Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 3341

1 Friday, 27 February 2004

2 [Open session]

3 [The accused entered court]

4 --- Upon commencing at 9.09 a.m.

5 JUDGE PARKER: Good morning. We are told there is a delay with

6 the witness arriving, no doubt because of the weather, but we are also

7 informed that counsel may wish to raise some matters with us, so we

8 thought we would use the time for that purpose.

9 Mr. Weiner.

10 MR. WEINER: Good morning. Your Honour, we have some housekeeping

11 matters which we'd like to raise, and one concerns next week. We will

12 have the psychiatrist here next week, and we know the Court wants a report

13 as soon as possible, so we thought the key thing which would enable a

14 report to come out within the next few weeks is to get the examinations

15 completed.

16 The doctors would like not only an examination, but they also want

17 to videotape the examinations. We contacted the prison -- or I'm sorry,

18 the detention facility, who indicates that that can be done but the hours

19 are very limited. Our other option is doing it in the building. The

20 Registry then raised the issue if we have a day of court and then the

21 defendant -- I'm sorry, the defendant or the accused then eats, by the

22 time we could start the interview it would be close to 3.00.

23 What we would like to do is either have one day off, which would

24 be take Tuesday off -- if we could take Tuesday off, we could get most of

25 the examination done, possibly even one day - maybe Wednesday - shorter

Page 3342

1 hours, but we would know after Tuesday how much could be completed.

2 Now, normally we would feel that that would seriously affect the

3 schedule of witnesses. We have a problem for next week.

4 Ambassador Fietelaars, who was supposed to be our witness for Monday and

5 Tuesday, had to return home for some personal matters. We do not have

6 Ambassador Fietelaars for next week. As a result, we have -- we will

7 finish this witness, then go into Mrs. Ogresta. Mrs. Ogresta we thought

8 would go into Monday. Our next witness isn't even arriving until the

9 weekend or Monday so we could barely put him on Tuesday, if not even place

10 him on the witness stand on Wednesday. As a result, we have a very, very

11 limited number of witnesses for next week. We have lost two days worth of

12 witnesses.

13 Taking one day off would not affect our schedule. It would enable

14 the report -- or the examination to be completed and the report to be in

15 as soon as possible. It would allow them to videotape the examination,

16 and it should not have any affect on the case from the Prosecution's point

17 of view. Thank you.

18 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Weiner, the prospect that you put to us of

19 interrupting the hearing simply to make it more convenient for the medical

20 examination has a familiar ring. It is exactly the position which the

21 Defence wanted and which we were reluctant to accommodate, if I remember,

22 and in the end, we indicated that we would start late - we were sitting in

23 the afternoons at the time - but we would not allow them a full day. But

24 you want now to have a full day for your own purposes.

25 MR. WEINER: Yes. And there's two reasons. Number one, as you

Page 3343

1 recall, at that time we had scheduling problems. Due to the loss of a few

2 days, we had witnesses backed up. We were even sending witnesses that

3 were here back home. We were flying them back.

4 Next week we have a problem. We do not have sufficient witnesses.

5 Even without losing a day for examination, we will probably have a day and

6 possibly even more than a day where we have no witnesses, and we have to

7 come before the Court and say because of losing Ambassador Fietelaars we

8 do not have a witness. That's number one.

9 Number two, when they made the request, they did not indicate it

10 was a psychiatric examination.

11 JUDGE PARKER: Oh, I'm sorry, they did, in my recollection.

12 MR. WEINER: No. They said a medical examination that would take

13 seven hours. They never said psychiatric.

14 JUDGE PARKER: But it was by a specialist psychiatrist. I would

15 put two and two together there and make four.

16 MR. WEINER: At the time all we knew was a medical examination.

17 It's not in the record that --

18 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Weiner, that's stretching, yes. But perhaps

19 your strongest submission would be to have a day off on Tuesday because

20 you simply have run out of witnesses.

21 MR. WEINER: That is -- in all likelihood we will not have a

22 witness anyway on Tuesday.

23 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you. Mr. Petrovic.

24 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, in connection with

25 what Mr. Weiner is saying that has to do with the schedule of witnesses,

Page 3344

1 the Defence has no position. In fact, it is at the discretion of you,

2 Your Honour, and of course the Prosecutor how they feel this should be

3 done.

4 But this morning the Defence heard another thing which causes

5 serious concern of the Defence which is the videotaping of a psychiatric

6 finding is something that the defendant and the Defence will not agree to.

7 This is the first time that we hear that someone is planning to film a

8 psychiatric examination.

9 In my career, which may not be all that long, I have never had

10 occasion to hear of a similar practice. But in view of the situation and

11 irrespective of that, the Defence and the defendant absolutely will not

12 consent to that. I do not see a single purpose, a single reason why

13 professional examiners would film on videotape their examination.

14 This is something which so blatantly encroaches upon the privacy

15 of the client and then can so blatantly be reflected on the content of

16 what the psychiatric examination will be that this simply causes us

17 serious concern and is something that the defendant and the Defence do not

18 consent to. This is something that we hear for the first time this

19 morning. This is something which is totally out of the ordinary and

20 something which is wholly unnecessary.

21 So please, Your Honour, take this into consideration also when

22 making your decision as to how much time is necessary and what manner of

23 organisation is required for the arrangements to be made for this medical

24 examination and expert opinion on the part of the psychiatrist, but to

25 film this on videotape, that is really totally unnecessary. Thank you,

Page 3345

1 Your Honour.

2 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Weiner, the first question is the necessity --

3 the first question is the necessity of videotaping.

4 MR. WEINER: Yes. Your Honour, this is not my request. This is

5 the request of the doctors. It is their practice. Some of the doctors in

6 the United States take the practice that they videotape. Not only do they

7 make their own notes during the examination, but they then take the tapes

8 back and they watch it where they have a chance to sit and review the

9 session after and to see whatever else they pick up and to make sure they

10 didn't miss anything. They also review it with a team, their own team, to

11 make sure that there is nothing that's missed. That is their practice.

12 It's not a situation where the videotapes are turned over to the

13 Prosecutors or it's anything we're requesting. This is their -- this is

14 the process that they use. Also, where we have different doctors

15 involved, they can contact each other. We have one doctor from Croatia,

16 we have two doctors from the United States; one is from the West Coast,

17 one is from Hawaii. They can contact each other, they can refer to

18 different times, different periods, different actions, different matters

19 or instance that they've seen and discuss it. That's why they use that

20 type of technique. They're comfortable with it and they've made the

21 request.

22 What we want to do is use a room similar to this where you have

23 videotape equipment. They have them at the detention facility and they

24 have them at this building. We're not going to have someone walking

25 around with a camera such as in a movie, taking pictures of the defendant

Page 3346












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

13 English transcripts.













Page 3347

1 while -- with a video camera while the interview or the examination is

2 occurring. This is a medical process. This is the type of process that

3 they use.

4 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you. Mr. Petrovic, you heard some further

5 development of the -- of the reason why the doctors, for their purposes,

6 apparently would prefer to use a tape. Do you have any further

7 submission?

8 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I unfortunately have

9 nothing to add to what I have already said. General Strugar does not

10 consent to being videotaped during the psychiatric interview. This

11 interview, as well as all other materials which are the result of the

12 psychiatric analysis will be submitted to the parties. They can also be

13 inspected and examined in this court and in all other ways. So this is

14 totally unnecessary. This process that Mr. Weiner is referring to is

15 being conducted in a room which is intended for interviews with the

16 accused. So this will have all the implications that the room is, in

17 terms of the views of the defendant and the people who are with him, it

18 will have all the implications of an interview being given to the

19 Prosecution.

20 It is hard to distinguish in such circumstances what is a

21 psychiatric need and what is the giving of an interview. And as I've

22 already said, additionally, this grossly encroaches upon the privacy of

23 Mr. Strugar. And as I've already mentioned, this has never been mentioned

24 so far even though we've been discussing this examination for over a month

25 now.

Page 3348

1 So it is with regret that I have to repeat, Your Honour, that the

2 accused Defendant Strugar does not agree to his psychiatric examination

3 being taped. No one, Your Honour, since medical evaluations have been

4 undertaken in the -- in this institution, no one has been videotaped

5 during such examinations. Why should General Strugar be the first

6 exception? For what particular reason? And many such examinations have

7 been undertaken by physicians from America, from Serbia, from Croatia,

8 from Europe, from all over the world, from all continents. So I don't see

9 a problem in that.

10 And as for the problems between Hawaii and the East Coast, that is

11 something which neither General Strugar nor the Defence are concerned

12 with. These people will be properly handsomely paid for their work and

13 they need to devote appropriate time to their duty, look at this man, and

14 render their opinion.

15 Thank you, Your Honour.

16 JUDGE PARKER: I would point out, Mr. Petrovic, that it is your

17 client who is raising the issue of his fitness to plead. It's not a

18 matter of just an uninvited intrusion into his privacy. The medical

19 experts that are being retained by the Prosecution, but they are

20 independent experts, have indicated a preference to use this because it

21 enables them not only to observe during the interview but to consider

22 again after the interview in case they have missed something during the

23 interview, so that it would seem on that basis that there could be some

24 medical advantage for them in being able to consider the tape afterwards.

25 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour -- I apologise. Just

Page 3349

1 one minute.

2 [Defence counsel confer]

3 JUDGE PARKER: Yes, Mr. Petrovic. I'm sorry.

4 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I would like to repeat

5 yet once again what I already said. First of all, there is a host of

6 quandaries, of unknowns in this entire thing. First of all, we don't know

7 who these people are. Of course we have confidence that these are

8 adequately qualified people who will do their job properly.

9 Secondly, it is not clear from what I heard what particular

10 profile, what particular profile of this particular profession they are.

11 Thirdly, I did not get it whether all these people would be coming

12 here or one would come here and then videotape the examination and then

13 send it to Hawaii. All these things are not clear to me, Your Honour.

14 Secondly, if someone wishes to view something several times, to

15 check and re-check, he can have it audiotaped. He can record it. He can

16 jot it down, the way our experts have been doing. He can stay here for a

17 day, two or three or five days more to test his impressions, to again

18 broach -- raise a subject with the defendant, to analyse things that he

19 finds need clarification.

20 Please, Your Honour, it is quite true what you have said, that

21 this is a request raised by the Defence. It is true that this is a

22 problem because, according to Dr. Letic's finding, this is a man who is

23 unfit to stand trial, but it is equally true that this precedent which

24 they wish to set in this Detention Unit is something that we never had

25 before.

Page 3350

1 Of course this can be easily verified from medical findings.

2 These are, of course, confidential matters, but they can be looked into.

3 Not a single interviewee for this purpose has been videotaped. So I ask

4 you kindly, Your Honour, not to allow General Strugar to become a

5 precedent, especially not in a situation when we have been waiting for

6 weeks, practically months now, for these esteemed experts to come, and now

7 we are faced with this kind of a request with just one of them wanting to

8 come and send videotapes to the other ones. Perhaps this is not the case.

9 I will allow that possibility. But at any rate, this position is such,

10 and please take it into consideration and take note of this position of

11 ours, namely it can be audiotaped. Let that be a compromise.

12 Thank you, Your Honour.

13 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you, Mr. Petrovic.

14 Is there anything further, Mr. Weiner?

15 MR. WEINER: Yes, just as a point of clarification: All three

16 doctors will be here. All three will examine the accused. All three --

17 or the two Americans would like the videotape. They are consulting with

18 the third doctor, the Croatian. They will all three have access to the

19 videos, to review them, or they would like to have access to the videos to

20 review them to make sure there's nothing they've missed, to see if there's

21 anything they would like to add so they get a full, complete picture of

22 what occurred. You get a complete picture by looking after, by listening

23 again, and hopefully they can get the best diagnosis that they're able to

24 get by getting the full picture. Thank you.

25 JUDGE PARKER: I take it that you do not dispute what is put by

Page 3351

1 Mr. Petrovic, that this would be the first time that that process has been

2 followed in this Tribunal.

3 MR. WEINER: In this Tribunal but this is probably the first time

4 we've had a competency hearing as to psychiatric fitness in this Tribunal

5 too. So we've barely had this situation raised other than one or two

6 defendants just examined.

7 JUDGE PARKER: Now, the second issue, Mr. Weiner. You mentioned

8 Tuesday. Bearing in mind the interests of Defence counsel, would Monday

9 be as convenient to you and the witnesses? I mean the witnesses rather

10 than you, that is the medical experts.

11 MR. WEINER: No, because they're flying in Sunday and some are

12 arriving Monday morning, so they were hoping to all have a full meeting.

13 Some are meeting -- two are going to meet, I believe, on Sunday, and one

14 is going to meet -- the three are going to meet Monday afternoon. So

15 we're hoping for Tuesday.

16 JUDGE PARKER: I was trying to secure a long weekend for the

17 Defence but it doesn't seem that it will fit for you.

18 [Trial Chamber confers]

19 JUDGE PARKER: We are of the view that the unavailability of

20 witnesses for Tuesday provides a reason to agree to the Prosecution

21 request that there be no hearing on that day, that happening to make it

22 more convenient for the medical examinations that are to be conducted.

23 Were it not for the unavailability of other witnesses, we would not have

24 been minded to treat the Prosecution request differently from the earlier

25 request we had from the Defence of a similar nature.

Page 3352












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

13 English transcripts.













Page 3353

1 We would, therefore, indicate that we will not sit on Tuesday of

2 next week.

3 With respect to the further request that this Chamber authorise

4 the videotaping of the interview, we are not presently persuaded of the

5 medical necessity for that. We can appreciate that it may have had some

6 convenience for the medical specialists, especially as they will be --

7 have come from and will return to different parts of the world, but in

8 view of the concern of the accused, his reluctance to be involved in a

9 videotaped interview and the obvious potential for his concern in itself

10 to affect his emotional composure if he is being videotaped, we think it

11 better that we do not authorise the videotaping of the interviews.

12 Was there any other matter that the Prosecution wished to raise at

13 this moment, Mr. Weiner?

14 MR. WEINER: No. I hope our witness is here.

15 JUDGE PARKER: Is there any matter that Defence counsel needs to

16 raise at this time?

17 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] No, Your Honour. I am sorry.

18 JUDGE PARKER: Don't apologise, Mr. Petrovic.

19 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour. Yes, in the desire

20 for us to make the best use of our time, to use it most efficiently, but

21 it so happens that we do not have anything to raise. But unfortunately it

22 will crop up eventually when we will have other things to deal with.

23 That's the way it usually happens. Thank you.

24 JUDGE PARKER: Well, the witness has arrived, we are told, and

25 will be brought in.

Page 3354

1 [The witness entered court]

2 JUDGE PARKER: Good morning, Mr. Vlasica.

3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning. Good morning.

4 JUDGE PARKER: Please sit down.

5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.

6 JUDGE PARKER: If I could remind you of the affirmation you gave

7 to tell the truth. It still applies.

8 Yes, Mr. Weiner.

9 MR. WEINER: Thank you.


11 [Witness answered through interpreter]

12 Examined by Mr. Weiner: [Continued]

13 Q. Good morning, Mr. Vlasica.

14 A. Good morning. Good morning.

15 Q. Yesterday you were shown that map. Can you take a look at it,

16 sir. And you marked on the map where your store was on Od Puca Street.

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. And is that mark still there?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. And is that the correct location?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. Thank you.

23 MR. WEINER: I'd like to offer the map at this time.

24 THE REGISTRAR: That will be P13.1.

25 MR. WEINER: Your Honour, would you like the map marked P13.1 or

Page 3355

1 should we give it just a full new number?

2 JUDGE PARKER: We have been using quite separate numbers in other

3 cases, so I think we'll continue that practice, although I must say my own

4 personal preference is exactly what the court officer has done, but we

5 were counselled that it would be more useful for some purposes if it went

6 the other way, so we'd better be consistent.

7 MR. WEINER: Thank you, Your Honour.

8 THE REGISTRAR: So that will be P83.

9 MR. WEINER: May the record reflect that that's P83, please. It

10 said P3.

11 JUDGE PARKER: I'm thinking that -- is this the map that was

12 marked for identification as 83 or a separate one?

