1 Friday, 9 February 2007
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.04 a.m.
5 JUDGE AGIUS: Good morning to you, Madam Registrar. Could you
6 kindly call the case, please.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning Your Honours. This is case number
8 IT-05-88-T, the Prosecutor versus Vujadin Popovic et al.
9 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you, Madam. All the accused are here. From
10 the Defence teams I don't see Mr. Haynes and I don't see Mr. Stojanovic.
11 Otherwise everyone is present. The Defence [sic] I see Mr. McCloskey,
12 Mr. Nicholls and Mr. Thayer.
13 I understand there is a preliminary matter you would like to
15 MR. McCLOSKEY: Yes, Mr. President. Just something briefly that I
16 should have sorted out and cleared up for the Court yesterday. You will
17 recall that PW-111, the last witness, when I asked him a question about
18 him giving us information that he had not told the doctors the complete
19 truth because he was worried about his pension, and I think you followed
20 up with a question, and he -- he said "no," basically. At that -- as you
21 can imagine, I did have a basis for that question. And I had -- at that
22 point I -- I didn't have the basis on my fingertips and I thought I might
23 have mixed him up with another witness.
24 Since that time, I have found the basis of that question, and I
25 should have cleared it up with the witness yesterday, but he had, in fact,
1 in a statement of 3rd December, 1998, told Mr. Ruez that very thing, that
2 he had not told the doctor the whole truth because he was worried about
3 his pension. I think he clearly had forgotten he had said that, but I did
4 not want to leave that answer on the record without having cleared it up,
5 and that's -- that's all I wanted to mention.
6 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you, Mr. McCloskey. Does anyone wish to
7 comment on that? None. For the record --
8 MR. LAZAREVIC: Maybe just one thing I would like to say. I don't
9 believe that this is the way, once the witness left to clarify things with
10 what -- I have no problem with this, we are all aware of this, what
11 Mr. McCloskey said. I just have a problem once the witness left that we
12 discussed this issue. This is basically giving evidence on Prosecution
14 JUDGE AGIUS: Yeah, but it's not evidence in favour of the
15 Prosecution, if anything. It would rather be evidence in favour of the
17 Yes, Mr. Bourgon.
18 MR. BOURGON: Thank you, Mr. President. I just want to say that I
19 hope that my colleague will react the same way we are reacting today when
20 something like this happens with one of the Defence witnesses. Thank you,
21 Mr. President.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you. I hope it won't happen again.
23 For the record, Mr. Haynes has entered the courtroom.
24 Yes. Anything else? No. So we can bring the witness in; first
25 of the two.
1 Incidentally, until he is ushered in, I asked you yesterday to
2 check whether disclosure of the witness statement, that I referred to
3 yesterday, has indeed been disclosed in November, as stated by the
4 Prosecution, to all the Defence teams.
5 [The witness entered court]
6 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. Then could I kindly ask you, the Defence
7 teams, since this witness is envisaged to start testifying, I think on the
8 28th or 26th or 28th of February.
9 MR. NICHOLLS: We are hoping around the 26th, Your Honour.
10 JUDGE AGIUS: 26th of February. Could you be kind enough to file
11 your response by the end of next week, by Friday, by today week, in other
12 words. All right. Thank you.
13 So good morning to you, sir.
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning.
15 JUDGE AGIUS: And welcome to this Tribunal. You are about to
16 start giving evidence. Madam Usher is going to hand you the text of a
17 solemn declaration you are required to take, namely, to testify the true.
18 Please proceed with reading it aloud, and that will be your solemn
19 undertaking with us.
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will speak
21 the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
22 WITNESS: WITNESS PW-157
23 [Witness answered through interpreter]
24 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you, sir. Please make yourself comfortable.
25 You are a Prosecution witness, and for that also a protected
1 witness. We have put in place three protective measures, namely, the use
2 of a pseudonym instead of your name, facial and voice distortion. I
3 suppose these have already been explained to you. All I want to know is
4 whether you are happy with this arrangement.
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
6 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you. One other thing I wanted to alert you to
7 is this: Since we have voice distortion, it is important that you don't
8 speak when anybody else's microphone is on. So always allow a pause
9 between question and answer, and if you notice that the red light -- if
10 you look at me now, you will see what I'm referring to. You see that the
11 red light on the microphone is on, don't speak. Wait until it's off. All
12 right? We will be keeping a watchful eye, but this is all to protect you.
13 Yes, Mr. Nicholls will be examining you first, and then we will
14 have some cross-examinations.
15 Mr. Nicholls.
16 MR. NICHOLLS: Thank you, Your Honours.
17 If I could hand the witness please P02441, the pseudonym sheet.
18 Examination by Mr. Nicholls:
19 Q. Witness, could you just read that sheet silently to yourself and
20 confirm that your name is printed on that sheet of paper.
21 A. Yes.
22 MR. NICHOLLS: If that could be shown to my colleagues, please.
23 Q. Sir, as I explained to you, you are what we call a 92 ter witness,
24 which means we will putting in a copy of your prior ICTY written statement
25 and your testimony from your earlier appearance at this Tribunal. Now, in
1 my office, did you read your ICTY written statement in your own language?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. And did you make the following correction, which was at page
4 0077-8115 at paragraph 4: It is written there, "Every call, no matter
5 what the subject or participant, was also in the notebooks." In fact, did
6 you tell me that personal calls of no military significance were not
7 transcribed in the notebook; is that correct?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Witness, with the assistance of an interpreter, because it was in
10 English, did you review your entire testimony in the Krstic case?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. And you made a correction there. This is at page 4544 at lines 5
13 to 7, you were asked a question about an intercept of 15 July 1995 at 9.52
14 a.m. which, Your Honours, is the same one at tab 5 in the packet 65 ter
15 number 1177.
16 The transcript in this section at line 5 to 7 states, "The
17 participant was probably Colonel Beara who was looking for Zivanovic
18 because that's what the text itself says. So the participant is Colonel
19 Beara." Could you please explain to the Trial Chamber what you wanted to
20 correct in that answer?
21 A. Can I be provided with that text, please?
22 Q. Yes. I can do that. We don't have it in English, but I can read
23 out the question and answer to you. Again, this is at page 4544 of the
24 transcript, line 3:
25 "Q. This is a very short conversation and my question for you is
1 the following: Can you tell me who was the participant in this
3 "A. The participant was probably Colonel Beara who was looking
4 for Zivanovic because that's what the text itself says. So the
5 participant is Colonel Beara."
6 Now, I don't want to lead you on this, but you told me in my
7 office there was something you wanted to change in that answer.
8 A. I'm sure that it was Colonel Beara.
9 Q. Thank you. Other than these corrections, can you attest to the
10 Trial Chamber that your ICTY statement and the transcript of your
11 testimony accurately reflect what you stated in the statement and in your
12 prior testimony?
13 A. Correct.
14 Q. And can you also confirm and attest that your answers would be the
15 same if you were asked the same questions today?
16 A. Yes.
17 MR. NICHOLLS: Could we go into private session, please, for a
18 short witness statement summary?
19 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, let's do that.
20 [Private session]
10 [Open session]
11 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you.
12 MR. NICHOLLS: In his statement and testimony, the witness
13 described the process in which he would intercept, record, and transcribe
14 VRS communications into the notebooks used at the northern facility. In
15 his testimony, the witness authenticated eight intercepts which we --
16 which he had personally transcribed by hand. And these are also
17 intercepts the Prosecution intends to tender in this case.
18 The eight handwritten intercepts from the Krstic testimony which
19 the witness authenticated are as follows: The Krstic Exhibit Numbers
20 first, P330/1, which is 65 ter number 1169 in this case, and that's at tab
21 3 of the packet. P332/1, which is 65 ter number 1177 in this case, which
22 is at tab 5. P333/1, which is 65 ter number 1178 in this case at tab 6.
23 P334/1, which is 65 ter number 1179 in this case at tab 7. P335/1, which
24 is 65 ter number 1187 in this case at tab 8. P337/1, which is 65 ter
25 number 1189 in this case at tab 9. P338/1, which is 65 ter number 1204 in
1 this case at tab 10, and P339/1, which is 65 ter number 1228 in this case
2 at tab 13. I just read that out because it's -- otherwise it's difficult
3 to match them up in the prior transcript.
4 JUDGE AGIUS: Just one question while we are at this. On the same
5 page, because we were precisely coming back to you on -- on this because
6 we look at page -- transcript page 4544 that you referred the witness to
7 earlier on. Of course, at the top of the page, there was Exhibit 332 and
8 we were going to draw your attention to that so we were not -- but further
9 down the page, there is also reference to exhibits in the Krstic case,
10 331/A, 331/B -- /1 B, 331/1B. This is not amongst the ones that you have
11 indicated to us now.
12 MR. NICHOLLS: Yes. I think -- I will have to check on that, Your
13 Honour. 331/1 is definitely one of the ones in this case, and the As and
14 Bs I would need to check again. I have them here, which version says R.
15 JUDGE AGIUS: What we need to know, because the B is obviously
16 referring to the Serbo Croat language, I take it, so the indication should
17 be towards 331/1. But we need to know whether that is also incorporated
18 into the dossier that we have been given behind any particular tab so we
19 will be able later on to follow the witness's testimony in Krstic to the
21 MR. NICHOLLS: This -- I hate to admit it, actually occurred to me
22 at about 3.00 a.m., that you may not have all the exhibits which are not
23 ones that I intended to tender, which means that you might have some
24 difficulty in following the testimony. But I -- that, as I say, occurred
25 to me very late last night, and so we may need to supplement with -- with
1 some of those because there were, for example, some photos in his Krstic
2 testimony of recording equipment or antennas or something like that that I
3 did not intend to go over again, but we can provide those to make it
5 What I've read out are all the intercepts in the packet which I
6 intend to tender which he also referred to in his testimony.
7 JUDGE AGIUS: All right.
8 MR. NICHOLLS:
9 Q. Now, I have a few additional questions for you, sir. Not very
11 First of all, do you recall that you reviewed 18 handwritten
12 intercepts and the corresponding printouts of those intercepts in my
13 office in a blue packet like the one I'm holding up with tabs?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. And did you also review the original notebooks containing the
16 handwritten intercepts which were copied into this packet?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. And you confirmed that the intercepts at tabs 1 through 17 were
19 all transcribed by you and you recognised your handwriting in the
20 notebooks as well for the -- for these intercepts?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. And here, in front of the Trial Chamber, could you please confirm
23 that you intercepted, recorded, and transcribed the intercepts you
24 recognised at tabs 1 through 17?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. And it's correct that you informed me that the last intercept at
2 tab 18, dated 24 July 1995 at 10.35 a.m., was not in your handwriting, you
3 did not transcribe that intercept?
4 A. I didn't note it down and I didn't record it either.
5 Q. Thank you. I have just a few questions now about some specific
6 intercepts. And could we first have -- I'm -- I'm going to ask questions
7 about intercepts at tabs 5 through 8. Could I have 117C, the printout
8 from tab 5 on e-court, please? 117C, excuse me.
9 It might take a minute, Witness, but it should appear in a minute
10 before you on the screen. There it is.
11 Now, could you please take a look at this intercept. I'm
12 interested in just the top portion and the first intercept at this time.
13 What is the date of this first conversation which starts off in
14 English "Colonel Beara," in your language "Pukovnik Beara"?
15 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Wait. Don't answer. Mr. Meek?
16 MR. MEEK: Mr. President, I don't believe there is any foundation.
17 In fact, my colleague just said he's going to talk about the printout and
18 I don't believe there is any foundation that this witness had anything to
19 do with the typed version, he did the handwritten version, but not the
20 typed version. So, I object.
21 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Mr. Nicholls.
22 MR. NICHOLLS: That's right. He didn't have anything to do with
23 typing this, but it's a printout of a conversation which he hand wrote.
24 So I think it's fair to just show him this printout to -- it's a quicker
25 way of establishing the date, which is already in the record, which has
1 been submitted.
2 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay.
3 [Trial Chamber confers]
4 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, I think the matter that has been raised is
5 easily solved. There is absolutely no reason why Mr. Nicholls should be
6 stopped from showing the witness the printout. But there is also the copy
7 of the transcript allegedly, as you say, in his own hand. And you can
8 refer the witness to that. And then at the end of the day, if there are
9 problems arising from either of these two, Mr. Meek has the facility to
10 cross-examine the witness.
11 MR. NICHOLLS: Thank you. And I intend to show him his
12 handwritten intercept as well.
13 JUDGE AGIUS: The question I mean, if you intend to ask him
14 questions relating to the content, those three lines or two lines in the
15 printout, there is no reason why you should select the printed version
16 instead of the handwritten one. I -- of course you can ask him a question
17 on the printed version too, if you have valid questions to put.
18 MR. NICHOLLS: I wasn't going to ask him about the content, Your
19 Honour. I was just going to establish that it is the same intercept and
20 ask him what the date of the transmission was. That's all. The date the
21 intercept was sent.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: Perfectly valid question, yeah.
23 MR. NICHOLLS:
24 Q. Okay. Sir, if you look at this intercept, the first one, which
25 begins "Colonel Beara," what was the date that this intercept was sent to
1 the corps command?
