Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 37221

 1                           Monday, 23 February 2009

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           [The accused Prlic not present]

 5                           [The accused Petkovic not present]

 6                           [The accused Coric not present]

 7                           [The witness entered court]

 8                           --- Upon commencing at 2.16 p.m.

 9                           [The witness entered court]

10             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Registrar, please call the

11     case.

12             THE REGISTRAR:  Good afternoon, Your Honours.  Good afternoon

13     everyone in and around the courtroom.  This is case number IT-04-74-T,

14     the Prosecutor versus Prlic et al.  Thank you, Your Honours.

15             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you.  Today is Monday,

16     February 23rd, 2009.  I'd like to say good morning to Mr. Stojic, Mr.

17     Praljak, Mr. Petkovic.  I'd like to say good afternoon to the lawyers, in

18     particular Mr. Khan who's come from very far.  I'd like to also greet all

19     of the representatives of the OTP, the witness who is waiting to be sworn

20     in.

21             Before we swear in the witness, I would like to give the floor to

22     the Registrar who has four IC numbers to give us.

23             THE REGISTRAR:  Thank you, Your Honours.  Some parties have

24     submitted lists of documents to be tendered through witness Vegar Veso.

25             The list submitted by 2D shall be given Exhibit IC 926; the list

Page 37222

 1     submitted by 3D shall be Exhibit IC 927; and the list submitted by 4D

 2     shall be given Exhibit IC 928.

 3             Thank you, Your Honours.

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

 5             I would like to read a very brief oral decision regarding the

 6     witness Kvesic.  This witness is to testify on February 27th [as

 7     interpreted].  The Praljak Defence has asked for 15 to 20 minutes for

 8     this witness in order to be able to carry out the examination-in-chief

 9     under Article 92 ter.  The Chamber grants this request to carry out an

10     examination-in-chief under Article 92 ter of the rules and regulations

11     and has decided following:  Stojic Defence will have one hour for the

12     examination-in-chief of this witness; the other Defence teams will have

13     an overall time of 30 minutes for the cross; and the Prosecution will

14     have one hour.  Then the Praljak Defence will have 20 minutes for the

15     examination-in-chief under Article 92 ter; the other Defence teams will

16     have an overall time of 15 minutes; and the Prosecution will have 30

17     minutes.

18             I see Mr. Scott has risen.  Mr. Scott.

19             MR. SCOTT:  Thank you, Your Honour.  Good afternoon, Mr.

20     President, each of Your Honours, counsel, all those in and around the

21     courtroom.

22             Your Honour, in terms of the Prosecution's witness -- excuse me,

23     exhibit list for the witness Vegar, I'm afraid we're still finalising

24     that and we didn't quite make it before -- by 2.15.  I've talked with

25     counsel for Mr. Stojic, and they've been gracious enough to indicate they

Page 37223

 1     have no disagreement or objection.  If we could file that by the end of

 2     the court day, that would be appreciated.  Thank you.

 3             MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Your Honours and

 4     everybody else in the courtroom.  The Defence of General Praljak is

 5     cognisant of the time given for the witness or that we requested earlier

 6     on, but for organisational purposes and to be able to manage my time, I'd

 7     like to tell the Court that we'll be finished with the witness in three

 8     or four minutes because we are not going to have any additional questions

 9     to his statement, so we're just going to do a formal verification of the

10     statement.  Thank you.

11             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Fine.  Witness, could you

12     please stand in order to say the oath, please.  Could you please declare

13     your name and first name.

14             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] My name is Bruno Pinjuh.

15             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] What is your date of birth,

16     sir?

17             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The 17th of September, 1958.

18             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Have you already testified

19     before a Tribunal, or is it the first time?

20             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.

21             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] You have never testified before

22     a Tribunal?

23             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.

24             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Fine.  What is your profession

25     or occupation?

Page 37224

 1             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm a pensioner.

 2             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] You're retired.  What are you

 3     retired from?  Were you in the army?  Did you work for the

 4     administration?  Did you work for a private company?

 5             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] From 1978, I worked in a school as

 6     a teacher, and during the war, I performed the duties that I was given,

 7     and I am a military retiree.

 8             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Fine.  So you are retired from

 9     the military.  Would you please take the oath.

10             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will

11     speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

12             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you.  You may be seated.

13             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

14                           WITNESS:  BRUNO PINJUH

15                           [Witness answered through interpreter]

16             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Let me give you some

17     information rapidly, but I'm certain that Madam Nozica has perhaps

18     already told you this.  You are going to be answering the questions she's

19     going to put to you.  After the examination-in-chief, the other Defence

20     counsel for the accused may ask you questions.  It may also occur that

21     the four judges you see before you will ask additional questions, and the

22     Prosecutor who is seated to your right, there are two representatives of

23     the Prosecution here today, but only one of them will cross-examine you.

24             You have taken the oath, and, therefore, you are a witness before

25     the justice system.  You will have no contact with anyone else, and if

Page 37225

 1     your testimony continues tomorrow, you must spend the evening quietly in

 2     your hotel room without telephoning to anyone, without sharing with

 3     anyone what you have testified today.  Of course, you can call your wife

 4     or other members of your family to let them know that everything is okay.

 5     That's all.

 6             We will be having a break every hour and a half, a half an hour

 7     break so that you can rest if at any point you feel comfortable, and of

 8     course this could occur.  It happens to the Judges, so it can also happen

 9     to a witness.  Just let us know, raise your hand, and we will have an

10     additional break.  That's what I wanted to tell you at this point in

11     order for this hearing to take place in a constructive fashion and so

12     that we not have any particular issues.

13             Madam Nozica, I see you are ready.  Go ahead.

14             MS. NOZICA:  [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.  Good

15     afternoon to everybody in the courtroom.

16                           Examination by Ms. Nozica:

17        Q.   Good afternoon Mr. Pinjuh.

18        A.   Good afternoon, and greetings to everybody in the courtroom.

19        Q.   As Judge Antonetti has just explained to you, I'm going to be

20     asking you some questions over the next two hours; that is to say, we

21     have a total of two hours for your examination, and I've already

22     mentioned a technical matter, but I'll repeat it now, and that is that we

23     have to pause, you and I, between my question and your answer so that

24     everything we say can be entered into the transcript.

25             Now, Mr. Pinjuh, I'm going to go through your CV briefly.  As

Page 37226

 1     you've already said, in 1978 you completed the pedagogical academy in

 2     Rijeka or the teachers training academy; is that right?

 3        A.   Yes.

 4        Q.   For the transcript, the town was Rijeka.  And you became employed

 5     that same year, in 1978, in Cerin, the primary school there in Citluk

 6     municipality, as a teacher?

 7        A.   Yes.

 8        Q.   In 1992, you were a member of the 4th Company of the HVO Citluk;

 9     is that right?

10        A.   That is correct, yes.

11        Q.   Can you tell the Trial Chamber what period that was?

12        A.   From the beginning of April until the beginning of June.

13        Q.   And that same year on the 1st of June - 1992 is the year we're

14     talking about - the HVO of Citluk municipality appointed you chief of the

15     Defence Department in Citluk; is that right?

16        A.   Yes.

17        Q.   So until the end of 1993, you performed those duties, and at the

18     beginning of 1993, you were appointed chief of the defence department of

19     Citluk in Citluk; right?

20        A.   Yes.

21        Q.   Can you tell the Trial Chamber how you came to be appointed chief

22     and at whose proposal and who actually appointed you?

23        A.   That was at the proposal of the municipal defence council and

24     municipality assembly of Citluk.

25        Q.   And did the chief of the Defence Department of Mostar put your

Page 37227

 1     name forward?

 2        A.   Not in 1992, no.

 3        Q.   Mr. Pinjuh, I'm talking about the beginning of 1993 when the head

 4     of the Defence Department appointed you chief of the Defence Department

 5     in Citluk, what was the procedure?

 6        A.   The chief of the superior administration which was superior to me

 7     in Mostar put forward my name, made the proposal, and then Citluk

 8     municipality approved it, and then after that I was appointed by

 9     Mr. Stojic, the head of the Defence Department, and it was the head or

10     chief of the Defence Department -- defence office.

11        Q.   So chief of the defence office in Citluk; right?

12        A.   Yes.

13        Q.   And you stayed in that position until July 1994 --

14             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I have a technical question.

15     These issues are very complex, and we want to be perfectly clear and to

16     advance step by step.  If I have understood correctly - but please do

17     correct me if I have misunderstood - Mr. Stojic appointed you to this

18     function, to this post, but he appointed you upon proposal by the

19     municipal council of Citluk.  Does this mean that if the municipal

20     council of Citluk had not proposed you, Mr. Stojic would not have been

21     able to appoint you?

22             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the head appointed me

23     at the proposal of the chief of the administration for the Defence of

24     Mostar with agreement from the municipal council of Citluk; and quite

25     possibly, I wouldn't have been appointed had the municipal council of

Page 37228

 1     Citluk not agreed to it.

 2             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Your response is the opposite

 3     to what you said to the question put to you by the lawyer.  You have just

 4     said that Mr. Stojic appointed you upon proposal of the municipality of

 5     Citluk.  Could you tell us slowly, exactly how things occurred, how it

 6     took place because it's extremely important.  We cannot afford to make a

 7     mistake.  Could you please tell us again exactly how you were appointed.

 8             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The procedure was as follows:  The

 9     chief of the administration of Mostar, which was the superior body to me,

10     defence administration, gave the proposal, put me forward, and the

11     municipal council agrees or does not agree, approves or does not approve,

12     and only after that does the head make the appointment.

13             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Fine.  But if the municipal

14     council of Citluk said they didn't agree, could Mr. Stojic have appointed

15     you just the same?  Are you absolutely certain?

16             MS. NOZICA:  [Interpretation] We still don't seem to have the

17     answer on record in the transcript.  In response to Judge Antonetti's

18     question, the answer was no.  The Judge asked are you absolutely certain,

19     and the witness's answer was, yes, he is certain.

20        Q.   Is that right, Mr. Pinjuh?  Is what I've just said correct?

21        A.   Yes.

22             JUDGE TRECHSEL:  As we are at this, I also found this rather

23     interesting.  Could you explain, Mr. Pinjuh, why it was the chief of the

24     defence administration in Mostar who proposed you?

25             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I assume that was because I was

Page 37229

 1     already doing work of that kind, and so he thought that I'd be up to the

 2     job and be able to tackle the duties I would be assigned in future.

 3             JUDGE TRECHSEL:  Thank you.  That is a good, fitting answer.  I

 4     had something different in mind.  My question went to the organisation of

 5     the military administration.  We have heard quite a bit about the

 6     organisation of the Ministry of Defence, and now comes up administration,

 7     the chief of administration Mostar, which must be something that is not

 8     the Ministry of Defence.  Is it part of the Ministry of Defence?  Is it

 9     subordinated to the Ministry of Defence?  Is Citluk within an area that

10     Mostar has higher responsibility for?  I hope I made it clear what my

11     concern is, and thank you for your answer.

12             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.  The defence administration of

13     Mostar is a military and territorial organisation, and Citluk is within

14     the frame -- comes within the frameworks of that administration.  That's

15     how it's set up.

16             JUDGE TRECHSEL:  Thank you very much.

17             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You're welcome.

18             MS. NOZICA:  [Interpretation] Your Honours, I understand that the

19     Judges are always interested, and that gives me pleasure, but all the

20     questions that I have on my list for this witness move in that direction

21     to explain what the administrations are, what the office is, what its

22     relationship to the Defence Department is, what the documents are which

23     bear this out, how appointments are made, what the procedure for that is,

24     and what it was like in practice.  So if you will let me move ahead, I

25     think we'll get to those interesting points very soon.

Page 37230

 1             JUDGE TRECHSEL:  Ms. Nozica, I apologise.  I plead guilty.

 2             MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Well, thank you for your questions,

 3     Your Honour, because from the questions you ask, I can see what is

 4     important, and then I'll be able to gear my questions towards that.

 5        Q.   Mr. Pinjuh, you performed those duties until July, the chief of

 6     the office in Citluk until July 1994, and in that same month, you were

 7     appointed chief of the sector for personnel in the personnel

 8     administration of the Ministry of Defence of the HR H-B; right?

 9        A.   Yes.

10        Q.   Very well.  Fine.  Now, you stayed in that post until the 1st of

11     January, 1998, when you retired?

12        A.   Correct.

13        Q.   Fine.  Now let's go back to 1992 again to explain matters.

14     During 1992 when you were the chief of the defence office in Citluk and

15     before you were appointed to the position by the head of the Defence

16     Department, who was your superior?

17        A.   The Croatian Defence Council of Citluk.

18        Q.   Very well.  Now, after you were appointed chief of the defence

19     office in Citluk in -- at the beginning of 1992, who was your immediate

20     superior?

21        A.   I've already said, the Croatian Defence Council of Citluk was.

22        Q.   Either I'm wrong, or it's been recorded wrongly in the

23     transcript.

24             After you were appointed chief of the Citluk Defence Department

25     at the beginning of 1993, after that period, who was your immediate

Page 37231

 1     superior?

 2        A.   At the beginning of 1993, my immediate superior was the chief of

 3     the defence administration Mostar, and the Citluk defence office came

 4     under its jurisdiction.

 5        Q.   I see.  Could you give us the name of the person who occupied

 6     that post, chief of defence administration of Mostar, because through the

 7     documents, that person will no doubt be mentioned.

 8        A.   At that time, it was Mr. Rade Bosnjak who occupied that post.

 9        Q.   Bosnjak, yes.  Well, we'll put right the names, but Rade Bosnjak,

10     and was that throughout 1993 that he was chief of the Mostar defence

11     administration?

12        A.   Yes.

13        Q.   All right.  Fine.  Now, during 1992, that is to say from the time

14     you started working in that area, and that was the 1st of June, 1993, to

15     be exact, until July 1994, the Croatian Community of Herceg-Bosna, how

16     many administrations for defence were there?

17        A.   There was the administration for the defence of Mostar, for the

18     defence of Tomislavgrad, Travnik, and Bosanski Brod, and later on, the

19     administration for the defence of Zepce as well.

20        Q.   Tell me, please, how many defence offices were there within the

21     defence administration of Mostar?

22        A.   There was the Mostar defence.  That was Siroki Brijeg, Grude,

23     Ljubuski, Citluk, Ravno, Stolac, Capljina, Neum, and I think in February

24     1993, Jablanica and Konjic as well.

25        Q.   Mr. Pinjuh, in general terms, general terms to start off with,

Page 37232

 1     what were the main tasks of the offices and administration of defence

 2     during the time that you worked there?  Can you list them, the main

 3     tasks, and then we'll look at them in greater detail on the basis of the

 4     documents I'm going to show you.

 5        A.   Well, mostly, they were tasks to see that the records for

 6     recruits were kept in order, mobilisation, replenishment of units,

 7     recording, recruitment, and links with units of the local administration

 8     in order to facilitate our work; mobilisation preparation, that is to say

 9     the terrain and so on and so forth; and other tasks for the requirements

10     of defence.

11        Q.   So you said record-keeping for recruits, and then you said

12     mobilisation for recruits, replenishment of the units?

13        A.   Yes to all that.

14        Q.   Recruitment again?

15        A.   Yes.

16        Q.   And information and surveillance?

17        A.   Yes.

18        Q.   Or monitoring and surveillance?

19        A.   Yes.

20        Q.   So this method of work or the tasks that you did, were they

21     regulated by the rules governing the armed forces of HZ-HB?

22        A.   Yes, this was precisely determined.

23        Q.   All right.  Now, would you take a look at my first document,

24     which is P 00289, the first document in my binder.

25        A.   I don't have any binders.

Page 37233

 1        Q.   You will be given them in just a moment.  Here they are.  May we

 2     take a look at the first binder because there are two, binder number 1

 3     and binder number 2, and in one you'll find the first document, the

 4     decree governing the armed forces.

