1 Wednesday, 17 May 2006

2 [Open session]

3 [The accused entered court]

4 --- Upon commencing at 9.12 a.m.

5 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning to everyone.

6 Mr. 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, Mr. Registrar.

10 One procedural matter. I was informed that the Defence would like

11 to hand out a summary of the last motion to Mr. Krajisnik. Is this to

12 inform him or just to give details, Mr. Stewart?

13 MR. STEWART: It's to keep our client informed, Your Honour; it's

14 as simple as that.

15 JUDGE ORIE: He was not informed until now about this motion?

16 MR. STEWART: No, Your Honour, that isn't what I said at all.

17 JUDGE ORIE: No, but I asked -- yes, okay. I'm just trying to

18 clarify.

19 MR. STEWART: Yes, absolutely, Your Honour, and I'm clarifying as

20 well. Of course we keep him informed but we would like to update the

21 information, Your Honour, and that's what we have done.

22 JUDGE ORIE: Any problem? No problem so the request is granted.

23 MR. STEWART: Thank you, Your Honour.

24 JUDGE ORIE: Oh, yes, perhaps is the Prosecution intending to

25 respond to this motion? The last motion filed by the Defence?

1 MR. HARMON: We are considering it, Your Honour. We received it

2 yesterday and we are probably going to respond to that motion.

3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Any idea about timing.

4 MR. HARMON: We don't, Your Honour. I will be able to inform the

5 Court perhaps at the end of the day when we have a chance to consult on

6 it.

7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Yes. So that we can dispose it -- dispose of

8 the -- to deal with it and decide on the motion without delay. Then the

9 next small issue, procedural issue I would like to turn into private

10 session.

11 [Private session]

12 (redacted)

13 (redacted)

14 (redacted)

15 (redacted)

16 (redacted)

17 (redacted)

18 (redacted)

19 (redacted)

20 (redacted)

21 (redacted)

22 (redacted)

23 (redacted)

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

1 (redacted)

2 (redacted)

3 (redacted)

4 (redacted)

5 (redacted)

6 (redacted)

7 (redacted)

8 [Open session]

9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Krajisnik, I again remind you that you're still

10 bound by the solemn declaration given at the beginning of your testimony,

11 and Mr. Stewart you may proceed.

12 WITNESS: MOMCILO KRAJISNIK [Resumed]

13 [Witness answered through interpreter]

14 Examination by Mr. Stewart: [Continued]

15 MR. STEWART: Thank you, Your Honour.

16 Q. Mr. Krajisnik, good morning. I feel like a sort of deputy

17 headmaster. I wonder what progress you were able to make with the

18 homework on the map?

19 JUDGE ORIE: I'm informed about that. Mr. Registrar has been

20 provided with the result of your homework, Mr. Krajisnik. That is, same

21 map, different marking on it. I see that the original is returned.

22 Perhaps it would be a good idea -- oh, I see that even a computerised

23 version is -- well, as a matter of fact, I invited you, Mr. Krajisnik,

24 to -- not to make any further markings but on one of the copies I see that

25 more or less the whole of the strategic goals are laid out. That means if

1 I could say the corridor between Semberija and Krajina indicated, the

2 corridor from Semberija to Romanija indicated, the -- it does not say

3 anything specific about the Drina river but that's understandable on the

4 basis of your testimony, and then we see the Neretva River issue.

5 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, excuse me, may I just inquire? I'm not

6 sure -- it sounds as if Your Honour is looking at a piece of material that

7 we haven't yet seen.

8 JUDGE ORIE: I'm sorry, then, I should give it to you because we

9 now have different version of marked maps. Well, we have a lot by now.

10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I did what you

11 assigned me to do. This is the original map and this is a contribution

12 for further understanding. I did not add anything to your map.

13 JUDGE ORIE: No. I do see -- I suggest the following. Could this

14 be shown to the -- Madam Usher, could this be shown to the parties?

15 Yes. And could this be shown to the parties as well? If you give

16 that to the Prosecution, then this one to the Defence, please, and then to

17 the Prosecution.

18 [Trial Chamber confers]

19 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber suggests the following to the parties.

20 The map as I marked it yesterday, to have it admitted in order to better

21 understand the testimony of yesterday, therefore we can't miss it, not

22 because it's such a beautiful map. Then to add to that, same size, the

23 map on which Mr. Krajisnik clearly indicated the -- where approximately

24 the corridor would have to be.

25 Mr. Krajisnik made some other -- some markings on the same map in

1 smaller size, also including other parts, I take it, from the strategic

2 goals. The Chamber leaves it to the parties to what extent they would

3 like to have that admitted into evidence as well, because it certainly

4 would need -- there are quite a lot of arrows which have not been part of

5 the testimony until now so if you'd like to further explore that, the

6 Chamber will not at this moment insist on it. You could use that material

7 prepared by Mr. Krajisnik.

8 MR. TIEGER: Your Honour, one quick question. The Court referred

9 to the document marked by Mr. Krajisnik. I take it that was a document

10 that was marked yesterday.

11 JUDGE ORIE: No, no. This is the one I marked yesterday. That

12 would then be [indiscernible] C2. That would then become C2A and then the

13 map exactly the same map on which Mr. Krajisnik indicated in red in more

14 detail there my idea on where the corridor would be is clarified to make

15 that C2B and whatever of the other markings you'd like to use or have

16 explained by Mr. Krajisnik, you're free to do so. Did you receive copies

17 of the --

18 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, we did, and in the immediate run-up to

19 court we hadn't actually appreciated that there were three other items

20 attached to the piece of paper. Your Honour, I'm -- I'm more than -- more

21 than happy with Your Honour's suggestion, which -- because it's clear from

22 the transcript what the provenance of that C2B map is. Your Honour, I was

23 going to suggest though that, yes, indeed it will be appropriate to seek

24 explanation from Mr. Krajisnik on the other three documents that he's

25 received -- he's prepared.

1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

2 MR. STEWART: So those -- well, at some convenient point those

3 have should have an appropriate D exhibit number, Your Honour.

4 JUDGE ORIE: I leave it up to you to what extent you would like to

5 deal with that. Then I add to that, there is another map, which, from

6 what I see from the Cyrillic, is a marked Cutileiro, but -- at least it's

7 related to Cutileiro although it's not exactly the same as what we saw

8 before.

9 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, I think -- would Your Honour please

10 hold that up just for a second? I think that may be one of the items that

11 we -- yes, it seems to be, Your Honour. That is -- I mentioned we

12 received a clip of items, and the first -- of the four items I've got the

13 first one is the smaller version what C2B, recalling Your Honour's

14 suggestion.

15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

16 MR. STEWART: And then we've got the same -- the second item is

17 the same reduced map marked in a different way, with different red lines.

18 The next one is the same map again, marked in a further different way with

19 red lines and black arrows and then the fourth item in the little clip

20 appears from what I can see from a few metres away, Your Honour, to be

21 just what Your Honour was holding up a few minutes ago, the Cutileiro map

22 marked with some red lines, arrows and, well, some sort of Pentagon.

23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, the only difference with the first map you

24 mentioned, it's different from 2B that in 2B the marking is made by hand

25 and here it seems to be a computerised red, but the shape is exactly the

1 same.

2 MR. STEWART: In that case, Your Honour I'm not sure I've even

3 just seen what's now C2B, so may I, Your Honour, glance at it just have a

4 glance at it? It's probably not --

5 JUDGE ORIE: It's exactly the same but now handmade instead of

6 computerised.

7 MR. STEWART: Oh, yes, Your Honour I had seen that.

8 JUDGE ORIE: That's what I thought.

9 MR. STEWART: It's got a tiny little bit of red against Han

10 Pijesak but I doubt whether that's going to affect the price of fish very

11 much.

12 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar, the map marked by me will now be C2A

13 and the other one will be C2B. Yes. Please proceed, Mr. Stewart.

14 MR. STEWART: Has Mr. Krajisnik now got this material,

15 Your Honour, or has he --

16 JUDGE ORIE: Well, I have dealt with mine. So if any of those --

17 but I see that you have -- you have copies with you, Mr. Krajisnik.

18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. You can have a look. All the

19 copies are the same like your copies. All of these were copies for me.

20 Perhaps somebody can have a look at it.

21 JUDGE ORIE: We have seen the copies. Let's just be sure that we

22 know exactly on which map we are working so what markings are found on the

23 map you're asking questions about, Mr. Stewart.

24 MR. STEWART: Yes, Your Honour. I probably just need for the

25 moment, Mr. Krajisnik has got this clip of four items. I just need to

1 have -- I'm in Your Honour's hands but I just need to have a simple system

2 of numbering for those four items so we with switch easily from one to the

3 other.

4 JUDGE ORIE: What about giving a serial number for the whole of it

5 and then start working A, B, and C. Mr. Registrar the next number would

6 be.

7 THE REGISTRAR: D192, Your Honours.

8 JUDGE ORIE: D192, and we'll see how many you use and then we will

9 assign A, Bs, and Cs.

10 MR. STEWART: If I were for the moment to call this clip of four

11 documents A, B, C, D, that with make life much easier.

12 JUDGE ORIE: Then I have to know which one you're going to use.

13 MR. STEWART: No, no, no, Your Honour, physically they are in an

14 order. We've all got them in the same order, A, B, C, D.

15 JUDGE ORIE: I've got them loose, so therefore --

16 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, perhaps Your Honour can be given --

17 I've got the same thing as Mr. Krajisnik's got, Your Honour.

18 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Then we make D192 this map 04022623, marked

19 with only a red Semberija-Romanija corridor line, nothing else marked on

20 it. Then the second one, same map with some eight black arrows on it, and

21 some red markings, Krajina in the west, Posavina corridor, Romanija,

22 Semberija corridor, one on the -- the real south of Bosnia-Herzegovina,

23 well, the map with a lot of ...

24 MR. STEWART: That's the one, Your Honour, yes.

25 JUDGE ORIE: That's the one. Okay, that will be 190 -- D192B and

1 then C is similar but the markings a bit different. One of the striking

2 differences being that the Posavina corridor is not marked by parallel

3 lines but by two lines coming together at the eastern part of those two

4 lines.

5 MR. STEWART: Yes, and there is a little extra line. That's the

6 one, Your Honour, yes.

7 JUDGE ORIE: And an extra line going north to the west. That will

8 be 192C. And then the last one is a grey map with -- which is a different

9 map but it's -- it seems that the name of Cutileiro appears on the bottom

10 of it in Cyrillic. It's greyish and there are quite a lot of markings,

11 red only, all the arrows in red. Please proceed.

12 MR. STEWART: Thank you, Your Honour. I'm quite confident that is

13 exactly the right stuff in the right order. And Mr. Krajisnik is nodding

14 he has that as well.

15 Q. Mr. Krajisnik, let's look at A then first of that clip. Now, is

16 the position that all you have done on there by marking the computerised

17 red line is indicate, in a slightly more refined and defined way, what was

18 under discussion yesterday and was marked by His Honour on His Honour's

19 map, C2A with dotted lines. So you just attempted to simplify and

20 indicate very specifically the proposed location of that corridor?

21 A. Yes, you're right.

22 Q. So Mr. Krajisnik, I'm not proposing to ask any further question

23 based on that map except to ask you straight away whether you feel

24 immediately that there is any explanation that you really need to add in

25 relation to this map at this point.

1 A. I fulfilled the obligation given me by His Honour, and I tried to

2 mark where we thought -- where we planned arbitrarily the route of the

3 corridor, and the corridor was subject to agreement with the parties. And

4 that was our right. So that's the corridor that goes the length of the

5 Drina. And, of course, it was subject to talks, as far as I know, where

6 we need territories and so on.

7 But those here are Serb areas through which the corridor was

8 supposed to pass.

9 JUDGE ORIE: Judge Hanoteau has a question.

10 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] Terribly sorry, my question is

11 slightly naive maybe, but that corridor that you showed us as you draw it,

12 first of all, tell us why do you need it there in an area which seems to

13 be completely Serbian, from the colour at least, on the map. I understand

14 that you would want to place the corridor in a non-Serbian area but why

15 would you draw a line on a -- on the territory that seems to be absolutely

16 Serbian? And second question, what is the status of this corridor? Does

17 that mean that it's a road? Is it a protected road by military presence

18 or is it a road that has a particular status? Could you please answer

19 those two questions, sir?

20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I would appreciate it

21 if you could put in front of you the first -- the last map, the Cutileiro

22 map, in order to follow my explanation.

23 The background we worked against was the Cutileiro map. That was

24 before the armed conflict. All this inside, Romanija, et cetera, are

25 unconnected Serb territories, just like Krajina was disconnected. Then

1 when the armed conflict broke out, we said just like we had to take

2 Krajina out of its isolation, we have to connect these territories,

3 because different times had begun. So the background for our work was

4 this map and we wanted to improve the Cutileiro plan with those corridors

5 as a new component that emerged during the armed conflict. Therefore, the

6 whole area was under blockade, isolated, and we wanted to save it from its

7 isolation. That's the reason why this corridor starts, like His Honour

8 said, on the top, where the corridor is cut off by Muslim territory, and

9 we were saying we should exchange, swap now, so that Romanija and Birac

10 are no longer cut off. That's the different.

11 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] Thank you very much, sir. Thank

12 you.

13 MR. STEWART: Sorry, did Mr. Krajisnik deal with Your Honour's

14 second question? I'm not sure.

15 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] Yes. Well, I understood that

16 there was -- there was no need nor a special status because the presence

17 of this corridor depended on an agreement and an exchange of population.

18 So if there is an agreement between parties, there was no need for a

19 special party to defend the existence of this special corridor.

20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] An exchange of territories, an

21 exchange of territories was needed in order to effect that. Like

22 exchanges were made in order to make the Posavina corridor and the

23 Cutileiro plan allowed for this.

24 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.