2 A. The 15th of July.
3 Q. 1995?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. I would like to now show the witness book 91, the original
6 notebook. And if we could put this on the ELMO. I don't know if my
7 colleagues want to see it first.
8 JUDGE AGIUS: Does anyone wish to see it? Mr. Meek?
9 MR. NICHOLLS: This is P02329; that's the exhibit number for book
11 JUDGE AGIUS: For the record, because I don't see it here,
12 Mr. Meek is examining the notebook.
13 MR. NICHOLLS: Okay. If we could have page 00800616 showing,
14 that's the other page. Thank you.
15 Q. Now, Witness, the intercept which is now on the screen, also
16 starting with, "Colonel Beara," could you please read that short
18 A. "Colonel Beara asked for General Zivanovic but he wasn't there, so
19 they asked to call him on the local number, 139."
20 Q. Thank you. Now, it's fairly clear, but can you tell me what the
21 channel was and what time this intercept was recorded?
22 A. Channel number 3 at 9.52 in the morning.
23 Q. Now, is this a summary or a verbatim transcription of the -- of
24 this recording which you intercepted?
25 A. This is a summary. He was asking for the exchange -- General
1 Zivanovic at the exchange. He wasn't there and that is why he was told to
2 call him on extension 139.
3 Q. Now, in your answer you just gave, who is the "he" when you
4 state "he was asking for the exchange"?
5 A. Colonel Beara.
6 Q. Can you just explain briefly, how did you arrive at the conclusion
7 that this speaker was Colonel Beara?
8 A. Probably at the time he introduced himself to the exchange and I
9 could have recognised him on the basis of his voice.
10 Q. Thank you. I would now like to ask you, still looking at the same
11 book, 91, P02329, which is on the ELMO, please read just silently to
12 yourself the next intercept which goes from pages 00800616 over to 0617.
13 And if it's easier for you, you can look at the handwritten copy of your
14 book on -- which is to your right. Just let me know when you've read that
15 next intercept.
16 A. I have read it.
17 Q. Thank you, Your Honour. Again, this is 65 ter number 1178. Now
18 at tab 6. If we could show the top of this intercept, where it begins --
19 if we could pull out a little bit. And if you can fit the whole heading
20 in. A little -- pull out a little bit more, please. Thank you. That's
22 Sir, what was the channel and time of this next intercept you
23 wrote down?
24 A. Also channel number 3 at 9.54.
25 Q. And at the top, you have listed the participants as General
1 Zivanovic and Colonel Ljubo Beara. My next question is, in this next
2 intercept you wrote down, how did you determine that Colonel Beara was a
4 A. I recognised his voice and called him Zivanovic,
5 General Zivanovic.
6 Q. You -- just to be very clear, you recognised whose voice when --
7 and who called somebody General Zivanovic?
8 A. Colonel Ljubo Beara returned -- addressed General Zivanovic.
9 Q. Thank you. I would like to now ask you about the next intercept
10 in that same book, P02329. This is the one that goes from pages 00800618
11 to 00800619. That is 65 ter number 1179, tab 7 in the packet.
12 Could you just read this intercept to yourself, sir, and then --
13 silently and then tell me when you you've finished reading it. And just
14 to be clear for you, sir, I'm referring to the exhibit -- the intercept
15 where you've written the participants are Colonel Beara and General
16 Krstic, and "(inaudible)"?
17 A. I've read it.
18 Q. Thank you. Could you just tell me again when was the time that
19 you -- of this intercept and the channel?
20 A. Channel number 3 at 9.57.
21 Q. And again, the same question with this next intercept which you
22 hand recorded, how did you determine that the speaker was Colonel Beara?
23 A. As I said a while ago, I could recognise his voice, but in this
24 intercepted conversation, he introduced himself on a number of occasions.
25 Q. Thank you. I want to show you one more intercept, that's at tab
1 8, it's 1187, but I want to show it to you in the book. The book is
2 number 97, which has 65 ter number P02328. First, I should ask if my
3 colleagues want to look at this book.
4 JUDGE AGIUS: For the record, Mr. Meek is examining the notebook.
5 MR. NICHOLLS:
6 Q. All right, sir. If you could please take a moment to read the
7 intercept on page 00801263, which is before you. And again, if you need
8 to pick up the book to read it, read it yourself in hard copy, that's
9 fine. Just read the entire intercept and tell me when you're done.
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Okay. Again, same questions: What's the channel and what's the
12 time for this intercept, please?
13 A. Channel 3 at 11.11.
14 Q. At the top the participants have been listed by you as Colonel
15 Beara, Colonel Ljubo Beara, Cerovic, and X. Again, how did you determine
16 that Colonel Beara was one of the participants in this conversation that
17 you transcribed?
18 A. Well, because they participated in this conversation. They are
19 mentioned in these intercepted conversations.
20 Q. You mean Colonel -- Colonel Beara is mentioned in the conversation
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Now, this is not being broadcast, Witness, outside the courtroom.
24 If you could look at the -- if we could go to the bottom of this page,
1 MR. NICHOLLS: Could we go into private session for one moment?
2 JUDGE AGIUS: Let's go into private session
3 [Private session]
16 [Open session]
17 JUDGE AGIUS: We are in open session.
18 MR. NICHOLLS:
19 Q. I will ask the question again, sir. Why is your signature --
20 don't worry, nobody can see it outside the courtroom. Why does it appear
21 on the bottom right of this page?
22 A. Well, whenever a conversation was intercepted, we operators, who
23 were involved in the electronic combat, we would sign such conversations
24 so that everyone could know who was working on a certain shift.
25 Q. Thank you. Now, the previous intercepts which we looked at in the
1 book today, your signature -- no signatures appear at the bottom by you.
2 Can you tell us why that might be?
3 A. I don't know. I can't see it. Maybe we could have a look at the
5 Q. Well, can I show it to you again, but maybe my colleagues will
6 agree that there is no signature of his at the bottom of the other three
7 intercepts we've looked at. And I just wonder why you're -- why those
8 ones in your handwriting you haven't signed them?
9 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. Meek.
10 MR. MEEK: Thank you, Mr. President. The witness has asked to
11 look at these intercepts, and I think he should be able to. Number one.
12 Number two, while he has these books, he should look at all the other
13 intercepts he did not sign or did sign.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, I think he should be given the opportunity to
15 have a look at the notebook, if he's asked for that.
16 MR. NICHOLLS: I agree, Your Honour. That's fine. And Mr. Meek
17 can show him whatever he likes on cross.
18 JUDGE AGIUS: That's correct.
19 MR. NICHOLLS:
20 Q. Could you please look at 00800616 through 0619, sir. For the
21 record, the witness is looking at P02329, which is intercept book number
23 Now, having reviewed that, did you see your signature on the
24 bottom of those pages, which are the same pages we looked at earlier
1 A. No, no.
2 Q. I will just ask you again, can you give any explanation of why
3 your signature doesn't appear on the bottom of those intercepts?
4 A. I can't remember.
5 MR. NICHOLLS: Thank you. I have no further questions at this
7 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you, Mr. Nicholls.
8 Who is going first? Mr. Zivanovic.
9 MR. ZIVANOVIC: Thank you, Your Honours.
10 Cross-examination by Mr. Zivanovic:
11 Q. [Interpretation] Good day. Witness, when reading your statement I
12 noticed that you said that you worked in shifts at your work post and they
13 were daily shifts that lasted three or four hours. You do remember that?
14 A. Yes. Those were the shifts, but sometimes we had 12-hour shifts,
15 it depended on our activities.
16 Q. Yes, you said that too. You also said that, as a rule, one
17 operator worked at night, whereas the day-time shift started at about 6.00
18 in the morning. Is that correct?
19 A. Yes, but it all depended on the activities, on the amount of work
20 in the office itself.
21 JUDGE AGIUS: And Mr. Zivanovic, and Witness, please allow a short
22 pause between question and answer. Although you are switching off the
23 microphone before the witness starts, but still it's too fast for the
25 MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation]
1 Q. I also noticed that you said that the previous operator would
2 usually inform you of the conversations he had heard during his shift and
3 he would also inform you about whether the conversation was on one
4 frequency and whether part of the conversation was on a different
5 frequency. Is that correct?
6 A. Yes, that's correct.
7 Q. In addition, I also wanted to ask you whether you could tell me
8 something else, apart from the Srebrenica area, the wider Srebrenica area,
9 Zvornik and beyond, I can see that you also monitored conversations in
10 other areas?
11 A. Well, we did what they ordered us to do in the corps command. We
12 rotated our antenna, depending on the records.
13 Q. Thank you. I would like to ask you something about the notebooks.
14 Given the shifts that you worked, can you remember how many notebooks you
15 had at your disposal at the same time?
16 A. I can't remember exactly. A lot of time has passed. Two or three
17 notebooks. Perhaps every device had its own notebook, I'm not quite sure.
18 Q. Tell me, you received those notebooks from your command?
19 A. Some from the command, sometimes someone would bring a notebook
20 in. People did as best they could.
21 Q. Did those notebooks have some sort of a registry number provided
22 by your command?
23 A. Well, we listed the number of the device on the cover and the date
24 on which we first started using the notebook. As to whether they
25 registered them, I don't know.
1 Q. Thank you. And tell me, as far as making notes in the notebook is
2 concerned, did you have to make a note of the dates in the notebooks?
3 A. No, it wasn't mandatory.
4 Q. And were you supposed to make a note of the frequencies?
5 A. Yes. We made a note of the frequencies and also of the dates. If
6 there was a lot of -- if there were a lot of conversations, if we didn't
7 have enough time, well it was possible to establish which particular date
8 was, in fact, concerned.
9 Q. If the conversation was interrupted in such situations, would you
10 note down when the conversation was interrupted when you re-established a
11 link between those participants?
12 A. Well, if there was an interruption, we would make a note of that,
13 or if you couldn't hear anything we would make a note of that, or if there
14 was a lot of background noise we would make a note of that too.
15 Q. And if, after a conversation had been interrupted, would you make
16 a note of the fact that a conversation had been established between other
17 participants? Would you write down their names if you knew of them?
18 A. Naturally I would write down the number of the channel and make a
19 note of the participants if we could recognise them.
20 Q. And the frequencies too?
21 A. Yes.
22 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
23 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. Zivanovic, your microphone.
24 MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation] I apologise.
25 Q. Since we've heard about the technology you used at work, did you
1 ever put the information from the notebooks into computers?
2 A. There are various operators working in cryptographic protection
3 who did such things.
4 Q. In any event, you didn't?
5 A. Well, perhaps on occasion, very briefly, if I was replacing a
7 Q. Can you tell me, when you worked on such occasions, did you write
8 down the date yourself in the computer or did the computer assign the date
10 A. Well, this was done manually, the date was registered manually in
11 the computer.
12 Q. In those reports, we saw that there were some numbers. Did the
13 computer assign the number or did you do that?
14 A. Whatever was put in was done so manually.
15 Q. We have information according to which those conversations on
16 inputting were coded. Was that done manually?
17 A. My colleague was involved in cryptographic protection.
18 Q. When you did input text into the computer, you weren't involved in
19 the cryptographic protection of that text?
20 A. No. I was only helping my colleague to put the text in, but he
21 was responsible for the cryptographic protection of the text itself, for
22 the encryption of the text itself.
23 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
24 MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation]
25 Q. I see that you have also mentioned laptop computers that you had
1 at your disposal. What kind of laptops did you have?
2 A. It was an ordinary computer. As if children knew what a computer
3 was in 1994. That was the first time I had seen a computer.
4 Q. You mentioned that laptop in 1999 when you gave a statement?
5 A. Well, it was a computer. Perhaps, I said that it was a laptop.
6 Perhaps I named it as a laptop.
7 Q. In other words, it was an ordinary computer?
8 A. Yes, it was an ordinary computer.
9 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
10 JUDGE AGIUS: Microphone.
11 MR. ZIVANOVIC: Yes.
12 Q. [Interpretation] You also said that you would make a note of
13 urgent conversations in the notebook. Was that your assessment or did
14 some of your superiors make such assessments?
15 A. We also made such assessments and our superior did so too, who was
16 there with us.
17 Q. Please explain something to me. You would listen to these urgent
18 conversations on a tape first of all; is that correct?
19 A. Well, yes. I would record it and also listen to it over the
20 headphones and I could come to certain conclusions as to whether it was
21 urgent or not and then we would immediately convey the information and so
22 on and so forth.
23 Q. You made a note of the fact that it was urgent in the notebook, or
24 rather, that it was urgent to convey such information to the command; is
25 that correct?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. In other words, the command only received this information through
3 written reports that were coded in the computer?
4 A. Well, they received such information over the phone if it was
5 urgent, or only subsequently, once the conversation had been noted down
6 from the recording, then it was put into the computer.
7 Q. If the command had then been informed of the noted conversation by
8 telephone, can you tell me why the notebook stated also that the
9 conversation was urgent?
10 A. Well, because we assessed that it was urgent, that was our
11 conclusion, so we made note of the fact.
