¹⁷⁴¹³

Monday, 10 March 2003

[Open session]

[The accused entered court]

--- Upon commencing at 9.04 a.m.

JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Nice.

MR. NICE: Your Honour, the next witness doesn't concern Croatia. It's a witness who deals with an aspect of the Bosnian indictment. She was originally called up to become a witness when there was a gap in the timetable caused through no fault of our own. No fault of anybody, just one of those things. And in the event she having come here to give evidence, it was judged better for her to remain in her position in the list. She's stayed here over the last few days and is ready to come in. I'm assisted today, as you can see, by Mr. Agha who has been involved in dealing with evidence with this witness.

I trust the Chamber has the summary with exhibits. Some of these exhibits we hoped to put on the computerised system, but the computer system is down.

[The witness entered court]

JUDGE MAY: Let the witness take the declaration. Could you just read out what's on the card, please.

THE WITNESS: [No interpretation]

JUDGE MAY: The interpretation seems to be creating difficulties.

THE INTERPRETER: Can you hear the English?

JUDGE MAY: Could you try again, please. The interpreters apparently couldn't hear it. There was some difficulty occurring. ¹⁷⁴¹⁴

THE INTERPRETER: Can you hear the English now?

JUDGE MAY: Sorry. Would you start again. I'm sorry. We're having trouble with this.

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

JUDGE MAY: Thank you. If you would like to take a seat.

WITNESS: MELIKA MALESEVIC

[Witness answered through interpreter] Examined by Mr. Nice:

Q. Your full name, please.

A. Melika Malesevic.

Q. Ms. Malesevic, that problem was nothing to do with you, it was just there was some problem with their sound system. So there it is. Mrs. Malesevic, were you born and brought up in Jajce in Bosnia-Herzegovina, living there until --

A. Yes.

Q. -- October 1992, on the 28th of October leaving with thousands of others at the time when Jajce was taken over by VRS soldiers and paramilitaries?

A. Yes.

Q. Did you go to Travnik, then to Kresovo?

A. Yes.

Q. [Previous translation continues]... majority area. Were you detained there with Bosniaks and Serbs?

A. Yes. ¹⁷⁴¹⁵

MR. NICE: Your Honour, I'm not going to deal with paragraph 3. The purpose of this witness is in relation to the matters that follow at paragraph 4. At least, I'm not going to deal with the first sentence of paragraph 3.

Q. You were exchanged in March of 1993, and you then went to Sarajevo via Visoko?

A. I was exchanged in March 1994 and went to Visoko and after that to Sarajevo.

Q. Thank you. You worked for a straightforward business, a commercial enterprise of some kind, but you also became involved in a non-governmental organisation for women refugees, and you then became involved in, or indeed it may be central to, the body of which you're going to tell us, which is the Alliance of Detainees of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

A. Yes.

Q. That Alliance was established in what year and with what purpose?

A. The Alliance was established on the 25th of August, 1996. It was established at the initiative of municipal associations and cantonal alliances so the information gathered in the field could be systemised and a database created. For this to be done we saw the need to set up an alliance.

Q. At the time of its establishment, had individual associations of former inmates of prison camps been created, but did your Alliance rationalise, integrate those other bodies, also creating further bodies or sub-bodies of the Alliance itself? ¹⁷⁴¹⁶

A. Yes, that's right. Before the Alliance had been set up, there were several municipal associations which worked in certain localities. Then two cantonal alliances were established, or associations, which dealt with the needs of the canton. For us to be able to cover the entire region of Bosnia and Herzegovina and to be work in a coordinated manner and systematically collect data, we set up the Alliance. After that, we began intensively to set up municipal associations and cantonal alliances. We also set up a regional association of the municipalities which were dispersed as well as a certain number of associations in the diaspora.

MR. NICE: Your Honour, exhibits to be produced by this witness are nine in number. May the file containing them be given a number of its own and then we'll proceed by tab numbers, if that's acceptable to the Court.

THE REGISTRAR: Your Honour, that will be Prosecutor's Exhibit 404.

MR. NICE: Thank you very much. If the Chamber would be good enough to turn to tab 1. If the witness could have the B/C/S version of this, and if the English version could be displayed on the overhead projector.

Q. Mrs. Malesevic, is there a statute of this Alliance, a detailed document with some 68 articles?

A. Yes, that's right. This is the basic act of the Association of Camp Inmates of Bosnia-Herzegovina.

MR. NICE: Your Honours, this is essentially really a document of reference for those asking questions of this witness. I'll just take us ¹⁷⁴¹⁷ to about four parts of it, and if the usher would be good enough to turn to the third page and Article 11. If we could see that on the overhead projector.

Q. Does that reveal -- and if you could, Mrs. Malesevic, follow Article 11 in the B/C/S version. Are the programme goals and tasks that the association identified as unifying and coordinating the work and activities of municipal societies, cantonal and regional associations and societies?

A. Yes.

Q. If we go to Article 12 on page 4, we see a definition, members of the association; municipal, city, cantonal, regional, societies or associations, the Bosnia-Herzegovina Women Inmates Activist Group, and the Societies of Camp Inmates Abroad.

A. Yes, that's right.

Q. Paragraph 13 says this: "The association is completely open to all societies of former camp inmates on equal footing." And then it sets out conditions for obtaining the status of member; correct?

A. Yes.

Q. And I think, Mrs. Malesevic, there was something you wanted to say perhaps in relation to Article 12, and I hurried you through it. Is there anything else you wanted to say?

A. I just wanted to say that the members of the association were associations of regional organisations, women's activists and so on which took in individual members. That was to facilitate the coordination of data gathering and data processing. So that is what I wanted to say. It ¹⁷⁴¹⁸ was via our individual members that you become a member of the association itself.

Q. If we turn over to page 5, Article 16, we read the following: "All former camp inmates, citizens of Bosnia-Herzegovina, who were forcibly taken and detained in camps or prisons during the aggression, may be members of the association through their local societies. "A foreign citizen who was imprisoned in an aggressor camp and prison in Bosnia-Herzegovina may also be a member of the association." And does that flesh out the definition of members of your society?

A. Yes.

Q. In summary, were -- was there or is there the possibility for both associations and individuals to be members of the Alliance?

A. The members of the Alliance are associations having the status of legal person, and individuals -- let me explain this. In the municipal associations, registration takes part of individuals into the Alliance. That is to facilitate coordination and data processing and collection so that members, individuals are members of the Alliance via our member associations enumerated here.

Q. Thank you. We're going to be looking at, of course, the information that came to you from your members which is why we're interested in the structure of the Alliance, and we therefore turn to tab 2 of the same exhibit, 404, which comes in a total of four sheets, I think. We can look at them very quickly.

MR. NICE: The first one, please, Usher, on the overhead projector. ¹⁷⁴¹⁹

Q. The Alliance is shown as having cantonal alliances, and then they are listed in the left-hand column: Una Sana, Central Canton Sarajevo, Tuzla, Neretva, Zenica-Doboj. In the middle, the regional associations in the RS, so that's Bosnian Krajina, Northern Bosnia, North-eastern Bosnia, Eastern Bosnia, Eastern Herzegovina. And then the associations abroad; Finland, Sweden, and Germany.

So is that the first breakdown of the composition of the Alliance?

A. Yes. They are direct members of the Alliance of Detainees or Camp Inmates of Bosnia-Herzegovina.

Q. And to give us a clear understanding of the cover that you have of the territory, if we turn to the next page, which deals with the second column, regional associations in the RS, we see - and I needn't list them all, or indeed perhaps any of them - we can see the various regional associations listed for the Bosnian Krajina, Northern Bosnia, and so on. For example, we can see in the middle, under number 9, Bijeljina, Bratunac, Srebrenica, Vlasenica and Zvornik.

Then on the next sheet we will come to the cantonal, the federation bodies, and the degree of breakdown by areas there, and again I needn't read the names out.

And then finally, the fourth sheet shows that even in respect of the communities of associations abroad, Germany's broken down into a total of five different associations, Sweden into three, and Finland into two. Is that correct, Ms. Malesevic?

A. Yes.

Q. Finally, and I don't think I need take the Chamber through any ¹⁷⁴²⁰ parts of this, although it's again available as an article of reference -- perhaps I'll look at just a couple. Are the rules, which would be tab 3 of Exhibit 404 -- let's just look at two bits of that. And if we look at the first substantive page.

MR. NICE: That's the next page, Usher. That will do, actually.

Q. These are the rules on establishing the status of camp prisoners. We can turn to the next sheet, please. Just look at Article 5 which gives one example for a person who has a valid document issued by the competent service of the International Committee of the Red Cross or certain other bodies. That's one way of proceeding. But as we can see if we turn over now to Article 7, it says: "Persons from Article 2 of these Rules who do not have a valid document ..." and then goes on to detail the circumstances applying to them; and Article 8 goes on to deal with persons who do not have a document from the competent organs as stipulated or are unable to get hold of it, who do not have witnesses or are unable to get hold of witnesses.

So these are various rules, are they, Mrs. Malesevic, covering the position of different people claiming to have been detainees but for whom material in support of their claim varies according to category; is that right?

A. Yes.

Q. And indeed -- sorry?

A. In article -- what I wanted to say was that the simplest way is if the camp detainee does not -- has a valid certificate, that's fine, or then he must find two witnesses who were with him in the camp and have the ¹⁷⁴²¹ certificate. Article 8 is the article regulating the status of detainees for persons without a certificate or witnesses. This article has been further elaborated, and let me explain. In addition to the statement that the person making the request has to make, the municipal association has to collect other relevant facts from government organisations that the place that is stipulated in the statement of the person asking for this status was a location where a camp existed. And then the municipal association makes the decision that this place or -- place of detention should be proclaimed a valid detention site and that it actually existed. And once that has been established, the papers are issued, or rather, the certificate.

Q. Thank you. We can go to tab 4, and, Mrs. Malesevic, it may be sensible for you to look at this document on the overhead projector.

MR. NICE: If you put the English version on the overhead projector but make sure the witness has the B/C/S version to follow, but I suspect she will be able to help us with a pointer, if necessary, by just explaining the process or process in outline for establishing detainee status.

Q. So very swiftly, please, if you could just take the pointer that the usher will give you and explain by pointing not on the television screen but on the document on the overhead projector what this rooting diagram tells us.

A. This diagram --

THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness please be asked to slow down. Could the witness please slow down and speak into the microphone. Thank ¹⁷⁴²² you.

JUDGE MAY: You're being asked -- you're being asked to slow down, please.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] An applicant tabling a request for detainee status, in keeping with the rules and regulations, must either have a certificate or two witnesses, two photographs, a statement, and go to the municipal association.

I apologise, but can I use the Bosnian text on the overhead projector, please? It's difficult for me to follow otherwise.

Q. Of course. And those of us who don't have the advantage of speaking B/C/S will follow English-language versions, and I'll ask the English-language version to be displayed at the end of your explanation. Carry on, please, from the place where you'd reached.

A. The applicant wishing to assert his status, before they come to the municipal association, must have with him a certificate or two witnesses with them, a special statement, and two photographs. Then the municipal association looks, by means of an authorised person, through the documents, asks them whether they wish to become a member of the Detainees Association of their own free will. Then a personal ID card has to be filled in, a personal record or dossier, and the dossier is a basic act -- basic document on the basis of which we ascertain status. The two photographs are taken. After that, the certificate and detainee dossier is studied by the authorised person and handed over to the representative of the municipal association, which goes through it, signs it, and sends it on to the cantonal association which also looks through the file, the ¹⁷⁴²³ dossier. Once it ascertains that everything is present and correct, it hands it on to the Association of Detainees where a separate special control is carried out, and the Association of Detainees stores the dossier and statement. A certificate is issued in four copies, then it is returned to the cantonal federation in three copies - the personal file, the request, a certificate - and one photograph. The cantonal federation keeps one copy and sends on the rest to the municipal association, after which an authorised person by the municipal association, once the certificate has been signed, gives the applicant a membership card and one copy of the certificate.

So the municipal association retains a request, one certificate, a copy of the personal file, and one certificate. That would be the procedure for determining detainee status.

MR. NICE: And if the usher would be good enough now just to place the English version on the overhead projector for those viewing.

Q. And Mrs. Malesevic, summarising what you've explained on that chart, on how many occasions in this process is the information provided by an applicant verified?

A. The information provided by the applicant is checked four times before the certificate certifying the status of former detainees is issued.

MR. NICE: Can we turn now, please, to tab 5. B/C/S version to the witness, English version on the overhead projector.

Q. Is this the document that has to be filled out by an applicant?

A. Yes. This is the basic document for establishing the status of a ¹⁷⁴²⁴ detainee, and every applicant is obliged to fill in this questionnaire and answer the questions it contains.

Q. Containing approximately how many questions altogether by the time you add them up?

A. This dossier contains 58 basic questions and 275 subquestions; a total of 325 questions. Page 1 contains personal data in great detail.

Q. I'm not going to ask you to go through it. The learned Judges can do that for themselves.

If we can go to page 7, at the bottom, please, Usher, we can see a box headed Nature and Types of Abuse in Camps. At the time of the preparation of this particular dossier, was there some 20 identified types of abuse that it was reasonable to expect applicants to refer to? You can see them listed there. Page 7, at the bottom.

A. Yes.

MR. NICE: However, if the Court would go to the end of this part of the English-language tab 5, it will find a page from a statement with the ERN number 2298938 at the top right-hand corner. If we could have that, please, on the overhead projector. It's all part of tab 5.

Q. Mrs. Malesevic, as a result of dealing with these applicants, the materials they supplied, verified in the way that you've described, did you identify some 63 forms of abuse alleged by those who became members of your Alliance?

A. Yes. I have to say that the first report on methods of torture and killing we obtained by reading the files of the detainees. Then we forwarded it on to the Centre for Research of Documentation where the ¹⁷⁴²⁵ analysts build it into this list, and that is how we obtained 63 different methods of torture. These are data that we have had for the last month. Unfortunately, this list is not final because we discovered something new regarding the methods of mistreatment every day. I would also like to point out that all the mentioned forms of abuse in this list are documented, and there are live witnesses who can testify about them.

Q. Take some of the more extreme examples. In the first block, under "Killings," we see included cutting off the head of a killed detainee or roasting a detainee on a spit. That's 14 and 15. Under Torture and Physical Abuse, 16, cutting off bodily parts by a chain-saw. 21, tearing off the genitals of detainees by criminals, forcing detainees to tear the genitals off each other as examples. Forcing -- 25, forcing detainees to eat the parts of their bodies. 27, inciting animals to massacre detainees. 31, salting wounds stitched up. General sexual -- 34, maltreatment of men. And 36, of children. 42, taking out of organs, and 44, forcing detainees to eat faeces. And then, under Psychological Abuse, dealing with cultural objects at 51. 55, letting co-inhabitants use detainees for forced labour, or slavery in conventional terminology. 58, 57, organising or allowing mass rape. Example 63, forced baptism.

So those are the larger list of abuses that emerge from consideration of the materials coming to you.

A. Yes.

Q. Of course your information not only detailed what happened but ^{17426 BLANK PAGE 17427} identified the places where it happened.

MR. NICE: May we now turn, please, to Exhibit 6, if we have that in colour. Excellent. Thank you very much.

Your Honours, I suspect -- I'm not sure whether your exhibit is exactly like mine. Do you have colour, may I ask? If we can provide you with a colour one, we will. I think it will be easier for you to refer to later, but meanwhile, we can look at this one on the overhead projector, which is colour coded.

