1 Monday, 24 June, 2002
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 10.06 a.m.
5 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Good morning. Please be seated. May we please
6 hear the case.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning. This is Case Number IT-97-24-T, the
8 Prosecutor versus Milomir Stakic.
9 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: And the appearances for the Prosecutor.
10 MS. KORNER: Joanna Korner, assisted by Ruth Karper, case manager.
11 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Good morning. And Defence?
12 MR. LUKIC: Good morning, Your Honours, Branko Lukic,
13 Mr. John Ostojic, assisted by Mr. Danilo Cirkovic, for the Defence.
14 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Thank you. Due to the fact that we have, as I
15 mentioned last week, to continue as scheduled, I have to come back to
16 three points which have to be decided in the near future.
17 First of all, we still need to reflect on the question of
18 authenticity of some documents. We had already a list of documents, first
19 those carrying a signature by whomsoever, and the intention is by the
20 Chamber to order a graphological expertise by handwriting expert, and it
21 has to be considered and discussed in how far it can be helpful to have,
22 in addition, a forensic writing expert on the documents before us. Those
23 documents bearing no signature at all, here we have to find out whether or
24 not the documents before us are written by a typewriting machine or by a
25 printer and, without doubt, an expert can come to some conclusions whether
1 or not the documents were prepared by the same typewriting machine or by
2 the same printer when it was done by computer. So therefore, the question
3 is ripe, and as we sometimes already stated, this takes time. And
4 therefore, we invite the parties hereby to address this issue no later
5 than next Monday. Then the Chamber will decide.
6 Second, having had some experiences, to put it neutral, with the
7 calculation of the expected time for at least the examination-in-chief, we
8 would ask the OTP to prepare us -- to prepare for us a realistic
9 calculation of the expected time for examination-in-chief for all the
10 witnesses still to come, in order to have ourselves a realistic basis for
11 the schedule, the schedule that is necessary for September, October,
13 And, finally, the kind request goes to proofing notes and exhibit
14 numbers of the witness to come tomorrow.
15 MS. KORNER: If Your Honour means Charles McLeod, there are no
16 proofing notes. And can I tell Your Honour now, the only evidence I shall
17 be adducing from him will be the record of his conversation with the
18 accused, plus his conclusions at the end of his visit. And that is
19 based, I think Your Honours have already had the --
20 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Right. Then if there's nothing, then we
21 know. And the estimated time will be?
22 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, I would have said half an hour in chief,
23 but because of the reading of the document into the record, I'll allow an
24 hour. Can I just remind Your Honours, he has to leave tomorrow
1 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Yes, therefore my question: You start
2 immediately tomorrow, 9.00?
3 MS. KORNER: 9.00, yes.
4 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: And then examination-in-chief until?
5 MS. KORNER: At the latest, 10.00.
6 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: 10.00. Probably, we then can really finalise
7 until 12.00 or 1.00.
8 MS. KORNER: Can I just mention before the witness comes back one
9 matter, and that relates to the witness that Your Honours wanted to
10 require to attend for a videolink. He's the gentleman -- I can't
11 remember --
12 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: There are two.
13 MS. KORNER: Two, yes, but this is the one --
14 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Mr. --
15 MS. KORNER: I'm not sure that he's not protected.
16 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Yes. Therefore, I'll just stop and say (redacted) full
17 stop, (redacted). And a lady from a mixed marriage.
18 MS. KORNER: Exactly. Yes, it's the Witness G, Your Honour. What
19 we've discovered subsequently is that for him to attend at either Sarajevo
20 or Banja Luka for the videolink would require a five-hour one-way journey
21 for him in a car, in considerable heat as it now is in Bosnia. As Your
22 Honour knows, the reason that we asked for him to be Rule 92 is that he
23 has a heart condition, and we're wondering whether Your Honours might
24 reconsider in the light of that whether or not you still require him to
25 give evidence through videolink. That's all; we're just raising it.
1 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: As things have changed, probably we have to come
2 back to even third solutions. And what about the other witness to be
4 MS. KORNER: As far as I know, there's no real problem with the
5 other witness. We're starting to make arrangements for the videolink. We
6 were unaware at the time -- he, when he agreed to it, thought that it was
7 going to be in the place that he lives. And it can't be, we don't think.
8 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Yes. Good. Then may we start with the
9 cross-examination. And I wonder if it wouldn't be in the interest of all
10 the participants to continue with this witness until 11.40, and then have
11 a break of half an hour. This would allow us to proceed only with one
12 break this morning. Fine. Okay.
13 Then the witness may be brought in.
14 [The witness entered court]
15 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Good morning. Please be seated. As there was a
16 really prolonged weekend in between, I regard it as necessary to recall
17 that also the upcoming questions has to be answered in a way that you
18 don't run into any kind of problems as to the fact that you are still
19 under the solemn declaration.
20 Then, the examination --
21 MS. KORNER: I'm sorry, Your Honour, before you go on, Ms. Karper
22 has reminded me, in our discussions, I think we may have identified the
23 witness. I wonder if you could just order it to be redacted from the
24 transcript. He is the subject of protective measures.
25 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Yes. Probably there were two letters or even
1 three letters too many. They may please be redacted.
2 MS. KORNER: Thank you.
3 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: (redacted)
5 MS. KORNER: No, it is a problem. That's the problem. With the
6 initial, plus where he is. That's the problem.
7 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Thank you.
8 WITNESS: MEVLUDIN SEJMENOVIC [Resumed]
9 [Witness answered through interpreter]
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, before we continue,
11 would Your Honours allow me to address you, please. During the several
12 previous days during the trial here at the Tribunal, several documents
13 have been tendered into evidence bearing my name and surname: the
14 documents which were signed and stamped by Mr. Vojo Kupresanin, the
15 President of the Autonomous Region of Krajina. The documents in question
16 were actually photocopies, that is, the photocopies have been provided to
17 the Court. You asked about one of the documents, and she said that the
18 original was with me. At that moment, I did not -- could not remember it.
19 The Prosecutor probably had better information or could remember the
20 issue. I looked through the documents that I have and I've found the
21 original of the document. At that moment last week, I couldn't remember
22 the fact that I possessed the original. But in the meantime, I have
23 managed to find it and, Your Honours, I hereby would like to submit this
24 original to you so that you have it as part of your file. But I would
25 like to have a photocopy of this document.
1 I don't know what number it would be given in this case, but I
2 believe that the relevant authorities will decide on it. So I'm hereby
3 giving you the original document.
4 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, Your Honour, please.
5 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Could the usher, please, present it first to the
6 Defence. And could the registry please find out what was the document
8 110, 15, there in the neighbourhood. If it then could be shown to
9 us. I think the Prosecutor has seen the document? Not yet. Please.
10 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, we haven't. Obviously, we can't talk to
11 Mr. Sejmenovic, and we're not sure what document he's talking about at the
13 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Yes.
14 Can it be agreed that we take the document under the number we
15 have with an additional "-1," B-1, and may, please, the Prosecutor prepare
16 a photocopy, another photocopy, of this document for the witness before
17 us. Thank you.
18 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, can I just -- it's S153. Is Your Honour
19 asking us to take the original and make it a court exhibit?
20 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: The original --
21 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, Your Honour, please.
22 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Sorry. Thank you. The original as a court
23 exhibit, and then a photocopy to be provided as requested for the
25 MS. KORNER: If it becomes a court exhibit, I'm not sure how the
1 witness will ever get it back again. I don't think he will. It will just
2 be filed with the Court. And whether Your Honours having seen the
3 original require it --
4 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: My understanding was that the witness would
5 be -- I think it would be enough for him to have a photocopy only. This
6 was my understanding.
7 MS. KORNER: Perhaps you could just confirm that he understands
8 that, that he won't get the original back.
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. Because I heard
10 -- I understood that the original was necessary for the purposes of
11 credibility. So I am willing to give this document, the original one, to
12 the Court, and only keep a photocopy of it.
13 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Thank you.
14 MS. KORNER: Yes, Your Honour. I'm told, Your Honour, it's S153.
15 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: So this original document is then admitted into
16 evidence, if there is no objection, first of all.
17 MR. OSTOJIC: There is no objection, Your Honour, just that we
18 can't authenticate the signature, but I would like the opportunity to ask
19 the witness a couple questions on this very document before the original
20 is taken away for photocopying, if I may.
21 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Yes, of course. But not to forget, admitted
22 into evidence as S153 B-1. And then may the usher please give the
23 original once again to the witness before it's later on copied.
24 So I think now we can start.
25 MR. OSTOJIC: Thank you, and good morning, Your Honours.
1 Cross-examined by Mr. Ostojic: [Continued]
2 Q. Good morning, Mr. Sejmenovic.
3 A. Good morning.
4 Q. I'm going to ask you a series of questions today, but first I'd
5 like to, with respect to the exhibit that you've just tendered this
6 morning to us, ask you a couple of questions. So if the usher would be
7 kind enough to give you the original back.
8 A. Please do.
9 Q. Thank you. With respect to the document that's before you, can
10 you just generally identify the document, what is it and what is the date
11 that it bears on the document?
12 A. The document bears the date the 19th of August, 1992. The title
13 of the document, that is, the heading is: "The Serbian Republic, the
14 Assembly of the Autonomous Region of Krajina, Banja Luka." This is a copy
15 which was signed and stamped by the President of the Autonomous Region of
16 Krajina. The purpose of the document was to enable me to travel to the
17 centre of the Banja Luka town pursuant to an invitation of the relevant
18 authorities and to have the required interviews or conversations. So in
19 order for me to be able to pass through the military checkpoints, I was
20 given this document.
21 Q. Further, with respect to that document, to the best of your
22 opinion, does it bear an original signature or does it at the very least
23 have an original ink on it with respect to the signature?
24 A. This is an original, the original that I was personally given. It
25 was compiled and stamped in the office of the President of the Autonomous
1 Region of Krajina, and it was Mr. Kupresanin, the president of the region
2 himself, who gave this document to me. He was the one who signed the
3 document and stamped it. As for the ink or the colour of the pencil, I
4 don't know. I wasn't looking at it. But the document is authentic and
6 Q. I'm not debating that, with you, sir. But look at the ink. What
7 colour is the ink of the signature: blue, black, red?
8 A. The ink is blue.
9 Q. Right, right. And that blue ink also bears a blue stamp,
10 correct? And therefore it's your conclusion, because it has a original
11 signature with the original colour of the ink that's reflected on that
12 document with a stamp over that signature, to you, it's an original
13 document. Correct?
14 A. That's not the reason why I consider it to be an original. This
15 is an original because I was personally given this document by him. It
16 was impossible for him to give me a forgery at the time. He said: "I'm
17 now going to write a certificate for you which you will have to carry on
18 you when passing through the checkpoints." Several minutes later, the
19 certificate was written out. He signed it and stamped it, and he gave it
20 to me personally for my personal use.
21 Q. Can you share with us, Mr. Sejmenovic -- and I understand that.
22 My point is, can you share with us, when you were the deputy in the
23 chamber of the municipalities for the Prijedor Municipality, whether the
24 stamp would generally accompany the original signature? Do you know if it
25 would or not?
1 A. Sir, let me describe for you a general principle which I believe
2 is applicable in your country as well. If someone holds an office, then
3 it is usually the secretaries who type out various forms of documents for
4 that person. Chiefs of these offices are in charge of signing these
5 documents, and then placing a stamp on it. That is a perfectly normal
6 procedure in respect of the majority of documents.
7 Q. I couldn't agree with you more, Mr. Sejmenovic. So is it fair to
8 say, sir, that if a document has a photocopy of a signature but bears on
9 top of that an original stamp, it is less authentic, less credible, and
10 obviously not signed or stamped contemporaneously with the date that it
11 bears on the document, unlike this document which clearly has the original
12 stamp and the original signature? Correct?
13 A. Sir, I really don't know what you're talking about. I'm really
14 not competent to answer this type of questions. It really falls outside
15 my scope of interest. You're trying to argue the original character of
16 the document that I was given on the spot.
17 I will tell you once again how it happened. I was taken to the
18 office of Mr. Kupresanin. He said: "We are going to issue a certificate
19 in your name." He was the one who wrote the certificate. He signed it.
20 He stamped it. And it was with this document that I was taken to
21 Bosanska Vrbanja. So the certificate which I was personally given by him,
22 which he personally signed and stamped, constitute an original for me.
