1 Thursday, 14 November 2002

2 [Open session]

3 [The accused entered court]

4 --- Upon commencing at 9.31 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 examination-in-chief of the accused

10 continues.

11 MR. PANTELIC: Good morning, Your Honours. I would like to inform

12 the technical booth that we have a problem with our notebooks here. We

13 don't have a transcript on the screens. So if we can get some assistance,

14 I would be grateful. Thank you.

15 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Perhaps something will be done.

16 Is it both the screen and the laptop?

17 MR. PANTELIC: Yes. Probably it's an issue of the programme or

18 arrangements with the -- with the LiveNote transcript on laptops, yeah,

19 notebooks.

20 JUDGE MUMBA: The screen is okay.

21 MR. PANTELIC: The screen is okay.

22 JUDGE MUMBA: All right.

23 MR. PANTELIC: We can move along, and then in the meantime I hope

24 that some of our friends from the technical unit will resolve the issue.

25 Thank you.

1 THE WITNESS: BLAGOJE SIMIC [Resumed]

2 [Witness answered through interpreter]

3 Examined by Mr. Pantelic: [Continued]

4 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, doctor. Tell me, yesterday we were

5 discussing the activities of the Crisis Staff in the second half of April

6 1992, and now in order to make this as systematic as possible, I would

7 like to move in chronological order month by month. I would be interested

8 in the following: What can you tell us about the period, say, a few weeks

9 before mid-April and the course of the month of April itself? Were there

10 any liquidations of SDS officials in the area? Were there any

11 provocations and various incidents around Samac in the region of Odzak?

12 What can you tell us about this? Generally speaking, what was the

13 situation like from that point of view?

14 A. I already said that the situation was very tense, that the

15 programme of the Croatian Community of Bosanska Posavina was being

16 implemented in all municipalities, and that the only municipality where

17 the job had not been completed yet was Bosanski Samac. Political

18 officials of the Serb Democratic Party were eliminated practically in all

19 of these municipalities. The president of the municipal board of the SDS,

20 Milovan Milosevic, was killed in Derventa. Then the president of the

21 municipal board of the SDS in Bosanski Brod was killed as well, Miroslav

22 Radovanovic. Then the president of the municipal board of the SDS Odzak,

23 Dragomir Tesanovic, was arrested, and he was subjected to unseen torture.

24 Then the president of the municipal board of the SDS, Stevo Josipovic, was

25 expelled from Orasje. And finally, they made an effort to get me here.

1 Q. Tell me, do you know any official of the SDS who had a nickname

2 Trumam? What happened to him?

3 A. Truman was president of the local SDS community in Donja Dubica in

4 the territory of Odzak and he was killed on the 18th or 19th of April,

5 1992.

6 JUDGE MUMBA: Excuse me. Sorry to interrupt. The Bench will also

7 require the same -- similar assistance for the laptops.

8 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

9 Q. This man nicknamed Truman, what was his first and last name?

10 A. His name is Rajko, Rajko Djuric.

11 Q. Where was Rajko Djuric killed?

12 A. He was killed in the village of Prud [Realtime transcript read in

13 error "Brod"], municipality of Samac, on the other side of the Bosna, on

14 the other side of the Bosna River.

15 MR. PANTELIC: Just a correction to the transcript. Page 3, line

16 12, instead of "village of Brod," it should be "village of Prud", P-r-u-d.

17 Could we have -- Mr. Usher -- could we have -- Ms. Usher, sorry,

18 your assistance. P9A.

19 Q. [Interpretation] Could you explain to us, doctor, what Prud

20 actually is. Is it part of the Samac municipality? How far away is it?

21 Can you give us a bit more detail?

22 A. It is part of the Samac municipality, but at that time -- I mean,

23 it's on the other side of the Bosna River. So right by the town of Samac

24 but the River Bosna separates the two.

25 Q. Could you please show Prud to us.

1 A. This is Samac, and this is Prud [Realtime transcript read in error

2 "Brod"].

3 MR. PANTELIC: Again, correction in the transcript. It's not

4 "Brod," it's Prud.

5 Ms. Usher, thank you very much for your assistance. You may take

6 your seat.

7 Q. [Interpretation] So Prud is an integral part of the municipality

8 of Samac? It's one of the local communes of Samac?

9 A. Yes, it was at that time.

10 Q. What is your personal knowledge about the period just before the

11 armed conflict broke out in Samac with regard to the activities of some of

12 the helmsmen of the SDA and the HDZ from Samac as well as members of the

13 TO and certain paramilitary formations? Were there any contacts between

14 them? Where did these contacts take place? Where did these meetings take

15 place? What was discussed and what was the influence of these activities

16 on the atmosphere in Samac? What you know, of course.

17 A. Could you put a shorter question, a more accurate question, a more

18 precise question.

19 Q. Do you know something about contacts between the helmsmen of the

20 SDA and the HDZ just before the war conflict broke out in Samac? Do you

21 know about any meetings between them? Do you know about their plans? Do

22 you know about the establishment of some of their joint organs, or do you

23 know nothing?

24 A. Information was coming in that they had formed military units,

25 that they had armed themselves, that they had set up a Crisis Staff in

1 Prud, that they have an operative plan to take over Samac. Then the

2 information was coming in that Muslims had established all of that on

3 their own as well, that is to say, together with the Croats on the one

4 hand, and on the other hand only the Muslims. So there would be an

5 exclusively Muslim command, an exclusively Muslim staff, Crisis Staff, and

6 that they brought in a lot of weapons, explosives, mines, and that they

7 created plans to take over the area.

8 Q. Do you have a specific name that is mentioned in relation to these

9 activities?

10 A. In relation to these activities, Sulejman Tihic is invariably

11 mentioned, as well as Alija Fitozovic; Mate Nujic; Filipovic; Marko

12 Bozanovic; the chief of police, Dragan Lukac, et cetera.

13 Q. At that time, what position did Sulejman Tihic hold?

14 A. Sulejman Tihic was an assemblyman in the municipal assembly and he

15 was president of the municipal board of the Party of Democratic Action in

16 Samac and a member of the top leadership of the SDA at the level of all of

17 Bosnia-Herzegovina.

18 Q. Who was Alija Fitozovic?

19 A. Alija Fitozovic, according to what people were saying then, was

20 commander of the military wing of the Party of Democratic Action in

21 Samac. He was a member of the executive board of the Party of the

22 Democratic Action, and later he was appointed Chief of Staff of their

23 Territorial Defence.

24 Q. What party did Mato Nujic come from?

25 A. Mato Nujic was from the Croat Democratic Union.

1 Q. What about Marko Bozanovic?

2 A. The HDZ.

3 Q. What is the role of Dragan Lukac in all of this?

4 A. Dragan Lukac took over the police, so he carried out his job.

5 What other jobs he had to do, I don't know.

6 Q. On whose behalf did he take over the police?

7 A. On behalf of the HDZ.

8 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Excuse me. I just have a question, Dr. Simic,

9 with respect to the last answer. Does the -- or did, rather, the chief of

10 police in Bosanski Samac usually act in that position on behalf of a

11 political party? Because in response to your question on whose behalf did

12 he take over the police, your answer is, "On behalf of the HDZ." And I'm

13 just wondering, is -- was that usual up to and, say, before the armed

14 conflict broke out?

15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That is one of the remains of the

16 Communist system. The chief of police was considered to be a political

17 appointee. Before one party, the League of Communists, would delegate its

18 own chief of police. However, after the first democratic elections, the

19 three parties decided who would be chief of police, or they would put

20 forward a proposal to the minister who to appoint. So we had an

21 inter-party agreement that all three parties would have a joint proposal

22 for chief of police, and that was Vinko Dragicevic, that is to say that

23 without the agreement of all three parties, the chief of police could not

24 change. But this was done overnight without the consent of the Serb side

25 and Dragan Lukac took over the police.

1 JUDGE WILLIAMS: [Microphone not activated]

2 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.

3 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

4 Q. Who appointed Dragan Lukac chief of staff?

5 A. I'm not aware of that. However, the Serb side did not take part

6 in this.

7 MR. LAZAREVIC: Your Honours, I apologise for the interruption of

8 my colleague, but here we have a question. It's page 7, line 1: Who

9 appointed Dragan Lukac Chief of Staff? And this would probably cause some

10 misunderstanding, because he was not in the staff of TO or whatever. He

11 was the chief of the police.

12 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Thank you for the correction.

13 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

14 Q. So let's repeat this question for the transcript. Who appointed

15 Dragan Lukac chief of police in Bosanski Samac? What was the competent

16 authority for that kind of thing?

17 A. I don't know about that, but the Serb side did not take part in

18 it.

19 Q. Very well. This is only for the transcript.

20 Tell me, Dr. Simic, at the beginning of May, do you have any

21 knowledge regarding the killing of some Serb soldiers at Grebnice? What

22 happened at the beginning of May? Do you have any knowledge regarding

23 this?

24 A. There were killings every day. I need a precise question.

25 Q. During the first ten days of May, do you remember -- well, I'm not

1 going to say mass killing, but certainly, say, 10 or 15 persons were

2 wounded on a bus.

3 A. Yes. This was in Novo Selo, this bus of soldiers of the Army of

4 Republika Srpska was bullet-riddled from an ambush.

5 Q. When did this occur? Do you remember?

6 A. The first half of May. I think it was by the 10th of May.

7 Q. Do you have any knowledge about the killing of non-Serb population

8 by Lugar in Crkvina?

9 A. Yes, regrettably. We learned about that as well.

10 Q. When did that happen?

11 A. Also around the 10th of May. I don't know the exact day, but it

12 was around those days.

13 Q. Do you have any knowledge with regard to the fact that this

14 incident in which Lugar took part, whether it took place before or after

15 this event when in Novo Selo on the bus Serb soldiers were wounded and

16 killed?

17 A. I think that this happened afterwards, after the massacre on this

18 bus.

19 Q. What was your personal reaction when you heard about the killings

20 in Crkvina committed by Lugar?

21 A. I think it was condemned by all citizens of Samac municipality as

22 a dishonourable and ruthless act, and this has brought shame on us until

23 the present day.

24 Q. Please tell me, was something done officially after that incident?

25 A. We asked all competent authorities, especially the judiciary, to

1 process that, to bring them to trial, to try them, and to punish them.

2 Q. And what were the competent judicial organs at the time?

3 A. At the time there already started emerging a small vacuum in the

4 judiciary. There was no military judiciary because the Yugoslav People's

5 Army was withdrawing and taking its military courts with it, and the Army

6 of Republika Srpska was only in the process of being established and was

7 only setting up its military courts, and it wasn't done until the 6th of

8 June of 1992.

9 Q. Tell me, Dr. Simic, what do you know about the incidents and

10 imprisonment of a large number of Serbs in Odzak -- in the Odzak area,

11 rather? When did this take place? Who was involved in it? How many

12 Serbs were involved? And then later on, I will put a few more questions

13 regarding this.

14 A. This is something that will be discussed at greater length by one

15 of the co-accused. The information we received was that Serb residents of

16 Odzak were imprisoned, that they were all put into camps, and that the

17 process of liquidation, extinction, rape, torture, and looting of the

18 entire property had commenced.

19 JUDGE WILLIAMS: [Microphone not activated] I'm having some

20 problems with the microphone.

21 MR. PANTELIC: If my mic is switched on, then you cannot --

22 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Oh, that's the problem.

23 Dr. Simic, I just have a question. Just going back to the

24 questions by Mr. Pantelic concerning Lugar and the competent judicial

25 authorities. I don't really see an answer in the sense that you said that

1 you asked all competent authorities to process that, but then your

2 subsequent answer, you said there was a vacuum in the judiciary and also

3 that military courts in Republika Srpska were not set up until the 6th of

4 June, 1992. So my question is: So what happened with Lugar? Did nothing

5 happen, because there was a vacuum in the civil -- civilian criminal

6 courts? Or when the military courts were set up on the 6th of June, 1992,

7 was something done to activate a military court investigation at that

8 time? Because, of course, we've heard from many of the witnesses that

9 there were military courts, I believe, in Brcko I think, so if you could

10 just help with that, I think it would be of assistance, please.

11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] From the 10th until the 20th of May,

12 the Yugoslav People's Army withdrew. Those who were not from Bosnia

13 withdrew beyond the territory of Bosnia-Herzegovina. And by doing so, the

14 military courts of the Yugoslav People's Army were withdrawn as well. I

15 am aware of it now that there was a vacuum in the judiciary; however, then

16 we did not know about that. We expected the Yugoslav People's Army, who

17 had a direct command over those volunteers -- we expected the army to

18 arrest them and to try them. However, they were withdrawing and they did

19 not do that.

20 Lugar was later arrested and expelled. And then once again when

21 he came back in the fall or during wintertime, he was then arrested and

22 tried in Banja Luka. There was another trial at the high military court

23 in Han Pijesak, but I don't think this case was in fact ever brought to an

24 end by military authorities. I think that they looked into it but didn't,

25 in fact, ever put him to trial.

1 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Thank you.

2 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

3 Q. All right. Now, let us go back to the events in Odzak. Based on

4 your information, when were the Serbs imprisoned in Odzak? When did all

5 of this take place?

6 A. All of that was taking place at the beginning of May, and my

7 co-accused will give you specific information. I don't know the exact

8 dates, and I wouldn't like to give you erroneous information now.

9 Q. Very well, Dr. Simic. You can tell me -- if you don't remember,

10 you can tell me so or you can just give me an approximate date. What was

11 the reaction of the Samac population regarding that? Did they have any

12 relatives in Odzak that were imprisoned? What was the reaction in town

13 among the residents when this took place in Odzak at the beginning of May,

14 as you said? What do you know about that?

15 A. Well, their reaction was fierce. Since this is an area that is

16 quite close to our town, 2 to 5 kilometres away as the crow flies, and

17 people have many relatives in both places. Some families had some members

18 living on one side and the other members of that family lived on the other

19 side, and some of them left the area before the war but still a lot of

20 families were divided between these two places, so members of families

21 started coming in from other areas, from abroad as well, looking for their

22 family members and asking that something be done to help those who had

23 been imprisoned.

24

25 Q. Do you know - did you know then or have you learned later on - how

1 many Serbs were imprisoned in Odzak then, approximately?

2 A. The information that we received was that 4.000 Serbs had been

3 imprisoned of all ages, from babies to the elderly, women and so on.

4 Q. I would like to ask you once again to speak slower and to wait at

5 least five seconds before answering my question; otherwise, the transcript

6 will not be accurate.

7 What was the reaction in the Crisis Staff? Did you discuss the

8 situation about the imprisoned Serbs? Did you go to somebody asking for

9 assistance as the Crisis Staff? What did you as an institution do

10 regarding this issue of Serbs imprisoned in Odzak?