13 MR. WEINER: No. We requested -- we offered it as an exhibit.

14 JUDGE PARKER: Yes, but --

15 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

16 MR. WEINER: I believe it should be 85.

17 THE REGISTRAR: I think the document doesn't say for what I put in

18 yesterday.

19 JUDGE PARKER: So I believe the correct number is now Exhibit P85.

20 And I just want to be sure that it's not the same map that was marked for

21 identification as 83.

22 MR. WEINER: The only reason I changed that is it first listed P3.

23 Based on this situation, could we have the witness sign it at this

24 point, just for protection.

25 JUDGE PARKER: I was wrong in raising 83. It's a photograph.

Page 3356

1 MR. WEINER: Thank you.

2 JUDGE PARKER: We've got ourselves clarified, and this is Exhibit

3 P85, and the witness is now signing it.

4 MR. WEINER: Thank you. Thank you.

5 Q. Sir, do you know a man by the name of Mato Skocko?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. Is he a friend of yours?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. And did he have a son?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. And what was the son's name?

12 A. Tonci.

13 Q. And was that the same Tonci that you saw with the bread truck,

14 driving past you on December 6 in the early morning hours between 6.30 and

15 7.00 with a little truck with bread on it?

16 A. Yes. It's not really a truck, but it's a type of vehicle.

17 Q. And did you learn from your friend that something happened to his

18 son on December 6th?

19 A. That morning, I did not know. I found out only a few days later,

20 in hospital, that the young man was killed.

21 Q. And when did you learn that he had been killed?

22 A. A few days later, in hospital. Perhaps two or three days later.

23 Then I found out who all the people who were killed in the territory of

24 the town of Dubrovnik were.

25 Q. No, I'm sorry: On what date was he killed?

Page 3357

1 A. The 6th of December.

2 Q. And did you learn how he had been killed, from the father?

3 A. No. I found out from the medical staff, from the nurses and

4 doctor.

5 Q. And did they say what happened to him?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. What did they say?

8 A. During the shelling, some shrapnel from a shell, a small fragment,

9 hit him at the door and went through the right side of his body directly

10 into the heart. So they didn't even notice the entry wound because there

11 was no blood. The young man turned around, and two metres further on he

12 fell, dead. Afterwards, they carried out an autopsy in the hospital, and

13 they realised that it was such a tiny fragment but that it did pierce the

14 heart nevertheless.

15 Q. Now, sir, you talked about your injuries that you suffered on

16 December 6th and that you were in the hospital for a little bit over two

17 weeks. As a result of those injuries suffered, did you receive a

18 disability from the government?

19 A. I was given the status of civilian invalid because I was not in

20 the military of Croatia's, so I am being treated as a 30 per cent disabled

21 person.

22 Q. I'd like to show you some papers at this time.

23 Sir, I'd ask you to please look at the document with the ERN

24 number 03517595 on it. It has a B as in "boy" in the upper right. It's a

25 decision and it's the document with the stamp. Do you see that document,

Page 3358












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

13 English transcripts.













Page 3359

1 sir?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. And could you go to the second page of that. Now, there are a

4 group of four statements at the top of the second page, and I'd like to

5 read the second statement. It begins: "First Instance Medical

6 Committee..." Do you see that, sir?

7 A. Yes. "First Instance Medical Committee for the medical

8 examination of the persons covered by the Law on the Protection of

9 Military and Civilian War Invalids evaluated by its Finding and Advice

10 number 141/96 from the 23rd of April, 1996, the invalidity of the

11 above-mentioned at --"

12 Q. Could you slow down a little bit for the translators and

13 stenographer, please. Could we continue with right after the date, 23

14 April, 1996, and just slowly read the rest.

15 A. "... the invalidity of the above-mentioned at 30 per cent due to:

16 condition after the wounding of the right upper leg with pronounced

17 deformation of the muscle. T.309."

18 Q. Thank you, sir.

19 A. You're welcome.

20 Q. Could you go to the next document exhibit with the C on the top in

21 the B/C/S. It's 03517597.

22 I'm sorry. Could you go to the third document. I apologise.

23 Strike that. 0517599 at the top without any letter. The third document

24 of this set. It says "Finding and Opinion," in B/C/S. Do you see that

25 document, sir?

Page 3360

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. And there are, under "Finding and Opinion," there are four

3 statements. Could you read what's typed in under the first statement

4 where it starts, "The condition after the wounding ..." Could you read

5 that in for the record, please, under 1.

6 A. "The condition after the wounding of the right upper leg with

7 pronounced muscle deformation T.309."

8 Q. Thank you, sir.

9 A. You're welcome.

10 MR. WEINER: I'd like to offer these three documents.

11 JUDGE PARKER: Do you want anything to come into evidence with

12 respect to the third of them or just simply to be accepted as it is?

13 MR. WEINER: No, just to be accepted with it because that is the

14 full three-part set.

15 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Rodic.

16 MR. RODIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the Defence is opposed to

17 having a number assigned to this document right now for the same reason

18 that we stated in respect to the first document. We have our reasons for

19 that. We want the Defence to deal with it, but we are not opposed to

20 having it marked for identification.

21 As for the third document, the Prosecutor has to be aware of the

22 fact that it is totally illegible, and that is why he probably withdrew

23 it, because the witness could not have read it in the first place. Thank

24 you.

25 JUDGE PARKER: Is this a document, Mr. Rodic, that you have not

Page 3361

1 had notice of, or these documents ones you have not had notice of?

2 MR. RODIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, all three documents were

3 submitted to the Defence last night at 6.00 p.m. I think that no further

4 comment is required.

5 JUDGE PARKER: That being the case, Mr. Weiner, I think as a

6 matter of courtesy we will defer until the closing of the

7 cross-examination and your re-examination whether to receive the document

8 into evidence.

9 MR. WEINER: That's fair. No problem.

10 JUDGE PARKER: As long as you remember to remind us.

11 MR. WEINER: All right. Thank you.

12 JUDGE PARKER: And it seems that a copy that Mr. Rodic has may not

13 be legible. No doubt between you you can resolve that.

14 MR. WEINER: Thank you.

15 THE REGISTRAR: Do you want this document to come under one number

16 or separately?

17 MR. WEINER: You could do it one number A, B, C or 1, 2, 3.

18 JUDGE PARKER: .1, .2, .3.

19 THE REGISTRAR: Thank you, Your Honour. Yes, so that will be

20 P86.1, .2, .3.

21 MR. WEINER: For identification at this time.

22 JUDGE PARKER: The document ending in 595 will be .1. The

23 document ending in 599 will be .2, and the document ending in 597 will be

24 .3.

25 Yes, Mr. Weiner.

Page 3362

1 MR. WEINER: Thank you.

2 Q. Now, sir, we'll finish up. Did you eventually become a member of

3 the military?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. When did you join the Croatian forces?

6 A. The 3rd of February, 1993.

7 Q. And what sort of function did you have in the Croatian military in

8 1993?

9 A. I drove a tank.

10 Q. And how long did you remain in that military?

11 A. For three years.

12 Q. Thank you. Now, sir, let's go back to October, November, December

13 1991. Did you ever see any sort of artillery weaponry in the Old Town of

14 Dubrovnik?

15 A. No.

16 Q. Did you ever see any mortars in the Old Town of Dubrovnik in that

17 same time period, October?

18 A. No.

19 Q. Did you ever see any anti-aircraft guns or any sort of

20 anti-aircraft or smaller -- smaller artillery pieces in the Old Town in

21 October, November, December 1991?

22 A. No.

23 Q. Did you ever observe any outgoing fire from the Old Town of

24 Dubrovnik?

25 A. No.

Page 3363

1 Q. Did you ever see any soldiers up on the walls or the ramparts in

2 the Old Town of Dubrovnik from October through December 1991?

3 A. No.

4 THE INTERPRETER: Could the interpreters please ask the witness to

5 speak into the microphone. Thank you.


7 Q. And finally, did you ever see numbers of Croatian soldiers in the

8 Old Town in October through December 1991?

9 A. No.

10 Q. Thank you very much.

11 MR. WEINER: No further questions.

12 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Rodic.

13 MR. RODIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

14 Cross-examined by Mr. Rodic:

15 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, Mr. Vlasica. I'm Goran Rodic,

16 attorney-at-law from Podgorica, and on behalf of General Strugar's

17 defence, I'm going to put a few questions to you in relation to your

18 testimony.

19 A. Thank you.

20 Q. Since we speak a similar language and since we understand each

21 other and due to interpretation-related problems, we should not overlap

22 each other. Please wait for me to put my question and then give your

23 answer.

24 A. That's all right.

25 Q. Tell me, during 1991, you lived in Klisevska Street number 13,

Page 3364












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

13 English transcripts.













Page 3365

1 which is at Babin Kuk; is that right?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. Is it correct that near your house there were hotels at that time,

4 Zagreb, Kompas?

5 A. Yes, near my house, yes. Not very nearby, but around there.

6 Zagreb about 200 metres, Kompas about 3 or 400 metres, towards the bay.

7 Q. Tell me, is this the first time that you're in The Hague?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. When did you come?

10 A. Sunday.

11 Q. Can you remember the date?

12 A. The 22nd.

13 Q. You arrived in the morning; right?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. You never came to The Hague before in relation to any kind of

16 obligations vis-a-vis the Tribunal?

17 A. No.

18 Q. Who else came to The Hague together with you from Dubrovnik,

19 people from Dubrovnik?

20 A. I know that some people came, but who it was, I don't know for

21 sure.

22 Q. Did you see anyone here?

23 A. No. I was just told that some individuals were here, but I didn't

24 see them.

25 Q. So during these five days you've been on your own. You didn't see

Page 3366

1 any other people from Dubrovnik?

2 A. Unfortunately, I've been all on my own.

3 Q. Did you happen to see Djelo Jusic?

4 A. No.

5 Q. Nikola Jovic?

6 A. No.

7 Q. Do you know them?

8 A. Yes, very well.

9 Q. Tell me, did you bring your medical documentation with you when

10 you came to The Hague?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. Did you ever submit this documentation to the OTP before you came

13 here?

14 A. No.

15 Q. What were all the documents that you brought along and what did

16 you give to the Prosecutor specifically?

17 A. What you saw.

18 Q. So altogether, these four documents.

19 A. That's right.

20 Q. Do you have any other documents on you?

21 A. No.

22 Q. Do you have the originals of these documents here with you?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. Do you have them right here, now?

25 A. No. They're at the hotel, the safe at the hotel.

Page 3367

1 Q. Tell me, what schools have you completed?

2 A. I completed the school for salespeople, a three-year secondary

3 school, and after that I did my military service and then I trained for

4 another two years in order to be trained as head of a shop.

5 Q. If I understood you correctly, this was before you went to the

6 army, I mean this additional training?

7 A. No. I said it very nicely. Later, after, I did my military

8 service.

9 Q. I'm sorry, I didn't understand you.

10 A. What a pity. We speak the same language.

11 Q. In the period from 1979 until today, have you ever had a criminal

12 record?

13 A. No.

14 Q. Or were any proceedings instituted against you?

15 A. No.

16 Q. The company Dubrovkinja, where you worked during 1991, was a

17 socially owned or state-owned company, wasn't it?

18 A. A state-owned company, of course.

19 Q. Since when have you had a private shop?

20 A. Since 1999.

21 Q. This is the shop in Mlini that was referred to?

22 A. First I worked in Mokosica for five years, and then I closed that

23 shop and opened a new one in Mlini.

24 Q. Is that your own shop? Do you own the premises?

25 A. No. I rented the space.

Page 3368

1 Q. Did you have anything like that in the Old Town?

2 A. No.

3 Q. Did you make any statements to the investigators?

4 A. Before, you mean?

5 Q. Yes.

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. Can you tell me when?

8 A. The year 2000.

9 Q. Was this on the 30th of May, 2000, in Dubrovnik, and was Dirk

10 Hooijkaas the investigator who talked to you?

11 A. Perhaps it did take place then, but I don't know the gentleman's

12 name.

13 Q. Do you remember -- do you remember Andrea Bralic who did the

14 interpretation?

15 A. I remember that there was a girl there, but I don't remember her

16 exact name either.

17 Q. Did you tell the investigator everything that you considered to be

18 of relevance?

19 A. The same things I am saying now I said then.

20 Q. Tell me, have you read this statement?

21 A. I could not have because it was English and I don't speak English.

22 But later on, when they translated it, then I read that out.

23 Q. Can you tell me when it was later that you were given this version

24 in Croatian?

25 A. I had another meeting with them, and then they brought it to me

Page 3369

1 and they asked me to confirm what I had said, and I said that all of it

2 was correct and that what was written down was exactly what I had said,

3 and that is the way it was.

4 Q. Tell me, this other meeting you had with them, how much time had

5 gone by between those two interviews?

6 A. To tell you the truth --

7 Q. Well, approximately.

8 A. About a year. I can't tell you exactly.

9 Q. So you were given the version of your statement in the Croatian

10 language after a year, which you then read and signed the English version;

11 is that not so?

12 A. Yes. That's the way it was, because I could see that it was --

13 that it reflected exactly what I had said, but I did not sign the English

14 version but the Croatian version. Of course, I cannot read English, and I

15 had to sign what was written in Croatian.

16 Q. Tell me, on the 30th of May, 2000, after you completed this

17 interview in which participated the investigator and the lady translator,

18 were you read out at that time the statement compiled in English, and did

19 the lady interpreter interpret it for you into Croatian to see what was

20 written?

21 A. I believe that it was a different date. I cannot recall the exact

22 date. Don't try to trip me.

23 Q. I'm not trying to trip you. What it says is this date, the 30th

24 of May.

25 A. Yes. Of course they read what I had said and they read it out to

Page 3370












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

13 English transcripts.













Page 3371

1 me.

2 Q. They read it out to you in English or was it translated to you

3 into Croatian?

4 A. Yes, it was.

5 Q. And after a year, they gave you this written statement translated

6 into Croatian in writing which you then read and signed?

7 A. Yes. After it had been written, yes, naturally.

8 Q. Thank you.

9 A. You're welcome.

10 Q. Did you give the investigators the medical documentation in the

11 year 2000 when they came to see you?

12 A. No, I didn't.

13 Q. Can you explain to me why you didn't give it to them?

14 A. Because nobody asked me to.

15 Q. Did you mention to them that you had been wounded?

16 A. Normally they already knew everything, just like you now know

17 everything.

18 Q. So on that occasion, the investigator didn't ask you to hand over

19 any documentation at all?

20 A. Well, frankly speaking, I cannot tell you exactly. I don't

21 remember.

22 Q. Can you tell me who was it exactly that asked this documentation

23 from you and when?

24 A. It was The Hague Tribunal. They told me that I should bring it

25 along when I came here.

Page 3372

1 Q. So on the 22nd of February you arrived at The Hague. So can you

2 tell me, in relation to the 22nd of February, how long before that was it

3 that they had asked you to submit - i.e. bring - this documentation?

4 A. That was about a month before that date.

5 Q. Did they mention, when they asked you this a month before that

6 date, that you should send it by fax or similar ways?

7 A. Yes, they did, but as I had no possibilities and I had a lot of

8 choice -- a lot of work to do with my business, I didn't. And it was also

9 hard to gather all the documents. I went to the hospital. It was hard to

10 collect all the documentation, because 13 years had elapsed after also.

11 So I really had great difficulty. They had great difficulty to find the

12 document for me. That's for one document.

13 For the other documents which you are seeing now, those I already

14 had, but of course I wanted to compile a complete file of documentation in

15 order to bring a proper file here.

16 Q. So you talked to the investigators in the year 2000, and the year

17 after that, in the year 2001, you were given the statement in Croatian for

18 you to read and sign. So tell me, from that time up to date, have you had

19 occasion, and if so, where and when, to re-read your statement?

20 A. Well, as you can see for yourself --

21 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter did not hear counsel because of

22 the overlapping.

23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You can see these documents which I

24 have before me, which you have, are documents which I had been given a

25 long time ago, so I put together this documentation, and that is I did my

Page 3373

1 best. There is no reason for me to remember any bad things.

