30589
Wednesday, 17 December 2003
[Open session]
[The witness entered court]
[The accused entered court]
--- Upon commencing at 9.05 a.m.
JUDGE MAY: Yes, let the witness take the declaration.
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
JUDGE MAY: Thank you very much. If you'd like to take a seat.
WITNESS: WITNESS B-1619
[Witness answered through interpreter]
JUDGE MAY: Ms. Pack, before we begin, there are some formalities that we need to do left over from yesterday. The first is to return the book, General Clark's book, which was not admitted, which we return now. There should be three copies.
The next is to formally inform the parties that we are minded, subject to -- subject to any submissions, that we are minded to sit on Monday, the 26th of January, and sit that week Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday. I've just had a note that the courtroom is available, but if there are any submissions from anybody, we'll hear them later in the day, but obviously we need to fix it today since it's the last day of sitting. I don't know if there are any other administrative matters to deal with.
MS. PACK: No, Your Honour.
JUDGE MAY: The registry also inform me that no redactions were 30590 made yesterday to the record.
MS. PACK: Mr. Nice will have ten minutes of administrative matters to deal with at the end of the day, so nothing for you now.
JUDGE MAY: Very well. Sorry to keep you, Mr. Witness, but we're going to start now.
MS. PACK: Can the witness be passed, please, his statement. Examined by Ms. Pack.
Q. Witness, if you look, please, at the first page of your statement, just the front page, are the details, your personal details set out on that first page correct?
A. Yes.
Q. And, Witness, if you look, please, at the first page of the statement in English, does your signature appear on the bottom of that first page and on the last page of that statement in English?
A. Yes.
Q. Witness, that statement is dated the 28th of June, 1997, and are the contents of that statement true to the best of your knowledge and belief, subject to some points of clarification which we'll come to?
A. Yes.
Q. You've had an opportunity, is it right, since being in The Hague, to read through a copy of that statement in your own language?
A. Yes, I've read it.
MS. PACK: Your Honour, I'd --
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. May.
JUDGE MAY: Yes. 30591
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Just a technical question. There is something wrong with the microphone. I can't hear anything that the witness is saying.
JUDGE MAY: We'll have that looked into. Just one moment.
JUDGE KWON: Ms. Pack, I think we need to confirm the pseudonym of the witness for the record.
MS. PACK: The pseudonym is B-1619 for the record.
THE ACCUSED: I'm hearing the interpreter, but I'm not hearing him.
JUDGE MAY: We'll have the technical matter looked into. If you'd like to take a seat, Ms. Pack, we'll deal with it.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I can hear the interpreter very well, but I cannot hear the witness himself.
JUDGE MAY: Yes. Let's go on.
MS. PACK: Your Honour, I'd ask to admit the statement dated 28th of June, 1997, under Rule 89(F), already the subject of a previous ruling by Your Honours on the 9th of December this year, under seal.
JUDGE MAY: Yes. We'll admit the statement, and we'll ask for the next number, please.
THE REGISTRAR: 620, Your Honour.
JUDGE MAY: Yes.
MS. PACK: Your Honour, I'll read a short summary. The witness, a Muslim, is from Zepa in the municipality of Rogatica. He gives evidence that on the 5th of August, 1995, after the fall of Zepa, he set off with eight friends towards Priboj in Yugoslavia. 30592 At or close to the border they came across 40 men dressed in blue police camouflage uniforms. They had to surrender. These men were from Serbia. The police could -- the witness could tell this from their accents, and they wore insignia on their soldiers of the police of the Republic of Serbia.
They beat the witness and his friends and then tied them two by two. They loaded them on a truck and took them in the direction of Visegrad.
At the village of Klasnik in Visegrad they came across local Serbs who beat the witness and his friends. The local Serbs called Milan Lukic by radio, asking him to come. Lukic later arrived with seven or eight colleagues. The witness describes the massacre of his friends by Lukic and his men whilst they were en route from Klasnik to Visegrad. He describes his detention and interrogation in Visegrad and his subsequent detention in Rogatica prison.
He saw General Mladic in Rogatica prison on four occasions. On the last occasion prior to the witness's exchange, Mladic joked at them and then his mood changed. He said, "There will be no exchange, only with Allah." Then his mood changed and he said he would let the witness be exchanged but that there would not be a second chance. On the 15th of January, 1996, a bus came, taking the witness to Kula. He was finally exchanged on the 19th of January, 1996. Your Honour, I have a couple of questions by way of clarification. Can the witness be shown his statement in B/C/S, please, paragraph 8. 30593
Q. Witness, there's a matter that you wanted to clarify in that paragraph. You say there that you went to the village of Podravanje in Srebrenica to buy food. Is it right that you went to that village yourself or did you receive food from that village, not actually going there yourself?
