081204ED

Page 29247

1 already.

2 MR. LAZAREVIC: Yes, Your Honours, he already signed a waiver.

3 It was already submitted yesterday, same reasons as Mr. Nikolic, and he

4 will join us later this day.

5 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. Thank you. Now, for the record, Prosecution

6 today is represented by Mr. McCloskey and Mr. Vanderpuye. Amongst the

7 Defence teams I notice the absence of Mr. Nikolic and Ms. Nikolic and

8 Mr. Haynes.

9 So, good morning to you, Mr. Kralj.

10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning.

11 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, we are going to continue with your testimony

12 today. I understand from what I have been told that you had reached

13 mainly -- roughly halfway through your direct examination of the witness.

14 You can proceed, Madam Fauveau.

15 WITNESS: SLAVKO KRALJ [Resumed]

16 [Witness answered through interpretation]

17 Examination by Ms. Fauveau: [Continued]

18 Q. [Interpretation] Sir, yesterday you explained the proceedings

19 when an order arrived, the procedure --

20 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] I would like the witness to be

21 shown 5D820. Procedure when an order arrived at the 1st Corps of the

22 Krajina. 5D820. Thank you.

23 Q. This is an order coming from the staff, the Main Staff, 27th

24 February 1994. Could you look at the handwritten note which is on the

25 top of the page.

Page 29248

1 A. Yes, I've looked at it.

2 Q. Is this note sent to you; is it directed to you?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. When you received an order like this one with a note like that,

5 what did you do, then?

6 A. Your Honours, pursuant to this order which arrived at the ops

7 room at the command post of the corps, the duty officer informed the

8 forward command post, which was at a distance from the main command post.

9 And then, since he had been given guidelines from the commander, he

10 followed the normal procedure which was to prepare our own order in a

11 written form to be dispatched to the subordinate units which were

12 involved in the implementation of this order.

13 I informed Colonel Vojnovic, who was my superior about this

14 order. Under normal circles, he would be the one to draft such orders.

15 And, in his absence, which is the case at hand, I prepared our own order

16 to the subordinated units and I returned this to the duty officer who

17 then followed the procedure and forwarded this order to the commander

18 for -- for him to sign it and to dispatch it across all the subordinated

19 units.

20 Q. Yesterday, we were talking about certain goods which were band in

21 the humanitarian convoys, and we spoke about video cameras and photograph

22 cameras. I would now like to talk about radio equipment. What was the

23 situation for radio equipment, radios?

24 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] And in meantime, could the witness

25 be shown 5D775, please.

Page 29249

1 Q. You can see at item 2 that there are certain equipment, radio

2 equipment, which was not authorised. Was there a reason for this?

3 A. International organisations in their vehicles had equipment to --

4 fixed equipment, within the convoy to communicate with their

5 headquarters. So there was no need for any additional equipment,

6 especially in light of the fact that some frequencies of radio devices

7 worked on the frequencies that might have been of use to the other side.

8 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Could the witness be shown 5D773.

9 Q. In this document, you can see that tents were not lead through,

10 they were held back for some time. Why? Could you let us know why tents

11 could not be transported and brought there?

12 A. We had a piece of intelligence, according to which the tents were

13 used not for the civilian population but for the military that was

14 deployed along the route or on the other side.

15 Q. What was the situation with the sleeping bags?

16 A. Your Honours, as you may know, the military used sleeping bags.

17 The civilian population did not need them so much as did members of the

18 enemy military.

19 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Could the witness be shown 5D767,

20 please.

21 Q. This is an authorisation from the Main Staff on the 7th of

22 January, 1993. And what I am interested in is last paragraph of the

23 first page.

24 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] It's also the last paragraph in the

25 English version, at item 3. You can't see the text in the B/C/S. Thank

Page 29250

1 you.

2 Q. What I would like to know is about item 3, one sees that in the

3 Belgrade convoys, mattresses and sleeping bags were not allowed either

4 for Muslims or for Serbs. What was the reason not to allow the

5 distribution of these items either to the Muslims or to the Serbs?

6 A. Your Honours, international organisations, and in this particular

7 case the UNHCR, resorted to various means to do stuff. And in order to

8 pay for the passage of the goods that were not allowed, they would offer

9 the goods to us; for example, mattresses and sleeping bags. But the

10 position was the same across the board, the transport of such goods was

11 not allowed and the distribution of those goods was not allowed either

12 among the enemy side or among our soldiers. It was just an attempt that

13 tried to make it look as goods offered to us in order for us to allow

14 them to transport goods to the other side; although, we had never asked

15 for such goods.

16 Q. What was the situation for the transport of fuel in 1993 and

17 1994?

18 JUDGE AGIUS: Just for the record, at 9.20, Accused Nikolic and

19 Pandurevic -- and Borovcanin entered the courtroom. Thank you. You may

20 proceed; and sorry for the interruption.

21 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.

22 Q. What was, in general, the situation for the transport of fuel in

23 1993 and 1994?

24 A. The transport of fuel should have been organised by special

25 vehicles intended for the transportation of fuel. Very often

Page 29251

1 international organisations used additional jerry cans to transport

2 certain quantities of fuel that they did not need, because their vehicles

3 did not use that particular type of fuel.

4 We tried to analyse the end user -- who the end user of the fuel

5 would be, would it be for the civilian population and for powering some

6 and powering some batteries, or would it be used for the combat and

7 non-combat vehicles of the enemy side. Based on that analysis and the

8 information we had from before as to what had happened from the fuel that

9 managed to pass through and ended up in the enclaves, certain guidelines

10 were provided so that the restriction of the transport of fuel was

11 reduced to a level that might correspond to the requirements of

12 power-generating batteries.

13 The quantities of fuel that might have been used for military

14 purposes were either limited or more often than not totally banned.

15 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Could the witness be shown 5D816.

16 This is an authorisation for the passage of humanitarian convoys on the

17 4th of February, 1994.

18 Q. As you can see, it is sent to the 1st Krajina Corps, also.

19 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] And I would like to see page 5 in

20 B/C/S and page 4 in English, please.

21 Q. In the middle of the page, you can see note 1. The entry of fuel

22 is not allowed. So I think you have already answered that this situation

23 occurred. You also spoke about the quantities of fuel which were not

24 needed.

25 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Could the witness be shown 5D1269.

Page 29252

1 Q. This is a conversation -- the summary of a conversation which was

2 intercepted, a summary of an intercept; and we can see in this passage,

3 in this paragraph, that General Milovanovic saying that UNPROFOR is

4 carrying abnormal quantities of fuel into the enclaves. This is on the

5 19th of August, 1994. Later, when you were at the Main Staff, were there

6 such concerns concerning -- were there such concerns about fuel?

7 A. UNHCR always tried to have a certain quantity of fuel in their

8 convoys, irrespective of the previous agreements and explanations and

9 refusals. This pointed to the fact that that fuel, and also based on

10 other information, that that fuel was required primarily by the military

11 that was deployed in Gorazde. Throughout all that period, the fuel was

12 always a sticking point, although, General Milovanovic had banned its

13 transport on several occasions.

14 Q. When you say that during all this period fuel was always -- you

15 are talking about which period, precisely?

16 A. I'm referring to 1994 as well as the first half of 1995.

17 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Could the witness be shown another

18 document with another intercept in 1994. This is 5D1273.

19 Q. In this intercept, we can see that -- well, it's a summary of a

20 conversation on the 5th of October, 1994. You see that humanitarian

21 convoys were allowed to go through, but that convoys with fuel were not

22 authorised. You already spoke a bit about the reasons why fuel was a

23 sticky point. Were there later situations in which certain convoys were

24 allowed to go through but precisely fuel was not allowed to go through?

25 A. From this document you can see that the fuel is intend for

Page 29253

1 UNPROFOR units and we, as soldiers, on the basis of information, how much

2 which combat vehicles.

3 JUDGE AGIUS: One moment. Yes, what's the problem,

4 Mr. McCloskey.

5 MR. McCLOSKEY: I'm sorry, Mr. President, I didn't mean to

6 interrupt --

7 JUDGE AGIUS: All right.

8 MR. McCLOSKEY: -- I just wanted to make a point. The intercepts

9 Ms. Fauveau is using are -- my understanding is that they are from the

10 Croatian forces. I don't know a whole lot about them, frankly, but if

11 she can just identify them as from the Croatian forces as each one so

12 that it's clear on the record. I don't think we are going to have an

13 objection from them. But I think it's important to be able to

14 distinguish these from the ones that we know so much about.

