Milosevic Transcript 2003-01-31

¹⁵²⁹⁸

Friday, 31 January 2003

[Open session]

[The witness entered court]

[The accused entered court]

--- Upon commencing at 9.05 a.m.

JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Milosevic.

THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.

JUDGE MAY: Microphone.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I should like to make an objection, because I didn't know, actually, what was happening in connection with this witness. I think this is just a pretext for a change in the order of the witnesses, and I wish to state this for the record, because the witness who was mentioned yesterday received protective measures from you only a couple of days ago.

JUDGE MAY: Just one moment. We're in the middle of the examination of this witness, and as you should know by now, if a witness is giving evidence, he shouldn't be interrupted unless it's some relevant part of his evidence which is being objected to. We'll come back to that. We'll come back to that when we finish this witness, and we can then deal with the order of witnesses, the next witness, and anything else you want to raise, but let us finish this witness, your cross-examination. Yes.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well, Mr. May. I had in mind that this subject was raised in the middle of the cross-examination by Mr. Nice. So I thought I was entitled to finishing it. But never mind. ¹⁵²⁹⁹

WITNESS: WITNESS C-[Resumed]

[Witness answered through interpreter] Cross-examined by Mr. Milosevic: [Continued]

Q. Mr. C-013, you were speaking about prisons, and as far as I understand it, you knew nothing about who was in prison the prisons, what they were doing there, what the conditions inside were. Isn't that right?

A. One could put it that way, yes.

Q. But you do know that they existed.

A. Yes.

Q. Were there Serbs and Croats in those prisons, criminals who had been arrested on various grounds because of their conflict with the law? And people of other ethnicities living in the area, they were all there, weren't they?

A. Yes.

Q. And since you didn't have anything to do with prisons, how did it happen that you released some people from prison as a result of which you say you had problems?

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Your Honour, this matter was discussed in private session.

JUDGE MAY: Yes. We'll go into private session.

[Private session]

[redacted]

[redacted] ¹⁵³⁰⁰ Pages 15300-15344 - redacted - private session

¹⁵³⁴⁵

[redacted]

--- Recess taken at 10.41 a.m.

--- On resuming at 11.05 a.m.

[Open session]

JUDGE MAY: Yes. We are in open session. Mr. Kay.

MR. KAY: Your Honours, if we turn to Exhibit 375, tab 1, the first letter. And for the purposes of this questioning, if you turn to page 8 of the English statement of the witness, middle paragraph. Questioned by Mr. Kay:

Q. C-013, when you gave evidence yesterday, you told us that the man who came to see you about events at the prison and who gave you this letter then discussed the matter with you; is that right?

A. I don't remember exactly. It wasn't just one man; he was Zeljko Cizmic, the chief of the police station in Dalj.

Q. Can you answer my question, please? You told us yesterday that he discussed the letter with you when he met you. Is that right?

A. I really do not understand the question. Are you referring to this man that I mentioned a moment ago?

Q. I am referring to this man.

A. Yes.

Q. Can you explain why in your statement, when you referred to this man coming to your office and giving you this letter to be handed to the minister, you said, "Without telling me anything about the contents of the ¹⁵³⁴⁶ envelope, he left my office"?

A. Yes. I didn't know what was in the envelope, that is true, just then. But then we had a short conversation. Something had happened. Such-and-such a person was there, and then he left the office, and they did such-and-such a thing.

Q. If that is your answer, can you also explain, then, why in your statement you have said: "Finally I opened it, and found a document inside.

"Having read the document, I realised that it referred to a very serious incident."

And that reading of the document was sometime later.

A. Yes.

Q. Can you explain the difference in your stories to this Court?

A. A few days ago, I explained that this, this document, was made four years ago, and that after coming here, many things came to mind, and I wanted to complement many points, and maybe that is the difference, nothing more than that.

Q. Looking at this document, which I think you mean the statement, that was made during a period of two days, the 16th and 17th of May of 1999. That was closer --

A. Yes.

Q. -- to the time of these events. Isn't that more likely to be a more accurate representation of what happened?

A. I don't see any major differences between the two stories. That is what happened. Now, whether that person said anything to me just then ¹⁵³⁴⁷ or not, and then I later remembered, I think that is not important.

Q. Well, that's for others to judge. But I'm giving you an opportunity to explain it because this document and what it means has been challenged by the accused. Do you understand? And it's to be tested as to whether you're telling the truth or not. Do you understand?

A. I understand everything.

Q. In fact, this statement goes on to say - and I'm turning to page 9, Your Honours - that your discussion with the man Cizmic took place after you had opened the letter, some days later, not before receiving the letter.

A. I did say that, that we spoke very briefly, maybe for a couple of seconds then, and then the conversation took place later.

Q. Looking at the letter which is dated the 23rd of September, do we take it that copies of this letter were sent to other places? Don't identify those places.

A. Yes, we can.

Q. Let's turn to letter two. This letter you said you'd never seen when you gave evidence yesterday; is that right?

A. Yes, I know which letter you're referring to, but I had never seen it.

Q. If we look at the letter, your evidence was that in fact you should have received a copy of it. Is that right?

A. Yes, that's right.

Q. Are you able to give us any explanation, then, as to why, if this official report was typed up for you and you were named as the first ¹⁵³⁴⁸ ^{BLANK PAGE} ¹⁵³⁴⁹ person to receive it, can you give any explanation why you wouldn't have received it?

A. I really cannot. I really cannot provide an explanation why I did not receive it.

Q. Looking at the report itself, does it say who wrote the report?

A. Yes.

Q. Who does it identify as writing the report? Can you point that out to us?

A. I can. Zeljko Cizmic, the commander of the Dalj police station.

Q. It said that he signed -- it's shown that he signed the report, but it doesn't say that he wrote the report or conducted the interview that's described within the report. Isn't that right?

A. I will need to explain to you the role of the police commander to be able to answer that question.

Q. Do we need to go into private session for that or can it be public session?

A. I can do it in public.

Q. Thank you. If you could, then, give a brief explanation.

A. Let me say briefly the commander or commanders of the police do not compile such notes. This is done by the operatives whose duty it is to do that. The commander sends them into the field to establish what had been done, any incidents or acts, and then they have to report to him as to what had been done. He has the right to allow one of the operatives, or order him, to write down what has been done, and he can just sign such a note. ¹⁵³⁵⁰

Q. Thank you. I've got one other matter to ask you about.

MR. KAY: For this purpose, Your Honours, if you could turn to page 5 of the statement, top paragraph.

Q. When you gave evidence, C-013, you told us that you went to Belgrade and, amongst other things, collected weapons, and you gave the Court details about that and about bringing them back. Can you explain the apparent contradiction in your statement which says that at the time of collecting equipment, equipment was delivered from Serbia for the militia and you were called at home and told to come and take over the equipment, and you took the truck to the office and stored it there, and the next morning distributed it, being the equipment.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Your Honour?

JUDGE MAY: Yes.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: I think we have to go into private session because it's now actually touching very much --

JUDGE MAY: Yes. Private session.

[Private session]

[redacted]

[redacted] ¹⁵³⁵¹ Page 15351 - redacted - private session

¹⁵³⁵²

[redacted]

[Open session] Re-examined by Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff:

Q. Witness, I would also like to refer to your statement, and it's actually the last paragraph of page 10, and I would like to quote. You say here: "I would also like to state that I have more information directly related to crimes committed in the territory of Eastern Slavonia, Baranja, and Western Srem. This information could jeopardise my life if leaked out. Therefore, I'm not willing or able to discuss it with the investigator at present."

At the time when you gave that statement, were you afraid and did you, therefore, not tell all you know?

A. Yes. At that time, [redacted]

[redacted]

[redacted] ¹⁵³⁵³

[redacted]

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Your Honours --

Q. Let me stop you.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: I think we should go into private session.

[Private session]

[redacted]

[redacted] ¹⁵³⁵⁴ Pages 15354-15358 - redacted - private session

¹⁵³⁵⁹

[redacted]

[Open session]

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF:

Q. Mr. Milosevic suggested to you that the Serbian MUP simply assisted the SAO authorities in establishing a civilian police to prevent ¹⁵³⁶⁰ looting. If I understood you correctly, it was the TO forces and Arkan who did the looting.

Did the MUP Serbia arm the TO and the people who did the looting? Do you know?

A. Yes, it did.

Q. And the special forces that arrived with Zavisic and later on, did they ever help you to prevent looting?

A. No. They worked independently. And to this day, I don't know what their field of activity was, in fact.

Q. Did the military authorities and the persons like Zavisic, Ante Kostic, Badza, did they ever assist you in your civilian duties and prevent the looting? Effectively assist you?

A. I can say quite frankly no, they did not.

Q. You mentioned -- or, rather, Mr. Milosevic addressed with you the person Dokmanovic, and you mentioned that he visited Mr. Milosevic in April and May and that he told you that. When -- which year do you mean, and when did Mr. Dokmanovic tell you about it?

A. The year was 1991, and I saw Dokmanovic many times at TO meetings, in April, May, June. And every time he would say where he had been, what he had been doing, as well as the objectives in that region.

