1 Wednesday, 24 January 2007
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness enters court]
5 --- Upon commencing at 2.15 p.m.
6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Registrar, would you please
7 call the case.
8 THE REGISTRAR: [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Mr. President.
9 This is case number IT-04-74-T, the Prosecutor versus Prlic et al.
10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I would like to greet everybody
11 in the courtroom, the representatives of the Prosecution, the Defence
12 teams, the accused. I would like to greet equally everybody present in
13 the courtroom, and on may have of my colleagues, I would wish Mr. Petkovic
14 a quick recovery. He's not with us today.
15 We will proceed with our work. I'm going to render a decision
16 with regards to the conference 65 ter. I will read slowly and I will
17 check the transcript to so there are no errors in the interpretation.
18 Yesterday the Chamber has received a joint motion by the Defence
19 that request was submitted after the written motions pursuant to 92 bis
20 regarding the municipality of Gornji Vakuf. The motion regards the
21 Prosecution's request of 15 December 2006, the response by the Defence of
22 12 January, 2007, and the request to authorise a reply by the Prosecution
23 dated 18 January 2007.
24 In the motion that was filed, the Trial Chamber has exceptionally
25 granted the motion. In the motion that was filed yesterday, the Defence
1 asked us to hold a 65 ter Conference in order to deal with the following
2 issues: Firstly, it seems that the Prosecutor agrees that the attacks on
3 the villages in the municipality of Gornji Vakuf were targeted at
4 legitimate targets. As a result of that, Defence will no longer have to
5 present its evidence in that sense.
6 Second, how does one interpret Article 92 bis, especially with
7 regard to the period of time that is mentioned by the Prosecution?
8 And three, does the Prosecution maintain that in Bosnia and
9 Herzegovina there was no conflict between Croats and Muslims in 1991 and
11 As regards point number one, in their request to authorise their
12 reply, the Prosecution maintains that the fact that the villages in the
13 municipality of Gornji Vakuf were defend -- defended or not is not
14 relevant because the Prosecution has never maintained there was an illegal
15 attack in the sense of the violation of the rules and laws of war and in
16 keeping with Article 3 of the Statute.
17 First of all, the Trial Chamber would like to emphasise that it is
18 not its task to interpret the indictment as has been maintained by the
19 Prosecution in their request. The question of the existence of a
20 legitimate military target is particularly posed within the framework of
21 destruction and killings that are invoked in paragraph 66 and 72 of the
22 indictment. Also, this question is relevant in -- with regard to the
23 allegations relative to the municipality of Gornji Vakuf. Therefore, the
24 parties will both be requested to present evidence in that sense.
25 As far as the question of the relevance of this point so as to
1 allow for the cross-examination of one or several witnesses whose
2 statements were filed pursuant to Article 92 bis of the Rules of this
3 Tribunal, the Chamber would like to refer you to the decision that will be
4 rendered in that regard.
5 Second point, the application of Article 92 bis of the Rules and
7 The Chamber will present its position with regard to the
8 application of the criteria which are provided for in Article 92 bis in
9 its decision that it will render soon pursuant to the request filed in
10 keeping with Rule 92 bis with regard to Gornji Vakuf.
11 Item three: The fact that Muslims and Croats in Bosnia were
12 engaged in joint defence at a certain point in time does not exclude the
13 existence of a conflict.
14 And finally, the Chamber does not deem necessary to deal with the
15 aforementioned subjects contained in the motion by the Defence that has
16 requested us to hold a conference in keeping with Rule 65 ter.
17 In a nutshell, within the next few days the Trial Chamber is going
18 to render a decision on the first point regarding Gornji Vakuf, and in
19 that decision we will provide answers to all the questions that the
20 Defence has filed in their submissions that we received yesterday. That
21 would be it.
22 And now, Mr. Bowen, again good afternoon to you. I hope you had a
23 pleasant evening yesterday. I have to tell you immediately that your
24 testimony will be finished today. Mr. Praljak has another 45 minutes, I
25 believe. The registrar will confirm that. And without any further ado,
1 I'm going to give the floor to Mr. Praljak, who is going to start asking
2 you questions that he deems necessary and useful.
3 WITNESS: JEREMY BOWEN [Resumed]
4 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] Good afternoon,
5 Your Honours.
6 Cross-examination by the Accused Praljak: [Continued]
7 Q. [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Mr. Bowen.
8 A. Good afternoon.
9 Q. Before we start, I would kindly ask you once again to be as short
10 as possible. I unfortunately don't have the time to discuss more
11 questions with you, and I hope you will appreciate that 45 minutes is a
12 very short time for everything that I would like to deal with. Therefore,
13 I'm asking you to answer my questions whenever possible with a yes or no.
14 And if I am need any additional explanations, then either I myself or the
15 Trial Chamber will ask you to provide additional explanations.
16 When you undertook your first trip from Sarajevo to Mostar, you
17 passed through Konjic and Jablanica. Isn't that correct?
18 A. I went on the outskirts of Konjic and I went to Jablanica, yes.
19 Can I turn down the volume of my headphones? Is there a place
20 that I can do that? Is it this? It's very loud. Okay. Yeah, that's
21 better. Thank you.
22 Q. Do you know that according to the 1981 census in Konjic there were
23 11.748 Croats and 22.826 Muslims?
24 A. No.
25 Q. Were you aware of the destiny of Croats from Konjic at the time
1 when you passed through that area? What had happened to them from spring
2 1993 onwards? Were you aware of their lot?
3 A. No, I was not.
4 Q. Do you know that in Jablanica, according to the 1981 census, there
5 were 2.630 Croats and 7.806 Muslims? Are you aware of that? Are you
6 familiar with that information?
7 A. No.
8 Q. Are you familiar with the lot of the Jablanica Croats from spring
9 1993 onwards?
10 A. I can guess at what you're getting at in Konjic and Jablanica,
11 but, no, I don't have precise details about that.
12 Q. Thank you very much. On your right-hand side you have a rather
13 big map on that table -- on that board on your right-hand side, and that
14 map shows the positions of the BiH army in green, and in red it says the
15 army of Republika Srpska, and in blue it says the Croatian Defence
16 Council. And you will either confirm this or not: There is also the
17 route that you took through the mountains from Jablanica to the entry into
18 the Mostar valley, and this is depicted in a kind of red colour. And you
19 will find all that on the right-hand side map which is the bigger of the
21 Would that be approximately the route that you took from Jablanica
22 across the mountains to get to Mostar? It should be marked in red. As
23 far as you can remember, of course.
24 A. Well, it's -- it's -- what I'm looking at is in orange, but if
25 it's that line then --
1 Q. Yes, yes.
2 A. I haven't seen it on a map before, but I'm assuming that's about
3 right. It certainly starts in the right place and ends more or less in
4 the right place.
5 Q. Thank you. As for the positions of the Republika Srpska army from
6 the enclave, ebala [phoen], Konjic, and the positions of the HVO and the
7 positions of the BiH army, are you familiar with all of these positions
8 more or less?
9 A. More or less, yes.
10 Q. Thank you. I would now like to ask you this: When you finished
11 the recording of your documentary, you took your Land Rover and went from
12 Mostar to the north towards Jablanica again. Would that be correct?
13 A. No, that's not correct.
14 Q. Which direction did you took when you left Mostar? Since we saw
15 the spotlights, we saw that there was shooting, what route did you take
16 from Mostar after the end of the shooting of your documentary? Where did
17 you go to? Since the spotlights were on the north of Mostar, can I then
18 say that you were northbound as you went towards Jablanica and further on
20 A. Those spotlights weren't filmed on our departure. When we left,
21 we left south towards Medjugorje, towards Medjugorje and then on to -- to
22 Split. Sorry.
23 Q. Thank you very much. Now I would kindly ask you to look at
24 document -- I -- the transcript that Witness Seid Smajkic authored here.
25 He is a high Muslim official in Mostar. The page is 2991. I would like
1 to call upon that transcript. The pages are 2991, 2992.
2 JUDGE TRECHSEL: We do not see the number of the document, of the
3 transcript. If you could please repeat.
4 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] The date is 4th of May,
5 2006. I apologise. The date is --
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't have any of that. I don't
7 have that document.
8 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation]
9 Q. No, you don't have to have it, no. The date is 31st of May, 2006.
10 The witness was Mr. Seid Smajkic, and the pages are 2991 and particularly
11 2992, 2993. The date is the 31st of May.
12 I asked them him the following question --
13 JUDGE TRECHSEL: I'm sorry, we don't have the document either.
14 Maybe it has a number, but --
15 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please. Microphone for counsel.
16 Microphone for the counsel.
17 MR. KOVACIC: Sorry, this seems not to be working. Sorry.
18 THE WITNESS: [In English] It is now.
19 MR. KOVACIC: Mr. Praljak is giving you reference of the page and
20 date of the transcript of -- in this case. So he will read portion of the
21 transcript. We are not -- we are necessarily not producing the transcript
22 copies. I cannot help.
23 I don't know whether it's working or not.
24 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.
25 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation]
1 Q. The question that I put to the witness, and I quote -- look at the
3 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] Can the map be put on the
4 ELMO? It will be of assistance to the Trial Chamber and to the witness.
5 And the map is the same one that I showed to the witness when I put this
6 question to him.
7 Q. Mr. Bowen, my questions referred to the capacity of the road and
8 the number of vehicles that could go on the road from Mostar towards
9 Jablanica and Konjic. And particularly the Bijela Bridge and the bypass
10 around Bijela Bridge.
11 My question to the witness was this: "We can see that this is
12 water, that this is a lake and an across that lake there is the Bijela
13 Bridge which according to our information was destroyed by the Serbian
14 artillery. Can you look at the Google satellite shot and can you see
15 there is a road on the left and on the right? It was a dirt road that was
16 built," and so on and so forth. Then His Honour Judge Trechsel asked
17 whether it was 150 metres or 150 kilometres long, and then we established
18 that this bypass was about 150 to 250 metres long.
19 And I asked the witness whether I was right, and his answer was:
20 "I know there was a bypass there and it was used by the BH army. This
21 bypass was used by the BH army in order to establish contacts with
22 Jablanica once the bridge had been blown up."
23 And my next question to the witness was: "Correct. There was an
24 asphalt road, Sarajevo-Konjic-Jablanica, and that road was interrupted.
25 There was 150-meter long dirt road and then the asphalt road continues
1 towards Blagaj, Mostar, and so on. Is that correct?"
2 And the witness answered: "Yes, that is correct."
3 Mr. Bowen, please, could you please look at the map, and could you
4 show us where, in which place on the Jablanica-Mostar road the HVO
5 interrupted that road in order to set up a check-up point? Where did the
6 HVO put up a check-up point? Did you yourself see that the road was
7 interrupted, or did you just rely on Mr. Humo's words on what he told you
8 in Jablanica?
9 A. I didn't quite follow you. Are you saying the road between Konjic
10 and Jablanica, are you asking me if it was interrupted?
11 Q. I'm talking about Jablanica-Mostar, sir. Could you please show on
12 the map where was it that that road was interrupted by the HVO? My second
13 question is: Did you ascertain that yourself? Did you go and see that
14 with your own two eyes or did you just rely on Mr. Humo's words?
15 MR. SCOTT: Excuse me, Your Honour, perhaps earlier the previous
16 appropriate question would be whether the witness has any knowledge of
17 this whatsoever. Whether he's ever been on that road or knows anything
18 about that road because there's no evidence that he's ever travelled on
19 that road or knows anything about it.
20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Bowen, the General seems to
21 be asking you about the words of Commander Humo. He told you the road is
22 blocked. You have to take an alternative route. And in his question,
23 Mr. Praljak is indicating, it seems, that that road was never blocked.
24 Did you rely on Mr. Humo's words, or did you go yourself to make
25 sure that his words are right, that the road indeed was blocked and that
1 you had to take an alternative route?
2 THE WITNESS: Neither of those two things, Your Honour. I relied
3 first of all on the information that I had from the UN, from UNPROFOR, and
4 from UNHCR in Sarajevo. I also relied on information I'd been given by
5 the Spanish Battalion of UNPROFOR in Jablanica, and, no, I didn't drive
6 down the road as far as I could see because during that war it was not
7 my habit to drive towards the confrontation line just for the sake of it
8 when the UN had already told me what the situation was on the ground. I
9 think it would have been a pretty dangerous thing to do, to drive towards
10 the BiH-HVO confrontation line just to see if I could talk my way through
12 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation]
13 Q. Do you know whether the Spanish Battalion at the time took that
14 road to go from Jablanica to Mostar?
15 A. They probably did, because UNPROFOR were able to go through
16 confrontation lines in a way that journalists weren't.
17 Q. Thank you. I will move on. Are you familiar with the German
18 broadcaster CDF?
19 A. Yes, I am.
20 Q. Do you know that on the 1st of September, 1993 -- issued an order
21 for a CDF team to be allowed to enter the Gabela collection centre and
22 that the footage that they recorded at the time was aired across the world
23 as one would say?
24 A. I didn't know that, no.
25 Q. Are you familiar with the name of your colleague journalist who
1 was a witness before this Trial Chamber, Ed Vulliamy?
2 A. Yes, I know Ed Vulliamy.
3 Q. Do you know that a witness before this Trial Chamber stated either
4 on the 8th or 9th of September, 1993, allowed him to enter Gabela or
5 Dretelj, I issued an order to that effect? Are you familiar with that
7 A. No, I'm not.
8 Q. Can we now look at the document 300673. And while we are waiting
9 for this to be done, are you familiar with the name of Sally Becker?
10 A. Sally Becker was she the person in the press dubbed the angel of
11 Mostar. Or maybe that was someone else.
12 Q. Yes, that's the person. Does the name ring a bell?
13 A. If it's the same person that we're talking about, yes, it does.
14 Q. Could you please look at your screen. The Main Staff of the HVO,
15 1st of September, 1993, "approval whereby Ms. Sally Becker, the
16 humanitarian aid worker, is allowed to cross the check-points and depart
17 to the left side of Mostar controlled by Muslim forces ..."
18 "On her way back Ms. Sally Becker will bring children ill and
19 powerless persons with two sanitary vehicles."
20 "All HVO soldiers are ordered to assist this humanitarian action
21 by Ms. Becker ..."
22 And this is signed by Major General Slobodan Praljak, myself. Do
23 you see that?
24 A. Yes, I can.
25 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Could I ask, Mr. Bowen, did you know anything
1 about this activity of Ms. Sally Becker in Mostar, this rescue action she
2 was about to undertake, or have you learned it now only?
3 THE WITNESS: I did know -- I'm pretty sure it was the same woman.
4 There was a person called Sally who was dubbed, as I say, in the English
5 press as the angel of Mostar. And I met her, in fact. I think it was my
6 first trip in August, my first trip, and she was then talking about trying
7 to do medical evacuation.
8 I mean I should say as well that on our second trip there we
9 entered from -- from the south, so we entered through the lines as well.
10 It was only on my first trip that I walked in with the Bosnian army from
11 the area near Jablanica of the on my second trip I came in and came out in
12 a vehicle through the south side of the -- the south end of Mostar. Also
13 on my first trip I left that way as well with -- with an UNHCR vehicle.
14 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Thank you very much.
15 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation].
16 Q. Now can we have 3D 00696 brought up to the screen? 3D 00696.
17 Mr. Bowen, you're going to see that this is a -- another document
18 referring to Ms. Sally Becker, another approval, "whereby a free pass with
19 a police escort on relation Citluk-Zitomislic-Vinjani Gornji is to be
20 secured as well as the departure route to the Republic of Croatia." Sally
21 Becker is here accompanied by seven other people who were either wounded
22 or whatnot, again signed by the HVO commander, Slobodan Praljak. Do you
23 see that?
24 A. Yes, I can.
25 Q. May I have the next document now, please, and it is 3D 00697.
1 Once again dated the 15th of September, 1993, and it is permission to
2 allow free passage with the police escort along the
3 Citluk-Zitomislic-Mostar left bank route to Sally Becker and a sanitary
4 vehicle of the HVO. And then we have two other names in an armed Land
5 Rover and the signature there is Slobodan Praljak. Do you see that
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Would you now take a look at another document. It is 3D 00693.
9 3D 00693. It is a book written by Sally Becker. "The Angel of Mostar" is
10 the title. It's in English. And could we turn to page 74 of that book,
12 MR. SCOTT: Excuse me, Your Honour, while we're turning in the
13 book could I just ask whether Mr. Praljak has any questions for this
14 witness other than -- we're doing what we've done so many times before,
15 simply putting documents in front of the witness and asking if Mr. Praljak
16 reads them correctly. The witness has added no information or foundation
17 to any of these documents in the last few minutes except it's the -- back
18 to, Did I read that document correctly? Are we leading up to any
19 particular questions for this witness or is this simply a reading test?
20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Praljak. Would you go
21 ahead and ask your question.
22 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] Mr. Prosecutor -- well,
23 Your Honour, the witness yesterday spoke about the impossibility of
24 reaching the right bank and the obstacles put up by the HVO, which means
25 me, what I did to prevent then arriving. Now, these documents and the
1 other ones that I'm going to show the reverse side of the medal in my
2 opinion, the reverse side of the coin. So it's all the period when the
3 witness was there, and I consider it relevant to test the truth.
4 May we now turn to page 74, paragraph 3.
5 MR. SCOTT: Well, Your Honour, that may or may not be the case,
6 but that don't change the fact whether this witness has any evidence to
7 give about them or not.
8 Mr. Praljak can present this evidence when he has the appropriate
9 time and witness to do so, but to ask this witness to simply read a number
10 of documents and say, "Have I read that correctly?", adds nothing to the
11 record whatsoever.
12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Scott, Mr. Praljak has just
13 explained to us that he wants to do. He has said that he's going to show
14 a series of documents - that he's going to put them to the witness - that
15 speak differently, and he wants to show that access was possible. That is
16 how I understand it.