 5        A.   Yes.

 6        Q.   Now, Mr. Pinjuh, this is a decree dated the 3rd of July, 1993, so

 7     can we go through -- 3rd of July, 1992.  Can we go through the articles

 8     as they affected your area of work, and let's look at Article 7 to begin

 9     with.  It regulates matters of your material requirements and

10     responsibilities.  So did you have tasks within this field as stipulated

11     here?

12        A.   Yes, we did.

13        Q.   Please look at Article 9, which refers to the powers of the HVO

14     HZ-HB in the area of defence and says under 5:

15             "Enacts regulations on the application and method of carrying out

16     mobilisation of men and materiel."

17             And 6:  "Decides on carrying out mobilisation."

18             In your experience, is this how mobilisation was carried out?

19        A.   Yes.

20        Q.   Please look at Article 10, which refers to the obligations of the

21     Defence Department and which says that the Defence Department carries out

22     tasks relating to points 9 and 18, items 9 and 18.  Mr. Pinjuh, we have

23     seen these documents more than once, so I will not dwell on them long,

24     but under 9 it says the mobilisation and manpower levels of the armed

25     forces and then also material obligations.  Is that what it says here?

Page 37234

 1        A.   Yes.

 2        Q.   In item 18 it says:  Ensuring the reinforcement and mobilisation

 3     of the armed forces.

 4        A.   Yes, or, rather, the bringing up to manpower levels.

 5        Q.   Mr. Pinjuh, please now look at Article 12, and this is linked to

 6     one of the questions asked by Their Honours.  It says in Article 12:

 7             "To carry out defence tasks ..." and in item 1, it says:  "As

 8     part of the Defence Department, administrations for defence and offices

 9     for defence shall be established."

10        A.   Yes.

11        Q.   So it says the decision on the numbers and headquarters and the

12     areas in which defence administrations and defence offices shall be

13     active will be passed by the HVO at the proposal of the head of defence.

14     Is that how it was, Mr. Pinjuh?

15        A.   Yes, that was the procedure.

16        Q.   Look at Article 13, which refers to defence administrations and

17     says that these are administrative and military territorial bodies

18     carrying out professional work relating to the armed forces under the

19     guidance of the head of defence; is that correct?

20        A.   Yes.

21        Q.   And are these tasks enumerated here under numbers 1 to 11?

22        A.   Yes.

23        Q.   Under numbers 1 and 2, is this mainly referring to tasks which

24     both administrations and offices dealt with most often in 1992 and 1993?

25        A.   Yes, almost all the time.

Page 37235

 1        Q.   Article 14 of this decree refers to defence offices which shall

 2     be constituent parts of the defence administration and shall in

 3     particular perform the following tasks:  Keep records of military

 4     conscripts, keep the records of materiel and equipment, and introduce

 5     conscription for defence needs.  I'm cutting this short because everyone

 6     can see the text.  Are these the main tasks that the offices for defence

 7     dealt with?  I'm asking you this for you to confirm because you are the

 8     chief of one such office.

 9        A.   Yes.

10        Q.   Please now look at Article 33.  This refers to raising up to

11     manpower level the armed forces.  We have already established that this

12     was one of the main tasks that both the defence offices and defence

13     administrations dealt with; is that correct?

14        A.   Yes.

15        Q.   In Article 33, the procedure for raising the manpower levels is

16     described, and in Article 35, we see that units and institutions are --

17     have their manpower levels raised according to the military assignments

18     and the priorities, and this is done by the offices for defence?

19        A.   Yes.

20        Q.   Now we'll move on to other kinds of tasks, which you said also

21     took up quite a lot of your time in 1992 and 1993, and that is

22     mobilisation.  Mr. Pinjuh, tell me, how long was mobilisation of the

23     armed forces carried out in 1992 and 1993 while you were working on this?

24        A.   Well, in my experience, starting from the 10th of July, 1992,

25     when it was declared, it went on until the end of the war, so

Page 37236

 1     mobilisation was carried on on a permanent basis, and it was never fully

 2     completed.

 3        Q.   All right.  Article 36 says that mobilisation can be general or

 4     partial in scope?

 5        A.   Yes.

 6        Q.   Article 37 says that mobilisation shall be ordered by the

 7     president of the HZ-HB.  That's how it was, Mr. Pinjuh?

 8        A.   Yes, it was.

 9        Q.   Article 38 says the following:

10             "The preparation and implementation of the mobilisation of the

11     armed forces shall be the responsibility of:  1, the head of the Defence

12     Department of the HVO for preparing and implementing the mobilisation of

13     the armed forces and the commanders of staffs, units, and institutions of

14     the armed forces for preparing and implementing the mobilisation of the

15     staffs, units, and institutions under their control and command."

16             Is that how it was, Mr. Pinjuh?

17        A.   Yes.

18        Q.   Mr. Pinjuh, could we now look at the next document, simply to see

19     whether this was prescribed in another decree, as well, and that is

20     00588.  This is the decree on the armed forces of the Croatian Community

21     of Herceg-Bosna.  The document is P - I don't see it in this transcript -

22     P 00588.  Yes, I see it now.  So this is the decree on the armed forces

23     of the Croatian Community of Herceg-Bosna, and it is dated from October,

24     the 17th of October, 1992.  Have you found it, sir?

25        A.   Yes.

Page 37237

 1        Q.   Very briefly, let's look at Article 7, which is identical to the

 2     previous decree that we have seen; is that correct?

 3        A.   Yes.

 4        Q.   Article 9, it's also identical?

 5        A.   Yes.

 6        Q.   And Article 10, it's identical; is it not?

 7        A.   Yes.

 8        Q.   Except that it's no longer item 18 but item 17 because in the

 9     previous decree, the numbers were a little different?

10        A.   Yes, and there's another difference, as well, in the numbers.

11        Q.   Articles 12, 13, and 14, do they also prescribe the same as the

12     previous decree?

13        A.   Yes.

14        Q.   Now, let's look at Article 33, which deals with raising the units

15     up to manpower level.  That's Article 33, 34, and 35.  Do they regulate

16     this area in the same way as before?

17        A.   Yes.  As far as I can see, the provisions are the same.

18        Q.   There is one change, which is in Article 34.

19        A.   Yes.  34.

20        Q.   To be quite precise, it's in paragraph 2, which says that:

21             "Commanders of brigades and high-ranking officers shall be

22     appointed ..." and so on, and Article 35, which refers to defence offices

23     remains the same.  Article 36 remains the same.  You'll have to confirm

24     because I'm not allowed to testify.

25        A.   Yes, yes.  Please excuse me.

Page 37238

 1        Q.   In Article 37 --

 2        A.   It remains the same.

 3        Q.   Is there anything added in paragraph 2, so we don't have to go

 4     back, Mr. Pinjuh, where it says that the president of the HZ-HB shall

 5     order the mobilisation of the armed forces, whereas now a new paragraph

 6     has been added which says mobilisation of the armed forces shall be

 7     organised in accordance with the plan of mobilisation dynamics and

 8     carried out in accordance with plans for the mobilisation of the armed

 9     forces?

10        A.   Yes, that's correct.

11        Q.   In Article 38, there is again something new.  Have you noticed

12     it?  It's in the last paragraph of Article 38.

13        A.   It has to do with the regulations?

14        Q.   Yes.  And these shall be issued by the head of the Defence

15     Department.  Regulations on preparation and execution of mobilisation of

16     the armed forces shall be issued by the head of the Defence Department.

17     All right.  So we have seen how things were according to the decree on

18     the armed forces.  Mr. Pinjuh, when did the defence administrations begin

19     to be active on the territory HZ-HB?

20        A.   In late 1992 and early 1993.

21        Q.   Mr. Pinjuh, do you know what document regulated the method of

22     selection of the chiefs of the defence administration and the other

23     operatives and other employees of the offices and administrations?

24        A.   Well, there was a decision on the internal organisation of the

25     Defence Department.

Page 37239

 1        Q.   Very well.  Can we now look at Document 2D 00567.  This is the

 2     decision on the internal organisation of the Defence Department, and it's

 3     dated the 17th of October, 1992.  Please take a look at item 8.  We've

 4     already said that the administrations and offices were active within the

 5     scope of the Defence Department, and here we shall see who was in charge

 6     of these administrations and offices and how the people were appointed.

 7             It says here that the chief of the administration shall be in

 8     charge, and he shall be responsibile to the head of the Defence

 9     Department.

10        A.   Is that how it was.

11        Q.   And it says here chiefs of Defence Departments are appointed by

12     the HVO of the HZ-HB at the proposal of the head of the Defence

13     Department.  Is that how it was, Mr. Pinjuh, or was there another chain

14     here in -- another link in the chain in practice?

15        A.   To the best of my knowledge, the municipality where the Defence

16     Department had its seat participated with its approval.

17        Q.   It further says assistant chiefs in the defence administration

18     shall be appointed by the head of the Defence Department.

19        A.   Yes.

20        Q.   All other operatives and employees in the defence administration

21     shall be assigned by the chief of the administration with the approval of

22     the head of the Defence Department or a person authorised by him.

23        A.   Yes, that's correct.

24        Q.   And now, we'll move on to defence offices which are mentioned in

25     item 9.  It says here that chiefs of the defence office manages the work

Page 37240

 1     of the defence office, and he is responsible for his work directly to the

 2     chief of the defence administration.

 3        A.   Yes.

 4        Q.   And through the chief of the defence administration to the head

 5     and deputy head of the Defence Department.

 6        A.   Yes, that's correct.

 7        Q.   And we are now coming to the question of His Honour Judge

 8     Antonetti.  It says here the chief of the defence administration --

 9     defence office shall be appointed by the chief of the defence

10     administration, or, rather, he shall be appointed by the head of the

11     Defence Department with the approval of the municipality.

12        A.   Yes.

13        Q.   And then it says here all other operatives and employees and the

14     defence officer are appointed by the chief of the defence office of the

15     approval of the Defence Department.  You did that?

16        A.   Yes.

17        Q.   Or a person authorised by him and with the opinion of the chief

18     of the competent defence administration; is that right?

19        A.   Yes.

20        Q.   So the opinion of the head of the defence administration was

21     sought.  So Mr. Pinjuh, the procedures were as described here with the

22     addition made by you in the case of the selection of the chief of defence

23     administrations?

24        A.   Yes.

25        Q.   Could you now please take a look at the next document.  We won't

Page 37241

 1     dwell on it, but let's look at it.  It's P 02477.  It's the decision on

 2     the internal organisation of the Defence Department of the 20th of May,

 3     1993.  Mr. Pinjuh, we have -- or, rather, you have looked at this

 4     decision, and as regards the manner of selection of officers in -- or,

 5     rather, employees in both the offices and administrations for defence,

 6     there were no changes here in relation to the previous documents?

 7        A.   That's correct.

 8        Q.   Let's take a look at 2D 1199, please.  2D 1199.  Yes.  It's

 9     correct in the transcript.  Mr. Pinjuh, you have before you a document

10     signed by the head of the Defence Department, and it's a proposal for the

11     appointment of the head of the defence administration for Mostar, who was

12     your superior; is that right?

13        A.   Yes.

14        Q.   Let's take it step by step.

15        A.   All right.

16        Q.   So this proposal is addressed to the Croatian Community of

17     Herceg-Bosna, Croatian Defence Council?

18        A.   Yes.

19        Q.   And it says that it is based on -- it's issued pursuant to

20     provision to the provisions of item 7 of the resolution, and it says that

21     it proposes that Mr. Rade Bosnjak from Mostar be appointed the head of

22     the defence administration who had served up until then as the head of

23     the HVO municipal headquarters in Mostar.

24        A.   Yes.

25        Q.   And it says:

Page 37242

 1             "I also inform you that we have received a positive opinion from

 2     the Croatian Defence Council from Mostar municipality regarding this

 3     proposal."

 4        A.   Yes.

 5        Q.   Mr. Pinjuh, you know that this is the procedure through which Mr.

 6     Bosnjak was appointed?

 7        A.   Yes.

 8        Q.   Now, let's look at 2D 1225.  You have seen many such decisions.

 9     They are all identical, and because of the shortage of time, I have

10     selected only two to illustrate to the Court whether this was the model

11     used for all appointments.

12        A.   Yes, that was the procedure.

13        Q.   Here we have a document signed again by the head of the Defence

14     Department, and it's dated the -- it's January 1993, and he is issuing a

15     decision in the office for defence in Odzak municipality.  Slavko Bago is

16     appointed head of the defence office in Odzak, and in the statement of

17     reasons, it says:

18             "At the suggestion of the head of the defence administration of

19     Bosanski Brod and with the previous consent of the Croatian Defence

20     Council of Odzak municipality, the head of the Defence Department has

21     decided as previously stated in this decision ..." and we even have here

22     a legal remedy described.

23        A.   Yes, that was the procedure.

24        Q.   And were you appointed according to that same procedure?

25        A.   Yes.

Page 37243

 1        Q.   Unfortunately, we couldn't find your letter of appointment, but

 2     it would have been the same as this; right?

 3        A.   Yes.

 4        Q.   Now, we have an agreement here, an agreement signed by

 5     Mr. Stojic, we saw in which cases he gave his agreement.  That is

 6     document 2D 1206.

 7        A.   Yes.  Whereby Mr. Abdulah Kasim Primeca, born in 1963, be

 8     appointed a higher clerk in the Defence Department.

 9        Q.   So this is for the appointment of these individuals, and all that

10     was necessary there was an agreement and consent by the head; is that

11     right?

12        A.   Yes.

13        Q.   All right.  Fine.  Now, we've looked at the legal frameworks and

14     the way in which appointments were made, the procedure thereof.  Can you

15     explain to the Court how the internal setup, what the internal setup was

16     of the defence administration and office?

17        A.   There was a decision and rules of procedure within the frameworks

18     of the offices for defence within HZ-HB, and it regulated all these

19     areas.

20        Q.   Can we take a look at document P 00988 now, please.  Have you

21     found it?

22        A.   Yes.

23        Q.   Can you explain to the Court what kind of decision this is, who

24     brought in this decision, and was it one of the documents you mentioned?

25        A.   It was the Croatian Community of Herceg-Bosna, the Croatian

Page 37244

 1     Defence Council from 1993 that passed this decision.  I can't see the

 2     date.

 3        Q.   That's fine.  But as it says in the preamble, it's the HVO HZ-HB

 4     who is making this decision; is that right?

 5        A.   Yes.

 6        Q.   Can we look at a decision that you mentioned -- or rather, this

 7     is the document you mentioned.  Now let's look at P 1553 next, please.

 8        A.   It is regulations on the internal organisation of the defence

 9     offices and administrations on the territory of the Croatian Community of

10     Herceg-Bosna, and it is passed by the head of the Defence Department, Mr.

11     Bruno Stojic.

12        Q.   All right.  Fine.  Now, Mr. Pinjuh, let's look at Article 3 of

13     these regulations briefly where it says that a united internal -- that

14     there's a united internal organisation for all the defence offices and

15     united systemisation, that is to say, who occupies what post and so on;

16     is that right?

17        A.   Yes.

18        Q.   Now, look at Article 4, please.  And it says that a uniformed

19     sector for the defence offices are prescribed for the municipalities

20     depending on the number and seats, and we have the work post set out for

21     people working in those offices; is that right?

22        A.   Yes.

23        Q.   And this brings us to the question of regulating the headquarters

24     of the administrations and offices and who passed this decision, what the

25     administrations -- defence administrations are, and what the offices are.

Page 37245

 1        A.   The HVO HZ-HB makes the decision as to the number of people

 2     working in the general area and the number of offices or administrations.

 3        Q.   Let's now look at P 00700.  It is a proposal for decision on the

 4     number of seats for the -- and headquarters for the defence offices and

 5     so on.  Is this proposed by the head of the department to the HVO HZ-HB;

 6     right?

 7        A.   Yes.  And as far as I remember, there were two more, two other

 8     amendments to the proposal.

