1 Monday, 8 July 2002

2 [Open session]

3 [The accused entered court]

4 --- Upon commencing at 9.05 a.m.

5 JUDGE MUMBA: Please call the case.

6 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. Case number

7 IT-95-9-T, the Prosecutor versus Blagoje Simic, Miroslav Tadic, and

8 Simo Zaric.

9 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, the Prosecution.

10 MR. DI FAZIO: Good morning, Your Honours. The next witness is

11 intended to be Witness A. The situation with him is that he, on the

12 weekend, finally completed his statement. It was -- he came on Friday and

13 wanted to make quite a number of alterations, and Ms. Reidy and myself

14 worked over the weekend, and thankfully we've reached the situation where

15 the final version is finally ready, but it hasn't gone through the 92 bis

16 procedures, the formal procedures, and therefore we're in a situation

17 where -- now, where he's here in the building, ready to go, and the

18 choices are two: one, we proceed with him in the normal way; or secondly,

19 we adjourn the matter to enable the Prosecution to comply with the 92 bis

20 procedures and hopefully produce him later in the day or tomorrow,

21 depending -- I don't know what the -- the registry may be able to assist

22 us on the time frame involved, later in the day, and proceed under the

23 provisions of 92 bis.

24 I urge upon you the second course of action, enabling us -- grant

25 us an adjournment, enable us to comply with the 92 bis procedures. That

1 will have a drastic reduction in time. Even taking into account an

2 adjournment, it would still result in a reduction of time. I've got three

3 areas I need to lead evidence from him: a couple of interviews in the

4 SUP, some background about the defendants, and the exchange. That's it.

5 But the rest of the statement, of course, deals with the horrific torture

6 that he endured in the TO, in the SUP, and so on. It's mainly that sort

7 of evidence.

8 So that's the situation that we're faced with. The statement was

9 given to the Defence on Saturday, I believe, Saturday afternoon it was

10 made available, although I understand from one Defence counsel that he may

11 need to get some further instructions from his client. But Defence

12 essentially -- counsel will correct me if I'm wrong, but essentially, I

13 think they're ready to proceed, using the 92 bis procedure.

14 So that's my application. I apply for an adjournment, enabling us

15 to comply with those procedures.

16 The question -- if you're minded to grant the Prosecution the

17 adjournment, one thing I can't assist you with is how long we need because

18 I just don't know how long it would take to arrange for this procedure to

19 be done, to be performed. Perhaps the registry could assist us with

20 giving us a time estimate of how long it would actually take to get

21 someone to swear and sign the statement. But I might like to end up by

22 saying that it will save a lot of time if you grant the adjournment.

23 JUDGE MUMBA: I'll hear from the Defence. Yes, Mr. Lukic.

24 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Good morning, Your Honours. I think

25 that I speak on behalf of all of my colleagues. We managed to exchange

1 our views regarding what the Prosecutor just told us. I wish to say

2 several things.

3 The Defence of Mr. Tadic and the Defence of Mr. Zaric, on Friday,

4 pointed out several times - I personally did it three times - to the

5 matter that concerns us regarding how we receive these statements. There

6 is an order of the Trial Chamber stating that the statements should be

7 delivered the minute it is signed by the witness, and in accordance with

8 Rule 21 of the Statute, all statements should be given to the other side

9 in due time so that the side can prepare and so that we can, after having

10 established contacts with our clients, receive appropriate instructions.

11 As the Prosecutor told us, there are certain changes, amendments,

12 that were delivered to us on Saturday afternoon, and these are

13 modifications to the previous statement that had been delivered to us

14 previously. The Trial Chamber should also know that during the week, and

15 we were unable to have contact with our clients, we only contacted them on

16 Friday afternoon. And despite the fact that we had telephone contacts

17 with our clients, we believe that that is insufficient because our clients

18 did not have possession of these statements and were unable to analyse

19 them and give us instructions accordingly.

20 The Defence will not oppose this witness to testify in accordance

21 with the Rule 92 bis if we are given an opportunity to consult our

22 clients. If this adjournment will be of sufficient length so that we can

23 go with our clients over the statement during the adjournment, then we

24 will not oppose this procedure. But at any rate, on behalf of the Defence

25 of Mr. Tadic - and I believe that the other colleagues will support what

1 I'm saying - if the Prosecution completes its chief today, and based on

2 what the Prosecutor told me, they expect this chief examination to last

3 some two, two and-a-half hours, then if we can adjourn after that, so that

4 we can, in the afternoon, contact our clients and go with them over this

5 statement, and then proceed with cross-examination tomorrow morning. And

6 as far as I know, we have another five witnesses that will testify

7 pursuant to Rule 92 bis, and if there will be further modifications to

8 their statements and if the Prosecution is unable to deliver these

9 modifications to us in a timely manner, then we will ask that we be given

10 appropriate time, pursuant to Rule 21 of the Statute, to go over these

11 modifications with our clients. Thank you.

12 [Trial Chamber confers]

13 JUDGE MUMBA: Pursuant to the submissions of both parties, the

14 Trial Chamber has decided that it will adjourn to allow the Prosecution to

15 complete the process, and then the Prosecution will get in touch with the

16 legal officer as to when we can resume the proceedings.

17 After examination-in-chief, which the Trial Chamber strictly

18 instructs the Prosecution to be brief and to stick to the matters only

19 accepted under the Rule, we shall adjourn to give sufficient time to the

20 Defence to consult with their clients, and that will certainly depend on

21 how much examination-in-chief and how much of the statement will have been

22 changed when you deal with the final procedure. So that the Trial Chamber

23 is interested in making sure that the Defence have sufficient time to

24 consult with their clients, get full instructions before

25 cross-examination.

1 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes. Of course, I've got no problem with them

2 having more time to get final instructions, and I'm grateful to the

3 Chamber for adjourning. With respect, I think it's the wisest course in

4 the circumstances.

5 JUDGE MUMBA: So the Prosecution will let the legal officer know

6 as soon as they're ready and --

7 MR. DI FAZIO: We'll make arrangements and get a good time

8 estimate so that we can, hopefully, resume later in the morning.

9 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. The Trial Chamber -- the proceedings will

10 adjourn until later this morning.

11 --- Recess taken at 9.16 a.m.

12 --- On resuming at 11.32 a.m.

13 [The witness entered court]

14 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. The proceedings are continuing. The

15 Prosecution.

16 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes, thank you. If Your Honours please, I'm glad

17 to say the adjournment proved fruitful. The procedures were followed and

18 the statement is now ready to go. So we can proceed. I understand that

19 the protective measures are already in place and that there is voice and

20 facial distortion of this witness and his testimony. So I would like to

21 proceed. I have a sheet with the personal particulars which I'd like to

22 be shown to the witness. And perhaps he can be sworn first, yes.

23 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Can the witness take the solemn declaration.

24 WITNESS: WITNESS A

25 [Witness answered through interpreter]

1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will speak

2 the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

3 JUDGE MUMBA: Please sit down.

4 Yes, Mr. Di Fazio.

5 MR. DI FAZIO: Thank you.

6 Examined by Mr. Di Fazio:

7 Q. Witness, when testifying, I'd appreciate it if you wouldn't use

8 your own name. I'll just refer to you as "witness," and just make sure

9 you don't mention your name when giving your evidence.

10 Now, would you please look at that document that I produced to

11 you. You will see both -- that it is in both English and B/C/S. Next to

12 the letter "A," is that your name?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. And next to the letter "B," is that your date of birth, and next

15 to the letter "C," is that the place of birth?