11 A. The pressure of the families was quite intense. We talked about

12 that almost on a daily basis. But the only thing that we could do was to

13 write letters and send it to all addresses that we were aware of and ask

14 for help. And about every few days, we would send out letters to various

15 organs in Yugoslavia, to the leadership of the Serb Orthodox Church,

16 asking them to appeal to the international organisations, asking for

17 assistance, and asking them to enable these people to leave the area. In

18 fact, their only request was to be enabled to leave the area.

19 Q. Tell me, please, did any of your fellow citizens of Serb ethnicity

20 offer to be a go-between on a voluntary basis in negotiations with Croats

21 about imprisoned Serbs? Did the Crisis Staff coordinate something

22 regarding this? Were any contacts established? What do you know about

23 that?

24 A. All of the people who hailed from that municipality, from that

25 side of the Bosna River, felt responsible, felt it was their duty to help

1 these people in despair. One of the eldest among them was Miroslav Tadic,

2 and he established first contacts through the centre for information, from

3 the Ministry of Defence, he established contacts with the Odzak side, and

4 this is how the negotiations started between the Odzak and the Samac side.

5 Q. Was a number of non-Serbs at that time detained at the stadium in

6 Crkvina?

7 A. Yes. We received information that a small number of civilians of

8 Croat ethnicity was imprisoned in the culture hall in Crkvina, and then

9 soon thereafter we also received information that all of them had been

10 sent home with apologies.

11 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Excuse me, Mr. Pantelic, just for clarification,

12 your question on page 13, line 1, was: Were they detained in the stadium

13 in Crkvina? Dr. Simic's answer is that they were imprisoned in the

14 culture hall in Crkvina. I know from some of the witnesses we heard about

15 the stadium. I don't recall about the culture hall. I remember a

16 gymnasium and -- rather, a stadium and adjoining building but not a

17 culture hall. So it might be the translation or not. Maybe you could

18 just clarify the point.

19 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, certainly, Your Honour, I will do that.

20 Q. [Interpretation] You heard what Her Honour Williams said. Some

21 witnesses mentioned a stadium in Crkvina, and now we -- please let me

22 finish. Let's clarify this. And another matter, doctor: Please watch

23 the screen in front of you. And when the cursor stops, then you can start

24 answering, because it is in your interest that everything you say is

25 properly recorded. I fully understand you. You want to reveal your

1 account of the events. You've waited for this for a long time. But I

2 have to tell you that we cannot properly do our job if we do not have an

3 accurate transcript. Thank you.

4 A. The culture hall in Crkvina and the sport fields, the stadium, are

5 right next to each other. The culture hall is the covered area, and the

6 stadium is an outdoor field, but they're right next to each other.

7 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Thank you. So we are talking, then, about the

8 same thing. Yes. Okay.

9 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please --

10 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Di Fazio.

11 MR. DI FAZIO: Just a matter that concerns the Prosecution.

12 Mr. Pantelic asked Dr. Simic of details of the first contacts with the

13 people in Odzak, and that was done through Mr. Tadic. And that was how

14 negotiations started.

15 His next question is this: Was there -- were there a number of

16 non-Serbs detained at the stadium in Crkvina? And the witness gave his

17 answer. It's not apparent to me if those two matters are connected, and I

18 don't know if that's what Mr. Pantelic is trying to establish. But if he

19 is trying to establish, then it should be made clear. In other words, is

20 what happened in Crkvina somehow related to the negotiations regarding the

21 exchange for the Serbs in Odzak, or are we moving on to a completely

22 different and unrelated topic? Because if it is related, then the witness

23 ought to be given his opportunity to say so and we ought to be clear about

24 it. If it's unrelated, fine, and we can move on to this completely new

25 topic. But as it arose at that point in time, I would like to know is the

1 witness's position that the round-up of Croats at Crkvina was a reaction

2 to the detention of Serbs in Odzak or not.

3 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Pantelic. I'm sure the request by the

4 Prosecution is clear. And can we have clarification from the witness.

5 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, yes, Your Honour. Well, I would not say that

6 I'm -- that my intention is to make some kind of fling between -- I'm

7 just --

8 JUDGE MUMBA: No, no, no. Just ask -- the witness understood the

9 Prosecution's intervention.

10 MR. PANTELIC: Yes.

11 JUDGE MUMBA: Ask the witness to clarify.

12 MR. PANTELIC: Of course, Your Honour. But maybe that's a matter

13 for clarification in cross-examination of my learned friend. I will do

14 that rather now. It's no problem. But it's not my job to make any

15 assumptions or connection with that regard. What I'm doing, Your Honour,

16 is to put certain episodes during the time period, time frame, and that's

17 my job. But of course I will clarify it -- I will clarify that with

18 Mr. Simic.

19 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. The Prosecution, if they misunderstand

20 anything, they're entitled to ask for clarification from the witness.

21 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, in cross-examination, Your Honour.

22 JUDGE MUMBA: No, no, no. Even when --

23 MR. PANTELIC: According to the Rules.

24 JUDGE MUMBA: No, no, no. Even when you're

25 examination-in-chiefing, there are certain rurals that the --

1 MR. PANTELIC: Your Honour, it's not --

2 JUDGE MUMBA: Can you go ahead to ask the accused to clarify.

3 MR. PANTELIC: Because this is a matter of legal issue, Your

4 Honour. I'm speaking about factual matters here, but I will clarify it.

5 JUDGE MUMBA: Mr. Pantelic.

6 MR. PANTELIC: I will clarify that. Of course.

7 JUDGE MUMBA: Just go ahead and do your job and listen to what the

8 Trial Chamber says.

9 MR. PANTELIC: I will do my job according to your -- legal

10 standards, Your Honour.

11 JUDGE MUMBA: Oh, that your view that you won't take the

12 instructions of the Trial Chamber?

13 MR. PANTELIC: I am taking your instructions, and I will

14 immediately ask my client about all these things. Of course.

15 THE INTERPRETER: Could the counsel also pause between question

16 and answer, please.

17 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

18 Q. The detention of the civilians in Crkvina, did it have anything to

19 do with Odzak?

20 A. I don't know.

21 Q. Who detained non-Serb civilians at the stadium in Crkvina?

22 A. I don't know.

23 Q. How long were non-Serb civilians from Samac detained in Crkvina?

24 A. Stevan Todorovic reported that it was for one afternoon only.

25 Q. Who did he report to?

1 A. The Crisis Staff.

2 Q. When was that?

3 A. In May, in May 1992.

4 Q. Who organised the transport of these people from Crkvina to Samac?

5 A. I don't know.

6 Q. Did Stevan Todorovic report again to the Crisis Staff about this

7 sometime after mid-May?

8 A. I don't remember.

9 Q. Tell me, in mid-May, since you mentioned it, the JNA pulled out

10 from the area of Samac, did it? What do you know about that?

11 A. Yes, in mid-May all active-duty officers and other soldiers who

12 were not from Bosnia-Herzegovina left the territory of Bosnia and

13 Herzegovina.

14 Q. Tell me, do you know who was the commander of the JNA units prior

15 to the pullout of the JNA from Samac?

16 A. Colonel Stevan Nikolic.

17 Q. And after he left, do you know who took over the command over the

18 practically newly set up army of Republika Srpska?

19 A. Retired Colonel Mico Djurdjevic.

20 Q. And what was that unit called, that unit commanded by retired

21 Colonel Djurdjevic?

22 A. These are military issues, to which I do not know the answer, and

23 I'll explain why.

24 Q. I'm only asking you about the name of the unit, if you happen to

25 know it, the number of the brigade. You don't have to answer if you don't

1 know.

2 A. At that moment I do not know.

3 Q. Why didn't you know that at that moment?

4 A. I don't know it to this day.

5 Q. But did you learn it during this case or during these years

6 following 1992 what that unit was called?

7 A. When I read the documents for the Defence, I read that there were

8 three laws at that time: A law which supported the Yugoslav People's

9 Army, a law which supported the Territorial Defence, and the law on the

10 establishment of the Army of Republika Srpska. At that time, all these

11 three laws were there. Which one was in force? Which army? Was it the

12 Yugoslav People's Army? Was the Territorial Defence? Was it the army of

13 Republika Srpska? I did not know at that time.

14 Q. When did you meet retired Colonel Djurdjevic and on what occasion?

15 A. I met him on the 14th or the 15th of April at a meeting in the

16 municipal hall.

17 Q. Tell me, how long did Colonel Djurdjevic head that military unit?

18 A. For about a month.

19 Q. Did you have a hand in any personnel decisions? Did you

20 personally or the Crisis Staff try to impose some personnel decisions

21 regarding that office, that is, his replacement at the head of that unit?

22 A. No.

23 Q. And do you know who succeeded him as the commander?

24 A. For a while it was Dragan Djordjevic, Crni, who assumed his post

25 for a few months. And then Lieutenant Colonel Mile Beronja for three

1 years until the end of the war.

2 Q. And who was the immediate superior of that military unit in Samac

3 commanded by Colonel Djurdjevic?

4 A. Colonel Djurdjevic's superior was Colonel Dencic, who was still a

5 member of the Tuzla Corps, that is, the Yugoslav People's Army.

6 Q. Did you communicate with Colonel Dencic?

7 A. Yes, once.

8 Q. And when was that and on what occasion?

9 A. It was -- it had to do with the visit in Ugljevik and the pressure

10 by the army to -- that Colonel Djurdjevic, because of his advanced age,

11 was no longer able to command the army.

12 Q. And that was when approximately?

13 A. I think it was the period of the beginning of June.

14 Q. And what was the decision -- or rather, what was the role -- what

15 was the role of the Crisis Staff, that is, your role in attending this

16 meeting with Colonel Dencic?

17 A. The role of the Crisis Staff was non-existent.

18 Q. You mean it was exclusively a military matter concerning the

19 appointments and personnel decisions? Is that what you are telling us?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. Tell me, in May Mr. Milan Simic was appointed the president of the

22 municipality of Samac. Is that so?

23 A. Yes.

24 MR. PANTELIC: Just a correction to the transcript, page 19, line

25 19. It is not the position of president of the municipality. It's a

1 position of the president of the executive board of the municipality of

2 Samac.

3 Q. [Interpretation] So the Crisis Staff appointed Milan Simic, an

4 economist, as the president of the executive board of the municipal

5 assembly. And who ran against him in these elections?

6 A. Mirko Lukic.

7 Q. Will you explain to us how was it decided, how did this decision

8 come about to elect Mr. Simic the president of the executive council? Who

9 was it that in a way lobbied for Mr. Simic and who nominated Mr. Lukic?

10 What were their qualifications? Will you please give us some views about

11 that episode.

12 A. My proposal was to appoint Mirko Lukic as the president of the

13 executive council because that post had been vacated. However, Stevan

14 Todorovic nominated Milan Simic, managed to win over several members of

15 the Crisis Staff. And when it came to voting, Milan Simic won.

16 Q. So, if I may put it that way, you ask your option were outvoted in

17 the Crisis Staff?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. Did Milan Simic --

20 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Excuse me. In terms of the voting on the Crisis

21 Staff, how did it -- how did it work, Dr. Simic? Was it -- did every

22 member have an equal vote, one vote? And the nominations, did they have

23 to come from members of the Crisis Staff or could they come from outside

24 persons?

25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The nominations always came from the

1 executive council. And when it came to personnel appointments, then

2 councilmen also had the right to nominate individual people -- I mean,

3 councilmen in the municipal assembly. But it also went through the

4 executive council and was put to vote at the municipal assembly or at that

5 time, but only for a short period of time, by the Crisis Staff. We had

6 the one-man-one-vote principle, and for a decision to become final, it had

7 to be a majority of more than one half of members voting.

8 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Just one follow-up question: You told us

9 yesterday that Mr. Stevan Todorovic, albeit that he was chief of police,

10 was not a member of the Crisis Staff. So in what capacity -- what

11 capacity did he have to nominate Milan Simic?

12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As of the second assembly, he was on

13 the roster of the members of the executive council, and therefore he was

14 entitled to make his proposals at the executive council. And the

15 executive body as the executive body always submits its proposal to the

16 parliament. It is always the executive council which does it.

17 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

18 Q. And what do you know about some family or friendly relations

19 between Stevan Todorovic and Milan Simic?

20 A. Milan Simic is Stevan Todorovic's in-law. He married his cousin,

21 his first cousin. Before the war -- before the war, they were together,

22 engaged in certain private business deals and were friends.

23 Q. [Microphone not activated]

24 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for the counsel, please.

25 MR. PANTELIC: I do apologise.

1 Q. [Interpretation] Sometime in late autumn of 1992, did Milan Simic

2 and Stevan Todorovic -- were Milan Simic and Stevan Todorovic arrested by

3 military authorities?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. Was it then that the corridor was closed by some volunteer units

6 and military persons who were in close communication with Milan Simic and

7 Stevan Todorovic?

8 A. The corridor was closed for 12 to 18 hours.

9 Q. And who did that?

10 A. Mostly the soldiers of the strike battalion.

11 Q. And in relation to this and some other incidents in military

12 units, were there the proceedings conducted against them at the Banja Luka

13 military court?

14 A. Yes. All the responsible participants were arrested and brought

15 before the court in Banja Luka.

16 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please, for the purposes of

17 clarification, the witness has referred to an organ called the strike

18 battalion. There's been a lot of evidence in the case of a -- an organ

19 consisting of paramilitaries. It might be of use for you to know if the

20 strike battalion is the paramilitaries or some other -- some other body.

21 And I know I can clarify it in cross-examination, but it's fair to the

22 witness -- he's putting his story now, so you should have it clearly, so I

23 submit it's a -- it's an inquiry that should be followed up.

24 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Can we have clarification as sought by the

25 Prosecution.

1 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

2 Q. Under whose command were the members of that strike battalion, as

3 you call it?

4 A. Under the command of the officers of the Army of Republika Srpska.

5 Q. Well, if you don't know, you don't have to tell us, but is that

6 strike battalion the same thing as the special purpose battalion?

7 A. It's one in the same battalion, but the terms are different.

8 Q. Were they within the 2nd Posavina Brigade?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. Who was commander of that brigade?

11 A. Commander of the 2nd Posavina Brigade was Lieutenant Colonel

12 Mile Beronja.

13 Q. So the 2nd Posavina Brigade is a unit of the Army of the Republika

14 Srpska. Is that right?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. Milan Simic and Stevan Todorovic, were they freed -- or rather,

17 were they released from military detention sometime late in the autumn of

18 1992 after these incidents that had to do with the battalion?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. My question was not properly interpreted, so I am going to repeat

21 it.

22 MR. PANTELIC: [Previous translation continues] ... In fact, my

23 question was related to the incidents with the blockage of the corridor,

24 of the closing of the corridor, not -- not to the incidents within the

25 battalion. So it's a rather different story. Just for the record. Thank

1 you.

