1 Tuesday, 5 September 2006

2 [Open session]

3 [The accused entered court]

4 [The witness entered court]

5 --- Upon commencing at 2.15 p.m.

6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Registrar, please call the

7 case.

8 THE REGISTRAR: [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Your Honour. Case

9 IT-04-74-T, the Prosecutor versus Prlic et al.

10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you very much. Today is

11 Tuesday, the 5th of September 2006. I'd like to say good afternoon to

12 everyone here representatives of the Prosecution, of the Defence and the

13 accused, as well as all the staff in this courtroom.

14 We have to proceed with the direct examination of the witness who

15 is here in the courtroom but before we proceed let me raise the following

16 issue. Through a motion of the 1st of September, 2006, the Prosecution

17 had applied to the Chamber for the admission of the exhibit submitted

18 during the hearing of Manolic. A chart had been annexed to this

19 application by the Prosecution, but we noticed that there was a mixture of

20 exhibits that had been tendered and exhibits that had not been submitted,

21 so we'd like to ask the Prosecution to submit a new application in which

22 they will make a clear distinction between one type of exhibits and the

23 other type of exhibits. And we'd like to invite the Defence, once they

24 receive the application, to make any comments they have within the time

25 prescribed, within the eight days that we indicated.

1 I wanted to make that very clear in order for us to be able to

2 rule very quickly on that matter.

3 As a general rule, let me invite both the Prosecution and the

4 Defence, when clarifications -- when you need clarification, please get in

5 touch with the Trial Chamber's legal officer, who will be able to clarify

6 a number of points for you. Of course, this does not prevent you from

7 raising the issue during the hearing, but that's a good way, a practical

8 way of resolving a number of issues. So I'd like to invite you to use the

9 services of the Trial Chamber legal officer in order to solve a number of

10 issues or to clarify a number of points.

11 Having said that, I'm now going to give the floor to Mr. Scott to

12 proceed with the examination of the witness.

13 MR. SCOTT: Thank you, Mr. President and Your Honours. Good

14 afternoon.

15 WITNESS: WILLIAM TOMLJANOVICH [Resumed]

16 Examination by Mr. Scott: [Continued]

17 Q. Mr. Tomljanovich, if we could continue on, I'd like to ask you a

18 series of questions continuing on with the procedures of how the HVO and

19 its various departments conducted their work.

20 And I'd ask that the witness please be shown Exhibit P 09530. If

21 we could scroll down a bit maybe so the witness can -- thank you very

22 much.

23 Mr. Tomljanovich, can you first of all introduce this document to

24 us, what it is, and how it relates to the work that you did.

25 A. Yes. These are the Rules of Procedure of the HVO HZ HB, and

1 they're signed, if we could look at the bottom --

2 Q. Well, it would be the bottom of the last page.

3 A. Bottom of the last page, yes.

4 Q. And for reference, I believe it's page 8. It would be page 18.

5 Maybe the numbering is off. It may be page 16 in e-court, I'm not sure?

6 A. Okay.

7 Q. Yes. Thank you.

8 A. Yeah. Signed by Jadranko Prlic on the 14th of October, 1992, and

9 this outlines the procedure by which the HVO HZ HB or the cabinet of the

10 HVO undertook its business. This seems to be for the most part a

11 confirming would be the practice which you find in the minutes of the

12 meetings which preceded as well.

13 Q. If we could go back to the second page of the document starting

14 with Article 2 or if -- perhaps we can look at the top of that -- I'm

15 sorry, if we can look at the top of that page. It says: "These rules of

16 procedure shall regulate the work of the Croatian Defence Council of the

17 Croatian Community of Herceg-Bosna hereinafter the HVO."

18 If I could first direct your attention to Article 4: "The HVO

19 shall programme its work to ensure its higher performance."

20 Did you see documentation and records, Mr. Tomljanovich, that

21 indicated that that practice was generally followed?

22 A. Yes, it was followed. First of all, I should explain that when

23 they say they shall programme its work or say that the work shall be

24 programmatic, that means that each department has to come up with a plan

25 for its activity in the near future which has to be implemented and the

1 implementation of each department's plan is supposed to be overseen by the

2 president and the secretary of the HVO HZ HB. And finally -- yes, in

3 fact, I have seen such programmes or plans and one is cited in my report.

4 Q. All right. Going over to Article 8 on the following page, please.

5 Is what is said in Article 8 in fact consistent with what you just

6 described to us a moment ago?

7 A. Yes. That the programme of work is adopted by the HVO and then

8 that the president and secretary of the HVO supervise the implementation

9 of the general HVO programme.

10 Q. Does the document then go on to actually regulate the way that

11 the sessions, the meetings of the HVO HZ HB themselves are actually

12 conducted?

13 A. Yes, it does. This document contains what are the rules of order

14 for meetings of the HVO HZ HB.

15 Q. Now, if we go over to -- starting at Article 10, please.

16 A. Yes. At Article 10 the president and secretary are charged with

17 supervising the organisation and preparation of the sessions. And the

18 articles that follow, follow the procedure which I outlined yesterday.

19 The agendas would be circulated to all the members along with any

20 documentation they needed to read prior to the meeting, which usually

21 included proposed legislation, and then the meeting was held and would

22 follow that agenda.

23 Q. And I think just one final item before we move forward. If you'll

24 look at Article 34, which I believe would be on approximately page 11 in

25 e-court.

1 A. Yeah. Article 34 simply reads that the decrees and decisions that

2 are passed at these meetings shall be published in the Narodni List HZ HB

3 and the dispositions and conclusions will only be published when it's so

4 decided by the HVO. And I could add that on occasion they did not publish

5 certain dispositions and conclusions.

6 Q. I think we saw one or more of these yesterday, but can you tell

7 the Judges again if, either way, did the HVO and its departments have the

8 practice of providing semi-annual reports on its work and activities for

9 the preceding six-month period?

10 A. Yes, they did, and the general HVO semi-annual reports are

11 compilations of those departmental reports.

12 Q. If we could direct our attention briefly to Exhibit P 04699. Can

13 you tell the Judges what that document is, sir.

14 A. This is the second semi-annual report of the HVO HZ HB finally

15 approved on September of 1993, but it covers the activity of the first

16 half of 1993. And it also states that it was formally adopted and

17 approved at the 49th meeting of the HVO HZ HB on the 7th of August, 1993.

18 Q. If I can ask to go to, just to pick out a couple of examples of

19 how these reports work, to page 16 of the document, please. And toward

20 the bottom half of the page. Thank you.

21 Do you see a paragraph there, sir, about -- the paragraph starting

22 with the language "In the period, over six thousand prisoners of war

23 stayed in appropriate centres on the territory"?

24 A. Yes, I do.

25 Q. Does that paragraph go on to indicate: "Prison governors have

1 been appointed to undertake all coordination work. The military police

2 have the task of providing security for prisoners?

3 A. Yes, it does. It also mentions that the detainees are

4 interrogated by SIS officers, and I should explain to the Judges: The SIS

5 was military counter-intelligence. And also by crime investigation

6 services the governors have been appointed and the military police have

7 the task for providing for security. And they also mention that there's

8 the problem of forced entry and violent investigation which has been

9 registered by some commanders.

10 Q. Okay.

11 JUDGE TRECHSEL: I'm sorry. Has it been registered by some

12 commanders or is it, rather, the violent investigation that was done by

13 some or attributed to some commanders?

14 THE WITNESS: That's a good question.

15 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Thank you.

16 THE WITNESS: I should look at the -- I should look at the B/C/S

17 original. I assume that it was -- the commanders were registering the

18 behaviour, but if I could look -- do we have the B/C/S copy there? That

19 might make it clearer, although it might not be any clearer in the

20 original as well.

21 MR. SCOTT:

22 Q. Do you have the original?

23 A. No, I don't think I have the binder of semi-annual reports.

24 Q. I have it. With the usher's assistance. Thank you.

25 A. Thank you. Do we know what the corresponding B/C/S page is?

1 Q. I don't have it, Mr. Tomljanovich, in my notes, I'm sorry.

2 A. Thank you. There we are. Looking at the -- hmm. I'm not sure

3 it's necessarily any clearer in the Croatian. I'll read it out in the

4 original. The sentence reads: [Interpretation] "Forceful entry and

5 forceful carrying out of investigations by certain commanders was noted."

6 [In English] Yeah, this translation, it would say "by certain

7 commanders."

8 JUDGE TRECHSEL: This would -- this would go along with the next

9 sentence which says that the behaviour should definitely be prohibited and

10 prevented.

11 THE WITNESS: Yes. Yes.

12 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Do you know whether any follow-up occurred? Do

13 you know what -- what was done to prohibit and prevent? And prevention is

14 more important in such behaviour.

15 THE WITNESS: Well, there are a number of documents I cite in my

16 report dealing with the situation in the camps and various discussion of

17 similar problems by various HVO functionaries. I think we probably will

18 be getting to those later today.

19 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Okay.

20 MR. SCOTT:

21 Q. All right. If we could then -- we have looked at -- sorry, I'm

22 just looking for what we covered yesterday. I believe we may have looked

23 at -- yesterday at Exhibit P 04735. Really, mostly a procedural

24 question --

25 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Counsel Nozica.

1 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] I apologise for interrupting, but

2 there's a misunderstanding here, and I'd like to deal with that.

3 This Javier report has two numbers, and the witness's report has

4 them as two different exhibits. So the number is 04699. Can we check

5 those numbers? And then we have -- that's the exhibit. And then after

6 that we have another exhibit. Just let me find the number. 4735, which

7 is in fact a continuation of that report, if I'm right. Do I understand

8 that correctly? Because they're different numbers, so one gains the

9 impression that the Prosecutor is referring to two different reports,

10 whereas it's a continuation of the same. Thank you.

11 MR. SCOTT: Exactly the next point in my outline, Counsel. Yes,

12 for whatever reason when the documents were originally prepared the report

13 was -- somehow became divided in two, and so counsel is right and that's

14 about -- again what I was about to explain.

15 P 04699 is the first half of the report for the first six months

16 of 1993, and P 04735 is the second half of that same report, again

17 covering the first six months of 1993.

18 Q. And if you'd like, Mr. Tomljanovich, just to confirm that. If you

19 could -- and we can probably do it just by looking at the electronic

20 version, to save time, perhaps. If we could pull up P 04735.

21 A. Yes, that's exactly the case. It was -- initially when the two

22 documents were scanned in the second and third semi-annual reports, the

23 end of the second report was scanned in with the third report mistakenly.

24 So we've split up the second report under the two -- or the second report

25 then was split into two halves but it should be -- the original document

1 was these two exhibits. It was a problem with the scanning in evidence.

2 Q. If you can just look at -- yes. All right. Can you look on the

3 screen, sir?

4 A. Yeah.

5 Q. Can you just confirm for the Judges, is that document the second

6 half?

7 A. Well, I have to look further up. I only see a paragraph in the

8 middle. Let me see, here, in my original. It should be. It starts right

9 in the middle. It's -- I forget which page it is in the original.

10 Q. All right. Well, perhaps I'm belabouring it too much with that

11 explanation. Perhaps that's sufficient but -- yes, indeed it is part of

12 the same document.

13 A. It is the same document.

14 Q. All right.

15 A. Although I can't find it in my copy here, that particular section,

16 but ...

17 Q. All right. Let's go forward, then, sir, if we can. I'd like to

18 direct your attention to a series of events in January of 1993. The

19 Judges have already received significant amount of -- a significant amount

20 of evidence on various international negotiations that were taking place

21 in early 1993, in particular concerning the Vance-Owen Plan. Can -- and

22 in this context, in fact, there have been references to what has been

23 called a "ultimatum" issued by the HVO on the 15th of January, 1993.

24 Can you assist the Judges, Mr. Tomljanovich, by putting this in

25 the context of the HVO structures, processes and orders that you saw

1 connected with that?

2 A. Well, yes. I do see in the report, and I begin with discussing

3 the order which was issued by Mr. Prlic on the 15th of January, 1993.

4 Now, the reason this is called an ultimatum is because this order says

5 that troops in the Vance-Owen provinces 3, 8, and 10, should either submit

6 to HVO control or leave the territory. Conversely, HVO troops in other

7 provinces should submit to ABiH control.

8 Q. Could we have, please, Exhibit P 01146. Do you have that, sir?

9 A. Yes, I do.

10 Q. And is that a copy of the decision of the 15th of April, 1993 --

11 excuse me, January, 1993?

12 A. Yes. I see the translation of one of the copies of this document.

13 We found quite a few copies of this particular document in the archives.

14 MR. KARNAVAS: Your Honour, if I may make a point of

15 clarification. The gentleman indicated that there was an order. There is

16 a vast difference between an order and a decision. I would appreciate if

17 such terminology is used with precision and accuracy.

18 THE WITNESS: Yes. I stand corrected.

19 MR. SCOTT:

20 Q. If you can look and direct your attention to paragraph number 1 of

21 the decision, and scroll down the page, please.

22 A. Yes. This is what I said earlier, that all units of the army of

23 Bosnia and Herzegovina which at this moment are stationed in provinces 3,

24 8, and 10. Now, these are the provinces, the proposed provinces of the

25 Vance-Owen Plan which would have had Croatian majorities. And then it

1 goes on to say here, "... which have been declared Croatian provinces in

2 the Geneva Accords shall be subordinated to the Main Staff of the HVO

3 armed forces." And the converse is true when you see in section -- or

4 paragraph number 2, the converse is true in provinces 1, 5, and 9.

5 Q. Can you go over to the second page of the document, please, and

6 direct your attention to Article 5, and --

7 A. Yeah. Yes.

8 Q. You indicated earlier that it was called an ultimatum?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. Does this document give a deadline?

11 A. Yes it does. It sets it at five days from the 15th of January,

12 which would be presumably the 20th of January, 1993.

13 Q. And the decision was issued over the name or the signature of --

14 A. Dr. Jadranko Prlic. And in the preamble it says that this

15 decision was reached at an extraordinary session of the HVO HZ HB.

16 Q. Does article -- or, excuse me, paragraph 6 indicate who should

17 implement this order?

18 A. Yes it does.

19 Q. Excuse me, this decision.

20 A. Yes, it does, and it should be implemented by the head of the

21 defence department of the HVO HZ HB, which at this time would have been

22 Mr. Bruno Stojic.

23 Q. Could we then it please go to Exhibit P 01140, P 01140.

24 Before that -- well, it's probably too late. Go ahead. It's all

25 right.

1 Can you tell us what that document is, please?

2 A. This is the order of Mr. Stojic which follows on the document from

3 Mr. Prlic earlier stating exactly how the previous decision is to be

4 implemented.

5 Q. All right.

6 A. So he's passing it on down the line.

7 Q. And in the opening paragraph, if you look at the very introductory

8 paragraph --

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. -- above the word "order," do you see a reference to a decision?

11 A. Yes, he makes a reference to the decision HVO HZ HB number

12 01-I-32/93, the 15th of January, 1993, which is the exhibit we just looked

13 at it.

14 Q. All right. Looking at paragraph number 7 of this order, does it

15 again indicate a deadline?

16 A. Yes, it does. It's worded slightly different here. Mr. Stojic

17 says explicitly the 20th of January rather than saying five days after the

18 is 15th of January, and he gives a specific time and that's 1900 hours.

19 Q. And can you explain to us what paragraph 8 indicates?

20 A. Well, I see half of it. "Chief of the Main Staff and the armed

21 forces of the HVO and the --" if I could see the next page. Yes. "And

22 the chief of the HVO military police administration shall be responsible

23 to me," me in this case being Mr. Stojic, "for implementation of this

24 order." So he's passing it another step down the line to the chief of

25 staff and to the head of the military police which at this time would have

1 been Mr. Petkovic and Mr. Coric.

2 Q. And in fact then if we could next go to Exhibit P 01156, and can

3 you tell us what that is, please?

4 A. I believe since the HVO main headquarters -- I believe this is

5 Mr. Petkovic's order, although, could I see the bottom quickly?

6 Q. The next page.

7 A. Yeah. I believe this is Mr. Petkovic's order. Yes, it is.

8 Further transferring the same order down to the operational zones or the

9 operative zones of Southeastern Herzegovina, Northwestern Herzegovina and

10 Central Bosnia as well as the 1st Mostar Brigade.

11 Q. If we could go back, excuse me.

12 A. I was just going to mention --

13 Q. If we can go back to the first page, please, so the Judges can see

14 that particular language. Paragraphs 1 and 2 or the introductory

15 paragraph, I should say, and 1. Thank you.

16 The reference orders -- it says, "pursuant to the decision of."

17 Do those reference documents relate to, first of all, the first one being

18 the decision of Mr. Prlic and the second one being the order of

19 Mr. Stojic?

20 A. Yes, they do.

21 Q. Go ahead. I'm sorry, you wanted to say something --

22 A. Oh. All I was going to say was that he sends it to every

23 operational zone with the exception of the Posavina Operational Zone.

24 JUDGE TRECHSEL: May I add a question on this document? Is point

25 4 here something which is different from the two parent decisions and

1 order?

2 THE WITNESS: I believe, and I'd have to be 100 per cent sure I'd

3 have to look at Mr. Stojic's order again to be sure it's not in there, but

4 I do believe this is the first time that's stated explicitly, that these

5 units would be treated as paramilitary units and disarmed.

