|
Content
/ Colormap • Page 9177 • {1/100} (1)Monday, 2 April 2001 [Open Session]
--- Upon commencing at 9.33 a.m. (5) JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Good morning to the technicians, the interpreters. Good morning representatives of the registry, counsel for the Prosecution, the Defence. Good morning, General Krstic. We will continue with the rebuttal of the Prosecutor today in this (10)case in order to complete the testimony which was left incomplete last time. Mr. McCloskey, you have the floor. MR. McCLOSKEY: Thank you, and good morning, Mr. President, Your Honours, Defence counsel. (15)We have Mr. Butler. He should be ready to come in, and if we could start off in private session just briefly. The Defence and the Prosecution have been working on some stipulations for -- oh, some for quite a while and some just recently, and I'd like to go over those and tell you about what we have agreed to and what we are offering as (20)additional evidence this morning, somewhat through Mr. Butler, but it should also be brief, if the Court would consider that. But if we could go into private session.
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] Very well. We will move
into private session for a few moments.
(20) JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] We are in public session, Mr. McCloskey. Please continue.
MR. McCLOSKEY: Mr. President, I would refer the Court to the
trial transcripts pages 7392 to 7393 for the particular areas that
Mr. Butler's testimony will be rebutting, involves General Krstic's
(25)response to questions about his knowledge of when prisoners were first
• A.: They were material that I had looked at but that I had not included in my narrative. (10) • Q.: And why was that? • A.: Given what these issues discuss now, they probably should have been, and I would suspect that I just missed them in the process of collating all the material around. • Q.: Where did these two documents come from? How did they come into (15)OTP possession? • A.: Exhibit 878 was a document that was seized from the headquarters of the Zvornik Brigade during a search by the Office of the Prosecutor. • Q.: And if we could get 877 ready for him also. And you know what 877 is, the daily combat report. (20) • A.: Yes, sir, same circumstances; it came into the possession of the Office of the Prosecutor as part of that same search.
• Q.: All right. If you could, and if you need to use the ELMO to help
illustrate it, can you just explain briefly this document and how it fits
into your analysis and especially where it refers to prisoners being
(25)taken.
• Q.: Could you now use the map, Exhibit 879, and put it on the ELMO and (20)just give the Court a brief outline of the -- where Bokcanski Potok is and where the intelligence people feel the various parts of the column are at the time of this document.
• A.: At the time of this document, which was drafted on the 12th but
not physically received by the Drina Corps until 1.00 in the morning on
(25)the 13th, the situation, as they understood it, was that the main elements
• Q.: Excuse me, if you could just say where it is, for the record. • A.: Through the Caparde and Spreca valley. The second element of the (5)column which consisted of what they called approximately 300 or 400 armed people moving up through the greater Kamenica area, which is Redzici, Velja Glava. Then the third series of the column, which was the main body of the column, the very long part in this area referred to as Bokcanski Potok which is an area that we frequently call -- it's the other side of (10)the road from the Sandici meadow in Kravica area. • Q.: Now, if we could go to Exhibit 877. If you could briefly describe -- we've seen many of these documents but how does -- does this document help identify units that may be in the area where prisoners are being taken on 12 July by -- according to the document we just looked at? (15) • A.: This specific document is the 12 July 1995 combat report, the regular combat report to the commander of the Drina Corps from the command of the 1st Zvornik Brigade, and in paragraph 2, discusses the primary tasks for the units and, in that, the brigade chief of staff, in this case Dragan Obrenovic, lays out where elements of both the brigade and -- to (20)include some of the military police assets of the brigade are located in ambush positions relative to where they believe the column is approaching or where the Muslim armed forces are.
• Q.: So if there is one military police detachment sent to Konjevic
Polje, that would be roughly in what area, looking at the map just to
(25)remind us?
• Q.: And those -- that happened on the 13th that we know of; is that (10)right? • A.: That is correct. The major captures of the Muslims took place on the 13th. • Q.: Now, this exhibit, the daily combat report on 877A notes about the military police detachment sent to Konjevic Polje, and it says, (15)"... pursuant to your order." So what is -- can you tell us, "pursuant to your order," who do you take that to mean? • A.: As broad as it is, I would take that to be pursuant to an order from the Drina Corps command. MR. McCLOSKEY: I have no further questions, Mr. President. (20) JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Thank you very much, Mr. McCloskey. Mr. Visnjic, please. MR. VISNJIC: [Int.] Thank you, Mr. President. • CROSS-EXAMINED by Mr. Visnjic: (25)
• Q.: Mr. Butler, let me go back to this last document. It is the daily
• A.: These daily combat reports would have been compiled by the -- by procedure, it should have been the operations duty officer of the Zvornik (5)Brigade. • Q.: The signature is the commander, Lieutenant Colonel Vinko Pandurevic. Was his presence confirmed during that period? • A.: During this period, Colonel Pandurevic was down in the area of Srebrenica. The reports in question were -- this one is not signed, but (10)the majority of the reports during this period were signed for him by the chief of staff, now Major Obrenovic. • Q.: Mr. Butler, did your investigations show a hypothetical assignment that this group from the Zvornik Brigade - and it is a department of the military police - was to have executed in the Konjevic Polje area? (15) • A.: I'm confused about the word that translated into English as a "hypothetical." • Q.: Let me rephrase that. Did your investigation ascertain the assignments that this group had in Konjevic Polje, and I'm referring to the group of the -- that is to say, the military police department, (20)detachment.
• A.: Putting it in context with the intercepts that we have, which I
think several of them pertain to police units in the area of Konjevic
Polje, the two options are, one, combat-related activity to defend that
intersection from the column, or the second one would be a traditional
(25)military police function of dealing with the prisoner issues. But at this
• Q.: Let me assist you. Could one function be the establishment of a (5)checkpoint for the control of traffic, for example, vehicles moving in that direction? • A.: That is an option and, again, given other information that, on the 13th, checkpoints were established there, it is a viable option, yes, sir. (10) • Q.: That means, then, that we have three possible options at this stage of our exchange of opinions, if I can put it that way; am I right? • A.: Yes, sir. • Q.: Mr. Butler, let me go back to a series of questions briefly that was put by my learned colleague, Mr. McCloskey. (15)Without any specific details, the Polje at Sandici, the Sandici meadow, we identified a tank which was within the composition of the MUP units. We identified the soldiers as well who were also MUP members. Am I right in saying that? • A.: The soldiers, as we discussed earlier, yes. Again, the issue was (20)a compilation of both MUP and soldiers. As for the issue of the tank, that one individual identifies it as a MUP tank, yes. • Q.: But we have a precise identification only for the MUP members. So far you haven't identified any of the members of the army; am I right in saying that? (25)
• A.: That is correct. The --
• A.: To be clear on that, I'm not sure of the answer. I just don't (5)recall the details. • Q.: Mr. Butler, the Branjevo farm events, the members of the 10th Diversionary Detachment were identified and, in your previous testimony, those of another unit which I don't want to specify now because we're in open session, so I won't be mentioning that unit. But was a member of the (10)Bratunac Brigade identified? Just give us a yes or no answer, please. • A.: No, sir. • Q.: Thank you. MR. VISNJIC: [Int.] Mr. President, I would like to ask the registry to give the witness and members of the Prosecution Exhibit (15)D165, please. • Q.: Mr. Butler, before we move on to this exhibit and to give a chance to the Prosecution to look through the document, I would like to ask you the following: During your testimony in the Prosecution case, you spoke about the use of MUP by -- that is to say, in the combat activities in the (20)Srebrenica enclave and the Krivaja 95 operation; am I right? • A.: That is correct. • Q.: You also in your testimony mentioned that one of the -- what led you to believe this at one point was that the MUP forces were mentioned in the Operation Krivaja 95 as reserve forces. Am I right? (25)
• A.: That is correct, sir.
• A.: At the time, I do not have a document, yes. • Q.: Mr. Butler, the units who were located on the line Konjevic Polje-Bratunac, were they MUP units? • A.: They were a mixture of both MUP and army, sir. (10) • Q.: What about the units that provided security for this axis, Konjevic Polje-Bratunac; were they also a mixture of MUP and army?
• A.: What I've been able to put together based on the documents and the
recent interviews, and of course I won't go into detail, is that the line
as it extended was the units closest to Bratunac were the 1st Battalion
(15)Bratunac Brigade. The units that extended up from the area of -- and
perhaps it's better if I use the map on this one.
This location being Bratunac, and again, here the intersection of
Konjevic Polje, in this segment closer to Bratunac is the 1st Battalion of
the Bratunac Brigade, and then you go up to the area of Glogova, from the
(20)area of Glogova through Kravica, and a little beyond is the 4th Battalion
of the Bratunac Brigade which, as identified earlier, is also the 8th
Battalion of the Zvornik Brigade. It was performing duty as part of the
Bratunac Brigade at that time. And then from beyond that, from the area
between Sandici and Konjevic Polje, what we've been able to determine is
(25)at least the 1st Company of the police, the Special Police intervention
• Q.: Mr. Butler, on the 13th of July in the afternoon hours at the positions between Konjevic Polje and Glogova -- or Konjevic Polje and (5)Bratunac, to take it further afield, on the 13th of July, were members identified, members of these two battalions, the Bratunac Brigade, on that route, road? • A.: [Previous translation continues] ... recent interviewees that we've done. (10) • Q.: I mean your investigations, were you able to come up with that, that on that road there were members of these two battalions on the 13th of July in the afternoon? You can give us a yes or no answer again; we don't need the details. MR. McCLOSKEY: Your Honour, I would like the witness to be able (15)to explain, if he needs to. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Yes. Go ahead, Mr. Visnjic. The question -- you were asked to give a yes or no answer, but if you wish to explain, you may do so. • A.: The answer is, as part of the investigation, in the case of the (20)1st Battalion, yes; in the case of the 4th Battalion, the documents reflect that, not a physical aspect of the investigation. As in the case of the MUP, that's part of the physical investigation. MR. VISNJIC: [Int.]
• Q.: Mr. Butler, was one of the tasks of the 1st Battalion to move from
(25)the Bratunac-Konjevic Polje road southwards into the depth of the
• A.: That is correct, sir. (5) • Q.: Thank you. Mr. Butler, I should now like to ask you to look at the document that you have before you, it is Defence Exhibit D165, but one more question before we go on to the document. You know the assertion by the Defence that the units which controlled the Konjevic Polje-Bratunac road were outside the chain of command of the Drina Corps. You know that (10)we say that. • A.: Yes, sir. • Q.: Mr. Butler, there was some discussion about that, and Defence witnesses were questioned as well as Prosecution witnesses on that particular issue. I should now like to ask you to look at document 165A. (15) MR. VISNJIC: [Int.] It is a document, Mr. President, which the Defence came by directly prior to this meeting, this sitting, and the document has been translated. If our colleagues of the Prosecution have any comments to make with respect to the translation, we will -- we are ready to accept this, but it is a document which was issued (20)by the Main Staff of the army of Republika Srpska, and it is signed by the chief of the intelligence department, General Zdravko Tolimir. • Q.: Mr. Butler, first of all, could I ask you to peruse the document before we go on to my concrete questions. I'm sure you need a few moments to look at it, and as do my learned colleagues of the Prosecution. (25)
• A.: Okay, sir.