2 Q. [Interpretation] Let us go back to the month of June 1992.

3 Sometime in the beginning of June you travelled to Belgrade, didn't you?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. Could you explain who you went to see, who you travelled with from

6 Samac. Could you give us a few details regarding that episode.

7 A. The trip was of a humanitarian nature exclusively. Most of the

8 civilian population of the municipality of Samac was in refugee camps in

9 Serbia. The smaller part, belonging to -- I mean, all ethnic groups. The

10 smaller part of the civilian population wanted to go to refugee camps in

11 Serbia as well so that they would not be in the war zone.

12 Q. I apologise for interrupting you, but among the refugees were

13 there any Muslims and Croats who were in Serbia as well?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. Please continue.

16 A. All our wounded were staying in hospitals in Serbia, and they were

17 in rehabilitation centres. All our gravely wounded persons who had

18 paraplegia or quadriplegia were put up at various spas in Serbia. We were

19 not in a position to pay for their stay there or for their treatment

20 there. We could not even buy prosthetic devices for the disabled

21 persons. We went to see Andjelko Maslic, our countryman, in order to ask

22 for assistance. People given by persons coming from the -- assistance

23 coming by persons coming from the same area. We wanted these people to

24 stay in the refugee camps so that they would not be thrown out of refugee

25 camps from rehabilitation centres, from hospitals, and so on.

1 Q. Excuse me. Why would they be thrown out of hospitals? Was it

2 because there were no relations between social funds, or simply for some

3 other reason? Why would people be thrown out of hospitals? Could you

4 explain that, please.

5 A. The reasons were the following: We could not pay. We could not

6 pay for a single day of their treatment; however, they were never thrown

7 out.

8 The second reason was that the number of wounded persons was on

9 the rise day after day from all parts of Republika Srpska.

10 And the third reason why we left was the detention of Serbs, of

11 the Serb population, in the territory of the municipality of Odzak, where

12 again we wanted to convey some information and to try to appeal to have

13 these people assisted through international organisations.

14 Q. Who was with you in this delegation, so to speak?

15 A. Milos Bogdanovic. Miroslav Tadic, I, Stevan Todorovic, and

16 Simo Zaric.

17 Q. When you finished this meeting at Mr. Andjelko Maslic's, what

18 happened then?

19 A. Then Stevan Todorovic took us to have coffee with his best man,

20 Colonel Jeremic.

21 Q. Where did this happen?

22 A. This was at the premises of the Air Force, but I'm not sure.

23 Q. Did Stevan Todorovic mention something else to you in relation to

24 that meeting? I mean, when you went to see his friend and best man. Did

25 he mention any other reason except for going to have a cup of coffee?

1 A. Stevan Todorovic always attached importance to himself, but it was

2 importance that he did not have. Then he tried to make up for this, with

3 some other persons and some other connections.

4 Q. Excuse me for interrupting, Dr. Simic. When I said that you

5 should speak slower, I didn't mean that slow. I mean, try to strike a

6 balance between that fast manner of speech and what you're saying now so

7 that you can hear in your headphones a flow of interpretation. Please.

8 Because now it is too slow. I do apologise, but could you speak at a

9 normal pace, like the way you talk.

10 A. At that meeting, we stayed about 40 minutes; we talked about all

11 our problems.

12 Q. Who else was present at the meeting?

13 A. One or two other men were present, but I don't know who they were.

14 Q. What was discussed specifically there? Who spoke the most and

15 what was the topic tackled there? Were you surprised to have been there

16 in the first place?

17 A. I was surprised. That was the first and the last time that I

18 went to that place.

19 Q. Tell me, these people who were with you at this meeting, did they

20 also talk? Did they also take part in the discussion? Did they behave in

21 a friendly way towards Stevan? After all, did you meet each other or were

22 they already there at the time when you arrived?

23 A. They were already there when we arrived. We shook hands. Time

24 went by quickly, and I do not recall all of the details of that

25 conversation.

1 Q. When did you return to Samac?

2 A. The same evening.

3 Q. Tell me the following: You said that your wife was heavily

4 pregnant at the time.

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. Was it possible for you to visit her? Because she was about 50

7 kilometres away from Samac.

8 A. No.

9 Q. Why not?

10 A. Because the army was between us, the HVO.

11 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Excuse me. Dr. Simic, on page 24 -- in fact,

12 page 23, line 25 and then the first couple of lines on page 24

13 Mr. Pantelic had asked you, in fact, two or three questions following one

14 another. The first was: At that meeting, what was discussed specifically

15 there? And then he went on and asked you whether you were surprised. And

16 you answered that you were surprised but you didn't answer as to what was

17 specifically discussed. I know you said you discussed your problems in an

18 earlier answer, but you didn't respond to counsel's question as to the

19 specifics. So if you can remember, you know, it might be useful.

20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I said later that this was ten years

21 ago and that -- as for the details of these 40 minutes of this discussion,

22 I do not recall them.

23 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Thank you.

24 MR. PANTELIC: Yes. Ms. Usher, please, I have documents to tender

25 into evidence. This is the medical list for -- Mira Simic, the wife of

1 the witness, also the original.

2 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Before we proceed, I just wanted to ask the

3 accused that -- it's rather interesting to note that you remember exactly

4 how long the meeting, the discussion took, that was 40 minutes, that was

5 ten years ago. But you can't remember any of the details of the

6 discussion.

7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] 40 minutes go by very quickly. In a

8 war situation a municipality has so many problems that if every one of us

9 took up a few minutes and spoke, that time would have gone by.

10 JUDGE MUMBA: Very well.

11 Yes, Mr. -- I thought I -- Mr. Di Fazio.

12 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes. If you -- the Chamber has finished with its

13 inquiries.

14 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.

15 MR. DI FAZIO: There's just one matter arising out of this exhibit

16 that I'd like to raise briefly, if I may.

17 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.

18 MR. DI FAZIO: It's this: Mr. Pantelic provided us with a folder

19 of his documents which were categorised and placed under various - what's

20 the word - headings or categories. It's like an index, in effect. For

21 various reasons, analysis of the transcript, it's important for the

22 Prosecution to know which section or -- it comes from so that we can

23 later, when the time comes, analyse the transcript. I would be grateful

24 if Mr. Pantelic could tell us which -- where it comes from in his folder

25 that he provided to us.

1 MR. PANTELIC: Yes. The internal number is R14.

2 Q. [Interpretation] Dr. Simic, please take a look at this document

3 and tell us briefly what this is about.

4 A. This is the fourth childbirth of my wife, Caesarean section, at

5 the maternity ward in Doboj, on the 20th of June, 1992.

6 Q. Your daughter was born then. What's her name?

7 A. Aleksandra.

8 Q. You did not manage to visit your newborn daughter and your wife

9 after she delivered the baby?

10 A. During those first few days, it was not possible.

11 Q. Was Samac surrounded?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. By which military forces?

14 A. Seven brigades of the HVO, a brigade of the Muslim army, and the

15 Croatian army.

16 Q. Since you did your residency in Doboj for a while, in the lower

17 right-hand corner, who is this doctor? Did you perhaps know him?

18 A. I did not. This is Dr. Hasandic. He is a Muslim by ethnicity.

19 MR. PANTELIC: If there is any objections, Your Honour, I would

20 like to tender this document into exhibit list.

21 MR. DI FAZIO: No objection.

22 JUDGE MUMBA: Can we have the numbers.

23 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honour. It will be D59/1 ter and

24 D59/1. Thank you.

25 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Excuse me. Mr. Pantelic, I believed or at least

1 we have it on the transcript, on line 16, that you asked Dr. Simic did

2 he -- did he know the doctor in the right-hand corner, and that would be

3 Dr. Spasojevic.

4 MR. PANTELIC: In fact, my question was to the left.

5 JUDGE MUMBA: It says to the right in the transcript.

6 MR. PANTELIC: Yeah. That's maybe my mistake. I will clarify --

7 I will clarify the transcript.

8 Q. [Interpretation] I referred to the bottom left corner, where we

9 can see the name of Dr. Hasandic.

10 A. Yes.

11 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Thanks.

12 MR. PANTELIC: You're welcome, Your Honour.

13 Thank you, Ms. Usher. You can take this exhibit and I'll move on.

14 Q. [Interpretation] In late June of 1992, what was the operation, the

15 large operation carried out in Posavina region?

16 A. In June of 1992, the Army of Republika Srpska carried out a

17 military operation trying to break through the corridor in Posavina

18 region.

19 Q. Do you know the reasons behind that military operation, even

20 though you are not a military expert?

21 A. The reason for that was total encirclement of all Krajina Serbs,

22 of Bosnian Krajina, Western Slavonia and Croatian Krajina, and the

23 inability to bring in equipment and materiel. So all of that caused the

24 Army of Republika Srpska to try to carry out this break-through and open

25 up the corridor.

1 Q. Military administration was introduced in Odzak at that time. Do

2 you know something about that?

3 A. When the Army of Republika Srpska entered the municipality of

4 Odzak, there was nobody there. And then General Talic issued an order

5 introducing military administration, a military rule in the territory of

6 that municipality.

7 Q. What was the goal of that military administration?

8 A. I don't know that.

9 Q. The Serb refugees from Odzak, those who were staying in Samac at

10 the time, did they go back to their hearths?

11 A. Mostly, yes.

12 Q. How was their return and their normal life in Odzak made possible?

13 How was the electricity provided to them and all the things?

14 A. The state companies that had branch offices in the territory of

15 Odzak before transferred their workers there and opened up the vital

16 systems, electric power supply, water supply, telephone lines, and so on.

17 Q. Did military authorities request the Crisis Staff of Samac and

18 other surrounding municipalities to nominate candidates or representatives

19 for the council that dealt with civilian matters in Odzak?

20 A. Military authorities in Odzak asked the surrounding municipalities

21 to send everyone who wasn't engaged sufficiently in neighbouring

22 municipalities to the municipality of Odzak providing that they were from

23 that municipality originally.

24 Q. So which civilians from the municipality of Samac were nominated

25 to give their contribution to the establishment of civilian government in

1 Odzak?

2 A. All of those who, by the opinion of the Ministry of Defence, were

3 believed not to have been sufficiently engaged in Samac municipality.

4 They were sent there pursuant to a document of the Ministry of Defence.

5 Savo Popovic was considered surplus in the Crisis Staff, and all other

6 companies also sent some of their personnel there.

7 Q. Do you know perhaps who was commander of that military

8 administration?

9 A. The first commander of military administration was General Novica

10 Simic, who at the time was colonel.

11 Q. How long did he remain in that post?

12 A. I don't know that exactly, but I think that there was a change in

13 commanders every two months.

14 Q. Did you personally go to Odzak? Did you have any contacts with

15 the officials from the military administration?

16 A. Very seldom. Only upon being invited to go there, because I

17 wasn't able to go there without a pass issued by them.

18 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please, may I seek further

19 clarification. And I suggest it will help everyone concerned. The

20 witness said that people -- civilians who were sent from Samac were those

21 who in the opinion of the Ministry of Defence were believed not to have

22 been sufficiently engaged in Samac municipality. The way that's

23 translated into English, I just don't understand what that means.

24 "Sufficiently engaged," engaged in what?

25 And secondly, the witness started to tell us of some of the

1 civilians who were sent there. He mentioned Savo Popovic. You may care

2 to know if any other civilians were also sent to -- or any other Samac --

3 Bosanski Samac people were also sent to Odzak.

4 JUDGE MUMBA: I think that touches on one of the crucial issues in

5 the indictment; that should be for cross-examination.

6 MR. DI FAZIO: Very well, Your Honours.

7 MR. PANTELIC: If we could have a break now, Your Honour. It's

8 11.00.

9 JUDGE MUMBA: Very well. We shall resume our proceedings at 11.30

10 hours.

11 --- Recess taken at 11.00 a.m.

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

13 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Pantelic, you're continuing.

14 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, Your Honour.

15 Q. [Interpretation] Dr. Simic, before we continue, let us go back to

16 a topic that has to do with what we discussed in the morning. Do you know

17 something about whether in May or June exchanges were organised between

18 the Serb and the Croat side?

19 A. I think that during that time there was just one exchange

20 organised, and at that it was organised by the International Red Cross.

21 Q. Do you know roughly how many people were exchanged on that

22 occasion, on the Serb side and on the Croat side?

23 A. I think it was 100 for 100.

24 Q. All right. And just one more question regarding that: What was

25 the role of the security organs, both civilian and military, in that

1 exchange process? Specifically, did the civilian and military security

2 organs have to issue a prior consent for this to go on?

3 A. Without the approval of all security services, the exchanges could

4 not take place. And by this, I refer both to civilian and military organs

5 and all three warring sides.

6 Q. We mentioned the presence of a number of volunteers from Serbia

7 who were in Stevan Todorovic's circle. What was your experience in

8 context with these people? Did you have any problems with them, and did

9 other people, your colleagues from the Crisis Staff, have any problems in

10 dealing with them? What was your viewpoint regarding this?

11 A. A part of them -- or rather, all of them were under the command of

12 the then-Yugoslav People's Army. A part of them after the war operations

13 would come into town and cause problems there. They would usually be

14 drunk and cause trouble to anyone they would meet. Some of them --

15 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, Your Honour.

16 JUDGE LINDHOLM: Yes. Page 34 and line 8, the accused is speaking

17 about Stevan Todorovic's circle. Could you give me an explanation on what

18 is meant by that.

19 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

20 Q. You heard His Honour Lindholm. Could you please explain what was

21 the relationship between Stevan Todorovic and these people.

22 A. Stevan Todorovic was not a serious person. Nobody considered him

23 as such. And in order to raise the level of his own importance and in

24 wartime also the level of his authority, he tried to surround himself with

25 certain individuals and abuse them at the same time, and these people were

1 seen in Stevan Todorovic's company on various occasions.

2 Q. Did you personally have any problems with these people and with

3 Stevan Todorovic?

4 A. I have had problems with Stevan Todorovic from 1990 to this day,

5 and almost all other members of the Crisis Staff were harassed by Stevan

6 Todorovic and by some of these other people, volunteers. And here I have

7 Milos Bogdanovic in mind, first and foremost, about whom Stevan Todorovic

8 invented a story that he sold a publicly owned camera, and later on this

9 man went to the front line and got killed there.

10 Later on, he harassed Mirko Ivanovic, a member of the executive

11 council, who didn't want to come back from Serbia any more. He also

12 harassed Fadil Topcagic and invented all kinds of stories about this man

13 and mostly laughed at every move he made. He also harassed Miroslav

14 Tadic. The volunteers on several occasions stirred up trouble in his

15 coffee-shop many times and several times forced him to perform some

16 improper acts, which he had to do in their presence, and so on. Stevan

17 Todorovic had awfully bad relations with me, starting in 1990, and this

18 always used to culminate in fierce arguments.

19 Q. Can you give us the names of some of those volunteers that you

20 were in conflict with or who badgered you?

21 A. The largest number of those volunteers and probably the most

22 delinquent psychopathological personality was Lugar, who I think not a day

23 would pass without causing some incident, wherever he might happen to be.