15 JUDGE AGIUS: I think it's fair enough. And I think Ms. Fauveau

16 would agree to that. Yes, I see her nodding.

17 So let's proceed. Sorry to have interrupted the course of your

18 answer, but I thought it was something directly relating to the answer to

19 all the questions that had been put. So let's proceed.

20 Mr. Kralj, you had just said:

21 "From this document you can see that the fuel is intended for

22 UNPROFOR units, and we as soldiers, on the basis of information, how

23 much, which combat vehicles ..."

24 You can start again, actually, and give your full answer to the

25 question. Thank you.

Page 29254

1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] From this document you can see that

2 the fuel was intended for the UNPROFOR units, and, as such, it was

3 transported in cisterns. However, the Main Staff of the army of

4 Republika Srpska had the precise information how many and what kind of

5 combat vehicles, let's say, if we are talking about Gorazde or some other

6 protected area, and which quantities were essential for the normal

7 functioning for a specific period of time.

8 It was not allowed to stockpile excessive supplies for which

9 there was no need, because it was always possible to provide more fuel

10 according to existing procedures for the needs of UNPROFOR. It was often

11 the case that the quantities were enormously high, and this was then

12 reduced down to normal quantities and the excess was banned.

13 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation]

14 Q. Can you remember whether in 1993 and 1994 there were periods of

15 time during which the movement of convoys was suspended or restricted?

16 A. There were occasions when the convoys would be suspended without

17 this being announced. This would usually happen because of their

18 security because they had information that some activities would be

19 underway, combat activities, which would not be good for their security

20 or for them -- it would not be good to find themselves in the territory

21 under the control of Republika Srpska. Of course, they did not give any

22 announcements in advance that the convoys would be suspended. I really

23 cannot tell you exactly which periods I am talking about or this

24 happened.

25 Q. One very last question with respect to that particular period of

Page 29255

1 1993 and 1994. Do you know how the Serbian civilian population reacted

2 when seeing these convoys move through, convoys that transported goods

3 for the Muslim population?

4 A. Your Honours, we had considerable difficulties with the civilian

5 population, especially close to the line of separation with the other

6 side because they believed that they're not receiving sufficient aid

7 while the other side is receiving too much aid and that it is being used

8 for military purposes. And this sometimes caused incidents at

9 checkpoints or along the routes of the convoys in the immediate vicinity

10 of the line of separation.

11 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Could the witness be shown 5D787.

12 Q. I would like to draw your attention to item 3 of this document.

13 A. I've read a paragraph 3.

14 Q. Does it say here that because of the situation you've just

15 outlined, things happened that way?

16 A. Yes, the result of the -- that is the result of the situation.

17 All the military organs of power from the president to the president of

18 the Assembly took the position that the convoys of humanitarian aid

19 should be allowed to pass to the other side without obstruction. And

20 that is why the civilian sector often cooperated with the organs of local

21 power or the police organs which were participating in the escort of

22 these convoys for the purposes of adhering to this paragraph.

23 Q. Yesterday you stated that around the end of 1994 you arrived at

24 the Main Staff. Could you tell us a little bit more about your duties at

25 the Main Staff?

Page 29256

1 A. Your Honours, by coming or being posted on duty at the Main Staff

2 of the army of Republika Srpska, I was appointed and assigned to the

3 duties of interpreter for the English language. My first -- or immediate

4 superior was Colonel Milos Djurdjic, who was performing the functions of

5 the chief of the sector for relations with foreign forces. Since this

6 position began to gain more and more in importance, I was assigned

7 additional duties, and they were to acquaint myself with all procedures

8 relating to cooperation with UNPROFOR, international organisations; and

9 to be ready and trained to assist Colonel Djurdjic in his work with these

10 organisations, and in his absence to be able to prepare the required

11 documents myself and to be able to submit them for processing according

12 to the previously established procedure.

13 Q. Who was the immediate superior of Colonel Djurdjic?

14 A. His immediate superior was General Mladic, who later transferred

15 part of the authorities from the sphere of humanitarian activities to the

16 Chief of Staff, General Milovanovic.

17 Q. What happened when the Chief of Staff, General Milovanovic, was

18 not present at Crna Rijeka? In such cases, who would deal with

19 humanitarian aid convoys and their movement?

20 A. In that situation, Colonel Djurdjic would consult on the issue of

21 the convoys with General Tolimir.

22 Q. I'd like to show you another intercept coming from the Croatia

23 collection.

24 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] 5D1272. This is dated 1994.

25 Q. I would like to know whether the situation described here was the

Page 29257

1 same in 1995. Do you know whether there were meetings between

2 representatives of the army of Republika Srpska and representatives of

3 UNPROFOR with respect to the passage of UNPROFOR convoys and all related

4 matters?

5 A. Your Honours, it was the practice in matters of convoy and the

6 passages of these UNHCR and UNPROFOR convoys to meet occasionally and as

7 needed both the chief of the Main Staff of the army of Republika Srpska

8 and in some cases the commander as well; but there was a rule who should

9 meet with whom: the chief of the staff with the Chief of Staff, or others

10 who met at lower levels, most frequently with General Milovanovic at his

11 level.

12 Q. Do you know whether in 1995 there was an agreement between the

13 Republika Srpska and UNPROFOR with respect to freedom of movement?

14 A. After each meeting they would make an appropriate record of the

15 meeting, we could even say an agreement, stating what the things were

16 agreed on during the meeting. And then, the corps commands were informed

17 about these matters.

18 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Could the witness be shown 1404.

19 We only have the English version of this document, 1404. 5D1404.

20 Q. Witness, yesterday you explained that you can speak English.

21 When you were at the Main Staff, did you have the opportunity to see this

22 document?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. Could you tell us briefly what this document is about for the

25 accused? Just briefly.

Page 29258

1 A. These are the principles relating to the freedom of movement of

2 UNPROFOR. The document is from the 31st of January, 1995.

3 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Could the witness be shown page 2

4 of the document. I'd like to see signature.

5 Q. Witness, do you recognise the signature we see on the right-hand

6 side of the document, where we read "HQ SA representative"?

7 A. This is General Tolimir's signature.

8 Q. What was the procedure required for a -- an UNPROFOR convoy to be

9 able to go through in 1995 when you were at the Main Staff?

10 A. The procedure was as follows: The UNPROFOR convoy would be

11 announced to the Main Staff of the army of Republika Srpska via fax at

12 their office at Pale. The request would be submitted according to the

13 already mentioned principles 48 hours in advance, this would be the

14 regular procedure. The request would be in Serbian and in English. The

15 fax would be operating 24 hours a day, seven days a week, meaning

16 non-stop; and most frequently it would be set to automatic reception.

17 The documents were sorted by Colonel Djurdjic or by myself depending on

18 who was at the office at a given time. It was not possible for the

19 office to be left unattended and that the document on reception -- on

20 receipt could not be sorted, the text compared, the text in Serbian and

21 the text in English would be compared.

22 I emphasize this because I would like to point out that often it

23 was illegible because the communications or the connections were not

24 good, so we had to see what it was about so that the document in the

25 Serbian version could be submitted in the mail for information to

Page 29259

1 General Mladic or General Milovanovic. Sometimes, there was a need for

2 direct telephone communication with the UNPROFOR office in Pale to

3 clarify some questions.

4 When the Serbian version of the UNPROFOR request was harmonised,

5 then Colonel Djurdjic, depending on the time available, would submit the

6 document in the regular post for review, or would ask for permission to

7 go to General Mladic directly with the document or, most, frequently,

8 General Milovanovic. Of course, before that he had to inform about all

9 the previously agreed on and signed on matters which they also were very

10 familiar with themselves because they were monitoring the situation and

11 knew the situation.

12 From what I was able to see, on the top page of the document of

13 the original, there would always be an initial of General Mladic or

14 Milovanovic for this convoy to be approved. If something was disputable

15 or it was not in accordance with the regular procedure, that paragraph

16 would be underlined, and it would be most often stated on the document

17 that the rest would be approved but this paragraph that was disputed

18 would not be approved; and UNPROFOR was asked for additional

19 clarification about the purpose or the intent of the articles that were

20 disputed. Then the approved document -- or, on the basis of that

21 document another document would be drafted and logged at the office of

22 Colonel Djurdjic. And again it would be returned for signature most

23 often to General Milovanovic. And then the approved document would be

24 returned by fax to the UNPROFOR office. Then we would usually make sure

25 by calling that they received the document. That would be the regular

Page 29260

1 procedure.

