1 Monday, 15 June, 2009
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 2.47 p.m.
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: Good afternoon to everybody in and around the
6 courtroom. Madam Registrar, will you please call the case.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Good afternoon, Your Honours. This is case
8 number IT-04-81-T, the Prosecutor versus Momcilo Perisic.
9 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much. May we have appearances for
10 the day starting with the Prosecution, please.
11 MS. BOLTON: Good afternoon, Your Honour. It's Carmela Javier,
12 Lorna Bolton, and Mark Harmon for the Prosecution.
13 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much. And for the Defence.
14 MR. GUY-SMITH: Good afternoon to everyone in the courtroom --
15 in and about the courtroom. Daniela Tasic, Chad
16 Tina Drolec, and our intern Kay Marshall. I'm Gregor Guy-Smith on behalf
17 of Mr. Perisic.
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much, Mr. Guy-Smith.
19 Ms. Prosecution, Madam Bolton.
20 MS. BOLTON: Thank you. The next witness for the Prosecution,
21 Your Honour, will be Mr. Sacirbey.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much. I guess he is coming by
24 MS. BOLTON: He is.
25 JUDGE MOLOTO: Good afternoon. Mr. Haider, good afternoon.
1 Mr. Sacirbey, can you hear me?
2 THE WITNESS: Good afternoon.
3 JUDGE MOLOTO: Good afternoon. Can you hear me well?
4 THE WITNESS: Yes, I can.
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
6 THE WITNESS: Yes, I can.
7 JUDGE MOLOTO: Will you please make the declaration,
8 Mr. Sacirbey.
9 THE WITNESS: Thank you.
10 I solemnly declare that I will speak the truth, the whole truth,
11 and nothing but the truth.
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much. You may be seated.
13 THE WITNESS: Thank you.
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you. Mr. Sacirbey, before we start and
15 before I hand you over to the counsel for the Prosecution, the Chamber
16 has been approached by Registry indicating that you request to have your
17 lawyers with you while you testify.
18 THE WITNESS: That is correct, Your Honour.
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: Okay. Just to let you know your request has been
20 granted, you can have your lawyers next to you before you start.
21 THE WITNESS: Thank you, Your Honour.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: You are welcome.
23 MR. GUY-SMITH: If I might, Your Honour.
24 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes.
25 MR. GUY-SMITH: With regard to the witness's request, in the
1 United States, as a matter of practice, a witness is allowed confer with
2 counsel not only during their testimony but also when they are not
3 testifying, and with regard to that particular practice, I trust that the
4 court will make an order that although Mr. Sacirbey can have his counsel
5 present, his counsel may not communicate with him whatsoever in any
6 respect from this time forward unless we reach an issue with regard to
7 matters concerning his potential criminal liabilities, which is a
8 different issue.
9 JUDGE MOLOTO: In fact, my understanding was that that's the
10 basis for wanting his lawyers to be present with him, and if he wasn't
11 able to communicate with his lawyer, it would nullify the very presence
12 of the lawyer. So I would expect that the lawyer would only come in when
13 matters of self-incrimination arise.
14 MR. GUY-SMITH: Well, I'm not --
15 JUDGE MOLOTO: I will make that warning before we start --
16 MR. GUY-SMITH: Okay.
17 JUDGE MOLOTO: -- to the lawyers and to him.
18 MR. GUY-SMITH: Thank you. Unless, then perhaps we could have
19 some further understanding because unless the Prosecution intends to
20 raise this matter with Mr. Sacirbey during the case in chief, it would be
21 inappropriate for the lawyer to be present during that time unless they
22 are going to be touching about those matter that revolve around any
23 issues concerning his self-incrimination and his privilege against that.
24 JUDGE MOLOTO: As I understood him, the Prosecution's motion that
25 it actually wanted to exclude that very kind of examination, I wouldn't
1 expect them to go and do something that they asked not to have done.
2 Madam Bolton, if you can place on record your shaking of the
4 MS. BOLTON: Yes, Your Honour, I have no intention of going into
5 that area in examination-in-chief.
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much. Is that okay?
7 MR. GUY-SMITH: Yes, that is. And with that in mind I would ask
8 that his lawyer be excluded from the proceedings until my
9 cross-examination because that would be the time that issue would come
10 up. If it comes up it comes up at the point in time that he would be
11 concerned about being involved in the answers that would incriminate him.
12 Other than that, his presence is not necessary.
13 MS. BOLTON: Your Honour, I have no difficulty with him not
14 communicating about any matters that come up in chief. I suppose that
15 like any other interested member of the public, the counsel would be
16 entitled to be present in the sense of listening to the proceedings, but
17 I certainly don't expect them to be communicating. And, of course, as
18 counsel I would expect them to abide by any warning you gave about
19 communications and the limits of communications.
20 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, and Mr. Guy-Smith, just for the free flow of
21 the proceedings without having to stop to allow lawyer to come in.
22 Obviously, they could have been very much in the gallery and listening,
23 and so if they are sitting next to him provided they don't discuss with
24 him, that they don't communicate with him, do you have any objection to
25 them being there next to him?
1 MR. GUY-SMITH: Well, I can see him and I take it that the
2 attorney -- if at some point he could identify himself, I take it that he
3 will be able to remain stone-faced throughout these proceedings.
4 MR. GUIRGUIS: Yes, Your Honours. My name is Peter Guirguis.
5 I'm from the International Law Firm of Fulbright & Jaworski, and I'm here
6 to represent Mr. Sacirbey. I am familiar with the court's rules and I
7 understand that I'm not to communicate with him about the substance of
8 his testimony, I appreciate the opportunity to be hear with him and hear
9 the direct testimony so that I can have context for any issues as they
10 are raised on cross-examination.
11 JUDGE MOLOTO: You said your name is?
12 MR. GUIRGUIS: Peter Guirguis, last name is spelled
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: You are -- okay. Mr. Guirguis, thank you so much.
15 I did want to say to you that -- yes, you did mention it, that you are
16 not supposed to talk to the witness while he is testifying. The only
17 time you may intervene is if and when any questions that may cause him to
18 self-incriminate arise.
19 MR. GUIRGUIS: Understood, Your Honour. I'll only discuss those
20 matters with him.
21 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much.
22 MR. GUY-SMITH: Only if I might add, I'm referring to the
23 Chamber's decision paragraph 13.
24 JUDGE MOLOTO: We are on paragraph 5, paragraph 13 or line 13?
25 MR. GUY-SMITH: No, I'm sorry. I'm referring to the Chamber's
1 decision with regard to this particular issue.
2 JUDGE MOLOTO: Okay. I am sorry.
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: I just want to say, yes, that order was given in
19 line with the jurisprudence of the Tribunal without having had the
20 benefit of the request from the witness himself for the presence of his
21 lawyer in court, and the only reason that we change that part now was
22 simply because of that request. Do I understand you to be saying that
23 notwithstanding the ruling, sir, that you still insist that you are
24 re-opening the matter? You want a reconsideration?
25 MR. GUY-SMITH: I'm not re-opening the matter. I'm --
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: What --
2 MR. GUY-SMITH: What I'm saying is that based -- based upon the
3 Trial Chamber's previous ruling, in the ostensible purpose for counsel to
4 be there, it is inappropriate for counsel to be there at this time. I am
5 not suggesting that during cross-examination it would be inappropriate
6 for counsel to be there, I believe that it would be. And as a matter of
7 fact I would encourage it. I come from that tradition. But at this
8 point in time it would not be, but I remain in the Chamber's hands.
9 [Trial Chamber confers]
10 JUDGE MOLOTO: Madam Bolton, do you have any final things to say
11 on this point?
12 MS. BOLTON: Simply that again I reiterate that there's -- a
13 Registrar is present, so if there were to be any difficulties or any
14 suggestion that Mr. Guirguis were communicating inappropriately, he would
15 actually be there to see it. And if Mr. Guirguis, if he were any other
16 member of the public, would be entitled to watch the proceedings, and he
17 has indicated that he like to be present so that if any issues arise in
18 cross-examination, notwithstanding the fact that I don't intend to go
19 into this area, I can't control, you know, everything the witness says or
20 what comes up sometimes in examination, he would like to hear so that he
21 has the context if anything arises on cross.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: We'll let the ruling stand as it is then.
23 Madam Bolton.
24 MS. BOLTON: Thank you.
25 WITNESS: MUHAMED SACIRBEY
1 Examination by Ms. Bolton:
2 Q. Mr. Sacirbey, can you hear me all right?
3 A. Yes, I can thank you.
4 Q. And, sir, could you first tell us what your date of birth is?
5 A. July 20, 1956
6 Q. And where were you born?
7 A. Sarajevo
8 Q. And in what country could you currently reside?
9 A. The United States of America.
10 Q. And when did you come to reside in the United States?
11 A. In July 1967, actually June 5, 1967.
12 Q. And approximately how old were you at the time?
13 A. Ten year old.
14 Q. And what is your current country of citizenship?
15 A. The United States of America. I also have citizenship of
16 Bosnia-Herzegovina, which I inherited from the former Yugoslavia.
17 Q. And how long have you been a US citizen?
18 A. Since 1973.
19 Q. Are you able to communicate in B/C/S?
20 A. Yes, although frankly English is more of my language of personal
21 and professional use.
22 Q. Can you read Cyrillic?
23 A. Very difficult.
24 Q. Can you tell us what your educational background is, sir?
25 A. Yes. I have a bachelor of arts from Tulane University
1 laude. I have a law degree that is a doctor of jurisprudence from Tulane
2 University. I have a master of business from Columbia University
4 Q. You indicated you have a law degree, were you ever called to the
6 A. Yes, I was in New York
7 Q. Did you ever practice as a lawyer?
8 A. Very briefly. Most of my professional practice was as an
9 investment banker.
10 Q. And how long did you work in that field, sir?
11 A. I worked as an attorney for approximately four to five years.
12 Q. And sorry --
13 A. Most of that was as --
14 Q. Please, continue.
15 A. Most of that practice was as counsel to Standard & Poor's
17 Q. You had mentioned a career in investment banking, and what year
18 did you have that career start in and how long did you do that for?
19 A. I moved over from counsel to Standard & Poor's to the business
20 side of the company in 1983, 1984, and I continued to practice until in
21 fact 1992.
22 Q. And what was your career change in 1992?
23 A. I was expecting it to be only a momentary diversion, but I was
24 asked to become the ambassador of Bosnia-Herzegovina to the United
1 Q. Who approached you and asked to you assume that post?
2 A. President Izetbegovic, then chair of the Presidency of the
4 Q. Where were you living at the time that you were approached to
5 take that post?
6 A. New York
7 Q. And where were you going to be posted if you assumed the job of
8 ambassador to the United Nations for Bosnia-Herzegovina?
9 A. It was New York, United States.
10 Q. How long did you hold the post of ambassador?
11 A. From 1992 until the end of 2000. Actually from May 22nd, 1992,
12 when Bosnia
13 course, I held several other positions on behalf of Bosnia-Herzegovina.
14 Q. Sorry, I think you told us the date you took the post being May
15 22nd, 1992. And my question was how long did you hold the post?
16 A. That would amount to almost nine years or over eight and a half
17 years. I guess I should highlight that at that time I also in fact, at
18 least for a short time, continued my private professional work as an
19 investment banker. I was assuming that I was holding that post really
20 for only a short duration until the war ended. Clearly it did not.
21 Q. Okay. You told me or you told us that you were approached by
22 President Izetbegovic, and can you tell me, did you have any diplomatic
23 experience prior to being approached by the president?
24 A. Unfortunately not. Obviously my experience as an attorney and
25 one involved in negotiations and investment banking was probably the most
2 Q. When you assumed the post in May 1992, could you tell me did you
3 have any staff or were you the only person working as a representative of
4 the Bosnia-Herzegovina at the UN?
5 A. Actually, Bosnia
6 therefore the only staff and the only assets that I had were those
7 personal to me or to my partners in my business profession. Over time,
8 of course, that evolved.
9 Q. Could you tell me when Bosnia-Herzegovina was recognised as an
10 independent country by the United States of America?
11 A. That was in April of 1992. If I'm not mistaken.
12 Q. And were any other or did any other countries recognise
13 Bosnia-Herzegovina at that time?
14 A. Yes. Countries recognised Bosnia-Herzegovina one by one. Either
15 on the basis of being approached by us, as was usually the case later on
16 when I was the representative of the United Nations, or in fact they did
17 it before Bosnia
18 recognition came from what we refer to as the western European countries
19 and United States.
20 Q. Okay. Sir, you should have in front of you, I hope, a series of
21 binders, and perhaps the Registrar can assist you with this?
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: If I may just interrupt you before you go to the
23 binders. Can you tell us when Bosnia and Herzegovina was admitted to the
24 United Nations, sir?
25 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honour. That was May 22nd, 1992.
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much.
2 Yes, Madam Bolton
3 MS. BOLTON: Yes.
4 MR. GUIRGUIS: Excuse me, Your Honour, this is Peter Guirguis,
5 and I beg your forgiveness, Ms. Bolton, but I just wanted to alert the
6 court to the fact that co-counsel for Mr. Sacirbey, Annemarie Corominas,
7 has joined me here in the room. She's also familiar with the court's
8 ruling and the court's rules with respect to the limitations of our
9 discussions with Mr. Sacirbey. Just wanted to make the court aware of
10 that before we proceeded. She just entered the room.
11 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, but --
12 MR. GUIRGUIS: My apologies to the court.
13 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much for your apology,
14 Mr. Guirguis, but is there a need for both of you to be in there?
15 MR. GUIRGUIS: Ms. Corominas is more familiar with the background
16 of Mr. Sacirbey's case and she's travelled here today from the
18 court to allow her to stay.
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: Can I hear any submissions. Yes, Mr. Guy-Smith.
20 MR. GUY-SMITH: In the entire time that I've been practicing
21 before this Tribunal, I've seen many witnesses come who would like the
22 benefit of some support. Some of the witnesses who I've seen come who
23 would like the benefit of some support, also in need of the benefit of
24 legal support. I have yet to see ever - this is the first time that I've
25 ever seen - a witness who is lawyer, and I think that the Chamber will
1 find soon - a seasoned -- a diplomat well versed in the ways of a
2 sophisticated give and take of questions and answers, and well versed in
3 what I would call the conflicts that exist during verbal trials.
4 JUDGE MOLOTO: May I interrupt you, Mr. Guy-Smith.
5 MR. GUY-SMITH: To have such support --
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: May I interrupt you. I don't think the
7 qualifications of the witness have to do -- have anything to do with
8 whether or not that witness is entitled to a lawyer. We are now dealing
9 here with just the question of the extra lawyer that is now coming into
10 the room. How --
11 MR. GUY-SMITH: Well, I object.
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much.
13 MR. GUY-SMITH: I object. I object.
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: Madam Bolton.