25 MR. STEWART: Yes, Your Honour, I just wanted to make sure

1 Your Honour's question hadn't slipped through the net.

2 JUDGE HANOTEAU: Merci.

3 MR. STEWART:

4 Q. Mr. Krajisnik, then, can we then go to -- it's the next one, map B

5 in this clip of maps? And I'm sticking with strategic objective 3 here at

6 the moment, Mr. Krajisnik. I don't want to stray into the other bits of

7 the maps that deal with the other numbered objectives. So staying with

8 that, there is a variation here. You've -- the main line, zig-zag line

9 north-south, appears to be exactly the same as on map A but there is added

10 a line branching off to the northeast. Could you explain that? Well,

11 first of all, you're clear which line I'm talking about, Mr. Krajisnik,

12 are you? The one that runs up to the eastern border.

13 A. That's clear.

14 Q. It's a sort of spur. What is the explanation of that addition by

15 you to the map?

16 A. Again, it is necessary to look at the Cutileiro map and see --

17 Q. That's D.

18 A. That's the last one. And you will see this whole area ended up in

19 Muslim hands, although there is a connection with Serbia in this area, in

20 the territory of not Skelani but Bratunac. Therefore, we were saying, in

21 case we are unable to agree on an exchange of territory to connect

22 Semberija and Majevica, Semberija and Romanija, rather, as we see on the

23 Cutileiro map, we will demand that the corridor pass on the right side.

24 Let me explain why Mr. Cutileiro gave this territory to the Muslim

25 side, because it's practically their territory, their territory apart from

1 the Cazin Krajina is compact, connected, whereas we lacked connection in

2 this part here because Herzegovina was connected to Montenegro and

3 therefore was not isolated. We accepted that as a compromise, namely the

4 Muslim side would have one separate territory whereas we would have two,

5 Krajina and Romanija. Now, when the war broke out, we took this

6 blue-green map, the working map, reflecting our rights, in order to

7 establish this corridor and connect Semberija with Krajina. That was the

8 reason. So we said, if you don't want an exchange, then give us what is

9 ours. Let us use the passage on the right-hand side in order to form a

10 Serb territory.

11 Q. So to simplify, Mr. Krajisnik, from the point where that spur goes

12 off to the northeast up to the border, the -- we are talking about

13 alternatives, but this was the less-preferred but alternative proposal if

14 the main proposal going right up to the north, into Semberija, could not

15 be achieved? Is that right?

16 A. The first map that I drew is the basic map, and it was our goal to

17 connect our territories in that way. We wanted to connect Serb

18 territories in Bosnia and Herzegovina amongst themselves and as an

19 alternative, if this should be impossible, to connect with Serbia and go

20 through Serbia because we needed agreement with the Muslim side on this.

21 This was just a necessary contingency plan, an alternative, and the first

22 one is the basic option. You're right.

23 MR. STEWART: Your Honour that's a slightly different way of

24 suggesting the same thing but I would suggest that that is clear and that

25 is a clear confirmation such as I was seeking. I hope Your Honours are

1 satisfied.

2 JUDGE ORIE: It's perfectly clear to us.

3 MR. STEWART: Thank you, Your Honour.

4 Q. I'd said, Mr. Krajisnik, I'm sticking with strategic objective 3

5 for the moment, consequently there appears to be nothing more to be added

6 in relation to strategic objective 3 arising from map C and D because

7 you've already commented on D. You're content with that, Mr. Krajisnik,

8 are you? Just so far as strategic objective 3 is concerned, there is

9 nothing more now to be added by comment on these maps?

10 A. Nothing. Or rather no, no, nothing.

11 Q. Okay. Good.

12 Mr. Krajisnik, I'm going to then -- I'm going to jog back to

13 objective 2, apologies, we have to go backwards and forwards a little bit,

14 for this reason, that you have included in these newly produced maps of

15 yours, a variation, variant, as between maps B and C. I just observe that

16 there appears to be, apart from an arrow, no significant difference

17 between B and D but could you explain, please, the slightly more elaborate

18 marking in the north in relation to obviously strategic objective 2 that

19 we see on map C?

20 A. Just one -- no, yes. I think this second map is clear but let me

21 explain some more. That is strategic goal 2 that was to include all three

22 sides, the Serb, Croat and Muslim sides because we have passage from Brcko

23 where we see this arrow and there is a section of Muslim territory there.

24 That should be ensured through exchange, so that the corridor can pass

25 this way. Related to this corridor, at the bottom, we see Kupres. On

1 this point, I explained this is in the western part. I explained that

2 Croats were interested in it because they wanted Central Bosnia connected

3 with Croatia so I drew this arrow to show the potential exchange capacity

4 and Croat interest in exchanging territories. In this Posavina area, we

5 have an arrow showing Muslim territory.

6 MR. STEWART: Your Honours, I wonder perhaps this map C could go

7 on the ELMO.

8 THE WITNESS: [No interpretation]

9 MR. STEWART: Okay. That's great, thank you, Madam Usher.

10 Q. Mr. Krajisnik, you appreciate the two items that you're

11 particularly being asked about are just where the black arrow is in the

12 northeast, that -- sort of open -- that V-shaped addition to the east and

13 then the almost vertical line running slightly east or north at the other

14 end to the west that goes up to the border. Those are the two changes as

15 between C and D so it's your explanation of each of those additions which

16 is being sought. Take them whichever way round you like.

17 A. This is Posavina. And there you see there are blue areas, there

18 are Serbs, but there is a large number of Croats as well. In the

19 Cutileiro plan, this went to the Croat ethnic community. If you look at

20 the last page, you will see this was Croat and we talked in Graz about two

21 things. One is outlet to the sea. But the second one was how to ensure

22 our corridor there. And then we showed the previous map, showing where

23 the Muslim side would be included and this map showing where the Croat

24 side would be included. So this is how the corridor would be resolved.

25 How? It would go through the Serb and Croat side up to the border here.

1 This is Muslim territory here. The missing part for us. And since there

2 was a Croat representative at that meeting, one option -- this was

3 Croatia. One option was to make a bridge there and in case we don't agree

4 with the Muslims, we would have this bridge to cross to this territory

5 here whereas Croats wanted this part here to connect Central Bosnia and,

6 of course, these territories there are Serb. It would certainly require

7 negotiations, including Croatia and, by necessity, the Muslim side because

8 that would concern a change of borders of Bosnia-Herzegovina and Croatia.

9 That was one option that was exploited later when we couldn't find a

10 solution for Brcko in which both Muslims and Serbs had a vested interest.

11 Q. I apologise for interrupting, just for a moment.

12 MR. STEWART: Your Honour I'm certainly not in the business of

13 encouraging endless markings of maps but it occurs to me the that last two

14 or three minutes - it's certainly not Mr. Krajisnik's fault - are likely

15 to be completely incomprehensible on a later reading of the transcript.

16 But --

17 JUDGE ORIE: You make it comprehensible, Mr. Stewart, either by

18 inviting Mr. Krajisnik to mark or to describe for the transcript.

19 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, I'm more than happy with the marking.

20 I simply wanted to be sure Your Honour's weren't going to be resistant to

21 further marking of maps.

22 Q. Mr. Krajisnik, you -- as soon as you started referring to bridge

23 and using the pointer, I am going to have to ask you, please, to make a

24 marking on that map to indicate at each point when you refer to a specific

25 feature or a specific point such as making a bridge there. I ask you to

1 mark it and then we'll consider some suitable label for it.

2 So --

3 A. I said that under the Cutileiro plan, this was Posavina, 1, and it

4 went to the Croat side. You will see that on the Cutileiro plan. And

5 then this map reflects one possibility that includes only an exchange of

6 territory between Serbs and Croats. Then another option was found. Here,

7 in this part, number 2, there was supposed to be a bridge, in order for

8 the corridor to cross to Croatia, and here, number 3, there would be a

9 bridge that would take us across to the Bosnian side. In this way --

10 sorry, one more thing. Number 4 is the area near Kupres the Croats were

11 anxious to have in order to have a connection with Central Bosnia, between

12 central Bosnia and Croatia. So that was the subject of our talks, in

13 addition to the outlet to the sea. If we were only to talk about an

14 exchange of territory between Serbs and Croats, and it included also those

15 blue areas, number 5, Serb areas that would go to the Croat side.

16 So we had the Cutileiro plan before us and we worked on this map

17 to see whether we could compact territories and exchange territories to

18 arrive at an acceptable solution.

19 Under the Cutileiro plan, the number 4 was supposed to go to the

20 Serbs but the other part here wasn't. It wasn't agreed. It was just

21 discussed as an option. Although the primary option was one shown in the

22 basic map. We wanted the corridor to go entirely through Bosnia and

23 Herzegovina, without diverting into Croatia but we needed an agreement for

24 that with the Croat side.

25 Q. The basic map for these purposes is map B, when you're referring

1 to this corridor?

2 A. Yes, yes.

3 Q. Were you going to add an explanation, then, of the spur at the

4 western end that runs up to the northern border? Just to the left on the

5 page of number 5.

6 A. You mean this here.

7 Q. No, up at the top, the very north?

8 A. The top?

9 Q. Yes recognition just to the very left of where you've put your --

10 yes, that's right.

11 A. This part here, where the refinery Brod was located, that's number

12 6, that parliament of Posavina was supposed to go to the Serb side. In

13 our talks, that was discussed, because we told them, you have three or

14 four refineries in Croatia and it would be fair for us to have some of the

15 facilities too. We discussed that this line should look like this.

16 I have to say for the benefit of the Trial Chamber that there

17 could be some adjustments to this map. But this is what we talked about

18 and I tried to depict the map as faithfully as I could. There could be a

19 margin of error of 100 metres up or down but this is the -- this reflects

20 the essence of our discussions.

21 Q. Yes, thank you, Mr. Krajisnik.

22 JUDGE ORIE: I suggest that we take a clean copy and leave that to

23 be 192C, and that the marked copy will then be D192E.

24 Please proceed.

25 MR. STEWART: Absolutely, Your Honour.

1 Q. And I'm not going to ask you anything more on map D then in

2 relation to strategic objective 2 or 3. Your Honour may I simply observe

3 that although a Cutileiro map D is different from the main Cutileiro map

4 in that it only distinguishes between Serb and non-Serb areas and so

5 doesn't draw any distinction between Muslim and Croat areas which are all

6 white. So one does need to look at the proper Cutileiro map for that?

7 JUDGE ORIE: And one of the other major difference with D7B which

8 is the Cutileiro map in D7B we find Semberija and Romanija connected.

9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I would appreciate it --

10 MR. STEWART: Absolutely right, Your Honour, that difference is

11 plainly there as well. But in terms of use of map, that -- the fact that

12 the Croat and Muslim areas are not distinguished on that map, D, is

13 something, well, just to watch out for, Your Honour, if I may put it that

14 way.

15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. Yes. Certainly. I had this

16 copy not the other one. I'm so sorry. If necessary, I'll draw what is

17 needed very easily.

18 MR. STEWART:

19 Q. Mr. Krajisnik, I don't think it matters?

20 JUDGE ORIE: It's perfectly clear.

21 MR. STEWART: It was just so that --

22 JUDGE ORIE: The only question arises is why the -- whether first

23 of all D192D lacks some information which we find on D7B but, of course,

24 the differences in connected Serb areas raises the question of whether

25 this was an earlier stage of the negotiations or a later stage and that's,

1 of course, still unclear.

2 MR. STEWART: Yes.

3 Q. Mr. Krajisnik, what I'd like to do now is just turn back to - I

4 hope you still have it there - the minute or record of the 16th assembly

5 session that we were looking at yesterday. It's still on page 13 of the

6 English, which is page 7 of the Serbian. We already looked at the

7 paragraph where Dr. Karadzic discusses the third strategic goal. And then

8 the next paragraph he says, "The fourth strategic goal is establishment of

9 the border on the Una and the Neretva rivers, on their working maps

10 proposed at the last session, the European Community recognised the border

11 on the Una. They marked the Una as our wartime border and painted

12 everything east of it blue."

13 Now, Mr. Krajisnik, there appears -- you've done marking on map B

14 and exactly the same marking on map C, and apparently exactly the same

15 marking on map D in relation to strategic objective 4, and I'm not sure

16 whether you still have in front of you, Mr. Treanor's map. That's P68 tab

17 16. But it also appears, Mr. Krajisnik, that there is no material

18 difference between your markings on all those maps and what Mr. Treanor

19 has marked on his map. First of all, can you confirm that that's correct,

20 Mr. Krajisnik? Mr. Treanor's marking goes further on, around the border.

21 That's clear. But otherwise, so far as your marking is concerned, that

22 coincides, doesn't it, with Mr. Treanor's marking for all practical

23 purposes?

24 A. Well, it is with regret that I have to say that Mr. Treanor's view

25 is quite different from what our intentions were. And I can explain what

1 the difference is.

2 Q. Yes. Please. We could take the objective -- I'm sorry, objective

3 4 is divided into two geographically separate points. Up in the

4 northwest, the Una, and down in the south, the Neretva. Mr. Krajisnik we

5 will take them in alphabetical order, shall we? You were looking at

6 Neretva. Let's deal with that first.

7 A. This is the Neretva River on this map. However, it is not being

8 said here that the Neretva River should be the boundary but the valley of

9 the Neretva River. You can take a look. I'm sure that that's what it

10 says here. Sorry, just a moment, please.

11 Well, I can't see now.

12 The Una and Neretva rivers, yes, well, it says the Neretva River

13 but it's really the Neretva River valley that is meant. Our only

14 objective was this one here, near Mostar. That is where.

15 Q. Mr. Krajisnik we will sort out later what to do about exhibit

16 numbers. If you're going to say something like "this one here," I'm

17 inviting you to -- if it's a point of any significance to mark what you

18 mean by "here". Do you see? Otherwise it's not possible for anybody

19 later to understand what your explanation has been. So whenever there is

20 a significant point on the map for your explanation, perhaps you'd mark it

21 in just the same way that you did a few minutes ago the other map?