2 The same document would be presented to the duty operations

3 officer for him to use his communication channels and dispatch it to a

4 specific corps so that it would reach the department which dealt with

5 these matters, or, rather, to reach the checkpoint. That was the regular

6 procedure.

7 Q. You stated that when requests from UNPROFOR would arrive and when

8 Colonel Djurdjic dealt with them, these requests were submitted to

9 General Mladic or General Milovanovic. Did it ever happen that these

10 requests were submitted to colonel and then later General Miletic? To

11 your knowledge, did that ever happen?

12 A. Your Honours, as far as I know, General Miletic never

13 participated in any decision-making with regard convoys, either with

14 General Milovanovic or General Mladic. This was not his job. He had

15 other things to do. He had other obligations that fell within his

16 purview.

17 Q. What was the situation as for signatures of a document which has

18 already -- which had already been prepared or which already contain the

19 decision taken by General Mladic or General Milovanovic? Did you have an

20 opportunity to bring these documents which were already finalised to

21 General Miletic so that he could sign them?

22 A. There were situations when no higher officers were present to

23 sign everything that had already been agreed upon pursuant to the regular

24 procedure so that the document might be dispatched and the aforementioned

25 activity to be implemented. And in such a situation, Colonel Djurdjic

Page 29261

1 would go to the duty operations officer on the day to see, to get

2 information, rather, whether there was anybody authorised to sign the

3 document so as to enable the document to be implemented and complied with

4 and so that the convoys in question could pass. In very rare cases, I

5 even believe that I once had an opportunity to get information from

6 General Miletic as to who was in a position to sign the document that had

7 already been approved.

8 Q. Excuse me, I interrupted you. Please continue.

9 A. General Miletic, in exceptional cases and only if the convoy in

10 question was really important, he could be talked into signing; or he

11 would ask the convoys to wait until the moment the superiors came back,

12 or he had obtained approval from General Milovanovic to let that

13 convoy -- or, rather, to have that document signed. This was not common

14 practice.

15 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Could the witness now be shown

16 5D81 -- 881. 881.

17 Q. Could you explain what this document is that you have in front of

18 you?

19 A. This document is marked as urgent. It deals with the movement of

20 a British convoy from Kiseljak to Gorazde on the 1st of January, 1994,

21 and back. This is about the supply of fuel which was regulated by the

22 weekly supply plan. It was an urgent document, and in the right-hand

23 side in the top corner of the page the initial is by Colonel Djurdjic, if

24 I am not mistaken.

25 Q. And the fact that the initials of Colonel Djurdjic, if you're

Page 29262

1 right, are on this document, does that mean that Colonel Djurdjic had

2 approved this convoy?

3 A. No. What this means for me is that he had had prior

4 consultations either with General Milovanovic or, exceptionally, with

5 General Tolimir. And since this was about the weekly resupply of fuel

6 and the passage of fuel tanks that had already been planned for, I

7 suppose that it was suggested to him by telephone that he should initial

8 that and to send the whole thing into the procedure. Those are very rare

9 cases.

10 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Could the witness be shown 5D882,

11 please.

12 Q. Now, this is the same type of document, but instead of having

13 initials here you can see handwritten, "Colonel M. Djurdjic." Can you

14 see this?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. I don't want to lose too much time with this document, but is

17 this document the same sort as the one we just saw a while ago?

18 A. Yes, this is a similar procedure, but the unit in question is

19 DutchBat.

20 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] [Previous translation

21 continues] ... 5D1310.

22 Q. Please have a look at this first page. This document indeed is a

23 self-contained document, and could you tell us what it is, what it

24 represents? Briefly, I don't need a thorough explanation for each

25 convoy, but in general what is this document about?

Page 29263

1 A. This document is about the movement of several convoys which had

2 not been approved. A short document had to be sent to the UNPROFOR

3 command stating the number of convoys, the time, what was transported.

4 It was not clear from the request, what the purpose of the goods that

5 were transported was. Additional information was sought, i.e.,

6 information was sent back that the convoys were not allowed to pass.

7 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Could the witness be shown -- could

8 the witness be shown the bottom of the page where the signature is?

9 Q. You can see the name of General Milovanovic, and would you be

10 able to recognise the signature on this document?

11 A. The letterhead always contained the name of Manojlo Milovanovic,

12 that was as per rules, but this obviously is not his signature. It is

13 possible that the duty officer who was -- or, rather, the person who was

14 the duty operations officer's superior, after a consultation with

15 General Milovanovic, signed this document in order to comply with the

16 procedure of maintaining communication with the UNPROFOR command. I

17 suppose that this is the signature of Pandzic, of Colonel Pandzic, who

18 was often the head duty officer.

19 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Could the witness now be shown the

20 top of the page, a bit higher, item 1.

21 Q. Just to identify what sort of a convoy we are talking about,

22 convoy from Sarajevo to Kiseljak, number 21-228/02.

23 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] And could one see now the B/C/S

24 version page 2 and page 3 for the English version. Just at the top, yes,

25 thank you.

Page 29264

1 Q. On this document one can see numbers 22102 -- 21-228/02. This is

2 a request for the convoy from Sarajevo to Kiseljak, and I would like to

3 know if you recognise the initials which are at the top of the document.

4 A. General Mladic.

5 Q. Just to be quite sure and clear, what do these initials mean, as

6 they are here, just by the name one can read? Just in a circled lane,

7 the initials in a circle.

8 A. This means that the convoy was not approved. It does say "no" in

9 the Cyrillic script.

10 Q. Can you see at the bottom of the page, some handwritten

11 observations. Do you recognise who wrote these handwritten notes?

12 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] I think it's page 4 for the English

13 version.

14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I suppose that this was additional

15 information by Colonel Djurdjic at the -- at General Mladic's request as

16 to what had been transported previously by the same people. Some

17 supplies could last indefinitely, and it says here, "Only after seven

18 days."

19 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation]

20 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... be here that this matter of

21 40 beds is mentioned, which had already been imported on the 19th of

22 February, 1995.

23 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Would it be possible to go back

24 both for the B/C/S and English version? Page 4, please.

25 Q. Item 1, paragraph 2, in this second paragraph can one indeed find

Page 29265

1 what was said in the handwritten note we've just seen?

2 A. It was not clear, the same number of soldiers, double the number

3 of beds. The question was raised, why if beds were being replaced, why

4 the old ones were not being returned. And the rest should have lasted

5 seven days as had been agreed before.

6 Q. I simply wish to know whether what can be seen on this document,

7 which has been typed, does it correspond to the handwritten words which

8 one has read before on the request coming from UNPROFOR?

9 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. Vanderpuye.

10 MR. VANDERPUYE: Thank you, Mr. President, and good morning to

11 you.

12 I would just simply ask if that's the question that's going to be

13 put to the witness, that the witness simply read the handwritten note

14 into the record; and the document that's otherwise translated speaks for

15 itself, and we can resolve this, I think, relatively quickly.

16 JUDGE AGIUS: Do you agree to that, Ms. Fauveau? I think it's --

17 it will facilitate our lives.

18 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Yes, indeed, Mr. President. Could

19 we go to page 2 in B/C/S, please.

20 JUDGE KWON: Page 5.

21 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation]

22 Q. Witness, could you read the handwritten remark which says, "The

23 19th February"?

24 A. "19 February, this is what was imported into Sarajevo: 40 beds, 1

25 pallet of office supplies, 10 crates of beer, 10 crates of fruit

Page 29266

1 juices ..."

2 Q. Would you please read just after that, if you can read it. Is it

3 legible?

4 A. It is a bit illegible, but it says:

5 "Only after seven days, drinks; and in the meantime they should

6 provide additional information as to who the beds are being transported

7 to."

8 Again illegible, and then it continues: "When they return old

9 ones," and I suppose that this refers to the 40 beds.

10 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Can we now go back to page 1 of

11 this document.

12 Q. I don't think you need to read paragraphs 2 and 3 of item 1, but

13 was it the regular procedure to incorporate in this document -- document

14 which was to be sent to UNPROFOR, the notes which were written on the

15 requests?

16 A. This note refers to the person who drafted the document, and it

17 was not obligatory to write it in that sense. It did not have to be

18 copied word for word. The document had to be drafted in this sense in

19 order to ask for additional information or say why something has not been

20 approved.

21 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Could the witness now be shown

22 5D1316, please. This is another notification concerning convoys which

23 hadn't been approved. And this is dated 29 March 1995 [sic].

24 Q. And for this document, please look at the signature. Do you

25 recognise the signature on this document?

