110607ED

Page 233

1 MR. MacFARLANE: Thank you.

2 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.

3 JUDGE KWON: Microphone, please.

4 MR. MacFARLANE: Thank you.

5 I believe that when we left off in cross-examination yesterday

6 afternoon, that we were in private session, and then we moved briefly

7 into public for procedural matters.

8 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.

9 We'll go back to private session briefly.

10 [Private session] [Confidentiality lifted by order of Chamber]

11 JUDGE KWON: Yes, we are now in private session.

12 Mr. MacFarlane.

13 MR. MacFARLANE: Thank you.

14 Cross-examination by Mr. MacFarlane: [Continued]

15 Q. Sir, yesterday in your evidence, if I recall correctly, and you

16 can correct me if I'm wrong, you had indicated that at a very, very early

17 stage, before you had any contact with the Office of the Prosecutor, that

18 you had a discussion with Mr. Seselj. Do you recall that?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. And that he had suggested that you go to the Office of the

21 Prosecutor and --

22 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Judges, there is no reason for this

23 to be in closed session, absolutely no reason whatsoever.

24 JUDGE KWON: Just bear with it for the moment. We'll see whether

25 we can lift the confidentiality or not. I can't find it at this moment.

Page 234

1 Yes, please.

2 MR. MacFARLANE: We'll be moving into it within one or two

3 questions.

4 JUDGE KWON: Yes.

5 MR. MacFARLANE:

6 Q. Sir, you also indicated, if I recall correctly, that Mr. Seselj

7 had suggested that you speak to the OTP and that you be truthful. Do you

8 recall saying that?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. Do you recall meeting with one or more of the investigators

11 around the 13th of September, 2003, at the Tribunal's Belgrade office,

12 and that it was a circumstance in which you had requested the meeting to

13 discuss various issues?

14 A. I don't remember that date.

15 Q. Well, perhaps I could refresh your memory a bit more. The

16 meeting was requested by you to discuss protective measures, in view of

17 the disclosure of a statement and possible testimony before the Tribunal.

18 Does that assist you at all?

19 A. I'm sorry, it didn't assist me at all.

20 Q. Well, perhaps I could attempt to refresh your memory further by

21 referring to some more specific details and see if that jogs your memory.

22 Do you recall advising the investigators that while on vacation on the

23 coast in Montenegro, you felt that someone was chasing you? Do you

24 recall that?

25 A. No.

Page 235

1 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Judges, some references are called

2 for here. On the basis of what is Mr. MacFarlane putting these

3 questions? This is not contained in the preliminary witness statements

4 at all. We do have to have some sort of reference.

5 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Seselj, I would like you -- I would like to

6 request to you not to interfere with the cross-examination. If

7 necessary, I take it that Mr. MacFarlane is ready to give reference later

8 on, but don't interrupt with the flow of his cross-examination.

9 Let's proceed, Mr. MacFarlane.

10 MR. MacFARLANE: Thank you.

11 Q. With a view to perhaps jogging your memory, do you recall

12 advising the investigators that a few days after an interview with the

13 Office of the Prosecutor, you visited the Serbian Radical Party offices

14 to check on the situation to see how things were going, and you were

15 wanting to see the reaction of the members of the party in respect of a

16 statement that you had provided to the OTP? Do you recall that?

17 A. I don't recall this either.

18 Q. Do you recall advising the investigators that you met strange

19 people around your building and in the street and on the buses, and that

20 that had happened seven or eight times from the date that you had given

21 the statement to the OTP?

22 A. I think I may remember this.

23 Q. Is the meeting coming back to you a bit more now, and the

24 discussions?

25 A. I really don't remember this meeting, but I did have the

Page 236

1 impression -- now, was it due to some fear or something else? I had the

2 impression that I was being followed by someone. It is quite possible,

3 and I said that to my family members, and my son said, Daddy, maybe this

4 is paranoia or something like that.

5 Q. Do you recall advising the investigators that you thought you

6 might be coming -- be becoming a bit obsessed and slightly paranoid

7 because of the things that you were seeing?

8 A. Well, if I said that my son said that to me, that he noticed this

9 form of paranoia, it is possible, but I really do not remember this

10 conversation with the investigators on that date that you referred to.

11 I think that I had a contact with them before Dr. Vojislav Seselj

12 voluntarily surrendered to The Hague. I really do not recall this date.

13 Q. Do you recall another meeting, perhaps with another date, that

14 involved the discussions that I've just outlined to you?

15 A. As far as I can remember, I think it was only then that I was on

16 the premises of The Hague Tribunal in Belgrade, sometime before

17 Dr. Seselj went to The Hague voluntarily. As for these previous dates

18 that you've referred to, I really do not remember any of that, and I

19 don't even know whether --

20 Q. Do you recall having a discussion with the investigators around

21 the period of time that I've just mentioned, where you discussed

22 protective measures and requested that your statement, if it's to be used

23 in legal proceedings, be used with a pseudonym and delayed disclosure?

24 A. As far as I can remember, during this first contact with the

25 people from the OTP, I said that whenever my name is mentioned, let it be

Page 237

1 in public, without any protective measures whatsoever. I didn't ask for

2 any protection. There was no need for me to do that.

3 Q. You have some recollection of some things and many

4 non-recollections. Is this perhaps attributable to the confusion and

5 forgetfulness that you referred to yesterday?

6 A. Obviously, that's the reason. I tell you, I remember that first

7 meeting with the people from The Hague Tribunal, that it was sometime

8 just before Dr. Vojislav Seselj went to The Hague voluntarily. I do not

9 remember that date that you mentioned a moment ago. What was it that you

10 said?

11 Q. So some of the things --

12 JUDGE KWON: Mr. MacFarlane, do we need to remain in private

13 session? If you could remind me of the reason why we should be in

14 private session for this topic, if necessary in the absence of the

15 witness.

16 MR. MacFARLANE: I will be tendering a document in the next

17 while, and I believe that it ought to be tendered in private session.

18 I'm moving into another area. The witness doesn't recall the matters

19 that I've raised, and so I've gone as far as I can on that issue. I will

20 move to another one that does involve a document.

21 JUDGE KWON: Very well, thank you.

22 MR. MacFARLANE: Thank you.

23 Q. Sir, I'd like to move to another area.

24 Yesterday, you indicated, if I recall correctly, that at one

25 point you were appointed to the position of the head of War Staff for the

Page 238

1 Serbian Radical Party. Is that correct?

2 A. Yes. After Ljubisa Petkovic resigned, I was appointed chief of

3 the War Staff.

4 Q. And I take it that would be a position of considerable authority.

5 It was a position that required a good person and who could handle a lot

6 of situations?

7 A. Well, my job as chief of the War Staff was a normal thing, a

8 usual thing. Our job there, the job of the team there, was to take in

9 refugees, and then later on, when I became chief of the War Staff, it had

10 to do with the organisation and sending of volunteers to threatened

11 territories. In principle, that was it. Nothing special happened,

12 except if we perhaps collected food and cigarettes, in particular, for

13 the people we were sending out into the field. That was it, and later

14 on, going to see the wounded in hospitals, and also the families of these

15 wounded persons. And, unfortunately, it was also my job to receive the

16 families of volunteers who had lost their lives and to help them with

17 procedural matters. That is to say, it had to do with the

18 Military Hospital, knowing people there, preparations regarding the

19 transportation of the deceased to their places of burial. It had to do

20 with that, primarily.

21 Q. Thank you. Yesterday, you referred, in direct examination, to a

22 meeting that you had with a Prosecutor. I believe you indicated it was

23 Ms. Dahl, and I believe you indicated that it was -- you thought it was

24 around 2007. Is that recollection of mine --

25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Judges, all of that was in public

Page 239

1 session yesterday. We are still in private session. We haven't seen a

2 single reason for being in private session until now.

3 MR. MacFARLANE: I propose to tender a document at this point. I

4 was endeavouring to lay the foundation for the document.

5 JUDGE KWON: Very well.

6 MR. MacFARLANE:

7 Q. The meeting that you had with Ms. Dahl and others, I suggest,

8 took place around the 16th of November, 2007. Would that sound about

9 right?

10 A. Possibly, it's quite possible.

11 Q. Did you have more than one meeting with Ms. Dahl or just simply

12 one?

13 A. Just that one.

14 Q. Thank you. I'd like to show you a document. It is both in

15 English and in Serbian and contains signatures. I would like you to take

16 a look at it. It purports to be a transcript of a meeting, and my

17 question is whether or not this is a transcript of the meeting to which

18 you made reference.

19 A. May I read this?

20 Q. Yes.

21 A. Thank you.

22 JUDGE KWON: So the question was whether this was a transcript of

23 the meeting the witness had referred to.

24 Mr. Drazilovic, can you help us, whether this is a transcript of

25 the meeting you referred to?

Page 240

1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes.

2 MR. MacFARLANE: Thank you.

3 Q. Yesterday, when you testified with respect to this meeting, you

4 were proceeding on the basis of your memory, and you indicated that you

5 were forgetful. So would you agree that this is the best evidence of

6 what took place?

7 A. [No interpretation]

8 Q. Thank you. I just want to ask you to comment on a few things.

9 There was a lawyer with you at the time?

10 A. I was required at this meeting to come over here and to testify

11 as a witness for the Prosecution. I refused that straight away, because

12 in my earliest statements, I had said that I can go to The Hague solely

13 as a witness for the defence of Dr. Vojislav Seselj.

14 Q. Sorry, sir, that wasn't my question. My question was to you: I

15 understand that a lawyer was with you at the time of this meeting.

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. And I understand further that that lawyer or that person was part

18 of the Seselj Defence team. Is that right?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. So you were relying on the resources of the Seselj Defence team

21 in order to meet with the Office of the Prosecution?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. Ms. Dahl advised you that you can expect to receive a summons,

24 and then further asked you if you would respond to the summons; is that

25 correct?

Page 241

1 A. Yes, she asked me that, but I said I would only come as a witness

2 for the defence of Dr. Vojislav Seselj, and I persistently repeated that.

3 Q. Yes, thank you. Ms. Dahl then discussed arrangements that could

4 be made for you, in terms of Victims Services, being picked up, allowing

5 you to look at documents to refresh your memory, and so on. She was

6 outlining the process, the procedure involved in testifying; is that

7 right?

8 A. Well, what is etched in my memory, and after reading this

9 document, she, in fact, requested me to come here as a witness for the

10 Prosecution, and she offered some privileges to me. She asked me if I

11 wanted something, how much I wanted, do I need some clothes, do I need an

12 escort, so all kinds of benefits. However, in response, I said, yes, I

13 would come as a witness to The Hague, but only as a witness for the

14 defence of Dr. Vojislav Seselj, and I didn't back off on this, so in

15 terms of all these offers that she made. And you can see in the minutes

16 of the meeting I said eventually that I'm not prepared to discuss this

17 matter any longer.

18 Q. She was outlining the support that's provided to witnesses who

19 testify at the Tribunal, wasn't she?

20 A. Yes, in principle, but it seems as if she was making all kinds of

21 offers just to persuade me to come over here as a witness for the

22 Prosecution.

23 Q. Near the end of the meeting, Ms. Dahl asked you about your first

24 contact with the Defence team. Initially, you said:

25 "I don't know the exact date, but it was a long time ago."

