1 Wednesday, 18 January 2006

2 [Open session]

3 --- Upon commencing at 8.36 a.m.

4 [The accused entered court]

5 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Madam Registrar, could you call the case,

6 please, and good morning to you.

7 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. This is the case

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

9 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you, ma'am.

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

11 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Good morning, Your Honours, ladies

12 and gentlemen. Yes, I can follow the proceedings in my own language.

13 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you. Good morning to you. You may sit down.

14 Appearances for the Prosecution.

15 MR. WUBBEN: Good morning, Your Honours. My name is Jan Wubben,

16 lead counsel for the Prosecution. Also good morning to my learned friends

17 of the Defence. I'm here together with co-counsel, Ms. Patricia Sellers,

18 Ms. Richardson, and our case manager, Ms. Donnica Henry-Frijlink.

19 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you, Mr. Wubben, and good morning to you and

20 your team.

21 Appearances for Naser Oric.

22 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Good morning, Your Honours. My name

23 is Vasvija Vidovic. Together with Mr. John Jones I appear for Mr. Naser

24 Oric. With us are our legal assistant, Ms. Adisa Mehic, and our

25 CaseMap manager, Mr. Geoff Roberts.

1 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you, madam, and good morning to you and your

2 team.

3 Are there any preliminaries you'd like to raise? Yes, Mr. Wubben.

4 MR. WUBBEN: I have a submission to make. My submission is that

5 the Prosecution will object to the Defence leading evidence by the Defence

6 expert Bilic whenever they've refer to new documents, totally new

7 documents, to be shown to that expert. The Prosecution received a list of

8 documents from the Defence, and those documents refer to their wish to

9 examine them in court, bring them into court for examination by this

10 expert. We signed the already analyst documents, however. There's also

11 mentioning of around nine new documents not being subject to prior

12 examination and comment by the Defence expert in his report.

13 I submit that in these circumstances it should not be permitted

14 for an expert to comment on new documents from the witness box. It is in

15 violation of Rule 94 bis, and the Prosecution will be deprived of the

16 opportunity of a Rule 94 bis expert report prior to examination.

17 Thank you.

18 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.

19 I don't know who is going to address this. We haven't got a clue

20 as to why you would like to have these witnesses [sic] put to the witness,

21 so perhaps you could explain that.

22 MR. JONES: Yes.

23 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. Wubben may also be jumping the --

24 MR. JONES: Well, that's it, Your Honour. I don't know if it may

25 be premature to explain how the witness will deal with those documents

1 which he hasn't analysed in his report, and perhaps we can deal with that

2 at the time. But it will be a question of a visual demonstration which

3 the parties can themselves see as to the quality of the paper on these

4 non-analysed exhibits and how that compares to the ones which he analysed,

5 but not as a matter of expert opinion, more as a demonstration for the

6 Trial Chamber and for the parties.

7 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you, Mr. Jones.

8 [Trial Chamber confers]

9 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. After consultation our position is as

10 following: We have heard what you have to say, Mr. Wubben, and what you

11 have to say -- what you had to say as well, Mr. Jones. We defer our

12 decision to the moment when you start making use of these documents, if at

13 all, and then we take our decision then. But we have, of course, taken

14 into consideration what your submissions are.

15 Yes, Mr. Wubben.

16 MR. WUBBEN: Okay. Thank you, Your Honour.

17 I have in addition, just for clarification, yesterday we discussed

18 the -- not calling of the other expert witness by the Defence, the

19 military expert. I just can take it that we don't have to file now a

20 94 bis motion. It's just for the record, Your Honour, for later on.

21 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. I thought we had settled that. The Defence

22 withdrew the witness only because of the position taken by the Prosecution

23 in requiring him present here for cross-examination and for no other

24 reason. And then I said if I have a confirmation of that, then of course

25 I will dispense you from having to file a motion, an ad hoc motion, in any

1 case. It will spare you having to file a motion and us having to come

2 down with a decision and the Defence, maybe, with a response. So that's

3 the position.

4 MR. WUBBEN: Okay. Thank you, Your Honour.

5 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you.

6 MR. WUBBEN: Will you please apologise me, I have to address other

7 business outside this courtroom.

8 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, certainly, Mr. Wubben.

9 Are there any other preliminaries from the Defence side?

10 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour, a brief question.

11 For the record, I wish to state that on the list of exhibits that

12 the Prosecutor wishes to show the witness in cross-examination, there are

13 again P15 and P333 for which the Prosecutor has heard from the witness,

14 Dzanan Dzananovic. These are not his signatures, and moreover the

15 Prosecution expert said that they were most likely not Dzanan Dzanovic's

16 signatures. I only wish to point out that these documents are

17 persistently being shown to the witnesses in that witness's absence.

18 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.

19 Do you want to respond to that? Do you wish to respond to that,

20 Ms. Sellers, please?

21 MS. SELLERS: Yes, Your Honour. I'll respond to it briefly.

22 We're not going to anything in relationship to the signature, but

23 moreover it's putting before the witness a bit of the contents and the

24 chronology of events. And so we're in no way trying to mislead the

25 witness.

1 What I can do, if Defence counsel insist, is reconsider during

2 break whether to show the documents at all, but there has been no intent

3 by the Prosecution at all.

4 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Ms. Sellers, I quite understand, but we have

5 all been lawyers in our career at one time or another, and it makes a

6 difference if you show the witness a document purportedly signed by

7 purportedly someone they've heard of when that someone has categorically

8 denied the paternity of the document. So if -- the reason for the purpose

9 of your question is not to establish the paternity of the document, then I

10 suppose you can refer to the events as they emerge from that document or

11 those documents without showing those documents to the witness.

12 MS. SELLERS: Your Honour, that certainly is a matter to go about

13 it.

14 JUDGE AGIUS: Because if you show me a document purportedly signed

15 by Mr. Wubben when in actual fact it wasn't, it is one additional reason

16 for me to take it that that is a position taken by Mr. Wubben. So -- all

17 right. I think you've understood me.

18 MS. SELLERS: Certainly. Your Honour, I do have one other matter

19 prior to the beginning of today's session, and that is that the

20 Prosecution would like to hand up a new P598. P598 is a document that we

21 were in the process - and I think I've put this on the record before - of

22 continuing analysing the document prior to presenting it toward a witness.

23 It has been a bit of a subject of a decision and recent decision. And the

24 Prosecution, in reviewing the document further, realised that there were

25 omissions of two -- well, three pages with writing on it and two pages

1 with minimal writing and a back photocopy of a page that has nothing to do

2 with the document. In order to be able to give to the Defence and to the

3 Trial Chamber the document in its complete integral form, we would like to

4 substitute P598 for what is virtually the same document, P598, but now two

5 or three pages that had been missing are included. Also the ERN range is

6 different, and that is how we were finally able to confirm that this was

7 the complete integral document. I wanted to do that before today's

8 session.

9 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Ms. Vidovic.

10 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, we wish to look at

11 that document and see what this is about, whether it's the same document,

12 and then we can comment on it. And we wish to do so before it is

13 replaced.

14 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. And also once we have reached this

15 position, which is very much understandable, I am not quite sure how wise

16 it would be to replace one with the other when reference may have been

17 made to the existing one, and particularly two pages carrying ERN numbers.

18 So if eventually we come to the conclusion then that we need to have the

19 new one in, then that will be the new one and that will be the document

20 which we will take into account for the purpose of our deliberations later

21 on. But I see no good reason for removing the other one from the record,

22 for various reasons. I mean, some of which I have mentioned.

23 The other thing I would like to mention is the following, and here

24 I reserve the position of the Defence. I don't know what's the content of

25 these missing pages that are now going to be present. So I'm reserving

1 the position of the Defence if the consequence of there not having been in

2 the records before means that they have missed some questions with some

3 witnesses, then I have to open the doors and the windows for the Defence.

4 MS. SELLERS: Your Honour, I completely understand that. And as

5 to your first point, I think it is correct, more logical, to not

6 substitute the document, but possibly either give this a small A or

7 whatever, just a new number. In addition, I will state that what we did

8 was revise the translations and now there's another English translation

9 that's in harmony with the complete document.

10 As to your second point which goes to the Defence's opportunity to

11 have redirected using this document, this document was used, I believe, on

12 one occasion at that point, objected to the Defence did not itself use the

13 document on redirect, but certainly the possibility lies open that they

14 might have, had other pages been available. So I completely understand

15 what Your Honour is saying.

16 JUDGE AGIUS: What's this document, 598, what is it?

17 MS. SELLERS: Your Honour, this is the document -- we are going

18 down a list of different types of names with diaries. This is a document

19 that your decision in 590 in terms of whether a witness was confronted,

20 Adam Sedemovic [sic], I believe.

21 It was referred to, I believe, as a war path or another type of

22 war diary. We can christen it with a new name or baptise it with a new

23 name. But I think when you see the document it is one that listed various

24 brigades or units that came under Prosecution's allegation, Potocari and

25 Pale, and showed what they did at different attacks.

1 JUDGE AGIUS: We'll see it anyway.

2 MS. SELLERS: Can I hand this to the Defence --

3 JUDGE AGIUS: Yeah, I would expect you to. And then I would

4 expect feedback from the Defence, and then you are expect a decision on

5 our part.

6 MS. SELLERS: Certainly, Your Honour.

7 JUDGE AGIUS: But it's not likely that there will be a

8 substitution. In other words, there will be --

9 MS. SELLERS: As a matter of fact, I will withdraw the request for

10 substitution and it will just be submissions. So I will hand three copies

11 up to the Defence and that will be one copy each of translation and --

12 this one.

13 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours.

14 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.

15 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] If I may?

16 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.

17 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] With respect to this document, it

18 was not shown to Mr. Ademovic, and that was why we objected. Mr. Ademovic

19 testified. He's mentioned in more than one place in the document, but it

20 was shown not to him but to other witnesses. It has been shown to more

21 than one witness, and I wonder what the responses of those witnesses would

22 have been to these additional pages. We do not wish the document to be

23 tendered in this manner. It can be tendered if it's shown to some other

24 witness, but in any case we wish to examine those pages in detail. And

25 let me mention that we have objected to the authenticity of this document.

1 JUDGE AGIUS: No, we would rather not have it now. We would

2 rather have it when a decision is taken.

3 MS. SELLERS: Right. Your Honour, if I can briefly state, I will

4 concur with Madam Vidovic, and I think that that was part of the filing in

5 one of the motions concerning the Rule 98 bis. It was not shown to

6 Mr. Sidik Ademovic, and I believe it was stated on the record by myself

7 that we were still in a period of analysing the document and bringing the

8 document forward. I wish it had been in its integral form when finally it

9 was used with witnesses, and that's why I'm being very open and placing

10 this on the record for the Court.

11 Now, in terms of the Defence wanting to examine the different

12 pages, I thought it might also be relevant that if I precisely say what

13 are the new pages so that one could go right to it. And that is the first

14 page, page -- ERN number 02995208. You will also notice the second page

15 as ERN number 02995208A, and that is a page that was a photocopy obviously

16 of a back page. It has some circles and numbers on it. And then I'm

17 informed that page that ends in ERN, I believe, 28 is also a page that was

18 not in the previous document, so therefore we're referring to it as a new

19 page.

20 And then I would draw your attention, that's for the record just

21 ERN number 02995228. And then I would draw your attention to what would

22 be referred to as the last page with any substantial writing, and that's

23 02995236. So those are the four pages, one not having much writing on it,

24 that the Prosecution would like to draw the Defence's attention to as not

25 having been included.

1 I would also just make it very clear on the record that this

2 document has been disclosed in its entirety previous to this point, so

3 these are not -- it's not new in the sense of disclosure, but only in

4 terms of --

5 JUDGE AGIUS: Translation --

6 MS. SELLERS: -- translation, yes.

7 JUDGE AGIUS: All right.

8 MS. SELLERS: And we are aware of the Defence's position on the

9 document.

10 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. Okay. We'll come back to this, later,

11 after the Defence have had an opportunity to examine the document.

12 Yes, Ms. Vidovic.

13 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, let me just say that

14 this document was never disclosed to us in this form. Its front page did

15 not look like this. It was not disclosed to us in the original. I wonder

16 where these four pages have been? This is a very important and serious

17 issue. I see Mr. Halilovic's name here and so on.

18 Your Honours, please take into consideration this kind of

19 behaviour by the Prosecution. What does this mean? Towards the end of

20 our Defence case now, documents are disclosed to us in their entirety. So

21 we have not been able to show to the witnesses who have been witnesses

22 here and whose names are mentioned in the document, we have not been able

23 to show them the document. Although the Prosecutor had this document, I

24 don't know where it was. It's not just that the translation has been

25 delivered only now; I'm sure that the front page did not look like this in

1 the document disclosed to us.

2 MR. JONES: If I --

3 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Jones.

4 MR. JONES: If I may just add one matter to that. I also see

5 immediately that on that first page and this reference to Mr. Mirzet

6 Halilovic being commander in Pale from 4th July 1992, we had Mustafa

7 Sacirovic here who gave a lot of evidence about what Mr. Mirzet Halilovic

8 was doing from 1st of July, 1992 in Srebrenica itself. And absolutely

9 that's something which I would have shown to him and dealt with him about.

10 So I can immediately see one witness anyway who would have had to come

11 back.

12 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Ms. Sellers.

13 MS. SELLERS: Your Honour, I'm grateful for the Defence having

14 raised these points. Let's make it clear on the record now that this

15 document was disclosed in its entirety in this form, and if there has been

16 any misunderstanding that that document in its entire form disclosed on

17 the EDS, the Prosecution, in trying to analyse this document, had not

18 realised that disclosure had been in its entire form and we were doing

19 some other work product in order to secure parts of the document. The

20 document was placed starting with ERN number 02995207. I believe that you

21 will find that has been available in EDS.

22 In terms of having presented this to other witnesses, it has

23 certainly been our impression that the Defence not only objected to the

24 document being shown to any witnesses and did not use it at that time.

25 That I leave for any further argument, but the Prosecution felt it had an

1 obligation to bring forward the entire document in its integral form so

2 that it would not be seen later on that the Prosecution was disclosing

3 documents with certain pages missing.

4 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. I think for the moment we have to close

5 the discussion here, and we will pick it up again later when we have more

6 concrete information and verification.

7 Witness, please, usher.

8 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

9 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. Since we started now earlier, and thanks to

10 the indulgence of the recorder here, our plan is, unless we need to have

11 additional breaks, to have a break at around about -- any time between

12 10.15 and 10.30, more likely 10.30, depending on how we stand at the time.

13 And then of course it will be a full 30-minute break, to be followed with

14 another break, a normal break later on, again of 30 minutes. All right?

15 [The witness entered court]

16 JUDGE AGIUS: Madam, good morning to you and welcome back.

17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning.

18 JUDGE AGIUS: Please make yourself comfortable. We are proceeding

19 with your testimony.

20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.

21 JUDGE AGIUS: Try to come as near as you can the microphones.

22 That's perfect. That's fine. If in the course of your testimony you need

23 anything, please let us know, and if at any time you feel tired or you hat

24 a short break, we will give you a short break, as required.

25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. Thank you.

1 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. Yes.

2 Ms. Vidovic.

3 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Could I have the usher's assistance

4 in showing the witness Prosecution Exhibit P608.

5 WITNESS: SUHRA DJILOVIC [Resumed]

6 [Witness answered through interpreter]

7 Examined by Ms. Vidovic: [Continued]

8 Q. Good morning, Witness.

9 A. Good morning.

10 Q. For the record, this is purportedly a decision by the staff of the

11 armed forces of Srebrenica dated the 12th of December, 1992, bearing the

12 following title: List of staff members and members of the intervention

13 platoon to receive meals in the people's kitchen. Please take a look at

14 the document. You had occasion to review the document during proofing.

