1 Wednesday, 30 March 2005

2 [Open session]

3 [The accused entered court]

4 --- Upon commencing at 9.06 a.m.

5 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning to everyone.

6 Madam Registrar, would you please call the case.

7 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. This is case number

8 IT-00-39-T, the Prosecutor versus Momcilo Krajisnik.

9 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.

10 Ms. Loukas, the Chamber is aware of the fact that, although we

11 have not seen it yet, that a motion has been filed yesterday in the

12 afternoon in respect of Witness 382.

13 MS. LOUKAS: 382.

14 JUDGE ORIE: And of course the Defence is invited to formulate as

15 soon as possible a response, even if that would be an oral response, which

16 would be totally acceptable under the present circumstances. I just

17 wanted to draw your attention to it so that a surprise comes not any later

18 than necessary.

19 MS. LOUKAS: Yes, Your Honour. In fact, I received an e-mail of

20 the filing from Mr. Gaynor from the Prosecution when I got out of court

21 yesterday and in view of the fact that I think that that Witness 382 is --

22 we could expect him, I imagine, to testify probably tomorrow, I think that

23 an oral response is all that we can offer at this point.

24 JUDGE ORIE: I just wanted to avoid that the surprise would even

25 be greater than it is already.

1 MS. LOUKAS: Thank you for that.

2 I should indicate before we proceed that we were ably assisted

3 with the assistance of an interpreter at our conference with Mr. Krajisnik

4 yesterday, thanks to the efforts of both Ms. Meleras and Ms. Petra Jacoby

5 from the Registry, which was very useful, and their assistance is greatly

6 appreciated. And additionally, I've asked for the assistance of an

7 interpreter during the day today so that we can communicate with Mr.

8 Krajisnik during the breaks and what have you.

9 I can indicate that interpreter is not here yet but I think there

10 is some problem always emerges because Defence counsel are not allowed to

11 bring people into the building and they have to have wait for somebody to

12 bring him in. But at some point --

13 JUDGE ORIE: We'll greet him whenever he arrives.

14 MS. LOUKAS: Thank you.

15 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Usher, could you please escort Mr. Alajbegovic

16 into the courtroom.

17 MR. HARMON: Mr. President, Your Honours, while we are waiting, I

18 just wanted to inform the Court that a number of corrections were made

19 yesterday to the OTP statement provided by Mr. Alajbegovic. I am informed

20 that those changes result in a change in construction in the language and

21 therefore -- in the B/C/S version of the statement, therefore the changes

22 aren't so easily entered. I will submit the English changed statement

23 from the OTP to CLSS and get a corrected version from them, and as soon as

24 I get it I will provide it to the Trial Chamber.

25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. My concern yesterday was that now and then I

1 get the impression that a lot of copying is done even when it's not

2 absolutely necessary, involving huge amounts of paper and -- but of course

3 it should never go to the detriment of the quality of our work. Yes.

4 [The witness entered court]

5 WITNESS: RAMIZ ALAJBEGOVIC [Resumed]

6 [Witness answered through interpreter]

7 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning, Mr. Alajbegovic.

8 THE WITNESS: Good morning.

9 JUDGE ORIE: I take it that you can hear me in a language you

10 understand. I also take that from your "good morning" response to what I

11 said.

12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's right. Good morning.

13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

14 Mr. Alajbegovic, please be seated. I'd like to remind you that

15 you are still bound by the solemn declaration you've given at the

16 beginning of your testimony yesterday and you will now be cross-examined

17 by Ms. Loukas, counsel for the Defence. Please be seated.

18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.

19 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Loukas.

20 MS. LOUKAS: Thank you, Your Honour, and before I proceed, I

21 should mention, as I neglected to mention in fact yesterday that I am ably

22 assisted today by Ms. Kelly Pitcher for the Defence.

23 JUDGE ORIE: Welcome in the courtroom.

24 Cross-examined by Ms. Loukas:

25 MS. LOUKAS:

1 Q. Good morning, Mr. Alajbegovic.

2 A. Good morning.

3 Q. Now, Mr. Alajbegovic, I want to ask you about your awareness of

4 various matters in relation to your local municipality at the outset.

5 Were you aware in and around March 1992 of Muslims in the Rogatica

6 municipality arming themselves through religious institutions? Were you

7 aware of that?

8 A. No.

9 Q. And Mr. Alajbegovic, you, yourself, through the police, I suggest

10 to you, were, in fact, involved in the process of arming local Muslims in

11 the Rogatica municipality.

12 A. No.

13 Q. Now, Mr. Alajbegovic, in relation to the split in the municipality

14 that was negotiated between the SDA and the SDS, you're aware, of course,

15 of a decision to divide the municipality into a Serb part and a Muslim

16 part, and that was a declaration that was signed by the president of the

17 local assembly, Adil Lutvic. Are you aware of that?

18 A. I'm not aware of the declaration, and the Serb side did ask for a

19 division into the Serb side or part and the Muslim part during the

20 negotiations. I am aware of that.

21 Q. All right. But you're not aware of the declaration signed by Adil

22 Lutvic; correct?

23 A. No.

24 Q. Were you aware in early April in 1992, when the war had begun

25 elsewhere in Bosnia, of Serbs moving out of Rogatica?

1 A. No, that was not going on.

2 Q. Were you aware of people in your local community, Bosniak Muslims,

3 saying things like "Serbs to Serbia, this is Muslim land"? Were you aware

4 of anything of that nature?

5 A. No, never.

6 Q. Now, tell me, on the 6th of May, 1992, were you aware of an attack

7 by Muslim paramilitaries in the -- on the Serb population in the village

8 of Borika?

9 A. No, that never happened.

10 Q. Were you aware that during that attack, that Branko Balcak, a Serb

11 man, was killed?

12 A. No, but I do know about his killing.

13 Q. Were you aware that his mother was also wounded?

14 A. No. We received information that he had been wounded by a grenade

15 coming from one of the members of the paramilitaries, Serb paramilitaries

16 that were located at Borika.

17 Q. So you weren't aware that the attack involved Muslim

18 paramilitaries; correct?

19 A. No, I was not aware of that and they couldn't have been involved

20 either.

21 Q. Of course you weren't present; correct?

22 A. At that point, no, but we received information according to which

23 they said that the Muslim village of Zivaljevic was under -- in danger,

24 under threat, and that was the only village close to where this man

25 Mr. Balcak lost his life.

1 Q. So we are in agreement there that you say you weren't aware that

2 Muslim paramilitaries were involved in the killing of Branko Balcak and

3 the severe wounding of his mother; correct?

4 A. So that means they weren't involved in that, and I'm quite certain

5 of that.

6 Q. Now, Mr. Alajbegovic, were you aware on the 20th of May, 1992,

7 that Drazenko Mihajlovic from Seljane was killed in the suburban

8 settlement of Zlatni Do?

9 A. No.

10 Q. And again, that was by Muslim paramilitaries?

11 A. No, I didn't know about that because I was on the territory of the

12 local commune of Kozlici.

13 Q. And were you aware that on the same day, the 20th of May, 1992,

14 Milos Vukovic was killed by Muslims in the village of Zivaljevina, near

15 Kovanja?

16 A. No, I was not aware of that. I don't know anything about that.

17 Q. Were you aware of --

18 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Loukas, just from my understanding, Zivaljevina,

19 is that different from the village the witness just mentioned,

20 Zivaljevici? Is that --

21 MS. LOUKAS: Your Honour, I can indicate that in terms of my

22 questions, the first village I mentioned in relation to the killing of

23 Drazenko Mihajlovic, that was Seljane, which is spelled S-e-l-j-a-n-e.

24 JUDGE ORIE: That's just north-east of Rogatica town, yes.

25 MS. LOUKAS: Yes. And perhaps for the benefit of the transcript I

1 might also spell the second area I spoke of, which is Zlatni Do,

2 Z-l-a-t-n-i D-o.

3 JUDGE ORIE: Can you indicate where that is located,

4 approximately?

5 MS. LOUKAS: Not at this point, Your Honour.

6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, okay. And then?

7 MS. LOUKAS: And in relation to the question I gave in relation to

8 Milos Vukovic, the killing of Milos Vukovic by Muslims, that was the

9 village of Zivaljevini, which is spelled Z-i-v-a-l-j-e-v-i-n-i, by

10 Kovanja, which is K-o-v-a-n-j-a.

11 JUDGE ORIE: I still have to locate that, but please proceed.

12 MS. LOUKAS: Thank you, Your Honour. Thank you, Your Honour. I

13 will just get my legal assistant to check on those positions to assist the

14 Court while I proceed with the cross-examination.

15 JUDGE ORIE: I found it, as a matter of fact. The villages are

16 quite similar in name, Zivaljevin or Zivaljevici, and Kovanja is just

17 north-west of Rogatica. Please proceed.

18 MS. LOUKAS: Thank you, Your Honour.

19 Q. Now, Mr. Alajbegovic, were you aware of Muslims leaving these

20 areas around the time of the 20th of May that I have just mentioned?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. And leaving in the sense of voluntarily, of course.

23 A. No.

24 Q. Now, Mr. Alajbegovic, towards the end of May 1992, were you aware

25 of Bosniak Muslims leaving Rogatica in buses belonging to Tenotrans, which

1 was, of course, shared by a Bosniak Muslim Midhat Pasic?

2 A. Yes. That happened before the 20th of May.

3 Q. Yes, would you care to put a date on it?

4 A. In the period between the 5th to the 15th of May.

5 Q. Thank you, Mr. Alajbegovic.

6 Now, were you aware of four Bosniak Muslims, in fact a pair of two

7 brothers, who were soldiers in the VRS from the municipality of Rogatica?

8 A. I don't understand the question.

9 Q. Were you aware of four Bosniak Muslims who were soldiers in the

10 Serbian army, in the --

11 A. I heard about two. I know about two men.

12 Q. Yes. And I'm speaking, of course, of the Bosnian Serb army.

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. And who were they?

15 A. They were two brothers, Izet and Himzo Golic.

16 Q. And was one of them later on the director of Centrotrans, to your

17 knowledge?