Q. You mentioned also the person Taska when you were asked, that he went to see Milosevic. Did Taska tell you that himself or how do you know that, and about what time period are we talking?

A. We're talking about that same time period, the same one that Dokmanovic is mentioned in except - and I have to correct myself there - ¹⁵³⁶¹ this was in April and May because, as you know, I left Bobota towards the end of May or mid-May.

At that time already, Tasak had been going to Belgrade every few days and he would return from there and say that he had been to see Mr. Milosevic, he had been with Mr. Milosevic.

Q. Mr. Milosevic asked you whether you fled the region, and you actually said that you were expelled, and I would like to try to establish what you mean when you used that term. Did you leave the region because you were afraid to get killed or harmed?

A. Yes. You put it very correctly.

Q. You had actually a similar exchange with Mr. Milosevic in relation to the fate of the Croatian population in and around Dalj when Mr. Milosevic put to you that the Croat population were not expelled but simply withdrew. You disagreed with him, and you said that there were many instances when members of the TO entered people's houses and forced them out.

Let me, therefore, clarify. Were -- was the Croatian population forcefully --

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. May, I have an objection.

JUDGE MAY: Yes.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] In the cross-examination, I put it to the witness -- I put his own statement to the witness in which it says quite literally - and I can find the passage and read it out to you - that the Croats who remained in Dalj after the liberation of Dalj did not have any problems. And I asked him to confirm that. And then he changed his ¹⁵³⁶² testimony afterwards. So I didn't present this assertion; I was quoting from his own statement, his own words when he said that the Croatian population over there had no problems.

JUDGE MAY: We can find the witness statement and we can look at the passage. Yes. Let's go on.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Found it. Here it is. Page 5, paragraph 2. It says here, and this is what I quoted: "The Croats who remained in the village at that time had no serious problems." And that is quite contradictory to his answer and response to the question during the examination-in-chief the day before yesterday as to whether all the Croats had left Dalj, and in answer to that, he said all of them did, that they had been expelled from Dalj --

JUDGE MAY: Mr. Milosevic, you have made your point. You've made your point. Yes. We will find it. We will look at the statement. It will be for us to make a decision about the effect of it. Now, counsel is entitled to clarify the position.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] My objection was that the lady over there was questioning the witness wrongly and presenting his assertions as being my assertions.

JUDGE MAY: Yes. We've heard what you've said. Yes, Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: I think there is something wrong with my microphone. It doesn't work. Oh, now it's working. Your Honour, I did not misquote the accused. Actually, it is -- what he put to the witness -- ¹⁵³⁶³

JUDGE MAY: Let's not spend too much time on this.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Okay. Okay.

JUDGE MAY: Clarify it.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: I want to clarify.

Q. You mentioned that Croats were forced out of their houses. Who did that, and in what kind of an amount did that take place?

A. That was done by the members of the TO. They were the ones who did that, and the citizens themselves, amongst themselves. And I remember very well having said that in my first statement. Neighbours against neighbours. And I also remember full well that I said that that same evening this was shown on television. So there is video footage and evidence of that.

Q. Did that happen during or after the attack or both?

A. Afterwards, after. This took place in the afternoon and the evening of that same day. And the camera crew had already arrived from the other side of the Danube, and this was directly televised.

Q. Mr. Milosevic put to you this quote in your statement, that the Croats that stayed did not have serious problems. And if it is -- the complete quote is, "at that time." And I would like to ask you: At the same time you told us about the detention of people, you told us about abductions by Arkan, and you spoke about the looting. Can you explain this discrepancy as it seems, the seemingly -- this sentence, can you explain this sentence, what you meant, that the Croats that remained did not have serious problems at that time? What does that mean?

A. I explained -- actually, I asked him whether it was yesterday or ¹⁵³⁶⁴ the day before, but I explained the term "at that time," and that "at that time" meant during that particular day or two days, while the attack was going on and immediately after the attack, nothing more than that.

Q. And the Croatian population, did they experience problems later on?

A. I explained that too. The Croatian population, in general, is considered to be -- that is to say, the members of all the nations or ethnic groups that are not of Serb religion. I said that many such people had stayed on in Dalj, Dalj mountain, and that the two or three villages that exist up there, that they were mostly populated by Hungarian inhabitants, by Hungarians, in fact. So those are the people that stayed up there and against whom this terror was exerted mostly.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Your Honour, that's my last question.

JUDGE MAY: Yes.

MR. KAY: One matter to be raised -- there is one matter to be raised. If Your Honours look at the first page of the newspaper article, where it says, "Your mandate was finished after the 9th of March. Do you believe that the 9th of March was a police mistake?" I point that out in the interests of the accused.

JUDGE MAY: Clearly we will need some other evidence on the point. Are we in open session? We are.

Witness C-013, that concludes your evidence. Thank you for coming to the International Tribunal to give it. You are free to go.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you too.

[The witness withdrew] ¹⁵³⁶⁵

MR. GROOME: Your Honour, while we're waiting for the witness to be brought in, there are a couple of preliminary matters. It seems that Mr. Kirudja has been the subject of some protective measures. After having discussed this with Mr. Kirudja during his days here in The Hague, he is not requesting any protective measures, and I would therefore ask the Chamber to amend any prior order which would have granted any protective measures for this witness.

JUDGE MAY: Very well.

MR. GROOME: Secondly, Your Honour, the witness spent over three years in the former Yugoslavia in an official capacity and conducted many meetings and negotiations. He has brought to The Hague his notebooks from that time and has asked that they be near him should his memory fail. They are here at the front of the courtroom. I would ask that he be permitted to have -- that they be placed within his reach so he may refer to them if he needs to during the course of his testimony.

JUDGE MAY: Yes, he can certainly do that.

MR. GROOME: And then finally, Your Honour, in preparation for Mr. Kirudja's testimony, a number of reports that he authored were reviewed. Now, while these documents are not Rule 68 as to Mr. Kirudja, they have nothing to do with his credibility, there is a view of these documents that they would corroborate some of the statements made by the accused that might be considered in the nature of a defence. Clearance has just been received for these documents. They have been disclosed this morning. I raise this now - it's a rather small packet of documents - but just to draw the attention of the accused and the amici to these documents. They ¹⁵³⁶⁶ may wish to review them over the weekend, and they may wish to -- Mr. Kirudja would be the person best able to authenticate and speak to these documents, they may wish to ask Mr. Kirudja about these reports. I would also note that they are available to be entered into evidence. The provider has released any claim of confidentiality over the documents.

JUDGE MAY: So -- just a moment. The package is available, is it, whatever?

MR. GROOME: It was handed over this morning, Your Honour.

JUDGE MAY: It was handed over both to the amici and to the accused.

MR. GROOME: Yes, Your Honour.

JUDGE MAY: So they have them and they may review them over the weekend, and if they want to ask questions about them, this is the witness to ask.

MR. GROOME: Yes, Your Honour. Just a clarification: They were handed to the registrar to be given to the accused. I don't know if he has physical possession of them yet.

JUDGE MAY: But they'll be coming his way.

MR. GROOME: Thank you.

JUDGE MAY: Yes. Yes, Mr. Milosevic, what is it?

THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.

JUDGE MAY: They can't hear you. They can't hear you.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I was saying -- my question was why we're in private session, but I see that in the meantime, it's been public, so there's no point in my putting that question at all. ¹⁵³⁶⁷

MR. NICE: Your Honour, before --

JUDGE MAY: Yes, we're now in open session, so there is no difficulty about that.

Yes. You've heard what counsel has said, that there will be some documents which will be served on you which relate to this witness which may be helpful to your case, so you should have a look at them over the weekend.

MR. NICE: Your Honour, before we start on the next witness, can I just mention a couple of administrative things that concern next week and Monday. Reminding the Chamber that the accused was already wanting to raise something about the witness list.

He's been served with a witness list, I hope this morning, which identifies today's witness and the witnesses coming next week. I trust the Chamber has a list as well.

JUDGE MAY: We do.

MR. NICE: C-39 won't start before Tuesday. Dr. Bosanac may be taken quite shortly.

JUDGE MAY: While we're dealing with that witness, we have, of course, made an order in relation to her transcript being admitted.

MR. NICE: Indeed so, and that's one of the reasons why she may be taken quite shortly. In any event, there really is the need for some resolution of some of the outstanding procedural issues. There's the financial argument, and it's now been fully addressed, or substantially addressed, in writing, and we would be anxious to dispose of that, were that convenient, on Monday. ¹⁵³⁶⁸ ^{BLANK PAGE} ¹⁵³⁶⁹

JUDGE MAY: It's not convenient on Monday. We recognise -- we recognise the -- that it is outstanding. Unless there's any very good reason, we would rather hear evidence. We have earmarked a date for it, which is a day on which we have to hear an interlocutory application, the 25th of February, and it may be convenient to have that day for legal argument and include Torkildsen as well as progress of the case into the agenda for the day.

MR. NICE: In which case only one other thing that we would have wanted possibly to raise on Monday, and that is part, in any event, of our general concerns about procedures, that we've had the first 92 bis application response from the amici, and I gather the other one's available and is going to be -- and is going to be served possibly a courtesy copy today and filed --

JUDGE MAY: Will that be done, please, so we have it for the weekend.