6 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Thank you.

7 THE WITNESS: I can say with certainty that was not the language

8 in Mr. Prlic's original order. I'm sorry, decision.

9 MR. SCOTT:

10 Q. If I can assist. If I could -- if we can go back to then

11 Mr. Stojic's order of P 01140, and specifically to paragraph number 3.

12 A. Uh-huh. Yeah.

13 Q. Could I ask you to look at the end of that sentence and see if

14 there's something similar to --

15 A. Yeah. I'm sorry I'd forgotten that there was similar language in

16 the order of Mr. Stojic. It does say that any of these units which do not

17 subordinate themselves to the relevant command will be treated as members

18 of paramilitary units and disarmed. That was an oversight on my part.

19 Q. And taken into custody.

20 A. And taken into custody, yes.

21 Q. Continuing with this series of events can I ask you next to be

22 shown P 01184. And can you tell us what that is and --

23 A. Yes this --

24 Q. -- and the purpose of including that in are report?

25 A. Well, this is a letter by Jadranko Prlic to the Croatian people of

1 Gornji Vakuf, to the HVO of Gornji Vakuf which is the municipal government

2 of Gornji Vakuf and to the HVO command which would be the municipal

3 military headquarters discussing the events in the aftermath of the

4 issuance of this ultimatum and giving full support to the Croats in Gornji

5 Vakuf where there'd been fighting in the aftermath of this particular

6 ultimatum.

7 Q. Does it make reference to the fact that this communication was

8 sent in connection with a session of the HVO HZ HB?

9 A. Well -- could we scroll down, please?

10 Q. Or up --

11 A. Or up.

12 Q. -- in paragraph ...

13 A. Yes. Yes. It mentions that "at today's session," which the date,

14 please, at the top. Or is it at the bottom? Unfortunately, I don't have

15 a hard copy of this document. In any event, we'll scroll up to the top

16 again, please. Thank you.

17 That at the -- that day's session of the HVO HZ HB they discussed

18 political and security conditions in the area of the HZ HB and

19 particularly in the area of your municipality, which in this case is

20 Gornji Vakuf municipality.

21 Q. In terms of a date reference, sir, if we can go back to the second

22 page of the document. You might see there's a box on that page and I can

23 just ask you --

24 A. Yeah.

25 Q. -- are you familiar with that kind of a stamp? Have you seen that

1 on ^but the translation is a ^check ^15

2 translation of the receipt stamp from the HVO Main Staff. Generally

3 speaking, the offices in various parts of the HVO are -- of the HZ HB

4 armed forces and government would -- especially the military offices would

5 stamp documents as received and give the time. And usually give serial

6 numbers for the receipt as well.

7 Q. All right. So --

8 A. And this document was received on the 18th of January, 1993.

9 Q. And in fact could we then go on to Exhibit P 01227.

10 A. That's -- that's -- it's not on the e-court screen yet. But I

11 have the hard copy here. I'll start discussing it.

12 This is a meeting or minutes of a meeting of an extraordinary

13 session of the HVO HZ HB. As I mentioned yesterday, the HVO HZ HB had its

14 regular weekly sessions which were numbered and when they had pressing

15 business they had extraordinary sessions, and this one, there's only one

16 item on the agenda and that's the current situation in the HZ HB with --

17 in regards to or in view of the HZ HB -- HZ HB HVO decision of the 15th of

18 January, 1993. And importantly -- the most important thing here is the

19 first full paragraph which states: "Analysing the implementation of the

20 HZ HB HVO decision of 15 January 1993 the head of the HZ HB HVO defence

21 department, Mr. B. Stojic, among other things, lists the situation in

22 Gornji Vakuf as calming down after attacks of extremist Muslim forces and

23 ABiH," that's army of Bosnia and Herzegovina, "units on settlements within

24 that municipality, inhabited by Croats, and attacks on Croatian Defence

25 Council units have been stopped."

1 Now, the significance of this passage is that this fighting in

2 Gornji Vakuf is being linked directly to the decision of the -- as part of

3 the implement -- linked -- as part of the implementation of the decision

4 of the 15th of January, 1993.

5 Q. Looking up you have mentioned that this -- these statement of this

6 report is attributed to Mr. Stojic. If we go up into the introductory

7 part of the document and indicating those present --

8 A. Yep.

9 Q. -- do you see Mr. Stojic listed as one of the persons present?

10 A. Yes, he is. He's the third person listed.

11 Q. And can you tell us from your review of these minutes of HVO HZ HB

12 meetings, were they typically attended not only by Mr. Prlic but by

13 Mr. Stojic?

14 A. Yes. Of all the available meetings we have, Mr. Prlic is at all

15 of them. Mr. Stojic is not at all of them, but if he does not attend his

16 deputy head of the department attends in his place.

17 Q. Do you recall the name of his deputy?

18 A. I believe it's Mr. Bozic.

19 MR. KARNAVAS: If I may interject here, a point of clarification,

20 Your Honour. As you well know we've heard testimony thus far that there

21 had been fighting in Gornji Vakuf the days preceding the 15th. Are we to

22 assume that this gentleman is stating here today under oath that there was

23 no fighting in Gornji Vakuf prior to the 15th and this is the only

24 interpretation that can be given to this particular decision? I think we

25 need a point of clarification in light of the testimony that we've had

1 before this Tribunal thus far.

2 MR. SCOTT: Your Honour, I don't think that's an accurate

3 characterisation of what Mr. Tomljanovich said. He simply said there was

4 a linkage between the events in Gornji Vakuf and implementation of this

5 decision. There is no indication that that was the only fighting or when

6 the fighting started.

7 MR. KARNAVAS: The implication, Your Honour, is, and if we look at

8 the indictment there's -- the Prosecution is making a linkage, that as a

9 result of the decision of the 15th, you had this heavy fighting going on

10 in Gornji Vakuf. Our -- our position has been and will remain that there

11 were -- the Gornji Vakuf incident or incidents had occurred much earlier

12 and as a result of trying to put an end to these situations, the decision

13 based on what was happening in Geneva was issued. So I think this is

14 major point that needs clarification, and this man is a historian. So I

15 would assume that as a historian with a Ph.D., he would appreciate and

16 understand the significance of these events as opposed to merely making

17 some sort of a conclusory remark. That's why I think at this point in

18 time a point of clarification may be needed.

19 I can go into it on my cross-examination, but I think now is the

20 time, because I think if he's going to be putting things into context in

21 talking about background, now is the time.

22 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Counsel Nozica.

23 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I apologise once again

24 for interrupting, but following on from what my learned friend has just

25 said, it would be a very good idea if the witness were to read out the

1 second sentence just to link up this ultimatum with the exhibit. I know

2 that I can do that during the cross-examination, of course, but I think

3 that it would be very important for the witness to read out the second

4 sentence since we have this exhibit and the conclusion that the witness

5 drew on reading just the first sentence. Thank you.

6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. We're going to try

7 and speed up. Let's hear the second sentence read out.

8 THE WITNESS: The second sentence, it's the next paragraph states

9 that, "HVO armed forces which were under explicit orders not to engage in

10 any combat activity were successful in preventing an enemy offensive, and

11 at the same time creating panic among the enemy. This resulted in a large

12 number of extremists surrendering to the HVO forces."

13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you.

14 MR. SCOTT: If you can be shown please Exhibit P 01305.

15 JUDGE TRECHSEL: I would really be interested in the witness

16 telling us what happened preceding the 15th of January in Gornji Vakuf.

17 This second sentence is not very clear. How does one prevent an offensive

18 by not engaging in -- in combat? I would like to know what do we have

19 to -- to imagine what -- what is this?

20 THE WITNESS: I'm afraid I can't answer that question either. I

21 don't know what the military situation in Gornji Vakuf was exactly. That

22 goes beyond the scope of my report, so I can't make any comment on that.

23 Nor can I comment on what was going on either before this report or before

24 the 15th of January necessarily, other than what I've seen in the

25 documents I looked at, which are looking at it from the level of Mostar

1 and a national level. But specifically what's going on locally, I'm

2 sorry, I couldn't tell you.

3 MR. SCOTT:

4 Q. If I might assist. If I can remind the Chamber that of course

5 there will be other fact witnesses that will be addressing all of these

6 matters, other international monitors, victim witnesses who will talk

7 extensively about what happened in Gornji Vakuf during this time.

8 If I could ask you please to go to Exhibit P 01305.

9 Can you he will it us sir what that is and how it relates to the

10 part of your report dealing with the sequence of documents relating to the

11 events in Gornji Vakuf?

12 A. Yes. This is a letter from Mr. Prlic to the then Prime Minister

13 of the Republic of Croatia Hrvoje Sarinic on the 25th of January, 1993,

14 appealing for his assistance in the wake of these events following the

15 15th of January, following the 20th of January.

16 Q. In the text of Mr. Prlic's letter, can you -- you may need the

17 assistance of the usher in leafing or going on to the other pages?

18 A. Yeah.

19 Q. Does he request that specific actions being taken by the Republic

20 of Croatia?

21 A. He does as a matter of fact and I'll check very quickly again to

22 see if I have this exhibit already in hard copy. Which -- 1, 3 -- no,

23 unfortunately I do not.

24 Q. All right. If we can -- if the usher can go forward to page 3 of

25 the document, please. Thank you.

1 A. Yeah.

2 Q. If you can look at that, sir, and just give us an overview.

3 A. Yep. He's requesting aid from the Prime Minister of the Republic

4 of Croatia, and the number -- the specific measures that Mr. Prlic

5 recommends is informing international officials of the situation which he

6 describes above, requesting from Mr. Alija Izetbegovic to end the

7 operations carried out by forces under his jurisdiction, and the third

8 point is to suspend all forms of aid being shipped from or through the

9 territory of the Republic of Croatia, particularly the supply of weapons

10 and equipment and materiel for military purposes. I presume this

11 discusses the military aid being sent to the ABiH although that's not

12 explicitly stated.

13 Next point is to explain to humanitarian organisations why due to

14 military operations and roads they've prohibited transport along the

15 humanitarian corridors and then finally to influence the media in the

16 Republic of Croatia in regards to the events described above. And here I

17 could add from some of the other meetings and some of the other documents

18 which I cite in my report the leadership of the HVO HZ HB was upset about

19 some of the press coverage they'd been getting in the Republic of Croatia,

20 particularly from the newspaper Slobodna Dalmacija from Split.

21 Q. And can you tell the Judges in looking at the --

22 A. Oh, yeah.

23 Q. Sorry, you --

24 A. No, I was just going to say -- I'm sorry. Could we scroll down

25 just a tiny bit? Because the final thing --

1 JUDGE TRECHSEL: I would like to come back to what you had just --

2 THE WITNESS: Yes.

3 JUDGE TRECHSEL: -- insinuated. Can you give us more specific

4 information about what I understand to have been a negative press in the

5 newspaper you mentioned.

6 THE WITNESS: Yes.

7 JUDGE TRECHSEL: What did they say?

8 THE WITNESS: Well, the specific item, and I believe this is cited

9 specifically in my report and that I cite this, they were upset how

10 Slobodna Dalmacija had been covering the events in Gornji Vakuf. I forget

11 the specific wording but I think they were upset that the number of

12 civilian casualties which the newspaper, which was a daily paper, Slobodna

13 Dalmacija, was claiming had occurred in Gornji Vakuf at that time. And I

14 believe that's in one of the cabinet meetings from right around this

15 period.

16 JUDGE TRECHSEL: And was the allegation that the HVO caused

17 these -- these civilian deaths?

18 THE WITNESS: I'm not sure because I didn't go and check Slobodna

19 Dalmacija for those days, but clearly they were portrayed in a negative

20 light in relation to those events.

21 MR. KARNAVAS: Your Honour, in light of the questioning, first of

22 all, I would request that the gentleman cite exactly where in his report;

23 secondly, just on this last admission, it appears that he hasn't even read

24 the articles of which he's quoting, an and now we're getting into a

25 slippery slope. Also, I just wish to point out and I didn't want to do so

1 even at the urgings of my co-counsel, that when he read the paragraph true

2 information to carry out true information somehow he omitted to point that

3 out.

4 Now, you know, I'm going to try to calm down during these

5 proceedings, but it's these sort of things that I see that are rather, in

6 my opinion, inconsistent with trying to get the truth out to this Trial

7 Chamber, because obviously there is a problem here. In carrying out true

8 information. I think this is very relevant, you know. So -- and if there

9 are articles, let him produce them. But obviously Mr. Prlic at least in

10 this instance is saying, Look, get out the true information whatever that

11 information may be. Transparency. Obviously they have nothing to hide.

12 It goes to any motives or --

13 MR. SCOTT: I guess Mr. Karnavas is testifying now on behalf of

14 his client, Your Honours. This is -- this is colour commentary we've come

15 across before. There's no place for it at all. Counsel can state his

16 objection according to the Rules of Evidence and Procedure, and the

17 commentary and argument and attacks on the witness or counsel are not

18 necessary.

19 MR. KARNAVAS: It's --

20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Karnavas.

21 MR. KARNAVAS: Well, it's not an attack. It's clear -- I'm

22 pointing out a fact. The gentleman -- it's on the screen. It's in the

23 record. I'm not attacking. This is where I think I feel like I'm being

24 victimised here, because I think when a witness intentionally and

25 purposely who works for the Prosecution omits critical words --

1 MR. SCOTT: There he goes.

2 MR. KARNAVAS: -- I think they need to be pointed out on the

3 record.

4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Counsel Karnavas, the question

5 that you've just raised is an interesting one and a relevant one, but you

6 could have raised it during the cross-examination, because proceeding in

7 this way you are making it impossible for the Prosecution to conduct its

8 business. You're taking up time. So you'll have every opportunity to

9 come back to the question, but I have a much more important question that

10 I'd like to ask the witness and raise with the witness.

11 This document, I note that it is a letter of the 25th of January

12 written at 2200 hours, that is to say 10.00 p.m. So a priori, the person

13 signing the letter, Mr. Prlic, attaches great importance to the contents

14 of the letter that is addressed to Mr. Sarinic, who is the Prime Minister.

15 Now, in the work -- in your work as an expert and historian, did

16 you see if there was an answer to the letter, a response by the Croatian

17 Prime Minister? Because in this particular letter, it is suggested to the

18 Croatian Prime Minister to take action on several levels. First of all,

19 to inform the international community of what is going on, to ask

20 Mr. Izetbegovic to intervene, and to temporarily suspend all circulation

21 of arms, ammunition, and others, and to explain to the humanitarian

22 organisations, international ones, the consequences of that offensive.

23 Now, was there a response, an answer to that letter?

24 THE WITNESS: Unfortunately, if there was a response I've never

25 seen it and as far as I know we don't have that document in our

1 possession.

2 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you. Yes. I thought

3 that might be the question -- the answer, because otherwise this would

4 have been annexed to the first letter. But I just wanted to clear that

5 up.

6 Please proceed, Mr. Scott. And we'll come back to the questions

7 raised by Mr. Karnavas during the cross-examination.

8 MR. SCOTT: Yes, Your Honour. Thank you.

9 Q. If we could then go to Exhibit P 01317.

10 A. Excuse me, could I finish the answer I was giving you earlier?

11 Q. Yes, please?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. Let me just -- let me caution you, Mr. Tomljanovich. I mean, I

14 know some we all get in a hurry and try to save time.

15 A. Yeah.

16 Q. If you're going to read directly from the document, go ahead and

17 take the time to read it verbatim.

18 A. Yes. Yes. I apologise for that. I was intending to paraphrase.

19 If I could go back to the end of this document where we were just

20 second -- oh, I'm sorry. We've already moved on to the next document?

21 Q. Well, if you still have the -- if you have the earlier document in

22 front of you, go ahead and make the comment you want to make.

23 A. I don't. I was just going to make the comment that the last thing

24 Mr. Prlic says is that, if -- and I'm paraphrasing since I don't have the

25 document in front of me.

1 Q. Stop.

2 A. Okay.

3 Q. Stop.

4 A. Then I won't.

5 Q. Can we all go back then to the last document, P 01305 to avoid any

6 controversy about what was said. The bottom of the last -- the bottom of

7 the second page.

8 A. Next page, yeah.

9 Q. All right. Sorry, bottom of the third page.

10 A. Okay. I was going to read the last part here which now -- this is

11 a quote. "If we assess that the situation is growing more complex and

12 thus become unmanageable within scope of our capabilities we shall have no

13 choice but to ask for military assistance from the Republic of Croatia."

14 Q. Do you recall during what period of time Mr. Sarinic was in the

15 position of Prime Minister of the Republic of Croatia?

16 A. Yes. Much of 1992, certainly the last half of 1992, until some

17 point shortly after this when he was replaced by Mr. Nikica Valentic. It

18 would have been late -- late winter or early fall of 1993.

19 Q. If we could go back to --

20 A. I'm sorry, late winter or other spring, I think.

21 Q. If we could go forward to Exhibit P 01317.

22 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Just a moment. The witness

23 raised the weight of the last paragraph. You've just read out the

24 paragraph which seems to say that Mr. Prlic was telling the Prime Minister

25 of Croatia that unless the situation improved he was going to ask for

1 military assistance from Croatia. Now, as an expert and historian

2 yourself, did you study the documents in your possession -- in your

3 possession provided by the Prosecution and undertake historical research

4 to see whether before that date, that is to say the 25th of January,

5 Croatia already did provide military assistance or whether it was as of

6 this particular date that it was going to send military assistance? Did

7 you ask yourself that question?