16 A. Yes.

17 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please, I believe that needs to be

18 produced and kept under seal.

19 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Can we --

20 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

21 MR. DI FAZIO: Is it to be given an exhibit number?

22 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, it will be but, Mr. Prosecutor, if you always

23 remember to switch off your microphone because of the voice distortion for

24 the witness.

25 MR. DI FAZIO: Oh, I see. Yes, I appreciate that.

1 THE REGISTRAR: It's Exhibit 131, P131.

2 JUDGE MUMBA: And it will be under seal.

3 THE REGISTRAR: Yes.

4 MR. DI FAZIO: Thank you.

5 Q. Witness, I'd like to produce another document to you. Would you

6 please look at this document that I produce. Can you tell us if that is a

7 document that you swore this morning and that if your signature appears at

8 the bottom - sorry - on the --

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. See if your signature appears on the front of the statement, the

11 front page of the statement. I think that's about three pages in after

12 the attestation.

13 A. Yes, on the fourth page.

14 Q. Yes. Thank you.

15 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please, I produce the statement

16 into evidence.

17 JUDGE MUMBA: This is the statement of the witness?

18 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes.

19 JUDGE MUMBA: Since he has a pseudonym, can we have the name

20 redacted, then?

21 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes. That would be necessary in order to maintain

22 the protection of the witness, and perhaps it can be redacted throughout

23 the document, wherever it appears. So it will have to be redacted, I

24 suppose, from the attestation and at the beginning of the statement as

25 well.

1 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. I see Mr. Lukic.

2 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] I would just like to say something

3 regarding the statement, but prior to that, let me tell you that we

4 received information from our clients that they cannot hear the witness,

5 so perhaps the technical personnel can look into that. Perhaps a channel

6 should be changed.

7 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Sometimes we do have problems when there is

8 voice distortion.

9 THE REGISTRAR: The video booth has informed me you should listen

10 to channel 8.

11 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] I would like the Prosecutor to tell

12 us, in view of the fact that we just now, prior to resuming our work,

13 received the statement under Rule 92 bis, and I saw that the B/C/S version

14 has 30 pages, 101 paragraphs, and the one we received on Saturday has 29

15 pages and 100 paragraphs. So perhaps the Prosecutor can tell me whether a

16 paragraph was added in the meantime, and if so, which paragraph it was,

17 and how do these two statements differ?

18 MR. DI FAZIO: I think Ms. Reidy is probably best placed to answer

19 that as she worked on the weekend, mainly over the statement, and she has

20 more information regarding that.

21 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Ms. Reidy.

22 MS. REIDY: Your Honours and the Defence, to the best of my

23 knowledge, the statement which was given to Defence on Saturday and this

24 statement do not vary in the contents at all. It's simply a matter of

25 formatting of the document that happened, that occurred. And the

1 difference is, I think I can say if there was a difference, it may have

2 occurred for the pages running onto an extra one. For example, on the

3 page with the ERN number in the corner 02296819, and that is page 7 of the

4 witness's statement in the B/C/S version, there's a little subheading that

5 says "Territorial Defence," is what it says in English. And there's four

6 of those subheadings inserted just because, at certain parts in the

7 statement, it jumps from one topic to another. So I think that when those

8 were inserted in the formatting, so the numbering of it, it caused the

9 document to run from 29 pages over into 30 pages, and as I said, the

10 numbering is just -- I think there was a mistake in the numbering. There

11 was two numbers repeated, and when that was corrected, instead of being

12 100 -- what was it, 100, it's a 101. But there's no material difference,

13 difference in the content; it's a matter of format.

14 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] If this is how it is, then we have no

15 objections to introducing the statement in evidence.

16 [Trial Chamber confers]

17 JUDGE MUMBA: Ms. Reidy, perhaps you can point out which paragraph

18 was numbered twice, so that the Defence can cross-check.

19 MS. REIDY: Your Honour, I'd have to get the old copy with me. I

20 don't have it with me. There was at one stage - and I don't know if this

21 was on the one, Saturday - two numbered paragraph 4s, but I think that

22 should have been corrected. And if you like, I can go out and get an old

23 copy and just double-check the numbering, which paragraph it was that has

24 been renumbered.

25 [Trial Chamber confers]

1 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. I think that can be done during the break and

2 inform the other parties as to what the problem is.

3 Mr. Lukic.

4 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Let me help my colleagues from the

5 Prosecution. I think that we cleared the matter. On page 13 of the

6 version we received on Saturday, there is paragraph 49 and then the

7 following one is paragraph 51. So paragraph 50 was omitted, and I believe

8 that is what caused the problem. No, I apologise. There is paragraph 50.

9 Sorry.

10 JUDGE MUMBA: I think we'll leave it with Ms. Reidy to give the

11 other party and the Trial Chamber the correct information.

12 MR. DI FAZIO: In any event, the really important thing is that

13 there's no substantial changes; it's a format thing.

14 JUDGE MUMBA: Very well. The statement will be admitted. But in

15 fairness to the Defence, if they find any substantial differences, they

16 should raise it with the Trial Chamber.

17 THE REGISTRAR: The number is P132, under seal.

18 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Di Fazio.

19 MR. DI FAZIO: Thank you. May I proceed now?

20 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.

21 MR. DI FAZIO: Thank you.

22 Q. Witness, do you know a gentleman named Simo Zaric?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. How long have you known him?

25 A. For more than 20 years.

1 Q. In the period of time leading up to April of 1992, can you tell us

2 what sort of relationship you had with him, whether it was just the fact

3 that you knew him, whether you socialised with him? Can you comment upon

4 the nature of the relationship you had with him?

5 A. Until the April of 1992, we were on good terms, friendly terms.

6 We were friendly before that. He knew me, I knew him. And he even was my

7 immediate supervisor while I worked --

8 Q. Thank you. Perhaps we can go directly to that aspect of things.

9 You said that he was your immediate supervisor while you worked. How did

10 that arise? What was his position, what was your position, and what

11 period of time are you talking about?

12 A. Well, I'm now referring to the time period starting in 1976 and up

13 until 1984 or 1985. I can't recall exactly, but he was my immediate

14 supervisor for some eight years during that period of time.

15 Q. Thank you. Now, what was his position during this period of time

16 that you've just mentioned?

17 A. He was the secretary of the secretariat.

18 Q. Secretariat of what?

19 A. Of Internal Affairs.

20 Q. And was that the Internal Affairs of Bosnia and Herzegovina?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. Did he ever -- I withdraw that question. During that period of

23 eight years, when he was the secretary of the Secretariat of the Internal

24 Affairs Department, where did he actually work?

25 A. While he was my immediate supervisor, he was the secretary or the

1 Chief of the Interior in the town where I come from. After that, he

2 assumed another office and he worked in the State Security Service, and

3 then from there on he went to the company called Buducnost, where he

4 served as director, and then he spent some time in Belgrade. And I think

5 that --

6 Q. I think we're advancing too fast here. Just let's go back to the

7 time when he was secretary or Chief of the Interior. Is that a position

8 also known as police chief?

9 A. Well, he was the chief to all personnel who worked in the

10 secretariat, and he was also the police chief in that town.

11 Q. And was that during this period of eight years between sometime in

12 the 1970s, leading into the 1980s?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. Thank you. What sort of work did he do following that appointment

15 that you've just described?

16 A. Well, listen. Perhaps I changed the chronology, but I know that

17 he worked for two terms as the secretary; after that, he went to the State

18 Security Service in Dobo or Modrica; and then I know that he was the

19 director of Buducnost for a while and was the representative of the Sipad

20 company in Belgrade.

