1 Monday, 30 November 2009
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused Simatovic entered court]
4 [The Accused Stanisic appears via videolink]
5 --- Upon commencing at 2.29 p.m.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Good afternoon to everyone.
7 Madam Registrar, could you please call the case.
8 THE REGISTRAR: Good afternoon, Your Honours. This is case
9 IT-03-69-T, the Prosecutor versus Jovica Stanisic and Franko Simatovic.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
11 Before we continue, I'd first like to verify whether the
12 technical facilities are working well.
13 Mr. Stanisic, I can see you. Can you see on your screen the
14 Trial Chamber, or at least me as Presiding Judge?
15 Has the telephone line been tested? Because you have a telephone
16 line which allows you speak with -- to speak with Mr. Knoops.
17 Mr. Knoops, could I ask you whether the line has been tested, and
18 if not, would you please test it right away.
19 MR. KNOOPS: Your Honour, it has not been tested.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Could you please test it right away to see if there
21 is any direct communication possible between you and Mr. Stanisic.
22 MR. KNOOPS: Thank you, sir.
23 [Defence counsel and accused confer]
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stanisic, do I understand that you can directly
25 communicate through this telephone line with Mr. Knoops in the courtroom?
1 THE ACCUSED STANISIC: [Interpretation] Yes.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you for that. Then of course the fact that
3 I'm verifying that all the technical facilities for Mr. Stanisic are in
4 place doesn't mean that you're not there, Mr. Simatovic, and assisted by
6 There are a few of procedural matters we have to pay attention to
7 start with, and first I should explain why we had this late start. The
8 late start is due to the fact that it turns out up to this moment to be
9 impossible to have a line with the UNDU and the videolink room in two
10 languages, which means that questions to be put to Dr. Eekhof cannot be
11 put to him through this line. I asked whether Dr. Eekhof would be
12 available to come to the courtroom so that he can answer any questions
13 here, because, Mr. Knoops, I understand that you have some questions for
14 Dr. Eekhof. Yes. May I take that up to the moment that Dr. Eekhof
15 arrives that we can continue with other procedural matters?
16 MR. KNOOPS: Yes, Your Honour. Thank you.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Then the Chamber received the -- first of all, the
18 30th of November report by Dr. Eekhof, "Health condition of Mr. Stanisic,
19 Jovica," and I do understand that you have further questions for
20 Dr. Eekhof on the basis of this report. Then we'll wait until he's
22 Then we also received the non-attendance in court form in which
23 Mr. Stanisic expresses that he feels too unwell to attend court in
24 person, that he does not waive his right to attend court in person, but
25 that he has indicated that he wishes to use the video-conferencing link
1 under the present circumstances, and as is clear to everyone now is that
2 he is actually using the video-conferencing link at this very moment.
3 Until we've heard answers from Dr. Eekhof on any questions that
4 you may have for him, the Chamber also wishes at this moment to proceed
5 with a few procedural matters.
6 I'm addressing you, Mr. Bakrac. The Chamber understands that you
7 would wish to raise an issue perhaps in private session, an issue which
8 relates to disagreements between the Simatovic defence and OLAD. The
9 Chamber is aware of the issue, but the Chamber prefers to raise it only
10 after the first break, for very specific reasons. So therefore the
11 Chamber suggests that we proceed at this moment, but that we pay
12 attention to it later today. I see you are nodding yes, which means that
13 we will proceed as I suggested.
14 There are a few procedural matters which I'll save for tomorrow.
15 There is ...
16 [Trial Chamber confers]
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. The next issue is that the Chamber would like
18 to issue a brief statement on conducting cross-examinations of witnesses.
19 Since the text of this statement has not been distributed yet to the
20 booth, I'll refrain from giving that statement right away.
21 [Trial Chamber and legal officer confer]
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I'd like to also make a short statement on the
23 agreed facts.
24 The second decision on adjudicated facts is still pending at this
25 moment and will be issued in due course, but I already wanted to address
1 an issue that came to the Chamber's attention in this respect. It
2 relates to the agreed facts, and the Chamber, as it has expressed on
3 previous occasions, cannot comprehend why the parties cannot agree on
4 some basic facts as opposed to simply not opposing that the Chamber takes
5 judicial notice of them. Matters could be expedited immensely if the
6 parties focused on matters that are truly in dispute. For example, will
7 the Defence want to challenge such basic facts as when Mr. Martic was
8 appointed to a certain position?
9 The parties are urged to focus on matters in dispute and try to
10 come to agreements on other matters.
11 In the same vein, the Chamber learned that there may be room for
12 agreement in relation to evidence relating to Witness B-1244. The
13 Chamber expects the parties to intensify their efforts on coming to an
14 agreement on certain facts, including those related to Witness B-1244,
15 and report back on their progress by December the 18th, 2009.
16 I do understand that it will take some time for Dr. Eekhof to
17 arrive. Mr. Knoops, is the matter you would like to raise and the
18 questions you would like to put to Dr. Eekhof, would that be an obstacle
19 to already starting with the first witness?
20 MR. KNOOPS: Your Honour, my questions would not be a problem to
21 be raised if the cross-examination or the examination-in-chief would be
22 limited to 45 minutes, but that not being the case, I expect --
23 JUDGE ORIE: Well, you say we can proceed for 45 minutes with the
24 first witness.
25 MR. KNOOPS: Yes.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Then we expect Dr. Eekhof to arrive in approximately
2 half an hour. So that would be a possibility.
3 MR. KNOOPS: Thank you.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stanisic, I noticed that when we entered the
5 courtroom that you were standing upright. I can imagine that it's not
6 very convenient for you to get up and down again, so the Chamber will not
7 in any way consider it as a lack of respect if you just remain seated
8 when we entered the courtroom. So feel free to do so.
9 Then we'll proceed -- then we'll proceed, and could -- is the
10 Prosecution ready to call its next witness, and -- Mr. Groome, we'll have
11 to interrupt when Dr. Eekhof arrives.
12 MR. GROOME: Certainly, Your Honour.
13 Your Honour, the Prosecution calls Edin Hadzovic, and the
14 examination will be conducted by Mr. Klaus Hoffmann.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Could the witness be escorted into the
17 No protective measures, Mr. Hoffmann?
18 MR. HOFFMANN: No. And maybe I can raise one issue even before
19 the witness coming in, just to save some time. Would I tender two maps
20 from the court binder of maps. Again those are just road maps and a town
21 map of Doboj for orientation purposes. Those are maps 30 and 31. I
22 think I have indications from the Stanisic Defence at least that there is
23 no objection as in the past. I have yet not heard from Mr. Bakrac.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Any objections against admission of the --
25 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] No, Your Honour.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Then Madam Registrar will soon assign numbers to
2 them. Yes, if you could do it right away, then.
3 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P80 and Exhibit P81, Your Honours.
4 [The witness entered court]
5 JUDGE ORIE: P80 and P81 are admitted into evidence.
6 WITNESS: EDIN HADZOVIC
7 [Witness answered through interpreter]
8 JUDGE ORIE: Good afternoon.
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good afternoon.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hadzovic, before you give evidence the Rules of
11 Procedure and Evidence require that you make a solemn declaration that
12 you speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
13 Madam Usher will hand out to you the text of the declaration.
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will
15 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Hadzovic. Please be seated.
17 Mr. Hadzovic, you'll first be examined by Mr. Hoffmann.
18 Mr. Hoffmann is counsel for the Prosecution.
19 Mr. Hoffmann, you may proceed.
20 MR. HOFFMANN: Thank you, Your Honours.
21 Examination by Mr. Hoffmann:
22 Q. Witness, I have just first questions on your prior statements,
23 and I want to ask you if you recall giving a statement to an
24 investigative judge of the Cantonal Court in Zenica in the case against
25 Predrag Kujundzic.
1 A. Yes.
2 MR. HOFFMANN: I would ask that we could see 65 ter 5172 on the
4 Your Honours, I'm just waiting for the B/C/S version to be shown
5 so he can identify his signature.
6 JUDGE ORIE: We see now two --
7 MR. HOFFMANN: Yes.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
9 MR. HOFFMANN: If we could go directly to page 7 in the B/C/S,
11 Q. Witness, on the screen before you, you see a document purporting
12 to be a statement given by you on 22nd June 1998, and I will ask you to
13 look at the signature on page 7, whether you recognise it.
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. And is it your own signature, I understand it.
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. And was this statement at the time given voluntary and free of
18 any pressure?
19 A. Voluntary.
20 Q. And did you have a chance to review the statement before signing
21 it at the time?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. And did you also have a chance to review the statement again
24 before coming to court today?
25 A. Yes.
1 MR. HOFFMANN: I would then ask that 65 ter 5173 be put on the
2 screen, please. It is a statement taken by ICTY investigators on
3 12 March 2001
4 Q. Witness, do you recall giving a statement to ICTY investigators
5 on the -- on this day?
6 A. Yes.
7 MR. HOFFMANN: And if we can please go to the page 10 in the
8 English document.
9 Q. And I will ask you, Witness, if you recognise your own signature
10 on page 10.
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. And also for this one did you have an opportunity prior to
13 testifying today to review a translation of these two statements in your
14 own language?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. And is it correct that you made two little corrections to the
17 ICTY statement, one being on page 7 of the English document. It's the
18 first paragraph. In the B/C/S it's the fourth paragraph.
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. It says in the statement "until 18 May, 1992," and you corrected
21 it to "Until 18 June 1992
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. And you made one other correction. That is on page 3,
24 paragraph 5 in both languages where you do mention a number of
25 check-points in Doboj, and the second one being at the Catholic church,
1 and you corrected it that this check-point is actually on the road to
2 Miljkovac and not on the road to Tesanj; is that correct?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. And subject to these two corrections to the 2001 statement just
5 made, did your statements that you signed in 1998 and 2001 accurately
6 reflect what you said to the investigative judge, respectively to the
7 Office of the Prosecutor?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. And if you were asked the same questions today that you were
10 asked at the time, would you give the same answers?
11 A. Yes.
12 MR. HOFFMANN: Your Honours, Prosecution tenders both of these
13 statements from 1998 and 2001, that is 65 ter number 5172 and 5173 into
15 JUDGE ORIE: Any objections Stanisic Defence?
16 MR. KNOOPS: No objection, Your Honour.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Bakrac for Mr. Simatovic.
18 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] No objection.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar, numbers to be assigned would be?
20 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibits P82 and P83, Your Honours.
21 JUDGE ORIE: P28 and P83 are admitted into evidence.
22 Please proceed, Mr. Hoffmann.
23 MR. HOFFMANN: Thank you, Your Honours.
24 Q. Witness, in your statement from 1998, which is now Exhibit P82,
25 in English at paragraph 2 -- at page 2 in the last paragraph and
1 continuing on to page 3, the same in the B/C/S version, you mentioned
2 some of the main activists in Doboj such as Milan Ninkovic,
3 Andrija Bjelosevic and Milan
4 orders received by local Serbs, and I quote "from higher up in Pale or
6 annexing it to their Serbian Republic
7 basis you made that statement.
8 A. Doboj had a majority Muslim population, Bosniak population,
9 accounting for 42 per cent. The Serbs accounted for 37 per cent and
10 Croats counted for some 7 or 8 per cent. As the SDS won the elections in
11 the town of Doboj
12 Serbs did not agree with that, and villages with the majority Serb
13 population started separating from the rest of the area and voicing their
14 desire to be annexed to Republika Srpska. There were all sorts of
15 rallies taking place in Doboj. Karadzic appeared at many of them. They
16 called for separation from the Muslim and Croat peoples. They didn't
17 want to live together with them. They put pressure on the rest of the
18 population, and some of that was tantamount to terror.
19 Q. Just one clarification. On the transcript it reads at line -- at
20 page 10, first, that the SDS
21 says the SDA won the election. Could you just clarify which party did
22 actually win the elections.
23 A. In the town of Doboj
24 Q. And what elections are you talking about? At what time period?
25 A. That was the first election in 1990. The SDA won the elections.
1 The chief of the municipality was appointed. He was a Muslim. The chief
2 of the police was also a Muslim. All the leading positions should have
3 been taken over by the Muslims. However, that resulted in a dis-balance,
4 and some of the SDS
5 positions. They started boycotting work. They started avoiding any
6 obligations, and basically they did not recognise the results of the
8 Q. Could --
9 MR. KNOOPS: Your Honour.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
11 MR. KNOOPS: At this point the Defence raise an objection as to
12 the way the witness is answering the very simple question of my learned
13 colleague Mr. Hoffmann, what is the foundation of this particular line in
14 the statement? Instead of giving the explanation for any such
15 foundation, the witness is giving opinion evidence without giving any
16 foundation for his statement as to quotations like "tantamount to
17 terror," giving percentages of Serbs, and we still do not know any
18 foundation for his explanation of his opinion.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hoffmann, I take it that after this answer you
20 would have sought the factual basis for the answers where it appears that
21 it mixes up to some extent with opinions.
