|
Content
/ Colormap • Page 4232 • {1/93} (1)Tuesday, 20 June 2000 [Open session] [The witness entered court]
--- Upon commencing at 9.38 a.m. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Good morning, technical booth, the interpreters. Good morning, Mr. Harmon, Mr. Cayley. Good morning, Mr. Petrusic, Mr. Visnjic. Good morning, General Krstic. (10)Good morning, Witness. Are you feeling rested today? Fine. As you know, today you're going to answer questions which Mr. Petrusic is going to put to you. I would like to remind you that you are still testifying under oath. Mr. Petrusic, you have the floor. (15)
WITNESS: WITNESS V
[Resumed] MR. PETRUSIC: [Int.] Good morning, Your Honours, my learned friends from the Prosecution. Good morning, Witness V. • CROSS-EXAMINED by Mr. Petrusic: (20) • Q.: Witness V, did you acquire your initial skills in radio telegraphy in the army of the former Yugoslavia? • A.: I wouldn't agree with that. I'm not a telegraphist. • Q.: Was your initial knowledge about electronic surveillance and radio interception acquired in the army of the former JNA? (25)
• A.: No, I wouldn't agree with that. I was a signalman in the army.
• A.: No. • Q.: Witness V, I have no intention of showing you a statement that you (5)gave to the Prosecution, but can you remember saying, on the 6th and 12th of May, 1999, when you were interviewed, that you were engaged in those activities? • A.: I was a signalman in the JNA, and I engaged in these activities only in the army of Bosnia-Herzegovina. (10) • Q.: How long did your training last regarding communication systems in the JNA? • A.: Six months. • Q.: Was the vocational training in communications -- did that take place throughout those six months? (15) • A.: No. The first three months were devoted to general training, and the second three months to more specialist training. • Q.: When you joined the army of Bosnia-Herzegovina, you engaged in electronic reconnaissance and radio interception? • A.: Yes. (20) • Q.: Can you tell us, at Okresanica, which devices did you use? • A.: They were amateur radio devices which were refurbished to be adjusted to the needs we had. • Q.: Could you tell us whether there was any difference between the equipment and the devices? (25)
• A.: Could you repeat that question?
• A.: There was a difference. As I have already told you, those were amateur devices that were adjusted to our needs. (5) • Q.: In order to monitor a conversation, what was essential in terms of equipment? • A.: Your Honours, I'd rather not answer that question. • Q.: Is that a military secret? • A.: Well, let us call it that. (10) • Q.: Can you be more specific without saying -- without the qualification of uncertainty? • A.: Yes, it is. • Q.: If the army you belonged to supplied photographs of that equipment, Exhibit 298 and 299, does that mean that you are still under (15)the obligation to keep this as a military secret? • A.: I'd rather not talk about that. • Q.: Is that your will? MR. CAYLEY: Mr. President, if I could interrupt Mr. Petrusic, and could I ask for a closed session? (20) JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Yes. Mr. Petrusic, do you agree we're going to go into closed session or, rather, private session? MR. CAYLEY: I can explain myself once we're in closed session, Your Honour. THE INTERPRETER: Closed session, sorry. (25)
THE REGISTRAR: We're in private session now.
THE REGISTRAR: We are in open session now. (10) JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Thank you, Madam Registrar. Mr. Petrusic, you may continue. MR. PETRUSIC: [Int.] • Q.: When you were monitoring a "conversation," let me put that in quotation marks, you took it down on a piece of paper. (15) • A.: Some of the conversations. If there was a shortage of notebooks, then this would be taken down on pieces of paper which would later be bound together. But most of those were lost. • Q.: Those that were not lost, what did you do with them? • A.: They were handed over to the superior command ad acta. (20) • Q.: Were they forwarded by means of a computer that was installed there? • A.: Written reports were sent by computer and the notebooks that were filled in completely would be forwarded by hand.
• Q.: Witness V, I should like to use an example and ask you, as a
(25)specialist in the area, to explain it for us. If, by way of example,
• A.: That depends. Sometimes it is possible to hear both; sometimes (5)one; sometimes one is more audible than the other. It depends. • Q.: In this particular example, can you tell us what that depends on? • A.: It depends on the direction of the antenna and the locations. • Q.: Those two participants in the conversation, were they on the same frequency? (10) • A.: I'd rather not answer that question. MR. PETRUSIC: [Int.] Mr. President, fully appreciating Mr. Cayley's objection, I would propose we go back into closed session.
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] Yes. Closed session, please.
JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] I see in the public gallery that we are in public session, so you may continue, Mr. Petrusic. Thank you very much. MR. PETRUSIC: [Int.] Thank you. (10) • Q.: Witness V, Exhibit 283 of the Prosecution, please look at the highlighted page 30 with the initials in the upper right-hand corner, "W.E." Witness V, you can put it on the ELMO. MR. CAYLEY: Mr. President, just out of caution, there is actually a signature on that page of somebody that could be identified (15)potentially. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Yes, Mr. Cayley, you're right. Perhaps we could cover or hide the signature with a piece of paper. Before putting it on the ELMO, conceal the signature with a sticker, please. (20) MR. PETRUSIC: [Int.] Mr. President, as the number and the initials are the subject of my question, perhaps it would be better not to place it on the ELMO but just to show it to the witness.
MR. CAYLEY: Mr. President, unfortunately it was placed on the
ELMO, so maybe if we could -- if you could make an order essentially to
(25)stop the public feed on --
THE REGISTRAR: Excuse me. The -- (5) MR. CAYLEY: Mr. President, the booth is indicating to me that they didn't switch to public feed, so it never went out on the television screen. So the problem doesn't arise. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] In any event, I think it is possible to show the exhibit with this small sticker on it, or focus on (10)number 30 and the initials "W.E." Mr. Usher, are you following me? Show only this part here. Yes. I think it is the upper corner, the upper right-hand corner. Fine. Mr. Petrusic, I'm sorry. Please continue. MR. PETRUSIC: [Int.] Mr. President, if I knew this would (15)have caused so many problems, I could have withdrawn that question, but anyway ... • Q.: Witness V, this page that carries the number 30 and the initials below, were they placed there by you or one of your colleagues? • A.: No, I didn't note that down. Perhaps one of my colleagues did. (20)Actually, I don't know. • Q.: Do you know whether one of your colleagues had a similar signature to this and these initials? • A.: No.
MR. PETRUSIC:
[Int.] Mr. President, the Defence has no
(25)further questions. Witness V, thank you.
JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Thank you very much, Mr. Petrusic. Mr. Cayley. (5) MR. CAYLEY: Thank you, Mr. President. • RE-EXAMINED by Mr. Cayley: • Q.: Witness, I only have really one question for you. Mr. Petrusic asked you in your cross-examination, when you were listening to a transmission, whether you could hear both parties to the conversation. (10)And your answer was that sometimes you could hear both parties and sometimes you could only hear one party, and it depended on a number of factors. The question that I have for you is simply this: Isn't it a fact that it was possible to monitor both participants in a conversation, and (15)in fact you did on a number of occasions? • A.: In many occasions, you could follow both participants, as I've already said. There were situations where one participant was not very audible, not as audible as the other. • Q.: And when one of the parties was not audible, what did you write (20)down in your written note of the intercept? • A.: Usually, if we couldn't hear at all, then we would make a note of it and say that one of the participants was completely inaudible. If it was partially audible, then we would put three dots where it was not audible and continue with the conversation. (25)
MR. CAYLEY: Mr. President, I don't have any further questions for
• QUESTIONED by the Court: JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Thank you very much, Mr. Cayley. Judge Fouad Riad, do you have any questions? No. (5)Madam Judge Wald. JUDGE WALD: Witness V, I just have a few general questions. The first is: Based on your knowledge and experience in both the JNA army and later in the Bosnian army, is it generally true that when parties are speaking, military parties, to one another on these lines, (10)they have a general notion that they may be intercepted? I mean are they aware that there may be interceptions by a different -- by an opposition force? I mean generally aware. I'm not asking you about any specific situation, but are they not generally aware that these relay stations are in existence and may be monitoring them? (15) • A.: According to some army rules, this should be respected. That is to say, they ought to know that they might be monitored. In most cases, depending on the circumstances and in wartime, they don't always adhere to that.
JUDGE WALD: So they have a general idea that there's a good
(20)chance they might be monitored. I think you've answered that, so I'll go
on to the second question.
Are there, without again getting specific in any way, are there
ways in which, say, two military posts in the same army could communicate
with each other by radio that would not -- that couldn't be intercepted,
(25)that would defy being intercepted? I mean do they have defensive devices
• A.: Yes, of course that exists. JUDGE WALD: Okay. So my third question then is: If somebody in Post A wanted to convey something that was very sensitive or delicate to Post B, why would they use an open -- or a line in which there was a risk, (10)a real risk, of interception? Why would they not use whatever these devices are that would be much harder or impossible to intercept? I mean, are there reasons, based on your observations and knowledge in both armies, that would explain why somebody who had some very sensitive information would use a line that was very possibly open to interception? (15) • A.: Well, number one, perhaps they don't have any other means of communication. Secondly, usually people think, "Well, they won't hear me this time." So those are the two sort of reasons. JUDGE WALD: Thank you.
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] Witness V, I have two questions
(20)for you. You said that one of the factors which could facilitate
communication was the direction of the antennae. As you know, the
communication channels here are wavelengths, airwaves. How do climatic
conditions or how can the climate and climatic conditions influence
communications? Or to put it another way, can the climate influence
(25)communication lines?
JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Can you explain that to us a little? • A.: Well, I'm not an expert in that field, I'm afraid, so I can't. (5) JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] For example, in January or July, in principle, what is a better time, a better season for communicating? • A.: Probably July, at least in the cases I worked on. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Yes. Well, is it July or January? (10) • A.: July, I said. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] July. Thank you. Another question. We saw the numbering of the pages with the initials, the "WV" and the "E." When you wrote your notes -- you did the transcript of this little notebook -- were those page numbers already (15)there or were the pages numbered once the notebook had been completed? • A.: When we received our notebooks, the pages were already numbered, because this was a measure of precaution, to avoid somebody ripping out the pages. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Very well. Thank you. (20)Judge Fouad Riad has a question for you.
JUDGE RIAD:
[Int.] Thank you, Mr. President.
