1 Wednesday, 26 April 2006
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness entered court]
5 --- Upon commencing at 9.05 a.m.
6 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Good morning, everyone.
7 Mr. Milovancevic, I believe you were in the thick of
8 cross-examination of the witness, Ambassador Galbraith.
9 WITNESS: PETER GALBRAITH [Resumed]
10 Cross-examination by Mr. Milovancevic: [Continued]
11 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
12 Q. Good morning, Mr. Ambassador. We will now proceed with your
13 cross-examination. Yesterday we left it off with some questions about the
14 shelling of Zagreb. To the extent possible, pursuant to the rules that
15 exist here at the Tribunal, let us go back to the moment when you
16 explained why you considered the Republic of Srpska Krajina the so-called
17 Srpska Krajina and you said it was because it was a self-proclaimed
18 republic that nobody in the world recognised as such. In this regard I
19 would like to ask you as follows: Is it true that in 1991, before the
20 arrival of UNPROFOR and its deployment, Republika Srpska Krajina had its
21 own territory? Is that true?
22 A. Since there was no Republika Srpska Krajina, one cannot speak of
23 it as having territory. There was territory under the control of local
24 Serb authorities, paramilitaries, but that doesn't make it the territory
25 of a state.
1 Q. Was this a territory at which the Serb population was a majority
2 or a minority in Croatia, and what territory was it where the United
3 Nations deployed their forces in order to keep peace and in order to
4 peacefully resolve the Yugoslav crisis? Is this the territory that we are
5 referring to?
6 A. Before the war, some of the territory in question had had a
7 Serbian majority. Some of it had had a Croatian majority. As a result of
8 the activities conducted by in part by your client, the ethnic cleansing
9 of the Croatian population, the territory was by the end of 1991 almost
10 purely Serbian.
11 Q. In that territory that we are talking about now, were there bodies
12 of the Serb authorities so to speak, the president of the republic, the
13 government of Republika Srpska Krajina, the assembly of the Republika
14 Srpska Krajina? Are you familiar with that? Are you aware of that?
15 A. There were bodies that said that they had those titles. Nobody
16 recognised them as lawful authorities but they did exercise de facto
17 control over the territory, and we met with the leaders of these de facto
19 Q. Am I right in saying that in that territory, the authorities of
20 the Republic of Croatia had no power, had no control whatsoever, at that
21 time, in 1991?
22 A. Yes. They had no actual power on the ground because it was
23 occupied or controlled by the rebel Serb authorities supported by Serbia.
24 Q. This territory had its population, its territory, and its bodies
25 of power elected in elections and you call it the so-called republic. Can
1 you by the same token call the Republic of Croatia the so-called Republic
2 of Croatia?
3 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Yes, Mr. Milovancevic, Mr. Whiting is on his
5 MR. WHITING: Well, I was going to make an objection but I'll
6 withdraw it.
7 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Thank you. Please continue, Mr. Milovancevic.
8 Counsel has withdrawn his objection.
9 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
10 Q. Can you answer my question, Mr. Ambassador?
11 A. Well, technically speaking, anybody or anything can be so-called,
12 but even something that's lawful is so-called. I'm so-called Peter
13 Galbraith. But the Republic of Croatia was an entity that existed within
14 the former Yugoslavia and it became a -- when Yugoslavia dissolved at the
15 end of 1991, it became a legally recognised successor state, a member of
16 the United Nations recognised by most countries in the world.
17 Q. Are you aware of the fact that the Republika Srpska Krajina asked
18 for international recognition and do you know whether it received
19 international recognition, if it did?
20 MR. WHITING: Okay, now I am going to object. I think that these
21 questions this morning first of all they go beyond scope of direct. We
22 are talking now about a time period that the witness specifically did not
23 testify about. Secondly, the witness was the Ambassador to Croatia
24 starting in 1993 and these questions are all about 1991.
25 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Mr. Milovancevic, what do you have to say in
2 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] My questions have to do with
3 the Prosecutor's examination-in-chief. He did ask the Ambassador about
4 Republika Srpska Krajina and I just want to know why he called it a
5 so-called republic. It exists, it has existed since 1991. Therefore, my
6 questions have to do with the period that was referred to by the
7 Prosecutor in his questions to the witness, when he called for his
9 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Very well, but the point that is being taken is
10 that the period in respect of which the legality is in issue is the later
11 period and not the earlier period that you're referring to. Therefore,
12 it's outside of the phase that was dealt with in direct or
13 examination-in-chief by the witness.
14 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, in order to avoid
15 misunderstanding and not to break the rules, the essence of my questions
16 has to do with the facts and the facts have to do with the legality. The
17 Prosecutor raised the issue of legality and asked the Ambassador to
18 provide his opinion on the status of the RSK. However, I can move on. I
19 have received enough answers from the Ambassador, if you agree with that,
20 Your Honour.
21 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Yes, Mr. Whiting.
22 MR. WHITING: Your Honour, I appreciate that and -- that
23 resolution of the issue. But I do want to clarify one thing, and that is
24 that I don't believe that I asked any questions of the witness about
25 issues of legality. They were factual issues about why the entity was
1 called the so-called RSK but I didn't -- this witness is not here as a
2 legal expert and I have not tried to draw legal opinions from him.
3 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: No. That is correct, but he has himself given
4 certain evidence and that evidence has indicated that he did not believe
5 that at the relevant time it was an entity that had the lawful sanction
6 from the international community. So I think in that regard, counsel is
7 entitled to put questions to him concerning the issue of whether there was
8 recognition, the issue of legality, but it must be contained to the period
9 that was referred to during the course of examination-in-chief.
10 MR. WHITING: Yes. I fully agree with that, Your Honour. Thank
12 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Yes, Mr. Milovancevic, you have heard what the
13 Chamber has said. Please proceed. But I believe that the question has
14 effectively been answered by the witness. If you have a different
15 position to put to him, put it directly instead of circuitously in
16 relation to the relevant period. Remember, this is not only a witness in
17 respect of which the regular guidelines of the Chamber exist but he
18 himself has certain protective measures which were referred to initially
19 that touch and concern him and how he can be examined and cross-examined.
20 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. I have
21 finished with that topic and I will indeed proceed.
22 Q. At one point in answering the Prosecutor's questions, you said,
23 Mr. Ambassador, that Milosevic had told you that he would not accept the
24 plan and that he would not receive the Z-4 plan delegation. With that
25 regard, I would like to know whether you received that information from
1 Mr. Milosevic personally. If not, who was it who told you that?
2 A. I did not receive the message -- I did not receive the message
3 from Milosevic personally, since the message was that he would not
4 receive the Z-4 delegation. I think the -- this was conveyed through the
5 co-chairman of ICFY as well as the American embassy in Belgrade.
6 Q. I would like to remind you of the fact that yesterday you referred
7 to a report that was sent by the British embassy on the 3rd of August 1995
8 and in that letter your meeting with Mr. Babic is described and it
9 contains a statement saying that the American embassy in Belgrade had been
10 in contact with Mr. Milosevic, however this was not correct. You believed
11 that they were in contact with Mr. Milosevic. However it turned out that
12 they couldn't get in touch with him. I would like to know based on which
13 information were you able to convey the information about the meeting with
14 Mr. Babic on the 2nd and the 3rd of August and how did you know that
15 Mr. Milosevic had been informed about the Z-4 plan, or were those just
16 your assumptions?
17 A. Well, with regard to the meeting with Mr. Babic, I personally had
18 the meeting with Mr. Babic so I knew everything that had transpired in
19 that meeting. It was a meeting between just the two of us, plus an
20 interpreter and a -- and my assistant, in the American embassy in
22 And I and my assistant prepared the reports on that meeting. As
23 to whether Milosevic was informed of the Z-4 plan, the plan was well known
24 in -- at the time. It was in the press. Copies of it were published
25 after it was presented. So I'm sure that he did in fact know what the
1 contents of the Z-4 plan were.
2 Q. Thank you. Can one say that in such a situation, the one that you
3 have just explained, the information conveyed to the Ambassadors of the
4 contact group, the Ambassadors of Spain, Italy and Canada, the information
5 that speaks about your meeting with Mr. Babic on the 2nd and 3rd of August
6 1995, is the information about the embassy of America in Belgrade having
7 informed Mr. Milosevic was actually an arbitrary piece of information,
8 because that meeting had actually never taken place?
9 A. Ambassador Hewitt's cable accurately reflected the content of my
10 meeting with Mr. Babic, which I had briefed to the contact group plus the
11 additional Ambassadors that you mentioned. I said that the American
12 embassy was or would be briefing Milosevic or would be seeing him to
13 solicit his support. That was what I believed to be the case, since our
14 charge, Rudi Perina, had instructions from the State Department to go see
15 Milosevic and to brief him. I, however, had left Belgrade in the morning
16 of the 3rd and this meeting with the Ambassadors was shortly after I had
17 arrived back in Zagreb, and I did not know at that time that this briefing
18 was not going to take place. If Gavin Hewitt had asked me at 6 p.m. that
19 evening, I think I would have known that Milosevic had in fact not seen
20 Perina and then his cable would have been a little bit different but I
21 don't think that there is any significance at all to the fact that I
22 thought at 2.00 or whatever time it was in the afternoon that that
23 briefing was going to go ahead.
24 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Ambassador, before the next question comes, may I
25 ask for clarification, before you mentioned that the message of Mr.
1 Milosevic in your eyes has been conveyed through the co-chairman of ICFY
2 as well as through the American embassy. What is ICFY? What abbreviation
3 is that?
4 THE WITNESS: It is the International Conference for the Former
5 Yugoslavia. It was the -- but just to be clear, Your Honour, I'm
6 referring then to our request that was put forward in January of 1995 to
7 come to Belgrade to present the plan. The original idea is that the Z-4
8 peace plan would be presented first to Milosevic [sic], second to the
9 leaders of the so-called Republika Srpska Krajina, and then after that we
10 would all go to Belgrade to present it to Milosevic. Milosevic told the
11 co-chairman of ICFY that he would not receive us and the same word was
12 sent to the American embassy in Belgrade to pass on to me.
