Milosevic Transcript 2003-04-10

¹⁸⁹³¹

Thursday, 10 April 2003

[Open session]

[The accused entered court]

[The witness entered court]

--- Upon commencing at 9.05 a.m.

JUDGE MAY: Yes, Milosevic.

WITNESS: WITNESS B-1[Resumed]

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

Q. [Interpretation] Mr. 1493, we stopped when we were discussing the referendum which you said necessarily took place following the failure of attempts to find a better solution. Do you remember the Izetbegovic/Gligorov plan? You mentioned that representatives of the republic, that is presidents of the republics, so all six republics had discussions?

A. I would like to ask that we focus on the questions for which I am a professional. I never was involved in politics, and I would ask that I not be asked political questions.

JUDGE MAY: Well, if you can answer the questions, do, but we take note of what you say.

Mr. Milosevic, there is little point in having a general political discussion with somebody who probably only has a general knowledge of it and no more. As we've said before, the important thing when cross-examining the witnesses is to concentrate on their evidence, the matters about which they can deal rather than general philosophical and ¹⁸⁹³² political matters. Yes.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. May, the witness spoke about the referendum on the independence of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and in his explanation, he said that efforts to find a political solution had failed, and now I'm asking him a question relative to what he himself said, why those efforts had failed. I asked him whether he remembers the Izetbegovic/Gligorov plan.

JUDGE MAY: Yes. And you've heard his answer. You've heard his answer. Yes. Let's move on to something else.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. And are you familiar with the Cutilheiro plan, which, within the conference chaired by Peter Carrington, was adopted and signed by all three communities, Serbs, Croats and Muslims. Do you remember that?

A. I remember the plan very well, but I would like to say again that I wouldn't like to get involved in top-level politics because that was something that you were involved in. I was engaged in the profession about which I testified, and that is the area in which I should like to be questioned about.

Q. Yes. But since you mentioned the referendum and since you are a citizen of Bosnia and Herzegovina, is there any dispute as to the fact that in Bosnia-Herzegovina, then and today, there are three constituent peoples living there, Serbs, Croats, and Muslims, and all three are recognised?

JUDGE MAY: We don't need to spend a lot of time on this. This is a matter of general knowledge, not a particular matter for this witness, ¹⁸⁹³³ the fact that he mentioned the referendum is not a matter -- and at the moment I'm looking for the reference to it. Mr. Groome, can you help us? Where did he mention the referendum in his evidence?

MR. GROOME: Your Honour, if you recall, I began to ask him about it and the Court advised me to not go into much detail because Court didn't find of it great assistance, so I don't think it was more than one question. I will work now and try to find the specific transcript reference.

JUDGE MAY: Yes. Well, if we didn't find it of much assistance with the Prosecution, we're not going to find it necessarily a great deal of assistance as far as you're concerned, Mr. Milosevic. I do remember now. Yes. Ask the witness something he can give some evidence about, Mr. Milosevic.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Every citizen of Yugoslavia can testify about this, because we are talking about three constituent peoples, the Serbs, Croats, and Muslims in Bosnia-Herzegovina.

JUDGE MAY: We're wasting time asking him general questions of this sort. You're taking your time up. It is, as you know, limited.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. 1493 explained, Mr. May, that this was, I don't know how to put it, a democratic act this referendum, so I'm asking him could a referendum held without --

JUDGE MAY: If you insist on asking these questions which I have told you are irrelevant, then you're going to be stopped altogether in cross-examining. Now, it's a matter for you whether you're stopped or ¹⁸⁹³⁴ whether you go on. This witness's views about the referendum are of no assistance to the Trial Chamber. He gave a great deal of evidence. You should ask him about that.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I considered this to be a relevant question, that the referendum the witness mentioned was held without the participation of the Serbs, and you probably consider that is not relevant. So the Serbs are also not relevant in this whole matter except to be blamed.

JUDGE MAY: That will be a matter which we will have to determine in due course, but this witness can't give us any useful evidence about it. If it's a fact, it can be admitted and it will be something about which the Trial Chamber will have to consider, but arguing with the witness about it isn't going to help us.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I'm not arguing with the witness at all, but then let us move on with these questions that the witness testified about.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Tell me, please, Mr 1493, so you wish to limit yourself to military matters, so let me ask you then, since you described the group of volunteers from Serbia, the volunteers as some sort of special units, tell me, please, how did you describe the Mujahedin in the army of Bosnia and Herzegovina? What were they doing over there?

A. All I can say is that in the first place, I did not describe the volunteers from the Republic of Serbia as volunteers, but I described them as special units, well trained, well prepared, and units that were under ¹⁸⁹³⁵ the command or, rather, under the control of the military leadership as is being proven now.

As for this question of Mujahedins, I can guarantee in my area of responsibility there was not a single one operating or in existence.

Q. Very well. Do you know anything about, for instance, the 7th Muslim Mountain Brigade?

A. I've given you my answer. In the area of my responsibility during the aggression on Bosnia and Herzegovina, not a single individual, not to mention a squad of them, was operating.

Q. Yes, but as a high-ranking officer of the army of Bosnia and Herzegovina, I assume that you must have heard of the 7th Muslim Brigade. This is just one example.

A. The 7th Muslim was not a brigade composed of Mujahedin. I will give you an answer, though you will probably be asking that question of someone from the area in which that brigade was. You are exaggerating when you say that there were I don't know how many thousand Mujahedin in Bosnia. I can tell you with full responsibility under oath that in that 7th Muslim Brigade, there were 250 to 300 men on the outside.

Q. Do you know how many passports of Bosnia and Herzegovina were issued to foreigners, to aliens?

JUDGE MAY: Would you deal with the matters which you know about, Witness B-1493. If you don't know, say so.

There's no point, Mr. Milosevic, asking him something he may have he heard on the radio or something of that sort or read in the newspaper. ¹⁸⁹³⁶ ^{BLANK PAGE} ¹⁸⁹³⁷ It's a pointless exercise, although, no doubt, you want to do it because you want to repeat your case over and over again, but you're not to do it. You can ask the witness if he knows.

Do you know about the issue of passports to foreigners, Witness B-1493?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I do know that passports were issued, as I heard on television and over the radio, but I never saw anyone -- any single one being issued or by whom.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. I didn't even think that you participated in issuing passports, but I assume you must know about it as does everyone. In your statement, you say that the Serbs had taken control of Bijeljina. Is that right?

A. No, they didn't take control of it. They occupied it.

Q. I don't know what it looks like in translation, but that is one and the same thing. To occupy is a foreign word, and to take it, zauzeti, is a Serbo-Croatian word meaning the same thing. Tell me, please, do you know how many Serbs were living in Bijeljina before the beginning of the war in Bosnia?

A. I know that the municipality of Bijeljina, according to the last census, had more than 50 per cent Serbs. So it was a municipality with a majority Serb population. But the town itself had a majority Muslim population.

Q. Very well. Tell me, how can it be that Serbs are taking Bijeljina and from whom are they taking Bijeljina from, a town in which they live? ¹⁸⁹³⁸

A. Sir, Bijeljina, as a town that was occupied by a special unit from the Republic of Serbia, was in the majority Muslim. The municipality of Bijeljina had a majority Serb population. Therefore, it wasn't the municipality that was occupied but exclusively the town itself.

Q. Are you saying that Serbs did not live in the town of Bijeljina?

A. They did. Certainly they did. They still do.

Q. Of course they do. Now, tell me, please, the commander of the Serb National Guard that was founded over there, this man Savic, Mauzer, is he from Bijeljina?

A. Mauzer is from the environs of Bijeljina. His unit was trained in the special training centre in Erdut, the Panthers.

Q. How do you know that?

A. Because I held such a position as to be able to know that.

Q. Now, tell me, please, do you know that this volunteer unit, the Serb Volunteer Guard of Zeljko Raznjatovic, Arkan, had come there to assist upon the request of the local leadership and in an arrangement with Mauzer himself? Are you aware of that? A private arrangement.

A. I don't know at all that that unit had come at somebody's invitation. I know that that special unit came from the -- from another republic, another state, that it committed aggression. And in the initial stages, it was only this unit from the Republic of Serbia that participated.

Q. I see. So there were no conflicts between the forces of the Green Berets and the Patriotic League which had blocked the town and the inhabitants of Bijeljina? ¹⁸⁹³⁹

A. First of all, there were no Green Berets in Bijeljina. Secondly, Bijeljina and the surroundings of Bijeljina, I explained that yesterday, I saw it, and I passed there, and I checked that area out. Bijeljina was blocked in a broad circle by units of the JNA.

Q. Bijeljina was never blocked by JNA units, but JNA units were to be found everywhere as throughout Yugoslavia.

A. I swear in this court that not a single road leading to Bijeljina was not accessible. Nothing could pass without being stopped and checked by members of the JNA and the Serbian guards.

Q. As regards this volunteer unit, this happened later on, but are you familiar with the events in Bijeljina on the 31st of March, 1992?

A. I wouldn't like to enter into the details regarding the incursion of the special unit from the Republic of Serbia, because this Court has already received an explanation about it and the number of dead.

Q. As regards the number of dead, on the video film this somehow slipped in after the clips with the meeting between the general and Arkan. There were also a couple of bodies that slipped in. The first one that you saw is the woman whose name is Antonija, and she was a Serb woman who was killed in Bijeljina. And the other body is again a Serb. Let's not go into any further details because I've already tendered those photographs.

Do you know those of your representatives of the Patriotic League of people and the Green Berets had killed in Bijeljina?

A. Regarding the casualties in Bijeljina, we didn't count who was Serbs, who were Bosniaks, who were Croats. If we had counted the victims, ¹⁸⁹⁴⁰ I wasn't in Bijeljina when those victims fell, but I do know that one of the first victims was a Serb at the railway station when he didn't wish to -- he refused to stop when an Arkan man asked him to stop.

Q. Are you telling us that Serbs killed Serbs?

A. Yes, precisely so. Arkan's men killed this Serb at the railway station.

Q. I see. So the Serbs were killing Serbs in Bijeljina. Do you know how many were killed?

A. That was explained to you by the man who was in Arkan's unit and who was active in Bijeljina.

Q. So did Mr. Gusalic, who testified here, do you know how the war in Bijeljina started when he --

JUDGE MAY: We're not going to go through what some other witness said. It's not to the point.

Now, you can ask this witness some questions which he can deal with, but it sounds to me as though it's all secondhand.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. And do you know who was in control of Bijeljina before the conflict, and do you know of the barricades in Bijeljina and the distribution of weapons to Muslims by Alija Suracevic, the president of the Bijeljina SDA from the mosque and the SDA headquarters in Njegosva Street?

A. No.

Q. I see. You don't know anything about that. And do you know of ¹⁸⁹⁴¹ the existence of lists of Bijeljina Serbs for liquidation?

A. I don't know.

Q. Very well. When you spoke of the plan and collecting data, in your statement you say that the order to collect data of this kind was also given to officer Ibrahim Hadzimustafic; is that right?

A. Could you repeat that? I didn't understand.

Q. In your statement in connection with the collection of data regarding the plan, that you started your testimony, that with your colleague Ibrahim Hadzimustafic, an officer, also received the same assignment to collect data and prepare the plan?

A. First of all, we didn't collect any data. We were working on it. The name you mentioned was my drawer. He was a draughtsman in my team. He was a draughtsman. That was his position.

Q. He's an officer, isn't he?

A. A reserve officer. A lieutenant.

Q. Is he a Muslim like you?

A. Yes.

Q. So could that be evidence that nothing was done on a discriminatory basis in that regard?

A. After the plan I mentioned, I was replaced, dismissed from my duties.

Q. Were you perhaps replaced because did you not intervene with that joint detachment of yours according to those people who caused the fires or whatever or were you replaced for the reasons you gave?

A. Well, I probably wasn't replaced for the reasons you gave me ¹⁸⁹⁴² ^{BLANK PAGE} ¹⁸⁹⁴³ because after me not a single officer --

MR. GROOME: Out of an abundance of caution, could I ask the Chamber to inquire from the witness whether the fact that his colleague's name said publicly whether that's going to compromise the protections that the Court has given him. I don't the answer to that, but it seems that it might.

JUDGE MAY: Well, are you asking for it to be redacted rather than go through --

MR. GROOME: Yes, Your Honour.

JUDGE MAY: Rather than go through this. Yes, we'll redact that. Yes, go on.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. All right. As you say on page 3, paragraph 1 of your statement, that non-Serb officers were replaced and sent to occupy less important positions, do you happen to know how many non-Serb officers there were in your own corps, not to mention the name of the corps or anything else to avoid having you identified. But how many non-Serb officers were there in your own corps?

A. In my corps, let me say there were quite a lot of non-Serb officers, but most of them occupied less important positions. And that's what I said yesterday. So none of the commanders, the chiefs of staff or assistance or battalion commanders, brigade commanders from 1991 were non-Serbs.

Q. That is not true, but answer me this, please: How many Serbs were there in the units of the army of Bosnia-Herzegovina at the time that you ¹⁸⁹⁴⁴ joined up?

A. In my own -- in the unit I commanded, there were about 4.8 per cent of them.

Q. 4.8 per cent, is that what you said? On page 2, paragraph 4, you say that after the withdrawal of the JNA from Croatia and Slovenia, the JNA units deployed mostly in areas where the Serb population was dominant. Is that what you said?

A. That's right.

Q. Were the Serbs hostile towards the JNA?

A. They accepted the JNA. They were friendly disposed towards them while it was the JNA.

Q. All right. You personally, as an officer of the JNA, did you feel more secure, safer where there was no -- there were no hostilities expressed towards the JNA, no hostile sentiments towards it?

A. Towards the JNA you say. Well, as I say, while it was the JNA, a popular people's army, we all felt proud of being part of the JNA. After 1990, the officers who were non-Serbs did not feel comfortable in that same army. We were humiliated. We were dismissed from our jobs. You took away our five-pointed star insignias, replaced them with Serb flags and so on. Our conversations were listened in to.

Q. Well, I wasn't in charge of the JNA, so I didn't take the insignias away. The fact that you changed them is your affair. But tell me this: Did you know of the phenomenon based on a political directive which came from the very peaks of the Democratic Action Party, from Alija Izetbegovic himself, that Muslim ¹⁸⁹⁴⁵ recruits were leaving the JNA or should leave the JNA and should not respond to the call-up for mobilisation and to go and join up into the units of the JNA? Do you know about that?