 9        Q.   For the transcript, I'd like to emphasise that all these

10     decisions are ones that we showed to witness Slobodan Bozic, so there's

11     no need for us to go through them all again.  But just look at the next

12     document, which is P 00767, and it is the minutes from the 11th session

13     of the Croatian Defence Council dated the 18th of November, 1992, and

14     under point 4 we see that there was a discussion of this proposal and

15     that it was adopted after a debate; is that right?

16        A.   Yes.

17        Q.   Now, Mr. Pinjuh, you said that there were two other amendments.

18     Can you confirm what these amendments were, if you remember, and can you

19     confirm whether the same procedure was applied for those amendments?

20        A.   I remember that in February in the defence administration of

21     Mostar, Konjic and Jablanica were attached, and in the second amendment

22     it was the formation of the 5th administration for the defence of Zepce

23     with all the attendant defence offices, and the procedure was the same

24     once again.

25        Q.   Very well.  Thank you.  Now, Mr. Pinjuh, as the chief of the

Page 37246

 1     defence office, did you compile any reports, and if so, what kind of

 2     reports were they, and who did you send them to?  Who were they addressed

 3     to?

 4        A.   Yes, we did compile six monthly and annual reports, and we sent

 5     them to the defence administration, which was in my case the Mostar

 6     administration, and then they would send them on to the head and deputy

 7     of the Defence Department.  As far as I know, they were also used in

 8     reports written for the government sessions of the Croatian Defence

 9     Council.

10        Q.   Did you compile any other periodical reports, for example, except

11     for these half-yearly and yearly reports?

12        A.   Yes, if the administration required and if the circumstances and

13     situation required it as well.

14        Q.   Very well.  Thank you.  Now, let's look at document P 4699, which

15     is a report on the work of the Croatian Defence Council for the period

16     from January to June 1993.

17        A.   Yes.

18        Q.   And in that report, take a look at page 5, please, of the

19     Croatian version, and it is page 3 of the English.  And it talks about

20     the Mostar administration area, which is the area to which your office

21     belonged, and we can see that from the first sentence there.  I'm just

22     going to point out certain sections, and we'll comment later, and I think

23     this is important.  Let's see if that was the case.

24             "In its work ..." and that's the second sentence of paragraph 1.

25             "In its work, it paid special attention to the recruitment,

Page 37247

 1     reinforcement, and mobilisation of reservists."

 2             Now, Mr. Pinjuh, they are the basic tasks that you yourself

 3     mentioned at the beginning of your testimony here this afternoon; is that

 4     right?

 5        A.   Yes.

 6        Q.   It goes on to say:

 7             "This administration will have final and exact date on the 19th

 8     of July, 1993, by which time mobilisation is to be completed in all the

 9     municipalities except Mostar.  In the next period, its activities will be

10     directed at the municipality of Mostar..." and then it says:  "... for

11     well known reasons."

12             Now, Mr. Pinjuh, tell us, please, can you remember what those

13     well known reasons were which had a bearing on the fact that in this

14     Mostar administration report those reasons are mentioned?

15        A.   Well, I remember that on the 30th of June, 1993, members of the

16     Croatian Defence Council who were Muslims by ethnicity disarmed their

17     combatants, Croats, from the HVO and that in actual fact this was a

18     declaration of war on the Croatian Defence Council in the area.  And that

19     is why the reports -- the order of the reports was disrupted, and that's

20     why there wasn't better information in Mostar at the time.  There was a

21     general disruption.

22        Q.   Mr. Pinjuh, did these events influence the further work towards

23     mobilisation in the area, especially when it came to the area under the

24     Mostar defence administration?

25        A.   Well, yes, certainly, because in 1991 when the aggression by the

Page 37248

 1     Serb army started in the territory of the HZ-HB, units were established

 2     on the basis of volunteers, and both Croats and other ethnicities manned

 3     those units.  However, after this particular event, it wasn't realistic

 4     to expect the Muslims to respond to the call-up for the HVO units, and

 5     that's why it disrupted the situation in Mostar.

 6        Q.   Mr. Pinjuh, we'll come back to those issues, but I'll move on and

 7     look at the report some more.  It says here that the Home Guards question

 8     was resolved in the shortest possible time.  Now, we'll talk about Home

 9     Guards later on, but were you involved in this work?

10        A.   Yes.

11        Q.   Fine.  It says on the basis of the decision to train recruits,

12     and your name is mentioned, and it says how many recruits responded and

13     what training courses were organised.  So were you involved in that work

14     too, Mr. Pinjuh?

15        A.   Yes.

16        Q.   All right.  Fine.  Look at page 7, please, of the Croatian

17     version, and that is page 5 in the English.  Once again, paragraph 3 on

18     page 5.  Page 5 in the English, please.  Have you found page 7?

19        A.   Yes.

20        Q.   There's an observation made here.  For the efficient work of the

21     administrations and defence offices, there must be a proper record of

22     personnel and materiel and technical equipment, and the chiefs come

23     across -- of the departments come across various difficulties in their

24     work in collecting information about recruits who were mobilised in

25     different ways without the knowledge of and recording by the office of

Page 37249

 1     people who are registered as recruits.

 2        A.   Yes, that's what the situation was.

 3        Q.   What was it?  Where was the problem?  Where did the problem lie?

 4     What was the problem here because this relates to the problems that the

 5     defence office was encountering.

 6        A.   To a great extent, the fact that people went into the units and

 7     left units without any record of that being kept, that was a problem.

 8     People tried to avoid the call-up.  They would give false addresses and

 9     things like that, so it was very difficult to keep abreast of the

10     situation and keep a proper and timely record of the recruits.

11        Q.   So that was a continuous problem, was it, of the office in 1992

12     and 1993?

13        A.   Yes, throughout 1993.

14        Q.   Mr. Pinjuh, we still have time before the break, and I think that

15     we can try and go into another very important area.  And I'm going to

16     question you about the Home Guards and Home Guard units and how that was

17     resolved, and I think that through my questions, we'll be able to answer

18     the question of how the manpower levels were brought up to scratch.

19             Now, in the 1993 report, we saw that the manpower levels were

20     replenished in the briefest space of time.  Can you explain to the Court

21     how this issue was resolved in actual fact?

22        A.   Well, the president of the HZ-HB, Mr. Boban, passed a decision on

23     the establishment of the Home Guards and their units, and on the basis of

24     that decision, the defence office and the Main Staff through their own

25     chains of command acted upon that, and specifically when we were

Page 37250

 1     concerned, the defence office would precisely define -- we were given

 2     precise assignments in that whole process and procedure, and that's why

 3     we were able to get through it fairly quickly.

 4        Q.   Let's look at the first document from this series, and then we'll

 5     continue discussing how this was done technically.  It was P 00680.

 6     Document P 00680.  Have you found it?

 7        A.   Yes.

 8        Q.   This is a decision on the establishment of the Home Guards passed

 9     by Mate Boban, president of the HZ-HB, on the 3rd of November, 1992;

10     right?

11        A.   Yes, right.

12        Q.   Now, tell us two things:  What were the tasks of these Home Guard

13     units, and who were the members of those Home Guard units?  Who became a

14     member of the Home Guards?

15        A.   The members of the Home Guard units were supposed to be military

16     recruits who didn't -- which -- who did not have their wartime schedule,

17     wartime assignment, which meant that they were mostly elderly persons,

18     and their task was to guard important features, roads, and so on and

19     everything that was important to ensure the normal -- normal life in the

20     area.

21        Q.   Now, let's look at some of these articles under this decision,

22     or, rather, we are going to comment them later on, but let's read some

23     out.  Article 5, it says:

24             "Units and headquarters of the Home Guard shall be subordinated

25     to the commands of operational zones" -- "operative zones and to the

Page 37251

 1     General Staff" -- to the Main Staff in the chain of command."

 2             Then Article 6 says:  "Upon this decision coming into force,

 3     those eligible for military service who have not been assigned their

 4     wartime stations shall be transferred to the units of the Home Guards."

 5     Is that it?

 6        A.   Yes.

 7        Q.   And Article 7 says:

 8             "The head of the Defence Department shall have the authority to

 9     prescribe regulations and draw up mobilisation plans for the Home Guard."

10        A.   Yes.

11        Q.   All right.  Fine.  Now, let's look at the next document following

12     this decision, and it is P 1424.

13             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, I'd like to come back

14     to the Domobrani, the Home Guards.  We've heard other witness, many

15     witnesses.  In fact, we've spent thousands of hours in this case, so now

16     we have more precise knowledge of certain events.  We know that several

17     prisons were guarded by individuals who came under this category.  They

18     were older, and, therefore, they were asked to do that task.  I see that

19     under Article 5, it states that these individuals were commanded by the

20     operational zone and the Main Staff.

21             In your opinion, a Domobrani who is assigned to guarding a

22     prison, what line of command does he come under?

23             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In my opinion, their unit which

24     sent them there, the unit they belong to, and above that unit should be

25     the operative zone or higher up.

Page 37252

 1             MS. NOZICA:

 2        Q.   I asked to you look at document P 1424.  It wasn't recorded in

 3     the transcript.  It's an order, as you explained, and it says that the

 4     head of the Defence Department issued one such order -- a decision,

 5     rather, and the second one was issued by the chief of the Main Staff.  So

 6     is this the decision issued by the -- by the head of the Defence

 7     Department?

 8        A.   To the best of my knowledge, yes.

 9        Q.   Well, here we can see an explanation as to why these units are

10     being established, and under 3 it says here that companies, battalions,

11     and regiments were established; is that correct?

12        A.   Yes.

13        Q.   And this document was delivered to the Defence Department in

14     Mostar, Tomislavgrad, Travnik and Bosanski Brod.  Is this what you

15     explained, that the department then sent the order down the chain?

16        A.   Yes.

17        Q.   Well, then, let's look at 01441.  This is an order issued by the

18     chief of the Main Staff referring to the order issued by the head of the

19     Defence Department of the 5th of February as regards the establishment of

20     Home Guard units.  Can you comment on this?  What is this about?

21        A.   Well, this is going down his chain of command to the operative

22     zones that he was in command of.

23        Q.   Mr. Pinjuh, what was the task of the defence office, if you can

24     explain very briefly, as regards this order?  What specifically did the

25     offices do pursuant to this order?  What did your office do, to be

Page 37253

 1     precise?

 2        A.   Well, in the first place, the office would carry out the call-up

 3     according to the order pursuant to the plan, according to the military

 4     occupational specialties or arms of service, and when a list had been

 5     drawn up of those who had responded to the call-up, the list would be

 6     delivered together with the files of these men to the Home Guard unit

 7     which was being established.

 8        Q.   All right.  Now, I'll ask you to look at P 1587.  That is a

 9     document signed by the chief of the defence administration Rade Bosnjak,

10     and it concerns the establishment of Home Guard units, and it refers both

11     to the order issued by the head of the Defence Department because as you

12     explained, this was sent to the administrations which further forwarded

13     it to the offices, and this one was delivered to the Konjic Jablanica

14     office.  But what concerns us here is item 2, which explains how the

15     operative units of the HVO armed forces are brought up to manpower level

16     according to the mobilisation plan, and it says that this is to be

17     carried out in accordance with Article 78, 14, 34, 35, and 110 of the

18     aforementioned decree; the decree is the decree on the armed forces;

19     Article 17 and 80 of the rules on carrying out compulsory military

20     service; Article 9 of the decision on the internal organisation of the

21     Defence Department; and it concludes that all requests for reinforcement

22     or -- for reinforcement must be forwarded to this administration via the

23     OZ OR MOB, south-east Herzegovina zone of operations to this

24     administration.

25             Mr. Pinjuh, can we first clarify the following:  I'm interested

Page 37254

 1     in this last sentence where Mr. Bosnjak says that all requests for

 2     reinforcement must be forwarded through the zone of operations, and he

 3     mentions the OR MOB.  What does OR MOB refer to, if you know?

 4        A.   It's the organisational and mobilisational affairs department,

 5     which was part of the zone of operations.

 6        Q.   And it says delivered or forwarded to this administration?

 7        A.   Yes.  That should be the proper route and the proper procedure.

 8        Q.   Very well.  Can you explain to Their Honours what documents were

 9     necessary and had to be passed before a request for reinforcement could

10     be put in, so on what basis could reinforcement of units of the HVO be

11     carried out?

12        A.   Well, first, there had to be plan of replenishment or

13     reinforcement, and this plan was based on assessments and proposal by the

14     department for establishment of the Main Staff, which forwarded it to the

15     administration for military conscripts and mobilisation, which then drew

16     up the reinforcements plan.  It would send the plan back to the military

17     territorial commands and the administration for defence, and they would

18     send then excerpts from this order to the offices that had these tasks

19     within their purview.

20        Q.   The administration for military conscription and mobilisation,

21     was it part of the civilian part of the Defence Department?

22        A.   Yes, it was.

23        Q.   Mr. Pinjuh, please tell us now who had to submit a request for

24     bringing military units up to manpower levels and to whom?

25        A.   To bring up to manpower levels the military units, the requests

Page 37255

 1     had to be submitted by the zones of operations to the administration, and

 2     the administration would then forward this to the offices carrying out

 3     the reinforcement, and we have seen that in the instructions issued by

 4     Mr. Rade Bosnjak.

 5        Q.   That's the one we're looking at now?

 6        A.   Yes.

 7        Q.   Mr. Pinjuh, were there other kind of requests?  For example, did

 8     brigades write directly to the defence offices?  Were there instances

 9     where this procedure was deviated from in practice?

10        A.   Yes.  Yes, there were such instances.  I have to say that there

11     were, yes.

12        Q.   Yes, we'll deal with that later.  When you were talking about the

13     proposal for the plan --

14             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I've tried to understand

15     exactly what your role was.  As I look at the document on the screen and

16     also the document P 700, if I understand correctly - and please do tell

17     me if I misunderstood something because it's very important - at the very

18     top, you have the department of defence with Mr. Stojic.  Then

19     underneath, there are four departments of the defence administration.

20     You have Mostar.  You have Tomislavgrad, Travnik, and Bosanski Brod.  And

21     in the department of the administration of Mostar, there are nine

22     districts:  Stolac, Ravno, Capljina, Neum, Vuski [phoen], Grude, Siroki

23     Brijeg, Citluk, and Mostar.  And if I've understood correctly, you were

24     the head in Citluk of the -- of that department of the administration.

25     Have I understood correctly?

Page 37256

 1             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's correct.

 2             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I've understood correctly, you

 3     confirm?

 4             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

 5             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Fine.  Very good.  So you see

 6     I've followed very closely.

 7             MS. NOZICA:  [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

 8        Q.   Mr. Pinjuh, you said a little while ago that the mobilisation

 9     plan was issued by the department for mobilisation of the Main Staff, and

10     then it was sent to the administration for conscripts and mobilisation,

11     and based on that they drew up a plan.  So let's now look at the armed

12     forces from the Main Staff to brigade level.  Who dealt with tasks

13     concerning mobilisation and reinforcement?

14             Let's look at document P 00502.

15        A.   Just a moment, please.

16        Q.   It's the next binder.  Sorry, it's my fault for not mentioning

17     it.

18             Mr. Bruno Stojic now here prescribes a temporary establishment of

19     the Main Staff.  Can we look at positions 44, 46, 47, and 48, please.

20     Could you just comment on that?  So 44, it says here above 44 the

21     department for organisation, personnel, and legal affairs, and then

22     there's a chief and a secretary; and 47 is an organisational officer; and

23     then there's mobilisation; and 48 is the officer for reinforcements.

24        A.   Yes.

25        Q.   Is this what you were referring to when you were mentioning the

Page 37257

 1     proposal for the plan of reinforcement?

 2        A.   Yes.

 3             MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation]

 4        Q.   Can we please look at document 2D 927, and could you please look

 5     at positions 21, 22, 23, and I will only say that this is also a document

 6     dated the 10th of December, 1992, and signed by Mr. Stojic, and it's an

 7     interim establishment of the command of the zone of operations.

 8             As these are all abbreviations, could you please tell us who

 9     these persons are in the positions I mentioned and whether they were

10     working on tasks having to do with mobilisation.

11        A.   Yes.  The assistant commander for organisational mobilisation and

12     personnel affairs, then there's a desk officer, a lawyer, and so on.

