Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 5351

1 Tuesday, 15 January 2002

2 [Open session]

3 [The accused entered court]

4 [The witness entered court]

5 --- Upon commencing at 2.18 p.m.

6 JUDGE MUMBA: Please call the case.

7 THE REGISTRAR: Good afternoon, Your Honours. Case number

8 IT-95-9-T, the Prosecutor versus Blagoje Simic, Milan Simic, Miroslav

9 Tadic, and Simo Zaric.

10 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Lukic. Cross-examination continuing.

11 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Good day, Your Honours. Before I

12 continue with my cross-examination, I would like to inform the Court that

13 the Prosecution has just provided me with the official translation and the

14 statement given at the SUP and also the ruling of the Court. So now I do

15 have the official translation of the document D23/3 ter ID and 24/3 ter

16 ID. So I don't know, now should I continue?

17 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. I wanted to confirm with the Prosecution.

18 MR. WEINER: That's correct, Your Honour. Those documents were

19 provided to counsel.

20 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, you can continue.

21 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] I would like to introduce first

22 document D23 ter ID, the English version. And could the usher please

23 distribute the copies to members of the Court.

24 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Weiner.

25 MR. WEINER: Your Honour, our notes indicate that this is document

Page 5352

1 D22/3. I just want to clarify with the registrar.

2 JUDGE MUMBA: Okay. The registry assistant, please can you help

3 with the correct number? This is the English version.

4 THE REGISTRAR: The English translation is the translation of

5 document D22/3 ID.

6 JUDGE MUMBA: And which one is this one? What is it, the D22?

7 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] This is the statement given at the SUP

8 in Bosanski Samac on the 9th of November, 1992.

9 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. The one the witness had said yesterday that he

10 didn't -- it wasn't his signature.

11 MR. LUKIC: That's right.

12 MR. WEINER: And the other document is 24/3, according to our

13 records.

14 JUDGE MUMBA: Which one?

15 MR. WEINER: D -- the judgement indictment -- judgement.

16 JUDGE MUMBA: Oh, the judgement of the court in Bijeljina.

17 MR. WEINER: Yes.

18 MR. LUKIC: Yes, 24/3.

19 MR. WEINER: Sorry. I just wanted to clarify that, Your Honour.

20 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Thank you.

21 THE REGISTRAR: This document is the English translation of

22 document D24/3 ter ID.

23 WITNESS: WITNESS M [Resumed]

24 [Witness answered through interpreter]

25 Cross-examined by Mr. Lukic:

Page 5353

1 Q. [Interpretation] Good afternoon, sir. Today we will continue with

2 a few more questions. I think I will be brief, but I would also ask you,

3 like I did before, just to respond with "yes," "no," "I don't know." If

4 you don't understand my question, you can ask for it to be repeated so

5 that we don't have problems like we did yesterday about interpretation of

6 the question.

7 Before we move to a different topic, I just want to come back

8 briefly to some of your responses yesterday regarding the distribution of

9 weapons in the courtyard of the TO building. Something there is not quite

10 clear to me.

11 Yesterday, in response to my question, you said that you don't

12 know who it was who decided who would be distributed weapons, who would

13 receive weapons and who wouldn't. Immediately after that, you responded

14 to my question whether you had asked to receive weapons, that you didn't

15 ask for that because you were sure that you wouldn't have received a

16 weapon. These two things are not quite logical to me. You're sure that

17 you would not have received a weapon, but you don't know who made these

18 decisions. Could you clarify this for us a little bit?

19 A. I'm sure that I wouldn't have received a weapon from those people

20 whom I had seen there, because they knew I was Tota's brother, and they

21 knew my brothers were in the 4th Detachment.

22 Q. This is clear to me but previously I asked you who it was who was

23 issuing the weapons and you said you didn't know.

24 A. According to the people who were there at the TO headquarters, the

25 large door, the gate was open, and I could see these people, Milos

Page 5354

1 Bogdanovic, Marko Bozanovic, Alija Fitozovic.

2 Q. Do you know where Milos Bogdanovic was working at that time?

3 A. I think he was commander of the headquarters of the TO.

4 Q. Thank you. Did you go to the courtyard of the TO building out of

5 curiosity or you went because you wanted to receive a weapon?

6 A. I went more out of curiosity.

7 Q. I assume that your memory serves you well, at least in regard to

8 what you stated one month ago, and I will remind you what you said. On

9 December 3rd, before this same Trial Chamber, on page 5016, you responded

10 as follows, I will read it in English [In English]: "My fellow citizens

11 carrying rifles so I went there too."

12 [Interpretation] And after that, you stated, on page 5017:

13 [English]: "I saw many people carrying weapons, and I thought why

14 shouldn't I have one too."

15 [Interpretation] You said this on the 3rd of December. Do you

16 remember that?

17 A. Ye.

18 Q. I'm asking you again: Did you go there in order to receive a

19 rifle?

20 A. When I set out towards the TO headquarters, I knew that they

21 wouldn't give me a weapon, but I went to see it. I went to see who was

22 distributing and who was being issued with the weapons. I was more

23 interested in that. Regarding my statement from December 3rd, I

24 completely agree. I could see that Serbian families were leaving Samac.

25 They were fleeing. So I was afraid.

Page 5355

1 Q. Thank you. Just one more clarification regarding the responses

2 you gave yesterday. When I asked you about your (redacted), you

3 told me that he worked in the offices with Mr. Tadic.

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. Was (redacted) involved or working on the exchanges?

6 A. I don't know whether he worked on them. I'm sure, though, that

7 this didn't go through him. Perhaps he compiled the lists on orders from

8 others.

9 Q. Did Mr. Sveto Vasovic work on the exchanges?

10 A. He was also in the offices with Mr. Tadic, with (redacted) .

11 Q. Thank you. We won't ask any more questions about that topic. I

12 would like to now deal with another part of your statement from the month

13 of December for clarification. On the 7th of December when you were

14 interviewed by the Prosecution, on page 5250, you stated that the wife of

15 Avdo Drljacic paid 400 marks, German marks to Miroslav Tadic so that he

16 would put Avdo on the list.

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. You knew Avdo Drljacic?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. Did you know his family?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. Avdo was with you at the Batkovic camp; is that right?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. Do you remember when Avdo Drljacic was exchanged, approximately?

25 A. In 1993.

Page 5356

1 Q. Are you sure?

2 A. August or September of 1993.

3 Q. I have different information, but I want to ask you anyway. Are

4 you sure it was summer?

5 A. No. No.

6 Q. If you're not sure, well, I will tell you. The information I have

7 is that Avdo Drljacic was exchanged on the 24th of December, 1992. Is it

8 possible that he was exchanged at that time?

9 A. No.

10 MR. LUKIC: Please bear with me for a minute.

11 [Defence counsel confer]

12 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

13 Q. In any event, he was exchanged quite awhile before you were

14 exchanged.

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. Did you see him and his wife after you were exchanged?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. When did you see him?

19 A. In 1994, in the month of July.

20 Q. And who told you that Avdo's wife gave that money to Tadic?

21 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, counsel. I just want to remind you to be

22 switching off the microphone after you ask the question.

23 A. My wife told me.

24 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

25 Q. Could you respond, please?

Page 5357

1 A. His wife was exchanged at the same time that my wife was exchanged

2 in 1993, and Avdo was also exchanged at that time.

3 Q. I asked you who told you about that money.

4 A. My wife told me first. She told me, "If I had had the money, I

5 would have gotten you out as well."

6 Q. And who told her?

7 A. Well, she was together with Avdo's wife Fadila in the bus. My

8 wife and Avdo's wife, they were exchanged together on the same day.

9 Q. I asked -- I didn't ask you who she was exchanged with. I asked

10 you who told your wife that Avdo's wife gave the money to Tadic. So can

11 you please answer to that? Was that -- was that Avdo's wife who told you

12 or somebody else?

