1 Wednesday, 20 June 2007

2 [Open session]

3 [The accused entered court]

4 [The witness entered court]

5 [The Accused Coric not present]

6 --- Upon commencing at 9.00 a.m.

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

8 case.

9 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. Good morning to

10 everyone in the courtroom. This is case number IT-04-74-T, the Prosecutor

11 versus Prlic et al. Thank you.

12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you. Today is Wednesday,

13 June 20th. I'd like to say good morning to the witness, to the

14 Prosecutor, and to the Defence counsel, and good morning to the accused as

15 well.

16 I know that Mr. Coric is not feeling well. I hope he will be back

17 with us very soon, and I understand that Mr. Sahota wanted to take the

18 floor so I'm going to give him the floor right now.

19 MR. SAHOTA: Your Honour, I would like to make a short oral

20 application on behalf of all the Defence teams for an extension of the

21 time limits to reply to two new motions that were filed recently on the --

22 dated the 12th of June, 2007. Both relate to evidence to be adduced

23 relevant to the Ljubuski municipality. Both motions relate to a

24 substantial volume of material which has been served in support.

25 The first motion, which is a motion brought under Rule 92 bis, has

1 around 300 pages of supporting material. The second motion, which is a

2 motion to adduce documentary evidence, has in the region -- or in excess

3 of, I understand, 1.500 pages of material.

4 The Defence are at the moment endeavouring to see whether it is

5 possible to file a joint response to both motions. The Defence teams are

6 also currently engaged in drafting responses to other substantial motions

7 that were recently filed by the Prosecution, including a motion pertaining

8 to 47 separate UN documents for which the Trial Chamber has kindly granted

9 an extension of the deadline for a reply to be filed until the end of this

10 month.

11 Mr. President, I don't think there's any prejudice to any party in

12 our application which is for an extension of the deadline for a response

13 to be filed until the 12th of July, 2007.

14 MR. SCOTT: The Prosecution has no objection.

15 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Scott.

16 MR. SCOTT: No objections, Your Honour.

17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Fine. The Chamber, after having

18 considered the matter, having heard the application and the comments made

19 by the Prosecution, will grant you an extension of time until the 12th of

20 July, 2007.

21 We'll now continue with the cross-examination of the witness. I

22 was told that you've used one hour and five minutes, Mr. Karnavas. Who

23 gave you the additional 55 minutes?

24 MR. KARNAVAS: I received 30 minutes, I believe, from Mr. Coric,

25 30 minutes from Mr. Pusic, and there may be a possibility that some

1 additional time may be granted to me by one of the other teams.

2 May I proceed?

3 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Please proceed, because

4 Mr. Coric has given you 30 minutes and Mr. Pusic as well. Please proceed.

5 MR. KARNAVAS: Very well. And with that, since you've raised the

6 issue of time, Your Honour, let me just say that I don't have sufficient

7 time, even with the time that's being allotted to me. I just want to make

8 sure that the record is there, especially with 120 paragraphs of a

9 statement that's coming in by the Prosecution; and in light of the

10 Prosecution's remarks yesterday, if anything goes uncontroverted through

11 this witness, then the Trial Chamber should accept it as fact. And so

12 based on that, I just want to make sure the record is clear, that if these

13 are the rules of evidence, if this is how the burden of proof is to be

14 applied in this courtroom, certainly, we can never get a fair trial.

15 With that in mind and with the record having been made, I will

16 proceed.

17 WITNESS: AZRA KRAJSEK [Resumed]

18 [Witness answered through interpreter]

19 Cross-examination by Mr. Karnavas: [Continued]

20 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, madam. I'd like to turn to

21 document 3708. That is Prosecution document.

22 MR. KARNAVAS: Perhaps the usher would be so kind as to give the

23 witness the binder.

24 Q. This was a document that an opportunity to see --

25 MR. KARNAVAS: The Prosecutor's binder. I don't mean to be

1 snapping, but if this time is going to be counted against me.

2 Q. 3708. This was a letter dated the 26th of July, 1993, and it was

3 visited upon you yesterday by Mr. -- or the day before by the Prosecutor.

4 This is from Mr. Rebic.

5 MR. KARNAVAS: 3708. Okay. Funny how things go. Okay.

6 Q. Now, do you recall seeing this letter? We talked about it

7 yesterday. Madam, there's no need to study it. It was shown to you by

8 the Prosecution. You commented on it. Now, you either recognise it or

9 you don't recognise it.

10 Do you recognise the document, a document shown to you by the

11 Prosecution, a document that the Prosecution went over with you, a

12 document that you and your colleague, Ms. Turkovic, turned over to the

13 Prosecution. Do you recognise it, yes or no?

14 MR. SCOTT: Excuse me, Your Honour. There is no point to this.

15 The witness has -- it's fair for the witness to look at a document before

16 answering a question. It's been overnight. Come on. Let's not start the

17 day this way.

18 MR. KARNAVAS: I don't have enough time.

19 Q. Do you recognise the document, madam, now that you put on your

20 reading glasses? Do you recognise the document?

21 MR. KARNAVAS: She understands English.

22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I have checked this, and I do know

23 the document.

24 MR. KARNAVAS:

25 Q. Okay. Now, in a second paragraph, it says here that "Croatia has

1 till today accepted 600.000 refugees from Bosnia and Herzegovina of which

2 277.000 are still in Croatia."

3 Was that the case to your knowledge; that is, that Croatia had

4 until that period of time received 600.000 refugees from Bosnia and almost

5 half of them were still in Croatia at that point in time? Was that a

6 fact?

7 A. It corresponds to the figures that were published at that time.

8 Q. All right. Now, if we turn over the next page, you were read a

9 portion yesterday and then we saw another document from the ambassador,

10 where Mr. Rebic is noting his surprise that the ambassador had not visited

11 the 6.138 expelled Croats from the Lasva Valley.

12 We're not going to -- I just want to point that out. I'm going to

13 bring this up in a later document, but do you recall being asked questions

14 about this from the Prosecutor?

15 A. No.

16 Q. All right. Very well. I'll just move on. Now, in the latter

17 part of this page, if we go to the second to last paragraph, it says: "In

18 accordance with the current politics, we have not differentiated between

19 the Croats and Muslims as you have. In hotels we have Muslims, just as in

20 refugee centres we have Croats. Proof Spansko is one suburb of Muslim

21 refugees with Croats, in another just a little further are displaced

22 Vukovar people."

23 Do you see that? Do you accept that or not, that representation

24 made by Mr. Rebic?

25 A. No, I don't agree with this.

1 Q. Okay. And if we turn to the next page, we can look at the --

2 A. I apologise, but I can't follow you that quickly. I've just now

3 located the paragraph, and I can say that I agree with what Mr. Rebic

4 observes, that in the hotels there were both Muslims, as there were Croats

5 in refugee centres. That is something that I agree with.

6 Q. Okay. Very well. Thank you for that clarification. Now, if you

7 turn to the next page, the last page, starting with the paragraph where it

8 says -- where it begins "Furthermore," Mr. Rebic says: "Furthermore, I

9 would like to warn you that all refugee centres and hotels are open and

10 free, and so all refugees have full freedom of movement and visiting, as

11 was proved by your visit in contacts with refugees."

12 Now, is it my understanding that you take exception with that; in

13 other words, that the centres were not -- were not open?

14 A. I don't understand the question. It says here or Dr. Rebic here

15 says that they're open.

16 Q. Okay. And do you disagree with that?

17 A. Could you be more specific in your question?

18 Q. Okay. Let me just read -- let me just read the portion and then

19 see if you agree or disagree: "Furthermore, I would like to warn you that

20 all refugee centres and hotels are open and free, and so all refugees have

21 full freedom of movement and visiting, as well -- as was proved by your

22 visit and contacts with refugees. And that is not the case in other

23 countries. We know that well. We always had to have permission when we

24 visited refugee camps in neighbouring countries where accommodated were

25 Croatian citizens."

1 Now, do you agree with that or not? There's two parts.

2 A. I agree fully with the first part. As to the second part, I don't

3 have an opinion because I don't have the necessary information.

4 Q. Okay. Very well. Now, the next document, again, this was shown

5 to you by the Prosecution and this is 3765. 3765. This was a letter by

6 Ms. Turkovic.

7 A. The document isn't here.

8 MR. KARNAVAS: There's another binder, and I'm not sure that this

9 was the binder that was given to the witness yesterday by the Prosecutor.

10 The big binder. If that's the Prosecution's binder, then when I make

11 reference to a Prosecution document, Mr. Usher, could you kindly assist

12 the witness in giving her that binder because the documents would be in

13 that binder, because they're a Prosecution exhibit.

14 JUDGE PRANDLER: I'm sorry, Mr. Karnavas, to interrupt you. I

15 really would like to ask you and to request you not to create a kind of

16 nervous atmosphere here in the courtroom. We have to be in a way more

17 tolerant to each other, and I believe the witness is trying to cooperate

18 and also the usher, and really I think that we don't need to have a kind

19 of showdown. Let us listen to each other.

20 I know that you are complaining. You have been complaining a

21 number times that you not have enough time, but anyway, now you have your

22 one hour more, and let us use it well, but don't try to be intolerant to

23 the witness. Thank you.

24 MR. KARNAVAS: Your Honour, if the time that it takes to show a

25 document to a witness is not counted against me I can wait five minutes.

1 But if I have to show five documents and it takes three minutes for each

2 document, that's 30 minutes from my time. It's not that I'm complaining.

3 It is that this Trial Chamber is not granting me the time that I need to

4 represent my client.

5 I've made that clear. It is not a complaint. It is a fact.

6 You're allowing 120 paragraphs of a statement to come in, and you're

7 granting us collectively six hours, one hour each. It's not fair but I

8 have to rush, and I don't mean to be rude.

9 Q. If you look at this document, ma'am, this was a letter shown to

10 you, again, it was by Ms. Turkovic, dated 28 July 1993. Do you see that?

11 You've seen this, have you not?

12 A. The document is before me and, yes, I have seen it before.

13 Q. Okay. And this is the document where the ambassador claims to

14 have visited the Croat -- the Croat refugees; correct? If you look at the

15 bottom, this was shown to you by the Prosecutor; and, in fact, you

16 testified that both the ambassador and you had gone to see the Croats,

17 and, again, the date is 28 July 1993.

18 A. I still maintain that I visited the Croats, and I also claim that

19 the ambassador did the same.

20 Q. Okay. Now, again, I point the date out, 28 July 1993, because the

21 next document, 4150, this is a Prosecution document, 4150, again, this was

22 shown to you yesterday or the day before by the Prosecutor, and this is

23 dated 13th of August, 1993. And, in fact, when you find it, you will see

24 that this is a document that you yourself generated and in fact signed.

25 If you just go to the back -- the last page, you'll see your name there as

1 the attache for refugees. Do you see this document?

2 A. I have the document in front of me.

3 Q. Very well. And you recognise the document?

4 A. I do recognise it, yes.

5 Q. And this is a document that you prepared?

6 A. Precisely.

7 Q. Okay. Now, if we go to the page where, if you look at the very

8 top part you see some numbers, these are ERN numbers. It's 0218-8969,

9 0218-8969. It would be the last page on B/C/S, I'm told. And it would be

10 the second last page in English for those of us following the English.

11 And, again, I point the date on the very first page is 13th of August.

12 If we look at the second to last paragraph, the second to last

13 paragraph, and let me read it; it's short. And this is a letter that

14 you're drafting and you're sending to the government of the Republic of

15 Bosnia-Herzegovina, to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and here's what

16 you state:

17 "About the refugees of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina-

18 Croats, sadly, we have no information at all, as we do not receive the

19 information about them nor do we receive any other information from the

20 office of displaced and refugees, and they themselves are not contacting

21 the embassy. We hope that you will understand that due to these kinds of

22 difficulties, we are unable to provide a better quality analysis of the

23 problematic of the refugees from the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina-

24 Croats."

25 Now, it seems to me somebody is providing false information.

1 Either you're providing false information to the government, your own

2 government, about those Croats, or Ms. Turkovic is providing false

3 information when she states that she visited, she visited these Croats

4 refugees from Bosnia-Herzegovina, because again I point to the dates. Her

5 letter in response to the previous letter is 28 July 1993, and here you

6 are two weeks later, two weeks later you're saying, "We don't know

7 anything about Croats."

8 Now, this is in your report. You generated it. You have

9 acknowledged that this is your report. Do you have any explanation to why

10 you're informing your own government from Croatia that you know nothing

11 about Croat refugees?

12 A. May I be allowed to answer?

13 Q. Yes.

14 A. I'd just like to ask you to read this out very precisely what I'm

15 informing the government about, and that is that I do not have information

16 about the problems that possibly Croat refugees have at that point in

17 time, because they didn't come and contact me, they didn't phone me up,

18 and they are dealing with the conditions under which they're living

19 without any assistance. And that is what it says here. What I'm doing is

20 I'm informing them. I'm telling them that I can't deal with the problem

21 of Croat refugees because I just don't have the necessary information

22 about that.

23 Q. Excuse me. If you go to your report, and this is why I would need

24 like two days to cross-examine you, but if you were to go to your report,

25 you indicated that one of your functions was to write reports. You know,

1 paragraph 14 of your own statement: "While I was -- while I was at that

2 position, I would produce reports whenever they were needed."

3 Now, it would seem to me, madam, that had you visited these

4 Croats, as you have represented, and had Ms. Turkovic visited these

5 Croats, as she had been representing, certainly, you would have some

6 evidence or some facts or some information to pass on to the authorities

7 as opposed to telling them, as you do in this particular document, and

8 these are your words, not mine, where you say: "We have no information at

9 all, as we do not receive the information about them, nor do we receive

10 any other information from the office of displaced -- of displaced and

11 refugees." And you go on so on and so forth.

12 So if you had visited them, if Turkovic had visited them and had

13 spoken to them and had seen their conditions and was able to talk to them,

14 there would have been some information to pass on to the authorities,

15 other than to say to them, We know nothing about the Croats of

16 Bosnia-Herzegovina, as you represent being the attache, and you're

17 representing this to your own government back in Sarajevo.

18 A. Would you please look at my report, the report in which I informed

19 my government in Sarajevo about the visit to the Croats, the Bosnian

20 Croats who were put up in Pinete.

21 Q. I'm going to move on madam because I've shown you the dates. This

22 are two weeks after Ms. Turkovic claimed to have seen these refugees. And

23 what you're -- you're mixing apples and oranges, with all due respect, but

24 we'll move on.

25 Let's look at 1D 01583. It's very quickly and it goes back to

1 what Mr. Rebic was saying and what you are claiming. Have you ever --

2 it's in my documents. It's a Defence document. 1D 01583. And we see

3 it's dated March 11, 1993. It's called "Asyl Times."

4 Are you familiar with this document?

5 A. I've never seen this document before. This is the first time.

6 Q. Okay. Were there any Muslim refugees in Denmark?

7 A. To the best of my knowledge, there were refugees from BH in

8 Denmark.

9 Q. Right. Because if we look at page 4, in the English version at

10 least, your name is even mentioned in it, that they were able to obtain

11 elementary school plans and curricula from the -- your embassy, and

12 particularly they mention you.

13 Now, did you ever receive any complaints from those refugees

14 there, that they were being put into camps or put into centres and they

15 were complaining that they were being ghettoised. They were being put in

16 a ghetto. Were there complaints that were coming to you?

17 A. I received letters from BH citizens who were in exile in third

18 countries. I didn't analyse the letters, but I was greatly concerned and

19 did my best to send them to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Sarajevo so

20 that they could take further steps, if necessary. I cannot really

21 remember that I received a letter of complaint from Denmark.

22 Q. Were you aware that in Denmark, as in other places, as Mr. Rebic

23 says, that accommodations of refugees were in separate centres? And in

24 here, they're complaining that they're mostly isolated from the

25 residential areas of the Danes. It is also a form of ghettoisation of our

1 refugees, preventing them from getting closer to and acquainted with

2 Danish life.

3 Now, do those sorts of complaints come to you? And in your

4 opinion, may I ask also, was the Danish way of treating the refugees, was

5 that improper in any way, the fact that they were put into centres so that

6 they could be watched upon and protected?

7 A. I really didn't give thought to things like that, either then or

8 now, and I don't think my personal opinion is important here. I don't

9 really know what you're interested in hearing. I never complained in my

10 communication about how people were accommodated and things like that.

11 Q. Okay. I just want to make sure I'm clear then. So you have

12 absolutely no complaints, before this Trial Chamber at least, as far as

13 how the Muslim refugees were accommodated by the Republic of Croatia?

14 A. As I said, I sent out a separate report about that.

15 Q. Ma'am --

16 A. -- with regard to the Gasinci and Obonjan conditions, and that

17 they were all right in keeping with the regular standards.

18 Q. All right. And what you're saying is that those camps -- those

19 centres were sub-standard in your opinion?

20 A. I claim, and I sent out reports, that the conditions of

21 accommodation in both the camps that I reported on most frequently were in

22 conformity with standards applied to refugees.

23 Q. All right. All right. Now, I want to as though you another

24 document, and this is 1D 01431. 1D 01431. This is dated -- if it's 1D,

25 it's a Defence. If it's P, then it would be the big binder. Okay.

1 A. I have the document.

2 Q. I suspect you haven't seen this document, but you were aware that

3 refugees were held in a place called Pinete; correct?

4 A. Yes, I'm aware of that.

5 Q. And I take it they were Croat refugees?

6 A. At the moment, when I went to visit Pinete, I was in contact with

7 the Croats who had fled from the BH.

8 Q. Okay. Now, here in this document, I only point this out in

9 fairness, on 13th of April, 1994, if we go to the second paragraph, it

10 says: "During the day, yesterday, Darinko Tadic had a meeting with the

11 camp coordinators and leaders to discuss the beginning of the transfer of

12 refugees from Pinete. The outcome of the meeting was that the camp

13 coordinators resigned and said they were unable to persuade the refugees

14 to move, and that they would not be responsible for the refugees if they

15 decided to move."

16 And then if you were to go on, it shows that two of the refugees

17 went on a hunger strike?

18 My question is: Were you aware that the Croatian government was

19 also trying to -- to resettle or -- or move or transfer Croatian refugees,

20 Croatian -- that is from Bosnia-Herzegovina, just as they had done with

21 the Muslims who they tried to transfer from, say, apartments or hotels to

22 centres? Were you aware of that?