23 Q. Again, as I said, I don't debate that with you, nor am I arguing
24 with you. I agree with you. My point is, while you were a member of the
25 republic assembly, did you ever have an occasion to see a document that
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 had your signature, but a photocopy of that signature, and subsequently it
2 bore an original stamp in the blue ink that you see there? Have you ever
3 experienced that in the time that you were a member of the republic
5 A. Are you talking about the issue of authenticating originals? That
6 is, of authenticating photocopies of original documents?
7 Q. Why don't we move on to another subject? I think I've exhausted
8 your understanding of the original. And I just wanted for the record to
9 make clear that that document that we have, S153-1, actually bears a blue
10 ink signature and a blue ink stamp. In any event, thank you,
11 Mr. Sejmenovic.
12 A. You're welcome.
13 Q. If you could be kind enough to return that original to the usher.
14 Sir, at the end of the session last week Thursday, we started to
15 discuss arms, weapons, and armaments, and whether the SDA members
16 solicited funds and/or money to those arms for the Bosnian Muslims -- for
17 the Bosnian Muslim population in Prijedor before April of 1992. You
18 stated, if you remember, in the last five or so minutes of your testimony,
19 that in fact, "Bosnian Muslims in 1992 were able to purchase weapons from
20 a large number of Serbs, Serbs from Omarska, Serbs from Prijedor, and even
21 some Serbs from the barracks."
22 My question to you, sir: In addition to those persons that you've
23 identified, were the Bosnian Muslims prior to April and May of 1992 able
24 to purchase weapons from any Croats?
25 A. When answering your question, I wasn't talking about Bosnian
1 Muslims but about people who lived in Kozarac. What I know or, rather,
2 what I heard from people, because I'm not an eyewitness to any sale or
3 purchase of weapons, this was just hearsay that I heard. I heard that
4 some Serbs from Omarska were selling weapons and that one could buy
5 weapons from them. I also heard that similar things were happening in the
6 town of Prijedor and that even some people from the barracks were doing
7 this. I repeat, I was not an eyewitness to any such transaction, nor was
8 this fact ever debated in the party or in the Territorial Defence. This
9 is something we simply heard about and something that was done by
10 individuals, and the number of such cases was purely symbolic. I,
11 therefore, limit this to the area of Kozarac and Prijedor and to the
12 general sort of information I had about this. And this is all I can say
13 on that subject.
14 Q. So did they or did they not, the people from Kozarac or the people
15 from Prijedor, namely, the Bosnian Muslims, were they able to purchase
16 arms from Croats?
17 A. In the area of Kozarac, there were very, very few Croats, almost
18 none. There may have been a dozen families or so. The areas inhabited by
19 Croats were on the other end of the Prijedor Municipality, in the area of
20 Ljubija and on towards the mountains. What went on there, I don't know.
21 And this was never something we discussed officially. So I did not get
22 any information about this.
23 Q. So you did not have any first-hand or direct information and you
24 certainly didn't have any second-hand information in connection with the
25 purchase of arms by Bosnian Muslims in the Kozara area from any Croats.
2 A. Sir, the Croats in the municipality of Prijedor were in the same
3 situation as the Bosnian Muslims. They shared the same fate. Their
4 houses were burned and they were taken to camps just like the Bosniak
5 Muslims. When the Serbs took over power, the Croats did not share power,
6 so they had the same problem as the Muslims. And now you're asking us
7 whether we could rely on them because, according to you, they had weapons
8 and were even able to sell them. Let me repeat, we shared the same fate
9 because we were not Serbs and we were in the same situation as the rest of
10 the non-Serbian population. That is why I doubt your theory.
11 Q. It's not a theory, sir. So is your answer, no, the Bosnian
12 Muslims did not obtain arms or weapons from Croats?
13 A. I don't know that such a thing was possible.
14 Q. Thank you for your direct response.
15 With respect to the Kozara police department and police station,
16 prior to April of 1992, sir, was it comprised of mostly the residents in
17 the Kozarac area who were of the ethnic Muslim group?
18 A. It's possible that there were also members of other ethnic groups,
19 according to the proportion they had in the population. I can't tell you
20 exactly what the composition was because that wasn't something I was
21 interested in.
22 Q. Well, you told us in Kozarac there were very few, maybe ten or so
23 homes that were Croatian. Do you know of any of those Croats who were
24 members of the Kozarac police station or police department prior to May of
1 A. I told you that the number of Croats in the area of Kozarac was
2 some ten or so families. The numbers were not large. And let me repeat,
3 I do not know what the ethnic breakdown of the police force was. There
4 may have been some individuals who were not Bosniak Muslims but the
5 composition reflected the composition of the population. I know this
6 principle was respected until the last moment, of course, if the people so
7 wished. But I can't answer your question with any precision.
8 Q. Can you name one Serb who was a member of the Kozarac police
9 station prior to April of 1992?
10 A. I don't remember. It's possible that there were some, but I can't
11 remember any.
12 Q. Of the population in Kozarac, the area that we've talked about,
13 Kozarac, what was the percentage of Muslim residents, 97, 99 per cent?
14 A. The vast majority or the absolute majority. There was a small
15 percentage of others.
16 Q. Do you know how many people were members of this Kozarac police
17 force or police department in April or before April of 1992?
18 A. I don't know either before or after April. I don't know.
19 Q. From November 1990, sir, when you took office as a member of the
20 chamber of municipalities from Prijedor, did you have any idea of what the
21 number of members were in the Kozarac police force?
22 A. Sir, I don't know. Why would I know? What member of parliament
23 of a country knows how many policemen there are, not even in a
24 municipality but in a local commune, in the smallest unit of
25 self-government? How would I know? There were 40 or 36 such local
1 communes in Prijedor. How would I know how many policemen there were in
2 each? It was simply not the subject matter I dealt with. Had I been the
3 chief of police, I would probably have known this, but I wasn't so I don't
4 know. I don't know this information either before or during the war. It
5 was not part of my job and it was not one of the issues it was my duty to
6 deal with.
7 Q. Speaking of those duties, did the chief of police have to report
8 to you as a member of the republic assembly?
9 A. Formally and legally, no one in the municipality of Prijedor was
10 subordinate to me. My post was such that I could influence the bills or
11 the proposals for changing regulations at the republic level.
12 Q. Did you know how many reserve police officers were members of the
13 Kozarac police force prior to April of 1992?
14 A. I don't know. I don't have this information. Everything I said
15 in answer to your previous answer also refers to this question.
16 Q. And sir, with respect to that, I have a follow-up question,
17 unfortunately. That is, do you know, sir, how many weapons the members of
18 the police force, the regular members of the police force of the Kozarac
19 police department, as well as the reserve policemen, how many weapons did
20 they have prior to April of 1992?
21 A. I don't know, sir. I repeat: I don't know. Because I did not
22 analyse this information, nor was it my duty to deal with it. This was at
23 the local level, and you can ask the chief of police there that question.
24 Q. Thank you.
25 Sir, with respect to the issue of weapons, is it true that the
1 young men who were watching and who were on duty in the vicinity of your
2 home, which was near the sentry posts toward the railroad tracks, near the
3 fish ponds, was it true that, in fact, they had bottles of petrol with
4 rags in them, which as we commonly referred to as the Molotov cocktail,
5 and that they used those weapons as a defence mechanism on those
6 checkpoints right near your town? True or false?
7 A. No, that is an erroneous interpretation of information I gave
8 previously. I can repeat: I know about at least one case, and there may
9 have been many such cases. The case I know about, I can describe again in
10 detail and I can draw, I can make a sketch of the exact position where
11 that young man was. And of course, I think it's useful for me to say that
12 no one in the Trnopolje local commune in the Territorial Defence knew how
13 to make a Molotov cocktail. And this young man poured a litre of petrol
14 into a bottle from his car tank, and with this litre of petrol, he kept
15 guard at the place designated for him by the Territorial Defence in case
16 they were attacked, in case a tank came along. Then he would aim the
17 bottle of petrol at the tank.
18 I know that there were four persons on that spot, and not a single
19 one of them had any weapons. All they had was that bottle of petrol.
20 Q. Well, thank you for that clarification. But let me just, so that
21 we're clear on this point, direct your attention to your testimony on May
22 24th, 1996, page 928, specifically, lines 3 through 9, or 3 through 11 is
23 what I'm going to focus on. At that time, Mr. Sejmenovic, you gave
24 testimony and your answer is a little lengthy here, so I'm just going to
25 focus on that part. If the Court would like me to read the entire answer,
1 I can, but it's rather lengthy. I'd just like to focus on line 3.
2 On line 3, page 928 of your May 1996 testimony, you state, among
3 other things: "For instance, I remember that in the vicinity of the house
4 where I lived that several sentry posts towards the railway tracks and
5 fish farms, that was the direction from which we expected the infantry
6 attack might be launched. The sentries were lads, were young men, who
7 were not armed with anything. They did not have any rifles. Most of
8 them, not even those pistols. But they would have a bottle of petrol with
9 a rag in it, with a piece of cloth in it. And that was the only thing
10 they had with them to spend on duty, to spend on guard through the night.
11 They did not even know how to make it, what you call it, Molotov
12 cocktail. They simply poured the petrol from the car into bottles. That
13 was how they did it. There was simply no time, no weaponry, no skilled
14 people, professionals, army officers who could organise it,
16 Now, that testimony seems to indicate, at least to me, sir,
17 respectfully, that there was more than one person and that there was more
18 than one bottle which was filled with fuel or petrol which was used as a
19 weapon at this checkpoint near your home by the railway tracks near the
20 fish farms.
21 A. Allow me to respond to that. You said that, in my previous
22 statement, I said they made Molotov cocktails. I denied this because
23 there was simply no one who knew how to make such a thing.
24 Secondly, in response to your question, I told you I saw one
25 person with a bottle. I know there were several such persons, and I heard
1 that they were at several sentry posts who had to do this, but they did
2 not really know how to make home-made bombs. So I repeat, this is
3 correct, and I can repeat it again. But with my own eyes, I saw the son
4 of one of my neighbours holding this bottle.
5 Q. Thank you. In addition to the weapons that we discussed that are
6 reflected in the list of the TO mobilisation that we talked about
7 yesterday, and some of which we discussed today, you mentioned also last
8 Thursday the issue of blacksmiths. Isn't it true, sir, that immediately
9 before the war, you and your group contracted - not contacted but
10 contracted - a few, not just one, but a few blacksmiths in order to
11 manufacture weapons for the Muslim residents and people in the Kozara
13 A. It was not a contract of any kind. Simply, there were several
14 blacksmiths and people asked them whether any one of them knew how to make
15 a weapon, something that could be used with gunpowder. I heard about this
16 on the ground, not at an official meeting. I know that in the village of
17 Kamicani, there was a blacksmith whose name I think was Besim, and I know
18 he made several old-fashioned rifles or pistols, something that looks like
19 a pistol. I know that they tried to make weapons, and that hand-made
20 weapons were later confiscated by the Serbian authorities who later spoke
21 of the manufacture of weapons. But this was not organised. There were
22 not enough blacksmiths. This is a rather rare trade. There were few of
23 them left. I personally know of two blacksmiths on an area with 25.000
24 inhabitants. There may have been three or four of them, but not more. Of
25 the two I know, I know that one did not know how to make weapons, and he
1 simply didn't succeed in this. I think the other one, whose name I think
2 was Besim, although I'm not sure, managed to produce two or three weapons.
3 And people thought they could shoot out of those weapons if there was a
4 necessity to defend the village.
5 Q. And in addition to those blacksmiths, sir, in fact, there were
6 other people who did some metal processing, who also manufactured their
7 own weapons. Correct?
8 A. I don't know about that. I'm only telling you about what I know.
9 Q. Let me direct your attention to the testimony that you gave in the
10 trial on July 13th, 1998, specifically, page 503. Again, your answer is
11 somewhat lengthy at that time but I'll read the section starting on line 2
12 of page 503, if I may.
13 Thank you. Line 2, page 503: "Immediately before the war, since
14 there was no other solution available, we contracted a few blacksmiths.
15 We wanted them to make some kind of home-made pistols, guns, with metal
16 tubes, because people were afraid and there weren't enough weapons. And
17 that was a way for the people to try to obtain some kind of weapons to arm
18 themselves and to defend themselves. And we managed to produce some of
19 those guns, and some other people who did some metal processing, they also
20 manufactured their own weapons."
21 In 1998, sir, it seems that not only were blacksmiths contracted,
22 they produced weapons for the residents of Kozarac, but also individuals
23 who were in the metal processing expertise also produced weapons. Is it
24 your testimony today that the metal processing people that you mentioned
25 in 1998 did not manufacture their own guns?
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 A. You're talking of 1998? That's a mistake. We're talking of 1992.