18 A. He worked in Centrotrans before the war.

19 Q. And were you aware of Croats who joined the Bosnian Serb army?

20 A. No, I'm not aware of that.

21 Q. And are you aware that these Bosnian Muslims who joined the army,

22 the Bosnian Serb army, are still in their homes in Rogatica, in the

23 Rogatica municipality?

24 A. They did not live in the urban area of Rogatica but in the village

25 of Zakomo, which is to the north, towards Sokolac. And they didn't

1 declare themselves as Muslims, they declared themselves as Yugoslavs.

2 Q. Okay. Now, Mr. Alajbegovic, you've given one statement to the

3 Bosnian authorities in 1999 and a statement to the Office of the

4 Prosecutor in 1999; correct?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. And of course you indicated in your evidence yesterday when you

7 were questioned by Mr. Harmon that you stand by your statements as true

8 and correct, subject to the corrections you made in court yesterday.

9 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Loukas, just for my information, I read in the

10 transcript, and that's what I heard as well, a statement to the Bosnian

11 authorities in 1999.

12 MS. LOUKAS: Sorry, Your Honour, it was the ICTY statement that

13 was 1999.

14 JUDGE ORIE: The other one was 1996 but I can imagine that you are

15 a bit confused by the additional date on the top -- on the bottom of each

16 page of the 1996 --

17 MS. LOUKAS: That's right, 1999 appears --

18 JUDGE ORIE: It has been cleared, we are talking about the same

19 document.

20 MS. LOUKAS: But it's interesting that both 1999 and 1996 appear

21 on the same document.

22 JUDGE ORIE: I think that he identified these documents as the

23 statements he gave in 1996, and he did that in 1999.

24 Please proceed.

25 MS. LOUKAS: Thank you, Your Honour.

1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

2 MS. LOUKAS:

3 Q. Now, you indicated in your evidence yesterday when you were

4 questioned by Mr. Harmon that you stand by your statements as true and

5 correct, subject to the corrections you made in court yesterday.

6 Rather than nodding, Mr. Alajbegovic, you'll have to give a verbal

7 answer so it can be recorded on the transcript.

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. And of course you're a police officer of many years standing,

10 Mr. Alajbegovic?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. And you have experience in assisting in the taking of statements

13 from witnesses throughout your career?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. And you are very well aware of what's required in a witness

16 statement; correct?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. Now, prior to signing your statements, in particular the statement

19 to the ICTY, you, of course, were asked prior to signing it if you had

20 anything to add; correct?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. And you also knew that when you were giving your statement in 1999

23 to the Office of the Prosecutor, that they wanted to have from you

24 everything that you knew on the period we're talking about; correct?

25 MR. HARMON: Objection, Your Honour. That assumes a fact not in

1 evidence. That assumes that this witness was informed that this person

2 who was taking this statement wanted to know everything that had to do

3 with the period that we're involved in in this indictment.

4 JUDGE ORIE: Isn't it true, Mr. Harmon, that the right of the

5 Defence to put leading questions also includes that where the Prosecution

6 is not entitled to put any question to a witness which suggests a fact not

7 yet established, that the Defence, on the other hand, is entitled to do so

8 because that's one of the -- one of the varieties of what a leading

9 question is. So apart from suggesting the answer, another variety of a

10 leading question is a question which suggests the existence of a fact not

11 yet in evidence.

12 So therefore, if I bring it back to the basics, you are blaming

13 Ms. Loukas for putting the leading question to the witness which she is

14 entitled to do, so the objection is denied.

15 Please proceed.

16 MS. LOUKAS: Thank you, Your Honour.

17 Q. Now, Mr. Alajbegovic, you knew, did you not, that when you were

18 giving your statement as a police officer of many years' standing, that

19 when you were giving your statement to the Office of the Prosecutor, that

20 they wanted to have from you everything that you knew from the period in

21 question; correct?

22 A. Yes. But at that moment, I did not talk about everything I knew.

23 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Loukas, whenever you might think that you could

24 convince a jury that if we are talking about events of a couple of months

25 that a witness would at all be in a position to tell everything he knows,

1 certainly a professional Bench will not be convinced by that.

2 Come up with whatever relevant, important information he has not

3 mentioned and we'll certainly pay proper attention to that, but these type

4 of questions that just put it to the witness, isn't it true that you would

5 tell everything, and then later on establish that he did not tell

6 everything, of course, it comes down to relevant information not mentioned

7 by the witness. And if I would ask you to tell everything you knew about

8 the last three months, you'd certainly fail.

9 Please proceed.

10 MS. LOUKAS: Well, Your Honour, I don't know about that. I write

11 a daily diary.

12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, even then, Ms. Loukas. And I would fail as

13 well, and I expect everyone in this courtroom to fail.

14 Please proceed.

15 MS. LOUKAS: Thank you, Your Honour. I will make one point in

16 relation to that, Your Honour, and it's just this: I take on board what

17 Your Honour has indicated, but I would also indicate that a man who has

18 been a police officer for so many years is in a different position to a

19 lay witness.

20 JUDGE ORIE: Of course. And even without -- I mean, in assessing

21 and evaluating the evidence of a witness, of course this Court, even -- I

22 do not mind if you draw the attention to that, but just verify that we are

23 aware - and it's just a verification, it's not -- of course this Court

24 will look at a statement of a police officer in a different way as it does

25 look at a statement of a plumber or whatever.

1 Yes.

2 MS. LOUKAS: Thank you, Your Honour.

3 Q. Now, Mr. Alajbegovic, now, of course, when you provided the

4 statement to the Office of the Prosecutor, you, yourself, as a police

5 officer, wished to provide everything that you considered significant

6 about the period in question; correct?

7 A. Yes. My statement mostly had to do with the case of Mico Andric,

8 who was indicted at the time.

9 Q. Yes, I understand that was the context in which your statement to

10 the Bosnian authorities was taken, that was in relation to Mico Andric,

11 but of course your statement to the Office of the Prosecutor in 1999 was,

12 of course, taken in a broader context; correct?

13 JUDGE ORIE: I see the witness nodding yes but we'd like to have

14 your answers because it does not appear on paper if you are just nodding.

15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. The statement did not include

16 a broader context.

17 MS. LOUKAS:

18 Q. You're referring -- when you say the statement did not include a

19 broader context, you're talking about your statement to the Bosnian

20 authorities; correct?

21 A. No, the statement given to the Tribunal.

22 JUDGE ORIE: Let me ask you, was your statement to the Tribunal

23 similarly focused on Mr. Andric as the statement you gave to the Bosnian

24 authorities?

25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No; to a lesser degree.

1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, and more -- in general terms, the events that

2 took place at that time. That's what Ms. Loukas referred to as a broader

3 context.

4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

5 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.

6 MS. LOUKAS: Thank you, Your Honour.

7 Q. And of course you, yourself, were anxious to ensure that you

8 provided the Office of the Prosecutor, as a police officer of many years'

9 standing, with whatever you knew in relation to potential links with

10 higher authorities; correct?

11 A. I confirmed that yesterday while giving evidence. I thought that

12 I would be giving additional information here and now too.

13 Q. Yes, but I'm talking about at the time you gave a statement.

14 Obviously, you are a police officer of many years' standing, a commander,

15 you know how to give a statement, don't you, Mr. Alajbegovic?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. And you know what's required of you?

18 A. I am here and available to tell the truth.

19 Q. And obviously the truth is, as a police officer of many years'

20 standing, when you gave your statement to the ICTY Office of the

21 Prosecutor, you knew that you had to provide them with significant

22 information, if you had it, about potential linkages with higher

23 authorities. That is correct, is it not?

24 A. The statement I gave to the Tribunal in Sarajevo shows in all its

25 paragraphs that --

1 Q. I will stop you there, Mr. Alajbegovic. You know very well my

2 question is about your statement to the ICTY. Now, please answer my

3 question.

4 MR. HARMON: Your Honour, he was answering the question and he was

5 interrupted.

6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, because the question was about the ICTY

7 statement and the answer was about the Bosnian statement, so therefore, --

8 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreters note that the witness said

9 "Tribunal" and in B/C/S when people say Tribunal, it means the ICTY.

10 They never refer to the abbreviation.

11 JUDGE ORIE: Did the witness -- perhaps I don't know whom to ask,

12 but he was referring to the Tribunal in -- yes. Now I do understand.

13 Ms. Loukas, there is a misunderstanding.

14 MS. LOUKAS: Obviously there is an interpretation question.

15 JUDGE ORIE: "The statement I gave to the Tribunal..." but not the

16 Tribunal in Sarajevo, but the statement he gave in Sarajevo to the

17 Tribunal, that is the ICTY, so therefore, where I said that you correctly

18 interrupted the witness, upon rereading it, I was similarly confused as

19 you seemed to have been.

20 MS. LOUKAS: Indeed, Your Honour. It seems there's been some sort

21 of -- something's been lost in translation, as it were.

22 JUDGE ORIE: No, I think nothing is lost but it's just the way

23 terms are used.

24 So therefore, Mr. Alajbegovic, I think we misunderstood you. When

25 you said, "The statement I gave to the Tribunal in Sarajevo," we

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

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

13 English transcripts.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 understood that you gave a statement to a Tribunal in Sarajevo instead of

2 giving a statement in Sarajevo to the Tribunal, meaning the ICTY.

3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

4 JUDGE ORIE: So what Ms. Loukas would like to know is the

5 following: Did you give all information you knew about communication with

6 higher levels of authority when you gave your statement to the

7 investigators of this Tribunal?

8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.

9 JUDGE ORIE: Are there any important portions you left out?

10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. All those official talks.

11 That would require an additional statement, wouldn't they, with an

12 elaboration of certain requirements made by the negotiators of the Serbian

13 side and the policy that was pursued in the municipality of Rogatica.

14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Ms. Loukas, then I think that you would be

15 interested to know why.

16 MS. LOUKAS: Indeed, Your Honour.

17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please proceed.

18 MS. LOUKAS:

19 Q. So Mr. Alajbegovic, you obviously told the people that interviewed

20 you that you had more information?

21 A. You mean the statement given at the Tribunal here or the statement

22 I made in Sarajevo?

23 Q. Well let's get something straight here, Mr. Alajbegovic. The

24 statement you gave to the Office of the Prosecutor for the ICTY, where was

25 that statement given?