MR. KAY: Yes, the transcript one. We've done the 64 witnesses, was done and --

JUDGE MAY: It just hasn't made its way to me is all. Judge Kwon has it.

MR. NICE: We are obviously anxious to know what the real current consequences of the time limit are. First of all, we need -- we need to know whether our calculation of the number of days remaining matches yours, and of course, we need resolution of the 92 bis matter, because, for example, if 92 bis witnesses are all going to be cross-examined, that's another 17 days for Croatia alone on the basis of the number of ¹⁵³⁷⁰ witnesses we are calling, or something like that. And we need resolution of that to budget remaining time and/or to persuade the Chamber further about procedural steps that may save time. So we are very anxious that that matter can be heard as swiftly as possible.

JUDGE MAY: Of course. As I say, the date we have in mind is the 25th of February.

MR. NICE: Thank you very much.

JUDGE MAY: Just help me on one thing, Mr. Nice. I'm looking at the overall number of witnesses. We had a list on the 31st of July. I take it that that has now been bypassed by the list which you provided on the 11th of December.

MR. NICE: Certainly, yes.

JUDGE MAY: That is the up-to-date list from which we should be working.

MR. NICE: Certainly the up-to-date list as of December. I can't, I'm afraid, recall whether there have been further amendments, but there may well have been. But no, that's the list to be working off for the time being.

JUDGE MAY: Very well.

MR. NICE: And one chart was provided in some detail for Croatia. There's another chart that's either been prepared or soon to be prepared for Bosnia and will be served on you if it hasn't been already. I can't remember the position on that.

There will be another motion about that today.

JUDGE MAY: Very well. Thank you. ¹⁵³⁷¹

MR. KAY: It would help us to know if there were any legal issues that would be taken on Monday because, if possible, I'm struggling with the judicial notice motion at the moment, which is quite a considerable document, and it's easier for me not to be in court, to deal with that.

JUDGE MAY: Well, Mr. Nice, are there any immediate issues which you need dealing with? I mean, I doubt we'll be in a position to deal with the Rule 92 bis. There are 64 at least, if not 70, statements involved and I doubt we will be able to deal with that on Monday.

MR. NICE: Your Honour, if -- if this witness takes a significant amount of Monday, as he may well now do, given the time, and if Dr. Bosanac is available, we can easily fill up Monday. But I wouldn't want -- I wouldn't want any delay to occur in relation to 92 bis because we really do need to know as soon as we possibly can.

JUDGE MAY: Very well. The only thing is we need a date -- to fix a date to hear legal argument about 92 bis. At the moment, we have in mind the 25th of February, but if you would wish us to deal with the matter earlier, of course we'll consider that.

MR. NICE: I'll revert.

JUDGE MAY: Perhaps you could let Mr. Kay know when you have in mind.

MR. NICE: Certainly. But I'm sure he can safely be out of court, on the present basis, on Monday.

MR. KAY: Would the Court forgive me if I just leave and make certain arrangements which need to be made, and I'll rejoin the court after the break. ¹⁵³⁷²

JUDGE MAY: Yes. Yes, Mr. Milosevic.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I should like to make an objection. In my opinion, the other side is intentionally complicating and causing confusion with the schedule of witnesses. They keep changing the order of witnesses, and you saw yesterday that the witness that should have appeared today has been removed from the list with the explanation that somebody threatened him, though it was a witness who has given, granted protective measures by you a couple of days ago. So it appears that throughout this time while he was not protected, nobody threatened him, but only a couple of days when he was granted protective measures --

MR. NICE: I suspect this is --

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] -- suddenly he was threatened.

MR. NICE: -- oblique attempt by this witness [sic] to identify yet another witness, and we dealt with it yesterday. We dealt with it on the basis that the witness was carefully not being identified. The accused knows perfectly well what is afoot. When he said yesterday his only desire was to know the order of witnesses, I was tempted to reply that it was to do with the order of witnesses that threats were effective. I can see no substance in what the accused is raising. All that's happened is there has been some acceleration of witnesses. He is no doubt ready to deal with this witness and what he is doing would seem to me to be probably devious.

JUDGE MAY: No. We disagree. He's entitled to make his objection. ¹⁵³⁷³ Now, you know quite well that if there's anything that should lead us into private session, Mr. Milosevic, we should go in there, but we'll let you make your objection, although so far, I can see no substance in it.

Now, what is it, the objection you want to make?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] My objection is that I believe that this is fabricated and also the next witness, Graham Blewitt, as far as I know, he's a Deputy Prosecutor, and he was not protected, and I assume that he was threatened and that's why he's been removed as well. So we have the next witness now in order --

JUDGE MAY: Mr. Milosevic, there is absolutely no substance in that suggestion. If there was any question of our thinking that this list was being manipulated for some improper purpose, we would rule on it. But there is none. This is a long and complex case involving a large number of witnesses who -- most of whom come from the region or from other areas of the world. It has been complicated by the fact that you have been ill from time to time and, therefore, the time has been broken up. There is no substance in what you say. We will protect your interests, which is this: That you should have time properly to prepare for each witness. We will do that and ensure that you do. Apart from that, there is nothing in what you say.

Now, let us get on with the evidence.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I have another matter to raise.

JUDGE MAY: Well, quickly. Quickly.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very quickly. I'm saving both my ¹⁵³⁷⁴ time and yours, as much as I can.

A moment ago, Mr. Nice said that the next witness, one of the next witnesses was Vesna Bosanac, that she would be brief, with some kind of transcript being attached from an earlier hearing. I think that is also unfair, because it is directed exclusively to limit my time.

JUDGE MAY: I'm going to interrupt you. In relation to a later witness, you can address us before she comes to give evidence. We're not going to waste time on it now. But if you care to look at the order which we made, you'll see that we admitted the transcript. Now, for the moment, we'll hear from this witness. In due course, we'll deal with others. Yes.

No. No, Mr. Milosevic. You've taken up enough time. Yes.

MR. GROOME: Your Honour, the Prosecution calls Mr. Charles Kirudja.

Your Honour, while he's being brought in, there is simply one binder of exhibits the Prosecution will seek to tender. Perhaps a number could be assigned to that now. I will be working with exhibits from the outset.

THE REGISTRAR: That's Prosecutor's Exhibit 378.

[The witness entered court]

JUDGE MAY: Yes. Let the witness take the declaration.

THE WITNESS: I solemnly declare that I will speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

JUDGE MAY: If you'd like to particular take a seat. ¹⁵³⁷⁵

WITNESS: CHARLES KIRUDJA

JUDGE MAY: Yes. Examined by Mr. Groome:

Q. Mr. Kirudja, the Chamber has permitted you to have access to your diaries during your examination. I'd ask you to just take a moment to arrange them in a way that will allow you to get to specific dates quickly.

Mr. Kirudja, who do you presently work for?

A. United Nations.

MR. GROOME: I'd ask that the witness be shown Prosecution Exhibit 378, tab 1.

Q. Mr. Kirudja, I would ask you to look at this document and tell us what it is.

A. It's a copy of my resume.

Q. To abbreviate your testimony, I will not ask you detailed questions about your background. Are you willing to answer questions about your educational and professional background should the amici or the accused wish to ask you?

A. Yes, I would.

Q. I want to focus in on your time in Yugoslavia. Can you please tell us what period of time did you work in Yugoslavia or the former Yugoslavia?

A. I arrived in the former Yugoslavia first week of April, 1992, and served there until June 1995.

Q. Can you please briefly tell us the different locations you were ¹⁵³⁷⁶ stationed at during that three-year period before we continue.

A. First I was assigned to Sector North and proceeded there through Sector East, arriving in Sector North Topusko around 18th of April.

Q. Where did you serve next?

A. I remained in Topusko in the capacity position of civil affairs coordinator until around August 1994 and then was asked to relocate and resume -- and assume the role of chief civil affairs -- Chief of Staff of civil affairs in Zagreb, where I remained until towards the August 1994, and then I was posted to Belgrade in the capacity of the delegate of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General, where I remained until June 1995.

Q. I want to focus the first part of my questions to you on your responsibilities in Sector North. Is it true that Sector North is located in Croatia?

A. Yes it is.

Q. And was that one of four designated areas, so designated by the Vance Plan, in Croatia?

A. Yes, it is.

MR. GROOME: I'd ask that Prosecution 378, tab 2, be placed on the overhead projector, and I would point out that this is a photocopy of an earlier Prosecution Exhibit, 336, pages 20 and 21. That's the map book.

Q. Mr. Kirudja, do you recognise Prosecution 378, tab 2?

A. Yes, I do.

Q. And what is that? What is depicted in that exhibit?

A. It's an approximate demarcation of what became Sector North of the ¹⁵³⁷⁷ area of deployment of the United Nations Protection Force.