Page 242

1 She asked further questions on that, and you said:

2 "I said what I said. I have said what I have to say."

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. You were unwilling to answer that question?

5 A. I wasn't prepared at the time to answer these kind of questions

6 that she put to me. I mentioned in my earlier statements that I was

7 maintaining a constant contact with members of the Serbian Radical Party.

8 Being a member, I used to go to the party headquarters, I visited all the

9 rallies or professional and scientific panels and discussions that were

10 organised with a view to providing defence for Dr. Vojislav Seselj. So I

11 always said, If you need something, please call me. Therefore, I asked

12 Ms. Dahl and this previous man - what was his name? - Paolo, if they

13 wanted to call me again, they should do that through my lawyer. Any

14 personal call that came from them at a later stage caused stress and fear

15 in me, quite substantial fear, because having realised what the crux and

16 the essence of the questions were that I was being asked, I realised what

17 it was.

18 I'm sorry, I just lost the plot a little.

19 Q. One of the questions that Ms. Dahl asked you near the end of the

20 meeting was this:

21 "Has anyone told you not to testify against Mr. Seselj?"

22 And your response was:

23 "I said that I would only testify for Mr. Seselj's defence. I

24 said this at the beginning."

25 Do you recall that?

Page 243

1 A. Yes, I do. But as I understood it, that was in the context of

2 whether I was threatened by anyone from the Serbian Radical Party. I was

3 persistently and constantly in contact with Dr. Vojislav Seselj's Defence

4 team and other people from the party. I used to go there. We saw each

5 other on a regular basis. So I just couldn't understand why she was

6 asking this question in this way, because it seems that she was

7 suggesting that I should say that I was afraid from someone; for example,

8 Ljubisa Petkovic. As you can see from my answer, you can see that I was

9 adamant and I refused to discuss this matter any further, because I

10 thought that what I said before was quite enough, as far as that meeting

11 went.

12 JUDGE KWON: Sorry to interrupt, Mr. MacFarlane.

13 Speaking for myself, I'm struggling to see how this line of

14 questioning is relevant to this case.

15 So you're minded to tender this transcript?

16 MR. MacFARLANE: Yes.

17 I intend to draw my questions to a close within the next minute

18 or so, and I endeavour to demonstrate the relevance.

19 JUDGE KWON: And the reason why we should stay in private session

20 was that this document is a confidential document?

21 MR. MacFARLANE: Yes.

22 JUDGE KWON: Yes, I would like you to conclude as soon as

23 possible on this topic. Thank you.

24 MR. MacFARLANE: Yes.

25 Q. The question that Ms. Dahl posed to you: "Has anyone told you

Page 244

1 not to testify against Mr. Seselj," with the greatest of respect, you

2 haven't answered that question. I would like to ask you that question

3 again, and I would appreciate a direct answer. Has anyone told you not

4 to testify against Mr. Seselj?

5 A. Nobody ever, anywhere, told me to testify against

6 Dr. Vojislav Seselj, and I am particularly referring to the people from

7 the Serbian Radical Party. Never, never. There was no need for that. I

8 was with the people from the Serbian Radical Party virtually on a daily

9 basis. We used to meet, we socialised, we went fishing, and other

10 pastimes, so I would also meet with them whenever I needed help, and they

11 were always considerate enough to oblige. So nobody ever, from the

12 Serbian Radical Party, threatened me or tried to force me to come here

13 and be a witness for the Prosecution, because that's really -- I'm

14 still --

15 Q. Sir, I have one final question for you, and it's this: You've

16 indicated that you were the head of War Staff and had a very responsible

17 and difficult position, and yet you've indicated that you were

18 intimidated and there is a rough attitude during the course of this

19 interview. You're a very experienced person, you've had rough times

20 before. How could you possibly have been intimidated during the course

21 of this interview as recorded in this statement?

22 JUDGE KWON: Before Mr. Drazilovic answers that question, I

23 wonder whether we cannot go back to open session for this answer,

24 Mr. MacFarlane.

25 MR. MacFARLANE: Fine.

Page 245

1 JUDGE KWON: And if you could repeat your question again in

2 public session.

3 We'll go back to open session, Mr. Drazilovic.

4 [Open session]

5 THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session, Your Honours.

6 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.

7 MR. MacFARLANE: If it could help, I could back up a few

8 questions to provide context so that there is context in the public

9 portion.

10 JUDGE KWON: Very well. Yes, please do so, Mr. MacFarlane.

11 MR. MacFARLANE:

12 Q. During the course of a discussion with the Prosecution in

13 November of 2007, you met with Ms. Christine Dahl, who is a Prosecutor

14 with the Tribunal, and she posed this question to you:

15 "Has anyone told you not to testify against Mr. Seselj?"

16 And your response was:

17 "I said that I would only testify for Mr. Seselj's defence. I

18 said this at the beginning."

19 My suggestion to you, sir, is that you did not really answer the

20 question that was posed. Would you agree with me?

21 A. Well, not exactly. I believe that my response contained the

22 answer to her question, and I immediately added that I only want to

23 testify as a witness for the defence of Dr. Vojislav Seselj. But it

24 seems that something remained unclear.

25 Q. During the course of your testimony, you have indicated that you

Page 246

1 were the head of the War Staff for the Serbian Radical Party, it was a

2 difficult position, it was a position of responsibility, and you dealt

3 with difficult issues all the time. We have evidence of what actually

4 occurred at this meeting, and you indicated that you felt it was an

5 intimidation, you felt that it was a rough meeting. I would like you to

6 explain how it's possible that you felt intimidated, given the fact

7 that -- given the reality of what we now know took place during that

8 interview. We have a transcript.

9 A. Well, it is possible, to put it simply. Why shouldn't it be,

10 because they took such an approach? So I'm going back again to my first

11 encounter with the investigator called Paolo, and his arrogance and his

12 threats that I would go to jail, that I would be fined, that if I failed

13 to confirm something that he knew, and he asked me to confirm certain

14 things, and I disagreed. And something started happening with me. I was

15 becoming depressed, I was losing my nerves, and I had to be treated

16 medically. So it is only natural for a person to snap under such

17 circumstances, regardless of the fact that I did this job as the chief of

18 the Crisis Staff. I obviously had skills for performing this duty. But

19 as I said, this was not any kind of special job. Anyone could have done

20 it. It just happened that I was chosen to do it. However, when it comes

21 to these interrogations that I was subjected to by the Tribunal's

22 investigators, it had a tremendous psychological impact on me, especially

23 when she started offering me certain benefits, remunerations, or some

24 luxurious circumstances that I would be given access to if I decided to

25 come here. They said they would be taking me out for dinner and things

Page 247

1 like that. So as a result, I suffered a breakdown, literally speaking,

2 and I felt very bad, psychologically. So my status had nothing to do

3 with the job that I was performing, because anyone could have done it.

4 Of course, there were some painful moments, especially during funerals

5 and meetings with the bereaved families, but that's it.

6 Q. Thank you. Thank you for your perspective on the interview. Of

7 course, the transcript will ultimately speak for itself, in terms of what

8 was said during the course of the meeting.

9 I'd like to move to the final area, which won't be lengthy.

10 You indicated during direct examination with Mr. Seselj that your

11 position is that you will not testify on behalf of the Prosecution and

12 you will not testify on behalf of the Chamber; is that correct?

13 A. I always maintained that I want to testify as a witness for the

14 defence of Dr. Vojislav Seselj. That's what I have always been saying.

15 Why would I appear as a witness in a different context? I don't

16 understand.

17 Q. Is it fair, then, to say that you are a supporter of Mr. Seselj

18 and, in essence, have become a part of his team?

19 A. I absolutely am a supporter of Dr. Vojislav Seselj. I have known

20 him for a long time. I don't know why I would testify against him. I

21 thought that I was summoned here, but nobody ever asked me a question

22 which comes out necessarily, why I would come here, because my name

23 appeared in some of his books. But weren't those books published after

24 the protective measures had been lifted, as far as I was concerned?

25 Therefore, I don't see any reason for me to testify against

Page 248

1 Dr. Vojislav Seselj. I am honoured to be mentioned in his books.

2 Q. My point, sir, is that you are a supporter of Mr. Seselj, and I

3 suggest to you that you don't want to see anything bad happen to him in

4 this trial. Is that correct?

5 A. Absolutely, yes, that's correct. There are certain charges

6 brought here that are absolutely baseless and have nothing to do with the

7 events that took place. And I'm not the only one who thinks this. The

8 majority of the Serbian people share this opinion. Mr. Seselj is not

9 defending himself so much as he's defending the Serbian people and

10 everything that has been happening with it.

11 Q. In relation to the specific charge before this Chamber, namely,

12 one of contempt of the Tribunal, I have no further questions. Thank you.

13 JUDGE KWON: Thank you, Mr. MacFarlane.

14 You tendered that transcript into evidence? That's already in

15 evidence?

16 MR. MacFARLANE: We have not.

17 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] He forgot to tender it.

18 MR. MacFARLANE: It was not formally tendered. I would seek to

19 tender it.

20 JUDGE KWON: Do you have any objection, Mr. Seselj?

21 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] No.

22 I have only two short supplementary questions. May I begin?

23 JUDGE KWON: Not yet, Mr. Seselj.

24 Shall we give the number for that transcript?

25 Microphone.

Page 249

1 THE REGISTRAR: This will be Exhibit P74, Your Honours.

2 JUDGE KWON: Should it be under seal or not?

3 MR. MacFARLANE: I would submit it should be under seal.

4 JUDGE KWON: I wonder why. That was -- the reason why it was

5 tendered confidentially at the time was because the witness received the

6 kind of protective measures at the time. But once it has been lifted, we

7 can deal with it openly.

8 MR. MacFARLANE: If the Chamber is satisfied on that, then that's

9 satisfactory from my standpoint.

10 JUDGE KWON: I consult my colleagues.

11 [Trial Chamber confers]

12 THE INTERPRETER: Prosecution microphone off, please.

13 JUDGE KWON: We'll admit it publicly.

14 Yes, Mr. Seselj, do you have anything to re-examine?

15 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I have only two brief questions

16 concerning, Mr. Drazilovic, your response to the last question asked by

17 Mr. MacFarlane.

18 Re-examination by Mr. Seselj:

19 MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]

20 Q. Do you recall that in March 2008, a decision by the

21 Trial Chamber III was taken to lift the protective measures in your case?

22 A. Yes, I do.

23 Q. Did you receive a document to that effect?

24 A. Probably.

25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Judges, since this was a

Page 250

1 confidential document, I'm not going to quote anything from it, with the

2 exception of one single legal principle. Therefore, fear not.

3 And I would kindly ask the Registry to hand over to

4 Dr. Drazilovic a document dated 3rd of March, 2008, in Serbian. The

5 original is in French. And also members of the Trial Chamber and the

6 Prosecution can have a copy each.

7 I'm only going to ask Mr. Drazilovic to look at page 3 and to

8 read paragraph 1, and it doesn't contain any confidential information.

9 It only deals with a legal rule applied by the Trial Chamber III.

10 Can you please hand this paper to Mr. Drazilovic in the Serbian

11 language. I hope that you have given copies in French or English to

12 members of the Trial Chamber.