22 JUDGE ORIE: I think the only reference Mr. Krajisnik made to the

23 map is he said this is the Neretva River here. I don't think even without

24 any further marking, and also in view of the testimony that followed, that

25 it should be rather the valley than the river itself, that it's clear

1 enough on -- at least Mr. Treanor's map, and I think we are looking to

2 Mr. Treanor's map at this moment.

3 MR. STEWART: Two comments, if I may, Your Honour. First of all I

4 was trying to led off the problem before it arose so we didn't have to go

5 over anything twice and also, Your Honour, I must say with respect, I

6 don't entirely share Your Honour's confidence in relation to page 21, line

7 7 and 8 where Mr. Krajisnik said "our only objective was this one here

8 near Mostar." We can all identify where "near Mostar" is but that does

9 seem to be a reference to a specific point on the map.

10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Invite Mr. Krajisnik to make any markings you

11 would like him to make though we might need a clear copy because this map

12 has been admitted into evidence as it is at the moment.

13 MR. STEWART: I'm more than happy to give -- I can't give him mine

14 because I've marked mine. It would obviously if that is the actual

15 original exhibit, it would be better. I think we are given assistance

16 such as we are often given and greatly appreciated by the Prosecution

17 team.

18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart, may I make a suggestion? If you see any

19 need of marking just ask-- invite Mr. Krajisnik and just tell him could

20 you please mark Mostar with a 1 or 2? That's ten words. I'm quite sure

21 Mr. Krajisnik will do it. Please proceed.

22 MR. STEWART:

23 Q. Mr. Krajisnik, please proceed.

24 A. I marked it over there on that map, and on this one that you have

25 before you. I marked the Neretva River valley area. That is the

1 strategic objective, not the entire current of the Neretva River but

2 exactly where Mostar is. The Neretva River valley where Mostar is. I can

3 show that, but you have this marked exactly. It's perhaps 10 or 15

4 kilometres. We were interested in that because you can see on this

5 blue-green --

6 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Krajisnik, you're referring, I take it to the

7 D192D, the most southerly small parallel lines going approximately

8 north-south, almost at the bottom? Is that what you had in mind?

9 MR. STEWART: And I think B and C, Your Honour, where there is a

10 clear red line.

11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. On C there is the small red line with -- could

12 I say -- which is the starting point for the black arrow going in

13 southwesterly direction, the middle of the 3 on that map.

14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. Yes, yes.

15 JUDGE ORIE: That's clear. Please proceed.

16 MR. STEWART:

17 Q. Mr. Krajisnik, was it -- well, that's Neretva. Let's just look at

18 the other part of objective 4 first, the Una River up in the northwest.

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. Do you -- your again B and C, you have marked not along the

21 borders but running from the border to the southwest, to the border on the

22 northeast. Do you wish to add any explanation in relation to that which

23 is marked on maps B, C, and D?

24 A. Since we have Mr. Treanor's map, this is the Una River. Now, I

25 have to mark this here. From here to the very end is the border with

1 Croatia, with Croatia.

2 Q. Excuse me, Mr. Krajisnik, could you mark with a number 1 --

3 Mr. Krajisnik, when you say here and you point to the map, would you mark

4 that with a number, please?

5 A. I will. From here, from this part, to this other part here, so

6 this is 1. This is 2. That is the riverbed itself, or rather 3. That is

7 the river that's the border between Bosnia-Herzegovina and Croatia. From

8 1 up to 4 over here is the boundary within Bosnia-Herzegovina. So this is

9 the Una River as a strategic objective within Bosnia-Herzegovina. From 4

10 up to 5, there is also a boundary between Bosnia-Herzegovina and Croatia.

11 Our strategic goal is only part of the Una River here, number 6, which

12 separated Muslim and Serb parts within Bosnia-Herzegovina. That's what I

13 drew on these maps. We were not interested now in borders with Croatia.

14 So this is what was drawn on the Cutileiro plan. Take a look and you will

15 see.

16 Q. And Mr. Krajisnik, I do notice that by comparing the maps, it

17 looks as if Mr. Treanor's line just west of -- you see where your number

18 6, your black line, goes down and joins the blue line, you see that?

19 A. Yes, yes. You mean Mr. Treanor, right?

20 Q. Yes. Just to the west -- if we go to where that black line joins

21 the blue line, if we go to the west, it looks as if Mr. Treanor's line

22 does go out noticeably further to the west there than your red lines on

23 maps B, C and D. First of all, do you agree and is that quite deliberate,

24 so far as your line marking is concerned?

25 A. I did not deliberately do this. It's very clear that this is the

1 Una River, and possibly this was a mistake, well, since I don't have the

2 actual Una River here, perhaps I made a mistake to the left or to the

3 right. Mr. Treanor, Mr. Cutileiro and I bore in mind the fact that the

4 Una River was the strategic objective. Now, since I did not have the map

5 here, rather I didn't have the river on the map here, that's why I drew it

6 the way I did.

7 Q. Mr. Krajisnik, it sounds to me as if possibly whatever word you

8 got in Serbian from my word deliberately was understood to imply something

9 negative. The English word wasn't. It -- yes. Well, you've -- thank

10 you, Mr. Krajisnik.

11 A. No. I didn't think it was bad.

12 Q. Well in that case, it's a non-issue, Mr. Krajisnik.

13 A. Possibly it was a mistake. Possibly it was a mistake. Yes. But

14 it was the Una River that was the border in all of these cases.

15 Q. Did you, as far as the -- these strategic goals go, where did you

16 see strategic goal 4 in difficulty or comparative ease in achieving and

17 agreeing that goal?

18 A. As I've already said, we talked to the Croatian side, and we did

19 not find a satisfactory solution for the Neretva River valley, for the

20 Neretva have to be the boundary. They wanted Marshal Tito street to be

21 the boundary. They wanted the entire town to be theirs. That was what

22 they wanted. When we had these preliminary talks before the assembly, we

23 just wanted the Una to be a strategic objective because it was envisaged

24 by the Cutileiro plan. However, there was a big group of MPs from

25 Herzegovina who in a way brought pressure to bear, namely that the Neretva

1 River area should be included, although I must say quite frankly that this

2 was not an objective or goal because the Croatian side was strongly

3 opposed to it and we knew that there was an interest involved on the

4 Muslim side as well. In a way -- I'm sorry, I am sorry. Well, it doesn't

5 matter now. Somewhere around Stolac. They wanted that area to be annexed

6 to some entity of theirs. The Cutileiro map did not envisage any part of

7 the Neretva River valley to belong to us. So I know that this was

8 pressure but we thought that we could come through as far as the Una River

9 was concerned because that was clearly the position of the international

10 community.

11 Q. Mr. Krajisnik, then, going back to the minute or record of the

12 assembly session, page 13 of the English, page 7 in your document, foot of

13 page 13 of the English, the fifth strategic goal is division of the city

14 of Sarajevo into Serbian and Muslim parts, and implementation of an

15 effective state government in each of those two constituent states. Thus,

16 "Sarajevo is strategically in the fifth place but the battle in Sarajevo

17 and for Sarajevo, seen strategically and tactically, is of decisive

18 importance because it does not allow the establishment of even the

19 illusion of a state. Alija does not have a state while we have a part of

20 Sarajevo."

21 Mr. Krajisnik, could you explain why Dr. Karadzic is saying that

22 Sarajevo is of decisive importance because it does not allow the

23 establishment of even the illusion of a state for, clearly, the Bosnian

24 Muslims?

25 A. The only thing that was a strategic objective was the first

1 sentence, that after -- well, how should I put this? After the United

2 Nations we would have part of Sarajevo. That was in the Cutileiro plan as

3 well. It was looked into. And then we left it under UN supervision and

4 then we would find a solution for Sarajevo subsequently. Now, what was

5 Mr. Karadzic explaining here? He is speaking in Banja Luka. I've already

6 explained that in socialism there was this animosity from Banja Luka

7 vis-a-vis Sarajevo, and it was quite justified. This refers to the former

8 system. I am from Sarajevo but I'm telling you the way it was. All

9 resources were concentrated in Sarajevo. Banja Luka was sinking lower and

10 lower, and in terms of development, it fell to the 22nd place in

11 Bosnia-Herzegovina. All people from Krajina continued thinking that way

12 too, that we would continue this policy of focusing on Sarajevo, and that

13 is why Mr. Karadzic is explaining why Sarajevo is important for us. Well,

14 he didn't do it here but he was saying how the Jews and the Palestinians

15 were fighting for Jerusalem because that is the capital of a state.

16 Now, what he said later as an additional argument, since Sarajevo

17 was the capital city, and for as long as we have part of Sarajevo, for as

18 long as we have the right to part of Sarajevo, it is not only the Muslim

19 side that is the representative of Bosnia-Herzegovina. They are not the

20 only ones who have a state. Let's put it this way. We are the state

21 because a capital city is always referred to and whoever has the capital

22 city is portrayed in the media as governing a state. What he was saying

23 in particular was that in Sarajevo, there was a large concentration of

24 population and, of course, of the military too, of the Muslim army. And

25 now he's saying, if we did not have our own territories then those armed

1 forces would have a lot more manoeuvring space, the Muslim armed forces

2 would, and that would bring pressure on the Krajina. All of that is by

3 way of propaganda because people, our MPs, did not understand and they

4 didn't wish to understand the importance of Sarajevo. As I've already

5 said, in the former Yugoslavia, Sarajevo was the second largest Serb city

6 and we didn't want to be excommunicated from Sarajevo. We wanted to have

7 at least those rural areas if we could not have part of urban Sarajevo.

8 And this was agreed upon in a preliminary manner and in all the maps,

9 Your Honours, in all the maps, excluding Pale, which is separate, I

10 haven't got the map here, Pale is totally to the east, and there is this

11 big territory. In all maps, what was envisaged was that one-third of this

12 remainder of Sarajevo, excluding Pale, should belong to the Serbs and

13 two-thirds to the Muslim-Croat federation or rather the Muslim side

14 because they were interested. Not a division. I repeat that once again.

15 In every case, we wanted it to be like Washington DC and I don't know what

16 else. Everybody kept saying that this would be a separate entity that

17 would have a council of its own but in these different neighbourhoods

18 there could be local laws and perhaps there could even be some emblems of

19 the constituent units but economically and politically, this would be

20 united at city level.

21 I have a paper here where agreement was supposed to be reached on

22 Sarajevo even before Dayton and in Dayton, and indeed this kind of

23 solution was agreed upon in Dayton, that Sarajevo should not be divided.

24 And then it was changed and Sarajevo was divided.

25 I can give you documents for everything I'm saying. Please, if

1 ever there is any dilemma, I'm going to get the right document and I'm

2 going to show it to you.

3 Q. Mr. Krajisnik, the -- you say, specifically in that answer, you

4 say -- this is line -- page 28 for everybody's else's reference in the

5 transcript, 28, line 6, you say, "in all maps what was envisaged was that

6 one-third of this remainder of Sarajevo excluding Pale should belong to

7 the Serbs and two-thirds to the Muslim-Croat federation or, rather, the

8 Muslim side because they were interested. Not a division. I repeat that

9 once again."

10 So how was -- how were Dr. Karadzic's words understood in Banja

11 Luka in May 1992 when he introduced the fifth strategic goal by saying the

12 fifth strategic goal is division of the city of Sarajevo into Serbian and

13 Muslim parts?

14 A. An atmosphere of war. I remember that assembly. Everybody was

15 thinking in his own way, in his own head. Everybody was just looking at

16 their local problems, if I can put it that way. Somebody was just

17 thinking of the corridor, somebody of the other corridor, somebody else,

18 access to the sea and so on and so forth. I assure you that this

19 strategic objective was something that perhaps ten per cent of the MPs

20 were interested in because, quite simply, they weren't paying any

21 attention. I believe that there were different ways of understanding this

22 because there were quite a few MPs, you will see the discussion later, who

23 thought we shouldn't live together any longer. We should have a division,

24 because they didn't want to observe this and so on and so forth. Probably

25 that group thought that now Sarajevo would be divided. But I assure you

1 that everything Mr. Karadzic is saying here is based on what we advocated

2 in the negotiations and what we will advocate in the negotiations if we

3 adopt this appeal to continue the conference. That was our objective.

4 You will see, Your Honours, that the MPs were saying all sorts of

5 things. Quite simply everybody spoke in his own way and we were just

6 trying to explain to them what it was that we were discussing at the

7 negotiations because before that there were negotiations in Brussels and

8 they were interested in seeing whether anybody had committed any kind of

9 betrayal, what was to be done with which territory and so on. And in

10 their own heads, some of them were thinking there will be no negotiations.

11 There will just be war. I don't preclude that possibility either, but I

12 assure you that this entire session had one single goal. For us to

13 explain what we were advocating, politically, and to try to continue the

14 conference. And many thought that it was unnecessary, that there would be

15 no conference whatsoever, because we had been betrayed, we had been

16 cheated. There was no transformation of Bosnia, and Bosnia had been

17 recognised nevertheless.

18 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, I'm coming to the 6th strategic

19 objective. If Your Honour wants me to the sea before 10.30 --

20 JUDGE ORIE: I don't know how much time you would need for the

21 sixth one.

22 MR. STEWART: Not long but more than two minutes.

23 JUDGE ORIE: If you could do it within five minutes you may

24 continue, otherwise --

25 MR. STEWART: There is a pretty good chance, Your Honour.

1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, okay. Then try to do it in five minutes then we

2 will have a break until 11 afterwards.

3 MR. STEWART:

4 Q. Mr. Krajisnik, strategic objective 6, the 6th strategic goal, I

5 will in the interests of time on this, I won't then read out the longish

6 paragraph in Dr. Karadzic's speech. It is -- it's relatively

7 straightforward and you'll be familiar with it.

8 What I'm going to invite you to do, Mr. Krajisnik, is if you could

9 just give a brief explanation of your red lines which are the same on the

10 various maps, B, C, and D. Mr. Treanor didn't attempt any lines there.

11 He just gives a big, black arrow pointing into the sea. Could you --

12 you've got the two lines, the one going diagonally, and then there are two

13 little lines together just to the southeast of that. I wonder if you

14 could offer the Trial Chamber an explanation of what you have marked on

15 these maps.

16 A. May I put this map on the ELMO?

17 Q. That would no doubt be very helpful, Mr. Krajisnik, thank you.

18 A. This arrow here, number 1 --

19 JUDGE ORIE: Are we now marking another map because there is the

20 one on which -- or is this --

21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] A new map. Maybe we can do it on

22 the same map.