15 MS. BOLTON: Yes, Your Honour. Obviously, it's an unusual
16 situation for the Prosecution because I don't know much about the
17 allegations that are out there. There is obviously an issue of
18 client/solicitor privilege that attaches to those issues, and I don't
19 know also very much about the background of the two counsel. I know that
20 the issues that are outstanding relate to both criminal matters and
21 extradition matters, and I don't know whether they have different areas
22 of expertise or different backgrounds. So I'm not really in a position
23 to tell you very much. I think probably Mr. Guirguis and Ms. Corominas
24 are better placed to explain why there is a need for both of them to be
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: I don't think that it's necessary for them to
2 explain because they actually have no right of audience before this
3 Tribunal. The only thing is they can only answer questions that are put
4 to them if there are any questions put to them, and I do not intend to
5 prolong this process. I think, Mr. Guirguis, I understand what you are
6 saying, if it is possible for your colleague to listen from another
7 place, it would be appreciative if she could do that because we are
8 having quite a bit of problems here. I think one of you is enough in the
9 room where the witness is testifying from.
10 MR. GUIRGUIS: Yes, Your Honours.
11 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
12 THE WITNESS: You can change places at some point in time.
13 MR. GUIRGUIS: Yes, perhaps -- with the Court's permission, could
14 we at least have the opportunity to switch positions in the courtroom
15 here if a different issue arises, because as Ms. Bolton actually
16 suggested and as I should have suggested to Your Honour, Ms. Corominas's
17 expertise and background with Mr. Sacirbey's case does relate more to his
18 extradition issues. And so if any of those issues come up, then I think
19 she would be the one better placed in the room. So I'll start in the
20 room now with her, and if it seems appropriate, then we'll switch out if
21 Your Honour's ruling is that only one of us is permitted at a time.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: At that time if you can raise the issue with the
23 Court, and then we'll decide it the time.
25 MR. GUIRGUIS: Thank you, Your Honour.
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: Let me just place on the record that the Chamber
2 has had redacted a portion read by Mr. Guy-Smith which related to an
3 issue of the 18th of May, 2009, in which the Chamber says -- that's from
4 page 5, lines 10 to 22, that's where the redaction is, because apparently
5 something confidential is contained in there. Thank you.
6 MR. GUY-SMITH: That was my understanding. We received a note
7 and we sent something back quite quickly saying we agreed. One, and I
8 truly do hate to belabour the issue, but I overheard -- first of all, I
9 see the witness speaking with his attorney which not supposed to occur at
10 all. And second of all, I overheard the attorney indicating to the --
11 I'm sorry, I missed her name, the co-counsel that they have a -- have a
12 method of listening to the proceedings outside of the room. Therefore,
13 much of what has been said thus far and has been represented thus far,
14 with regard to this particular attorney being present, that's Mr.
15 Guirguis, I think is quite frankly disingenuous.
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Well, I didn't hear that and I don't know whether
17 you want us to go into a trial within a trial about that.
18 MR. GUY-SMITH: No, I absolutely don't, Your Honour. I actually
19 want to try the case that we have before us.
20 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much. Madam Bolton --
21 MS. BOLTON: Thank you.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: -- you may proceed.
23 MS. BOLTON:
24 Q. We were referring -- about to refer to a binder, sir, which
25 should contain documents --
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. -- from 1992, I believe is how they are labelled?
3 A. That is correct, I have it here.
4 Q. Okay. Could you please turn to the first tab where you should
5 find a document 65 ter 4999?
6 A. Yes, I think I have it in front of me.
7 Q. Okay. And it should be Resolution 755?
8 A. That is correct.
9 Q. And what did that resolution accomplish?
10 A. This resolution was --
11 MR. GUY-SMITH: Excuse me, I think before the witness begins to
12 give his opinion as what resolutions accomplish, there needs to be a
13 further foundation laid.
14 MS. BOLTON:
15 Q. Can you read witness?
16 MR. GUY-SMITH: Well, if he is going to be reading --
17 THE WITNESS: Well, we have the --
18 MR. GUY-SMITH: Excuse me, if he's going to be reading the
19 resolutions, that's surely a waste of our time here. The Chamber can
20 read the resolution. We don't need a witness reading resolutions to us.
21 JUDGE MOLOTO: Madam Bolton, any response?
22 MS. BOLTON: There's nothing inappropriate with the question,
23 Your Honour. He's already, in fact, been asked and answered on what date
24 the Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina
25 I am now asking him to look at a document and identify what that document
1 was and place that document in context.
2 JUDGE MOLOTO: If you can just sort of ask the questions that lay
3 some kind of foundation for the document.
4 MS. BOLTON: Okay.
5 Q. Sir, as a result of your of your work as ambassador for
6 Bosnia-Herzegovina to the United Nations, did you have occasion to attend
7 meetings of the Security Council?
8 A. Yes, I did.
9 Q. And are you familiar, sir --
10 JUDGE MOLOTO: Madam Bolton, I'm sorry to do this to you. I know
11 you are -- the Registrar has just told me that the Registrar in New York
12 has just communicated to her that he confirms that the counsel outside
13 the room cannot hear what is taking place inside the room, as
14 confirmation from the Registrar from New York.
15 MS. BOLTON: Okay. Thank you. Sorry Your Honour, I didn't hear
16 the last thing you said.
17 JUDGE MOLOTO: You may proceed.
18 MS. BOLTON: Thank you.
19 Q. Yes, Mr. Sacirbey, we were talking about your role as ambassador
20 to the United Nations and whether you attended meetings of the Security
21 Council, and in that capacity were you present when resolutions were
22 passed with respect to Bosnia-Herzegovina?
23 A. Yes, I was.
24 Q. Are you familiar with the resolutions that were passed with
25 respect to Bosnia-Herzegovina between 1992 and 1995?
1 A. Yes, I am.
2 Q. Okay. Do you recognise the document that's before you, sir,
3 Resolution 755?
4 A. That is correct, I do recognise it.
5 Q. And what did that accomplish?
6 A. That resolution in fact was an endorsement, a recommendation one
7 would say, where the Security Council forwards to the General Assembly
8 the recommendation that Bosnia-Herzegovina be admitted to the United
9 Nations as a full member with all the rights and obligations. I would
10 just like to caution that when this resolution was passed, I was not yet
11 the ambassador of Bosnia-Herzegovina, that would only happen a couple of
12 days later, but I did have access at that time to Security Council
13 members and of course to at least some of the proceedings.
14 Q. Okay.
15 MS. BOLTON: I wonder if this document to be entered as an
16 exhibit, Your Honour.
17 JUDGE MOLOTO: It is admitted into evidence. May it please be
18 given an exhibit number.
19 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, the document will become Exhibit
21 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much.
22 Yes, Madam Bolton
23 MS. BOLTON:
24 Q. Sir, could you tell us when the Republic of Slovenia Bosnian
25 became a member of the United Nations?
1 A. It was on the same date, May 22nd, 1992.
2 Q. And could you turn to the next document in the tab that you have
3 open, and it should be 65 ter 4998.
4 A. I am there.
5 Q. Sorry, one moment, sir. Yes, sir. Sir, and can you confirm for
6 us what this resolution accomplished?
7 A. This is the same context as in the case of Bosnia and
9 recommendation that it be admitted as a member with full rights and
11 Q. Okay. And we are looking at Resolution 753; is that correct?
12 A. That is correct.
13 Q. And Resolution 754 which is on the same page, what did it
15 JUDGE MOLOTO: Just before we go to that one, I thought your
16 questions, Madam Bolton, related to the Republic of Slovenia
17 MS. BOLTON: It did, sir, and the next question I think is going
18 to clarify what the witness is talking about.
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: But what you were talk about previously, you were
20 talking about Slovenia
21 MS. BOLTON: Yes, he has -- if I could ask the Court to scroll to
22 Resolution 754, which is on the same page.
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: Okay. Proceed, ma'am.
24 MS. BOLTON: Yes, thank you.
25 Q. We got a little out of order there, sir, Resolution 754, what did
1 it accomplish?
2 A. It was the same as in the context of the Republic of Croatia
3 Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina, which is a recommendation by the Security
4 Council for the United Nations General assembly to admit Slovenia
5 full member with all the rights and obligations.
6 Q. And looking at the document --
7 A. The three countries were -- the three countries were admitted at
8 exactly the same time during the same proceedings in the General
10 Q. And I just notice that the date on this resolution is actually
11 the 18th of May, 1992, and you've told us the actual date of admission is
12 the 22nd May, 1992. Can you just explain that?
13 A. Yes. These are recommendations of the Security Council which
14 then are left up to the General Assembly to in fact proceed, and number
15 one, of course, have a vote, and second to actually through the proper
16 proceedings admit these three states. So, in fact, the Security Council
17 may take up this matter, this recommendation, at a separate time from the
18 General Assembly, and in fact may take up the issue in each country
19 individually and separately as it deems appropriate.
20 MS. BOLTON: Okay. If that document can be marked as the next
21 exhibit, please, Your Honour.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence, May it
23 please be given an exhibit number. Now, which document is this, ma'am?
24 I know it's 4998, but is it Resolution 754, 753, or both.
25 MS. BOLTON: It's both, please, Your Honours.
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
2 MR. GUY-SMITH: No objection.
3 THE REGISTRAR: The document will become Exhibit P2429, Your
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much.
6 Yes, Madam Bolton
7 MS. BOLTON:
8 Q. Before we go on to consider some other documents, sir, I just
9 want to discuss a little bit about the United Nations itself and
10 particularly the General Assembly and the Security Council which we've
11 already been referring to here today. What -- can you tell me what the
12 work is or what the General Assembly's jurisdiction is?
13 A. The General Assembly of course consists of all the member states,
14 and it addresses issues of general concern. It also has several other
15 sub-bodies associated with it, that is various committees, agencies,
16 institutions, if you would, these bodies may even in fact recommend to
17 the Security Council, but generally the resolutions of the General
18 Assembly do not have the same power; i.e., Chapter 7 or Chapter 6 power
19 that the Security Council resolutions do.
20 Q. And when you are talking about power, what are you talking about?
21 A. I'm really talking about mandatory performance under the chapters
22 of the Chapter 7, for example, of the Security Council --
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Mr. Guy-Smith.
24 MR. GUY-SMITH: Excuse me, I do not believe that the witness has
25 been called as an expert to interpret the various provisions of the
1 United Nations.
2 JUDGE MOLOTO: Sure, but this question was not put to him, he
3 volunteered this information.
4 MR. GUY-SMITH: But --
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: And he --
6 MR. GUY-SMITH: I think we need to be very careful here because
7 the manner in which the question was put was put in terms of
8 jurisdiction, and with regard to the issue of jurisdiction, specifically
9 because it is - as we all know - a legal term of art, I think we need to
10 be stepping carefully, and I understand the Chamber's view with regard to
11 issues concerning answers that come from witnesses as to whether or not
12 they can be stricken or they can be limited.
13 JUDGE MOLOTO: And the other concern here is that you stand up at
14 a time when the witness is answering, not at the time when the question
15 has been put.
16 MR. GUY-SMITH: Well --
17 JUDGE MOLOTO: You know, so the impression you are leaving me is
18 that you are objecting to the answer, not to the question.
19 MR. GUY-SMITH: Well, I'm objecting to both.
20 JUDGE MOLOTO: At least if you object to the question, if you
21 could please stand up at the time the question has been asked.
22 MR. GUY-SMITH: Sure.
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: Not in the middle of an answer by the witness.
24 MR. GUY-SMITH: Sure.
25 JUDGE MOLOTO: For purposes of this objection, I think I must
1 allow this to -- just finish off that point that you are raising, Madam.
2 MS. BOLTON:
3 Q. Yes, sir, if you could clarify what you meant when you were
4 talking about -- you started to answer and to talk about mandatory
5 compliance versus and then you were cut off, what were you talking about,
7 A. That is correct. The United Nations Security Council has unique
8 authority in an actual context, which is to address great threats to
9 peace and security, and in this context it can apply what's called
10 Chapter 7 or Chapter 6 authority. Chapter 7 has the full weight of the
11 international community behind it. And in fact, it is not only
12 compulsory, but various methods may be applied to ensure compliance with
13 such resolutions.
14 Clearly, when we speak of chapter -- when we speak of UN Security
15 Council versus General Assembly, the General Assembly is more, one would
16 say, of a body that advises, that takes stands on international issues,
17 while in fact this UN Security Council, in fact, is one that can impose
18 measures including mandatory measures, including potentially forced
19 sanctions, things of that sort.
20 Q. Just going back to the General Assembly, sir, when it meets are
21 its meetings held in public or in private?
22 A. They are always in public.
23 Q. And how about the Security Council when it meets?
24 A. The UN Security Council may meet in private consultations. In
25 fact, there's a special room on the side of the Security Council Chamber
1 for such consultations. As far as I am aware of, all the votes of the
2 Security Council, though, are taken in public, and such debates
3 associated with those votes are in public. And UN Security Council
4 members do have a history of meeting also in partial membership, that is
5 two, three, five members may meet to discuss these issues beyond any sort
6 of formal setting.
7 Q. How many members are there on the Security Council?
8 A. As of today it's 15.
9 Q. How many of those seats of the 15 -- are any of those seats of
10 the 15 permanent seats that don't change?
11 A. Five are permanent members.
12 Q. And the other ten then?
13 A. The other ten rotate in two year terms. Actually five and five,
14 so there are elections every year for five members, and those
15 non-permanent members stay on the council for a period of two years.
16 Q. And during the time of the Bosnian war in 1992 to 1995, were any
17 of the parties to the conflict Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, were they --
18 either of them have a seat in the Security Council?
19 A. No, not until not -- well, until the late 1990s.
20 Q. And did the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia have a seat in the
21 Security Council during that time-period?
22 A. No, it did not.
23 Q. You've mentioned that this Security Council can meet in private
24 and you indicated that the number of members who would attend those
25 sessions would vary. If you weren't a member of the Security Council,
1 and by that I mean you don't have a seat on the Security Council, could
2 you attend those meetings?
3 A. You may be called upon by some of those countries to consult.
4 Bosnia and Herzegovina was frequently called upon by some of those
5 countries to provide insight. Sometimes to relay information to other
6 Security Council members through those meetings. We frequently met with
7 what was then called a non-align group. Sometimes we met with what
8 were -- what was called the P3, P4, P5, or P3 plus 2. For example the P3
9 plus 2 was a reference to the two permanent EU member, the United States
10 and generally there were two other EU members that were non-permanent on
11 the council.
12 Q. Okay. Let me stop you there, sir. With respect to the public
13 meetings of the Security Council that you have alluded to, if you didn't
14 have a seat in the Security Council, could you attend those meetings?
15 A. That is correct. If the meeting what a formal meeting, you would
16 actually sit on the side of the Chambers, and each county does actually
17 have a seat designated for it to the extent that there were informal
18 consultations going on in the anti-Chamber, if you would, most of us were
19 not only aware of it but we made sure we were present, and we were
20 present in what's called the Security Council delegates lounge where in
21 facts we exchanged views, provided information, or whatever was
22 appropriate in that diplomatic context.