8 THE WITNESS: Oh, yes, absolutely. Not just for this report but

9 this is an issue which has come up in all of the trials we've had

10 involving the HVO and Herceg-Bosna. And certainly there was military

11 assistance prior to this date. There was assistance in training and

12 assistance with materials, and certainly at least in the border areas, and

13 no one contests this, there was the presence of Croatian troops, although

14 as far as I know prior to January of 1993 there were no actual Croatian

15 HV, Croatian army troops in Bosnia and Herzegovina outside of a couple of

16 the border areas.

17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I don't know how the Croatian

18 was translated into English, but when I see the English sentence it

19 says, "We shall have no choice but to ask for military assistance." That

20 means that, if one is precise, they should have asked to continue

21 assistance, whereas here we gain the impression that this is asking for

22 assistance and not for the continuation of assistance. So how do you

23 explain that? How do you understand that?

24 THE WITNESS: Well -- now, once again I'm speculating and I'm not

25 saying this on the basis of anything explicit in any documents I've seen;

1 however, there are two reasons for that, I suspect. One, I suspect what

2 Mr. Prlic means here is not that they will request military assistance in

3 terms of more material but that they will request military assistance in

4 terms of direct intervention or the sending of HV troops which did indeed

5 happen later.

6 Now, the other thing which has to be kept in mind is that all

7 throughout this period and even after the war the legal fiction was

8 maintained that Croatia -- the Republic of Croatia was not militarily

9 involved in Bosnia and Herzegovina. So that may be another explanation,

10 although once again I can't say that based on anything I've seen

11 explicitly from any document.

12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you. I'm sure we'll have

13 an opportunity to come back to that.

14 Mr. Scott, please continue.

15 MR. SCOTT:

16 Q. If we could then go forward to P 01317. Can you tell us what that

17 is, please, and also if it bears any connection to the letter to Prime

18 Minister Sarinic?

19 A. Yes. This is -- these are the conclusions of an emergency meeting

20 of the HVO HZ HB held on the 26th of January, 1993, and this document is

21 issued under the serial numbers of Mr. Prlic, and these conclusions relate

22 to the fighting in Central Bosnia.

23 Q. If you look at the items in the -- most of the body of the report,

24 do you see any similarity between this and the letter sent to the Croatian

25 Prime Minister?

1 A. Yes. There's a -- the situation is being described in similar

2 terms.

3 Q. Now, just so there's no confusion, when you -- this is a report of

4 the session on the 26th of January, 1993. Directing your attention to the

5 paragraph on the bottom of page 1.

6 A. Uh-huh.

7 Q. Do you have any information that any of the statements being made

8 here by Mr. Prlic are in fact true?

9 A. Well, I do know that there was an incident in Dusina at this time

10 committed by ABiH forces, but as far as the specifics are concerned, I

11 don't know.

12 Q. In fact, Mr. Prlic indicates here "There is still no accurate

13 information about casualties"; is that correct?

14 A. Yes, yes. "... but it's known that 33 HVO soldiers were killed,"

15 yes.

16 MR. SCOTT: Your Honour, I've been reminded again to tender the

17 exhibits as we go, and to catch up with where we are, I will now tender P

18 09530 -- yes?

19 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] But before you do, one follow-up

20 question related to this last document. Let me move to point 7. It is

21 stated that the government of the Republic of Croatia was informed of a

22 situation. Their assistance was requested depending on the turn of event.

23 Here there's nothing about military assistance. Between the letter we saw

24 previously and that meeting that took place on the next day, did you see

25 an evolution, a difference? Why isn't the military factor clearly

1 mentioned? Have you wondered about it? Have you asked yourself that

2 question? Because that's a question I immediately ask myself when I read

3 these documents.

4 THE WITNESS: Not necessarily, because there's a few explanations

5 for that. One is that there was an evolution in the position. The other

6 is just that it wasn't formulated very specifically in this next document.

7 And having no other information to go on, I really don't know which or if

8 something else is the case.

9 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Mr. Scott, your

10 numbers.

11 MR. SCOTT: Yes. P 09530, P 04699, P 04735, P 01146, P 01140, P

12 01156, P 01184, P 01227, P 01305, and P 01317. The reason I hesitated,

13 Your Honour, is because I -- because obviously we are listing these in the

14 order in which they're -- they came up in examination but not in numerical

15 order. Obviously they're out of numerical order, but that's the order in

16 which they've been used.

17 Q. Sir, I'd like to go forward, if we can, from January of 1993 to

18 another situation, a series of documents in April of 1993. Can you tell

19 the Judges, just to set the context, were there continuing developments

20 concerning the Vance-Owen Plan by the latter part of March, 1993?

21 A. Yes, there were.

22 Q. And briefly, what was the status of the Vance-Owen negotiations as

23 of late March, 1993?

24 A. I believe that it had been signed as well by both the Croatian and

25 Muslim sides but that the maps had not been signed and some of the

1 specifics had not yet been signed, but that it had not yet been approved

2 by the Bosnian Serb side.

3 Q. Did your report indicate -- your research indicate that there was

4 extensive discussion of these developments among the HVO records during

5 this time period?

6 A. Yes, particularly -- not so much in March but, yes, very much so

7 in early April, yes.

8 Q. Could I ask you to please direct your attention to P 01778.

9 A. Uh-huh.

10 Q. What is that, please?

11 A. Well, I'm looking at a different document from what I have.

12 Q. It should be 1778.

13 A. Oh, I'm sorry. I was looking at 1778. I'm sorry. I don't have a

14 hard copy, but this is the 33rd session of the HVO HZ HB held on the 1st

15 of April, 1993.

16 Q. And just for these purposes, if I can direct your attention to the

17 last page on page 7, item D -- item 8, subitem (d).

18 A. Uh-huh. Yeah. This is the end of the meeting, and the last thing

19 that's stated is that "the Vance-Owen Peace Plan documents must be

20 provided so that it can be discussed at the regular HVO HZ HB session on

21 Saturday, 3rd of April, 1993."

22 Q. Did you find, sir, in your inquiry that in fact those matters were

23 discussed at the regular meeting on the 3rd of April?

24 A. Yes, absolutely.

25 Q. Could I ask you then to go to P 01798.

1 A. Uh-huh. Yeah.

2 Q. Can you tell us what that is?

3 A. Yes. These are the minutes of that meeting that was held on the

4 3rd of April, 1993, and the agenda is one item, and that one item is the

5 discussion of the documents of the Vance-Owen Peace Plan. And I'll say at

6 the outset, the most unusual thing about this meeting is this is the only

7 meeting which we have in our possession or only minutes of any meeting we

8 have in our possession at which Mate Boban was present.

9 Q. The only meeting of the HVO HZ HB.

10 A. Yes. The only meeting of the HVO HZ HB that he was present for.

11 Q. Can you tell from this document whether despite the fact that

12 Mr. Boban was there, did -- well, let me put it this way: If Mr. Boban

13 was there, did he or did Mr. Prlic chair the meeting?

14 A. It states there, "Present, Dr. Jadranko Prlic, who is chairing the

15 meeting ..." So Mr. Prlic chaired the meeting.

16 Q. All right. Sir, this document goes on for some time about these

17 matters and I would just like for you, if you can, to take us through the

18 document --

19 A. Okay.

20 Q. -- And how it relates to the matters we were talking about this

21 afternoon and the work done on your report?

22 A. Yes. In this meeting all of the participants discuss going

23 forward or not going forward -- thank you -- discuss whether they should

24 go forward or not go forward a -- with the idea of the ultimatum of 15th

25 of January, 1993, and to subordinate ABiH units to the HVO in provinces 3,

1 8, and 10, on conversely -- or subordinate the ABi -- or the HVO units to

2 the ABiH or the Muslim or what they consider to be the Muslim-proposed

3 provinces.

4 At the very beginning under item 1, it states, and I'm just

5 paraphrasing the first couple of paragraphs. Mr. Mate Boban gives a

6 report on the peace plan. It's described by him as being optimal.

7 And in the second paragraph on page 2, I'll read that out

8 entirely, second paragraph on page 2 after discussing the plan itself,

9 Mr. Boban states: "The HVO HZ HB is also of the opinion that in all its

10 important segments, the provisional system of executive government that

11 has been established in the area --"

12 Q. Slow down a bit, please.

13 A. Oh, I'm sorry.

14 Q. Go ahead.

15 A. "... that has been established in this area --" or, sorry, "in

16 the area of the Croatian community of Herceg-Bosna, is entirely consistent

17 with the powers of the provincial organs of government defined in the

18 basic document and in the agreement on provisional organisation and that

19 the system will be consistently applied in provinces 3," and there's a

20 question mark next to 3 because the legibility, "8, and 10."

21 Now, this states that the intention is that the system of

22 government continue in these provinces such as it had been in the HVO HZ

23 HB.

24 Q. Could I direct your attention to not the very next paragraph which

25 is the --

1 A. Uh-huh.

2 Q. -- quote but the paragraph that begins the words "Until the

3 republic is fully demilitarised."

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. There is a reference in that paragraph to the joint statement of

6 Mr. Mate Boban --

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. -- and Mr. Alija Izetbegovic. Can you tell us what that is a

9 reference to?

10 A. That is a reference to the agreement or the alleged agreement

11 under the six points on the next page, the substance of which is to

12 subordinate to carry out the same -- to carry out the decision basically

13 of the 15th of January, 1993, and put the army of BiH in provinces 3, 8,

14 and 10 under the control of the Main Staff of the HVO.

15 Q. Now, before we -- I'm not going to take you through the six terms.

16 Everyone will have that in front of them, but can you tell the Judges,

17 please, was there in fact at this time -- was there in fact a joint

18 statement signed by Boban and Izetbegovic?

19 A. To my knowledge there was not. And furthermore, if you look at

20 the paragraph after the six points, the one which begins, and I'll read

21 the full quote out here: "The HVO HZ HB hopes that because of the

22 enormous importance of the Statement, Mr. Alija Izetbegovic will sign this

23 document, because it is yet further evidence of a desire for peace, which

24 everybody wants."

25 So that one indicate that it had not yet been signed by

1 Mr. Izetbegovic.

2 Q. Does the discussion at this meeting go on to indicate what would

3 happen if President Izetbegovic did not sign the joint statement?

4 A. Yes. And immediately in the next paragraph it says: "At this

5 meeting the HVO HZ HB adopted the position that if the aforementioned

6 Statement is not signed by the leaders of the Muslim delegations in

7 provinces number 3, 8, and 10, then the basic premise in the Peace Plan,

8 that all ethnic armed forces will have to withdraw to their domicile

9 provinces, should apply."

10 Next paragraph: "If the Joint Statement is not implemented, the

11 appropriate military and other authorities of the HVO HZ HB shall

12 implement this provision of the Basic Document of the peace plan in

13 regions numbers 3, 8, and 10. At the same time, the HVO HZ HB will

14 respect the jurisdiction of the authorities in the provinces predominantly

15 populated by the two other peoples."

16 Q. In the next paragraph, I'm not going to ask you to quote it unless

17 you feel the need to.

18 A. Uh-huh.

19 Q. Does the discussion indicate what would happen to various organs

20 or institutions of Bosnia and Herzegovina inside these provinces 3, 8, and

21 10 after this statement was enforced?

22 A. Yes, it does, and basically the same principle follows that

23 followed for the military, for the police as well, and what they call "The

24 police organs of the former Ministry of the Interior of Bosnia and

25 Herzegovina will cease to exist with the coming into force of the

1 already-signed documents of the Vance-Owen Peace Plan, and the public at

2 large will be informed about the complete takeover of all powers by the

3 Department of the Interior of the HVO HZ HB in provinces numbers 3, 8, and

4 10."

5 Q. Can you tell us, sir, during this meeting was there discussion of

6 sending out various members or representatives of this body, the HVO HZ

7 HB, around Herceg-Bosna to essentially, if you will, and my paraphrase, to

8 get the word out?

9 A. Yes, precisely. At the beginning of page 5 in the English

10 translation, that's exactly what that one short paragraph says, that the

11 members of the HVO HZ HB will visit municipalities and explain to the

12 authorities the essence of the Vance-Owen documents and the conclusions of

13 this meeting.

14 Q. And before we finish on this document, there are particular

15 conclusions that are numbered there. Can you go to item number 9,

16 please?

17 A. Yeah.

18 Q. On the last page of --

19 A. Yeah. Item number 9, which is the final conclusion,

20 reads: "After the meeting, members of the HVO HZ HB will tour the front

21 line."

22 Q. And did you see any evidence in the documentation or the

23 information that you had available to you that that in fact happened, that

24 there were -- in fact representatives did go out around this time and that

25 members of the HVO HZ HB did tour the front line?

1 A. Not in the documentation I reviewed for the preparation of this

2 report. I didn't see anything regarding members of the HVO HZ HB touring

3 municipalities or the front line. However, I did see documentation

4 regarding military personnel touring municipalities.

5 Q. Could I ask you, please, to go next to Exhibit P 01788, unless

6 there are questions. Yes.

7 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Excuse me. Just to be precise. Number 9

8 concerns visiting the front line?

9 THE WITNESS: Yes.

10 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Now, you have told us that there is information

11 on militaries visiting the municipalities --

12 THE WITNESS: Yes.

13 JUDGE TRECHSEL: -- which would be something clearly different,

14 wouldn't it? It's not the same thing --

15 THE WITNESS: No.

16 JUDGE TRECHSEL: It's entirely different.

17 THE WITNESS: Absolutely, I was --

18 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Thank you.

19 THE WITNESS: Yeah.

20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I'd like to put a question to

21 you about this meeting that lasted four hours, the 34th session of the HVO

22 with Mr. Boban, and they discussed the issue of a Vance-Owen Plan. As

23 part of your work as an expert, did you compare the Vance-Owen Plan, on

24 the one hand, with its many components, did you compare that with the

25 points, with the items discussed during that meeting, and was there a

1 coincidence, a total coincidence between what was discussed during that

2 meeting and the very essence of the Vance-Owen Plan, or did you notice

3 differences between the two, and if you noticed differences, what were

4 they?

5 THE WITNESS: Well, I -- I should state at the outset that I

6 didn't review the peace plans themselves or the diplomatic situation for

7 the writing of this report. This report was intended to deal with the

8 governing structures and processes of Herceg-Bosna. However, I am

9 familiar with the Vance-Owen Peace Plan and the primary difference between

10 what's in this meeting or the view of the peace plan which is in this

11 meeting and what I generally understood to be the essence of the

12 Vance-Owen Peace Plan, as I understand it from my earlier work here at the

13 Tribunal, was that it was not the intention of the international community

14 to cede these provinces to one particular ethnic group, rather, that the

15 country would be divided into cantons in which certain ethnic groups would

16 be majorities and many of them, which is a significant difference.

17 The second difference from the reading of the Vance-Owen Peace

18 Plan and from my understanding of the Vance-Owen Peace Plan just based on

19 my knowledge, not on any work that I did for this report, is that the

20 other sides did not intend for the plan to be immediately implemented

21 before all parts of it had been approved.

22 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] In other words, these are the

23 two main items you'd like to outline. First of all, according to the

24 Vance-Owen Plan, there were supposed to be cantons with ethnic majorities

25 that would vary from canton to canton, and the second main point was that

1 the implementation of the Vance-Owen Plan had not been defined extremely

2 precisely, whereas in this, during that meeting, they already set a date

3 for the implementation of the plan. I'm just trying to --

4 THE WITNESS: Yes.

5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] -- summarise what you've told

6 us.

7 THE WITNESS: Yes. And I should add, too, and this is probably a

8 better way to put it, that I don't think the internationals or the other

9 side realised that the implementation of the Vance-Owen Peace Plan would

10 mean the extension of Herceg-Bosna authorities over provinces 3, 8 and 10

11 immediately and over all of those territories.

12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Well, I think we'll have the

13 opportunity to discuss that again during the cross-examination.

14 We have five minutes left, Mr. Scott.

15 MR. SCOTT: Thank you, Mr. President.

16 Q. In this respect, then, in terms of the discussion of getting the

17 people either going into the field, either to the front line or to

18 municipalities, can I ask you please to look next at P 01788.

19 A. Uh-huh.

20 Q. Did your review of the documentation indicate that in fact on the

21 day before the meeting Mr. Praljak and Mr. Coric had already travelled to

22 Central Bosnia?

23 A. Yes, and this is what I was referring to when I mentioned military

24 personnel visiting the municipalities.

25 Q. And what does document -- or Exhibit P 01788 indicate?

1 A. I should state at the beginning that this -- what we have in our

2 hands, the one translation, isn't actually the whole document. This is an

3 excerpt from a logbook from the Operational Zone of Central Bosnia, and

4 it's in regards to a meeting which they held with General Praljak; he's

5 referred to here as Colonel Dario Kordic; Mr. Ignac Kostroman, who was an

6 HDZ official; Mr. Valentin Coric; as well as the commander of this

7 particular Operational Zone, Colonel Tihomir Blaskic. And it's discussing

8 this implementation of Vance-Owen.