13 A. Avdo's wife told my wife and my wife told me.

14 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, may I just consult with

15 my client for a moment, please?

16 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Go ahead.

17 MR. LUKIC: Thank you.

18 [Defence counsel and accused confer]

19 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

20 Q. Could you please tell me the wife -- the name of Avdo Drljaca's

21 wife?

22 A. Fadila.

23 Q. They had two children?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. Is the real name of Avdo Drljacic Abdulah Drljacic?

Page 5358

1 A. I know him as Avdo. I don't know his real name.

2 Q. Was he born in 1958?

3 A. I'm not sure about that.

4 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I would like the witness

5 to be shown two exchange lists. Unfortunately, at the moment I don't have

6 enough copies to be able to introduce that into evidence, but these are

7 the lists of people who were exchanged on the 24th of December, 1992, when

8 Abdulah Drljacic was exchanged and when his wife and two children were

9 exchanged. This is evidence of the Prosecution, Number 00734804. And I

10 would just like the witness to look at this list of women to see whether

11 his wife was exchanged at the same time as the wife of Abdulah Drljacic,

12 and perhaps during the break I will be able to make enough copies so that

13 I could tender that -- the list into evidence.

14 JUDGE MUMBA: I wanted to be clear, because you said this is

15 evidence of the Prosecution. So I'm wondering what document that is.

16 Then it should have a number.

17 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] The list of the men, I do have the

18 number of Prosecution evidence, but the list of the women, perhaps I'm not

19 sure if this is a document that I received from the Prosecution, but I'm

20 not ready at this point to tender it into evidence. The Prosecution is in

21 any case familiar with both of these lists.

22 JUDGE MUMBA: All I'm wondering is it hasn't been discussed in

23 this case before. It hasn't got an ID number.

24 MR. LUKIC: No.

25 JUDGE MUMBA: All right. And both documents are in Serbo-Croat.

Page 5359

1 MR. LUKIC: Yes, just the list of exchanges.

2 JUDGE MUMBA: Can I hear from the Prosecution?

3 MR. DI FAZIO: I'm in a difficult position because I haven't seen

4 the document, and I don't know which of our documents it supposedly is.

5 JUDGE MUMBA: Maybe the usher can get the document from counsel

6 and show it to the Prosecution counsel.

7 MR. DI FAZIO: I wonder if Mr. Lukic can tell us if it is one of

8 the documents in on your 65 ter list. We had a series of lists of

9 exchanges and it may be one of those, in which case --

10 MR. LUKIC: One is from that list. One is from that document; the

11 other is not.

12 MR. DI FAZIO: Just for the sake of -- of efficiency, can we just

13 have them marked at this stage and then I can consider -- look at them

14 carefully and provide the Chamber with my attitude towards the question of

15 its form --

16 JUDGE MUMBA: Can we have them given to the registry assistant for

17 marking them with ID numbers.

18 MR. DI FAZIO: The copies I have or --

19 MR. LUKIC: No. I only have those ones now. I'll make a copy

20 during the break.

21 MR. DI FAZIO: I do apologise. I wonder for the assistance of

22 the Prosecution whether Mr. Lukic could indicate which of the exchange

23 lists, which document it is so we that can probably -- dig out our own

24 copies as well.

25 MR. LUKIC: So one document which have a number of the copy of

Page 5360

1 number of Prosecutor 734802. It's the list of the exchanged persons, men.

2 First person on that list named Drljacic, Abdulah. Just the best --

3 JUDGE MUMBA: Can we have the ID number, please.

4 THE REGISTRAR: ID number is document D25/3 ter ID, and the next

5 document D26/3 ter ID.

6 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Could the witness be shown document

7 D26/3. So only that one.

8 MR. DI FAZIO: Might I see the document just very briefly before

9 it's handed to the witness, just cast my eye over it, please?

10 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.

11 MR. DI FAZIO: Thank you.

12 JUDGE MUMBA: The witness should be shown D26 first.

13 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

14 Q. Witness, I don't believe you have ever seen this document before.

15 I would like to ask you to read the heading of the document slowly?

16 A. "List of civilians who went for exchange on the 21st of December,

17 1992, in Dragalic."

18 Q. Can we agree that this list consists mostly of women and children?

19 A. There are also some elderly men.

20 Q. When you look at this list, I think it has only two pages.

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. Would you please have a look to see if you can find the wife of

23 Avdo Drljacic on this list, and if so, under what number, and also whether

24 your wife's name is on the list. If you see your wife's name, don't say

25 it out loud, but simply tell us whether she's on the list or not.

Page 5361

1 A. Number 79, that's Avdo's mother, and under number 84 is his wife

2 and two children.

3 Q. Would you have a look again to see whether your wife and children

4 are on this list?

5 A. No.

6 Q. Thank you. I will ask you again. Did Avdo's wife tell your wife,

7 in the summer of 1993, on the bus as we were being exchanged, that she had

8 given money to Tadic? Think carefully.

9 A. My wife was exchanged on the 27th of January, 1993. That is the

10 exact date.

11 Q. But let me remind you of what you just said, that Avdo Drljacic's

12 wife was in the same exchange. Yes or no?

13 A. According to this list no, but I wasn't there at that exchange

14 because Mr. Tadic would to the hangar, read out names from the list,

15 people would go out.

16 Q. Do you still assert that Avdo Drljacic's wife was exchanged at the

17 same time as yours and that that was when she had told her that she had

18 given money to Tadic? Is that what you're saying or not? That's my

19 question.

20 A. I have told you what my wife told me, because I wasn't there.

21 Q. Very well. You also told me that you saw Avdo Drljacic

22 afterwards, after your release.

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. How many times did you see him, if I can ask you that?

25 A. Almost every day. We lived in the same street in Orasje.

Page 5362

1 Q. Did he ever tell you that his wife had given money to Tadic?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. When did she tell you that?

4 A. Well, he told me that on several occasions. He always used to

5 say, "One should have money in one's pocket. If you would have had some

6 money, you would have been released."

7 Q. But you haven't answer my question. Did he tell you that his wife

8 had given money to Tadic, yes or no, and if so, when?

9 A. Are you asking me about the date?

10 Q. Yes, the date when he told you that, approximately.

11 A. It was in 1994, maybe in July or August. Because we were

12 neighbours, and we would sit down together more than once.

13 Q. Did he tell you that he was exchanged together with his wife, that

14 is, his family?

15 A. I learned that when I was exchanged.

16 Q. Witness, you gave your first statement to the OTP investigators in

17 June 1996; is that correct?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. And then you were asked about the alleged payments made to Tadic

20 for putting names on the exchange lists; is that correct?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. And at that time, you never mentioned Avdo Drljacic and his wife;

23 is that correct?

24 A. I can't remember exactly what I said in 1996 because I have made

25 so many statements.

Page 5363

1 Q. If I were to read your statement to you and remind you that there

2 is no mention of Avdo Drljacic in it, are you certain? Can you confirm

3 this? Can you confirm that you did not mention Avdo Drljacic in 1996?

4 A. I'm not sure of that.

5 Q. You were interviewed a second time by the Prosecutor in the summer

6 of last year in Orasje; is that correct?

7 A. I think it was in Gradacac the second time.

8 Q. And on that occasion, you never mentioned Avdo Drljacic and his

9 wife, and yet Tadic was discussed; is that correct?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. The first time you mentioned Avdo Drljacic's wife was here during

12 your proofing sessions in December with the Prosecutor.

13 A. You should know that I was not in a hotel those two years. I was

14 in a camp. Things come back to me. I couldn't remember everything all at

15 once, all the things I'd been through.

16 Q. But you will agree with me that your memory was fresher in 1996

17 than it is -- it was in 2001; is that correct?

18 A. Well, yes. One grows old.

19 Q. Thank you. Are you aware of the fact that Avdo Drljacic made a

20 statement to investigators of the Prosecution?

