1 Tuesday, 3 March 2009
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 2.18 p.m.
5 JUDGE AGIUS: So good afternoon to you, Registrar. Could you
6 call the case, please.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Good afternoon, Your Honours. Good afternoon to
8 everyone in and around the courtroom much.
9 This is case number IT-05-88-T, the Prosecutor versus
10 Vujadin Popovic et al.
11 Thank you, Your Honours.
12 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you, sir.
13 For the record, Mr. Popovic is not present today. We are in
14 possession of his waiver. Representation: Prosecution, Mr. McCloskey,
15 Mr. Mitchell; absent from amongst the Defence teams -- I have problems
16 already with this - absent I notice Mr. -- Mr. Nikolic is here.
17 Mr. Bourgon, Mr. Josse. Is Mr. Petrusic here or not?
18 MR. NIKOLIC: No.
19 JUDGE AGIUS: And Mr. Petrusic.
20 Where is Mr. Bourgon? He hadn't finished yesterday.
21 MS. NIKOLIC: [Interpretation] Mr. Bourgon suddenly had to leave.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: Nothing serious, I hope.
23 MS. NIKOLIC: [Interpretation] No, it isn't. Thank you for your
24 consideration, Your Honours.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
1 Now, before we start, we are sitting again today, unfortunately,
2 pursuant to Rule 15 bis. Mr. Justice Stole is still unwell.
3 Mr. Ostojic, it was my understanding yesterday that you wished to
4 address the Trial Chamber. Since Mr. Bourgon is not here, maybe you
5 wish, if you still have a mind to address us. Proceed.
6 MR. OSTOJIC: Good afternoon to Your Honours.
7 JUDGE AGIUS: Good afternoon to you.
8 MR. OSTOJIC: My apologies to Judge Kwon, I can't see him, but I
9 know he's there.
10 Your Honour, I certainly echo the objection raised by my learned
11 friend Mr. Bourgon yesterday and the decisional and authoritative cites
12 that he relied on, and I was glad to hear that the Prosecution found them
13 also to be reliable, as did Mr. Haynes for the Pandurevic Defence. We,
14 however, also have two specific and two general objections with respect
15 to this line of questioning.
16 First, as a general matter, we believe that it's an improper use
17 of documents which the Pandurevic Defence team is using in their
18 redirect, which could have been used in their direct examination, and we
19 refer the Court specifically to its earlier decision on the 14th of July,
20 2006, specifically under Roman numeral II, subsections E and F.
21 The Defence of Mr. Pandurevic, in its direct examination, covered
22 many documents which it tried to use and elicit corroborative evidence to
23 support the position of Mr. Pandurevic. Now they claim and admit that
24 they have carefully -- actually, they say "very carefully" orchestrated
25 this redirect, which would purportedly, "point to features of the
1 evidence where he, Mr. Pandurevic, could not possibly have known about
2 which go to support the accuracy of his account." We submit that this is
3 not proper redirect, and it should have been done on direct examination,
4 and therefore ask the Court to sustain our objection.
5 Specifically --
6 JUDGE AGIUS: One moment before you continue.
7 I don't know whether you were precisely going to deal with this,
8 but you mentioned the use of certain documents very generically. Could
9 you be more specific and indicate which documents, in particular, you're
10 referring to?
11 MR. OSTOJIC: Sure.
12 For example, Mr. Pandurevic, during his direct examination,
13 utilised P377 and P378. He also used the tactical log-book to support
14 some of his -- or to corroborate some of his testimony about his
15 whereabouts and movements during that time, among other orders, but those
16 come to mind specifically with that reference point.
17 Presently on redirect, we've had approximately 33 new documents
18 that have not been on their list that they're trying to utilise for the
19 same purpose, which they should have done on direct examination, we
20 submit, based on their own admission.
21 Furthermore, if I may, Your Honour, specifically with respect to
22 the use of 7D423, which is the statement of facts of Momir Nikolic,
23 there's a -- we object to that -- use of that document, and that's where,
24 I think, we ended yesterday.
25 There's a specific order that this Trial Chamber rendered on
1 February 6th, 2008
2 clearly states and quite plainly that the sole purpose and use of that
3 document is to be utilised against the Prosecution witnesses, which were
4 used by two Defence counsel in their cross-examination, namely, of
5 Mr. Boering at that time. So we suggest that the use and the manner that
6 the Pandurevic team is suggesting is improper and highly prejudicial.
7 Our next objection as a general matter is that we've never
8 received a proofing note even before the testimony of Mr. Pandurevic or
9 during his redirect, which is a general matter that violates the rules
10 and the practice in this Chamber.
11 And, fourthly, the attempt to rehabilitate this witness cannot be
12 done in the manner proposed by the Defence of Mr. Pandurevic. It would
13 be proper, in our view, if Mr. Haynes would inquire of Mr. Pandurevic
14 specifics and even notes that were taken from his meetings with the
15 Krstic Defence team, with his meetings with Mr. Obrenovic and others, as
16 well as his meetings with Mr. Zivanovic, but to utilise something like
17 evidence in 2003 and to claim that somehow that corroborates his
18 testimony is highly improper. So we ask that the Court sustain our
20 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you, Mr. Ostojic.
21 Do you wish to comment at all, Mr. McCloskey?
22 MR. McCLOSKEY: No, Mr. President.
23 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you. I just wanted to make sure.
24 And does any other Defence team, with the exception of
25 Mr. Haynes, wish to comment?
1 Right. Mr. Haynes, if you could address, briefly, the points
2 raised yesterday by Mr. Bourgon and today by Mr. Ostojic.
3 MR. HAYNES: The one legal authority which I looked at concerning
4 re-examination or redirect examination in this Tribunal stated that
5 nothing much needs to be said about it, and I agree with that. Nothing
6 much needs to be said about re-examination.
7 JUDGE AGIUS: Let me stop you.
8 I had, after discussing with my colleagues, every intention to
9 make it clear that we don't need any lectures on what the state of the
10 law is, especially since we have in the past pronounced ourselves, in one
11 Chamber or another, on these issues already, and you should understand
12 that we are fully aware what the state of the law is.
13 MR. HAYNES: I didn't -- I didn't propose to.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you.
15 MR. HAYNES: But it is a reactive form of examination, and it is
16 triggered by cross-examination.
17 We spent a little time yesterday evening and this morning
18 compiling hundreds of references in the cross-examination conducted by
19 Mr. Bourgon and Mr. Pandurevic to augment the headings that I set out in
20 my re-examination of him yesterday, but perhaps the best summary of the
21 way in which Mr. Pandurevic was cross-examined was the commencement of
22 the cross-examination by Mr. Ostojic, which is on the 19th of February at
23 page 31773, lines 17 and following, and it ran like this:
24 "I do not believe, with all due respect, you on several issues.
25 I think what you've testified to is a post facto construct in order to
1 create a defence, a failed defence, which was used by the Krstic Defence
2 team as well as the Blagojevic-Jokic Defence team, and you're not
3 surprised at all by our position, would I be correct?"
4 And you may recall he then asked Mr. Ostojic to lower his voice.
5 Mr. Ostojic said:
6 "Mr. Pandurevic, I will try and keep my voice down," then moved
7 the mike a little lower. "I don't mean to yell at you, but we are close
8 to one another here."
9 And he goes on:
10 "Sir, I also want to tell you that I don't agree on a number of
11 issues. So there's no surprises, I'm going to highlight some of them,
12 and we'll have a discussion about them in the next few days.
13 "For example, these are not an exclusive list, but, for example,
14 I do not agree with your position or your theory of absence of commander
15 and this senior officer issue that you raised. I don't agree with you on
16 your zone of defence versus zone of responsibility. I don't agree with
17 you with the issue of POWs and whether they're my POWs or Main Staff
18 POWs. I don't agree with you about the contents of the purported
19 conversations you had with Mr. Obrenovic."
20 THE INTERPRETER: Could Counsel please slow down when reading.
21 MR. HAYNES: I'm very sorry:
22 " ... and the 16th, 17th, 18th and 19th of July, 1995. Further,
23 I don't agree with you for the reasons you gave us as to the opening of
24 the corridor. And also on smaller issues, I don't agree with you on the
25 issue that you raised with respect to brotherhood and unity --"
1 JUDGE AGIUS: You are running even faster now. Please slow down,
2 thank you.
3 MR. HAYNES: "As well as your tenure in Slovenia
4 And over the page, and when I rediscovered this last night, it
5 was with some incredulity. Mr. Ostojic went on to say:
6 "I suggest to you, sir, that your Defence team didn't know about
7 the conversations you purportedly had with Mr. Obrenovic on the 16th and
9 I pause. It was, I imagine, having forgotten that, that
10 Mr. Ostojic rose to object to my asking my client about what he had told
11 me in re-examination earlier on in the case, and it didn't include, and
12 it was merely as I said in my opening introduction, it was construct by
13 you, and you looked at me at some of the evidence, and you fit this
14 neatly in a package in order to prepare your defence; wouldn't I be right
15 about that?"
16 Now, each of those accusations and allegations were put
17 skillfully, repetitively, and forcefully throughout the course of,
18 I think, something like seven days of cross-examination by Mr. Bourgon
19 and Mr. Ostojic, and it is my right now to repair those suggestions. It
20 is not in any way intended as a counter-attack against those who made
21 them, but it is intended to clarify and rebut the suggestion of a
22 constructed case, of telling lies, of putting his head together with
23 Dragan Obrenovic, for a start.
24 Now, the second and perhaps equally important issue is: The very
25 heart of this case is the question of command responsibility, and you
1 know it is my client's case, that though he had the title of commander of
2 the Zvornik Brigade, the operations that were being carried on in the
3 Zvornik area between the 15th and the 18th of July, approximately, were
4 not under his command. And it was put to him again forcefully,
5 repetitively, and skillfully that they were. And we're now going to turn
6 to rebut that suggestion by showing the growing -- by showing the
7 developing events, from Bratunac on the 13th of July, through tot he
8 events in Zvornik on the 14th and 15th of July, which show, as it were,
9 an alternative command structure in place, and all that arises directly
10 from the questions he was asked in cross-examination. I don't really
11 want to say anymore.
12 Cross-examination is a skillful art, and it's one which has to be
13 conducted responsibly and carefully, because if you get careless, you
14 open the door to re-examination. And I submit that every door which I
15 now -- will now seek to walk through has been opened by Mr. Bourgon and
16 Mr. Ostojic principally.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. Ostojic.
18 MR. OSTOJIC: Thank you, Mr. President. Briefly in reply --
19 JUDGE AGIUS: Briefly, please.
20 MR. OSTOJIC: Yes. Two points.
21 One, he ignores the fact that his position, when he put this
22 witness on the stand, has never changed. His claim that command
23 responsibility is something that they want to rebut now, they've
24 contradicted that in their direct examination. To go back to it
25 certainly is not proper redirect examination.
1 Secondly, for him to claim that we've opened the door because
2 we've challenged his evidence, that's exactly what cross-examination is.
3 He should have, and I'm sure he did, based on the level of preparation
4 that they had and the request for leave to prepare with this witness and
5 with documents throughout his testimony is really unfair to the Defence
6 and unfair to my client specifically. They had an opportunity to
7 prepare; they know what our respective decisions are. And for him to say
8 that he's somewhat surprised by our questions on cross-examination is a
9 bit, with all due respect, disingenuous when we had no idea, under any of
10 the documents or evidence that's been brought forth, that Mr. Pandurevic
11 now claims at the 12th hour that he had these purported conversations
12 that never have been provided to any of the Defence formally or
13 informally. So for him now to go on and do another direct examination,
14 we believe is improper. And that's all he's doing.
15 Momir Nikolic and his --- specifically this exhibit that we're
16 talking about, I mean, 7D423, he doesn't even address that, so I assume
17 he either concedes it or realises that that should not have been utilized
18 in this redirect and only could have been opened if he wanted to on his
19 direct examination.
20 Thank you.
21 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you. Do you wish to comment, Mr. McCloskey?
22 MR. McCLOSKEY: No, Mr. President.
23 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you.
24 Mr. Haynes, I do notice, actually, that there were some issues
25 raised by Mr. Ostojic which you did not address. One, in particular,
1 relates to the allegation that you did not make available, the proofing
3 MR. HAYNES: Well, I hope I don't need to dwell on that for very
4 long -- [Overlapping speakers]
5 If Mr. Ostojic was standing in my shoes and somebody suggested to
6 him that his clients should provide details of their conversations with
7 their lawyers to anybody, I imagine he would faint, frankly. He's not an
8 ordinary witness, he's an accused person, and those sorts of exchanges
9 are never disclosable, in my view.
10 JUDGE AGIUS: And about the allegation that you've made use of
11 new documents that you could have made use of during your direct?
12 MR. HAYNES: I don't -- I don't think that's right. In fact, I'm
13 sure it's not right. Had I put Momir Nikolic's plea agreement on the
14 screen and read it out to my client in direct examination, people would
15 have been horrified. That's why I say this is a reactive form of
16 examination. It's a reaction to the way in which he's been
17 cross-examined. And I think I dealt with it, as it were, the reasons why
18 briefly yesterday, my words quoted back at me yet again, that I'm
19 entitled now, given the manner of the attack on my client, the suggestion
20 that he got his head together with Obrenovic in 1999, that he composed
21 his account piecing together the evidence ex post facto, that he didn't
22 tell his lawyers about things he gave evidence about, to deal with all
23 those things, by reference, as it were, reference points that were not
24 obvious or available to me in direct examination. And the use of
25 documents that I propose to make is entirely consistent with the use of
1 documents throughout the whole history of this trial, most particularly,
2 I'd have thought, in re-examination. And there was some spectacular
3 examples during the course of the Prosecution's case of this sort of
5 JUDGE AGIUS: All right, thank you.
6 Yes, Ms. Nikolic.
7 MS. NIKOLIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours. Good
8 afternoon to everyone.