Q. Did part of -- the area that you've outlined, I'd ask you to point to it with the pointer.

A. This is the area demarcated in black, approximately.

Q. Part of the area or the outline of Sector North, was that an internationally recognised border?

A. Not all of it. I beg your pardon. Not all of it. The part that constituted an international border in the sense of the recognised border between Croatia and Bosnia is this part beginning right here, following that, coming right through Velika Kladusa, all of this, continuing that way, continuing that way. It proceeded the other way but the sector did not extend that far. And then this rough demarcation turns around that area, as you can see, proceeds this way, and ends there. This is not an international border.

Q. So the record captures that, would it be fair to say that the lower line on the map is the international border? The upper and the left-hand line indicates an internal border of Croatia?

A. That's partially correct. The bottom part indicates an international border. The top part indicates an approximate extent of what became the boundary of Sector North and not necessarily an international border.

Q. Could I ask you to indicate where your office was located when you worked in Sector North.

A. Right here, in a place named Topusko.

Q. Now, would it be fair to say that your primary responsibility in ¹⁵³⁷⁸ ^{BLANK PAGE} ¹⁵³⁷⁹ Sector North was to work as a member of the UN in the implementation of the Vance Plan?

A. Yes, it is.

Q. Can I ask you to please describe for the Chamber the paramount features of the Vance Plan.

A. Vance Plan had basically three essential or prime components which are described basically in terms of operational requirement as the first part being the complete demobilisation of the previous military forces and containment of the weapons that were issued to those units under United Nations joint custody, what in the Vance Plan is known as double key. That was the essence of the primary and immediate requirement or expectation of the Vance Plan.

Second, the Vance Plan did envisage a requirement for someone to keep law and order after these forces had been demobilised. It therefore required a police force be in the area and be made up of the local police that -- be made of local police only endowed with light weapons, side weapons, and that that police be monitored closely by the UN deployment of civil police and it would be responsible for law and order, and that police be made up of representatives of the community as it used to be prior to the forces. That's the second part.

Third part, the Vance Plan also envisaged that after the demobilisation, after the police is deployed in the manner I have mentioned under the monitoring of the UN, that there be conditions that would be conducive for voluntary return of all displaced persons in the area, and such conditions necessitated trying to look after rebuilding, ¹⁵³⁸⁰ restoration of the infrastructure and so forth, humanitarian aid and all of that, and that would be the third major component.

Q. I want to ask you about the second feature, that dealt with law and order. Did part of that also place restrictions on the type of governmental system that could exist in the area?

A. The Vance Plan had recognised in those areas where the UN be deployed, it named opstinas - roughly translated to municipalities - that were constituted at that time, consisting of a mayor and a police force. And those opstinas named as comprising each of the sectors would be the soul recognised authority in the area for the purposes of the Vance Plan, maintenance of the status quo and law and order. An example: In Sector North, there is Vrginmost. It's a police station. It's a municipality. It had a mayor called Obradovic and it had a police chief called Djuro Skaljac. That was the recognised authority in Vrginmost. Other than that, the Vance Plan recognised the signatories of that Vance Plan, which were the authorities in Belgrade and the authorities in Zagreb.

Q. So was it correct then that the Vance Plan did not recognise any umbrella governmental structure that united local municipalities in this area?

A. It's correct.

Q. Now, who was the head of the UN mission to Croatia at this time?

A. Initially when this mission was deployed, it was Lieutenant General Satish Nambiar.

Q. And was he a military person or a civilian? ¹⁵³⁸¹

A. He was a lieutenant general, a military person.

Q. And was it unusual for a UN mission to be headed by a military person?

A. Yes indeed. This was very deliberate. And the then head of the DPKO in New York, the department of peacekeeping operation, Marrack Goulding, did explain publicly why that was so, and that was because the Vance Plan was a holding pattern of the status quo pending a lasting solution, political solution being found elsewhere outside the mission, and to underscore that point, the mission was not headed as normally it would be by a Special Representative of the Secretary-General, to serve notice that it did not have responsibilities for political negotiations for the matters that separated the parties.

Q. Was that --

JUDGE MAY: Mr. Groome, when you get to a convenient moment, it's time for a break.

MR. GROOME: This would be convenient, Your Honour.

JUDGE MAY: Mr. Kirudja, we're going to break now. In this and any other breaks there may be, may I remind you not to speak about your evidence until it's over, and that does include the members of the Prosecution team.

We will adjourn now for 20 minutes.

THE WITNESS: Understood.

--- Recess taken at 12.17 p.m.

--- On resuming at 12.36 p.m.

JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Groome. ¹⁵³⁸²

MR. GROOME:

Q. Mr. Kirudja, just before the break you were explaining to us why a military person was the head of the implementation of the Vance Plan. I'd like to ask you a few more details about the Vance Plan. Are you familiar with the term UNPA or U-N-P-A?

A. Yes, I am.

Q. What is that, please?

A. It stands for the United Nations Protected Area.

Q. And can you please describe what was a UN protected area in terms of the Vance Plan.

A. Basically, these are the areas in Croatia where there had been a conflict by what was referred to in those days as local Serbs, Croatian Serbs, and that territory had been under the control of those local Serbs, and those were the areas where the United Nations protected -- protection force, UNPROFOR, was to be deployed.

Q. Now, your tenure in Sector North lasted from April 1992 until March of 1994; is that correct?

A. Correct.

Q. Can you please tell us what your title or titles were during that period.

A. When we started out, the title was given in Sector North was chief civil affairs official, and within a few weeks, the head of civil affairs normalised that title to civil affairs coordinator.

Q. And who was your immediate superior?

A. Mr. Cedric Thornberry, director of civil affairs. ¹⁵³⁸³

Q. Now, can you briefly tell us what your primary responsibilities were with respect to the implementation of the Vance Plan.

A. As civil affairs coordinator, my responsibilities included seeing to it that the assets of the United Nations deployed in the mission were put fully to use and deployed for the purposes envisaged in the Vance Plan as well as in the normal way the United Nations missions are conducted. That included, specifically, an advisory role to the military sector commander in order for him to be familiar with how the mandate of the UN is to be executed. Then there were responsibilities that were civil -- civilian in nature that were directly under my responsibilities, and that was particularly in terms of civil -- work of the civil police and humanitarian work, the construction of infrastructure, and so forth.

Q. Your work on the military side of this, did that include participating in negotiations regarding cease-fires, the handing over of weapons, the control of borders, and securing of the confrontation line?

A. Yes, they did include that.

Q. During the course of your meetings and negotiations in this regard, can you briefly tell us the types of and the level of military people that you would deal with.

A. There were -- you could group those military groups in three categories. We have the military, our own military structure, the sector commander on the one side, that is on my team side. Then there was the military of the local forces that were there before we came in, and that divided into two groups; on the Serb side and on the Croatian side.

Q. Now, the forces that represented the United Nations, what was the ¹⁵³⁸⁴ name given to those troops?

A. Those troops were always known as United Nations protection -- peacekeeping forces.

Q. Were they also known as UNPROFOR?

A. Yes; United Nations Protection Force.

Q. Could you tell us the name of the general on the Serb side who you most had contact with.

A. At the beginning when we arrived in Sector North, we had to deal with the commander of the 10th Corps, Lieutenant General Spiro Nikovic.

Q. Now, with respect to your duties regarding the police structures, would you be dealing with the local police chief, such as Mr. Skaljac who you testified to already?

A. Yes. On the police chief -- it's not just that but all police chiefs in the opstinas that were part of Sector North, and there were a number of them.

Q. Did your negotiations, or did you have any business to conduct with the member of the Ministry of Interior of the Republic of Serbia?

A. No.

Q. And did the Vance Plan envisage that the Republic of Serbia Ministry of Interior had any role to plan in the implementation of the Vance Plan?

A. Not in that area that I designated.

Q. Do you recall the day that you first arrived in Sector North?

A. Yes. I recall that it was on or about 18th of April.

Q. When you arrived, was there a UN presence in Sector North ¹⁵³⁸⁵ already?

A. Yes, we had already two battalions deployed there; the Polish battalion and the Danish battalion.

Q. And was there a period of time when you were in Sector North that you yourself were dependent upon the JNA for fuel, food, and logistical support?

A. Very much in that very early period when we arrived. Not all the contingent or the means of the -- assets of the United Nations had arrived, and therefore, we depended very much so on the support of the JNA units that were still in the area.

Q. And was it not a fact that the JNA brought you to Sector North your first time?

A. Yes. The bus that took me from Belgrade was operated and secured by the JNA.

Q. Can you tell us who you met in Sector North your very first day.

A. Other than the sector commander?

Q. The sector commander, can you tell us his name?

A. Yes. It was Brigadier General Musa Bamaiyi of Nigeria.

Q. And did you meet the local UN police chief?

A. There was the local UN police chief by the name of Kai Vittrup of Denmark.

Q. And did you meet anybody else that day?

A. Yes. There was a man that introduced himself to me as court liaison with the local authorities.

Q. And did he tell you his name? ¹⁵³⁸⁶

A. Yes. He introduced himself as Slobodan Lazarevic.

Q. During your first meeting or interaction with Mr. Lazarevic, did he offer to introduce you to someone?

A. Yes. He offered to -- first he offered to tell me who was who in terms of local authorities and then zeroed with one person. He said, "You need to meet this gentleman as soon as you can. He's useful or influential," whatever.