(5) • A.: There were. You had to use certain codes and so on, names, so on. JUDGE RIAD: This would be sufficient protection, or were there other means of keeping items which cannot be reached in the JNA? • A.: My work post, the work I did, we had to adhere to some of these (10)things. But in other jobs, on other posts, the protective measures might have been more stringent. JUDGE RIAD: So you think that there were other means which cannot be intercepted. • A.: Yes. (15) JUDGE RIAD: Thank you very much. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Very well, Witness V. That brings you to the end of your testimony here at the Tribunal. We should like to thank you for coming and wish you bon voyage to your country. Do not get out of your seat straight away because you enjoy protective (20)measures. I think we need to take a break to prepare for the next witness. Mr. Cayley, I think we also have exhibits to tender.
MR. CAYLEY: What you just mentioned, Mr. President, in respect of
a break, we've spoken with our learned colleagues, a 15-minute break
(25)because the next witness requires voice distortion and that has to be set
JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Mr. Petrusic, are you able at this point to state your views with regard to yesterday's exhibits and the ones tendered today? Mr. Petrusic. (25)
MR. PETRUSIC:
[Int.] Mr. President, with respect to
JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Mr. Cayley, any comments? MR. CAYLEY: Simply this, Mr. President, and I don't wish to sort of repeat myself ad nauseam: My understanding of the Court's decision was that additional time was to be given to the Defence because they had not (15)had sufficient time to read all of these three volumes in their entirety. These are very short documents, the extracts; they can be read very quickly. The witness has provided foundation by identifying his handwriting and confirming that he took them down. By admitting these into evidence, it in no way admits the entire (20)notebook, so the linkage for the Prosecution in that respect is still missing. But, as I say, the witness has identified these, he's provided foundation, and it's my view, my submission, that they should be admitted into evidence at this point in time.
JUDGE WALD: Mr. Cayley, let me just make sure I understand your
(25)position. Suppose we were to admit these excerpts into evidence now, and
MR. CAYLEY: Your Honour, what was actually going through my mind was this: It was actually economy in use of witness. I'm sorry I may not actually be answering your question directly. (10) JUDGE WALD: Go ahead. MR. CAYLEY: We had a single witness who identified all of these books. JUDGE WALD: Yes.
MR. CAYLEY: If the Defence raise a problem with all of the books
(15)in their entirety, we would call that one witness back. Each of these
individual intercepts extracted from the notebooks have been identified by
a particular witness. If these are admitted now -- and I have to say for
the moment, and I can't speak for the Defence, I can't see what objection
they can make to this specific document because they've been able to read
(20)it and it it's very brief -- we would not then have to call back each of
the intercept operators to answer questions on each of the individual
exhibits. I know it's not Mr. Petrusic's intention that we should call
back all of these witnesses, but we may find ourselves in a position where
we would have to do so.
(25)So that's where my thought in this was coming from. I don't
(5) JUDGE WALD: Excuse me for interrupting you. So suppose, worst-case scenario, something happens and the books don't get admitted into evidence, would that automatically invalidate these transcripts if they had already been admitted into evidence? MR. CAYLEY: I don't believe so, Your Honour, based on the Rules (10)of Evidence with which I've become familiar. Perhaps our systems -- perhaps the answer to your question would be, "Yes," but I think here it would perhaps lower their value on the scale of evidence. But I do believe that you would still be able to consider them in evidence. You just wouldn't have the source book available. It would perhaps be a "7" (15)rather than a "10", to put it crudely.
JUDGE WALD: All right, thank you.
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] With respect to the documents
and their admittance, the Chamber feels that they should be taken
(20)together. It is true that they are of a different nature, but we're going
to give them the same treatment all together and we are going to give the
Defence time to pronounce themselves.
But I should like to tell the Defence that it is important, with
respect to the Prosecutor's job, to know whether the documents are
(25)admitted or not. So as soon as the Defence counsel can give us a
(10) MR. CAYLEY: Mr. President, I'm sorry. There's four more exhibits which I suspect my learned colleagues will not have a problem with. 138 and 139, which were maps offered by my learned friend Mr. Harmon, the first map showing the operator locations at Okresanica, 139 showing lines of radio communication. 137 was the list of call signs legend, and 300 (15)was the list of operators which the previous witness identified. That document should be under seal because it identifies many of the witnesses. Thank you. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] I think, Mr. Cayley -- yes, very well. I have just received the interpretation, so that's all right. So (20)that particular one was under seal. Mr. Petrusic, with respect to the exhibits.
MR. PETRUSIC:
[Int.] The Defence has no objections to
make to the documents put forward, but I feel that Document 137, Lasta,
that it should read " Istra" and not "Lasta". But that is just a
(25)suggestion on my part. That is to say, we suggest that the Prosecution
JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Mr. Cayley -- MR. PETRUSIC: [Int.] But I have no other objections to the documents. (5) JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Mr. Cayley, do you accept the suggestion made to you by the Defence, to replace "Lasta" by " Istra"? MR. CAYLEY: Yes, Mr. President. Thank you, Mr. Petrusic. I think rather than myself giving an answer, we should actually check with the witnesses with whom we're dealing, because I'm not an expert on this. (10)It's possible that we made a mistake in the name of the call sign. But my understanding also is that these call signs did change from time to time, so I would appreciate that possibility and maybe we will amend it. Thank you. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Very well. So 137, Exhibit 137, (15)was shown to the witness as it stands. Mr. Petrusic, all these exhibits, 138, 137, 139, are public ones, and the other one is under seal. If there are any corrections, we can introduce them later on. But otherwise, they are admitted. 300 is under seal. (20)We will now have a 20-minute recess to prepare the courtroom for the next witness. Witness V, please remain seated for a few more minutes. Thank you for coming.
--- Recess taken at 10.30 a.m.
JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Good morning, Witness. Can you hear us? (5) THE WITNESS: [Int.] Good morning. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Will you please read the solemn declaration that the usher is going to give you. THE WITNESS: [Int.] Yes. I solemnly declare that I will speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. (10)
WITNESS: WITNESS W JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Thank you. Perhaps you could get closer to the microphone, please. Move closer to the microphone, please. (15)Are you comfortable? THE WITNESS: [Int.] Is this better? JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Yes. You are now going to see your name written on the piece of paper that the usher is going to show you, and tell us, yes or no, whether that is your name. (20) THE WITNESS: [Int.] Yes. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] So you're now going to answer questions put to you by Mr. Harmon, who is on your right, please. Show it to the Defence, please.
MR. HARMON: Yes. Thank you very much, Mr. President. Good
(25)morning, Your Honours. Good morning to my colleagues for the Defence.
• Q.: Witness, I'm going to be referring to you as "Witness W" throughout the course of your testimony. Now, Witness W, can you tell me, what is your nationality? (5) • A.: Yes. I'm a Muslim. • Q.: And from what country do you come? • A.: I come from Bosnia and Herzegovina. • Q.: Could you describe for the Judges your educational background, please? (10) • A.: Yes. I have a two-year post-secondary education as a teacher of technical education. • Q.: Are you currently employed in Bosnia? • A.: Yes, I am. • Q.: Where do you work? (15) • A.: I'm working in AID. • Q.: What does "AID" stand for? • A.: It stands for the Agency for Investigation and Documentation. • Q.: The translation that I heard was "Agency for Investigation and Documentation". Is that a correct description or is it the Agency for (20)Information and Documentation? • A.: You received the correct translation. • Q.: Before the agency for which you worked, AID, was it named the Service for State Security or SDB? • A.: Yes. (25)
• Q.: Have you been employed by SDB since 1982?
• Q.: Witness W, I'd like to turn your attention now to the time period when there was war in Bosnia, specifically in December of 1994, and ask you at that time did you form an electronic surveillance unit composed of (5)members from the SDB?
• A.: A minor correction. I didn't form it,
[redacted] (10) • Q.: Now, what was the purpose of this particular unit you've just described? • A.: The purpose. I wouldn't call it a unit. It wasn't a military unit. It was a department of the service. And its purpose was to go on site, to choose an appropriate location, and to survey and intercept radio (15)waves and thereby acquire interesting information for the needs of our service. • Q.: Did you and other members of your service conduct those activities from December of 1994 until the end of the war? • A.: It is true that we engaged in those activities in that period. (20) MR. HARMON: Now, if I could have the assistance of the usher, please, and if I could have the usher place Prosecutor's Exhibit 138 on the ELMO. 138 is a map. Mr. Usher, that's fine, thank you. • Q.: Witness W, can you tell the Judges where you conducted these activities from, from what location? (25)
• A.: In the period from 1994 until the end of 1995, I was at the
MR. HARMON: And the witness has pointed to that location on Prosecutor's Exhibit 138. • Q.: Witness W, how many men were working with you in this particular (5)endeavour?
• A.:
[redacted] • Q.: Can you tell the Judges how you conducted your work in terms of shifts? (10)
• A.: Our work was conducted in shifts.
[redacted] (15) • Q.:Now, you've informed us that [redacted] unit was working at the location of [redacted], and my question is: Did the army also have an Anti-Electronic Warfare Unit at that same location conducting similar activities? • A.: Yes. Actually, this was an army facility in which we used only (20)one room. It is a facility in which our corps had its own sections for reconnaissance, and we were given this one room to use which we did use. So we engaged in the same activities.
• Q.: Witness W, while you engaged in the same activities, was your work
separate and independent from the similar work being conducted by the army
(25)units at that same location?
• Q.: We'll come to that, Witness W. When I say "independent," you didn't use the same staff members that the army used in attempting to (5)intercept communications, did you? • A.: That is correct. We had civilians and they had soldiers. • Q.: In addition, you touched on it in your previous answer, your physical location where you were conducting your intercept operations was in a different part of the facility than where the army was conducting its (10)intercept operations; is that correct? • A.: It was the same facility. I wouldn't like to describe it, but within that one building, we were one of the rooms in a row, the room that was free, unoccupied, at the time. • Q.: All right. Witness W, my point is that you were in a separate (15)room with members of your unit conducting your activities; the army, at the same facility, was conducting its activities from different rooms; is that correct? • A.: That is correct. We had that one room in which we worked, stayed, and even slept in our free time. (20) • Q.: In spite of the differences between the two units, the army unit and the unit from the SDB, did you use similar types of equipment to attempt to capture enemy radio communications?