9 Just a few sentences I would like to join into in what my learned
10 friend Ostojic already said.
11 Concerning the statement of Mr. Nikolic, Momir Nikolic, this
12 Trial Chamber has already admitted 4D16 into evidence. As concerned in
13 examination in chief and in, specifically, cross-examination of
14 Mr. Pandurevic, not a single event mentioned in the statement of
15 Mr. Nikolic was subject to his examination. Mr. Pandurevic did not take
16 part in the events that constitute an integral part or a part of this
17 statement of fact of Mr. Nikolic, at least according to what he said.
18 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you.
19 [Trial Chamber confers]
20 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. We are unanimous in what I'm going to
21 communicate to you.
22 Overall, we are satisfied that the line of questions that
23 Mr. Haynes so far has put to the witness on redirect, and I say
24 "generally and overall," do constitute a reaction to the various
25 questions put on cross-examination by both the Prosecution and Defence --
1 and other Defence teams. However, we also wish to make it clear that
2 since we still have an ongoing redirect, should at any moment you feel
3 that questions are put that do not fall within the parameters of what the
4 law is about redirect examination, you should stand up, draw our
5 attention, and we will decide these issues on a case-by-case basis.
6 As regards the allegation made by you, Mr. Bourgon --
7 Mr. Ostojic, sorry, regarding the use of new documents, and in particular
8 the Momir Nikolic statement of facts, it's in our judgement Mr. Haynes
9 has not been seeking the introduction of that statement into evidence,
10 but has only been making use of parts of that statement of facts which he
11 is putting as a supposition to the witness for his reaction. As such,
12 there is nothing irregular in this practice, with the understanding, as I
13 said, that it's not being sought to tender that document as evidence of
14 its contents, as evidence of its contents.
15 So we can proceed now.
16 Incidentally, before you continue, because I'm sure we will come
17 to this in due course, and this may be the last sitting this week: We
18 haven't seen yet, although we know that it has been filed, your notice
19 for rebuttal. We have it now? Okay, but I haven't seen it, anyway. It
20 must have arrived now since we started the sitting. Okay.
21 And I am informed that you are preparing to have two of your
22 three witnesses already granted for reopening in line. I would like you
23 to keep in mind, in your scheduling process, that we do not intend to sit
24 next week on Friday, the 13th, so we are not sitting on that day not
25 because of superstition, but because we need to meet and discuss urgent
1 business that we have to decide.
3 MR. HAYNES: While we're on that, my witness coordinator, I'm
4 just reminded, did ask me to say that the position with our potential
5 witnesses next week is that there's one ready for Monday; one, possibly
6 two, for Tuesday. I wouldn't have thought the witness for Monday would
7 fill a whole court day.
8 JUDGE AGIUS: All right, thank you.
9 MR. McCLOSKEY: Mr. President, if we think that the Pandurevic
10 case will be over by the end of Tuesday still, and if no one objects,
11 then we will try, and I'll, you know, formally request we get those two
12 witnesses here. They should be ready, but that's different than saying,
13 yes, bring them here. So if there is no objection, we're ready to bring
14 those two people here.
15 MR. HAYNES: We are talking about this anyway. I think you
16 should know that.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Okay. Thank you.
18 So, Mr. Haynes.
19 MR. HAYNES: Sorry for the interruption. Let's --
20 MR. HAYNES: [Overlapping speakers] ... it's absolutely right
21 that these things should be dealt with properly.
22 I thank Ms. Nikolic for her intervention, and in the light of
23 that I will not call up 7D423. I'll call up 4D16, which is in evidence,
25 WITNESS: VINKO PANDUREVIC [Resumed]
1 [The witness answered through interpreter]
2 MR. HAYNES: And I think we need to go to paragraph 10, which is
3 certainly at page 6 of the English, and the B/C/S as well.
4 Re-examination by Mr. Haynes: [Continued]
5 Q. Now, I'm not going to read all this out, Mr. Pandurevic, so when
6 it comes up in your language, will you read down through paragraph 10
7 yourself, please, as far as you wish to, and let us know when you're
9 A. I've read it.
10 Q. You may have told us this yesterday. I simply can't remember.
11 When was the first time you were aware of the contents of this document?
12 A. That was when I saw it here at the Detention Unit.
13 Q. And it probably goes without saying, then, you didn't know what
14 this document said when you spoke to Eileen Gilleece in October of 2001;
15 is that right?
16 MR. OSTOJIC: I object to the form of the question,
17 Mr. President, because this document was created in 2003. So I think
18 it's improper.
19 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Thank you, Mr. Ostojic.
20 Yes, Mr. Haynes.
21 MR. HAYNES: Yes.
22 Q. Did you know what this document said when you spoke to
23 Eileen Gilleece?
24 A. No, I had no idea at all what knowledge Mr. Momir Nikolic had.
25 Q. And when you first learnt of the contents of this document, what
1 was your reaction?
2 A. I was simply surprised to learn about all the activities that
3 took place, if what is said in this statement of facts is true. This was
4 totally new to me.
5 Q. And if it is true, could you comment, please, on the sort of
6 command relationships that are in operation in this paragraph of this
7 statement of fact?
8 A. During this trial, we heard about several kinds of relationships
9 in the -- or communications line in the VRS. One of it was by courier.
10 It was normally used at the level of platoons or in companies. We hear
11 here that Momir Nikolic was acting as the courier. He left Bratunac and
12 went to visit Drago Nikolic and to impart to him certain information or
13 orders from Colonel Beara. This is not a standard chain of a command
14 which is in compliance with command and control. For that to be correct,
15 it was necessary for the commander of the Zvornik Brigade, or the person
16 standing in for him, to receive an order from the corps command, either
17 this one or some other one, and then comply with it.
18 This was one of the methods in which a number of officers are
19 involved or a group of officers are engaged to carry out a task, and it
20 is known who among them is the most senior and the most responsible for
21 the execution of the task.
22 Most probably, as I understand it, this task was not designed by
23 this person, himself, but rather from someone who has the right to
24 control and command in the VRS, and in this case I think it was his
25 immediate superior:
1 MR. HAYNES: Thank you. Can we have a look now, please, at
2 2D642. This is an untranslated Croatian intercept.
3 Q. You may have to read it out for us slowly, Mr. Pandurevic, when
4 it comes onto the screen. Nice and slowly for the interpreters, please,
5 Mr. Pandurevic.
6 A. I think I already read this intercept. It reads:
7 "13th July 1995
8 sending four buses, two trucks, and one trailer-truck to Kasaba for
9 transportation of the captured Muslims. These men will be transferred to
10 the camp in the village of Batkovici
11 criminals and ordinary soldiers will be carried out."
12 Q. Yes. You were asked by Mr. Ostojic and, I think, the President
13 to interpret the word "selection." How does this fit in with what we now
14 know was going on in Bratunac with Deronjic and Momir Nikolic and others?
15 A. In response to the question of Their Honours, I tried to say that
16 this conversation was not conveyed in its integral form, it was kind of
17 shortened. The word "selection" was used in its literal meaning. That's
18 why inverted commas. In light of the entire context of these events and
19 the facts pertaining to them, I understand that this was necessary and
20 that a decision was made on the 13th of July to separate the prisoners
21 into those who were considered to have committed war crimes and to those
22 who are not to have committed those crimes.
23 Q. Very well. Now, you were asked by Mr. Bourgon a number of
24 questions about Drago Nikolic's motor car. Do you recall that?
25 A. Yes, I do.
1 Q. And in July of 1995, what was the position in relation to
2 Drago Nikolic's motor car?
3 A. My previous decision was altered at the time. By this decision,
4 I banned Drago Nikolic from using the official car for his purposes, but
5 rather to use it as the rest of the Command or members of the Command
6 were doing. In July, he already had a vehicle that he used at his own
7 discretion, meaning without my permission and without my consent.
8 Q. And do you know what sort of motor car that was?
9 A. I remember how it looked like. I think that it was an Opel
10 station wagon, painted olive-drab green, if I remember correctly.
11 Q. And do you remember who his drivers were?
12 A. I didn't know the names of the drivers or other people who used
13 to drive him. I saw these names here, in the work logs that were
14 presented here during the trial.
15 Q. Well, can we have a look, please, at P903. Sorry, I think I'm
16 wrong here. P904 is what I wanted to look at.
17 Is that the car you were talking about?
18 A. Yes, it is.
19 Q. And within the Zvornik Brigade, do you recall what function
20 Milorad Bircakovic, Mirko Ristic, had?
21 A. I think that they were all members of the a military police
22 company. I saw Mr. Bircakovic in person when he was here, and I remember
23 this face, and Arapovic, Misko. However, I don't remember a Mirko Ristic
24 at all.
25 Q. Okay. Can we go to page 2 of this document. And as far as is
1 possible for Mr. Pandurevic, unless you find it easier to read the
2 English, can we blow up the bottom entries for the 13th of July. Now,
3 can we leave that document to one side for a moment and just deal with
4 some matters of procedure.
5 You've told us, or at least if you haven't, other people have,
6 that in addition to the duty officer at the Command of the
7 Zvornik Brigade, there was a duty officer at the Forward Command Post; is
8 that right?
9 A. Yes, that's how it was at the time.
10 Q. And we've heard a plethora of evidence that at the Command, there
11 was also a deputy duty officer who, as it were, was on night duty. Is
12 that right?
13 A. Yes, and he was called assistant duty officer.
14 Q. Thank you for the correction. Was that the same position at the
15 Forward Command Post?
16 A. No. At the Forward Command Post, there was just one man.
17 Q. And what, principally, should a duty officer do at the Forward
18 Command Post?
19 A. In principal, at the Forward Command Post, was used, and some
20 critical situations, and when I say "critical," I'm referring to the
21 seriousness of the situation at the front-line i the combat sense, when
22 attacks or activities of the hostile side are expected. And the officer
23 who is present at the Forward Command Post, he is in direct combat
24 contact, if I may say so. He has a direct ability to observe and follow
25 what's happening at the front, and he can feel what's going on in a
1 battle. At the same time, he's receiving information from duty officers
2 and subordinate units, and from time to time he informs the duty officer
3 in the barracks about the situation in the area of the defence of the
5 Q. What about leaving the Command Post; should he do that?
6 A. According to the regulations, he's not allowed to leave the
7 Forward Command Post without there being a substitute for him, or he
8 needs to receive, from his superior officer, a permit to leave the
9 Forward Command Post, and in the meantime another officer needs to be
10 sent to take over those duties.
11 Q. Well, can we have a look at the two sets of entries for the 13th
12 of July, please, in relation to this motor vehicle you're telling us
13 about. What's the first entry we see for the 13th of July?
14 A. We can see that this vehicle went, on the 13th of July, from
15 Standard in the barracks to the Forward Command Post. Then it returned
16 back to Zvornik and was used locally, was driven locally, meaning either
17 in Zvornik or in the immediate vicinity of Zvornik.
18 Q. And the second set of entries?
19 A. Also on the 13th, this vehicle made several trips. I don't know
20 what order they used to record it, but my conclusion would be that the
21 first trip was Standard-Bratunac-Zvornik, and then
22 Orahovac-Zvornik-Orahovac, or perhaps vice versa. Perhaps it is more
23 likely that it was vice versa.
24 Q. And what sort of distance did that vehicle apparently travel,
25 completing those journeys?
1 A. Well, this is some 200 kilometres of distance that was covered,
2 if the entries in this document are accurate.
3 Q. Would your Forward Command Post duty officer be doing his duty by
4 travelling 200 kilometres during the course of the day?
5 A. No. While he's on duty, he had to be on IKM. He could go on
6 foot to the observation post, to the neighbouring battalions and their
7 commands, but it wasn't his duty to tour units. So while on duty, he
8 would not have been able to travel this distance.
9 Q. Thank you. Now, Mr. Ostojic and you briefly discussed a man
10 called Zoran Zekic. Can you remind us who he was in July of 1995?
11 MR. OSTOJIC: Can I have a page reference, please .
12 MR. HAYNES: 19th of February, 2008, page 31810.
13 MR. OSTOJIC: Thank you.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: Do you need time, Mr. Ostojic, or can we proceed?
15 MR. OSTOJIC: He can proceed, yes.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you.
17 MR. HAYNES:
18 Q. Who was Zoran Zekic in July of 1995?
19 A. He was president of the Executive Board of the Zvornik Municipal
21 Q. And what sort of relationship did you have with him?
22 A. It was a business kind of a relationship, an official
23 relationship with a person who was performing certain duties. They had
24 to do with the matters of the brigade that could have been resolved by
25 the municipal government and had to do with members of the brigade who
1 were from that municipality.
2 Q. He gave evidence before us on the 28th of February, 2007.
11 [Private session]
20 [Open session]
21 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you. We're in open session.