13 JUDGE KWON: I don't see the point of putting this document,

14 which is a court order, to the witness. You can put your question

15 directly to the witness without having to show this document.

16 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well, I can do that.

17 MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]

18 Q. I'm going to read only the first paragraph on page 3 of this

19 document, which reads:

20 "Given that although the protective measures are always

21 introduced in order to achieve an equilibrium between the protection of a

22 witness and the rights of the accused, each witness may eventually decide

23 for himself whether he or she will testify before the Trial Chamber

24 without protective measures. Therefore, the pseudonym --"

25 JUDGE KWON: Now I was able to read the passage, and I'm certain

Page 251

1 my colleagues will agree with me, but it's not for the witness to answer

2 this question. It is for the Chamber. The witness is not a legal

3 expert, and he is not in the position to deal with whether or not

4 protective measures should be allowed or not.

5 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Kwon, my intention was not to

6 ask the witness about this. However, you are attacking me even before

7 you heard what my question for the witness was.

8 JUDGE KWON: Very well. What is your question, Mr. Seselj? Put

9 your question to the witness.

10 MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]

11 Q. Mr. Drazilovic, do you recall this document?

12 A. Well, yes.

13 Q. Do you recall that this passage was contained in this document to

14 the effect that each witness can eventually decide for himself whether to

15 testify before the Trial Chamber without protective measures?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. And at that time, the protective measures that had been applied

18 to you were lifted?

19 A. Yes, that's correct.

20 Q. At that moment in time, was it clear to you, and if this was the

21 position of the Trial Chamber, that I can use it and apply it in every

22 other case of every other witness who wants to have protective measures

23 lifted?

24 A. Yes.

25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I have another document. I

Page 252

1 provided copies for the Trial Chamber and for the Prosecution as well,

2 and I think that the witness can be shown this as well. These are

3 delivery notes from the printing plant.

4 Do I have to explain to you again why I am raising this or can I

5 proceed with my question?

6 MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation].

7 Q. Mr. Drazilovic, I would kindly ask you -- it's only two pages.

8 These are photocopies of three delivery notes, three delivery notes; is

9 that right? You are versed in publishing?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. Please do not mention the title of the book, because if you do

12 so, there is a risk of us moving to a private session and for the

13 transcript to be redacted. Therefore, do not ever mention the title of

14 the book. Just give me a yes-or-no answer.

15 Is this the book that is the subject of these proceedings? Just

16 don't say the title of the book.

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. And the title is correct?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. The people from Registry who speak Serbian can verify this for

21 the Trial Chamber.

22 MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]

23 Q. Do you see the number of the delivery note here?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. Do you see the date? It says here "Zrenjanin" and what is the

Page 253

1 date?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. Tell me the date.

4 A. 10th of September, 2008.

5 Q. Do you see the name of the printing plant in the heading?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. Is it the Dragic Printing Plant from Zrenjanin?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. Please take a look at the second delivery note and tell me the

10 date.

11 A. 11th of September, 2008.

12 Q. And the third one, the date?

13 A. The 12th of September, 2008.

14 Q. How many books were delivered to the Serbian --

15 THE INTERPRETER: Could the speakers please pause between

16 questions and answers.

17 JUDGE KWON: The interpreters were not able to catch up to the

18 speed the both of you are speaking. Please put a pause between the

19 question and answer.

20 I take it there should be an English translation of -- English

21 version of this proces-verbal.

22 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] There is no English translation,

23 whatsoever, because, Mr. Kwon, the Registry did not allow me to proof the

24 witness. They did not want to pay for the trip of my legal adviser and

25 case manager. I'm calling 10 witnesses today without any preparation or

Page 254

1 proofing whatsoever. I received this by fax today. You can see the

2 date, the 7th of June. I had no possibility to prepare my witnesses.

3 I'm intentionally being put into the position of a wandering goose in the

4 fog.

5 May I continue?

6 JUDGE KWON: So what is your question in relation to this

7 document?

8 MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]

9 Q. Mr. Drazilovic, on the third day, on the 12th of September, how

10 many books were delivered?

11 A. 3.000 -- 3.120.

12 (redacted)

13 (redacted)

14 (redacted)

15 Q. Do we have proof here that protective measures in your case were

16 lifted on the 3rd of March, 2008?

17 A. Yes. That is to say, half a year had elapsed by then.

18 Q. Half a year later, the book was published containing the

19 statements that you gave to me; right?

20 A. Yes, that's right.

21 Q. Why, then, are they bringing charges against me because I

22 published your statements six months after measures of confidentiality

23 were lifted in your case?

24 You see, Judges, what lack of seriousness there is on the part of

25 Mr. MacFarlane in discharging his duties.

Page 255

1 JUDGE KWON: It's not for the witness to answer that question.

2 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] This is now a question for the

3 Trial Chamber. This is the very point of it. Now, this is me scoring a

4 point.

5 JUDGE KWON: Why did you not raise this in your

6 examination-in-chief, how this issue arose in the context of the

7 cross-examination?

8 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] This is derived from

9 Mr. MacFarlane's last question. And in response to that, the witness,

10 himself, said that his statements given to my associates were published

11 six months after his protective measures had been lifted. Find that in

12 the transcript. The witness, himself, said that.

13 JUDGE KWON: Mr. MacFarlane, I didn't recognise you rose at the

14 time. Yes.

15 MR. MacFARLANE: Thank you.

16 With a view, hopefully, to being helpful to the Chamber, and for

17 the record, the first document, which is the order that the accused made

18 reference to, dated the 3rd of March, 2008, is already before the Chamber

19 as Exhibit 31, just to assist on that point.

20 And with respect to the broader question that the accused has

21 raised of lifting and whether the protective measures were in existence,

22 that will be the subject of submissions at the end of the trial and will

23 involve a comparison of the extent to which the order rescinded or varied

24 the original order.

25 Thank you.

Page 256

1 [Trial Chamber confers]

2 JUDGE KWON: Thank you, Mr. MacFarlane.

3 Do you have anything further to ask the witness for your redirect

4 examination, Mr. Seselj?

5 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Kwon, since the Prosecutor did

6 not ask for his 65 ter document to be admitted into evidence, I am

7 tendering the decision of the Trial Chamber of the 3rd of March, 2008,

8 that contains the underlying legal principle that each and every witness

9 can decide for himself whether he is going to testify under protective

10 measures or not.

11 JUDGE KWON: That is already in the evidence, so you don't need

12 to tender it again. That's the --

13 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] When was this admitted? When was

14 this admitted, Mr. Kwon? I don't remember that. Was that in that big

15 package that the Prosecutor brought in on the first day of the trial?

16 JUDGE KWON: I think this was the part of the Prosecution's

17 Bar Table motion, which we granted, and there is no issue. I don't think

18 the Prosecution is challenging that at the time of this -- at the time of

19 this delivery, the --

20 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Just in case, if, perchance, you

21 had not admitted this into evidence.

22 JUDGE KWON: Then have you concluded your re-examination,

23 Mr. Seselj?

24 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Wait and let me tender something

25 else, and then I will be done.

Page 257

1 I tender these three delivery notes of the printing press to the

2 Serb Radical Party that show that a total of 10.000 copies was printed of

3 the book in question, and that these copies were being delivered over the

4 course of three days in succession, and that this is irrefutable proof of

5 the book being published in (redacted) 2008, which had not been contested

6 earlier on, either. From the very beginning, we have all known that the

7 book was published in (redacted) 2008.

8 JUDGE KWON: Do you have any observation, Mr. MacFarlane?

9 MR. MacFARLANE: I hadn't seen the document. It's in Serbian,

10 and not in English. It seems to me it's common ground the publication

11 took place in (redacted) of 2008, so I --

12 JUDGE KWON: There is no challenge as to the date of the

13 publication?

14 MR. MacFARLANE: No. It's set out in our pre-trial brief. I

15 believe the phrase that we used was "early in (redacted), perhaps

16 somewhere around the 1st of (redacted)," so that appears to be common

17 ground.

18 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

19 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, this document supports the

20 pre-trial --

21 [Trial Chamber confers]

22 [Trial Chamber and Legal Officer confer]

23 JUDGE KWON: Given that we do not have the English translation of

24 these delivery notes, we'll mark them for identification.

25 THE REGISTRAR: This would be Exhibit D4, MFI'd, Your Honours.

Page 258

1 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Seselj.

2 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.

3 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I've already told you that I have

4 completed my cross-examination.

5 I just wanted to tell you that I have officially asked the

6 Registry to pay the travel expenses for my legal adviser, Dejan Mirovic,

7 and Nemanja Sarovic, my case manager, so they could come a few days

8 before the trial, come to The Hague, and help me prepare Defence

9 witnesses and proof them. In prison, they set a particular office for

10 those purposes. However, I never received an official answer from the

11 Registry, why they did not accept that, although I spoke to quite a few

12 representatives of the Registry. That is why I was not in a position to

13 proof the witnesses, but you see how successful I am even without

14 proofing and preparation.

15 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.

16 Mr. Drazilovic, that concludes your evidence. So on behalf of

17 the Chamber, I thank you for your coming to The Hague to give it. Now

18 you are free to go.

19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] May I ask you something, Judge?

20 JUDGE KWON: On an exceptional basis, yes, Mr. Drazilovic.

21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Would you please allow me to

22 exchange greetings with Mr. Seselj?

23 [Trial Chamber confers]

24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I kindly ask you to allow me that.

25 [Trial Chamber confers]

Page 259

1 JUDGE KWON: It is not for us - it is for the security people to

2 decide - but I would say no. You can say something briefly now in open

3 session. Otherwise, we are not in the position to allow you to approach

4 the accused -- the witness -- the accused and say something. On an

5 exceptional basis, we allow you to say something to the accused.

6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I have nothing to say to him,

7 actually. I have nothing to say to him. I would just like to shake

8 hands with him, because I was hoping that I would be able to do that.

9 After all, I haven't seen him in eight years, except on TV screens. It

10 would really mean a great deal to me.

11 JUDGE KWON: I don't see any problem. Yes, please go on.

12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] May I? Thank you.

13 Thank you, Judge.

14 JUDGE KWON: Mr. MacFarlane.

15 MR. MacFARLANE: Thank you.

16 There is a small procedural issue that I'd like to raise --

17 JUDGE KWON: You may be excused. You may be excused. Thank you.

18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.

19 [The witness withdrew]

20 MR. MacFARLANE: I've just been -- I've just been advised that

21 the issue that I wish to raise has been taken care of, so we don't need

22 to deal with it. Thank you.

23 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

24 JUDGE KWON: We'll have a break for 20 minutes.

25 --- Recess taken at 3.45 p.m.

Page 262

1 [The witness entered court]

2 JUDGE KWON: Good afternoon, sir.

3 If you could take the solemn declaration, please.

4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will

5 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

6 WITNESS: DS-2

7 [Witness answered through interpreter]

8 JUDGE KWON: Following the decision made in another Chamber, you

9 will be receiving the protective measures, which is: You will be called

10 by a pseudonym, which is DS-2, and your face and voice cannot be heard

11 outside the courtroom. Do you understand that?

12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I do, but I refuse to testify

13 under protective measures.

14 JUDGE KWON: To cut it short, this Chamber has nothing to do with

15 that order, because we cannot but follow the decision made in another

16 case. So in order to lift the confidentiality, Mr. Seselj or

17 Mr. Prosecutor should apply to that Chamber to that effect. So we have

18 no say to that protective measures.