2 MR. RODIC: [Interpretation]

3 Q. Perhaps you didn't understand me quite correctly.

4 A. Possibly.

5 Q. What I'm interested in is from the year 2001 to this day, have you

6 had occasion to re-read your statement?

7 A. No. No.

8 Q. Did anyone read out your statement to you?

9 A. In the year 2001 when I received it and signed it. Actually,

10 after that I was no longer interested in it. This is what I said, and I

11 stand behind my words, and I have no reason to be concerned with that any

12 more.

13 Q. Did you read it now in The Hague after you came here?

14 A. Yes, I did.

15 Q. Who gave it to you?

16 A. This gentleman.

17 JUDGE PARKER: I think the record should reveal an indication of

18 Mr. Weiner.

19 MR. WEINER: Yes.

20 THE WITNESS: I'm sorry.

21 MR. RODIC: [Interpretation]

22 Q. Were there any mistakes in the statement which you read?

23 A. Everything reflected exactly my words.

24 Q. So what you said in the statement is what you're saying today in

25 court.

Page 3374

1 A. That is right.

2 Q. There was no need for any corrections.

3 A. Naturally there wasn't.

4 Q. Tell me, I assume that after having served the military, you were

5 assigned in accordance with the law on the military obligation into the

6 reserve force of the JNA, were you not?

7 A. Yes, I was.

8 Q. Can you tell me to what particular unit.

9 A. Territorial Defence Reconnaissance Unit. I was a reconnaissance

10 soldier according to establishment.

11 Q. So you kept this establishment post also in the reserve?

12 A. Yes, I did.

13 Q. Tell me, this Territorial Defence unit, who did it belong to?

14 Where was it located?

15 A. Well, it was within the framework, I believe as would it be only

16 normal, of Trebinje, because we were to Trebinje, to Duz for training, and

17 to this location -- help me. If you can help me remember the name. It's

18 in Montenegro.

19 Q. Well, it doesn't matter. I suppose then that you did military

20 exercises as part of the Trebinje Brigade?

21 A. Yes, that is correct.

22 Q. In 1991, you were 34 years old, and you were still a military

23 conscript. You were still eligible for the draft?

24 A. Well, yes, I was, but I was not a military conscript any more

25 because I finished that in 1989.

Page 3375

1 Q. Can you tell me what it was that you finished?

2 A. Well, the reserve formation. Namely, I was given a document to

3 the effect that I was no longer a reservist.

4 Q. Why was that?

5 A. Well, in all fairness I really don't know. Perhaps because of the

6 volume of my work or because I had put on some weight. I really don't

7 know.

8 Q. So at 34, the army could do without you. That is quite

9 unbelievable.

10 A. Well, yes, but it was a commonly known fact why I was excluded,

11 because people knew what lay in store in the -- what would happen over the

12 next two or three years, and the entire Territorial Defence of Dubrovnik

13 was dismantled and all the weapons were taken to the Trebinje barracks so

14 that we were left without weapons.

15 Q. You are referring to 1989 [1999] when they sort of wrote you off

16 from the reserve force.

17 A. Yes exactly, because they knew exactly what was going to happen.

18 In fact, they had been planning beforehand.

19 MR. WEINER: Your Honour. I don't want to object, it's just the

20 transcript says you're referring to 1999. Should that be corrected?

21 JUDGE PARKER: It should be 1989. That was the question I think

22 you asked, Mr. Rodic.

23 MR. RODIC: [Interpretation] That is right, Your Honour.

24 Q. Can you explain in more specific terms what was it was that was

25 being planned as of 1989?

Page 3376












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

13 English transcripts.













Page 3377

1 A. What was being planned? This is something that the top brass of

2 the Yugoslav People's Army knows or knew, and the Yugoslav leadership,

3 because if they had withdrawn the complete armaments of the Territorial

4 Defence, that we in the city of Dubrovnik could no longer have any

5 weapons, it only meant that this was being done in a planned fashion. Now,

6 what was being planned? I think you know that better than anybody else.

7 What was being planned was what happened later.

8 Q. Do you have any prejudices vis-a-vis my person or --

9 A. No, none at all.

10 Q. Because you say I knew, I know what was -- what had been in store,

11 what was being planned.

12 A. No, because you are the Defence counsel for this gentleman. Of

13 course I have respect for you, but I -- this is the way I have to say it.

14 How else could I put it?

15 Q. But when you say that they dismissed you from the reserve force in

16 1989 and you only stopped being a member of the League of Communists only

17 in 1990, that is a bit illogical, don't you think?

18 A. Look here, I'll tell you this: Had I known what would happen, I

19 would have perhaps left the League of Communists even earlier, but I think

20 that it is not at all important at this point when I ceased being a member

21 of the League of Communists because this is really immaterial vis-a-vis

22 this.

23 Q. So you believe it unimportant?

24 A. I do. I do. I think it unimportant because it is something else

25 that we are now discussing. We are not discussing what I was and whether

Page 3378

1 I was a member of the League of Communists.

2 Q. But our distinguished colleague the Prosecutor asked you before I

3 did. It was not me who started asking you this question.

4 A. That's right.

5 Q. But you replied to him.

6 A. Yes I did. I had to tell him my entire biography because he has

7 to have all these particulars. So, of course, do you.

8 Q. Would you please be so kind as to also give me all the replies I

9 want. I want --

10 A. Of course I will tell you everything that I want -- that you want

11 to hear and that I know the answer to. Of course I will be telling you

12 the truth, except when I don't know I will not reply.

13 Q. What was the rank that you had when you left the army?

14 A. It was lance corporal. When I left the reserves. I apologise. I

15 didn't quite get your question. When I left the reserves I was given the

16 rank of Second Lieutenant.

17 Q. And in this period since you finished serving the military service

18 up to 1989, what was your promotion record? How come and on what basis?

19 A. Because I went for training twice and because of my merits.

20 Q. What training?

21 A. I went to Makarska for training of reconnaissance and sabotage

22 units two times.

23 Q. When you say on the basis your merits, that means that you were,

24 so to speak, a good soldier also in the reserve and gave a good account of

25 yourself?

Page 3379

1 A. Yes, naturally.

2 Q. And were you maintaining -- was your name in the military

3 department, in the recruitment office in Dubrovnik records?

4 A. Yes, it was.

5 Q. And did the recruitment office in Dubrovnik actually exclude you

6 from the reserve?

7 A. Well, since so many years have elapsed, I am not sure, but I'm

8 quite sure this instruction came from the top, but from where exactly, I

9 can't say.

10 Q. What do you mean "from the top"?

11 A. Well, from the top echelons of the Yugoslav People's Army. It

12 couldn't have been anyone from the centre of the city unless such

13 instructions have been passed down from some people who were to remove us,

14 so to speak, from the reserve force.

15 JUDGE PARKER: Is that a convenient time, Mr. Rodic?

16 MR. RODIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.

17 JUDGE PARKER: We will have a 20-minute break.

18 --- Recess taken at 10.25 a.m.

19 --- On resuming at 10.51 a.m.

20 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Rodic.

21 MR. RODIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. During the

22 break, in contact with the Victims and Witness Unit, I was asked about

23 another one of the Prosecution witnesses about to come, and that is Ivo

24 Vujnovic, Your Honour. I don't know whether we should deal with this

25 matter in front of this witness or should the witness be asked to wait

Page 3380

1 before we resolve the matter that has to do with the next witness.

2 JUDGE PARKER: Does it directly concern his evidence?

3 MR. RODIC: [Interpretation] It doesn't.

4 JUDGE PARKER: I think the witness could stay seated.

5 If you'll excuse us. Just stay where you are and we'll deal with

6 another matter.

7 Yes, Mr. Rodic.

8 MR. RODIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the witness Ivo Vujnovic

9 was announced by the Prosecution in its submission on the 25th of

10 February, and it was stated that he would testify on the 2nd of March. So

11 again the seven-day deadline was not observed, and this is what had been

12 established at the Pre-Trial Conference on the 15th of December, last

13 year. That is one point.

14 Another thing is far more of a problem and it has to do with the

15 testimony of that witness. Part of the material for him, namely

16 transcripts, was disclosed to the Defence only two days ago, and it was

17 only last night that the Defence received audiotapes. The point of these

18 transcripts and the audiotapes is that intercepts, alleged intercepts were

19 recorded pertaining to the 6th of December, 1991, and this was done by the

20 mentioned witness.

21 Bearing in mind the disclosure order between the parties which

22 cannot be less than ten days, and that was also established at the

23 pre-trial conference on the 15th of December last year, the Defence indeed

24 is not in a position to prepare itself to cross-examine this witness.

25 During such a short period of time, we cannot deal with all this material.

Page 3381

1 Therefore, it would be useful if this witness were not brought to The

2 Hague at that point in time so that no undue expenses are incurred by way

3 of his travel and so on. It would be better if he could come on another

4 occasion and testify then so that he could be dealt with during one trip.

5 So this material is the core of the matter that his testimony

6 deals with, and we are not in a position to check it out during such a

7 short period of time. We cannot listen to the intercept. We cannot

8 consult experts in this particular field.

9 JUDGE PARKER: Are these intercepts military intercepts?

10 MR. RODIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.

11 JUDGE PARKER: And they relate to the 6th of December, 1991?

12 MR. RODIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.

13 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you, Mr. Rodic.

14 Mr. Re.

15 MR. RE: The -- it is true the tapes themselves were disclosed, as

16 I found out, I think, two days ago. The Prosecution, we understood that

17 they had been disclosed some time ago. It seems to have been an

18 administrative oversight not to have disclosed the tapes themselves. We

19 certainly disclosed the transcripts of the tapes within the required time

20 period under the order.

21 JUDGE PARKER: What does that mean?

22 MR. RE: The exact date? Can I just consult with the case

23 manager? My learned friend's submission has taken me just by surprise at

24 this particular time.

25 The 24th --

Page 3382












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

13 English transcripts.













Page 3383

1 JUDGE PARKER: Of February.

2 MR. RE: Of February, yes.

3 JUDGE PARKER: And how extensive are these transcripts and tapes?

4 MR. RE: From memory, I think there's about 15 pages of

5 transcripts. That's from memory. My learned friend can correct me if I'm

6 wrong.

7 The -- it would have been well within time had Mr. Fietelaars,

8 Ambassador Fietelaars testified as anticipated next week. We weren't

9 anticipating Mr. Vujnovic testifying until sometime later next week, and

10 we had to reschedule him because Mr. Fietelaars became unavailable due to

11 personal reasons at the beginning of the week.

12 The nature of the -- the nature of the evidence, it doesn't

13 actually concern -- there certainly aren't intercepts involving the

14 accused, orders, or anything directly from the accused.

15 JUDGE PARKER: They must be relevant.

16 MR. RE: They're relevant as to the fact of an extent of

17 communications between JNA units on the 6th of December, 1991. That's as

18 far as the Prosecution will take the evidence of this witness. He was a

19 person who was intercepting -- an amateur, so to speak, intercepting and

20 taping conversations and then making transcripts of them and providing

21 intelligence to the Croatian authorities. It -- that's the limit of it.

22 It's only to establish the extent of and the fact of JNA communications on

23 the 6th of December, which is circumstantially leading to circumstantial

24 inferences available back up to the accused and the chain of command.

25 So in that sense, it's -- the late disclosure is -- is not as

Page 3384

1 prejudicial as it may seem at first blush.

2 JUDGE PARKER: But there would have been no opportunity to have

3 any technical evaluation of the tapes if they are not disclosed until two

4 days ago.

5 MR. RE: Of course. The -- there is a difficulty with these

6 tapes, and we will be relying more heavily upon the transcript and the

7 fact of the witness identifying what was said by his transcript rather

8 than the tapes. The tapes are very unclear. They're very - what's the

9 word? - soft, hard to hear, and the witness has had to go back himself to

10 transcribe them in Zagreb. We tried to transcribe them here but the

11 interpreters couldn't do so so he's gone back to transcribe them himself.

12 JUDGE PARKER: That only strengthens the concern of Mr. Rodic, I

13 would think, that they have adequate time with the tapes.

14 MR. RE: I can't -- I don't -- of course the Prosecution doesn't

15 disagree that the Defence, of course, should have proper preparation time

16 if they want to cross-examine the veracity of the tapes and so on.

17 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Re, let me indicate the Chamber's first

18 impression; that is that it would be quite impractical to expect the

19 Defence to cross-examine next week this witness. Whether you would want

20 to call him in chief is a different matter, but as Mr. Rodic points out,

21 it would be perhaps more efficient if the witness came at a later time and

22 got his evidence and his cross-examination over at the one time.

23 MR. RE: Could we possibly revisit this a little bit later in the

24 day when I've -- when we've had a chance to speak to VWU and work out

25 witnesses and -- and so? I certainly understand Your Honour's point.

Page 3385

1 I'll be in a much better position to respond to it maybe in an hour or

2 two.

3 JUDGE PARKER: Well, there are two issues. The first is whether

4 the Defence should be required to cross-examine the witness if the witness

5 is called. I think you can take it the answer is no.

6 For the Prosecution, then, will be the consequential question,

7 whether to proceed with calling the evidence of this witness in chief or

8 whether to have another witness, if one is available, or whether to have

9 even more time not sitting.

10 I leave that with you.

11 MR. RE: I'll --

12 JUDGE PARKER: And we will hear in due course.

13 Mr. Rodic, we've rather moved ahead of you, perhaps.

14 MR. RODIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I'm sorry that my learned

15 friend Mr. Re is improvising now in your presence, although I gave you the

16 exact figures.

17 It is not true that we received the audiotape two days ago. We

18 received it last night at 6.00 p.m. The transcripts were given to us two

19 days ago. That is correct. The transcripts do not amount to 15 pages but

20 a lot more.

21 And another thing that is correct is that this witness, on the

22 15th of December last year, gave a statement to the investigators of the

23 OTP and, at that time, he handed over these audiotapes and his

24 transcripts. It's been more than two months since then.

25 That is accurate information in relation to this submission put

Page 3386

1 forth by the Defence. Thank you.

2 JUDGE PARKER: You heard the position that was indicated to

3 Mr. Re, Mr. Rodic. We leave it to the Prosecution whether or not they

4 call the witness next week, but if they do, you will not be required to

5 cross-examine, and that will have to happen at a later time. And as you

6 suggest, it may be more practical to defer the witness altogether to a

7 later time.

8 So I think we can -- you can rest easy on that at the moment. It

9 may be that the Prosecution will want to introduce a different witness at

10 somewhat short notice. We'll have to see whether that produces any

11 problems when and if that should happen.

12 I think we can carry on now with the cross-examination of our very

13 patient witness sitting here. Thank you.

14 MR. RODIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

15 Q. Sir, we will continue now with the cross-examination.

16 I would be interested in the following: During 1990 and 1991, did

17 you get any call-up papers from the military department?

18 A. No.

19 Q. Tell me, was there any mobilisation in Croatia before October

20 1991?

21 A. No.

22 Q. Was general mobilisation declared in Croatia later?

23 A. No, not as far as I know.

24 Q. I'm talking about these last three months of 1991.

25 A. As far as I know, no.

Page 3387

1 Q. Did you listen to the radio regularly?

2 A. Well, from time to time.

3 Q. Did you perhaps hear through the media that there was a general

4 mobilisation call?

5 A. I didn't hear about that.

6 Q. Do you have a military booklet?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. Are your years of military service during the war registered in

9 there?

10 A. For the Yugoslav army or for the Croatian army?

11 Q. I mean the Croatian army.

12 A. Yes, from 1993 until 1996, yes.

13 Q. And before you joined the Croatian army, can you tell me which

14 formation you were in in the defence of Dubrovnik?

15 A. I was a civilian in the Civil Defence. It's not a formation.

16 It's not part of the military establishment. It is there to help

17 civilians; to put people in shelters, to bring food, to bring material

18 that is indispensable for people who are in shelters.

19 Q. Who was commander of the Civil Defence?

20 A. I don't know.

21 Q. What position did you have in the Civil Defence?

22 A. I was a mere worker, believe me. Nothing. I mean, when some help

23 was needed, then they called me to help.