• A.: No, sir, I've not. • Q.: Mr. Butler, does this document correspond to the standard form used for documents with this kind of contents compiled by the organs of (5)the Republika Srpska army in the course of July 1995? • A.: For the most part, it does; however, the one anomaly that I would note is that usually as part of the header data -- and probably to make that clear to everybody, this is the information that I refer to as the header data, who it's to and under what circumstances, to or for (10)information. Generally the date is there, and on this document, we don't see the date at that part; however, there is a date of 12 July on the back as well as an order number. Normally, we see those at the front, and that would leave me a bit of a question. But other than those things, it is a pretty standard format. (15) • Q.: Mr. Butler, in view of the format of this document, am I right in saying that this document was compiled by Major General Zdravko Tolimir, in those days member of the Main Staff of Republika Srpska? • A.: In this particular case, it was certainly released under his signature, yes. (20) • Q.: Am I right in saying, Mr. Butler, that this document was issued on the 12th of July 1995 and that it reached the command of the 2nd Romanija Motorised Brigade on that same day at 2210 hours?
• A.: I believe that's -- it certainly reached the command of the
Romanija Brigade, 2nd Romanija Brigade at that time. So given all of
(25)that, I would say -- I would be pretty comfortable saying that it's the
• Q.: Am I also right in saying that the document was registered in the book of records the next day, the 13th of July 1995, as can be seen from the stamp on this document? (5) • A.: Yes, sir. That's consistent with the practice, as I understand it. • Q.: Mr. Butler, this document was sent to several addressees. Among others, one of the addressees is the forward command post at Pribicevac, to General Krstic in person. My question is whether, on the 12th of July (10)1995 late in the evening, the forward command post at Pribicevac was operational? • A.: I believe that it is my opinion, and it is the Prosecution's contention, that the forward command post at Pribicevac did remain operational during this period. I do not believe that it shut down, (15)consistent with some of the Defence witnesses, at midnight or earlier on the evening of the 11th. I believe it remained operational. • Q.: And according to your contention, until when did that forward command post continue to operate?
• A.: I believe that, consistent with some of the exhibits that were
(20)forwarded either through my testimony or through the cross-examination of
General Krstic, there is one particular order there dated the 13th of July
that is also addressed to the forward command post at Pribicevac and I do
not know the number of that exhibit, unfortunately. So it's my contention
that certainly the Drina Corps headquarters had an understanding that on
(25)the 13th of July, the forward command post at Pribicevac was still in some
• Q.: The documents were addressed to the forward command post at Pribicevac, but do you have any evidence to show that they were received there? (5) • A.: On the 13th, no. • Q.: And on the 12th? • A.: I believe that during the cross-examination of one of the witnesses, I believe who was a protected witness so I will not mention his name, the Prosecution forwarded a document that was received late evening, (10)early morning hours of 12 July. I believe it was the late evening of the 11th to the early morning of the 12th of July. • Q.: Mr. Butler -- let me withdraw that. Is that the only piece of evidence on the basis of which you assume that this forward command post was operating or, rather, receiving documents? (15) • A.: No, sir, it's not.
• Q.: Mr. Butler, the document before you, Defence Exhibit D165,
consists of two parts, if I can call them that. In the first, there is a
description of information based on an interview with a prisoner of war.
I should like to draw your attention to the second part of this document
(20)which begins, in fact, on page 2. Particularly the first paragraph of the
document, which reads: "We have informed Ministry of Internal Affairs of
Republika Srpska organs who are stationed in Konjevic Polje with the legal
corridor through which the Muslims of Srebrenica are breaking through
considering that they have the assignment to secure the Bratunac-Konjevic
(25)Polje communication." Is that statement correct or true?
• Q.: Mr. Butler, if we look at page 1 and see to whom the document was (10)addressed, the MUP of Republika Srpska and RDB, in the Defence submission, that is the Department of State Security of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Republika Srpska. Would you agree with me in my interpretation of this abbreviation? • A.: I believe that's an accurate interpretation, yes. (15) • Q.: Why, Mr. Butler, would the Main Staff, the supreme body, give orders to a small MUP unit in Konjevic Polje to secure the communication line?
• A.: I think if you look at this document in its entirety, not only who
it was sent to and, again, first when you look at the header information,
(20)the first individuals that it was sent to, the primary customer, so to
speak, was the Drina Corps command. And, again, looking at it if you look
at -- as you've noted on the second page, if you look in the second
paragraph below the yellow highlighted one, it also discusses the duty of
the brigade command to inform the Department of Public Safety and
(25)Security.
(10) • Q.: Mr. Butler, it is the submission of the Defence that the Konjevic Polje-Bratunac road was controlled by the MUP either through the special brigade or other MUP units. Can this document be said to fit into the submission of the Defence as well? • A.: Looking at the first and the second paragraphs of page 2 and using (15)those as the basis, I would say that it doesn't. And the reason that I don't believe it does is the fact that the brigade commands are being told through their organs of intelligence affairs to propose to the commanders the measures to undertake to prevent the illegal breakthrough of the Muslims. Putting paragraphs 1 and 2 on page 2 together, I don't believe (20)it supports that contention. Now, again, if you look at paragraph 1 in isolation, it would support that contention. • Q.: Mr. Butler, can it be seen from this document that the MUP was subordinated to the Drina Corps?
• A.: I do not believe that this document specifically states that the
(25)MUP is subordinate to the Drina Corps. However, I believe that you can
• Q.: Mr. Butler, your knowledge of the word "collaboration" or (10)"cooperation," does that indicate subordination or does cooperation mean something else, the meaning attributed to the word by the Prosecution when interpreting certain other documents? • A.: The word, and this is kind of fuzzy because it's, again, the translation, and that's where it gets unclear. The phrase it's normally (15)done is "cooperation." I'm assuming that in this particular translation, "collaboration" and "cooperation" are the same word for the purpose of the translation. In this particular case what I look at this is looking at it in the form of the brigades to cooperate and, in the sense of the JNA doctrine, cooperation does not specifically mean command. (20) • Q.: Mr. Butler, does the Prosecution possess any document except for the Krivaja 95 plan from which it would be possible to find in writing which would -- or rather which would describe the relationship of the Drina Corps command over MUP units and specifically over MUP units stationed along the Konjevic Polje-Bratunac communication line? (25)
• A.: There is a 15 July -- I believe it's 15 or 16 July 1995 daily
• Q.: Mr. Butler, you will agree with me that that order is dated the (10)16th of July. I looked at it yesterday. It is a regular combat report of the Bratunac Brigade, dated the 16th of July. To be quite clear, in the period of the 11th, 12th, and 13th of July when the certain events occurred along the route Konjevic Polje-Bratunac, is there any single document specifying the command (15)relationship of the Drina Corps over the MUP, either as special Brigades or any MUP units? • A.: During that period, there is not a physical document, no, sir. • Q.: Mr. Butler, even if you were to consider the first paragraph only of this document, which shows that the Main Staff is in a certain sense (20)setting assignments to the MUP, be it a small unit as you allege or the entire MUP unit as submitted by the Defence ... • A.: I'm sorry, is that a question, sir? It kind of hung off on the transcriber.
• Q.: Allow me to repeat it, Mr. Butler.
(25)If we look at the first paragraph on page 2 of Exhibit D165, even
• A.: I would agree with the latter interpretation you gave it, that is, familiar with the assignments of the MUP units, by virtue of the fact that in the first paragraph it notes that, "We have informed the organs of the Ministry of the Interior Affairs," and it specifies they're not -- that (10)they're not tasking them, "them" being the Main Staff is not tasking them. And again, considering this is coming from the intelligence department and not from operations, it would be inappropriate for them to be tasking as such. So I would agree with your second interpretation, that they're certainly aware of the MUP presence in Konjevic Polje. (15) • Q.: Mr. Butler, who did the MUP report to about its activities in Konjevic Polje and along the Konjevic Polje-Bratunac route?
• A.: Based on the recent series of interviews, and again I won't go
into detail on that, the individuals in question continue to essentially
indicate that they reported up through their MUP channels to at least as
(20)far as Colonel Borovcanin, who we've identified in previous testimony as
the commander of the MUP forces on the ground in that area.
The next link over would be Colonel Borovcanin reporting to the
local army commands, and in that particular case, we do not have any
physical evidence that establishes that linkage other than their proximity
(25)presence.
• A.: No, sir. Most of the information I have indicates that the Drina (5)Corps units had an awareness, certainly in the intercepts and certainly in other documents, that they were aware of the activities of the MUP all through that period. Intercepts of the 12th and of the 13th and some on the 14th are pretty clear that they're currently coordinating their activities. (10) • Q.: Mr. Butler, who was the commander of the Drina Corps on the 13th of July in the afternoon hours? • A.: It is my contention, based on the signed order from General Krstic as the commander of the Drina Corps, that I believe the order of time is sometime between 1730 and 2000 hours, and again, my memory has slipped on (15)that one but, based on that signed order, I believe that General Krstic was the commander of the Drina Corps in that period. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Sorry. Yes, Mr. McCloskey. MR. McCLOSKEY: This is getting beyond the scope into some issues that if Mr. Butler -- if they wish to reopen and they wish to go into this (20)with Mr. Butler, if at least he could have the documents present to help refresh his recollection. But I -- this is -- I would object to any further -- going further afield.
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] Yes. I was going to raise that
particular issue. I think that Mr. Butler discussed this issue at length,
(25)as you know, and to go back to it, perhaps he should have the document in
MR. VISNJIC: [Int.] Mr. President, this is just an introductory question to the question that comes next, but to refresh Mr. Butler's memory, I should like to ask the registry to provide him with (5)document 525, Prosecution Exhibit 525. • Q.: It is an interview carried out on the 13th of July at 1829 hours -- or rather, a conversation, I'm sorry, between Zile and an X, and during your examination-in-chief, during the Prosecution case, you identified one of these two participants in the conversation as General (10)Zivanovic. In the course of this conversation, mention is made, a list -- made of a list of prisoners of war -- no, I'm sorry, a list of potential war criminals which General Zivanovic is requesting from the other participant in the conversation. Is that right? (15) • A.: Let me just take a minute to read this again, please. Okay, your question again, sir? • Q.: In this conversation, reference is made to a list of suspected war criminals which, as far as I can remember, General Zivanovic is requesting to be given to him for the purposes of an investigation. Am I right? (20) JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Yes, Mr. McCloskey. MR. McCLOSKEY: I object to counsel's conclusion. I think that this clearly is not established, who this is, conclusively.
