1 Monday, 20 October 2008
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 2.17 p.m.
5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Registrar, kindly call the
7 THE REGISTRAR: Good afternoon, Your Honours. Good afternoon to
8 everyone in and around the courtroom. This is case number IT-04-74-T,
9 the Prosecutor versus Jadranko Prlic et al.. Thank you, Your Honours.
10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
11 Today is Monday, and good afternoon to the accused. Mr. Pusic is
12 back with us. A special good afternoon to you. Good afternoon to the
13 Defence counsel and to Mr. Stringer and his team. Not to forget the
14 interpreters, the usher, and -- ushers, and registrars.
15 We're going to continue with our work, but I'll first give the
16 floor to the registrar who has some IC numbers for us.
17 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, some parties have submitted lists
18 of documents to be tendered through Witness Zelenika Mirko.
19 The list submitted by 1D shall be given Exhibit number IC 00864.
20 The list submitted by 2D shall be given Exhibit number IC 00865.
21 The list submitted by 4D shall be given Exhibit number IC 00866.
22 The list submitted by the Prosecution shall be given Exhibit
23 number IC 00867.
24 Thank you, Your Honours.
25 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. Registrar. I
1 have three oral rulings. Mr. Registrar, can we first briefly move into
2 private session for the first decision.
3 [Private session]
21 [Open session]
22 THE REGISTRAR: We're back in open session, Your Honours.
23 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Second oral ruling. On the
24 15th of October, 2008, the Prosecution filed a motion asking the Trial
25 Chamber to cancel the testimony of Witness Neven Tomic scheduled to start
1 on the 27th of October or, in the alternative, to postpone his testimony
2 until the Prlic Defence has disclosed a more expansive 65 ter summary
3 together with documents related to interviews that took place between
4 Neven Tomic and Milan
5 As to the first issue, the Trial Chamber recalls its 13th of
6 October, 2008, oral ruling in which it ruled that the Prlic Defence had
7 disclosed enough supplemental information for the Trial Chamber and the
8 Prosecution to be able -- and for the Prosecution to prepare its
9 cross-examination. The motion by the Prosecution is therefore moot on
10 this issue.
11 With regard or on account of time constraints connected with the
12 forthcoming testimony of Neven Tomic, the Trial Chamber asked the Prlic
13 Defence to file its response on the second part of the Prosecution motion
14 related to the alleged interview of Neven Tomic with Milan Cvikl by the
15 22nd of October, 2008.
16 Third oral ruling. It is an important one, and I'm going to read
17 it out slowly. Oral ruling related to the testimony of the expert
18 witness Milan Cvikl. On the 16th of October, 2008, the Prosecution filed
19 a new motion for the dismissal or postponement of the testimony of expert
20 witness Milan Cvikl on the ground, inter alia, of late disclosure by the
21 Prlic Defence of the expert's report. The testimony of expert witness
22 Milan Cvikl is scheduled, based on the schedule filed by the Prlic
23 Defence, to testify as of the 17th of November, 2008.
24 After careful review, the Trial Chamber has ruled that the
25 testimony of witness Milan Cvikl shall be postponed until further notice
1 and shall issue a written decision as soon as possible.
2 So, Mr. Karnavas, in other words, Milan Cvikl will not come on
3 the 17th of November, 2008, and he's likely to appear in 2009, a date we
4 have not specified yet. Furthermore, the issue might come up in a
5 similar way for another witness due to testify after Cvikl because we are
6 in the same situation, since the Trial Chamber to date still not has the
7 expert report. So it can be expected that will the second expert witness
8 will be heard in 2009 at a date that will be agreed, I suppose, with the
9 Stojic Defence or with the Praljak Defence depending on everybody's
11 Have you understood, Mr. Karnavas?
12 MR. KARNAVAS: Yes, I have, Mr. President. Good afternoon,
13 Mr. President. Good afternoon, Your Honours.
14 A report was filed last night at approximately -- I believe it
15 was 9.30, maybe 10.00 at night. This should be -- perhaps it hasn't been
16 circulated yet. I'm told that it is -- it has been circulated. It
17 actually -- it's two reports. In total, it's about, I believe, 40 pages,
18 but if the decision is to postpone it, we certainly would appreciate
19 having notice so then we could advise our expert. The same thing with
20 the first expert. We would want to know as much as, you know, time in
21 advance because the gentleman is a Member of Parliament in Slovenia
22 so he could juggle around his schedule.
23 And getting back, if I may, Your Honour, to the second decision,
24 I can categorically state as I've stated in the past, but I'll do so
25 again, and if you wish I can do it in writing: There are no interview
1 statements between Mr. Tomic and Mr. Cvikl. Now, what I have done, what
2 I have done, because I anticipated this sort of decision, I wrote to
3 Mr. Cvikl and asked him to kindly put down the methodology of these
4 particular interviews and -- so that there would be some clarity. That
5 way, we could provide that information to you and to the Prosecution.
6 I have not heard back from him, perhaps because of his schedule,
7 but when I do get that information, I will pass it on.
8 I have nothing further.
9 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Mr. Stringer, with
10 regard to the second expert report, the Prlic Defence is telling us that
11 it is about 40 pages long. So you'll have to take a stance very quickly.
12 If you don't have any problem with it, just say so, and the expert
13 witness can then come very soon. But should there be a problem -- and
14 now I'm turning to the other Defence counsel. Is there a problem with
15 translating it -- translating the 40 pages into B/C/S, then the other
16 Defence counsel have to advise us, but apparently there's no problem.
17 Yes, Mr. Karnavas?
18 MR. KARNAVAS: The second report was actually done in Serbian,
19 and the Prlic Defence at its own expense translated it into English to
20 expedite it, knowing that it would take forever because of the backlog.
21 So we did it, and so we have it. We circulated the English. The B/C/S
22 version hasn't been circulated yet, but we will do so probably today,
23 later today, but my staff was working very late yesterday to collate it
24 and circulate it. Thank you.
25 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Khan.
1 MR. KHAN: Good afternoon, Mr. President, Your Honours. There's
2 one matter arising out of the oral ruling which I'm asked to raise,
3 and -- well, there's two matters, in fact, that arise out of the
4 postponement of the testimony of my learned friend Mr. Karnavas's expert,
5 Mr. Cvikl, and it's this: We hope that this decision will not impact
6 upon when we are expected to start our Defence case; in other words, that
7 in the event that Mr. Karnavas's case is shortened, we won't be expected
8 to start earlier than we have anticipated because I'm told that
9 scheduling has already taken place to some degree, at least, and so that
10 would prejudice us.
11 The second matter, Your Honours, that I'm asked to raise is that
12 we have a very strong preference, and in fact it's our application that
13 this expert Cvikl gives evidence before we start our Defence case because
14 as I understand it, his testimony is relevant to testimony that we will
15 call in our Defence case, in particular, one of the Defence experts, and
16 we want to hear what Mr. Cvikl is going to say before we call that expert
17 to give evidence.
18 Your Honours, those are the matters that I have been asked to
19 raise for your consideration.
20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Khan, since you're on your
21 feet, you'll be able to answer straightaway. In the schedule you
22 prepared, when did you plan your first witness?
23 MR. KHAN: Your Honour, from the beginning of December, 1st of
25 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] So your first witnesses could
1 come early December. No problem. No problem.
2 MR. KHAN: Your Honours, I understand that that's exactly the
3 case. There wouldn't be a problem with witnesses coming at the beginning
4 of December, but with the caveat that I've been asked to raise that we
5 would very much like to dispense and complete the testimony of Mr. Cvikl
6 before we start our Defence case. In other words, we -- to that extent,
7 we were opposed to the Prosecution application or suggestion to interpose
8 Mr. Cvikl in the Defence case of Mr. Stojic. We'd like to finish with
9 that case before we start ours.
10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes. Judge Trechsel has a
12 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Two questions, actually, Mr. Khan. The first
13 is, is it your point that you would not even wish to start before you
14 have heard the expert Cvikl? And the second, if not, if you could live
15 with having him sometimes during your own defence, when do you plan that
16 to end? I could probably figure it out by looking back in the paper, but
17 you will be able to tell me right away, I suppose.
18 MR. KHAN: Your Honour, if you'll give me a moment, I think my
19 learned leader wishes to add something to me. One moment.
20 [Defence counsel confer]
21 MR. KHAN: Your Honour, dealing with the second question first,
22 we don't know. We don't have an approximation at the moment off the top
23 of my head, at least, as to when we hope to finish our Defence case. I'm
24 sure that could be given in a very ballpark fashion a little bit later,
25 but the first witness was going to be an expert, and it was -- the first
1 witness for the Stojic Defence was going to be an expert, and it was for
2 that reason that I was instructed to request that we finish with
3 Mr. Cvikl before we start our case.
4 Your Honour, the other matter which, of course, may impact upon
5 your determination of this matter is that, of course, there are some
6 pending 92 bis, 92 ter witnesses that my learned friend has to put before
7 the Trial Chamber. So that may enable all parties to be happy.
8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Khan, yes, we sought some
9 information from the translation department to know how long it would
10 take for the report to be translated into B/C/S for the sake of the
11 accused, and we were told that they needed two months. Today is the 20th
12 of October, so 20th of November, and then 20th of December. In other
13 words, the report cannot be made available to the accused in the best
14 possible case before the 20th or the 21st of December. So at first
15 blush, it's not possible for your first witness to come prior to the 22nd
16 of December. However, you are absolutely right. Mr. Karnavas is still
17 due to give us a list of 92 bis witnesses. Indeed, should the Prosecutor
18 would wish to cross-examine some of them, we could have them before you
19 start, and your expert could come in January. We could start in January,
20 both Mr. Cvikl straight after the recess, and then you would start after
21 him. But we still need the 92 bis list. Mr. Karnavas promised to do it
22 very quickly last week, but it has not been done yet.
23 When can we expect it?
24 MR. KHAN: Your Honour, just one additional matter with your
25 permission. I'm most grateful for that clarification. I was told just
1 whilst I was on my feet that it's important we view the matter, that
2 we hear Mr. Cvikl before we start our Defence case, that the issue
3 regarding the translation, I'm told that arrangements will be made from
4 -- by the Stojic Defence to independently get that translated so not as
5 to overburden the court translation department, CLSS. So, Your Honours,
6 I've just been told that at the moment, but that may expedite matters. I
7 don't envisage that -- well, maybe I've got the wrong end of the stick.
8 One moment.
9 [Defence counsel confer]
10 MR. KHAN: Your Honours, no. I think -- that offer, it was
11 quickly retracted. I think -- as the January date was mentioned that we
12 will not undertake that leviathan task. I'm grateful.
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Karnavas, regarding your 92
14 bis witnesses, when can we expect the list? Now you understand the
15 urgency of the matter.
16 MR. KARNAVAS: I do. I do, Mr. President. If we could just go
17 into private session for a second.
18 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes. Let's go into private
20 [Private session]
11 Page 33383 redacted. Private session.
9 [Open session]
10 THE REGISTRAR: We're back in open session, Your Honours.
11 MR. STRINGER: And good afternoon to you, Mr. President and Your
12 Honours and counsel.
13 I just have a number of responses to the various items that have
14 been raised. In respect of the translation into the Serbo-Croatian of
15 Mr. Cvikl's report, what I'm hearing or what I understand is that really
16 isn't going to happen until after the 1st of the year or that it's going
17 to push Mr. Cvikl into 2009. And if that is the case, I just wanted to
18 make sure I understand that correctly because based upon not only the
19 translation issue but the size and the complexity of the report and the
20 volume of documentation that's involved, we're going to need at least
21 until that time-frame to prepare ourselves. That was my first point.
22 We were interested to hear that the Stojic Defence is intending
23 to lead off their case in chief with an expert. We've not yet discussed
24 our -- the fact that the Trial Chamber's earlier Scheduling Order
25 required the Defence reports to be disclosed to the Prosecution on the
1 31st of March, 2008.
2 Now, I'm concerned already that we're already being forced into
3 the same position now that we've had with the other experts. I don't
4 know who the expert is. I have not seen this person's report. This
5 person is apparently intended to testify beginning the first week of
6 December, and again, that's unacceptable. The date for disclosure of the
7 expert report has not been met. We have 30 days to file our response to
8 the report under Rule 94 bis, and so here we are being set up right off
9 the bat into a situation which I think is prejudicial to the Prosecution
10 in its ability to prepare to meet this evidence.
11 In respect of the Rule 92 bis witnesses that the Prlic team is
12 still intending to call, obviously we haven't seen the statements of four
13 of those witnesses, and the Prosecution would obviously reserve its
14 position on that.
15 I think that it's likely the Prosecution is going to at least
16 request that one or more of the eight witnesses be called, and I'm not
17 saying necessarily it will be all eight, but from what we know about the
18 witnesses and what we know about the four witnesses who have testified
19 previously and were - I agree - subject to cross-examination previously,
20 I think at the moment Prosecution's inclined toward requesting that at
21 least one of them come for cross-examination. We've not arrived at a
22 final position on that, but once we have counsel's final submissions on
23 all of his 92 bis witnesses, we'll file a prompt response to that so that
24 the Trial Chamber can arrange or factor in whatever scheduling may be
1 And then one final remark, and this relates now to the Trial
2 Chamber's decision to postpone the testimony of Mr. Cvikl. Again,
3 because he was schedule to come rather soon, we prepared over the weekend
4 a response to the submission of the Prlic Defence that was filed last
5 Friday. That was a Prlic submission asking that about 89 documents be
6 added to their Rule 65 ter list, and all of these documents are linked to
7 the expert report of Mr. Cvikl.
8 Now, we filed a fast response, again, because of the scheduling,
9 and we thought it would advance the discussion to get that filed quickly.
10 However, as the Trial Chamber will find, that response was largely driven
11 by the possibility that Mr. Cvikl might be coming to testify beginning on
12 the 17th of November.
13 Now, I just thought it would be useful to inform the Trial
14 Chamber and the parties that in -- in light of the Trial Chamber's ruling
15 today and in light of the fact that Mr. Cvikl won't be testifying until
16 next year, our position in respect of adding those documents to the Rule
17 65 ter list is likely to change. Certainly, I think the Prosecution's in
18 a position now to show greater flexibility in terms of adding those to
19 the list now that we will, it appears, have sufficient time to assimilate
20 those. However, I'm informed that about 58 of those documents we don't
21 have translations for yet. So ultimately our response will depend upon
22 the timing of our receiving the translations. But rather than everyone
23 going away and reading the response that we just filed earlier today, I
24 can inform all of you that our position on this is going to now be
25 changed I think in view of the postponement of Mr. Cvikl's testimony.
1 Thank you.
2 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Khan, one little problem.