A. I was never a member of the SDA party myself, but I do know that a member of the Presidency of Bosnia-Herzegovina, Alija Izetbegovic, in fact, by virtue of his office forbid or brought in a directive by which the Territorial Defence units could not be deployed in the territory of the Republic of Croatia, and that the recruits should not respond to the mobilisation call-up.

Q. Ah, that they should not respond. Were are you talking about the Serbisation of the JNA if the Serbs responded to the call-up for the mobilisation whereas in Bosnia-Herzegovina the Muslims and Croats, following a political directive, failed to respond to the call-up for mobilisation?

A. Bosnia-Herzegovina and its recruits did not wish to take part in the aggression either against Slovenia or against Croatia.

Q. All right. I like to hear that they were aggressions. Now, tell me this: From what I can see in your statement on page 3, paragraph 9, you refer to the Serb Crisis Staff and say that you heard of it for the first time in March 1992. Is that right?

A. Yes.

Q. And do you know the reasons for which the Serb Crisis Staff was set up?

A. The Serbian Crisis Staffs were set up on the territory of Bosnia-Herzegovina and before that in Croatia quite a long time before. ¹⁸⁹⁴⁶ The SAO Posavina. So these Serb territories. That's where they were. And they were formed on a purely ethnic basis and level, including all the Serbian insignias, the Serbian flag was flown from municipality buildings and so on.

Q. All right. In the alleged arming of the Bosnian Serbs by the JNA, did the Muslims take part in that?

A. You probably found one paragraph where I state that somewhere towards the end of -- let me just remember this correctly. That a large column turned up which was brought in by Hadziefendic, Hasim from Belgrade, that they -- he spent the night in my place in the barracks and then took the column after to Banja Luka to resupply the rocket brigade, to resupply it with rockets.

And let me just finish what I was saying. That gentleman is married to a woman from Loznica. He remained in the army of Yugoslavia. He was promoted during the aggression between the army of Bosnia-Herzegovina to the rank of general and performed a high function in the General Staff of the army of Yugoslavia and he lives in Belgrade today.

Q. So effected the aggression against Bosnia-Herzegovina, did he? All right. Fine. Now, tell me this: During the time you spent working in the JNA, your service in the JNA and the period you're testifying about, was the JNA the sole legitimate armed formation, and I would like to emphasise the word legal, lawful.

A. The Yugoslav People's Army was the sole legal armed force on the territory of Yugoslavia. ¹⁸⁹⁴⁷

Q. All right. Now, tell me whether the legal and legitimate operation of repositioning its officers from one place to another, including the Territorial Defence, which was within its composition, was that all right too? And we cleared that up yesterday. Is that right?

A. I don't understand your question.

Q. Is it legal to transfer certain units from one place to the other of that sole legal armed force on the territory of Yugoslavia?

A. Of course it was legal. But it was not legal to transfer and pull out the Yugoslav People's Army from the area of Slovenia, from the whole of the territory of Slovenia. That isn't legal. Neither was it legal to hand over the Varazdin Corps which was the best-armed corps without a single bullet having been fired. It was not legal to hand over the Rijeka Corps without a single bullet being fired either.

Q. Tell me about the Varazdin Corps? They?

A. Well, you know who they did surrender to; to the members of the Croatian guards.

Q. Do you know how many blockades were set up, blockades of the barracks and attacks on the barracks of the JNA throughout Croatia?

A. Yes, I do know about that, but the Varazdin Corps was very strong and was able to resist all those blockades had there been the interest of doing so. It could have solved that problem had it really been interested in doing so. And that's why you brought that corps commander to trial in Belgrade and he was found guilty and sentenced to I don't know how many years in prison.

Q. I didn't ask you that. I asked you whether the JNA had attacked ¹⁸⁹⁴⁸ ^{BLANK PAGE} ¹⁸⁹⁴⁹ Croatia or was it that the Croatian paramilitaries attacked the JNA?

A. The JNA attacked Croatia. The first beginnings of the aggression in Croatia were precisely what I said in my statement yesterday. From Mirkovci, Jankovci and the infiltration of Seselj's White Eagles, introducing general chaos in Croatian towns. Then the JNA would turn up and little by little occupy it. That's how it all began and that's what happened in Vukovar too.

Q. But don't the facts tell us otherwise, Mr. 1493 or what?

A. Information or data tells us how it was in Bosnia-Herzegovina, With Bijeljina, with Zvornik, with Brcko the same thing happened. You know what happened in Brcko, the slaughter that took place there. Not the JNA, but you first infiltrated the paramilitary formations or special purpose units, the specials. And they had lists and were ordered to arrest all professors, doctors, well to do and respected people, to loot them too, and then the JNA took control.

Q. Mr. 1493, I'm not asking you that. This isn't the right place for political propaganda about an alleged aggression, the alleged aggression of the Serbs.

JUDGE MAY: That's one of the crucial issues isn't it, Mr. Milosevic that you've been raising as to how this matter started. So the witness is entitled to give evidence about it.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well, Mr. May, fine. So witnesses do have the right to make political speeches, do they?

JUDGE MAY: The evidence about the start of the aggression, Mr. Milosevic. That's extremely relevant, I should have thought. You've ¹⁸⁹⁵⁰ certainly raised it.

Yes, let's move on.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Very well, tell me this: Can paramilitary units be those who are within the composition and under the command of the JNA? Is that possible?

A. The JNA was established according to its formation and structure, and anything that did not belong to that formation and establishment was paramilitary.

Q. Yes, of course. If there is a volunteer unit under the command of the JNA, for example, by law and according to the law on defence of Yugoslavia, it too belongs to the defence forces of Yugoslavia, doesn't it?

A. According to the strategy of armed struggle which was in force at the time, it did not provide for any paramilitary volunteer units of any kind. But the defence of Yugoslavia was in the hands and based on the use and deployment of the Yugoslav People's Army, the Territorial Defence, and the police.

Q. All right. Fine, Mr. 1493, but you know full well that the law also provides for the fact that everybody who defends Yugoslavia by -- through arms and its territorial integrity is to be part and parcel of the armed forces?

A. He is an individual who is conjoined with a formation of the JNA or Territorial Defence. He cannot under any conditions be outside those formations. Anything outside those formations is considered to be ¹⁸⁹⁵¹ unlawful and not legal.

Q. All right. Fine. Now, tell me this: The army of Bosnia-Herzegovina whose member you were, was it legal or illegal?

A. The army of Bosnia-Herzegovina of which I was a member was the sole legal armed force on the territory of Bosnia-Herzegovina.

Q. And tell me this: The army of Republika Srpska, was it legal or not?

A. The army of the Republika Srpska was an illegal formation on the territory of Bosnia-Herzegovina.

Q. So it was only the Muslims who had the right to bear arms in Bosnia-Herzegovina in a civil war; is that right? As far as the Serbs, they did not enjoy that same right, and I assume the HVO was an illegal formation, too.

A. Sir, I have told you that the unit under my command, that I had a brigade unit commander who was a Serb. I had [redacted]

[redacted] [redacted] May that be struck from the record, please.

A. How come that conflict, the conflict that took place at different times, different periods between the Serb forces, Muslim forces and Croatian forces and so on and so forth, how come you consider only the Muslim forces to be legal forces?

A. The army of Bosnia-Herzegovina was not an army of the -- was not a Muslim army. The Bosnia-Herzegovina army was made up of all three ethnic groups living on the territory of Bosnia-Herzegovina, and all three ethnic groups fought within the army of Bosnia-Herzegovina for the territorial ¹⁸⁹⁵² integrity of Bosnia-Herzegovina.

Q. Tell me, please, do you know facts and figures about how many Muslims there were in the army of Republika Srpska?

A. Very few.

Q. How many thousands, I'm asking you?

A. Only those who had to protect their families had joined up.

Q. Those who had to be recruited for their families' sakes, did they sign up to be directors, leaders, functionaries, et cetera?

A. I precisely quoted the example of the man who held a high rank, a general in the Yugoslav army. He brought in the rockets and missiles, and I believe that he stayed on in the army not because he liked to stay on but in order to protect and safeguard his family.

Q. I see. So you drew that kind of observation and logic for the thousands of Muslims what made up the army of Republika Srpska, and that logic does not hold true for that handful of Serbs who were in the Bosnia-Herzegovina army; is that right?

A. Let's me repeat. The handful -- there was not a handful of Serbs in the army of Bosnia-Herzegovina. I can tell you the numbers, quote the figures if need be in the unit under my command, for example. So it was not just a handful of men.

Q. You said 4.8 per cent. That was the figure you quoted, and that -- such a small number comes under the statistical error type of figure.

A. The figure is 100 per cent correct.

Q. Yes, but that negligible figure is considered a statistical error. ¹⁸⁹⁵³ Now, as you say that the JNA occupied towns and villages, how can it occupy places where it had been present for the past 50 years?

A. Because the Yugoslav People's Army no longer was because a people's army. It had lost all the attributes of a popular army when it withdrew from Slovenia. Once it had withdrawn from Slovenia, it was no longer of the Yugoslav People's Army, no longer a popular national army.

Q. All right. Now, you say that the non-Serb population had to be left without their leading figures, without their leaders; is that right?

A. Every plan had lists of persons who in the first stages, in the initial phase should have been arrested and killed by the specials. And Brcko is a fine example of this where about 3.000 intellectuals were killed in the space of just several days.

Q. Oh, come on. That kind of information nobody has ever heard of. Nobody has heard of facts and figures like that. But tell me this: As you say that there were plans to behead and leave it without its leaders tell me where you got that information from.

A. That information comes from the political leaders, from the political peaks.

Q. You mean from your political peaks?

A. That those lists exist can be seen from the fact that it wasn't Ilija or Hasan who should be killed seeing to their land, but it was professors, doctors, and engineers which were to have been liquidated, and Brcko, Prijedor, are good examples.

Q. All right. Tell me, which Yugoslav officer anywhere issued orders to that effect, orders of that kind which implied the liquidation of ¹⁸⁹⁵⁴ ^{BLANK PAGE} ¹⁸⁹⁵⁵ intellectuals and respected citizens, and so on?

A. Those lists were compiled by members of the SDS.

Q. All right. But how do you know or how can you claim -- how do you dare say -- where do you get the audacity to state that the plans were planned in the 2nd military district and there was a secret agreement between the JNA and the local SDS? And you state that on page 4 of your statement.

A. I saw a list of highly respected individuals, the inhabitants of a town, and that list was compiled by the SDS, and it contained the names of individuals to be liquidated in the first stage.

Q. Were they liquidated?

A. No, they weren't, because the town wasn't occupied.

Q. So you saw a list of persons up for liquidation but they weren't liquidated. Fine.

A. Because the town was not occupied in the final instance.

Q. All right. Tell me who took part in these agreements on the part of the SDS? Who represented the SDS? Who represented the JNA? If you know anything about those agreements at all, then you must have some knowledge about who, on behalf of the SDS, did this and who, on behalf of the JNA, did this.

A. The beginning of 1992 into the command in which I myself went, that is to say from February up until April when the events in Bijeljina were unleashed, there were daily visits by the most highly responsible persons in the SDS came to visit the command headquarters. I myself did not have access nor did any lower-ranking officers have access to the ¹⁸⁹⁵⁶ command but people had daily meetings about what was going to be done and the events that were to come to pass. And I state in my statement -- I quote some of the names there.

Q. Could you give me some names now? Could you name some names?

A. Yes, I could, but may we go into private session for that?

JUDGE MAY: Yes

[Private session]

[redacted]

[Open session]

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Tell me, please on page 4, paragraph 8, you say -- I won't mention the name of the corps but the appropriate command of the JNA of that corps did not have any command over Arkan's unit during the conflict in Bijeljina. Is that right or not? ¹⁸⁹⁵⁷

A. That is what I said, because if he had had command over it, then he wouldn't have allowed that unit to do what it did. So when that unit arrived from Serbia, it did not resubordinate itself to the corps, but it carried out orders that it received from someone else.

Q. Very well. You mentioned Biljana Plavsic in Bijeljina and you showed her on this tape. Was she an official of Serbia or Bosnia-Herzegovina? Was she a member of the Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina?

A. If you listen to my statement, that is what I said, that Biljana Plavsic, as a member of the Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina, with the authority to authorise force, instead of giving orders at least to the police if to no one else, which was very powerful in Bijeljina, to arrest those Arkan's men, she embraces him and congratulates him on the misdeeds he had committed. That is what I said yesterday.

Q. Very well. But tell me, didn't a Serbian member of the Presidency and a Muslim member of the Presidency come together, that is, Biljana Plavsic and Fikret Abdic?

A. That is what I said yesterday. On the right there was Fikret Abdic, Lieutenant Colonel Prasovic, and on the left, Biljana Plavsic. You can see them walking together. Let me add, Fikret Abdic, when he came to Bijeljina his car was stopped. He and his two escorts were forced to lie down. They were thoroughly searched and only then was he allowed to join in.

Q. How do you think that Biljana Plavsic could have issued orders as a member of the Presidency of Bosnia-Herzegovina to any police or military ¹⁸⁹⁵⁸ unit?

A. The police was under the authority of the Presidency.

Q. The police was within the competence of the government of Bosnia-Herzegovina. Surely you know that.

A. Yes, I do. So that Biljana Plavsic could have called up the prime minister of Bosnia-Herzegovina and given him that order. She had the authority to do that.

Q. Please tell me, are you really claiming that this general who was in fact Chief of Staff as far as I know, of the 2nd Military District, reported to Arkan in Bijeljina?

A. Will you please find somewhere this? He went towards Arkan. He stopped. He saluted him, and then he congratulated him.

Q. Wait a moment, please. Why are you talking about reporting? How can someone who is coming -- arriving be reporting --

JUDGE MAY: The witness has explained what he meant, and there didn't seem to be any point going on. We've seen the video. We don't need to go on about it.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. May, that is what I'm saying. Why is he calling it reporting? How could it be?

JUDGE MAY: We have seen the video. We have heard his evidence. There is no need to take any further time or waste time on it. Let's move on.