23 Q. I'm only interested right now, sir, on -- in your ability to
24 participate in the public sessions and be present in the public sessions.
25 So you've told us, I think, that you could be present in those sessions;
1 is that correct, the public sessions?
2 A. That is correct. That is correct.
3 Q. Okay. And were you entitled to participate in the discussions as
5 A. Yes, we would have to make an application to participate. That
6 application did not have to be granted, and that application could be
7 limited to the ability to sit at the table and observe, that is as one
8 that is considered a party to the issue, or in fact you could participate
9 with the right to speak.
10 Q. And would you ever have a right to vote in the Security Council
11 as a member state that didn't have a seat?
12 A. No, you would not.
13 MS. BOLTON: I see the time Your Honour did you want to take the
14 break at the regular time.
15 JUDGE MOLOTO: Indeed we would. We'll take the break and come
16 back at 4.00.
17 MR. GUY-SMITH: Excuse me, Your Honour, does the admonition stand
18 with regard to no contact between the witness and the lawyer?
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: Can you say that again?
20 MR. GUY-SMITH: The admonition stand with regard to the issue of
21 no contact between the witness and his lawyer?
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: I don't know whether we can still find them.
23 MR. GUIRGUIS: I'm here, Your Honour, and I understand the
24 admonition not to discuss any substance of the witness's testimony with
25 him over the course of the entire week absent any issues that arise with
1 respect to incrimination or things to that effect.
2 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
3 MR. GUIRGUIS: The rule is well understood.
4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much. You are so warned. May we
6 --- Recess taken at 3.34 p.m.
7 --- On resuming at 4.09 p.m.
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: Madam Bolton.
9 MS. BOLTON: Thank you, Your Honour. Before I continue, the
10 clerk pointed out to me during the break that the first exhibit that was
11 marked today, being Exhibit P2428, actually contains two resolutions,
12 Resolution 755, that we discussed, and there's another resolution, 763,
13 and I'll just clarify for the record that the Prosecution isn't relying
14 on Resolution 763.
15 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you, Madam Bolton.
16 MS. BOLTON:
17 Q. Mr. Sacirbey, before the break, we were talking about your work
18 at the United Nations, and we briefly touched on the fact that when you
19 first became the ambassador, that you were basically working out of your
20 home and so forth. Was there ever a time when there was anyone other
21 than yourself working for the mission on behalf of Bosnia-Herzegovina at
22 the United Nations?
23 A. Yes, there was.
24 Q. Okay. Can we touch now on the status of the Federal Republic
1 start by asking if the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia had been
2 a member of the United Nations?
3 A. Yes, it had.
4 Q. And we've already established that when it began to break up that
6 granted membership in the United Nations. Can you tell me whether the
7 Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, Serbia Montenegro
8 MR. GUY-SMITH: Excuse me, before we go any further the question
9 is as it's presently put forth, which is "when it began to break up," is
10 historically inaccurate to the extent that it's going to be of any issues
11 to the Chamber. The question should be properly framed.
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: Madam Bolton.
13 MS. BOLTON: I don't think, Your Honour, that there's any issue
14 with respect in these proceedings. My friend's objection to the use of
15 "break up," it doesn't have any connotation. I can reword the question
16 if you would like, Your Honour.
17 JUDGE MOLOTO: If you like to reword, reword it.
18 MS. BOLTON:
19 Q. When Croatia
20 themselves independent, after that process, sir, can you tell me whether
21 the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia followed suit and applied for
22 membership at the United Nations?
23 A. No, it did not. Not at least during the period of the conflict.
24 Q. What was its -- what was the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia's
25 position on membership -- its entitlement to membership at the United
2 MR. GUY-SMITH: Well, at this point unless there's a foundation
3 laid, I would object to the question.
4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Foundation for what, Mr. Guy-Smith?
5 MR. GUY-SMITH: For the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia's position
6 with regard to its entitlement to its membership.
7 JUDGE MOLOTO: And what kind of foundation should be laid for
8 that kind of question?
9 MR. GUY-SMITH: Well, there is as a matter of fact a series of
10 legal documents to discuss this matter and was a hotly contested legal
11 issue, Your Honour.
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: I'm not quite sure. Are you discussing legalities
13 or are you discussing time-frames, ma'am?
14 MS. BOLTON: I'm not discussing the legalities, I'm trying to
15 discuss what its status was at the United Nations, what rights it had,
16 and my friend is right that there is some documents but I can't -- I'm
17 trying to introduce into evidence those documents so that we can have
18 clarification as to what its status was. I'm not asking for a legal
19 question at all, I'm just asking for the historical context, Your Honour.
20 JUDGE MOLOTO: I think if you can tie to your question a
21 time-frame, it will be allowed.
22 MS. BOLTON: Certainly.
23 Q. In -- let's look at the spring of 1992, Mr. Sacirbey, could you
24 tell me what position the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia was taking with
25 respect to membership for the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia in the
1 United Nations?
2 A. It was a fluid situation. Certainly the -- many of the diplomats
3 that were once representing the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia
4 did in fact continue to represent the Serbia Montenegro. Others, in
5 fact, resigned from those posts and went on either into private life or
6 into representing other countries. It was, though, quite clear that
7 there was a continuity of the presence of some of these diplomats,
8 although not until the September of 1992 was the status of Serbia
10 United Nations General Assembly.
11 Q. All right. Before we get to September of 1992, could you tell us
12 if there was any discussion in the Security Council on this issue?
13 A. Yes, there was. Certainly at that period of time immediately
14 before September, but throughout the time, and the question was did in
15 fact the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, that is Serbia Montenegro, have
16 the right of continuity to the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.
17 Q. What do you mean by that?
18 A. If Bosnia-Herzegovina --
19 Q. Sir, what do you mean?
20 A. Well, a continuity -- let me give you another example. Russia
21 was assumed to have continuity for the Soviet Union, but in fact in the
22 case of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, the Federal
23 Republic of Yugoslavia
24 regarding its continuity, and in fact Slovenia, Croatia,
25 Bosnia-Herzegovina, and other states subsequently did challenge that
1 continuity, that is that in fact Serbian Montenegro, that is the Federal
2 Republic of Yugoslavia
3 a member.
4 Q. When you are talking about continuity, can you just clarify what
5 you mean, continuity?
6 A. State continuity.
7 MR. GUY-SMITH: Excuse me, once again if we are talking about
8 this from a standpoint of a legal standpoint, there has been no
9 foundation laid for this gentleman to discuss the matter. If we are
10 talking about it from another standpoint, then I don't object to the
11 question but since the question as phrased is sufficiently vague and
12 there are legal issues with regard to all of these terms that are of
13 importance to the Trial Chamber's consideration, I would request that the
14 questions framed are quite specific.
15 JUDGE MOLOTO: I didn't understand the question to be from a
16 legal standpoint, and I thought it was sufficiently specific and clearly
17 excluding the legalities, it was just asking what this witness knows as a
18 person who was in United Nations at the time.
19 MS. BOLTON: Thank you, Your Honour.
20 Q. Could you explain what you are talking about when you are talking
21 about continuity with respect to membership in the United Nations?
22 A. We were talking about state or legal continuity which means that
23 in fact the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, that is Serbia
25 in fact Russia
1 MR. GUY-SMITH: Well, Your Honour --
2 THE WITNESS: In this case in fact it was the -- a different
4 MR. GUY-SMITH: I think the answer given by the witness indicates
5 the exact problem that I raised, specifically -- especially after your
6 particular ruling in which the witness said "We were talking about state
7 or legal continuity..." right after you had indicated in your
8 understanding that the question was not to be from a legal standpoint.
9 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Guy-Smith, my understanding is that this
10 witness is a fact witness, he's not an expert. And I'm -- he's telling
11 us what he understands the facts to have been, and whether those facts
12 were legal or not legal, we will hear evidence on as to when the legal
13 succession took place.
14 MR. GUY-SMITH: Well, you may -- as a matter of fact you may or
15 you may not, Your Honour, and with regard to the --
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Well, if we don't then it's not a hotly disputed
18 MR. GUY-SMITH: Well, to the extent that this witness is
19 rendering opinions that deal with legal matters predicated upon his
20 understanding of legal matters, it is of some moment. But if we are
21 going to be in a situation where we are going to have expert evidence,
22 for example, on Article 6 and Article 7, if we are going to be going
23 through an entire discussion of how the United Nations is put together
24 and how these specific provisions apply to member states or non-member
25 states, and the Prosecution is intending on doing such things, fine.
1 But in the absence of that, which you have, is you have a
2 gentleman who is giving legal opinion about -- in areas where he has not
3 been yet established as any expert and as you yourself said. He has been
4 called as a fact witness not as a legal witness.
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, but the thing is --
6 MR. GUY-SMITH: I'm sorry, and expert witness.
7 JUDGE MOLOTO: -- I haven't heard him giving -- opining. I've
8 heard him tell us what he knows from what he observed when he was there.
9 He hasn't given opinion.
10 MR. GUY-SMITH: Well, he used specifically the terminology that
11 you had but a moment before indicated was not the thrust of the question.
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: Do you have any response, Madam Bolton.
13 MS. BOLTON: I do, Your Honour. The -- and my friend can object
14 to my questions, but he continues to object to the witness's answers, and
15 these are matters he can deal with in cross-examination rather than
16 continually interrupt my examination-in-chief.
17 MR. GUY-SMITH: I understand Ms. Bolton's position, however,
18 there's a problem here. And I understand the court's ruling with regard
19 to the -- its view that witness's answer that is non-responsive or goes
20 far afield from the question is not something that can be objected to. I
21 happen to take issue with that and don't believe that should be the state
22 of the law but that is what you have ruled. This is not helpful,
23 however, to the Chamber. This is not helpful at all because if you have
24 a witness who is engaged in giving you non-responsive answers, and going
25 far afield from the issue at hand, we are engaged in a couple of things:
1 One is a wasting of time; two is a witness who is being, in fact,
2 utilized in a manner for which they're not called. He is being utilized
3 as an expert when he is a fact witness, and there's slippage, and the
4 slippage is inappropriate.
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: To the extent you comment on my ruling, I just
6 want to say to you, sir, that that ruling stands that I made earlier.
7 And whether you take issue with it or not it's another matter. You can
8 decide what you want to do about that. And I just want to say to you, if
9 anything comes from the witness that is not -- that is far afield from
10 issues before Court, the proper basis is relevance. And, unfortunately,
11 yes, I still say, it is not in my knowledge permissible to object to a
12 witness's answer because then otherwise you might as well take the stand
13 and answer on behalf of the witness. If the witness has been asked a
14 question and he answers the way he answers, that's how he answers. You
15 can object to a question, and I stand by that ruling, and what you want
16 to do with that is your decision.
17 MR. GUY-SMITH: I understand you in that regard. There's common
18 objection in American jurisprudence called objection, none responsive to
19 the question.
20 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes. We are not in American jurisprudence.
21 MR. GUY-SMITH: I appreciate that.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much.
23 MR. GUY-SMITH: But to the extent you have a witness who is going
24 far afield, we need to have some remedy, perhaps the remedy is for the
25 Court to instruct the witness to answer the question asked as opposed to
1 going off on a lark.
2 JUDGE MOLOTO: Relevance becomes the basis of objections. If
3 anybody goes far afield, the question becomes relevance, not none
5 MR. GUY-SMITH: So I'm clear with regard to the Court's position:
6 If a witness gives an answer which I deem to be not relevant, am I in a
7 position to object to that answer on the grounds of relevance?
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: You'd have to object to the question that's not
10 MR. GUY-SMITH: Well, I'm saying if the question is a relevant
11 question but the answer is an irrelevant answer, is the Court's ruling
12 that I can object --
13 JUDGE MOLOTO: No, that's not the --
14 MR. GUY-SMITH: -- on the grounds of relevance.
15 JUDGE MOLOTO: No, that's not the Court's ruling.
16 MR. GUY-SMITH: Very well. I understand the --
17 JUDGE MOLOTO: [Overlapping speakers]
18 MR. GUY-SMITH: -- then I -- then I understand the Court's
20 JUDGE MOLOTO: Okay. Thank you.
21 Madam Bolton, you may proceed.
22 MS. BOLTON: Thank you.
23 Q. Sir, in the binder before you, perhaps to clarify this issue, I
24 could ask you to turn to the next document, which is tab 2, Resolution
25 757 which is Prosecution Exhibit 202 in these proceedings.
1 A. Thank you, we are getting there.
2 Q. Yes, okay.
3 A. I have that in front of me, thank you.
4 Q. Thank you, sir. If you could turn to the second page of the
5 resolution. There is a paragraph that starts with the underlined word
6 "noting" approximately halfway down the page. Are you able to locate
7 that, sir?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. The text says:
10 "Noting that the claim by the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia
12 former Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia in the United Nations has
13 not been generally accepted."
14 Does this document, sir, accurately reflect the position the
15 Federal Republic of Yugoslavia was taking on this issue in the spring of
17 A. It reflects, of course, the view of the United Nations that it
18 was not generally accepted. On the other hand, of course the Federal
19 Republic of Yugoslavia
20 automatic membership.
21 Q. Okay. You've alluded to the fact, sir, that there was eventually
22 in September 1992 a ruling of sorts on this issue or clarification in the
23 Security Council, and I wonder go you could please turn to the second
24 document in that same tab. It is Defence Exhibit 30 in these
25 proceedings. Resolution 777.
1 A. That's correct. I have it in front of me.
2 Q. Is this the document you were referring to in your previous
3 testimony, sir, or were you referring to some other document?
4 A. No, this is the recommendation of the Security Council to the
5 General Assembly upon which the General Assembly did eventually act.
6 Q. And did the General Assembly agree with the recommendation or
7 disagree with the recommend?
8 A. It, in fact, did agree.
9 Q. As a result of that ruling, could you tell me what rights the
10 Federal Republic of Yugoslavia had in the General Assembly?
11 A. It did not have the right to be seated or to participate in the
12 actual work of the General Assembly. Obviously did not have the right to
13 vote. Although, in fact, there was a plaque left in the General Assembly
14 reflecting the Federal Republic
15 Q. When you talk about participate in the actual work of the General
16 Assembly, would that include participating in discussions in the General
18 A. That is correct.
19 Q. When the General Assembly and the Security Council were, for
20 example, considering passing resolutions, was there any information that
21 would be circulated about those draft resolutions?
22 A. There would be. Usually before the resolution was adopted, there
23 at least would be a draft resolution that would be circulated and of
24 course once it was adopted then it no longer would be a draft.
25 Q. And did the General Assembly and the Security Council circulate
1 other kinds of documents to member states?
2 A. They did. They may have been reports from the
3 Secretary-General's office, that is the Secretariat. It may have been
4 documents from other institutions or agencies of the United Nations,
5 rapporteurs, and of course of member states.
6 Q. And what were the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia's rights to
7 receive those kind of documents?
8 A. First of all, we do know that they did receive those documents,
9 and second of all, we do know that they in fact did also circulate
10 documents at least subsequent to this period.