15 Is that right? Is it right that in December 1992 there was a people's

16 kitchen in Srebrenica?

17 A. No. I know of no such kitchen. There had never been any such

18 people's kitchen in Srebrenica, let alone in 1992. There was a small

19 kitchen run by Hakija Meholjic on the premises of Hotel Domavija. It was

20 a small kitchen and it was held only by Hakija Meholjic.

21 I can give you the reason. He had his own shop before the war,

22 and when it became obvious that war would break out, he stashed the stock

23 that was in the kitchen somewhere, and subsequently his house was torched.

24 So it was good of him to have stored the food somewhere. Later on he

25 relocated the -- these goods to the premises of Hotel Domavija, and this

1 was good for many people who were able to have meals there.

2 Q. But isn't it true that this kitchen was set up later on?

3 A. Yes. It was I believe in May 1993.

4 Q. Very well. Please take a look at this list. Did you ever hear of

5 any sort of intervention platoon in Srebrenica?

6 A. I was not aware of one, and I don't think one existed.

7 Q. Thank you. Please take a look at the list. Under number 2, you

8 see Osman Osmanovic. We talked about him yesterday. In December 1992,

9 was he in Srebrenica?

10 A. No. As I've already said, he left on the 25th of November, 1992,

11 for Gorazde, and he could not have possibly been there on this date.

12 Q. Please take a look at the name under number 5, Smajo Mandzic. Did

13 you know the person?

14 A. Yes. He resided in Dugo Polje and spent the entire war in

15 Dugo Polje. He had his own group. He was a local group leader of

16 fighters, and he was always at the front line because Dugo Polje borders

17 with Bratunac municipality. So he never was in Srebrenica before

18 demilitarisation.

19 Q. Please look at the name under number 19, Hajrudin Malagic. Do you

20 know this person?

21 A. Yes, I do. His brother was of great assistance to me during the

22 war. He helped me with some chores at home, he and his wife, so I know

23 them well.

24 Q. Please tell us, was he in Srebrenica in this period of time?

25 A. No, he wasn't. Malagic was given an assignment to take some sort

1 of a message to Tuzla. He set out across a wooded area with a group of

2 people, I don't know who, and he was supposed to meet up with Mirsad

3 Mustafic in Tuzla, and Hajrudin Avdic gave him this assignment. That's

4 why I know about it.

5 Q. Do you know when he asked him to set out?

6 A. I believe it was in the summer of 1992. He returned only in

7 February 1993 with a journalist, a foreigner. I don't know his name.

8 Q. Very well. Please take a look at the name under number 35, Kemal

9 Mehmedovic. Does this name mean anything to you?

10 A. Kemal Mehmedovic hails from Pale. Pale was not occupied; it was

11 free territory. So he resided at Pale throughout this period. There was

12 no need for him to come to Srebrenica. He had a house over there, but he

13 was quite a problematic person.

14 I knew him from before the war. I had a friend who worked on the

15 traffic misdemeanours court, and she would tell me that she had problems

16 with Kemal Mehmedovic. She called him "Kemo." She said that there were

17 numerous cases relating to him that she had to deal with. This was the

18 misdemeanours court.

19 Q. To your knowledge, did he have anything to do with some sort of

20 units or groups in Srebrenica itself?

21 A. No. I am not aware of any such thing. Why would he come to

22 Srebrenica from Pale? He had land over there. He was able to farm the

23 land and tend to the cattle.

24 Q. Thank you. In the course of 1992, were you aware of the existence

25 of a prison in Srebrenica?

1 A. A prison in 1992?

2 Q. Yes.

3 A. As far as I know, there was never any prison in Srebrenica. There

4 was a detention unit, especially in 1992. I find the notion of a prison

5 being there a bit ridiculous. I apologise.

6 Q. Do you know that after demilitarisation a prison was set up headed

7 by Hajdin Mustafic [phoen]?

8 A. Prison? Well, I repeat, I know only of a detention unit. I know

9 nothing of a prison.

10 Q. On the issue of this detention you've been mentioning, where was

11 it located?

12 A. It was located on the premises of the public security station. It

13 was a rather small detention unit, not a prison at all.

14 Q. Do you know whether, in addition to this detention unit, as you

15 put it, which was located in the MUP building, there were some other

16 detention premises?

17 A. Yes. But this was only at a later stage in January 1993. Excuse

18 me. I heard about this. I did not see for myself. Two or three rooms

19 were refurbished for the purposes of detention.

20 Q. Can you tell us what the circumstances were that led you to come

21 to know about these additional detention premises?

22 A. Yes. It was -- or rather, cold at the time. And Jusufovic came

23 to Mr. Hajrudin Avdic to inquire after the possibilities of obtaining

24 blankets. There was no firewood, it was rather cold, and this was a

25 wide-spread phenomenon. There was shelling. I remember that my mother

1 sent my brother over to inquire after me because there was shelling, and

2 he was there in my office whilst Jusufovic was waiting to be received by

3 Avdic.

4 We talked about this, and my brother, who was rather young at the

5 time and is a quite sensitive man, and he said -- he proposed to go back

6 home and bring a blanket, although he said: My mom is already angry

7 because I already gave away everything we had. And I told him to go over

8 to my home to bring some blankets for Nurija Jusufovic to take over to the

9 detention unit for those people there. It was the end of 1992 or the

10 beginning of 1993.

11 I'm afraid my emotions are interfering with my possibility to

12 testify.

13 Q. Let's take it slowly, Madam, if I may inquire in connection with

14 this?

15 JUDGE AGIUS: Wait. If -- let's take it not just slowly, but also

16 differently, Ms. Vidovic.

17 Do you want a short break? If you are feeling uncomfortable -- we

18 want to make sure that you are giving testimony with the utmost ease. So

19 if emotionally you're feeling a little bit unhappy, we'll give you a break

20 if you need one and have a cup of coffee and then continue.

21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, it's not necessary at the

22 moment. I can proceed. Thank you.

23 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] If -- thank you, Your Honour.

24 Q. Witness, can we clarify a matter in order for me to ascertain

25 whether I understood you well. You said that Mr. Nurija Jusufovic came to

1 ask for blankets for the detention. Can you tell us for which detention

2 premises for these blankets needed?

3 A. These were the additional detention premises which were made

4 available in a house in the vicinity of the municipal building.

5 Q. Did he say for whom the blankets were needed on this occasion?

6 A. Well, we did not really ask. We presumed that they were for the

7 detainees.

8 Q. From what he told you, was it clear to you that the blankets were

9 needed for the additional detention premises situated in this home near

10 the municipal building?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. Can you tell us, if you remember, when this was?

13 A. It was in the -- it was January 1993. I recall that it was

14 wintertime and it was rather cold.

15 Q. In addition to what you've just said, Nurija trying to procure

16 blankets, were there other occasions when you talked about the provisions

17 for the detention unit or anything in connection with that?

18 A. Yes. Oftentimes they would come to see what the possibilities

19 were to obtain firewood. We did not have any electricity, so we had to

20 rely upon firewood, but there was no firewood in Srebrenica town so we had

21 to go into the countryside and talk to the farmers there and try to ask

22 them to bring firewood on carts into town, especially for the purposes of

23 the hospital.

24 Q. When you say "they," who was it who came asking for firewood?

25 A. I meant Nurija Jusufovic. And Becir Bogilovic would come on

1 occasion, as would Mr. Hasanovic, asking for the needs to be tended of the

2 hospital.

3 Q. Did you ever see these premises with your own eyes?

4 A. No. Believe me, I don't think there was any need for that.

5 Q. Did you ever hear anything about who the prisoners were?

6 A. No. I was not interested in that. I knew what my duties were,

7 and I did not have any spare time. I also had to take care of my family.

8 I had underaged children, who stayed back at home, and I worried about

9 them constantly, especially when there was shelling on.

10 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Could I have the usher's assistance

11 in showing the witness Defence Exhibit D987.

12 Q. Please look at the document. I will read from the document. It

13 says: "Avdic, I have here with me Serb citizens from Karno, nine of them,

14 who are imprisoned here. They were brought in during the night, last

15 night, and they are here now. Please decide and tell us what to do with

16 these citizens." It is -- purportedly it is signed by Jusufovic, Nurija,

17 commander of the SJB Srebrenica.

18 Did you see this document before I showed it to you?

19 A. No.

20 Q. Very well. The document says: "Avdic, I have those citizens

21 imprisoned here."

22 Based on what you knew of the contacts existing between the people

23 there, who would be this person Avdic Jusufovic is addressing?

24 A. This would be Hajrudin Avdic, naturally. As Nurija Jusufovic was

25 indeed commander of the SJB Srebrenica, it was only natural for him to

1 address these needs to him -- or rather, to address this information to

2 him.

3 Q. Are you surprised by the fact that Nurija is addressing Mr. Avdic

4 on this matter?

5 A. No. I'm not surprised at all because I know that he was commander

6 of the SJB, and Mr. Avdic was president of the municipal War Presidency,

7 and of course he would address him on the issues since he was his

8 superior.

9 Q. Do you know of anyone else coming to the War Presidency and

10 discussing matters in relation to detentions -- detention units?

11 A. Yes, I remember Elvir Dzozic. I know him as Zele. I took some

12 time to remember his name, but his name was Elvir Dzozic.

13 Q. Was there something specific about him, something peculiar about

14 him?

15 A. He lost his arm during the war. He was a decent sort of man, and

16 I always took pity in seeing him without his arm. And he was doing his

17 best to make sure that the detainees were doing -- were in good condition.

18 JUDGE AGIUS: Do the parties agree that there is a mistake in the

19 English translation of document P987, that where you -- in the first line

20 you see the word "Karm" it should be "Karno." So automatically -- the

21 parties are agreeing that there should be a correction. And we're talking

22 of page with ERN 0359211. Thank you.

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

24 Q. We stopped when you were talking about Zele. Do you know what

25 Zele was doing, what his profession was?

1 A. I can't remember. I only know that he used to come together with

2 Nurija Jusufovic and that he was there at the detention unit.

3 Q. Very well. I will move to a different topic now. Were there Serb

4 families in Srebrenica during the war?

5 A. Yes, but only at the beginning of 1992. I think some five to six

6 families stayed behind.

7 Q. In relation to these Serb families, what was the position of

8 Hajrudin Avdic and the War Presidency in relation to these Serb families?

9 A. It was a correct position, it was -- as far as I remember. Since

10 Hakija Meholjic had some food under his care, they would arrange for the

11 food to be delivered to these Serb families because there was no food to

12 be had in Srebrenica.

13 I remember an elderly couple who resided in the vicinity of the

14 municipal building, and I'd go over to see them quite often to see whether

15 they needed anything. I -- once I came to see them in -- wearing a skirt

16 that was rather large for me. The lady asked me whether I had lost weight

17 and I said: Yes. And I told her that all my clothes were too large for

18 me now. And she suggested that I bring my clothes to her and that she

19 would re-tailor them to suit me, and that was very kind of her and so I

20 did.

21 I recall another situation when I saw two lads I didn't know when

22 I was on my way there. And she saw me looking at them a bit suspiciously,

23 and she told me: Well, you know, these were refugees that were sent by

24 the War Presidency to be put up with us, to sleep with us, and it is also

25 good because they were worried and concerned about our safety because

1 there were many refugees and they could also provide protection for us.

2 Q. In other words, the War Presidency took an effort in trying to

3 take care of these people?

4 A. Yes. We also thought that they would not target us as much if

5 they knew that there were their people among us; however, the Serbs did

6 not really pay much attention to this. They shelled us indiscriminately.

7 There was this other occasion when I went over to their place and

8 they told me most probably they ought to leave. And I told them: Why?

9 You have your own home here, you eat the same food we eat. And they

10 replied: Well, that's not the point. There were people from the

11 Red Cross who came to see us and they asked that we be evacuated. I could

12 see that they did not wish to leave, but they told me that there was this

13 order for all the Serbs to be evacuated from Srebrenica. They were very

14 sorry to leave their home, to leave their neighbours. We had many

15 refugees in Srebrenica, but very few native residents.

16 Q. After the tragedy, these families who spent some time with you in

17 Srebrenica during the war, did they return after this tragedy?

18 A. When I went back to Srebrenica, I went to see this colleague of

19 mine who works on the executions at the misdemeanours court in Srebrenica,

20 and I inquired after this family. I forgot what their family name was

21 because many years had passed. And so I explained to her who I was

22 talking about, and she understood, and she said that they never wished to

23 return, that they said that they would never return because Srebrenica was

24 not what it once was. They are still in Serbia. And I really wanted to

25 visit them. I would really like to see them.

1 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] I would ask now that the witness be

2 shown two photographs -- or rather, three photographs, in order to speed

3 things up.

4 Q. And, Witness, please look at 1 and 2. First of all, do you agree

5 that these photographs are part of the video clip we saw yesterday showing

6 the session of the War Presidency where you identified people?

7 A. Yes, I agree.

8 Q. Please first look at photograph number 1 and tell us again who the

9 people on this photograph are.

10 A. To the right is Aziz Nekic. To the left is Hamed Alic.

11 Q. Is Hamed Alic the one with a moustache in a yellow shirt?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. Is Nekic the one in the blue shirt?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. Now, please look at photograph number 2.

16 A. Yes, I've seen it.

17 Q. Is Mr. Aziz Nekic shown on this photograph as well?

18 A. Yes. He's next to Hamed Alic in this photograph, too, and the one

19 in the middle with side-burns.

20 Q. And who's sitting to the left of Mr. Nekic?

21 A. Hamed Alic.

22 Q. And to his other side?

23 A. Hamdija Fejzic.

24 Q. So Mr. Nekic is the person between Fejzic and Alic?

25 A. Yes.

1 Q. Very well. Thank you. Now, please, can you tell Their Honours

2 who Mr. Aziz Nekic was?

3 A. Aziz Nekic worked first with Becirovic, Dzemo Becirovic. And

4 later on he worked - and that was when humanitarian aid began to arrive -

5 he was given the task of being chief of humanitarian aid. That was his

6 title more or less.

7 Q. Was he a member of the War Presidency?

8 A. Yes, he was.

9 Q. Very well. When he started working with humanitarian aid, did he

10 have contacts with foreigners, as far as you know?

11 A. Of course he had. How else could he have received humanitarian?

12 It was foreigners who brought in humanitarian aid, and he would take it

13 over from them, keep records of what had been received, and he would

14 organise unloading and then the distribution of the aid at various points.

15 Q. Now please look at photograph number 3. Do you know the person

16 wearing a uniform and standing to the far right of this photograph, the

17 person with side-burns?

18 A. Yes, yes, that's Mr. Aziz Nekic.

19 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please, Your Honour.

20 JUDGE AGIUS: Let's put this photo on the ELMO, please, and --

21 because since there is more than one person wearing a uniform and -- yes.

22 We're talking of -- there seem to be two persons wearing a

23 uniform, one with a cap on his head, and that's more or less the left-hand

24 side of the photo near the person wearing the light blue jacket, and

25 another one who is standing on the far right of the photo, right behind

1 what appears to be another soldier wearing a metal helmet. That's the

2 person we're talking about, the man standing behind that soldier with the

3 metal helmet. Do you recognise that person?

4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

5 JUDGE AGIUS: Who would that be?

6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Aziz Nekic.

7 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation]

8 Q. If you have a pointer, can you point to him, Madam?

9 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, point.