23 A. I didn't know about that.

24 Q. Okay. You weren't -- okay. And this is the last -- the second to

25 last paragraph, it says: "We warn you that they still refuse to be

1 resettled; and according to reports from the MUP, several women have

2 threatened to commit suicide if the move does not take place." It then

3 goes on to say: "In the next few hours, we expect the refugees to step up

4 their passive resistance, and it will probably be impossible to carry out

5 the move peacefully. It will thus be necessary to -- to cooperate with

6 the MUP and the Ministry of Defence. And in the case the operation

7 continues, we request that you establish necessary coordination with

8 superior officers in the MUP (Mr. Moric) and the Ministry of Defence

9 (Mr. Vukina) in Zagreb. We urgently request instructions for further

10 action."

11 Now, this happened in 13 April 1994. We're talking about Croats

12 from Bosnia-Herzegovina, which obviously the embassy would have been

13 responsible for, and as you indicated were caring for or tried to care

14 for. Is it your evidence that you were totally unaware of this action?

15 A. Specifically, yes. As for Mr. Esterajher, concerning the same

16 problems that were taking place but at a different locality, I certainly

17 knew about that.

18 Q. Okay. But it seems to me though that the Croats from

19 Bosnia-Herzegovina are treated pretty much the same as the Muslims from

20 Bosnia-Herzegovina, the refugees, that is, at least from this letter. It

21 seems, at least in Pinete, the Croats from Bosnia-Herzegovina are having

22 to transfer out, just like the Muslims from Bosnia-Herzegovina had to do

23 on occasion; correct?

24 A. That is what it written in this document, that.

25 Q. Okay. All right. I'll move on. 1D 01582. And I just want --

1 this is a letter dated April 26, 1994. It's from Mr. Rebic. It's to a

2 Mr. Fischer, and it says here: "Surviving winter office, Fischer." Did

3 you know a Mr. Fischer by any chance?

4 A. I met Mr. Fischer.

5 Q. And, in fact, this particular document comes from you.

6 A. The document from Professor Adalbert Rebic.

7 Q. Right. But this was a document that we got from the Prosecution,

8 that apparently either you or Ms. Turkovic turned over, but I just wanted

9 to highlight a couple of points. On the first paragraph, it says: "Taking

10 into account the permanent cooperation between your humanitarian

11 organisation and the Office of Displaced Persons and Refugees of the

12 Government of the Republic of Croatia, we would kindly request that you

13 accept the changes in the procedure for issuing permits for transit

14 through the Republic of Croatia."

15 Now, we go on and it says here: "Namely, due to the frequent

16 complaints from the Bosnia and Herzegovinian authorities claiming that

17 this office, together with international humanitarian organisations, is

18 helping the Serbians in the 'ethnic cleansing' of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

19 In accordance with the embassy of Bosnia and Herzegovina in Zagreb,

20 international humanitarian organisations must submit, with the request for

21 acquiring permits for transit through the Republic of Croatia, a written

22 concept from the Embassy of Bosnia and Herzegovina in Zagreb."

23 Now, were you aware of this letter, and were you aware of these

24 actions; that is, here is Mr. Rebic asking that consent first be granted

25 or received by your particular embassy before there's any transfer. Were

1 you aware of this?

2 A. This is the first time I see this letter, and it is it the first

3 time that I hear that Dr. Adalbert Rebic believed that the embassy asked

4 they should issue transit permits. This looks very strange to me, to tell

5 you the truth.

6 Q. Okay. Well, Mr. Rebic is not asking for your embassy to issue

7 permits. They're asking for written consent. So -- because you and the

8 others were complaining that the internationals and that Croats were

9 assisting in the ethnic cleansing. So here he's asking Mr. Fischer,

10 somebody you knew and worked with, to get written requests. That way

11 there would be, a common word that we use here in court, "transparency."

12 There would be no hidden agendas. Everybody would know exactly what was

13 happening. Were you aware of these efforts by Mr. Rebic?

14 A. It is correct that we complained a great deal about what was

15 happening with citizens from Bosnia-Herzegovina, but this is the first I

16 hear that we asked for us to give consent, but I never knew of Mr. Rebic

17 asking for something like that.

18 Q. All right. Very well. If we go to the next document, we're going

19 to switch topics. This deals primarily with prisoners and the two centres

20 we were talking about, 1D 01577. 1D 01577. It's dated September 20,

21 1993. It's addressed to a Mr. Hurtic.

22 A. I have the document.

23 Q. Okay. Did you know a Mr. Hurtic?

24 A. I knew him. I know him, yes.

25 Q. And who was he?

1 A. He was also a staff member of the Embassy of Bosnia-Herzegovina in

2 Zagreb.

3 Q. Okay. Now, if you look at the first -- the second paragraph, it

4 says here, basically, that there had been a meeting on the 20th of

5 September, and that Dr. Granic on behalf of Franjo Tudjman, who was, you

6 know -- that there was an implementation or that they agreed for the

7 implementation of the joint declaration of the September 14, 1993, talks

8 that had been held, and that there was a working group that was

9 established and that there were certain agreements that were made. Were

10 you aware of this working group? And this is in regards to refugee centre

11 in Dretelj.

12 A. I don't know about that.

13 Q. Okay. Now, in the first -- in the paragraph under number 1, where

14 it says, "We -- it was agreed as follows," it says: "The centre in

15 Dretelj will be closed." And then if we skip -- I don't want to go --

16 spend too much time reading, but it says, "... 500 refugees accepted the

17 offer of the Office of Displaced Persons and Refugees of the Republic of

18 Croatia to be relocated in Obuljen and Gasinci." Do you see that?

19 A. I see that.

20 Q. Were you aware that this transfer was based on an agreement that

21 was reached with this working group?

22 A. This is the first time I hear of it, or rather, that I see it.

23 Q. And then it says, "The remaining 510 refugees will, in cooperation

24 with the ICRC, be sent to adequate centres in Croatian Republic

25 Herceg-Bosna." Were you aware of this?

1 A. No.

2 Q. Okay. We're going to set this document aside and we'll pick it up

3 again shortly with the next topic, but we can now move on to the next

4 document, and that would be 1D 01575. 1575. And this is dated August 13,

5 1993, and we see that it is -- it is signed at the end by a clerk in the

6 Department of Refugees, Nametak Zejna.

7 A. I have the document.

8 Q. I am sure you know this -- this is a woman, right?

9 A. It's a lady. Yes, I know her.

10 Q. In fact, she worked closely with you, did she not?

11 A. She was in the department for refugees of the BH embassy.

12 Q. Okay. Now, this document is relevant because of certain

13 paragraphs that are in your statement -- in general would be paragraph 40,

14 Your Honours, and then it would be 57, 58, and 59. But I just want to

15 point out a couple of things in this letter -- or this information.

16 One, it shows that the UNHCR had -- it says it has an office in

17 Gasinci centre. Now, were you aware that UNHCR had an office in as

18 opposed to around?

19 A. I was aware that the UNHCR was constantly present in Gasinci.

20 Q. That wasn't my question though. My question was whether you were

21 aware that they had an office in. Being present means walking about

22 maybe, going off and on, but having an office in means that they are

23 there. Now, were you aware that they had an office there? It's sort of a

24 yes or no or I can't remember answer.

25 A. I received information. I was not in that office personally.

1 Q. Okay. So does that answer -- so is the answer to my question yes,

2 they had an office in -- in the centre?

3 A. I don't know.

4 Q. Okay. Let me get this straight. Did you ever visit the centre?

5 A. Yes, many times.

6 Q. Okay. And you were able to walk around?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. Okay. All right. And I take it that this individual, Ms. Zenja,

9 she's a pretty responsible individual?

10 A. It was my assessment that she was responsible individual.

11 Q. Okay. Now, if we go further down again, Your Honours, in the next

12 paragraph we see again it says: "The UNHCR office in Gasinci ..." and I

13 point that out, because I think it is relevant as to whether they have an

14 office in as opposed to having an office by.

15 Now, we've covered that, but let me go down, further down the

16 page, because this is her assessment, and towards the second to last

17 paragraph it says: "A special problem is caused by the immediate vicinity

18 of the barracks of the Croatian Guard, and the refugees complain because

19 of uncontrolled entry of guard members and militia and other persons of

20 doubtful -- of doubtful moral values."

21 Do you see that?

22 A. I see that paragraph.

23 Q. Okay. Now, it doesn't say here, and I point this out and Their

24 Honours can take it for whatever it's worth, it says nothing here about

25 beatings or physical mistreatment as you have stated in paragraphs 57 and

1 58 of -- of your statement but, rather, it says that there was problem of

2 uncontrolled entry of guards and other persons of doubtful moral values.

3 And I take it that the doubtful moral values had to do with people that

4 were probably engaged in drug trafficking. Would that be correct?

5 A. I don't know what Mrs. Nametak meant by this. I don't know.

6 Q. All right.

7 MR. KARNAVAS: And Your Honours on paragraph 59 of the statement

8 the witness has indicated UNHCR had a branch office near, near, Gasinci in

9 Djakovo. So I point that out, because here we have somebody from the

10 embassy saying something different.

11 Q. All right. We'll of move on. I don't think there's anything

12 more -- well, there -- just this one -- if we go to the next -- the very

13 last paragraph, I just want to point this out for the Trial Chamber. It

14 says here that with the announcement of a possible return to the liberated

15 areas in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the refugees have expressed a great

16 interest in returning, so there has been a list compiled be consisting of

17 120 persons ready to return to Tuzla, Zenica, Mostar and Bugojno." And it

18 says that: "The organisation for the return is being handled by the

19 High Saudi Committee."

20 Were you aware that there were people in this particular centre

21 that wanted to return to Bosnia-Herzegovina?

22 A. I was aware of that.

23 Q. Okay. And -- all right. And I should also point out, I'm told,

24 at the end of the second paragraph, Your Honours, where it says: "The

25 majority of the citizens in transit are for Bosanska Krajina, Banja Luka,

1 Prijedor, Kotor Varos," because earlier it says: "There are 900 citizens

2 who do not have refugee status but are staying at the centre only as a

3 transit point, but it would appear that the 900 are going to the Bosanska

4 Krajina," and when we're talking about Banja Luka, Prijedor, and Kotor

5 Varos, we're talking about the Republika Srpska. Right?

6 A. We're talking about the areas that the refugees came from

7 originally, and they were under --

8 Q. Right.

9 A. -- the control of the Republika Srpska.

10 Q. Okay. All right. If we go on to the next document very quickly,

11 7 -- this is 1D 01585. This is dated 7 October 1993. Okay.

12 A. I have the document.

13 Q. And it says here that this is from the International Committee of

14 the Red Cross. And I take it you had contact with them?

15 A. I am sorry. The document is in the English language. I don't

16 have it in the local language. I don't have a translation.

17 Q. Okay --

18 A. I am sorry. It's here -- or, no, it's not. No.

19 Q. Okay no problem.

20 A. It seems to me there is only the English version.

21 Q. Okay. All right. Well, were you aware that the ICRC was prepared

22 to participate in the implementation of the release of all detainees held

23 by Croatian Defence Council simultaneously with the detainees of the

24 Bosnian government, that they were willing to assist?

25 A. As for this particular information, I did have it but from the

1 media.

2 Q. All right. Then we'll go on to the next. If we go on to the next

3 document, 1D 01579. And if you find it. This is dated January 4, 1994.

4 Do you have it, ma'am?

5 A. I do. I do have it.

6 Q. Okay. If you go to the back, you'll see that it's signed by

7 director of the RC Obonjan, and it's Miroslav Maslac.

8 A. I see that it's his signature, yes.

9 Q. Okay. You recognise the gentleman? You know the gentleman?

10 A. I know him.

11 Q. And this letter is addressed to you, "dear Ms. Azra." Now I'm

12 just going to read the first paragraph and then there is some other

13 language in here that might be interesting, but it he says here: "For

14 many days and nights I have been watching the tragedy of the Croatian and

15 Muslim nations in the territory of the internationally recognised state of

16 Bosnia and Herzegovina mute and desperate because of my own helplessness.

17 I am aware that I cannot stop the tragedy, that my word is merely a silent

18 whisper in the complete darkness, and I decided to contact you in order to

19 ask you to use your position and the authority that you possess without

20 any doubt, and contact Ms. Biserka Turkovic and other officials of the

21 Presidency of BiH with solely one purpose: To stop the offensive and

22 announce -- and announced [sic] bloodshed in the areas of Central Bosnia."

23 And then if we go on further down, it -- again, he's asking you --

24 he's appealing to you to appeal to those in Bosnia-Herzegovina who are

25 waging war in Central Bosnia to stop the madness that was going on.

1 My question is: Did you receive this letter?

2 A. I really do not remember.

3 Q. And I say -- so I take it if I were to ask you whether at any

4 point in time you had contacted the authorities with respect to what he

5 was asking you to do, and that is to stop the -- the activities that were

6 happening in Central Bosnia where it would appear, at least, that the

7 Croats were on the receiving end of the ethnic cleansing process --

8 JUDGE PRANDLER: Mr. Karnavas.

9 MR. KARNAVAS: Yes.

10 JUDGE PRANDLER: It is not critical. I would only like to make a

11 correction in the record, and it is that when you said "to stop the

12 offensive and announce -- and announced the bloodshed." I'm sure that it

13 is "renounced," with an R.

14 MR. KARNAVAS: I was reading literally, but you're probably right.

15 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Renounced, yes. Thank you.

16 MR. KARNAVAS: Unfortunately, I tend to read what's on the paper.

17 Q. In any event, you don't recall whether you had contact with

18 anybody based on letter, since you don't recall even receiving the letter?

19 A. My general firm position was that I was against any kind of

20 bloodshed. As for the specific letter, I do not recall having received

21 it, and, therefore, I do not know that I could have reacted -- or rather,

22 I do not remember.

23 Q. Okay. Very well. If we go on to the next document, 1D 01950. 1D

24 01950. In this particular document, we see that it's dated September 25,

25 1993, and the next set of documents deal with convoys and the working

1 group.

2 You were part of a working group, were you not, madam?

3 A. I was.

4 Q. Now, if we look at this document, what becomes rather obvious is

5 that you, in this working group, are there on behalf or as a

6 representative of the Muslim nation and not as a representative of the

7 Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Would that be correct?

8 A. You are not right.

9 Q. All right.

10 A. All the time, I felt to be the representative of the government of

11 Bosnia-Herzegovina.

12 Q. All right. Well, I point that out, because if you go into the

13 middle of this document, it says: "The representatives of Croatian and

14 Muslim nations." And when we look at who are the representatives, we see

15 Zubak and Tadic, who are from the Bosnia and Herzegovina Croats, and then

16 we see Azra Krajsek, Agovic, Jasarevic, and they seem to be for the Muslim

17 nation. So at least with respect to this particular document, you're

18 there in the working group as part of or on behalf of the Muslim nation;

19 is that correct?

20 A. That is not correct. If you look at all my knowledge, I was, in

21 full consciousness, the representative of the government of

22 Bosnia-Herzegovina, and as such was a member of this group.

23 Q. All right. Could you point to me anywhere, then -- or let's look

24 at the very last page. Maybe this will help us. The very last page, it's

25 your signature there, is it not?

1 A. Correct.

2 Q. Now, would it surprise you if I were to say, because we don't have

3 the time, that in reading this document, nowhere in this document it says

4 that you're there on behalf of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, or

5 on behalf of the Embassy of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina; but,

6 rather, the only references to you being there is as a representative of

7 the Muslim nation, just as Mr. Zubak is there on behalf of the Croatian

8 nation?

9 A. What I know is that I was appointed to the working group on the

10 basis of an agreement between Presidents Izetbegovic and Tudjman, and that

11 the Presidents of the States of Bosnia and Herzegovina and Croatia

12 appointed the members of the working group.

13 Q. Okay. Very well. If we look at -- we don't have much time to

14 spend on this, but if we go to paragraph 7.3. I just want to point

15 thought because I want to go back to an earlier document that we looked

16 at.

17 On 7.3 it says: "It is necessary to provide for written consent

18 of the army of Bosnia and Herzegovina and HVO for undisturbed transit of

19 the convoy through the territories under their control. With that

20 purpose, it is suggested that all war activities cease while convoy is in

21 transit."

22 Do you see that?

23 A. I don't see it, but --

24 Q. Okay.

25 A. -- as far as I followed the situation, that is something that I do

1 know about. I haven't managed to find the actual paragraph, though.

2 Q. It is under the paragraph number 7, numbered 7.3. So that would

3 be under --

4 A. Yes. Thank you. I can see it now.

5 Q. All right. Now, the reason I point that out is because if you go

6 back to document 1D 01577, Your Honours, and madam, this was a document

7 that we visited earlier. This was a letter from Mr. Pogarcic to a Mr.

8 Hurtic from your embassy. We look at paragraph number 2, that's numbered

9 2, and we see here it says:

10 "As regards the humanitarian convoy stationed in Stobrec, Split,

11 as we are informed by the competent authorities of the Republic of Croatia

12 and Croatian Republic Herceg-Bosna, for us there are no obstacles for

13 departure. The Embassy of the RBiH in Zagreb should define the time of

14 departure of the convoy by request to the Ministry of Interior of the

15 Republic of Croatia, which has been done -- which has not been done so

16 far.

17 "I must inform you that the Muslim army started with fierce

18 attacks on the whole front line from Mostar towards Central Bosnia,

19 especially Vitez, on September 20, 1993," and it goes on and so on.

20 Now, were you aware that, at least with respect to this issue,

21 that they were waiting, from your particular embassy, documentation or

22 some sort of an announcement as to the time of departure of the convoy?

23 A. I did not know.

24 Q. Okay. Because if we look at the very last sentence in this

25 particular paragraph, it says: "Therefore, I suggest that the convoy for

1 Gradacac," whatever, "from Stobrec is rerouted towards Zupanja for obvious

2 reasons."

3 So in other words, if we look at what precedes this, is that the

4 ABiH is waging war. UNPROFOR has been notified. A convoy is ready to

5 come. And in spite of what is happening, in other words, in spite of the

6 ABiH, which was the Muslim army, for all, you know, as we know it, even

7 though they were on the offensive, here you have Mr. Pogarcic suggesting

8 an alternative route in order to get this convoy going, but it needed

9 authorisation from your embassy. Do you see that?

10 A. I can see what he's written, yes.

11 Q. Okay. Well, I know what he's written, but -- but this person,

12 Mr. Hurtic, he would have been the responsible person to write to about

13 these sorts of matters; right?