22 MR. HOFFMANN: I think to -- to some extent there will be more
23 questions in -- in the same direction. On the other hand, I think he has
24 given some evidence in the statements already. So I try to focus on some
25 of the issues, and I think he did refer to the rallies and other meetings
1 of the Serbs in the region, the attendance of Karadzic and what was said
2 at the time, which is, as I understand, the basis for his statement.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But at the same time, that resulted in a
4 dis-balance and some of the SDS
5 the SDS
6 the answers are not found in the statement, you are invited to further
7 explore them. But at the same time what is already in the statement
8 doesn't need to be further explored and could be understood by the
9 parties as providing the factual basis for the answers the witness is
10 giving now. Please proceed.
11 MR. HOFFMANN: Thank you, Your Honours.
12 Q. Just to follow up, Witness, on what the Presiding Judge just
13 said, when you refer to the Serbs did turn down offers, could you explain
14 what you meant by that.
15 A. The SDA won the elections and was given mandate to appoint people
16 to various positions. Since the SDA won, he was he titled to the -- it
17 was entitled to the positions of the president of the municipality, the
18 president of the MUP. Serbs were given other positions and other
19 functions, but they did not want them, and instead of accepting those
20 positions they obstructed the work of all the bodies to which they should
21 have been elected. They simply started creating their own -- I don't
22 know how to put it. Their own bodies. And they called referendums in
23 the villages where the majority Serb population, and that those
24 referendums, those villagers decided that they didn't want to live in
25 Bosnia-Herzegovina but, rather, that they wanted to live in
1 Republika Srpska.
2 MR. HOFFMANN: I'll ask that 65 ter 2595 be put on the screen.
3 It's a number of decisions of local communities in the Doboj
4 municipality, all dated 13 October 1991
6 Q. Witness, did you have a chance to review those decisions prior to
7 your testimony?
8 JUDGE ORIE: You can't hear me at this moment in your own
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can hear you, but --
11 MR. HOFFMANN:
12 Q. Can you hear me now?
13 A. I can.
14 Q. I'll just repeat the question. Did you have a chance to review
15 those decisions prior to your testimony?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Can you describe what decisions are taken by those local
19 A. These are decisions by local communes taken at the meetings of
20 their local assemblies and saying that they didn't want to live in Bosnia
21 and Herzegovina
22 Bosnia-Herzegovina and annexed to the former Yugoslavia or, rather, to
23 the Republika Srpska.
24 Q. Did you know about those kind of decisions at the time?
25 A. Not at the time.
1 MR. HOFFMANN: Can we please go down page 1 to the bottom.
2 Q. And, Witness, can you look at the person who signed that first
3 decision. Are you familiar with that person?
4 A. Yes. His brother and I worked together in the same company.
5 Dragan Dejanovic.
6 MR. HOFFMANN: And if we can go up to the header of the document,
8 Q. Witness, if you look at the header, would you say that this
9 document appears to be authentic to you?
10 A. Yes.
11 MR. HOFFMANN: Your Honours, the Prosecution tenders this
12 document into evidence.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Any objections?
14 MR. KNOOPS: Your Honour, we don't have a fundamental objection
15 to the document as such, but we question whether the witness is the
16 proper person through which the document could be tendered, because we
17 still do not have any foundation heard in his testimony as far as page 2
18 of the first statement concerns the last paragraph on which the
19 Prosecution has questioned the witness as an alleged basis for the
20 foundation of his knowledge of his testimony. So in the absence of a
21 clear answer to that foundation question, we oppose the introduction of
22 these documents through this witness unless the Prosecution is able to
23 provide us that foundation through the witness.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Is there any issue in relation to the
25 authenticity of these documents?
1 MR. KNOOPS: Not as far as the Defence concerns.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Does the Defence accept that these decisions then
3 were produced at the time as a result of apparently the bodies which, as
4 the decisions say, issued these decisions?
5 MR. KNOOPS: We won't contest that, Your Honour.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Why not, then, bar table the decisions which would
7 be -- I mean, in this Tribunal we have a tradition which does not
8 strictly require the introduction of documents through a witness, and of
9 course it there's any authenticity issue, then that should be thoroughly
10 looked at. But if there seems to be not such a matter, then whether it's
11 through this Witness -- I -- it's now on the record that you do not
12 oppose the admission into evidence of these documents, although you put
13 us on notice that you do not consider this witness to be the right person
14 to introduce it.
15 Any objections by the Simatovic Defence?
16 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I would like to join my
17 learned friend Mr. Knoops's words. There is no point in tendering this
18 document through this witness. He never saw the document before. He
19 does actually know the person who signed it, but he cannot even confirm
20 the authenticity of the signature. This is about the municipality of the
21 Doboj, about one of its local commune, and in principle I agree with the
22 words of my learned friend Mr. Knoops. When it comes to local communes,
23 these are irrelevant decisions. I don't think that they merit any
24 attention whatsoever.
25 JUDGE ORIE: That's -- now we're mixing up several matters.
1 First of all, whether there's a challenge to the authenticity. It is
2 understood, Mr. Bakrac, that you say that this witness is not a person
3 who could authenticate these documents. At the same time, you share the
4 views of Mr. Knoops who said there is no challenge to the authenticity as
5 such, apart from that it may not be this witness who could give that.
6 And he also said that we not oppose admission of the document into
8 Therefore, if you say, "I share the views of Mr. Knoops," I take
9 it that there's no objection against it having been admitted, but that
10 you have problems in the way in which it is introduced by the
11 Prosecution, and that a bar table tendering would have been more
13 MR. KNOOPS: Your Honour, if it may assist the Prosecution, also
14 for future potential tendering of documents, we have to remind that this
15 witness was from 1975 till 1992 a bookkeeper in Doboj. And really the
16 question is, with all due respect to the witness, a bookkeeper is the
17 capable person as a witness to tender documents with a political
18 connotation like this.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Well, whether a book keeper is excluded from the
20 group of persons who could -- but let's not make matters any more complex
21 than they are already. I do understand that there's no objection against
22 admission, although there's a challenge as to whether this witness would
23 be the appropriate person to -- to confirm the authenticity of these
25 Mr. Hoffmann, you have tendered this document. Do you insist
1 on -- on this witness as the appropriate vehicle to introduce this
2 document, or would you say, well, it gives some support on the testimony
3 of the witness, so irrespective of whether he is the person who could
4 authenticate it?
5 MR. HOFFMANN: Your Honours, I think there is -- there's several
6 points. Of course we can tender those kind of documents from the bar
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
9 MR. HOFFMANN: That can be done. At the same time, I think the
10 witness did give some evidence on the document.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Well, he said that he knew the person -- he
12 knew the brother of the person who signed it. That's the -- I think the
13 only --
14 MR. HOFFMANN: Well, he actually -- if I may. Actually, before I
15 even called up the document, he did say on page 12 that the --
16 "The Serbs called referendums in the villages where they had a
17 majority Serb population. Those villages decided that they did not want
18 to live in Bosnia-Herzegovina but, rather, wanted to live in
19 Republika Srpska."
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
21 MR. HOFFMANN: It's exactly that context where these decision are
22 in --
23 JUDGE ORIE: Let's save our energy for the next document where
24 there is a real dispute about whether it should or should not be admitted
25 into evidence.
1 This document which consists of five pages, five similar
2 documents, Madam Registrar, the number would be?
3 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P84, Your Honours.
4 JUDGE ORIE: And is admitted into evidence.
5 Please proceed.
6 MR. HOFFMANN: Thank you, Your Honour. I do have a similar
7 document which is 65 ter 2596. It's a document from the SDS board in
8 Doboj sent to the SDS
9 Q. Witness, if you look at that document, again it's in the same
10 context. Did you know about the decision mentioned in this document at
11 the time, that is, in October 1991?
12 A. Yes. That meeting was held in the bank and was attended by
13 Karadzic as well, and it resounded in Doboj. It was a bombshell.
14 Q. Can you just explain what you mean by referring to "it was a
16 A. At that time unrest started in Doboj. There was the arming of
17 the army, and the police started separating from the regular police, all
18 sorts of formations starting descending upon Doboj, and we still hoped
19 that everything would come to an end, that the situation would calm down,
20 that there would be no complete separation. However, when this decision
21 was taken, that was the end, and the Serbs no longer wanted to live
22 together with us. That's what the decision meant.
23 Q. Are you familiar with the person who signed this document, which
24 can be seen on the bottom of the page?
25 A. The SDS
2 Q. And just for the record, can you read out the name, please.
3 A. Milan Ninkovic, an engineer.
4 MR. HOFFMANN: Your Honours, I would tender this document into
6 JUDGE ORIE: Same objections to be put on the record, but no
7 fundamental objection against admission as such?
8 MR. KNOOPS: Yes, Your Honour. Thank you.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Bakrac, I see you're nodding.
10 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] I am.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
12 And, Madam Registrar.
13 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P85, Your Honours.
14 JUDGE ORIE: P85 is admitted into evidence.
15 Please proceed, Mr. Hoffmann.
16 MR. HOFFMANN:
17 Q. Witness, in your 1998 statement, in English on page 3, second
18 paragraph; B/C/S page 3, paragraph 2, you refer to Doboj being
19 strategically important. Can you explain in what sense you think that
20 Doboj was of strategic importance?
21 MR. KNOOPS: Your Honour, objection. Witness is not an expert.
22 Also in considering his profession, he is not competent to answer any
23 questions on military strategical issues.
24 JUDGE ORIE: It depends on how factual the questions are. Could
25 you please --
1 MR. HOFFMANN: I didn't even ask about military context. It's
2 his own statement where he says it's strategically important. I'm just
3 trying to find out what he means by that, and that's just a factual
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I think if this is part of his statement and
6 it's not factual in itself, then it's even good to ask the witness about
7 what he meant by that, because then we'll be able to assess whether
8 there's any factual matter underlying what at first sight seems to be an
10 Yes. So the question then is properly phrased as -- not as in
11 what sense you think that Doboj was a strong of -- strategically
12 important, but what he meant by that. That's what we're seek, and as
13 factual as possible.
14 Could you explain what you meant by it, and try to explain it to
15 us in terms of what you personally observed or you personally heard or
16 what you personally know.
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Doboj, when I look upon it
18 strategically, is an important traffic hub and a railroad hub. In former
20 Banja Luka, Belgrade
21 through Doboj. And then there is Mount Ozren, and Doboj is at the foot
22 of that mountain, and Mount Ozren
23 were paramilitary units up there, and in the Second World War it was also
24 a well-known refuge of Chetniks and other paramilitary units, so that all
25 traffic that went from or to Banja Luka had to pass through Doboj. And
1 the same applies for traffic going to Serbia and to Krajina.
2 THE PROSECUTOR: I would ask that 65 ter 1744 be put on the
3 screen. It is a newspaper article from 13 February 1992. And if we
4 could please go to the last paragraph in the B/C/S original on the first
5 column of that. And the relevant translation is found on the English
6 page, second last paragraph.
8 short paragraph that you see enlarged on the screen now.
9 A. "For this reason serious consideration was given also to the
10 necessity to establish communication geographic links. It is not
11 disputed that Northern Bosnia is a bridge and a natural line between the
12 two Krajinas, the Knin Krajina, the Bosanska Krajina, on the one hand;
13 and Semberija and Serbia
14 Q. Thank you. This newspaper article referring to a meeting of the
16 A. I haven't hear you well, I apologise.
17 Q. I was asking, this is a newspaper article about the --
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. -- SDS
20 the Court if you heard about such meetings at the time and what you just
21 read out about the links between the Krajinas and Serbia.
22 A. Yes.
23 MR. HOFFMANN: And if we can please look at, in the second
24 column, the fourth paragraph. I think it's a bit further down. And in
25 English it's on the page 2, the third paragraph.
1 Q. The article does refer to a certain, I quote from the English
2 translation, "Proposal for population transfers."
3 MR. JORDASH: May I formulate an objection.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Well, perhaps we -- we first listen to the question
5 and then if there's any need to object to it. And apart from that, I'm
6 not very used that two counsel dealing with the same witness. It's
7 usually focused on one of them. Now, you're both equally fine with me,
8 but two of them is at least unusual. Usually it's one counsel who, as
9 they call it, perhaps a bit inappropriate, take the witness. Now I see
10 that I've got two counsel against one Mr. Hoffmann at the other side. I
11 don't know whether that's usual in your jurisdiction. I don't know
12 whether you have experienced this in this Tribunal.
13 MR. JORDASH: No. We were simply fortifying our defences against
14 Mr. Hoffmann.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Okay. Let's -- let's first -- let's first see
16 whether -- what the question is.
17 MR. JORDASH: Sorry to -- can I just raise another issue, just
18 very briefly.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
20 MR. JORDASH: And this relates to our client Mr. Stanisic. We
21 notice 45 minutes has gone past.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Well, to what extent 45 minutes will be
23 finally delivered is still a matter to be determined.
24 MR. JORDASH: Yes.
25 JUDGE ORIE: But perhaps we remain on the safe side. But perhaps
1 it is good to finish at least that we know whether there is a question
2 and what the objections to that question would be, and then we'll have a
3 break, and hopefully then the doctor will arrive meanwhile.