10 THE WITNESS: [Indicates].

11 JUDGE AGIUS: And for the record, the witness points precisely to

12 the person on the far right of the photo, which had -- to which he had

13 been referred to by the Bench. Okay.

14 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation]

15 Q. Have you any idea how come Mr. Nekic is wearing a uniform?

16 A. As the municipal War Presidency received a few uniforms when they

17 came from Tuzla, when the first journalist arrived by helicopter, they

18 brought with them several uniforms. And of course Hajrudin Avdic

19 distributed them. I think he gave one to Aziz Nekic because he was a

20 refugee and he didn't have any clothes. Probably that's why he gave it to

21 him.

22 Q. Thank you.

23 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes -- exactly. Yes, that's what it says, as if you

24 were reading my mind.

25 Let's start with photo number 1, please, we'll integrate the whole

1 thing and have it clear so that we will be sure that there are no mistakes

2 here.

3 Right. There are three persons that you see on this first photo.

4 We'll start with the person on the far right wearing a yellow shirt and a

5 moustache. Yes. Could you point to this person so that I make sure that

6 we are referring to the same person? Could you point to that person on

7 the photo, on the ELMO. Yes.

8 THE WITNESS: [Indicates].

9 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Correct. You are pointing at the same person

10 I mentioned or pointed out to you. Who is that person, please?

11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's Hamed Alic.

12 JUDGE AGIUS: Now next to him in the centre of the photo, there is

13 a person wearing a blue shirt. Who is that person?

14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's Aziz Nekic.

15 JUDGE AGIUS: And he is the same person you pointed us -- pointed

16 to us in the previous photo?

17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

18 JUDGE AGIUS: And then there is another person at the far left of

19 the photo wearing a black shirt and a moustache and beard.

20 THE WITNESS: [Indicates].

21 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, you are pointing to him. Who is that person?

22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's Hamdija Fejzic, the president

23 of the Executive Board.

24 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. And now, Madam Usher, could you kindly put on

25 the ELMO photograph number 2, please.

1 And let's start from the far right. There is a person sitting

2 very comfortable on a sofa there, sofa-chair, in a reclined position

3 wearing a white shirt and a kind of a gilet. Who is that person?

4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's Mirsad Dudic.

5 JUDGE AGIUS: To his left there is a person wearing a yellow shirt

6 with a moustache.

7 THE WITNESS: [Indicates].

8 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. You're pointing to him. Who is that person?

9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's Hamed Alic.

10 JUDGE AGIUS: And to his left there is another guy with a blue

11 shirt. Who is that person?

12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's Aziz Nekic.

13 JUDGE AGIUS: And to his left, there is a person with a moustache

14 and beard. I can't say that he is wearing a black shirt, but he seems to

15 be holding a paper in his -- in one hand and has his other hand -- arm

16 lifted. Who is that person?

17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's Hamdija Fejzic.

18 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, yes, yes. She is right.

19 And to his left there is another person with what appears to be a

20 cream colour shirt, also holding a paper in his hand and also wearing a

21 moustache and beard. Who is that person?

22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Hajrudin Avdic.

23 JUDGE AGIUS: Are you happy with this, both parties?

24 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, if the witness can take

25 another look at the photograph in connection with this last person.

1 Q. Could you take another look, please?

2 JUDGE AGIUS: Photograph number 2. Yes.

3 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation]

4 Q. The person sitting next to Fejzic?

5 JUDGE AGIUS: If you think she is wrong, please go ahead and

6 indicate -- suggest to her who that person is.

7 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation]

8 Q. Could this be Krdzic perhaps?

9 A. It's possible. It's possible. Because both wore beards and had a

10 similar profile.

11 JUDGE AGIUS: Yeah, but I remember yesterday --

12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I do apologise --

13 JUDGE AGIUS: From the --

14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- it really is Adif Krdzic. I

15 wasn't quite sure because I was looking at the profile. Yes, yes. It's

16 Krdzic, Adif Krdzic.

17 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, the video showed Hajrudin Avdic wearing a

18 completely different shirt, and I referred -- made a reference to the

19 pattern of his shirt when we were describing.

20 [Trial Chamber confers]

21 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

22 JUDGE AGIUS: Let's give these three documents a number, please.

23 You need to help me, Madam Usher [sic], please 100 --

24 THE REGISTRAR: 1004.

25 JUDGE AGIUS: Point 1, point 2, point 3.

1 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation]

2 Q. Witness, I'll move on to another topic. Did you know a person

3 called Senad Alic?

4 A. Yes, I did.

5 Q. Who was he?

6 A. Senad Alic, his parents and my parents had a house in the same

7 street. They were close by. His parents lived in Germany. Senad Alic

8 was in Germany, but he came from Germany in 1992 with a young journalist;

9 that's how I remember him. I think the journalist's name was Philipp, but

10 I'm not sure. He was very young and good-looking, and he was interested

11 in everything.

12 Q. Let me ask you: Are you sure it was 1992 or was it 1993? Do you

13 recall?

14 A. It may have been January or February 1993. Probably February. I

15 know it was cold. I know they sat in my office, and I made him some herb

16 tea. And they sat and talked with us.

17 Q. They brought uniforms from Tuzla, you said. Who was "they"? Do

18 you remember?

19 A. It was a foreign journalist who came by helicopter. I'm not sure,

20 but I am sure that we got two or three uniforms in the War Presidency.

21 Q. Were there any Bosniaks who arrived as well?

22 A. Yes, yes.

23 Q. When Senad came to Srebrenica, what foreign language was he

24 speaking?

25 A. His parents were in Germany, so of course he spoke German and a

1 little English. But he spoke German well. He also spoke a little

2 English.

3 Q. Did he ever come to the War Presidency?

4 A. Yes. He was the only person there who could speak German and a

5 little English, so he was used as an interpreter by the War Presidency.

6 Q. Who did he interpret for; do you remember?

7 A. For Mr. Hajrudin Avdic, sometimes for Hamdija, or anyone who

8 needed an interpreter.

9 Q. Thank you. Now I'll move on again.

10 Before the war, did you have children?

11 A. Yes. Yes, I did.

12 Q. Did you take your children to the health centre in Srebrenica for

13 check-ups?

14 A. Certainly.

15 Q. Did you go there yourself for check-ups?

16 A. Certainly I did.

17 Q. Did you see what the medical documents looked like in that health

18 centre before the war?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. Do you remember what the name was?

21 A. It was Dr. Asim Cemerlic General Hospital.

22 Q. Did you see any stamps of the health centre of those documents?

23 A. Yes, I did.

24 Q. Did they bear the name Dr. Asim Cemerlic?

25 A. Yes, of course, because that was the name of the health centre and

1 that's what it said on the stamp.

2 Q. This health centre, did it belong to Zvornik municipality or

3 Srebrenica municipality? Did it have anything to do with Zvornik

4 municipality?

5 A. No, no. Excuse me. Srebrenica was a separate municipality and

6 Zvornik was a different municipality. There was no connection between the

7 two. We weren't even neighbouring municipalities because Bratunac came in

8 between.

9 Q. Do you remember the name of the hospital during the war? Did it

10 retain its name, Asim Cemerlic?

11 A. Of course it did.

12 Q. What was its full name?

13 A. In the war it was walled the War Hospital. However, it was

14 always, actually, called the Dr. Asim Cemerlic Hospital.

15 Q. During your testimony yesterday you told us that Dr. Avdo

16 Hasanovic was a member of the Executive Board of the municipal War

17 Presidency. Is this correct?

18 A. Yes, it's correct.

19 Q. Did you have occasion to see any documents written by him to the

20 War Presidency?

21 A. Yes, yes. When he wrote reports about the epidemiological

22 situation in the hospital and delivered them to the War Presidency, I

23 usually saw those reports.

24 Q. Did those reports have a stamp?

25 A. Of course they did.

1 Q. Was it a stamp on which it said "Zvornik," or did it say "Dr. Asim

2 Cemerlic, Srebrenica."

3 A. Dr. Asim Cemerlic, Srebrenica. Why would it say Zvornik? The

4 hospital was not in Zvornik but in Srebrenica, and we were Srebrenica

5 municipality, not Zvornik municipality.

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

7 witness to be shown a document bearing the ERN number 01840591. This is a

8 medical finding dated 27 December 1994, number 191/94, for the person

9 named Avdo Huric. At the bottom of the document it says: "The finding

10 made by Dr. Ilijaz Pilav."

11 Q. Witness, please take a look at this document, primarily at the

12 heading. And then look at the stamp. Do you see that the heading

13 says "Srebrenica General Hospital"?

14 A. Yes, I do.

15 Q. After demilitarisation, was the name changed into War Hospital or

16 not?

17 A. As I've said, the hospital was always called "general hospital."

18 It was termed "War Hospital" simply because there was a war on.

19 Q. After demilitarisation, was it called again as it had been

20 earlier?

21 A. Yes. It was again called General Hospital Srebrenica, as before

22 the war.

23 Q. Please take a look at the stamp affixed to this document.

24 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, could the document

25 please be placed on the ELMO with the stamp visible?

1 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Let's put the original on the ELMO, please.

2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can see it now.

3 JUDGE AGIUS: Further down. Is it okay? Okay.

4 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation]

5 Q. Witness, can you see the name of the hospital, as contained in the

6 stamp?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. Can you say what it says?

9 A. "General Hospital, Dr. Asim Cemerlic."

10 Q. Thank you. Is that the stamp you said you had seen in the reports

11 by Dr. Avdo Hasanovic?

12 A. Yes. That is the stamp of the health care of the general hospital

13 of Srebrenica.

14 Q. Was there just this one health care centre in Srebrenica which

15 later on became the hospital?

16 A. Yes. There was just this one and the same institution first

17 called the health care centre and then the general hospital.

18 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, could this document be

19 assigned an exhibit number?

20 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. This document will now become Defence

21 Exhibit D1005. It has ERN number 01840591. It consists of one page in

22 the original, B/C/S, and another page being the English translation

23 thereof.

24 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, could the usher show

25 two Prosecution exhibits to the witness, P50 and P53.

1 Your Honour, could P50 be placed on the ELMO first so that -- or,

2 please, if the original could be placed on the ELMO, the B/C/S original.

3 Thank you.

4 Q. Witness, take a look at the stamp there.

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. Do you agree that this stamp says - and the document is -- dates

7 from 1993 - there are two stamps there. Is that correct? One that was

8 affixed across War Hospital Srebrenica and the other one next to Dr. Avdo

9 Hasanovic's name. Please take a look at the stamps. Do you agree that

10 the stamps say "General Hospital Zvornik, internal ward Zvornik"?

11 A. Yes, that's correct.

12 Q. As far as you know, was Srebrenica hospital ever a unit of the

13 internal ward of the Zvornik hospital?

14 A. No. Neither before nor after the war.

15 Q. Did you ever see any such stamps on the reports written by

16 Dr. Avdo Hasanovic?

17 A. No, never.

18 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Could you please place the other

19 document on the ELMO, the Bosnian original, P53.

20 Q. Also take a look at the stamp next to Dr. Avdo Hasanovic's name.

21 Do you agree that this document also says "Zvornik Hospital, internal ward

22 Zvornik"?

23 A. Yes, I agree.

24 Q. Does the earlier comment apply to this as well?

25 A. Yes. This is not the stamp of the Srebrenica General Hospital. I

1 can't really account for this stamp here because it is not Srebrenica

2 General Hospital's stamp.

3 Q. Thank you.

4 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, could the witness be

5 shown the document bearing the number 01838903. This is a new exhibit. I

6 apologise. This is a report on this entry and epidemiological situation

7 in the area of Srebrenica municipality signed by Dr. Avdo Hasanovic. The

8 heading reads "Srebrenica General Hospital." Please take a look at this

9 document. Please pay particular attention to the stamp.

10 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Could the Bosnian original be placed

11 on the ELMO, please.

12 Q. You can see that the document dates from July 1994; that's what

13 the document says. Can I direct your attention to the stamp. Can you

14 tell the Trial Chamber what the stamp next to Avdo Hasanovic's name reads.

15 A. The stamp reads 00UR health centre, Dr. Asim Cemerlic, and that's

16 the Srebrenica stamp.

17 Q. You mean the stamp of the Srebrenica General Hospital?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. Is this the stamp that you had occasion to see?

20 A. Yes, on reports such as this one. As I've already said, these

21 were reports which had to do with the situation in the hospital itself.

22 Q. Is my understanding right that you used to see -- that the stamps

23 that you used to see on Dr. Avdo Hasanovic's report are the ones such as

24 this one?

25 A. Yes.

1 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Before I proceed, Your Honour, could

2 this document be assigned an exhibit number?

3 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. This document, Madam Vidovic, will become

4 Defence Exhibit D1006. It consists of one page in the original B/C/S

5 language, with ERN 01838903, and additionally two pages being the English

6 translation thereof. Thank you.

7 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation]

8 Q. Witness, you told us that when the court was established in July

9 1993 you were assigned to work there. My question is as follows:

10 Before -- before June 1993, was there any court operational in Srebrenica?

11 A. No. Because there were no conditions in place for that. As I've

12 already said, in April 1992, all intellectuals, including the judges, left

13 Srebrenica. Srebrenica was not left with a single judge until June 1993.

14 Q. I would like you to keep your answers short. We are pressed for

15 time.

16 Was there a court-martial ever operational in Srebrenica?

17 A. No.

18 Q. A misdemeanours court?

19 A. No.

20 Q. What were the duties you were assigned to in June 1993?

21 A. The municipal War Presidency was trying to introduce an order, and

22 their intention was to establish a lower court in Srebrenica. But we did

23 not have the conditions for that. We did not have electricity, equipment,

24 or eligible people. There was only Mensur Omerovic who had passed the bar

25 exam and he was appointed president of the lower court in Srebrenica, but

1 there weren't others with the same qualifications. We did not have the

2 necessary equipment. We did not have a panel of judges. I think it was

3 only at the end of 1994 that it started proceeding.

4 Q. First of all, is it right that you continued working for the court

5 for a long time after the war?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. The duties you performed at the court in 1994, did they look like

8 anything which had to do with court work?

9 A. No. We had some essential services that we provided, but it was

10 just only jurists without the bar exam who were working there when they

11 had to.

12 Q. Under the conditions existing in Srebrenica, was it possible to

13 conduct normal inquiries?

14 A. Yes. One could conduct investigations, but only to the extent

15 necessary. However, it was impossible to hold trials because the court

16 did not have a panel of judges. It was only the investigative stage that

17 could be taken care of, but only for certain cases.

18 Q. These investigations, did they yield any information that was

19 necessary for cases to be conducted?

20 A. No, hardly.

21 Q. Were there any expert -- experts who had to help in the

22 investigative stage, like the ballistics experts and so on and so forth?

23 A. No. And this was one of the reasons why the court was unable to

24 operate properly.

25 Q. Were you aware of the fact that some of the detention-related

1 cases were sent over to Tuzla?

2 A. Yes, I was aware of that. I know that these cases were sent to

3 Tuzla through the ham radio operators. These were detention-related

4 cases. When detention had to be extended, this had to be done through

5 Tuzla; however, communications with Tuzla were difficult. We had

6 difficulties, those of us who worked at the court. Even the president of

7 the War Presidency had difficulties. The detainees were aware of the

8 detention period. They knew that -- for how long they could be kept in

9 detention, and as soon as the detention orders expired, their family

10 members would approach the War Presidency and complain.

11 Q. Did I understand you to say that the cases were forwarded to

12 Tuzla, but none of the rulings or decisions returned?

13 A. Yes, that's what I said. We had enormous difficulties because the

14 cases would be kept in Tuzla for several months, three to four months,

15 without the decision coming back. And people complained, and rightly so.