19 Do you understand, Mr. Witness?

20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I understand, Your Honour.

21 But as I've already said, all of this was topsy-turvy. It was a very

22 long trip, too. It was very hard for me. I came as a witness for the

23 defence of Mr. Seselj.

24 Am I speaking too fast? Can you follow what I'm saying?

25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I have an objection, Mr. Kwon.

Page 263

1 I called all my witnesses as witnesses that would testify in

2 public.

3 Secondly, I now have an opportunity to refer to the position of

4 Trial Chamber III; namely, that every witness can decide for himself

5 whether he is going to testify before the Chamber without protective

6 measures. This witness decided to testify without protective measures,

7 and you don't have the right to impose such measures on him.

8 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. MacFarlane.

9 MR. MacFARLANE: I think and submit that the point that we're at

10 right now and the issue is perhaps a small illustration of one of the big

11 issues in this case, and that is Mr. Seselj's perception that, in some

12 fashion, a witness makes decisions on whether the person is a protected

13 witness, whether it can change in a variety of circumstances. The Jovic

14 decision from the Appeals Chamber is very clear on that, that it's only

15 lifted on order of the originating Chamber.

16 So when the accused indicated he had a number of witnesses, I

17 wondered whether he would be applying. And the evidence before you on

18 the Bar Table motion indicates previous cases in which, in fact,

19 Mr. Seselj did apply for variations or rescinding of protective measures,

20 so he knows very clearly what has to be done, and I'm puzzled on why he

21 didn't take steps and why he's asserting this position. But it arises

22 from a fundamental understanding of who controls the process. The

23 Chamber does, and for good reason, because that's the protection to a

24 witness to ensure that they're not intimidating to attempt to retract or

25 recant on the protective measures.

Page 264

1 Thank you.

2 JUDGE KWON: I take it by now, Mr. Seselj, you understand the

3 Rules. As indicated by Mr. MacFarlane, until such time as the original

4 Trial Chamber varies or rescinds the original protective measures,

5 there's no way other than we just follow the existing protective

6 measures.

7 Let's not waste time anymore. It's now for you to examine the

8 witness.

9 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Kwon, I have to say this to

10 you: I have no need to address Trial Chamber III to have protective

11 measures lifted, because I have the position of Trial Chamber III,

12 stating, ultimately, that each and every witness can decide himself

13 whether he's going to testify before the Chamber without protective

14 measures. All of my 10 Defence witnesses decided independently to

15 testify without protective measures. You imposed protective measures on

16 one of them yesterday, and I hope that you will not be able to impose

17 protective measures on anyone else.

18 JUDGE KWON: I said not to waste time. Start your examination,

19 Mr. Seselj.

20 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, I won't before a decision is

21 made whether the witness is going to testify or not. He told you that he

22 would not testify under protective measures. You cannot behave as if he

23 had never presented any position whatsoever. The witness is not a mere

24 object in this courtroom, he's not just a thing. He is a participant in

25 these proceedings, just like all the rest of us.

Page 265

1 JUDGE MORRISON: Exactly. And like all the rest of us, we're

2 subject to the Rules, Mr. Seselj. And the Rules are that this Chamber

3 sitting at the moment does not have the power, of its own motion, to

4 rescind the protective measures. I think you understand that very well.

5 It's not a question of imposing protective measures on the witness;

6 they're there. And there's a methodology by which they can be removed,

7 but that process has not gone through. It seems to me it's a matter

8 entirely for you now, whether you want to carry on with the protective

9 measures being in place or whether you don't. That seems to be the

10 choice you have.

11 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] According to the decision of

12 Trial Chamber III that decided on protective measures, the witness,

13 himself, is entitled to lift his own protective measures. The witness is

14 entitled to lift these measures himself.

15 When I examined the first two witnesses, their point was that the

16 statements given to me were public, and they agreed to have those

17 statements published in my book. And now a witness appeared here again.

18 I helped you yesterday with having the first witness waver and

19 ultimately decide to testify under protective measures. Today, I'm not

20 going to help you. If you are trying to get this witness to agree to

21 testify with protective measures, then you go ahead and try to do that.

22 I am not going to start my examination before the witness, himself, gives

23 up on his own position that he will not testify under protective

24 measures. He said that clearly.

25 JUDGE KWON: If you are applying to this Chamber to lift the

Page 266

1 protective measures, we --

2 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] No, I'm not asking you for

3 anything, except to respect the will of this witness. This witness wants

4 to testify in public, and he is resolute in his intention to testify in

5 public only. The question here now is whether you are going to respect

6 his decision and his will, which is based on the aforementioned decision

7 of Trial Chamber III. So he does have legal grounds of insisting for --

8 for insisting on his own position. If the Trial Chamber said that

9 ultimately each and every witness can decide for himself, then he,

10 himself, decides. It is not for you to decide. It is for him to decide.

11 JUDGE KWON: We cannot disregard or ignore the existing

12 protective measures. It is for you to decide whether or not to continue

13 with your examination of this witness. You can withdraw this witness.

14 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] No, I'm not going to give up. I

15 haven't even started my examination because you haven't created

16 conditions for me to do that.

17 When the witness introduced himself to you, signed the pseudonym

18 sheet, he told you that he refused to testify under protective measures.

19 This is still a pending problem. You haven't solved it. Once you solve

20 this problem, I will start my examination.

21 JUDGE KWON: The Chamber -- in my opinion, the Chamber has made

22 its position very clear. I would like you to start your examination,

23 Mr. Seselj.

24 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] How could I do that, because the

25 witness said that he would not answer the questions under protective

Page 267

1 measures. How shall I start? Put a question to him and get silence from

2 him, is that what you want?

3 JUDGE KWON: Start your examination, Mr. Seselj. Ask your

4 questions.

5 Examination by Mr. Seselj:

6 MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]

7 Q. Sir, do you still abide by your position, that you don't want to

8 answer any questions until the protective measures are lifted?

9 A. Yes, and I stand by that position.

10 And may I address the Trial Chamber, please?

11 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. MacFarlane.

12 JUDGE MORRISON: Mr. MacFarlane, I think you wanted to --

13 MR. MacFARLANE: Again, more with a view to assisting than

14 anything else, two points.

15 The first is that you have before you, in Exhibit 33, a motion

16 brought by the accused for a review of protective measures, so that the

17 process is well known, well understood by the accused. And I think the

18 Chamber's comments might reflect that point.

19 The second point is: I don't know the identity of the witness

20 yet, I don't know the witness's name, but I'm wondering if it would be

21 appropriate, in closed session, to determine the name, because there was,

22 if I recall correctly, one witness who was before Trial Chamber III who

23 sought to have the protective measures rescinded, and Trial Chamber III

24 didn't do that, so -- but I don't know if this is the witness.

25 So I put that forward as a potential. If I'm wrong, then that

Page 268

1 route goes nowhere. If my recollection is correct, then that might be a

2 reflection of Trial Chamber III's view of the matter. But I simply put

3 that forward as a potential option here.

4 THE INTERPRETER: Could the Prosecutor switch off his mike,

5 please.

6 [Trial Chamber confers]

7 JUDGE KWON: The Chamber explained, both to the accused and to

8 the witness, about the Rule. If both of them do not accept the Rules of

9 the Tribunal, I don't think there's a point of keeping the witness

10 anymore.

11 Mr. Witness, are you still minded not to give evidence under the

12 protective measures?

13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, if I may address you

14 briefly. Do you allow this?

15 JUDGE KWON: Yes.

16 (redacted)

17 (redacted)

18 (redacted)

19 (redacted)

20 (redacted)

21 (redacted)

22 (redacted)

23 (redacted)

24 (redacted)

25 The Trial Chamber in the Vojislav Seselj case received a document

Page 269

1 confirming that I had never asked for any protective measures to be

2 introduced, because I never asked for any, and I think that the

3 Trial Chamber is fully aware of that. Therefore, I believe that this is

4 sufficient grounds for me to testify in public, that nobody is

5 threatening me or exposing me to any danger, and I would kindly ask the

6 Trial Chamber to take into consideration my view that I am only willing

7 to testify without protective measures.

8 JUDGE KWON: I now understand your position, Mr. Witness.

9 The point is this: You are called as a Defence witness, called

10 by -- Defence witness, i.e., Mr. Seselj's witness. It is Mr. Seselj that

11 wanted you to testify before the Tribunal. In order for you to testify

12 in public, Mr. Seselj should have applied to the original Trial Chamber,

13 i.e., Trial Chamber III, to rescind the protective measures given by the

14 Chamber previously. Otherwise, we cannot hear you in public session.

15 That's the Rule. So now it is for you to testify with the protective

16 measures. Otherwise, we cannot proceed.

17 Did I make myself understood to you?

18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honours. But as I said,

19 unfortunately, I think that maybe we can reach a compromise, if I may say

20 so, in the sense that Mr. Seselj might, in the meantime, apply for the

21 lifting of the measures. And although I'm poorly and my health is not

22 good, if that happens, I am willing to come back and testify again.

23 JUDGE KWON: Or as a way of compromise you referred to, you can

24 give testimony with protective measures, and after Mr. Seselj succeeded

25 in getting that decision of rescission of protective measures, we can

Page 270

1 release or lift the confidentiality of all the transcript and video-tape

2 later on.

3 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Kwon --

4 JUDGE KWON: I'm asking the witness.

5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I understood what you said,

6 but please understand my position as well.

7 I experienced horrible things during my testimony. I was even

8 threatened with the accusations of the contempt of court. So due to

9 that, quite simply, I do not trust the Trial Chamber any longer, that

10 they would do as you suggested and that they would take the decision as

11 requested. Therefore, in other words, if I can only appear here as a

12 witness and testify in public.

13 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Seselj.

14 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I wanted to raise an objection,

15 Mr. Kwon, that you, as the Presiding Judge, cannot create an agreement

16 with the witness that imposes a certain obligation upon me. You want to

17 reach an agreement with the witness that will force me to apply to

18 Trial Chamber III to file a request for lifting the measures.

19 I have here a crystal-clear position taken by Trial Chamber III

20 to the effect that ultimately every witness may testify before the

21 Trial Chamber without protective measures. I'm not going to risk that

22 Trial Chamber III might change this. They may reconsider their principal

23 position, and they may rescind it. And I published my book on the basis

24 of this position.

25 JUDGE KWON: The Chamber will not get into a legal debate as to

Page 271

1 the Rules. We made it clear as to the meaning of the Rule.

2 So I will finally ask the witness and Mr. Seselj whether the

3 witness and the accused are minded to proceed with evidence with

4 protective measures.

5 Mr. Witness?

6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, I refuse to testify with

7 protective measures.

8 [Trial Chamber confers]

9 JUDGE KWON: While we find it to be very unfortunate, the Chamber

10 cannot find another way than allowing the witness to be excused.

11 So, Mr. Witness, now you are free to go. Could you wait a minute

12 until we draw the curtain.

13 [The witness withdrew]

14 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

15 JUDGE KWON: Do we need to have a break in order to proceed with

16 the next witness?

17 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

18 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. MacFarlane.

19 MR. MacFARLANE: No, I was just rising --

20 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.