• A.: Yes, very similar equipment. The equipment had the same system of
work. One could distinguish the model or the type, the manufacturer of
(25)the equipment. It had a different manufacturer.
(5) • A.: Yes, similar. • Q.: Now, Witness W, could you enlighten us, please, as to the different objectives between the types of communications in general that your unit was attempting to intercept and, to the extent that you know it, the types of communication the army was attempting to intercept? (10)The reason I ask you that question is I'd like you to shed some light on why two units at the same location, using similar equipment and techniques, were operating. Could you shed some light on this issue for us, please? • A.: In that period, that is, at that time in December 1994, when we (15)moved into that location, our main aim was to collect information regarding the interests of the State Security Service. I don't know whether it is necessary for me to explain what kind of information those are. • Q.: Witness W, suffice it to say it wasn't exclusively military (20)information; is that correct? • A.: We did not collect military information, but if, in the course of our activities, we came by such information, we would pass it on to the army unit.
• Q.: Now, just so the record is perfectly clear, in July of 1995 when
(25)the VRS took over the enclave of Srebrenica, was your unit operating from
• A.: Yes. Yes. • Q.: During the period of time when the enclave fell, did your unit collect military communications and record military communications? (5) • A.: Yes. In that period we did not -- we were not particular. The situation was such that we all had to dedicate all our efforts to everything that was going on. • Q.: Now, let me talk about the cooperation and the coordination between your intercept unit and the army units that were also intercepting (10)communications. Did the army share with you intercepted communications that it received? • A.: Let me elaborate a little. It was not customary until then to exchange information at that level of that type, but when this situation became so difficult, we did so on the spot. We agreed and implemented the (15)agreement and exchanged information throughout in both directions; that is, the army would share their information with us and we would share all our information with them, at [redacted] • Q.: When you say "at this period of time," are you referring to the period of time when the enclave of Srebrenica fell to the VRS? (20) • A.: Yes, yes, and throughout the time of the events that followed after the fall of Srebrenica. • Q.: And did you exchange this information, at a minimum, on a daily basis? • A.: Yes, we exchanged them on a daily basis. (25)
• Q.: And did you exchange the information more often if the information
• A.: Yes, depending on the urgency. We would assess the urgency in such a way that we classified information as especially urgent and ordinary information. We didn't make any further distinctions in (5)assessing urgency. It was either very urgent or not very urgent. Very urgent information was exchanged immediately, and just the urgent, several times during the day. • Q.: Witness W, I'd like you to explain mechanically how the information that the army had, that they wanted to provide to you, was (10)obtained by you. How was it exchanged? • A.: Of course I'll explain that. The information obtained by members of the corps, the 2nd Corps, were processed in their communications centre and converted from paper to computer. And after that, using a diskette, the file would be typed in. The contents of the information would be (15)received on a diskette on our own computer. We would record that information under our own numbers, and we would add a sentence which would read, I think, "Taken over from the unit of the 2nd Corps," so that our superiors would be able to distinguish between the information we had obtained and the information obtained by that unit. (20) • Q.: Witness W, so it's perfectly clear, would the information that the army gave you be downloaded onto a disk and then given to the SDB? • A.: Yes. My department would receive it.
• Q.: What they would receive would be the complete text of one or more
intercepted communications that the army had obtained that particular day;
(25)is that correct?
MR. HARMON: Now, if I could have the assistance of the usher, (5)please, and I would like first of all shown to the witness Prosecutor's Exhibit 302/2C. It's a four-page document in B/C/S. Witness W, if you just review that document before we place it on the ELMO, then we'll place it on the ELMO, and I want you to identify certain parts of that exhibit, please. (10)For Your Honours' benefit, this particular exhibit has a four-page B/C/S text, and then the last conversation on the B/C/S of that particular document has been translated into French and English. So only one of the conversations on this 302/2C has been translated into French and English. • Q.: Witness W, have you had a chance to review Prosecutor's Exhibit (15)302/2C? • A.: Yes, I have looked at it. MR. HARMON: Now, if the usher could place that on the ELMO. • Q.: Witness W, I'm going to ask you -- Mr. Usher, if you would kindly place the top portion of the document so it is visible on the ELMO. (20)Witness W, can you take a look at the document that's on the ELMO, and can you identify this document, please?
• A.: As I have said, it is a document or information obtained by the PB
of the 2nd Corps and forwarded to my department. My department would
register that document under number 626 on the 14th of July, 1995, with an
(25)indication that it was taken over from the 2nd Corps. This was the
• Q.: And the date, "14/7/95", is the date that you received the communications that are contained in this document from the army; is that correct? (5) • A.: Yes. On that date, we received this file on a disk. We typed it into our computer on the edit programme that we used, and we added -- there's something I forgot to say. In the heading of such a document which would be forwarded to us by the corps, there would be their header with the contents. And instead of that, we would put our number, the (10)date, and the indication that it was taken over from the 2nd Corps. Everything else is the same as the original text. It is the original text. • Q.: The original text as received from the army? • A.: Yes, yes. (15) MR. HARMON: Now, Mr. Usher, if you would turn to the last page of the B/C/S version. It has an ERN number of 00927783, and if you would place that on the ELMO. • Q.: Witness W, there appears on the ELMO now a conversation. Is this one of the conversations that you received from the army on the 14th of (20)July, 1995? • A.: Yes. That is within that one file that we received that day.
MR. HARMON: What Your Honours then have is a translation in
French and English of that one conversation. I will read the translation
into the record, and I would also direct Your Honours' attention to
(25)another exhibit which was tendered through Witness U. It is Exhibit
(B.:) Who wants to talk to him? (10): The Palma duty officer wants to talk to him. Beara is needed urgently, somebody needs him. The Superior Command urgently needs him, but he has to call me. (B.:) Okay. (15) (P.:) Okay what? Give me Beara, don't hang up.
(J.:) Hello, who is it, Major, I'm the duty
officer at Palma. I need Beara urgently.
This is Major Jokic, who is that? Why the
(20)fuck are you not answering? Is Ostoja
there? Is Brko there? Don't fuck around,
the line has to be free and you must pick it
up right away! Who is Ostoja? Is Ostoja
there? Have him call me urgently. I will, I
(25)will. Hello! Hello!
(J.:) Hello! (X.:) ... Hello. Is the operations duty officer (5)looking for me? Go ahead. Vojanovic is not here, he's up at Snagovo. There are some problems there, at the line I've told you about. The Turks have pushed our guys back toward Crni Vrh. (10) (Y.:) ... (X.:) Yes. I told him to consolidate the lines up there. That's it. (J.:) Hello! (B.:) Just a moment. One moment old man. (15) (J.:) Is that Beara? Jokic here. BE: ... (J.:) We were together, Colonel, Sir. Number 155 called you and asked you to call him urgently. (20)BE: ... (J.:) Number 155. That's, I mean, Superior Command, you go ahead and call them, you have, so I don't speak like this. BE: ... (25)
(J.:) Yes. Hey. We have huge problems over
(J.:) There are big problems. Well with the people, I mean, with the parcel. (5)BE: ... (J.:) Who? Drago is nowhere around. I don't know where the others are all day. BE: ... (J.:) What? Call up there number 155 in the (10)Superior Command and that's it. Okay, boss. BE: ... Why number 155? Where is that? (J.:) Well, I can't tell you on this line, you know. You have it over there at (15)signalsmen', who that is. BE: Yes?
(J.:) Bye.
Remark: Thanks to the switchboard operator's
mistake at Badem we recorded a conversation
(20)between X and Y, who couldn't be heard,
while he was intercepting and the line 44 was
open for Jokic."
And that ends the translation of the last conversation that is found on
Prosecutor's Exhibit 302/2C.
(25)Now, Witness W, I'd like to return to the work that was being
• A.: Yes. Perhaps we should go a step backwards first and then take a
step forward.
(10)After looking at the frequency spectrum, searching it, and we were
able to differentiate the frequency that was of interest to us and
determine the exact channel we were interested in, and setting the radio
devices so the operators could monitor that particular conversation and
tape conversations of that kind in such a way that from the reception set,
(15)the receiving set, which was made up of several components, the NF signal
or the voice signal would be brought onto the Uher tape recorder, and this
recorded in volume audibly each conversation.
As soon as a operator heard a conversation of this type going on,
he would switch on the tape recorder, the tape recorder would then begin
(20)recording, and after having recorded the conversation, depending on its
urgency, that is to say, if it was an urgent conversation, it would be --
that tape, that is to say, would be relayed to a free Uher and
reproduced. Another operator, the second operator would replace the first
operator and continue to monitor the conversation.
(25)Depending on the quality of the signal received, the conversation
• Q.: So if the conversation was audible, it would be recorded from the tape into the computer, and if there was a problem with the understandability or the quality of the transmission, then, from what I understand of your testimony, you would sit with colleagues, you would (15)reduce the conversation on a piece of paper until there was some form of agreement as to its accuracy, and then it would be typed into the computer; is that correct? • A.: That's correct, yes. • Q.: What happened to those pieces of paper on which the conversation (20)was recorded? • A.: Well, it was customary for pieces of paper of that kind to be set fire to. When we had a certain number of them, we would burn them. That was customary in our service.
• Q.: Now, let me then turn my attention to the procedure once again.
