Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 39070

 1                           Wednesday, 22 April 2009

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           [The accused Prlic and Coric not present]

 5                           [The witness takes the stand]

 6                           --- Upon commencing at 2.20 p.m.

 7             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Registrar, could you please

 8     call the case.

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

10     everyone in and around the courtroom.

11             This is case number IT-04-74-T, the Prosecutor versus Prlic

12     et al.

13             Thank you, Your Honours.

14             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you.

15             This is Wednesday.  I greet the accused and the counsel, also the

16     witness, and the representatives of the Prosecutor's office, and all the

17     people who are helping us in and around the court.

18             The Registrar has to give us a number.

19             THE REGISTRAR:  Thank you, Your Honour.

20             2D has submitted its response to the Prosecution's objections to

21     its documents tendered via Witness Davor Korac.  This list shall be given

22     Exhibit IC989.

23             Thank you, Your Honours.

24             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.

25             Before I give the floor to the witness, please, speak slower than

Page 39071

 1     usual, because the interpreters have some problems.  Thank you for all

 2     the efforts you may make to make things better.

 3                           WITNESS:  IVAN BAGARIC [Resumed]

 4                           [The witness answered through interpreter]

 5             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Prosecutor, I greet you

 6     also, and have you floor.

 7             MR. LAWS:  Good afternoon, Mr. President, each of Your Honours,

 8     and everyone around the courtroom this afternoon.

 9             And good afternoon to you, Dr. Bagaric.

10             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good afternoon.

11                           Cross-examination by Mr. Laws:

12        Q.   You told us on Monday that you were a doctor and that you were

13     also a politician; is that right?

14        A.   Yes, you can put it that way.

15        Q.   All right.  I want to ask you a few questions about politics, if

16     I may, and I want to start with a meeting in Tomislavgrad in December of

17     1991.  All right?  And what I want to start by doing is just to make sure

18     we've got the right Ivan Bagaric, because you told us about another

19     document that you thought that there might have been somebody else with

20     your name in Herceg-Bosna at the time.  So if you'd start, please, by

21     looking with me at the first document in the binder you've just been

22     given, P00089.  Binder 1, I'm so sorry.  All the documents are in

23     binder 1.  What we have in binder 2 are the transcripts from

24     Dr. Bagaric's testimony in another case.

25             So if you would look with me, please, Doctor, at P00089, and

Page 39072

 1     you'll see that at page 1 that we're at a meeting of the 27th of December

 2     of 1991, chaired by Dr. Franjo Tudjman, but if you'd turn on to page 20,

 3     and it's actually a very few pages in because we've taken out the

 4     intervening pages that don't concern us today, if you turn just one, two,

 5     three, four, five pages, you should find a page that has at the top an

 6     excerpt from the minutes of the 2nd regular session of the Presidency of

 7     the Croatian Community of Herceg-Bosna.  Can you see that?

 8        A.   On page 20, yes, if that is that.

 9        Q.   All right.  And what's happening here, as we're going to see, is

10     that a colleague of yours called Mr. Kostroman is reading the minutes of

11     a meeting that took place in Tomislavgrad on the 23rd of December, 1991,

12     all right, and towards the foot of the page he has a list of names of

13     people who took part in the discussion.  Can you see that?

14        A.   No, I can't.  Just bear with me for a moment.  Let me try and see

15     what we're talking about.  It's in Tomislav --

16             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] [Previous translation

17     continues]... which makes our interpreting quite hard.

18             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can see it, yes.

19             MR. LAWS:

20        Q.   [Previous translation continues] ... it's on the same page in the

21     B/C/S/ as it is in English, and it's page 20, and we have a list of names

22     there.  The session was chaired by President Mate Boban.  Can you see

23     that?  And then three lines up from the bottom, we have your name, or a

24     name that is also yours, "Ivan Bagaric."  Can you see that?

25        A.   Yes.

Page 39073

 1        Q.   And is that you who was at a meeting in Tomislavgrad in

 2     December of 1991, Dr. Bagaric?

 3        A.   I attended a lot of meetings.  I don't know which one is this.  I

 4     would have to be given a moment to look at it.  Maybe I can explain, and

 5     this will be a direct answer to your question, if you give me a minute to

 6     explain things.

 7        Q.   Well, I can give you any time you'd like to explain things, but I

 8     want to just get clear whether it's you or not.  Tomislavgrad, I think,

 9     is your hometown, is it not?

10        A.   Well, I believe that this is my name at the foot, because it says

11     "Ivan Bagaric."  However, I would have to look at the whole thing more

12     closely in order to be able to properly recognise it.

13        Q.   I understand that, and we're going to look at some of the things

14     that were said at that meeting.  And if you're in any doubt about whether

15     it's you or not, you've only to tell us.  I want to be clear with you

16     whether that Ivan Bagaric is you.  All right?  Some of the other names

17     there, Dario Kordic, Ante Valenta, Ivan Sarac, who you told us, I think

18     in answer to a question by Judge Mindua, had become the head of the

19     Ministry of Health and was a friend of yours; yes?

20             THE INTERPRETER:  Would the counsel speak into the microphone.

21     The counsel's microphone is covered by his binder.

22             MR. LAWS:  I'm very sorry.

23             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, I don't understand your

24     question.  Are you asking me whether my name is Ivan Bagaric, indeed, or

25     whether I was the one attending the meeting?  It says here

Page 39074

 1     "Ivan Bagaric."  This is probably me.  However, until I have a closer

 2     look at the thing, I can't say that for a fact.  It says "Ivan Bagaric"

 3     here.  My name is Ivan Bagaric.  Your Honours, I attended a lot of

 4     meeting, and this may well have been one of them.

 5             JUDGE TRECHSEL:  If I may try to assist.  Mr. Bagaric, are you

 6     aware of any person in Herzegovina who had an interest in politics and

 7     would attend such meetings, and who happened to have the same name; or

 8     have you not heard of another Ivan Bagaric who would attend such a

 9     meeting?

10             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, of course I'm not the

11     only Ivan Bagaric.  There is lots of them.  The name is very common, the

12     family name is very common.  However, judging by the other names, I would

13     assume that this was indeed me.  I've already said that, and that's why

14     I'm saying that I don't understand the gentleman's question, because I

15     already confirmed that this was probably me.

16             JUDGE TRECHSEL:  Thank you.

17             MR. LAWS:  Thank you very much.

18        Q.   Can we turn the page, then, please, and see what was being

19     discussed here.  Item 1:

20             "The Croatian Community of Herceg-Bosna congratulates the entire

21     people on achieving our historical objective - the establishment and

22     final international recognition of the Republic of Croatia."

23             And you see that?

24        A.   Yes, I can see that.

25        Q.   And then in the next paragraph, congratulations to Dr. Tudjman?

Page 39075

 1        A.   Yes, I can see all of that, yes.

 2        Q.   And then in item 2:

 3             "The Croatian Community of Herceg-Bosna has once again confirmed

 4     the will of the entire Croatian people of Herceg-Bosna expressed on the

 5     18th of November, 1991, in Grude, taking the historic decision to

 6     establish the Croatian Community of Herceg-Bosna, which serves as a legal

 7     basis for the entry of these territories into the Republic of Croatia."

 8             Can you see that?

 9        A.   Yes, I can see that.  However, Your Honours, I have to comment.

10     May I be allowed to comment upon what you have just read out and asked me

11     whether I see it or not?

12        Q.   It's a matter entirely for Their Honours to decide, whether you

13     can comment at this stage.

14             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Prosecutor, perhaps you

15     can -- if you don't want to answer the question, perhaps you can pursue

16     something else, if you don't think it's worthwhile.

17             MR. LAWS:  I'm entirely neutral as to that.  The witness has

18     asked for permission to speak.  I don't want to deny him.  It's for the

19     Court to decide.

20             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] If you wish to answer, give

21     your answer, please, Witness, but briefly.

22             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, it's

23     incomprehensible, when it says here that a decision is being made which

24     says:  "... as a legal basis for the entry of these territories into the

25     Republic of Croatia."  I have never, ever attended a single meeting at

Page 39076

 1     which such a decision was made, and I don't think anybody else has.  I

 2     don't know that this was ever voted on and decided on, because a

 3     statement of this kind, which is a nonsense and even at that time was

 4     never spoken aloud, I don't believe that we ever voted on that, that we

 5     ever decided that.  I don't remember this conclusion.  I don't remember

 6     any of the other things, but they are quite logical.  However, this

 7     particular thing is totally illogical and incomprehensible.

 8             MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] I did not intervene before the

 9     witness answered.  However, maybe the witness should be explained the

10     nature of this document which is in front of me -- in front of him.  You

11     can see on the page before that Mr. Kostroman, which the Prosecutor

12     started talking about, conveyed conclusions from some other sessions or

13     meetings.  Maybe we could take things one at a time.  Maybe we could ask

14     the witness whether he attended the session, whether the conclusions of

15     some sort were made, whether he saw them or not, and then present them to

16     him, because this is not meetings of -- this is not minutes of a meeting.

17     These are just conclusions that were presented by Mr. Kostroman.

18             I just wanted to say this, and maybe this will be of some

19     assistance both to the Prosecutor and to the Trial Chamber to see what

20     this is all about.

21             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I never --

22             JUDGE TRECHSEL:  Excuse me.  The interpreter, you wanted to

23     translate --

24             THE INTERPRETER:  No, this was finished.  This was the beginning

25     of the witness's answer.

Page 39077

 1             JUDGE TRECHSEL:  Okay.  Your suggestions, Ms. Nozica, are fully

 2     sensible, but this is now for the Prosecution to decide what they want to

 3     ask him, and I think we should not interfere with that.

 4             But what the witness should be told:  This document in no way

 5     speaks about any vote taken, about any decision taken.  It only speaks

 6     about the foundation of an organisation which, in the opinion expressed

 7     here, could be a legal basis for any further decisions which, however,

 8     clearly have not been taken, and it's not said that they have been taken.

 9     So the nonsense is -- there's no nonsense in that sense.

10             Excuse me, Mr. Laws.  Please go on.

11             MR. LAWS:  I'm very grateful, Your Honour.

12             MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I apologise, I

13     apologise.  It was said that a meeting was held and that conclusions were

14     arrived at.  You can see it in the transcript, and this was the reason

15     why I intervened.  Minutes were taken.  Maybe you can look at the

16     document from the beginning.  The minutes were taken by the following

17     persons, and one of them was Mr. Bagaric, and it says further on:

18     "Pursuant to the overall and quality debate, the following conclusions

19     were arrived at ..."  This means that these were conclusions that

20     somebody made, and that's why I intervened, because I wanted to be sure

21     that the witness participated in the meeting and whether he participated

22     in the conclusions being made, and then conclusions should be listed from

23     1 to 10.

24             This is my intervention, because this is an interpretation of

25     some minutes.

Page 39078

 1             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Your colleagues have the floor,

 2     so ask your questions from the Prosecution, since the witness had told us

 3     under oath that he believes that never item 2 was discussed in his

 4     presence.

 5             MR. LAWS:  Yes, we've heard that answer.

 6        Q.   Dr. Bagaric, let's see if item 10 was ever discussed in your

 7     presence, shall we?  That's at page 24.  Can you see item 10, Doctor?

 8        A.   4 or 10?

 9        Q.   Item 10.  It's at page 24.  Do you have that paragraph, Doctor?

10        A.   Item 4 is on page 22.

11        Q.   No, item 10 on page 24.

12        A.   [In English] Yes.

13        Q.   Thank you.  And there it says:

14             "The legitimacy of Alija Izetbegovic, president of

15     Bosnia-Herzegovina, to represent the Croatian people in public is hereby

16     revoked."  It goes on to say why.  Do you remember being at a meeting

17     where anything of that kind was said?

18        A.   I apologise.  Please bear with me.  Yes.  Well, yes, this was on

19     the 27th of December, 1991.  Absolutely, Your Honours, I don't remember

20     any such conclusion.  However, I would still be willing to understand

21     this conclusion which was brought at that time, because that was the time

22     after the Serb side set to fire, destroy, and kill the entire Croatian

23     village of Ravno in Herzegovina, and then when one of the members of the

24     Presidency of Bosnia-Herzegovina, not the president himself, when he said

25     that this was not his war, that he was not going to take part in it.

Page 39079

 1             I was one of the deputies in the Parliament of Bosnia and

 2     Herzegovina at the time.  I was elected during the first multi-party

 3     elections in 1990.  I personally objected to such a position taken by

 4     Mr. Izetbegovic because he was representing the Bosniak Muslim people and

 5     in a certain way he represented the entire Republic of

 6     Bosnia-Herzegovina.  However, at that time he was not representing the

 7     Croatian interests.  I personally, at a meeting in Sarajevo, in the

 8     Parliament, and there are a lot of people who can testify to that, I

 9     asked Mr. Alija Izetbegovic, President, Sir, I would like to perceive you

10     as my own president as well, and in order to be able to do that, I would

11     have to have you represent our interests as well, and so on and so forth.

12             So one of the attendees of the meeting was also Father Ferdo

13     Vlasic, and I remember that meeting clearly.  That meeting was a very

14     informal meeting, and that person, during the time of communism, Your

15     Honours, spent about 18 years in prison.  He was a true Croatian and

16     Herzegovinian Mandela.  Together with Alija Izetbegovic, he was in

17     prison.  I asked him to get in touch with the president at the time,

18     because I was just one of the deputies who issued very important

19     documents for Bosnia and Herzegovina, and I wanted him to -- well, if you

20     so wish.

21             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Continue.

22             MR. LAWS:  Thank you, Mr. President.

23        Q.   Dr. Bagaric, I've waited patiently for you to answer the

24     question, but now we're talking about things that are a long way from

25     this meeting, and I'm asking you --

Page 39080

 1        A.   But they have a lot of bearing, a lot.  No, I have to -- I have

 2     to react here.  I have to react.  This is -- but this is not true, this

 3     is not correct.

 4             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, you consider this very

 5     close to the matter.  The Prosecution think this is not relevant or very

 6     far away from it.  Wait until the other questions are asked so that we

 7     can see what the position -- here you have spoken quite a while, and we

 8     have to understand the problems in this matter.  We didn't know that you,

 9     yourself, had spoken in Parliament in Sarajevo to President Izetbegovic,

10     so this is now in the transcript.

11             MR. LAWS:  Thank you, Mr. President.

12        Q.   Dr. Bagaric, we're going to spend a little time, you and I, this

13     afternoon, and if it comes to it, tomorrow as well.  At the end of that,

14     you're going to be given a chance by Ms. Nozica to explain the things

15     that remain to be explained.  All right?  You're not going to be deprived

16     of an opportunity to speak.  But in the meantime, I'm going to be asking

17     you, I hope, some quite clear questions, and it's going to help me, and

18     perhaps you as well, if we can just try and stick to answers that reflect

19     those questions.  Is that all right with you?  Thank you very much.

20             Now, this document that we have been looking at is, as I showed

21     you at the very beginning, a tape-recording that was made on the

22     27th of December of 1991, in which matters that had been discussed at a

23     meeting in Tomislavgrad in December -- 23rd of December, 1991, were read,

24     and at page 19, we can see how the reading begins.  Can you see, in the

25     middle of the page, it's Mate Boban speaking, and he says:

Page 39081

 1             "I would like to ask that the conclusions be read and then

 2     perhaps raise some points for discussion and arrive at the truth from the

 3     region itself, that is, from the people, rather than airing my opinion or

 4     anybody else's."

 5             And Mr. Tudjman says:

 6             "All right.  Please continue.  Please introduce yourself for the

 7     record."

 8             And then Mr. Kostroman starts to read.  He introduces himself,

 9     and over the page he says what he's reading; an excerpt from the minutes.

10     All right?  And this is where we started with you, as you now believe it

11     is, present at the meeting whilst these matters are discussed.

12             So far, Dr. Bagaric, do you and I agree?

13        A.   I apologise.  You are reading from page 19 in Croatian; is that

14     so?

15        Q.   What I just read to you is page 19 in the Croatian, and in the

16     middle of the page President Tudjman asks Mr. Kostroman to introduce

17     himself for the record, and he says:

18             "I am Ignac Kostroman, secretary of the Croatian --"

19        A.   Tudjman, you're saying Tudjman?

20        Q.   Yes.  [Overlapping speakers].  It's the 27th of December.  It's a

21     meeting presided over by Mr. Tudjman at which the minutes from the

22     meeting in Tomislavgrad are read.  I apologise if that hasn't been made

23     clear enough to you so far, but that is the position.

24        A.   God, himself, would not be able to understand this.

25        Q.   Well, Dr. Bagaric, I'm looking around the room, and -- I suspect

Page 39082

 1     that everybody here understands it and that you do too, so let's not

 2     waste time with speculating about God's abilities.

 3             The 23rd of December meeting was one at which you were present,

 4     in which -- in which, Dr. Bagaric, people were outlining their views so

 5     far as they related to Herceg-Bosna and what it was intended to do;

 6     that's the position, isn't it?

 7        A.   But I don't understand.

 8             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Try and help us.  We have a

 9     document here, a document of 127 pages, and the Prosecution communicated

10     to us some parts of it.  But as I understand the problem, there is a

11     meeting on the 27th of December, presided over by Mr. Tudjman, and a

12     delegation which is from Bosnia-Herzegovina, and this meeting is in

13     Zagreb, it's held in Zagreb.  And during this meeting, and the

14     Prosecution will tell me if I'm right, one mentions a meeting which took

15     place a few days before on the 23rd of December, that is to say, four

16     days earlier, in Tomislavgrad, and during that meeting you were

17     personally present on the 23rd of December.  And during this meeting of

18     the 23rd of December, apparently, there are several points or items which

19     were on the agenda which were discussed.  This is how this document

20     features, which in fact contains two things; one meeting of the 27th of

21     December, during which there is the reading of a meeting of the 23rd of

22     December.

23             Do you understand a bit better the problem?

24             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.  Precisely, that's what

25     I didn't understand, because I was confused by -- how come Tudjman is

Page 39083

 1     suddenly in Tomislavgrad?  I thank you for this clarification.