12 Q. Earlier on you said that you would make a note of that, so that it
13 could be urgently sent through the computer, but that is, in fact, not the
14 reason for which it was noted?
15 A. That's not what I said. If the conversation concerned shelling,
16 for example, the shelling of Tuzla, et cetera; it's an example, if I say
17 Tuzla. Or in such cases, we ourselves would assess whether it was urgent
18 or not. There wasn't time to put the information into the notebook. We
19 would immediately phone the command, tell them what the situation was.
20 For example, if coordinates had been provided, the population had to be
21 informed so that they could take shelter, et cetera. And only afterwards
22 would we note everything down in the notebook and state that it was a
23 matter of urgency.
24 Q. I also see that you, when speaking of tapes, that you would
25 receive erased tapes?
1 A. When the tapes were completed, we would give them to the commander
2 and receive new tapes.
3 Q. And there was nothing on the new ones, there was no conversation
4 recorded on the new ones?
5 A. Naturally, nothing.
6 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
7 MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation]
8 Q. I would like to ask you to examine one of the intercepts which you
9 noted down. This is OTP 65 ter list number 1189.
10 THE REGISTRAR: Please identify A, B or C.
11 MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation] This is P24/21.
12 THE INTERPRETER: Counsel does not have microphone on.
13 MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation] This is OTP tab 9. And it's
14 marked here as 1189. B/C/S version. 1189B.
15 Q. Do you remember this particular intercept? Do you remember the
16 intercept that is on the screen now?
17 A. [No interpretation]
18 JUDGE KWON: I think it's the button --
19 MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Could you please scroll down.
21 Q. This is the conversation at the bottom, where it says 1358. Do
22 you remember this conversation at the bottom, channel 3 at 1358 hours?
23 A. Yes, I saw it earlier.
24 Q. Can you tell me whether this time was recorded afterwards, after
25 the entire text was recorded?
1 A. You mean the time next to the channel? Well, it was noted down at
2 the same time when the channel was noted down.
3 Q. Did you routinely record time in this fashion, sort of in a
4 slanted way?
5 A. Well, when pressed for time, you write as you can. It's not like
6 we did it when I served in the JNA.
7 Q. What do you mean pressed for time? Were you pressed for time when
8 recording time?
9 A. Well, I don't know, but there was no rule specifying that we had
10 to write it in one line. We could write it above or at the continuation
11 of a sentence.
12 Q. Can you explain the reasons for not noting down the frequency
14 A. We noted down the frequency earlier, and then here we recorded
15 only the number of the channel.
16 Q. So you did not record the frequency for each intercept?
17 A. The frequency is always the same. As long as it is active, it is
18 always the same. As soon as there is a change, as soon as we notice that
19 nothing is happening on a particular channel, then we would know that they
20 changed the frequency and we would look for the new one.
21 Q. In this heading, we can see that there are two participants;
22 Zlatar, duty officer there and duty officer in Palma, correct?
23 A. Yes.
24 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
25 MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation]
1 Q. At the very bottom of the page you can see that there was an
2 interruption in the conversation. Could we now turn to the following
3 page? I can see that the participants are not recorded after this
4 interruption. Do you see that?
5 A. Well, it says previously that there was an interruption in the
6 conversation, and then the exchange asks, "Who is it?" It's on the
7 following page. And then the response is, "Duty officer at Palma." So
8 somebody marked the next person with an X, meaning unidentified person.
9 And then they -- that person says, "Who do you need to speak to?" And
10 then the rest is clear.
11 Q. Are you trying to say that the participants were the same and
12 that, as a result of that, you did not identify them specifically?
13 A. No, I didn't know who the other participant was, the one marked
14 with an X. Only those cases where I was fully certain would I identify
15 the person as they introduced themselves. For example, I identified Palma
16 with a P.
17 Q. All right. Thank you. Can we go to the previous page, please.
18 In the previous page, these two participants are marked with letters Z and
19 P, correct?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Can we now turn to the following page, please? The one we saw
22 just now.
23 Now, we have some participants here, one is marked with an X, one
24 is marked with a letter B, and naturally, there remained the participant
25 marked earlier with P. And after this interruption in the conversation,
1 it seems to be that this is a conversation among different people, in
2 addition to the one marked with a P.
3 A. Looking at the text, one could conclude that this was perhaps
4 Zlatar, but since I wasn't sure, I didn't want to speculate.
5 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. Zivanovic, you started your cross at 9.48. That
6 means you have just gone beyond the 20-minute. We will allow you two
7 minutes more and that's the end of it.
8 MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation] I need just one or two more
9 questions, and I will finished with my cross-examination. Thank you, Your
11 Q. I wish to tell you now that, again at the bottom of this page, it
12 says again that the connection was disrupted, the -- there was an
13 interruption in the conversation, correct?
14 A. That's what it says.
15 Q. And this is something that you noted down?
16 A. It is in my handwriting.
17 Q. Thank you. Can we now move to the next page, please?
18 Do you see that we have yet another participant marked with a C,
19 and we do not know who that person is, and the person was not identified
20 in the heading at the beginning of the conversation.
21 A. This C probably stands for "centrala," the telephone exchange.
22 Q. And can we please establish that somewhere midway through the page
23 it -- there is a text in parentheses where it says, "Immediately after the
24 conclusion of the conversation," and then it seems there is a new
25 conversation. There is a letter G and that person says "hello" and then
1 in parentheses, it says, "Immediately after the conclusion of the
2 conversation" which means that what follows should be a new conversation.
3 A. This is a conversation on the same exchange, which means that the
4 previous participants signed off and then the new ones continued. I think
5 that this is all coming from Palma.
6 Q. So it seems that there were three disruptions in these
7 conversations, at least, that's what I was able to count. You didn't note
8 down the time when the communication was re-established.
9 A. These disruptions or interruptions were very brief. There was
10 probably a break in communication.
11 Q. Thank you.
12 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you, Mr. Zivanovic.
13 Who is next? Mr. Bourgon.
14 MR. BOURGON: Thank you, Mr. President.
15 Cross-examination by Mr. Bourgon:
16 Q. Good morning, Witness.
17 A. Good morning.
18 Q. I have a few questions for you concerning your -- both your
19 statement and some of the intercepts that you say you took down
21 My first question goes to, in respect of your statement, I would
22 just like to confirm, because we don't see that whether it is in the
23 statement or in your testimony in the Krstic case, that you received any
24 specific training before you took up your position and started taking
25 intercepts. Is that correct?
1 A. I did have training. I became familiar with the equipment before
2 we started working with them. We started with an ordinary Rup, R-u-p, and
3 started intercepting with them and then we got these other pieces of
4 equipment and some colleagues of ours knew how to work with them, so it
5 was not difficult at all for us to work with that equipment.
6 Q. Thank you. So I take it that it was on-job training but you never
7 attended a formal course with respect to the taking of intercepts; is that
9 A. I worked on radio relay equipment back in the former JNA, and
10 then --
11 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreters didn't hear the end of the
13 JUDGE AGIUS: Witness, can you repeat your answer again, because
14 the interpreters didn't catch up the last part of your answer, please.
15 Thank you.
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As for the equipment, I learned
17 about it in the JNA when I had training, and then I had additional
18 training in my ham radio club, and then yet another training, which I
19 received when I started working there.
20 MR. BOURGON:
21 Q. Thank you, Witness. Now, I'm just going to go straight to the
22 point. You did not attend a formal course before you started taking
23 intercepts; is that correct?
24 JUDGE AGIUS: I think his answer -- I think he's answered that
25 question, Mr. Bourgon. Let's move to more substantial matters.
1 MR. BOURGON: Will do, Mr. President. But some other witnesses
2 have said that they have attended a course, a 30-day course, and I want to
3 establish that he did not attend this course.
4 JUDGE AGIUS: I think he said it.
5 MR. BOURGON: Thank you, Mr. President. I will move on.
6 Q. Witness, my second question goes to the correction which you made
7 this morning. My colleague referred you to something in your statement
8 that you wish to correct. Now, I draw your attention to your statement,
9 and I will quote from this statement, because on two occasions, you
10 mention, and I -- this is the fifth paragraph on the -- on page 8115 of
11 your statement, where you state, "All calls were recorded no matter what
12 the subject or participants." So that's at one point. Later in the same
13 statement it says again, "All calls were recorded."
14 So I just wonder how come is it only today that you come and say
15 well, no, not really all calls were recorded? Can you share with us, why
16 is it that you only make this correction today?
17 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Nicholls.
18 MR. NICHOLLS: That wasn't the correction. The correction was
19 about what calls were transcribed into the notebook.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Mr. Bourgon.
21 MR. BOURGON: I will check the transcript, but this is not at all
22 what I have in -- neither in the notes that were given to me by my
23 colleague, and I will quote from these notes. And I will also go back to
24 the transcript at the beginning, and I hope that I will get more than 20
25 minutes to do my cross-examination because I'm going to waste some time
2 MR. MEEK: Mr. President, Your Honours, while he is looking, I
3 join in that objection because we're going find out in a minute exactly
4 why we have to take this time, but you'll see. I join this objection.
5 MR. BOURGON: In the notes that were received from my colleague,
6 it says here, those are the notes from my colleague, it says the witness
7 corrected the following portion of his ICTY statement at page 00778115,
8 which is the page I quoted, and it says at paragraph 4, "It is not correct
9 that every call, no matter what the subject or participants was also
10 recorded in the notebooks. It is correct that every call was
12 So that's what I'm asking the witness to confirm now. And if I go
13 into the statement itself, and I quoted two portions from that statement
14 from page 8115, and it says, "All calls were recorded." And the first one
15 it says also, "All calls were recorded no matter what."
16 Q. I want to confirm, is it correct that all calls were recorded?
17 That's my question, Witness.
18 A. All called were recorded on the UHER tape recorder, but we didn't
19 take down silly things if somebody was dating somebody or things like
20 that. And we also had papers where we recorded participants immediately,
21 and later on we would see whether it was something that we should
22 transcribe and put it in the notebook or not. But if somebody was just
23 chatting up their girlfriends on the exchange, then we didn't need to
24 write that down.
25 Q. Thank you, Witness. Now the reason I ask this question is that if
1 all the calls were recorded on the tape, and then what you -- well, first,
2 let's go with the first question. Transcribing the conversations in the
3 notebook took place later and not immediately after the call was recorded.
4 Is that correct?
5 A. Correct.
6 Q. Now, if that is -- if that is so, and all calls are on that tape,
7 it means that later on when you -- the time comes for you to transcribe a
8 particular conversation, that it would be necessary for you to find that
9 same conversation on the tape using your initial notes that you took. Is
10 that correct?
11 A. We would normally write down the number, when the conversation
12 started, the number on UHER, and when it concluded. We recorded those
13 numbers and we knew exactly at which number the conversation started, and
14 at which it ended.
15 Q. But these numbers do not appear, whether it's in your notes --
16 today I don't know these numbers -- what these numbers are, the start
17 number and the end number of any particular conversation. Is that
19 A. These are the numbers taken from UHER. We needed that number in
20 order not to note anything on the tape, but to be able to know when the
21 conversation started, nevertheless.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: Let's make this clear. You are referring to the
23 counter on the UHER, aren't you?
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, the counter, yes.
25 MR. BOURGON: Thank you.
1 Q. I move on to -- I will skip the next two questions which were put
2 to you by my colleague, and I move now to the next question, which is that
3 when you had an important conversation that was taken directly to the --
4 to -- on the laptop before it was actually put in the notebook. Now,
5 that's -- I refer here to page 116 of your statement. I would like you to
6 confirm that in some cases the conversation was first put on the laptop
7 before it was actually transcribed in the notebook. Is that correct?
8 A. I can't remember. It was long time ago. It's been a long time.
9 Q. But if -- if this is what your statement says, then that would be
10 correct, because, of course, your recollection was better then than it is
11 now; is that so?
12 A. If that's what it says in my statement, that -- then it means that
13 it's correct. But I can't remember, because it's been a long time. I
14 can't remember what happened 11 or 13 years ago.
15 Q. I fully understand, and I fully agree with you that it's very
16 difficult for you to remember what might have happened while you were
17 taking these conversations. I will have just a few questions before the
18 break, and then I will move on. I have two intercepts to discuss with you
19 maybe after the break.
20 My first question is, I would like you confirm that it was always
21 necessary for you to listen to those conversations many times before you
22 could transcribe them in the notebooks. Is that correct?
23 A. Naturally. When you are noting down something in the notebook you
24 naturally have to play the tape back, because it's going too fast and you
25 can't write down at the same speed.
1 Q. Now, speed is one component, but the other component is that the
2 quality of the tape was very bad and there was lots of interference. Is
3 that correct?
4 A. Whenever we established that something wasn't clear, say something
5 wasn't clear to me or I wasn't 100 per cent sure about a word, then I
6 would call my colleagues and then I wouldn't tell them what I thought I
7 heard, I would ask them to listen to that portion of the conversation.
8 So, for example, I would call in one colleague, two or three, and then we
9 would jointly conclude what we heard and note that in the notebook.