2 Q. Pardon me for interrupting you. The reference to 1998 was your
3 testimony in the Kovacevic case which was in July of 1998.
4 A. Okay, okay. Yes, now I understand. I apologise. Let me
5 repeat: I knew of the blacksmith Besim in Kamicani who produced several
6 improvised weapons. That's the first thing.
7 Secondly, I know that some blacksmiths did not know how to do
8 this. For example, Meho Hodzic, who was a neighbourhood of mine and who
9 was a blacksmith, didn't know how to do this. I also heard that some
10 people who were not blacksmiths manufactured their own weapons, people who
11 were metal workers, who knew how to handle metal. I heard about this
12 also. And in the end, for the first time at this Tribunal, I saw lists of
13 weapons where I saw hand-made weapons listed. And then it became clear to
14 me that the information I had only heard but I had no personal knowledge
15 of this, I realised that some people who were not blacksmiths had managed
16 to produce weapons.
17 Let me repeat: Anyone who could find any means of preparing for
18 defence to prevent a massacre tried to do so, either by making a weapon or
19 using a bottle of petrol or improvising some sort of weapon. This was
20 simply a process of self-defence which took its course. We are speaking
21 of the period just before the war, when the Serbs had already taken over
22 power in Prijedor with the army and had reinforced their positions around
23 Kozarac, and people were trying to do what they could, without any
24 success. On the other side, you had the most up-to-date weapons and guns,
25 and on this side you had people with bottles of petrol and handmade guns
1 who were given the worst possible sort of ultimatum, and claims were being
2 made that they were armed to the teeth.
3 Let me summarise: The Territorial Defence, or rather the command
4 of the Territorial Defence in Kozarac, did not recruit blacksmiths or
5 metal workers. The Territorial Defence in Kozarac did its job. Certain
6 individuals tried to, at least, improvise a weapon if they could, by any
7 means. And let me repeat: I know of a specific case where a blacksmith
8 in Kamicani produced several weapons. I know some blacksmiths did not do
9 this. I know that some men managed to produce their own weapons. How? I
10 don't know. I assume that they knew how to work with metal or they
11 couldn't have done it. So they knew how to process metal.
12 Q. I think I understand your testimony. But can you just clarify
13 this for me, Mr. Sejmenovic: Were you a member of the command of the
14 Territorial Defence in Kozarac?
15 A. No.
16 Q. How do you know then, not being a member, not actively
17 participating in the Territorial Defence, not even, according to your
18 testimony, having any weapon or arm, how do you know, sir, if the command
19 of the Territorial Defence did or did not contact and contract these other
20 blacksmiths? How would you know?
21 A. Sir, I knew about the local Territorial Defence in my local
22 commune. I know all the important orders that arrived. So if this had
23 been the case, I would have said so. It's in my interest to tell the
24 truth, to say everything that happened. It's in all of our interest. I
25 know that in the village of Garibi, for example, a young man who was 19
1 years old managed to make a weapon by himself. And he thought it was a
2 weapon. He managed to put a bullet in it and to prepare it for use. He
3 was not a blacksmith. He was not a metal worker, but he managed to do it.
4 I also know that the local Territorial Defence had a blacksmith,
5 Meho Hodzic, but they never, ever said to him: "Meho, from now on you are
6 going to produce weapons." I would have known this if it had happened.
7 If they had received any such order, they would certainly have passed it
8 on to Mr. Meho Hodzic. So I am speaking of the local community where I
10 And finally people came to me and asked me: "Is there anyone who
11 knows how to make weapons? Why is the Territorial Defence not organising
12 something? We should try and do something." Therefore, as for the
13 command of the Territorial Defence, I don't know. But I know that they
14 issued orders to the local Territorial Defence units and that the local
15 unit never received such an order.
16 Q. Now, I know your testimony in connection with the Kozarac police
17 station and police department, both the regular police officers and the
18 reserve, that you do not know how many weapons they had prior to April of
19 1992. Do you know, sir, who the individual was who was in charge of that
20 police station prior to April 1992?
21 A. I don't know who it was. But I do know that there was a gentleman
22 called Osman who went to negotiate in Prijedor on behalf of the police
23 station. Whether he was a chief, he may have been, but I'm not sure. I
24 don't remember very well. Osman, who people called Osmaj [phoen],
25 usually, whether that was his post before, I don't know whether he was
1 formerly the chief of police. I don't know. He may have been. I can't
2 say with any certainty whether he was or was not. But I do know that he
3 went to Prijedor to talk with the Crisis Staff and the Serbian authorities
4 on behalf of the police. And I know that he never came back from those
6 Q. When were those negotiations in terms of a time reference? Was it
7 before or after April 30th, 1992?
8 A. It was just before the attack on Kozarac, perhaps a day before.
9 According to some information, he had already been to Prijedor once to
10 negotiate and come back. And then when he went there the second time, he
11 never came back, according to some information. But all I know for sure
12 is that he did go, and perhaps there are people who were still alive whom
13 you can ask about the details of these contacts as far as the police and
14 Territorial Defence are concerned.
15 Q. Let me ask you this, sir: From the time of November 1990 up until
16 April of 1992, when the late Mr. Cehajic was president of the Municipal
17 Assembly, did he have any competencies or rights to either control,
18 command, or punish members of the Kozarac police department, or direct
19 them as to where they should go, what they should be doing, and when they
20 should be doing it?
21 A. The president of the municipality who held the highest ranking
22 post in the municipality could contact the members of the municipal
23 government directly. He had the competency of replacing the president of
24 the municipal government. He also had the power to evaluate the work of
25 the ministers of the municipal government. Of course, his basic job was
1 legislative and he had to convene the assembly and take care that laws
2 were implemented. In cases of emergency - in cases of emergency, I
3 repeat - he became the chief of a body which was set up under emergency
4 situations, and it was called the National Defence Council. And then he
5 had the highest competencies and powers to rule directly, I think. Yes.
6 He had direct authority to influence the chiefs of particular services at
7 lower levels. That's what I know, and those are general facts. Anyone
8 who took any part in government would know that.
9 As for the actual legislation dealing with his competencies and
10 powers, well, you can have a look at those laws and legislation.
11 Q. And, quite frankly, I have. Do you, as you sit here, being a
12 member of the legislative republic assembly, recall specifically that
13 competencies as you've just alleged and asserted with respect to the local
14 president of the Municipal Assembly, is it your position that they exist
15 in writing or existed at that time?
16 A. As for the documents in writing, the competencies of the National
17 Defence Council were provided for in relevant documents, and it is the
18 president of the municipality who is, by virtue of his office, the chief
19 of that body. In accordance with pre-war laws which were very specific,
20 all of these functions were stipulated and detailed. But I cannot tell
21 you much about how it actually functioned.
22 Q. Do you know if the National Defence Council existed while the time
23 Mr. Cehajic was president of the Municipal Assembly?
24 A. I am not sure. I think that it was on these -- the insistence of
25 the Yugoslav People's Army, that is, Mr. Arsic in particular, and the SDS,
1 as far as I can recall, that talks were conducted and that the body --
2 that this body was established. At least, attempts were made to establish
3 such a body. Whether any sessions were held and how many, whether
4 anything was discussed and what, I don't know. I don't know because I was
5 not a member of this council.
6 Q. Do you know who the members of the council were?
7 A. By virtue of their offices, as far as I can remember, the members
8 of the council were the president of the municipality, the president of
9 the municipal government, the minister, that is, the chief of police,
10 chief of Territorial Defence as well, I believe, a representative of the
11 military if it happened to be located in the area, that is, the JNA, and
12 possibly someone else. I would probably need some time to think and I
13 will be able to give you a more precise answer.
14 Q. Thank you. With respect to your participation and membership in
15 the republic assembly as a member of the chamber of municipalities in
16 Prijedor, can you tell us or describe for us the hierarchial structure of
17 the various police stations that existed in the Prijedor municipality from
18 November of 1990 through April of 1992?
19 A. I know very little about it, I must admit. I know that there was
20 a Ministry of the Interior which existed at the level of the state, that
21 the person in charge was the Minister of the Interior, who reported to the
22 Prime Minister, the president of the government, or to the assembly or the
23 Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina upon their invitation. His
24 department, that is, the Ministry of the Interior, was organised in such a
25 way that it had regional police centres and local police centres, that is,
1 at the level of the municipalities.
2 And even further below, at the level of larger local communes or
3 associations of local communes, that would be the general structure of
4 this ministry, and that's what I know about. But as for the details, I
5 really cannot tell you much. Also, practically speaking, I did not have a
6 duty to analyse these structures in depth. I also know that it was
7 divided into the sector of public security and the sector or department of
8 state security, and the traffic department, that is, the traffic safety
9 sector, the traffic control. I don't know what exactly this department
10 was called. The traffic police, probably.
11 Q. For purposes of clarity, when you mention on line 9 of today's
12 transcript, "Ministry of the Interior which existed at the level of the
13 state," that would be, in your mind, the republic level or the federal
15 A. I am referring to the republic level.
16 Q. When you say that the person in charge was the Minister of the
17 Interior who reported to the prime minister, the prime minister of the
18 republic level, correct?
19 A. Yes. He reported to the prime minister at the level of the
20 republic. We had the corresponding type of structure and authority at the
21 local level, as far as local competencies are concerned. The minister of
22 the interior -- yes, please.
23 Q. When you say the Minister of the Interior was in this hierarchical
24 structure that you described, he also responded or was obligated to report
25 to the president of the government, again, you mean the president or the
1 government of Bosnia and Herzegovina and not the president of any local
2 government of the 109 municipalities, correct? It was that he reported
3 to, solely and exclusively, to the president of Bosnia and Herzegovina,
5 A. The Minister of the Interior of Bosnia and Herzegovina is a member
6 of the government of Bosnia and Herzegovina. As such, he is directly
7 subordinated to the prime minister. And I repeat: If necessary, or if
8 invited to do so, he was also obliged to report to the assembly of Bosnia
9 and Herzegovina or the presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and also to
10 inform the presidency and the assembly of BH about his activities.
11 As for the local level, local problems and the local level of
12 police functioning, a very similar structure and very similar hierarchical
13 relations existed, that is the chief of police was directly responsible to
14 the president of the Executive Board, but he was also obligated to report
15 to the president of the municipality on his activities, which was done in
16 practice, at least in respect of major issues that he was supposed to deal
17 with. Again, if need arose, or if invited, he would also report to the
18 Municipal Assembly on his activities. I'm telling you about this general
19 insight that I have in this structure.
20 As for the legal specificities of the issue, I do not feel
21 competent to speak about.
22 Q. And due -- is it your testimony that there is some document or
23 statute which establishes this local hierarchy that you just described at
24 the municipal level? Is that your position?
25 A. Once again, I don't know. I am not able to speak about statutory
1 regulations. I'm telling you about the practice which could be observed
2 in every municipality. A parallel structure existed at the local
3 municipal level and at the republic level. You can ask me hundreds of
4 questions regarding the relevant statutory provisions but I really do not
5 feel competent to tell you about it.
6 MR. OSTOJIC: One moment, please.
7 [Defence counsel confer]
8 MR. OSTOJIC:
9 Q. So the gentleman Hasan Talundzic, do you know him, correct? Or
10 you knew him, correct?
11 A. I knew Hasan Talundzic.
12 Q. Was he obligated, at least according to you, to report to both
13 Mr. Cehajic and Dr. Kovacevic from the period of November 1990 to April
15 A. Once again, the direct --
16 Q. Yes or no, was he obligated according to your testimony just
17 now --
18 A. I don't know. I don't know.
19 Q. Let me try to change the subject for a moment, sir, if you permit
20 me. Do you know a gentleman by the name of Evledin Rizvanovic?
21 A. I know the person by the name Evledin Rizvan, a gentleman from
22 Prijedor, from the Puharska neighbourhood.
23 Q. We're talking about the same individual. I have it as
24 "Rizvanovic" but nevertheless, was this gentleman you're referring to a
25 member of the Crisis Staff on or about April and May of 1992?
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 A. First of all, I do not know that a Kozarac Crisis Staff was ever
2 established, at least formally speaking. Second, I know the person by the
3 name of Evledin Risvan from Puharska. I don't know a person by that name
4 as a resident of Kozarac, no.
5 Q. Do you know, sir, a person by the name of Ismet Kurtovic?
6 A. No.
7 Q. Do you know a gentleman by the name of Esad Alisic, who was a
8 reserve captain and who purportedly was involved in arming the Muslims in
9 the Kozara area in 1992?