(25)Were the conversations that had been intercepted recorded in writing soon
• A.: If they were very urgent, classed as very urgent information, then it was immediately processed. If it was not very urgent information, then it would also be processed in a short space of time afterwards, if nothing (5)happened after that conversation; that is to say, if there were no other conversations, then that too would be processed. • Q.: So if it wasn't an urgent conversation, how long after -- and I'm speaking in general terms -- how long after was it that it was reduced to writing? (10) • A.: Not long. It didn't wait long. Up to one hour. • Q.: Now, was there an effort by your service to accurately record these conversations, in other words, make sure that each word that had been intercepted was accurately reproduced on the computer? • A.: It was essential that every word, literally every word be recorded (15)and that it should be audible, properly heard. You couldn't guess because these were serious matters, and anything that was not sufficiently clear, not heard well enough, any word not heard well enough was not recorded. • Q.: Witness W, how was it that you and your colleagues were able to identify the speakers in the intercepted communications? (20)
• A.: I have to say that we knew some of the speakers very well from the
media, we knew their voices. Every citizen of Bosnia-Herzegovina and
further afield were well acquainted with their voices. Many of them
introduced themselves as well once the connection was established. So
they would say, "Good morning. I'm so and so. I need so and so," and
(25)that would give us the information we needed about both participants, both
• Q.: In the situation where you could not identify the people who were (5)speaking back and forth, how did you record that on your reports? • A.: That too happened on several occasions, and we would use "X" and "Y" to denote those individuals. • Q.: Now, were the written records of the intercepted communications maintained by your agency in the regular course of business? (10) • A.: Yes. Of course it was our duty to make up an archive, that was standard practice in our service, and to store the information we had arrived at, and that is what we did with these documents as well. • Q.: Witness W, I'm now going to put before you a number of exhibits, and I'd like to start with Prosecutor's Exhibit 303. (15) MR. HARMON: Mr. Usher, if you could have at your disposal Prosecutor's Exhibit 303 through Prosecutor's Exhibit 312. Mr. Usher, if you would first of all place the B/C/S version of Prosecutor's Exhibit 303 on the ELMO. • Q.: Witness W, I'd like you to take a look at Prosecutor's Exhibit (20)303, and let me ask you first of all, is this a document that was prepared by the SDB? • A.: Yes, it is a document compiled by my department. • Q.: How do you know that looking at this document? Use the pointer if need be. (25)
• A.: In the heading it says "CSB/SDB," up here, "SDB Tuzla." Then you
(5) • Q.: Now, Witness W, at the bottom of this particular exhibit there appear to be a set of numbers, "JN160/JD065." What do they represent? • A.: Yes, I forgot to say, and that is perhaps the basic piece of information. As a signature, you have the names of people, the codes, the codes of the people who compiled the document. The first one, "JN160," (10)denotes the man who recorded the conversation, taped the conversation, and the second code, that is to say, "JD065," is the man who reproduced the conversation. MR. HARMON: Mr. President, may I go into private session for just one or two questions, please. (15)
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] Yes. Let us move into private
session, at least for a couple of minutes.
JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] I see that we're already in public session. (5)Please continue, Mr. Harmon. MR. HARMON: • Q.: Witness W, focusing on this particular communication, there are a number of initials that go down the left-hand side indicating the participants in the conversation. Am I correct that "K" stands for Krstic (10)and "X" stands for Lieutenant Colonel Krsmanovic? • A.: Yes, you're right. • Q.: I will read this communication into the record, starting at the upper left-hand corner: "CSB/Security Services Centre/-SDB/State Security Service/Tuzla (15)Date: 12 July 1995 Number: 552 Very urgent On the above date, while monitoring the Zvornik-Vlasenica Radio Relay on frequency (20)785.000 MHz at 0735 hours, we recorded a conversation between someone called Krstic (K) and Lt. Colonel Krsmanovic (X). The conversation is as follows: (K.:) Hello, is that Krsmanovic? (25)
(X.:) Yes, go ahead.
(X.:) Yes. (K.:) Now, Pale, Visegrad, Rogatica, Sokolac, Han Pijesak, Vlasenica, Milici, Bratunac, (5)Zvornik. Now, this, from all these places, 50 buses in total are to be at the stadium in Bratunac by 1700 hours. (X.:) At 1700 hours at the Bratunac stadium. (K.:) May very sure this is done. Is that (10)clear? (X.:) Understood. (K.:) Go ahead. JN160/JD065." MR. HARMON: I have finished with this exhibit, Mr. Usher. (15) • A.: I have just one remark to make. MR. HARMON: Please. • A.: I apologise. I think that in reading the frequency, you said "705", and the frequency was, in fact, "785". MR. HARMON: If I did make that mistake, thank you for the (20)correction. That's correct. Mr. Usher, I would like to have 304C placed on the ELMO, with the date on the upper left-hand corner visible. • Q.: Can you see that document, Witness W? • A.: Yes, I can. (25)
• Q.: And can you tell the Judges, is this a document that was prepared
• A.: Yes, it is. This is also a document compiled by my department. MR. HARMON: Your Honours, in the B/C/S version there are two conversations, 557 -- number 557 and 558, and we have only translated 557, (5)so the record is clear. I will read this into the record then, number 557, and I'm only reading that part of this B/C/S version that has been starting with 557. "A conversation between a certain Ognjenovic (O) and a General (G) from the Drina Corps (10)Command in Vlasenica (code name Zlatar) took place on the same day, on the same frequency, on channel 5, at 0843 hours. The conversation proceeded as follows: (G.:) Ognjenovic, what's happening around (15)Jagnic (?). What have you heard? (O.:) As far as I know, they heard here that the Turks are passing through a certain area and that they've found a path through the minefield. (20) (G.:) Okay, right. And has the commander ordered /them/ down in Konjevic Polje what's to be done?
(O.:) He ordered them, he ordered these guys
down at Palma /code name/ (Zvornik Brigade)
(25)what to do and so forth. Both the
(G.:) Good, to the MUP in Konjevic Polje and Zvornik. Okay, bye." And at the bottom of the B/C/S version, there appears the letters (5)"JN160/JD065". • Q.: And, Witness W, again the designation "JN160/JD065" is the same as what you previously described, is that correct, the person who heard the conversation and recorded it? • A.: Yes, that's right. (10) • Q.: And looking at this document, can you tell us the date when this conversation was intercepted? • A.: Yes. It is also the 12th of July, 1995. MR. HARMON: Let me turn to the next exhibit, Witness W. Mr. Usher, if you would kindly place 305 -- just one moment, please. (15)Mr. Usher, if you would place 305B on the ELMO, please. • Q.: Witness W, will you take a look at Prosecutor's Exhibit 305B, and then I'll ask you some questions about it. Have you had a chance to take a look at that exhibit? • A.: Yes, I have. (20) • Q.: Was this an exhibit that was captured by members of your unit? • A.: Yes, it is the document captured by the members of my unit. • Q.: On what day?
• A.: On the 12th of -- I think there's a mistake here, because it says
"04/1995". I think that's a mistake, because 561, the number 561, it
(25)says the 12th of the 4th, "04". That's probably a mistake.
• A.: Number 561, we know, according to the order, what date was connected to that number. I apologise. What was it I said, the 12th of the 7th? That's probably a mistake. I didn't notice it until now. (5) • Q.: What date do you believe this document was captured by members of your service? • A.: I have the exact date. I can check it out. I can check it, because I have a notebook, a diary, which records all the information that came in. (10) • Q.: Can you refer to your notebook, please, and confirm for us the date of this particular transmission? • A.: Therefore, it was like this: The date was -- just one moment, please. Let me find it. 561, 561. Just one moment, please. Yes. The 12th of July, 1995, I have it here, when the file was formed and when it (15)was sent out.
MR. HARMON: Thank you, Witness W. Now, I will read this document
into the record, then.
"CSB /Security Service Centre/-SDB /State
Security Service/ Tuzla."
(20)"Date:", as recorded in the original
document, "12 April 1995.
Very urgent.
Number: 561.
On the aforementioned date while monitoring
(25)Pale Radio Relay, on frequency 785.000 MHz,
(5) (K.:) I said, are they passing over there? (O.:) No, not near us. (K.:) Then where are they? (O.:) We are not sure. They passed down there and ran into a minefield in Duboki Potok, as (10)you perhaps already know that. And how they came back, one group of 200 of them returned, but we don't know whether they passed or returned. (K.:) Are there any remains of the dead in the (15)place where they went through? (O.:) Our guys didn't manage to get down there, since there are mines laid by our right neighbour. We don't have plans, so we didn't go down there. (20) (K.:) Collect the data as much as you can, call the units on the lines, particularly the ones on the right wing. Have them investigate everything, and then we'll get in touch.
(O.:) I don't know if you're going to be able
(25)to get in touch with Radika up there, so let
(K.:) Go ahead and try. The conversation continues between Krstic and Krsmanovic (X). (5) (K.:) What happened with the buses? (X.:) They should arrive in two minutes. (K.:) Have them start immediately. (X.:) Okay. We'll order them to move as soon as they arrive. (10) (K.:) Do you understand, to leave immediately. (X.:) ... (K.:) Go on. JN160/JD073." • Q.: Again, Witness W, the "JN160/JD073" represents what you've told us (15)previously; is that correct? • A.: Yes. MR. HARMON: Now I'll turn to the next exhibit, which is Prosecutor's Exhibit 306. Mr. Usher, if you would kindly place 306/C on the ELMO. (20)Your Honours, there is a conversation that is 562 and a portion of 564 on the B/C/S. We have only translated the other conversation, 563, that's found on the original B/C/S version. • Q.: First of all, Witness W, can you identify this document as being a document that was prepared by members of your service? (25)
• A.: Yes, that is correct. It is our document.
• A.: On the 12th of July, 1995. • Q.: I will read this document into the record. I'm reading from 306/A: (5)"CSB/Security Services Centre/-SDB/State Security Service/Tuzla Date: 12 July 1995 No. 563 On the aforementioned day while monitoring Zvornik-Vlasenica RR direction on frequency (10)785.000 MHz, Channel 11, at 12:20, we recorded a conversation between two unidentified men (X and Y). The conversation went as follows: (X.:) What are we going to do about fuel? (15) (Y.:) I don't know. I told Miletic. (X.:) Yes. (Y.:) He doesn't know either. (X.:) Those trucks are leaving from Ilijas, Pale, Visegrad, Zvornik, Sokolac, Rogatica. (20)They are all coming here now. (Y.:) Do you have any orders from up there?
(X.:) I have it from Krsto, where he ...
ordered directly. That request went up there
and I am thinking that it can't be 200
(25)litres. It is 200 tonnes. And this morning
(Y.:) Call Mile. (5) (X.:) I'll call him right away." All right. We will now turn to the next document, which is Prosecutor's Exhibit 307. MR. HARMON: Mr. Usher, again we'll follow the same procedure, if you would kindly put 307C, the B/C/S version, on the ELMO. (10)Again, Your Honours, this is a document in the original B/C/S that has two identified conversations, number 570 and 571, and the attached translations only are to number 570. • Q.: Witness W, you've had an opportunity to take a look at this document. Can you first of all tell me, is this a document that was (15)prepared by your service? • A.: [No interpretation] MR. HARMON: I didn't get a translation of that. • Q.: Let me ask the question again. Is this a document, Prosecutor's Exhibit 307, is this a document that was prepared by your service? (20) • A.: Yes, it is our document. • Q.: On what date was this document prepared? • A.: This document was also prepared on the 12th of July, 1995.