23 JUDGE ORIE: Perhaps take the other one. Otherwise we have such a

24 huge, all the markings on the same map, not that one.

25 MR. STEWART:

1 Q. Mr. Krajisnik, you could take map B in that little clip. I think

2 the lines are the same on B and C?

3 JUDGE ORIE: No, no. We used -- I said the marked map would be E,

4 and that's the one I'd like to have further markings made on.

5 MR. STEWART: Yes. Can Your Honour just remind me which that was

6 drawn from.

7 JUDGE ORIE: Now we have a problem because I see that was already

8 for the Una River markings were already on another map as well. Let's

9 take the clear map. Then we have -- I -- I didn't notice that, that we

10 have now the -- well, let's say the Posavina markings on number E. We

11 would then have the Una River markings should then be F, because that's

12 another map from what I -- oh, yes, no. That was marked on -- yes. We

13 can use E again because the markings on the Una River were made on a new

14 copy of the P68, well, let's say the Treanor map. Okay. Please proceed

15 on number E. That is the already-marked map. Yes, that one.

16 MR. STEWART: Thank you, Your Honour.

17 JUDGE ORIE: So could we just move that on so that we can see the

18 south access to the sea? Yes.

19 MR. STEWART: Thank you.

20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Since Bosnia and Herzegovina is

21 clearly marked on this map, you see, the outlet to the sea would be here.

22 I'll mark it now with 7, if you agree.

23 MR. STEWART:

24 Q. That seems to make sense, Mr. Krajisnik, number 7.

25 A. Here, in the area of Prevlaka, Molunat and Prevlaka, the Serb side

1 would have access to the sea. In exchange, we would give the hinterland

2 of Dubrovnik to the Croat side. That's number 8, this blue area here, and

3 that would be a swap of territories. That was indeed agreed in Dayton and

4 the proposal was made, but they forgot to sign it.

5 Let me now tell you why we thought we were entitled to this. The

6 Cutileiro plan did not offer us this. This is number 9. This here is the

7 Bosnian access to the sea. And on account of the entitlement of Bosnia

8 and Herzegovina, we demanded that we too have access to the sea, rather

9 than the Croat community only. I have this plan discussed in Dayton for

10 the exchange of territories, and according to the Stoltenberg plan, it was

11 also envisaged. Croatia gave its agreement, Bosnia and Herzegovina gave

12 its agreement, and Yugoslavia too. That was a most serious proposal. We

13 suggested that the Muslim side have access too, in an exchange for Neum.

14 However the Croats didn't agree with this because it would cut their

15 territory into two. The Muslims didn't ask for it any way. Only we asked

16 in the negotiations for access to the sea. That's something that was

17 discussed in Graz and even previously with the Croat side, and I have to

18 tell you exactly what I heard from Mr. Tudjman personally. He said, "I

19 understand the Serb side in Bosnia and Herzegovina. It's a stone's throw

20 from their territory to the sea and still they don't have access to it."

21 And indeed, this proposal was made.

22 MR. STEWART: Thank you, Mr. Krajisnik. Your Honour, may I just

23 very simply -- before the break, might I inquire if Your Honours could let

24 us know, not right now but conveniently soon, where we, the Defence, have

25 got to in terms of the timing of Mr. Krajisnik's evidence? We had that

1 late start the first day and then, of course, there may have been other

2 matters. I'm wondering because Your Honour has the computer information.

3 I'm wondering if we could be informed where we have got to so that we can

4 finalise our planning of bringing Mr. Krajisnik's evidence to a conclusion

5 in a helpful, planned way.

6 JUDGE ORIE: We will consider the matter and let you --

7 MR. STEWART: Thank you, Your Honour.

8 JUDGE ORIE: We will have a break until 11.00.

9 --- Recess taken at 10.37 a.m.

10 --- On resuming at 11.12 a.m.

11 JUDGE ORIE: We will turn into private session for a moment.

12 [Private session]

13 (redacted)

14 (redacted)

15 (redacted)

16 (redacted)

17 (redacted)

18 (redacted)

19 (redacted)

20 (redacted)

21 (redacted)

22 (redacted)

23 (redacted)

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11 Page 24202 redacted. Private session.

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 (redacted)

2 [Open session]

3 THE REGISTRAR: We are in open session, Your Honour.

4 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.

5 Mr. Stewart, please proceed. Mr. Josse it's you who is going to

6 proceed.

7 MR. JOSSE: It is I. I'm going to be on my feet for a little

8 time, Your Honour.

9 JUDGE ORIE: It's the same to the Bench. The Defence may proceed.

10 MR. JOSSE: Thank you very much. For the Court, my learned

11 friends, and indeed Mr. Krajisnik's information, I'm going to go through

12 some further intercepts during the course of this morning. Probably

13 tomorrow, I will then invite Mr. Krajisnik to comment specifically on

14 certain allegations that have been made in the course of the Prosecution

15 case by various Prosecution witnesses. That's the plan, at least,

16 Your Honour.

17 There is in existence a further bundle of intercepts that have

18 been prepared, all the remaining intercept that I'm going to invite

19 Mr. Krajisnik to deal with have previously been exhibited, Your Honour.

20 As Your Honour is aware, Mr. Krajisnik has his own version of these. I

21 gave them to him with the Court's permission last week and I see he's got

22 them open in front of him. Could the remaining bundles be handed out?

23 They've already been given to the interpreters. There is a large bundle

24 with a much smaller additional bundle of one particular intercept which I

25 left out of the original group.

1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. The Chamber, for logistical reasons, would not

2 mind if we find them on our desk when coming into the court.

3 MR. JOSSE: I'm sorry. I take responsibility for that.

4 WITNESS: MOMCILO KRAJISNIK [Resumed]

5 [Witness answered through interpretation]

6 Examination by Mr. Josse: [Continued]

7 MR. JOSSE:

8 Q. Mr. Krajisnik, we are first going to look at an intercept between

9 you and Mr. Tintor. It is dated the 3rd of April of 1992. It doesn't

10 actually say that on the intercept.

11 MR. JOSSE: Your Honour, this is the third page of the first

12 intercept in the bundle. The others -- these were exhibited as a group.

13 The others don't involve Mr. Krajisnik and I'm not going to ask him about

14 them. This is simply one page long, at least in the English, and as I

15 understand it's P529, tab 377. It was mentioned in passing, I understand,

16 during the evidence of Ms. Hanson but only in passing.

17 Q. We see that you say to Mr. Tintor, "War must not be provoked no

18 matter what. If he" -- maybe a translation issue here -- "or they wants

19 to get in, let him or they get in but please take no war."

20 Answer: "No problem."

21 You go on: "Take my advice. The people are, God forbid, that

22 somebody gets killed. Everything will be a problem. Please, we should

23 not be the ones to start. We simply have to do what we are entitled to do

24 and what we are not we shall not do it. Isn't that so?"

25 Tintor: "Certainly."

1 You go on: "I am asking you to listen to me and discuss with

2 the Rajko as well, calmly and slowly, no matter what comes, because as

3 long as there is no war, nothing is lost. Is that okay?"

4 Later on, very near the end of the intercept, you say, "Avoid

5 everything in order to prevent the war, sit down and talk with them,

6 agree about it."

7 Answer: "Certainly."

8 And then you say: "If there is a need for shooting, we should

9 talk first. Don't do it, please."

10 "All right, certainly no problem."

11 And then you say, "Do not let the war to start."

12 What's this about, please?

13 A. Can you tell me which intercept that is? Because I've read it but

14 it's not arranged in sequence here so I can't find it. I remember reading

15 that intercept. The first one I have is 388, written in hand.

16 MR. JOSSE: Your Honour, the problem is that the B/C/S is in

17 manuscript for some strange reason.

18 JUDGE ORIE: Oh, that's the one which we find in the bundle --

19 yes.

20 MR. JOSSE:

21 Q. I understand, Mr. Krajisnik, it says 6 in handwriting at the top

22 of the page, top of page 6 in your version.

23 A. Yes. Yes. Are there two other manuscripts coming before it, also

24 in manuscript? This one ends in -- the ERN number ends in 481.

25 Q. They don't involve you and I'm not asking any questions about the

1 two that come before this one. You heard me read various extracts

2 [Microphone not activated] You are clearly telling Mr. Tintor that war

3 should not break out. What is going on at that point in time?

4 A. That's true. I don't remember this particular intercept this

5 minute but I remember the circumstances he was very highly strung,

6 frightened, and I had several conversations with him in the same vein,

7 when he called me to get some more information.

8 Q. All right. Let's look at I think the next one which is --

9 MR. JOSSE: Your Honour, this is another one between the same two

10 protagonists, not the next one in the bundle, in fact, I'm going to leave

11 that.

12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes.

13 MR. JOSSE:

14 Q. This is the following day, the 4th of April.

15 A. Yes, I found it.

16 Q. It's quite short. Mr. Tintor says to you, the middle of the

17 intercept: "Look I called you this morning to check about this thing.

18 These people from slow and ski Brod have been calling me. Fuck,

19 military."

20 You say: "Look, Simovic and Doko have gone there. I called down

21 there. The SDS and HDZ representatives, they will receive them, go there

22 and try to calm the situation down. I know that this vice-president of

23 theirs from the HDZ, what's his name?"

24 What's that about?

25 A. There was an MP there, Mr. Stanic. He is mentioned in one

1 assembly session transcript as captured by the Muslim forces, and I

2 intervened -- by the Serb side, and I intervened through Trifko Radic that

3 he be released. I called this Mr. Stanic here. He is mentioned as being

4 the president of HDZ. Simovic and Doko went to see him. That was

5 Minister of Defence of Bosnia-Herzegovina and it is said that they had

6 gone there and would talk to the parties. That was the first contact

7 between Bosanski Brod and Slavonski Brod to solve some problems.

8 Q. This intercept was referred to on the 12th of April 2005, when

9 Mr. Kljuic, it appears, was asked some questions by Judge Orie, and

10 Mr. Kljuic said that the intercept explains the situation in Bosanski Brod

11 and the bridge which could no longer be used by that time.

12 Anything you want to say about that?

13 A. Well, yes. You have this previous intercept when a different

14 delegation had travelled, Mr. Ejup Ganic and Mr. Koljevic, and it was my

15 conversation with Mr. Koljevic, saying that two delegations went to try to

16 resolve this problem of the bridge between Bosanski Brod and Slavonski

17 Brod across the Sava River, and Mr. Kljuic is right, the problem was that

18 this bridge was closed down and citizens on both sides really needed to

19 use it. There was also the surrounding crisis and the high tensions.

20 Q. Could we now turn, not to the next intercept? I'm going to come

21 back to that in a moment but the one after that because that --

22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Tieger?

23 MR. TIEGER: Your Honour, my recollection, although I'm looking

24 quickly through the transcript is that this second intercept, although

25 there was a reference to its appearance in testimony on a particular date,

1 was not referred to by any previous number or was not given a number. I

2 don't recall off-hand whether the first intercept was referred to by a

3 pre-existing exhibit number or received a new number. But if we are going

4 to be going through intercepts I think we should be identifying them as

5 clearly as possible.

6 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Josse?

7 MR. JOSSE: I agree with that. I do not know whether they have a

8 specific number. I'm told by the person who assisted me with this that

9 it's part of P292. That is all I know, I'm afraid.

10 MR. TIEGER: The additional information I have is that it is P292,

11 KID, 31143.

12 MR. JOSSE: Up until this point we have not given additional

13 exhibit numbers to those intercepts that I've asked Mr. Krajisnik about,

14 D-numbers. We could start doing that now but we probably should have

15 done -- started that two weeks ago but I'm entirely neutral about this, of

16 course.

17 JUDGE ORIE: I'll have to think it over, whether we need -- I

18 mean, if we haven't done it for the last two weeks, it can wait for one

19 more day. And perhaps I should -- first of all it should be clear that

20 whenever we are talking about intercepts that they should be clearly

21 identified which ones they are. I'll try to sort this out with

22 Mr. Registrar, and come up with a solution most likely.

23 MR. TIEGER: Yes. Your Honour, if this will be of assistance, it

24 appears that we -- looking at the list provided by the Defence, we have

25 exhibit numbers, specific exhibit numbers, for all of the intercepts

1 contained in the bundle. In that connection I would mention that the

2 first intercept referred to today appears to have been P529, tab 377.

3 JUDGE ORIE: I checked that and that's correct.

4 MR. JOSSE: I knew that and I put that on the record.

5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That's on the record. For the second one?

6 MR. TIEGER: And I have an extra copy of that so maybe it would be

7 useful for Mr. Josse as he goes through the material.

8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And he can refer to it and I'll try to get them

9 on my screen so there -- can verify whether we are -- no, no, to

10 Mr. Josse.

11 MR. JOSSE: I'm very grateful to my learned friends.

12 As I think everyone is aware, the tab number on the left-hand side

13 of this index is a Defence working system, so to speak, which no one else

14 in this courtroom need worry about.

15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

16 MR. JOSSE:

17 Q. If I could turn next to -- I will use those numbers simply because

18 that's probably going to be the easiest way for people to identify where

19 I'm going -- to 178, which is P529, tab 406. This is another intercept on

20 the same day between the same two gentlemen.

21 Mr. Krajisnik, I assume that this is later in the day because this

22 one begins with a "good evening." The one we have just looked at begins

23 with a "good afternoon." I want to take you to the middle of this

24 particular page.

25 A. Yes.

1 Q. Mr. Tintor says, "I hear you've been informed, Rajko has told me

2 about that part. They are getting ready up there. Reportedly they are on

3 the move already."

4 Krajisnik: "Who is on the move?"

5 Tintor: "Well, the Muslims from Kobilja Glava."

6 Krajisnik: "Yeah."

7 Tintor: "They are on their way towards Grahoviste, towards Zuc

8 and the situation is tense. I think a conflict will break out up there."