4 Mr. Hoffmann, what was your question?
5 MR. HOFFMANN: Yes.
6 Q. Witness, I want to hear from you. You see in front of you that
7 there is mentioning of a proposal for a population transfer, and again
8 it's in the fourth paragraph on the second column in B/C/S. Can you tell
9 the Court if at the time you ever heard about such proposals for a
10 population transfer?
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, and the objection is?
12 MR. JORDASH: The objection is less to the question and more to
13 the manner in which we are proceeding. I would put the objection in this
14 way: That this is a newspaper, from where we do not know. The witness's
15 ability to comment on it, we do not know. We haven't had it disclosed to
16 us as to this witness's ability to comment on this particular newspaper
17 article, and we submit that putting an exhibit in front a witness,
18 reading a helpful aspect of that exhibit in support of a party's case,
19 and then inviting the witness to add a little bit more is an unfair
21 JUDGE ORIE: It's at least leading. That's without any question.
22 MR. JORDASH: Indeed.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Then, Mr. Hoffmann, perhaps you could think during
24 the break about rephrasing your question. And not to say that under no
25 circumstances contemporaneous newspaper articles could not be admitted
1 into evidence, but to give it to the witness and then to say, "Is that
2 what you heard?" is -- without any question is one of the most leading
3 ways of putting a question. So therefore if you would consider
4 rephrasing it. But we'll first have a break.
5 Mr. Stanisic, we'll have a break, but I would like to tell you
6 that if at any other moment you feel that you would need a short break,
7 then never hesitate either to address me or to give a call to Mr. Knoops
8 so that we can consider your request, and of course we'll take it very
9 seriously. Most likely after the break we'll -- we'll have Dr. Eekhof
10 with us. Most likely we'll have Dr. Eekhof with us after the break so
11 that we can put further questions to him in relation to his report.
12 May I also invite you, Mr. Stanisic, your last words which do not
13 appear on the transcript. Now wait until I finish what I said, and then
14 -- even if it is to thank me, but there's no need to do that all the
15 time. But that you wait until we finish speaking and that you then tell
16 us what you would like to convey to the Chamber so that it also appears
17 on the transcript. But from what I understand, the previous words were
18 just expressions of gratitude, rather than anything else.
19 We'll have a break, and we'll resume at 5 minutes to 4.00.
20 [The witness stood down]
21 --- Recess taken at 3.25 p.m.
22 --- On resuming at 3.58 p.m.
23 JUDGE ORIE: I do understand that Dr. Eekhof has arrived. Could
24 we invite him to enter the courtroom.
25 Before Dr. Eekhof enters the courtroom, is there any party which
1 consider it appropriate to ask Dr. Eekhof to -- to give a solemn
2 declaration, or would we just hear his information?
3 MR. GROOME: The Prosecution sees no need, Your Honour.
4 MR. KNOOPS: No need, Your Honour. Thank you.
5 MR. BAKRAC: [No interpretation]
6 JUDGE ORIE: I took the last words that you would agree,
7 Mr. Bakrac, although it was not translated to us.
8 [Dr. Eekhof entered court]
9 JUDGE ORIE: Good afternoon, Dr. Eekhof. Please be seated.
10 DR. EEKHOF: Thank you, Your Honour.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Dr. Eekhof we received your report of the 30th of
12 November, 2009, and the Stanisic Defence has expressed a wish to put
13 further questions to you in relation to that report.
14 Mr. Knoops, please proceed.
15 MR. KNOOPS: Thank you, Your Honour.
16 Good afternoon, Dr Eekhof, thank you for joining us today. Sorry
17 that we interrupted your busy schedule. I have a few questions on
18 paragraph 6 of your report today. And in that report you opined that it
19 was your estimation that Mr. Stanisic can resume -- can participate for
20 periods of at least 45 minutes, and you estimate that he can resume
21 participation in the proceedings after a 30-minute break. However, this
22 remains unclear without assessment.
23 Now, my question is, how in your professional view could this
24 time-frame be assessed? And secondly, what should be the frequency of
25 such assessment?
1 DR. EEKHOF: Up to now the problem is, of course, it has never
2 taken place. He hasn't testified up to now. So what I have done, I've
3 looked at the activities and consultations and other things which
4 Mr. Stanisic has done, and I think it has been proven that he can keep
5 his attention and function normal intellectual during at least
6 45 minutes. That's how I came to the conclusion.
7 MR. KNOOPS: And as to the time break of 30 minutes, what is the
8 foundation for that time break?
9 DR. EEKHOF: Well, I say that's more or less just an estimation
10 without -- not based on anything but maybe the idea that after half an
11 hour people can come down to rest and clear their mind, but there's no
12 evidence-based reason for 30 minutes.
13 MR. KNOOPS: Dr. Eekhof, is it -- is it your opinion that that
14 assessment should be taken place on a daily basis? Can it, in other
15 words, can it vary from day to day?
16 DR. EEKHOF: Well, the last weeks we haven't seen many
17 variations, so I think an assessment once weekly would be enough. But
18 I've been instructed to write a report every day that Mr. Stanisic will
19 appear in court, so will have every day an assessment, unless instructed
21 MR. KNOOPS: Dr. Eekhof, now with respect to the videolink, it is
22 clear that there is medical staff available for consultation in case of a
23 need for reassessment of this time-frame. Mr. Stanisic has expressed his
24 incentive also to come to court. How would you envisage that situation
25 in terms of the assessment of the time-limits and the break?
1 DR. EEKHOF: Well, there are two points on the time-frames. One
2 is what he is physical able to do, and in the last weeks he's been proven
3 able to go to a hospital in another town, that's for about three hours in
4 a car, and with about three-quarters of an hour - that's how I come to
5 the 45 minutes - consultation, and coming back from that town. That's
6 how I came to the three-hour frame. But today I've instructed also the
7 guard to note exactly all his activity on a logbook so that I can assess
8 it tomorrow.
9 MR. KNOOPS: Thank you. No further questions.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you. I have one question for you, Dr. Eekhof.
11 Is my understanding correct that it is that there are no strict medical
12 standards for the assessments and it's rather, to say it very bluntly,
13 that apart from the basic medical assessment, that, apart from that, it's
14 -- that the proof of the pudding is in the eating.
15 DR. EEKHOF: As I said it has to be evaluated during -- but -- in
16 fact, there is no -- I can only do it by observation. I observe and I
17 read the logbooks and see what Mr. Stanisic has done. I also see him
18 during consultations. Sometimes I meet him when he's in the smoking
19 room. So I've got an idea of what he can do.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
21 DR. EEKHOF: And what I've put it as a maximum, and the proof the
22 eating of the pudding would be the proof how long he can last.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Of course with -- I'm not saying this but
24 being very cautious about the situation of course. It's not in any way
25 to express a lack of caution.
1 No further questions.
2 Prosecution no further questions.
3 Yes, Mr. Groome.
4 MR. GROOME: Your Honour, if I can ask just a couple of questions
5 and follow up to Mr. Knoops's questions.
6 Dr. Eekhof, on the 1st of September the Chamber issued -- it's
7 the latest of one of its articulations about the way in which we should
8 proceed in trial, and said that we'd have sessions of an hour and
9 15 minutes. Do I take from your testimony today that it's quite possible
10 that Mr. Stanisic would be able to sit for an hour and 15 minutes, it's
11 just that you haven't been able to assess that because of the types of
12 interaction you've observed?
13 DR. EEKHOF: Physically, my opinion is that he would be able to
14 sit for one hour and 15 minutes. Obvious, of course, psychological span.
15 I can only base it on what I've observed up to now.
16 MR. GROOME: My only other question to you is -- and maybe this
17 is an obvious question. But in your view does Mr. Stanisic have the
18 capacity presently to advise the Chamber or his attorney if he feels that
19 he's experiencing some particular difficulty during the course of a
20 hearing or during the course of a day?
21 DR. EEKHOF: I don't think he'll have any problem with telling
22 people if he's -- if he has a problem.
23 MR. GROOME: No further questions, Your Honour. Thank you.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
25 MR. KNOOPS: One question, Your Honour in re-examination.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
2 MR. KNOOPS: Dr. Eekhof, the Prosecution just confronted you with
3 a time-frame of one hour and 15 minutes. You just answered, Well,
4 physically it's possible. Psychologically --
5 DR. EEKHOF: Could be possible.
6 MR. KNOOPS: Could. Could be possible.
7 As far as his mental state is concerned, did you verify with your
8 staff, in particular the psychiatrist Dr. Petkovic, whether a time spent
9 of one hour 15 could be endured by Mr. Stanisic mentally?
10 DR. EEKHOF: I'm not confident about that expect because a time
11 spent of one hour and 15 minutes is new for me at this moment.
12 MR. KNOOPS: So from a mental point of view you cannot confirm
13 that Mr. Stanisic can, in fact, endure a time-frame of one hour 15; is
14 that correct?
15 DR. EEKHOF: Well, I can not also state that he's not able to do
16 it in the moment. It's only what has been proven up to now in
18 MR. KNOOPS: Thank you very much.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Dr. Eekhof, since the Bench has no further questions
20 to you, I would like to thank you very much for coming. We'll see
21 whether we can resolve the problem that we can use only one language at
22 distance, if that can be resolved that might save you coming to the
23 courtroom, which is, of course, not very pleasant, not the easiest way of
24 communicating. Thank you very much.
25 DR. EEKHOF: You're welcome.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Would you please follow Madam Usher.
2 [Dr. Eekhof withdrew]
3 JUDGE ORIE: I suggest to you, Mr. Bakrac that, we would briefly
4 pay attention to the matter you would like to raise at the end of this
5 session which would prolong the next break a bit.
6 [Defence counsel confer]
7 MR. HOFFMANN: Can I maybe raise one other exhibit-related matter
8 before the witness comes in.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Please do so, Mr. Hoffmann.
10 MR. HOFFMANN: Just again in terms of maybe saving some time, and
11 I just had a quick chance to talk to the Stanisic Defence on it. One of
12 the next exhibits is a collection of photos that I personally took in
13 Doboj in last year just to identify the locations where people were
14 detained. It's 65 ter 5169. It is yet not formally on the 65 ter
15 exhibit list but is pending for admission or amendment to the exhibit
16 list. However, I understand from at least the Stanisic Defence that
17 there is no objection to the admission of that collection of photographs.
18 So I would simply ask --
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
20 MR. HOFFMANN: -- whether the Simatovic Defence has any issue
21 about that collection of photos.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mainly to identify locations rather than --
23 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, we have not had the
24 time to peruse that collection of photos. If it is not a problem, we
25 would like to look at that collection during the next break, and we will
1 be able to state our views during the next session.
2 [The witness takes the stand]
3 JUDGE ORIE: Have they been uploaded?
4 MR. HOFFMANN: They have been uploaded.
5 JUDGE ORIE: So if you know how to use your e-court system, then
6 you can look at them even during the break, but Mr. Hoffmann, you will
7 see when -- at what time you'll introduce them and see then whether the
8 Simatovic Defence has looked at them or not.
9 We'll continue. If you're ready, please proceed.
10 MR. HOFFMANN: Thank you. Yes.
11 If I can ask the court usher to bring back the newspaper article
12 on the screen, which is 65 ter 1744.
13 Q. And, Witness, can I ask you if you ever heard about any proposal
14 in 1991 or 1992 relating to a transfer of population or exchange of
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Can you explain what you learned or heard about such proposals at
18 the time?
19 A. At that time, Serb -- Serbs asked for those places with a
20 majority Serb population to be separated and that the minority peoples in
21 those places should move out. In practical terms, that was expulsion.
22 Q. Do you know if any such proposals were ever implemented?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. Can you explain how, if you know.
25 A. As soon as they took over, the SDS I mean, all Muslims and
1 Croats, and I'm talking about Doboj, all Muslims and Croats were fired
2 from their jobs. They started blowing up Muslim and Croat cafe bars and
3 cars. People started moving out spontaneously. Arrests started. We
4 were being put in camps, and we were exchanged.
5 I personally and my family were arrested after the shelling of
6 Doboj, and I was put in a camp. I managed to escape from one of those
7 camps where I was. The others were exchanged.
8 There was a curfew in Doboj. Muslims and Croats were allowed
9 only to walk between 8.00 and 11.00 to go for their supplies. After that
10 we had to stay home. In the meantime, they visited the empty houses,
11 looted and took away everything that was in the houses. They broke in,
12 stole property, and they took us into camps.
13 Q. Now, what you just told about these things that happened and
14 having reviewed the article in front of you, would you say that what is
15 said in this article is consistent with what you learned about those
16 proposals at the time?
17 A. Yes.
18 MR. HOFFMANN: I would tender this newspaper article into
19 evidence. And just for the record, it is from a local newspaper,
20 "Derventski List" and was published on 13 February 1992.
21 MR. JORDASH: No objection.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Bakrac.
23 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] No.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Madam Registrar.
25 THE REGISTRAR: The article will become Exhibit P86,
1 Your Honours.
2 JUDGE ORIE: P86 is admitted into evidence.
3 MR. HOFFMANN:
4 Q. Witness, I want now to draw your attention to your detention in
5 1992, and especially your detention at the so-called Perco's disco in
7 prior to coming to court today to review collection of photographs from
8 various locations in Doboj.