 2             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Fine.  And in the

 3     27th of December meeting, among the attendees you have Tudjman, Boban,

 4     and possibly others, but that we do not know, and apparently you were not

 5     in Zagreb on the 27th of December.

 6             Prosecutor, I don't know if I managed to shed light on this for

 7     everyone, because this is somewhat complicated.

 8             MR. LAWS:  Thank you very much, Mr. President.

 9        Q.   You understand the position now, Dr. Bagaric, and the true

10     position is this:  At that meeting, the intention of Boban and others, so

11     far as Herceg-Bosna was concerned, was discussed.  And you were there,

12     and I'm going to suggest to you that you knew full well what the aims of

13     Mate Boban and others were.

14        A.   My answer is no, because you said that Mr. Boban had expressed

15     certain intentions.  I don't remember the term you used, but I didn't

16     understand it.  I was an MP, a deputy in the Parliament, and as a deputy

17     I attended certain meetings that were related to the organisation of the

18     defence of the Croatian people, and at that time also of the Muslim

19     Bosniak people.  Such meetings I attended quite frequently.

20             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, for the Prosecution

21     this is -- this document is a very important item, because it's in the

22     indictment, it's in the pre-trial brief.  Item -- in item number 2, it's

23     clearly written that the Croatian Community of Herceg-Bosna somehow

24     confirms that it wants to enter, so to say, the Republic of Croatia.

25     This was besides expressed on the 18th of November, 1991.  Apparently you

Page 39084

 1     did attend that meeting.  So if you say that this was never discussed, we

 2     have an issue, because it would mean that this document was forged, so

 3     either you lie or the document lies.

 4             So do you understand that what you're saying is of the utmost

 5     importance, because according to the document that we have, there was

 6     this debate where there was yourself, Kostroman, Boban, Kordic,

 7     et cetera.  So there were many of you, and this issue, which is paramount

 8     for the Prosecutor's case, is debated -- presented, debated, and adopted.

 9     Earlier on, you said it wasn't, so I'm getting back to you.  Are you sure

10     this was never discussed?

11             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I said that I did

12     attend one meeting in Tomislavgrad, and I suppose this is the meeting,

13     which was also attended by those people from this group that we have

14     referred to here.  However, I can't say that each and every of these

15     points were not discussed, but I don't remember.  I say with full

16     responsibility I don't remember discussion on this point, and especially

17     that this conclusion was made, because from that point of view it was

18     dumb and unclear, and even more so from today's point of view.  But I

19     personally don't remember it, anyhow.

20             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] You can carry on, Prosecution.

21             MR. LAWS:

22        Q.   2.51.15[Previous translation continues]... you don't remember it.

23     I'm going to have to suggest to you that it's quite something to forget,

24     when you're at a meeting and fellow politicians and leaders are talking

25     about acceding to Croatia and revoking the authority of Mr. Izetbegovic.

Page 39085

 1     That's quite something to slip your mind, isn't it?

 2        A.   You are not right, Mr. Prosecutor, because there are two things

 3     involved here.  It is one thing to recall Mr. Izetbegovic at the time

 4     from representing Croats politically, and it is another thing to take a

 5     decision to accede.  Looking from the point of view of that time, I quite

 6     understand that dissatisfaction was expressed about Mr. Izetbegovic, and

 7     there might have been even public releases to that effect, but as far as

 8     this conclusion is concerned, I don't agree that there was any discussion

 9     of this nature.  I don't remember that, at least, and I'm stating that

10     before this Court with full responsibility and before God.

11             JUDGE TRECHSEL:  I'm sorry, Mr. Bagaric.  I'm not sure whether

12     you have heard and understood what I have told you earlier this

13     afternoon.  If you look at this text, this text is not a decision to join

14     Croatia.  You say there was no decision taken to join Croatia, and you

15     are quite right.  That is not what this text says.  This text says, We

16     founded the Croat Community of Herceg-Bosna, which would be a legal basis

17     from which eventually to jump into Croatia, but it is not a decision to

18     jump and to join.  Maybe if you reconsider this, you can agree that or

19     remember that this was actually said.

20             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, you're right, Your Honour.

21     However, I really don't recall this, no.

22             MR. LAWS:

23        Q.   Dr. Bagaric, I'm going to suggest to you simply this: that you

24     were not in any doubt at all about what the aims of Mate Boban and

25     Herceg-Bosna were.  They were nationalist aims.  They were going to

Page 39086

 1     accede to Croatia.  That is the simple truth of the matter, isn't it?

 2        A.   No.  That would mean, in that case, that for me, as a

 3     representative, as a deputy, Mate Boban was God, to whom we did not dare

 4     say a word or oppose.  That means that Ivan Bagaric, as an MP in the

 5     Parliament of Bosnia and Herzegovina, was a "yes" man.  But as far as

 6     Ivan Bagaric was concerned, that was never the case, and that includes

 7     that particular point in time.

 8             Whether Mate Boban had certain intentions or not, I don't know.

 9     Possibly.  But nobody ever officially presented that to me, nor did I

10     ever think, Your Honours, that this would happen, simply because it was

11     impossible to realise, it was impossible to implement, and I was aware of

12     that even then.

13        Q.   Well, whether it was possible or not, it was certainly going to

14     be something that would cause a great deal of displeasure among many

15     Muslims in the population that was claimed as Herceg-Bosna, was it not?

16        A.   No.  No, no, because that region that proclaimed itself

17     Herceg-Bosna was a region which, when the state had collapsed or even

18     when it was obvious that it would eventually collapse, we wanted to

19     defend ourselves however we could, and therefore we assumed certain

20     autonomy so that we could take decisions in order to be able to organise

21     defence.  I was there, and you weren't.  It was in keeping with the

22     constitution at the time.

23             You said that I was a politician.  I am primarily a doctor, but I

24     accept that I was acting as a politician then.  You had the right, in

25     defence, to join others.  That sort of joinder was legitimate.  It was

Page 39087

 1     the will of elected representatives, and I did participate in organising

 2     the defence of areas where Croats were the majority and where there were

 3     also Muslim populations, in order to oppose an overwhelming enemy, which

 4     were the Serbs.  Later, there were victims, of course, due to the

 5     aggression that was caused by Serbs, by the Serbian Army.  That is the

 6     truth.

 7             I lived it, and my family suffered through it and paid the price,

 8     and my brother, whom we mentioned yesterday, got killed defending Bosnia

 9     and Herzegovina, as a volunteer who had come from Germany via Croatia,

10     and laid his life there.

11        Q.   We heard about that and we're sorry for that, but --

12             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, you've provided a

13     lengthy answer to the Prosecution's question, but I'm interested in the

14     following, because this is the first time we've had a member of

15     Parliament, who was at the Sarajevo Parliament.  What you've just said

16     today was said by you in the Parliament, was it, by you or by others, and

17     do we have written records of addresses by members of Parliament on the

18     very topics you're dealing with today?

19             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I've always said that.

20             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, but as a member of the

21     Sarajevo Parliament, when you take the floor, is there a record, is there

22     a transcript of what you say?  For example, you said, Well, I challenge,

23     or, I address Izetbegovic.  When you asked that question in Parliament,

24     perhaps you provided an answer.  Is there a written record of your

25     question, and was that answer also recorded, and have other MPs like you

Page 39088

 1     developed that thesis on the issue of Bosnia-Herzegovina?

 2             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, Mr. President, thank

 3     you for giving me this opportunity to answer this question, because

 4     I think it's very important.  I think you really need to understand this

 5     for any further discussion.  I am really in a hurry to go back to my

 6     obligations, but this is more important than my obligations and

 7     engagements or anything else.

 8             It was a time when Serbs openly assaulted Croatia, shelled both

 9     Dubrovnik and Vukovar, and other towns, and it was obvious that war would

10     begin in Bosnia-Herzegovina.  At that time, I sat in the same Parliament

11     as Alija Izetbegovic, Stjepan Kljujic, and Radovan Karadzic.

12     Radovan Karadzic, I stress.  I rose to the rostrum on one occasion, and

13     there must be a record of that, because it was obvious that the war would

14     begin, that Serbs were preparing for war.  They were doing the job in

15     Croatia and preparing a war in Bosnia and Herzegovina.  It was evident

16     and plain for everyone to see.  So I came to the rostrum and I said, You

17     are there.  Radovan Karadzic, representing Serbs; Stjepan Kljujic,

18     Croats; Alija Izetbegovic, Bosniaks; come up here and say that there

19     would be no war.

20             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Okay, I've given you plenty of

21     time to answer, but my question was fairly specific.  Is there a written

22     record of the debates in the Parliament in Sarajevo?  And you say, I

23     don't know.  Do you?

24             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Perhaps absolutely --

25             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Are you saying it is possible?

Page 39089

 1             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm sorry, I can't know.  I have no

 2     way of knowing.

 3             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Fine.

 4             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm not sure whether these records

 5     are still in existence, but it would be very important to look at them to

 6     see just who said what in Parliament.  But I am proud of what I said.

 7             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, you ought to know the

 8     following:  In this court, the procedure is not set by the Judges.  It's

 9     up to the parties to provide evidence, the Prosecution, the Defence.  Had

10     I been running this procedure, the first thing I would have done would

11     have been to look at the transcript of the debates in the Sarajevo

12     Parliament, with Karadzic, Izetbegovic, yourself, Kljujic, et cetera, but

13     I do not have such documents.

14             Please carry on, Prosecutor.

15             MR. LAWS:

16        Q.   We're going to move away from that meeting to the next year,

17     Dr. Bagaric, September of 1992, when you were offered a job within the

18     Herceg-Bosna Ministry of Defence to be the head of the Health Sector.

19     September of 1992.  All right?

20        A.   Which document is that?

21        Q.   You don't need a document for it.  It's 2D00702.  We don't need

22     one.  You know you were appointed in September of 1992.

23        A.   Well --

24             MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Counsel, I'm sorry.  We haven't

25     heard your question yet, but I still want to be precise.  It wasn't a

Page 39090

 1     ministry.  It was the Department of Defence.  I would appreciate

 2     precision in the names of various agencies.  It was not a ministry, at

 3     least not in that month.

 4             MR. LAWS:  I don't expect that anybody was misled.

 5        Q.   In September of 1992, Dr. Bagaric, you were approached and

 6     offered a post within the Herceg-Bosna Department of Defence; all right?

 7     Who offered you that job?  Who was it who got in touch with you?

 8        A.   I'm sorry, Your Honours, but I really cannot give such short

 9     answers here.

10             I was an MP to the Parliament of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and I

11     was offered the post of head of the Health Sector much, much earlier.

12     I've already said that we doctors had organised a medical service much

13     earlier than September.  Local representatives in Sarajevo and others

14     offered it to me when we were organising the defence of the region.  It

15     was not actually an offer, it was an appointment, but that appointment

16     was already in place.  Nobody was offering it to me.  This was just a

17     renaming.  When other appointments were made, I was appointed to this

18     post.  That much is true.

19        Q.   All right, Dr. Bagaric.  Let me ask the question more broadly.

20     Who was it who first invited you to take any sort of job, role, position

21     of responsibility, within any part of the Herceg-Bosna apparatus of

22     state?  Do you follow that question?  You were a doctor and you were a

23     member of Parliament, and then somebody asked you to become involved in

24     some way with Herceg-Bosna, and I'm asking you who it was.

25        A.   Those were my colleagues, MPs -- representatives, that is, and

Page 39091

 1     there were over 40 in Sarajevo.  It was at one of our meetings when we

 2     were talking and when we were aware that the war would indeed start, and

 3     we discussed who could do what.  And I, being a doctor, they said that

 4     since I was an MP and a doctor, it would be good for me to make

 5     preparations for assistance to the wounded and such.

 6        Q.   Would you please try now to answer the question, giving us

 7     perhaps some names of the people within Herceg-Bosna who asked you to

 8     become involved in organising the Health Sector?  Just some names; not

 9     your colleagues.  Who were they?

10        A.   They were doctors, Dr. Ivan Sarac, Marko Frankovic, then a

11     gentleman -- I believe Boskovic is the name.  I haven't seen him in a

12     long while, also a doctor.  Then a gentleman by the name of Markovic,

13     also a medical doctor.  Ante Bosniak, a dentist from Citluk.

14     Nevinka [phoen] --

15        Q.   You were able to give us a number of names, and that helps us a

16     lot.  The first is Dr. Ivan Sarac, who was also at the meeting in

17     Tomislavgrad in December of 1991 and, as you said, went on to become the

18     senior official within the Health Department.  But these were people at a

19     similar level to you, weren't they?  Who was it above you who was able to

20     give you the very important job that you told us about yesterday?

21        A.   It was not a job; it was a duty.  I did not get employed there,

22     and I did not receive a salary.  It was a duty.

23             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, the Prosecutor is

24     asking you a technical question.  He's asking who appointed you or

25     offered you the job.  Either you know or you don't.  If it's Mr. Stojic,

Page 39092

 1     you say it's Mr. Stojic.

 2             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, formally speaking, I don't

 3     remember.  I don't know.  It was not Mr. Stojic.  I don't know who it

 4     was, who formally did it, but I know that Mate Boban as well is one of

 5     the MPs in the Parliament of Bosnia and Herzegovina, because I met up

 6     with Boban at the Parliament and he was probably at the same meetings, so

 7     it could have been him.  I don't remember if anyone formally appointed

 8     me, but as I said, it was a duty, not a job.

 9             MR. LAWS:

10        Q.   Yes, and we all appreciate the difference that you're trying to

11     draw, I'm sure.  But is the short answer that it was Mate Boban?  Can we

12     not just cut to the chase?  Isn't that the position?  Mate Boban asked

13     you to do this job, end of story.  That's it, isn't it, Dr. Bagaric?

14        A.   No, no, no.  I was an MP, on an equal footing with other MPs.

15     Therefore, it transpired from a discussion among MPs who were also

16     physicians.  Mate Boban could not have made the offer because he's not a

17     physician.

18        Q.   Dr. Bagaric, I really don't want to spend very much more time on

19     this, but you don't have to be a physician to appoint somebody who's

20     going to assist Bruno Stojic in that way, do you?  It's not a sensible

21     answer that you've given to this Trial Chamber, is it?  And you're a

22     sensible man, Doctor.

23        A.   If you can be satisfied with my answer that it could have been

24     Mate Boban, I've given it to you.  It could have been Mate Boban, as far

25     as the formal appointment is concerned, but I'm trying to explain how the

Page 39093

 1     proposal came about.

 2        Q.   You give it and you take it away.  Not interested in that.  I'm

 3     interested in your appointment, and you give the name Mate Boban, but

 4     then you want to take it away again, and it's just wasting our time.

 5     Mate Boban gave you the job, and he gave you the job because you were a

 6     trusted person who shared with him many of the goals of Herceg-Bosna.

 7     That's the simple answer, isn't it?

 8        A.   No.

 9        Q.   All right.  Well, I'm going to suggest to you, before we turn to

10     look at some of the details of the evidence that you've given in the last

11     two days, that that is what lies behind you, as a doctor.  You are a

12     doctor and a politician, and you are a politician of a particular

13     character in 1991 and 1992 and 1993, a loyal and trusted politician,

14     intimate with Boban and with others who were key to Herceg-Bosna.  That's

15     you, Dr. Ivan Bagaric, isn't it?

16        A.   No, no.  I was not loyal to Mate Boban.  I was loyal to the

17     people who elected me, that is, the Croats of Tomislavgrad municipality.

18        Q.   When you gave evidence on Monday -- I'm going to turn away from

19     that now, and I'm going to come back to it at the end of what you and I

20     have to say to one another.  When you gave evidence on Monday, Doctor,

21     you said that when you visited Sovici/Doljani, you said, To my great

22     satisfaction, no crimes had been committed against the civilians there,

23     and that this was confirmed by the Muslims to whom you spoke.  Do you

24     giving that answer?

25        A.   I remember the gist of my answer, but I'm not sure I said that

Page 39094

 1     exactly in that way.  I'm not sure.  Why?  Because Muslim commanders

 2     accused us, and that includes me, as a physician, saying, Your army, your

 3     troops raped our women, victimised our civilians.  But eventually when we

 4     got there, we saw that it was not like that.  I'm not saying that not a

 5     single civilian was killed.  At that time, I wasn't really aware.  But

 6     when we came there, the people whom we found there and that expressed

 7     their satisfaction, speaking to us and to the Muslim representatives,

 8     including Mr. Halilovic, and we went there and we were satisfied that the

 9     truth was not exactly what we had been told.

10        Q.   I'm going to ask you to pause there, if you wouldn't mind,

11     Doctor, because the question that I asked you was whether you recalled

12     giving the answer that it was to your great satisfaction that no crimes

13     had been committed against civilians and that the Muslims had confirmed

14     that.  And I think you and I are agreed that that was the gist of what

15     you were saying.  It may not be the absolute word-for-word answer, but

16     that's the gist of it.  And you gave evidence to a very similar effect at

17     this Tribunal in the case of Tuta Stela, did you not?

18        A.   I testified in the case of Tuta Stela about the so-called general

19     circumstances.  I don't remember that this was discussed.  However, if

20     this had been discussed, then my -- the only answer I could have provided

21     was along these lines, because that's how things transpired.  And I will

22     never forget what happened and how it was.