16 Q. When you said that people were right in complaining, who do you

17 mean?

18 A. I meant people who had a family member who was kept -- who was in

19 custody, in detention. We had to wait for the decision to see whether the

20 detention would be extended or rescinded. In the absence of such

21 decisions, we could do nothing and there were people coming to us

22 complaining.

23 Q. Did this stay the execution of cases, including the investigation

24 and trial stages?

25 A. Yes, it did.

1 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] I would like the witness to be shown

2 a document bearing the mark DA179864. This is a record of interview of an

3 accused.

4 Q. Please look at -- take a look at page 1. It says: "Record from

5 questioning of the defendant." There below it says: "Attended by:

6 Investigating judge." And then the record taker, Suhra Djilovic. Is that

7 you?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. Did you see this document prior to your coming to The Hague?

10 A. No.

11 Q. Please look at the person interviewed, Nezir Merdzic. Does this

12 name ring a bell? Did you indeed work as a court reporter for this case?

13 A. Yes, I did. But I'm not sure whether this may have been retyped.

14 I'm sure that this is not the record I typed out. I did type the record

15 of the interview, but this is not that particular copy.

16 For instance, take a look at the very end of the document. You

17 have the court reporter, counsel, investigating judge, even the accused

18 was supposed to be at the end. All of them should have been. And all of

19 them would sign the record. Every record had to be signed by these people

20 once it was typed out.

21 Q. Would you accept that this is the document you worked on in this

22 particular case?

23 A. Yes. I did type the record concerning the interview of this

24 person, but this is not the typewritten copy I produced.

25 Q. Under the law, was it customary for all the participants in the

1 proceedings, either before or during or after the war, to sign these

2 documents once they were completed?

3 A. Of course. This is customary for all the pre-trial stages. Had

4 these documents not been signed by the court reporter, the accused, the

5 counsel, or the investigating judge, the document would not have had any

6 validity.

7 JUDGE AGIUS: One moment. One moment, Madam Vidovic, let's make

8 this clear.

9 Madam, what you recall, therefore, is that in this particular case

10 involving a certain Nezir Merdzic, you did type out a report? You do

11 remember that?

12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I do. I remember typing it.

13 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. And the report that you typed would then have

14 been followed with the signatures of the various persons that would

15 normally sign that document. In this case, yourself, defence counsel,

16 Avdo Majstovovic [phoen], and the investigating judge, Mensur Omerovic,

17 and you are also saying the accused or the suspect person himself. Would

18 that be correct?

19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes.

20 JUDGE AGIUS: So what you are seeing here is allegedly a typed

21 copy -- typed, unsigned copy of the original that you would have typed.

22 Would you accept that statement?

23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I didn't understand the end of your

24 question.

25 JUDGE AGIUS: The end of my question is the following: Would you

1 accept the suggestion that what you are seeing there, in front of you, in

2 your own language, in B/C/S, is not the document that you typed out

3 yourself and was fine -- was signed by various people, but allegedly a

4 typed copy of it, a retyped copy of it, without signatures?

5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. I assert that this is only a

6 copy, a retyped copy.

7 JUDGE AGIUS: But -- but are you in a position to confirm to us

8 that what appears in this document that you have been shown today, these

9 three pages in your own language with no signatures at the end, but with

10 an indication of various names, is a faithful reflection, reproduction, of

11 the document that you, yourself, had signed -- had prepared and signed?

12 Would you guarantee to us that there are no changes, no alterations in

13 this document?

14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know. I haven't read the

15 text, and I couldn't know that. All I know is that as the court reporter

16 I would always sign the record, and my signature should be on this

17 document but I don't see it. I believe it was retyped.

18 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. If I gave you time to read out this document

19 in its entirety, do you think you would be in a position to confirm to us

20 whether this is a faithful reproduction of the document you yourself typed

21 out and signed, or would you still maintain that you would not be in a

22 position to remember?

23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] All I can say is that every record

24 that we made we signed in our own hand. The investigating judge, myself,

25 and all those present.

1 JUDGE AGIUS: All right.

2 Judge Eser would like to put a question.

3 Judge Eser, please proceed.

4 JUDGE ESER: I just would like to now how it worked. Now, when

5 there was a meeting or a hearing with a defendant and you have been there

6 as the recorder, recording -- the record-taker, did you take notes by

7 handwriting or did you type it directly into the machine?

8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I would type it directly on the

9 machine, directly on the typewriter. The investigating judge would be

10 putting questions, and I would be typing. It would be typed directly.

11 JUDGE ESER: And then it would be read by the defendant, all the

12 parties, then they would sign?

13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes. Everybody would read it

14 and then sign it, especially the witness or the accused. They would

15 certainly read it, and only then would they sign it. And then it would be

16 signed by the investigating judge and by me.

17 JUDGE ESER: All right. This is a rather long report. Now, would

18 this report be read to the people present or would everybody read it

19 individually and then sign?

20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The witness or the accused would

21 always read it individually. They would be given it to read, and only

22 then would they sign it.

23 JUDGE ESER: And the people would stay and wait until he has read

24 it and signed it?

25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes.

1 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you so much, Judge Eser.

2 Let's give this document a number. This document, which in the

3 original B/C/S language consists of three pages, bearing ERN DA17-9864

4 to 9866, and corresponding translation into English thereof, consisting of

5 three pages, is being tendered by the Defence and marked as Defence

6 Exhibit D1007.

7 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation]

8 Q. In connection with this let me ask you, Madam, have you heard that

9 trials were conducted pursuant to these investigations later on in Tuzla,

10 and that people were acquitted because of deficiencies in the record.

11 Have you heard of this?

12 A. No, I'm not aware of this. After the disaster that happened, I

13 went to Tuzla. I was looking for accommodation for myself and my

14 children. I was trying to find a school for my children. I was alone in

15 the street with my children, and I didn't even think about these things.

16 I had my own personal problems and obligations, so I didn't follow this

17 up.

18 Q. In any case, the judge asked you: Can you tell us whether what

19 you typed out has been correctly reproduced?

20 A. I couldn't say whether everything had been faithfully reproduced

21 from the original.

22 Q. Thank you. I'll move on now. After the demilitarisation, did the

23 situation in Srebrenica change?

24 A. No, it didn't. The situation remained the same as it had been in

25 1992 and early 1993. The situation remained the same.

1 Q. Were there still Serb attacks?

2 A. From time to time. Sometimes they were even worse than before.

3 Before the demilitarisation, we expected shelling attacks and so on, so we

4 were careful, we were cautious. We were careful to take shelter.

5 However, after demilitarisation we thought we could move about

6 freely, but this was not the case. A shell would always land from

7 somewhere, either from Tara or from Rogac. A multiple-rocket launcher

8 would be fired once a month, for example. There was constant fear. We

9 couldn't be safe.

10 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Could the witness now be shown D551.

11 Q. Please look at the document. You saw it during the proofing. Is

12 that correct?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. This is a document issued by Srebrenica municipality, the

15 Presidency, from the 26th of May, 1993. And I will read to you only small

16 excerpts in order to gain time.

17 It says here: "Statement or communique. Srebrenica has become a

18 large camp where there are so many problems every day that it is

19 impossible to resolve them."

20 Then in the third paragraph it says: "There are no free premises

21 in Srebrenica, even the garages are full. Up to 30 people live in one

22 small flat."

23 And then a little lower down it says: "There is no food or

24 electricity -- there is no water, electricity, or other living conditions

25 in Srebrenica. When Srebrenica was declared a protected zone, three

1 convoys would arrive every week, and now there is only one convoy with

2 meager quantities of food. There is no food, clothes, and so on."

3 Please turn to page 2. At the end of the second paragraph, it

4 says: "Weekly convoys of half-empty trucks don't bring enough food for

5 even one day."

6 And then it goes on: "The Chetniks at their checkpoints first

7 plunder the road convoys at their checkpoints, then tear the sacks and

8 scatter the remaining goods around the trucks. Why do you allow this?"

9 My question is: Does this reflect the actual situation in

10 Srebrenica after the demilitarisation?

11 A. Yes. This communique reflects correctly the situation in

12 Srebrenica at the time. Everything that is stated here is how things

13 were, actually.

14 Q. It says here that: "About 3.000 people without a roof over their

15 heads are spending days and nights under the open sky and we are asking

16 for tents and sleeping bags."

17 And please look at the end. It says that: "It's impossible to

18 organise life in Srebrenica until the large quantities of -- large numbers

19 of displaced persons leave. Therefore" --

20 JUDGE AGIUS: One moment, Ms. Vidovic, because there is a problem

21 that I need to attend to.

22 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

23 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. Let's proceed. It's no major problem.

24 One moment. Let's go into private session for a minute.

25 [Private session]

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11 Page 15286 redacted. Private session.

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 (redacted)

2 (redacted)

3 (redacted)

4 (redacted)

5 (redacted)

6 (redacted)

7 (redacted)

8 (redacted)

9 (redacted)

10 (redacted)

11 (redacted)

12 [Open session]

13 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation]

14 Q. We left off, Madam --

15 JUDGE AGIUS: And my apologies to you, Madam Vidovic, for having

16 interrupted you like this, but I thought I was duty-bound to bring this to

17 your attention.

18 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation]

19 Q. Madam, we left off when I was about to refer to the organisation

20 of life in the town. It says in this report: "It is impossible to

21 organise life in the town until it is relieved of the burden of so many

22 displaced persons."

23 Please turn to the last page of the document and take a look. It

24 says here: "In order to organise life in Srebrenica, we ask that UNPROFOR

25 organise the sending of doctors, lawyers, and teachers to Srebrenica. We

1 cannot agree on a demilitarisation if its sole meaning is that minimum

2 quantities of food are delivered to the town while there is no water,

3 electricity, telephone lines, and when schools, hospitals, courts, and

4 other organs of civilian authority are not working. In order to make life

5 bearable, we need cadres."

6 Does this document reflect the actual situation in Srebrenica,

7 especially with regard to cadres?

8 A. Yes, yes. It was a huge problem. We had few literate people

9 there, and they were working in the municipal War Presidency and the

10 Executive Board. There were too few of them to be able to do everything.

11 Of course we had enormous problems. We didn't have doctors, we didn't

12 have judges, we didn't have teachers. Simply, we did not have

13 professionals able to do things.

14 And we had vast numbers of refugees. It was terrible. The free

15 territory in Srebrenica was small. I regret the fact that we are short of

16 time, otherwise I would explain certain things. It's hard for me to talk

17 about this, but I wish I had time to describe the situation in 1993.

18 In 1992, I've already said quite a lot about that; but in 1993

19 after the demilitarisation, I can say that the situation got even worse.

20 In 1992 we still had food from the stocks that people still had, food they

21 had stored up. In 1993, these stores ran out. Morillon came. He said we

22 would be a protected area, and we relaxed a little. They promised us

23 regular deliveries of humanitarian aid. They would announce seven trucks,

24 and we would expect them happily, all the population, the refugees, we who

25 were working. We would be looking forward to their arrival. We would be

1 happy in the expectation of the aid. And seven trucks would arrive, four

2 of them would be empty. Only three of them would contain food.

3 People would see the empty trucks, and they would rush to the

4 municipality. They would ask to see the municipal war president, and they

5 would say: When is the food going to be distributed? Our children are

6 hungry. They would see the seven trucks arriving, but how could we

7 explain to them that only three of them had food in them? People didn't

8 believe us. They said: You're stealing the food. It would have been

9 impossible to steal it because the moment the trucks arrived, everybody

10 would be out there in the street. They would all be rejoicing, waiting

11 for the food to be distributed. Some people did see that the trucks were

12 empty, and they wouldn't come. But there were lots of people who couldn't

13 see that the trucks were empty. So we had enormous problems because of

14 that.

15 Q. Very well, Madam. Thank you. And my last question to you is:

16 Did the situation change before the fall of Srebrenica?

17 A. No, never. That's how it always was. They would say humanitarian

18 aid is arriving, 13 trucks are arriving, we would rejoice. But when they

19 arrived, they would say: We were stopped in Bratunac and the trucks were

20 looted. They wouldn't let them pass through. They always had problems in

21 Bratunac or Zvornik.

22 Q. Very well.

23 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours. I have no

24 further questions.

25 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you so much, Madam Vidovic.

1 I suggest that we have the break now, and that will be a 30-minute

2 break. And we'll take it up from there.

3 Do you think you'll finish -- probably not, looking at your eyes.

4 No. So our effort we laboured in vain. We came 30 minutes earlier today,

5 but we're still not there. Don't worry.

6 Madam, if you need to, inform your family that we will not be

7 finishing with your testimony today. We will finish tomorrow and not

8 today.

9 MS. SELLERS: Your Honour, I would not want to cause any false

10 hope, but if she could maybe reserve calling her family until after we go

11 to the next break. I will be able to judge better, in case there is a

12 chance.

13 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay, thank you.

14 So rather than contacting your family now, give it another two

15 hours, and we will know better whether you are finishing today or you're

16 finishing tomorrow and then you can contact your family or our staff can

17 contact your family on your behalf.

18 Thank you. 30 minutes from now means we will start 30 minutes

19 from now, anyway.

20 --- Recess taken at 10.23 a.m.

21 --- On resuming at 11.04 a.m.

22 JUDGE AGIUS: So, Madam, you are now going to be cross-examined by

23 Ms. Sellers, who is one of senior counsel in the Prosecution team. You

24 will recall what I told you the first day, yesterday, when you entered

25 into the courtroom, that in terms of your solemn declaration you have a

1 responsibility to answer truthfully all the questions that are put to you,

2 irrespective of who is putting the questions. In other words,

3 irrespective of whether it's the Defence team that is questioning you or

4 the Prosecution team.

5 At the end of the first break -- or the second break, rather,

6 at 12.30, we should know more or less whether you will be here with us

7 again tomorrow or whether you would finish the testimony -- your testimony

8 today. And in that case, you would be able to contact your family. All

9 right?

10 Ms. Sellers.

11 MS. SELLERS: Thank you, Your Honour.

12 Your Honour, I'll have to say this will probably be the first time

13 that we're using the stand and the microphone at the same time without it

14 stretching long. So if I'm too far away from the microphone, please let

15 me know. We're all adjusting a bit in the new courtroom.

16 JUDGE AGIUS: Reception on my side is perfect. I don't know about

17 my colleagues. Are you hearing her well? And I think if there is a

18 problem, most of the time it can be adjusted by increasing the level, the

19 sound level.

20 But I want to make sure that the interpreters can hear

21 you well. All right. All right. I see thumbs up in all the booths.

22 Thank you.

23 Cross-examined by Ms. Sellers:

24 Q. Ms. Djilovic, my name is Patricia Sellers. I'm standing over

25 here; as a matter of fact, I'm the one who is standing literally now, and

1 I'm with the Office of the Prosecution. I'll be asking you some

2 questions, and in the interests of trying to see if we could try and

3 conclude today, I might be going rather rapidly through some documents

4 with you, and my intention is just to elicit testimony. It is in no way

5 to confuse you. If you would like to slow down, take time -- more time

6 than it appears that I'm allowing, please just let me know. There will be

7 absolutely no problem with that, okay?

8 I would like to begin by confirming, Ms. Djilovic, that you spent

9 most of your adult in the town of Srebrenica. Is that correct?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. Do you know or did you know Mustafa Djilovic?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. Could you please tell the Trial Chamber what relationship, if any,

14 he is to you?