13             MS. NOZICA:  [Interpretation]  Could we please look at the next

14     document.  That's 2D 01370.

15        Q.   This is a diagram showing the brigade establishment.  You have

16     page 3 under 1 and 2, and in English, it's page 5, 1 and 2.  Could you

17     please tell me on page 3, under 1 and 2, whether these -- this is the

18     organisational mobilisational department?

19        A.   Yes.  Officer, yes.

20        Q.   Could you repeat your answer, please.

21        A.   These were the assistant commander for organisation and

22     mobilisation and personnel affairs and then officer dealing with the same

23     affairs.

24        Q.   I have only two other documents to deal with in this area, and

25     then if it's time for a break, we can take a break.

Page 37258

 1             Sir, did you have contacts in your offices for defence with the

 2     members of the commands of the units which were in the area of Citluk

 3     municipality as regards both mobilisation and bringing up to manpower

 4     levels?  Did you have to have contacts with them?

 5        A.   Well, we did have contacts with them, especially with the

 6     officers dealing with mobilisation and personnel affairs.

 7        Q.   Can you tell us briefly?

 8        A.   Well, the officer was the person who receives the list and the

 9     files of the men and handles them, and he is a very important person in

10     communication when there is an exchange of information about people

11     leaving and coming and going for different reasons.

12        Q.   Mr. Pinjuh, I asked you whether there were any deviations from

13     the regular procedure as regards reinforcing the units or, rather,

14     bringing up to manpower level, and people applying not to the proper

15     body.

16             MS. NOZICA:  [Interpretation] Could we now look at document 1223,

17     please.  2D 1223.

18             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.  We might say that this is an

19     example of the way things were sometimes done.

20             MS. NOZICA:  [Interpretation]

21        Q.   Yes, I was waiting for my question and your answer to be recorded

22     in the transcript.

23             This is a request dated the 2nd of April, 1993, for bringing up

24     to manpower levels the battalion in Neum, and it's signed by Nedeljko

25     Obradovic.  According to the practice and the instructions issued by

Page 37259

 1     Mr. Rade Bosnjak, could the brigade commander request reinforcements of

 2     men and do so by applying to the chief of the office directly?

 3        A.   No.  He should have done this through the zone of operations.

 4        Q.   And to whom should he have applied, to the office or to the

 5     administration for defence?

 6        A.   To the administration for defence, which would then have

 7     forwarded whatever referred to the offices to the offices because there

 8     are all sorts of things mentioned here, the civilian police and things to

 9     do with medical examinations and so on and so forth.

10        Q.   All right.  Now we are dealing only with bringing up to manpower

11     levels.  Let's please look at document --

12             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I am afraid it's time for the

13     break.  20 minutes' break.

14                           --- Recess taken at 3.45 p.m.

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

16             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Well, the Court is in session.

17     There has be a slight correction to the transcript on page 2, line 4.

18     There should be 25 rather than 27.  25th of February, 2009, to be

19     perfectly accurate.

20             Ms. Nozica.

21             MS. NOZICA:  [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

22        Q.   Mr. Pinjuh, I've been told that we tend to speak quickly, either

23     I in asking my questions or you in the answers, so the court reporter has

24     a problem there.  So I want to ask you to slow down or, rather, to make

25     pauses between questions and answers.

Page 37260

 1             Mr. Pinjuh, before the break, we were discussing the request

 2     coming in from the first brigade of the HVO with respect to reinforcement

 3     and manpower levels for the brigade, and let's just remind ourselves, you

 4     were saying that that was not in conformity with procedure or practice,

 5     so take a look at P 01880 next, please, which is a letter, which the head

 6     of the Mostar defence administration, Mr. Rade Bosnjak, is sending to Mr.

 7     Bruno Stojic the head of the Defence Department, on the 15th of April,

 8     1993, in which he refers to the request we saw a moment ago under

 9     number 2D 1223.

10             Now, Mr. Pinjuh, does Mr. Bosnjak indicate here that requests of

11     that kind are not in conformity with procedure?  I think that we'll find

12     that on page 2, so can you give us your opinions about that?

13        A.   Well, I think that the head of the defence administration here

14     has stipulated that there has been a violation of regulations in

15     violation of procedural regulations, and according to what it says here,

16     latterly, he is very strict in expressing this, and I would even say that

17     he bringing into question the need for administrations and offices to

18     exist at all if that's the way they are going to be working.

19        Q.   Very well.  We are going to move on to another area now, and it

20     is this:  In the report for the first half of 1993, the biannual report,

21     or, rather, six-monthly report in which the administration for defence of

22     Mostar says that it has conducted certain affairs with respect to

23     recruitment.  Can you tell me what these tasks were and whether you in

24     the defence office were involved in any way in this work?

25        A.   Yes, we were involved.  Certainly we were, and the work involved

Page 37261

 1     introducing the new people into the records, the dates of birth.  I think

 2     that it was 1975, people born in 1975 and some older people who failed to

 3     become soldiers so that all this was done on the basis of the regulations

 4     governing civilian service and military service.  So we accomplished this

 5     task fairly quickly and I would say fairly well too.

 6        Q.   Mr. Pinjuh, you mentioned that this was done according to the

 7     military services and civilian services duties.  Can you look at 2D 1232

 8     next, please.  Are those the rules that you referred to?

 9        A.   Yes, that's right.

10        Q.   Would you look at Article 17 to 33 and tell us whether they are

11     provisions which relate to recruits and the procedure that you spoke

12     about?

13        A.   Yes, those are the articles.

14        Q.   Now, let's take a look at document 2D 1023 next, please, which is

15     a decision dated the 7th of June, 1993, signed by Mr. Bruno Stojic and in

16     which he says that teaching centres for training should be formed for the

17     south-east Herzegovina operation zone; the centres for training in the

18     Capljina base and the Heliodrom base; and then for north-west

19     Herzegovina, that operation zone; training centres are to be formed in

20     Crvenice, Tomislavgrad municipality; and under number 2, coordination of

21     the preparation of the centre for uninterrupted taking-in of recruits for

22     appropriate working conditions and residence will be conducted by the

23     Main Staff headquarters using the operational zones and heads of training

24     centres.  Now, can you explain to us why such a decision was necessary in

25     the first place when recruits were being called up and taken in and

Page 37262

 1     trained and the courses, training courses that were to be put in place?

 2        A.   Well, it was necessary to ensure the right premises for

 3     accommodation and also for training for the new recruits, first of all,

 4     basic training and then more specialised training courses, so that when

 5     they had completed all that, they could be said to have completed the

 6     military service.

 7        Q.   Now look at 2D 1210, please.  That's the next document.  It is a

 8     letter once again from the head of the Mostar administration,

 9     Rade Bosnjak, sent on the 15th of July, 1993, to the head, Mr. Bruno

10     Stojic, and it is -- it concerns certain recruitment affairs.  So could

11     you tell us whether something had to be done before the recruits were

12     sent off for training?

13        A.   Certainly.  And from this, we can see that not everything

14     functioned properly at all levels.  However, all the recruits had to sit

15     for a medical examination, and a recruitment -- sit before a recruitment

16     commission, and I can see from this letter from Mr. Bosnjak that he

17     speaks about problems in certain health institutions with respect to

18     recruits and recruitment, probably medicines, something to do with

19     medicines and the resources necessary and everything concerning a proper

20     medical examination.

21        Q.   Now, let's look at the last document in this area, which is

22     P 4091 [Realtime transcript read in error, "B"].  It's not B; it's P for

23     the transcript.  4091.  Yes, that's right.  Unfortunately, my time is

24     limited, so I won't be able to look at this in any great detail, but this

25     is an order for specialised training.

Page 37263

 1        A.   That's right.

 2        Q.   And from this, does it follow that basic training was conducted

 3     for recruits before this, and then that there were specialist training

 4     courses for recruits as well; is that right?

 5        A.   Yes.

 6        Q.   All right.  Fine.  Now, can you tell me, Mr. Pinjuh, who was in

 7     charge of recruitment training?  Did that come under the offices or the

 8     administration, or who was in charge?

 9        A.   For training, it was the department for education and training

10     attached to the Main Staff.

11        Q.   Now, Mr. Pinjuh, let's take a look at document P 7433, and I'm

12     going to ask you to explain to the Court what this is.  What kind of

13     document is this?

14        A.   This is an annual analysis of the performance of the Mostar

15     defence administration for 1993.

16        Q.   Now, let's take a look at page 3.  It's also page 3 in English.

17     And tell us, please, what in this annual analysis report does it say on

18     page 3, under defence administration tasks, et cetera?

19        A.   Well, it sets out the legal grounds for establishing the

20     administrations and offices for defence.

21        Q.   Will you look at page 13 in the Croatian version now, which is

22     page 9 in the English, and explain to the Court what we see on that page.

23        A.   This page shows the structure of the people working there for the

24     Citluk defence office, and I was the head of the office, so the employees

25     there.

Page 37264

 1        Q.   Thank you.  May we look at the next page, and on the next page,

 2     Mr. Pinjuh, is a review of the combat engagement for recruits in Citluk

 3     municipality, and it says also in percentages in relation to the number

 4     of military recruits in the military records.

 5             Now, questions like this have already been raised in this

 6     courtroom, and I'm going to ask you the question directly because I

 7     assume you compiled this.

 8        A.   Yes.

 9        Q.   The first line says that the number of Croat inhabitants

10     according to the 1991 population census was the number it says here.

11     Now, why was an analysis conducted according to the number of Croat

12     inhabitants, this analysis, this particular analysis that you said was

13     done at the end of 1993?  Why does it only mention Croat inhabitants?

14        A.   Well, I've already said that so let me repeat, that on the 30th

15     of June, 1993, the incident that I mentioned before took place whereby

16     the members of the HVO who were Muslims captured their fellow fighters

17     from the HVO, their fellow combatants, and after that all the analyses

18     which would be different would not provide a realistic picture of the

19     people who were in the military.

20        Q.   Mr. Pinjuh, regardless of the national ethnic structure of Citluk

21     municipality, we'll come to that later on, but in the area in general,

22     the area covered by the Mostar defence administration, after the 30th of

23     June, could they count on members of the -- of Muslim ethnicity as being

24     members of HVO units?

25        A.   As far as I know, yes, some of them remained in HVO units until

Page 37265

 1     the end of the war.

 2        Q.   That's not what I asked you, Mr. Pinjuh.  I'm asking you

 3     something else.  Yes, some did stay on, but what I'm asking you is this:

 4     In the area covered by the Mostar administration after the 30th of June,

 5     could the HVO count on the Muslim members -- could Muslims be engaged in

 6     HVO units?

 7        A.   Ah, no, not that, no.  They could not.

 8        Q.   All right.  Fine.  Now, tell me, in the Citluk municipality area,

 9     what was the ethnic structure in 1991 there?

10        A.   Well, I'll not quite sure whether there were more than 1 to 2

11     percent of Serbs and others, perhaps a little larger percentage of

12     Muslims.  It was almost an ethnically pure Croat environment.

13        Q.   Mr. Pinjuh, do you know whether on the territory covered by the

14     Mostar defence administration whether there were Muslims within the HVO

15     units before the 30th of June, 1993, and after that?

16        A.   Yes, I know that some of them remain there until the end.

17        Q.   Let us now take a look at page 43 of this same report, which is

18     --

19             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Just a technical detail.  In

20     Citluk, while we have the list of all the people who were with you, now,

21     number 5, Kruno [phoen] Stojic, is he a relative of Mr. Stojic's or not?

22     His first name is Kruno.

23             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, no, they have nothing to do

24     with each other.

25             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] And number 12, Ivan Pinjuh, is

Page 37266

 1     this person a relative of yours or not?  He was in charge of

 2     correspondence.

 3             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, no, he wasn't a relative or

 4     relation.

 5             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.  Ms. Nozica.

 6             MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] thank you.  And thank you, Your

 7     Honour.

 8        Q.   Now, the gentleman mentioned under number 12 was Teklic [phoen],

 9     so he was a courier, was he?  Would you explain that to us briefly?  What

10     did Mr. --

11        A.   He took 'round the invitations, mostly, call-ups.

12        Q.   I asked you to take a look at page 43, which is page 32 of the

13     English, and can you explain to the Trial Chamber what we have on that

14     page in this general analysis?

15        A.   This page shows the internal structure of the defence

16     administration and defence office.

17        Q.   Take a look at the next page now, please.  This is a diagram of

18     the internal structure of the defence administration for Mostar.  That's

19     a chart.

20             JUDGE TRECHSEL:  You would be very kind if you indicated the

21     pages in the English version because I think it's not what you've told

22     us.

23             MS. NOZICA:  [Interpretation] Your Honour, I said that it was

24     page 32 and the following pages, that is to say 33, 34.

25             JUDGE TRECHSEL:  Thank you.  Thank you.  Now I see it.

Page 37267

 1             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] On the next page, the question you

 2     just asked me --

 3             MS. NOZICA:  [Interpretation]

 4        Q.   Just a moment, please.  We need to bring it up on e-court.  We

 5     now have 33 on our screens of that chart.  Now, move on to the next page,

 6     which would be 34 of the English, and in Croatian, what is this?

 7        A.   This is a chart showing the internal organisation of a defence

 8     office.

 9        Q.   There's another page in English.  Yes, now we have it.  So this

10     is a diagram showing the internal organisation of a defence office; is

11     that correct?

12        A.   Yes.

13        Q.   Mr. Pinjuh, does this analysis also mention all the difficulties

14     that the administrations and offices came across?

15        A.   Yes.

16        Q.   As we will quickly move on to questions concerning mobilisation,

17     would you please look at page 52 in the Croatian, which is page 40 in

18     English.  Have you found it?

19        A.   Yes, I have.

20        Q.   Just a moment.  It starts with mobilisation; right?

21        A.   Yes.

22        Q.   Where it says what the task of mobilisation was, and then it says

23     that the special passes ensuring that measures of readiness are carried

24     out and constant mobilisation of personnel and materiel resources in

25     order to reinforce and replenish the armed forces and take other

Page 37268

 1     effective measures for the defence of the country?

 2        A.   Yes.

 3        Q.   In this analysis covering performance in 1993, does it follow

 4     that mobilisation work was permanent and constant in the offices

 5     administrations for defence?

 6        A.   Yes, correct.

 7        Q.   Some problems encountered in the mobilisation process are

 8     mentioned here, out-of-date military records and all the other

 9     difficulties mentioned here.

10        A.   Yes, those were the main difficulties.

11        Q.   It also mentions conscripts who had lived in Croatia before, but

12     their records were kept in our offices.  Were there persons in your

13     records who were living in your area but who had volunteered to join

14     units in the Republic of Croatia after the attack by the Serb forces or,

15     rather, the JNA in Croatia?

16        A.   Yes, there were such people.

17        Q.   Mr. Pinjuh, in the course of 1993, did you draw up overviews of

18     the engagement of conscripts in the Citluk defence office, and did you

19     forward this information to the defence administration in Mostar?

20        A.   Throughout 1993, we constantly carried out analyses and compiled

21     reports and forwarded them to the defence administration which to the

22     best of my knowledge then forwarded them to the Defence Department.

23             MS. NOZICA:  [Interpretation] Could we please now look at

24     1D 1672.

25        Q.   These are minutes from a meeting of the HVO of the HZ-HB dated

Page 37269

 1     the 22nd of July, 1993.  Could we please look at conclusion number 1, if

 2     you can clarify, which says that the Defence Department shall for the

 3     next meeting update the summary of engagement of Croatian conscripts

 4     according to the recruitment structures with the number of killed and

 5     wounded and update the existing information.

 6             Mr. Pinjuh, briefly, these are minutes from a working meeting

 7     held on the 22nd of July, 1993.  Can you comment on the reasons why a

 8     summary of engagement of Croats is required?

 9        A.   Well, it's quite obvious.  We've already mentioned the 30th of

10     June, 1993, and this must be the reason why an analysis is being asked

11     for in this way.