3 You told us that you were planning to call an expert. We don't have the
4 expert's report. The Trial Chamber is about to issue a written decision,
5 and it will request to have expert reports two months before they appear
6 because you've got the 30 days under Rule 94 bis, and everybody's got to
7 prepare for the testimony, of course. Today is the 20th of October.
8 Now, if your expert were to come to the 1st of December, the 2-month
9 period is not complied with. So when are we going to receive your
11 MR. KHAN: Yes, I'm most grateful, Mr. President. The expert,
12 first and foremost, is Mr. Davor Marijan. He's listed on our 65 ter
13 list, and I received an English copy of that report last week in English.
14 It will be served upon the Prosecution by the end of this week. So I've
15 been -- we've been quite timely, I think, between receipt of the report
16 in English that I can read and service upon the Prosecution, which will
17 be by the end of this week.
18 It's a short report. It's 60 pages at the moment. It's not a
19 long report at all, and given the time line that has been detailed
20 previously, of course, the Prosecution will get, in all likelihood, and
21 it's October still, the two months or thereabouts to prepare. But this
22 is a quite a discrete report of about 60 pages at the moment. They will
23 get it at the end of this week, and they are, of course, not being set up
24 right off the bat, and it's a bit premature in my respectful submission
25 to contend at this juncture that there's any prejudice at all. They will
1 get it at the end of this week, and I think when it is seen, when it's
2 read by my learned friend, they will have more than sufficient time to
3 deal with that report.
4 Your Honours, I hope that assists.
5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you very much. As far as
6 the Trial Chamber is concerned, we shall see how things stand much more
7 clearly when we have the eight 92 bis reports of Mr. Prlic, and we want
8 the Prosecution to tell us who they want to cross-examine. I won't quote
9 any names. There are some people on the first list who have high-ranking
10 jobs, and I'm sure they have a very tight schedule, and these people
11 might not be able to come at short notice given their agenda.
12 So we would like the Prosecution to let us know if and when they
13 wish to cross-examine these witnesses. Then the Prlic team will say when
14 they can come.
15 Mr. Stringer, do we agree on this?
16 MR. STRINGER: I would only add that once we have the Prlic
17 Defence motion - and I'm assuming there's going to be a motion relating
18 to all eight of the 92 bis witnesses that are being proposed - once the
19 motion is filed, I can assure the Trial Chamber that the Prosecution will
20 respond very quickly. We know now all of them, who they are, and we
21 know -- obviously, we have the testimony of four of them. So once we
22 have the motion for all eight, we'll be able to respond very quickly.
23 MR. KHAN: Your Honour, of course, it's somewhat difficult given
24 that there is this pending 92 bis motion dealing with these eight
25 witnesses, but I wonder if it's possible at all at this juncture to get
1 an indication from the Trial Chamber as to when we on behalf of Bruno
2 Stojic should be ready to start our Defence case, when in January. I
3 don't know if Your Honours can give any guidance at this juncture, but it
4 would be of assistance.
5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Well, listen. If CLSS takes
6 two months, this means that nothing can be done before the 20th of
7 December; and if you can only start examining the witnesses after this
8 witness, Milan Cvikl would come at the beginning of January, and your
9 first witness would come straight after him. I don't see how we can do
10 it any other way. But if you have another suggestion, please share it
11 with us. We are very happy to hear of any intelligent suggestion.
12 MR. KHAN: Your Honour, I think there's been a circular from the
13 President of the Tribunal that the court recess - and I stand to be
14 corrected - is until the 9th of January. Is the Trial Chamber also
15 minded to have the court recess for the same period, or would there be
16 any variance from what the Tribunal is going to be enjoying?
17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] First of all, you are now
18 addressing another issue which we have already addressed. To begin with,
19 we had thought of starting before the 9th of January, but one of the
20 Judges sitting on this Bench will not be available. And as far as I'm
21 concerned, I will not be available from the 12th to the 19th. Therefore,
22 the winter recess might last even longer, i.e., four weeks, which means
23 that our last hearing should be held on the 12th of December, and we
24 would resume on the 9th of January.
25 MR. KHAN: I'm most grateful.
1 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Stringer.
2 MR. STRINGER: Just one remark, Mr. President. I don't want by
3 my silence for the Trial Chamber to conclude that the Prosecution
4 necessarily accepts, with respect, the submissions of the Stojic team.
5 If they want to know what Mr. Cvikl is going to say, they can read the
6 very lengthy detailed report that he's submitted. It's not clear to me
7 that they will be in the dark about what his testimony will be if they
8 read his report. It doesn't seem to follow that they need to wait to see
9 what he comes and says when in fact it's likely the Trial Chamber will be
10 considering the report in advance of his testimony, possibly admitting
11 parts of it into evidence even before he testifies.
12 If the time-frame stands as it is with the witness coming for
13 four days of testimony, I think -- I would hope that it's fair to assume
14 that most of that time will be spent on cross-examination, assuming that
15 the expert report or parts of it come into evidence.
16 So everybody knows or will know what Mr. Cvikl is going to say,
17 assuming he says and adopts what's in his report. So it doesn't seem
18 clear to me why we have to stop everything on the Stojic side until after
19 he's testified.
20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Karnavas, just one small
21 point of detail. On looking at your schedule, I noticed that you had
22 planned to hear Mr. Cvikl as of the 17th of November for four days. Had
23 you planned to have these four days for cross-examination, or had you
24 included examination-in-chief?
25 MR. KARNAVAS: Well, Your Honour, initially we had Mr. Cvikl down
1 for six hours. We then reduced him to four hours, that is, for the
2 direct examination. We anticipated the rest of the week would be taken
3 up both by direct and other cross from both aisles.
4 It is conceivable that the direct may be shorter. I don't know.
5 I mean, I can assure the Trial Chamber that the report, which is rather
6 comprehensive, and anyone who looked at it can see that there are
7 actually two aspects of it and perhaps three. The first part is sort of
8 general, dealing with the former Yugoslavia
9 That's to give everyone some context. And then it goes into an analysis
10 of the various legal instruments that were passed by the Croatian
11 Community and the Croatian Republic of Herceg-Bosna as well as a
12 comparative analysis of what was happening elsewhere.
13 I don't think, and I would agree with the Prosecution here, that
14 there aren't going to be any surprises. What -- there maybe some
15 amplification as to certain areas in order to give it more context, and
16 of course, we're hoping that there would be questions from the Bench and
17 from the others that would flush out any issues that remain unclear, but
18 the report is rather comprehensive. And again, we haven't sat down to go
19 through the report with the gentleman, and we don't know to what extent
20 the Prosecution's going to be objecting to the entire report, parts of
21 it, or what have you. But we put down four hours for cross -- for direct
22 examination, and we thought that that was rather modest considering the
23 overall scope of his testimony even with the report because parts of the
24 report may not necessarily be -- I don't mean to offend anyone, but may
25 not necessarily be accessible to everyone because they may not be
1 familiar with economics, you know, and maybe the writing style is
2 somewhat rigid.
3 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Khan, one last question.
4 We understood that you established a connection between your witness
5 Davor and Cvikl, and you wanted your conditions Davor to come and testify
6 after Mr. Cvikl. That, I understand perfectly well. That is not why I
8 I'd like to know, on the list of your other witnesses, could you
9 not call to testify other witnesses and separate Davor from Cvikl?
10 Couldn't you call other witnesses that would address other topics other
11 than that one? To avoid wasting time, of course.
12 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Your Honours. If I
13 may, I would like to reply to this. We have built our entire defence
14 strategy on this basis: First of all, the witness named in our 65 ter
15 list will tell us about the structure of the defence department, and then
16 he will pave the way for other witnesses who will come along and build on
17 his explanation, the explanation provided in his expert finding. This is
18 how we organised our defence.
19 First of all, it depends or relies on the expert report. We
20 fully respect the fact as it is that we should not be causing any undue
21 delays; but as things are now, there will be no undue delays. If we take
22 into account witnesses that might be 92 bis witnesses for the OTP
23 pursuant to a proposal of the Prlic Defence and then the 92 ter witness
24 statements that will be tendered, it seems to follow that there is no way
25 we can start before the 12th of December, which is when the recess
1 begins. Therefore, I do not believe that we shall in any way affect this
2 or cause any undue delays in relation to any witnesses during the Prlic
3 or Stojic Defence cases.
4 Just for the benefit of the record, I wish to make it known to
5 everyone that the Stojic Defence does not believe that there could be any
6 traps for the Stojic Defence in Mr. Cvikl's evidence. However, our very
7 first witness is also an expert, and he will tell us about all the
8 different segments of the defence department, including those addressed
9 by Mr. Cvikl. Therefore, we believe it would be a good thing for us to
10 first hear Mr. Cvikl, which would then allow us to pose certain questions
11 to our own expert. In the best of cases, we could use this to refute
12 Mr. Cvikl's evidence.
13 We do not believe that this is a trap that is being laid for us,
14 but we do think that this would, nevertheless, be a good thing. And we
15 could perhaps use this to readjust our case later on, but that could only
16 happen if our witness comes before.
17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Your witness Davor is, in
18 strategic terms, important because he will be the cornerstone of your
19 defence strategy, and all the other witnesses will come after him. That,
20 I have understood.
21 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Thank you. I would like to have confirmed by
22 Mr. Karnavas that his second expert must be number two and must come
23 after Cvikl because if that were not the case, then I regard it as not
24 excluded that he can be heard still before the recess, and it would be
25 for Mr. Stringer or for the Prosecutor to tell us as soon as possibly
1 what their view is on this, Mr. Karnavas. Thank you.
2 MR. KARNAVAS: I don't have a problem with that witness, and it's
3 a she.
4 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Yes, I know.
5 MR. KARNAVAS: I don't have a problem with that witness coming
6 before Mr. Cvikl. That's not a problem. I mean, we would need -- for
7 scheduling we'd want to inform her, but we had hoped that if there was a
8 delay and if the Prosecution were not going to object to it and if she
9 could make it in her schedule to call her even a week earlier, so -- but
10 we remain rather flexible on that.
11 JUDGE TRECHSEL: If you can give an answer, but I don't want to
12 pressure you.
13 MR. STRINGER: I appreciate that, Your Honour. The report was
14 just received by us today. We're reviewing it at the moment. It's
15 troubling to us that no one except the Prosecution seems to be bothered
16 at all by the fact that these experts' reports are being filed so many
17 months after the deadline set by the Trial Chamber. And maybe the Trial
18 Chamber's granted extensions of time that the Prosecution doesn't know
19 about. I don't know, but we wouldn't be in this situation at least if
20 there hadn't been some advance notice and possibly a submission to say,
21 "Look, we need more time," but none of that's happened, and here we are
22 at the very end of the Prlic case, and we're being put in the position
23 of having to respond when in fact we shouldn't even be having this
25 But be that as it may, all I can say at this juncture, Your
1 Honour, is that we're reviewing the report. I'll go back, and we're
2 going to confer, and I can assure the Trial Chamber that we will inform
3 you very soon, within a matter of days, whether we feel like we can go
4 ahead. I can assure the Trial Chamber and counsel that I cannot picture
5 us agreeing to move forward the date of the witness's testimony by one
6 week. I think the question is whether we agree to go ahead as scheduled
7 for that final week of November or whether in fact it's our position
8 that -- whether we persist in our position that the expert report as well
9 as that of Mr. Cvikl be excluded for having failed to meet the time
10 deadline; or secondly, whether it should be postponed at some point later
11 than the last week of November, but we will inform you of our position on
12 that within a matter of days.
13 MR. KARNAVAS: If I could just briefly respond. The Prosecution
14 was giving us their expert reports in the middle of their case. Perhaps
15 the gentleman wasn't here at the time. Mr. Sudetic, for instance, they
16 promised him as an expert. He wasn't in the end called because he was
17 rejected as such being that he was an employee of the OTP and not an
18 expert of any source. But nonetheless, for months they kept saying that
19 they were going to call him. For months, we were waiting for a report;
20 and when we got it, it was binders and binders and binders, yet I heard
21 no apology from the Prosecution.
22 Expert Miller was similarly in that fashion. In fact, with him,
23 they put him on, and then it was afterwards they added documents to the
24 65 ter list. We, on the other hand, have taken the other route.
25 So we are prepared to answer those questions in motion. We
1 looked at the rules; we looked at the rulings; we looked at the
2 deadlines; and it was quite interesting that the Prosecution up until a
3 month ago had absolutely no problem. And all after sudden, as the case
4 is getting closer and closer to the end of the Prlic case, now it seems
5 that every Monday we spent arguing about procedural issues, and I wonder
6 why. So I take offence to this somehow we have missed these deadlines.
7 We have been consistent. They've known about it; they haven't
8 complained; and now they're trying to turn this into an advantage, and
9 that's pure poppycock.
10 MR. STRINGER: One brief response, Mr. President. Every
11 Prosecution report of every expert was provided many, many months in
12 advance to the Defence teams before anyone was in the position of having
13 to cross-examine -- or consider or prepare cross-examination of a Defence
14 witness or to prepare a Rule 94 bis response to a Prosecution expert
16 We know the difficulties in assembling this sort of evidence with
17 these sorts of expert witnesses, and if any of the Defence teams had ever
18 approached the Prosecution to say, "Look, we need more time. We're going
19 to get these filed, but we're not going to be able to do it within the
20 deadlines set by the Trial Chamber," there would have been no objection
21 whatsoever from us on that.
22 The problem and the reason why the objections are coming in at
23 this late stage is because a 200-page expert report of an economist, a
24 former member of the World Bank, and current Member of Parliament of the
25 State of Slovenia
1 October accompanied by about 5.000 pages of documents, and it was
2 proposed that we would file our 94 bis response to that report and then
3 be prepared to cross-examine this witness during the week of November
4 17th; and the Prosecution, Mr. President, never put any of the Defence
5 teams in that situation.
6 We would have had no problem to extensions of deadlines for
7 filing the report so long as it didn't prejudice us in time. Now, I
8 recognise the Trial Chamber is postponing the testimony. That's fine.
9 But I can tell you, it's caused a week or so of very nervous preparation
10 on the Prosecution side because it's all come in so late in the Defence
12 MR. KHAN: Your Honour, I'm not, with your leave, going to
13 address the substance of my learned friend's observations on this issue.
14 In my respectful submission, while it's not agreeing with much of what my
15 learned friend says, the issue is moot, that the Trial Chamber has
16 indicated that it is in the throes of issuing an order that expert
17 reports must be given to the other parties two months before the witness
18 is called. In those circumstances, Your Honour, I think there can be no
19 contention of prejudice or being disadvantaged, and it will not help
20 clarify matters, to rebut what my learned friend has said. So I have no
21 other observations than the issue is moot.