1 A. In Sarajevo.

2 Q. Okay. So both statements were given in Sarajevo, correct; the

3 Bosnian statement and the statement for the Office of the Prosecutor of

4 the -- this Tribunal?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. Okay. I am now asking you about the statement you gave to the

7 Office of the Prosecutor of this Tribunal in 1999. Do you understand me

8 thus far?

9 A. Yes, I do understand you.

10 Q. Okay. Now, you've told the Court that you did not give all the

11 information in your statement to the Prosecution, and what you left out -

12 this is at the bottom of page 15, the beginning of page 16 - is that --

13 what you left out was all those official talks. "That would require an

14 additional statement, wouldn't they, with an elaboration made by certain

15 requirements from negotiators of the Serbian side and the policy that was

16 pursued in the municipality of Rogatica."

17 Now, my question, Mr. Alajbegovic, is obviously when you were

18 giving your statement to the investigators of the Office of the Prosecutor

19 for this Tribunal, you obviously told the people that were interviewing

20 you that you had more information; correct?

21 A. That is an elaboration of certain theses from the statement given

22 in Sarajevo.

23 Q. Did you tell the investigators from the Office of the Prosecutor

24 in relation to this Tribunal in 1999 that you had more information?

25 A. I did not say that but I thought that I would have an opportunity

1 once again to give additional details and thus expand my original

2 statement. That is the entire state of negotiations that was not

3 described in detail in the statement and now in the context of what I said

4 yesterday when I was giving evidence.

5 Q. So Mr. Alajbegovic, how many years have you been a police officer?

6 A. Well, my police career started in 1975 and it's still there. That

7 is to say, for all of 30 years.

8 Q. Would you care to tell this Tribunal why you left out significant

9 information from your statement as a police officer of 30 years' standing?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. Good. Go ahead.

12 A. Everything I lived through during the negotiations, and then

13 during the war operations, and during my stay in Gorazde and when I went

14 to Sarajevo, all of that affected me, and it has left certain consequences

15 that I still suffer at this very moment.

16 Q. You're not saying that you're incapable of performing your duties

17 as a police officer, are you?

18 A. That's what you've said. No. I am capable of performing the

19 duties that I do perform.

20 Q. Yes, thank you, Mr. Alajbegovic. Let's move on to the next topic.

21 Now, in relation to your 1999 statement to the Office of the

22 Prosecutor of this Tribunal, from paragraphs 5 to 10 on the first page --

23 and it may be useful, I think, if the witness actually has the statement

24 in front of him for these purposes.

25 Now, Mr. Alajbegovic, you deal there on page 2 in the English

1 version, which is paragraphs 6 to 10, on basically the rise of Serb

2 nationalism and some rallies; correct?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. And you also gave evidence of this at pages 30 and 32 of -- 30 to

5 32 of the transcript from yesterday, for the benefit of the -- of Your

6 Honours and the Prosecution.

7 Now, just to place these matters in context, this question of

8 nationalism, Mr. Alajbegovic, you are, of course, aware that when the --

9 prior to the introduction of the elections, that three major nationalist

10 parties were formed in Bosnia; correct?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. And in fact you'd be aware that the Bosniak Muslim party, the SDA,

13 was, of course, formed prior to the Serbian Democratic Party; correct?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. And in terms of the rise of nationalism amongst the various

16 communities in Bosnia, you are, of course, aware that on a visit to Turkey

17 in July 1991, that Mr. Izetbegovic asked to join the Organisation of

18 Islamic Countries. You're aware of that, aren't you?

19 A. No.

20 Q. Well let me put it to you this way, Mr. Alajbegovic: You've

21 referred in your statement to the rise of Serb nationalism, but you would

22 concede, would you not, that there was a rise in nationalism amongst all

23 three communities in Bosnia; correct?

24 A. No.

25 Q. Moving on to the next topic.

1 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Loukas, I'd like to ask one additional question

2 in this respect.

3 Mr. Alajbegovic, isn't it true that the three nationalistic

4 parties that were formed -- well, were mainly based on the nationality or

5 ethnicity of the members and that there was a general movement to have the

6 political spectre mainly formed by parties which were not primarily based

7 on political programmes such as you find in other countries - socialist,

8 liberals, et cetera - but that they were mainly driven by the nationality

9 or the ethnicity of those belonging to those parties.

10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, but the Party of Democratic

11 Action had the possibility to have members of other ethnic groups join

12 their ranks, and there were indeed such cases.

13 JUDGE ORIE: What was the SDS -- could you not become a member of

14 the SDS if you were -- if you had reported yourself as Yugoslav or if you

15 were a Muslim or ...

16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Some people did that too.

17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So to that extent, what I am trying to find out

18 from your evidence is whether all the three groups, that is let me say

19 Croats, Muslims, and Serbs, organised themselves in the political sense in

20 that period of time in accordance with this background rather than with

21 political programmes which were unrelated to the national or ethnic

22 background of the party members.

23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, it depended. Not all three

24 options were based on that principle of homogeneity.

25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. You said you could become a member of the SDA

1 even if you were not a Muslim, and at the same time, you say you could

2 become a member of the SDS even if you were not a Serb.

3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

4 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Loukas, please proceed.

5 MS. LOUKAS: Thank you, Your Honour.

6 Q. Mr. Alajbegovic, are you sure you're not being a Bosniak Muslim

7 advocate rather than an objective witness to this Trial Chamber?

8 A. No. I think that I am an objective witness and my objective is to

9 tell the truth, to say what I know.

10 Q. Now, Mr. Alajbegovic, just on this topic of nationalism, were you

11 aware of an SDA rally in Velika Kladusa in September of 1990 in which

12 about 200.000 people attended?

13 A. Through the media only.

14 Q. Weren't you aware that there were many green flags and people and

15 -- some people in Arabic dress there? You were aware of that, weren't

16 you?

17 A. I was not aware of that dress. I don't know about it even now. I

18 didn't know about it at that moment either.

19 Q. Were you aware that there were people there with portraits of

20 Saddam Hussein?

21 A. No.

22 Q. Now, Mr. Alajbegovic, you were aware, of course, that

23 Mr. Izetbegovic, the SDA leader, was a guest of honour at the SDS

24 inaugural event. You were aware of that, weren't you?

25 A. Yes.

1 Q. Now, moving on to a -- another topic. If we go to page 3 of the

2 English statement, and paragraph 12 in your statement, you talk there

3 about various people going around Serb villages, telling them that there

4 was a Muslim threat, and you've referred to that being -- yes, you've --

5 in that statement, you've referred to the people from Serb villages --

6 going to Serb villages and telling that there was a Muslim threat.

7 Now, you were aware of comments, were you not, Mr. Alajbegovic,

8 by --

9 MS. LOUKAS: If I might have a moment, Your Honour.

10 Q. -- comments by Mr. Zulfikarpasic criticising Mr. Izetbegovic when

11 he said that: "If Slovenia and Croatia were to leave Yugoslavia, we would

12 declare independence for Bosnia and the Muslims would defend it with

13 arms." You were aware of that, weren't you?

14 A. No.

15 Q. You would concede, wouldn't you, that in that sense the threat

16 that some Serbs might have perceived was not exactly illusory, was it?

17 A. I don't understand the question.

18 JUDGE ORIE: The question is the following: Whether, on the basis

19 of what Ms. Loukas just put to you, that Muslim leaders expressed

20 themselves in terms of independence and to defend that, that it was not

21 just an illusion that some Serbs thought or that Serbs thought that they

22 were in -- that they were under threat and that they were in danger.

23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes to what? It was not illusory or was it illusory?

25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It was not -- or rather, it was an

1 illusion for the Serb people.

2 JUDGE ORIE: But the question then is if I say: "I'll defend

3 myself with arms," could that be perceived by others as a threat or as at

4 least a danger?

5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That is a lesser form of danger, but

6 the Serbs knew that the Muslims were not armed and that they did not have

7 a single military unit that would defend them.

8 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Loukas, please proceed.

9 MS. LOUKAS: Thank you, Your Honour.

10 Q. You were aware, were you not, Mr. Alajbegovic, that there were --

11 let me put it to you this way --

12 MS. LOUKAS: And I'm referring here, Your Honours, to evidence

13 given by Witness 659, pages 63 and 64, of the 14th of March.

14 JUDGE ORIE: If you just allow me to get the 14th of March on my

15 screen, Ms. Loukas.

16 Yes, please proceed.

17 MS. LOUKAS:

18 Q. You were aware, were you not, that the SDA was arming itself, were

19 you not?

20 A. No, I was not aware of that.

21 Q. And of course you denied that you were supplying arms to your

22 local community.

23 A. No.

24 Q. Okay. Now let's --

25 THE INTERPRETER: Or rather, "I'm not." Interpreter's correction,

1 I beg your pardon. "No" meaning he did not.

2 MS. LOUKAS: Thank you for that correction.

3 Q. Now, Mr. Alajbegovic, let's have another look at your statement,

4 and now we're going to go to paragraphs 3 and 4 -- sorry, that's

5 paragraphs 14 and 15 on page 3 in the English version. And this is a

6 matter that was dealt with in the transcript at pages 42 to 46 yesterday.

7 Now, you've indicated there that you were -- sorry, Your Honour,

8 I've just lost a document.

9 Yes, paragraphs 14 and 15, you have that before you. That you

10 were an eyewitness to the unloading of automatic rifles, machine-guns,

11 hand grenades, RPG, seven rocket-launchers, and ammunition; correct?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. And this was a topic on which you were asked some questions by His

14 Honour Judge Hanoteau, and this was an area in which you took no action;

15 correct?

16 A. No. We didn't take any action.

17 Q. Now, if we look, for example, at -- and I'm now going to page 4 of

18 your statement, which is paragraph 19, you say there that --

19 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Loukas, before you proceed, could you please

20 clarify, the answer is not entirely clear to me. You put it to the

21 witness that he took no action.

22 MS. LOUKAS: Yes.

23 JUDGE ORIE: You asked, "Correct?" The answer was, "No. We

24 didn't take any action," which is a bit contradictory. And apart from

25 that, it's not easy to reconcile with the extensive answers he gave to the

1 questions of Judge Hanoteau yesterday where a distinction was made between

2 reporting and taking any action apart from reporting.

3 So it's not clear. It certainly does not assist me at this

4 moment. So if you find it an important matter, I'd like you to further

5 clarify the matter. If you say that's sufficient, then we leave it as it

6 is.