17 JUDGE TRECHSEL: I agree. I read this in the same time. But like
18 the Prosecution, I believe that this is not cross-examination. This is
19 presenting evidence. He's presenting documents as evidence to us, and
20 it's not now that the Defence evidence is to be presented. There is a
21 phase in the proceedings for the Defence to present their evidence, and as
22 long as a witness doesn't have anything to contribute to the evidence, I
23 think it is not correct to bring it before us in the context of
25 MR. MURPHY: Your Honour, if I can assist on that for a moment.
1 Once again, I'm sorry to have to return to this theme, Your Honour, but as
2 long as we're hearing from the Bench that the Defence will have an
3 opportunity to present witnesses at a later time, I have to keep, with
4 respect, making the point that that contradicts the burden of proof on the
5 Prosecution to present a prima facie case before the Defence is called
6 upon to present evidence at all.
7 The second point, Your Honour, is this: Mr. Scott objects to
8 General Praljak showing the witness a document and saying, "Did I read
9 this correctly?", and so on. About 80 per cent of the direct examination
10 we've had from the Prosecution over the past three months has been exactly
11 in that form, and we have been quite tolerant in not objecting to it, but
12 I think if that's to be the practice, we should be given the same -- the
13 same latitude.
14 Your Honour, the real question here is that it seems to me based
15 on the witness's answers today that the witness has now said that on the
16 second trip he was able to enter Mostar without difficulty from the south
17 side going through the lines, and that raises, I think, a legitimate
18 question as to how that corresponds with the testimony he gave yesterday
19 about the -- about the ease or difficulty of getting into West Mostar for
20 the purpose of presenting a balanced presentation. So I think,
21 Your Honour, I would invite you to give General Praljak some latitude in
22 this cross-examination.
23 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Well, with all due respect, I did not talk about
24 calling witnesses. I talked about presenting documents which have no
25 relation to the witness and only remotely to what he says. And I did not
1 say that all the work of Mr. Praljak was not correct. Certainly there are
2 some absolutely useful questions, but this shooting of documents at the
3 witness who cannot testify on them, because he does not testify with
4 regard to these documents, that I continue to be of the opinion that it
5 don't belong into this context.
6 MR. MURPHY: Well, Your Honour, if I -- I would -- as a common
7 lawyer, I welcome that observation. I would simply ask that it be applied
8 to the Prosecution also, because it has not been applied to the
9 Prosecution so far.
10 MR. KARNAVAS: If I may just adjust one quick remark, Your Honour.
11 I think when documents are shown to the witness that might expose, for
12 instance, a different set of facts than the witness has testified to, in
13 other words, he wasn't aware of certain other facts that might -- that,
14 had they been available to him at the time, might have -- he might have
15 formed a different upon, I think in those instances such documents are
16 relevant because it demonstrates the lack of information that the -- that
17 the witness had at the time when he formed certain -- certain conclusions,
18 and I think that's what General Praljak is trying to do.
19 And lastly, I just want to say we don't know yet how much time
20 will be allocated to the Defence. I haven't raised that issue at some --
21 because the matter is on appeal, but at some point we will need to tackle
22 that issue, how much time does the Bench anticipate I giving the Defence
23 so we can make some tactical decisions on what to present during this
24 phase and perhaps what to present during our defence, if we so choose to
25 put on a defence.
1 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I asked the
2 witness whether he heard -- he had heard of Sally Becker, and he said yes.
3 He said he knew that she was referred to as the angel of Mostar in London,
4 which is the title of the book by Ms. Sally Becker.
5 Next, in the documentary we saw the state of children. Now, I
6 would like to refer to an excerpt from Sally Becker's book to show what
7 the HVO through Sally Becker sent out as a message to the left bank about
8 the care of children and their mother -- and their mothers. I think that
9 that is a valid question, and I beg the Court's indulgence to be able to
10 ask it.
11 MR. SCOTT: Before that is decided, Your Honour, the Prosecution
12 must have a chance to respond to some of the things that have been
14 It is indeed a recurring theme somehow that because the Defence
15 does not necessarily have the burden at any time to put on a case, at the
16 same time that we -- we cannot be constantly reasoning backwards from that
17 saying they can tender any evidence at any time in the Prosecution case.
18 One does not follow from the other. We have to meet our burden of proof,
19 it's true, but you can't simply bring a witness into the courtroom and
20 then bombard that witness with document after document that he or she
21 knows nothing about and can add nothing about.
22 I didn't object -- for the record and so it's clear, I did not
23 object to the question whether the witness knew who Ms. Becker was because
24 I thought --
25 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Scott --
1 MR. SCOTT: Your Honour, may I make my record, please?
2 There's no translation. There's no translation.
3 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Can you hear the
5 MR. SCOTT: Now I can.
6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I'll give you the floor but I
7 was a little taken aback by what you've just said. You said that you were
8 surprised that the Defence was putting to the witness documents that he
9 has no knowledge of. But, Mr. Scott, the Prosecution presents documents
10 to witnesses all the time that witnesses have -- are not at all familiar
12 MR. SCOTT: Not true at all.
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] So you do the same thing.
14 MR. SCOTT: Not true at all.
15 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] We're trying to understand.
16 There are certain witnesses that came into court. You showed them
17 military documents and they knew nothing about those. They didn't know
18 who the author of the document was except that there was a little point
19 perhaps that the document referred to a situation they had lived through.
20 Now the accused Mr. Praljak is putting a book to us titled "The
21 Angel of Mostar," which has to do with what that lady experienced and so
22 on and so forth. So I am trying to weigh up the two sides, the
23 Prosecution and the Defence, and I don't see why you object to him
24 presenting a book, whereas if we read the first paragraph on the first
25 page, we can see as I did that there was a question raised about
1 circulation and obstacles. So I think you should allow the Accused
2 Mr. Praljak to ask his question. And that's where I don't understand you,
3 Mr. Scott. But if you continue, perhaps I'll be able to understand you
5 MR. SCOTT: Thank you, Your Honour. I have to respectfully
6 disagree with the Court's -- with the President's observations. That is
7 not what the Prosecution has done. When the Prosecution has called
8 witnesses in connection with a document, the witnesses have talked about
9 if not the -- not the source of the document, they have talked about the
10 facts stated in the document. And to the best of your knowledge we may
11 have erred on occasion, but to the best of our intention and practice the
12 witness has always been able to add something to the document whether it
13 was what was consistent what he or she experienced on the ground, "Yes,
14 this in fact reflects what happened in our village around this time," et
15 cetera, et cetera. So I don't agree whatsoever that this is the same
16 thing. It is not the same thing. And that was my second point in
17 response to Mr. Murphy. With all respect to my learned friend, that is
18 not -- it was unfair to characterise the Prosecution case in the way that
19 he has and we object to that.
20 Thirdly, Your Honour, one of the points that was made by counsel
21 suggested that Mr. Bowen's evidence this afternoon somehow is inconsistent
22 tent with the evidence he gave evidence. I beg to differ. Of course, the
23 transcript will speak for itself. I submit to the Court that Mr. Bowen's
24 testimony how he got in and oust Mostar on each occasion is entirely
25 consistent, entirely consistent with the way he testified about it
1 yesterday and it's the record again will confirm that.
2 MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I really don't wish to
3 take up any more court time but I have to say one thing, and that is that
4 I consider this entire discussion - we've lost seven or eight minutes as
5 far as I was able to see - arose and came about with the intervention of
6 my learned friend of the Prosecution, which was too early. It was
7 premature. Mr. Praljak started with the document, and he wanted to get
8 his question. So I think that the Prosecution jump the gun. And I think
9 that was done intentionally to belittle the weight that the presentation
10 would have.
11 Secondly, the witness was there. The witness told us about what
12 he saw and what he heard and what he knew. The Prosecution yesterday
13 introduced the witness as a top expert for Bosnia. I don't want to go
14 into the witness's expertise, but in Bosnia the message was clear. He
15 knew everything about Bosnia, about Sarajevo, Mostar, and so on and so
16 forth. So the object of the cross-examination is quite clear, and we must
17 see what he does indeed know.
18 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Praljak, please proceed.
19 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation]
20 Q. On page 74 on Ms. Sally Becker's book, and you have it in English,
21 of course, we see what Dr. Ivan Bagaric said, and he was the commander of
22 the HVO military. He said: "We Croats have nothing against the innocent
23 civilians in this war. We will give you permission to travel to eastern
24 Mostar to evacuate not one but all the children from the hospital there
25 and their mothers."
1 Now, sir, my question is this: Do you know about the activities
2 undertaken by Sally Becker and that all the children that she brought in
3 were sent to Split for care and medical attention? Did you hear about
4 that? Did you know about that? Are you familiar with that event?
5 A. Yes, I know that Sally Becker managed to evacuate a couple of
6 children. I have to say, though, I stand 100 per cent behind what I said
7 in the film about medical evacuation. And I also have to say that there
8 was a very different approach to aid workers, especially freelance aid
9 workers like Sally than there was to journalists from major news
10 organisations. It's like comparing apples and oranges.
11 Q. I apologise, sir, but I have to interrupt you. You told us that
12 yesterday. There's no need to repeat it.
13 May I have the next document please 3D 00700. Document 3D 00700.
14 The document is the -- dated the 24th of September, 1993. Was
15 Eamonn Matthews in your team? Brian Hulls, Nicholas Walker, and Vanessa
16 Vasic Janekovic? Were they members of your own team?
17 A. Yes, that was my team. That was our document. That was when we
18 entered Mostar from the south as I've said.
19 Q. It says approval that here with free passage is allowed to the BBC
20 television crew to the final check-point of the HVO military police on
21 Buna; the TV crew in the below cited composition makes a document -- is to
22 make a documentary film in those areas." And then the names follow and it
23 is signed by Slobodan Praljak, which is me. Is that how it reads?
24 A. Yes, it is indeed how it reads in English.
25 Q. I don't want to enter into polemics about what you said yesterday.
1 Now, is it true that the HVO commander allows you to make this film on the
2 left bank whereas he does not allow you to make a film on the right bank
3 of the Neretva River? Does that seem to you be logical this kind of
4 approval and lack of approval?
5 A. No, it doesn't seem logical, I agree, but that's what happened,
6 I'm afraid.
7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Bowen, when I saw this
8 document I asked myself the same question. I asked myself about logics.
9 Listening to you yesterday, one gained the impression that there was a
10 total block on the HVO side and that you were not able to make any
11 documentary. Now we have a document here that seems to tell us the
12 opposite, the contrary.
13 Now, this document signed on the 24th of September, 1993, how did
14 you obtain it? Tell us that, please. How did you obtain this document?
15 THE WITNESS: Eamonn Matthews obtained the document during his
16 time in West Mostar. I think I've made clear throughout that we -- we
17 entered -- when we -- on my second trip there we entered through the HVO
18 lines coming from the south. I've been very consistent about that. And
19 clearly it's impossible to pass through a confrontation line without the
20 consent of the people who are involved in that confrontation.
21 I -- as for the question of whether -- about the logic, you know,
22 I agree. It's -- it does seem -- I'm a bit bemused. It is bemusing that,
23 you know, one could get permission to film -- you know, cross through the
24 lines but not get the permission we needed on General Praljak's side, but
25 I'm sorry, that was the situation.
1 JUDGE TRECHSEL: But, Mr. Bowen -- may I ask one -- may I ask
2 again the question which probably has been put to you before? Did you
3 apply to film also on the western side of the Neretva?
4 THE WITNESS: As I said before -- I mean, I was not privy to
5 the -- you know, the blow-by-blow discussions that Eamonn Matthews had
6 when he visited with Vanessa Vasic Janekovic who was our translator. I
7 wasn't privy to every bit of their discussion because I wasn't there and I
8 only received a verbal report of it, but he same back and said we're not
9 getting the cooperation we need to work on the west side but we have got
10 permission to cross over into the east.
11 Now, to -- to get that permission as well I'm pretty sure that he
12 had the assistance of members of the EU Monitoring Mission, who I know
13 assisted us in getting that particular piece of paper. That's certainly
14 my recollection of that.
15 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Thank you.
16 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Witness, I think that you have
17 probably already answered my question, the one I wanted to ask you. I
18 just wanted to check one thing. In the documentary that we were shown
19 yesterday, there was certain sections that were filmed in West Mostar,
20 west. Is that right?
21 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] In the film that we saw
22 yesterday, are there any portions that were filmed in the HVO zone?
23 THE WITNESS: No. As I said yesterday, there was nothing filmed
24 in the HVO zone. The only sight you saw of the HVO zone was filmed from
25 the forward positions of the BiH army.
1 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Praljak, go ahead. The
2 registrar tells me that you've already used up 40 minutes.
3 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] Your Honour.
4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, I'm surprised to learn that
5 as well. Could you check that, Mr. Registrar? It seems a little
7 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] I haven't used up more than
8 15 minutes.
9 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] The registrar has just informed
10 me -- well, he apologises because it's yesterday and today, 30 minutes in
11 all. 32 minutes. Go ahead anyway.
12 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation]
13 Q. Did Mr. Matthews inform you, Mr. Bowen, that I asked him and
14 entreated him, implored him to come to the right bank as well and to film
15 both sides, which is a minimum of journalist ethics that would require him
16 to do so? Did he inform you about that?
17 A. No, he did not.
18 Q. Thank you. So it's logical -- would you agree with me when I say
19 that it would be logical to have allowed you to go to the left bank and to
20 order the snipers and artillery and me -- expulsion of people, me to allow
21 you to film that?
22 A. I'm sorry, I didn't get the whole translation of that. Could
23 you repeat it, please? I can't see the transcript in front of me either,
24 so ...
25 Q. Is it a logical conclusion that I allowed the BBC crew to go to
1 the left bank and then proceeded to order snipers to shoot, to order the
2 artillery to fire, people to expulse the Muslims so that this could
3 provide good subject matter for a war film and a documentary? Do you
4 think that's absurd?
5 A. I don't think it's a matter of whether it's absurd or not. We
6 filmed what we saw on the east side of Mostar. We didn't fabricate that.
7 Those are things that happened. You know, I cannot comment directly on
8 what you told Mr. Matthews because I wasn't there.
9 Q. Very well. Thank you. The next document, 3D 00733. 3D 00733 is
10 the number of the next document that I'd like to show on e-court. It is
11 the book by Sefer Halilovic on strategy.
12 Do you know who Sefer Halilovic is?
13 A. Yes, I do.
14 Q. It is entitled, "A Sly Strategy."
15 On page 138, I'm not sure what page it is in the English version.
16 It might be the same page number, number 138. It says that the necessary
17 documentation for an operation entitled Neretva '93, Delic with his stamp
18 and seal allowed has given permission for everything to go forward and we
19 are going out in the field, et cetera.
20 Now, in that same book, "A Cunning Strategy," according to Sefer
21 Halilovic the BH army should have been brought to the western borders of
22 Bosnia-Herzegovina. Do you know that Neretva '93, that operation,
23 according to the words of Sefer Halilovic, we can't see them on our
24 screens, unfortunately, should have reached the western borders of
25 Bosnia-Herzegovina? That's what it was designed to do. Do you know about
1 that, Mr. Bowen?
2 A. No. I'm not familiar with these -- these orders. I certainly
3 wasn't familiar with them at the time.
4 Q. Do you know the time of the operation, how long it lasted, when it
5 started and when it finished? It's duration. But if you didn't hear of
6 the operation itself, then I'm sure you can't tell it us about the
7 duration either.
8 A. That's correct.
9 Q. Can we agree on this point, that the western borders of
10 Bosnia-Herzegovina are the borders towards Croatia, that is to say from
11 Dalmatia stretching to the south, Dubrovnik, Split, and further on, are
12 those the western borders of Bosnia-Herzegovina?
13 A. Yes, I guess so. I'm familiar with the map, yes. The west, yeah.
14 There's [Microphone not activated] of course.
15 Q. Thank you. As you from the 24th of September were in Mostar
16 yourself -- I'd like document 3D 00740 to be shown now, please. 3D 00740
17 is the number of the document.
18 It is a combat order by the command of the 4th Corps signed by the
19 4th Corps commander, Mr. Arif Pasalic. You met Mr. Arif Pasalic, and you
20 know that he was the commander of the 4th Corps; is that right?
21 A. Yes. I met Pasalic, yes.
22 Q. Thank you. Now, on page 1 -- we don't have time to go through all
23 the documents, but they will be tendered later on with the maps. It
24 says: "In-depth the Operative Group south and infiltrated groups
25 inflicted heavy losses --"
1 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Praljak, the document that
2 you mentioned we don't seem to have in our binders, 740. The last
3 document was signed by Rasim Delic.
4 MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, it should be the first
5 document after the list, because it was subsequently added. So not going
6 by the numbers but immediately after the list.
7 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation]
8 Q. Mr. Bowen, you see the document. You say you know Mr. Pasalic,
9 and we'll check out his signature later on. In point 1, Mr. Pasalic says,
10 "the enemy, the Ustasha forces of the HVO," so he's already calling us
11 Ustasha forces. And then in point 2, he says the forces inflicted heavy
12 losses on the enemy in live force and military materiel. And then he goes
13 on to say the North 2 Operative Group forces with the BiH group engaged in
14 active operations at Djubrani and Planinica and the Mostar valley.
15 May we have the last page on our screens now, please, the last
17 And the signature is that of Mr. Arif Pasalic. But let's look at
18 point 7. It says: "Attack readiness only when the signal zapad," or
19 west, "is given. Combat readiness with the zapad signal."
20 The next document is 3D 00736.
21 A. It doesn't say that actually in the English version; it
22 says "Illegible."
23 Q. This is a handwritten document, and I don't know why it hasn't
24 been translated. It is not illegible. It says: "The activities to be
25 carried out only when the west signal is given," but we will leave it to
1 the translators to correct their work.