22 MR. HAYNES: I think I actually said that Mr. Pandurevic and
23 Mr. Ostojic discussed Zoran Zekic.
24 JUDGE AGIUS: Alright. Let's proceed.
25 MR. HAYNES: We're in open session. Can we have a look at 7D236,
1 please, pages 32 and 33 in the English and 28 to 30 in the B/C/S.
2 Because it's a multi-page document, I'm going to give
3 Mr. Pandurevic a hard copy to read through. It's been highlighted, if
4 anybody objects, but I'm going to ask him to -- sorry.
5 We're looking for 7D236.
11 JUDGE AGIUS: Well, yes. I don't know what you just said,
12 whether we need actually to redact once more. I think we --
13 MR. HAYNES: Can we go into private session, and I will try and
14 give comfort to everybody.
15 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. And we also need to redact --
16 MR. HAYNES: We do.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: -- Mr. McCloskey's intervention as well.
18 MR. HAYNES: Yes.
19 JUDGE AGIUS: As well as the previous one, which I'm still
20 waiting for to sign.
21 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
22 [Private session]
11 Page 32402 redacted. Private session.
4 [Open Session]
5 JUDGE AGIUS: For the record, we've been in public session now.
6 Yes, Mr. McCloskey.
7 MR. McCLOSKEY: I'm sorry about this. Could we go into private
9 THE COURT: Let's go into private session, please.
10 [Private session]
11 Pages 32404-32406 redacted. Private session.
22 [Open session]
23 JUDGE AGIUS: We are back in open session.
24 Mr. Haynes.
25 MR. HAYNES:
1 Q. Now, you were asked a number of questions by Mr. Ostojic about a
2 man called Marko Milosevic, and by Mr. Bourgon a number of questions
3 about a man called Ostoja Stanisic. Can you remind us respectively who
4 those two people were?
5 A. Ostoja Stanisic was captain first class, at the time commander of
6 the 6th [realtime transcript read in error "1st"] Battalion. Marko
7 Milosevic, nicknamed Majo, was his deputy.
8 Q. And what working relationship, if any, had Milosevic had with
9 Drago Nikolic earlier in the war?
10 A. I apologise. It says in the transcript that he was commander of
11 the 1st Battalion, whereas he was the commander of the 6th Battalion.
12 As for the reply to your question, I didn't know what
13 relationship existed between Mr. Milosevic and Drago Nikolic.
14 Q. Thank you. Now, Marko Milosevic gave evidence before us on the
15 26th of June, 2007. Do you remember his evidence?
16 A. I do.
17 Q. He told us that the 6th Battalion received a call in the morning
18 of the 14th of July between 10.00 and 12.00, to tell them that prisoners
19 were coming to the school at Petkovci, and at about 4.00 or 5.00 in the
20 afternoon of the 14th of July, he was sent to Petkovci to pass a message
21 to Colonel Beara. He said he went to the school, where he saw
22 Drago Nikolic, who pointed out Beara to him, and he passed the message to
23 Beara. He said the school was surrounded by security which was not from
24 the Zvornik Brigade, and later that evening he heard gun-fire coming from
25 the school.
1 Now, in fairness, Mr. Ostojic put to us -- both Marko Milosevic
2 and Ostoja Stanisic that they made all this up, the fact that they'd seen
3 Colonel Beara. I'd like you, please, to -- I've not done it again, have
5 MR. McCLOSKEY: No. It's misleading, but I won't object as long
6 as we get the fact correct that the call came from the office of the
7 Zvornik Brigade.
8 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you, Mr. McCloskey.
9 Mr. Haynes -- Ostojic.
10 MR. OSTOJIC: Thank you, Mr. President.
11 It is leading. I do object that it's leading, but I also don't
12 see that this is proper redirect. If we're looking at the conduct of
13 Mr. Pandurevic and we challenged him on both his command and what he
14 claims that he's had certain conversations, to go over all the evidence
15 that the Prosecution may have called, unless all their entire defence is,
16 which I believe now it is more clearly than before, that all it is, is
17 adopting the Krstic and the Blagojevic Defence, but I don't think it's
18 proper in this context, and again I reiterate my objection that this is
19 improper redirect examination.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: He's referring precisely to questions, specific
21 questions put by you to the witness during your cross-examination. How
22 can it fall outside the parameters of redirect?
23 MR. OSTOJIC: With all due respect, Your Honour, he's not, and he
24 doesn't even cite a page or a line, because it's not what I asked him
25 about Marko Milosevic. The witness invited and only told us about
1 Marko Milosevic and Ostoja Stanisic, that they were pretty iter-related
2 or integrated with Dragomir Vasic, which was supposed to be the 6th
3 Battalion commander for Moral and Guidance and Religion. That was the
4 extent of the questioning for him, but I invite him to give me that
5 specific page cite where I question their credibility or not.
6 JUDGE AGIUS: Fair enough.
7 Yes, Mr. Haynes.
8 Thank you, Mr. Ostojic.
9 MR. HAYNES: Yes, it's 1331 to -- 13331 to 13332.
10 JUDGE AGIUS: While it's right in front of you, why don't you
11 read up Mr. Ostojic's question to the witness so that we are in --
12 MR. HAYNES: I'm not sure what we're -- I'm being asked to do.
13 I've just given two pages that refer to his cross-examination of
14 Marko Milosevic, and I'm not going to read all of that out.
15 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. But your question, as I have it in the
16 transcript, and therefore subject to the transcript being faithfully
17 reflecting the questions, says:
18 "Now, in fairness, Mr. Ostojic put to us that both
19 Marko Milosevic and Ostoja Stanisic, that they made all this up, the fact
20 that they had seen Colonel Beara ..."
21 Mr. Ostojic, as I understand him, is denying having ever put
22 these questions.
23 MR. OSTOJIC: No, I think, if I may interrupt, and I apologise,
24 I think you misunderstood me, with all due respect, and it's --
25 Mr. Haynes prefaced his questions to try to open a door to discuss
1 Marko Milosevic, to reiterate evidence as he may see it. We never asked
2 or inquired of this witness that. And proper, in our view, in proper
3 redirect examination if I had opened or cited Marko Milosevic or Ostoja
4 Stanisic's testimony, then he could go into it; we didn't. And I'm
5 advising the Court if he could give me the page number where I inquired
6 of this witness specifically where we inquired of -- but he's citing
7 page 13331 and 13312, which is testimony a year or two ago of those two
8 individuals, which is not what I'm objecting to. That testimony is in
9 evidence. I'm objecting, saying it's an improper scope of examination.
10 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay, I read you better now. Thank you.
11 Yes, Mr. Haynes.
12 MR. HAYNES: No, I'm not suggesting he -- he questioned the
13 credibility of Ostoja Stanisic or Marko Milosevic during his
14 cross-examination of Mr. Pandurevic. He did question their credibility
15 when he cross-examined them as witnesses. But what he did in this case
16 was question the credibility of my client, and in particular say that he
17 didn't agree with his position on his theory of the absence of commander
18 and the senior officer issue that you raised, and this is the very heart
19 of that very issue. This is where there are prisoners at a school being
20 guarded by members of a unit that are not part of the Zvornik Brigade,
21 Drago Nikolic, and the chief of security of the Main Staff. And I want
22 my client to, as it were, explain what command relationship is going on
24 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. McCloskey.
25 MR. McCLOSKEY: That may be a submission, that they were not
1 being guarded by members of the Zvornik Brigade, but -- and that's what,
2 I think, Stanisic said. However, that is not an established fact in this
4 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. It's going to be a ping-pong game.
5 MR. OSTOJIC: No, it's not. Just very briefly, if I may. Thank
6 you, Mr. President.
7 And in fact he can just look to the admission by his deputy or
8 Chief of Staff, Obrenovic, where he says the 6th Battalion was involved,
9 and all those other things. So it's only a submission on their part, but
10 I think it's still improper redirect examination, and we object on those
12 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Your final word, Mr. Haynes, and we'll
14 MR. HAYNES: I don't want one. I think I've said all I need to
15 say, and it's nearly the break, isn't it?
16 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. Let's have the break, then. Thank you.
17 Twenty-five minutes.
18 --- Recess taken at 3.34 p.m.
19 --- On resuming at 4.05 p.m.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Where were we?
21 Mr. Haynes.
22 MR. HAYNES: We were at Petkovci on the 14th of July, I think.
23 Q. You were asked some questions by Mr. Ostojic by reference to a
24 document that was an interview of his client's former driver, a man
25 called Milos Tomovic, and it's 2D639, and can we have that put into
1 e-court, please, quickly. It's not translated, this document, into
2 B/C/S, so far as I'm aware. We need to look at page 3.
3 The principal purpose of Mr. Ostojic's cross-examination of you
4 was to establish whether you knew that somebody else knew that his client
5 had an alibi, but I'd like to look at line 16. I'll read them out:
6 "Okay. Before we get ahead of us both, can I just stop by saying
7 in July of 95, when you drove Beara to these places, what kind of vehicle
8 did you have?
9 "It was Puch, military vehicle, and a Golf 3. Those two vehicles
10 I was assigned, I was given, and I drove them.
11 "And in which of these two vehicles did you drive Colonel Beara
12 down to Bratunac?
14 "And what colour was this Golf?
16 I'll give everyone else a transcript reference. It's 13305.
17 Do you remember the evidence of Marko Milosevic as to what sort
18 of vehicle he saw in the vicinity at Petkovci on the 14th of July?
19 A. Unfortunately, I don't.
20 Q. Very well. Now, before we broke, we had a little discussion, and
21 I'll cut straight to the chase. What command situation do you see in
22 operation at Petkovci, according to the evidence of Marko Milosevic and
23 Ostoja Stanisic, as you understand it to be?
24 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, hold it.
25 Yes, Mr. Ostojic.
1 MR. OSTOJIC: It calls for speculation and expert testimony that
2 this witness is not qualified to give, Mr. President, and so we object on
3 those grounds.
4 JUDGE AGIUS: Do you wish to comment, Mr. Haynes?
5 MR. HAYNES: No. I think he can answer it. He's a general.
6 [Trial Chamber confers]
7 JUDGE AGIUS: We believe it's a question that is related to his
8 office and that he can answer it. So, please, Mr. Pandurevic, could you
9 proceed with your answer.
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I will most certainly
11 do so, but I would kindly ask you for some patience because this is a
12 crucial thing, and I would like to explain it in more details, and I will
13 focus myself on the area of Petkovci.
14 In the period between the 10th and the 20th of July, the Army of
15 Republika Srpska was engaged in carrying out a variety of tasks.
16 Sometimes, these tasks were carried out by units as a whole, and
17 sometimes they were carried out by elements from different units combined
18 as temporary formations and under separate command.
19 If we look at the Drina
20 as a whole, was tasked with defending the defence zone and engaged in
21 combat with the 28th Division. The Sekovici Brigade was tasked with
22 defending its own defence zone, and so on and so forth. At the same
23 time, parts of these brigades, as well as parts of other brigades, were
24 in the Krajina as part of a temporary formation and were engaged in
25 carrying out tasks under separate command that had been established as a
1 provisional command for that specific task.
2 In addition to this, also carried out were tasks relating to the
3 events that are subject of this trial. For that purpose, in my judgement
4 and according to my conclusions, the commander of the Main Staff issued
5 tasks to a specific individual, gave him a number of men and assets, and
6 told him to carry out the task with them.
7 Specifically, I think that Mr. Beara, not before -- because he
8 was the head of the Security Administration but because he was given a
9 task by Mr. Mladic to deal with the prisoners of war, and based on all
10 the documents that we've seen here, whether through General Krstic or
11 directly through Mr. Furtula, he was also given a unit, buses, and other
12 assets required for the execution of this task. Also involved in this
13 task were a number of men who were working for the Security Service.
14 Now, in what way did this person in charge act? He acted as a
15 commanding officer and carried out a specific task. He had received his
16 orders from his superior. He was given powers and authority to put it
17 into practice. And all the men that were involved in the execution of
18 this task were under the direct command of the most senior individual
19 directing the mission. In other words, this was no parallel chain of
20 command or any chain of command within the security organ. This was, in
21 fact, the command structure established for the execution of a specific
23 Mr. Beara had an opportunity and the possibility to command all
24 the men engaged in this task for three reasons. The first and the most
25 important one was because he was appointed to do that by the commander of
1 the Staff. He didn't do it of his own accord and not because he was in
2 the Security Service. Secondly, as a member and chief of the Security
3 Service, he could engage any VRS security officer. And, thirdly, because
4 he was the most senior officer on the ground at the time.
5 Therefore, in Petkovci, all the men engaged around the school
6 building and in dealing with the prisoners of war were directly
7 subordinated to Mr. Beara. Regardless of the fact that for formerly
8 there were members of the Bratunac brigade, Zvornik Brigade, MUP, the
9 10th Sabotage Platoon, et cetera. But within the system of command in
10 this specific circumstances, they were subordinate to Mr. Beara, and he
11 had command responsibility over them.
12 I apologise for this lengthy answer.
13 MR. HAYNES:
14 Q. Thank you. Now, as I asked you a few moments ago, it was
15 suggested by Mr. Ostojic, of course, that Mr. Beara was in Belgrade at
16 the relevant times, and I would just like to have a look at a couple of
17 documents with you.
18 MR. HAYNES: Could we look at P377, page 751 for you and page 133
19 for the rest of us?