11 Q. And the reason you say you know they received those kinds of
12 documents is what?
13 A. Because we had firsthand knowledge. In part because we really
14 were quite focused on the issue of what was the status of Serbian
16 membership while maybe not having all the rights of membership. They
17 certainly did have diplomats accredited to the United Nations, visas were
18 issued, documents were distributed and received. Even at some point in
19 time they participated in the discussions of the Security Council upon
20 their request.
21 Q. Were their rights of participation in the Security Council any
22 different than the rights enjoyed by Bosnia-Herzegovina?
23 A. That's a little bit difficult to say because we as a member state
24 had the right to ask to be seated and to participate. Serbian Montenegro
25 also did subsequently make the same request and at some point in time in
1 fact they were granted. Whether it was perceived by the Security Council
2 members and others to be exactly the same right or not is difficult to
3 say, but from a perspective of actually being there, receiving documents,
4 being part of the discussion, it was very much similar.
5 Q. Who was -- you mentioned the fact that there had been a
6 representative of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia at the
7 United Nations. Do you remember what that person's name was in the
8 spring of 1992?
9 A. I don't remember his full name to be very honest with you, I only
10 had one interaction with him and he actually left before we became --
11 that is before Bosnia-Herzegovina became a member of the United Nations.
12 Q. Okay. Who became the FRY representative at the -- Federal
13 Republic of Yugoslavia
14 A. The time-frames are interesting in a sense that there was, of
15 course, what would he call a Charge d'affair at one time. Then there was
16 Ambassador Dzokic and Ambassador Jovanovic who were there most of the
17 time when I was there.
18 Q. And how do you spell Ambassador Jokic's name?
19 A. It's -- well, in --
20 Q. In English.
21 A. In our language it would -- yes, I guess that would be
22 J-o-k-i-c-h. But the spelling would be quite different in the Bosnian
23 Croat or Serba.
24 JUDGE MOLOTO: And what would that spelling be in Bosnian and
25 Croatian spelling?
1 THE WITNESS: That would be different. It's actually -- D-z --
2 JUDGE MOLOTO: Could you spell it in B/C/S?
3 THE WITNESS: Yes, D-z-o-k-i-c.
4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
5 THE WITNESS: Your Honours, there's little thing at the end of
6 the C that indicates it's a CH sound.
7 JUDGE MOLOTO: Okay.
8 MS. BOLTON:
9 Q. Dealing with Ambassador Dzokic, did he have any staff?
10 A. Yes, he did. In fact, the staff was there, I believe, before he
12 Q. Approximately how large was his staff?
13 A. Again, during this period of time there were probably anywhere
14 from ten to as many as 20 plus staff. Now, how many of them were
15 accredited diplomats, probably it was more like 5 to 10, again depending
16 on the time-frame. Usually, also countries would tend to bring in more
17 staff when there were particular issues of great interest or, for
18 example, during the General Assembly session in the fall, countries would
19 tend to bring in temporary diplomatic staff to address the greater
21 Q. Do you know whether the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia had a
22 military attache at any time from May of 1992 to the end of 1995?
23 A. I'm actually not certain of that.
24 Q. Could you tell me how much contact you or your staff had with
25 Mr. Dzokic on a day-to-day basis or weekly basis?
1 A. There was actually pretty extensive contact. I personally
2 refrained from direct contact because the fact that Serbian Montenegro
3 did not provide Bosnia-Herzegovina with diplomatic recognition. I did
4 not wish, therefore, to reciprocate with any legitimacy. It was in fact
5 a diplomatic option. But there was certainly interaction and it was not
6 one of those combative situations, but because again of the diplomatic
7 situation we did not interact that frequently.
8 Q. Would your staff share with you what happened in those
10 A. Absolutely. And I would encourage them to do so.
11 THE INTERPRETER: Excuse me, could the speakers please make
12 pauses before question and answer for benefit of the accused.
13 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much. I'm sorry, Mr. Interpreter.
14 Yes, Madam Bolton, and you, Mr. Sacirbey, both of you are
15 speaking in English and we are having interpretation into various other
16 languages. If you could please have a pause between question and answer
17 to allow for the interpretation to flow smoothly. Thank you so much.
18 MR. GUY-SMITH: And if we might get a time-frame or some
19 specificity with regard to the interaction between these two parties,
20 that would be of some assistance, as opposed to the general and rather
21 ambiguous state of the record as it stands right now.
22 MS. BOLTON:
23 Q. I am talking -- sir, just for clarification of my last series of
24 questions, I'm talking about the entire time-period from May of 1992 to
25 the end of 1995. That's what I intended when I asked the question of how
1 many contact you or your staff were having, and if -- could you please
2 clarify if there were time periods where there was more or less contact
3 than you've already indicated?
4 A. The contact probably was more frequent toward the end of that
5 period or at least the middle of it. In parts, because of course the
6 staff that I had evolved into significantly more, in part because an
7 exchange of information sometimes was in fact necessary. Nonetheless,
8 the exchange was continuous during that time-frame. There were many
9 diplomats eventually that we brought on on behalf of Bosnia-Herzegovina
10 that knew some of the diplomats of Serbian Montenegro personally and
11 interacted with them quite more regularly than I would, and including my
12 deputy at that time Ivan Misic, and they in fact did fill me in on those
13 discussions or those talks.
14 Q. And based on the information you were receiving from your staff,
15 could you comment on how well informed Mr. Dzokic appeared to be on the
16 events that were transpiring in Bosnia-Herzegovina --
17 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Guy-Smith.
18 MR. GUY-SMITH: Well, I'm going to object on a couple of grounds.
19 It calls for speculation based upon multiple unsourced hearsay, except to
20 the extent that we've had the name of one individual who was his deputy
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Madam Bolton.
23 MS. BOLTON:
24 Q. Can you give us the names of your staff, sir?
25 A. Yes. During that time-frame it was quite extensive, so let me
1 make sure that I'm as complete as I can be. But I doubt if I'm going to
2 get everyone in there. There was Miles Raguz, there was Ivan Misic,
3 Nenad Periskic, Amela Sapcanin, those were my immediate diplomatic staff.
4 I'm sure I'm leaving several others. Michael Young [phoen]. Phil Colin
6 Q. Is that your list, sir?
7 A. I'm sure I'm leaving some people out. At any point in time we
8 had probably at least five accredited diplomats starting, let's say, with
9 the fall of 1992. That number was rather fluid and the personalities
10 were fluid. Many of them were volunteers, and they were many times
11 employed to be addressing the specific United Nations committees, for
12 example the 3rd committee or the 1st committee so that in fact
13 Bosnia-Herzegovina could be active in all the work of the United Nations.
14 Q. Okay. And you've talked about diplomatic staff specifically.
15 Who would have actually had contact with the Federal Republic
17 A. Actually, most frequently would have been either Ivan Misic or
18 Miles Raguz or Amela Sapcanin or John Kraljic [phoen] which is a name I'm
19 adding just now. Or Phil Colin, I think -- I think those were the ones
20 that would have been more frequently involved.
21 Q. So based on the reports that you received back from those five
22 individuals as to their discussions with Mr. Dzokic, could you comment on
23 how well informed Mr. Dzokic appeared to be?
24 THE COURT: Mr. Guy-Smith.
25 MR. GUY-SMITH: First of all, the question as posed
1 mis-characterizes the witness's answer, so I'll start with that. And
2 we'll go from there.
3 JUDGE MOLOTO: Madam Bolton.
4 MS. BOLTON: I'm not sure what the alleged mischaracterization
5 is, Your Honour.
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Guy-Smith.
7 MR. GUY-SMITH: Question asked on page 40, line 6 through 8 deals
8 with the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia Staff. That would be multiple
9 individuals, none of whom have been named. Question at page 40, lines 13
10 through 15 deal with specifically as to their discussions with Mr.
11 Dzokic, but that's not the state of our record. The state of our record
12 is that he was discussing who his staff talked to with regard to the
13 Federal Republic of Yugoslavia's staff, not with Mr. Dzokic.
14 MS. BOLTON: So I'm trying to locate the record, Your Honour. My
15 initial question which had to do -- that my friend objected to which had
16 to do with the fact that he received reports from his staff, and then we
17 talked about the fact that there were five individuals basically who had
18 contact with the FRY diplomatic mission, and in my position, with
19 respect, Your Honour, is that when you combine those two statements, it's
20 clear that we are talking about the same individuals as being individuals
21 who reported their contacts with the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia
23 MR. GUY-SMITH: That's an entirely different position than
24 whether or not anybody spoke to Mr. Dzokic, and she's identified the
25 question with regard to Mr. Dzokic. Now, whether or not the identified
1 individuals of Mr. Sacirbey's staff spoke with individuals in the FRY
2 staff is something that I believe probably happened. Who those
3 individuals were I have no way of knowing because there's no information
4 about that, but more importantly what she has done is she's taken a
5 collective hearsay grouping of individuals on both sides and then refined
6 it to Mr. Dzokic which is inappropriate because that's not what the
7 witness answered.
8 MS. BOLTON: Actually, my initial question at page 37, lines 18
9 to 19 was specific to contact with Mr. Dzokic.
10 MR. GUY-SMITH: I think Ms. Bolton misses the point, because if
11 she takes a look at page 39, beginning at line -- I think it's line 5
12 through the end of that particular section is where this -- we went off
13 on this particular unfortunate journey.
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: Madam Bolton, I understood you to be asking two
15 different questions. You asked about contact with staff and then you
16 asked when the -- your opposite number objected, it was when you asked
17 him about reports from Mr. Dzokic, from discussions with Mr. Dzokic.
18 Maybe just so that we can run a little bit smoothly, if you could just
19 focus your question if you want to talk about reports, and I suspect when
20 you talk of reports you're talking of official reports between
21 specifically Mr. Dzokic and any of the staff of the BiH embassy.
22 MS. BOLTON: When I use the term "report" I'll clarify with the
23 witness, Your Honour --
24 JUDGE MOLOTO: If you could, please.
25 MS. BOLTON: -- if Your Honour is confused.
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: If you could, please.
2 I guess I seem to sense that Mr. Guy-Smith's problem is he
3 doesn't know -- want a mixture of hearsay of evidence from unknown
4 sources to specific information coming from specific people to specific
6 MS. BOLTON: All right.
7 Q. Yes, my question, Mr. Sacirbey, if we could go back to the
8 beginning is, did your -- you've given us the name of five diplomatic
9 staff. Can you tell me how much contact on a day-to-day basis during the
10 conflict those individuals would have had with Mr. Dzokic?
11 A. I'm quite certain that at least one of them, which is my deputy
12 at that time Ivan Misic, had quite regular contact with Mr. Dzokic. I
13 would also add that frequently when we were dealing with diplomats from
14 other states, we were not necessarily dealing with them on a first name
15 basis. The references in the United Nations generally are to people as
16 the country that they represent. It is quite common in the United
17 Nations that you are not always dealing with people whose first or last
18 name you would know. But with Mr. Dzokic, I remember very clearly that
19 Mr. Misic frequently gave me the updates of his discussions with Mr.
21 Q. Okay. And when gave you updates and reported what he discussed
22 with Mr. Dzokic, could you tell me how well informed Mr. Dzokic appeared
23 to be, based on those reports, as to events that were transpiring in
25 A. I was left with the strong impression that the information was
1 extensive and in many cases detailed.
2 Q. Sorry, what do you mean when you say that the information was
3 extensive and in many cases detailed? My question was how well informed
4 Mr. Dzokic appeared to be?
5 A. He seemed to be well informed.
6 Q. What kind of issues would your representatives discuss with Mr.
7 Dzokic or members of his staff?
8 A. Frequently they were --
9 MR. GUY-SMITH: I do apologise, if we could have some time-frame
10 with regard to this apart from a three year time-frame. There are many
11 many things that happened during those three years, and they have
12 different legal as well as factual import to the matters before this
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: Madam Bolton.
15 MS. BOLTON: Sorry, Your Honour, I was under the impression that
16 I was running my examination-in-chief and my friend may want to clarify
17 in cross-examination issues such as this, but it's not a proper objection
18 to a question that doesn't -- that it's not specific enough to suit
19 counsel's needs.
20 MR. GUY-SMITH: Well, it's vague as to time.
21 JUDGE MOLOTO: We've been given a time-frame of 1992 to 1995. If
22 you're unable to hone in on a shorter time, fine. If you are not, that's
23 the time we have got to live with and Mr. Guy-Smith can clarify things in
25 MS. BOLTON: Thank you.
1 Q. Yes, Mr. Sacirbey, if you could answer my question about the
2 kinds of issues that were discussed and during that time-frame 1992 to
4 MR. GUY-SMITH: If I might, the importance of this is that we do
5 have --
6 THE INTERPRETER: The speakers are kindly asked to make pauses
7 before question and answer for the benefit of the accused.
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: I hope you heard what the interpreter said.
9 Mr. Guy-Smith, you can start your -- what you wanted to say.
10 MR. GUY-SMITH: Yes, if I might, we do have an indictment here
11 and the indictment period is discrete and does not cover the entire
12 period of time that Ms. Bolton's question discusses.
13 JUDGE MOLOTO: Madam Bolton, how I now understand Mr. Guy-Smith
14 is -- you are going outside the time-frame of the indictment.
15 MS. BOLTON: Well, there's already been, I think, Your Honour, a
16 series of rulings in this case that indicate that matters precede the
17 indictment period may still be relevant in terms of issues such as
18 foreseeability. What I'm trying to establish at this point in time, Your
19 Honour, the relevance is the flow of communication, the knowledge of the
20 federal -- the representatives of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia
21 It's relevant that they knew of events, for example, in 1993, and I
22 appreciate that there will be a separate issue to be argued as to the
23 extent to which General Perisic was updated on any information that was
24 available, but I think it's still relevant that the FRY representatives
25 knew what was going on -- sorry, the diplomatic representatives knew what
1 was going on in 1992, 1993, for example.
2 JUDGE MOLOTO: Objection would be overruled then.
3 MS. BOLTON: Thank you, Your Honour.
4 Q. Sorry, Mr. Sacirbey, if we could go back then. We were talking
5 about generalities here of the time-period of 1992 to 1995, and if you
6 could just highlight for us what kind of issues were typically discussed
7 with the FRY mission by your representatives?
8 A. Certainly the primary issue we would try to bring to their
9 attention are the reports of various atrocities, actions, military
10 actions within Bosnia-Herzegovina, and of course the implications for the
11 population as well as the country. The FRY may also wish to discuss the
12 issue of sanctions. Within that context we may also ask the transport of
13 military goods and other goods or people that may in fact come from
14 Serbian Montenegro
15 status of Serbian Montenegro at the United Nations. We may discuss,
16 depending on the moment, the various reports issued by the
17 Secretary-General reporting on the condition of the population on the
18 military actions, where those military actions may have come from, and of
19 course the consequences for the humanitarian situation, things like
20 delivery of food and medicines.