10 A. Sorry, what did you say his name was?
11 Q. Esad Alisic.
12 A. I think I've heard the name and the surname, but I don't know the
13 person by the name of Esad Alisic. There's quite a few individuals by the
14 surname of Alisic. It sounds like a name of a Prijedor or Kozarac
16 Q. Do you know a gentleman or person by the name of Jusuf Ramic, who
17 was chief of the Crisis Staff from April 25th, 1992, and commander of the
18 regional Territorial Defence headquarters from the 21st of May, 1992? Do
19 you know that person?
20 A. No.
21 Q. Let me, with the Court's permission, show you a document that
22 we're going to ask be marked as the next Defence exhibit.
23 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Provisional D12.
24 MR. OSTOJIC: If I can have the usher tender the first copy,
25 because it has some markings on it, to the OTP, and then the balance, one
1 to the witness and then to the Court, please. Just so the record is
2 clear, this was included in our May 2002 binder, just so that when we go
3 back to retrieve it, we'll remember where to look for it. Thank you, Your
5 MS. KORNER: May I just mention, Your Honours, this was disclosed
6 to the Defence. And if Your Honours look at the first page of the English
7 translation, which it's not even a translation, it's a summary, it
8 contains a translator's note. Your Honour, it has got nothing to do with
9 the document. It was an internal note. It shouldn't have been disclosed
10 in that form, but it has been disclosed, but it has nothing whatsoever to
11 do with the document.
12 MR. OSTOJIC: I most definitely disagree with counsel on this
13 point. It's clear why they object to the translator's note, but I think
14 it defies logic why the entire document of in excess of 250 pages was not
15 translated in the English language, why we only received excerpts of that
16 document, and I would like, if permitted, to ask this witness what his
17 thoughts are on that document, specifically since the OTP's very own
18 translator believes that the main value with this document lies in the
19 description of how the Muslim Territorial Defence was organised.
20 Respectfully for the Court, I see it says "TO" on the English
21 trans, but that's "obrana" for "defence." I think that's what it means.
22 In addition, there are some concrete issues within the summary that we
23 have that I would like to ask this witness, having been in the Kozarac
24 area and specifically knowing some of these individuals, and I think that
25 we can and should be permitted to put this document to the witness and
1 obtain his position or opinion on it.
2 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, I'm not objecting to that. I'm not
3 objecting to -- I'm merely pointing out that the translator's note is
4 internal, is personal. I don't know who the translator was. And
5 therefore, it can't be, as it were, taken as a statement of fact or
6 whatever. So Mr. Ostojic is perfectly able to put the summary if he wants
7 to, to the witness, but the translator's note is not of any evidential
8 value, we submit.
9 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Unfortunately, we have to live with this, as it
10 is normally international custom, a translated document should bear the
11 signature of the translator and stamp. But here, we have additional
12 translator's notice, and that is open also for our French speaking
13 colleagues, it reads: "This is an account of personal experience,
14 detailed and thorough, but does not contain many facts. There are very
15 few dates in the text. I think that the main value lies in the
16 description of how the Muslim TO was organised. The statement seems
17 unbiased and is equally critical of Muslims and Serbs. It is not clear
18 what is hearsay and what the witness experienced." And then a line, and
19 then "instruction for use," and I don't know whether here already starts
20 the document, but probably the witness can tell us on the basis of the
21 document before him.
22 THE INTERPRETER: If there are no copies for the interpreters, can
23 the original be -- or the translation be placed on the ELMO, please.
24 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Does the Defence have another copy for the
1 MR. OSTOJIC: Regretfully, we don't. And the original transcript,
2 just so that we have a clear record, of the document that we're referring
3 to was received by us, I believe, on this past Saturday. And if I can
4 just enter the ERN number, which starts with 00798786 and proceeds
5 approximately 237 pages and ends at 00799030.
6 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: My understanding is that you want to tender only
7 the pages we have available in B/C/S ending with page 184. This is the
8 ERN number 977 at the end. Right?
9 MR. OSTOJIC: At this time, yes, Your Honour.
10 MS. KORNER: Can I just ask --
11 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Unfortunately, we can't see the first page.
12 MR. OSTOJIC: I received the document in the very manner in which
13 I photocopied it. So I have the document which was subsequently provided
14 to us, which has the first page which I believe accurately is translated,
15 which is the first page of our document bearing the ERN number L0001604.
16 And I'd be happy to tender that to the Court for its review.
17 MS. KORNER: Can I just ask, the copy I have been given has all
18 sorts of markings on the translation. Why is that? Do Your Honours have
19 markings? I've got highlight, I've got sort of names being in square
20 brackets around them.
21 MR. OSTOJIC: I hope that the Court doesn't have that.
22 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: We, too, have, and with great interest follow
24 MS. KORNER: Yes, that's not how it was disclosed.
25 MR. OSTOJIC: Those are my markings. If I can withdraw that and
1 make the appropriate copy. It was my understanding that we copied the
2 unmarked version, Your Honour. So I apologise for that.
3 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Apparently, it's only names and, yeah, okay.
4 But once again, we have to concentrate. The document never can be the
5 translation. The document can only be the B/C/S document, and apparently
6 the beginning of page 13 it starts, and there is a blanket on the top of
7 the page. Then it continues until page 16, continues with 20, 77, 110,
8 184. So it's just a compilation of several pages.
9 MR. OSTOJIC: Correct, Your Honour.
10 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Okay.
11 MR. OSTOJIC: If I may proceed, since we have approximately ten
12 minutes, maybe we could get through this document.
13 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Yes, of course.
14 MR. OSTOJIC: If I can use this document, understanding the
16 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: No problem.
17 MR. OSTOJIC: Thank you.
18 Q. Sir, it states on this document, I believe, that
19 Evledin Rizvanovic, the individual that you know, as you've told us it
20 states here, according to Mr. Jusuf Ramic, that he was a criminal, pushed
21 forward by the SDA. Being a member of the SDA, do you know if: (a) Mr.
22 Rizvanovici was a criminal; and why was he pushed forward by the SDA?
23 A. Let me ask you -- let me answer with two elements in response to
24 your question. First of all, it was not my job to establish who criminals
25 were. Second, at the time the party was developing at the local level and
1 at the time of the creation of other political parties, generally
2 speaking, a number of people took up certain positions, certain functions,
3 which was a perfectly natural process at that time. So neither myself nor
4 the president of the initiative committee dealt with criminal records of
5 various individuals. We knew that we should not allow for a well-known
6 criminal, and in respect of whom we had relevant information, to become
7 appointed or elected to a specific position. The SDA had several thousand
8 of members at that time. We were trying to establish it without the
9 assistance of the relevant social structures at the time, and we had no
10 way of checking everything. So these things normally happened at that
12 The work of the people was a voluntary one, and it was the case
13 with other parties as well, such as the SDS or HDZ. Only those
14 individuals in respect of whom it was evident that they had criminal
15 record were prevented from running for certain functions. Later on, when
16 it was discovered that some of them -- that certain individuals were --
17 had criminal record, then steps were taken to remove that person
18 from office. I didn't know anything about Mr. Rizvanovic at the time, if
19 he had a criminal record and if -- well, if that's what you state on the
20 basis of this document, then I can just say no.
21 Q. Do you know if Ismet Kurtovic was in charge of acquiring weapons
22 for the Muslims in the period of April and May of 1992?
23 A. I know only about a musician whose name was Ismet Kurtovic. He
24 was a member of the well-known pop band. He lives in Croatia now. As for
25 Ismet Kurtovic from Prijedor, I don't know anything about that person. I
1 don't remember that name, at least at this moment. I will think about it
2 during the break. But I'm sure that I would have known if he had been of
3 any significance in this context.
4 Q. Is there any reason that you know of as to why Mr. Ramic would put
5 down in a 235-plus page report that Ismet Kurtovic was in charge of
6 acquiring weapons for Muslims, why you would think that would be incorrect
7 since you don't know the individual?
8 MS. KORNER: I'm sorry, Your Honour. How can he answer that
9 question? He has already said he doesn't know Mr. Ramic. How can he know
10 whether or not what was in the mind of Mr. Ramic?
11 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Sustained.
12 MR. OSTOJIC:
13 Q. Let me ask you this, sir: In this report by Mr. Ramic --
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, with your permission,
15 I would like to answer this question.
16 MR. OSTOJIC: Thank you, Mr. Sejmenovic. No, I'm kidding, Your
18 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Please.
19 MR. OSTOJIC: I'll move on, Your Honour.
20 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: But please take care that you -- you are here as
21 a witness, and not -- it's indeed not a guessing game. But please
23 MR. OSTOJIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
24 Q. Sir, immediately below where Ismet Kurtovic's name appears on page
25 4 of the English transcript, it says specifically: "Provocation by
1 Muslims organised by the SDA." Do you, sir, have any information or
2 knowledge whatsoever what the provocation was and who at the SDA organised
4 A. Generally speaking, sir, let me try to answer the four previous
5 questions. You're asking me about an individual whom I do not know. Had
6 this person been important in this whole process, I would have surely
7 known him. Further, this individual makes mention of a number of other
8 persons whom I had never met. I do not know about the individuals you
9 have just named. While you were talking to Their Honours, I took the
10 opportunity of going through this document and reading the portions of the
11 document. I fully respect the right of the gentleman by the name of
12 Jusuf Ramic to have certain opinions and impressions, however the document
13 here contains some very stupid, preposterous things. He is identifying
14 some 98 intellectuals as members of the party. He's also speaking about
15 the internal boundaries of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina at that
16 time or, as it is stated here, the official of the SDA in Prijedor and the
17 one in Bihac had quarrelled before the war as to the centre of the canton,
18 whether it would be in Prijedor or in Bihac. I mean, this is complete
20 I merely wish to emphasise that you are bringing me in a very
21 difficult moral situation. You're asking me to state my opinion about the
22 individuals whom I do not know, and to comment on certain very absurd
23 things. I fully understand the requirements of your job. Of course, I'm
24 perfectly willing to answer your questions, but I specifically emphasise
25 the fact that I am not familiar with these names, except the Evledin
1 Rizvanovic. As for the activities that you mentioned, I must say that the
2 SDA did not dare speak about any provocations at the time.
3 Q. And that's true, sir, according to what you're telling us, from
4 April 30th, 1992, all the way through May 21st, 1992, right? Never even
5 discussed provocation, correct?
6 A. No.
7 Q. It's not true?
8 A. It was true throughout that period of time, ever since the setting
9 up of the SDA. If you're talking about provocations, it was the SDA that
10 was provoked. You did not ask me any question about that, nor did Their
11 Honours ask me any such questions. Had they done so, I would have been
12 able to give you an answer. It was us who suffered a number of
13 provocations because we were in a very difficult situation, in particular,
14 with respect of the power, with the force, that we had -- that we were
15 faced with.
16 Q. I understand, and we talked about that a little bit. Just to go
17 back to telling us about this individual, I'm certainly, sir, not asking
18 you to pass judgement on any individual here, including Mr. Ramic. But
19 you state that if he was in a position of some influence or power, you
20 would have known him. The author states that he was chief of the Crisis
21 Staff from 25 April, 1992, and the commander of the regional Territorial
22 Defence headquarters from the 21st of May, 1992. Is it your position that
23 you don't know who this person is?
24 A. Sir, I have already told you, I don't know anything about the
25 existence of this Crisis Staff. As the deputy president of the party, I
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 simply don't know.
2 Q. It talks about on a subsequent page, and again, I'm just trying to
3 cover these topics with you, the illegal arm trafficking mainly done by
4 Serbs but also by brothers Enes and Senad Kapetanovic. Did you, sir,
5 know either Enes or Senad Kapetanovic?
6 A. No, sir. These are people from the area of Prijedor, from the
7 villages surrounding Prijedor. I lived in the other end of Prijedor, in
8 the Kozarac area, which is 15 kilometres away from the town of Prijedor.
9 You're asking me about persons who were known locally, and I can honestly
10 say that I know nothing about them. You may go on, of course, but I
12 Q. According to Mr. Ramic, it says: "Apparently the Muslim TO
13 acquired a huge amount of weapons." Mr. Ramic, being the chief of the
14 Crisis Staff and commander of the regional TO, would you agree with me,
15 sir, that he is in a better position to determine the amount of weapons,
16 arms, and armaments the Territorial Defence had in April and May of 1992
17 than yourself?
18 MS. KORNER: I'm sorry, I didn't want to interrupt again. That
19 depends very much on whether this man is who he says he was. And unless
20 my learned friend knows for a fact that he was who he says he was.