The coding here is blue, which is round, is a location where there was one detention facility. A diamond, which is yellow, I think, is one where there were five locations. And the square "10" is one where there were ten locations.

How many -- that apart, the document speaks for itself. That apart, please, how many detention facilities altogether have you been able to identify and from what number of records have you drawn this information?

A. I would like to say that in the territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina, we registered 651 camps. We did the registration on the basis of statements, dossiers, and checking out all those statements, and that is how we obtained the number of 651 detention places in Bosnia and Herzegovina. These on the map were under the Serb control. They were 520 of them. All these have been checked and are based on statements of live witnesses.

Q. A number of records that you rely on being how many?

A. We have 35.000 members who, immediately after the formation of the ¹⁷⁴²⁸ Federation of Detainees, provided detailed statements, descriptions of events, the number of detention facilities within a canton, and so on. This was the initial information that we obtained about camps. Then through the dossiers and statements, as illustrated by the previous document, where they stated the places of detention, under whose control they were, how many people there were in them, and it is on the basis of those statements that we obtained these -- the data. We have about 7.000 filled questionnaires but there are many in municipal associations which we cannot take over because we do not have adequate space for their storage.

Q. From records you have been able to analyse, what do you calculate to have been the bare minimum of non-Serbs detained in the 520 facilities run by Serbs or Bosnian Serbs?

A. Just now I'm unable to say, but I have to point out that the research is under way. We are collecting data, but certainly there were more than a hundred thousand, according to information we have collected so far. However, the number will probably be determined in due time when we are able to collect all the information together and provide complete information.

Q. That reminds me, I haven't got you to give the period covered by these acts of detention. What period are we dealing with?

A. It is the period from 1992 to 1995.

Q. The figures that you achieve, do they match or are they different from figures that have been given by such organisations as Amnesty International or Helsinki Watch? ¹⁷⁴²⁹

A. I should like to clarify this. We were formed in 1996. However, ever since 1992, there are many organisations that have been active, including state organisations such as the state commission for collecting data about war crimes, non-governmental organisations, journalists who reported that 200.000 people were detained in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The number may be even greater. And we inherited this figure of 200.000. It may be a realistic figure, but I am unable to say for sure until the research has been completed.

MR. NICE: Tab 7 of Exhibit 404, please. And again this is a document really to become a document of record rather than one that we need go through in detail.

Q. Have you prepared a list of the detention facilities under Serbian control? And we can see simply on page 1, for example, the ten facilities you've identified within that period of years in Banja Luka, or further down the page, the 15 that you've identified in Bijeljina. And if we go to the last page, we will see that you total those facilities as the 520 that you have given us in evidence.

A. Yes. Yes. We compiled this list in the Centre for Research and Documentation on the basis of statements that we had available to us. And for all these detention facilities, we have documentation and members who are willing to provide more detailed information about them, if necessary.

Q. Thank you. Tab 5, please. Tab 5, Mrs. Malesevic, is the page from the indictment against this accused -- I beg your pardon. Tab 8. I don't know why I thought it was tab 5. Entirely my fault. Tab 8. It's the page from the indictment against this accused, page 29, ¹⁷⁴³⁰ and it's the Schedule C identifying detention facilities. Have you reviewed this list of detention facilities referred to in the indictment?

A. Yes, I have, and found that all the camps were recorded in our Alliance, all these detection facilities.

Q. All bar one?

A. Yes. Yes. With the exception of Bijeljina, the new slaughterhouse. We have no data about the new slaughterhouse.

Q. Thank you. I'm not going to ask you to say anything about -- or say something about all of these detention facilities, but it may help the Chamber if you give us some of the examples, more memorable or severe examples of what your records reveal in relation to one or two of them. Number 3, the Bijeljina facility of which you do have records at Batkovici detection centre, what happened there, in summary? In a word, if a word will do.

A. Yes. The Batkovici detention facility, it is a farm on the outskirts of Bijeljina. It was established in July 1992. 3.800 detainees passed through the camp. The conditions were quite impossible for the detainees: There was no food or water; in fact, they were housed in silos which used to be used to store maize. As the detainees were brought to Batkovici from other detention camps - Manjaca, Doboj, Zvornik - tents were also used in Batkovici. Our witnesses report on unbearable conditions: Very great heat, heavy labour, starvation.

Q. Very well. I'm sorry to cut you short, but as you know, time is much of the essence in this case. Number 9, Brcko's Luka detention centre. The Chamber -- ¹⁷⁴³¹

A. The detention centre Luka was close to Brcko. It is a factory for sand and gravel. There were mass killings. Women, children were detained there. There was large scale rapes, beating up, and killings. A large number were killed. Many were taken away in an unknown direction.

MR. NICE: The Chamber will possibly know or remember that Brcko and the Luka detention centre featured in the Jelisic case.

Q. Bratunac, the Vuk Karadzic school, please.

A. The Vuk Karadzic detention centre is interesting in many respects. Large-scale killings took place. Witnesses recount the terrible picture that they found when they entered. There were 750 of them. When they entered the school, there were bloodstains, parts of bodies, a couple of corpses, massacred bodies with a cross sign on them. In the Karadzic school, the detainees didn't get anything to eat or a drop of water for four days. Terrible crimes were committed there. Eyewitnesses talk about objects specially designed for torturing the detainees. More than a hundred detainees were killed there.

Q. I was going to ask you. You say more than a hundred. More than a hundred over all or in any particular time?

A. Daily.

Q. [Previous translation continues]...

A. No. In this -- in three days, more than 300 detainees were killed in the Vuk Karadzic elementary school. The corpses were burnt in containers in the schoolyard. It was dreadful, according to the eyewitnesses. A horrendous situation.

Q. I'm going to ask you about five more locations. Number 11, ¹⁷⁴³² Cajnice. The hunting lodge Mostina, where about 100 detainees were kept. Again the conditions were horrific. They were starved, tortured, beaten up. But in July, after the death of a combatant at the Gorazde front, a massacre occurred. More than 62 inmates were killed on that occasion. A witness survived this and can testify about it.

Q. Number 15, Kalinovik, please.

A. Kalinovik. The gunpowder warehouse there where 101 detainees were kept. Our witness, the only survivor from that camp, describes how they were liquidated. After a certain period of time, they were forced to board trucks waiting for them. There were three trucks, and they tied the detainees and telling them to move on, that they were going to take them to the prison in Foca. However, on the way there, the truck on which our witness was stopped. They were told to get off. Four detainees were selected from the group, and the rest were executed. Our witness was just wounded, and he watched the whole scene.

These four were untied and told to throw in the bodies into a shed, and then they too entered and then four men in uniform poured gasoline over the bodies and some tyres and set fire to them. Our witness managed to survive and to testify about this.

Q. Thank you.

A. This was a group of 23. As for the others --

Q. Sorry. The group of 23 that were burned; is that correct?

A. Yes. And as for the others, we don't know how they ended up. The assumption is that they ended in the same way as these.

Q. Number 18, the penultimate one about which I'm going to ask, being ¹⁷⁴³³ the Omarska camp which may be known to the Chamber for other reasons, and then over the page, Keraterm and the other sites in Prijedor. From records coming to you, revealing what activities?

A. Yes. Omarska, Keraterm, and Trnopolje were large camps that thousands of detainees passed through. There were large-scale killings in those camps. In Omarska, hundreds were killed. There were a certain number of women detained there too who experienced sexual abuse and other mistreatment. Forward was short, conditions were unacceptable, visits were not allowed, and there were mass killings there.

Q. And finally number 24, Zvornik, the Celopek Dom Kulture. Can you tell us, please, some of the worst things that have been reported to you. And on this occasion I'll turn back to the same topic of earlier ones, but on this occasion give us some idea of the number of witnesses who have been able to help you with what you can tell us about Celopek.

A. I'm unable to tell you the exact number. We have quite a number of witnesses, but I would mention the example of one witness who speaks of a serial rape of men, sexual abuse of men. He describes that it was horrific. There were about 170 detainees there. There were uniformed men who called out eight of the detainees, fathers and sons. Our witness was not with his father, so they took his uncle. And they forced them to climb onto the stage and to strip. Then they forced them to do sexual abuse of various kinds.

Afterwards, the detainees were forced to bite off each other's penises, and all this was under the control of men in uniform on the stage. And when they found that three detainees did not fulfil their ¹⁷⁴³⁴ assignment, they were sentenced to death. And one witness says that he had to hold one of them when he was stabbed with a knife. And each time the knife was taken out of the body, he had to lick the blood off it. That is how three detainees were killed on the stage in the presence of all those in the hall.

This Celopek camp is interesting in various other respects because of various types of torture practised there.

Q. Mrs. Malesevic, you can answer questions to the accused if he challenges what you're telling us.

Let's look now, please, at the last tab, tab 9, a series of photographs. These photographs coming to you from one source or another reflecting treatment of in the detention centres of which you've spoken.

A. Yes.

Q. It may be you can or it may be you can't identify the particular detention centres here in The Hague looking at these documents. For example, this one, do you know which detention centre it was?

A. I think this was Trnopolje. That is what it says on the photograph.

Q. And if we can go to the next one, which is also marked "Trnopolje." Thank you. The third one. Do you know where this one or the following one come from?

A. I wouldn't be able to say.

Q. Very well. The next one is marked Manjaca.

MR. NICE: The following one, please, Usher.

Q. This one is marked Manjaca. We see men sitting in a building ¹⁷⁴³⁵ designed for something else. It may be agricultural. How does this match in general with the accounts you received of the treatment and housing of detainees? While you're answering, perhaps the usher will put the next couple of photographs on and we'll just run through them until we come to the end of this sequence. How do these match the accounts generally?

A. They match the statements given. What we see in these photographs matches the statements. Of course, the torture and abuse is not shown on the photograph, but this is the setting in which they were held.

Q. Next, please. Next, please. And then the next one. The degree of emaciation on this man, was that unprecedented or were there other accounts, descriptions, and photographs of a like kind?

A. All statements speak of starvation. They were on the verge of death. Many died of starvation. So this was quite a usual photograph, especially for camps such as Batkovici, Zvornik, and so on, Manjaca, Omarska, Keraterm.

Q. Last photograph, please, showing -- well, what does that show to you and to what degree is that typical of what you were told or shown?

A. If I see well, this lady has a cross drawn on her back, and this was done very frequently to camp inmates. Many of them have similar scars.

Q. The ethnicity of the detainees either by and large or for the largest part being what?

A. In most cases they were Bosniaks. Of course, talking about these camps under Serbian control, there were some Croats too who were mistreated in the same way as the Bosniaks. ¹⁷⁴³⁶

Q. Before I turn to one last very short topic, you've told us how this information comes from documents you've reviewed yourself. Have you also spoken to some or many of the members of your Alliance and the applicants for membership personally?

A. Yes. All the documents that reach the Alliance with respect to statements and dossiers, I read them before a certificate is issued. However, I didn't point out that a Centre for Research and Documentation has been formed attached to the Alliance to collect all material, not just statements but other documentation as well, which is scientifically analysed and systemised. Together with the other workers in the Centre for Research and Documentation, we systemise all the data and on the basis of collected data we form a list of violations of human rights, detention facilities, the number of detainees, and so on, so that this is a very time-consuming effort. And I must say that it is rather slow because --

Q. I'll state my question: Have you also met some of the applicants on a personal basis and heard their accounts given personally?

A. Yes, very frequently. I speak to people both in the field and in my office, and I am in regular contact with many detainees. I talk to them and I even check out some statements or some allegations which I have any doubts about, so that I have very frequent contact with the detainees.

Q. My last question about detainees before I turn to topic paragraph 12 on the summary: People applying to join the Alliance, do they get any kinds of benefit, financial or otherwise, that you have to take into account when assessing the accuracy of the information they provide?

A. Unfortunately, I have to say that this population is not included ¹⁷⁴³⁷ in the law and doesn't have any privileges. However, in some cantons, when it comes to health care, they have certain facilities like the Sarajevo and Zenica and Doboj cantons. They also have certain discounts in public transport. But they don't have any rights at the level of the federation nor do they receive any material compensation. This certificate helps the most to leave Bosnia and Herzegovina. I wish to point out that detainees and misplaced -- displaced persons, their property has been destroyed, so that their -- it is very difficult for them to return home, and they are keen to leave the country, and they have a certain degree of priority among refugee institutions. So unfortunately, they do not enjoy any special rights, though the -- one of the priority tasks of the Alliance is to insist on regulating the rights of former detainees. However, we haven't succeeded to date in doing so.

Q. Have you, though, from time to time, you or your colleagues, had occasion to check the accuracy or indeed potential inaccuracy of information provided and to reject or certainly to suspend applications?

A. Yes. Applications are rejected if they're not complete at the municipal level. They don't reach the federation at all, I do not see them. However, in the municipal association where they establish the status of detainee, if documents are not complete, if the allegations are not correct -- because I have to explain in a certain municipality, people know one another so it is much easier for them to check out the statements, and if anything is wrong, then at the level of the municipal association, they reject those applications. So that at the level of the federal federation, we have not had occasion to reject any applications, ¹⁷⁴³⁸ as we are the last level instance to check out this information.

Q. Last topic, Mrs. Malesevic, is a separate one really. From the records provided to you, was there any pattern emerging of interference with, damage to, destruction of religious property, mosques, and so on?

A. I'm sorry, I didn't understand the question. How do you mean pattern? Could you repeat that, please?

Q. Were there complaints of the destruction of mosques and the damage of and destruction of other religious property?

A. Yes. Yes, there were, and our detainees claim that while they were taken into custody, before detention, they were witnesses to the mining and burning of private property and religious sites as well. And we have a lot of testimony about that. And that created even greater panic amongst our members.

Q. Thank you very much, Mrs. Malesevic. You will be asked some further questions.

JUDGE MAY: Yes.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. May, a vast number of facts have been presented here, and you will recall that the last witness, Mr. Grujic, before this one, also testified, and in his testimony -- or, rather, through his testimony ten binders were introduced which we wouldn't be able to go through as Defence exhibits in three months. Here too we have an enormous number of facts put forward, and I think that you will have to allow time for them to be cleared up.

JUDGE MAY: Yes. You will have an hour or so to cross-examine this witness. We'll see how you get on, if you want more time. If there ¹⁷⁴³⁹ are matters which emerge which you need to challenge the witness on, then of course you can apply to have her recalled later, or you can call evidence about it. So the opportunity to challenge her evidence will go on from today. But why don't you begin your cross-examination today.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] As you know, Mr. May, I am challenging a lot of what the witness has said. Because this is a false indictment, then of course the witnesses and their testimony is false too. Cross-examined by Mr. Milosevic:

Q. [Interpretation] Mrs. Malesevic, you have told us terrible, horrendous things done to the detainees here. You just actually enumerated them. You went through them. But how long were you yourself in a camp?

A. Nine months.

Q. And which camp were you held in for nine months?

A. I was in a Croatian camp.

Q. Ah, so you were in a Croatian camp. Were you ever in a Serbian camp?

A. No, Mr. Milosevic, but we do dispose of a large number of facts and figures --

Q. I'm just asking you, and give me a straight answer: Were you ever in a Serbian camp? Could you tell me, please, whether you were ever in a Serb camp.

A. No.

Q. Well, how, then, can you testify about a Serbian camp if you spent eight months in a Croatian camp? ^{17440 BLANK PAGE 17441}

A. On the basis of the information collected in the Alliance and Association of Bosnia and Herzegovina of Former Camp Inmates and on the basis of live witness testimony and witnesses who confirm that.