14 A. I don't know.

15 Q. Hold it, hold it, hold it, hold it.

16 A. I don't know what he was responsible for.

17 Q. If you look at the top of it, it says "Mr. Zlatko Hurtic, attache

18 coordinator for humanitarian activities." He's not addressing this to the

19 janitor of the Embassy the Republic of Croatia -- of Republic of Bosnia

20 and Herzegovina. He's addressing this to the responsible person that's

21 engaged with these sorts of issues; right?

22 A. Yes, but you asked me why he was in charge of reporting, and my

23 answer to that was that I didn't know.

24 Q. Well, maybe -- maybe what I said was lost in translation, and this

25 is not to say that it was mistranslated. But in any event, 1D 01591.

1 This is a letter dated 25 November 1993, and it's addressed to a

2 Mr. Raguz.

3 You know Mr. Martin Raguz, or you knew of him? Right?

4 A. Yes. I do apologise, but what's the document that we're looking

5 at?

6 Q. 1D 01591. It's my fault. I'm asking you to look for a document

7 while I'm also asking you questions.

8 A. I do have the document, yes. Thank you.

9 Q. Now, here it is from the High Commissioner for Refugees, and here

10 if we just look at the very first sentence, it says: "I would like to

11 express my utmost satisfaction with the activities of the joint

12 commission. Our convoy movements have been eased and in no way hindered

13 since the commission was formed and the precise procedure of notifying was

14 established."

15 So it seems that, at least from this particular letter, things are

16 working rather well, and Mr. Raguz is being complimented for his

17 assistance. Were you aware of that?

18 A. I apologise, but what is your question? Do you mean that I didn't

19 know about the commission or the contents, the activities contained in

20 this letter? If you're asking me that, then no, I was not aware of that.

21 I didn't know about it.

22 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Karnavas, you've used up two

23 hours, so who has been giving you additional time?

24 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I apologise for

25 interrupting, but I'd like to request that you reconsider your decision

1 about time given to the Defence teams for cross-examination. In view of

2 the fact that this witness will be heard tomorrow as well, I think that it

3 is far fairer to have the entire time intended for this witness spent in

4 the courtroom, rather than keep to the decision about six hours of

5 cross-examination which ruling was taken before the cross-examination

6 began - allow me just to finish - and, in fact, that we have a statement

7 with 121 articles. If we just ask two questions on each of these

8 paragraphs, that would mean five minutes per paragraph which is 605

9 minutes altogether or ten hours.

10 In addition to that, the Prosecutor tendered 37 documents. If we

11 were to analyse each of these documents even superficially, this would

12 take us another five hours extra. So we do need more time. I am going to

13 give my time to Mr. Karnavas and to others who are dealing with this it,

14 if I can put it civilian topic, but I with like to ask the Trial Chamber

15 to enable Mr. Karnavas, at the expense of the joined time at our disposal,

16 to complete his cross-examination; and if he is not able to do that, then

17 I really will allot him all my time as well.

18 Thank you.

19 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Fine. You're talking about 121

20 paragraphs in the written statement, but I'd like to remind you that the

21 Chamber has stressed that amongst these paragraphs, you have paragraphs

22 that are more or less relevant with respect to the indictment, so you

23 don't need to review the entire statement. That's one point.

24 The second point is that you're right, indeed, we still have one

25 day tomorrow, but you should not forget that the Judges will ask

1 questions, and we also have to take into account the redirect examination,

2 and we have to be very careful in terms of the time we use.

3 I would also like to have many hours to put questions to this

4 witness, but I also take into account the fact that the accused are in

5 detention at the moment and they are entitled to it an expeditious trial.

6 Therefore, we need to focus on what's the most important, and that is what

7 you are trying to do.

8 Yes, Mr. Praljak.

9 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] Your Honours, having dealt

10 for many years with the problem of assistance by the Croatian state to the

11 BH army and the Muslim people, on Thursday I brought to The Hague 95

12 binders - and I'm showing you a picture of all the binders because I can't

13 bring them into court - with 10.000 documents in them dealing with all

14 manner of topics: Education, refugees, the wounded, displaced persons,

15 aid and assistance in support, the culture, the arming of the BH army, the

16 training of the BH army, the units, their establishment, and so on and so

17 forth. Unfortunately, here the indictment begins from the criminal

18 enterprise of Franjo Tudjman.

19 Now, these 95 binders, which we will bring into court willy-nilly

20 at one point, can we at least go through some of the topics here? She

21 won't know much about the army, but let's go through the education system.

22 She might know some people, because there were over 30 persons who had the

23 status of diplomatic representative who within her embassy dealt with the

24 arming of the army of Bosnia-Herzegovina from the territory of the

25 Republic of Croatia.

1 I took part in it. I took part in it as assistant minister for

2 providing Gasinci. The 3rd Brigade was in the less well-adapted part. So

3 we help the army. I know every place where the weapons were stored,

4 packed in tins sent in the UNHCR. We have the numbers who transported the

5 weapons with the knowledge of Minister Susak and myself and the Croatian

6 government. And we're faced here with a fact where you have to prove

7 something, but I am ready. I have 95 binders, and many of these documents

8 I wanted to deal with Ms. Azra. She visited Obonjan once. It's a pity

9 that we only have one hour, and I must say it's almost impossible.

10 Thank you.

11 MR. KARNAVAS: Just to briefly respond, Mr. President. First and

12 foremost with the statement, if the Trial Chamber thinks that certain

13 paragraphs are not relevant, then I think there's an obligation by the

14 Trial Chamber, since they're going to curtail our time, there's an

15 obligation, I stress that, to inform the parties which paragraphs it finds

16 not relevant. That way the Prosecution can make whatever submissions it

17 wishes to make on behalf of why certain paragraphs are relevant and

18 perhaps should be considered; and on the other hand, the Defence would

19 know what paragraphs the Trial Chamber feels to be not relevant. That way

20 we don't have to waste our time. I indicated last time that a judicial

21 hint would be welcoming in that fashion.

22 Secondly, I wish to remind the Trial Chamber, as I did yesterday

23 in a motion that I filed, it was a refiled motion on a motion for

24 severance, that Mr. Prlic on occasions has waived his right to an

25 expeditious trial, as it is understood by this Trial Chamber and other

1 Trial Chambers; that is, a rather quick trial. And I noted in my one

2 motion how in the Krajisnik case, Judge Orie indicated to Mr. Krajisnik

3 that he was not going to hold it against him; in other words, this

4 particular right.

5 So Mr. Prlic is in no hurry of having a fast trial, but he wishes

6 to have a very fair trial; and if it takes longer, so be it. I think we

7 can all live with that.

8 Be that as it may, I just wish to go on at this point. I'll try

9 to go as fast as I can, keeping in mind that my colleagues also need time

10 for themselves, having made my record.

11 Q. Okay. Now, if I could go on to the next document just very --

12 well, we were interrupted, and you asked why I was asking you those

13 questions. And the reason I'm going through this is because there seemed

14 to be some insinuation on your part that humanitarian aid was not going

15 back to Bosnia-Herzegovina. As I understand it, you said something about

16 seven months there hadn't been a single convoy that had gone to Bosnia and

17 Herzegovina. Is that correct?

18 A. That is the information I had and that's what I said.

19 Q. And here and that's why I pointed out this letter, it appears that

20 you weren't aware of that. But let me show you 1D 01329. 1329. And --

21 and of course if we look at the bottom -- first of all, this is dated 10

22 December 19 -- well, it indicates the passage approved for the following

23 convoys from 1 June 1993 till 10 December 1993. 1 June to 10 December.

24 And this is from the office of refugees and expelled persons of HR HB.

25 If we look at the bottom we see some initials, MR, and there's a

1 signature. On the second page we see a signature line, and it's

2 Martin Raguz. And we see on the very first page total convoys 1.399, and

3 then on the second one we see Jablanica, and we have 2.000 -- I mean --

4 it's 25.847. This is -- we're talking about tonnes.

5 What's more telling, however, is the list that we see. And we

6 don't have time to go through the list, but would it surprise you to

7 learn - and the Trial Chamber can verify this, they can do an accounting -

8 that at least from June -- June 15th until September 23, 1993, based on

9 these statistics, and perhaps Mr. Raguz will come either from the

10 Prosecution or from the Defence to verify this, that we have 193 convoys

11 going through. Would that surprise you, madam? Were you aware of that?

12 A. No, I was not aware of that.

13 Q. Do you think -- well, let me ask you something else, because in

14 reading your statement early this morning, I re-read it again, and

15 something caught my eye again, and that is you made a statement here

16 saying that -- in your statement you indicate that you had no dealings or

17 no contacts with the officials of HZ HB, the Croatian Community of

18 Herceg-Bosna, or -- and then later on with the Croatian Republic of

19 Herceg-Bosna. Is that correct?

20 A. Correct.

21 Q. Now, may I ask, is there a reason why in light of the fact, in

22 light of the fact, and here's the tripwire, that President Izetbegovic,

23 the president of the Presidency, along with others who are representing

24 the Muslim nation, were having talks and discussions with members and

25 officials of the Croatian nation of officials of the Croatian republic or

1 the Croatian Community of Herceg-Bosna, and in fact a lot of those

2 discussions were not -- were held also with the internationals and in

3 Zagreb. So is there a particular reason why you in the embassy of the

4 Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, supposedly representing all of the

5 people of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, why you did not have any

6 contact with any officials?

7 MR. SCOTT: Your Honour, I just want to register an objection to

8 the form of the question. It's Mr. Karnavas's characterisation that

9 Mr. Izetbegovic was the president of the Muslim nation. That's his

10 characterisation. The Prosecution does not agree with that.

11 MR. KARNAVAS: I indicated that he was the president of the

12 Presidency --

13 MR. SCOTT: Of the Muslim--

14 MR. KARNAVAS: -- of the SDA.

15 MR. SCOTT: I'm reading --

16 MR. KARNAVAS: He was representing the Muslim nation that's the

17 difference. He was the president of the Presidency, but we also had

18 testimony and I remind Your Honours of Mr. Okun, Ambassador Okun. It was

19 very clear Silajdzic, Ganic, all of them were representing the interests

20 of the Muslim nation and the army of ABiH was the military arm of the SDA.

21 I think that's uncontroverted.

22 MR. SCOTT: I don't think that's the case, but I waive my

23 objection, Your Honour.

24 MR. KARNAVAS: I leave it to the Court.

25 MR. SCOTT: Exactly. I'll leave it to the entire trial record on

1 there. Thank you.

2 MR. KARNAVAS: Now --

3 Q. Question: Is there any reason why you didn't have any contact with

4 them? Were you forbidden, were you instructed not to, or was this

5 something out of a personal choice?

6 A. I was not instructed. I didn't deal with matters of choice, but

7 nobody tried to contact me or call me up at all and that was the reason

8 that I had no contact.

9 Q. Okay. Very well.

10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, Mr. Karnavas asked you

11 the question I wanted to put to you yesterday. You were working at the

12 embassy. You were a member of the embassy. Amongst the Judges here you

13 have two former ambassadors. We know perfectly well that when you work in

14 an embassy your first task is to have contacts with the officials of the

15 country where you are serving, and you don't sit there waiting for people

16 to get in touch of you. It's up to the embassy to get in touch with the

17 outside, to make contacts.

18 You, apparently, were in charge of all humanitarian questions.

19 Why didn't you take the initiative of taking contacts or making contacts

20 with the Croatian officials who could have helped you in your task?

21 A. I was in permanent contact with them, the Office for Displaced

22 Persons and Refugees, especially, and also with the Ministry of Foreign

23 Affairs. I had contacts with them and the staff of the Ministry of

24 Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Croatia, and all the other officials,

25 but I understood it that I was asked why I didn't have contacts with

1 institutions of the HZ HB. And believe me when I say, I didn't even know

2 that they existed, that they were official bodies and had representative

3 offices in the Republic of Croatia.

4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] You had never heard of this body

5 called the Republic of Herceg-Bosna? You'd never heard of that body?

6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I knew that an HZ HB entity existed,

7 but I didn't know that this HZ HB entity had its office in the Republic of

8 Croatia, or offices. So I understood that you were asking me why I didn't

9 contact -- have contacts with that particular office.

10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Karnavas.

11 MR. KARNAVAS:

12 Q. Okay. You had contacts with the Sarajevo government?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. Mostar was in Bosnia and Herzegovina at the time? Still is, by

15 the way.

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. And so you knew where to contact any of the officials of the HZ HB

18 or the HR HB if you wanted to; correct?

19 A. Sir, I was the attache for refugees.

20 Q. Exactly. With respect to refugee issues, if you needed to or if

21 you wanted to contact, because after all refugees were coming from

22 Herzegovina, okay, whether it was Central Bosnia or Herzegovina, okay,

23 from areas that were within the Croatian Community of Herceg-Bosna, okay,

24 if you wanted to get in contact with them, you knew how to; correct?

25 A. Yes, and I did come into contact with institutions who were

1 responsible for taking care of them, and they were institutions of the

2 host country.

3 Q. Okay. Okay. Well, I just want to -- no, it's not whatever. The

4 point is I'm asking you about the Croatian Community. I'm not asking you

5 about Croatia. Because it seems to me, ma'am, that when you see a Croat,

6 wherever he comes from, you think that he should be represented by the

7 Croatian Republic, right, from the Republic of Croatia. Is that your

8 opinion?

9 A. I'm very surprised that you can think that you know what I am

10 thinking.

11 Q. Well -- well, I'm asking you because -- I'm asking you because you

12 were dealing with Mr. Zubak. You were dealing as the representative of

13 the of Muslim nation. Mr. Zubak was the representative of the Croatian

14 nation. You had three nations, plus others, recognised in

15 Bosnia-Hercegovina, and my question is: How is it that you, as a

16 representative of the embassy, dealing with refugee matters in Croatia or

17 dealing with citizens of Bosnia and Herzegovina, which included Croats

18 from Bosnia and Herzegovina, how is it that you chose not to have any

19 contact with, based on your statement, of authorities of the Croatian

20 Community of Herceg-Bosna, keeping in mind that Izetbegovic, Silajdzic,

21 Ganic, and others were having contacts with those officials, be it Mate

22 Boban, be it others, dealing with all sorts of issues including issues

23 dealing with refugees?

24 So how is it that you chose not to have any contact with officials

25 from the Croatian Community of Herceg-Bosna? What is your explanation?

1 A. I was always very decisive and resolute on the fact that I would

2 have contacts with all institutions that were open and that existed and

3 were open to providing assistance, protection to the refugees of Bosnia

4 and Herzegovina in Croatia. So I maintained contacts with all those

5 institutions. I never made any decisions deciding that I would contact

6 the HZ HB institutions, but they could not have had access to solving BH

7 refugee problems in the host country, so I didn't need to contact them.

8 It wasn't a matter of a decision on my part. There was no decision-making

9 in that sphere.

10 Q. All right. Very well. I'll -- I think I'll accept that answer,

11 for whatever it's worth.

12 1D 01589. If you could look at this document which may tie into

13 what we've been discussing. 1D 01589. This is a document that's dated

14 May 31, 1993. At the very top, you see that it's from the Embassy of the

15 Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Zagreb.

16 If we look at the second page, we see a signature and we also see

17 the official stamp, and this has been signed by Ms. Turkovic. Do you see

18 this, madam?

19 A. I can see the document. I have it, yes.

20 Q. And if we look at the very top part, we see that it says:

21 "Mr. Jadranko Prlic, mandator of the government of Bosnia-Herzegovina,"

22 and then there's a fax number, so at least you have no how to contact him,

23 or Ms. Turkovic knew how to contact him.

24 Were you aware of this letter, and were you aware of what capacity

25 Mr. Jadranko Prlic was serving as mandator of the government of

1 Bosnia-Herzegovina?

2 A. I've never seen this letter before. I do know that Mr. Jadranko

3 Prlic was a politician with a lot of authority and credibility. Now, what

4 post he held exactly, I never knew. I wasn't interested. I mean, I

5 didn't deal with things like that.

6 Q. If we go to 1D 01588, 1d 01588, dated May 31, 1993, and this is

7 from the office of the president of the government of the Republic of

8 Bosnia and Herzegovina, and here it says: "We attach a letter from the

9 embassy of the RBiH in Zagreb that is arrived addressed to me but also

10 sent to high representatives of the International Peace Conference on the

11 former Yugoslavia and UNPROFOR. The letter requests the provision of air

12 transport for wounded persons from the left bank of the Neretva River and

13 our assistance is requested."

14 And then later on it -- you see in the second paragraph, it says:

15 "I ask for your full cooperation ..."

16 And this was sent to your embassy. Were you aware of these

17 efforts by Dr. Jadranko Prlic to the letter that was sent by Ambassador

18 Turkovic to Dr. Jadranko Prlic, as well as to Lord David Owen and others?

19 A. No, but I did know that these problems were dealt by other

20 departments. So I didn't necessarily have to be informed of this, and

21 I've never seen this document before. This is the first time.

22 Q. Now, were you aware that Dr. Jadranko Prlic was engaged in any

23 capacity with the Croatian Community of Herceg-Bosna or the Croatian

24 Republic of Herceg-Bosna? Were you aware of that at that time? I know

25 you were in Zagreb, but were you aware of that?

1 A. I knew that he was some high-ranking official; but to be quite

2 frank, I don't know what post he held.

3 Q. Okay. Very well. Now, if we could just very quickly, and I just

4 want to -- somewhat relevant to this topic.

5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] We are at about time for the

6 break. How many more minutes do you need?

7 MR. KARNAVAS: If I could go -- I think I need five minutes, Your

8 Honour. Five minutes, and I think I could -- I'll just -- I can leave

9 it -- if I have five minutes, I can finish up and then leave my time.

10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Fine. Please proceed.

11 MR. KARNAVAS:

12 Q. Just very quickly, just two documents back to back: 1D 01586, and

13 then I'll be looking at 1587. So if we look at those documents very

14 quickly.

15 The date is May 21, 1993. So that would be ten days earlier. And

16 this is in regards to a goodwill mission from the Republic of Turkey.

17 Were you aware of this goodwill mission at or about that time?

18 A. No.

19 Q. All right. Were you keeping track of any activities that were

20 happening no Bosnia-Herzegovina, or were you just so focused in Croatia

21 that you didn't know what was happening in Central Bosnia or Herzegovina?