Page 29267

1 A. This is General Milovanovic's [Realtime transcript read in error,

2 "Mladic"] signature. And there is also a list of convoys which have not

3 been approved.

4 Q. On the basis of the fact that General Milovanovic signed this

5 document, can you say who decided that these convoys shouldn't be

6 approved or wouldn't be approved?

7 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, one moment, before you answer the question.

8 Mr. Vanderpuye.

9 MR. VANDERPUYE: Thank you, Mr. President. I think there is a

10 correction due in the transcript with respect to the date of the

11 document. It's indicated 29th March and the document is dated 26th of

12 April.

13 JUDGE AGIUS: 26th of April. Yes.

14 MR. VANDERPUYE: Thank you, Mr. President.

15 JUDGE AGIUS: The references to line 18 of the previous page.

16 Okay. Let's proceed, thank you for that, and it will be taken care of.

17 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] My colleague is perfectly right,

18 it's my fault. There is another mistake, also. Page 21, line 21. I

19 don't think the witness spoke about the signature of General Mladic. I

20 will ask him again.

21 Q. Could you say who signed this document, witness, please.

22 A. I don't understand your question. Could you please provide me

23 with the page that you are talking about.

24 Q. There is a mistake in the transcript. Could you repeat what you

25 said a while ago, who signed this document, if you please?

Page 29268

1 A. General Milovanovic, the Chief of Staff signed this document.

2 Q. The fact that this document or, let's say that the fact that this

3 document was signed by General Milovanovic.

4 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Vanderpuye.

5 MR. VANDERPUYE: The question is leading, and I would ask my

6 colleague to rephrase.

7 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] I hadn't finished my question.

8 Well, I don't know how he can say. The witness was just going to say

9 that this document was signed by General Milovanovic.

10 Q. According to the signature on this document, can you say who

11 decided not to approve this convoy? Is it possible to say who took the

12 decision on the basis of this document?

13 A. Your Honours, by just inspecting a signature, it is not possible

14 to see who it was who decided for the convoys not to be let through. We

15 he don't know whether it was General Mladic or General Milovanovic. We

16 would have to go back to the beginning, to document number 1, and then at

17 the top of the document we could see who initialed the document and added

18 the word "yes" or "no." In this particular case the word is "no," the

19 convoy is not approved.

20 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Could the witness be shown page 2

21 of the document. Page 2 in English as well.

22 Q. Do you recognise the initials we see on this document?

23 A. General Mladic, you can see "no" and his initial.

24 Q. Can you tell us now who decided not to approve this convoy?

25 A. General Mladic made the decision.

Page 29269

1 JUDGE AGIUS: Any time it's convenient --

2 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Well now, for example.

3 JUDGE AGIUS: Let's have a break now. Thank you.

4 --- Recess taken at 10.31 a.m.

5 --- On resuming at 11.00 a.m.

6 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Madam Fauveau.

7 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. Could the

8 witness be shown 5D1314. This is a notification dated the 29th of March,

9 1995, related to UNPROFOR convoys that have been approved. I'd like to

10 show page 2 to the witness in B/C/S, page 3 in English.

11 Q. Witness, here we see a handwritten comment "yes" encircled and

12 next to that we see two initials. Could you identify these initials?

13 A. The first initial above is one of General Mladic and the other

14 one underneath is that of General Milovanovic.

15 Q. Can you provide us an explanation. Do you know why both of them

16 initialed this document? With did these two generals initial this

17 particular document?

18 A. This is an exceptional situation when both were in the same

19 office. The document was first looked at by General Mladic, then

20 continuing with his review of the mail, he gave it to General Milovanovic

21 to look at, and then he also put his signature on it in order to let

22 Colonel Djurdjic know that the document has already been shown to him.

23 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Could the witness be shown page 13

24 of the document in B/C/S and page 19 in English. Please turn to item 6.

25 We have a detailed list of the cargo transported.

Page 29270

1 Q. Why does this request go into such a level of detail?

2 A. What this is about is it's the Ukrainian Battalion; and what was

3 required is to state the type of equipment and weaponry that was entering

4 the protected area and whether the quantities noted are for themselves or

5 for someone else. That is why we insisted on this and agreed in advance

6 in order to build confidence and trust between UNPROFOR and the army of

7 Republika Srpska that the entire range of equipment and weaponry and

8 other items be put on the list of items being transported by the convoy.

9 Q. When the Main Staff notified its subordinate units of the cargo

10 transported by authorised convoys, would that part of the text, with a

11 list of cargo transported, would that also be sent to the subordinated

12 units when they were notified of the convoys?

13 A. In principle, yes. If there was such information in the request,

14 then in order to prepare and carry out adequate checks, the information

15 would mention item by item specifically the equipment or the articles

16 that were supposed to be in the convoy as in the request.

17 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Could the witness be shown 5D1315.

18 JUDGE KWON: If you're moving, Ms. Fauveau Ivanovic, can you see

19 the upper part of the B/C/S document.

20 Mr. Kralj, we see here as well the signature of Generals Mladic

21 and Milovanovic? No, I'm asking, whether signature of Mladic and whose

22 signature is that?

23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The upper signature is the one of

24 General Mladic and the lower one is that of General Milovanovic.

25 JUDGE KWON: Whose handwriting is it that reads "yes" with

Page 29271

1 "restriction"?

2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] General Mladic's.

3 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.

4 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] This is another notification sent

5 to UNPROFOR listing the convoys that have not been authorised. On the

6 first page we see the signature of General Milovanovic, could the witness

7 be shown page 2 of this document, that would be page 3 in English.

8 Q. Do you recognise the initials on this document?

9 A. This could be the initial of Milos Djurdjic.

10 Q. Does that mean that Djurdjic approved or, rather, disapproved the

11 passage of this convoy?

12 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Vanderpuye.

13 MR. VANDERPUYE: Thank you, Mr. President. The question assumes

14 a fact not in evidence. This witness has said that it could be and not

15 that it is, and so I think the question presupposes that.

16 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, but he hasn't excluded the possibility either.

17 So assuming that there is that possibility, what would be his answer to

18 the last question, provided my colleagues agree with me.

19 JUDGE KWON: I think she was asking is it meaning of the "ne."

20 JUDGE AGIUS: So, yes, yes, let's proceed.

21 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation]

22 Q. First of all, can you tell us what this "ne" means, "ne," this

23 handwritten observation we see here. What does that mean?

24 A. It states here "ne," "no." Since this is about fuel supplies

25 Colonel Djurdjic had a plan for the fuel supplies which was agreed on

Page 29272

1 earlier. Evidently this was not in accordance with the plan, and in the

2 procedure he consulted his superior who was not physically accessible;

3 and he was given oral agreement that this convoy should not pass. For

4 the purposes of record keeping and for information, he had to place his

5 initials there, perhaps he didn't process his document -- this document

6 further, but without the initials the document could not be passed on for

7 further processing.

8 Q. I'd like to show you document P2454.

9 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] 2554. This is a notification to

10 subordinated units dated 1st of July, 1995. I'd like to show you page 2

11 of this document. Could the witness be shown the very bottom of the

12 page, please. That would be page 4 in English. Here we see the name of

13 General Miletic.

14 Q. Based on this document, can you ascertain who authorised the

15 convoys listed in this document? A total of eight convoys are listed in

16 the document.

17 A. I couldn't say until I see the number of the convoy and whose

18 initials are at the top of the document. That person would have approved

19 it. All this means here is that this is being submitted for further

20 procedure. It does not mean that General Miletic did or did not approve

21 this request or convoy. The role of General Miletic in this case was

22 just to sign what somebody approved and that should go as written

23 information for the information of the person to whom the document is

24 sent.

25 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] I would like to come back to page 1

Page 29273

1 of this document, please.

2 At item 2, we see that we have a convoy going from Gorazde

3 through Rogatica, Podromanija, Pale, and Sarajevo; and we see that this

4 convoy has been approved, convoy number 01-007/07.

5 I would like the witness to be shown 5D884.

6 This is a request for approval for convoy 01-007/07 going from

7 Gorazde to Sarajevo.

8 Q. Do you recognise the initials we see on this particular document?

9 A. The initials below are those of General Mladic. The one to the

10 right could be that of General Tolimir.

11 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Could we now show the witness again

12 P2554. We've just reviewed the request for approval of the convoy

13 mentioned at item 2 of this particular document.

14 Q. Based on your experience, can you tell us whether for each of the

15 convoys listed in this document, a request was needed?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. Would every single request show and bear the approval of the

18 person who had approved the convoy?