15 A. Yes, Mustafa Djilovic is my husband's brother.

16 Q. And also I'd like to ask you about Ekrem Djilovic. Is he someone

17 who's also related to you or to your husband?

18 A. Yes. Ekrem Djilovic is my husband.

19 Q. And your husband and his brother, were they with you in Srebrenica

20 during the time period of 1992 through 1994?

21 A. Yes, throughout the time.

22 Q. Thank you. I would now like to go back to some of your previous

23 testimony, and you stated that you worked with the War Presidency, in

24 particular Mr. Avdic, from latter part of July 1992 up until March or May

25 1993. Is that correct?

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. Would you just confirm, was it until March 1993 or was it until

3 May 1993?

4 A. The lower court was established only in May 1993, but I continued

5 working for the municipal War Presidency because there were no conditions

6 in place for the lower court to function, and it did not, in fact,

7 function until the -- until the very end of 1993. I hope I made myself

8 clear now.

9 Q. Yes. Thank you. I do understand.

10 Before you came to work for Mr. Avdic, did he have another

11 secretary who was doing the technical secretarial work that you did?

12 A. No. As far as I know, he did not. The municipal War Presidency

13 was established only on the 1st of July, and I started working for the

14 Presidency at the end of July 1992.

15 Q. Well, when you came to work for him, did you review any documents

16 that might have been written during the month of July after the

17 establishment of the War Presidency?

18 A. No, I didn't. Perhaps one or two documents, but there was no need

19 for me to review his earlier documents unless he showed them to me

20 personally because it had to do with something we were working on.

21 Q. I see. And a question that might rather common sense: I know

22 that you had an outer office that led to Mr. Avdic's office. Well, were

23 any papers or files that you kept that you generated, because you did

24 quite a lot of typing yourself, was that kept in your outer office or was

25 that kept in Mr. Avdic's office?

1 A. All the documents were with Mr. Avdic.

2 Q. So if persons came with reports or documents, then I understand

3 that they would be handed over to Mr. Avdic. They didn't necessarily have

4 to be handed over to you. Is that correct or am I -- have I

5 misunderstood?

6 A. I received documents for Mr. Avdic in his absence. Or if someone

7 was in a hurry, had a document to hand in to Mr. Avdic but had no time to

8 be received by him, then I would take over the document and hand it over

9 to him later on. So this was the case only when he was absent or when he

10 was busy.

11 JUDGE AGIUS: Now, let's make this clear.

12 There are two ways of going about this matter. There are

13 scenarios where the person, whoever it is, let's take Mr. Avdic in this

14 case, would never really receive and keep for himself any documents, but

15 any documents that are offered to him, he would say: Give them to my

16 secretary. And the secretary would take those documents and then refer

17 them to Mr. Avdic. That's one system.

18 The other system is: You would receive some documents from

19 individuals that you would pass on to Mr. Avdic, and Mr. Avdic would also

20 receive some documents himself without you knowing that he has received

21 these documents, and he would keep the entire -- the whole lot. Is this,

22 the latter system that I have described which was in operation in

23 Mr. Avdic's term at the time?

24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm not sure I understand, so I'll

25 repeat. In Mr. Avdic's absence, I would be the one receiving the

1 documents for him. Naturally, upon his arrival, I would pass the

2 documents over to him. Or when Mr. Avdic was busy and somebody came to

3 see him or hand a document to him but Mr. Avdic was busy and the person

4 was in a hurry, I would take the document and then pass it on to Mr. Avdic

5 later. Have I made myself clear now?

6 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, you have made yourself clear, Madam, completely

7 clear. But there is still one aspect which has not been cleared. What if

8 someone gave Mr. Avdic, himself, a document? Would you then -- would it

9 also be passed on to you by Mr. Avdic or would Mr. Avdic keep it for

10 himself? Would he inform you of the document or would he just put it on

11 record or in his files and that's the end of it?

12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] He would keep the document for

13 himself. There was no reason for him to inform me thereof. I was his

14 subordinate; he was my superior.

15 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. So, in other words, who was in charge of

16 the filing?

17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. Avdic kept all the documents

18 with himself. My office was the outer one where persons passed through.

19 I was supposed to keep the visitors there if he was busy, and I would

20 otherwise be typing documents when we had paper available and only in the

21 cases when this was a matter of urgency. Because we worked in

22 makeshift -- improvised conditions. There was a war on, and you have to

23 understand that we had shortages of almost everything.

24 JUDGE AGIUS: But in other words, within your sphere of

25 responsibilities, you did not have the -- the role of filing and keeping

1 custody over these documents that were received by Mr. Avdic? That was

2 not your responsibility, in other words?

3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, it wasn't.

4 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay.

5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Besides, we did not even have the

6 material necessary for filing documents. If we happened to have the odd

7 binder, it would be used; otherwise, there wasn't much of that around.

8 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay.

9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] We did not even have log-books to

10 enter such information into.

11 JUDGE AGIUS: All right.

12 [Trial Chamber confers]

13 JUDGE AGIUS: For the second time in a day, Judge Eser and myself

14 were thinking exactly alike. So I put the question that he meant to put.

15 Ms. Sellers.

16 MS. SELLERS:

17 Q. Thank you very much, Ms. Djilovic, for explaining this.

18 Then the next question I would like to ask, just very briefly, has

19 to do with Mr. Hamdija Fejzic. Did he have a secretary, a technical

20 secretary, like yourself?

21 A. No. No, he didn't. He didn't have a secretary. I serviced all

22 of them, including Hamdija Fejzic, and that was in 1992 and early 1993.

23 There was not much to do. We did not have material or conditions to

24 enable us to work. We were there to keep this institution alive in order

25 to make the people arriving into town and the people who were in town more

1 comfortable, feeling that they had someone there thinking of them, taking

2 care of them.

3 Q. Then am I correct in assuming that if there was typing to be done,

4 then you did the typing for Mr. Fejzic and for Dzemal Becirovic, Rasid

5 Efendic, those who were located in the same building, or is that an

6 incorrect assumption?

7 A. I would not be retyping, rather I'd be typing out a letter or

8 whatever had to be typewritten. As we only had this one typewriter, we

9 had only one ink ribbon which became worn out over time, we only used the

10 typewriter for the essential documents, appeals or such-like writings that

11 had to be typed out.

12 Q. And I take it that that typewriter, the functioning typewriter was

13 on your desk or within your working area?

14 A. It was a mechanical typewriter which was made operational. It had

15 the ink ribbon, and it was in my office.

16 Q. Yes. And you did mention that you had to get paper. And since

17 you were the main typist, the only typist within the municipal building,

18 did you yourself ever go to different places to get paper so that you

19 could type on so you could fulfil your work responsibilities?

20 A. No. Normally all of us tried to obtain blank paper wherever we

21 could, but this was not a specific obligation of mine. My obligation was

22 to type whatever I was dictated, although whenever I came across some

23 blank paper I'd bring it over to work.

24 Q. Sometime did the persons for whom you worked, Mr. Becirovic,

25 Mr. Efendic, would they bring paper to you so that you could type some of

1 the work or the letters that they dictated to you?

2 A. They rarely dictated the text to me, but of course they would

3 bring papers although it wasn't blank paper. Normally it was paper that

4 had already been used on one side of the sheet, and then we'd use the

5 blank parts of it. And this was true for the entire 1992.

6 Q. Thank you. Now I'd like to ask you some questions, again

7 work-related, but concerning your schedule. You testified that you worked

8 between the end of July until May, even a bit longer than May. Could you

9 tell us more specifically how many times a week you would come into the

10 office?

11 A. I can't tell you exactly. It -- it all depended on the situation

12 in the town. When shelling was more intense, I wasn't able to come into

13 office. I'd wait for a lull in shelling. They'd tell us, you know: You

14 should not go out when the shelling is going on. You should wait for the

15 point when they stop to recharge their barrels and then go out.

16 So I did not go out that often. There was a war on. The

17 situation was dreadful. And if I were to find myself in the same

18 situation now, I don't think I'd be able to endure it. And sometimes I

19 wonder how I managed to endure the situation, to walk out in the street

20 with the shells landing around me. I'd even happened to step in a puddle

21 of blood belonging to a man who'd been hit by a shell. I did my best to

22 help my children, the children of others. I did whatever I could.

23 Q. Ms. Djilovic, thank you. I do understand that very much that the

24 conditions that we're speaking of were conditions that were quite

25 difficult. Given even those very difficult conditions, could you tell the

1 Trial Chamber that you were at the work of the municipal building once a

2 week? Are we talking about twice a week? Are we talking about at least

3 once a day but maybe for a very short time period? Give us an idea.

4 A. There were periods when I was able to go there every day and work

5 without a problem, and then two or three days would pass without me being

6 able to go to work. Whenever I could, I went. There were days when I was

7 unable to return home and had to spend the night in the cellar of the

8 municipality building when there was heavy shelling. Those were the days

9 when, to avoid risk, we would wait for the nightfall or spent the night

10 there.

11 Q. And during that time period when you were not able to come to

12 work, would the municipal building still be functioning? Would Mr. Avdic

13 still receive people, receive reports, have visitors, sometimes hold

14 meetings?

15 JUDGE AGIUS: If you know.

16 MS. SELLERS:

17 Q. If you know.

18 JUDGE AGIUS: If you know.

19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know. I don't know, but I

20 think that whenever I was unable to come the gentleman was also unable to

21 come; at least I believe so. It must have been true for everyone, that

22 they had to remain in shelters. But I don't know.

23 MS. SELLERS:

24 Q. Thank you. Because I was going to ask you: Would you know

25 whether that's the case for Mr. Fejzic, Mr. Becirovic, Mr. Efendic, that

1 they conducted no business during the time periods when you were unable to

2 come? That, if I understand correctly, you said that you do not know.

3 A. I don't know whether they were able to come.

4 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Ms. Vidovic.

5 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, to avoid

6 misunderstanding, which Efendic do you mean? Two different persons were

7 mentioned, one of which did not work in Srebrenica. And when you put the

8 question like this, it can confuse the witness.

9 MS. SELLERS:

10 Q. I'm speaking about Mr. Rasid Efendic.

11 JUDGE AGIUS: But basically she has already answered she doesn't

12 know --

13 MS. SELLERS: For the record --

14 JUDGE AGIUS: Let's move.

15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I believe, as far as I've

16 understood -- I know Resid Efendic. I don't know Rasid Efendic --

17 JUDGE AGIUS: It's okay. Don't bother about it.

18 I have one question. Maybe I can close this particular

19 parenthesis here. When you had this bombing, this -- these attacks,

20 shelling, as you call it, were you the only person who would stay indoors

21 and protect yourself, not go out, or was it the general practice of

22 everyone? Everyone would stay indoors when there was shelling going on?

23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. It depended on the part of town

24 shelled. Not all of us lived in the same part of town. If the part of

25 the town where I lived was shelled, I wouldn't go out. If the part where

1 Fejzic and Becirovic lived was shelled, then they wouldn't come. And of

2 course, if the entire town was being shelled, none of the people would

3 move. It all depended on the part of town targeted.

4 JUDGE AGIUS: And you cannot be more specific than that? In other

5 words, there is no way you can tell us that there were days when you

6 couldn't go to the municipal -- municipality building because there was

7 shelling and that Mr. Avdic also couldn't go or Mr. Fejzic couldn't go?

8 In other words, you're not in a position to be as specific as Ms. Sellers

9 tried to elicit from you?

10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] There were days when nobody was able

11 to come to work, but those were really rare occasions.

12 JUDGE AGIUS: All right.

13 Ms. Sellers, I think you have got more -- enough information.

14 MS. SELLERS: Yes.

15 JUDGE AGIUS: If you have any further questions on this, of course

16 you can go ahead; but if not, let's close on this --

17 MS. SELLERS: I'm quite satisfied with that, Your Honour.

18 Q. I'd like to go to the next organisational issue concerning your

19 work. And is that, with the War Presidency at times there were meetings.

20 Now, were you involved in organising the meetings, and by that I mean in

21 contacting people who were to attend the meetings to let them know the

22 time and the place and possibly the agenda of the meeting?

23 A. No. No. That's not the way it was. I'm not sure I understand

24 the question. Can you clarify a bit?

25 Q. Certainly, and I appreciate you asking me that. When the meetings

1 of the War Presidency were held, such as the one we saw on the film, was

2 it part of your responsibility to contact the different people who were to

3 attend the meeting? Did you tell them when the meeting would be held,

4 what room it would be held in, the different subjects that would be

5 discussed at the meeting? Was this part of your responsibility?

6 A. I can only say that as there were few people and all of them were

7 there, it wasn't my duty to summon them, but they'd agree amongst

8 themselves as to when the meeting should be held. And they met only when

9 the situation permitted them to meet. It did not depend on us, in fact,

10 on when we wanted to have the meeting. When most of the people were

11 there, they'd discuss the possible date of the meeting. And if the

12 circumstances permitted it, the meeting was held.

13 You have to understand that we worked under improvised conditions.

14 It was not a normal situation where I would be contacting people and

15 inviting them to come for the meeting. When all these people were there,

16 sometimes Avdic would tell them that the meeting should be held or I

17 should -- I told them. But there were no conditions in place for the

18 meetings to be held, as is normal; rather, depending on the circumstances,

19 given the shelling, we met when we could. Otherwise, I would probably

20 have been inviting people, sending a courier over to them to let them

21 know. Since we did not have these conditions, we did not have a courier

22 for that. We did as best we could.

23 Q. Yes. And Ms. Djilovic, that's one thing I wanted to ask you.

24 You've testified, you told the Trial Chamber there was no courier service,

25 and yet we saw the film with a meeting that had quite a few people in the

1 room. If I could count, there were upwards of 10 to 15 people. One of

2 the persons came from Potocari. How was that person, if you know,

3 notified about the meeting? Are you aware of how that happened?

4 A. Most probably that particular person happened to be in town, and

5 some of the members of the War Presidency told the person that he or she

6 should come to attend the meeting.

7 Q. Okay. So that's a possibility of what could have happened,

8 because you don't really know how meetings or the meeting schedule was

9 communicated to the members of the War Presidency. Isn't that correct?

10 A. It's not that I don't know. I know the ways in which they could

11 have been notified. They could have been notified only when they were

12 there, the situation permitting. During the morning meeting, they would

13 discuss the possible times when they could meet. You have to know that

14 there was a war on and the War Presidency itself was a makeshift organ

15 which had to work under conditions which were not normal. In spite of

16 that, there were attempts at making it work.

17 Q. Certainly. You've just testified that there was the morning

18 meeting. I don't believe that I completely understand what you mean

19 by "the morning meeting." Was this a regular occurrence, Ms. Djilovic?

20 A. No, no. Rarely Hajrudin Avdic, Fejzic, sometimes Becirovic,

21 sometimes Hasanovic, all were present to discuss their duties because they

22 were trying to perform some of them -- those duties, and that's what I was

23 referring to. The situation permitting, they would meet in the morning to

24 discuss these matters, and that was when they would schedule a meeting of

25 the municipal War Presidency. And then all of them would notify others.

1 Q. Thank you for that clarification.

2 Now, the film that we saw with the meeting from the War

3 Presidency, you were not present, physically present, in that meeting,

4 were you, Ms. Djilovic?

5 A. No. No, I wasn't.

6 Q. Usually were you present -- I'm sorry. Were you going to say

7 something?

8 A. But I was sitting in my office in the room leading into the office

9 of the president of the War Presidency. So I was sitting in the room in

10 front.

11 Q. I see. Normally --

12 JUDGE AGIUS: One moment.

13 What's happening, Mr. Jones?

14 MR. JONES: Yes, Your Honour, my lead counsel has informed me she

15 wasn't feeling very well.