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. And did you recognise the locations that were on those
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. And did you also have a chance to review an index of all those
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. And can you confirm that this intention that you reviewed is
17 actually correct?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Now, Your Honours, I notice what Mr. Bakrac said about this photo
20 collection which is 65 ter 5169. Normally I would have intended to
21 simply tender that collection into evidence without going through the
22 process of showing individual photos now to the witness. What I would
23 propose, to give Mr. Bakrac some time, would be to give it a P number,
24 mark it for identification, and then maybe admitted it into evidence
25 after the next session if we have a response by Mr. Bakrac.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Do you want to rely on these photographers with this
2 witness, or ...
3 MR. HOFFMANN: Yes.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then I take it that if there -- they'll be
5 marked for identification then. I do understand that the mere purpose is
6 to identify locations, rather than anything else.
7 MR. HOFFMANN: Yes. It's basically to identify three detention
8 locations and their exact location in Doboj.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
10 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, we're now talking
11 about the photos and illustrations. I can now agree for the collection
12 of photos to be admitted into evidence. And this is just to make
13 everybody's life easier.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I do understand that that's also the Stanisic
16 Madam Registrar, a serious of photos, 65 ter 5169 receives
18 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P87, Your Honours.
19 JUDGE ORIE: P87 is admitted into evidence. Please proceed.
20 MR. HOFFMANN:
21 Q. Witness, can you tell us briefly who was actually detained in the
22 disco, the so-called Perco's disco?
23 A. Croats and Muslim were is detained there from neighbouring
24 villages and from the town of Doboj
25 were those with predominant Croat and Muslim populations.
1 Q. Were these men, women, and children detained at the disco?
2 A. Only men.
3 Q. And were these men civilians, police officers, soldiers, if you
5 A. Civilians.
6 Q. And were you personally ever given a reason for your arrest and
8 A. No.
9 Q. In your 2000 -- in your 1998 statement, which is Exhibit P82, you
10 mention a certain Slobodan Karagic, aka Karaga, coming to the military
11 hangars near the Bosanka company. Are you able to tell the Court whether
12 this Slobodan Karagic was a member of the regular Serb police or army?
13 A. He was a member of a paramilitary unit. I don't know which one.
14 He came to the camp where we were, and he was looking for hidden money,
15 jewellery, gold, and if he found any, that person would be set free. As
16 far as I know, nobody was as a result of such practices.
17 Q. And can you describe the Court, if you remember, how this person
18 was dressed.
19 A. A camouflage military uniform. A camouflage uniform with a red
20 beret that he wore on the head.
21 MR. HOFFMANN: I would ask that 65 ter 4840 be brought on the
22 screen. It's a number of payment lists from the CSB Doboj from the time
23 area -- time period April 1992. And if we could go in the original
24 directly to page 9.
25 Q. Witness, can I ask you to look at the list of names that you see
1 there and tell me if you recognise any of the names on the list.
2 A. Slobodan Karagic [realtime transcript read in error "Karadzic"];
3 Nenad Markocevic, who was a kayak athlete in Doboj.
4 Q. Do you know if the second person that you mentioned,
5 Nenad Markocevic, whether he was --
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. -- if you know, a member of any police or army unit or any other
9 A. He was a member of a unit just like Karaga, but I don't know
10 which. They wore uniforms and red berets. And when people were lined up
11 in the form of a human shield, he was on that line where we were.
12 Q. I just note that a few lines above the name of Slobodan Karagic
13 is actually misspelled, and it says now Karadzic. If that could be
15 A. Karagic, yes.
16 Q. If he could then turn to the next page, and I'll ask you again,
17 Witness, if you recognise any of the names on this second part of that
19 A. No.
20 Q. If you look at the last four names, any of those are familiar?
21 A. Milan
22 hangar in Perco's disco club. He was an employee of the Doboj Izvor
23 company, and he was the chief of the cool depot -- cooler depot.
24 MR. HOFFMANN: I'll ask that this exhibit be admitted into
1 MR. JORDASH: Could I put an objection on the record, and the
2 problem is this, that whilst we can accept and don't dispute that this
3 witness has recognised certain names on this list, what we are troubled
4 by is the way in which notice of this evidence is given. What we're told
5 and what we were told in relation to this witness is this -- this is your
6 evidence. These are your statements. And we are obviously given a
7 variety of Rule 66 statements. We're then given, as in this case, a list
8 of payments to a number of named people from the CSB Doboj. What we're
9 not told, what we learn as we sit in court, is the connection between the
10 two. There's nothing in the witness's statement to say he's going to
11 look at this list and confirm that these names appear on the list, and he
12 knows of them. We are, in effect, being made to guess at the connection
13 that this witness is going to be asked to make between his witness
14 statement and exhibits which are disclosed to us, yes, but not disclosed
15 to us in a form which is useful so that we can make the various
16 connections before we hear it in the courtroom. So that's my objection
17 to this general approach to the way in which the Prosecution's case is
18 apparently going to be led.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. If you have -- when you saw this list,
20 Mr. Jordash, what came to your mind? That is a list of what?
21 MR. JORDASH: Well, the list is -- is obvious in the sense that
22 there are named people who --
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
24 MR. JORDASH: -- the Prosecution would say --
25 JUDGE ORIE: That's clear. But I asked you what came into your
1 mind apart from that you were able to see that this is a list of persons.
2 MR. JORDASH: That the witness was going to say that he knew one
3 or more of the people on this list.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And -- so actually, it happened what you
5 thought would happen.
6 MR. JORDASH: But we were struggling with what's 41 names and not
7 knowing which one the witness was going to say he knew and what they
8 meant to the Prosecution case.
9 JUDGE ORIE: And then I take it that you asked Mr. Hoffmann --
10 I'm a bit confused about what this is all about. Could you give us
11 further information.
12 MR. JORDASH: Well, the problem with that is -- I understand
13 exactly what Your Honour is getting at, but the problem with that is we
14 were, in the first instance, had a list sent to us of exhibits which
15 numbered, I think, in terms of pages, over 300 pages.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
17 MR. JORDASH: So it places us at a real disadvantage to have to
18 go through every single line of those 300 pages, query what might be in
19 the Prosecution's mind, send an e-mail to the Prosecution. One of the
20 exhibits, for example, was Assembly minutes from Republika Srpska
21 Assembly meeting, 168 pages. We had no idea what it was in that that was
22 going to be a part of the Prosecution case, or what it was suppose to
23 prove. We cannot go through, with all due respect, every single line and
24 query each time what it is the Prosecution are trying to say with a
25 particular page and with a particular line.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. To some extent, Mr. Jordash, I fully
2 understand what you're troubled by, and therefore one of the solutions
3 for this would be -- I mean the witness in his statement talks about
4 Mr. Karagic, and apparently Mr. Hoffmann thinks that this list where the
5 name of Karagic appears is something worthwhile because it corroborates
6 the evidence, et cetera. The easiest way of dealing with these matters
7 is that, and I'm also looking at you Mr. Hoffmann, is to tender it from
8 the bar table, and then in accordance with a very specific procedure,
9 which is accompanied by a joint filing in which you, Mr. Hoffmann, say,
10 What is the relevant portion of that? Give that in advance to the
11 Stanisic Defence so that they can survive. You consider page 8 relevant.
12 We are aware of that now. But for us, page 14 is even more relevant. So
13 please, Chamber, look at page 14 as well. So that we get a focused
14 introduction of lengthy documents. I mean if we are talking about five
15 documents in which it is explained that the SDS has decided that it will
16 follow the wish of the people, et cetera, that's obvious from its
17 beginning. But if we're talking about these lengthy documents, there
18 must be ways to find a solution which would meet some of the concerns,
19 which I fully understand Mr. Jordash, and also assist the Chamber because
20 we are in a similar position if we have to go through 130 pages.
21 Sometimes it's, of course, after the testimony. But if you could give a
22 hand to Mr. Jordash, that will save him a lot of time. It will avoid a
23 lot of problems. So try to find a solution to say any document from
24 which it is not immediately clear two or three days before the witness
25 comes and testifies, it's already look specifically at this page or that
1 page because that's the reason why we introduce these documents. This
2 will certainly save a lot of time in court. It will assist Mr. Jordash
3 in using his time as efficiently as possible, and it doesn't harm you.
4 Would it?
5 MR. HOFFMANN: No, Your Honours, and we're glad to follow that
6 guidance. Although I must say --
7 JUDGE ORIE: It's a suggestion at this moment, and it's mainly
8 focusing on documents of greater length. I also want to emphasise that a
9 bit of imagination now and then helps already quite a bit. But 13 pages
10 of names where, apparently, we have only seen now Mr. Karagic and
11 Mr. Markocevic, if you'd say specifically page 9, that would certainly
13 MR. HOFFMANN: Yes.
14 MR. JORDASH: And the -- our main concern is the names.
15 Obviously we can use our imagination and will with Assembly minutes and
16 so on. We wouldn't expect the Prosecution to indicate each and every
17 paragraph and what it means. We can work it out. But as we understand
18 the case against Mr. Stanisic, the Prosecution are going to disclose and
19 rely upon names linked to various security centres. We need to know,
20 respectfully, who it is they say is connected to the security centres and
21 how those security centres are connected to the Serbian DB. What we're
22 trying to avoid is having names flung into the courtroom linked in some
23 tenuous or some solid way to the security centre and then later on the
24 Prosecution telling us what it all means. And that's why our main
25 concern is the names. Who is it the Prosecution say was working for the
1 DB? Thank you.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Again, I spent a bit more time on it than I would
3 usually do, primarily because I would urge the parties to -- to assist
4 each other in identifying exactly what the focus of this case is.
5 If I look only at this document, Mr. Hoffmann, at the top of it,
6 sometimes it says Bosnia and Herzegovina. Sometimes it says CSB
7 It's -- it's not -- it's clear that people are supposed to receive
8 advance payment for their salary, but it's -- if you would have said
9 these are the people who are in the camps, that would certainly have
10 assisted, and I don't think that anything would have been lost. So I --
11 again, and that's something you'll hear for many more weeks if not
12 months, that let's try to focus on what really is in dispute.
13 Please proceed.
14 I took it also that there's no objection against admission into
15 evidence, Mr. Jordash, but this is very short for what was a longer
17 MR. JORDASH: Yes.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Bakrac, no objections?
19 MR. BAKRAC: No, Your Honour.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.
21 THE REGISTRAR: The document will become Exhibit P88,
22 Your Honours.
23 JUDGE ORIE: P88 is admitted into evidence. Please proceed.
24 MR. HOFFMANN: Thank you, Your Honours.
25 Q. Witness if we can now turn to the events on July 12, 1992. In
1 your 1998 statement at page 5, Exhibit P82, you state that members of the
2 Red Berets took out 50 prisoners, including yourself. Can you tell the
3 Court if at the time when you were taken out of the disco any of those
4 Red Berets was referred to by name or nickname.
5 A. The commander of the Red Berets was called Golub by his men; and
6 as he had a Montenegrin accent, we inmates called him the Montenegrin,
8 Q. So Golub and Crnogorac are actually one and the same person?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. And during the actual human shield incident, you state that this
11 Crnogorac killed a certain Kalem. Can you describe how he was dressed?
12 And I'm referring to Crnogorac.
13 A. He was wearing a camouflage military uniform with a red beret,
14 and he lined up a human shield. And to give an example of what to do in
15 order to prevent the people from escaping, he shot a bullet into the back
16 of Kalem's head.
17 Q. Apart from -- apart from the uniform, can you describe Crnogorac?
18 A. He had a large scar from his brow to his chin. It looked like a
19 cut inflicted with a knife. It was on the right -- actually, on the left
20 side of his face.
21 Q. At the time you spent in Doboj and especially in detention, did
22 you ever hear of any other man that was referred to or known by the
23 nickname of Crnogorac other than the one you saw on 12 July 1992?
24 A. No.
25 MR. HOFFMANN: And if we can please see the next exhibit, which
1 is 65 ter 5012 on the screen. It is in fact another payment list, this
2 one being undated.
3 Q. And, Witness, I would ask you if you can read in the B/C/S
4 original, if you can, the header of that document or the list.
5 A. "The group of Crnogorac," if I can see it well.
6 Q. And if you look at that list of names, do you recognise any of
7 those names?
8 A. I only know Nenad Kujundzic. He's Predo Kujundzic's brother.
9 Predo was the leader of the so-called Predo's Wolves.
10 Q. Do you know what happened to this Nenad Kujundzic on this list?
11 A. He was killed in Doboj. That's what I learned after the war,
12 that he was killed in Doboj and that a shell fired by the BiH Army killed
14 MR. HOFFMANN: Thank you. Would I tender this payment list as
15 well into evidence, that is 65 ter 5012.
16 JUDGE ORIE: I hear of no objections.
17 Madam Registrar.
18 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P89, Your Honours.
19 JUDGE ORIE: P89 is --
20 MR. JORDASH: Sorry, Your Honour.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
22 MR. JORDASH: We did object to this prior to the hearing, and we
23 do maintain an objection. We don't know -- perhaps I'm missing it, but
24 we don't know from where it derives.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hoffmann, could you give any ...