20 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. Ostojic.
21 MR. OSTOJIC: This may be my last objection if the Court just
22 gives me a clear indication that they are going to deny all these
23 objections, but this is clearly outside the scope of cross-examination.
24 I didn't challenge this to the witness, nor, with all do respect to him,
25 do I care what his thoughts are about witnesses or his evidence. I
1 didn't ask him what he thought about our witnesses or about Mr. Beara
2 being in Belgrade
3 which apparently somewhat successfully, because all we're doing is
4 reiterating some of these questions, his conduct and his responsibility
5 and his credibility and veracity. I didn't address the issue of
6 Mr. Beara being in Belgrade
7 witnesses were brought forth by the Prosecution, in my opinion, but most
8 certainly by the Pandurevic Defence, since they raised no questions at
9 that time.
10 JUDGE AGIUS: All right, but we haven't heard the question, as
11 yet. This is it. I mean, I need to hear the question first before I can
12 properly ask my colleagues to assess with me your objection.
13 So let's hear the question --
14 MR. OSTOJIC: I apologise then, Your Honour.
15 JUDGE AGIUS: Let's hear the question first, because I don't
16 know -- or even before the question, your remarks, if you have any,
17 Mr. Haynes, and then we'll decide on the objection.
18 MR. HAYNES: No, I can take the questions very quickly. It was
19 probably my fault, but I thought it was a courtesy to introduce the
20 purpose of the questions, but the questions, themselves, are quite
22 Q. If we have a look at page 751 in P377. That's 133 in e-court.
23 There's an entry about halfway down that page. Can you help us,
24 General Pandurevic, as to the date and time of that entry, approximately,
25 by reference to the other pages in the book?
1 A. This is the date when Mr. Jokic was on duty. He began on the
2 14th. Let me just check whether we are still on the 14th. Yes, the
3 14th. And this entry: "155, Beara to call," was entered after the last
4 one, which was at 2000 hours. So that would be after 2000 hours on the
5 evening of the 14th.
6 Q. And do you know what "155" is?
7 A. I think that's an extension number. That's what I knew at the
8 time. That was an extension number at the Main Staff, panorama.
9 Obviously, the duty officer had received a message to tell Beara to call
10 this extension number.
11 Q. Now can we go over the page, please, to 752 for you, 134 for the
12 rest of us. It's probably obvious from the fact we've gone forward in
13 the book, but how close is that entry made to the end of the day on the
14 14th of July? In particular, I'm referring to: "0900, Beara is coming."
15 A. I think it says: "900 hours, Beara is coming." I think what it
16 means is that he would be there at 9.00 the following day, because if it
17 had been in the unit, it would have been written "2100 hours," because
18 that's how the duty operations officer used to record times.
19 Q. Thank you very much. Now can we go to P1177.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: And, Mr. Ostojic, do you still maintain your
21 objection, having heard the question and the answer?
22 MR. OSTOJIC: I do, Mr. President, on this whole line. I think
23 it's way outside the scope of cross-examination. And if their point is
24 to prove the involvement of Beara, they should have gave us some notice
25 of that being their tactic. It's certainly not on any of the material
1 that we received from them, so we're also raising that.
2 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. Let's continue and keep your objection in
3 mind for digestion in due course. Thank you.
4 Yes, Mr. Haynes.
5 MR. HAYNES:
6 Q. You've seen this before, I think, in cross-examination by
7 Mr. McCloskey.
8 A. Yes, I did.
9 Q. Do you recall the evidence of Richard Butler as to who could be
10 found on extension 139 at the Zvornik Brigade?
11 A. I think that Mr. McCloskey also mentioned this extension, and
12 I think that this extension number belonged to Drago Nikolic, if I
13 remember correctly.
14 Q. Now, just a piece of geographical information. What time would
15 you have to leave Belgrade
16 Zvornik Brigade for about 10.00?
17 A. Well, there are various things that have to be taken into
18 consideration, but if you drive very fast, you would need one and a half
19 hours or one hour and forty-five minutes. Therefore, one should set off
20 at 8.00, at the latest.
21 MR. HAYNES: I'd like to call P1179 into e-court now, please.
22 The B/C/S is under seal. I'm wrong about that. It's not under seal.
23 Q. Now, this is a fairly famous document in this case, but please
24 take your time to read it through, and I want to put a few questions to
25 you about it.
1 A. Could I please have a look at the next page. Thank you. Can you
2 please scroll down a bit.
3 I've read these two pages.
4 Q. Thank you. Now, you've told us that at about this time, at 10.00
5 in the morning on the 15th of July, you were pulling your units out at
6 the front, Zepa. Were you still in radio contact with the Forward
7 Command Post?
8 A. Yes, I was, with the former command post of the Drina Corps.
9 Q. And would it have been possible for General Krstic to call you
10 and ask you to give 20 or 30 men to Colonel Beara when you got back to
12 A. Yes, it would have been possible.
13 Q. Did he do that?
14 A. No.
15 Q. Can you imagine why not?
16 MR. OSTOJIC: Calls for speculation.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. We don't want you to speculate. You either
18 know or not, or Mr. Haynes moves to his next question.
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I wouldn't like to speculate,
20 Your Honours.
21 JUDGE AGIUS: Your next question, Mr. Haynes.
22 MR. HAYNES:
23 Q. How many men did you return to Zvornik with?
24 A. I returned with the whole TG-1; not all at once, but the total
25 was about 400 men. They came in groups.
1 Q. How many names are mentioned in this conversation, so far as you
2 can see?
3 A. In addition to the participants, Krstic and Beara, also mentioned
4 are Nastic and Blagojevic. And there was a misspelled name, Tasic and
5 Sladojevic, referring to the latter two ones. And I also see the name
6 Idjic [phoen] or Indjic.
7 Q. Would it have been possible for General Krstic to say during this
8 conversation, Don't worry, Ljubo, Vinko will be back in a little while,
9 and he's got 400 men with him?
10 MR. McCLOSKEY: Objection. Anything is possible, and that's
11 really speculation.
12 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Let's move on to your next, please,
13 Mr. Haynes. Objection sustained.
14 MR. HAYNES: Can we look back at P377, page 756 for you and 138
15 in e-court.
16 Q. The entry at the very bottom of the page, Mr. Pandurevic, what
17 does that refer to, "Badem dispatched reinforcements"?
18 A. This entry made at 0921 hours: "Obrenovic ordered an urgent
19 request for reinforcements from the corps, reported Badem dispatched
20 reinforcements," therefore this was a request by Dragan Obrenovic for the
21 corps to find additional men to reinforce the Zvornik Brigade.
22 Q. Any reference there or on the following page that Colonel Beara
23 should be informed of that?
24 A. No, I don't seen one. I haven't seen anything like that.
25 Q. Let's move on.
1 Now, Mr. Bourgon cross-examined you about the role of
2 Drago Nikolic and the screening of volunteers to join the
3 Zvornik Brigade, and in particular about a group of men who came from
5 A. I think that I tried to explain this during cross-examination as
6 well. Especially at the beginning of war, there was a large number of
7 volunteers who came there with various motives in mind, so therefore it
8 was always necessary to check their true motives and their human
9 qualities. Later on during the war, their numbers dwindled, but the
10 screening procedure remained the same in order to verify whether they had
11 honourable intentions or they had some other intentions, such as trying
12 to clear their past records or to acquire some personal gains and things
13 like that.
14 Q. In relation to the group you told us about, who I think came from
15 Uzicka Pozega, what were your concerns?
16 A. Well, in that particular instance, as far as I remember, a larger
17 group came of some 30 men, and it was dangerous to keep them as one unit,
18 as one whole unit, because there would be a tendency to do various bad
19 things. And they were housed in a Serbian village, and they created
20 trouble there. And, as such, they were returned back. Other volunteers
21 that were sent individually to various units and the Zvornik Brigade were
22 known to their superiors and also to security organs. They knew of their
23 qualities, and they were in our units in that capacity throughout the
25 Q. This may be difficult to answer, but during the period of time
1 that you were in command of the Zvornik Brigade, about how many
2 volunteers were there to join the brigade?
3 A. Well, they would join the brigade and then leave. Some of them
4 stayed for a longer period of time, some for shorter. There were some
5 who stayed longer. I wouldn't be able to give you the exact number, but
6 there were other kinds of volunteers, soldiers from the Zvornik Brigade
7 itself. For example, if a unit had to be sent out for a special mission,
8 or a certain group of soldiers had to be sent to another unit temporarily
9 to accomplish a task there, then officers from battalions and companies
10 would ask for volunteers who wanted to do that voluntarily, and if nobody
11 volunteered to do that, then they would designate the people who would be
12 sent on these special missions.
13 Q. What was the screening procedure, as far as you know?
14 A. If volunteers came from other areas outside of Republika Srpska,
15 sometimes security organs of higher commands would do the screening and
16 simply inform the subordinate commands that everything was all right with
17 these people, that they had been screened, or that the security organ of
18 the unit they were joining should conduct the screening. Their
19 biographical data was screened, their past, whether they had any
20 convictions, whether some of them that escaped from prison and so on.
21 Those kinds of things were checked.
22 Q. Were records kept?
23 A. I really don't know what kind of records were kept by security
24 organs regarding that. There probably were some records. And later on,
25 they were kept on the record of the units where they served.
1 Q. So if somebody was looking for a gang of dangerous people, who
2 would be the best person in any army unit to ask?
3 A. Well, it's a difficult question, who would be --
4 MR. McCLOSKEY: I'm going to object. It's --
5 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
6 MR. McCLOSKEY: You know, what is the question, what's the
7 relevance, where are we going with this?
8 MR. HAYNES: I'll move on.
9 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you, Mr. McCloskey.
10 MR. HAYNES: Let's for the last time, I think, in this case have
11 a look at P2741, and I'm going to provide you with a hard copy,
12 General Pandurevic.
13 Q. I'm sure you're very familiar with this document, but would you
14 just read through it for a couple of minutes, and I've only got a couple
15 of questions about it for you at this stage.
16 A. Yes, I am familiar with this document, more or less.
17 Q. Just to clear up something you were -- that was put to you by
18 Mr. Bourgon: Does that instruction prevent the deployment of a security
19 officer as duty officer at the Brigade Command?
20 A. I think that it doesn't say anything about that explicitly.
21 There is no ban on that. But in order for me to be 100 per cent sure, I
22 would need to read the entire document. However, my recollections
23 indicate what I have just told you.
24 Q. I'll move on, because I'm anxious that we should finish today.
25 What was the practical effect of a determination that
1 intelligence -- sorry, I'll start again.
2 What was the practical effect of a determination that a certain
3 task fell under the heading "Intelligence and Counter-Intelligence"?
4 A. Well, these instructions define, per se, the method of work of
5 security organs. As I have said earlier, this is entitled somewhat
6 different than in the book on formations. In the book, it is simply
7 framed -- phrased differently, because the security organs are mentioned
8 first here, and then the intelligence organs. However, what is important
9 for me, from these instructions, is item 5, paragraph 2, where it says
10 Sector for Security and Intelligence organs of the Main Staff of VRS
11 decides on transferring and sending, on special missions, members of the
12 security and intelligence organs within their scope of work, which is to
13 say that they could be assigned special tasks by the assistant Chief of
14 Staff of the Main Staff. And also there are provisions about special
15 measures, awards and so on.
16 Q. What would you know about what a security officer was doing if he
17 determined what he was doing was intelligence or counter-intelligence?
18 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. McCloskey.
19 MR. McCLOSKEY: You know, that sounds speculative to me, and
20 we're also -- the general nature of this document has been discussed over
21 and over again, and unless we have something very specific we're
22 responding to Mr. Bourgon on, I think this is going beyond the scope. As
23 to the last answer, I don't know where that's coming from or what it's
24 responding to.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: Do you wish to comment, Mr. Haynes?
1 MR. HAYNES: I'll go straight to the point. Never mind an
2 invitation to go straight to the point, and as Mr. McCloskey knows, I'm
3 never afraid to go straight to the point.
4 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. Refrain from --
5 MR. HAYNES: No, no, that's --
6 JUDGE AGIUS: Let's refrain from unnecessary comments. Just go
7 to the point.
8 MR. HAYNES:
9 Q. You had a prolonged debate with Mr. Bourgon about what tasks
10 might or might not amount to counter-intelligence. A simple question:
11 Did Drago Nikolic ever report to you what he was doing with Colonel Beara
12 at Petkovski on the 14th of July?
13 A. No, never.
14 Q. Did he ever submit any report to you about events at Orahovac?
15 A. No, never.
16 Q. Or Rocevic?
17 A. No.
18 Q. Now, I'm going to move away from that.
19 People touched briefly, in their cross-examination of you, upon
20 various items of literature that you'd written. How many books have you
22 A. I think four or five.
23 Q. And what post-graduate qualifications do you have?
24 A. In Ljubljana
25 Sociology, and I -- my minor was Social Ecology. My PhD studies were in
1 the field of Sociology of the Military, as a separate and distinct field
2 of Sociology.
3 Q. Now, Mr. Bourgon cross-examined you on the basis that your
4 evidence contradicted certain other opinions expressed in this case, and
5 I'm going to ask you your views on some of those people.
6 Can we start with Remy Landry. How would you compare your
7 knowledge of the relevant facts in this case to his?
8 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. McCloskey.