21 I'm sure I can go on for quite sometime, but I hope that serves
22 the purpose.
23 Q. And when you use the word "we may discuss," are you indicating
24 that these issues were or were not discussed?
25 A. No, they were. Again, of course, keeping in mind the time-frame,
1 all of these issues were discussed.
2 Q. Tell me, was there ever a time between May 1992 and the 24th day
3 of November, 1998, when the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia was not
4 represented at the United Nations in New York?
5 A. Not that I can recall.
6 Q. I take it, sir, that there were times when the Bosnian war was
7 the subject of discussions in the General Assembly?
8 A. That is correct. We, in fact, initiated such a discussion as
9 early as the fall of -- actually late summer fall of 1992.
10 Q. And were there occasions when the Bosnian war was also the
11 subjects of discussions at the Security Council?
12 A. That was very frequent.
13 Q. And to the best of your recollection, were there ever occasions
14 when the subject of the Bosnian war was being discussed in either of
15 those forums when someone from the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia's
16 mission was not present?
17 A. I cannot recall such a moment.
18 Q. Were there any occasions between May of 1992 and the end of 1995
19 when you were permitted to address the Security Council on matters
20 relating to Bosnia-Herzegovina?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. On the occasions that you spoke, could you tell us how frequently
23 or infrequently someone from the FRY, Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, was
24 present, and by that I mean a member of their mission?
25 A. As far as I know, they were always present.
1 Q. In the context of having discussions at the General Assembly and
2 the Security Council at the United Nations, would I be correct in
3 assuming that there had to have been some efforts for the Security
4 Council and General Assembly to keep abreast of what was happening in the
6 A. That is correct.
7 Q. What sources of information did the Security Council have
8 available to it in terms of what was actually happening in the region?
9 A. First of all, they may have had various reports from the
10 Secretariat, that is UN representative agencies. Whether it was UNPROFOR
11 or such other missions, rapporteurs, as those were institutions directly
12 associated with the United Nations, and there were multiple such
14 They may have also received reports from other international
15 institutions, for example, the EU monitoring mission. They may have
16 received reports from related institutions, for example, various
17 groupings of states, and of course, they would receive information from
18 member states themselves, and those member states might in fact also
19 include media reports.
20 Q. And you've used the word "may" again, does that mean they did or
21 did not have information available from the sources you've listed?
22 A. In fact in all of those instances were reflected at least on
23 several occasions in actual sources. I do know that, of course, even
24 Bosnia-Herzegovina, in my capacity as ambassador, did at times convey to
25 the Security Council media reports.
1 Q. You mentioned the fact that information was available from
2 UNPROFOR at times, and I wonder if I could ask you to turn to tab 15A in
3 the binder that's before you. And this is 65 ter number 5986.
4 A. We are having just a little bit of difficulty identifying the
6 Q. It should be tab 15A.
7 A. It was just in a separate book, I believe.
8 Q. No, it should be in that -- oh, yes, sorry, you have the Bosnian
9 translations, you are correct. I'm sorry.
10 A. Yeah. Thank you. Okay. And what is the number --
11 Q. I am sorry, it's 65 ter 5986, and the title at the top of the
12 document should be "UNPROFOR Press and Information Press Release, 16
13 March, 1993."
14 A. That is correct.
15 Q. My question is with respect to the release of information from
16 UNPROFOR, how often did they release press releases such as this one
17 during the time-period of the conflict?
18 A. It was frequent but by no means comprehensive.
19 Q. Sorry, I don't know what you mean by comprehensive?
20 A. The information was released very frequently, but it does not
21 mean that in fact every and any information was released.
22 Q. Would the information that the Security Council be the same as
23 the information that was released to the press?
24 A. Not necessarily. We have been -- we know that there were some
25 confidential briefings that were given to the Security Council as a
1 whole, but more likely at least to some Security Council members. But by
2 and large, most of the information that was available to the Security
3 Council was eventually available to all member states, to others that
4 were part of the diplomatic staff, and of course the media.
6 MS. BOLTON: If that document, Your Honour, could be marked as
7 the next exhibit.
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: Document is admitted. May it please be given an
9 exhibit number.
10 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, the document will become Exhibit
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much.
13 Yes, Madam Bolton
14 MS. BOLTON: Thank you.
15 Q. In your capacity as ambassador for Bosnia-Herzegovina, did you
16 have access to any sources of information that wouldn't have been
17 available to the Security Council?
18 A. Yes, I would.
19 Q. Were there ever occasions when you came into possession of
20 information that you wanted to place in front of the Security Council or
21 make them aware of?
22 A. Yes, I would.
23 Q. How would you go about doing that?
24 A. Well, as we just discussed, once a document was made a document
25 of the General Assembly or the Security Council, then in fact it was
1 available to all, and it was quote unquote a public document. So to the
2 extent that we in fact would received information from any source that we
3 believe was credible, we would then submit it to either to the
4 Secretary-General's office or more likely to the president of the
5 Security Council or in some instances it may have been also made a
6 document to the General Assembly. Regardless, when we requested that it
7 be distributed as a document of those bodies, of those institution, then
8 in fact it would be a public document.
9 Q. And in what form would you report the information?
10 A. What we would do is we would attach a letter to one of these
11 institutions, most of the times it was the president of the Security
12 Council, asking that in fact that information be distributed as a
13 document of the Security Council. At that point in time, again it would
14 be a public document.
15 Q. And was the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, notwithstanding the
16 issue of its status, receiving copies of your documents?
17 A. Yes, it was. And in some instances we would actually make
18 certain that those documents would be even directly mailed to the
19 representatives of or and to other member states. So that in fact some
20 of the documents may have even gone directly from our office.
21 Q. Apart from the fact that some of the documents were mailed, how
22 else do you know that they were in fact receiving copies of your
24 A. Once in fact -- actually, I want to make sure I'm correct in my
25 representation. Most of the times, at least during that time-frame,
1 documents were either faxed to other countries, or they may have been
2 hand delivered. But once a document was made a document of the United
3 Nations Security Council or the other institution that I mentioned, then
4 all member statements in fact would receive that, and we knew that in
5 fact the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia/Serbian Montenegro was on the
6 distribution list. Needless to say, these documents were sometimes
7 discussed, they were part of those discussions that we mentioned before
8 with representatives of Serbian Montenegro.
9 Q. Any reason to believe that representatives from the Federal
10 Republic of Yugoslavia
11 A. Simply because there was reply either in person or subsequent in
12 some form of a formal response. I am not aware of any instance where
13 those documents had caught anyone by surprise at the Federal Republic
15 Q. What kinds of topics would you discuss in your correspondence,
17 A. Most of the time they related, of course, again to the human
18 situation on the ground. The abuse of the population, what we referred
19 to at that time as genocide, and we still believe it. What we discussed
20 as the humanitarian situation, the interruption of food and medicines.
21 Frequently the supply of military goods and men coming from Serbian
23 sanctions, violations of the border monitoring. And in some instances,
24 of course, we may have relayed -- particular conditions may be related it
25 to Bosnia-Herzegovinian citizens being held in the other neighbouring
1 countries, particularly Serbian Montenegro.
2 Q. And what were you -- sorry, would you be able to estimate or give
3 us any idea of how many letters you might have written between 1992 and
4 1995 on the topics that you articulated?
5 A. We were quite persistent. We of course tried to convey not only
6 the specific deeds that were involved, but a systematic approach on the
7 part of the forces of Serbian Montenegro and their agents in Bosnia
8 would say we probably averaged a document more frequent than every other
9 day. Let's say about 200 documents a year. Sometimes multiple documents
10 during even a single day.
11 Q. What were you trying to achieve by writing that many letters?
12 A. In part each one of those events needed to be noted, particularly
13 if there was something that was related to the human condition. I felt
14 it was my obligation to take note of each victim, take note of each crime
15 committed against the Bosnian people. I did not wish those victims to be
16 forgotten. So that was my way of conveying some sort of respect to their
17 individual identity. But also, it was important, I think, to convey that
18 there was a systematic effort underway to not only undermine the
19 sovereignty and territorial integrity of Bosnia-Herzegovina, but in fact
20 to engage in great violations of international humanitarian law, that is
22 Q. Who were you trying to convey that to?
23 A. Of course, the international community as a whole. The member
24 states. The media. And of course Serbian Montenegro.
25 Q. We began this discussion by talking about information that was
1 available to the Security Council in making their decisions and you
2 indicated that one of the sources of information were media reports. Can
3 you tell us what kind of access to media resources such as television,
4 radio, newspaper, delegates had at the UN headquarters?
5 A. We would have access of course to all of that through various
6 channels, but we might also have access to more in the view of the fact
7 that most media institutions, or at least a the larger ones are
8 represented at the United Nations. There are various media reports that
9 were also put out beyond the normal channels in what was called the UN
10 correspondence association area on the third floor of UN headquarters.
11 We may in fact have some of these media reports also sent out to us
12 specifically by such reporters. On several occasions certainly I was
13 contacted directly either to ask questions or more accurately, I guess,
14 in response to your question, to convey certain pieces of information
15 that might be relevant to the work of the United Nations Security
17 Q. You talked about there being a correspondence association area on
18 the third floor of UN headquarters. Would you have to go up and get
19 information or request information from them, or would they distribute it
20 without asking, or what was the procedure?
21 A. First of all, at the time when I was present, and I believe that
22 practice still continues, countries and sometimes media institutions will
23 put out the reports in like a filer. And also of course sometimes those
24 filers would be actually directly faxed or sent to all the member states.
25 Most of the time that was employed by other member states, but at
1 times it could be also employed by some of the media organisations.
2 Q. Okay. One of the resources I was asking about was television.
3 What access to television coverage was there at the UNHQ,
4 UN Headquarters?
5 A. There was, of course, the United Nations TV which was something
6 that was available to all -- well, let me rephrase that. It was
7 available to in fact all of Manhattan
8 mission in fact did have access to that UN television channel. And then
9 of course we would have access to all the other media, in particular CNN,
11 NBC, at that time. And they --
12 Q. When you say you may have -- sorry. When you are talking about
13 we had access, are you talking specifically about your mission? Or are
14 you talking about this being available in public areas or something else
16 A. Yes, I think I should be very specific. I know what I had
17 available to my mission, and of course I could easily move the channels
18 around. I know also that in several public areas of the United Nations
19 including at the United Nations Security Council delegates area, there
20 was a television set up. Most of the time it was broadcasting CNN.
21 Q. And that delegates area is the area you've already discussed as
22 being by the Security Council anti-room; is that correct?
23 A. That is correct. It's the UN Security Council lounge.
24 Q. Okay. I want to now start to deal with the situation in
25 Bosnia-Herzegovina chronologically, sir. And if we could -- if you could
1 turn your mind back to May 1992, can you tell us what the situation was
2 the time you assumed your post with respect to the ability of the
3 government of Bosnia-Herzegovina to acquire arms?
4 A. Bosnia and Herzegovina was deemed to be subject to an arms
5 embargo imposed upon what at that time was the Socialist Federal Republic
6 of Yugoslavia
7 Q. Could you turn to tab 5 in the binder that you previously had.
8 And this is --
9 A. Yes, we are going there.
10 Q. Thank you. It's 65 ter 6036.
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. You were just talking about an arms embargo having been imposed
13 on the Socialist Federal Republic
14 document and tell me if this is the document that you were discussing.
15 A. Yes. And this document was referred to in subsequent
16 resolutions. That's why I'm very familiar with it.
17 Q. Okay.
18 MS. BOLTON: Could this document please be tendered as an
19 exhibit, Your Honours.
20 JUDGE MOLOTO: Its admitted. May it please be given an exhibit
22 THE REGISTRAR: The document will become Exhibit P2431,
23 Your Honours.
24 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much. Yes, ma'am.
25 MS. BOLTON:
1 Q. You indicated that this arms embargo resolution was referred to
2 in subsequent documents, and if you could turn to the next page in that
3 same tab, you should see a document 65 ter 4997.
4 A. We are just having a little difficulty locating it, let me make
5 sure. Resolution 740?
6 Q. Yes. And if you could look at chapter -- sorry, brief
8 Yes, on the first page you have before you there's paragraph that
9 starts with the words underlined "expressing concern," do you see that?
10 A. Yes, I do.
11 Q. Is this one of the resolutions, then, that referred to
12 Resolution 713?
13 A. That is correct. Although, I will note again that I was not the
14 permanent representative of Bosnia
15 Q. I take it you weren't present then when this resolution was
17 A. No, I was not.
18 Q. Okay. Are you able it to say, sir, whether this text is a
19 authentic copy of Resolution 740?
20 A. Again, because it was referred to by subsequent resolutions, I
21 did review all of these during my tenure, yes.
22 MS. BOLTON: Could this be marked as an exhibit, please,
23 Your Honour.
24 JUDGE MOLOTO: It is so marked. May it please be given an
25 exhibit number.
1 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit P2432, Your Honours.
2 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
3 Madam Bolton.
4 MS. BOLTON:
5 Q. At any point during May 1992 to the end of 1995, was there any
6 discussion of lifting the arms embargo with respect to Bosnia and
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Who initiated that discussion generally?
10 A. Certainly Bosnia-Herzegovina did, but there were other states who
11 felt that the situation was one where Serbian Montenegro was in fact
12 fully armed while Bosnia-Herzegovina was left without the means to defend
13 its sovereignty and territorial integrity and that in fact the arms
14 embargo created an uneven situation where in fact contributed to the
15 conflict rather than reduced it.
16 Q. Did the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia ever take a position on
17 the issue either orally or in writing, of whether -- and the issue I mean
18 whether the arms embargo with respect to Bosnia-Herzegovina should be
20 A. It was very clear in its preparations that the arms embargo
21 should continue with respect to Bosnia-Herzegovina.
22 Q. Was any explanation offered as to why they were opposed to
23 lifting the arms embargo?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. What was the explanation?
1 A. That, in fact, Bosnia
2 referred to us at that time Bosnian Muslims were given weapons that it
3 would somehow increase the war, increase the fighting, and that in fact
4 it would just only fuel the conflict.
5 Q. Next document I'd like or development I'd like to discuss with
6 you, sir, is Resolution 752 which we'll find at tab 6 of the binder. And
7 this is already in evidence as Exhibit P201.
8 A. Yes, thank you, I have it.
9 Q. Now, my first question is, the date on this resolution is the
10 15th of May, 1992, which was before you officially became the ambassador
11 of Bosnia-Herzegovina. Could you tell us whether you were present when
12 this resolution was debated and passed?
13 A. Actually, I was present because by then our admission to the
14 United Nations was envisioned, and I was acted as an informal
15 representative of the Bosnia-Herzegovina at the time.
16 Q. And we've already talked a bit about the fact that there was a
17 transition period with the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and the
18 Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and the change in delegates, can
19 you recall whether there was anyone from Serbian Montenegro in attendance
20 when this was discussed, or from the Socialist --
21 A. Yes, I can.
22 Q. Or from the Socialist Federal Republic
23 A. At that time I believe the name was only used Yugoslavia, and,
24 yes, there was present.