22 A. Well, I can tell you that at that time, I was working 15 hours a

23 day --

24 Q. So the answer is no?

25 A. -- at a minimum, in order to deal with problems related to Croatia

1 and the refugees in Croatia.

2 Q. I'll take that as a --

3 A. I couldn't answer yes or no, because neither would be accurate.

4 Q. Very well. You weren't aware of this. But here in both of these

5 letters, both of these documents, 1D 01586 and 1587, we see that

6 Dr. Jadranko Prlic signs as President of the government of RBiH, and he's

7 asking for cooperation and assistance. And I take it, from your answer,

8 you simply don't know anything about any of this. If the answer is no,

9 I'll just move on.

10 A. I don't know.

11 Q. Okay. Now, going back to it a question that was asked by Judge

12 Trechsel yesterday, and I did see one document that sort of caught my

13 interest, and that was 10049. It's a Prosecution document. 1 -- 1 --

14 it's a big binder.

15 MR. KARNAVAS: Mr. Usher, please.

16 Q. 10049. And this is in regards to a question with respect to

17 people going back and forth, vacationing in a sense, visiting family

18 members, that sort of thing. 10049. It's dated 21 April 1993. It's a

19 letter to the RBH embassy in RH, which would be the Republic of Croatia,

20 from the RBH military mission in the Republic of Croatia, Split desk. So

21 this is a military -- this is generated by the military. And I just

22 wanted us to look at a couple of things.

23 First is, in the first paragraph, we see that it says: "There are

24 approximately 130.000 citizens of Bosnia and Herzegovina registered in the

25 general area of Dalmatia. We estimate that among them are a large number

1 of men liable for military service staying here for various reasons

2 (official visits, approved visits to families, drivers and staff working

3 for humanitarian organisations, wounded persons and persons staying

4 without permission of relevant RBH organs)."

5 My question is who are -- who would grant the permissions? Who

6 are these organs, the RBH organs, that would grant these relevant

7 permissions or these permissions that would -- you know. Do you know

8 them? Which organs --

9 A. I really don't know. I know when I went out on official trips

10 what the authorities -- what authorities I had to contact in order to get

11 permission to travel on business.

12 Q. Was the military mission in Split complaining that there were some

13 men of military age or conscripts who were more or less deserting, for

14 lack of a better term, or vacationing or not doing what they were supposed

15 to be doing back in Bosnia-Herzegovina? Was that a complaint?

16 A. Not as far as I'm concerned. I mean, not to the office for

17 refugees that I had.

18 Q. Okay. So you had no knowledge of that. Okay.

19 A. No. I had no knowledge about what it was that they were --

20 Q. Very well.

21 A. -- reporting about.

22 Q. And one last aspect of this document. If you go to page 2 and if

23 we go to the first paragraph, because I'm told that this may be somewhat

24 relevant, and I'll start reading: "Because of the blockade, a lot of

25 people and equipment are prevented from returning safely to Bosnia and

1 Herzegovina in their original units, -- in their original units," I point

2 that out for the Judges, "while nearly all their HVO permits valid for

3 Republic of Croatia have expired. For this reason over 1.000 men," and

4 here in English it says, "fit for military service," but I'm told it

5 should read, "conscripts," "and many more refugees have contacted our desk

6 VI in Split indirectly or in person. We have noticed that all men fit for

7 military service are filled with panic, fear and uncertainty as a result

8 of numerous provocations and incidents and -- incidents that they and

9 their families have been exposed to, including physical abuse, arrests,

10 and taking away of our citizens."

11 Now, were you aware that there were -- that there were over 1.000

12 conscripts, Muslim conscripts, in Croatia at that time while there was a

13 war waging next door?

14 A. No.

15 Q. All right. One final question and we could take our break and

16 I'll be through. Yesterday you indicated -- a question was posed to you

17 by the Prosecutor regarding the Mujahedin. Were you aware that there were

18 Mujahedin in Central Bosnia?

19 A. I heard from refugees that they had heard that Mujahedin would

20 come.

21 Q. That's not my question. My question: Did you know that they were

22 there? And I say this because we have footage of -- of the president of

23 the Presidency, Mr. Alija Izetbegovic, we see him there while they're

24 chanting. There are photographs. The world knows about it. And in fact,

25 in a courtroom next door soon Mr. Delic, General Delic, is going to be

1 prosecuted, and the Mujahedin are a central theme into that Prosecution.

2 So I'm asking you. Were you aware, were you personally aware that there

3 were Mujahedin in Central Bosnia? Answer yes or no.

4 A. No.

5 Q. Okay. And so when the refugees told you that the Mujahedin were

6 there or that they had been told that they were there and coming, did you

7 believe them, or did you think this was something that was made up in

8 order to scare them to leave?

9 A. Before I thought that they were scaring them with that, saying

10 that the Mujahedin would appear. I did not really believe in that myself.

11 Q. Okay. Did you ever come to learn, however, the atrocities they

12 were committing and how they committed them in order to scare them? Did

13 that ever come to -- did you ever learn of that later on?

14 A. Much later, when the war was over. When communication and

15 information went up. When information was publicly provided. And that

16 provided for the possibility that this was not an erroneous announcement.

17 However, at the time when I received this information, I had no knowledge

18 of my own, and to tell you the truth, I did not believe in this.

19 Q. Thank you very much. Thank you, ma'am.

20 MR. KARNAVAS: I have no further questions.

21 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Fine. We'll take a 20-minute

22 break, and we'll resume at 11.00.

23 --- Recess taken at 10.42 a.m.

24 --- On resuming at 11.05 a.m.

25 MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, as a matter of

1 courtesy, I think it is only right for me to say that we have a new

2 trainee here in the courtroom, Stjepan Rako. He's a residence of the

3 Republic of Netherlands, and he is Croatian by origin. Thank you.

4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I wish your new trainee welcome

5 here.

6 Ms. Nozica, you have the floor.

7 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours. Good

8 morning to all in the courtroom. Before I start, I would like to inform

9 the Court that I have one hour of time. That is the time that was

10 allocated to me for cross-examination, and have an hour that I got from

11 the Coric Defence.

12 I would now like to ask for the usher's assistance to give the

13 binder of documents to the witness and to the Prosecutors.

14 Cross-examination by Ms. Nozica:

15 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, Ms. Krajsek.

16 A. Good morning.

17 Q. This is already your third day --

18 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Ms. Nozica, I was looking at the

19 report. You have one hour of your own time, but you only have 30 minutes

20 from Mr. Coric, because Mr. Coric had granted you 30 minutes -- or rather,

21 had granted 30 minutes to Mr. Karnavas. So you have one hour and 30

22 minutes in total.

23 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Yes. Thank you. Thank you.

24 Q. Ms. Krajsek, several times, during the course of these three days,

25 you said that you knew roughly about the statistics, about the number of

1 refugees and displaced persons who, from the beginning of the war, in

2 Bosnia-Herzegovina in this Croatia. You probably saw some of them during

3 the course of your work, and, obviously, you knew some things because the

4 relevant statistics were published. Am I right?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. I believe it would be important for us to deal with a specific

7 document. That is the second document in your binder. That is 2D 4 -- 2D

8 00486. So that is the second document in your binder.

9 A. I have the document, yes.

10 Q. As we can all see, this is a document of the government of the

11 Republic of Croatia, the Office for Refugees. We see that the date is the

12 12th of June, 1998, and it says here who it was sent to; that is to say,

13 government of the Republic of Croatia, the Office for Cooperation with the

14 International Criminal Tribunal. So this is our source.

15 This has to do with refugees and displaced persons from the period

16 of 1992 to 1998 in the Republic of Croatia.

17 Now, I'm going to go with some of the -- with you through some of

18 the statistics where you may have some indirect knowledge, and also the

19 period about which you certainly have direct knowledge.

20 I would just like to say that the document was given to the

21 interpreters as well, and I think that we will be able to go through these

22 important matters quickly.

23 The first part deals with information about the population of

24 Bosnia and Herzegovina in 1991, and all of us in this courtroom are more

25 or less familiar with this. And now I'd like to move on to the other

1 part, and it has to do with the UNHCR information about refugees from

2 Bosnia-Herzegovina.

3 The first sentence says: "According to UNHCR information, there

4 were 1.8 million displaced persons and refugees from Bosnia-Herzegovina in

5 1995 distributed as follows: 900.000 displaced persons within

6 Bosnia-Herzegovina, 200.000 refugees in FRY refugees in third countries,

7 western Europe and countries across the ocean. By the end of 1997,

8 according to UNHCR information, some 400.000 refugees and displaced

9 persons came back to Bosnia and Herzegovina which included almost 300.000

10 people from third countries."

11 Are you aware of this information? This is UNHCR information. I

12 know that up until the end of August 1994 you were at that post in charge

13 of refugees in Croatia, but I imagine that you expressed some interest

14 later on as well for these figures.

15 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreters note they have great trouble

16 hearing the speaker could she please speak into the microphone. Thank

17 you.

18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] We tend to say that regardless of

19 what I did afterwards, I always kept an eye on this matter. I more or

20 less always knew what was going on in terms of these statistics.

21 THE INTERPRETER: It interpreters note, it is the counsellor who

22 is a problem for us, not the witness. Thank you.

23 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation]

24 Q. Now I would ask you to move on to paragraph 3. So it's on the

25 next page. It has to do with refugees from Bosnia-Herzegovina in the

1 Republic of Croatia. Are things all right with my microphone now? Can

2 you hear me better?

3 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreters note yes thank you.

4 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation]

5 Q. I hope things will be better now and we are moving on to refugees

6 of Bosnia-Herzegovina in the Republic of Croatia and this is information

7 by years. I think that you have already said that you are aware of this

8 particular piece of information that towards the end of 1992 in Croatia

9 there were about 300.000 refugees and the actual figure is 371.319

10 refugees from Bosnia-Herzegovina out of which in terms of their status we

11 are talking about the end of 1992 285.630 of them had refugee status and

12 85.689 of them did not have that status.

13 Until the end of 1992, large groups of refugees entered Croatia

14 and it was not possible to register all of them by giving them --

15 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Excuse me. I didn't want to rudely to interrupt

16 you, but I cannot help noticing that if I add 285.000 and 85.000, I do

17 not -- I get quite considerably above the 300.000 total. I get then to

18 about 370.000. So something -- something must be wrong. Out of 300.000,

19 it is not possible that 285.000 have the status and another 85.000 do not.

20 I think you wish to clarify.

21 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] 371.319 refugees in December 1992.

22 However, I would like to ask you, Your Honour, we are going to have tables

23 here as well. Now, I'm talking about figures because they are relevant as

24 well, but we will see them through the relevant statistics. So you will

25 be able to compare all these figures, and you will see that they are all

1 tally in terms of what is written in this report.

2 So all the way up to the end of 1992, large groups of refugees

3 were coming to Croatia. So it was not possible to register all of them in

4 terms of registering them as persons having the status of refugees?

5 Q. You agree with that, don't you? They were not coming in organised

6 fashion at that time. People were fleeing, and it is certain that not

7 everyone could be registered straight away.

8 A. I agree with what you said.

9 Q. In addition to that, in the SFRY, in December 1992, there were

10 31.449 refugees from the FRY. You don't need to know all of this, but it

11 does seem logical in view of the fact that the war broke out then.

12 A. I would not like to answer questions that are related to pure

13 statistics, because then I can only talk about my feeling, and that is not

14 an acceptable criterion.

15 Q. Ms. Krajsek, I'm going to ask you to kindly give me an answer.

16 This is a very important document. During the first day of our

17 cross-examination, the Judges asked us whether we had this information.

18 I'm just asking you to give me answers in terms of what you know, and you

19 can freely say, I think that would be about it.

20 I mean, even if we were to ask the author of this text about this

21 now, I think he could not give accurate figures.

22 In May 1993, when -- after the re-registration of refugees,

23 271.096 refugees from Bosnia-Herzegovina had refugee status in May 1993 in

24 Bosnia-Herzegovina -- from Bosnia-Herzegovina; then it says part of them

25 left for Western European countries and a smaller part did not keep their

1 refugee status or they returned to Bosnia-Herzegovina.

2 Now we are talking about the period when you were in Zagreb;

3 right?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. So, more or less, you could be aware of this piece of information?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. Then it says, in December 1993, there were 282.728 refugees in

8 Croatia. I'm going to skip a paragraph now. And then it says, according

9 to information of the 22nd of July, 1994, in Croatian, there were 30.000

10 refugees from Central Bosnia and other areas of the conflict between

11 Croats and Muslims. They consisted of 30.000 Croats and 3.000 Muslims,

12 approximately.

13 That is the period while you were still in Zagreb. Can you say

14 something about this, at least in approximate terms about these figures?

15 A. They seem logical to me.

16 Q. All right. Now we're going to move on to paragraph 2. It says,

17 out of the total of 271.096 of refugees in Croatia, in May 1993, after the

18 registration of refugees was carried out, there were 110.634 Croats, which

19 is to say, 40.81 per cent; then 157.066 Muslims, which is 57.93 per cent;

20 1.272 Serbs, which is 0.47 per cent; and 2.124, that is say, 0.78 per cent

21 members of other national minorities.

22 We are talking about some statistics from May 1993. Did your

23 embassy and your office within the embassy ever deal with such matters;

24 that is say, the ethnic composition of refugees in terms of the

25 statistics. And can you confirm this information, to the best of your

1 knowledge, what we see here?

2 A. I asked the Office for Expellees and Refugees to receive

3 information about refugees registered in the Republic of Croatia. In this

4 first stage, I did receive statistics from the office.

5 Q. Does that information tally roughly with what I said?

6 A. As far as I can remember, it could be that or something similar.

7 Q. Thank you. Further on, it says: "Before that, at the end of

8 1992, there were 60 to 70 per cent of Muslims among the refugees. The

9 percentage of Croats and Muslims started to change at the end of 1993 and

10 during the following years. At the end of 1993, new Croat refugees came

11 to Croatia from Central Bosnia."

12 I think that you testified about that too; right?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. Now, why did this decrease take place? And it's the next

15 paragraph. The most important reason for the reduction of the number of

16 refugees in Croatia in May 1993, when compared to the number of -- number

17 at the end of 1992, is the large departure of refugees towards third

18 countries. At first, in summer, autumn of 1992, the Western European

19 countries and overseas countries had quotas for taking in refugees. You

20 were not in Zagreb, but I think that you knew about that. I think we all

21 knew that America, Australia had certain quotas set and certain priorities

22 in terms of immigration into these countries. Are you familiar with that?

23 ?

24 A. I was aware of that.

25 Q. It was primarily Muslim refugees who left Croatia in accordance

1 with entrance policies of western countries who introduced a rationed and

2 selective acceptance of BH refugees. They accepted primarily ex-prisoners

3 from Serbian camps, mixed marriages, et cetera. Can you and I add younger

4 people to this category, that that was a category that they took in?

5 A. Yes. Intellectuals were also welcomed as well.

6 Q. Yes, yes. The last paragraph, through those programmes of

7 transfer into foreign countries, western European and overseas countries

8 from the 1st of October 1992 to the end of May 1998 42.076 refugees left

9 Croatia, and they were mostly Muslims according to UNHCR information. And

10 then the text explains why there was a small portion of Croats and it's

11 precisely due to these criterias. It says Croats could not meet the

12 criteria because Croats from Bosnia-Herzegovina had dual citizenship and

13 the countries of immigration generally believe that Croatians from

14 Bosnia-Herzegovina had yet another homeland that could take care of them.

15 However, it is also fair to add that quite a few Croats left, especially

16 families of guest workers who had already been living and working in

17 Germany. Does that correspond to your own knowledge?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. It is a generally known fact and you and I can conclude that

20 perhaps Germany was one of the countries that took in the largest number

21 of refugees from Bosnia-Herzegovina, not taking into account the ethnic

22 background of these refugees at all. Is that your knowledge as well?

23 A. I think so, yes. Yes.

24 Q. Very well. Then the text says at the end of 1992 between 65 and

25 70 per cent of refugees were Muslims. In 1993 that percentage changed to

1 58 per cent in 1993 around 40 per cent in 1994 and around 25 per cent in

2 1995 most of the refugees in 1995 were Croat refugees from

3 Bosnia-Herzegovina and this is roughly what you said; that this number of

4 Muslims if we proceed from those who originally came in 1992 the number

5 actually went down. That corresponds to your own knowledge. Am I right

6 or am I not right?

7 A. In part.

8 Q. When you say "in part," I wish you would say where it is that I'm

9 right in part?

10 A. As in terms of the overall figures that I mentioned, but I use

11 that number as the total number of Bosnian citizens who had fled not only

12 Muslims. I really did not know of any other figures, so I couldn't have

13 provided anything else.

14 Q. I know what information you provided and I know that you received

15 some of this information that you agree with that as far as 1993 is

16 concerned so I'm just asking. I'm not saying that you're the person who

17 actually carried out this analysis, but I'm just asking you that on the

18 basis of all this information that you got and on the basis of your

19 personal knowledge did you know, for example?

20 A. Total numbers in structure, no.

21 THE INTERPRETER: Could speakers please slow down thank you.

22 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation]

23 Q. It says further on in the text and this is very important until at

24 the end of 1992 or until the end of 1992 large groups of refugees poured

25 into Croatia week after week, and at the same time large groups left

1 Croatia for European countries. So it was hard to follow the situation of

2 all the refugees from Bosnia-Herzegovina and all the official information

3 lagged after the actual situation. At that time, there was a constant

4 ratio of 30 per cent of refugees who were not registered.

5 Now, madam, does this seem to you to be logical?

6 A. Yes. But could you please tell me -- may I ask you something?

7 Could you give me the number of the paragraph that you're reading from?

8 Q. You moved on to page 2 of the text, and I'm reading that second

9 paragraph on this page of yours.

10 A. Thank you.

11 Q. Last sentence. "The number of refugees began to stabilise only at

12 the beginning of 1993 and it was then that the office undertook the first

13 registration of refugees." Is that what you knew about?