Q. So you're telling us about what you yourself wrote but also what your witnesses wrote out.

A. These are systemised data written on the basis of witness statements.

Q. And who compiled all these documents, the documents that you are presenting here as evidence and proof?

A. They are authentic statements.

Q. Well, I haven't seen a single authentic statement here. We're talking about documents that you showed here, and you went on to explain the 63 ways of abuse, and so on and so forth. Now I'm asking you who compiled and drew up those documents?

A. The Detainees Alliance and the Centre for Documentation on the basis of those statements of our members.

Q. All right, so you're introducing documents as evidence that you yourself compiled. You yourselves compiled.

A. No, we did not compile them ourselves.

Q. Well, who did; God then, the Almighty?

A. They emerged as the result of our investigations and research.

Q. We'll come to your research and investigations in just a moment and to the authenticity of your information.

You stated in your statement that you were in Kresovo and that there were two to two and a half thousand civilians there, detained there; ¹⁷⁴⁴² is that right?

A. Yes.

Q. That is in your second paragraph. I'm -- I suppose somebody will attack me and say that I'm defending Croats, but I'm defending the truth. Mrs. Malesevic, you know that according to the population census in Kresovo, the total number was 2.500 inhabitants throughout the whole municipality of Kresovo. Two and a half thousand Muslims, actually. So in the town and in all the surrounding villages. And if what you're saying were to be true, that would mean that all the Muslims from the Kresovo municipality would have had to have been in that prison of yours.

A. Yes, and most of them were, Mr. Milosevic, but don't forget that there were a lot of refugees there. And I was a refugee and detained as such in Kresovo with the other inhabitants.

Q. So you still maintain that there were two and a half thousand prisoners, detainees, in the Croatian camp in Kresovo; is that right? All right. Fine. So if you stand by that assertion that there were two and a half thousand detainees, how come, then, that in your statement, the one you gave on the 15th -- no. That's your date of birth. I'll find the date of the statement. On the 20th of April, 1994, to the Centre in Sarajevo. On page 2 of that statement, you say that the Muslim population detained from the Kresovo area about 500 individuals; men, women, children, and elderly persons.

So in this statement, you say that about 500 were detained, were taken into custody. That is to say that the Croatian forces who were in Kresovo took into custody 500 men, women, children, and elderly persons. ¹⁷⁴⁴³ In this statement of yours here where you say --

JUDGE MAY: Mr. Milosevic, you can make these points much more quickly. There's no need to labour them.

Mrs. Malesevic, would you like a copy of the statement?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

JUDGE MAY: Now, what is the part you're asking about, Mr. Milosevic?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. May, on page 2 of the statement, and it is a statement taken in the Serbian language, line 2, it says: "All the Muslim population, all the Muslim population have been detained from the Kresovo area, somewhere around 500 men, women, children, and elderly persons." That's what it says in this statement here. And a moment ago --

JUDGE MAY: Yes. We've heard her evidence. Let the witness deal with what's in the statement.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. This statement was given in 1994 upon my leaving the camp. These 500 persons, men, women, children, and the elderly were according to what I was able to register when they brought us to the school. That was on the spot.

Subsequently, however, talking to the locals and other detainees, I received information that between two and a half thousand and 3.000 was the actual number that were detained. And these were persons who were there together with me.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Mrs. Malesevic, did all of this take place during the Muslim ¹⁷⁴⁴⁴ attacks on Travnik when they went from Tarcin, Igman, on to Kresovo, when they set fire to Croatian villages and when the Croats put you in some sort of, as you say, camp, what you call camp, whereas in fact as far as my information goes, nothing happened to anyone there. Isn't that right?

A. Well, I don't wish to answer that question.

JUDGE MAY: Is there any reason why you shouldn't answer the question? What is being suggested seems to be is that it wasn't a camp. Perhaps you could tell us whether that's true or not.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It was a camp. It was a camp in which all human rights were withheld, in which we were short of food, water, our movements were restricted and so on. So it really was a camp. And what Mr. Milosevic is talking about, the combat and such at that time, I really don't know and can't comment on that.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. All right. How did they abuse you and mistreat you then, apart from the fact that you say here that while you were working they played Ustasha songs? That's what it says here in your statement.

A. Yes.

Q. Was there any other way in which they mistreated you?

A. I had to do heavy manual labour.

MR. NICE: Your Honour --

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Did you write --

JUDGE MAY: Yes. Yes, Mr. Nice.

MR. NICE: The Court will have observed that I quite specifically, ¹⁷⁴⁴⁵ in going through the summary, did not deal with the treatment of this witness in any of the camps, and I made it clear that the purpose of her evidence was different from that. We know that the time limits on us are very strict and we're doing our best to follow them, and it will, of course, be for the Chamber to decide how much time the accused is allowed in cross-examination, but it would be my submission that his time is available essentially to cross-examine on the material that we have led and that the Court should be careful, or could be very careful or cautious before allowing any extension of the time available for that purpose caused by his exploring issues that we have specifically not explored. And the problem may arise, and I'll just mention it now, may arise more frequently in the future, because there are always going to be witnesses -- there are many witnesses whose evidence could cover a number of topics, and if we choose only to cover one topic, not least because of the time limits on us, the overall time limits, our efforts to contain the time our case takes will be thwarted if the accused is always allowed - and I'm not suggesting he is this time - to go into the other topics that the witness could have covered but we've elected not to touch. It's a problem that's going to arise.

JUDGE MAY: Mr. Kay, yes.

MR. KAY: If the Court will just permit us an observation on this matter. It's really for the accused to decide how he wants to use his time, in many respects. There are a vast number of issues that a witness such as this is able to cover and does cover, and one can see from the entirety of the material that a number of different matters arise. And if ¹⁷⁴⁴⁶ he chooses to select certain areas that are available within the background of the material, then in our submission that would be a matter for him in the presentation of his case.

JUDGE MAY: I suppose there is one aspect of the matter with this witness in particular, because clearly there's a great deal of information which she covers, and I've said to the accused that if he requires at some later stage to challenge the evidence, he not having had it in any detail before, as I understand it, then of course we would consider an application.

One aspect of that will be how he's spent his time now, and if it's found that he's not spent it on the central issues, it may affect whether we allow the witness back. But apart from that, speaking for myself, I would be inclined to agree with you. If it's relevant, the accused should be able to cross-examine on it, but he's got to bear in mind the time constraints.

[Trial Chamber confers]

JUDGE MAY: No. We're agreed on our approach. It's just a question of time, Mr. Milosevic. Of course you can ask this question -- this witness about her experiences. We consider it to be relevant to her evidence, it may be relevant to her credibility. It's a matter which you can cover. But of course it may mean that you're not covering something else that you want to cover. But continue.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. May, you are making it quite impossible for me to cross-examine witnesses by putting the time constraints on me, and this is the umpteenth time that my time is being ¹⁷⁴⁴⁷ limited, but I shall continue.

Do you consider that I have asked an irrelevant question when I raised the question of the statement given to the Muslim police which is different to the statement given here? Do you consider that to be irrelevant, perhaps?

JUDGE MAY: No. Nobody has said it's irrelevant. In fact, we said the last question was relevant, if you'd listened to the ruling. But it's a question of time. Everybody is under constraints of time, and that includes you, and what you can't do is waste time on irrelevant matters. Not that we found this matter is irrelevant, but in future examination, bear it in mind.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right. Is this a relevant question, then:

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Could you explain that to me, please, Mrs. Malesevic: You were in a Croatian prison and you're talking about Serbian so-called camps, and here in your statement, on page 1 of it, you say that you are an economist, second level economist, and here in the one given to the police, your own police force, you say that you are a chemistry technician. What are you?

A. I am a chemical technician, but I did study economics. I have not verified my papers. I studied economics for four years, worked in the field of economics and finance.

Q. All right. Fine. I understand. So you never graduated, actually. You were a student but never graduated, and you are in fact a ¹⁷⁴⁴⁸ chemical technician, chemistry technician; right? That's your profession. Let's move on then.

Your association, I see from your statement, has 5.000 members; is that right?

A. Our Alliance has 35.000 members, and there are 5.000 members who filled in a dossier. That was when I made the statement in 2001.

Q. So there were 5.000 members who filled in these questionnaires in 2001. And where are the additional 95.000? You say that there were a hundred thousand in the camps.

A. I didn't say members. I said that according to the records that we have, and these records vary, these are lists provided by our members, lists from the state commission that engaged in exchanges, and many others who participated in the research. As you see, there's an entry when the witness has to say who was detained with him. And on the basis of such statements, we obtained the figure of 100.000.

Q. And how many do you have on the list of the commissions that conducted the exchanges?

A. The commission can tell you that. But regarding the data that we needed, for example, how many were exchanged at a particular place, to check out whether the detainee was really there, we asked for a list for that particular exchange. We don't have all the lists from the state commission for exchanges.

Q. And what is the figure of those persons that were exchanged?

A. You will have to ask the state commission that.

Q. So you don't know anything about that? ¹⁷⁴⁴⁹

A. I think that they should answer that question.

Q. But then how can you do your work if you don't know how many people were exchanged?

A. Every person that applies for this status brings with him this certificate from the commission for exchange. And on the basis of those individual certificates, we establish the status. Very rarely do we ask for a complete list for a large-scale exchange.

Q. Yes. But you're using the figure of 100.000. So if you're using that figure of 100.000, surely the figure, the number of people exchanged, would be a very reliable source of information, as it is signed, it is carried out in the presence of the International Red Cross, it is verified in a certain sense. So it can be a very reliable figure as opposed to this rough figure that you were using of 100.000.

A. Unfortunately, in addition to lists of the state commission, there were lists of the International Red Cross committee, UNPROFOR, and others. Many detainees simply fled from camps or abandoned the camps, so that the information of the state commission is not complete. But it is certainly information that we sometimes use, but we do not have available the data of that commission.

Q. Is the existence of your Alliance well known throughout Bosnia and Herzegovina?

A. Yes. It is a legal entity. It is active in Bosnia-Herzegovina and in the diaspora.

Q. So since it is known, only 5.000 applied up to 2001, doesn't that figure tell you anything? ¹⁷⁴⁵⁰

A. Not 5.000, Mr. Milosevic, 35.000.

Q. Yes. But 5.000 filled in the questionnaires.

A. Yes, and they're continuing to fill in more.

Q. Do you believe that you have precise, comprehensive data?

A. No. I pointed out that the research was ongoing and that we hope that at one point we will be able to have the exact figure, but we still don't have that figure.

Q. Can you tell us about the ethnic composition of your members. What is the percentage of Muslims and Croats and Serbs?

A. Unfortunately, it is common knowledge that it was mostly Bosniaks that were detained, but we also have registered Croats and Serbs.

Q. My question was: Do you have any figures to give me?

A. I haven't prepared them, but I can send them. That's no problem.

Q. You've brought from the Alliance of Detainees of Bosnia-Herzegovina this table, and I see that within the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina you have six alliances, and within Republika Srpska five alliances. So there's only one more in the federation than in the Serbian area. How come you have no figures about detainees in Republika Srpska?

A. Yes, we do have data. The data I presented about Zvornik, Kalinovik, and so on. If you look closely, you will see that the regional association in Republika Srpska were formed, but in the territory of the federation, unfortunately, many of our members can still not return because everything has been destroyed. But once they return to the municipality from which they were expelled, they will certainly be ¹⁷⁴⁵¹ registered there according to the laws of Republika Srpska.

Q. Do you have any Serbs in your association?

A. We do.

Q. How many? You're the secretary of the Alliance, you should know.

A. Well, we have a certain number, but I can't tell you the exact figure.

Q. Very well. We'll move on. From Article 16, paragraph 1 of the Statute of your alliance, which has been provided here as the main document, your Statute, I see that every member of the alliance, or rather, any detainee may be a member of the association who was, during the aggression against Bosnia-Herzegovina, forcibly taken and detained in camps or prisons; is that right?

A. Yes.

Q. Is it true that in paragraph 2 of the same article, it says a foreign citizen who was imprisoned in aggressor camps and prisons in Bosnia and Herzegovina may also be a member of the association?

A. Yes.

Q. If that is so, in view of the fact that in the quoted article mention is made of aggressor camps in Bosnia and Herzegovina, who carried out the aggression against Bosnia and Herzegovina?

A. Mr. Milosevic, I must say that most of our detainees claim that there was large-scale presence of paramilitary units, the JNA, Arkan's units, and so on, because places like Zvornik, Vlasenica, Visegrad, the local Serbs could not have ethnically cleansed the areas without the assistance of paramilitary units. And I think the expression "aggression" ¹⁷⁴⁵² is quite adequate in view of all the evil done.

Q. Since you mentioned some paramilitary or voluntary units that -- units of volunteers who are small, as is common knowledge, do you -- are you aware of entire Mujahedin brigades who came from outside Bosnia-Herzegovina to fight on the side of the Muslims?

A. No.

Q. So you don't know anything about that?

A. No.

Q. Very well. Let's not waste time. Since here you mentioned the possibility of foreign citizens being members of your association, which camps and prisons can be considered aggressor camps and prisons according to the provisions of your Statute? Which camps?

A. The camps which were under the control of both the Croatian and Serbian forces.

Q. If Serbs or Croats were in a Muslim camp - and you have plenty of such cases - were you in an aggressor camp or not?

A. You see, the formation of camps by Bosniaks was - how shall I put it? - something that followed, but it was not part of the system. I have information about those camps. We are collecting that information. As far as we know, there were no massive killings in them. There was no starvation, sexual abuse.

Q. No. It was paradise over there in Bosniak camps. It was paradise.

A. I'm not saying that, but there were Bosniaks, Croats, and Serbs that were detained there. There were individual camps, according to our ¹⁷⁴⁵³ information.

Q. Very well. I understand your answer. So you consider yourself a detainee in an aggressor camp.

A. Yes.

Q. And you were in a Croatian camp.

A. Yes.

Q. So Serbs or Croats who were in Muslim camps, do they consider themselves to be in an aggressor camp or do you consider them to have been in an aggressor camp?

A. That is what they say, but if that is what they say, let them prove it.

Q. Do you know how many camps there were and improvised prisons in which Muslim extremists, Mujahedins that cut off heads and put them in boxes, tortured and killed Serbs, inhabitants of Bosnia-Herzegovina?

A. Yes, we do have certain camps under Bosniak control. I can say maybe we don't have complete information, but we're in the stage of collecting such information, and we will be ready to present them to this Tribunal as soon as we have sufficient information.

Q. In those camps, were there -- in those Muslim camps, were there any Serbs from Serbia or from Australia or from I don't know where, or were they Serbs, inhabitants of Bosnia-Herzegovina?

A. I'm sorry, I didn't understand the question.

Q. Those Serbs detained in Muslim camps, were they also inhabitants of Bosnia-Herzegovina?

A. I assume they were. ^{17454 BLANK PAGE 17455}

Q. And those Serbs who had Muslims in their camps, were they also inhabitants of Bosnia-Herzegovina?

A. Yes, but our witnesses speak of massive presence of paramilitary units.

Q. In which camps were they present?

JUDGE MAY: Mr. Milosevic, we must -- we must come to -- bring this to a close. It's time for the adjournment.

Mrs. Malesevic, would you remember, please, in this adjournment and any others there may be not to speak to anybody about your evidence until it's over, and not to let anybody speak to you, and that does include the members of the Prosecution team.

We will adjourn now for twenty minutes.

--- Recess taken at 10.33 a.m.