24 Q. Does this Civil Defence have an establishment of its own with its

25 own command, et cetera?

Page 3388












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

13 English transcripts.













Page 3389

1 A. Believe me, I don't know.

2 Q. Who was it that called you up then?

3 A. Well, it was people who were organised in this respect. I don't

4 know whether there were any formations involved. I just know that they

5 called me and said, "Ivo, this should be taken here and that should be

6 taken there. Could you take this food to the shelter," things like that.

7 Q. You said "at the level of the people who were involved in the

8 organisation." Those were your exact words.

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. What do you mean by that? What do you actually mean when you say

11 that?

12 A. People who were in charge of the Old Town so that it would

13 function somehow, because there were a great many civilians in the Old

14 Town. That is to say that things had to be organised so that these people

15 could somehow live in the Old Town.

16 Q. Please focus on my question, and please give me brief and succinct

17 answers because of the time limits involved.

18 So you've been repeating time and again what the Civil Defence

19 does. I know. We heard about that three times from you. I am asking you

20 specifically how they got in touch with you as a member of the Civil

21 Defence. Who was it that called you up? Who are these people who are

22 organised at this level, as you had put it?

23 A. I would receive a telephone call, and who these people are, I

24 don't know.

25 Q. Which telephone did they use? Where did they call you?

Page 3390

1 A. They called my number at the store.

2 Q. And an unknown person phones you at the store and makes you go

3 here and there in the Old Town?

4 A. Well, it's not that anybody made me go here and there. We were

5 all involved because we were all supposed to help each other.

6 Q. Can you tell me who these X, Y people are?

7 A. I don't know.

8 Q. Did you ever receive such calls around midday or in the afternoon

9 or in the early evening? Please wait for me to finish my question.

10 A. No.

11 Q. I still haven't finished.

12 A. I'm sorry.

13 Q. So was it necessary for you to provide your services for the Civil

14 Defence during other times of the day; midday, afternoon, early evening?

15 A. No.

16 Q. So by when were all these needs of the population in Dubrovnik

17 over in relation to your duties in the Civil Defence?

18 A. As far as I'm concerned myself, it was between 6.00 and 8.00 in

19 the morning.

20 Q. So where did you spend your working hours between 6.00 and 8.00 in

21 the morning?

22 A. In the store.

23 Q. Was that your job before the war, too, to sell these food products

24 at the store?

25 A. Yes.

Page 3391

1 Q. Did you do that same job between 6.00 and 8.00 in the morning

2 while you were at the store in this period between October and December

3 1991?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. When did you then carry out your activities related to the Civil

6 Defence and assisting people in terms of material, bringing them food to

7 the shelters, et cetera?

8 A. Since I was the head of that particular facility, of course I had

9 my workers, my employees, and if anything was needed, then I took care of

10 it.

11 Q. A few minutes ago, you told me that you spent the time between

12 6.00 and 8.00 in the morning at the workplace, in the shop. You did not

13 mention that you left at any point.

14 A. Well, I didn't because it all depended on the needs involved.

15 Q. Who would call you and who would tell you about these needs?

16 Could you please explain this to us. What was this all about?

17 A. If a person whose name I would not know would phone me at the

18 store and tell me, "Ivo, please take such-and-such an amount of bread and

19 such-and-such an amount of water to a shelter," Ivo would do it and go

20 back to the shop.

21 Q. Can you remember any other task that you carried out on behalf of

22 the Civilian Defence except for carrying milk?

23 A. That's the only thing I did. Nothing else.

24 Q. So you're a member of the Civilian Defence, and in terms of all of

25 the activities in the October - December 1991 period, the only thing you

Page 3392

1 did was go out a few times in the period between 6.00 and 8.00 a.m. in

2 order to take some milk to the shelters.

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Is that your assertion?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. If you were the boss, if you were the foreman, why couldn't one of

7 your workers take that milk there?

8 A. Well, you know how it was. If I -- I wouldn't have wanted a woman

9 to go out and expose herself to risk. And I received that order, so I

10 thought it was the right thing to do.

11 Q. Tell me, are you personally ashamed or is there any other reason

12 why you don't want to talk about your participation in the 1991 war?

13 A. I did not understand the question.

14 Q. My question is, are you perhaps ashamed or is there any other

15 reason why you do not wish to explain to us here your participation in

16 this period from October to December 1991 in the, shall I say, Civilian

17 Defence of the Old Town?

18 A. There is no shame. I did what I did during the war. I'm proud of

19 it. I did it to help the people, and I'm proud of having helped them.

20 Q. So you helped these people on the orders of unknown people; right?

21 Did you ever help any people without having received the orders from

22 anyone?

23 A. Yes, certainly, when the need arose.

24 Q. Were these needs daily needs?

25 A. No, they were not.

Page 3393

1 Q. Why weren't they?

2 A. Well, it depended on the actual time. Of course, if someone was

3 in need, I would see to that particular need of that particular person. I

4 would help him.

5 Q. In your statement which you gave the investigators in the year

6 2000 in paragraph 2 you describe how the attack on Srdj had started on the

7 1st of October by shelling. Then in that paragraph, you say: "I noticed

8 a number of smaller JNA patrol boats in the area. They would stay away at

9 a safe distance so that shells could not hit them."

10 Can you tell me what you meant by this, these boats were being

11 away at a safe distance, maintaining a safe distance in order not to be

12 hit by shells.

13 A. What I meant was that these patrol boats which had blockaded

14 Dubrovnik were a bit away from the walls. And as for the shells not

15 hitting them, it could have been a stray shell that could have hit your

16 own boat. That's what I meant, and that's what they sought to avoid.

17 Q. From my side, from where I'm standing, I cannot hit a single boat,

18 Mr. Vlasica.

19 A. Of course I meant from the side of the Yugoslav People's Army. I

20 apologise to you, sir.

21 Q. So these patrol boats were a bit off at a safe distance from the

22 ramparts of the Old Town in order to avoid getting hit by JNA shells?

23 A. That's the way I saw it. That's what I thought. We had no

24 weapons, and this is the only thing I had in mind when I made the

25 statement.

Page 3394

1 Q. Who didn't have any weapons?

2 A. We in Dubrovnik didn't have any weapons. If you were thinking

3 about our shells.

4 Q. I'm not speaking in terms of "our" or "your." I'm asking you who

5 is "we" in Dubrovnik?

6 A. I'm talking about our people, our citizens who remained in

7 Dubrovnik.

8 Q. So there were no weapons at all in Dubrovnik?

9 A. To the best of my knowledge, no. I didn't see any weapons, nor

10 did I hear that -- nor did I know that there were any.

11 Q. And you didn't hear that there were any weapons there?

12 A. I wasn't interested, frankly speaking.

13 Q. You go on in this same statement to say: "Large gunboats arrived

14 in the area later on. I remember the name of the boats being Split and

15 Kotor. I'm able to recall the names because I had taken a course for a

16 unit commander and had been involved in the Croatian Civil Defence, and I

17 have a personal interest in armaments. During my time in school, we had

18 classes relating to the armament power of the former Yugoslavia."

19 Can you explain to me what kind of a course for a unit commander

20 was it you completed and this personal interest of yours in armaments.

21 A. When I was serving the Yugoslav People's Army as a member of a

22 Reconnaissance Unit, in order to reconnoiter, I had to be trained. I had

23 to know what arms I was looking for and what formations there were and

24 existed.

25 And as for the ships, we normally had seen them before so that at

Page 3395

1 that particular point I recognised them. And then again, it was written

2 in the newspapers what their names were. It was no secret.

3 Q. You say that during your military service with the JNA, you

4 completed the course for a unit commander.

5 A. Perhaps it is miswritten. Actually, I was trained for lance

6 corporal, squad leader.

7 Q. Do we agree that there is a huge difference between a squad leader

8 who is a plain soldier and a unit commander?

9 A. We certainly do.

10 Q. If nothing else, you have this necessary military experience?

11 A. Yes, I do.

12 Q. Can you explain to me more specifically the sentence: "During my

13 time in school, we had classes relating to the armament power of the

14 former Yugoslavia."

15 A. Well, we were told --

16 Q. Who? Who told you?

17 A. Naturally my superiors who were in the Yugoslav People's Army gave

18 us information as to the approximate power of the Yugoslav People's Army.

19 We certainly were not given accurate information, but it was,

20 nevertheless, quite certain that we were a quite powerful army then.

21 Q. So during this training course that you attended, not for a

22 commander of a unit but for a lance corporal, you learned all this during

23 that time.

24 A. Yes, definitely.

25 Q. Tell me, where is the headquarters, the staff of the Civil

Page 3396

1 Defence?

2 A. I do not know.

3 Q. And you said that you knew Nikola Jovic.

4 A. Yes, I do, because we were in the same line of work.

5 Q. Was Nikola Jovic also a member of the Civil Defence?

6 A. I don't know. I don't know about that.

7 Q. Did Nikola Jovic also perhaps on occasion leave his store in order

8 to perform a duty for the Civil Defence?

9 A. I don't know.

10 Q. If I tell you that Nikola Jovic testified here and that he also

11 said that he had been a member of the Civil Defence and that he had been

12 sent on behalf of the Civil Defence to Orasac to open fire at JNA ships

13 from a Maljutka, can you comment on that? What is your opinion about it?

14 A. This is what you are saying. I don't know anything about that.

15 Q. Mr. Vlasica, I'm familiarising you with what was stated before

16 this Tribunal by Nikola Jovic. He said that as a member of the Civil

17 Defence --

18 MR. WEINER: Objection, Your Honour.

19 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Weiner.

20 MR. WEINER: He's asking this witness for his opinion of Nikola

21 Jovic's testimony. I would argue that that's improper cross-examination.

22 You're asking one witness to comment upon another witness's testimony.

23 MR. RODIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, Nikola Jovic, a witness

24 who took the stand before this distinguished Chamber said that he had been

25 a member of the Civil Defence, like this witness here. However, Nikola

Page 3397

1 Jovic said that as a member of the Civil Defence, he had a military

2 mission, namely to open fire from Maljutkas at the JNA ships within the

3 framework of the same duties and obligation of a formation to which both

4 that witness and this witness belonged. So I'm asking this witness here

5 whether that was the -- appropriate to the Civilian Defence establishment

6 at the time.

7 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Rodic, you certainly may ask him whether he was

8 ever called on to perform any military functions, perhaps whether he knew

9 of any other members of the Civil Defence who were called on to perform

10 military functions, but you -- the way you were putting the question

11 before suggested you were wanting the witness to say whether he believed

12 or accepted what the earlier witness, Mr. Jovic, had said, and that is not

13 a proper question.

14 MR. RODIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I shall rephrase the

15 question.

16 Q. Were members of the Civil Defence, in any form, sent to perform

17 purely military tasks?

18 A. To the best of my knowledge, no.

19 Q. Do you know any other members of the Civil Defence?

20 A. As to whether I know others, I only know those people who helped

21 other people in town.

22 Q. Mr. Vlasica, I think that helping other people in town is closely

23 associated with the Civil Defence, but it is a personal matter of every

24 man, of every human being. I believe that you, even if you had not been a

25 member of the Civil Defence, would have helped people in Dubrovnik, in the

Page 3398

1 Old Town.

2 A. Of course I would have, as far as that question is concerned. But

3 we only worked within the Old City to help others, and that is what I

4 personally know.

5 Q. Did you ever hear of any member of the Civil Defence performing a

6 military duty?

7 A. No, I didn't.

8 Q. To your knowledge, were members of the Civil Defence engaged in

9 only assisting people in terms of providing food for the population or was

10 there something else there too?

11 A. As far as I was informed, this is the only thing we did. I don't

12 know about anything else.

13 Q. Did you report to anyone to say that you had completed the task

14 that had been assigned to you?

15 A. No.

16 Q. What, for instance, if it should so happen that you set out to

17 take milk to the shelter and then you are prevented from doing that?

18 A. What I took there, what supplies I did manage to take, I had to

19 make a document about it which I then initialed and then handed it over in

20 Dubrovnik. What happened after that, I don't know.

21 Q. In other words, you maintained records.

22 A. Naturally, because I was in charge and responsible for those

23 goods.

24 Q. And Dubrovnik -- Dubrovkinja would then submit those records to

25 the Crisis Staff?

Page 3399

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

2 Q. Was there a Crisis Staff in Dubrovnik at that time?

3 A. I personally don't know.

4 Q. So you don't know anything practically. You don't know about the

5 Crisis Staff. You don't know that there were any armaments in Dubrovnik.

6 The only thing which you do know is that you helped people as part of your

7 duties within the Civil Defence, taking milk to the shelter.

8 A. That's right.

9 Q. In the third paragraph of your statement from 2000, second

10 sentence. In the first sentence you say: "There was severe and sporadic

11 shelling throughout October. The JNA had actually surrounded the city of

12 Dubrovnik during this time."

13 Then you go on to say: "During this period, I was aware of

14 Croatian citizens taking their speedboats and picking up small armaments

15 from one of the islands. These armaments, including uniform and food,

16 were being smuggled in."

17 What is this, Mr. Vlasica?

18 A. You are perfectly aware of the fact that in October there was set

19 up a detachment of armed ships in the area of Dubrovnik. So these lads

20 who were within this fleet of armed ships, which I only found out later,

21 were compelled to lay their hands on as much light weaponry as they could

22 to find a hand grenade or two in order to prevent the Yugoslav People's

23 Army from entering the city.

24 Q. Mr. Vlasica, five minutes ago you repeated -- you decidedly

25 repeated several times in response to my question there were no armaments

Page 3400

1 in Dubrovnik.

2 MR. WEINER: I'd object, Your Honour.

3 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Weiner.

4 MR. WEINER: Yes. I think he's taking the witness out of context.

5 At that time they were talking about the Old Town of Dubrovnik, although

6 the question was Dubrovnik. This has been an objection I've made previous

7 in this trial, that sometimes we refer to the Old Town as strictly

8 Dubrovnik, sometimes you call it the Old Town, sometimes you call the

9 whole area Dubrovnik, sometimes you refer to it as "the city" and

10 sometimes you say "the town." If the language could be used when you're

11 questioning about Dubrovnik, if the whole municipality, use "the

12 municipality"; if it's strictly on the Old Town use "the Old Town," but

13 phrases have been used on several witnesses that it becomes unclear what

14 exactly we're speaking about. All those questions at the time were

15 concerning the Old Town, even though the next phrase -- the next question

16 was "Dubrovnik."

17 MR. RODIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I'm sorry, but I have to

18 say my colleague is absolutely misusing his right to raise an objection

19 and is doing something which he shouldn't be doing because up to this

20 point you have been hearing us ask these questions. When I ask about

21 "Dubrovnik," of course this refers to the entire city. If I'm

22 particularly interested in the Old Town area, I underline that

23 specifically. And people from -- of Dubrovnik who come here to testify

24 understand this very well, whereas what my colleague is doing right now is

25 to hint to the witness who is listening to this debate of ours, and

Page 3401

1 assisting him in replying to my question when I actually pointed to the

2 contradictory nature of his statement, and I suppose that of course now

3 the witness shall give a reply along the lines of the Prosecutor's

4 objection, and this is something which is really inappropriate.

5 MR. WEINER: May I respond to that one, Your Honour?

6 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Rodic, you're half right and half not right.

7 If Mr. Weiner was doing as you suggest, you are correct, but I've got to

8 say it has not been clear to me whether you were speaking of Dubrovnik as

9 the municipality, the greater area, or the Old Town, and that is a

10 confusion that I have seen has affected the evidence of more than one

11 witness so far. So that in that respect, Mr. Weiner is well justified.

12 I think we have drawn attention to this difficulty at this point.

13 You may carry on with your questioning now, and we will take into account

14 what you have said as we evaluate the evidence of the witness. Thank you.

15 MR. RODIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

16 Your Honour, on page 45, line number 10, you can verify what I've

17 just said. To my question -- to my question, "Do you have any weapons?" -

18 and before that we had been talking about Dubrovnik - the witness

19 decidedly said, "We in Dubrovnik did not have any weapons." So he didn't

20 say, "We in the Old Town." He said, "We in Dubrovnik." The witness is

21 from Dubrovnik and he knows what he is saying perfectly well.