19 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Could the witness be shown page 1

20 and paragraphs 5 and 6.

21 JUDGE PROST: Madam Fauveau, I don't think the record reflects

22 the witness's answer to the last question. I believe he said "yes" but

23 it's not recorded here.

24 JUDGE KWON: Line 12.

25 JUDGE PROST: At line 12.

Page 29274

1 JUDGE AGIUS: Exactly, you will just have to ask him again.

2 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.

3 Q. For each one of these individual requests, is it the case that

4 they would bear or show the signature or -- or the decision of the

5 officer who was supposed to approve this particular convoy?

6 A. Yes, Your Honours, without that it could not be released into the

7 procedure of drafting the information.

8 Q. Please have a look at convoys 5 and 6, just to get an idea of

9 what it's all about. I can tell you it's -- these are convoys going from

10 Srebrenica to Belgrade and Zagreb.

11 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] But now if we turn to page 2 of the

12 document. Page 3 in English. At the very top of the page we see a note

13 stating that these convoys have been approved with some reservation or

14 subject to some reservation, conditionally. We saw that the document

15 bears the name of General Miletic.

16 Q. But, do you know who could have drafted this document?

17 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Vanderpuye.

18 MR. VANDERPUYE: That calls for speculation, Mr. President.

19 JUDGE AGIUS: Not necessarily, he could answer the question.

20 So Mr. Kralj, if you could answer the question. If you know you

21 know, if you don't you don't.

22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The convoy -- actually this

23 document was drafted by Colonel Djurdjic. It was typed in the sector for

24 typing the material, usually the typists would type that under his

25 control, that would be the original version. Evidently, what we have

Page 29275

1 here is the transmission via encryption.

2 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation]

3 Q. Do you know how Colonel Djurdjic knew that these convoys number 5

4 and 6 had been approved conditionally?

5 A. Colonel Djurdjic was an expert, and he monitored the overall

6 situation with the convoys. That word "conditional" is a bit unclear to

7 me, because it was either that it would pass or not pass, if anything

8 were to pass. So I cannot precisely answer what this word

9 "conditionally" means in this case.

10 Q. Would the officer who decided that the convoy was allowed to go

11 through, would that officer also set a number of conditions to be

12 complied with for the convoy to go through?

13 A. Your Honours, I am not familiar with that. I don't know.

14 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Could the witness be shown 5D1307.

15 Q. This document was sent to you because we see that it was

16 addressed to Lieutenant-Colonel Kralj, and this document is signed by

17 Lieutenant-Colonel Indic; do you know who is Lieutenant-Colonel Indzic?

18 A. Lieutenant-Colonel Indzic was in the group for UNPROFOR at the

19 Sarajevo Romanija Corps command.

20 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Could the witness be shown the very

21 bottom of the page. In the last paragraph we can see that:

22 "Colonel Lugonja spoke with General Tolimir. The journey is

23 approved. The units need to be notified of it."

24 Q. Who is Colonel Lugonja, do you know?

25 A. Colonel Lugonja worked at the command of the Sarajevo Romanija

Page 29276

1 Corps. I think that in a way he was superior to

2 Lieutenant-Colonel Indzic.

3 Q. But why did Colonel Lugonja spoke with General Tolimir, do you

4 know why he did that? General Tolimir.

5 A. I assumed that there were no other officials who were authorised

6 to approve the convoy, and probably this movement was --

7 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Vanderpuye.

8 MR. VANDERPUYE: Thank you, Mr. President. The question clearly

9 called for speculation, given the witness's answer it seems readily

10 apparent that he doesn't know --

11 JUDGE AGIUS: Started his answer with the words "I assume ..." So

12 it is to an extent speculation. We can't proceed on the basis of

13 assumptions. So you either move to your next questions, Madam Fauveau,

14 or you clarify some things with the witness.

15 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Could the witness be shown the top

16 of the document.

17 Q. This document also has two initials. Can you identify these

18 initials?

19 A. General Milovanovic and General Tolimir.

20 Q. One could already see on this document that Colonel Lugonja had

21 informed you that this trip was allowed and proved, so why was it

22 necessary to obtain an authorisation, a written authorisation?

23 A. We could not draft a document without a written approval. That

24 was the procedure. Irrespective of any prior oral agreements, a written

25 document had to get to Colonel Djurdjic's desk.

Page 29278

1 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Could 5D960 be shown to the

2 witness, please. We do not have a translation in English, but we have

3 prepared a draft translation.

4 Q. Sir, do you know who is Petko Obucina.

5 A. Petko Obucina worked in the office of the

6 Vice-president Koljevic.

7 Q. Look at this intercept. It seems that Petko Obucina speaks first

8 with General Mladic, and after that, he expressly asks for

9 General Tolimir to be put on the line.

10 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Could the witness be shown a bit

11 lower on the page the contents of this conversation. The fifth line from

12 the bottom, one can see the name of Milos, and the fourth, also, from the

13 bottom; and Srebrenica is mentioned.

14 Q. Do you know why Petko Obucina asked to speak to General Tolimir?

15 A. I don't know.

16 Q. Or the fourth line from the bottom, one sees that the commander

17 has approved what was requested, approved the request. Can you read

18 this, can you see this?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. In this context, when the commander is mentioned, who is the

21 commander?

22 A. Always Mladic, General Mladic.

23 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Could the witness be shown document

24 5D961. And this is -- this comes from the same collection of documents

25 and there also is an audio recording of it.

Page 29279

1 Q. So here again it's a conversation with Petko Obucina and a

2 non-identified person; but you could see the name Kralj, could it be you?

3 A. [No interpretation]

4 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Could the witness be shown the

5 lower part of the page, the bottom of the page.

6 Q. Your answer was not taken in the transcript for my former

7 question. Could you tell us if the Kralj who was mentioned in this

8 conversation, is it you?

9 A. "Da," that's me. Yes, that's me.

10 Q. At the bottom of the page, one sees that Petko Obucina says that

11 he's spoken to the General, and Djurdjic asks him which one, and Obucina

12 says, Tolimir.

13 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Could we now see page 2 of the

14 document.

15 Q. At the middle of the page Petko Obucina transmits to Milos a

16 mention according to which the principle chief was saying that at

17 Srebrenica one could enter and go out of the enclave. Did you often have

18 situations like this one when Petko Obucina and other civilian organs

19 transmitted to you, colonel or judge [as interpreted], messages from

20 General Tolimir or from General Mladic?

21 A. It didn't happen often. This is the only case that I know of.

22 Q. Do you know whether in such a situation that Colonel Djurdjic

23 checked what was said by Petko Obucina?

24 MR. VANDERPUYE: Objection.

25 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.

Page 29280

1 MR. VANDERPUYE: Mr. President, objection, it's a leading

2 question, and it calls for speculation as well.

3 JUDGE AGIUS: Do you wish to comment, Ms. Fauveau, or not?

4 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] No, Mr. President, no thank you.

5 [Trial Chamber confers]

6 JUDGE AGIUS: I don't agree with you at all, Mr. Vanderpuye. If

7 he could answer that question, he should do so. So Mr. Kralj, if you

8 could that question, without speculating, please.

9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Colonel Djurdjic, in this case,

10 went to General Tolimir's office to clarify the situation. Whatever was

11 not covered by papers and approvals could not be sent into the procedure.

12 Very often people in the coordination body were not privy to our further

13 procedures, and they thought that things could be done over the

14 telephone, which was not the case. It just could not be done.

15 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Could the witness be shown 5D1280.

16 This is an intercept coming from the Croatian collection. This is a

17 summary of a conversation which took place on the 13th -- of the 30th of

18 June, 1995. The office of General Nicolai, executive office of

19 General Nicolai is mentioned.

20 Q. Do you know who was General Nicolai?

21 A. General Nicolai was the Chief of Staff of UNPROFOR, I believe.

22 Yes, I'm certain he was the Chief of Staff of UNPROFOR.

23 Q. And General Nicolai, apparently, sent a request to

24 General Tolimir, and it's seen between brackets that there is

25 General Mladic mentioned between brackets.

Page 29281

1 Did General Tolimir, about these humanitarian issues and the

2 UNPROFOR convoys, did he replace General Mladic for these matters?

3 A. General Tolimir was involved in the procedure to approve convoys

4 and to meet with UNPROFOR on the issue of convoys, and he would be

5 replaced by General Milovanovic. In the absence of General Milovanovic,

6 General Tolimir could also issue approvals; however, the UNPROFOR

7 procedure was as follows: If they had contacted General Tolimir as per

8 the procedure, then they would continue talking to him for any assistance

9 because they already knew him because they had already met with him; and

10 that's why they addressed General Tolimir in the hope that he would be

11 able to assist them, to speed things along. And this case, obviously, is

12 about the transfer of the body of a fallen soldier.