21 A. No.

22 Q. Thank you. I would now like to ask you just a few more questions

23 in connection with your statement. Do you -- have you ever been to Samac

24 since your release?

25 A. Yes.

Page 5364

1 Q. Could you tell me how often you've been there?

2 A. Well, when I have some time off, when I'm free on Sundays.

3 Q. Do you go to cafes in Samac?

4 A. I go to Ignjo Popovic's place because he's a school friend of

5 mine. So that's the only place I go to.

6 Q. Now that you mention Ignjo Popovic, did your schoolmate tell you

7 that he had taken some people away from Samac, transported them away from

8 Samac during the war?

9 A. I don't know anything about that, because I wasn't in Samac during

10 the war.

11 Q. Do you see any of the people we have heard about, Cera, do you see

12 them in Samac?

13 A. I see Perica.

14 Q. Do you see Mr. Blagovic?

15 A. I saw him in Gradacac once, then Stojan Blagovic.

16 Q. Marinko Stefanovic?

17 A. No.

18 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I would now like to ask

19 just a few more questions about the topic that we started yesterday and

20 that's the statement made in the SUP.

21 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.

22 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

23 Q. Witness, since yesterday, you have had time to look at the text of

24 the statement in full. With reference to the facts you spoke of before

25 this Court, is there anything in this statement that contradicts what you

Page 5365

1 said? Yes or no? If there is, tell us what.

2 A. Yes.

3 MR. DI FAZIO: I object to that question. It's enormously general

4 and completely unspecific. What is he supposed to do? Revise everything

5 that he said and then compare it with this? I don't mind my learned

6 friend putting contradictions to him, it's perfectly proper, but it's got

7 to be specific. He's got to know what --

8 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, but this is the statement to which the witness

9 said he didn't sign.

10 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes.

11 JUDGE MUMBA: Isn't this the same statement that he was allowed to

12 take with him so that he could read through and see whether or not --

13 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes --

14 JUDGE MUMBA: -- he made it, yes.

15 MR. DI FAZIO: I've got no problems with his being asked about the

16 content of the statement. Indeed he should be, because we're still

17 uncertain as to whether he is the author of this or -- all that we know so

18 far is he says that's not my signature.

19 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.

20 MR. DI FAZIO: We don't even know what he says about the rest of

21 the document. It seems to me that if my learned friend wants to

22 cross-examine him about that, I've got no objection, but we've got to see

23 what the witness says about the content of the document, so he can say,

24 "It's mine," or, "No, it's not mine," and then -- and then put

25 contradictions to him if Mr. Lukic thinks that he's contradicted himself.

Page 5366

1 That should be the procedure rather than --

2 JUDGE MUMBA: Because -- yes, because you can only put a

3 contradiction from a statement if the witness says he made the statement.

4 MR. DI FAZIO: That's right. Now if he says --

5 JUDGE MUMBA: Because it's possible that he could have given a

6 statement but never signed it. That's possible.

7 MR. DI FAZIO: That's possible. I entirely agree.

8 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.

9 MR. DI FAZIO: That's exactly right. But until he says, "Look,

10 I've looked at the content of the statement, and I can say it's mine or I

11 can say it's not mine," that --

12 JUDGE MUMBA: That has to be established --

13 MR. DI FAZIO: That has to be established.

14 JUDGE MUMBA: -- and then we can go into the contents. But before

15 that is done -- Mr. Lukic, I'm sure you're following the submissions of

16 the Prosecution.

17 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour, but I think that as

18 regards the content of the statement, my question is quite proper. I just

19 wanted to know whether there is anything in this document that is not

20 correct. If we are to go sentence by sentence, part by part, I can do

21 that too.

22 JUDGE MUMBA: No. But we have to know -- you should ask the

23 witness whether he made this statement. He may not have signed it; it is

24 possible. So we have to clear that first before we can deal with

25 contradictions, if any.

Page 5367

1 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] I agree. I asked the witness

2 yesterday and he responding to the question and the question of my learned

3 friend he said that he had never signed a statement, and to my question of

4 yesterday he also said he didn't sign it, so I will ask again.

5 Q. Witness, you have read this statement in detail. Are you still

6 saying that this is not your statement?

7 JUDGE MUMBA: That is not correct. When I was discussing with the

8 Prosecution, I did say it is possible for a person under interrogation to

9 make a statement, right, and yet not sign it, he just goes or he is

10 released, right? It is possible. So if you ask him -- because he read it

11 through. First you ask him whether he made the statement, which is

12 recorded in this document, because he could have made it and yet still say

13 he didn't sign it, and then you can deal with the contradictions.

14 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour, Judge Mumba.

15 I asked the witness yesterday. I asked him many questions regarding his

16 statement to the SUP before I showed him the document, and then he said

17 that specifically he responded to the questions to Inspector Savic only

18 whether he was or was not a member of the SDA scouts unit, and now I will

19 ask the witness.

20 Q. Besides that fact, did you say anything else to Inspector Savic

21 during your questioning?

22 A. Inspector Savic showed me a red piece of paper written by hand

23 about this size where there was my name, stating that I was a member of

24 the scout unit. After I told him that I was not a scout, he was

25 continually holding a police baton. He kept bending it and hitting it on

Page 5368

1 the table. But he didn't take any notes. He didn't write anything down.

2 But I don't remember. And he didn't give me anything to sign either.

3 Q. So he didn't ask you anything about your membership in the SDA?

4 A. This top part of the statement, he asked me right away when I was

5 at the door whether I was in the SDA. The second part of the statement,

6 when I was detained the first time, around the 12th of April, then the

7 officer on duty, Mirko Pavic, when Cera brought me to the SUP, when I ran

8 to the SUP, then he went and checked and said, "There's nothing against

9 you. Go home and don't go out." And then after three or four months,

10 when I was detained, Stevan Arandjic appeared and saying that I wounded

11 him in April. So this is September now, so it's practically four months

12 or longer that this stayed there. Stevan didn't report me that I wounded

13 him. I walked around Samac freely. I was walking. I was carrying out my

14 work duty, and I was close to the police station every day. Nobody

15 brought me in or arrested me.

16 Q. I asked you on the first day to be specific and if you don't

17 remember something to say that you don't remember it. My question

18 yesterday was -- this was also a question asked to you by my learned

19 friend the Prosecutor, decidedly whether the investigator Milos Savic

20 asked you anything else except about your membership in the SDA scouts

21 units, and you responded no. Now we hear that when you were at the door,

22 as you said, he did ask you about whether you were a member of the SDA or

23 not. Did you remember this when you read this document?

24 A. Last night, when I was reading the document, I remembered a little

25 bit, the bit about the SDA. But I think that when you asked me before

Page 5369

1 about the police officer, you asked me that yesterday. And also about

2 whether I was at the roadblocks or at the barricades. This -- that part

3 fits.

4 Q. So we can agree that Inspector Savic, during your questioning in

5 the SUP --

6 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.

7 MR. WEINER: Your Honour, the witness --

8 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.

9 JUDGE MUMBA: Your microphone, please, Mr. Weiner.

10 MR. WEINER: The witness is describing two different interviews;

11 one at the door of the police station, and one when he's interviewed

12 apparently upon or after arrest, and now they're trying to mix them

13 together. He's talking about two separate interviews and then trying to

14 say that he's being either incorrect or he's not being truthful with the

15 Court, or he's confused. There's two separate interviews which occurred

16 apparently. One was at the door of the police where a couple of questions

17 were asked, and one was at a later point, and then there's kind of the

18 third at Batanice which was some sort of a trial, if you want to refer to

19 it even as that.

20 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Lukic. Can we have clearer questioning,

21 please.

22 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I'm not making any

23 insinuations. If my question was not clear to my learned friend from the

24 Prosecution, he will have the opportunity in redirect to re-establish this

25 again. I asked the witness, and I thought he understood me, whether Milos

Page 5370

1 Savic right away asked him at the door to the room where he was conducting

2 the interview, asked him about his membership in the SDA, and also about

3 all of these facts that are noted in the statement except for those

4 related to Stevo Arandjic. So this is just one statement. Is this one

5 statement?