21 Q. Thank you. The period -- can you recall during what period of

22 time he worked with the State Security Service in Doboj or Modrica?

23 A. I think that upon leaving the Buducnost or leaving the MUP, he

24 went there. I'm not sure when. It is difficult for me to remember now

25 which year it was.

1 Q. That's okay. I'm not -- if you can't recall, don't say so. But

2 can you tell us if you're aware of what his duties were when he was

3 working at the State Security Service, what type of work he was engaged

4 in?

5 A. At the time, he was at the helm of a department in that service,

6 and that service was in charge of all matters in the interests of the

7 state, meaning Yugoslavia and Bosnia and Herzegovina.

8 Q. What type of work was it? I mean, I've got an idea of what it is,

9 but let's try and be as precise as we can. Can you tell the Chamber what

10 sort of work it was?

11 A. Well, it entailed matters in the interests of the state, which

12 means following people and everything else that at the time was capable of

13 undermining the state system. So they would follow people, monitor

14 diplomats, follow people who had contacts with people in the Western

15 Europe and who at the time were against the state system.

16 Q. Thank you. During the period of time that he worked with state

17 security, did you maintain a relationship with him, see him from time to

18 time, and so on?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. Thank you. Can you tell the Chamber what sort of work he was

21 doing in the period of time leading up to 1992?

22 A. Well, everything that I just enumerated is the kind of work that

23 he did up until 1992.

24 Q. Was he working in state security up until 1992?

25 A. Well, towards the very end of 1992, he worked in the State

1 Security Service, but I think that before April 1992, he retired -- he had

2 retired.

3 Q. I'm sorry. I don't think I can follow you there. You -- there's

4 no dispute in this case, Witness, that on April 16th and 17th, the

5 conflict broke out in Bosanski Samac, and so on, and there's no dispute

6 that you were arrested very shortly after the 16th and 17th of April, kept

7 in custody and so on. When you say that he worked in the state security

8 towards the very end of 1992; is that correct? Are you talking about 1992

9 or 1991?

10 A. No, in 1991.

11 Q. Okay. That's what I thought. So he worked, as far as you're

12 aware, in state security at some time in 1991, stopped working for them;

13 is that the situation?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. Okay. And after he stopped working for state security in 1991 at

16 some point, what sort of work did he undertake, if anything?

17 A. I don't know what he did. Perhaps he helped his wife, who had a

18 private shop.

19 Q. Very well. Did the -- was it the practice in the period of time

20 leading up to April of 1992 for state security to maintain or keep an

21 office in police stations?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. How was that effectively carried out in the day-to-day sense?

24 Would they have an office in the police station? Would it be kept locked?

25 Would there be someone working out of that office every day? Would that

1 person liaise with the police officers in the station? How did it

2 actually, in practice, work out?

3 A. There was an office on the floor that was used only by personnel

4 of the State Security Service. So they had a key to that office and were

5 able to come and go as they pleased.

6 Q. And in the period of time leading up to April of 1992, in Bosanski

7 Samac, did the police station have just such an office?

8 A. Yes, they did, but in 1992 they would come to it very

9 infrequently.

10 Q. Thank you. Have a look around the courtroom and see if you can

11 see Mr. Simo Zaric. If you can, can you point him out and identify him,

12 please.

13 A. He is sitting in the middle.

14 Q. Yes. Just a few more -- a bit more description, if you please, so

15 that we can be absolutely certain.

16 A. It's the gentleman with grey hair, has headphones, wears

17 eyeglasses, has chequered blazer --

18 Q. Thank you.

19 A. -- and a shirt.

20 MR. DI FAZIO: Thank you. Can the record show that the witness

21 has identified the defendant Mr. Zaric.

22 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.

23 MR. DI FAZIO:

24 Q. What about the two gentlemen sitting next to him? Can you tell

25 who they are?

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. Yes. Please do.

3 A. Looking from my seat, to the right is Dr. Blagoje Simic, who is

4 wearing a dark suit and has a short beard; and to the right of Mr. Zaric

5 is Mr. Miroslav Tadic, with eyeglasses, grey moustache, greyish hair, dark

6 suit, white shirt, and so on.

7 Q. Thank you.

8 MR. DI FAZIO: And can the record show that the witness has

9 identified the other two defendants, Mr. Blagoje Simic and

10 Mr. Miroslav Tadic.

11 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.

12 MR. DI FAZIO:

13 Q. How long have you known Miroslav Tadic?

14 A. Well, I've known him for a long time as well. I know him by his

15 name, and I've known him for at least 20 years.

16 Q. Did you have a close relationship with him or is it just the fact

17 that you knew who he was?

18 A. We weren't in very close contacts. We would greet each other,

19 "hello, hello," and we have had no special close contacts.

20 Q. Thank you. What about Blagoje Simic? Can you comment on your

21 relationship with him? Was he a person just that you knew or did you

22 enjoy any closer relationship with him?

23 A. No, nothing special. I knew him. I remember him coming as a

24 young person to Samac, where he worked for a while. Whenever I was on

25 duty, he would hardly ever come around. We've had no particularly close

1 relations, but we were not in bad relations either.

2 Q. Are you of Croatian ethnicity?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Thank you. Now, Witness, in your statement you describe the

5 events that took place in Bosanski Samac immediately prior to April of

6 1992, and you describe the events of the night of the 16th and 17th of

7 April, and you describe your arrest and the series of horrific beatings

8 that you suffered whilst in custody. I don't propose to take you through

9 all of that evidence. There is one aspect of your evidence that I would

10 like to deal with more specifically, and that is the period of time

11 following your arrest, when you were in custody in the TO.

12 In the week or so immediately following your arrest, --

13 JUDGE LINDHOLM: Excuse me, Mr. Prosecutor. Which paragraph or

14 paragraphs are you referring to?

15 MR. DI FAZIO: It's not in the statement, if Your Honour pleases.

16 If I am going to seek clarification of a specific paragraph, I'll take you

17 to it, but because it deals directly with the witness, it wasn't included

18 in the statement. So I'll lead him on it.

19 Q. In the period of time following your arrest, when you were in

20 custody in the TO, were you taken for any interviews in the SUP building?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. Can you recall how long after your arrest the first of these

23 interviews took place?

24 A. A few days after my arrest.

25 Q. Had you already by that stage been subjected to the beatings and

1 attacks by paramilitaries and others in the TO?

2 A. Yes. In the TO building, and even before that, in the MUP

3 building.

4 Q. Yes. Thank you. Who interviewed you?

5 A. In MUP building, I was interviewed by Inspector Milos Savic.

6 Q. Thank you. Now, can you -- I know that you didn't have a mirror

7 and so on, but can you try and give the Chamber a description of what you

8 would have looked like, what you believe you looked like at the time that

9 you were interviewed, and in particular, can you let us know whether you

10 had blood on your face and on your clothing, the sort of injuries that you

11 think you would have been displaying.

12 A. Until the first interview, when they had brought me to the MUP

13 building, in the course of the interrogation they started beating me, in

14 the office, immediately. Lugar would beat me. He put my head between his

15 legs, and somebody was hitting me behind on my back, on my buttocks, on my

16 lower back. Then I had to put my arms on the desk. He would hit me on my

17 fingers. I had all my fingers swollen. Then he would slap me, with his

18 palm, in the face, and I started bleeding.