--- On resuming at 10.57 a.m.

JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Milosevic.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. So, Ms. Malesevic, will you answer my question with precision, please. The Serbs who were detained in one of the Muslim camps, can they be members of your association?

A. Yes. We have members from the Tarcin camp, which was a camp under Bosniak control.

Q. Very well. So they can be members of your association.

A. Yes.

Q. So if they can be members, does that mean that the Muslims also committed aggression against Bosnia-Herzegovina, that is, the camps ¹⁷⁴⁵⁶ founded by the Muslims, can they be considered aggressor camps as well?

A. In view of the number of camps held by the Bosniaks being so minute as being compared to the others, they were not in the system, they were not under control of the army, so we don't have such information. They were in individual isolated cases and they were processed by the Bosniaks.

Q. Since you say they were an insignificant number, then surely you must know how many Muslim camps there were in the territory of Bosnia-Herzegovina in which the Muslim authorities detained Serbs, primarily civilians.

A. At first we focused most on the camps in the autonomy of Fikret Abdic, Serbian camps, Croatian camps, and only then will the Serbs' turn come. But we have seven or eight such camps. But as we continue our research, we will probably have more information.

Q. Do you know that in the territory of Bosnia-Herzegovina, up until and including 1995, according to data of the committee for collecting information on crimes committed against humanity and international law, there were 420 camps and prisons established by Muslims and in which Serbs were detained, tortured, and killed. 420 according to the data of the state commission.

A. I'm not familiar with that figure. However, we are active throughout the territory of Bosnia-Herzegovina, and it would be a good thing if we managed to complete our task together. We have documentation and witnesses, so it would be a good idea if we could bind together the information available to the Serbs. It would certainly be a step towards ¹⁷⁴⁵⁷ reconciliation.

Q. Do you believe that it is a contribution to the truth or is it a contribution to further confrontation if incorrect data are presented about alleged Serb crimes as are contained in your testimony?

A. We are convinced that only by means of the truth can we restore co-existence and trust among people.

Q. I see that you have provided here data on camps founded by what you call the Serbian authorities.

A. Yes.

Q. I do not have time, unfortunately, to cover everything because you have a list on 12 or 13 pages, I think, of camps, and you say at the beginning that the data contained in this table are correct on the 15th of October, 2001, as of that date. So let me just use a pilot approach as an example, in other words, because we can't cover 13 pages. Mr. Nice mentioned 15 camps in Bijeljina. As I know that Bijeljina is covering this trial, as are many other places and people in them, I will ask you several questions about it. Fifteen camps.

What is Polje Janja? Janja playground. No one ever heard of that expression.

A. I can't speak about the details because the documents are in the Alliance, but I'm sure that we have sufficient evidence to prove that that was a detention facility. We have the necessary documentation stored in our offices.

Q. Can you give us at least two or three, or maybe just one name of a person detained in this Janja playground? ¹⁷⁴⁵⁸

A. No. Just now I'm unable to do that.

Q. Very well, then. Let me take another example. Something close to the railway station, a correctional facility. Either a maintenance office or a correction facility. No one ever heard of it.

A. Mr. Milosevic, all the things you're referring to we can provide ample evidence to this Tribunal. I cannot speak about the details now. I don't think that would be correct, because there are so many details.

Q. But each of these facts contribute to the establishing of the guilt of certain people who allegedly did something over there in those places. Take number 9, for instance, the fortress or the castle. No one if Bijeljina knows of any fortress in Bijeljina nor is there any such fortress in Bijeljina nor is there a cafe by that name. These buildings simply don't exist. People never heard of them, not to mention camps there.

A. Mr. Milosevic, I claim once again that everything that is listed can be documented. Whether the right name was used I can't say. But all the locations to which people were brought unlawfully, we call them camps. So there are documents to corroborate this. How many people went through them, we can provide detailed information if this Tribunal requires it.

Q. What is the Novo Selo farm? Such a facility doesn't exist in Bijeljina or in the territory of Semberija at all. Two kilometres from Bijeljina there is the agricultural estate called Semberija consisting of several farms. Novo Selo is mostly a Muslim village from which not a single Muslim has left. They're still living there and working at the agricultural estate there. Is that true or not? ¹⁷⁴⁵⁹

A. I can only claim here that we have the necessary documentation for this, but I'm unable to comment on the details at this point in time and at this place.

Q. Do you know, for example, what you say here, the military warehouse of Patkovaca? That is a warehouse, it was never a prison let alone a camp.

A. No, Mr. Milosevic, but people were detained in facilities of that kind, in garages, warehouses, private houses, and everywhere where persons were held en masse we refer to as camps. Of course, once we complete our classification of detention points, we'll have better definitions.

Q. You say here, for example, the 4th of July utility services camp. In Bijeljina, there is an utility service by the name of the 4th of July, is there?

A. Yes, and that's where persons were probably detained, held for a certain period of time, and abused.

Q. The 4th of July was working both during the war and after the war. It was operational. Muslims worked there, so did Serbs, and they still work there. And the director is the same. His name is Milan Peric. He was the director during the war and after the war, and there was never a prison there, it was just a company. And not a single Muslim during the war was even dismissed from the enterprise. Do you know about that? Are you aware of that, Mrs. Malesevic?

A. No. I'm hearing that for the first time, because what I know is that in Bijeljina, before the war broke out, people were being dismissed from their jobs, Muslims and Croats. And this forced the people to seek ¹⁷⁴⁶⁰ refuge and seek employment elsewhere. So what I know is something else. They were left without a job and then had to leave their homes and were expelled.

Q. Are you saying that Muslims were expelled from Bijeljina?

A. Yes, on the basis of the statements that our research centre has.

Q. All right. Tell me this then, then. You enumerated the Vanekov Mlin camp, and according to the information my associates have collected, Vanekov Mlin was exclusively for Serb transgressors, or rather, soldiers who had committed an offence of some kind, members of the army of Republika Srpska, and it was a prison.

A. Yes, where Bosniaks and Croats were put up as well.

Q. That's not true. Do you have any evidence to bear that out?

A. There is documentation in the Centre for Research of the detainees alliance.

Q. All right. My associates noticed you mentioned the S. Hase elementary school. In Bijeljina they think this is a bit of a joke because there is a primary school there, Marko Filipovic, Zikica Jovanica, Zikica Jovanica Spanac, and Hamza Hamzic. There is another secondary school centre called Alija Aliagic, but there is no elementary school by the name of S. Hase in the Bijeljina area at all. The citizens of Bijeljina are watching this, are attending these proceedings. So do you say that a school named S. Hase actually exists? Is that what you're saying?

A. Well, from this place I cannot check anything out. Perhaps it is in the vicinity of Bijeljina and so the witness said that it belongs to ¹⁷⁴⁶¹ Bijeljina. But I'm sure that such a school does exist.

Q. All right. You then talk about a prison. There's no prison let alone a school, let alone a prison. So how can anything then exist? Then you have an agricultural school listed here. Can you name one single Muslim who was detained in an agricultural school? The agricultural school worked as an agricultural school.

A. It probably exists. I'm sure it exists, or rather, I'm sure that documents exist about that particular locality and the individuals. As I say, everything was compiled on the basis of statements in the dossiers.

Q. There were Muslims in the school but just as teachers, the teaching staff of the school, not as detainees or prisoners. Are you aware of that?

A. No.

Q. And then you have Osman Velagic's house in Janja. That's the next one. Not a single Muslim was ever imprisoned in Janja. Do you know that?

A. I'm sure that the house existed as a place of detention. Persons who were detained in the house testified to this. They were mistreated there.

Q. Can you quote a name? Can you give us the name of somebody who was detained there at all?

A. Don't expect me to give you names, Mr. Milosevic. I have tried not to do that because I wasn't -- I was only -- I only prepared my report but without any specifics. So I can't give you a name.

Q. And you also say that the police station in Janja was a prison. My information tells me that the entire police station has three rooms, ¹⁷⁴⁶² one for the duty officer, one for the chief and one for -- as a cloakroom, and that in Janja throughout that time in the police force there were a number of Muslims working there as policemen. Nobody was detained or held there. Perhaps somebody was taken into custody, an offender of some kind who had committed some kind of offence or crime. Do you know anything about that?

A. I know that people were taken into custody, detained there, and mistreated. And when you're talking about camps, schools, police station buildings were used, and other facilities as well.

Q. Mrs. Malesevic, you're saying all this. You're giving us some general information and general facilities used as camps. I am being specific and asking you about the fifteen camps in Bijeljina that you have listed, and nobody in Bijeljina knows about them except for this Batkovici collection centre, that one Batkovici collection centre.

A. Well, our members -- our witnesses know more about that and can give you more information.

Q. All right. When we come to the Batkovici centre, my associates have collected information about that, and that information speaks of the following - and please confirm this or deny it - that in that collection centre of Batkovici, the International Red Cross had a continuous presence there and it was through this collection centre that persons were taken for exchanges and that nobody from that centre went amiss in any way. Do you have any information or facts that anybody suffered a fate otherwise in Batkovici?

A. Yes, I have. 3.800 persons passed through Batkovici, according to ¹⁷⁴⁶³ our facts and figures and this was an agricultural estate. Terrible, horrendous crimes took place there. Prisoners were forced to drink their own urine and other people's urine. They had to do strenuous physical labour, they had to beat each other, they were forced to beat each other, and there was terrible abuse and mistreatment. Predominantly the detainees were men. They were taken off to dig trenches, communicating trenches, to make up a live shield, human shields. Other inmates were brought to Batkovici as well. The International Red Cross Committee did visit and tour the camp but it wasn't there all the time, it wasn't present all the time. And many detainees were hidden away when these ICRC visits took place. So any who passed through Batkovic were not registered by the International Committee of the Red Cross at all.

Q. Do you have any proof about what you're saying now, what you're claiming? Because according to the information amassed by my associates, everybody was registered and there are reports and minutes about each individual case, and I think the opposite side, the other side over there has those documents as well.

A. Mr. Milosevic, we have a lost documents when it comes to the Batkovici camp and the terrible horrendous things that people were put through there. The fact is that the International Red Cross did visit it, that's why mass killings did not take place here -- there, but persons were kept without food until the point of hunger. People were beaten, their ears were cut off, they were abused horrendously and maltreated in different ways.

Q. All right. Let's not enter into the details any more. But my ¹⁷⁴⁶⁴ information tells me that nobody was killed in the camp, that they were all registered, that the Red Cross did visit the camp and that via this collection centre, in fact, it was prisoners of war who were exchanged. And you're saying that none of that is right. Is that it?

JUDGE MAY: No. The witness has given her evidence. She says there was mistreatment there, and no point going over that again.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Do you know about a report on places of detention, real ones and otherwise, toured by the KEBS commission in Bosnia-Herzegovina from the 30th of August until the 3rd of September, 1992, places where persons were allegedly detained? And you have the OSCE report on that.

A. No, I don't know about that. Not fully at any rate.

Q. They visited a total of 21 centres. That was the number they were told existed according to the report, and I will tender the report. They visited -- in seven centres the data proved to be false because there were no people in those seven centres, which leaves us with 14 centres; 21 minus 7. And we have the Muslim part of the Ripac village ten kilometres from Bihac. Bihac, Manjaca, Trnopolje, the police station in Livno, the school in Livno, the village of Rascani, the prison in Mostar, Sarajevo Viktor Bubanj, and then the ones where nothing was found I won't bother to read out. Then there is Bileca, Susica, Batkovic, Konjic. And they have here that Bihac was held by the Muslims, that Viktor Bubanj Sarajevo was also under Muslim control, that the sports hall in Konjic was under Muslim control, that Celebici and the others were under Muslim control. So on this list of theirs, of the 14 where there were some persons, I've ¹⁷⁴⁶⁵ enumerated several under Muslim control. This is an OSCE report, although the OSCE report was compiled in 1992.

A. Mr. Milosevic, Ripacki Logor was under the control of the Serbs, not the Bosniaks.

Q. I'm talking about Bihac now and by Bihac, nearby Bihac. That was Serbian controlled. That's what it says. In Bihac it was the Muslims that had control. Livno, Croatia. In the school, the Croats. In Rascani, Croats. Mostar, Croats. Viktor Bubanj Sarajevo, Muslim control. In the sports hall in Konjic, Muslim control. And in Celebici, also Muslim control.

Q. So are you aware of these camps, the ones I've just read out, because you say you have nothing about that, and here we have an OSCE report dated 1992. So from the 30th of August to the 3rd of September, 1992 they toured these different localities to ascertain what existed there.

A. I do know those camps and the places stipulated, but this is an incomplete OSCE report. We have been doing research work for seven years now, and we uncover something new all the time. So I can't actually say that the report is incorrect, but it is incomplete.

Q. So incomplete as it is, it does contain information about several Muslim camps, whereas you say you have no information about Muslim camps.

A. I did not say that. I said that we do have registered and recorded camps under Bosniak control, and they are dealt with in the same way, because we look at the entire territory of Bosnia-Herzegovina, and we have members regardless of ethnic and religious affiliation, and we look ¹⁷⁴⁶⁶ at camps as camps. Detainees are detainees regardless of their ethnic affiliation, religious affiliation, or whatever.

Q. Well, a moment ago for the Muslim victims you said "ours," and then you said if the Serbs provide data, then we'll have a complete report. So you don't consider the Serbs to be yours, your own.

A. I was referring to our alliance. Our alliance of Bosnia-Herzegovina, which implies a multinational alliance. But as you are presenting the kind of data that we don't have, I think it would be a good idea to coordinate all this data to see where we are stand.

Q. Is it possible that you don't even have the kind of information that the OSCE commission ascertained?

A. As I say, the data is incomplete.

Q. I do believe that it is incomplete too but even that incomplete data does contain information. For example, in point 16 here, as Zvornik is referred to - and you spoke about Zvornik and a camp there a moment ago - and here it says no proof. The number of detainees found: Zero. Only 20 Serb refugees were found there. That's what it says here. And that was on the 2nd of September, 1992, the OSCE mission visiting Zvornik.

A. Yes, Mr. Milosevic, but up until September they were either all killed, dispersed, exchanged, or whatever, and I can well believe that no Bosniaks were found there. I can accept that, yes.

MR. NICE: Your Honour, the accused says he's going to submit this report. Probably the sooner it's submitted, so that we can look at it, the better. It's difficult for the witness to be dealing with sentences taken out of context if we don't know what the context is. ¹⁷⁴⁶⁷

JUDGE MAY: Yes. Have you got it, Mr. Milosevic? Have you got any copies for us?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes. I'll give you copies straight away.

THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Do you know, Mrs. Malesevic, that it was said that there was a camp for Muslims in Serbia too?

A. Yes.

Q. And do you know that that mission came to look into the matter because somebody had provided them with erroneous information that in the mines of Aleksinac there was allegedly a camp? Do you know about that incident?

A. No, I don't know they went to check this out, but that place did exist, I do know about that.

Q. Well, it says here the Aleksinac mine in Serbia and there is no proof, zero detainees and no evidence or proof of detainees, the 3rd of September, 1992. There was never any camp in Serbia at all.

A. Well, I'd have to remind you about Zivovica, Metrovi Polje [phoen], Sremska Mitrovica, Uzice. Those were all localities where the Bosniaks were taken and detained. As for the OSCE report that they didn't find anybody there at that time, I can agree with that. Perhaps at the time they went there there was indeed nobody there.