22 JUDGE PARKER: It may be clear to you, Mr. Rodic, but that was not

23 clear to me whether he was speaking of the Old Town or of the greater

24 municipality. You see the problem?

25 MR. RODIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the municipality of

Page 3402

1 Dubrovnik is the entire city of Dubrovnik including the Old Town. The Old

2 Town is not separate. It is just one entity within the larger entity of

3 the municipality of Dubrovnik.

4 JUDGE PARKER: I'm aware of that, Mr. Rodic. I am aware of that.

5 The point I'm making is that so much in this case depends on a distinction

6 between the Old Town itself and the greater area which is Dubrovnik. A

7 lot of the questioning can be understood to mean one or the other, and

8 it's not clear at that time which is intended. The questioner may mean

9 one thing; the answer may be intended to mean the other. So it is a

10 matter which you need to keep in mind when you are asking questions. And

11 when something is critical to your case, whether the witness is speaking

12 of only the Old Town or the whole of Dubrovnik, I think you need to be

13 careful in the way you question so that the answer is unmistakably one or

14 the other.

15 I've just indicated to you that an answer which you got from this

16 witness which you referred to, to your mind was unmistakably the whole

17 municipality. In my mind, I wasn't clear which the witness meant.

18 I think --

19 MR. RODIC: [Interpretation] Very well, Your Honour.

20 JUDGE PARKER: -- all counsel should watch that.

21 MR. RODIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I will try to clarify it

22 in the best possible way.

23 Q. Mr. Vlasica, since you were born in Dubrovnik, grew up in

24 Dubrovnik, spent all your time in Dubrovnik, when we say "the municipality

25 of Dubrovnik," can you explain to us what it all includes.

Page 3403

1 A. The municipality of Dubrovnik encompasses the entire area down

2 from Debeli Brijeg to Metkovic.

3 Q. When we say Debeli Brijeg, that is at the border with the Republic

4 of Montenegro, and before Debeli Brijeg there is Mokosica, Konavle and

5 other areas that all belong to the municipality of Dubrovnik?

6 A. That's right, that's right.

7 Q. And when we say "the town of Dubrovnik," can you give us a more

8 precise border of that urban area.

9 A. When we say "town," we know what we mean by "town." We mean the

10 Old Town of Dubrovnik. And when we say "Dubrovnik," then we mean a

11 broader area.

12 Q. When you say "the town of Dubrovnik," what are you referring to?

13 A. I told you. When we say "the town."

14 Q. If you meet a German person and if he asks where you're from, do

15 you say that you're from the Old Town or do you say that you're from

16 Dubrovnik?

17 A. I told you very nicely. As far as we down there are concerned,

18 that is one thing. But if I were talking to a German or somebody else, I

19 would of course say, "I come from Dubrovnik." But as far as we, the local

20 population are concerned, we know full well what the town is, the Old

21 Town, and what the entire town of Dubrovnik is.

22 Q. Could you please explain to me what the town of Dubrovnik is,

23 then.

24 A. The town of Dubrovnik is the entire area from Kantafiga to

25 Belvedere.

Page 3404

1 Q. The Hotel Belvedere is to the east and Kantafiga is to the west.

2 Can you put this in a more specific context?

3 A. That's the town of Dubrovnik.

4 Q. What goes on after Kantafiga?

5 A. Sustjepan, Mokosica, et cetera, but this was the town of

6 Dubrovnik.

7 Q. And when we say "the Old Town"?

8 A. Of course the Old Town is within the walls, the ramparts.

9 MR. RODIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, has this been clarified

10 sufficiently now?

11 JUDGE PARKER: For this witness, yes. Whether other witnesses

12 understand it the same way is going to be a difficult question, though.

13 You'll have to be alert to the problem throughout the trial.

14 MR. RODIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

15 Q. Mr. Vlasica, can we repeat this now, bearing in mind what we

16 discussed just now? Were there any weapons and soldiers in the territory

17 of the town of Dubrovnik in the period from October to December 1991?

18 A. As far as the town of Dubrovnik is concerned, there were

19 formations of the police, and there were formations of people, of course,

20 who were defending the town of Dubrovnik.

21 Q. What kind of police formations existed?

22 A. Reserve police. That is as far as I know. I wasn't there, so I

23 don't know basically.

24 Q. What about this other part? Just a moment, please.

25 This other part, when you say "people who were defending the town

Page 3405

1 of Dubrovnik," tell me, please, who are these people?

2 A. These are people who went of their own free will to defend our

3 beautiful town of Dubrovnik.

4 Q. So the police, both active and reserve, have been defending the

5 town in line with their official duty, and all the rest are --

6 A. I said reserve. I did not say active police. That is number one.

7 And as for other people who joined up, of course it was of their own free

8 will.

9 Q. Mr. Vlasica, you said the reserve police, that's true. But tell

10 me, then, what did the active police do in Dubrovnik? Were they on

11 vacation or were they engaged?

12 A. As far as I'm concerned, I don't know anything about that.

13 Q. How come you know about the reserve police, then?

14 A. Through conversations with my friends I learned that people were

15 called up within the police force to go out and defend the town of

16 Dubrovnik.

17 Q. Who called up these people?

18 A. I don't know. They didn't tell me that. I did not go that far in

19 my questions. I wasn't interested in that.

20 Q. You do know how a reserve force operates and what the principles

21 involved are. Did they receive call-up papers to report there?

22 A. I know all of this about the reserve force, and I know what you're

23 trying to ask me, but as far as this is concerned in particular, to tell

24 you the truth, I really don't know who called them, how they were

25 deployed, where they were deployed. Personally, I was not in that context

Page 3406

1 and I was not interested in that because I had other things to do, and

2 that's it.

3 Q. What did you do from 8.00 a.m. until the end of the day?

4 A. My friend, I was in shelters.

5 Q. Which shelter?

6 A. At Babin Kuk, at the house of the Karaman family. Believe me, in

7 a room of about 20 square metres, 4 by 5 metres, there were 22 of us. And

8 you should see what it's like, being in a room like that and waiting for a

9 shell to hit you.

10 Q. In that period, did you use any other shelter?

11 A. When I would go to work and if the town of Dubrovnik was being

12 shelled very heavily, if I could not, therefore, take my car from the Old

13 Town to Lapad, then I would seek shelter in the Old Town. Then I would

14 not go immediately. I would leave only if I could leave, and I would stay

15 there if I had to stay.

16 Q. If I understood you correctly - and of course correct me if I'm

17 wrong - while you were in the Old Town, you went to a shelter only if that

18 was possible for you, that is to say if there was no danger of something

19 hurting you between the shop and the shelter.

20 A. When we would close the shop at 8.00, I would go to the shelter in

21 Revelin or at St. John's Fort. Of course we sat there, talked about all

22 sorts of things. We listened to the news. And when it became possible

23 for me to leave the Old Town, when the shelling was over, then I would

24 take my car and go to Babin Kuk, because my family was still there.

25 Q. Did that happen every day in the Old Town while you were working?

Page 3407

1 A. No.

2 Q. How many times did this happen in this period between October and

3 December 1991?

4 A. Believe me, during those two months while I worked, as far as I'm

5 concerned and my comings and goings, I don't know exactly how many times I

6 stayed in town, but not very many times, because from 8.00 in the morning

7 onwards, I could go back.

8 Q. Since this was only a few times over those two months, as you

9 said, I would like to know what you did then between 8.00 a.m. until

10 midnight on such days. What did you do? Did you only sit in that room at

11 Babin Kuk?

12 A. What else? We sat there. We talked. We tried to function as

13 best we could. There were young children there. What could we do? We

14 couldn't take walks because we had no idea when the shelling would start.

15 So we did not want to risk anything. We were there in the shelter, in

16 front of the shelter. We would not move away from the house more than

17 five metres.

18 Q. All right. Now I would like to ask you to explain to me what I

19 read out to you a short while ago, what had to do with the month of

20 October. Namely: "I know that during this period Croatian citizens took

21 their speedboats and picked up small arms from one of the islands. These

22 arms, including uniforms and food, were being smuggled in."

23 Could you elaborate on that a bit?

24 A. As far as I know, there was a detachment of armed boats which went

25 during the night to Kalamota and from Kalamota to Lopud, because near

Page 3408

1 Dubrovnik there was a formation of armed ships of the Yugoslav People's

2 Army. Those young men were so brave and they went there and they brought

3 small weapons - rifles, hand grenades and things like that - because we

4 needed that for the defence of the town of Dubrovnik. And ammunition, of

5 course. Because we did not have anything. Had we had the weapons that

6 were in the town of Dubrovnik until 1990 belonging to the Territorial

7 Defence, we certainly wouldn't have needed that. But since we had nothing

8 except for our personal weapons, hunting weapons, carbines that we

9 ourselves had, we the citizens of the town of Dubrovnik, we gave that to

10 the reserve force so they could use that. This was certainly needed by

11 the defence, and that is my answer, what we went to get and what we

12 brought.

13 Q. Tell me, how do you know about this secret information and secret

14 actions?

15 A. Well, you know, quite a bit of time went by before I made my

16 statement in 2000, and believe me, over those ten years or so, I found out

17 quite a few things that had happened, about quite a few things that had

18 happened, so I learnt about that too.

19 Q. When you say "we, the citizens for the defence," do you include

20 yourself?

21 A. I said that I personally was not anywhere until the 3rd of

22 February, 2003 [sic]. I was not in any formations as far as the military

23 is concerned, and I did not have any contact with weapons.

24 Q. Tell me, were there any Croatian troops at Babin Kuk?

25 A. As far as I saw myself, there weren't any at Babin Kuk.

Page 3409

1 Q. Did you hear of any presence of Croatian troops at Babin Kuk?

2 A. I did not hear about any such thing myself.

3 Q. What happened afterwards with these weapons and uniforms that were

4 smuggled in on speedboats? Who was this distributed to?

5 A. As far as I heard, this went to the front line, the defence line

6 at Sustjepan, Srdj, and Belvedere.

7 JUDGE PARKER: Could I just intrude to ask, were you called up for

8 reserve service in 2003 or 1993?

9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm sorry. 1993.

10 JUDGE PARKER: I remembered you saying that earlier, and then you

11 answered Mr. Rodic a moment ago 2003. Thank you.

12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I am sorry. I just

13 made a mistake.

14 MR. RODIC: [Interpretation]

15 Q. Mr. Vlasica, in that period, did you move about Gruz?

16 A. No, because it was very dangerous.

17 Q. Tell me, you said that the Zagreb Hotel is about 200 metres away

18 from your place of residence in 1991.

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. What was there at the Zagreb Hotel?

21 A. To tell you the truth, I don't know.

22 Q. Did you perhaps hear that the staff for the defence of the town of

23 Dubrovnik was there, Nojko Marinovic?

24 A. That's what you said, not me.

25 Q. Have you heard of Nojko Marinovic?

Page 3410

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. Can you tell me what you heard?

3 A. I heard that Nojko Marinovic was released from the Yugoslav

4 People's Army, that he was a commander in Trebinje, and that he came to

5 the Croatian side. As a person who was very knowledgeable, as far as

6 military matters were concerned, he stood in the defence of the town of

7 Dubrovnik, and the only thing I can say is "Thank you."

8 Q. Was he in charge of the defence of Dubrovnik?

9 A. Yes. From what I heard, he was.

10 Q. What forces did he use to defend Dubrovnik?

11 A. That I don't know. I don't know what formations he had, what size

12 they were.

13 Q. Did you hear about Captain Cengija?

14 A. I heard later that Captain Cengija had been a police commander,

15 that he was a police commander after the war ended.

16 Q. Did you hear that he was in command on Zlatni Potok and earlier at

17 Brgat?

18 A. No, that I didn't hear. I don't know that.

19 Q. Did you hear perhaps that the Civil Defence staff was at the Hotel

20 Kompas?

21 A. I don't know that. That's what you are saying. I really kept to

22 myself and sought to survive, minded my own business.

23 Q. Is this still a military secret, Mr. Vlasica?

24 A. No, it is not a military secret. I'm telling you what I do know.

25 Q. Did you hear about Zuljevic Aziz?

Page 3411

1 A. No.

2 Q. Do you know where the Palma was?

3 A. Yes, of course, I know very well. I pass by it every day.

4 Q. Do you know that the Crisis Staff of the police was there?

5 A. No.

6 Q. You saw no one there?

7 A. Well, I did see the reserve police there, but I don't know what

8 they did there. It was out of my competence, was not for me.

9 Q. But you did see the reserve police around the Vila Palma?

10 A. Yes, I did see them, but it was none of my business.

11 Q. Were there any HOS forces in the October to December 1991 period

12 in the town of Dubrovnik?

13 A. In the town of Dubrovnik, as I heard that there were HOS forces,

14 but I didn't see them personally.

15 Q. Were there HOS members in the Old Town?

16 A. As for the Old Town, I claim and maintain that in the Old Town

17 until the time I was wounded, I had never seen any HOS formations nor any

18 other army within the walls of the Old Town.

19 Q. Tell me, where was the Territorial Defence headquarters?

20 A. I don't know.

21 Q. Do you know Jadranko Delas from the Secretariat for National

22 Defence of Dubrovnik? And do you know that they used Dubrovkinja trucks,

23 that of your firm, in other words, to bring armaments and ammunition to

24 the port of Gruz which was then deposited between the berths number 9 and

25 10 in the warehouse?

Page 3412

1 A. That is what you are saying. I don't know anything about it.

2 Q. Did you hear anything about it?

3 A. No.

4 Q. When you mentioned the large-scale attack and shelling in November

5 1991 and the attack on the Gruz port, were there any loud explosions in

6 the Gruz harbour?

7 A. At that time, I was at Babin Kuk, and I was observing this from

8 the house in which I was staying. And believe you me, what I did see was

9 really horrendous. The entire harbour was on fire. Now, whether there

10 were explosions, whether there were things which were being kept --

11 whether these explosions were caused by goods being kept in the warehouses

12 or because of the shelling, I don't know, but I do know that everything

13 was ablaze. The coffee storehouse, the refrigeration facility, the ships;

14 everything was on fire. Believe me, it was terrible. And also, I didn't

15 want to stay very much outside the shelter because one never knew whether

16 the shelling would stop -- they would stop shelling that portion and start

17 shelling Lapad. So I didn't observe it all the time, believe me.

18 Q. I believe you, but please tell me, I'm interested in whether you

19 heard loud explosions on that occasion.

20 A. I told you that personally I don't know whether these explosions

21 were caused by the incoming shells or, as you claim, because there were

22 arms there and the arms exploded and caused the explosions. I couldn't

23 tell. I couldn't distinguish between these two, so I cannot give you an

24 answer.

25 Q. Tell me, did you see or hear that from three speedboats -- with

Page 3413

1 three speedboats they were transporting people from the harbour to Ston

2 and then were bringing back reinforcements, ammunition to town?

3 A. As regard to your question whether people were taken away, I don't

4 know. But I did hear that weapons were being brought. Whether it was

5 being brought from Ston or Kalamota or Lopud, I don't know, because if

6 every person knew the source of everything which was being brought in,

7 that would have been too much.

8 Q. Do you know Mato from the Port Authority, from the Harbour

9 Master's office who drove this hydrofoil?

10 A. There were many Matos around. Which Mato?

11 Q. He worked in the Port Authority.

12 A. Please tell me his last name.

13 Q. Do you know where the Vila Rasica was?

14 A. The Vila Rasica? Yes, I do.

15 Q. Did you see members of the ZNG there?

16 A. I didn't go to the Vila Rasica. It is to the south where I was.

17 It is on the slopes of this hill, Petka. There was no reason for me to go

18 there, I had no business going there, so I don't know what was going on

19 there.

20 Q. Tell me, was the chief of the police department of Dubrovnik Djuro

21 Korda?

22 A. Yes, I heard that that was the commander, the head of the police.

23 Q. Was a part of the Special Police Unit housed in the Old Town and a

24 part in Srdj?