1 MR. HOFFMANN: Yes. The Prosecution received this document from
2 the RS MUP in a response to an official request for assistant --
3 assistance, that was RFA 649, a request for any evidence on the unit of
4 the Red Berets in the possession of the RS MUP.
5 MR. JORDASH: We withdraw the objection.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
7 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, the Simatovic Defence
8 has an objection to the authenticity of this document. If you look at
9 it, you will see, that is, if you look at the first ten signatures, you
10 will see that it is -- that they are all by one and the same person.
11 It's the same signature. And there is no date, no visible date,
12 indicating when this document was drafted. We can only tell that this is
13 the year 2008. The document isn't dated, and you don't have to be a
14 graphologist to tell that the first ten signatures are exactly alike.
15 They always read Nedeljko Kovac, and the only very last signature
16 Kujundzic is authentic. And the Simatovic Defence challenges the
17 authenticity of the document and opposes it being admitted.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Two questions, Mr. Hoffmann. The first, 2008 we
19 find fax headers. 1st of September, 2008; 2nd of September, 2008.
20 MR. HOFFMANN: Those are obviously fax numbers, which I honestly
21 assume that those are from the RS MUP. We have gotten this document in
22 that form with those fax numbers from the authorities in the RS MUP. So
23 our clear understanding is that this doesn't refer to the time-frame for
24 2008 but while the RS MUP authorities collected evidence to respond to
25 the official request for assistance that this document was provided
1 internally and then provided to the Office of the Prosecutor.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Bakrac the second matter, you say, it's
3 not authentic because they're all the same signatures. Now, if I would
4 intend to make a forgery, I would not put seven signatures all slightly
5 different. So whether this is really a sign of a lack of authenticity or
6 whether it's just person A signing for receiving money which was intended
7 for someone else is -- I do not see exactly yet what the authenticity
8 issue is, because that there are the same names, Nedeljko Kovac, several
9 times. That is clear. I think there could hardly be any dispute about
10 that. But would that deprive the document of its authenticity, or would
11 it even emphasise the authenticity?
12 Do you agree that if I would like to make a forgery, I wouldn't
13 do it this way?
14 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I believe that what my
15 learned friend from the Office of the Prosecution is true, but before the
16 Defence agrees with the possible admission of this document be shown the
17 request and the reply of the RS. We can only see the date of the fax,
18 but the document itself is not dated. It reads: "The group of
19 Crnogorac." To us this document seems not authentic. All the persons
20 from number 1 through number 10 -- or, rather, for all those persons, one
21 and the same person signed. So if the document should be authentic, it
22 would be logical for it to bear the signatures of the persons mentioned
23 by name here to the right of the all the amount. So I still oppose the
24 admission of this document, and I ask for the request sent to the RS and
25 their reply to be shown to the Defence so that we can see when and from
1 whom it was received.
2 JUDGE ORIE: I suggest that the document will be marked for
3 identification, that there will be further communication between you,
4 Mr. Bakrac, and you, Mr. Hoffmann, so that you can see the request for
5 assistance and that Mr. Hoffmann can inform you about the follow-up given
6 to that and that the Chamber will meanwhile consider whether with or
7 without that information the Chamber could decide on admission or not,
8 and hopefully the matter can be resolved by tomorrow.
9 Madam Registrar, I think you assigned already a number, but ...
10 THE REGISTRAR: This will now become Exhibit P89 marked for
11 identification, Your Honours.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
13 Please proceed, Mr. Hoffmann.
14 MR. HOFFMANN: Thank you, Your Honours. And just for the record
15 I think even the response from the RS MUP itself is an exhibit and now
16 I'll make sure that we get that information to all Defence teams.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Please do so.
18 MR. HOFFMANN: And of course -- and of course the same for the
19 RFA itself.
20 Q. Now, Witness --
21 MR. KNOOPS: May I remind the Court that the 45 minutes have
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
24 MR. KNOOPS: Thank you.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stanisic, we've been now a little bit over
1 45 minutes. I had on my mind to continue for approximately another 10 to
2 15 minutes and then to have a bit of a longer break. Is that something
3 that you could cope with as far as your attention is concerned?
4 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter cannot -- the interpreter
5 cannot hear the accused.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stanisic, one second. The interpreters cannot
7 hear you. I don't know what is it, whether it's a technical problem, or
8 whether it's just the volume of speech, but let's just wait for a second
9 so that everything you tell us is properly translated.
10 THE ACCUSED STANISIC: [Interpretation] I can repeat.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but I first want to seek information that the
12 interpreters can also hear you, and I'm -- if you could just say a few
13 words now so that we first verify whether your voice is heard. Could you
14 just say a few words.
15 THE ACCUSED STANISIC: [Interpretation] I can hear you well, and I
16 can hear the interpreters well.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Could I now hear perhaps through the English booth
18 whether the interpreters can hear Mr. Stanisic.
19 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter confirms that he can hear the
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Would you then please repeat what you just
22 said, Mr. Stanisic, in response to my suggestion that we would go on for
23 another, I think I said, 10 to 15 minutes and then have a bit of a longer
24 break. Would that be possible for you?
25 THE ACCUSED STANISIC: [Interpretation] Yes, but I have a remark
1 which was not put forward today.
2 Over for the last seven month -- months I practically spent in
3 bed, and it is difficult for me to be present even through videolink. It
4 was my wish to come to the courtroom today and tell you in person and ask
5 you to follow the trial through videolink. So I would like to use this
6 opportunity to make that request, because it is very difficult for me to
7 follow the proceedings. But do continue, and I will do my best to
9 JUDGE ORIE: Well, the Chamber has considered your right to be
10 present at trial, Mr. Stanisic. We have received medical reports of what
11 doctors say you would be able to do. And as you may be aware, the
12 Chamber has facilitated, of course first of all, your presence in court,
13 which goes without saying, but that if you'd prefer to follow the
14 proceedings through videolink the Chamber has done everything to make
15 that possible for you. So therefore, the facts that we accepted that you
16 would be in the UNDU and not physically present in this courtroom may
17 already be made clear to you that if -- if this is the way in which you
18 want to follow the proceedings and to be able to participate in that,
19 that the Chamber has accepted that choice.
20 So we go on for another 10 to 15 minutes and then we'll have a
21 break, a break which will be a little bit longer because we'll first deal
22 with a procedural matter, but your presence is not required for that.
23 Mr. Hoffmann, please proceed.
24 MR. HOFFMANN: Thank you, Your Honours.
25 Q. Coming back to the 12 July 1992
1 your testimony to review a sketch drawn by someone else that shows the
2 route taken from the disco to the area where you were used as human
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. And was that sketch an accurate depiction of the route from the
6 disco to the front line?
7 A. Yes, it was.
8 MR. HOFFMANN: Your Honours, I would tender this document - it's
9 65 ter 3566 - into evidence. Again, I appreciate an indication already
10 from the Stanisic Defence earlier on that there is no objection to the
11 admission, so I would not even waste more time to call it on the screen.
12 I would look at Mr. Bakrac now if there is any objection to the sketch
13 being admitted into evidence.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Bakrac.
15 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] No, Your Honour.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Usher, the marked map would receive number?
17 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P90, Your Honours.
18 JUDGE ORIE: P90 is admitted into evidence.
19 Please proceed.
20 MR. HOFFMANN: Thank you. And a similar issue arises for the
21 next 65 ter Exhibit, 4872. It is a video of the actual exhumation
22 process, and again from the Stanisic Defence I understand there is no
23 objection to the admission of this document.
24 I could have a few questions to the witness about it, but I would
25 not intend to play this video. It's simply a video recording of the
1 exhumation process in 1998.
2 JUDGE ORIE: I'm -- and --
3 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] No objection.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Stanisic Defence no objections either?
5 MR. HOFFMANN: If Your Honours --
6 JUDGE ORIE: Is it -- is it --
7 MR. HOFFMANN: If you prefer I ask two or three questions without
8 playing the video, and just for the record that he confirms the --
9 JUDGE ORIE: Well, I have not seen the video, so I don't know
10 exactly what we could ask the witness what could not be seen on the
11 video. That's -- I suggest the following: That -- that you give us an
12 opportunity to look at it and that we'll then invite you or not invite
13 you to put any further questions to the witness in relation to this, but
14 that is one of the disadvantages of this system, that we haven't seen it,
15 so I do not know how useful it is or how -- or whether it's totally
16 useless to play it.
17 MR. HOFFMANN: If you prefer we could play a very short clip from
18 the beginning that shows just basically the location where it happened,
19 and I think it's important then to ask the witness whether that is the --
20 the location of the incident on 12 July 1992.
21 JUDGE ORIE: How much time would that take?
22 MR. HOFFMANN: I think we can play less than a minute from the
24 JUDGE ORIE: Less then a minute. Let's do that so that we know
25 approximately what we're talking about.
1 Is it with text or without?
2 MR. HOFFMANN: It's without.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
4 [Video-clip played]
5 MR. HOFFMANN:
6 Q. Witness, did you have a chance prior to your testimony to review
7 this video recording of the exhumation process in 1998 in Doboj -- or
8 near Doboj, to be precise?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Does that video show the exhumation that actually took place at
11 the location where you were used as a human shield?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Were you present during that exhumation process at the time?
14 A. Yes. I showed them the place.
15 MR. HOFFMANN: Your Honours, that -- those would be the basic
16 questions I would have for the witness at this time.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. The video could then receive a -- an exhibit
19 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P91, Your Honours.
20 JUDGE ORIE: P91 is admitted into evidence.
21 Please proceed.
22 MR. HOFFMANN: Thank you, Your Honours. And just for the record,
23 the video ERN was V000-7608.
24 The next exhibit I want to put to the witness is a list of names
25 of victims. It has ERN 0672-7955.
1 Q. And, Witness, once it appears in court, I ask you, did you have a
2 chance to review that list prior to coming to court? And did you mark it
3 in the first column --
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. -- did you mark in the first column any person, any name that you
6 personally know?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. And in the second column, any person that you are certain that he
9 was detained at the Perco's disco with you?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And finally in the last column, one person that had also been
12 previously detained at the military hangars?
13 A. Yes.
14 MR. HOFFMANN: If we can scroll down a bit.
15 Q. If we look at the number 11 on the list. Jasmin Makarevic. Is
16 that the same person that you know and that is mentioned in your earlier
17 statement, the 1998 statement?
18 A. No. Jasmin Makarevic, the one whom I mentioned, is still alive.
19 He resides in Germany
20 This is Hasib Mehmedalija, and this person here is the son of Safet. The
21 difference lies in the father's name.
22 Q. And just for a clear record, is it your testimony that then
23 actually two persons with the name Jasmin Makarevic were in prison at the
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. And did you add in handwriting the nickname of Salih Makarevic,
2 number 13 on this list?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. And if we can go down to the bottom of the document. Do you
5 recognise your signature as of today under that list?
6 A. Yes, I signed the document.
7 MR. HOFFMANN: Your Honours, I tender this list of victims from
8 Doboj as marked by the witness into evidence.
9 JUDGE ORIE: I hear of no objections.
10 Madam Registrar.
11 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P92, Your Honours.
12 JUDGE ORIE: And is admitted into evidence.
13 Please proceed. I would say that your next question should be,
14 within the next four or five minutes, should then be concluded if there's
15 anything you could deal with in four to five minutes.
16 MR. HOFFMANN: Yes.
17 Q. In your 2001 statement, Exhibit P83, you mentioned the pre-war
18 ethnical distribution in Doboj. It's in page 2. Can you tell the Court
19 if you know what the distribution of the ethnic groups was after the war.
20 A. How are things now? Or are you asking me about how things were
21 before the war?
22 Q. No, after the war.
23 A. After the war, 8 per cent Muslims, 2 to 3 per cent Croats, and
24 the rest about 80 to 90 per cent are Serbs.
25 MR. HOFFMANN: In light of what you said about the next break, I
1 would rather now go for the break, but maybe -- I understand from the
2 earlier objections about the lengthy documents, obviously, I can't give
3 too much notice now, but at least over the break would I tell the next
4 Exhibit which is 65 ter 1336. It's an RS Assembly minutes paper that I'm
5 interested in one part which is on the B/C/S page 81 and in English it's
6 page 110. Thank you.
7 JUDGE ORIE: I hope that it will assist the Defence.
8 Mr. Stanisic, we'll deal with a matter which I would say doesn't
9 affect you in any way, a procedural matter, so I suggest that you take
10 already your break and that we would resume at 20 minutes to 6.00, which
11 is 35 minutes from now.
12 Mr. Knoops, I take it that this has your consent, that --
13 Then Mr. Bakrac, did I understand that you wanted to go into
14 private session for the the issue you wanted to raise, or is it ...
15 Perhaps you first, but then in private session, explain why the matter
16 has to be raised in private session.
17 We turn into private session.
18 [Private session]
11 Page 2255 redacted. Private session.
3 [Open session]
4 THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session, Your Honours.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
6 Before I would give you an opportunity, Mr. Bakrac, to raise the
7 matter, I would just tell you what the Chamber is informed about. Let
8 me ...