7 MS. LOUKAS: It is an area that I may come back to, Your Honour,

8 depending on how much time I ...

9 JUDGE ORIE: I didn't want to conceal from you that as it stands

10 now, this part is less assisting than the extensive answers given

11 yesterday.

12 MS. LOUKAS: Indeed, Your Honour.

13 Yes, I think at this point, Your Honour, in view of the other

14 matters I have to cover and in view of my limited time, I'll proceed to

15 another matter, and if I have some time, I'll come back to this as well.

16 Q. Now, we go to paragraph 19 of your statement. So you there

17 indicate that somebody else witnessed something but the -- basically the

18 only other person that can verify what you're saying there is dead;

19 correct?

20 A. The information came in through the police station from Stjenice

21 to the effect that Mr. Karadzic, with his escorts, was moving in the

22 direction of Rogatica. The patrol from Rogatica went to the road and then

23 the escorts went to the regional road running from Rogatica to Borika

24 where Mr. Karadzic arrived. He arrived at the facility that is mentioned

25 in paragraph 19, so I received confirmation from up there from a man who

1 was a member of the reserve formation. I gave him your name yesterday and

2 I will be happy to repeat it today if you need it, but unfortunately, in

3 1997 and 1998, he died a natural death in Sarajevo.

4 Q. Okay. Now, so -- so far we've got you taking no action in

5 relation to what you say occurred at paragraphs 15 and 16; correct?

6 A. Practically, we did not take any action, but as far as information

7 goes, I informed my superior, who was the chief of the police station, and

8 as the party president, he probably assessed that it didn't warrant any

9 action in the sense of taking practical steps such as confiscating the

10 weapons from -- and taking it away from the area or preventing it from

11 reaching the area it was intended to reach.

12 Q. And who was your superior?

13 A. The chief of the public security station was Mr. Ismet Osmanovic,

14 and he also acted as president of the democratic -- Party of Democratic

15 Action for the Rogatica municipality.

16 Q. Now, moving on to another area, and now we're on page 5, which is

17 paragraphs 37 and 38, where you indicate that you saw Mr. Vasiljevic

18 arming the population. And you gave evidence about these matters at pages

19 39 to 41 of the transcript yesterday.

20 MR. HARMON: Your Honour, I think that incorrectly states the

21 evidence. This incident -- the witness testified he received the

22 information about Vasiljevic arming the people. Counsel has stated that,

23 "You indicate that you saw Vasiljevic arming the people." So I think the

24 question contains information that is inaccurate.

25 MS. LOUKAS: Indeed, Your Honour, I was proceeding from the

1 statement that didn't have the correction on it, received information.

2 JUDGE ORIE: It has been corrected, especially in this aspect.

3 MS. LOUKAS: Indeed, Your Honour.

4 Q. So -- and that's an aspect that you corrected that you received

5 information about it, but in any event, that's not the area I want to ask

6 you about. I want to ask you about these photographs. Who took the

7 photographs?

8 A. Crime inspector of the public security station in Rogatica.

9 Q. Okay. And in relation to these photographs, you've indicated that

10 a photographic album was compiled, correct?

11 MS. LOUKAS: Page 40 of the evidence from yesterday, Your Honours,

12 at line 16.

13 Q. That's correct, isn't it?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. And of course as a good police officer who knows how to protect

16 evidence, you kept a copy yourself as well, didn't you, as the commander?

17 A. No, a copy remained in the crime police department and another

18 copy I personally took to the department of the crime police of the

19 republican SUP, which was headed by, as assistant minister, Momcilo

20 Mandic. I handed it over to his head of department for that area. I

21 mentioned the man's name yesterday while giving testimony.

22 Q. Now he was a Muslim, of course; correct?

23 A. Judging by his name, yes, but I don't know how he declared himself

24 because I noted that he didn't have a Bosnian accent.

25 Q. Okay. In any event, so two copies of these photographs are

1 produced, according to your evidence; correct?

2 A. That is correct, yes.

3 Q. And to your knowledge, have the Office of the Prosecutor been able

4 to locate any copies of these photographs?

5 A. I'm not quite sure. I don't actually know.

6 MS. LOUKAS: I might just ask on the record of the Prosecution,

7 Mr. Harmon, if copies of these photographs have been located.

8 MR. HARMON: No, we don't have possession of those photographs,

9 Your Honour.

10 MS. LOUKAS: Okay.

11 Q. Now, pages -- at pages 59 and 60 of the transcript from yesterday,

12 you were again asked some questions by His Honour Judge Hanoteau about

13 reporting various matters. You will recall being asked those questions;

14 correct?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. Now, he was asking you about -- I'll come to a specific question.

17 He asked you, "These are documents you drafted yourself." This is at page

18 60, line 14 and 15. And your response was, "As I received information and

19 as I went out into the field where I saw many things with my own eyes, I

20 would return to the police station, draft my text, and then send it by

21 teleprinter or teletype to the central base of the SUP, the Secretariat of

22 the Interior."

23 Do you recall giving that answer?

24 A. Yes, it was the republican Secretariat for Internal Affairs of

25 Bosnia-Herzegovina during that interval, that's what it was.

1 Q. Now, to your knowledge, has the Office of the Prosecutor been able

2 to locate any of these documents that you drafted?

3 A. I don't know.

4 MS. LOUKAS: I ask Mr. Harmon to confirm for the court record if

5 any of these documents have been located.

6 MR. HARMON: To my knowledge, they have not, Your Honour. We do

7 not have possession of them. For counsel's benefit, had we had possession

8 of these documents and the photographs, they would have been led into

9 evidence.

10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

11 MS. LOUKAS: I can imagine that was the case.

12 JUDGE ORIE: So therefore, Ms. Loukas, you are spending quite a

13 lot of time on drawing our attention to the fact that although the witness

14 is talking about photographs and reports, that they have not been produced

15 and therefore there's no way to verify the correctness of his answers in

16 this respect. Is that correct?

17 MS. LOUKAS: That's correct, yes.

18 JUDGE ORIE: It took me about 17 seconds, approximately, to draw

19 my own attention to it. Please proceed.

20 MS. LOUKAS: Thank you, Your Honour.

21 Q. Now let's move on to page 86 of the transcript of the evidence

22 that you gave yesterday, and I think that that was at -- let's see, we're

23 dealing with -- yes, pages 85, 86, in relation to a letter, and that's

24 mentioned at paragraph 47 of the statement.

25 You see what I'm talking about there, Mr. Alajbegovic?

1 A. Yes, fully.

2 Q. Okay. Two copies of that letter?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. And you tell the Court that you, as a police officer, tore up the

5 letter; correct?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. And of course, to your knowledge, the other copy of the letter

8 can't be found; correct?

9 A. No, it can be found.

10 MS. LOUKAS: Well, I ask the Prosecution if a copy of this letter

11 has been found.

12 MR. HARMON: The same answer that I gave previously, Your Honour:

13 Had I had a copy of this letter, I would have produced it. I am

14 attempting to try to find that letter. I've made efforts to find that

15 letter, and if I do, I will submit it to the Court and to counsel.

16 JUDGE ORIE: At the same time, the witness says that it can be

17 found. Could he tell us how it could be found.

18 MR. HARMON: I can -- the witness provided me --

19 MS. LOUKAS: Well, Your Honour, I think it would be better to have

20 the evidence firsthand from the witness.

21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

22 MR. HARMON: I have no problem with that.

23 JUDGE ORIE: Could you tell us how it could be found, this letter?

24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The letter, one copy of the letter

25 was handed over to the military authorities and it has been stored in the

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

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

13 English transcripts.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 files of the 1st Rogatica Brigade, which is located in Gorazde at present,

2 and the intelligence organ has access to it, of the units of the

3 federation in Gorazde.

4 MR. HARMON: Your Honour, for the record, that's the same

5 information that I was provided by this witness and I have made efforts

6 to, based on that information, locate this letter, and again I will state

7 if that letter is located, I will present a copy of the letter to the

8 Court and to the Defence counsel.

9 JUDGE ORIE: Were these recent efforts?

10 MR. HARMON: Yes. I received this information from the witness

11 when he came here and I took that information and immediately made a

12 request for assistance.

13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. May I ask you one additional question,

14 Mr. Alajbegovic: In your statement, in paragraph 47, you give a literal

15 quote, that's what you did in 1999. What made it possible for you to make

16 a literal quote from that letter?

17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The letter made a great impression

18 on me and all those who were informed of the contents of the letter at

19 that time because we realised that the Serb forces and the Serb army were

20 preparing an offensive to cleanse the terrain and to expel us from the

21 hearths that we had been living and occupying for centuries, so we can't

22 forget the text of the letter and I am ready and able at all times to

23 quote it, 90 per cent of what was written in the letter.

24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but I may take it that you could not for the

25 full 100 per cent guarantee every word to be literally the words written

1 in that letter because it would require you to keep in your mind for seven

2 years a seven- or eight-line text. I would be hesitant to rely upon my

3 memory under those circumstances. Not about the general content of the

4 letter, but on literally quoting.

5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, yes.

6 JUDGE ORIE: You would have the same hesitation; is that a correct

7 understanding of your answer? You do not give a full 100 per cent

8 guarantee that the quote is in every respect a correct quote; is that a

9 correct understanding?

10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, but 90 per cent correct, I

11 would say.

12 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Ms. Loukas.

13 MS. LOUKAS:

14 Q. Mr. Alajbegovic, you've mentioned a couple of names I just want to

15 take you to. Petar Jesic. Do you remember mentioning that name?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. And you're aware that he was not a member of the SDS; correct?

18 A. I don't know.

19 Q. Okay. And a Mr. Sokolovic, you were aware that he wasn't a member

20 of the SDS, weren't you?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. He was a member of Mr. Mirko Pejanovic's party, wasn't he?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. Now, are you prepared to concede the possibility that Mr. Karadzic

25 did not meet with General Milosevic in Borika?

1 A. Yes. The village is Borika, a weekend house of the former Prime

2 Minister of Yugoslavia, Mr. Dzemal Bijedic, where Rajko Kusic had his

3 headquarters, and I'm quite sure that Karadzic did meet Milosevic there.

4 Q. Okay. So you don't allow for the possibility that that's not

5 correct; correct?