Q. And do you recall the name that he told you?

A. Yes.

Q. And what was the name?

A. A man he named as Toso Paic.

MR. GROOME: I'm going to ask that Prosecution Exhibit 378 tab 3 be placed on the overhead projector.

Q. Mr. Kirudja, I would ask you, do you recognise what is now on the overhead projector?

A. Yes. Those are photographs of some of the individuals.

Q. Are those some of the individuals that you've mentioned here today?

A. Yes.

Q. Who labelled this photograph?

A. I did.

Q. Did you do that yesterday or the day before?

A. It was yesterday.

Q. Thank you. Now, during your tenure in Sector North, did you have other dealings with Mr. Lazarevic? ¹⁵³⁸⁷

A. Yes, frequently.

Q. Can you please tell us the context and give us, in a very summary fashion, your impression of and your interaction with Mr. Lazarevic.

A. My initial encounter -- meeting with Mr. Lazarevic and subsequent events, he struck me as trying very much, without even my invitation, to tell me a lot of things that I didn't ask, many of which were in the nature of, like, "You will need me." And I got the feeling that I'm being framed for something. I'm being asked to be dependent on a man that I don't even know what he is quite after, and I began to be, frankly, suspicious.

Q. Did there come a time when you viewed him as obstructing your work?

A. It didn't take long for that to happen, and it did, and I -- the effect was serious.

Q. Can you give us a concrete example of a way in which he obstructed your work.

A. Not long, a matter of weeks, we had, of course, begun to hire our own local staff to assist in the UN mission in the normal way, and we had hired one resident of Topusko who was an interpreter. She began shortly to complain to me of Mr. Lazarevic in the manner that made her very nervous, and pretty soon things got out of hand. I was out on a mission on a normal day, and I come back to the headquarters to find she's been arrested.

Q. Are you able to tell us her name?

A. Yes, I can. ¹⁵³⁸⁸ ^{BLANK PAGE} ¹⁵³⁸⁹

Q. What is it?

A. She was Miss Indira Kulenovic.

Q. And can you describe -- when you returned from the mission, did you make inquiries as to why she was arrested?

A. Yes. Not only -- I actually went to the police station where she had been charged, and that was in Vrginmost, and I received from the chief of police charges against her.

Q. And what were the charges against her, as best as you can remember?

A. I remember them because they were rather difficult for me to appreciate since they didn't sound natural. The first charge was that she was hired by the United Nations without local authority's agreement. The second charge was also unnatural; she was a foreigner. I repeat, we hired her as a resident of Topusko. Another charge was that she was taking the UN to places without authorisation. That also didn't look natural, because as an interpreter, she just went along where the UN wanted to go. And finally, she was charged with the, quote, spreading misinformation.

Q. What ultimately happened to Mrs. Kulenovic?

A. Well, as soon as I find that she is now under arrest and under these kind of charges, I feared that the worst to come to her. I just had her transported across the boundary to Bihac where we had an UNMO office, and she continued to work there in safety.

Q. Was there another incident in which Mr. Lazarevic was acting as a translator that you believed he was obstructing your work?

A. Yes. Much later on, because he would come along with these local ¹⁵³⁹⁰ authorities whom he interpreted to us, and came a time when we had another meeting, and this time with another local official by the name of Spanovic. And during the course of that meeting, I got a hint from my other local interpreters that we are not getting the interpretation as the speaker was talking. And that, of course, was serious, because we relied on accurate interpretation from the speaker.

As soon as I heard that, I notified the sector commander who was part of the meeting that this was happening, and we stopped the meeting altogether.

Q. Before we leave this area, one final question: Regarding the arrest of Mrs. Kulenovic, did you come to learn at some point that Mr. Lazarevic was behind her arrest?

A. Yes. This arrest of a staff member of the United Nations we consider normally as a very serious matter, and I had to do something about it, and I did raise a concern over this with another official, and that course of that meeting where I was lodging our displeasure on the local officials, I learned that he was behind this, and the officials themselves, the local officials themselves, told me it's not their doing. He was the instigator

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Groome, let's me ask Mr. Kirudja a question. Mrs. Kulenovic was at the police station when you went there, and then I think you said you had her transported.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Did you receive any objections to that? Were they cooperative? ¹⁵³⁹¹

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you for the question. One, I didn't need their acquiescence in that transfer, because all we did was put her in our own vehicles and transfer her across into Bihac, which is out -- which was outside their jurisdiction.

JUDGE ROBINSON: But I still don't understand. I mean, was she in the custody of the police station?

THE WITNESS: Yes. She had temporarily -- as soon as I went there to complain, they had released her temporarily.

JUDGE ROBINSON: I see.

THE WITNESS: -- during the time when I was making my complaint.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you.

THE WITNESS: You're welcome.

MR. GROOME:

Q. Mr. Kirudja, I want to draw your attention now to a meeting on the 13th of May, 1992. On that day, had you arranged a meeting with Mile Paspalj, the then president of the RSK parliament?

A. Yes. That is what I meant when I said I did make a complaint to some local officials on this matter. It was in that context that I met with Mile Paspalj.

Q. And did you arrange the meeting?

A. Yes, I did.

Q. And was it your intention to meet with Mile Paspalj alone?

A. Yes. For the simple reason that Mr. Slobodan Lazarevic was working with the military and civil officials in Kordun. Mr. Paspalj was a resident of Glina in an area where they did not have a jurisdiction, and ¹⁵³⁹² I wanted a neutral person to lodge the complaint into.

Q. Did anybody show up at this meeting --

A. Yes.

Q. -- other than Mr. Paspalj?

A. Yes. To my surprise, Toso Paic showed up in the meeting that took place in Glina.

Q. Now, did you lodge your complaint with Mr. Paspalj?

A. Yes. I proceeded to make him understand the nature of my complaint and in full.

Q. And did he respond to you?

A. No. Mr. Toso Paic was the one who responded to me. Mr. Paspalj just listened.

Q. And what did Toso Paic say to you?

A. He sought, as best I remember, he sought now to allay my charges that this was a hostile act against the UN operation. He sought to reduce the gravity of that charge by saying this was a misunderstanding, that the charge about restrictions that we felt coming through them, was it intentional? It was specifically on the charge of taking UN people in areas that are not authorised by them. He said, "No. We didn't mean to obstruct your freedom of movement. We just wanted to protect you from going into areas where there are mines."

Q. After that meeting, did Toso Paic come see you again that same day?

A. Yes. The meeting ended, and I returned to my office in Topusko. And now also later he showed up there, accompanied by the same chief of ¹⁵³⁹³ police who had arrested Mrs. Indira Kulenovic, Djuro Skaljac, and wanted to talk about the subject all again.

Q. And did he indicate to you anything about Mr. Lazarevic's position or role in the area?

A. Actually, he came candid. Not only that he said that Mr. Lazarevic was the one behind it, he just told me she was not guilty of any of these charges, but by then, I'd already taken her out.

Q. And what did he say about the role that Mr. Lazarevic had in the area?

A. He said that from now on, there will be new liaison officers dealing with you as the UN. And that was an allusion to the liaison officers that I was using at the time that were attached to the JNA, and that Mr. Lazarevic himself was not representing himself as a liaison person.

Q. And who did he say he was representing as a liaison officer?

A. A commander of Kordun, a second colonel, Cedo Bulat.

Q. Now the name Paic is ordinarily spelled P-A-J-I-C. Did Toso Paic indicate to you that his name was spelled somewhat differently than that?

A. Yes. That "J" is dropped when he spelled his own name; just P-A-I-C.

Q. Now, during the time that you were working to implement the Vance Plan, did it become clear to you that the Croatian side and the Croat-Serb side viewed the plan or had different interpretations of the plan?

A. Yes. This came very early, and it was quite a serious problem, because Vance Plan had delineated opstina by opstina what constituted the ¹⁵³⁹⁴ areas we had to deploy our UN assets. The Croats interpreted that to mean if an opstina is named as part of that, then the civil boundaries of that opstina - read the municipality - constituted the edge of the area where we had our deployment, the area of the United Nations protected area. That they marked in their maps as the edge of the sector. On the Serb side, they did not read it that way. They read it wherever they had taken the conflict to and formed what they called a confrontation line, if you trace that sequence of the area where they were facing Croats troop to troop, that is the edge of the area where the UN had to deploy itself.

Q. Now, the difference between the areas, the opstina borders and the foxholes and confrontation borders, did those areas of dispute get a particular name?

A. Yes. The map drawn with one assumption or the other produced an area of difference that became known as the pink zone.

Q. Now, during the course of your duties, did you have frequent contact with the local Serb mayors in Sector North?

A. Yes, routine contact.

Q. And was there anything common about their view or their expressions to you about what their desire was for the political structure they wanted to live under?

A. There was almost a unison refrain that we heard at every meeting regardless of the agenda; that the UN should understand what happened in these areas was a conflict that resulted into the separation of us Serbs from non-Serbs, and as soon as you understand that we Serbs now have to ¹⁵³⁹⁵ live apart from these other Serbs in one country, the better the peace will be restored in this area. And that refrain was heard time and time again.