25 A. That is what you are saying. To the best of my knowledge, that

Page 3414

1 was not the case.

2 Q. Was the Croatian Party of Rights in Dubrovnik with its unit named

3 Sokol, "Falcon," in Dubrovnik?

4 A. This is the first time I hear about it, from you.

5 Q. Was there any kind of headquarters in the municipal assembly in

6 the town hall next to the Rector's Palace?

7 A. That is what you said. I don't know anything about that.

8 Q. Do you know where the Vila Palma is?

9 A. I just told you that I did, that I do.

10 Q. How far is it from the Old Town?

11 A. Well, perhaps two kilometres, some two kilometres. If from Lapad

12 station to the Old City there, three kilometres, then I believe this

13 distance is about two kilometres.

14 Q. Tell me about the Hotel Dubrovnik President. It is at Babin Kuk;

15 right?

16 A. Yes, it is.

17 Q. Were there any Croatian troops in and around that hotel?

18 A. To the best of my knowledge, all the hotels at Babin Kuk were

19 filled with civilians. There were people from Konavle, from Zupa, from

20 the surrounding places. They were all accommodated in these hotels to

21 fill their capacity, and the rest were accommodated in other hotels as

22 well. What you are saying, I don't know anything about that.

23 Q. Were there any Croatian troops in the area of Babin Kuk?

24 A. To the best of my knowledge, no.

25 Q. And in the area of Lapad, were there any Croatian troops there?

Page 3415

1 A. To the best of my knowledge, no.

2 Q. And in the Lokrum area, the isle of Lokrum, were there any

3 Croatian troops there?

4 A. I know that even less, frankly speaking.

5 Q. And at the Belvedere Hotel?

6 A. At the Belvedere Hotel there were normally people who were

7 defending the city. Now, whether they were in the hotel or on the

8 surrounding slopes, I don't know.

9 Q. Were there any troops or artillery emplacements on the Montovjerna

10 site?

11 A. As for Montovjerna and whether there were any troops there, I

12 didn't see any personally. And as for artillery, as I told you at the

13 beginning, we were a very poorly equipped and supplied army, so I don't

14 see how there could have been any artillery but I don't know whether there

15 was any.

16 Q. Tell me, do you know which part is called the Chinese wall?

17 A. There is a part of Montovjerna which is called the Chinese wall

18 down there towards the stadium -- Stadion Hotel. There is a block of

19 buildings which was built there and is called the Chinese wall.

20 Q. Were there any military positions there?

21 A. As far as I personally know, no, there weren't any military

22 positions there.

23 Q. And when you look in the direction of the Old Town from the Pile

24 Gate, to the left towards the hill, in front of the ramparts of the Old

25 Town, were there any artillery emplacements or troops there?

Page 3416

1 A. Well, there may have been troops up there on the road, on the

2 coastal highway, but as for artillery, I know that we didn't have any.

3 Q. Do you know whether there had been any, shall I say, makeshift

4 bunkers, sandbags in the general area of the city of Dubrovnik? Because

5 you moved about a lot and you could see those.

6 A. Yes, there was, and this was established sometime at the end of

7 October, I think. I cannot recall with precision. I know that we rushed

8 to set these things up because we were expecting the forces of the

9 Yugoslav People's Army to enter the very heart of the city, because an

10 incredibly large number of civilians, women and children, had already set

11 out, and we expected the Yugoslav People's Army to enter the city so that

12 we erected these sort of bunkers for street fighting and for defence in

13 street fighting.

14 Q. Did you see such a bunker, for instance, near the post office at

15 Ilijina Glavica?

16 A. Yes, near the post office at Ilijina Glavica there was, looking

17 from above, or if one were expected that an army or troops would advance

18 from above, it was normal for a bunker to be stationed properly there to

19 stop them.

20 Q. Was it perhaps at the Petka Hotel too?

21 A. Near the Hotel Petka? Let me try to remember. Yes, there was

22 one. Now, I remember. There was one at the Hotel Petka as well.

23 Q. Was there one near the Boninovo health centre as well?

24 A. Yes, there was one in that section as well.

25 Q. Was there one in front of the building of the electrical power

Page 3417

1 authority of Dubrovnik?

2 A. There was one at the Lapad station, in front of the Minceta

3 department store.

4 Q. Was there one near the city market?

5 A. Well, truth to tell, there were quite a few of them, but I do not

6 remember the exact locations of all.

7 Q. Do you remember having seen perhaps such facilities, bunkers at

8 the Hotel Adriatic, at the Kompas Hotel, in the Lapad inlet, at Babin Kuk?

9 A. Well, frankly speaking, I did not move around town a lot. From

10 where I lived, actually apart from the route which I normally took to go

11 and to return, that was it. I didn't move about town to go about town a

12 lot, and I cannot tell you with precision whether there were such

13 facilities or not. Of course bunkers had been established for defence

14 purposes. If the army were to enter the town, the Yugoslav People's Army,

15 that is, on the next day, we of course intended to defend ourselves as

16 best as we could, but where they were and what type of bunkers they were,

17 I can't tell you. I can only tell you that I saw some of them en route

18 from Babin Kuk to where I was and back as I drove my car. Later I took

19 the other route, via Boninovo, so this is all I can tell you on the

20 subject.

21 Q. Do you know Tomo Djordjevic who lives near the Elita Vila?

22 A. This is the first time I hear about him.

23 MR. RODIC: [Interpretation] Will Ms. Usher please just give the

24 witness this photograph.

25 MR. WEINER: Excuse me, Your Honour. Is that an exhibit or is

Page 3418

1 this -- is this an exhibit? Have you got copies for --

2 MR. RODIC: [Interpretation] Yes, my learned colleague. We will

3 see whether we will be exhibiting this, if the need arises.

4 Q. Mr. Vlasica, is this perhaps you on this photograph?

5 A. No. I don't know who this is. It doesn't look like me at all.

6 Q. This photograph was taken some 12 or 13 years ago, in 1991.

7 A. Well, it's definitely not me.

8 Q. Well, take the photograph in your hand and take a closer look at

9 it.

10 A. No. No, this is definitely not me. This couldn't be my profile,

11 really.

12 Q. All right. Please be so kind as to return the photograph to me,

13 Ms. Usher, and I thank you.

14 A. Thank you.

15 Q. Can you tell me whether the Croatian army undertook any operations

16 in the period October to December 1991 from the area of the city of

17 Dubrovnik?

18 A. Well, I have to say again that we didn't have any weaponry to

19 speak of, and undertaking operations implies an activity involving larger

20 scale weapons. I tell you that we only had small arms, short-barrelled

21 arms, in fact. And now whether they undertook operations in terms of

22 opening their own pistols or carbines towards you - and I apologise, I

23 don't mean you, I mean the Yugoslav People's Army - I don't know that.

24 But as for artillery, I know that there were no such operations.

25 MR. RODIC: [Interpretation] Can I ask Ms. Usher, then, to show the

Page 3419

1 witness this photograph.

2 Q. So what you are saying, they just had this infantry, small arms,

3 light arms; right?

4 A. Mr. Rodic, to the best of my knowledge and what I was able to

5 learn was this, and this is what I say, what I know.

6 Q. Are you perhaps familiar with this?

7 A. What I can say is that I -- that this is a mortar.

8 Q. This mortar was emplaced in Bogisica Park. Had you ever heard,

9 did you see any mortars of the Croatian artillery there?

10 A. Mr. Rodic, as for Bogisica Park, it is not en route from where I

11 -- on the route which I took to go to and leave the Old Town. It was

12 someplace around the medical school.

13 What was there? I think you know better. I personally didn't see

14 it.

15 Q. Did you perhaps hear somebody you know bragging how they were

16 successful with just a rifle or with a mortar?

17 A. Believe me, to the extent that I was able to move about and to

18 hear things during that period, I didn't hear anything of the kind. And

19 being a civilian, I did not have access to anything bigger so that I

20 didn't know if it did exist.

21 Q. As you were in the JNA Reconnaissance Unit during your military

22 service period, in the Sabotage and Reconnaissance Units --

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. -- and you said that you completed a specific training course

25 for --

Page 3420

1 A. Familiarising ourselves with weaponry.

2 Q. Familiarising yourselves with weaponry and that we were well

3 trained in the equipment used by the former JNA. Were you personally

4 interested in -- and you said that you were personally interested in

5 armaments. Now, tell me, while moving about through Dubrovnik from your

6 place of work in Old Town to the house in which you were accommodated, did

7 you ever in the period October to December 1991 able to hear the sound of

8 a mortar opening fire from that area, the Old City, the Old Town?

9 A. That's a well-phrased question.

10 Q. Thank you.

11 A. Whether I heard it, yes, I certainly heard it. But whether it was

12 fire being opened from Bogisica Park or from a section of Zarkovica, I

13 don't know. And as I live in Lapad, the spreading of sound was something

14 that one couldn't actually distinguish. One couldn't tell whether it was

15 from Bogisica Park or from above the Old Town. And Zarkovica is above the

16 city. It is only normal for these sounds to refract. So would you be

17 able to tell whether the shooting took place from Bogisica Park or from

18 Zarkovica? I certainly couldn't tell at that time from where the shooting

19 came.

20 Q. Tell me, is Bogisica Park towards the Old Town?

21 A. Well, Bogisica Park is on Ilijina Glavica, and it is in the

22 direction towards the Old Town. It is not in the direction of Lapad but,

23 rather, in that of the Old Town.

24 Q. And how far is it, approximately, from the Old Town?

25 A. Well, it is up there near the -- passed the Hotel Imperijal and up

Page 3421

1 the hill, and if you're walking on foot, perhaps 700 or 800 metres. And

2 as the crow flies, perhaps 300 metres or so.

3 Q. Tell me, what about Zarkovica? How far away is it, approximately,

4 from the walls of the Old Town, the eastern walls of the Old Town?

5 A. Believe me, as far as Zarkovica is concerned and Bogisica Park,

6 it's, well, around there. From St. John's Fort to Zarkovica, if we said

7 this is 300 metres, well, it couldn't be more than 400 metres, as the crow

8 flies, from St. John's Fort.

9 Q. Tell me --

10 MR. RODIC: [Interpretation] Thank you very much. I won't be

11 needing the photograph any longer now.

12 JUDGE PARKER: Is that a convenient time, Mr. Rodic? Sorry. I

13 thought you were pausing. If you want to ask a question, go ahead.

14 MR. RODIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, just one question in

15 relation to this photograph.

16 Q. Sir -- sir, can you just tell me -- Mr. Vlasica, can you tell me,

17 do you know the man in the photograph?

18 A. Yes. I've seen him in Dubrovnik.

19 Q. Do you know his name?

20 A. I don't.

21 Q. Just tell me, is he wearing a uniform of the Croatian army?

22 A. Well, you can see for yourself that he's not.

23 MR. RODIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, thank you. We can

24 adjourn at this point.

25 JUDGE PARKER: I think the record should reveal what photograph

Page 3422

1 was being shown.

2 MR. RODIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, this is a new photograph

3 that looks like the previous one that was already marked as an exhibit.

4 However, during the break we'll try to make copies, and then we are going

5 to tender it into evidence. So it has to do with the same person in

6 Bogisica Park, which was already admitted into evidence, but now the face

7 can be seen better.

8 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you. We will have a 20-minute break.

9 MR. RODIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

10 --- Recess taken at 12.25 p.m.

11 --- On resuming at 12.50 p.m.

12 JUDGE PARKER: Could I indicate, Mr. Rodic, that it would be a

13 significant advantage if you could complete your cross-examination this

14 session. Just -- we leave it to you whether that is possible.

15 MR. RODIC: [Interpretation] Believe me that I will make an effort

16 to finish today, Your Honour.

17 Q. Mr. Vlasica.

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. I'm sorry.

20 MR. RODIC: [Interpretation] Before we start, Your Honour, this

21 last photograph that we had a look at, the Defence would like to tender it

22 into evidence, and could we please have a number assigned to it? So could

23 the usher please distribute copies to all the parties.

24 MR. WEINER: Your Honour, can we see this? It was flashed at us.

25 There was no copy.

Page 3423

1 JUDGE PARKER: As a very special consideration as it is Friday,

2 Mr. Weiner, you may see the exhibit, yes.

3 MR. RODIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, if my learned friend

4 doesn't realise it himself, this comes from P66. So it comes from the

5 Prosecution.

6 JUDGE PARKER: I think Mr. Weiner has been shown a black and white

7 copy.

8 MR. WEINER: Colour.

9 JUDGE PARKER: Oh, you've got the colour, right.

10 MR. WEINER: No objection. Thank you.

11 JUDGE PARKER: It will be received.


13 MR. RODIC: [Interpretation]

14 Q. Mr. Vlasica, so during this period of time in the period between

15 October and December 1991, did you see in the territory of the town of

16 Dubrovnik a car or, rather, a vehicle on which a three-barrelled gun was

17 placed, Hispano?

18 A. No.

19 Q. Did you see one with a mortar mounted on it?

20 A. No.

21 Q. Have you heard of any such thing?

22 A. No.

23 Q. Did you see a truck on which the word "Kobra" is written and there

24 is camouflage painting on it?

25 A. No.

Page 3424

1 Q. Did you see or hear that in the area of the park of Gradac there

2 was some Croatian artillery?

3 A. I never heard of this; I never saw this.

4 Q. Tell me, was there any civilian police in the Old Town?

5 A. There were no uniforms. There wasn't any civilian police either.

6 Q. Was there any military police?

7 A. No.

8 Q. Did it happen sometimes that Croatian soldiers would come to your

9 store to buy something?

10 A. As for the Croatian army, whether they came into the Old Town,

11 they were not allowed to enter the Old Town.

12 Q. And who had forbidden this?

13 A. At the entrance into the Old Town, there were reserve policemen

14 who were very strict and who did not allow any soldiers or weapons to

15 enter the Old Town.

16 Q. Why not?

17 A. Because the Old Town was a protected area, protected by UNESCO

18 flags. And it was well known that soldiers had no business in the Old

19 Town.

20 Q. So these reserve policemen, if I'm not mistaken, they were

21 supposed to stand at the Pile Gate, at all the gates into the Old Town?

22 A. Yes, there are three gates leading into the Old Town.

23 Q. How many reserve policemen were there at these entrances?

24 A. As many as were needed. One, two, three. I didn't count them. I

25 just know that they did not allow anyone in. I also needed to have a pass

Page 3425

1 in order to be able to get in.

2 Q. So this was strictly observed?

3 A. That is what I claim and this is what I know very well, because I

4 know that every time I came, I had to identify myself. I had to show

5 identification.

6 Q. So you never saw any uniforms in the Old Town?

7 A. I've already said that my answer was no.

8 Q. Thank you. Tell me, did the siren go off or the all-alert in the

9 area of the town of Dubrovnik, when there was shelling, of course?

10 A. Well, how could the siren go off if there was no electricity?

11 Q. You're an experienced soldier. You must have heard about things

12 that could be done by hand. You just turn it with your hand.

13 A. Yes, I have heard about this, but indeed I didn't see any such

14 thing.

15 Q. So there was no siren that went off in Dubrovnik in order to show

16 that there was a state of alert and that the shelling was beginning?

17 A. No.

18 Q. You were often in the area of the Old Town, and you would

19 certainly have heard about this if it had happened?

20 A. Certainly.

21 Q. Tell me, why did you not go to the shelter?

22 A. I myself told you that I worked from 6.00 to 8.00, and during that

23 time, I carried out my duties. I sold the goods that we had. If the

24 shelling would start, of course I would not stay there. Then I would

25 certainly go to the shelter. But after finishing my working hours, after,

Page 3426

1 too, I would go there for sure, yes.

2 Q. You said that the most intensive shelling took place in November,

3 between the 7th and 11th.

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. In response to my learned friend's question, you said that the

6 port in the Old Town had been shelled and that small boats had been sunk.

7 A. Yes. There were two attacks on the harbour between the 7th and

8 the 11th of November and on the 6th of December.