16 JUDGE AGIUS: All right.

17 MR. JONES: That's why she's withdrew, but we can -- I asked her

18 and she said we can continue for the time being.

19 JUDGE AGIUS: But if you think that we should stop, we will also

20 stop.

21 MR. JONES: Yes. Hopefully it will remain in short duration, and

22 if not, then perhaps in 10 or 15 minutes --

23 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. But do let us know, please, because I

24 saw it happening --

25 MR. JONES: Yes.

1 JUDGE AGIUS: -- rather abruptly, so I didn't know exactly what

2 was happening.

3 MR. JONES: Yes.

4 JUDGE AGIUS: But you're quite sure that she was in the condition

5 to confirm to you that we can proceed because if she wasn't, then

6 obviously --

7 MR. JONES: Yes, I did ask that.

8 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. I thank you, Mr. Jones.

9 Yes, sorry, Ms. Sellers.

10 MS. SELLERS: No, no. And certainly, this is quite important.

11 Q. Yes. I wanted to ask you usually or on a regular basis, did you

12 attend the meetings of the War Presidencies -- Presidency, such as the one

13 that we saw in the film?

14 A. No, not always. I did sometimes. When Mr. Avdic asked me to come

15 in, when he needed something, only on such occasions, but that happened

16 rarely.

17 Q. And did you draw up the agenda or any document that would be

18 handed out to the participants at the meeting that would detail the

19 subjects that were going to be discussed?

20 A. I can't answer that. I'm not aware of that. I don't think so,

21 no.

22 Q. Well, let me just rephrase that. Before each meeting -- oh. Yes,

23 ma'am?

24 A. Could you repeat your question, please?

25 Q. Certainly. Before each meeting were you tasked with writing up an

1 agenda, writing up a piece of paper that would have the different subjects

2 that would be discussed at the meeting to give to participants?

3 A. No. No. We didn't have materials. I didn't have anything to

4 write on. I didn't write any agendas. If anyone did that, it was the

5 secretary of the municipal War Presidency, Resid Efendic. He would have

6 done that, not me.

7 Q. All right. And let me just ask a question that might appear quite

8 stupid. But in lieu of not having any paper, would you inform the

9 participants as they went into the door what would be the subject matter

10 that would be discussed at the meeting? Would you say it orally, as

11 opposed to giving them a written document?

12 A. No, no. Neither in writing nor orally.

13 I have to tell you again that the situation was not normal. This

14 wasn't normal kind of work. It was all improvised. Quite simply, no. I

15 didn't write anything or inform anyone. They would find out at the

16 meeting itself what it was about.

17 Q. Yes. And then my other question related to the meeting in terms

18 of your responsibilities, is that after the meeting would you be asked to

19 write down from any notes that Mr. Avdic took a summary of the meeting or

20 a compte-rendu?

21 A. Sometimes, not always. Sometimes, but not always.

22 Q. So could one --

23 A. As far as I can recall.

24 Q. Could one say that you usually wrote down a summary of the meeting

25 or you rarely wrote down a summary of the meeting of the Presidency?

1 A. I never wrote any summaries, but the president would dictate

2 something he felt necessary. He would dictate and I would type.

3 Q. Okay. Now, you've mentioned -- just a couple minutes ago you

4 testified that Mr. Efendic, Resid - I hope I'm pronouncing his name

5 correctly - Mr. Efendic was his secretary and it was his function at the

6 War Presidency to take down notes. Have I understood you correctly?

7 A. Yes, yes. He wrote up the minutes.

8 Q. Now, would you type the minutes after he wrote them up?

9 A. No, no, I didn't. Those minutes were not typed out. They

10 remained as they were because we were saving paper, if we had any. We

11 were saving it for something that it was more necessary to type out.

12 Minutes stayed the way they were. If they were handwritten, they remained

13 handwritten.

14 Q. Thank you. I understand. Well, did you have a chance then to

15 read over his handwritten notes, his handwritten minutes, after each

16 meeting so that you could be kept informed of what happened at the

17 meeting?

18 A. As I didn't type out his minutes, as I didn't type them out, there

19 was no need. For Mr. Resid Efendic, I never typed out his minutes, so I'm

20 not familiar with his handwriting.

21 Q. Thank you. Now, I have another question, and again it's technical

22 and, really, I beg your indulgence. I've never learned how to type very

23 well, nor very fast, and I'm certain you're much -- you're very skilled at

24 typing and taking dictation. When you type something that's being

25 dictated to you, particularly during the time period you were at the War

1 Presidency, did you also read back the document, understand the document,

2 try and keep a memory of what the document was about in addition to

3 performing the services of typing it and preserve -- memorialising it and

4 typing?

5 A. No. My task was only to type what was dictated. I took care to

6 type out what was being dictated to me as best I could, and that was my

7 only task. I wasn't interested in the content of the text; I was looking

8 at the letters and the esthetic appearance of the page, the layout, not

9 the content.

10 Q. And in relationship to the esthetic appearance, you've testified

11 to the Trial Chamber that on one occasion when there was bombing that

12 someone said: Please put a heading on the paper that you were typing, and

13 it wasn't easy for you to even say: This is one time period when I will

14 not put a heading. So I think that shows that you are concerned about how

15 your documents look, their appearance. Correct?

16 A. Yes, yes, and that's what I said. The shelling then was so

17 intense and I was so terrified that I don't even know how I managed to

18 type that out at all, and I remember that heading very well. I didn't

19 have time. And when he said: There's no heading. I said: Please, put

20 it in yourself. You'll be sending this. I remember that document very

21 well.

22 The shelling was so intense - I explained this yesterday - that

23 there were even grammatical errors. I was so terrified. I thought a

24 shell might land at any moment because the Serbs shelled the municipality

25 most often, and as my office was on the second floor I kept looking out of

1 the window. I remember that incident really well and the dictating of

2 that document then.

3 Q. As the seat of the local government, is it your opinion that the

4 municipal building was often the recipient of probably more shelling than

5 other places in the town?

6 A. Yes. I apologise. Yes, certainly. The municipal building was

7 shelled most often and was most subject to attacks.

8 Q. Ms. Djilovic, returning a bit to esthetics, I noticed on the

9 document that you're referring to that it appears that you might have

10 corrected some of the spelling errors by typing over a letter in a word to

11 make sure that it was correct, or would you just handwrite it in order to

12 save typing paper?

13 A. I don't know what document you're referring to.

14 Q. I'm referring to the document that you typed during the bombing

15 when someone asked you to put the heading on it.

16 A. No. I didn't have the time to either retype it or anything. I

17 may have typed over a letter, but I don't think I typed over anything

18 really because there was no time to put in corrections.

19 I remember that day very well when we were dictating, when the

20 gentleman was dictating that document to me. I didn't have time to go

21 back and to type the errors over or put in handwritten corrections. I

22 didn't even have time to put in the heading. I said: Put in the heading

23 yourself.

24 Q. When you did have time, when there was not the intense bombing of

25 the municipal building, would you often, or on occasion, in order to save

1 paper, write in corrections on your document by hand or possibly type over

2 something that you had typed before?

3 A. No, no. No. Under normal conditions when there would be no

4 shelling, when it was a peaceful day - when I say "peaceful," I mean when

5 there was no shooting - then I would be very careful when typing, to make

6 sure that it looked nice. We were using typing appeals or reports. And I

7 never entered corrections by hand myself, no.

8 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Judge Eser would like to put a question.

9 JUDGE ESER: I just have a question.

10 At this point, since different from Ms. Sellers, I have had to

11 type quite a bit in my early days. Now, when you typed, you told us that

12 you did not have time to re-read it and then make corrections, but

13 sometimes it happens that while you are writing you realise that you made

14 a mistake. Now, would you make -- would you try to correct this mistake

15 immediately, or would you say: Leave it as it is and go on? Because you

16 realise that you forgot a letter while typing, then would you try to

17 correct this immediately or would you just leave it as it is and go on?

18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Under normal conditions, in a normal

19 situation without shooting, I rarely make mistakes. So I didn't need to

20 go back, type over, or enter corrections by hand. Not me.

21 JUDGE ESER: Perhaps you did not get my question completely. At

22 least as I am used to -- sometimes --

23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Could you please repeat your

24 question. I don't know what document you're referring to.

25 JUDGE ESER: No. I am not referring to any specific document.

1 My question was -- my question was: As is my experience,

2 sometimes you type, and while you are typing you realise you forgot a

3 letter or made a wrong letter. Now, would you then try to correct this

4 immediately or would you rather say: Leave it as it is and I'll go on?

5 So I do not mean the situation where you have typed a letter and then you

6 would re-read it; that's not what I mean. I mean the case where you are

7 typing and while you are typing you realise that you made a mistake

8 whether you would corrected it or whether you would just leave it as it

9 is.

10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think I rarely entered corrections

11 because it was rarely necessary. I always tried to type correctly. It

12 was an ordinary typewriter, a mechanical typewriter. Once you type over a

13 letter you don't know what letter it actually is. So it's better to leave

14 it as it is than to type it over. Very rarely did I type one letter over

15 another letter.

16 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you, Judge Eser.

17 MS. SELLERS:

18 Q. Yes. Ms. Djilovic, was it ever brought to your attention that

19 some of the persons who you typed for might have added things on to the

20 document, either written something on the document, corrected from their

21 point of view, a spelling of a name?

22 A. I don't remember that. I don't recall. I don't know. I can't

23 answer because I don't recall.

24 Q. Certainly. Now, the days that you were not present at the

25 municipal building because of the shelling, is it possible that other

1 people used your typewriter since it was the only one in the building?

2 A. I'm not aware of that.

3 Q. Do you know whether Mr. Avdic was a decent typist?

4 A. He didn't type well, but he could have used a typewriter but he

5 wasn't a good typist. He's a mechanical engineer, not a typist. But a

6 brief text, yes, he could type it out. But he wouldn't do that often. He

7 would usually write it in handwriting.

8 There was a war on. The conditions were wartime conditions. The

9 situation was not normal, so we didn't really feel that everything had to

10 be typed, as would have been the case in normal circumstances.

11 Q. So if I can just try and understand what you're saying is that if

12 Mr. Avdic wrote something out, as opposed to typing it out, that would

13 carry the same effect? He can write something and deliver it; it doesn't

14 have to be typed, because of the war going on?

15 A. Yes. Yes. He could have written it out.

16 Q. Now, am I correct also to assume that Mr. Becirovic was not a

17 great typist?

18 A. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. Which Becirovic do

19 you mean?

20 Q. I'm talking -- I'm referring to Becirovic, Dzemal Becirovic, who

21 was part of the Presidency -- I'm sorry, Dzemal Becirovic.

22 A. I don't know whether he could type or not or what his typing was

23 like.

24 Q. And if you would bear with me, I would like to ask the same

25 question --

1 A. Was I --

2 Q. Yes. I would like to ask the same question in relationship to --

3 if you know, whether Naser Oric was a good typist.

4 A. I knew Naser Oric so slightly. I only saw him a few times during

5 the war. I don't know really. I'm not in a position to know that.

6 Q. Do you know whether he ever came over to use your typewriter,

7 ma'am?

8 A. No, never. I was the only one who had a typewriter. The only

9 typewriter that could be used was the one in my office, and I never typed

10 anything for Naser Oric. He never asked me to type something out for him.

11 Q. Now, you've stated that you had the only typewriter in the

12 municipality. And what I'd like to understand, do you mean that you

13 had -- I'm sorry.

14 A. Yes, yes.

15 Q. Did you have the only typewriter in the municipal building, or did

16 you have the only typewriter in the municipality of Srebrenica?

17 A. I think there were only two typewriters, ordinary, mechanical

18 typewriters. I worked on one; the other one was in the office of the

19 Executive Board. It stood there in case someone ever managed to get a

20 ribbon for it and then it would be possible to use it. But the only

21 mechanical typewriter that could be used was in my office.

22 Q. So am I assuming that your answer to my question is that you had

23 the only working typewriter in the municipal building?

24 A. Yes, and that one was in my office.

25 Q. And you're really unaware if there were any other working

1 typewriters in the municipality of Srebrenica? That's correct; right,

2 Ms. Djilovic?

3 A. As far as I know, there weren't.

4 Q. Okay.

5 JUDGE AGIUS: That's -- yes. I want to make sure -- Judge Eser

6 has the same feeling I have, that she may have misunderstood your

7 question. Perhaps you may repeat it. You could repeat it.

8 MS. SELLERS: Yes --

9 Q. Well, why don't we take it -- we'll just break it down a bit

10 further, Ms. Djilovic.

11 I'm to understand from your testimony - and please correct me if I

12 am wrong - that to your knowledge you had the only working typewriter in

13 the municipality, the opstina, of Srebrenica? Are you prepared to say

14 that? Yes, or you don't know?

15 A. When you say "the municipality of Srebrenica," I don't understand.

16 Q. Okay.

17 A. Do you mean the entire free territory? As far as I know, there

18 was only that one typewriter, and I don't know of any other. I don't know

19 of the existence of any other. I know that there was this one in the

20 municipal building, and I think it was the only one that had a ribbon and

21 that could be used in 1992.

22 Q. So --

23 JUDGE AGIUS: So basically, to your knowledge you know of your own

24 typewriter and you don't know of any other typewriter. But you are not

25 excluding that there could have been other typewriters with ribbons that

1 you never came to know about? For example, are you aware whether the

2 hospital had a typewriter? Are you aware whether the police -- the

3 security section had a typewriter? Are you aware if Hakija Meholjic had a

4 typewriter?

5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Not at the beginning. Later on they

6 may have managed to get a mechanical typewriter each.

7 You know, even if you get hold of a typewriter, it would be hard

8 to get materials, because mechanical typewriters had to have ribbons.

9 Ribbons dry out, they get torn, they get worn out. It was very difficult

10 to find the materials you need for a typewriter. I know by the -- my own.

11 I'm not aware. I don't know, but I don't think they had any at the

12 beginning at least.

13 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. Well, I think we can leave it at that

14 and move forward. Thank you.

15 MS. SELLERS: Yes. Thank you, Your Honour.

16 Q. Madam Djilovic, thank you very much for that explanation, in

17 particular about your working area. And I would now like to turn to a

18 time period just very briefly before you came to work at the municipal

19 building. In the month of June 1992, you were aware that war had broken

20 out in the Srebrenica area. That was your testimony; correct,

21 Ms. Djilovic?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. Now, when did you become aware that the War Presidency existed and

24 there might be a possibility of you working there?

25 A. When Becirovic called me to talk, when he learned I was there. He

1 asked me to come and see him, and then I learned that there was a body

2 called the municipal War Presidency; it was an improvised body. When he

3 said to me "municipal War Presidency," at first I imagined something else.

4 But when I saw what the conditions were like, it didn't look like a body

5 or an institution. It was all makeshift. But people were doing their

6 best.

7 As I said yesterday, if we heard that there was a literate person

8 somewhere, we could go and ask them to come. People were trying to set

9 something up. It was just an attempt to do something under the conditions

10 prevailing at the time. The town had been looted; there was nothing

11 anywhere. When refugees arrived, all you could see for days was streets

12 full of people, mostly women and children, people who had been expelled.

13 Q. Ms. Djilovic, were you also aware around that same time period

14 that there had been some attempts to organise a defence of Srebrenica?

15 A. I didn't start working at once. The war broke out in April, and

16 it was only towards the end of July that I began to work. And I didn't

17 know what was going on. I was confused. We'd all been living and working

18 together nicely, and then suddenly those same people who had been living

19 with us were shelling us. They had looted us. They had burnt houses.