Don't bother to answer any more.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Very well. What is the general manner of greeting somebody when ¹⁸⁹⁵⁹ one is wearing a uniform and has a cap on his head? Doesn't an officer greet everyone in that way?

A. Let me explain. The difference between reporting and a greeting is a drastic one. Take the tape and review it. When you're reporting to someone, somebody reporting to somebody else who is coming, he has to stop at a distance of three or five steps. He has to stand at attention and salute. Then this other one approaches and greets him. And you will be able to see that on that tape.

Q. You haven't explained that, but apparently Mr. May insists that you have explained it and we will have occasion to hear other witnesses who know more about it.

Very well. Just give me a yes or no answer to save time. Did JNA members take part in the fighting in Bijeljina in any way?

A. At the time that Arkan arrived, they did not.

Q. The whole war in Bijeljina lasted four days. There was no fighting after that. Therefore, did members of the JNA take part in any kind of fighting at any time in Bijeljina?

A. During the expulsion of the population from Bijeljina, members of the JNA participated in searching of houses, expulsions, lootings, and so on.

Q. Are you saying that members of the JNA searched houses and looted them?

A. Yes.

Q. Which unit?

A. The military police went there, individuals, groups. ¹⁸⁹⁶⁰ ^{BLANK PAGE} ¹⁸⁹⁶¹

Q. Mr. 1493, there are so many witnesses from Bijeljina. How can you claim such a thing? Did you see that?

A. I didn't see that, but I can claim that with certainty on the basis of what the people said who were exchanged from the Batkovic camp and who came to our side.

Q. Very well. We'll hear those men. It is quite contrary to the information that I have here.

A. That was not the process only in Bijeljina. In Prijedor and Banja Luka as well. The JNA occupied Banja Luka.

Q. Very well. Regarding the reporting that you refer to, isn't it logical that he could have only reported to the general and not the other way round?

JUDGE MAY: We're stopping wasting time like this. Now, you've got about 20 minutes left. I suggest if you have any more important questions you go on to them.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well, Mr. May. I really do have quite a number of questions for this witness.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. As a senior officer of the army of Bosnia-Herzegovina and later in view of the positions you held, were you aware that in Sarajevo at the end of June 1991 a rally was held at which only Muslims were present, members of various parties of Islamic orientation? Are you aware of that?

A. No, I'm not.

Q. And do you know anything in connection with the establishment of the so-called Council for National Defence which later became the ¹⁸⁹⁶² political wing of the Patriotic League?

A. I did not take part in that, nor am I aware of it.

Q. Do you know the name of Sefer Halilovic?

A. Very well.

Q. At the time he was already a former JNA officer and later commander of the Main Staff of the army of Bosnia-Herzegovina. Is that right?

A. Yes. Sefer Halilovic was never the commander of the BH army.

Q. No, not commander, Chief of Staff. Is that right?

A. Yes, that's right. That's what we're talking about, Chief of Staff.

Q. Was he entrusted with the ideological shaping of the army, the defence plan of Sarajevo and the Sarajevo region?

A. Sefer Halilovic can never be entrusted as an individual with such a task. A whole team of people has to do such thing.

Q. Just say yes or no.

A. No. The answer is no.

Q. Very well. But we have his statement too. Then it is easy to establish.

A. He did head the team.

Q. As this was happening in June 1991, tell me, who attacked Sarajevo in June 1991?

A. Sarajevo was not attacked in 1991.

Q. Well then what kind of a military organisation of the so-called defence of Sarajevo was being worked on in Sarajevo in June at this ¹⁸⁹⁶³ gathering of exclusively Islamic organisations?

A. I am not familiar with that.

Q. And don't you think then that on the pretext of the defence of Sarajevo an aggressive fundamentalist organisation was being formed which later called itself the Patriotic League of people?

A. In Sarajevo?

Q. Yes. Yes, that's my question.

A. I don't know about that because I did not participate in it at the time. I was never a member of the Patriotic League or the Green Berets. Let me tell you that.

Q. Do you know that before Sefer Halilovic the drafting of the plan on the so-called defence of Sarajevo was rejected by also former senior officials in the JNA who were Muslims, General Sarac, Safet Hadzic, Azim Hodzic, who were offered also this task of organising this, and they refused?

JUDGE MAY: See if the witness knows anything about what you're asking.

Do you know anything about this allegation? It's a suggestion which the accused is making. Do you know anything about it? Other than what you might have read in the papers or seen on the television.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I don't know anything about that. I only know as much as the other citizens of Bosnia and Herzegovina or citizens of Yugoslavia know about that.

JUDGE MAY: Yes. Mr. Milosevic, move on to something that he can deal with. ¹⁸⁹⁶⁴

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Do you know anything at all about a meeting many months before any conflict broke out attended by Izetbegovic, Halilovic, Munir Jakic, Resad Bekic, Safet Hadzic, as president of the Crisis Staff of Sarajevo, Mirsad Kemo, Zeljko Pudza, and when the Main Staff of the Patriotic League was named? Do you know anything about those events?

A. I know nothing about it, nor have I heard of such a meeting.

Q. Very well. Tell me now, please, as this plan is something I'm not aware of, what is the plan called RAM, R-A-M?

A. I said in my statement that I never saw it. I heard of it but I never saw it.

Q. What are you heard about that RAM plan?

A. That it exists. All I can explain now to you is that the RAM plan, and I repeat that I never saw it nor was directly involved in it. But I had worked on war planning ever since 1988, at a very high level and it now prompts me to recall a plan that was not called RAM but had roughly the same borders and the same roles. Namely, in 1988, the political and military leadership of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia decided to disband the 9th army in Slovenia and disband the 7th army in Bosnia-Herzegovina and to form the 5th Military District based in Zagreb and the 1st Military District based in Belgrade. The 1st military district has borders exactly along the line that the Greater Serbia was interested in. Those were the borders of the 1st Military District, that is, along the lines Virovitica-Karlobag. And the deployment of those unit were such -- so I hadn't seen this plan RAM but plan S2 is a plan I worked ¹⁸⁹⁶⁵ on for nights and months. The distribution of cause was such that the Novi Sad Corps was between the rivers of the Drava and the Sava right up to Virovitica. You asked me. Allow me to answer.

Q. That was is not my question. We will just be spending time. Your corps covered --

JUDGE MAY: Let the witness finish. Just explain if you would so the Court -- so the Court can understand. What is the connection of what you're saying with the RAM plan?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't believe you will be able to hear this from other witnesses because this is something I worked on, on this plan.

According to this plan S2, the Novi Sad Corps would be between the Drava and Sava rivers. I don't have a map here, so just south of Virovitica up to the Sava River. Then below it comes -- below that corps was the Tuzla 17th Corps reaching the line roughly Slunj, Glina. Then below it would

come the 5th Banja Luka Corps north of Prijedor in Croatia, and then further down there's the Knin Corps, which was not part of the 5th Military District but remained in the military naval district but was on the border along this line of interest.

JUDGE MAY: What -- so we can follow, what is the point that you're making of the similarity between -- of the S2 plan with the RAM plan? What did you understand the purpose to be?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, there are two similarities or, rather, identical features. The first, the area of ¹⁸⁹⁶⁶ ^{BLANK PAGE} ¹⁸⁹⁶⁷ responsibility of the 1st Military District, the Belgrade district, coincides fully with the plan RAM, the north-western border of plan RAM. Secondly, the deployment of units of the 1st Military District according to the S2 plan fully coincides with the plan RAM and the interests --

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Mr. 1493, let me cut short your pains. This plan RAM does not exist. It's a code for switching over to a coded conversation. And what you're talking about, three military districts and how they covered the whole of Yugoslavia, this is common knowledge.

[redacted]

A. Will this be redacted, please? I want this redacted.

JUDGE MAY: Yes. Let's go into private session now.

[Private session]

[redacted]

[redacted] ¹⁸⁹⁶⁸

[redacted]

[Open session]

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Yes. But didn't you say that this reorganisation of the military districts was carried out in 1988?

A. Yes, precisely so.

Q. So what organisation are you talking about as a function of any type of Greater Serbia? You're talking about 1988 and the reorganisation of the Yugoslav People's Army into the three areas and the distribution of the whole territory that way, the internal organisation of the Military-Naval Sector and the RVPVO. That was the JNA. So what Greater Serbia are you talking about?

A. All I am saying is that with the disbanding of the 7th Army ¹⁸⁹⁶⁹ District and it being joined up to the 1st Army district, that the north-westerly boundaries of the 1st Military District coincide with the boundaries of the Greater Serbia which was where the interests lay.

Q. Who did you hear anything about a Greater Serbia from? Did you ever hear from any officials of Serbia or Yugoslavia of a plan for a Greater Serbia? Did you ever hear anything of that kind?

A. No. I just heard about it quite a bit in the political speeches.

Q. Any functionary in power in Serbia and Yugoslavia?

A. Yes.

Q. So who then? Give me a name.

A. Seselj many times.

Q. Well, Seselj was in the opposition until 1997. I'm asking you about officials in power.

A. Well, I recall his speech.

Q. All right. Let's move on not to waste time. You say you know nothing about all this.

In the summary on page 2, point 8 of your statement, you refer to the Patriotic League of peoples as a group set up by non-Serb civilian authorities and the local population; isn't that right? Take a look at the summary, point 8 of your summary?

A. The Patriotic League? What did you say?

Q. Yes. You say a group set up by non-Serb civil authorities and the local civilian population?

A. I said I was never a member, nor did I take part in the creation of the Patriotic League nor was a member of the Patriotic League. ¹⁸⁹⁷⁰

Q. Well, how then is this mentioned in your summary?

A. I don't know.

Q. And do you know anything about the Patriotic League as being formed as a paramilitary formation of the SDA in the spring of 1991?

A. I said I did not take part in the establishment of the Patriotic League.

Q. I'm not asking you whether you took part in its formation. I'm asking whether you know about it, know about this?

A. No, I don't.

Q. You don't. Right. Now, later on, do you know anything about the fact that it had nine military districts, subregional headquarters and staff at lower levels, municipal levels, headquarters after those lower-down levels? Do you know anything about that?

A. At the start of the aggression against Bosnia-Herzegovina, in Bosnia-Herzegovina we had the Ministry of Defence which stayed intact as it did before the aggression. And there were Territorial Defence Staffs of the Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina at the beginning of the aggression which was -- which took over the role and continued working as it had done before the aggression. So that in Bosnia-Herzegovina, as far as the Territorial Defence is concerned and the Ministry of Defence or ministries of defence, prior to the aggression and after the aggression no changes -- there were no changes at all. The Defence Minister stayed the same.

Q. All right. Now, do you know that what you say, that it was formed by the local inhabitants, that this 10th subregional headquarters was in ¹⁸⁹⁷¹ Serbia -- Serbia in Novi Pazar, covering Novi Pazar, Tutin, Sjenica, Prijepolje, Varos, and Priboj on the territory of Serbia as well as Klevja [phoen], Bijelo Polje on the territory of Montenegro? Do you know anything about that?

A. No, I don't.

Q. And you don't know that this was formed in the spring of 1991, as early on as that?

A. No.

Q. Do you know that there were manoeuvre units and special platoons for terrorist activities and sabotage, that they were formed? Do you know anything about that?

A. Where?

Q. Within the frameworks of the Patriotic League of people's or nations?

A. No. I was in the area, and there was no such unit there.

Q. All right. Now, as you occupied positions that you did, that you say you did, do you know that all these regional and subregional staffs and headquarters were formed precisely by Sefer Halilovic using forged ID cards, for example, Mirsad Tucin [phoen], a Muslim, and a Croat, and a Serb ID card, that in his travels he resorted to forged ID cards?

A. In the Territorial Defence where I was, I was not appointed by Sefer Halilovic but by the Defence Minister Doko.

Q. All right. Tell me this now, please: Do you know who was responsible for planting an explosive device at the mosque in Novi Sarajevo, in Novi Sarajevo, or, rather, do you know -- ¹⁸⁹⁷² ^{BLANK PAGE} ¹⁸⁹⁷³

JUDGE MAY: [Previous translation continues]... The witness given evidence about this?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, he mentioned the Patriotic League of Nations, and they were precisely responsible for doing that.

JUDGE MAY: This is a waste of time. Move on.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. And do you know that the sabotage terrorist units of the Patriotic League of Peoples --

JUDGE MAY: Let us establish --

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. -- Forcibly --

JUDGE MAY: -- There was such a unit or the witness knows anything about it.

THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please. Microphone, please.

JUDGE MAY: No. I'm going to deal with this. It's alleged that the Patriotic League had a sabotage terrorist unit. That's the allegation which is made by this accused. Do you know anything about any such unit or whether there's any truth there that sort of allegation?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, Your Honours, I say with full responsibility that in the area of responsibility which was under my command, and that was the largest area in Bosnia-Herzegovina, there was not a unit of this kind.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. In your area of responsibility, the road Visegrad-Uzice to Dobrun, did that come under your area of responsibility? ¹⁸⁹⁷⁴

A. No.

Q. All right. Then I won't asking you anything about that. Do you know how these formations were armed, the units set up in the spring of 1991 on the Muslim side? Do you know how they were armed?

A. Well, I'm not going to speak about a Muslim side or a Serb side or a Croatian side. If you want to talk about these matters then we can speak about it as being the Territorial Defence at the beginning and later on the army of Bosnia-Herzegovina. And what I can tell you is this: After I left the JNA and joined the Territorial Defence, that in that area you would not be able to rally a company with any arms, even hunting weapons.

Q. Well, we've heard that story, but I don't know who killed all the Serbs in Bijeljina with those hunting rifles that you mention. But do you know that all the business of arming the Patriotic League and the paramilitary formations in general was done by -- Alija Izetbegovic gave this job to Hasim Cengic who was a member of the political leadership of the PNL, and he was later the Defence Minister too?

JUDGE MAY: Do you know anything about what the accused is talking about?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know anything. All I can say is that Hasan Cengic was never the Defence Minister.