19 Q. Yes. The savagery of the beatings that you suffered is, I think,

20 I hope, sufficiently reflected in the statements. What I'm asking you to

21 tell the Chamber is what sort of picture you would have presented to your

22 interrogator, Milos Savic at the time that you went in. First of all, did

23 you have blood on your clothing, blood on your face, black eyes, cuts,

24 bruises, torn clothing, that sort of -- that's the sort of thing I want to

25 know, the sort of features that I want to know about: The time that you

1 went into the interview, what did you look like?

2 A. I felt really bad. I could hardly stand on my feet. My arms were

3 all swollen. I was covered with blood all over. I was bleeding from my

4 nose. I couldn't really see any more. My eyes started closing. As I

5 went there, simply when they took me to Milos, Milos was surprised with

6 the way I looked. And I noticed that he himself felt sorry with my

7 appearances.

8 Q. Just remind the Chamber: Who was Milos Savic? What was his

9 position prior to the 16th and 17th of April?

10 A. Prior to the 16th and the 17th of April, Milos was a worker, a

11 staff member, and an inspector in the Samac MUP. He was an active staff

12 member there.

13 Q. Thank you. Now, you say that Mr. Savic was surprised to see you

14 and he felt sorry for the way that you looked. Did he do anything to

15 assist you?

16 A. He only asked for a coffee to be brought in for me, and he told

17 me, "Now you can drink it, but if somebody in a camouflage uniform should

18 come in, I'll say that it's my coffee." I didn't really drink the coffee,

19 because I was not in a state which would allow me to drink the coffee.

20 Q. Thank you. Did he proceed to ask you questions?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. What sort of topics was he covering in his questioning?

23 A. First, he asked me what I was doing and how much money I had on my

24 account, where were my kiosk keys, and I told him that one of the officers

25 had already taken everything from me. And he asked me whether I had

1 received any compensation for the kiosk that had been blown up on the 24th

2 and 25th of December, 1991. I told him that I had not, that the kiosk had

3 been insured, but the policy premium was denominated in Yugoslav dinars.

4 Due to the inflation, the value went down to such an extent that I didn't

5 really go through the trouble to ask for the compensation. Then he asked

6 me whether I had any knowledge of who in my village had weapons. I told

7 him that I didn't know that, and I told him, "If you want me, I'll sign

8 anything, as long as I can thus survive."

9 Q. Do you have any memory or recollection of any of this being

10 recorded by anyone?

11 A. No.

12 Q. Thank you. During the course of this interview that you've been

13 telling us about, did you hear the voice of any of the defendants?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. What did you hear?

16 A. I heard the voice of Mr. Simo Zaric.

17 Q. Where was the interview being conducted in the building?

18 A. It was conducted on the second floor, to the left, across the

19 toilet room, in which -- well, this had previously been the office of the

20 police station commander.

21 Q. Thank you. And could you tell from where Mr. Zaric's voice was

22 coming?

23 A. It was coming from the corridor.

24 Q. Did you ask to speak to him?

25 A. Yes.

1 Q. I take it you conveyed the request to speak to him to Mr. Savic.

2 Am I correct in that?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Were you allowed to speak to him?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. And where did you go, or did he come into the office in which you

7 were?

8 A. Milos took me to a room which was behind the office. It looked

9 like a very small reception office. And then there was a room next to it

10 which was an office. It used to be the office of the chief of the police

11 station, and I knew it because I had worked before. And Milos took me

12 there.

13 Q. And is that where Mr. Zaric was, in that office that was formerly

14 the office of the chief of police?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. Thank you. What did you say to him, and what did he say to you?

17 A. I said, "Come on, Simo. Please. What is this? What is going on

18 here?"

19 Q. What did he say?

20 A. He was rather angry, and he said, "Did you really need this? What

21 did you do? Why did you do it?" I told him, "But Simo, you know me very

22 well. What is it that I had done? I had done nothing. Had I done

23 something which is no good, I wouldn't be here, would I? Why was I

24 brought here," I asked him.

25 Q. Did he offer any insight as to why you were a prisoner or what

1 sort of prisoner you were?

2 A. As I asked him what was going on, he said, "You are treated a

3 political prisoner, you and Mane." He was referring to Sulejman Tihic.

4 And then I asked him, "Well, Simo, how can you put me on a par with

5 Sulejman?" I was nothing but a simple reservist. I was not a president

6 or a representative, official representative, of any party whatsoever.

7 And then he told me, "You will be treated as a political prisoner since

8 you will be exchanged."

9 Q. Thank you. Did the exchange between you two men continue or was

10 that the end of it?

11 A. We didn't talk for a long period of time. We were both standing

12 in front of a desk; I can't really recall was it earlier or after this

13 conversation. He was asked by somebody to go downstairs, and he did go

14 downstairs.

15 Q. All right. Okay. Thank you. Now, the appearance of Mr. Zaric:

16 Can you tell us how he was dressed, please?

17 A. Simo had nothing on his head. He had a camouflage uniform, and on

18 the shoulder he had a white band, an epaulette.

19 Q. Was he armed?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. What sort of weapon did he have?

22 A. A Scorpio.

23 Q. Is that a small machine pistol?

24 A. It is something slightly bigger than a machine pistol.

25 Q. Okay. Did this office have a safe in it?

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. Do you have any recollection if the safe was opened or closed or

3 had been rifled through?

4 A. I can recall very well that the safe, which was on the left -- or,

5 rather, on the right from the entrance side, was open. Some papers were

6 lying around. Some pictures were taken off the walls. And it was obvious

7 there were paintings, that they had removed some pictures from the walls.

8 Q. Thank you.

9 MR. DI FAZIO: Would Your Honours just give me a moment to confer

10 with my colleague, please?

11 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.

12 [Prosecution counsel confer]

13 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes. Thank you.

14 Q. Now, in your statement, you describe pretty well continuous

15 beatings and attacks leading up to the period of time when you left for

16 Brcko. I would like to know if, following this interview that you have

17 just described, whether you were ever interviewed again before the

18 transfer to Brcko.

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. And can you tell us who was the person who interviewed you on this

21 second occasion?

22 A. By the same person, by Milos Savic.

23 Q. In the same place, in the SUP building?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. And I take it that your visual appearance had not differed;

1 indeed, I assume from reading your statement that it would have become

2 even worse than it was on the first interview.

3 A. Well, my appearance was worse, indeed.

4 Q. Thank you. What was the topic -- what were the topics of

5 conversation that were covered in the interview on this second occasion?

6 A. Well, the topics were the same. He continued to put to me the

7 same questions. He also asked me who provided weapons to residents of my

8 village. I told him I didn't know that. I told him that some 10, 15

9 people who I knew had never had any weapons, but then I had to say

10 something so that he could write down my statement.

11 Q. Why did you feel compelled to say something?

12 A. Well, I thought this would facilitate my further situation, that I

13 would no longer be mistreated and beaten.

14 Q. Am I correct in saying that you just wanted to give them the sort

15 of information that you thought that they wanted?

16 A. Yes. They expected from me that I knew something, that I would

17 tell them something, but I can tell you now that I knew nothing.

18 Q. Thank you. Now, on this occasion, did you see or were you aware

19 of the presence of any of the defendants?

20 A. I continued to hear the voice of Simo Zaric. I also heard the

21 voice of Topolovac, Mihajlo.

22 Q. Just so that we can fix this in time - I know it's difficult for

23 you - but can you give us an idea how long after the first interview this

24 second interview took place?