Q. Well, look at the people of Aleksinac. They would be able to tell you best whether there was a camp in the Aleksinac mine at all. You can ^{17468 BLANK PAGE 17469} ask the people, the coal mine there. Do you think that if that were true, it could be hidden? A truth like that could be hidden?

A. Well, the public didn't know about many places and I do think that is possible, that it could have been concealed from the public. And I think that the Serbs in Serbia did not know about localities of that kind. That is possible as well.

Q. And do you know, Mrs. Malesevic, that the authorities of the Republika Srpska told me that apart from the prisoner of war centres, there were no camps at all on the territory of Republika Srpska or in Serbia?

A. Well, except for the prisoner of war centres.

Q. Yes, where the prisoners of war were held, such as those that were taken prisoner in combat. The Serbs on the Muslim side or the Muslims on the Serb side or the Croats on the Muslim side, the Muslims on the Croatian side, and so on and so forth.

A. Well, I believe that that's what they told you, however, the information was kept confidential and hidden from the public and they still are hidden from the public.

Q. Well, it would be very advantageous for you, Mrs. Malesevic, to have the truth out, to reveal the truth so that we know about all the camps.

A. Yes, that is my ultimate goal.

Q. Well, you didn't leave that impression on me with the information you provided us with as to that being your goal.

JUDGE MAY: In terms of time, Mr. Milosevic, you have another ten ¹⁷⁴⁷⁰ minutes.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Ten minutes is too little, Mr. May.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. You speak of Trnopolje. Do you know that Trnopolje was a refugee centre that was open, that people came in and out of? That was where the forgery was made, where that lady, I think her name is Ms. Marshall, I think the film was shown, this forgery --

JUDGE MAY: No. You're not putting this claim, this allegation which has been dealt with frequently. You're not putting it to this witness. You can call your evidence about it, but there have been several court cases already which have dealt with it.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well, Mr. May. I would like to tender this OSCE report. And before you take it, you have here also an UNPROFOR proposal for the exchange of prisoners signed by Abudllah Razek, Brigade-General of Sarajevo, sector commander of UNPROFOR, Serbs captured by Bosnian armed forces in Tarcin, 700; in Posevici 150; in Hrasnica, 23. And also the Bosniaks captured by Serb forces in Luka, 57; at Ilidza, 7; at Hadzici, 600. So this was written by Brigadier General Abudllah Razek, commander of the Sarajevo sector. It was an UNPROFOR proposal.

JUDGE MAY: Mr. Milosevic, just a moment. You're not giving evidence. We'll look at those documents.

Which is the OSCE report? We've got one -- since it's not in English. We have here UNPROFOR. We've got that. We can see it with a list of camps. Just a moment. Just a moment. Let me finish. Then you've also given us what appears to be a totally unattributed list. Now, ¹⁷⁴⁷¹ what is this?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] It is a part of the OSCE report of that date, written on that document. If necessary to get hold of the original document, we can get hold of it. It is in the OSCE archives. There's no question about that.

[Trial Chamber confers]

JUDGE MAY: We're going to return the partial document. We will call for the entire document.

Have you -- perhaps you can help us with it, Mr. Nice.

MR. NICE: I don't know yet if I have it. If I do, I'll produce it.

JUDGE MAY: Yes.

MR. NICE: I'll probably know better at the end of the next break.

JUDGE MAY: If not, Mr. Milosevic, you can get it for us.

MR. NICE: They're checking for it now, apparently.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes. I'll obtain it for you. There will be no problems.

JUDGE MAY: What we might do, just so that we don't get confused later, is mark that extract for identification as a Defence exhibit, give that the first number and then we'll give the UNPROFOR document the next number.

THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, the partial OSCE report will be marked for identification as Defence Exhibit 111. And the UNPROFOR will be Defence Exhibit 112.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] ¹⁷⁴⁷²

Q. Ms. Malesevic, I assume that you cooperate with the Red Cross.

A. Yes.

Q. I have here a report and information. The data is prisoners of war which are being regularly visited by the International Committee for the Red Cross in Bosnia and Herzegovina, dated the 14th of May, 1993. And then the location is given, the number of prisoners, and the date of the last visit. They are being regularly visited. Under the supervision of Bosnian Croats in Livno, Mostar, Orasje, Rascani, Slavonski Brod, Kaonik, and Prozor.

Now, my question is regarding those under the supervision of the Government of Bosnia and Herzegovina, as it says here, those are the ones you don't know about. And this is the 14th of May, 1993, Breza, Bihac, Hraznica, Igman, Mraziste, Kladusa, Konjic, Ramiz Sarcin, Sarajevo, Stupari, Sarajevo Centre, Tarcin, Pazaric, Tesanj, Tuzla, Visoko, Zenica. And then under supervision of the Bosnian Serbs, Banja Luka, Tunjice, this is a regular prison for decades, Batkovic that we've spoken about. The hospital in Bijeljina where one is registered. Doboj, Kotor Varos, Kula, Kula Butmir Sarajevo, and then a small camp at Banja Luka, no prisoners. Visegrad, no prisoners. Zvornik, no prisoners; and Zasavica, again there are some.

So do you know anything about these camps which, according to the report, this report, were visited by the International Committee for the Red Cross that were held by Muslims? Breza, Bihac, Hrasnica, Igman, Mraziste, Kladusa, Konjic, Ramiz, Sarcin, Sarajevo, Stupari Sarajevo Centre, Tarcin, Pazaric, Tesanj, Tuzla, Visoko, Zenica, do you know ¹⁷⁴⁷³ anything about them?

JUDGE MAY: Just a moment. Before you do, let the witness see the document. She can't possibly comment on it without seeing it.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. The heading is "Prisoners of war that are being regularly visited by the International Committee of the Red Cross in Bosnia and Herzegovina."

A. This report of the International Committee is dated 1993, where, according to our records, many camps under Serbian control were closed, which means in 1993 the number of camps was significantly reduced. As for the camps under Bosnian control, of course we are familiar with some of them. But for your information, I can tell you that the camp in Velika Kladusa was thoroughly investigated and processed. It was under the control of Fikret Abdic. I personally participated. We have plenty of evidence for that. We have evidence for Tarcin and Konjic as well. However, many of the detainees listed here are not on our list. Maybe they're not in Bosnia. Maybe they haven't contacted us. I must say again that we compile all our reports on the basis of authentic statements of witnesses. We don't rely too much on international bodies because really we wish to check out everything.

Q. And are you familiar with the camp at Celebici?

A. Yes.

Q. And do you know that in that location it was Serbs in the first place who were detained?

A. Yes. ¹⁷⁴⁷⁴

Q. And do you know that Alija Izetbegovic, on the 8th of October, 1992, visited the camp at Celebici?

A. No.

Q. And had you heard that on that day members of the Green Berets took an oath of allegiance in front of them while the Serb detainees were in manholes.

JUDGE MAY: This is going well beyond the witness's evidence. Now, Mr. Milosevic, you've got about another two or three minutes.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Tell me, please, how many Serbs, former detainees, became members of your alliance, Ms. Malesevic?

A. Just now I'm unable to say with precision.

Q. And do you know of a place called Dretelj close to Capljina?

A. Yes.

Q. And do you know that in that location the authorities also formed a camp for Serbs, exclusively civilian Serbs?

A. I'm aware of Dretelj as a camp held by Croats and in which both Serbs and Bosniaks were detained.

Q. So what if Croats held it; then it's not relevant?

A. Yes, it is. We have it on our records.

Q. Does your Alliance know who Ahmet Makitan, known as Maks, father's name Omer, from Stolac is?

A. No.

Q. Do you know who Edib Buljubasic is, a former JNA officer?

A. No. ¹⁷⁴⁷⁵

Q. So you don't know anything about this? You didn't learn from any witnesses how many tortures were committed by these two men? Let me just give you some examples. Abuse, rapes, killings of Serbs in Dretelj, in that particular camp that you're familiar with. You know of the camp, but you don't know anything about what happened there nor who were the perpetrators. You know nothing about that?

A. I can't go into those details now because I haven't prepared myself for that.

Q. And do you know Srecko Herceg and Blazo Kraljevic? Have you heard of them?

A. No.

Q. If you know about the Dretelj camp, then you must know that they were the managers of those camps, the wardens of those camps. So you don't know anything about that. And Alliance, your Alliance, in view of Article 11 which envisages among its tasks and assignments the filing of charges against those who were abused by your members. Have any charges been filed against someone who killed, massacred, or abused Serbs in those camps?

A. We are just preparing material for such criminal proceedings, and very shortly we will be filing charges.

Q. And do you know that the barracks of the former JNA, known as the 27th of July, in Bihac from 1994 to 1996 was transformed into a camp in which members of the VRS were mostly detained?

A. Yes. These were camps for prisoners of war. But we are mainly concerned with civilians. ¹⁷⁴⁷⁶

Q. And as an alliance, since Article 17 of your Statute says that you will represent the interests of detainees and their families which are alleged to still be in aggressor camps, did you also represent the interests of the families of any Serb who was killed as a result of beatings, torture in one of those camps, roasted on the spit, bodily parts cut off? Did you file charges or did you represent the interests of family members of any one of them?

A. Yes, we do represent the interests of all those members who applied to us. I can't remember that we had an example of a Serb detainee contacting us. I can't claim that there weren't any, but I can't recollect any.

JUDGE MAY: You can have two more questions, Mr. Milosevic, and then your time is up.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Does your Alliance have information that anyone from the Republic of Serbia or in the Republic of Serbia founded a single prison or camp for persons from Bosnia-Herzegovina?

A. Yes, we do have some information.

Q. Which information? Please tell me.

A. Sljivovica, Mitrovo Polje, Sremska Mitrovica.

Q. Sremska Mitrovica is a regular prison.

A. Yes, to which Bosniaks from Bosnia-Herzegovina were illegally taken.

Q. Are you referring to Mitrovo Polje in 1995 in which a whole ¹⁷⁴⁷⁷ brigade was housed which fled to avoid extermination in Eastern Bosnia?

A. It's a fact that there were only males, but elementary human rights were violated there.

Q. Ms. Malesevic, do you know that I received that brigade, allowed it to cross the Drina to save their lives? There was 840 of them, and that on that same day they were visited --

JUDGE MAY: This goes way beyond her evidence. Yes, Mr. Tapuskovic.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. May, testimony of this kind which turns Serbs into monsters cannot be cross-examined in such a brief period of time, because this is a pile of lies.

JUDGE MAY: That is by way of comment, not a proper observation. You've had your chance to cross-examine. You were told that there would be a limit on time. If you have an application, you have some more information you want to put, more detailed information, we will consider it in due course, but meanwhile, Mr. Tapuskovic to cross-examine. We haven't yet -- just one moment. I'm sorry, Mr. Tapuskovic. We haven't yet dealt with the Red Cross document.

Mr. Milosevic, you referred to a Red Cross report. Again, it appears here in the form of a faxed list. What we don't have is the -- have you got the rest of the report?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I can provide it. Unfortunately, I have here very limited -- it would be putting it mildly to say modest possibilities, but I can provide the documents in their entirety. But Ms. Malesevic has seen this document. It is a report of the Red Cross, ¹⁷⁴⁷⁸ and it is not in dispute.

JUDGE MAY: No. We will exhibit it in this way: We will mark it for identification, give it the next exhibit number, and then in due course you can produce the original, I mean the whole report, in which case we will give it a full exhibit number. But for the moment we'll mark it for identification.

THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this document will be marked for identification as Defence Exhibit 113.

JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Tapuskovic.

MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours. Questioned by Mr. Tapuskovic:

Q. [Interpretation] Ms. Malesevic, I have very limited time for the cross-examination, and I should like to try to address only two points, if I can, and to explain to Their Honours a few things. The first relates to Article 1 of the Statute of the Association of Camp Inmates of Bosnia-Herzegovina. It is tab 1, Exhibit 104 [as interpreted]. Article 1. It says: "The Association of Camp Inmates of Bosnia and Herzegovina (hereinafter the Association) is a voluntary non-partisan association of citizens, former inmates who accept its program and this Statute..." So primarily of citizens; is that right?

A. Yes.

Q. So it was adopted on the 25th of August, 2001. This is the state of Bosnia and Herzegovina. 2005 [as interpreted], I'm sorry, which existed for five years.

A. No. The statute was adopted in 1996 and amendments were made in ¹⁷⁴⁷⁹ 1999.

THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter corrects herself: On the 25th of August 2001.

MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation].

Q. Yes, but in any case, Bosnia-Herzegovina existed already for many years in the form in which exists today.

A. Yes.

Q. So I would like to know whether this is a statute that was approved also by the Republika Srpska.

A. As you see in our programme aims, we wish to act throughout Bosnia-Herzegovina. It has been certified by the Ministry of Justice.

Q. Yes, but has it been approved by Republika Srpska? And I'm asking this because of something that is contained in the Statute that is reference to aggression against Bosnia-Herzegovina. Has Republika Srpska approved the contents of this Statute?

A. I can't answer that question. We were registered by the Ministry of Justice. Whether they gave their approval or not, but the Association has the status of a legal entity.

Q. I'm asking you because it is hard to include in a Statute of this kind something that still has to be proven, especially as this is a state consisting of three entities.

THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness repeat herself.

MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. She said, "I can't say anything about that." Very well, can you explain for Their Honours tab 5, referring to ¹⁷⁴⁸⁰ killings and torture and physical mistreatment. Here you mentioned a whole series of forms of killings and torture and physical abuse. Also, in the last tab, we saw photographs which have been seen many times already here in various places. I would like to know, if you could explain to Their Honours, first regarding torture and physical abuse. This was reported by survivors, obviously. For example, under 21, tearing -- tearing off genitals of detainees by criminals. Do you have a photograph of such people?

A. I am sorry, sir, but how can you expect photographs of such crimes? We have an authentic witness.

Q. But wouldn't it be logical if there were survivors for us -- to show us a photograph of such a horrific crime?

A. If -- even if I had a photograph, I wouldn't be able to present it without permission of the witness.

Q. Very well. If you can't do for that, then for number 30. Something detainees against wooden and glass objects. Do you have photographs of that?

A. No.

Q. So you don't have any material evidence, any photograph or any of these things listed from 16 to 44 here?

A. Material evidence are the consequences that are still visible on the bodies of former detainees, and a host of witnesses who were watching this.

Q. I'm not asking you about the witnesses watching this. I'm asking you about these people who survived and complained to you of the horrific ¹⁷⁴⁸¹ torture they were subjected to. Why don't you have a single photograph to corroborate what they experienced?

A. We don't have it.

MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours.

MR. NICE: A few points arising. Just dealing with the last point of Mr. Tapuskovic.

Re-examined by Mr. Nice:

Q. You say you have no photographs of injuries. We've seen some photographs of injuries already, but you have no photographs of injuries of the particular categories of abuse that he referred to?

A. That's right.

Q. Any particular reason for that?

A. First of all, when crimes of this kind were committed, there was no filming, or rather, the detainees were not in a position to take photos, because this was all done far from the public eyes and it is only the inmates that can testify to that.

Q. Insofar as the inmates would be describing injuries inflicted on them as individuals, any reason why we haven't got photographs of those?

A. That is possible, absolutely so.

Q. It is possible there are some photographs of the injuries that they sustained?

A. Yes.

Q. Which brings me to the next point. Brings me to the next point: Does your documentation include medical reports where medical reports would be appropriate, or not? ^{17482 BLANK PAGE 17483}

A. Yes. There are medical findings and reports attached to the majority of cases. However, many, when they left the camps, were not able to seek medical assistance straight away.