6 A. This top part of the statement about membership in the SDA, I

7 didn't see a pen or a pencil in his hand, and there was nothing for me to

8 sign. He only had one small piece of red paper and that was all. I would

9 agree with that.

10 Q. See then we can agree that you told Inspector Milos Savic, when

11 you were giving him your statement -- so you gave him information about

12 your membership in the SDA, about your leaving the SDA, about your

13 conflict with Coner, about your alibi, we can put it that way, in the time

14 when the barricades, roadblocks were put up, but you claim that you didn't

15 say anything regarding Stevo Arandjic?

16 A. Yes.

17 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please, again I'm not objecting to

18 the question, but -- sorry, the line of questioning here, but there's a

19 whole heap of topics that my learned friend has put to this witness as

20 apparently contained in what we call the first part of the statement.

21 We've got information about membership of the SDA, leaving the SDA,

22 conflict with Coner, alibi because of the roadblocks, but nothing about

23 Stevo Arandjic, and he answers "Yes."

24 Now, how are you -- how will you know if the witness is saying

25 he's merely agreeing nothing about Stevo Arandjic and whether or not the

Page 5371

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Page 5372

1 witness is agreeing that all those other discreet little topics were in

2 fact in reality put to the witness.

3 JUDGE MUMBA: No. I think the -- yes. The points that the

4 counsel mentioned, the topics of interview --

5 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes.

6 JUDGE MUMBA: -- were clear and the witness answered. That's all

7 that counsel did. Counsel is not saying everything in this statement.

8 No, he pointed out the topics.

9 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes. I've got no problem with that. I've got no

10 problem with that. But I don't know if the witness is agreeing that all

11 of those topics were raised or merely that Arandjic was mentioned. I

12 don't know and how can the Chamber know that. If I might respectfully

13 suggest, what Mr. Lukic should do is put to him one by one. During that

14 interview was membership in the SDA mentioned, yes or no. And the witness

15 can say -- tell us. Then go on and tell us was Coner mentioned, your

16 conflict with him, yes or no, and then we can go on. And then finally get

17 to that point, because you just don't know whether the witness is agreeing

18 that all of these things in the first part of the statement were in

19 fact --

20 JUDGE MUMBA: No, no, no.

21 MR. DI FAZIO: -- put to him.

22 JUDGE MUMBA: What I'm saying is the topics discussed by counsel

23 were clear, right, as to what was discussed between the witness and the

24 person who was interrogating him. So the counsel -- counsel isn't saying

25 they're all in this statement. He has left the statement aside. He's

Page 5373

1 merely picking out the topics.

2 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes.

3 JUDGE MUMBA: Maybe we can go through this again just to make it

4 clear, because it seems to me you wanted the questions put to the witness

5 one by one.

6 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes. I think that would be clear so that we can

7 know whether or not those topics were raised in fact with the --

8 JUDGE MUMBA: With the witness.

9 MR. DI FAZIO: -- at the interview. I know not in regards to

10 the --

11 JUDGE MUMBA: The statement, no.

12 MR. DI FAZIO: Perhaps I misunderstood it, I don't know. But it

13 seemed to me we were left with some --

14 JUDGE MUMBA: All right. Maybe --

15 MR. DI FAZIO: I think it would be important to the Defence

16 counsel, I would think, if he's going to eventually submit that the

17 document is true or false. From that point of view, I think we should be

18 absolutely sure about just what was said between this witness and the --

19 JUDGE MUMBA: All right, yes.

20 MR. DI FAZIO: -- and the interrogator.

21 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. I think Mr. Lukic have very easily go over

22 that again one question at a time and then the witness can give the

23 answers.

24 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

25 Q. I assume, sir, you understood what we are about to clarify. I

Page 5374

1 will ask you questions now and you will respond. During your questioning

2 in November 1992 at the SUP premises by Inspector Milos Savic, at that

3 time, did you say anything about your membership in the SDA?

4 A. First of all, this was in September and not November, and I said

5 about my membership in the SDA just as it is stated here.

6 Q. Did you tell Inspector Savic anything about the reasons why you

7 left the Party of Democratic Action?

8 A. As it's written here, the conflicts, these are the reasons which I

9 talked about, which I stated.

10 Q. So you told him that you had a dispute with Coner and that that is

11 the reason why you left.

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. Did you, on that occasion, answer about questions about your

14 alleged presence at the roadblocks, i.e., were you present at the

15 roadblocks that were set up by the members of the SDA in Samac?

16 A. The inspector had photographs of people who were at the

17 roadblocks, and he only asked me where I was at the time the roadblocks

18 were set up, and I told him where I was.

19 JUDGE SINGH: Mr. Lukic, please concentrate on the statement first

20 and go back to the road blocks later. Try to establish and get on with

21 this document first.

22 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] I am asking the witness facts from the

23 document. It's the last sentence in the first paragraph, sir.

24 JUDGE SINGH: You haven't highlighted that, are you?

25 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for Judge Singh.

Page 5375

1 JUDGE SINGH: I'm sorry. You didn't highlight that. You want to

2 expand your inquiry now?

3 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] I highlighted in yellow thinking that

4 yesterday we would just read parts of the statement. So I just wanted the

5 relevant parts of the statement to be read out. But now since the witness

6 has read the whole statement, I'm asking you him about all the facts that

7 he talked about in the statement.

8 Q. Sir, on that occasion you told Inspector Savic that you were at

9 the Hotel Plaza with Gligorovic and Tutnjevic; is that correct?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. Did you talk -- did you tell Inspector Savic on that occasion and

12 did he question you about whether you would a member of the SDA scouts

13 unit?

14 A. He showed me a list of 10 or 11 people on a piece of paper where

15 there was also my name and my phone number. I denied this categorically

16 because I was not a member.

17 Q. Did I understand properly that at that time you told the Inspector

18 that you were not a member of the scouts unit of the SDA?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. Did Inspector Savic ask you anything regarding the incident with

21 Stevo Arandjic?

22 A. No.

23 Q. You've read this statement. You also read that part of the

24 statement last night; is that right?

25 A. This statement from the 9th of November, 1992, the part that

Page 5376

1 relates to Stevo Arandjic, is that in any way different compared to what

2 you told the court in Bijeljina?

3 A. I gave the same statement to the court in Bijeljina and to the

4 public security station in Samac, that I did not have a weapon, so

5 therefore, I was not able to wound him. And I only heard about Stevo

6 Arandjic at the court in Bijeljina. Before that, I didn't even know about

7 him.

8 Q. Can we please clarify something? You have just said that before

9 the court in Bijeljina and in the public security station in Samac, you

10 said that you didn't have a weapon and that you could not have wounded

11 him.

12 A. Yes. How -- with what could I have wounded him? If I was at

13 home, sitting at home, I was taken away, beaten. I was carrying out my

14 work duty. How could I have wounded him? With what?

15 Q. Did you tell that to Inspector Savic?

16 A. I think that's what it says here, that I did not have a firearm.

17 It's written here, but I didn't even say that. We didn't talk about

18 Stevan Arandjic in Samac.

19 Q. Sir, a few minutes ago, you stated: [Previous translation

20 continues]... "statement to the court in Bijeljina and to the public

21 security station in Samac that he did not have weapon. So therefore, I

22 was not able to wound him."

23 A. I think that mistakes are possible. It's just an omission. I am

24 constantly being charged with the fact that I did have a weapon, but a

25 hundred times later, I regretted the fact that I did not happen to have a

Page 5377

1 weapon.

2 Q. [Interpretation] Let's conclude. This statement does not bear

3 your signature? Yes or no?

4 A. This is not my signature.

5 Q. In your opinion, why would somebody place your signature at the

6 bottom of a statement which you are abiding by?

