Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 35038

 1                           Wednesday, 26 November 2008

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           [The witness entered court]

 5                           --- Upon commencing at 9.24 p.m.

 6             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Registrar, can you please

 7     kindly call the case.

 8             THE REGISTRAR:  Good morning, Your Honours.  Good morning

 9     everyone in and around are the courtroom.  This is case number

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

11             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. Registrar.  I'd

12     like to first welcome the accused.  I would like to greet also the

13     counsel.  I'd like to welcome Mr. Stringer, Ms. West, their assistants,

14     and all the people who are here to help us.  We are 25 minutes behind

15     schedule as there was a technical problem which has now been solved.

16             I would now like to give the floor to the registrar who I think

17     has two IC numbers to give us.

18             THE REGISTRAR:  Thank you, Your Honour.  The Prosecution has

19     submitted its response to documents tendered by 1D and 3D via witness

20     Neven Tomic.  This list shall be given Exhibit number IC 00895 and

21     IC 00896 respectively.  Thank you, Your Honours.

22             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you very much, Registrar.

23     Madam West you have the floor.  You have one hour and 45 minutes left.

24             MS. WEST:  Good morning, Mr. President, Your Honours, and

25     everyone in and around the courtroom.

Page 35039

 1                           WITNESS:  SVETLANA RADOVANOVIC [Resumed]

 2                           [The witness answered through interpreter]

 3                           Cross-examination by Ms. West: [Continued]

 4        Q.   Good morning, Professor.

 5        A.   Good morning.

 6        Q.   Do you have a copy of your report?  Why don't you get that out.

 7     Thank you.

 8             Now you have, in your direct testimony, spoken about the 1991

 9     census of which you were a part; correct?

10        A.   Yes.

11        Q.   And you would agree with me that when the interviewers went out

12     to collect the information from the residents, this was a face-to-face

13     interview; correct?

14        A.   Yes.  This is the interview method that is used.

15        Q.   Thank you.  You described situations in your testimony where

16     people were reluctant to give their JMBGs.  What is the source of your

17     information for that?

18        A.   I did not say that people were reluctant.  I said that some

19     people provide their IDs, some didn't.  Some went to work without leaving

20     their ID and you obtain information from household members who are at

21     home.  One household member can provide data for all the other members of

22     the household.  Very often, even in the 1991 census, companies would

23     issue everybody with certificates -- certificates as to where they

24     worked, what their IDs were, what was the name of their professional

25     activity, but it doesn't mean that everybody had it on them.

Page 35040

 1             There was a recommendation for everybody to leave these pieces of

 2     paper at home so as to enable their household members to provide correct

 3     data, but I don't know whether everybody complied with that.

 4             On the certificates that the employees of various companies were

 5     issues, the key issue was the ID of the company that you worked in and

 6     the line of profession that the company was involved in, because those

 7     questions were something that people did not answer to readily, and

 8     statistics found that key information for the analysis of the economic

 9     structures in the state.

10        Q.   But you anticipated my next question which regarded the people

11     who were employed, and so is it your testimony that if a person was

12     employed the company would actually provide a certificate with their JMBG

13     that they were supposed to give to the interviewer?

14        A.   It's not like you say.  The companies were supposed to issue

15     every employee in their hand.  It was not submitted to their home

16     address.  Primarily, this certificate contained the ID of the company and

17     the industry that the company belonged to, but I'm not sure whether those

18     contain the IDs of the citizens themselves.  I'm not sure.  The forms

19     still exist and I could check.  The purpose of these certificates, or the

20     primary purpose, was not to provide the ID of the individual citizens but

21     the IDs of the companies and the industries that the companies were a

22     part of.

23             The issuing of these certificates by the companies would have

24     been pointless if it was done only to provide the citizens ID, because in

25     1991 every citizen in the former Yugoslavia had their own ID either on

Page 35041

 1     their identification document or their driving licence or their social

 2     security card.  So it was not the primary goal of such certificates

 3     issued by companies to provide citizens with IDs.  I'm not disputing the

 4     fact that the form may have contained that as well.

 5        Q.   Thank you.  When you came to the OTP in April of this year, you

 6     had access to the OSCE voter registry database; correct?

 7        A.   Correct.

 8             MS. WEST:  Mr. President, may we go into close session?

 9             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Registrar, please.

10                           [Private session]

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 35042











11 Pages 35042-35045 redacted. Private session.















Page 35046

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5                           [Open session]

 6             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, we're back in open session.

 7             MS. WEST:  And if this exhibit could be taken off of e-court.

 8     Thank you.

 9        Q.   Professor, you've given extensive testimony regarding the OSC

10     [sic] voter registry.  Are you familiar with the eligible requirements?

11        A.   You mean what OSCE required, the OSCE requirements?

12        Q.   Yes.

13        A.   Yes.

14             MS. WEST:  If we may have P 10735.  That's in the second binder

15     as well.  That is page 2 of the English, page 69 of the Serbian.

16        Q.   If you look right in front of you, you'll see it.  So this is the

17     general framework agreement for -- it's the Dayton peace agreement

18     regarding elections.  It's what Dayton required.

19             And if you go to page 2 of the English, Article IV talks about

20     eligibility, and I'm just going to read that.

21             It says:  "Any citizens of Bosnia-Herzegovina aged 18 or older

22     whose name appears on the 1991 census for Bosnia and Herzegovina shall be

23     eligible in accordance with electoral rules and regulations to vote.  A

24     citizen who no longer lives in the municipality in which he or she

25     resided in 1991 shall, as a general rule, be expected to vote in person

Page 35047

 1     or by absentee ballot in that municipality, provided that the person is

 2     determined to have been registered in that municipality as confirmed by

 3     the local election commission and the provisional election commission.

 4     Such a citizen may, however, apply to the commission to cast his or her

 5     ballot elsewhere.  The exercise of the refugee's right to vote shall be

 6     interpreted as confirmation of his or her intention to return to BiH.

 7             "By election day ..." --

 8             THE INTERPRETER:  Could you please slow down.  Thank you.

 9             MS. WEST:  Thank you.

10        Q.   "By election day, the return of refugees should already been

11     under way, thus allowing many to participate in person in elections in

12     Bosnia and Herzegovina.  The commission may provide an electoral rules

13     and regulations for citizens not listed in the 1991 census to vote."

14             So you would agree, Professor, that according to this Article IV,

15     in order to be eligible to vote per OSCE, you just had to be on the 1991

16     census?

17        A.   They to be citizens of Bosnia and Herzegovina; they had to be of

18     age, over 18; and it was recommended for them to be on the census, but

19     that was not the absolute requirement.  If they were not on the census,

20     citizens could bring two witnesses who themselves were on the census, and

21     prove that both that they were citizens of Bosnia and Herzegovina and

22     that they could vote.  Not only two witnesses, they could go to their

23     religious leader.

24             If you want me to, I can provide the OSCE instruction to see what

25     precedents were made.  I -- one of the recommendations were that the

Page 35048

 1     citizens were on the 1991 census; but if they were not, they could prove

 2     that they were citizens.  Would you like me to show you the

 3     recommendation?

 4        Q.   No, Professor.  I don't disagree with you on that, but I would

 5     like to go back to this language under Article IV.  And, here, it also

 6     talks about something we were previously talked about, which is where

 7     their vote should count, the choice as to where they want their vote to

 8     count.  Do you see that in here?

 9        A.   I agree with you.  Citizens could vote wherever they wanted to

10     vote, providing that was approve by the commission, if there was

11     something in dispute.  If they were in the same municipality in 1991

12     where they wanted to cast their vote in 1996, then they did not have to

13     go to the commission at all.

14        Q.   All right.  Professor, would you agree with me that where a

15     person wanted their vote to count is very different from where they

16     actually walked into an office and registered to vote?

17        A.   I wouldn't agree with you.  First, I have to go to an office and

18     declare my wish.  On the assumption that I was in Mostar and that I was

19     currently in Sarajevo for any reason, either voluntarily or forcibly, and

20     when elections are announced, it would be only logical for me to go to

21     Sarajevo, and I can say, "I would like to have my vote counted in Mostar.

22     If not, then I express my wish to vote in Sarajevo."  Then they will say,

23     "Yes, prove since when you have been in Sarajevo.  Did you arrive in 1996

24     or after 1996?"

25             I have to be a declared permanent resident or I have to have a

Page 35049

 1     refugee status, and I have to have a document proving that I was a

 2     refugee who was not able to go back to their original place of residence.

 3        Q.   Thank you, Professor.  I think we agree on this point, because as

 4     you just explained, this person would want their vote to count in Mostar,

 5     but they actually registered to vote in Sarajevo; right?

 6        A.   It's not always like that, I'm saying.  That may be approved.  I

 7     may have my vote counted in Mostar, but I have to have a good reason, an

 8     explanation.  If I had moved out voluntarily, I don't want to go back to

 9     Mostar, I'm a resident of Sarajevo.  If my resettlement was forcible,

10     then I can apply to have my vote count in the place where I resided in

11     1991; but in the meantime, I could have changed my mind.  I'm a refugee

12     of Sarajevo, but that's where I want to stay.