9 What's that about, please?

10 A. After the line was established between two warring parties in

11 Vogosca, a significant part of Vogosca ended up in Muslim hands. A part

12 that is not in the urban area of Vogosca, it's called Kobilja Glava. And

13 now Mr. Tintor reports that the Muslims set out from Kobilja Glava, from

14 Sarajevo, from the east, towards them, towards Vogosca, and they want to

15 take control of this settlement Grahoviste and another one, Zuc.

16 I had my doubts about this but the basic point is that the Muslims

17 did indeed go for Grahoviste and captured a certain number of civilians

18 whom they took to Sarajevo. I'll remind you that the president of Vogosca

19 municipality testified here, saying that in agreement with the Serb side,

20 he later went to Sarajevo to find those six Serbs, but he couldn't find

21 out from the Presidency in which prison they were detained because there

22 were many prisons among them, private prisons, and their corpses were

23 subsequently found. However, they didn't attack Vogosca. They attacked

24 this place Grahoviste instead.

25 Q. Turning the page in the English -- sorry, question: The Rajko

1 being referred to in both these intercepts is whom, please?

2 A. It's Rajko Kopravica, president of the executive council of

3 Vogosca municipality, the local government, from before the armed

4 conflict. It's the highest position on the Serb side in the Vogosca

5 municipality, joint, as it were. And later he was also at the head of the

6 local government during the armed conflict. He died recently.

7 Q. As I mentioned, over the page in the English, you say, "I told him

8 to inform this Momo Mandic for the police, you know." And then a few

9 lines after that, you go on, "That's the most important thing. Finally,

10 the people do need to organise themselves but in no circumstances should

11 we look for trouble. It's very important to keep peace, you know."

12 Now, this intercept, Mr. Krajisnik, was played in this Court on

13 the 2nd of March of 2005, at page 9774 in the transcript, during the

14 evidence of Ms. Hanson, and she suggested that this intercept shows that

15 you were being informed about the situation on the ground, bearing in mind

16 that Mr. Tintor was apparently the president of the Vogosca Crisis Staff.

17 What do you say about Ms. Hanson's assertion in that regard?

18 A. It is not correct, but I'll explain what this is about, and I

19 understand how she got confused, how she got the wrong impression. This

20 place is the next to my municipality, next door to my village. We call

21 each other neighbour normally, even though we are at a distance of one or

22 two kilometres because we all attended the same primary school. I knew

23 personally both Mr. Rajko Kopravica and Mr. Tintor and I can understand --

24 I can explain why he calls me "kum," best man.

25 Beset by misfortune and panic, they are in -- addressing me

1 looking for help, expecting me to find a way to help them. It's not

2 somebody who was 500 kilometres away but somebody closer by. He called me

3 and Mr. Tintor called me too, Mr. Rajko Kopravica and Mr. Tintor. In our

4 part of the world, if you know somebody who holds some position, you call

5 him even though it's not strictly within his area of competence, asking

6 him to find somebody who could possibly help them. Gentlemen prosecutors

7 and Your Honours, you remember when the problem of the police was

8 discussed, when the police station was divided, when they quarrelled

9 amongst themselves and even a protected witness explained how no agreement

10 could be reached about the police. He mentioned this problem of the

11 police and I said, "Call Mr. Mandic to deal with it because he knows

12 Mandic no better, no worse, than he knows me."

13 That is the point of this conversation.

14 And since Mrs. Hanson is not aware of these mutual relations, she,

15 with good reason, tried to explain it in her own way, concerning the issue

16 to what extent somebody at the top was informed. She used this to

17 illustrate. It would have been different if somebody from Sanski Most had

18 called me. I was practically a local of this area and an MP for this

19 constituency. It has nothing to do with me personally but I couldn't say

20 "No, I don't want to talk to you."

21 Q. Could we turn to the next conversation? This is one several weeks

22 later, on the 21st of April, between you and someone called Momo Garic.

23 JUDGE ORIE: Exhibit number?

24 MR. JOSSE: It is P67, tab 29, and P529, tab 407. And I will put

25 it in the context of the evidence in a few moments' time.

1 Q. Who is Mr. Garic, please?

2 JUDGE ORIE: By the way I verified both numbers and they are both

3 correct.

4 MR. JOSSE: Thank you, Your Honour.

5 Q. Mr. Krajisnik, who is Mr. Garic?

6 A. Mr. Garic is a man from Vraca, that is to say from Novo Sarajevo,

7 whom I knew. It's also mentioned in this material when I once asked him

8 to send a fax or something like that. I knew him personally and I tried

9 to receive information from him because he lived there. He lived in

10 Sarajevo, at Vraca. That's to say on this hill above Grbavica. He's an

11 acquaintance of mine.

12 Q. The conversation begins with someone from your office trying to

13 get through to him. That person succeeds and on the second page in the

14 English, we see the substance of the conversation. You ask what the

15 situation is like. Mr. Garic says, "Well, there are some little problems.

16 Could you receive me up there for a brief meeting?"

17 Answer: "Well, sure, no problem."

18 Couple of lines down; "All right, I'll come there, I'll find some

19 vehicle, I'll come there."

20 And you ask, "What the situation like up there?"

21 And Mr. Garic says, "Well, it's all right for the time being, we

22 had some casualties and many wounded."

23 Now, this has been played twice to this Court, once on the 26th of

24 February of 2004, at page 1695 of the transcript, during the course of

25 Mr. Treanor's evidence. He says that it is significant because it shows

1 that you at that point, president of the assembly but also a member of the

2 National Security Council was dealing directly with a Territorial Defence

3 commander on the local military situation in that commander's area.

4 It was also played on the 2nd of March of 2005, at page 9776, in

5 the course of Ms. Hanson's evidence. She said that this showed you were

6 informed about the situation on the ground because of Mr. Garic's

7 membership of the Novo Sarajevo Crisis Staff. So two similar points by

8 the two experts brought before this Chamber by the Prosecution.

9 What do you say about their assertions?

10 A. The point they were advocating, that they were trying to justify,

11 was actually done without going into detail. I am from Sarajevo. I was

12 personally interested in what the situation was like in every single part

13 of Sarajevo. This is a private, a personal matter, not only because I'm

14 an MP. And, I didn't call colonels, generals, and I don't know who else,

15 I called people I knew. So that they would tell me about it, just like

16 any person would express this kind of interest. In terms of his broader

17 neighbourhood, if I can put it that way.

18 It is not put in any other way at all. It's not that I'm saying,

19 now, you report to me and so on and so forth. No. You just hear some

20 information. What is going on where you are? You don't know what this is

21 all about. You don't know whether a friend got killed, whether there is

22 someone who is doing something on his own. I am personally interested,

23 because independently from one's high office, one has personal reasons for

24 being interested in the place that he's from. So now I'm asking him, if

25 you remember, Your Honours, there was this conversation that was played

1 here between me and Karisik, Milenko Karisik, this policeman I knew.

2 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... say that --

3 A. I'm sorry.

4 Q. We are literally going to play that in one moment.

5 A. You are quite right. I just wanted to say one thing and I'll

6 finish. I'm so sorry, I do apologise. You're quite right. I just wanted

7 to say the following. My communication with these people was on a

8 personal basis. I was talking to people I knew. I did not call on the

9 basis of the high office I held. I didn't call any commander saying now

10 you report to me and whatever. I will remind you that this is the third

11 day since I got to Pale. Or was it the fourth day? I came on the 15th.

12 On the 15th of April. And then I returned to Zabrdje and then I went back

13 to Pale. I assume it was the first or the second day. Or the third day.

14 I don't know. I can't be very accurate on that.

15 If you remember, that meeting of the national security council on

16 the 15th, it was stated that I was present there and that I returned to

17 Zabrdje, and then again with my family I came to Pale.

18 Q. Let's turn to the conversation that you were just referring to.

19 MR. JOSSE: Your Honours, this is found, the next tab. It's also,

20 in fact, the tab after that, 180 and 181 in our presentation are

21 identical. They bear completely different ERN numbers, however, but we

22 think that the translations are the same. There are therefore three

23 relevant -- I beg your pardon, two relevant exhibit numbers, P67, tab 30

24 and P292, KID, 31205.

25 JUDGE ORIE: Any tab number on the 529?

1 MR. JOSSE: There is no 529.

2 JUDGE ORIE: I thought you just said -- let me just check. You

3 said P292, yes, I'm sorry.

4 MR. JOSSE:

5 Q. This is a conversation that involves Radomir Ninkovic, Milenko

6 Karisik, Nikola Koljevic at one point, and yourself, Mr. Krajisnik. I'm

7 only going to refer to one short passage. Towards the bottom of the

8 second page in the English, Karisik says, "Well, we know everything. We

9 know everything. We know everything. The forces of the Serb ministry are

10 not engaged but they are shooting at us here. They shot at us from

11 hand-held rocket launchers. Most missed but one projectile hit the F

12 facility where we are."

13 Krajisnik: "Yes."

14 Karisik: "Was supposed to enter in our base. Three walls have

15 been penetrated. They shot at us from snipers and things like that.

16 However, we have stayed here and we are calm. We returned a couple of

17 rounds, just what we had to and nothing more."

18 Krajisnik: "Yes, yes."

19 Karisik: "It's mainly members of the TO who are engaged. As far

20 as I know the army hasn't shot at all."

21 Krajisnik: "Yes, yes. It's chaos. And the army can't engage

22 because then we would have real problems. Can you make contact with them

23 just so that we know how they are doing? I need to know this, damn it."

24 What did you mean when you said "real problems"?

25 A. If you read the entire conversation, as far as this same locality

1 is concerned, Vraca, there was a need to talk to the police, because

2 Mr. Koljevic expected a delegation of the European Community. So I talked

3 to this Mr. Karisik now, whom I also know, and I had a conversation that

4 was similar to the one I had had with Garic. Until Mr. Koljevic got

5 involved too, in order to ask the basic question, namely whether the

6 delegation of the European Community had arrived. The essence of this is

7 that he is saying that it was the armed people, not the army, not the

8 police.

9 I would like to remind you and the Honourable Trial Chamber that

10 that is when a cease-fire was being sought, and Mrs. Plavsic talked to

11 Mr. Stanisic. She was still in Muslim Sarajevo. There were a lot of

12 mutual accusations that were leveled, but it was necessary to establish a

13 cease-fire and it was necessary to continue talks on the problems in

14 Ilidza, if I remember correctly. So I took advantage of this opportunity

15 to discuss this same subject with Karisik until Mr. Koljevic got involved

16 too in order to deal with the main topic.

17 Q. What did Mrs. Plavsic ask of Mr. Stanisic?

18 A. Mrs. Plavsic was in the Muslim part of Sarajevo, I've already said

19 that, and she was with Mr. Doyle. And UNPROFOR was guarding her from

20 these gangs that were out of control at the time. No one had control over

21 them. They were on the Muslim side. If you remember, one particular

22 document, she was in charge of contacts with UNPROFOR. This is one of the

23 conclusions of this National Security Council, as we called it. So she

24 was in contact with them and they said, well, try to get the Serb side to

25 stop shooting and we will reach agreement with the Muslim side, to

1 establish a cease-fire and to have problems resolved. In this

2 conversation, she resolutely said to Mr. Stanisic, the MUP minister who

3 was there and she sought information about what was going on, you ever the

4 conversation here and I have the conversation here, and she said, "You

5 have to observe this. I order you to do that so that we should not be

6 blamed, even if they shoot at you, let us just resolve this problem."

7 It's easy to find this conversation and to see that it is in the

8 framework of everything that was going on. Now, three days later,

9 Mr. Karisik says, we are not responding, the army is not involved. Now,

10 look, they even destroyed the wall of the building that we are in and we

11 only respond when absolutely forced to.

12 Q. When this intercept was played in the course of Mr. Treanor's

13 evidence, at page 1695 of the transcript, he made a similar point, the

14 point he had made so far as the previous intercept is concerned, and he

15 says that this shows that you were dealing with a prominent police

16 commander trying to get information about the situation in Sarajevo. What

17 did you say about that?

18 A. Well, I hope -- well, it's fully understandable that Mr. Treanor

19 came to that conclusion, although he came to the wrong conclusion. I had

20 been in Pale only for two or three days perhaps, and you saw that as far

21 as coordination of the Territorial Defence is concerned, and National

22 Defence, Mr. Karadzic was in charge of that. I had no role in this. But

23 Mr. Treanor didn't know that, and Mrs. Hudson [as interpreted] didn't know

24 it either. Actually I was just expressing my interest when I talked to

25 people I knew. It had nothing to do with the office I held. So that I

1 would receive information as a citizen who lived in Sarajevo and who had a

2 personal interest involved. I was asking whether there was anything

3 wrong, and I would try to intervene with those who were responsible to

4 prevent that kind of thing from happening. Because I was interested in

5 that as a private person.

6 Q. Let's go on --

7 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Josse could I just ask one question?

8 A little bit further up in that same conversation, you ask,

9 Mr. Krajisnik, "Do we know who initiated the whole thing?"

10 And then Mr. Karisik answers: "Well, I don't know if I should

11 talk about that on the phone now."

12 And then you say, "No, don't, don't, but" -- and then the

13 conversation continues.

14 That suggests that who initiated the matter should not be known to

15 others who may listen in. Could you explain two situations? If it was

16 your side that had initiated, whether it would make sense not to discuss

17 it on the phone, and the same question for -- if the other party would

18 have initiated it, where it seems to be known, whether it would make sense

19 not to discuss it on the phone.

20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In the Serbian language, when you

21 listen to this intercept, I clearly indicated that I was concerned over

22 the possibility that someone from the Serb side did it. I received that

23 information, that somebody did something in adventurous fashion. Now,

24 there was no dilemma there. Now, why did he have to say to me, Petar or

25 whoever did that? I said, well, don't, because I knew that someone in an

1 unauthorised adventurous manner, did something that was deadly and ill

2 conceived. I didn't want that to happen. I certainly could have called

3 Mr. Karadzic and I could have said, "Well, you're in charge of that.

4 Could you please try to intervene so that these people would not do

5 that?", although I don't think I could have done anything like that or

6 actually I don't see what I could have done.