2 Now can I have 3D 00736 brought up on the screen? This is an
3 order for attack. The date is 15 September 1993. It is approved by
4 Commander Arif Pasalic, and this was a very long order which was signed by
5 Commander Samir Drljevic. He is commanding an axis of the attack.
6 Obviously we cannot read the whole order, but does it say that this is an
7 order for attack which analyses all the axis that the BiH army is supposed
8 to attack? And can I have the last page now, please, where it says how
9 many combat sets should be ready and distributed to every man and every
10 unit. And it was sent to the 1st Battalion, the 2nd Battalion, the 3rd
11 Battalion, the 4th Corps Command. It was signed by Commander Samir
12 Drljevic. There is also a BiH army stamp.
13 Do you see the stamp, Mr. Bowen? Can you see it? No, you can't
14 see it. Okay. Very well then. You don't have it in your version.
15 Did you ever hear --
16 A. I have the English version; it's not stamped. I see the stamp
17 now, yes.
18 Q. My question to you is this: Do you know anything about these
19 activities of the BH army and the preparations for these activities at the
20 time? However, this question will be better illustrated by the following
21 document that I'm going to show to Mr. Bowen. Unfortunately, because of
22 the -- Mr. Bowen, I'm going to read to you some things from Esad Sejtanic
23 book. Have you ever heard of Esad Sejtanic in Mostar? Have you ever
24 heard of that name? Does it ring a bell?
25 A. Maybe a small bell. Not a big one.
1 Q. Mr. Sejtanic authored the book about Herzegovinians, "At the
2 Fiery Doors of Bosnia." This was a publication that was published. I'm
3 going to read it slowly and ask you what you knew about the activities
4 described in the book at the time when you were on the ground.
5 On page 180 it says this --
6 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Is this a document we should also have?
7 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: No. No.
8 Q. [Interpretation] Page 180 it says: "The line of defence were
9 established against the Serb forces but they were not active in combat
10 sense. However, on the same lines there was smuggling of all sorts of
11 goods, and for the most part with the bare necessities that were lacking
12 such as flour and sugar," and so on and so forth.
13 On page 181 it says this: "Within the framework of the
14 preparations for the planned operative -- combat operations there was an
15 open talk about the possibility that the Serbian side would help us by
16 direct artillery support and by delivering to us critical materiel and
17 equipment, and primarily by the sale of a large number of artillery shells
18 of various calibre."
19 Later on I'm going to ask you about how familiar you were with the
20 artillery of the 4th Corps, but let me continue.
21 "I attended a meeting on the contact line with the Serb forces in
22 the village called Busak where Safet Orucevic, Fatima Leho, and Sefkija
23 Dziho defined the conditions under which the Serb side would help us in
24 our combat activities. The Serb side agreed to all the conditions. They
25 would give us a -- one 128-millimetre howitzer with the team and 200
1 projectiles, and so on and so forth. As a token of our gratitude for the
2 cooperation so far, Safet Orucevic gave Novica Gusic, the commander of the
3 Nevesinje brigade, almost a brand new GX Golf."
4 JUDGE PRANDLER: I'm sorry to interrupt you. So far I have
5 refrained from asking questions or in a way calling into question about
6 the major themes which you are following and also the -- yesterday
7 afternoon other colleagues of yours have followed by the Defence team.
8 Somehow I fear that I didn't want to interrupt you when you asked the
9 witness, Mr. Bowen, about why he did not go to West Mostar. For me, the
10 question is what he has presented to us is about East Mostar, Mostar
11 east. So now somehow I fear that the Defence, you, and others will
12 address this issue: What happened in East Mostar? And it is not for me
13 at least, not the major issue why he did not go to West Mostar. It is my
14 first problem which I would really like to have an answer.
15 Now, the second question is now you have now mentioned various
16 interviews and parts of a book, and you have been speaking about the
17 intentions and the discussions with the Serbs, et cetera. Again, I am a
18 bit surprised because it has nothing to do what the witness, Mr. Bowen,
19 has told us yesterday about the situation in East Mostar. So I real
20 little feel that a cross-examination should concentrate on the major
21 problem which most exposed or which had to be exposed by a given witness.
22 It is not about only Mr. Bowen but all the witnesses which we so far have
23 listened to, and that is why I really feel that the Defence have to
24 address this question: What happened in East Mostar? What was true or
25 what was false in that documentary which we have seen yesterday? For me
1 it is the major importance, and I would like to -- to ask you and also the
2 other colleagues to address these points which I raised. Thank you.
3 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Praljak -- I will give you
4 the floor, Mr. Karnavas.
5 Mr. Praljak, I ascribe to the words of my colleague. This witness
6 has come to talk -- to it talk about what was going on in the West Mostar,
7 and to that intent the Prosecution has shown us a video which spoke about
8 various subjects, and as my colleague has just said, and he has right, we
9 Judges are not interested what was going on there. If you want to ask him
10 questions about Mostar, West Mostar, that's okay. Now you're asking him
11 about Serbs and contact lines, which is interesting, but the witness is
12 here, and we would like to hear what is important and what is relevant in
13 terms of the indictment, which has a probative value.
14 The questions that you're asking that might be interesting from
15 the general point of view do not go in the heart of the matter that we,
16 the Judges, have to deal with. That's why my colleague has told you, you
17 are wasting your time, Mr. Praljak, for nothing. Do you understand that?
18 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] Your Honour --
19 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Karnavas has asked the
21 MR. KARNAVAS: If I may be of some assistance, Your Honour, and I
22 think this is what -- the dilemma that the Defence faces in general, aside
23 from the time limitations. The video begins with the gentleman talking
24 about Croatian propaganda echoing over the front line, and he goes on
25 about the aiding and abetting of the Croatian government and there was
1 some questions posed yesterday. Now, I dare say that the gentleman comes
2 in to the theatre over there, that part of the war, sort of in the middle
3 of the third act, or the third scene of a four-act play. He doesn't know
4 what's happening before. He certainly doesn't know what's happening
5 during and/or afterwards. He sees one side. And yet he is projecting the
6 entire film from the east side point of view. He claims that he can't go
7 on the west, yet he gets permission from the west to travel to the east.
8 That's a different story. But nonetheless, I think if we're going to
9 paint a correct picture and to see what, if anything, we're going to
10 give -- how much value we're going to give to the film, granted I think
11 that we do see some sniping. We do see the conditions in the hospital.
12 That is undeniable. It's on the film. But on the other hand -- on the
13 other hand -- on the other hand, the gentleman comes in without having
14 done his homework and certainly doesn't know what's happening in the
15 general theatre. And I think what General Praljak is trying to do is
16 paint the picture that -- that what we don't see in the video is the army
17 of BiH's orders for the attack. He doesn't know what's happening
18 beforehand. He's being led by somebody to see certain things, and it's a
19 one-sided, lopsided view.
20 Now, if the video is coming in solely for the purpose of showing
21 what the conditions were in the -- the hospital conditions were on the
22 east side, that's one thing this, but that's not the reason they're
23 bringing it in. They are they're bringing it in to show that the east
24 side is under siege. Very well. Don't you think it might be relevant for
25 the gentleman to know what is happening on the west side and why the West
1 is perhaps attacking? Who's attacking whom? And I think that's being
2 what is brought out.
3 JUDGE TRECHSEL: No, Mr. Karnavas.
4 MR. KARNAVAS: You don't think that's right?
5 JUDGE TRECHSEL: No. We will get a full picture by many
7 MR. KARNAVAS: We're trying to help you.
8 JUDGE TRECHSEL: You cannot expect one witness to draw an entire
9 and even to draw a very equitable picture.
10 MR. KARNAVAS: I agree with you.
11 JUDGE TRECHSEL: This is -- what -- what the purpose is with the
12 presentation of this documentary is not so important. We will place it in
13 its place within the entire thing, and you can be assured that we can very
14 well see that this is to a certain extent one-sided. We will also hear
15 the other side. But we cannot get a full picture in the context of this
16 one testimony. It's just asking too much.
17 MR. KARNAVAS: I agree. I agree. And with that, Your Honour, my
18 comfort level is, you know, slightly better. Not much, but slightly. But
19 thank you very much.
20 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, with your leave.
21 Just four sentences, literally. And I would like to use them to show you
22 that the questions by General Praljak are in direct connection with the
23 documentary and with the words of our -- today's witness, journalist
24 Bowen. In the first minutes we saw the following sentences being uttered
25 by Mr. Bowen. "General Pasalic was not happy, although he should have
1 been. During the 30 hours of intensive -- intense fighting, his men
2 managed to break through a neighbourhood which was under the Croat control
3 and up to the hill called Hum, which towers above Mostar. This is
4 probably one of their most important single victories in this war." It
5 seems that the witness knew the BH army was engaged in offensive
6 activities. In the 37th minute of the film it says, "However, from
7 Sarajevo an order came that they had to withdraw." In other words, the
8 witness knew that there had been an order that came from Sarajevo and,
9 with your leave, just two more sentences about the ammo supply, which is
10 also decided on by Sarajevo. The next sentence says: "In any case,
11 independent Muslim commanders also buy weapons from the Serbs." Which
12 means that it was the Witness Bowen who introduced the Serbs into this
13 rather than Mr. Praljak.
14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Bowen, you have listened to
15 interventions by one and the others. Mr. Praljak maybe will not receive
16 this well; however, Ms. Alaburic has clarified the situation to a certain
18 Tell us, when you were there, when you were filming in August and
19 September, did you personally witness some military operation by the BiH
20 army against the HVO? Because you see, what we see in the documentary
21 that you authored, we see civilians that are crossing over through those
22 areas. We see the BiH army soldiers. We see civilians crossing the river
23 Neretva during the night. We also see dead and wounded people in the
24 hospital. This is what is depicted in your documentary.
25 However, there is nothing about any attacks against the HVO. The
1 Defence puts it to you that there were attacks during that period of time.
2 However, you were there and we will have other witnesses who will come and
3 testify so this issue will be clarified even further, but now that you are
4 here can you tell us whether you can tell us, "Yes, while I was filming
5 there were attacks by the BiH army," or, "While I was filming there was
6 nothing going on, on the BiH army side. The situation was calm and
8 THE WITNESS: When we were there for the filming of the
9 documentary, General Pasalic was able to spend a lot of time with us.
10 The -- the operation, which I think those orders that we saw referred to,
11 was by the time we got there in late September I think over with. As the
12 lawyer there said, he described how his forces had made some progress
13 towards the mountain of Hum and then had withdrawn. He said it was
14 because of orders from the capital in Sarajevo.
15 Now, I was interested to see those documents because it sort of
16 bears out what we were saying in the film, that there had been a pretty
17 serious military operation going on there which, by the time we got there,
18 was over. I was also interested to get confirmation about what the BiH
19 people told me about receiving weapons from the Serb side. I just want to
20 say in case there's any misapprehension about the documentary, this was
21 never at the time presented by the BBC than a report from one side. Front
22 line, and I made clear throughout that my -- my interpretation of what was
23 happening there was that the Bosnian army was fighting a war, fighting
24 hard, and fighting successfully. At no point have I tried to suggest that
25 they were lambs who were just waiting to be slaughtered. They were
1 fighting very hard. And I've been to many wars and I know when one side
2 is fighting hard and the other side is fighting hard, people get killed on
3 both sides. I mean, that is war. That is the way it is.
4 I think that the documents that we have been seeing, I just wish I
5 had access to them at the time, because they bear out what my reporting
6 actually discovered on the scene through talking to people.
7 To -- sorry, Your Honour. I'll directly finish answering your
8 question. While we were there, there were exchanges going on across the
9 confrontation lines, and there was artillery as well and there was
10 sniping. But as far as I could see there was no concerted military
11 operation. The commanders were pretty relaxed. For example, there's a
12 scene in the film where the commanders get together in a house and they
13 have some drinks and afterwards, we didn't show it, but they were having
14 target practice on a wall. They were very relaxed. So I think that
15 suggests that this military operation that's been referred to was over
16 with by the time that we were filming.
17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] During the 15 days in September
18 while you were there, were there at any given time BiH offensives against
19 the HVO, or was there just a -- a separation line and things were just as
20 usual, shots across the separation line? What did you experience on the
22 THE WITNESS: My memory of it is that there was -- there was
23 pretty constant shell-fire and small-arms fire but nothing -- there was no
24 military offensive as such going on. They weren't at the time we were
25 there trying to break out of the line, for example.
1 Why can I say that? As I say, I deduced that from the state of
2 mind of the commanders, the fact that the movements of troops around the
3 town. We moved to the north and the south of the whole enclave, and as I
4 say, the commanders were relaxed. The men were certainly going up to do
5 their duties on the front line, but normally during an offensive you would
6 expect soldiers could be moving in the rear echelon. You'd expect to see
7 casualties coming back, you know, in fair numbers. And you'd expect to
8 see pretty constant and quite intense shell-fire. I've been in different
9 wars and quite a few offensives, and I've seen that. And at the time I
10 would say that the level of activity that we saw was more along the lines
11 of -- while we were filming there, was more along the lines of to'ing and
12 fro'ing, fighting back and forth across the confrontation line, no
13 specific offensive as such. However, I knew that there had been that
14 intense fighting because I'd been fold about it and between my first visit
15 and my second visit I'd seen more damage on the east side. There was a
16 lot more by September than there had been in August.
17 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I simply want
18 to challenge the credibility of this witness, to put it simply.
19 Q. From the book, on page 183, it says this: "Combat activity
20 started in the early morning hours on the 20th of September." Again
21 we're talking about the year 1993. "And they followed a plan, especially
22 on the flanks where we expected to achieve successes that would then be
23 used to prolong the activities against the city centre it. I'm asking the
24 units --"
25 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] The Judges are listening to with
1 a lot of attention because are trying to challenge the credibility of this
2 witness, and you're reading from a book, from page 183, but we don't have
3 the book. It would be in your best interest, if you believe that this is
4 a key document, that you should have this document translated and that you
5 should provide it to us.
6 Don't get me wrong. I trust you when you're reading the document,
7 but it would be much better if we had the book ourselves.
8 You have read the sentence out. Can you now ask the witness
10 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] Your Honour, last night we
11 did not manage to have the book translated. Together with the -- a nurse
12 [as interpreted] and the orders that arise from the book will be submitted
13 to the Trial Chamber. Will you allow me to read two more sentences it
14 says the action in the city centre had some successes in the Balinovac
16 Q. Is the Balinovac neighbourhood part of Mostar on its western side?
17 Do you know that Mr. Bowen?
18 A. Balinovac neighbourhood. On the west side. I'll take your word
19 for that.
20 Q. And now can you pay attention to the rest of this sentence: "With
21 a strong, and I repeat very strong Serb artillery, the success was quite
22 likely." And this is on page 180. It says there towards "the sequela of
23 the combat activities on the units of the 4th Corps were really terrible.
24 During the retreat to our starting positions we had over 30 dead and about
25 a hundred slightly and seriously wounded."
1 Mr. Bowen, this started on the 20th and lasted until the 30th when
2 everything was called off, according to the words that we heard in your
3 documentary. Did you know anything about this? And if you didn't know
4 anything about such major offensive operations, how come you didn't know
5 a thing about such major offensive operations? This is my question to
7 A. I suspect the end of the operation was a bit less major than he
8 was suggesting because I was there at the time, and while as I say there
9 was a lot of -- there was activity going on the whole time, no one said to
10 me, "We've got a major offensive going." General Pasalic was able to
11 spend the whole of one evening with me and then the whole of the following
12 day in a very relaxed mood. If a major offensive had been going on then
13 he hid it very well. He said that by the time that we got there and we
14 started talking about this that the fighting was over with. That level --
15 that offensive, anyway, that operation.
16 Q. Thank you for your answer.
17 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] Can the witness now be shown
18 this piece of paper? For my next question, can the piece of paper be put
19 on the ELMO, please?
20 Q. Yesterday in your documentary --
21 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] For the transcript, while
22 you're putting your questions we are looking at the map, and the Judges
23 have just established that Balinovac is in Mostar west. So not in the
24 eastern part of Mostar but at the extremity of the town, in the western
25 part of Mostar.
1 THE WITNESS: I'm not a -- I was there during the war for a period
2 of time, and I was not able to get to know every district of Mostar and
3 every place name. So I will accept what you're saying about that, but I
4 wasn't familiar with that -- or if I was, I've forgotten.
5 MR. SCOTT: There is no inconsistency. The transcript says that
6 the Balinovac neighbourhood was on the west side on page 38, line 12.
7 Lines 8 to 12. So I'm not sure what the inconsistency is. That's what's
8 been said all along. It was on the west side.
9 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] There is no lack of consistency.
10 I just wanted to make it clear for the record that Balinovac is in western
11 Mostar rather than in eastern Mostar. We have to know that.
12 You, Mr. Scott, should know that there could be an attack that
13 came not from the western part of Mostar but from somewhere else. That's
14 why it is necessary to establish where Balinovac is on the map of Mostar.
15 Let's move only. The time runs quickly.
16 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation]
17 Q. I believe that I have some more time, because the lawyers and
18 yourself have used up a lot of my time.
19 Could you please look at the document. Yesterday in your document
20 we saw a dead woman's body on the bank of the Neretva. Since the Judges
21 visited Mostar and they saw that Neretva runs through a very deep canyon
22 in Mostar, and judging by the bridges that connect the two banks of the
23 river, the banks are some 15 or 20 metres long -- high, and very steep.
24 I tried to do some mental arithmetics and at the height of the
25 bank of 20 metres and at the place where the Neretva is some 50 metres
1 wide, that's one scenario. And the other scenario is if the Neretva is 60
2 metres wide and the banks are 20 metres high. And if the HVO positions
3 were some 350 metres away from the Neretva River, I tried to calculate how
4 high should a sniper or a rifle have been in order to hit a woman washing
5 clothes on the river Neretva at this angle.