13             There are all sorts of possibilities which I can explain before

14     the commission and the commission may grant approval or not.

15        Q.   Thank you, Professor.  I think we're very clear on that point.

16             MS. WEST:  Let's move to Exhibit 10738, 10738.  We'll look at

17     the -- page 7 of the English and page 4 of the B/C/S.

18        Q.   This is the OSC [sic] adjudication manual.  This is the manual

19     that OSCE gave out to the people who worked for them and who worked for

20     the registration to help the employees understand what to do.

21             Now, particularly on page 4 of the English and then page --

22     excuse me, page 7 of the English and page 4 of the B/C/S, it talks about

23     in-person registration, and this talks about in-person registration

24     outside the BiH.  I'm going to read this and then we'll talk about it.

25             It says:  "The voter registration process in the federation and

Page 35050

 1     Croatia will essentially parallel the registration process conducted

 2     within the borders of BiH.  Voter Registration Committee staff will

 3     verify illegibility, and applicants will complete scannable registration

 4     forms in person at out-of-country voter registration centres."

 5             Professor, my question is:  Would you agree that this language

 6     which suggests that in the BiH, people actually came to the office to

 7     register to vote and the OSCE employee had to verify their eligibility?

 8     In other words, people came in person themselves to register to vote?

 9        A.   These are voters in SRJ and Croatia.  This has nothing whatsoever

10     to do with the procedure that was in place in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

11     The voters from SRJ or FRY and Croatia came in person.  They could not

12     send somebody in lieu of them, but that don't change anything.

13             Voters from the FRY, and I know that for a fact, who had

14     citizenship of Serbia could -- had to have their passport on them proving

15     that they were also residents of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and then they

16     would register to vote.

17        Q.   And, again, if we go back to this language, it says that that

18     out-of-country registration that they're describing, and you're right,

19     parallels the registration process conducted in-country.

20             So I ask again --

21             MR. KARNAVAS:  It says "essentially parallels."  There's a

22     difference between "parallels" and "essentially parallels," and I suspect

23     the word "essentially" is there for a particular purpose.

24             MS. WEST:

25        Q.   So, if I can ask, Professor, again, would you agree that this

Page 35051

 1     suggests that in-country, people had to come in to register?

 2        A.   In Bosnia and Herzegovina, they did not have to come in person.

 3     I suppose that the majority did come in person; but the way I understand

 4     it, they didn't have to come in person.  It was recommended.  Whether

 5     they all came in person or not is a different matter.  And when you say

 6     that it is essentially something that parallels the other process, it

 7     does not have to correspond in temporal terms.

 8             The process started -- lasted from October to December.  To be

 9     very precise, the process of registration lasts for two and a half

10     months --

11        Q.   Thanks, Professor.

12        A.   -- and it was --

13        Q.   Thank you.

14             MS. WEST:  We're going to move on I'll ask you to go to P 10737,

15     P 10737.

16        Q.   It's binder 2.

17        A.   Could you repeat the number?

18        Q.   If you look on the screen, Professor, you'll see it.

19        A.   Okay.  Okay.

20        Q.   So this is the OSCE citizenship verification subcommission form.

21     So, if we go to Article 17, you'll see that right in front of you, and go

22     to part 3, where it says:  "If an individual's name is not found on the

23     1991 census as adjusted for use in the 14 September 1996 elections during

24     the voter registration period, proof of citizenship in 1991 will require

25     the individual to present ..." --

Page 35052

 1             THE INTERPRETER:  Counsel is kindly asked to slow down.

 2             MS. WEST:  Thank you.  My apologies.

 3        Q.   "... will require the individual to present during the voter

 4     registration period either a certificate of citizenship issued prior to

 5     1991 or a receipt issued by the appropriate municipal authority to

 6     establish that he or she was recorded as a citizen in one of the official

 7     municipal record books prior to the 1991 census.  All such receipts shall

 8     be subject to verification in accordance with the practices and

 9     procedures established under the authority ..."

10             So Professor, this is what you were talking about earlier;

11     correct?

12        A.   Correct.  But this is only one part of it.  The direct

13     recommendation is something that I will take out from my briefcase, and I

14     will show it to you.

15             Can somebody assist me, please.  It says here:  "How do you

16     verify the identity of voters, recommendation of what documents may be

17     used."

18             MR. KARNAVAS:  For technical purposes, it may be good to put it

19     on the ELMO and also to identify what the document is, the title of it.

20             So, Professor --

21             MS. WEST:

22        Q.   Professor, can you identify what that document is?

23        A.   Yes.  It is the document that I sent to the Prosecution.  It is

24     called the Manual for the Registration of Voters.  It's from 1997.  It

25     was published by the OSCE.  I will read or perhaps somebody else can

Page 35053

 1     read.  I don't know.

 2        Q.   You can go ahead and read the part to which you refer.

 3        A.   "Each person registering must provide identification documents."

 4     So I'm not going to read everything.  The documents that may be used are

 5     list here:  Personal ID card, certificate of citizenship, passport, birth

 6     certificate, certificate, and so on.

 7             "Persons who do not have any of the documents -- identification

 8     documents listed above may prove their citizenship by proffering a

 9     statement that includes:  First name and last name, address at the time

10     of the census, personal ID number, and present current address.  The

11     statement must be made in the presence of one of the following:  A

12     permanent judge, a cleric, a municipal official, or two persons whose

13     names are on the 1991 census."

14             So one of those persons must be present.

15        Q.   Thank you.  I'm going to focus on what you said early on.  You

16     said that the documents that may be used are listed here:  Personal ID

17     card, certificate of citizenship, passport, birth certificate,

18     certificate, and so on.

19             And, so, would you agree with me that the purpose of them

20     providing something physically, a piece of identification, as according

21     to this OSCE verification says - or it doesn't say, excuse me - is to

22     compare is to the 1991 census, so that the OSCE employee can compare that

23     ID to the 1991 census?

24        A.   Madam, all the voters list, regardless of whether it's peacetime

25     or wartime, are always made on the basis of the database compiled on the

Page 35054

 1     basis of the census, always.  Now, if there was a war and if there were

 2     movements of population, the census must be the basis, at least in the

 3     former Yugoslavia.  I don't know about other countries.

 4             Now, if we were to set up the voters list in Croatia or for the

 5     elections in Serbia, the census is used as the basis, because who can

 6     record each and every voter?  You, first of all, have to know what the

 7     electorate is, and you get this idea of what the electorate is on the

 8     basis of the census.

 9             How can somebody say that 70 per cent or 30 per cent of the

10     voters turned out for the elections?  It is stated on the basis of the

11     voters list that were put together prior to the election, prior to the

12     vote, and those voters lists were put together on the basis of the

13     census.  Of course, the voters list must be updated.  Persons died and so

14     on.

15        Q.   Thank you.  That's very helpful.  And in this case in the 1997

16     election, 80 per cent of the electorate came out and registered; correct?

17        A.   No, this is not correct.  This is what your expert states, but

18     this is not correct.  And if you look at her tables where she says that

19     she matched 42.000 and that the number of -- for the population in 1991,

20     that would be about 60 per cent, that's 60 per cent of --

21        Q.   [Previous translation continues] ... I think you misunderstood my

22     question.  My question had to do with how many people came out to

23     register in 1997.  Isn't it a fact that 80 per cent of the electorate

24     came out in 1997 and actually registered to vote?  I'm not talking about

25     matching.

Page 35055

 1        A.   No, that is not a fact.  Your expert claims that the voters lists

 2     lack between 20 and 40 per cent of the voters.  In the Blagojevic

 3     response, which I also have here, this is what your expert claims.

 4        Q.   Okay.  Thank you, madam.  But let's go back to what you said

 5     earlier, when you were talking about the electoral rolls being based on

 6     the census.  Would you agree with me, then, at every OSCE registration

 7     office, the OSCE employees had both manual copies, physical copies of the

 8     1991 census, and a computer copy of the 1991 census, in order for them to

 9     make sure that the person who walked in the door had been on the census?

10        A.   I don't agree with the terminology, but it may be a translation

11     issue.  Registering -- voters are not registered on the basis of the

12     census.  It is based on the individual records.  In Bosnia and

13     Herzegovina, there was the census, and the first instruction to whoever

14     is registering the voters is look for that person in the census, but

15     there is a whole series of problems that one encounters in trying to find

16     persons.  There is a special note saying "Attention:  Because of the

17     quality of the records for the first name and last name, there might be

18     problems with finding persons.  If you do encounter this problem ..." --

19        Q.   I think this must be a translation issue, because that wasn't my

20     question.  My question was:  When somebody registered in 1997, walked

21     into the door, isn't it a fact that OSCE had a copy of the 1991 census

22     there both in hard copy and on a computer?  That's my question alone.

23        A.   They had copies in the computer with first name, last name, and

24     so on.  So not the entire census, just the first name, last name, and

25     some other characteristics, but they did have it.  On the basis of the

Page 35056

 1     1991 census, they were trying there to find the person who came to

 2     register.  Sometimes they would succeed and sometimes they would fail.

 3        Q.   Thank you.  Let's just then in a general way talk about the

 4     process that a person went through when they wanted to register to vote.