7 For me, it was not in dispute, well, maybe it was in dispute, but

8 that this was an individual or a group from the Serb side that did

9 something that was impermissible. And it was mentioned here. I wasn't

10 worried about whether the Muslim side did that. Why did the Serb side do

11 that? This is the kind of information that got to me.

12 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you for that answer.

13 Please proceed, Mr. Josse.

14 MR. JOSSE:

15 Q. Let's move on, please, to a conversation on the 7th of May of 1992

16 between you and someone called Karlo. I think you referred to this

17 conversation yesterday at page 13 of the transcript when you were talking

18 about Territorial Defence in Grbavica?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. We -- this is P627. We see on the second page in the English,

21 that Karlo says, "And somewhere around the tobacco factory and onwards to

22 Korija [phoen] the mall, they are shooting from there but only on and off.

23 There would be a lot of fire for ten minutes and then everything goes

24 quiet. So it's nothing really special. Well, nothing much, right? No.

25 Who told me this? This Professor Plavsic." Karlo goes on, "Oh, yes,

1 she's down there and hears the echoing and thinks it's where we were."

2 Karlo says, "But we had two or three terrible nights. Then it stopped."

3 First question, Mr. Krajisnik, is who is Karlo?

4 A. Karlo is one and the same person, Mr. Karisik. Well, it was sort

5 of a nom de guerre. It's one and the same person, Mr. Milenko Karisik.

6 I'm sorry, I noted something down here, that on the 14th of May, Mr.

7 Stanisic talked to Mrs. Plavsic. That's the conversation I referred to a

8 few moments ago. The 14th of May. I'm sure that the gentlemen of the

9 Prosecution have this and I have it here in my records. So it's the 14th

10 of May. On the 20th of May, she left town.

11 Q. And then the second part of this conversation, Mr. Djeric takes

12 over and continues speaking with Karlo.

13 I'd like to move on, please, to --

14 A. I'm sorry, there is something that's important here. Who said

15 this? Professor Plavsic. Mrs. Plavsic called me from the Muslim part of

16 Sarajevo because I was in Pale, and that is how come Karlo and I had this

17 conversation and she was probably saying that something was going on at

18 Grbavica. So that's why I'm talking to him. Afterwards, Mr. Djeric, the

19 Prime Minister, takes the receiver from me. We were probably together.

20 And then he talks to him. You can see here that she had informed me. And

21 I remember that we had whatever, two or three conversations. She was in

22 Sarajevo and I was in Pale.

23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Josse, would you allow me to go back briefly to

24 one of my previous questions? Because otherwise it might slip out of my

25 mind.

1 MR. JOSSE: Of course.

2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Krajisnik if I understood you well when I asked

3 you the question about who might have initiated that -- attack or at least

4 that shooting, did I then understand well that you -- the one who called

5 you, I think it was in Vraca, that you thought it to be possible that Serb

6 shooting was directed against other Serbs at this moment, when you said it

7 was an irresponsible act? Is that how I have to understand that?

8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I received

9 information from someone that the Serb side took some action, not against

10 the Serbs, but probably against the Muslims. It was excessive. I don't

11 know whether it's correct, but I assumed and I was worried. Why was this

12 done? There was a cease-fire of sorts. That is why I had already formed

13 an opinion that the Serb side had done something that was wrong and that's

14 why I raised the issue with him. So it was against the Muslims, not

15 against the Serbs.

16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. At the same time, Mr. Karisik says, "But they

17 are shooting at us here. They shot at us from hand-held rocket

18 launchers."

19 Was that a response to what you called an irresponsible act by the

20 Serbs? How do I have -- I'm just trying to get a picture of what happened

21 at that time, because the earlier question was about who initiated that

22 but at the same time, Mr. Karisik says that they are shooting at us from

23 hand held rocket launchers. That was Muslims who would shoot at where

24 Mr. Karisik was?

25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. President, these are two

1 different cases. That was on the 21st of April, and this is the 7th of

2 May. Now, when I talked about the first case, I was saying that somebody

3 had acted in an adventure us fashion. That's the information that I

4 received. As for the 7th of May, this was this contact between Mrs.

5 Plavsic and UNPROFOR, yes, yes.

6 JUDGE ORIE: I just want to limit the question entirely to the

7 21st of April. You said adventurous action taken by Serbs. That's the

8 information you received. Now, this shooting at the place where

9 Mr. Milenko Karisik was located, was that in return to that adventurous

10 activity? Because he says, "They are shooting at us."

11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, no. Throughout that time, there

12 were mutual exchanges of gunfire. Now, what Mr. Karisik is saying here is

13 that there had been an intention to impose a cease-fire, and somebody

14 instructed them not even to respond with gunfire even when they are

15 attacked by the Muslims from Vraca. He is just saying, we are just

16 defending ourselves and we respond only when absolutely necessary,

17 although they are shelling us, and this is the 7th of May when we are

18 getting ready to go to Nevesinje. So these are two incidents, what we

19 have before us now, and that is what Karisik is explaining, that the

20 school that they are staying at is being shelled all the time. That is to

21 say, that he is blaming the Muslim side, and they are not being allowed to

22 respond. That's the way it was. And the first one was a different matter

23 altogether.

24 JUDGE ORIE: If that would be the case, I would have expected, as

25 an answer, to do we know who initiated the whole thing to say, well, the

1 Muslims because they started shelling us. That's initiating, unless it's

2 a wrong understanding of the English or perhaps of the translation, who

3 started -- who took the initiative? And I have some difficulties in

4 reconciling that because there would hardly be any reason not to say that

5 it was the Muslims who violated whatever cease-fire there was or -- and

6 that they initiated it, therefore, and I do see later that a few rounds

7 were fired in return. But it's -- it's still a puzzle for me.

8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] If you would just have a little

9 patience, I would try to be as precise as I can. This is the 7th of May.

10 From the 4th of April until the 7th of May, and onwards, at the school

11 building in Vraca --

12 JUDGE ORIE: May I just interrupt you, Mr. Krajisnik. I am

13 talking about a telephone conversation intercept that took place on the

14 21st of April so what happened on the 7th of May could not have influenced

15 this conversation. I don't think I was clear enough when I said --

16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'll come back to that

17 conversation. I'm sorry.

18 JUDGE ORIE: But I would like you to concentrate on that first.

19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You are talking about Karisik,

20 Koljevic, and -- that one?

21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, and especially the beginning before Mr. Koljevic

22 enters the conversation.

23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes.

24 JUDGE ORIE: That's where I said, why not talk about who initiated

25 the whole thing. That was my previous question to you. And then you said

1 you -- you thought that it was possible that it was adventurous action by

2 Serbs or by a Serb, and then I said but Mr. Karisik is talking about being

3 fired at where he is located, and therefore I wondered whether that was

4 a -- considered to be a Muslim response to the adventurous act or whether

5 it was Serbs shooting at another Serb position. That's what I was trying

6 to clarify.

7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Right. We are only talking about

8 the 21st of April, when I had two conversations with Garic and

9 Mr. Karisik. And now we are discussing only the conversation with Karisik.

10 Your Honours, throughout the time from the 4th of April until the

11 21st of April, at the school house in Vraca, the police was deployed, and

12 that school was constantly shelled by the Muslim side. So that is not in

13 dispute. And we wanted a cease-fire to start. However, according to the

14 information provided by the UNPROFOR, they responded against the Muslims

15 and one could no longer tell who is shelling whom and who is responding to

16 whom. But our main objective to stop the shelling at all costs and that's

17 the same thing that I mentioned with reference to Mrs. Plavsic. Now,

18 speaking of Mr. Karisik, he is talking about what I called an adventurous,

19 reckless action, the people in Vraca were constantly under fire and

20 somebody made a recollection, adventurous move, taking proactive action

21 against the Muslims. They probably set off downhill. It's not just that

22 they were returning fire from the school building. Somebody must have

23 said, "Let's take action now. Let's get involved."

24 And at that time, even the EC monitors were supposed to come and

25 verify that we were not shooting at them, that they were shooting at our

1 men at Vraca, to have an objective assessment. That was our entire

2 conversation. I received information that somebody on our side, on the

3 Serb side, made an active move against the Muslims but you are right on

4 one point, Your Honour. It came after a prolonged Muslim action against

5 the police located in the school building. The Muslims simply wanted to

6 drive them out.

7 JUDGE ORIE: And then the shooting with the hand-held rocket

8 launchers was in response to that or was Mr. Karisik referring to any

9 earlier event?

10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Can you just indicate the passage?

11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I'll read that. Mr. -- after you discussed

12 whether to discuss on the phone who initiated the whole thing, Mr. Karisik

13 says, "Well, we know everything, we know everything, we know everything.

14 The forces of the Serb ministry are not engaged but they are shooting at

15 us here. They shot at us from hand-held rocket launchers. Most missed

16 but one projectile hit the F facility where we are." And then he further

17 describes what damage was done, adding that "they shot at us from snipers

18 and things like that. However, we stayed here and we are calm. We

19 returned a couple of rounds, just what we had to and nothing more."

20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Correct.

21 Your Honour, that eloquently confirms what I just explained. It's

22 not that the Serbs shot at them. The Serbs didn't shoot at the MUP. The

23 Muslims shot from the other side. They even broke through the wall. He

24 is talking about the other -- what the other side was doing. And what

25 might have provoked somebody into an adventurous, reckless action, that

1 was at the end of the day futile because it didn't succeed. And now he's

2 talking about two things. Neither the JNA nor the MUP were involved in

3 what I call this adventurous action, only the Territorial Defence. And

4 when he's talking about the attack against them, the MUP, he's talking

5 about the Muslims who were firing at that location from the other side of

6 the Miljacka river from Sarajevo. I know exactly what this is about, and

7 if you read the rest, you will understand that the monitors were expected

8 at that moment to identify who was shooting at whom, and who was

9 initiating all that.

10 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you for that answer.

11 Please proceed, Mr. Josse.

12 MR. JOSSE: Your Honour, I was about to in fact take Mr. Krajisnik

13 to an additional intercept, with -- dart around a little bit, but there

14 are two other intercepts, one of which I have copies of, the others I

15 don't, which shed some further light on the questions Your Honour has just

16 been asking. The first was handed out in a loose-leaf bundle.

17 Mr. Krajisnik doesn't have it.

18 JUDGE ORIE: Could Mr. Krajisnik be provided with it? Yes, please

19 proceed.

20 MR. JOSSE: And the other, perhaps I will try to organise during

21 the break. If not, I'll simply tell the Trial Chamber the number.

22 Q. This, Mr. Krajisnik, is P292, KID 39219. It's a conversation

23 between you and someone called Milinkov [phoen]. And it's on the same

24 day, the 21st of April. If we look towards the bottom of the page in the

25 English, after some discussion of heavy shooting. You asked what part of

1 the city this is. He says, "Grbavica 1 and Grbavica 2, all the way

2 between Vrbanja bridge down the Miljacka to the Milutin Djuraskovic street

3 near the Zeljeznicar stadium."

4 And you ask: "And not over the Miljacka on the other side,

5 right?"

6 And he says: "No."

7 He goes on and says, "They put up fierce resistance." I'm

8 summarising now. He says, "We have around ten wounded, men, one killed so

9 far." You asked for clarification of that and he tells you that someone

10 called Zoran Josilo has been killed and you say, "My dear God."

11 And you ask whether Mico is down there.

12 Now, I in fact was going to ask you -- I wasn't going to deal with

13 that in as much detail. I was going to ask you some questions about that

14 in a few moments because Mr. Brown dealt with this in passing in the

15 course of his evidence. But before I do that, bearing in mind the

16 questions the learned judge has just asked you, does that shed any more

17 light on the situation that you've just been talking about?

18 A. Yes. This Milenkovic is a man I know. He was a secretary at the

19 Crisis Staff. I wanted to find out from him -- I wasn't telling him, Why

20 did you go and do that? I just wanted to get a picture of what was going

21 on, and all this is about is this quote-unquote adventurous action that

22 somebody irresponsibly started. I was finding out how many people were

23 wounded, how many dead, because it was in my mind something very reckless,

24 and I was calling people I knew to find out about it.

25 Q. I'm asking this question for a reason. What is the precise name

1 of this man Milinkovic?

2 A. I don't remember. I'll soon forget my own name, I'm afraid. I

3 don't remember even his face any more, but I knew the man. He was a rank

4 and file member of the SDS, an acquaintance. I met him at a meeting. He

5 was a wonderful, very fine man.

6 Q. Is Milinkovic his surname?

7 A. Yes, yes.

8 Q. The reason I ask that, Your Honour, is that at page 16213 of the

9 transcript, when Mr. Brown is asked about this intercept, it's transcribed

10 as someone called "Milan Kovic," and that's why I wanted to clarify the

11 matter?

12 A. No, no. Milinkovic.

13 Q. Well, Your Honour, I'll talk to the transcriber during the break.

14 He's made the correction now. Thank you.

15 JUDGE ORIE: I couldn't check immediately but what you say is

16 Mr. Brown must have, although he gave a different name, must have referred

17 to Mr. Milinkovic is that --

18 MR. JOSSE: Well, this transcript -- I beg your pardon, this

19 intercept was referred to and the name of Milinkovic was wrongly

20 transcribed as "Milan Kovic." There caused me some confusion.

21 JUDGE ORIE: But you take it that this was a transcribing problem

22 rather than that Mr. Brown was referring to --

23 MR. JOSSE: I do because he definitely talks about KID 39219, so

24 it's clearly this intercept. I'm going to deal in a moment with what

25 Mr. Brown said about this intercept. I'd like to deal with that in

1 conjunction with R187, which is some six weeks or so later. I'm going to

2 go -- I'm going to dart around, Your Honour, for reasons I think will be

3 clear.

4 JUDGE ORIE: If we later come to Mr. Brown's testimony, do you by

5 any chance have the date as well or --

6 MR. JOSSE: I -- I -- could Your Honour give me one moment?

7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Otherwise I'll find it, if you read the --

8 MR. JOSSE: No, I don't off-hand, sorry.

9 JUDGE ORIE: Okay.

10 MR. JOSSE:

11 Q. Now, tab 187 is a conversation between you and Radivoje Grkovic on

12 the 27th of May of 1992. It is P292, KID 31425, and P389, KID 31425.