10 Q. So the content of -- of any particular conversation which was
11 difficult to listen to is, in the end, the product of a consensus between
12 you and three or four others and whatever you could conclude, then you
13 said this is what we heard. Is that correct?
14 A. As for the intercept, some were extremely clear, and intelligible.
15 If I, as an operator, wasn't sure, then I would ask my colleagues for
16 assistance, so we would decipher together what was said. For example,
17 sometimes a word would be said in a less loud voice, or there was perhaps
18 some background noise and this is what made it difficult to discern.
19 Q. Thank you. Now, I just refer you to your testimony in the Krstic
20 case, and that was on page 4495, where it says, "Frequently we would get
21 together, if we could not understand a word."
22 So is it -- would you agree with me that it was more often the
23 case that you had to ask your colleagues to go over an intercept than
24 those intercepts which you say were clear? That was the exception rather
25 than the rule; is that correct?
1 A. I don't know how often that took place. I know that it wasn't
2 true just of me, but also of my colleagues. They would ask for assistance
3 in solving a problem.
4 Q. And that's exactly what I'm trying to get at, simply that it was a
5 regular thing that you would help your colleagues or your colleagues would
6 help you in trying to decipher what was on those tapes. Is that correct?
7 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Nicholls.
8 MR. NICHOLLS: This question has been asked a thousand times of
9 other witnesses and has been asked several times to this witness.
10 MR. BOURGON: This is cross-examination. My colleague had better
11 sit down. Thank you, Mr. President.
12 JUDGE AGIUS: Well, I think it's better to have a break. Let's
13 have a break. 25 minutes.
14 --- Recess taken at 10.28 a.m.
15 --- On resuming at 10.58 a.m.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Bourgon.
17 MR. BOURGON: Thank you, Mr. President.
18 Q. Witness, I'd like to take you to Exhibit 1177 Bravo for B. Can I
19 have this one on the ELMO -- on the e-court, please.
20 Witness, I have two questions in relation to this specific
21 intercept, and a question was put to you by my colleague as to why this
22 was written in the third person, maybe that was not the exact question,
23 but that -- why it was written in such a manner. And my question to you
24 is, because I referred to your statement, and that is on page 116. Sorry,
25 on page 116. And where you say that "if the call was a general one such
1 as this, I sometimes recorded it in this way."
2 I would like to confirm with you, or if you could confirm that
3 whenever we see a conversation written in that third person or this type
4 of style, that this is indeed because this was a conversation you
5 considered to be a general conversation.
6 A. Well, there were often such conversations. Someone would be
7 looking for someone. We wouldn't write down what was said. Let's say the
8 other participant was there, so we just made a summary note. Colonel
9 Beara was looking for General Zivanovic in this particular case. So we
10 would briefly note such things.
11 Q. Would I be correct in saying that of course the -- if you had
12 noted down the exact words which were mentioned on that occasion --
13 JUDGE AGIUS: One moment, Mr. Bourgon. One moment.
14 Mr. Zivanovic, can you approach -- can you approach us a little
16 [Trial Chamber confers with Mr. Zivanovic]
17 JUDGE AGIUS: My apologies to you, Mr. Bourgon, but we needed to
18 check something.
19 MR. BOURGON: Thank you, Mr. President.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, go ahead.
21 MR. BOURGON:
22 Q. Witness, I will repeat my question, which is simply to say that,
23 if you had noted down on that specific occasion the exact words which had
24 been mentioned, there would be more to it than simply those three lines;
25 is that correct?
1 A. Well, I don't know. I'm not sure.
2 Q. And with respect to this specific conversation, also in your
3 statement on page 116, you mentioned that you could not be sure of the
4 date, but that there was a way for you to try and identify the date, and
5 that was by counting the number of days from this conversation to the next
6 date which was recorded. And I quote your words. You mention, "I believe
7 the conversation was on 15 July."
8 My question is as follows: You also said in your statement that
9 you can't be sure of this because even though you are counting backwards
10 from the first date in the book, you mention, "I am not sure because
11 another notebook may have been used in between." Do you recall saying
12 this in your statement?
13 A. I don't.
14 Q. Do you recall, during your testimony in the Krstic case, where
15 counsel for the Prosecution did an exercise with you, and I'm referring to
16 page 4500 of the transcript, where basically he took you from the
17 beginning of the book, looking at each conversation with the times, to try
18 and determine the date of a specific conversation? Do you remember doing
19 this exercise with the Prosecution in the Krstic case?
20 A. I remember that I went back in time.
21 Q. I'll try to make my question as precise as possible. First, I
22 would like you to confirm that one of the ways which you believe it is
23 possible to identify the date of a conversation is to look at the time of
24 each conversation and to analyse this from the perspective of the first
25 date which was put in the book. Is that correct?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. But of course this exercise is not certain because, as you have
3 said, another notebook may have been used in the meantime. Is that
5 A. I don't think that any other notebook was used. Because this one
6 was only used for that particular device and for these channels. We can
7 see that all the channels here are the same. And everything was in order
8 until the channel was changed and some other participant was involved.
9 Q. Thank you, Witness. I'll go to your statement, and that was on
10 page 1116, and I would like you for -- to clarify this for us, where you
11 say, and now I will quote the exact words: "I am not sure of this,
12 especially as another notebook may have been used in between."
13 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Nicholls.
14 MR. NICHOLLS: Just, if there are going to be more questions on
15 the statement about this area, if the witness wishes to look at his
16 statement, I think he should be able to. That's all.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: I think that should be adopted as a practice, each
18 time the witness indicates his desire to look at -- Witness, do you wish
19 to look at these notebooks or these parts? On the statement, rather.
20 MR. BOURGON: Mr. President --
21 JUDGE AGIUS: I think we should show it to him.
22 MR. BOURGON: Absolutely. I have no problem with that. It is on
24 JUDGE AGIUS: And page 11 --
25 MR. BOURGON: And that's on page 8116.
1 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. And this is -- yeah, is it in -- is it
2 available in B/C/S?
3 MR. BOURGON: Sorry, in B/C/S, sorry. That was the -- it would be
4 better for the witness.
5 THE REGISTRAR: The document is not available in e-court at all.
6 MR. BOURGON: I was told it was entered in the -- in the e-court.
7 And my copy is -- I have...
8 JUDGE AGIUS: Does it have a Prosecution number?
9 MR. BOURGON: 2440 is the Prosecution number, but it's not -- I
10 don't believe it's in the e-court, unless -- because we were -- I have
11 been told it was on 7D90.
12 JUDGE AGIUS: Ms. Stewart is --
13 THE REGISTRAR: It is in e-court as a Prosecution document.
14 MR. BOURGON: It is? Do we have it in B/C/S.
15 THE REGISTRAR: 65 ter number 2440.
16 MR. BOURGON: Can we use it from the Prosecution, 2440, the B/C/S
18 JUDGE AGIUS: It's already being done, Mr. Bourgon.
19 Madam Registrar, it is important that --
20 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
21 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, I have my microphone on. It is important that
22 this is not broadcast.
23 THE REGISTRAR: It is not being broadcast, Your Honour.
24 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. Thank you. In English it's 11 --
25 MR. BOURGON: B/C/S version, Mr. President, the page is 7814. And
1 that is -- and is the last -- the second last paragraph on the bottom.
2 Q. In your statement, Witness, can you see the statement on your
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. The second paragraph on the bottom, I would just like you to, if
6 you can -- sorry, it's the third paragraph on the bottom, whereas you say
7 that on the 12th page of that book, now you are then referring to book 91,
8 and that was the conversation channel 3 at 9.52 which was the one that was
9 on the e-court, and you say here, "I'm not sure of this, especially as
10 another notebook may have been used in between." And then you say, "But
11 by counting the number of days," you believe that it was on the 15th. Can
12 you explain this for us, please?
13 A. I think that it was a slip here in the statement when it says that
14 another notebook was used. I think there was a mistake.
15 Q. I'll leave it at that and I'll go to the next intercept, and that
16 is on tab 2. And I would like to have on the e-court, please, 1165B for
18 Can you see this exhibit on your screen, Witness?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Now, in this intercept we see that you have not identified, but
21 you put at the top participants X and Y, which were both heard
22 occasionally. My first question goes to, because in this -- in this
23 intercept, two names are mentioned. And at the beginning where you
24 attribute the sentence to X, it says, "Someone should find Drago Nikolic
25 now and have him call Dzukic over here."
1 I just want to confirm that looking at all the notes that I have
2 here, as well as the notebook, that the name you that you did hear is in
3 fact "Dzukic"; is that correct?
4 A. Correct.
5 Q. Now, I move down on this intercept, because you mention at the top
6 that Y was heard only occasionally, but at the end of the intercept where
7 you have the speaker X, where it begins with "Yes, in Vlasenica" then we
8 only have one speaker. I would like to confirm with you that everything
9 that follows must be attributed to speaker X. Is that correct?
10 A. Correct.
11 Q. Now, I understood from reading both your testimony and your
12 statement, that when there was something that you did not hear you were --
13 the -- you were supposed to put three dots and some brackets or
14 parentheses. So what I don't understand is how come you have all this
15 text attributed to X but we don't know whether you heard anything in
16 between those sentences. So am I to understand, from looking at this
17 intercept, that you heard all of this from X and you could not hear
18 anything from speaker Y? Is that correct?
19 A. The lower part concerns X; those are X's words. And as far as Y
20 is concerned, I didn't hear him anymore.
21 Q. But we can't tell if there was a pause or not between those
22 sentences of X. Is that correct?
23 A. Well, there probably was a pause. When we took this down from the
24 tape, we made notes in this way. We didn't use those dots.
25 Q. So today, if I tried to know how long this -- this part, this
1 conversation attributed to X at the end, where he is the only one that you
2 can hear, it is not possible for me to tell how long this segment lasted.
3 Is that correct?
4 A. I don't know how long it lasted.
5 Q. Thank you. That's my point. I would like to move to tab 5, and
6 that is -- sorry, tab 7. And to go to 1179E -- I for India on the
7 e-court, please. This is a new intercept that we received yesterday, so
8 that is not the one we want. 1179I for India, and it should be the one
9 handwritten from the notebook. Thank you.
10 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. Bourgon, I mean, when we deduct the time you
11 needed to verify, interruptions and whatever, you have now been
12 cross-examining the witness for 27 minutes.
14 MR. HAYNES: Can I just say I have spoken to Mr. Josse. Neither
15 defendants 6 or 7 are going to cross-examine this witness. I know you
16 like advance notice, but it's no prejudice to them if Mr. Bourgon
17 oversteps his time, and he is perfectly welcome to the time we would have
19 JUDGE AGIUS: Again, there are others. Mr. Meek, I suppose, needs
20 some time.
21 Mr. Lazarevic.
22 MR. LAZAREVIC: Yes, Your Honour. We decided not to
24 JUDGE AGIUS: And Madam Fauveau.
25 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] I won't be needing more than 10
1 minutes, Mr. President.
2 JUDGE AGIUS: And you, Mr. Meek.
3 MR. MEEK: Your Honour, we put down 30 minutes and I believe that
4 will be appropriate.
5 JUDGE AGIUS: That is not the question. There is the 20-minute
6 limit that we imposed for intercept witnesses.
7 MR. MEEK: We understand, Your Honour. I will abide by the
8 Court's order.
9 JUDGE AGIUS: How much more time do you need?
10 MR. BOURGON: Two questions, Mr. President.
11 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. So let's do it. You will have your 10
12 minutes or whatever time you require. Mr. Bourgon will be allowed to
13 finish, and Mr. Meek will have the time he requires. And that should
14 cover everyone. Correct. Okay. Let's proceed.
15 MR. BOURGON: Thank you, Mr. President.
16 Q. Witness, I would just like you to draw your attention to this
17 particular intercept which is on your screen, and I would simply like to
18 confirm the same thing as we did for the last intercept, that everything
19 we see with the letter B is attributed to the person identified as B, and
20 we have no idea what the other person is saying on this intercept,
21 because, as you say at the top, Krstic was inaudible. Is that correct?
22 A. Correct.
23 Q. And my last question, Witness, goes to -- towards the end of this
24 intercept, there is a word that is used and this word is "parcels." Now,
25 in your statement you mention something about the word "parcels," and you
1 said that this was a very common word in -- that you heard many times in
2 many conversations, and that this could refer to weapons, to ammunition,
3 or to many other things. Is that correct?
4 A. That's correct. This was my assumption as to what there might
5 have been in the parcels.
6 Q. Thank you, Witness. I have no further questions.
7 MR. BOURGON: Thank you, Mr. President.
8 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you.
9 Madam Fauveau.
10 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Could we show the witness P1172B --
11 THE FRENCH INTERPRETER: 1177B, interpreter's correction.
12 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] P1177.
13 Cross-examination by Ms. Fauveau:
14 Q. [Interpretation] With regard to this conversation that was
15 recorded at 9.52 -- do you remember this conversation, or rather, the note
16 you made of this conversation? Do you remember it today?
17 A. How do you expect me to remember after all these years?
18 Q. Obviously you have no idea of the date on which you made this
20 A. Right now I don't know that.
21 Q. Could we now show the witness P1177C.
22 When you were working in the army, did you have the opportunity of
23 seeing reports of this kind?