13 Q. You mentioned contacts with UNPROFOR, did you ever take part --

14 or did you ever attend a meeting with representatives of UNPROFOR?

15 A. At the beginning with the commander of the Main Staff, I was at a

16 meeting that took place at Sarajevo airport, and I also participated

17 quite often when Colonel Djurdjic met with the representatives of the

18 UNPROFOR office in Pale.

19 Q. Do you know whether General Miletic attended the meetings with

20 the members of UNPROFOR? I am speaking of the period going from the 1st

21 of January, 1995 until end of July 1995.

22 A. As far as I know, no.

23 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Could the witness be shown 5D1306.

24 This document is dated 6 March 1995, and one can read the name of

25 Colonel Miletic.

Page 29282

1 Q. Do you recognise the signature?

2 A. This is not Colonel Miletic's signature. This is -- it looks

3 like Pandzic's signature to me.

4 Q. In this document, the Main Staff of the army of the Republika

5 Srpska informs UNPROFOR that General Milovanovic is absent; and,

6 therefore, the Main Staff of the Republika Srpska army proposes to

7 postpone the meeting until the return of the general.

8 In the Main Staff, was it decided who could negotiate with

9 UNPROFOR, who was in a position to negotiate or discuss with the

10 representatives of UNPROFOR?

11 A. Yes, it was decided. Since this involved a commander of the

12 UNPROFOR staff, the normal procedure was that when the UNPROFOR request

13 was discussed, that the meeting would also be attended by the Chief of

14 Staff of the army Republika Srpska.

15 Q. Do you have any information on this? Did General Mladic request

16 from President Karadzic and from the civilian organs of the government

17 some instructions when he was going to meetings with the representatives

18 of UNPROFOR?

19 A. The normal procedure stipulated for the presidency to be informed

20 about the activities of the Main Staff involving UNPROFOR before a

21 meeting. And after the meeting, appropriate reports were sent to the

22 president.

23 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Could the witness be shown document

24 5D1295. This is a document sent by the general commander Mladic to the

25 president of the Republika Srpska. This is a very short document.

Page 29283

1 Q. We see that General Mladic sends to the president the equipment

2 or documents concerning the meeting of the 19th -- January 19th, 1995 and

3 requests suggestions concerning the position of the delegation.

4 Here, it's a question of freedom of movement. You have already

5 in part answered my question, but did General Mladic -- was he in a

6 position to decide alone with -- without the president on matters as

7 important as freedom of movement of UNPROFOR?

8 A. Your Honours, the freedom of movement for the UNPROFOR is a very

9 broad term. It implied the freedom of movement across the entire

10 territory under the control of the army of Republika Srpska, which

11 required additional positions and involvement on the part of the civilian

12 authorities, the civilian police, and in a way informing the population

13 about UNPROFOR activities. Thus, the issues of such important nature had

14 to be communicated to the president and guidance was sought from him on

15 those matters.

16 Q. We have already spoken about fuel matters. I would like to ask

17 you a specific question concerning the fuel for Srebrenica.

18 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Could the witness be shown 5D1276.

19 This is an intercept from the Croatian collection dated 3 January 1995.

20 And this conversation takes place between General Mladic and Svetlana the

21 translator of UNPROFOR.

22 Q. In the middle of the document one can read that General Mladic

23 said that for Srebrenica, 35 tons in total. This would be enough for

24 five months, should suffice for 5 months.

25 You have already said there were some estimations made of the

Page 29284

1 quantities necessary, but could you explain how and who did these

2 estimations or calculations?

3 A. This was done by the competent organs of the technical services

4 together with Colonel Djurdjic based on the number of vehicles, the

5 UNPROFOR activities that took place in Srebrenica, and a proposal would

6 be given to -- for this to be something that would allow for the normal

7 work of the UNPROFOR. And there was also intelligence according to which

8 some of the fuel was shared with the military of the opposing side which

9 was in Srebrenica.

10 Q. A few questions, a few technical questions I would like to ask

11 you. Were there any problems - I think you already mentioned this - were

12 there any problems when receiving requests from UNPROFOR?

13 A. Your Honours, there were technical problems, problems of

14 technical nature, because of the illegibility of the documents which were

15 faxed through. Sometimes the fax would run out of paper, so only one

16 half of the document would go through. That's why additional information

17 would be sought over the telephone in order to complete such incomplete

18 documents. It also happened that UNPROFOR office provided us with roles

19 of fax papers, because they were the ones who spent most of our fax

20 papers, that's why they provided us with supplies to facilitate our

21 communication.

22 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Could the witness be shown 5D834.

23 This is a document from 1994, but what I am interested in is in the third

24 paragraph, one can see: "[In English] From the UNPROFOR command for the

25 former BH is badly planned."

Page 29285

1 Q. [Interpretation] Was the situation such -- what was the situation

2 in 1995?

3 A. The coordination on the UNPROFOR side was not good enough. They

4 did not inform us properly about the time of arrivals of their convoys at

5 the inter-points. So it happens that on one day several convoys were

6 supposed to pass through the entry checkpoint. And in view of all the

7 activities that such a checkpoint had to undertake in terms of the

8 controls of the convoys, there were certain problems created by that.

9 Both for those who were involved in the -- in the checks as well as in

10 traffic; in other words, unnecessary confusion and commotion would be

11 created at the checkpoint which resulted in the faster checks, and as a

12 result the checks were not of good quality.

13 In order to avoid such situations, the checkpoints, i.e., the

14 commands of the corps brigades proposed adequate solutions and that was

15 to talk to the UNPROFOR command and draft a joint plan. This would be

16 aimed at convoys moving faster, safer, and easier.

17 Q. When the Main Staff informed subordinate units of the passage of

18 convoys, would subordinate units also report to the Main Staff that the

19 convoys had passed through?

20 A. There was a regular procedure to proceed along the line of

21 command announcing to the corps which convoys are approved. And then, in

22 the response or return information, in regular reports, the answer would

23 be provided if the convoy had passed through, if there were any problems

24 in relation to the passage of the convoy.

25 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Could the witness be shown 5D1070,

Page 29286

1 please. This is a regular combat report from the Drina Corps dated 4th

2 of May, 1995.

3 Q. At item 3, we have a list of convoys, a rather short list. Is

4 this what you were referring to earlier when you spoke about information

5 provided by subordinate units?

6 A. Yes, that is the answer. They were not getting into details.

7 They would just cite the number of convoys and what you see here, just

8 the basic information. This was enough for us to compile our records and

9 to note down that such and such a convoy had passed through.

10 Q. Would you receive more detailed reports related to proposals made

11 by subordinate units to improve the operation of checkpoints or to

12 identify problems?

13 A. There were such cases, yes.

14 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Could the witness be shown 5D847.

15 Q. Yesterday I showed you a similar document, but it dated back to

16 the beginning of 1994. Here we have a document that bears no date, but

17 because of content and since it refers to what happened in 1994, we can

18 come to the conclusion that this document dates from 1994, the beginning

19 of 1995. Did you ever see any such documents at the Main Staff?

20 A. I didn't see the document, but Colonel Djurdjevic [as

21 interpreted] had a habit of briefly informing me about documents of this

22 type that he would receive. I am familiar with the contents.

23 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Could page 2 of the document be

24 shown to the witness, please. Page 2 in English, as well. At item (c)

25 this relates to behaviour and abuse of mandate by UNPROFOR and

Page 29287

1 humanitarian organisations.

2 Q. Could Colonel Djurdjic have notified his superior, General

3 Mladic, or anyone else at the Main Staff, with respect to that particular

4 section of the report?

5 A. Your Honours, the procedure was reverse. All the mail that would

6 arrive at the Main Staff would be submitted for review by the commander

7 or the chief; and in this case the commander or the chief would pass the

8 document -- I mean, they would read it first. More likely that would be

9 the case than General Djurdjic reading it first, and then they would

10 issue the adequate guidelines.

11 Q. Paragraph 1 of item (c), in the last sentence of this paragraph,

12 we see that up to 30 transits by convoys and individuals were approved

13 daily. When you were at the Main Staff in 1995, how many requests would

14 you receive on daily basis, roughly speaking?