9 Q. We are talking about the port in the Old Town?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. Did you say that to the investigators?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. I mean when you gave the statement to them, did you tell them

14 about that?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. Were you there? Did you watch the shelling, or did you see the

17 damage due to the shelling?

18 A. That's right, after the shelling, because believe me, I don't know

19 who would have had the courage to go into the port area then, and all

20 conceivable weapons were shooting at the harbour.

21 Q. Were you badly affected by that when you saw that the old port was

22 shelled?

23 A. Yes. We had no food, and the population of the Old Town, in order

24 to supply us with some food, they took their little boats to the area

25 between Lokrum and the Excelsior Hotel, and they did a bit of fishing so

Page 3427

1 that we would have some food because there wasn't enough food. And then

2 their little boats were sunk. I heard that over 80 per cent of the small

3 fishing boats were sunk during the shelling. And also the little boats

4 that were a bit bigger.

5 Q. Mr. Djelo Jusic said here before this Trial Chamber that 80 per

6 cent of the fishing boats were destroyed in the port. Did the two of you

7 ever discuss this particular piece of information?

8 A. I did not talk to Mr. Jusic about anything. That's what I heard

9 about later, but I saw it myself when all of this was over. After the

10 11th, I myself went to the old port and I saw that quite a bit had been

11 destroyed. To tell you the truth, I am not a proper assessor in order to

12 be able to estimate the actual damage, but later on, after the first

13 shelling and after the second shelling, people said that about 80 per cent

14 of all these boats were destroyed.

15 Q. All right. You said a short while ago that you told the

16 investigators about all of this in 2000.

17 A. I said I did, but I said that the shelling took place between the

18 7th and the 12th. I said it the first time, but I don't think I referred

19 to it specifically the second time. I don't know exactly.

20 Q. Mr. Vlasica, in your statement, why is there not a single letter

21 about the shelling of the port in the Old Town?

22 A. Believe me, throughout the statement that I gave, I do not know

23 whether everything can really be put together, whether everything can be

24 put into this one or two or three hours that I had this discussion with

25 them. Of course some things had to be omitted.

Page 3428

1 Q. I asked you before, and you claimed that you read the statement

2 more than once. And you did not notice this? You did not add this? You

3 did not make any correction to that effect? It remained unregistered.

4 How come now, 13 years later, you are talking about the shelling of the

5 port and the Old Town?

6 A. I told you that some things were omitted. Some things I simply

7 didn't mention. Also, I said to you that as for what I did say to them,

8 that they recorded it correctly. I certainly made no mention of this

9 particular piece of information, but I'm telling you about it now. Of

10 course, it is only natural that I cannot remember everything.

11 Q. All right. Let me just tell you that in the last paragraph of

12 your statement, the one but last sentence on the first page, you say: "I

13 remember that the worst shelling took place on the 10th. The JNA shelled

14 the harbour of Gruz and the surrounding warehouses."

15 How far away is the port of Gruz from the port of the Old Town?

16 Just tell me the distance involved.

17 A. The distance is four kilometres.

18 Q. Thank you.

19 Tell me, yesterday before the Honourable Trial Chamber, you got up

20 and you showed them that on the 6th of December, you were in your store,

21 and when you heard the sound of a truck you thought that was bringing in

22 bread, that you then stepped out with your right foot. You were at the

23 doorstep of your store; is that correct?

24 A. At that moment, I certainly did not step out. At that moment, I

25 was not at the door. I heard the sound of the truck and I started moving

Page 3429

1 towards the door. Then I walked out, and I looked left, to my left.

2 Q. All right. And that's when you were hit by the shell or, rather,

3 the shrapnel, when you went out then, that's what I mean.

4 A. Not at that very moment. I was standing and watching. So it

5 wasn't that very moment, but it was a very short period of time, perhaps a

6 minute or two. I did not go back immediately.

7 Q. Tell me, this wound of yours, when you showed it yesterday, the

8 entry wound where your pocket is on your right thigh --

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. -- one can say that it's the upper part of the right thigh; is

11 that right?

12 A. Yes, here.

13 Q. What about the exit wound, when you showed the inner side of your

14 thigh? Was it at a point that was lower than the entry wound?

15 A. Yes. It went this way.

16 Q. So the wound goes from a higher part to a lower part; isn't that

17 right?

18 A. Yes, perhaps two or three centimetres downwards.

19 MR. RODIC: [Interpretation] I would like to ask the usher now to

20 place this map before the witness.

21 Q. Can you please use the pointer to show us your store on this map.

22 A. Here.

23 Q. So at the corner of that building, the one that you pointed at?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. Tell me, where did the shell fall?

Page 3430

1 A. I said this very nicely. I don't know exactly where it fell, but

2 I think that it fell either here on the Varteks building or this building

3 here, Marojica Kaboga, here. One of these two places. I can't tell

4 exactly because I never went there to see where it had actually fallen.

5 Q. I would like to ask you now to point to your store.

6 A. It's here.

7 Q. Does that mean right at the corner of your building?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. The first building on the left that you showed now, the Varteks

10 building, how far away is it from that corner?

11 A. Believe me, my door and the Varteks door are not more than seven

12 or eight metres apart.

13 Q. Can you describe this building to me? Please point at the Varteks

14 building with the pointer.

15 A. Here it is.

16 Q. Please describe the building. What's in there?

17 A. Downstairs is the Varteks ready-made clothing boutique. Further

18 up was the restaurant of the Dubravka Hotel, the terrace of the restaurant

19 of the Dubravka Hotel.

20 Q. This terrace of the restaurant is upstairs, isn't it?

21 A. Yes. There's a bridge here from this building to the terrace, and

22 the street is not this wide; it's a very small street.

23 Q. How high up is this terrace of the restaurant?

24 A. Three or four metres. Three metres, three or four.

25 Q. Does it have a stone edge?

Page 3431

1 A. I didn't go there, but I think you can only sit there.

2 Q. How high is this little stone wall?

3 A. It's about as tall as the armchair I'm sitting in.

4 Q. About a metre?

5 A. No, no, less.

6 Q. In your statement, you said: "The shell exploded on the terrace

7 of the restaurant that is around the corner from the store. Since the

8 streets in the Old Town are very narrow, the shrapnel from this shell

9 ricochetted back and forth between the walls and struck me."

10 So behind the corner there was a restaurant?

11 A. Of course, round the corner. If you look at the Hotel Dubravka.

12 Of course this is around the corner. I mean, please don't split hairs in

13 terms of every little word I say. It fell nearby, so of course it was not

14 far away. If you look at it, it's only a few metres. It can't be more

15 than ten metres.

16 Q. And the height is about three or four metres?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. And there is this small wall around the restaurant?

19 A. There is no wall. That's where people sit. It's not a wall.

20 It's like stone benches, actually.

21 Q. All right. So you stepped out with your right foot, and you were

22 then hit by this shrapnel; is that right?

23 A. Yes, that's right.

24 Q. Did you fall after you were hit?

25 A. No. I turned around and I said, "Kate, I was hit." I entered the

Page 3432

1 shop and walked for about two metres and then I lay on the floor.

2 Q. What were you wearing that day?

3 A. I was wearing jeans. I had boots that we call Canadian boots, and

4 I had jeans trousers on, and up, I had a lined jeans jacket, a padded one.

5 Q. Why did you say yesterday that this piece of shrapnel hit you in

6 the right foot?

7 A. I didn't say that. I said in the right upper leg.

8 Q. It says the right foot in the transcript. Perhaps it was

9 mistranslated.

10 A. No. I said in the right upper leg. I can show it to you

11 personally.

12 Q. All right. And in your statement, you say: "A large piece of

13 shrapnel passed directly through my right upper leg and many smaller

14 pieces hit my feet and arms. I only received bruises from these since I

15 had been wearing boots and a jacket." Is that so?

16 A. Yes, it is.

17 Q. What kinds of bruises were these? Were these scratches? Were

18 these bleeding wounds; what?

19 A. No. These were minor bruises because the shrapnel pieces had

20 already lost in impetus by the time they reached me because they had

21 already hit the walls. In fact, I found a piece of shrapnel in the pocket

22 of my jacket, and one had hit me just above the boot, in the shin, and

23 some in the arms, but that was minor.

24 Q. So you also found that piece of shrapnel in your pocket?

25 A. Yes, a very tiny piece of it.

Page 3433

1 Q. And was your jacket, your parka, was it green?

2 A. Well, it is a jean jacket, which is a windbreaker. It was blue.

3 Q. And what kind of clothes was Tonci Skocko wearing?

4 A. He was in civilian clothing, and what exactly he was wearing, I

5 don't know. I know those were civilian clothes. He was normally dressed

6 like myself.

7 Q. You don't remember a single item of his clothing? Was he also

8 wearing jeans?

9 A. To tell you frankly, I cannot remember with precision. I just saw

10 this in a jiffy. This was all a very brief time and I had only a few

11 moments in which to see him. He didn't stop at the door at all. It was

12 just a matter of seconds, but I saw him well. I did see what he was

13 wearing.

14 Q. Why didn't you make a single reference in your statement to the

15 investigator to either the fact that you had seen Tonci Skocko nor that

16 you knew that Tonci Skocko had been killed nor that you knew that a piece

17 of shrapnel had pierced his heart, as you stated? Why didn't you mention

18 this by a single word in your 2000 statement?

19 A. I told what they asked me.

20 Q. Was this not an important piece of information for you to give

21 them?

22 A. To tell you frankly, had they had asked me, I would have told

23 them.

24 Q. And if they didn't ask you, you wouldn't?

25 A. Why would I?

Page 3434

1 Q. Isn't Tonci Skocko more important than some little boat in the

2 port?

3 MR. WEINER: You're asking this witness to speculate as to the

4 questions that the investigators should or should not have asked him. He

5 can't answer that, why they didn't ask him, if they considered it

6 important, if he considers it important. It wasn't asked of him.

7 JUDGE PARKER: I think it's clear, Mr. Rodic, that this matter was

8 not mentioned to be included in the statement. We've noted that, but it

9 is now given in evidence. We've appreciated the distinction.

10 MR. RODIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

11 Q. Yesterday you said that at your store you lay bleeding for over

12 two hours and a half and that the advice of the doctor to your colleague

13 Kate Buric was to keep you awake and not let you fall asleep; is that

14 correct?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. Is it not the case that, due to blood loss, immediately after you

17 left the Old Town you fainted?

18 A. Yes. It was at the Pile Gate that I lost consciousness. I cannot

19 remember the route.

20 Q. We heard that. Let's move on, please. Would you be so kind as to

21 position this map so that you are able to show us on the screen which

22 route you took in your car and to tell us how much time it took you to get

23 out of the Old Town.

24 A. As the shop is here, when he came with his car, the yellow Golf

25 here, we took the Od Puca Street directly this way, up to this fountain

Page 3435

1 here, and then we exited on Pile.

2 Q. So how much time, approximately, did it take you from the store to

3 reach the Pile Gate? How much time was that, roughly?

4 A. Believe me, seeing what the situation was at that time, I'm quite

5 sure that he speeded, but he couldn't have sped so much because of all the

6 material that had fallen from the roofs and was obstructing our -- the

7 street. So I cannot tell you exactly how much time it took us to get

8 there.

9 Q. Did you enter the car yourself or did someone carry you in?

10 A. He carried me into the vehicle. I was already very, very weak and

11 couldn't get inside myself.

12 Q. Where did he put you, in the front or in the back?

13 A. He put me in the front seat which he had reclined, and of course

14 he lay me on this reclining seat.

15 Q. So you were actually lying in the car?

16 A. Yes, I was. And that is why I could see. As I lay there, I could

17 see these buildings ablaze and on fire to my left.

18 Q. If I understood you correctly, so you assert that in such a

19 condition, wounded, losing much blood soon after -- and soon after you

20 left the Old Town you had also fainted, you were nevertheless speeding

21 through the Old Town in order to save your life, and you managed to

22 register all the damage that you indicated in response to the Prosecutor's

23 questions; is that so?

24 A. First of all, I was not bleeding any more because the blood loss

25 had been staunched. And secondly, I'm quite sure and I claim that I saw

Page 3436

1 what I saw in terms of damage. I didn't see the actual damage on the

2 external walls in terms of how much of damage there was. What I did see

3 was that I -- were houses burning. It was only two months later when I

4 returned to the Old Town that I saw what we had lost.

5 Q. Mr. Vlasica, don't you remember that yesterday you said that you

6 saw the statue of St. Joseph hit when you were leaving the Old Town as you

7 were being driven in this car? Do you remember?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. Excuse me. I haven't finished. Do you remember then that you

10 also saw Onofrio's fountain as being hit?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. And you saw all this from the car?

13 A. Yes. Yes. It was only normal. But if you take into

14 consideration, if you think about it, one could see it.

15 Q. Why do you not make a single reference to this in your statement

16 from 2000?

17 A. I repeat: I told them what they asked me.

18 Q. And at hospital, were you -- did they give you a transfusion?

19 A. Yes, they did, but how much blood I received, I really cannot

20 recall. I only know that Dr. Bogdanovic told me, "Ivo, everything will be

21 all right." And I know that the drip was by my side.

22 Q. Let us please -- will you please shorten your answers.

23 A. Yes, I will.

24 Q. In your statement, you state the following on page 2, the

25 penultimate paragraph, you say: "When I arrived at the hospital, they

Page 3437

1 x-rayed my leg to see if the bone had been damaged. They subsequently

2 gave me a blood transfusion and bandaged my leg up. After five or six

3 days, they stitched up my wound."

4 And you stayed in the hospital until the 21st of December, 1991.

5 Is this, what you stated here, correct?

6 A. Yes, it is correct.

7 Q. Do you also remember whether you received any anti-tetanus shots

8 or some antibiotics?

9 A. I was given some injections. I remember Dr. Mahanitoni [phoen]

10 came every morning. They cleaned, of course, my wound, and it goes

11 without saying that I did receive some injections in the thigh.

12 Q. Do you remember how many of these injections you had to be given?

13 A. No, I don't remember that.

14 Q. Was it more than five?

15 A. I don't know. I don't remember. How can you ask me these things?

16 I can't recall such stupid things.

17 Q. Mr. Vlasica, this is not stupid. This is your life we are talking

18 about. You had bled profusely, so can you remember whether you were given

19 one, three, five or ten shots during your treatment?

20 A. Well, all the while, all the time which I spent in hospital, I was

21 already in a much better condition because I was -- first of all, I was

22 relieved, personally, being in hospital, and I knew that I was surrounded

23 by medical staff and that I would be helped. And believe me, they

24 undertook -- they did everything they could to properly treat my wound and

25 deal with it. And as I was otherwise generally healthy as I am now, I

Page 3438

1 believe that this will --

2 Q. Mr. Vlasica, I have to stop you. I have to interrupt you. You

3 are very verbose.

4 You said you received a shot in the thigh. Do you remember

5 whether you received just that one injection that you remember or were

6 there more?

7 A. There were more, I'm sure, because they must have given me

8 something against sepsis. I don't know what exactly now.

9 Q. Why don't you refer by a single word in your statement to the fact

10 that you were actually clenching gauze between your teeth, that the nurse

11 lay on top of you to hold down your arms and legs? Why don't you mention

12 this by a single word about all these efforts that you had to suffer

13 during the administration of medical treatment?

14 A. Because as I keep telling you, I only responded to questions that

15 were being put to me.

16 Q. Thank you. Now, Mr. Vlasica, I have to ask you, who forged this

17 document of the 18th of February, 2004, which confirms that you were

18 treated from the 6th of December to the 21st of December at the general

19 hospital in Dubrovnik? Do you know who falsified this document?

20 MR. WEINER: I'd object to that, Your Honour.

21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Falsified?

22 MR. RODIC: [Interpretation]

23 Q. Yes.

24 JUDGE PARKER: Yes, Mr. Weiner.

25 MR. WEINER: I'd like to know if the counsel has a good faith

Page 3439

1 basis to make that claim.