JUDGE MAY: You're wasting your time asking questions about which the witness knows absolutely nothing. You're wasting the time of the Court and taking up the time of your cross-examination. You have five minutes left. So if you've got any important questions, you should ask ¹⁸⁹⁷⁵ them instead of these political ones.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, I have quite a number of questions left.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Now, do you know that Sefer Halilovic himself, in statement he made to the investigators of that other side over there, as far back as 1996, said that the Patriotic League, later the army of Bosnia-Herzegovina, obtained its weapons in such a way as --

JUDGE MAY: How can he know about what somebody said to the investigators, apart from what he said himself? I'm going to consult as to whether we shouldn't bring all this to a conclusion. You're using the occasion to make political points, and it seems to be a complete waste of time.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Please. This is not a political --

JUDGE MAY: Just a moment.

[Trial Chamber confers]

JUDGE MAY: Yes. You've got five minutes.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. What I was asking you was this: Did you know about the theft and looting of weapons from the JNA warehouses that were carried out, as Mr. May interrupted me a moment ago, which were carried out on the basis of what Sefer Halilovic himself said? Do you know about this taking place?

A. No, I don't.

Q. All right. Now, you said that after the events in Bijeljina, you ¹⁸⁹⁷⁶ joined the army of Bosnia-Herzegovina. That's right, isn't it?

A. Yes.

Q. So you joined up on the 10th of April; right?

A. Yes.

Q. That's what you say in your statement. After the Serbs took control of Bijeljina.

A. Like I said in my statement.

Q. All right, then. Is this what is true, that on that day, on the 10th of April, 1992, the army of Bosnia-Herzegovina was established and that that was the sole reason that you left the JNA on that particular date and not the fact that Bijeljina had been taken control of?

A. It is not true that the BH army was formed on the 10th of April, sir.

Q. All right. Fine.

A. If you want to tell me -- if you want me to tell you when it was formed, I'll have to hurry up and go back home because it celebrates its anniversary. It was formed on the 15th of April, 1992, in fact. So that you should know that fact.

Q. All right. So you joined the BH army five days before it was actually established. Right. Fine.

[redacted]

A. I would like this to be redacted from the transcript.

Q. What has that got to do with it? I'm not asking you about your own name. I'm asking you about something else and someone else. ¹⁸⁹⁷⁷ Mr. 1493, is it true that already in the month of June 1992. BH army within its composition had 230.000 soldiers of which the 2nd Corps, for example, numbered 70.000 men?

A. Is this in private session? Could this be stricken from the record?

Q. Explain to us why it should be in private session. It doesn't identify you in any way.

JUDGE MAY: [Previous translation continues]... And then see what the difficulty is, but we'll go into private session.

[Private session]

[redacted]

[Open session]

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] ¹⁸⁹⁷⁸ ^{BLANK PAGE} ¹⁸⁹⁷⁹

Q. All right. Tell me this: Is it true, in view of the fact that from the -- you were in the army from its very inception, the so-called army of Bosnia-Herzegovina, that already in June 1992 it numbered 230.000 men bearing arms?

A. No, that is not correct.

Q. Well, how many men did it have? Could you be so kind as to tell us? And this is something that we can check easily. We can check out what you're saying and what actually happened according to the facts and figures.

A. I can only speak about the unit I was in, the unit that I was head of at the time.

Q. Well, how can you then say that it is not correct if you don't know? You can say you don't know, not that it's not correct. Because now you say that you can only vouch for your own unit.

A. I know about my own unit which was best armed. All the other units had less weapons than my own unit.

Q. All right. Tell me how many men your unit had then?

A. I can't tell you that.

Q. Why not?

A. I can't. Because.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I think, Mr. May, the witness is duty-bound to answer this question.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can answer it in private session.

JUDGE MAY: Yes. Yes, Mr. Milosevic.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. May, you weren't listening. The ¹⁸⁹⁸⁰ witness has just explained that the number I mentioned for the Bosnia-Herzegovina army was not correct, and then he said he could only vouch and tell us for his own unit. Then I asked him whether he can --

JUDGE MAY: We will go into private session and then we're going to bring this cross-examination to an end. Yes, let's go into private session

[Private session]

[redacted]

[redacted] ¹⁸⁹⁸¹ Pages 18981-18987 - redacted - private session

¹⁸⁹⁸⁸

[redacted]

--- Recess taken at 10.41 a.m.

--- On resuming at 11.01 a.m.

[Open session]

JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Tapuskovic.

MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, it is the submission of the amici that this last document --

JUDGE MAY: We will deal with that.

MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] -- Regarding all the matters I ¹⁸⁹⁸⁹ asked in private session --

JUDGE MAY: Yes. Give it the next C number. Under seal.

THE REGISTRAR: C6.

MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] It is also our submission in view of the significance of this document, in our judgement, without mentioning the names, I think that this should be heard in open session too without mentioning names.

JUDGE MAY: I don't think we need go over it again. The matter's been dealt with. It's on the record and we've heard it.

MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] In any event, if you accept the document, it should be known what the documents are about, because these are court documents, official documents.

JUDGE MAY: There is no need to go over it again. The matter has been put before the Court.

MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Mr. Witness, during the examination-in-chief yesterday, you said that the war in Croatia started in the night between the 7th and 8th of May, 1991. Is that right?

A. I never mentioned the 7th and 8th of May.

Q. I'm sorry. What is the date then?

A. I didn't talk about the beginning of the war in Croatia at all. I just spoke about the situation that I was in in the period from the 2nd of May until the 5th of May.

Q. And is it true that serious armed conflicts started after the proclamation of independence by Slovenia and Croatia at the end of June? ¹⁸⁹⁹⁰ ^{BLANK PAGE} ¹⁸⁹⁹¹

A. I didn't mention that in my testimony.

Q. But I'm asking you. Do you know that in view of the job you performed?

A. I don't know.

Q. You don't know what happened in Slovenia?

A. Yes, I do know what happened.

Q. Do you know what happened after that regarding the blockade of barracks?

A. Where?

Q. All over Croatia. You were then active, up until April 1992. Did you know what the army experienced during the period of that year while you were still a member of the army. Do you know that at all?

A. I don't know.

Q. Do you know that all the barracks were under blockade? You mentioned the Varazdin barracks a moment ago.

A. Blocked by unarmed people.

Q. There was no fire opened on barracks?

A. Yes, from rifles.

Q. The Varazdin Corps did not respond to that fire.

A. The Varazdin Corps had a Armoured Brigade with 96 tanks, and they did not react. Not a single tank fired a single shell.

Q. And that is why that general was held responsible?

A. Yes, that's right.

Q. Let me ask you now something in connection with the document we were dealing with yesterday and which you read out upon the request of the ¹⁸⁹⁹² Prosecutor. That is tab 2 of Exhibit 425. If you remember, you read out yesterday a part of it, the last sentence, and you said when the Prosecutor asked you in connection with the last sentence that the reference, in fact, was to the fact that the commander cadres, the military leaders, had to concern themselves with the protection of the lives of soldiers. Isn't that what you said?

A. I can't remember exactly, but I think it says to be able to protect manpower. It meant its own personnel and not the people in its area of responsibility.

Q. I see. To protect the soldiers themselves. That was my understanding too.

A. Yes.

Q. But in the previous sentence of that same document which is dated the 4th of April, 1992, you were still in the army, weren't you?

A. Yes.

Q. Let me read it out to you, what it says here so as to spare you the trouble. It is the paragraph on forecasts, and it says: "In the days to come, a further deterioration is expected over the overall security and political situation. Inter-ethnic conflicts in Posavina and Semberija threaten to escalate and spread to other parts of the zone of responsibility with the possibility of very tragic consequences, human casualties, and material damage. Armed provocations are possible of commands and units as well as attacks on military warehouses and isolated facilities by paramilitary formations."

Under those circumstances, as well as in the other situations when ¹⁸⁹⁹³ barracks were surrounded during the time you were still in the Yugoslav People's Army, did the army invest maximum efforts to avoid unnecessary casualties and damage?

A. In the territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina, not a single barracks was surrounded because everything was moved out from places where the majority were Muslims or Croats in time.

Q. That is what I wanted to ask you about. Was there attack on the army when it was pulling out in Sarajevo, and in other places too? Were the soldiers endangered and attacked though they weren't attacking anyone when they were pulling out?

A. I didn't quite understand your question.

Q. You're claiming that in Bosnia, barracks were not blocked. For instance, in Sarajevo itself?

A. In Sarajevo, there was no blockade of barracks but of the command.

Q. Were there any casualties among soldiers who were jeopardised outside the barracks?

A. You will see from the tape provided by the commander of the 2nd Military District, it is not at all correct what is being claimed. Six people were killed in that column. You will be able to see that.

Q. But let's go back to the document I'm holding in my hand. In point 2, you read it up to the middle, and I would like to read the rest of it for you. "The influence can be felt of SDS and Arkan's propaganda which leads to the departure of soldiers from the unit with weapons." Would you agree with that?

A. Virtually from the events in Slovenia and then in Croatia and ¹⁸⁹⁹⁴ Bosnia-Herzegovina, there was large-scale desertion. Even parents went to fetch their sons, their recruits from the army. And this went on literally until the end of the war.

Q. Can you tell us, since you were an officer, that from the moment the problems arose in the area of Yugoslavia in those days, that the main problem was related to the military and state leadership as to how to make an appropriate decision to deprive paramilitary units of weapons? Is that so or not?

A. I'm not aware of that.

Q. You're not. I see. Let me now ask you a few more questions in connection with your evidence.

You said that on the 10th of April, you left the JNA because it was no longer a people's army. So it was on the 10th of April, 1992, after the Serbs had captured Bijeljina that you left JNA, because as you say, it was no longer a people's army. In other words, it means that you thought it was a people's army up until that moment. Yes or no?

A. We officers, particularly Bosniak officers, considered the Yugoslav army to provide security for us, and we wanted to live in that common state. But however, the sequence of events from Slovenia onwards gradually deprived the Yugoslav People's Army of those characteristics. So it no longer existed until when it withdrew from Slovenia.

Q. But you were a member until 1992 and only then you realised it was no longer people's army?

A. I realised that long ago because I didn't perform any serious duties by then. And there were other reasons. ¹⁸⁹⁹⁵

Q. But I wanted to ask you, when you left the Yugoslav People's Army, did you believe that you had the good luck that in the territory of Bosnia-Herzegovina at the beginning of war there were plenty of both active and reserve officers who stood up in defence of defence of Bosnia and Herzegovina so that the [redacted] region and all other regions, not only that of [redacted]--

A. Is this being redacted, please?

Q. I'm sorry. Yes. There's that one word, yes?

JUDGE MAY: You know, Mr. Groome, there is a great deal of confusion at the moment in this evidence. The witness seems to have the idea that he can ask for whatever hearing he wants. Now, I don't know how he got that notion. No doubt it's the fault of the Court for allowing it to happen. But future witnesses must be disabused in this. Now, I cannot see -- we'll go into private session. We'll go into private session, and we'll deal with the matter. But it's -- it is very unsatisfactory to have a hearing in which this kind of process is taking place all the time.

[Private session]

[redacted]

[redacted] ¹⁸⁹⁹⁶ ^{BLANK PAGE} ¹⁸⁹⁹⁷

[redacted]

[Open session]

MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Here is what you said in your statement to the investigators on the 20th of April, 2002. "In May 1992, JNA units who remained in Bosnia-Herzegovina were just renamed into units of the army of ¹⁸⁹⁹⁸ Republika Srpska. Those were the only changes that took place." Is that precisely what we were just saying, that the Serbs from Bosnia and Herzegovina who were living there now were simply renamed into soldiers and officers of the army of Republika Srpska? Did the same apply to your own units?

A. Yes, precisely. JNA units who found themselves in the territory of Bosnia-Herzegovina were renamed the army of Republika Srpska. All the commanders and all units, 80 per cent of the manpower remained in Bosnia-Herzegovina. Only a part of the anti-air defence units, whereas all the other units remained in the territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and all officers were receiving their salaries from the budget of Yugoslavia until perhaps a year ago. And the present Chief of Staff of the Main Staff of the army of Republika Srpska is a retired general of the army of Yugoslavia.

Q. Thank you. A moment ago, you said that you heard for the first time in March 1992 of Serbian Crisis Staffs. Is that right?

A. Yes.

Q. But here in your statement, you said earlier on, "I have no information about the participation of the SDS and the Serbian MUP in the formation and organisation of these Crisis Staffs. I also have no information of the involvement of officers of the 17th Corps or other officers of the JNA." Is that right?

A. Yes, that's right.

Q. Is it also right that you have no information of officers of the state security in the JNA? That's what you said earlier on. ¹⁸⁹⁹⁹

A. That I have no information about the participation of the Serbian MUP? I didn't get your question.

Q. This is contained in your statement. Do you remember saying that? And you also said: "As for the role of the MUP, I can say that most Serbian members of the MUP of BH left a certain place after the events in Bijeljina in April 1991 and went to territory under the control of Bosnian Serbs where they formed the Serbian MUP within the framework of Republika Srpska."

A. That is correct.

Q. Is this correct, that you have no information regarding the involvement of the army of Yugoslavia when Srebrenica fell in 1995?

A. That also is correct, because I wasn't in the area.

MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

JUDGE MAY: Yes.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I have two objections that I would like to be recorded while the witness is here present. The first objection relates to you. Namely, you refused any word to be uttered in open session in connection with a court document referring to war crimes.

JUDGE MAY: That's absolutely right. It's on the court record. What's your second objection?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I wish to say that this witness, in his public evidence, spoke about --

JUDGE MAY: No. We're not here to listen to speeches from you. You've had a very long cross-examination. We have ruled on the matter you've raised. Now, if you've got a second objection, make it, or we're ¹⁹⁰⁰⁰ moving on to re-examination.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] My second objection, which I also wish to be entered in the record, has to do with the fact that this is now, according to my records, the 38th or 39th witness already, and I'm sure there will be more, who is denying what is stated in his statement. And he gave the statement on the 20th of April, 2002, and he denied that he ever said --

JUDGE MAY: Very well. We hear what you say. It is not a matter for -- to interrupt the witness's evidence about. It's a matter on which you can comment in due course. But it's no matter for objection. Yes, Mr. Groome.

Yes.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Let me finish, please. If the witness is giving a statement, he certainly does not make the summary. You would not allow me to question him regarding the Patriotic League of people, though, in the summary under point 5 he speaks about it.