12        Q.   Do you remember doing such analyses?

13        A.   Yes, I remember that we did do them.

14             MS. NOZICA:  [Interpretation] Could we please look, then, at

15     document P 6017.

16        Q.   Mr. Pinjuh, this is an analysis of the capabilities and

17     assignments of military conscripts in the Croatian Republic of

18     Herceg-Bosna and dated the 22nd of October, 1993, and at the beginning,

19     security and military situation is mentioned.  And I will ask you to take

20     a look at page 5 in the Croatian text, which is page 8 in English,

21     because it provides data for Citluk municipality.

22        A.   Yes.  This is the information I analysed and sent to the defence

23     administration.

24        Q.   There's an interesting piece of information here in the third

25     line from the bottom in your report where it says HV and RH MUP 19.  Can

Page 37270

 1     you explain to Their Honours who these military conscripts are?

 2        A.   These are conscripts who were kept in the records of the HVO, or

 3     our office, and who after the aggression on the Republic of Croatia

 4     volunteered to join units of the Croatian army.

 5        Q.   Can you please look at page 8, which is page 13 in English.  Here

 6     we have the total at the level of the Mostar defence administration, and

 7     it says that in this administration alone there were --

 8        A.   1.128 military conscripts.

 9        Q.   Where, Mr. Pinjuh?  Where were these 1.328 [as interpreted]

10     conscripts?

11        A.   In the units of the Croatian army and the Ministry of the

12     Interior of Croatia, where they were volunteers.

13        Q.   Thank you.  I think it's all right.  The number is in the

14     transcript.

15             Mr. Pinjuh, we will deal with these questions later, but as my

16     time is limited, I would now like to show you briefly several documents

17     referring to meetings held in 1993 in the administrations and offices,

18     and I will ask you whether these documents reflect the problems you came

19     across.

20             Please look at document 2D 1209.

21        A.   These are conclusions and proposals from a joint meeting of the

22     chiefs of the defence administrations and offices for defence in

23     northwestern Herzegovina.  The meeting was held on the 14th of April,

24     1993, in Tomislavgrad, and you can see from the issues on the agenda what

25     the problems were, and these were similar in other administrations as

Page 37271

 1     well.

 2        Q.   Could you please look at 2D 995.

 3        A.   I remember this.  There was an unannounced inspection by the head

 4     -- or, rather, the chief of the administration with his assistants, and

 5     there was a report on the situation found in each office.

 6        Q.   Please look at P 6234.

 7        A.   These are minutes from a session of the Mostar defence

 8     administration of the 29th of August [as interpreted], 1993, at which I

 9     and one of my officers were present.  And you can see that the meeting

10     was also attended by Mr. Bruno Stojic, the chief of the administration

11     for military -- for conscripts, Mr. Barbic [phoen] and Mr. Basinovic

12     [phoen] from the same administration.

13        Q.   I don't know whether you said this or whether it's an error in

14     the transcript.  When was this meeting held?

15        A.   It says the 29th of October, 1993, here.

16        Q.   All right.  Mr. Pinjuh, we've seen several meetings here, could

17     you tell us, please, whether problems were discussed at these meetings,

18     and what were the problems faced by everyone present in 1992 and 1993?

19        A.   This mostly had to do with updating military records, problems of

20     draft evasion, people moving from one unit to another on their own

21     initiative, people joining units on their own initiative, and so on.

22        Q.   Very well.  At the very outset, you said that the most important

23     tasks dealt with by the administrations and offices for defence were

24     inter alia mobilisation tasks.  Can you explain to the Court how

25     mobilisation was carried out in the territory of the HZ-HB, and let's

Page 37272

 1     look right away at 2D 1364.  And then please explain to the Court what

 2     this is about, and I will put more questions to you after that.

 3        A.   This is a mobilisation proclaimed on the 10th of July, 1992, by

 4     the president of HZ-HB, Mr. Mate Boban.

 5        Q.   Mr. Pinjuh, according to the decree on the armed forces, was Mr.

 6     Mate Boban the only person authorised to declare mobilisation?

 7        A.   Yes, he was.

 8        Q.   Can you explain to Court what you were doing in July 1992, what

 9     work you were doing, and whether you were doing anything that had to do

10     with this proclamation of mobilisation?

11        A.   As I said, on the 1st of June, I became the administrator of the

12     office, and this mobilisation came as a surprise to me, although we had

13     already managed to put the military records more or less in order.  The

14     first thing we did was to call up conscripts aged 18 to 60.  We drew up

15     lists of these men and handed them over to the existing units, which had

16     been established as volunteer units in 1991.  This job never stopped.

17     Whoever failed to respond was called up again and again in an attempt to

18     get them to do their duty like everybody else.

19             JUDGE TRECHSEL:  Ms. Nozica, I hope it's not a question

20     anticipating yours, but anyway, it's on my time, the Bench's time, so you

21     can only relax about it.

22             Mr. Pinjuh, you have told us previously - now you have alluded to

23     it again - that mobilisation was practically a permanent thing that went

24     on and on practically all the time.  Now you have said that Mr. Boban was

25     the only one authorised to order mobilisation.  How do we reconcile the

Page 37273

 1     two things?  I can imagine, but I would like you to tell us.

 2             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The president Mr. Boban pursuant to

 3     the decree on the armed forces was the only one who had the right to

 4     declare mobilisation.  But mobilisation has its time-period and tasks.

 5     As we've already mentioned, these tasks, for reasons already stated,

 6     could never be carried out fully.  They were never completed.  That's why

 7     they were carried out over a longer period of time than initially

 8     envisaged.

 9             JUDGE TRECHSEL:  Thank you.  If you look at the document

10     2D 01364, you see in number 4 that President Boban orders mobilisation

11     must be finished by 18 hours July 11th, 1992.  Do we have to understand

12     that this was disregarded practically?  This did not work; it was not

13     finished then?

14             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think that according to what you

15     have said, Your Honour, our reports were sent within this dead-line, but

16     the effect of this order was not good enough so that the order was not

17     carried out fully.

18             JUDGE TRECHSEL:  Right.  That's what I gather from what you told

19     us.  And later on, was Boban's order renewed, or was it just continuing

20     in its validity so that you continued to mobilise on the basis of the

21     original order?

22             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, correct.  As far as I know, we

23     implemented this order permanently.

24             JUDGE TRECHSEL:  Thank you.

25             MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

Page 37274

 1        Q.   I'd now like to ask you to explain to the Court why mobilisation

 2     was proclaimed on the 10th of July, 1992.  What happened when this

 3     mobilisation call came?

 4        A.   I remember that it was the time with a fierce attack by the Serb

 5     army against HZ-HB, especially the municipalities mentioned in this

 6     particular order.

 7        Q.   Now, the answer you gave earlier on to me and now to Judge

 8     Trechsel, that the business of mobilisation was continuous and that no

 9     new mobilisation was proclaimed but you carried on working in 1992 and

10     1993 pursuant to this came proclamation for mobilisation, I'd like us now

11     to look at several other documents to see what happened next.

12             MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] 2D 00847 is the document I'd like us

13     to look at next.

14             JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Madam Nozica, since we are talking

15     about the mobilisation on the basis of these documents, 2D 01374, I'd

16     like to come back to the document we examined before the break, P 00680,

17     which referred to the Home Guards.  And here in that document, it states

18     under Article 7 that the head of the Department of Defence also had the

19     right to mobilise Home Guards in particular.  Is this the same

20     mobilisation, and does it mean that the head of the Department of the

21     Defence had an equivalent privilege, so to speak, as President Mate Boban

22     regarding mobilisation, except that in the case of Mate Boban, it was the

23     mobilisation of the armed forces, whereas for the head of the department

24     for defence, it was the mobilisation of Home Guards?  I'm not quite sure

25     how that's been translated into French.

Page 37275

 1             MS. NOZICA:  [Interpretation] Your Honour, I do apologise, but

 2     may I be of assistance and indicated to the witness that what

 3     Judge Mindua is asking you referring to Article 7 of the establishment of

 4     the Home Guards, Mr. Pinjuh, you have it on e-court.  On the screen in

 5     front of you, you have Article 7, so that's what the Judge is asking you

 6     about.

 7        Q.   So what is stipulated in Article 7?  Was that the task of

 8     mobilisation, or was it something else?

 9        A.   No, it's not the same thing.  Well, in this document we are

10     dealing with the establishment of the Home Guard units.

11             JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] The Home Guard was part of the

12     armed forces, the HVO; isn't that the case?

13             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, that's right.  However, older

14     people were in the Home Guards, as we said, and we spoke about their

15     task, so that's why this relates to the establishment of separate Home

16     Guard units.

17             JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.  I understand

18     now.

19             MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation]

20        Q.   Mr. Pinjuh, what you've just been asked by the Judge, he is

21     linking up mobilisation or, rather, bringing mobilisation into connection

22     with the term used in Article 7 where it says that the head of the

23     Defence Department shall have the authority to prescribe regulations and

24     draw up mobilisation plans for the Home Guard.  Does this have anything

25     to do with the very act of mobilisation?  I think that's what the Judge

Page 37276

 1     was linking up.

 2        A.   No.

 3        Q.   You've just explained that to us, haven't you?

 4        A.   Yes.

 5        Q.   All right.  Fine.  Now, I'm going back to document 2D 00847, and

 6     we are continuing our discussion about mobilisation.  So in order do

 7     that, let's look at the conclusions made in this document.  I think that

 8     it's on page 2 in both versions where it says:

 9             "The Defence Department of the HZ-HB and the Main Staff of the

10     HVO shall undertake all military mobilisation measures in order to

11     provide full protection for Croats in Bosnia-Herzegovina."

12             Now, my question to you is this.  That was point 1 of the

13     conclusions.  The first point of the conclusions on e-court, please.

14     Yes, we have 1.  We are just interested in point 1.

15             Now, Mr. Pinjuh, can you explain to the Court what these measures

16     are, and were they the measures that you referred to when speaking about

17     the continuation of mobilisation, and did you receive these conclusions?

18     The document is 2D 00847.  That's the document number, for the record.

19             Yes, go ahead, please.  Answer that.

20        A.   This deals with steps and measures that we took continuously, so

21     it's not a question of any new mobilisation.  It's continuous.

22        Q.   Mr. Pinjuh, did you receive through the defence administration

23     conclusions of this kind in order to continue with your work in the area

24     of mobilisation and do what you needed to do and what hadn't been done

25     yet?

Page 37277

 1        A.   Yes, that's right.  And these were conclusions for the defence

 2     office to take into consideration.

 3        Q.   Mr. Pinjuh, take a look at document P 2575, which are the minutes

 4     from an HVO HZ-HB session and the HVO for Mostar municipality dated the

 5     31st of May.  The previous one was dated the 19th of April, 1993, whereas

 6     this is the 31st of May, 1993.  And I'm going to show you the documents

 7     in chronological order so that we can see whether these affairs with

 8     mobilisation were done under 1993, and under the conclusions here, if we

 9     look at the conclusions - it's on page 1 of the English and Croatian - it

10     says that the Defence Department of the HVO HZ-HB shall be continued as

11     well as recruitment.  So was this what you did continuously throughout

12     1993?

13        A.   Yes.  Yes, that's right.

14             MS. NOZICA:  [Interpretation]  Now, let's look at the next

15     document, which is P 2707.

16        Q.   Would you like to comment and tell us what this decision is?

17     It's the 10th of June, 1993.  That's the date.  It's a decision.  What

18     about?

19        A.   Once again, it says decision on carrying out mobilisation, which

20     means continuous, and in Article 1 it refers to all non-mobilised men of

21     military age, et cetera, et cetera.  So that is a continuation of the

22     affairs we discussed earlier on.

23             MS. NOZICA:  [Interpretation] Would you now take a look at the

24     next document, which is 2D 1485.

25        Q.   And this is an order from Mr. Stojic dated the 18th of June,

Page 37278

 1     based on the decision by the HZ-HB government and which refers to

 2     additional mobilisation for military conscripts in the municipalities of

 3     Mostar, Siroki Brijeg, Citluk, Grude, Ljubuski, and Posusje.

 4        A.   Just a minute, please.  Yes, Mostar, Siroki Brijeg, Citluk,

 5     Grude, Ljubuski, and Posusje.

 6        Q.   And since mention is made of Citluk, could you explain to us why

 7     it was necessary on the 18th of June to issue an order like this, and we

 8     saw the ones earlier on.

 9        A.   Well, quite obviously in these particular municipalities,

10     mobilisation had not been implemented properly, so they are being asked

11     to effect mobilisation additionally.

12        Q.   Now, let's look at the next document, which is P 3024, and we saw

13     this document in the courtroom.  We've seen it before.  This is 12 days

14     after the previous order, and this one relates to just the HVO of

15     Posusje.  Can you tell me why this decision was passed?

16        A.   Well, because of the well known events of the 30th of June that

17     we mentioned earlier on, and Posusje municipality quite obviously did not

18     implement the previous orders as it should have done.

19        Q.   I've just been told that I have 12 more minutes at my disposal,

20     and I have two areas to get through which I think are fairly important,

21     so I'd like to ask you if possible to move through the documents a little

22     quicker.

23             Look at 2D 1233 first, please.  They are documents which had to

24     do with mobilisation, and can we just have your comments.

25        A.   This is another way in which those who had not responded to the

Page 37279

 1     mobilisation call could do so.

 2        Q.   Here we have a document that you signed, 2D 1224.

 3        A.   It's the same thing here except the names of the people are

 4     mentioned, names of people to responds to the call-up and the names of

 5     those who were placed at the disposal of the Defence Department who had

 6     returned.

 7        Q.   Can you comment, 2D 1234, the next document, please.

 8        A.   Once again, a public invitation sent through the media stating

 9     that anybody who had failed to respond to the mobilisation call should do

10     so and report for duty.

11        Q.   May we have your comments on P 3038 now, please.  This is a

12     public announcement signed by Mr. Stojic and Mr. Prlic dated the 30th of

13     June, 1993, and it comes after the event that we mentioned here a number

14     of times.  We have here Mr. Stojic's order, which says that all military

15     recruits in Herceg-Bosna regardless of where they are must report to the

16     defence offices, the nearest defence offices or report to their units and

17     municipalities.  Is this a proclamation of mobilisation, or is it a

18     continuous implementation of the mobilisation process as you have already

19     explained to us?

20        A.   It's just a continuation of the mobilisation.

21        Q.   All right.  So we can round up this topic of mobilisation.  Tell

22     us, please, was it carried out in a satisfactory way until the end of

23     1993, and I mean mobilisation?

24        A.   Well, I don't think it was, no.  It could have been done in a

25     much better way, accomplished in a better way.

Page 37280

 1        Q.   Mr. Pinjuh, in the mobilisation procedure and bringing the

 2     manpower level up to a full complement, were there activities of

 3     unauthorized bodies trying to mobilise people in HZ-HB?

 4        A.   Well, I did hear about certain examples whereby the units

 5     themselves mobilised people directly, and it wasn't an isolated case

 6     either.

 7        Q.   Did you hear that the HVOs in the municipalities, in individual

 8     municipalities did mobilisation work, although they didn't have the power

 9     to engage in those affairs?  Did you hear about that?

10        A.   Yes, there were such examples.

11             MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Now, can we take a look at document

12     P 01831.

13        Q.   Just tell me whether that is a document which confirms what

14     you've just said.

15        A.   Yes, that's it, because the Mostar municipality cannot proclaim a

16     mobilisation.

17        Q.   Now, skip over the next document, and look at P 15500 next,

18     please, and tell me whether the municipal government of the HVO of Mostar

19     could on the 25th of February, 1993, pass a decision on the establishment

20     of Home Guard units.

21        A.   No, this goes beyond its powers.

22        Q.   And one more document, which is 1D 110 --

23             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I have a question.  You just

24     said that this was not under his powers.  Why is it that Mr. Topic, whose

25     name is seen in many document, why is it that he intervenes here?