20 And at first I was confused. I didn't even think there was something I

21 could do. I was just trying to survive with my children. When we went to

22 bed at night, I would thank God that we had not been wounded and that we

23 were still in good health. The same would happen in the morning. For

24 days and months, I was in a state of confusion.

25 When Becirovic asked me to come to work, I thought about it and

1 then I said: Well, let's start. He had said to me: We have to try and

2 do something. There are a few educated people left, a few literate people

3 left. You see how many refugees there are. There's no one to work in the

4 administration, to type, and you can do that. So I agreed.

5 But when you say "defence," I don't really understand what -- can

6 you clarify what you mean by "defence"?

7 Q. Certainly.

8 A. What were you trying to say by this word "defence"? I do

9 apologise because I can't answer.

10 Q. No. Let me try and state the question a bit clearer. When I

11 asked whether you might have been aware at some attempts to organise the

12 defence of Srebrenica, I'm talking about an armed defence. Were you aware

13 of any attempts of men, armed men, trying to protect Srebrenica, the town,

14 or the outlying villages throughout the municipality of Srebrenica?

15 A. As far as I know, every village, every local commune, tried to

16 protect its own perimeter. The -- the persons tried to defend their

17 homes, so wherever they resided, that was the place that they tried to

18 defend. Although, I don't know in what ways they did that because I know

19 that we did not have any weapons and they had to prevent the Serbs from

20 advancing into the area. I know that despite these attempts, the Serbs

21 continued with their attacks.

22 Q. Madam Djilovic, let me try and be even more specific. Did you

23 hear or know about people such as Hakija Meholjic, Akif Ustic, Naser Oric,

24 Zulfo Tursunovic prior to working at the municipal building?

25 A. No, no. I was not aware of this. I didn't know where these

1 people were or what they were doing.

2 Q. Were you aware of people such as Suljo Hasanovic?

3 A. Yes. I knew Suljo Hasanovic from before the war because he also

4 worked for the administrative organ. When I started working, I learnt

5 that Suljo had only just arrived. He was released from a place called

6 Suceska because he was probably in his own village when the war broke out

7 and then subsequently came into town, when he was able to come to the town

8 when the Serbs had already retreated.

9 Q. At that time period did your husband or brother-in-law talk about

10 men, armed men, who were trying to defend their towns or villages? Was

11 that ever a subject of conversation?

12 A. No, no. My husband, my brother-in-law, and I were together all

13 the time. And whatever I was unable to know, they were unable to know,

14 too.

15 MS. SELLERS: Your Honour, I would like to ask if the witness can

16 be shown Prosecution Exhibit P4, please. It's on Sanctions.

17 Q. Ms. Djilovic, I would ask you to look through this document. You

18 will see that its date is June 15th, 1992, and it has a

19 title: "Srebrenica TO," a number qualifying the letter. And it

20 says: "By the powers vested in him, the commander of the Srebrenica TO,

21 hereby issues the following order."

22 "With the aim of confronting the aggressor and engaging in the

23 struggle for liberation and return of the occupied territory -- occupied

24 areas, all the commanders of self-organised armed groups are ordered to

25 immediately commence the organisation and establishment of the Srebrenica

1 TO units as follows."

2 Now, you've testified that during May and June that there were

3 local groups, people defending their own locale, and that there was Serb

4 aggression. Would you agree with the statement in this first paragraph

5 that talks about the aggressor and the organisation of local groups in the

6 occupied areas?

7 A. First of all, the TO staff did not exist in May, June, or even

8 July. As far as I understand, there was never a properly functioning TO

9 staff in Srebrenica in the strict sense of the term.

10 Q. Might I ask you when --

11 A. In order -- or rather, had we had the army, we would have been

12 able to have a staff. As it was, it was impossible.

13 As for the local group leaders, when I started working I found out

14 that there were local group leaders and that there were groups of people

15 who got organised in the places where they lived in order to prevent the

16 Serbs from entering the area as far as possible. That's what I know and I

17 believe it to be true.

18 As for this particular stamp, it's quite unclear to me. But I've

19 told you as much as I know about this order.

20 Q. So, Madam Djilovic, if I understand that your testimony is that

21 you were just unaware? You did not know, did not speak to your relatives

22 about any form of local organisation of an armed resistance in Srebrenica.

23 Would that be correct?

24 A. I did not talk about this with my family because we didn't know.

25 I was at home at the time and I didn't know anything. Those were the days

1 and months when we were confused. I've already said that. We were unable

2 to believe that things were really happening that way. It was only when I

3 started working that as I was working I learnt about the existence of

4 local group leaders, all of whom were located in the same places where

5 they had lived. For instance, Suceska, there was Zulfo Tursunovic, who

6 had his local group there. He came to see Hajrudin Avdic, and that's how

7 I got to know about it. He would talk about this group of his and how

8 they had come under attack.

9 As for the TO staff, it existed only before the war. I worked for

10 the secretary for national defence, and I know what the staff of the

11 Territorial Defence is. And I know that therefore this could not have

12 been a proper staff. And I also find this stamp quite unclear.

13 Q. Madam -- Mrs. Djilovic, let me just -- first of all just ask you

14 two things. We're going to have to try and keep your answers a bit

15 shorter. Please explain fully but a bit shorter because of the time

16 consequences. And to get more specifically to the questions that come out

17 of the answer that you just gave, so you would agree that about 45 days

18 after June 15th, by the end of July 1992, then you're aware of Zulfo

19 Tursunovic having organised a group or being a local leader within

20 Suceska, yes or no?

21 A. I learnt about this when I started working.

22 Q. Yes.

23 A. That's to say that Zulfo Tursunovic was at Suceska, that he had a

24 group of defenders defending Suceska.

25 Q. Yes. All right. Now, can I also confirm that within 45 days you

1 also learned that Naser Oric was going to be a member of the War

2 Presidency and that his role in the War Presidency was related to the

3 armed forces. Isn't that correct? Just --

4 A. Could you clarify, please. I don't understand the question.

5 JUDGE AGIUS: I -- I think it --

6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know which 45 --

7 JUDGE AGIUS: I think you can split it in two, Ms. Sellers.

8 Always referring to these famous 45 days. And the first part would be:

9 Would it be correct to say that within these 45 days you also learned that

10 Naser Oric was going to be a member of the War Presidency? Answer that

11 question first.

12 MS. SELLERS: Your Honour, I might say that maybe it would be

13 easier for her if I was to say --

14 Q. By the end of July, when you joined the War Presidency, then you

15 learned that Naser Oric was a member of the War Presidency as a commander

16 of the TO?

17 A. No. I found out and saw that Naser Oric was a member of the War

18 Presidency. I did not know what his duties were and what he was doing. I

19 only knew that he was a member of the municipal War Presidency. I didn't

20 know what his duty was. I didn't have to know everything.

21 Q. Yes. And then let me just continue down that vein and find out,

22 Ms. Djilovic, if you would agree that by the end of July 1992 you then

23 learned that Mirzet Halilovic was going to be the commander or was the

24 commander of the military police. Is that correct? And I refer you to

25 subsection 10(c) on the document before you.

1 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Jones.

2 MR. JONES: Yes, Your Honour, I'm afraid that's bound to be

3 misleading to the witness because her answer in relation to Mirzet

4 Halilovic which she gave yesterday relates to the War Presidency. We know

5 that this relates to a different organ. The witness has given her answers

6 about the Territorial Defence, whether it existed. I'm afraid that her

7 answer is going to combine what she knew about Mirzet Halilovic and the

8 military police with this document to give the Prosecution a link between

9 Mirzet Halilovic and the staff --

10 MS. SELLERS: Your Honour, I would now have to ask Defence

11 counsel, please, certain things that should not be said before the witness

12 about as to what is the intent of my question.

13 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, you are hundred per cent correct. However, you

14 do also need to rephrase your question because it does have the tendency

15 to confuse the mind of the witness as to what you're really asking about

16 Mirzet Halilovic and whether this is in connection with the works of the

17 War Presidency and so on and so forth.

18 MR. JONES: Yes, may I -- I mean, it is an important issue, and if

19 need be, maybe the witness should withdraw. I am concerned that there

20 will be by the mixture of this document and the question, there will be a

21 spurious confirmation.

22 MS. SELLERS: Your Honour, if you will allow me to rephrase my

23 question.

24 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. Please do rephrase. I think it needs to

25 be rephrased in any case.

1 MS. SELLERS:

2 Q. Madam Djilovic, would you please refer back to the document that's

3 in front of you, and I would ask you to look at number 10, subsection (c).

4 Do you see on the document it says: "At the VP" -- it says in

5 parenthesis "firing positions. The organisation to be carried out by

6 Mirzet Halilovic."

7 My question to you is, did you learn by the end of July that

8 Mirzet Halilovic was to be a commander of the military police?

9 A. I don't remember.

10 Can I ask for a short break, please? I'm really tired, too tired

11 to continue.

12 JUDGE AGIUS: Certainly.

13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I cannot recall everything.

14 JUDGE AGIUS: Madam, I told you myself earlier on that any time

15 you would like a break, to tell us, and I can see that you are tired.

16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.

17 JUDGE AGIUS: So we will have a 30-minute break starting from now.

18 And after the 30 minutes, if you think that -- if you prefer not to

19 proceed any further today, if you're too tired, do let us know and we'll

20 stop immediately.

21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know for how long it was

22 planned to proceed. That would enable me to know how to answer your

23 question. I don't know how many questions you have still to put to me.

24 JUDGE AGIUS: You are right. I thought you were informed about

25 this. We will break now for 30 minutes, that means we will start at about

1 10 to 1.00. And we will then stop at 1.45, quarter to 2.00.

2 And I take it that you will not finish today?

3 MS. SELLERS: That's correct, Your Honour.

4 JUDGE AGIUS: And then we will resume tomorrow at 9.00, otherwise

5 if you are feeling too tired to continue today we will stop today after

6 the break. You will tell us: I'm too tired, we will stop, and then we

7 continue tomorrow at 9.00. If you can continue today, I think it will be

8 better for everyone, but I'm not trying to pressure --

9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I will try to continue

10 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Jones.

11 MR. JONES: Yes, after the witness withdraws, maybe just a minute

12 or two to explain the objection in her absence. It might be useful.

13 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.

14 Please escort the witness out of the courtroom.

15 [The witness stands down]

16 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Jones. I think I understand your

17 objection, but the question is that it's through -- Ms. Sellers was right,

18 it shouldn't be discussed in front --

19 MR. JONES: Yes, exactly, Your Honour. That's why I didn't get

20 into detail. Yes, I think Your Honour understands, but just for the

21 record, to make it clear what my objection is.

22 It's that this witness has given evidence about Mirzet Halilovic

23 and the military police but that was in the context of the War Presidency.

24 If she's shown this document which talks about the staff and then said:

25 So can you confirm 10(c), that gives us spurious confirmation of P4 in

1 relation to the staff when, in fact, that question is only ever related to

2 the War Presidency. She's answered in relation to the staff, and it's, I

3 submit, pretty clear. But if she's asked: Was Mirzet Halilovic head of

4 the military police in the staff, it's pretty obvious what her answer is

5 going to be given in that she's already said that there wasn't a staff in

6 the proper sense. So I'm concerned that a misleading answer will be

7 given. That was my objection.

8 Also we can't overlook the fact that VP says "firing positions" in

9 the English. And until that's -- unless and until that's clarified, then

10 it's a complete non sequitur to read a question about firing positions and

11 then ask about the military police. That's obviously less important, but

12 my first submission is --

13 JUDGE AGIUS: That would be definitely confusing --

14 MS. SELLERS: Your Honour, might I --

15 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Ms. Sellers

16 MS. SELLERS: Might I please respond, because I'm sure my learned

17 friends are well aware that we are on cross-examination and therefore the

18 evidence that the witness has given is being tested. Now, I think it has

19 been established what is her position in terms of the military police as

20 the evidence she has given so far. But it has also been established by

21 her evidence of people who she knew was on the War Presidency when she

22 came to join the War Presidency herself in that capacity. And I am using

23 document P4 to ask her had she been aware of a TO staff, and her answer

24 slowly migrated to: Well, if there was one, it was improvised, not that:

25 Absolutely not one. I am asking her now about persons that appear on this

1 document and then do they reappear. Does she know about them again in the

2 capacity within the War Presidency. And I will be showing her soon a

3 document that the Defence has used that she has confirmed when she later

4 heard their names and positions in the War Presidency.

5 Now, I grant you that the witness might be confused by some of my

6 questioning and to rephrase the question. But to imply that our intent is

7 to make her now say, yes, this document is the TO has been established,

8 she is free to revise her answer, change her answer, maintain her answer.

9 I would like to state, on the other hand, that, as discussed very

10 briefly with Madam Vidovic, sometimes the witness does seem to go on with

11 an answer, and I'm trying to not cut her off. And so she has brought up

12 issues about this document, of what it looks like, about stamps and

13 things. And I'm just getting a little bit concerned as to my -- am I

14 hearing a record being played. And I don't want to bring that up in front

15 of the witness, because I have no intent of going into certain things on

16 the document, to keep it brief, and also to keep it relevant.

17 MR. JONES: Just very briefly. I agree, it's cross-examination,

18 but still we don't want to get misleading evidence on the record. And it

19 was really because the question asked about Mirzet Halilovic and then

20 Ms. Sellers said: And I refer you to subsection 10(c) on the document.

21 And so that's my concern, this linkage of her testimony with 10(c),

22 when 10(c) has to be read in the context --

23 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, but I think it's clear enough in our minds now

24 and we can proceed.

25 MR. JONES: Thank you, Your Honour.

1 JUDGE AGIUS: So we will have a 30-minute break, and that means we

2 will start at five minutes to 1.00, with the proviso if she's not feeling

3 well, I will adjourn. Thank you.

4 And the same applies to you, Madam Vidovic. I take it that if

5 there is a problem, we will not proceed.

6 Thank you.

7 --- Recess taken at 12.26 p.m.

8 --- On resuming at 1.06 p.m.

9 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. So -- now -- so [French spoken]. It has

10 become complicated. We will not continue with any testimony this morning.

11 I don't think I need to go into details, but there are more than one

12 reason. I have asked the Victims and Witnesses Unit to send the witness

13 back to the hotel, rather than bringing her to explain and whatever.

14 However, before we adjourn, we would need a little bit your

15 assistance on what I'm going to mention. As I hinted earlier on, we are

16 in the process of discussing amongst ourselves and also with the registrar

17 the appointment of a handwriting expert, one or more. Chances are that it

18 will be one. I also remember hearing some submissions -- a submission

19 from, actually, both of you, but mostly from the Defence, asking whether

20 they -- you would be allowed to make submissions on terms of reference and

21 it was also mentioned, en passant, possible nationality issues that could

22 arise. And of course I explained, because we had anticipated all this and

23 we had discussed it, and of course I said of course although the

24 appointment and the terms of reference is our business and nobody else's,

25 we agree that we only stand to gain if we received submissions on -- and

1 we hear what your submissions are. So if you could go into these today,

2 I'm not saying that you must, if you could, then obviously we will be

3 utilising the minutes that we have left more profitably.

4 The other thing is this: That one of the things that we obviously

5 need to communicate to the would-be expert or experts - I haven't got the

6 least clue of who this would be - is the availability of original

7 signatures by the accused or what has been considered as original

8 signatures by the accused. We are, of course, not in a position to turn

9 on the Defence -- on the accused and tell him: Could you please volunteer

10 us with a number of specimen signatures? That's of course unless he is in

11 a generous mood and wants to come forward and gives us -- give us specimen

12 signatures.