24 Q. Did you try to do something in this regard to stop such incidents,

25 that is, the perpetrators of such incidents?

1 A. With Stevan Todorovic, it was almost impossible to achieve. And

2 the brigade commander, that is, the brigade command was about 40

3 kilometres away. And when the brigade engaged them on the front and in

4 combat operations, then peace reigned in the municipality and in the town

5 itself. But the chaos would start after their return from the front and

6 when they would count their fatalities, their dead and their wounded, and

7 that is when the trouble started.

8 It was only -- the strengthening of the state and the

9 strengthening of the Army of Republika Srpska is the thing to do, and

10 especially when General Talic arrived in the area, who across the area

11 covered by the 1st Krajina Corps arrested all the groups and all the

12 individuals who were not under the command of the Army of Republika

13 Srpska. So he arrested the group in Prnjavor, in Doboj, in Modrica, in

14 Samac, in Srpsko Orasje, in Brcko, and so on and so forth.

15 Q. Another episode in -- we've heard a number of testimonies --

16 JUDGE LINDHOLM: Excuse me for interrupting.

17 MR. PANTELIC: I do apologise, Your Honour.

18 JUDGE LINDHOLM: Which time period are you now talking?

19 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

20 Q. You've heard the question of His Honour Judge Lindholm. What

21 period are you talking about?

22 A. I'm talking about April, May, June. So end of April, May, and

23 June.

24 JUDGE LINDHOLM: Which year?

25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] 1992.

1 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

2 Q. In this case, we heard several testimonies about white armbands

3 that allegedly were worn by members of non-Serb ethnicity in Samac. Were

4 you aware of this phenomenon? I'm talk about mid-April 1992 onward.

5 A. Apart from the soldiers, I didn't see anyone else wear such

6 ribbons. I never heard anyone request that such ribbons be worn. I did

7 not see any order or heard an order requesting that such ribbons be worn,

8 and I can say under full responsibility that they are not ours.

9 Q. Were there any such announcements, that is, orders, on the radio

10 that non-Serbs in Samac were to wear such white ribbons or armbands?

11 A. There was no such announcement on the radio to wear them, but I

12 have to add that radio did not work; primarily because there was no

13 electricity, and secondly because the aerial system had burnt down on the

14 17th of April, when the elementary school also burnt down. And before

15 that, it was only a 300-watt radio station, so it could barely cover the

16 centre of the town, that is, the kind of power that people have in their

17 homes.

18 MR. LAZAREVIC: Your Honour, I believe that there is some

19 inconsistency here in the transcript. It's page 34, line -- I'm looking

20 at the laptop, actually. Line 25. The witness says, "And I can say under

21 full responsibility that they are not ours." Actually, this is not what

22 he said. It doesn't have any sense, I mean, speaking about ours, our

23 white ribbons or something like that. He was talking about not wearing

24 any white ribbons. And that was the --

25 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Maybe -- Mr. Pantelic, please clarify that

1 with the witness.

2 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, Your Honour, I will just try to find on my

3 machine. 34, line 25 -- 37? Uh-huh. I can see your response, "And I can

4 say under full responsibility that they are not ours."

5 Q. [Interpretation] Uh-huh. Very well. Right, Dr. Simic, let's

6 clear this up. In that answer you said that apart from the soldiers, you

7 didn't see anyone else wearing those ribbons or armbands, that you didn't

8 know -- that you were sure that nobody requested anybody to wear it and

9 that you claim under full responsibility that -- what?

10 A. These were not worn by any civilians that I saw.

11 Q. This answer requires a supplementary question. Does that mean

12 that you never saw a civilian wearing white armbands?

13 A. I did not see a single civilian wearing these white ribbons.

14 Q. And did the Crisis Staff ever discuss that possibility at all, to

15 order civilians to wear those white ribbons?

16 A. The Crisis Staff never discussed that possibility, nor is there --

17 nor was there any reason for anything like that.

18 Q. And tell us, you mentioned that the soldiers wore those white

19 armbands. Where? On which part of their uniform did they wear them?

20 What did they look like, and do you know why did they wear them?

21 A. The soldiers wore them so that -- as a sign of identification on

22 the front. At times they were yellow, at times they were red, and at

23 times they were white. And usually they would have them on their

24 shoulders, because all three sides had similar uniforms and on the front

25 it was very difficult to tell one soldier from the other.

1 Q. In July or in late July you were wounded and you were in a

2 hospital in Brcko and then the clinical setting in Belgrade. Is that

3 correct?

4 A. Yes, it is.

5 MR. PANTELIC: For the benefit of my learned friend, it's R15/1,

6 2, 3, and 4. This is a medical documentation that we have been -- that we

7 have provided to you.

8 I would like to tender it in evidence, the medical documentations

9 with regard to the episode that we just want to clarify.

10 MR. DI FAZIO: I have no objections, if Your Honours please.

11 JUDGE MUMBA: Very well. Can we have the numbers, pleas.

12 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

13 Q. Dr. Simic, look at this documentation. And since you are a

14 doctor, just a few words about what this is about.

15 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, it will be D60/1 and D60/1 ter.

16 Thank you.

17 A. This is a bullet wound in the upper right leg, a bullet which went

18 through the leg, with the obliteration of the blood vessels.

19 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

20 Q. You were treated in the medical centre in Samac first, then in

21 Brcko, and finally you were admitted into the clinical centre in

22 Belgrade. Is that correct?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. And when were you wounded?

25 A. Why, on the 23rd, 23rd of July.

1 Q. Which year?

2 A. 1992.

3 Q. And what were the circumstances of your wounding?

4 A. The circumstances were those of the self-inflicted wound.

5 Inadvertently, I wounded myself.

6 Q. So that is -- I mean, so that it was an accident. It just

7 happened by accident?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. How did it happen? What did you have -- what was the weapon that

10 wounded you and what happened to the weapon? Did it fall, or when it

11 fired by itself, what happened?

12 A. I was cleaning my pistol, and that is when it fired.

13 Q. And how long did your rehabilitation last altogether? I don't

14 mean only the period in the hospital, but also the post-operative one.

15 A. Well, it was three or four months, except that my condition did

16 not improve for a long time, that is, until the beginning of 1993.

17 Q. Were the major blood vessels in your leg injured?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. Thank you.

20 MR. PANTELIC: I would like to tender these exhibits into

21 evidence.

22 JUDGE LINDHOLM: I have a question here. When counsel asked how

23 did it happen, and so on, the answer was, "I was cleaning my pistol and

24 that is when it fired." I am an old officer in the Finnish army, and

25 pistols don't fire when you're cleaning them. So if you could clarify

1 this situation for us. Thank you.

2 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

3 Q. You heard His Honour Judge Lindholm's question. Will you give us

4 some more details about this.

5 A. Well, it is an outdated model of a TT pistol, Zastava pistol, and

6 it's bad properties that it fires off when it drops. And so I was

7 cleaning, and it fell, and so it went off, and that is how my leg was

8 wounded. These old Zastava pistols, not all Zastava pistols are like

9 that, but this was an older model of Zastava TT pistol. And when it

10 fell -- when they fall, they simply go off.

11 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Excuse me. I just have one question.

12 MR. PANTELIC: Yes.

13 JUDGE WILLIAMS: On the same issue.

14 In the English translation of the case history and medical

15 findings, the current illness of yourself in that case, Dr. Simic, is

16 listed as "war injury," not "self-inflicted injury." Presumably the

17 doctor wrote down what the doctor was told when you presented your case,

18 so I find this a little strange. I'm looking at page 3 of the English

19 translation, and at the bottom right-hand corner it's signed by Dr. Sego.

20 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, Your Honour. We shall clarify that. Of

21 course.

22 Q. [Interpretation] So as far as I understood, you could not take the

23 pistol apart, cleaning its parts. You were cleaning the outside of the

24 pistol, and it fell and went off.

25 A. I was cleaning it whole.

1 MR. PANTELIC: Does that satisfy your inquiry, Your Honour,

2 this -- these details?

3 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Yes. But that was the response to Judge

4 Lindholm's question.

5 MR. PANTELIC: Yes. And now I clarify that --

6 JUDGE WILLIAMS: My question was totally different.

7 MR. PANTELIC: Of course.

8 Q. [Interpretation] Now tell me, since your hospital documents say

9 that it was a war injury and that you had arrived from the war-affected

10 area, that is, in Brcko, would you please explain to us the mechanism.

11 How are these reports typed and on the basis of what information? Do they

12 include all the details and in view of the circumstances and all that?

13 Can you give us some more details? Because you're a doctor, after all.

14 A. I do not know why it says "war injury," but I had arrived with all

15 the other wounded from Brcko during the war. Brcko was the centre

16 hospital where all the wounded were brought from the front, and then

17 forwarded -- sent down to Belgrade, where the teams on duty would admit

18 them and then operate on them and look after them. There was no reason

19 for the word "war" to be put there because it was an injury that I had

20 inflicted on myself inadvertently. True, in the war-affected area, but I

21 had injured myself.

22 Q. So in that period afterwards you underwent certain

23 rehabilitation. Tell me, in the month of August 1992, were you in Odzak

24 in a house with a swimming pool where some of the members of the Samac

25 population were doing their work obligations inter alia a female witness

1 who testified before this Trial Chamber?

2 A. I was not at any swimming pool in Odzak, nor do I know where this

3 is, nor do I know of its existence at all.

4 Q. In September 1992 and upon the request of then-Colonel Simic, who

5 was military commander, did you discuss at the Crisis Staff the arrival of

6 volunteers from Serbia for the second time in that zone?

7 A. I did not attend such a meeting of the Crisis Staff. Actually, of

8 the War Presidency. At that time, there was no Crisis Staff.

9 Q. Are you aware of some letter of the War Presidency that was

10 addressed to this group of volunteers so that they would have a basis for

11 coming and joining the military operations taking place there at the time?

12 A. I cannot recall that we wrote any letter.

13 Q. Do you have any knowledge in respect of these volunteers

14 reappearing in the area in the autumn of 1992?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. We are going to move on to November 1992. During the proceedings,

17 the Prosecutor exhibited the letter of 13 signatories, as it is called

18 here. Tell me briefly, what circumstances were involved regarding the

19 writing of this letter, then relations between the military structures and

20 civilian authorities, and the possible resolution of these problems?

21 A. Could you please repeat this question for me.

22 Q. Are you aware of this letter that indicates certain omissions in

23 the work of the civilian authorities that was signed by 13 members of the

24 military, that is to say, officers and soldiers?

25 A. Yes. But we called that information.

1 Q. What do you know about this information and generally speaking

2 about the circumstances that are relevant to the creation of that

3 information?

4 A. The executive board said that they had obtained a document that is

5 confidential, secret, at the brigade command in Pelagicevo, on the

6 territory of the municipality of Pelagicevo, 40 kilometres away. This had

7 to do with the problems in the municipality of Samac as well. The

8 information had both positive and negative parts. That was our assessment

9 then. And the executive board proposed that the municipal parliament be

10 convened and that this information be presented before the municipal

11 parliament.

12 Q. Tell me, what were the positive and what were the negative

13 assessments regarding this information, if you recall?

14 A. The positive ones were that crime was being pointed out, and there

15 was crime, both in the area of the military and among the people

16 themselves. And this also indicated some omissions on the part of the

17 civilian authorities that indeed did take place. As for the negative, the

18 first document envisaged a struggle for power -- rather, the imposing of

19 military rule. Secondly, the territory of the municipality of Pelagicevo,

20 the municipality of Srpsko Orasje, the municipality of Samac, and the

21 municipality of Odzak were not clearly spelled out. It was written in

22 general terms and the problems varied from one municipality to the other.

23 We thought that the executive board of the Municipal Assembly of Samac and

24 the command of the brigade should overcome this problem through talks

25 between themselves, which indeed they did.

1 Q. [Microphone not activated]

2 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please. Microphone for

3 Mr. Pantelic.

4 JUDGE MUMBA: Microphone.

5 MR. PANTELIC: Yes. Yes. Sorry. I do apologise for -- to the

6 interpreters.

7 Q. [Interpretation] Was the corridor closed before the civilian

8 authorities found out about this information or afterwards? Can you

9 pinpoint this in terms of time?

10 A. I'm tired now, and I cannot exactly say.

11 Q. Tell me, you personally and the civilian authorities - I mean, the

12 Crisis Staff and the War Presidency and later, of course, the Municipal

13 Assembly of Samac - did you address the competent military authorities

14 with a view to preventing crime among the military? Did you inform them

15 about this? Did you make efforts to have this resolved? I'm talking

16 about the period when you held the civilian positions.

17 A. Yes, both in writing and orally.

18 MR. PANTELIC: Your Honour, I would like to tender into evidence a

19 document which is actually notice -- notice signed by the person in charge

20 for the forest company with regard to some -- some criminal incidents.

21 For the benefit of my learned friend, that's RH36.

22 Q. [Interpretation] You have a look at this document and we're going

23 to comment on it a bit. Did you have any contact with this document

24 previously? Do you know what this is about?

25 A. Yes.

1 Q. I understand that this document was created on the 30th of

2 January, 1993, by the company called PIK Samac and that somebody signed it

3 on behalf of director Stevan Tutnjevic. Is that correct?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. What is this document about?

6 A. This is unplanned and unrelenting cutting of woods in the

7 municipality of Samac and in the war zone, actually.

8 Q. Is there any mention as to how the members of the military units

9 behaved?

10 A. Well, yes. They behaved aggressively. They did not allow the

11 workers of the agricultural company to enter their estate, and this is a

12 reaction on the part of the leadership of the agricultural company towards

13 everybody regarding the unplanned cutting of trees.

14 Q. And who was this letter addressed to?

15 A. President of the executive board of the municipality of Samac,

16 president of the municipality of Samac, head of the Department of Economy

17 of the municipality of Samac, the Chief of Defence department of the

18 municipality of Samac, the head of the Public Security Station, the

19 military police, and their archives.

20 MR. PANTELIC: If there is no objection, Your Honour, I would like

21 to tender this document into evidence.

22 MR. DI FAZIO: No objection, if Your Honours please.

23 JUDGE MUMBA: Very well. Can we have the number.

24 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honours. It will be D61/1 and D61/1

25 ter. Thank you.

1 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

2 Q. Dr. Simic, during your term of office as president of the

3 municipal assembly and before that, did you report to some other

4 authorities on crime -- the occurrence of crime?

5 MR. PANTELIC: [Previous translation continues] ... The number of

6 this -- of next documents is RB10.

7 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Mr. Pantelic, you asked a question though, and

8 Dr. Simic didn't have the opportunity to answer before you introduced the

9 document.

10 MR. PANTELIC: Yes. That's just my --

11 Q. [Interpretation] Take a look at the document, Dr. Simic, see what

12 this is, and then we are going to discuss it.