25 A. That was soon after the first interview, perhaps a day or two

1 later. In fact, I wasn't able to follow the time. I just know that when

2 I was brought in for the second time, there was still a guard on duty in

3 the corridor, and Milos was not alone. There was a typist, a woman, a

4 typist, with him then.

5 Q. Was she apparently recording what you had to say?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. Thank you. Now, let's get back to Mr. Zaric. You said that you

8 heard the voice of Simo Zaric. Did you see him on this occasion? Did you

9 have any dealings with him on this occasion?

10 A. No.

11 Q. Did -- as far as you could tell, did Mr. Milos Savic have anything

12 to do with him, with Mr. Zaric, during the course of this second

13 interview?

14 MR. LAZAREVIC: Your Honours, this is calling for speculation, I

15 believe.

16 MR. DI FAZIO: No, it's not.

17 MR. LAZAREVIC: If he has the knowledge, he has, but whether --

18 just to speculate, did he or did he not have ...

19 MR. DI FAZIO: Well, it's not necessarily. I mean, the witness

20 might say, "Well, Savic went out and I could hear him speaking to

21 Mr. Zaric," or he could come back and say, "I've had a conversation with

22 Mr. Zaric," or he might say anything of that nature which is not

23 speculative. I don't see how it invites speculation.

24 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. I think the Prosecution --

25 MR. DI FAZIO: And as Ms. Reidy points out, I did qualify my

1 question by asking: "As far as you could tell."

2 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. I think the Prosecution --

3 MR. DI FAZIO: I'll ask the question again.

4 Q. Witness, I don't want you to speculate, but if you know of

5 anything or can recall anything that indicates any dealings between

6 Mr. Savic and Mr. Zaric during the course of the second interview, let us

7 know. If you can't recall anything concrete, fine, but if you can, let us

8 know.

9 A. I heard nothing. In fact, I saw nothing. I just heard his voice

10 and the voice of Mihaljo Topolovac.

11 Q. Thank you.

12 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Excuse me, Mr. Di Fazio. Maybe we need a slight

13 clarification on line 5 of page 26, because what we have here in the

14 English is: I heard nothing, I saw nothing, I just heard his voice. So

15 it doesn't really make sense.

16 MR. DI FAZIO: I'll clarify that.

17 Q. You said that you heard nothing and saw nothing and just heard his

18 voice. I assume you're referring to Simo Zaric when you say that you

19 heard his voice.

20 A. Yes. If you allow me, I'd like to explain this whole situation,

21 please.

22 Q. Yes, I would like you to explain. That's exactly what I'd like

23 you to do. Thank you.

24 A. I heard the voice of Mr. Simo Zaric and of Mr. Topolovac speaking

25 in the corridor. Milos asked me, because he had nothing else to ask me --

1 in fact, he decided to go out of the office, to the corridor, and only a

2 few minutes later he came back with a little piece of paper, with a few

3 questions that would have to be addressed to me written on it.

4 Q. Thank you. And can you recall the questions that were asked of

5 you?

6 A. Well, it was about some persons in Croatia, but I can't really

7 recall.

8 Q. What's the significance of his going out and coming back with a

9 little piece of paper?

10 MR. LAZAREVIC: Well, I believe that again this is calling for

11 speculation. What is the significance of another man's acts?

12 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Di Fazio. The objection is sustained.

13 MR. DI FAZIO: I'll rephrase it.

14 [Prosecution counsel confer]

15 MR. DI FAZIO: Sorry. Would Your Honours just bear with me for a

16 moment, please?

17 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.

18 MR. DI FAZIO:

19 Q. You can't recall any of the questions that were read out from the

20 piece of paper; that's your position, is it?

21 A. Well, they asked me about some persons from Croatia. They asked

22 me whether I knew about some Crisis Staff. And I don't know what else.

23 Q. Do you know where the questions came from? I mean, I know that

24 they came from the piece of paper, but do you know who originated those

25 questions?

1 MR. LAZAREVIC: I really have to object again. It is obvious what

2 the witness stated, that these were on the paper that Milos Savic had.

3 Whether they come from I don't know who or -- I mean, this is really

4 calling for speculation.

5 MR. DI FAZIO: He may have information as to where the questions

6 came from. That's all I'm asking.

7 JUDGE MUMBA: Because he remained where he was being interviewed.

8 MR. DI FAZIO: He remained where -- his evidence so far is he

9 remained in the offices.

10 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.

11 MR. DI FAZIO: Savic went out, came back with a piece of paper and

12 there were questions on it. He can't recall what the questions were.

13 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.

14 MR. DI FAZIO: All my question is --

15 JUDGE MUMBA: But how would he know, because he didn't go out with

16 him?

17 MR. DI FAZIO: Well, I don't know. I mean, I don't know. That's

18 what I'm trying to ask him: Does he have any idea where the questions

19 came from or where the piece of paper came from. He might have been told

20 something. I don't know.

21 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Perhaps if you ask him whether he has an idea

22 where the piece of paper came from, and then he has to explain.

23 MR. DI FAZIO: Sure. I'm not asking him to speculate.

24 MR. PANTELIC: Your Honour, well, it's just a matter of principle

25 that I'm objecting. In fact, this is page 26, line 25. Question

1 was: "And can you recall the questions that were asked of you?" And

2 then, page 27, answer on line 2: "Well, it was about some persons in

3 Croatia, but I can't really recall." So this witness actually answered to

4 all this line of questioning of my learned friend. So if he will try, I

5 don't know how, artificially to obtain the answer of this witness, that

6 would be unfair, because he's pursuing a line of 10 or 15 questions with

7 regard to this simple and very, very basic fact. Thank you.

8 MR. DI FAZIO: I've conceded. I mean, we've all heard very

9 clearly that the witness has said he can't recall what the questions

10 were. He's got only the vaguest notion of what the questions were. It's

11 not the notion -- it's not the content of the questions that I'm

12 interested in; it's the origin of the questions that I'm interested in.

13 That what I'm interested in.

14 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.

15 MR. DI FAZIO: And that's what I'm asking him.

16 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. You can go ahead.

17 MR. DI FAZIO:

18 Q. Now, Witness, I don't want you to speculate. If you have

19 concrete -- some sort of concrete evidence to offer the Chamber, please

20 do, but if you don't, don't go into what you suppose is the case. Do you

21 have any idea of the origin of the questions?

22 A. All I know is that when the voice of Mr. Simo Zaric was heard from

23 the corridor, he went out of the room and left me inside with the typist.

24 After several minutes, he came back with a little piece of paper

25 containing these questions.

1 Q. All right.

2 MR. DI FAZIO: Thank you. I'm not going to take it any further

3 than that. Thank you.

4 Q. Now, were you ever asked to sign any document following either one

5 of these two interviews?

6 A. Not after the first interview but, yes, after the second one.

7 Q. This is the one that we've just been talking about. Were you

8 actually able to grip a pen in order to put a mark on the page?

9 A. Somehow I managed. I don't know what kind of a signature I put on

10 it.

11 Q. Did you have any idea of the contents of the statement?

12 A. I don't remember.

13 Q. Thank you. Very well. We'll leave this second interview and

14 we'll proceed now to the passage -- the point in your statement where you

15 describe the transfer to Brcko.

16 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Excuse me, Mr. Di Fazio. Before you move on to

17 that, I wonder whether the witness remembers whether this statement was

18 read out to him. Because you've asked as to whether he signed it --

19 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes, yes, of course. I will clarify that. Yes,

20 Your Honour.

21 Q. You heard Her Honour's question. Did they read it out to you

22 before you were asked to sign it?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. Thank you. And then -- it having been read, then you signed it, I

25 take it, or attempted to sign it?