6 A. No.

7 Q. Now, are you prepared to concede the possibility that the Uzice

8 Corps of the --

9 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Loukas, you are constantly creating confusion.

10 You say, "You do not allow for the possibility; is that correct?" If the

11 witness then says No, that means that it's not correct or that he doesn't

12 allow, but your questions are a source of confusion.

13 Do you understand what I mean?

14 MS. LOUKAS: Well, Your Honour, I'm happy to ask the question

15 again.

16 JUDGE ORIE: But I take it that --

17 MS. LOUKAS: But I wouldn't have thought my questions were a

18 source of confusion, Your Honour.

19 JUDGE ORIE: Well, in this respect, they are. Yes, you say, "Do

20 you allow for the --" "You don't allow for the possibility that that's

21 not correct." That means you are certain --

22 MS. LOUKAS: Perhaps I have fallen into something of a double

23 negative there, Your Honour. I will concede that. I will concede that,

24 Your Honour.

25 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.

1 MS. LOUKAS: Sometimes one gets carried away with the flow of the

2 moment, Your Honour.

3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

4 MS. LOUKAS:

5 Q. So you don't concede that possibility, correct, Mr. Alajbegovic?

6 A. No.

7 Q. Okay. Now, moving on to the Uzice Corps of the JNA. You've given

8 evidence in --

9 JUDGE ORIE: Again, Ms. Loukas, if you ask "You don't concede that

10 possibility; correct?" and if the answer is No, then that means that the

11 witness says he concedes that possibility because you ask whether it's

12 correct that he doesn't concede. If he then says No, that means it's not

13 correct that he doesn't concede, so therefore he concedes, and that

14 creates the confusion.

15 Do you understand what I mean?

16 MS. LOUKAS: Yes, I understand what you mean but I don't think

17 that anyone in the courtroom is unclear about what the witness is saying,

18 Your Honour.

19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, and if you carefully listen to what he says and

20 if you carefully read what he says, the understanding of everyone is

21 exactly opposite from what he actually says, and that's, of course, is

22 situation which is confusing and which should be avoided to the extent

23 possible.

24 Please proceed.

25 MS. LOUKAS: Okay.

1 Q. Mr. Alajbegovic, you say there's no possibility --

2 MS. LOUKAS: No, I can't do this without going into a double

3 negative. I think I'll leave it alone, quite frankly, Your Honour.

4 JUDGE ORIE: You also could ask whether he's perfectly certain

5 that it happened.

6 MS. LOUKAS: Indeed, Your Honour, but it's really quite pointless.

7 JUDGE ORIE: That's exactly the same question, and the other

8 question, the way you put them - and you did that not once but you did

9 that several times - is, per se, confusing.

10 Let's not debate it, but perhaps we'll find the moment somewhere

11 in the next six months, a moment to talk about logics and the logic in

12 questioning.

13 Please proceed.

14 MS. LOUKAS: Indeed, Your Honour, but -- I'm sorry, Your Honour,

15 but I think we've spent rather a long time on a matter that didn't need so

16 long, quite frankly.

17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. It's 10.30, anyhow, Ms. Loukas.

18 MS. LOUKAS: Thank you, Your Honour.

19 JUDGE ORIE: I don't know whether you want to -- whether you would

20 enter a new subject.

21 MS. LOUKAS: I certainly will be, Your Honour, but I think I will

22 leave possibilities and double negatives alone for the time being.

23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Ms. Loukas, looking at the clock, do you have

24 in mind how much time you'd still need?

25 MS. LOUKAS: Well, Your Honour, I don't think I have much further

1 to go with this witness, quite frankly, but ...

2 JUDGE ORIE: If you say, "I need another five minutes," we'd --

3 MS. LOUKAS: I'm certainly not talking about five minutes.

4 JUDGE ORIE: Okay, but let's say within half an hour, you would

5 expect to ...

6 MS. LOUKAS: I would expect within half an hour, allowing for no

7 possibilities of double negatives, Your Honour.

8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Well, it saves some time.

9 You would then stay just within the 60 per cent, which is not an

10 absolute rule but -- so please be confident that there's no problem in

11 that respect. We'll adjourn until five minutes to 11.00.

12 --- Recess taken at 10.30 a.m.

13 --- On resuming at 10.59 a.m.

14 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Usher, you may escort the witness into the

15 courtroom.

16 [The witness entered court]

17 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Loukas, please proceed.

18 MS. LOUKAS: Thank you, Your Honour.

19 Q. Now, Mr. Alajbegovic, prior to the break, I think we were dealing

20 with this question of General Milosevic, a matter that you covered in

21 paragraph 20 of your ICTY statement of 1999.

22 Now, in that portion of your statement, you deal with this visit

23 of Colonel Dragomir Milosevic and Mr. Radovan Karadzic; correct?

24 A. Could you just tell me which paragraph it is?

25 Q. It's paragraph 20, Mr. Alajbegovic.

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. Now, Mr. Alajbegovic, if I were to tell you that our

3 investigations reveal that Colonel Dragomir Milosevic was not there at

4 that time, would that in any way change your evidence?

5 A. No.

6 Q. Okay. Now, in relation to the evidence you've given about the

7 Uzice Corps of the JNA being in the Rogatica municipality on the 19th of

8 May, 1992, if I were to tell you that our investigations thus far reveal

9 that that corps was not there on the 19th of May 1992 or anywhere around

10 that period, would that in any way change your evidence?

11 A. No.

12 Q. Now, Mr. Alajbegovic, going on to another topic, you gave evidence

13 at pages 71 and 74 of yesterday's transcript in relation to Mr. -- let's

14 see, we're talking about the negotiations here, and you indicated in your

15 evidence that you said, and this is page 71 at line 12: "Mr. Tomo, what

16 does all that mean? What does all this mean?" And you said in evidence

17 that his answer was this: "He said we can't wait any longer because there

18 is enormous pressure being exerted on us by the Main Board of the SDS and

19 the military command and that the SAO of Romanija had already been formed

20 and that this coincided with what I said in my statement and I stated

21 again that Rogatica officially belonged to the SAO Romanija, that they

22 couldn't wait any longer because pressure was being brought to bear

23 against them to get the job done."

24 Do you recall that question and answer, Mr. Alajbegovic?

25 A. Yes, I do recall it.

1 Q. And you also gave evidence at page 74, line 10, in response to a

2 question from Judge Orie, you said, "With every conversation, every

3 dialogue that we had, they always said that they would report to the Main

4 Board of the SDS in Pale. Whether they really did so, I don't know, but

5 that's what they said at the negotiations."

6 You recall that further answer in relation to that topic; correct?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. Now, this question of there being conversations with Mr. Batinic

9 and others with an expressed pressure coming from the Main Board of the

10 SDS, that's just simply not the truth, is it, Mr. Alajbegovic?

11 A. That is the truth that pressure was brought to bear and that that

12 is what they were saying.

13 Q. Okay. And of course you were aware in 1999 that this conversation

14 supposedly happened; correct?

15 A. 1999?

16 Q. Yeah, you were aware of it when you gave your statement to the

17 Office of the Prosecutor.

18 A. Yes.

19 MS. LOUKAS: Okay. If the witness might be shown his two

20 statements.

21 Q. Can you tell me where, in either of those statements, you mention

22 anything about the Main Board of the SDS, Mr. Alajbegovic?

23 MS. LOUKAS: Perhaps the Prosecution might care to concede that it

24 does not appear.

25 A. On page 3 of my statement, it says, "Parallel with the arming of

1 the Serb population, there were ongoing actions of the SDS party aimed at

2 disarming the Muslim population." This can directly be linked to the

3 context of the orders of the Main Board of the SDS that were being sent to

4 the local SDS board in Rogatica.

5 Q. Mr. Alajbegovic, you did not mention to the investigators this

6 conversation with Mr. Batinic about the Main Board of the SDS or any

7 conversations in relation to pressure coming from the Main Board of the

8 SDS, did you?

9 A. It is mentioned in the context of this conference of Batinic in

10 terms of what it should mean.

11 Q. You didn't mention the Main Board of the SDS, did you?

12 A. That was omitted, but the statements made by Batinic at the time

13 as negotiator of the SDS were moving along those lines.

14 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Loukas, the point is clear, unless there's any

15 further detail which we should know about, but your point is perfectly

16 clear to the Chamber.

17 MS. LOUKAS: Thank you, Your Honour.

18 Q. Let's move on to another topic, a topic in which you gave evidence

19 at page 86, 85 and 86 of the transcript from yesterday. This is in

20 relation to that topic of the letter.

21 Here we have a question from Judge Orie. The question was: "What

22 was more in the letter which is not quoted here? I would like to ask you

23 very much to focus on it because the other information we have read, the

24 statement, so therefore we are aware of that. Please proceed." And your

25 response was: "Right. The letter, the next portion says the Muslim

1 population, so 'population,' the word 'population' there is missing, and

2 the signature is the SDS of Rogatica permissions office. That is what is

3 missing here in this letter."

4 Do you recall that portion of your evidence yesterday?

5 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Loukas, just for the sake of the transcript, I'm

6 quoted --

7 MS. LOUKAS: Yes.

8 JUDGE ORIE: -- but the start of the quotation marks should be

9 before "The question was..." It was actually not my question but I put to

10 the witness a question which he did not seem to fully understand at that

11 moment. So therefore the quotation marks should not start with, "What was

12 more in the letter," but should start with, "The question was: What was

13 more in the letter..."

14 Because that's what the transcript says. It says, "The question

15 was: What was more in the letter..."

16 Do you understand what I mean?

17 MS. LOUKAS: Oh, I see what Your Honour is saying.

18 JUDGE ORIE: Because it was not my question.

19 MS. LOUKAS: Indeed, Your Honour. Well, of course I didn't insert

20 the quotation mark, but just for the record that -- it's clear.

21 JUDGE ORIE: Just for the record, that is clear. Please proceed.

22 MS. LOUKAS: Indeed, Your Honour, and the record is clear. Thank

23 you.

24 Q. Now, of course you recall giving that answer on page 86 of the

25 transcript. You've got the statements in front of you.

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. It's not included, this SDS signature, in your statements, is it?

3 A. It's not included. It was addressed to the SDS office in

4 Rogatica.

5 Q. So that doesn't appear on either of the statements that you gave;

6 correct?