13 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Thank you very much.
14 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation]
15 Q. In other words, you've explained to the honourable judge that the
16 first piece of information on Z-4 dating from January 1995 should have
17 been conveyed to Mr. Milosevic and that's one position. And the telegram
18 and your information about your meeting with Mr. Babic and about an
19 immediate Croatian attack, this second situation refers to the 2nd and 3rd
20 of August of 1995. Have we now been able to clarify that little issue,
21 Mr. Ambassador?
22 A. Just to make sure that is no misunderstanding, these are, as you
23 say, two separate events, one related to the presentation of the Z-4 peace
24 plan, and the second related to an agreement that I concluded with
25 Mr. Babic on the evening of the 2nd of August 1995, which involved five
1 points, one of which was that Babic would accept the Z-4 plan with the
2 private message to Tudjman that he understood the end result would be much
3 less autonomy for the RSK than contained in the Z-4 plan. On the 3rd of
4 August, there was a -- the -- Rudi Perina attempted to be in touch with
5 Slobodan Milosevic to get him to support this deal between Babic and
6 myself from the previous night, and that was considered extremely
7 important because Babic had said, "One word from Milosevic, one sentence
8 from Milosevic, and Martic and the other leaders of the RSK will accept
9 this deal that Galbraith and I have concluded."
10 Q. Thank you for this clarification, Mr. Ambassador.
11 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Galbraith and I.
12 THE WITNESS: I was quoting Babic. I hope I've been clear.
13 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Right, right.
14 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation]
15 Q. With regard to this explanation that we have arrived at, and with
16 regard to your words that Milosevic would -- said that he would not accept
17 the Z-4 plan and who you received that information from, you also told us
18 yesterday that Milosevic had accepted the cease-fire but that he was
19 afraid of the offer of the autonomy because of Kosovo. Actually he was
20 afraid that such an autonomy would be demanded for Kosovo as well. With
21 this regard I would have a question for you, Mr. Ambassador. Are you
22 familiar with the fact that Kosovo, in 1991 and in 1995, had a full
23 autonomy in the Republic of Serbia?
24 A. I'm not aware of that fact because it is not true.
25 Q. If you're not aware of something, I don't see how you can claim it
1 to be untrue. However, I have the following question for you concerning
2 Kosovo. Have you ever had a chance to look at the SFRY constitution
3 according to which Kosovo had its autonomy, has its academy, has its own
4 entire schooling system, that's to say education, health system, police,
5 everything. It had the highest form of autonomy under the European
6 standards both in 1991 and in 1995? Now, do you know these things or do
7 you not?
8 A. I am generally aware of what the constitution of the former
9 Yugoslavia provided and what was intended for Kosovo, but the reality in
10 Kosovo is that the Albanian majority was completely disenfranchised. It
11 was run by Milosevic with the Serbian minority. There was brutal
12 repression in the province. And so it is not possible to speak of
13 meaningful autonomy in Kosovo.
14 Q. Mr. Galbraith, between 1993 and 1998, you were the US Ambassador
15 to Croatia. Now, were you or rather did you visit Kosovo ever before that
16 period and who did you have contacts with and in what way did you obtain
17 the information that you are relaying now? The information you're
18 testifying to now, as a politician?
19 MR. WHITING: I'd object to the -- I would object to that last
20 reference. He's not testifying as a politician.
21 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: You only object on that issue, the reference to
22 the witness as a politician?
23 MR. WHITING: You know, I'm also very close to objecting on scope
24 grounds here once again but I think a question about the basis of his
25 knowledge is a fair question --
1 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Yes.
2 MR. WHITING: -- if it doesn't go further than that.
3 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Mr. Milovancevic -- one moment, please,
4 Ambassador Galbraith. Mr. Milovancevic has to have the opportunity of
6 Please do respond, Mr. Milovancevic. Or do you concede that your
7 description by use of the word "politician" as ascribed to the witness was
8 somewhat inappropriate?
9 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, if the latter
10 part of my question is objectionable, then I will withdraw it. What I
11 wanted to say was that Mr. Galbraith is an Ambassador, must have been a
12 man who was involved in politics and I do consider him a man involved in
13 politics and therefore a politician. However, I can fully withdraw that
14 part of my question, if that poses a problem.
15 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: From my knowledge of that state, it does not
16 follow. Please go ahead.
17 THE WITNESS: I visited Kosovo twice, in 1990 -- December of 1991
18 and November of 1992. I met with the local Serbian authorities, including
19 the head of the autonomous region, as well as the Ibrahim Rugova and the
20 Albanian democratic movement. I might add I visited Kosovo Polje and some
21 of the Serbian monasteries as well.
22 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: How would that affect the opinion which you
23 formed in respect of that particular state of -- in relation to Kosovo,
25 THE WITNESS: It was clear from those visits that there was brutal
1 repression of the Albanian majority by the Serbian minority and that there
2 was no meaningful self-rule on the part of the Albanian majority, and
3 therefore it doesn't change my conclusion that one of the reasons that
4 Milosevic did not like the Z-4 plan is that a -- an arrangement that
5 provided very great autonomy to the Serbian minority within Croatia, in
6 the Krajina region, would set a bad precedent for the -- for Kosovo
7 because it would imply that perhaps he would have to grant the same kind
8 of autonomy for the Albanian majority. I might add, Your Honours, that
9 there was also another reason why he didn't like the Z-4 plan, which I
10 should have mentioned yesterday, which is that the plan provided for
11 autonomy for the Serb majority region of Krajina, as I testified
12 yesterday, but it involved the full reintegration into Croatia of those
13 areas, like Eastern Slavonia, which had had a Croatian majority in 1991,
14 and his real interest was in trying to acquire Eastern Slavonia. He
15 didn't care about the Serbian population in Krajina, which was an
16 impoverished region far from Serbia but was much more interested in
17 Eastern Slavonia which was rich farm land and had oil fields.
18 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Thank you.
19 Yes, Mr. Milovancevic, please continue.
20 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
21 Q. As far as I understood your answer, Mr. Galbraith, you made one
22 visit in 1991 and another one in 1992, the total of two visits to Kosovo.
23 My question in connection with that is as follows. On these occasions,
24 were you visiting Serbia or Yugoslavia?
25 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Mr. Milovancevic, you had been allowed a certain
1 laxity but do remember that there are specific restrictions concerning the
2 witness. And you have to honour them.
3 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. I will
4 move quickly with this topic. I believe we are close to finishing it.
5 Q. Tell us, Mr. Ambassador, you were visiting the area of former
6 Yugoslavia in 1991. Who did you visit specifically on the occasion of
7 your visit to Kosovo in 1991 and the same question for 1992?
8 MR. WHITING: Your Honour, I'm going to object. I think the -- I
9 think the witness has addressed the issue. He's given the basis for his
10 opinion, fully explained it. I think this goes far beyond the -- what is
11 fair on cross, given the direct. We are now just entering into all kinds
12 of questions about Kosovo.
13 I would also add, Your Honour, that I would like to while I'm on
14 my feet address the issue of the length of the cross-examination. By my
15 calculation, the cross examination has just exceeded the length of my
16 direct examination and by the Court's order of 13 April 2004 [sic],
17 paragraph 11, the Court ordered that ordinarily cross-examination should
18 not exceed the length of direct examination. Of course, I recognise that
19 there are exceptions and I understand if it may have to go on for a little
20 longer but I don't think it should go on for very much longer and in fact
21 in this case the witness does have other arrangements to leave this
23 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Well, each counsel has his own style but I'm
24 sure that Mr. Milovancevic will be guided by the fact that there are time
25 limits, in terms of the guidelines.
1 And probably you could give an indication to the Trial Chamber at
2 this point how much longer you intend to be with the witness, having
3 regard to the fact that you have exceeded the cross-examination -- the
4 examination-in-chief. And the guidelines are in fact the 13th of April
5 2006. We would just like to have it on the record. If there is a
6 reference to 2004, it was an error.
7 Please proceed.
8 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, as for the
9 objection by my learned friend, in order to speed up the examination I'll
10 withdraw my question. We have received appropriate answers any way.
11 First of all to save time, this examination lasted a bit longer precisely
12 because of the numerous objections that consumed practically half of the
13 Defence's cross-examination. I had the intention of not prolonging this
14 examination too far. I will move along quickly. I do have the caution
15 received both by the Chamber and the Prosecution and I will act
16 accordingly. Thank you.
17 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: I take your point, Mr. Milovancevic, but some of
18 the objections were properly taken. So you have to try to be more direct,
20 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
21 Q. Mr. Galbraith, yesterday, after you explained your view of
22 Milosevic's position vis-a-vis the Z-4 plan, you stated that his, that's
23 to say Milosevic's, dream concerning greater Serbia included Slavonia,
24 Krajina and Dubrovnik. My question in connection with this is as follows:
25 Did you ever discuss his dreams with Mr. Milosevic?
1 A. I met with Mr. Milosevic in October of 1992, in Belgrade, and I
2 raised the issue of greater Serbia. He at that time denied that he had
3 any ambitions for greater Serbia but frankly I didn't believe him and I
4 think nobody else in the government -- in the US government believed him
6 Q. Does this mean that despite Mr. Milosevic's denial of the thesis
7 of a greater Serbia, you and the American government were of the view that
8 in fact this idea existed, that's to say that was your position to believe
9 that? Is that what you're saying now?