21 JUDGE KWON: We'll break for five minutes.

22 --- Break taken at 4.42 p.m.

23 --- On resuming at 4.50 p.m.

24 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Seselj, is your next witness Mr. Jovic?

25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, I call Mr. Nenad Jovic as my

Page 273

1 Examination by Mr. Seselj:

2 MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]

3 Q. Mr. Jovic, after you have had your initial contacts with

4 The Hague Tribunal, who was the first to mention the protective measures

5 for your testimony?

6 A. I knew nothing about any protective measures. I was only asked

7 to produce my passport to get a visa and that I would appear here as a

8 protected witness.

9 Q. In the case against me?

10 A. Yes, in the case against you. But I refused that, I didn't agree

11 to do that. No, I won't do it.

12 Q. So can I take it, then, that you were declared a protected

13 witness against your will?

14 A. Yes, totally against my will, because I know everybody, I can

15 recognise their voices, I know what they did.

16 JUDGE KWON: If both of you put a pause between the question and

17 answer, since you are speaking the same language.

18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Very well. We'll do our best.

19 MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation].

20 Q. Do you recall who was it that mentioned your name for the first

21 time in public as a protected witness in the case against me?

22 A. Yes, I do. That was Natasa Kandic, and I have this CD here with

23 me with a press conference that was actually a show broadcast on TV Fox

24 on the 28th of November. And on the 7th December, I actually held this

25 press conference, and I have a CD here which shows who it was who

Page 274

1 mentioned that for the first time.

2 Q. Did I schedule a preparatory interview with you before your

3 appearance?

4 A. For this appearance, yes.

5 Q. But this conversation never happened?

6 A. No.

7 Q. Because I couldn't bring my legal adviser or a case manager?

8 A. It wasn't explained to me why you couldn't do this.

9 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Judges, is it possible for the

10 Registry to take this CD, to make copies for the Prosecution, for myself,

11 and possibly for the Trial Chamber in order for it to be admitted into

12 evidence, because I have never seen this CD before. So the Registry may

13 look into it and make a copy?

14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I have both the CD

15 and the transcript, and I can give all that to you.

16 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Because I had no contacts with

17 Mr. Jovic prior to these proceedings, can we resolve this issue in this

18 manner? I would like to continue my examination-in-chief while the

19 Registry is making the copies of the CD and the transcript.

20 JUDGE KWON: Shall we put the transcript on the ELMO so that the

21 Amicus, as well as the Chamber, can take a look.

22 Is it in B/C/S?

23 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] No, it's not in B/C/S. It is in

24 the Serbian language.

25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] May I say something else,

Page 275

1 Your Honours?

2 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Jovic.

3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I also took two newspapers that

4 came out on the 8th of December, after the conference that was held on

5 the 7th of December. So all of Serbia knew what I had said, how I was

6 mistreated and all the things that were done to me, also that I said that

7 I didn't want to be a Prosecution witness. It was Mr. Antonetti who

8 called me as a Chamber witness, and that is how I testified via

9 videolink.

10 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I hope this is not considered to be

11 my time. I would not discuss this with Mr. Jovic, that is to say, what

12 the Prosecution did with him beforehand, so that we do not go too far

13 from the topic of these proceedings.

14 I agree with what you said, that I should focus only on

15 disclosing the identity of protected witnesses, not anything else, so

16 I think it would be better if somebody from the Registry made copies of

17 the material we have just received, rather than people looking at the

18 version on the ELMO and trying to find their way.

19 Do you agree with that?

20 JUDGE KWON: We'll deal with this issue of admitting this CD, as

21 well as the transcript, at the end of this session. In the meantime, let

22 us proceed.

23 MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]

24 Q. You mentioned that Natasa Kandic - that is the last thing you

25 said in response to my question - was the first person who spoke on Fox

Page 276

1 TV in November 2007 and presented your name and surname as a protected

2 witness in my trial?

3 A. That's what I said, quite precisely. You will see what

4 Nenad Jovic from Mali Zvornik will tell you when he comes in to court.

5 Q. As a protected witness?

6 A. Something like that.

7 Q. Was that on the 28th or the 29th of November?

8 A. It's possible that it was the 29th. I'm not very good with

9 dates.

10 Q. Who is Natasa Kandic?

11 A. I don't know. I asked that question several times. Last time,

12 Judge Antonetti -- well, if she's an employee of the Court, she should be

13 punished, and if she's not, then the punishment should be double.

14 Q. We have to wait for the interpreters a bit.

15 A. Yeah, I understand that.

16 Q. Have you ever heard of The Hague Tribunal initiating proceedings

17 against The Hague Tribunal because she disclosed your name as a protected

18 witness in these proceedings?

19 A. I never heard of that. I proposed that to the Court because I do

20 not have the financial capability to do that.

21 Q. Before Natasa Kandic said that, did anyone know that you were

22 planned to be a Prosecution witness in these proceedings?

23 A. No one knew. I didn't know either. They made me an offer. I

24 refused, and I left these papers unsigned. I left. I said, I don't

25 need -- I mean, I don't want to repeat all of this. We're wasting time.

Page 277

1 I said, I don't need protective measures. If necessary, I'm going to

2 face the Court and testify.

3 Q. And when you heard that Natasa Kandic mentions your name

4 publicly, your name as a protected witness in the proceedings against me,

5 what did you do then?

6 A. Then I told all my friends about this. I told them my code-name,

7 my pseudonym, VS-83, I think. That's what I read. And I told everybody

8 about that, and I said that that was a futile thing for me. And I did

9 not expecting anything. I went to Republika Srpska and never had any

10 problems.

11 Q. Where did you hold this press conference after Natasa Kandic's TV

12 show?

13 A. In the Serb Radical Party. I would have organised it elsewhere

14 if it was somebody else's leader that was concerned. However, since it

15 was about you, then I addressed the Serb Radical Party.

16 Q. If I understand you correctly, when you heard Natasa Kandic

17 mention your name as a protected witness in the proceedings against me,

18 then you addressed the Serb Radical Party and you asked that they

19 organise a press conference for you. Right?

20 A. Yes. I called and I asked to speak to some lawyer, and a man

21 answered the phone and told me that I should come there and that we would

22 reach an agreement.

23 Q. Did you give any interviews to the press?

24 A. Well, yes, to "Pravda." We have "Pravda" here. There were

25 several newspaper houses present there, if I can put it that way,

Page 278

1 "Novosti," "Kurir," "Blic," all of these dailies published that, and

2 people from Sweden even said they saw me on TV.

3 Q. Can you give these newspapers to the representatives of the

4 Registry so that they can provide copies of this interview with you for

5 all of us?

6 A. That's why I brought all of this.

7 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Judges, are you going to order

8 someone from the Registry to do that for us, to make copies of these

9 newspapers so that we can see this? This is a bit unusual, but also it

10 is not the usual thing to bring witnesses in without any kind of

11 proofing. Had Mr. Jovic given this to me, I would have made copies.

12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] May I say something?

13 On every newspaper, it says "Page 20." That means that it's

14 there. Then on this other one, it says, in pen, "Page 5," so that's the

15 page you should look for so that you don't have to go through the whole

16 newspaper.

17 MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]

18 Q. Mr. Jovic, can you show us the longest interviews from these

19 newspapers for the cameras, the longest interview that was published?

20 A. It was "Pravda." Let me just find it now.

21 Q. Please turn it to the Trial Chamber, and then I assume that the

22 cameras are going to pick it up?

23 A. Here's what it says:

24 "I'm not going to lie against Mr. Seselj."

25 I'm showing it to the Trial Chamber now.

Page 279

1 Q. What was the date of that "Pravda"?

2 A. The 8th, in the morning. I'll have a look now. It should be the

3 8th of December, because the press conference was on the 7th of December.

4 Q. And the year is ...?

5 A. 2007.

6 Q. 2007. So was that eight or nine days after Natasa Kandic

7 appeared on television?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. Very well.

10 A. Can I put this down now?

11 Q. Yes, you can put it down. Thank you.

12 After these interviews for the newspapers - I see that the

13 Trial Chamber is not reacting to my proposal, that the Registry take this

14 over - did you take part in some kind of public panel discussions?

15 A. Of course I did, before and after that. I'm a supporter of the

16 Serb Radical Party ever since the inception of the Serb Chetnik Movement.

17 I used to be a member, too, but we all know why I was excluded, because

18 of disobedience, because I stayed in Tenja without the group. But, yes,

19 I did take part in all the public panel discussions that were organised

20 on every anniversary of your stay here in The Hague in detention.

21 Q. Did you speak at these public gatherings?

22 A. Yes, at the trade union's hall. It was a scholarly gathering

23 called "Stop to the Tyranny of The Hague." I spoke in public. I told

24 people about what happened to me with these investigators, everything

25 that happened to me later in October last year. I was even on

Page 280

1 video-beam, because there were a lot of speakers, and then I explained

2 all of this on video-beam too.

3 Q. Do you remember when the annual assembly of the Committee for the

4 Defence of Vojislav Seselj was held in Zemun?

5 A. Yes, I remember that. I became a member then, and I'm a member

6 of that committee.

7 Q. When you say that you became a member, does that mean that you

8 signed a paper joining the committee for my defence?

9 A. I'm sorry, we are speaking so fast once again.

10 In Zemun, I signed a paper in order to become a member of the

11 Committee for Defending Vojislav Seselj, and I became a member of this

12 association, and I took part in their work.

13 Q. Does this association function as a kind of non-governmental

14 organisation?

15 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter did not hear the witness's

16 answer.

17 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well.

18 JUDGE KWON: The interpreters did not hear your answer because

19 both of you spoke so fast, overlapping.

20 But before that: Mr. MacFarlane, do you object to dealing with

21 this "Pravda" newspaper at the end of the session, after having taken a

22 look?

23 MR. MacFARLANE: I would like to take a look, but, fundamentally,

24 I have no objection.

25 JUDGE KWON: I would appreciate that the Court Deputy could make

Page 281

1 a photocopy of it and hand it over to the Amicus Prosecutor.

2 Could you repeat the last question? I will read it for you:

3 "Does this association function as a kind of non-governmental

4 organisation?"

5 What was your answer to that question, Mr. Jovic?

6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. Yes, my answer was, Yes.

7 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.

8 MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]

9 Q. Do you know? However, if you do know, don't say the title of the

10 book out loud. Do you know why these contempt proceedings are underway,

11 because of which book of mine? Just say yes or no.

12 A. No.

13 Q. Do you know -- you don't know the title of the book?

14 A. No, no, no.

15 Q. And do you know that some of the texts in this book that are part

16 of the charges are your statements given to my associates?

17 A. Yes, and I'm pleased, because I gave these statements with that

18 intention, allowing you to use all my statements in the electronic media,

19 in a court of law, anywhere. Heaven forbid that you be in this position

20 again. So the media, internet, court, everywhere. You can use all the

21 statements that I gave. I signed them, and also they were stamped in

22 court.

23 Q. Let us be very specific on part of your very exhaustive answer.

24 Does that mean that you gave your consent that I publish your

25 statements in my book?

Page 282

1 A. Precisely. You didn't have to ask me anymore. I gave my

2 consent.

3 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I have completed the direct

4 examination.

5 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. MacFarlane.

6 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreters cannot hear the witness.

7 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Jovic, did you say something?