JUDGE MAY: I don't know what your objection is. You're making a speech. What is it that you want to say, and make it clear.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] In answer to my questions about the Patriotic League of people, he says: "I don't know that." And here in the summary he says the league founded by --

JUDGE MAY: What is it that you are asking us to do?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I'm asking for an investigation into who compiles these things which later prove to be contradictory in the evidence of the witness. And he is not the first witness. This applies ¹⁹⁰⁰¹ to a host of witnesses.

JUDGE MAY: Yes. We hear what you say. Mr. Groome?

MR. GROOME: Your Honour, it's very often the case that witnesses, when confronted with statements that are several years old, they may have different memories at that time. They may have made a mistake. Very often the procedure which is followed in taking the statement, the witness never sees the statement in their own language. It's read to them through an interpreter. These are all fair matters for cross-examination. Mr. Milosevic has fully exploited that, and it's a matter for the Chamber to consider what it considers --

JUDGE MAY: I wasn't going to invite you to respond, but anyway, you have.

MR. GROOME: Sorry.

JUDGE MAY: These are matters which of course the accused can raise in due course when it comes to considering the weight to be given to witnesses. These are lengthy statements, and it's not uncommon for witnesses to have different recollections.

Yes.

MR. GROOME: Your Honour, I just ask for a private session for the first few questions I have to put to this witness.

JUDGE MAY: Yes.

[Private session]

[redacted]

[redacted] ¹⁹⁰⁰² Page 19002 - redacted - private session

¹⁹⁰⁰³

[Open session]

MR. GROOME:

Q. B-1493, Mr. Milosevic put to you that Arkan came to Bijeljina at the invitation of Mauzer and the local leadership. Let's assume for the purpose of my question that that is a true fact. My question to you is: If that were to be true, does that lessen or negate the obligation that the JNA had with respect to this incursion of armed men into the Bijeljina area?

A. Let's assume that Arkan was called to Bijeljina by Mauzer, and he was also a special illegal unit. That does not lessen the obligation on the part of the chief of the staff of the 2nd Military District to react and to have these -- to take measures against these persons who came in from another state.

Q. Now, Mr. Milosevic put a question to you. I'm going to read the question and then read the answer. Then I want to ask you a follow-up question. Mr. Milosevic's question was the following:

Q. Was the JNA the sole legitimate armed formation and I would like to emphasise the word legal, lawful. Your answer was.

A. The Yugoslav People's Army was the sole legal armed force on the territory of Yugoslavia.

Now it appears that both you and Mr. Milosevic agree on this point. My question to you is the following: Did the JNA or the command of the JNA that covered the areas of Serbia in which men like Arkan, in Erdut, and Seselj were gathering men together, arming them and training ¹⁹⁰⁰⁴ them before they were sent into Bosnia, did the JNA in that area also have the obligation to deal with these armed formations?

A. The JNA -- first of all, those units were trained in JNA centres. They were trained by JNA officers, and the JNA prepared them, to all intents and purposes, for that.

Q. Was that in violation of the laws and regulations governing the JNA?

A. Fully, because the Yugoslav People's Army did not have the right to train or arm units which were not within its formation.

MR. GROOME: I have no further questions.

JUDGE MAY: Witness B-1493, that concludes your evidence. Thank you for coming to the Tribunal to give it. You are free to go.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.

[The witness withdrew]

JUDGE MAY: Mr. Nice, while we're waiting for the next witness, let me mention the next selection of Croatia 92 bis witnesses which we'll deal with. They relate to Skabrnja, Knin, Jajce camp and Vocin. And I've noted in chronological order C-1072, 1073, 1102, 1160, 1166, 1186, 1192, 1202, and 1205, and we'll take those at a convenient time, if possible this week.

MR. NICE: Thank you, Your Honour. We'll try perhaps to deal with that tomorrow. And it may be convenient tomorrow if I deal with the question of disclosure of materials generally. I'll be in a position to do that then.

The next witness is an open-session witness, so the Court should ¹⁹⁰⁰⁵ be adjusted. It's Morten Torkildsen. I'll for the public record set out what the position is about his reports, but the Chamber will require, of course, to follow only his second report and an index of exhibits. I intend to deal with perhaps a dozen exhibits very briefly in what I hope will be a succinct examination-in-chief of the witness. There being a full report, there was no need or, it seemed to me, utility in providing a further summary.

And while the witness is coming in and for the benefit of journalists and others who may be familiar with the overall material, they should know that the witness Morten Torkildsen filed or the Office of the Prosecutor filed in respect of the witness two reports, a first report which related to Kosovo, which is not, by order of the Court, to be given in evidence, although three documents from it are to be admitted, and they will be added to the documents produced by the second report. The second report deals with Croatia and Bosnia, and I will present some parts of that on the overhead projector. But otherwise, those viewing, in particular the journalists, will have to take advantage of seeing the fully produced report if they want the detail of the matters into which we are inquiring.

In addition to those materials, there is a curriculum vitae of the witness. It was served with a filing of the 21st of June. For convenience, I'll lay one or two pages of that on the overhead projector as I take him very briefly through his experience.

JUDGE MAY: While we're waiting, it might be convenient to deal with the exhibit numbers. ¹⁹⁰⁰⁶

MR. NICE: Yes.

JUDGE MAY: And get an exhibit number, the next Prosecution number for the expert report.

THE REGISTRAR: That will be P426.

MR. NICE: And, Your Honour, the registry and Ms. Wee have cooperated in the way the exhibits should be produced, and also your legal officer Gideon Boas. We have an exhibit list which takes account of the decision of the Chamber, and I should make this point clear as well for the benefit of those who may have seen the whole report. The Chamber excluded from consideration one or two paragraphs from the second report. I'll deal with that as we go through. And in light of, therefore, the deletions from the second report, the admission from the first report of three exhibits, it seemed helpful to have a comprehensive index which I hope is before you. That index takes us through 61 tabs. I beg your pardon. Sixty-five. Thank you very much. And I'm in the Court's hands as to whether the exhibit index and the associated exhibits should simply become part of the same exhibit 426 or whether they should be separate.

JUDGE MAY: I think the report should be separate. It might be more convenient to have a separate bundle. Is that what is proposed?

MR. NICE: That would certainly -- well, at the moment, the only thing against that is if you look at the index itself, the very first exhibit on the index is the second report. So that part matters --

JUDGE MAY: So it doesn't seem to be on the wit of man to have Exhibit 427 as the next exhibit and just don't bother about tab 1.

MR. NICE: Very well. 427 is the exhibit. And the curriculum ¹⁹⁰⁰⁷ vitae maybe we can put in as 428.

JUDGE MAY: Can we have the witness now.

MR. NICE: And in all cases, I will hope to have the witness having a copy of the document in front of him with the usher placing the relevant pages of a parallel document on the overhead projector where appropriate.

[The witness entered court]

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

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

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

WITNESS: MORTEN TORKILDSEN

MR. NICE: May the copy of the overhead projector become our Exhibit 428 go on -- on the overhead projector. Copy of the curriculum vitae go on the overhead projector, become our Exhibit 428. Examined by Mr. Nice:

Q. Page 1 of that, Mr. Torkildsen, revealed that you received a master of science in shipping, trade and finance; Paragraph 2, you earned a bachelor of science in management sciences from the University of Manchester; Paragraph 3, you've since 1989 been professionally involved in auditing financial transactions; Paragraph 4, 1989 to 1992, senior auditor with the auditor department with the city of Oslo; Paragraph 5, senior investigation officer from 1992 to 1994 with the Norwegian directorate of taxes, conducting various detailed investigations; Over the page, paragraph 6, please. Sorry. We're moving fast but this is material the ¹⁹⁰⁰⁸ Chamber has seen so it's really for the public side of the trial, the public character of the trial.

Paragraph 6. From October 1994 to April 2 --

JUDGE KWON: No, that's not.

MR. NICE: Wrong page.

JUDGE KWON: The usher can find the declaration of Mr. Torkildsen.

MR. NICE: You've only got two pages out of three for some reason. Take those two pages and I'll have to follow them from the ... From October 1994 to April 2000, the special investigator with the Norwegian National Authority for Investigation and Prosecution of Economic and Environmental Crime. And we can see by scanning it the scale of the investigations you had to investigate there, following money trails in the work that you did.

It's perhaps worth noting at the foot of what we can see on the screen that in the course of this work, you were granted particular powers by the United Kingdom government; is that right?

A. That's correct, yes.

Q. The next paragraph. You then had to deal with a major corruption case involving UNICEF. You set that out in paragraph 7 of this curriculum vitae.

A. Yes, that's correct.

Q. Paragraph 8 and over the page, please. The top of the page, please. Thank you.

You were then a tax auditor in Norway, directing police in their financial investigations? ¹⁹⁰⁰⁹

A. Yes.

Q. And paragraph 9, presenting your reports in court. And then from January 2000 until the present, you've been a financial investigator, one of the very limited number at most of financial investigators working in this institution for the Office of the Prosecutor; is that correct?

A. Yes.

Q. And in preparing the reports that have been presented to the Court, you've reviewed more than 10.000 pages of materials in order to reach the conclusions you have.

A. Yes. Probably a lot more than that.

MR. NICE: If I can have those pages back so that I don't mislay them. May the witness have a copy of his second report, and usher, I'm going to ask if you be so good as we go through pages of report with the witness, if you'd lay the corresponding pages on the overhead projector so that they may be viewed. If he could have a copy himself and here comes another one for the overhead projector.

Q. Mr. Torkildsen, I'm only going to ask a comparatively limited number of questions, perhaps half an hour's worth, we'll see. But if we go to page 3 at the bottom of your report, paragraph II, summary of conclusions. Having reviewed the materials you did review --

A. Yes.

Q. -- Did you conclude that the "SFRY and/or the Republic of Serbia provided financial and material support to the Serb-controlled districts in Croatia between 1991 and 1995 and in Bosnia-Herzegovina between 1992 and 1995"? ¹⁹⁰¹⁰

A. Yes, that is correct. When going through the documents, I have seen no other source of external financing for the RS and the RSK than the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and the Republic of Serbia.

Q. Paragraph 6. Was that support directed towards Serb military units and Serb civilian government organs established in those areas?

A. Yes.

Q. Taking the form of direct financial assistance, military equipment, food, personnel, and expertise?

A. Yes, that is correct.

Q. Paragraph 9. In your judgement, given your expertise, did you conclude as a strong conclusion that funding for the army of the Republika Srpska and the army of the Republika Srpska Krajina, known for the purposes of your report and generally as the VRS and the SVK, came from a single financing plan for all three Serb armies?

A. That is correct, yes.

Q. Paragraph 10. The SFRY provided assistance, financial and material, to the VRS and the SVK by providing military material and also by paying the salaries of the officers in those armies?

A. Yes, that is correct.

Q. You also deal with budget deficits. Just a word about that. Can you explain that to us in a sentence?

A. Yes. Basically the -- the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, short named the FRY, was covering the budget deficits of Republika Srpska and Republika Srpska Krajina.

Q. Paragraph 11 sets out this view that to facilitate this support ¹⁹⁰¹¹ from the SFRY the economies of the SFRY, the RS, and the RSK were organised into a structure that can be described as an economic and monetary federation.

Now, is that a term of art that you have coined? A term of art. A term you have coined or is it a term that find any expression in any other literature?

A. It is partly an expression that's mentioned in some of the documents, but it's also obvious particularly from one of the exhibits attached to this report, the so-called report by Mr. Miletic who was a director at the National Bank of Yugoslavia.

Q. But that's a -- that's the one report I think that's been excluded. No, the report's included?

A. The report is included, yes.

Q. Very well. So it's partly your own phrase but it's also reflected elsewhere?

A. Yes. But it's obvious from the documentation attached to this report that it was a monetary union and something similar to an economic federation.

Q. In paragraph 12, you deal with terminology that you use throughout the report of a primary issue, but you match that here to the phrase "printing money." Can you just give us a sentence or so on that conclusion? And we'll probably look later at the economic and financial consequences of the use of primary issue, but can you just explain these terms?

A. The -- in simple terms, the phrase "primary issue," would mean a ¹⁹⁰¹² credit done by the National Bank of Yugoslavia and basically the printing of money.

Q. Paragraph 11 -- beg your pardon. Paragraph 13. It's going to be tab 11 which we'll want to display. No. Sorry. Paragraph -- as I was. Paragraph 13, you deal with the Serbian Ministry of Defence, and you say that it played a major role in financing and providing of equipment. There was a document I wanted you to look at just to remind the Judges. It's this one here. Thank you very much. The Chamber may recall this document, I think, coming through C-032 on the 10th of March.

Just have a look at it, please. Can it be placed on the overhead projector?

The Chamber will remember the document probably because of its colourful presentation.

Now, this is a document I think which you hadn't -- it hadn't come to your attention until yesterday in the way things work out.

A. That is correct. I had never seen this document before I was shown it yesterday.

JUDGE KWON: C-032, meaning Vasiljevic?

MR. NICE: No. No, it wasn't C-032.

THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, Mr. Nice, please.

JUDGE KWON: Microphone.

MR. NICE: I've got the microphone off because I'm not sure. I just want to be quite sure the witness was in open session. I'm sure he was, but I just want to check on the name. But I'll come back to the name ¹⁹⁰¹³ of the witness. We'll look at the document because the Chamber will recall it and I haven't made out His Honour's naming of the witness is correct.

Q. While we're looking at the document, your conclusion therefore drawn well before this document was produced in evidence was that the Serbian ministry of defence played a major role in financing and providing military equipment at the Serb-controlled districts in Croatia, and you said this, Mr. Torkildsen: "Such a task was not conducted by the Serbian MOD alone because it possessed no stocks of military supplies. Rather the aid occurred with the executive assistance and the cooperation of the JNA VJ".

Now, yesterday when you saw this document without having the transcript of the witness's - relevant witness's - evidence drawn to your attention, the document was explained to you and the witness producing it was in open session, Miroslav Djordjevic. Does this document match your conclusion?