6 My question to you, Mr. Bowen is this: When you saw the dead
7 woman's body on the bank of the Neretva River, Mr. Bowen, did you go down
8 and did you look at the opposite side? Because you said the woman had
9 been sit from the HVO side. Did you look at the angle at which the woman
10 could have been hit? And as you were looking, did you see a building that
11 should have been some 200 or 100 metres high according to my mental
12 arithmetics, which I think is good. So my question is, did you go down?
13 Did you look at the opposite side, the opposite bank? And did you
14 establish where the sniper could have been shooting from in order to kill
15 that woman? Did you understand my question?
16 A. Yeah, I understand your question, and for your information I can
17 tell you that that picture was filmed by our cameraman Nigel Chandler and
18 I wasn't with him because I was with the other cameraman when he was
19 working. So I wasn't with him when he was filming so, no, I was not able
20 to make those checks.
21 Q. But, Mr. Bowen, you make the conclusion in your film, and I can't
22 hear the words of your cameraman, I can hear your own words, where you say
23 that the woman that your cameraman filmed at a distance of 10 metres was
24 killed by a sniper from the HVO side.
25 Is that some poetic -- that extreme poetic licence which should
1 not be allowed? Could you answer that question, please?
2 A. No, no, it's not poetic licence it was based on what the -- the
3 witnesses to it and the people who were there were saying.
4 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Mr. Bowen, if we look at the map of Mostar, do
5 you have an idea as to where this woman was washing? Was it on -- on
6 the upper side north of Carinski Most, or was it near Cernica or Stari
8 THE WITNESS: I haven't got a map at happened actually.
9 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation]
10 Q. On that other map to your left, Mr. Bowen. You have that map. To
11 your left.
12 A. I've got a very clear one here too.
13 Q. That's a good map there.
14 A. It's difficult for me to say. I don't want to get this particular
15 thing wrong. So I think if I was going to answer that directly I would be
16 making a bit of a guess because --
17 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Don't then.
18 THE WITNESS: -- because I didn't have the benefit of this map at
19 the time.
20 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Don't if you can't say.
21 THE WITNESS: I don't really want to guess. I've got some idea,
22 but it would be 50 per cent guesswork and, you know, calculation and --
23 plus based on where I think we were at any given time.
24 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Thank you.
25 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] May I have another document;
1 it is 2D 0086, please.
2 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Praljak, you've almost used
3 all of your 45 minutes, so this has to be the last document that you're
5 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] 2D 00086 is the number of
6 the document.
7 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
8 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Federal.
9 Q. Mr. Bowen, yesterday you said in your film, in your documentary,
10 that you were able to conclude on the basis of some factors that the
11 Croatian army was in Mostar -- in the Mostar area and that was pursuant to
12 orders from Zagreb, on the basis of some ID cards or whatever.
13 Now, according to this document compiled by the security sector of
14 the HVO, it lists 14 British citizens. Are you familiar with any of the
15 names on that list?
16 First of all, did you know that those people were in Mostar? Did
17 you know that they were in the BH army units? And do you know, looking at
18 the other pages of the document, that they were paid in Croatian dinars by
19 the BH army?
20 A. I don't recognise those names. I didn't know that there were
21 British mercenaries on the BiH side at that time. I wish that I had,
22 because I would definitely have tried to contact them and interview
23 them, because it would have been an interesting development and a
24 strong story.
25 Q. And what about your friends Mr. Humo and Arif Pasalic? How come
1 they didn't introduce you to your compatriots? That's one question. And
2 second, did somebody from the British government send them? Do you have
3 any information about that? And the fact that a group of Englishmen are
4 on one side, can we conclude that they were sent by the British government
5 or the Queen or somebody else?
6 A. As I said, I only wish Humo and Pasalic would have introduced us.
7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Just a moment, please. This is
8 a hypothetical on the part of Mr. Praljak.
9 THE WITNESS: Does --
10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Or, rather, a hypothesis.
11 THE WITNESS: Okay. The -- I would have -- would the British
12 government have sent them? I know they had special forces soldiers moving
13 around quite large areas of Bosnia, but I certainly saw nobody who looked
14 like a British soldier while I was in Mostar, and I don't believe that the
15 British government were intervening militarily on the side of the BiH
16 government in Sarajevo. If that's true, it would be a very interesting
17 development even now, and if I had more documentation, I promise you we'd
18 do a documentary about it.
19 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I'm sorry my
20 time is up. I could go on asking a lot of questions about the artillery,
21 the artillery by the hospital, the military facilities in Mostar of the BH
22 army within the urban centre, the number of Croats on the eastern bank,
23 the number of Muslims on the west bank, and the difference between ethnic
24 cleansing and persecution and everything else that the witness presented
25 here. And I think that the witness was too hasty in making his
1 conclusions on many of these points, but I'm sorry, I have no more time.
2 Thank you, Mr. Bowen for answering my questions.
3 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Before we end, Mr. Praljak, you
4 said what you said, and I'd like as the Judge to tell you that I don't
5 have the right to questioning you, but I'm telling you that you said this
6 on page 25, line 2, and you repeated it on page 24, line 21. You said, in
7 order to allow the witness to make his report, that you gave an order to
8 the artillery and sniper to cease-fire. You said that on two occasions.
9 It's in the transcript. You can check that out.
10 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] No, completely wrong. My
11 sentence was a very clear one as a hypothesis, and the question was this:
12 Is it logical that a commander of an army issues the BBC with a permit or
13 gives permission to go to the opposite enemy side to make a documentary
14 then, once having granted them that permission, permission to do so, to
15 issue an order? This is a hypothetical. To issue an order to their
16 snipers and artillery and people who are expelling the Muslims,
17 persecuting the Muslims, for him to be able to film a document which will
18 be later awarded, given an award.
19 So that was something absurd that I was stating and I wanted to
20 hear from Mr. Bowen whether he agrees with me, or whether crimes of that
21 kind is quite a normal thing.
22 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you for that explanation.
23 Any re-examination, Mr. Scott?
24 MR. SCOTT: Yes, about two questions, Your Honour.
25 MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour.
1 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Just a minute. Mr. Kovacic
2 would like to say something.
3 MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] I just have a very brief question.
4 I need two minutes. Mr. Praljak didn't have time to do so, and I consider
5 it to be important before Mr. Scott continues.
6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Go ahead.
7 Cross-examination by Mr. Kovacic:
8 Q. Good afternoon, Mr. Bowen, I am Defence counsel for Mr. Praljak.
9 In the documentary that you showed us yesterday, it is at 8 minutes 49
10 seconds, at one point you made a comment and you said, "Up until now -- so
11 far, except for the tannoys relaying Croat propaganda, not all that
12 different," et cetera, et cetera, you clearly imply that there is a
13 difference in how Croatian propaganda is being disseminated, the tannoys.
14 Do you know what I'm referring to?
15 A. Yeah. I'm looking at the transcript now. I mean what --
16 Q. At 8.49. 8 minutes, 49 seconds.
17 A. I'm looking at it, sir. If I can explain what my line was
18 referring to. I said that --
19 Q. May I interrupt you? All I wanted to observe was that you know
20 what I'm referring to and I'll ask my question now. I'll go --
21 A. Sure. Sure, absolutely. Sorry, yes, I understand. I do know
22 what you're referring to and I'm reading it.
23 Q. Thank you. So along with that comment the audiotape in the
24 background you can hear a female voice from this loudspeaker or the
25 tannoys that you're talking about, and we listened to it carefully, and
1 the woman says the following words: "The signal for the -- the code for
2 Republic of Croatia is 385. For Slovenia it is," et cetera, et cetera.
3 My question to you is this: Do you speak Croatian?
4 A. No, I don't but I know what they were staying on that particular
5 part of the -- I can speak a bit of it to -- I understand -- I knew it was
6 numbers when we went through the tape. The point is, though, if I can
7 explain, that broadcast went on for many hours a day and we listened to it
8 a lot and I listened to it with our translator who described to me what
9 was being said. It so happened that in the edit the piece that they
10 picked up because it was a clear piece of audio, was that. That doesn't
11 take anything away from the reason that the tannoys were -- the HVO did
12 not set up those tannoys to give people information about direct dial
13 services in a city with no telephones. You know, they were there for a
14 purpose, and that purpose was to try to get over the political propaganda
15 points of one side. And if you were at the front line areas and I would
16 have spent time with people who lived in apartments there, they heard it
17 the whole time, often at night as well. And we heard it and as I say I
18 sat there with a translator and she translated it for me.
19 Q. So your interpretation of those words that we heard in the
20 background over the tannoys was part of the propaganda. Now, please
21 explain this to me: What's that got to do -- what's that propaganda got
22 to do -- or why should the Republic of Slovenia be mentioned and the area
23 code for Slovenia? Is Slovenia involved in that propaganda as well?
24 Because your answer -- by your answer you make your conclusion, but I'm
25 asking you about the words that can be clearly heard there in the
1 background. Among other things, we heard the area code given for the
2 Republic of Slovenia. Is that then Slovenian propaganda? Can I interpret
3 it that way? I would be able to following the same logic that you're
4 saying that it's Croatian propaganda. If you apply the same logic, that's
5 how that can be interpreted. So can you explain that to us please?
6 A. I think what you've said is an absurd statement. I've made it
7 clear that for many hours a day the views of the Croatian side were being
8 broadcast over the front line on tannoys. Now, perhaps they were
9 replaying something that for some reason had a public information element
10 regarding the best numbers to call, but as I say there were no telephones
11 in the city anyway and that broadcast was not about the best way to make
12 telephone calls.
13 Frankly, we didn't make a big deal of it. We -- I had to explain
14 why there was tannoy noise on the tape, and I said that it was not all
15 that different from any other urban front line in Bosnia-Herzegovina
16 because that was certainly the first time that I'd come across a tannoy
17 broadcasting for many hours a day over a front line. I mean, that was the
18 point I was making.
19 Q. Very well. Now, did you record some other portions of that as
20 you say, propaganda or just what we heard? The question is simple. Yes
21 or no?
22 A. Well, without having the rest [phoen] of the tapes here, I can't
23 answer yes or no. I was with the translator having it translated to me.
24 You don't -- when you're making a television documentary, you just film
25 bits of things, and I imagine what happened -- the normal professional
1 technique, Mr. Praljak will tell you about this, is that as well as doing
2 the pictures, which is -- it's an on-off with the video, so you get a
3 broken up soundtrack, what happens then is the cameraman records a section
4 of sound that you put over the edited version. And our cameraman who
5 don't speak Croatian clearly decided to record the section where they gave
6 dialling tone information, direct dial information. However, in my
7 notebook there was the other stuff that the translator gave to me which
8 was a description of what the broadcaster was actually saying.
9 Q. Thank you for the explanation of technology, but I'm sure you will
10 agree that on the documentary we saw there was no other propaganda, as you
11 call it, except for those five or six words that I quoted. Is that
12 correct? Yes or no? Is there or isn't there?
13 A. I recorded what was happening there. It so happens and this was
14 probably as well because, you know, they should have chose -- listen, I
15 accept they should have chosen a better piece of sound for that section of
16 the picture, because it is a bit confusing. I accept that. But I'm
17 telling you there was propaganda coming out of those tannoys.
18 Q. Very well. To round up and conclude, this was your selection of
19 an excerpt of that propaganda. Would that be right then?
20 A. Us collectively. I wasn't involved in selecting that little piece
21 of signed, no. But I'm telling you, as I said -- excuse me. I made my
22 point already about the fact it was happening. I mean, I don't make
23 things up. I do -- I want to say this because there have been all kinds
24 of, Your Honour, allegations being made about my journalistic -- my
25 professionalism. I've been a journalist for a long time and I'm telling
1 you I've discovered and I know and I've been trained that you don't make
2 things up. There was no need to make things up in East Mostar. What was
3 happening there was extraordinarily dramatic. That's the reason why we're
4 still walking about it 14 years later. It was very dramatic and it was
5 all there. It was all laid out in front us. I did not make that up. And
6 what's more, I stand a hundred per cent behind what it was I reported
7 there. I had no stake in telling lies about the war, I can assure you.
8 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Mr. Bowen --
9 MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation]
10 Q. But Mr. Bowen, my -- what I was implying is very clear. You're
11 talking about propaganda, and on the documentary that you played
12 regardless of the technological explanation you gave, that you said that
13 others did that and so on, you said that there was Croatian propaganda
14 there. Now, if you listen to it and many others who understand Croatian,
15 if they were to understand it, they hear a message that has nothing to do
16 with propaganda whatsoever. So that's the only thing I'm asking you.
17 JUDGE TRECHSEL: That point -- the point, I think, has been very
18 clearly made.
19 I have a -- I have two questions, actually, to Mr. Bowen. The
20 first is: Were you aware of what this passage actually meant? Had that
21 been translated to you before or had you just trusted your cameraman that
22 he would take a representative sample?
23 THE WITNESS: Well, I know what "tri, osam, pet" means, and "tri,
24 osam, and devet," and so on. I know what that means. I -- it meet help
25 if I very briefly in two lines explain how we would work in that
2 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Couldn't you just answer the question? Were you
3 aware that someone who understands Croatian hears these telephone
4 informations in the documentary?
5 THE WITNESS: Yes. When we were viewing the tape, when we were
6 viewing the finished product, before it was broadcast with other
7 translator who was with us in -- in Mostar, she made the same point, that
8 it was -- it was just numbers, and it was as she explained. So yes, we
9 were well aware of that. But for technical reasons, unfortunately, that
10 was the clearest piece of audio we had. It doesn't get away from the
11 fact, and as I say I would stake my journalistic reputation on it, that
12 was -- propaganda was what was being broadcast. They didn't set up
13 tannoys to just give people the football commentaries.
14 JUDGE TRECHSEL: That's my second question, Mr. Bowen, Can you
15 give an example? Do you recollect --
16 THE WITNESS: Yes.
17 JUDGE TRECHSEL: -- a sentence that was actually spoken and leads
18 you to say it was propaganda?
19 THE WITNESS: I can't give you an exact sentence as an exact
20 word-for-word quote, but the sense of -- when I was listening there, what
21 they were doing, they were broadcasting the news as seen from the Croatian
22 side. Your know, along the lines of, Once again our troops are achieving
23 victories on, you know, on this front and that front. You know, in the
24 same way that when I listened to BiHTV in Sarajevo and elsewhere they
25 would give the news from their particular perspective and, lo and behold,
1 that also showed a large number of victories and it also pointed out the
2 viciousness of the their opponents and they way that they were oppressing
3 civilians, rather as the Croatian did.
4 You know, I didn't take either news broadcast seriously. I
5 regarded boat as propaganda. That was one of the reasons for the Western
6 media being there, was to try to get to the truth of it and not take the
7 slanted versions that were being broadcast by the protagonists in the war.
8 Thank you.
9 MR. KARNAVAS: For the sake of our interpreters I do believe they
10 need a break. We're going almost on two hours, and I don't mean -- I
11 mean, I know the Prosecution has some questions and the gentleman wishes
12 to go, but I think in fairness to the --
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes. We're going to take a
14 break and reconvene in 20 minutes' time. Mr. Praljak needs a few seconds
15 to explain something, so when we reconvene we'll hear Mr. Praljak first
16 for a few seconds, then the Prosecutor will be able to conclude the
18 --- Recess taken at 4.08 p.m.
19 --- On resuming at 4.30 p.m.
20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Praljak wants to clarify
22 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] First of all, I would like
23 Mr. Bowen to look at the map. Can he please sign the map and put today's
25 Secondly, in my decision pursuant to which BBC team is allowed to
1 make their documentary, and this is where there was a mistake in the
2 transcript, and I'm talking about Exhibit 3D 00700. It says precisely
3 this, which is shooting a documentary in these areas. I would kindly like
4 the interpreters to interpret this correctly: In these areas we are
5 giving permission, and I interpret this means in all the areas under the
6 control of the HVO and also permission to cross our check-points to the
7 eastern side. I'm afraid there has been a different interpretation it,
8 and I'm kindly asking for this to be established precisely. The
9 permission applies to all areas, which means all areas under the control
10 of the HVO.
11 And the third thing I would like to clarify -- just a moment. Let
12 me just finish.
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Can you please allow Mr. Praljak
14 to finish what he was saying?
15 Go ahead, Mr. Praljak.
16 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] And the third thing has to
17 do with the voice and image synchronicity. When Mr. Bowen said the
18 propaganda was not recorded well, and he said that to the interpreter, the
19 interpreter was there every day. She could have recorded something
20 better, and she could have underlaid that under the image. I would like
21 to ask Mr. Bowen whether this is correct and whether this is technically
22 possible to record a different sound and attach it to the image.
23 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] First of all, the interpretation
24 issues. Mr. Praljak, can you read in your own language the text so the
25 interpreters can interpret and then we can see what conclusions could be
1 drawn. Can you please read in your own language the first paragraph.
2 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] "Approval allowing free
3 pass to the final check-point of the HVO military police on Buna to the
4 BBC TV crew, the TV crew is making a documentary in these areas, in these
6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Scott, you were on your
8 MR. SCOTT: Yes, Your Honour. Well, part of the answer has
9 been -- I think part of the problem has been addressed. First of all, I
10 guess, just so the record is -- there is no confusion in the record, when
11 Mr. Praljak once again asked the witness to sign and date any of these
12 items, I'd like the record to be clear as to what the significance is of
13 signing it. What does that mean? The Chamber has given some indications
14 before but I just want to make sure the record is clear of any
15 significance of signing and dating the item.
16 Number two, we now have the translation booth interpretation of
17 the document. I don't think it's -- I don't think it's appropriate or
18 acceptable, especially not in this context, for Mr. Praljak to get up and
19 tell us what he thinks it really meant. I mean, the language is there.
20 It's now been interpreted by the booth, and he cannot put his own spin on
21 it as it were.
22 I think those are where matters stand at the moment. Then I have
23 a couple of questions, final questions, to put to the witness.