 5     I'll describe it and you just tell me if you agree.

 6             It would be:  Step one, a person would go to the office; step

 7     two, that person would give their name and give some sort of

 8     identification that you describe; step three, the OSCE employee would

 9     consult the census, whether on the computer or hard copy, to see if the

10     person standing in front of them matched up with the census; step four,

11     if that person is the same person, then it's a match and they can

12     register; but, step five, if they can't find that person on the census,

13     then there would have to be alternative ways for that person to ensure

14     that they were a citizen in 1991.

15             Would you agree with me generally what I just described was the

16     procedure?

17        A.   Generally speaking, yes.  But when you say something like that,

18     you infer that the OSCE official managed to find Svetlana Radovanovic

19     with that name.  Perhaps, he was unable -- they were unable to find

20     Svetlana Radovanovic because it says "Svelana" or "Sjelana"; but then,

21     based on some other identification markers, they can determine that they

22     actually did find me in the --

23        Q.   Thank you, Professor.

24        A.   -- census.  So it is the duty of the official --

25        Q.   Thank you.  That being the case, is it then fair to conclude that

Page 35057

 1     in 1997 or 1998, OSCE was the very first organisation to do a matching of

 2     the voters electoral rolls with the 1991 census?

 3        A.   In 1997 and in 1998 in Bosnia, yes.  However, if OSCE had not

 4     been there, it was -- if it had been peace, there would be electoral

 5     commissions that would do that.  It just so happened that it was OSCE.

 6        Q.   And would you agree with me that OSCE, as result, acted as a type

 7     of filter for the matching that OTP later did?

 8        A.   Not a chance, no.

 9        Q.   Okay.  Let's look at examples then.  When you came here in April,

10     when you came to OTP, you had access to all the data that -- upon which

11     OTP based their results; correct?

12        A.   I had voters lists, yes.

13        Q.   Okay.  So, in regard to my question yesterday as to whether a

14     match to the JMBG would be ideal, you said:  "It would be the best, most

15     reliable method, but not ideal, provided that the personal ID number is

16     unique and correct.  It is unique as the name suggests, but it also needs

17     to be correct.  It is the most reliable key for matching, having again a

18     numerical key but of a different kind."

19             I then asked:  "Had the OTP used the personal identification key

20     only, and that was the only never they used, would you disagree with the

21     results if it was based on that and just that entirely?"

22             Your answer, Professor, was:  "The matching method, now we have a

23     problem with the key.  If the personal ID number had been used as the

24     key, and if it had been reliable and correct numbers, then the data would

25     definitely be more reliable."

Page 35058

 1             Professor, my question now is:  With that testimony in mind, do

 2     you recall that the OTP matching technique resulted in 142.204 names that

 3     they matched up?  They literally matched 142.204?  Do you recall that

 4     information?

 5        A.   I remember, but they did not use the JMBG but the name, the last

 6     name, and so on and so forth.  If matching was also done with JMBG as the

 7     key, it doesn't say how many matches were found according to that key.  I

 8     know what -- only what your expert stated.  She stated there was matching

 9     according to name, last name, and ID number, and so on and so forth.  And

10     if that is the case, how many were matched according to the ID number?

11        Q.   Professor --

12        A.   That would give me some reliability.  I could say, okay, this is

13     now a reliable result.

14        Q.   Now, you had the capacity to run this test as well, and what

15     percentage of the 142-plus thousand came from a match from the JMBG, and

16     just the JMBG?

17        A.   Madam, that was not my task at all.  I'm not trying to prove any

18     figures here to anybody.

19        Q.   Professor, would your opinion of the OTP report change if you

20     knew that 85 per cent of the 142-plus thousand linked names were matched

21     using just the JMBG?

22        A.   First of all, I doubt that there were so many correct JMBGs in --

23     of citizens in the eight municipalities of Bosnia and Herzegovina or

24     Herceg-Bosna.  It would be a precedent.  According to what I know, there

25     were major mistakes all over Bosnia in JMBGs of citizens.  If 85 per cent

Page 35059

 1     of the JMBGs in the eight municipalities of Herceg-Bosna were correct,

 2     which doesn't mean that it has 13 digits, and if 85 per cent of the JMBGs

 3     in the census were also correct, I would consider this a very high degree

 4     of positive matches.

 5        Q.   Thank you.

 6             MS. WEST:  We're going to look at P 10761, and may we go into

 7     private session, please.

 8             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Go ahead.

 9                           [Private session]

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 35060











11 Pages 35060-35075 redacted. Private session.















Page 35076

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6   (redacted)

 7   (redacted)

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17                           [Open session]

18             MR. KARNAVAS:  Mr. President, if I may be heard for two minutes.

19              on page 36, line 24, Judge Trechsel indicate that I pretended,

20     and I understand that this is perhaps a linguistic issue.  I understand

21     Judge Trechsel's English is his second or third of the many languages

22     that he speaks, but I do wish to make sure that the record is rather

23     clear.  When I stand up and object, I'm not trying to pretend anything.

24     I make submissions.  I make them in good faith.  I'm not trying to lie,

25     cheat, or to do anything that is inappropriate.  So I just want the

Page 35077

 1     record to reflect that.

 2             I apologise for raising my voice, but that was the issue that

 3     obviously got under my nerve, the issue or suggestion that somehow I was

 4     pretending.  Again, I want to make sure that you know that I don't

 5     pretend.  I make submissions.  I am a member of a bar.  I'm considered an

 6     officer of the court.  We do have certain ethical obligations, and one of

 7     the obligations of a lawyer is to be forthright and honest with the Trial

 8     Chamber at all times.

 9             So I just want to make sure the record is clear.  I can only

10     think that Judge Trechsel was not -- did not mean that somehow I was

11     lying to the Bench.  It could be just a terminological issue due to

12     linguistics.

13             That's all, Your Honour.

14             JUDGE TRECHSEL:  You're absolutely right, Mr. Karnavas, 100 per

15     cent.  It's a linguistic, intercultural problem.

16             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.

17             Ms. West, you have 42 minutes left, I've been told by the

18     registrar.

19             MS. WEST:  Thank you, Mr. President.

20        Q.   Professor, you have your report directly in front of you?

21        A.   Yes.

22        Q.   Now, in your report, on page 26 of the English - it's page 24 of

23     the B/C/S - you note that the sample that OTP used, in it, the share and

24     change of rank of the Muslim and Croat population related to the overall

25     population in 1991 and in 1997 and 1998 have not been significantly

Page 35078

 1     affected.

 2             My question is:  In this regard, are you noting that overall in

 3     the area that we're talking about the ethnicity proportions did not

 4     change, they about stayed the same?

 5        A.   It's not I who says that; it's your witness, your expert.  In the

 6     part of her analysis which I quoted from, she says that this is

 7     interesting because there were no visible changes in the ethnic

 8     structure.  I can pinpoint that part.  I can tell you where she says so.

 9     I quote her in my report.

10             According to the results provided by your expert and according to

11     the table that I drafted for the total area of Herceg-Bosna, the changes

12     are not visible.

13             Yesterday, or the day before, we discussed the shares, 44.4 and

14     54.6.  If you remember, let's not go over the same grounds again.  There

15     are no radical changes in the shares of particular ethnic groups in the

16     overall population of Herceg-Bosna.

17        Q.   And, Professor, that was the bigger point you were trying to make

18     in that discussion of 22 per cent or 10 per cent.  It's that there's no

19     significant change overall; correct?

20        A.   No.  What I was saying was that your expert used non-demographic

21     indicators in order to represent the change in ethnic structure to be

22     bigger than it was actually as a matter of fact.  She claims that a share

23     of Croats rose by 22 per cent.  But when you take into account

24     demographic indicators, it is not correct that their share rose by less

25     than 10 per cent.  I believe 9.8 per cent.

Page 35079

 1             In other words, your expert used indicates -- indicators that

 2     referred to the percentual change of the per cent, which means that one

 3     figure rose in relation to another figure by 22 per cent based on a

 4     non-demographic indicator.

 5        Q.   But when we talk about the overall ethnicity of the area, that is

 6     not something that distinguishes changes in ethnicity within

 7     municipalities, does it not?

 8        A.   That can be seen as having been done by your expert for every

 9     municipality.  There are myriads of tables there with myriads of

10     repetitions; however, she never presented an analytical table.  It is

11     certain that things differed from one municipality to the next when it

12     comes to the ethnic structure.

13             I must say that these changes were the result of what your

14     experts -- expert believes that are good matched numbers.  In statistical

15     terms, the good matched number is beyond comparison with the statistical

16     results of 1995, because in her comparison, your expert is mixing apples

17     or pears or apples and oranges.

18        Q.   Now, you had just indicated that, on line 9 and 10:  "It is

19     certain that things differed from one municipality to the next when it

20     came to ethnic structures."

21             Now, let's talk about that.  I'm going to ask you to look at

22     P 10752, and we'll put this on Sanction.  So it should come up on the

23     screen in front of you.

24             Now, Professor, this is one of the OTP tables that regards

25     exactly what you noted, the certain ethnicity changes within

Page 35080

 1     municipalities.