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] Yes, Mr. McCloskey, but I think
that we have Mr. Richard Butler here who will answer that question.
(25)Perhaps it would be a good idea to show the document on the ELMO,
MR. VISNJIC: [Int.] Mr. President, my question is on the monitor, on the LiveNote. (5) • Q.: So am I right, Mr. Butler? • A.: "Zile" is a nickname that we associate with General Zivanovic, yes, sir. Let me just go back to the transcript here and make sure there's nothing of part of the question that I missed. And yes, as part of that, the individual Zile is requesting a list of war criminals. (10) • Q.: Mr. Butler, should we hypothetically assume that this conversation is authentic, that a participant in the conversation is General Zivanovic, that MUP units are under the command of the Drina Corps, would it be possible that at 1820 [as interpreted], a time which the Prosecution contends - I'm sorry, it should be 1829 for the LiveNote, not 1820 - a (15)time when, according to the contention of the Prosecution, the killings in Jadar, in Cerska, had already occurred, and most probably also the killings began or underway -- or are underway at Kravica, how would it be possible for General Zivanovic, the commander of the Drina Corps, not to know about it? (20)
• A.: Looking through the LiveNote transcript, there are two issues in
that question, and I think maybe the best way for me to answer it is to go
over each of them, the first one being General Zivanovic is the commander.
And again, as I've indicated, I don't believe by this period of time he is
the commander of the Drina Corps based on the other documents. And
(25)certainly this intercept is an indicator that he may be. There are other
• Q.: Mr. Butler -- JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Mr. Visnjic, I think we need a (15)break. Are you about to finish? MR. VISNJIC: [Int.] Mr. President, another five minutes, perhaps. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] All right, then. Please go ahead. (20) MR. VISNJIC: [Int.] • Q.: Mr. Butler, the first order signed by General Krstic, was it signed at 2030 hours? • A.: You'll have to give me the order on that one. I just don't recall the exact time. (25)
• Q.: It is Prosecution exhibit ...
• Q.: Within that time period, General Zivanovic is nonetheless conducting a conversation, an active conversation, a kind of conversation that would be expected from a Corps Commander? (10) • A.: Certainly an active conversation expected of someone who is a General. • Q.: Mr. Butler, according to the contention of the Prosecution or, rather, the hypothesis of the Prosecution, General Krstic and General Zivanovic were together during that time period; am I right? (15) • A.: I believe that during that time period, the general body of evidence used by the Prosecution put General Mladic, General Krstic and General Zivanovic together during some portion of that time period and that is, in fact, the change of command. That is the event that occurs at the Vlasenica headquarters on the 13th. So I believe we have all three (20)principals there at that time. • Q.: Mr. Butler, General Zivanovic, at least that can be concluded from the conversation conducted on -- at 1829 hours, is not aware of the listed and mentioned events Jadar, Cerska and probably Kravica; am I right?
• A.: Those events are not listed in the contents of this conversation,
(25)no, sir.
• A.: The one part where I have some difficulty in concluding that is the fact that given in Exhibit 877 which is the 12 July combat report and, again, that report was sent -- if I can find my English language (10)translation -- at 1710 hours, and this one from the intelligence director of the Main Staff wasn't sent from 2210. So based on the fact that the Main Staff document comes out many hours after the daily combat report, and the fact that they have received the order prior to putting in the daily combat report at 1710, I'm not sure you can make a direct linkage to (15)that. There are many documents that we have dated the 12th and 13th that have been tendered into evidence which talk about the setting up of checkpoints and everything else, and I think those are probably more tied to 877 than Defence 165 is. MR. VISNJIC: [Int.] Thank you, Mr. President. I have (20)no further questions. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Very well, Mr. Visnjic. We are now going to have a half-hour break. --- Recess taken at 11.08 a.m. --- On resuming at 11.45 a.m. (25)
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] Mr. McCloskey, will there be any
MR. McCLOSKEY: Just a few. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] -- as regards the issue of Zile Zivanovic. You made an objection and I thought that you would have an (5)opportunity to react if you think it necessary. MR. McCLOSKEY: Thank you, Mr. President. That was one of the issues I just wanted Mr. Butler to review. • RE-EXAMINED by Mr. McCloskey: • Q.: In fact, Mr. Butler, could we go to Exhibit 525A. I hope you've (10)still got that in front of you, and if you could make sure the whole thing is on the ELMO. Have you had a chance to carefully read this and review what you had said about it previously? • A.: Yes, sir, I have. • Q.: Now, what can you tell us about who is speaking and -- in this (15)conversation? • A.: In this particular intercept, it's clear that they only have one side of the conversation. And they make it clear that the individual identified as Zile is not audible. So you have this subscriber that's on the other hand of the conversation. You do not have Zile himself. (20) • Q.: So this line down the page, "Let me explain what's happening, call me in the morning. We'll fucking miss them and they'll get away scot free." In your opinion, is that Zivanovic or Zile? • A.: No, sir, that's the other subscriber. • Q.: And do you have any idea who this person is? (25)
• A.: No, sir.
(5) • A.: It's tab 4, sir. • Q.: Okay. And can you put that on the ELMO. Now, just again, briefly, what can you tell us about this on the issue of municipal police and who they may be taking orders from? • A.: In this conversation, again, the subscriber is Obrenovic, and it (10)discusses the fact that, listen, please, I call them -- that Mane will call him, and that the police in Konjevic Polje have been told to do the same as the Engineer Battalion is doing, that he can give orders to them through the commander of the Engineering Battalion. So in this regards, this puts the civilian municipal police receiving their orders through the (15)commander of the army Engineering Battalion at Konjevic Polje. That's the 5th Engineering Battalion. • Q.: And the 5th Engineering Battalion, as we recall, is a Drina Corps asset? • A.: Yes, sir. (20) • Q.: Now, was Witness S interrogated by people in camouflage uniforms in front of the headquarters and COMS building of the 5th Engineering Battalion on the 13th of July? • A.: I believe that is his testimony, sir, yes.
• Q.: All right. Now, if we can go to the next intercept that I've
(25)asked you to look at, it's the July 13 intercept in the same exhibit, 364,
JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Mr. McCloskey, could you tell us the number of the document, please. (5) MR. McCLOSKEY: Yes, this is 364/1, and then it goes by date, July 13th, tab -- • Q.: Mr. Butler? • A.: I don't believe there's a tab number listed on this one, unless it's -- (10) • Q.: It's the grey tab. • A.: Sixteen. • Q.: Tab 16. And again, can you just briefly remind us the context of this, who these people are, and how it fits into this issue. • A.: This is a conversation between the two subscribers, one of them (15)General Krstic, one of them is a Borovcanin who we understand Ljubo Borovcanin was the person in charge of the police activities relative to Potocari and the general area of Srebrenica. And in this conversation, Krstic is calling Borovcanin, asking him where he is at the command post, and essentially, you know, wanting to determine whether or not he has any (20)problems. And again, Borovcanin says he does not. He tells Krstic that he doesn't have any problems. • Q.: How do you view this militarily? Can you give any indication of the relationship between these two?
• A.: I believe, as I said in my direct testimony pertaining to this
(25)one, to me, this is an indication that Borovcanin is functioning under the
• Q.: All right. Now, let's go back to the Defence Exhibit 165 from Tolimir of the Main Staff to General Krstic, Lieutenant Colonel Popovic, and other units. And I notice in the bottom of the first paragraph the (5)prisoner -- they say, "The prisoner estimates that on 11 July this year within Zulfo's group, about 500 armed Muslims left. Among them were also military-capable unmarried women and children." Do you know why the Main Staff would be interested in military-capable children? • A.: No, sir, I don't. (10) • Q.: Can you, after studying this document, provide your opinion as to who would have captured this individual? • A.: In looking at this document, the -- and I'm sorry, I have to pull it off the screen here. I can't read it from the ELMO. In the very first series of lines of the first paragraph, it (15)discusses that on 12 July at 1800 hours on the road Bratunac-Kravica in the region of the village of Kajici, a member was captured. That village is the headquarters of the 4th Battalion of the Bratunac Brigade which, again, is also the 8th Battalion of the Zvornik Brigade. Given those -- the fact that where he was captured as well as the (20)kind of questions that are being asked of him as to where the Muslim military formations are, my conclusion is that the individual was captured by the army, not by the MUP. MR. McCLOSKEY: No further questions.
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] Thank you very much,
(25)Mr. McCloskey.
JUDGE RIAD: [Int.] Thank you, Mr. President. • QUESTIONED by the Court: JUDGE RIAD: Good morning, Mr. Butler. (5) • A.: Good morning, sir. JUDGE RIAD: I just have one question you may be in a position to give me a satisfactory answer. You're adamant in your conclusion that -- you said exactly: "Most information indicate that Drina Corps had an awareness of the activities of the MUP and that they were currently (10)coordinating their activities together, so let us consider that the bottom line was that they were aware, the Drina Corps was aware of the MUP activity." Now, how far would the Drina Corps command be entitled to use a veto, to use a modern word, to use a veto against activities of the MUP, (15)when -- if they are aware of what they are doing? Could they tell them, "No, don't do that," granting this is the bottom line?
• A.: Yes, sir, they should have been able to do that. The legislation
on when the MUP comes under army command is fairly clear on the fact that
once MUP units are subordinated to the army, that they fall under the
(20)command of the brigade and corps commanders in that zone. The only
specific limitations on the army commander resolves around not using the
MUP outside of the agreed framework of what they were sent to do and the
fact that the army commander cannot replace the MUP commander of that
unit. It still has to remain under MUP actual command.
(25)Other than that, and given the fact that the army would command
JUDGE RIAD: So in the last analysis, the army of the Drina Corps had to okay the activity of the MUP, to give -- if the consent is not given, they cannot act, and they can't tell them no? • A.: For those specific functions that they were put under army (10)control. For other civilian policing type of functions, it's a different story, but when they're specifically put under the army control, they have that veto, as you use, yes, sir. JUDGE RIAD: And what would you call policing functions? • A.: The normal municipal police functions: crime enforcement, local (15)security of the population in Milici area and those types of areas. Their traditional police functions. When they're mobilised, there's a special unit, so to speak, and placed under army command. For example, their use along the roads, that's not a traditional police function. In that case, they're being used as a police formation under army command, and in those (20)functions, they do that. But for normal police functions, I would say that, yeah, the army doesn't necessarily have a voice in that. JUDGE RIAD: And the police functions would be the normal police functions -- • A.: Yes, sir. (25)
JUDGE RIAD: -- which have --
JUDGE RIAD: Thank you very much. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Thank you very much, Judge Riad. (5)Madam Judge Wald has the floor. JUDGE WALD: Mr. Butler, three questions. One is a little bit more specific version of the area you were talking to Judge Riad about. Even if in your understanding of VRS rules and regulations, et cetera, even if a civilian MUP had been assigned the task of securing a (10)road, would they conceivably have had the authority when capturing people on that road, given the fact that these people we have been told again and again were looked upon as part of the follow-up of the 28th Muslim army, would they -- or can you think of a conceivable source of authority for the MUP having secured the road and captured people on the road to (15)themselves dispose of captured prisoners of war, not handing them over to the army, even if they had been given that -- given the task of securing that road? • A.: No, ma'am. Most of the information that I had indicates that the army was the primary proponent agency for prisoners of war, again, with a (20)view to collecting the individuals and exchanging them for captured soldiers that the Muslim side or the Croat side had. In that regard, I don't have anything that would indicate that the MUP, of their own, would dispose of prisoners and not turn them over to the army.