10 A. I believed, and I think this view was shared by many people in the
11 US government who've dealt with the Balkans, that Milosevic had a plan for
12 greater Serbia, that he was implementing the plan, that he was using the
13 military forces of the former Yugoslavia to try to accomplish that
15 Q. In your testimony in the Milosevic case, when answering the
16 questions by the Prosecutor, you stated that you never saw any documents
17 or anything in writing that would support the idea of greater Serbia; is
18 that correct?
19 A. I can't answer that question because I don't have the testimony in
20 the Milosevic case in front of me, and I would want to see the exact
21 exchange to understand the point that I was making.
22 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Yes, Mr. Milovancevic, do you have that
23 testimony with you to present to the witness so that he may properly
24 observe what you are putting to him and answer your question appropriately
25 and effectively in the circumstances? The guidelines again are upon you.
1 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I'm quite
2 satisfied with Mr. Galbraith's answer. I do not wish to waste any more
3 time on this. I find the explanation quite satisfactory by your leave.
4 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Thank you.
5 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation]
6 Q. Mr. Galbraith, yesterday you spoke of Mr. Milosevic's dreams of
7 greater Serbia. Also in response to the Prosecutor's question, you
8 presented, or rather gave some statements concerning Mr. Martic which not
9 only went beyond what is propriety but rather went to directly offend him,
10 that he was a man of limited abilities, of limited intelligence. I'm
11 interested in the following. The disagreement of Mr. Martic with your
12 political proposals and views, was that the basis for your assessment of
14 A. Let me begin by saying that it was not my intention to offend the
15 accused. I was asked by the Prosecution for my assessment of him, as I
16 had been asked in the Milosevic trial, and I gave the same answer. My
17 assessment was based on the meetings I had with him, as well as
18 conversations I had with other people who knew him and had interacted with
19 him. I felt that he was a man of very limited abilities, was way over his
20 head in trying to handle the situation of the Krajina Serbs, and frankly,
21 yes, I think it was an act of extraordinary stupidity to have refused a
22 peace plan, refused to receive a peace plan that came from the most
23 powerful countries in the world, a peace plan that had it been
24 implemented, had the negotiations proceeded, there would have been no
25 Operation Storm, the population, the Serbian population of the Krajina
1 would have remained, the -- there would have been very substantial
2 self-government there, and quite possibly the defendant would not be here
3 in this courtroom.
4 Q. Mr. Galbraith, yesterday you explained that Mr. Martic's objection
5 was that he could not discuss the Z-4 plan until a decision is taken to
6 extend the mandate of UNPROFOR in Croatia and that this was in fact done
7 in the month of March. In connection with this, did the attack by the
8 Croatian forces against the UN zone in Western Slavonia, therefore a
9 protected area, at the point in time when you were proposing a peace plan,
10 give the basis for Mr. Martic to believe that this was a bona fide plan
11 that was able to give any hope to the Krajina population?
12 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Can the witness properly answer for Mr. Martic
13 in that regard? Is it a fair question to put to the witness, do you
15 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I will rephrase
16 the question. This will be a direct question for Mr. Galbraith.
17 Q. Your negotiating intentions, both of you and those who authored
18 the Z-4, plan, were they sincere in their approach to the Krajina Serb
19 people, where in the midst of a peace process, the Croatian authorities
20 wipe out the entire Western Slavonia area without any consequences to
22 A. I can say to you that the United States, the Russian Federation,
23 the European Union and the United Nations, all of whom were co-sponsors of
24 the Z-4 plan were very sincere in wanting to find a peaceful settlement to
25 the conflict within Croatia that provided very substantial autonomy for
1 the Serbian people and also enabled those who had been displaced or
2 ethnically cleansed to return to our homes -- to their homes. We devoted
3 enormous effort, time and effort, to this process. I can tell you that to
4 this day I am bitterly disappointed that it was unsuccessful. When you
5 refuse to negotiate peace seriously, war often is the consequence. Mr.
6 Martic played games in 1994 that prevented the peace process from going
7 forward. He refused the plan on January 30th, 1995. The direct
8 consequence of his action was the operation that took place in Western
9 Slavonia. He demonstrated fully in that operation that he had no ability,
10 the RSK had no ability to defend themselves and, of course, the Croatians
11 then were emboldened to launch Operation Storm in August of 1995. All of
12 this was a huge tragedy for the people of the Krajina and it's something
13 that I personally deeply regret and I think that's true of the others who
14 participated in this peace process.
15 Q. Mr. Ambassador, you said that the greatest powers of the world
16 were there to give an offer to the Krajina Serb people. On the other
17 hand, you tell us that the Croatian authorities did what they willed. Did
18 you have the abilities, were you able to stop the Croatian authorities
19 from engaging in these operations? You were there, offering a peace
20 settlement in Krajina, reportedly, while at the same time, although the
21 Croatian authorities should find themselves content with the peace
22 process, they launch an attack against Western Slavonia. Did you have any
23 influence to wield on the Croatian authorities?
24 A. We had substantial influence on the Croatian authorities, and we
25 urged them successfully urged them to exercise restraint on a number of
1 occasions in 1993. In November 1994, when the RSK was attacking across
2 the international border into the Bihac enclave, we put a lot of pressure
3 on the Croatians to exercise restraint. The fact is, because of your
4 client, there was no peace process in April of 1995. We had presented the
5 plan or attempted to present the plan in January of 1995. He refused
6 physically to pick up the plan, to touch it. And after that, there really
7 wasn't a peace process. The Croatians were frustrated. He then refused
8 to keep the agreements that he had already made, include -- he closed the
9 highway through Western Slavonia. War is the consequence of what happens
10 when you don't make peace. And it was an avoidable tragedy.
11 Q. Mr. Ambassador, my next question has to do with the period
12 immediately preceding your talks with Mr. Babic, which took place on the
13 2nd and 3rd of August 1995. In response to Amicus Tapuskovic in the
14 Milosevic's case, that is to say Amicus Tapuskovic's questions, you said
15 that you were at Brioni on the 30th and 31st of June. Was that indeed --
16 or rather, July. Was that indeed the case, Mr. Galbraith? Were you at
18 MR. WHITING: Your Honour, I wonder first if we could have a
19 reference for my own purposes. Again, there is -- if the witness could
20 have available to him the prior testimony.
21 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Yes, Mr. Milovancevic. Do you have that which
22 is necessary?
23 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. I'm simply
24 trying to proceed more quickly with the witness. We have all seen the
25 material but I'd like to know whether Mr. Galbraith was at Brioni on the
1 30th or the 31st of July 1995. This is a question which doesn't have to
2 do with any document.
3 MR. WHITING: Your Honour, but --
4 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: The foundation for the question is contained in
5 a document.
6 MR. WHITING: Yes, and in fact I have now found the reference and
7 in fact the witness -- the counsel has misstated the evidence that was
8 given in the testimony. On page 78, 26th of June 2003, the Ambassador
9 stated that he was there on the 1st of August 1995, and in this context,
10 it's an extremely important distinction. So this is precisely why it's
11 important to have the document available.
12 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Yes, Mr. Milovancevic, have you heard what
13 Mr. Whiting has said as to the de facto evidence that was given? That it
14 is in fact a reference to the 1st of August? And could you give the
15 witness the opportunity to answer the question in respect of what was said
16 and then to go on to the second part of it?
17 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, my question is a
18 general question, whether the witness remembers having had a meeting with
19 President Tudjman on the eve of the Operation Storm, whether it was in
20 July or in August 1995. It's a general question.
21 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: So you withdraw your reference to the evidence
22 that was given in the other case, then?
23 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] That is correct, Your Honour.
24 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Very well. Please go ahead.
25 THE WITNESS: Yes. Yes.
1 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation].
2 Q. Do you know that before your meeting with Mr. Tudjman, towards the
3 end of July or maybe on the 1st day of August 1995, there was an operation
4 by the Croatian armed forces in Grahovo and in Glamoc and these are places
5 in the territory of Bosnia-Herzegovina. The Croatian armed forces took
6 those two places in the territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina? Are you
7 familiar with that fact?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. You've also explained that around the 21st of July 1995, you
10 learned about the Croatian intention to launch a military intervention in
11 Krajina. With regard to that, I'm interested in the part of the answer
12 that you provided saying that the government of the United States was in
13 two mind as to what to do because they feared a possible outcome of the
14 situation in Bihac. Are you familiar with what the real situation in
15 Bihac was at the time, Mr. Galbraith?
16 A. Yes. I was familiar with the situation in Bihac, but I did not
17 say that the United States was of two minds. We had a very clear
19 Q. Do you know that before Operation Storm, Mr. Thorvald Stoltenberg
20 the co-chairman of the conference on Yugoslavia and Mr. Akashi the Serb
21 forces had withdrawn from Bihac and all the military activity had ceased
22 and this was done with the mediation of the two gentlemen that I
24 A. The situation in the two weeks before Operation Storm was very
25 complicated. There was an attack by the Bosnian Serb army and the army of
1 the Republika Srpska Krajina on the Bihac enclave, the army of the ARSK
2 crossing the international border. There was a time when we feared that
3 Bihac would fall and that Ratko Mladic would engage in the same kind of
4 slaughter of the people of Bihac, the men and boys of Bihac, that he had
5 done in Srebrenica. In the few days immediately before Operation Storm,
6 there were indications that the forces from the ARSK were ceasing their
7 military operations, but at that stage, the momentum for war was very
8 strong and as I've explained, we did attempt even at that late stage to
9 try to find a peaceful settlement.
10 Q. Mr. Galbraith, are you familiar with the presidential statement of
11 the Security Council of the United Nations dating from February 1994, in
12 which the Croatian forces were requested to withdraw from
13 Bosnia-Herzegovina, from the territory of a different state? With regard
14 to this, do you find that the operations in Glamoc and Grahovo meant that
15 Croatia had again intervened on the territory of a different state despite
16 the previous warnings on the eve of Operation Storm and flash? Is that
17 the momentum that you were referring to, Mr. Galbraith?