• Q.: I will read into the record this document.
"Tuzla CSB/Security Services
(25)Centre/-SDB/State Security Service/
(10) (X.:) Go ahead, General. (M.:) Have these buses and trucks left? (X.:) They have. (M.:) When? (X.:) Ten minutes ago. (15) (M.:) Good, excellent. Continue to monitor the situation. Don't let small groups of them sneak in. They've all capitulated and surrendered and we'll evacuate them all - those who want to and those who don't (20)want to. (X.:) I understand, General.
(M.:) Don't issue any statements and don't
interrupt them over the /?radio/
station. We'll open a corridor towards
(25)Kladanj.
(M.:) Indeed, let it pass there. Take a patrol of ours to wait on the road and remove the mines and obstacles ... leave the territory. (5) (X.:) Yes, General. JN160/JD073." Once again, Witness W, those numbers at the end stand for what you have previously testified; is that correct? • A.: Correct. (10) • Q.: I'll now turn to the next exhibit, which is 308. MR. HARMON: Mr. Usher, kindly put 308 on the ELMO. • Q.: Witness W, is this a document that was prepared by your service? • A.: Yes, that also is a document prepared by my service. • Q.: When I say and I have said in the past, "is this a document (15)prepared by your service," what I mean specifically by that question in respect of this document, the previous documents, and the documents to come, is this a document of an intercepted communication that was captured at the mountain top [redacted], where you were monitoring enemy communications? (20) • A.: Yes, that is correct.
• Q.: Then I will read this document into the record.
"Tuzla CSB/Security Services
Centre/-SDB/State Security Service/
Date: 13 July 1995
(25)Number: 597
(O.:) General, sir, is that you? (G.:) Yes. (10) (O.:) It's Major Obrenovic. (G.:) Greetings. (O.:) Listen, those ambushes I've been setting up over there on the wide road and on part of Glodansko Brdo - they just called me two (15)minutes ago, there's a large column of Turks, three continuous kilometres long, from the school in Glodi. (G.:) Wait! Listen, you can't talk like that on the phone. Call Mane, gather everybody (20)and send them all up there right away. (O.:) Mane's? (G.:) Yes. (O.:) Well, that's why I'm calling you.
(G.:) Tell them right away to gather and drive
(25)up there. As soon as possible.
(G.:) Come on chief, don't let anything through. (O.:) We'll stop /them/. (5) (G.:) OK, take care. JN160/JD065." Once again, Witness W, do the number designations at the bottom of the page relate to what you have previously testified about? • A.: Yes, that is correct. (10) • Q.: We'll now turn our attention to the next exhibit, which is Prosecutor's Exhibit 309. MR. HARMON: Mr. Usher, once again kindly place the B/C/S version on the ELMO. • Q.: Examining the B/C/S version, Witness W, can you tell us whether (15)this is a document of intercepted communications that were collected by your unit operating from the mountain top that you've previously identified? • A.: Yes, that is our document. • Q.: On what date was this particular communication intercepted? (20) • A.: The messages 605, 606, I can't see whether there are any others, were downloaded on the 14th of July, 1995. MR. HARMON: Once again, Mr. President and Your Honours, we have only translated the conversation 606 in the B/C/S. On that same page there is conversation 605 and a portion of 607. (25)
• Q.: I will now read into the record number 606. Actually, Witness W,
MR. HARMON: Mr. Usher, you would have to move this down so the witness can see it. The portion under number 605, there's a small (5)paragraph under 605, starting with the word "navedenog." • A.: You're talking about conversation 605? • Q.: I'll withdraw the question. I had some confusion on this. MR. HARMON: Mr. Usher, will you return to 606, please. • Q.: I will proceed in reading this into the record, then. (10)"Number: 606 On the above-mentioned day, intercepting the Pale RR /radio-relay/ route on frequency 836.000, channel 13, we registered at 0805 hours a conversation between General Mladic (15)(M) and an unidentified male person (X). The conversation proceeded as follows: (M.:) Hello, friend. (X.:) Good morning, brother. How are you? (M.:) Fine, fine. You bet. (20) (X.:) A man can't get away from you in the newspapers, both foreign and local. (M.:) I can't help it. (laughs)
(X.:) That's the way. Listen, I'll be brief
and to the point: I was here just now with a
(25)narrow circle, you know, of friends here, and
(M.:) Well, I am after Sunday. (X.:) But not today and tomorrow? (5) (M.:) I'm busy, but I am /here/ today if you can come over. (X.:) You'll be there late in the afternoon? (M.:) Until 1500 hours and then I'm going to the field. I'll be busy for two or three (10)days and then I'm coming back. (X.:) And where's Pepo? (M.:) Pepo is in the field. The rest of the conversation was not interesting." I've concluded reading that particular document, and we'll now (15)turn our attention to 310, Prosecutor's Exhibit 310. MR. HARMON: Mr. Usher, kindly place the B/C/S version of this document on the ELMO. This is a document, Your Honours, that has conversations numbered 605, 606, and 607 on the document, and we've only translated number 607. (20) • Q.: Looking at the B/C/S document, Witness W, can you tell me if this was a document containing captured communications from the enemy that was prepared by your service? • A.: Yes, we prepared it. • Q.: On what date did you prepare it? (25)
• A.: You would have to move it up so I can see the beginning. Yes, the
• Q.: I will now read into the record the translation of the conversation number 607. "Number: 607 (5)/handwritten:/ The pursuit On the same day, intercepting the Pale RR /radio-relay/ route on frequency 836.000 MHz, channel 5, at /?0810/ hours, we registered a conversation between two (10)unidentified male persons (X and Y). The conversation proceeded as follows: (X.:) Have a lot of their soldiers escaped to the woods? (Y.:) Well, a lot did, the motherfuckers. (15) (X.:) You don't say. (Y.:) Yeah, down there around Kasaba and Konjevic Polje. It's a real fuck-up now to chase them all out. (X.:) Are they active or is it just mopping up (20)that's going on? (Y.:) Well, there's a little bit of everything. There are those who are mostly surrendering but some are still resisting. (X.:) Uh-huh, it's not too dangerous? (25)
(Y.:) Well, fuck it, this road here, from
(X.:) Was there any damage? (5) (Y.:) No. A policeman was seriously wounded, but overall it's good. The road will stay closed until further notice. (X.:) And have the colleagues arrived, the ones yesterday? (10) (Y.:) Radakovic said he's expecting them today. You mean these signalmen of ours? (X.:) I meant the guy who went yesterday to Bijeljina. (Y.:) Well, I don't know if he was able to get (15)through. Radakovic told me that two captains and a staff sergeant are arriving today. But I don't know what happened because the road was closed. Just military vehicles, the 'special purposes' ones, can pass. (20) (X.:) So would you say that this area is sealed off? (Y.:) Well, yes. (X.:) They don't have anywhere to escape?
(Y.:) Well, that shouldn't happen. It's mostly
(25)under control, although it's woods out
(X.:) In kilometres approximately, how many square kilometres is that? (Y.:) I can't tell you now exactly. (5) (X.:) Is it basically five by five? (Y.:) Yes, yes, something like that. They fucking know that terrain, they've spread out in the woods and it's very difficult. (X.:) And do they have any food up there? (10) (Y.:) Hardly anything. (X.:) They can sleep now wherever they want? (Y.:) Well, they can't go on for long like that. They can for a short time, it's just that they can fuck us up somewhere. (15) (X.:) Yeah, they can. JN160/JD065." That ends my reading of this document. Again, Witness W, the numbers "JN160/JD065," does that represent what you previously testified about? (20) • A.: Yes, they mean the same.
MR. HARMON: I'll turn now, Witness W, to the next exhibit. It's
Prosecutor's Exhibit 311. Again, Mr. Usher, kindly place the B/C/S
version of 311 on the ELMO.
Your Honours, again this a document which contains multiple
(25)conversations in B/C/S. We have only translated the conversation numbered
• Q.: Witness W, is this a document that was prepared by your service, and does it contain the captured enemy communications? • A.: Yes, it is also a conversation that we intercepted. (5) • Q.: On what date? • A.: Could you show me, please? Yes. The 14th of July, 1995. MR. HARMON: I will read this into the record. "Number 610. On the above date, while monitoring a Radio (10)Relay Zvornik - Vlasenica on frequency 785.000 MHz, Ch. 3, at 0910 hours, we recorded a conversation between the Drina Corps Commander, Milenko Zivanovic (M) and Major Jokic (J). (15) (J.:) General, just to inform you, I just have some information about the Turks. (M.:) What? (J.:) They were crushed on Velja Glava and now there is a huge group moving towards the (20)Drina, according to intelligence, towards Zljebac - Mladevac. The group is huge, absolutely enormous. (M.:) How big is the group?
(J.:) It's huge. Ever since I heard this
(25)information I can't fucking believe it.
(J.:) Thousands of 'em. Our intelligence officer sent us an info. (M.:) Which intelligence officer? (5) (J.:) Dusko Vukotic. (M.:) Where are you calling from now? (J.:) From here, as a duty officer. (M.:) And where are they headed? (J.:) According to our intelligence organs they (10)spread out from Velja Glava, they think in this direction, so now they're going back towards Mladevac and towards Zljepce over there to Novo Selo, you know? (M.:) Yes, yes, Mladevac. Good. Good. I know (15)that. (J.:) Yes, Kula Grad, to the left of Kula Grad. (M.:) Mane needs to be informed immediately. (Mane, a MUP employee, most likely a chief). (J.:) Whom should I inform? (20) (M.:) The Zvornik Public Security Centre. They're there now. The army is doing other work at the moment. (J.:) The Chief of Staff, Obrenovic, is coming now so we'll take steps immediately. (25)
(M.:) Mane should finish that off for you
(5) (J.:) Is that so? (M.:) Take care. JD073/JD065." May I have just a moment, Mr. President. My colleague has passed me a note. (10)My colleague has brought to my attention there appears to be two sentences that have not been translated on to the English version of 610, and on the B/C/S version, 311/B, it appears that the first two sentences at the bottom of that page have not been translated at least on to the English version. I think I can read the first sentence in B/C/S. It (15)appears to say: "Hello, Major Jokic." The second sentence I cannot read, but we will go back to the Language Service Section with this particular exhibit and submit a more complete and revised version of this. Witness W, now let me turn to the last exhibit in this series. It is Prosecutor's Exhibit 312. (20)Mr. Usher, if you would show this to the witness, because the reproduction, at least my reproduction, is not very clear. Let him inspect it first, and then it can be placed on the ELMO. Mr. Usher, please place that on the ELMO.