 2             I'll ask you this:  Isn't it true that in 1991, of the area of

 3     which we speak, there were eight municipalities that had a relative

 4     majority of an ethnicity and six municipalities where there was an

 5     absolute majority; however, by the time of 1997, all 14 of those

 6     municipalities had absolute majorities?  Isn't that true?

 7        A.   According to this data, yes.

 8        Q.   Okay.  So, when you made statements in your direct testimony

 9     regarding the lack of an overall change or overall difference of relative

10     rank of ethnicities, you were not looking at the municipalities

11     individually internally, were you?

12        A.   Not correct, no.  I looked at every municipality individually,

13     but the problem is as follows:  For the years 1997 and 1998, the data was

14     combined by your expert at her own will, rather than using a proper

15     methodological solution.  I provided an analytical table not having any

16     other data, but the combination of your expert, to show that at the

17     general level there were practically no changes.

18        Q.   Thank you, Professor.  I'm going to --

19             JUDGE TRECHSEL:  Could you -- I'm sorry, Ms. West.

20             Could you indicate what the course of this table is.

21             MS. WEST:  Your Honour, this is the PowerPoint presentation the

22     OTP used in Ewa Tabeau's expert testimony, and it is Annex A1 of the OTP

23     report.

24             JUDGE TRECHSEL:  Thank you.  So it's Tabeau.

25             MS. WEST:  It is Tabeau, yes.

Page 35081

 1             JUDGE TRECHSEL:  Okay.

 2             MR. KARNAVAS:  I'm not sure it's in evidence, though, Your

 3     Honour.  I understand it was rejected by the Trial Chamber.  So I may be

 4     incorrect, but I'm told this was rejected by the Trial Chamber.  So if

 5     that is the case, then I would object to this table being used for any

 6     further testimony.

 7             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] We'll check.  We'll check.  I

 8     can't remember at this stage.

 9             Witness, I have one question.  I'm a bit lost, I have to say.

10             Take a look at Mostar, Srpski Mostar.  In 1991, we have 55.6 per

11     cent of Muslims.  In 1997, we have 98.3 per cent of Serbs.  Is that

12     really possible?

13             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is also a key methodological

14     problem.  If you calculate in this way, then, yes, it is possible.

15     However, there is a problem which is looking at the data according to the

16     new administrative territorial division.  This new administrative

17     division was introduced in 1996 or 1997.  It divides the Mostar

18     municipality into eight individual municipalities, and every border

19     between the two of these eight municipalities, in this case, for

20     Dr. Tabeau, means resettlement or a change of ethnic structure.

21             People may have remained in the same place but are now divided by

22     borders.  And if you have heterogeneous settlements or

23     heterogeneous-ethnic structure, those are usually concentrated, and one

24     line can move that concentration, and you end up with a new municipality

25     with a totally new composition of the population.  What you see here is

Page 35082

 1     this Srpski Mostar.  This Srpski Mostar, with regard to the entire

 2     municipality of Mostar, I believe it represents less than 1 per cent of

 3     the total population.

 4             Now, if you take into account such a small percentage or such a

 5     small figure, and you represent them in figures -- in percentages without

 6     presenting absolute figures, then you obviously get a mathematically

 7     correct representation which excludes many other elements, which might

 8     draw your attention to the fact why this is so.

 9             Much more reliable -- reliable information would be obtained if

10     she did it according to the administrative and territorial division that

11     was in place in 1991.

12             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [No interpretation]

13             [Interpretation] Let's take the example of Mostar-Jug.  In 1991,

14     we have 49 per cent of Croats, it seems.  Then there's a sharp increase

15     in 1997, up to 96 per cent.  But looking at this table, somebody else

16     could wonder when did that sharp increase occur.  Was it in 1993 or was

17     it after 1993?

18             For a demographer, can a table provide that type of information?

19             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.  No table of this type can be

20     found in the report.  There's no way for you to say this happened in

21     1993, this happened in 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, and so on and so forth.

22             Dr. Tabeau did everything for the period between 1991 and 1998;

23     however, she does not offer a single sentence or a single way or a single

24     source of data to establish what was happening between 1991 and 1997 or

25     1998.  She cannot say this happened between 1991 and 1992, this happened

Page 35083

 1     between 1992 and 1993.  In other words, there's no way, because there are

 2     no sources of data that would lend themselves to doing that.

 3             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Indeed, this table had been

 4     rejected by the Trial Chamber, but it may be used, of course, to test the

 5     credibility of a witness.  Otherwise, yes, indeed, this table had not

 6     been admitted.

 7             Please proceed, Ms. West.

 8             MS. WEST:  Thank you, Mr. President.

 9        Q.   Ma'am, you just indicated that OTP used what I can term as the

10     post-Dayton municipalities, instead of the 1991 municipalities for the

11     analysis.

12             Isn't it true, ma'am, that OTP is not the only organisation that,

13     when determining returning refugees and displaced peoples, used the

14     post-Dayton municipalities?

15        A.   Well, the question is, Who is doing what?  Many are using the new

16     administration, but are not using the 1991 administrative division to

17     show what happened in the intervening period.  Now the whole of Bosnia

18     and Herzegovina uses the new administrative division.  But if you are a

19     demographer, if you want to have comparative data and if you want the

20     data to be comparable, then you use those elements that you are certain

21     will yield the result that you need.

22             Your expert turned the 1991 division into the new division.  It

23     is very difficult, because you have to take the census circles out, and

24     this is a very complex task.

25             Then something that did not exist, such as Mostar South or Mostar

Page 35084

 1     North, you first have to go to the statistical circles, to the original

 2     material.  As a rule, those are the actual forms.  They probably don't

 3     exist because they are destroyed after three years.  So you have to go to

 4     the material that you have in the -- on the magnetic media, storage

 5     media.  Then you --

 6        Q.   Thank you, Professor.  Let's move on.

 7             You spoke yesterday about the War Hospital records, and I'd like

 8     to show you P 10752.  It will be Sanction as well, and that's P 10752.

 9             JUDGE TRECHSEL:  That's the one we just had, I think.

10             MS. WEST:  I think, Your Honour, the document that you have in

11     front of you on Sanction is the one to which I'm referring, and I'll

12     ensure that the record's correct about the exhibit, but it is the

13     document in front of you.

14        Q.   Professor, you personally examined the War Hospital records;

15     right?

16        A.   Well, I can't say that I personally did it.  I acquainted myself

17     with what this data source looks like.

18        Q.   Let's look at page iii of your report, and it's page iii in the

19     B/C/S as well.

20             It says "Work performed," number 1, you talk about your

21     colleagues, and then you say:  "In addition, I've personally examined the

22     death registers, about 500 pages ..." --

23             THE INTERPRETER:  There is too much background noise, so the

24     interpreters cannot hear the speakers.

25             MS. WEST:

Page 35085

 1        Q.   Again, it's under number 1, and you said:  "In addition, I

 2     personally examined the death registers, about 500 pages, and the

 3     registers of the Mostar War Hospital, number of pages unknown."

 4             So again, Professor, do you have a memory of personally examining

 5     these records?

 6        A.   Yes.  I do recall that I examined them, but I did not produce any

 7     results from the records.

 8             But let me tell you what it means, "personally examine."  In

 9     order for me to acquaint myself with the data source used by Dr. Tabeau,

10     I went through all the materials, but I did not obtain any results from

11     that.  Let me show you what my examination looked like, what it boiled

12     down to.  If I may put one document on whatever this machine is called.

13        Q.   Professor, I'd like to move on.  I asked you whether you

14     personally examine them.  You said, yes.  Now you're describing that.  I

15     think the Court, unless it wants more testimony on this issue, we should

16     move on.

17             So my next question is:  In regard to those records, OTP found

18     that 49 people were killed from gunshots, 214 were killed from shelling,

19     209 from unknown, and the total being 472.

20             Professor, would you agree with me that OTP produced these

21     numbers from counting?  There's no matching going on.  They went through

22     records to record who was killed by gunshots, who was killed by shelling.

23     It was actually a counting method.

24        A.   I will agree, but there are persons who were killed in traffic

25     accidents and suicides among those who are listed here.

Page 35086

 1        Q.   Thank you.

 2        A.   This figure is not large, but there are some.

 3        Q.   Thank you.  That was not my question.

 4             Professor, I'd like to move on to something that we've talked a

 5     little bit about and it's the proportion method, and this is something

 6     that you discussed in your report.  If you can go to page 11 of your

 7     report.

 8             MS. WEST:  This is page 12 of the English.  Page 11 in the B/C/S,

 9     page 12 in the English.

10        Q.   You wrote:  "We note that the proportion method is not used and

11     has never been used in scientific ..." --

12        A.   I can't follow you.  I really can't follow you.  I don't see

13     where you're reading.  If it's at page 11, there's not a single sentence

14     that begins the words "I notice ..."  Maybe it's an interpretation thing.

15             It says:  "The first procedure boils down to simple

16     arithmetic ..."  Is this at the beginning of page 11 in B/C/S?

17        Q.   Professor, go to the paragraph that starts "The second

18     procedure ..."