18 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Yes, Mr. Whiting?
19 MR. WHITING: Thank you, Your Honour. I'm going to object on
20 relevance grounds. I don't see how this would be relevant.
21 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Mr. Milovancevic, what is your response? I was
22 making the same inquiries.
23 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the witness has
24 told us that the Croatian side used the situation in Bihac as a pretext to
25 launch an operation on the territory of Krajina and that his government
1 had taken a position on that. What I want to know is whether this
2 witness's government thought that the intervention of the Croatian troops
3 in the territory of Bosnia-Herzegovina regarded as illegal and contrary to
4 the international law. This was in preparation of operations of storm and
5 flash. The burden here is transferred on to Mr. Martic, and Knin fell
6 after the Croatian troops had taken Glamoc because it is from Glamoc that
7 the Croatian artillery was able to shell Knin and this is what the Trial
8 Chamber should be aware of. And this is why I have put this question to
9 the witness.
10 MR. WHITING: Your Honour, I think counsel has explained the
11 question and what it is he's trying to elicit but I don't think he's
12 explained the relevance of it. I don't see how that information is
13 relevant to the charges and the indictment in the case before the Trial
15 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: I crave your indulgence.
16 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I would like to
17 move on.
18 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Yes. Mr. Milovancevic, might I just say
19 something? It sounds very much like it is material that you would address
20 the Chamber on when the relevant time comes. But for now, the direct
21 relevance, I do not see it. So yes, please move on.
22 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
23 Q. Mr. Galbraith, did you hear anything about the meeting between
24 Mr. Tudjman and the top leadership, military leadership of Croatia on the
25 eve of Operation Storm on the 30th or the 31st of July 1995? At that
1 meeting he informed his military leadership he -- that there was no
2 military justification for the operation against the Serbs, i.e. that
3 Bihac could not be taken as a pretext? However, that the Republic of
4 Croatia enjoyed the support of the government of the USA if it intervened
5 in Western Slavonia? Are you familiar with that? Are you aware of that
6 speech that Mr. Tudjman delivered to his military leadership?
7 A. If I may ask a question, are you referring to the transcript of
8 the meeting in Brioni, I believe on the 31st of July, that was
9 subsequently made public by the Croatian government?
10 Q. Yes.
11 A. Obviously I was not aware of that -- of any speech that he made to
12 his military commanders in a closed meeting at the time, but I did see the
13 transcript at the time of the Milosevic trial.
14 Q. Yesterday on direct you said that Mr. Babic after the meeting with
15 yourself --
16 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: I needs a clarification from the witness.
17 Before you proceed, might I get a clarification? When you answer yes,
18 Mr. Witness, are you referring to yes you're aware of that meeting, or are
19 you answering yes to the statement that was made? Are you adopting that
20 as a statement that was made within the confines of the transcript on that
22 THE WITNESS: Thank you, Your Honour, for the clarification which
23 I should have made. I'm answering yes that I'm aware that there was a
24 transcript of the meeting. If the transcript were presented to me and I
25 sat here and read it I might be able to agree or disagree with a
1 characterisation of it but I'm not agreeing with any characterisation of
2 it right now.
3 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Would you have the transcript? Is it necessary
4 for you to produce it, Mr. Milovancevic, if you might stand? Thank you.
5 Are you pursuing the contents of the transcript?
6 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I do have the
7 contents of the transcript, but I believe that at this point it is not
8 important for the witness because he was not present at the meeting and he
9 said that he read about it in the press. That's why I'm not presenting
10 the witness with the transcript. At the Milosevic trial, he was
11 familiarised with the contents of the transcript and I'm not insisting on
12 that particular detail at this moment. Thank you very much. And I
13 believe this is a good time for our break.
14 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Would you be much longer?
15 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] No. I'm sure I'll be able to
16 finish in the course of the next session.
17 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Thank you very much, Mr. Milovancevic.
18 We will take a break and come back at quarter to 11.
19 --- Recess taken at 10.16 a.m.
20 --- On resuming at 10.48 a.m.
21 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Yes, Mr. Milovancevic?
22 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
23 Q. Mr. Galbraith, we finished the last session by talking about the
24 meeting with Mr. Tudjman and his meeting with the top military leadership
25 of the 31st July, on the eve of Operation Storm. You said that at the
1 Milosevic trial you were presented with a transcript from that meeting on
2 the 31st of July. Do you remember whether you were asked questions by
3 Mr. Tapuskovic on page 23200 on 26th of July, questions about Tudjman
4 having as a goal of that meeting to strike a final blow on Serbs so that
5 they could disappear and he gave a task to Mr. Sarinic to go to Geneva and
6 negotiate but just to buy time because he did not intend to sign any
7 agreements? Do you remember that detail? If not, you can tell us so?
8 MR. WHITING: Your Honour, could the witness once again could the
9 witness be presented with the transcript because again there has been a
10 reference to it?
11 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Yes, Mr. Milovancevic, before the break you were
12 asked about the transcript. Do you have the transcript? Please produce
13 it to the witness and have him look at it and proceed on that foundation.
14 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour; I
15 understand your comment. Given the witness's previous answer the
16 Prosecutor's objection, I'm not going to proceed. I will move on in order
17 to avoid wasting any more time on this.
18 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: You won't be wasting time. You'll be doing what
19 is necessary and abiding by the guidelines. It's not a question of
20 whether or not you're wasting time here.
21 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the question was
22 not direct. That's why I'm not insisting on the transcript and on this
23 evidence because the witness did not attend that meeting. Thank you.
24 Q. Mr. Galbraith, do you know anything about the fact that Mr. --
25 Secretariat General of the United Nations, and I believe that at the time
1 that was Mr. Boutros-Ghali, on the 3rd of August 1995, which is on the eve
2 of Operation Storm, he called Mr. Tudjman and implored with him not to
3 launch any military operations against Krajina? Do you know anything
4 about that detail at all?
5 A. At the present time, I don't recall the specifics of that. We --
6 there were a number of people, myself included, who urged
7 President Tudjman not to take military action on the 3rd of August. I've
8 already testified to that.
9 Q. On the 4th of August 1995, the Republic of Croatia launched a
10 large-scale military operation against the RSK, against the zones under
11 the protection of the United Nations. A few days later, the entire
12 territory was occupied, the population was expelled, and the property of
13 the Serb population there was destroyed. With regard to that, I have the
14 following question. Are you familiar with the fact that the world media
15 published your photo on a tank of the Croatian army, a photo that was
16 taken during Operation Storm?
17 A. No photograph was taken of me during Operation Storm on a Croatian
18 tank. I was not on a Croatian tank during Operation Storm. The only
19 photograph that was taken in fact was on a tractor with Serbian refugees
20 who I was trying to protect from a Croatian mob, as you know.
21 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Successfully or unsuccessfully?
22 THE WITNESS: Successfully.
23 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Thank you.
24 Mr. Milovancevic your client is asked to contain himself and
25 behave appropriately unless he has some communication to make to you in
1 the course of this hearing.
2 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, I wish to say something, of
3 course, I do.
4 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Communication can only be made through your
6 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, may I have a brief
7 moment with my client?
8 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: You wish the benefit of an audience with him,
9 with your client?
10 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Just for a moment, thank you.
11 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Very briefly, thank you.
12 [Defence counsel and Accused confer]
13 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
14 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: You're welcome.
15 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] With your leave I would like to
17 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Would you have the photograph of the witness on
18 the tractor with you to place before him? No?
19 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] There is even a video clip,
20 Your Honour, featuring Mr. Galbraith on a tractor, but there is no dispute
21 about that. Mr. Galbraith was indeed on a tractor with the Serb refugees
22 and he was helping the population and protect the population from being
23 stoned by a mob. But this was not my question. I only asked
24 Mr. Ambassador whether he was on a Croatian armoured vehicle? We received
25 an answer and I am happy with that answer. I have nothing further to that
2 Q. My following question --
3 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: I'm sorry, the witness on a tank, not on a
4 tractor, because what is in issue is the fact that he was not on a tank,
5 he was on a tractor? So I correct myself. Do you have the photograph of
6 him on the tank? Would your response be the same?
7 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, at this moment,
8 the Defence team does not consider this photo important. We will try to
9 lead this evidence with other witnesses in different ways. I just wanted
10 to hear from the witness whether he knows anything about that or not.
11 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Very well.
12 Yes, Mr. Whiting?
13 MR. WHITING: Your Honour, I don't want to waste time but I think
14 that there -- I'm not clear, because counsel needs to have a basis for
15 putting that kind of question to the witness and does he in fact have a
16 photograph that -- as he has described? I would ask that if the Court
17 could get an answer to that question from the counsel to determine if
18 there it was a basis for that question. Because I'm not aware of such a
20 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: That was what I was attempting to do,
21 particularly by virtue of the fact that Ambassador Galbraith has denied
22 the fact that he was on a tank. He has said where he was and what he was
23 doing and I wanted to be advised as to whether Mr. Milovancevic had that
24 photograph to put to the witness.
25 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, with your leave I
1 would like to explain and I would like to answer my learned friend. In
2 the Milosevic case, Mr. Galbraith explained how he had arrived at the
3 place of combat and he said that he had been in a Croatian armoured
4 vehicle and then that he moved on to a Croatian tractor belonging to a man
5 that he knew, and my question arises from the Milosevic case transcript
6 but I wouldn't waste any more time on that because there will be more time
7 to dwell upon that issue if the Defence team deems the issue to be
8 important, and of some consideration in the course of this trial. And
9 with your leave I would like to proceed with some other questions.
10 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Please do. It's just that you had raised the
11 issue yourself in the course of your cross-examination, and I do believe
12 that the witness has something to say. Please go ahead.