24 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] There is a map, sir, that you
25 have before you. Could you please -- Mr. Praljak has -- which one, is it
1 Mr. Praljak, the map on the left, the map on the right?
2 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] The long map on the
3 right-hand side of the witness. The witness has testified to the extent
4 he could that this might have been the truthful representation. I'm not
5 saying that the witness said that this was absolutely correct, but it says
6 on the record to what extent the witness could confirm that this was the
7 true representation, and that's why I'm asking him to sign the map.
8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Sir, could you please sign the
9 map. It is clear for the Trial Chamber the map has been shown to the
10 witness. The questions have been asked, and he has answered the
11 questions, which has been put on the record.
12 Can we have the IC number for this Mr. Registrar.
13 THE REGISTRAR: That will IC 247, Your Honours.
14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you. We're drawing to an
16 Mr. Scott, any re-examination?
17 MR. SCOTT: Yes, Your Honour. Thank you.
18 Re-examination by Mr. Scott:
19 Q. Sir, when you were reporting as you told us about during your
20 direct examination, when you were reporting of the events in Vukovar, can
21 you just tell the Judges, please, who were the principal victims of the
22 actions that were taking place around Vukovar at that time?
23 A. The Croatians.
24 Q. And can you tell the Judges, please, whether to your knowledge
25 anyone on the Croat side complained about your reporting, that you didn't
1 report the Serb side?
2 A. No. On the contrary.
3 MR. KARNAVAS: I object -- I object to the relevance and --
4 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for the counsel, please.
5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Karnavas, you know that the
6 Chamber, when a journalist makes a documentary, they rely on the
7 reporting. We suppose that since the story has been aired on BBC there
8 were people who applauded the story, and if we want to -- if we want to
9 talk about this story, the Prosecution may ask whether there was any
10 criticism about a certain documentary, and in this case we're talking
11 about any Croatian criticism.
12 Mr. Bowen, did you understand the question? We can assume that
13 this story was also broadcast on TV, and, once it was broadcast, was there
14 any criticism about that?
15 THE WITNESS: Yeah, there was criticism, Your Honour. It came
16 from the Serb side. When I -- I travelled to the Serb side, I was
17 actually held up at gunpoint and put in prison for -- or in a cell for
18 some time because of their anger at our reporting of what was happening on
19 the Croatian side.
20 When I returned from -- from the Zagreb side, when I was -- during
21 that period when I was going to Vukovar on a daily basis, they were very
22 pleased that we were doing it because we were highlighting what was --
23 what was happening there. As I say, the only criticisms we had were from
24 the Serbs who didn't like it.
25 MR. SCOTT:
1 Q. And, sir, unfortunately, and, as you indicated yourself, your
2 journalistic integrity has been somewhat attacked here. Could you tell
3 the Judges when you pointed out -- when you heard that there were Croat
4 prisoners on the Muslim side and when you asked and were allowed to film
5 that, why did you want to include that?
6 A. Well, I was aware that using prisoners as forced labour on a front
7 line, for example, as they were doing, was a war crime, and I was -- I'm
8 always very interested in the -- the aspects of international humanitarian
9 law that applied to the kind of things that I reported in war zones. I
10 think it's a good way of putting them into context. So by using that
11 framework of international humanitarian law.
12 So I was -- and I think I made the point, I can't remember the
13 precise words in the script, but, you know, I made the point that this was
14 not a good thing to do. I can't remember if in the script or the
15 documentary I used the word "war crimes," but anyway, the impression I was
16 seeking to give was that this was a side that was fighting a war in a very
17 determined, not to say ruthless, manner. You know, it was not my job, I
18 felt, to say who were the good guys and who were the bad guys. My
19 interest in war zones is more the effect of war on civilians rather than
20 making judgements about who is in the right and who is in the wrong when
21 they're actually fighting their war.
22 Q. As is suggested by the Defence that you were writing a pro-Muslim
23 piece, did you think that that footage and what you saw and what was in
24 your documentary, do you think that part of it reflected favourably on the
1 A. No. I think that it -- it -- well, it showed the reality -- you
2 know, it showed the reality of what they were doing; it didn't show them
3 in a particularly good light. In fact I said that in the script, I can
4 see it now, that the commander didn't try to hide the way the Bosnian army
5 treats its soldiers. "Prisoners dig the trenches and lay sandbags in the
6 most exposed and dangerous positions on the front line."
7 Now, I was not trying to make the Bosnian army out to be the good
8 guys in this particular war. What I was most interested in was the
9 condition and the plight and the pressure being put on 25.000 or so
10 civilians who were in East Mostar.
11 Q. Thank you, Mr. Bowen.
12 MR. KARNAVAS: Mr. President, I would like to do some
13 re-cross-examination. I'll be very brief.
14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] The Chamber will deny you the
15 right to put additional questions after the re-examination, and this is --
16 this has been the ruling of the Appeals Chamber. If you want to revisit
17 some issues later on, there will be other witnesses, and they may be able
18 to help you to clarify the things that you wanted to tackle today.
19 MR. KARNAVAS: Very well, Your Honour. Very well. But for the
20 record, and I could care less what the Appeals Chamber has said about
21 re-cross-examination. I am entitled to make the record. But I would ask
22 the Trial Chamber to ask this gentleman here, when they sought permission
23 supposedly and were denied permission from the commander of the HVO, which
24 appears otherwise, did they -- did he mention Vukovar, that he had painted
25 the Croats in a very positive way in Vukovar and therefore they would --
1 they should rest assured?
2 Also, I would like the Trial Chamber, and this has not been
3 mentioned by anyone, did he ever actually see this order that was by
4 General Praljak and did he interpret it one way or another that he could
5 not film anything, or was this -- was this told to him by the producer?
6 In other words, did he actually see it and interpret it that they cannot
7 do any filming on the west side of the river? Because I think those
8 questions are left untouched.
9 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I'm going to rephrase this.
10 Questioned by the Court:
11 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Sir, we have a problem about
12 this decision or this -- decision by Mr. Praljak, and I'm going to put
13 that question to you. When you had in your possession this decision that
14 you were supposed to show at check-points that allowed you to move about,
15 did you or any of your associates who were with you, I suppose that at
16 that time that there were check-points, and if there were check-points you
17 had to show the papers. So did you have that piece of paper on you,
18 either you or some of your associates, to show at various check-points
19 that you had to go through?
20 A. I'm assuming it was the same piece of paper. Yes. I was actually
21 driving the vehicle, and so when we stopped at the HVO check-point I
22 handed the piece of paper to the -- to the soldiers there.
23 If I could just clarify just how you get these pieces of paper in
24 these situations. They tend to be -- you get the paper after the
25 discussion, and then someone says to you -- you have your negotiation, you
1 have your discussion, they gave you the answer, and then they gave you a
2 piece of paper that you hope will cover the agreement that you've made.
3 That's the way it always worked. You get it after the end of your
4 meeting, as it were. You hang around for a bit. They go off and type it,
5 and then they come back and you go out with it.
6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. In English I see
7 that you say, "I handed the piece of paper." Did you read it? When you
8 heard that there was a document, did you read it or did you just take it
9 for granted that you had a piece of paper that would get you through?
10 A. Well, yeah, I had a look at t I is a you that all our names were
11 on it, see that Matthews' name has been misspelt, but it -- I mean, I
12 can't read Croatian. I had a limited knowledge of the language. Maybe a
13 vocabulary of about a hundred words that I used to use at check-points and
14 I certainly couldn't read it or write it. And our interpreter explained
15 to me that this was the pass that would get us through the HVO
16 check-point, and we certainly didn't interpret it as something that gave
17 us authority to film on both sides, no.
18 MR. KARNAVAS: Was the gentleman at the negotiations? That's the
19 critical aspect of it. And I think that's what needs to be said. Now,
20 from his previous as I understand it, he was not.
21 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I believe that you have already
22 answered, Mr. Bowen, and that you said that you were not involved in that.
23 It was your colleague Matthews who was involve in the negotiations.
24 That's what I understood. Maybe I have misunderstood. When Mr. Praljak
25 handed you that document, had you participated in those negotiations, or
1 was it Mr. Matthews who was involved and who was in charge of that.
2 A. No, Your Honour, you explained it correctly. I was not at those
3 negotiations, as I made clear several times.
4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] That's exactly what I
5 understood, and that's why I have not asked you to clarify.
6 Your testimony is now finished. It was very long. It lasted
7 almost two days. I would like to thank you on behalf of myself and my
8 colleagues for having answered the questions by the Prosecution, by the
9 Defence teams, the accused, and the Judges. I wish you a safe journey
10 back home, and I wish you success in your journalistic career. I'm going
11 to ask the usher to escort you out of the courtroom.
12 THE WITNESS: Thank you very much.
13 [The witness withdrew]
14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] For the next witness, it has
15 been indicated that the Prosecution will have two hours. I believe that
16 there is a video that will last about an hour, so together the Prosecution
17 will have two hours including the video, and the Defence teams will have
18 the same amount of time for the cross-examination. So once the
19 Prosecution finishes, we should then finish the cross-examination tomorrow
20 at 7.00.
21 Is that the way you have foreseen things for this week,
22 Mr. Scott?
23 MR. SCOTT: I apologise, Your Honour. Apparently there's been
24 some confusion. The video has nothing to do with the next witness. The
25 video we have put on the schedule some days ago when the schedule was
1 circulated to everyone, including to the Judges, and as further
2 explained in a letter that should have been distributed to you today and
3 to counsel.
4 This is the presentation of various video material. The Chamber,
5 and in particular yourself, Mr. President, has invited us on a number of
6 occasions to present video material to the Chamber, and we're prepared to
7 do that tomorrow. But it has nothing to do specifically with this
9 When the next witness is finished, we would propose to play that
10 video material, which is approximately one hour.
11 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I would like to understand.
12 There is a witness who is forthcoming?
13 MR. SCOTT: Yes.
14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] If there is a video, the video
15 will be shown to the witness so that --
16 MR. SCOTT: No.
17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] So the video has nothing to do
18 with the next witness?
19 MR. SCOTT: That's correct, Your Honour. There is no connection
20 between the two.
21 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Now I understand
22 much better. There is no connection between the two. Very well.
23 For your examination-in-chief of this witness, how much time will
24 you need?
25 MR. SCOTT: Two hours, Your Honour.
1 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Two hours. And after the
2 cross-examination, the video that has nothing to do with the witness will
3 have to be played tomorrow, I suppose.
4 MR. SCOTT: It can be played any time, Your Honour. Obviously if
5 we don't finish the witness until 7.00 tomorrow night we won't have the
6 video tomorrow.
7 [The witness enters court]
8 MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, maybe just a minute
9 about that video that has been announced. We have received a notification
10 today from the Prosecution and the script of all the videotapes that the
11 Prosecution wants to show without any witnesses, in the absence of any
12 witnesses. I have not had time to consult with my colleagues; however, on
13 behalf of General Praljak's Defence I object to these videos being shown
14 in such short time. We simply don't have time to view all that material,
15 and as you've just said, it will not be shown tomorrow. It will not be
17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Kovacic, I'm surprised.
18 This material is P 1041, and it was disseminated already a month ago.
19 First of all, you had to watch the video when you got it.
20 MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I'm not talking about
21 the video that we had for the previous witness. We're talking about the
22 letter dated 24 January, which is today, in which the Prosecutor informs
23 us that tomorrow they want to show 9 or 11 video clips. In the absence of
24 any witnesses, I object to that. It can't be done from one day to
25 another. We have to have the time to view the videotapes that are to be
2 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Mundis, you have just
3 entered the courtroom, and I want to ask you a question. After this
4 witness we are going to have a video, a video that consists of several
5 tapes, and the numbers are 1041, 2059, 2463, 242 -- all these videotapes,
6 can you tell us when were they disclosed to the Defence?
7 MR. SCOTT: Your Honour, I'll --
8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Scott, you have the floor.
9 MR. SCOTT: Excuse me, Your Honour, I will continue to handle this
10 particular matter please. Your Honour, these are -- as the Court has just
11 rightly pointed out, all of these are exhibits in the 65 ter exhibit list,
12 and we had indicated some -- that we would be playing videos. What
13 they -- what they are is that from these various videos there has been put
14 together, approximately a one-hour presentation and again, Your Honour,
15 we've done that with the understanding that this is what the Chamber has
16 asked us to do.
17 If the Chamber doesn't want to hear it, doesn't want to receive it
18 that way, of course you can tell us that, but that's -- again we're going
19 forward on the basis of your direction.
20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Since the Judges
21 will meet tomorrow as they indeed meet every day, we will discuss this
22 issue and tomorrow we will be able to tell you what will happen with this
23 video presentation, but we have to tell you that we have noted the
24 objection of the Defence that has informed us that they have not been
25 given enough time to prepare.
1 WITNESS: JOVAN RAJKOV
2 [Witness answered through interpreter]
3 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Sir, before you read the solemn
4 declaration could you please stand up. You're going to tell me your name,
5 your first name, last name, and date of birth.
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Jovan Rajkov, born August 26, 1957.
7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Sir, what is your current
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm a doctor, a surgeon, and I work
10 in the South Camp hospital in Mostar.
11 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Doctor, have you ever testified
12 before an International Tribunal or a local court about the events that
13 took place in your country in the 1990s of last century or is this the
14 first time you testify?
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is the first time.
16 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Could you please read the solemn
17 declaration that the usher is just giving to you.
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will speak
19 the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you, Doctor. You may be
22 Since this is the first time you are appearing before a court as a
23 witness, I'm going to provide you with some information as to how this
24 testimony of yours is going to take place. First of all, you're going to
25 be asked questions by the Prosecution whom you may have met today or
1 yesterday. The Prosecution has informed us that they will need two hours
2 for the examination-in-chief, and during their examination, I'm sure that
3 they will be showing you some documents. They have provided us with a
4 bundle of documents which is about half a metre wide.
5 When they have finished with their examination it will be the
6 Defence's turn. They are seated to your left. As you can see there are a
7 number of them. Behind them are the six accused who are also entitled to
8 put questions within the scope of what we call the cross-examination.
9 We have issued a decision to give ample time to Defence for their
10 cross-examination. Your testimony should finish tomorrow by 7.00 in the
11 afternoon. Please try and be as precise as possible in your answers,
12 because your answers are being translated into the English language, and
13 that -- you can see on the screen before you constitute the transcript,
14 and we will also have some evidence in the form of documents that will be
15 presented to you by the Prosecution and the Defence.
16 The four Judges seated before you can at any point in time ask you
17 questions according to our Rules, and we will certainly take that
18 opportunity either to clarify some of your answers or to clarify some
19 things to us, because it is our task in the future when this trial is
20 adjourned to deliberate and to render a decision in these proceedings.
21 If during your testimony there are any problems, please do not
22 hesitate to inform us about that, especially if you are not feeling well,
23 because even though you are a doctor, sometimes it does happen that
24 witnesses don't feel well, and we would like you to inform us about that
25 as soon as possible.
1 This is how all this should take place, but I believe that the
2 Prosecutor has already informed you about all this.
3 I'm now going to give the floor to Ms. Egels for the
5 MS. EGELS: Good afternoon, Your Honours. Good afternoon to
6 everybody in the courtroom.
7 Examination by Ms. Egels:
8 Q. Good afternoon, Witness. Witness, could you briefly describe to
9 the Trial Chamber what is your professional background from approximately
10 1989 until April 1993, please.
11 A. As you mentioned 1989, by then I had completed the secondary
12 school and the faculty of medicine in Sarajevo. I passed my professional
13 examinations and started working as a volunteer or doing temporary work
14 for 15 days, up to a month, in the emergency unit. I worked in the
15 emergency clinic from 1989 to 1992 with a few interruptions because it was
16 all temporary work, but as a volunteer I was present all the time up until
17 1989. And you want to know after that, do you.
18 Q. Yes, until April 1993, please.
19 A. From the 11s of April to the 11th of June I worked in the military
20 unit. On the 11th of June, Dr. Dzikic, who was the head at the time, said
21 he didn't need my services any more, and I tried to activate myself, not
22 to stay at home doing nothing. Since I was a doctor I joined up with the
23 civilian protection, but I wasn't registered with the civilian protection
24 I was just there and did everything that I could and knew how to do
25 until - I don't know what day this was - when a list appeared with some 19
1 Serb names and surnames and three Muslim names on it. This list was
2 posted and both times under both lists on one piece of paper it said that
3 the people listed were required to leave the premises of the civilian
4 protection doesn't, and I logically concluded that the best thing for me
5 to do would be to leave because I didn't know what this -- what was going
6 on and what this was about. So I stayed at home for a certain amount of
7 time until I linked up with the BH army through private channels.
8 And from the 27th of August, 1992, I became a doctor within the
9 Medical Corps of the BH army and the Mostar battalion. And that was until
10 1992. When the Medical Corps relocated from where it was to begin with in
11 South Camp and the south barracks in Mostar, we relocated mostly because I
12 insisted on having a better -- better premises, and I went to the hygiene
13 institute. That was in October 1992. And that's where I stayed until May
14 1993 when that hospital, it was a hospital, and it really started working
15 as a hospital.
16 Q. Let me take you back. You just explained to us that you went to
17 the hygiene institute from October 1992 onwards. There is a map that is
18 going to be provided to you that has Exhibit number 9517. Can I ask you
19 to show us on that map where the hygiene institute is? Can I ask you to
20 mark the location of the hygiene institute with number 1, please.
21 A. If I may say so, this isn't a very precise map. So -- and I don't
22 think some of the small streets have been entered into it properly. It's
23 difficult to orientate oneself. Let me just take a moment to do that.
24 And you want a number there, do you?
25 Q. Number 1 for the hygiene institute, please?
1 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] With respect to this map P 9717,
2 many witnesses made the same remarks and said that it was very difficult
3 to find their way there and that some of the street names had changed.