19             Do you see that?  It's the second paragraph.

20        A.   Yes, okay.  Yes, I see it.

21        Q.   "We note that the proportion method is not used and has never

22     been used in scientific expert research for population migrations.  It

23     was occasionally used in statistics until the 1990s, only in the

24     evaluation and sorting of data about unknown age structure.  But upon the

25     United Nations' recommendations, it has been eliminated from expert

Page 35087

 1     research because of the unreliability of the results obtained by its

 2     application."

 3             Professor, what is the source of the UN recommendation?  Can you

 4     cite me a manual or a handbook?

 5        A.   Yes, I can.  Before a census is taken, the international

 6     organisations and the United Nations that have a population department

 7     send to all the countries recommendations that have to be taken into

 8     account when a census is taken --

 9        Q.   Professor, thank you.

10        A.   -- things that should be taken into account.

11        Q.   Thank you, Professor.  That's not responsive to my question.

12             My question was:  Can you cite me a manual or a handbook?  You

13     said, Yes.  What is the name of the manual or the handbook?

14        A.   "Recommendations for the Census around the year 2000."

15        Q.   Okay.  But you did not footnote it in your report, did you not?

16        A.   No, because I'm not quoting from it.  I simply say that in

17     accordance with the recommendations that were in place in 1990s, the

18     distribution method, at least when it came to determining the age

19     brackets of the population, should not be use.  So I did not make a

20     direct quotation.  Those were just the recommendations, the

21     recommendations that were valid for the former Yugoslavia.  I cannot now

22     say whether the same recommendations are in place in the USA or

23     elsewhere.

24        Q.   Professor, that's not what you said.  I'm going to read this

25     again.  You said:  "We note that the proportion method is not

Page 35088

 1     used ..." --

 2             THE INTERPRETER:  Please slow down.

 3             MS. WEST:

 4        Q.   "... and has never been used in scientific expert research of

 5     population migrations.  It was occasionally used in statistics until the

 6     1990s," and then you describe the age structure.

 7             Then you say:  "But upon the UN recommendations, it has been

 8     eliminated," eliminated, "from expert research because of the

 9     unreliability of the results obtained by its application."

10             So my question is:  Can you give me a cite as to where it's --

11     how the United Nations, when the United Nations said you shouldn't use it

12     any more?

13        A.   I've already told you.  "Recommendations for the Census done

14     around the year 2000."  But this does not pertain to the first part that

15     you just read, and that is that it is not known that the proportion

16     method is used in professional and expert research.  That's not the UN

17     recommendation.  Scientific and expert research --

18        Q.   [Previous translation continues] ... let's go to --

19        A.   -- is guided by professionals, by experts --

20        Q.   Let's go to P 10758, P 10758.  This is the UN handbook on

21     migration, binder 3, but it will come up in front of you.

22             MS. WEST:  It's 10758.  Thank you.

23        Q.   This handbook is from the UN website, and it was downloaded last

24     week.  I'd like you to look at B/C/S page 3, and it's the English page 5.

25             This excerpt says:  "In addition to household registers, the

Page 35089

 1     amount of information ..." --

 2        A.   Well, I don't have the text in front of me.

 3        Q.   One moment, ma'am.  There you go.  Follow along.

 4             "In addition to household registers, the amount of information

 5     collected by governments for other purposes may be useful in estimating

 6     migration.  In the United States, base data on migration streams between

 7     States is obtained from tax records.  Because a substantial majority of

 8     American households file tax forms each year, and because they are

 9     required by law to enter their social security numbers and current

10     address, computers are able to match records for adjacent years and count

11     the number of movers (See Wetrogan and Long, 1990).

12             "However, because low-income persons are not required to file tax

13     forms, and because persons entering the labor force or entering the

14     country may not have filed in the previous year, only about 80 per cent

15     of the population are covered by matching tax records for adjacent years.

16     Although migration rates are based only on matched records, when these

17     rates are applied to the total population, it is assumed that the

18     uncovered population moves at the same rate.

19             "Wetrogan and Long, 1990 compared these rates with census and

20     current population survey rates for comparable periods and found the

21     differences were small."

22             Professor, you would agree with me that what this UN handbook is

23     talking about when it says, "Although migration rates are based on only

24     match records when the rates are applied to the total population,"

25     specifically in regard to that, that's talking about the distribution or

Page 35090

 1     proportion method, is it not?

 2        A.   Yes.  That is the distribution or the proportion method, but it

 3     has nothing to do with the method applied by your expert.

 4        Q.   Thank you.  And would you agree with me, Professor, that it would

 5     be unusual for the UN to advocate this method on their website if they

 6     did not recommend it?

 7        A.   What the UN is doing has anything to do with the official

 8     publication of the data relating to population statistics.  I did not

 9     deny the proportion method.  It exists, it is in use, but a scientific or

10     an expert work, at least to my knowledge - and I'm not familiar with all

11     the literature - explaining the migrations, in particular forcible

12     migrations, never used the proportion or distribution method, for a very

13     simple reason:  Because you know in advance what you will get when you

14     apply this method, in particular --

15        Q.   [Previous translation continues] ... that is not --

16        A.   -- if you operate with very small numbers statistically speaking.

17             MS. WEST:  That is not responsive to my question.

18             MR. KARNAVAS:  It is very responsive because we're dealing with

19     two different situations.  One is in the United States, for instance,

20     which is the example, people moving voluntarily.  Another one is a

21     situation where you had a war.  People moved during and after the war,

22     and there are two different reasons.  That's the explanation why the

23     witness is saying one cannot be compared with the other, and she should

24     be entitled to provide a full explanation.

25             MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, if I may.  I think it

Page 35091

 1     might be useful in order to clear up this matter which is very important.

 2             In the section which my learned friend Ms. West quoted from our

 3     expert's paper, it's quite clear that she's speaking about a

 4     non-representative sample and about data obtained from a

 5     non-representative sample, which are then distributed on a larger set,

 6     quite unlike the example that is brought up by Ms. West, which speaks

 7     about a representative sample of 80 per cent, which is then distributed

 8     to the overall population.

 9             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Madam Witness, on this issue

10     about the proportion method, the Prosecutor is showing you a document

11     stemming from the United Nations.  Apparently, it's used in the United

12     States of America to deal with migratory flows.  This is something which

13     is checked by tax forms being filed, in which case you can deduce a

14     number of facts.

15             Now, of course, this document can lead to discussions, but

16     Mr. Karnavas made an objection that one should not confuse between

17     regular migrations and voluntary migrations and forcible migrations; and,

18     therefore, you cannot apply the same method in the case of a forced

19     migration or a voluntary migration.

20             Now, you, madam, who are the expert, what do you think about

21     that?  Can method be applied to any type of migration, or should it

22     consider the question of forcible migrations with more precise analysis

23     tools?

24             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The method can be applied to all

25     kinds of migrations.  The only question is, What sense does it make?  You

Page 35092

 1     see here a segment of data which is small, and then on the basis of the

 2     proportion that you establish there, you extrapolate onto a larger case.

 3     So you have 100 cases, and you extrapolate to 400 cases; 140.000 cases to

 4     200.000 cases, and you considered all of them to be forcible.  This is

 5     not true, because out of all the cases, regardless of the reliability,

 6     you can have both voluntary and forcible migrations, and yet you assume

 7     that all of them are forcible and you do the opposite.

 8             You do not use a bigger sample numerically speaking, but you use

 9     a sample that is smaller and which is highly debatable.  You apply the

10     proportion method transposing the results to a sample which is twice the

11     size; and, of course, your results is twice as large.

12             An expert who uses this, who has 10 per cent or 20 per cent of

13     known -- known cases or known facts, and then extrapolates to the 80 per

14     cent of the facts that are not known, knows that she will get a higher

15     figure.

16             We yesterday spoke about 135 causes of death that are known, and

17     then this is extrapolated to 404 cases.  So, instead of having 70 people

18     as victims of the shelling, the expert estimates that it's 303 victims of

19     shelling.  This is entirely unreliable method for migrations or for any

20     other kind of --

21             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Well, Professor, I've got a

22     very concrete case that I'd like to give you, and please tell me as a

23     demographer how you would have dealt with this particular case in very

24     concrete terms.

25             Let's imagine that in a given village, let's say village X,

Page 35093

 1     people in the village learn that the village Y, which is 50 kilometres

 2     away, was caught by an armed forces, and that the inhabitants of the

 3     village from X, who are 50 kilometres away, decide to leave village X

 4     because they think that they may also be subjected to some risks and that

 5     there may be some shelling and that they may be caught and captured.

 6     Therefore, these people leave village X.

 7             Now, the demographer who might look at this situation from the

 8     point of view of forcible migration, now, do you think that the

 9     inhabitants of village X would be count as forced migrants; or would they

10     be considered as voluntary migrants?

11             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, this is a very complex

12     question as far as I'm concerned, because we know who forced -- the

13     forcible migrants are.  There's a definition.  It's either a refugee or a

14     displaced person who was forced to move out.

15             But if I were to answer to your question the way I understand it,

16     it is very important to know how long these people remained elsewhere,

17     whether they fled for just one, three, or five days, and then went back.