7 A. Yes, but it's true. I stated it yesterday here, and it has to do

8 with the letter. Everything that I did not say in my statement, I

9 confirmed here yesterday all the things that were missing. That is to say

10 that in the letter it said that buses would be provided for the civilian

11 population in order to relocate them to the central parts of Bosnia where

12 the Muslim population is supposed to live from Visoko to Zenica. That is

13 missing from my statement and I confirmed it yesterday here.

14 MS. LOUKAS: If the witness might be shown a copy of the

15 supplemental information sheet, dated 25th of March, 2005.

16 Q. Now, Mr. Alajbegovic, you had a conference --

17 JUDGE ORIE: Do we have a B/C/S version of that supplemental

18 information sheet?

19 MS. LOUKAS: Yes, Your Honour, I can continue asking questions

20 while it is found.

21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, of course.

22 MS. LOUKAS:

23 Q. Mr. Alajbegovic, you, of course, had a conference with the

24 Prosecutor on the 25th of March. Last Friday; correct?

25 A. Yes.

1 Q. And you were asked to provide any corrections you might have of

2 your statements; correct?

3 A. They asked me whether I abided by this statement or whether I had

4 any corrections to make in view of the statement, so that's what I did.

5 Q. Now, in your supplemental information sheet, you don't even

6 mention this additional bit of the letter in relation to the SDS Rogatica

7 signature on the document, do you?

8 A. The office of the SDS in Rogatica, that's what it said and I

9 insisted on that.

10 Q. Did you tell the Prosecutor that during your conference on the

11 25th of March?

12 A. Yes, I told him and I also said where the letter could be found.

13 MR. HARMON: Your Honour, I accept responsibility for that

14 oversight. Indeed, this witness did tell me that and I did not enter that

15 into the supplemental information sheet. I apologise to counsel and I

16 apologise to the Court for this sheet being incomplete but the witness did

17 inform me of that.

18 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Harmon.

19 MS. LOUKAS:

20 Q. Now, let's move on to another topic, shall we, Mr. Alajbegovic.

21 And I'm now going to evidence you gave at page 57 of the transcript from

22 yesterday. Beginning on page 56, for the benefit of Your Honours and the

23 Prosecution, you gave this answer in response to a question which was:

24 "Did you have conversations with Rajko Kusic where he made assertions as

25 to the territory of Rogatica?" And Mr. Harmon says to you, "You have to

1 answer the question aloud," and your response was: "Yes, I can answer

2 very specifically. From September 1991 until the beginning of 1992, Rajko

3 Kusic called me up two or three times offering me maps and telling me that

4 this was Serbian territory. He produced coloured maps which I received as

5 preposterous, but on the second and third time he was more insistent and

6 even tried to intimidate me, saying that if we insist on seceding from

7 Yugoslavia, we would be deported and expelled unless we pledged loyalty to

8 Serbs because they considered they Rogatica to be part of Serb territory:"

9 Now, you recall giving that answer, Mr. Alajbegovic?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. And if we also go to page 92 of the transcript, and that's at the

12 bottom of page 92, you said in response to a question from Judge Orie, you

13 gave this response: "Furthermore, the ultimatums expressed in the

14 negotiations to surrender weapons, to be loyal to Serb authorities,

15 failing which we would be deported and ethnically cleansed from those

16 areas proved to be true in other territories. In those three areas along

17 those three axes where Muslim forces were concentrated, operations were

18 later developed such as the Zepa enclave operation and these areas were

19 cleansed from the Muslim population. That is another fact."

20 Do you recall giving that answer?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. Now, Mr. Alajbegovic, you've there indicated that the terms that

23 were used in the ultimatums by the negotiators were "deported or

24 expelled"; correct?

25 A. Yes.

1 Q. Those specific terms; correct?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. And of course when you gave your statements, you were aware that

4 those were the specific words used "deported or expelled"; correct? I'm

5 talking about your statements to the Bosnian authorities and to the Office

6 of the Prosecutor.

7 A. Well, all right. I mean, that's the context of the Bosniak

8 dialect, so it's a bit ambiguous, but deportation, expulsions and ethnic

9 cleansing have the same objective.

10 Q. You did not express these ultimatums in your statements as threats

11 of deportation or expelled, did you, Mr. Alajbegovic?

12 A. No, but all of that had to do with expulsions and ethnic

13 cleansing, an ultimatum, loyalty; if not, then the terrain would be

14 cleansed in order to have the population deported from the area.

15 Q. Now, Mr. Alajbegovic, you, as a police officer of 30 years and a

16 commander, know how important it is to use the specific words in your

17 statement that you say were actually used, don't you?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. Now, Mr. Alajbegovic, the reason those words do not appear in your

20 statement is because you are not telling the truth in your evidence in

21 chief about those words specifically being used. That's what I'm

22 suggesting to you.

23 A. That's what you said, but I was telling the truth.

24 Q. Now, Mr. Alajbegovic, I put it to you one last time: I suggest

25 that you are being an advocate for the Muslim cause rather than giving

1 objective evidence before this Trial Chamber as a police officer that will

2 assist the interests of justice. And I take it you would disagree with

3 that proposition; correct?

4 A. No.

5 Q. That is that you disagree with the proposition I've just put to

6 you; correct?

7 A. I do not agree with what you said. I'm not a lawyer for the

8 Muslim people. I am here in the role of witness and I wish to say the

9 truth. The truth is everything that could be established here yesterday

10 through my statements.

11 MS. LOUKAS: No further questions, Your Honours.

12 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Ms. Loukas.

13 Mr. Harmon, do you have any need -- is there any need to reexamine

14 the witness?

15 MR. HARMON: Your Honour, there is a need merely to clarify the

16 record that was made yesterday, and I would like to direct the witness's

17 attention and Your Honours' attention to page 42 of the transcript from

18 yesterday. This relates to paragraphs 14 and 15 in the English statement

19 to the Office of the Prosecutor.

20 Re-examined by Mr. Harmon:

21 Q. Yesterday, Mr. Alajbegovic -- first of all, Mr. Alajbegovic,

22 you have the statements in front of you and can you turn to paragraphs 14

23 and 15 and you will see that paragraphs 14 and 15 of the transcript deal

24 with your being an eyewitness to the unloading of weapons. And in your

25 evidence yesterday, you gave the following answer at lines -- I asked you

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

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

13 English transcripts.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 the question as follows on line 14 and the answer that you gave on line 16

2 is as follows: "Could you first of all give us an approximate date or

3 time when that distribution took place in your presence?" And your answer

4 was: "Yes, all this took place at the beginning of 1991."

5 Is that a correct answer?

6 A. That's a correct answer.

7 Q. Okay. So that -- the -- those events took place in the beginning

8 of 1991. When, in the beginning of 1991? Are you able to clarify that

9 further?

10 A. I think it's the beginning of February and the end of January. We

11 cannot confirm now whether it was the last day in the month of January

12 1992 or the first day of February 1992, but it's certain that this

13 happened in the beginning of 1992.

14 JUDGE ORIE: I notice that the question in your testimony

15 yesterday was about 1991 and now you're spontaneously giving further

16 details, you're referring to early 1992. Was it 1991 or was it 1992 or

17 was it -- let's say was it a couple of months before the armed conflict

18 started or was it one year and a half before that?

19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] If we are talking about 15 and 16,

20 then that happened in 1992.

21 MR. HARMON: That answers the question and that clarifies the

22 record. Thank you very much.

23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

24 MR. HARMON:

25 Q. Let me turn your attention to another area in the examination

1 where I believe there may be an error in the transcript.

2 Yesterday -- and I'm referring, Your Honours, to page 53 of the

3 transcript, specifically line 3 and specifically line 6.

4 For context, Mr. Alajbegovic, this deals with the occasion when

5 Colonel Dragomir Milosevic was present at the barricades and I asked you

6 the question: "Can you inform the Trial Chamber of the relationship

7 between Colonel Dragomir Milosevic and the formations that were under the

8 command of Rajko Kusic?"

9 In your answer, I won't read all of your answer, but I'll read

10 part of it, you said: "And that's what happened. Radomir Milosevic went

11 forward. Rajko Kusic went halfway to meet him. They stopped to talk

12 behind the roadblock and after they emerged, we realised that Rajko Kusic

13 too is under the command of Radomir Milosevic."

14 Is the name Radomir Milosevic the person you were referring to or

15 were you referring to someone else in your answer?

16 A. Dragomir Milosevic.

17 Q. So the answer should be -- when it's -- when the answer from

18 yesterday refers to Radomir Milosevic, that should be changed to Dragomir

19 Milosevic; is that correct?

20 A. Yes, yes. It's the commander of the barracks in Han Pijesak and

21 later the commander of the Sarajevo Romanija Corps, so it's that man.

22 Q. Now, you were asked a question on cross-examination by Ms. Loukas

23 about the words "ethnic cleansing" and "deportation" and the like.

24 MS. LOUKAS: Well, Your Honour, just so we can assure that we have

25 the correct quotation, the questions -- the specific question that I asked

1 was the terms "deporting" or "expelling."

2 I'll just get my assistant to get the exact page reference for

3 Mr. Harmon's benefit.

4 MR. HARMON: I don't need that, Your Honour. I think the witness

5 understood the question and I would just like to clarify.

6 Q. Can you tell us, Mr. Alajbegovic, what happened to the Muslim

7 villages after the -- after May the 22nd, 1992?

8 MS. LOUKAS: Your Honour, this does not arise from

9 re-examination. My cross-examination was specifically on this topic in

10 relation to the use of specific words and it's quite clear that my

11 cross-examination was focused in that way.

12 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Harmon.

13 MR. HARMON: Your Honour, I refer Your Honours to page 5 of the

14 Bosnian statement, the statement he gave to the Bosnian authorities, and

15 while we are talking about words, I'm talking about what happened and it

16 is consistent with the words that were testified to by this witness.

17 There's no number and lines in this but I'm referring to the middle of the

18 page, who he has discussed ultimatums and ultimatums to turn in weapons,

19 and if Your Honours turn to page 5 - paragraph 6, actually, but it's on

20 page 5, in the middle of the page, there is the --

21 JUDGE ORIE: Page 6.

22 MR. HARMON: Page 5, Your Honour.

23 JUDGE ORIE: Page 5.

24 MR. HARMON: It is paragraph 6 but it's page 5 and will you see

25 where he describes what happened when there was no compliance with the

1 ultimatums.