13 Mr. Grkovic introduces himself at the beginning of the intercept

14 as a battalion commander. And turning halfway through this quite long

15 conversation, he answers a question -- you ask him about -- you say, "So

16 no one is attacking the barracks?"

17 He says: "We have no information, President. No one is attacking

18 it now." They seized the convoy, was broken down during the evacuation

19 towards Ilidza, towards Lukavica, actually, it was going in several

20 directions. The convoy was broken. The action wasn't coordinated. It

21 wasn't -- it was coordinated by an idiot from Belgrade. Boskovic betrayed

22 it, you know.

23 You say: "You know what I'm interested in."

24 Question: "What, president?"

25 Answer: "A lot of equipment was left there. Cannons, howitzers,

1 and things."

2 Grkovic: "Believe me, I don't know anything about it but I'm in

3 touch with" --

4 Krajisnik: "And do any of your men know?"

5 Grkovic: "I really don't know. I suppose the men in Lukavica

6 don't know."

7 Well, first of all, Mr. Krajisnik, what's this about, please?

8 A. Well, the topic has already been discussed but I'll repeat. The

9 evacuation of barracks from Sarajevo was agreed with the Muslim side. The

10 Yugoslav People's Army and the Muslim side and on several occasions

11 representatives of the JNA came from Belgrade. What I mean is among them

12 was the then-assistant for security, Mr. Boskovic. And that evacuation

13 followed after the massacre that happened when this column of troops was

14 leaving Sarajevo. The command of the 2nd Military District.

15 Let me mention one more thing. Instead of Kukanjac, it was

16 Mr. Mladic who led this operation on behalf of those units of the

17 Yugoslav People's Army who were there. Since Mr. Boskovic had come from

18 Belgrade, they had various contacts with the Presidency of Bosnia and

19 Herzegovina. It was Mr. Abdic who was their contact person in the

20 Presidency, and an agreement was signed for them to be given safe passage.

21 I don't know the exact terms of that agreement. I heard that evening --

22 somebody called me to tell me, because it was also in the area where I

23 lived. Somebody called to tell me that the barracks was under attack and

24 that area also held some civilians. So I made this call to find out more

25 and this Grkovic person, whom I didn't know, picked up the receiver and he

1 told me the barracks are no longer attacked. They have been evacuated

2 already. But this column is under attack, and we don't know who is dead

3 and who is alive. I'm paraphrasing now. Maybe the agreement was

4 different. I'm certain that this action was led by Mr. Boskovic

5 representing Belgrade and Mr. Mladic representing the JNA in Sarajevo.

6 And we were an interested party, a concerned party, because there was a

7 lot of weaponry in those barracks, according to our semi-reliable

8 information, and I wanted to find out if the report we got was correct,

9 that the barracks were under attack or whether the agreement had been

10 observed.

11 You remember this document we had here, the book of Karim

12 Loncarevic, The Battle for Sarajevo. He wrote about how much weaponry was

13 seized and how many weapons they saw at the barracks of Josip Broz Tito.

14 This Mr. Loncarevic and the others did not honour the agreement with the

15 JNA. Instead, they seized a lot of weapons from the barracks, in

16 violation of the agreement. And I have to say that the soldiers we

17 interviewed denied that that amount of weaponry had been left behind. And

18 we were not sure whether they were lying because they didn't want to be

19 held responsible for leaving so much weaponry behind, or there was

20 something else to it. But we never managed to find out exactly which

21 information is correct, the one we were given by the officers or what

22 Mr. Loncarevic wrote. I just wanted to find out about it because I was

23 interested.

24 Q. Now, so far as this conversation was concerned, and the one that

25 we have just looked at on the 21st of April, between you and

1 Mr. Milinkovic, Mr. Brown commented in relation to both, that it would

2 appear that you, Mr. Krajisnik, had an ability to speak to low-level

3 commanders in order to avail yourself of the situation in the territory.

4 What do you say about Mr. Brown's conclusion?

5 A. All those who were present heard who was in charge of coordination

6 between the Territorial Defence and the police, the JNA had its own

7 command and was supposed to leave on the 19th from Bosnia-Herzegovina, but

8 they were not able to because their barracks were under siege. Everybody

9 knows that I had no jurisdiction over it and you could see that from the

10 transcript produced here. If I could have called up some commanders who

11 would report to me, as Mr. Brown seemed to imply, that would be incorrect.

12 I could have called as a private person to find out what was going on, but

13 it wouldn't have been an official inquiry from a superior to a

14 subordinate. It was not about the line of command, and you can see that

15 from the papers. Mr. Brown probably didn't have available to him the

16 facts that we know and he drew the wrong conclusion. Why wouldn't the

17 speaker of the assembly call up people he knew to inquire? Why wouldn't I

18 do that, even if I occupied a lower office than I did? I was interested

19 in that area but I was interested in other parts of Bosnia and Herzegovina

20 too. It doesn't mean that I have any jurisdiction over anything or that I

21 have a position of superiority, which makes the conclusion drawn by

22 Mr. Brown completely incorrect.

23 He probably would change his mind too, if he had been able to read

24 those conclusions and familiarise himself with the documents. But he must

25 have based his conclusions on something different, or maybe he had a prior

1 theory that he was trying to defend.

2 Q. Just before we take the break, perhaps I should also ask you, so

3 far as the last conversation is concerned, that is the one between you and

4 Mr. Grkovic on the 27th of May, that in fact was played to this Court at

5 page 6290 of the transcript, during the evidence of Mr. Kljuic, and he

6 simply said, the whole thing having been played, that this is indicative

7 of your knowledge of the situation on the ground. Presumably your answer

8 to that is the same as you've just given in relation to my question

9 concerning Mr. Brown.

10 A. Well, if I had known, I wouldn't have been calling this man. I

11 called in order to find out, to check those reports, the random

12 information I was getting from all sides. But let me tell you one thing:

13 As far as this agreement between the Presidency and the JNA was signed, I

14 have a copy of that. It should have been signed by Mr. Kljuic. I think

15 it was signed by him. And it should have been honoured. I'm not blaming

16 Mr. Kljuic, but his side and the other side violated the agreement. We

17 can see that from various sources. Both Mr. Abdic and Mr. Kljuic are the

18 kind of people who would honour agreements they signed but it was local

19 people who attacked this column, not giving a damn about what the

20 Presidency decided. You can see that from the book of Mr. Loncarevic when

21 he writes that somebody was saying, Well, they will be angry with us if we

22 take the weapons, and another person replies, What do we care? We just

23 take the weapons.

24 I'm not blaming anybody.

25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Josse, we are about at the break. My

1 recollection doesn't tell me whether this agreement is in evidence, yes or

2 no. That's the agreement between, from what I understand, between the JNA

3 and Presidency on the withdrawal from the Marshal Tito barracks.

4 MR. JOSSE: I don't know off-hand, Your Honour.

5 JUDGE ORIE: Could you please find out and see whether there is

6 any --

7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It's not in evidence. I can provide

8 it. I just don't have it here at the moment.

9 JUDGE ORIE: Would the parties consider, because it makes -- let

10 me say the following. It could -- it could be relevant to know whether

11 knowledge of military matters on the ground are directly related to an

12 agreement which was concluded, not by just the military but where

13 government or at least civilian authorities were involved in such an

14 agreement, or whether this knowledge was there if there was not any

15 previous civilian involvement in the situation that arose.

16 MR. TIEGER: Neither Mr. Harmon nor I have any specific

17 recollection that that document is in evidence. We can check on the break

18 but essentially at this point our recollection is the same as my learned

19 friend's.

20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Would the parties consider whether it would

21 be -- whether it would assist the Chamber to have this, the copy of such

22 an agreement in evidence.

23 Then we'll have a break until 1.00.

24 --- Recess taken at 12.41 p.m.

25 --- On resuming at 1.12 p.m.

1 JUDGE ORIE: Before we continue, there was one issue pending in

2 relation to Exhibit P64A, tab 698, the minutes from a meeting of the

3 National Security Council and the government of the Serbian Republic of

4 Bosnia and Herzegovina held on the 28th of April. There was a problem

5 with one word, being illegible in paragraph 10 of these minutes.

6 Meanwhile, and -- the parties have consulted their language experts, and

7 have agreed on a -- how to read this paragraph, and with the always

8 appreciated assistance of CLSS, now a new translation has been provided.

9 Based on this agreement on what that word is in B/C/S, the translation is

10 as follows: "Ten: Suggestion adopted on the need to inform the Crisis

11 Staffs more fully about opinions, proposals, and information available to

12 the public, and on the Crisis Staff informing the government." That's the

13 new translation. The Prosecution is invited to file a new, corrected

14 translation of P64A, tab 698.

15 MR. TIEGER: One additional matter, Your Honour, related to the

16 closed-session or private-session discussion earlier.

17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

18 MR. TIEGER: I believe I can address it without the need to go

19 into private session. And I would indicate to the Court that the item

20 discussed has been provided to the Registrar, who has it now.

21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. The Chamber observes that this is the second

22 time that a mistake was made, which is not -- which is not how it should

23 be.

24 MR. TIEGER: We agree, Your Honour.

25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Josse?

1 MR. JOSSE: Mr. Krajisnik is pointing at me. I think he has

2 something he would like to mention to the Court.

3 JUDGE ORIE: If it has got nothing to do with the last observation

4 made by Mr. Tieger, then we can remain in open session. Otherwise we

5 would have to go into private session.

6 Mr. Krajisnik?

7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I will be careful not to do anything

8 wrong in terms of public sessions. I just have December 2003, what the

9 Prosecution provided. I don't have this particular date. So could I

10 please have a copy of what you received just now?

11 MR. JOSSE: Yes. I -- before Your Honours came into court,

12 Mr. Sladojevic showed me a CD, so clearly some service has been made on

13 the Defence, but the problem remains the same, of not contacting

14 Mr. Krajisnik. If the Prosecution could produce another CD, that would be

15 the easiest solution. If not, I suppose we will have to try and copy the

16 one we have been given.

17 MR. TIEGER: Of course, we will be happy to help.

18 MR. JOSSE: Thank you.

19 JUDGE ORIE: Then that being resolved, we can continue.

20 Mr. Josse?

21 MR. JOSSE: Your Honours, on the Bench in front of you is an

22 additional intercept. This in fact is P625. I wasn't going to ask

23 Mr. Krajisnik about it. Could he be given a copy, please? Because it's

24 not in the bundle. This was introduced as a contextual exhibit, after or

25 in the course of the evidence of a protected witness. As far as we can

1 see, it has never been alluded to at all during the course of this trial.

2 Your Honour, again it's in the light of the questions that

3 Your Honour asked of Mr. Krajisnik that I'm now bringing this to his

4 attention.

5 Q. This is a conversation on the same day, 21st of April 1992,

6 between you and someone called an unidentified male. From the Vraca local

7 community, he says rather pointedly, when you, Mr. Krajisnik, ask him

8 whether he's a member of the Crisis Staff. And on the second page you ask

9 whether they, "Can they withdraw?" And he said, "Well, they tried, they

10 went down there to try to get those men out of encirclement." Goes on,

11 there was great treason there. You asked who betrayed. And he says,

12 "Well, who knows? They just welcomed them. They simply ran into fire."

13 Bearing in mind what you've already said about the situation in

14 Vraca, does this help refresh your memory or recollection at all?

15 A. Yes. This is a sequel to the conversation I had with Mr. Garic.

16 I tried for some reasons to make some additional checks and I tried to

17 reach him but he had by then probably left that locality so somebody

18 answered phone. I didn't even check who it was. And I asked him about

19 the situation there and he described it the way we said earlier on, that

20 somebody got there, that there was some kind of treason, words to that

21 effect. That man is probably trying to justify the persons who took this

22 ill conceived action.

23 MR. JOSSE: I'm going to move one, if I may.

24 JUDGE ORIE: Perhaps one clarifying question. A couple of times

25 in these telephone conversations people are talking about down and down

1 there. Should this be understood to be Vraca a little bit elevated from

2 the Grbavica area?

3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

4 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.

5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, you're right, Mr. President.

6 MR. JOSSE: Your Honour, I'm now going to turn to the two

7 conversations that the Defence are -- have been plead aware of that

8 contain exchanges between the witness and Ratko Mladic. Both have been

9 exhibited. One has previously been played. Because of their obvious

10 importance in the case, I intend to have both played and then ask

11 Mr. Krajisnik about them. The first is one on the 24th of May of 1992.

12 It's our tab 185. It bears exhibit number P154, tab 33. As far as we are

13 aware it's never been referred to at all in the evidence previously.

14 Could I ask --

15 JUDGE ORIE: A number should be assigned to it.

16 MR. JOSSE: It has a number, Your Honour. It has a number. It's

17 just never been referred to. It's part of a large batch of Babic

18 intercepts.

19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I see it has, yes.

20 MR. JOSSE: Could that please be played?

21 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreters note that they do not have any

22 copies.

23 JUDGE ORIE: Could we have a look. Which numbers are they in your

24 bundle?

25 MR. JOSSE: Tab 185, in the left-hand margin. I thought these --

1 JUDGE ORIE: We have, it's listed here 184 and then it jumps to

2 186 on the index.

3 MR. JOSSE: I hadn't spotted that.

4 JUDGE ORIE: You see, with the front page is intercepts involving

5 MK, and they are -- 183 and 185 are not on the index or the cover page.

6 MR. JOSSE: Well, Mr. Sladojevic can put it up on the screen in

7 B/C/S?

8 JUDGE ORIE: I take it that would best --

9 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreters note that it is usually

10 impossible to actually interpret these intercepts. We can barely hear

11 them and it is very fast. We agreed earlier on that we would read out the

12 written translations provided to us. If we do not have a written

13 translation, we cannot read it out and we cannot hear most of it.

14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Josse, therefore, even if the B/C/S version would

15 be on the ELMO, then speech would be too quick, so perhaps you provide and

16 leave it to a later moment.