Page 37281

 1             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, I'm not quite sure.  He

 2     refers to the Statute.  He refers to the Statute of Mostar municipality

 3     and relies on that, although there's no logic for him to make decisions

 4     linked to the mobilisation process, either mobilisation of materiel and

 5     technical equipment or manpower.

 6             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Another question.  If Mr. Topic

 7     interferes in the -- in the responsibilities of the Department of

 8     Defence, does that have a political meaning or not?

 9             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, I'm not sure how far this was

10     important.  I really can't say.  I apologise, but I really can't say

11     either way.

12             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Go ahead, Madam Nozica.

13             MS. NOZICA:  [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

14        Q.   Now, the proclamation of mobilisation for a materiel tech -- or

15     equipment of manpower, did that come under the remit of the Defence

16     Department or the president of the HZ-HB?

17        A.   Only under the authority of the president of the HZ-HB.

18        Q.   I have five more minutes, so let's try to get through the last

19     area as quickly as possible, and I'd like you to go back to the recruits

20     who were on the list for military recruits in your municipality, and we

21     looked at P 6017, and they were in units of the Croatian army and MUP of

22     the Republic of Croatia.  I'm now going to show you a document -- well,

23     skip over one document and find P 3336 and tell me when you've found it.

24        A.   I've found it.

25        Q.   This is a letter signed by Mr. Stojic, and it is addressed to the

Page 37282

 1     defence minister, Mr. Susak, defence minister of Croatia and the Minister

 2     of the Interior, and it has to do with military recruits who unlawfully

 3     are in the Republic of Croatia, and he says they should be sent to the

 4     collection centre in Grude.  Mr. Pinjuh, according to your records, in

 5     your offices, defence offices, did you draw up lists of persons -- the

 6     document is P 336.  5336.  P 5336.  Did you draw up the lists of these

 7     recruits who were spending time unauthorised elsewhere?

 8        A.   Yes, and I believe that when it came to the numbers and figures,

 9     this is the result of the report sent through the offices to the head.

10        Q.   I would now like to ask you to look at P 2647, please.

11        A.   Yes.

12        Q.   This is a letter sent by Mr. Stojic of the Ministry of Defence of

13     the Republic of Croatia to the personnel department asking that the

14     status in the 4th Brigade be resolved and enabling them to stay with us,

15     and three persons are mentioned:  Zlatko Jarkic, Stojan Musa, and

16     Ivan Sabljic.  Mr. Pinjuh, do you know these persons personally, and did

17     you have -- or your office for defence in Citluk, did you participate at

18     all in the compilation of this document?

19        A.   I know all three persons.  All three had been pupils or students

20     of mine.  I know that after they were wounded in the Republic of Croatia,

21     they spent a time recuperating on the territory of the Croatian Community

22     of Herceg-Bosna from where they had gone to join the Croatian army, and

23     they were still kept on the records of the Citluk defence office where

24     they reported while they were there.

25             In the meantime, their unit in the Republic of Croatia asked for

Page 37283

 1     them back, and they said they would declare them to be deserters if they

 2     didn't come back.  They were willing to help, but their status had to be

 3     resolved, which is why I sent a letter to the chief of the

 4     administration, who evidently forwarded it to the head, and he sent it to

 5     the personnel administration of the Republic of Croatia, and I know that

 6     this was resolved in a positive way and that they remained for awhile in

 7     the units of the HVO.

 8        Q.   Let's go back a little bit because some things need to be

 9     clarified.  These three persons, if I understood you correctly, were on

10     the records of the Citluk defence office because they came from that

11     area; is that correct?

12        A.   Yes.

13        Q.   Did these three persons volunteer to join the units of the

14     Croatian army when the aggression of the JNA against Croatia began?

15        A.   Yes, in 1991.

16        Q.   Did these three persons later answer the call-up they received

17     from your office as members of the HVO?

18        A.   Yes, that's correct.

19        Q.   Did they ask through you, and you through the administration, and

20     the head of the department Stojic that their status in the 4th Brigade of

21     the Croatian army be resolved from where they had left in order to join

22     the HVO?

23        A.   Yes, that's correct.

24        Q.   Very well.  And finally, let's look at the next two documents.

25     2D 1239.  Just tell Their Honours what this is about.

Page 37284

 1        A.   Well, this is a certificate issued by the defence office to every

 2     conscript at his request confirming that Stojan Musa in this case was a

 3     member of the office or, rather, was -- that his name was in the military

 4     records of the Citluk defence office.

 5        Q.   And Stojan Musa is the same person mentioned in the previous

 6     document P 2647; is that correct?

 7        A.   Yes.

 8        Q.   Would you please look at the next document, which is 2D 1240.

 9        A.   It's about the same thing, but --

10        Q.   Just wait a little, please.  Yes, go ahead, sir.

11        A.   It's also a certificate in this case for Ivan Sabljic stating

12     that his name is in the records of the Citluk defence office.

13        Q.   We don't have any information about Zlatko Jarkic, but can you

14     confirm that his name was also on the records of your defence office and

15     that he was a conscript obliged to respond to a call-up from the Citluk

16     office?

17        A.   Yes, I can confirm that.

18        Q.   Mr. Witness, to the best of your knowledge, were there also

19     Muslims who went to join the Croatian army as volunteers in the beginning

20     of 1991, that is after the JNA aggression against Croatia?

21        A.   Yes, there were.

22        Q.   Do you know whether some of these Muslims came back to join the

23     Army of Bosnia-Herzegovina [Realtime transcript read in error, "Army of

24     Republika Srpska"] and whether they had to go through the same procedure

25     of regulating their status, their previous status in the Croatian army?

Page 37285

 1        A.   Yes, yes.  They had to go through the same procedure.

 2        Q.   And my last question for the witness:  Did you have in 1992 and

 3     1993 any direct contacts with Mr. Bruno Stojic?  How often and on what

 4     occasions?

 5        A.   In this period, we could have had only a few official meetings,

 6     which the gentleman attended.

 7        Q.   Mr. Pinjuh, did anyone in the course of your work in 1992 and

 8     1993 ask you to do anything contrary to the regulations or to your

 9     conscience?

10        A.   No.

11             MS. NOZICA:  [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. Pinjuh.  Thank you,

12     Your Honours, I have concluded my examination-in-chief.

13             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you, Ms. Nozica.  Now, a

14     very short follow-up question, if I may, for you, Witness.  Those three

15     people, you knew them well because they were your students, so you have a

16     good memory, Mr. Musa, Mr. Sabljic, and Mr. Jarkic.  There are three of

17     them.  So if I understood you properly, these three persons entered the

18     Croatian army as volunteers, but when they became members of that army,

19     what nationality were they?  What nationality were they at that time?

20     Were they citizens of Bosnia-Herzegovina, or were they Croatian citizens?

21             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] They were citizens of the Republic

22     of Bosnia-Herzegovina, but they were Croats.

23             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Well, so they went to Croatia

24     as volunteers, I assume to fight the Serbs because they were injured.

25     They must have been injured during combat with the Serbs; is that so?

Page 37286

 1             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's correct, yes.

 2             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Up until now, this all seems

 3     very logical, but something surprised me earlier on.  You said that they

 4     risked being deserters in Croatia.  They were not Croatian, so how could

 5     they become deserters?

 6             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Their unit would have considered

 7     them volunteers because they had left that unit.  After their recovery,

 8     they were supposed to rejoin the unit and --

 9             THE INTERPRETER:  Interpreter's correction:  Would have

10     considered them deserters.

11             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] So they wanted their status to be

12     put on hold.

13             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] A last technical question, if I

14     may.  As far as you know, these three students, your own students, when

15     they entered the Croatia army, did they have a contract with the Croatian

16     army?

17             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] To the best of my knowledge, yes,

18     they did.

19             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] So as far as you know, yes.

20     Well, before we have the break, there are still 25 minutes, the

21     cross-examination for the other counsel, as well, D3 to begin with or,

22     rather, D1, whatever you prefer.  I don't really know who does what

23     anymore.  D1.

24             MS. TOMANOVIC: [Interpretation] The Defence of Dr. Prlic has no

25     questions for this witness.  Thank you very much.

Page 37287

 1             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Fine.  D3.

 2             MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, the Defence of

 3     General Praljak will be the first to take the floor, as the Defence of

 4     Mr. Prlic has said they have no questions.  We have just a brief

 5     question, which is of a mostly military nature, and if I may be allowed

 6     to ask leave for General Praljak to put the question himself.

 7                           Cross-examination by the accused Praljak:

 8        Q.   [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Witness.  Good afternoon, Your

 9     Honours.

10        A.   Good afternoon, General.

11        Q.   Just a brief question, to the best of your knowledge, did the

12     Yugoslav People's Army attack Croatia without attacking

13     Bosnia-Herzegovina, or did they have a plan to attack all the peoples who

14     were hindering the implementation of its idea to take all the territory

15     of Bosnia-Herzegovina and aligning Croatia, Karlobag, Virovitica, and so

16     on, Karlovac, Karlobag, and Virovitica, up to the sea?

17             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I can confirm with certainty

18     that that's how it was.

19        Q.   According to what you know, it was the peoples, the Muslims, the

20     Croats, whether they were called Croats in Bosnia-Herzegovina or Croats

21     in Croatia, as well as Hungarians, and Ukrainians, and Slovaks, who were

22     on the territories which the Serbian political and military ideas

23     considered to be Serbian lands?

24        A.   Well, all territories were attacked where there were Serbs.

25     Rather, all those who were not Serbs living on territories where there

Page 37288

 1     were Serbs were attacked.

 2        Q.   So the Serbian political and military leadership considered that

 3     any area where even a small number of Serbs lived or even no Serbs were

 4     actually Serbian lands?

 5        A.   Yes, that's correct.

 6        Q.   Thank you very much.

 7        A.   You're welcome.

 8        Q.   My second question:  Are you aware that in the April 1992 I

 9     arrived in the areas of Citluk, Capljina, and so on, Mostar?

10        A.   I know that you arrived, but as to the month ...

11        Q.   All right.  Now, could you tell Their Honours whether

12     mobilisation and bringing the units up to manpower level was the most

13     difficult job that you, Bruno Stojic, Mate Boban, Slobodan Praljak, or

14     anyone else had to perform in that area to the best of your knowledge?

15        A.   Well, I think it was.

16        Q.   Thank you.  Now, tell Their Honours the following:  If you called

17     up some people who had given false addresses, left on their own

18     initiative, gone to Germany or Croatia or somewhere else, or got hold of

19     certificates saying they were unfit and so on, so if only 50 percent, 60

20     percent, or 30 percent of the men you had called up responded, what legal

21     or other means did you have to take any sort of action against those who

22     had not responded, although they were bound to do so by law, so what

23     could you, Mate Boban, or Bruno Stojic do to those people?

24        A.   Almost nothing.

25        Q.   I'll repeat the end of my question.  So throughout the war,

Page 37289

 1     throughout the war, if you sent call-up papers, sent them out, and 50

 2     percent, 60 percent, 30 percent of the men responded, what could you do

 3     to those who had failed to respond?  What punishment, what sanctions

 4     could you impose, or what could be done pursuant to the laws and

 5     regulations in force?

 6        A.   There was nothing we could do, to put it in a nutshell.

 7             THE ACCUSED PRALJAK:  [Interpretation] Thank you very much.  I

 8     have no further questions.

 9             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] One moment.  One moment.  I

10     have a question.  Following the questions raised by General Praljak, I

11     was listening to both the questions and answers and looking at document

12     P 6017, which is in binder number 2.  Now, what I was interested in was

13     page 2 concerning the situation of the municipality of Tomislavgrad.

14             Now, in that municipality - there's no point in looking at the

15     document; you can rely on what I'm saying - there are 27.347 citizens,

16     Croatians; 7.716 conscripts, military conscripts.  Now, what I see is

17     that abroad there are some 3.105 people, 3.105, in other words, almost

18     half of the number of the conscripts.  So General Praljak when he raised

19     his question was highlighting that.  But how is it that Tomislavgrad,

20     that municipality could get these 3.105 people to return?  These people

21     were abroad in Denmark, Hungary, perhaps in Switzerland or France.  They

22     were working.  They had gotten married, had children at school, and so

23     on.  How could those people return, take up arms, whereas they -- they

24     were making Volkswagon automobiles in a factory in Germany or something

25     like that?  Things are not as simple as they might look.  What were the

Page 37290

 1     means that you had at your disposal, you yourself, to get these people to

 2     return?

 3             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] At municipal level, including the

 4     municipality of Tomislavgrad, the municipality could issue a local

 5     decision on their material obligation.  These were people who had work

 6     permits who had left for foreign parts before the war.  Many had taken

 7     their families with them, and they would probably stay there throughout

 8     their working lives.  Therefore, there could be no repression applied,

 9     nor was any applied to the best of my knowledge.

10             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.  Well, my question

11     applied to Tomislavgrad, but if you look at Livno, the same applies at

12     Livno.  There were 28.456 Croatian citizens, 9.312 military conscripts,

13     and we see that 3.409 are Livno Croatians that are living abroad.

14             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Those are two examples of

15     municipalities where most of the male population was working abroad, most

16     males were working abroad, and two municipalities where only during the

17     summer would you be able to see the proper number of children and men.

18             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] During the afternoon, I also

19     saw a document that mentioned these conscripts, and in that document it

20     was stated that a non-negligible percentage hadn't actually done their

21     military service in the JNA or else had only entered military service for

22     ten months.  The HVO, was it confronted with this problem of

23     qualification of the conscripts in as much as many of them hadn't done

24     their military service at all and those that had hadn't done it for very

25     long?  Was that a true problem?

Page 37291

 1             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, certainly it was a problem

 2     because nobody was prepared enough for war, especially not young people.

 3     But it was difficult, young men who were already in the units, it was

 4     difficult to send them back for training, basic and specialised training

 5     courses, so they preferred staying on in the units, and then a Solomon's

 6     solution [as interpreted] was found to be reservists and then from a

 7     reservist's position to go back to being active.

 8             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Last question.  This analysis

 9     of the conscripts, well, in this document I was struck when I looked at

10     the detail of the statistics.  I was struck by the number of criminal

11     proceedings that had been taken on a municipality-by-municipality basis.

12     For instance, in Tomislavgrad, 410 criminal reports; Livno, 501; Posusje,

13     307; Hana Prozor [phoen], 307; Kupres, 167 --

14             THE INTERPRETER:  Or 166, interpreter's correction.

15             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Uskopic [phoen], 256-66;

16     Bugojna, there were none there; Jablanica, nothing is indicated; Mostar,

17     147; Siroki Brijeg, 46; Ljubuski, 147; Capljina, 58; municipality of

18     Mostar, now, this is a record figure, 1.056, 1.056; Neum, 26; Stolac, 74;

19     Rude [phoen], 107.  Well, these figures seem to be fairly significant.

20     According to you, all these proceedings taken against conscripts, what

21     was the cause of these proceedings?

22             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, the cause was the resistance

23     to respond to the call-up and to do military service, so this is an

24     attempt, well, at intimidation because as far as I know all this remained

25     dead letter on paper.  So we did say what we wanted, but there was no way

Page 37292

 1     in which we could force them to comply.

 2             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] These figures, and it seems to

 3     be -- 1.671, were they also -- did this include criminal proceedings that

 4     had nothing whatsoever to do with the failure to carry out one's military

 5     service?

 6             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know.

 7             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Ms. Alaburic for D3.

 8             MS. ALABURIC:  [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Your Honours.

 9     Good afternoon to everybody in the courtroom.

10                           Cross-examination by Ms. Alaburic:

11        Q.   Mr. Pinjuh, good afternoon to you too.  I have two groups of very

12     short questions on behalf of the Petkovic Defence.  The first group of

13     questions will relate to the questions raised by Judge Antonetti about

14     the engagement of the Home Guards in securing prisons, providing security

15     for prison, and this was recorded on page 31 of the transcript.  And

16     then, Mr. Pinjuh, I shall be asking you a few questions about the answer

17     you gave about the two offices within the Main Staff.  The first -- or,

18     rather, department.  The first was for manpower levels and the second for

19     additional training.