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. Thank you. I'd like now to leave this topic and turn to the

3 transfer to Brcko.

4 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please, you will find this in the

5 statement talked about at paragraph 60 and 61 of the statement.

6 Q. You describe in your statement the transfer to Brcko, and I take

7 it you were transferred there on trucks.

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. You were -- tell me if I'm correct: You were loaded onto the

10 trucks, you and other fellow prisoners, from the TO, into the trucks; is

11 that correct?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. Thank you. I'd like to ask you some questions now about that

14 procedure and the events immediately prior to you being loaded onto the

15 trucks. First of all, can you recall about what time of day the whole

16 thing -- the whole event took place?

17 A. It was sometime in the evening hours. It was after the dark.

18 Q. At this stage, could you actually see anything because of the

19 blows that you had received around your eyes?

20 A. At the time, I couldn't see anything. I could perhaps see some

21 light; that was all.

22 Q. Thank you. Did you hear the voice of any of the defendants at the

23 scene as you were being loaded into the trucks?

24 A. I heard the voice of Mr. Simo Zaric.

25 Q. Thank you. Now, it's not in dispute in this case that a large

1 number of prisoners were taken, transferred, from Bosanski Samac to Brcko.

2 What I want to know is: Did a small number of prisoners remain in the TO,

3 prisoners who had been kept in custody with you but who were not

4 transferred to Brcko?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. Can you recall anyone at the time saying anything about those

7 particular prisoners?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. Who was that, and what was said?

10 A. Mr. Simo Zaric.

11 Q. What did he say?

12 A. He said that Luka Gregurevic, Izet Izetbegovic, Anto Orsolic,

13 Matic - I don't know if somebody else was there, also - he said that they

14 would remain to be exchanged there.

15 Q. And in fact, in the days following, did you ascertain that they

16 had not been transferred with you and the other prisoners to Brcko?

17 A. They were not with me in Brcko.

18 Q. Thank you. Thank you. Now, you were eventually taken to Brcko

19 and stayed there for a while. In the period of time that you were in

20 Brcko, did you see any of the defendants or hear any of the defendants?

21 A. I heard and was able to see a little bit Mr. Simo Zaric. I was in

22 such a bad state that I had trouble seeing.

23 Q. Can you recall anything that he said or did, or is it just the

24 case that you knew that he turned up there at some stage?

25 A. Well, on one day, in a special room where I was practically unable

1 to move, with my eyes completely closed, Tihic Sulejman and Dragan Lukac

2 were with me in that room at the time. And then Simo Zaric came on one

3 occasion, together with a certain JNA officer in charge of security. His

4 last name was Petrovic. After that, I didn't see him any more. However,

5 I heard that he had visited it.

6 Q. Thank you. On this occasion when you were in the room and you

7 were in this terrible state, can you -- have you got any idea what

8 Mr. Zaric did by coming to the room where you and Lukac and Sulejman Tihic

9 were?

10 A. I don't know. He probably came to see the state that we were in.

11 Q. Thanks. Do you know if he actually came into the room that you

12 were in?

13 A. He was in the room.

14 Q. Yes. Thank you. You said that the other man who was with him,

15 Petrovic, was in charge of security. How do you know that?

16 A. I heard about Mr. Petrovic in 1991 and 1992, and I have

17 information that he came to some working meetings at the police station,

18 that he contacted with Dragan Lukac, who was acting chief of police

19 station. I personally didn't know him; I simply heard of him. And then,

20 when he was in Brcko and when they came out, Dragan said, "That's the guy

21 called Petrovic."

22 Q. Thank you.

23 MR. DI FAZIO: Would Your Honours just give me a moment to confer

24 with my colleague, please?

25 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.

1 [Prosecution counsel confer]

2 JUDGE MUMBA: We shall take a 20-minute break now because of the

3 fact that we are going to stop at --

4 MR. DI FAZIO: That actually suits me.

5 JUDGE MUMBA: - 1345, yes. And we shall continue our proceedings

6 at 1305.

7 --- Recess taken at 12.45 p.m.

8 --- On resuming at 1.08 p.m.

9 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, we'll proceed with the Prosecution.

10 Yes, Ms. Reidy.

11 MS. REIDY: Your Honour, the Bench had indicated that during the

12 break I should clarify what the renumbering was. Would you like me to

13 explain?

14 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, please.

15 MS. REIDY: With the help of the Defence counsel, we saw where the

16 renumbering occurred. For the benefit of the Bench, as I think Defence

17 counsel know, if you turn to the paragraphs 98, 99, and 100 of the

18 witness's statement, that's the page with the ERN number 02296866. You'll

19 see that paragraph 99 is a very short, one-sentence -- or three-sentence

20 paragraph, where the witness says, "After a year, I went to Orasje to work

21 with the Security Service as a civilian employee. They came to ask me if

22 I would join them. My family was in Slavonia." That sentence in the

23 B/C/S, in the version that was disclosed on Saturday evening, was

24 still part of paragraph 98 because it dealt with another -- when we

25 compared the two versions, the English and the B/C/S, that sentence became

1 paragraph 99 in the B/C/S; hence the B/C/S and the English both have 101

2 paragraphs and not 100 as the version disclosed to the Defence on the

3 Saturday evening. So that's where the renumbering happened and it's not

4 an extra -- and no extra information; just a renumbering of the

5 paragraphs.

6 JUDGE MUMBA: Very well. I take it that is agreed to by the

7 Defence that this was the problem.

8 MR. LAZAREVIC: Yes. During the break, I personally checked that

9 with Ms. Reidy. I can confirm that this is correct what she stated.

10 JUDGE MUMBA: All right. Thank you.

11 Mr. Di Fazio, please proceed.

12 MR. DI FAZIO: Thank you.

13 Q. You -- just I want to return briefly to one matter that took place

14 in the TO building. In your statement --

15 MR. DI FAZIO: And if Your Honours please, you will see this in

16 paragraph 47.

17 Q. In your statement you say that -- you're telling -- you describe a

18 number of people who were in custody with you, and you talk about

19 Ivica Evic and Kemal Atic, Esad Cosic, and Franjo Barukcic, who was

20 arrested by Miro Tadic from his house. How do you know and what

21 information do you have that Franjo Barukcic was arrested by Mr.

22 Miroslav Tadic? On what do you base that assertion?

23 A. Franjo Barukcic and I spent more than one month together in the

24 prison in the MUP building, and he told me that Miro Tadic, whom we called

25 Brko, came to fetch him with a rifle.

1 Q. Where were you when Franjo Barukcic told you this?

2 A. At the time, we were in the MUP building.

3 Q. And is this towards the end of your incarceration, when you were

4 eventually exchanged, or in the first part of your incarceration,

5 immediately after your arrest?

6 A. That was some time later when we were able to talk. The two of us

7 were in one cell, and that was in June, the first half of June, and he

8 told me a bit about his life and told me how this had happened.

9 JUDGE LINDHOLM: Mr. Di Fazio, just for the clearance of the

10 transcript: On page 35, line 20, you read, if I start from the foregoing

11 line, "whom we call Brko came to fetch him with a rifle." Who was

12 carrying the rifle, the him who was fetched or the fetcher?

13 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes. I'll clarify that. I intend to get more

14 detail.