24 A. These are the reports that were sent to the command.
25 Q. Have you -- or did you have the opportunity of seeing them?
1 A. Well, as I said earlier, occasionally I would help my colleague
2 type the report, and he would do everything else that was needed, meaning
3 the encryption.
4 Q. When you typed out your reports, when you transcribed the
5 conversations, did you make a note of the date and of the number?
6 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Nicholls.
7 MR. NICHOLLS: It may be me being slow, but I'm just not sure what
8 number is being referred to, for clarity in the transcript.
9 JUDGE AGIUS: I don't know if this is a question of interpretation
10 or not, but perhaps you can repeat your question, taking into
11 consideration Mr. Nicholls's remark, Madam Fauveau.
12 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] The question concerns the date of
13 the report and the number of the report, the number that is to the left,
14 in the left-hand corner, in the upper left-hand corner.
15 JUDGE AGIUS: And one further thing. Did you make a note of the
16 date and the number? Where? You are obviously asking him whether he made
17 a note of that. Where would he make a note of that?
18 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] I will be more precise. What I'm
19 interested in is to know whether the witness himself typed out the date
20 and this number, or is it the person who was responsible for encryption
21 who did this.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you for that clarification. It's now more
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This was done by the person who did
25 encryption. That person put in all this data.
1 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation]
2 Q. So would it be correct to say that a report of this kind is a
3 report that you have never seen before, not in this form, you've never
4 seen a report of this kind before?
5 A. I did see the reports, as I told you earlier. Occasionally I
6 would help my colleague by typing, but only the text portion.
7 Q. When you typed out the text, the upper part of the report was
8 already in the computer? I'm referring to the date, the number, the
10 A. No. They would insert it. It was not already in the computer.
11 They would insert it. And I was only responsible for typing the text, and
12 then they would insert the rest. But I did it only maybe once or twice, I
13 mean, typed the text, without doing anything to the heading.
14 Q. As far as this particular report is concerned, that relates to the
15 conversation, you said that you couldn't remember the date of the
16 conversation exactly. Is it correct to say that you never saw it before
17 you went to speak to OTP investigators? You had never seen this
18 particular report before speaking to the OTP investigators.
19 A. I hadn't.
20 Q. And you didn't know who had typed it out on the computer?
21 A. Well, I know that. I told you, my colleague. There was a man who
22 was responsible for encryption, and he would retype this and insert the
23 date, the date that's in the heading, and that was always the same date
24 that was in the notebooks.
25 Q. Sir, I understand that as a rule [indiscernible] work, that in the
1 case of this report, you have no means of confirming that this report had
2 been, in fact, typed in the northern sector where you were located -- in
3 the northern location.
4 A. This report was typed in the northern location.
5 Q. How is that you can confirm this? On what basis do you make such
6 a claim?
7 A. In the heading it is stated.
8 Q. And how did you know that someone hadn't taken this document later
9 on and typed out a report of this kind after the war?
10 A. No. Nobody knew what these reports would be used for. Nobody
11 knew that they would reach this place here. It wasn't like we were
12 playing with this.
13 Q. Sir, I'm not referring to you or to any of your colleagues. I'm
14 just asking you how you can exclude the possibility of this report having
15 been written after the war, regardless of how this was done or by whom.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Nicholls.
17 MR. NICHOLLS: I think he's --
18 JUDGE AGIUS: One moment.
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Why, for what reason?
20 JUDGE AGIUS: Stop. Your microphone.
21 Yes, Mr. Nicholls.
22 MR. NICHOLLS: I think he has explained everything he can about
23 the typewritten report. He has explained his contact with it and how he
24 drew his conclusions.
25 [Trial Chamber confers]
1 JUDGE AGIUS: I think -- let's approach this in the way it should
2 be approached legally. Your question should be, to the witness, whether
3 he has any knowledge at all that this report or others like it were typed
4 out after the war and not during the time in which they are purported to
5 have been typed out on the face of each document. And then the rest, if
6 you want to bring evidence, of course you are free to bring evidence.
7 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] I simply want to have an answer to
8 my question as to how he can be sure that the report was drafted during
9 the war, because my colleague from the Prosecution did say that the
10 witness knew nothing about this report, but nevertheless, he asked him to
11 confirm the date on the basis of this report.
12 JUDGE AGIUS: This is why we are telling you that your question
13 should be the way we phrased it for you and not the way you did.
14 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation]
15 Q. Sir, would you allow for the possibility that this report was, in
16 fact, drafted after the war?
17 A. I doubt it.
18 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] I have no further questions,
19 Mr. President.
20 JUDGE PROST: Merci, Madam Fauveau.
21 Mr. Meek.
22 MR. MEEK: Thank you, Your Honour.
23 Cross-examination by Mr. Meek:
24 Q. Good morning, Witness. How are you?
25 A. Thank you for inquiring.
1 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
2 JUDGE AGIUS: Sorry, Mr. Meek. Go ahead.
3 MR. MEEK:
4 Q. Witness, my colleague just asked you about the document 65 ter
5 1177C, and how the date got typed in there. Do you recall that?
6 A. As I said earlier, when it comes to inserting it on the computer,
7 where the encryption was done, it was done by my colleague who was
8 responsible for that part of the job. All I did was record intercepts,
9 transcribe them, and note them in the notebook. I didn't enter or insert
10 any dates. It was done by them.
11 Q. I understand that, but I think you answered that the encryptor
12 typed that date in from the notebook, from your notebook, and your
13 handwritten transcription, correct?
14 A. He inserted or typed the conversation, and we didn't record dates
15 in the notebooks all the time, because the transcribed conversations were
16 immediately typed.
17 Q. Witness, on page 47 you answered that, line 6, "He would retype
18 this and insert the date, the date that's in the heading, and that was
19 always the same date that was in the notebooks." Do you recall your
20 answer, sir?
21 A. It's possible that I phrased it that way. Let me repeat it now.
22 We didn't record the date in the notebook every time. For example, every
23 intercept that was recorded on a certain day was encrypted afterwards.
24 Q. Well, you never recorded the dates in the notebook, did you,
1 A. There was so much content that I think that we would need a truck
2 to transport it. Now, as to exactly how many times we recorded the date,
3 I wouldn't be able to tell you that now.
4 Q. Thank you. But referring to this intercept, there was no date in
5 the notebook, correct?
6 A. I can't tell you until I have a look, because I can't remember.
7 Q. Okay. Would you like to look at the whole notebook, or the page
8 that you transcribed in your own handwriting, the alleged conversation?
9 Which one?
10 A. It doesn't matter to me.
11 MR. MEEK: May he look at the notebook real quickly?
12 JUDGE AGIUS: Madam Usher, please.
13 MR. NICHOLLS: You want 00800616? That's the page you want?
14 MR. MEEK: That's correct. And you might put that on the ELMO,
16 Q. Witness, do you see that?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. It says "CH-3", then "9:52," correct?
19 A. Yes, that's the channel number and the time of the conversation.
20 Q. Would you agree with me there is no date in your handwritten
22 A. It says at the top "channel 3, 9.52." There is no date, but the
23 fact is, that this book, the notebook was opened or commenced on the 14th.
24 Q. And I'm not going to go over the fact that you really don't know
25 what date this was because my colleague has already done that.
1 What I want to go to is your meeting with Mr. Nicholls from the
2 OTP, and you met with him on two different dates this month, did you not,
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. And you also agree with me, and I think you already have, that
6 your recollection was much better back when you testified in Krstic case,
7 for example, than it is today?
8 A. I think yes.
9 Q. And you will agree with me that a long time has gone by and the
10 longer that goes by your memory fades. You have already testified to that
11 I believe, correct?
12 A. Well, memory needs to be refreshed. It never fades really.
13 Q. Thank you for that answer, because on the 7th day of February,
14 2007, you met with Julian Nicholls and he refreshed your memory, didn't
15 he, when he told you that in the Krstic case at page 4544, lines 5 through
16 7, that you had probably made a mistake when you used the word "probably"
17 in line 5. Isn't that a fact, sir?
18 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, one moment before you answer.
19 Mr. Nicholls.
20 MR. NICHOLLS: I object to that question. There is no basis for
21 it. I didn't say that to the witness.
22 MR. MEEK: I object to him putting the answer in this witness's
23 mouth, Judge.
24 MR. NICHOLLS: I object to him with no basis and no foundation
25 whatsoever making before this Court statements which he alleges that I
1 made, words that came out of my mouth. Unless he has some foundation for
2 it, I object to words being attributed to me which I did not make.
3 JUDGE AGIUS: Just one moment.
4 Mr. Meek, I think we need to have you clarify this first. On what
5 basis are you maintaining that when the witness met with Mr. Nicholls,
6 Mr. Nicholls told the witness that in the Krstic case at page 4544, lines
7 5 through 7, the witness had probably made a mistake when he used the
8 word "probably"?
9 MR. MEEK: Your Honour, could the witness take his headphones off?
10 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Do you understand English, Witness?
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.
12 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. So could you remove your headphones for a
13 while, please?
14 What you are suggesting is that the statement that ultimately it
15 seems the witness volunteered to Mr. Nicholls, namely, that that excerpt
16 on page 4544 needed to be corrected on his part, was not his own reaction
17 to reading the transcript itself, but a prompt from Mr. Nicholls himself.
18 This is what you are suggesting. So what we would like to know from you
19 is on what are you basing this, because you can obviously ask the witness
20 if Mr. Nicholls prompted him to make the correction or whether it was an
21 impromptu one on the witness's part. But if you are suggesting that
22 Mr. Nicholls -- you are not putting the question to the witness, you are
23 making it a statement --
24 MR. MEEK: Your Honour, maybe the question actually was not
25 phrased properly.
1 JUDGE AGIUS: All right.
2 MR. MEEK: But my foundation for it is the fact that, and it will
3 come out later, this witness doesn't remember any of these conversations.
4 He said it in his statement; it will come out.
5 JUDGE AGIUS: That's a different matter.
6 MR. MEEK: That's fine. Let me rephrase the question.
7 JUDGE AGIUS: I think we will close this chapter and you will
8 rephrase your question.
9 MR. NICHOLLS: I just want to make clear, my objection is to
10 specific words attributed to me. He has made the allegation that I said
11 to the witness, you probably made a mistake, and I asked him to change it
12 and nothing has happened.
13 JUDGE AGIUS: No, you are 100 per cent correct. If that is true
14 and Mr. Meek has a foundation, then obviously he can proceed along those
15 lines. But he hasn't provided us with...
16 MR. MEEK: I will rephrase the question. I apologise.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. Okay. Incident closed. I don't want to
18 blow it up beyond what is necessary.
19 Yes. Witness, don't answer the previous question. The substance
20 of the question is going to be rephrased and then you answer the -- this
21 new question.
22 MR. MEEK:
23 Q. Witness, before I get to this question that I'm going to rephrase,
24 you gave a statement to the Office of the Prosecutor back in 1999, 7th day
25 of May. Do you recall that?
1 A. I don't know the exact date, but I think it was in 1999.
2 Q. You are correct. May of 1999. Now, in that statement, and for
3 the Court and the record, 8115 would be the ERN number.
4 You stated at the bottom that you can't remember now if you had a
5 notebook for each machine. Do you remember saying that, sir?
6 A. I don't remember.
7 Q. Okay. The next page, the English version, 8116, again for the
8 record, it's 65 ter 7D90.
9 When you were discussing or giving your statement, you stated that
10 you were not able to remember the exact conversation that took place
11 allegedly on what you claim is the 15th of July at 0954 hours. Do you
12 remember that, sir?
13 A. No.
14 MR. MEEK: Could the witness be shown on e-court 65 ter 2440,
15 that's the B/C/S statement.
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] We would need to take it off so that
17 it is not revealed to the public.
18 THE REGISTRAR: This document is not being broadcasted at all.
19 JUDGE AGIUS: I think we need to put the witness's mind at rest
20 that you must have heard me before making sure that any such document is
21 not broadcast. So put your mind at rest that no one else is seeing it
22 outside these four walls, except of course the technicians that are
24 MR. MEEK: In the B/C/S version, it's probably the last page or
25 the second to the last page. It would be the last page in B/C/S. No,
1 before. One more page before that. I'm sorry.
2 Q. You see the paragraph that starts with, "The next column of the
3 book is also mine and is headed, 9:57 CH 3"? Please scroll higher.
4 Do you see the paragraph, sir?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. And just take a moment to read it. Have you finished, sir?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Now, when you gave this statement it was read to you back in your
9 own language, correct?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. You signed saying that you understood it and that everything in
12 there was true to the best of your knowledge and recollection, did you
13 not, sir?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. You do not remember that conversation, do you? You didn't
16 remember it then in 1999 and you don't remember it today, correct?
17 A. When I looked at these documents I became able to remember the
18 conversations, some conversations. As for what it says here, that only
19 one participant in this intercept could be heard, this was in a duplex
20 mode, which means that the other participant was on another channel.
21 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Nicholls.