18     If they fled because of some fear, it was their personal motivation.

19     They were motivate by their fear to leave.

20             So the direct answer to your question would require me to know

21     some other elements, whether it lasted for a longer time, whether the

22     fear was justified.  Probably, well, all fears in war are justified.

23     Whether those people were able to go back at one point or whether they

24     all remained as internally displaced persons, well, in order to be able

25     to give you a full answer, I would have to know more facts, because they

Page 35094

 1     can be forced to migrate or voluntary.  But what is important to know is

 2     whether, stricto senso, forcible migrants.

 3             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Right.

 4             So, in my case, it's complex question, and a demographer would

 5     really have a hard time answering the question.  He or she would have to

 6     look carefully into all the circumstances in order to make his

 7     conclusion.  Is that what I'm supposed to deduce from your answer, ma'am?

 8             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's correct, in particular if a

 9     demographer has in front of them the OSCE instruction, saying that both

10     voluntary and forcibly displaced persons are displaced persons.  The OSCE

11     takes into account that there were situations where somebody may have

12     left their home voluntarily.  So not all migrations are classed as

13     forcible migrations, and this is done when voters are registered.

14             A demographer must be aware of the complexity of the situation

15     and must be aware of the definitions of various phenomena and events that

16     they are dealing with and studying them; in particular, when comparisons

17     are made.

18             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.  Over to

19     you, Madam West.

20             MS. WEST:  Thank you very much, Mr. President.  I'd to look at --

21     I'd like to look at P 10727, P 10727.  It's page 29 of the English and

22     page 1 of the B/C/S.

23             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Will I see it in front of me on the

24     screen?  That's easier that way.

25             MS. WEST:

Page 35095

 1        Q.   Professor, have you heard of Jean Paul Sardon?  He's the French

 2     demographer who testified for Serbia in the ICJ case when Bosnia sued

 3     Serbia for genocide.  Have you heard of him?

 4        A.   I heard of him.  I'm not familiar with his work.

 5        Q.   Okay.  I'm just going to read a portion of his testimony from the

 6     ICJ, and then ask you a question.  It's entitled "The Victims of the War

 7     in Bosnia-Herzegovina."  It's under number 1.

 8             It says:  "Estimating the number of victims for this conflict is

 9     a matter so sensitive and so emblematic of the inter-ethnic conflicts

10     that accompanied the break-up of the former Yugoslavia, that it is more

11     often treated emotionally and as a topic calling for rigorous scientific

12     examination.

13              "All sorts of figures are circulating, selected according to the

14     sensibilities of those who cite them, without their feeling it necessary

15     to test their validity or even simply check their source."  Then there's

16     a table of a number of sources and some numbers.

17             And after that, he testified that:  "Thus, we have seen the

18     estimates of the number of persons killed and missing blossom, ranging

19     from 20.000 to 328.000, a quite extraordinary ratio of 1 to 16.  Most of

20     these estimates circulate without anyone knowing exactly what their

21     sources are or on what basis they were calculated - assuming that they

22     were not the result of some form of spontaneous generation.

23              "The first observation that can be made on analysing these

24     estimates is that their level depends to a large extent on the ..." --

25        A.   I don't see that portion now.

Page 35096

 1        Q.   You have it in front of you now?

 2        A.   Yes, I do.  Thank you.

 3        Q.   "The first observation that can be made on analysing these

 4     estimates is that their level depends on to a large extent on the

 5     geographical origins of their authors.  Estimates made in

 6     Bosnia-Herzegovina are always much higher than those from outside the

 7     country.  The average of the local estimates is in excess of 247.000 as

 8     against less than half that figure, 118.000, for the average of the

 9     foreign estimates.  This is relatively common in situations of this type:

10     The victims' side always overestimates its losses.  In addition, most of

11     the local figures take into account the increase in the death rate due to

12     the deterioration in living conditions during the war.

13             "Unfortunately, whether the figures were produced inside or

14     outside the former Yugoslavia, it is not at all easy to see how their

15     authors reached them.  This is not generally stated at the time of the

16     publication; however, there is a limited number of methods that can be

17     employed:

18             "Using debt statistics supplied by the Sarajevo institute of

19     public health.

20             "Comparing the expected population inherited from the last

21     census, 1991, and the estimated current population.

22             "Combining these two methods."

23             MS. WEST:  The next page on the English.

24        Q.   "The main problem in such work is the lack of critical appraisal

25     of the quality of the sources used, in particular the death-rate data

Page 35097

 1     generated by the Institute of Public Health.  We know that these greatly

 2     overestimated the number of deaths due to double counting.

 3             "Among all the estimates to which we have had access, one is

 4     conspicuous for its quality, and that prepared -- that is prepared by Ewa

 5     Tabeau and Jakub Bijak, demographers attached to the office of the ICTY

 6     Prosecutor."

 7             Professor, my question is that:  Although you have a poor opinion

 8     of the report in this case, do you concede that qualified experts in the

 9     field would disagree with your assessment of Ewa Tabeau's work?

10        A.   Well, I cannot agree to a question that is phrased in this

11     manner.  I do not agree with Dr. Tabeau's work in terms of the reports

12     that she submitted.

13             Now, as for the assessment for the overall number of victims, she

14     gave an interview in our papers where she denies that The Hague Tribunal

15     actually established this figure at 200.000, 300.000.  She provided an

16     estimate.  Well, she has lots of data sources, and I think that her

17     estimate is the most realistic one.

18             Now, when it comes to her expert reports --

19        Q.   If we can go back to my question, and my question --

20        A.   I apologise.  I probably did not understand your question.  Could

21     you please be more specific.

22        Q.   Do you concede that qualified experts in this field would

23     disagree with your assessment of her work?  The answer to that question

24     is a yes or no.  Do you concede that?

25        A.   I don't.

Page 35098

 1        Q.   Thank you.

 2             MS. WEST:  Mr. President, I don't --

 3             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't.  I have to say, if you

 4     will -- I have to say why I don't concede.

 5             MS. WEST:  Mr. President, the question was does she concede.  She

 6     does not.  That's fine.  The Prosecution has no further questions.

 7             MR. KARNAVAS:  I can do redirect.  I can do redirect.

 8                           Re-examination by Mr. Karnavas:

 9        Q.   Perhaps you would be so kind, Professor, to provide a fuller

10     answer to the question posed.  So go ahead.  I know the Prosecution is

11     not interested in the answer, but we are.

12        A.   First of all, this is not my evaluation of the work of

13     Dr. Tabeau, the overall work that Dr. Tabeau did.  This is about the

14     evaluation that the most objective evaluation was given by Dr. Tabeau.

15     In other words, the Prosecution in asking me whether the gentleman who

16     evaluated the work of Dr. Tabeau, and the answer is no.

17             However, he says that her estimates, amongst all the estimates

18     that he lists, are probably the most correct one, and I agree with that.

19     These estimates are probably the most correct ones.  I did not deal with

20     the estimates.  However, I'm not saying this is the evaluation of the

21     work of Dr. Tabeau.  Maybe one particle, maybe one tiny part of

22     something.

23        Q.   I have a few more questions to ask you.  You were asked a

24     question as far as how you were able to -- whether you had examined the

25     book from the hospital, the hospital books.  You said, Yes, and then you

Page 35099

 1     wanted to show how you went about in examining the records.  You were

 2     reaching for something, and then you were cut off.

 3             Again, we are interested to see how exactly you examined those

 4     records.  Could you please show us?

 5        A.   I must say this:  I was asked to look at the data sources, to

 6     evaluate these data sources that may or may not be use by a demographer.

 7     I would like to show you how a data source looks like and what served to

 8     come up with all the figures and causes of this.

 9             I have a page from a death registry in Bosnia.

10             MR. KARNAVAS:  If you could put it on the ELMO.

11        Q.   If you could be so kind as to explain what this -- where this

12     document is from.  We'll have to give it an IC number at some point.  So

13     where is this from, and then please proceed by explaining it to us.

14        A.   This originates from the book of the Mostar War Hospital, which I

15     took from the demographic department of the OTP.  This is just one page,

16     and that book has quite a few pages.  There are a lot of problems because

17     some pages are missing and so on and so forth.

18             I brought this as an example.  As I was looking at this, I was

19     making my decisions about the value and the reliability of this source of

20     data.  If you pay attention, you will see that we're dealing with the

21     names and family names of people who were admitted to the hospital, that

22     only their name and last name and the year of birth is entered, and some

23     are also characterised as soldiers and others as civilians.

24             Then there are also diagnosis that the attending physician

25     entered.  I am not a doctor, obviously.  I'm not a physician.  Although I

Page 35100

 1     tried to translate some of the diagnoses, I found it difficult.

 2             Whether these diagnoses are also the causes of death according to

 3     Dr. Tabeau, I don't know.  She distributes her data according to the

 4     causes of death.  I'm sure that she had a doctor's assistance, but I

 5     wouldn't know.

 6             What I'm trying to say is this:  Even good experts, physicians,

 7     would have a hard time interpreting these Latin diagnoses.  I believe

 8     that if you -- if you are considering the causes of death, then you have

 9     to list that you were assist by a physician or you have a certificate of

10     death.