22 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Well, we will close the debate
23 on this issue. I think everybody knows what it is all about. The Trial
24 Chamber will hand out a written decision on this matter very soon. As
25 you have understood, we are jeopardised by the translation deadlines,
1 which take two months. There's nothing we can do about that.
2 We shall now bring the witness into the courtroom. Mr. Usher,
3 could you go and fetch him, please.
4 [The witness entered court]
5 WITNESS: MARINKO SIMUNOVIC
6 [Witness answered through interpreter]
7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Good afternoon, sir. Can you
8 give us your first name, last name, and date of birth, please.
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Marinko Simunovic, born on the 28th
10 of June, 1957.
11 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] What is your occupation at the
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I have a degree in engineering.
14 I'm deputy director of the general directorate for civilian airlines in
16 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Sir, have you already testified
17 before a court of law on those events which unfolded in the former
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is the first time.
20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Would you please read the
21 solemn declaration.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will
23 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
24 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you, sir. You may sit
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
2 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I would just like to convey to
3 you some information which will shed some light on the way in which these
4 proceedings will unfold. You will be asked to answer questions which
5 will be put to you by the Defence teams, and you have already seen these
6 documents with Mr. Karnavas when you prepared for this hearing. After
7 that, Defence counsel representing the other accused - they are sitting
8 on your left - will put questions to you as well.
9 The Prosecutor who is on your right, there are two of them on the
10 team today. Well, they will put questions to you. This will be part of
11 our cross-examination. I think it will be Mr. Stringer who will put
12 questions to you.
13 The four Judges that make up the Bench and that are sitting in
14 front of you will put questions to you in the course of these
16 Please try and be as accurate as you can when you answer. If you
17 don't understand the meaning of a question, please don't hesitate, and
18 ask the person who has put the question to you to rephrase it even if it
19 is a judge putting a question which seems unclear to you. Don't
20 hesitate, and ask to have the question repeated to you.
21 We have breaks every hour and a half. We shall have a break in
22 half an hour's time because we have spent 45 minutes on procedural
24 You have taken the solemn declaration, which means that you are
25 now a witness of the court, and you may not contact Mr. Karnavas.
1 If you do not feel well at any time, raise your hand if you wish
2 the hearing to be suspended for short time. Don't hesitate. If you wish
3 to put a question yourself, you may do so.
4 Mr. Karnavas, you now have the floor.
5 MR. KARNAVAS: Again, good afternoon, Mr. President, Your
6 Honours. Good afternoon, everyone in and around the court.
7 Examination by Mr. Karnavas:
8 Q. And good afternoon, sir.
9 A. Good afternoon to you.
10 Q. I'm going to start by asking you some questions on your
11 background, and then we're going to go right into the events that are
12 relevant for us.
13 You've told us that you are an engineer by training. As I
14 understand it, you got your engineering degree from -- was that in
16 A. Mostar, yes.
17 Q. And prior to the war, as I understand it, you worked in the
18 aviation industry; is that correct?
19 A. That's right. I was working for the Sokol Mostar company in the
20 new programme development section. If you need any detail, I'll be happy
21 to provide those as well. Ten years of experience with the Sokol
23 Q. Now, I'm going to ask you to speak slowly because everything is
24 being translated, and so if there could be a pause, as well, that would
25 be most useful and helpful.
1 What exactly did you do for Sokol, just so we -- if you could
2 just tell us very briefly.
3 A. Sure. I worked on projects, mostly ground equipment for former
4 military programmes for the special purpose Sokol industry production.
5 Q. All right. And --
6 A. I later worked on projects that had to do with civil aviation.
7 In 1988 and throughout 1989, I was with the joint team in the airbus
8 headquarters in Toulouse, France
9 airbus models, the parts for which were at the time built by the Mostar
10 Sokol company, of which I was a part.
11 The last project that I worked on was producing documents,
12 technical documents and the technical documentation for a seaborne
13 minibus, which is another thing that the Sokol company was supposed to
14 build at the time.
15 Q. All right. Thank you. And now, where were you -- or where did
16 the war find you? Let's put it that way.
17 A. The war caught me in my family home. I was still living with my
19 Q. Where?
20 A. In Mostar. Radoca [phoen] was the name of the neighbourhood.
21 It's in the south of Mostar, very close to the Sokol factory.
22 Q. All right. Now, we've heard lots of testimony about the events
23 that occurred in and around Mostar in 1992, April and May. If you could
24 tell us, up until what point did Sokol operate during that period?
25 A. Sokol officially continued to operate up until mid-April. It was
1 getting very difficult, however, and the number of people for
2 security-related reasons had stopped showing up for work. All of the
3 production activity had already ground to a halt by the second half of
5 Q. Okay.
6 A. It proved impossible for a number of people to simply report for
8 Q. And we're speaking of April 1992?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. When did you stop working at Sokol?
11 A. I stopped working -- well, I don't remember the exact date, but
12 it was sometime early in April.
13 Q. All right. Now, we know, and we're going to hear lots of
14 testimony from you, that you were involved in the Red Cross in the Mostar
15 municipality; is that right?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. When did you begin working for the Red Cross?
18 A. I started working for the Mostar Red Cross on the 28th of June,
20 Q. Okay. And --
21 THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness kindly wait before he starts
22 answering the question because he understands English, obviously.
23 MR. KARNAVAS:
24 Q. Okay. You're going to have the wait. Listen, you know, because
25 there's -- we need to have a little pause.
1 All right. And -- well, it seems that there was some sort of a
2 gap between the time that you stopped working at Sokol and the time you
3 started working with the Red Cross. Could you please tell us, where were
4 you; what did you do?
5 A. Sure. I spent some of that time in an area that was at the time
6 surrounded by the JNA and the reservists. I was no longer able to go to
7 work. Later on, when the explosion occurred on the 3rd of April, the
8 explosion in Mostar, most of the population from Radoc [phoen] moved to
9 the centre of town.
10 Q. All right.
11 A. I would occasionally go back to Radoc on two occasions, to be
12 more specific, to get some things that I'd left behind and that my family
13 now needed because they'd fled Mostar as soon as the 3rd. They first
14 went to Ljubuski and then later on to the peninsula of Peljesac
15 father, my mother, my two children, and my wife.
16 Q. All right. Well, how is it you got involved in the Red Cross?
17 A. Well, this has to do with the previous story. They had gone on
18 before me, but they didn't bring any of their stuff. So I went back to
19 Rodoc in order to get some things that I could then take through and
20 bring them back to my family.
21 There was this one time that I was on my way to visit my family
22 in Peljesac. I drove back through Baska Voda, which is where my
23 grandparents were. I wanted to see them as well.
24 Q. All right. And --
25 A. And that's where I was struck by a health problem, a back
1 problem. I was bedridden for a full ten days. Once I was able to move
2 again, I had already learned that there was some refugees from Mostar and
3 other areas in Baska Voda, and there was a humanitarian organisation that
4 was operating there, and the name of this humanitarian organisation was
5 Croatian's Young For Herceg-Bosna's Young. I started working with that
6 organisation, and I tried to do whatever I could to organise aid for
7 Mostar because I knew what the situation was like in the town. Towards
8 the end of that month, on or about the 26th, I managed to have the first
9 aid shipment to Mostar --
10 Q. Which month are we talking about?
11 A. -- and I started getting in touch with the people there.
12 Q. Which month --
13 A. The 11th of May. That's when it began, and then I stayed in
14 Baska Voda until the 28th of June, and I had also visited my family in
16 Q. What was the date or month when you made -- when you took the
17 shipment to Mostar? What month was that? May, June, July, August?
18 A. Beginning of May.
19 Q. All right. Now, how is it that you got this job at the Red
20 Cross? I mean, you went from being an engineering in the avionics
21 industry to distributing humanitarian aid. How did you get that? How
22 did you make that transition?
23 A. The transition occurred on account of a mere accident. I simply
24 met those people while I was over there who were involved with that
25 humanitarian organisation. Then I also knew some people who were dealing
1 with logistics in the town itself, and that was when I brought the aid
2 there. They recognised my ability to work with speed and efficiency and
3 that I could get aid relatively quickly. I had already got in touch with
4 a number of people, and I also had a lot of experience when I worked with
5 the Sokol team, some projects. I knew how to get those things up and
6 running, and some people were aware of my experience.
7 Q. All right. Now, who appointed you to this position?
8 A. The municipal council.
9 Q. And what position did you start at?
10 A. I was first appointed coordinator for the work of the Red Cross
11 in war, and then there was the proper procedure for me to be appointed
12 executive manager of the Red Cross.
13 Q. All right. And how long did you work for the Red Cross?
14 A. I worked with the Mostar Red Cross from the 28th of June, 1992
15 to the 1st of April, 1998
16 Q. All right.
17 A. I left, and I became the chief secretary of the BH Federation Red
19 Q. Okay. And when did you finally finish working with the Red Cross
20 in BiH?
21 A. I left the Red Cross altogether on the 3rd of October, 2003.
22 Q. All right. Now, I want to focus your attention to the period
23 when you first started working with the Red Cross. If you could please
24 tell us how the Red Cross in Mostar municipality was organised, number
25 one; and number two, what sort of activities did it carry out, if any?
1 A. When I joined the Red Cross, the Red Cross worked under a statute
2 that dated to a period before the war, but it, the Red Cross or I --
3 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter can't tell what the subject is.
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- actively joined the developments
5 that had to do with war in Mostar at the time. However, people who were
6 in charge of the Red Cross were not getting any younger and were lacking
7 the energy or the stamina to lead the Red Cross in this newly arisen
9 MR. KARNAVAS:
10 Q. Let me stop you here.
11 A. [In English] Okay.
12 Q. I need you to listen to my questions and only answer my
13 questions. Right now, we need to figure out, what did the Red Cross do
14 as an organisation? If I want to know about who was leading it, I'll ask
15 you. So what was the Red Cross doing as an organisation because it may
16 change from country to country, region to region.
17 A. [Interpretation] The Red Cross distributed humanitarian aid. It
18 also administered first aid in a purely medical sense. It collected
19 charity and blood donations. It also mediated in the search for missing
20 persons on behalf of the international committee.
21 Q. All right. Now, when you joined, what was the size of the staff?
22 A. If you mean the operative structures of the Red Cross, seven or
23 eight people. The warehouse and all the other activities, over 20
24 persons, some volunteers and some employees of the Red Cross.
25 Q. All right. What about physical facilities? What sort of
1 facilities did it have other than an office?
2 A. We had a reserve warehouse in the building. We had a couple of
3 computers, the ones that were in use at the time. We had a certain
4 rolling stock, one small vehicle and one freight vehicle, and we also had
5 some equipment that was used for rendering assistance or first aid to the
6 people who were needing it.
7 Q. All right. Well, that leads me to my next question. The aid
8 itself, where was that coming from that you were distributing?
9 A. Well, the aid was coming from various donors. The main
10 collaborator of the Red Cross was the ICRC, by definition, as well as the
11 UNHCR and other organisations that expressed interest to provide help to
12 Mostar at the time. There were also lots of donations arriving in the
13 town through people who were engaged outside of the country, and all this
14 aid was addressed to the Red Cross in the town.
15 Q. All right. Well, you mentioned the ICRC and the UNHCR. What
16 were the other organisations that were in and around Mostar at the time
17 providing aid?
18 A. In addition to the Red Cross, our partners were Merhamet and
19 Caritas, and later the Red Crescent and other locally based organisations
20 established in the area of Mostar municipality, and they had their own
21 sources of aid.
22 Q. All right. Now, before I ask you to describe to us how the aid
23 was distributed, if you could explain to us whether the Mostar municipal
24 Red Cross was tied into any other regional or state organisations, you
25 know, Red Cross organisations.
1 A. The Mostar Red Cross initially did not have any contacts with the
2 Red Cross of Bosnia-Herzegovina, since all the communication lines had
3 been severed with these institutions. At the time when I joined them,
4 there were -- there was already a regional Red Cross established of the
5 Croatian Community of Herceg-Bosna, and I got involved in the operation
6 of the coordinating body that was monitoring the activities of other Red
7 Cross organisations.
8 Q. Okay. Now, this regional organisation, to what extent was it
9 influencing the activities in Mostar, that is, the Mostar municipal Red
11 A. Only in that part where we were obliged, according to the statute
12 and other documents on which we operated, we were obliged to maintain the
13 mandate of the International Red Cross. Otherwise, there was no
14 intention on their part to influence our work in any way whatsoever.
15 Q. And can you please tell us whether you know about other
16 municipalities, if they had a similar Red Cross organisation, and if so,
17 how it operated.
18 A. Well, every municipality in Bosnia-Herzegovina had a Red Cross
19 organisation established, and all these organisations of the Red Cross,
20 in compliance with their capabilities and needs, attempted and made
21 effort to provide assistance to people who were in hardships due to
22 everything that was happening in our country at the time, either to a
23 greater or to a lesser extent depending on their capacity, the situation
24 on the ground, the number of the staff available, et cetera. However,
25 Mostar was in a specific situation. The town of Mostar was the place
1 where -- which had so many people in need, and at what -- at one point
2 more than 90 per cent of the population was in need of assistance or aid
3 of all sorts.
4 Q. All right. Well, we're going to get to that in more detail, but
5 first, can you tell us to what extent the Mostar municipal Red Cross had
6 any relations with the local government, the Mostar municipality.
7 A. Only to the extent that with a view to the response to the
8 situation we had common ground. The social welfare institutions had a
9 compatible mandate to the one that we had, and in that specific area we
10 had more close ties and frequent meetings. As far as the influence of
11 the executive authorities is concerned, we had a complete free hand to
12 operate as we wanted.
13 Q. All right. And what about the executive authority, the HVO
14 HZ HB? Was there any relationship or any association between that
15 executive body and the Mostar municipal Red Cross?
16 A. Only in the event that there was a need for that for whatever
17 reason that we had to ask permission to import some staff, and we needed
18 papers issued by these institutions. So these were the only situations
19 that we needed to contact with them. Otherwise, that was not necessary.
20 Q. All right. Now, you indicated -- you told us that there were
21 several organisations providing aid. Were these organisations, along
22 with the Red Cross, coordinating in any way their efforts, and if so,
24 A. Yes. These organisations, also by the intention of the
25 government, worked in concert; and they established a coordinating body
1 that monitored the situation on the ground, collected information about
2 the people in need, the situation about the inflow of humanitarian aid,
3 and the direct distribution of that humanitarian aid on the ground. That
4 was a very productive and constructive work that this body did. Meetings
5 took place on a weekly basis. We always had unlimited access to the
6 information about which organisation received what kind of aid so that we
7 can prepare a joint plan of distribution.