Q. The accused --

A. We do have a certain number of medical reports, yes.

Q. The accused asked you a number of questions suggesting that detention centres simply didn't operate as detention centres. Now Mr. Tapuskovic has apparently challenged certain of the allegations of torture and physical abuse. Your records are clearly substantial and voluminous, but would it be possible for you to return to those records and to search them in respect of these particular challenged locations or challenged injuries and to find records that sustain your evidence?

A. Yes, absolutely.

Q. You haven't turned all your records, very substantial as they would be, over to the OTP of the ICTY, and I'm not for one second suggesting that you should do that, but is there any reason of confidentiality or similar why, having identified those particular records about detention centres and injuries, any particular reason why you shouldn't make them available to this Tribunal?

A. First of all, all the documents that I place at the disposal of the Tribunal I will have to ask acquiescence from our members once again, but I assume that there is a portion of those documents that cannot be handed over to the Tribunal, and this refers to the rape of women and, as a result, those women bore children. So I don't think it would be a good idea if data of that kind were to be presented. ¹⁷⁴⁸⁴

Q. Mrs. Malesevic, there will be no detailed questions about that. I'm only concerned with the very particular suggestions that have been put to you by the accused and now by Mr. Tapuskovic. If you find documents dealing with those particular allegations, and we'll list them for you before you leave, I hope, will you be in a position to find and to produce to the Chamber documents that support what you've said?

A. Of course, yes.

MR. NICE: Your Honour, the first thing I'd ask is that when she leaves, Mr. Agha will extract from LiveNote a list of all the challenged locations and challenged acts of torture. We can send those with the witness and she can then take whatever time is necessary and send us a package of materials and we will provide them to the Chamber and to the accused. If that would be appropriate. If seems to me it arises from the cross-examination.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. May.

[Trial Chamber confers]

JUDGE MAY: Yes. What we have in mind is this: That the Prosecution should be able to produce the evidence. Of course, if need be, we may have to ask the witness to come back to deal with it in cross-examination.

MR. NICE: Yes, Your Honour.

JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Milosevic.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Just to make things quite clear: The request made by Mr. Nice just now is absolutely unfeasible, because she cannot obtain a list of the challenged elements of her own testimony ¹⁷⁴⁸⁵ when I have not had time myself to challenge the elements in her testimony. What she can get is just a list of what during this short space of time I did succeed in challenging and contesting. And as I have been limited in time, you can imagine what other things I could still challenge and contest.

So the expression "all the challenged material" is quite inappropriate. I challenge the entire testimony.

JUDGE MAY: We will deal with those parts on which there were detailed challenges. That material can be provided and we'll consider it.

MR. NICE:

Q. Mrs. Malesevic, you just heard the accused say that he challenges the totality of your testimony, and you will have heard him earlier raise "pile of lies." I think it's a suggestion that you've been lying to this Chamber. Now, you've given an account of how individual alleged inmates and victims record their histories for your Alliance, and you've identified how they have some limited benefits arising from membership of the Alliance and how they sometimes have to be checked out.

A. Yes.

Q. Is there any other benefit passing to them as individuals, to the municipal or other local associations, or to you as an officer of this Alliance preparing these records? Do you get anything out of it?

A. For what we do, and we do it for a large number of people both in the field and in the Alliance, nobody reaps any benefit from it. Our work is almost on a volunteer basis. Nor do our members enjoy any kind of rights. The sole motive there is truth. ¹⁷⁴⁸⁶

Q. And the accused pressed you about Serbs. You said yes, there were Serbs in the associations but you didn't have the particular statistics of ethnic composition. Given your Alliance's multi-ethnic principles, is there any reason to break down those who claim to have suffered in this way on grounds of ethnicity or not?

A. I don't think there is, no.

Q. The accused has placed before us two pages in your own language that you I don't think have seen of the OSCE report. I mean, haven't seen here.

MR. NICE: I wonder if the witness could see that and the UNPROFOR page, just before she leaves court just to see if she has any comments on them in their original form and see indeed if she recognises them.

JUDGE MAY: Let her see them now.

MR. NICE:

Q. And while we're coming to you, Mrs. Malesevic, do you know anything about the methodology of the alleged OSCE report one way or the other?

A. I must say that I don't know about the methodology, the methodology they used in their work. However, this is the 3rd of September. According to our information, many camps were already closed by that date when we're speaking about Eastern Bosnia. I have never seen this document before. I'm looking at it for the first time now.

MR. NICE: I think, Your Honour, that was the OSCE extract, so described.

Q. And if you look at the other document that has come to you. Just ¹⁷⁴⁸⁷ see if you've seen this one before. It may be the Red Cross document.

A. No. I haven't seen this document either before.

Q. Cast your eyes down and see if there's any comment you want to make on it.

A. Well, it's like this: What they say, Tarcin here, we do have records of Tarcin, and we know that it was a camp where there were detainees. In addition to Bosniaks, Croats, and Serbs were there too.

Q. No other comment?

A. No.

Q. And then finally this: Has there been any question of Serbs applying to register their interest in your Alliance being rejected on grounds of ethnicity?

A. No, not for ethnicity. Nobody was refused on those grounds. The only thing that might have happened was that the material wasn't complete. But we are a multi-ethnic Alliance, so there would be no reason to reject any claims or requests from those quarters.

Q. As a matter of fact, are there associations that are Serb based or Serb-dominated perhaps because they exist in Serb-dominated areas?

A. Yes. Yes. According to our information, quite recently an association was set up in the RS of survived detainees, and we're preparing to enter into contact with them so that we can work together, get the material that they have and so on. We had earlier contact previously with another association of missing persons and detainees. They encompassed those persons killed, detainees, missing persons. This has been separated now, and it is an Association of Detainees separately, ¹⁷⁴⁸⁸ and we have good cooperation with that.

MR. NICE: Your Honour, that's all I ask of this witness, subject to the fact that she will be asked to bring documents or to find documents and send them to us.

JUDGE MAY: Ms. Malesevic, that concludes your evidence for the time being. What we're going to do is to ask you to produce some documents on the matters you were questioned about. It may be that we will have to ask you at some future date to return to give evidence about those documents, but meanwhile, thank you for coming to the Tribunal, and you're free to go.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.

[The witness withdrew]

JUDGE MAY: It may be convenient, while the witness is departing, to deal with one or two interlocutory matters that we've been asked to rule on.

One matter is the Witness Zana Baca. I may have mispronounced that. We gave leave that the witness should be substituted for another witness last week. The question which we're now asked is whether she may give her evidence under Rule 92 bis. We think that appropriate. She will be coming to give evidence anyway and will be cross-examined. The witness -- the amici asked us to extend time in one particular case dealing with the admission of transcripts. We will grant that as asked.

MR. KAY: Thank you, Your Honour.

JUDGE MAY: We are asked to deal with some protective measures for ¹⁷⁴⁸⁹ a witness -- witnesses. It's the application of the 5th of March. Since we're in open session, I won't mention the names, but there are three witnesses, the application of the 5th of March. We shall grant that as asked.

MR. NICE: Thank you.

[redacted]

[redacted]

[redacted]

[redacted]

[redacted]

[redacted]

[redacted]

[redacted]

[redacted]

[redacted]

[redacted]

[redacted]

[redacted]

[Private session]

[redacted]

[redacted]

[redacted]

[redacted]

[redacted]

[redacted] ¹⁷⁴⁹⁰

[redacted]

[redacted]

[redacted]

[redacted]

[redacted]

[redacted]

[redacted]

[Open session]

JUDGE MAY: I think that concludes those matters. Shall we start the next witness? Yes. We've got ten minutes. Yes.

MR. NICE: It was --

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. May --

THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.

THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session, Your Honours.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I have not been informed of any changes to the order of witnesses, although before the break you did give instructions that I should be informed on time about the order of witnesses. On my list I have Zana Baca, and not Djordjevic who is going to be next. On my list he comes after her. So I should just like you to take note of that, that not even your instructions were respected and abided by by the opposite party, that is to say, to let me know on time as to the list and sequence of witnesses.

JUDGE MAY: Our list dated the 3rd of March makes it plain that he is to be next, Mr. Djordjevic is to be next.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I usually receive the order of ¹⁷⁴⁹¹ witnesses. The last one that I received says Baca Zana, followed by Djordjevic and so on.

JUDGE MAY: We've got the 27th of February and that also gives Mr. Djordjevic as next. I don't know what date you've got. It sounds as though you're dealing with an earlier document.

MR. NICE: It may be that the accused is -- has in mind a conversation that Ms. Dicklich, who sits next to me, had with his associates where at some stage she said there was a possibility that, for administrative reasons, Baca and Djordjevic would have to be reversed but in fact -- and the associates were invited to alert the accused to that possibility, but in the event, the list is as it was.

JUDGE MAY: Yes. So we'll hear his evidence next. How long do you think you will be with him in chief?

MR. NICE: I'm anxious to try to finish him this morning.

JUDGE MAY: To finish him today?

MR. NICE: I may not, but I'm anxious to.

JUDGE MAY: Yes. You will have this afternoon to prepare your cross-examination of this witness.

Let me deal with one other matter, and that is that Dr. Ranta I think is due on Wednesday.

MR. NICE: Yes.

JUDGE MAY: That being so, her evidence, since she has been fixed for a particular day, will have to be interposed. So we will hear Dr. Ranta on Wednesday, whatever the state of the evidence, and any other witness will have to be dealt with around her evidence. ¹⁷⁴⁹²

MR. NICE: Grateful for that. And I don't know if the Court's formed a provisional or indeed final view as to how her evidence should be dealt with and what should be the order of the questioning.

JUDGE MAY: I thought we'd made it plain. If we haven't, we will deal with it by way of her producing her -- any statement, that we will in due course have examination -- any questions by the Bench, examination by the Prosecution, examination by the accused and the amici, and then any other questions by the Bench.

MR. NICE: Your Honour.

JUDGE MAY: So, Mr. Milosevic, to explain that, that when Dr. Ranta comes, we will first of all have the Prosecution giving cross-examining or examining. We will then -- you will then follow, and then it will be the amici, and that will conclude her evidence. The Bench will ask questions either at the beginning or the end according to the determination of the Bench itself.

I think by this time we're really up to the break. Yes. We might as well break. We will break a bit early and have 20 minutes.

--- Recess taken at 12.10 p.m.

--- On resuming at 12.35 p.m.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. May.

JUDGE MAY: Just a moment. We're having a witness sworn. Yes. Let the witness be sworn.

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

JUDGE MAY: If you'd like to take a seat. ¹⁷⁴⁹³

WITNESS: MILOSAV DJORDJEVIC

[Witness answered through interpreter]

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

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] First of all, I can provide the entirety of the report of the International Red Cross dated the 14th of May, 1993, of which I gave you only one page.

And secondly, could you please tell me how much time I will have for witness Helena Ranta.

JUDGE MAY: We haven't yet worked out times. Why? Are you thinking you may need a longer time than usual?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] No. I just like to be informed how much time I will have as she's planned for Wednesday so that I have an idea.

JUDGE MAY: Yes.

[Trial Chamber confers]

JUDGE MAY: We have in mind an hour. You'd have an hour to cross-examine her. But let's go on with the witness.

MR. NICE: Your Honour, this witness, as the Court may remember, was originally listed with a pseudonym. He made it plain, as I revealed on an earlier occasion, that once he'd received the waiver he required, he was content to give evidence fully openly.

Examined by Mr. Nice:

Q. Your full name, please, sir.

A. My surname is Djordjevic, my first name Milosav.

MR. NICE: Your Honour will also recall that the witness's ¹⁷⁴⁹⁴ statement has been the subject of an application that part of it be admitted under the provisions of Rule 92 bis, an application that was granted, and amongst the various paragraphs that are to be admitted under 92 bis, paragraph 1, paragraphs 22 to 25, paragraph 29, and then paragraphs 47 through to 70 and indeed 71.

The first paragraph -- sorry. May the statement and what's called the 92 bis package now be produced and given its exhibit number.

THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that's Prosecutor's Exhibit 405.

MR. NICE: The witness produces several exhibits which come collected together in a file. May they also be produced immediately and given an exhibit number.

THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, the exhibits for Mr. Djordjevic will be Prosecutor's Exhibit 406.

MR. NICE:

Q. You are, I think, a retired general; is that correct?

A. Yes, that's correct, Mr. Prosecutor.

Q. And from the extended curriculum vitae which is before the Chamber in written form, we extract that on the 20th of October, 1991, you were appointed head of the Coordination Group at the Ministry of Defence of the Republic of Serbia for SAO Krajina, and you started to work there for General Tomislav Simovic?

A. That's correct, Mr. Prosecutor.

Q. He being the Minister of Defence for Serbia, you holding that position until -- a fairly short period of time, until the 22nd of December of 1991. ¹⁷⁴⁹⁵

A. That's correct.

Q. The Serbian Ministry of Defence was established, as you understand it and can assist us if necessary, according to various laws and was based on the then-existing Secretariat for People's Defence, the SNO of the Republic of Serbia?

A. Yes.

Q. You would say that the legal basis for the establishment of the Ministry of Defence can be found in a number of laws, and you've listed them as follows: The 1990 Serbian constitution, the 1974 SFRY constitution, the 1982 SFRY All People's Defence law, the 1984 Serbian All People's Defence law, and the 1991 Serbian All People's Defence law?

A. That's correct.

Q. In addition, you refer to the rules of internal organisation and systemisation of work within the Ministry of Defence.

A. Yes. This was adopted by the government of Serbia in 1991.

Q. And finally, you've been able to bring to The Hague one further document which is the 1984 Law of Defence of the Republic of Serbia, which is tab 1 in our exhibit, the number of which I've already forgotten.

THE REGISTRAR: 406.

MR. NICE: 406. Thank you very much.

Q. 406, tab 1. And if we can just have a look at that very briefly, very briefly.

If we turn to the 4th page of 10, as it appears in the bottom right-hand corner, we see that Article 111 is under the sub-heading Republic Secretariat for People's Defence and that it goes to say: ^{17496 BLANK PAGE 17497} "The Republic Secretariat for People's Defence, within its domain, and beside the affairs which conducts according to the general regulations on administrative bodies, conducts the following administrative affairs ..." and then it lists them.

And at number 13 on page 6 of 10, at paragraph 13: "Organises, monitors and coordinates preparation and training of working people and citizens for All People's Defence in cases of immediate war, threat, at war, and in other special situations."

Page 7 of 10, paragraph 24. The body carries out certain affairs for the National Assembly of the Republic of Serbia, and the system is listed there.

And you would also draw our attention over the page to page 8 of 10, paragraph 29: "In cooperation with the Federal Secretariat for National Defence, the appropriate army commands, organs, and the JNA, it participates in ensuring the reinforcement of armed forces and other needs of All People's Defence in organising and conducting of training exercises; it makes and coordinates plans for the Defence ... takes part in choosing war locations."

Perhaps paragraph 30, third line: "The Republic Secretariat for National Defence, in case of imminent war danger, in case of war, as well as in other states of emergency ..." and sets out what it does. And that's, I think, all I need ask from you by way of a very general survey of that one additional Statute.

So these Statues and Rules, as you understand it, provide a basis for the Serbian Ministry of Defence? ¹⁷⁴⁹⁸

A. Quite so. But the new Law of People's Defence of the Republic of Serbia of 1991 eliminated some of those tasks and reduced them in relation to the contents of the 1984 law.