25 Q. Who, do you remember?
1 A. I do not. I do not remember the individual by name.
2 Q. The resolution, looking at the first page of the document, it's
3 divided obviously into paragraphs, and the third paragraph on the first
4 page starts with the words "deeply concerned." Have you located that
5 paragraph, sir?
6 A. I'm just -- yes, I have.
7 Q. It says:
8 "Deeply concerned about the serious situation in certain parts of
9 the former Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, and in particular
10 about the rapid and violent deterioration of the situation in
12 And I am going to go slower, I'm sorry. And then there is, if
13 you would turn your attention to - brief indulgence - the second page,
14 there are numbered paragraphs, there's a numbered paragraph 6, where
15 there is a reference to: "the forcible expulsion of persons from the
16 areas where they live and attempts to change the ethnic composition of
17 the population." My question for you, sir, is could you tell us what
18 events in Bosnia-Herzegovina, what was going on that prompted the
19 inclusion of that language by the Security Council?
20 A. First of all, there were reports received from independent
21 sources including UN sources, European sources, certain human rights
22 groups and media. Also at that time with Dr. Haris Silajdzic, the
23 foreign minister of Bosnia
24 to the Secretary-General's office regarding the events. As well as to
25 certain member states who in fact accorded us an opportunity to meet with
1 them. And I remember this very vividly because one of the discussions
2 was, Do we call these events genocide?
3 Q. Okay. I'm sorry, sir, I've got to interrupt you because --
4 A. Yeah.
5 Q. -- we are going to need to take a break in a moment. But could
6 you just answer the question which was, you know, what were the actual
7 events before we discuss how they were or weren't going to be
9 A. Yes, they were already events happening. In particular, we were
10 out in the Drina
11 attack. We knew that in fact individuals either had been murdered or
12 forced out of their homes. We had seen refugees coming to other urban
13 centres in the region, like Sarajevo
14 course many refugees already pouring outside of the borders of Bosnia
16 reports or rely upon other independent sources.
17 MS. BOLTON: Okay. We'll come back to this issue, but I think
18 it's time for tour next break, sir. We'll take a break and come back at
19 quarter to 6.00. Court adjourned.
20 --- Recess taken at 5.19 p.m.
21 --- On resuming at 5.47 p.m.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Madam Bolton.
23 MS. BOLTON: Thank you.
24 Q. Mr. Sacirbey, before the break you were talking about reports you
25 were receiving from the Drina
1 or were part of the discussion of Resolution 752, and you talked about
2 the fact that individuals were either being murdered or forced out of
3 their homes. When you talk about individuals, who are you referring to?
4 A. I'm referring to the non-Serb population, particularly the
5 Bosniak or Bosnian Muslim population, but also any of those that in fact
6 stood up the para-military as well as the regular military forces that at
7 that time were occupying Bosnia-Herzegovina.
8 Q. Apart from the reports from the Drina river valley, were you
9 receiving reports from any other regions at the time?
10 A. Yes, we were receiving some reports from the Krajina region, some
11 reports from Herzegovina
12 Bosnia-Herzegovina, and of course Sarajevo
13 practically been encircled and was already under sniper fire and
15 Q. Okay. I'm looking at again the text of Resolution 752, and I
16 note that at numbered paragraph 3, that the Security Council included a
17 demand that all forms of interference from outside Bosnia-Herzegovina,
18 including by units of the Yugoslavia People's Army as well as elements of
19 the Croatian army, cease immediately. Can you tell me why there was
20 reference to the Yugoslav People's Army or JNA are included in this
22 A. Yes, the JNA was involved, if not always in actual campaigns of
23 what was then called ethnic purification, then they in fact were involved
24 in consolidating those position that were achieved through ethnic
25 cleansing or purification, and in fact they were also involved in the
1 siege of Sarajevo
2 leave by the government of the Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina, in fact
3 had not complied, and we viewed them as in fact not only a combat as an
4 adversary to the territorial integrity and sovereignty of
6 Q. There is a further reference in this document, and I'm looking at
7 the first page of the document, sixth paragraph from the top, paragraph
8 starts with the words "having considered" and there is then a reference
9 to an announcement made by Belgrade
10 A. Yes, I note that.
11 Q. Yes. What was the announcement that Belgrade made?
12 A. Under pressure Belgrade
13 of its military forces from Slovenia
14 in fact was supposed to comply under that provision.
15 Q. I'm sorry, so the announcement from Belgrade then, was that to
16 the effect that they would comply or not comply, or?
17 A. As we understood it, it was one that they would comply. But
18 there was, of course, some lack of commitment that we understood there.
19 Q. In terms of information that was subsequently received in the
20 wake of that announcement by your government, and by that I mean the
21 government of Bosnia-Herzegovina, what did you understand was happening
22 with respect to the -- to the withdrawal of the JNA?
23 A. We received very little indication that actually withdrawal had
24 been underway, and there were even indications to the contrary.
25 Q. As far as your government was concerned, what was happening with
1 the JNA troops in Bosnia-Herzegovina?
2 A. Certainly it had been hoped at the beginning of the year that the
3 JNA would at least be a neutral force, if not somehow providing some
4 sense of nullifying the para-military force that had already become
5 active. But at this time it was quite evident that the JNA was in fact
6 undertaking military operations which were against the territorial
7 integrity and sovereignty of Bosnia-Herzegovina, and, of course in
8 particular, in many ways inflicting harm upon the population as well as
9 besieging cities.
10 Q. Sorry, my question wasn't specific enough. When I referred to
11 what was happening with the JNA, I meant to be specific to the issue of
12 whether -- we were talking about whether it was withdrawn. What was your
13 understanding as to what the JNA was doing in terms of the actual
15 A. We had no indications of withdrawal, I certainly was not given
16 indications and my government felt there that was no withdrawal.
17 Q. So if the troops weren't withdrawing, what were they doing?
18 A. They were staying put, actually in some cases digging in, and as
19 I said we actually received some indications that even new troops and new
20 materiel was coming across the Drina
21 more precise. Some troops had also by the way come in from the other
22 side, withdrawing JNA troops had come in from Croatia, presumably
23 withdrawing through Bosnia-Herzegovina to Serbian Montenegro but in fact
24 had stayed in Bosnia-Herzegovina. I should also emphasise that point.
25 Q. And those troops that stayed in Bosnia-Herzegovina, did they stay
1 under the banner of the JNA?
2 A. Of course depends on the time-frame, but yes, through May they
3 did. The time-frame of this resolution, that is accurate.
4 Q. And post-May?
5 A. At some point in time, we were informed that in fact these troops
6 had changed in effect the banner, as you called it, or the patch on their
7 uniforms and in fact had redesignated themselves as the Army of Republika
8 Srpska, and overnight or within a matter of minutes they had gone from
9 being the Army of Yugoslavia, that is Serbian Montenegro, into the Army
10 of Republika Srpska.
11 Q. Was that information available to the Security Council or just to
12 your government?
13 A. That information was issued subsequently in a report to the
14 Security Council which, to be very honest, at least caught me by surprise
15 because we did not see a substantive withdrawal of the JNA.
16 Q. We'll come back to that issue in a moment, just for
17 clarification, sir, but I want to look at one further part of this
18 resolution, which is found at numbered paragraph 4 on the second page of
19 the resolution.
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. And could you tell us what was suppose to happen to the weaponry
22 the JNA had in Bosnia-Herzegovina according to this provision?
23 A. Well, this was a key point, and it was certainly consistent with
24 the arms embargo resolution which is that the weapons that were part of
25 the JNA, and remember the JNA was of course an army of all Yugoslavia
1 including its former republics, that is Croatia, Slovenia
2 Bosnia-Herzegovina, so the weapons in fact were either supposed to be
3 left within the authority of the government of Bosnia-Herzegovina or to
4 be placed under United Nations monitoring or actually control, I
5 shouldn't even say the monitoring. It was supposed to be delivered to
6 the international body.
7 Q. Does the provisions actually indicate the weapons are to be left
8 under the authority of the government of Bosnia-Herzegovina?
9 A. It says "... or subject to the authority of the government of
10 Bosnia-Herzegovina or be disbanded and disarmed with their weapons placed
11 under effective international monitoring." The point was that since we
12 were the legal authority we, of course, had the right to those weapons if
13 in fact the international did not take control of them.
14 Q. I believe that document is already an exhibit in these
15 proceedings, so if I could ask you to turn to the next document in your
16 binder. Sorry, actually to tab 3 in your binder, I'm sorry --
17 A. Okay.
18 Q. -- which is 65 ter 9183. You should have a document before you
19 that appears to have a date of 27 May, 1992, you described as a letter
20 from the Charge d'affair of the permanent mission of the government of
22 A. That's correct, yes, I do.
23 Q. Okay. Who authored this -- first, do you recognise this
24 document, sir?
25 A. Yes, I do.
1 Q. The first page looks like it's signed by Dragomir Dzokic, and
2 then there is an annex which is signed by Branko Kostic. Who is
3 Mr. Kostic?
4 A. As outlined in the document, he's vice-president at the time of
5 the Serbian Montenegro
6 Q. You said you recognised this document, where did you recognise it
7 from, sir?
8 A. I actually received -- excuse me, I'm rushing into your answers.
9 I apologise to the interpreters. I recognise it as having in fact been
10 relevant to the discussion as to whether or not the Federal Republic
13 Q. Did you receive a copy of this document back in May 1992, to the
14 best of your recollection?
15 THE INTERPRETER: You are kindly requested to switch off your
16 microphones while not using them, you are also kindly requested to pause
17 between questions and answers. Interpreters are having a lot of
18 background noise, thank you.
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you. Madam Bolton.
20 MS. BOLTON:
21 Q. Sorry, sir, you can speak now.
22 A. Okay. Thank you. Yes, I actually -- I remember seeing it
23 several days, well, a day or two after it was released.
24 Q. Okay. Sir, there's three aspects of this document I'd like to
25 discuss with you. The first aspect you'll find at -- the first aspect
1 you've already averted to, which is the issue of whether they were
2 complying with Resolution 752. And if I could turn your attention to
3 page 3, there is a paragraph and that -- sorry, is page 3 of the entire
4 document, is page 2 of the annex. And there's a paragraph that starts
5 with the word "thirdly"?
6 A. Yes, I see that.
7 Q. Okay. There is an indication here -- the text reads:
8 "Thirdly, the Presidency of Yugoslavia decided on the day of the
9 promulgation of the constitution of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia
10 that is on 27th April, 1992
11 to the territory and citizens of Yugoslavia. As a result, all of the
12 citizens of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia who had been in the YPA,
13 Yugoslav People's Army, troops, in that republic were withdrawn by 19th
14 May, 1992, together with their share of equipment and armaments."
15 I'm going to ask about that last phrase, "together with their
16 share of equipment and armaments." Had there been any discussion at the
17 Security Council surrounding Resolution 752 to suggest that the JNA was
18 entitled to take with it a share of equipment and armaments?
19 A. First of all, there was no such discussion that in fact any of
20 the military weapons would be left in the hands of those other than the
21 legitimate government of the Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina. As you can
22 see from this paragraph, there is no reference to the government of
23 Bosnia-Herzegovina. They frequently just referred to that authority in
25 letter before. I did not view it as being authoritative on the issue of
1 whether or not the United Nations itself had in fact concluded that
2 Resolution 752 had been complied with, and when I saw this letter, I did
3 not believe that in fact that resolution had been complied with. And
4 this particular paragraph it itself indicates that it had not been
5 because it implies that in fact some of the weapons was not delivered
6 either to international control, that is UN control, or to the control of
7 the legitimate government of Bosnia-Herzegovina.
8 Q. The second aspects of the letter I want to direct you to is the
9 paragraph directly above the paragraph we've just been discussing, and
10 that's the paragraph that starts with the word "secondly."
11 The text reads:
12 "Secondly" --
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. "... the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia has demonstrated a
15 maximum degree of tolerance with respect to the premature decisions on
16 the international recognition of Bosnia and Herzegovina
17 Could you tell me what we are talking about when we talk about a
18 country being internationally recognised?
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: Excuse me.
20 Mr. Guy-Smith.
21 MR. GUY-SMITH: I take it that we are asking the question in the
22 same manner that we've asked it before which is factual and not legal in
24 JUDGE MOLOTO: Madam Bolton.
25 MS. BOLTON: Yes, Your Honour.
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: Any response?
2 MS. BOLTON:
3 Q. Yes, sir. Could you answer the question I posed.
4 JUDGE MOLOTO: No, no. Any response to the objection?
5 MS. BOLTON: My friend was I thought asking for clarification
6 that I was asking it as a factual question not as a legal question, I'm
7 asking for his understanding of a term of art at the UN.
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Mr. Guy-Smith. I thought --
9 MR. GUY-SMITH: Then I have an objection with regard to relevance
10 of what his understanding of "a term of art at the UN" may be. It either
11 has legal significance or it doesn't.
12 THE WITNESS: Your Honour, if I may interject. This is the
13 witness, Mr. Sacirbey, if I may interject, Your Honour, I can maybe help
15 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes. You want to interject, Mr. Sacirbey, yes?
16 THE WITNESS: Yes, maybe I can help clarify the issue that seems
17 to be coming back as to whether these are legal or factual issues.
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, you what do you want to tell us?
19 THE WITNESS: Well, Your Honour, of course these issues have a
20 legal context, but in fact I was dealing with them in the factual
21 elements of the institutions within which I was working. Whether my
22 legal interpretations were accurate or not, I don't believe is something
23 that is particularly at issue here. It is in fact in how these matters
24 were being handled in the context of my responsibilities as a
25 representative of Bosnia-Herzegovina, and therefore that is what I am --
1 I believe I am addressing here, Your Honour.
2 JUDGE MOLOTO: Okay. Would you like to perhaps find out how he
3 handled it in his capacity as a representative of the Republic of
5 MS. BOLTON: Certainly.
6 Q. Sir, can you explain to me in terms of the job that you had to do
7 as ambassador, was it significant to you whether or not
8 Bosnia-Herzegovina was recognised internationally?
9 A. It was very significant. First of all, every country that
10 recognised Bosnia-Herzegovina then accredited it certain rights to
11 Bosnia-Herzegovina, including treaty obligations, including various
12 matters related to international relations, but most importantly, each
13 country that recognizes Bosnia-Herzegovina at that time also recognizes
14 its territorial integrity and sovereignty.
15 From this then we could also develop our membership in
16 international institution, including the United Nations. It would be
17 very difficult for Bosnia-Herzegovina to be admitted to an international
18 body like the United Nations unless there was either an existing
19 recognition or an intent to recognise Bosnia within its existing borders,
20 its territorial integrity. Also, Bosnia
21 membership, commits itself to abide by the rules of that international
22 institution and also to respect the territorial integrity and sovereignty
23 of neighbouring states. In particular in this context we represented on
24 numerous occasions that we would respect the territorial integrity and
25 sovereignty of Serbian Montenegro; that is, the Federal Republic
2 Q. At any point during the conflict, so 1992 to 1995, did the
3 Federal Republic of Yugoslavia reciprocate and recognise
5 A. No, it did not.
6 Q. Was it ever called upon to do so?
7 A. Yes, it was, on numerous occasions.
8 Q. By whom?
9 A. First of all by Bosnia-Herzegovina, and second of all by other
10 international institutions or let's say member states.