8 Q. All right. Well, perhaps before the break you can tell us in
9 very -- sort of general terms how aid was distributed once it was
10 received by the Red Cross so we sort of have a general picture because
11 then after the break we'll go into the documents.
12 A. In view of its potential and available capacities, the Red Cross
13 was entrusted with coordinating and running the database of the inflow of
14 aid. The aid was distributed in the following way: All the humanitarian
15 organisations that were participating in this coordinating body would
16 provide their respective information about how many tons or units of
17 certain goods they had on stock in their warehouses. This kind of
18 information would be fed to a joint database, and then with regard to the
19 number of users in local communities where the distribution points were
20 located, we issued orders to our commissioners, local commissioners, to
21 take over the stuff, and they would come with trucks to load it.
22 For example, two tons of flour were loaded from one storehouse
23 from Merhamet and other stuff from Caritas, just 2 or 300 litres of
24 cooking oil, just as an example, and depending who was nearest and which
25 storehouse was nearest, this one would be used. So the storehouses were
1 in different locations, and they had one joint responsibility and
3 The distribution was done at distribution point by local commune
4 commissioners, and the ones from Caritas worked, also, at the local
6 Q. Thank you.
7 MR. KARNAVAS: This may be a good time for us break, and -- it's
8 our general time, Mr. President, for our break, and then we could go to
9 the documents.
10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] absolutely. We are going to
11 break for 20 minutes.
12 --- Recess taken at 3.42 p.m.
13 --- On resuming at 4.08 p.m.
14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] The court is back in session.
15 Mr. Stringer, are you about to tell me that you will not be leading this
16 witness during your cross-examination?
17 MR. STRINGER: Well, Mr. President, actually, I want to inform
18 the Trial Chamber and the parties of two things which I should have said
19 during the previous session today. The first is to introduce the Trial
20 Chamber to Mr. Ignacio Gomez who as a legal intern with the Office of the
21 Prosector has assisted in our preparation for this witness; and the
22 second was to inform the Trial Chamber that the cross-examination will be
23 conducted by my colleague, Mr. Longone. Thank you.
24 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Karnavas, I have a fourth
25 oral decision which I wish to hand down. This will be very brief. This
1 will be the last decision, I hope.
2 On the 16th of October, 2008, the Trial Chamber has decided to
3 deduct from the Petkovic Defence the time it had taken up when during the
4 cross-examination of Witness Mirko Zelenika. It had addressed topics
5 that had not been addressed during the examination-in-chief of the
6 witness in question.
7 On the same day, the Petkovic Defence asked the Trial Chamber to
8 motivate its decision in order to be able to hand down a decision as soon
9 as possible. The Trial Chamber would like the Prosecution to respond to
10 this motion and to respond on the second argument in particular put
11 forward by the Petkovic Defence.
12 According to the Petkovic Defence, the procedure whereby time is
13 deducted when a particular Defence team addresses topics -- or new topics
14 during the cross-examination of a witness [no interpretation] -- from
15 which time is deducted -- let me read the last paragraph again.
16 Indeed, according to the Petkovic Defence, the procedure whereby
17 time is deducted from one of the Defence teams when it addresses new
18 topics during cross-examination of a witness by [as interpreted] another
19 team of the Defence, this would be unfair given what is applied to the
21 The Prosecution should reply if it so wishes by the 21st of
22 October, 2008, at the latest.
23 Mr. Stringer, could you look into this and respond, please.
24 JUDGE TRECHSEL: A small observation on the translation. On line
25 8: "During cross-examination of a witness of another team," not "by
1 another team." What is meant is "the witness of another team."
2 MR. STRINGER: Mr. President, just thinking quickly, we are in
3 the process of preparing a written submission that goes to, I think, the
4 related -- some related issues that have been raised which relate to
5 scope of cross-examination by the Prosecution and whether documents can
6 be put to Defence witnesses during cross-examination by the Prosecution
7 if those exhibits were not included on the Rule 65 ter list of the
8 Prosecution that was filed some years ago, and I'm just wondering whether
9 it might be best for us to introduce this additional topic in our written
10 submissions which are already being prepared in that they are somewhat
11 related to the issue of cross-examination and -- as between the different
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Stringer, the Trial Chamber
14 feels that it is better to separate these topics. Mrs. Alaburic raised a
15 very specific issue, and what you have just said is a much broader topic.
16 Now, as regards the specific issue mentioned by Mrs. Alaburic, we
17 would like you to respond by tomorrow at the latest so that the Trial
18 Chamber can hand down its decision.
19 MR. STRINGER: And just to clarify. Mr. President, does the
20 Trial Chamber want from the Prosecution a written submission on that or
21 an oral statement of what our position is given the shortness of time? I
22 don't know what your preference is. Very well.
23 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] We would like you to respond
24 orally tomorrow afternoon. You can tell us orally.
25 MR. STRINGER: We will do that, Mr. President.
1 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Karnavas.
2 MR. KARNAVAS: Thank you, Mr. President and Your Honours.
3 Frankly, I think we should just cut the Gordian knot on that one, just
4 dispense with the rule and just allow the parties to ask whichever
5 questions they wish that are relevant to their cases, but those are my
7 Q. Sir, if we could go to the documents. You have your binder
8 there, and we're going to go to the first document. This portion of the
9 documents has been -- it's under Red Cross organisation in general. 1D
10 02648. If you could look at that document. We see that it's dated 9
11 October 1991, and if you could please tell us what this decision is all
12 about, keeping in mind that it's before your time, that is, with the --
13 with the Red Cross.
14 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for the witness, please.
15 MR. KARNAVAS:
16 Q. Okay.
17 A. [In English] It's okay?
18 Q. Yes.
19 A. [Interpretation] This document shows that this gentleman
20 appointed here received a decision from the Secretariat for National
21 Defence to the effect that he is being appointed to the post in the Red
22 Cross organisation of Mostar.
23 Q. All right. And we can see at the preamble that this deals with
24 the law on All People's Defence, and it talks about a work obligation.
25 So can we conclude that this appointment is based on -- is a work
1 obligation sort of appointment?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. If we go to the next document, 1D 02649. This is dated 10
4 October 1991, and we see the individual who signed it, and here we see a
5 wartime -- this reflects a wartime assignment. Is that somewhat similar?
6 A. Yes. This document preceded the issuance of this decision. This
7 was the list of individuals that received individual decisions. The
8 previous document just showed that each individual received their own
9 decision on appointment.
10 Q. All right. And I take it if somebody has this sort of wartime
11 assignment they don't have to have another assignment such as being
12 mobilised into the military; is that correct?
13 A. No. No. All the individuals who were assigned to work with Red
14 Cross were obliged to respond and carry out the Red Cross activities
15 stipulated in its statute and under its mandate.
16 Q. Right. And -- fine. I guess what I was trying to say is if they
17 have that assignment, then they cannot be assigned to have a military
19 A. No, no, they couldn't.
20 Q. Now, if you look at --
21 JUDGE PRANDLER: Mr. Karnavas.
22 MR. KARNAVAS: Yes.
23 JUDGE PRANDLER: Mr. Karnavas, I'm sorry to interrupt you. I am
24 still with the previous document and -- but also, it is connected to the
25 present one, and that document which is the 2648 and also the other
1 documents here, for me it's somehow creating a problem in the way that
2 although there is a reference to the law on All Peoples Defence, et
3 cetera, when the authorities are given the right to name somebody and to
4 work in any capacity; on the other hand, I really feel that if we are
5 speaking about the Red Cross, and since I also used to be connected to
6 the work of the Hungarian Red Cross in those years - in the 1990s,
7 actually - apart from my other functions and work, I would only ask the
8 witness how and which way the independence of the Red Cross at that time
9 were regarded by the authorities, and was there an authority - Red Cross
10 authority, I mean - which was responsible, also, for ensuring the
11 independence and, of course, the cooperation at the same time of the
12 local Red Cross authorities with the authorities of the municipality,
13 which is my question to the witness: How the structure of the Red Cross
14 has been in a way helped, on the one hand, by the municipal authorities,
15 but on the other, that their independence was also -- or should have been
16 upheld at the same time, in my view.
17 THE WITNESS: [In English] Okay. [Interpretation] Since
18 according to the statute the Red Cross is an institution that aids the
19 authorities in carrying out the tasks relative to its mandate, the people
20 who were not able-bodied for military service and had information about
21 how the Red Cross operated were under these orders assigned to help the
22 Red Cross in its activities. Therefore, these people were not the only
23 members of the Red Cross organisation, but in the event of war or any
24 natural disaster they were compelled to report to the Red Cross and work
25 for them, which happened, indeed, in this case, in this particular case
1 of this gentleman and this list.
2 These were the people that I found at the Red Cross in addition
3 to the secretary of the Red Cross who was there according to the
4 preconceived establishment.
5 JUDGE PRANDLER: Thank you. I would like only to say that, of
6 course, this part of your answer is satisfactory, and I see the point,
7 your point, as well.
8 My second question was - and now I reformulate it - that in your
9 view the independence of the work of the Red Cross in Mostar, and of
10 course, let us say that in those circumstances in other municipalities,
11 had been ensured as an independent one in your judgement? And if the
12 answer is yes, which kind of methods were used to have your independence
13 upheld? Of course, at the same time you had to cooperate with the
14 authorities. There is no doubt about that.
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The Red Cross's independence is
16 ensured through the bodies that were established in order to monitor the
17 work and the functionality of the Red Cross. Each Red Cross had its own
18 assembly, its presidency, and its working bodies that were directly
19 involved in carrying out the Red Cross activities and, also, the staff on
20 the ground who were at disposal as volunteers for the purposes of
21 implementing the Red Cross mandate. Cooperation with the authorities
22 went as far as we had contact points or common ground in social welfare
23 issues where we cooperated with social welfare institutions, hospitals,
24 and other medical institutions. So these were our joint activities in
25 this specific area.
1 The delivery of humanitarian aid, as well, and its distribution
2 requested and required certain customs, permissions, and other permits;
3 and therefore, we had to cooperate with institutions that issued these
4 permits. We also had coordinated actions with the police if a convoy
5 needed protection or if certain goods had to be secured or protected from
6 theft or any similar situation. So in all the situations where we had
7 certain needs and requirements for the protection from the authorities,
8 we sought this protection. And on the other hand, the authorities only
9 asked us to do what was within our remit and our mandate and created
10 possibilities for us to do the best job we could through certain forms of
11 aid like covering the fuel costs or other minor administrative issues
12 that were able to provide for us and which we were not able to get from
14 JUDGE PRANDLER: Thank you very much for your explanation,
15 Mr. Simunovic. That is now clear.
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You're very welcome.
17 MR. KARNAVAS:
18 Q. Just as a follow-up, to your understanding did the Red Cross --
19 was the Red Cross ever ordered to do anything by the municipality?
20 A. No.
21 Q. All right. A little bit more specific: We understand that there
22 were a list of people that were the recipients of aid, and we'll see that
23 there's also a certain criteria as far as what sort of aid, the amounts
24 of aid to be provided to the recipients. With respect to that aspect of
25 your work, did the municipality, the authorities in any way try to
1 influence who should be on the list, how much aid they should be given,
2 or anything of the sort?
3 A. Well, no, since the record of the people in need of aid were made
4 up by professional services of the municipality and the Social Services
5 on the ground; and based on these records and the information about the
6 overall number of potential users, we were involved in other activities,
7 as well, not only humanitarian aid.
8 Q. All right.
9 A. We decided how we were going to operate and what the scope of our
10 aid was going to be.
11 Q. All right. If we could look at the next -- the next document,
12 which is 1D 02650. And if you could sort of help us out here a little
13 bit. And again, it's in connection with the previous questions. What is
14 this document, and what does it reflect?
15 A. This document is linked to the previous document. We see these
16 people here, and information was to be entered into the military booklets
17 saying that these persons were available to the Red Cross, and there
18 needed to be a Red Cross stamp on this for the other part to be verified,
19 as well, not just the signature but also the stamp.
20 Q. All right. Well, going back to the question that was asked by
21 His Honour, if we look on page 2 of this list under number 1, "manager of
22 the professional service secretary." Do you see it? And we see that
23 this is a reserve officer, and it's Omer Katica -- or Arif Katica. Is
24 that it? Arif, because Omer would be his father. Do you see the name?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. Okay. And who was that individual?
2 A. This was the secretary of the Red Cross. It is precisely
3 pursuant to this request that he was appointed secretary of the Red Cross
4 under his war assignment.
5 Q. All right. Okay. Let's go on to the next document.
6 JUDGE TRECHSEL: I have even two questions. Sorry, Mr. Karnavas.
7 First, Witness, in the list a number of numbers are crossed out,
8 and others are encircled. Number 1 is crossed out. Do you know what
9 this means? Can you explain?
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Persons whose names are circled
11 were professionally involved with the Red Cross before the war. And the
12 persons whose names are crossed out were in charge of certain fields of
13 activity. For example, there was a non-professional commission including
14 the persons who operated on a voluntary basis.
15 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Okay. I will not insist on this.
16 I would like to go back to the answer of yours that is recorded
17 on page 45, in lines 14, 15, where you said -- 13 to 15, where you said
18 that the records of the people in need of aid were made up by
19 professional services of the municipality and the social services on the
20 ground. This was in connection with the independence.
21 Now, did you - the Red Cross, Mostar Red Cross - did you in any
22 way control whether these lists were adequate, or did you take them at
23 face value and act on that basis without asking any further questions?
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, we had a Red Cross
25 commissioner for each municipality -- or rather, for each local commune,
1 and this person at each of the local communes knew exactly what these
2 persons were and what their status was. Therefore, any report from the
3 social work centre had -- or rather, the Red Cross people had insight
4 into these statuses and the people who worked there.
5 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Thank you.
6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, this is the first
7 question I put to you: On looking at number 3, Dr. Fazlibegovic, born in
8 1953. Can you confirm that this was a physician who was dealing with
9 medical problems?
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
11 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] He is the son, as I can read,
12 of Mehmed or Ahmed Emir. Is he a Muslim?
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. Yes. He's Ahmed's son.
14 Father's names are in the brackets here.
15 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] This Muslim who was a doctor
16 worked for the Red Cross in Mostar. For the entire period of the war or
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. He worked at the Mostar
19 hospital. As for his work with the Red Cross, he monitored activities
20 related to the administration of first aid and other activities being
21 monitored by him or other activities pursued by the Red Cross. He was
22 not a Red Cross employee.
23 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] You told us that he worked at
24 the hospital. You told us that there were two hospitals, one hospital in
25 West Mostar and one hospital in East Mostar. Which hospital was he
1 working in?
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Just one hospital in Mostar, and he
3 worked with that hospital. And he still works there, as a matter of
4 fact; and today, it's in West Mostar.