7 MR. WEINER: I object.

8 JUDGE MUMBA: Mr. Weiner, you object?

9 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.

10 JUDGE MUMBA: Your microphone.

11 MR. WEINER: Sorry. They're asking this witness to speculate as

12 to why someone else would commit forgery. It's not within his knowledge.

13 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Lukic.

14 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] I withdraw that question.

15 Q. You stated that you saw Stevo Arandjic at the court in Bijeljina

16 for the first time.

17 A. I knew him personally before the war, Stevo. And during the war,

18 the first time that I saw him during the war was in 1993.

19 Q. Were you in some kind of dispute with him before the war?

20 A. No.

21 Q. You said that he was friendly with your brothers who were members

22 of the Fourth Detachment; is that right?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. Do you know that Stevo Arandjic reported you much later after that

25 incident because he was good friends with your brother?

Page 5378

1 MR. DI FAZIO: Well, if Your Honours please --

2 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Di Fazio.

3 MR. DI FAZIO: It seems that -- unless I'm wrong -- would Your

4 Honours just bear with me?

5 [Prosecution counsel confer]

6 MR. DI FAZIO: Is seems to me that the witness is being asked to

7 comment upon something that Stevo Arandjic did when his evidence has been

8 repeatedly that he didn't see the -- Mr. Arandjic - I'm sorry - until

9 whenever it was in 1994 that the trial took place in Bijeljina. Now, he's

10 been fairly consistent about that, so what is the purpose of the question

11 if this witness says that he didn't see him at all until trial?

12 MR. LUKIC: I understand. I will not ask this question. Sorry.

13 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, because I was wondering how this witness would

14 know if that report was made later and for what reasons.

15 MR. LUKIC: Sorry, Your Honour.

16 Q. [Interpretation] Can we agree that everything that is in this

17 statement dated the 9th of November, 1992, except for the part referring

18 to Stevo Arandjic, is it really what you stated in the SUP?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. One last question about this. Where was your wife exchanged? Do

21 you know the place where she was exchanged?

22 A. I think it was in Dragalici, via Croatia she went to Orasje.

23 MR. LUKIC: Thank you, Your Honours, I have no further questions.

24 JUDGE MUMBA: I was wondering about these documents, the ID 24,

25 the judgement of the court in Bijeljina, and this very statement of

Page 5379

1 the SUP. Do you wish to tender them into evidence?

2 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Yes, certainly, Your Honour.

3 Yesterday we had only ID numbers given because there were no translations.

4 Now I wish to tender them into evidence. And there is one more thing I've

5 forgotten. With the Court's approval, I would like to ask the witness to

6 sign his name on a blank piece of paper several times and for this also to

7 be introduced into evidence.

8 JUDGE MUMBA: I'm wondering about that latter part, the signature,

9 because the witness has agreed that everything in this statement is

10 correct except for the part regarding -- what is his name?

11 Stevo Arandjic.

12 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, this statement is very

13 important for me because of the credibility of this witness who --

14 JUDGE MUMBA: No, no.

15 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] -- made statements several times.

16 JUDGE MUMBA: No. What I'm trying to say is you want to have the

17 handwriting expert, I presume, when you're asking for his handwriting,

18 just to say -- to prove whether or not -- or to show whether or not he

19 actually signed this statement. Okay.

20 May I have the Prosecution's stand on the -- first the admission

21 of the two documents?

22 MR. DI FAZIO: On that, could I address you after the afternoon

23 break and give you the Prosecution's position on that. There's a matter

24 regarding that that I want to speak to my learned colleagues about. I can

25 you an answer immediately after the break.

Page 5380

1 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. What is your position on these documents?

2 MR. DI FAZIO: On that issue it's a fairly novel situation. I've

3 not encountered it. May I have a moment to confer with my colleague,

4 please?

5 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.

6 [Prosecution counsel confer]

7 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Di Fazio?

8 MR. DI FAZIO: It seems -- it seems to me, if Your Honours please,

9 the exercise is going to be pointless and -- unless it's conducted in such

10 a way that an expert can say -- will meet whatever criterion an expert

11 needs to be met in order to carry out an examination.

12 JUDGE MUMBA: You see, the point is -- the contents of the

13 statement, except for Stevo -- the one gentleman --

14 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes.

15 JUDGE MUMBA: -- have been agreed to by the witness.

16 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes.

17 JUDGE MUMBA: It's just that he says he didn't sign it.

18 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes, yes.

19 JUDGE MUMBA: Now the issue of the signature, to prove the

20 signature is a matter we can deal with at a later stage.

21 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes. I take it that the Chamber is of the view

22 that the signature should be taken at this stage.

23 JUDGE MUMBA: No, no, no, not at this stage, because you are yet

24 to submit on it, because you were just asking to come back on the break.

25 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes, yes.

Page 5381

1 JUDGE MUMBA: What I'm saying is we can have the documents

2 admitted and leave the issue of the signature on D22 still pending. I

3 mean, right now, and then you can come back and make your submissions.

4 MR. DI FAZIO: On the sample signatures.

5 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Whether or not he should provide samples or

6 whether or not you want to do anything about it.

7 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes. Well, my preference would be to address you

8 on both of those issues immediately after the break, if I could have a --

9 JUDGE MUMBA: Okay. On both, whether or not you have any

10 objection.

11 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes, the taking of samples from this witness in

12 court, so we all know the document and we all know where the samples are,

13 and (b), the question of the full admission into evidence of this

14 document, the statement --

15 JUDGE MUMBA: What about the judgement?

16 MR. DI FAZIO: -- About those two issues --

17 JUDGE MUMBA: What about the judgement, D24, the judgement of the

18 court in Bijeljina?

19 MR. DI FAZIO: There is no objection to that. I think the witness

20 has effectively said he agrees with that

21 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. So the -- no, no, no. The judgement in

22 Bijeljina; that's what I'm talking about.

23 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes, he had no dispute.

24 JUDGE MUMBA: Okay.

25 MR. DI FAZIO: I have got no objections to that.

Page 5382

1 JUDGE MUMBA: Could we have the number, please.

2 THE REGISTRAR: Defence Exhibit D24/3 ter, and the English version

3 D24/3.

4 JUDGE MUMBA: And both are under seal because they contain the

5 particulars of the witness.

6 Now, Mr. Lukic you have finished your cross-examination except for

7 perhaps replying to what the prosecution may say on the other document and

8 the signature, so you will have that opportunity later. We will continue

9 with the cross-examination by other counsel.

10 MR. LUKIC: Thank you, Your Honour. I've finished.

11 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. The next counsel. Yes, Mr. Lazarevic.

12 MR. LAZAREVIC: [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Your Honours. On

13 behalf of Mr. Saric's defence, I will conduct the cross-examination of

14 this witness. If you could bear just one second with me just to prepare

15 my papers.

16 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Yes, you can go ahead.

17 JUDGE SINGH: Witness, while the counsel is getting his papers

18 prepared, perhaps I would like to ask you one question on the court

19 proceedings which took place in Bijeljina. In Bijeljina, sorry.

20 Now, you said that Arandjic gave evidence. Did he give a

21 statement or did he actually come to court and give evidence before the

22 court in your presence? And if he did that, did you cross-examine him?

23 Were you given the opportunity to cross-examine him?

24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] He was in the courtroom, and he

25 testified there, but I did not have the right to ask him anything. I had

Page 5383

1 no rights. He made his statement, he finished it, and he left.

2 JUDGE SINGH: Are you saying he spoke only or was the statement

3 read by the Prosecutor?

4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] He spoke. He made it orally.

5 JUDGE SINGH: Thank you.

6 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Counsel can proceed with cross-examination.