14 A. Yes, I knew that the registration took place at that time.

15 Q. Now, we have information here for April 1995 and for statistical

16 purposes that attends this analysis, I'm just going to read some of the

17 facts, some figures, and tell me if you know about them because you'd

18 already left at the time, it says: "In April 1995 Croatia had 185.428

19 refugees from Bosnia-Herzegovina and once again we have a national

20 structure here or national breakdown where it says consisting of 134.086

21 Croats, 47.880 Muslims and the rest were Serbs and members of other ethnic

22 groups. " And then we have another figure, that is to say, the number of

23 refugees who came in from the territory of the federation and that is

24 75.456 and from the areas that were under the control of the Serbs in

25 Bosnia-Herzegovina and that figure is 109.864.

1 A. I'm very sorry, but please don't ask me about 1995 because I

2 really can't address that.

3 Q. Can we then conclude with looking at paragraph 4 which speaks of

4 1993, so we can go back to that period; although, it goes on until the

5 31st of May 1996. But it says: "From 1993 until the 31st of May, 1996,

6 Croatia received 40.161 refugees, mostly from areas of Bosnia-Herzegovina

7 under Serbian control on the basis of entrance permits that were issued by

8 the Office for Refugees and Displaced Persons."

9 Now, did you know about that? Were you aware of that? And in

10 your contacts with the refugees, did you hear about information both

11 refugees and Croats and Muslims who came from the area controlled at the

12 time by the army of Republika Srpska?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. I'd now like to ask you to look at something that I think you

15 ought to know about, the last paragraph of that page where it says, "From

16 the summer of 1995 until July 1996 there were some 20.000 Muslim refugees

17 from Velika Kladusa and Cazin were accommodated in Kupljensko in the

18 Republic of Croatia. Now, do you know anything about that? And we're

19 dealing with some general facts. It is the time of the conflict between

20 the 5th Corps of the BH army Fikret Abdic's forces.

21 A. Yes, I do know about that. Prior to my return to

22 Bosnia-Herzegovina, on one occasion, I visited these people. They were

23 displaced persons. Actually, they were in no man's land in between the

24 two countries in the Kupljensko in Croatia. They hadn't gone into Croatia

25 yet, and they hadn't left BH yet.

1 Q. Now, if we look at the last sentence of that paragraph, where it

2 stays that the camp was closed at the beginning of 1996, when in May 1996,

3 when the refugees moved out and were relocated?

4 A. I really don't know if it was in the media then, probably, but I

5 didn't listen to the news on a regular basis. I listened to it

6 selectively.

7 Q. I asked you about that because you spoke of considerably -- you

8 spoke a lot about these two places, and we see that these refugees were

9 relocated there, too, the ones who came --

10 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Ms. Nozica, could you please enlighten the

11 Chamber on the relevance of these figures from 1966 for our work -- or

12 1996 for the work of the Chamber? It seems a bit far-fetched to me. You

13 certainly have a good explanation but I'd like to know it.

14 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I don't have any

15 exceptionally good explanation, except to say the analysis before you

16 comprises a period which is relevant to the indictment, but some facts and

17 figures do not go up -- do not include only the period which is relevant

18 to the indictment. So it says, as we can see, it ranges from 1993 to

19 1996. So as we're interested in a set period of time between those two

20 dates, I really can't say. I wasn't the person who compiled these

21 statistics.

22 But we will, of course, be showing facts and figures which

23 concentrate on the period we're interested in, and what I wanted to know

24 was the efforts undertaken by Croatia - I'm sure Mr. Praljak will do

25 that - as far as the refugees in Bosnia-Herzegovina are concerned

1 throughout the time period in the indictment. And that is something that

2 this witness can testify to because most of these refugees who arrived in

3 1992 are ones she came across when she came to take up her post in 1993,

4 but I will skip over the portions which relate to 1996.

5 Q. So now, Witness, may we go on to point 10 of this analysis, and

6 there we have something that is very important. And it is the table

7 jibing the situation and everything we've been talking about. So, as I

8 say, we have a chart there which shows us what the situation was like in

9 December 1992, that's what it starts off with, and the total number. And

10 we saw from the analysis that in 1992, the office did not have all the

11 statistical data at its disposal.

12 Now we can see May 1993. That's the next entry and the figure

13 there is 271.096. That's the total, and here it just shows the figures

14 for Croats and Muslims; then we go on to 1995, 1996, and 1997. We're not

15 going to deal with those now. And that would more or less correspond to

16 what we read out in the analysis; isn't that right, Witness?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. Now let's move on to the fourth part of this analysis, which is

19 page 6 of the Croatian, and in the English we don't have the page numbers,

20 but it comes after point 14. And the heading of that chapter is "Dynamics

21 of the Refugee Crisis," the survey. It's section 4, and it speaks about

22 the first arrivals of refugees from Bosnia-Herzegovina to Croatia in April

23 1992. That's the first paragraph. The second paragraph speaks of the

24 refugee wave at the end of May and beginning of June, the expulsion of the

25 population from various areas, and so on and so forth.

1 And now I'd like to look at the penultimate paragraph, where it

2 says, "The first columns of refugees from Bosnia-Herzegovina are moving

3 towards Croatia." That means we're dealing with May 1992 and the waves

4 are spiralling, the refugee waves are spiralling. And we see between 1

5 and 2.000 refugees pouring into Croatia every day. Large groups of

6 refugees arrived in Croatia after the occupation of Bosanska Posavina and

7 Jajce at the end of 1992.

8 . And the last paragraph says, "In March 1992, the refugees from

9 Bosnia-Herzegovina in Croatia numbered 16.000-odd, 16.579 to be exact.

10 And at the end of that year, we have 371.319 refugees, and I'm sure you

11 know that that was the situation, if not in absolute figures, but you

12 realise that this figure of 371.000-odd was the result of the war in

13 Bosnia-Herzegovina?

14 A. Yes, that corresponds to what I know.

15 Q. Thank you. Now let's look at page 7. So it's that same section,

16 that same chapter. I'd just like to ask you whether you know about this.

17 It says, "After the appeal, the government of the Republic of Croatia in

18 July 1992 to the European countries to take in Bosnian refugees, and a

19 part of large column of refugees from Bosnia-Herzegovina through Croatia

20 is moving towards the west across Croatia two-third countries, and about

21 450.000 refugees went that way. But before that, according to certain

22 statistical data, they spent time in Croatia on an average of three

23 months."

24 Now, can you tell us whether this is something you knew about?

25 A. After the events, I did receive information to that effect.

1 Q. Now let's move on to the next page, which is page 8 in the

2 Croatian version. In English,, let me just say that it is chapter 5

3 entitled, "The Welfare System for the Refugees and Displaced Persons in

4 Bosnia-Herzegovina." And the number in English is 2D 380118. It's

5 already on e-court.

6 Yesterday, during your testimony, you said - and I took note of

7 that on page 39, lines 13 to 16 - that this organisation -- or rather,

8 that the organisation of the Department for Refugees and Displaced

9 Persons, according to the different regions, is something you knew about.

10 A. Yes, I did know that they had local offices.

11 Q. I'm reading the first sentence. It says, "At the end of 1992, in

12 order to take care of the refugees, Croatia organised a special system by

13 connecting the already existing system of welfare sentence with a newly

14 formed Office for Refugees and Displaced Persons." And it says that 22

15 regional offices for refugees and displaced persons were organised, and

16 that would correspond more or less to what you knew about; is that right?

17 A. I can't tell you the exact number, but yes, I do know that a lot

18 of offices were opened throughout Croatia.

19 Q. Yes. They probably opened successively as the need arose?

20 A. Well, if your point isn't to give an exact figure, then I can

21 agree with you.

22 Q. Yes, quite right. That's what I was after. Now let's look at

23 paragraph 4, which speaks about money issues. So let's just make an

24 introduction. It says, "The Office for Refugees and Displaced Persons of

25 the government of Croatia takes care of refugees and displaced persons

1 through the national fund or republican found called Kralj Zvonimir, which

2 is financed from the national budget." Did you have any about that?

3 A. I did hear of the King Zvonimir Fund.

4 Q. Right. Now we can move on to chapter six, on the next page,

5 entitled, "Financial Expenditure for the Welfare of Refugees and Displaced

6 Persons in the period between 1992 and 1997." And that is the English

7 page 2D 38-01169.

8 We have here facts and figures, and I think you said that

9 statistics isn't a strong point of yours when it comes to money, how much

10 money Croatia spent on refugees from the budget and so on.

11 A. No, I don't know about that.

12 Q. Nonetheless, let's go through this or parts of this section to

13 see -- and we're talking about funds which Croatia received from the

14 UNHCR, the European Community and various donations. Let's see if

15 something rings a bell. It says, "Most of the expenses for the

16 accommodation of refugees and displaced persons in the Republic of Croatia

17 were made by the state, the Croatian state. From 1991 until the end of

18 1997, Croatia spent more than 1.603 billion US dollars on refugees and

19 displaced persons, including the expenses of health care, schooling, et

20 cetera. Of that sum, 1.133 billion US dollars were used for basic care

21 for refugees and displaced persons, 718 million US dollars for displaced

22 persons, and 415 million US dollars for refugees."

23 I'd now like to move down two paragraphs, and it says, "From the

24 budget of Croatia, the Republic of Croatia from 1992 to 1997, the national

25 fund was the channel for the realisation of this, and the figure was

1 5.651.000 Kunas. Kunas aren't relevant. Let's go to dollars. And it is

2 it is 897.020.658-odd US dollars.

3 And then it says, "The total international financial help for the

4 care of refugees and displaced persons donated through the office for

5 refugees and displaced persons amounted to a total of 227 million US

6 dollars. And then it goes on to break this down for welfare, settlements

7 for refugees and displaced persons, and partly for renovation. And now we

8 come to an important part: The contribution of international help for

9 refugees and displaced persons never rose above 30 per cent in relation to

10 the sums spent from the Croatian budget and its contribution in the period

11 from 1992 to 1997 is 11 per cent on an average. Now, you might know

12 this.

13 It says: "Through the National Kralj Zvonimir Fund from 1992 to

14 1997 international humanitarian programmes of the UNHCR, the European

15 Union, the Norwegian government" --

16 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Ms. Nozica, sorry for

17 interrupting, but we are perfectly capable of reading the document. What

18 would be more interesting would be for you to put questions to the witness

19 rather than reading out portions of the text and ask the witness to -- the

20 witness to say yes. We are perfectly able to read the document. What we

21 want from the witness is for her to tell her -- tell what she says -- what

22 she knows about the events. So ask her whether she knew about funding and

23 she can say, Yes or No. If she says No, then move on to something else.

24 Well, of course, if you want to spend your time that way that's your

25 choice.

1 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I've just done that.

2 Perhaps you didn't notice, but I did just ask the witness and say that we

3 are moving on. The witness said she didn't know, and I will ask questions

4 about this. But I was just asking the witness whether she knew about

5 these facts and figures provided by the UNHCR, the European Union, and so

6 on and so forth. And I'll tell you of the sums. Here it says that the

7 UNHCR donated 82.661 -- or rather 82.661.978 US dollars. Do you know

8 about that? Or do you know anything at all about how much the UNHCR

9 donated to dealing and caring for refugees and displaced persons.

10 A. Counsel, I have to apologise. This is maybe a professional

11 deformation, because I'm an auditor and I memorise auditing data from

12 confirmed official sources. Now, I don't want to say about -- anything

13 about this, what I heard, what I read. I really didn't focus my attention

14 on information of this kind so I don't know.

15 Q. Well, can we look at the end of this document together linked to

16 this information as you say. It is signed by the head and it says all the

17 above facts and figures are official information of the Office for

18 Refugees and Displaced Persons of the government of the Republic of

19 Croatia and most of the official information appeared in official

20 publications published by the Croatian government. So can you testify

21 that you might have seen some of these facts and figures in official

22 Croatian sources? About the number of refugees, the number of funds, the

23 structure and so on and so forth?

24 A. Well, I said yes official information published by Croatian

25 institutions, yes.

1 Q. Very well. Thank you. Could you tell us did you see that?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. For the transcript, we have to say that attached to this document

4 is Document 2D 00494; namely, information that pertains to table 10 of

5 this report pertaining to April 1995. Madam, I am not going to go through

6 this with you. I just want the transcript to reflect this.

7 Now we have document 487, statistical information about the ethnic

8 structure of refugees. Paragraph 3 of this report speaks about that, the

9 document is 2D 00488. That is information in paragraph 10 in the part

10 that pertains to May 1996, and I would particularly like to say that there

11 is Document 2D 00492 and 2D 00493. These are tables that refer to the

12 resources used for taking care of refugees and expellees from 1992 until

13 1997. All this information was provided by the government of the Republic

14 of Croatia, the office for displaced persons and refugees.

15 I'd like to ask you something else now. We saw some information

16 here as to what was done and to what extent by Croatia?

17 MR. SCOTT: Excuse me, Your Honour. Your Honour, there haven't

18 been any questions put to the witness about these documents at all. I

19 don't understand the procedure. I'm sorry, I've been doing this for quite

20 some years now.

21 You can't just simply go through a list of documents, read the

22 numbers into the record, and not put a question to the witness. We've now

23 gone quickly through about four or five documents. Not a single question

24 has been put to the witness, nor has the witness confirmed any of these

25 documents. And I'm just saying so there's no confusion on the point when

1 it comes time for a motion to admit these exhibits the Prosecution is

2 going to oppose it as there's been no foundation through this witness as

3 to the -- as to any of these, virtually any of the documents, there may

4 have been one or two exceptions at the beginning; I'll have to go back and

5 look. But certainly in the last few minutes, there's been no validation,

6 not even a question to the witness, about any of these documents.

7 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Your Honours, the Prosecutor has is

8 the right to oppose this, and I imagine that that's what he will do. But

9 I assume that he will first look at the transcript from the witness's

10 testimony. The witness confirmed that she knew about this information and

11 these tables only contained this information structured in a particular

12 way. I'm not going to put any special questions to this witness. This

13 witness was asked considerably about what she knew and what she

14 remembered, and she said what she knew and she said what she didn't know

15 and what she remembered, what she didn't remember. There's quite a bit of

16 information. I just don't want to go through all these statistics any

17 long are, because I don't have enough time but these are statistics that

18 pertain to the analysis that was read out.

19 MR. SCOTT: Excuse me, Your Honour, I won't belabour it much

20 longer, but just to make the point. We just went over, for example, we've

21 lasted on the page, but I believe 2900488 if I'm not mistaken. And again

22 Your Honour, there wasn't a single question. The witness hasn't verified

23 a single document on this page and for counsel to say, she says she's seen

24 some material before; she's seen some official documents somewhere before,

25 in general, adds nothing. I'm sorry.

1 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Ms. Nozica, you've submitted and

2 shown a number of tables. Let me take, for example, the table in

3 Exhibit 492. We see a number of tables, a number of figures, but put

4 questions to the witness to support your case. Tell the witness listen

5 here, We have a table with these figures. Witness, can you tell me and so

6 on and so forth, and then the witness might or might not agree with you,

7 because if you're just trying to say that the Croatian government spent a

8 lot of money, yes, we can see that. It's obvious. But we're not going to

9 spend hours on that. We can see that a lot of money has been spent and

10 this has not been challenged. The witness therefore might confirm or not

11 what you're saying and then you can move on to something else.

12 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Your Honours, that was precisely the

13 aim of everything I was doing that it would become evident to you that

14 Croatia spent a lot of money. I could have done it through this analysis

15 and as for the tables, it is unnecessary for me to show the witness each

16 and every one of them. I will do that if I'm given extra time. But I

17 said for the transcript that, for example, table 2D 00494, I am kindly

18 asking you whether we can look at this document on e-court. D 00494.

19 Does it to correspond to information from paragraph 10 of the

20 report -- of the report that is under number 2D 00496? You can compare.

21 So it corresponds to this information -- may I just finish please,

22 Mr. Prosecutor. It has to do with April 1995. If you allow me to finish,

23 I will say that we see from these tables that are here that at the end of

24 the table a figure is mentioned, 185.428. That is the total number of

25 refugees in April 1995, in table -- in this table, rather, like in the

1 analysis for April 1995.

2 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, but what is your question

3 for the witness?

4 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I have put a question

5 to the witness, and the witness said in response that she knew some of

6 these figures and did not know about others. These tables only contain

7 statistics about the matters referred to in the analysis.

8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Sorry, may I just --

9 MR. SCOTT: No, sorry, Witness, before --

10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Scott.

11 MR. SCOTT: I'm not getting a microphone for some reason or

12 another. Your Honour, we're about to lose it from the screen, but I think

13 the answer we got sets it out quite well. On page 65, line 13 or 14, that

14 we are about to lose, we saw, in fact, what the real motivation is. That

15 was precisely the aim of everything that I was doing, Your Honour, and

16 that would become evident to you that Croatia spent a lot of money. In

17 other words, counsel was acting as a witness in presenting documents to

18 the Chamber without putting any questions to the witness. The point of

19 the exercise was for counsel to give what evidence to the Court and

20 testify in place of the witness, and it was, indeed, simply to take the

21 Chamber through documents for the purposes of the Chamber seeing

22 documents, for which there is no evidence on the record at this point.

23 And it would not be, with all due respect, I mean, this is a point

24 of view, that's exactly the point. There is no evidence before the

25 Chamber on this matter that has been confirmed by a witness, except

1 Counsel's presentation. So I do object, Your Honour. This is not the

2 proper way to proceed. And just now, Mr. President, when you cautioned

3 counsel on putting the question to the witness, the only response was, and

4 it's the only response we've received for the last 15 or 20 minutes, is

5 the witness has said she saw -- she had seen some of these figures. Well,

6 out of about ten documents so far, which of the figures had she seen and

7 what does she know and what can she say about them?

8 MR. MURPHY: Your Honour, I --

9 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Murphy, I'll give you the

10 floor later. But if the Defence wants to highlight that the Croatian

11 government has spent money for the refugees, the way I would have gone

12 about it would be as follows: I would ask the question to the witness. I

13 would ask her whether she knew that the Croatian government had spent

14 money. She would have said yes. Then you would proceed as follows: I'm

15 going to submit a document related to money spent throughout the years

16 1993, 1994, et cetera. Can you confirm that these expenses correspond to

17 the money spent by the Croatian government; and then the witness would say

18 I can, I can't, et cetera. And thus we would save a lot of time.

19 One day I should make a demonstration for you to get you to

20 understand how you should go about it. Ms. Nozica, please put questions

21 to the witness, questions that are useful for the Chamber to try and

22 highlight what you want to establish. You're trying to establish that the

23 Croatian government has spent money. Okay. But that you can do extremely

24 quickly. You just ask the witness whether she was aware of it. If she

25 was not aware of it, then you can ask how come at the embassy she had no

1 information about the budget, et cetera, and then you can start a line of

2 questioning.