2 MR. RODIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, reading the content of

3 this document, listening to the witness, and having seen other

4 documentation, I absolutely have grounds to contend, to assert that this

5 is a forgery, and what my learned colleague Weiner said yesterday in

6 reference to the content of this document, I can say that this is an

7 insult to common sense, because this document says: "On the basis of

8 clinical findings, we establish that this is a tangential entry and exit

9 wound of the left upper leg, rather more to the side, at the edge of the

10 upper third, and there is profuse bleeding from the wound."

11 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter doesn't have the document.

12 MR. RODIC: [Interpretation] If you remember, yesterday when this

13 piece of evidence was admitted, my learned colleague Weiner, on page 92,

14 lines 5 and 6, in response to a question of yours, said to you: "Your

15 Honour, this witness, when he came here, brought this document. It is in

16 the process of translation. We can give it to the interpreters. I would

17 like him to read it or shall we give it to the interpreters to interpret?"

18 Already at that moment a document with an English translation was

19 on the ELMO. At that point, the Witness Vlasica confirmed that this was

20 his paper of discharge, and on page 93, row 15, you intervened, Your

21 Honour, yesterday, and you pointed out for Colleague Weiner that it seemed

22 from the translation that a different leg was being described than the

23 other indicated by the witness. And what I say is an insult to common

24 sense is on page 93, line 18, where Colleague Weiner says, in responding

25 to you: "Yes, I know, but that is on their left and on his right if you

Page 3440

1 look at him. That is from their aspect on the left side but with respect

2 to this person it is on the right side."

3 I presume, I assume, I am certain that he has explained to you how

4 a physician looks at a patient and describes his findings. Also, I have

5 lots of other objections to this particular document.

6 First of all, the diagnosis. "Vulnus Explossivum Femoris Sin" has

7 been miswritten. In the word "Exlossivum" there is a superfluous 'S'.

8 The seal, the stamp on this document which says "Directrix" is unclear,

9 but we can see from this copy that the "Directrix" has been typed over the

10 stamp. So this means that the document was first stamped and then the

11 word was typed over it.

12 In the diagnosis, underneath the actual diagnosis is the

13 prescribed therapy, where it says: "Treatment. Treatment --" and then it

14 is followed by an English word. So we're talking about a document in the

15 Serbian language where an English word is used. I'm spelling it out:

16 D-R-A-I-N-A-G-E. It should be an 'E' instead of an 'A' if we want it to

17 be correct even in English.

18 JUDGE PARKER: It's also a French word, which may have a

19 relevance.

20 MR. RODIC: [Interpretation] I haven't heard, Your Honour, that

21 they had been using French words or, rather, this one word when recording

22 medical findings in Dubrovnik in 1991, or in Belgrade or Podgorica, for

23 that matter.

24 Also, the textual description of the wound does not correspond to

25 the Latin diagnosis.

Page 3441

1 So essentially, our objections are the grounds from which I

2 actually derive what is my basic contention, Your Honour.

3 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Rodic, thank you for that. I think we've dealt

4 with two matters at once; firstly the grounds upon which you would submit

5 in the end that the document is a forgery; and secondly, the basis upon

6 which you believe you may properly put to the witness that it is a

7 forgery.

8 I think that the objection of Mr. Weiner is well-founded, that you

9 have gone straight in to simply putting to the witness that, "This is a

10 forgery; who forged it?" You may, if you had wanted to, have put to him,

11 "Isn't it the case that this was made out by somebody other than the

12 hospital?" "Isn't it the case there's something wrong with the seal?"

13 And learnt what, if anything, the witness could say about those matters.

14 But it's a matter for the Tribunal in the end, of course, to determine

15 whether or not all of the difficulties and deficiencies that you've

16 carefully submitted demonstrate that the document is either a forgery or

17 is unreliable and that we ought not to put any weight on it or that it's a

18 document that we ought not even receive into evidence.

19 I don't see, though, that most of those matters are things that

20 you can effectively put to this witness in cross-examination. He will

21 either -- well, he has told you where he has got the documents. There

22 may, of course, be errors or mistakes in a document that have got nothing

23 to do with this witness. They can be made by other people. They can be

24 made genuinely or they can be made by fault, somebody trying to deceive.

25 So those possibilities as to conclusion are for the Chamber.

Page 3442

1 I think you have identified very clearly the matters that you want

2 us to consider, whether or not the document might be regarded as a forgery

3 or with suspicion. I don't think there's anything further you need to put

4 to the witness about it, but if there is something, of course you might do

5 so.

6 MR. RODIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. I accept your

7 suggestions. Perhaps I rushed things a bit, but everything associated

8 with this document is, believe me, a complex process. I should like to

9 remind this distinguished Chamber that at the beginning of the examination

10 of this witness, the Prosecutor asked the witness whether he was receiving

11 any sort of emolument from the Croatian government, which he emphatically

12 refused.

13 Yesterday, when you asked Mr. Weiner and conveyed to him these

14 discrepancies between the statements of the witness and this document,

15 Mr. Weiner explained this to you, and I have to say to you that the three

16 documents which were given to the Trial Chamber today under marks P86, 1,

17 2, and 3 were only subsequently submitted to us last night. So

18 objectively the question arises - of course when I say this I try to have

19 the whole picture in mind - if the witness brought these documents with

20 him in The Hague, there is absolutely no reason for us to have been given

21 this first finding only two days ago and what they presented to the Court

22 today under P86 only last night. But that -- even that, only after you

23 posed that particular question and observed this problem in connection

24 with this particular document. That is what led me to express this

25 opinion about that document.

Page 3443

1 JUDGE PARKER: Well, thank you, Mr. Rodic. The record has

2 recorded all those matters, and a number of them had been noted by the

3 Chamber already. There will certainly be an issue of fact to be decided

4 by the Chamber in due course about these matters. But if you have

5 concluded that part of your questioning about the document, you may want

6 to go on and finish your cross-examination.

7 MR. RODIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. I should like

8 to indicate in advance that perhaps I will be needing an extension of five

9 to ten minutes in order for us to be able to complete this today, and I

10 would like to ask your permission for that extension.

11 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Weiner.

12 MR. WEINER: Your Honour, we've checked with the schedule. This

13 courtroom won't be used until 3.30, according to the computer schedule,

14 and so we would have no objection to finishing today.

15 JUDGE PARKER: Move on, Mr. Rodic.

16 MR. RODIC: [Interpretation] Needless to say, Your Honour, this

17 also encompasses the question whether Colleague Weiner will be able of

18 finishing his redirect today. If he could please let me have this

19 information, because if he is, then I will give up a large portion of my

20 own questions. I will certainly do my best to finish on my part, and that

21 also begs the question of whether we will be able to discharge this

22 witness, generally speaking, to leave The Hague.

23 MR. WEINER: We will finish today. I will do what's necessary.

24 JUDGE PARKER: I would be grateful, then, if you could move on

25 with every reasonable speed, Mr. Rodic.

Page 3444

1 MR. RODIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

2 Q. Mr. Grbic [sic] the three documents, medical documents that were

3 shown to you today, did you bring them together to The Hague with the one

4 which was shown to us yesterday?

5 A. First of all, I'm not Grbic. I'm Mr. Vlasica.

6 Q. I apologise. Mr. Vlasica.

7 A. Second, I brought all the three documents, but to set your heart

8 at rest, let me tell you, all these documents that I have also exist in

9 the medical centre in Dubrovnik, identical documents. So you cannot put

10 it to me that these are forgery. If there have been some mistakes made,

11 this is their mistake, not my mistake.

12 Q. Do you know in what upper leg you were hurt?

13 A. I do and how, because I can feel it quite acutely.

14 Q. Why didn't you intervene when you saw that it was written wrong if

15 it is written wrong?

16 A. Look here, the way Mr. Weiner put it and the way they recorded it,

17 and of course what you are saying, what we are all claiming, when I stand

18 in front of you, perhaps what is right to me is left to you. Maybe there

19 was a confusion. Maybe they made a confusion. Maybe there was a mistake

20 in the writing. But the facts are not wrong.

21 Q. Tell me, did the directrix herself write this down for you?

22 A. No, she didn't. It was written by people who were in the surgical

23 ward. Dr. Segedin, I believe it says.

24 Q. Yes.

25 A. He wrote it and he took it to the lady director for her signature.

Page 3445

1 Q. Are you saying that the doctor -- and you claim that if the doctor

2 is standing opposite you and is facing you, looking at you, he would write

3 in his finding left leg because to him it is on the left, whereas in

4 actual fact you had been wounded in the right leg; is that what you're

5 claiming?

6 MR. WEINER: It's for the doctors to state what the doctor would

7 claim.

8 JUDGE PARKER: That's well-founded, Mr. Rodic.

9 MR. RODIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, that's what the witness

10 said to me, and then I asked him to confirm it. I'm not the one who put

11 the question before he had explained it to me, rather. His explanation

12 was the one that was given by Mr. Weiner, so now I'm asking him whether he

13 is making the same assertion.

14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] May I say something? May I explain

15 something, rather? As far as Segedin is concerned and the typing,

16 Dr. Segedin did not write this in front of me. I asked for this two days

17 in advance in order to get it out of my documentation from 1991 in terms

18 of my wound, and I said that I had to bring it here. They wrote it out

19 for me, and I just came to take this document. So Dr. Segedin did not see

20 me himself at all. He just copied this from the documents that had to do

21 with my medical treatment then.

22 MR. RODIC: [Interpretation]

23 Q. All right. Let's not waste any time. This is clear. Is it true,

24 Mr. Vlasica, that in your statement there are some things that are simply

25 missing? Your statement of the year 2000 there is not a single word about

Page 3446

1 the platforms at certain -- on certain buildings that are cultural

2 monuments in the Old Town. Also, there is no mention of big flags, UNESCO

3 and Red Cross flags, that were flying on some buildings in the Old Town.

4 A. Mr. Rodic --

5 Q. Just a moment, please. I'm going to mention all of this to you

6 and then you will respond.

7 Also, that in the morning of the 6th of December, you saw Tonci

8 Skocko passing by your store and everything you said about him then.

9 Also, there is no mention in your statement that you were surveying the

10 damage sustained by the Old Town as you were being driven to hospital, and

11 also that you -- your wound was sutured in hospital without any

12 anaesthesia. Is that true, that none of these things that you did mention

13 in your examination-in-chief is not part of the statement you gave to the

14 investigators in 2000?

15 A. That is correct. I told them about what they had asked me.

16 Q. All right. Now let me ask you something else. When you talked to

17 my distinguished friend Mr. Weiner on the 22nd, did you mention to him the

18 mortar, Bogisica Park, the mortar in the park, the way in which it was

19 fired, there was sporadic gunfire, that there was a lack of ammunition for

20 the mortar in Bogisica Park, and also that they fired very little

21 ammunition from Bogisica Park and that on the 6th of December, they ended

22 their artillery support to the defenders at Srdj? Did you mention this to

23 Mr. Weiner on the 22nd when you came to The Hague?

24 A. I answered the questions that Mr. Weiner had for me.

25 Q. I'm asking you specifically.

Page 3447

1 A. I've answered you specifically. I have told you quite

2 specifically, and I listened to you carefully, so I answered everything

3 that he asked me about.

4 Q. I want to get an accurate answer. All this information that I

5 gave you just now -- please let me finish my question. All this

6 information that I gave to you just now, everything I said to you just now

7 about Bogisica Park, sporadic gunfire, the mortar, the lack of ammunition

8 on the 6th of December, did you utter any of that? Did you tell

9 Mr. Weiner about that?

10 A. I told Mr. Weiner about what he asked me.

11 Q. So you did have knowledge about that.

12 A. I was answering the questions that were being put to me.

13 Q. And you did not say a single word about this to the investigators

14 in 2000?

15 A. I'm telling you yet again, I told them about the things that they

16 asked me about.

17 MR. WEINER: That's not true. Your Honour, in 2000, if you look

18 at the last paragraph of his statement, he states he's in the hospital,

19 he's in the hospital with a person by the name of Zika, who was a soldier

20 who was up on Srdj, part of the people defending Srdj, and they spoke

21 about the war. He told him about the different things that happened and

22 -- during that day. As a result, I asked him about that and he indicated.

23 They didn't ask further, but there was discussion about Zika and all that

24 information comes from Zika about what happened in Bogisica Park.

25 That's not correct.

Page 3448

1 MR. RODIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I do not agree with this

2 objection, because in that part of the statement, in this last paragraph

3 that my colleague read out, there is no mention whatsoever of Zika having

4 said anything about Bogisica Park. The witness confirmed to me just now

5 that he told Mr. Weiner about what he knew about Bogisica Park when they

6 were preparing for this testimony, during the proofing. And if you

7 remember, before the break I showed the photograph with the mortar in

8 Bogisica Park, and I put questions in relation to that photograph. Then

9 the witness denied it.

10 Your Honour, in view of my promise, I would like to -- I beg your

11 pardon. I thought that I was interrupting. I thought that you wished to

12 say something.

13 Q. I would like to complete the cross-examination of this witness by

14 asserting, Mr. Vlasica, that you were not telling the truth before this

15 Honourable Trial Chamber over these past two days.

16 MR. RODIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, and thank you, Your

17 Honours.

18 MR. WEINER: I move the Trial Court to strike that. That's not a

19 question, it was just an argument he made.

20 JUDGE PARKER: Well, let me help Mr. Rodic and the record by

21 asking the witness whether you agree with that proposition, that you were

22 not telling the truth in your evidence.

23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, when I came here, I

24 took a solemn oath that I would speak the truth and nothing but the truth.

25 What I said was the truth.

Page 3449

1 And as for what Mr. Rodic said about me, I can only say thank you

2 to him.

3 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Rodic.

4 Yes, Mr. Weiner.

5 MR. WEINER: No re-direct, Your Honour.

6 [Trial Chamber confers]

7 JUDGE PARKER: I am pleased to be able to tell you that your

8 evidence is now at an end and you are now free to return to your home.

9 Thank you for your attendance and for your assistance.

10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you. Thank you, Your Honour.

11 JUDGE PARKER: You may leave the court, if you wish, now.

12 And while you're going, could I mention to counsel that it seems

13 in view of developments and the note that I have received during the

14 morning, that it is convenient now --

15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.

16 [The witness withdrew]

17 JUDGE PARKER: -- as I understand it, for there to be no sitting on

18 Monday as well as Tuesday. The reason for this is that, following the

19 concern raised by the Prosecution the day before yesterday about the slow

20 progress with medical testing and the concern echoed by Mr. Petrovic that

21 this was simply taking too long to resolve, the question of the accused's

22 health, I have been told that it has been possible to schedule both the

23 urological and the MRI testing for this Monday, the urological in the

24 morning and the MRI in the afternoon. I think in view of that and the

25 importance of resolving this question of the fitness of the accused, we

Page 3450

1 should take advantage of those appointments, and for that reason not sit

2 on Monday. We had already decided not to sit on Tuesday. This seems to

3 fit in with the Prosecution's schedule because of its embarrassment that a

4 witness it had programmed for next week is unable to attend, and it's been

5 greatly facilitated, Mr. Rodic, by the speed with which you were able to

6 conclude your cross-examination of this last witness. That will mean that

7 your client doesn't have to come in here on Monday, and he can just be

8 able to attend to the medical appointments that have been made.

9 So for the reasons indicated, the Chamber will not sit on Monday

10 or Tuesday, and the hearing will continue on Wednesday.

11 Do you want to say something, Mr. Petrovic?

12 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the Defence has been

13 informed about this, that thanks to your intervention, the MRI was moved

14 ten days ahead. Also in relation to all these other arrangements, it is a

15 response to your intervention that all of this has been speeded up. So I

16 simply wish to thank you on behalf of the Defence for your prompt

17 reaction.

18 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Weiner.

19 MR. WEINER: Your Honour, I'd like to tender those documents now.

20 However, we're -- since I believe there is going to be some argument,

21 maybe we should wait until Wednesday.

22 JUDGE PARKER: The question of their admission will be further

23 considered when we resume. It's clear that there's going to be quite some

24 consideration needed. So that can be dealt with next week.

25 I thank counsel for their comments, and we will adjourn now until

Page 3451

1 Wednesday.

2 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.56 p.m.,

3 to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 3rd day of March,

4 2004, at 9.00 a.m.