20             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mrs. Alaburic, perhaps it would

21     be preferable to take our break now, which will give you an opportunity

22     to start up again after everybody has had a rest.  Let's have a 20-minute

23     break.

24                           --- Recess taken at 5.37 p.m.

25                           --- On resuming at 6.00 p.m.

Page 37293

 1             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Madam Nozica.

 2             MS. NOZICA:  [Interpretation] Your Honours, I just I have to

 3     intervene.  On page 64 of the transcript, line 6, in my question, it said

 4     the Army of Republika Srpska.  Well, it's being corrected.  My colleague

 5     tells me it should be the Army of Bosnia-Herzegovina.  It's being

 6     corrected, but as I'm on my feet, I thought I'd just say what I wanted

 7     to, so if it's being corrected, then that's fine.  Thank you.

 8             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 9             MS. ALABURIC:  [Interpretation]

10        Q.   Your Honours, Mr. Pinjuh, as I said, my question -- first

11     question will relate to the Home Guards, and as Judge Antonetti asked a

12     question about this, the involvement of the Home Guards with respect to

13     securing certain prisons.  I'd like to look at a document now in my

14     binder.  P 1424 is the document number.  1424 is the number.  That's

15     right.  It's a document which you've already looked at today, and you

16     discussed it with my learned friend Ms. Nozica.  It is an order from Mr.

17     Bruno Stojic dated the 5th of February [Realtime transcript read in

18     order, "15th of November"], 1993, which relates to unit mobilisation

19     changes and in respect of the Home Guards, and I'd like us to take a look

20     at the statement of reasons or explanation of the order, as it says.  I'd

21     like to put the date right also.  It says the 15th of November in the

22     transcript.  I said the 5th of February, 1993, and in the statement of

23     reasons it says that the Home Guard units are being established in order

24     to protect the territories and facilities of special significance for the

25     defence and to provide support to the armed forces.  Is that roughly what

Page 37294

 1     you yourself said, that the Home Guards were in fact units, relatively

 2     older people, designed to protect territories and safe-guard certain

 3     facilities and features; is that right?

 4        A.   Yes, that's what I said.

 5        Q.   Now, let's look at point 2, which defines the special interest

 6     features of special interest and significance to defence.  I don't need

 7     to read through them because we can all do that ourselves.  But tell me,

 8     please, Mr. Pinjuh, among those facilities, if I'm reading this

 9     correctly, there's no mention of any prisons; right?

10        A.   No, there is no mention of that, no.

11        Q.   Very well.  Now, it says there that the features of special

12     importance, special significance can be, during a state of war,

13     facilities which are deemed such by the head of the Defence Department or

14     the chief of the Main Staff or commander of the operative zone.  Now, Mr.

15     Pinjuh, do you know any decisions or orders or any other documents

16     whereby one of the authorised persons mentioned would define a prison as

17     a facility of special significance to be guarded by the Home Guards?

18        A.   No, I'm not aware of that.

19        Q.   All right.  Fine.  Now, let's take a look at page 1 of the

20     document again and focus on 1.2 where it says that the command of the

21     Home Guards, the Home Guard command, along with the municipality HVOs and

22     operative zones evaluate the situation on the territory and determine

23     facilities of special significance for the defence.  And in this

24     connection, my question to you, Mr. Pinjuh, is this:  Theoretically, did

25     the possibility exist for some municipal HVO in agreement with the

Page 37295

 1     municipal units, whether the Home Guards or a municipal brigade, could

 2     they decide to proclaim a feature, a facility for special defence and

 3     then decide to engage the Home Guards for providing security for that

 4     facility?  Could that happen theoretically?

 5        A.   Well, I can't really comment.

 6        Q.   All right.  Fine.  Now, a brief explanation, Mr. Pinjuh, with

 7     respect to the answers you gave with respect to the Main Staff.  And the

 8     two departments, the first department that you mentioned was the manpower

 9     level reinforcement, and this was recorded on page 36 of the transcript,

10     and then mention was made of the department for education and training on

11     page 42 of the transcript.  And about the formation of the Main Staff,

12     you discussed that on the basis of document -- well, it's not in my

13     number, but anyway, the number is P 00502, the formation of the Main

14     Staff or establishment of the Main Staff, and it is a document compiled

15     in September 1992.

16             Now, taking that document and your statements about the existence

17     of two departments within the Main Staff, one might gain the impression

18     that the Main Staff was a very impressive body at that time.

19             So I'm going to show you a number of documents now about the Main

20     Staff members, and perhaps we could comment the work of the Main Staff

21     which undoubtedly took part in implementing these two tasks that were

22     mentioned, significant ones, in the examination-in-chief.  Look at 2D

23     1352 now, please.  2D 1352.  And that's the last document in this set of

24     documents, in my binder.  It is a list of persons in the Defence

25     Department in the Main Staff for salaries.  It's a salary list for 1992.

Page 37296

 1     And the last document relates to the Main Staff.  So take a look at that,

 2     please.

 3             So it's a list of salaries for November 1992 for Main Staff

 4     members.  The document was compiled on 17th of December, 1992, signed by

 5     the chief of the Main Staff Milivoj Petkovic, and here we see that in the

 6     Main Staff, on the salaries there, we have 20 persons.  Have you found

 7     the document?  It's the last document.  Just look at the Croatian

 8     documents.  The number at the bottom is 2D 66-0134.  It's the last page

 9     both in Croatian and English.  Have you found that?  Have you managed to

10     find it?

11             Mr. Pinjuh, see it says Main Staff, 20 persons.  Is that what it

12     says in the document?

13        A.   Yes, I do see that.

14        Q.   Now, part of the document is illegible, but perhaps we'll manage

15     to decipher something.  Tell me, did you know how many people worked in

16     the Main Staff in December 1992 roughly speaking?

17        A.   No.

18        Q.   All right.  Tell me, are any of the names familiar on the list?

19     For example, number 8, Zvonimir Susec, have you ever heard of him?  Does

20     it ring a bell?

21        A.   Yes.

22        Q.   Tell us who he was.

23        A.   He was -- he worked in the Main Staff, and I think that he worked

24     in the area of manpower level reinforcement.

25        Q.   Yes.  It is Zvonimir Susec.  Now let's look at another document,

Page 37297

 1     Mr. Pinjuh, and I'll repeat the name again.  Zvonimir Susec, S-u-s-e-c.

 2     Zvonimir Susec.  Well, we'll have the next document, and the name is

 3     clearly written there.  It's P 1579, which is a telephone directory dated

 4     March 1993, and under number 4, we have a list for the Main Staff --

 5        A.   Could you tell me the number again, please.

 6        Q.   P 1572 is the number.  Number 1, the Defence Department, and then

 7     point 4, the Main Staff of the HVO of Mostar.  Look at that list.  You

 8     will find them on the following page, as well, and somewhere in the

 9     middle it says Zvonimir Susec.  Mr. Pinjuh, from this list can we

10     conclude that in that establishment department, there's just this one

11     person, the chief Zvonimir Susec?

12        A.   I can't confirm that.  In the minutes, yes, but I can't confirm

13     that that was actually the case.

14        Q.   Well, I'm asking you that on the basis of this list.

15        A.   Well, you said this was a telephone directory, whereas a military

16     formation is something different.

17        Q.   All right.  Formation establishment.  Does that mean the actual

18     manpower level, or does establishment mean a systemisation of the work

19     post regardless of how many people were going to employ in a given

20     institution?

21        A.   Well, I think that establishment when it comes to the Main Staff

22     and the operative zones, military territorial staffs didn't lack carters,

23     didn't lack manpower according to my experience, but I can't say anything

24     based on telephone numbers and telephone directories.

25        Q.   We've just seen the telephone directory, but we also saw the

Page 37298

 1     payroll for November 1992, and on that list were 20 persons.  Here now,

 2     you are looking at this document.  Let's see one more document, and then

 3     I'll ask you the question.  The document is P 1683.

 4             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, I have examined this

 5     telephone directory carefully.  According to what you remember in Citluk,

 6     how many telephones did you have?  You don't remember?

 7             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I really can't say.

 8             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Well, if I said that you had

 9     two, the 08850082 and 5080582 and 584, that you had two telephone lines,

10     what would you say?  Is it true?  And did the telephone function

11     correctly, or did it not work very well?

12             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, it was down -- the line was

13     down from time to time, but for the most part it functioned properly with

14     interruptions; the lines were interrupted; there was a lot of digging

15     going on and so.

16             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Fine.

17             MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation]

18        Q.   Mr. Pinjuh, let's look at the next document.  P 1683 is the

19     number.  It is a list of members of the Main Staff compiled on the 18th

20     of March, 1993, signed by Brigadier Petkovic.  Have you found the

21     document?  Mr. Pinjuh, of course you can't compare that to a telephone

22     directory in order to see whether it's correct, but can we conclude that

23     in the Main Staff at that point in time together with the driver, the

24     secretary, the adjutant, the typist and so on, there were 32 persons?

25     There was one whose position had not been regulated yet and temporarily

Page 37299

 1     employed in the Main Staff, two more persons.  Is that what follows on

 2     the basis of this document?

 3        A.   Yes, that's what we can see here.

 4             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Madam, I think we have to say

 5     that for the two individuals who were employed temporarily, were two

 6     Croatian officers, Miro Prce and Josip Speranca.

 7             MS. ALABURIC:  [Interpretation] Your Honour, yes, that is clear,

 8     and this document is already exhibited.  We have seen it several times in

 9     the courtroom, and I think in the past weeks we have a report by Mr. Prce

10     on his temporary work in the Main Staff and with respect to the

11     establishment of the Home Guard.  So that is not being challenged.

12        Q.   Anyway, Mr. Pinjuh, on this second page, number 26, we have

13     Zvonko Susec again, and it says assistant to chief for establishment and

14     staffing; and then 27, Tomislav Naletilic, chief for establishment; and

15     then 37, Zeljko Akrap, assistant for education and training; and there's

16     nobody else there dealing with any of these two major groups,

17     establishment and education and training in the Main Staff.  Is that what

18     one can conclude on the basis of this document?

19        A.   Yes, that's what it says here.

20        Q.   Now, if you recall the establishment of the Main Staff dated

21     September 1992, and you were presented that document during the

22     examination-in-chief, the establishment of the Main Staff and under

23     number 44, 46, 47, 48, you spoke about the existence of department -- the

24     department for manpower level replenishment.  And we have 75 functions in

25     that document, and if you add up all the people working there and

Page 37300

 1     occupying one post, it would follow that the Main Staff

 2     establishment-wise ought to number about 100 persons.  Did you analyse

 3     the document in that way?

 4        A.   No.  But the Main Staff below it has the operative zones, and

 5     they have these same people or, rather, similar people engaged in similar

 6     work, and they have war brigades who have people working in these areas,

 7     an assessment of the plan, a proposal for a plan, and then the plan goes

 8     to the administration for mobilisation and defence, which draws up a

 9     plan.

10        Q.   Mr. Pinjuh, I don't wish to deal with that.  I'm not challenging

11     that at all.  All I want us to do is to clarify certain matters because

12     from your answers about the existence of a department within the Main

13     Staff dealing with these matters, the Judges could draw the conclusion

14     that the Main Staff had about 100 persons organised in different

15     departments and that this functioned in a somewhat different way from

16     what these documents show.  So that's why I'm asking you, if you compare

17     these documents now, the ones I'm showing you now with the establishment

18     of the Main Staff itself, what would you have to say?  Was the Main Staff

19     -- were the manpower levels in the Main Staff replenished 100 percent?

20        A.   I can't say on the basis of a telephone directory and this

21     document here, which is, in my opinion, far more relevant than the

22     telephone directory because we are dealing with a list of persons who

23     have regulated status in the Main Staff and persons who do not.

24        Q.   But Mr. Pinjuh, that's why I didn't show you the telephone

25     directory alone.  I showed you three documents, so if you look at all

Page 37301

 1     three of them together, and you can see that in November 1992 there were

 2     20 people in the Main Staff including all the auxiliary staff, and that

 3     in March 1993 there were 32 employees employed full-time, including all

 4     the auxiliary staff.  What would you as a person dealing with a

 5     maintenance of manpower levels in certain units have to say about the

 6     manpower levels in the Main Staff?

 7        A.   Well, it may have been approximately the same as the manpower

 8     levels of the wartime units or even less.

 9             MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] Thank you very much, Mr. Pinjuh.

10     Your Honours, I have completed my cross-examination.  Thank you very

11     much.

12             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, I have a question, but

13     I don't know if you are able to answer or not and since it was the

14     Alaburic Defence that presented this document.  We are talking about the

15     telephone directory.  It is P 1572.  In the telephone directory, you are

16     listed under page 4.  You are in there.  It's the Department of the

17     Defence here.  I see the head Bruno Stojic, deputy Slobodan Busic, and

18     then I see Mladen Naletilic and then Veso Vegar.  To your knowledge, what

19     was Naletilic doing in the department of the defence, if you know?  If

20     you don't know, just say so.

21             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I regret that I don't know the

22     answer to that question.

23             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Fine.  Well -- for D5.

24             MS. TOMASEGOVIC TOMIC:  [Interpretation] No, we have no questions

25     for this witness.  Thank you.

Page 37302

 1             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you.  D6.

 2             MR. SAHOTA:  We have no questions for this witness either.

 3             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Before I call on the

 4     Prosecutor, I believe the Registrar has an IC number to give.

 5             THE REGISTRAR:  Yes, Your Honour.  The Prosecution has finally

 6     submitted its list of documents to be tendered through witness Vegar

 7     Veso.  This list shall be given Exhibit number IC 929.  Thank you, Your

 8     Honours.

 9             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Fine, the Prosecution can begin

10     its cross-examination.

11             MR. KRUGER:  Good evening, Your Honours.  Good evening, counsel,

12     everybody else in and around the courtroom.

13                           Cross-examination by Mr. Kruger:

14        Q.   Good evening, Mr. Pinjuh.

15        A.   Good evening.

16        Q.   Mr. Pinjuh, just to start off, I'd like to just quickly revisit

17     one or two of the things that you've testified about so far.  Now, the

18     first thing, you responded to a question by General Praljak that with

19     regard to conscripts who did not heed call-up papers or call-up orders,

20     there was actually very little that could be done with regard to them.

21     You recall that answer of yours or that topic?

22        A.   Yes, I remember that.

23        Q.   Now, sir, is it correct that the decree on the armed forces and

24     then the other decrees pertaining to -- sorry, if I may interrupt myself.

25     If I could just ask the usher if we could retain the documents of those

Page 37303

 1     binders.  Thank you.

 2             My apologies, sir.  If we can return to the question.  Is it

 3     correct or do you know that the decree on the armed forces and then

 4     various other decrees pertaining to the HVO military affairs provided

 5     that not reporting or not heeding call-up orders constituted an offence;

 6     it was a crime?

 7        A.   Yes.

 8        Q.   And punishment was also prescribed for that offence; correct?

 9        A.   I assume it was, yes.

10        Q.   And, sir, isn't it also correct that the big problem with draft

11     dodgers is that they go abroad, they run away, they hide, and that's why

12     it's very hard to catch them; is that correct?

13        A.   Yes, that's correct.

14        Q.   So actually, if you say there was very little that you could do,

15     that doesn't mean that you wouldn't do anything if you could trace these

16     people.  It was simply a matter of you had to find them first; correct?

17        A.   We couldn't trace them.  We couldn't get at them, neither we nor

18     the court.

19        Q.   Okay.  Now, sir, the next thing that I would just quickly and

20     briefly touch upon, and for this if we could quickly go back to the

21     documents in the binder provided to you by the Defence of Mr. Petkovic,

22     and that's the binder that you were looking at previously.  I'd like to

23     refer you to the last document in that binder, and that is 2D 01352, the

24     very last document in that binder.  Do you have it?