3 MR. MURPHY: Yes. Thank you, Your Honour. I would like to be

4 heard briefly on this, because I think it does raise a couple important

5 points of principle.

6 Firstly, what Ms. Nozica has been doing with this witness is

7 exactly what we have spent month after month after month listening to

8 Mr. Scott do with witnesses, asking -- putting documents to them and

9 asking them whether that corresponds with their knowledge and experience.

10 May I finish, Mr. Scott, please?

11 The record will be quite clear when Your Honours look at it, as I

12 was, following it line by line, that that is what my colleague was doing.

13 And what we've been presented with here, Your Honour, is documents which

14 are clearly come from a very reliable source. I know it's inconvenient

15 for the Prosecution to be confronted with facts very often in this case,

16 but that's what's happening here. And Mr. Scott is entitled, afterwards,

17 wards to make whatever objections he wants to the exhibits. We will make

18 a response.

19 One of the things we can say in our response is that we have been

20 inundated over the last few days with requests for admissions of evidence

21 by the Prosecution for documents of a very similar nature emanating from

22 public authorities, which Mr. Scott blandly says are admissible under

23 89(C). Now, he can have it one way or the other, but not both ways. If

24 the Prosecution can adduce official documents and put them in evidence, we

25 can do the same, whether or not the witness testifies about their

1 contents. These are documents that come from the Republic of Croatia.

2 And, Your Honour, we'll make that argument in it due course, but

3 what Ms. Nozica did was to very properly put questions to this witness to

4 ask whether certain figures corresponded with -- with her knowledge. The

5 witness in some cases said it did; in some cases said it didn't.

6 Now, if Mr. Scott had been listening to the testimony, he would

7 have understood that the other documents Ms. Nozica referred to are, in

8 fact, tables, which present in summary form the more detailed information

9 presented in the -- in the report; and to save time, Ms. Nozica referred

10 to them for the purpose of the record. That's all that happened.

11 Mr. Scott's intervention was completely inappropriate, and he can

12 make his objections at a later time. And I ask that Ms. Nozica to now be

13 allowed to continue with her cross-examination.

14 JUDGE TRECHSEL: I think, Mr. Murphy, I think it is necessary to

15 recall that according to the rules established by this Chamber and

16 practice, during the presentation of the Prosecution's evidence, the

17 Prosecution can introduce documents which have not been put to a witness

18 because they could not, you know, you're quite aware. The Defence will

19 have that possibility when the Defence presents its case, but not now.

20 These are the rules we have established. So your comparison, with due

21 respect, is not entirely fair.

22 MR. MURPHY: Well, if that's the -- if that's the case, Your

23 Honour, I -- I will have to go back to the Court's previous rulings and

24 look at the orders that were made. If that's true, I'm very surprised to

25 hear that. It's not my recollection -- it's not my recollection. I'm not

1 saying Your Honour is wrong. I'll have to look at it, of course, and

2 maybe Your Honour has the order in front of him and -- and will be able to

3 correct me. But, Your Honour, it -- what we're doing here, Your Honour,

4 and we've been doing throughout this trial is to introduce in

5 cross-examination documents tendered by the Defence. I think that's

6 happened on a consistent basis.

7 There have been numerous orders by the Trial Chamber admitting

8 such documents tendered by the Defence on exactly the basis we're doing

9 now. And, Your Honour, I see no basis for Your Honours to say that we may

10 not use public documents from the Republic of Croatia in order to

11 cross-examine a witness, who was in an official position with the embassy

12 in Zagreb at the material time. It's the only way to confront her with

13 the facts. I know that's inconvenient for the Prosecution, but I think

14 it's a legitimate function of cross-examination.

15 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Murphy, there may be a

16 misunderstanding here. The documents submitted by the Defence will, of

17 course, be admitted by the Defence if the documents are -- have a

18 probative value and are relevant, especially since these documents have

19 been provided as part of the cooperation with the Tribunal. This document

20 was provided on the 12th of June, 1998, to the OTP as part of the

21 cooperation with the OTP.

22 What matters for the Judges is the substance of these documents

23 and what you want to highlight in these documents. That's what I wanted

24 to draw your attention upon, because obviously the witness was not

25 familiar with these documents. She can't talk about the figures. The

1 only thing she can say is of a very general nature. In other words, did

2 the Croatian government budget certain expenses for the refugees? She

3 said yes, and then we move on to something else.

4 But spending so much time reading out figures in tables, it's

5 waste of time. A waste of time for you, a waste of time for me. I'd

6 rather we moved ahead. Of course, these tables are extremely interesting,

7 especially when I see that there is a breakdown of refugees according to

8 the various localities.

9 Mr. Scott, you wanted to take the floor.

10 JUDGE TRECHSEL: May I just answer Mr. Murphy. I would refer you

11 to the decision of 13 July 2006. It's number 6, which says that under the

12 conditions hereafter, the Prosecutor can, after hearing of a witness, and

13 so forth, and this is not -- this does not refer to both parts. We have

14 discussed this in Chambers, actually. So that is the reference of what I

15 referred to.

16 MR. MURPHY: Well, Your Honour, obviously, I don't have the

17 advantage of knowing what Your Honours discussed in Chambers. In order to

18 save time, may I just say, Your Honour, of course, and I take Judge

19 Antonetti's point that we -- we need to -- there are certain times when,

20 of course, we need to move on. It is, if I may say so, however, just

21 another illustration of the problems at that arise because we don't have

22 sufficient time.

23 If there were time to go through these documents line by line, we

24 do -- we could, of course, do what Mr. Scott apparently wants us to do,

25 but, Your Honour, we have to do what we can given the time. And if we're

1 going to stand on -- on formalities here and say, well, we can't consider

2 these documents now, and at some later time they're going to come in, then

3 a great deal of time will be wasted. And we won't have the opportunity of

4 challenging this witness on very important points.

5 Your Honour, despite the order of the 13th of July, I would

6 respectfully submit that if information is tendered by the Defence that

7 that challenges the substance of a witness's evidence, that is information

8 that the Trial Chamber should consider. It may be that -- that later the

9 statistics may have to be proved in their own right, but it would be a

10 disadvantage to the Chamber if you can't have a witness confronted with

11 facts relating to her testimony. That's all we're trying to do, and it

12 shifts the burden of proof away from the Prosecution.

13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Scott.

14 MR. SCOTT: Thank you, Your Honour. I hope the Chamber

15 appreciates my patience. It's very difficult when one stands up not to --

16 not to be tempted to try to respond to everything that's been said in the

17 last few minutes, but I won't attempt that. I leave it to the Chamber's

18 good judgement and recall of the record itself as to what's been said and

19 not said.

20 My only points -- I only have two points to make very briefly.

21 One is I would invite counsel not to personalise these comments and talk

22 about, you know, what the Prosecution is afraid of and not to be

23 confronted. It's inconvenient to be confronted with the facts. When I

24 stand up and made my objection, I was not personal to the counsel on other

25 side. I simply made a legal objection. I didn't make personal comments

1 about her or any other counsel. I don't think it adds anything, frankly.

2 Number one. And I would just ask, and I would ask and invite my

3 colleagues, that is not necessary to engage in that sort of behaviour.

4 Number two, Your Honour, more importantly, my only point is this:

5 Of course, both parties can put in documents from public sources at the

6 appropriate time. I don't want to be inconsistent. Absolutely, I think

7 there are documents that should come in on their own, and the Chamber has

8 provided -- the Chamber has provided vehicles for doing that.

9 What I do object to and what I don't think is proper

10 cross-examination -- excuse me, Your Honour. No. I'm not finished, but

11 I'm just waiting to have the Chamber's attention. What is not proper,

12 Your Honour, and my only point is, my only point is that this is

13 cross-examination and we have a witness on the stand, and there shouldn't

14 be any pretense that the witness has added anything to the material that's

15 been put in front of her. That's the point. Not whether these documents

16 can be tendered in some other way. They probably can.

17 And, indeed, the Prosecution will use various vehicles available

18 to it under the Rules to tender documents, but that is not the same thing

19 to sit here in court and go quickly go through a bunch of documents, as

20 if, as if the witness is adding value to them. That is the problem and

21 that's the nature of my objection.

22 But, Mr. President, as you said some minutes ago, if that's how

23 the hour of cross-examination wants to be spent, then I suppose it's up to

24 them to use the time or waste the time as they see fit.

25 MR. MURPHY: Your Honour, I apologise --

1 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours.

2 MR. MURPHY: -- if I personalised anything regarding Mr. Scott. I

3 inadvertently borrowed some language he used in response to Mr. Karnavas

4 yesterday, which I probably shouldn't have done.

5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank.

6 Ms Alaburic.

7 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, you say something,

8 and hopefully remind all present in this courtroom, of something that

9 Judge Trechsel said in July 2006 about the possibility of admitting

10 evidence into the record. If you remember when this decision was passed,

11 the Defence counsel reacted straight away to the fact that the Prosecutor

12 has the right to tender some documents irrespective of witnesses.

13 And we said immediately that we thought that this infringed upon

14 the equality of arms in the proceedings involved, and we were given an

15 explanation to the effect that, of course, this right does not only

16 pertain to the Prosecution but that equal rights are enjoyed by the

17 Defence too. We trusted that interpretation, and we did not ask for the

18 decision to be changed in writing as well.

19 If that would be the interpretation of the entire Trial Chamber,

20 what His Honour Judge Trechsel said just now, we will certainly initiate

21 an amendment of this decision. Otherwise, we, Defence counsel and our

22 clients, will not be in a position to fully avail ourselves of the right

23 to defence during the Prosecution case. Thank you.

24 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Ms. Nozica, we might have wasted

25 20 minutes, and I would have rather taken a look at your documents so

1 please proceed.

2 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. I hope this

3 isn't my 20 minutes, but I just wish to explain one point. I showed an

4 official document by the government of Croatia which shows and I'm sorry

5 to say this in front of the witness there is no need for her to go out.

6 What the Croatian state did not only in terms of money and Your Honour

7 asked the witness to see how much money was spent. I never expected the

8 witness to know that. She was in the embassy of another state. But I had

9 to go through each of these facts and figures to test whether the witness

10 knows about it, and she did confirm knowing about some of those elements.

11 So this document speaks of the overall efforts made by Croatia during a

12 time which in the indictment comes under joint criminal enterprise.

13 Now, for me every confirmation by this witness for even the

14 smallest statistical figure is sufficient for the time being. There will

15 be more witnesses coming in, Mr. Praljak will be doing the work for me,

16 there will be other evidence that we're going to present, but for the

17 transcript I'd like to make this clear. The Prosecutor today did

18 precisely something that you reprimanded the Defence for yesterday. He

19 came across a document which does not correspond to -- which doesn't suit

20 the Prosecutor. It was an official document so he intentionally

21 interrupted us. It showed things that were notoriously well-known. And

22 if -- unless we deal with these documents in the courtroom, he will have

23 the opportunity of lodging a complaint in due course to object. So if he

24 considers that some of these tables were not treated with the witness, let

25 him raise an objection, but please may I be allowed to conduct my

1 cross-examination.

2 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Please proceed then.

3 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Thank you.

4 Q. Madam, just to finish off this topic about money and funds. I

5 understood you to say that you didn't have this information, you didn't

6 know how much money Croatia spent and if you ever saw the facts and

7 figures you don't remember them. Would that be the correct interpretation

8 of what you wanted to say?

9 A. Correct.

10 Q. Thank you. Now I have in front of me a document, and I assume you

11 have the Prosecution binder in front of you still. Just to make a brief

12 comparison. The document is P 04150 [Realtime transcript read in error

13 "P 0415"]. It's a Prosecution document, Prosecution binder. The number

14 again P, Prosecution, 0415. And you'll tell me when you've found it. You

15 signed it. It is a report on the problems of RBH in the State of Croatia.

16 Have you found the document?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. It is dated the 13th of August, 1993, and I'm going to refer to

19 page 2 of the Croatian version, and that will be found on ERN number 0218.

20 8.

21 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Just a point on the record. You have said

22 P 0415. It is P 04150, and it was wrong in the record. So that could

23 have misled.

24 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Thank you, thank you. That is indeed

25 the document. So for Their Honours, I'm going to say that the ERN number

1 is as follows 02188966.

2 Q. And in the Croatian version, madam, it is on page 2. And it is

3 the last paragraph in the Croatian text, and it is the second paragraph on

4 the page that I quoted in English.

5 Now, today we spoke about refugees in other countries, but if we

6 compare, and that's what I'd like to do now since this is your own

7 observation, where it says that Turkey would take in 2.000 of our citizens

8 in two collective centres, put up towards the Bulgarian border, one 100

9 kilometres and the other 130 kilometres away from Istanbul. And it says

10 here that there are 2.000 refugees there already.

11 Now, this is the portion that I'd like to focus on about the use

12 of funds and resources. It says: "Turkey would be ready to meet the

13 costs of transport from Croatia from an earlier given amount of money of

14 40 million US dollars."

15 That's the information you received, that Turkey was ready to take

16 in these additional 2.000 refugees, but the Bosnians should pay for their

17 own transport to Turkey?

18 A. I was writing about what Ambassador Tufan informed me about.

19 Q. My colleague Mr. Karnavas asked you about the status and

20 conditions of certain refugees. Now, can you make a comparison between

21 what Croatia did and the situation facing refugees in Denmark? And you

22 and I, as BH citizens, know about all this. We spent many -- a lot of

23 time on ships and ferries. Can you give me a general assessment? You

24 don't know how much money Croatia spent, you say. However, on the basis

25 of the conditions under which refugees lived in other countries and the

1 conditions -- compared to the conditions they lived in in Croatia, can you

2 give us your assessment, a general assessment of how much Croatia did for

3 the Bosnian refugees?

4 A. I'm sorry, but I can't.

5 Q. Can you tell us then whether most of the Bosnian refugees were put

6 up in Croatia along the coast, or, rather, most of these people were put

7 up along the Adriatic coast?

8 A. I don't know whether most of them, but that a large number of them

9 were, that I can confirm.

10 Q. Was there a large number of refugees arriving in 1992 put up in

11 the holiday centres and hotels and given collective accommodation there;

12 is that right?

13 A. Yes, that is right. I can confirm that.

14 Q. Right. Now, in Turkey, did Turkey offer accommodation to refugees

15 along the borders -- its borders with Bulgaria not as in Untily [phoen]

16 but just like -- but, whereas, Croatia offered them accommodation along

17 the Adriatic coast?

18 A. Yes, it is correct that Turkey offered what I stipulate in the

19 letter.

20 Q. Well, would that mean that conditions were better? And we must

21 not forget that Croatia itself was at war and some of its territory in the

22 north was occupied and that the refugees were accommodated far away from

23 the crisis zones? So just on that point would you say that Croatia

24 offered the refugees from Bosnia-Herzegovina much better conditions than

25 did most of the European countries? Can you confirm that?

1 A. No, I could not.

2 Q. All right. I don't want to insist. Can you tell me then how much

3 the state of Bosnia and Herzegovina spent on refugees in Croatia through

4 the department and office that you worked for?

5 A. No, I'm sorry, I can't say that. I don't know.

6 Q. Why can't you tell me that? Why can't you say? Do you not know

7 or what?

8 JUDGE PRANDLER: I'm sorry to interrupt you. Of course I'm not

9 here for speaking about the situation and the conditions, let's say, in

10 those camps when we had in Hungary during the war, but I may say that it

11 is rather difficult to compare the situation and the conditions in

12 different countries. Of course, Hungary didn't have the Adriatic Coast,

13 itself, a very nice place to be.

14 On the other hand, I believe that the conditions should be and

15 could be determined, not only by the geographic situation of a camp but

16 really what is being offered to the refugees. And since I happened to be

17 there in the camps in Baranja, in southern part of Hungary, of course, in

18 this case we try to do our best, I mean, the Hungarian government, to

19 help.

20 I'm just saying this because you asked the question if the

21 situation, overall situation, and the conditions were better in Croatia

22 than in, let's say, Turkey, or some other countries.

23 Thank you.

24 MR. MURPHY: Your Honour, I'm -- I'm grateful for that

25 intervention. I just ask my colleague for permission to make a short

1 observation which would be, of course -- I'm sure Your Honour would be

2 aware of the importance of not bringing any personal knowledge that he may

3 have from his own observation as a substitute for the evidence given by

4 the witnesses in this case. I know Your Honour appreciates the importance

5 of that.

6 JUDGE PRANDLER: Yes, I accept this. Thank you.

7 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I did not wish to make

8 any comparisons between individual countries, but I did take the example

9 of Turkey. And I say here that Turkey agreed to -- to take in 2.000 of

10 our citizens, but they are requiring funds to transport them from Croatia

11 to Turkey.

12 I think the witness knows quite a bit about this, and I wanted to

13 obtain an evaluation from the witness about the accommodation of the

14 refugees in Croatia, but she said she wouldn't comment. So I now went on

15 and asked what Bosnia and Herzegovina as state spent in Croatia.

16 Q. Madam, how big was your budget in the embassy for the refugees

17 from Bosnia-Hercegovina? I assume you had a budget of some kind?

18 A. The Budget, you mean the funds of the Republic of

19 Bosnia-Herzegovina? I don't know which budget you mean.

20 Q. I mean your department in Zagreb at the embassy. Did you receive

21 funds, resources which allowed to you act and intervene when it came to

22 refugees?

23 A. In cooperation with the NGO sectors and UN organisations, we did

24 dispose of certain funds based on projects financed by donators, by

25 donors. And I can't tell you that now, because I can't speak of any total

1 sum or the specific project -- project involved.

2 Q. But I didn't ask you that. I asked you about the funds, the

3 resources, money. Just a moment, please for the transcript.

4 I was speaking about funds given to you by the Bosnia-Herzegovina

5 government to be used on refugees, Bosnian refugees, in Croatia, so funds

6 from the budget of the State of Bosnia-Herzegovina or other funds for that

7 matter, of Bosnia-Herzegovina. I'm not referring to donations, and I'm

8 not referring to the monies collected from non-governmental organisations.

9 My first question is what the BH government gave to be spent on

10 refugees.

11 A. During my mandate, the directorate for displaced persons and

12 refugees provided 50.000 marks for the requirements of the teaching staff

13 in extra territorial schools of the BH in the RC. I assume that this was

14 from the BH budget, funds from the budget, but I can't claim that. But

15 those funds came from the directorate to the department.