JUDGE WALD: Would they have had any authority to do so, to your
(25)knowledge? Could they have hustled them all off to the local gaol?
JUDGE WALD: And had they treated them -- we're in supposition now. Had they treated them as civilians captured in what you might say were ordinary police activities, they would have -- would they not have (10)had to go through regular civilian kinds of justice procedures in order to dispose of them legally? • A.: The only procedure that I'm aware of, and I believe I discussed this a little bit in my direct testimony, where the police are the primary proponent are those individuals who have been identified as potential war (15)criminals in which case they fall under the purview of the police. JUDGE WALD: Okay. I have two very quick questions on one of your main exhibits, 877A, just to put what you've talked about into context. There are two other references in paragraph 2 under command of the Drina Corps which is on page 1 that I just wish you might tell me what you think (20)they were talking about. One is the third little dash down, "All other units have made preparations and intensified vigilance against possible arrival of Turks behind our back." Who are they talking about there? Are they talking about the regular Muslim army? Who are they talking about? (25)
• A.: No, ma'am. In this case they're talking about the column. As
JUDGE WALD: Okay. So that may be read as saying that they have all their units on some kind of -- other units that haven't been given other designations, on vigilance again the column, against the arrival? (10) • A.: Yes, ma'am. JUDGE WALD: The other one is two dashes down. This one we're now talking about is on the 12th of July, and they said, "We sent to Bratunac, pursuant to your order, eight buses from Drinatrans, two buses from Praga, and four of our trucks." What context do you put that in, this being the (15)12th? Is this part of the original commandeering of buses or does this mean these buses have been deflected from some of their women and children escort over to Bratunac to pick up the men? • A.: No, ma'am. I believe this is in relation to the original call from the Drina Corps for buses. (20) JUDGE WALD: Okay. Thank you.
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] Thank you very much, Madam Judge
Wald.
Mr. Butler, I also have a question for you, but I am somewhat
concerned that -- how to put it -- that I will not be able to formulate it
(25)very clearly, but you might be able to help me.
(5) • A.: Yes, sir. The unit in question is the 4th Battalion of the Bratunac Brigade. Where it gets somewhat confusing is that same unit is also the 8th Battalion of the Zvornik Brigade, and because there was always a manpower shortage in the Bratunac area, what occurred some time in the late 1993 time period was that the 8th Battalion from the Zvornik (10)Brigade was attached to, on a long-term attachment, to the Bratunac Brigade to cover that period -- cover that stretch of the road and around the enclave because they did not have the manpower. So the brigade, the battalion functioned under the command and control of the Bratunac Brigade; however, it was organic to the Zvornik (15)Brigade.
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] If we look at the document D165
and the Prosecution Exhibit 877, if we look at both these documents
together, we see that they both are dated the 12th of July. The document
number 877, in the second paragraph, which starts with the words, "Primary
(20)tasks for units," we see further down, in the fourth paragraph where we
can read, I will read it in English
[In English], "to the area of the 8th
in Kajici."
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] Okay. So finally I didn't
actually have a question, but thank you anyway for helping me understand
this issue.
(5)We will have no further questions for you, Mr. Butler. Thank you
once again for coming here. Let me just wish you a lot of success in your
future work. Mr. Usher will show you out of the courtroom. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Mr. McCloskey, I think that (10)there are some documents to be tendered into evidence by you and by the Defence as well. Please let us hear you. MR. McCLOSKEY: Yes, Mr. President. We have the first of all the stipulations, 890, 891, and 892. And then we have 877, 878, the two July 12 reports; 879, the map. And Ms. Keith tells me we have also -- there's (15)an old intercept from a while back that Bogicevic/Zivanovic intercept which has not been dealt with, but it may be dealt with on the matters which was for that other subject. So I would offer the six exhibits into evidence. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] As regards the intercept (20)Bogicevic/Zivanovic, has it been marked for identification? Does it have a number? MR. McCLOSKEY: It's 884A and B and we have no objection to that intercept going into evidence. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Mr. Visnjic. (25)
MR. VISNJIC:
[Int.] Mr. President, the Defence has no
JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] So, Mr. McCloskey, I don't know whether you wish to reply to the objection which was made by the Defence concerning 877 through 879, and also I don't know whether you wish to state your opinion regarding Defence Exhibit 165. (15) MR. McCLOSKEY: Regarding 877, 878, and 879, that issue has been fairly fully briefed on paper. You have received our response to their motion to exclude it so I don't think anything more need be said on that unless you have any particular questions. As for the new Defence document, D165A, we would like to have a (20)chance to get an official translation of that. We also would like to hear where it came from. Some kind of foundation, I think we have a foundation witness, perhaps that witness can help us, but just some sort of indication that it has some indicia of reliability.
JUDGE WALD: Mr. McCloskey, we've been deluged with paper of late,
(25)so I'm sure it's covered some place in your paper, but remind me, on the
MR. McCLOSKEY: No, the -- they are extremely specific. JUDGE WALD: That was the questioning on the cross-examination of General Krstic or it was Judges' question. It was my question. I've been (10)trying to get you to say that, Mr. McCloskey, but I wanted to make sure. MR. McCLOSKEY: We quoted the exchange between you and General Krstic in our papers. JUDGE WALD: I thought, but I needed to be reassured that was right. (15)
MR. McCLOSKEY: He was very clear that he did not have any
information about prisoners being taken in the 12-17 time frame in
response to your specific questions and that is what we -- when we found
these documents, we realised they were of importance and so we wanted to
bring them into the rebuttal case, and that's what they are for.
(20)The first document is very specific to your question. The second
document is -- provides the identity of one of the units of the VRS that
was doing the -- was in that area that may have been involved in
prisoners, and also additionally rebuts the Defence claim that the Drina
Corps was not in that area involved in this process. That is more of a
(25)general rebutting on the second one, but it -- so it provides context to
JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] In view of the reservations made by Mr. McCloskey, that is the official translation of the document, source (5)of authenticity, is there anything that you wish to add, Mr. Visnjic? MR. VISNJIC: [Int.] Mr. President, as regards the official translation, of course we agree that the Prosecution be given some additional time while waiting for the official translation of the document. As regards the source of the document, I think I have two (10)options. I can inform you about the source of the document now, or during the break I can inform the Prosecution about the source of the document and if they agree with the document, maybe they will withdraw the objection. So we have two possibilities. It's up to my learned colleague (15)Mr. McCloskey to decide, and I will do as he sees it fit. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Mr. McCloskey, in response to what Mr. Visnjic has just told us concerning the authenticity of the document? MR. McCLOSKEY: I think if we can speak during the break, we can (20)probably resolve that issue.
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] Very well. We decide to admit
into evidence exhibits number 890, 891 and 892, that is, the stipulations
of the parties. As regards the document 884A and B and documents 877, 78,
and 79, will be discussed together with other documents that the Chamber
(25)needs to rule upon. And the document 165 will perhaps have to wait until
MR. PETRUSIC: [Int.] Good morning, Your Honours. Good morning, counsel. The Defence is ready to proceed with this phase of the (10)proceedings. We have a witness waiting, and in view of that, I should like to propose that we move into private session briefly because the witness will be requesting protective measures. We have discussed the issue with the counsel from the Prosecution, and they agree as regards the protective measures, that is, the pseudonym and image distortion of the (15)witness.
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] Let us move into private session
so that we can hear about the reasons for this application for protective
measures.
(15) MR. PETRUSIC: [Int.] • Q.: Mr. DG, were you a member of the army of Republika Srpska, and if so, during which period? • A.: I was a member from the 7th of July, 1993, to 1995. I'm not sure of the exact date. (20) • Q.: During the war on the territory of Bosnia-Herzegovina, you were a regular soldier doing your regular military service, were you not? • A.: Yes. • Q.: What training did you have? • A.: I was an encrypter, radio telegraphy, signalsman. (25)
• Q.: In the period, that is to say, at the beginning of July 1995 up
• A.: Yes. • Q.: During that time, did you perform the duties for which you were (5)trained? • A.: Yes. • Q.: May I just ask you to make pauses between my question and your answer. We, of course, speak the same language, but what we say has to be interpreted, so let us try to make greater pauses between question and (10)answer to facilitate the work of the interpreters. Thank you. Witness DG, can you explain to us, please, briefly what your work consisted of, that is to say, your professional training and your work as an encrypter and teleprinter operator. • A.: We would receive telegrams, encrypt them, and decode them. (15) • Q.: Would you explain to us the technique you used, how were telegrams received, how you decoded them, and your role in that work. • A.: A telegram would come from the operative centre to the office of the encrypter. It was placed at a small aperture that existed in the office, and the encrypter would take over the telegram and process it on (20)the teleprinter. After that, he would encode this on a special machine, a machine -- an encryption machine, and once the message has been encrypted, he would hand it over to the teleprinter operator and he would dispatch it further to the addressee where the telegram was intended to go.
• Q.: You're now talking about the premises you worked in, the office
(25)you worked in. Now, I am interested in knowing whether you can do the
• A.: Yes, I can do my work in the field, but you have to have a special (5)vehicle with all the devices in it which is supplied with the antenna in order to be able to establish communication with the station in question. • Q.: From the 5th of July up until the 11th of July, were you at the forward command post of Pribicevac, doing the work you have just described to us, that is to say, working as an encrypter and teleprinter operator? (10) • A.: Yes. • Q.: You performed your work in the vehicle that you have just described to us; is that right? • A.: Yes. • Q.: When did you leave the forward command post of Pribicevac? (15) • A.: We left Pribicevac when the army entered Srebrenica. I don't remember the exact date, but I do know that when the army passed the centre of town and went further on, we received orders from Major Jevdjevic, we packed up our things and went towards Srebrenica. • Q.: Can you tell us what time of the day it was? (20) • A.: It was between 6.30 and 7.30.