8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. I said that I have a problem

9 with my veins. It's going to be hard for me to turn this way and look at

10 you, so please don't understand this by me refusing to look at you.

11 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Perhaps it would be a good thing if

12 Mr. MacFarlane was to be relocated somewhere else within this courtroom.

13 He is too close to witnesses, anyway, and perhaps that was done on

14 purpose. You see, witnesses are half a kilometre away from me, and

15 Mr. MacFarlane is only half a metre away or so.

16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Physically, I cannot handle this.

17 I cannot look this way and that way and then this way and then that way

18 again.

19 JUDGE MORRISON: Witness, nobody's going to take it as any form

20 of rudeness, that you don't look at the person who is asking you

21 questions. Indeed, because we are the people who have to determine what

22 you say, it might be better that you simply look at us anyway.

23 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. MacFarlane.

24 MR. MacFARLANE: Thank you, Your Honours.

25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Very well, very well.

Page 283

1 Cross-examination by Mr. MacFarlane:

2 Q. I'd like to start off, sir, by asking you to take a look at a

3 document that's been tendered in these proceedings and marked as an

4 exhibit as 55Q.

5 And I'm not sure where the Court Usher is at the moment.

6 Perhaps -- we have a 55Q in both English and in Serbian.

7 JUDGE KWON: Shall we put the English on the ELMO and give the

8 Serbian version --

9 MR. MacFARLANE: To the witness.

10 JUDGE KWON: -- to the witness --

11 MR. MacFARLANE: Yes.

12 JUDGE KWON: -- after having shown it to the accused?

13 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, me too, I think. I should be

14 receiving a copy as well.

15 MR. MacFARLANE: That has already been provided to the accused in

16 the usual way and was included in the Bar Table motion.

17 JUDGE KWON: It's unfortunate that e-court is not working today.

18 MR. MacFARLANE:

19 Q. Sir, I'm not asking you to read the entire statement, but,

20 rather, if you could read the first two paragraphs. And I have some

21 questions once you're done that.

22 A. From up here, you mean [indicates]? Oh, down here. Oh, I see.

23 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] While we're waiting, can the

24 Registry tell me how many minutes I used in the direct examination of

25 Mr. Jovic?

Page 284

1 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Seselj, you can ask it during the break.

2 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, I wouldn't want to do it

3 during the break because I have to be checking on Mr. MacFarlane to

4 prevent him from using more time than I have used. That is important for

5 me. If I used up only 10 minutes, then he is allowed to use only 10

6 minutes as well.

7 JUDGE KWON: It is for the Chamber to decide how long the other

8 side should cross-examine the witness, not for you.

9 MR. MacFARLANE:

10 Q. Mr. Jovic, my question is a relatively narrow one, and that is:

11 Does the information set out in this statement, in terms of your -- it

12 purports to be your name and village and other personal information.

13 Does that name you, and is it accurate?

14 A. Yes, it's correct.

15 Q. Thank you.

16 A. But the date of birth --

17 Q. What is the date of birth?

18 A. 2nd of October, 1957.

19 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Objection.

20 In the statement here, there is no date of birth.

21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Oh, there isn't. I don't even know

22 when this was given at all and to who. SUP, Mali Zvornik. "Issued by

23 SUP, Mali Zvornik." What is this?

24 JUDGE KWON: I don't follow your objection, Mr. Seselj. It is

25 the witness who has raised the issue of date of birth, not the

Page 285

1 Prosecution. You can ask it -- clarify it during your re-examination.

2 Q. Is the information contained in that paragraph, which names you,

3 purports to, and village, and ID card number and so on, is that accurate

4 and does it identify you?

5 A. Well, that is what I'm telling you, sir. It's not correct.

6 First of all, there is no Municipal Court in Mali Zvornik. I

7 live in Mali Zvornik. I live three kilometres away from the centre, two

8 and a half kilometres. We don't even have a misdemeanor judge, let alone

9 a court of law. What do you mean a court in Mali Zvornik, a municipal

10 court in Mali Zvornik? I mean, really, this is something I don't know

11 about at all. We're going to see what the rest says, but this is not

12 correct. It is in Loznica that there is a municipal court. That is

13 20 kilometres further down the Drina River. We don't have a municipal

14 court. We never had one.

15 Q. Let's move to the next paragraph, aside from the Municipal Court,

16 the paragraph that names you -- purports to name you, and the village

17 where you live, and so on. That's the paragraph I would like you to

18 focus on, and my question is: Is that accurate, and does it identify

19 you?

20 A. Yes, but there is no ID card number. It says: "Issued by

21 Mali Zvornik SUP." My ID card was issued in Belgrade, and I can show

22 you. We received them from Belgrade. They are being taken to Belgrade

23 to be certified. And it says here: "Place of issue: Belgrade." And

24 there's a stamp as well.

25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May I take a look at Mr. Jovic's ID

Page 286

1 card?

2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As far as I'm concerned, you may.

3 JUDGE KWON: Not now.

4 Let's proceed, Mr. MacFarlane.

5 MR. MacFARLANE:

6 Q. Sir, after that paragraph there is a heading called "Statement,"

7 and then it starts out:

8 "I have given several court-certified statements ...," and so on.

9 Can you take a look at that paragraph and advise whether or not

10 you provided that statement?

11 A. Yes, it is.

12 Q. Thank you. And let's just be really clear on the preceding

13 paragraph. It starts out:

14 "I, Nenad Jovic, of Radalj village, Mali Zvornik ..."

15 Does that name you?

16 A. Can you please repeat the question? I had some problems with --

17 Q. In the short paragraph which sets out your name, I suggest, I

18 just wanted to confirm that that portion that says:

19 "I, Nenad Jovic, of Radalj village, Mali Zvornik ..."

20 My question is: Does that mean you?

21 A. Yes, but my ID card number should be here. Can we look on the

22 back side to see who certified this?

23 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Judges, maybe we don't have the

24 same document. In my copy, we have the number of the ID. It's 3109

25 [as interpreted]. Now I'm perplexed. Why is he saying that there is no

Page 287

1 ID number? Do we have a different document in front of us?

2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm sorry, Mr. Seselj, I found it.

3 Yes:

4 "I, Nenad Jovic, of Radalj village, Mali Zvornik municipality, ID

5 card number 31091, issued by the Mali Zvornik SUP, hereby give

6 voluntarily the following court-certified statement."

7 So shall I keep on reading? What was your question?

8 MR. MacFARLANE:

9 Q. My question is: Does that identify you?

10 A. Yes, of course it's me.

11 Q. Thank you. Now, sir, you've described in direct examination that

12 you wish to testify in open court and that you didn't have any particular

13 concerns, but I'd like to take you back to earlier years, because my

14 suggestion to you is that you've gone through a transformation of sorts

15 for reasons that aren't clear, and so I'd like to start at the beginning.

16 And I suggest to you that you have actually given several

17 statements to the Office of the Prosecutor, starting in the year 2003,

18 perhaps as many as five or six statements; is that correct?

19 A. Yes, it is correct, but it is also correct that -- I explained

20 this at the previous trial, I went through all this. All of this was

21 based on blackmail, all of this was fabricated. Is there anyone else on

22 this world to whom I should say that Rita Pradhan kept me sitting in a

23 chair for 14 hours?

24 Q. Well, let's just take a look at that for the moment. I suggest

25 to you that you gave a statement to the OTP in July of 2003, and then had

Page 288

1 a further meeting and gave a statement in September of 2003, and then

2 returned, gave a further statement in October of 2005, and then returned

3 and gave a further statement in late October of 2006, and then returned

4 and gave a statement in June of 2007, and then returned and gave a

5 statement in July of 2007, and then returned and gave a further statement

6 in October of 2007. Is that correct?

7 A. Yes, it is correct. There are quite a few correct things. But

8 since a third country was guaranteed to me, a better life, money, hotel

9 accommodation here in Holland, the company of beautiful girls whose

10 services I can make use of at the expense of the Tribunal, I just wanted

11 to see what they were going to do with me, because my life was at stake.

12 But once I learned that all these were lies, because whatever they say is

13 a lie, and you will see this here, and after that I held this press

14 conference and I gave a statement to Dr. Vojislav Seselj's Defence team.

15 Q. Well, let's go in order here, because it's obvious, and you've

16 just agreed, that you kept going back to the OTP and were co-operating

17 with them and providing statements. So I'd like to go through in a bit

18 of detail and direct your attention to one of the first statements,

19 perhaps the first, on the 10th and 11th of July, 2003. And I suggest to

20 you that you gave a detailed 23-page statement, and included in that

21 statement is this statement: that you were willing to testify, but that

22 you're concerned about yourself and the safety of your family. Do you

23 remember that?

24 A. I remember then an APB bulletin was issued for me when I was in

25 Montenegro. Rita Pradhan said that I had to come forward immediately.

Page 289

1 So under this pressure of an APB and a potential indictment, I eventually

2 ran away. I fled the apartment where I was sleeping. I went over there

3 and said, I don't want to sign anything, and I left. Rita told me that

4 the policemen guarding the building would be instructed to arrest me and

5 take me to a jail, and then, You are going to be taken to The Hague and

6 that you are going to sing like a canary. I thought of my kid at the

7 time. And people who wanted to harm me probably lost something --

8 everything in the war; their house, their family, whatever. I don't know

9 who it was that she sent after me.

10 Q. Witness, I'd like to ask you a question. You've been referring

11 to and refreshing your memory on the basis of Exhibit 55Q. I'd like you

12 to recall on the basis of your own recollection.

13 And perhaps the Court Usher could retrieve the exhibit at this

14 point, because I would like to be very clear on your relationship with

15 the Office of the Prosecutor, in terms of the statements.

16 In connection with the first statement that I referred to, 2003,

17 for one thing, I would like you to advise on the accuracy of this: It's

18 my understanding that you voluntarily approached the Belgrade Field

19 Office and wanted to talk to the investigators in 2003. Do you recall

20 that?

21 A. Of course I remember, but I didn't do that of my own free will.

22 I received a summons, and I'm sorry that I didn't keep it. Actually, I

23 was hiding the whole affair because I didn't want to be accused of

24 co-operating with The Hague Tribunal. That's what I said last time when

25 I appeared at a trial. But no problem, we can do that another three

Page 290

1 times, if necessary, because that is the truth. If you wake me in the

2 middle of the night, I will tell you the truth. As for lies, I have to

3 learn them by heart and then I stutter when I utter them. I have been

4 having medical problems since 2003 because of them.

5 Q. There is no doubt in your mind that during the course of that

6 2003 interview and statement, that you indicated that you were willing to

7 testify, but that you were concerned about safety; isn't that true?

8 A. Nobody asked me to testify until the second or the third

9 encounter, when they came up with this thick statement already prepared

10 in advance. And they wanted me to sign this against Mr. Seselj, and they

11 told me that I was going to testify against Simatovic and others

12 afterwards. I hadn't seen Mr. Seselj for a long time. What can I tell

13 them about him? Listen, I was a policeman, and I have no idea what the

14 strategy of the party was.

15 Q. My question was not with respect to testifying against

16 Mr. Seselj, in particular, but my question was whether or not there is a

17 discussion about testifying and that you said that you were concerned

18 about safety. That's my question, and I'd like you to answer that.