16 Q. And do you know whether the embassy came by funds in different

17 ways? Do you know about the logistical centres, military logistical

18 centres were financed, for example, logistical centres of the state of BH

19 in Croatia? Do you know about that?

20 A. No.

21 Q. I'm now going to look at -- ask you to look at 2D 00 - and it will

22 be the last document before the break - 497. 2D 00497 is the document

23 number. I think it's the third document from the bottom. Tell me when

24 you've found it.

25 A. I have got the document.

1 Q. It is an article entitled, "The Secret of the Suitcase with a

2 Million Dollars." You have the text in Croatia. So leaf through three or

3 four pages and you'll see that you have the document there. It is the

4 independent weekly called "Dani."

5 MS. NOZICA: May we have it on e-court? The page number is 2D

6 380170. It is the 184th issue of Dan, and the text is identical.

7 Q. And I'm going to it read something out to you which relates to the

8 financing and money that possibly the embassy might have had at its

9 disposal, even for refugees. It says here, "The secret suitcase with a

10 million dollars." It has who the member of the Bosnian government is.

11 "Dr. Fatih Ali Hassanien, director and founder of the TWRA, every week

12 handed over a suitcase with a million American dollars, which he -- was

13 sent by the Islamic world to the Bosnians."

14 I'll ask my question at the end. It says, "The embassies, the BH

15 Embassy in Zagreb and Vienna, are the key to understanding Bosniak war

16 diplomacy, which is at the foundations of today's diplomatic

17 representation of Bosnia-Herzegovina. They were two of the most murky and

18 linked-up embassies for only one reason. Both of them functioned in close

19 connection with the TWRA, and the circle around Dr. Fatih Ali Hassanien

20 says a Bosniak investigator of war crimes who during 1993 and 1994 was in

21 contact with most of the RBiH embassies in western Europe."

22 I'm going to skip the next paragraph. Now, the editorial offices

23 of the weekly Dan, for the record. It was a weekly published in

24 Bosnia-Herzegovina in Sarajevo, was it not?

25 A. Yes, it is a weekly that is published in Sarajevo.

1 Q. "The editorial offices of Dan," it says, "are in possession of

2 original documents which show the impotence of official organs to uncover

3 parallel influences, links, and the course followed by money in Bosnian

4 diplomatic circles in Vienna and Zagreb." And then there is mention of an

5 investigation conducted against TWRA, and I'm going to read the

6 penultimate paragraph on the first page.

7 It says, "The money which arrived mostly from Saudi Arabia,

8 Brunei, and Pakistan did not reach Ali Hassanien, only on the basis of the

9 seven bank accounts." Seven bank accounts are mentioned in the previous

10 paragraph, but in the suitcase as well?

11 MR. SCOTT: I apologise for interrupting. But before it's about

12 to leave the screen now, on line 21 of page 81 attributes some text as an

13 answer of the witness, when it was not an answer of the witness. We've

14 lost it now, I'm afraid, but perhaps someone can go back in e-court. But

15 there was an indication on that line that some text was the answer of the

16 witness and it was not. It was the continuing part of the question. In

17 fact, there hasn't been an answer.

18 The witness hasn't given an answer, except to identify a weekly

19 publication in Sarajevo for some minutes. So while I'm on my feet, Your

20 Honour, as of now - there may be questions coming - but as of now, we're

21 back to simply reading documents to the court, which the Chamber may find

22 interesting, but I note without putting any questions to the witness.

23 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I do ask you, and I

24 said this at the beginning. Well, I have to ask the witness something. I

25 wasn't able to prepare the witness, who showed her -- who was shown a

1 series of documents by the Prosecution. So I'm showing this, and it is

2 only proper that the Trial Chamber and the witness sees these documents

3 and knows what they're about.

4 Q. So, madam, I'll just say, very briefly. It says, "The money

5 arrived in suitcases at the beginning the war. Dr. Fatih travelled from

6 Vienna to Zagreb on a weekly basis by car with a suitcase full of money,

7 Sudanese number plates, and there were 3 to 5 million American dollars in

8 the suitcase. On a regular basis Dr. Hassanein, with respect to an

9 investigation carried out by the Austrian and German police, claimed that

10 he handed over the money in Zagreb to a member of the Bosnian government."

11 Now, madam, I'm just going to ask you something in that regard,

12 very short questions.

13 Did you know about the writings of this weekly? I'm sure you read

14 it in Sarajevo.

15 A. You mean about the press writings?

16 Q. Yes. Did you know that an investigation was conducted into the

17 alleged money. I say alleged, but about the money that reached Zagreb in

18 a suitcase?

19 A. Just from these sources, yes.

20 Q. And, in that respect, did you give out any information?

21 A. No.

22 Q. Did you have any knowledge to the effect that money came to the

23 embassy in some ways that would have been apart from the budget of

24 Bosnia-Herzegovina, apart from NGO resources?

25 A. No.

1 Q. Did you ever ask authorised officials, the ambassador or anyone

2 else in the embassy, to allocate certain funds for the hardest hit

3 categories of refugees that addressed you?

4 A. The information I had was that there were no resource, and that's

5 why I did not make such requests.

6 Q. If necessary, we can take the break now; and then after the break,

7 I'm going to calculate how much time I have left, and then I'm will

8 continue my cross-examination.

9 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] We are going to break for 20

10 minutes.

11 --- Recess taken at 12.32 p.m.

12 --- On resuming at 12.54 p.m.

13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I think Mr. Scott would like to

14 speak.

15 MR. SCOTT: Thank you very much. I'm reluctant to take courtroom

16 time, but I know we won't finish with the witness today under any

17 scenario. And I'm afraid if I wait until 1.45, I know everyone tends to

18 try to move out the courtroom rather quickly. So two quick matters, Your

19 Honour.

20 When I make -- when the Prosecution, and I'm sure the Defence as

21 well, makes a commitment to the Chamber to provide certain information, we

22 want to follow through on that. And, yesterday, Judge Trechsel raised a

23 question about a handwritten notation, a number on one of the documents.

24 It was document Exhibit P 10060. And in the transcript, yesterday, Judge

25 Trechsel raised a question of why on the English translation there was --

1 the number 104425 had been put on the translation as indicating it was

2 handwritten on the original.

3 I have may have had the inquiry, Your Honours, and my initial

4 explanation was -- was in fact wrong, but what I did find was that it

5 was -- it's simply a number that apparently was put on by CLSS, the

6 interpreters, for their own administrative purposes. It was not on the

7 original document as it came into the Tribunal, but CLSS has a certain

8 numbering system sometimes, and it was a number that they added, and then

9 whoever did the English translation carried it over on. So, Your Honour,

10 that's the information on that point.

11 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Thank you.

12 MR. SCOTT: Secondly, Your Honours, and I'm going to say this

13 because the witness is here and I don't want to take the time to excuse

14 here. But if I can address the matter without mentioning any particular

15 name, and I'll hopefully everyone in the courtroom will be cautious in

16 this regard. The Prosecution is due to make a certain filing today that

17 was discussed earlier. We are asking to be granted some additional --

18 some additional words, and again without describing exactly what the

19 pleadings are.

20 The Defence to date on this same matter have filed a total of 30

21 pages worth of pleadings comprising some 9.926 words, 9.926 words. The

22 Prosecution to date has filed seven pages and 2.601 words. The Chamber

23 previously grand us leave to file a reply, and we're asking to be able to

24 file a reply somewhere in the vicinity of about 4.800 words, which will

25 still bring us well under the total words used by the Defence if the

1 Chamber agrees.

2 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] You are granted the permission

3 to do so. You are allowed up to 4.800 words.

4 MR. SCOTT: Thank you, Your Honour.

5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Fine. Well, we still have 45

6 minutes; and according to the time imparted to the Defence, it is time

7 granted to Ms. Nozica. So, Ms. Nozica, you have the floor.

8 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

9 Q. Ms. Krajsek, I'm going to ask you to look at a document, 2D 0009.

10 That is the first document in my binder, as far as I can see.

11 A. I have the document.

12 Q. We have very little time. Could you look at least at the first

13 page. Do you know this document? It was compiled on the 16th of July

14 when you were in the Embassy of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina in

15 Zagreb.

16 A. I'm not familiar with this document.

17 Q. All right. I'm going to ask you about some of the persons

18 mentioned in this document and you probably know them. So this is a

19 document of the embassy of the Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina in Zagreb,

20 and it gives the names of certain persons who live in the -- who work in

21 the military economic office and in the logistics department of the

22 Supreme Command Staff or, rather, they initiate proceedings for the

23 official appointment of these persons.

24 Please look at these persons. Do you know any of the six persons

25 mentioned here in the military economic office, and can you confirm

1 whether you came across them when you were in Zagreb?

2 A. Except for the person under number 3 -- rather, number 6, Blanka

3 Vucak. I saw all the rest of them while I was in Zagreb.

4 Q. For the interpreters, I have to caution both of us, myself and

5 you. After my question, we should make a small break, a pause, you and I,

6 so that we do not overlap.

7 A. Can I just ask that they let me hear the interpreter because then

8 I will realise how long they take to finish. It will be easier.

9 Q. You can hear the interpreters from a distance and you can also

10 look at the transcript in front of you, and you can follow that.

11 Tell me -- this other logistics department of the Supreme Command

12 Staff of the Armed Forces of the Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina in Zagreb,

13 there is 21 names mentioned here. Can you tell us whether you came across

14 any of these persons in Zagreb and whether you were in touch with them in

15 any way?

16 A. I met persons 2, 3, 4. I'm not sure, but number 14 sounds

17 familiar. Those are the only persons that I came across, and I only had

18 contacts with them that would boil down to saying hello to each other, but

19 I didn't have any official contact.

20 Q. Thank you. We see here that this has to do with the procedure of

21 legalising these centres dated the 16th of July, 1993. Did you have any

22 knowledge to the effect that these persons had been in Zagreb before this

23 date as well?

24 A. No.

25 Q. As for Mr. Hasan Cengic, did you see him in Zagreb in the embassy

1 or somewhere else?

2 A. I did, but outside the period when I was engaged as the attache

3 for refugees.

4 Q. Could you please tell me then what this period was then?

5 A. 1992. September and October, because then I was waiting in Zagreb

6 for humanitarian flights that would enable me to return to my country.

7 That's when I met him.

8 Q. So I can conclude that you were a rather frequent guest at the

9 embassy in 1992 as well. You did not have an official capacity, but you

10 came there to see how you could get to Sarajevo.

11 A. There was no embassy at the time. There was the office of the BH

12 in the Republic of Croatia.

13 Q. And that's when you saw Mr. Hasan Cengic as you said. Did you

14 come across any other people from this list?

15 A. Possibly. But, you know, perhaps I didn't know their names. I

16 did not know of having seen them.

17 Q. Did you know that there were logistics departments of the Supreme

18 Command of the armed forces of BH in Zagreb?

19 A. No.

20 Q. Within the embassy did you have any staff meetings these different

21 departments? Did you know about who was doing what?

22 A. I did not have any comprehensive information about this in terms

23 of what the tasks and duties were of certain individuals. We had a few

24 staff meetings and the plan was to have regular meetings, at least once a

25 week, but after one or two meetings this practice withered away.

1 Q. Could we now look at 2D 00498. That is the one but last document

2 in my binder. Just tell me when you find it.

3 A. I have the document.

4 Q. I would like to say for the transcript that this is a document

5 that was provided by the Prosecutor to us according to Rule 68. It is a

6 rather comprehensive document, probably related to the TVRA agency. At

7 least that is what I infer, but can you just help me with part of this

8 document, and that part is even translated.

9 Please, could we just look at the first page of this document. We

10 have a few pictures here, a few photographs, some of which have dates as

11 well. I would just like to ask you, because your copy is far more legible

12 than what it is in e-court. Please look at these photographs and tell me

13 whether you can recognise any of these people. I have to tell you that

14 according to my knowledge this document was obtained from the Bosnian

15 embassy that was in Zagreb.

16 Q. Do you know any of the people on these photographs? These

17 photographs have dates: April, June, other months in 1992.

18 A. No one seems familiar to me, as far as I manage to see on these

19 photographs.

20 Q. Madam, could you please tell me in that year, 1992, and in 1993,

21 in the Bosnian embassy in Zagreb did you come across any individuals of

22 Arab origin who came to get documents needed for entering

23 Bosnia-Herzegovina? I'm asking you about 1992 when you came to the

24 embassy every now and then and the beginning of 1993.

25 A. No, I did not come across such people.

1 Q. All right. Did you have any knowledge to the effect that they did

2 receive documents from the embassy in Zagreb for entering

3 Bosnia-Herzegovina?

4 A. I did not know about that.

5 Q. Thank you. Could we please look at the pages in this

6 document 0328-4603. That is the first page. These are certain tables.

7 When you find them, tell me, please. And it also says 1, and then you go

8 all the way to table 17.

9 A. I have the page that ends in 4603.

10 Q. Thank you.

11 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] For the Trial Chamber, I would like

12 to say that the translation was made only for those parts that we are

13 going to refer to -- or rather, that I'm going to refer to in my

14 cross-examination, and we have given the entire text to be translated, so

15 then we are going to put the translation into e-court once we get it.

16 Q. So we see here that this is a document of the ARBiH centre for

17 logistics with Supreme Command headquarters Zagreb Samobor group and it

18 says here the army of -- the Republic Bosnia-Herzegovina centre for

19 logistics of the Supreme Command headquarters Zagreb-Samobor group. Did

20 you know of the existence of this group in Samobor?

21 A. No I didn't.

22 Q. You said that you knew Mr. Hasan Cengic and you confirmed that you

23 saw him in 1992 in Zagreb. Is that right?

24 A. That's right.

25 Q. Did you know Mr. Suajba Seta?

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. Did you come across him?

3 A. I came across him at the embassy.

4 Q. In 1992 or later?

5 A. No, no. When I came there as attache.

6 Q. What was it that he did then?

7 A. His work and the work done by some other colleagues is what I

8 thought was related to the electronic transfer of documents coming from me

9 and other colleagues to Bosnia and Herzegovina. So that was my knowledge.

10 The transfer of documents from Zagreb to Sarajevo in that way.

11 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreters note we cannot hear Ms. Nozica

12 because she overlapped.

13 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation]

14 Q. Suajba Seta. Thank you. We saw a document related to an official

15 appointment from July 1993. I'm just going to ask you about some persons,

16 and I'm referring to number 1, for example, where the salary for 1992 is

17 referred to. Ejub Husika, did you know that person?

18 A. No. Do you want me to go through this list and then I'll tell

19 you?

20 Q. All right.

21 A. Kalajdzic Sulejman.

22 Q. You knew him?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. Does it say convoy for Visoko next to his name?

25 THE INTERPRETER: The speakers are speaking at the same time the

1 interpreters note.

2 JUDGE PRANDLER: Excuse me. The interpreters have already many

3 times requested you, Ms. Nozica, and also the witness, that you should

4 slow down and to have one minute at least or something like that in

5 between the questions and answers. Thank you.

6 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Thank you.

7 Q. Madam, you heard this. It pertains to both of us. So we will

8 slow down.

9 Number 5, Silajdzic Sulejman. You knew him. And I would just

10 like to say for the transcript that on the 8th of January, 1993, there was

11 some convoy going to Visoko. Is that what this paper says?

12 A. No. It says -- no. In the document I'm looking at it is the 22nd

13 of December.

14 Q. What item are you looking at?

15 A. Oh, I beg your pardon. Number 5 is the 8th of January. I do

16 apologise.

17 Q. You said that you would tell us roughly whether you knew anybody

18 else.

19 A. Person number 8. And the same person is referred to under number

20 16, the same person referred as referred to in number 5. And I don't know

21 anybody else.

22 Q. All right. We have identified some people. So let me put it this

23 way now: Number 5, 9, and 10. Numbers 5, 9, and 10. It says that there

24 are some convoys going to Visoko, to Vlasenica, and yet another convoy

25 going to Visoko under number 10.

1 Did you have any knowledge about this period, that is to say the

2 month of December 1992, 1993, that there were some convoys going in these

3 directions?

4 A. No. At that time I was in Bosnia.

5 Q. In the period while you were staying in Croatia did you have any

6 knowledge about some convoys being prepared and some convoys going? You

7 were obviously interested in going back to Sarajevo; right?

8 A. I did not have any knowledge. At that time, I was in contact with

9 the UNHCR and I was asking about what the possibilities were in term of

10 humanitarian aid.

11 Q. Madam, table number 2. I just have a brief question. Number 1,

12 2, 3, 4 says that these are salaries for 1992; is that right?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. Doesn't this document show that the centre for logistics of the

15 Supreme Command headquarters existed in Zagreb at that time as well?

16 A. The document does speak about that.

17 Q. Let's move on to table number 3, and I'm coming up to something

18 that I consider to be vital as far as your testimony is concerned so far,

19 so let's look at table number 3 now. Under 1 it is Sulejman Kalajdzic.

20 It is a convoy of equipment and materiel for Visoko. Do you know what was

21 in the convoy?

22 A. No.

23 Q. Do you know that there was the main logistics base in Visoko that

24 was called Gloc? Did you know about that?

25 A. No.

1 Q. Later on when you returned to Bosnia did you learn that it was the

2 main logistical base for supplying the BH army?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. While you were in Zagreb -- you say you didn't know about it.

5 A. No, I didn't, no.

6 Q. Let us look at numbers 10 and 11. The convoy is going to Visoko

7 once again, and it says the arrival of four trucks, trailer trucks, Saja's

8 trucks.

9 Now, because I haven't got much time I'm going to have to go

10 through this a little more quickly. So let's take a look at table 4.

11 We'll skip table 5 -- or, rather, let -- this is still 1992. We see under

12 number 14 a convoy carrying equipment and materiel. Under 4 it says

13 convoy, and we see the funds set aside.

14 Now, these are considerable funds, as you can see. The document

15 was obtained from the embassy, the Bosnian embassy in Zagreb. Did you

16 have any information at the time or subsequently about the way in which

17 all these activities were financed? And I'm asking you this connection

18 with your answer when you said that you had hardly any resources or

19 negligible resources coming to you from Bosnian to finance the refugees.

20 So did you know how activities of this kind were financed? Did you have

21 the knowledge then or subsequently?

22 A. Neither then nor subsequently, except much later from the mass

23 media.