15 Q. Now, I know that you're reporting to us what Franjo Barukcic told

16 you, but can you clarify a couple of matters? First of all, you said

17 someone was carrying a rifle at the time that Franjo Barukcic was

18 arrested. Who did you understand to be wielding the weapon, carrying the

19 weapon, at the time he was arrested?

20 A. Mr. Miro Tadic had the weapon. All of us used to call him Brko,

21 Miro Brko.

22 Q. And did Franjo Barukcic ever tell you where he was arrested, where

23 he was actually -- where Mr. Miroslav Tadic arrested him? Was it -- and I

24 don't -- I mean, details. Where in Bosanski Samac did that take place?

25 A. He was at home, and he came to get him at home.

1 Q. Did Franjo Barukcic give you any idea of when precisely he was

2 arrested?

3 A. I didn't quite understand you.

4 Q. Yes. Did Franjo Barukcic, when he was describing to you his

5 arrest by Miroslav Tadic, did he give you any details as to when he was

6 arrested, for example, during the day on the 17th or in the days

7 following? Have you got any idea?

8 A. I think that he was arrested on the very first day.

9 Q. All right. Thank you very much. That's all I want to ask you

10 about that particular topic.

11 Now, Witness, in your statement you describe your eventual return

12 after having been taken to various places, Batajnica and Zemun and so on,

13 but you describe your eventual return to Bosanski Samac, where you stayed

14 from about the 25th or 26th of May, I believe, until your exchange. Do

15 you recall describing that in your statement?

16 A. Yes, I remember that well.

17 Q. Thank you. And you describe further beatings and mistreatment

18 that you suffered at the hands of your captors in that particular period

19 of time. Do you recall that?

20 A. Yes, I do.

21 Q. In that period of time when you were in Bosanski Samac, did you --

22 and prior to your exchange, did you see any of the defendants?

23 A. I saw Miroslav Tadic twice.

24 Q. Where were you when you saw him?

25 A. In the solitary confinement cell.

1 Q. In what building?

2 A. In the MUP building.

3 Q. Who was -- was anyone in the cell with you?

4 A. Franjo Barukcic was with me.

5 Q. Sharing the cell with you?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. Were there any other prisoners in cells adjacent to you?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. Who were they?

10 A. There was Dragan Lukac and Mato Perkovic.

11 Q. Were these two cells, the ones occupied by yourself and the other

12 one occupied by Lukac and Petkovic, adjacent, right next to each other?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. Thank you. Tell the Chamber what transpired when you saw

15 Mr. Tadic. And you said that you saw him twice, so let's go to the first

16 occasion, if you can recall, and tell us what happened.

17 A. Miroslav Tadic came into our room. He was looking for

18 Mato Perkovic. He went out with him and they had a conversation about

19 something in the corridor.

20 Q. Can you recall what they spoke about?

21 A. I could overhear, and later on Mato told me about this. He told

22 me that Miroslav had a telephone conversation with his brother, Stjepan,

23 who was in Brod, and he told him that his mother and father were alive,

24 that his wife and child were well.

25 Q. Was there any discussion of matters relating to exchanges, as far

1 as you could tell?

2 A. I couldn't hear anything of the kind. We simply asked him, "Mato,

3 Mato, what's going to happen?" And he replied that we would be exchanged.

4 Q. Again, what sort of appearance would you have presented to

5 Mr. Tadic on this occasion, you and, indeed, your cellmate and the

6 prisoners in the cell next to you?

7 A. I think I looked the worst, but Mato Perkovic didn't look much

8 better. One could tell that he had injuries on his head. He was beaten

9 just as badly as I was. And somehow all of this took place a few days

10 after we were transferred from the garage into the MUP building.

11 Q. Thank you. Did Franjo Barukcic have an injury to his leg?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. What sort of visual impact did the injury to his leg have? What

14 did it look like?

15 A. Well, listen. He was an elderly man. He was over 65 at the time.

16 He was a retiree. And his leg caused a great deal of pain. If I'm not

17 mistaken, he had an open wound there. And when he got there, he told me

18 that he had not been able to leave the house because of the situation with

19 his leg. Because had he been able to leave after they started shooting,

20 he probably would have gone to Prud, where he originally had hailed from.

21 Q. Thank you. As far as you're aware, had Perkovic done anything,

22 made any moves, spoken to anyone - and I know he was in custody - to bring

23 about an exchange?

24 A. I really don't know. I do know, however, that his brother was a

25 friend of Miroslav Tadic's, as well as of Stevo Todorovic's. Before Samac

1 was occupied, his brother had been a council --

2 THE INTERPRETER: Correction by interpreter.

3 A. -- the owner of a furniture company. And since his brother was a

4 well-to-do person, he had many acquaintances, and he probably also knew

5 very well Miroslav, since Miroslav came and told him that his family was

6 okay, that his mother was alive, and other matters.

7 MR. DI FAZIO:

8 Q. Thank you. Now, were you eventually exchanged, Witness?

9 A. Yes. In the end we were, but that was some 10, 15, 20 days later.

10 Q. Thank you. Did someone come and tell you on the day of your

11 exchange that you would be exchanged?

12 A. On the 4th of April -- well, actually, at that time we weren't

13 aware of the date, but we could see through the window that the sun had

14 reached the rooftops, so we thought it was around noon. Somebody called

15 Jovanovic Slobodan would come in. He had worked in the police station in

16 Samac. He called out my name, but in fact he was also whispering when

17 doing so. I looked through the window, with the bars on the window --

18 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Krgovic.

19 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] I apologise, Your Honour. On page

20 40, line 8, the witness said on the 4th of July and not April. Perhaps my

21 learned friend would be kind enough to clarify this date once again.

22 MR. DI FAZIO: I will, and it will come out because I'm going to

23 show him a document, so we'll establish the date. And I'm grateful to my

24 learned friend for pointing that out. So we'll clarify that. Perhaps

25 I'll do that now.

1 Q. Witness, when you were describing the date of your exchange, in

2 the transcript, in English, it came across as the 4th of April. Is that

3 in fact correct or incorrect?

4 A. No. On the 4th of July.

5 Q. All right. Thanks.

6 Now, what I want to know -- all I want to know is this: This

7 fellow Jovanovic came to the cell and told you that you were going to be

8 exchanged. Was this an announcement that came out of the blue?

9 A. No. He was in the back yard. He called out my name from the

10 courtyard and he would approach to the wall so that he would not be

11 conspicuous. He told me, "You will be exchanged." I was so happy. I

12 couldn't believe it. Then Lukac asked me what was going on, and I said,

13 "We will be exchanged." He asked me, "Everybody?" And I said, "Most

14 probably everybody will be exchanged." And then he left.

15 Q. I see. I think I misunderstood you, Witness. Are you suggesting

16 that this man Jovanovic secretly gave you this information, that he

17 whispered it, passed it on to you?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. Okay. And that's, in fact, the day that the process of exchange

20 started?

21 A. Yes. That was on the 4th of July.

22 Q. Thank you. Were you taken to the premises of the primary school?

23 A. After some time, somebody - I don't know exactly who - from the

24 police came in, fetched me and Mato Perkovic, they put us in a car and

25 they took us to the courtyard of the school centre.

1 Q. Were there assembled a number of civilians there?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. What ethnic background?

4 A. I saw most of them who were of Croat ethnicity, from Hasici,

5 Tisina, and some Muslims from Samac.

6 Q. People bidding farewell to other people and crying, and so on?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. Were you placed on buses and eventually taken off for your

9 exchange?

10 A. Yes. I was put on a bus and then we had to wait for a certain

11 period of time, until all buses were full, and then in a column we started

12 and left Samac.