11 Q. During the conflict, did you become aware at any point in time of
12 the strategic objectives of the Bosnian Serbs?
13 A. Yes, I did, but to be more accurate, we understood it as
14 strategic objectives of Serbian Montenegro along with their allies in
16 Q. What do you recall as some of those objectives being?
17 A. It was --
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: Sorry, I'm not quite sure whether you are on the
19 same page. Your question was about strategic objectives of Bosnian
20 Serbs, the answer was:
21 "We understood it as strategic objectives of Serbian Montenegro
22 along with their allies in Bosnia-Herzegovina."
23 MS. BOLTON: Thank you, I will clarify, Your Honour. I
24 understand your point.
25 Q. When you are talking about the allies of Serbian Montenegro in
1 Bosnia-Herzegovina, who are you referring to?
2 A. We refer today them frequently, to be again more accurate, I
3 appreciate Your Honour's comment as well, as their agents. Sometimes we
4 would refer to them as the Pale Serbs. Sometimes we would refer to them
5 by the general designation of Serbian. We actually did not refer to them
6 as representing all of the Bosnian Serbs and did not accredit them that
8 Q. Okay. So when I speak about the Bosnian Serbs, would you equate
9 that with the term Pale Serbs that you've just given us?
10 A. That is correct. We did not wish to give this conflict the
11 perspective of an ethnic or religious conflict which we believe the other
12 side did.
13 Q. So going back then to what you understood were these joint
14 objectives shared by - according to your understanding - both Serbian
16 those objectives?
17 A. To put it in very broad terms, and you will please ask me to
18 specify it if anything more is needed, it is a Greater Serbia with
19 contiguous, that is, continuous borders, that in fact there would not be
20 an internationally recognised border between the Republic of
21 Bosnia-Herzegovina and Serbian Montenegro
22 territorial ambitions were rather dynamic, to use that term. In fact,
23 that the -- if in -- I understood that in fact if all of Bosnia
24 conquered that in fact it all would become part of some Republika Srpska
25 and that in fact that would become all part of some Greater Serbia.
1 Q. You have indicated that you believed there was commonality and
2 objectives between the government and Federal Republic of Yugoslavia
3 the forces in Pale. My question is if the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia
4 had recognised Bosnia-Herzegovina, would that have had any impact on the
5 ability to realise what you consider to be or what you believe to be the
6 strategic objectives?
7 MR. GUY-SMITH: That question is --
8 THE WITNESS: Absolutely.
9 JUDGE MOLOTO: Sorry Mr. Sacirbey. Yes, Mr. Guy-Smith.
10 MR. GUY-SMITH: That question is both speculative and vague.
11 JUDGE MOLOTO: Madam Bolton, would you like to answer.
12 MS. BOLTON: The witness seems to have not had any difficulty in
13 answering the question, Your Honour. And if the response he gives
14 indicates that he did not -- that he thought the question was too vague,
15 then we will ask follow-up questions.
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: I'm not quite sure I find -- I don't see the
17 vagueness. Let the witness answer and we'll hear.
18 MR. GUY-SMITH: But -- a two-part objection.
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: I don't understand what you are saying,
20 Mr. Guy-Smith. You gave us one objection, now you're saying two-part
22 MR. GUY-SMITH: I gave you two objections. I said it was
23 speculative and it was vague. The question is -- is speculative and it
24 is vague. Thus far, we've dealt with the issue of it being vague.
25 JUDGE MOLOTO: Would you like to say anything about speculation,
1 Madam Bolton.
2 MS. BOLTON: In my view it doesn't call on him to speculate. The
3 question calls on him to give an answer, and if he can't give an answer
4 that isn't based on speculation then he will so indicate, Your Honour,
5 but he started to answer without any difficulty before my friend
7 MR. GUY-SMITH: As a classic issue, when somebody asks a question
8 that has within it the word "if" it is by definition speculative.
9 JUDGE MOLOTO: The basis for this question, as I understand it,
10 is that the witness has testified that the strategic objective was that
11 if the entire Bosnia-Herzegovina could be conquered, it would be made
12 part of a Greater Serbia. Now, obviously if Bosnia-Herzegovina is
13 recognised, I guess it's a question of logical deduction whether or not
14 the strategic objective has been achieved or not. And whether the
15 question is put or not, as I say, it's a very logical deduction and I
16 don't think it's speculation. From that point --
17 MR. GUY-SMITH: We're dealing with the issue of the -- in -- and
18 you see, the problem is that you're dealing with the issue of the impact.
19 The question is the impact.
20 JUDGE MOLOTO: It's fine. The impact on the strategic objective.
21 The question is allowed.
22 MS. BOLTON:
23 Q. You may not have heard His Honour, Mr. Sacirbey, he indicated the
24 question was allowed, so could you continue your answer unless you need
25 me to repeat the question?
1 A. Thank you, Your Honour. We certainly felt that the issue had
2 merit in blunting the objectives on any Greater Serbia, because the
3 recognition of Bosnia-Herzegovina by Serbian Montenegro, that is at that
4 time the government in Belgrade
5 international legal terms prohibited any or all of Bosnia-Herzegovina
6 being somehow in the future annexed into a Greater Serbia.
7 Q. I just want you to skip ahead in time for a moment to the talks
8 that preceded the Dayton Accord. Did you participate in those talks?
9 A. Yes, I did, as foreign minister of Bosnia at that time.
10 Q. Was there any discussion at those peace talks around this issue
11 of a Greater Serbia
12 A. Yes, there was. To be more precise on the point, the recognition
13 of Bosnia and Herzegovina was in fact a critical point with the
14 negotiations and it concluded with Serbian Montenegro recognising the
15 sovereignty and territorial integrity of Bosnia-Herzegovina.
16 There were, I must add, some efforts there to also though, at
17 least on the part of Belgrade
18 of the Pale Serbs, to bring about a referendum in the so-called Republika
19 Srpska at that time that would allow for Republika Srpska to declare its
20 decision to leave Bosnia-Herzegovina and presumably would be allowed to
21 join at that time Belgrade
22 ultimately was not left in the Dayton Agreement.
23 Q. And who on behalf of Belgrade
24 position that there ought to be a possibility of a referendum on
25 cessation in the Republika Srpska?
1 A. Ms. Bolton, this point was addressed to us through many
2 negotiations leading up to Dayton
3 the delegation of Slobodan Milosevic.
4 Q. If we could return to the text of the letter, the final aspect I
5 want to discuss is the issue of paragraph -- page 4, the first paragraph.
6 So if you would turn the page from the page that we've been dealing with.
7 The very first --
8 A. I'm there.
9 Q. The very first paragraph says:
10 "The option of sanctions against Yugoslavia on the basis of
11 unsubstantiated claims of aggression is deeply unfair and wrong. History
12 knows of no case of a country threatening another without using the army.
13 As of 19th May this year, not a single soldier who is a citizen of the
14 Federal Republic of Yugoslavia remains in that republic, and the borders
15 with Bosnia and Herzegovina have been closed for 30 days now for any
16 crossings of armed individuals or groups who might try to make them."
17 My question to you is this: The text suggests that the options
18 of sanctions was being discussed against the Federal Republic
20 represent what was in fact happening in the discussions of the Security
22 A. We referenced both aggression as well as, of course, grey
23 violations of an international humanitarian law, that is, acts against
24 our citizens as I've referred to by the term ethnic purification or
25 genocide. And I will also note that of course this paragraph does not in
1 any way reference the delivery of military goods.
2 Q. I'm not sure your answer was responsive to my question, which was
3 in the context of discussions surrounding Resolution 752 --
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. -- does this text accurately summarise the reason why sanctions
6 against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia were being considered?
7 A. They were being considered for two reasons. One of them is
8 aggression, that is interference into the affairs or more correctly
9 violations of the territorial integrity and sovereignty of a neighbouring
10 state, that is Serbian Montenegro violating the territorial integrity and
11 sovereignty of Bosnia-Herzegovina; and second, of course, was the
12 implications that this had in terms of the population. Violations of
13 international humanitarian law, i.e., genocide.
14 Q. And the means by which the government of Serbian Montenegro was
15 allegedly engaged in aggression and interfering with the affairs of
16 Bosnia-Herzegovina at that time?
17 A. The first would have been through its military forces, that is
18 regular military forces. The second one would have been para-military
19 forces that came from Serbian Montenegro, which I believe the Court is
20 familiar with. And the third would have been, of course, actual raids
21 across the border conducted by military forces including air power from
22 one side of the border to the next. I guess the fourth we would say is
23 the supply of goods to whatever we designate those forces within Bosnia
24 to be to carry out this aggression and to carry out the attacks upon the
1 Q. Notwithstanding the letter that was sent that we've been
2 discussing, were the sanctions in fact adopted against Yugoslavia
3 A. Yes, they were.
4 MS. BOLTON: Could this document we've been discussing please be
5 marked as an exhibit, Your Honours.
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Admitted into evidence. May it please be given an
7 exhibit number.
8 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit P2433, Your Honours.
9 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
10 Yes, Madam Bolton
11 MS. BOLTON: Thank you.
12 Q. If you could turn to the next -- one moment, sir.
13 [Prosecution counsel confer]
14 MS. BOLTON:
15 Q. Sorry, sir. Yes, if you could turn to the next tab in your
16 binder being tab 4, you should have in front of you a one-page document
17 which is Exhibit P334 in these proceedings.
18 A. That's correct.
19 Q. Can you just take a moment and look at that. It's -- if you
20 could just read that to yourself for a moment, sir. Yes, you've read it,
22 A. Yes, I have.
23 Q. You were telling us earlier about your recollection of some
24 strategic objectives you became aware of during the conflict. How does
25 the text of this document compare to your recollection of what you became
1 aware of during the conflict?
2 A. It is very consistent in that it outlines what is called the
3 strategic objectives for the Serbian people in Bosnia-Herzegovina.
4 However, as you can see, there are many demarcation lines even left open
5 including particularly what I note here as Point 6: Access to the sea
6 for Republika Srpska, which means that this seem to be a rather open
7 ended plan for the creation and expansion in effect of Republika Srpska
8 with few limitations.
9 Q. Do you recall whether you ever saw this text while this conflict
10 was ongoing, sir.
11 A. I do not recall seeing it at the time. Certainly I was aware of
12 these provisions, but I do not recall seeing this text at the time.
13 Q. And could you indicate approximately what the time-period was
14 when you first became aware of the strategic objectives?
15 A. It was actually quite in the beginning of probably in the early
16 summer, late spring of 1992. We certainly referenced these in the
17 context of the Greater Serbia and we used that term quite frequently.
18 Q. If you could turn, sir, to a different exhibit. The tab 7 in
19 your binder, which is Prosecution Exhibit 202 in these proceedings,
20 Resolution 757 of the Security Council. Do you have that document before
21 you, sir?
22 A. Yes, I do.
23 Q. We were talking a few minutes ago about the fact that
24 notwithstanding the letter from the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia some
25 sanctions were imposed against the fellow Republic of Yugoslavia
1 first question with respect to this document is were you present when it
2 was debated and passed? When this resolution was debated and passed?
3 A. Yes, I was.
4 Q. And what was the date this was passed?
5 A. If I'm not mistaken, 30th of May, 1992.
6 Q. If I could draw your attention to the third page of this
7 resolution where there are again numbered paragraphs?
8 A. Yes, I'm there.
9 Q. I'm looking at numbered paragraph 1. There is a condemnation of
10 a failure of the authorities of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia to
11 take effective measures to fulfill the requirements of Resolution 752.
12 What requirements of Resolution 752 did the Security Council determine
13 had not been complied with?
14 A. Well, as you have, I believe, indicated, despite the previous
15 letter from the authorities, the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, in fact
16 there had been failure to withdraw the Yugoslav People's Army from the
17 territory of Bosnia-Herzegovina.
18 Q. Looking at beginning at paragraph 4 there is a text which starts
19 with the words "decides that all states shall prevent" then there's a
20 series of subparagraphs and other paragraphs that follows. What was the
21 effect of this resolution? What was were the -- sorry, what was -- what
22 did the UN Security Council resolve to do?
23 A. One of them was to obviously provide sanctions, but as
24 importantly, or more importantly, it was particularly to focus on
25 military goods that could be used to contribute to the war effort led
1 against Bosnia-Herzegovina.
2 Q. What was the -- when you talk about sanctions, who was being
4 A. In this case it was the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, that is
5 Serbian Montenegro, if you would, the government in Belgrade.
6 Q. And what was the nature of the sanctions that the Security
7 Council imposed?
8 A. They had clearly political economic implications. Political in
9 the sense that a country should never want to be sanctioned, especially
10 under Chapter 7. And --
11 Q. Sorry, sir, I think -- I'm interrupting because I think you've
12 misunderstood my question. What kinds of sanctions --
13 A. Please.
14 Q. What kinds of sanctions was the Security Council imposing?
15 A. They were imposing mandatory sanctions under Chapter 7, number
16 one, so these were not voluntary to member states, they were mandatory,
17 which means that each member state had to comply with the provision as it
18 relates to their dealing with the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. Number
19 2, they in fact prevented certain goods, transshipments, dealings with
20 the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, some in a more general economic
21 nature, some very specific to products, if you would, goods that could be
22 used, particularly in a military capacity.
23 Q. In terms of the economic sanctions, what was -- what were the
24 most important elements of that?
25 A. Particularly trade, and transshipment of goods and of course even
1 financial implications for that.
2 Q. In the context of the discussions that have resulted in passing
3 of this resolution, was there any discussion of how imposing economic and
4 other sanctions on the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia was going to
5 improve matters in the region?
6 A. By looking it at the resolution itself, it outlined -
7 particularly the previous paragraphs - it outlined why in fact the
8 Federal Republic of Yugoslavia was being sanctioned, i.e., that it had
9 not met its obligations under the previous resolution mentioned. And as
10 a consequence, the desired objective was to compel the Federal Republic
11 of Yugoslavia
12 to its -- the presence of its forces in Bosnia-Herzegovina, and the
13 actions of those forces both on the issue of aggression, but also the
14 issue of engaging in acts that violated the rights, that is, violated and
15 endangered of course and in many cases inflicted harm upon the population
16 of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
17 Q. Was this the only resolution imposing sanctions against the
18 Federal Republic of Yugoslavia that was passed by the Security Council
19 during the conflict?
20 A. No, there were actually several more, quite a few more.
21 Q. Was there discussion in the context of those additional
22 sanctions, which I promise we will discuss in a little more detail later,
23 was there discussion of what the UN Security Council hoped to achieve by
24 sanctioning the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia?