9 Q. And does it indicate who chaired this particular part of the

10 meeting and how long this part of the meeting lasted?

11 A. Yes, it does. The meeting was chaired by General Praljak, and the

12 meeting began at 10.30 in the morning, ended at noon. So it was an hour

13 and a half long.

14 Q. Can you give us, then, an overview, you can take us to any

15 particular part of the document you wish, the discussion of this meeting

16 as it relates to the Vance-Owen peace process, or the HVO view of that

17 process?

18 A. Yes. General Praljak begins the meeting, and I'll just point out

19 a few sections of what he says that are of particular importance for

20 that.

21 In the first paragraph where he speaks, midway through the

22 paragraph he states that: "This declaration establishes the immutability

23 of the borders of the Republic of Croatia." Now, in parentheses there is

24 a question mark because this isn't horribly legible. And the quote

25 continues: "No way to change them anymore, peaceably or by force. The

1 Republic of Croatia can now itself sign treaties with international

2 organisations. This declaration represents a great victory and we must

3 have patience."

4 Now, the next paragraph, Mr. Praljak says that Mr. Izetbegovic's

5 option for Bosnia-Herzegovina is finally out of the question. "He has

6 signed."

7 Further down in that same paragraph, he states: "The Croatian

8 Community of Herceg-Bosna will remain. It will have its own Assembly, and

9 the provincial government will rule the country."

10 "The central government will have nothing."

11 He continues. At the end of that section he says: "The West is

12 not interested in history but in the number of Croats in these parts."

13 And at the beginning of the next page of the translation, Praljak

14 continues and says: "Salvation lies in protecting the population and

15 enhancing the birth rate."

16 Further down, he continues and says: "There will be moving out

17 and resettlement, and the population will homogenise."

18 Now, moving further down to the end of this page, a Mr. Borivoj

19 Malbasic asked about Vares, and General Praljak said: "There is no

20 policy that can capable us to have everything. If you think there is,

21 tell us."

22 Q. Mr. Tomljanovich --

23 MR. SCOTT: Your Honour, I see the time, and we'll come back to

24 this document after the break.

25 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] It's 10 to 4.00. We'll resume

1 at 10 past 4.00.

2 --- Recess taken at 3.48 p.m.

3 --- On resuming at 4.10 p.m.

4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] The hearing is resumed.

5 Mr. Scott, you have the floor.

6 MR. SCOTT:

7 Q. Mr. Tomljanovich, I think before the break you were addressing

8 some comments towards the bottom of page 2 of the report?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. Let me just look over to the next page and see. Would you cast

11 your eyes over the next couple of paragraphs on the next page and see if

12 there's any further comment specifically you want to make about that.

13 A. I should probably quote -- take the quoted from -- mention the

14 quote from the general, which would be General Praljak in this meeting,

15 about three paragraphs down where he says: "Territorially speaking, we

16 shall take what continues to be Croatian. What use is a territory while

17 there are no Croats?"

18 Q. Just hold on for a moment, please. The registry is going to the

19 next page, I believe.

20 A. Okay. I'll continue. "We need the territory and the boarders

21 that we inhabit.

22 "The role the population plays on the stage is for political

23 profit. This does not mean that it can play this role and succeed.

24 "If the Croatian people don't want to move into and inhabit its

25 own territory, then we have gained nothing."

1 After a question, further down, from someone apparently

2 representing Zenica, the response of General Praljak was: "The commission

3 will continue its work and continue to make decisions."

4 Q. Let me just stop you there and just -- if you have any more

5 comments about what you've just taken us to, otherwise I have a couple of

6 other questions about the document and then subject to Judges' questions

7 I'll move forward. If not, Mr. Tomljanovich, did -- in addition to

8 Mr. Praljak, does the document indicate there was also some discussion

9 involving Mr. Coric?

10 MR. KOVACIC: Your Honour. [Interpretation] Your Honour, if I

11 may, just a brief intervention in order to save time for the sake of the

12 cross. The last two documents referred to P 0178 [as interpreted], and

13 the previous one 01788 deal with alleged statements by General Praljak at

14 the meeting in Gornji Vakuf and the other meeting. We haven't seen that

15 these are minutes from meetings. These are notes taken by someone, and we

16 don't know who signed them, so we do not know on what basis this expert

17 Witness claims that these are words spoken by General Praljak. These are

18 notes made by someone, especially this latter document. The witness says

19 it's the logbook of the operative zone, but I'm familiar with the logbook

20 from the Kordic-Cerkez case and I don't think that's the document. I

21 think this is the diary of General Blaskic, a completely different

22 document. So they have been misrepresented. They have not been correctly

23 described here.

24 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. We'll put the

25 question to the witness. Personally I'd like to go back to the beginning

1 of the document. We see the date, the 2nd of April. It's a document that

2 has been written on a notebook with squares, and someone wrote down what

3 happened during a meeting of the brigade commanders in the zone.

4 We can see on the document who are the brigade commanders present,

5 the commanders of independent units, as well as assistant commanders, and

6 then the drafter lists General Praljak, Kordic, Kostroman, Blaskic, and

7 Coric. It is explained that the meeting begins and is chaired by

8 General Praljak, beginning at 10.30 to finish at 12.00. And apparently

9 the one who wrote these minutes recorded what he heard or what he

10 summarised.

11 Therefore, my question to you, Witness, is as follows: You have

12 read what General Praljak stated during that meeting. Same question as my

13 previous question. Does this -- of these -- statement of General Praljak

14 in accordance with the Vance-Owen Plan, are they in line, these

15 statements, with the meeting that took place and that was chaired by

16 Mr. Prlic with Mate Boban and all the others? Do the statements of

17 General Praljak find themselves in line with all of these other documents

18 or have you noticed differences between the two?

19 THE WITNESS: Well, again, this gets a little bit beyond the scope

20 of this report. However, based not just on the material which I reviewed

21 for this report but other material which will be introduced by other

22 witnesses, I think General Praljak's statements are consistent with other

23 statements we see in other documents from other witnesses, which I haven't

24 cited in this report because I expect them to be addressed by another

25 witness, and it's outside of the scope of what I was intending to do. But

1 I do think they're in keeping with the general approach.

2 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Fine.

3 MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, if I may. I do

4 apologise for interrupting. But if the witness says that this was not

5 within the scope of his report, why are we dealing with it now? This is

6 just something mentioned in passing. "We found Praljak here, so let's

7 bring Praljak in."

8 We have an expert witness now. We have received the report, and

9 we know what the scope of the report is. If other evidence is being

10 slipped in by the way, we should have been informed about it. The witness

11 is being made use of to say something he has not prepared to testify

12 about.

13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. I take good note of

14 your comments. I do not see in what way the statements of the witness can

15 prejudice your client, but maybe I'm mistaken.

16 Mr. Praljak, you want to take the floor, but first tell us why you

17 want to speak, because we want to avoid any problems.

18 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] With reference to what

19 Mr. Tomljanovich has just read out, I do not deny the fact that at that

20 time I attended that meeting. I only failed to understand what it was I

21 was supposed to have said, because the sentences read out are sentences I

22 don't understand. They've been translated again and again, and I don't

23 recognise these words. I don't understand what it is I'm supposed to have

24 said.

25 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. We also take note of

1 your comments. Yes, we've got the point, Mr. Kovacic. No need to

2 belabour the point. Mr. Praljak said, "Yes, I took part in the meeting,"

3 but he does not understand the meaning of these excerpts that are being

4 produced. What would you like to add?

5 MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] I only wanted to say, but

6 Your Honour has already asked the witness. We don't know what the

7 provenance of this document is, so there is no foundation for this

8 document, and it's being used if examination. We don't know what the

9 value of the document is. What is it, in fact? The witness is evaluating

10 this document but no foundation has been laid. Where does this document

11 come from?

12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Mr. Scott, we have a

13 handwritten document here. Where does that document come from? I assume

14 it's a document that was found by the investigators of the OTP somewhere.

15 Can you provide us some explanations about this, because the excerpts in

16 English are excerpts of some paragraphs of the document, and I suppose

17 that in B/C/S we might have only excerpts of the document. So is there

18 another larger document, more comprehensive?

19 MR. SCOTT: Your Honour, without doing a specific check at this

20 time I would have to -- my answer would be this, subject to verification:

21 It is either -- it comes either from the operational log of the Central

22 Bosnia -- the HVO Central Bosnia Operative Zone of which Tihomir Blaskic

23 was the zone commander, or it comes from -- it may come from, as counsel

24 suggested, it may come from his -- from his own personal logbook. Those

25 are the two sources that I'm -- would be most familiar with. I can

1 certainly check that further.

2 I do note that it has the stamp of the HVO Croatian State Archive

3 or, excuse me, the Croatian State Archive in the upper right portion of

4 the page. It is by all indications part of a longer document.

5 Mr. President, once again, if the Chamber -- the Chamber is always

6 coming in and saying I have this avalanche of documents. If the Chamber

7 wants another 200 pages to go with this particular two pages, we can --

8 three or four pages we can happily do that. There comes a time -- let me

9 just suggest, and I'm in the Chamber's hands, of course, but it seems to

10 me there comes a time where there has to be, for some representation, that

11 the document comes from a much larger document and we have to go forward

12 on that basis, but I'm --

13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, but by tomorrow you will be

14 able to tell us where that document comes from. You're assuming, and you

15 might be right, that this document might come from the personal archives

16 of Colonel Blaskic, and it might even be Colonel Blaskic's handwriting we

17 have here. He might be the one who drafted this document. This is just

18 an assumption, and there might be other assumptions, but I believe by

19 tomorrow you might be able to know where the document comes from because

20 we have a written document with a stamp, yes, of course, but we don't know

21 exactly where the document comes from.

22 Mr. Kovacic.

23 MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I do apologise for

24 taking up time, but I think we have now reached the crux of the matter.

25 First of all, I suggest that the witness be asked about the provenance of

1 the document, but also because I know what document this is, regardless of

2 what the witness knows. I have to say that as my colleague said, as my

3 learned friend said, it's a document from the operative zone, but it's

4 Blaskic's personal diary, and in the Blaskic appeal this same OTP claims

5 that the document is not authentic, that Blaskic wrote it up later,

6 subsequently, after all of these events while preparing for his testimony

7 before this Tribunal. That's what the Prosecutor claims in the Blaskic

8 appeal. So in the appeal they say this is a non-authentic document which

9 Blaskic prepared for his defence, but in this case the expert witness is

10 dealing with the document. He hasn't told us what the document is. This

11 is being evaded, and I wanted the witness to be asked this.

12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, you've heard our

13 discussion. You've had access to this document because you've probably --

14 most probably read it whilst preparing your report. Did you know where

15 that document came from? Is this a document produced by Colonel Blaskic,

16 a document he drafted himself? And apparently, some said that although

17 this document is dated 2nd of April, 1993, apparently, according to some,

18 this document could have been drafted later in the preparation of his

19 case. What do you have to answer to this?

20 THE WITNESS: I'll begin at the very start. This particular

21 document was found in the Croatian state archives, I believe late in the

22 year 2000 by our investigators. It bears on the upper right-hand corner,

23 you can see right now that's -- it's displayed, the stamp of the Croatian

24 archives. I believe it was discovered along with other documents of the

25 Operational Zone of Central Bosnia.

1 What the Defence counsel was talking about is an issue having to

2 do with previous trials as to how these particular documents would have

3 been characterised, either as personal diaries or unit diaries or unit

4 logbooks. I think for our purposes today, without discussing things in

5 previous trials, all we need to know is that this is one of the books --

6 you can call it a logbook, you can call it a diary, which was found with

7 the other documents of the Operational Zone of Central Bosnia. As to

8 whose handwriting this is, I don't know.

9 MR. KARNAVAS: Your Honour, this is a non-response to your

10 question. I think that we deserve an answer to your question, which is

11 very vital. And it's not up to the witness, albeit he is part of the

12 Prosecution, as we pointed out. It's not up to him to decide what is or

13 did not valid for us today. He should just do his job and answer the

14 questions.

15 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, but my question was a very

16 specific one, was without any ambiguity.

17 This specific document, you've had the opportunity to review it.

18 Is it the personal diary of someone? If that's the case, whose personal

19 diary? Apparently Colonel Blaskic's diary? Do you know it or not?

20 So either we have a document that was found in the archives of the

21 HVO in the year 2000, as you've stated, but as far as you're concerned,

22 you have no idea who wrote that document. That could be an answer.

23 Because an expert when faced with a document, especially a handwritten

24 document, would automatically ask himself these types of questions. So

25 I'm not talk here to the staff member of the OTP, I'm talking to the

1 expert who took a solemn declaration and should, as an expert, tell me how

2 he analysed this specific document, how he analysed the way this document

3 was prepared and by whom. What do you have to say to that?

4 And then there is the remaining question of whether this document

5 was drafted by Colonel Blaskic or not.

6 And I'm not asking the question to Mr. Scott. I'm putting the

7 question to you, so don't look at Mr. Scott. Look at me. What do you

8 have to say?

9 THE WITNESS: This document is one of the documents which was

10 discovered by us in the archives in Zagreb in 2000. I don't know who the

11 author is other than that it has to be persons working in the centre of

12 the Operational Zone of Central Bosnia. I'm also not sure that this

13 document has one single author or multiple authors. I wouldn't

14 characterise it as a personal diary.

15 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you. At least your answer

16 is clear. But when I look at the version in B/C/S, I see that I have

17 seven pages in B/C/S. And if I look at the translation in English, it

18 says translation, page 44, page 46, page 47, and so on and so forth. Does

19 that mean that the document has at least 50 pages and that what we have in

20 B/C/S here is only part of the entire document?

21 THE WITNESS: Yes, that's exactly what that means. This is an

22 excerpt from a longer document, which I believe is a bound notebook.

23 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] And this notebook, did you read

24 it in its entirety?

25 THE WITNESS: No, I did not. I only read the sections which were

1 relevant for my testimony today.

2 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Did you see it in its -- did you see the

3 original?

4 THE WITNESS: Yes. I saw the originals of this and other books in

5 the archives in Zagreb in either the summer or fall of 2000. And I

6 remember particularly well, because at the time there was a great deal of

7 controversy as to where the diaries of General Blaskic were, and when we

8 found these -- I remember finding these particular volumes and having

9 these particular volumes copied at that time, because at the time it was

10 very significant for the Kordic trial, which was then in its Defence

11 phase.

12 JUDGE TRECHSEL: I must confess I'm a bit amazed that we do not at

13 least have a photocopy of the cover or the first page, which normally has

14 some sort of indication on the source, and perhaps the very last page

15 where sometimes there is a signature. How come that we do not have this?

16 Is this out of your control or --

17 MR. SCOTT: Your Honour, that -- that would be the fault of the

18 Prosecution team and the not the fault of Mr. Tomljanovich. He did not

19 prepare these particular exhibits. So if fault -- if there is fault, then

20 the fault lies not with Mr. Tomljanovich but with the team. As I

21 indicated about ten minutes ago, this is indeed an excerpt from a much

22 longer document, and we will be happy to provide -- in fact, I've already

23 requested, I've already requested that the full document be made

24 available, be investigated and made available.

25 Excuse me. I think I have the floor at the moment on this, and I

1 want to be heard just as other counsel want to be heard as well.

2 This witness was asked --

3 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Scott, the entire document,

4 you've disclosed it to the Defence probably. So the Defence has had the

5 entire document.

6 MR. SCOTT: Your Honour, I can't say that while I'm standing here

7 right now. If anyone thinks -- if anyone in the courtroom thinks that I

8 would have 9.000 documents under exact disclosure committed to memory, I'm

9 sorry, you're mistaken. I'm very happy to make further inquiries if the

10 Chamber gives me a chance to do so. But no, I do not have all the

11 information in my head as I stand here this moment. I'm happy to answer

12 the Judges' inquiries, any inquires you'd like to direct to us given the

13 opportunity to do so. Thank you.

14 MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, two things. First of

15 all, bearing in mine the response of the expert witness, without reference

16 to what my learned friend has said, I propose that examination on this

17 document be suspended and that counsel moves on, because the witness only

18 knows that the document was found in the archives of Croatia, and this

19 fact alone does not make the document acceptable per se or describe it per

20 se.

21 Secondly, Your Honours, at the end of the excerpt we have there is

22 a clause about the number of sheets of paper, and it states

23 clearly: "This notebook contains a hundred." It's written out and also

24 in figures, "a hundred marked sheets and will be used for keeping the war

25 diary." And it's signed by the commander of the operative zone of Central

1 Bosnia, Tihomir Blaskic, printed out and then signed by him, or at least

2 it appears to be signed by him. So first of all there are a hundred

3 pages, and we've been dealing with two or three.

4 Secondly, he states clearly that the notebook containing a hundred

5 pages will in the future be used for keeping a war diary. So this is the

6 basis for something that occurred later.

7 I propose that this document be excluded and that we move on, but

8 I have to reiterate we were not given notice that the witness would be

9 entering into this domain. So in my view, this whole area of examination

10 should be stricken from the record.

11 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Fine. We'll conclude a

12 discussion on this point.