13 THE WITNESS: What I -- I arrived at the scene in my armoured car.
14 It was an American automobile that had -- that was armoured. It was a
15 Chevrolet Caprice, not a military vehicle of any kind, and what I
16 testified to is that my original plan was to ride in the convoy of
17 refugees in that vehicle with the American flag flying so that there would
18 be a clear warning to the mob and to the Croatian police that if they were
19 throwing stones at the -- if they allowed stones to be thrown at the
20 refugees they would also be stoning an American -- official American
21 vehicle, in fact the Ambassador's vehicle. I had also told the Croatian
22 President Tudjman that I intended to do this because I was dissatisfied
23 that he had -- that the Croatian government had not protected the
24 refugees. Instead, because a man in the crowd on a tractor recognised me
25 and as I was talking to him - I didn't know him, he recognised me from
1 television - he invited me to ride on his tractor and I decided to do
3 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Thank you.
4 Yes, Mr. Milovancevic. Please proceed. Thank you.
5 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
6 Q. In connection with this detail you just mentioned, Mr. Galbraith,
7 about the conduct of the mob, as you put it, and the fact that you put
8 President Tudjman on notice about this, can you describe for us the
9 conduct of the Croatian armed forces in the course of and in the aftermath
10 of Operation Storm vis-a-vis the population, the local population and the
11 property in the area covered by Operation Storm?
12 MR. WHITING: Objection, Your Honour. I would object, Your
13 Honour. The question --
14 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: I'm sorry.
15 MR. WHITING: The question -- we are now moving into the conduct
16 of the Croatian armed forces during the course of Operation Storm. This
17 is, number 1, beyond the scope of direct examination, number 2 it is not
19 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Yes, Mr. Milovancevic?
20 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I'm merely trying
21 to arrive at the information about the true intentions and goals of the
22 operation undertaken by the Croatian forces and of Operation Storm through
23 this witness's answers. He told us that the immediate motive of the
24 attack was the Bihac operation. However, before Operation Storm we had
25 Operation Flash, and then we heard about the witness's activities prior to
1 Operation Storm and since he was the eyewitness of all these events that
2 transpired in the course of several days, the 3rd, the 4th and 5th of
3 August 1995, I thought the question relevant in order to hear what the
4 witness had to say about the actual intentions and goals of the Croatian
5 forces, on the one hand, and of the Z-4 plan and of the negotiators on the
6 other side. This might be prejudicial for or damaging for the Prosecution
7 but my intention was not to break the rules. Rather, I wanted to examine
8 the witness on these specific matters.
9 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: The witness spoke in general terms, and I
10 believe that you are going beyond the bound of the rules in seeking to go
11 into these specific areas, and I am not going to allow you.
12 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the problem that
13 the Defence has been constantly faced with in the course of this
14 cross-examination was the attempt by the Prosecution to protect the
15 interests of one state. In the view of the Defence, such an attempt seems
16 to be more important or seems to override the interests of our client and
17 under such circumstances, we are unable to perform our duties properly.
18 We can simply have those questions allowed that suit the Prosecution. I'm
19 afraid I cannot continue with my cross-examination and for these reasons I
20 will have to stop.
21 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Mr. Milovancevic, please, please, because you're
22 imputing something to the Bench that does not exist, firstly, and there is
23 also the issue concerning the OTP, the conduct of its case, and imputation
24 in respect of the integrity of this witness. Now, are you saying that
25 Mr. Whiting has been in favour and pursuing the interest of one state or
1 are you referring to the evidence of the witness? Or is it both?
2 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the problem
3 experienced by the Defence is as follows: The Prosecution has called a
4 witness who was an Ambassador of the greatest world power, who testified
5 or rather who witnessed the events in 1995 up to Operation Storm.
6 However, the Defence was allowed to put only a fraction of questions that
7 were completely out of any relevant context. We were prevented from
8 examining the witness properly. Now, this approach by the Prosecution to
9 have the witness examined while protecting the interests of one state, in
10 our view, violates the right to a fair trial. The need to protect these
11 interests is in direct conflict with the need to protect the right to a
12 fair trial. I cannot put a single question that would open up enough
13 space for me to put follow-up questions that I believe are relevant for
14 the case and for my client. This, Your Honour, was not an objection that
15 I raised with regard to this honourable Chamber but with regard to the
16 Prosecution and their course of proceeding. Now, if the need to protect
17 the interests of a state overrides the interests or rather the right to a
18 fair trial, then I no longer wish to continue examining the witness.
19 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Mr. Milovancevic, I can say this. I'm truly
20 disappointed in you, as you stand there and as I sit here, and if you are
21 imputing in any way that by reason of the fact that this witness is an
22 ambassador of a world power it would affect the manner in which evidence
23 would be dealt with, then that is a very, very sad and inappropriate
24 statement to make. It's also a false statement. He ranks as any other
25 witness in the eyes of the Chamber. And his evidence would be dealt with
1 in the same way as any other witness whatever his or her status. And that
2 is a real and proper fact that you will have to contend with, whether you
3 like it or not.
4 Now, let me say this to you also: The evidence comes before the
5 Chamber with two considerations: A, the guidelines which you would wish
6 to wipe away and have disappear magically. Secondly, there is the issue
7 of the order touching and concerning the witness. I repeat, which
8 dictates in very strong terms how you may question the witness. Can you
9 go beyond direct examination or what I would term examination-in-chief?
10 The answer is in the negative, which you must comprehend. We are also
11 dealing with a particular period, and circumstances in a particular way.
12 And you have been able to accept that. If it is that this witness has
13 given evidence in a manner that in the Defence opinion appears to favour
14 Croatia or any other party, it is open to you to put the reverse position
15 to the witness but in the proper terms, and you are -- I say this as a
16 position coming from 34 years as Defence counsel. If you have the
17 evidence that is contrary to the witness's, put it to the witness in the
18 proper form in cross-examination and if it happens that a case has been
19 made out when the time comes, put your evidence to confront it and to
20 contradict it.
21 I would like to think that in a moment of folly, and in a moment
22 of weakness, you questioned the integrity of the Court, although you claim
23 that it was not directed at the Court, and I think unfairly, Mr. Whiting
24 and the witness, because he was merely attempting to do his duty, as the
25 Bench is, and the witness may give his evidence as it sees it. He's not
1 obliged to agree with the case for the Defence. And I would like you to
2 complete your cross-examination and behave appropriately. If you have
3 finished it, then so let it be, but as for taking your seat in a huff
4 because you didn't get your way, it smacks of being a little bit unfair to
5 all the parties here and somewhat puerile. Please forgive me. You may
7 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] I understand. Your Honour,
8 thank you for cautioning me and I wish to say one more thing only. The
9 position I presented, I presented precisely having regard to the order
10 which has to do with this witness. It was precisely about this order that
11 my objection had to do with.
12 At this moment, I have no further questions for the witness.
13 MR. WHITING: Your Honour, I just have very few, maybe two or
14 three questions on redirect. For the first question if we could have
15 Exhibit 391 published, please, on the monitor?
16 Re-examination by Mr. Whiting:
17 MR. WHITING: If we could go to the second page, please?
18 Q. Ambassador, you recognise this as the code cable that you talked
19 about, you testified about earlier?
20 A. I do.
21 Q. I want to ask you about point 4, specifically the source of the
22 information in that point, if you know it. It says, "Babic, who remained
23 calm throughout, apologised for the way the RSK authorities had reacted to
24 the Z-4 plan. He himself had wanted to accept what was on offer." This
25 is the next sentence that I'm interested in. "Martic and Milosevic were
2 Now, are you able to tell us what the source is for that sentence
3 in the code cable, please?
4 A. I believe. It's Milan Babic.
5 Q. And did he give that information to you in your meeting with him
6 on August 2nd, 1995?
7 A. He did.
8 Q. My only other question is to clear up what may have been a
9 misspeak and I just would refer to page 8 of today's transcript. I just
10 want to read you a sentence of an answer that you gave and ask you if it's
11 accurate. It's in reference to the presentation of the Z-4 plan in
12 January of 1995 and this is what you said, according to the
13 transcript, "The original idea is that the Z-4 peace plan would be
14 presented first to Milosevic, second to the leaders of the so-called
15 Republika Srpska Krajina, and then after that we would all go to Belgrade
16 to present it to Milosevic."
17 A. I think that is an error of the transcript and not of how I spoke.
18 Q. Could you just it's just for purposes of the record if you could
20 A. Yes. What I said was that the plan -- the original idea was that
21 the plan would be first presented to President Tudjman in Zagreb, then to
22 the leaders of the so-called RSK in Knin, and finally to Milosevic in
24 Q. Thank you, Ambassador. Those are all my questions, Your Honour.
25 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Thank you very much.
1 Judge Hoepfel, are there any questions you wish to put to the
3 JUDGE HOEPFEL: No questions, thank you.
4 Questioned by the Court:
5 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: I just have one or two questions. You were
6 cross-examined concerning a statement made by the accused, Mr. Martic,
7 that he was sorry about the shelling of Zagreb and he had in fact been
8 aiming for military targets. You recall that evidence?
9 A. Yes. The article by John Pomfritt in the Washington Post.
10 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Now, what I want to get from you, and please
11 tell me if you're in a position to speak to this fact, where would the
12 nearest military target have been? If you do not know, then just say so.
13 A. I can't speak to the precise distance, but the Ministry of Defence
14 was several kilometres away. But aside from that, if you -- if one
15 considers that a military target, there were no military targets in
16 downtown Zagreb. It was a -- the centre of a city, purely a civilian
18 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Thank you. And now another question. You were
19 asked about the normality, having regard to diplomatic protocol, of
20 attending on and conferring on a weekly and daily basis with the Croatian
21 president. What circumstances that you spoke to prompted this?