• Q.: Let me remind you, Witness DG, the event that you're talking
about, the entry of the army into Srebrenica, and what among the parties
in the trial is not contested is the date, the 11th of July.
Yes, when you spoke about the time of day, 6.30 -- between 6.30
(25)and 7.30, you mean the afternoon, p.m.?
• Q.: Could you describe briefly for us the route you took and what your destination was. • A.: From Pribicevac, that's when we left Pribicevac at that time, as I (5)say, between 6.30 and 7.30 p.m., we came across a downhill section, a steep slope, and the Major ordered us to get out of the vehicle because the slope was so steep that there was the fear that it would turn over, and even the driver had to keep his door open for this eventuality, in case it started turning over, that he could jump out. (10)After that, we reached an asphalt road with sharp bends, and that was our descent towards Srebrenica, down this asphalt road with the sharp bends. • Q.: And then you continued your journey through Srebrenica towards where? (15) • A.: We stopped in Srebrenica. We stopped for three, four, five minutes. We got out of the vehicle. Some of my friends wanted to take a television set because we didn't have a television set in our -- in the room we slept in. But the Major ordered us not to do that and he said that nobody was allowed to take anything except the driver who took up a (20)shovel because we needed a shovel for our vehicle. We didn't have a shovel. The Major also took a potted plant. He took that with him, a pot with flowers, and we went on towards Bratunac in the vehicle.
• Q.: Mr. DG, without going into the details, tell us, please, along
(25)that road to Bratunac, did you pass Potocari?
• Q.: Did you notice anything characteristic in Potocari? • A.: When we passed through Srebrenica. When the doors opened, were opened in Potocari, I saw, I noticed a UN base. And before that, when I (5)opened the door, I saw a mass of people. When I opened the door again at one point, on the right-hand side of the road, I saw the UN base and on the left-hand side, I saw the large UN hangars. Beside that, there was a small stone church where the dome of the church had been destroyed. (10) • Q.: Tell me Mr. DG, when did you arrive in Bratunac? • A.: It was already dark. I don't know exactly, but we -- it started getting dark as we were passing through Srebrenica, which means that it might have been at around 10.00 p.m., half past 9.00 or 10.00 p.m. • Q.: How long did you stay in Bratunac? (15) • A.: I don't know exactly, but it was between half an hour to one hour. • Q.: And where did your route take you after that? • A.: The Major ordered that nobody was to leave the vehicle, and when he returned, we went on towards Vlasenica. (20) • Q.: Tell us, please, at the end of that journey, your destination was Vlasenica, in fact? • A.: Yes. • Q.: When did you arrive in Vlasenica? • A.: I'm not sure, but it was around 12.00. (25)
MR. PETRUSIC:
[Int.] May I now ask the usher to take up
• Q.: Tell me, please, Mr. DG, whether this is your signature on this telegram. • A.: Yes. (5) • Q.: Tell me, please, briefly, what does your handwritten note mean at the bottom of this telegram? • A.: That I received the telegram at 5.35, and that I sent it or handed it over to somebody in the operations centre five minutes later, five minutes after that. (10) JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Mr. Petrusic, could we see on the ELMO the original, please? MR. PETRUSIC: [Int.] Yes, Your Honour. The Defence was just going to suggest that. Could you please place the original of the document that the (15)witness has under the ELMO so that his signature can be seen. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Excuse me, but I think we have a problem of -- involving the protection of the witness. It's not legible, that's true. Yes, fine. MR. PETRUSIC: [Int.] (20) • Q.: So Mr. DG, you received this dispatch at 1715, gave it a number, and then handed it in to the operations centre; is that right? • A.: Yes. MR. PETRUSIC: [Int.] You can remove the document from the ELMO now. (25)
• Q.: Mr. DG, was it your duty to deliver that telegram?
• Q.: So every telegram that you received, it was your duty to deliver it in person? • A.: Yes. (5) MR. PETRUSIC: [Int.] Could I ask the usher to assist me with Exhibit OTP 830 and 831. • Q.: Mr. DG, you have before you Exhibit 831, and on this telegram too do we see your signature? • A.: Yes. (10) MR. PETRUSIC: [Int.] Would you be kind enough to place the original on the ELMO again, please, page two, please, page two of the original. Now would you hand the telegram back to the witness, please, the original. • Q.: Mr. DG, on this telegram, it says that it was received on the 11th (15)of July 1995 at 2350 hours. You said that the forward command post at Pribicevac, to which this telegram was addressed, was left by you between 1830 and 1930 hours. Can you explain how is it then that this time is indicated on this telegram? Before you answer that question, I should like to show you another exhibit, Prosecution Exhibit 830. (20)Could it be given to the witness, please. With both exhibits in mind, could you please answer my question as to how it is possible for this telegram marked as OTP Exhibit 831 to have been received at 2350 hours?
• A.: Upon arrival at Vlasenica, I -- it is my duty to carry my
(25)equipment and documents to the encryption office because they are -- may
• Q.: Let us clear that up a little. You are saying that this telegram with the time indicated 2350 was received by you in Vlasenica? • A.: Yes. (10) • Q.: So this telegram with the time 2350 on it, that is, OTP Exhibit 830A, do you link this telegram to the telegram you have in front of you marked as OTP Exhibit 830 [as interpreted] Will you please look at the stamp on it on page 2. Do you connect these two telegrams together? • A.: Yes, they are one and the same telegram. The only thing being is (15)one is outgoing and the other is incoming. • Q.: So is the outgoing the OTP 830 exhibit? • A.: Yes. MR. PETRUSIC: [Int.] My co-counsel tells me that there is an error in line 17, page 59. It should say 831A instead of 830. (20) • Q.: Mr. DG, could you give me a clear and specific answer, please. We have Exhibit 830 and the stamp on it indicating the time 2250, does that mean that somebody from Vlasenica, the encoder or the teleprinter operator received this telegram from his command? • A.: Yes, but he received it, the encoder received it at 2230. (25)
• Q.: And what about the time 2250, what does that mean?
• Q.: After that time, that is, after 2250, does the teleprinter operator try to deliver it to you? (5) • A.: Probably, because that is his job. • Q.: Yes, please go on. • A.: But because he is unable to get into contact with me then, he put the telegram on the other side of the wall as one that has not been delivered. (10) • Q.: So the moment you arrived in that room, he handed it over to you? • A.: Yes. • Q.: And then you entered this information with the time 2350. • A.: Yes. After which I took it to the operations centre and handed it to the officer on duty. (15) • Q.: Mr. DG, are you quite sure that you received this telegram in Vlasenica at 2350 in the way you have described? • A.: I am.
MR. PETRUSIC:
[Int.] Mr. President, the Defence has no
further questions for this witness, but I would like to briefly draw the
(20)attention of the Chamber to a problem which I assume Mr. Harmon will
comment on. The problem occurred between the Defence and the Prosecution.
In fact, the Defence notified the Prosecution what this witness would be
testifying about, and in this notification, it omitted to mention some of
the facts that the witness has testified to which was due to shortage of
(25)time and discussions that members of the Defence team had between Belgrade
JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Yes, Mr. Harmon.
MR. HARMON: Mr. President, Your Honours, I'm at the Chamber's
disposal. I reviewed this summary, this factual summary. It is
(10)materially different than what the witness has testified to today, and I
feel disadvantaged by virtue of that significant set of differences,
particularly those found in the second paragraph of the summary.
I am at your disposal. My preference would be to cross-examine
this witness after I've had some time to reflect on now what is asserted
(15)to be an accurate statement of the facts, but I'm at your disposal, Your
Honours. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Very well, Mr. Harmon, we will act as follows: We will postpone the cross-examination of this witness (20)for tomorrow. I hope there are no problems for the Defence -- for the witness, I'm sorry. So now is a good time for our lunch break. There's no point in beginning with another witness now, so we will now have our 50-minute lunch break, and we will come back to continue our work after that. (25)
--- Recess taken at 12.56 p.m.
JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Yes, Mr. Petrusic, please proceed. (5) MR. PETRUSIC: [Int.] Thank you, Mr. President. We have in the courtroom before the Trial Chamber Witness DB, who testified on the 6th, 7th, and 8th of November last year. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Witness DB, we're going to refer to you in that way for reasons well known to you. You have already been (10)here to testify. Let me remind you that we consider that you are still under oath because you took the solemn declaration when you first came to testify, so this is a continuation of that testimony, in fact. Having said that, Mr. Petrusic, please proceed.
WITNESS: WITNESS DB
[Resumed] • EXAMINED by Mr. Petrusic: • Q.: Witness DB, after the 12th of July 1995, you were at the forward command post of the Drina Corps, the forward command post of Krivace. During the time you spent at that forward command post, did you see (20)Lieutenant Colonel Popovic at all? • A.: No.
• Q.: Were you aware, did you have any knowledge or did you see Colonel
Beara at the forward command post or perhaps in the region where the
combat -- where combat took place in the period between the 12th of July
(25)and the 2nd of August?
• Q.: You testified in your examination-in-chief that on the 13th of July 1995 at the forward command post at Krivace, General Krstic arrived, as you said, some time in the morning hours before noon or around noon or (5)in the early afternoon. You said you weren't able to remember correctly. Have I quoted you correctly, Witness? MR. HARMON: Mr. President, it would be helpful to me if Mr. Petrusic, when quoting previous testimony, could direct me to the page in the examination so I can check the examination and the answer. (10) MR. PETRUSIC: [Int.] I withdraw the question. • Q.: Witness DB, do you know when General Krstic arrived at the Krivace forward command post, let me put it that way? JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Mr. Petrusic, but there was the general question, the general issue. So please, when you quote somebody's (15)testimony, could you please give us the page of the transcript so that the Prosecution can refer to it. MR. PETRUSIC: [Int.] Yes, Your Honour. I accept your proposal and the objections made by the Prosecution and I'll do my best. • Q.: Witness DB, do you know when General Krstic arrived at the Krivace (20)command post, to repeat my question? • A.: General Krstic arrived at the Krivace forward command post on the 13th of July, but I don't know whether it was exactly before noon or in the afternoon. I don't remember the time exactly but I do know that it was that particular date. (25)
• Q.: From the 13th of July up until the 2nd of August, did General
• A.: Yes. • Q.: During that time, did General Krstic tour the units that were engaged in combat operations? (5) • A.: Yes. • Q.: Do you happen to know where General Krstic spent the night, spent his nights during that time period? • A.: General Krstic spent the night in the nearby village, a village several kilometres away from the forward command post. He was staying (10)with his wife's family. • Q.: What was the communication means that General Krstic used during the time he spent at the Krivace forward command post? • A.: During his stay at the Krivace forward command post, for commanding subordinate units engaged in the Zepa operation, General Krstic (15)used a radio device, the RU 2/2K with encryption protection. • Q.: Was that the device that he used to communicate with the subordinate units who were engaged in combat at Zepa? • A.: Yes. • Q.: Witness DB, the subordinate commanding officers, how did they (20)address General Krstic, his subordinates, after his arrival at the Krivace forward command post? What was their form of address to him? • A.: We all addressed him according to the rules and regulations as "General, sir." • Q.: Did anybody address him as "Commander"? (25)
• A.: No.