2 MS. LOUKAS: Well, Your Honour, I've looked at that paragraph

3 myself and it's quite clear what my questions in cross-examination were

4 about to a police officer of 30 years who knows how to give specific

5 evidence.

6 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Loukas, you're now repeating -- if you give me an

7 opportunity to read exactly ...

8 MS. LOUKAS: Thank you.

9 [Trial Chamber confers]

10 JUDGE ORIE: The objection is sustained.

11 Ms. Loukas did not pay any attention to what happened but

12 exclusively dealt with the words used during the negotiations and the

13 ultimatums which is a chapter which is not the same as what actually

14 happened so therefore, the later events are in evidence as part of the

15 Bosnian statement. So therefore, that's a separate chapter.

16 Please proceed.

17 MR. HARMON: I have no further questions. Thank you, Your Honour.

18 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.

19 MR. HARMON: Thank you, Mr. Alajbegovic.

20 JUDGE ORIE: Judge Hanoteau has one or more questions for you,

21 Mr. Alajbegovic, unless Ms. Loukas, the questions put by Mr. Harmon would

22 raise any need.

23 MS. LOUKAS: No, Your Honour. Mr. Harmon's re-examination is --

24 JUDGE ORIE: I took that more or less from the character of his

25 questions. Yes. Judge Hanoteau has one or more questions for you.

1 Questioned by the Court:

2 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] Yes, sir. I'm talking about the

3 period preceding the events -- on the eve of these unfortunate events.

4 I'm talking about that period, and I would like to understand how the

5 institutions worked, the institutions you belonged to. Therefore, I would

6 like you to try to use your imagination. You have witnessed a crime, an

7 ordinary crime, let's assume that; do you understand what I mean? You see

8 that this crime has been committed and I suppose in this situation, you

9 draw up a report even if you do not arrest the perpetrator of the crime.

10 Once this report has been drafted, whom do you send it to? You don't keep

11 all these notes to yourself.

12 A. Yes. There were reports because the sequence of events was that

13 the legal organs of authority of the Rogatica municipality since the war

14 conflicts broke out were active at a war location which was dislocated

15 from ...

16 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] I'm not talking about the events

17 that took place during the war. I'm not talking about that. I'm talking

18 about the events of everyday life. You are a police officer. You find

19 out that a crime or crimes have been committed, crimes that I would call

20 ordinary, crimes that have nothing to do with any conflict whatsoever.

21 What is the procedure that you follow in this case? From the time when

22 you find out that a crime has been committed, what do you do with your

23 notes, with your reports? Whom do you send them to?

24 A. I and my associates, the people -- the operative officers in the

25 police force on the territory of the Rogatica municipality, once we arrive

1 at the police station, we would jointly compile, and I set out the main

2 concept or said what happened and then the typists would do their part of

3 the job, we would compile the document, and the documents would be sent to

4 the chief of the police station to sign, and then he would assess

5 -- it would be up to him to assess whether to send it forward up the

6 ladder to the SUP or to telephone them, because some information was

7 communicated by telephone.

8 Now, as far as criminal responsibility is concerned --

9 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] So you send that to the SUP. You

10 said that the SUP was the secretary to the Ministry of the Interior.

11 A. Republican.

12 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] Of the republic.

13 A. Republican Secretariat of Internal Affairs of Bosnia-Herzegovina.

14 And one copy of the document would remain in our archives, in the

15 documents of our office, the office I was in at the time.

16 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] In that case, at some point, the

17 prosecutor or the judges had to be seized of these reports at some point,

18 so who would transmit, who would submit these reports to the prosecutor or

19 to the judges?

20 A. It was the department of our crime police, our crime police

21 department who maintained contact with the Prosecutor who was then active

22 in the Rogatica area. Now, in view of the fact that he was a Serb by

23 ethnicity, he didn't do much, he didn't mind much about things like that,

24 and considered them -- the evidence that we provided to be material that

25 wasn't serious.

1 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] The second question: Yesterday,

2 you told us that when you found out the facts that you mentioned when you

3 were a witness, for example, of the unloading of weapons from military

4 trucks, when you said that pictures were taken, pictures of crates of

5 ammunition that had been unloaded, you gave an answer to one of my

6 questions and you said that you drew up a report and that you sent that

7 report to the SUP. That's right, isn't it?

8 A. Yes, that is correct.

9 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] What sort of reaction did you

10 expect from the Secretariat of the Interior Ministry from the SUP, what

11 sort of reaction did you expect from them, what response?

12 A. We expected a positive reaction and permission to take more

13 concrete steps on the ground to disarm the paramilitaries.

14 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] Well, so you never received these

15 instructions.

16 A. No, we didn't. There was no feedback information. Everything

17 stopped there. It was just an oral agreement that we shouldn't complicate

18 matters and that we should stop the proceedings, and then once the

19 circumstances were right, certain steps might be taken.

20 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] One last question. You told us

21 that you were in command of several dozens of people, you were the

22 superior of a number of policemen. You mentioned about 100 policemen, if

23 I remember properly. Is that right?

24 A. Yes. The formation numbered 210 police employees, it was based on

25 a multi-ethnic principle, a full complement based on multi-ethnicity from

1 the ranks of Serbs and Muslims alike. The ratio was 60 to 40.

2 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] 60 per cent of what?

3 A. Muslims. 60 per cent Muslims and 40 per cent Serbs.

4 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] What prevented you from sending

5 your men to intervene following these events, these facts? When you were

6 a witness to the unloading of weapons of -- and when you saw that these

7 weapons were distributed to members of the civilian population, what

8 prevented you from taking steps, together with your men?

9 A. The answer is a very simple one: In all these operations, the

10 commander took part and with respect to war plans and whatever, it was

11 Mr. Mladen Vasiljevic, which means that I couldn't take any steps

12 bypassing him. I informed the chief of the police station, as I have

13 already told you; that's all I could do. And then the process went on

14 that way. I was told not to take any measures because it would complicate

15 the situation.

16 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] In your opinion, what would have

17 happened if you had played the role, the part that had been defined for

18 you by your institution? You were a representative of the state, you had

19 an authority as a police officer. What would have happened if you had

20 made use of that power, in your opinion?

21 A. My powers went along the lines of applying the provisions that

22 were in force of the Criminal Code; however, in view of the fact that the

23 situation was a complicated one on the ground and as the superiors

24 assessed the situation and their conclusion was that we shouldn't cause

25 problems or conflicts, let time tell and put it off. Because there were

1 attacks that were being planned against the Muslim population in Rogatica.

2 So that was the point. That's why the legal provisions were not applied

3 by the legal organs of power and authority.

4 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] But did you say that you did not

5 agree with that way of going about things?

6 A. Well, yes, but my position could do nothing to change matters.

7 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] This is my very last question:

8 What was your duty? According to your duty, what were you supposed to do?

9 A. At that point in time, you mean.

10 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] At that time.

11 A. My duty was to provide information through the police stations in

12 the field from the local communes to deal with all the -- with the problem

13 in hand, to assess it, to see the security situation and how far both

14 ethnic groups were threatened, to assess the activities of the police,

15 and to present all that material and report to the head of the police

16 station. According to the hierarchy, the chain of command going upwards,

17 he would inform the competent ministry or Secretariat of the -- of

18 Internal Affairs of Bosnia-Herzegovina.

19 JUDGE ORIE: I've got two questions to you as well, one in -- as a

20 follow-up from the questions put to you by Judge Hanoteau.

21 Was your position such that you had to obey orders from your

22 superiors or could you proceed on your own authority in these sensitive

23 matters of arming civilians?

24 A. I couldn't do anything independently, but through the method of

25 information, they asked me my opinion and these were assessed -- this was

1 assessed by my superiors, the more responsible people in the Rogatica area

2 and the Ministry of Interior of Bosnia-Herzegovina in the higher instance.

3 JUDGE ORIE: Who was your direct superior in the Rogatica area?

4 A. Well, we've already taken note of that but I'll repeat it again.

5 The head of the police station was Mr. Ismet Osmanovic who, at that time,

6 was the acting president of the Party of Democratic Action.

7 JUDGE ORIE: Did he explicitly instruct you not to further proceed

8 and not to further investigate the distribution of arms?

9 A. He wasn't explicit in the context but he always said that we

10 should wait to see how matters developed, all with the aim of putting off

11 a conflict, and the feedback information that we received -- that reached

12 me was that he, either in written form or oral form, did inform the

13 competent authorities in the Ministry for the Interior of

14 Bosnia-Herzegovina.

15 JUDGE ORIE: Was that usual in relation to such sensitive issues,

16 that instructions or orders were rather implicit than explicit? Do you

17 understand what I mean? Just to give you an example, I can say: "I

18 instruct you not to investigate this." Or as a superior, I could say, "I

19 think it would be wise that no further investigations take place in this

20 respect," which is not an explicit order. But what was the tone, I would

21 say, in those sensitive areas? Was this uncommon that there was no

22 explicit order or was that common?

23 A. Well, at that point in time, for us, it was not definite. The

24 Serb people didn't lack weapons because the Yugoslav People's Army had too

25 many weapons, a surplus of weapons, and if he were to issue orders that we

1 should investigate, then this might lead to direct conflict, which was not

2 the aim nor the policy pursued by the Democratic Action Party that he led,

3 all in the aim of keeping the peace and coexistence in the territory.

4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Although it's not a direct answer to my

5 question, I would like to move to another subject.

6 Yesterday, you told us about the facts that supported your

7 impression that Dragomir Milosevic had command over Mr. Kusic and his

8 formation. You told us that Mr. Milosevic insisted on separation effected

9 through blockades and that this became effective once Mr. Kusic and his

10 formation arrived, and that's -- that made you conclude that Mr. Milosevic

11 had command over Kusic and his formation. Is that a correct understanding

12 of your testimony of yesterday?

13 A. Yes. We drew the conclusion that at that point in time, through

14 the Kusic/Milosevic talks at the barricades and Kusic listening to the

15 orders to disband the blockade, which didn't mean a great deal at that

16 time because there was other blockades towards the enclave of the Zepa

17 local commune, that Kusic was directly under the command of Mr. Milosevic.