13 MR. LAZAREVIC: Your Honours, if I may ask for one thing on behalf

14 of our client. I've been informed by them that they are -- when they look

15 at the ELMO, they just see English version of the document. And I believe

16 that there are enough versions in English for the Trial Chamber. So for

17 their benefit, it would be better to place a B/C/S version of the document

18 on the ELMO so they could understand what it's all about.

19 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreters note that they do not have copies

20 of the documents that Defence counsel present, so it is indispensable for

21 them to have copies, either on the ELMO or in the booths. Thank you.

22 JUDGE MUMBA: Mr. Pantelic, you've heard what the interpreters

23 have said.

24 MR. PANTELIC: Yes. I would --

25 JUDGE MUMBA: Vis-a-vis the suggestion by Mr. Lazarevic. So make

1 an effort to give copies to the interpreters in the booths.

2 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, I'll do that.

3 Q. [Interpretation] Are you familiar with this document?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. I see that it is number 16/93, but there is no date. If I am

6 right, if I am -- if we look at this number, when I say that this was

7 sometime around the beginning of 1993 --

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. What is this document about?

10 MR. DI FAZIO: Well, if Your Honours please, at this point --

11 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.

12 MR. DI FAZIO: If there's some magic in the number 16/93 that

13 enables us to ascertain that the letter was sent in early -- early 1993,

14 as Mr. Pantelic suggested to the witness, then perhaps we ought to know

15 what it is that indicates why it is that 16/93 must mean early 1993.

16 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, Your Honour.

17 Q. [Interpretation] So bearing in mind this number "16," and bearing

18 in mind the number of documents that were there during the sessions of the

19 municipal assembly, during their work, what can you conclude? Of course,

20 we cannot say precisely whether this 16 document was in April, May, or

21 September, but what do you infer when you say that it's the beginning of

22 1993?

23 A. Only one assembly had 1 to 30 items on the agenda, so this is a

24 small number, a number 16. And obviously, this is the beginning of 1993

25 because later on this number was much bigger.

1 Q. Further on your personal recollection with regard to this letter,

2 what can you do with it in terms of time?

3 A. This is when the Muslim and Croat armies were trying to cut off

4 that corridor. And every day they were launching operations. This is

5 about 4 or 5 kilometres away as the crow flies -- or rather, it is 4 or 5

6 kilometres as the crow flies that they tried to cut off, and they wanted

7 to leave the Serbs without any possibility of communication.

8 Q. Excuse me. I'm just asking you about time. I'm interested in the

9 time. 1993, at which time in 1993? Just that. Do you have any personal

10 recollections regarding this? I assume that you signed this document.

11 A. This is the winter of 1993.

12 Q. Thank you. Now, please tell us, did you discuss anything at

13 parliament or in commissions with regard to the phenomenon that you refer

14 to in this letter, and what happened after this letter?

15 A. This phenomenon was discussed as the municipal parliament because

16 this was a problem in practically all local communes. The problem was in

17 the following: Wherever the army was stationed, it left some damage.

18 There was looting, there was theft, and there was no end to this. And

19 every day brigades came and went. They changed their locations. They

20 changed their command posts, operative zones, and quite simply during the

21 war this was a constant problem, how to secure personal and social

22 property.

23 Q. Did you get any response from the military authorities regarding

24 the prevention of crime, lootings, and theft?

25 A. I received some response orally, as far as I can remember, some

1 promises that the military police in cooperation with the civilian police

2 will reinforce its activities aimed at preventing any kind of crime in the

3 territory of the municipality.

4 MR. PANTELIC: If there is no objection, could we have a number

5 for this document.

6 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.

7 MR. DI FAZIO: No objection.

8 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Can we have the numbers.

9 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honours. It will be D62/1 and D62/1

10 ter. Thank you.

11 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

12 Q. And one more question regarding this period of time: You've

13 mentioned this before, but perhaps you could give us some additional

14 information. What was the work of the Serb Assembly of the Municipality

15 of Samac like in 1992, towards the end? Did it function then?

16 A. Yes, it functioned throughout the time; however, it has had

17 regular sessions, since late 1992. And up until this day, its sessions

18 are usually held once a month or once every two months.

19 Q. When you spoke about difficulties at the medical centre and

20 problems relating to procuring sufficient equipment and supplies for

21 haemodialysis, I have an article here and I would like you to give your

22 comments.

23 MR. PANTELIC: [Previous translation continues] ... R30.

24 Q. [Interpretation] Do you remember this article in the papers?

25 A. Yes.

1 Q. Does it speak about the difficulties the medical centre in Samac

2 faced and the dialysis department?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. If we take a look at the second page, do you see there any

5 statements given by non-Serb residents of Samac?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. Could you please just read out the names mentioned here.

8 A. Munira Zaimovic, Ferida Arslanovic.

9 Q. What is their ethnic background?

10 A. They're Muslims. Danica Pacak is a Croat.

11 Q. Thank you.

12 MR. PANTELIC: Could we have the exhibit number for this, Your

13 Honour.

14 JUDGE MUMBA: No objection, I take it?

15 MR. DI FAZIO: No, if Your Honours please.

16 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.

17 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, it will be D63/1 and D63/1 ter.

18 Thank you.

19 MR. PANTELIC: In the meantime, I have a couple of copies for the

20 interpreters' unit. If you can pass these documents to them in order to

21 help them. On the top right-hand side, there is an internal number that

22 we are using here so that they can immediately localise it.

23 Q. [Interpretation] Now I would like to discuss with you the activity

24 of the Crisis Staff directed at securing everything that was necessary for

25 the agriculture. Were there such efforts made by the Crisis Staff and

1 executive organs?

2 A. Yes, those were regular activities of a municipal assembly which

3 every year would adopt the plan for harvesting and then there would be

4 implemented through the executive organs.

5 Q. Then I would like to know whether the War Presidency also was

6 involved in certain problems with utilities, infrastructure, and tried to

7 repair houses that were damaged by war activities so that residents could

8 live in them.

9 A. Yes. The War Presidency was involved in this; however, it was

10 always transferred to the executive organs.

11 MR. PANTELIC: [Previous translation continues] ... RH10. And

12 then I would like to have certain ...

13 MR. DI FAZIO: No objection, if Your Honours please.

14 JUDGE MUMBA: Very well. Can we have the documents and the

15 numbers.

16 THE REGISTRAR: It will be D64/1 and D64/1 ter, Your Honours.

17 Thank you.

18 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

19 Q. When was this decision adopted, the one before you now?

20 A. On the 6th of November, 1992.

21 Q. Did you sign it?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. What is this decision about? What was the objective, the

24 intention of the War Presidency when this conclusion was adopted?

25 A. The objective was to establish a public construction company that

1 would repair all buildings that had been destroyed due to war operations

2 in the territory of the entire municipality.

3 Q. Did this pertain to the entire population regardless of their

4 ethnicity?

5 A. Yes, to the entire population and the entire municipality.

6 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you, Ms. Usher. You can take these

7 documents.

8 Q. [Interpretation] Yesterday we spoke about certain activities of

9 the HDZ in the region.

10 JUDGE MUMBA: Let me ask for clarification. This document, the

11 second paragraph, it says, "We hereby instruct the executive committee."

12 Is this the executive committee of the War Presidency?

13 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, that's the executive committee of the

14 municipality but of Serbian Municipality of Bosanski Samac.

15 JUDGE MUMBA: Very well. Thank you.

16 MR. PANTELIC: That is my understanding, yes.

17 Q. [Interpretation] Yesterday we spoke about what you knew about

18 certain activities of the HDZ in Bosanska Posavina, and now I would like

19 you to take a look at this document and give us your comments if you can.

20 MR. PANTELIC: For the Defence, it's R7.

21 Q. [Interpretation] Dr. Simic, do you know Ivan Brizic, who signed

22 this document? Have you heard of him?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. Is the content of your document in conformity with what you know

25 about the intentions of the Croat people in Bosanska Posavina region?

1 A. Yes. I heard these stories and allegations from Mate Nujic and

2 another person who was a member of the Croat community in Bosanski Samac.

3 MR. PANTELIC: If there is no objection, I would like to tender

4 this document into evidence, Your Honour.

5 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please.

6 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Di Fazio.

7 MR. DI FAZIO: Sorry, would Your Honours just bear with me for a

8 moment, please. Thank you.

9 Thank you. If Your Honours please, no objection to the

10 introduction of this particular document. I wonder if Mr. Pantelic, who

11 has up until fairly recently been giving extra copies to us at the time

12 the document is introduced - in addition to the binder that he's already

13 provided - will be providing us with further documents in court, as you

14 were up until just recently?

15 MR. PANTELIC: [Microphone not activated] Yes.

16 MR. DI FAZIO: Thank you.

17 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Can we have the number, please.

18 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, it will be D65/1 and D65/1 ter.

19 Thank you.

20 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

21 Q. Dr. Simic, do you know who Iko Stanic is?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. Tell us something about this gentleman. Who is he? What is his

24 occupation?

25 A. I had information that he was from Derventa and that he was

1 president of the Croat Community of Bosanska Posavina.

2 MR. PANTELIC: I would like to discuss with the witness

3 document -- our internal number is R3.

4 Q. [Interpretation] As we can see, this document hasn't been signed.

5 It bears no stamp. It is what it is. The Defence was unable to obtain

6 another document apart from this one.

7 Now, please tell us what you know about the intentions and

8 objectives of the Croat Community of Bosanska Posavina and the territorial

9 scope of that community basically are in conformity with what is said here

10 in this document.

11 A. Mostly, yes.

12 Q. Can you tell us when was this document drafted? What is the date

13 in the upper left corner?

14 A. I believe it is the 12th of November, 1991.

15 MR. PANTELIC: Do you have any objections, Mr. Di Fazio?

16 MR. DI FAZIO: No objection.

17 MR. PANTELIC: I would like to have a number for this document.

18 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, can we have the number.

19 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, it will be D66/1 and D66/1 ter.

20 Thank you.

21 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

22 Q. Now, Dr. Simic, I have another document of the War Presidency

23 which is not of a particular relevance. It's a technical document.

24 However, it is important because of some topics that I want to bring up.

25 MR. PANTELIC: For the Defence, it's RH24. In fact, this is the

1 decision to appoint the secretary of the -- secretariat of Economic

2 Affairs on a municipal level.

3 Q. [Interpretation] I suppose, and you can correct me --

4 JUDGE LINDHOLM: Excuse me.

5 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, Your Honour.

6 JUDGE LINDHOLM: The document you handed over to us a moment ago

7 dated the 12th of November, 1991, and signed by Iko Stanic, what do you

8 intend to show by this document?

9 MR. PANTELIC: Yes. On the basis of the testimony of my client

10 here with regard to the establishment of Croatian Community of Bosnian

11 Posavina and especially with regard to the municipalities which should be

12 according to that plan should be included in this region, where you can

13 find also under the number 4, Bosanski Samac, it's just corroborative

14 evidence to the context in which certain events in Samac and in the region

15 were -- were cured at that time in 1991 and 1992, since the period and

16 time frame of the document is from October 1991 until the end of 1993. So

17 it's just a context. Yes.

18 Q. [Interpretation] Let's go back to this document. I suppose that

19 this is -- have you looked at it? You can see the heading and the stamp

20 and all that. You can see that it is a certain decision of the War

21 Presidency, isn't it?

22 A. It is.

23 Q. So please tell me, when was this decision taken, the one that you

24 have in front of you?

25 A. The 1st of August, 1992.

1 Q. Were you present at the War Presidency session then?

2 A. I wasn't.

3 Q. Who signed this decision?

4 A. I don't know.

5 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you. You can -- if there is no objections, I

6 would like to have -- to an exhibit number for this document, Your Honour.

7 MR. DI FAZIO: No, there is no objection. But perhaps if I might

8 adopt Judge Lindholm's question, what is the relevance of it? That's a

9 threshold that a document has to overcome before it's admissible. It's

10 got to be relevant. And apart from any other considerations -- and I

11 don't want the stand in the way of the Defence in producing documents if

12 they're important to their case. I don't want to do that at all. But for

13 the life of me, I just can't understand the significance of this.

14 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Because it seems the -- even the accused says

15 he wasn't the president then, he doesn't know who signed, so what is the

16 relevance --

17 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, Your Honour.

18 JUDGE MUMBA: And what can the accused say about this?

19 MR. PANTELIC: Absolutely. I will gladly explain that.

20 First of all, since this document was issued on the 1st of August,

21 1992, when my client was on the medical treatment, and since we have one

22 of the documents issued by a War Presidency for Mr. Stevan Todorovic, if

23 you remember, to travel on the session of republican parliament of

24 Republika Srpska, which was signed by the secretary of the War Presidency,

25 and since we are a layperson with regard to the handwriting analysis,

1 probably I will make certain comparisons and then expert will say whether

2 the document issued to Mr. Stevan Todorovic at that time, at the end of

3 July 1992, and this particular document, which was issued on the 1st of

4 August, bears actually same signature. So in -- in that way it might be

5 relevant.

6 And also it will show the way how certain documents in certain

7 institutions were signed. Whether it was strictly assigned to certain

8 person in his authority or in practice during the war operations and

9 during that time practically the other persons might be in a situation to

10 sign, on behalf of one institution, certain documents. But that's the

11 issue for the closing argument, of course.

12 JUDGE MUMBA: Very well. Let's have the numbers, then.

13 THE REGISTRAR: It will be D67/1 and D67/1 ter, Your Honours.

14 Thank you.

15 MR. PANTELIC: [Microphone not activated] The same applies to the

16 next document we would like to produce. This is RH13. This is also a

17 sort of decision to relieve the secretary of Secretariat for Economic

18 Affairs, also issued on the 1st of August. So it's the second document

19 which might be of importance for the topics that I just raised.

20 Q. [Interpretation] So my question is the same as with regard to the

21 previous document. We can agree that this document was adopted on the 1st

22 of August, 1992.

23 A. Yes, by the War Presidency. Yes.

24 Q. Were you present at that session?

25 A. No.

1 Q. And later on when you returned, did they inform you that these

2 documents had been passed?

3 A. By and large, no.

4 Q. Do you recognise the signature?

5 A. I don't.

6 MR. PANTELIC: If there is no objection, I would like to tender

7 this document into evidence, Your Honour.

8 MR. DI FAZIO: No objection.

9 MR. PANTELIC: Now I would like to discuss a payroll list of the

10 War Presidency of --

11 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Can we have the number, please.

12 MR. PANTELIC: Oh, sorry, Your Honour.

13 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honours. It will be D68/1 and D68/1

14 ter. Thank you.

15 MR. PANTELIC: Yes. Now I would like to discuss a document. It's

16 a -- it's a payroll list for War Presidency. RH18 is our internal

17 number. It's a payroll list for the month of July 1992.

18 Q. [Interpretation] Dr. Simic, we've already talked about the

19 contents of these payrolls, so there are no special questions here. All I

20 want you to do is to confirm for me if this is the payroll for July 1992.