21 MR. OSTOJIC: I can't imagine the OTP would give us a document
22 with its very own comments that states that the statement seems unbiased
23 and is equally critical of the Muslims and Serbs, and now will tell us
24 that it may or may not be fraudulent.
25 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, that's the difficulty about -- that's
1 what I meant. I don't know who this translator is. I don't know how he
2 or she came to make the comments. That's why I'm saying it's not
3 something that we would respectfully submit the Court or indeed the
4 Defence can take into account.
5 MR. OSTOJIC: Well, Your Honour --
6 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: I think we shouldn't dispute too much about
7 this. I would appreciate if we could have, after the break, the first
8 page of the entire document and, of course, the last page, to find out
9 whether there is a signature or whatsoever. And -- yes. In English, the
10 cover page reads: "Report received and signed for by the military
11 attache, BH Senad Kubat."
12 MR. OSTOJIC: Your Honour --
13 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Does the witness know this person, Senad Kubat?
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I do know Senad Kubat. He was in
15 the local SDA in Bosanska Gradiska, and he held a post there. Later on,
16 during the war, he worked at the consulate of Bosnia and Herzegovina in
17 Zagreb for a brief time, and then he was dismissed from that job. He was
18 dismissed because he had certain characteristics that were incompatible
19 with work in the diplomatic service.
20 MR. OSTOJIC: Your Honour, before --
21 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Let's come back after the break to the question
22 of the authenticity of the underlying document. And the trial stands
23 adjourned until 10 minutes past 12.00.
24 --- Recess taken at 11.40 a.m.
25 --- On resuming at 12.14 p.m.
1 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Please be seated. Did the parties agree, if I
2 may ask, what we have before us, a document or a fragment or whatsoever?
3 MS. KORNER: I didn't realise Your Honour was asking us to agree.
4 It's a summary of what's in the document, translation.
5 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Yes. A summary, but not of that what follows in
6 B/C/S. In B/C/S, therefore, are some pages.
7 MS. KORNER: I don't know what it is.
8 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Yes. And therefore, it is difficult to
10 MR. OSTOJIC: Yes, we'll try to clarify it if I may, Your Honour.
11 As the chronology was, the document that we received in a May 2002 binder
12 included the very pages and exhibits that the Court has. On the B/C/S
13 version of that document which is immediately following a divider page, it
14 starts on page 13, which has the ERN number of 00798805. What's troubling
15 to the Defence, Your Honour, with respect to the following pages in the
16 B/C/S, on the top left hand corner, it specifically states that it's a
17 copy of a report made by Ramic Jusuf, a copy was made by Swedish police,
18 page 20. The text that we received Friday or Saturday of the original
19 text of that document, does not have - and we have that document here -
20 does not have that description on the top left-hand side of any of these
21 pages. So we really don't know ourselves, Your Honour, and we invite the
22 Prosecutor to help us with that.
23 However, what we were able to do, based on the documents that we
24 did receive, was to find at the Court's request the front page, which is
25 in B/C/S, and there's two signature pages which, for the record, if I may
1 just read their ERN number, the first one being ERN number 00798790, and
2 the second one being 00798792, that we can tender to the Court as
3 requested, with the usher's assistance, of course, Your Honour.
4 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Please, first, to the Prosecutor. I'm afraid
5 the Prosecutor actually doesn't have these pages.
6 If the witness can help us understanding the language, what it is
7 said -- what is said on the document dated 21 May, 1992.
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] On the document dated 21st of May,
9 1992, at the top it says: "the republican staff of the Territorial
10 Defence of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina." Underneath it
11 says: "Municipal Territorial Defence Prijedor." Then there is a
12 handwritten protocol number. Underneath, it says the 21st of May, 1992.
13 Then it says, "Re: Order on the appointment of Jusuf Ramic." Underneath
14 it says: "Pursuant to the constitution of the Republic of Bosnia and
15 Herzegovina and the decision of the presidency of the Republic of Bosnia
16 and Herzegovina, the decree law on the armed forces, Jusuf Ramic is
17 appointed commander of the regional Territorial Defence staff in Puharska.
18 This decision shall enter into force on the day it is issued."
19 At the end it says: "Commander of the Territorial Defence staff
20 Prijedor, Lieutenant-Colonel Muharem Handanagic." And there are seals at
21 the top and at the bottom which say around -- the seal in small letters,
22 it says: "Territorial Defence staff, Bosnia and Herzegovina," and in the
23 middle, it says: "Prijedor Territorial Defence staff."
24 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: May I ask, do you know this Mr.
25 Muharem Handanagic?
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, Your Honour, I don't.
2 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: It's very difficult to work with such a
3 non-document insofar as we have it before us. But I think we shouldn't
4 waste time now.
5 Please proceed with your line of questions.
6 MR. OSTOJIC: If I may, Your Honour, with your permission, ask the
7 witness, Mr. Sejmenovic, to read the document as well because I think it
8 relates to the question that the Court posed prior to our break. And it
9 has the ERN number 00798792.
10 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Please, we would be grateful.
11 MR. OSTOJIC:
12 Q. Mr. Sejmenovic, directing your attention to the document bearing
13 the ERN number 00798792, would you please read that document out loud for
15 A. Very well. This is a document which at the top bears the
16 letterhead of the United Nations. Underneath, it says: "UNHCR, Zagreb.
17 The UN High Commissioner for Refugees office in Zagreb." Address:
18 "Kupska Street number 2, Zagreb, Croatia." Then there is a handwritten
19 date, the 2nd of September, 1993.
20 Underneath it says: "To whom it may concern: We hereby certify
21 that" and then the lines are filled in, "Mr. Jusuf Ramic, born on the 15th
22 of October, 1947, registered with the UNHCR under number VV-00081, is
23 under the protection of this office. The certificate shall be valid for
24 one month."
25 On the right-hand side, it says that "The certificate has been
1 extended from the 21st of September, 1993," and it bears the stamp of the
2 UN High Commissioner for Refugees. And then there are two more seals to
3 the right and to the left. On the left-hand side, there is the signature
4 of Mr. Jacques Mouchet, who is in charge of the mission, and on the
5 right-hand side, the same certificate has again been extended, and the
6 extension is certified with a seal. Underneath it says: "Extended until
7 the 22nd of December, 1993" and then there is the signature and an outline
8 of a stamp which is not clearly visible.
9 In the middle on the right-hand side, the photocopy shows that
10 there was a photograph and that there is a stamp, the details of which
11 cannot be seen on the photograph and the document.
12 Q. Thank you, Mr. Sejmenovic.
13 MR. OSTOJIC: Your Honour, at this time I'd like also to introduce
14 these three documents in addition to what was provisionally identified as
15 D12, as independent exhibits.
16 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: I'm afraid we run into several problems when we,
17 for example, read in the -- we even can't call it a summary, speaking
18 about a detailed description of the Hambarine incident on pages, and
19 indicated them. It's a mixtum compositum of several issues, helicopters
20 bringing in weapons for the Serbs, and so on. I think, to work with this
21 document in a responsible way, a prerequisite would be that we have the
22 document in its entirety, and it should be, indeed, translated in its
24 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, fine, if the Defence put the document
25 in. They can arrange the translation, but we can't. I mean --
1 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: No doubt. But from my perspective, yes, to whom
2 it may concern, who is interested in the special parts may provide
3 translation of those parts but then real translation and not work with
4 these excerpts, and then some pages, and we can't really see the link
5 between these excerpts and the pages in B/C/S. Notwithstanding in order
6 to facilitate today's procedure, the Defence may continue now with a line
7 of questions on the basis of some excerpts they want to emphasise.
8 MR. OSTOJIC: Yes. And Your Honour, obviously, with respect to
9 the Defence case, should we proceed in that manner, we would have the
10 relevant documents, despite the fact that it's a numerous document,
11 translated accordingly. We are given, however, a certain number of
12 documents to work with and, therefore, we presented it to the Court. And
13 I would also like to know if we can see the original of that document or
14 if the Court can see it. But my other question relates to what I earlier
15 said. In the copy that we have, it references the Swedish police. In the
16 document in full that we received apparently does not reference - and I'm
17 making that representation and the Court is welcome to examine
18 that - does not reference the Swedish police. So we, quite frankly, are
19 at a loss as to specifically this document, and that's why we're putting
20 certain issues that were only summarised to the witness.
21 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: To cut a long story short, I would invite the
22 parties to meet on this issue, to provide the original document, and then
23 to decide how to proceed, what has to be translated and whatnot.
24 MR. OSTOJIC: Thank you, Your Honour. If I may proceed just with
25 a couple more questions on this document.
1 Q. Sir, can you tell us geographically where Crna Dolina is in
2 relation to Prijedor?
3 A. I'm not sure. There is the Crna Rijeka or "black river," and then
4 there is the Crna Dolina or "black valley." Whether this is on the
5 mountain of Kozara or on the other side of the mountain, or if it's in the
6 direction of Grmac, that I'm not quite sure of.
7 Q. Are you familiar or do you know of any attempts by three sabotage
8 groups to blow up artillery in the Crna Dolina area?
9 A. No, this is the first time I've heard of this.
10 Q. You mentioned provocation and incidents. I'd like to ask you
11 about one that we believe occurred on or about May 2nd, 1992, where a
12 Serbian police officer was killed. Are you familiar with an incident that
13 occurred in the Prijedor Municipality wherein a Serbian police officer was
14 killed, and the suspect or the alleged killer escaped and went to
15 Puharska? Are you familiar at all with that event?
16 A. I don't remember that event. It's possible there was some news
17 about this on the radio, but I really don't remember well.
18 Q. Thank you. Clarify this for me, sir: Is it your position that a
19 Crisis Staff in Kozarac did not exist, or you don't know whether or not it
20 existed, from April 30th of May of --
21 A. Okay, okay. Okay. Sir, there was a Territorial Defence staff.
22 There were people who probably, by analogy, because there was a Crisis
23 Staff in Prijedor, called this body a "Crisis Staff." They refer to it as
24 such. And it's possible that some people used that term. However, there
25 was a Territorial Defence staff in Kozarac. The fact that it was
1 broadened in this emergency situation means that it was expanded. It
2 means that it dealt with the crisis, but it was not a Crisis Staff. It
3 was a Territorial Defence staff. That's what I know about this.
4 Q. Can you tell me, to the best of your knowledge, who the members of
5 that group were, or entity, as you've described it? Who were some of the
7 A. There was the Territorial Defence and there was a commander of the
8 Territorial Defence. There was the police as well, and the chief of
9 police. There was also the reserve police force or the so-called war
10 police. All in accordance with the existing laws. There was an
11 individual who was the head of the structure. There was also the civilian
12 protection which also had a chief. There was the local commune and the
13 president of the local commune. All these individuals made up a body
14 which discussed the issue of defence in cases of -- in case of an attack
15 on the surrounding villages. The central body, the one that was competent
16 and had authority in the organisational sense, was actually the
17 Territorial Defence staff, that is, the command of the Territorial Defence
18 or the commander of the Territorial Defence.
19 Q. Can you list for me, sir, the names of those individuals?
20 A. I know that Osmaj, Osman, was with the police. I further know
21 that there was a person who was the head of the local government office.
22 Then there was Mr. Becir Medunjanin, who was there from the municipal
23 secretariat for national defence. I cannot remember any other names.
24 Q. Do you know if Mr. Causevic was a member?
25 A. Causevic. What was his name?
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 Q. That's all I have, just his last name.
2 How about Mr. Bahonjic?
3 A. Bahonjic, Islam Bahonjic was from the Kamicani local commune.
4 It's possible that he had some kind of post in Kamicani but I'm not sure
5 about that. I know that he, Islam Bahonjic, went to Prijedor to take part
6 in negotiations there. But he never came back.
7 Q. How about an individual by the name of Mr. Fazlic?
8 A. I don't know.
9 MR. OSTOJIC: If I may, with the Court's permission, have the
10 usher tender a document to the witness, and we have copies for the Court.
11 And the first one, we would ask it be given to the OTP. We would
12 provisionally ask that it be marked or identified as Exhibit D13.
13 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Right. Provision D13, and we remain with D12,
14 that there will be no decision on the admission into evidence today until
15 the dispute is settled.
16 MR. OSTOJIC:
17 Q. Mr. Sejmenovic, just let me know when you've had an opportunity to
18 review the document so I may put some questions to you.
19 A. I haven't read all of it, but I have looked at the first, the
20 second, the third, and the fourth page.
21 Q. Do you know what this document is, sir?
22 A. I don't know exactly what it is. I can see that it's handwritten
23 and could, perhaps, be some kind of minutes of a meeting.