Q. The Ministry of Defence of the -- we'll look very briefly at the control of the Ministry of Defence and the Federal Secretariat for People's Defence, the SSNO. Was the Ministry of Defence of the Republic of Serbia part of the Serb government; and if so, to whom did it answer?

A. Could I have a table shown, because it would be easier to explain. But I can do it without also.

Q. In that event, let's look at tab 2, please.

MR. NICE: May that go on the overhead projector.

Q. And making it, General, if you would, please, as simple as possible, because complexity may not be required. We see here the government of the Republic of Serbia in the centre, with the Prime Minister identified, and then the Ministry of Defence below it with its minister identified. We'll come to the coordination office in due course. Question: To whom did the Ministry of Defence answer?

A. In the first place, the Ministry of Defence is accountable to the government of the Republic due to the very fact that the Minister of Defence is a member of the government. At the same time, both the government and the Ministry of Defence are accountable for their work to the National Assembly. So each Minister, in addition to being accountable to the government, is also accountable to the Assembly of Serbia. But for certain activities within the competence of the president of the Republic, the Minister of Defence is also accountable to the president of the ¹⁷⁴⁹⁹ Republic as he is to the government.

As for the Federal Secretariat for National Defence and its relationship with the Ministry of Defence of the Republic, this horizontal line pointing left and right means that these ministries cooperate, that is the SSNO and the Ministry of Defence. And this top arrow indicates that for certain activities, the Federal Secretariat for National Defence is superior to the Ministry of Defence of Serbia, primarily when the Presidency of the SFRY transfers some of its competencies to the Federal Secretariat for National Defence. And then the SSNO has this superior role.

JUDGE MAY: Remind us, if you would, of SSNO. What is it an abbreviation for?

MR. NICE: Federal Secretariat for People's Defence. I hope. Your Honour, if we simply note on this chart that there is a coordination office within the Ministry of Defence, we can then look at the next chart, tab 3.

Q. This is a chart, General, that identifies the principal tasks of the Ministry of Defence. The tasks of the ministry, I think you say, are dealt with in the 1984 law that we looked at very briefly. Is that right?

A. That's right.

Q. And if we look at this diagram, which is quite busy but simplified for us by colour, can you help us, please, with the -- the charts -- sorry, with the tasks as identified by the various different coloured chains? Was there something to do with the monitoring and preparation of the population for the defence of the Republic? ¹⁷⁵⁰⁰

A. Mr. Prosecutor, we have shown here the tasks of the coordination group as a working body attached to the Ministry of Defence of Serbia.

Q. Let's deal with -- yes. My error. Let's go back one stage then and just deal with the main tasks as you would describe them before we look at this particular document. The main tasks of the ministry itself, what do you say they are? Forget the chart for the time being. What do you say the main tasks of the ministry were?

A. The main tasks of the Ministry of Defence were to monitor, initiate, prepare, and guide the overall defence preparations of the civilian structures of the society of Serbia, to cooperate with the Federal Secretariat for National Defence, the commands of army districts, and the republican staff for National Defence in the preparation and organisation of all people's resistance, not regarding the use of armed forces. And a special task which the Federal Secretariat for National Defence transferred to the Ministry of Defence for Serbia was to collect information regarding the condition, preparation, and availability of staff for the Territorial Defence of the Serbian Autonomous Province of Krajina, or Krajina, all three which joined to form the Serbian Republic of Krajina. So this was done because the commands of the military districts were overburdened with their operative tasks of commanding the armed forces. So it was thought appropriate for the Minister of Defence of Serbia to do a part of those tasks on behalf of the Federal Secretariat for National Defence.

Q. Did the Ministry of Defence get involved in military planning at the strategic level or was it more limited, do you say, in its function? ¹⁷⁵⁰¹

A. No, Mr. Prosecutor. The Ministry of Defence of Serbia did not take part at all in operative planning, the use of the armed forces at all.

Q. Did it give assistance to the Territorial Defence or to the JNA?

A. That it did. It did assist it through mobilisation, preparations of personnel, providing supplies, but not within the direct competencies of the ministry but in cooperation with the commands of the armed forces and the Federal Secretariat for National Defence.

Q. Was it involved at all in the training of the Territorial Defence of Serbia, or indeed in the SAO Krajina's Territorial Defence?

A. As far as I know, it was not.

Q. Did you, in the event, hear something about the man Vasiljkovic, whether he was engaged in training?

A. Mr. Dragan Vasiljkovic, or Captain Dragan, as he was known, did once visit the Ministry of Defence. When I met him in the corridor, I didn't speak to him, but I heard from Minister Simovic that he had requested that he be approved the use of so-called Bubanj Potok, which is a training centre, a shooting range and a training centre for soldiers which was under the control of the command of the defence of the city of Belgrade, that is, under the JNA. And through some sort of an arrangement reached between the command of the army district and the Ministry of Defence - I don't know who else participated - he was given this permission for Captain Dragan to organise a training centre in Bubanj Potok, which is 16 or 17 kilometres from the centre of the city. However, as far as I have been informed, literally three men came ¹⁷⁵⁰² to attend that training course, two from Krajina and one from Belgrade or Serbia, so that that course never took place there. I didn't inquire into that, nor was it my duty to concern myself with that.

Q. Did the Serb Ministry of Defence have relations with the Serb Ministry of the Interior in which information was exchanged?

A. Yes.

Q. Do you recall as an example one particular meeting involving Simovic, the Minister, and Aleksandar Vasiljevic and Zoran Sokolovic?

A. Yes, I do remember, Mr. Prosecutor.

Q. Also about Radmilo Bogdanovic. In 1988, did he become Minister of Internal Affairs of Serbia?

A. Yes, he did.

Q. When did he resign technically?

A. As far as I can remember, it was after the large-scale demonstrations in Belgrade in March 1991 or shortly after that. I don't know the exact date. He submitted a request for resignation to the Assembly and it was accepted.

Q. He was replaced, as we know, by Sokolovic.

A. Yes he was.

Q. But in fact did Bogdanovic retain any position, any influence in the ministry thereafter?

A. Mr. Bogdanovic did not have any position in the ministry, any official position in the ministry any longer. However, as his successor was a person, according to certain beliefs of people who had contact with him, had not been properly prepared to take over that position in -- ¹⁷⁵⁰³ behind the scenes, amongst ourselves we referred to Minister Bogdanovic as a shadow minister. In other words, that they were closely cooperating and Bogdanovic was probably assisting him, but I don't have any specific evidence to corroborate that or any document to that effect but that was the general belief.

Q. And the closeness or otherwise of the relationship, if any, between the Sokolovic and the accused? What did you discover about that?

A. As far as I recall from the party work, that is when the League of Communists of Serbia was still in existence, Mr. Sokolovic was the secretary of the Central Committee, and at the time Mr. Milosevic was president of the Central Committee. So quite naturally, they had close, direct relations.

Q. We've heard of the Ministry for Ties with Serbs outside of Serbia. Did the ministry for which you were working, the Ministry of Defence, have relations with that other ministry?

A. Yes, absolutely so. But I did not attend any meetings of either Ministers. There were a large number of refugees that had come in from Croatia, from Krajina, who came to see us, the Defence Ministry and my own coordinating group, and they were intermediaries as was the Ministry of Defence and the Ministry for Ties with Serbs outside Serbia. We helped them find accommodation, to see to their well-being and so on. I apologise, but there's a clause, let me just say, in the new constitution, the constitution of today, that the Ministry for Relations with Serbs outside Serbia has as one of its tasks to assist them in maintaining their independence, autonomous character, their human rights ¹⁷⁵⁰⁴ and so on and so forth. So those ties emanate from those provisions and that kind of situation.

Q. And was there a similar level of contact between the Ministry of Defence and the agency for immigration led by Radmilo Crncevic?

A. It would be more correct to say -- to call it the Matica Iseljenika, not for immigration but the matrix. And Mr. Radmilo Crncevic at that time was the president of this Matica association. And then there were ties and cooperations along the lines I mentioned earlier; the Defence Ministry and the Matica for refugees.

Q. You've told us of the general functions of the ministry, and now I get to the chart that I put on the overhead projector too early, tab 3. Were you on appointment in October 1991 made head of something called the coordination group for SAOs within the Serbian Ministry of Defence?

A. Yes, I was.

Q. Throughout that period until December 1991, did you remain an active-duty JNA officer?

A. Yes, I did.

Q. Typically, would your appointment to this task have required a decree of the SFRY Presidency?

A. It would have been typical had a general been appointed to a set post, and my case could be considered in that regard. But why wasn't this done? According to the law on national defence of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, the Presidency appoints generals, the Federal Secretary for National Defence appoints Colonels and lower ranking officers, the commanders of the Territorial Defence officers up until the ¹⁷⁵⁰⁵ rank of colonel for their own units and formations. However, this was not typical. It wasn't a typical appointment as a permanent organ and part of the ministry, the body of the ministry, because it had a department for military matters, for defence and protection and other departments. This was a working body, an ad hoc body. So I was sent to work there and not appointed permanently, because my active service was to have expired by the end of the year.

Q. Did General Krstic, head of the personnel sector at the SSNO, have anything to do with getting you to do this job?

A. Yes, that's right, Mr. Prosecutor. I submitted a written request in mid-October after all the events that came to pass in Croatia and the general attacks on the barracks, which is where one of my officers, one-time officer was executed within the frameworks of a barracks that was taken over in Bjelovar. As I had passed over my duties to somebody else, there was no sense in me remaining in my position of retiree. And therefore --

Q. [Previous translation continues]... just for a moment, General. I just wanted to know, and I think you said yes, did General Krstic have something to do with your appointment; and if so, what?

A. Yes, he did.

Q. What did he have to do with it?

A. He did in the sense that I tabled a written request that my decree in pensioning me off be rescinded, postponed until the end of the war. After that, General Krstic called me up on the telephone and told me that the decree would not be changed. ¹⁷⁵⁰⁶ Several -- I do apologise, but several days after that conversation, we had another conversation over the phone, and he told me that there was the option of me going to the JNA command, a corps of some kind somewhere, but that the decision was revised and I was sent to the Ministry of Defence --

Q. So it was --

A. -- of Serbia.

Q. -- Krstic appointing you to this --

A. Yes, that's right. He was the head of the personnel sector. And we can't say explicitly that he appointed me. All he did was to convey to me on the basis of my request to the Supreme Command that it was decided that I go to the Defence Ministry.

Q. Of the Republic of Serbia.

A. That's right, yes. The ministry of the Republic of Serbia.

Q. The Coordination Group of which you were now the head for the SAOs within the Serbian -- within the ministry, did it act in some way as an intermediary between the SSNO and the Ministry of Defence and the local Territorial Defences and the SAOs in Krajina, Western Slavonia, and Western Srem?

A. Precisely so, yes.

Q. How many people worked in the Coordination Group?

A. I can't give you an exact figure. There was an order to that effect, an internal order, actually, but it was between seven and ten persons, officers, mostly colonels by rank.

Q. All, or all bar secretarial, military? ¹⁷⁵⁰⁷

A. Yes. All were members of the military, members of the JNA, either retired officers or officers who had already handed over their affairs and were about to retire --

Q. And was the --

A. -- like myself. More or less in the same position as myself.

Q. And was your office, physical office, initially located in the main building of the Serbian Ministry of Defence, subsequently moving to another part of the city of Belgrade?

A. Yes, that's right, Mr. Prosecutor.

Q. I think there may have been a plan to divide the Coordination Group according to geographical division of the SAOs, but that was never implemented.

A. Correct.

MR. NICE: Your Honour, there's one small passage that the witness would only be in a position to give in private session. There's one question.

JUDGE MAY: Yes.

[Private session]

[redacted]

[redacted]

[redacted]

[redacted]

[redacted]

[redacted]

[redacted] ¹⁷⁵⁰⁸

[redacted]

[redacted]

[Open session]

THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session.

MR. NICE:

Q. The colour-coded chart, tab 3, now on the overhead projector, shows, I think, the six main tasks of the Coordination Group. Can you interpret the chart for us, General, colour by colour, but starting with which ones you regard as the most important, the most major tasks, if there is such a distinction.

A. There was no major distinction, but our emphasis was on the following tasks: I'm going to point from top to bottom, moving downwards. The realisation of requests for officers, that is to say officer cadres for the Territorial Defence of SAO Krajina and responding to those requests.

Q. That's the blue line.

A. Let me go back. Yes. I'll go back to an explanation. Just let me enumerate. The next was request for logistical support for Krajina; the quartermaster section, technical, materiel, and so on. The next request was assistance in constituting Territorial Defence units, organising them not for combat but according to the systematisation, what belongs to whom and so on. And finally, in the bottom right-hand corner, preparation of the staffs of SAO Krajina to take in the UN forces, because there are intimations that they would be arriving to monitor the cease-fire in ¹⁷⁵⁰⁹ Krajina, or rather, in Croatia.

But let me go back to the first request.

Q. You've temporarily overlooked salary payment and money, but we'll come to that at the top of the chart in due course. Very well, request for officers, the blue --

A. I do apologise, yes. That was a slip. We'll go back to that. But the number one task, or first from the top, is to -- or, rather, from the TO staff of Krajina, they asked us to send them officers, and we didn't have enough of those officers. As we did not have officers available in my direct group or ministry, what we had to do was to send on the requests to the Personnel Department, that is to say, General Krstic and his officers, and other commands who had officers available, if I can say had a surplus of cadres, if I can put it that way.

Q. The blue passage pointing up to SSNO goes like that and then up to SSNO, and then the line shows, does it, officers being provided direct by the SSNO across the top to those bodies that had requested them.

A. Yes, that's right. And we were also simultaneously informed that that had been carried out. The second task, the request for logistical support as it was called, logistical reconnoitering or whatever, in the system of command - and I have to explain this first of all - for the armed forces was designed and organised according to the following pattern: The commands of the military districts of the JNA, the corps commands and other operative groups were responsible for logistical support to Territorial Defence units who were directly within their composition, placed at their disposal. ^{17510 BLANK PAGE 17511} As one-third of the total number of some 34- 5.000 Territorial Defence members from Krajina were in this kind of position, two-thirds were outside this system. And they were detachments, battalions, companies according to the municipalities and zones areas, and for that portion of the Territorial Defence units, the logistical support had not been fully organised. So they lacked clothing, communications devices, ammunition, even certain weaponry and so on.

Q. Now --

A. And they would send in their requests from Krajina. The requests would come in to us. We would then contact the logistical departments of the SSNO and the commands of the 1st Military District and asked them to cater to their needs and comply with the requests put in. Sometimes from a certain logistical department the response would come there, assistance would be given through that, and sometimes it would go through the command of the 1st Military District. And the requests would be answered. I have to stress at this point that the requests that came in from the SAO Krajina for the most part were unrealistic. They were enormous, very high. And then we had to make a selection to see what was realistic according to the number of men on the ground. And then we would suggest this to the logistical organs to meet these demands as far as they were realistic.

The next tasks, if I may --

Q. I'm going to -- we'll come back to that, but before we've lost sight of the provision of officers and to just fill in a few matters of detail and then we'll return to the other part of this, which is the ¹⁷⁵¹² logistical support, a word or so about the officers. When you were looking for officers - paragraph 17, Your Honours - when you were looking for officers, did you make recommendations to the SSNO yourselves?

A. Yes, we did make recommendations requesting the SSNO to supply us with a list of officers available in order to meet the requirements and requests. We asked this from the personnel sector.