23        Q.   Well, it was discussed when you gave evidence, and I'm putting to

24     you, and maybe you'll just agree --

25        A.   It's possible.

Page 39095

 1        Q.   -- that the gist of what you were saying in the Tuta Stela case

 2     was the same; that you went to Sovici, Doljani, and that you spoke to

 3     people, and you were pleased to find out that really there were no

 4     complaints against the HVO.  That's what it came down to in your evidence

 5     here on Monday, and very much the same thing some six years ago.  All

 6     right?

 7        A.   Correct, it is possible.  If I was saying anything at the time,

 8     then I would have been saying the same things I'm saying today.

 9        Q.   That's right.  And the six years that elapsed since the

10     Trial Chamber in that case delivered its judgement, have you troubled at

11     any stage to have a look at that judgement and to see whether it might be

12     that your state of knowledge of events in Sovici/Doljani is inadequate?

13        A.   I said that I had testified about general circumstances.  I did

14     not testify about Tuta or Stela [as interpreted] because I did not know

15     them.  Of course, I never investigated the --

16        Q.   Did I ask you that?  Did I once ask you that?  Just have a look

17     at the question.

18        A.   Yes, you did.  You did, you asked me that.

19             MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] I apologise to the Prosecutor.  The

20     witness is answering the Prosecutor's question, and he should be let to

21     do so.  His last sentence was that he didn't know these people and he

22     never investigated, and he was about to answer your question, but he

23     should have been allowed to do so.

24             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, the Prosecutor has

25     asked you a very specific question.  He says six years ago you testified,

Page 39096

 1     there was a judgement, and the Prosecutor is asking you whether you read

 2     the judgement, and, if so, if this changed or would change your

 3     conclusions.  So it's quite specific.

 4             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I am sorry.  I never read the

 5     judgement, and nothing can modify my memory and my feelings, because my

 6     feelings are even more important than what I remember, the feeling that I

 7     had when I was there.

 8             MR. LAWS:

 9        Q.   To say that nothing could modify your feelings about it is --

10        A.   No, no.

11        Q.   Don't interrupt me, please, Doctor, while I'm just finishing my

12     question.  I'm doing my level best not to interrupt you when your answers

13     run to many, many lines.  But you've just said nothing can modify your

14     memory or your feelings, and I'm going to ask you whether historical fact

15     is not capable of altering the way that you view events in

16     Sovici/Doljani.

17        A.   No.  You want to represent me as a person without feelings.  You

18     said that I had just said that nothing can change my feelings.  I did not

19     say that.  If a crime had been committed, and I did not know about it, I

20     would still feel comfortable, this is not correct.  I said that nothing

21     could change my memory and the feeling that I had at the time.  I

22     experienced what I did, and I was happy to see that nothing of the kind

23     described by the Muslim commanders had happened there.

24             Here, every word is being weighed, and for my own sake, for the

25     sake of this Trial Chamber and this Tribunal, I would like to provide a

Page 39097

 1     very clear answer to every question of yours.  Please, stop putting words

 2     into my mouth if I never said them.

 3        Q.   Later, perhaps you'll get a chance to check, but I used your

 4     words, not my own.

 5             Dr. Bagaric --

 6        A.   Very well.

 7        Q.   -- at paragraph 238, the Trial Chamber describes a number of

 8     events that had taken place in Sovici and Doljani.  They say that the

 9     Muslim houses in the area were burnt to make sure that there would be no

10     return of the Muslim population.  They say that Muslim religious sites,

11     like the mosques in the area, were systematically destroyed.  All right?

12     And that had taken place, the destruction -- just wait a moment.  The

13     destruction of the houses and the destruction of the mosque in Sovici had

14     taken place at the time that you arrived with the joint mission on

15     4th/5th of May.

16             Did you see houses that had been razed to the ground and rubble

17     where the mosque had been?

18        A.   I didn't see that, Your Honour.  I arrived in an UNPROFOR

19     vehicle, under protection.  I was brought in front of the school.  We had

20     a meeting there, and nothing of the sort -- I don't remember having seen

21     any of that.  If I'd seen any such thing, I would have remembered.  I am

22     saying what I heard at the meeting from the people who were also

23     attending that meeting and who had been detained in that school.  There

24     were detained Muslim Bosniaks, and we spoke to them, and this is what I

25     am talking about.  Later on, we got back into the APC and we left.

Page 39098

 1             And as for the area that the Prosecutor is mentioning, whether

 2     something of the kind happened immediately after we had left, I don't

 3     know that, either.  I'm not saying that all that the Prosecutor is

 4     mentioning could not have happened there.  However, at that meeting I

 5     don't remember anybody having raised that as a problem.  I don't remember

 6     having seen anything of the kind, any of us.

 7             The most important thing for me was that the civilians who were

 8     there told us that there had been no mass killings, large-scale rapes,

 9     and all the other things that I feared I would possibly find there and I

10     didn't.

11        Q.   The people that you were talking about in your last answer, the

12     people with whom you had a discussion about mass killings and large-scale

13     rapes, they were the villagers of Sovici/Doljani and the surrounding area

14     who by that stage had been held captive in the schoolhouse for more than

15     a fortnight.  Are you seriously saying they had no complaints about the

16     HVO?

17             MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] I apologise to my learned friend.

18     I believe that there has been a misunderstanding of the previous answer

19     of the witness.  He said that the people did not complain of mass

20     murders, rapes on a large scale, and I therefore believe that part of my

21     learned friend's question, where he says that the witness discussed mass

22     murders with the people, and rapes, is simply not fair, because this

23     contains a statement that the witness never uttered.

24             MR. LAWS:  Well, may I answer that?  May I answer that?  On

25     Monday of this week, and we can all check the transcript, this witness

Page 39099

 1     gave evidence that the Muslim population of Sovici, in the schoolhouse,

 2     were complaining about their own side not having sent them sufficient

 3     help.  They were complaining that the army, the ARBiH, hadn't sent them

 4     the help they wanted, and not a word about any complaint to do with the

 5     HVO.  The question, I submit, is a fair one, and I'm going to repeat it,

 6     if I may.

 7        Q.   There were no complaints, then, about the HVO; do we have that

 8     right?

 9        A.   I believe you misunderstood me.  If we're going to be fair,

10     completely fair, I see what you're saying.  It's not that they complained

11     that the army had not sent them any help.  They complained because they

12     had been betrayed by the army commanders.  And I'm paraphrasing.

13     Somebody told them, Don't worry, launch an attack.  Maybe not an attack,

14     but in military terms, something, We will then come to your aid.  And

15     this didn't happen.

16             I'm talking about a conflict, and it was not the insufficient

17     help because somebody had attacked somebody else.  The civilians were

18     very dissatisfied with the Muslim commanders, with Halilovic, and I don't

19     remember that they ever expressed any dissatisfaction with anybody else,

20     or maybe I wasn't there if such dissatisfaction was expressed.  From what

21     I could hear, there was no such dissatisfaction at all.

22        Q.   You've just expressed again the view that I was putting to you

23     and which Ms. Alaburic suggested might be unfair.  I think we can all see

24     that that is your view of things and that the question that I put to you

25     was not unfair.  No complaints about the HVO, and so you come here in

Page 39100

 1     2009 and say what you said about your great satisfaction there were no

 2     complaints and no crimes committed against civilians.

 3             The people that you spoke to --

 4             MR. KARNAVAS:  I'm going to object to that.  Is that commentary,

 5     or is that evidence, or is he summing up?  I think what his view is --

 6             MR. LAWS:  I'm trying to draw the strands together from an

 7     extremely difficult and complex web of answers that the witness has

 8     given.

 9             MR. KARNAVAS:  Well, he can do that in his final brief, not

10     during the --

11             MR. LAWS:  No, because I've got another question to ask.

12             MR. KARNAVAS:  Well, I believe that last commentary was

13     commentary for final brief and not part of a question.

14             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Prosecutor, please ask your

15     questions.

16             MR. LAWS:

17        Q.   The people who you were speaking to in that schoolhouse, who were

18     prisoners of the HVO, were later to be put onto buses and transferred to

19     an area near to Gornji Vakuf, and I'm going to ask you to look at an HVO

20     document with me, please.  It's P02372.  It's a little bit further on in

21     the same binder that you were given earlier today.  Do you have that

22     document, Dr. Bagaric?

23        A.   Yes, I do.

24        Q.   You can see that it's over the name of somebody called

25     Marko Rozic and that it is from the Jablanica municipality defence

Page 39101

 1     office, and it calls itself a decision.  It's dated the 13th of May of

 2     1993, and under Roman I, it says:

 3             "All movable property and real estate of the Muslims that

 4     emigrated shall be considered to be spoils of war and it shall belong to

 5     the HZ-HB Croatian Defence Council."

 6             Can you see that?

 7        A.   Yes, I can see that item.

 8        Q.   And this Trial Chamber has heard evidence of villagers from that

 9     locality who were transferred, and who came back, and who found that

10     their property had been taken, and that was being done, Doctor, in order

11     to ensure that the Muslim population would not want to return.

12             And the question that I'm going to ask you is:  Having looked at

13     some of this evidence and that document, do you want to change your

14     feelings about Sovici/Doljani or is the position, as you said a while

15     ago, that nothing could change your view of it?

16             MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, objection to the

17     question, because the witness --

18             MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Your Honours, this time -- this type

19     of examination, Your Honours, I have a right to object.  This is an

20     inappropriate questioning.  The conclusions that the Prosecutor tries to

21     draw only irritate the witness.  If we want to irritate the witness, if

22     we want to aggravate the witness, if we don't want the witness to answer

23     the questions -- I can see Judge Trechsel not approving with what I'm

24     saying, but I will still bring my point home.

25             He did not say that he could not change his feelings about what

Page 39102

 1     happened.  He explained very clearly that the feeling that he had at the

 2     meeting and what he learned at the meeting at the time cannot be changed.

 3     The witness is now being portrayed as ruthless and insensitive to things

 4     that might have happened and he did not know about.  This is an

 5     inappropriate type of examination, and that's why I'm objecting.

 6             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Ms. Nozica, Ms. Nozica, your

 7     intervention is totally inappropriate for the following reason:  The

 8     witness has given his position.  Since the beginning, he is not changing

 9     this position.  All right, very well.  We have understood very well his

10     point.

11             The Prosecution, who is doing his job, he has his own thesis

12     about it, and he shows a document to the witness.  Everybody can read it,

13     everybody can see it.  Muslims have seen their house taken by the HVO.

14     The Prosecution tells him to look at this document, Does this document

15     change the way you feel about the events?  That's all.  He answers, No,

16     or he can say, I'm discovering this now.  This is the debate.  You are

17     objecting because you don't like this.

18             I will make you note, Ms. Nozica, that during the four hours you

19     have been using, never the Prosecution has asked for the floor.  He let

20     you do your job, and you did it quite well.  Let him do his job properly,

21     and the Judges will decide.

22             MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I apologise.  I accept

23     your position and your opinion, but then obviously the Trial Chamber has

24     not understood what the witness actually said.  The witness said, I have

25     feelings about the fact -- facts and what I heard at the meeting.  He

Page 39103

 1     never -- and what I saw on that day.  He never said that nothing could

 2     change his feelings if there were things that he never heard or saw, and

 3     that's why I'm intervening.  Now he is being asked whether this could

 4     change his feelings, and he said that his feelings arise from what he,

 5     himself, heard and saw, and that's why I intervened.  Otherwise, I would

 6     not have intervened, because I understood from the Prosecutor's questions

 7     that he is trying to portray the witness in a completely different light.

 8             MR. LAWS:  If I may reply to that, please, just briefly.

 9             First of all, I'm not remotely trying to irritate the witness.

10     The witness has, on two occasions at this Tribunal, given a version of

11     events at Sovici/Doljani which the Prosecution say is from an entirely

12     fictional world, and we're allowed to address that.  That's what I'm

13     doing, and I'm going to move on to the events of May, if I may.

14             MR. KARNAVAS:  If I could just be heard for one second.

15             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Can I answer the question, please?

16             MR. KARNAVAS:  If I could be heard for just one second, because

17     I think the problem is, if I could just summarise it, is that the

18     Prosecution is mischaracterising the witness's testimony and that he's

19     using that as a predicate in order to formulate his next question, and

20     that is, if you go back and you listen to it very carefully, look at the

21     transcript, it is exactly -- it is a technique that is used by common-law

22     lawyers when they want to trick a witness, and this is not the purpose of

23     this procedure.  So I would appreciate it if my learned colleague would

24     be very careful in not mischaracterising the witness's testimony when he

25     sums up and uses it as a predicate, as a basis in formulating a following

Page 39104

 1     question, in looping.

 2             MR. LAWS:  Well, I'd respectfully submit it's hard to know, then,

 3     what the purpose of calling this witness to deal with Sovici/Doljani was.

 4             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Prosecutor, even under the

 5     assumption that you were trying to trick the witness, you have

 6     professional Judges on the Bench; therefore, it is not possible.  I shall

 7     not enter -- I will not enter in this question.  I listen to the

 8     question, I listen to the answer, I watch the witness, and this is how I

 9     proceed.  And I have the documents in front of me.

10             Therefore, Witness, you are a doctor, you're a deputy, a member

11     of Parliament.  You have high functions.  You understand the meaning of

12     the question from the Prosecution, and under oath you have been with

13     UNPROFOR in Sovici with Halilovic and General Petkovic.  You were in this

14     school, you saw the people who were there.  You got back into the vehicle

15     and you left.  That's what you told us, and I am just noting what you are

16     giving is your own version.  The Prosecution just said that he takes

17     issue with what you say.  Therefore, this is clear.

18             What do you say now?

19             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.  I actually

20     did not answer the Prosecutor's question -- the last Prosecutor's

21     question before the interventions of the counsel.  He asked me whether I

22     would change my feelings after having seen the decision, and it is

23     exactly as the counsel put it.  I said very clearly that nothing can

24     change the feeling and the memory that I had at the time, there and then,

25     so many years back, because my memory is still vivid.  Why?  Because I

Page 39105

 1     was afraid that the stories were true, because if they had been, I would

 2     have been sad, it would have been terrible.  People would have been

 3     killed, and that would be just the beginning of a long and sad story.

 4             However, when I see this order, this decision, and if things were

 5     as they are described herein, which I don't know anything about, then of

 6     course any normal person -- I don't know whether this decision is

 7     militarily correct or whether there is -- it is correct to take

 8     somebody's house as a spoils of war, but I believe that nobody's house

 9     can be spoils of war.  And of course, I'm sorry if things happened in the

10     way described in here, in this decision.

11             JUDGE TRECHSEL:  I would just like to make one observation.

12             I think in these many objections, Ms. Alaburic was just talked

13     down by Ms. Nozica, but I think you have not -- you're not insisting.

14             MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, let me just say that

15     my learned friend Nozica has priority because Dr. Bagaric is her witness.

16     That's why I retreated.  But I really wanted to say exactly what my

17     learned friend Nozica said, so there's no need for me to add anything to

18     her words.  She summed it up pretty well.

19             JUDGE TRECHSEL:  Fine.  I fully agree to the reaction of our

20     President of the Chamber, but there is one point which I think is to be

21     criticised in the question of the Office of the Prosecutor, of Mr. Law,

22     and it's on page 31-32, where you said, Mr. Law:

23             "And this was being done, Doctor, in order to ensure that the

24     Muslim population would not want to return."

25             And I think there you're going a bit beyond what is in the

Page 39106

 1     document and giving interpretation which is yours, and it's not correct,

 2     I think, to put that to the witness as if it were an accepted fact.

 3             MR. LAWS:  I fully accept what you say, Your Honour.  The

 4     Prosecution say that's the inference to be drawn.

 5             JUDGE TRECHSEL:  Thank you.

 6             MR. LAWS:  Thank you.

 7             JUDGE TRECHSEL:  Please continue.

 8             MR. LAWS:

 9        Q.   In the following month, Dr. Bagaric, May of 1993, large numbers

10     of Muslim residents of Mostar were taken from their homes and put into

11     the Heliodrom.  You know that, do you not?

12        A.   I know of the Heliodrom.

13             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, you are not answering

14     precisely the question.  The question of the Prosecution is fundamental.

15     He is asking you, Do you know, are you aware of the fact that people were

16     taken to the Heliodrom?  And you answer, I know the Heliodrom.  So the

17     question was much more precise.  He wanted to know if you knew -- if you

18     were aware of the fact that people had been taken to the Heliodrom.  This

19     is the substance of the question.

20             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I knew of the situation.  I knew of

21     the final situation, which was that people had been brought to the

22     Heliodrom, a lot of people had been brought there, a lot of Muslims and

23     Bosniaks.  Under what conditions, under what circumstances, I don't know,

24     because I never saw that with my own eyes, and I cannot answer the

25     question in any other way.  I know of the Heliodrom, I knew of the

Page 39107

 1     Heliodrom, and I know that people had been brought there, that people

 2     were there.  I know that, and that's the only fact I know.

 3             MR. LAWS:  We're going to need to go into closed session just for

 4     a moment, please, if we may.

 5             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Registrar, please, closed

 6     session.

 7                           [Private session]

8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22                           [Open session]

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

24             MR. LAWS:

25        Q.   Dr. Bagaric, Witness 2D-AB had a memory of it being you who had

Page 39108

 1     first asked him to go to the Heliodrom immediately after the arrest that

 2     had taken place in the early part of May in Mostar.  He remembered it as

 3     you, Dr. Bagaric, who had told him to go down there.  Does your memory

 4     accord with his?