15 A. I mentioned earlier that it was a skill to take these requests

16 from the fax and to arrange them, because they would be arriving in a

17 period from -- at a certain period we would be receiving 20 to 30

18 requests via fax on a daily basis, that's why we would to sort them. And

19 it was receiving 24 hours a day, and for 24 hours a day there was the

20 option of disposing of those requests. That was just here. I am not

21 even referring to requests that were sent to other corps.

22 Q. Do you know anything about medical evacuations?

23 A. There were requests for evacuation due to health reasons from the

24 enclaves, and the way out was by road or by helicopter. These requests

25 were processed summarily, and those who needed assistance -- to make sure

Page 29288

1 that those who needed assistance would have these requests approved in

2 time.

3 Q. I would like to show you 5D890. This is an authorisation for any

4 medical evacuation from Srebrenica to Sarajevo. The document is dated

5 21st of March, 1995. Based on your recollection, can you tell us whether

6 during that period and after the 21st of March of any medical evacuations

7 took place from Srebrenica whilst Srebrenica was a protected area?

8 A. There were medical evacuations from Srebrenica. And these were

9 of patients, allegedly civilians.

10 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Could the witness be shown 5D894.

11 This relates to another medical evacuation from Srebrenica to Sarajevo.

12 The document is dated 27th of March, 1995.

13 Q. In the third paragraph of this document we can see that 30

14 civilian patients are being evacuated as part of this medical evacuation.

15 Who was in charge of approving such medical evacuations?

16 A. All approvals for entry and exits into the enclaves were approved

17 by the Main Staff, by the chief or the commander, the commander or the

18 chief.

19 Q. When you mention the chief, who is this? Who you are thinking

20 of?

21 A. I am thinking of the chief of General Milovanovic.

22 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Could the witness be shown 5D1313.

23 Item 3, please. We find the approval of a medical evacuation that has to

24 take place in the period between 28 to 30th of March, 1995. And in order

25 to avoid any misunderstanding, this relates to the 30 patients mentioned

Page 29289

1 in the previous document.

2 Could we now turn to page 4 in Serbian, in the Serbian version of

3 the document, please. That would be page 5 in the English version of the

4 document. Under item 2 of this request, we see that this relates to 30

5 civilians patients who have to be evacuated out of Srebrenica.

6 Q. Do you recognise the initials underneath the handwritten comment

7 we see at the very top of the page?

8 A. This is General Mladic's initial.

9 Q. Something is handwritten, and we see -- and then rest is

10 illegible. Who is Toso?

11 A. General Tolimir.

12 Q. Why did General Mladic get in touch with General Tolimir and not

13 directly with Milos to deal with the situation?

14 A. There was relevant intelligence that medical evacuations were

15 being used for various diversions or for different purposes, for

16 transport of specific persons or equipment. And there were indications,

17 and this did happen, that these evacuations were always approved in time.

18 And this procedure would then include the service that General Tolimir

19 was dealing with, that he would carry out the required assessments and

20 conduct the appropriate talks with General Djurdjic for purposes of

21 preventing abuses of medical evacuation convoys.

22 Q. You talked about evacuations by helicopter. Based on your

23 recollection, can you tell us whether in 1995 there were evacuations by

24 helicopter?

25 A. There were medical evacuations as well as helicopter trips into

Page 29290

1 protected areas. I am talking about UNPROFOR helicopters.

2 Q. I'd like to show you 5D1296. This is a request for approval for

3 a helicopter flight.

4 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Could the witness be shown very

5 bottom of the page, the handwritten part of the document.

6 Q. Do you recognise this handwriting?

7 A. This is General Mladic's handwriting.

8 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Could the witness be shown page 2

9 of the document. The very top of the page.

10 Q. Does this confirm what you've just said? I am talking about the

11 signature we see here, does this confirm what you've just said?

12 A. Yes, this is General Mladic's signature.

13 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Could the witness be shown 5D1297.

14 This is document dated 7th of February, 1995. Here we see that

15 General Mladic approved a helicopter mission, but in the first paragraph

16 he talks about frequent requests for helicopter missions and of abuse of

17 this, something that took place in the night between 6th and 7th of

18 February, 1995.

19 Q. Did you hear about such abuses?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. Now, something that I should have asked you earlier on. We see a

22 number here, 06/17-121. Does this number mean something? I am talking

23 about 06, does 06 mean something particular?

24 A. Your Honours, in office correspondence, the office that recorded

25 the post separated the list of documents under the number 06, which was

Page 29291

1 something that Colonel Djurdjic maintained for the needs of registering

2 the cooperation with UNPROFOR and humanitarian organisations. The mark

3 "06" means that that was the civilian tasks sector under Colonel

4 Milos Djurdjic. All correspondence that was sent to UNPROFOR, most of

5 the time would be logged in our logbooks marked as 06.

6 Q. We are talking about helicopter flights, and before that we were

7 talking about medical evacuations. I would like to show you 5D1298. In

8 this document, we see that a medical evacuation has been approved for

9 February 14, 1995, to evacuate a sick child accompanied by his twin

10 brother and mother. This document is dated 13th of February --

11 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] I think there is an interpretation

12 problem in the B/C/S.

13 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. Because in English we are receiving

14 interpretation for sure. Let's start with the accused, first.

15 Were you receiving interpretation in your language? No. So

16 there is a problem for sure. I don't need to ask anyone else. Could I

17 have an indication of when the interpretation into B/C/S stopped? In

18 other words, what needs to be repeated.

19 THE ACCUSED MILETIC: [Interpretation] The last question, I

20 believe.

21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Could you please repeat the

22 specific question?

23 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. I will read it out myself slowly.

24 Madam Fauveau's questions was the following:

25 "We are talking about helicopter flights, and before that, we

Page 29292

1 were talking about medical evacuations. I would like to show you Exhibit

2 number 5D1298. In this document, we see that the medical evacuation has

3 been approved for February the 14th, 1995, to evacuate a sick child

4 accompanied by his twin brother and mother. This document is dated 13th

5 of February."

6 That's where you had stopped. I don't think that concluded your

7 question, so if you could proceed and bring it to an end, then the

8 witness can answer assuming that it all has been now interpreted into

9 B/C/S. Okay.

10 Go ahead, Madam Fauveau.

11 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation]

12 Q. My question is the following: How long did it usually take for

13 such requests to be decided upon?

14 A. The question of the helicopter flights is a very sensitive one.

15 As far as actions by units are concerned, if they were not informed about

16 these helicopter flights. That means that it was necessary after

17 receiving approval of information to send an act to the corps command or,

18 rather, to units on positions that at a certain time the corridor would

19 be opened, and the helicopter flights would be approved referring to the

20 precise route in order to prevent any incident happening that may mean

21 the downing of the helicopter. So that warning would imply a reasonable

22 period of time of at least six hours.

23 Q. My question was: When you receive a request for a medical

24 evacuation of that sort, how much time was it necessary to decide at the

25 level of the Main Staff?

Page 29293

1 A. The evacuations had priority. Such a document would immediately

2 be processed in the shortest possible way. It would need to reach

3 General Mladic or General Milovanovic quickly in order to complete the

4 process as soon as possible, and you could see from the document itself

5 that nature of the injury, whether it was an evacuation that could maybe

6 take some time, or whether it was necessary to do it immediately. But it

7 would be processed in the shortest possible time.

8 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] This would be a good moment to

9 break.

10 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. Merci, Madam. Let's have the break now, 25

11 minutes. Thank you.

12 --- Recess taken at 12.31 p.m.

13 --- On resuming at 12.59 p.m.

14 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.

15 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] We were speaking of the helicopter

16 missions; in particular, this mission approved for the 14th of February,

17 1995. Could the witness be shown 5D1126.

18 Now, this is a report from the Main Staff 14th February 1995.

19 Could the witness be shown page 3 in English and B/C/S. It's page 3 in

20 both cases.

21 Q. In this first paragraph, I am talking about item 6 (a), we can

22 read that in the area of the 5th and 6th Brigade, Podrinje, a helicopter

23 which had not been announced and which is not yet identified as been

24 seen.

25 Do you know which region was covered by the brigades of Podrinje?

Page 29294

1 A. The area leading up to the protected areas.

2 Q. We see that helicopter had been approved. Now, in this report --

3 by the report, can you conclude that it is indeed the helicopter -- the

4 helicopter which had been approved or is it another helicopter?

5 A. This is not about an approved helicopter. It is about a

6 helicopter of unknown origin using the corridor to carry out a mission of

7 its own. Knowing very well that during that time, no fire would be

8 opened.