4 Isn't it possible for the Prosecution to find a map of Mostar dated 1993?
5 I assume that you can't give me a reply now, but as professional Judges
6 this is something that came to my mind straight away.
7 MS. EGELS: Your Honour, a complete answer is indeed not something
8 that I can give you, but what I can tell you is that indeed it was very
9 difficult to find an accurate map of 1993 of Mostar except for the
10 military maps, but the military maps are being so detailed that then we
11 are facing the other problem, which is to try to find a simple street back
12 on that map. So this is why we chose this commercial map to try to give a
13 certain idea of what it looked like.
14 Now, maybe for the purpose of this specific location --
15 Q. Witness, could you tell us, the hygiene institute, on which street
16 was it located?
17 A. If I might be allowed to add something. On this area below this
18 separation line there were no changes in the street names. The street
19 names remained the same.
20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Praljak wanted to say
21 something about the map. He was on his feet.
22 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] On the glass behind you,
23 Witness, we have a very detailed map, an aerial view of Mostar. So
24 perhaps you can use that one so that we have the precise locations marked
25 on the map.
1 MS. EGELS: Well, I believe that for the purpose of this location
2 the witness just marked the place.
3 Q. Can you just give us the name of the street where the hygiene
4 institute was, please?
5 A. The street in which the institute was and where it is now is
6 called Marsal Tito Street or Main Street, and it is in fact the main
8 Q. And is this street located in East or in West Mostar?
9 A. East.
10 Q. Thank you. Now, you explained that you entered the ABiH and --
11 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] May we have an IC number first,
13 MS. EGELS: Yes, Your Honour, but I was going to ask that a little
14 bit later because I was going to ask the witness to mark other locations
15 on the map, but --
16 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Perhaps we could have a number
17 because it will be simpler. A number Mr. Registrar, please.
18 THE REGISTRAR: That will be given Exhibit number IC 248,
19 Your Honours.
20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you.
21 MS. EGELS:
22 Q. So you explained to us you entered the ABiH and you started first
23 as a doctor, first at the south camp, then at the hygiene institute, and
24 this until April of 1993. Now, to take you back to that period of April
25 of 1993, was then a war hospital established in the location of the
1 hygiene institute in East Mostar?
2 A. You can't call it the establishment of a war hospital -- a
3 hospital, especially not a war hospital. Those of us that were there of
4 the medical service, there were 3 times 6 of us, six doctors, six nurses,
5 six drivers. We relocated the -- well, clinic or outpatients' clinic from
6 south camp to the hygiene institute where we used the basement section.
7 Only the left-hand side, a very small room there for -- as a reception for
8 the patients, a small room where they spent the day, and a small medicines
9 depot. And one of the rooms was supposed to be for the dentist, but that
10 was never actually finished. We never had the necessary equipment.
11 That's what we managed to do, but perhaps in April, moving towards
12 May, thanks to the fact that we left the right-hand side empty if the need
13 arose for -- that right side had some rooms which had tiles on the walls,
14 and there was a trough for washing, as we call it, a trough with two or
15 three taps, and two old sterilisation pieces of equipment which the
16 hygiene institute used, then we thought that this would be ideal for
17 emergencies, as an operating theatre. And there were other rooms there
18 that could be used if we came by the equipment we needed equipment -- we
19 were general practitioners, so we had an idea of what an operations unit
20 theatre should look like, so we managed to collect that equipment and we
21 had something that resembled an operating theatre, at least under those
23 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Doctor, there seems to be a
24 divergence between what you're saying and what the Prosecution is saying.
25 The Prosecution termed this presence as a war hospital and you said no it
1 was just a hygiene institute with additional equipment as a surgery.
2 Now, was this a civilian or a military facility? And the personnel
3 there, including yourself, were you civilians or were you under military
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] At the beginning in 1992 to 1993, it
6 was a surgery and later on became a war hospital. It was a surgery or
7 clinic organised by the BH army and, yes, the staff did come under the
8 authority, if I can put it that way, of certain commands. I'm not a
9 military expert, so I don't know about the chain of command, but during
10 the war everything seems to be under some sort of military command. But
11 if you're asking me whether it was only soldiers who were treated there,
12 then no. The entire population on the east bank, civilians, women,
13 children, everybody without any difference were treated there.
14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] So did you have -- were you a
15 civilian or were you a military man working, or were you a civilian
16 working in a military hospital? What was your status?
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I personally did have a military ID
18 card as of August 1992, and that was the only way at the time that you
19 could be on the east bank unless you were in -- an inhabitant of the east
20 bank. Unless you had a house there you had to have permission to cross
21 over to that side.
22 I lived on the west bank, so if you were a member and had this ID
23 card, then you could cross over to the other bank.
24 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you. That gives us a
25 little more insight.
1 You may proceed.
2 MS. EGELS: Could the witness be shown Exhibit number 9865. It is
3 in the three binders that are just next to you, and it's in the last
5 Q. Witness, do you recognise the building on that photograph?
6 A. Certainly I do. That is the hygiene institute in Mostar in Tito
7 Street taken later on. And the building was a different colour then. It
8 was purple.
9 Q. Witness, could you show us on that picture, and maybe by using the
10 picture on the screen in front of you, where the medical part of that
11 hospital was first based in that building? Can we see that on this
12 picture? You talk about the basement of the building.
13 A. You want me to show you the medical part. It's not really a
14 basement, a cellar. Not everything is below ground, and you can see that
15 here. That is the level of the basement ceiling. So the basement ceiling
16 was on that level. So a third of it was above ground. There's a window,
17 as you can see. That's the window over there.
18 At the beginning, what I mentioned to begin with, this area here
19 was the room that -- well, we used it as a kitchen. We used it as a day
20 room. And the reception area was on the opposite side. I can't show you
21 that here. There's a separate entrance on the other side, on the back
22 side of this building. So when you go down the steps into a small room,
23 on the same level of all this was the reception area where we took
24 patients in. The medicines -- where we kept the medicines was on the
25 other side. And the room that became the operating theatre is here, under
1 this area here, right along the length of the building. And then the
2 intensive care unit was next to the operating theatre.
3 So that was it basically.
4 MS. EGELS: Could I ask registry to give an IC number to this
5 document, please.
6 THE REGISTRAR: That will be given Exhibit number IC 249,
7 Your Honours.
8 MS. EGELS:
9 Q. Witness, in April 1993, by whom was the rest of the building
10 occupied? The upper floors of the building.
11 A. In April 1993, you mean? Well, I have to explain it this way:
12 When we arrived into the building as a medical corps, we were sort of
13 tenants, not to say guests, of the 1st Customs Company which used this
14 building for its own purposes. As far as I could see during that period
15 it wasn't actually used for anything else but a premises to rest in or
16 somewhere where they would gather when they were sent on assignment up at
17 the front line.
18 There was a small room at the entrance looking onto the main
19 street. It was the communications centre, if I can call it that, with the
20 special telephone and flippers and so on. But they didn't use the
21 building all the time. They used it when they liked. But they gave the
22 whole basement area over to us. They remained on the floor above, and
23 little by little they left the building until the whole building came to
24 be used as a hospital, and later on there were hospital rooms for patients
25 on the upper storey.
1 Q. In April of 1993 was the whole building already used for medical
3 A. In April, no, the whole building wasn't used for medical purposes,
4 just part of the basement area.
5 Q. Moving further into the period of May of 1993, was at that time
6 the building used only for medical purposes?
7 A. If you want me to tell you exactly, I know what happened on the
8 9th of May. Later on things went step-by-step, but on the 9th of May,
9 1993, we used, and I'll enumerate all the things, the reception surgery.
10 That is to say the little room to the left of the staircase. The day
11 room, the dispensary that I mentioned for the storing of medicines, the
12 operating theatre, and the room next door where there were seven or eight
13 beds at the most on that day.
14 Q. On the 9th of May, 1993, were there any soldiers accommodated in
15 that building from the company you mentioned? Were there any weapons
16 gathered in that building?
17 A. On the 9th of May there was still someone up on the storey above.
18 We hadn't taken over that floor for our medical purposes, and they would
19 just go there to have a bit of a rest, a lie-down and so on.
20 Now, before we took over all of it they stored some weapons, a
21 little -- a small amount of weapons in the basement room. They were asked
22 to get rid of them, so on the 9th of May, that wasn't there any longer.
23 Where they moved those weapons I don't know. It wasn't within the
24 compound of that building. So there wasn't any of that after the 9th of
1 Q. Witness, as we are now on the 9th of May, I would just like to
2 take you to that specific date. Could you tell us about the situation on
3 that specific date as you remember it from where you were at that time?
4 A. I can start a few days before that, if that isn't a problem.
5 Q. Yes. Go on.
6 A. Here's why -- let me tell you why. Because I came on duty -- we
7 had 24-hour duty shifts. I arrived on duty on the 6th of May, and already
8 at that time -- well, like the people like to say there was tension. The
9 situation in town was tense. It was dangerous to move around in a uniform
10 by another army group, if you were to pass by somebody else. That's the
11 impression I gave. But I went to work wearing civilian clothes. I was on
12 duty on the 6th of May, and on the 7th in the morning, that was customary,
13 we would hand over a report to the chief of the medical service. Rahmo
14 was the man. I think he was in the command buildings in Vranica,
15 wherever. I don't know.
16 Anyway, I phoned him up in the morning, reported to him, and he
17 told me that the situation was tense and that it would be better if I
18 stayed there and tell the people taking up shifts after me, that they
19 should stay there on the 6th, 7th, and 8th of May. During that time we
20 had an awful lot of work. They said quite clearly although nothing
21 specific was stated they just said the situation was tense, highly tense,
22 you knew you had to prepare for something but you didn't know exactly what
23 because nobody specified. So I always had the impression that things were
24 spontaneous and it was just thanks to the people employed there to -- that
25 were working there, that we had to work quickly to equip the premises that
1 we wanted to have and to use as a -- as a theatre, operating theatre.
2 So -- and the dispensary and so on.
3 We selected the types of medicines we needed for emergencies, for
4 large numbers of injured or wounded persons if something was going to
5 happen. And obvious -- we sort of felt that it probably was. And I know
6 that on the 9th of -- on the 8th of May in the afternoon Dr. Konjhodzic
7 came by and he asked me -- he said, "Should I be here today or not?" I
8 asked him where he lived. He said he lived in Ledara, which I knew was
9 somewhere on the border regions, the border belt between the BH army and
10 the HVO, and I told him to come. So he came around at some - at about
11 5.00 a.m., laid down on the bed next to me, and then some terrible
12 shelling started. There was a lot of terrible firing and shooting, and we
13 thought, What's happening, nobody told us anything. We switched the radio
14 on. There were some proclamations which sort of said that an operation
15 was under way by the HVO and the police forces, I'm paraphrasing now, of
16 course, and that members of the BH army were asked to surrender, to hand
17 over their weapons, and to put out white flags of surrender. And in the
18 meantime songs, patriotic songs were being played, you could hear them,
19 and the wounded began coming in. And then there was, what can I call it,
20 a semi-organised chaos in the hospital because it was a hospital. As soon
21 as you begin getting in a large number of patients needing surgery, it was
22 no longer an outpatients' department or anything like that. You had to
23 deal with them and operate. You had to tend to the wounds.
24 Q. So on that -- sorry. On that first day, on the 9th of May, were
25 there any casualties brought to the hospital?
1 A. Yes, yes. Straight away in the morning. Well, not at 5.00 a.m.,
2 no. People didn't know where to be -- where to drive or take the wounded.
3 But it's a small town, so by word of mouth people began to realise where
4 these people should be taken. So around 8.00 or 9.00 we received our
5 first casualty, fatality. He was a soldier lying face down on a
6 stretcher, and the second person to be killed after that one was a nurse
7 of ours. She was 19. Her name was Linda Petkovic. And I know that she
8 was one of those darkers, darker types that launched herself into any
9 risky situation that was around, and she went to the main road with an
10 ambulance and a driver. It was a sort of white Italian ambulance that
11 they managed to pick up. And we heard that the vehicle was hit -- when
12 they were coming back from Konak, that they were targeted and hit by an
13 anti-aircraft machine-gun. The driver was wounded, but Linda was the
14 second fatality. On that day we had 14 fatalities. It wasn't a problem
15 for me to remember that. Fourteen people dead.
16 I don't know why I had -- was told to do something with the
17 bodies, and I put them into an empty room up there on the floor above, and
18 I know that quite literally I lined them all up and that there were 14 of
19 them, and there was nowhere elsewhere I could put them except on the
20 floor. So I lined them up along the floor.
21 Q. When you refer to the death of Linda the nurse, and you said she
22 was in an ambulance, was the vehicle distinctively marked as an
24 A. Yes, it was. It was what we call the ambulance, emergency
25 ambulance, yes. It wasn't an ordinary kombi van or anything like that.
1 It was an ambulance for emergency.
2 Q. And when these first casualties came in, was there anyhow [sic]
3 that the name or diagnosis of these people were documented at that time on
4 the 9th of May?
5 A. Well, some records were kept of patients. They were introduced
6 into the logbook that the surgery used. There wasn't a separate logbook
7 that was kept as of that first day, but it letter the logbook well. It
8 was just the last pages of the logbook we'd been using previously there,
9 in the surgery. Now, how precisely they were kept well, we can discuss
10 it, why they're like they are, incomplete, because of all the conclusion
11 that reigned in the hospital at that time.
12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] There's a question from the
14 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Excuse me, Madam Prosecutor, but
15 I'd just like to seek clarification, to clear up the confusion in my mind.
16 Your hospital began taking in persons who were wounded, how were
17 injured, but before you said that, there were soldiers there and they had
18 weapons in the basement as of the 8th of May. Is that right? While you
19 were -- were the soldiers still there? And what about the weapons? Were
20 the weapons still there when these casualties began coming in? Could you
21 clear that up for me, please?
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't think you heard everything I
23 said. Probably that's the case.
24 On that day there were no weapons in that building. I know that
25 because I know that that particular room where the weapons had previously
1 been stored -- not that they were taken away on the 8th of May, they were
2 taken away before the 9th of May on some day, but I know when I -- when we
3 were there in the basement premises, on one occasion I happened to see
4 that room open, and I saw that there were some weapons in there, when we
5 arrived at the beginning. And we demanded that the weapons be taken away.
6 They needed a little time to do that, to find where to take the weapons.
7 Where they took them, I don't know, but it wasn't moved to anywhere else
8 in the building because I knew every nook and cranny of that house. I
9 knew every corner of that building and I knew there were no weapons in the
10 hospital. Not then, no. That's for sure.
11 Now, as far as the soldiers were concerned, I said that by that
12 time they had given over the basement to us. Yes, some of them used some
13 of the rooms above to rest or just to pass the time. Some of them.
14 Let me explain that. It's a building which sort of belonged to
15 the 1st Customs Company, and members of that company were people who lived
16 in the surrounding neighbourhood. And if you look at the map, you'll be
17 able to see, if you can see - I don't know, can you see? - that the
18 hygiene institute is in part of town by is called Carina. Carina. So it
19 was the 1st Carina company, Carina meaning customs. So the hygiene
20 institute was in a part of down called Carina. Can we show it here? Can
21 you see that? And soldiers lived in houses nearby, so they didn't need to
22 stay in that building.
23 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Thank you.
24 MS. EGELS:
25 Q. To go back to the previous question, you explained that the
1 casualties that came in on the 9th of May were recorded in a protocol
2 book. Can I ask you to turn to Exhibit number P 02789, and it's in the
3 first binder just next to you. 2789.
4 It's that first document, 278 -- 6, sorry. Sir, do you recognise
5 this document?
6 A. I know what this is. This is one of the last pages of the
7 previously mentioned protocol book which had been used by the surgery up
8 until the 9th of May, and until then we thought of it as the protocol of
9 the war hospital, and I know that because there is something very
10 characteristic on that particular page.
11 Q. And can you tell us what that is?
12 A. The patient number 5 on the list 4545 is Bajrami Hidajeta. He was
13 born in 1976. Let me translate what it says on the right-hand side. She
14 was a pregnant lady just about to give birth to her child. I know that
15 she arrived on the 9th of May.
16 Q. Sir, can I ask you to explain how to read this protocol book
17 starting by the first column.
18 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Your Honour. Your Honour, I
19 apologise to my learned friend. We have a wrong document on e-court.
20 Just to avoid any confusion. We don't have the same document on e-court.
21 MS. EGELS: So the document is P 02786.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, that's the page.
23 MS. EGELS:
24 Q. So as I said, could I ask you to explain to us how to read this
25 document starting from the first column with the numbers.
1 A. The first column contains numbers, but there is something before
2 that. There's the markings that were adopted into our practice in the war
3 hospital in order to simplify things and in order to incorporate as much
4 information as possible, because the only records that we could have and
5 we could keep were this type of protocol books.
6 Why I'm saying this. These are not our hospital protocols. We
7 used the protocols that we could get hold of. The one that we are looking
8 at had previously been used by the outpatients surgery of the former JNA.
9 That you can see at the top of the page, because it says "Rank, military
10 post." We squeezed everything on one page in order to record as much as
11 possible. The basic things, that is, the basic things were the name, the
12 date of birth, and the diagnosis.
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Doctor, let's clarify a few
14 mention. Can you comment upon the first thing that we can see column by
15 column? On the left-hand side there is a square, a black square. There
16 is a P, and so on and so forth. Can you take it little by little and
17 explain every single thing? What are these things?
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Very well. On circled P is the
19 initial or the first letter in the word "reception," which means that the
20 patient was admitted. Then there's an ordinal number in the protocol from
21 the moment the protocol was opened up to that moment. Then there is the
22 first and the last names of the patient. You can see that, can't you?
23 Then there is the year of birth. The first one is 1968. Then there is an
24 empty space. And then there is a diagnosis. And I can read the diagnosis
25 to you, the first one. I can translate it to you, if you want me to do
2 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Just the first one. What was
3 the diagnosis for the first patient?