25 A. Yes, there was. Both in the context of the resolution, but also
1 in the context of the statements made by member states of the UN Security
3 Q. So what was the end goal of imposing sanctions on the Federal
4 Republic of Yugoslavia
5 A. To cease their direct and indirect actions as they in fact
6 continued to fuel not only the conflict, but also, if you would the
7 aggression, but also to in fact cease those actions that caused such harm
8 to the population, as we have come to call them ethnic cleansing. And
9 also to bring about a normalization of the relationship between
10 Bosnia-Herzegovina and Serbian Montenegro
11 reference to the issue of mutual recognition, and the respect for each
12 other's territorial integrity and sovereignty and the border.
13 Q. You talk about compelling the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia
14 cease their indirect actions. What are you talking about? What was
15 being alleged?
16 A. Certainly we always knew that there were troops being sent into
18 goods of military value being sent into Bosnia-Herzegovina. Also
19 so-called para-military forces were given largely free rein to go in and
20 conduct ethnic cleansing and brutal campaigns, and in fact there may have
21 been even what one could consider political actions by were contrary to
22 the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Bosnia-Herzegovina
23 including, of course, the failure to recognise Bosnia-Herzegovina's
24 sovereignty and territorial integrity.
25 Q. What was the thinking at the UN Security Council in terms of what
1 would happen if you could successfully eliminate the contributions that
2 the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia was alleged to be making to the
3 conflict in Bosnia-Herzegovina?
4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Mr. Guy-Smith.
5 MR. GUY-SMITH: Well, if that's covered by a resolution, that's
6 one matter. But now we are dealing with the entire thinking of the UN
7 Security Council. The question as is presently posed is vague and I
8 think is outside the ken of this particular witness's ability to answer
9 what the thinking was.
10 MS. BOLTON: I'll rephrase.
11 Q. Was there discussion in the context of the UN Security Council as
12 to what was hoped to be achieved by eliminating the contributions that
13 were allegedly being made by the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia?
14 A. It was the thinking of the government of Bosnia-Herzegovina and
15 reflected by many of the member states of the UN Security Council and
16 other independent observers that without the support, direct and indirect
17 support of Belgrade
18 is, the war would in fact be extinguished.
19 Q. You indicated that was the thinking of Bosnia-Herzegovina. Did
20 you share that strategy or thinking with any members of the UN Security
21 Council or the council as a whole?
22 A. Yes, we did. And vice-versa.
23 Q. And did any of that -- did any of that thinking occur in the
24 context of discussions of proposed -- or any of that discussion occur in
25 the context of proposed resolutions sanctioning the Federal Government of
2 A. That is correct. Since the objective was to end the war, to end
3 the ethnic cleansing, obviously the resolutions were designed to stop, to
4 impede Belgrade
5 Q. I'm going to change topics a little, sir, and discuss Sarajevo
6 which we've only touched on very briefly.
7 Could you tell me what the situation in Sarajevo was in the
8 spring and summer of 1992?
9 A. It dramatically changed from, let's say, mid-spring, that is
10 April, particularly after sniper attacks upon a peaceful March of
11 individuals calling for no war in Bosnia
12 that point in time, and very quickly Sarajevo
13 By late that spring, it was very difficult, if not impossible, to
14 come or leave Sarajevo
15 period, which you're referring to, Sarajevo was in a very troubled
16 humanitarian situation. Very limited, if any, access, not only to food
17 and medicines, but even to water.
18 Q. Under which forces were laying siege to Sarajevo?
19 A. The Serbian forces. And these forces particularly at that time
20 not only had encircled the city, but in fact were very frequently
21 involved in military actions from not only sniper fire, but obviously
22 bombardment. And it was, from what I can tell, it was rather
24 Q. Was the topic of the bombardment of Sarajevo and sniper fire,
25 sniper attacks in Sarajevo
1 Security Council in the spring of 1992?
2 A. Yes, starting in the spring of 1992, that is correct.
3 Q. Just focusing on the spring and the summer of 1992, how
4 frequently were those topics being discussed at either the UN Security
5 Council or the General Assembly?
6 A. I would say almost daily.
7 Q. Did the Security Council pass any resolutions dealing with
9 A. I think it's safe enough to say that the resolutions we have
10 discussed already in fact did incorporate Sarajevo, because in part the
11 demand to withdraw the JNA troops was related to lifting the siege of
13 Q. Other than the resolutions we've already discussed, were there
14 any other resolutions passed?
15 A. Yes, there were, but I'll need to refresh my memory as to the
16 exact time-frame that you want me to address here.
17 Q. I'm just going to ask you to identify some documents, sir. You
18 should still be in tab 7, and if you turn the page to the end of the
19 document we've just been discussing we should have --
20 A. Right.
21 Q. -- document 65 ter 2075.
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. And those are titled Security Council Resolutions 758, 760, and
25 A. That's correct.
1 Q. And just refresh your memory, sir, as to whether these
2 resolutions all or any individual ones dealt with the situation in
4 A. Yes. At this point in time the issue of actually delivering
5 humanitarian assistance, and even the ability of the international
6 community to have access to Sarajevo
7 into play. These resolutions dealt with that. So we are going from
8 resolutions that dealt with the effect of siege of Sarajevo by the JNA
9 forces to the humanitarian situation, and even to the point where the
10 international can in fact observe and act in its ability or its mandate
11 to improve that humanitarian situation.
12 MS. BOLTON: Okay. If I could just ask that this -- these three
13 resolutions be marked as an exhibit, Your Honour.
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: They are so marked. May it please be given an
15 exhibit number.
16 THE REGISTRAR: This document will become Exhibit P2434, Your
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
19 MS. BOLTON:
20 Q. If you could turn to tab 8, please, sir.
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. You see Resolution 764, which is 65 ter 2069. Do you have that
23 document, sir?
24 A. I do.
25 Q. Thank you. Looking at the text of this document, two parts I
1 want to refer you to, sir. The first is the second column on the first
2 page. There's a paragraph that starts with the words "deeply disturbed."
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. "Deeply disturbed by the situation which now prevails in Sarajevo
5 and by many reports and indications of deteriorating conditions
6 throughout Bosnia and Herzegovina."
7 And then if you would turn the page there is paragraph --
8 numbered paragraphs and numbered paragraph --
9 A. That's correct.
10 Q. Numbered paragraph 10 indicates:
11 "Reaffirms that all parties are bound to comply with the
12 obligations under international and humanitarian law and in particular
13 the Geneva Conventions of 12th August 1949
14 to order the commission of grave breaches of the Conventions are
15 individually responsible in respect of such breaches."
16 Was this resolution passed or triggered by any particular event
17 or events?
18 A. Yes. I think to tie into your questions now overall, around this
19 same period of time we had what's referred to generally as the bread-line
20 massacre, which was widely seen in the media where dozens of people had
21 been murdered by the indiscriminate shelling of civilians lined up to
22 receive bread within the town of Sarajevo
23 the humanitarian conditions had really come to deteriorate in terms to
24 access to food, medicine, water. There were lots of reports not only of
25 sniping, but shelling. And in particular, there were reports -- I
1 shouldn't say reports, that confirmed of course information, of
2 individuals from certain parts of Sarajevo
3 municipal unit, certain parts of that municipal unit in fact had been
4 ethnically cleansed, and most of that population had been forced out of
5 their homes. Many actually, at least for some time detained, put into
6 various camps, some deported outside the country, others managed to come
7 into the territory at that time held by the government of Bosnia and
9 At that time we were also obviously demanding greater action from
10 the international community, to undertake political and/or military
11 action to lift the siege of Sarajevo
12 Bosnia-Herzegovina. It was also the time the French President Mitterrand
13 had flown into Sarajevo
14 Q. Okay. Just dealing with the text where there is discussion or
15 reminding that the parties are bound to comply with international
16 humanitarian law and the Geneva Conventions, was there discussion of
17 whether any of the events that you have articulated were being reported,
18 for example, shelling of people standing in a bread line, sniper attacks,
19 was there a discussion of whether those incidents would constitute
20 breaches of the Geneva Convention?
21 A. Yes, there was. There was, as you said, shelling, sniping.
22 There was attacks upon neighbourhood, that is where people were actually
23 then expelled from their home, and of course, there was a denial of those
24 necessities of life, whether it was foods, medicines, or water. And in
25 fact, there was a denial of movement within the city because the city was
1 surrounded and besieged.
2 Q. In terms of the involvement of the FRY delegation and the meeting
3 that resulted in Resolution 764, was the FRY delegation represented to
4 the best of your recollection?
5 A. Yes, they were.
6 Q. Did you raise the issue of either the bread-line massacre or the
7 siege generally with the delegation, the mission, FRY mission in New
9 A. I did and my staff. Just to add to your point before, by then in
10 fact our staff had expanded to several individuals although we were still
11 working out of my private business office.
12 Q. You mentioned that the bread-line massacre was widely reported in
13 the media. How much media attention did events in Sarajevo attract
14 generally between 1992 and 1995?
15 A. Tremendous amount. I don't think I was necessarily biased in
16 that perspective. It was rather impossible to ignore, almost in any news
18 Q. And how much communication did you have, if any, as the Bosnian
19 ambassador with the press?
20 A. Extensive at that time. I probably was giving several interviews
21 a day, maybe four, five, six on the average.
22 Q. Were there any accredited journalists at the United Nations from
23 within the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia?
24 A. Yes, there were. I seem to recall at least two most of the time.
25 Q. Would you by chance remember anyone's name or what agency they
1 worked for?
2 A. I don't remember names to be very honest with you, but I do
3 remember that they worked for -- sometimes they were pool reporters and
4 sometimes they were specifically associated with some of the largest
5 media, that is publications in Belgrade
6 directly sometimes to Belgrade
7 including B92, the radio station.
8 Q. In terms of your communications with the media, you've indicated
9 you gave interviews. Did you ever give press conferences or hold press
11 A. Yes, I did. Generally, those conferences were scheduled in what
12 is known as the United Nations press room. Again, right there in UN
13 headquarters, very close to the Security Council Chamber. Those were
14 formal press conferences, and there usually would actually be sent a
15 schedule indicating that a conference would be held, and we usually tried
16 to alert the media at least several hours -- more likely a day or two in
17 advance, but at least several hours. Other times in front of the United
18 Nations Security Council, as is the practice today, there would be in
19 fact impromptu press conferences with most of the UN media core present.
20 Q. Sir, if you could try to keep your answers short, we have a lot
21 of territory to cover. With respect to the press conferences, could you
22 tell us if they were attended by the media representatives you told us
23 were accredited at the UN from the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia as a
24 general rule?
25 A. Yes, they were. Both the formal and informal.
1 Q. Did you or any of your staff make any effort during the conflict
2 to monitor what was being reported in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia
4 A. Yes, we did. Particularly one of my deputies, Ivan Misic, was a
5 former reporter, so he paid special attention to that.
6 Q. Were allegations of shelling and sniping of civilians in Sarajevo
7 reported in the media in Belgrade
9 A. Certainly sometimes, and certainly even in the direct reports
10 that I gave to, let's say, a station like B92, I'm very well aware that
11 they were reported.
12 Q. And how about other allegations of ethnic cleansing by the
13 Serbian forces in Bosnia
14 A. That is correct, they were.
15 Q. Could I ask you to turn to tab 9, please, sir.
16 A. Yes.
17 MS. BOLTON: I'm sorry, that last document should be tendered as
18 an exhibit if it hasn't already been, Your Honour.
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: It has not yet. It's admitted. May it please be
20 given an exhibit number.
21 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, the document will become Exhibit
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
24 MS. BOLTON:
25 Q. You should see before in tab 9 three documents, the first of
1 which is 65 ter 3763.
2 A. Yes, I have that in front of me.
3 Q. This is a document titled "A Note by the President of the
4 Security Council." What is this document?
5 A. Sometimes the president of the Security Council would make a
6 statement on behalf of the entire membership of the UN Security Council,
7 that was in lieu of a resolution or more accurately reflected a consensus
8 of the Security Council members. It did not have the weight of a
9 resolution, but in fact, it did have an indication of the thinking of the
10 Security Council as a whole.
11 Q. Okay. This text that this document refers at paragraph 3 to
12 continuing reports of widespread violations of international humanitarian
13 law, and in particular reports of the imprisonment and abuse of civilians
14 in camps.
15 What was -- what is this resolution or sorry, this statement
16 referring to?
17 A. This is the time when we started to receive very clear evidence,
18 pictures, not just newspaper accounts, but even pictures and TV footage
19 of Bosnia-Herzegovinian citizens being held in detention in what I think
20 one can label as concentration camps or detention camps. And there were,
21 of course, other reports of continued ethnic cleansing, removal of people
22 from their homes, and of course reports of individuals or actually groups
23 being murdered. I say groups, because many of the reports that we
24 received were large scale and systemic killings.
25 Q. When you talk about Bosnia-Herzegovina citizen, who was
1 reportedly detained in these camps?
2 A. The non-Serb population, Bosniaks, that is Bosnian Muslim and
3 Croats, but there were also sometimes Serbs who opposed the regime or
4 opposed the efforts of division of Belgrade who were also in fact made to
6 Q. And when you talked about there being pictures and TV footage,
7 how widely publicised were the images of the camps at that time?
8 A. At this point in time, this dominated the news, the global news.
9 MS. BOLTON: Could that document be marked as an exhibits please,
10 and could you turn to the next document in that tab.
11 JUDGE MOLOTO: It is admitted into evidence. May it please be
12 given an exhibit number.
13 THE REGISTRAR: The document will become Exhibit P2436, Your
15 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
16 MS. BOLTON:
17 Q. The next document, and there's two more documents in this tab.
18 One is 65 ter 2192, which is Resolution 770.
19 A. Yes, I have that.
20 Q. With respect to that resolution, I don't want to discuss it in
21 any detail, I'd just like you to take a look at the text and confirm for
22 me whether this appears to be a true copy of the actual resolution that
23 was passed?
24 A. Yes, it is.
25 MS. BOLTON: If that could be marked as an exhibit, please, Your
2 JUDGE MOLOTO: It is so marked. May it please be given an
3 exhibit number.
4 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit P2437, Your Honours.
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much.
6 Yes, Madam Bolton
7 MS. BOLTON: I think that would - actually, I see the time, Your
8 Honour - be a convenient time to break and we'll deal with the other
9 resolution tomorrow.
10 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much, Madam Bolton.
11 Just before we break, Mr. Sacirbey, while you are in the
12 witness-stand, just to remind you, you may not discuss the case with
13 anybody, not even with your counsel there in the US, until you are
14 excused from testifying. Okay?
15 THE WITNESS: That is recognised, Your Honour. Thank you.
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: And the Chamber stands adjourned to tomorrow at
17 quarter past 2.00 in the afternoon. That's Netherlands time. In the
18 same courtroom, I guess you will be in the same venue. Court adjourned.
19 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.00 p.m.
20 to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 16th day of June,
21 2009, at 2.00 p.m.