22 MR. NICHOLLS: I just want to make it clear for the Court, and I
23 think it's fair that the portion of the transcript which counsel is
24 directing the witness to is a different intercept than the one he began
25 this line of questions of, which was at 9.52. So he started off talking
1 about that one with the witness. He has now directed the witness here.
2 JUDGE AGIUS: To another one.
3 MR. NICHOLLS: It's not --
4 JUDGE AGIUS: Yeah, okay.
5 MR. MEEK: I'm going to clear it up.
6 JUDGE AGIUS: I'm sure you will.
7 MR. MEEK:
8 Q. The document we're talking about is the one allegedly between
9 Beara and Krstic who you could not hear, who was inaudible, correct?
10 JUDGE AGIUS: To simplify matters, that is available -- if that
11 intercept is available, let's show it to him. I mean --
12 MR. MEEK: Sure, it will be --
13 JUDGE AGIUS: I think he's seen it.
14 MR. MEEK: 65 ter 1179C, I think, or B.
15 JUDGE AGIUS: If we have a hard copy of it, it's better so that
16 the rest of the statement remains on the screen, for him to be able to
18 MR. MEEK: Your Honour, the book is in front of him on the ELMO,
19 and this conversation is allegedly two minutes after the one before.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. Can you help him, Madam Usher, please?
21 MR. MEEK: It's there right now, Judge.
22 Q. You see on the ELMO, sir? And again, "channel 3, 9.52." Do you
23 see that?
24 A. I see channel 952, 954, which means channel 3, but not channel 3
25 at 9.57.
1 Q. Do you see that, sir?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. And again, if you just go one page back in the notebook you get to
4 the alleged intercept that you say came in at 9.54, correct?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. And right above that is the 9.52 intercept, correct?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Now, I believe you've already testified in cross-examination that
9 you don't remember the 9.52 conversation, that it was -- you just
10 synopsised it, right?
11 A. I wrote this down, which means that I heard Colonel Beara talking
12 to somebody asking to speak to General Zivanovic. So I noted it down
14 Q. Okay. But if we go back, flipping one more page to the 9.57 --
15 no, the other way. The alleged conversation at 9.57, channel 3, where you
16 say Krstic is inaudible, you gave a statement and you said you do not
17 recall this conversation happening. And that was true when you told the
18 OTP that, wasn't it?
19 A. Well, I can't remember the conversation. This isn't the only
20 intercept. How could I remember all of them?
21 Q. Well, that's fair. Now I would like you to look at --
22 JUDGE AGIUS: One moment. Mr. Nicholls.
23 MR. NICHOLLS: I'll withdraw it. I will just leave it.
24 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. Thank you.
25 MR. MEEK: Maybe we can do this on e-court. It would be 65 ter
1 1187 in English, probably 1187A in the handwritten B/C/S version. Could
2 they be put on the screen for him?
3 Q. Now, do you see those on the screen, Witness?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. And on the right-hand side is handwritten, and 1263 as the last
6 ERN numbers. Do you see that, sir?
7 A. I didn't understand this.
8 Q. Do you see on the right, is that your handwriting on the right,
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Okay. Now, when you gave a statement to the OTP back in 1999, you
12 did not recall that conversation at the time, did you?
13 A. I didn't then. As I already told you, I can't remember until I
14 see the document.
15 Q. Are you telling me and this Court that they didn't show you these
16 documents when they -- when you made your statement in 1999?
17 A. Sir, it seems that you are asking me to quote from each of my
18 intercepts. When I see the original material in front of me, then yes, I
19 can recognise my handwriting, the way I wrote down paragraphs, and all the
21 Q. Maybe it's a matter of interpretation. My question is simple.
22 They showed you this notebook and they showed you this entry when you gave
23 your statement, and you said, "I do not now recall this conversation, but
24 again, I am sure I recorded it correctly from the tape of the
1 That was in 1999 when the Office of the Prosecutor showed you that
2 notebook, right?
3 A. If that's what it says there, then it's correct.
4 Q. Well, I'll just ask that the Prosecutor stipulate that's exactly
5 what he said in his statement in 1999 about this intercept.
6 MR. NICHOLLS: We can do that. This is in evidence. I mean, the
7 Court and everybody else is going to be able to read it. It's been
8 submitted. It will be submitted.
9 MR. MEEK: The statement is going to be submitted?
10 MR. NICHOLLS: Yes, this is a 92 ter witness.
11 MR. MEEK: All right.
12 Q. So my question to you is, if in 1999 you couldn't remember these
13 conversations actually taking place, but when you looked at your
14 handwritten notes you said, yes, those are my notes, so therefore what I
15 wrote down must have been said, that's what I heard; isn't that your
16 testimony, sir?
17 A. Everything that is noted down here in the original, everything
18 that is written by me, is a true reflection of what happened.
19 Q. Okay. Then, sir, you came as a witness in the Krstic case, and
20 when you were asked about the conversation that -- which we were talking
21 about earlier between allegedly Beara and Zivanovic, you stated, "The
22 participant was probably Colonel Beara who was looking for Zivanovic
23 because that's what the text itself says."
24 Now, you remember that testimony?
25 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. Nicholls.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I need to see the text.
2 JUDGE AGIUS: One moment. Mr. Nicholls.
3 MR. NICHOLLS: Either show him the text, I would say, or show --
4 the complete answer would be better.
5 JUDGE AGIUS: Yeah, but the witness has already shown -- indicated
6 that he wishes to see the text, so let's show him the text first, and then
7 if necessary --
8 MR. MEEK: He doesn't speak English, and I don't have a B/C/S copy
9 of his testimony.
10 MR. NICHOLLS: You can just read exactly the entire answer, not
11 just the first part.
12 MR. MEEK:
13 Q. The question that was put to you in Krstic, sir, was:
14 "Q. This is a very short conversation and my question for you is
15 the following: Can you tell me who the participant was in this
17 Your answer:
18 "A. The participant was probably Colonel Beara who was looking
19 for Zivanovic because that's what the text itself says. So the
20 participant is Colonel Beara."
21 Do you recall that testimony, sir?
22 A. I would have to have a look at that document.
23 Q. Well, you met with Julian Nicholls, the Prosecutor, on the 7th of
24 February, and apparently you told him that you really were mistaken in
25 using the word "probably" and that you are certain that the participant
1 was Colonel Beara, didn't you, sir?
2 A. I am requesting that you show me the document, and then I will
3 give you a concrete answer.
4 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, let's put it on the ELMO, but it's not going to
5 be of much help, because this is -- this is in English. What you are
6 going to see.
7 MR. MEEK: [Microphone not activated]
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I need the original.
9 MR. MEEK: It's not a clean copy, and if you want --
10 JUDGE AGIUS: No, but I think it is in the e-court in any case.
11 But the thing is I don't know what you mean by saying that you want the
12 original, because this is a copy of the transcript of the -- your
13 testimony in Krstic, and it's in English. I mean -- unless there is --
14 there is a copy in your own language, which can be made available and no
15 condition that it is a faithful translation of the original.
16 MR. NICHOLLS: We don't have it, as you say, Your Honour, in
17 B/C/S. That's -- I'm not sure the witness realises that, that there isn't
18 a copy in his language. This is the only copy we have. The audio is also
19 disclosed, but has not been played to the witness. He -- it was gone
20 through with the interpreter.
21 MR. MEEK: May I put the question to this witness?
22 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. I mean, he can see the document now, for
23 whatever it's worth to him, at least.
24 MR. MEEK: Is it on the e-court system?
25 JUDGE AGIUS: No, it's --
1 MR. MEEK: Page 4544.
2 JUDGE AGIUS: -- not yet on the e-court system, no. And it's not
3 on the ELMO either.
4 MR. MEEK:
5 Q. Witness, you wanted to see this, now you have it in front of you.
6 And start at line 3. 1, 2, 3, the third line down. And it says "Q."; do
7 you see that? And that means a question by the Prosecutor. "This is a
8 very short conversation, and my question for you is the following."
9 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Nicholls.
10 MR. NICHOLLS: Just to be correct, fair to the witness, this is
11 not a question by the Prosecutor. This is cross-examination he is reading
13 MR. MEEK: Pardon me.
14 Q. I apologise. This was a question put to you -- and I'm going to
15 start reading it again. Do you see where line 3 is, Witness? Can you
16 read any English at all, sir?
17 A. No.
18 Q. Okay. What about numerals, 1, 2, 3?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Okay. You see where it says line 3, there? You see that, sir?
21 Do you see that, sir?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Now, let me read it in English, and it will be translated in
24 B/C/S, okay? Question put to you in cross-examination in Krstic:
25 "Q. This is a very short conversation, and my question for you is
1 the following: Can you tell me who the participant was in this
3 Line 5, your answer, under oath:
4 "A. The participant was probably Colonel Beara who was looking
5 for Zivanovic, because that's what the text itself says. So the
6 participant is Colonel Beara."
7 Now, do you remember that, sir, when you testified under oath in
9 A. I remember that. I remember that I testified, in fact, but I
10 can't remember this testimony.
11 Q. Okay. Well, you told the truth in Krstic, didn't you? You told
12 the truth in Krstic, didn't you, sir?
13 A. I always tell the truth.
14 Q. Okay.
15 A. I always tell the truth and nothing but truth.
16 Q. Then, sir, tell me how it is, 11 years after this alleged
17 intercept was taken by you, that you suddenly remember that seven years
18 ago when you testified in Krstic that it was a mistake to use the
19 word "probably" in line 5? How did you come about that, sir?
20 A. I remember General Krstic's trial, but I can't remember my
21 testimony with precision, but everything that I said is the truth.
22 Q. Okay. So if it was the truth that it was probably Colonel Beara,
23 is it also the truth when you told Julian Nicholls from the OTP on
24 February 7th of this year that you made a mistake when you used the
25 word "probably" in the Krstic trial? That's my question.
1 A. I can't remember. I'm a bit under pressure.
2 Q. Well, sir, we're all a bit under pressure. I assume, on February
3 7th, when you were sitting in the office somewhere with Julian Nicholls
4 having a cup of coffee, you didn't feel real pressure, did you?
5 A. I have been under pressure since I came over here.
6 JUDGE AGIUS: Let --
7 MR. MEEK: One question. I'm done with this.
8 Q. Who came up with the idea that when you used "probably" in the
9 Krstic trial, that you were mistaken? Who came up with that idea on
10 February 7th of this year in The Hague?
11 A. Perhaps if I read through this testimony I noticed that a mistake
12 had been made.
13 Q. Did you read through the testimony, Witness?
14 A. Yes, I read through it.
15 Q. You read through it or it was read to you?
16 A. I read it myself.
17 Q. Okay. And what language did you read it in, sir?
18 A. In my mother tongue.
19 Q. My question to the OTP is simply, do they have a copy of this
20 testimony in B/C/S? They represented they don't a while ago on the
21 record, and I want to know if they do.
22 MR. NICHOLLS: No.
23 MR. MEEK: Okay. Thank you very much.
24 Q. Now, sir, when did you first hear Mr. Beara's voice? If you
1 A. I can't remember. It was a long time ago.
2 Q. And can you tell me what characteristics in his voice that he had
3 that made you recall it and know it?
4 A. I can't remember at this point in time, but from 1992 until 1996,
5 all the participants in the network were participants I could recognise on
6 the basis of their voices. It wasn't even necessary for them to introduce
8 Q. Is it your testimony that you knew each and every participant by
9 their voice without having to be introduced or having been introduced? Is
10 that your testimony, sir?
11 A. It wasn't necessary for them to introduce themselves. I could
12 recognise whether it was Beara, Krstic, Zivanovic, et cetera. But we made
13 notes of matters in the notebook as you can see. For example, Colonel
14 Beara and General Krstic has been noted down here, and then it says that
15 you can't hear Krstic. So I just made a note of what Colonel Beara said.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: I don't think you have answered the question. It
17 was put to you that you must have heard, over this time, a lot of persons
18 speaking or talking, and the question is, are you affirming here that you
19 recognised the voice of each and every one of these many persons that you
20 heard talking or whose conversations you intercepted or only of some?
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: You need to explain. I think Mr. Meek is owed a
23 clear answer to that.
24 MR. MEEK:
25 Q. Witness, explain this, because you just answered to my question a
1 while ago under oath and you said you knew everybody. What is it?
2 JUDGE AGIUS: The reason why I put the question is precisely
3 because I disagree with you, Mr. Meek, or I didn't --
4 MR. NICHOLLS: This is the first time I have done it in this
5 Tribunal. I object to his manner with the witness. The witness has said
6 that he is feeling a bit of pressure. I think the witness is trying his
7 best. There is no need to raise his voice and make those gestures, and
8 really, insult the witness in that manner.
9 MR. MEEK: Let the record reflect he is pointing at me, Judge.
10 MR. NICHOLLS: That's correct. The record is correct. There may
11 be some more pointing.
12 JUDGE AGIUS: I think when it's time, and hopefully it will never
13 get to that stage, when the witness needs to be protected we will
14 intervene. Don't worry about it.
15 Witness, did I make myself clear? You answered "da" but I
16 think "da" needs some further explanation. Let me make it even simpler.