13 Mr. Scott, the Defence of General Praljak tells us that the

14 witness statement, if he had the opportunity to view this document is

15 however not in a position to tell us who prepared this document, who is

16 the author of the document, and based on that the Defence of

17 General Praljak would like the document to be excluded. What do you have

18 to answer? And then they'll move on to another topic. Of course, the

19 Chamber will make a ruling afterwards.

20 MR. SCOTT: Your Honour, these questions are taking us in circles

21 and they do not go to the reliability or accuracy of this document or to

22 the work of this witness. First of all, I don't know how many times --

23 more times I need to say what I said about 15 minutes ago. This is an

24 excerpt of a longer document.

25 Now, the Prosecution, frankly, feels a bit whipsawed on this

1 because on the one hand we're told every day that there's too many

2 documents and too many pages. Just this day - just this day - I was asked

3 by court staff to select only the relevant pages of a longer document.

4 When I do that I'm acting in compliance with the instructions, and then

5 I'm criticised for not giving you another 200, 400 pages. So I'm happy to

6 do that, but at some point I represented from the outset, I think -- I'll

7 be happy to go back to the first transcript reference, which is now

8 probably about 20 minutes ago. As I said, this is an excerpt of a much

9 longer document, and I also indicated I do not have all the details

10 concerning the document committed to memory. I will be happy to provide

11 the Chamber with that additional information if I have it.

12 Secondly, secondly, if I can put questions to this witness about

13 the documents and others like it, I think it's -- I think it can be fairly

14 addressed. When an historian goes into an archive there is a vast array

15 of material that's available. It has the indicia of reliability up to --

16 it's in the official state archive. It bears an archival stamp. It may

17 be consistent with other information known to the -- to the researcher,

18 and there's all sorts of reasons why this document and reliance on the

19 document may be perfectly acceptable and the kind of work that historians

20 and researchers do every day. And the attention that's been put on this

21 document, the criticisms that have been put on this document the last 20

22 minutes or so is -- is not reasonable to beyond a certain point. And I

23 agree we will provide the Chamber with additional such information that

24 we have, but I submit, Your Honour, that much of this has been blown

25 entirely out of proportion simply for the purposes of obstructing this

1 examination.

2 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] The only questions -- question

3 that was of interest to the Judges was the source of the document, and

4 you've told us about it. You've told us that this document was discovered

5 in the archives in Zagreb.

6 Now, about the reliability. Yes, if we asked the question about

7 the source of the document, it's because of Mr. Praljak's comments, who

8 said that he did not recognise what he was supposed to have said during

9 that meeting. So when reviewing the reliability of the document, we

10 decided to inquire about the provenance of the document. We haven't made

11 a definite ruling. We'll have -- might have questions put to the witness

12 about that during the cross-examination. Mr. Kovacic might give us

13 additional information. We'll see.

14 MR. SCOTT: Your Honour, forgive me if I'm trying the Chamber's

15 patience. I don't mean to. But this is another perfect example of --

16 with all respect, Mr. Praljak shouldn't be allowed to get up and pop up

17 and give testimony during the testimony of another witness. He stands up

18 and says I don't agree. I don't know what that document was about. I

19 don't remember. This is not what I said. Well, if he wants to put on his

20 case and Mr. Praljak wants to take the witness stand some time, he can say

21 that. He can call witness to that effect, and then that witness will

22 also, just as here, be subject to cross-examination. That but -- for

23 just -- just standing up and doing this --

24 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Scott, that was not the

25 issue. We have an expert witness who is testifying, and who in line of --

1 as part of a line of questions is telling us that there was a meeting

2 between General Praljak and various brigade commanders. The expert

3 witness tells us about what General Praljak said about a number of issues.

4 Mr. Praljak, who is the main person concerned, said, "I was present at

5 that meeting but I don't recognise my statements." So automatically the

6 Judges react by saying, "Where does that document come from?" We can see

7 this is a handwritten document. I think these are legitimate questions

8 that the Judges are entitled to ask. It does not mean that this document

9 is irrelevant or has no probative value, not at you will. We'll make that

10 determination at the end. We are in the middle of this process. We have

11 not completed if.

12 We are now going to move on to another topic. I see that

13 Mr. Karnavas wants to stand up, but if that's about the same issue, I

14 don't really see the point of giving you the floor, but, yes, if you

15 really want to speak, I'll give you the floor.

16 MR. KARNAVAS: I just want to supplement a little bit here,

17 because first of all, nobody is questioning the integrity of the

18 Prosecution. We are questioning the integrity of the document itself,

19 just as the Prosecution, in the Blaskic case, or now they're reopening the

20 Blaskic case and they're making accusations particularly against one of

21 the counsel, Defence counsel, of having forged documents, presented those

22 documents to the Tribunal. That's why the sensitivity -- there's a

23 high -- we're highly sensitive about these sorts of documents. We want to

24 know not just where they came from and simply because a document came from

25 an archive does not necessarily mean that a document is authentic,

1 especially when the Prosecution is claiming, and I assume they have a

2 basis for making claims, that documents forged and put into the official

3 archives. These are their allegations that they're making. And these are

4 relevant documents. So that's why -- and this gentleman, apparently, is

5 involved in all these cases. So he should know the documents. That's why

6 we're -- we're challenging all of this. And we believe that in all these

7 documents there should be a foundation by this particular gentleman.

8 Where did he get the document, if he knows how it was generated, and so on

9 and so forth.

10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. No. We'll stop

11 here, because we could discuss the matter for days.

12 We'll now move on to another topic. If you wish to do so, if you

13 wish to use your time that way during the cross-examination, you will be

14 in a position to ask further questions to the witness about that topic

15 during cross-examination but we'll now move on to something else because

16 we've now spent 20 times discussing this topic.

17 Mr. Scott.

18 MR. SCOTT: Your Honour, as I said I would if given the time to

19 get more information before we leave, the entire document -- I am told and

20 I verified it in e-court myself, the entire document is Exhibit P 01796.

21 It is fully translated, and it had been disclosed to the Defence at least

22 since the 11th of February, 2005.

23 If I could ask that the witness please be shown document P 01789.

24 Q. Sir, this is a record from the Central Bosnia Operative Zone of

25 the HVO dated, on the second page, indicating a stamp date of 2 April,

1 1993, a report by the -- apparently the duty officer Franjo Sliskovic.

2 Can I ask you please to look at the second page, item number 2.

3 If you can go up higher on the page. Well, that's not the

4 translation that I'm looking at. Perhaps the previous page in that

5 version then, please. Go to the bottom of that page.

6 Does that record of the Central Bosnia Operative Zone corroborate

7 that there was a meeting with General Praljak at this time?

8 A. Yes, it does, as Mr. Praljak has just confirmed.

9 Q. Yes. Could I ask you next to go, please, to P 02124. And can you

10 tell us what this is and how this relates to the other documents we've

11 talked about today.

12 A. This is a letter from Jadranko Prlic dated the 27th of April,

13 1993, and it's written to the municipal governments of Kiseljak, Busovaca,

14 Vitez, and Travnik, all of which are in this part of Central Bosnia which

15 was -- we've been talking about with the last few documents and which was

16 in the area of the Central Bosnia Operative Zone. And Mr. Prlic is

17 informing them that the HVO HZ HB held a meeting on the 24th of April,

18 three days earlier, related to these problems and the conflicts between

19 the Muslims and the Croats there, and he announces his attention to -- or

20 their intention to send a working group made up of vice-president of the

21 HVO HZ HB, Kresimir Zubak, the head of the justice department Zoran Buntic

22 and the head of the subdepartment for social welfare and the family Ilija

23 Zuljevic. And to study the situation and propose measures to be taken.

24 And he reminds them that "It is necessary to prevent facts and the

25 situation to the working group and ensure the conditions for the

1 realisation of this task." And it's related to the previous documents in

2 that. It's his taking -- it's the actions of Mr. Prlic and the HVO HZ HB

3 in regards to some of these incidents that had followed the 16th of April

4 when fighting had broken out in this region.

5 Q. May I ask you please next to look at Exhibit P 02142. And can you

6 tell us what this document is and what it is about, please.

7 A. This is a report on a meeting which was held in Citluk, which is

8 just very close to Mostar, on the 29th of April, 1993, and it's called a

9 meeting of the HZ HB, and we should be careful. As far as I can tell from

10 this document, this is not per se a meeting of the Presidency of the HZ HB

11 but a meeting of members of the Presidency of the HZ HB as well as the

12 members of the -- here it's called the government of the HZ HB HVO, and

13 this is another example of what I talked about yesterday, that the HZ HB

14 HVO can colloquially be called the government, as well as other Croat

15 dignitaries, municipal presidents, and HDZ municipal chiefs. Altogether,

16 about 60 persons, and they're discussing the current political and

17 military situation.

18 Q. And do you recall the particular reasons request this meeting was

19 organised and called around the 29th of April, 1993?

20 A. Well, because there was a great deal of fighting in Central Bosnia

21 between the ABiH and the HVO at this time. This was a serious situation

22 and that's why this meeting was called, I'm sure. It doesn't say

23 explicitly but it's called -- here it's explicitly stated for information

24 about the joint statement with Mr. Izetbegovic as well as the political

25 and military situation.

1 Q. Now, as we look forward into this document does it again follow a

2 format of giving a summary, a report, it's not verbatim, but a form of

3 minutes as to what different participants in the meeting said?

4 A. Yes. I would call these minutes of the meeting.

5 Q. Now, on page 2 of the document, for example, about the middle of

6 the page are there comments or statements attributed to Mr. Stojic?

7 A. Yes, there are. And Mr. Stojic says -- and before I read the

8 quote I'll just mention that this is in regards to the joint statement or

9 alleged joint statement between Izetbegovic and Boban. He says: "All

10 reports from the field indicate that the Muslims have not accepted the

11 statement. They are attacking Vitez, Busovaca, Kiseljak, Konjic, et

12 cetera. They are carrying out ethnic cleansing. The Croats have been

13 driven out from Travnik even though the town is being held under siege. I

14 ask for a political decision ordering units to advance into that part of

15 the HZ HB."

16 Q. At the bottom of that same page there's a comment or intervention

17 attributed to Mr. Zubak. Can you look at that entry and again does it tie

18 back into other documents and information that we discussed this

19 afternoon?

20 A. Yes. Mr. Zubak here, I assume this is a typo as far as Brnetic,

21 but he says that he visited Zenica, Busovaca, and Vitez, as was mentioned

22 in the earlier document by -- written by Mr. Prlic.

23 Q. If you can go on to the next page there is some discussion by

24 someone by the name of Anto Valenta, which I'm not sure the Chamber has

25 heard about before perhaps. I may be wrong. Can you tell who Mr. Valenta

1 was and the position he held as of April of 1993?

2 A. Yes. In my report, I mention that after the first wave of

3 appointments to the HVO HZ HB, the appointments -- the persons appointed

4 were overwhelmingly from Herzegovina. Thereafter, three vice-presidents

5 were appointed from areas outside of Herzegovina to represent areas

6 outside of Herzegovina, and one of these persons, who was a vice-president

7 of the HZ HB HVO, was Anto Valenta, who, prior to the war, was a

8 schoolteacher, I believe in Vitez. And he published a book shortly before

9 the war advocating the relocation of populations in Bosnia so that the

10 Croats would occupy one section solely, the Bosnians would occupy a middle

11 section solely, and the Serbs another section solely, and to solve

12 political problems through ethnic resettlement, which was what he was most

13 famous for before becoming president of the HZ HB HVO.

14 Q. All right. And then directing your attention, please, to the last

15 page of the minutes and the final statements attributed to Mr. Boban.

16 There is this language in item number 2 under those comments: "In making

17 a decision, certain limiting factors must be taken into account,

18 especially when it concerns the Republic of Croatia. Due to the events in

19 Vitez (the village of Ahmici), EU ministers have almost announced

20 sanctions against Croatia."

21 In reference to the language that says "certain limiting factors,"

22 can you provide any assistance to the Chamber as to, based on your

23 investigation, inquiry, what that reference would be about?

24 A. Yes. I think in the context, especially since he mentions

25 problems like Ahmici and mentions sanctions against Croatia, the warning

1 is that the HVO HZ HB or Herceg-Bosna in general would need to certainly

2 watch its behaviour and its image with the international community,

3 because any trouble the international community -- or any trouble the

4 Republic of Croatia has with the international community is a problem at

5 the same time for Herceg-Bosna, and the Republic of Croatia would be held

6 accountable for the actions of persons in Herceg-Bosna.

7 MR. MURPHY: Your Honour, may the witness be asked what that

8 interpretation is based upon, whether it's simply a matter of speculation

9 or whether there's actually any substance for it, please?

10 MR. SCOTT:

11 Q. Please go ahead and provide the answer.

12 A. Yes. I didn't include the evidence that was based upon because

13 that evidence is mainly evidence from the transcripts which were made in

14 the office of President Franjo Tudjman. It was not the intent of this

15 report to discuss these issues or to address those documents. However,

16 the subject of international sanctions being levelled against Croatia

17 because of the behaviour of Herceg-Bosna was discussed quite a few times

18 and was quite an important worry for the Croatian government during this

19 period.

20 Q. And could I ask you now to go to Exhibit 21 -- P -- yes?

21 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I was waiting for you to ask the

22 question, but you didn't. So I'm going to ask it.

23 In this document, I can see that the document was prepared by two

24 persons, Pero Krizanac and Drago Bilandzija, but I can also see mention

25 made of annexed papers or enclosures that is to say joint statements of

1 Boban and Izetbegovic, and the conclusions of the meeting. Now, the

2 conclusions, we don't seem to have them. So, Mr. Expert, was your

3 attention drawn to that, because there was supposed to be some conclusions

4 because we can see the interventions of various people but then we see

5 conclusions. Have you seen those conclusions or not? Never?

6 THE WITNESS: Yes, we have seen these conclusions and I cite --

7 they are a separate exhibit and a separate document, and I do cite them in

8 the report.

9 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] And you have the references?

10 THE WITNESS: Yes, I do. Just a second.

11 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Scott.

12 MR. SCOTT: Your Honour, it was the next exhibit I was going to go

13 to, P 02198.

14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Fine.

15 JUDGE TRECHSEL: May I -- may I before we go that way have an

16 answer to a question of detail? The second person to have prepared the

17 report, Mr. Bilandzija, is defined as "head." Can you explain what that

18 means?

19 THE WITNESS: I don't know what Mr. Bilandzija was the head of, to

20 be honest. It might -- no, I'm sorry, I can't answer that question.

21 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Thank you.

22 MR. SCOTT:

23 Q. If we can go then to Exhibit P --

24 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.

25 MR. SCOTT:

1 Q. -- P 02198.

2 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Just an observation on my part.

3 As you just said, apparently the conclusions are in the following

4 document.

5 MR. SCOTT: Yes.

6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] But looking at the document and

7 the typing and so on, I can see that it's -- it wasn't typed on the same

8 machine, typewriter.

9 MR. SCOTT: I'm not saying it was the same -- I'm not saying it

10 was the same document.

11 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Taking -- taking that up, it is also from Vakuf

12 and from the 5th of May.

13 MR. SCOTT: Yes. Well, perhaps the witness can explain these

14 items if given the opportunity to do so. I did not suggest that it is the

15 same document. Your Honour, Mr. President, asked if there was a record of

16 conclusions. This is a record of the conclusions of that meeting.

17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] So what you're saying is that

18 it's not the same document. But I can see in the previous document that

19 there should be some conclusions, and you said the conclusions are in the

20 document numbered 2198.

21 MR. SCOTT: That's correct.

22 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] And now you're saying yes, but

23 perhaps it's not the same document or the same conclusions.

24 MR. SCOTT: No, Your Honour, I never --

25 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] So that's what I'm querying.

1 MR. SCOTT: My statement in the transcript will show that I never

2 said it was the same document. I said the conclusions of the meeting were

3 reflected in a document, and I submit to the Court that they are submit --

4 that they are reflected among -- perhaps among other places in Exhibit P

5 02198. But perhaps if we could put questions to the witness, the witness

6 will be able to assist us.

7 Q. Sir, if you have Exhibit P 02198 available to you, can you look at

8 that document and can you assist the Chamber with whether the conclusions

9 of the Citluk meeting are stated in this document?

10 A. Yes. As a matter of fact, the first page of this document is the

11 cover letter to the contents. It's being forwarded later. It's being

12 forwarded by Ivan Saric, chairman of the HDZ from Uskoplje. It's the same

13 town as Gornji Vakuf. Uskoplje is just the non-Muslim sounding name for

14 Gornji Vakuf.

15 Q. Who gave Gornji Vakuf the name of Uskoplje?

16 A. It was used during the war. The Herceg-Bosna officials changed

17 the name of a number of towns. Gornji Vakuf became Uskoplje. Prozor --

18 let's see here. Yeah. Prozor became Rama. A few others. They referred

19 to Tuzla solely --

20 Q. If you'll stop for a moment because Judges are engaged in a

21 separate conversation.

22 [Trial Chamber confers]

23 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Praljak, you were on your

24 feet. If you want to challenge it, you can challenge it during the

25 cross-examination. That's the proper time to do that. Otherwise, we stop

1 the proceedings.