• Q.: Witness W, is this a document of a recorded intercepted
(25)communication that was captured by your service?
• Q.: And was this captured -- strike that. On what day was this communication captured? • A.: I can't see it very well on this copy. I can't even see the (5)number quite well, whether it is "664". If it is, I could check in my diary regarding the date. But most probably it is the 16th of July, 1995, as far as can be discerned from this copy. MR. HARMON: All right. Let me -- may I have just a moment. • Q.: Witness W, I'm going to see if I can get a better copy of this. (10)I'll ask you a question after the break. We'll try to get a better copy of this. In the meantime, we'll reserve that question, and let me pursue this. Looking at this document, are you able to see whether this was a document that was, in fact, prepared by your service? (15) • A.: Yes, it is obviously a document prepared by my service. MR. HARMON: Mr. President, since the witness has not identified the document number or the date, I'm reluctant to read in the translation. So if we could have a break, at which point I will endeavour to get a better copy for the witness, so then I can proceed. This is my (20)last document, by the way, and then I will conclude my examination of the witness. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Very well, Mr. Harmon. We were waiting for the end of the presentation of these documents, but we understand. So we're going to have a break, a half-hour break. (25)
--- Recess taken at 12.37 p.m.
JUDGE RODRIGUES: Mr. Harmon, let's continue. MR. HARMON: Good afternoon, Mr. President and Your Honours. We have resolved the issue. I have a better photocopy of the (5)exhibit I had intended to show the witness earlier; it is 312/C bis. If you could show that, Mr. Usher, first to the witness so he can identify the date and the number of the intercepted communication, we'll place that on the ELMO and proceed. • Q.: Witness W, I apologise for presenting to you earlier a poor (10)reproduction of this exhibit, but now that you've had an opportunity to examine it, let me ask you first of all, is this a communication that was intercepted by members of your unit? • A.: Yes. That is the text of the message that my unit registered. • Q.: On what day was this particular message intercepted? (15) • A.: On the 16th of July, 1995.
• Q.: Then I will read this translation of 312/C bis into the record.
"CSB/Security Services Centre/-SDB/State
Security Service/Tuzla
Date: 16 July 1995
(20)Very urgent
No: 664
On the above date, monitoring the Pale Radio
Relay on frequency 836.000 MHz, Channel 13,
at 1615 hrs, we recorded a conversation
(25)between Main Staff Duty Officer and General
• A.: Yes. We just heard one of the speakers, and we wrote it down that way. (15) • Q.: The numbers that appear at the end of this document, "JD073/JD065," are those code numbers for members of your unit? • A.: Yes, that's right. • Q.: I've concluded with that document.
MR. HARMON: Your Honours, I'd like to return very briefly to
(20)Prosecutor's Exhibit 306, which, in the form it was presented to Your
Honours this morning, omitted the second page. So I have had a new
document prepared; it is Exhibit 306/C bis.
Mr. Usher, if you would put the last page of that document on the
ELMO, and particularly what I would like to have on the ELMO, Mr. Usher,
(25)are the numbers that appear at the bottom of the second page.
• A.: I didn't understand the question. (5) • Q.: At the bottom of this document that is now complete, do the numbers "JN160/JD073" appear? • A.: Yes, yes, they do appear. • Q.: And that, consistent with your previous testimony, indicates the identity of persons involved with this particular communication; is that (10)correct? • A.: That's right, yes. MR. HARMON: With that, Mr. President and Your Honours, I've concluded my direct examination. Thank you very much. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Thank you very much, (15)Mr. Harmon. Mr. Petrusic. Witness W, you're now going to be answering questions put to you by Mr. Petrusic. Please go ahead. • CROSS-EXAMINED by Mr. Petrusic: • Q.: First of all, let me say good afternoon to you, Witness W. (20) • A.: Good afternoon. • Q.: In performing your duties, you worked in the same building where the members of the army were located, the Bosnia-Herzegovina army, for anti-electronic warfare and reconnaissance; is that correct? • A.: Yes, that's right. (25)
• Q.: Did you proceed according to the same rules?
• Q.: Were there any written rules or regulations which you, that is to say, your service, were duty-bound to abide by in the performance of your duties? (5) • A.: No, apart from the housekeeping rules of conduct. • Q.: Do you know whether rules of that kind existed in units -- in the units of the Bosnia-Herzegovina army? • A.: I think that it is clear to you that I am a member of the SDB, and I don't know what rules they used or whether they had any. (10) • Q.: Did you, or the service to which you belonged, in that location keep a diary of any kind, of daily orders or anything of that kind? • A.: We were not a military organisation. That is typical of a military organisation. It is typical for the service to which I belong that all the papers on which the messages are recorded, after use, after (15)they've been sent on, be destroyed, especially as we were located in premises not owned by us. • Q.: In view of the service that you belonged to, did you have a work plan of any kind from that service? • A.: Nothing specific in concrete terms. At the beginning, I described (20)what we did and what our basic tasks were. THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness please speak into the microphone. We're having difficulty following him. MR. PETRUSIC: [Int.]
• Q.: Can you tell us, how many sets of equipment for interception did
(25)your service dispose of?
• Q.: [No interpretation] (5) • A.: What was interesting for us, of course, we did. • Q.: Did your service -- MR. HARMON: Excuse me. There appears on the transcript -- excuse me, Mr. Petrusic. There appears on the transcript " [No interpretation]" for one of your questions, which makes the record incomplete. (10) THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter wasn't able to hear. There was something wrong with the microphone. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Yes, Mr. Harmon, thank you very much. It is page 90, line 22. You have the answer, but no question. The question has not been recorded in the LiveNote. [Page 80] (15) MR. PETRUSIC: [Int.] • Q.: "Were the frequencies memorised," was the question. • A.: Do I need to answer that question again? • Q.: Yes. Please repeat your answer. • A.: Yes. The frequencies were memorised, those that we found (20)interesting. • Q.: Witness W, the Prosecutor asked you in detail about the procedure of reception of messages, their transcription. But what the Defence is interested in, is the reception of that message and what happened to it after that or, rather, how it was typed into the computer. (25)
• A.: As I have already recounted, the way in which a message was
• Q.: Was it forwarded to headquarters by means of computer? • A.: Yes, of course. Excuse me. What do you mean when you say "by (5)computer methods"? It was processed in the computer and forwarded with the help of a modem. • Q.: So it was forwarded by fax modem? • A.: I wouldn't like to talk about the way in which messages were transmitted. (10) • Q.: I won't insist on that, but was that method, the one you do not wish to talk about, used from the 12th of July onwards during that period? • A.: Mostly. • Q.: Can you tell us when you were supplied with this computer equipment? (15) • A.: Let me put it this way: Another department I headed in 1992 already had a computer, so the computer in this facility was not available from the beginning, but I received it. I couldn't tell you the exact date, but that can be established on the basis of the encrypted files, because in the period when I didn't have a computer of my own, the (20)information was forwarded through the communications system of the 2nd Corps, to the command of the 2nd Corps, and then from the 2nd Corps Command, information was forwarded to the headquarters of my service on a disk.
• Q.: When one of your messages was forwarded in the method you have
(25)described, do you know whether there was a reception stamp on that
• A.: I don't understand what kind of stamps you're referring to. • Q.: When you forwarded a message to your superior service, did it register somewhere that it had received that message? (5) • A.: You see, that also enters into the question of the method of transmission of information, but everyone knows that information has to be registered upon reception. • Q.: So you had some sort of confirmation that the information had been received. (10) • A.: Of course. • Q.: On the Uher tape recorder tapes, you have recorded tapes. What happened to those tapes? • A.: I think your question was not phrased properly. The Uher tapes did not contain cassettes but conversations, taped conversations. (15) • Q.: Thank you for correcting me. So you tape a cassette, that is, you tape conversations on a cassette. What happens to that cassette? • A.: It depends on the type of conversation, its importance, and other characteristics which would determine how it would be kept, if at all. • Q.: If they are the conversations that we heard read out today and (20)which were read by the Prosecutor and which you confirmed, have those conversations been preserved on tape? • A.: I could not answer that question. I think that it is a sensitive question and I do not wish to answer it.
• Q.: Is it because you don't know or because you don't want to answer
(25)it?
MR. HARMON: Mr. President, perhaps we could go into a private session and Your Honours could explore this with the witness.
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] Yes. We are going into private
(5)session, please.
JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] I see that we are in public session, so you may continue, Mr. Petrusic. (20) MR. PETRUSIC: [Int.] • Q.: Exhibit 303/C of the Prosecution which you confirmed -- and it is a conversation between Krsmanovic and a certain Krstic -- on which grounds do you identify that certain Krstic if he did not introduce himself, nor did the other participant in the conversation call him by name? (25)
• A.: An excellent question. You see yourself that this is not the very
• Q.: Witness W, you mean that this frequency, 785, that this frequency (10)was covered both by you and the army? • A.: Well, in those pauses that we had on our frequencies. • Q.: Witness W, reviewing these conversations that were shown to you today, I note that they mostly refer to this frequency of 785.000. • A.: What do you want of me? (15) • Q.: You said that you didn't use it frequently, but the conversations shown to you -- • A.: They are very few in number. • Q.: But would you agree with me, then, that the conversations shown to you in the course of the day were captured from the frequency 785.000? (20) • A.: Of course. I confirmed that several times.
• Q.: Witness W, it seems to me that you still have in front of you
Exhibit 303/C. In the header, after the date and the number, there is the
sentence: "On the above date, while monitoring the Radio Relay
Zvornik-Vlasenica on frequency 785.000 ..." et cetera, you recorded a
(25)conversation between these two participants.