21 A. It is.

22 Q. And on behalf of the War Presidency of the Municipality of

23 Bosanski Samac.

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. Thank you.

1 MR. PANTELIC: If there's no objections, I would like to tender

2 this document into evidence.

3 MR. DI FAZIO: No objection, if Your Honours please.

4 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Can we have the numbers.

5 THE REGISTRAR: It will be D69/1 and D69/1 ter, Your Honours.

6 Thank you.

7 MR. PANTELIC: I have another document. It's a pay list for the

8 month of November 1992, also for War Presidency.

9 Q. [Interpretation] Right. So, Dr. Simic, is this --

10 MR. PANTELIC: Sorry. RH16.

11 Q. [Interpretation] Yes. Is this the payroll for November 1992?

12 A. Yes, for some members of the War Presidency.

13 Q. And what about others?

14 A. Pursuant to the decree, the president, the vice-president, and

15 councilmen, who I suppose were on the payroll in other places.

16 Q. When you say "councilmen," you mean the councilmen in the

17 municipal assembly?

18 A. I do, yes.

19 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you. If there is no objection, I would like

20 to tender this document into evidence.

21 MR. DI FAZIO: There is no objection to the document being given

22 its -- being tendered into evidence, if Your Honours please. But again,

23 it's a question of making things clear.

24 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.

25 MR. DI FAZIO: To the Chamber. From the answers of the witness --

1 I gather from -- if you read the exchange between Mr. Pantelic and the

2 witness, that this document that we're just producing now contains only

3 some of the War Presidency members, because other War Presidency members

4 were being paid via their positions in the municipal assembly.

5 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.

6 MR. DI FAZIO: So these -- I take it that this salary list is not

7 exhaustive of -- of all the War Presidency members.

8 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.

9 MR. DI FAZIO: And if that's the case that's common to all of

10 these salaries, then we'd better -- we'd better know that, had we not?

11 Because --

12 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.

13 MR. DI FAZIO: The composition of the War Presidency is matter of

14 importance and it may affect --

15 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.

16 MR. DI FAZIO: -- Crisis Staff salary records as well. I raised

17 this issue yesterday, I believe, when I think the first payroll was

18 introduced. And I asked specifically if it was an exhaustive, complete

19 list of the Crisis Staff, because I think it related to Crisis Staff

20 documents, and the answer was that it did.

21 As the documents have come in, therefore, I've been under the

22 impression that -- and the Chamber may be under the same impression that I

23 am, is that these payroll lists show you the membership, and they may not.

24 And that's what I'm concerned about.

25 JUDGE MUMBA: Let's have the explanation from the accused on the

1 matters raised by the Prosecution.

2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] We introduced yesterday the payroll

3 of the Crisis Staff, and that was the final payroll list. That was

4 followed by the decree of the president of the republic saying that the

5 Crisis Staff were being disbanded and War Presidencies introduced instead,

6 and indeed informing members of the War Presidency. And it said that the

7 president and the vice-president of the municipal assembly - and that was

8 their decree that was tendered - then the president and vice-president of

9 the executive council and some councilmen from amongst the councilmen or

10 in the municipal assembly.

11 So specifically here we had Mr. Milan Babic, who was a councilmen

12 and subsequently president of the municipality of Pelagicevo, because at

13 that time already the municipality of Pelagicevo was about to split away.

14 So who is missing here is the president and vice-president of the

15 executive council who were on the payroll of the executive council, and

16 Milan Babic who was on the payroll of the municipality of Pelagicevo.

17 JUDGE MUMBA: Very well. We'll proceed.

18 Yes. Can we have the numbers first, please.

19 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honours. It's D70/1 and D70/1 ter.

20 Thank you.

21 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

22 Q. Something -- something because of the interpretation, something is

23 not indicated in the answer you gave us and which we have in the

24 transcript, so could you please repeat it for us. You mentioned that the

25 Prosecutor had tendered this decree in this case.

1 Will you please provide us with this information.

2 A. As far as I can remember, the Prosecution's exhibit -- I may be

3 wrong, but I don't think I am -- the Prosecution tendered the decree on

4 the establishment of War Presidencies, and that decree - can we get this

5 document - specifies who were members of the War Presidency.

6 Q. This, Dr. Simic, was merely --

7 A. In contrast with the Crisis Staff, which was -- which was in its

8 final shape according to that payroll.

9 Q. I asked you merely because of the transcript, because your words

10 were not faithfully put here when you said it, so that is why I had to ask

11 you. And as for the analysis of this document and all the rest, now this

12 is a legal matter and we shall come to that later on. We shall discuss it

13 when time comes for that.

14 MR. PANTELIC: Well, thank you, Your Honour. I think it's about

15 time for the break. In the next part, I will just go through certain

16 exhibits on the Prosecution list, certain decisions of the Crisis Staff

17 and War Presidency. Then my plan is to go through certain issues raised

18 by Mr. Stevan Todorovic as well of some of the other Prosecutor witnesses,

19 which I think that it will be a fairly brief process.

20 JUDGE MUMBA: So you're expecting to wind up today?

21 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, that's correct, Your Honour.

22 JUDGE MUMBA: Very well.

23 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please, as it's not quite 1.00,

24 might Mr. Re take this opportunity to produce some documents --

25 JUDGE MUMBA: We have --

1 MR. DI FAZIO: -- that arise from the document the other day of

2 the experts.

3 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.

4 MR. RE: Yes. Might I tender into evidence material arising from

5 the cross-examination of Professor Nikolic and Dr. Kecmanovic. I tender

6 the Badinter report opinions, that's the conference on Yugoslavia

7 arbitration committee's opinions 1, 2, 3, and 4 --

8 THE INTERPRETER: Could the counsel please speak up or come closer

9 to the microphone. The interpreters can barely hear him.

10 MR. RE: Excuse me for just a moment.

11 JUDGE MUMBA: Counsel, how many documents do you have?

12 MR. RE: I have four Badinter reports, three --

13 JUDGE MUMBA: It will take a bit of time, won't they? We have to

14 understand that the accused requires a break.

15 MR. RE: Of course.

16 MR. PANTELIC: And other matter, if you allow me, Your Honour:

17 We -- frankly, we were not in the situation - especially Defence for

18 Mr. Simic, Dr. Simic - were not able to physically check all these

19 documents. So I kindly ask a few days for us during the --

20 JUDGE MUMBA: To be able to look at them. All right.

21 MR. PANTELIC: So we can resolve that and then we will inform the

22 Trial Chamber accordingly.

23 JUDGE MUMBA: Very well.

24 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you.

25 JUDGE MUMBA: We shall adjourn for lunch and we will resume our

1 proceedings at 14.30 hours.

2 --- Luncheon recess taken at 1.01 p.m.

3 --- On resuming at 2.40 p.m.

4 JUDGE MUMBA: The Trial Chamber has been informed that the

5 Prosecution wish to raise a procedural matter before we continue with

6 examination-in-chief.

7 MR. RE: That's quite correct, Your Honour.

8 Before we continue, the Prosecution has a matter which it must

9 raise and place on the record before the Trial Chamber concerning Rule 68

10 and disclosure under the Rules of Procedure and Evidence.

11 It has come to the Prosecution's attention today that it is not in

12 a position to confidently say that it has provided all material which may

13 be exculpatory under Rule 68 to the three accused. I raise the matter now

14 after Mr. Simic has -- Dr. Simic has started giving his evidence because

15 it may affect the evidence or the defence which he may be running in his

16 case.

17 The Prosecution can say that it did an all-system search of all

18 the material it has in its collection in 1998. The search has to be

19 updated and it has to be updated properly to pick up all possible

20 exculpatory material. It has then to be reviewed by Prosecution lawyers

21 before material can be turned over to the Defence. The Prosecution has --

22 one moment.

23 During the course of the trial, the Prosecution has disclosed

24 material in relation to each of the witnesses that it called and is

25 confident that that material has produced everything under Rule 68. The

1 Prosecution has also done searches, name searches of the three accused,

2 the three present accused. One of them is ready; that's Dr. Blagoje

3 Simic. It has produced some seven volumes. We got it over the last day

4 or couple of days. The Prosecution has not yet had a chance to review the

5 material, to assess it, to translate -- draft translate any material

6 there, and to turn over anything potentially exculpatory to the accused

7 Dr. Simic before he completes his examination-in-chief.

8 The remaining two searches on the other two accused, I'm informed

9 today as of lunchtime, will be available by close of business Tuesday.

10 The all-systems search, which is across all of the Prosecution's

11 some-3 million document, searching for all relevant search criteria in

12 this case which may impact upon the Defence of the accused and may

13 potentially - we don't know - produce exculpatory material, I'm told as of

14 lunchtime today, will take 100 personnel person days to complete.

15 The acting Prosecutor has made a decision to put a team on to this

16 straight away to try and accomplish this task as soon as possible, but

17 with past experience and the pressure on the OTP's information support

18 unit system, it could take several months to complete the all-system

19 search of everything relevant in this particular case.

20 We have discussed this. We had a meeting with the Defence

21 counsel; it came to our attention today. We brought this to the attention

22 of the Defence counsel immediately at lunchtime. The search has to be

23 done and it has to be done properly. We have copies of the search

24 criteria which we are providing to Defence counsel as to the search which

25 was done before. We will, with Defence counsel's assistance -- we

1 discussed this with them over lunch -- put in any term which is they

2 consider to be relevant to their Defence, thus maybe producing more

3 material, potentially relevant material.

4 So the Prosecution at this point can only say we have -- we don't

5 know whether there is additional material there. There may be; there may

6 not be.

7 The impact on the case at the moment as we see it is that in

8 paragraphs 11 and 12 of the indictment, the three accused charged jointly

9 in relation to a common purpose, it would appear that -- I can say that at

10 the moment this is -- it's hypothetical as to what may well be produced.

11 We just don't know. But we are extremely anxious to ensure that this is

12 done properly and the trial does not proceed in a way -- in any way which

13 would be unfair to the three accused.

14 The Prosecution also say that when the original searches were

15 done, the Prosecution did not know what the potential defence was going to

16 be, so the original search criteria was obviously different to what it

17 would be today at the close of the Prosecution case and the beginning of

18 the Defence case. And we add it's only been since, I think, November last

19 year that an all-system search could have been possible, and there have

20 been extreme pressures on the Prosecution searching system, especially

21 with the Milosevic trial in recent times.

22 It would appear that there are several alternatives available as

23 to what we can do in this situation: The Defence have indicated they

24 would seek an adjournment to seek instructions as to where they go from

25 here. And at this stage I raise the matter so that the Defence and Trial

1 Chamber are aware that at this stage, at least, we cannot confidently say

2 that we've provided everything under Rule 68.

3 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please, there's just one further

4 matter that I wish to add to that. Mr. Re omitted to mention that the

5 process hasn't been static. It didn't come to a halt. It's been

6 ongoing. I know for a fact that the former Prosecutor in this matter,

7 Ms. Paterson, was engaged in disclosure, the exercise of disclosure of

8 Rule 68 material to the Defence. She was engaged in that when I first

9 arrived, and that was the beginning of 2001. And of course that procedure

10 was ongoing last year with Ms. Reidy tending to disclosure and searching

11 for any exculpatory material throughout her period of time here at the

12 OTP, as indeed were Mr. Weiner and myself. So the situation is nowhere

13 near as alarming as you may think at first. It's really the -- this last

14 search that Mr. Re mentioned that is of -- of crucial interest, the

15 ultimate search, the all-system search, and of course the searches for

16 the -- other searches for the individual defendants that he mentioned.

17 But I just wanted to stress that it's been ongoing and continuous whilst

18 the matter was in the hands of Ms. Paterson and also last year.

19 JUDGE MUMBA: And this is on an indictment which has been with the

20 Prosecution since 1995.

21 MR. DI FAZIO: Well, I don't know the precise date of the

22 indictment, but I believe it goes back to the mid-1990s, if Your Honour --

23 JUDGE MUMBA: And if the search has been ongoing, why hasn't the

24 Trial Chamber been informed, especially at the close of the Prosecution

25 case, why wasn't the Trial Chamber informed that you are not yet -- you

1 have not yet completed Rule 86 obligation -- Rule 68 obligations? Because

2 there was no notice to the Trial Chamber.

3 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes. Well, I was under the impression that the

4 searches had been properly conducted and complete. This --

5 JUDGE MUMBA: No. Because the submission has been --

6 MR. DI FAZIO: Sorry, I --

7 JUDGE MUMBA: The --

8 MR. DI FAZIO: Properly conducted and ongoing.

9 JUDGE MUMBA: It started about November last year.

10 MR. DI FAZIO: I'm sorry?

11 JUDGE MUMBA: That the search system started about November last

12 year.

13 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes. Well, perhaps Mr. Re can address you on

14 that. I don't know what this all-system search is and when it came into

15 evening. Mr. Lay might be able to answer you on that.

16 JUDGE MUMBA: Very well.

17 MR. DI FAZIO: Might I be able to confer with my colleagues. I

18 might be able to answer your inquiry more precisely.

19 [Prosecution counsel confer]

20 [Trial Chamber confers]

21 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Re.

22 MR. RE: There are two different types of searches we're talk

23 about here. As Mr. Di Fazio correctly addressed you on, Your Honours, the

24 searches he was referring to are witness searches. They are

25 witness-specific searches relating to the witnesses who gave evidence in

1 this case.

2 The trial team did searches of particular indexes which the

3 Prosecution has to search for exculpatory material and handed that over on

4 an ongoing basis to the Defence teams. That relates to the witnesses who

5 were called in this case. It was an all-systems search as well. There

6 were two searches done. The search I'm talking about is an all-systems

7 search of the entire Prosecution collections, and there's a number of

8 collections which have been added since 1998 which haven't been searched,

9 and those are the ones which will pick up things other than just the

10 defendants' names. It's a search of all varying criteria of keyword which

11 may come up in the case, like "4th Detachment," the "Cafe AS," or

12 whatever. There's a lot of different things which may turn up in

13 different indexes which have not been systematically searched; that's the

14 difference. Of course material was handed over on an ongoing basis during

15 the trial. That is why the Prosecution cannot confidently say that it has

16 uncovered and reviewed all potentially exculpatory material on an

17 all-system search.

18 Does that assist, Your Honour?

19 JUDGE MUMBA: Very well. Yes.

20 [Trial Chamber confers]

21 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. As a result of what the Prosecution have said,

22 the Trial Chamber's decision is that we'll go ahead with the

23 examination-in-chief of Blagoje Simic, up to the questions that

24 Mr. Pantelic had prepared. We shall not close the examination-in-chief,

25 and then we will hear the Defence.

1 MR. PANTELIC: Well, Your Honour, if I may address the Court.

2 Unlike for the Prosecution, it is very alarming issue for the Defence. I

3 will just give you one example --

4 JUDGE MUMBA: Mr. Pantelic.

5 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, Your Honour.