 5        A.   If he said so, I will agree.  I was with him almost every day,

 6     and we provided each other with instructions or commands -- or, rather,

 7     not commands, we did not command each other.  If that's his testimony,

 8     then I can agree with that.

 9        Q.   If you can remember for us, please, how you came to learn that

10     large numbers of people been detained at the Heliodrom.  Who was it who

11     told you so that you could tell Witness 2D-AB that he should go to the

12     Heliodrom?

13        A.   Your Honours, one could say that you could not hide the fact that

14     a city is ablaze.  It was a notorious fact.  My colleagues, doctors, were

15     talking about that.  And if we are talking about the same thing, it was

16     the beginning of an open conflict in Mostar with the BH Army on the one

17     side and the HVO on the other side, so we're talking about major

18     developments in Mostar at the time.

19        Q.   I understand that, but the position was this:  People had been

20     taken from their homes, including, as this Trial Chamber has seen, large

21     numbers of doctors, put in the Heliodrom, and you appear to have said to

22     2D-AB that he should go there, and you agree that he may well be right.

23     Were you saying that that was just from your general information, as

24     somebody who was in Mostar at the time, or was the position that somebody

25     asked you to go there or, rather, to send 2D-AB there?

Page 39109

 1        A.   I don't remember that anybody asked me to do that.  I repeat, it

 2     was a major development.  I can't be sure, after so much time, when I was

 3     there, but I believe that it was significantly later.  I spoke about that

 4     yesterday -- the day before yesterday.  I really can't remember, sir, how

 5     this transpired.  I can't remember the details of this.

 6        Q.   You also told us that when he came back, and he had found it an

 7     upsetting visit, when he came back he told you and other people in the

 8     Health Sector what he had seen there; do you recall that?

 9        A.   Well, I really can't remember that specific moment, but I believe

10     that I was provided with a full picture, that I was provided actually not

11     a full picture but a general picture of the situation over there, about

12     the needs to intervene, to monitor the situation, as it were, and so on

13     and so forth.

14        Q.   He recalls that it was in the Health Sector, having come back

15     from the Heliodrom, and he was telling people, including you, what he had

16     seen, he told us what he had seen, that he had seen people who were very

17     afraid, people who didn't know why they had been put into prison, and

18     people who were overwhelmingly Muslims.

19             Now, I want you to cast your mind back for us, please,

20     Dr. Bagaric, because that's an extraordinary turn of events in the life

21     of any city, isn't it?

22        A.   I've already said that this was the beginning of an open conflict

23     in Mostar.  It was a big event, something that I had feared all the time.

24     Everything pointed to that, and it did happen, and this was one of the

25     consequences of that development.

Page 39110

 1        Q.   The question that I'm asking you -- the question that I'm asking

 2     you is there for everybody to see; that he recalls that he was telling

 3     people in the Health Sector what he had seen.

 4             MR. LAWS:  I'll give way to Mr. Karnavas.

 5             MR. KARNAVAS:  Perhaps it may be good, because of the guidance

 6     previously provided by the Trial Chamber, for the gentleman to read from

 7     the transcript what exactly was said, and give us a page number, and what

 8     have you.  That this way, the gentleman would actually hear the words,

 9     and this may be of some assistance.  I don't mean to interrupt or

10     disrupt.

11             MR. LAWS:  Well, I think we all have the general --

12             MR. KARNAVAS:  Procedure, sir.  We have procedures here.

13             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Fine.  It's time for a break.

14     During the break, Prosecutor, you can seek and look for the exact

15     transcript of 2B [as interpreted] so everyone is aware of what was said.

16     So we'll have a 20-minute break now.

17                           --- Recess taken at 3.49 p.m.

18                           --- On resuming at 4.12 p.m.

19             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] All right.  Prosecutor, so I'm

20     sure that you have found the exact words uttered by Witness 2B [as

21     interpreted], so, please, you can read them out to Mr. Bagaric.

22             MR. LAWS:  The transcript is at page 37602, and it's a question

23     posed by Judge Antonetti at line 9, the question starting at 15:

24             "When you left the Heliodrom, did you tell your superiors, I'm

25     going to the prison -- I'm going to the Heliodrom, I've met people whom I

Page 39111

 1     knew, and these people didn't know why they had been detained?  Did you

 2     tell that to your superiors, and if you did, what did they then tell

 3     you?"

 4             And the witness said:

 5             "First of all, of course I did tell them.  That was my duty, that

 6     was my duty to tell them, and when I went down there, as you've already

 7     heard, well, Dr. Bagaric told me to go down there."

 8             And, Dr. Bagaric, you were Witness 2D-AB's superior, were you

 9     not?

10        A.   Yes, that's right.

11        Q.   So I hope that we're all agreed.  I want to ask you whether you

12     agree with his recollection that when he came back from the Heliodrom, he

13     reported to you about what he had seen.

14        A.   Well, I can't agree or disagree with his recollection, but I can

15     say that if he says it happened like that, that it was a man who

16     performed his task professionally and with whom I cooperated very

17     closely, so I have reason to believe that whatever he said, it is roughly

18     true or exactly true.

19             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Doctor, when I asked the

20     question to that witness, what I had in mind was the situation of your

21     Muslim colleagues, and I asked that question and I thought I knew that he

22     had colleagues who had been detained, so it was quite important.

23             Let's imagine we Judges here find some of our colleagues have

24     been arrested.  It's quite an important event, which you do remember.  So

25     when you heard that your Muslim colleagues were arrested, it must have

Page 39112

 1     struck you, you as well as all the Croatian doctors, and you must have

 2     asked yourselves, well, why did they arrest them?

 3             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, I mean, I have to be

 4     perfectly precise and honest.  At that time, at that moment in time in

 5     the beginning of May, I am not sure that I already knew that the doctors

 6    were there. (redacted) had told me, then it's probably true.  However,

 7     I don't recall that moment.

 8             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Hold on.  We need to redact

 9     this, because you've pronounced the name of the witness.  And since there

10     were protective measures, I'd like to ask the Registrar to draw an order.

11             You can proceed.

12             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes.  So I suppose, although

13     I'm not sure, that my colleagues who were detained at the time were

14     Mr. Stranjak and Mr. Hadzic, I believe.  And I'm not sure whether they

15     were formally at the HVO or not and what the circumstances were, but I

16     know for sure that these physicians were absolutely certainly at that

17     centre later, and with them - how shall I put it? - we did an important

18     job there, because they remained to work at Heliodrom.  And for every

19     physician, and certainly me, when we heard the news first, it must have

20     been unpleasant.

21             MR. LAWS:

22        Q.   Well, I'm going to come to doctors in just a moment, but I was

23     asking you about when the Witness 2D-AB came back and reported to you,

24     and you said that, well, you're not sure, but if he said that that was

25     right, it was probably right, but you don't recall at the moment.  That's

Page 39113

 1     what you said --

 2        A.   That's correct.

 3        Q.   [Previous translation continues] ... line 18.

 4        A.   Yes.

 5        Q.   If you'd look in the bundle, please, at the document P02315.  Do

 6     you have that document, Doctor?

 7        A.   Yes.

 8        Q.   You can see that it's over the name of a colleague of yours about

 9     whom you've already spoken, Dr. Ante Kvesic; is that right?

10        A.   Yes, Ante Kvesic.

11        Q.   This is a list -- the heading of the document is a list of the

12     employees of the Mostar HVO regional field hospital and their family

13     members who were taken away from their flats.  It's a list that contains

14     106 names.  It would --

15             MS. TOMASEGOVIC TOMIC: [Interpretation] My learned friend, I'm

16     sorry, I'd like to say that we have the wrong document on the screen.

17     Document 3315 is on the screen, and the Prosecutor wanted 2315.  I've

18     been warned from behind, and it's true we have the wrong document on the

19     screen.

20             MR. LAWS:  Thank you very much.  Yes, P02315.  I think the

21     witness has the right document.

22        Q.   Were you aware, sir, of these people being detained at the

23     Heliodrom?

24        A.   Quite honestly, I don't remember this list, but I do know for

25     sure that Dr. Kvesic, who was the director of the hospital, took care of

Page 39114

 1     that and he was in charge, and he knew what happened to all of the

 2     people.  I don't know which of these people are doctors, although I see

 3     that some of them are, one, two, yes, and who were family members.

 4             And another reason why I'm not qualified to speak of this

 5     document is that at that time, due to a particular set of circumstances,

 6     I was not in Mostar on -- I was not in Mostar on the 11th of May.  I was

 7     there on the 5th May, but at that time not.  I think I was on the road.

 8             This was after my visit to Canada that had been arranged much

 9     earlier, and the procedure of getting the visa took quite a long time.

10     So I spent quite a long time in Canada, and that was done in agreement

11     with my colleagues and with my superiors.  That's why I can't be

12     qualified to speak of this.  But I hold that if Dr. Kvesic signed it, I

13     suppose that in this incident some doctors and family members were taken

14     away, although I don't know, really.

15        Q.   Help me, please, Dr. Bagaric.  Are you saying that you were or

16     were not aware that in May of 1993, a large number of civilians in Mostar

17     were arrested and taken to the Heliodrom?  Were you aware of that in

18     May of 1993 or were you not aware perhaps because you were in Canada or

19     on the road?

20        A.   I said I was aware of that, of course I was.  But I spoke of this

21     document in particular dated 11th May, and I said I wasn't sure.

22             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Hold on, Dr. Bagaric.  Please

23     be accurate.  We find out, because I didn't know that you were in Canada

24     in May.  When did you go to Canada and when did you come back?  When did

25     you leave and when did you come back?

Page 39115

 1             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think -- I think, but I'm not

 2     sure, that sometime on the 15th, I had already arrived in Canada, and I

 3     stayed at least 20 days, at least; two days more or less, but that's the

 4     time-frame.

 5             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Which means that on the 9th,

 6     10th and 11th of May, you were in the area, in the Mostar area?

 7             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I was in the area of Mostar when

 8     that first clash happened.  I cannot tell you the exact date.  If that

 9     was before the 15th, a few days before the 15th, then I certainly was

10     there.  Was it on the 9th?

11             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] But when, on May the 11th,

12     Dr. Kvesic - sorry about the pronunciation - draws that report stating

13     that there are 106 persons belonging to the medical profession, in the

14     broad sense of the word, who were expelled from their flats and brought

15     somewhere, we know that there are several doctors, and there are names,

16     and there is the 12th and the 13th, et cetera, this is quite a

17     significant event which affects the medical community, so you must have

18     been informed on the 11th of May.  It cannot be differently.

19             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I've already said

20     that I remember the incident, the event.  I remember that some medical

21     staff and family members were taken away.  But this was signed -- this

22     was dated on the 11th of May.  It doesn't mean that the event happened on

23     the 11th.  I don't know when the document was created, but I know of the

24     event.

25             MR. LAWS:

Page 39116

 1        Q.   Whenever you came to know about it, Dr. Bagaric, the position was

 2     that the HVO had been taking people who had not done anything wrong and

 3     had been putting them in a prison just outside Mostar; can we agree about

 4     that?

 5        A.   Well, people were certainly taken away and out of Mostar to

 6     Heliodrom.  That is indisputable.  That's my answer.  But certainly, if

 7     you let me finish, I can't go into the guilt of -- guilt or innocence of

 8     any of these people, but I suppose certainly that a large number of these

 9     people could not have been guilty of anything.

10        Q.   You don't -- you do not, in your heart, seriously believe,

11     Dr. Bagaric, that of this list of 106 doctors and their family, and other

12     medical staff, that we're dealing with a list of wrong-doers who had to

13     be detained?  You don't believe that at all, do you?

14        A.   No, no, no, that's not true.  I see these names.  If it's true

15     that these people were Mila, Maja, and the physicians, Safiqa [phoen],

16     Azra, Latifa, I believe that they were not wrong-doers, that they had not

17     done anything wrong.  I'm saying that I can't be sure that some of these

18     people did not do anything wrong.  I don't know about that, in fact.  I

19     know of the event, I know that these things happened, that indeed

20     physicians, and I'm talking primarily of physicians, were taken away to

21     the camp, or rather the prison, or whatever.

22             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Doctor, if some, as you said,

23     could have been wrong-doers, but I'd like to draw your attention to

24     32 and 37.  Look at this.  These are children.  How do you account for

25     this?

Page 39117

 1             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I didn't see this.  Of course,

 2     children.  But normally, Your Honours, I've already said if women were

 3     taken away, if children, as we see, were taken away, then certainly there

 4     could have been no reason, unless the reason was to protect those people

 5     from the conflict.  That, I could understand.  Of course, I could not

 6     understand it in the broader context, whatever reason was preferred.

 7             MR. LAWS:

 8        Q.   You were in this period, Dr. Bagaric, regularly meeting with

 9     Bruno Stojic?

10        A.   Quite honestly, I don't remember meeting with him regularly at

11     that time.  I'm sorry, but could you help me?  When was the first day of

12     the conflict in that month?  Was it the 5th, the 6th?  What was the date

13     of the open conflict in May?

14        Q.   I'm dealing now very specifically with Bruno Stojic; all right?

15     I want you to focus on him for a moment.  You told the Trial Chamber,

16     either yesterday or the day before, that you had meetings with him as the

17     need arose.  Did you ever discuss with Bruno Stojic the events that had

18     led to people being imprisoned in the Heliodrom?

19        A.   In that period, in that particular period from the date when it

20     happened until this date, I certainly was unable to discuss it with him,

21     because I was already away in Canada, as I told you.  Certainly, later,

22     when I came back, I not only talked to Bruno; I discussed it with many

23     people.

24        Q.   Well, you'd have been back in June, you told us, and this would

25     still have been a very big story in Mostar in June, these arrests.

Page 39118

 1     Heliodrom was to continue, as we're going to see, for many, many months

 2     after this.  Did you at any stage have a conversation with Bruno Stojic

 3     about what was happening and why people were being detained in the

 4     Heliodrom prison?

 5        A.   When I returned, I think this group of people had already been

 6     released, and as far as I remember -- or perhaps the majority had been

 7     released, so I don't remember any discussion with Bruno Stojic

 8     specifically on this topic, or anyone else, for that matter, because by

 9     the time I returned, I believe most of these people had been released.

10     It was the initial period of that first conflict, and then things calmed

11     down.  The circumstances were no longer that dramatic.

12        Q.   Well, as I think we are agreed, and as we're going to see,

13     whatever the position with the doctors and their families might have

14     been, the Heliodrom continued for many, many months, and I'm going to ask

15     you the question again and give you another opportunity to answer it.

16     During that time, did you ever have a conversation with Bruno Stojic

17     about what had led to people being detained in the Heliodrom?

18        A.   Your question relates to the entire period, doesn't it, from the

19     beginning of Heliodrom until the end?

20        Q.   I used the word "ever."  I hope it was clear to you.  I've used

21     it twice.  Did you ever have a conversation -- just let me finish, and

22     we'll get it absolutely clear.  Did you ever have a conversation with him

23     about this topic?

24        A.   I think I did, I think, but I think I also spoke to a great

25     number of people, not only Bruno Stojic.  I must admit not too often,

Page 39119

 1     because we didn't meet very often, except at collegium meetings.

 2        Q.   What did Bruno Stojic say about why people were in the Heliodrom?

 3        A.   I can't really interpret now what Bruno Stojic said, or what I

 4     said, or anyone else.  However, I believe that my discussions related to

 5     the situation, such as this case, that things should be improved,

 6     redressed, to the best our ability to influence things, but the security

 7     situation was so disrupted in Mostar that you couldn't know what was --

 8     what the right thing to do was and what to decide.  I think that was the

 9     gist of whatever I could have discussed with Bruno Stojic or anyone else.

10        Q.   I'll try that question one more time.  You've said that you can't

11     really interpret now what he said, or what you said, or anyone else.  Can

12     you help us at all with what Bruno Stojic said about why people were in

13     the Heliodrom?

14        A.   I don't remember specifically.  It was an open conflict, and it

15     was impossible to control the overall situation in the region or to

16     protect either Muslims or Croats, because the hostility was open and

17     deteriorating.  I don't remember this detail specifically.

18        Q.   Is that going to be your answer to my question?

19        A.   I would, I would stick to that answer.

20        Q.   Did you know that there was a forced labour programme within the

21     Heliodrom?

22        A.   After my return from Canada, I think -- I think I went to

23     Heliodrom for the first time sometime after my return from Canada and

24     assessed the situation for the first time.  I had heard by then,

25     especially from reports by our physicians who were working there and from

Page 39120

 1     talking to them, that indeed there were certain incidents involving

 2     prisoners who were sent to perform certain jobs.  With a certain delay, I

 3     did hear about these things, but I was not directly informed, no.

 4        Q.   Your colleague, Dr. 2-AB [sic], has told this Trial Chamber that

 5     he suspected there was a forced labour programme, had suspicions about

 6     it, and that he told you about his suspicions, and the transcript is

 7     page 37648.  And that would accord with your recollection, as you've just

 8     described it to us?

 9        A.   I repeat, I heard it from my colleagues, doctors.  I can't say

10     that it was him or any particular individual.  These doubts existed,

11     these suspicions existed.  And these things happened to a certain extent,

12     but I don't know on which scale and how often they happened.  I don't

13     know any particular details.

14        Q.   He was concerned because with his experience of the

15     Geneva Conventions, something that you've talked about, he knew it was a

16     war crime, and he recalled a conversation in which he said to the warden

17     of the Heliodrom, Stanko Bozic, that he should be careful because it was

18     a war crime.  With the suspicions that you had, what did you do,

19     Dr. Bagaric?

20        A.   I have to repeat.  I was head of the Health Sector of the

21     Croatian Defence Council, the Medical Sector, somebody who was in charge

22     of that particular field.  And relating to the organisation of the Health

23     Service, I regularly received I don't know how many reports, but I never

24     had reliable information about what you're asking me about until the

25     people who were sent to perform certain jobs were wounded and then sent

Page 39121

 1     for treatment to the Mostar Hospital, and then all of those who had to be

 2     informed were informed.