• A.: During that period, General Krstic had several drivers. One of them was his main driver; the other drivers accompanied the main driver. His main driver was a soldier, Dalibor Krstic, Private Dalibor Krstic. (10) • Q.: That main driver, Dalibor Krstic, was he there from the 11th to -- 5th to the 11th, through that entire time, was he at the Pribicevac forward command post all the time during that time period? • A.: As far as I remember, he was there throughout with General Krstic. I base that on the fact, my recollections on the fact that General Krstic (15)in that period of time, because of his leg injury, had two or three times a day to bandage his wound. That is to say, he would have to care for his injured leg, and he was helped in doing that exclusively by his driver, Dalibor Krstic. • Q.: To the best of your recollection, at the Krivace forward command (20)post, when did the units start arriving and the commanding officers of those units who were to engage in combat at Zepa? When did they start to arrive?
• A.: In the region of the forward command post of Krivace at Zepa,
already on the 12th of July, the 5th Podrinje Infantry Brigade had already
(25)arrived, and it was commanded by Lieutenant Colonel Furtula. And the
• Q.: At the forward command post -- or let me ask you this: Do you (5)know the commanding officer whose name was Miso Pelemis? • A.: Yes, I do know him. • Q.: At the forward command post at Pribicevac between the 5th to the 11th, did you happen to see that particular commanding officer? • A.: I did not see him. (10) • Q.: Did General Krstic use a vehicle with a radio telephone; that is to say, in the vehicle used by General Krstic, was there a radio telephone installed in the vehicle? • A.: No. That particular device was a device that the Corps Commander's vehicle had, and I know that as a signalsman myself it was a (15)problem, a great problem for me how I could reach General Krstic while he was resting for the night, because during that period of time he didn't take a signalsman with a mobile device with him, nor was there any other device in his car of that kind. • Q.: In the night between the 11th and 12th of July after your arrival (20)in Bratunac, did you on that occasion leave a signalsman behind with a device as an escort to General Krstic? • A.: Yes. • Q.: That particular device, who was General Krstic able to communicate with using that particular device? (25)
• A.: It was a mobile device within the network of command to the
• Q.: Witness DB, when did you, yourself, arrive at the Krivace forward (5)command post? • A.: I arrived at the Krivace forward command post on the 12th of July early in the afternoon, immediately after noon, and I think it was at about 2.00 p.m. or thereabouts. • Q.: When you arrived at Krivace, how much time did you need to make (10)the device operational, the device which we call the teleprinter? • A.: Not more than 15 minutes. MR. PETRUSIC: [Int.] Mr. President, the Defence has no further questions for this witness. We have completed our examination. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Thank you very much, (15)Mr. Petrusic. Mr. Harmon, your witness. MR. HARMON: Thank you very much, Mr. President, Your Honours. • CROSS-EXAMINED by Mr. Harmon:
• Q.: Witness DB, good afternoon. I didn't think we'd be seeing each
(20)other so soon. Welcome back to The Hague.
Witness, the first area you were examined by my colleague, you
were asked the question whether you saw Lieutenant Colonel Popovic and
Colonel Beara at the forward command post in Krivace, and your answer was
that you did not see either one of them at the forward command post in
(25)Pribicevac. Did I understand your testimony correctly?
• Q.: Your testimony is not -- that they weren't in the Zepa area of responsibility from the 12th of July until the 2nd of August, is it? • A.: As far as I remember, the lawyer, Mr. Petrusic, asked me the (5)following question, he asked whether I had seen them during my stay at the Krivace forward command post and Godjenje forward command post in the area of combat operations during the Zepa operation, and I said no. • Q.: But your testimony to this Trial Chamber is not that these people weren't in the area where the Zepa operation was taking place, but that (10)you personally didn't see them at the forward command post in Krivace; is that correct? • A.: I can testify that I did not see them at the forward command post in the Zepa region and that I did not hear that they were anywhere in the combat operation zone Zepa. So neither did I see them personally at the (15)forward command post where I was, nor did I hear from anybody that they were somewhere in the zone where the combat operations were. • Q.: Now, Witness DB, during your previous examination, you testified that while you were in Zepa, a number of days after the operation started, you went back to your quarters in Vlasenica to the headquarters and you (20)took a shower and a bath. Do you remember that testimony? • A.: Yes. I returned for one night in the -- I came late at night and left early in the morning to return to the forward command post.
• Q.: Is it possible, Witness DB, that in your absence, Lieutenant
Colonel Popovic and/or Colonel Beara could have gone down to the Zepa area
(25)and been at the forward command post or within the area of responsibility
• A.: Theoretically, that is possible, but I left the forward command post in the evening hours when all activities and combat operations were over for the day and returned in the early hours of the morning the (5)following day. Now, if they were there in that period, I would have known that from my signalsman and I have no information to that effect. • Q.: Now, in addition to leaving the forward command post to go to take a bath up in Vlasenica, you also left the forward command post in the Zepa area to go visit your parents, didn't you? (10) • A.: Yes. That was towards the end of July, about the 25th, I would say. That is to say from the 25th to the 30th, and that was one afternoon. MR. HARMON: Where did -- let me go into private session for just a moment, please. (15)
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] Yes, let us move into private
session for a few moments.
JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] We're in open session, (10)Mr. Harmon. MR. HARMON: • Q.: How long a period of time did you stay at your parents'? • A.: About two hours. • Q.: How long did it take you to get to your parents'? (15) • A.: About 45 minutes, between 45 minutes and one hour. • Q.: During that visit to your parents, did you stop any other place or did you go directly to your parents and return back to your post directly from your parents' house? • A.: I think I went straight back to the forward command post. (20) • Q.: Now, Witness DB, is it possible that, in your absence, Colonel Beara came either to the forward command post or came to the Zepa area where combat operations and negotiations were being conducted? • A.: Theoretically, that is possible.
• Q.: Does that theoretical possibility also refer to Lieutenant Colonel
(25)Popovic either coming to the forward command post or to the Zepa operation
• A.: Well, probably, but let me state once again, I have no knowledge about that in my absence because my signalsman would certainly have informed me about that, and then I wouldn't have testified the way I did, (5)the way I am testifying, if that had been the case. • Q.: Now, let's focus on your duties while you were at the forward command post, Witness DB. In fact, you were supposed to stay in and around the immediate area of the communications vehicle; is that correct? • A.: That was my basic task. (10) • Q.: And in fact, you weren't supposed to leave that area in and around the communications centre of the forward command post, were you? • A.: If I went, I went with the permission of my superior. • Q.: How many times during the Zepa operation, Witness DB, did you leave the forward command post area of the communications vehicle? Recall (15)as best you can. You've already described two events: taking a bath in Vlasenica, visiting your parents. How many other times did you leave the immediate area of the forward command post during the whole Zepa operation? • A.: According to my recollections, those were the only two times that (20)I left for some considerable length of time. For the most part, I was -- that is to say, for the rest of the time I was within the region of the forward command post. • Q.: Now, General Krstic left the area of the forward command post on a number of occasions, didn't he? (25)
• A.: Yes. General Krstic, according to my knowledge, would go from
• Q.: And you didn't accompany him when he went on those journeys from (5)the forward command post, did you? • A.: No, I didn't, but a signalsman, a soldier, would always go with him with a mobile device. • Q.: And you don't know who he met when he was away from the forward command post, do you? (10) • A.: I don't know. My information is that he went to the commanding officers immediately subordinate in the area of the responsibility, and he would call me many times and tell me to convey a request of some kind with respect to more ammunition or some other materiel or logistics on another line. (15) • Q.: Witness, I am going to read you some testimony of a witness who testified in open session with a pseudonym, referring to Witness DC. MR. HARMON: And perhaps for the sake of this witness I could identify DC in private session so he knows who DC is. I think it's appropriate, given his testimony. (20)
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] Yes, that would be a good idea.
Let us move into private session for a few moments.
MR. HARMON: • Q.: Now, Witness DB, I'm going to read you the testimony of Witness DC. This was open session testimony. MR. HARMON: And counsel, for your convenience, I'm referring to (15)page 7450, lines 4 through 12. • Q.: This was a question put to Witness DC by my colleague, Mr. Petrusic. Tell us, please, among the command staff of your Superior Command, did you see any of them at Zepa? (20) • A.: I would see General Krstic most often. I also saw General Ratko Mladic. I saw some other senior officers from the Main Staff, as it was called then. Do I need to enumerate the names? MR. PETRUSIC: Yes, please, tell us who you saw. (25)
• A.: I saw Colonel Beara, Tolimir, officers from the Drina
(5) • Q.: Did you see Colonel Popovic in Srebrenica on the 11th of July? • A.: I can't really say. I saw him somewhere. I did see him somewhere, whether it was Srebrenica or Zepa. • Q.: Okay. Let's move on a little bit in your testimony and (10)ask you, you testified on direct examination about who you saw in Zepa, and in response to my colleague's question, you said you saw both General Krstic, General Mladic, and the Main Staff officers, including General Tolimir, Beara, and others? • A.: Yes, yes. (15) • Q.: Is that correct? • A.: Yes. • Q.: Where did you see them in Zepa? Where was it that you saw them? • A.: I saw them at the forward command post of Krivace. (20) • Q.: Approximately when did you see Colonel Beara at the forward command post in Krivace?
• A.: In the course of the operation, that was for sure, but I
saw him several times. I think Beara or Tolimir, that they
were negotiating with the Muslims. I don't know them very
(25)well, but I just saw them there.
• A.: He was present. I think he was involved in the (10)negotiations, and he was also chief of security. I won't read the rest of the answer. I stopped at line 6. Now, let me turn to the last set of questions on this topic, Witness DB. This is found at page 7513, lines 17 through 25. Judge Wald asked Witness DC in open session: (15)Witness DC, I have only two questions. Do you remember the date or approximately the time that Beara was in Zepa? I know you were there sometime from the 13th of July till the 2nd of August, I think. Can you place the time that he was there within that framework? (20) • A.: Within that framework, the 13th, 14th, I didn't see him, but I think on the 15th onwards. JUDGE WALD: So you saw him several times from the 15th on when he was involved in negotiations?
• A.: Yes, yes.