17 MR. JOSSE: Correct. I'm not going to deal with either of these.

18 I'm going to move on to a completely different subject.

19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. It's appreciated. I had another gotten about

20 that it's not just the B/C/S text not being available but also that the

21 interpreters would need, in order to do their job properly, the

22 translation.

23 MR. JOSSE: Thank you. And I thank the interpreters for pointing

24 that out.

25 Could I be given one moment, please?

1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

2 [Defence counsel confer]

3 MR. JOSSE:

4 Q. Mr. Krajisnik, you can put the intercept bundle away. We will

5 return to that tomorrow morning. I'm going to ask you about a discrete

6 and completely separate topic. And that really involves the departure of

7 the Muslims from Pale.

8 This was ostensibly dealt with in this Court by the evidence of

9 Mr. Crncalo who was a Muslim inhabitant of the town at that time. He in

10 particular described a series of meetings involving the president of the

11 municipality, and also Malko Koroman, the chief of police that culminated

12 in the departure of the Muslims. At one of these meetings, he described

13 Mr. Koljevic as being present and saying, "It does not matter that you

14 want to live with us. The Serbs don't want to go on living with you."

15 What was your knowledge of these events and the difficulties, if

16 any, that the local Muslims were having?

17 A. The surname I heard was wrong. And I'm afraid that this might

18 have been a protected witness. I know the person's name. I know who

19 spoke about this. But the last name is quite different. So --

20 JUDGE ORIE: If it's quite different, we do not even need a

21 redaction. But even then, Witness, let's first turn into private session.

22 [Private session]

23 (redacted)

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11 Page 24242 redacted. Private 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 [Open session]

7 THE REGISTRAR: We are in open session, Your Honours.

8 MR. JOSSE:

9 Q. Mr. Krajisnik, educate me, please; how shall I be pronouncing this

10 gentleman's name?

11 A. The witness's name was Sulejman, Crncalo, Crncalo. Could the

12 interpreters please spell it out?

13 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreters's note, C-r-n-c, with a diacritic,

14 a-l-o.

15 MR. JOSSE: Thank you.

16 Q. The question I asked in relation to him, a few moments ago, was a

17 summary, involved a summary of his description of events prior to his

18 departure, events involving the president of the municipality,

19 Mr. Koroman, and at one point, Mr. Koljevic. And my question to you was

20 how much you knew about these events.

21 A. When that was happening, I did not know when it was that the

22 Muslims had left Pale. When the process was over, I found out. I only

23 heard about it during a conversation when they expressed their intention

24 of wanting to leave Pale. I showed you where Kikinda was. This entire

25 activity was conducted by the municipality, and I assert before this

1 gathering that the Muslims left voluntarily and that there is a decision

2 of the municipality that there is their request, there is their list,

3 there is a record from the municipal assembly when some people voiced

4 their opposition in terms of them leaving, and the then Muslim units had

5 committed a true massacre over the territorials from Pale and over 50 men

6 got killed then or I don't know the exact number. So it was then that

7 they wanted to leave Pale at any cost.

8 As for all the documents that came after this testimony, they were

9 collected and there are several statements from people from Pale who we

10 did not manage to bring here, but that were verified. This was the

11 president of the municipality, members of the Crisis Staff, and so on and

12 so forth. Mr. Koljevic, Mr. Karadzic, or I did not participate in this.

13 On the contrary, this was a totally unnecessary thing done by them because

14 politically it was bad later, and this man, and I assert that, and I'll

15 show you that, he was highly uninformed.

16 There is a contract on the exchange of the house that he had

17 signed. His house in Pale was returned. There is this entire

18 documentation, and I can give you an answer to everyone of your questions

19 based on all the investigations carried out, if I can put it that way.

20 But at that time, when this happened, the entire municipality was so

21 unhappy. No one wanted them to leave. On the contrary, they left because

22 they could have been stopped only by force, and that would have gone

23 against the grain of our principles, making it impossible for someone to

24 freely decide on where they would go. So I ask you, please, since I was

25 in Pale, I'm aware of each and every detail now, and I have all this

1 documentation for you so that you can have the true picture.

2 So in response to your question, at first I knew that there was a

3 wish on their part. I was not aware of the process itself, as it evolved

4 when they made a request to the assembly -- to the municipal assembly and

5 so on but it was only later that I found out that they had actually left.

6 That was it. Not only me, but Mr. Koljevic and everybody else. They

7 left. They took whatever they could take.

8 Your Honours, this man did not sell his house or exchange it.

9 There were these contracts on safekeeping houses. You take care of my

10 house on the other side and I take care of your house. And this is a

11 contract that had been certified and the man's house was returned to him.

12 Obviously this witness was a bit less informed because his brother made a

13 statement that was quite different.

14 There is also a statement made by a Muslim lady who stayed there

15 throughout the war and she talked about how she fared. So it would be

16 very useful to look into this entire matter and to call some witnesses

17 from Pale itself so that they could say specifically what happened. There

18 are several witnesses who are there, and you can choose who you would like

19 to call.

20 MR. TIEGER: Excuse me, Your Honour.

21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Tieger?

22 MR. TIEGER: I understand that there is room for considerable

23 latitude in an examination of this nature. However, when Mr. Krajisnik

24 begins to cite alleged statements that are not before the Court, begins to

25 marshal evidence that's not going to be before the Court, and weave them

1 into his examination, that's where we have to draw the line. I certainly

2 don't blame my learned friend. I don't think that he attempted to elicit

3 that and I accept that Mr. Krajisnik is not so familiar with the process

4 that he may understand the problem but I think at this point, Your Honour,

5 that's a line that should be drawn.

6 JUDGE ORIE: You say it either should have been raised in

7 cross-examination or it should have been put to the witness at that time

8 under Rule 89(H)?

9 MR. TIEGER: There are a variety of other ways of dealing with it.

10 This would not the proper.

11 MR. JOSSE: Your Honour, a couple of the points that Mr. Tieger

12 has just raised I was going to attempt to clarify with Mr. Krajisnik.

13 Q. Firstly, Mr. Krajisnik, you referred twice to the fact that there

14 were witnesses from Pale who could say specifically what happened. And

15 you also said that -- excuse me a moment. I quote, "We did not manage to

16 bring here." Clearly referring to those witnesses.

17 As far as you are concerned, why have those witnesses not come

18 before this Court?

19 MR. TIEGER: I'm sorry, now we are moving in a completely

20 different direction and I -- that's not a relevant matter for purposes of

21 the objection I made. If there is some intention afoot to broaden the

22 nature of the evidence before the Court, then it needs to be addressed

23 directly. My objection is --

24 JUDGE ORIE: You would say under those circumstances to say it

25 very -- perhaps in an unconventional way, then Mr. Krajisnik should be in

1 the position of the accused again and the parties should not through a

2 witness first discuss what latitude there would be to introduce any

3 further evidence and then the second question is whether it could be done

4 by this witness. Is that what you had in mind? Or, of course, I'm not

5 that familiar with how to resolve these matters in a fairly adversarial

6 system.

7 MR. JOSSE: Perhaps before my learned friend replies, my response

8 was going to be a rhetorical one: What is wrong with that question, the

9 question that I have just asked?

10 MR. TIEGER: I raised an objection. Now, what I understood

11 counsel to be doing, was to be laying some kind of foundation for making--

12 for the reasons why, not even for the justification for, legal

13 justification for, but for the motivation for trying to use Mr. Krajisnik

14 as some sort of summary witness for information that was otherwise not

15 going to be before the Court.

16 JUDGE ORIE: I didn't understand it to be that Mr. Krajisnik was

17 introduced as a summary witness but rather to find out what the procedural

18 consequences should be from the fact that if there were good reasons to

19 believe that these witnesses could not be called to appear in this Court,

20 and then to later perhaps discuss what the consequences would be, but

21 first, just to establish what Mr. Krajisnik knows about the impossibility

22 of those witnesses to appear before this court, and not any further, and

23 not to replace their potential --

24 MR. JOSSE: Precisely.

25 JUDGE ORIE: -- evidence, by Mr. Krajisnik.

1 MR. JOSSE: Precisely.

2 JUDGE ORIE: If it's understood like that, would you still object,

3 Mr. Tieger? We would limit it clearly to: Does Mr. Krajisnik know, did

4 he contact them and -- or did they die, or whatever.

5 MR. TIEGER: I think an objection could be made. I think

6 nevertheless the Defence wishes to bring that information before the

7 court. It seems to me the Court wishes to hear that limited information,

8 and on that basis I won't stand in the way.

9 JUDGE ORIE: Then you may proceed, Mr. Josse, in accordance with

10 that small corridor.

11 MR. JOSSE:

12 Q. Mr. Krajisnik, we don't want to know what these people would have

13 said or might say, were they to provide statements or were they to come

14 here. We simply want to know what you understand to be the reasons the

15 Defence have not called them.

16 A. I will reply, but I kindly ask the Trial Chamber to allow me just

17 a brief comment on what just transpired, to assist the Trial Chamber of

18 course. The Defence --

19 JUDGE ORIE: Very much a procedural issue that comes up which is

20 left in the lands of counsel, so you may respond to the question put to

21 you by Mr. Josse, whether you're aware of the reasons why the Defence did

22 not call these witnesses.

23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] All right. I will answer. The

24 Defence did not call these witnesses because they did not have time.

25 There are certified statements, a number of them, and one of them was

1 ready and willing to come on several occasions but simply didn't fit with

2 the schedule. That's Mr. Sarac.

3 MR. JOSSE: That's all you need to say.

4 JUDGE ORIE: So it's due to time reasons that these witnesses were

5 not called. That reminds me of a lot of submissions and quite a few

6 decisions taken by this Chamber and also the emphasis this Chamber has put

7 on whether to use the time for preparation or to present evidence in

8 court. I don't have to revisit all that but that comes into our minds at

9 this moment without drawing any conclusions at this very moment.

10 Please proceed, Mr. Josse.

11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, please, you made me a

12 promise, if I may just remind you so that I can avoid errors in my further

13 testimony.

14 JUDGE ORIE: And the promise was, Mr. Krajisnik?

15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] If you remember, when I sat at the

16 other Bench, you said that if I have knowledge of a document or an event

17 or anything at all that could be of assistance to the Trial Chamber and

18 everybody else, that I should produce it, and that -- that was some sort

19 of privilege of mine. Maybe I cross that line from time to time with the

20 best of intentions just to let you know what I know. Everybody keeps

21 interrupting me. I can't finish one sentence.

22 JUDGE ORIE: There might be a good reason why Mr. Josse --

23 MR. JOSSE: The good reason is, I was going to ask you this very

24 question. That was going to be my next question which was, you had

25 referred in the long, substantive answer you gave explaining your

1 knowledge or lack of knowledge in relation to the departure of these

2 people, to documents. I was going to invite you to bring them here

3 tomorrow morning. Any problem with that? It's a question to you,

4 Mr. Krajisnik.

5 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Josse invites to you bring them tomorrow morning

6 and ask whether you have any problem in doing that.

7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] They have all the documents, and so

8 do I. And if they don't have them, I'll try to locate them. No problem.

9 All right, I'll try to find all those documents.

10 MR. JOSSE: And we will do the same.

11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then I foresee -- could I just inquire at this

12 moment, the last minute, what are we going to expect? I mean, are we

13 talking about decisions of the Crisis Staff or are we talking about

14 statements of witnesses? Because that makes quite a difference for me.

15 And perhaps also for my colleagues.

16 MR. JOSSE: I have a file in this building that says "Pale" on it.

17 I think the documents in that file fall into the category of the former

18 rather than the latter. However, I need to check and -- but I am fairly

19 certain about is that most of them are untranslated.

20 JUDGE ORIE: Which makes the issue not easier -- any easier

21 because very often we know more or less what to expect from a document by

22 just reading the title, that -- well, I would very much like, Mr. Josse,

23 you to use part of the afternoon discussing the matter, because this

24 creates -- well, could I say a procedural novelty, if witness statements

25 would be introduced by the accused as a witness, where 92 bis has not been

1 used, the witness has not been called. I'm talking about if there were

2 any witness statements in there. And then untranslated brought to our

3 attention, that at least creates a situation which I have not seen

4 described before.

5 MR. JOSSE: Let me make life a little bit simple. I don't know

6 what course Mr. Krajisnik would like me to undertake or any course he

7 might wish to undertake himself but at this stage of the case, I certainly

8 do not intend to do that. Counsel are not going to introduce statements

9 from witnesses via Mr. Krajisnik.

10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Therefore, Mr. Krajisnik, if you have

11 documents, you may have perceived from this discussion that it would

12 create at least a very complex and difficult procedural situation if the

13 documents you would find this evening would be witness statements, and you

14 referred to statements of witnesses earlier so there is a fair chance that

15 there would be a strong opposition and I'm perhaps not -- my guess is not

16 far from what we could expect, Mr. Tieger?

17 MR. TIEGER: Correct, Your Honour.

18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So that could create quite a lot of problems.

19 If, however, there are other documents, let's just assume that any

20 municipal body has taken any decision in which it invited all the citizens

21 to discuss exchange of property, that might be a totally different matter

22 and then we are in the area of what I would call the kind of documents we

23 found in Prosecution dossiers as well. Then there still remains the issue

24 whether the witnesses should have been confronted with that material at an

25 earlier stage but if we come to that, if we come to that bridge, we will

1 cross it. Or stop before the bridge. I don't know what it will be.

2 But I think it would be good that the parties would communicate

3 this afternoon to see more or less what they could expect from each other

4 tomorrow and see to what extent problems could be resolved in a consensual

5 way already.

6 This having said, I've lost my little note on that -- we'll

7 adjourn for the day, Mr. Krajisnik, but not until after I've instructed

8 you not to speak with anyone about your testimony already given or still

9 to be given. You might not even have time, being very busy perhaps this

10 evening, in finding your documents, but this is my instruction for you.

11 We will adjourn to tomorrow, 9.00, same courtroom, and the parties

12 are informed that the Registrar has sent updated lists of exhibits to

13 them.

14 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.50 p.m.,

15 to be reconvened on Thursday, the 18th day of May,

16 2006, at 9.00 a.m.

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25