24 Q. And what's the date of that meeting? 26th of April, 1992?
25 A. Yes, that's what it says, 26th of April, 1992.
1 Q. Let me ask you this, because I forgot a question with respect to
2 the prior issue. Who from your area, from the local commune of Trnopolje,
3 was a member of the Crisis Staff or the Territorial Defence that you
4 previously described and the individuals that were included in there? Who
5 from Trnopolje specifically was on that committee?
6 A. I don't know. In terms of function, no, I know a few individuals.
7 If I saw a photograph, I'm sure I would be able to recognise a few members
8 of the Territorial Defence. As to who had authority, I don't know.
9 Q. On the first page of the B/C/S document dated 26/4/1992, it has on
10 the third word "RK" and "S." Do you know what that stands for, sir,
11 "RKS"? Is it the republic Crisis Staff, the regional Crisis Staff, or
12 the Hratne War Crisis Staff?
13 A. I don't think it stands for any of the three possibilities that
14 you enumerated. I think it could actually mean the regional Crisis Staff,
15 "rajon." Because the Territorial Defence is divided into departments,
16 the so-called rajoni. The department or the area of Kamicani, the area of
17 Kozarusa, the area of Trnopolje, and I think that the "RKS" stands for
18 Rejonski Krizni Stab, Area Crisis Staff. That's how it would translate, I
20 Q. In what area in particular are we, then, speaking of, sir?
21 A. I'm speaking in general terms. The Territorial Defence was
22 divided into areas, notwithstanding the region. I don't see anything in
23 particular here. It just says the work of the RKS, from the last meeting
24 until today. Mention is made of Kozarac and a number of villages in the
25 area of Kozarac. So the area in question obviously is Kozarac or the
1 surrounding villages. I can see Hadzici. No, excuse me, these must be
2 the names, the surnames, of the people here. I am familiar with some of
3 these individuals and I know that they come from Kozarac or the
4 surrounding area.
5 Q. In fact, on the item under "agenda," it identifies Kozarac,
6 Trnopolje, and several other areas. Correct?
7 A. Just a moment, please.
8 Q. Under --
9 A. Under point 1, Kozarusa, Kozarac, Trnopolje, Kevljani, Kamicani.
10 Underneath, it says "Kozarusa, not organised." Underneath Kozarac, we
11 read the word "organisation." An additional text is written below these
12 other names. "Conflict," I don't know exactly what it means. And this is
13 actually an enumeration of the local communes in this area.
14 Q. Knowing the individuals that appear on this document, sir, do you
15 know what role they played with respect to the Crisis Staff that is
16 referenced in this document?
17 A. Here we read the surname of Bahonjic. I knew Islam Bahonjic, who
18 was a deputy at the Municipal Assembly and lived in the area of Kamicani.
19 Whether he had a function at the Territorial Defence, I don't know. But I
20 know him from the municipal parliament sessions. I can further see the
21 surname of Causevic, but I don't know who the individual is. It goes on
22 with the surname of Hadzic. The individual in question is possibly
23 Mr. Hadzic from the village of Hadzici, who was also a deputy at the
24 Municipal Assembly and was also an official with the local party branch.
25 Hadzic, it says, a proposal, a suggestion, is being made that the few of
1 us should go there and try to exert influence and so on and so forth. I
2 believe that his name was Teufik, but I'm not a hundred per cent sure.
3 But it would be logical because Bahonjic is here, so it was only logical
4 that Hadzic was present as well. However, I don't know about Causevic.
5 Q. Under Mr. Hadzic's name, it talks about an issue of food
6 provisions for daytime checkpoints. Do you see that in the middle of the
8 A. Yes, it talks about the food provision for the checkpoints in Dera
9 and Krkici. Below, we read again the name of Bahonjic.
10 Q. Where were those two checkpoints in relation to either Kozarac or
11 the town of Prijedor, do you know?
12 A. In relation to Kozarac, it says here Dera and Krkici. I know that
13 Dera is village situated right above the town of Kozarac, going in the
14 direction of Kozarusa. The village is situated along a creek. The area
15 of Krkici refers to the lower part of Kozarac, below the Prijedor/Banja
16 Luka Road. I don't know exactly what part of Krkici or what Krkici they
17 had in mind.
18 Q. Directing your attention to page 2 of the B/C/S document, sir, it
19 continues to talk about Mr. Bahonjic, and then it lists certain weapons.
20 Can you please read for us what is said on page 2 of the B/C/S document
21 which can be found, for the Court, on page 1 of the English translation.
22 A. Below the upper text, we see a list consisting of several items
23 concerning weapons. Under point 1, that is, in the first row, the number
24 I think is 7, Zoljas, handheld rocket launchers - 2, "KAM." I don't know
25 what it is. It must be the abbreviations of the names of villages around
1 Kozarac, and the -- in the abbreviation of the town of Kozarac
2 itself. 2 Kamicani, 1 Kevljani, the abbreviation, that is, and 1 Kozar --
3 I don't know whether this stands for Kozarusa, but most probably
4 it does. Underneath, we read: "One TROMB," probably an abbreviation
5 for "tromblom." 2 DP, AP, which is an abbreviation for an automatic
6 rifle. And then the number of the rifle in question. And the location
7 of Kevljani - 30 pieces of ammunition. It goes on. One automatic rifle,
8 and the number of the rifle. Trnopolje, 30 pieces of ammunition.
9 Next row: 2 PAP, which is an abbreviation for a semi automatic
10 rifle, "dash" one PAP for Kozarusa, followed by the number of the rifle in
11 question, one semi automatic rifle to go to Kozarac. Yes, that's what it
12 says, to send to Kozarac. And then we read the letters KOZE or KOLE. I
13 don't know what it means. "Three clips of ammunition for Kevljani and
14 Trnopolje" is written underneath. The next row reads: "One bomb,,
15 Kamicani, one grenade." Then we have an illegible part -- Kozarac. One
16 sniper, Besici. The next row reads: "Two Zoljas, Hrnici; two Zoljas,
17 Suhi Brod; and two Zoljas, Dera." These are the villages in the area of
19 The next row, "One semi automatic rifle, Kozarac 1," that is the
20 local commune of Kozarac because the town itself was divided in several
21 local communes. "One semi automatic rifle, Kozarac 2." It goes on ":
22 One Zolja, one hand grenade, one clip, Kozarac 2." Underneath, "One semi
23 automatic rifle, Kamicani."
24 That is what I can read on this piece of paper I have translated
25 or rather explained to you the abbreviations.
1 Q. Thank you, sir. And just a further explanation, did you mention
2 the one sniper that's listed in the middle section of that?
3 A. I read loud and clear all of the rows of this text. It says:
4 "One sniper" but no further description is given. We don't know if it's
5 a hunting sniper or a military sniper.
6 Q. On the second line of that description of weapons, there's the
7 word that you described as a "TROMB." Can you describe for me as a person
8 who was in the reserve and who was specifically in the artillery unit of
9 the reserve, the military reserve of the JNA, what is that?
10 A. I said TROMB. It says here -- it reads "TROMB." So it must be an
11 abbreviation. And I said that it was my assumption that the abbreviation
12 stood for tromblom. It was customary for all military-age men to have it.
13 It's a sort of extension for an ordinary type of rifle, which is used in
14 case of the attack of armoured vehicles, something that all military age
15 men were familiar with and had undergone training in. I also think that
16 the Territorial Defence had a specific number of trombloms, which is
17 actually a rifle-launched grenade. They each had a few pieces of it.
18 Q. From your experience, sir, this rifle-launched grenade, that is a
19 weapon that can cripple and, in fact, destroy tanks. Correct?
20 A. It cannot destroy a tank, no. It is a very light type of weapon.
21 Not even Zoljas, the hand-held rocket launchers that are listed here can
22 destroy a tank. Different weapons are used for the purposes of destroying
23 tanks. As far as I can remember, these rifle-launched grenades or
24 trombloms, every squad or every platoon had a number of individuals who
25 carried such rifle-launched grenades. I don't know exactly about their
1 use, but they were not used against large armoured vehicles. Perhaps to
2 attack armoured personnel carriers or bunkers, I'm not sure. I'm not an
3 expert in that.
4 Q. Thank you. With respect to the individual that's identified there
5 as Kole, do you know if that is a member who was also a member of a
6 paramilitary group that operated in the Prijedor Municipality in 1992,
7 otherwise known as Kolina's group?
8 A. I have heard of the individual by the name of Kole. As regards
9 paramilitary units, I don't know. But as far as I remember, there were no
10 paramilitary units as such. I know that the Territorial Defence had
11 mobilised all of those who had placed themselves at the disposal of the
12 Territorial Defence and who had any -- some kind of weapon, even the
13 people who did not have any weapons but wished to participate in the
14 defence. Well, how these individuals referred to themselves, I don't
15 know. How they called themselves, that's a different problem.
16 Q. Why do you see it as a problem as to --
17 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
18 MR. OSTOJIC:
19 Q. Why do you see it, sir, as a problem as to how these individuals
20 identified and called themselves during the period April through May 1992?
21 A. No, no. I may have used the wrong word. I should have said it's
22 a completely different issue because there were a number of individuals
23 who identified themselves with various names, as the yellows, the greens,
24 the reds, I don't know. It is typical for every army. I'm only talking
25 about the Territorial Defence and those who were outside the framework of
1 the Territorial Defence. I mean, had there been such elements, I would
2 have known about them, had there been units who did not wish to be
3 organised in the Territorial Defence. We were actually afraid that such
4 cases would happen and cause incidents which would then serve as a pretext
5 for an attempt by the Serbian artillery or infantry. That was the very
6 purpose of organising this defence. There were no paramilitary units or
7 formations whatsoever. And I am sure that I would have been aware of that
8 had such units existed.
9 Q. And the incidents that you were afraid of having been made by
10 various groups, are the incidents those that did, in fact, occur, the
11 incident at Hambarine, the incident at Kozarac, in the period that we
12 discussed earlier today? Are those the type of incidents that you were
13 afraid that paramilitary groups would actually provoke and then,
14 unfortunately, a response by the military would follow? Are those the
16 A. Sir, I don't think we understand each other, or you may have
17 misinterpreted and abused what I have said. But it's possible that there
18 has been a misunderstanding. Great care was taken of the demands of the
19 population that a defence be organised through the existing bodies of the
20 Territorial Defence in case of an attack. And from the very beginning,
21 any possibility for having people, individuals, working outside this legal
22 framework was eliminated. We tried not to create conditions for such a
23 phenomenon to occur. And one of the main reasons why we paid attention to
24 that was the fact that the members of the Territorial Defence tried to
25 exert as much influence and control over their individuals in order to
1 prevent individuals from making various types of provocations in, say, a
2 drunken state. This has nothing to do with the incident which occurred at
3 Hambarine or in -- on the Prijedor/Banja Luka Road as it was claimed by
4 the Serbian Crisis Staff.
5 Q. Let me ask you about this paramilitary group that we've gotten
6 some evidence on and see if you know them. How about Ramiz's group? Are
7 you familiar with a group called Ramiz's group?
8 A. No.
9 Q. Do you know a group by the name of Didin's group?
10 A. No, I have only heard of an individual called Didin. He was
11 actually called Hasan, but they called him Didin. He was killed. And I
12 repeat, Kole himself was a member of a Territorial Defence unit. And it
13 is possible that he referred to his unit as "my unit" or "Kole's group."
14 It is also possible that outsiders referred to this group as "Kole's
15 group." But this group was part of the Territorial Defence.
16 Similarly, later with the military, you had "Cobras" or "Wolves"
17 or units that had named themselves according to the names of their
18 commanders. This was something -- this was different. All I'm trying to
19 say was that nothing was done outside the control of the Territorial
20 Defence. I mean, I was involved enough to have been able to notice such
22 Q. What about the Green Berets, sir? Were they considered a
23 paramilitary group in April 1992? Or is it your opinion that they also
24 were only part of the Territorial Defence under the command of the
25 Territorial Defence of Kozarac?
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 A. Sir, I have to repeat once again: The formation of Green Berets
2 never existed in the territory of the Prijedor municipality. The fact
3 that certain individuals referred to themselves as such is a different
4 issue. Generally speaking, at the level of the republic -- do you want to
5 hear me? So at the level of the republic, or in the media, we had already
6 heard about a unit which was called the Green Berets in Sarajevo. It was
7 probably a response to the Red Berets, that is, the special military
8 forces that had come to Bosnia from Serbia in several waves. So there was
9 a group which referred to themselves prior to the establishment of the BH
10 army as the "Green Berets." Later, after the army had been set up, there
11 were no Green Berets whatsoever. I even think that the members of this
12 group, the Green Berets, later on had lots of problems with the military
13 administration. The main staff of the Territorial Defence --
14 THE INTERPRETER: Can the witness be asked to slow down.
15 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Would you please slow down a little bit. Thank
17 THE INTERPRETER: And repeat the last portion of your answer.
18 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Unfortunately, the last portion of your answer
19 wasn't --
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I understand. You want me to
22 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Yes, please.