9 The Chamber was copied on a letter which you have sent to OLAD in
10 which you express your disagreements with the decision taken on
11 remuneration and -- and clarity, as on what basis such a decision is
12 taken. In that letter, you have emphasised that you would have expected
13 that it was announced that you would already receive a decision not only
14 late last week but at earlier stage you said, and it was more or less
15 promised to you. And further, now having received this decision, that --
16 that you are unhappy with the decision, with the outcome, and that you
17 give the reasons why.
18 Now, the first question which arises, apart from that this
19 Chamber, if it can offer good services to resolve any problem, it will
20 certainly seriously consider whether it is in a position to do so, yes or
21 no, but the normal remedy you would find in the directive on the
22 assignment of counsel, because we find ourselves in a situation where
23 there's a very delicate and sensitive balance between the authority --
24 and I suddenly become aware that the witness is still with us. There's
25 no reason whatsoever to keep him here when we are discussing procedural
2 Therefore, if you'd rather have a cup of tea or coffee than to
3 listen to our procedural matters, Madam Usher will show you --
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
5 [The witness stands down]
6 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Bakrac, so the first question which arises is
7 whether under the specific rules, you'll find in Article 31 of the
8 directive on the assignment of counsel, whether for, as Article 31 says,
9 for settlement of disputes over payments, whether it is appropriate at
10 this moment to address the Chamber or whether it would be more
11 appropriate to seek the remedy, taking it that we're talking about more
12 than 5.000 Euros, the remedy being that your final request for review
13 with the Registrar, who then shall refer the matter to the President for
14 his determination. And that the President under those circumstances
15 shall request submissions from the aggrieved party and the respondent.
16 So I wonder whether we should at this moment hear your submissions or
17 not. Also, in view of the case law, the case law which emphasises
18 against the delicate -- the delicacy of this matter, that is, that a
19 Trial Chamber cannot assume any powers which are specifically put in the
20 hands of the President; and the delicacy on the other hand is that the
21 Trial Chamber, whether now immediately or during the follow-up of this
22 proceedings is, of course, responsible for ensuring that Mr. Simatovic
23 receives a fair trial. So therefore, the first question I'd like to put
24 is whether this is already the time for the Chamber to be seized of such
25 complaints. And the second issue I would like to add to that is that the
1 Chamber inquired whether the responsible Registrar official, (redacted)
2 is present, and it turns out that she's absent today, so if you would
3 consider that it would be appropriate to raise the matter, which is
4 certainly not clear if you look at the relevant articles, that at least
5 that we should then hear from both parties, but the Chamber would still
6 have to consider whether it is at all in a position to hear such a
7 complaint before the matter has been raised with the -- by a request for
10 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I completely agree
11 with you. However, you have to understand the delicate matter and the
12 delicate nature of the situation. We're very happy. The Simatovic
13 Defence team is happy with the way the Trial Chamber understands our
14 situation with the sequence of witnesses, breaks, and the possibility
15 given to us to prepare together with Mr. Simatovic for his defence.
16 Why do I believe that this is the right moment for me to address
17 this matter? On the 11th of September my learned friend Mr. Petrovic and
18 I raised the issue, and between then and the 30th of November we did
19 not --
20 [Trial Chamber confers]
21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Bakrac, the Chamber is not yet convinced that it
22 is for the Chamber at this moment to be seized of the matter, but if you
23 would like to put on the record just to inform the Chamber of what's
24 going on, what the issue is, and if you would then in view of the
25 existing regulations and the case law as it was developed, especially by
1 the Appeals Chamber, then would seek the appropriate remedy, then the
2 Chamber would allow you in three to five minutes to explain what your
3 problem is, but this is not an acceptance of the Chamber being seized of
4 any matter at this moment in this respect, but the Chamber will for the
5 time being understand this as purely informative as you telling the
6 Chamber that you have a problem with OLAD which you'll try to resolve in
7 accordance with the applicable rules and the case law as developed by the
8 Appeals Chamber. You have an opportunity to do so.
9 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, may I be allowed one
10 minute more to tell you why the issues are related and why we are
11 addressing you.
12 This Defence team has continued this trial after nearly three
13 months from a hotel room and with one laptop, because for the time being
14 we don't have enough money, and this impacts the efficiency of our work
15 in the courtroom and our obligation to present our client in a
16 professional manner.
17 For two and a half months we did not receive any information from
18 the Registry about the funds available to us. Why are we addressing you?
19 Of course we have already approached the Registry with the request to
20 review their decision, but we are duty-bound to tell this Trial Chamber
21 that because of the problems we have the Registry, we have a lot of
22 problems putting together our defence and representing the interests of
23 our client and his right to a fair trial.
24 Thank you very much. We fully hope that you will show
25 understanding for us and that you will assist us in any way possible in
1 dealing with our problems.
2 JUDGE ORIE: One thing is for certain, Mr. Bakrac, there is a
3 dispute between the Simatovic Defence and the level of remuneration that
4 what has become clear to us while receiving a copy of your letter. To
5 the extent the Chamber, without going beyond what its competence is at
6 this moment and can assist in resolving it, of course, we'll give it our
7 best efforts. At the same time, the Chamber will not go beyond what is
8 clearly in the rules and what is clearly in the case law. We have to
9 observe that, because otherwise we're creating more problems than there
10 are already at this very moment.
11 It's at least clear. It's on the public record at this moment,
12 and if there will be any follow-up which would focus on fair trial
13 issues, of course it may well be that the Chamber, depending on what will
14 be argued, may find the matter at a certain moment, I'm not saying now,
15 within the boundaries of its competence, but that depends also on the way
16 how it's presented, how it's introduced.
17 We leave it for the time being in this way, but the Chamber is
18 fully aware that this is not the end of the story. That's -- that may be
19 clear to everyone in this courtroom.
20 Any other procedural matter to be raised at this moment? If not,
21 we'll have a break, and we'll resume at ten minutes to 6.00. And could
22 the UNDU be informed that the presence of Mr. Stanisic is not required
23 any earlier than ten minutes to 6.00.
24 --- Recess taken at 5.24 p.m.
25 --- On resuming at 5.52 p.m.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Since I see that Mr. Stanisic has arrived but not
2 yet has put on his earphones, we'll wait for a second.
3 Mr. Stanisic.
4 Mr. Hoffmann, are you ready to proceed?
5 MR. HOFFMANN: Certainly, Your Honour.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Let me just verify.
7 Mr. Stanisic, you've got on your earphones now, and you can hear
8 us in a language you understand?
9 THE ACCUSED STANISIC: [Interpretation] Yes.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Hoffmann.
11 MR. HOFFMANN: Thank you, Your Honour. And having given further
12 considerations to the time that we spend in court and the objections
13 earlier on to the lengthy document, I will actually skip the next exhibit
14 and move on to one last subject with this witness.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Please do so.
16 MR. HOFFMANN:
17 Q. Witness, can you tell the Court what happened to your wife and
18 two kids when you were imprisoned by the Serb forces in Doboj.
19 A. My wife and two children and my mother-in-law were exchanged at
20 Slavonski Brod on the 4th of September, 1992.
21 MR. HOFFMANN: If I can ask that we see 65 ter 3609 on the
22 screen. It is an exchange -- a list of people exchanged on 4 September
24 JUDGE ORIE: May I take it that you want to establish that the
25 witness was exchanged?
1 MR. HOFFMANN: It's actually in relation to his family members.
2 JUDGE ORIE: I mean his family members, yes.
3 Is there any dispute about this? The family members of the
4 witness being exchanged?
5 MR. JORDASH: No.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Bakrac?
7 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] No, Your Honour.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hoffmann.
9 MR. HOFFMANN: Okay. Then I would cut it short and ask that this
10 exhibit be admitted into evidence.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. May I take it that there is no, then,
12 objection against it being bar tabled? I see two times nodding no.
13 Madam Registrar.
14 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P93, Your Honours.
15 JUDGE ORIE: P93 is admitted into evidence, and as we understand,
16 is a document which corroborates the testimony of the witness that his
17 family members were exchanged.
18 Please proceed.
19 MR. HOFFMANN: Thank you, Your Honours. And maybe just for the
20 record, indeed his family members are listed as number 62 until 65, that
21 is, his mother-in-law and his wife and two kids.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
23 MR. HOFFMANN:
24 Q. And, Witness, I would like to ask you whether you would say that
25 your wife and your children left Doboj in September 1992 on their own
1 free will.
2 A. In the situation that we had both lost our jobs and there was a
3 curfew in Doboj, that was we were only allowed to move about three hours
4 a day, and we had no source of income, and she registered with the
5 Red Cross for leaving Doboj. When she was leaving Doboj, she was only
6 allowed to take two plastic bags -- or, rather, a larger bag with some
7 laundry, whereas the money and the jewellery she had on her was taken
8 away from her and she was put on a bus. Whether that is voluntary, if it
9 can be called voluntary transportation, I don't know. Voluntary
10 transfer, correction.
11 Q. Thank you. The Prosecution will play a short clip from
12 Prosecution Exhibit 65 ter 3536, the video ERN being V000-0406A, and the
13 clip runs from minute 54, 5 seconds; to 58 minutes, 45, of the original
15 [Video-clip played]
16 MR. HOFFMANN:
17 Q. Witness, did you recognise this man, Jozo Mandic, from Doboj,
18 shown on this footage?
19 A. Yes, I did.
20 Q. And have you seen his name on the list of prisoner -- of people
21 exchanged that we just saw, which was Exhibit P93?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. And would you say that his account that we just heard about the
24 events in Doboj is consistent with your own experience and knowledge of
25 the time-frame in 1992?
1 A. Yes, fully. Yes.
2 MR. HOFFMANN: Your Honours, I tender this clip into evidence.
3 MR. JORDASH: We do object, Your Honour.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
5 MR. JORDASH: My learned friend's just effectively introduced a
6 second witness as a corroborative witness to this witness's account
7 without going through the usual procedural safeguards which ensure that
8 the Defence are put on notice and proper notice of the Prosecution case.
9 That's our objection.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Bakrac.
11 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes. Our objection goes along -- is
12 along the same lines as my learned friends.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hoffmann, apart from that, if I remember well I
14 gave rather precise guidance on how to deal with videos with text on it,
15 that is transcript being provided to the booth and that we would have,
16 therefore -- on the record we would have English and we would have French
17 so that we would have a complete record, whereas now what we have is we
18 can try to find the video again and then read at the bottom what
19 apparently was said. I didn't check the B/C/S version.
20 MR. HOFFMANN: If I may on that point, we actually did provide
21 the booth with the transcript. And when the video started I did actually
22 expect to hear it, but then didn't want to interrupt. I'm sorry for
23 that; maybe I should have interrupted. But we did provide as in the past
24 the necessary transcripts to the interpreters.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Apparently the -- you did provide the
1 transcript also in English?
2 MR. HOFFMANN: My understanding is yes. Yes, both languages.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then apparently we have not developed yet a
4 routine which I had on my mind which ensures that we have a complete
5 transcript in English and in French, but perhaps Mr. Jordash is quite
6 happy with it, because that means that the second witness is not on the
7 record yet.
8 Could you please respond to that part of the objection.
9 MR. HOFFMANN: I'm honestly, at least as far as there is an
10 objection to notice of the Prosecution case, I'm not quite sure if I
11 understand that, because I think we have clearly given notice of the
12 Prosecution case, and this is just part of the evidence to -- to underlie
13 the Prosecution case, and it's part of the Prosecution case that people
14 were deported from -- from Doboj, and this is related to it.
15 In terms of -- that we see on the video somebody else than the
16 current witness to state the events, it's basically -- and I think to
17 some extent the jurisprudence of the case law here does allow for that.
18 It is a contemporaneous document taken at the time of the events. We
19 don't have the chance that we have any record of this witness or his
20 family members at the time.
21 This man that is seen on the video gives on the day of the
22 exchange a clear record of what he went through and how he was exchanged.
23 This witness's family members were exchanged on the very same
24 day. He went through the same events. In that circumstance, I think
25 it's proper to leave that evidence -- or to admit that evidence.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Jordash, two questions. The first: What did
2 you exactly mean by "without giving notice"? And the second is, would
3 this witness have qualified for 92 bis, apart from the attestations?
4 MR. JORDASH: Firstly, without giving notice, we have been -- had
5 this exhibit disclosed to us. We did know what was on the video. We
6 didn't know that the Prosecution would be seeking to rely upon the truth
7 of what the witness in the video has just said.
8 JUDGE ORIE: What would you have expected, the colour of the
9 buses or -- I mean --
10 MR. JORDASH: The fact that there was a victim. What instead the
11 Prosecution will do -- what they've done is introduced Arkan in Doboj.
12 The witness hasn't mentioned him. My learned friend will seek to rely
13 upon that evidence in addition to what this witness has already said
14 about the perpetrator groups, which leads me to the answer on the issue
15 of the 92 bis. Respectfully, probably not. It would not be admissible
16 for this reason: That it goes to the acts and conduct of the accused
17 insofar as the indictment and the -- sorry, not the indictment but the
18 Prosecution's opening has indicated that they say Mr. Stanisic was in
19 control, command and control, of Arkan.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. The Arkan issue, Mr. Hoffmann.