7 MR. LAZAREVIC: Thank you, Your Honour.

8 Cross-examined by Mr. Lazarevic:

9 Q. [Interpretation] Good day, sir. Witness, I will not address you

10 by your name. Please don't take it as an insult. It is simply the usual

11 procedure for protected witnesses. My name is Aleksandar Lazarevic, and I

12 will ask you questions on behalf of Mr. Simo Zaric. I will endeavour to

13 put my questions to you simply and in a way that can be answered by "yes,"

14 "no," or, "I don't remember." If you do not understand any of my

15 questions, please tell me so that I can reformulate them and put them in a

16 different way.

17 Mr. Lukic has already told you that you should wait for the

18 question to be interpreted before you begin to reply, and you have also

19 heard this from the Presiding Judge, Judge Mumba, but before I begin

20 putting questions to you, on behalf of my client, I wish to express his

21 regrets because of all the bad and difficult things that you, your family,

22 and your brothers have gone through in Bosnia during the war.

23 I will now begin my questioning.

24 [In English] [Previous translation continues] ... line of

25 questions that could possibly indicate some information about the witness.

Page 5384

1 They are about his personal background and the personal background of

2 some members of his family. So I believe that it would be appropriate to

3 go in private session. As soon as I finish with this line of examination,

4 I will inform the Trial Chamber.

5 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Can we go into private, please?

6 [Private session]

7 (redacted)

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 (redacted)

23 (redacted)

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

Page 5385

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Pages 5385 to 5404 redacted private session.

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Page 5405

1 (redacted)

2 (redacted)

3 (redacted)

4 (redacted)

5 (redacted)

6 (redacted)

7 (redacted)

8 (redacted)

9 [Open session]

10 MR. LAZAREVIC: [Interpretation]

11 Q. I would like to move to a different topic now.

12 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. We are in open session now.

13 MR. LAZAREVIC: [Interpretation]

14 Q. This is a topic that you've already testified about and a topic on

15 which my learned friend Mr. Lukic already questioned you about, and it

16 relates to the distribution of weapons. So I would also like to ask you a

17 few questions about that.

18 Amongst the people who were distributing the weapons in the

19 TO building, was Ibrahim Salkic, called Ibela, amongst them too?

20 A. I didn't see him then at that time when I was there.

21 Q. And could you please tell me, were the weapons being distributed

22 inside the TO building or in the courtyard of the TO building?

23 A. When I saw that through the gate, through the large TO door, they

24 were being distributed outside in the courtyard.

25 Q. You said that Serb police officers upstairs in the police building

Page 5406

1 were looking at that. They were watching. Is that true?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. The building across the street, is that a police station?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. The Serb police officers who were watching, do they work at that

6 police station?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. So they were at their place of employment.

9 A. Well, I don't know if it's their place of employment to stand at

10 the windows of the building.

11 Q. Were these windows open?

12 A. Closed.

13 Q. Could you please tell me if it's true that on the first floor of

14 the police station are the officers of the chief of SUP, the crime

15 inspectors, as well as the commander of the police station, that these

16 officers are on the first floor?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. The chief of the police station in Samac on the 16th of April was

19 Dragan Lukac; is that right?

20 A. I think that Dragan Lukac was a criminal inspector in the crime

21 sector but I think it was Vinko. I think his last name is Vinko

22 Dragicevic from Hasici.

23 Q. Well, Dragan Lukac told us that at that time he was the chief of

24 police, that shortly before that he was appointed to that post and this is

25 why I was asking you specifically about that date, the 16th of April, when

Page 5407

1 the weapons were distributed. But in any case, is Dragan Lukac a Croat by

2 ethnicity?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. And Vinko Dragicevic?

5 A. A Croat.

6 Q. And the commander of the police station at that time, was it Namik

7 Suljic?

8 A. I don't know.

9 Q. Do you know who Namik Suljic is?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. Is he a Muslim?

12 A. Ye.

13 MR. LAZAREVIC: May I have one second?

14 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.

15 [Defence counsel confer]

16 MR. LAZAREVIC: [Interpretation]

17 Q. Could you please tell me whether Namik Suljic worked with the

18 police? If you don't know whether he was a commander or not, at least did

19 he work in the police?

20 A. I know he was a teacher at the high school, but also I saw him on

21 the street in the uniform of a reserve police officer.

22 Q. Thank you. That is an answer to my question.

23 MR. LAZAREVIC: Your Honours, I believe that we will have to go to

24 private session just briefly because again I will mention some names of

25 the brothers of the witness and this could jeopardise his identity.

Page 5408

1 J.MumbA: All right. Can we go into private session again,

2 please?

3 [Private session]

4 (redacted)

5 (redacted)

6 (redacted)

7 (redacted)

8 (redacted)

9 (redacted)

10 (redacted)

11 (redacted)

12 (redacted)

13 (redacted)

14 (redacted)

15 (redacted)

16 (redacted)

17 (redacted)

18 (redacted)

19 (redacted)

20 (redacted)

21 (redacted)

22 (redacted)

23 (redacted)

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

Page 5409

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Pages 5409 to 5419 redacted private session.

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Page 5420

1 (redacted)

2 (redacted)

3 (redacted)

4 (redacted)

5 (redacted)

6 (redacted)

7 (redacted)

8 (redacted)

9 (redacted)

10 (redacted)

11 (redacted)

12 (redacted)

13 (redacted)

14 (redacted)

15 (redacted)

16 (redacted)

17 (redacted)

18 (redacted)

19 (redacted)

20 [Open session]

21 MR. LAZAREVIC: [Interpretation]

22 Q. Just one more question. We're discussing Fadil Topcagic. Did his

23 whole -- was his whole face covered in paint?

24 A. No.

25 Q. Can you then explain to us the parts of his face that were

Page 5421

1 painted? His cheeks, his forehead?

2 A. His cheeks, his forehead.

3 Q. What about his cheek? What about his nose?

4 A. No. No. He couldn't have painted his lips. At least not at that

5 time, his lips were not painted.

6 Q. I would like to follow the chronology in your testimony so as not

7 to confuse things. You testified that sometime around the 20th of April

8 that you went to a meeting that was held in the Buducnost factory. Is

9 that correct?

10 A. Not at the meeting. All of us citizens from Bosanski Samac were

11 told to go there, all people of military age and able to work.

12 Q. I may have misused this word "meeting," but at any rate, I'm

13 speaking about this event when everybody went to the Buducnost factory on

14 the 20th of April because that's what happened then. You said that before

15 you went there, your neighbour, Djoko Pisarevic, told you that you had to

16 wear a white band. Is that correct?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. Did he tell you that only Muslims and Croats should wear that

19 ribbon or did he just tell you that you should put it on?

20 A. That Muslims and Croats should wear it. I don't think Djoko was

21 wearing one of them. He was a Serb, so he didn't need to wear one.

22 Q. Did Djoko tell you -- I'm trying to rephrase the question. Did he

23 tell you that you personally should put on a band or did he tell you that

24 there is an order that a band should be worn?

25 A. He said that everybody needs to wear a band; there is an order to

Page 5422

1 this effect. Muslims and Croats are to wear it.

2 Q. Did you see any of the Serbs wear the band?

3 A. As far as I remember, I did not.

4 Q. Did soldiers wear a white band?

5 A. On the arms where we wore them, they did not.

6 Q. I think my question was only whether -- whether they did wear a

7 band or did not. This is the question that you need to respond to,

8 please.

9 A. There is a difference in the way it's worn. The soldiers wore

10 thin ribbons tied up here, and we had to tie broader bands around our arm.

11 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please -- if Your Honours please,

12 can the transcript indicate that when the witness was describing the "thin

13 ribbons tied up here," and I quote directly from the transcript, he

14 indicated a portion on his right -- his left arm near the elbow, part of

15 the upper arm. I just think that ought to be put in the transcript. This

16 sort of evidence could become important.

17 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. As the correct description where the arm --

18 where the band was worn.

19 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes. Thank you.

20 MR. LAZAREVIC: I have no objection to that.

21 Q. [Interpretation] Did anybody set the width of the band that should

22 be worn?