5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] In 1993, right, May, June,
6 July, August 1993, where was this doctor? Was he in West Mostar, in East
7 Mostar? Where was he?
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] West. West.
9 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] During this period May, June,
10 July, August, September, October, November 1993, did he attend the Red
11 Cross meetings? Was he working for the Red Cross in Mostar?
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I wasn't with the Red Cross at the
13 time, I. He was an activist. He was a volunteer with the Red Cross, but
14 he was an employee of the hospital.
15 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.
16 MR. KARNAVAS:
17 Q. All right. And as I understand it, at that time - correct me if
18 I'm wrong - as I understood you, at that time there was only one hospital
19 in Mostar. Is that correct? Okay.
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. All right. And you said that this list is of people -- of
22 individuals working with the Red Cross before you arrived. Do they
23 continue to work when you arrived?
24 A. All those actively involved with the Red Cross continued to work
25 there even following my arrival.
1 Q. All right. If we go on to the next document, 1D 02653. This is
2 May 20th, 1992
3 at this document it's -- it purports to -- it's from a -- these are
4 minutes of a meeting of the founding of a regional Red Cross, and here we
5 see Mostar under Group I, number 7.
6 When you started working with the Red Cross and throughout your
7 tenure with the Red Cross, can you tell us whether this regional
8 organisation worked in a manner in which these minutes reflect?
9 A. No.
10 Q. All right.
11 A. The regional Red Cross was working as a unified organisation made
12 up of the 38 municipal organisations. No division such as this Groups I,
13 II, and III
14 Q. Okay. So in reality, this was never implemented?
15 A. That's right.
16 Q. Okay. If we look at 1D 02652. This is the first meeting of
17 staff of the regional Red Cross. This is seven days later. It's 27 May
18 1992. If we look at that, and again, I understand this is before your
19 time, but I want to draw your attention first, if you look under item
20 number 2, that a Mr. Branko Leko from Posusje was proposed and
21 unanimously elected. Can you tell us whether that was in fact the case,
22 that Mr. Leko was elected, I guess, as the regional president?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. And can you tell us what role did he play as the regional
25 president during your tenure?
1 A. He was a very cooperative and productive person. He was also the
2 initiator as the chairman of this body of meetings, coordination
4 Q. All right. Now, let me -- let's look at item number 3. It says
5 here, because this will come up if I don't raise it, that there was a
6 controversial debate, a long and controversial debate on the proposal of
7 Grude and Livno; and it was voted that Grude should be chosen as the
8 temporary seat of the regional Red Cross.
9 Can you tell us whether you later on came to know what the
10 controversy was all about, why Grude versus Livno?
11 A. Based on what I learnt at a later stage, Grude was chosen for two
12 reasons, one having to do directly with the position of the chief
13 secretary, with the staff, Mr. Bozo Vukoja [phoen], who was at the same
14 time the executive manager of the Grude Red Cross; the other having to do
15 with the possibility of communicating because Livno was quite far away in
16 relation to most of the municipalities that made up the Red Cross, and
17 communication was difficult.
18 Q. All right. Again, I'm going to ask you to speak slowly. It
19 doesn't help if you speak fast and then pause. So you have to sort of,
20 like, pace it.
21 A. [In English] Okay.
22 Q. And then still pause but not too long.
23 A. Thank you.
24 Q. You're welcome. 1D 02655. You spoke of a statute. We see this
25 is May 1992, and this is the statute of the regional Red Cross. Are you
1 familiar with this document, sir?
2 A. [Interpretation] Yes. When I started working with the Mostar Red
3 Cross, I had occasion to look at this document as well.
4 Q. All right. Now, again, going back to what the question was, I'm
5 trying to figure out if I understood the question that was posed from the
6 Bench. If we look at Article 2, it talks about voluntary humanitarian
7 organisation of citizens; and again, we went back and we saw that this
8 was a document with respect to the assignment, and it was as if the
9 person being assigned was actually being ordered as a work obligation.
10 Is there any conflict in that?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. All right. So how could it be -- how could it be a voluntary and
13 independent organisation if at the same time somebody's being ordered to
14 perform work at the Red Cross due to their war assignment?
15 A. Well, the Red Cross is an organisation whose scope is broader
16 than just working within the working organ of the Red Cross where people
17 actually work if you take the municipal organisations, the basic
18 organisations based across schools and municipalities, so the Red Cross
19 stretches far and wide across each and every one of these municipalities
20 on a voluntary basis, on the basis of spreading humanitarian and other
21 mandates. The institution itself, because it performs its very peculiar
22 tasks in keeping with the Geneva Conventions and other protocols and
23 agreements as stated in Article 2, is a humanitarian organisation of
24 citizens which is an organisation of special social interest. That's
25 line 3 in Article 2.
1 Q. All right. Let's move on. If we could look at Article 8, we see
2 a purpose of work under Article 8, and then again, we see a basic
3 pragmatic task under Article 9. I take it, having looked at Articles 8
4 and 9, can you tell us whether the same purpose of work and the same
5 basic pragmatic tasks were also part of the mandate of the Mostar
6 municipal or any municipal Red Cross?
7 A. Yes, for the most part, because these commitments and the purpose
8 of activity was something that followed from the international
9 conventions. One of the organisations could not meet all of the
10 requirements, but in every statute the commitment was there.
11 Q. All right. If we go to Article 9 very briefly and we look at the
12 second to last -- the penultimate bullet point, if you will, it says:
13 "To collect, organise, keep, and provide the data on victims of armed
14 conflicts and mass adversities and carry out other activities of tracing
16 Can you tell us whether this was part of the mandate being
17 carried out by the Mostar municipal Red Cross?
18 A. Yes. The Mostar Red Cross was gathering information on victims.
19 It was also gathering information on accidents. It was also mediating
20 with the international committee in terms of exchanging information on
21 people who had been separated. It was also helping reunite families and
22 missing persons.
23 Q. All right. If we go on to the next document, 1D 02654. Yes.
24 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Just a follow-up question. These tasks,
25 Witness, are the same tasks basically that are the tasks of the municipal
1 Red Cross; is that correct? There is no basic difference. That certain
2 task would be exclusively on the regional level?
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, the statute of the regional
4 Red Cross was the one that other statutes for municipal organisations
5 were based on. Every municipal organisation was under an obligation to
6 perform operative work on the ground and to perform these very duties and
8 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Thank you.
9 MR. KARNAVAS:
10 Q. And I don't want to get ahead of myself because we will see a
11 document later on which is the statute for the Mostar municipality, but
12 that's dated November 1993. But at that time, was there a local statute
13 for the Mostar municipality or other municipalities that you are aware
15 A. The Mostar Red Cross never worked without a statute that applied.
16 The Red Cross statute was there, and it was based on principles of the
17 international movement. The statute of the Mostar Red Cross was based on
18 the Bosnia
19 time. When the regional Red Cross was established, given the fact that
20 Mostar was part of this regional Red Cross, we based our statute on the
21 regional Red Cross statute, which itself, if you look at the title and
22 introduction, was consistent with the BH Red Cross statute. If you look
23 at the preamble to this statute, it invokes the BH Red Cross statute, if
24 you look at the conclusions from the regional Red Cross Assembly of
25 establishment for further work.
1 Q. All right. I'm going to ask you again to please speak a little
2 slower so that the translators are not overtaxed because they are trying
3 their level best to be as accurate as possible.
4 If we go on to the next document, 1D 02654, and everyone should
5 have been provided with the corrected version of this document, the
6 corrected translated version of it, we see this is dated 4 June 1992. We
7 see at the bottom the gentleman that we made reference to earlier, Branko
8 Leko, and at the very first paragraph, it says: "Due to the broken
9 communications with the headquarters of this humanitarian organisation in
11 of the Red Cross in the Croatian cantonal areas have joined together into
12 a regional association of the Red Cross of the Croatian Community of
13 Herceg-Bosna with the headquarters in Grude."
14 My one question is: Knowing that you didn't join the Red Cross
15 until a few -- a couple weeks later, nonetheless, can you tell us
16 whether, indeed, this is accurate, that is at that time the
17 communications were broken between the headquarters -- the headquarters
18 in Sarajevo
19 is, again, concerning the Red Cross.
20 A. Yes. We were not able to communicate with Sarajevo at the time I
21 arrived and for the following 20-odd days. We were unable to communicate
22 with the headquarters of the International Red Cross -- of the BH Red
23 Cross in Sarajevo
24 afterwards given the situation that prevailed in Sarajevo. In some
25 cases, to do with some requests we used ham radio operators to establish
1 communication, but that was the only line of communication that was open
2 to us whenever we were doing our best to assist a particular person and,
3 of course, messages from the international committee because those
4 were -- always arrived in written form.
5 Q. Okay. All right. Thank you. If we go on to the next document
6 1D 02434. If you could please look at it. And again, this pre-dated
7 your arrival, so my first question would be: At the time that you did
8 start working and thereafter with the Red Cross of the Mostar
9 municipality, did you become acquainted with the agreements that are
10 contained in this particular exhibit, 1D 02434?
11 A. I didn't have a chance to look at this document at the time, but
12 I am familiar with the Red Cross mandate through brochures, leaflets and
13 documents that were forwarded to us by the international committee. I
14 look at what this document reflects, which is a document that I saw at a
15 later stage, and it reflects verbatim the provisions of the Geneva
16 Conventions and the mandate of the international committee, as well as
17 that of International Red Cross branches at a local or national level.
18 Q. All right. Well, let's look at concretely page 4, for instance,
19 where at the bottom of the page we see a section called "Beneficiaries
20 and types of assistance." If you go on to page -- the bottom of page 4
21 and on to page 5, we see different criteria.
22 Can you tell us whether this was being followed in Mostar?
23 A. This was the prescribed minimum, prescribed by the International
24 Red Cross committee for aid in the eventuality of disasters and
25 catastrophes, and then they list all the various population groups or
2 If there was any aid that was available in quantities that were
3 sufficient for those in need, then we were able to distribute aid to this
4 extent. If not, then more time would be granted for the distribution
5 process itself or between two rounds of distribution or shipments, if you
6 like, which gave us a chance to put together a package that was realistic
7 and that met these requirements because any other sort of distribution or
8 breakdown or division would have been insufficient.
9 Q. Okay. And we're going to cover that in greater detail later on.
10 I just wanted to get that bit information at this point.
11 Now, if we could go on to the next document, 1D 02660. This is
12 the statute of the Mostar municipal organisation of the Red Cross dated
13 November 1993, and we see President Marinko Simunovic. That's you,
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. And I take it you are familiar with this document?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Okay. And I guess it begs the question if the regional statute
19 that we saw earlier was -- was dated May 1992, why did it take so long -
20 November 1993 - for there to be a statute for the Mostar municipal Red
21 Cross? And be very brief about it.
22 A. Well, it was difficult to convene the Red Cross Assembly during
23 the actual war. That's one of the reasons. Under the statute, only an
24 Assembly can amended the statutes or adopt new phrasing, a piece of new
25 phrasing for the statute.
1 Secondly, we had a statute that actually applied, and this
2 allowed us to undertake any activity in terms of our reaction when it
3 came to the fundamental task of the Red Cross, which was to provide
4 various forms of aid. Therefore, the late adoption of this statute - if
5 I may put it that way - was an excuse for our statute to be brought in
6 line with the Red Cross statute at the national level, the BH Red Cross
8 Q. All right. Now -- and if we look at Article 7 and Article 8,
9 going back to Judge Trechsel's question, we see in Article 7 the goals
10 and activities; in Article 8, the main programme goals. I take it these
11 were the actual activities that were being carried out even prior to the
12 adoption of this statute; is that correct? Based on your previous
13 answer, that is.
14 A. Yes, that's a fact.
15 Q. All right. And before we leave this document, let me just ask
16 you one general question. During that period of time, as I understand it
17 from your testimony earlier, the ICRC were there and, of course, UNHCR.
18 Were there ever any complaints to your knowledge -- were there any
19 complaints to your knowledge that the Red Cross of the Mostar
20 municipality was not carrying out its activities properly?
21 A. No. It was even quite the opposite. The Red Cross of Mostar was
22 commended for the way it operated and how it implemented the required
23 mandate, and precisely for those reasons we were recognised as a very
24 reliable, transparent and good partner for receipt and distribution of
25 humanitarian aid on the one hand and as a good partner of the ICRC and
1 other organisations when it comes to other forms of activities that the
2 Red Cross was involved in.
3 Q. All right. Thank you. We go on to the next document, 1D 02661,
4 and this is the last document in this segment. This is the Law on the
5 Red Cross of the Croatian Republic of Herceg-Bosna. It's dated -- I
6 believe it's November 1994 -- October 1994. Why was it necessary to pass
7 this law, to your knowledge?
8 A. Well, if we refer to what was said before, the Red Cross is an
9 aiding organisation which provides help to the authorities in pursuing
10 the goals and programme tasks, then we in the Red Cross were very keen on
11 regulate our activities in a legal way and thereby make it possible for
12 us to be better and more efficient in our work. We also wanted to
13 resolve the question of cooperation with the government institutions at
14 all levels to resolve the issue of functioning and financing of the Red
15 Cross and to solve certain problems relating to responsibility in working
16 for the Red Cross and by the Red Cross and the mandate that it was
17 supposed to carry out.
18 Q. All right. Thank you. If we go on to the next segment. Unless
19 there are any questions, we'll go on to the next topic which deals with,
20 in general, we call it refugee status, but we will be dealing with these
21 sorts of issues, refugees and displaced persons.
22 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, we have just seen a
23 whole series of documents that show us how the Mostar Red Cross was put
24 in place at the level of the municipality but also at regional level, and
25 as I understood it, you were the president of the Red Cross in Mostar.
1 Earlier on, we mentioned the ICRC. Did you have any contacts
2 with the International Committee of the Red Cross, and if so, who were
3 you in permanent contact with?
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I had contacts with
5 the ICRC and with the delegates of the ICRC who were in charge of
6 cooperation in our area, either through meetings and conversations on our
7 premises or through meetings in their offices that were in various
8 locations both in Mostar and outside of Mostar. It all depended on what
9 they wanted to do and how they organised things.
10 The initial contact I personally had with the ICRC in Split
11 Late Mostar offices and field offices were established. And during
12 intense fighting in 1993, they relocated their offices to Medjugorje.