19 A. Well, I'm going to answer your question.

20 This was presented to me as a kind of interview, that there would

21 be no court proceedings to follow. They asked me if I knew something,

22 given the fact that I was in the war, and then, of course, if I didn't

23 know anything, it was no problem. However, later on all of them gathered

24 together, and then they kept me for 14 or 15 hours, and they threatened

25 me with prison. That was their strategy of destroying a whole family. I

Page 291

1 had a small child at the time, and they were hiding in a forest in order

2 to save their lives, because their lives were threatened because of me.

3 Who could save me from that?

4 I'm not raising my voice to you. The two of us are just

5 conversing. I'm telling you the truth. I am telling you how it was, and

6 that's what I did the last time.

7 Q. And from what you said, the truth is you were concerned about

8 safety for you and your family?

9 A. Listen, I didn't want to talk to them about anything. If anyone

10 suspected that I was co-operating with The Hague Tribunal, they would

11 kill my family. Therefore, leave me alone. But they told me, If you try

12 to go home, the policeman -- the guard at the gate would take you to

13 prison. That was blackmail, and all these promises about third

14 countries, and money, and other promises.

15 I have a friend, and I talk to him on the phone sometimes. So

16 who's the liar here, the investigator, or is it me?

17 Q. Well, I think you've, in part, just answered that question,

18 because you indicated that if it was known that you were co-operating,

19 you may be killed, and yet for several years you were co-operating and

20 providing statements. Isn't that accurate?

21 A. I was only interrogated, but I did not co-operate. There was a

22 statement written against this man here, Mr. Seselj, and I was only

23 required to sign it and I would have been paid for it. And they told me,

24 Look at you. You walk in such old war shoes, you have no money. You

25 just need to sign this. And I didn't want any money, and I don't want

Page 292

1 any money from you either.

2 I have a child that was bullied in school. Other kids kicked him

3 because I was known to have been in the office of The Hague Tribunal.

4 Q. Thank you for your advice on that. Let's move forward a bit to

5 subsequent events. I'd like to get your comments.

6 And I would direct your attention, in particular, to an interview

7 on the 25th of October, 2005, where you discussed the fact that you are a

8 radio amateur and have a licensed radio station in your home, and that

9 you communicate with people from all over the former Yugoslavia. Do you

10 recall that event and that discussion?

11 A. Well, I don't remember, but I'm telling you I have a license, and

12 I've been a Ham Radio operator for 20 years. I have a license issued by

13 the Ministry for Telecommunications. It's my hobby, and I talk on the

14 radio with the people in Slovenia, in Mostar. We are on friendly terms.

15 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Kwon, I expected you to ask

16 Mr. MacFarlane to explain the relevance of these questions.

17 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreters didn't hear what the witness

18 said.

19 MR. MacFARLANE: The relevance will emerge very quickly.

20 JUDGE KWON: Not necessary.

21 Mr. Seselj, you interrupted the interpretation of what the

22 witness was saying, so we couldn't hear.

23 Just a second.

24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I said -- may I?

25 JUDGE KWON: Yes. We heard until that it was your hobby and you

Page 293

1 talk on the radio with people in Slovenia and Mostar:

2 "We are on friendly terms."

3 And what did you say after those words?

4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. He asked me the reason for

5 that, and I said, I may have even talked to you. I probably conducted

6 about two million conversations. I talk to people in Canada, to

7 everyone. Maybe that's why he's asking me. That's the point of my being

8 a Ham Radio operator. If you ask me this kind of question, what else can

9 I answer? This was not a question.

10 JUDGE KWON: Mr. MacFarlane, I see the clock. For the planning

11 purposes, can I know how much more do you have for the cross-examination?

12 MR. MacFARLANE: I would expect roughly 10 to 15 minutes.

13 JUDGE KWON: Then we'll take a break now.

14 We'll break for 20 minutes.

15 [The witness stands down]

16 --- Recess taken at 5.40 p.m.

17 --- On resuming at 6.02 p.m.

18 JUDGE KWON: Mr. MacFarlane, I was informed by the VWS that the

19 witness was not feeling well and didn't want to continue with the

20 remainder of his evidence. So the Chamber allowed the witness to

21 retreat, and we'll continue with the remainder of your cross-examination

22 tomorrow, first thing.

23 MR. MacFARLANE: Thank you.

24 JUDGE KWON: So in the meantime, we proceed with the next

25 witness, who is Mr. Rankic.

Page 296

1 JUDGE KWON: Let's bring in the witness.

2 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Therefore, you didn't allow me to

3 call Mr. Rankic.

4 JUDGE KWON: You submitted your submission in relation to the

5 order of witnesses.

6 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The practice applied in this

7 Tribunal is that parties call their respective witnesses.

8 [The witness entered court]

9 JUDGE KWON: Good afternoon, Mr. Rankic.

10 If you could take the solemn declaration, please.

11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will

12 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

13 WITNESS: ZORAN RANKIC

14 [Witness answered through interpreter]

15 JUDGE KWON: Please make yourself comfortable.

16 Yes, Mr. Seselj.

17 Examination by Mr. Seselj:

18 MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]

19 Q. Mr. Rankic, have you already testified as a court witness in the

20 main trial against me here?

21 A. Yes. On the 11th and 12th of May last year, I testified here

22 viva voce.

23 Q. Did you provide several statements to my associates, wishing to

24 be a witness for my defence?

25 A. Yes.

Page 297

1 Q. Did you inform my associates that all your statements that you

2 have provided to us could be made public?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Do you know that in a book of mine, I published your statements

5 given to my legal associates and others?

6 A. Yes, I know that.

7 Q. Did you give your consent for these statements of yours to be

8 published in my book?

9 A. Yes, of course.

10 Q. Was this consent explicit in response to their question as to

11 whether you agree that this be published in such and such a book? Did

12 you agree to that?

13 A. Yes, of course.

14 Q. Mr. Rankic, did you appear at some public gatherings where my

15 books were promoted?

16 A. Yes. If necessary, I can tell you exactly.

17 Q. How many such events were held?

18 A. Two or three.

19 Q. Did you attend any scholarly gatherings, some of which were

20 international ones, where the violation of my procedural rights in

21 The Hague proceedings was discussed?

22 A. Yes, of course. It's not only that I was present, but I also

23 addressed the present via videolink. There were several thousand people

24 there.

25 Q. Did you give your full name and surname on the occasion?

Page 298

1 A. I gave my full name and surname throughout. Had that not been

2 the case, I would have filed charges against whoever would have said that

3 I was VS-017.

4 Q. Did you ask The Hague OTP to provide protective measures to you?

5 A. No, never.

6 Q. When was it that you first found out that these protective

7 measures were imposed on you nevertheless?

8 A. When I was brought, by way of a deception, here to The Hague for

9 the first time in 2006.

10 Q. Did you explain at these gatherings, at these events, how you

11 were treated by the Hague OTP?

12 A. Yes, of course.

13 Q. And what did you say about that?

14 A. I said that pressure was first brought to bear against me in

15 2003, that the investigator, Paolo Pastore-Stocchi, in the presence of

16 Sabine Schulz, another investigator, exerted pressure against me, to

17 provide a statement as he liked, not as I had wanted to. Dissatisfied

18 with my statement, in the presence of Ms. Schulz and Ms. Marina Krstic,

19 an interpreter, he tore up my first statement, saying that they have

20 witnesses who claim that my statement does not correspond to their

21 statements or, rather, the facts as they had happened, and that he also

22 had something against me, as such.

23 Q. Did they threaten you with criminal proceedings against you in

24 The Hague because you were an official of the Serb Radical Party and a

25 member of its Crisis Staff?

Page 299

1 A. Yes, they did. In the beginning of August 2003, I was threatened

2 by Mr. Stocchi, and in the beginning of January 2004, the investigator

3 Rita Pradhan. I think that's her name.

4 Q. Please do not actually say the name of the book that this is all

5 about. Just say yes or no. Do you know what the title is of this book

6 where I published your statements?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. Do you remember that this book was promoted at an event in

9 Belgrade?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. Do you know where this promotion event was held?

12 A. I am sorry, I really do not remember exactly.

13 Q. Was it at the trade union's hall?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. Did you attend?

16 A. Yes.

17 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I have no further questions.

18 I insist that Mr. MacFarlane gets the amount of time that

19 corresponds to the total of the time that I had used.

20 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. MacFarlane.

21 MR. MacFARLANE: Your Honours, I'd like to provide a brief

22 submission or commentary on the last point made by the accused.

23 It's clear that he has shifted his strategy in the trial. He

24 recognises that it's very easy and very quick to demonstrate current

25 consent. My intention is to show the evolution or transformation of a

Page 300

1 witness, which requires more time. That is the strategy. And for the

2 purposes of truth-seeking, I'm asking for the Court to exercise some

3 discretion so that I can show that transformation of the witness.

4 [Trial Chamber confers]

5 JUDGE MORRISON: Well, Mr. Seselj did raise, actually, the case

6 of Dr. Karadzic. It's a matter of public record that the time spent upon

7 cross-examination allowable to Dr. Karadzic is often far greater than the

8 time spent on examination-in-chief by the Prosecution. So it seems to me

9 to be a matter which is well known in this Tribunal, that sometimes it

10 takes longer to cross-examine than it does to examine in chief.

11 MR. MacFARLANE: Thank you. I'll continue.

12 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I have to object first yet again.

13 Mr. Morrison, you are not allowing me to object?

14 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Seselj, this time we're not hearing you.

15 Mr. MacFarlane, please continue.

16 MR. MacFARLANE: Thank you very much.

17 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] You want me to walk out, Mr. Kwon?

18 Order the guard to lead me out. What do you need me in this courtroom

19 for? How can Mr. Morrison say that Mr. Karadzic has a lot more time than

20 the Prosecutor does, and then he compares that to our situation, in which

21 he puts me in the role of the Prosecutor who is conducting the

22 examination-in-chief, and Mr. MacFarlane is being put in the position of

23 someone who is defending himself.

24 There is a difference between a professional and a

25 self-represented accused. A self-represented accused always has the

Page 301

1 privilege of conducting longer direct examination and longer

2 cross-examinations. Mr. Kwon knows that full well, because he was a

3 Judge in the trial of Slobodan Milosevic and he is now presiding over the

4 Chamber that is trying Mr. Karadzic. And now other rules apply to me.

5 I have to have a privilege, as a self-represented accused, to

6 have more time for direct examination and cross-examination than the

7 representative of the Prosecution here. Do not -- do not confuse me with

8 the Prosecutor here.

9 That is what I had to say to you.

10 JUDGE KWON: It is the Chamber that monitors the fair and

11 expeditious conduct of the trial. As long as the parties remain in the

12 relevant issues, the Chamber would allow it to continue. The Chamber

13 will monitor the --

14 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] But, Mr. Kwon, this morning -- or,

15 rather, today, when you were saying, at the very outset, that we should

16 stick to relevant issues, you were referring to both Mr. MacFarlane and

17 myself. You actually meant me, and now, all of your criteria have gone

18 completely down, as far as Mr. MacFarlane is concerned. However, this is

19 not the first time that you are showing how partial you are as a Judge.

20 You are well known for being that way throughout, Mr. Kwon.

21 JUDGE KWON: That's a misrepresentation of what I said. That

22 relevance issue -- test equally applies to both the Prosecution as well

23 as the Defence.