11             Second of all, there are a lot of empty columns under the title

12     "Diagnosis."  For example, here, there is nothing here.  Nothing has been

13     entered under the title "Diagnosis" next to this name.  However, there's

14     also -- I apologise.  There's also the year of birth missing.  You only

15     have the name.

16             So on its own, this document is a very contestable source of

17     data.  It really makes you decide to choose only the cases that you

18     really can prove are reliable.

19             In her report, Dr. Tabeau mentions a number of others.  She says

20     a number of pages misses.  She says pages from 190 to 215 are missing.

21     However, since she assumed that these pages also contained wounded, she

22     also calculates how many persons could be on the missing pages, and she

23     adds them to the total number of wounded that she found on the pages that

24     are there, those who are wounded and those who died of their wounds.

25        Q.   Is this an acceptable scientific method recognised within the

Page 35101

 1     field of demography?

 2        A.   An expert demographer has to arrange, that's his duty, to arrange

 3     his source of data in order to obtain at least a minimally reliable

 4     result.

 5             Dr. Tabeau does not evaluate this data source as an acceptable,

 6     but, rather, says that it is ridden with problems, but I still accept it

 7     acceptable.  I don't agree with her.  I don't know what is the degree of

 8     reliability that she attaches to it, if you take into account there are

 9     pages missing, if you don't say, or at least you don't say in the report,

10     who was it who interpreted the diagnosis for you, the diagnosis that you

11     claim with the clauses ever death.  I don't understand anything about

12     these diagnosis.  They may be lethal, they may not be lethal, but I don't

13     know.  I would need an expert to help me.

14        Q.   Okay.  I have two or three more questions.  One had to do with

15     the census.  As I understand it from your testimony on direct

16     examination, there was optical scanning done, and that's how it was all

17     computerised, of all the forms that were filled out from the fieldwork;

18     is that correct?

19        A.   Yes.  Optical scanning was carried out.

20        Q.   And I believe that you said that Bosnia-Herzegovina was one of

21     the republics that actually had the names that were scanned along with

22     the forms.

23        A.   Yes.  I saw this here in The Hague actually.

24        Q.   Now, do you know whether the instructions given to those who went

25     out in the field to actually fill out the names and the forms --

Page 35102

 1             MS. WEST:  Objection.

 2             MR. KARNAVAS:  I haven't finished the question.

 3             MS. WEST:  Your Honour, actually, I think it's -- well, excuse

 4     me.  Please finish the question.

 5             MR. KARNAVAS:

 6        Q.   Do you know whether in filling out those forms, there were any

 7     particular instructions on whether they should use Cyrillic, or the Latin

 8     script, to use capital letters?  Were there any instructions so you have

 9     a uniform approach?

10             MS. WEST:  Objection, Your Honour.  This is beyond the scope of

11     the cross.  We didn't discuss the optical scanning or the Latin script at

12     all.

13             MR. KARNAVAS:  The fact that she didn't mention optical scanning

14     doesn't mean that it is beyond the scope.  There were lots of questions

15     with regard to the names and to the changing of the names, and how the

16     demographic department of the OTP took it upon themselves to change

17     names.  So it is well within the scope, especially considering that at

18     some point there was further discussion as far as the OTP experts

19     deciding on the basis of names one's particular ethnicity.

20             So I think it's well within the scope, Your Honours, if I could

21     get a ruling.

22             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Madam, please answer the

23     question.

24             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In Bosnia-Herzegovina, there were

25     two letters, the Latinic script or the Cyrillic scripts.  Both could be

Page 35103

 1     used equally.  There was no recommendation as to what you could use.

 2     There was just one recommendation.  There were little boxes, and just one

 3     letter could be entered in one box.

 4        Q.   Were they required to use capital letters?  Were they required to

 5     use capital letters, or could they write in the forms however they

 6     wished?

 7        A.   There was no recommendation.  I find this a rather strange

 8     question.  Nobody actually provided you with a recommendation as to how

 9     you should write.  You could use any script.  You were not supposed to

10     enter two letters in one box.  That would be that.

11        Q.   Okay.  Now, based on the optical scanning, were then the names

12     typed on a particular roll, or was it just left to the scanning as far as

13     to the records?

14        A.   They were left in their original form as they were scanned.

15        Q.   Okay.  And afterwards, they were not typed in any way to make a

16     list of who was -- who was on the census, as far as the names were

17     concerned?

18        A.   You never do that in statistics.  A name is not statistical

19     information.  In statistical terms, nobody is interested in names.  In

20     Serbia, for example, nobody even entered either the first or the last

21     names; Montenegro also.

22        Q.   All right.

23        A.   I can't guarantee about Croatia.

24        Q.   Do you know whether all the names were legible and all the names

25     were correctly spelled when they were optically scanned?  That's the

Page 35104

 1     essence of my question.

 2        A.   According to the original material, there were a lot of mistakes.

 3     Some were legible, some not.  Some had signs instead of proper letters.

 4     There were a lot of mistakes.

 5        Q.   And how were those mistakes corrected, if you know?  How was a

 6     determination made that the -- to make sure that all the names were

 7     correctly spelled?

 8        A.   According to the OTP's experts wrote, it was done with the help

 9     of experts for the names of the region.

10        Q.   All right.  But my question was:  Was it ever done officially in

11     1991?  That's what my question is.

12        A.   Are you referring to statistical bodies?

13        Q.   Yes.

14        A.   If that's the case, I repeat, nobody ever controlled, corrected,

15     or was at all interested in the names.

16        Q.   All right.  Now let's go on -- well, let me just go back to

17     the OTP.  As I understand your previous answer, the OTP did through their

18     experts make attempts or did, in fact, try to figure out the correct

19     names.

20             Do you know whether this is an acceptable practice within

21     demographics; and, if so, are there any particular standards?

22        A.   I've never heard of any such thing.  I can't even believe that

23     there are standards, how to correct a wrongly written name.  I don't even

24     believe that there is a methodology for checking whether the name was

25     entered correctly, unless you went out and collected all of the ID

Page 35105

 1     documents and compared them with what you have in your statistical books.

 2        Q.   Do you know whether at least the OTP made a list of all the names

 3     that they thought were found to be questionable and corrected?  So where

 4     at least we have a list of those names that we can sort of separate from

 5     ones that were known versus the ones that needed to be corrected, did you

 6     find such a list by them?

 7        A.   No.  I don't know if the OTP, indeed, has such a list or not.

 8        Q.   All right.  Now, going to your -- one of the issues, it would

 9     appear on cross-examination from your answers, was you took exception to

10     the quality control, if I could use that term, in a sense with the

11     matching.  You were shown, for instance, Mirsad Halilovic I think was the

12     name, and shown that there was 89.9 per cent matching.

13             Then, as part of your answer, you indicated that while some

14     numbers, some of the JMBG numbers, could be matched, other keys were used

15     for other names in order to do matching.  In other words, where numbers

16     were not available, other keys were used.

17             Do I have your testimony correct, if I ask my next question?

18        A.   Well, you understood me correctly.  If there is no JMBG, what was

19     used were names and last names.  But we don't know if anything at all was

20     done with regard to the JMBG, so I really am not in a position to say.

21        Q.   Well, let me go step-by-step.  It usually helps.  In addition

22     to -- I should say, aside from the ones that they were able to match with

23     the JMBG numbers, did the OTP keep records, so you can make a

24     determination as to how they did the other matching, who was matched by

25     other procedures other than the JMBG, so then you could look at those

Page 35106

 1     names and see whether the matching was done correctly?

 2        A.   As far as I know, the answer would be no.  There's no single

 3     report with a reference to something of that sort having been done.

 4        Q.   And as I understand your testimony, you indicated that in order

 5     to augment the numbers, they kept changing the key in order to get more

 6     matches, to create more matches, to augment the numbers; is that correct.

 7     Do I understand your testimony correctly?

 8        A.   Yes, in this case, in order to augment the numbers.  There are

 9     also cases when the numbers were reduced.  It all depended on what they

10     wanted to achieve.

11        Q.   All right.  Well, specifically with respect to the keys, the

12     different keys that were used in order to make the different sorts of

13     matching, is there anywhere in their records that you can look at as a

14     demographer and you can say 30 per cent or 40 per cent were matched by

15     simply looking at the JMBG numbers; 20 per cent were matched by this

16     other method, only data of births; 10 per cent were match in some other

17     fashion?

18             Is there anything of that sort for you then as a demographer to

19     look at and examine so you would know exactly how they arrived at a

20     particular number, at the final result?

21        A.   There is no reference to that matching statistics in any of the

22     reports that I've had an occasion to read.

23        Q.   All right.  Just one last question:  As a demographer if, if you

24     were going to take that approach because of the sources that were

25     available and the limitations within the sources, would a demographer --

Page 35107

 1     would it be part of the demographer's work to keep track of those sorts

 2     of records so that the event somebody else wanted to look at and do a

 3     quality-control check that would be -- that information would be

 4     available?

 5        A.   Yes, that would be a professionally correct approach.

 6        Q.   One last question:  With OSCE, we looked at -- we looked at one

 7     paragraph, and we were told that people went out and gathered information

 8     or people that were actually taking the information.

 9             Do you know whether those who were actually collecting the

10     information for OSCE, whether they were internationals or whether they

11     were domestic?