 3             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, I'm going to ask you a

 4     technical question.

 5             In the Defence Department, headed by Mr. Stojic, because he was

 6     number one, would he summon meetings with several people to discuss

 7     questions?  Would he summon you and other people to say, We have this and

 8     this problem.  This is the situation.  We have the Heliodrom.  There are

 9     detainees.  What do we do?  Was this the way he worked, or was everything

10     partitioned and you were not aware of the existence of a general policy,

11     you would only take care of your 25 staff members, because you said there

12     were 25 staff members, and there were no so-called thematic [Realtime

13     transcript read in error "fanatic"] meetings or meetings on very

14     significant issues?  Could you tell us how this was organised?  If

15     Mr. Stojic were to testify, I'd ask the question directly, but for the

16     time being I'm not aware at all of how this was organised.  This is why

17     I'm asking the question.

18             JUDGE TRECHSEL:  Just for the -- regarding the record, page 51,

19     on line - what was it? - 22, an amusing misprint, because it said that

20     there were no so-called fanatic meetings.  "Thematic" was the word, not

21     "fanatic."  Thank you.

22             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, I talked about thematic

23     meetings and not fanatic meetings.  So, Witness, I'd like to thank my

24     colleague for spotting the typo.

25             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Right.  Your Honour, Mr. President,

Page 39122

 1     I'm talking about the time after my return from Canada.  It was a time of

 2     open hostility and war, and at that time I really don't recall a single

 3     meeting that I attended.  I don't think the collegium even met at that

 4     time, and quite honestly it was a time of great turmoil.  Nobody knew

 5     what the next day would bring.  People worked each in their own sector

 6     and did whatever they thought best.  I, being in charge of my

 7     Health Sector, had my hands full, and I really don't recall any

 8     discussion on this topic in that period.  And I don't think there were

 9     any thematic meetings at that time, or perhaps I didn't attend them.

10             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Okay.

11             MR. LAWS:

12        Q.   Did you at any stage raise with Mr. Stojic your concerns over

13     whether there might be a forced labour programme at the Heliodrom?

14        A.   Well, let me go back to what I've just said.  In a certain way, I

15     focused and concentrated entirely on the health work, and I thought if

16     the medical staff could help improve the situation, including on this

17     point, I informed Mr. Stojic of that intention.

18        Q.   Well, for the people who were being injured and killed as a

19     result of the Heliodrom labour programme that they were going to need

20     medical help, but you were also a brigadier in the HVO, and it was that

21     organisation that was using people from the Heliodrom to perform

22     dangerous, life-threatening work.

23             If you had suspicions about it, wouldn't it have been the most

24     natural thing in the world for you to say to Bruno Stojic, You know, I'm

25     not sure, but I think we might have a problem at the Heliodrom?

Page 39123

 1        A.   We all knew that we had a problem at the Heliodrom, in terms of

 2     all the aspects of the situation.  I'm coming back to the part where you

 3     said that people got wounded, and to be honest, during the initial

 4     period --

 5        Q.   I wonder if you could just focus on forced labour and people

 6     being taken out of the Heliodrom to work, rather than telling us about

 7     all aspects of the situation, which you know is not what I'm asking you.

 8     Why don't you just try?

 9        A.   As a physician, as the chief of the HVO Medical Corps, I did not

10     have any reliable information to that effect.  I never heard that

11     something of the kind was happening.

12        Q.   I wonder if you would look, please, at the document in the binder

13     that you were given earlier today and you still have in front of you.

14     It's P04352, and it's a letter dated the 20th of August of 1993, over the

15     name of Stanko Bozic, and it's addressed to Bruno Stojic, and it's headed

16     "Military Secret."  And it's writing -- Stanko Bozic writing to

17     Mr. Stojic to tell him that there's been a visit by the International

18     Committee of the Red Cross, and can you see that the items that are said

19     to be in violation of the Geneva Conventions within the Heliodrom are,

20     number 1, "sending detainees to work," and then they go on to talk about

21     food and bad conditions.  I want to ask you --

22        A.   I can see that.

23        Q.   -- from the other end now.  Did Bruno Stojic ever say to you,

24     Dr. Bagaric, you have people from your section going into the Heliodrom.

25     Any information about sending detainees to work?  Did he ever raise that

Page 39124

 1     topic with you?

 2        A.   Well, of course Bruno Stojic knew that our doctors did go to the

 3    Heliodrom, and if my colleague (redacted) -- I apologise.  If my colleague

 4     said that -- I apologise.  I believe that this has to be redacted.

 5             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Registrar, this has to be

 6     redacted.

 7             Will you continue, please, Mr. Bagaric.

 8             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] During that period of time when he

 9     left, and later on when I left, of course that Bruno Stojic knew that,

10     and it was our intention, in a certain way during those tortured and

11     difficult times, to carry out a humanitarian intervention with a view to

12     protecting health in the area.  I believe that it was not just him who

13     was well informed about the whole situation, that there were others.

14             MR. LAWS:

15        Q.   It may be just the interpretation, but I'm not clear -- genuinely

16     not clear what you're saying there.  In the English, it says:

17             "During that period of time when he left, and later on when I

18     left, of course that Bruno Stojic knew that, and it was our intention, in

19     a certain way during those tortured and difficult times, to carry out a

20     humanitarian intervention."

21             Can you just answer the question for me?  Are you saying that

22     Bruno Stojic knew or did not know that there was a forced labour

23     programme within the Heliodrom?

24        A.   I did not say that, no.  You asked me initially whether I

25     informed Mr. Bruno Stojic -- this is your last question, whether I

Page 39125

 1     informed him that we, as physicians, when it came to the establishment of

 2     healthcare in the Heliodrom, and I said, in answer to that, that he must

 3     have known that.

 4             And now on to your question as to what Bruno Stojic knew, what he

 5     knew before the report on the 20th of August, I really don't know.  I

 6     don't know that Bruno Stojic knew that people over there were forced to

 7     do physical labour.  I don't know whether he knew that or not.

 8        Q.   Well --

 9             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, Dr. Bagaric, you have

10     here in front of you a letter, the letter which the director of the

11     prison sent to Mr. Stojic.  This letter is important because it reveals

12     that Mr. Bozic has a warning about the future, has questions about the

13     future, perhaps concerning this Tribunal, and he says, I don't want to be

14     responsible or liable.  Therefore, he concludes also by saying that all

15     this must not in any way be reproached to the commander of the prison or

16     the commander of the HVO, in the interests of "our people."

17             Therefore, this is a very alarming letter, because it speaks of

18     breaches of the Geneva Conventions, it says that there are detainees

19     working outside.  So a document as important as this one of the 20th of

20     August, you never heard about it?  You never heard anything about it,

21     because a person who is responsible was actually thinking of the Tribunal

22     and of the possibility of being indicted.  You never heard about that?

23             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I answered the

24     Prosecutor's question and I said that I didn't know, and I didn't know

25     whether Bruno Stojic was aware of that before the 20th of August.  I was

Page 39126

 1     talking about that period of time.  But it is clear that if Bruno Stojic

 2     received this paper, then on the 20th of August he became aware of that.

 3     But I was talking about the period before that period, so I'm not sure.

 4             There's no way for me to know what he knew about those things

 5     very specifically.  I, as a doctor, subsequently learned that people were

 6     wounded when taken to do certain jobs, and I heard that as a doctor,

 7     looking after people in the hospital.  I heard it in the hospital from

 8     people who were there after a certain period of time.

 9             MR. LAWS:

10        Q.   Let's just turn the page with that document, if we may.  Sorry,

11     part of what I said was cut off there, and that's my fault.

12             Can we just turn the page, and can you find the sentence that

13     begins:  "After the Red Cross's departure, we were not able to remedy

14     these wrong-doings."  Can you see those words?  It's about six lines from

15     the bottom of the letter.  And the next sentence reads -- do you have

16     that, Dr. Bagaric?

17        A.   I apologise.  Is this in Mr. Bozic's document?  Just a moment.

18     Please bear with me.

19        Q.   "After the Red Cross's departure, we were not able to remedy

20     these wrong-doings.  On the contrary, the number of wounded and killed at

21     the workplace is increasing by the day."

22             So I'm going to come back to the question that I asked you a few

23     moments ago.  Did Mr. Stojic ever say to you, Well, Dr. Bagaric, you have

24     people going into the Heliodrom.  Can you help me with whether people are

25     being wounded and killed?  The people that you have going into the

Page 39127

 1     Heliodrom are doctors, who might well learn of things of that kind taking

 2     place.  Did Mr. Stojic ever --

 3             MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Your Honours --

 4             MR. LAWS:  Could the witness just answer the question, unless

 5     there's an objection to the form of the question.

 6             MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Yes, I would object to the form of

 7     the question.  The witness said if Bruno Stojic had received this letter.

 8     First of all, we should learn about what the witness knows about whether

 9     Bruno Stojic received the letter, and then we could proceed.  In the

10     transcript, just a moment, I'm going to draw attention to the correct

11     page, it is page 56, line 9, the witness said, "if Bruno Stojic received

12     this paper."

13             MR. LAWS:  We don't have an opportunity to ask him, and I'm

14     asking the witness whether Bruno Stojic ever raised with him the contents

15     of it.  That might help us on the issue of whether he received it, and it

16     might be relevant to the case more generally.  In my submission, it's a

17     perfectly fair question which the witness can answer, if he chooses to

18     do.

19        Q.   Did Stojic ever say to him, Anything from your inspections that

20     can help me as to whether it's true that people were being killed and

21     injured on forced labour at the Heliodrom?

22        A.   I said why my men went there, and I personally.  And as for your

23     specific question, what you're asking about, I don't remember.  I don't

24     remember that this ever transpired.

25        Q.   The reason that your men went there is totally unconnected to the

Page 39128

 1     answer to my question, which is:  Did Bruno Stojic ever raise it with

 2     you?  It's not a hard question, Dr. Bagaric.  You are, I respectfully

 3     suggest to you, capable of telling us whether the truth is that he did,

 4     or he didn't, or you can't remember.

 5        A.   I claim with full responsibility that I don't know.

 6        Q.   You don't know whether Mr. Stojic ever said to you, Just down the

 7     road, there's a place where I've heard people are being killed and

 8     injured?  You just don't know whether that's the position?

 9        A.   I don't remember that Bruno Stojic ever told me that.

10             THE INTERPRETER:  Could the speakers please be asked not to

11     overlap.  Thank you.

12             MR. LAWS:

13        Q.   The truth is, I'm going to suggest to you, that this was

14     something that was not a secret to anyone.  It was well known, and it was

15     tolerated because it was useful.  And that's the truth about this, isn't

16     it?

17        A.   No.  I said that this was a well-known matter.  It was well known

18     that people were taken for work.  But I also said that I learned that

19     only subsequently.  I learned that from the professionals in the war

20     hospital that I would encounter from time to time who would tell me about

21     people having been treated there.

22             I said clearly that I don't remember that Bruno Stojic ever said

23     to me, Go there because people are being wounded over there.  I repeat, I

24     was in charge of the Healthcare Service, which means that if people were

25     anywhere, working or soldiering, of any ethnic affiliation, we

Page 39129

 1     intervened, as physicians, as the Health Service, so it would have been

 2     totally superfluous for him to tell me, Somebody has been wounded, you

 3     have to go and assist them.  That would have been unnecessary, and that's

 4     what I said.

 5             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Your answer enables me to

 6     continue on a matter.

 7             Just let's take an assumption, a concrete case, so that everybody

 8     can understand the problem.  Imagine a case of a prisoner who is doing a

 9     certain job or work.  I don't qualify it as forced labour.  He goes from

10     the prison, outside the prison, to do a job, and then he is injured by a

11     bullet and he is taken to the military hospital where he is going to be

12     immediately treated by a doctor.  If, for instance, he's received a

13     bullet in his lung, the bullet is going to be extracted and so on.  We

14     know, because we've been in this case for years and we know all the

15     details, we know that normally when somebody is admitted in hospital,

16     there is the name on the book, the register, the date of his entry, the

17     first diagnosis which is made, for instance, wound to the chest by a

18     bullet, and then there is also who the person is, a soldier, civilian,

19     prisoner.  Normally, one will indicate "prisoner."  The doctor, the

20     surgeon who is going to operate upon him and extract the bullet

21     automatically knows that it is a prisoner who has been injured by a

22     bullet outside the prison.

23             This information -- this doctor, shouldn't he convey this by the

24     chain of command to say that he, as a doctor, he has operated upon a

25     prisoner who normally was supposed to be in a prison and not receive a

Page 39130

 1     bullet outside of the prison, or be hit?  If there is a report of this

 2     type, did you have any knowledge of that, yourself, because there hasn't

 3     been only one person injured, there have been several persons injured and

 4     there have been several people killed?  So this is a -- have you seen or

 5     heard any sort of report of this kind which would have come to you

 6     through medical channels?

 7             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I understand your question.  The

 8     war hospital in Mostar, which was in the very centre of the city and

 9     which treated the wounded, any wounded, all wounded, I believe that at

10     that moment the physicians who treated a patient didn't know the

11     circumstances of their wounding.  There were -- was a lot of wounded,

12     different pathology.  I spent most of the time in Mostar or in the field

13     all over the place.  My office was in Mostar.

14             However, during that period of time I don't remember ever having

15     received a report speaking of somebody who was wounded while performing

16     certain work.  It was only later on when I read some reports, but that

17     was much later.  The reports were issued by our physicians who went

18     there, and I learned from the reports that such wounding did happen, but

19     it was a time when it was a notorious fact that things like that could

20     have happened.

21             However, I don't want to dwell upon the circumstances.  I'm not

22     questioning how things happened.  Somebody could have been working within

23     the camp and still be wounded because it was all a war zone, or maybe

24     they could have been taken to the front-line to work, I don't know, on

25     the protection of what shall I call those lines and be wounded like that,

Page 39131

 1     but that was only later, subsequently.  Such cases, I believe -- I don't

 2     believe that they were that frequent, but it was later on when everybody

 3     was in a position to learn about that.

 4             MR. LAWS:

 5        Q.   Would you have a look, please, at document P05465.  P05465, a

 6     little further on in your binder.

 7        A.   [In English] Yeah, I saw it.

 8        Q.   Thank you.  This is a document dated the 29th of September of

 9     1993.  Again, it's over the name of Stanko Bozic.  This time it appears

10     to be directed to you, Dr. Bagaric.  Can you see your name there?

11        A.   [Interpretation] I can see my name, yes, and this does refer to

12     me, if the document was sent directly to me.  Actually, this document was

13     sent directly to me.  However, I had already seen the document in my

14     first testimony.  I don't remember this document precisely, but I know

15     exactly what it is and how it was, and I am willing to comment upon it,

16     Your Honour.  I'm willing to comment upon it, because I believe it's very

17     important.

18        Q.   Doctor, Stanko Bozic has some concerns.  In particular, he tells

19     you that there are difficulties and problems encountered regarding the

20     treatment of some severely wounded and sick inmates, due to inadequate

21     accommodation, insufficient material and medicaments.  And he wants you

22     to arrange the transfer of sick people, and he points out that there's to

23     be a visit by the Red Cross, and that's another good reason to move those

24     who are sick out of prison and into a hospital.  All right?

25        A.   Yes, I can read it in the document, exactly.

Page 39132

 1        Q.   How did you think, when you got that letter, that people in a

 2     prison might be severely wounded?

 3        A.   I've already said that this was on the 29th of September.  I'm

 4     talking about the 29th of September.  I remember this document from the

 5     previous case, where -- during which I testified.  I beg your pardon.

 6     No, this is very important, the date is very important, because when we

 7     are talking about the month of June, Your Honour, it's not the same.

 8     It's not the same, whether it is June, July.  This was a time of chaos,

 9     this was also a chaotic time.  However, a bit later and before this

10     document was issued, we had already carried out various interventions.

11             The Prosecutor, I am not going to say that he did it

12     intentionally.  I understand that he wants to state his case and tries to

13     discredit me as a witness, but I believe that you should know that before

14     this document was issued --

15             JUDGE PRANDLER:  Dr. Bagaric, as a witness, first of all, let me

16     again ask you what I have done already before, that you should speak

17     slowly and to wait a bit after questions, et cetera.  But my second and

18     probably equally important remark is that you should not, in a way,

19     criticise the Prosecutor.  He's doing his job.  You have to answer the

20     question.  If you are not satisfied with the form of the question, then

21     of course you may mention this, and then the Chamber is going to take a

22     decision about it.  But again I say that, as usual, you have been

23     speaking quite, in a way, as an extended way, but please try to

24     concentrate on the question itself.

25             Thank you.

Page 39133

 1             MR. LAWS:  Thank you, Judge Prandler.

 2        Q.   The question was this:  How did you think, when you got that

 3     letter, that people in a prison might be severely wounded?

 4        A.   I never said that I had received this letter.  I never claimed

 5     that I remember this letter.  I remember this letter from the previous

 6     case in which I testified.  At that time, I objected to this letter,

 7     although I respect Mr. Bozic, and I would like to express my respect for

 8     the way he looked after the people at a very difficult time.  However,

 9     what I'm saying is -- is that it is very important, and it doesn't matter

10     whether I see the letter or not.  What matters is that two very important

11     documents have been skipped here, and they were all issued in August.