13 Q. During this process, at this stage of the process, did you see any

14 of the defendants?

15 A. No.

16 Q. As the line of vehicles proceeded, did you -- and the day went on,

17 did you see them, any of the defendants?

18 A. Yes, I did.

19 Q. Thank you. Perhaps before I get on to that, I should ask you

20 this: Do you know a gentleman named Dragan Djuheric, with a nickname

21 Coc?

22 A. Djuheric, Coc. Yes, I do.

23 Q. What ethnic background was he?

24 A. Muslim background.

25 Q. Was he a member of the 4th Detachment?

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. Did he have any role to play in the events of your exchange?

3 A. He escorted me on a bus. He was one of the armed soldiers. He

4 was sitting next to the driver.

5 Q. Thank you. Thank you for that. Now let's go to the defendants.

6 You said that you did see some of them. Who did you see?

7 A. I saw Mr. Simo Zaric and Mr. Tadic.

8 Q. What were they doing when you saw them?

9 A. The buses had just started. We were crossing the Samac area.

10 Some side streets were used by the drivers. I know these routes very

11 well. And somewhere close to Bijeljina, one of the buses had a breakdown.

12 Q. Please continue your account.

13 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Pantelic.

14 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, Your Honours. Page 43, line 7 to 9. The

15 witness also gave certain description that the way, why they were crossing

16 the Samac area was due to the fighting operations. So I would like --

17 because we heard that from him. It's on the audiotape, of course, but in

18 order to correct this part of transcript, I think we should clarify that.

19 Thank you.

20 MR. DI FAZIO: Thank you. I'll do that.

21 Q. Witness, as part of your answer, you -- when you were describing

22 the journey of the buses, you mentioned some fighting, apparently. Can

23 you just tell us what you said about that?

24 A. I didn't hear any fighting, but we used these side tracks, a much

25 longer route. We could have taken a much shorter route.

1 Q. Fine. Now, let's get back to the issue that I'm interested in,

2 and that's this. It's when you saw any of the defendants. You started to

3 tell us that one of the buses had a breakdown. Is that connected with the

4 occasion that you saw any of the defendants in this case?

5 A. Yes. I saw everybody there. I knew almost everybody who were

6 escorting us. They were in uniforms. They had weapons. And I saw

7 Simo Zaric and I saw Tadic Miroslav there.

8 Q. What were they doing?

9 A. They were a part of our escort.

10 Q. Were they in a car?

11 A. They were in a special car, a separate car.

12 Q. Were they armed?

13 A. I can't recall that.

14 Q. Thank you. Did you speak to them?

15 A. Not at that time.

16 Q. Did the breakdown of the bus compel you to stay overnight rather

17 than proceeding on to the exchange on that particular day?

18 A. Later, the bus was repaired. Then we proceeded. And at about

19 9.00, 10.00 p.m. - it was already dark - we arrived at the destination

20 area, the place where we were supposed to get to.

21 Q. And was it too late to go through with the exchange at that time?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. Did the exchange in fact take place the following day, that is,

24 the 5th of July?

25 A. Yes.

1 Q. Was Simo Zaric and Miroslav Tadic present on that day, that is,

2 the 5th of July?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Did you speak to them?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. What was said, and who approached whom?

7 A. I think I approached them.

8 Q. What was said? What transpired between you?

9 A. Well, we didn't have any lengthy conversation. I was still in a

10 very poor state. Furthermore, for six, seven days, we were not given

11 anything to eat. It was during the night that we had to sit on the buses,

12 and because of excitement, I really can't recall all the details. I do

13 know, however, that we greeted one another. Simo and myself shook hands.

14 I shook hands with Miro. And Miroslav said, "Come on. When you get

15 there, we will exchange these people."

16 Q. I'm sorry. How did you understand that last comment that

17 Miroslav Tadic made? What did you understand him to mean?

18 A. Well, I understood it that on the site where I was going to cross

19 to, there were no detainees of Serb ethnicity.

20 Q. What was he asking of you? What did you understand him to be

21 asking of you?

22 MR. LAZAREVIC: Your Honours, I do believe that we need to

23 intervene to the transcript, because it is completely changing the sense.

24 He said he believes that where the detainees of Serb ethnicities, and here

25 it states there were no detainees of Serb ethnicity. It's page 45 - just

1 one second --

2 JUDGE MUMBA: Line 17?

3 MR. LAZAREVIC: Yes, line 17.

4 MR. DI FAZIO: I'll deal with the whole topic again.

5 MR. PANTELIC: In addition, Your Honour, again, it's a matter of

6 maybe our learned friends from interpreter booth are tired today or maybe

7 it's Monday, I don't know. Page 45, line 13, "We exchange these people."

8 And that caused the misunderstanding from the part of the Prosecution. In

9 fact, this witness said that he is quoting Mr. Miroslav Tadic, that

10 Miroslav Tadic said, "Let's try to exchange these people," meaning both

11 sides, and that was not translated as such, and then we have a problem.

12 MR. DI FAZIO: Okay. Thank you.

13 Q. Witness, can you just tell us again in your own words what the

14 comment was that Miroslav Tadic made after you had greeted him and

15 Simo Zaric.

16 A. We greeted each other. Then he told me, "Now, look. Let's make

17 sure that these people are exchanged," meaning that I would be transferred

18 somewhere to Croatia, or I don't know where. I really didn't know where I

19 would go. I had no information. That there were detainees on the other

20 side.

21 Q. All right. Thank you. Now, Witness, it's of course abundantly

22 clear that you would have been desperate to get away from your torturers

23 and so on. However, did anyone ever bother to speak to you or consult

24 with you or ask you if you wanted to leave Bosanski Samac?

25 A. No.

1 Q. Up until April of 1992, up until the 16th of April of 1992, did

2 you have any plans to leave your life and your home in Bosanski Samac?

3 A. No.

4 Q. Thank you.

5 MR. DI FAZIO: Can the witness be shown D12/3 and D12/3 ter.

6 Perhaps if we have the B/C/S on the ELMO for the benefit of the

7 defendants.

8 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.

9 MR. DI FAZIO: Thanks.

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 JUDGE MUMBA: I was just wondering: Is there a dispute that he

25 was exchanged that day?

1 MR. DI FAZIO: No, there isn't. I'm going to be very brief.

2 There's only one or two questions I need to ask about the document.

3 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Perhaps we'll go into closed session.

4 MR. DI FAZIO: Thank you.

5 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, closed session because of the ELMO part.

6 [Closed 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 [Open session]

1 MR. DI FAZIO:

2 Q. Witness, you -- there's no dispute that you were exchanged and

3 eventually reunited with your family and your wife. What I want to know

4 is this, and tell me if this is a correct assessment of the situation:

5 For various reasons, your wife decided to leave Bosanski Samac on the

6 night of the 16th of April, with the children, with your children, and was

7 able to get away, and remained in Croatian-held territory right up until

8 the time that you were reunited with her. Is that correct?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. Thank you.

11 JUDGE MUMBA: Mr. Prosecutor, we're going beyond the time.

12 There's the afternoon session, so we'll have to adjourn until tomorrow

13 morning at 0900 hours.

14 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Could, please, my learned friend

15 indicate to us how much time he will need for his direct, so that we can

16 get ready?

17 MR. DI FAZIO: Five minutes.

18 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at

19 1.48 p.m., to be reconvened on Tuesday,

20 the 9th day of July, 2002, at 9.00 a.m.

21

22

23

24

25