A. Yes, it does, because based on my -- the documents I have reviewed, I can see that the Serbian Ministry of Defence received a lot of requests from the various Serb-controlled districts in Croatia in 1991 and 1992, and the way that I understood it is that no Ministry of Defence do themselves possess the military hardware or financial means. And that means that basically they haven't got -- must have forwarded these requests to the JNA who were sitting on the military hardware. And also when it comes to financial assistance, the Serbian Ministry of Finance must have been involved. ¹⁹⁰¹⁴

Q. Thank you. Then back to paragraph 14 of your report. You speak of a large number of documents showing decisions regarding the support to the Serb-controlled districts in Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, were made by the highest-ranking military and political leaders of the SFRY and the Republic of Serbia. Do you particularly refer to what may go on the overhead projector or in part may go on the overhead projector C4682, tab 11 of what is now our Exhibit 427. If you take us to what you believe to be the relevant part of this, please, or summarise its effect for us, Mr. Torkildsen.

A. Basically these -- these are the minutes of a meeting between the accused and the leadership of the RSK, including Goran Hadzic and Milan Martic. In this meeting, they are planning for the financial needs of the RSK, for the army, and the police in the coming year, 1993, and also for the two remaining months in 1992.

MR. NICE: The Chamber has, I think, already seen this document produced through another witness.

Q. Very well. Back to your report. Paragraph 15. You conclude as follows: "When the JNA pulled out of Bosnia-Herzegovina in the second half of 1992, it left the Serbs there with a nearly complete army supplied with the remains of the JNA's 2nd Military District." And you referred to quotation of Mladic in a report of December 1992, "Our army is one of the rare ones in history to have started a liberation war with a very solid material base especially as concerns combat hardware, ammunition, and food reserves."

And you say that that particular remark is supported by the ¹⁹⁰¹⁵ written statement made by the accused which we can find in our 4C, which is now tab 3. Thank you very much. On the ELMO, please, if we can. Can you look at this, please, Mr. Torkildsen, on the overhead projector. Take us to the passage of significance?

A. It's the passage on the second page of the translation. I think you have gone to the third page.

Q. Second page. Thank you.

A. And in particular, the second paragraph starting with "As regards the resources spent for weapons, ammunition and other needs of the army of Republika Srpska and the Republic of Serbian Krajina, these expenditures constituted a state secret and because of state interests could not be indicated in the Law on the Budget, which is a public document. The same applies to the expenditures incurred by providing equipment, from a needle to an anchor, for the security forces and special anti-terrorist forces in particular, from light weapons and equipment to helicopters and other weapons which still remain where they are today, and this was not made public because it was a state secret, as was everything else that was provided for the army of Republika Srpska."

Q. Now, this of course was the statement that the accused made when he'd been detained and in respect of his detention; is that correct?

A. That is correct. It's dated the 2nd of April, 2001.

Q. And it's one of the three documents filed with the first report which that was admitted into evidence by the Trial Chamber.

MR. NICE: Very well. Thank you, usher.

Q. With those conclusions, we'll look at a limited number of ¹⁹⁰¹⁶ paragraphs of your report before I sit down, and if we can have in mind the structure of your report. On page 5, Roman III, you dealt with the financing of the JNA between 1992 -- 1991 and 1992. The passage was only a few pages. If we could turn to the next page, page 6, paragraph 19, just for amplification.

In dealing with this topic, you refer to the transcript of a Presidency meeting held on the 21st of August, 1991, where there was a discussion about the lack of revenue in the SFRY budget and financing of the JNA. And you then set out the view of Ante Markovic, president of the SIV. Remind the Chamber what the SIV was and Ante Markovic's position and summary again what is contained in 19 and over again to the quoted passage.

A. Mr. Markovic was the last prime minister of the SFRY. And the SIV, that's the federal Executive Council.

What they are discussing here is basically the financing of the SFRY budget at the time. The problem was for the SFRY budget was that the different republics were pulling out, and they were no longer contributing towards the federal budget, meaning that they had to find other means of financing. And the only alternative they had was to get their finances through the National Bank of Yugoslavia, and that means primary issues. They basically printed money to finance the federal budget.

Q. The relevant quotation can be seen over the page at page 7. One of the advantages of this document having been served publicly or filed publicly is that the sharp eyed have been able to draw to attention anything that may be in error. ¹⁹⁰¹⁷ Your report faithfully sets out the translation received by you of the names Pelivan, but in fact there is an inconsistency between the name Slobodan Pelivan and Jure Pelivan which should be corrected by the replacement of which name?

A. It should read Jure Pelivan.

Q. On both occasions. That's on page 7 towards the top, but you were simply setting out what was the actual translation that was provided to you.

A. That is correct.

Q. We move on for those viewing who may have seen the full document. It's important to observe at page 9, at paragraph 23, which runs over to page 10, has been excluded from consideration.

On page 10, and therefore come to paragraph 24 under the broad heading, Roman IV, "The creation of a monetary federation and its impact on the financing of the Serb-controlled districts in Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina." The largest passage of your report, I think. Of this we need perhaps focus on a few paragraphs. If we go to paragraph 30, and perhaps you'd be good enough really to summarise for us your paragraphs 30 and 31, there being no documents I wanted to draw to the Chamber's attention.

A. What basically happened regarding the restructuring of the banking industry was that the RSK and the RS established their own national banks that were both subordinated to the National Bank of Yugoslavia. And through this coordination and subordination, primary issues were made available for the RS and the RSK. And it's sort of is monetary ¹⁹⁰¹⁸ integration and monetary union was at this final stage in the beginning of 1994 where they eventually got the same currency across the three regions.

Q. Thank you. Usher, if you'd be good enough to go to page 13, paragraph 37. Again there being no documents to look at on this occasion, perhaps you could summarise that for us, Mr. Torkildsen.

A. Well, this monetary union that was created made sure that money was made available for the RS and the RSK. And it also made sure that the major vehicle to make this money available, the so-called SDK, the public accountancy service was in operation throughout the whole RS, RSK and the FRY this was tied together.

Q. We'll see a document shortly that deals with the importance of SDK, but if we now go over the page, usher, to page 14, paragraph 39. At paragraph 39, Mr. Torkildsen, you record reviewing a report, part of 4769, written by Milivoje Miletic, then director of the National Bank of Yugoslavia who was stationed at the NBRS. Expand for us NBRS?

A. That's the National Bank of Republika Srpska.

Q. Between the 4th and the 8th of April, 1994. And with those experiences to hand, Miletic analysed the restructuring of the national banking systems and indeed set out three stages for the restructuring. This is the one paragraph where I think several exhibits can usefully be looked at and in a sequence.

Thank you very much. Thank you. First tab 32, C4712. And while that document's coming to the overhead projector, the Chamber may wish, in order to save time, to look on to paragraph 111 at page 40 where the same document is referred to and ¹⁹⁰¹⁹ I'll just read what it says there of the document before the witness take us to any details of it he wants to particularly bring to our attention. The document is dealt with at paragraph 111, describing it as the "Analysis of combat readiness and activities of the army of the Republika Srpska in 1992, dated April 1993. The report demonstrates the extent to which the VRS was supported by the FRY and the JNA in 1992 and 1993." Mr. Torkildsen, with that summary and the document on the overhead projector the places where you want to draw our attention?

A. If you can go to page 128, please. And at the bottom of this page.

Basically the whole report is a report on the activities of the Republika Srpska army in 1992, and there is a section within this report on finances as well.

Q. If anybody following in the B/C/S version, it's at page 112, I think.

A. And there's an amount mentioned at the bottom of the page which is actually the planned expenditure for the RS army in 1992, and it reads 53 billion dinars. Not accurate, but let's leave that. If you can please go to the next page. And just to mention that the RS army budget was, of course, part of the whole budget for the RS, as it is in any country.

And you can see on the top of the page there what they had actually spent by -- by February 28, 1993. They had spent more than 81 billion dinars.

And further down there, it's actually a breakdown of what these ¹⁹⁰²⁰ expenditures are. And we can see that personnel outlays accounts for more than 50 per cent of the total expenditure. And by personnel outlays, it's basically salaries for the conscripts and other support for them.

Q. If that --

A. I also think if we go to the next page we will see the number of soldiers, conscripts, in the RS army in 1992. Yes, it's mentioned there. It's actually -- it reads that the budget was drawn up for an army which should have numbered 100.000 soldiers, while its average strength was actually 212.000, 212.000 troops.

Q. The reference there to hyperinflation, do you want to deal with that now or later, and its consequences on the economy and finances generally?

A. If we can take that later, please.

Q. Anything else on this document or is that the purpose for which you require it in amplification of what's in your written report?

A. As mentioned, this army budget was part of the budget of the RS, and I have reviewed the -- actually, the RS annual accounts for 1992.

Q. Now, this is one of the new documents, I think that, that's been produced, and the order in which you would like to review them is C5358, tab 59. This was a document added to your original report, coming from the Official Gazette of the Republika Srpska?

A. Yes. This is actually the budget for 1993. I mean, we can look at that now, but I was actually referring to the --

Q. Of 1992.

A. Annual accounts for 1992. But since this is on the overhead now, ¹⁹⁰²¹ what is mentioned here is that the original income of the budget is a rather small amount compared to the total budget as you will see here. And as you also can see under Article 2 is it is mentioned credits in the amount of 729, something, and the term "credit" in this respect means primary issues. This is the money originating from the National Bank of Yugoslavia in Belgrade.

Q. It may be necessary just to justify that observation. What does a credit in this setting mean primary issue, which is printing of money?

A. If we go -- if we can have the Miletic report on the overhead.

Q. Yes, certainly. That's 4712 again, tab 32.

A. Sorry, Mr. Nice. That's the wrong -- it's actually exhibit labelled 4769.

Q. 4769, yes. Sorry.

A. And it should be the first document attached to that exhibit.

JUDGE KWON: What's the tab number?

MR. NICE: 4769.

JUDGE KWON: Tab 14.

MR. NICE: Tab 14, yes.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] And go a bit -- it's the paragraph that starts with "The first phase of the operations of the National Bank of Republika Srpska ...". And further down it's mentioned that "It was normal to issue primary money on the basis of previous experience coming primarily from the National Bank of Yugoslavia." And going a bit further down there, it's stated that: "Among other things, from the second half of 1992 and onwards, primary money was ¹⁹⁰²² issued through banks and the budget so that on the 31st December 1992, the balance of primary issue credits were 77.8 billion dinars. About 14.3 per cent of these credits, or 11.1 billion dinars, were given through the banks, while the remaining 85.7 per cent or 66.7 billion dinars were given for the budget of the Republika Srpska."

Q. All primary issue money distributed in two identified different ways. Any significance in the different ways that the money's being provided?

A. No. I mean, the money was basically given to cover the budget deficit of Republika Srpska, because they did not have original income or, basically I mean taxes to cover their expenditure.

Q. And so the credits that we saw on the previous document, justified by you, as amounting to primary issue printed money from this document.

A. That is correct. And if we go back to that document, the -- this revised budget for 1993, you will also see that almost all of it went to the RS army.

Q. The exhibit we're looking at at the moment features in your report at paragraphs 45 and 50. To save time, we might just remind ourselves what's said there. Is there anything else you want to say about the document while it's on the overhead projector at the moment?

A. No.

Q. We draw from it in your report at paragraph 45 that the programme described by Miletic created a single monetary region to include the FRY, the RS, and the RSK coming into effect in March 1994. The National Bank of the Republika Srpska commended by Miletic because, "As legal tender, ¹⁹⁰²³ the new dinar functions fully in the territory of the Republika Srpska." Anything you need to add to that or is that sufficient for your purposes?

A. Well, at that time they had the common currency for all three regions and that was the currency issued and controlled by the National Bank of Yugoslavia in Belgrade.

Q. And you pick the point up again at page 18, paragraph 50 of your report where you refer to the minutes of the May 1994 meeting of governors, 4779, also appearing as 4769, where the minutes mention that the three banks operate as the main branches of the Yugoslav National Bank -- sorry, the two banks, and the two banks implement decisions of the national bank, and then the governor of the National Bank of Republika Srpska and the governor of the National Bank of Republika Srpska Krajina are required to attend sessions of the council of the Yugoslav National Bank without voting right, thus reinforcing your conclusions, if it was needed for you to make those conclusions, about complete integration?

A. Yes, it was integration, and it was very much a subordinate relationship, meaning that the RS and the RSK national banks were subordinated to the National Bank of Yugoslavia.

Q. Thank you. I think in this sequence -- I'm sorry for having got the first two documents in the inconvenient order for you. I think you would like to go, correct me if I'm wrong, to B4647 next, which -- tab 30, thank you very much. Tab 33, which is a decision by the Republika Srpska on taking an out a loan from the National Bank to pay for the needs of the republic. Your comment on this document, please. ¹⁹⁰²⁴

A. Yes. Again the -- there was not enough money in the budget of the Republika Srpska, so they had to take out a loan from the National Bank. But when I'm referring to the National Bank here, I'm referring to the National Bank of Republika Srpska. But the money that they lent to the budget of the RS did originate from the primary issues given from Belgrade. And the amounts more or less fits in with what is mentioned in the report by Mr. Miletic.

Q. When you say more or less, the difference in amount, can you just remind the Judges of the figures, if you can remember them, to show how much it is more or less?

A. Yes. I think the figure mentioned by Miletic was 66.8 billion dinars, but here it is mentioned an amount of 56 billion dinars.

Q. This same document.

JUDGE MAY: When you get to a convenient moment, it's quarter past.

MR. NICE: Yes.

Q. Nothing more you want to say about the document at the moment, Mr. Torkildsen?

A. The only thing I want to say is if you look at the interest rate, I think it's mentioned a bit -- it's mentioned 5 per cent per year. That means that this loan was basically a gift, and it's going to be paid down effective as of 15/12/98, meaning due to the hyperinflation, when you actually pay this back you would pay back nothing. For instance, in September 1993, the inflation had reached an enormous amount per month. I think at that time, the one Deutschmark was ¹⁹⁰²⁵ actually the equivalent of 86 million dinars. So even if this is a huge amount at that time in 1992, when it comes time to paying this back, it was worth nothing.

Q. Those conclusions can also be found at paragraph 76 of your report in summary form.

JUDGE MAY: We will adjourn now for 20 minutes. Mr. Torkildsen, would you remember, please, in this and any other adjournments there may be during your evidence not to speak to anybody about it, and that includes the members of the Prosecution team.

THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honour.

JUDGE MAY: Twenty minutes.

--- Recess taken at 12.18 p.m.

--- On resuming at 12.47 p.m.

JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Nice.

MR. NICE:

Q. Torkildsen, we've already looked when looking at your overall conclusions briefly at this document, tab 11, C4682, but looking at the body of it, it being a conversation with the accused, there may be some further comments you want to make on it.

We see in the paragraph on the screen the accused Milosevic recorded as accepting the concept of forming the defence system of the Krajina on the basis that is set out there. I don't want to take time reading all of it, although I want to go to the financial bit at the end. Any comments you want to make on this page?

A. Well, the last sentence in this paragraph that this will be ¹⁹⁰²⁶ accomplished through the Ministry of Defence of the Republic of the Serbian Krajina and the Ministry of Defence of the Republic of Serbia.

Q. Thank you. Can we go to the foot of the page, please. Usher, could we go to the foot of the page, please. "The problem of ensuring of the planned means for this year was brought because the Ministry of Defence of the Republic of Serbia does not have enough money inflow." I think. Can we then to the next page.

"The president of the government of the Republic of Serbia was to intervene so the means could be delivered and he accepted it. "Based on the above-mentioned requests, I asked the Minister of Defence of the Republic of Serbia to plan the necessary means for financing the defence of the Republic of Serbian Krajina in 1993 to ensure the inflow of the means in this year and that would be 200 millions till the end of the month, and 150 till the 5th of December." Any comment?

A. I only comment that this problem of financing was obviously solved through primary issues. One of the exhibits, the RSK budget for the first half of 1993 clearly indicates that.

Q. In any event, this is a record of a conversation involving the accused, is it not?

A. Yes.

Q. We see the Republic of Serbia specified here rather than a federal body.

A. That is correct, but obviously there must have been some sort of cooperation between the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and the Republic of Serbia that I do not know about. ¹⁹⁰²⁷

Q. We passed over, my error, tab 65, the Republika Srpska's annual account for 1992, and I think there was a comment you wanted to make on that.

A. If we have a look at Article 1 here, it is mentioned here an amount of total generated income in the amount of 18 something, and we can see that the total expenditure is much higher than that. And you have something called uncovered expenditure in this Article, and the uncovered expenditure here would basically be covered by primary issues. I would then like to refer back to the loan that was taken up on the 8th of August, 1992, that was shown on the overhead earlier on. And I would also point out the budget for -- or actually the revised budget for 1993 that was shown here as well. This all indicates that this was financed through primary issues, the uncovered expenditure. And also, I would like to highlight the Miletic report where he estimates that 66.8 billion dinars was put forward into the budget of the RS.

Q. Tab 64 next, please, which is the RSK budget for 1993, one of the two -- one of the new -- three new documents that have been produced today. Your comment on this please, significance?

A. First I would like to make the comment that this is a budget and not an annual statement, meaning that it's a plan for their finances for the first half of 1993. And it's mentioned here that the funds for the territories under the UN protection in the amount of -- I think it reads 609 billion dinars are obtained from additional funds of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. And in addition to this, we have the National ¹⁹⁰²⁸ Bank credits in the total amount of -- well, it's even higher. It probably reads 2.231 billion dinars, meaning again primary issues. And as a total, I think that these two budget items actually finance more than 90 per cent of the total budget for that period. And if we can go further down on this document, please. Next page.

A bit further down is a post called expenditure. Yes, there. And as we can see, most of the -- or actually about two-thirds of the expenditure planned for in this budget goes for funds for education and self-protection. It is specified military salaries covering about one-third of the salaries. Thank you.

Q. Thank you. Tab 63 next, the FRY's 1993 budget. I think we may be missing the first page of the English translation, but I hope you will be able to -- no, we're missing it here in court. Providing the passage that the witness wants is not on the first page, we will be all right. Mr. Torkildsen, can you survive with what we have?

A. This budget is merely to illustrate that the method of financing in the FRY was the same in this budget. It's not actually a budget. It's the actual annual accounts, I think, for 1993, and it shows that more or less the whole budget or annual accounts of the FRY for 1993 were financed through primary issues. And it also shows that most of the -- this budget goes for the army, meaning the VJ.

Q. Have you -- did you look for, in the budgets of the FRY and in their annual accounts, postings of sums in respect of the armies of the RS and the RSK? ¹⁹⁰²⁹

A. Yes, I have looked for that, but I have found no budget posts in the FRY budgets indicating that they were funding the RS or the RSK army.

Q. In your judgement, is that consistent with that which the accused said in his document relating to his detention about the necessity for secrecy of these funding procedures?

A. Yes, it is. The only post I managed to find in this -- in these FRY budgets is actually a post somewhere mentioning funds for the UN protected areas. But that's just a very small amount, or actually, a small percentage of the total budget. In my view, that could not have gone to the RS army or the RSK army.

Q. Very well. Let's go back to your report. There are only a couple more exhibits to look at and then I shall be done. On the report itself we were on page 14, paragraph 39. I've swept up several of the references I would have otherwise taken you to. We can pass on, I think, just to paragraph 53 on page 19. You've dealt with this in part already, but it may be helpful and perhaps helpful if put in conventional or homely terms just to explain what the SDK system was and what it could be likened to and what it facilitated.

A. First, it's basically a transfer system for settling financial transactions. And it also had an auditing control function. So basically the primary issues were channelled through the SDK system when they were made available for the RSK and the RS. But also in the documents there are a lot of mentioning about problems with the SDK system. It was not functioning all the time. Just to highlight that. ¹⁹⁰³⁰

Q. Yes. Those of us broadly familiar with electronic transfers to banks or whatever it may be, this was such a system but with particular objectives in mind?

A. Well, it was something similar, but I don't know the technicalities of how this worked.

Q. But you've set out at paragraph 56 at the foot of page 19 of your report the view taken of it in a speech by Karadzic at the plebiscite of the Serb people on the 1st of November, 1991, where at the top of page 206 your report he made this point in reflect of the significance of the system: "Be prepared soon to take over the SDK decisively. I mean, to appoint your own man in the SDK. Prepare the ground, first talk to them, ask them whether they're ready to work in a moment that is not legal, in accordance with the laws and regulations which you, as the municipality authority, will give them."

Any significance about that beyond what is stated there by Karadzic?

A. Basically the SDK system must have been of paramount importance to be able to conduct transactions, whereas the only alternative would have been cash payments. Just reflecting on our own system, I mean, if everything was to be settled in cash, of course it would have created enormous problems.

Q. To page 22 of your report, please, paragraph 62, and tab 24, B3501 I may have missed one tab we have to look at, but let's go to tab 24, B3501. At paragraph 62, you refer to the decision by the government of the Serbian Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina on the 14th of May, 1992, ¹⁹⁰³¹ regarding the use of funds available from the primary issue. The document is now on the overhead projector. Your additional comment? You can see it all set out probably on page 22 of your report, but your comment?

A. Yes. It's actually set out in paragraph 62 here. I mean, the most important thing is that the primary issues will be used in accordance with the decisions of the National Bank of Yugoslavia.

Q. Very well. And nothing more to be said about it than that?

A. At -- at that time, the National Bank of Republika Srpska was not created yet, and it was obviously that these primary issue were given directly from the NBY and not through the National Bank of Republika Srpska.

Q. You draw attention at page 25 your report, paragraph 72 to one particular documents which we needn't look to, although it's been exhibited before. Document C4830, or properly tab 18 of 352. A request for cash from the National Bank of Republic of Serb Krajina, to the National Bank of Yugoslavia authorising a grant of cash in the sum of 10 million dinars, then equivalent to 10 million Deutschmarks. Any comment on that?

A. That is correct. It shows that the National Bank of Republika Srpska Krajina was still even in 1995 requesting cash from the National Bank of Yugoslavia. I'm not saying that they got this from a gift, but at least the NBY is the provider of the cash here.

Q. And as we come to the end of your passage of your report on financing of the JNA, those viewing it familiar with the total document ¹⁹⁰³² should know at page 27 and onwards that paragraph 79 and then through paragraph 80, 81, 82, and 83 are being excluded from consideration by the Chamber.

So that brings us on page 30 of your report. To a paragraph headed "Inflation and the value of the Yugoslav dinar." Again, this may not be the most convenient place, lest I should forget it, can you make the comments you can make about the linkage of primary issue or printing of money, inflation and hyperinflation and the effect that that had?

A. The effect it had is basically set out in the two appendixes to this report, appendix A and B, showing how the value of the dinar was devaluated compared to the Deutschmark. As I pointed out in September 1993, one Deutschmark was worth the equivalent of 80 -- 80 something million dinars. It's also said by economists that primary issues would be very much be the equivalent of an extra tax on the people. It's like transferring wealth from the citizens to the state, because it's the state whose possession of the means and the result of the primary issues. They are actually increasing their money on behalf of the citizens who are still left with the same money. So it's definitely a transfer of wealth from the citizens to the state.

Q. And in this case used substantially, very substantially, for funding the armies and the other governments in the way that you've revealed.

A. Yes, that's correct.

Q. We saw at an earlier stage a divergence of opinion between the accused and Ante Markovic about these matters. The effect of ¹⁹⁰³³ hyperinflation generated through the printing of money on an economy, is that something that is well known and well recorded in standard literature?

A. Yeah. I mean, there is lots of articles on this issue. I would just like to say one thing regarding the -- I have tried to convert a lot of the dinar sums that are mentioned in this report into Deutschmark, but I think that these conversions should be read very carefully, because it's very difficult to do a calculation in periods when we are talking about hyperinflation.

I think the most important area is to look at the budgets and the relative proportions that's financed through primary issues and what the money actually went to, to the army. Look at the percentages there.

Q. On page 31 of your report, at paragraph 89, section Roman V, you deal with the assistance to the Serb-controlled districts in Croatia made by the Republic of Serbia. There's nothing I need you to, I think, amplify there. So we can go straight to page 39, paragraph Roman VI where I have just a couple of references to you under the heading "Assistance to the Serb-controlled districts in Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina made by the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia." Paragraph 108 and following.

And then at page 40, page 110, you set out an analysis by Mladic of the importance to the VRS of the support to the Serb-controlled districts in Bosnia-Herzegovina in an earlier report dated September 1992. Your comment on that and, if necessary, we can look at an exhibit but maybe survive without, if possible. ¹⁹⁰³⁴

A. Yes. My reason for including this is that the financial assistance provided which are described in several documents should be put into perspective. Of course, if we -- it's obvious here that Mladic is talking about the transformation of part of the JNA into the VRS. And of course if he had to convert this into financial terms, that would have been a huge amount of equipment.

Q. Over the page to 112. You deal with an analysis from, I think, the exhibit inferred from the previous page. Any comment on this or does it speak for itself?

A. Yes. It's mentioning of -- of a letter of credit here, a sort a guarantee. And the sums mentioned have eventually had to be covered by -- by the primary missions. And the amounts mentioned there, I mean, it's mentioned soldiers' wages on the bottom here. And in document C4712, the wages to the soldiers were mentioned as well. I think we have already covered this.

Q. Perhaps the last documentary reference because I've skipped one or two will be C4752 which is tab 52 and page 42 your report, paragraph 116. This document, I think, is a memorandum we can see dated December of 93 by the Chief of Office of the SDK, Commander Cedo Radankovic for a meeting at the VJ General Staff and the coordination of tasks. What does it reveal to you, please, Mr. Torkildsen?

A. Sorry, which paragraph.

Q. Paragraph 116 and --

A. Yes. This document basically shows that it was one single financial plan for funding all three armies, meaning the RS army, the RSK ¹⁹⁰³⁵ army, and the VJ. They are -- there's talk here about the financial requirements for all three armies and how much each of them should have.

Q. We can find the quotation you've set out in your report. Perhaps you can point it to us if you can find it quickly where it says: "We have learned unofficially that the above total balance of requirements for 1994, the federal government will only be able to provide 850 million USD for all three armed forces instead of 3.29 billion." This indicates an overall and collective view. Is that the decision?

A. Yes.

Q. If you can find that on the document, do so.

A. There is a footnote in the report here, but it's actually -- it's an ERN reference here, so --

Q. All right. Don't worry. It's there to be found. Yes. Thank you very much. I think in the circumstances, that's all I need ask you. Wait there, please. You'll be asked some further questions.

JUDGE KWON: The problem is that we don't have ERN number in our exhibit.

MR. NICE: No. Your Honour, if necessary, I'll find it, but I don't want to take time unnecessarily. I'll deal with it in a minute or later.

JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Milosevic.

THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.

JUDGE MAY: Microphone.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, it's switched on now. I don't ¹⁹⁰³⁶ know whose fault it is, but so far I haven't had a chance to see any of these exhibits. So I'll ask you to bear that in mind. I won't be able to quote them, but I'll take it from my notes, the notes that I took down listening to the testimony. So I'll be able to comment and ask my questions based on those notes and what I heard. And I must say that my associate hasn't seen those documents either. Just before the break, the registrar handed me this batch of documents. Now, whether that arrived earlier or not, I don't know.

However, there won't be any problems on that score, except perhaps I won't be able to tell you of the exhibit number, because as I say, I'm seeing all this for the first time what the witness has testified about but not to waste time.

Could you tell me, please, how much time I will have at my disposal for this witness.

JUDGE MAY: Well, why don't you make a start with the half hour available. We'll then consider how long you might need bearing in mind that there is a report for you to cross-examine on. But certainly into tomorrow when you will have a chance to look over the things with your associates and look at the new exhibits.

If it's of any assistance, I would think something in the region of two hours, but that's merely an immediate resort.

MR. NICE: To assist the accused he had all the exhibits in advance apart from three additional exhibits which were provided to him recently. And his associates have been provided with the notification of what the tabs would be so that it should be possible for them to compile ¹⁹⁰³⁷ the existing exhibits into a tabbed order.

JUDGE MAY: It's by no means easy from experience to get the tabs and the numbers in line.

Mr. Milosevic, will you, when you want to refer to a number, give it the C number if you've got it and then we can relate it to what's in the new exhibit bundle. But remember we need for the purposes of the record to make sure we identify it, so there may be a bit of time spent on that. Yes.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, that is precisely -- that is precisely why I drew your attention to that. I said that I don't have the numbers. But as I can see that Mr. Torkildsen is able to find his way around this material very easily, it won't be difficult for me to comment on the contents of what he says and to clarify certain points having to do with the contents of the report.