21 MR. HOFFMANN: I clearly have no objection if we redact that
22 little notice. In my view --
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Jordash, if Arkan is taken out does the
24 objection stand?
25 MR. JORDASH: To this particular video the objection would not
1 stand, but although the procedure -- we would intend to object in the
3 JUDGE ORIE: That's clear. Mr. Hoffmann is put on notice on
5 I suggest the following solution: We take advantage of the fact
6 that we had no routine yet. Therefore, we do not find on the record at
7 this moment the exact words spoken. You provide and you tender in
8 relation to this document a transcript in English and translation in
9 B/C/S, and you redact the transcript in relation to Arkan.
10 I'm looking at you, Mr. Jordash. Would that, for the time being,
11 resolve your problem?
12 MR. JORDASH: Your Honour, yes. Thank you.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Bakrac, you shared the objections by
14 Mr. Jordash.
15 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. I was just going
16 to provide the same explanation, but the matter is resolved now.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, with your agreement as well.
18 Mr. -- so we -- for the time being the video receives a number,
19 but will be marked for identification and we wait for uploading of the
20 transcript. Perhaps it is uploaded already in two languages.
21 MR. HOFFMANN: The transcript has been uploaded.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Has been uploaded.
23 MR. HOFFMANN: It's just now a matter of redacting --
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, redacting. Of course, we wait until we have
25 received the redaction. Please show it to Mr. Jordash before you report
1 to the Court that you have uploaded it.
2 Madam Registrar, the number to be assigned.
3 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P94 marked for identification,
4 Your Honours.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And that will finally cover both video and
7 Please proceed.
8 MR. HOFFMANN: I have no further questions for the witness.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Hoffmann.
10 Mr. Jordash.
11 MR. JORDASH: Thank you, Your Honour.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hadzovic, you will be cross examined by
13 Mr. Jordash. Mr. Jordash is counsel for Mr. Stanisic.
14 Cross-examination by Mr. Jordash:
15 Q. Good afternoon. You've indicated --
16 A. Good afternoon.
17 Q. You've indicated in your statement of the 12th of March, 2001
18 that there was a huge military garrison in Doboj in a place called
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. And in addition to that, am I correct that there was also
22 warehouses in Potocani, which is in Doboj?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. And can you confirm that there was JNA warehouses also in the
25 south suburb of Usora? U-s-o-r-a.
1 A. There were warehouses at the village of Sevarlije
2 of Potocani, which is close to Doboj. There was a barracks where
3 conscripts would do their military service, and there was a small
4 facility in the south, and there were also warehouses at Usora where we
5 were in the camp.
6 Q. This was for the JNA, prior to the war, an important military
7 strategic area. Would you agree with that?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. And Milovan Stankovic was, prior to the war, the deputy commander
10 of the military garrison in Doboj?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. The commander during -- before the war was a Muslim called
13 Cazim Hadzic; is that right?
14 A. I'm not sure what his name was.
15 Q. It's probably not that important, but what is perhaps more
16 important is that when the war broke out, Milovan Stankovic took over as
17 the commander of the garrison?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. And all the equipment and vehicles, armory, and so on, came under
20 his command?
21 A. I suppose so.
22 Q. Well, you must have observed, I suggest, that Stankovic was in
23 command of the JNA who remained in Doboj. Is that correct, from what you
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. And Miljkovac remained the centre of the military activity after
2 the war broke out in the Doboj area; is that right?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Are you able to confirm that the president of the Crisis Staff in
5 May of 1992 of Doboj was a JNA captain called Milenko Glikoric [phoen] -
6 let me spell that for you, G-l-i --
7 A. Milovan Ninkovic.
8 Q. Yes.
9 Are you able to confirm that the president of the Crisis Staff
10 was that man who was a JNA captain?
11 A. Yes, he was the president of the SDA and the president of the
12 Crisis Staff.
13 MR. HOFFMANN: Just for the record, I think the party he's
14 referring to was actually the SDS
16 MR. JORDASH: Yes, I think that must be --
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] SDS, yes. SDS.
18 MR. JORDASH: Thank you.
19 JUDGE ORIE: This being corrected, please proceed.
20 MR. JORDASH:
21 Q. And he worked closely with Stankovic from what you observed when
22 the war broke out --
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. -- in controlling the military resources that had been left by
25 the JNA.
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. And you observed - is this right - trucks in 1992 taking the JNA
3 weapons and transporting them to the barracks in Miljkovac?
4 A. Weapons and armaments, ammunition and tanks were taken to
5 Podnovlje, which is in the direction of Modrica. And units, that is
6 paramilitary units, that were coming in from outside were given
7 accommodation in the barracks. They were the so-called reservists,
8 bearded men who rampaged in the city, who provoked, sang Chetniks songs,
9 et cetera. So they found accommodation in the 4th of July barracks as
10 reserve units.
11 Q. Right. So from what you observed, the volunteers, paramilitary
12 groups who came into the region reported to Stankovic who then ensured
13 they had lodgings in the old JNA barracks; is that correct?
14 A. Lodgings, yes.
15 Q. And from there they would receive their orders from Stankovic.
16 Is that something you were aware of?
17 A. I don't know about that.
18 Q. Okay. In March of 1991, you were on your way to Samac, and you
19 observed a check-point 15 kilometres from Doboj; is that correct?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Thank you. Just remember --
22 A. Yes, it is.
23 Q. -- what you're saying is being taped. And they were dressed like
24 normal soldiers; is that right?
25 A. They were reserve units. They wore military uniforms, but it
1 wasn't the regular army. They weren't regular units. They were
2 reservists. All reservists had been called up to report at the barracks,
3 but the -- the Muslims and Croats did not respond to the call-ups because
4 the president of our recognised country said on TV that nobody should
5 report or respond to the call-ups by the regular military, but the
6 Serbian soldiers did -- did report, and they were handed weapons and
8 Q. Right. So the response to the call-up meant that irregular
9 forces or irregular men were coming into the Doboj region, being given
10 military uniforms and acting as reserve soldiers; is that correct?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Men who could, from what you observed, be perhaps better
13 described as paramilitaries dressed in JNA outfits. Is that correct?
14 A. Well, let me tell you. All reservists back then in that system,
15 we were obliged to report and establish regular military units. So
16 whoever puts on a military uniform is -- is then a member of a unit
17 commanded by the regular military. We were all reservists. We had the
18 duty to report at the barracks, and we participated in exercises, and we
19 were under the command of professional military officers.
20 Q. Yes. But during the war the situation changed, and those --
21 JUDGE ORIE: We have problems with the transcript apparently.
22 Could we first fix that. It seems to be a technical problem.
23 I suggest to the parties that we slowly proceed, and if it
24 becomes really an obstacle for further proceeding, then of course we'll
25 stop. But often when it's fixed then we have the whole transcript again
1 because our transcriber is still active.
2 Please proceed, and if anyone considers that we should stop,
3 please address the Court.
4 Mr. Jordash.
5 MR. JORDASH:
6 Q. I think, Mr. Witness, you have described what the process should
7 be or should have been for the reservists, and what I'm suggesting
8 happened from what you observed in Doboj was a number of reservists from
9 different areas and groups answering the call of the SDS in Doboj and
10 entering Doboj and acting as regular military units; is that correct? I
11 know it's a long question.
12 A. [No interpretation]
13 Q. So you as a citizen and you and your fellow citizens --
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. -- "acting as regular military units" creates
15 some confusion with me. Of course, it could be that the witness is fully
16 aware of what you meant, but I'm not.
17 MR. JORDASH: Let me --
18 JUDGE ORIE: Therefore, the answer is not clear to me either.
19 MR. JORDASH: Let me try to clarify that, Your Honour.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
21 MR. JORDASH:
22 Q. The place where the reservists who came into Doboj -- or came
23 from Doboj would go is to the JNA barracks in Miljkovic; is that right?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. And they would then fall into whatever military formation was
1 being organised by Stankovic and his JNA commanders. Is that something
2 you observed?
3 A. Well, I suppose so. I was not in the barracks. I don't know
4 whose command they were under, but I suppose that if he was the barracks
5 commander, then they were under his command. I don't know. I wasn't
6 there. I can't -- I was not in the barracks, so I was not in a position
7 to know.
8 Q. Okay. Let me ask you something you might know then. Just to
9 confirm, they would receive their command from whoever was the commander
10 at the barracks. If you don't know, you don't know. It's fine.
11 A. Believe me, I don't.
12 Q. From what you observed, though, the source of the command was the
13 JNA structures which exist --
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hoffmann.
15 MR. HOFFMANN: I do object. The witness has clearly answered
16 that he wasn't present there, so I don't know how we could ask him how he
17 did observe anything in this regard at the place.
18 MR. JORDASH: I'll take the objection and move on.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Please do so.
20 MR. JORDASH:
21 Q. What you did observe and you can testify to is that the arming
22 which was being conducted, arms were coming from the JNA to the SDS, the
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. And Stankovic was then working alongside those reservists.
2 A. I don't know whether Stankovic was directly involved with the
3 reservists. I wasn't there. I didn't know who was involved in that job
4 from the officer staff.
5 Q. Okay. Let me ask you something different. Let me take you
6 through your account.
7 Can you recall giving a statement to the Doboj state security
8 service on the 11th of August, 1992?
9 A. Who was that? Who did I apparently give my statement to? What
10 did you say?
11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hoffmann.
12 MR. HOFFMANN: I just want to raise one matter. As far as I can
13 see, we have so far received no notice from either Defence teams what
14 kind of exhibits or even prior statements they might want to use during
15 cross-examination. I think that was part of the guidelines from the
16 Chamber, that we would be informed at the start of the cross-examination.
17 And regarding the prior statement, I would suggest that it would
18 be proper to put the statement to the witness so he can actually look at
20 JUDGE ORIE: Well, it depends what the questions will be, but if
21 you want to go to the content of that statement, then you still can ask
22 questions. It's not necessarily to be done in the way that giving the
23 statement to the witness. I leave that in the hands of Mr. Jordash.
24 Mr. Jordash, but the first objection was that you had not yet
25 provided the Prosecution with your exhibit list to be used during cross.
1 MR. JORDASH: Well, as my learned friend perfectly knows, we had
2 a discussion before cross where I asked one of the Prosecution to load
3 the statements, one of which I'm about to refer to, into the e-court.
4 Hence I had assumed Mr. Hoffmann would understand -- but, actually, it
5 wasn't an assumption. I said to Mr. Hoffmann that I would use it during
7 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hoffmann, is that --
8 MR. HOFFMANN: Well, maybe it's getting a bit picky here. But
9 following some of the objections we had from the other side, yes, we did
10 talk about the prior statements; yes, we were asked to actually upload
11 all prior statements. There was no indication whether one, all of them,
12 or some of them would be used. So following the line of objection,
13 actually --
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And you immediately asked Mr. Jordash, "Are
15 you going to use them?" with the same kind of curiosity as I expected
16 earlier to be with Mr. Jordash.
17 MR. HOFFMANN: Well, the indication we had was then that we
18 should upload all of them just to be on the safe side.
19 JUDGE ORIE: We're not on the playground. We in a court of law
20 where we try to seriously deal with matters.
21 Mr. Jordash, could you inform Mr. Hoffmann at this very moment
22 whether you want to use more than one?
23 MR. JORDASH: I will use the 11th of August, 1992, statement. I
24 will use the witness's statement of the 30th of November, 2007, and I
25 will use the transcript which arose from the trial, which the statement
1 had been compiled for, as I indicated prior to cross-examination.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And next time you'll spontaneously tell
3 Mr. Hoffmann, and if you forget about it, Mr. Hoffmann will ask you about
4 it; isn't it?
5 MR. JORDASH: Your Honour, yes, of course.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
7 And I do see that apparently the LiveNote has been fixed. There
8 is a possibility to reconnect, at least on my computer.
9 MR. JORDASH: May I ask for the witness's 11th of August, 1992,
10 statement. The number --
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can't hear a thing. My -- I
12 don't hear anything.
13 JUDGE ORIE: If no one speaks, you'll not be able to test. I'll
14 speak again. Mr. Usher, I'll speak again, and if you do not hear
15 anything on the B/C/S channel, then we should seek the assistance of
16 our ... technicians, I wanted to say.
17 MR. USHER: In the background you hear some fuzz or ...
18 JUDGE ORIE: This reminds me of another matter.
19 Mr. Stanisic, I do understand that you can switch on and off your
20 microphone. Is that correct?
21 THE ACCUSED STANISIC: [Interpretation] Yes.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Would you mind to switch it off when you're not
23 speaking, because it gives some background noise, and I don't think that
24 it interrupts your hearing us.
25 THE ACCUSED STANISIC: [Interpretation] I can switch it off, yes.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And whenever you think you would need to
2 speak, please switch it on. We have --
3 THE ACCUSED STANISIC: [Interpretation] Very well.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Do you now -- yes, I see that apparently the witness
5 hears the B/C/S translation by now.
6 Therefore, Mr. Jordash, you're invited to continue.
7 MR. JORDASH: Thank you, Your Honour.
8 Could I ask, please, for the witness's 11th of August, 1992,
9 statement. The number on the right-hand corner at the top is 03000522.