22 A. I'm afraid, Your Honour --
23 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: You did say in answer to him when you were asked
24 if it were normal for you to do that as a diplomat, given the diplomatic
25 protocol of having the monthly and weekly meetings and being in such close
1 association, as I recall the evidence, with the Croatian president, and
2 you said the circumstances would dictate how often you met with the person
3 and how you communicate with the person and I'm asking what were the
4 specific circumstances in this instance that prompted you to meet in that
5 fashion and to communicate in that fashion?
6 A. I understand the question.
7 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Yes.
8 A. Just broadly, the amount of time that an Ambassador might spend
9 with the head of government or the head of state would depend on the
10 circumstances, both the country you were representing and what was going
11 on in the country where you were serving. In this case, the United States
12 was a principal power concerned with the war. We had a lot of influence
13 with the Croatians. Frankly, all the parties were looking to us as the
14 one power that might be able to help end the war. So I was seeing Tudjman
15 on a very regular basis, dealing with the crisis of the day, whether it
16 was some military action in Bosnia, some action by the Croatian government
17 that we were objecting to, whether it was being briefed about developments
18 but it was because of the war and then because of the peace process, which
19 involved both the process I've described to you with the Krajina Serbs and
20 also the peace process in Bosnia that I was seeing him all the time, alone
21 and also with a steady stream of visitors from Washington as well as from
23 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: And I must ask you this question: If the
24 Republika Srpska Krajina was not a territory, and it did not have
25 international recognition, nor indeed recognition by your own state, why
1 were you sitting down with it and engaging it in negotiations with a view
2 to peace?
3 A. Well, because there was a war, and it was the goal of my country
4 and of President Clinton to do everything possible to try to end that
5 war. In visiting Knin I was doing so in my capacity as the United States
6 Ambassador to Croatia, visiting a part of the Republic of Croatia, and I
7 met with the local authorities there, the act of meeting with them in no
8 way conferred any recognition of them. I, of course, never used the
9 titles that they themselves used. I never referred to the defendant as
10 President or Mr. Babic as foreign minister or Mr. Mikelic as Prime
11 Minister. But this is something that the United States does in many
12 circumstances, not just in Croatia but in other parts of the world. We do
13 meet with rebels and even those who have themselves proclaimed to have
14 their own state.
15 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Thank you. For information, you said that
16 Mr. Martic had indicated that he would not meet with you because you had
17 breached protocol by first having meeting or audience with the Minister of
18 Foreign Affairs. Who is that person?
19 A. That would have been Milan Babic. Incidentally, there is, of
20 course, no protocol that would in any diplomatic practice that would
21 suggest that because you meet with the foreign minister, you have in some
22 way offended the president. This was an absurd position that he took.
23 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: I have no further questions and I thank you. I
24 am now going to ask Mr. Whiting to ask any questions arising from the
1 MR. WHITING: Thank you, Your Honour. I have no questions to ask.
2 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: And you, Mr. Milovancevic, do you have any
3 questions to put to the witness arising out of the questions coming from
4 the Bench?
5 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] I do not have any questions
6 arising from the Bench's questions. Thank you.
7 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: I'm grateful to you.
8 I believe that that would be the end of the testimony from you and
9 I want to thank you for coming and giving your evidence.
10 THE WITNESS: Thank you, Your Honours.
11 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: I want to thank your counsel also.
12 [The witness withdrew]
13 MR. WHITING: Your Honour, Mr. Black will be handling the next
14 witness so we are going to do a little switching around here and if I may
15 be excused, as well as Ms. Heather Schildge from the US embassy. I f we
16 could both be excused.
17 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: I had indicated that she could be released and
18 you most certainly can be released.
19 MR. WHITING: Thank you, Your Honour.
20 MR. BLACK: Your Honours, as soon as the usher returns I'm ready
21 to call our next witness.
22 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Very well.
23 MR. BLACK: The next witness is Mr. Stanko Erstic.
24 [The witness entered court]
25 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Could the witness please take the declaration.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will speak
2 the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
3 WITNESS: STANKO ERSTIC
4 [Witness answered through interpreter]
5 MR. BLACK: Thank you very much, Your Honour.
6 Examination by Mr. Black:
7 Q. Good morning, Mr. Erstic. Can you hear me and understand me
9 A. Yes, I can.
10 Q. If at any time you don't understand one of my questions please
11 just let me know and I'll try to state it more clearly. Do you understand
13 A. Yes, I do.
14 Q. First, could you please state your full name for the Court?
15 A. Stanko Erstic.
16 Q. Mr. Erstic, did you provide a witness statement to this Tribunal
17 in October of 2000?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. And do you remember having a chance to review that statement and
20 certifying its accuracy in June of 2003?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Did you subsequently come to the Tribunal and appear as a witness
23 in the case against Slobodan Milosevic in July of 2003?
24 A. I did.
25 MR. BLACK: Your Honour, Mr. Erstic's prior testimony along with a
1 few associated documents was admitted by your decision of 16 January 2006.
2 The materials have been given exhibit numbers, 392 to 397, and in
3 particular, I would note that Exhibit 392 is the transcript of his
4 testimony in the Milosevic case and Exhibit 396 is his witness statement
5 certified pursuant to Rule 92 bis. Just so it's clear, he appeared as a
6 92 bis witness in the Milosevic case as well. That's why there is a
7 certified statement in addition to the trial transcript.
8 Now, Your Honours, following the usual practice for a 92 bis
9 witness I'll first read a summary of his evidence. After that I'll have
10 just a couple of questions. Those questions relate to the act and conduct
11 of the accused and that's why they were not tendered pursuant to Rule 92
12 bis. Before I begin my summary I would merely direct the interest Trial
13 Chamber's attention to page 30 of the atlas which is Exhibit 23. The
14 village of Medvidja which will be discussed appears in grid B-1 just a
15 couple of kilometres north-east of Bruska.
16 I'll now begin the summary.
17 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Thank you, Mr. Black.
18 MR. BLACK: Thank you, Your Honour.
19 The witness, Stanko Erstic, is a Croat born in the village of
20 Medvidja, Croatia. Relations between Croats and Serbs in his area were
21 reasonably good up until the summer of 1991. However, even before that,
22 local Serbs began gathering in the local bar to sing nationalistic Serb
23 songs, the words to the songs included phrases such as "Milosevic, send us
24 some lettuce. There will be meat because we will be slaughtering Croats."
25 A sign was placed on this bar saying, "Drinks not allowed for Croats and
1 dogs." And Croats in the area were increasingly targeted with hostile
2 remarks from the armed Serb patrons of this bar.
3 This same bar became a hangout for members of Martic's Militia.
4 They mostly wore green camouflage uniforms with a patch on the shoulder
5 saying, militia and SAO Krajina in Cyrillic script. Beginning in 1990,
6 barricades were set up on the roads in this area, around Medvidja and
7 Bruska. As time went on the harassment at these barricades increased and
8 in the summer of 1991 the witness became aware that some people were being
9 arrested at the roadblocks. A few days before the witness was himself
10 detained he saw a local Serb dressed in the uniform of Martic's Militia
11 and carrying an automatic rifle. This person swore at the witness,
12 calling him names and asking him what he was doing. Then this person hit
13 the witness in the chest with the butt of his rifle after which the
14 witness walked away.
15 On the 2nd of October 1991, the witness was detained by two local
16 Serb men who were armed and wearing the uniform of Martic's Militia. They
17 and another local Serb then drove the witness first to Kistanje in a car
18 with licence plates of the Territorial Defence. At Kistanje the witness
19 was held for a short time in a building marked "militia" or police where
20 he saw other militia members. The witness was then taken to Obrovac where
21 he spent the night in a police station that had been taken over by the
22 Serb militia.
23 The next day, still in Obrovac he was interrogated by a Serb
24 police about activities in Medvidja although the witness did not know what
25 they were talking about and eventually they told him he would be taken to
1 Knin. On the next day, the 3rd of October 1991, the witness was taken by
2 two members of Martic's Militia to the old hospital in Knin which was
3 being used as a prison. There, he was detained for one month along with
4 approximately 120 other Croat prisoners, mostly civilians, except for
5 about 20 members of the Croatian National Guard who had been captured in
7 During his month at the prison, the witness was continually
8 harassed. Beatings and interrogations took place around the clock. Every
9 day the guards would take some detainees out to be beaten, sworn at,
10 taunted and abused. The witness himself received two broken ribs and one
11 cracked rib but other detainees were injured even more severely. The
12 detainees were also forced to do different kinds of work during their
14 The guards at this prison were members of Martic's Militia. While
15 the witness was detained in the prison, Captain Dragan's men and members
16 of the JNA reserve sometimes stayed in a section of the hospital used as a
17 dormitory. The witness frequently saw Captain Dragan's men at the prison.
18 They were not local Serbs and they treated the prisoners better than the
19 others. Captain Dragan's men wore a lighter green uniform than did
20 Martic's Militia and they wore patches with the Serbian flag and the four
21 Cyrillic Ss.
22 On two occasions, the witness saw Ratko Mladic in the prison. On
23 the second of November 1991, the witness was exchanged along with other
24 prisoners. He was picked up from the prison in Knin by members of
25 Mladic's special military police wearing JNA uniforms. The prisoners were
1 first taken on buses to the JNA barracks in Knin where other prisoners
2 boarded the buses. From the barracks, they were taken to the exchange
3 point and about 100 Croats were exchanged for Serb prisoners.
4 After his release the witness stayed in Zadar. He joined the
5 Croatian army in 1993 and he participated in Operation Storm in 1995,
6 although he was not involved in any fighting during that operation.
7 When the witness finally returned to his family home in 1995, his
8 house and about ten others in the hamlet had been destroyed. One of the
9 two village churches had also been mined and damaged.
10 That completes the summary, Your Honours.
11 Q. Mr. Erstic, I just have two very short topics to ask you about
12 today. First, if we could see on e-court please Exhibit 266?
13 Mr. Erstic in a moment on one of the screens in front of you there
14 will appear an image. We just have to wait for one moment.