12     Before this letter, we had already done a lot in providing health service

13     at the Heliodrom.  There are two documents --  I will go back to your

14     question.  I understand.  I'm coming back to your question.  I apologise,

15     I apologise.

16             MR. LAWS: [Previous translation continues] ... Mr. President, to

17     just confine ourselves to this document.

18             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Dr. Bagaric, the Prosecutor is

19     asking you questions about a document, and I want to be fair.  I'm not

20     taking sides.  I just see that when you received this document, you

21     couldn't infer that these people had been wounded outside the prison,

22     because there is nothing said about forced labour in the document.

23     Simply, the director of the prison calls your attention on the fact that

24     some detainees are wounded and have to be treated, and strangely,

25     curiously, at the one-but-last paragraph, he uses nearly the same words

Page 39134

 1     as those used in the letter of the 20th of August, and between the letter

 2     and this, there have been exactly 148 other documents from the prison.

 3     This is number 722, and in August 574, so there were 148.  And despite

 4     the time span during several weeks of 148 documents, he literally lifts

 5     this same wording of his preceding letter, and he doesn't speak of the

 6     Tribunal and he doesn't speak of forced labour, but he underscores the

 7     question of the health situation of wounded detainees and asks you to

 8     take the necessary steps.

 9             So the Prosecutor was asking you, Have you been aware of this

10     document, have you known about this document, and you have answered this

11     document was already talked about during another testimony.  And what we

12     are interested to know is whether, on the 29th of -- you had in your

13     office this document in front of you.

14             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] On the 29th of September, not the

15     29th of August.  You mean the 29th of September, don't you, 29th of

16     September?  I don't remember this document.  However -- however, if you

17     will allow me, I would still like to say a sentence that I believe is

18     very important.

19             My colleague, whom I mentioned very often here, (redacted)

20     (redacted) was a much more relevant source of information than Mr. Bozic,

21     when it came to treatment, medical care, the supplies of medicines and

22     medical supplies.  Even before this date, we had already carried out a

23     forceful humanitarian intervention in order to provide everything that

24     Mr. Bozic is complaining about in this letter.  Even before that, we

25     transferred the sick and probably the wounded.  A relationship was

Page 39135

 1     already established between the prison and the hospital in Mostar.  It

 2     was already well known who was doing what already at that time.  So if I

 3    received reports from (redacted) that a medical point had been established

 4     there, that people were being examined and treated, that doctors were

 5     engaged there, and I myself issued an order that this is how things

 6     should be done and implemented, then I believe (redacted) and my

 7     colleagues.  I personally was not very concerned and worried by this

 8     report, as regards the healthcare, because I knew that it was being

 9     applied and it was under full control, very firm control.

10             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Registrar, one has to redact

11     the name of the doctor which features several times on the transcript.

12             MR. LAWS:

13        Q.   As I understand it, you're saying you're not sure whether you got

14     it, and we appreciate that.  Could you look, please, at the words that

15     are three lines above the entry enclosure, the list of the wounded and

16     sick.  You can see a sentence which reads as follows:

17             "I kindly ask you again to use your influence to have this issue

18     solved."

19             Dr. Bagaric, there isn't, with respect to you, I'm going to

20     suggest, any getting away from it.  Stanko Bozic was telling you, in this

21     letter and on other occasions, that people in the Heliodrom were wounded,

22     needed medical attention, and the question that I asked you I don't know

23     how long ago is one that, in the circumstances, I'm going to ask for your

24     help with again.

25             Can you help us whether you knew, now, having looked at that, and

Page 39136

 1     the word "again," can you help us with whether you knew --

 2             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I have to intervene, because

 3     the question of the Prosecution is formed in such a way that, from a

 4     medical point of view, you might be mistaken.

 5             We all have this letter in front of us.  This letter

 6     distinguishes between two categories, the wounded detainees and the sick

 7     detainees, and contrary with what the Prosecutor says in the sentence he

 8     quoted, it's only about the sick, not the wounded.

 9             So medically speaking, can one infer this:  The wounded people

10     have been treated properly and put back in prison under medical help, but

11     for the sick people, no, you don't know what illness, when you see this

12     letter perhaps you don't have the medicines or the equipment, and he

13     requests they're -- that they are admitted in hospital, because they

14     already come from the hospital?  So if they come from the hospital, it's

15     not necessary to send them back to the hospital.  But for the sick, maybe

16     they need to be admitted in the hospital, so shouldn't there be here a

17     medical reading of this letter?

18             While the Prosecutor seems to take the two aspects together, that

19     is to say, the wounded and the sick, my impression in this letter, that

20     is, the wounded treated in the hospital, it is not necessary to send them

21     back to hospital, while the sick, yes, it is necessary.  Could you

22     interpret or read this letter in this way or the way the Prosecution

23     reads it?  I'm asking the question.

24             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes.  To your question, which

25     is absolutely correct, I would like to provide a very concise answer.

Page 39137

 1             Mr. Bozic says here, when it comes to the treatment of a certain

 2     number of seriously sick and wounded persons who have been brought in,

 3     due to the inadequate conditions of accommodation and the lack of

 4     medicines and medical supplies, during that period of time, and I'm

 5     saying this before you, Your Honours, at that time in the centre, we

 6     provided not only a medical point, but even beds.  I'm not actually sure

 7     about that.  However, we had a medical point.  I don't know whether this

 8     was in this particular period of time, but I believe so.  I'm not sure.

 9     I believe that we even had accommodation for our doctors who were

10     detainees.  That's one thing.

11             And then, secondly, when it says "move the sick and provide them

12     with hospital care," that was a common occurrence.  Very often, doctors,

13     detainees, Muslims, would very often determine who among the detainees

14     could not be treated in the prison but rather in the hospital, and

15     whenever that happened, whenever they requested that, those people would

16     be sent for treatment to the hospital, and I'm claiming that with full

17     responsibility here.  Sometimes they may have been delayed, due to the

18     overall situation.  However, eventually they would be sent to the

19     hospital.  I remember that I intervened several times, not many times,

20     maybe a couple of times, when they could not deal with that at the level

21     of the hospital and the prison.

22             On the other hand, when he's talking here about again using your

23     influence, I would like to explain and say that this was absolutely as

24     I'm going to tell you.  If I had received this letter from Bozic, this

25     could have been only the first letter from him, not the second.  Why is

Page 39138

 1     that?  Because he says here this is in the spirit of the Croatian

 2     language, and that was something that we often used -- I use it myself

 3     often whenever I write a letter to somebody.  In the first part of the

 4     letter, he says, I'm sending you this letter to inform you about this and

 5     that and the other and so on and so forth, and then he continues to say

 6     this and he finishes by saying, I am addressing you again, which means

 7     for the second time in the same letter, not in the second letter.

 8             Sir, I am convinced that this was the first letter -- if I ever

 9     received it, that this was the first letter from Bozic, I'm convinced,

10     and that the second part or the latter part of the letter actually

11     follows up on the first part of the letter.  This -- soon after that we

12     intervened in order to see what was actually going on there, although I'm

13     not even sure that we ever received this letter, or maybe that

14     intervention of ours coincided with the letter.  I really don't know, but

15     there are other documents that can confirm what I have just told you.  I

16     remember that intervention of ours, but I don't remember this particular

17     letter, not at all.

18        Q.   Turn over, please, to P05503, which is a letter written by a

19     commission that includes 2D-AB.  And we can see on page 3 of the English

20     that it is addressed both to you personally and to Bruno Stojic, and

21     I think in one of your earlier answers you were saying, Well, compared to

22     Stanko Bozic, I'd rather have the information from 2D-AB.  And here, sir,

23     you have it under the heading "Proposed Measures."  At item 4, it is

24     proposed by the commission that the seriously ill and wounded should be

25     transferred to the Mostar HVO War Hospital.  Can you see that?

Page 39139

 1        A.   Yes, I can see it.  It's a very important document.  I can see

 2     it.  May I answer this?

 3             This is not a letter from some commission.  This is the letter

 4     from the commission of the most reliable people for whom I am a superior;

 5     Dr. Sandrk, Dr. Curic, et cetera.  If you compare this to the previous

 6     letter, where Mr. Bozic writes that he is dissatisfied because there is a

 7     lack of medicines, and he wrote that letter on the 29th September, if we

 8     look at this letter carefully, it is possible that this intervention of

 9     ours coincided by chance.  But it says the infirmary of the centre is

10     well supplied with medicines and medical supplies.  I'm sorry, but I

11     really believed Sandrk, Kolak and Curic more than anyone else.

12             MS. TOMASEGOVIC TOMIC: [Interpretation] I'm sorry, I waited for

13     the witness to finish his answer.  I have a technical objection.

14             I already informed the Prosecution and I said that there is a

15     mistake in the translation of the stamp, and I expected this error would

16     be corrected, but I can see again that the wrong translation of the stamp

17     is being used again.  It's the stamp on the first page of the document.

18     In the English version, it says that it is the Department of the Defence,

19     and below that the Administration of Military Police.  And in the

20     original, we see that it's the Defence Department; no mention of the

21     military police.  I was told before that it would be corrected.  I'm

22     talking about the front page.

23             MR. LAWS:  Well, I will certainly see to it that that stamp is

24     investigated.  Can we just stick with the issue of people who are

25     seriously ill and wounded and who need to be transferred to hospital.

Page 39140

 1             MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I did not understand,

 2     the question has not been asked, but in order to concentrate and for the

 3     sake of time, I really think the witness should be allowed to finish and

 4     tell us who was attending during this meeting.  The previous document was

 5     of the 29th.  The current one is the 30th.  The information contained is

 6     different.  If this is not done, I will do it in re-examination.

 7             MR. LAWS:  No, I'm sorry.  I'm going to have to object to that

 8     objection.  The witness was asked a very specific question about item

 9     number 4, and he started by telling us about the composition of the

10     commission, and then went on to talk about the infirmary.  It's a

11     question that can be dealt with very easily.

12        Q.   We can see in this letter, this report, Dr. Bagaric, coming to

13     you, that your colleague, whose word you esteem, is reporting to you that

14     there are seriously ill and wounded people within the Heliodrom, and I'm

15     going to come back to the question that I asked you a while ago.  When

16     you got that report, did you think to yourself, How are people being

17     wounded in the Heliodrom?  This isn't people whose wounds have been

18     treated in hospital and have come back to the Heliodrom.  This is people

19     who need to go to hospital.  Weren't you concerned to know what they were

20     doing there?

21             MR. LAWS:  I would appreciate it if the witness could answer the

22     question.

23             MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Your Honours -- I'm sorry?  Right,

24     no problem.  I would just like to ask the Prosecutor where he sees, in

25     point 4, that these people were wounded in Heliodrom.  Where can we see

Page 39141

 1     that in point 4?  I just want to say that something is implied in the

 2     question that is not there in point 4.

 3             MR. LAWS:  It's completely beside the point.  These people need

 4     to be transferred to hospital from prison.  Whether they were wounded in

 5     the prison, outside the prison, they are people who need hospital

 6     treatment for their wounds.  They are in prison.  I suspect we all agree

 7     that they should not be in prison.  The witness was receiving information

 8     to that effect.

 9             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Prosecutor, in paragraph 4 it

10     is said that the seriously ill and wounded should be transferred to the

11     Mostar Hospital.  This is all it says.  Well, one may think that the

12     wounded were wounded when working outside the camp, but possibly.

13             MR. LAWS:  Absolutely.  I'm not saying that it says that for a

14     moment.  What I'm saying is, when this witness received this information,

15     did it not occur to him to wonder why people were being wounded whilst

16     they were in the Heliodrom or wounded and then being taken to the

17     Heliodrom rather than to hospital?  It's a fair question.  He's come to

18     tell us that, in his opinion, the medical care was very good.  These

19     documents, we suggest, show the contrary.  And I can be allowed to ask

20     him that question, in my submission, and I would appreciate an answer.

21             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Fine.

22             Doctor, can you answer the Prosecution's question?

23             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] We can't see anything from this.  I

24     quite agree with what you said, Your Honour, but I'm here for the

25     Defence, but more than anything I am here for you, so that you are able

Page 39142

 1     to take the right decision sometime in the future.

 2             On this document, I was trying to show certain things that really

 3     need to be understood, and it's difficult to understand them without

 4     taking into account the whole situation that preceded this.  It's very

 5     important to note that at one of the collegium meetings in that month, we

 6     discussed -- and this is the only meeting I remember discussing the topic

 7     of Heliodrom, and until then we physicians had already intervened, and we

 8     were a constant presence there.  This is, in fact, proof, Your Honour,

 9     that we continually, constantly monitored the situation, except for

10     Dr. Curic, who was there.  And in addition to the medical point that was

11     organised there, in addition to all that, I sent those three physicians,

12     and they were not sending me this report as to a stranger.  They know

13     very well who sent them there.  I sent them as a follow-up of our

14     constant monitoring.  And you see here below it says:  "Enclosed, command

15     of the Health Centre of the 8th of September, 1993."

16             That is two days prior.  That command, that order, is an order

17     that I personally signed.  So they offer here a very important

18     instruction, how to proceed.  They appraise everyone of the problem.

19     They send it to the office of the president, the Defence Department, the

20     Main Staff, the Health Sector.  Why did they write "Health Sector"?

21     Because I sent them.  The Office for Exchange, et cetera, and even the

22     director of the centre.  They say that he was there together with them

23     during the inspection.  And Dr. Pehar was there, who was outside the

24     brigade, and the other doctor who was working at the infirmary.  So at

25     that time we had continuous supervision at Heliodrom.

Page 39143

 1             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Well, Doctor, we have this

 2     document saying that three doctors -- three doctors draft a report, and

 3     in item 5 state that the seriously ill and wounded must be transferred to

 4     the war hospital.  Say I'm Mr. Mate Boban, I receive that report, because

 5     that's sent to him, and I see item 4 and, okay, think, Well, this is

 6     Mr. Bagaric's responsibility because he's a doctor.  I'm Mr. Stojic, I

 7     receive that letter, I look at item 4, and I say, well, this is a medical

 8     question which is the responsibility of the Medical Sector, so this is

 9     what I think.  What do you think of that?  I'm Mr. Tole from

10     headquarters, I can see it's medical, This is not my area of my

11     competence, it is the area of Dr. Bagaric.

12             So you're on the front-line there, and this is what the

13     Prosecution wants to ascertain.  What did you do?

14             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Absolutely, we complied with this.

15     I don't remember specifically a specific document so as to be able to

16     show you, but I claim with full responsibility that within a day or two

17     this problem was solved.  My commission and my people said that this

18     needed to be done, but not only that.  They wrote many things with a view

19     to improving the health situation.

20             JUDGE TRECHSEL:  Dr. Bagaric, you're here as a witness, and your

21     task is to answer questions.  Do you remember what the question is here?

22     The question is:  Did you inquire -- did you wonder how come there are

23     these people wounded in Heliodrom?  Why were they wounded?  That is the

24     question.  You talk at length around and beside, but you do not answer

25     the question.  So would you please be so kind and to limit yourself to

Page 39144

 1     precisely answer the question which is asked of you, full stop.  When the

 2     Prosecutor wants more comment, he asks you.

 3             MR. LAWS:  Thank you, Judge Trechsel.

 4        Q.   Dr. Bagaric, you've just finished telling us that you would have

 5     acted on this within a day or two and the problem would have been solved.

 6     Would you turn, please, to document --

 7             JUDGE TRECHSEL:  I'm a bit astonished, Mr. Laws.  You asked the

 8     question many lines ago.  Now I ask the witness to answer the question,

 9     and instead of letting him answer --

10             MR. LAWS:  I'm sorry.

11             JUDGE TRECHSEL:  -- or wait whether he does, you go on.

12             MR. LAWS:  I thought -- Judge Trechsel, I do apologise.  I

13     thought you were giving him an instruction for the future, and I'm

14     turning to the next document in the sequence.

15             JUDGE TRECHSEL:  Well, the question is still unanswered.

16             MR. LAWS:  The question is still unanswered, I agree, and if the

17     witness would like to answer it --

18             JUDGE TRECHSEL:  Yes.

19             MR. LAWS:  -- he of course may.

20             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I should -- I mean, I want to

21     answer.

22             It was a time where wounding was such a frequent occurrence in

23     all parts of town.  Wounding, as wounding, did not cause surprise, or

24     wonderment, so on the 30th of September it was abundantly clear to

25     everyone that prisoners are used from time to time.  I think that

Page 39145

 1     everyone knew that prisoners performed certain jobs around the detention

 2     centre, that shells were falling around, that people were exposed to risk

 3     and got wounded.  What was more important to me was to assess the

 4     situation and redress irregularities than to go into the nature of

 5     disease and wounding.  The medical approach was more important.

 6             MR. LAWS:  Thank you.  Would you turn then, please, to

 7     document P502 --

 8             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Hold on.  Witness, there is

 9     something important in this document, item 7, because obviously the

10     members of the commission wanted to place you under supervision, because

11     look at item number 7.  They state that the Department of Defence had to

12     be informed of measures to be taken by the 1st of October at noon, and

13     then they add the reference to the fax number.  So it is that

14     commission's view that there is an emergency and that action needs to be

15     taken.  And earlier on, you said, Well, I did act, because everything was

16     settled, and this is important.  Do you confirm that you have taken all

17     the necessary steps to implement this commission's recommendations?

18             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Under item 7, we have the telephone

19     number at my office.  It's my office.  We didn't leave this item 7 and

20     send it to the office of Mate Boban so that he reply.  We wanted to

21     appraise him of the problem, and everyone was to address problems at

22     their level.  So with regard to the health situation, of course that care

23     existed.  We got information, what was done and how much progress was

24     made, and we constantly monitored that situation.

25             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] But, Doctor, by this answer do

Page 39146

 1     you mean to say that it was up to Mr. Boban to give the green light,

 2     because we are talking about medical issues?