9 MR. McCLOSKEY: This seems to just be getting into argumentative.
10 Your Honours can make the judgements about, you know, personal
11 qualifications. You know, "I'm better than he is," what's the point to
12 that, or, "He's better than I am"? The form of the question is improper.
13 JUDGE AGIUS: What are you trying to --
14 MR. HAYNES: Well, Mr. Bourgon put to him this question: "So
15 you're right and three military experts are wrong?" He's brought into
16 question their expertise. That puts that ball squarely in play. It was
17 a stupid question, if I may say so, but I'm going to deal with it.
18 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. And if he says -- makes a statement now
19 that tries to nullify the effects of the Bourgon question, where do we go
20 from there? Ultimately, as Mr. McCloskey said, it's us who are going to
21 make an assessment.
22 MR. McCLOSKEY: I have no objection to taking an opinion or a
23 statement of Landry and asking the general to comment on his view of it,
24 but the way that was phrased was not getting us anywhere.
25 MR. HAYNES: I'll let you make a decision on that while I sit
2 JUDGE AGIUS: Ms. Nikolic.
3 MS. NIKOLIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, can we please be
4 given a reference to the page that Mr. Haynes is referring to when
5 speaking of the question put by Mr. Bourgon?
6 MR. HAYNES: 17th of February, 2009, page 31648, line 19, and
7 page 31650, line 20.
8 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you.
9 Mr. Ostojic, sorry.
10 MR. OSTOJIC: I'm sorry to make this point, but I just -- it
11 leaves a bad taste when a colleague, even on the opposing side, would say
12 that a question is stupid. I know yesterday there were some references,
13 and we do do that from time to time, but I would just ask the Court, as
14 it did just moments ago, just to refrain from making those comments. He
15 could have objected at that point when Mr. Bourgon asked the question, I
16 don't know that it a basis to say a question is stupid, but I find it
17 actually distasteful. I just want it on the record.
18 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Haynes.
19 MR. HAYNES: I'll try to keep my temper. That's a man who
20 invited me to go onto the witness box yesterday, but I won't say anything
21 like that again.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you.
23 MR. OSTOJIC: Only because they raised the issue.
24 JUDGE AGIUS: Stop it, please. We've travelled a long way in a
25 very smooth -- on a very smooth journey, and let's not spoil it at the
2 [Trial Chamber confers]
3 JUDGE AGIUS: In anticipation of what the witness's answer could
4 be, especially following your question, Mr. Haynes, I don't think we need
5 it. We are in a position later on to make an assessment. We've heard
6 him testify; we've heard Landry testify; we've heard Butler testify;
7 we've heard others testify.
8 MR. HAYNES: Thank you. Then I will move on and we'll get --
9 JUDGE AGIUS: And I can assure you that until now, we haven't
10 made up our minds as to who is more qualified than who and who gave a
11 better expert opinion, so let's leave it and move to your next question.
12 MR. HAYNES: Thank you.
13 I want to just sweep up a few minor points. Can we have a look,
14 please, at P30. And again this is quite a long document, so I'll see if
15 I can provide you with a hard copy to read through.
16 Q. Now, this is the order amending directive number 4. What's the
17 effect of an amending order?
18 A. As far as I remember from my previous readings of this document,
19 this is an amendment to the directive number 4, shortening the dead-lines
20 for executing certain tasks. At that time, they suppose that it is
21 possible to bring the war to an end by way of negotiations. These
22 amendments to directives, or to orders, or any other combat documents,
23 can amend it in the way of supplementing it or changing the place of
24 execution, engagement of forces, and so on. These are the kinds of
25 details that can be amended.
1 Q. And does that order amending directive 4 make any reference to
3 A. No, I don't see that. No such mention.
4 Q. Did you receive any order, in the combat actions you've described
5 for us in the early part of 1993, to remove civilian populations from
6 their homes?
7 A. No.
8 Q. And was that ever your objective in carrying out combat
9 operations in that period of time?
10 A. No.
11 Q. I just want to give you the opportunity of looking at P409,
12 please, page 25 in both languages.
13 And the document will need to go to the left a little bit so that
14 Mr. Pandurevic can see paragraphs 52, 53, and 54.
15 In answering questions to Mr. McCloskey, you had in mind,
16 I think, some legal provisions. Are these what you were referring to?
17 A. Yes. These are the regulations on the application of the -- of
18 the International Laws of War within the armed forces of the SFRY. I was
19 referring to the regulations which deal with civilian population and how
20 they need to be protected, and also exceptions to the rule on general
21 protection and item 53, which is where it is specified in what
22 circumstances the commander will not have such responsibility or when
23 combat operations cause or inflict -- inflict casualties amongst
24 civilians. Then we have three cases that represent exceptions. I spoke
25 about the category of civilian population which is with an armed unit,
1 when I spoke about the reports shown to me by Mr. McCloskey.
2 Q. One last thing on, as it were, 1993. You pointed out, on a map
3 that came from General Zivanovic, I think, 146 burnt Serbian villages,
4 and we saw much earlier in the trial, I think, with PW-168, some
5 underlying, as it were, video footage of the way in which people were
6 murdered in those places.
7 Did you see things like that, yourself, during that period of
9 A. During the war, I did see exhumed bodies from the area of
10 Glodjansko Brdo, from the area of Kravica, and I also saw mutilated
11 bodies in the area of Visegrad, near a village called Jelasci.
12 Q. Were the people you were fighting combat with farmers defending
13 their homesteads, as was suggested to you?
14 A. Those were members of the Army of Bosnia and Herzegovina. As for
15 their basic occupation previously, whether some of them were farmers or
16 workers, that's something I don't know.
17 Q. Now, in answer to a question from Mr. McCloskey about how you
18 interpreted Directive 7, you made reference to some NATO generals.
19 And I'd like now, please, if we could put 7D1126 into e-court.
20 And we need to go to the very last page of this document.
21 I'll read it for you slowly so that it's translated:
22 "General Short noted that he is stepping up attacks on Serbian
23 troops in Kosovo.
24 "'General Clark has set for me as my number 1 priority the
25 killing of that army in Kosovo,' he said, 'And I think I am going to be
1 able to do that. Not tomorrow or the next day, but we have flown our
2 first day-time B-52 air-strikes in Kosovo, dropping Mark-82s. And if I'm
3 a young Serb soldier, eating my lunch at 2.00 in the afternoon, and out
4 of the grey skies over my head comes a hundred-plus Mark-82s, that ought
5 to be a signal that we're entering a new phase of the air campaign and
6 we're taking the gloves off a little more.'
7 "These days, striking directly at the Milosevic government is
8 very much on his mind. While NATO says it is not fighting against the
9 Serbian people, General Short also hopes that the distress of the
10 Yugoslav public will undermine support for the authorities in Belgrade
11 "'I think no power to your refrigerator, no gas to your stove,
12 you can't get to work because the bridge is down - the bridge on which
13 you held your rock concerts - and you all stood with targets on your
14 heads. That needs to disappear at 3.00 in the morning.'"
15 Was this what you had in mind, as it were, when you talked about
16 the bombing of Belgrade
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. And what combat activity is General Short describing in this
20 A. He described activities which could directly affect the morale
21 and the mood of the population and the enemy forces.
22 Q. Thank you. Now, just moving on very quickly: How long after the
23 conversation with Brano Grujic on the 15th of July, at the IKM, was your
24 conversation with Ljubo Bojanovic?
25 A. Well, as far as I remember, I said an hour, hour and a half. I'm
1 not sure. Not a long time went by.
2 Q. And the information that you received from Brano Grujic,
3 Ljubo Bojanovic, and Dragan Obrenovic, did it suggest that the prisoners
4 had arrived in one large group at roughly at the same time or that they
5 were arriving over a protracted period?
6 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. McCloskey.
7 MR. McCLOSKEY: Leading.
8 MR. HAYNES: It's not.
9 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Haynes.
10 MR. HAYNES: No, it's not. There were two alternatives there.
11 MR. McCLOSKEY: He can ask, "What does this suggest to you?"
12 JUDGE AGIUS: That would be simpler, but it's true that there are
13 two alternatives, and that, in my mind, could make it a leading question,
14 because you're only offering two when there could be even more.
15 MR. HAYNES:
16 Q. How did you understand the prisoners to have arrived in Zvornik?
17 A. Well, given that I did not receive information at the same time
18 from all of these three men, my impression was that they were arriving in
19 convoys, but I had no idea whether they had all arrived in one day or
20 over two days.
21 Q. And what about their presence in schools? Similarly deal with
23 A. I knew about their presence in school based on what I had been
24 told by Mr. Grujic, and I understood this to be a temporary place for
25 them, especially when Ljubo Bojanovic provided additional information,
1 saying that he knew that buses passed by the barracks but that the
2 Zvornik Brigade had not been given any task relating to them.
3 Q. When Obrenovic told you that the prisoners had been executed at
4 Orahovac, when did you understand that that had occurred?
5 A. I understood it the way he told me. He explained that that took
6 place on the evening of the 14th.
7 Q. And what did you think then was the likely fate of all the
9 A. Since he later mentioned Petkovci, and what Mr. Ostojic had told
10 me, my conclusion was that all these unfortunate men had their fate
12 Q. And what impact on your views did your journey pass to Orahovac
13 on the evening of the 17th have?
14 A. On the evening of the 17th, I passed by Orahovac. I saw the
15 disturbed earth there, and I understood that what Obrenovic had told me
16 was actually true.
17 MR. HAYNES: Now, can we just look quickly at 7D686 [realtime
18 transcript read in error "7D866"], please. It appears as "866" in the
19 transcript. What I wanted was 686, and this is the right document that's
20 in e-court. Thank you.
21 Q. Now, you were asked some questions by Mr. Ostojic in relation to
22 this document about capturing prisoners. Can you just remind us,
23 according to your understanding, what the situation of the prisoners in
24 the schools was at the time General Krstic wrote this order.
25 A. They had already been taken prisoner, and there was no need for
1 them to be captured again. This order referred to the forces of the
2 28th Division that were trying to make a breakthrough towards Tuzla
3 Q. Were any prisoners captured by your forces -- I'm sorry, I'll ask
4 it in an open way.
5 What happened to the prisoners captured by your forces between
6 the 15th and the 26th of July?
7 A. These prisoners were taken to the military remand prison at the
8 Standard Barracks. At my intervention, the Drina Corps decided to
9 transfer them to Batkovic, and that is what happened.
10 Q. Were any prisoners captured by your forces taken to any of the
11 schools in the indictment?
12 A. No.
13 Q. I just want to revisit a document shown to you by Mr. McCloskey,
14 P295, at page 227 in B/C/S and 228 in English.
15 Can we take the document in B/C/S to the right a little bit, and
16 blow it up a little bit.
17 Now, when you looked at this with Mr. McCloskey, it was quite
18 hard to read. Can you read the entries for the 16th and 17th of July as
19 to where that vehicle went?
20 MR. McCLOSKEY: The record should reflect he had the original
21 when he did this. I'm told it's upstairs at the moment.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you.
23 MR. HAYNES: The photocopy is not bad. I'll try -- I'll see if
24 it's any better.
25 MR. McCLOSKEY: This particular document had some white-outs on
1 it, as the general will remember, so it's a bit of a strange document.
2 We can get it, if you like.
3 MR. HAYNES: Well, no, I'll see if he recalls it from the other
5 Q. On the 16th and 17th of July, on this document, what was the
6 finishing point of the journey made, so far as you could work out?
7 A. On the 17th of July, from 18 to 15, it says "All Staro Selo," and
8 I remember that there were two lines for correcting typos with
9 typewriters. Therefore, this does not correspond to the original.
10 Q. Very well. I think we can see, in relation to the 17th of July,
11 quite clearly what the last destination written in there is. Can you
12 confirm that for us, please.
13 A. I said that the final destination on the 17th was Papraca.
14 Q. And where is that?
15 A. Papraca is situated on the Memici-Sekovici road, and it was in
16 the zone of defence of the Sekovici Brigade.
17 Q. Thank you. Can we have a look at P336, please.
18 Again, something about which you were asked questions by
19 Mr. McCloskey, the 13 eliminated Muslim soldiers. Do you recall the
20 evidence of Zoran Jovanovic on this point?
21 A. I remember his testimony. Particularly about this issue, I am
22 not sure.
23 Q. How would this information find its way into a regular combat
24 report? Who would tell who what?
25 A. For the duty operations officer to be able to compile a regular
1 combat report, he first has to receive reports from subordinate units,
2 i.e., battalions and independent companies. Since here we had separate
3 units formed to scour the ground outside of their defence zones, and
4 these units are mentioned here, these units reported directly to the duty
5 operations officer about how many soldiers they had captured or how many
6 they had killed during the search of the ground or during fighting.
7 Q. Very well. Now, Mr. McCloskey also summarised for you some of
8 the evidence of a man called Ahmo Hasic. Do you recall that in your
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. I'm going to summarise some of his other evidence for you, and we
12 need to go into private session just for a second or two.
13 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Let's go into private session for a while,
14 please. One moment.
15 [Private session]
11 Page 32438 redacted. Private session.
4 [Open session]
5 JUDGE AGIUS: We are in open session.
6 MR. HAYNES:
7 Q. In relation to the duty operations officer's log-book, who kept
8 that record, and what was or should have been recorded in it?