12        A.   I don't know, because I can't tell from the instruction who it

13     was, but I know that internationals organised everything and provided

14     recommendations and monitored the process.  Whether any foreigners who

15     spoke B/C/S entered data or not, I can't say, because there's no

16     reference at all.

17             One more thing that I would like to add:  When I'm saying

18     entering data, I mean interviewing people.  Who was it who then

19     transferred data onto the magnetic media and the rest of the process?  I

20     suppose that it was OSCE people who did that.

21        Q.   Okay.  When you say "OSCE people," are you saying were they

22     internationals or nationals or both?

23        A.   I don't know if there were any nationals in OSCE, but there may

24     have been.  But when I say "OSCE," I mean foreigners, internationals.

25        Q.   Thank you.

Page 35108

 1             MR. KARNAVAS:  I have no further questions.  Thank you very much.

 2             MS. WEST:  Your Honours, may I have one question on re-cross.

 3             MR. KARNAVAS:  There is no re-cross, Your Honour.  In our system

 4     here, there is no recross.  In fact, the Prosecution has been very firm

 5     that the party who calls the witness has the last word.  I'm certainly

 6     not inclined to do redirect on redirect examination.

 7             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I'll confer with my colleagues.

 8                           [Trial Chamber confers]

 9             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Ms. West, Mr. Karnavas is right

10     as far as the principle is concerned; however, the Trial Chamber, in its

11     decision, has said in exceptional circumstances.  What are the

12     exceptional circumstances in this case which would justify an extra

13     question on your part?  Could you please explain?

14             MS. WEST:  Yes, Your Honour.  In this case, the way it's been

15     left with the Trial Chamber is that there's substantial information

16     that's out there that was either not even considered by the OTP or was

17     not shared by the OTP.  I refer specifically to page 66 starting with

18     question 10.

19             My question would only be whether this witness ever asked for

20     that material.  I think it would provide some clarity for the Chamber.

21             MR. KARNAVAS:  I'm still not clear what exactly she's making

22     reference to, Your Honour.  She had plenty of time on cross-examination.

23     We made it very clear on direct examination that we provided documents to

24     the OTP which they should have used after, all these years, having a

25     specialised unit, with all the millions of dollars being poured into,

Page 35109

 1     that my witness had to purchase the material and provide it to them.  So

 2     this is not an unknown factor.  I certainly don't see on page 66 what the

 3     reference is, and how the Trial Chamber somehow is at some disadvantage.

 4             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Before I confer once again with

 5     my colleagues, if I understand correctly, Ms. West, the question you'd

 6     like to put to the witness is to know whether the expert, the witness,

 7     has asked or not information from the Office of the Prosecutor; that is,

 8     supplemental information, in particular information on several elements.

 9             Is that the only question you were planning to ask?

10             MS. WEST:  This is it, yes.

11                           [Trial Chamber confers]

12             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.

13             Professor, you heard the question from the Prosecution.  Could

14     you please answer this very technical question.

15             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] If we are talking about the

16     matching statistics, then -- did I understand the question properly, the

17     matching statistics?

18             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Ms. West.

19             MS. WEST:  Thank you, Mr. President.

20                           Further cross-examination by Ms. West:

21        Q.   The question is in regard to the matching statistics that

22     Mr. Karnavas asked you about, and, specifically, to be clear, the

23     question had been --

24        A.   I understand if you are talking about the matching statistics.

25             In the Srebrenica case, I asked from the demographic department

Page 35110

 1     to provide me with the matching statistics and all the criteria that were

 2     matched.  I received 71 criteria that were used for matching.  That was

 3     in 2004.  And then in 2008 or maybe 2007, I even mentioned that in my

 4     report.  I received an answer from the demographic department that

 5     thousands upon thousands of cases were out there for which visual method

 6     was used for matching.

 7             So there was no concrete answer given, and I have it in my report

 8     in one of the footnotes.  I can read it out to you.  I have in my

 9     possession a document in which the OTP says that, in thousands upon

10     thousands of cases, they used visual method in order to determine what

11     could be matched.

12             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Ms. West, this answer, is it

13     okay?

14             MS. WEST:  Well, I guess I should ask further.

15        Q.   Do I understand that your answer is no?  Because your answer is

16     in the Srebrenica case.  In this case, did you ask for this material; and

17     is that answer no?

18        A.   In this case, I did not ask because the method would be the same;

19     and if I received an answer, would it make sense for me to repeat the

20     request.  All expert reports prepared by Dr. Tabeau use the same method

21     with regard to the ethnic structure; and in all of my reports, there is

22     an objection precisely to that fact, that there's no statistics provided.

23             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] The Professor said that she

24     hadn't asked for those documents, because in the Srebrenica case, the

25     answer that you describe on page 69 had been provided to her.

Page 35111

 1             Professor, on behalf of my colleagues and myself, I would like to

 2     thank you for having spent this week with us to testify in this case.

 3     You are now free to go back home, and I wish you well.

 4             I'd like Mr. Usher to take you out of the courtroom.

 5                           [The witness withdrew]

 6             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you, and good-bye.

 7             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] As everybody knows, we will

 8     resume our work on the 12th of January since Mr. Karnavas completed

 9     examination of all his witnesses apart from the expert witness.

10             The expert witness is scheduled to testify on the 12th of

11     January; is that correct, Mr. Karnavas?

12             MR. KARNAVAS:  That is correct, Your Honour.

13             I do have one matter I wish to raise.  It's just a technical

14     matter.  This Friday we are due to provide our motion with all the --

15     concerning all the documents.  There's about 15 or 1.600 documents that

16     we will be moving in by way of motion, and, of course, we have to prepare

17     the relevant explanations.

18             We are just about finished.  But just to be on the safe side, we

19     would like a one-week continuance, or if we could have until next Friday

20     to file, just to be on the safe side, we would appreciate it.  We don't

21     believe that anybody would be disadvantaged.  Our initial date that we

22     had chosen was based on the fact that we would be finishing our entire

23     case by the -- by this particular date.  Now it looks like we'll be

24     finishing on the second week of January, so I don't think anyone would be

25     disadvantaged or prejudiced by a one-week extension.

Page 35112

 1             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.  Yes, we're talking

 2     about 1.600 documents, and, of course, you have to meet all the criteria

 3     as set in our guidelines.

 4             What does the Prosecution think about this?

 5             MR. STRINGER:  Mr. President, the Prosecution have no objection

 6     to the extension of time for the Defence, on the condition that the Trial

 7     Chamber grant some additional, some significant additional time to the

 8     Prosecution to prepare its response.  I'm recalling, and, obviously, the

 9     Prosecution submitted large document motions, the Prosecution did not

10     object at the time to giving the Defence additional time to prepare their

11     responses.

12             This is happening over the holidays as well, and staff are going

13     to be -- are going to be leaving the Tribunal and going home for the

14     holidays.  So if we could possibly get until mid or even late January to

15     file a response to the document motion, then certainly there's no

16     objection to counsel's filing it a week late.

17             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.  I will confer with

18     my colleagues.

19                           [Trial Chamber confers]

20             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] The Judges have just conferred.

21     We will grant Mr. Karnavas' application, and we will give you a one-week

22     extension.  You can, therefore, file your motion not this Friday but

23     Friday next week.  Since there will be many pages, because there are many

24     documents, the Prosecution has until the 20th of January, 2009, to file

25     its response.

Page 35113

 1             As I indicated, we will resume our proceedings on January

 2     the 12th.  We will hear the last witness for Mr. Karnavas.  Then the week

 3     after, we will hear the first witness for Mr. Stojic's Defence.  We've

 4     received a work plan for the months of January, February, March, and

 5     April.

 6             As regards April, the last witness scheduled, since the 13th of

 7     April is a holiday and since it is customary for the Chamber to take a

 8     few days off because it's in the very middle of the first half of the

 9     year, the witness scheduled will be postponed to Monday, April the 20th.

10     There will be no hearing on the 14th, on the 15th, nor on the 16th of

11     April.  So we will move that witness to the week after, and it will be

12     better for that witness anyway, because otherwise he would have had to

13     come back on the Monday after, because you said you would need four days

14     while we had only three available that week.  So it will be, of course,

15     very good for the witness as well.

16             Mr. Scott, Mr. Stringer, do you have any issue you'd like to

17     raise?

18             MR. STRINGER:  No, Mr. President.

19             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Defence, no?

20             As you know, we have a few decisions pending on pending motions.

21     They'll be ready momentarily, and we're going to focus on these

22     decisions.  We'll met at the beginning of next year.  I wish everybody

23     good work, because there is a lot of work to be done for everybody, very

24     important work.  We'll make all the necessary arrangements to present you

25     with all the pending decisions as soon as possible, so that we can start

Page 35114

 1     fresh at the beginning of next year with all the decisions rendered,

 2     apart, of course, our decision on the motion to admit a certain number of

 3     documents, because we'll have to wait for the Prosecutor's response

 4     before we can make a final determination.

 5             See you soon.

 6                           --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 12.38 p.m.,

 7                           to be reconvened on Monday, the 12th day

 8                           of January, 2009, at 2.15 p.m.