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The diagnosis for the first patient
5 when you read it in Latin, when you read the abbreviation, this is vulnera
6 explosiva, thoraxis et abdominis, which means, they there, this is
7 multiple wound, these were almost all wounds, and, if it is VV, then it
8 means multiple wounds, explosive wounds of the right side of the chest and
9 of the right arm. That's for the first patient.
10 Later on there are some other data, which are important to explain
11 for you to understand what they mean, and I can go on and explain them to
12 you, the information and data.
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Go ahead.
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The third patient that you can see
15 on this page, number 4543. His number's encircled. We did that in order
16 to show who died, who had been killed, and the lethal outcome. For
17 example, if anywhere in the protocol the number is encircled, that means
18 that the person died. Then there is the name and the family name. There
19 is no age, no year of birth. We could not find that out. We -- it says
20 that he is a soldier. We sometimes put that, whether somebody was a
21 soldier, a civilian, or a child. Why a child? Because we wanted to know
22 whether there was a certain person in question because some people share
23 the same names. It says here "soldier." There is also a diagnosis,
24 vulnera explosiva, thoraxis et abdominis, which means explosive wounds of
25 the chest, abdomen, and it says "exit lethalis," which means lethal
1 outcome at 13 hours 20 minutes. The circle is just to facilitate reading
2 the protocol.
3 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] And the last qualification.
4 Those who recorded these things, were they doctors, nurses, paramedics,
5 military, civilians? Who were those who worked in the protocol? It seems
6 that this is the same handwriting so it must have been the same person.
7 But who were these people who filled out the protocol?
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. This is the same handwriting,
9 but the principle was this: The diagnoses were established and filled out
10 by doctors. Here you can see that in this particular case the doctor also
11 entered all the other information, the name, the last name, the date of
12 birth, the diagnosis, everything.
13 Later on, as the hospital developed and as we had an increased
14 number of cases, an increased number of wounded, it depended on the shift,
15 who the people on the shift were, who was the official person on duty,
16 although we did everything during the period of time that was necessary
17 for the work to be completed. We somehow divided work in the way it was
18 suitable to the shift.
19 In our -- my shift we had a paramedic who in realistic terms was a
20 doctor, because he was just about to graduate from the medical school. So
21 if we had 14 patients at the same time, this is how we did: He would
22 record the names. I would establish the diagnosis. I would make a note
23 of that on a piece of paper, and then together with him I would coordinate
24 the names with the wounds. That's why in certain cases you can find two
25 different handwritings of that person and of another very experienced
1 paramedic. So in some cases these two paramedics would sometimes write,
2 "diagnosis pursuant to our instructions." A diagnosis otherwise should
3 not have been entered by a paramedic. It was always our diagnosis.
4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] It is now 20 to 6.00. We're
5 going to have a 20-minute break and we shall resume at 6.00.
6 --- Recess taken at 5.40 p.m.
7 --- On resuming at 6.00 p.m.
8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] We shall now resume. I believe
9 we have to give an IC number to a document. Mr. Registrar.
10 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Mr. President. The handwritten schematic
11 drawing of the Neretva banks shall be given Exhibit number IC 250. Thank
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. This has lasted five
14 seconds, and this is how it should be done.
15 Please proceed, Madam Prosecutor.
16 MS. EGELS:
17 Q. Witness, to go back to the exhibit that we were just looking at
18 before the break, 2786, you mentioned as a diagnosis at the first line, "v
19 explosiva." Could you give us the basic diagnosis of war wounds that we
20 can find back in such protocols?
21 A. I'm not -- I can say it's very simple. There is explosive wounds
22 and gunshot wounds. The explosive wounds are inflicted by explosive
23 devises as a result of shell -- explosion, booby-trap explosions and
24 gunshot wounds which could be divided into two wounds. Those are
25 penetration wounds, penetration -- gunshot wounds as a result of a bullet.
1 And then there's penetration wound which have the entry point and the exit
2 point, again gunshot wounds which have penetrated the body and have left
3 the body through a different point, through the exit point.
4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Would that qualification result
5 from the international standards on distinguishing between different types
6 of wounds inflicted by various types of explosives and bullets?
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] There is some of discrepancy among
8 experts in the field to a certain extent, and I'll tell you what this is
9 about. Every -- it has always been a question whether a wound is
10 inflicted by a bullet that explodes in the body, and there are such
11 wounds, and I know that from the war experience. Sometimes a bullet
12 enters the body and then its brass casing explodes into several fragments
13 in the body.
14 In practice, if you don't have a complete set of diagnostic
15 devices such as ATG, which allows you to see whether the wound was
16 inflicted by the shrapnel or whether it -- the wound was inflicted by
17 the -- a brass casing. If there are many fragments, it is always a
18 question what the wound was inflicted by.
19 However, in practice a gunshot wound is always inflicted by a
20 bullet, by a pistol bullet, a rifle bullet, or any type of bullet, whether
21 it remained intact, in one piece, or whether it was fragmented.
22 This is at least what -- what you can find in forensic textbooks
23 that I and my colleagues used to learn from. This is what our diagnoses
24 are based on.
25 MS. EGELS:
1 Q. And in these protocol books, Witness, these explosive wounds and
2 gunshot wounds, how are they mentioned?
3 A. In -- in interpretation I don't quite get your question. Can the
4 interpretation be a bit more clear so that I can answer your question?
5 Q. When one reads the diagnosis in these protocol books, is the --
6 are the words, for instance, "Explosive wound," or "Gunshot wound" written
7 in your language or is it written in another language, and if it is
8 written in another language, what are the words used for these two
9 specific kind of wounds?
10 A. In our medical practice the diagnoses are always in Latin, if I
11 understand your question correctly. So these are not descriptions of the
12 wounds. These are Latin terms for the types of wounds. Everything is in
14 Q. So what would be the Latin term for explosive wound?
15 A. Vulnus explosivum.
16 Q. And what would be the Latin term for gunshot wound?
17 A. Vulnus sclopetarium or transsclopetarium, if it is a penetration
18 wound with an entry and exit point. So we're talking about two types of
19 gunshot or sclopetarium wounds.
20 Q. Thank you. Flipping through the document that you have in front
21 of you, do you at one point recognise your own handwriting in that
23 A. It's not easy to find. This is a minimised copy of the original
24 that is somewhat larger. For example, here, 416 is 0. The diagnosis is
25 in my handwriting, but the name is not, however. 4630 is -- the name is
1 in my handwriting whereas the diagnosis not. 4602. This is my happened
2 writing. The complete entry save for the therapy that is mentioned here.
3 And there is a lot more of that if you wish me to continue. And these
4 pages I can't see any more. 4613, as well the name, diagnosis, and
5 therapy, they're all in my handwriting.
6 Q. Thank you. Thank you. To go back to the 9th of May and the
7 situation in the hospital, in the days afterward how did the situation
8 unfold at the hospital?
9 A. On the first day we had one major problem. Those were patients
10 that had to be surgically treated. We had a young lad. I remember that
11 he was wounded in the upper leg, and he was wounded in his genitals. He
12 had to be surgically treated. However, what we could do was to try and do
13 it in local anaesthesia, because the only doctor who was present there and
14 who had some surgical knowledge and who was of that speciality was
15 Dr. Konjhodzic, who fortunately enough was also a general surgeon and a
16 neurosurgeon. He had two specialties. However, we did not have an
17 anaesthesiologist, so we could not anaesthetise the patient. Between the
18 night of the 10th of May we treated him surgically but in local
19 anaesthesia, which was not pleasant for the patient nor for us. And
20 especially not for me. I was just a beginner. I was a general
21 practitioner at the time.
22 What we managed to do on the following days by asking questions,
23 by making inquiries with all those who arrived was to try and ask them and
24 find somebody in the town who would be either a surgeon or an
25 anaesthesiologist, and we managed to bring to the hospital an
1 anaesthesiologist, and that was the only anaesthesiologist that we that we
2 ever had in the hospital, and we also brought another surgeon. So maybe
3 within the next 48 hours we had an anaesthesiologist, two surgeons, and
4 the four of us who had worked before in the outpatients' clinic. Three of
5 us were general practitioners, and the fourth person was a dentist.
6 If you want me to tell you something else, I would like to say
7 that during the first few days we were forced to take over from the army
8 the rooms upstairs one by one because we needed beds and rooms for the
9 patients. The total number of beds that we managed to put into the
10 hospital -- why I'm saying managed, because there was simply not enough
11 room for all that we needed. And I know that we had 13 beds in the
12 so-called ICU, which was the room next to the operating theatre. There
13 were actually two rooms by the OR, and we also used beds in front of the
14 OR. There were 13 such beds. Upstairs there were 2 times 13 beds, in
15 other words 26 beds all together and plus the 13 downstairs, that was the
16 top capacity of that building. That was the building filled to the full.
17 And during those first days or within the first week we were forced to
18 discharge patients after only a few days to some other premises in town
19 which were not even close to being equipped as our hospital. But there
20 was room for the patients, and that was the most important thing. They
21 could be hospitalised there, although this was not real hospitalisation,
22 but they were under our care, under the care of medical personnel even
23 there, even in those improvised rooms.
24 Q. You just mentioned other premises. Could you tell us what
25 premises you're talking about?
1 A. The buildings I'm talking about usually bear the names that they
2 used to have before the war. I'm primarily referring to the -- what we
3 called stationary, which had been used in the army for a place where
4 military patients, recruits, conscripts were hospitalised. For example,
5 they could not be for the active service or for the hospital. If they had
6 a sore throat then they would be placed in something that whereas
7 something like an outpatient clinic. So we used the same term.
8 For example, let me try and remember, to start with, from north to
9 the south. One was in the atomic shelter in Zalik. Another such premise
10 was in the building across the road from --
11 Q. Can I interrupt you and ask you to go back to the map of Mostar
12 that you were showed a little bit before, and that is now bearing IC
13 number 248, and maybe pinpoint on that map the locations you're referring
15 A. Shall I just point to them or shall I mark them? This is a very
16 thick felt-tip pen, so it's not easy for me to mark.
17 Q. May we just mark them with a pen and with a number. So the first
18 you just mentioned was -- the atomic shelter in Zalik will bear a number 2
19 for that map.
20 A. Can you hear me? I can do it just by --
21 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] If number 1 is outpatients'
22 clinic, now we need number 2 to mark the next thing.
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] However, number 2 can just be an
24 approximation because Zalik is not on the map because it is further to the
25 north-east from the boundaries of the map. I can just point to the
1 direction. I can just mark the direction where Zalik was.
2 Shall I go on?
3 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, go on.
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The next one would be the building
5 across the road which did not have an official name. It was just called
6 the building across the road. It was not a building. It was just a
7 facility that was under construction. It had just the back walls, some
8 columns, and the upper floor, and the concrete ceiling. Fortunately
9 enough it had a basement. And it was in use until the moment when the
10 basement was flooded. And that -- it was just across the road from the
11 hygiene institute, and I can mark it on the map.
12 The next one --
13 MS. EGELS:
14 Q. This is number 3.
15 A. The next such building was the premises of the former insurance
16 company called Dunav. I'll try and find it here on the map. Shall I put
17 number 4 next to it?
18 Q. Yes, please.
19 A. There it is, number 4. That's the Dunav.
20 And the next one, further to the south, is in the basement of the
21 former social security services, which is in Fejiceva Street. Again, this
22 is just an approximation. So this is number 5.
23 And the next such building toward the south which had been used
24 until the moment the building was hit and burnt down, but nothing happened
25 to anybody in there. This is the former building of the League of
1 Communists that they used to refer to as the committee building. That's
2 number 6.
3 Q. 6, yes.
4 A. [Marks]. The next such building is the former health centre in
5 Brankovac. This is a large building. At the beginning we used only the
6 basement, and then we were forced to use other floors as well to the
7 extent possible.
8 Q. In all of these buildings what was the extent of the facilities
9 and the equipment for the patients?
10 A. There was no equipment as such. Let me tell you why. The
11 patients were there in beds such as they existed, and as for the personnel
12 there was a nurse in each of the buildings, and they would change shifts.
13 What they had, they had dressing material and some pain-killers. They
14 didn't have any instruments or anything else. And a doctor would be given
15 a task from time to time which depended on the situation and on the status
16 of the patients. A doctor would be given a task to visit some of these
17 buildings, to check up on the patients and to intervene if necessary.
18 According to the plan that the patients were given, patients would
19 either come to us or would be brought to us to have their wounds dressed.
20 This would happen during the night when it was safer.
21 Our situation was somewhat different in Zalik, in the vicinity of
22 the Zalik facility because a doctor resided there. He was in charge of
23 that facility.
24 And in the Brankovac facility, maybe a few weeks later we had to
25 accommodate the department of internal medicine because we had patients
1 with heart conditions and similar things. And the hygiene institute had
2 to be dedicated to surgery. So maybe 15 days later in Brankovac we had
3 doctors who were only in charge of internal medicine patients with
4 internal diseases. And since we also brought surgical patients to recover
5 there, then these patients as well would be in their charge, in the charge
6 of those specialists in internal medicine.
7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Doctor, if I understand you
8 well, you're saying that number 1 was the facility where there were three
9 surgeons, two GPs, and this is where you received all those who had been
10 wounded or killed. They were treated there on the spot. They were
11 surgically treated. And then after that you would dispatch them to the
12 six other facilities. And Brankovac was a more specialised facility with
13 a specialist in internal medicine. And you're saying that in other places
14 there was very little. There was some dressing material and a few
15 medicines. But the surgical team were primarily located in the facility
16 number 1. And you're saying that during the night those who had been
17 dispatched to the six buildings could return to the facility number 1 to
18 have their wounds dressed and tended to.
19 Is that what the situation was like in medical terms, and is that
20 what the situation was like with regard to the facilities that you had at
21 your disposal to treat the wounded?
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is precisely so. In the
23 institute, hygiene institute, there was an anaesthesiologist, two
24 surgeons, and four GPs. This is what I said, and as for the patients
25 being brought to us, this was our plan, which didn't always succeed. It
1 depended on the situation. Those who had to be additionally treated were
2 brought back if they needed a minor surgery or surgical treatment of the
3 wound. If that was too dangerous, then this would be either postponed or
4 the fashion would be changed. They wouldn't come to us. We would rather
5 go to them. We would go across the road or to some other facility, if
6 that's what you're asking me.
7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] You have explained that these
8 facilities received both soldiers and civilians.
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Everybody.
10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] If a child, for example,
11 suffered from an appendix, where would they be sent? Where would such a
12 child be sent, to you or to one of those other facilities?
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] These children would be sent to the
14 hygiene institute. Any patient who needed surgical treatment would be
15 taken straight to the hygiene institute, but on one occasion I personally
16 had an occasion to provide CPR to a man who had a heart failure.
17 So if you're asking me about any surgical cases, all of them were
18 brought to us, be it a hernia or an appendicitis, any such case.
19 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you I have understood.
20 You may proceed.
21 MS. EGELS:
22 Q. Sir, except for the hygiene institute and the other institutes
23 you've referred to were there any other institutes in Mostar after 9 May,
24 and, if so, which ones?
25 A. There were others. At first we referred to them as points and
1 then as outpatients' clinics. Why? Because it was impossible for anybody
2 to move from one part of the town to the other, from south to the centre,
3 from Zalik to the hygiene institute. If you wanted to go on foot it was
4 very far, and that's why we set up the so-called outpatients' clinic in
5 certain places that I can identify for you, or I can even mark those for
6 you, but I don't know whether you'll be able to orientate yourself on the
8 I would very much like to have another pen in order to be more
9 precise when marking. This is very thick, a very thick tip.
10 Shall I mark? In the Zalik shelter there was an outpatient clinic
11 manned by Dr. Duranovic. I suppose I don't have to mark that again.
12 Q. No.
13 A. In Santic Street -- not exactly in Santic Street because Santic
14 Street was the combat line, the closest to it was this outpatients' clinic
15 which was referred to as Santic outpatient clinic. It was somewhere
16 around here. What number should I mark it with, number 8?
17 It was between a wall and the counter of a former bakery. That
18 was where the outpatients' clinic was.
19 In Cernica -- in the shelter of a residential building, there was
20 the Cernica outpatient clinic.
21 In the so-called Semovac there was another outpatients' clinic.
22 That's number 10.
23 Q. So just for the record because while you're marking it it's not
24 recorded, the Cernica outpatient clinic was given number 9; is that
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Okay. And Semovac number 10?
3 A. Yes.
4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Along the front line there were
5 three outpatients' clinics, 8, 9 and 10.
6 Very quickly, what was the medical equipment in those outpatients'
7 clinics? Was there a nurse? Was there a doctor? Who was there, and what
8 did they have by way of medical equipment? Because they were very close
9 to the front line, and this -- these were the places that -- where they
10 might have victims to which they had to tend very quickly. What did they
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'll tell you as soon as I show you
13 where another outpatients' clinic was, which was in Donja Mahala, number
14 11. And I am adjust repeating. This is just approximations hereabouts.
15 Each of these outpatients' clinics had its doctor on staff.
16 Those were all general practitioners. Those were doctors who resided in
17 the vicinity of these outpatients' clinics. I can tell you their names,
18 if you wish me to do so, if it's important. In Zalik, the doctor who
19 worked there was a doctor who lived in a building not far from the
20 outpatients' clinic. In Santiceva, a doctor worked who lived in a
21 building next to that outpatients' clinic. In Cernica there was a doctor
22 who had previously resided in the west side but then was expelled, and
23 that is where he resided at the moment. And as for Semovac and Mahala, we
24 had one doctor who -- whose house was in between the two of these
25 outpatients' clinics.
1 There were also nurses who were not officially employed. We used
2 the former students of the medical high school who had not completed their
3 education, but they had basic medical knowledge, and they had some basic
4 dressing materials. They didn't have any surgical tools or instruments.