13 After that, they came back to Mostar again, and that's it.
14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Could you give us the names of
15 your counterparts, the usual ones, the ones that were in Medjugorje and
16 the one who moved to Mostar? Could you give us some names, professional
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I would have to look at my journal,
19 and that would take some time. I do remember, though, some persons, some
20 individuals. For example, Mr. --
21 MR. KARNAVAS: Excuse me, sir. Excuse me. Because of the
22 sensitivity, we may need to do this in closed session, as I understand
23 it. You know, this is the type of organisation that doesn't like to
24 either participate in these sorts of events, and so I don't want to
25 compromise -- I mean, I don't care one way or the other, but they
1 certainly won't come and testify in court because they wish to maintain
2 their neutrality, so that's the only reason. But I have no objection one
3 way or the other, but I'm just bringing it to the Court's attention.
4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well, but you do not have
5 any specific names, do you? Because you said you had to look into your
6 documents. So I don't think it's even worth going into private session
7 since you can't give me any names.
8 The thing that interested me was to know whether you had any
9 contacts, and you said you did. That's the main thing.
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
11 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you. Please proceed,
12 Mr. Karnavas.
13 MR. KARNAVAS:
14 Q. Yeah. Well, let me just pick up where you left off a little bit.
15 You had indicated -- the question was whether you had contact with the
16 ICRC, and then you mention that at one point in May they moved to
17 Medjugorje, correct? Or you just said that. Now --
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. And as I understand it -- and I'll just get ahead of the story at
20 this point. As I understand it, at some point you were asked to go to
21 the Heliodrom on or about May 9, 1993
22 A. Yes, for humanitarian reasons and providing relief to the people
23 who were there.
24 Q. Right. We're going to go step by step. There's nothing to be
25 alarmed by.
1 Can you please describe to us, of course, now, why did you go
2 there and what exactly did you do, if anything?
3 A. The only reasons for us going there was to find a way and to have
4 an insight into the prevailing situation and to find a way of providing
5 help to the people who were there.
6 Q. All right. Let me stop you here. Did you go -- volunteer and go
7 on your own, or were you asked to go there? Which of the two?
8 A. Well, upon my arrival and my joining the Red Cross of Mostar, I
9 found - I have to say that - a devastated Red Cross, particularly the
10 premises where it was housed, because our offices were 200 metres from
11 the front line at the time where combat operations were ongoing. Then I
12 learned what actually had happened, and that is that a certain number of
13 people were put up that night at Heliodrom.
14 Q. Go ahead.
15 A. I immediately got in my car and went to the site to see what it
16 was all about. With me was my assistant for humanitarian issues. I
17 wanted to see if there was anyone I can talk to and how I could help
18 these people because I learned that there was a large number of civilians
19 there. And those are precisely the category that we had been providing
20 help to and who were the beneficiaries of our aid.
21 I went back to the warehouse, see what the situation was and
22 established a channel for providing aid to the extent that we were
23 capable of doing. We provide aid in food, toiletries, and all other
24 items that were available on stock. However, at the time I have to say
25 we did not have sufficient quantities of goods because the inflows from
1 other humanitarian organisations were considerably reduced.
2 Q. All right. Well, we're going to talk about that period and what
3 was available as far as resources to distribute --
4 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Excuse me, Mr. Karnavas. You had started off by
5 asking about Heliodrom.
6 MR. KARNAVAS: I haven't finished.
7 JUDGE TRECHSEL: And he hasn't answered. Yeah. Okay. Okay.
8 MR. KARNAVAS: I haven't moved on. I mean, just --
9 JUDGE TRECHSEL: I'm sorry. I thought you were going further.
10 MR. KARNAVAS: No, no, no. No, I -- he mentioned something
11 about -- there was a --
12 JUDGE TRECHSEL: I've heard it.
13 MR. KARNAVAS: Okay.
14 Q. My first question now is, staying with the Heliodrom, was
15 somebody coordinating this effort that you were involved in, that is
16 assisting and providing aid? Was anybody on that end working with you or
17 coordinating these efforts?
18 A. I had contact with the chief logistical officer of this
19 institution and these facilities, as well as with people who were working
20 with him.
21 Q. All right.
22 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] One moment, Witness, because
23 you're jumping one step, skipping one step, because this topic of the
24 Heliodrom is an important one, as you know well.
25 I've listened to you carefully so far, and I understood that
1 together with a colleague of yours, you got on board a vehicle and you
2 drove to the Heliodrom in order to assess the situation. That's what you
3 said, isn't it?
4 When you got there -- well, is there the Red Cross sign on the
5 car, or was it a civilian car? And when you got to the Heliodrom, whom
6 did you see? What did that person tell you? What did you say?
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I drove in a car that had the Red
8 Cross markings, and that was always my practice, to use the vehicles with
9 the Red Cross sign.
10 At the gate of Heliodrom, we were allowed to pass through once
11 they saw the Red Cross sign. I reached the building where the military
12 command was. I was familiar with this area because that is where I was
14 I asked if there's anyone I can talk to about the humanitarian
15 aid for the people who were being kept there. I met with the person who
16 was in charge of logistics in military terms, and I assessed the needs
17 with this person and assessed the quantities that we were able to
19 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] This means that nobody
20 prevented you from doing your work. Could you feel there was some
21 resistance, because when one sees the Red Cross arrive, that may arise --
22 that may cause problems sometimes.
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I didn't have such problems.
24 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Fine.
25 MR. KARNAVAS: And I'm sure there will be more questions from the
1 Bench on this. Just let me get in a question or two.
2 Q. Aside from providing humanitarian aid as you just described, did
3 you at any point in time do an inspection of the premises to see the
4 conditions of the premises and the condition of the people, whether they
5 were sufficiently being taken care of? Did you do any of that? And
6 that's a yes or no.
7 A. Excuse me. Are we still talking about Heliodrom?
8 Q. Yes. We haven't left it. You'll know when we leave Heliodrom.
9 We're going to be there for a while.
10 A. [In English] Okay. Okay. [Interpretation] I didn't carry out
11 any detailed inspection.
12 Q. Okay. Why not?
13 A. Because the office where we had a meeting was on the ground
14 floor. I thought that I had to respond quickly. I left this office
15 after an hour at the most.
16 Q. All right. Excuse me. You just told the President of the -- of
17 the Trial Chamber that you could come and go. Everybody respected you.
18 They saw that you were with the Red Cross. Why did you not walk around
19 and inspect the premises at some point to see how those people that were
20 there, how they were being kept, you know, whether they had sufficient
21 facilities, the food. Did you do any of that?
22 A. Well, one of the reasons that we didn't have an opportunity to do
23 that was because the ICRC came and they undertook to assess the condition
24 in which the people were being kept there.
25 Q. All right. Well, did you ever -- was that part of the mandate as
1 far as you know, the mandate of the Mostar municipality or any
2 municipality, that is, to inspect places?
3 A. If these were officially pronounced as prisons, then the local
4 Red Crosses did not have the mandate to do any inventory or inspection of
5 the persons kept on such premises.
6 Q. All right. What about for tracing purposes? Were any efforts
7 made, for instance, in providing forms for folks to fill out if they
8 wanted to locate missing family members or friends? Was any of that done
9 by -- by you or your staff during that period?
10 A. On that site, the ICRC also undertook all activities in this
11 regard. They distributed the messages, and they took over the written
12 messages that actually came from that site.
13 Q. All right. And can you tell us, to what extent did you provide
14 humanitarian assistance? You said you went back, you looked for it. Was
15 it one day, two days? What sort of stuff did you bring back to this
17 A. We first and foremost provided toiletries and food that could be
18 cooked on the premises or in the kitchen where food was being prepared
19 for the staff on the site, and we also took a number of blankets and
20 mattresses and other items that we had available and that could have
21 facilitated this improvised accommodation of people.
22 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, there's something I'm
23 finding difficult to understand. The authority of your organisation and
24 the ICRC, if I am to understand your answers just provided to
25 Mr. Karnavas, you were in charge of toiletries, food, and mattresses, and
1 the ICRC had to handle all the rest? What are the different competencies
2 of the ICRC and your body?
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The mandate of the ICRC with regard
4 to persons who are incarcerated was to keep records and to assess the
5 situation and to distribute messages and later on convey these messages
6 to the recipients. This is the usual mandate of the ICRC in a situation
7 where you have people in incarceration.
8 Our Red Cross, on the other hand, in this particular case was
9 involved only in the humanitarian aspect of the situation, that is, the
10 provision of the necessary aid for these people such as food, toiletries,
11 and items relating to their accommodation conditions.
12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I understand better. Fine.
13 MR. KARNAVAS:
14 Q. All right. Now, if we could go to the documents, going back to
15 the documents, and I'm going to first refer you to 1D 00596. And here,
16 this is 25 July 1992
17 files or -- I believe it should say cards, who come to Mostar
18 municipality. And if we look at under Article 2, it talks about the
19 office for Social Welfare, Health Care and Refugees of the Mostar
20 Municipality, of the Mostar Municipal Croatian Defence Council.
21 Can you tell us what this is all about? What are they talking
22 about when they say refugee cards or files, and are you familiar with
23 this particular office, the office for social welfare?
24 A. Yes. Specifically, this document is something that I found later
25 at the Red Cross, and I knew that it had been issued. This document
1 refers to the previous lists compiled at various locations of the
2 expellees and refugees, and this constitutes an effort to bring some
3 order to these records containing the names of the people who arrived to
4 the municipality of Mostar
5 Q. All right. And the office for social welfare, were you familiar
6 with this particular office, and if so, how? Very quickly, please,
7 because we really do need to move on.
8 A. Yes. This office was functioning as part of municipal
9 authorities in Mostar, and it has offices in charge for all these domains
10 relating to general social welfare issue and protection as well as the
11 refugees in Mostar municipalities. This office employed professionals,
12 and it is only logical to expect that these professionals would be
13 entrusted with taking care of issuing cards or establishing files
14 relating to these persons.
15 Q. All right. Let's look at the next document, 1D 00623. These are
16 the "rules on protecting refugees and displaced persons in Mostar
17 municipality," and this is September 16, 1992. Are you familiar with
18 this -- this document, and could you please tell us how so?
19 A. Yes, I am familiar with this document. It essentially contains
20 an effort to regulate the situation pertaining to the expellees and
21 refugees and expellees in Mostar on various levels, that is to say with
22 regard to their status, their rights, their protection and, generally
23 speaking, records relating to them. This document also indicates or --
24 that there was a need to cooperate with the Red Cross and other
25 humanitarian organisations. So I was fully aware of the contents of this
1 document and, believe me, I was glad that this document had been issued
2 because there was chaos in terms of seeking aid. People would go from
3 one location to another exerting pressure on humanitarian organisations,
4 on social welfare institutions. They tried to gather as much aid as
5 possible without valid arguments, and that was a good opportunity to
6 bring some order in this situation.
7 Q. All right. Now, if you look at the next document and --
8 actually, the next two documents are very similar. 1D 02759 and -- and
9 of course, the next one, 1D 02761. We see these are -- these are family
10 cards. Are you familiar with these documents?
11 A. Yes, I am.
12 Q. Can you just very briefly tell us what these documents are. What
13 is a family card, and how does it work?
14 A. The family card, as you can see here, was something that each
15 family -- after an analysis was made by professionals and in the presence
16 of representatives of humanitarian organisations, it was established that
17 they are eligible to receive humanitarian aid, and this kind of card was
18 then subsequently issued to them in order to facilitate the registration
19 or the entry of dates when they received aid, including the type of aid
20 received, and this card had to be verified or certified to the effect
21 that this person and his or her family, at the time when they applied for
22 aid, were eligible to receive it. In other words, all the individuals in
23 local communes who needed aid had either a family card, if they were
24 heads of the household, or individual cards for those who didn't have
25 families and was deemed to be a valid beneficiary.
1 On the front page, top side, you can see that this card is valid
2 and each subsequent date is another verification of the fact that the
3 carrier or the holder of this card is the recipient of aid.
4 On the second page --
5 Q. Go ahead.
6 A. It's not shown on the screen, so I'm waiting. Page 2, if you
7 look at the left-hand column, you have the type of aid that was provided
8 to this person or family. You have the date, which means that this was
9 when the aid reached the family or the person.
10 I do have to admit that column 2 and column 3 are somewhat
11 clumsy, and you see that the dates were copied from column 3 back to
12 column 2 on the day when aid was redistributed.
13 Q. All right. If we go on to the next document, 1D 00754, and this
14 is a document -- we've seen this before. This is a decision. It's dated
15 15th of April, 1993, and it's a decision governing the rights granted to
16 refugees, expelled persons, and internally displaced persons. And we can
17 look -- if we look at Article I, we see that there's an exclusion to
18 certain persons that are within the age of 17 to 60 and women 17 to 55,
19 and ultimately we'll see another document where this was amended, so it's
20 18 as opposed to 17.
21 Were you familiar with this decision at the time?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. All right. Now, before we talk about the decision, could you
24 kindly explain to us what the situation was like in Mostar, you having
25 been there, living there, and then working very closely and distributing
1 humanitarian aid? Can you please tell us what the situation was like?
2 And in particular, we're concerned about expelled persons, refugees,
3 internally displaced, the numbers.
4 A. Well, as for the situation in the period leading up to this
5 decision and right after, there were almost 30.000 beneficiaries of
6 humanitarian aid living in Mostar, all because of different reasons.
7 To provide sufficient aid for such large numbers of people
8 enjoying the status of displaced persons or refugees was an enormous
9 endeavour. Another thing we were facing was that the aid which had been
10 more plentiful before now merely continued to trickle in to the Red
11 Cross; and according to our records, the situation was the same in other
12 humanitarian organisations whose work we coordinated, as I explained
14 Another problem that occurred was people becoming double
15 beneficiaries of humanitarian aid, people living at two different
16 locations. That is why you see paragraph II in this decision, indicating
17 that internally displaced persons must go back to wherever they can in
18 Mostar municipality in order to avail themselves of their right to
19 receive humanitarian aid in one location alone.
20 Likewise, men of military age. If you look at paragraph I, you
21 can see that. Men of military age were busy in their military units, and
22 they weren't classified as being in need of various forms of aid.
23 Q. All right. If we look at also Article IV. Here, it says:
24 "Pursuant to Items I, II, and III
25 expelled persons, or refugees put up in education facilities shall be
1 relocated to other collective accommodation facilities for expelled
2 persons..." and so on.
3 Can you please explain to us why this would have been necessary,
4 this Article, if you know?
5 A. I know that schools were used to house refugee centres. I know
6 that the idea was to have the schools back up and running and for the
7 construction to continue. It was for this reason that one tried to have
8 these people who were occupying schools moved to other buildings, or if
9 these were internally displaced people, to be moved back to whichever
10 areas were available to them in order to make the schools available again
11 for teaching to continue.
12 Q. Well, let's look at 1D 01083, and let's see what Jablanica does a
13 few weeks earlier, 19 March 1993
15 And here, it says: "Until further notice, the Red Cross shall
16 issue refugee cards with temporary residence to refugees and displaced
17 persons who are not military conscripts and arrive in Jablanica
18 municipality after this Presidency's order ..."