24 Yes, Mr. MacFarlane.

25 MR. MacFARLANE: Thank you, Your Honours.

Page 302

1 Cross-examination by Mr. MacFarlane:

2 Q. Sir, you've outlined your current views and current thinking on

3 the publication of your name and your statement by the accused. I'd like

4 to take you back to earlier years, and I'd like to ask you to comment on

5 what appears to have been an evolution or a transformation over the

6 years.

7 I'd like to take you back to August of 2003, when you were

8 interviewed by investigators with the OTP, the Office of the Prosecutor.

9 Do you remember that?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. And, in fact, you have been interviewed on quite a number of

12 occasions. On my count, at least five times. Do you agree with that?

13 A. Four or five times, possibly.

14 Q. So you kept going back to the Office of the Prosecutor, to sit

15 down with the investigators and talk to them about your knowledge, and,

16 in most of those instances, to provide a statement to them; isn't that

17 true?

18 A. No, that's not the way it was. For the most part, they were

19 pressuring me to make a statement. Otherwise, they would send the

20 Serbian police to bring me in.

21 Q. Let's move to the statement that you provided on the 6th of

22 September -- pardon me, 19th of September of 2006. So this is some three

23 years later. And you were interviewed by a Prosecutor and several

24 investigators, and provided a statement. And in that statement, you made

25 this statement:

Page 303

1 "I am willing to testify before the Tribunal about the events I

2 described ..."

3 And then this is the important part.

4 "... but I have significant concerns for my safety, and I would

5 only testify if I can be guaranteed that my safety would not be

6 compromised."

7 Do you recall talking to the investigators about safety, and do

8 you recall insisting that that be included in that statement?

9 A. No, that is absolutely incorrect. They said to me that I was in

10 danger in Serbia, allegedly, from the Serb Radical Party, and possibly

11 some foreign elements too. Therefore, they said that it was desirable,

12 from that point of view, that they give me these protective measures.

13 When I testified viva voce here, I denied all of this that the

14 Prosecution presented, because they wrote this up in a way that suited

15 them.

16 Q. You agree, though, that there was a discussion about the issue of

17 safety and that the investigators provided you information concerning

18 your own safety; is that correct?

19 A. Yes, that was discussed, but I did not insist on protective

20 measures.

21 Q. Let's move forward from September of 2006 to a couple of months

22 later in November of 2006, where you, once again, sat down with the

23 investigators and provided a statement. And in that statement is the

24 following:

25 "I'm willing to testify before the ICTY about the events I

Page 304

1 described, but I have significant concerns for my safety, and I would

2 only testify if I could be guaranteed that my safety would not be

3 compromised."

4 And there was a Serbian version which you signed. Do you recall

5 that?

6 A. Yes, of course I recall that. However, at the time I was in

7 house detention here in The Hague, where I spent all of two months, and

8 my movement was restricted.

9 Q. Once again, in the year 2006, in June, in particular, do you

10 recall meeting with the investigator and your telling the investigator

11 that you have been approached by a group of people in Belgrade and told

12 not to play with your life, and that your son had answered a phone call

13 where the caller threatened to blow the witness up? Do you recall that?

14 A. Yes, I recall that. However, the threat was not addressed to me

15 directly; rather, to my son. However, I'm not sure that this has

16 anything to do with this case. Perhaps this was totally apart from all

17 this that has been going on.

18 Q. That's your current thinking, but I'd like to take you back to

19 that time which is what we're talking about is your thinking at an

20 earlier stage. And I suggest to you that you were certain at that stage,

21 or strongly believed, that the incidents took place because of your

22 co-operation with the Office of the Prosecutor. Do you recall that?

23 A. No, no, that is not correct. I was never sure that it was that

24 way. The Prosecution referred to that as a conversation between them and

25 myself, but I'm not sure that it was a real threat at all. It is

Page 305

1 possible that the Prosecution fabricated the threat altogether.

2 Q. Once again, I'm taking you back to that point in time in 2006.

3 And I suggest to you that you were concerned at that time that these

4 events took place because of your co-operation with the OTP.

5 A. No, that has nothing to do with the OTP. Of course, my fear was

6 the natural fear of a parent for a child. That is only natural.

7 Q. So you agree that there was a concern that you had at that time?

8 A. Of course, for the safety of my own child. I was afraid on that

9 account.

10 Q. And I suggest to you that there is a discussion about the

11 prospects of a temporary relocation and whether that would be sufficient.

12 And perhaps other protective measures were discussed as well, but a

13 temporary relocation to another country was discussed. Do you recall

14 that?

15 A. First of all, I have to point something out.

16 One of the reasons why I was brought to The Hague was, allegedly,

17 that they had lost all of my statements or, rather, that they had all

18 been stolen at Belgrade Airport, and that, therefore, I had to come to

19 The Hague to provide all of these statements again. In fact, that

20 purported to be the main reason for bringing me to The Hague. Once I

21 arrived in The Hague, the trial of Mr. Seselj had started in the

22 meantime, and they took advantage of my presence here in The Hague to

23 call me as a witness. Of course, I did not accept that. And since they

24 had deceitfully brought me to The Hague, I escaped from The Hague in the

25 same way.

Page 306

1 Q. Well, you were anticipating my next question, because I wanted to

2 ask you a question in relation to the disappearance of the statement or

3 documents during the flight.

4 On the 17th of September, 2006, I understand that you met with a

5 Prosecutor and investigators, that that information was provided to you

6 that some material had gone missing, and that you did not express any

7 concerns for your safety with respect to that. Do you recall that?

8 A. No, of course not. As for myself, personally, I never felt any

9 fear of anything.

10 Q. I'm speaking now of the disappearance of the materials. You

11 advised the investigators that you weren't particularly concerned because

12 of that?

13 A. Of course, why would I be concerned?

14 Q. Thank you. I'll take that as a yes. I suggest as well that on

15 the 18th of September, 2007 - that's a year later - that you were met by

16 a number of people, and that you advised that you would not attend an

17 interview with the OTP, and that you didn't want to testify for either

18 party in the Seselj trial, and that you didn't have any security concerns

19 at that stage. Do you recall advising people that you didn't want to

20 testify for either party?

21 A. No, that's not the way it was. If the Court allows me to do so,

22 I'll explain what had actually happened.

23 This is how it was: The Office of the War Crimes Prosecutor

24 called me to come to the Special War Crimes Court. Mr. Mrdak called me,

25 asking me to come to Ustanicka Street in Belgrade, the War Crimes Court

Page 307

1 there, in order to talk to Mrs. Dahl. However, I didn't want to talk to

2 anybody. If I were summoned by the Court here in The Hague, I would come

3 and say, viva voce, what it was that was troubling me and what had

4 actually happened. So this is what I did last year.

5 Q. Do you recall having discussions with -- do you recall having

6 discussions with respect to relocation to a third-party country, and

7 initially discussions about the prospects of going to Sweden?

8 A. Yes, that was mentioned, but I had no other way of getting my

9 documents except by accepting to co-operate with the OTP.

10 Q. The reason that you had discussed the prospects of Sweden was

11 that you had someone that you knew there, and that was an appealing

12 third-party -- third country for you?

13 A. Yes, yes, of course.

14 Q. But instead, the plan ended up being a relocation to the

15 Netherlands; is that correct?

16 A. No, that was never mentioned.

17 Q. But that did take place? You were relocated to the Netherlands

18 for a period of time; isn't that correct?

19 A. I said a moment ago that I did not move to the Netherlands.

20 Rather, I was brought to the Netherlands by deceit.

21 Q. You were provided with accommodation, allowances, and an identity

22 card; isn't that correct?

23 A. No, I didn't have any documents on me, except for this little

24 card that was with a code. As for accommodation and money, yes, I was

25 staying at some apartment. I received 25 Euro a day for food expenses.

Page 308

1 And you, yourself, should know what 25 Euro a day means in the

2 Netherlands.

3 Q. You were also provided with a mobile phone and contact details of

4 protection personnel who you could contact 24 hours a day; isn't that

5 correct?

6 A. That is correct.

7 Q. And there were no restrictions on your movements within the

8 Netherlands, you could go wherever you wanted to; isn't that true?

9 A. As far as I know, automatically, by virtue of the fact that I

10 didn't have a passport with me, my freedom of movement was restricted.

11 Q. Movement within the Netherlands, itself, was unrestricted, wasn't

12 it?

13 A. I don't know whether it was or whether it wasn't. I didn't

14 experiment.

15 [Prosecution counsel confer]

16 MR. MacFARLANE:

17 Q. Sir, I want to show you two documents that have been tendered in

18 these proceedings. For the record and for the Chamber, they are marked

19 as 55D and 55E.

20 And, sir, I would like you to take a look at the beginning few

21 paragraphs of both of these documents, and I'll have a few questions for

22 you in connection with the first few paragraphs.

23 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. MacFarlane.

24 MR. MacFARLANE:

25 Q. Sir, I'd like you to take a look at, first of all, 55D.

Page 309

1 Perhaps the Usher could help you in focusing initially on 55D.

2 I'd like you to look at the first paragraph, in particular. It

3 provides information that purports to include your name and some personal

4 information. Can you read that over and advise if that, in fact,

5 identifies you and provides information of a personal nature concerning

6 yourself?

7 A. Well, I hope I don't have to read all of this. I'm simply

8 checking whether this is my statement, the one that was certified in

9 court.

10 Q. I'm asking you to take a look at the very beginning of the

11 statement. It names -- purports to name you and provide information

12 concerning you. And my question is: Is that accurate? Does it identify

13 you and is it accurate?

14 A. Yes, yes, it is accurate.

15 Q. Let's move, then, to Exhibit 55E, the second one, and my question

16 is the same thing. Take a look at the opening paragraphs, and does that

17 identify you and provide personal information concerning you?

18 A. Yes.

19 (redacted)

20 (redacted)

21 (redacted)

22 (redacted)

23 (redacted)

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

Page 310

1 (redacted)

2 A. As far as I know and as far as I am familiar with the Rules of

3 the Tribunal, I have the right to request protective measures. It is up

4 to the Court to decide whether these measures would be granted or not.

5 However, no one has the right to impose protective measures on me.

6 Q. One last question. Let's try this from a different angle.

7 Do you know the date upon which the protective measures that the

8 Court ordered concerning you were lifted?

9 A. I really don't know.

10 MR. MacFARLANE: Fine.

11 No further questions. Thank you.

12 JUDGE KWON: Thank you, Mr. MacFarlane.

13 Do you like to re-examine Mr. Rankic, Mr. Seselj?

14 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] In my estimate, my

15 examination-in-chief lasted between five and seven minutes.

16 Mr. MacFarlane's cross-examination lasted almost half an hour. Am I

17 entitled now to 25 minutes for redirect?

18 JUDGE KWON: As long as your re-examination is limited to the

19 things that arose from the cross-examination by Mr. MacFarlane.

20 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] But the cross-examination was

21 absolutely irrelevant. Mr. MacFarlane dealt with the matters that have

22 no relation whatsoever to the bill of indictment. The bill of indictment

23 was based on my publication of witness statements. However, what

24 Mr. MacFarlane dealt with --

25 JUDGE KWON: Are you minded to put questions to the witness or