5 They did not perform any surgical procedures. They would refer patients
6 to us. And they had some basic medicines that we managed to donate to
7 them from our central dispensary. And I'm talking about pain-killers,
8 some antibiotics, maybe some anti-diarrhoea medicines, but not a lot. And
9 they treated all those who resided in their catchment area, in their
10 vicinity, including soldiers from the front lines, because that's who they
11 were closest to.
12 In the -- in these areas people resided throughout the war. The
13 areas were never abandoned, if this is what you're asking me.
14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] And another explanation
15 regarding pain-killers. Were they class 3, of the morphine group?
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Only the hospital had medicines from
17 the group that you're referring to, two types. I remember two types. I
18 don't know how they came to have them, where they came from or how, but I
19 do know that in the hygienic institute they suddenly appeared. When I say
20 suddenly, I mean suddenly. I was surprised to see when somebody unloaded
21 this quantity, quite a large quantity of these strong pain-killers. One
22 was Fortral and the other was morphine. I can't remember how much of
23 what. I know that there was 3.000 units -- ampoules of one and 5.000 of
24 another. And we used all that up much before the end of the conflict.
25 MS. EGELS:
1 Q. Going back then to the hygiene institute and to the situation
2 there, you just mentioned the equipment or the medicine that was used.
3 Could you describe us a little bit further how the hospital was equipped
4 to deal with all the patients that it received?
5 A. Was we were dealing with the surgical hospital, then the equipment
6 was surgical too, surgical equipment. Let me try and take this
7 step-by-step. The operating table, one was sort of secondhand, if I can
8 say it that way -- that way, and it had a very big drawback. That is to
9 say you couldn't keep it level although there was hydraulic adjustment but
10 it kept falling down and you had to keep raising it up and put something
11 under it to keep it on that level.
12 The other was an old tin table or bed which we used in a field
13 hospital, but it was a collapsible one and you could use it. It was
14 useful, although it didn't look very nice.
15 Then at the beginning there was one operating lamp from
16 pre-history, if I can put it that way. How it came to be there, I -- I
17 don't know. It was a very old one.
18 And we had the ventilation pumps to suck in the blood and various
19 other bodily fluids that needed to be sucked out or in.
20 We had anaesthesia equipment, two pieces of anaesthesia equipment.
21 And as far as I know, they had formerly been owned by the JNA and had
22 probably been brought in from one of the warehouses of South Camp or North
23 Camp later on where the Yugoslav People's Army had their depots. They
24 were ancient but the anaesthesias were glad with them because they did
25 work. But we didn't have the essentials and when I mentioned anaesthetics
1 although I'm not an expert in the field we were able to use barbiturates
2 to have the patient fall asleep, and we managed keep the patient in a
3 relaxed, as we call it, whereby the muscles are relaxed so that you can
4 operate on the patient, because whenever you touch a nerve or muscle, even
5 if the patient is asleep, the muscles react. So these were the two
6 medicaments that we had.
7 But what we didn't have is what is usual in an operating room.
8 The oxygen tanks that you can see or if it's a centralised system then you
9 don't see the tanks that we had to use. So we had to use ordinary air and
10 use the equipment for anaesthesia, which rises and falls and enables the
11 patient to breathe. This pump is called an ampoule [as interpreted] pump.
12 It takes its name from the firm that produces it. There were no oxygen
13 ampoules. Oxygen is a gas which is necessary to keep the patient in that
14 sort of unconscious state, because the patient is unconscious. You relax
15 your patient. You breathe instead of the patient, and all that's working
16 is the patient's heart. So as far as I know, it was very difficult to
17 maintain this unconscious state with what the anaesthesiologist had with
18 the medical equipment they had and the level of anaesthesia was never high
20 Now, if I were to mention the instruments, well, we did have
21 instruments. At the beginning I thought they were very good because I was
22 a beginner, but I know better now. They were very primitive apparatuses
23 which are no longer used, and we had to use them, and we didn't have
24 enough of those either. We had to sterilise them all the time. We had to
25 sterilise them in between surgical operations, and we didn't have complete
1 sets of these either. There was always something lacking.
2 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Doctor, what about blood? Did
3 you have any blood reserves. If your patients lost a lot of blood could
4 you go ahead with transfusions? What did you do about that, about the
5 blood situation, blood transfusions?
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The problem was resolved in a very
7 primitive way, the most primitive. When I say most primitive, in terms of
8 medicine, medical science. There were bottles with fluids in order to
9 determine the blood groups, and we had one set of that. We needed to
10 conduct blood transfusions but how could you determine the blood group?
11 So I and my colleague, Mrs. Focic, we went back to our university days
12 and we remembered having picked each other, and I was 0 group, and we
13 pricked each other as we did when we were at university. So we would
14 test each of our blood groups and then test them with these samples and
15 the test fluids that we had in our set and then constructed the chart
16 that -- you can have a set chart ready-made, but we had to do this
17 ourselves using the test board. But that's how we did it, so it's
18 interesting. What you do now is, interaction between the donor blood and
19 the recipient, but we had no way of doing that, of conducting tests like
20 that, let alone any others. So the blood was administered later on. How
21 shall I explain this to you?
22 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] So, did you have enough blood or
23 did you conduct in situ blood transfusions?
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. You've hit the nail on the
25 head. I was just trying to say that and didn't manage to form a
2 Yes, we provided blood on a need-to-have basis. We took it
3 straight away and administered it straight away. We had nowhere to store
4 it. We just had an ordinary fridge but not the proper fridge. So we
5 never had any stockpiles of blood. You had to get the blood from a donor
6 and give it to the patient straight away, on the spot; in situ, as you
8 MS. EGELS:
9 Q. Witness, going back to what you explained about the surgical
10 influence and the need for them to be sterilised, what was the
11 sterilisation equipment that you had at that time at the hospital?
12 A. I don't know whether I said at the beginning that there were two
13 what we call autoclaves, a sterilisation unit like a big barrel under very
14 high pressure, and wet sterilisation is conducted in this device so you
15 need water and electricity. So at the beginning we used these two large
16 sterilisation units, but when there was no more electricity then we
17 couldn't do that any more. This equipment sterilisation equipment
18 couldn't function any more. And then we moved to one autoclave or
19 sterilisation unit which looked very funny to people who came in and saw
20 it working. It was an old military sterilisation unit in which the
21 temperature necessary for sterilisation was reached by using firewood. It
22 had a funnel. So you would make a fire with the firewood, and it had to
23 be behind the building on - what shall I call it? - a balcony, and that's
24 where we sterilised with the bare necessities, what you had to sterilise
25 with steam. And then there was dry sterilisation, which you needed for
1 your instruments. We used a dry sterilising unit, very big with two large
2 doors and with a lock that was faulty. So luckily it had two handles and
3 we could hold the door closed by putting a pole to catch the two handles.
4 This is something that we inherited, this sterilisation. It happened to
5 be there in the service, and it was too big. I assume it's -- it stayed
6 there because it was too big to carry anywhere else. So it just happened
7 to be there, as luck would have it.
8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] With regard to the sterilisation
9 of instruments, did you have any patients die on you as a result of
10 infection because the conditions were so poor and because the instruments
11 weren't properly sterilised? Did you have cases where the operation had
12 succeeded and you had managed to treat the wounds but unfortunately, given
13 the bad conditions, the patient developed an infection, septicemia, and
14 this led to their death ultimately? Because I assume that the medicines
15 you had couldn't deal with septicemia. So were you able to deal with that
16 kind of case?
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I cannot say that there were deaths
18 resulting from unsatisfactory sterilisation, and here's why I say that.
19 If there were wounds that had become inflamed, and there were that kind of
20 wound, then my logical conclusion was to link that up, and I don't want to
21 defend myself on the level of sterilisation, but I'd like to link it up to
22 something we always say when it's a question of a war wound, and that is
23 that it is primarily infected. The war wound is primarily inflicted. So
24 that every inflammation when I do triage then I have to assume that the
25 wound was caused by a dirty implement through dirty clothing that somebody
1 died of septicemia, no, as far as I know that did not happen.
2 MS. EGELS:
3 Q. You also mentioned the lack of electricity and the water
4 necessity. Could you explain to us what the situation was for these two
5 necessary elements in the running of the hospital, water and
7 A. Well, if you're asking me about that then in the first month, it
8 was wonderful because everything worked. There was electricity and there
9 was water too and we could as you all the equipment that we had properly.
10 However, I don't know exactly when, I can't remember what date that was,
11 but when we were left without electricity and water the situation became
12 extremely difficult. You couldn't even wash your hands properly let alone
13 anything else. With the water -- the water situation was as follows:
14 There was a plastic reservoir, fairly large, I can't tell you exactly how
15 large, but anyway it was there to hold water but it was also there to
16 protect the window and there were sandbags piled up on top of it, and then
17 there was another one, a little smaller, maybe half the size, and that
18 one, that reservoir was in front of the kitchen window and you could see
19 that on the photograph from that day where -- from that room where people
20 spent the day. I don't know what to call it. And the third wasn't a
21 reservoir; in fact, it was a receptacle which was not more than a hundred
22 litres, could not take more man a hundred litres and it was under the --
23 in front of the window of the reception area. All those reservoirs were
24 linked with a rubber tube where the tap was. Well, actually the tap
25 didn't exist. We had to use a surgical clamp to shut the water off.
1 That's the water situation.
2 Now, the electricity situation is as follows: At the very
3 beginning, even before the conflict began, as luck would have it, a man, I
4 don't know who he was, he happened to pass by the building and met me, and
5 he said, "Have you got a generator?" And I wondered, Why is he asking me
6 whether we have a generator, and I said we didn't. And he said, "Well,
7 there's a generator in a building -- in a house above us up on the hill.
8 It's a building that contains some water pipes or something." And there
9 was a generator there. And obviously he knew about this generator, which
10 was a good quality generator and hadn't been used for too long. It was a
11 test generator. And he suggested that we move it in. And I said, "All
12 right. Fine." I don't know how we succeeded in doing this, but I think
13 the very next day the generator was brought into the hospital. It was an
14 enormous -- an enormous generator, very powerful. I can't express this in
15 any numerical terms, but I know that a lot of other people latched on to
16 the generator, the radio at one point, and some other administrative
17 services of the War Presidencies or whatever else, some commands and so
18 on, they latched onto that, and some private consumers, too, so that this
19 caused some problems. But that wasn't the main problem. The main problem
20 was that this generator used a lot of fuel and we couldn't get the fuel
21 needed to operate it so that it wasn't working for long.
22 The generator was only turned on when we had a major operation in
23 the theatre. Otherwise, we worked in darkness or semi-darkness. What we
24 used to light the hallway, and the hallway in the basement was the main
25 area where we conducted triage and all the preparations, the examinations,
1 and so on.
2 So this hallway was lighted with two small car bulbs attached to a
3 generator in the wall.
4 So that's the water and electricity situation. And it would be
5 better if you don't ask me about the sewage system. It was impossible to
6 clean anything. We used -- there was one toilet that we all had to use
7 and it was a terrible sight to behold.
8 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Witness, at the beginning of this account you
9 have said that the first month was fine. Could you just recall which
10 month that was, please?
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm speaking about the very
12 beginning. It might have not have been one month. It might have been
13 more or less, but if it's vital to you, well, I don't know the exact day
14 that the power was cut. Let me try and remember. The 30th of June, for
15 example. I know that there was electricity at the hygiene institute on
16 the 30th of June. So that's more. That's a longer time than what I said.
17 But after that I really can't remember that we had any lighting after
18 that. That was the latest date when I know that I was in hospital and the
19 light was as strong as it is here in the courtroom now.
20 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Hvala.
21 MS. EGELS:
22 Q. To go back to the operating room you said you didn't have a
23 powerful lamp. After the electricity was cut down, what did you use to do
24 the operations?
25 A. When there was no more electricity, the lamp was linked to the
1 generator if we had fuel to run the generator. If not, then we received
2 from a doctor, I don't know which one but I know he was a doctor, from the
3 Medicos del Mundo, Medicines of the World. We received three or four, no,
4 I think it was three because I can remember that three of us had those
5 lamps that you put on your forehead, on your head and forehead used by
6 cave explorers. They were ordinary lamps, if I can say, made in China
7 that are very cheap. They had a few batteries at the back and a few wires
8 for this light in front. It wasn't one of those proper lamps with optic
9 cables and the very high-tech ones. So when there was no electricity you
10 would put this lamp on your head and I had one otherwise the person doing
11 the operation would swap and have the lamp on his head.
12 Q. What about --
13 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Execution me. Dr. Rajkov, do you have any idea
14 as to what the situation of hospital facilities on the other side of the
15 Neretva was? Did you -- did you have any -- ever any contact, any
16 exchange with colleagues from the -- from the -- I mean the political west
17 of the Neretva, the HVO-controlled part of the town?
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I personally did not have any direct
19 contact with my colleagues on the west bank, as you say. However,
20 following on logic, the pre-war hospital, which for some organisational or
21 construction reasons were -- was located in some of these places, it
22 existed -- this hospital existed before the war and it had all the
23 necessary equipment that a hospital needs to have. So if we -- it was the
24 surgical hospital. It existed before the war, during the war and after
25 the war. So what it had then it had at that too. It wasn't under a
1 siege. It wasn't under a blockade. If they needed something they could
2 bring it in, install it, whatever.
3 If you're asking me whether I have any notion of it, then that's
4 my notion and I think I'm right.
5 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Thank you.
6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] The question that was asked a
7 moment ago I wanted to ask myself, because in principle a doctor doesn't
8 enter into political considerations and problems, but did it ever happen
9 that -- did you ever try, regardless of the situation, to contact the
10 other side for urgent emergency evacuations, for patients who demanded
11 much more sophisticated treatment which needed better equipment and so on?
12 Either with the people on the other side or the ICRC or anything like
13 that? Or an UNPROFOR unit who -- which could use an armoured vehicle
14 perhaps and transport patients. So did you look into any of these things
15 at your level?
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] At my level, that is to say me
17 personally, no. I was the surgical labour force, if I can put it that
18 way. I was not in any management position or position of leadership. I
19 know that our head of hospital did have contacts with what we call the
20 Spanish Battalion. I don't know if that's the proper name, but probably
21 through them with someone on the other side perhaps or some international
22 organisation. I know that evacuations were organised, and I know on two
23 occasions they were unsuccessful. After I personally wrote out a list
24 very, very quickly because they were moving out, and it was the Spanish
25 Battalion's armoured vehicles, I made out a list of patients to be
1 evacuated and one or two hours later here they were back again. What
2 happened? They didn't let them pass. That's all I know. Who didn't let
3 them pass? Probably not the Bosnian side. I don't know. Anyway, that
4 was the answer: They didn't let us pass.
5 As to another case I know that the patient or patients were
6 supposed to be evacuated by helicopter and then that helicopter was
7 blocked in Medjugorje think it was.
8 I personally do have one example of an evacuation but from a later
9 period and it went via SpaBat and via the liaison officer. We needed 24
10 hours to evacuate it. But that was a long time later. Maybe it was even
11 after the conflict had stopped.
12 MS. EGELS:
13 Q. Except for the usual staff at the hospital, were there during the
14 period after 9 May medical staff coming from the hospital to help, coming
15 from out of East Mostar?
16 A. Whether after the 9th of May there was still medical staff that
17 came to help us? Ah. Well, yes. Yes, they did, because they offered
18 their services. Anybody with any medical knowledge who had perhaps worked
19 within a hospital and lived on the eastern side did, but that wasn't -- it
20 didn't improve matters, and there were a few -- although there were a few
21 elderly and experienced nurses, but very few of them had worked in
22 surgery, had worked in an operating theatre. But we didn't have any
23 doctor coming in, no. The number of the staff was constant. What we had
24 at the beginning we had later on, the same number of doctors and so on.
25 Q. What about doctors coming from outside East Mostar, for instance,
1 from West Mostar, after the 9th of May?
2 A. From West Mostar. Nobody ever came to our hospital from West
4 Q. Were there doctors or nurses from any other organisations or
5 hospitals that would come at one point and help you?
6 A. Yes. First of all, and I say first and foremost because they were
7 the first and were the most numerous, were doctors from the Medicos del
8 Mundo organisation, and most of them were Spaniards, were Spanish,
9 although there was an elderly British doctor and I think a few others from
10 other countries. But I remember this one in particular.
11 Then there was some medical staff. I say medical staff
12 intentionally because, as far as I remember from the Medecins Sans
13 Frontieres, members of the services such as epidemiology, hygiene, some
14 kind of child care and protection, not paediatrics, but they would come,
15 and there were a few doctors coming in sporadically in waves from time to
16 time, teams from Sarajevo. That was it.
17 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone.
18 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes. We're going to have to
19 adjourn for the day, but one more question from me as a point of
20 clarification. You've answered a lot of questions. This will facilitate
21 everyone's task tomorrow.
22 Did it ever happen that you administered care and attention to
23 Croats who might have been wounded, who were prisoners who happened to be
24 there in the East Mostar zone? Did you ever do that, that is to say care
25 for Croats?
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Not that it happened. It was
2 customary. It was very usual. We gave surgical help and anything else to
3 everybody. Not only prisoners from the HVO but, for example, I remember a
4 soldier from the Spanish Battalion who was hit by the bridge, and we have
5 him in our protocol logbook. We took them all in, treated them in
6 hospital, operated on them. I myself operated on a number of them, I
8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Thank you.
9 We have to adjourn for the day. We have four hours left tomorrow.
10 A lot of questions have been tackled. I hope that the Prosecution will
11 focus so that the Defence can go ahead and perhaps there's some medical
12 specialists among the Defence teams.
13 Doctor, I wish you a pleasant evening. On behalf of myself and my
14 colleagues. As you are a witness of justice, please do not contact any of
15 the parties. And we shall reconvene tomorrow at 2.15.
16 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.04, to be
17 reconvened on Thursday, the 25th day of January,
18 2007, at 2.15 p.m.