• A.: You mean if one of the parties is calling from Pale, for instance? (5) • Q.: If one of the participants is outside the radio relay Zvornik-Vlasenica, can you record that conversation? • A.: Technically speaking, and that is the only way I can view things, I receive the signal on that segment of the route, conditionally speaking. So everything I register on that direction and I consider to be (10)interesting, I take it down. • Q.: Of course, when you're talking about the direction, you are talking about the radio relay direction. • A.: Yes, yes. • Q.: All the evidence shown to you or, rather, the conversations shown (15)to you mainly relate to the Zvornik-Vlasenica radio relay. So there are two destinations or, rather, two locations. In Exhibit 305/B, you begin your report with the same sentence: "On the above-mentioned date, while monitoring Pale Radio Relay ..." without the other location of the radio relay direction being indicated. (20)
• A.: You've obviously found a mistake in the written report, an error,
and I should like to clarify something.
On a radio relay route, we can hear the complete telephone
communication taking place along that route regardless of where the
participants may be at that particular moment.
(25)What does that mean? It means that a participant in the
• Q.: So you say this is an error? • A.: Which? • Q.: Where you just mentioned the radio relay route Pale, without (5)indicating the other location. • A.: Your Honours, I'm trying to explain things, that frequency is not linked to locations. A frequency is the route that we intercepted, and along that route, at the intercepted wavelengths, we captured conversations which may have been spoken in Rogatica or Bijeljina, and as (10)far as I can remember there was some conversations coming from Serbia all along that one and the same route. • Q.: So in this case, as you said, that was an error. • A.: Of course. This is an error on the part of the person who was typing this report. Frequency 785 determines the route that was (15)intercepted. Pale, Zvornik, Vlasenica, et cetera, those are not determinant. So in this specific case, "Pale" is the error. • Q.: It wasn't me who said it was an error, you said it was an error and I repeated it. But, sir, we're talking about one and the same frequency here, (20)both when we're talking about the Pale route and the Zvornik-Vlasenica route, and that is 785.000.
• A.: I'm afraid you don't understand me. I am claiming or, rather,
noting and stating that in Exhibit 305/B the word "Pale" has been
erroneously written, because it should be "the Radio Relay Route
(25)Zvornik-Vlasenica." That is how we called it. So here a substitution was
• Q.: Talking about Exhibit 305, where you identify General Krstic as a participant in the conversation, whom again the other participant does not (5)identify in the course of the conversation, was the same method of identification used that you described with respect to Exhibit 303/C, and that conversation was one between Krsmanovic and Krstic? • A.: Not necessarily. Some were -- halfway through the examination-in-chief by the Prosecution, I explained the way in which we (10)recognised voices. Maybe 1073, the operator, recognised the participant by his voice. • Q.: In these two exhibits, 305/B and 303/C, we have the same person listening in, intercepting the conversation. In 303/C, he describes him as a certain Krstic, and 305/B, as General Krstic. So it is the same (15)operator and I think it is the same date, the 12th of July. There is a few hours' difference between 7.35 and 12.05 when the second conversation was intercepted. Can you tell us, if the message was intercepted by the same person, is it possible that in one case he describes him as "a certain" (20)and in the second case as a specific person, that is, as "General Krstic"?
• A.: Something that you should know is that in these two conversations,
there's 1065 and 1073, two different reproducers; that's one point. The
second point, the person who is recording and the person who is
reproducing are physically in the same room, so even if that did happen so
(25)quickly, it explains why there was no dilemma in the second conversation.
• Q.: In Exhibit 308/C -- MR. PETRUSIC: [Int.] Could I ask the usher to leave the (10)exhibits for the time being. • Q.: -- by hand we see in the upper right-hand corner, as far as I was able to decipher it, it says "Search for civilians -- pursuit of civilians." Could you tell us whether you know who wrote that down, on what occasion, why and when? (15) • A.: Personally, I believe that that has absolutely nothing to do with the reproduction of conversations, and I would rather not comment on it. • Q.: The same words can be found on Document 310/C. • A.: My answer is the same. • Q.: Just a moment, please. I apologise. On Document 310/C, in the (20)middle -- at the top of the page, it says "pursuit" again. No, it says "capture of civilians," I'm sorry, at the top of the page. And in the middle of the page, it says "pursuit" in handwriting. My question is: is that your handwriting? Did you write that?
• A.: I have given my answer. I think that that has absolutely nothing
(25)to do with reproduction.
• A.: I have no reason to change my answer. • Q.: Will you tell me, please, sir, whether this photocopy of these (5)documents -- are they true to the original? • A.: Yes. • Q.: On the original documents themselves, are these words written there? • A.: Yes. (10) • Q.: We have one more document that I'd like to show with the same contents. This is 311/B. I assume that your answer is the same. Is it? For purposes of the transcript, in the right-hand side of the page, towards the end of the page, it says "pursuit". MR. PETRUSIC: [Int.] Mr. President, the witness has not (15)answered the question. I am waiting for an answer. • A.: Sir, as far as I understood you, you just noted that in the right-hand corner it says the word "pursuit". You didn't ask a question. MR. PETRUSIC: [Int.] • Q.: I'm asking you whether you wrote that or someone else in your (20)service subordinate to you. • A.: I have already stated my answer and do not consider that that influences the quality or the aspect of the conversation itself. MR. PETRUSIC: [Int.] Mr. President, that completes my cross-examination. Thank you. (25)
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] Thank you very much,
MR. HARMON: I do, Mr. President. Thank you. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Please go ahead. (5) • RE-EXAMINED by Mr. Harmon: • Q.: Witness W, let me start with Exhibit 303. You were asked by my colleague Mr. Petrusic a question about how it is that you could identify someone called Krstic in this conversation when the name "Krstic" is not mentioned anywhere in the text. And as I understood your answer, and I (10)would appreciate your clarifying this for me, when the conversation was being intercepted, initially the tape recorder that captured the conversation was not on, and between the point in time when the conversation was first heard by the intercept operator and the time it took to depress the tape recorder, a certain portion of the conversation (15)was omitted from the tape. Do I understand that correctly? • A.: Yes, sir, you understand that correctly. That did happen on occasion, and I warned of that in a portion of my testimony. I said that these were very serious matters and that in all cases, when we were not absolutely sure who we were dealing with, we would always place the letter (20)"X" or "Y" to denote that individual. Similarly, if we were not 100 per cent certain of a letter, we would place a question mark next to the name. I hope that from reading all these documents, that you have been able to realise that all we did was serious work and that it was profound work as well. Thank you. That's my answer. (25)
• Q.: Let me stay with this particular document, and let me put myself
(5) • A.: The conversation was not long. Therefore, the conversation is short. • Q.: With an intercept operator who hears a conversation and knows that he is a little late in capturing all the conversation, in other words, is a little late in depressing the button, what steps, if any, are taken to (10)record or identify the speakers in the initial omitted sentence of the conversation? Were any steps taken at all? • A.: Yes. Let me put it this way: The operator, when the conversation starts, can lose a split second of time, and when he releases the stop button, in releasing the stop button he has already heard the (15)participants. However, and straightaway at that very same moment he records the participants, whether we know who they are or not; that is to say, whether they have introduced themselves or not, whether they are known or not known to the operator. At that very same moment, we record the time the conversation (20)starts. At the same time, we also record the numbers on the tape recorder so that we can go back and reproduce the conversation from the tape.
• Q.: So, generally speaking, when an operator hears a conversation and
a party is identified, the first step, I take it, is to depress the button
on the tape recorder, and the second step is to attempt to record the
(25)missing portions or the identities of the speakers, if that's possible.
• A.: That's correct. That is precisely the order. We record the identity of the party, if we know who that is or whether this was stated, so we record the time of the conversation, the numbers from the meter, and (5)afterwards we record the frequency, the channel on which the conversation took place. Of course, all this is linked up to the date. MR. HARMON: Let me change the topic. My colleague asked you a series of questions about the Zvornik-Vlasenica radio frequency, 785 megahertz, and if I could have the (10)witness shown Prosecutor's Exhibit 139. Mr. Usher, if you could place on the ELMO the lower left quarter of this document. If you would raise it just a little more, please. Raise it up, please, Mr. Usher. That's fine. Thank you very much. • Q.: Now, have you seen this document before coming to court, (15)Witness W? • A.: Yes, I have. • Q.: Do you see the communications route that used 785.000 megahertz on this document, and could you point it out to the Judges, please? • A.: I think that's the route. (20) • Q.: Witness W, do you see a line that goes from the location Panorama and goes up towards Zlatar, and there are some numbers midway between those two locations specifically saying "785.000 megahertz"? If you would move your pointer up. No, Witness.
MR. HARMON: May I approach the witness and just point on the
(25)exhibit to what I'm referring to.
(5) • Q.: Witness W, can you -- what does this "785.000 megahertz" that I've pointed out to you indicate? • A.: The frequency 785, it is 785 megahertz, and it denotes the frequency of the route or the bearer of the signal who, within his composition, has 24 channels, if you can understand that. It is the upper (10)and lower sound volume which has 24 sound-speaking channels. Now, what does that mean? It means that each of these frequencies can bear a load of 24 telephone conversations in one direction. That means in one direction, a conversation in one direction, unilateral, one-way. (15) • Q.: Witness W, I want to understand radios, I can assure you, better than I know them now, but I'm learning every day. Let me ask you this: When there are two speakers in a radio communication, the first speaker is physically located at Location A and the second speaker who is receiving the conversation is located at Location B. When a radio (20)communication is transmitted from Point A to Point B, does it have to go through a relay centre on some occasions or can it be transmitted directly?