 3             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know that.  We didn't ask

 4     him whether -- to intervene or not, medically.  We wouldn't have asked

 5     him, ever.  We intervened without anyone's permission because it was a

 6     priority, and this order wasn't created in agreement with Boban.

 7             MS. NOZICA:  Your Honour, if you allow me.  Perhaps the

 8     translation of item 7 is wrong that appears from your question, because

 9     in item 7 it says:

10             "Inform the Defence Department on the aforementioned measures."

11             That's the telephone number for reporting on the measures taken.

12     We got translation from French that you asked, Were you informed of these

13     measures?  On the contrary, this point provides the possibility for

14     others to inform the Defence Department.

15             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, that was our telephone to

16     which people could report on the measures.

17             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Doctor, listening to you, the

18     doctor drafting the report suggests measures, and he's the one to

19     implement those?

20             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.  He is the one who would

21     supervise their actions, their implementation.  It doesn't depend on us

22     at the Health Sector.  It depends on the doctor in the 3rd Brigade.  It

23     depends -- it says, look, that the centre is in a very bad state.  How is

24     it possible for prisoners to be used for labour, whereas the centre

25     itself is not clean and tidy?  We came to the centre, and we put the

Page 39147

 1     health situation of the people there under constant supervision, and to

 2     the best of our abilities, we were rather successful.  For that part, I

 3     am really prepared to take all responsibility that it was indeed as I

 4     described.

 5             JUDGE ANTONETTI:  Fine.

 6             MR. LAWS:

 7        Q.   Thank you.  Could we turn to document P05812.  P05812.  It's a

 8     letter dated the 11th of October of 1993 to Bruno Stojic, and I would ask

 9     you, please, to find the paragraph numbered 2.  You'll see that at the

10     foot of the letter, it's over the name of Stanko Bozic.  Can you find

11     paragraph 2, Doctor?

12        A.   I think so.  Please quote.  I think so, yes.

13        Q.   It says that there's severe wounding and other suffering of the

14     detainees:

15             "A.  A large number of wounded detainees need the kind of medical

16     attention that can only be administered at hospital, which we are unable

17     to provide."

18             Then it goes on to deal again with the problem of supply of

19     medical equipment and so forth.

20             Can we try to take this one quite shortly?  You agree with me

21     that if Stanko Bozic is right, then the problem of people with wounds who

22     need hospitalisation is continuing?

23        A.   Speaking of this segment of health security, of course the

24     situation was not ideal either there or in Mostar, certainly not.

25     Mr. Bozic is not right when he speaks of the Health Sector, with two

Page 39148

 1     doctors at the centre, plus extra doctors from outside who report to us

 2     at the same time and say that from the point of view of health support

 3     and health protection, the situation is quite satisfactory.  Of course,

 4     in other circumstances it would not have been satisfactory, but for that

 5     situation that prevailed there, it was different.  Our representative

 6     talked tete-a-tete with the doctors who worked there, and then in

 7     cooperation with our physicians they kept improving and improving the

 8     measures.  There was always room for improvement.

 9             JUDGE PRANDLER:  Yes, Mr. Laws, I would like to ask a question

10     about this very paragraph issue refers to.  That is on the English text,

11     of course, page 2, paragraph 2, and I don't know why, but there are two

12     As there, and the second one I am referring to, and there is a remark.

13     And I would like to ask the witness to concentrate on that remark, and it

14     is being stated, and I quote:

15             "The International Committee of the Red Cross visited the SVZ on

16     the 10th, 11th and 12th August 1993 and pointed out a number of

17     irregularities that also constitute violations of the Geneva

18     Conventions."

19             And here is the first item, sub-point A, which says that:

20             "The use of detainees for work."

21             We have already -- end of quotation.  We have already talked

22     about the possibility -- rather, we talked about the very fact that there

23     were wounded detainees there, but of course it was not clear what was the

24     causes of their wounds, et cetera.

25             Now, I wonder if you have -- this report was, of course, sent to

Page 39149

 1     you, and -- rather, to Mr. Bruno Stojic, but you received it as well, and

 2     I wonder if you have not looked at it at that time and if you had -- if

 3     you had done anything to, in a way, to see to it that the detainees

 4     should not be used for work.  It is my question.

 5             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm sorry, Your Honour, but I have

 6     here a document that was sent to Bruno Stojic.  That's what's written

 7     here.  And the next document that you're probably referring to begins

 8     with item 2, but it has no heading.  Is that the same document, or

 9     perhaps the pages are not properly organised in my version?  They must

10     be.  Just a minute.  In my version, I have 1, then 6 and 7 and 8.  That's

11     what confused me.  The last page should be -- should come last, and in my

12     version it's in the middle.  That's what confused me.

13             So this document was received by Bruno Stojic and Zarko Tole.

14     This is the 11th of October, a long time after the setting up of that

15     centre for isolation or prison.  So if this indeed happened as

16     Stanko Bozic is saying, then all those who should have known about it

17     certainly knew.

18             I'm trying to say that my job, as a doctor, was first of all to

19     organise health protection inside, and that people who needed medical

20     assistance should be brought to the hospital.  And I guarantee here that

21     it all functioned well even when I was not there, because everyone had

22     their very clear assignment.  But, of course, I don't remember who was

23     wounded, how, and what kind of injuries they had, but I say with full

24     responsibility that under the circumstances, we created excellent

25     conditions for medical staff.

Page 39150

 1             Once, I spoke to one of the detainees, who was a physician

 2     himself, who told me openly, We did a great job, and he was referring to

 3     me and himself and all those who were there.

 4             JUDGE PRANDLER:  Thank you.  Dr. Bagaric, at the same time I

 5     would like to refer back to an earlier document which we have seen and

 6     which was addressed to you by Mr. Bozic, and in that he makes reference

 7     to the impending visit of the ICRC delegation, and therefore he asks you,

 8     and of course other colleagues, to do something with the wounded.  So

 9     these two documents are very much interrelated, and that is why I asked

10     you this question.  I am not quite convinced that you have, in a way,

11     taken care at that time about the -- I mean, not personally you, but I

12     mean your service, if you had done the necessary actions and took the

13     necessary actions either to take care of the wounded, but of course I

14     also took note of your answer.  Thank you.

15             MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I'm sorry.  Before we

16     get too far ahead, I just want to say that not the entire answer of the

17     witness is recorded.  On page 79, he said the document is addressed to

18     Bruno Stojic, if he ever received it.  It's very important to me, and

19     it's not on the record.

20             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I need, if you allow me to, to

21     provide a clarification with regard to what the honourable Judge said,

22     for the sake of the full truth.

23             The first letter by Bruno Stojic on the 29th September, where he

24     says there is not enough medicine, and on the 30th of September our

25     commission goes out and, together with him, inspects the situation, and

Page 39151

 1     they say that the supply of medicines is quite adequate, so it looks --

 2     this looks to me like a standard form letter.  There is a shortage of

 3     medicine, there is no shortage of medicine, et cetera.  I appreciate his

 4     concern, but, Your Honours, it was more important to me what physicians

 5     have to say about that.

 6             And, second, the first thing was written on the 29th September

 7     and the second thing on the 11th of October, quite a while after.  By

 8     that time, every sick person and every wounded person was transferred for

 9     proper treatment.  I don't know if there were any more woundings after

10     that, but if there were, we intervened; if not me, personally, those who

11     had the assignment.

12             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.  We're going to take

13     a break for 20 minutes.

14                           --- Recess taken at 5.51 p.m.

15                           --- On resuming at 6.11 p.m.

16             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Prosecutor, Mr. Laws, you have

17     the floor.

18             MR. LAWS:  Thank you, Mr. President.

19        Q.   Dr. Bagaric, I'm going to ask you a few very short questions, and

20     can we try and make a little progress with "yes" or "no."  They're going

21     to be very easy.

22             Is it right that you never went to the Dretelj prison?

23        A.   Never.

24        Q.   Thank you.  Is it right that you never went to Gabela?

25        A.   Never, it is right.

Page 39152

 1        Q.   And it's the same answer for Ljubuski?

 2        A.   Same answer.

 3        Q.   But your colleague, Dr. 2-AB [sic], was going to each of those

 4     facilities, was he not?

 5        A.   This is in line with what I was already talking about.  We were

 6     continuously monitoring what was happening in the detention centres and

 7     prisons, and so on and so forth.  We engaged local physicians from the

 8     local units regularly and continuously.  Within the detention centres, we

 9     formed the points which employed detainees doctors, (redacted)

10     (redacted), was in charge of the coordination of all these

11     tasks, and I regularly received his reports and together talked with him

12     I talked about that, and that's why I didn't go there myself.  And the

13     gentleman whom you mentioned, he did, because that's -- that was part of

14     our agreement.

15        Q.   Yes.  And he was going there in his capacity as a member of your

16     staff, your subordinate, to write reports which came to you and to the

17     Health Sector; is that right?

18        A.   It is true that he submitted reports and he sent them to several

19     addresses.  Based on his reports, I also issued certain commands and

20     orders with regard to the improvements that he thought were necessary.

21        Q.   Would you turn, please, to document P04756?

22        A.   04?

23        Q.   04756.

24        A.   [In English] No, I cannot find. [Interpretation] I apologise to

25     the Trial Chamber.  Can I say one thing that is very important?  I

Page 39153

 1     omitted saying this before, and this is the last time I'm asking you for

 2     such thing.  I've noticed something very important that I would like to

 3     deal with, and it refers to the previous document dated 11 October 1993,

 4     issued by Mr. Bozic.

 5             Mr. Bozic writes about something based on which the Judge could

 6     conclude that nothing had been undertaken.  However, I adhere by my

 7     previous words and I continue repeating that we continuously monitored

 8     the situation.

 9             However, in item 2, Bozic himself says what the Committee of the

10     Red Cross on the 10th/11th of December saw and what they pointed out.  It

11     says "taking prisoners to work."  Secondly, the quality and quantity of

12     food and improvements.  Number 3, bad conditions in solitary cells.  None

13     of the three things fall within the purview of the healthcare sector or

14     the doctors that were in charge of implementing that.  This is very

15     important and it should be recorded.

16             He is talking about the healthcare situation, I understand his

17     concern.  However, this report issued by the Red Cross confirms that what

18     he's talking about, from the medical point of view, was not the way he

19     describes it.  And I would like to finish with that, and I apologise for

20     this intervention.  So we are talking about his document, that document

21     that we discussed previously.  I'd like to thank you.  Thank you very

22     much.

23             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you very much for these

24     specifications.

25             MR. LAWS:

Page 39154

 1        Q.   Well, since you raise it, Dr. Bagaric, of course it was not your

 2     role to feed the detainees within the HVO prisons, but your section

 3     learnt that they were being inadequately fed and that they were becoming

 4     malnourished as a result, didn't it?

 5        A.   Yes, there were such problems, and it is true that an order was

 6     issued to remove that problem.  This is not a direct healthcare issue,

 7     but it could have an impact on health, and this was sent to the warden,

 8     to the doctors who were there, and to all the others who were in charge

 9     of that issue.  This was a direct recommendation by our commission to do

10     that, and according to what I know and the subsequent reports, you can

11     see that the situation with that regard considerably improved at the

12     Heliodrom.  There was still certain problems every now and then, but

13     generally speaking, that problem was being dealt with and finally became

14     rather satisfactory.

15        Q.   We spent quite a lot of time with your colleague 2D-AB on the

16     topic of nourishment.  The position in other centres, do you agree with

17     me, was simply appalling?  We can take it as quickly as that, can't we ?

18        A.   According to his reports, I can't say that the situation was

19     appalling, but it was not satisfactory.  Every now and then, it was not

20     satisfactory and efforts were made to remove all the problems, to point

21     to the problem and help with that.

22        Q.   I don't want to do the same exercise as I did before, but not

23     satisfactory is one thing.  People were reduced to shocking physical

24     states as a result of their detention by the HVO.  That's what it comes

25     down to, isn't it?  You know that, don't you, Doctor?

Page 39155

 1        A.   I heard that some people were indeed quite malnourished.

 2        Q.   And so if we look, please, at document P04756 --

 3        A.   Please repeat the number.  I apologise.

 4        Q.   I think we turned it up just a few moments ago.  It should be the

 5     one open in front of you.  These are the minutes --

 6        A.   [In English] Yeah, okay, okay.

 7        Q.   These are the minutes of the heads of the Defence Department held

 8     on the 2nd of September, 1993, and Bruno Stojic was there.  And if we

 9     turn to see item 4, we can see that you were there?

10        A.   Yes, I was at the meeting.

11        Q.   And I think you looked at this briefly when Ms. Nozica was asking

12     you questions.  Under item 3, and it's page 4 of the English and it's

13     page 3 in the B/C/S, we have an entry:

14             "Military prisons are another example of very bad work.  The head

15     took the floor and said ..."

16             Can you see those words?

17        A.   Please continue.  I'm looking, and I'm sure I'll find it.

18        Q.   You're looking, good.

19             "My opinion is that we have two military prisons."

20             Can you see those words?

21        A.   I'm listening.  Go on, go on.

22        Q.   "Heliodrom -- Heliodrom and the military prison Ljubuski.  As for

23     the other places where detainees are held, Gabela and Dretelj, I do not

24     consider them as military facilities and refuse to personally endorse the

25     work of these institutions."

Page 39156

 1             Can you see those words?

 2        A.   [No interpretation]

 3        Q.   But your colleague, Witness 2D-AB, had been inspecting those

 4     facilities as your subordinate as a member of the Department of Defence,

 5     hadn't he?

 6        A.   Yes, a member of the Health Sector of the Defence Department.

 7        Q.   So did it not strike you as odd in that meeting that the head of

 8     that department was saying, actually, that they weren't his

 9     responsibility?

10        A.   Again, I have to elaborate.  I won't be long, I promise.  I see

11     that your time is very precious.

12             I remember that meeting.  That was the first time that I heard of

13     the form of something being military or non-military.  This follows up on

14     my yesterday's words, when I said that I didn't know whether something

15     was a detainee centre, a central prison, an isolation centre or whatever.

16     It was at that time that I was able to make a distinction between a

17     central prison in Ljubuski, and in that case the head had in mind the

18     Defence Department that he was in charge with, and he was talking about

19     his responsibility, or the responsibility of the Defence Department.  And

20     as for the other centres, he believed that he -- or he actually didn't

21     know what that was all about, he didn't know who was behind them, and so

22     on and so forth.

23             However, Your Honours, I, as a physician, and I'm talking from

24     that point of view, I really did not care and it didn't make any

25     difference as to who had established any of them.  I don't know whether

Page 39157

 1     there are any documents signed by anybody about their establishment.

 2     What mattered to us was to be present there all the time in order to

 3     improve the healthcare and the condition of health.

 4             Two months before this meeting, until the end of the year, you

 5     will find all the 20 documents talking about efforts that were made in

 6     order to improve the situation.  When Mr. Stojic says that he does not

 7     deny their existence, he's talking more about the formal responsibility,

 8     who should be formally in charge of each of them, and that's how I

 9     personally understood his words.  That's what I believed at the time.

10        Q.   Well, who was going to be in charge of them if not him?

11        A.   Honestly, I don't know, especially from the position of the times

12     which were as they were.  And all the time as we're talking about that,

13     you have to bear that in mind that the situation was really difficult,

14     and I claim with full responsibility that nobody could control the

15     overall situation.

16             I personally, when I said that it was not the Defence Department,

17     I said that yesterday or the day before yesterday, what I meant, I was

18     talking within the context of never having heard that a decision of that

19     sort or -- was either made or signed by the Defence Department.  I never

20     saw such a decision.  Nobody put me abreast of any such decision.  Nobody

21     ever asked for my opinion.  Given the area of responsibility of certain

22     units and the doctors who, in one way or another, looked after the

23     healthcare needs, there we established our contacts with them and the

24     detained doctors.  I personally issued an order to establish points later

25     on, and before that, the supervision was constant.  And this is all I

Page 39158

 1     know about the responsibility, and which detention centres belonged to

 2     whom and who was responsible, and when I say "responsible," I mean in

 3     charge of.

 4        Q.   Just the previous month, your colleague 2D-AB had been in

 5     Dretelj, and now the person who's the head of his department is saying he

 6     doesn't endorse that facility.  Didn't it at the time strike you as odd,

 7     as unusual, 2D-AB had been working on behalf of the department?

 8             MR. KARNAVAS:  Your Honour, at this point I'm going to object.

 9             First, it's been asked and answered.  He's already indicated that

10     as a physician, he did not hear as far as who was responsible for the

11     facilities.  As a physician, he cared for the individuals.  So I think

12     the question has been asked and answered.

13             MR. LAWS:  Well, if I may reply, this witness's view, as a

14     physician, is not really the question.  The question is:  What did he

15     think when Stojic said it was nothing to do with him?

16             MR. KARNAVAS:  He's already asked and answered that question as

17     well.

18             MR. LAWS:  Well, he hasn't answered it in a way that is remotely

19     satisfactory.  He's talked about a large number of other details and not

20     answered that question.  It's a straightforward question.  He hasn't

21     answered it at all.

22             MR. KARNAVAS:  Well, I leave it for the Trial Chamber to decide.

23     But as far as I understand, he answered to the best of his ability.

24     Whether it's satisfactory to the Prosecution or not, that's another

25     question.

Page 39159

 1             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] You are right, Mr. Karnavas,

 2     this is another matter.

 3             Mr. Laws, you can continue.

 4             JUDGE TRECHSEL:  I just wish to say that I do not agree with this

 5     decision.  I think the Prosecutor would have been right to go on.  But I

 6     guess that I'm in a minority, but just for the record.