18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, well, you give further information now, but

19 since you yesterday very much insisted that at the arrival of the Kusic

20 formation, the wishes of Mr. Milosevic -- well, were -- became effective

21 through these formations, I would like to put to you that if one assumes

22 that Mr. Milosevic had similar wishes as Mr. Kusic would have, then would

23 it not be true that upon the arrival of the Kusic formation, that even if

24 there would have been no command relationship between Milosevic and Kusic,

25 that the Kusic formations could have created a same result, could have

1 created a same effect if Kusic wanted the same as Milosevic wanted, not

2 because he was ordered to do what Milosevic wanted, but because he wanted

3 it himself?

4 I'm just putting this because you said, "Upon arrival, this is

5 what happened; therefore, that was a command relationship between

6 Milosevic and Kusic." I'm now creating a picture in which two persons not

7 linked in a command relationship wished to do the same and therefore the

8 factual situation might be exactly the same as you described but now

9 without a command relationship between Milosevic and Kusic.

10 That was a very long question. Could you comment on this

11 possibility?

12 A. I'll do my best in providing an answer and showing you the

13 sequence of events. We're talking about the 25th of March. Milosevic had

14 more intelligence information about upcoming operations of Serb military

15 and paramilitary forces and the forces of the Yugoslav Peoples' Army for

16 attacks on Sarajevo, and most probably he wanted to put off negotiations

17 in April for the Rogatica area because the number of men, the forces, and

18 later on we saw that was true, that they would be transferred to the

19 Sarajevo battleground, theatre of operation. So that was some -- it

20 appeared as if Kusic, at that point in time, was not hierarchically linked

21 up, was not under the command of General Milosevic.

22 JUDGE ORIE: You say was not hierarchically linked but

23 nevertheless, your testimony yesterday was that he had -- or he exercised

24 command of the Kusic formation. You say if it's not in a hierarchy, what,

25 then, made Milosevic be in the position of commanding Kusic and his

1 formation?

2 A. He was an authority as a military superior and the man -- the top

3 man for the Romanija Corps coming -- that Rogatica came under, and Kusic

4 was aware of that. Now, whether he was hierarchically subordinate on the

5 basis of documents, I don't know, but one gained the impression that he

6 was, and this is what became apparent on the spot at the barricade,

7 because it was from this barricade that officially, to his commander, the

8 deputy to Milosevic, Dzambasovic, Kusic criticised him. He said, "What

9 are you waiting for? Go and line up the Muslim army."

10 Several days later, from Sarajevo by phone, he phoned me, the head

11 of the police station, Mr. Dzambasovic called me up personally, informing

12 us that he was on holiday at that point in time, and that was a whole

13 scenario. It meant that the role ceased at that point in time of the

14 Muslim representative in the units of the army as Milosevic's deputy.

15 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you for your answers. Any need for further

16 questions in relation to the questions put by the Judges?

17 MS. LOUKAS: No, Your Honour, no questions arise.

18 JUDGE ORIE: Same for you, Mr. Harmon?

19 MR. HARMON: No, Your Honour, same for me, thank you.

20 JUDGE ORIE: Then, Mr. Alajbegovic, this concludes your testimony

21 in this Court. We'd like to thank you for having come far away to The

22 Hague and having answered all questions, both questions of the parties and

23 of the Bench. I wish you a safe trip home again.

24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.

25 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Usher, would you please escort Mr. Alajbegovic

1 out of the courtroom.

2 [The witness withdrew]

3 JUDGE ORIE: The exhibits, Madam Registrar.

4 THE REGISTRAR: Number P565 has been reserved for the witness

5 statement compiled on 10 May 1996 before the investigating judge of the

6 high court in Sarajevo, the redacted version to be tendered by the

7 Prosecution to the Registry.

8 Exhibit P566 has been reserved for ICTY witness statement dated 26

9 January 1999, the corrected version to be tendered to -- by the

10 Prosecution to the Registry.

11 JUDGE ORIE: The same is true for the translations, because there

12 was the bottleneck, as far as I understand.

13 MR. HARMON: Your Honour, the bottleneck applies only to P566.

14 The changes that were made in the Bosnian statement were the changes that

15 in paragraph 1 of the date, as I recall, changed from 1974 to 1979, and in

16 the last paragraph there was a date, that number changed from 14 to 15, so

17 I think we are prepared to tender those particulars.

18 JUDGE ORIE: 566, yes, with the two dates, the two numbers.

19 MR. HARMON: Changed, yes.

20 JUDGE ORIE: And --

21 MR. HARMON: Those will be handed in to the registrar after the

22 first -- after the next break, Your Honour, but we're prepared to tender

23 that.

24 JUDGE ORIE: We'll receive that soon but -- okay.

25 THE REGISTRAR: P567, colour map and graph of the ethnic

1 composition of Rogatica.

2 P568, order from Rajko Kusic dated 01 August 1992; and P568.1, the

3 English translation.

4 P569, news article from Tanjug dated 17 May 1992; and P569.1,

5 English translation.

6 P570, news article from Glas dated 19 May, 1992; and P570.1,

7 the English translation.

8 P570 [sic], document list of identified Bosniak civilians killed

9 by the members of Rogatica Brigade during ethnic cleansing of Rogatica

10 municipal territory.

11 P572, colour map and graph of the ethnic composition of Rogatica

12 annotated by the witness.

13 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar. I would like to make a

14 suggestion to the parties, and that is the following: Ms. Loukas, you

15 have expressed your objections against the ICTY statement, at least

16 certain parts of it.

17 MS. LOUKAS: Indeed, Your Honour.

18 JUDGE ORIE: If, Mr. Harmon, you are redacting in view of the

19 changes made by the witness, that statement, could you try to agree on

20 whether there should be any deletions. I mean, Ms. Loukas dealt with

21 certain parts. Of course, some of the bits of the testimony of the

22 witness has clarified issues or -- and sometimes it's better to leave the

23 original text in it because reference is made to that; on the other hand,

24 we also have parts where a deletion would not harm at all because the

25 witness fully testified on that issue in viva voce testimony, and then I

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

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

13 English transcripts.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 can imagine that if that is not exactly the same as what we find on paper,

2 that Ms. Loukas would rather concentrate on the viva voce testimony.

3 Would there be a possibility that the parties agree whether any,

4 apart from the changes necessary on the basis of the testimony of the

5 witness, whether any smaller parts could be taken out such as to meet your

6 concerns about the content, whether the parties could agree on that so

7 that we have a final version which does not need any further amending?

8 MS. LOUKAS: I'm happy to enter into discussions with Mr. Harmon

9 on that point.

10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Harmon.

11 MR. HARMON: I am too, Your Honour. On the other hand, often

12 times there is reference to the paragraph and what's in certain

13 paragraphs, and I think that would confuse the record.

14 JUDGE ORIE: Of course it should be done with common sense, I

15 would say, of course. Sometimes it's not just ...

16 MS. LOUKAS: Your Honour, I'm sure that both Mr. Harmon and I can

17 approach the matter with some common sense.

18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I am fully confident as well. So any further

19 objections to the exhibits then, Ms. Loukas?

20 MS. LOUKAS: No, Your Honour, on the part of the Defence, no.

21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That means apart from P566, all the other

22 exhibits are admitted into evidence and the Chamber will later decide on

23 the amended version of P566.

24 Then is the -- the next witness to be called for the Prosecution

25 arrives for cross-examination only and protective measures are in place,

1 which are, Madam Registrar ...

2 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

3 JUDGE ORIE: And the protective measures, protective measures,

4 closed session, and as a consequence of a decision taken by another Trial

5 Chamber.

6 MR. HANNIS: That's correct, Your Honour.

7 JUDGE ORIE: Now, I wonder what would be a wise thing to do.

8 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

9 JUDGE ORIE: For many reasons, and I apologise to you, Mr. Hannis,

10 the Chamber would prefer to have an early break, so to have a 20-minutes

11 break now because some technical matters have to be dealt with which is

12 better done in the absence of the Chamber, and we would then restart at

13 12.25 and then continue until a quarter to 2.00.

14 MS. LOUKAS: Yes, Your Honour, there's just one matter I should

15 place on the record at this point very quickly, and that is that during my

16 conference with Mr. Krajisnik yesterday, it became apparent that he hadn't

17 been informed that the name of the next witness, the witness we're about

18 to deal with now, and I won't mention the name because of the protective

19 measures, so I gave Mr. Krajisnik the material in B/C/S that I had in my

20 possession in relation to this witness so that he could look at it

21 overnight. I think there was some changes between the weeks, between last

22 week and this week, and apparently the information that I thought had been

23 conveyed to Mr. Krajisnik had not been conveyed to him in terms of the

24 identity of the next witness, because there were some last-minute changes

25 about the order and what have you.

1 In any event, I have provided that information to Mr. Krajisnik in

2 the conference that we had yesterday, so subsequent to Mr. Hannis dealing

3 with the 92 bis aspects, I will need an opportunity for a further short

4 conference with Mr. Krajisnik.

5 JUDGE ORIE: Would this, then, not be the best -- the next 20

6 minutes, or you would need more time?

7 MS. LOUKAS: I would need more than 20 minutes, that's why I

8 mention it, Your Honour.

9 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

10 JUDGE ORIE: My computer might need 30 minutes, so if that would

11 do, Ms. Loukas, but of course, it's -- of course changes have been made

12 but the next witness is on the list already for quite some time.

13 MS. LOUKAS: Indeed, Your Honour, but Your Honour is quite aware

14 of the changes.

15 JUDGE ORIE: We'll adjourn until 12.35, almost 30 minutes, and

16 then we'll continue in closed session, which we are not in yet but we will

17 then -- after the break, we will start in closed session.

18 --- Recess taken at 12.07 p.m.

19 --- On resuming at 12.48 p.m.

20 [Closed session]

21 (redacted)

22 (redacted)

23 (redacted)

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11 Pages 11148-11176 redacted. Closed session.

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 (redacted)

2 (redacted)

3 (redacted)

4 (redacted)

5 (redacted)

6 (redacted)

7 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.51 p.m.

8 to be reconvened on Thursday, the 31st day of

9 March, 2005, at 9.00 a.m.

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25