Q. Now, the transcript has recorded your last answer as "we Serbs now have to live apart from the other Serbs in one country." Is that correct?

A. Yes. In one country, yes.

Q. And what was your response to when people would make this suggestion to you?

A. Hearing it, there was something that didn't quite click to me, and I said to them, "What do you mean by the same country? Right here. We are here now. Do you mean one country here or do you want to leave this area? It doesn't look like you're going to leave this area and go to one country where Serbs can all live together. There is a country called Serbia. Are you going to leave?" They said, "No, we don't mean that. We mean we want to live in one contiguous Serb area no matter where Serbs are."

Q. Now, during your work, were you involved in -- I'm sorry. As part of the Vance Plan, the JNA had agreed to withdraw from Croatia, correct?

A. Yes.

Q. And were you involved in meetings and negotiations regarding the details of that withdrawal?

A. Yes.

Q. I want to draw your attention to the 29th of April, 1992. Did you have a meeting with General Nikovic regarding the withdrawal of the JNA from Croatia? ¹⁵³⁹⁶

A. Yes, we did. Can you please describe in substance what was said during the course of that meeting.

A. In that meeting, the purpose was for General Nikovic to supply the UN and the sector commander with his timetable and plans for demobilising, as requested by the Vance Plan, all the military units that were deployed in Sector North. And that was the discussion and we did get his plans, complete with his schedule, what it is he was going to withdraw, and where. We also got more than that. A kind of rationale, explanation of certain things the way he thought, that should be happening.

Q. Could you please tell us, what was his rationale for -- what you are about to say regarding his rationale. Please continue.

A. It came prefaced with something that caught my interest very much, when he said, "You should understand there is a new reality taking shape in the former Yugoslavia." And he said something to the effect that when we are all done, there will be a new Yugoslavia containing seven countries, and he proceeded to name them. He named them pretty much in reflection of the republics that constituted the former Yugoslavia; Croatia, Slovenia, and then he said Serbia and Montenegro will be one Yugoslav, then he named the next country would be Serb Republic of Serbian Krajina, Macedonia, and Bosnia and Herzegovina, without calling it anything else. He just called it Bosnia-Herzegovina. However, he went on to explain with regard to Bosnia, he expected when all is done, 80 per cent of Bosnia - those were the words he used - would be under the control of Serbs. Ninety-three per cent of what he termed Serbian Krajina will also be under the control of Serbs. ¹⁵³⁹⁷ Second general policy he explained was that the JNA that had hitherto had control of the military in those areas, had orders to withdraw all officials who were not native born either in Republic of Serbian Krajina or in Bosnia and Herzegovina, with the exception of 13 officers, he said, that will remain. All others who were born outside will have to leave the area after the demobilisation, except those who were born there.

Q. Now, General Nikovic was the commander of the 10th Corps of the JNA; is that correct?

A. Right.

Q. Had he calculated, if he were to remove these JNA soldiers, as you've described, had he calculated how many JNA soldiers would remain behind in the area to assume duties under some new or different form?

A. We didn't get into the number of soldiers. They got the formed units that were to remain. Not the soldiers, the formed units, fighting units. And he named at least of the units that would remain, along with the weapons that would be left behind, as Territorial Defence forces?

MR. GROOME: I'd ask that Mr. Kirudja be shown now 378 tab 4. I ask that it be placed on the overhead projector.

Q. I'd ask you, Mr. Kirudja, do you recognise this list that's now before you?

A. Yes.

Q. And can you tell us what list --

A. It's a list of the units that were deployed in Sector North and that also were part of his command and that which were to remain after ¹⁵³⁹⁸ ^{BLANK PAGE} ¹⁵³⁹⁹ demobilisation and the weapons that were to be -- the types of weapons that were to be left behind.

MR. GROOME: I ask the director to zoom out a little bit so we can see the entire list.

Q. Mr. Kirudja, I would ask you, was this list created from notes that you had --

A. Yes.

Q. -- in your diaries?

A. Yes, it is.

Q. Now, I'd ask you to describe briefly to the Chamber, what was your impression of General Nikovic regarding his integrity and his sincerity for the execution or implementation of the Vance Plan?

A. A very impressive man. I kind of -- he gave me the impression of a professional soldier, truly dedicated to his profession, trying to do a very clear job and trying to answer as best as he can the request that he demobilise his troops, and he meant it. He seemed very focused and meant it.

Q. Did you also believe that he was genuine in his efforts to demilitarise or collect the weapons in the area?

A. Pretty much so. And he spoke almost in very -- a soldier; very definitive in what he wanted, very clear. In fact, now that you remind me, he said something during that time that I was saying the policies that he would leave behind, the words, "We intend to leave a clear and clean situation administratively."

Q. And did General Nikovic in fact leave a clear and clean situation? ¹⁵⁴⁰⁰

A. He intended to do that and in terms of the schedule that he supplied about what will be demobilised, when it will be demobilised and the result. He was that clear.

Q. Did anything prevent him from completing his task?

A. Yes. We met him again in the process of seeing this schedule being implemented, and I believe might have been 10th of July when we met him, to be received with what to us was a bombshell news that, "I am no longer commander of the 10th Corps, I am called a retired general."

Q. Now, at any of your previous meetings with him, had he ever discussed with you that he had planned to retire around this time?

A. No. And it didn't really stand to reason, because the schedule itself had indicated that towards the end of May - two weeks or so remained - when all of what he had said would be completed; namely, there would have been a demobilisation, there would be a retirement of all the officers not born there, and he was from Montenegro himself, so it didn't quite add up that he is now a retired general two or three weeks before the demobilisation plan that had he announced to us was to take place.

Q. Based on your conversation with him, did you form an impression as to whether his retirement was a voluntary act or a forced act?

A. It was unmistakably something that he himself didn't expect. Therefore, it would come into the category that it was a premature termination of his role in the area.

Q. Now, at some point the JNA did formally withdraw from Sector North. What I'd ask you to do at this stage, can you please compare or describe for the Chamber, or compare for the Chamber what the command ¹⁵⁴⁰¹ structure -- how did the JNA exist prior to withdrawal, and what was left after they withdrew?

A. Again focusing in Sector North, when we arrived, the JNA was organised in three command zones in that sector, and they had the names Kordun and Banja and Lika, these military operational zones; Kordun, Banja, and Lika. These operational zones existed before we arrived, and after the demobilisation, they remained again distinct operational zones. Taking, for example, Kordun, there was no change. It was commanded by Cedo Bulat before we arrived and, after demobilisation, it remained under the command of Cedo Bulat. So pretty much, other than the name JNA disappearing, the command zones and many of the individuals involved in it remained pretty much the same.

Q. And would it be fair to say that by this time you were able to recognise individuals that you would have contact with that were formerly members of the JNA?

A. Yes, I recognised many of these individuals as long as they wielded authority in the area.

Q. And did you see many of those individuals after the JNA formally withdrew?

A. Yes.

Q. This new force that remained after the JNA withdrew, was it significantly smaller than the JNA?

A. I'm not sure whether you mean smaller by the total number of soldiers in there or the structure.

Q. Let's take the first part. In terms of the number of actual ¹⁵⁴⁰² troops, was it significantly reduced?

A. That would be difficult for me to give you a definitive answer precisely because of the question you asked earlier about demobilisation, that were supposed to be demobilised under the Vance Plan. So that would pose a problem in terms of how many numbers, because whatever numbers they were, they were supposed to be demobilised, and they were demobilised a little later, in May.

Q. How about the second part in terms of size of the command structure?

A. No, that did not change.

Q. In your dealings with this force that was left behind afterwards, what was the name of this force as it was represented to you?

A. They went by the same names they used to go. If it is in Kordun, it was the Kordun command. If it was in Banja, it was Banja. Banja had their headquarters in Petrinje, the command was in Petrinje. Kordun was commanded in Kordun in and around Topusko and Vrginmost.

Q. How was the entire force referred to?

A. They at certain points began to refer -- later not -- progressively became known as the army of the Republic of Serbian Krajina.

Q. Did you ever hear the term "Territorial Defence Force" used?

A. Yes.

Q. And when was that used and what was it used to refer to?

A. It was used very early in the Vance Plan demobilisation because of the Serbs' intent on signalling to us the need to defend their territory and therefore they would not fulfil that requirement as quickly or as ¹⁵⁴⁰³ planned by Vance Plan, that requirement of demobilisation.

Q. Another witness has testified before this Chamber that this force was referred to internally as the 21st Corps. In your dealings with this force afterwards, did they ever refer to themselves to you as the 21st Corps?

A. No, not in this particular sector.

Q. Were you familiar with Colonel Bulat's headquarters or commands?

A. Yes.

Q. Did he have more than one?

A. Yes. I had the opportunity to be in those commands as we discussed matters.

Q. Would you be able to describe one of them as his primary headquarters or command?

A. Yes.

Q. And where was that located?

A. Not far from our own headquarters in Topusko. In a wooded hilltop behind the hotel.

Q. And can you give us some idea about how many times you were in that office?

A. Many, many times; I can't count.

Q. Did you ever become aware that in that office there were a number of special phones or hotlines?

A. Yes. This one was easy for us to be drawn to our attention because general to general, meaning the sector commanders speaking to Bulat, military officials did request each other, Where can I reach you in ¹⁵⁴⁰⁴ case of emergency or something? And they say, There is a hotline. You can call me on this hotline. So I knew they had some lines called hotlines where the general commanding the troops could reach them if they wanted to reach them.