2 Continue, Mr. Scott.

3 MR. SCOTT:

4 Q. All right. By way of that introduction, then, sir, can you then

5 take us to the document and make any comments that you would in response

6 to the questions that have been raised by some of the Judges in the last

7 few minutes about these conclusions.

8 A. Yes. Once again, the cover letter says that he's forwarding two

9 different things. First of all, minutes of a meeting held in the

10 Presidency in Travnik is one thing, and the second thing is the

11 conclusions of the top representatives of Croat people who met in Citluk.

12 And what follows, then, he is sending it to Pavo Mlakic, what follows then

13 on the next page are the conclusions of the meeting, and there's all

14 together 11 of them and it's entitled, "Meeting of the highest Croat

15 representatives in Citluk."

16 Q. All right. Have you seen any other accounts of giving -- stating

17 the conclusions of this meeting in Citluk, either in the media or

18 elsewhere?

19 A. No, I have not. Which doesn't mean that there aren't any, but I

20 have not seen them.

21 Q. The -- in the first page of the document, the report, the

22 enclosure, not the cover letter, after a long -- it says: "After a

23 long-lasting discussion which among others who participated,

24 Mr. Boban ..." and others, in that list of names there is the name

25 Miro Lasic. I don't know if you're familiar who Mr. Lasic was at that

1 time and what position he held?

2 A. Yes, I am.

3 Q. Can you he will it us just very briefly about what position or

4 positions Mr. Lasic held during the time of April, 1993?

5 A. Mr. 1993, Mr. Lasic was a member of the BiH Presidency, and I

6 believe, although I'm not sure off the top of my head, but I believe he

7 replaced Stjepan Kljuic in that capacity.

8 Q. So you're talking now about the Presidency of the Republic of

9 Bosnia and Herzegovina.

10 A. Yes, in Sarajevo. Yes.

11 Q. And going on, then, to the next individual, Mile Akmadzic.

12 A. Akmadzic.

13 Q. What position -- who was he and what positions did he hoped at

14 this time?

15 A. Mr. Akmadzic at this particular point in time was still the Prime

16 Minister of Bosnia and Herzegovina, although I don't think he was

17 particularly active in this role at that time. By the end of the year, he

18 would be minister in the HR HB cabinet or interrepublican relations

19 and -- I believe it's called interrepublican relations and foreign

20 relations or some such thing.

21 Q. But again so there's no confusion, when he's listed here as Prime

22 Minister, and what you've just said a moment ago this is Prime Minister of

23 the Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina, the central government located in

24 Sarajevo; is that correct?

25 A. Yes.

1 Q. All right. If we can move on to another topic and set of

2 documents, sir. As part of your report -- let me just see if I can give a

3 page reference. In the area of your report around from about the -- page

4 88, perhaps, and following, one of the topics that you discuss in your

5 report is a mobilisation that the HVO issued in approximately June, 1993.

6 A. Yes, I did mention that.

7 Q. And what can you tell us -- just by way of introduction, what you

8 can tell us about that?

9 A. Well, that was the mobilisation. I think it's the 11th issue of

10 Narodni List for that year. I don't believe it's in this part of my -- I

11 don't believe it's in this part of my report.

12 Q. This is the one that you mentioned yesterday.

13 A. Yes, the one I mentioned yesterday in which -- signed by both

14 Mr. Prlic and Mr. Stojic ordering mobilisation and, among other things,

15 ordering persons to show up at their local -- or to show up at defence

16 offices for the mobilisation. I think it also mentions a curfew and other

17 items.

18 Q. Can I ask that the witness be shown P 02707.

19 A. Yes, that's the order. Or the decision on carrying out

20 mobilisation.

21 Q. You told us yesterday, I believe, and can you correct me if I'm

22 wrong, that there was something different about the publication of this

23 particular decision in the Narodni List, the timing of it?

24 A. Yes. As I mentioned yesterday, generally speaking the Narodni

25 List would come out periodically when there was enough material to fill an

1 entire issue. However, this is the only instance in which a whole issue

2 was one order or one decision and issued immediately by itself as an

3 entire issue of the Official Gazette.

4 Q. Could I then ask you to go, please, to Exhibit P 03038. As soon

5 as you have that --

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. Can you tell us what that is?

8 A. Well, this is a document signed by both Bruno Stojic and Jadranko

9 Prlic on the 30th of June, 1993, which -- it is a public appeal following

10 the attack by the ABiH on the -- I think it's on the northern barracks in

11 Mostar, and it's an appeal to the public, a sort of call to arms, a rally.

12

13 Q. And can I just ask you, in terms of the issue of mobilisation, can

14 I just ask you to look at item number 1 on the bottom of the first page of

15 the English version.

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. And if you can just confirm to the Judges whether this document

18 also relates to the issue of mobilisation.

19 A. Yes, it does, and it states -- before you get to the actual

20 numbers, it makes it clear that -- that this order is being issued by

21 Bruno Stojic in particular, and the first order is for all conscripts to

22 report to their units in the next 24 hours. And then there's a number of

23 other parts to this which include the curfew and closing of shops and

24 catering facilities.

25 Q. And do you know, sir, whether this order was put into effect?

1 A. I believe it was. I believe it went further down the chain of

2 command.

3 Q. If you could then look at Exhibit P 03077.

4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] It's a question that I all --

5 have already asked another witness, but since you are an expert witness

6 here I'd like to hear you point of view. In the B/C/S document, this

7 famous 3083 document, it says "Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina," as a

8 heading, and underneath the "Croatian Community of Herceg-Bosna." Now,

9 the fact that it mentions the Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina, as an expert

10 what conclusions can you make from that? What do you deduce from that?

11 What was the reason for the fact that the community of Herceg-Bosna also

12 put Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina, whereas there was a Republic of

13 Bosnia-Herzegovina? So what can you tell us as an expert on this very

14 minor point but, nevertheless, interesting?

15 A. Actually, I don't think it's necessarily a very minor point, and

16 it is very interesting. On the letterheads of Herceg-Bosna, of the HVO or

17 the HZ HB in that period, beginning about in August of 1992 and beginning

18 through the rest of the HZ HB period, the Republic of Bosnia and

19 Herzegovina is put at the top of the letterhead as a sort of pro forma

20 thing. Now, bearing in mind some of the other evidence we've seen, in

21 particular the -- the constitutional court decision nullifying

22 Herceg-Bosna and the basic decisions of Herceg-Bosna, it's a bit

23 surprising to see that. However, keeping in mind the limiting factors

24 which Mr. Boban was discussing in the minutes of the meeting we just saw,

25 one limitation on Herceg-Bosna, I think in this period, and once again I'm

1 basing this on evidence not from -- that I did not use in this report, but

2 a total declaration of independence at this point in time by Herceg-Bosna

3 would have caused serious political troubles for the Republic of Croatia,

4 and that's my speculation. And it's only my speculation. I've never seen

5 an order describing why Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina has to appear

6 on the letterhead, but that's what I speculate based on all the evidence

7 I've seen.

8 MR. KARNAVAS: Your Honour, at this point in time I -- I must make

9 one observation. The witness made a report and has cited certain

10 documents. If he's going to be offering opinions or speculations, in this

11 instance based on other documents which are not in the report, we need to

12 know exactly what are those documents. It's fine for him to give opinions

13 off the top of his head and say, "Well, we've seen documents," or, "this

14 is from something else I've done, but at least if we're going to

15 double-check this information, we need to know specifically what are those

16 documents. Otherwise, they are just empty opinions based on nothing other

17 than his word.

18 JUDGE TRECHSEL: I'm sorry, Mr. Karnavas, but in document P 02142,

19 there is this reference to the limiting factors, and I don't see that the

20 witness has now mentioned any other documents.

21 MR. KARNAVAS: I'm afraid I don't follow His Honour's observation.

22 The point that I'm making is he has indicated in his answer that it's not

23 something that he's put into his report but, rather, from other documents

24 that he's reviewed. That was my understanding, and this is the second

25 time. In fact, I wrote a note to Mr. Murphy to -- cautioning him about

1 when he raised his objection.

2 My whole point is, when he goes off script to -- and give an

3 opinion not included in the report, not referenced in the report, what I

4 am suggesting is he identify what exactly is that material, what is he

5 basing that opinion on. That way we can then cross-examine and or at

6 least you would have the opportunity of reviewing that to make sure that

7 his opinion is based on something that -- other than mere speculation.

8 I don't know if I'm being inarticulate or maybe I'm too tired and

9 I've missed the point.

10 JUDGE TRECHSEL: I am tempted to, but I think it's not my role to

11 argue with you.

12 MR. KARNAVAS: Very well. Well, you can argue any time you wish,

13 Your Honour.

14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Scott.

15 MR. SCOTT:

16 Q. If I could ask you -- I think the last question -- the last

17 question I put to you was to move and whether the mobilisation orders

18 that were look at here, decisions, or calls, whatever you want to call

19 it, calling for that to happen in the letter by Mr. Stojic and Mr. Prlic

20 on the 30th of June, whether that was put into effect, and I just -- I'd

21 just asked you to go to P 03077.

22 Do you have that, sir?

23 A. Yes, I do.

24 Q. Can you tell us what that is? And in this instance, I would like

25 you -- anything that ties directly back into the document we were just

1 looking at, please point that out.

2 A. This order is forwarding the previous orders on mobilisation

3 further down to all the battalion commands as well as military police

4 sections and military police administration departments, and it's

5 signed -- I think the signature on the original of this one is actually

6 the signature of Mr. Lavric, who is the deputy of Mr. Coric, but he's

7 signing under Mr. Coric's name, and moving the particulars of Mr. Stojic's

8 order and transmitting it down to subordinates in the military police in

9 regards to mobilisation.

10 Q. Well, if you allow me to be very specific for a moment. If we can

11 go back to the first page of the English version, whenever we can, and if

12 we look at the order, there's a reference number after the reference to

13 Mr. Stojic and Mr. Prlic, it says "Number 02-1-765/93." And could we --

14 could I ask that the ushers please take us back to Exhibit 3038.

15 Can you look at the top, the order on this document, sir? Can you

16 confirm to the Judges that the reference number on this document is that

17 number?

18 A. Yes. The reference numbers are identical. It's 02-1-765/93. So

19 this order here, Exhibit 3077, is making direct reference to this earlier

20 order.

21 Q. All right. And does Mr. Coric -- by the order of Mr. Coric, does

22 he put anyone in particular in -- make anyone responsible for the

23 enforcement of these orders?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. Go ahead.

1 A. If you look at the second page towards the bottom -- the second

2 page of Mr. Coric's order. If we could have that on the screen. Exhibit

3 3077. 3077, page 2. Yeah. Oh -- yeah, the second page. Thank you.

4 The paragraph -- scroll up a tiny bit. The paragraph here under

5 the 5th part of the order, it says: "All military police units are

6 charged with the implementation of this order within their zones of

7 responsibility. The unit commanders shall be responsible for the

8 implementation of this order, and checks will be carried out by authorised

9 officers from the military police administration."

10 Q. All right. All right, sir. That completes --

11 Let me see if I can catch up on exhibits, Mr. President. We

12 tender P 01778; P 01798; P 01796; which is the full version, the long,

13 full version of the Central Bosnia document that we spent so much time

14 talking about; Exhibit P 01788; Exhibit P 01214; Exhibit P 02142; Exhibit

15 P 02198; Exhibit P 03038; and Exhibit P 03077.

16 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Scott, I think we have to

17 look at timing. You're running a little late for various reasons. Now,

18 I'm going to ask the registrar to tell me how much time the Prosecution

19 has used thus far, but I think that you have used between five hours

20 and -- five and a quarter hours and five hours, 45 minutes. And we're

21 going to have to take a break anyway in a few minutes' time. You'll have

22 one hour after the break, which will lead us to around 6.00 -- or, rather,

23 you will have used about six hours, and eight hours was what was allotted

24 to you, which means two hours for tomorrow. So I'd like to know how you

25 stand. Where are you at in your examination-in-chief?

1 MR. SCOTT: Well, Your Honour's -- excuse me. Your Honour's

2 observations are on target. In fact our records -- I didn't hear, I

3 didn't have the transcript turned on what the registry computation was.

4 Our calculation, and of course -- of course, the registry's calculation

5 will control, but our calculation is that I have used approximately four

6 hours and 20 minutes of the time.

7 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, Your Honour, please. Microphone for

8 the Presiding Judge.

9 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] They tell me you have used six

10 hours or, rather, five hours and 55 minutes. So that's roughly six hours.

11 So you were given two days, and the two days run out at 7.00. So how

12 much more time would you need?

13 MR. SCOTT: Your Honour, at the very least after today I would

14 speculate we would need at least two hours. I would obviously have to sit

15 down and speak with the registry. It may be that the way that Mr.

16 Frejabue was keeping time is not the way the time is being taken now. In

17 the past -- I know that from experience over the last -- since we started

18 trial in April that Ms. Winner's time and the time taken by the registry

19 has almost always been very, very close and there is obviously some reason

20 for that discrepancy which we'll have to explore.

21 I understand that of course we talked about two days. One might

22 have thought that two days we would hopefully get something like seven or

23 eight hours. Now, by my calculations -- if our calculations are correct,

24 then I've only used about half of the time that I had estimated. In any

25 event, I think the Chamber will have seen the interventions and the way

1 that the witness -- I think --

2 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] We thought you had not hours but

3 days, and the days were Monday and Tuesday. So in theory, Tuesday runs

4 out at 7.00 p.m., but we'll discuss the matter amongst us Judges. And

5 there were quite a few interventions by the Defence and questions by the

6 Judges, justified, of course.

7 MR. SCOTT: Of course.

8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] We're going to take the break

9 now anyway. It's half past 5.00, and we reconvene at ten to 6.00.

10 --- Recess taken at 5.31 p.m.

11 --- On resuming at 5.53 p.m.

12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Before giving the floor to

13 Mr. Scott, let me come back to the issue of time. The Judges have

14 discussed the matter. As you know, we had decided to allocate two days to

15 the Prosecution and three days to the Defence. However, we take note of

16 the fact that the Prosecution is running late and will not be in a

17 position to complete direct-examination within two days. So that's why we

18 have decided to add two hours to these original two days. In other words,

19 Mr. Scott, tomorrow you will have two additional hours. Obviously this

20 will have an impact on the time for the Defence. We'll still keep the

21 three days for the Defence, but they will also have two additional hours.

22 Therefore, three days and two hours for the Defence. If you complete on

23 Monday, then that will be very well, but if not, then we will need to

24 postpone the end of the cross-examination to another day, not during the

25 following week but during the week after. So there might be two

1 additional hours on another day, except, of course, if the Defence

2 complete its cross-examination on Monday at 7.00 p.m.

3 Mr. Scott, you have one hour left until 7.00 p.m. today, and you

4 will have two hours tomorrow. I hope that there will be no more

5 interventions and that you'll be able to complete your direct examination

6 within these three hours.

7 MR. SCOTT: Thank you, Your Honour. I'm sure Mr. Tomljanovich

8 will enjoy every possible extra hour that he doesn't have to talk to me

9 and cannot talk to me about something else. So we will press on.

10 What I may do, Your Honour, and I just want to be very

11 transparent, is reduce the number of documents that I will put to the

12 witness, recognising that that means that other documents I'll put to the

13 witness will necessarily be in some cases out of context, therefore, I

14 suppose, possibly prompting questions from the Judges as to what's the

15 purpose or context of this document, but I don't have time to go through

16 all the documents, so I'll just jump a bit from document to document, I'm

17 afraid.

18 Q. If I can next turn, sir, to the question of taxes and finance --

19 strike that. Let me back up.

20 Sir, today so far I have taken you through -- we've covered three

21 essential topics or scenarios, series of events. One was the -- a series

22 of orders related to the 15th of January, 1993, ultimatum. The second

23 scenario or series of events being related to the discussions in early

24 April, 1993 about, again, the subordination of the ABH forces in provinces

25 3, 8, and 10 to the HVO, and the third scenario I took you through was on

1 the question of mobilisation.

2 In each of those situations I showed you a series of documents.

3 Can you tell the Judges whether -- do those documents illustrate what you

4 saw in your research that the structures and processes that you described

5 generally yesterday, in a general way, were in fact the structures and

6 processes followed in the three scenarios that we went through today?

7 A. Generally speaking, yes. As I described yesterday, my report has

8 three parts to it. First describing the foundation documents and the de

9 jure framework, and the second part showing how those structures

10 functioned in practice and how these processes and structures would react

11 and how orders were moved down the line in these situations, de facto, in

12 1993. Then I returned to the de jure structures of HR HB at the end.

13 But, yes, all of these episodes do show that the system, for the most

14 part, functioned as planned.

15 Q. Let me next take you to then the topic of taxes and finances. If

16 we can touch on that just for a very few minutes. You included -- that's

17 topics in your report. Is that correct, sir?