23 A. No. As far as I know, they did not.

24 Q. Do you know whether anybody ordered that this should be worn?

25 A. I don't know that, but I know that everybody did wear one.

Page 5423

1 Q. So you heard about this from Djoko Pisarevic. You didn't receive

2 any kind of notice or any information to this effect?

3 Excuse me. Your answer was not registered by the transcript, so

4 could you please repeat your answer to the last question. Concerning

5 whether you heard about the obligation to wear the band from Djoko

6 Pisarevic and to whether you received any kind of notice or information to

7 this effect?

8 A. No. I didn't receive anything to that effect.

9 Q. Further on in your statement, you said that when you walked

10 towards Buducnost you saw vehicles with the markings of the army of

11 Republika Srpska. Is this true?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. Could you be more specific about these markings of the army of

14 Republika Srpska. Where were they? Were they on the licence plates, on

15 the tarpaulins, on the doors of the vehicles?

16 A. It was on the licence plates, VSR, and then the licence plate

17 number.

18 Q. Do you know when was -- on what date was the army of

19 Republika Srpska established?

20 A. A long time before the war broke out in Samac.

21 Q. Does that mean that the 4th Detachment was also a part of the army

22 of Republika Srpska?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. Does that mean that it was not part of the JNA? I'm asking you

25 once again.

Page 5424

1 A. The last time I testified here, I said that it had nothing to do

2 with the JNA, the real JNA. And I don't know about this kind -- this JNA.

3 Q. Is that your opinion, your conclusion, or is this relying on some

4 facts that you know about the structure of the army of Republika Srpska,

5 the international situation in Bosnia, and so on?

6 A. When I see soldiers or an army where its members wear beards and

7 they have cockades, then this is not, in my opinion, the JNA.

8 Q. So the information that the army of Republika Srpska was formed on

9 the 12th of May, 1992, is not true, according to you?

10 A. According to me, no.

11 Q. I would now like to move to this meeting, this gathering that was

12 held in Buducnost. You said that the meeting was addressed by Jovo Savic.

13 Is that true?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. Before that meeting was held, did you know Jovo Savic?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. Do you know where Jovo Savic lives?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. And you know what he looks like?

20 A. Yes, I do.

21 Q. You were present at that meeting. Do you know in which capacity

22 Jovo Savic was there? What was his position or his function in the army

23 at that time?

24 A. I don't know.

25 Q. Do you know that he was deputy commander of the 4th Detachment?

Page 5425

1 A. I don't. I don't know.

2 Q. I won't put any more questions to you, then, concerning this

3 meeting then.

4 Just a few more questions about this. Did Jovo Savic wear a beard

5 perhaps?

6 A. No.

7 Q. Did he wear a tall hat with a cockade on his head or something

8 similar?

9 A. No.

10 Q. Could you please tell me what kind of a uniform Jovo Savic had?

11 A. When we were in Buducnost on that day, he wore an officers

12 uniform, a regular SMB uniform, olive-grey uniform.

13 Q. Was that the uniform that was worn in the JNA at that time?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. Let's move now to an event that happened after you left that

16 meeting in front of the AS Cafe, and you described it in your statement

17 here before this Tribunal. I would now like to ask you about some details

18 concerning that event.

19 What was the weather like at that time? Maybe I could help you.

20 Was it cold that April and did it snow a couple of days before that?

21 A. I remember it wasn't very cold. You could sit outside.

22 Q. That event, when you were beaten up by two persons, what time of

23 the day was it? Could you be more specific about the time of day that it

24 happened?

25 A. It happened around noon that day, between 11.00 and 12.00 noon. I

Page 5426

1 can't say exactly what time it was.

2 Q. Well, thank you. I'm not insisting that you pinpoint the exact

3 time.

4 This event which you described in your first statement, which we

5 have already referred to and which has been shown to you, and that's your

6 statement given to the investigators of The Hague Tribunal on the 14th and

7 the 17th of June, 1996, in that statement, you didn't say -- you didn't

8 state that you saw Simo Zaric on that occasion. Is that true?

9 A. I don't remember whether I said that, but I did see him, and I

10 stand by that.

11 Q. I'm only asking you about that statement of yours at that time.

12 Did you state that you saw Simo Zaric at that time?

13 A. I don't remember whether I stated it or not.

14 MR. LAZAREVIC: I believe that my learned colleague from the

15 Prosecutor could be of certain assistance like in the previous time when I

16 had --

17 JUDGE MUMBA: Just to get confirmation.

18 MR. LAZAREVIC: Yes, just for confirmation because it would be

19 much quicker that our learned colleagues looked briefly through the

20 statement, and they -- particularly on this portion of the statement when

21 this incident is explained. So maybe we can do something about it, just

22 to avoid that I show the whole statement.

23 JUDGE MUMBA: This is the statement of the 14th and 17th of June.

24 MR. LAZAREVIC: 14th and 17th of June, 1996, yes.

25 JUDGE MUMBA: And what exactly are you stating to the witness.

Page 5427

1 MR. LAZAREVIC: Going through this statement, I have noticed that

2 the statement of my client, Mr. Zaric, was not mentioned in this incident,

3 and it is the incident in front of Cafe AS on 20th of April.

4 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, the Prosecution.

5 MR. DI FAZIO: Having seen the statement, I can confirm that the

6 witness certainly describes the episode. He describes the presence of

7 Miroslav Tadic at the cafe on the -- during the episode and injuries he

8 received, his subsequent hospitalisation, but as far as the episode is

9 concerned, he makes no reference to Mr. Simo Zaric. Mr. Simo Zaric is

10 certainly referred to later in the statement but in the context of other

11 matters. And I couldn't fine my comments purely to the statement of the

12 14th and 17th of June, 1996. Thank you.

13 MR. LAZAREVIC: [Interpretation]

14 Q. The Prosecutor has confirmed that Simo Zaric was not mentioned in

15 relation to this incident when you provided this statement, i.e., your

16 statement does not contain that information that Simo Zaric was present.

17 Ten years have passed since then, as you have said, so I would

18 like to ask you, has your recollection improved?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. So ten years later, you remember things better than you did then;

21 is that right?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. Could you please tell me, then, what Simo Zaric was wearing when

24 you saw him?

25 A. He was wearing a military camouflage uniform.

Page 5428

1 Q. A camouflage military uniform. Well, that was my next question.

2 I was expecting you to say that he was in a uniform, but I waited to see

3 what kind of a uniform it was, and you've already responded to that.

4 Then you said that during that incident when they were beating

5 you, that Sumadinac and Cera who savagely beat you up, you said at one

6 point you lost consciousness. Is that true?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. Could you please tell me how long you were unconscious?

9 A. I couldn't take a watch with me to see how long I was lying down.

10 I have no idea how long I was lying down.

11 Q. So you don't know how long you were unconscious for. Did you see

12 Simo Zaric before you lost consciousness or after you came to?

13 A. After I came to. After I recovered, I saw him.

14 Q. So you didn't see Simo Zaric at all until you regained -- until

15 after you regained consciousness?

16 A. When they were beating me, I had to look down so that I couldn't

17 look around to see who was coming in and out, in and out of the cafe.

18 Q. So you don't know when Simo Zaric arrived?

19 A. I know he was there, but I don't know when he arrived.

20 Q. Thank you very much. After that episode when you were forced to

21 run to the SUP, you arrived at the police station and were told there that

22 from that day on, you need to report to the SUP every morning. Is this

23 true?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. Could you please tell me who issued this order?

Page 5429

1 A. It was Mirko Pavic and five or six police officers were there.

2 Q. But specifically who told you, "From tomorrow on, you have to

3 report to the police station."

4 A. I think it was Mirko Pavic, but I can't really say now.

5 Q. Do you know what was Mirko Pavic's post in the police at that

6 time?