9 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Could the witness now be shown

10 document 1299. This is a document sent by the Main Staff to UNPROFOR.

11 In the second paragraph, I can see that the helicopter mission which had

12 been approved took place without any problem, but that after that in the

13 sentence beginning by -- at 11.30, one sees that another helicopter was

14 heard.

15 Q. I would like to know if such incidents had an influence on the

16 decisions taken by the Main Staff concerning the approval of helicopter

17 missions?

18 A. Your Honours, the monitoring of such incidents provided the Main

19 Staff with an opportunity to pay special attention to the approvals

20 granted to helicopter missions, which means that there was analysis and

21 most missions were requested to use the land route, if at all possible.

22 Q. We spoke of the UNPROFOR convoys and the medical evacuations.

23 Could you tell us who in 1995 decided that are humanitarian convoys could

24 pass, could go through?

25 A. Decisions were made by the commander or the Chief of Staff if

Page 29295

1 they were about the movement on UNPROFOR. And the coordination body

2 provided appropriate approvals and proposals to the Main Staff to

3 consider convoys of humanitarian organisations in the part dealing with

4 the transport of such supplies which might be used for the other side's

5 military purposes.

6 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Could document 5D1283 be shown to

7 the witness, and this is an intercept which, unfortunately, has no date.

8 But by the contents of the conversation, it's obvious that it was July

9 1995.

10 Q. In this conversation, one of the speakers takes place, and it is

11 supposed that it is Colonel Djurdjic who took part. But what I am

12 interested in is what is said about state committee which decided to

13 approve the requests of HCR, UNHCR, 1418 and 1428 and 1429. Would you

14 know what this organ is?

15 A. The government had established a committee to cooperate with

16 humanitarian organisations. Its seat was in Pale. The president of that

17 committee was the vice-president, Vice-president Koljevic, and

18 Colonel Djurdjic represented the Main Staff as a member of that

19 committee. The committee to cooperate with international humanitarian

20 organisations.

21 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Could document 6D7 be shown to the

22 witness. In B/C/S that's page 2, while in English it's page 1.

23 Q. You can see there it's about a decision of the creation of the

24 state committee for cooperation with the United Nations and the

25 international organisations dealing in humanitarian matters, and I would

Page 29296

1 like you to look at Article 5, which is on page 2 in the English text.

2 The first organ we see mentioned in this article is the

3 coordination organ for humanitarian operations. We have already several

4 times seen this coordination organ mentioned. Does this decision have to

5 do with this coordination we already spoke about?

6 A. Yes, it does.

7 Q. Who would send the requests for the passage of convoys, of

8 humanitarian convoys, to the Main Staff?

9 A. It would be the coordination body from the secretary's office,

10 they would send it.

11 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Could the witness be shown 5D1284.

12 This is a conversation or an intercept. The date is not determined.

13 Q. And do you know when Colonel Djurdjic arrived at the Main Staff?

14 A. Colonel Djurdjic took over from Colonel Magazin. I arrived --

15 or, rather, joined on the 3rd of November, 1984 [as interpreted]. He was

16 already there. I can't give you the exact date. I don't know.

17 Q. Could you repeat which year this was. When did you arrive at the

18 Main Staff?

19 A. I did not take over any duties. I joined. Colonel Djurdjic was

20 still in his position, and I joined on the 3rd November 1994.

21 Q. In this conversation, Colonel Djurdjic speaks with a certain

22 Branko or Branka, and he says that requests have to be sent by the --

23 through the coordination organ. And what I would like to know is if you

24 look at what you've got at the bottom of the page in B/C/S.

25 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] And in English it's the beginning

Page 29297

1 of page 2.

2 Q. Colonel Djurdjic speaks about the official procedure and of a

3 rectangular stamp. What -- do you know what Colonel Djurdjic is talking

4 about in this conversation?

5 A. This refers to the regular procedure that was used in the

6 coordination body. Before this body existed, some other organisations

7 sent their requests directly to the Main Staff. This is obviously a

8 Branka from the area of Sarajevo to whom they sent assistance through the

9 Main Staff. And, now, since the new organisation was in place, they were

10 supposed to talk to the coordination body, and they did not have enough

11 information; and it was Branka's intention to try and push this through

12 to Colonel Djurdjic . However, Colonel Djurdjic was performing according

13 to the new procedure that was put in place. He clearly told her that it

14 could not be sent for the procedure if it did not go through the

15 procedure of the new coordination body.

16 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Could the witness be shown 5D1308.

17 And could page 2 in B/C/S be displayed and page 3 for the English

18 version, please. We can see there is a stamp, a rectangular stamp on

19 this document.

20 Q. Could you explain what it is, this rectangular stamp?

21 A. This is a stamp of the coordination body, the body that we have

22 just discussed. And this is a list of their documents, and you can see

23 clearly the title of the body, the Coordination Body for Humanitarian

24 Aid, whose president was Vice-president Koljevic.

25 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Could we go back to back to page 1

Page 29298

1 of the document. We see that this is a document from the coordinating

2 body dated 17th of May, 1995; and I am interested in the note we see on

3 this document at the bottom of page 1.

4 Q. It says that the weekly plan was approved except for note 3 on

5 page 3, satellite telex with equipment needed for the UNHCR office. Who

6 decided that this equipment could not go through?

7 A. The coordination body decided that. The coordination body of the

8 government of Republika Srpska.

9 Q. This is number 1179-HCR-783 dated 17th of May, 1995. I'd like to

10 show you another document, 5D905. Here we have a notification from the

11 Main Staff. The date is a bit difficult to decipher, but I believe it's

12 the 18th or the 19th of May. Here in the first paragraph of this

13 document, we read:

14 "We hereby notify you that we have approved request number

15 1179-HCR-783 of the coordinating body."

16 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Could we now turn to page 2,

17 please. The very bottom of the page, we have a note here saying we have

18 not approved the transport of a satellite telex to Srebrenica on the 24th

19 of May with accompanying equipment. This is the next-to-last paragraph.

20 Q. When the Main Staff received documents from the coordinating

21 body, what was the procedure then followed?

22 A. Since Colonel Djurdjic was a member of the Coordination Body for

23 Humanitarian Aid of the government of Republika Srpska, when he received

24 a document of this nature, he was clear that the coordination body had

25 informed UNHCR that the equipment would not be allowed to pass. And

Page 29299

1 according to the regular procedure, he informed his superior officer, in

2 this case either General Mladic or General Milovanovic, who did not have

3 any objections to this type of document. They simply approved it

4 automatically.

5 However, this obviously so far as a technical mistake. It says

6 in the remark:

7 "We did not approve the transport of satellite telex with

8 equipment to Srebrenica, even before the coordination body had informed

9 UNHCR about that and told them that this would not be approved."

10 There was no need to put this into the remark to subordinated

11 units. For the subordinated units, it would have sufficed that the order

12 had arrived from the Main Staff and the convoy escort had been provided

13 by a written document from the coordination body disallowing this type of

14 transport.

15 Q. You stated that it was not necessary to send that to subordinated

16 units, but how would subordinated units know what was approved and what

17 was not approved if that particular information was not disclosed to

18 them?

19 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, one moment. Mr. Vanderpuye.

20 MR. VANDERPUYE: Thank you, Mr. President. It seems to me that

21 this is not a sufficiently clear question. What the witness testified to

22 was the remark on the document referring to "we did not approve it," and

23 the question that's being put to him is not in that context. It's in a

24 completely different context.

25 JUDGE AGIUS: Do you wish to comment to that? I think

Page 29300

1 Mr. Vanderpuye is right. But it's up to you, Madam, if you think your

2 question is right you can pursue it, and we'll see then what the witness

3 has to say.

4 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation]

5 Q. Would the coordination body send its direction -- its decisions

6 directly to the corps and to the brigades?

7 A. No.

8 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Could the witness be shown 1405. I

9 believe that this document should not be displayed outside of this

10 courtroom. It's an intercept that has not been translated. We have

11 prepared a draft translation. Whilst the document is being brought up,

12 one question.

13 Q. Do you know who Mr. Kekic is?

14 A. Mr. Kekic was a member of the coordination body.

15 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] 5D1405, please.

16 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. Vanderpuye.

17 MR. VANDERPUYE: Thank you, Mr. President. While we're waiting

18 for that one to come up, I just wonder if my colleague could put on the

19 record which collection this particular exhibit comes from so that the

20 record is clear as to what it is.

21 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, are you in a position to do that?

22 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Could we move into private session,

23 please.

24 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, of course. Let's move into private session,

25 please.