19 So looking at Article I and looking at the previous decision, are
20 there any similarities or dissimilarities in what is happening in
22 A. It's quite obvious that there are similarities, the idea being
23 that men of military age should be taken off the humanitarian aid
24 distribution lists. Likewise, if you look at paragraph II, the idea is
25 to safeguard buildings in which schools could continue --
1 Q. All right.
2 A. -- to operate. So the reasons are very similar.
3 Q. All right. Now --
4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [In English] Now it's time for the break.
5 [Interpretation] We will have a 20-minute break now.
6 --- Recess taken at 5.38 p.m.
7 --- On resuming at 6.00 p.m.
8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Karnavas, you have used one
9 hour and 27 minutes.
10 MR. KARNAVAS: Yes, Your Honour. Thank you.
11 Q. Now, I'm going to have to -- we need to get through one more
12 document, actually, with this chapter. There are two in the binders, in
13 this particular chapter, and this is -- we'll look at P 02151, and again,
14 keeping in mind the decision of April 15, that is 1D 00754, which was
15 then amended on the 29th of April, which is P 02140. But let's look at
16 this conclusion, P 02151. This is from Merhamet. First, do you know the
17 gentleman by the name of Izet Sahovic? Do you know him?
18 A. Yes. Yes, I still work with him. He's deputy manager of the
19 Mostar airport, and we work together on a daily basis.
20 Q. All right, and this document is dated 30th of April, 1993, and in
21 this document it makes reference to the previous ones that we talked
22 about, the decision of 15 April 1993
23 aware of this particular conclusion at the time?
24 A. Not this document.
25 Q. All right. Now, as I understand -- I want you to look at now 1D
1 02813. Do you have it there? It should be in your binder. 1D 02813.
2 That's the very next document. Do you have it?
3 A. Yes, yes.
4 Q. Okay. All right. And do you recognise this document?
5 A. This is an excerpt from my diary.
6 Q. All right. And as I understand it, you have your diary with you,
7 the entire diary back then?
8 A. The entire diary.
9 Q. And this was a diary that you -- you allowed us to copy and
10 which, also, you allowed us to provide to the rest of the parties,
11 including the Prosecution; is that correct?
12 A. Of course.
13 Q. All right. Now --
14 A. One proviso though. What I see on the screen is not exactly what
15 the page contains.
16 Q. Okay. Let me -- let me show you --
17 MR. KARNAVAS: If the usher could please assist us here and give
18 this to the gentleman. I'm told that we need to put the number on the
19 e-court, or you could put it on ELMO.
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I have the document, but what I see
21 here on the screen is not --
22 MR. KARNAVAS:
23 Q. All right. Let me just -- please work with me because I'm under
24 a tight schedule, and all these little delays are valuable time -- is
25 valuable time lost.
1 What do your notes reflect?
2 A. My notes reflect one of the meetings with the UNHCR on the 30th
3 of April, 1993, with members of the Caritas attending, the Red Crescent,
4 Merhamet, the Red Cross, and other humans organisations that were part of
5 the coordination committee for the reception and distribution of
6 humanitarian aid in Mostar municipality. What was discussed at the
7 meeting was the situation regarding food shipments, the shortage of food
8 in the UNHCR system, and other problems to do with the arrival of
9 humanitarian aid. It was also concluded that throughout that period
10 there were 30.000 beneficiaries of humanitarian aid throughout Mostar
11 municipality. Likewise, if you go further down you see that new refugees
12 are arriving from Central Bosnia.
13 Q. All right.
14 A. If you turn the page, you see on page 2, child care is referred
15 to there, and then one debated the change in the status of refugees and
16 displaced persons, and this had to do with the aforementioned decision.
17 Q. All right. Go ahead.
18 A. My own remark about this was that the decision also had to do
19 with the overall quantities of food available. Earlier on, we stated the
20 other reasons for the decision to be adopted.
21 Q. All right. Now, at that point in time, since we see that
22 Merhamet was present, did they take a position or did the -- did the
23 decision of 15 of April come up?
24 A. No.
25 Q. All right.
1 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter didn't understand the witness.
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- in the sense of the previous
3 document what their reaction would be. That wasn't something that would
4 actually stated here.
5 MR. KARNAVAS:
6 Q. Okay. So that wasn't brought up at the meeting on that
7 particular day.
8 A. No, not on that day.
9 Q. Okay. And again, just to be clear, this meeting, by looking at
10 those who were participating, are these the participants of this
11 coordinating committee?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Okay. All right. Now, if we go on to the next chapter which
14 ties in a little bit with --
15 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] One moment. One follow-up
16 question. I'm looking at your handwritten notes. They are about a
17 meeting with the UNHCR, with Caritas, and Merhamet. I'm interested in
19 At that meeting, who was the Merhamet representative? Do you
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the representative of
22 Merhamet at most of these meetings was Mr. Izet Sahovic. The Merhamet
23 office, the Mostar Merhamet, was in the same building as the Red Cross.
24 We passed through the same door every day to gain access to the building,
25 and he was at most of these meetings.
1 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. So that's on the
2 30th of April, ten days away from the 9th of May, 1993. What was the
3 mood of the Merhamet representative? Did he think that the situation was
4 caused by a generalised conflict, or did he blame the HVO? What was his
5 personal point of view?
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] We were dealing with humanitarian
7 issues and nothing else. We were only considering the amounts of
8 humanitarian aid available to us. Was it sufficient? Was it possible to
9 distribute the quantities that we had? We never went any deeper into the
10 relations that you mentioned except in as far as it concerned
11 humanitarian aid.
12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] If I understand you well, you
13 were exclusively interested in the consequences of the situation, not in
14 the causes of it together with the other participants. You were only
15 speaking about the consequences. You did not deal with the causes
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Precisely. We did not. We talked
18 about what we had to do if the quantities of food decreased and the
19 number of persons to be fed increased.
20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Please proceed.
21 MR. KARNAVAS: Thank you.
22 Q. After this particular meeting, did Merhamet continue to -- to
23 show up at these coordinating committee meetings and participate?
24 A. The next meeting was attended by people from Merhamet on the 4th
25 of May, and then they stopped coming.
1 Q. Okay. And -- okay. When was the next meeting in May? What
3 A. The 4th of May.
4 Q. Okay.
5 A. We have it on the next page.
6 Q. And when did they start -- when did they start showing up again
7 to meetings, if they ever did?
8 A. Early in June. I can't remember the exact date, but it's
9 somewhere in my notes. It was between the 12th and the 15th of June.
10 There was a regular meeting that was held during that period.
11 Q. All right.
12 JUDGE PRANDLER: May I --
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] There are a few questions.
14 Wait a moment.
15 JUDGE PRANDLER: Mr. President, I would like to ask a question.
16 You made a reference a few minutes ago to the Red Cross and also
17 to the -- to Crescent Rouge. That is mainly that part of the
18 International Red Cross -- Red Crescent movement which are from the
19 Muslim States. I wonder if when you mentioned Crescent Rouge, Red
20 Crescent, if you had in mind let's say the Crescent Rouge, Red Crescent,
21 from Turkey
22 that part of Herzegovina
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The organisation was established,
24 the Red Crescent, at the municipal level in Mostar. It actively took
25 part in the work of the coordinating committee despite the fact that you
1 can't have two organisations with two different coats of arms, as it
2 were, active in one country. We had an opportunity to get the maximum
3 amount of aid, so we went along with this, for this organisation to
4 continue its work because all they were doing was about humanitarian
5 work. Their participants were actively involved in all of the
6 coordination meetings held by the coordinating committee. They were
7 highly cooperative. They provided a lot of information. They helped
8 with the situation, and they made a number -- a significant number of
9 donations. One can assume that they got the aid that they provided to us
10 from countries under the sign of the Red Crescent, but this is something
11 that can be easily checked if you go back to their records. I'm not
12 privy to any detail about their sources.
13 JUDGE PRANDLER: Thank you very much, Mr. Simunovic, although I
14 would have liked to know if that organisation as you just explained was a
15 grassroots organisation only in Mostar, or was it in a way connected to
16 national -- other national branches like -- let's say in Sarajevo or any
17 other place; because as we all know, the Red Crescent and the movement is
18 in a way also international as such, that is the federation of the
19 national societies of Red Cross and Red Crescent. So my question was
20 mainly directed to the fact if they had any international relationship or
21 they were only acting in the field of -- rather, not national but only
22 local levels. Thank you.
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, they operated in
24 several municipalities across Bosnia and Herzegovina. Their structure
25 was not a closed one in terms of hierarchy. They operated locally across
1 local communes, but there were some missions through activities well
2 known to me because I participated in the process of establishing the Red
3 Cross of the federation and the society of the Red Cross at the federal
4 level to start setting up a national structure of the Red Crescent in
5 Bosnia and Herzegovina, which at the same time as you suggested was not
6 possible because in one country you can only have one symbol and one
8 Later on when the situation normalised, we discussed this
9 problem, and we as the Red Cross -- or rather, there were no
10 prerequisites in place for a national form of the Red Crescent to be
11 established since the BH Red Cross had already had a tradition of some 80
12 years, and the international movement did not order dual or double signs
13 or symbols or two such societies in one country. So you're quite right.
14 They didn't have the structures, but I was in those bodies and structures
15 establishing the Red Cross and international recognition. But at this
16 point in time, there were no problems for them being the institution that
17 they were to get humanitarian aid because that was in everyone's best
18 interest, and that was a top priority at the time.
19 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, when there was the
20 federal republic, the Socialist Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina, at the
21 time was there both the Red Cross and the Red Crescent, or was there only
22 the Red Cross?
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Only the Red Cross, which had been
24 part of the Red Cross of Yugoslavia; but the way it was structured, now
25 there was only one institution, Red Cross - "kriz" or "krst" - because of
1 the dual use of that word in the various variants of the language.
2 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] As to the structure of the Red
3 Crescent, for instance, in Mostar, what time did they show up?
4 MR. KARNAVAS: If I may be of assistance, Your Honour. If we
5 look at document 1D 00643, which is in the next topic.
6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] So I'll find the answer in that
7 document. Maybe I was ahead of myself. Sorry, Mr. Karnavas. You may
9 MR. KARNAVAS: Okay.
10 Q. If we go back -- now I want to go to your report, which is 1D
11 02651. This is your report, is it not? It's dated 23 March 1994, but
12 it's -- it's for the activities of 1993; is that correct?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. All right. And as I understand it, in this report there are some
15 charts which may be of some assistance to the previous answers that you
16 gave concerning the availability of humanitarian aid in and around the
17 months of April and May of 1993. Is that correct?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. All right. And perhaps if we could look at two charts that might
20 be of some assistance, and it might be easier if we look at the B/C/S
21 version. And the one chart -- I'll read the number at the bottom. It's
22 1D 510756. That would be -- that would be the first one. Maybe we could
23 pull it up on -- so everyone can see it. And in English, it's 1D 570376.
24 Do you have the chart with you?
25 A. [In English] Yes.
1 Q. Okay. And if you could please explain this chart to us, what
2 does it mean, and how can we read it? First, what does the title say?
3 A. [Interpretation] The title reads: "Dynamics of entry of
4 humanitarian aid into municipal Red Cross Mostar in 1993."
5 Q. Okay.
6 A. Lower down you see the months, and then this vertical column
7 shows the amount in terms of tonnes of humanitarian aid that came in.
8 Q. All right. And if we look at the months of April and May, we
9 could see how much came to the Red Cross; is that correct? If you look
10 at the bottom.
11 A. Certainly. It can be seen clearly. January, February, March,
12 the humanitarian aid arrival was on the wane; and then some more came in
13 in April; and then May, June, July, quite poor in terms of humanitarian
14 aid being received by the Red Cross.
15 Q. All right. Now, if we look at the next document -- the next
16 page, here we see another chart. Perhaps you could help us out on this
17 one. And that would --
18 A. Given the fact that the Red Cross was keeping records, also, for
19 the other organisations that were part of the coordinating committee, in
20 our report we provided an illustration of the overall influx of
21 humanitarian aid in relation to all the organisations that were part of
22 the committee. It clearly shows that in April there was a significant
23 decrease in terms of humanitarian aid coming in, and that was in relation
24 to nearly all the institutions, and in May it was simply insubstantial.
25 Q. All right. To make sure that I understand it.
1 MR. KARNAVAS: And Your Honours, in the English version, it's 1D
3 Q. If we look at this particular chart, this has all of the aid that
4 is coming in to the coordinating body as opposed to the previous one,
5 which just reflected the aid that came into the Red Cross.
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. And would it be this amount of aid that would then have to be
8 distributed to everyone who was in need of that humanitarian aid in and
9 around Mostar municipality?
10 A. The humanitarian aid that was available in January, February, and
11 March was meant to be distributed, yes, of course. However, nothing
12 arrived; nothing new arrived in April.
13 Q. Okay. Now, unfortunately what we don't have, it would appear, we
14 don't have a trend or statistics as to how many refugees were there at
15 the time, right? We don't have this in this --
16 A. No. I don't have that.
17 Q. Right.
18 A. We didn't keep that kind of record.
19 Q. Right.
20 A. But one can cross-reference this to the previous one showing that
21 there were over -- or about 30.000 beneficiaries.
22 Q. And that was based on the document that we saw that comes out of
23 your diary, 1D 02813. You have to say something because we need to make
24 a record.
25 A. Yes, yes.
1 Q. Okay.
2 A. I apologise. Yes.
3 Q. I don't mean to be aggressive, but time is -- and I take it --
4 let me just ask this question in a non-leading fashion. When were those
5 notes taken that are in your diary? When were the notes taken, sir?
6 A. The day it happened.
7 Q. Okay. Contemporaneously?
8 A. That goes for every page, of course. Contemporaneously, yes.
9 Q. All right. Now, sticking with your report, very briefly, again,
10 because we need to move on, if we go on to the last few pages.
11 MR. KARNAVAS: I think it's the last two or three pages, Your
13 Q. What we see -- and this would be 1D 510764, 765, 766, this is in
14 the original version. We see a -- we see a list, and then we see HRD,
15 which I suspect, it's Croatian dinar; is that correct?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. And then further down at the bottom and on the next page, we see
18 DEM, and I take it that's Deutschmarks.
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. At some point we see ITL, and I take it that would be Italian
22 A. That's right.
23 Q. Okay. Can you explain to us why you're referencing here the aid
24 in Croatian dinar, Deutschmark, or lira?
25 MR. KARNAVAS: And I'm referring to pages 22 to 24 in the English
1 version, Your Honours, for the record and for everyone's benefit.