7 A. I don't know, but I think he was a deputy commander or something

8 like that.

9 Q. I won't insist on that. If you don't know, you don't know.

10 According to your testimony, you continued to report to the SUP

11 day after day; is that right?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. How long -- excuse me. I will rephrase my question.

14 When you used to go to the SUP, what time of the day did you go?

15 A. In the morning, around 8.00 a.m.

16 Q. And while you were reporting to the SUP, how long would you stay

17 at the SUP -- the -- at the SUP?

18 A. When I came to the SUP, I would report to the officer on duty and

19 then he would note down the information that I had reported in, and after

20 that, I returned home.

21 Q. Well, could you give us an estimate? How long did it take you

22 from the moment you came in until the time you left the SUP building?

23 A. Sometimes it took five minutes and sometimes it took one hour.

24 Q. Further on in your testimony, you stated that on one of those

25 occasions when you reported to the SUP you saw Simo Zaric and that at that

Page 5430

1 time, he told you when you didn't -- and did he tell you that when you

2 didn't know how to be a gentleman, then you can be a slave? Is that true?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Could you --

5 JUDGE MUMBA: Counsel, the interpreters are a little behind. Can

6 you just wait?

7 MR. LAZAREVIC: I'm sorry. I'll wait for a second.

8 Q. [Interpretation] Can you tell me, this event in the police station

9 when Simo Zaric allegedly told you that, where exactly did that happen?

10 A. At the entrance to the police building there are -- there is a

11 small staircase where the duty officer is, where there is a stall where he

12 is. There is a double door a little further on. There was Seselj's

13 picture, and we had to take a bow there first.

14 Q. Apart from Mr. Zaric and yourself, was there anyone else present

15 at the time?

16 A. No. I can't recall. I know that the duty police officer was

17 there, Mr. Zaric, and myself. I was there to report.

18 Q. I would have to bring you once again back to your interview given

19 to the Office of the Prosecutor of the 13th of July, 1996. Did you on

20 that occasion tell the Prosecutors that Simo Zaric had told you that since

21 you didn't know how to be a gentleman, you now had to become a slave, that

22 he told you that in Zasovica as you dug trenches? So is this how you

23 described it to the Prosecutors on the 13th of July?

24 A. I really can't tell you now what I said. I gave a lot of

25 statements, and I don't remember to whom I said what. I had to give

Page 5431

1 statements all over the place, to the police, but I do know now that this

2 conversation took place in the police station.

3 Q. I would like to dwell on this a little more.

4 MR. PANETLIC: Your Honours, if I may intervene.

5 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Pantelic.

6 MR. PANTELIC: It seems to me that the witness mentioned,

7 inter alia, police and Prosecution, tuzlusvo [phoen]. Maybe my learned

8 friend can clarify that with witness, because we heard that impression.

9 It was on line -- page 77, line 2. Thank you.

10 MR. LAZAREVIC: I will definitely do that and thank you my dear

11 colleague for that.

12 Q. [Interpretation] It seems that the transcript does not reflect

13 your words. You said that you had given statements -- a lot of

14 statements. You mentioned the police and the Prosecution; is that

15 correct?

16 A. Yes. That's how it should be.

17 Q. Thank you. I would now like to pinpoint the actual time when this

18 event took place as you claim that it did. So it happened at the time

19 when you were still reporting as ordered by Mirko Pavic to the police

20 station every morning. Is that the time period we're talking about?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. So this happened before you started doing your work duty?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. How did you then understand his remark about the slave? Because

25 this was before the time when you were forced to go on work duty.

Page 5432

1 A. I understood it to mean that I -- I was on one side and my

2 brothers were on the other side. If I had joined my brothers, I would not

3 been here. I would not have been beaten up or anything.

4 Q. What is your opinion on this issue? Do you believe that it would

5 have happened if you had joined your brothers? I'm asking you to

6 speculate perhaps, but this is -- in fact, I'm just asking you for your

7 opinion.

8 A. Perhaps this was a harder road, but I'm quite happy that I took it

9 because it is easier for me. I would never have joined them.

10 Q. So the sense of the remark -- the meaning of the remark was that

11 this would not have happened if you had joined your brothers.

12 A. Yes.

13 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Mr. Lazarevic, I wonder whether you could seek

14 from the witness a little clarification. This goes to the point raised by

15 your colleague Mr. Pantelic and then confirmed by the witness that he said

16 I gave statements to the police and the Prosecution. I would be

17 interested to know which police and where.

18 MR. LAZAREVIC: Yes, Your Honour. I will ask the witness again.

19 Then I thought maybe you would ask me what Prosecutor he referred to, the

20 Prosecutor of The Hague Tribunal or some other Prosecutors.

21 Q. [Interpretation] Judge Williams wanted me to clarify some things

22 with you, some details regarding this part of your testimony pertaining to

23 when you said you had given a lot of statements to the police, to the

24 Prosecution, and so on. She would like to know what police you're

25 referring to. If there were several police forces involved, which ones,

Page 5433

1 if you could specify. And what about the Prosecution? What did you mean

2 by that?

3 A. When I was exchanged in 1994, I gave a statement to the civilian

4 police in Tuzla and to the military police. In 1994, I came to Gradacac,

5 and I have gave a statement to the civilian police there. I met my family

6 in July 1994, and I gave a statement to the police in Orasje, to the

7 military police in Orasje. Also in Domaljevac I gave a statement to the

8 civilian police.

9 As regards the Prosecution, I referred to the Office of the

10 Prosecutor of the Tribunal.

11 Q. Thank you very much.

12 MR. LAZAREVIC: Your Honour, I can proceed. Is this enough for --

13 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Yes. Thank you.

14 MR. LAZAREVIC: Thank you.

15 Q. [Interpretation] I would now like to go very briefly because we

16 are running out of time. We don't have time to ask many more questions.

17 This will refer to the beginning of your work duty or forced labour,

18 depending on how you want to call it.

19 In your testimony, you mentioned that you saw Simo Zaric on those

20 occasions when you were in front of the SDK building and that he was just

21 passing by and going upstairs to see Bozo Ninkovic. Is that what you

22 said?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. The SDK building has the ground floor and the first floor; is that

25 correct?

Page 5434

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Page 5435

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. In the ground floor there is just the public accounting office,

3 the SDK as it was known at the time?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. Upstairs in that building there was the Secretariat for National

6 Defence and the communication centre service; is that correct?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. At the time when you were in front of the building receiving your

9 work assignment, as you said, you were in front of the building. You did

10 not get into the building?

11 A. Yes, I was in front of the building.

12 Q. So you were unable to see whether Simo Zaric went to the

13 communications centre or to the Secretariat for National Defence; is that

14 correct?

15 A. Yes.

16 MR. LAZAREVIC: Your Honours, I was thinking about moving to some

17 other topic, and I believe that we are now to finish. It's 1800.

18 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.

19 MR. LAZAREVIC: I can continue tomorrow with cross-examination.

20 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. We will continue tomorrow.

21 Mr. Pantelic.

22 MR. PANTELIC: Your Honour, just a few seconds, please. This

23 witness mentioned that he gave a certain number of various statements to

24 Bosnian police, Croatian police, et cetera. I would be very grateful if

25 our learned friends, in this break until tomorrow, can check their records

Page 5436

1 and maybe find some of these statements, because the well-known fact

2 within this Tribunal is that the Prosecutor is in close connection with

3 the security services, intelligence services, and police from Bosnia. So

4 in other cases was the case probably. I'm not sure for this particular,

5 but just -- because we have a witness here, maybe we could have some other

6 angle.

7 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Yes.

8 MR. PANETLIC: Thank you. Thank you.

9 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. The Prosecutor can find out whether they have

10 anything and be able to tell us tomorrow.

11 We will rise until tomorrow afternoon at 1415.

12 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 6.00 p.m.,

13 to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 16th day

14 of January, 2002, at 2:15 p.m.

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25