9 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. McCloskey.
10 MR. McCLOSKEY: We've gone over this. I don't think it was a
11 contested issue in my cross, anyway.
12 MR. HAYNES: Yes. Well, it may not arise from your cross.
13 JUDGE AGIUS: Let's proceed anyway, and let's see.
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You're referring to 5377 and 5379,
15 the duty operations log-books.
16 MR. HAYNES: Yes.
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The entries were made by duty
18 operations officer on the day of their respective duty, or by their
19 assistants, or while they were resting; whether that happened during the
20 night or he had to go to the lavatory or he left the office for a coffee
21 break. However, we don't have two important documents here that didn't
22 appear anywhere, which is the rota of the duty operations officer, and we
23 don't have also the book of observations by the duty operations officer.
24 This was a separate book that contained observations made by each duty
25 operations officer during his shift, and it was handed over during the
1 change-over of duty, but -- to me or to the Chief of Staff, and I don't
2 see this book anywhere.
3 Q. From where does the obligation arise to keep a log-book, as duty
5 MR. McCLOSKEY: Your Honour, continuing objection. I can't
6 respond to any of this, and so he's going off into areas that I'm not
7 going to be able to respond to and areas that could have been brought up
8 that I don't see that are contested.
9 MR. HAYNES: I don't want to say too much, because it will be
10 said that I'm leading the witness, but this doesn't arise from
11 Mr. McCloskey's cross-examination. It arises from criticism of another
12 document, and I want to draw the comparison between P377 and P379 and the
13 other document, which is P378.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. McCloskey.
15 MR. McCLOSKEY: If the witness will stick to answering specific
16 questions, we won't get into the problem. If there's something he has in
17 specific -- but what we're seeing is we're going into the history of what
18 is not available to us, and that is a very long history which I don't
19 think we want to get into. So if it's specific and it's responsive to
20 something Mr. Bourgon or someone else, no problem, but right now we're
21 going into histories of what we don't have in the Zvornik Brigade, and
22 that is an area that we didn't get into in our --
23 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, but --
24 MR. McCLOSKEY: God knows how many days.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: I know as much as you do, Mr. McCloskey, so you
1 want to know exactly how far Mr. Haynes intends to go.
2 MR. HAYNES: Let me see if I can --
3 Q. What's the difference between the diary kept by the duty officer
4 and the log-book kept by the duty officer?
5 A. These terms are somewhat complicated. I understand what I have
6 in front of me, 5377, which is a working work log of duty operations
7 officer, as an ancillary document in which the duty officer records
8 information, messages, orders, conveyed communications, et cetera.
9 based on this book and the entries contained there in, keeps an
10 operations diary or log-book. Therefore, the entries in this book and
11 the operations log-book are almost identical. A lot can be also found of
12 an identical nature in regular combat reports. Therefore, there is a
13 direct link between these three sources, which is a working log-book of
14 the duty operations officer, duty operations diary, and regular combat
16 Q. Did every brigade have a log-book or should every brigade have
17 had a log-book?
18 A. I cannot remember exactly what the instructions on operations
19 duty provide, whether this was a mandatory book or an auxiliary book. We
20 had one, and I think it was a good idea to have it, and I think that each
21 brigade should have had one.
22 Q. And I'll try this one more time. What about the diary?
23 A. The operations diary is something different. It's a mandatory
24 instrument that has to be kept by each brigade.
25 Q. The three books are all about the same size, and we've seen them
1 in your hands. What was your view as to the preservation of those
3 A. These documents were kept in the safe with the operations duty
4 officer. It's a metal cabinet which was locked and which was under the
5 control of the operations duty officer.
6 Q. And where were they when you left your term of office as
7 commander of the Zvornik Brigade?
8 MR. McCLOSKEY: This has been asked and answered, as has most of
9 the other explanations that the generals have. If we can get to a point,
10 I really do not want to make the request to be able -- allowed to
12 JUDGE AGIUS: Can we move ahead, Mr. Haynes?
13 MR. HAYNES: We can, and --
14 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. Let's do that.
15 MR. HAYNES: I want to look at another record, please. It's
16 P354, and I'm going to hand you a hard copy of that.
17 Q. Help us as to what this is, firstly, General Pandurevic.
18 A. This is another auxiliary document which represents the survey of
19 the engagement of unit -- of men from a specific unit, and here we have a
20 military police unit in July 1995. We heard here why these documents
21 were established, and I kept a similar record in the JNA, referring to
22 the presence and absence of members of the company, although the original
23 idea and the original format of the document is not as we see it here.
24 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. Haynes, it's break time.
25 MR. HAYNES: Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't realise. I get lost in
1 these 80-minute --
2 JUDGE AGIUS: We'll have a 25-minute break now. Thank you.
3 --- Recess taken at 5.25 p.m.
4 --- On resuming at 5.53 p.m.
5 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Haynes.
6 MR. HAYNES:
7 Q. Mr. Pandurevic, just -- just before the break, you were looking
8 at P354 with me, and I've not got many questions on this. But according
9 to that document, how many military policemen were there in the
10 Zvornik Brigade in July 1995?
11 A. We can see that in the beginning of the month, and then all the
12 way up until the 14th, there were 89 soldiers, according to the list, and
13 at the end of the month there were 80 of them. So there was this
15 Q. Now, could we go to page 3 in this document, please. Thank you.
16 Now, just remind us how many military policemen you believed had been
17 deployed to guard prisoners from the Zvornik Brigade.
18 A. Well, I have said what I knew, and what I was told by
19 Dragan Obrenovic is that on the 13th, five or six were given to Nikolic.
20 Q. Now, have you -- are you familiar with what Richard Butler says
21 about this particular page of that record?
22 A. I really don't remember.
23 Q. Okay. I'll ask it another way. Did your belief, that there were
24 five men deployed, ever change from anything you learnt during the
25 following 14 years?
1 JUDGE AGIUS: One moment, one moment.
2 Yes, Ms. Nikolic.
3 MS. NIKOLIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I think this involves
4 speculation, and the witness is asked to speculate about the opinion he
5 had today or 14 years ago, about the events that had taken place in 1995.
6 JUDGE AGIUS: The witness has been here for a good two and a half
7 years. He knows that if answering the question means speculating, he
8 shouldn't answer it. But if he can answer it, then let's proceed and get
9 his answer.
10 Can you answer this question without speculating, Mr. Pandurevic?
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honours. I have seen
12 here a large number of soldiers who testified, and who testified about
13 where they were and where they saw other soldiers, so based on that, my
14 information about people present in various locations changed during this
16 MR. HAYNES:
17 Q. And do you still think only five military policemen were deployed
18 in relation to the guarding of prisoners?
19 A. I don't think that any longer. Perhaps the same people changed
20 locations, but we heard here that there were members of military police
21 in various locations, and most likely it was at least that number. As
22 for the total number, I don't know what it was.
23 Q. Now, who would have kept this document? Where would it have been
24 kept, and who by?
25 A. This document was in the Military Police Company, and I think we
1 have heard here, from a man who testified here, about the list and how he
2 kept this list. He was a clerk in the company, as far as I can remember,
3 a records clerk.
4 Q. According to your evidence, was Obrenovic's consent required for
5 the deployment of military policemen?
6 A. No. Had those people been available immediately, they would have
7 been taken without previous consent of Dragan Obrenovic.
8 Q. Thank you. I just -- we're very near the end now. I just want
9 to move on to the question of Semso Muminovic very, very briefly. Remind
10 us when you first learned that Muminovic was trying to get in touch with
11 you and what he wanted.
12 A. I have said that according to my recollection, this was conveyed
13 to me by Jevdjevic at the Krivace IKM that Semso was looking for me. I
14 didn't know the details about what he wanted form me and I received that
15 information again when I came to the IKM at the Delici village.
16 Q. When you spoke to him, was the conversation being recorded at
17 your end?
18 A. No, not on my end.
19 Q. When you spoke to him, did you know it was being recorded by
21 A. I didn't know that anybody was recording it, but I assumed that
22 all of those who had a Motorola and who had that frequency could have
23 listened to that, and they did listen.
24 Q. When you spoke to Semso Muminovic in 2001, did you know then that
25 there were tape-recordings of your any of your conversations with him on
1 July the 15th and 16th?
2 A. I didn't know.
3 Q. And did he say anything during that meeting that indicated that
4 he knew about it?
5 A. I am not sure that he gave me any sort of a signal, that he
6 indicated in any way that he had a recording of that conversation of
8 Q. When did you first learn about the recording?
9 A. Well, I heard -- I saw some of his statements here, where he
10 mentioned cameramen and journalists who were present on the day of the
11 conversation, and most likely the cameraman recorded that. And I also
12 saw in the statement of Sabic, Veiz, who said that he was aware of this
13 recorded conversation on the 15th, the conversation between me and Semso.
14 Q. And when did you first hear the recording?
15 A. I heard it here, when I received it on a CD. You handed it to
16 me, and most likely you, yourself, had received it from the Prosecution,
17 because it bears their number.
18 Q. Just to clear something up, so far you're aware, does he -- does
19 he remain a witness on your list of witnesses?
20 A. Yes. He gave a statement under 92 bis, and I don't know what
21 became of it, what your final decision will be. As far as I know, he is
22 still on our witness list.
23 Q. Thank you. Now, just a few questions about the -- about
24 Mr. Popovic.
25 Can we look again, please, at P291.
1 You've answered, really, rather too many questions about this
2 transaction already, so I'm not going to exasperate you further, but how
3 could this have been done differently, by which I mean accounted? What
4 documents could have been used to indicate the movement of fuel to
5 Mr. Popovic from the Zvornik Brigade dump?
6 A. Given that the fuel was leaving the Zvornik Brigade and was going
7 to another unit or to another financial organ, in this particular case
8 the Command of the Drina Corps, this sort of a list had to be drawn up
9 for this to be sent over. I don't know -- I'm not aware of any other way
10 in which this could have been given over. This could have been given
11 over as a loan. But this is a document that is sent to the bookkeeping,
12 and in the bookkeeping records it is said that the Zvornik Brigade is
13 divested of this amount of fuel, as indicated here.
14 Q. What other documentation can be used to show the dispensing of
16 A. There is a so-called LIP, the list of the fuel issued and
17 received. We saw it in relation to the 13th and 14th, when TG-1 received
18 fuel in Vlasenica. That's one method. And these records are kept at the
19 gas station or in the location where the fuel is given. Such a
20 possibility also existed in the Zvornik Brigade.
21 Q. And what would have been required to do it in that way?
22 A. In order for the fuel to be issued for the use of own units via
23 the so-called LIP, there needs to be an order and an approval for the
24 fuel to be issued or given, and there need to be justified reasons for
25 that, or, rather, this needs to be given for the tasks to be
2 Q. Any other way?
3 A. There are no other regular ways. If somebody comes directly with
4 a vehicle to a gas station, and if Mr. Pantic, who took care about the
5 usage of fuel, and if he issued a receipt saying that such and such
6 amount of fuel is approved for that person, then such a person could have
7 gone to a gas station with such a receipt, and whoever was operating the
8 gas station would have issued to him the amount of fuel indicated in the
10 Q. Okay, thank you. And I now want to just look at, I think for the
11 last time, P377, page 770 in the hard copy that you have, and in e-court
12 page 152.
13 A. Yes, I have the page.
14 Q. It's the entry at 2125. Can we just back up in history a little
15 bit, and you can remind us about when it was the self-propelled guns were
16 taken and what happened to them after that, as precisely in time as you
17 can, please.
18 A. I think that these self-propelled guns were taken sometime in the
19 morning. I wouldn't be able to say exactly what time it was on the 16th.
20 I know that they were taken out of action soon thereafter, in terms of
21 firing at us, and that throughout the day they remained in the same
22 positions where they were, because they could not be moved. They were
23 dug in, and they were facing the enemy positions in the area of Nezuk.
24 Whether it was 9.00, 10.00, I'm not sure. It could have been earlier.
25 Q. And so that it's clear on the transcript, are we talking about
1 9.00 or 10.00 in the morning or evening?
2 A. In the morning.
3 Q. Now, when was the last combat action on the 16th of July?
4 A. I think at around 11.00. Or after 11.00 there was an
5 interruption in combat, and there were perhaps occasional exchanges of
6 gun-fire, sporadic ones, because not all of the units on the ground had
7 perhaps received the information that negotiations were in progress and
8 that people were working on a truce.
9 Q. And by 9.00 in the evening, what was going on at Baljkovica?
10 A. Well, at the time it was already getting dark. It was the time
11 when the passage of the column on the 28th Division was halted. It was
12 then that Semso and I, with his superior command, Malkic, agreed on what
13 the situation should be overnight so that in the morning we could
14 continue letting through the columns of the 28th Division.
15 Q. And how long had the self-propelled guns been back in your
16 possession by then?
17 A. Well, at least as early as 12.00, the crew was around them, and
18 then further on as well.
19 Q. I'm just shifting slight. How -- remind us how it was you
20 composed the interim combat report of the 16th of July and how it got to
21 be sent from the Zvornik Brigade Command.
22 A. Well, I dictated the report to Captain Milisav Petrovic, and it
23 could have been sent to the corps only from the Zvornik Brigade via a
24 coded teleprinter, because they did not have that kind of encoding at the
1 Q. And I'm not sure whether you've told us this or not, frankly, but
2 did Milisav Petrovic take it to the Zvornik Brigade or ring it through,
3 as it were?