17 If over this period of time you heard or you intercepted the conversations
18 say of 100 persons, are you stating here today that you could recognise
19 the voices of each and everyone of those hundreds persons or of only some
20 of them.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, I could recognise most of
22 their voices, starting with Beara, Krstic, Zivanovic, Borovcanin. I can't
23 remember all of them now. I can't list all of them, but I knew most of
24 them on the basis of their voices. I could recognise most of their
1 MR. MEEK:
2 Q. Thank you for that answer, Witness, but I will point to the Court,
3 page 65, line 12 through 15, Witness, you just answered -- you said, "from
4 1992 until 1996, all the participants in the network were participants. I
5 could recognise on the basis of their voices. It wasn't even necessary
6 for them to introduce themselves." Are you taking that back now, sir?
7 A. That's what I said, that I could recognise their voices. Well,
8 then that is the case. And I could recognise the participants. As soon
9 as a signal was captured, it means the network was activated. As soon as
10 a participant was heard, I was able to recognise the participant.
11 Q. Just to be clear, did it take you any time to recognise the voices
12 or the very first day you were there you got an intercept and you knew it
13 was Zivanovic without him introducing himself or anybody saying his name.
14 Is that what you're telling me?
15 A. When I started doing that work I couldn't immediately recognise
16 the voices. The participants had to introduce themselves. It's only
17 after some time had passed, let's say about a year, it's only then that I
18 was able to recognise the voices of the participants.
19 Q. So to make this even clearer, you started doing this at this
20 location in 1992; is that correct?
21 A. I apologise. At the northern location. We were at another
22 location before, and I think that we moved to the northern location in
24 Q. Can you tell me, sir, approximately how often did you hear
25 Mr. Beara's voice?
1 A. Well, it was quite frequently. I can't remember how often
2 exactly, but quite frequently.
3 Q. Okay. So the Prosecutor has given us, if I am counting correctly,
4 four separate intercepts by you where you allegedly heard Mr. Beara, for
5 your testimony today. Am I correct?
6 A. I don't know how many he provided you with.
7 Q. Well, you sat with -- two days with the OTP and you went through
8 these intercepts, didn't you, sir?
9 A. Yes, I went through them, but I can't remember anything anymore.
10 I went through all the conversations. I even said that one of the
11 transcriptions wasn't mine.
12 Q. And if I tell you that there were only four intercepts where
13 allegedly you heard Mr. Beara, would you disagree with that?
14 A. I don't think I would agree with that. I think that there were
15 more such conversations, more such intercepts.
16 Q. And I would ask you why the Prosecutor didn't put all those more
17 in there, but you don't know that.
18 Could you show the witness, please, 65 ter 1187B, I believe. And
19 A is the English.
20 Witness, you see these now, these pages? On the right, ERN number
21 1263 on the top says "channel 3, 11.11".
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Is that your handwriting?
24 JUDGE AGIUS: This is not being broadcast now.
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
1 MR. MEEK:
2 Q. Who is the participant Cerovic?
3 A. Are you putting that question to me?
4 Q. Well, yes, you are the one answering questions, sir.
5 A. Colonel Beara and Cerovic are the participants here. I can't
6 remember exactly who Cerovic was. I can't remember what position he
8 Q. And who is X in this conversation, Witness?
9 A. A person who probably hadn't introduced himself or herself.
10 Q. And you see that about five lines down there is a word, "Triage
11 has to be done on the prisoners." Do you see that, sir?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. In fact, that word is used three times in this alleged intercept,
14 is it not, sir?
15 A. Four times. The word "triage" is used four times.
16 Q. Thank you, sir. Did you often hear that word used when you were
17 intercepting conversations and listening to them?
18 A. I can't remember whether it appeared in any other intercepts.
19 MR. MEEK: Could the witness be shown the actual notebook that
20 this handwritten -- his handwriting is in? It may be -- it may be next to
21 him, I'm not sure.
22 Q. While we're looking for that, Witness, you've already told us that
23 the use of the term "parcels" was a code word. So I'm asking you now,
24 what was the word "triage," what did it mean?
25 A. I don't know what the word means. What was heard was what was
2 Q. Now, what date was that, sir? What date -- you're looking at the
3 original notebook. There is no date on that page, is there, Witness?
4 A. The 14th of July. It would be possible to figure out the date
5 because on the 14th of July, well, that's the date when the notebook was
6 first used.
7 Q. Just so I'm clear on this, this was the 14th day of July, that you
8 took this alleged intercept?
9 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. Nicholls.
10 MR. NICHOLLS: I -- I won't object. I don't think that's at all
11 what was said, but...
12 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay.
13 MR. MEEK:
14 Q. Witness, let me just ask you this: Just a moment ago you
15 answered, you said, when I asked you the date, because it wasn't on the
16 page, you said:
17 "A. The 14th of July --"
18 For the record, it is line 11, page 70. You went on to say, "It
19 would be possible to figure out the date because of the 14th of July.
20 Well, that's the day this notebook was first used."
21 So I want to clear it up. This intercept was taken by you on the
22 14th of July, correct?
23 A. I don't know the exact date. All I can say is that the notebook
24 started being used on the 14th of July. As for the date of this
25 intercepted conversation, well, I couldn't say exactly, but I think that
1 one could figure out the date. I assume that this would be possible. I
2 think it would be the 15th or the 16th.
3 Q. Thank you. Finally, I want to make this clear. I want to
4 understand that when you would finish a notebook, you would turn it into
5 the platoon commander, correct? Or it was placed in a cabinet by the
6 platoon commander and later, depending on the urgency, the tapes and books
7 were taken to the 2nd Corps headquarters for their review. Is that
9 A. Yes, we handed the notebooks over to him. He would keep them in
10 his office, the notebooks and the tapes, and later they were probably
11 taken up to the corps command, or rather, it's not that they were probably
12 taken up there, they were certainly taken to the corps command archives.
13 Q. And you never saw them again after you gave them to the platoon
14 commander, correct?
15 A. No, not until I came here.
16 Q. And you do not know who had access to that cabinet that the
17 platoon commander put those notebooks in, do you, sir?
18 A. It was his office, and only he had access. He alone was there; we
19 never went there.
20 Q. Thank you, Witness. I have no further questions.
21 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you. We'll -- yes, Mr. Nicholls.
22 MR. NICHOLLS: If I could, just for the record, at page 71 at
23 lines 8 and 9, the witness was saying, "I think it would be possible to
24 figure out the date," and then the last line of the answer is, "I think it
25 would be the 15th or the 16th." I just wanted the record to reflect that
1 before he gave that last answer, he was looking at the notebook and
2 flipping through pages. Otherwise it won't be clear.
3 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you for pointing that out. We could see that
4 and we confirm it. Thank you.
5 We will have a break now. And for -- of 25 minutes. Maybe we
6 can -- we can handle that stage now. Do you have a re-examination?
7 MR. NICHOLLS: No, Your Honour.
8 MR. LAZAREVIC: Your Honour, during the testimony of this witness,
9 the name of my client was raised and I kindly ask for the opportunity to
10 cross-examine just very briefly, couple of minutes after the break.
11 JUDGE AGIUS: Certainly, after the break. All right.
12 [Trial Chamber confers]
13 JUDGE AGIUS: We just wanted to inform you that I need to be away
14 this last session, or a major part of it. So we will be sitting pursuant
15 to Rule 15 bis. I have to attend to a personal problem. And Judge Kwon
16 will be presiding. Thank you.
17 --- Recess taken at 12.31 p.m.
18 --- On resuming at 1.00 p.m.
19 JUDGE KWON: Good afternoon. As was informed, we will be sitting
20 pursuant to 15 bis.
21 Mr. Lazarevic.
22 MR. LAZAREVIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
23 Cross-examination by Mr. Lazarevic:
24 Q. [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Witness.
25 A. Good afternoon.
1 Q. Before we went to the break, when speaking of the persons whose
2 voices you recognised, on page 67 of today's transcript, you listed
3 certain participants, including Borovcanin. Let me ask you this first:
4 Was this a slip of tongue, or do you maintain that you recognised the
5 voice of General Borovcanin?
6 A. I recognised voices. I enumerated names. Roughly, I can't
7 remember all of the names of the participants, but I did recognise all of
8 the voices.
9 Q. So when you said Borovcanin, among other participants, did you
10 refer to General Ljubomir Borovcanin?
11 A. I'm not quite sure. I can't remember now.
12 Q. I have just a couple of more questions to clarify, that if you
13 recognised somebody's voice that was a result of having heard that voice
14 many times before, so that you became familiar with the intonation and
15 certain features of the voice, correct?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Now, I'm speaking in hypothetical terms. If you heard General
18 Borovcanin many times, I suppose that you would have noted down some of
19 his conversations.
20 A. We wrote down all of the conversations. Right now I just can't
21 remember. Perhaps I mentioned Borovcanin's name accidentally.
22 Q. Thank you very much. I have no further questions.
23 JUDGE KWON: Thank you, Mr. Lazarevic.
24 Mr. Nicholls, do you have any re-examination?
25 MR. NICHOLLS: I do not, Your Honours.
1 JUDGE KWON: I have a brief question to the witness. I'm not sure
2 whether this is an appropriate question to put to you, Witness, but I
3 wonder if you know by any chance the method, how the typed versions or
4 encrypted versions of intercepts were sent to Tuzla, or command.
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think that these encrypted
6 conversations were sent by computer. Some kind of computer.
7 JUDGE KWON: What do you mean by "computer"? Did you have
8 Internet access, and then you sent them by e-mail, or it -- how?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know. To tell you the
10 truth, I don't know. All I know is that all information was sent
11 immediately to the corps command.
12 JUDGE KWON: Thank you. That concludes your evidence, and I would
13 like to thank you for coming to the Tribunal to give it. You may now
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
16 JUDGE KWON: So shall we deal with exhibits? I understand
17 these -- this has been distributed to the Defence. I wonder whether there
18 is any objection in relation to that.
19 [The witness withdrew]
20 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Meek.
21 MR. MEEK: Yes, Your Honour. Prosecution wants to tender in
22 tab -- excuse me, Judge. I think it's tab 16. Frankly, the witness
23 didn't even mention it, and Mr. Nicholls -- yeah, tab 16, 65 ter 1310.
24 Some alleged intercept at 0805 hours. It's got a 2475 ERN number on it.
25 Never mentioned, number one. Number two, the Prosecutor said we're going
1 to deal with eight intercepts, tab 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and 13.
2 JUDGE KWON: Did they not confirm with the witness that 17
3 intercepts were those transcribed by the witness?
4 MR. MEEK: What is the basis to bring it in?
5 JUDGE KWON: Was it not our practice? I was specifically reminded
6 by Judge Prost that Mr. Nicholls referred from tab 1 to tab 17.
7 MR. NICHOLLS: If I could say something to be clear for the
9 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
10 MR. NICHOLLS: I confirmed that those were his intercepts in his
11 handwriting. What I said was I was going to ask questions about tabs 5
12 through 8, not about eight intercepts.
13 MR. MEEK: Well, Your Honours, as long as the record reflects that
14 the intercepts that this witness actually testified about are the only
15 intercepts that he alleged heard my client's voice, or who he thought was
16 my client's voice.
17 [Trial Chamber confers]
18 JUDGE KWON: The Chamber does not think the Prosecution has to go
19 through each and every intercept they are going to produce. They are
20 entitled to deal with these certain intercepts, they like to emphasise
21 or -- so the objection is not sustained.
22 Any other objections? So those will be admitted pursuant to the
23 prior practice, so intercepts will be marked for identification and
24 those -- those in bold letters will be put under seal.
25 In relation to the question I put to the question [sic], have we
1 heard that kind of evidence so far, as to the actual method, how those
2 were sent to the command? Mr. McCloskey?
3 MR. McCLOSKEY: I believe we -- we have -- we could go into
4 private session, I can...
5 JUDGE KWON: Yes, we will do that. Just a second.
6 [Private session]
2 [Open session]
3 [The witness entered court]
4 JUDGE KWON: Good afternoon, sir. Would you kindly take the
5 solemn declaration?
6 THE WITNESS: [No interpretation]
7 JUDGE KWON: I haven't heard any --
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will speak
9 the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
10 WITNESS: WITNESS PW-145
11 [Witness answered through interpreter]
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will speak
13 the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
14 JUDGE KWON: Thank you. Please be seated. Sir, you -- you have a
15 protective measures of voice distortion and face distortion, so that you
16 will not be recognised outside the courtroom, and also you will be
17 referred to as Prosecution Witness 157. Do you understand that?
18 Yes, Mr. Thayer.
19 MR. THAYER: Mr. President, he has another protected witness
20 pseudonym, PW-145.
21 JUDGE KWON: Thank you very much. I just saw the number of the
22 previous one. So you will be referred to as Prosecution Witness 145.
23 Mr. Thayer.
24 MR. THAYER: Thank you, Your Honour.
25 Examination by Mr. Thayer:
1 Q. Good afternoon, Witness. Madam Usher is handing --
2 A. Good afternoon.
3 Q. -- read it to yourself please and confirm that your name appears
4 on that page along with the pseudonym PW-145. For the record, the
5 pseudonym sheet is P02431.