13 However, from my recollection at least -- I don't know what you

14 did in the case of Bilic, but I would take it that he had at his disposal

15 original signatures, and I don't know what happened to those

16 original signatures. Similarly I don't remember -- I'm being extremely

17 honest with you, a lot of water has passed under the bridge since then,

18 but I don't remember what Mr. Fagel, if that is his correct name, had at

19 his disposal, and I don't remember if we have any documents where the

20 accused's signature is undisputed. So if you could at least help us in

21 this context -- we can find out, mind you, but the thing is if I get to

22 the answers now it will help me try and push the registrar quicker and

23 better.

24 MS. SELLERS: Your Honour, if I could just remind you, and I think

25 Defence counsel can correct me if I'm misstating it, but at the very

1 beginning of the trial that we offered under 89 (F) the affidavit of two

2 investigators, Steve Tedder and Barney Kelly who had witnessed the actual

3 signatures of Mr. Oric on certain those documents. And I believe there

4 was a date that was also placed on the document. Those were the

5 controlled copies that we used, and my recollection is that the Defence in

6 lieu of cross-examining investigators Tedder and Kelly on their evidence

7 of the affidavit having witness's signatures and agreed for it to be

8 admitted as such.

9 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. I have a vague recollection now of what you're

10 saying, but it's a vague recollection, I must be honest. Although usually

11 my memory is very good, I don't remember the details so I wouldn't

12 comment.

13 Yes, Mr. Jones.

14 MR. JONES: Yes, Your Honour, and I'll address this matter of

15 the -- of non-contentious signatures but in the spirit, as Your Honour

16 has suggested, of making use of time. Whether I might now put on the

17 record are concerns, submissions, et cetera, not obviously for immediate

18 resolution nor even necessarily for response by the Prosecution because I

19 imagine Mr. Wubben might be dealing with this.

20 But there are -- there are four or five points which I'd like to

21 put on record, and I understand from a brief conversation with the

22 Chamber's Legal Officer that things are moving reasonably quickly. So I

23 think it might be useful to do that in the course of that. I'll also

24 mention the position from the Defence regarding non-contentious

25 signatures.

1 And I think I can probably group the issues into maybe six -- six

2 categories. And I must apologise, I don't have my file in front of me,

3 but it's fine. I can still --

4 JUDGE AGIUS: If I've taken you by surprise, we can stop here and

5 take it up again tomorrow so -- because I don't want either of you to be

6 taken or to --

7 MR. JONES: No, I --

8 JUDGE AGIUS: -- on the wrong foot. It's certainly not my

9 intention.

10 MR. JONES: No, indeed, Your Honour, and we're not taken by

11 surprise because your Legal Officer mentioned that this would come out.

12 It's simply that I'm not able to refer to exact P numbers.

13 The first issue is who is appointed as the expert and that's

14 obviously a matter for the discretion of the Trial Chamber, but we do have

15 submissions, and at least a couple of them were going to emerge from

16 during the course of examination of Professor Bilic. I can state now that

17 one of them is concerned with the need for an expert to be familiar with

18 the script in which the signatures or handwriting appear, and that's not

19 just the question of language, Bosnian, but also Cyrillic and Latin

20 scripts, and in the course of examination-in-chief of Professor Bilic I'll

21 expand on why in our submission it's necessary to have someone who knows

22 the language if they're going to carry out this forensic analysis.

23 A second concern - I'll try not to go too quickly - is in the

24 course of our looking for experts we noticed, or we were told by an expert

25 from one country that if a colleague from another associated country has

1 reached a certain conclusion, that they normally wouldn't differ from that

2 conclusion, and that was in relation to the Dutch report. And that

3 already posed problems for us. Again, it's an issue --

4 JUDGE AGIUS: Yeah, I can put your mind at rest on that so that

5 you don't need to make further submissions that whoever the expert will be

6 it will certainly not be Dutch, it will certainly not be German, at least

7 for the time being, certainly not be Danish, and certainly not be

8 Maltese. That's the -- the -- at least our approach. Then obviously if

9 we are brought with our hands to the wall and there is no option but to

10 choose a German one or a Danish one, then obviously we might go there.

11 But for the time being that's our intention. They will be elsewhere.

12 MR. JONES: It was less that issue. And I think since for the

13 moment there won't be a German, it follows I can mention that we contacted

14 a German expert whose position was basically that as they were in the same

15 association -- professional association as the Dutch forensic examiners

16 that they wouldn't expect to reach a different conclusion. And so our

17 concern is that if there's someone who's from the same association as the

18 Dutch but not Bosnian examiner, that there would already be a

19 predisposition to agree with the Dutch expert. That raises also the

20 question would your -- I'll say your expert for convenience, would your

21 expert have access to the reports of the parties' experts, which is

22 another issue? But that's as to who is appointed.

23 The second set of issues concerns the contested sample, and I

24 gather from the e-mail sent out by your Legal Officer that Your Honours

25 consider that there are, I think, eight or so --

1 JUDGE AGIUS: Or nine.

2 MR. JONES: Eight or nine which are contested. Our position would

3 be that where our expert says: Probably not the signature of Naser Oric,

4 that that is very much contested. It's a conclusion bordering on

5 certainty, and again it's a matter which will emerge from his testimony,

6 but saying "probably not," rather than reaching a definite conclusion is

7 sometimes a function of whether you've got a good sample or not. It's not

8 a function of any doubts. So we would say that actually he should look --

9 your expert should look at all the exhibits mentioned in our expert 's

10 report.

11 JUDGE AGIUS: That's the inclination, our inclination for the time

12 being as well. In other words --

13 MR. JONES: There is the question then also of whether that

14 includes Hamed Salihovic and Hamdija Fejzic contested signatures. But

15 again, that's obviously a matter for you, but it's a matter which we have

16 a position on, which is that he should see everything, and that's a

17 submission I can expand upon at some point.

18 In terms -- the third point would be the terms of reference, and

19 again it's a matter for Your Honours, but we would flag up the following.

20 Firstly, we wouldn't -- we would be concerned if your expert were to know

21 that he was examining Prosecution Exhibits for the reason that

22 professional and independent though he may be, there may be, conscious or

23 unconscious, inclination to have Prosecution Exhibits from a war crimes

24 case and to understand that they would be -- that they should find that

25 these are genuine or that they're from the accused. Again, as I say, this

1 isn't a fully developed submission as such, but flagging up a concern that

2 the expert shouldn't know which way he should go, if Your Honours follow.

3 That he has no idea what conclusion favours whom.

4 Also in terms of terms of reference, we would wonder whether the

5 expert, your expert would actually look at and comment upon the reports of

6 the parties' experts, whether your expert would produce a report, and if

7 so, what the schedule would be for our -- for us to respond or for our

8 expert to look at it, and then of course the issue of cross-examination,

9 related to which is -- the question is will this be evidence against the

10 accused? Because if it's in any way going to be evidence against the

11 accused, then of course I submit we have to be able to cross-examine him.

12 And Your Honour has assuaged my concerns about that the other day. But,

13 again, an issue to flag up.

14 JUDGE AGIUS: Might have assuaged even further, Mr. Jones, apart

15 from what I said last time on the basis of what we had discussed in my

16 room, there is also always the possibility if this arises of both of you

17 or either of you recalling as expert -- your ex parte expert witnesses to

18 give further testimony arising out of the experts -- the

19 court-appointed -- sorry, Trial Chamber-appointed handwriting expert. So

20 please take -- for the time being at least that all options are open and

21 that you will even have, if you require it, the possibility of having the

22 expert sit -- sitting down with you there during the testimony of our

23 expert to help you put questions. And if you want to bring him over to

24 give evidence, again recall him later on, yes, of course, it's -- there is

25 a safeguard in the Rules. Please don't ask me which rule number it is.

1 But while we adhere to the principle that a prospective witness should

2 never be present in the courtroom while another witness is giving

3 evidence, that rule does not apply to a prospective expert, for example,

4 or a court expert.

5 So please feel safe, hundred per cent safe that we will provide

6 you with -- you and the Prosecution with all the opportunities you require

7 to fulfil your obligations towards Prosecution in one case and the accused

8 in the other.

9 MR. JONES: Yes. Thank you.

10 JUDGE AGIUS: To the utmost.

11 MR. JONES: Thank you. Thank you, Your Honour. I'm very obliged

12 for that.

13 Just in that regard -- in that regard, and again, as I say, I'm

14 just -- really mentioning issues now rather than looking for an immediate

15 response. But there's also, in relation to cross-examination, the issue

16 raised by Mr. Wubben this morning of whether, in fact, we could produce to

17 the court-appointed, the Chamber-appointed expert, documents which he

18 hadn't examined but nonetheless which we wish to show to him for his

19 comment. Again, that would be something which would be important for us

20 because -- especially if the expert has a -- doesn't have a full sample in

21 the end, we may want to show him documents which are experted, looked at

22 to get his or her opinion on that.

23 I come to the issue - I think it's the fourth issue - of

24 non-contentious signatures, and that is a very complex issue for two

25 reasons. The position is -- was correctly summarised by Ms. Sellers in

1 that I think it's P100 is a Prosecution -- I believe Prosecution -- P100

2 is a collection of signatures allegedly made by our client during the

3 course of his interview and a declaration of Mr. Tedder, and I think

4 someone else goes to that issue, and we didn't insist on the right to

5 cross-examine Mr. Tedder on that, and so those samples we used as

6 non-contentious signatures for the Prosecution expert report.

7 It's not possible to say that, therefore, those signatures are not

8 contentious at all from the Defence side for at least one issue which

9 is -- this is, as I say, where it gets complicated. Very shortly we will

10 be submitting a motion regarding the interview of our client, asking for

11 it to be excluded. Now, if his interview is excluded, then the signatures

12 which were taken during the course of his interview for the reasons

13 mentioned in the -- in our motion may be the fruits of a poison tree to

14 use -- I think it's an American phrase, although it's sometimes used in

15 the UK as well. And so that's why we can't simply say that it's -- that

16 there is no dispute concerning those signatures. There is a dispute of

17 sorts.

18 And as for the others used by our expert, Professor Bilic,

19 non-contentious samples, not just of the accused but also of Hamed

20 Salihovic and Hamdija Fejzic, they haven't been disclosed or filed, and we

21 would have to very seriously consider the position of providing, as Your

22 Honour appreciates, samples of our client's signature. That's an

23 extremely, seriously important matter which we would have to consider.

24 The fifth point which I've just marked down is whether the -- any

25 report produced by the court-appointed -- Chamber-appointed expert would

1 be evidence in this case, but that's -- in a way, I've touched on that

2 already.

3 And just the final concern I have is sort of a philosophical one,

4 if I may put it that way, which is this: That the expert that we

5 selected, we are putting forward, is an independent expert, and the

6 Prosecution in the same spirit put forward an independent expert. So

7 firstly just in terms of terminology, I suppose, we wouldn't want there to

8 be a suggestion that there is the independent expert and then the parties'

9 experts so that whatever the Chamber-appointed expert says would have a

10 greater value or credibility than the parties' experts. Because, in fact,

11 in our submission the position remains the same, that the expert is not

12 going to be more credible simply because he was appointed by the Trial

13 Chamber. Again, it's a question of weighing how they appear on the stand,

14 their techniques, their methodology, and those sorts of matters. And we

15 would have a concern that if the Chamber-appointed expert only saw, let's

16 say, a few exhibits, let's say he didn't look at the Hamed Salihovic

17 documents, that he would reach a different conclusion from our expert or

18 from the Prosecution expert, that therefore his expertise is taken in

19 preference to our experts and then our experts' conclusions on other

20 matters are discredited by that token.

21 I think Your Honour probably follows the point I'm making. That's

22 something which we're concerned about. Of course, I appreciate that Your

23 Honours will not automatically accept the testimony of your expert in

24 deference to -- I mean, over the parties' experts.

25 So it was simply because Your Honour said that since you, the

1 Chamber, doesn't understand the forensic science of graphology that

2 therefore it was necessary to appoint an expert. But in my submission,

3 the problem remains the same. In any case --

4 JUDGE AGIUS: We are appointing an expert not only because we

5 don't understand the principles or the science of graphology, but mainly

6 because we have got two reports that are diametrically opposed, so -- not

7 completely, but almost completely. So at that point in time we feel

8 helpless -- in a helpless position, and we need help. So whether we would

9 accept that help or not, we may end up with appointing someone and finish

10 up with being completely unhappy with his report, or their reports. I

11 don't know. But we'll strive not to. That's the position basically.

12 MR. JONES: Yes. Well, thank you, Your Honour. I'm obliged for

13 you hearing those submissions at this point, and I can subsequently

14 develop them, but I just wanted to put them on the record now.

15 JUDGE AGIUS: All right, okay. Thank you.

16 So that's the position. All right.

17 Now, I didn't mention all this to start a discussion because, as I

18 said, who we choose and what the terms of reference will be, of course,

19 will -- is our prerogative.

20 Do you wish to make a submission, Ms. Sellers, or do you wish to

21 postpone it until Mr. Wubben's here?

22 MS. SELLERS: I would just like to make a very brief comment and

23 then ask could we address this tomorrow morning when I can more fully

24 discuss this with my colleagues.

25 JUDGE AGIUS: Yeah, that's why I'm offering you --

1 MS. SELLERS: Yes.

2 In terms of an independent forensics expert, I agree with the

3 Defence that I think all the experts are independent. I don't think we

4 have any controversy over the submission of that argument.

5 In terms of the nationality of an expert, of course I think we

6 leave that within the Trial Chamber's hands. I am certain that the

7 Defence has already raised a question concerning the nationality of our

8 expert. We have not chosen at this point and do not anticipate raising

9 questions of bias as related to the nationality of the Defence expert, and

10 we would just ask that the Trial Chamber, in their seeking of terms of

11 reference, go to the crux of the issue, which is the handwriting and, in

12 our opinion, not the nationality.

13 The issue of the person, the expert, having to be familiar with

14 Cyrillic script, being familiar with Latin script, understanding the

15 language, might in some ways limit the experts that one can seek out, and

16 we're aware of that. There are several countries that do use Cyrillic

17 scripts or whatever, but I do not think at this time period that we would

18 want to be hemmed and hawed into choosing one nationality, a type of

19 expert. We are much more concerned with the expertise and just proceeding

20 with the matter.

21 We are going to have other submissions probably concerning Hamed

22 Salihovic and other documents, and I would just like to underscore that at

23 this point in time, prior to the Defence filing their application on the

24 interview, that the only uncontested controlled copies of signatures we

25 have are that as we have agreed in P100.

1 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. So I thank you.

2 We will adjourn until tomorrow morning with this proviso. I don't

3 think how our witness is -- will be feeling tomorrow morning. And if she

4 is not a hundred per cent fit to continue giving evidence, I will adjourn;

5 there is no question about it. I will not force her to answer one single

6 question.

7 Same thing applies to you, Madam Vidovic. Should at any time you

8 require an adjournment, please let us know and we will accommodate you for

9 sure. There's no question. I mean, we are, of course, pressed for time,

10 but a day here and a day there is not going to change anything. All

11 right. The only thing is that if there is a shifting of our schedule by

12 one day involving us to sit on the 27th, then we will not be sitting on

13 the 27th because one of them -- one of us has a problem on that day. So

14 we were scheduled to stop on the 26th, or finish on the 26th, but if we

15 don't, then we continue and skip the 27th. All right. Clear enough?

16 Thank you.

17 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.30 p.m.,

18 to be reconvened on Thursday, the 19th day of

19 January, 2006, at 9.00 a.m.

20

21

22

23

24

25