Cross-examined by Mr. Milosevic:

Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Torkildsen, in your report you state that you graduated management, shipping, trade and finance, that those are your specialist subjects. Is that right? You graduated in those subjects?

A. That's right. I do have a master's degree in shipping, trade, and finance.

Q. Well, tell me this, please. Do you have any qualifications whatsoever in law, and specifically as it relates to an assessment and evaluation of exhibits and evidence in court proceedings, for example?

A. I have no education in law.

Q. Very well. Now, you said and I'm quoting you: "I managed ¹⁹⁰³⁸ successfully to find, identify, and draw vital information with respect to financial documents, witness statements, and other documents." You say something to that effect.

Can you tell us exactly the nature of the source of your information upon which you base your conclusions, and also to be more specific as to what you meant by saying that?

A. It is basically in-house documentation I have identified that's contained within the evidence system of the OTP.

Q. Very well. That's fine. Now, tell me this: In your report, at least the one I read, I did not notice that you refer to any provisions of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and its member republics at all. Am I right in concluding that if I say you didn't use that source material, either constitutional or laws and bylaws, would I be right in saying that, in assuming that?

A. I did use laws, because as far as I know, the budgets and the annual accounts are introduced as laws and published in the Official Gazettes.

Q. When I say constitutional laws, laws and bylaws, I'm not thinking of the laws governing the budget only, because the budget is adopted by the parliament. But I'm talking about the provisions, legal provisions from the constitution and the general provisions of the SFRY and its Member States. So apart from the budget, did you take a look at these other provisions, laws, bylaws, et cetera?

A. No, I did not.

Q. Very well. Do you consider that you can have a complete analysis, ¹⁹⁰³⁹ a valid analysis of the financing of state organs for any particular state from the resources that same state disposes of if you don't include the legal norms governing financing as well as other relevant laws?

A. Yes, I think so, because I think the budgets and the figures speak for themselves.

Q. Very well. Without going into the details of the federal system of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, do you think that we can conclude -- legal system, I apologise. Did you reach the conclusion that is it is from the resources that make up legally the resources of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, would it be possible to finance the functioning of that same state regardless of what level, federal level, republican level, and of course to finance and put into practice certain -- these demands of the economy, that the economy makes?

A. Yes. That would be the normal way of financing. A budget is, normally in any jurisdiction, is approved by the Assembly.

Q. Fine. And as far as you know, is there any country in the world, any state in the world which does not have an army and police force which are not financed from its public sources and revenues?

A. At least I have not heard about such a country.

Q. Let me ask some more preliminary questions to clear up these matters.

You -- as you yourself say, you used witness statements, did you not?

A. I did not use witness statements for this report. This is solely based upon documents. The report I provided on the Kosovo aspect of the ¹⁹⁰⁴⁰ financing was based upon witness statements and notes from interviews with witnesses, et cetera.

Q. Well, that's what I'm asking you. That means -- or let me ask you this: So you did use certain witness statements, didn't you? That isn't being challenged, is it? Are you disputing that?

A. I am, actually.

JUDGE MAY: He's given his answer, Mr. Milosevic. He's used witness statements for the part that's been excluded, not for the part the evidence about which he's giving. He said he used the documents for that.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well. So you excluded those reports where statements were included. Is that right, Mr. May? You excluded that from the testimony; is that right?

JUDGE MAY: I think he means you.

THE WITNESS: Yes. I'm excluded giving evidence about the Kosovo report. If I may correct myself. There's one witness statement or statements that's used in this report, and that is the appeal against your detention in your domestic case dated 2nd of April, 2001.

JUDGE MAY: I'm sorry. In fact, I misunderstood the accused. The answer is yes, we excluded the first report on -- which was based on the statements. It's one of the reasons we excluded it.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well, Mr. May. In the interest of this cross-examination, let us clear up one point. Does what mean, because even now in this batch that I received from the registry, it says "Second expert report of Morten Torkildsen." That is number one. Does that mean that this second report is included in what we have to discuss ¹⁹⁰⁴¹ or not?

JUDGE MAY: I don't follow you. The report which you should be dealing with are -- is headed "Second expert report." And as you know if you've been following, it is that concerned with Croatia and Bosnia. We're not concerned with the other report which we excluded.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes. But could you please explain to me this report, Mr. Torkildsen? This is purely a technical matter. So this report which is headed amended report of expert witness Morten Torkildsen, ending with chapter VII, headed opinion, and pages 106, 107, 108 up to 111, is that report part of what we are reviewing now or has it been excluded from what we are reviewing now?

A. In you're referring to the amended expert report for Kosovo, that one is excluded.

Q. It doesn't say Kosovo here. It says: "Amended report of expert witness Morten Torkildsen, 11th of July, 2001." There was a discussion with I don't know whom, and so on?

JUDGE MAY: That's all been excluded, that. The one you should concentrate on is the second report dated the 18th of November, 2002.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well. From the 18th of November, 2002. Unfortunately, I don't have that report here but never mind, I will follow my notes. I don't think this will cause major difficulties.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Mr. Torkildsen -- very well. Thank you. At the very beginning of your testimony this morning or, rather, today, you spoke about the ¹⁹⁰⁴² financing of Republika Srpska and the Republic of Serbian Krajina, and you stated -- I'm now relying on only what you said here. I'm not referring to any written statement of yours but only to what you said here, and that is that Republika Srpska and the RSK were financed exclusively by the SFRY or the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. And I noted down your words. You did not see any other sources. Is that right?

A. The only other source I saw was the Republic of Serbia.

Q. Are you aware that the Republika Srpska and the Republic of Serbian Krajina also had their own budgets and their own public revenues out of which those budgets were financed? Not in their entirety, that's true, but at least partially. Did you have those facts in mind?

A. Yes, I am aware that the Republic of Serbia had its own budget, yes.

Q. Not the Republic of Serbia but the Republika Srpska. I'm talking about the Republic of Srpska and the Republic of Serbian Krajina.

A. Yes, I am aware that those two entities had their own budgets, and that's what I've been referring to today. We have seen on the overhead here several of the budgets.

Q. So is it at issue that both the Republika Srpska and the RSK had their own public expenditures and revenues, public revenues about which they decided at their own assembly meetings, again in the form of laws on the budget? Is that in dispute?

A. It is not in dispute that they had their own expenditures, and it's not in dispute that they had their own revenues as well. It's -- but it's a fact that most of the revenues into the budget were provided by the ¹⁹⁰⁴³ FRY.

Q. So what you said, that you didn't see any other sources except the FRY, cannot be accepted as being correct, because it is quite obvious that they had their own public revenues. Is that right or not?

A. They had their own public revenues, but they were very limited. For instance, in 1993, almost all of their revenues originated from primary issues.

Q. The analysis that you carried out, did you place it within the context of the events which affected the economic situation within the territory of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and the Republika Srpska and the Republic of Serbian Krajina, or did you examine and analyse these things out of context, the law on the budget, the various provisions and items in FRY, in the Republika Srpska and the Republic of Serbian Krajina, et cetera?

A. I made the analysis based on the documents that are attached to this report.

Q. Very well. Mr. Torkildsen, are you aware of the fact that in 1992, already in the spring of 1992, sanctions were in force against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia?

A. Yes, I am aware of that. It was actually enforced on the 30th of May, 1992, where a complete trade embargo was imposed by the UN on the FRY.

Q. And are you aware that in 1993, already in May 1993, after the Vance-Owen Plan was rejected, the most rigorous sanctions were introduced which completely hermetically closed the territory of the Federal Republic ¹⁹⁰⁴⁴ of Yugoslavia?

A. I am aware that further sanctions were introduced. I do not remember the details about them.

Q. Do you know that when those severe sanctions were introduced in 1993, which completely blocked in the economic, financial and every other sense the territory of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and the Republika Srpska and the Republic of Serbian Krajina, that this provoked immense economic damage. And already in the second half of 1993, it provoked this hyperinflation. Did you bear in mind this sequence of events?

A. I do not doubt that there must have been difficult times. I mean, I find it logical that these sanctions sort of enhanced the need for primary issues and the consequence of that, the hyperinflation that occur occurred.

Q. Hyperinflation, as you say. And did you notice that this was ongoing? The hyperinflation started already in May or June 1993, and once the inflation percentages were hundreds of millions at the end of 1993, at the end of 1994 through a new set of measures the inflation was stopped and the economic situation stabilised?

A. Yes. I am aware that the inflation was stabilised in probably January 1994 when Governor Avramovic of the National Bank of Yugoslavia actually pegged the dinar to the Deutschmark.

Q. It pegged it to the Deutschmark. And as you're a financial expert, do you know what in fact was the key decision which enabled the stability of the dinar? The key decision of that programme which was then ¹⁹⁰⁴⁵ implemented by the National Bank. But a key decision and a key feature of that programme.

A. I would assume that the key decision was to stop using primary issues to finance the budget deficits. And that's actually what happened as well, as far as I can see, from the -- for instance, the FRY budget that I have reviewed for 1994. It was rather a limited amount of the revenue in that -- for that year that originated from primary issues. I think it was less than 10 per cent. It was completely opposite to what had happened in 1992 and 1993.

Q. That was a correct answer, Mr. Torkildsen. So that the key decision was the political decision taken. Let me put it very briefly, that there would be no budgetary deficit financing through primary issue, that the deficit could not be financed through primary issue. Do you as an expert believe that in that way the stabilisation was actually effected?

A. Yes, that sounds reasonable to me.

Q. A moment ago, you said primary issue impoverishes people, the population. I think it is more correct to say, I hope, that inflation does that. For example, I remember a governor, an old governor of the National Bank of Italy many years ago, I've forgotten his name, he was already retired, and when he told me the policy of inflation is pursued by poor governments because they do not wish to be taken -- to be criticised by the trade unions or by the government. So inflation and not primary issue is one of the factors or, rather, the main factor. But inflation is an unjust factor which impoverishes people because it taxes more or less ¹⁹⁰⁴⁶ equally a poor man and a rich man. Isn't at that right, Mr. Torkildsen?

A. I don't totally agree with your analysis. Basically primary issues creates inflation. That is -- that is a fact, and that's actually what happened.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, this is all very good if you are in an economics class, but perhaps you should pay a little more attention to those matters that affect the central issues.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. A central issue that we have already addressed is that inflation was provoked by the sanctions introduced in 1992 and the even more severe ones in 1993 so that we rightly qualified them as a silent genocide. Would you agree with such a qualification or not as an economist, as a person studying finances?

A. I don't know if I would comment to a silent genocide, but I don't think that these inflation and primary issues was merely the result of the sanctions imposed, because also in 1994 there were sanctions and you did manage to finance your budgets for 1994 as well even if the income did not originate from primary issues.

Q. That shows that we were capable of dealing with it. But in any event, the economy was functioning at a much lower level as you probably know precisely because of the sanctions. It was incomparably less developed as an economy, isn't that right?

A. I wouldn't know, by I think what you're saying makes sense.

Q. Very well. Mr. Torkildsen, you refer to some sort of an economic federation, a monetary union using those categories. So tell me, please, ¹⁹⁰⁴⁷ are you aware of the fact that Republika Srpska, the RS, and the RSK had their own central banks and that they printed their own money, that there was the currency of Republika Srpska printed by the central bank of Republika Srpska or, rather shall issued by the central bank of Republika Srpska and the currency of the Republic of Serbian Krajina issued by the central bank of the Republic of Serbian Krajina? Are you aware of those facts?

A. I am aware that in 1992 and 1993, the RS and the RSK had their own currencies and that these currencies were printed at the Topcider mint in Belgrade, the printing facility of the National Bank of Yugoslavia. And I'm further aware that these two currencies of the RS and the RSK, they're set at the parity with the Yugoslav dinar, meaning that one RSK dinar and one RS dinar was the equivalent of one FRY dinar.

Q. Mr. Torkildsen, surely as an expert you will agree that the place where currencies are printed is only of technical significance. The question of the issuance of money by both central banks is more important. The previous SFRY used to print currencies for some other states, which doesn't mean that we were issuing that money. You know that sometimes the currencies, the bank notes of a one country will be printed in another country because this is a purely commercial business, a commercial deal, a service done by another country. But what I'm saying is that it was issued by the central banks of the RS and the RSK, regardless of where those currencies were printed because they didn't have mints of their own. Surely you distinguish between those two things.

A. Yes, I distinguish between them to a certain extent, but obviously ¹⁹⁰⁴⁸ letting someone print your currencies is a form for technical support and also considering this monetary union that existed and that these currencies were sort of convertible with each other at -- on a one-to-one basis. And also the fact that the primary issues there provided by the national banks of Yugoslavia is a part of the same matter.

JUDGE MAY: Just a moment. It's about time we adjourned. You can ask one more question and then Judge Robinson has a question.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Mr. Torkildsen, it is not at issue that both the RS and the RSK addressed the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia for assistance, and Republic of Serbia and the Republic of Montenegro and Serbs in the diaspora, so there is no dispute over that. It is not disputed either that they received such assistance. What is wrong if the RS and the RSK addressed Serbia or the FRY for assistance? What can be considered as wrong or impermissible in this activity? So what if they did? Who else could they address themselves to the FRY or Serbia or Montenegro, the two republics of the FRY?

A. I totally agree with you, Mr. Milosevic. They had no one else to turn to so their only place for getting financial assistance would be the FRY or the Republic of Serbia.

JUDGE MAY: Yes. We'll do it tomorrow morning, but Judge Robinson has a question.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Torkildsen, your report covers what period, what years?

THE WITNESS: It covers the period 1991, including 1995. Between ¹⁹⁰⁴⁹ 1991 and 1995.

JUDGE ROBINSON: On in that period, you were able to note support from the FRY for the budgets of the RS and the RSK. What I wanted to find out was whether you're able to do an analysis of the previous years, let us say from 1985 to 1991, and make a comparison as between the support which the FRY gave the budgets of the RS and the RSK with the supports during that specific period.

THE WITNESS: Your Honour, in the 1980s and in 1990 and 1991, there did not exist any budgets for the RS and the RSK, so that would be difficult.

JUDGE ROBINSON: I see. Okay. Thank you.

JUDGE MAY: Yes. We will adjourn now. Nine o'clock tomorrow morning, please.

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