Q. Do you have any personal knowledge regarding where the other phone was on the other side of that hotline?

A. No.

Q. Did Colonel Bulat also have a headquarters in Petrova Gora?

A. Yes. That's a wooded forest behind there.

Q. And did you visit what command centre?

A. Yes. Uh-huh.

Q. Can you briefly describe what that centre was like.

A. It was a very curious place because it's hard to even find where it is. It goes back to the Second World War, and it's underground, and this is a place they had the pleasure of showing to me and telling me even the Germans couldn't find them during the Second World War if they wanted to find them.

Q. Were you taken in to some portion of the underground facility there?

A. Yes.

Q. Now, in the course of your duties and attempts to implement the Vance Plan, did you come to believe that there was a significant loophole in the design of the plan?

A. It was very, very obvious and clear and a source of a lot of frustration for us. ¹⁵⁴⁰⁵

Q. Could you please describe to the Chamber what that loophole was.

A. The Vance Plan essentially said, We want to have these UN protected areas free of all military fighting forces except police for the normal law and order. The local Serbs in that area saw that loophole and transformed what for all practical purposes were armed -- would be armed fighting forces in camouflage uniforms, they went about to transform them to local police forces, from the green colours of the camouflage colours of the military to the blue colours of the militia or police, painting APCs into blue colours of the police, things like that.

Q. Now, when you say "APCs," you mean armoured personnel carriers?

A. Right.

Q. So are you saying that armoured personnel carriers that you saw green at one stage, you later saw the same vehicles now painted blue?

A. When you say the same vehicles, you don't mean that I checked the licence plate and make sure it is the same, but if you went into an area where there used to be just a police station with no APCs, now you find they have APCs painted blue colour. That didn't come from outside. The only other place where the APCs were was in the military area. If you mean that way.

Q. Now, you told us earlier that the Vance Plan envisaged that local police would carry light arms.

A. Yes.

Q. The arms that you saw these military people turned police officers, the arms that you saw them carrying, was that in compliance with the dictates of the Vance Plan? ¹⁵⁴⁰⁶

A. There is a time sequence involving your question. Yes, at certain times you saw that, but the time sequence would have been -- we would first try and have those equipment contained in the UN areas, and a certain point the Serbs took them all back and then they're in the hands of the police.

Q. Well, let me ask you, when was it that you were successfully able to bring the arms in and place them in a contained area under the security of the UN?

A. Sometime between July and August that was achieved that the weapons were laid down and put under UN control, double control with the Serbs and the UN controlling them. And they were demobilised from camouflage uniform.

Q. Now, this is July or August of 1992?

A. Correct.

Q. How long did they remain -- first let me ask you, the containment process, did that involve a system where it required two keys to unlock them; a key held by the UN and a key held by local Serbs?

A. Correct. That's the Vance Plan.

Q. Did there come a time -- or you've described a time when those weapons were taken out. When was that?

A. They remained there until about January of 1993.

Q. And were they taken out with the permission of the United Nations?

A. No. It was as a result of the first of a number of actions taken on the other side by the Croats, and that was the action I'm referring to of re-taking of Maslenica, a bridge part joining Dalmatia. As soon as the ¹⁵⁴⁰⁷ Croats made that offensive, the Serbs went back and overran all that equipment, and they took them all out from storage.

Q. Now, you were beginning to describe for us the weapons that the police were carrying. Can you please now connect these events to that.

A. Yes. As soon as that happened, therefore, whether they were wearing blue uniform or not, they were carrying the long weapons clearly not allowed under the Vance Plan.

Q. I want to draw your attention now to a particular area, the area of Bihac in Bosnia. In the course of your duties in Sector North, did you become aware of events that were occurring in Bihac, Bosnia?

A. Yes. And pretty early, because in the earlier questions you did understand we had to go to Bihac where we had negotiation, and that was a normal situation. Pretty much it became a source of conflict, and in that pocket we called Bihac pocket, in time, became a source of a stream of refugees escaping.

Q. Can you briefly tell us what was occurring -- when things did develop in Bihac. Can you tell us when that happened and what occurred in Bihac.

A. We got basically the first inkling all was not well in Bosnia pretty early in April. And in fact, it was at all times in a convoy involving General Nambiar in his first visit into the sector. He had arrived by air into Bihac, and we had a convoy to try to get him in, and that's when we started seeing roadblocks into the area unexpectedly, all over the place. Before that, there was normalcy completely. The whole area was normal. From there on, those roadblocks and the conflict between ¹⁵⁴⁰⁸ ^{BLANK PAGE} ¹⁵⁴⁰⁹ the Muslims and the Serbs in that area began to intensify.

Q. Can you describe for us what the situation in Bihac was in May of 1992.

A. They come in April and by May it was rather -- the first notice we got had to do with the request for assistance because Bihac also had one of the largest hospitals in the area, and people asking for help because they felt they cannot get all the supplies they needed in the hospital. The humanitarian supplies were coming short. And we got all these kind of indications that we needed help in that area.

Q. What was the predominant ethnicity of Bihac?

A. The Bihac pocket, what we refer to as the Bihac pocket in that map that I showed, almost half of that international border was, on the opposite side of the border, was predominantly Muslim. All the way to certain part where the opstina of Dvor begins and continues on the left. So that pocket, up to a certain point, was predominantly Muslim.

Q. Now, when the JNA withdrew from this area, did it do anything in relation to the airport?

A. Yes.

Q. What did it do?

A. It was clear about 15th of May, I believe, around that time, give or take a day, the airport was blown up.

Q. And that was blown up by whom?

A. The JNA.

Q. Did any of the predominantly Serb areas that you were aware of, or in control of the Serbs, were you aware of any other airports in those ¹⁵⁴¹⁰ areas being blown up by the JNA as they withdrew?

A. No. This one was the only area that I was informed by UNMOs. We had an UNMO observation point there.

Q. And by "UNMOs," you mean United Nations Military Observers?

A. Yes, located in Bihac.

Q. I want to ask you to take a look at 378, tab 6, and ask you is this a report that you made regarding the situation in Bihac?

A. Yes.

Q. I'd ask that the second page of that be placed on the overhead projector. And I would draw your attention to paragraph 2. Did you, in your report, indicate that the situation had deteriorated so much that both the ICRC and the UNHCR had ceased operations?

A. Paragraph 2? Beg your pardon?

Q. Yes.

A. Paragraph 2. Yes.

Q. Did you, in paragraph 4, report some sensational unverified claims by Serbs of atrocities committed by Muslims, and you believed that these claims were a concerted action by Serb leaders in both Croatia and Bosnia to isolate local Serbs? Did you report that?

A. Yes.

Q. Did you also in that report indicate that Serbs had retreated from the town of Bihac, leaving mostly Muslims behind and that the Serbs in the hills surrounding the town controlled the main road and strategic points and that in recent days before this report the town had been shelled from ¹⁵⁴¹¹ these vantage points?

A. Yes.

Q. I'm going to ask you to read what you wrote in paragraph 9 of this report.

A. Paragraph 9 and I quote: "Stories coming from Bihac and the surrounding Bosnia opstinas of Velika Kladusa, Cazin, Bosanski Novi and Bosanski Krupa thus paint a gloomy picture similar to the one in Sarajevo and Mostar. There are fears that behind the border, the mountains and the forest, unspeakable atrocities may be unfolding. This message is sent in the hope that an alert could be relayed to authorities with the competence to begin to address the problem before it is too late for the desperate people in the area. Such an action could begin with a relief operation for Bihac..."

Q. That's sufficient, Mr. Kirudja. And what is the date of this memo or report?

A. This report is dated 16th of -- yes. It's written there in French. 16th -- that has to be August. The front page.

Q. I'd draw your attention to the second page of the exhibit, the first page of the memorandum.

A. Yes.

Q. There's a date at the top of that. Does that --

A. Yes. 16 June. I'm sorry.

Q. Of what year?

A. 1992.

Q. Did there come a time in your tenure -- ¹⁵⁴¹²

MR. GROOME: We can take back the exhibit. Thank you. Actually, I'd ask that tab 5 of Prosecution Exhibit 378 be placed on the overhead projector.

Q. Mr. Kirudja, during your tenure, did you become aware of certain activity occurring in Bosnia which we now call ethnic cleansing?

A. Yes.

Q. Before I ask you specific details about specific instances, I would ask you just to describe generally what you learned and the circumstances under which you learned it.