4 A. No, somebody had to take it. A vehicle had to go, or a courier,
5 or Milisav Petrovic himself, but a vehicle had to go there and take the
6 paper to the Command of the Zvornik Brigade.
7 Q. Let's come back to this entry at 2125. Who's this an inquiry
8 from, and about what?
9 A. On the same page?
10 Q. Yes.
11 A. Well, from Zlatar. Mostly likely, duty operations officer from
12 the Drina Corps asked the duty operations officer at Palma, that is to
13 say, in the Zvornik Brigade, whether self-propelled guns had remained in
14 our hands.
15 Q. And had that been an important issue at any time earlier in the
17 A. I don't know in what sense and for whom it could have been
18 important. Whether it was important for the corps command and what they
19 knew about that, I'm not sure about that. It was important for me to put
20 them out of action as soon as possible so that they wouldn't fire on my
22 Q. It's just that you were looking the other day at an intercepted
23 communication involving Mr. Popovic at about 9.16 on the evening of the
24 16th of July, and you might recall Mr. McCloskey suggesting that in that
25 conversation, he was defending you. Do you remember the conversation?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Had anybody come to the Forward Command Post on the 16th and
3 asked you what the situation was in relation to these self-propelled
5 A. No, nobody from the superior command came to see me on the 16th,
6 the evening, at the IKM, nor did they ask me in relation to these, to
7 these self-propelled guns.
8 Q. And at 9.00 or quarter past 9.00 on the evening of the 16th of
9 July, would you have described the situation at horrible?
10 A. No, not at that time, not at all. The situation was completely
12 MR. HAYNES: Right.
13 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Haynes, if you could ask your witness to read
14 the entry at 2125 again so that I can hear the translation.
15 MR. HAYNES: Yes, certainly.
16 Q. Can you -- you heard Judge Kwon's question?
17 A. Yes. Your Honour, it says, from Zlatar, they require information
18 as to whether the self-propelled guns remained in our hands at 2125.
19 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
20 MR. HAYNES:
21 Q. The final strait, Mr. Pandurevic. I want quickly, in response
22 really to the totality of what's been put to you, to run you through the
23 events of the 4th to the 20th of July, or there -- and thereabouts.
24 Which brigade was responsible for the conduct of combat operations in the
25 Zeleni Jadar area?
1 A. If you're referring to Krivaja 95, the direction of the axis of
2 the operation was Zeleni Jadar. Rajne Bojna was the axis of Tactical
3 Group 1, which was under my command.
4 Q. I wasn't. I was referring to the situation generally.
5 A. The positions facing the 28th Division in the area of
6 Zeleni Jadar were held by Tactical Group Pribicevac, which comprised an
7 independent battalion from Skelani and parts of the Bratunac Brigade. In
8 the area of Zeleni Jadar, there were units of the Independent Battalion
9 from Skelani.
10 Q. Who was responsible for the conduct of troops carrying out the
11 combat operations under Krivaja 95?
12 A. The forces which participated in the Krivaja 95 operation -- or,
13 rather, the forces that carried out active combat operations were under
14 the command of General Krstic.
15 Q. And was he at that time a commander in his own right?
16 A. No. At the time, he was Chief of Staff and deputy corps
17 commander, but in that particular situation he was appointed to command
18 those forces in that particular task, and he at the time held the
19 position of the commander, or, rather, he was the officer in command.
20 Q. Generally, who was responsible for the conduct of combat
21 operations in Orahovac, Petkovci, Rocevic, Kula, Pilica, Kozluk and
23 A. The person who was given the task to transport the prisoners and
24 to put them into the facilities that you mentioned.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: Did you speak in the -- I just want to make sure
1 that the transcript is correct. Did you speak in the singular or in the
2 plural? In the transcript, we have "the person," one person. Is that
3 what you said?
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honours, one person was
5 in command of all of those forces, and he had people who were
6 subordinated to him.
7 MR. HAYNES:
8 Q. I better clear that up, because I was, in fact, asking you about
9 the situation outside the period with which we're concerned. Let's take
10 the month of June 1995. Who was responsible for the conduct of combat
11 operations in those places then?
12 A. If you are referring to the facilities and the schools in the
13 villages that you have just mentioned -- is that what you're referring
15 Q. I'm referring to the responsibility to conduct combat operations
16 in those villages.
17 A. Should armed forces of the Army of Bosnia and Herzegovina
18 appeared in those locations at any point in time, it would have been the
19 Zvornik Brigade who would have been responsible for engaging them and
20 waging combat against them.
21 Q. But perhaps we can come now to the question you may already have
22 answered. Who was responsible for carrying out the illegal operation to
23 kill prisoners of war in those areas?
24 A. Well, the person who was given the order to transport them, to
25 put them up in these facilities, and to organise the execution. And it
1 certainly wasn't an officer from the Zvornik Brigade.
2 Q. What authority did you have to give orders to military policemen
3 from Bratunac?
4 A. None.
5 Q. What authority did you have orders -- sorry. What authority did
6 you have to give orders to members of the 65th Protection Regiment?
7 A. None.
8 Q. You now know that certain members of the Zvornik Brigade carried
9 out guard duties, digging work, burial work, transportation, et cetera.
10 Did any of them act on your orders?
11 A. No.
12 Q. Under whose command were those people at the time?
13 A. They were under the command of the person who was in charge of
14 all of those tasks.
15 MR. HAYNES: General Pandurevic, thank you very much indeed.
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Ostojic.
18 MR. OSTOJIC: Thank you, Mr. President.
19 Your Honours, in the interests of justice and in the spirit of
20 fairness, I would respectfully request that the Court use their
21 discretion and allow me 30 minutes to conduct a re-cross-examination.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: We have to follow the usual practice. First we
23 want to know what questions you wish to ask, and then we decide if to
24 allow any or all of them.
25 MR. OSTOJIC: I don't -- the areas that I would -- I don't
1 typically read out my questions, but the areas that I would like to
2 question him is related to a document P196 --
3 JUDGE AGIUS: What's that?
4 MR. OSTOJIC: Which references -- it is in evidence, and it's an
5 order from the Drina Corps, excuse me, dated the 15th of April, 1995
6 which in paragraph 2, the instructions, states:
7 "All commands - from battalion level upwards, are to determine
8 places behind the front-line at which captured members of the enemy army
9 are to be collected."
10 JUDGE AGIUS: And what's your question?
11 MR. OSTOJIC: Whether or not this specific order that was
12 received purportedly, although it says 1st Zvornik infantry Brigade, so
13 when it was received by the 1st Zvornik Infantry Brigade, was it ever
14 modified, amended, or altered.
15 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. Haynes, because after all you also have a
17 MR. HAYNES: Well, it's a document dated the 15th of April, 1995
18 sent to intelligence and security organ heads. I can't see the relevance
19 of that. I can't see why he couldn't have been asked that the first time
20 'round. Mr. Ostojic had about four days with him.
21 JUDGE AGIUS: Let's stick to the essentials.
22 What's your next question, Mr. Ostojic.
23 MR. OSTOJIC: It similarly relates to P107, which was a document
24 that was sent -- as we see who should be in charge of the detainees, and
25 it was changed in the Bratunac Brigade, and also we would use 7D382,
1 which in English shows on page -- I apologise, it's not paginated, but
2 under section 10, subsection B, certain changes with mark-outs of the
3 security organ, and then handwritten sections as to who should be
4 utilising those --
5 JUDGE AGIUS: And what do you want to prove? What do you seek to
6 prove with both questions?
7 MR. OSTOJIC: Specifically, to rebut Mr. Pandurevic's testimony
8 in connection with this command-and-control issue with respect to the
10 And also, just to respond briefly to Mr. Haynes' comment, this
11 wasn't sent -- the first one which we're discussing, P196, was actually
12 sent to the Command of the 1st Zvornik Brigade, not to the sections that
13 Mr. Haynes references. It's on the face of the document.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: That should appear on the face of the document. I
15 was going to precisely say that. So why don't you tell us which other
16 questions you have in mind.
17 MR. OSTOJIC: In addition, in light of the fact that Mr. Haynes
18 and the witness -- or the witness is actually now shifting the failure to
19 include parts of his testimony on the 65 ter list, we would like to
20 revisit the 65 ter list with his interview on the 2nd of October, 2001
21 which is 7D1154. And I would ask to inquire also with respect to whether
22 it was his attorney's omission, the issue of Ljubo Bojanovic as well,
23 because today on page 53, lines 15 through 19, he mentions him, and to
24 have -- to know from this witness whether it was counsel's decision not
25 to object to the admission of Mr. Bojanovic's statement, where it's
1 completely inconsistent with what this witness said, or was that
2 Mr. Pandurevic's decision.
3 JUDGE AGIUS: One moment. Do you wish to comment on that,
4 Mr. Haynes?
5 MR. HAYNES: Asked and answered, I think.
6 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, I think so.
7 Yes, Mr. McCloskey.
8 MR. McCLOSKEY: Mr. President, since we have one accused so
9 pointedly accusing another accused of actually being in command, and I
10 don't recall that being part of the direct examination, that we have a
11 chief of security actually exercising now command, clearly over and over
12 again it's mentioned, I think five or ten minutes for Mr. Beara to get
13 into that, I wouldn't object to. I don't wish to get involved in it.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. Haynes.
15 MR. HAYNES: Well, I do. We have procedures here, and we've
16 adhered to them for two and a half years. All of this could have been
17 dealt with in cross-examination. Half an hour, he wants. He just wants
18 to have another bluff and bluster and make a few loud speeches, and the
19 witness is very, very tired.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: Please refrain from passing certain comments which
21 don't do anyone any good.
22 MR. HAYNES: I will, but if you're talking about fairness,
23 there's a very, very tired man sitting here who's had enough now.
24 MR. OSTOJIC: I'm actually not tired.
25 [Trial Chamber confers]
1 JUDGE AGIUS: What other questions do you have? We are reserving
2 our decision on this command structure issue that you have referred to.
3 We want to hear what other questions you have.
4 MR. OSTOJIC: Yes, thank you.
5 The next issue I'd like to visit with the witness, with your
6 leave, is Exhibit 2D642, which is the exculpatory Croat intercept, where
7 today, on pages 15, lines 24 and 25, and then page 16, lines 1 through 9,
8 Mr. Pandurevic gave some testimony on that, and it's not clear, so I'd
9 like to clarify it. Given the plain text of the --
10 JUDGE AGIUS: What do you want to clarify?
11 MR. OSTOJIC: Specifically, when he testified on those pages, it
12 was implied that there was going to be a selection and then a transfer to
13 Batkovici, but if we look at the Croat intercept, specifically the word
14 "gdje" or "where," and the selection, it would first put them in
15 Batkovici and then a selection to be made.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. That's clear from the document, itself,
17 I think.
18 MR. OSTOJIC: I'll withdraw that one.
19 The next issue, if permitted, is the issue of Momir Nikolic's
20 plea. I would like to ask him concretely, on page 2 of this statement of
21 facts, at paragraph 6, where Mr. Nikolic includes the Drina Wolves of the
22 Zvornik Brigade, to hear his comments about that, because Mr. Nikolic
23 says they were involved in the -- some of the criminal activities, and he
24 was there at the time or close to it.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: Do you wish to comment on that, Mr. Haynes?
1 MR. HAYNES: No, I think we've established who had command of the
2 Drina Wolves when they're outside the zone of the Zvornik Brigade, and
3 I think it's a rather contradictory attitude to the Momir Nikolic plea
5 JUDGE AGIUS: Which is your next question?
6 MR. OSTOJIC: And further with sticking with Mr. Nikolic,
7 although Mr. Pandurevic claims that he only saw the statement of facts in
8 2005, upon his arrival to the UNDU, the plea was public for two years, or
9 possibly even more, two and a half years, I would like to ask him, since
10 he was following the proceedings, if he had learned from other sources,
11 not the statement itself, but from other sources, what was contained
12 within that statement.
13 JUDGE AGIUS: It can be the subject of a submission later on by
14 anyone who is interested in it.
15 Your next question would be what?
16 MR. OSTOJIC: My next area would be to learn from this witness
17 whether it was his decision or his Defence team not to challenge or
18 otherwise --
19 JUDGE AGIUS: Forget that. Move to the next one.
20 MR. OSTOJIC: If I could just put it on the record,
21 Mr. President, so I have --
22 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, of course.
23 MR. OSTOJIC: Thank you, and I apologise. Or otherwise refuse to
24 cross-examine any witnesses such as Svetlana Gavrilovic, Mira Cekic, or
1 JUDGE AGIUS: Next question.
2 MR. OSTOJIC: Finally, I would like to -- although I find it
3 surprising they would use the Milos Tomanovic interview, we have three
4 documents in our initial submission with respect to our line of
5 questioning before the Court sustained an objection from my learned
6 friend of the Pandurevic Defence team, even though they challenged us to
7 put our case to him, and those two exhibits relate to a statement that I
8 personally received from the witness, and also what the Prosecution has
9 said from their investigator, specifically when they asked Mr. Tomovic
10 that they had information that Mr. Beara was in Belgrade in July of 1995.