2 Q. So why is it in Croatian dinar, Deutschmark, or lira? Could you
3 give us a quick explanation so I can move on.
4 A. Well, each annual report contains a financial report. This is
5 about certain amounts that were indicated in Croatian dinar. That
6 represented our transactions through the clearing house, and at the time
7 the clearing house was doing business in Croatian dinar. The amounts in
8 other currencies were donations from certain countries, and this was
9 reflected in the currency designated.
10 If you look at the title page, you can see that the Mostar Red
11 Cross had an account with the ZAP
12 currency account in the equivalent foreign currency, and this allowed us
13 to receive donations from a variety of sources.
14 Q. All right. And that -- that brings me to my next question
15 because we see a giro account. I take it that -- was that for -- well,
16 what was it for, the giro account? What does that reflect?
17 A. Every institution registered was obliged to open an appropriate
18 account in order to conduct its business, and quite simply once we
19 applied for registration, we filled out the form and we acted as the
20 other institutions did at the time.
21 Q. But where are you opening up this account? For some of us who
22 may not know, where is this account located?
23 A. In Mostar.
24 Q. Which institution?
25 A. That was the clearing house --
1 Q. The payment bureau?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. ZKP?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Okay. I can't lead you. That's why I'm trying to get you to
6 give me the answers, but we got there.
7 Now, with respect to the banks - because this may be an issue
8 that the Judges may wish to explore or my colleagues - we see one bank --
9 or two banks or two accounts, one for foreign currency, one for domestic.
10 Can you tell us, when you joined, when you joined the Red Cross back in
11 July 1992, were these accounts in existence at the time, these bank
13 A. No. There was only the one previously opened with the clearing
14 house, and that was the institution that acted as a service for socially
15 owned institutions and other businesses for internal transactions.
16 Q. Okay. And when you mean clearing house, you're talking about the
17 payment bureau?
18 A. Yes, I do.
19 Q. All right. We just need to be precise.
20 Were banks available at the time? Were they functioning in and
21 around Mostar at the time, do you know, when you joined the Red Cross?
22 A. Believe me -- well, yes, in a sense, but how they operated and
23 what problems they were facing, I don't know. All I know is that we used
24 these two accounts for our business transactions.
25 Q. All right. All right. If we go on to the next document, 1D
1 02772. This is the next segment. This deals with distribution of
2 humanitarian aid in general, and here we see someone being appointed.
3 Could you please explain what this document is about; and the social
4 welfare centre, what is that?
5 A. It was part of the municipal institutions in Mostar. The social
6 welfare centre operated within this system. This centre worked together
7 with the local community; and at the proposal of a representative of the
8 local commune, they appointed people to coordinate work on the issues
9 relating to this area.
10 Q. All right. Well, what was the function of the local commune
11 concerning the distribution of aid? What was its function?
12 A. That was a direct distribution point of humanitarian aid. So in
13 cooperation with the commissioner from the centre and the government
14 commissioner for this particular local commune as well as representatives
15 of international humanitarian organisations, humanitarian aid was first
16 collected from the storehouses of the organisations participating in the
17 coordinating committee, preparing them for distribution, keeping records
18 and cards on the status of beneficiaries, and direct distribution of aid
19 that arrived in this particular local commune and was provided by the
20 coordinating committee, or rather, the organisations operating in the
22 Q. All right.
23 A. There was first internal reception, and every time a list for
24 distribution was publicly exposed or made, it was made known to the
25 public which kind of category of population was due to receive aid and at
1 what time.
2 Q. All right. You're going to have to speak a little slower. So
3 just to make sure that I understand you, at the local commune when there
4 was a distribution to be made, they would publish it so that the
5 community -- the members of the commune, those living in and around would
6 know when the distribution would occur and what was being distributed.
7 A. Yes. Yes.
8 Q. And I take it based on your previous answer, somebody with a card
9 may then be qualified and would go and collect. Is that correct?
10 A. Yes, according to the lists that was publicised so that everyone
11 who came on a certain day would receive the same items. There couldn't
12 have been any differences.
13 Q. All right. What about if somebody wasn't on the list but they
14 felt that they -- that they needed to collect some humanitarian aid, you
15 know, at that level? Do you know what the procedure would be, if any,
16 for such a person either to get a card or to at least get some -- some
17 aid on the spot?
18 A. Well, basically, according to the adopted rules, a person may
19 apply to acquire the right to aid and to be given a card. In Mostar
20 municipality, there were also soup kitchens established where everyone
21 who felt that they had no other way of getting a meal on a particular day
22 were able to go and get one there, or they could try and just talk to
23 someone and attempt to get aid, but I think that it's happened very
24 seldom for anyone to get any aid unless they had a proper card.
25 Q. Okay, which brings me to my next question. Who would -- you said
1 they would have to fill out a form to get the card. Would that happen at
2 the commune level, or would it happen at some higher level? Who would
3 make this -- where would the actual form be filled out, and who would be
4 making the decision, at what level?
5 A. These forms were filled out at the local commune. The social
6 welfare centre had their commissioners at the local level, as well as did
7 the humanitarian organisations, and people simply knew who had what
8 status in their community, and that would be confirmed through the
9 issuing of a card, and the social welfare centre had to verify this card.
10 Q. Okay. If we go on to the next document, 1D 01328. This is a
11 decision to establish the Coordination Committee for Collection,
12 Reception, and Distribution of Humanitarian Aid.
13 Now, we've already discussed somewhat or you talked about a
14 coordination committee. Is that what this decision is all about, setting
15 up that particular committee?
16 A. Yes. This was the foundation for setting up this body; and on
17 the basis of this document, we initiated meetings and launched our
18 activities, agreed how we were going to operate. We prepared, also,
19 documents that would help us monitor the whole activity.
20 Q. Now, on -- under Article II, it says: "The committee shall have
21 president and vice-president who shall be elected by the committee
22 members ..." and so on. Do you recall who were the president and
23 vice-president of the coordination committee? Do you recall offhand?
24 A. I don't know these names, but I do know that the Red Cross was an
25 administrative and operative support in terms of monitoring the work and
1 the assessment of the situation concerning the availability of
2 humanitarian aid.
3 Q. All right. If we go on to the next document, 1D 00643. This is
4 dated 8 October 1992
5 increase the number of members of the Council of Humanitarian Aid and
6 Social Welfare." And here we see: "The Red Crescent commissioner shall
7 become the tenth member of the Council of Humanitarian Aid and Social
9 And now, is this Council for Humanitarian Aid, is this the same
10 coordination committee, or is this something else?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Okay. Well, let me -- Yeah. It's a poorly phrased question on
13 my part. You know, I take full responsibility for that.
14 Okay. Are we speaking -- when it says here --
15 JUDGE TRECHSEL: This time, Mr. Karnavas, I think the question
16 was okay, but the answer was a bit difficult. Do you prefer red or blue?
18 MR. KARNAVAS: Yes.
19 Q. The Council for Humanitarian Aid, what is it referring to?
20 A. That's a coordinating committee for collection and reception.
21 Q. Thank you. Now, if we go on to the next document, and it's sort
22 of been spliced for -- for convenience, but I think that you have the
23 original one. This is document 1D 02662. This is a chart on
24 humanitarian aid distribution. Is that correct?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. Do you know who prepared this chart?
2 A. In the right top corner, you can see exactly who did this.
3 Q. All right.
4 A. The idea was done by Mrs. Antonije Jurisic, a member of the Red
5 Cross staff, and Mr. Zeljko Coric and Goran Zunic prepared this diagram.
6 They were also working with the Red Cross. Mr. Zeljko Coric was head of
7 the office for IP support of the Red Cross.
8 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction: IT support.
9 MR. KARNAVAS:
10 Q. Now, we don't see the Red Crescent here. Is there a reason for
11 that, on this chart, or is it?
12 A. The reason is that this chart was made before they joined this
14 Q. All right.
15 A. There's also Merhamet missing here. This is just an idea of how
16 to design the work of the coordinating committee.
17 As we can see here, there are only six organisations
18 participating at the time, and the tenth one was the Red Crescent.
19 However, the principle was the same.
20 Q. Right.
21 A. Whether it consisted of one or more organisations, the way of
22 keeping records, processing the data relating to the aid supplied and the
23 mode of distribution was identical.
24 Q. Okay. Now, very briefly, and if -- if the Bench has questions
25 I'm sure they'll ask. If we look at the left -- the left bottom of
1 this -- of this chart, we see "Local communes." Do you see that? And
2 then there's 1, 2, 3. Are you with me?
3 A. Yes, yes.
4 Q. Okay. Unless you tell me, I don't know, so -- now -- and then we
5 see some lines. What is that reflecting?
6 A. These lines represent actual distribution of aid at the local
7 levels in local communes and other communities. The aid was distributed
8 that was received by any of these organisations on the coordinating
9 committee. The aid would be loaded to the truck of the representative of
10 the local commune. He would then go back to his local commune, prepare
11 and organise the distribution in accordance with the information that we
12 presented earlier.
13 This coordinating committee also agreed for certain institutions
14 to be given priority in receiving humanitarian aid, certain humanitarian
15 aid, and that was soup kitchens; students; dormitories where internally
16 displaced persons and refugees were housed; also, the old people's home;
17 the nursery; and also the hospital in terms of medical aid; and finally
18 the civilian protection when it came to the distribution of aid that was
19 appropriate to be received by them; and of course, all modes of organised
20 accommodation that were either existing at the time or were later
21 established in order to help accommodate the people.
22 Q. All right. Thank you. Now, if we go on to the next document --
23 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, we still have this
24 document, and you are the author of this document since your name is on
25 it. This is something I'm interested in. "Donatori." It says "sponsor"
1 in English. This heading is the one I'm interested in. Who were the
2 sponsors, these donatori, these people who provided aid? Can you give us
3 any instances of this?
4 A. I don't think that the word "sponsor" is an appropriate one as
5 far as --
6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] In the English translation,
7 it's been translated by "sponsors."
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It should read "donors," but this
9 is besides the point now.
10 Various donors, that is to say people who organised themselves
11 abroad in order to collect aid for Bosnia-Herzegovina and Mostar, as well
12 as other humanitarian organisations who were self-organised abroad and
13 came to our areas bringing humanitarian aid, and if Your Honours allow
14 me, I can show you in my report a list of some 15 or 16 organisations
15 that made donations in 1993 -- in 2003 to Red Cross. That's page 15 --
16 THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness please repeat the number of
17 the page.
18 MR. KARNAVAS: If -- if I could. Hold on one second, please.
19 This would be from the document 1D 02651, and it's page 13, Your Honours,
20 in that document. And of course, there's a list of the donors. If you
21 want to put it on the ELMO, we could do that and everyone can look at it,
22 but it's the Maltese Knights, Association of Italian Solidarity, Soros
23 Foundation, Agape, UNHCR, Care International, ICRC, Red Cross Grude,
24 Caritas - Cathedral, UNICEF, Red Cross Posusje, the Turney school,
2 of addresses, the cities where these donors are from.
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] If you allow me, I can add
4 something to this. Each of these organisations who were participant had
5 a list of their donors, and the list was much longer. This is just the
6 list of organisations that were cooperating at the time with the Red
7 Cross, and this is the litigation that we had, an overview of the total
8 quantity of aid that reached our area at the time, and that we agreed and
9 coordinated together how we were going to distribute this aid.
10 MR. KARNAVAS:
11 Q. Okay. If we go on to the next document, 1D 02572. This is May
12 4th, 1993. This is to the Office for Displaced Persons and Refugees,
14 Now, was this to the municipality of Mostar
15 A. That's what it says here.
16 Q. Okay. Well, that's what I'm asking you. So it belongs to the
17 Mostar municipality.
18 Now, do you know Mr. Demirovic?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Okay. And what was he at the time? It says "President."
21 President of what?
22 A. He was the president of the SDA regional committee in Mostar.
23 Q. Okay. And if we look at the very first line, it says here: "A
24 large quantity of seed arrived to the port of Ploce
25 Assistance to the Muslims of the Republic of BiH
1 And then it goes on to say: "Regional SDA Committee for
3 of humanitarian aid ..." and so on. If we keep reading, we see that some
4 aid is to remain in Mostar while other aid is to continue onwards.
5 And my first question to you is, was this usual for this a
6 political party, a regional political party, SDA, to be involved with
7 humanitarian organisations such as Merhamet?
8 A. To tell you the truth, I have never seen this document before,
9 and I found it -- find it very illogical to see direct involvement of a
10 political party in the work of a humanitarian organisation. That never
11 happened with our organisation.
12 Q. All right. Okay. And when it talks about seed, do you know what
13 kind of seed they're talking about, keeping in mind what gets planted
14 around there.
15 A. I don't know. I can only suppose that it was potato or wheat or
16 something that was suitable for sowing.
17 Q. All right. If we go on to the next document --
18 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Just a question in this regard, Witness. Is it
19 acceptable or is it accepted, even, that an organisation provides
20 humanitarian aid and says it is destined only for a part of the
21 population of an area, like here? This is apparently a Muslim
22 organisation, and they only want to assist Muslims. Now, is that
23 legitimate, or should the wish be disregarded and the aid be distributed
24 equally amongst all those who need it?
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, in my view it was something
1 that happened on the ground. There was a fund for assistance for the
2 Muslims of Bosnia-Herzegovina, and if it acted by distributing food to
3 Muslims only, then it was not acceptable. However, if part of the aid
4 received by Merhamet, the aid was received through the coordinating
5 committee, then it couldn't happen that this aid would be distributed
6 solely to the Muslims but to all the needy.
7 I also have to tell you that the issues relating to humanitarian
8 aid were very - how shall I put it? - or -- provided a chance for
9 manipulations, and that is the reason why we in Mostar wanted to
10 introduce some order in this area and to provide aid to all the people in
11 need irrespective of who they are.
12 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Thank you.
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Karnavas, two minutes
14 before we finish. It might be better to resume tomorrow.
15 MR. KARNAVAS: Yes, because the next question will probably last
16 longer than two minutes, Your Honour, the answer that is, so this would
17 be a good spot.
18 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] You have had two hours and ten
19 minutes, for your information.
20 Witness, as I told you, you are now a witness of the court, and
21 you may not contact anyone. As you know, we shall meet again tomorrow at
22 a quarter past 2.00 since we are sitting in the afternoon tomorrow. So
23 much for that.
24 Mr. Stringer, I hope you might be able to give us your positions
25 orally tomorrow in light of the requests made by the Trial Chamber.
1 I wish all and everyone a pleasant evening.
2 JUDGE TRECHSEL: May I just inform everyone that I will
3 unfortunately be absent tomorrow. I'll be in again the day after
5 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 6.58 p.m.
6 to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 21st day
7 of October, 2008, at 2.15 p.m.