(25)Now, Witness DB, do you have any reason to believe that Witness DC
• A.: Witness DC was one of the officers in one
[redacted]
• A.: I can't say -- I can't dispute
[redacted] testimony. All I can do is
maintain and stand behind my own testimony and everything else that I have
(5)just said. And my dilemma is -- the question is how
[redacted] • Q.: You also said [redacted] Did you see [redacted] there? (10) • A.: I didn't see [redacted] at the forward command post of the Drina Corps at Krivace. [redacted] could have been at the forward command post of [redacted] own brigade, which was close by, maybe about a kilometre or a kilometre and a half away from the village of Godjenje where we had a second forward command post. (15) • Q.: Witness DB, did you know that General Tolimir was in the area of the Zepa operations? • A.: I think he was in the Zepa operation area and that he was at the location where the negotiations were going on. • Q.: Did you see him? (20) • A.: No, I didn't see him. I saw him on some photographs. • Q.: Now, was Miso Pelemis, who you've testified about, who you say you knew, was he in the Zepa area of responsibility? • A.: No. I think that he wasn't at all in the Zepa area, neither he or his units. (25)
MR. HARMON: Now, can I have the witness please shown OTP Exhibit
• Q.: Witness, take a moment to familiarise yourself with this article, if you would, please. There's a B/C/S version that's attached. Are you familiar, Witness DB, with the publication Drinski? (5) • A.: Yes. • Q.: Does this appear to be an article from the Drinski magazine? • A.: That is what it appears to be. • Q.: What is the Drinski magazine, would you tell the Judges, please? • A.: Do I need to read the whole article? I haven't had time to read (10)it all. • Q.: No. I'm going to direct your attention to a couple items in this article. Could you tell the Judges what the Drinski magazine is. • A.: Drinski was a wartime magazine of the Zvornik Brigade which, in its editorial policies and programmes, to a good extent ignored the (15)wartime reality of the Drina Corps. • Q.: Now, Witness, why don't you finish reading the article. It's not a very long article and if you -- and when you've finished that, just let me know and I'm going to ask you some questions about this article. • A.: That was what I was asking you if I could do. Do I need to read (20)the article on the second page? • Q.: Well, I want you to be comfortable with the contents of this article.
MR. HARMON: While the witness is reading that, if the usher could
please prepare OTP Exhibit 28, Tab 15, please. If not, I have a copy that
(25)I could submit to the witness if it's not readily available. We can make
• Q.: Have you finished reading that article, Witness? • A.: Yes, and I apologise. It was rather difficult because the copy machine didn't copy the beginning of each word properly and clearly, so I had to use my common sense to guess what the words actually are. (10) • Q.: I understand. And it's my responsibility for furnishing you with a better copy. I apologise for that. MR. HARMON: Now, could this exhibit be placed on the ELMO, Mr. Usher? This is a copy of 28/17, which is found in Prosecutor's Exhibit 28. If you place that on the ELMO. (15) • Q.: Witness, this is an exhibit. It has been identified, and the people in this exhibit have been identified by previous witnesses, and this is a still image from a video that is also in evidence. MR. HARMON: The video is, for Your Honours' -- for the record, Prosecutor's Exhibit 145 bis. (20) • Q.: Now, do you recognise the man on the far right-hand side of that particular still image? • A.: The picture is not clear and I'm not quite sure, but judging by the profile, it could be Miso Pelemis, Lieutenant Miso Pelemis.
MR. HARMON: Now, leaving that exhibit right where it is,
(25)Mr. Usher, could you take the article that is in front of the witness and
• Q.: Now, Witness, do you see in the top picture of Prosecutor's Exhibit 881 the third man from the left, wearing a dark, darker-coloured outfit, who has a profile. Do you see that man I'm referring to? (10) • A.: Yes. • Q.: Can you identify that man? • A.: You probably would like me to say that they are one and the same person, but really, the photographs are so poor in quality that I can't say that, though the profiles are similar, I must say. (15) • Q.: Let me pass to you, Witness DB, the original version of this magazine, and I'm going to ask you to study the same image, and I want your opinion on whether the individual, the two individuals are the same. MR. HARMON: Show it to the witness, please. • A.: This picture is not much better, either. I must admit that these (20)two profiles do look alike at first glance, but I wouldn't have the courage to ascertain that they were one and the same person with any certainty.
MR. HARMON: Your Honour, and for counsels' benefit, I have the
original magazine, and if Your Honours would like to inspect it or counsel
(25)would like to inspect it, I can circulate that as well.
MR. HARMON: Would you pass that up to the Judges so they can look at it. (5) • Q.: Witness DB, while we're on the topic of Miso Pelemis, you said you didn't see him at the forward command post in Pribicevac, but in fact, General Krstic on occasion could order Miso Pelemis to perform certain functions and tasks, isn't that correct?
• A.: I know - and that is what I testified the last time, I gave this
(10)same statement to the investigator, your investigator in April last year -
I know that a unit of which Lieutenant Pelemis was the commander appeared
somewhere in the area of combat operations over Srebrenica several days
after those operations had started because as I was passing by not far
from the Pribicevac forward command post, I saw their signalsman. And
(15)that prompted me, because I knew that they were not in the communications
plan, so I was thinking forward as to how I would establish communications
with them if they needed to hear a command from General Krstic, because we
had a protected command line to subordinate units and that was the only
line or connection that I recognised.
(20)So I sought to achieve that all units under the command of General
Krstic should have a device, a coded device to be within the command
network. However, their signalsman explained to me that they didn't need
that device, and he continued along his way towards Srebrenica, probably
where his unit was.
(25)In view of the fact that this was a diversionary detachment of the
• Q.: Well, General Krstic knew Miso Pelemis, didn't he? • A.: I assume he did. • Q.: Just so the record is perfectly clear, Prosecution Exhibit 881, (10)which is the article that you took a look at, is an article from Drinski magazine with a date of -- that the author gives to the text of the 24th of July 1995. This article -- take it, if you'd like to take a look at the original. This article deals with Zepa, doesn't it, and the operation in Zepa? (15) • A.: Yes. The photograph could be from a much earlier period, from another period. Because in the footnote, it says Officer Svetozar Andric with associates. It doesn't indicate that it is in the operation for Zepa or anything like that. Secondly, it seems to me that Colonel Svetozar Andric had a black (20)T-shirt on him, and here he is wearing a regular uniform. So this photograph may not have been taken from Zepa. It may have been taken out of the archives by the journalist as journalists are wont to do. • Q.: And Svetozar Andric participated in the Zepa operation, didn't he? • A.: Yes. (25)
• Q.: Last point of interest in this particular article is on the last
• A.: Yes, that is what the journalist wrote here. • Q.: All right. Now, let's move on to again staying with the topic of (5)Miso Pelemis. If the witness could please be shown Prosecution Exhibit 882. Witness, if you would turn over to the B/C/S version and review that. This, for your information, was an intercepted radio communication which has been dated the 25th of June 1995. Do you see the B/C/S version (10)and could you read that, please? MR. HARMON: Mr. Usher, could you put the English version on the ELMO, please. • Q.: Have you had a chance to review that intercepted communication, Witness DB? (15) • A.: Just a moment, please. Yes, I've managed to read it. • Q.: Now, the two correspondents in this intercepted communication are Popovic and General Krstic and midway down through this intercepted communication, I will read what is contained in it. Krstic -- JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Yes, Mr. Visnjic. (20) MR. VISNJIC: [Int.] Mr. President, I have reviewed this intercept briefly with my colleague, Mr. Petrusic. Could the Prosecutor explain briefly the purpose of showing him this conversation, because I don't think the witness has discussed the relationship between General Krstic and Pelemis and so on. So could Mr. Harmon explain, please. (25)
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] Mr. Harmon.
(5) JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Continue, please, Mr. Harmon. MR. HARMON:
• Q.: I will read to you, Witness DB, what is said in this intercept and
I'll start -- I'm starting midway through the intercept.
Krstic: Have Miso Pelemis come over here with his unit as
(10)soon as possible.
Popovic: Yes, sir.
Krstic: So have him gather them urgently. Tell his lad that
I asked him, because it's really much needed. We have big
problems.
(15)Popovic: Yes, sir.
Krstic: Do you understand?
Popovic: Yes, sir.
Now, Witness DB, there has been testimony in these proceedings,
you first of all testified that you saw the 10th Sabotage Detachment
(20)communications officer at the forward command post at Pribicevac on the
9th of July and that you had a conversation with him. There has been the
testimony of Drazen Erdemovic, who testified in public session, that his
commander, during the Srebrenica operation, was Miso Pelemis. There has
been video footage introduced in this trial, Prosecution Exhibit 145 bis,
(25)showing Miso Pelemis and General Mladic on the 11th of July 1995 in
• A.: Mr. Prosecutor, I think that I have given you an exhaustive answer to that question. (10) • Q.: Well -- • A.: A detailed answer. • Q.: Could I have another answer; it won't be exhaustive. Could I have a yes or no to the question that I have asked you. Do you believe that Miso Pelemis was in the Srebrenica area of responsibility on -- during the (15)Srebrenica operation? JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Yes, Mr. Petrusic. MR. PETRUSIC: [Int.] Mr. President, the Defence objects because we feel that the Prosecutor can ask the witness whether the Witness DB saw or has any knowledge or hearsay knowledge that Miso Pelemis (20)was in Srebrenica but not in the way the question has been put to the witness.
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] Yes, Mr. Petrusic. I think that
Mr. Harmon, having given a series of information to the witness, and as
the witness was in the area, he is asking whether the witness believes
(25)what the Prosecutor is asking him. I think it's a legitimate question and
MR. HARMON: • Q.: Witness DB, can you answer my question or would you like me to repeat it? (5) • A.: If I remember your question correctly, allow me to repeat my answer that I gave half an hour ago. I personally, at the Pribicevac forward command post, did not see Miso Pelemis. But from his signalsman and the shots that I saw here from Srebrenica on the 11th, I learnt that Miso Pelemis and his unit were there, but I personally did not see him. (10)Nor did we - and I mean the command of the Drina Corps - did we have direct contact with Miso Pelemis and his unit. • Q.: Do you believe that Miso Pelemis, based on the information that I discussed with you, the article that I've shown you from the Drinski magazine, do you believe that Miso Pelemis participated in and was present (15)in the Zepa area of responsibility during the Zepa operation? • A.: First of all, there is something I have to tell you. The document and the exhibit that you have shown me and which is in front of me now, I have to comment on it because I am a professional, and I have graduated from the highest military schools with respect to ways in which to collect (20)material evidence of this kind, that is, intercepted communications. • Q.: Witness DB, you can comment on the evidence in just a moment. The question I asked you is, do you believe that Miso Pelemis was present in the Zepa area of responsibility during the Zepa operation?
• A.: I know that I did not see his signalsman or Miso Pelemis, nor do I
(25)have any knowledge that Miso Pelemis himself or his unit were at Zepa.
(5) MR. HARMON: Mr. President, I see it's 3.00. Are we going -- is this an appropriate time to break? JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] How much more time do you need, Mr. Harmon? MR. HARMON: Probably 15 more minutes. (10) JUDGE RODRIGUES: Fifty? MR. HARMON: Fifteen, one five.