 7             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] No, no, not at all.  There must

 8     be a mistake between Judges.  We are not forbidding the Prosecution to

 9     continue.  If he wanted to insist on the problem, he may continue.  I

10     didn't say the opposite.  On the other hand, I just wanted to hasten on

11     what Mr. Karnavas had said.

12             You may continue, Mr. Laws.

13             MR. LAWS:  Thank you, Mr. President.

14        Q.   Cast your mind back, Dr. Bagaric.  You're in a meeting with the

15     head of your department, and he's saying, Those prisons aren't anything

16     to do with me.  Didn't it strike you as odd that the same department had

17     been inspecting them?  That's the question that I've asked.  Could you

18     try to answer it, please?

19        A.   Yes, absolutely, absolutely.  At that meeting, I didn't find

20     anything strange.  Personally, it really didn't matter to me who was

21     responsible for what centre.  I knew, even at that time when we were at

22     that meeting, Your Honours, that our doctors and me personally, although

23     I was not directly responsible, it was not my direct responsibility;

24     however, I knew that we had undertaken all the measures that I've already

25     spoken about at great length.  I personally issued orders to do this,

Page 39160

 1     that, or the other.  The gist of that was a continuous healthcare and

 2     surveillance, and my -- the person in charge was my colleague, and you

 3     know who it was.

 4             And now the answer to your question, how did he go there.  He was

 5     in charge of preventive medicine in the Service for Hygiene and

 6     Epidemiology in all the units of the Croatian Defence Council.  All the

 7     facilities which were in the areas of responsibility of these units were

 8     also his responsibility.  For example, he would go and inspect the

 9     brigade, and he would also inspect, for example, a refugee centre which

10     was within that brigade, or a detention centre.  And together with his

11     colleagues, doctors, he regularly controlled the healthcare situation

12     there.  That would be my answer to you.

13        Q.   Very well.  Can we turn to the topic, please, of humanitarian

14     aid, about which you spoke at some length yesterday and the day before,

15     and I want to understand what your position is.

16             You're here saying that you helped East Mostar with medicine and

17     with supplies?

18        A.   Yes, I said so, whenever I could, and even if I could do more, I

19     would have.  I'm very sad and I'm very hurt that my proposal that I

20     tendered was not adopted, because there would be less war and less evil

21     if it had been adopted.  If the hospital in the centre of town could have

22     been used as a joint hospital, that would have put an end to the war in

23     Mostar.

24        Q.   You blame the international organisations for not doing enough to

25     help?

Page 39161

 1        A.   I didn't blame them.  I am grateful to them.  We had a little

 2     celebration of three years of war healthcare after the war, and I

 3     officially recognised their efforts.  They are the people who had left

 4     their homes in Europe and came to our city in war to help us, and

 5     whatever they did, I will be eternally grateful to them.  However, I

 6     believe that some of those organisations could have been much more

 7     efficient.  This is my experience, and I would like somebody to look at

 8     that and to see how humanitarian work could be improved in the future.

 9     This is what I was talking about.

10        Q.   The word that you used was "disappointed" in them, in the

11     international organisations?

12        A.   I may have been disappointed every now and then, but now I've

13     told you something that I believe is the closest to the truth.

14        Q.   And you also added, and it's the transcript page 82 of that day's

15     evidence, that the Muslims didn't want to cooperate because they would

16     not have been able to enjoy the reputation of victims.  Do you recall

17     saying that?

18        A.   I know what you're talking about, but this is not what I said.  I

19     said that I was always wondering how come there was no reply from the

20     other side.  When I asked UNPROFOR and the International Red Cross and

21     the international representatives whether we were going to do something,

22     for example, when I met as the person number one -- I am sorry to be

23     sidetracking here, and I say with full responsibility that I offered very

24     many times to meet to -- with the person number one on the other side,

25     and this never materialised, and I wondered why that was.  And I assumed

Page 39162

 1     that the doctors of the BH Army were not the ones who blocked those

 2     talks.  I believe that it was somebody else.  A politician very high up

 3     above them made those decisions and told them that they couldn't do that,

 4     because if you do that, then Croats will not be as evil as they wanted us

 5     to be at the time, because that was the message that they wanted to send

 6     to the world about the Croats in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and it is so

 7     clear.

 8             Your Honours, to this very day, Croats are -- do not enjoy a

 9     satisfying situation.  During the war, Croats were halved in Bosnia and

10     Herzegovina, and still there is no political solution to that problem.

11     And if we were an animal species that was halved, I believe that we

12     would --

13        Q.   Well, I am going to have to stop you there, Dr. Bagaric.  You're

14     now telling us about the reduction in Croat --

15        A.   I apologise.

16        Q.   -- population, and I'm asking you about something that you said

17     and asking you to confirm that part of the blame for what happened in

18     East Mostar must be placed at the door of the Muslims, themselves.  And,

19     in essence, that is what you're saying, is it not?

20        A.   That's not what I said.  At least that's not how I said it.

21        Q.   Well, what part of it have I misunderstood?  A politician --

22             MR. KARNAVAS:  That's my whole point, Your Honour.  He's

23     misstating the record.  He talked about they were getting orders from the

24     higher up, so he's blaming higher political officials.

25             MR. LAWS:  Yes.

Page 39163

 1             MR. KARNAVAS:  So if he's going to say Muslims, which we're

 2     talking everybody.  It's like saying Croats or Serbs or whatever.  You

 3     know, there's a big difference between the people and some high-level

 4     officials that are calling the shots.  So if he wants to be precise and

 5     if he wants to get a precise answer from the gentleman, and not make him

 6     appear as if he's trying to be evasive, which seems to be part of the

 7     tactic here, then I suggest that he asks precise questions.

 8             I know the tactic, Your Honours.  This is what happens:  The

 9     witness doesn't want to answer because he sees Muslims in the general.

10     He's talked about political authorities at the very top.  So I would

11     kindly ask for the Trial Chamber to direct the Prosecutor to be precise

12     when quoting what the witness has stated.

13             Thank you.

14             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's correct, yes, that's

15     correct.

16             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, in your previous

17     answer, was it an accurate, specific answer, or does it need to be

18     complemented because Mr. Karnavas has taken the floor?  Had you fully

19     answered the Prosecution's question or did you want to qualify and to add

20     things to your answer?

21             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think counsel interpreted my

22     position correctly.  I think that's the problem, that's where the problem

23     lies.  I cannot blame the Muslims.  I'm blaming the leadership, which was

24     making political decisions at the time, decisions that were affecting

25     people on the ground, the Croats and Muslims at war.  That's what I

Page 39164

 1     meant, and that's why, when the Prosecutor asked the question the way he

 2     did, I said I believed it was not entirely true.

 3             MR. LAWS:  Let me try and phrase it in a way that you'll agree

 4     with.

 5        Q.   Are you saying that somebody with political influence over the

 6     people living in East Mostar, somebody in that position was trying to

 7     bring about a situation where the people in East Mostar would not be

 8     helped?  Is that the effect of it?

 9        A.   If one side of Mostar is suffering, both sides are affected, but

10     one is affected more.  We were faring better on the east than the other

11     side.  If one side has all the possibilities to resolve the problem of

12     the other side, and the other side is not responding, I said I held that

13     someone up there on the political level must have decided that this

14     should not be done.  That's what I meant, and I have nothing to add.

15        Q.   Thank you.  I'm going to explore with you, in the course of the

16     rest of today and into tomorrow, a completely different proposition,

17     Dr. Bagaric, and it's this: that the HVO brought about the conditions in

18     East Mostar and they saw to it that those conditions remained appalling

19     for month after month.  That's the case that I'm going to put to you.  Do

20     you understand that?

21        A.   I understand, but I don't accept.  I don't think that is the

22     truth, at least not the entire truth.  The whole truth would be that

23     before the conflict in Mostar, there had been a conflict in the valley of

24     the Neretva River, in Konjic, where Bosniak Muslims had really committed

25     a horrendous crime, not only in Grabovica but in that entire area, and

Page 39165

 1     step by step they were advancing toward Mostar.  Therefore, if it had

 2     transpired, and I'm speaking as someone who was there all that time and

 3     who never knew whether they would live to see the next day, if the Muslim

 4     forces had been a little stronger, they would have taken Mostar and

 5     continued on to Capljina, because their politicians were not even ashamed

 6     to say it openly.  So the whole situation was caused by that conflict,

 7     which was pure war.  If there had been no resistance from the Croatian

 8     side, from the Croat side, then this would have happened entirely

 9     differently.  And I'm sorry that these things happened at all, of course.

10             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, I'm mindful of the

11     time, because I absolutely want your evidence to be over by tomorrow, but

12     there is something important on which I need to respond.

13             You say that if the Muslims had taken Mostar, they could have

14     gone on until Capljina, and you said that this didn't happen on account

15     of the resistance.  Does that mean that had there not been a resistance

16     from the Croats, the Muslims would have taken Mostar and would have taken

17     control over the whole territory?

18             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm convinced of that.

19             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] We'll look into military

20     aspects with General Praljak when he testifies.  I'll come back to that

21     matter then.

22             Prosecutor, you can go on.

23             MR. LAWS:

24        Q.   I want to look with you, please, at the blockade of East Mostar,

25     as I'm going to call it, and at the difficulties that there were in

Page 39166

 1     getting aid and supplies into East Mostar.  All right?  That's the topic,

 2     and I'm going to start, please, by looking at two documents from the

 3     Defence binder that you were provided with on Monday, the larger binder,

 4     and we're going to look just a little bit at the position in West Mostar.

 5     We start with 2D00714, please, 2D00714.

 6             And, Dr. Bagaric, can you help us, please.  Towards the end of

 7     the first paragraph on the first page, we have a sentence which reads:

 8             "During the previous week, the Central Medicines Depot received

 9     four valuable shipments of humanitarian aid ..."

10             Can you see that?

11        A.   Page 1?  2D714, on page 1?

12        Q.   Page 1.  And if you look in the B/C/S, 11 or so lines down from

13     the top, you can see on the left-hand margin there's the number "20.000."

14     Can you see that?

15        A.   Yes, yes, I can see it now.

16        Q.   So during the previous week, the Central Medicines Depot, this is

17     of the hospital on the west bank, received four valuable shipments of

18     humanitarian aid, totalling around 20.000 Deutschemarks in value; yes?

19        A.   Yes, it's written there.

20        Q.   Immediately before that is:

21             "The supply of medicines and medical supplies at the HVO

22     RB Mostar is satisfactory."

23             Do you see that?

24        A.   Next sentence?

25        Q.   The sentence immediately before:

Page 39167

 1             "The supply of medicines and medical supplies ... is

 2     satisfactory."

 3             All right, so that's --

 4        A.   Yes, yes, I see it.

 5        Q.   That's the week 7th to 13th September.  If you turn on, please,

 6     to 2D00738, that's a document in which you're reporting to Bruno Stojic

 7     for the week August 3rd to August 10th, and again medical materials and

 8     medicines supply for the war hospital HVO Mostar is satisfactory.  And

 9     then in the past week, the Central Drugs Warehouse of the Main Medical

10     HQ, Croatian Community HB, accepted eight valuable drug shipments from

11     donations worth around 500.000 Deutschemarks?

12        A.   Yes, I can see that.

13        Q.   And the position so far, as access to Mostar for supplies coming

14     to the hospital on the west bank, was that if people wanted to send

15     assistance to you, they could?

16        A.   Yes, that's correct, but at this point I have to tell the Court

17     what the truth is about this 500.000 Deutschemark.

18             After the war, I was president of the board of the hospital in

19     Mostar.  These 500.000 Deutschemark -- this was written by those who sent

20     us the medication, but out of those 500.000, we actually had some losses

21     to dispose of that rubbish.  I don't know the exact figure, but I know

22     that the hospital spent a lot of money, and I'm not making this up.  It

23     was in the newspapers at the time.  This was medication whose shelf life

24     had expired.  A truck comes from Germany, from a donor, and they drop it

25     there.  And you even have to say, Thank you.  But we still had stocks of

Page 39168

 1     that after the war, and it cost us a lot to take it to waste disposal

 2     facilities in various places.  But the Prosecutor is right, we were in a

 3     much better situation as far as medical supplies are concerned than the

 4     other side in Mostar.

 5        Q.   But those shipments had no difficulty getting through to you, did

 6     they?

 7        A.   They were unusable, most of them.  The overwhelming majority of

 8     these medicines were unusable, but of course we received shipments of

 9     medication.

10        Q.   You were in, as you say, a much better position on the west bank

11     than was the case on the east bank?

12        A.   Correct, I agree.

13        Q.   Is the reason for that that the HVO controlled access to Mostar?

14        A.   I think the better question would be:  Was this caused by the

15     war?  And the answer is yes, the war is the real reason.  In the

16     circumstances, the west side of Mostar had a hinterland, a large area in

17     depth shielded from the war, whereas the east side had a front-line

18     running through it, and of course under those circumstances it was

19     difficult to get through to the east side of Mostar.  That's common

20     knowledge.  And it didn't depend only on HVO, whether something is able

21     to get through or not; it also depended on the other side.  That's where

22     the front-line was.

23        Q.   The HVO could agree for a convoy of humanitarian aid to come

24     through its territory and to the east bank or it could withhold that

25     agreement; is that not the case, Dr. Bagaric?

Page 39169

 1        A.   I don't know.  It's a very tricky question, so I can't answer

 2     with a yes or no.

 3        Q.   Well, have a look with me, please, at P04527 [Realtime transcript

 4     read in error "P024527"], it's in the same binder that you're -- no,

 5     sorry.  It's in the smaller binder that you had today, the Prosecution's

 6     binder, P04527 [Realtime transcript read in error "P024527"].

 7        A.   Yes.

 8        Q.   And what we can see there is a document dated the 26th of August

 9     of 1993, and it's headed "Croatian Community of Herceg-Bosna,

10     Defence Department, Military Police Administration, Mostar."  Can you see

11     that?

12        A.   I can see that.

13        Q.   And the order is to this effect:

14             "On all border crossings and in the entire territory controlled

15     by the 5th Military Police Battalion, ensure a free passage, freedom of

16     movement for personnel carriers, foreign journalists, humanitarian

17     organisations' officials, and all other citizens who possess movement

18     clearances signed by the following individuals."

19             Then we have a list of names.  Bruno Stojic is somebody who can

20     grant one of those permits, Slobodan Bozic, from whom we've heard,

21     Ivo Lucic, Mr. Praljak, Mr. Petkovic, Mr. Tole, and then at number 9,

22     you?

23        A.   Yes, that's me, my name.

24        Q.   And that's definitely you?

25             JUDGE TRECHSEL:  Sorry, because I'm so meticulous sometimes.

Page 39170

 1     Page 89, line 12 and 13, two times a wrong number appears for the

 2     document.  The "2" must be omitted.  It is P04527.

 3             MR. LAWS:  Yes, it is.  Thank you.

 4        Q.   Dr. Bagaric, you were one of those who could give authorisation

 5     for humanitarian organisations' officials to pass through the territory

 6     of Herceg-Bosna, according to this order; is that right?

 7        A.   That's not right.  Your Honours, this -- first of all, I have

 8     never seen this document before, but it doesn't matter.  I was certainly

 9     one of the people -- I was the person who led the Health Sector.  I

10     frequently begged people for this or that.

11             What does this mean?  Physicians come from various places and

12     want to pass through to the hospital, and of course since it was a war

13     zone, people's documents were checked and their movements were checked.

14     I was personally the one who frequently asked for such approvals, and

15     people naturally thought that I could provide certain signatures for our

16     medical needs.  But if you look at this carefully, it says "at all border

17     crossings."  They were not towards the East Mostar, they were towards the

18     Republic of Croatia.  It was needed for rotation of medical teams,

19     transfers of our patients to other hospitals.

20             What I said about this Ms. Sally Baker, whoever addressed me and

21     I was able to help, I always helped, but those were individual requests

22     and they were not frequent, because it made no sense to ask a doctor for

23     that.  So that was primarily for the purpose of ensuring or providing

24     medical assistance.

25        Q.   When the HVO wanted to deny access for humanitarian aid, it was

Page 39171

 1     very straightforward.  They simply didn't grant a permit.  That's the

 2     position, isn't it?

 3        A.   I don't think it was exactly that way.

 4             MR. LAWS:  Mr. President, I see the time.  I'm going to develop

 5     this tomorrow, but that might be an appropriate moment.

 6             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] In terms of time, you have

 7     another hour and 40 minutes, approximately.  The Registrar is going to

 8     calculate this, Prosecution.

 9             Witness, I have noticed that your answers are very long.

10     Tomorrow, since we're all concerned with time, I'll ask you to be shorter

11     in your answers and try and avoid political reasonings.  I know that

12     you're a politician and that you're a good speaker, but please be

13     extremely concise so that the Prosecution can ask a question and have a

14     specific answer, so that he can move on to something else quickly.  So

15     please make an effort.  But I'm sure you will manage.

16             I'll give the floor to my colleague.

17             JUDGE TRECHSEL:  I apologise to the parties for being absent

18     tomorrow due to an academic engagement.

19             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] There will be no extra time.

20     Your evidence will finish tomorrow.  The Prosecution will have an hour

21     and 45 minutes.  I hope that he will endeavour to reduce time.  I'm sure

22     that the Stojic Defence has additional questions, redirect questions, but

23     I hope that this will take place very quickly.

24             So I wish you all a pleasant evening, and I'll see you all

25     tomorrow at 2.15.

Page 39172

 1                           --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.02 p.m.,

 2                           to be reconvened on Thursday, the 23rd day of

 3                           April, 2009, at 2.15 p.m.