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The individuals who referred to
24 themselves as Green Berets in the town of Sarajevo were never part of the
25 establishment, according to the decisions issued by the government organs,
1 at least in Sarajevo. So it was not a decision made by the Territorial
2 Defence or any other body. This was a group that called itself that, but
3 according to the establishment, they were part of the Territorial Defence
4 of the army of Bosnia and Herzegovina. As for Prijedor, at the local
5 level, for example, in Trnopolje, there was not a single man bearing arms
6 known as a member of the Green Berets. I'm also speaking of Kozarac. So
7 the people who put themselves at the disposal of the Territorial Defence
8 were not called that. I don't know if there were such units elsewhere,
9 but I repeat, such a formation was never established either at the
10 municipal or the republic level. And because I'm speaking fast, I will
11 repeat: In the town of Sarajevo, the Green Berets had a lot of
12 complications with the administration when they wanted to register the
13 fact that they were a part of the armed forces at the beginning of the
14 war, when the army of Bosnia and Herzegovina was being set up.
15 MR. OSTOJIC:
16 Q. Sir, I agree with your earlier comment that we maybe don't
17 understand each other, and it's possibly that it's my fault. I'm not
18 interested to know if these paramilitary groups, Kolina's, Ramiz's,
19 Didin's, the Green Berets, or any other others that may have existed,
20 whether they existed legally or legitimately. All I want to know from
21 you, sir, is whether or not those paramilitary groups existed in the area
22 of Prijedor Municipality from April through May of 1992. I agree with you
23 that they weren't legal entities, but did they exist?
24 A. Sir, I heard about this as much as you did. I heard that some
25 people called a unit commanded by Kole "Kole's group." Of course, I heard
1 in the Territorial Defence that there were no groups outside the system.
2 Q. Did you hear, sir, if the mujahedin were fighting in Bosnia at
3 that time?
4 A. Not at that time. I learned about this from the press a few years
6 Q. Did you learn from the press that, in fact, they were in the
7 Bosnia area in the spring of 1992? Correct?
8 A. No, I don't remember having read that, not about that period.
9 Q. Did the article that you read, sir, did that tell you how it came
10 about that they were present in Bosnia and under whose command did they
11 come under?
12 A. Some foreign soldiers who decided to fight on the side of the army
13 of Bosnia and Herzegovina, as far as I know from the press, arrived, first
14 as members of humanitarian organisations. Later on, they volunteered to
15 join the armed struggle. Most of them were from Islamic countries, but
16 there were also some Britons, some Germans. I don't know about other
17 nationalities, but I do know about the ones I've mentioned.
18 I read that, later on, they established their own unit, but I know
19 nothing about the details. I can only tell you my impression of what I
20 read in the paper, so I'm not a good source for that sort of information.
21 Q. Help me with this: Which source or which press report did you
22 refer to earlier?
23 A. Well, first, the Serbian television spoke a lot about it, then
24 various newspapers in Sarajevo, the independent press. Also, papers that
25 supported one or other of the political parties. This was also something
1 that international bodies investigated, and these people were interviewed.
2 I was not especially interested in this so I did not go into it any
3 further. I concentrated on my duties. That is why this is something I
4 never investigated. I'm just trying to tell you what I know.
5 Q. And the duties that you continued to do was the duties, actually,
6 as the representative of the chamber of municipalities in the Prijedor
7 Municipality? Are those the duties you're referring to?
8 A. Up to 1995 or early 1996. Today, I have nothing to do with
9 politics or any political party and this has been the case for some time.
10 And I have not kept up with political events.
11 Q. Sir, let me try to move along with some other documents I'd like
12 to ask you about it. Do you know if on October 24th, 1991, at an SDA
13 party meeting, that certain members were assigned weapons duties? That
14 is, again, October 24th, 1991. Do you recall any such meeting or anything
15 like that occurring?
16 A. No, I don't remember any meetings from that period. I don't
17 remember, but I do know that in that period, as a response to the
18 behaviour and the moves of the SDS, all possibilities were discussed.
19 Q. Is it your general testimony, just so I get it right, because you
20 mentioned Red Berets and the Green Berets, the Bosnian Muslims, all they
21 did was essentially respond, and whatever they did, it was essentially a
22 response to what the SDS did. Is that basically what your testimony, in a
23 nutshell, is?
24 A. It depends --
25 Q. [Previous translation continues]... Correct?
1 A. Sir, we've spoken about a lot of things. For the most part, yes,
2 but we would have to go over it again to establish whether it refers to
4 Q. We're keeping track and we'll get to that later.
5 MR. OSTOJIC: If I may have the Court instruct the usher to assist
6 me with the next exhibit, if I may.
7 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: It's my understanding that you tendered the
8 document with the provisional number D13. Are there objections by the
10 MS. KORNER: I've now lost track of documents. You mean this one?
11 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Yes, we discussed --
12 MS. KORNER: No, Your Honour.
13 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Then admitted into evidence D13 A, English; D13
14 B, B/C/S.
15 Please, may I ask, for a better understanding, this document was
16 disclosed by the OTP and translated by the OTP before disclosure. Right?
17 Can you identify it from the bottom line?
18 MS. KORNER: At the moment, we can't identify where this comes
19 from. It has got no ERN numbers on it.
20 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: No, my question is --
21 MS. KORNER: But we think it was part of the TO documents.
22 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Can you assist us with this, for a better
23 understanding, that you can mark it on the list of exhibits what it is?
24 We are still discussing D13.
25 MR. OSTOJIC: If I can get back to the Court on that - I do not
1 have the exact binder of which this document was found - but it's my
2 recollection that it's from a binder of documents, and I'll be able to
3 provide the Court with the specific answer on that, that was provided to
4 us from the OTP.
5 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Because I'm a little bit surprised, to be
6 honest, about the bottom line indicating the document number. To a
7 certain extent, it differs from others. Maybe I'm wrong.
8 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, we think, whatever this is, it's not an
9 official translation. We think we know when we disclosed, but we're not
10 at all sure where it comes from.
11 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Whatever it may be, with the assistance of the
12 witness before us, we got some access to the content of this document.
13 Thank you.
14 Then the next would be provisional D14.
15 MR. OSTOJIC: I would ask the Court, because we're unclear, this
16 may be J3, but I'm not -- I don't know. For some reason, our notes seem
17 to reflect that.
18 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Yes, indeed, it's J3 -- with The Hague the 20th
19 of November, 1991. I remember.
20 MR. OSTOJIC: I would like then for the witness to be shown J3,
21 because I have a couple questions on that.
22 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Yes. And sorry, registry, it's not D14. It's
23 indeed already admitted under J3.
24 MR. OSTOJIC: If we can have the usher remove the other documents
25 in front of the witness, Your Honour.
1 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Sorry, I have some legal problems. Using a
2 document which - I have to be cautious - which may be forgery, using such
3 a document in the courtroom, knowing that it's a forgery, may cause
4 problems even for Defence counsel.
5 MR. OSTOJIC: Your Honour, I'd like to be heard on this briefly,
6 and I'm glad the Court pointed it out, which is why initially, quite
7 frankly, as the Court remembers that was a document that we were going to
8 introduce and withdrew it, and then -- for the same reason, and then the
9 Court ask that it be introduced. I think it's important, though, that we
10 perhaps touch on this outside the presence of the witness because I think
11 we may be able to clarify the issue that the Court is inquiring about.
12 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: But please, don't forget that it was admitted
13 into evidence, if not for other purposes, then for the purpose to prove
14 that there is a forgery on the market.
15 MR. OSTOJIC: I would ask that the Court, respectfully -- would
16 that opinion, respectfully, be reserved until we are able to at least
17 discuss it, since it was a document that was provided to us by the OTP?
18 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Right.
19 MR. OSTOJIC: Shall I proceed with this witness, Your Honour?
20 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Yes.
21 MR. OSTOJIC: Thank you.
22 Q. Sir, can you describe Document J3 for us, please. What is it?
23 A. Well, I see before me that this is a photocopy of a manuscript.
24 The date at the top is the 24th of October, 1991.
25 Q. And sir, is it also relating to the SDA meeting wherein certain
1 individuals in certain areas were assigned to weapons duty?
2 A. I did know there are lots of duties assigned here. Where do you
3 see weapons duty?
4 Q. I'm just reading the English translation, but I'm asking the first
5 line on the first page of the B/C/S version under the date of 24/10/1991.
6 Can you read that?
7 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: May I ask for a short break, please.
8 MR. OSTOJIC: Yes, Your Honour.
9 --- Break taken at 1.17 p.m.
10 --- On resuming at 1.20 p.m.
11 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Please be seated.
12 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, just --
13 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Sorry. We just conferred in depth, and
14 therefore we thought it would be better to do it outside with the
15 assistance of an interpreter.
16 No, the Bench will now at allow to proceed on the basis of a
17 document which, to be very diplomatic, where this is at least a strong
18 suspicion that it's a forgery and we can't allow to use forgery as a
19 basis of a witness statement in the courtroom.
20 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, we suddenly worked out where these
21 documents come from, why they are in this form. They were provided to the
22 OTP as part of the Tadic case. They come from the Tadic Defence lawyers.
23 Your Honour, I don't know one way or the other, but I have looked, and
24 I've looked at the transcript of what was said, and I have to say I think
25 Mr. Koumjian may have slightly misinterpreted the 20th of November entry
1 which led everybody to believe that it may be a forgery. I don't know one
2 way or the other. The simplest way, of course, is to establish from the
3 Tadic Defence lawyers where these documents come from.
4 MR. OSTOJIC: If I may just ask a couple questions, not on the
5 document - we have your ruling - but in connection with that specific
6 issue in a general sense to the witness, if I may, Your Honour.
7 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: But please, not on the basis of this document.
8 MR. OSTOJIC: Of course. May the usher be asked to remove the
9 document from the witness.
10 Q. Sir, as a member of the republican assembly, were you aware of a
11 conference, the European Conference on Security and Cooperation involving
12 the Serbian and Bosnian people in Bosnia and Herzegovina in 1991? Are you
13 aware of that organisation?
14 A. This organisation did exist but not in connection with the Serbs
15 and Muslims in Bosnia and Herzegovina. It's an organisation that has
16 always existed and still exists today. A few days earlier, when you asked
17 me the same question, of course I knew because their delegates, the
18 delegates, of the OSCE monitored the parliament sessions. They wore white
19 uniforms. They drove white cars. We referred to them as monitors, or
20 they referred to themselves as such when they held press conferences. I
21 also know in principle - and I repeat in principle - what their function
23 Q. All right. And their involvement was from approximately June of
24 1991 through when?
25 A. I don't know exactly, but they were there until the attack on
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 Sarajevo started. I think they were at the last assembly meeting that I
2 attended in Sarajevo, but I can't be quite sure. I think they were there
3 throughout that period until the situation deteriorated.
4 Q. There was also an entity from the European community, correct?
5 A. The European community and the capes [as interpreted] were there,
6 so were the ambassadors of foreign countries.
7 Q. Was the UN there at all, or any representatives from the UN?
8 A. I can't be sure. I know that, later on, they were present in
9 large numbers, but I don't know whether they were there then.
10 Q. Do you know, sir, if on July 5th, 1991, the European community
11 issued a declaration with respect to the situation in the former
12 Yugoslavia, namely, in Bosnia and Herzegovina? Are you familiar with that
13 decision or declaration?
14 A. I know that the international community dealt with the status of
15 the various republics of the former Yugoslavia extensively and the
16 pretensions of Serbia Montenegro toward other republics. I know the
17 international organised a number of conferences and negotiations. But as
18 for the exact chronological order and what meetings were held, I don't
19 remember that. But I can tell you that the international community was
20 very involved in all this.
21 Q. Do you know where they met initially when they would discuss these
22 issues? Do you know where in Europe they met?