24 Q. What did you learn then from the mass media?

25 A. That this was financed from sources and funds of assistance that

1 the article in the weekly Dan referred to.

2 Q. You mean the funds that arrived in Zagreb?

3 A. What the press wrote about and the media broadcast. That's what I

4 knew about. When it was broadcast and made public.

5 Q. May we now move on to a period when you arrived, and that was

6 March 1993, was it not?

7 A. Yes, that's right.

8 Q. Now, let's go through this as quickly as possible and look at the

9 it penultimate page, page 16. That's the one that I want to focus on now.

10 We have here the 22nd of April, 1993, an entry under number 8. We

11 have a convoy with six trailer trucks of equipment to Gorazde. Now, you

12 mentioned a convoy that was held up for a long time because it didn't have

13 the necessary permit. Mr. Karnavas asked you that. And then under number

14 8 here and again under number 13 here we have materiel and equipment for

15 the 208th mountain brigade of the armed forces of the RBiH and the date is

16 the 22nd of April, the 24th of April twice.

17 Now, based on this document, did you know that weapons and trailer

18 trucks, some going to Gorazde intended for the armed forces of the

19 Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina precisely at that time when this trailer

20 truck was not able to move, in fact, was moving to Bosnia-Herzegovina?

21 A. No.

22 Q. Then nor later?

23 A. That's right. I didn't know then, and I didn't know later.

24 Q. Madam, working in the embassy did you know how weapons were

25 procured, purchased, or, rather, did you know that this logistical centre

1 of the Supreme Command Staff both in Zagreb and in Split during this

2 period of time, which is 1992 and 1993, up until May as we see can from

3 these documents, that these logistical centres were procuring weapons and

4 sending them to Bosnia-Herzegovina, to the BH army? Did you know about

5 that, that they -- that these resources were coming through or from

6 Croatia? From official sources, unofficial sources. You had various

7 conversations. You mentioned Mr. Silajdzic. You met Mr. Hasan Cengic.

8 What do you think his role was in Zagreb, and did you have any information

9 whatsoever about the weapons which were going across Croatia into

10 Bosnia-Herzegovina?

11 A. I did know of the problems that certain individuals were facing,

12 Mr. Asim Karamehmedovic, for instance, Mr. Hasan Cengic. I don't remember

13 the exact period, but they did have problems linked to the procurement and

14 transport of weapons, and I did know that this was linked to Slovenia, had

15 to do with Slovenia and Croatia.

16 My first information came from the media. I learnt very little,

17 almost nothing at all, outside that. I didn't discuss the issues. I

18 didn't try to learn about this from other employees at the embassy either.

19 Q. During your testimony, what made an impression on me was the

20 persistence and emotion with which you spoke about the plight of the

21 refugees and said that certain refugees didn't have any money even to use

22 ferries, ferry boats.

23 Now, later on when you learnt, as you say, from the media about

24 all these funds, which in one way or another were in the possession of the

25 embassy in Zagreb, didn't you ask anyone why you were not given part of

1 those funds which could be used to -- which could be used for the refugees

2 to alleviate their plight? Did you talk to anyone after learning all

3 about this, that there were those funds, that there was all that money in

4 Zagreb; whereas, your department had very little resources?

5 A. I did wonder privately. It occupied me a great deal. I spoke to

6 the former director of the directorate for displaced persons and refugees.

7 Neither of us knew that -- well, we thought that there was no money. And

8 I'm very sorry that if money really did exist, why it wasn't geared

9 towards looking after and helping the refugees and of course displaced

10 persons at the time that I was still in Bosnia, too.

11 Q. Did you discuss this issue with the ambassador? You mentioned the

12 directress, which was Mrs. Sokic; isn't that right?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. But she was in Sarajevo?

15 A. Yes, that's right. I did talk to Mrs. -- I did talk about funds

16 to Mrs. Turkovic, and she clearly told me in no uncertain terms that the

17 embassy had no funds and that the Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina had no

18 funds, and then I started writing about projects which I submitted to

19 donors whom I considered might finance them and accept them.

20 Q. Thank you. Now we're going to move on to my last topic. On page

21 49, line 20 up until page 50, line 9 of yesterday's testimony, that is

22 say, on the 19th of June, you said that you visited Croatian refugees from

23 Kakanj and Zenica at the stadium called Poljud.

24 Now, this was after Ambassador Bisera Turkovic had visited the

25 same location. Is that right? Is that what you said? Do you want me to

1 repeat?

2 A. No. I'm just waiting for them to finish interpreting.

3 No, that's not right. I said Ambassador Turkovic visited them

4 while they were at the Poljud-Split stadium, and that I visited them at

5 Pinete.

6 Q. From this, I can conclude that you're talking actually about the

7 same group of refugees; is that right?

8 A. Yes. I do believe it was the same group.

9 Q. Now, the group that you yourself visited in Pinete which is in

10 Istria, is it not, for the record, just to make that clear. That's in

11 northern Croatia, the northern Croatia coast. You said that you learnt

12 that she was at the stadium in Poljud for just a few days, or rather, the

13 group was there and then it was transferred; is that right?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. The Prosecutor showed us a document, and would you please look at

16 it now. It is P 05960. P 05960 in the Prosecution binder. When you find

17 it, let me know.

18 A. I have the document.

19 Q. Right. Fine. In response to the Prosecutor's questions, you said

20 that that could have been the group that you talked to in Pinete; right?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. This is a report, on the last page, dated the 26th of October,

23 1993, and I'd like to ask you to look at the second paragraph on page 1,

24 to see how the group arrived at Pinete. You can read it out. It says

25 that the group set off from Metkovici across Ploce in ships and arrived in

1 Pula, a group numbering 1.500 displaced persons. You'll find that in the

2 second paragraph.

3 A. Yes, I see that paragraph.

4 Q. Would you agree with me, then, when I say that Mrs. Turkovic

5 couldn't have visited this group or that you visited a different group,

6 because quite obviously it's not the group that was in Poljud; is that

7 right?

8 A. Quite possibly.

9 Q. Well, both can't be possible, so can you tell me now? You

10 expressly said that Mrs. Turkovic visited the group at Poljud and that

11 that group was soon transferred to Pinete in Istria, after which you

12 visited it; whereas, here you -- here it says, and you confirm to the

13 Prosecutor, that it was the same group. But quite obviously this group

14 was never at Poljud. Isn't that right?

15 A. Well, I thought it was the same group. I probably made an

16 oversight in the portion of the text which speaks about the group that was

17 transported by ship. It doesn't say that there was a group from Poljud,

18 but I claim that there was the group, as well, from the information media

19 in Croatia who reported on refugees that were at Poljud.

20 Q. So you talked to that group, the group that was at Poljud and

21 which later arrived at Pinete, and they told you that they arrived because

22 allegedly they were afraid of the Mujahedin and that that's how they came

23 to leave their homes; is that right?

24 A. I didn't put the accent on whether it was the same group or not.

25 What I claimed and what I claim today is that I visited a group of Croats

1 from an area and that I talked to them in Pinete, and I conveyed exactly

2 in my report what those refugees informed me about.

3 Q. For the transcript, I'd like to remind you of the transcript of

4 the 19th of June, lines 50, et cetera, that it was a group of refugees

5 visited by Ambassador Turkovic at Poljud and several days later they were

6 transferred to Pinete, and that's when you visited them in Pinete

7 afterwards, later on.

8 So this is quite obviously not the same group. And let's take a

9 look at what group it was that Ambassador Turkovic visited. Look at

10 P 03765 now, please. It's a document that you've already been shown today

11 by my colleague Mr. Karnavas. The number is P 03765.

12 A. I have the document.

13 Q. Let's take a look at page 2 in the English version. Its all on

14 page 1 in English. First of all, the document is dated the 28th of July

15 1993, let's say that; and then on page 2, it says the following: "In this

16 connection, I wish to mention that immediately upon the refugees' arrival

17 Central Bosnia, I went to Poljud to visit them and issued instructions to

18 ensure resources for them from the logistical centre Split. I organised

19 bread distribution and asked that they be transferred to better

20 accommodation."

21 From this document and from this statement, the ambassador says

22 that in July, she visited those refugees at Poljud; and from what she

23 says, it would emerge that she did what she could for the Croatian

24 refugees, that she asked that bread be distributed to them, and that she

25 invested efforts to provide them with better accommodation. Isn't that

1 right?

2 A. Regardless of what emerges from this, I know that she went to

3 Split, that she was put in contact with the refugees, and that's the same

4 thing that she writes in the letter here.

5 Q. What emerges logically from this, and that's the only thing, is

6 that the refugees visited by Ambassador Turkovic in Poljud and the ones

7 that you confirmed yesterday as having met in Pinete confirming a

8 Prosecution document, that it cannot be the same group of refugees,

9 because these others arrived on the 20th of October, 1993; whereas,

10 Ambassador Turkovic is writing a letter on the 28th of July, 1993.

11 MR. SCOTT: Your Honour, I'm sorry. I object. I've been trying

12 to keep my mouth closed this last section today, to not get on my feet,

13 but this is pure fantasy. For the counsel to suggest that because the

14 ambassador visited one set of refugees or displaced persons in July, on

15 one occasion, that that means it's impossible that either this woman or

16 the ambassador could have interviewed or gone to another group of

17 displaced persons at another time in 1993, and that somehow both can't be

18 possibly be true is just outlandish. I mean, it's just absolutely

19 outlandish to say there is an inconsistency between this document and the

20 other documents. Two different times, two different trips that the

21 witness has confirmed and there is no evidence to the contrary, and this

22 is just -- this is not proper.

23 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] I apologise, Your Honour, but it

24 seems that the Prosecutor is testifying now. The Prosecutor can look at

25 the witness statement, and she spoke of the same event. Now, of course,

1 the witness can say there were two or three groups, but the witness spoke

2 about the same event and that is the reason why I endeavoured to show that

3 this was impossible, that it was the same groups.

4 Q. You told us that the refugees told you of the conditions under

5 which they left Kakanj. I'd now like to ask you to tell me the following:

6 Did you make a note of names?

7 A. No.

8 Q. Did you ask people when you talked to them who they were? Did

9 they introduce themselves? So when you made your notes of your

10 conversations with them, wouldn't it be logical -- well, we saw a

11 series -- or rather, when people complained to you, members, I have to say

12 members of the Bosniak people during individual periods, you had the

13 names.

14 Now, the people you talked to this time, you had no names. Didn't

15 they give you any names? You didn't write them down? They didn't tell it

16 you of the circumstances they left?

17 A. They did give me this information. They introduced themselves. I

18 knew who I was talking to. I knew their first and last names, and they

19 gave me answers to the questions I was interested in. And, quite

20 literally, I asked them whether they were well taken care of, whether they

21 had accommodation, whether they had a dry and warm place to live, what

22 would happen to their children, would they be able to continue their

23 education.

24 And since they didn't say that they have any burning problem and

25 that they needed essential assistance from the BH embassy, I didn't feel

1 that I had to write a separate report or ask assistance of the UN or other

2 organisations present in Croatia. So that is why there's no separate

3 report about that.

4 Q. Yes. That is what, objectively speaking, and we heard what the

5 Prosecutor had to say, is making this mix-up, because you have reports

6 about everything you did, except for this visit to the Croatian refugees.

7 So we can't establish when it happened, when it took place.

8 Now, you said that those refugees told you that they had left

9 because they were told that the Mujahedin were --

10 MR. SCOTT: Excuse me, Your Honour. Where are the reports? I

11 mean, we have reports for everything else she did, and then counsel tries

12 to make an inference of impeachment. And there is just no foundation for

13 that. I'm sorry to be on my feet. I'd really would rather not be on my

14 feet, but it's not proper. It's simply not proper for the counsel to make

15 statements not in the record, not supported evidence, act as if it is

16 evidence, and put to the witness. While you made notes about everything

17 else, there is no evidence of that. There is simply no evidence of that,

18 so she can't put it to the witness in that way. I'm sorry. I really did

19 not want to object, but there really have to be some rules in the

20 courtroom.

21 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Ms. Nozica, do you have any

22 evidence?

23 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the problem is that the

24 witness has no evidence and no information about the visit to the Croatian

25 refugees because that's what the witness said, and that's the only thing

1 that I said and we're sorry that it didn't exist. And we saw that the

2 Prosecution showed us a series of reports from other meetings, and I just

3 took note of that with regret, nothing more than that.

4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Might I be allowed to add a piece of

5 information? I did compile a report from my official visit to Pinete; and

6 in that report, I did not include the names and surnames of the refugees

7 that I talked to. However, the general observation was made that I

8 visited them and that they were taken care of, that they had recognised

9 refugee status, and that they didn't have any problems and I left. And

10 that is included and contained in my report and the report is in the

11 documents.

12 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation].

13 Q. Madam, I asked you something else. I asked you about the

14 information that you said you had received from refugees about the

15 circumstances under which they left Zenica, Kakanj, et cetera, that

16 apparently they had been told that they would be slaughtered, killed by

17 the Mujahedin. So that is what we are discussing. Did you write down who

18 told you that? Did you include that in your report? Do you have any

19 names?

20 A. The information is included in my report. These were refugees I

21 contacted in Pinete, and I included this in my report; not the names and

22 surnames of the refugees, but what mattered to me was that every

23 institution should do whatever was necessary and whatever they could on

24 the basis of the information that I provided.

25 These Mujahedin, even if they did exist, could no longer get close

1 to the refugees once they were in Croatia. So it wasn't important for me

2 to give the name and surname of the said individual. That was my logic in

3 terms of reporting.

4 Q. We have spent a terrible -- terribly long amount of time on this.

5 I just asked you whether you knew the names and surnames of these persons

6 or whether you included that in your report, and please, that would be the

7 end of that.

8 Now I'm going to conclude, and I'm going to use my last document.

9 We saw from this report of Mrs. Turkovic that she visited Poljud, the

10 refugees there, and she provided whatever was necessary for them.

11 As we look at this report, it seems obvious that the Embassy of

12 Bosnia-Herzegovina in Zagreb took care about the suffering Croats and

13 Muslims. That's what they were called then. Can we put it that way?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. Could we please look at a document? That was the last one, the

16 last digits being 499. It should be the one but last document in the

17 binder.

18 A. I have the document.

19 Q. I'm going to ask you now whether you refer this. You could

20 remember - you were there at the time - so let's have a look at this.

21 What is all of this about? The Embassy of the Republic of

22 Bosnia-Herzegovina in Zagreb. Infamous lies at village Doljani near

23 Jablanica became a participant in committed crimes over Croatian

24 civilians. First of all, can I ask you whether you knew about the crime

25 committed in Doljani against Croats?

1 A. I learned about that from media in Croatia.

2 Q. Let's read some of the important parts in this document. It says

3 here that "Despite indisputable facts and evidence and despite

4 recognisable pictures of massacred and murdered Croats at the village of

5 Doljani near Jablanica, on television and through the media, this went all

6 round the world. The Embassy of the Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina in

7 Zagreb issues a denial and denies that crimes were committed saying the

8 during the occupation of Doljani by Muslim criminal groups of the

9 so-called ARBiH, which participated domestic Muslims from Doljani and

10 Jablanica and Mujahedin, one civilian who entered the area with his herd

11 of sheep accidentally."

12 Ivan Marjanovic is the name of the person signing this document,

13 but let's look at this. It says that this is a denial of the Embassy of

14 the Republic of Croatia and that it was sent to all the media, not only in

15 Croatia but throughout the world, in order to cover up the crime

16 committed.

17 "So far it has been proven that 42 civilians were executed in

18 massacres and also that over 200 Croat civilians were Doljani went

19 missing; and then it says further on that they were put up in a prison in

20 Jablanica, that they were detained there.

21 The Honourable Judges have the translation, but could they please

22 look at the original. You can see here that this denial came from the

23 embassy in Zagreb, and you can even see the telephone number. Is that

24 right? And the date is the 10th of August, 1993. You can see that as

25 well, and the massacre happened on the 27th and 28th of July, 1993.

1 And it says here that this denial indeed, and it is very

2 surprising that a civilian got killed. He got killed accidentally as he

3 was herding his sheep. And this is practically 13 days after the crime

4 was committed when it could have been established beyond any doubt that

5 the crime had been committed in Doljani.

6 Did you know that the embassy expressed its views in this way

7 before and after it had it the possibility of objectively viewing the

8 suffering of Croats in Bosnia-Herzegovina?

9 A. I did not know about that.

10 Q. You did not know about this it press release of the embassy?

11 A. I didn't.

12 Q. You were there then?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. Was it possible for that many things to be going on at the embassy

15 that you did not know about? How big was this office? How many staff

16 members were there in the embassy? How many permanently employed persons

17 were there at the embassy?

18 A. I don't know exactly, but I would prefer explaining the

19 organisation of my own office.

20 Q. I didn't ask you about that.

21 A. It is possible that quite a few things could have been going on at

22 the embassy, quite a few activities without me knowing about them.

23 Q. Finally, a question, Ms. Krajsek. You insisted that this was the

24 embassy of Bosnia-Herzegovina and that you were the representative of

25 Bosnia and Herzegovina, not of the Muslim people. And my colleague asked

1 you yesterday about the ethnic composition of the embassy, and you said --

2 or rather, you did not answer that question.

3 You said that some people had Croat citizenship. I'm going to ask

4 you quite simply. This embassy, in terms of the population of Bosnia and

5 Herzegovina itself, were there any other persons in this embassy apart

6 from Bosniaks in view of the entire population?

7 A. I don't know.

8 Q. In your office, was there a single person -- or rather, how many

9 people were employed in your office? That is the most sensitive question

10 dealing with refugees. How many people were employed in your office?

11 A. The number varied between three, five, and seven.

12 Q. Was there a single Croat or Serb in your office?

13 A. I did not look at anybody's documents. I don't know.

14 Q. You're the only person at that point in time who did not know what

15 somebody's ethnicity was, and you know very well that that was a moment

16 and also today in every organ in Bosnia-Herzegovina there is proper

17 representation of all the ethnic groups in Bosnia-Herzegovina, precisely

18 so that some members of some ethnic groups would not consider this to be,

19 say, a Muslim embassy. How come you cannot answer that? Thank you very

20 much. This concludes my questions.

21 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Fine. Time has come to adjourn.

22 We'll resume tomorrow morning at 9.00 a.m. Thank you.

23 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.48 p.m.,

24 to be reconvened on Thursday, the 21st day

25 of June, 2007, at 9.00 a.m.