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Sir, we met earlier in the week and a witness statement was taken
8 from you at that time; is that correct?
9 A. Yes, correct. Yes, correct.
10 Q. And was that statement read back to you in your own language?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Did you sign it, sir?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. And can you attest, before this Trial Chamber, that the contents
15 of that witness statement are true and accurate?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Sir, can you further attest that the answers would be the same if
18 you were asked those same questions here in court today?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Sir, what I'm going to do now is read a very brief summary of your
21 witness statement, which was taken on the 6th and 7th of this month. And
22 I will keep it generic enough, so I believe we will be able to stay in
23 open session for the entire summary.
24 The witness is a Bosniak Muslim. He completed electro-technical
25 high school in 1981. He performed his mandatory JNA service in 1982 to
1 1983. And the witness became a ham radio enthusiast in 1978, competing in
2 amateur radio competitions between that year and 1985. The witness also
3 holds a B category ham radio certification.
4 In April 1992 the witness began serving in a signals and
5 communications unit of the State Security Services of a CSB located in
6 Bosnia and Herzegovina. While in the same unit, he began working regular
7 shifts at the northern location in approximately the end of January 1995.
8 The witness described their shift structure, the equipment they
9 used, and the procedures they followed to intercept and transcribe
11 The witness reviewed 23 typewritten intercepts and confirmed that
12 he was either the recorder/transcriber or the typist/cryptographer for
13 each of them. The witness's code-name appears at the bottom of each
14 intercept, along with the name of his colleague.
15 And for the record, the OTP witness statement is P02430.
16 Now, sir, in preparing for your testimony today, did you review a
17 packet containing material pertaining to -- or containing material
18 pertaining to 23 intercepts?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. And specifically, sir, did that packet contain typewritten
21 printouts of 23 intercepts?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. And, sir, were you able to confirm whether or not those 23
24 intercepts were conversations which you either recorded and transcribed or
25 typed and encrypted?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. And finally, sir, are the 23 intercepts contained in the packet
3 which you reviewed the same intercepts that were just referred to in your
4 OTP witness statement?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Thank you, sir. I have no further questions at this time.
7 JUDGE KWON: Thank you, Mr. Thayer.
8 Who will go first? Mr. Krgovic.
9 Cross-examination by Mr. Krgovic:
10 Q. [Interpretation] Good afternoon, sir.
11 A. Good afternoon.
12 Q. Since the two of us speak the same language, in order to protect
13 your identity, would you please not start speaking until I turn off my
14 microphone. You will see when the red light is off, then you should start
15 speaking in order to protect your voice.
16 A. All right.
17 Q. Sir, in the statement you gave to the Prosecutor you mentioned a
18 piece of information, namely, that in the report which you sent to the
19 superior command, you would normally put in information that you received
20 from the BiH army. Do you remember stating that?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. When putting in that data, did you listen to the conversation that
23 you received from the BiH army?
24 A. No.
25 Q. Did you use the same equipment or you had separate equipment
1 through which you listened and transcribed intercepts?
2 A. You mean the same equipment as the army?
3 Q. Yes.
4 A. Roughly it was the same equipment. It was not a professional
5 equipment, but rather amateur equipment.
6 Q. When recording and transcribing these conversations and when
7 producing your reports, in the heading you would always insert -- insert
8 certain data and this preceded the text of the conversation?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. And in that heading, you would normally include the frequency of
11 the conversation?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. And participants in the conversations?
14 A. Yes, if they were known at the time.
15 Q. And if you couldn't hear some participant, you would duly note
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. And if you did not record the conversation from the very
19 beginning, you would note that down as well?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Could we now show to the witness Exhibit 6D41.
22 Sir, I don't know whether this is your intercept, but this is an
23 example of a heading, and I would like to see whether this is how you
24 typically produced headings. You will see it on the screen, and then you
25 can confirm it.
1 See here, the paragraph that begins with the words, "On the 9th of
2 July." Were you able to read this?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. This is a typical example of how you worked, right?
5 A. Just a minute, please. Roughly. There are some differences in
6 the form, but roughly, yes.
7 Q. Could we now show the witness 65 ter document 1096?
8 THE REGISTRAR: [Microphone not activated] Could the counsel please
9 specify if it is A or B, please.
10 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Unfortunately, in the document that
11 we received, it is not marked as B. The only mark it has is ERN 03201098,
13 THE REGISTRAR: [Previous translation continues]...
14 JUDGE KWON: That's part of tab 2, isn't it?
15 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, tab 2. Not this one, but the
16 following one. 03201098 is the number.
17 THE REGISTRAR: The one on the screen is 98.
18 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] 1099.
19 Q. Sir, do you remember transcribing this conversation?
20 A. Yes, I do.
21 JUDGE KWON: Should we not show the previous page, the bottom
22 part, "Broj 535"?
23 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] That's precisely the right one.
24 Thank you, Your Honour.
25 Q. Sir, you transcribed this conversation too, or recorded this
1 conversation. Do you remember?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Here in the heading it is stated that you didn't hear the other
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. If you look carefully at this conversation, you will see that the
7 name of Karadzic is not mentioned there at all.
8 A. Can I see the rest of it?
9 Q. Yes. Could the witness be shown the entire conversation, please?
10 Please look at it. It's in front of you. In the first
11 conversation and in the second conversation, if you look carefully, you
12 will see that Karadzic is not mentioned anywhere. Do you agree with me?
13 A. Yes, I fully agree with you. But you can see that he is
14 addressing the other person with "The President."
15 Q. So based on that, based on the fact that the word "President" is
16 mentioned in the conversation, you concluded that the other participant
17 was Karadzic and that's why you put in his name. Did I understand you
19 A. Well, the title of "President" is mentioned. Typically, this way
20 of addressing the person holding that office, and you know how normally
21 with what respect somebody addresses their president, we concluded that
22 this other person was Karadzic.
23 Q. Could it have been some other president?
24 A. I don't think that it could have been the case.
25 Q. Why do you say that?
1 A. Well, because, given the events at the time when these things were
2 happening, well, you will see from subsequent conversations, if you had a
3 look at all of them, that at one point in time we emphasised the fact that
4 Mr. Gvero was in the Main Staff on his own. In fact, I don't mean that he
5 was actually on his own, but he was the only superior member of the Main
6 Staff present. And everything he said at the time was conveyed to his
7 immediate superior. We knew that all the new information was directly
8 conveyed to the president, that is to say, to Karadzic.
9 Q. But that's your assumption. It's not contained in these
10 conversations; is that correct?
11 A. Well, my assumption, given all the time that has passed, it's a
12 little difficult to say because there are quite a few of other
13 conversations that haven't been seen here, conversations in which it was
14 quite clear as to who was addressing whom. So it's difficult to say, but
15 believe me, even now I'm certain that Karadzic was concerned.
16 Q. But in the conversation that you intercepted, the information that
17 you were referring to was not present. This is just your conclusion, your
18 assumption, a conclusion you have reached on the basis of analysis of your
20 A. Yes, it is a conclusion on the basis of analysis of previous
21 conversations and of all other conversations. We knew how people were
22 addressed, how certain people addressed others, and we knew what was done
23 on certain channels.
24 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
25 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Could we see 6D43. Unfortunately,
1 Your Honours, we obtained this document yesterday. It's a Prosecution
2 document, so we only have the B/C/S version, and we have a hard copy. So
3 we'll ask the usher to show the witness this document and we have copies
4 for the Chamber.
5 JUDGE KWON: Very well. In the meantime, can I ask the witness to
6 clarify what he meant by -- when he said, "Mr. Gvero was the only superior
7 member of the Main Staff present." Present where? Sir, could you clarify
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think that's what I said. Present
10 in the Main Staff of the then RS army.
11 JUDGE KWON: I don't think I follow in full. I don't think you
12 mean that he is the only person present in the Main Staff. If Mr. Krgovic
13 could pursue on this matter further. I leave it to you.
14 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Let me just refer back to this.
15 Q. Have a look at the screen. It says, "General Gvero is present in
16 the Main Staff today." In the main command, in the Supreme Command Main
17 Staff. That's what it says here.
18 Please have a look at the document on the ELMO, not this one but
19 the next one.
20 Have a look at the document that you have in front of you. Can
21 you see that another president is mentioned here as well, and he is being
22 addressed with respect. Read through that conversation and just focus on
23 these sentences in which Gvero is apparently addressing that president.
24 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Thayer.
25 MR. THAYER: Yes, Mr. President. I'm just wondering if there is a
1 date that could be attached to this document.
2 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Krgovic. And if I can say this, it is very
3 difficult to follow the -- for the non-B/C/S reader. So if you could ask
4 the witness to read out the relevant parts.
5 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation]
6 Q. Should I read it out, or will you do so? Will you read the
7 relevant parts out loud? Your Honours, with your leave, I will read them
8 out. I think we will be able to get through them more rapidly in that
10 JUDGE KWON: The Chamber wouldn't mind.
11 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] There is a question mark and that's
12 how the conversation starts. "Hello. Good day. Good day. Gvero. How
13 are you, General? How are you? Well, I'm fine. Is the president there?
14 Well, the president is outside. He's not in the room. He will be here in
15 10 minutes' time. Is there a message you would like to leave?" I don't
16 want to read through the part that starts with the letter G.
17 "Greetings president. Gvero. Greetings, General."
18 Q. Can you see that General Gvero is speaking to another president
19 and is also addressing him in terms of respect, as you yourself said?
20 Would you agree with me? I can see you nodding.
21 A. But just explain on what basis you draw the conclusion that
22 Krajisnik is concerned.
23 Q. That's your service's conclusion too, because in the upper
24 right-hand corner it says Krajisnik, but the name Krajisnik isn't
25 mentioned anywhere in the conversation. So this is just another
1 assumption that Krajisnik is, in fact, concerned.
2 JUDGE KWON: [Previous translation continues]... Mr. Thayer.
3 MR. THAYER: Again, Mr. President, in line with my request for
4 some sort of date on this document, we haven't established that this
5 witness can recognise this as one of his sites or has any other
6 familiarity to authenticate what this particular printout is purporting to
7 be. So I just ask for perhaps a little bit more basis to be laid for, for
8 example, the last question, where it was put to the witness that it is
9 his -- I believe his army's assumption.
10 JUDGE KWON: I thought the witness was able to -- would be able to
11 deal with the question as far as the president is concerned.
12 But, Mr. Krgovic, could you clarify the date, or could you answer
13 to -- answer that question?
14 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I can. This document
15 is dated the 28th of April, 1994. It was in the Prosecution bundle of
16 documents. I found it in the IDS -- in the EDS system, and that's why it
17 hasn't been translated yet. It has an ERN number, so it can be located,
18 and it is part of a collection of documents, a group of documents.
19 Q. If you have a look at the frequency to the left, if you have a
20 look at the direction, are you familiar with this frequency and with the
21 elements that we can see to the left?
22 A. Well, the frequency isn't one that is familiar to me.
23 Q. I apologise. Can you see the frequency?
24 A. Yes, I can.
25 MR. KRGOVIC: Can the witness be shown Exhibit 6D21?
1 JUDGE KWON: How long do you think you will stay longer with this
3 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Well, about another 15 minutes, Your
5 JUDGE KWON: Have we received the time allocation amount of
6 Defence counsel? I haven't received one.
7 Proceed in the meantime. 6D21.
8 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] [No interpretation]
9 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
10 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation]
11 Q. This is a document from the service that you worked in and
12 forwarded certain documents to this Tribunal. Could the witness be shown
13 the third page of this document.
14 Sir, can you see that Gvero and this gentleman are addressed
15 as "president", that Gvero addresses this gentleman as "president"? You
16 agree with me?
17 A. Yes, I do agree. But he says president, vice-president,
19 Q. Can we agree that the participant in the conversation, who we can
20 call Gvero, calls three persons he addresses "president"?
21 A. Yes. I'm telling you yes, but there is a correction here. It
22 says "president," "vice-president," "professor."
23 Q. When you have a look at this conversation, is Gvero informing
24 Koljevic about his activities and about his discussions with UNPROFOR?
25 Would you agree with me that that's what the conversation is about? I see
1 you nodding but you should say it out aloud.
2 A. You asked me whether I can see from this document that he spoke to
3 UNPROFOR members; is that correct?
4 Q. Yes. This concerns relationships with UNPROFOR?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. And that's also the case for the intercepts that you recorded, the
7 subject is the same?
8 A. Well, do you have the first one in mind?
9 Q. The first two that you recorded. Would you agree that the subject
10 is the same?
11 A. Yes.
12 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Krgovic, when it would be convenient, we passed
13 the time to adjourn for today.
14 Mr. Witness, unfortunately the Chamber has decided a long time ago
15 that we need to break next week for a -- for the parties' preparation for
16 the case. So we will resume Monday the 19th at 9.00. So I take it that
17 you have to go back and come again.
18 The hearing is adjourned.
19 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.47 p.m.,
20 to be reconvened on Monday, the 19th day of
21 February, 2007, at 9.00 a.m.