10 And could I ask for the -- obviously the witness's statement in --
11 THE REGISTRAR: Could the counsel please refer to the 65 ter
12 number or the exhibit number. Thank you.
13 MR. HOFFMANN: Just to assist on that, I think those, because
14 they are not exhibits, they actually have no 65 ter numbers. So the only
15 thing that is as a reference would be the ERN number, which I think my
16 learned friend just referred to.
17 MR. JORDASH: Thank you. There is another number on the
18 left-hand bottom corner which is 0202. I don't know if that helps.
19 02027929, which is the, I think, ERN number.
20 This is the English version. Thank you.
21 Q. Mr. Witness, would you look at the document on the left and just
22 quickly familiarise yourself with -- with it.
23 Do you recall giving a statement on the 11th of August, 1992
24 the Doboj state security?
25 A. This could have only be in Tesanj, not in Doboj. I was not in
1 Doboj at the time. On the 12th of July I fled Doboj, and at that time I
2 was living in Tesanj.
3 Q. Well, let's just deal with -- we'll come back to that in a
4 moment, but I hear what you're saying, but I want to first deal with the
5 content of the statement and see if that is a statement you recall giving
6 at least.
7 JUDGE ORIE: But why --
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
9 JUDGE ORIE: It says on the 11th of August, 1992, on the premises
10 of the Tesanj SJB. Well, I mean, what's the problem?
11 MR. JORDASH: I'm sorry, I missed that. I beg your pardon,
12 Your Honour.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
14 MR. JORDASH:
15 Q. Do you recall giving this statement to the State Security Service
16 in Doboj?
17 A. Correct. Yes.
18 Q. And you gave this statement to report what had happened to you?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Earlier in that year in May and June and July?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. And the statement you gave the public security station was to
23 state security representatives; is that right?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Who were interested in recording your complaint; is that right?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. And the account you gave was the best account you could recall at
3 that point in time; is that correct?
4 A. Yes. That was 20 days or maybe a month after I had fled. I was
5 then treated. I fled on the 14th of July. Then I spent 20 days in
6 hospital, and then they came to fetch me, and then I provided my
7 statement is them.
8 THE INTERPRETER: Could the second witness's microphone please be
9 switched on. Thank you.
10 MR. JORDASH: Sorry, could you please repeat the request again.
11 THE INTERPRETER: One microphone was not working.
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I fled on the 12th of July. I was
13 fleeing for two days, and then on the 14th of July, I ended up in
14 hospital suffering from the consequences. Then they came to fetch me,
15 and I was taken to provide that statement.
16 MR. JORDASH:
17 Q. Thank you. Let's have a look at this statement. Could you have
18 a look at paragraph one, please. Is it right that you told the
19 interviewers that you had fled from the aggression which had started with
20 the arrest by the Serbian Army? Perhaps the better way for me to do it
21 is just to read the statement and ask you to confirm it. Did you say:
22 "From the aggression against Doboj until 12th of June this year,
23 when I was arrested by the Serbian Army, I was mostly at home"?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Did you then say:
1 "On the 6th of May, 1992, I was arrested by the Red Berets and
2 taken to the Serbian SUP
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. And that was your first reference to Red Berets, am I right, when
5 you were interviewed at that time?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Did you, going on through the statement, tell the interviewers
8 that Faruk Ajanovic, Fehro Mujakovic, and Mustafa Alicic's brother were
9 brought with you on that day, the day you were arrested?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Did you tell the interviewers that the Malic brothers and the
12 sons of Milovan Suka looted your house?
13 A. Milovan Suka, or actually his son, came and they were looking for
14 a pistol that I had, and I had a licence to carry it. That weapon was
15 registered -- registered with the MUP. They took it away from me. They
16 took the pistol from me. And then from the lower ground they took my
17 child's video games - at the time it was Commodore 64 - and some other
19 Q. Will you confirm that there were locals from Doboj who were
20 working with some of the police officers harassing civilian's such as
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. And some of those police officers and some of those locals were
24 working with the Serbian Army. Would you confirm that?
25 A. The locals of Serb ethnicity were either members of the reserve
1 police or the reserve military. Some organised themselves in different
2 ways. They were known as Predo's Wolves, White Eagles. They were
3 independent units that operated around Doboj.
4 Q. Thank you. Let's -- let's read on. The second paragraph. Did
5 you tell the investigators that on the 12th of June, 1992, the
6 Serbian Army had conducted a search of the area of Orasje, Krcevine, and
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Thank you. Were these local army men also working with these
10 local reserve military during those searches? During those arrests?
11 A. A group appeared, and they looked like men from Krajina, men from
12 Banja Luka. They wore Red Berets, but none of them were locals. None of
13 them were from Doboj.
14 Q. Well, we'll come back to that in a moment, because if you look at
15 the second paragraph, you describe the men who conducted the sweep as the
16 Serbian Army who were conducting the sweep. There's no mention there of
17 Red Berets.
18 A. For me, for us, all those who arrested us were the Serbian Army.
19 Those things were not done by the Muslim army. Those things were done by
20 the Serb army. Whether they were Red Berets or Arkan's men or somebody
21 else, in any case they were the Serb army.
22 Q. So you use the phrase "Serb army" to describe any military
23 formation of a Serb ethnicity at that time?
24 A. At that time there was no regular Serb army in the sense that
25 they introduced themselves as such. They all worked together. When I
1 was in prison, I was guarded by reserve police officers, active police
2 officers, and soldiers, and those soldiers were on the strength of the
3 reserve army and also the Red Berets. They all acted as guards. They
4 were all one and the same thing.
5 Q. So from what you're saying, the Red Berets were working within
6 other units or as a separate unit? In what way were you able to
7 distinguish the Red Berets?
8 A. The Red Berets arrived in Doboj, which means that they all came
9 in an organised way upon somebody's invitation. Their task was to
10 arrest, to take people from their homes, to ill-treat and beat people.
11 They had been invited. They could not just come to Doboj without being
12 in concert with the regular army which billeted them in the barracks and
13 in other facilities such as old people's homes and schools. That's where
14 they slept.
15 Q. When you gave your statement in 1992, on the 11th of August, you
16 didn't mention the Red Berets on the 12th of June, 1992. You mentioned
17 the Serbian Army. Am I correct?
18 A. For me that was the Serb army, the Serbian Army.
19 Q. Well, you told us a moment ago that the Serb army was anyone in
20 the Serb military formation. Wasn't that what your evidence was a moment
22 A. I said that all formations that were there were the Serb army,
23 starting with the Red Berets and the reserve army, the reserve police.
24 They were all together.
25 Q. Okay. Let's move on to your statement. No mention --
1 JUDGE ORIE: One second. Mr. Stanisic, we -- we usually continue
2 until 7.00. Is that okay with you?
3 THE ACCUSED STANISIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.
4 JUDGE ORIE: That would be another seven to nine minutes from
6 Yes, please proceed, Mr. Jordash.
7 MR. JORDASH: Thank you.
8 Q. If I can ask you to turn to -- turn to the third paragraph. And
9 you mention here Slobodan Karadzic [sic] coming to the camp during your
10 detention on the 12th --
11 A. Just a moment. Just a moment. I can't see that.
12 Q. Sorry.
13 MR. HOFFMANN: Just for the record again, I think the misspelling
14 of the name has happened again. There was a reference to
15 Slobodan Karadzic, but it should be Karagic, if I'm not mistaken.
16 MR. JORDASH: Sorry, that's my pronunciation. K-a-r-a-g-i-c.
17 Q. And you told the - is this right - the investigator at that time
18 that Karagic came to the camp just the once; is that right?
19 A. He came on several occasions. He had a notebook, and he asked
20 all of us prisoners whether we had hidden any gold or money, foreign
21 currency mostly. He asked where those were hidden, and then he promised
22 us that he would let us go if we told him about any hidden jewellery or
23 money. We offered to give him our property, houses, cars, and he said
24 no, only foreign currencies or gold. And then after that he never --
25 Q. Mr. Witness, I'm sorry to interrupt. I was just asking quite a
1 specific question, whether you told the investigator at that time that
2 Karagic came to the camp only once, because that's what --
3 JUDGE ORIE: Just a minute. Mr. -- there appears to be a -- it's
4 perhaps your pronunciation. If you think about a grouse which gives a
5 better "gee" and a "G." And that creates the problem. Again, I'm not
6 talking about Famous Grouse, but a grouse. I think that's approximately
7 the sound you have to pronounce in order to have Karagic on the
8 transcript rather than Karadzic.
9 MR. JORDASH: I will get used to this at some point. Karagic we
10 are talking about.
11 MR. HOFFMANN: Sorry, that was actually not my point.
12 JUDGE ORIE: That was not your point. I'm sorry, Mr. Hoffmann.
13 MR. HOFFMANN: I just think that we have to be fair in reading
14 from the statement. And it does not say that he only came once. It says
15 he came once, so that the witness obviously is giving the event of one of
16 those visits of Slobodan Karagic. It is not state as is suggested that
17 the witness at the same said he only came once. That's not on the
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, although it may be that that would have been --
20 first of all, if there is any quote from a previous statement, if there's
21 any chance of even the quote being contested as being incomplete or
22 inaccurate, I invite the parties to quote literally and to give the
23 proper context, and once then a witness has answered a question in
24 relation to that, it would be for re-examination, Mr. Hoffmann, to
25 further clarify that.
1 Please proceed.
2 MR. JORDASH:
3 Q. Mr. Witness, did you tell the investigator, as is noted on the
4 first line of this paragraph, that Karagic came once and asked the
5 prisoners whether any of them wanted to ransom their heads?
6 A. [No interpretation]
7 Q. And did you reading five lines down say, "He never came again"?
8 A. Yes. Yes, that's what I'm reading here, yes.
9 Q. Thank you. And that's what you told the investigator.
10 A. Yes, that's what I read here. That's what it says.
11 Q. Thank you.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Again, the answer if -- "That's what I read here.
13 That's what it says," is still not answer to your question.
14 What you read there, is that what you said at the time?
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] At the time, I was speaking under
16 the impression of the 20 days that I spent in the camp. They were
17 insisting on the names, and I gave them what I remembered, and that's how
18 my answers were recorded, I suppose.
19 MR. JORDASH:
20 Q. So the impression you had during that 20 days was that Karagic
21 had come only once. So that's why you told the investigator he'd come
22 only once.
23 A. Yes, he did come once.
24 Q. No, that he'd come only once. He never came again. Are those
25 the words you used to the investigator?
1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hadzovic, the issue is whether Mr. Karagic came
2 once to the camp and never again, or is that what you intended to say, or
3 has he been more than once in the camp?
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As far as I can remember, he did
5 come but only once. I remember that he came once. I don't know whether
6 he came any other time, but I know that that time when he came he had a
7 notebook, and he was looking to purchase our heads. He was looking to
8 exchange our lives for money or gold.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Jordash, within the next two minutes we have to
10 adjourn, so if you -- but I can imagine that you would want to put
11 another question to the witness.
12 MR. JORDASH: Thank you.
13 Q. Just moving down the statement, did you tell the investigator, in
14 the same paragraph, a certain Slavko who used to be a prison guard,
15 worked as guard at the entrance to the camp where you were being held?
16 That was the Percin Discotheque. P-e-r-c-i-n.
17 A. Do you want me to answer?
18 Q. Yes, please.
19 A. Yes. He was a retired prison guard in the Doboj prison.
20 Q. And did you tell the investigator that there was occasional
21 visits from Milan Kerkez? Formally employed at --
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. -- the Izbor cold storage plant?
24 A. Yes, he called, he came.
25 Q. This was a local man?
1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Jordash.
2 MR. JORDASH: Sorry, Your Honour.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. If the witness could answer that question. He
4 was a local man?
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, he was a local who had a job
6 at Izbor in Doboj.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Jordash, I'm looking at the clock. If
8 this ...
9 MR. JORDASH: Certainly.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hadzovic, first of all I'd like to instruct you
11 that you should not speak with anyone about your testimony, not about the
12 testimony you've given until now and also not about the testimony still
13 to be given tomorrow. We'd like to see you back tomorrow morning --
14 tomorrow afternoon at half past 2.00.
15 Mr. Jordash, could I inquire as far as timing is concerned.
16 MR. JORDASH: I would fully anticipate to finish within 35,
17 40 minutes tomorrow.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Bakrac, how much time would you need?
19 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, it is difficult to
20 make that estimate because Mr. Jordash has already tackled some issues,
21 and it all depends on Mr. Jordash's future questions, but I don't think I
22 will need more than 45 minutes or an hour.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We'll then see.
24 Mr. Stanisic, we will adjourn for the day. I'm addressing you
25 because you're not here with us in the courtroom, but you're there
1 through the videolink. We adjourn until tomorrow, the 1st of December,
2 and we'll not start at quarter past 2.00 as usually, but at half past
3 2.00 because there is a swearing-in ceremony which may not end before
4 quarter past 2.00.
5 We stand adjourned.
6 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.00 p.m.
7 to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 1st day
8 of December, 2009, at 2.30 p.m.