25        A.   01352?

Page 37304

 1        Q.   01352, yes, that's correct.  And, sir, that is the list of

 2     payment for the Defence Department and the Main Staff signed by

 3     Bruno Stojic, but we were looking at the very last document earlier,

 4     which pertains to the payment of the Main Staff or the payroll of the

 5     Main Staff.  If you could just return or turn to that document, the very

 6     last one in that collection.  Do you have it?  And it starts off with

 7     Adem Zulovic.  You see that as number 1, and then it goes to number 20.

 8     Now, sir, my question on this is, if you look through those 20 names, you

 9     will notice that the name of General Petkovic doesn't appear there or,

10     for instance, the name of Miro Andric, who appears on later lists.  My

11     question to you is:  Do you know who was paying for their salaries at

12     this time?

13        A.   I really can't answer this question because I don't know.

14        Q.   Now, before stepping off that, do you know Mr. Miro Andric and

15     General Petkovic, and then Miro Andric's brother Baz [phoen] Andric who

16     will appear on the later lists, were they members of the HVO or were they

17     members of the HV?

18             MS. ALABURIC:  [Interpretation] Your Honour, I don't want to

19     interfere, and I do apologise to my learned friend, but could the

20     foundation be laid for Mr. Miro Andric for the period in 1992 because he

21     appears in the lists for 1993.  Thank you.

22             MR. KRUGER:  Your Honour, I won't belabour this point.  There are

23     documents in evidence.  I didn't trace them.  I can trace them by

24     tomorrow, which refers to him as being also on the Main Staff in 1992.

25     But I won't be labour that point.

Page 37305

 1        Q.   Sir, let's step off that and --

 2        A.   To your question, yes.

 3        Q.   Sorry, did you want to respond to that question, sir?

 4        A.   I met Mr. Petkovic, but I didn't know the other gentleman.

 5        Q.   Sir, let's turn for a moment to the Home Guards, and for this I'd

 6     like you to turn to document P 01746 in the Prosecution binder.  Sir,

 7     before -- do you have the document in front of you?  P 01746.  I think it

 8     should have a little yellow tab.

 9             Now, before we look at that document, you recall that we've

10     already looked twice at a previous document which was an order issued by

11     Bruno Stojic on the 5th of February, 1993, on the formation of Home

12     Guards units based on the decision and organisation of Home Guards.  Do

13     you recall that document that we looked at, the February order, 5

14     February order by Bruno Stojic to establish Home Guards units?  Do you

15     recall that?

16        A.   Yes.

17        Q.   For the record, that was document P 01424.

18             Now, sir, if we can look at this document, P 1746.  This is an

19     order by Milivoj Petkovic dated 28 March, 1993, and if we read at the

20     top:

21             "Given that in most cases order number 01-254/93 of 8 February,

22     1993, which concerns the organisation of the Home Guard, has not fully

23     implemented, and in order to ensure that it is organised as quickly and

24     as well as possible, I hereby order, in collaboration with defence

25     administrations, immediately set about implementing all tasks in the said

Page 37306

 1     order ..."

 2             Sir, my question to you is:  This is General Petkovic issuing an

 3     order to all operational zones of the HVO -- or within the HZ-HB, and

 4     this pertains to the establishment of Home Guards units.  Do you agree

 5     this is an order for the implementation of the original order by Bruno

 6     Stojic?

 7        A.   Yes, on the establishment of temporary commands, if that's the

 8     order you are referring to, two officers, one non-commissioned officer to

 9     receive Home Guards, if they are put at their disposal.

10        Q.   So, sir, in other words, this order demonstrates that an order by

11     Bruno Stojic on the 2nd of February is translated into action within all

12     the operational zones of the HZ-HB; correct?

13        A.   To the best of my recollection, when replying to this, I said

14     that the head sent the order down his line and the chief of the Main

15     Staff also sent almost the same order down his line, and the order states

16     who had to do what.

17        Q.   Just -- we may get back to this in another context, but Milivoj

18     Petkovic's order, wasn't that only made possible because there was an

19     earlier order by Bruno Stojic?

20        A.   No.  One does not exclude the other.

21        Q.   Sir, let's turn to something totally different now.

22             MR. KRUGER:  And I'd like to show you the very first document in

23     the Prosecution binder.  That is document P 00020.  P 0020.  It's the

24     very first document.

25        Q.   Now, sir, this document is the 1991 survey of the population or

Page 37307

 1     the "national composition of the population, 1991 results for the

 2     republic by municipalities and populated areas."  And I've only included

 3     an extract with regard to Citluk municipality, and if you go to the very

 4     last page of your document, and this page has not been translated into

 5     English because it isn't necessary, so in the B/C/S version, for the

 6     English speakers, it's also the last page of the B/C/S version.  And sir,

 7     there we see Citluk.  The total population for Citluk is shown in 1991 as

 8     15.063 people, and of that amount - and if we just move two columns or

 9     three columns across - the total number of Croats is 14.623.  Are those

10     figures basically correct to your recollection?

11        A.   They could be.  I believe this comes from the statistics.

12        Q.   And, sir, if we look in Citluk municipality in 1991, in the

13     second column it says there were only 111 Muslims; is that correct?

14        A.   It could be correct, yes.

15        Q.   And then only 19 Serbs and 17 Yugoslavs, also basically correct?

16        A.   That's what it says here.

17        Q.   And 113 declared themselves as others.  Now, sir, stating the

18     obvious, and I think you've also said this, but Citluk municipality was

19     essentially inhabited exclusively by people of Croat ethnicity; is that

20     correct?

21        A.   Yes, for the most part, yes.

22        Q.   Now, I'd like to show you this data presented in a different

23     format, and this is in the second-last document in your binder.  It's

24     P 10851.  P 10851.  And this is a map that was prepared after the 1991

25     census, and there was such a map basically for each municipality.

Page 37308

 1             Now, first of all, if we look at the top above the map, we'll see

 2     the figures, once again, Croats, 14.823; Serbs, 19; Muslims, 111;

 3     Yugoslavs, 17; and others, 113.  So that corresponds with the previous

 4     document that you saw.  That's correct; yes?

 5        A.   Yes.

 6        Q.   Sir, if we look at the map itself, is that basically a map of

 7     Citluk in the middle?

 8        A.   Yes.

 9        Q.   Okay.  Now, the map is full of red circles, and if we look at the

10     legend above, which says Croats, 14.823, it shows that Croats are

11     indicated by red circles.  So this, once again, shows that Citluk is

12     basically inhabited by Croats; correct?

13        A.   That's correct.

14        Q.   Now, sir, if we look at the municipality to the south of Citluk.

15     That's Capljina municipality; correct?

16        A.   Yes.

17        Q.   And we see that in Capljina municipality, to the eastern side of

18     Capljina municipality there are a number of green dots.  Is it correct

19     that that basically corresponds to the area where the Dubravad [phoen]

20     plateau lies?  Is that basically where the Dubravad plateau lies, sir?  I

21     see you're shaking --

22        A.   Yes.  Well, more or less, yes, approximately.

23        Q.   Now, sir, the green dots, if we look at the legend, they

24     represent people of Muslim ethnicity showing that on the Dubravad

25     plateau, Muslims stayed and lived; correct?

Page 37309

 1        A.   Yes.

 2        Q.   Do you know what happened to those Muslims during the course of

 3     1993 who stayed on the Dubravad plateau?

 4        A.   I really don't know.  I don't know anything about that.

 5        Q.   To the west of Citluk, is that municipality basically Ljubuski?

 6        A.   Yes.

 7        Q.   And we see there's a small concentration of Muslims, and if we

 8     look very carefully, we'll see that that town where that dot is is

 9     Gradska.  Do you know what happened to the Muslims in Gradska during

10     1993?

11        A.   No, I really can't answer that.

12        Q.   Sir, if you don't know what happened to these Muslims in the

13     municipalities adjoining Citluk, why is that?  Were you only focused on

14     the events in Citluk or -- where you had functions to perform?

15        A.   Well, we had so much work to do, you can see from these reports

16     that we didn't -- well, that we barely had time to do them properly.

17        Q.   What happened to the 111 Muslims who resided in Citluk during

18     1993?  Were they still there by the end of 1993?

19        A.   I think most of them were, and I think they are still there

20     today.

21        Q.   Did you receive any order to arrest any military-aged Muslim

22     males during Citluk in 1993?

23        A.   Well, I never received such an order, of course, because in 1991

24     we had units established which included Muslims, and in 1992 we knew that

25     the army of BH was being established, and the Muslims went over to those

Page 37310

 1     units, and we did not make a fuss about that, nor did they make a fuss if

 2     someone moved from the BH Army into the HVO.  So to the best of our

 3     knowledge, their conscripts are either in the BH Army or in third

 4     countries.

 5             MS. NOZICA:  [Interpretation] Your Honour, I'm trying my best to

 6     abide by the rules.  I did not intervene before the witness answered, but

 7     we should really have some grounds for this question.  The witness

 8     testified about what he was doing, so was he someone who could issue

 9     orders of the kind my learned friend is asking about, and could he know

10     based on his work in the office for defence about all these events?

11             MR. KRUGER:  Your Honour, if I may just briefly respond.  The

12     witness being involved in defence matters should know about these matters

13     or at least have an idea if such orders were being received or executed

14     in the municipality where he worked.

15        Q.   Sir, you did not arrest any -- or do you know of any Muslim males

16     who were arrested within Citluk municipality during or from the 30th of

17     June, 1993, onwards?

18        A.   To the best of my knowledge, no, not then or later either.

19        Q.   Are you aware of any Muslim women, children, or elderly who were

20     expelled from Citluk municipality from July 1993 onwards?

21        A.   I don't have any such information.

22        Q.   So certainly you must have heard that Muslim males were arrested,

23     military-aged men were detained from the 30th of June onwards by the HVO

24     in places such as Gretelj [phoen] and Gabela?  Sorry, is there a problem

25     with the translation?

Page 37311

 1             MR. KRUGER:  Your Honour, it seems there's problem with the

 2     translation.  Isn't it coming through?  It's taking time.

 3             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, informally I heard that there

 4     were some military prisons, but where they were, I didn't know, nor was

 5     it my job to know and what sort of prisons they were, really.

 6             MR. KRUGER:

 7        Q.   Okay.  What about the expulsion of women and children and

 8     elderly -- Muslim women, children, and elderly persons from

 9     municipalities such as Capljina and Stolac?  Didn't you hear about that,

10     or didn't you know about that?

11        A.   Well, I didn't know anything officially, but there were rumours

12     going around, so it's very hard for me to comment on this really.

13        Q.   Sir, just before stepping off of this map, if we look at the very

14     centre of this map we see a dot, a big dot saying Citluk, and that's the

15     town of Citluk.  Was that where you were based?

16        A.   Yes.  The Citluk defence office was in the town of Citluk itself.

17        Q.   And if we go north-east from there to Mostar, it appears that

18     that is totally Croat-controlled territory; is that correct?  If we look

19     at the red dots, judging by them.

20        A.   Yes.

21        Q.   Sir, does that -- can we deduce from that that there were

22     basically also good communications from Mostar to Citluk?

23        A.   Well, for my affairs, I did have communication with Mr. Bosnjak,

24     and he was my superior.

25        Q.   Now, sir, we only have a few minutes left.  If I can quickly

Page 37312

 1     refer you to the document just after this map in the binder, and that is

 2     document 2D 00150.  It's behind -- after the map, sir.  Yes.  2D 00150.

 3     This is a Defence exhibit, 2D Defence exhibit.

 4             Sir, this is a document dated the 9th of June, 1993.  It's the

 5     overview of the national structure of members of the HVO signed by Jure

 6     Brkic.  And if we look at the attachment or appendix number 1, we see --

 7     well, first of all, let's at least just say that he says:

 8             "On your request, enclosed to the letter we deliver to you the

 9     overview of the national structure of members of the HVO."

10             And then the appendix, it says name of unit, for instance,

11     Department of Defence, a total of 247 people:  Croats, 238; Muslims, 9;

12     and percentage of Muslims is 3,64.

13             Now, sir, my question is, did you also have to conduct such an

14     exercise with regard to Citluk?

15        A.   Yes, we did compile tables of this kind or reports or overviews,

16     but I mentioned the reason why we insisted upon this.  The 30th of June

17     -- it was all after the 30th of June, 1993.

18        Q.   But, sir, this document predates the 30th of June.  This is the

19     9th of June, 1993, so why would it be important to determine how many

20     Muslims there are and their percentage in the different units in the HVO?

21     What is the purpose?

22        A.   Well, it was important because we had jointly established the

23     first units which were formed on the basis of volunteers, so to see who

24     the members of the units were, that was important, and that's why it

25     lists Croats and Muslims here, and that's -- those are the numbers.  Now,

Page 37313

 1     in later reports, the reports were compiled just for Croats because for

 2     the well known reasons, we objectively could not count on the Muslims

 3     anymore.

 4        Q.   But that was only after the 30th of June; correct?

 5        A.   Yes, and that's why it says Croats and Muslims here.

 6             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Well, we'll have to stop

 7     because Mr. Scott needs a few minutes.  I have a question for Ms. Nozica.

 8     Your second witness, is he or she going to be ready tomorrow?

 9             MS. NOZICA:  [Interpretation] Your Honour, with your permission,

10     I'd like to bring the witness in the day after tomorrow because

11     technically it's impossible for me -- well, the witness arrived today, so

12     I really can't have enough proofing time with him and bring him into the

13     courtroom on Tuesday.  So I had planned him for Wednesday, and with

14     respect to what Mr. Kovacic just said, I'm quite sure that we'll finish

15     with the witness on Wednesday by the end of the day.

16             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Well, Mr. Scott.

17             MR. SCOTT:  Thank you, Mr. President.  Just two housekeeping

18     matters just trying to assist to clarify a couple of items.  The

19     Prosecution --

20             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Can this be done in the

21     presence of the witness?

22             MR. SCOTT:  I think it can, Your Honour.

23             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Go ahead.

24             MR. SCOTT:  Thank you very much.  Your Honour, there was a

25     request last week by the Stojic Defence to add an exhibit in connection

Page 37314

 1     with the next witness, and just so the record is clear, the Prosecution

 2     doesn't have any objection to that.  Seems the most efficient way of

 3     dealing with that matter.  The Prosecution does not object to the

 4     addition of that exhibit.

 5             Secondly, Your Honour, concerning the same witness, Mr. Kovacic

 6     indicated earlier today that he would have, well, virtually no questions

 7     for the witness, but I assume -- presumably he is taking it as a 92 ter

 8     witness.  One question of clarification:  Were there any exhibits in

 9     relation to that witness?  We understand there will be a -- presumably

10     there is a statement, but are there any -- if counsel could indicate,

11     that would be helpful, Your Honour.  Thank you.

12             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Kovacic, for witness --

13     92 ter witness, will there be any exhibits.

14             MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, we don't plan to have

15     any exhibits with the next witness, but we are going to have the proofing

16     session, and I think we are duty-bound to hold a proofing session before

17     we bring the witness into the courtroom.  So we don't plan to do so, but

18     whether the witness will or not, I don't know, but if he has anything to

19     add, then I'll let you know about that in good time.

20             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.  So for the time

21     being, there will simply be a statement, and you will be asking him to

22     confirm that it's his statement and that it's his signature.  Mr. Scott,

23     that's what Mr. Kovacic says.  Is that agreeable to you?

24             MR. SCOTT:  Yes, Your Honour.  Thank you very much.

25             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Right.  It's practically 7.00.

Page 37315

 1     Witness, let me remind of your instructions:  No contact with anybody

 2     whatsoever.  We shall meet again tomorrow.  The hearing will begin with

 3     you tomorrow at 2.15, since we will be holding our hearing in the

 4     afternoon.  So, yes, that is indeed the case.  Afternoon session

 5     tomorrow, quarter past 2.00.  And I say this all the more because I will

 6     be on another -- in another hearing in the morning, so I know it's going

 7     to be in the afternoon.  Have a very nice evening.  We'll see you

 8     tomorrow.

 9                           --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 6.59 p.m.,

10                           to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 24th day of

11                           February, 2009, at 2.15 p.m.