6 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. I haven't yet given you an opportunity to

7 answer. I simply said just wind up your questions. You won't close the

8 examination-in-chief and then the Defence -- because all the three are

9 affected. Then the Defence will put whatever points they want to put on

10 record and then the Trial Chamber will consider that before we proceed.

11 MR. PANTELIC: I understand, Your Honour. But I don't know in

12 which part I can cut my examination-in-chief, because the line of

13 questioning might be related to the issue that it was just raised with the

14 Prosecution. If there is something of importance for the Defence, then

15 maybe I will not follow certain line of questioning. So I'm a little bit

16 confused now how I can fulfil my obligation as Defence counsel.

17 JUDGE MUMBA: No, no. The point is you started yesterday.

18 MR. PANTELIC: Yes.

19 JUDGE MUMBA: So just complete it as you prepared it.

20 MR. PANTELIC: Yes.

21 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. And then whatever -- whatever documents the

22 Prosecution are talking about are given to you, you'll be able to address

23 the Chamber. So -- with the other three accused.

24 Because the point is the -- what the Prosecution have raised may

25 have far-reaching effects than we can immediately see right now. Yes. So

1 the Trial Chamber doesn't want to stop the proceedings. Complete your

2 questions. The examination-in-chief will not be closed, and thereafter

3 all the Defence counsels will be able to address the Chamber on this

4 issue.

5 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, I understand, Your Honour. But I have another

6 problem: First of all, I need at least half an hour to discuss this new

7 issue with my client, and then we need at least 15 minutes just to consult

8 among the Defence, because it may affect the Defence case and also the

9 trial by itself, because --

10 JUDGE MUMBA: No, Mr. Pantelic. I don't think you understand what

11 I'm saying. You are not going to close your case.

12 MR. PANTELIC: I understand that, Your Honour.

13 JUDGE MUMBA: Okay.

14 MR. PANTELIC: I understand it.

15 JUDGE MUMBA: Can you get instructions from the Trial Chamber?

16 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, of course.

17 JUDGE MUMBA: Complete your examination-in-chief. We won't close

18 it. And then we'll deal with this issue. Because it affects the whole

19 Defence case.

20 MR. PANTELIC: And in particular this examination-in-chief also.

21 JUDGE MUMBA: Anyway, just go ahead and complete the questions you

22 had prepared and then we'll deal with this matter.

23 Yes. I have to explain to the accused person that the Trial

24 Chamber has taken note of what the Prosecution have said. Of course the

25 accused person may not understand it completely. Time will be given to

1 the counsel and all the accused persons to be able to resolve this matter

2 in the best way possible. All the Trial Chamber is trying to do is just

3 complete the questioning that you had prepared.

4 MR. PANTELIC: I would like to discuss with Dr. Simic some of the

5 Prosecutor's exhibits already tendered into the evidence. Could I have

6 the assistance of Mr. Usher and the registrar. It is Exhibit P25.

7 Q. [Interpretation] Dr. Simic, a few questions regarding this

8 document.

9 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Excuse me. I think we have the same problem as

10 before. For Mr. Tadic and Mr. Zaric, we should have the B/C/S version on

11 the ELMO.

12 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, Your Honour. I think that would be the best

13 solution.

14 Q. [Interpretation] Doctor, could you put the Serbian version on the

15 ELMO and then you can see it either there on the ELMO or on the screen in

16 front of you.

17 Please tell me, please, who drafted the text of this decision?

18 A. The executive council of the Municipal Assembly of Samac.

19 Q. What was the objective of this decision?

20 A. The objective was to fund the erection of a monument to fallen

21 soldiers.

22 Q. Were there any specific criteria set as to who and under what

23 conditions can use money from this fund?

24 A. Well, it is set out in this decision. I can't comment on that.

25 Q. And this financial assistance, did it apply to the families of

1 fallen soldiers solely from Samac municipality or any other one as well?

2 A. It applied to all the soldiers who were killed while serving in

3 the Army of Republika Srpska, regardless of where they were from.

4 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you, Mr. Usher. I've finished with this

5 exhibit.

6 Now I would like to discuss Exhibit P49. Please put it on the

7 ELMO.

8 Q. Is this a form that was used in the Crisis Staff by the Crisis

9 Staff for these purposes?

10 A. I don't know.

11 Q. Is this your signature here?

12 A. It isn't.

13 Q. Do you know that on behalf of the Crisis Staff the Zastava 101

14 vehicle was temporarily confiscated from Delic Dragan, who was its owner?

15 A. I don't know about that.

16 Q. Was this confiscation of a vehicle ever discussed at the Crisis

17 Staff sessions?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. How was it discussed?

20 A. It was said that all kinds of requisitions which take place during

21 the war are the sole responsibility of the Ministry of Defence and that

22 nobody else was authorised to do that.

23 Q. Were there any cases of abuse in these matters where certain

24 individuals carried out requisitions without the knowledge of the Crisis

25 Staff?

1 A. Well, I believe that this is one of such cases of abuse, although

2 I cannot confirm that this document is authentic. However, soon

3 thereafter this stamp was put out of use and a new stamp was introduced.

4 And once the Crisis Staff ceased to exist, then this stamp wasn't valid

5 any more.

6 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please, just a matter of lack of

7 clarity in the evidence again.

8 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.

9 MR. DI FAZIO: A question was asked if this particular

10 confiscation was discussed at the Crisis Staff, and the witness said yes,

11 it was. Mr. Pantelic asked how was it discussed. And then the witness

12 said that all kinds of requisitions which took place during the war were

13 the responsibility of the Ministry of Defence. I understood his answer to

14 mean that this particular requisition, the one mentioned in P49, was

15 discussed. Now, if so, Mr. Pantelic should follow that up and make it

16 clear for the Chamber.

17 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Pantelic. You have understood what the

18 Prosecution is talking about.

19 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

20 Q. Dr. Simic, was this particular case of requisition of a vehicle,

21 of Zastava 101 owned by Dragan Delic, was this particular requisition

22 order discussed at the Crisis Staff session?

23 A. This particular order was not discussed at the Crisis Staff

24 session.

25 MR. PANTELIC: Yes. Thank you, Mr. Usher. Now I would like to

1 discuss the Exhibit P71.

2 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Excuse me, I have a supplemental question to that

3 of the one just posed by Mr. Di Fazio.

4 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, Your Honour.

5 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Because -- on page 72, line 15 Dr. Simic says,

6 "Well, I believe that this is one of such cases of abuse," which from a

7 logical grammatical construction seems to refer back to this document in

8 question, to this particular requisition. So this is a little bit

9 unclear, what we have here on the record at the moment.

10 MR. PANTELIC: Okay. I'll clarify that.

11 Q. [Interpretation] So we established here that you did not sign this

12 order. Is that right?

13 A. Yes, it is.

14 Q. We have also established that this order was not discussed at the

15 Crisis Staff session.

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. That this phenomenon of requisition was discussed at the Crisis

18 Staff sessions in general terms.

19 A. Yes, that's right.

20 Q. And that it had been concluded that this fell under the

21 responsibility of the municipal department of the Ministry of Defence,

22 that they were in charge of these matters in wartime.

23 A. It was concluded that it was solely within the scope of

24 responsibilities of the Ministry of Defence.

25 Q. And that you knew that there were individual cases of abuse of the

1 institution of the Crisis Staff and its stamp.

2 A. Yes. However, all such cases had to be reviewed by the Ministry

3 of Defence.

4 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Okay. Thank you.

5 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, Your Honour.

6 P71, please.

7 Q. [Interpretation] Have you ever seen this decision?

8 A. Here at the Tribunal within the materials presented here.

9 Q. Do you recognise the signature?

10 A. No.

11 Q. Were decisions of the Crisis Staff typed by such a typewriter with

12 this kind of letters?

13 A. No.

14 Q. What alphabet was used?

15 A. Cyrillic alphabet, whereas this is a Latin one.

16 Q. Did you ever discuss this document with Stevan Todorovic and this

17 phenomenon described in this document, namely, the isolation of Croats?

18 A. No, I never discussed this document with Stevan Todorovic.

19 Q. Have you ever met with Stevan Todorovic in the premises of my

20 office in Belgrade?

21 A. No.

22 Q. How many times have you met with me before you surrendered to the

23 Tribunal, The Hague Tribunal? Do you remember?

24 A. Two or three times.

25 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Excuse me. Mr. Pantelic --

1 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, Your Honour.

2 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Could you explain perhaps what the relevance of

3 your question is to has Dr. Simic met with Stevan Todorovic in the

4 premises of your office in Belgrade. What does it mean? What relevance

5 does it have?

6 MR. PANTELIC: Yeah, because Mr. Todorovic said before this Trial

7 Chamber that on one occasion he discussed that matter and that specific

8 document with Dr. Simic in my office, so it's a question of clarification

9 of the evidence that was produced here.

10 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Okay. Thank you. Thank you for refreshing my

11 memory.

12 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

13 Q. And my last question: In mid-May in 1992, were members of Croat

14 nation, citizens of Croat ethnicity in Bosanski Samac, placed in vital

15 facilities in town?

16 A. No.

17 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you, Mr. Usher.

18 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Excuse me again, Mr. Pantelic.

19 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, Your Honour.

20 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Again for the sake of clarification, what do you

21 mean when you say "placed in vital facilities in town"?

22 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

23 Q. Would you have in mind under the term "vital facilities," and I

24 don't mean pertaining to this decision. But generally, what do you have

25 in mind under that term?

1 A. Waterworks, hospital, police [as interpreted], power supply

2 company --

3 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Thank you.

4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- silos.

5 MR. LAZAREVIC: Your Honours, I have to object to the transcript.

6 I have --

7 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.

8 MR. LAZAREVIC: I haven't heard that Mr. Simic said "police," and

9 I see that it is in transcript.

10 MR. PANTELIC: I will clarify that, Your Honour.

11 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.

12 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

13 Q. Since there is a problem with the transcript, you didn't say

14 "police;" however, that's recorded here. On the other hand, you did say

15 "silo," and that wasn't recorded here. So let's repeat it again. What do

16 you understand by "vital facilities in town"?

17 A. Waterworks or the central building of the water supply company,

18 electric power supply company, and by this I mean transmission station,

19 silo, hospital.

20 MR. PANTELIC: Now it's clear in the transcript.

21 Could we have Exhibit P72, please.

22 Q. [Interpretation] As you can see this, this is a decision on

23 establishing War Presidencies in municipalities during -- when there is an

24 immediate threat of war or an emergency, dated 8th of June. And let us

25 now take a look at Article 2 and establish whether the answer that you

1 gave us this morning had to do with this.

2 A. The War Presidency consists of the republic deputy, and as a rule

3 president of the municipal assembly or his deputy, or rather,

4 vice-president, president of the executive council or his deputy, or

5 vice-president or a citizen who is an assemblyman. This is what I meant

6 when I said today that the membership of the War Presidency is regulated

7 by this decision.

8 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you. Can we have Exhibit P73, please.

9 Q. [Interpretation] Please tell me what was the objective of this

10 decision.

11 A. I don't know.

12 Q. Did the War Presidency -- although, you've already answered

13 this -- but tell us, please, was -- pursuant to this decree, was the War

14 Presidency or its composition changed in Bosanski Samac?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. Is this your signature down here?

17 A. No.

18 Q. Do you know perhaps whose signature it is?

19 A. No.

20 MR. PANTELIC: Yes. Thank you, Mr. Usher.

21 Please, P74.

22 Q. [Interpretation] Do you remember this decision?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. What was the motive for passing this decision?

25 A. An improvement in nutrition of soldiers and an appeal to the

1 command of the brigade.

2 Q. Is this unit, special battalion, which is mentioned in this

3 decision, did it exist within the brigade?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. If you know, please tell us how many soldiers were there in this

6 special battalion and who were these soldiers.

7 A. I don't know exactly. There were several hundred soldiers.

8 Q. Where were these soldiers from?

9 A. From the territory of Samac municipality as well as Pelagicevo and

10 Srpsko Orasje municipalities and Odzak.

11 Q. So that means those were local residents, weren't there?

12 A. Yes. To a degree, yes.

13 Q. Were there non-Serbs there as well? Do you know about that?

14 A. I believe that there were.

15 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you, Mr. Usher.

16 P75, please.

17 Q. [Interpretation] Do you recall this document?

18 A. I do.

19 Q. Did you sign it?

20 A. Most probably, yes.

21 Q. And who prepared the text of the document?

22 A. The executive council of the municipal assembly.

23 Q. And what was the purpose behind this letter?

24 A. Economic linkage, economic ties between the two municipalities.

25 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you, Mr. Usher.

1 P76, please.

2 Q. [Interpretation] Do you recall this document?

3 A. I do.

4 Q. And what was the purpose, or rather, the objective and the

5 backdrop against which this document was passed?

6 A. To allow the executive council to draw the money from the budget

7 and buy identical uniforms for the strike battalion at the request of the

8 brigade command.

9 Q. Is that that same battalion of several hundred men, locals from

10 the area?

11 A. Yes.

12 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, thank you, Mr. Usher.

13 Please, P77.

14 Q. [Interpretation] Are you familiar with this document?

15 A. From this Tribunal's records.

16 Q. Did the Crisis Staff take this order?

17 A. No.

18 Q. Is there a signature on this document?

19 A. There isn't.

20 Q. What type of letters do we have in this document?

21 A. These are Latin characters.

22 Q. Have you perhaps heard during the past period who could have

23 been -- who could be the author of this document? Do you have any

24 information?

25 A. I can only make guesses.

1 Q. And what would your suggestion be?

2 A. Witness Stevan Todorovic.

3 MR. PANTELIC: [Previous translation continues] ... P78.

4 Q. [Interpretation] Have you seen this document before?

5 A. No, until I saw the records of this Tribunal.

6 Q. And have you seen any documents with a seal like this one, earlier

7 in your work?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. And is it the institution indicated on the stamp, SAO Semberija

10 and Majevica?

11 A. Yes.

12 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you, Mr. Usher.

13 Could we have now P81, please.

14 Q. [Interpretation] Before we make comments about this document, SAO

15 north of Bosnia, as you told us yesterday, was never in working order. It

16 never really came to be.

17 A. As far as I know, that's so.

18 Q. And at approximately what time did the municipality -- the Serb

19 municipality of Bosanski Samac join SAO Semberija and Majevica?

20 A. In the early days of combat operations in Samac.

21 Q. Will you please cast a look at the document. Have you seen it

22 before?

23 A. I have.

24 Q. Who prepared it?

25 A. The executive council.

1 Q. Yes, please.

2 A. The executive council of the municipal assembly.

3 Q. And what was the purpose behind this disposition?

4 A. Milos Bogdanovic's proposal to recruit somebody from the

5 municipality into this service. So the Ministry of Defence's proposal to

6 recruit somebody, to bring something into this service.

7 Q. Was that in conformity with law, to pass such a disposition on

8 behalf of the Crisis Staff?