15 Mr. Erstic, please look at the image on the screen in front of you
16 and tell the Judges whether you've ever seen a patch like this before.
17 A. Yes. In 1991.
18 Q. Where did you see a patch similar to this?
19 A. I saw it in my village, and after that in the prison.
20 Q. Who wore this patch?
21 A. Martic's Militia from Krajina.
22 Q. Thank you. That's all for that exhibit.
23 Just one more topic, Mr. Erstic. Did you see Milan Martic during
24 October of 1991?
25 A. Yes, I did, in front of the prison, in the yard in front of the
2 Q. What was he doing at the time that you saw him?
3 A. He crossed the yard and I saw him as we were unloading some
4 agricultural machines and some food stuff.
5 Q. Do you remember how he was dressed?
6 A. He wore a camouflage uniform.
7 Q. Did you notice if he wore any insignia on his uniform?
8 A. The same one, the Krajina Militia.
9 Q. When you say the same one, do you mean the one that we just saw on
10 the screen in front of you?
11 A. Yes, yes.
12 Q. Mr. Erstic, did you know Milan Martic at that time?
13 A. The guards told us that it was him, the militia members who were
14 there told us that.
15 Q. I understand that. Just so it's clear, if they had not told you,
16 would you have been able to recognise Milan Martic at that time?
17 A. Not at the time. I saw him later on TV, and that was that.
18 Q. Thank you very much, Mr. Erstic.
19 MR. BLACK: Your Honours, I have no more questions in direct
21 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Thank you, Mr. Black.
22 Mr. Milovancevic?
23 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, it will be
24 Mr. Perovic who will lead the cross-examination. He is my co-counsel.
25 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Very well. Mr. Perovic, please proceed.
1 MR. PEROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
2 Cross-examination by Mr. Perovic:
3 Q. Good afternoon, Mr. Erstic.
4 A. Good afternoon.
5 Q. I suppose you know that I am one of the Defence counsel for
6 Mr. Martic and I will lead the cross-examination as has been envisaged by
7 the rules of the procedure.
8 A. Yes, I'm aware of that.
9 Q. From the summary that has just been read out to us by the
10 Prosecutor, the summary of your statement previously given to the
11 Tribunal, it arises that up to 1990 or 1991 the situation in the area
12 where you resided and the relationship between the Croats and the Serbs
13 were relatively good.
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. The situation deteriorated after the referendum in Croatia in the
16 year 1990, a majority of the population voted in favour of the
17 independence of Croatia at that referendum according to you, as you say;
18 is that correct?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. You also say within that context that just like a majority of
21 Croats in 1990 you joined the Croatian Democratic Union; is that correct?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. What governed you in your decision to join the HDZ?
24 A. Nothing in particular, nothing special.
25 Q. Maybe I should ask you whether ever before that you belonged to
1 any political party?
2 A. No, never before that. I didn't belong to any party.
3 Q. However, you joined the HDZ?
4 A. Yes, I did.
5 Q. And you can't say why you joined the HDZ?
6 A. I joined for Croatia, we voted for the HDZ. We wanted to have
7 Croatia as our state, and that was that.
8 Q. Within the same context, you also say that after the referendum in
9 1990, in Rade Pupovac' pub you saw members of the local paramilitaries
10 gathering. That's your wording.
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. And you proceed to say that they were all members of Martic's
14 A. Yes, that's correct.
15 Q. And now, what I would like to know is how come you know that those
16 people who were members of the local paramilitary were also members of
17 Martic's Militia?
18 A. Of course I knew, they had the patches, they wore the insignia
19 featuring the words Martic's Militia. They were armed.
20 Q. You believe it is enough for somebody to put on a patch and by
21 doing that they become members of a certain formation?
22 A. They had patches, they were armed, they put up barricades, and
23 they started harassing people, and that was enough.
24 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Mr. Perovic, just a little bit slower for me,
25 please. Thank you.
1 MR. PEROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
2 Q. You were arrested on the 2nd of October 1991?
3 A. Correct.
4 Q. Who arrested you?
5 A. The Krajina Militia, my next door neighbours, Skoric, Dusan
6 Skoric, Stevo Milanko, and Slobodan Skokna.
7 Q. In the summary of your statement, on page 2, you say, "I was
8 arrested by the paramilitary on the 2nd of October 1991."
9 A. Yes, the Krajina Militia.
10 Q. You used the word paramilitaries. That's why I'm asking you. Do
11 you make any distinction between the paramilitaries and the militia?
12 A. The paramilitaries were the militia.
13 Q. And it is one and the same for you?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Thank you. You were released on the 2nd of November of the same
16 year, and there was an exchange, wasn't there?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. When you spoke about the moment when you were arrested, you
19 mentioned that you were together with Petar Erstic, a person who bore the
20 same family name.
21 A. Yes, he was my neighbour.
22 Q. And you also said that the people from the paramilitary did not
23 show any interest in that person. Why not?
24 A. I don't know. They were just not interested in him. Maybe I was
25 the only person of interest to them.
1 Q. Why would that be the case?
2 A. You don't --
3 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter can't hear the witness.
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] They said that I had a radio
5 station, which I never saw. I only saw a radio station in the former JNA.
6 That was their explanation.
7 MR. PEROVIC: [Interpretation]
8 Q. I wouldn't go into the details of your stay in prison, save for
9 one thing. You mentioned that two of your ribs were broken and one was
10 fractured; is that correct?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. And during your testimony in the Milosevic case, you said that you
13 did not have any medical documentation about that.
14 A. I beg your pardon, what documentation?
15 Q. Medical documentation?
16 A. Medical documentation? I was sent to treatment. I asked for the
17 documents and they said that they were missing. They were never filed.
18 The first time I was hospitalised was in Rijeka.
19 Q. How many detained Croats were there in the prison in Knin where
20 you were?
21 A. About 120 or thereabouts.
22 Q. During the exchange that took place on the 2nd of November 1991,
23 how many of you were released from prison?
24 A. 100 or so, 20 remained, those people came from the Lika side.
25 Q. The 20 who remained, were they members of the Croatian National
1 Guard Corps?
2 A. There may have been two or three reserve policemen and the rest
3 were civilians, mostly elderly men.
4 Q. In other words, during the exchange, 100 Croats were released?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. They were exchanged for 60 Serbs?
7 A. Yes. I suppose so, some 60 or so.
8 Q. Who allowed for an exchange of that sort to happen?
9 A. It was the International Red Cross that mediated in that.
10 Q. And on the Serb side?
11 A. On the Serb side, Mladic was the one who had the main say.
12 Q. Did Martic participate in the exchange in any way?
13 A. I wouldn't know that.
14 Q. When you were released from prison in 1993, you joined the
15 Croatian army and you participated in Operation Storm; is that correct?
16 A. Yes, it is.
17 Q. I don't have any other questions for you, Mr. Erstic. Thank you,
18 Your Honours. This completes my cross-examination of this witness.
19 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Thank you, Mr. Perovic.
20 Mr. Black, do you have any re-examination?
21 MR. BLACK: None, thank you, Your Honour.
22 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Any questions, Judge Hoepfel?
23 Questioned by the Court:
24 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Witness may I ask you once more about the day when
25 you were arrested? You said who arrested you, "the Krajina Militia, my
1 next door neighbours." And then you mentioned four names. They were not
2 exactly clear so can you describe once more the whole scene, who came, who
3 addressed you, and who were -- who was part of that and what was explained
4 to you?
5 A. Let me start with the first things first. Petar Erstic my
6 neighbour called me to help him with some work in the garden. I came over
7 there to help him, and maybe some half an hour or an hour later, from
8 behind a wall, there came two men in camouflage uniforms. They approached
9 us and then I saw that I knew both of them. One of them was Dujo Skoric,
10 also known as Dusan, and Stevo Milanko. I was holding an axe in my hand.
11 I put it on the side at their request, I put it on the ground. They asked
12 me to put my arms in the air. I did that. And they told me, "You're
13 coming with us." I said, "Very well." And they said, "We have things to
14 ask you." I was walking in front of them, they were walking behind me.
15 They didn't say a thing to me while we were walking. Some 300 metres away
16 from that place, they arrested me. On the main road, there was a driver
17 waiting for us. I knew him as well, Slobodan Skokna was his name. They
18 put me in a car, they took me to Kistanje. I stayed in Kistanje for some
19 20 minutes or half an hour. From Kistanje they took me to Obrovac. I
20 spent the night in Obrovac. On the following morning I was interrogated
21 there. They asked me about a radio station, a radio set which I said I
22 didn't have, and that the only time I ever saw a radio set was in Serbia
23 when I was serving in the JNA. The inspector who interrogated me told me,
24 "Okay, if you don't want to tell us, then we will take to you Knin."
25 Then I told him, "You can do whatever with me. If I don't have that
1 thing, I can't make it up." Maybe 40 minutes or an hour later, they put
2 me in another car and they took me to Knin. When we arrived there, we
3 were -- I was taken to the prison in the old hospital. I had not been
4 aware of the existence of an old hospital there, and then the beatings
5 started, the mistreatment, all sorts of things started after that. And
6 that's how it happened.
7 Then there was this exchange. I was released and at one point I
8 thought I would never see the light of day. What else do you want me to
9 tell you?
10 JUDGE HOEPFEL: I would like to know if you learned something
11 about who or on whose behalf you were arrested. What authority was it or
12 did you see that just on the insignia and took your own conclusions?
13 A. I didn't know anything else. I only saw their patches and I knew
14 them. They were from my village. We went to school together. Who it was
15 who sent them to arrest me, I really wouldn't know.
16 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Thank you.
17 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Yes. Mr. Erstic, I'm going to ask you a few
18 questions. Your ribs that were fractured, were you able to get treatment
19 when you were in prison in respect of that?