JUDGE RODRIGUES: Fifteen.
[Int.] The idea was to finish
with this witness today, but just a moment, please. I shall confer with
my colleagues. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Mr. Petrusic, is it possible for you to envisage now how much time you need for your additional questions? MR. PETRUSIC: [Int.] That depends on the future questions from the Prosecution. I think we could be able to finish today. (20) JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] So let's try to finish with this witness today. So Mr. Harmon, please be as economical as you can with the time. MR. HARMON:
• Q.: Witness, let me turn to another subject, which is related to your
(25)testimony, as to when you saw General Krstic at the forward command post
• A.: Well, I remember it in general terms. I probably don't remember it in all its details, but I remember what I said. (5) • Q.: And in that interview, Mr. -- do you remember Jean-Rene Ruez, the investigator, the French investigator, asking you questions? • A.: Yes. • Q.: He asked you the following question: "Okay. So do you remember the 13th of July, at what moment of the day --" (10) JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Yes, Mr. Visnjic. I apologise, Mr. Harmon. MR. VISNJIC: [Int.] Mr. President, the Defence has not got the interview. Mr. Harmon is quoting a document. Would he please either rephrase the question or provide us with a copy of the text that he (15)is quoting from and reading into the transcript. MR. HARMON: I will be glad to. I hadn't finished phrasing the question before I was interrupted, but I was going to put the question then to the witness if he remembered the question and he gave that answer. So if I could be permitted, Mr. President, to read the question, I will (20)then ask the question of the witness. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Okay. And afterwards we'll see. We'll hear from Mr. Visnjic. MR. HARMON:
• Q.: Witness DB, during the interview -- I'm going to read from the
(25)transcript of the interview:
• A.: No, I can't. He had the handover of duties in Drina Corps, so it was probably late in the evening, but I know for (5)sure he wasn't there on the 12th, but he was there when the attack was launched. Witness DB, do you remember being asked that question and do you remember giving that answer? • A.: Yes. (10) • Q.: All right. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Mr. Visnjic, I assume you have no objection at this point in view of what the witness said. MR. VISNJIC: [Int.] No, Mr. President. But as a matter of principle, I would like to object to this method of asking questions. (15)We feel that if Mr. Harmon is going to quote from a document, we ought to have the document too, and so should the witness to put himself into the context of what he is being asked, because we cannot assess the witness's answer because we can't assess what is said in the transcript. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Mr. Harmon, your reply. (20) MR. HARMON: Yes, the witness remembers the question and remembers the answer accurately. I believe that's sufficient. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Very well. Please proceed.
MR. HARMON: Now, could I have the witness then shown Prosecutor's
Exhibit 364/1, 13 July 1995, tab 10. It's a document that is under seal,
(25)and if it's not readily available, I have a copy that I can make available
JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Yes, to speed matters up. (5) MR. HARMON: This is the B/C/S version. If you could show that to the witness, please. It's under seal. • Q.: Please, if you'd read that intercepted communication. I'm referring to the bottom intercepted communication, Witness DB, the one that is intercepted off of the frequency 785.000. You can find it at the (10)lower third of the page. Do you see that, channel 6, 1822 hours? • A.: And what is the date? • Q.: The date of this is the 13th of July. The time of this intercept is 1822 hours. MR. HARMON: I don't know if Your Honours have this intercepted (15)communication before Your Honours. It's difficult to examine without this, but I could read this into the record. It's under seal only because there are some initials that appear at the bottom. Can I read this into the record while the witness is reading this? JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Yes, go ahead. (20) MR. HARMON: This is 785.000, I say this is the frequency, channel 6, 1822 hours. Participants, X - telephone switchboard (woman) (C.:) He is out. (X.:) What about Colonel Lazic? (C.:) He is in the field. (25)
(X.:) Is Lazic there?
(X.:) Is Krstic there? (C.:) He is outside in front of the building. (X.:) Tell him to come. The men can't wait. Night is falling. (5)They have to work. The operation is at stake. (C.:) He is here with General Mladic. (X.:) Will you please, if it is possible, so that these men don't have to wait/? Tell them to/call on phone number 889-110. We are on (line?). (10) (C.:) Okay. (X.:) Is it necessary to dial the area code 071? (C.:) I know. (X.:) Please. Take care. Thank you very much. (C.:) You're welcome. Have a nice day. (15) • Q.: Witness DB, have you a chance to review this intercepted communication from the 13th of July at 1822 hours? • A.: Yes. • Q.: Was General Mladic at the forward command post on the 13th of July at 1822 hours? (20) • A.: I don't think he was. • Q.: And what about Colonel Lazic? • A.: No. • Q.: Who is Colonel Lazic? • A.: Colonel Lazic was an operations man in the Drina Corps. (25)
• Q.: And where was Colonel Lazic stationed?
• Q.: Where was he normally stationed? • A.: In what period? • Q.: 13th of July, 1995? (5) • A.: I really don't know where he was exactly because at the time I had a lot of personal jobs -- I had a lot of jobs to attend to myself, and there was a lot of combat activity as well. • Q.: Do you know where General Mladic was on the 13th of July at 1822 hours in the evening? (10) • A.: I don't know. At the time, I was at the Krivace forward command post. • Q.: All right. We can conclude with this document. • A.: May I something, Mr. Prosecutor? May I be allowed to say something? (15) • Q.: Yes. I am trying to get through this examination quickly. You will have an opportunity with Mr. Petrusic asking you questions but, please, if you have a comment about this document, please proceed.
• A.: I can comment this document only on the assumption that it is
correct and authentic, on that assumption alone. Because I was in a
(20)position to look through some other documents where two intercepting
groups from different positions were intercepting and recording certain
conversations and there was so many differences and mistakes and things
that were not clear in them that, for example, because of poor audibility
and because of the people that were doing the intercepting because they
(25)were poorly trained and not professional enough, I remember one of them
• Q.: Thank you. Now, Witness, you said that you left the forward command post on the 12th of July -- I'm sorry, the evening of the -- you left the forward (15)command post on the 12th of July -- I'm sorry, the 11th of July, the evening of the 11th of July. Now, when you packed up your radio communications van, did you tell the headquarters at the Vlasenica that you were packing up and were going to be off of the communications net? • A.: I don't remember. I don't remember exactly. I don't remember (20)that detail whether I called them and told them or whether I just packed up and left. I don't remember that particular detail. • Q.: Well, let's stay with military logic for a moment, Witness DB. The communications centre at the forward command post in Pribicevac was the central, critical communications post on the net; isn't that correct? (25)
• A.: Yes. That was an important link in the command chain.
(5) • A.: You're right from the theoretical standpoint. But from Pribicevac to the first major communications point network in Bratunac, I needed about an hour, a maximum of an hour so that as the combat positions changed and the units and the command moved forward, it was essential that a soldier carrying a mobile device go with General Krstic and that he (10)command the units at Srebrenica. So that was the main goal, the main objective and that line remained continuous. But my move to Bratunac and this interruption of one hour at that particular point in time, it was not serious, a serious break in communications because we planned that communications centres should (15)move around. Whether I told Vlasenica or not that we would be moving, I really can't say now. • Q.: Well, you were out of communications links for about four hours, by my calculation, Witness DB. What do you think you did? Did you tell Vlasenica headquarters that you were going out of the net for about four (20)hours? What do you recall?
• A.: My main job was that I was near to General Zivanovic and near to
General Krstic. That was the main thing for me. And it was up to them.
They decided everything and they were in command. So me and my
connections were there to serve them, whereas the Vlasenica did not
(25)interest me any more. There was nobody there in Vlasenica to make key
• Q.: What was your normal practice when you moved, when you packed up a forward communications centre and moved? Was your normal practice to inform the headquarters that you were doing that? • A.: Those headquarters, as I said, those -- the decision-makers in the (10)Krivaja 95 operation were there close by me in the area of responsibility and the broader region of Srebrenica. So the reason why I had come to Srebrenica which was to help the command of the Srebrenica operation, that line was not interrupted and that was what was important for me. And let me say again, perhaps I did call Vlasenica purely for (15)technical reasons as a go-between and maybe I didn't. I don't remember. I don't remember that particular detail. • Q.: All right. My question was something different. What was your normal practice when you pulled up a forward command post communications centre and left and went off the line? Did you normally contact the (20)headquarters and tell them that you were now no -- you were blacked out, you were no longer capable of being communicated with?
• A.: I say again, if the command, if all those in command of the
Srebrenica operation, or rather Krivaja 95, had they been in Vlasenica,
then it would have certainly been my job to call them. That is the rule.
(25)But as I say, they were all in the Srebrenica region.
(5) • A.: No, you said that, Mr. Prosecutor. I am trying to explain to you the practice and what we do in the field, practical steps, wartime steps. So my command was in the broader region of Srebrenica which meant that both General Krstic and General Zivanovic were there. And they, for me, are the command, the commanding officers. And they are the ones requiring (10)those lines. Vlasenica, at that point in time, was just a go-between for other communication lines. • Q.: We'll move on to a different topic. Who were the other drivers for General Krstic? You mentioned one; could you tell me who the others were? (15) • A.: At that point in time, of General Krstic's drivers, I remember that there was Dalibor Tosic who, later on, was given another assignment during the operation on Zepa and he was seriously wounded so I link these events up. There was another driver from Vlasenica and his name was Bjelanovic. He came later on, but during those operations, he was there. (20)
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] Mr. Harmon, I apologise for
interrupting. I know that you did your best to wind up but I think we
have reached our limits and we can't overstep that limit. Let me
therefore propose that we hear the end of this testimony tomorrow.
Witness DB, you will have to come back tomorrow because I'm afraid
(25)we cannot continue now. So we're going to adjourn for the day and we
MR. HARMON: I apologise I couldn't finish as fast as I wanted (5)but, Your Honour, I have one question and I realise there is a rule about contact with witnesses but I notice that there has been a witness, an expert witness who has been in the audience during the course of DB's testimony, and there is a no-contact rule with this in -- that has been in practice. I know my colleagues from the Defence intend to abide by that (10)but I would ask that the witness who has been in the audience also be admonished not to have contact with this witness overnight. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] The witness in the public gallery will be next to testify; is that right, Mr. Harmon? Is that the basis for what you are saying? (15) MR. HARMON: Yes. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Mr. Visnjic or Mr. Petrusic, would you like to respond? Mr. Visnjic. MR. VISNJIC: [Int.] Mr. President, the proposal is in order and we, of course, did intend to adhere to that rule and the (20)witnesses are not located -- have not -- do not have the same accommodation.
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] Very well, Mr. Visnjic. We have
full confidence in you and we hope that everything will develop properly
and in order and we adjourn the meeting until tomorrow morning. Thank
(25)you.
|