18 A. Yes, I did.

19 Q. Could I ask that the witness be shown P 00410. And if you have

20 that, sir, can you tell us what that is and again the -- the -- relate it

21 to the parts of your report, if you can help us relate it to the question

22 of taxes and finance in connection with the Croatian Community of

23 Herceg-Bosna.

24 A. This is a decree as reprinted in Narodni List from the 28th of

25 August, 1992, and signed by Jadranko Prlic, and it -- it decrees the

1 introduction of a war tax in the territory of the HZ HB in the times of

2 the imminent threat of war, during the state of war, and just very

3 briefly, the tax, as outlined in Article 2 --

4 Q. Hold on one moment, please, because right now we're looking at --

5 if I can ask the ushers to go to the fourth page of that document because

6 I think there's two different decrees in this exhibit. And for those

7 using a hard copy, looking at a hard copy, it's the fourth page of Exhibit

8 P 00410. Now will you continue, sir now that people have --

9 A. Yes. In Article 2, just very briefly, this tax is described as

10 being a tax of 10 per cent on paid salaries per month. And going on to

11 the next page, it also taxes 3.000 Croatian dinars per month for

12 independently employed entrepreneurs.

13 Q. All right. Let me just top you there, sir, because -- in the

14 interest of time.

15 A. Yeah.

16 Q. That was one particular tax, but in your report you talk about the

17 various means by which the Croatian Community of Herceg-Bosna or the HVO

18 sought to raise revenue or found ways to raise revenue.

19 A. Yes. This is one among many ways in which they were raising

20 revenue.

21 Q. Now, if you can go back to the first page of that same exhibit,

22 the one we started looking at, and tell us what that decree is about.

23 A. That -- and I'm not sure if that's the same exhibit although the

24 translations are together. That is the decree on opening the account for

25 the budget of the HZ HB, and it establishes a bank account into which the

1 monies for the budget will be deposited. And it was also approved on the

2 same day, 28th of August, 1992, which is soon after the HVO HZ HB began

3 meeting.

4 Q. Can you look at Articles 3 and 4 and tell us the purposes or name

5 of the account and where the account, or accounts, was or were, depending

6 if it's single or plural, opened?

7 A. Articles 3 and 4 say that the budget account will be opened with

8 the Mostar Public Auditing Service and with the commercial bank.

9 Q. And this decree was issued by --

10 A. I believe it's Jadranko Prlic. If we could scroll to the end. He

11 signs the decree. Yes.

12 Q. All right. If I can next ask you then to turn your attention to

13 Exhibit P 00511. And as soon as you have -- well, let's wait for it to

14 come up on the screen. Can you tell us what that is?

15 A. This is the actual request to open that same account for the

16 budget of the HZ HB, and it's dated on the 21st of September, 1992.

17 And --

18 Q. Go ahead.

19 A. And authorises three persons to manage the funds in that

20 particular account with their signatures, the first being Neven Tomic who

21 was the head of the financial department or the finance department, the

22 second Jadranko Prlic the president of the HZ HB HVO, and finally Zeljko

23 Bandic who was an employee of the financial department or finance

24 department.

25 Q. Now, if we can look at the -- it's worth in this instance, I

1 think, looking at the B/C/S original, if we could pull up the second page

2 which would be ERN 03424131.

3 Directing your attention, sir, to number 2, can you just go ahead

4 and read that in the original language, allow it to be translated for us,

5 and then indicate whether that then by this document is indicated as

6 Mr. Prlic's signature.

7 A. [Interpretation] "2. Dr. Jadranko Prlic, president of the HVO HZ

8 HB, who will sign his name as follows." [In English] And then it follows

9 with a signature which I recognise as Mr. Prlic's signature.

10 Q. And the other two men have apparently indicated their hand

11 signatures as well; correct?

12 A. Yes, they have.

13 Q. Let me next ask you to direct your attention to the last document

14 in all these bundles, which is P 09551.

15 And in the English excerpt, Your Honours, it's going to be -- this

16 document, the way the translations were put together in various bits and

17 pieces, there is not a continuous pagination. So I ask the Chamber to

18 bear with me. If you can go about probably -- approximately four-fifths

19 of the way through the document until you get to the page that says

20 "budget" and item number 1 under that heading it says, "budget revenue."

21 And in the B/C/S document, page 0040 starting at page 5232, the section on

22 finance, starting on page 5232 and continuing on to 0040-5237. And if all

23 else fails, we can put it on the ELMO, I suppose.

24 May I suggest in the interest -- since time is precious,

25 Mr. President, we can just put these two pages on the ELMO, of the English

1 version. I apologise. It will have some yellow markings on it, but I

2 don't think they say a whole lot.

3 First of all, Mr. Tomljanovich, can you remind the Judges what

4 document P 00 -- or, excuse me, P 09551 is?

5 A. Well, this section here is an excerpt from the whole exhibit,

6 which is the semi-annual report of the HVO for the second half of 1993.

7 Q. So this report would roughly cover the period from July to

8 December, 1993?

9 A. Yes. And in this particular section where they actually discuss

10 the budget they cover all of 1993 in certain respects.

11 Q. All right.

12 A. Actually, in the beginning here they do.

13 Q. In your research, Mr. Tomljanovich, did you find that there were

14 accounts given -- accountings given of the budget revenues for 1993 and

15 the expenditures by the HVO in 1993?

16 A. Yes, there are, and that's spelled out in this particular

17 document. In the first section we see here, various tax revenues which

18 amount to -- I believe that's 104 billion Croatian dinars. Then there's

19 non-tax revenue in section 2. Revenues from credits in section 3.

20 Donations and other revenues in section 4. Revenues from previous years

21 carried over, and then the total revenue is at the bottom of the page.

22 Q. And could you go to the next page. Could you put the next page on

23 the ELMO in terms of expenditures?

24 A. The next page lists the expenditures, and I believe this is all in

25 Croatian dinars. And it lists the various places where the money went in

1 1993 from January to December, and just a quick look at that you can see

2 that the vast majority of the budget went to the defence department, and

3 the total, it's up here, 169 billion, and total expenditures are 197

4 billion.

5 Q. Thank you. We can go forward. For the record I'm told and I

6 apologise for not having this information at hand previously but pages

7 that were put on the ELMO in the e-court pages are pages 39 and 40 of the

8 English version for the record.

9 In your report, sir, did you also talk about the issues of

10 refugees, handling of prisoners, population movements?

11 A. Yes, indeed, and it's something I spent a great deal of space on,

12 because that was a complicated issue which shows the de facto functioning

13 of the Herceg-Bosna institutions.

14 Q. All right. All right. Mr. Tomljanovich, on that point I was

15 going to show you eight documents but because of time I'll only show you

16 two. So if I can direct your attention to P 03052. And as soon as you

17 have Exhibit 3052, P 03052, sorry, can you tell us what that is?

18 A. This document is a draft document written by Mr. Berislav

19 Pusic --

20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Ibrisimovic.

21 MR. IBRISIMOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President. As

22 Mr. Tomljanovich is also an archival expert, this document is not signed

23 by Mr. Pusic. There is no date and no protocol. So can we hear how the

24 witness knows that the document was actually compiled by Mr. Pusic? I am

25 also interested in the provenance of this document, because I don't see

1 the stamp of the Croatian state archives on it.

2 THE WITNESS: Yes. First of all, this document is what we call in

3 our own jargon type signed. That's correct. There is no particular

4 signature from Mr. Berislav Pusic, although this particular document was

5 written most likely right after the foundation of the office for the

6 exchange of prisoners and other persons.

7 This particular document, as far as I remember, is a new document

8 which was provided by the OTP from Bosnian federation authorities, and

9 this was, I believe -- there's two collections we received recently. I

10 believe this collection was the -- either the office for refugees and

11 displaced persons or the collection of the Department for Social Welfare

12 and the Family, although this certainly was not received in the Croatian

13 archives. This was provided to us by Bosnian federation authorities, and

14 it was found in Western Herzegovina.

15 MR. SCOTT:

16 Q. And can you tell us, sir, what the document is -- indicates or is

17 about?

18 A. It's a proposal for the internal organisation of this office and

19 puts forward the estimation of the funds, equipment, and staff needed, and

20 proposes a flowchart and other details for organising this office.

21 Q. Let me back up and ask you, in your research and in your report,

22 in fact, you cover, among other agencies or bodies, commissions, services

23 related to refugees, prisoner exchanges, et cetera, is one of those bodies

24 something called the Service for Exchange of Prisoners and Other Persons?

25 A. Yes, it is.

1 Q. And in particular, did your research show that during this time

2 period, that is approximately mid-1993, going forward, that Mr. Pusic was

3 the head of that office or service?

4 A. Yes. And in fact, his appointment was in Narodni List and that's

5 cited in my report.

6 Q. And before we leave this document, then, this appears to be at

7 least a proposal over the typed name of Mr. Pusic for the operation of

8 this office?

9 A. Yes, it is.

10 Q. Could I ask you to look at Exhibit P 03191. And can you tell

11 us -- if you have that, can you tell us what that is?

12 A. This is a translation of the actual appointment signed by Dr.

13 Jadranko Prlic on the 5th of July appointing Berislav Pusic head of the

14 service for exchange of prisoners and other persons of the HVO HZ HB.

15 Q. Based on your research, Mr. Tomljanovich, can you tell us the

16 title makes reference to "and other persons," who these other persons

17 were?

18 A. I would assume, and it's never spelled out explicitly, that "other

19 persons" would be everyone who is not a prisoner of war and would be

20 civilians.

21 Q. On the question of the movement of population, did you also look

22 at the question of Bosnian Croat refugees coming to Herzegovina from other

23 parts of Bosnia and Herzegovina?

24 A. Yes, I did. In the summer -- spring and summer of 1993, a great

25 number of Croat refugees arrived in Herzegovina, Western Herzegovina, and

1 other parts of Herceg-Bosna from Central Bosnia and other places after the

2 fighting between the ABiH and the HVO, and they were resettled in various

3 places, but there was a great effort to find places for those refugees,

4 including there in Herzegovina.

5 Q. As part of that, sir, can you tell us, during this time were there

6 ever any discussions or in fact actions to evacuate or move large blocks

7 of population from other parts of Bosnia and Herzegovina into Herceg-Bosna

8 territory?

9 A. Yes, there were. There was in particular one very large

10 evacuation from Vares.

11 Q. Before we get to that, can I ask you to direct your attention to

12 Exhibit P 02283. And can you tell us what that is, and again then relate

13 that back if you will to your report.

14 A. This is a letter from Colonel Blaskic, who was the commander of

15 the Central Bosnian military zone, to Mate Boban, Jadranko Prlic, and

16 Bruno Stojic, and it's in regard to "Your oral order for evacuation of

17 people and the army." And Mr. Blaskic -- or Colonel Blaskic is informing

18 them that the oral order for evacuation which he had received, he's

19 received the order but that he has information on why the order for

20 evacuation will not be taken out -- undertaken.

21 Q. And why is that?

22 A. Because in the second paragraph he says that it's not possible

23 because the evacuation would have to be carried out through territories

24 controlled by -- here it says the MOS, which would be really the ABiH, the

25 Bosnian army, and that there's no other way to get through.

1 Q. All right.

2 A. And he suggests not long after that that they negotiate with the

3 Muslim leadership, and if that's not possible, to negotiate with the

4 persons.

5 Q. All right. Let me just stop you briefly. Again, I don't know if

6 the Chamber has seen the reference or the abbreviation "MOS" before, so

7 let me just ask you what is that? An abbreviation for -- literally from

8 the B/C/S language, can you tell us what that means?

9 A. It means the Muslim armed forces which is not, as far as I know,

10 not an abbreviation they used for themselves but it was frequently applied

11 in HVO documents to the army of ABiH, the army of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

12 Q. All right. Now, if the ushers could help us by going to the

13 second page of that document.

14 You made reference to the fact that there was some discussion or

15 proposal about approaching the Serbs about being able to evacuate people

16 from Central Bosnia through Serb-controlled territory. Can you point out

17 in the document, that language, to the Judges?

18 A. Yes. That's in the second sentence on the second page, which is

19 up a little I think. There we are. It's already there. Beginning

20 with "In order to be able to carry out given tasks," this is a quote, "In

21 order to be able to carry out the given tasks, I suggest to openly

22 negotiate on this with the Muslim leadership and in case of their refusal

23 to consider the possibility to pull out across territories controlled --

24 and in case of their refusal," sorry, I'm going backwards, "to consider

25 the possibility to pull out across territories controlled by the Chetniks,

1 although I am aware that Chetniks are Chetniks and nothing else but

2 Chetniks."

3 By Chetniks here I assume he's using that to refer to the Serbs in

4 general which is not strictly speaking correct or not politically correct,

5 certainly, but that's what he means.

6 Q. Let me ask you to next direct your attention to Exhibit P 03413.

7 And when you look at what document, can you tell us -- first of all tell

8 us what it is?

9 A. Yes. This is a letter written on the 13th of July, 1993, to the

10 president -- Presidency of the HZ HB, to the president personally. So

11 it's going personally to Mate Boban. And I believe if you look at the

12 bottom it's signed -- or it's Mr. Prlic at the bottom. If we can look.

13 On behalf of the HVO HZ HB. Yes. It's signed by Dr. Jadranko Prlic as

14 president of the HVO HZ HB.

15 Q. All right. And what is the topic or subject matter of this

16 letter?

17 A. Yeah. If we could go back to the beginning of the document. Yes.

18 Mr. Prlic is informing -- he's reminding, I believe, and not informing for

19 the first time, he doesn't say that explicitly, but he's informing Mr.

20 Boban of the conclusions reached at an HVO HZ HB meeting on the 15th of

21 June, 1993, and has a number of conclusions which he's telling him about,

22 asking for assistance in various ways, and particular relevant to the

23 earlier documents we saw, Article 3 here, if you see it, says: "A

24 proposal has been put to the Presidency of the HZ HB and Supreme Commander

25 of the HVO to reach the decision to withdraw all military units together

1 with the local Croatian population from areas outside of the defined Croat

2 provinces. For that purpose an assistance of UNPROFOR and UNHCR needs to

3 be requested in the form of an ultimatum."

4 Q. And do you know whether there were any -- in fact, any evacuations

5 carried out after the 13th of July of 1993? Or movements or withdrawals

6 it's said here.

7 A. Yes, there were. There were a number of evacuations. And --

8 Q. Go ahead.

9 A. Oh, I'm sorry. I mentioned the one from Vares in particular. Or

10 there were a number of evacuations from Vares.

11 Q. Two other documents two things not dealing with the issue that

12 we're talking about now but before we leave the document in terms of

13 evacuations or movements of people. In Article 2 or paragraph 2 do you

14 see that?

15 A. Yes. Yes. Article 2, and this gets back to what we were talking

16 about earlier today, Article 2 reads: "A proposal has been put to the

17 Presidency of the HZ HB and the Supreme Commander of the HVO to urgently

18 seek the military aid for the protection of BiH Croats from the Republic

19 of Croatia."

20 Q. And --

21 A. That's --

22 Q. Well, let me just go again to then Article 4. Can you tell us

23 anything about what paragraph 4 references, and if you know, whether any

24 steps were taken to --

25 A. Number --

1 Q. [Indiscernible - overlapping speakers] ... at that.

2 A. Section number 4 makes reference to a proposal put forward to

3 Mr. Boban to form a wartime cabinet in accordance with a decree on armed

4 forces, which is foreseen in the decree on armed forces. This implies it

5 hadn't actually been done until this period, but later documentation shows

6 that there were smaller meetings of the persons in the cabinet most

7 responsible for these -- for defence and security.

8 Q. And who would -- who would those persons be?

9 A. I believe it was Mr. Prlic, Mr. Stojic, and off the top of my head

10 Mr. Kvesic as head of the Department of Internal Affairs.

11 Q. The Ministry of the Interior some might call it?

12 A. Well, you can --

13 Q. MUP.

14 A. Six of one, half dozen of another.

15 Q. All right. Now, if I can go back -- sorry, but before we go to

16 the next item if you go back to paragraph number 3 it says, "... outside

17 of the defined Croat provinces." Now, this document is dated the 13th of

18 July, 1993. Can you assist the Judges in terms of what would be -- if you

19 can, what would be the defined Croat provinces at this time period?

20 A. At this time period actually off the top of my head I'm not sure

21 if the provinces as outlined in Vance-Owen were still on the table or if

22 the maps they were discussing in the Owen-Stoltenberg Plan were already on

23 the table. It would have been one or the other but I'm not sure which at

24 this particular stage. It was late for one and early for another, I

25 think.

1 Q. Could I ask that the witness be shown the map number 11 from

2 Exhibit P 09276. And in particular, please, map number 11. I'm told it

3 would be page 12 in e-court.

4 Sir, using this map, looking at the -- which is -- the Chamber's

5 previously seen, it's been discussed with other witnesses, the Vance-Owen

6 Peace Plan, to your knowledge, sir, looking at approximately the middle of

7 the map and locating the municipalities of Vares and Kakanj -- yes.

8 A. If you look at this particular map showing the Vance-Owen

9 provinces, and we were discussing earlier provinces 3, 8 and 10 which are

10 shaded here in blue, if you look here in the middle near the number 9

11 where it's white, right under the number 9 there's Kakanj, and to the

12 right of that is Vares.

13 Q. And can you tell the Judges, sir, whether Vares and Kakanj as the

14 Vance-Owen map evolved in 1993 up until the late spring and early summer

15 of 1993, did that -- did provinces -- did the so-called Croat provinces, 8

16 and 10, ever include Kakanj or Vares?

17 A. No, they did not.

18 MR. KARNAVAS: I suspect at some point we're going to get some

19 historical background from our historian here as to what was happening in

20 those locations at that particular time.