20 A. No, no. There were no medicines, there was nothing, no.
21 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: You were not seen by a doctor or a nurse or
22 anybody medical or given any attention whatsoever, having received those
24 A. Nobody looked after us. One could die sooner than being seen by a
1 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Are you still having problems with your ribs or
2 have you recovered?
3 A. I have problems with my back, with my spine, when the weather
4 changes, when there is a south wind or when it rains or when I engage in
5 somewhat heavier labour, then I can feel it.
6 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: The other persons who were taken with you, what
7 became of them? Did they remain in prison or what happened?
8 A. I was on my own on that occasion. I was taken there on my own.
9 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: The other persons who were in prison, were they
10 all Croats or were they persons of other nationalities? Were Serbs there?
11 A. There was one Serb from Obrovac. I do not recall his name. He
12 did not want to join either the army or the police and at least that's
13 what he told us and that's why he was imprisoned. And there was also a
14 Croat from Bosnia. I believe that he was from Grahovo.
15 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Did you see any women at all as prisoners?
16 A. No. There wasn't a single woman there.
17 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: When you got back to your village, what did you
19 A. Destroyed, torched, there was not a single roof standing.
20 Everything had been blown up, the church, so that it looked terrible.
21 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Were there any people there when you got there?
22 Was there inhabitants or --
23 A. There was nobody.
24 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Thank you. No further questions. Yes, any
25 questions arising out of the questions from the Bench coming from either
1 counsel, Mr. Black, or after you, Mr. Perovic?
2 MR. BLACK: None from the Prosecution, Your Honour, thank you.
3 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Mr. Perovic, what about you? What about you,
4 Mr. Perovic.
5 MR. PEROVIC: [Interpretation] Just one, Your Honour.
6 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Yes, thank you.
7 Further cross-examination by Mr. Perovic:
8 MR. PEROVIC: [Interpretation]
9 Q. You mentioned some names, Bosko and Stevo Milanko, Dusan Skoric
10 and Slobodan Skokna as the persons you knew as locals?
11 A. I apologise, Bosko Milanko is a person who hit me with a rifle
12 butt as I was walking to the local store. I never said that he took me to
13 Knin or arrested me.
14 Q. I appreciate that. I am interested in something else. You can
15 just wait until I put a question to you. The people whose names you
16 mentioned, were the villagers, that's how you know them?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Before these events in 1991, who were they engaged in? What was
19 their profession?
20 A. To be honest, they were shepherds, just sheep herders.
21 MR. PEROVIC: [Interpretation] I have no other questions.
22 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Thank you, Mr. Perovic. I believe Judge Hoepfel
23 would wish to put a question.
24 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Yes, just for a little clarification. You
25 described this situation of the village when you returned, everything
1 destroyed, as you said, but to be more precise, what really -- what was
2 destroyed and especially I think the Prosecution counsel mentioned two
3 churches, one of them having been mined. Can you be a little more
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, there were two churches. One
6 of them was mined and the other was damaged to a great extent. It wasn't
7 completely destroyed.
8 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Thank you.
9 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Mr. Black, Mr. Perovic, anything arising out of
10 that question from Judge Hoepfel.
11 MR. BLACK: No, Your Honour, thank you.
12 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Mr. Erstic, I want to thank you for coming and
13 giving your evidence. You are now free to leave.
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
15 [The witness withdrew]
16 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Mr. Black, we are a little bit past the hour.
17 Would you have another witness to continue with?
18 MR. BLACK: Your Honour, we do not have another witness to
19 continue this week. There were a couple matters that we would like to
20 raise. I think it would take five or ten minutes. I don't know if the
21 preference is to do it now or perhaps come back in half an hour.
22 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: You can give an indication but the Chamber
23 certainly intends to come back at 1230 because there is it an outstanding
24 matter that the Chamber had wished to deal with. So you can give an
25 indication the issues that you with wish to raise. Have you -- is
1 Mr. Milovancevic also aware of the issues?
2 MR. BLACK: No I haven't. He's aware of the issue. I haven't
3 discussed it with him today. It has to do with whether or not the Defence
4 intends to respond to our submissions regarding the evidence of Milan
5 Babic (redacted)
6 (redacted). Those are the two issues I just wanted
7 to raise.
8 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Certainly we had intended to raise the first one
9 and I believe it could be done at 12.30. Is that convenient? Well,
10 certainly, Mr. Milovancevic, you had intended to be here at 12.30 in any
11 event, so we could deal with those issues then and you could have your
12 responses ready.
13 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. That
14 is fine with me.
15 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: I look forward to hearing from you. Can we now
16 take the adjournment to 12.30, please.
17 --- Recess taken at 12.04 a.m.
18 --- On resuming at 12.33 p.m.
19 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: One moment, please, Mr. Black.
20 MR. BLACK: Certainly.
21 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Please proceed.
22 MR. BLACK: Thank you, Your Honour. It was just a small thing if
23 we could go into private session briefly, please.
24 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Yes. We can go into private session, please.
25 [Private session]
11 Pages 3882-3883 redacted. Private session.
10 [Open session]
11 THE REGISTRAR: We are in open session, Your Honours.
12 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Thank you. Yes, Mr. Whiting?
13 MR. WHITING: Your Honour, as the court is aware, on April 6, 2006
14 the Prosecution filed a submission with respect to the evidence of witness
15 Milan Babic setting forth the Prosecution's position in quite detailed
16 form on what we believe should happen with that evidence and why.
17 Under the rule -- under Rule 126 bis of the Rules of Procedure and
18 Evidence the response of the Defence was due on April 20th, 2006. We did
19 not receive either a response nor a motion for an extension of time. On
20 the 21st of April 2006 we filed an application for an order from the Trial
21 Chamber asking that the Defence be ordered to file its response
22 immediately and that in the event the Defence sought an extension of time,
23 that it be granted an extension of time no later than the 27th of April
24 2006, which is tomorrow. We would submit that the Defence has had more
25 than ample time to write its submissions with respect to this, Milan
1 Babic's evidence. It was exactly seven weeks ago today that the Defence
2 indicated that it could provide its submission within five or six days.
3 Now, later the Defence indicated to us privately that it would wait for
4 our submission and then respond which we found to be perfectly reasonable.
5 However, tomorrow it will have been three weeks since the Prosecution
6 filed its submission. So for those reasons we would ask that the Defence
7 be ordered to file its response to the Prosecution's submission by
8 tomorrow, the 27th of April. Thank you.
9 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: But you will admit that your motion was quite
10 weighty, not to pre-empt anything but I'm going to ask Mr. Milovancevic to
12 MR. WHITING: I do accept that and I'm -- I really am sort of the
13 last person to try to kind of press absolute, strict adherence to
14 deadlines and for that reason we are agreeable to an extra week. However
15 we do think that the Defence should follow the rules and seek an extension
16 not just let it drift. And if the Defence indicates that it needs a few
17 extra days beyond tomorrow, until Monday, for example, I'm certainly not
18 going to argue about that.
19 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Yes. Mr. Milovancevic, let the Bench, the
20 Chamber, hear from you in respect of the position of the Defence. You had
21 indicated on the 8th, I believe, that we would see a motion forthcoming
22 from you. There has been no motion, in fact, and in the interim the
23 Prosecution has filed its own motion, the OTP, but we have had no response
24 to that either. And the time limit for responding is certainly passed so
25 what will happen and how quickly?
1 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I will answer your
2 question directly. We expect that we will have a response ready by
3 tomorrow or the day after tomorrow at the latest. When the issue of late
4 Milan Babic's testimony was raised for the time, Judge Moloto stated in
5 the order that both the Prosecution and the Defence would give their
6 submissions so we started out -- our point of departure was the fact that
7 we would give our submissions regardless of the Prosecution's submissions.
8 That's why we did not adhere to the time limits although it is true that
9 the Prosecution filed a submission which is quite complex in legal terms
10 and, of course, we have to respond to that as well. And we will do so, we
11 will file that particular response possibly by tomorrow, if not, by the
12 day after tomorrow at the latest.
13 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Thank you, Mr. Milovancevic. I crave the
14 indulgence of both counsel in order for the Trial Chamber to consult.
15 [Trial Chamber confers]
16 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: You have indicated, Mr. Milovancevic, that by
17 Friday of this week, is it, the relevant responses should be filed and
18 delivered? Is that your position?
19 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] That's right, Your Honour.
20 That's correct.
21 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Can we then make a ruling that by Monday, the
22 2nd -- sorry, I'm very sorry, one moment.
23 [Trial Chamber confers]
24 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: I stand corrected. By Monday, the 1st of May,
25 you will file and deliver the relevant response.
1 MR. WHITING: Your Honour, just a small matter. Monday is
2 actually a holiday so perhaps -- it's Queen's Day. It's the Queen's
4 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Good, sorry. I speak in total ignorance. I
5 overlooked and forgot. You see a smile on my face but I have to remain
6 serious. So then we will be very kind and you're going to get to extra
7 day. Tuesday the 2nd of May, 2006, for the filing of the relevant
8 responses from the Defence.
9 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
10 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Is that okay with you, Mr. Whiting?
11 MR. WHITING: Yes, okay, it is absolutely fine with the
13 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Fine. And thanks for the correction. Is there
14 any other business? If not, I think we could effectively take our
16 MR. WHITING: Unfortunately we don't have any other witnesses for
17 this week. Our next witness will be available on Tuesday, May 2nd and I
18 believe we are sitting in the morning. No, or maybe in the afternoon.
19 Don't rely on me for that. We're sitting sometime that day.
20 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Monday the 1st being effectively a holiday for
21 which I am sure we are all grateful, the sitting of the Chamber will be
22 adjourned until Tuesday the 2nd of May, 2006, in the afternoon, at 2.15,
23 in the relevant courtroom. We will now stand adjourned to that date and
24 that time.
25 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 12.47 p.m.,
1 to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 2nd day of May
2 2006, at 2.15 p.m.