9 A. No.

10 Q. And how long did this disposition last?

11 A. Seven days -- three to seven days.

12 Q. How many did you say?

13 A. Three to seven days.

14 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you.

15 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please, I'm -- and I say this

16 knowing that I can clarify matters myself in cross-examination.

17 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.

18 MR. DI FAZIO: But the sooner clarified, the better, I submit.

19 I'm not entirely sure what Mr. Pantelic -- what the witness means

20 by the use of the word "disposition." And if it means the appointment of

21 Simo Zaric -- sorry, if somebody brought -- yes. There's a reference to

22 this disposition lasting seven -- three to seven days. We should surely

23 have some idea or understanding what caused the end of this disposition,

24 whatever disposition might be. It's just not clear to me. And when you

25 come to read the transcript, you might wonder what precisely it means.

1 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. I think the witness can explain that.

2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Because the administrative agencies

3 [Realtime transcript read in error word "agent"] concluded that this paper

4 was not in conformity with law. It was sent back for redrafting, and we

5 withdrew it and stopped it. That is, we declared it invalid. We vacated

6 it.

7 JUDGE MUMBA: Is that clear, Mr. --

8 MR. DI FAZIO: It's clearer, yes. Thank you.

9 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

10 Q. Once again, please, will you repeat your answer because in the

11 transcript in English it says "agents," and that -- could then be

12 associated with police services. But you said "administration," so will

13 you please repeat your answer once again.

14 A. Administrative [Realtime transcript read in error word

15 "admonitive"] agencies compared it with the existing laws and decided that

16 this document was not in conformity with law. So they returned it for

17 redrafting and the Crisis Staff decided to vacate it.

18 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Excuse me, Mr. Pantelic, again on the same note

19 for clarity, I take it on line 15 of the transcript, what I think I heard

20 in the translation was Dr. Simic said "administrative agencies." We have

21 "admonitive agent" at the moment.

22 Administrative agencies. Is that the right word?

23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

24 MR. PANTELIC: Yes. I think that -- that was the issue for the

25 court recorder. So probably in -- but I am very grateful for your

1 intervention, Your Honour. Of course. Thank you.

2 Now, could we have P88, please.

3 Q. [Interpretation] Are you familiar with this order?

4 A. I am.

5 Q. And who issued it?

6 A. The executive council.

7 Q. When you read it, is there anything illegal in it? Is there

8 anything wrongful with it? And what is its purpose? And please pay

9 attention in particular and comment on item 3, if you can. Specifically,

10 was the purpose of this order to engage in plunder or to prevent plunder?

11 A. The purpose of this order was to prevent plunder.

12 Q. Is this your signature here?

13 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Excuse me, Mr. Pantelic.

14 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, Your Honour.

15 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Excuse me, Mr. Pantelic. This is just a question

16 now of the type style. I thought we heard a few minutes ago that the

17 Cyrillic alphabet was used and not the Latin alphabet in documents

18 produced post-April 1992. Now, here, if my eyes don't deceive me, we have

19 the Latin alphabet.

20 MR. PANTELIC: That's absolutely correct.

21 JUDGE WILLIAMS: So could you explain how come -- or rather,

22 Dr. Simic explain how come this document is using the Latin alphabet.

23 MR. PANTELIC: Because, Your Honour, I must draw your attention on

24 page 86, line 6, where the author -- actually the institution of this

25 document was mentioned. That is the executive board or the executive

1 council. So that was my understanding, but I will clarify that if you --

2 JUDGE WILLIAMS: No, I understand that was the case. But -- so

3 the executive board used the Latin alphabet, whereas the Crisis Staff used

4 the Cyrillic alphabet. Is that the case?

5 MR. PANTELIC: I will ask the question.

6 Q. [Interpretation] If you remember, first, did the technical

7 services draft and type these documents by and large?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. And again by and large, did the executive council use prevalently

10 Cyrillic or Latin, and what about the Crisis Staff, and what about some

11 other agencies, if, that is, you have any knowledge about that?

12 A. We did not have enough Cyrillic typewriters, so those that existed

13 were used by the Crisis Staff in the early days, because the earlier state

14 did not have Cyrillic typewriters in the administrative agency. They were

15 all Latin alphabet. And this, I think, is a computer printout. And so

16 the Latin alphabet was used for a while until they also managed to procure

17 Cyrillic typewriters.

18 Q. My next question: So you in the Crisis Staff did not discuss this

19 order, yes or no?

20 A. No.

21 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you, Mr. Usher.

22 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please, again --

23 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.

24 MR. DI FAZIO: Let me preface my remark with again, I know it's a

25 matter I can go to in cross-examination. But you're hearing evidence from

1 the witness now and now is a good time for him to make his evidence

2 clear. This is said to be an executive council document -- executive

3 board -- executive council document, not a Crisis Staff document. We're

4 looking at P88.

5 MR. PANTELIC: That's correct.

6 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes. It says -- unless I'm looking at the wrong

7 document. I don't understand. It says "Crisis Staff," at the bottom,

8 "Crisis Staff" at the top," nothing on it about the executive board. I

9 just wanted to make sure I was looking at the same document.

10 MR. PANTELIC: It's on the ELMO.

11 MR. DI FAZIO: I'm sorry.

12 MR. PANTELIC: ERN number 00 --

13 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes. I am looking at the right document. I'm not

14 mistaken. Perhaps a question might be asked as to what is it --

15 JUDGE MUMBA: You are saying that it shows "Crisis Staff" at the

16 top and "Crisis Staff" at the --

17 MR. DI FAZIO: It shows "Crisis Staff" from top to bottom, all

18 over. If there's something that the witness knows that he can tell us

19 that makes this an executive board document, then he should explain it to

20 the Judges, because that's the evidence. He says it's --

21 JUDGE MUMBA: Doctor -- yes.

22 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes.

23 JUDGE MUMBA: Dr. Simic, can you explain that, please.

24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, these are the very early days

25 of the war, when there is a lot of confusion in everything. So there was

1 confusion in the authorities as well, and later on it was defined and we

2 were physically separated several kilometres, I mean, the executive from

3 the legislative powers, from the executive power. And every order that

4 followed was increasingly precise, saying the executive council, the

5 executive council, and one knows what is are the decisions of the Crisis

6 Staff. And every decision of the Crisis Staff should also bear my

7 signature; that was common knowledge. But these are the very early days

8 and there was -- the very early days of the war and there was a lot of

9 confusion.

10 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

11 Q. And you say that practically this was done by the executive

12 council by using the name of the Crisis Staff?

13 A. Yes.

14 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you. Could we have P89, please.

15 Q. [Interpretation] Could you please give me your comments regarding

16 this document, whether this kind of decision was adopted at the Crisis

17 Staff.

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. Who prepared the text of this decision?

20 A. The executive council.

21 Q. What was the objective of this decision?

22 A. Introducing a state of emergency in the territory of the

23 municipality.

24 Q. For what reasons?

25 A. These are legal matters now, and I think it is all written here.

1 It is hard for me to comment on this.

2 Q. All right. Was Samac bombed by the Croat forces at that time?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Were there incursions by sabotage groups of the enemy army?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. Were there problems with electricity, water, et cetera?

7 A. Yes.

8 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Usher.

9 Please, P90.

10 In the meantime, Your Honour, what is our timing for today? In

11 4.15 or --

12 JUDGE MUMBA: 16.15.

13 MR. PANTELIC: 16.15. Thank you.

14 Q. [Interpretation] Are you aware of this decision?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. What was the basis for passing this decision?

17 A. The proposal of the Ministry of Defence, or rather, of the

18 executive council. And the primary objective was to prevent desertion.

19 Q. Tell me, did a higher institution -- I mean, higher than the

20 Municipality of Samac -- pass a similar decision?

21 A. The SAO Semberija and Majevica did too, but have soon this was

22 dealt with by the Ministry of the Interior and the Ministry of Defence.

23 Therefore, this soon became invalid, because republic enactments always

24 supersede municipal ones.

25 Q. But at that time were you duty-bound to respect the decisions of

1 the SAO Semberija and Majevica?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. Was the Crisis Staff ever in charge of issuing passes to the

4 civilian population for leaving the territory of the municipality of

5 Samac?

6 A. No.

7 Q. Who was in charge of that?

8 A. Passes were issued -- well, it depended on who they were for.

9 Soldiers from a brigade, civilians, the Ministry of Defence, or civilians

10 in the Ministry of the Interior.

11 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you, Mr. Usher.

12 Could we have P91.

13 Q. [Interpretation] Are you aware of this order?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. In the period of war operations the party SDS, did it carry out

16 its activities?

17 A. No.

18 Q. On the basis of what?

19 A. On the basis of the decree of the government of Republika Srpska,

20 that in times of imminent threat of war and in a state of war the activity

21 of political parties shall be frozen.

22 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you. Please, P92.

23 Q. [Interpretation] Are you aware of this decision?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. The meeting of the municipal parliament, can you remember in terms

1 of the date when this decision was passed when did the municipal

2 parliament meet approximately?

3 A. I don't understand your question.

4 Q. Looking at the date of this decision --

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. -- can you say after that date when was there a session of the

7 municipal parliament?

8 A. The next month in 1992, that is to say, December 1992.

9 Q. And this decision bears which date?

10 A. The 28th of November, 1992.

11 Q. What was the basic objective of this decision?

12 A. These premises were used by the Serb Democratic Party before the

13 war too; however, during the war the military entered this entire

14 building, particularly upstairs. There were many heavy weapons that were

15 brought up there because this was at the immediate front line. And when

16 fire was exchanged, this building was being destroyed day after day. In

17 this way, we didn't want the military to use it for war operations. We

18 wanted a bunker to be built in front of this building so that the building

19 would not be totally destroyed.

20 Q. Is that building on the banks of the Sava River?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. As the crow flies, how far away is the line where the enemy army

23 was?

24 A. 100 to 150 metres.

25 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you, Mr. Usher.

1 Please, P93.

2 Q. [Interpretation] Are you aware of this decision?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. What was the objective of passing this decision?

5 A. It is self-explanatory. The objective was to prevent the selling

6 of alcoholic beverages.

7 Q. Were there any incidents caused by alcohol at that time in Samac?

8 A. Almost every day there were incidents as a consequence of war

9 operations and also as a consequence of the extensive use of alcohol.

10 Also, there was alcohol that was of dubious quality.

11 Q. Was this directly related to the uncontrolled use of weapons as

12 well?

13 A. Inter alia that, too.

14 Q. Did this threaten the safety of the civilian population of Samac?

15 A. Yes.

16 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you, Mr. Usher.

17 P94, please.

18 Q. [Interpretation] Is this your signature on the document?

19 A. No.

20 Q. Are you aware of this document?

21 A. No.

22 Q. Can you comment on this document? Is this a certificate stating

23 that plunder can be carried out, or is the reason for this certificate

24 quite different? What is your understanding of this document?

25 A. I think that the document is self-explanatory, that there are

1 family ties involved.

2 Q. Do I understand this correctly, that this Simo Stojcevic from

3 Pelagicevo can go to the house of Andjelko Ljubic and take things --

4 Andjelko Ljubic's things, because that is actually the home of Simo

5 Stojcevic's parents. So that is private property.

6 A. That is what this document says.

7 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you, Mr. Usher.

8 Please, P95.

9 Q. [Interpretation] Are you aware of this decision?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. What was the objective of passing this decision?

12 A. For humanitarian aid to be centralised and equally distributed

13 among the local commune, because it would happen that certain local

14 communes would have continuous aid and others did not receive any aid

15 whatsoever.

16 Q. Who prepared this draft decision, the draft of this decision?

17 A. The executive council.

18 Q. I am asking you whether it was the staff of the executive council

19 or the executive council itself.

20 A. The staff, the professional staff of the executive council, but

21 under the control of the executive council.

22 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you, Mr. Usher.

23 Please could we have Exhibit P96.

24 Q. [Interpretation] Are you aware of this document?

25 A. Yes.

1 Q. What was the point of this document?

2 A. This document -- or rather, there is this same kind of document

3 that says "Slavko Nikolic." This is his son or his relative. Slavko

4 Nikolic lived in Samac, but originally he came from Serbia. He was a

5 member of the Crisis Staff of the town of Samac. So he felt the need and

6 he thought he could, because he originally came from Serbia, ensure or

7 provide some humanitarian aid.

8 Q. Slavoljub Nikolic and Vidoje Nikolic, were they ever involved

9 in -- in the organisation that supplied Samac with weapons?

10 A. I'm not aware of that.

11 Q. Were they involved in the organised sending of trained personnel

12 so that they would join the units of the Army of Republika Srpska?

13 A. I'm not aware of that.

14 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Usher.

15 Please, P97.

16 Q. [Interpretation] I assume this is the document that you referred

17 to, but in order to avoid any misunderstanding, you just said that he was

18 a member of the Crisis Staff of the town of Samac. Could you please

19 explain what that means in relation to the municipality.

20 A. Well, the town of Samac is a local commune. Every local commune

21 at that time had a Crisis Staff of its own.

22 Q. And what were the powers of these local Crisis Staffs, so to

23 speak?

24 A. Always related to the community itself, to public utilities, to

25 what related to the work of their assemblies and the executive councils of

1 their assemblies.

2 Q. You mean of the local communes?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. You said that, and it was not in the transcript, so I would like

5 it to be there.

6 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you. P98, please.

7 Q. [Interpretation] Are you aware of this document?

8 A. Yes.

9 MR. WEINER: Your Honour.

10 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.

11 MR. WEINER: Are we going to 4.15 today? Do you want to break now

12 and discuss that matter in relation to -- let the Defence counsel speak to

13 their clients now about that problem. Would it be better to break now as

14 opposed to breaking at 4.15 when the day is over, since he's going to

15 continue on with this witness anyway into tomorrow?

16 [Trial Chamber confers]

17 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. The Trial Chamber is of the view that we'll

18 break now, and we'll continue tomorrow.

19 MR. PANTELIC: And Your Honour, do I understand well that we can

20 confer with our clients now here at the premises of the Tribunal? That's

21 my understanding.

22 JUDGE MUMBA: Before they are taken to the Detention Unit.

23 MR. PANTELIC: Yes. Because the closing time at UN is quarter to

24 5.00, so technically it will not be possible to --

25 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Since the matter was raised rather abruptly,

1 yes, you'll be allowed to confer with your clients. And yes, since it's

2 examination-in-chief, so you're allowed to contact your client. You can

3 go ahead.

4 MR. PANTELIC: Limited to the issue -- the procedural issue that

5 is we raised. We are not discussing any --

6 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, that was raised by the Prosecution.

7 MR. PANTELIC: Yes. Thank you.

8 JUDGE MUMBA: The Court will adjourn until tomorrow morning at

9 9.30 hours.

10 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you.

11 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned

12 at 4.02 p.m., to be reconvened on Friday,

13 the 15th day of November, 2002, at 9.30 a.m.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25