• A.: It depends on where the two parties in the conversation are
located. There are relay centres which direct the direction, and the two
(25)parties in a conversation -- I explained this a moment ago -- need not be
• Q.: Let me give you a concrete example, Witness W. Could one party to (5)the conversation, for example -- strike that. The conversation that you intercepted that is the subject of Prosecutor's Exhibit 303A was intercepted along a certain frequency, the Zvornik - Vlasenica Radio Relay. Now, the frequency is identified as 785.000. Based on that information in this report, can you point on this (10)map to tell me the approximate route or the area where this conversation was intercepted? • A.: I claim that the conversation passed Route 785, passed through it. That is what I can say. • Q.: Let me ask you the next question, which is: Could one of these (15)speakers in this conversation have been physically located -- and for the sake of example -- at Bratunac, which is on the right side of the map at Badem? Is that possible? • A.: Yes, it's possible. • Q.: And, therefore, when the conversation was being communicated to a (20)location, for example, at Zlatar or at Vlasenica, the conversation, as I understand it, would pass from Bratunac, through the communications centre which is at Panorama, and then be repeated up the line to Vlasenica. Is that correct? • A.: Yes, yes, that's correct. (25)
• Q.: And, therefore, when you intercepted the communication, it was
• A.: That's correct, yes. (5) • Q.: So to conclude, the physical location of the persons at either end of the communication -- I'm sorry, at the transmitting end of the communication isn't necessarily Panorama, which is the centre of the radiating lines in this diagram; is that correct? • A.: That's correct. (10) MR. HARMON: I have no additional questions. Thank you. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Thank you, Mr. Harmon. Judge Fouad Riad. JUDGE RIAD: [Int.] Thank you, Mr. President. • QUESTIONED by the Court: (15)
JUDGE RIAD: Good morning, Witness W. I have just one question,
and I would like to ask you this question knowing that it's not a
professional question. I'm a layman; I'm not scientifically involved like
you.
You said that there are some sound recordings not starting from
(20)the beginning, and certain recordings would have the first sentence
missing. You mentioned as an example, saying, "This is General Krstic.
Give me so and so." Then you said later that when you don't capture the
beginning, you record first and then you start to find the identity of the
party. When you missed the first part and you record, then later you try
(25)to record the identity of the party. How do you find the identity of the
• A.: Your Honour, at the beginning of the conversation, he might have identified himself. He could have stated his name; he could have done that even before the operator switched the tape recorder on, but the (5)operator heard it and recorded it on paper. So the two parties -- and the two parties can, of course, identify themselves in the course of the conversation. However, there is another thing. Very often the voices can be recognised. In the course of one day you have the same person having (10)several conversations, and of course the operator can remember the sound of his voice. Or another case, he might say that he is the corps commander, for example, and we did have a corps commander at the time so we would know who that person was. JUDGE RIAD: In fact, this leads me to a more specific question, (15)because you said textually there are several methods for the recognition voices. I'm speaking of scientific methods, the way you can have a voiceprint or that sort of thing. • A.: No, no, no.
JUDGE RIAD: If we apply this to Prosecution Exhibit 303/A, when
(20)you say the conversation was between someone called Krstic and Lieutenant
Colonel Krsmanovic, according to your knowledge, how did they detect that
it was Krstic? Because it's announced as a fact. He said it was as if he
knew it but it did not come in the conversation. In the conversation they
said, "Hello, is that Krsmanovic?" but the other doesn't say, "Hello, is
(25)that Krstic?"
JUDGE RIAD: So it becomes a matter of practice that they always know who is speaking, and then they just mention it without having to prove it. • A.: Any dilemma that might exist would be recorded as well. So if he (15)wasn't certain, then there would be an "X," or if it wasn't audible enough, if he didn't hear just one letter of the name, once again you would have a question mark next to the name, which means that it associates that name but it need not be, because one letter might change a name. So unless you have heard a name completely, we would put "X" or (20)"Y."
JUDGE RIAD: That's quite satisfactory. Thank you.
Just as a hypothetical question. In the conversation in the same
document, there was an order by, what you called, someone called Krstic
asking for 50 buses in total at the stadium in Bratunac, by 1700 hours.
(25)Could there be any possibility of knowing if he's calling from Bratunac,
• A.: We were not able to locate this with any precision. JUDGE RIAD: Or approximately, you cannot. (5) • A.: We only knew that the conversation passed by that segment, and we intercepted it there. JUDGE RIAD: Thank you very much. • A.: Thank you too. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Thank you very much, Judge Fouad (10)Riad. Madam Judge Wald has the floor.
JUDGE WALD: Witness, two of these intercepts do identify in the
paper form General Krstic as being a participant in the conversation, 303
and 305, and then there are several intercepts which you or whoever
(15)prepared them doesn't identify. It says, "Unidentified General" or
"Unidentified X" or "Y" and you had told us that very often the person
listening can sometimes identify because they recognise the voice, as well
as a formal introduction that goes on the tape.
My question is: Since all of these intercepts that we've been
(20)dealing with over the last hour all took place over a couple of days, July
12th to July 14th, would it be reasonable to infer, since General Krstic,
by whatever means was identified as the participant in two of them, that
that pretty much means that he would not have engaged in any of the
intercepts where the people are unidentified, like "Unidentified General,"
(25)or else his voice would have been recognised, or is that not a fair
• A.: I hope that I have understood you correctly now, and you must try and understand me too. JUDGE WALD: I will. (5) • A.: I forgot to mention a detail which can bring the operator into a dilemma, that is to say, that he cannot say the name, that is, the quality of the connection, the quality of the sound. Perhaps it was an individual who took part in the previous conversation, but because of the quality of the communication connection itself -- what I want to say is that we (10)didn't want to send out any disinformation to our head office ourselves; that was not our intention at any time. JUDGE WALD: So you are saying that you erred on the side of being very conservative, and even if you thought somebody might be the same person, you wouldn't put it down unless you had something more certain; is (15)that right? • A.: Yes, that's right. That is precisely right. We would have to be 100 per cent certain in order to write somebody's name down. JUDGE WALD: Thank you. • A.: Of course we didn't know that there would be The Hague. (20) JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Witness W, you have just asserted something that I was going to ask you, because you said that you were doing serious work but that at the time - then - you didn't know that you would be working for the Tribunal as well. • A.: No, I did not. Not in my ... (25)
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] Another question. You saw a
• A.: Well, this is my answer: I think that it was a type of working document that you have been handed; the working documents. So why should (5)I speak on that subject if it was the task of my service? I think that is sufficient, to answer your question. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Very well. Another question. If the document 557 -- so we have document 557, and the date is the 12th of July. Document 563 has the same date, that is (10)to say, the 12th of July, and another document, 563 -- no, document 561, what date should it have? Have you got a pencil and could write it down, a piece of paper -- Mr. Usher, please -- because it's more visible that way. So document 561, dated the 12th of April -- I beg your pardon. No, I jumped the gun. Let (15)me start again. Document 557, 12th of July; 563, 12th of July. What is the date that document 561 should have? Have you understood? • A.: It would be logical that the same date would be on that document too; that is logical. However, there is the possibility of the fact that (20)it was sent -- that is to say, I'm not quite certain of which document we mean, whether it was a document taken over, but it might have been processed during the night and entered in the following day, or that it was somewhere between day and night. I would have to see. I would have to check that. (25)
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] Your answer is sufficient. In
• A.: Yes. (5) JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Another question for you. I'm not sure that I understood something properly. What is the date when you began working in that building with the Anti-Electronic Warfare Unit in it? • A.: There is an exact date. I know that it was in December 1994 when (10)the first report was sent out. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Another question. We can see that the 12th of July, there was a lot of work on the 12th of July for you. We can also see that the operator JN160 worked throughout the day of the 12th, more or less, because the documents have that date, and also on (15)the 13th and 14th. Let us take the 12th for a moment. If that particular individual listened in once and recognised the voice of General Krstic, is it logical to suppose that he could recognise it in all the intercepts, subsequent intercepts, except the ones where you said there was a poor communication (20)line?
• A.: It is not logical to recognise it every time. Let me try and
explain why. Nobody could take on the responsibility of saying, "I heard
the voice once and I'll be able to recognise it every subsequent time."
First of all, this is because we didn't only listen to Krstic.
(25)Had we only listened to Krstic and had we only had Krstic, then that could
JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Another question: During those (5)same days, on the other side in your service I think you said that there were at least two people working there, the operator, that is to say, Operator JN160, and the other person, Operator JD073. How did you work together? • A.: Quite simple. We had a room the size -- that is to say, it was (10)three and a half metres by three metres in size. And I've already said that we had a bed there and the device and a table, and that was enough. We were there all the time. That's where we were. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] And my other question: The documents that we have seen have to do with two frequencies largely, 785 (15)and 836. Let's leave out the other numbers. We see that the 785 frequency produced at least -- that is to say, the documents were obtained on channels 5, 11 and 3. The other one, let us leave behind for the moment. Now, these channels, 5, 11 and 3, were they part of the 24 (20)possible channels on the same frequency or not?
• A.: Yes. Very often -- that is to say, I have not mentioned this so
far. In identifying the individual channels within the frameworks of
those 24 channels, we knew exactly who was using which, but with the
proviso that from that telephone, somebody else could call from that
(25)telephone. So we never dared say exactly who it was. It was a telephone
JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Did the same person monitor the same channel or could the same person switch to other channels? • A.: We had distinct channels, and as we didn't have many personnel, only [redacted], we mostly used those few channels or listened to those few (10)channels and frequencies and all the things that we have said; identified the channel, who it belongs to, et cetera, et cetera. So it wasn't one person who was associated to one channel exclusively, because we didn't have sufficient people. But we also did not cover hundreds of frequencies at the same time. That was not possible. (15) JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] So thank you very much. We have learned a lot about radio today, and so we wish to thank you for teaching us and, above all, for speaking seriously. Thank you for your testimony. I think we have some exhibits to admit, Mr. Harmon.
MR. HARMON: I have shown and introduced through this witness's
(20)testimony and laid the foundation for a number of exhibits. These are
exhibits which were not contained in the notebooks but which are distinct
pieces of paper, and I can identify them. And I would move for their
admission, obviously understanding the Court's previous ruling. But this
constitutes a distinct set of documents, and I will identify them.
(25)303A, B and C; 304A, B and C; 305A, B and C; 306A, B and C and C
JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Thank you, Mr. Harmon. But in (5)view of the ruling of the Chamber, perhaps they should be put in the same package, and I think that is what Mr. Petrusic is about to ask. Mr. Petrusic. MR. PETRUSIC: [Int.] Yes, precisely so, Mr. President. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] In that case, Mr. Petrusic, you (10)see that the Prosecutor has facilitated your task a little, so please try and facilitate the task of the Prosecution as well. So review all the documents so as to be able to take a position as soon as possible, please. I think we have come to the end of your testimony, Witness W. We (15)thank you very much for coming here, and we wish you success in your work and a safe journey to your country. We will now adjourn. We will be here again tomorrow at 9.30. --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 2.45 p.m., to be reconvened on (20)Wednesday, the 21st day of June, 2000, at 9.30 a.m. |