21 MR. SCOTT:

22 Q. If I can ask you to look at -- next at P 03796.

23 JUDGE TRECHSEL: I'm sorry, Mr. Karnavas, what kind of

24 intervention has that been? Is that a question or an objection? I think

25 that's the two things you are allowed to make at this stage, is that

1 right?

2 MR. KARNAVAS: Well, the gentleman is an expert. He's an

3 historian. Now they're talking about documents of evacuation. Is this in

4 the abstract? Is something happening at the time? Is there a reason

5 why the gentleman spent seven and a half years -- I think it helps the

6 Trial Chamber understand why this information is being brought forward.

7 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Well, that's for the Prosecution. The

8 Prosecution is leading their evidence and then afterwards you can

9 challenge and ask what is left open and correct and so forth.

10 MR. KARNAVAS: Very well. This is a very unusual process. I've

11 never seen this before.

12 MR. SCOTT: Well, let me just be very, very -- respond very

13 briefly, Your Honours. The Court has the entire report and virtually

14 everything that I've talked about yesterday and today is discussed in much

15 greater detail in the report. The procedure that the Chamber has invited

16 us to follow is to allow the expert to essentially hit, if you want to

17 call it highlights, my friends on the other side might call it the

18 lowlights, I don't know, but hit various aspects of the report and in --

19 in a summary overview sort of way. If the Chamber's concerned that I am

20 already behind in my time, I can assure you we would be much further

21 behind if we covered all these topics in full detail.

22 Further, the Chamber has directed the Prosecution to go through

23 those particular exhibits in the report which it seeks to have admitted

24 into evidence. There again, all I can do at this point given the time

25 limitations is try to put what I consider the most important exhibits

1 before the Chamber and, necessarily so, there's a limited time to do that.

2 The Chamber has seen over the last -- since yesterday and the

3 Chamber has had a number of questions about the documents, good questions,

4 reasonable questions. And if we had more time I myself would have spent

5 more time on each document but if I do that we wouldn't get very far and

6 unfortunately those are the rules that, in the circumstances that we --

7 all of us find ourselves in.

8 If Mr. Karnavas wants to talk and use his time in

9 cross-examination to go into the report, he has the whole report. He can

10 go through any part of it that he would like to in great detail.

11 So if I can again ask the witness to look at P 03796.

12 Q. And again, sir, can you tell us what this is?

13 A. This is the minutes of the 48th session of the HVO HZ HB, which

14 were held on the 29th of July, 1993.

15 Q. And specifically to the topic at hand, the refugees or displaced

16 persons, can I ask you please to look at -- to be shown page 4 of the

17 document under item 14. And can you give us -- again, can you just look

18 at item 14 in relation to your report.

19 A. Yes. Item 14 deals with some of these same issues. First thing

20 to be underscored is paragraph 3, in which Mr. Zubak reports on the

21 measures which were taken to anticipate the 10.000 or so Croats from

22 Central Bosnia they expect to have come. After emphasising certain

23 problems he talks -- he goes on. And then at the bottom, the very last

24 paragraph, it states: "Bearing in mind the situation on the ground, and

25 in particular the migration of the Muslim population, a unanimous decision

1 was taken to expand the service for the exchange of prisoners and other

2 persons to include representatives of the municipalities of Mostar,

3 Capljina, Livno, and Stolac." And then it lists who their own members on

4 this commission would be. I'm sorry, that's period, closed quote, and

5 then they list the members they are appointing to this committee.

6 Q. In addition to and again taking stepping aside from the current

7 topic but because its in this particular document if I can ask you to look

8 at the mention page, be shown the top of page 5 in reference to something

9 you mentioned --

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. -- a couple of moments ago.

12 A. Yes. That's the first paragraph there and this refers to what we

13 were talking about earlier. I remembered correctly. What it says here is

14 that "given the military situation, and particularly in the territory of

15 Mostar, it was agreed that president Dr. J. Prlic should hold special

16 working meetings with the collegiums of the Departments of Defence and the

17 Interior."

18 Q. What is whatever that word is?

19 A. I don't have the B/C/S in front of me but I expect it would be

20 "kolegij," and that would be a meeting of the department head or

21 minister. In this case the department head still with all of his

22 assistants. So it would be the head of the Department of Defence and all

23 of his assistant department heads, as well as the head of the interior

24 department and all of his head -- assistants with Mr. Prlic. So this

25 would be a narrower meeting of people concerned with security.

1 Q. Could I next ask you, then, to look at Exhibit P 04282 [Realtime

2 transcript read in error, "04218"].

3 A. Uh-huh.

4 Q. And can you tell us what that document is, please.

5 A. Yes, this is a document from Mr. Prlic to the Vares municipal

6 government on the 18th of August, 1993. And this is in regard to the

7 evacuation of Croats from Kakanj who had been living already as refugees

8 in Vares. And he mentions that they will secure their evacuation to

9 Western Herzegovina.

10 One thing which needs to be underlined is that in the second

11 paragraph here when he mentions that he's prepared for the -- or that they

12 have prepared for the transport and they ask them to, and here's the

13 quote, beginning mid sentence. But to save on time I'll start here, "...

14 secure the consent of the 'S' side for transportation over territories

15 that they control."

16 Q. From your research, sir, can you tell us what the reference to "S"

17 side or who the reference is to or what?

18 A. In a great number of documents which we found in the Zagreb

19 archives since the year 2000, coming from this area of Central Bosnia, in

20 particular Kiseljak, and -- and that part of Central Bosnia, they refer to

21 the Serbs as either "S" in quotation marks or, as the "XY" side in

22 quotation marks. But given the number of documents we've seen, it's very

23 clear that that's what they mean and that they use it consistently.

24 Q. All right. And if -- sorry. Then if we can go then back to, I'm

25 afraid, to the final document again at the end of the bundle. P 09551.

1 And again, Mr. President, with my apology, this is again a

2 document where the translations are currently in separate components and

3 there is not a continuous page reference. In the B/C/S document, for

4 those looking at that, or if it assists the registry at all, it is -- it

5 can be found in the pages 0040-5261 through 0040-5264. And in the English

6 version it's almost -- in fact, it's the last three pages of the

7 English -- last three pages of the English translation. So if you just go

8 back until you're almost in the B/C/S, you'll find the top of the page,

9 says, "Department for Refugee Care."

10 Thank you very much to the registry for your assistance on that.

11 If I can ask you then to go to the next page of that document.

12 Again, it's a bit different than the one I had. Can you scroll down,

13 please. On to the next page.

14 Sir, if I can direct your attention -- if you will refer to this

15 because, at least those working in English will be referring to exactly

16 the same format, the reference to the third paragraph starting on this

17 page. Do you see references to 'a movement of Croats from Kakanj"?

18 A. Yes. In the third paragraph. 10.500 Croats from Kakanj and

19 Kraljeva Sutjeska to Vares.

20 Q. And after that paragraph, can you tell us, does it make reference

21 to an evacuation from Vares later that year?

22 A. Yes, it does. In the next paragraph it mentions 2.986 persons,

23 being the first huge evacuation from Vares and taking place on the 30th of

24 August, 1993.

25 Q. And where were these people located in Herzegovina?

1 A. It says here to the municipalities of Capljina and Stolac, which

2 is south of Mostar.

3 Q. And beyond that can you -- was there a second movement of

4 population from Vares?

5 A. Yeah. The second huge wave of evacuations it says here took place

6 on the 4th of November, 1993, and it says about 5.500 people expelled from

7 Kakanj, and that 1.700 of them were directly accommodated, and I think in

8 this sense "directly" means immediately, in the Republic of Croatia and

9 the rest of them were accommodated in the municipalities of Livno, which

10 is Western Bosnia, Ljubuski, Citluk, and Capljina, all in Herzegovina.

11 Q. All right. If I might -- Mr. President, I've been -- indicate

12 there is a problem on page -- of the transcript and unfortunately the page

13 has gone by, I believe, but the last -- not this exhibit but the previous

14 exhibit in the transcript apparently was referred to, I'm told, as P

15 04218. It may be that I misspoke. It should be P 04282.

16 All right. Well, we'll start the next topic, I suppose, this

17 evening and I want to turn to the question of the HVO prisons or camps.

18 Did you look at that the structures and processes involved with the prison

19 and camps operated by the HVO during 1993?

20 A. Yes, I did.

21 Q. As part of your report did you research documents showing how

22 various of the camps were established, how they were operated and

23 closed -- and if they were closed at some point?

24 A. Yes, I did. Not for all of the detention centres, but for some of

25 them to show the general pattern, and to show how -- how the organs and

1 structures of Herceg-Bosna dealt with that and who was responsible for

2 what.

3 Q. Can I ask you to look now at P 00452. And can you tell us what

4 that document is and how it relates to the part of your report dealing

5 with the camps.

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. Or prisons.

8 A. This document is the decision of the 3rd of September, 1992,

9 signed by Mr. Bruno Stojic, establishing the central military prison for

10 the HZ HB at the Heliodrom barracks near Mostar, and appointing the

11 warden.

12 JUDGE TRECHSEL: I'm sorry. The term "warden" seems to me

13 surprising. Would it be the prison governor in normal English language?

14 The terminology of the United Kingdom.

15 THE WITNESS: Well, that's -- United Kingdom I'm not sure. I can

16 only tell you what it might be in the Croatian, and I know that it often

17 gets translated differently. I've seen both director and warden in

18 translations.

19 MR. SCOTT:

20 Q. Well, let's go to the B/C/S version if that will assist. If we go

21 to item number 2 on the B/C/S version, and as we have in the past would

22 you just read that in the original language and --

23 A. Yeah. It says: [Interpretation] "2. For the warden of the

24 central military prison. Mr. Mile Pusic, Krusevo, Mostar, is appointed."

25 THE INTERPRETER: "Ravantlje" means "director," in literal

1 translation.

2 MR. SCOTT: All right. Thank you for that.

3 Q. Could we then go to Exhibit P 00515, the order by -- order by

4 Mr. Stojic of the 3rd of September, 1992. Would you look at this document

5 and tell us what it is.

6 A. Now, this is a continuation of the same activity, and this order

7 is signed by Valentin Coric on the 22nd of September, 1992, and addressed

8 to his assistant for investigations. Here it is translated as the

9 governor of the central military prison and the governors, the four

10 governors of HVO military remand prisons. And it's establishing -- it's

11 also again ordering for a central military prison to be established at the

12 barracks situated at the Mostar heliport or Heliodrom.

13 Q. And in this order does Mr. Coric indicate who will be responsible

14 for executing, carrying out his order?

15 A. Yes, he does. In the last paragraph in the order, if we could

16 move down to the -- yeah. Thank you.

17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Now, in this order, first of

18 all, it says, "to establish a central military prison in the barracks

19 situated at the Mostar heliport." Now, what I'm interested in is the

20 second paragraph where I see that in this military prison there were

21 prisoners of war, and then it says: "And army prisoners (both military

22 and civilian)." What are your conclusions in that respect? I'm not

23 asking about speculation here, I'm asking about your conclusions.

24 THE WITNESS: The conclusion which is not based on any other

25 documentation but my assumption that prisoners taken by the army would be

1 civilian could mean males in service age or it could mean any other

2 civilian prisoners that the -- that the army or military bring in. Which

3 of that -- which it is, I don't know from the document.

4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.

5 MR. SCOTT:

6 Q. If we can -- if we can perhaps finish this -- next couple

7 documents before 7.00. Look at Exhibit P 02679.

8 Can you tell us about that document, please.

9 A. This document is a decision signed by Jadranko Prlic on the 8th of

10 June, 1993, to set up the county military prison and the county prison for

11 the municipalities of Capljina, Neum, Ljubuski, and Ravno in Gabela.

12 Q. And does it say when this decision goes into effect?

13 A. It says that the decision takes into effect immediately and that

14 it will be published in the Official Gazette.

15 Q. Could we next go to P 02674.

16 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] A question from me. This is a

17 decision to set up a prison, Gabela, but it says the county military

18 prison and the county prison. So was it a prison that was both a military

19 prison and a civilian prison at the same time? Is that what that means?

20 THE WITNESS: I assume it does.

21 MR. SCOTT:

22 Q. It may or may not assist in looking at the next document. If you

23 have Exhibit P 02674 and tell us what that is.

24 A. This is the appointment on the same day, also signed by Jadranko

25 Prlic, to appoint the head of the county military prison in Gabela.

1 Q. And who is that?

2 A. Boko Previsic.

3 Q. Now this particular decision, it does not reference the county

4 prison but only the county military prison; is that correct?

5 A. That's correct.

6 Q. And if I can show you finally for today Exhibit P 07668. You have

7 that?

8 A. Yes, I do.

9 Q. Can you tell us what that is?

10 A. This is a translation from the Official Gazette of a decision made

11 by Jadranko Prlic -- or signed by Jadranko Prlic on the 22nd of December,

12 1993, and this nullifies the two orders of 8th of June, 1993, which we've

13 seen before. This is undoing the foundation of the prison and the

14 appointment of its director.

15 And I should note that the -- this document was reprinted in the

16 Official Gazettes, but I haven't been able to find the actual opening of

17 the -- of Gabela or the appointment of its director in the Official

18 Gazettes.

19 Q. Other than the documents that we looked at a moment ago.

20 A. Yes, but those are from the Official Gazettes. Those are original

21 copies.

22 Q. The effect of the decision reflected on P 07668 is the Gabela

23 prisons were closed.

24 A. Yes. And --

25 Q. Sorry.

1 A. Sorry.

2 MR. SCOTT: Your Honour, I think that concludes our time for

3 today. I can either catch up on the exhibits now. I suppose we can do it

4 first thing in the morning, whichever you prefer.

5 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, Your Honour, please.

6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] May we have a list of your

7 exhibits?

8 MR. SCOTT: Yes. We will tender -- I'm told from previously I

9 failed to tender P 01789, and then more recently P 00410, P 00511, P

10 09551, P 03052, P 03191, P 02283, P 03413, P 09276, if not previously

11 admitted. We think it has been, but if it hasn't, I tender it now. P

12 03796, P 04282, P 00452, P 000515, P 02679, P 02674, and P 07668.

13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, Counsel Ibrisimovic.

14 MR. IBRISIMOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President. Just

15 briefly. I stand by the objection I made with respect to document 03052.

16 The document isn't signed. It hasn't got a date. There is no preamble.

17 So what is the provenance? The witness said that it probably came from

18 the archives of Bosnia-Herzegovina, but we know nothing for sure.

19 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Another few seconds. Tomorrow,

20 the Prosecution will have two hours to complete the examination-in-chief.

21 As you know, the Defence teams in theory have tomorrow and the following

22 day, and we said that you must decide how to divide the time up between

23 you, and you'll have Monday as well, so you will three days in total.

24 Now, at this stage, Mr. Karnavas, have you reached an agreement

25 with your colleagues as to how to divide up the time, or do you want the

1 Trial Chamber tomorrow at 2.15, before starting, to divide up the time for

2 you?

3 MR. KARNAVAS: Thank you, Mr. President. I understand that you've

4 already decided that for us. You gave us the amount of time, divided by

5 six --

6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] We haven't decided anything for

7 us yet. We're waiting for you to tell us how you intend to proceed.

8 MR. KARNAVAS: In the sense that -- well, there are six of us, and

9 among ourselves we know what we need to do. I've repeatedly objected to

10 this process but you've told us this is the amount of time. We have about

11 12 hours or so among ourselves, perhaps 14. We divide it by six, and then

12 if somebody wants to give up their time to another team because they won't

13 use it, that's the way we'll proceed. Obviously, as I've said before,

14 this is not in my opinion appropriate under the circumstances when you

15 have somebody spending seven and a half years on a report, but we will

16 live by the Court's decisions.

17 MR. MURPHY: Your Honour, I anticipate -- in fact we do now have

18 an agreement between the Defence teams as to how the time will be

19 allocated and I think we'll be in a position to announce that to the Trial

20 Chamber at the close of the examination-in-chief.

21 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Fine. Mr. Murphy,

22 you're telling us that you're going to reach an agreement and that's what

23 we the Judges would prefer. We would prefer you to decide amongst

24 yourselves rather than have to decide for you. Of course, you can always

25 calculate by dividing by six, but perhaps that rule, divide it by six,

1 isn't preferable. So I would prefer it if you were to divide up the time

2 amongst yourselves between counsel and the accused to avoid any chaos or

3 harbour the feeling that certain people weren't given the opportunity to

4 raise the issues they wished to raise.

5 So between now and then, you have time to meet and decide what

6 you're going to do, reach an agreement.

7 Mr. Scott?

8 MR. SCOTT: Your Honour, just one second. I do appreciate the

9 Chamber giving me the two hours tomorrow. Perhaps I was a bit grumpy

10 before but we'll be able to complete given the extra time, I think.

11 MR. MURPHY: Your Honour, I'm quite confident it won't be

12 necessary for the Court to make an allocation. The Defence counsel will

13 be able to divide the time and in a manner that will be acceptable to

14 everyone.

15 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. I apologise to the

16 interpreters for taking 10 more minutes. We reconvene tomorrow at 2.15.

17 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.07 p.m.,

18 to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 6th day of

19 September, 2006, at 2.15 p.m.

20

21

22

23

24

25