Q. Did the SSNO evaluate and make a decision thereafter?

A. Yes. The personnel sector was in charge of that. They even came to see us. We would go to see them to agree upon certain officers, because for the most part they were high-level, high-ranking officers such as colonels, lieutenant-colonels and so on.

Q. Did the SAO presidents ever take a role in deciding which officers should or should not be deployed based on where people were born?

A. Mr. Prosecutor, I know only of Mr. Babic, one case in point. He personally intervened with regard to some officers, but there were only two or three such cases. For the Defence Minister, for example, of Republika Srpska Krajina, a lieutenant-colonel which he preferred we suggested that he was not suitable for that particular task. And we offered the head of the personnel department a colonel, this was another man, and even perhaps a general. We put forward the name of a general.

Q. In the event, were most of the assigned officers those who had been born in the Krajina or in Western Slavonia or Western Srem?

A. Yes, that's right.

Q. And in the two months that you were working at the Coordination ¹⁷⁵¹³ Group, how many officers do you know of being sent in the way described?

A. I don't have the documents with me, but I think it was between 20 and 30 officers who were sent.

Q. And --

A. And that to the staff, if I might, of the Territorial Defence of Krajina and also sent to the commands of the Operative Zones and perhaps some brigade of the Territorial Defence. Not lower than that.

Q. And in deployment, were they still active-duty officers of the JNA?

A. For the most part, yes, active officers, just reassigned.

Q. Can we look, please, at tab 4 on this topic. And if the --

A. Yes, that's it.

Q. -- English version on the overhead projector. Just drawing to the Judges' attention passages of it. At the top right-hand corner, from the Territorial Defence, the headquarters of the Serbian autonomous territory of Krajina -- sorry, to the headquarters of the Serbian autonomous territory of Krajina, from the head of the Personnel Department of the SSNO. And then we see it's dated the 20th of September, shortly before your appointment. And it says: Are directed to the headquarters of the Territorial Defence of the Serbian Autonomous Region of Krajina a list of people, starting with Kasum Obrad Dusan and going on over the page. And then when we come to the bottom of the next page, after the eighth name, a communications senior sergeant, Bjeljac Petar, we see after his name: "The above-mentioned are obliged to report to the mentioned command of the unit. ¹⁷⁵¹⁴ "The above-mentioned remain in the mentioned unit according to the needs of the service and in accordance with the decree of the 271st article of law of service in the armed forces, after which they will immediately return to the unit from which they have been directed." We see that signed on the third page by Gojko Krstic. So does this fit with, although it comes just before your period, the deployment of officers from the JNA to the Krajina in the way you've described?

A. Correct. And if I may just add, the same system for solving these matters was in place then. They are temporarily transferred there, and they are appointed to a concrete duty by the commander of the republican staff of the TO of Krajina, except for some exceptions, the zone commanders, brigade commanders or others that are appointed by the personnel sector or department. That's it.

Q. Going back to the coloured chart tab 3, briefly. And you'd been dealing, and it's my fault for having let you go ahead without dealing completely with officers, dealing with logistical support, and you've summarised that. Paragraphs 19 and following in the summary, Your Honours.

We may have heard this already, but was there a unified logistical system in the SFRY armed forces?

A. The logistical system was established in that way. The commands of the military districts, that means a third of the territory of the former SFRY, logistically speaking, supplied the whole -- all the armed forces on its territory with the proviso that exceptions were made that ¹⁷⁵¹⁵ the lower compositions of Territorial Defence in the municipalities, for part of their materiel, relied on the so-called socio-political communities or, rather, the municipalities themselves, whereas the military materiel, weapons, ammunition, military equipment, vehicles, and so on, all that went via the logistical bases of the commands of the military districts on whose territory they are to be found. If, on the other hand, they are lacking in certain resources, they would contact the SSNO and then these resources would be supplied them through the wartime reserves. That is how the system functioned.

Q. So that the brown markings on this chart show the requests for assistance coming in from the Krajina, going out to the SSNO or to the 1st Military District, and then vehicles, ammunition, clothing and so on, being supplied directly back to the requesting bodies?

A. Yes, because the Ministry of Defence of Serbia, apart from weapons, had nothing else, and the communications.

Q. You dealt, I think, a little earlier with extravagant claims of one kind or another. Can you just give us an example of one substantial if not extravagant claim?

A. Well, for example, the president of the then SAO Eastern Slavonia, Baranja, and Western Srem, that was Mr. Goran Hadzic, brought me a piece of paper on which, as far as I recollect, there were 30 or 40.000 grenades for a P176 millimetre gun, for example.

Q. When he came to see you on that occasion, who was he with?

A. He came to see the minister, but in the meantime, I saw to this request. And he was accompanied by Mr. Zeljko Raznjatovic, nicknamed ¹⁷⁵¹⁶ Arkan. He was an escort or I don't know what his actual function there was.

Q. How was he dressed, Arkan, on that occasion?

A. Well, I would say he was wearing some sort of tank uniform of a khaki colour, greyish-khaki colour, with a belt here, without any epaulettes, and here he had the insignia and rank of colonel. His badge designated the rank of colonel. A beret perhaps on his head, something of the sort.

JUDGE MAY: Yes.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I just want to draw attention to an imprecision in the translation. Mr. Djordjevic said that in the Ministry of Defence, apart from side weapons, they didn't have anything. He used "personal weapons," meaning personal weapons of members of the Ministry of Defence. So the word "personal" did not appear in the translation. So it says, "except for weapons, they had nothing." So this changes the very substance of the explanation he gave.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] May I repeat that part of my evidence? Mr. May, Your Honours, the Ministry of Defence, as Mr. Milosevic has already said, each officer carries his own pistol or an automatic rifle, depending on the weapon issued, and the Ministry of Defence has its centre for communication of control. This unit had its warehouse outside of town with vehicles, communication equipment, and so on, and it would be activated only in wartime or when an order was given. And that personnel had rifles, automatic rifles, and pistols. And the communications or Signals Unit was intended to secure the Presidency of ¹⁷⁵¹⁷ Serbia, the government of Serbia, and communication links in wartime should any bombardment happen, locations where the government, the president was so that -- that is what I meant when I said that the ministry had nothing but those personal weapons.

MR. NICE:

Q. Finally on this topic: When Arkan was in the Ministry of Defence, was he typically allowed to roam the building armed?

A. All of us, upon entering the building, while my Coordination Group was in the building, we had to leave our pistols at the porters. This applied to me as a general as well. As for Mr. Raznjatovic, I simply don't remember. It simply wasn't something that I focused on. I just don't remember. It's quite possible that he came with a pistol, but I'm not sure. Because knowing of the rule to leave it downstairs at the porters, I assumed that he had left it too.

Q. Those people who were well known in the ministry, if he was one of them, what was the practice so far as their carrying of arms was concerned?

A. In the building, no one carried weapons, even the people employed there, members of the ministry. No, no one.

Q. A brief look, please, at Exhibit --

A. I'm sorry, have we completed this chart regarding financing?

Q. You're quite right, we haven't, but I was going to look at some particular parts that deal with logistics. So if you'd be good enough now, please, to look at Exhibit 352, tab 76, as an example of logistic support. A document the Chamber's seen before. We need only look at the ¹⁷⁵¹⁸ front page of it and flick through the inventory. This is a document from the Serb Autonomous District of Krajina, 18th of September, 1991, requesting ammunition from the Republic of Serbia, reference a telegram of the 12th of the September forwarding the list of items needed by the SAO Krajina, and then Knin Territorial Defence and a large, it may even be said, shopping list of items.

Does that fit with the pattern of supply you've told us about? Just yes or no if it does.

A. It fits, but this document that I see now confirms what I just said, the enormous requests or exaggerated requests. Let me give you a couple of examples.

Q. Briefly, please, because I want to move on swiftly.

A. Take, for instance, number 8, 7.9 millimetre heavy charge bullets. This for an ordinary old rifle. In its combat set, it has 50 bullets, and here the request is for 631.000. If you divide this up, it would mean tens of thousands of men armed with rifles, and there weren't any such numbers. I don't know what prompted them to make such requests of such enormous quantities.

Q. Very well. Tab 5, please. A document dated the 11th of December from the Ministry of Defence. So this is within your period. It's from the Republic of Serbia Ministry of Defence --

A. Yes.

Q. -- to the Serbian Autonomous Region of Krajina, and it says that the --

A. Yes. ¹⁷⁵¹⁹

Q. -- HQ Lika has asked us to provide them with certain material. Provide the requested, the request has to come through you. This procedure has to be persistently implemented and it comes from the Assistant Ministry of Defence, General Kuzmanovic. Any comment beyond that as to what it says itself?

A. I can say the following: It would be logical for the Chief of Staff, for the commander of the Territorial Defence of Krajina, in the spirit of this document which arrives as a warning from the Ministry of Defence to elaborate concrete obligations for subordinates regarding implementation of this request coming from the ministry. So this is the problem, precisely the problem that needs to be commented on. That is, there were too many of these local requests coming from municipalities, from zones, from individual areas of Krajina. And then through the ministry, we urged that they be cautioned about this, that it was simply impossible to meet those requests.

MR. NICE: As the Court will see, there is a handwritten note attached. I'm not going to deal with it in detail. The probable position on that is dealt with in the summary, if anybody wants to follow it. Nothing --

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. That's the Chief of Staff passing it on.

MR. NICE:

Q. Thank you very much. Tab 6, please.

MR. NICE: Your Honour, although this is a single document, we're only going to be looking at the first two pages of it. It remains the ¹⁷⁵²⁰ same single document as it came to us.

Q. This, then, is a document of the 16th of December, within your period of appointment from the Krajina Territorial Defence staff to the Ministry of Defence in Serbia for the needs of material supply of headquarters support unit, a request for, and then rifles, pistols and so on set out, signed by, on the second page, the assistant commander of logistics, Milos Pupavac. Thank you.

That shows the same system; correct?

A. The same, yes, the same.

Q. Tab 7.

MR. NICE: I gather there's error here, Your Honours, in the translation. If we look at the last line of the body of the text before the title of the signatory, it says, "Territorial Defence headquarters of the Federal Autonomous District of Krajina." I think it should read, "Serbian Autonomous District of Krajina."

Q. But this, General, is a document from the logistics assistant to the federal secretariat, saying that: "Due to excessive work, Banja Luka and the problem related to it, please take measures that the following be assisted by the 530th logistics base ..." There's a reference to the 1st and 3rd Operational Group and the Territorial Defence headquarters of the Serbian Autonomous District of Krajina.

Your comment on this document, please, which appears to be ordering the 530th logistics base to provide logistical assistance to the Krajina Territorial Defence Staff.

A. Do I need to make a comment? ¹⁷⁵²¹

Q. Well, I suppose it is this: Does this document reveal that decisions about logistical support are made a high level if not the highest level within the SSNO?

A. Mr. Prosecutor, this confirms the brief explanation that I gave regarding the system of logistics: By relying on the commands of the military districts, corps commands and operative groups, in principle, but as there were deviations for lower-level units on the ground, then they relied on the municipalities and JNA units close by. So this is mostly in line with the way it was regulated at the time.

Q. Thank you very much. Tab 8. This is dated the 23rd of December. Yes. It is an answer to the previous document, 683165, and it goes to the assistant of the Federal Secretary for logistics and it says, "Your telegram, strictly classified," for the 20th of December. "Scheme modification which was recommended by you because of overload of the 993.POB Banja Luka cannot be performed completely," and then they raise an alternative proposition. They accept that they were tasked to do what they were tasked to do but they couldn't do it completely; correct?

A. That's quite correct. The logistics of the 5th Military District is providing an additional request responding affirmatively but requiring from the -- saying that it is impossible to fulfill all the requests made in the previous document.

Q. Exhibit 352, tab 4. The 1st of November, 1991, from the Republic of Serbia Ministry of Defence, going to the secretary of the Republic of Serbia government, Budimir Jovkovic, asks if you could put the following item on the agenda of today's government session: "Report on assisting ^{17522 BLANK PAGE 17523} Serbian areas in Croatia. Given its importance and level of confidentiality, this item should be discussed at a government session closed to the public." This proposition or proposal, rather, coming from the Ministry of Defence of the Republic of Serbia over the signature of the Deputy Minister, Branislav Kuzmanovic.

Do you have any recollection of this particular step being taken?

A. No, except the initiative that we had launched for financing. This may fit into that, possibly.

Q. Entirely on this sector of the proofing, 352, tab 5, and the last of the substantial exhibit productions through this witness. Just a few more afterwards, I think.

This is a document of the 1st of November to the government of the Republic of Serbia, report on providing assistance to Serbian districts in Croatia. It sets out at paragraph 1 how assistance has been provided to the Serbs in Croatia but there's still an urgent need, as well as numerous requests and demands for assistance in material, supplies, and equipment. It can then be read, next paragraph: "Having considered top priority several times and reduced them to the most essential needs of the Serbs in Croatia, we believe that by the end of 1991, the Republic of Serbia should provide them with material assistance to the amount of 80.256.700 dinars" and so on, the figures mentioned, for communications equipment, and then a further figure, a very large figure for civilian protection equipment, and the weapons and military equipment.

Over the page, second page. The financial assistance that should be provided for November and December amounts to 1.25 billion, if that's ¹⁷⁵²⁴ the billion calculation we use, calculation for the approximate numerical strength of about 50.000 men of the Territorial Defence of Krajina, SAO Western Slavonia, and the SAO Slavonia, Baranja and Western Srem. And then further down this page, three-quarters of the way down: "Since there are no legal grounds for this, that is providing assistance to meet these needs is not regulated by law, we propose these issues be legally regulated by an appropriate decree, especially in view of the fact that these needs are great and can be expected to grow." Any particular comment on that beyond what appears on the document itself, General?

A. The figure that you mentioned includes Civil Defence, which is outside the armed forces in Krajina. I can say the following: In the Coordination Group in contact with the TO staff of Krajina, at their request we asked that they send us the numerical strength of men, officers, non-commissioned officers, and soldiers.

Q. Can we see --

A. They did send this to us, and then the financial body in the Ministry of Defence, according to certain criteria that were applicable in the armed forces, made an estimate of financial funds needed for personal incomes. I didn't see the document at the time, but it fully corresponds to the efforts that Serbia was making at the time. There is one further point: Mention is made here in this document, the words that there is -- there are no legal grounds. I would like to make my own personal explanation, if I may. The law on all people's defence of the SFRY stipulated that those ¹⁷⁵²⁵ giving assignments to a body within the armed forces or anywhere else, and those assignments exceed the possibilities of financing out of one's own resources, then the person giving the assignment is also duty-bound to provide the funds, which means the SSNO. Probably in this case also this meant the Republic of Serbia itself.

Q. And if we can look at attachment 5, which is three pages in from the end of the English version and possibly place it on the overhead projector, because it's a table that shows the personnel in the Krajina, Slavonia, Baranja, and Western Srem Territorial Defences.

JUDGE MAY: Mr. Nice, this must be the last.

MR. NICE: I understand that. Your Honour, once we've displayed it, the Court can see it and it's available to refer to hereafter. Your Honour, I've made less satisfactory progress than I'd hoped. I'll be faster, swifter tomorrow morning.

JUDGE MAY: Very well. We'll adjourn now. General, we're going to adjourn until tomorrow morning. Could you please be here at 9.00 to continue your evidence. Could you remember this also: During the adjournment and any others there may be, not to speak to anybody about your evidence until it's over, and that does include the members of the Prosecution. Tomorrow morning.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I understand. Thank you.

--- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.50 p.m., to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 11th day of March, 2003, at 9.00 a.m.