23 A. Europe?
24 Q. Where? They met here at The Hague, didn't they, sir?
25 A. Well, I find this question rather funny. I don't know that they
1 met in The Hague. I know that they met in Skopje in Macedonia, and in
2 Lisbon later on. I don't know whether this was 1992 or 1993. I know that
3 there were several international conferences, but this was at the higher
4 political level, so I wouldn't know a lot about that. I paid attention to
5 what my job was and the work of the parliament in Sarajevo. From time to
6 time, we did receive reports from various international gatherings, but I
7 don't remember the details.
8 Q. Thank you.
9 MR. OSTOJIC: If I may now ask the Court to have the usher assist
10 me with another document that was provided to us on May 28th, 2002. It's
11 under tab number, I believe, 881. And I would --
12 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: This should be provisional D14. Right?
13 MR. OSTOJIC: Yes, Your Honour.
14 Q. Just quickly, Mr. Sejmenovic, if I can direct your attention to
15 the top right-hand corner of the B/C/S version, number 388. I'll be
16 asking you some questions on that and other documents. But initially,
17 that one.
18 A. I am looking at page 388.
19 Q. Can you tell me, sir, what this document is? It's provisionally
20 marked D14.
21 A. It says here that these are minutes.
22 Q. And can you tell us the date of those minutes?
23 A. It says the "30th of March, 1992."
24 Q. And below, there's four individuals' names which purport to have
25 also their signatures next to their names. Correct?
1 A. Correct. Correct.
2 Q. Do you know any of these four individuals?
3 A. I know them all by sight, and one of them was a friend of mine.
4 He was a secretary in the party, an official secretary employed as such by
5 the party, and he was in charge of the finances for a while, and later on
6 another person was appointed. This refers to Mr. Izet Kararic. And as
7 for the others, I know Evledin, Skapor Salih and Hopovac by sight.
8 Hopovac was on the Executive Board of the party. It's possible that
9 Kadiric was also, but I'm not sure.
10 Q. Do you recognise the signatures of any of those individuals,
11 including the individual of Mr. Kadiric?
12 A. There are some signatures here, but I don't know what their
13 signatures look like, so I can neither confirm nor deny that these are
14 their signatures.
15 Q. Can you tell me, sir, within that document below, in the centre of
16 the document, it makes reference that certain money was given to a Crisis
17 Staff. Do you see that? There's 8.000 din, and then it goes on. Talking
18 about a Crisis Staff.
19 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: May I just interrupt for a better understanding
20 because, once again, we are surprised to read on the first page a stamp
21 "SDA," north Rhine Westphalia, which is north Rhine Westphalia in Germany.
22 It's a document from Germany, is it right?
23 MR. OSTOJIC: Your Honour, I was going to get back to that. There
24 are some documents here that apparently were from the -- and I don't want
25 to give testimony - from an SDA entity abroad where monies were collected
1 for whatever reason, trying to remain neutral, yes. I'm going to ask him
2 about that, but I wanted to --
3 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Just for a better understanding, were these
4 documents attached to each other? That would mean that, for example, here
5 the first page, you tendered "SDS, north Rhine Westphalia," and then the
6 town of Essen, that this collection was done in Germany or is it an
8 MR. OSTOJIC: I don't know if it's a misunderstanding. But to
9 answer the Court's question, we were given the 18 pages that were provided
10 to the Court in exactly the same format that we have tendered it in. In
11 fact, I have the copy of the letter which corresponds to that which
12 indicates that there are ten English pages and eight B/C/S pages. So all
13 we did was not give the Court the communication between the OTP and the
14 Defence. But that is how we got the document on May 28th, 2002, which the
15 OTP states may fall within Rule 68 of the Rules of Procedures and
17 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Thank you for the clarification.
18 MR. OSTOJIC: If I may continue, Your Honour. Would the Court
19 mind if I just have an answer to my question, and then I'll get back to
20 the stamp. Thank you.
21 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Yes.
22 MR. OSTOJIC:
23 Q. Mr. Sejmenovic.
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. With respect to page 388 of the B/C/S version of this document
1 wherein you identified certain individuals that you knew professionally
2 and personally, it mentions, I believe, on at least three occasions a
3 Crisis Staff. And again, the letter we're referring to, or the minutes
4 we're referring to, are dated 3 -- meaning March 30th, 1992.
5 A. Yes, that's what it says here, the Crisis Staff. I'm waiting for
6 your question.
7 Q. I just wanted to know if you saw it or not. Did you see it in
8 there? Yes?
9 A. Yes. Yes, I did.
10 Q. What Crisis Staff, on March 30th, 1992, in Prijedor would these
11 four individuals be referring to if, according to you, none existed?
12 A. I told you several times that the Crisis Staff, formally speaking,
13 was never established, formally, that a body should be established named
14 the Crisis Staff, that it should have its stamp and the president and so
15 on and so forth. How these groups of people were commonly referred to and
16 how these individuals were called in light of their functions, I don't
17 know. I think that this is some kind of financial report of this body.
18 It says here it is distributed to the Crisis Staff, but it doesn't say
19 which Crisis Staff. I don't know about any specific body of this kind at
20 the time, nor have I ever seen a document which would have been signed as
21 a document of a Crisis Staff. I think it was the Territorial Defence and
22 the Territorial Defence staff. Again, that's just my opinion. It's not
23 necessarily correct.
24 Q. Were any of these four individuals that are identified which bear
25 their signature on that page 388, were they members of the Territorial
1 Defence in Kozarac or in any other area on or about March 30th, 1992?
2 A. I don't know that.
3 Q. If you can just -- if I may direct your attention to the second
4 page of that document which bears the number 390 on the top right-hand
5 corner, and can you tell me if you know anything about this stamp which
6 seems to be from the SDA?
7 A. This is the first time that I see a stamp of this kind. I know.
8 I can read "SDA." Underneath, we read "Nordrhein Westfalen demokratisch
9 acktion." And underneath, it reads: "The party for democratic action."
10 So it is possible that this is the stamp of the SDA branch in Germany
11 established in this town and in this region. According to what it says in
12 the stamp, that would be it. But I don't know whether that is the case.
13 I know that the SDA, as well as the majority of the parties that were
14 created in the area of the former Yugoslavia, had its branches in --
15 abroad, the SDA, the HDZ, the Slovenian parties and the political parties
16 from other republics. I've just told you what I see here.
17 Q. Quickly, if I may direct your attention to page 385 which appears
18 on the top right-hand corner.
19 A. I've found 385.
20 Q. Thank you. It also identifies three of the same individuals which
21 appeared on the March 30th, 1992 document, correct, that you've discussed
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. And it also identifies Dr. Mirza Mujadzic, do you see his name at
25 the bottom, the signature that appears to be his to the right of his name?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Do you recognise Dr. Mujadzic's signature at all, sir?
3 A. No, I don't. I never paid attention to signatures. I know that
4 the three named individuals here are the secretary of the Executive Board
5 of the SDA, the treasurer of the SDA, of the Executive Board of the SDA,
6 and Salih Skapur, who was maybe a member of the Executive Board, but I'm
7 not sure. I know that these individuals were in charge of the finances of
8 the party, including the payment of utility costs and similar. It was a
9 normal procedure of obtaining funds for the party, as was done by all
10 other parties, and as it is customarily done by the parties in your
11 country. So we were not an exception in this regard.
12 Q. Sir, isn't it true that these members, as well as other members of
13 the SDA, actually called for a boycott of the work and called for a
14 boycott of the schools and the payment of duties to the Prijedor
15 Municipality on or about April of 1992? That the SDA made that call for a
16 boycott, is that true?
17 A. A call to boycott schools and jobs?
18 Q. Correct.
19 A. This is the first time I hear about this. I couldn't possibly
20 imagine any political party as having this type of influence over people,
21 that it should appeal to people to give up their salaries without which it
22 would have been impossible for them to live. They were in a difficult
23 situation anyway.
24 Q. Let me direct your attention, sir, to page 348 of the documents
25 that you have before you provisionally identified as D14. And it's
1 towards the end. Are you there, sir?
2 A. Yes, I'm looking at it. 348.
3 Q. Can you describe for us, in the limited time we have, what is on
4 the top left-hand side of that document?
5 A. The top left-hand side, on this copy, we see in the upper left
6 corner three letters, "SDA." Underneath: "The Sarajevo party for
7 Democratic Action, regional board for the Banja Luka/Prijedor region."
8 There's no date. There's no stamp. On this paper, which is a memo, a
9 handwritten text can be found.
10 Q. Hopefully when we get the original, we'll find the date of that
11 document, sir, but thank you for that. I recognise it doesn't have a
12 date. That document was given to us by the Office of the Prosecutor.
13 Quite frankly, sir, does it not say within this document that has
14 the letterhead of the SDA that there was a call for a boycott for both the
15 work, school, and the payment of duties?
16 A. It's complete nonsense, sir. How can you ask a question like
17 this? No, never, at any point in time did anyone call for a boycott on
18 behalf of the SDA. Even after the blockade of Kozarac, people still went
19 to work and to school. Up until that moment when they were actually
20 physically turned back and had to stop working --
21 MS. KORNER: [Previous translation continues]... This document
22 also was submitted as part of the Tadic original appeal by Tadic's then
23 lawyer. We have no originals. These are the only copies we were provided
24 with. We have no idea where these documents come from, what validity or
25 not they have, whether or not they are genuine. I should say that I am
1 informed that when the -- when Tadic retained new counsel, these documents
2 were not resubmitted as part of the appeal. Your Honour, at the moment, I
3 would object to it being entered into evidence at all.
4 MR. OSTOJIC: I think it's quite ironic that the OTP will, two
5 weeks before this witness testifies, give us 18 pages and acknowledge and
6 admit that it forms and is part of the Rule 68 of the Rules of Procedure
7 and Evidence of this Tribunal, not tell us that the document comes from
8 any suspect sources, invite us to ask questions on it as they did earlier,
9 and then now withdraw it. I'm not sure if we can rely on any of the
10 documents, quite frankly, that the OTP is proposing to us that are undated
11 and unsigned, in light of what they are currently telling us and the
12 position they currently have.
13 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, there's a difference between those that
14 we seize as part of a search and seizure operation from various places and
15 those that are supplied to us. We are obliged by the rules to give to the
16 Defence anything which might be Rule 68. I wasn't aware where these
17 documents came from. I don't know whether Dr. Mujadzic was asked about
18 his signature rather than this witness being asked about it. I'm told
20 MR. OSTOJIC: Because unfortunately, we were given this on May
21 28th, 2002, Your Honour. That's when we were given these documents.
22 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: It's correct to understand that evidently it was
23 translated by the Defence at such time in Tadic, and we can find in the
24 English version on the bottom line "voluntary contributions
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, I'll double check, but I think so. I
2 think it was translated by the Tadic -- it doesn't look like one of
3 our references.
4 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: I think, once again, may I ask the parties to go
5 in some more details. Evidently, the OTP followed on the obligation under
6 Rule 68, provided this document, not going into some details, and the
7 Defence is now confronted with a problem whether or not, or where, at
8 least, the source of this document is. Could you please be so kind and
9 provide us with an explanation on the source of this document until
10 tomorrow -- no, not tomorrow, until Wednesday, because we have -- we can
11 only continue on Wednesday with the cross-examination of the witness
12 before us.
13 If not tomorrow, we can finalise the next witness. I don't know
14 whether protect -- no, the next witness, and then we can proceed possibly
15 already tomorrow. But we should know some more information on both
16 documents disputed in present before we decide on the admission into
18 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, we'll make what inquiries we can.
19 Your Honour, may I just ask: Is this witness's evidence going to
20 be completed on Wednesday?
21 MR. OSTOJIC: I'm confident that we will be able to, Your Honour,
22 but it all depends on the answers provided. But I'm confident that we
24 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: And it depends on the number of questions to be
25 put by the Judges. But what is the background of your question, the next
1 witness arriving Thursday?
2 MS. KORNER: Yes, the next witness. And this witness has been
3 here for a very long time. I know Your Honour will say it was four days
4 and 90 minutes in chief, but that was because of the reading of documents
5 into evidence, and Your Honour, I'm not sure it was that. But I think it
6 would be nice if the witness could know whether or not he's going to be
7 leaving here. He has been here for some ten days now.
8 JUDGE SCHOMBURG: The only thing we can say is we shall try our
9 best, but we can't really conscientiously promise to do so.
10 Unfortunately, we have to leave it open. Of course, it depends when we
11 can start tomorrow.
12 This concludes the day and the trial stands adjourned until
13 tomorrow, 9.00.
14 [The witness stands down]
15 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at
16 1.48 p.m., to be reconvened on
17 Tuesday, the 25th day of June, 2002,
18 at 9.00 a.m.