11 If the Court remembers, I was limited in asking that question, but now --
12 JUDGE AGIUS: Of course I remember.
13 Do you wish to comment on that, Mr. Haynes?
14 MR. HAYNES: I don't understand what the question is or could be,
15 but --
16 JUDGE AGIUS: Anyway, let's proceed with your next question.
17 MR. OSTOJIC: [Indiscernible] that I would like, although there's
18 more questions in each of those areas, just so the Court knows.
19 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Of course, we could stay here even the entire
20 of next week. Let me consult with my colleagues, please, and we'll come
21 back to you shortly.
22 [Trial Chamber confers]
23 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. Mr. Ostojic, as briefly as possible, you are
24 allowed to put some questions to the witness on the matter of the command
25 structure. That's about it. We'd like you to restrict it to ten
2 MR. OSTOJIC: Just so I'm clear, is that it, or is that about it?
3 Can I ask you to reconsider --
4 JUDGE AGIUS: No, that's it. When I say it, forgive my English,
5 it's not my native language.
6 MR. OSTOJIC: I apologise. Thank you, Mr. President, and
7 Your Honours.
8 Can we have P196, please, on e-court.
9 Further cross-examination by Mr. Ostojic:
10 Q. Mr. Pandurevic, this is a Drina Corps command order, and although
11 your counsel says it's only to intelligence and security organs, can you
12 tell me, at the top portion of it, to whom this was sent to, in addition
13 to intelligence and security organ heads? Read it out loud, please.
14 A. You see, the Drina Corps units are enumerated here, and it says
15 specifically heads of the organs for intelligence. In order for everyone
16 to know which organ, they had to specify the units where these organs
17 are. Therefore, this document refers exclusively to security organs,
18 because in the title, we have security organ, and security organ cannot
19 send an order to me. This is just an instruction issued by the
20 Drina Corps or, rather, its security organ, instructing the security
21 organs of subordinate units how to conduct this business of arresting and
22 treating the prisoners of war and other prisoners.
23 Q. So you never received this, although it says on the top, first
24 line: "To Command of ...," and then the second one is the 1st Zvornik
25 Infantry Brigade; is that what your testimony is?
1 A. Yes. If he put, as an addressee, the chief of Security, it
2 wouldn't be clear to whom it was addressed. You see that this is sent by
3 the security organ of the Drina Corps, not by Zivanovic.
4 Q. So if it says: "To Command of 1st Zvornik Infantry Brigade,"
5 that's not you, even though it's the fourth month, the 15th day, and the
6 1995, the year; correct?
7 A. If it says only the Command of the 1st Bratunac, the 1st Zvornik,
8 et cetera, et cetera, without specifying to the chief of security and
9 intelligence, then this document would come directly to me. As the case
10 is, it went to the chief of security. If he deemed necessary, he would
11 have informed me about it, and maybe he did so.
12 Q. And then let's look at page 2 of this document in B/C/S -- in
13 English and in B/C/S. It's under the word "Instruction," and it's
14 identified as paragraph number 2 numerically. It says as follows, and
15 I think you've heard this already:
16 "All commands - from battalion level upwards, are to determined
17 places behind the front-line at which captured members of the enemy are
18 to be collected."
19 It obviously has more. You're welcome to read the rest. This
20 also refers to not you but someone else, correct, even though it plainly
21 says: "All commands - from battalion level upwards"?
22 A. I can agree with you in that respect, but it will then turn out
23 that the security organ of the Drina Corps is issuing orders to brigade
24 commanders from battalion upwards. These locations should have been
25 decided by the security organs of the battalions. If I accept that this
1 should be done from the battalion commands upwards, then it explicitly
2 states that the chief of security from of the Drina Corps is directly
3 issuing orders to me.
4 Q. Help me with this: Are you familiar with the second amended
5 consolidated indictment, which I'm sure you are, in this case wherein the
6 Prosecution from the outset has never charged Mr. Beara with any command
7 responsibility? You're aware of that, aren't you?
8 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. Haynes.
9 MR. HAYNES: What's that got to do with the price of fish,
11 MR. OSTOJIC: Well, depending on how he answers, though, I'm sure
12 I know the answer, I would have a follow-up question on that, and then we
13 can --
14 MR. HAYNES: None of this arises from any of the re-examination.
15 This is all the same theme that was developed in cross-examination a week
16 or so ago.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. McCloskey.
18 MR. McCLOSKEY: That's precisely the issue that I had in mind.
19 Because they made a big emphasis on commander, as Krstic was a combat
20 commander, and this was really the redirect, where they really have
21 rammed that home, and so I think five or ten minutes on that topic is not
23 [Trial Chamber confers]
24 JUDGE AGIUS: Proceed with your next question, because actually
25 whether he's aware of that or not is irrelevant at this stage.
1 MR. OSTOJIC:
2 Q. And isn't it true -- and isn't it true, Mr. Pandurevic, that you
3 knew that, and in light of that, you decided to create your defence to
4 shift the responsibility on Mr. Beara specifically as it relates to
5 command because you full well know he's not charged with any command
7 A. You see, I don't remember what is stated in the amended
8 indictment regarding the charges against Mr. Beara. He doesn't have
9 command responsibility, but he has personal responsibility.
10 You have to understand one thing, and I've already said that:
11 Mr. Beara didn't find himself where he did in those days because he was
12 the chief of Security Administration and he didn't have the right to
13 command. He was given a specific task, and he was appointed a person in
14 charge of command during that task. So all the people assigned to him
15 were under his command, and he commanded them temporarily.
16 For example, my assistant for morale, Ljubo Bojanovic, was a
17 temporary battalion commander. The chief of artillery -- anti-aircraft
18 units, Milenko Kajtaz, was temporarily commanding a battalion in Krajina.
19 And operations officer Petrovic was also temporarily commanding a
20 battalion. Therefore, each and every officer, regardless of his position
21 per establishment, can be appointed as a temporary commander over a
22 certain unit or to conduct the execution of a certain task, and that
23 includes a security organ. And he is not responsible, in terms of
24 command, because he is a commander, but because he commanded those men in
25 those days. And we saw from the document who issued these illegal
1 orders. He is responsible under 7(1) personally.
2 Q. Thank you for your legal opinion on that, although I respectfully
3 disagree. Did you see at any time one specific document or one witness
4 that said under oath here that Mr. Beara was given this specific task
5 from Mladic?
6 A. No, I didn't see any document --
7 Q. So --
8 JUDGE AGIUS: Let him finish the answer.
9 MR. OSTOJIC: Sorry, there was a pause, and I thought he was
10 done. I wasn't looking at him. Sorry.
11 JUDGE AGIUS: Finish your answer, please, Mr. Pandurevic.
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours.
13 Similarly, somebody organised the transportation of POWs and bus
14 convoys. They didn't organise themselves by themselves. And this wasn't
15 organised either by Blagojevic, as the brigade commander, nor the
16 Zvornik Brigade.
17 MR. OSTOJIC:
18 Q. Mr. Pandurevic, and we've heard that, and the Prosecution talked
19 about that in the Krstic and Blagojevic case. With respect to Mr. Beara
20 specifically, and Mr. Mladic, do you know where Mr. Mladic was on the
21 14th of July, 1995?
22 A. I don't know where he was. Even worse, if Ljubo Beara decided on
23 his own to do something like that without anyone's order, which I think
24 is highly unlikely.
25 Q. You don't have any evidence, you've heard from no witnesses,
1 you've reviewed no documents, that there was this purported order from
2 Mladic to Beara; that's correct, right?
3 A. I've seen and heard what appeared in this case here in the form
4 of witness statements, intercepts, duty operations officer work log of
5 the Zvornik Brigade, et cetera. This is what gives me a right to draw a
6 conclusion that this operation was commanded by your client.
7 Q. Now, you've also not seen --
8 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. Ostojic, your last question --
9 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
10 MR. OSTOJIC:
11 Q. Mr. Pandurevic, you have not seen one piece of evidence, other
12 than to know that Mr. Mladic was in Belgrade
13 Ambassador Bildt, I think, on the 14th of July. We've seen the Croat
14 intercept. Why don't you, sir, as the commander you claim to be, admit
15 that this is a complete construct and this is only being presented by you
16 in order to give a defence? Be the gentleman we think you are.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: This could be an argument that you can bring later
18 on, if you want to discredit this witness. It's not a question that you
19 put to him now, knowing what the answer is going to be in any case.
20 Do you wish to answer this question, Mr. Pandurevic? Then go
21 ahead, answer.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honours.
23 If Mr. Mladic, on the 14th, was in Belgrade, you have an
24 abundance of evidence that Mr. Beara was in Bratunac on the 13th, and
25 Mladic was not in Belgrade
1 And the second part of your question, you mentioned the intercept
2 of the 13th. How come that your client was distributing and allocating
3 buses for the transportation of POWs if he had no powers and no authority
4 to do that?
5 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, that's it. I thank you, Mr. --
6 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, Your Honour.
7 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you, Mr. Ostojic.
8 Judge Kwon, do you have any questions? Judge Prost?
9 MR. HAYNES: I thought I might ask a couple of questions arising
10 from that.
11 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for Mr. Haynes.
12 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. Haynes, it's -- Judge Prost.
13 JUDGE PROST: Mr. Pandurevic, I just have one point I want to
14 raise with you, and it relates to the famous P329, if we could pull that
15 up, the interim combat report, 15th of July. I want to be sure that I
16 understand perfectly what your evidence is on this point.
17 Questioned by the Court:
18 JUDGE PROST: As I take it, and I'm looking at the evidence you
19 gave on direct on the 2nd of February, a month ago, and it's at
20 page 30983 and following in the transcript from that date, particularly
21 lines 16 to 21, my understanding is that when you wrote or dictated this
22 interim combat report, the information that you had on prisoners in the
23 schools came from Brano Grujic. Is that correct?
24 A. Yes, Your Honour, that's correct.
25 JUDGE PROST: And while you had discussions with Ljubo Bojanovic,
1 he didn't have any additional information about the schools; he simply
2 related some information about buses with prisoners that had gone in the
3 direction of Bijeljina?
4 A. Yes, Your Honour.
5 JUDGE PROST: And I know that you were paraphrasing the
6 conversation, obviously, after all this time, that you had with
7 Mr. Grujic. What you stated was that: "He told me," you said, and I'll
8 just read it to you:
9 "He didn't stay long. He simply arrived and asked me how come
10 there were prisoners in some schools on the territory of Zvornik
11 municipality. I think he mentioned the school in Petkovci and the one in
13 Now, that's the way in which you described the information that
14 you had received; correct?
15 A. Yes.
16 JUDGE PROST: Then my issue is, Mr. Pandurevic: When I look then
17 at P329 and the information that you related there, you said:
18 "An additional burden for us is the large number of prisoners
19 distributed throughout schools in the brigade area."
20 And for me, there's quite a difference there between the
21 information that you received and the information that you relate. I
22 read the report as being much broader and a much stronger statement than
23 the information that you'd received from Mr. Grujic, and I'm wondering if
24 you can explain to me how that information got translated into the report
25 in that manner.
1 A. Your Honours, if I can look at the next page, because I would
2 like to check the translation, whether I said throughout schools or a
3 number of schools or a few schools, I really need to look at the next
4 page. It says here we have additional burden imposed on us by a large
5 number of prisoners housed in the schools in the area of the brigade. I
6 didn't quote or cite the names of the schools. And this is the
7 information that I received, and I passed on the identical information in
8 my report to the corps command.
9 JUDGE PROST: So the phrase that you used was "in the schools"?
10 A. Yes, Your Honour.
11 JUDGE PROST: Thank you.
12 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you, Judge Prost.
13 That brings us to the end of your testimony. I thank you,
14 Mr. Pandurevic.
15 The understanding is that we stand adjourned until Monday -- no,
16 we can't do all the documents in five minutes.
17 [Trial Chamber confers]
18 JUDGE AGIUS: Yeah, I imagine there's not going to be any
19 opposition. Let's start with the Haynes -- or the Pandurevic documents.
20 This is the one; no?
21 Yeah, there is a set of documents totalling 91; is that correct,
22 Mr. Haynes?
23 MR. HAYNES: I'm sure it is. These things happened largely
24 without reference to me, while I'm here, but I know a very careful eye
25 has been kept on documents that have gone into evidence during the course
1 of the examination and the re-examination, and that's, I'm assured, is an
2 accurate one, and I would ask for them to be admitted.
3 JUDGE AGIUS: Are there any objections?
4 Mr. McCloskey.
5 MR. McCLOSKEY: Yes. Mr. President, I'm told that there is -- at
6 just a brief glance, there's documents in this list that were never used
7 in the -- in the testimony, and I think at this point it may be a good
8 idea to try to get our act together on that.
9 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. Then I was right. Let's wait until
10 Monday. In the meantime, you will have an opportunity to go through them
11 more carefully, Mr. Josse included. He usually asks for time.
12 All right. Monday, you will come back to us with further
13 evidence, Mr. Haynes?
14 MR. HAYNES: Yes.
15 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay, thank you.
16 MR. McCLOSKEY: Mr. President, the Witness Section is saying they
17 have visa issues and things, so I will get back to everyone on our
18 ability to provide witnesses on the following Wednesday.
19 JUDGE AGIUS: All right, okay. Thank you.
20 In the meantime, there may be developments. We'll keep you
21 informed. Thank you.
22 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 6.56 p.m.
23 to be reconvened on Monday, the 9th day of March,
24 2009, at 9.00 a.m.