A. Normally, we would go about doing what I describe as the mandate under the Vance Plan, and in so doing in that course, events would begin to surprise us, and such a surprise occurred particularly in that part where the Serbs controlled both sides of the border, meaning in the Sector North, the opstina, the mayor, and the chief of police, across the border, the international border, on the other side he was also facing another Serb municipality. Serb controlled. That's what I meant; Serb controlled, mayor, police. And that surprise came when we began to see requests -- first a trickle of people escaping and then a request from the UN which for all intents and purposes seems to want to recruit us to help them move massive numbers of people from one -- from their villages out through the sector into far away places, like Slovenia, Germany, or Austria. And that, in retrospect, looked very, very troubling then and now to us, that this was actually what we were being requested to do, help in moving massive people from their homes.

Q. Now, Mr. Kirudja, I'd ask you to take a look at the overhead ¹⁵⁴¹³ projector, and is this a chart that was made in conjunction with you and in consultation with your notebooks regarding or summarising the ethnic cleansing in Bosnia that you became aware of?

MR. GROOME: And I would ask the director to please focus on the uppermost portion of the chart.

A. Yes, I recognise that summary beginning on 26 of May, from Dvor, ending on 22nd of July on top of the chart, as you referred to. I recognise that.

Q. Okay. We'll leave that on the overhead so those of us unfamiliar with this complicated set of facts may rely on it if necessary, but I want to draw your attention to the 26th of May, 1992. Did, as part of your regular course of duties, did you visit the Croatian municipality of Dvor?

A. Yes.

Q. And did something unusual happen during that visit?

A. Yes. Outside the agenda that I was going to discuss, the mayor of Dvor stopped to make a request of me that sounded surprising.

Q. And what was that request?

A. He requested -- first he started with an announcement that he and his counterpart in the municipality of Bosanski Novi, across the border, had agreed to transport 5.000 people from Bosanski Novi to pass through Sector North to a destination they called Austria or Slovenia. So that was the announcement. The demand was, one, we in the sector should and could provide a film crew to film the transit of these people across the Serb-controlled area specifically to document that they passed through safely and did not remain in the Serb-controlled areas. ¹⁵⁴¹⁴ The second demand was we provide through the ICRC presence and our humanitarian presence, the backing, logistical backing to make sure this event goes without any trauma with the people involved.

Q. What was the name of this mayor from Dvor?

A. The mayor from Dvor at that time on that specific date was Mr. Borojevic.

Q. And did he indicate to you whether or not this group of 5.000 people were leaving voluntarily or were being forced to leave?

A. Actually, to my surprise, he told me they are all leaving voluntarily.

Q. What was your response to this request?

A. First, there was something unnatural and counter-intuitive about that and I told him so. I asked him, one, who are these people? He said they're all Muslims. I said but you are the mayor of Dvor, it is in part of the UN, and they are coming from another country and you understand Bosnia is a different jurisdiction, you don't have authority there yourself, and you want them to leave, and you tell me they are leaving voluntarily. That's third-hand information and it doesn't sound natural. Are they leaving their homes? Yes. How do people leave the natural comfort of their homes voluntarily? And he was stuck there because he realised that I didn't believe that.

Q. And what happened after that?

A. Because we were meeting not far from his office, the next thing I know, he had run into his office and was holding the phone and said, "Here is the mayor of Bosanski Novi. If you don't believe, talk to him." ¹⁵⁴¹⁵

Q. And what was the name of the mayor of Bosanski Novi at that time?

A. Later on, the full name became clear, not at that point. His name was Radomir Pasic.

Q. And what was his ethnicity?

A. A Serb.

Q. Now, did you speak to the mayor of Bosanski Novi on the phone?

A. No. At that moment, no. I told both the mayor that I wasn't really going to do that at that moment.

Q. What happened then?

A. I want to consult my notes because I know something was there.

Q. Okay. Please do.

A. Remind me of that date again.

Q. The 26th of May, 1992.

A. Yes. On that day, something he also said to me that stuck to my mind when I asked him, "You have no jurisdiction. You are talking to me from Dvor about Bosanski Novi. How come you're involved and why it is so?" And that's when he said to me something to the extent, "There is a new government in Bosanski Novi which is a part of --" and I quote -- "Serbian Republic of BiH."

Q. Had you ever heard the term "Serbian Republic of BiH" before?

A. No. And not even from General Nikovic who was telling us of the new reality. He had never used that term. That's the first time I heard it.

Q. What happened next? I'm sorry. Before we leave this meeting: After leaving the meeting, did you have an opportunity to reflect on it ¹⁵⁴¹⁶ and did you draw some conclusions about what you were being asked to do?

A. Yes. Something I alluded to earlier. Part of the reason I wouldn't take the call from this mayor was what he was asking was of an enormous implication, and he didn't seem even to himself to be bothered by that, that he would be requesting the UN to participate in a movement of thousands of people to leave their homes somewhere. And because it was -- it carried this non-sequitor, difficult to understand thing, I felt I was -- I better be careful here because we're being recruited. It looks like somebody's trying to recruit us to join in something we normally never do. We don't create refugees, we help them. And that's what it seems like we're being recruited; to create refugees.

Q. What happened next?

A. I left Dvor, and the next day, the very next day, around noon, I was in my office in Topusko, and I'm told there is a delegation downstairs that wanted to see you, and that turned out to be the mayor of Bosanski Novi, accompanied by his executive council members and his chief of police.

Q. What happened?

A. I asked them in and they came into my office and proceeded to reprise the whole story that I had heard the day before, with greater explanation because, obviously, he had been told that I didn't seem to believe this claim that these people would be leaving voluntarily. So he set out to give me greater detail about why they were leaving voluntarily.

Q. What did he say?

A. I summarised -- it boiled down to the Muslims, he said, didn't ¹⁵⁴¹⁷ want to fight in anybody's army, but they wouldn't also leave to areas that were in Central Bosnia. They wanted to get out of the entire area. And it also boiled down, upon inquiry and probing from me, that the Muslims had refused to swear allegiance to this new Serbian Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina and wouldn't fight. So the only reason they were leaving is because of what they called military weakness as a minority. It's at that point when I said it doesn't sound to me then they're leaving voluntarily, and then he said, and I quote, "Well, I admit they are -- there has been pressure brought to bear on them" from what he called Serbian military irregulars.

Q. Did you write an exact quote of what he said in your diary?

A. Yes.

Q. For the sake of preciseness, I'd ask you to go to it and read it for us.

A. He said, and I quote: "I admit that the Muslims have been under pressure of armed Serbian irregulars."

Q. Drawing your attention to the 6th of June, 1992, did you receive a report about something that was occurring at that time in the town or the football stadium of Bosanski Novi?

A. Yes. As a routine in our office, a flash, what the military call a flash report, had come into our situation room and it was brought to my notice immediately, from the Danish contingent in Dvor, telling me they had observed a number of people across.

Q. UN observation posts, were they identifiable and well-marked posts? ¹⁵⁴¹⁸ ^{BLANK PAGE} ¹⁵⁴¹⁹

A. Yes. When we deploy UN observation posts and others, they are clearly identifiable from a long distance, with a flag flying on them, the blue flag. You wouldn't mistake them. They are clearly intended to be noticed.

Q. The Danish contingent, it was observing, making its observations from where?

A. They were in Dvor. And if you go to where this company was located, across the river you can -- in the direction of Bosanski Novi, you can see a football field through binoculars, and the soldiers were looking through binoculars.

Q. So these soldiers are in Croatia, looking across the river into Bosnia, into Bosanski Novi?

A. Yes.

Q. What did they report seeing?

A. They reported what they called a group of people being herded and moved around in a football field.

Q. Did they approximate the number of people in that football field?

A. I'm not sure I remember the exact number. They were in hundreds at that point when the flashpoint came in the football field.

Q. And were those people being detained in that football field?

A. They said they were being detained there and some being herded into buses. And that's being detained in the football field.

Q. Did the report indicate anything peculiar about the way the people had arranged themselves in the football stadium?

A. Yes. To our surprise, the report said the human beings being ¹⁵⁴²⁰ huddled there had formed themselves into a SOS.

Q. They formed themselves into the letters SOS?

A. Yes.

Q. That being the universal sign for help.

A. Yes.

MR. GROOME: Your Honour, if the Chamber is intending to break at quarter to two today, this would be a good spot.

JUDGE MAY: Very well. We will break. Yes, Mr. Milosevic. We're just about to adjourn. Yes. What is it?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes. Yes, I understand that. My question is of a practical nature, and this is it: After Mr. Kirudja, I have received this new list of witnesses, and the next one is Vesna Bosanac. And a moment ago we heard from Mr. Nice that he's going to include some sorts of transcripts which will shorten the time, cut down the time. So I'd just like to know how long you're going to give me for cross-examination of Vesna Bosanac and what your intentions are. I have absolutely no idea how he's going to cut down the examination-in-chief, and I have already said that this is geared towards reducing my time for cross-examination, that that's what it's aimed it. So please tell me how long I'll have.

JUDGE MAY: It will not reduce your time for cross-examination. The fact that the evidence is being given by way of transcript will be taken into account, and you will allowed a proper amount of time. You have no fear on that score. ¹⁵⁴²¹ We will adjourn now. Monday morning, 9.00.

--- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.47 p.m., to be reconvened on Monday, the 3rd day of February, 2003, at 9.00 a.m.