A. No, I did not go there myself. Actually, food was brought from that village and then we bought it.
Q. Witness, could you turn to paragraph 22, please, of the statement that you have in front of you.
A. Yes.
Q. Witness, you describe in that paragraph [French translation on English channel].
JUDGE MAY: There is a problem with the French coming through on our channel, the English.
THE INTERPRETER: Sorry, there was a wrong gesture. Sorry.
JUDGE MAY: Very well. Thank you very much. All seems to be well.
MS. PACK:
Q. You describe in that paragraph your surrender to the police of the Republic of Serbia along with eight of your friends. Are you able to say which side of the border with Serbia, the Bosnian or the Serbian side, that you surrendered?
A. Well, I cannot say exactly. This happened around the border. We were surrounded from all sides, from the Serbian side and this other side, so I cannot say exactly where we surrendered. 30594 BLANK PAGE 30595
MS. PACK: Can the witness be shown the second tab of the exhibit bundle, the map.
JUDGE KWON: I'd like to check whether the accused is following the conversation.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] On the channel that is the customary channel where the Serbian translation is, and that is also where I should hear the voice of the witness, I can hear the interpretation, but I cannot hear the witness at all. And since he is quite far away and he is speaking very softly, I cannot hear him without the microphone here in the courtroom. I don't know if Mr. Tapuskovic has the same problem.
MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] The problem is the same.
JUDGE MAY: Yes, we might try -- would the witness, if you can, come closer to the microphone. It may be that you can really come no closer than you already are, but perhaps you can, and perhaps you can speak as loudly as you can, and we'll try and resolve it that way.
MS. PACK:
Q. Witness, you have in front of you a map initialed by you under your pseudonym and dated the 15th of December. Have you encircled on that map marked A the approximate area where you surrendered with your friends?
A. Yes.
Q. And within that area, do we see the town of -- the village of Stolac on the Serbian side of the border?
A. Stolac, a mountain, a hill.
MS. PACK: Your Honours, that area also appears on the Prosecution Exhibit 326, page 33, reference 2E. 30596
Q. Witness, going back to paragraph 22 of your statement, having tied you up two by two, you and your friends, where did the Serbian police take you?
A. The Serbian police took us to Klasnik in the municipality of Visegrad.
Q. Whom did they leave you there with?
A. They handed us over there to the local Serbs, that is to say the Serbs who were probably from Visegrad.
Q. Did they take you or your friends to their own or any police station?
A. No. They just transferred us there. It was a kind of camp there where the local Serbs were in Klasnik.
Q. Witness, was there another group of men in Klasnik?
A. Yes. There were about 20 other men there too, 20 men in uniform. They were sitting apart from the rest. They were wearing the same uniforms with the same insignia.
Q. Were you able to tell where they were from?
A. Well, they were from Serbia, judging by their accent. They were also in uniform, and they were talking for a while. They were talking to a prisoner. So I could conclude on the basis of that conversation that they were from Serbia.
Q. Did you subsequently hear where specifically they were from in Serbia?
A. Yes, I did hear that. This small unit was from Kraljevo. They explained that they knew about some particular places when they were 30597 talking to this prisoner, and the brother of one of these soldiers had some kind of a cafe or restaurant or a butcher shop in Kraljevo, and the prisoner remembered that because he did his military service before the war in the town of Kraljevo.
Q. Witness, finally, can you remember what sort uniforms these men were wearing?
A. This entire group had the same camouflage uniforms. They had White Eagles' patches on their sleeves, but I did not notice their caps.
MS. PACK: Your Honour, I've no further questions. One matter that I would like to raise before the witness is cross-examined, I've identified at the start of the summary those matters which may, if questioned upon, lead to the identification of this witness. Just two matters at the start of the summary and I'd ask Your Honour to hear those matters, if they arise, in private session.
JUDGE MAY: Yes, we'll go into private session to deal with them.
MS. PACK: Not necessarily now, Your Honour, it would simply be if they arise.
JUDGE MAY: No. It's necessary that it be said in private session so that it can be heard.
[Private session] (redacted)
(redacted) (redacted)
(redacted) (redacted) 30598 (redacted)
(redacted) (redacted)
(redacted) (redacted)
(redacted) (redacted)
[Open session]
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Don't worry, Mr. May, I'm not going to compromise the witness in any way. I'd never do that.
JUDGE MAY: Yes. Very well. Cross-examined by Mr. Milosevic:
Q. Mr. 1619, you were underage at the time when the war broke out in Bosnia-Herzegovina?
A. Yes.
Q. Again, I can barely hear you. Let me try to put the volume up as much as possible, because it's not Ms. Pack who is speaking now. So it was only towards the end of 1995 that you became of age; is that right?
A. Yes.
Q. In paragraph 16 of your statement, you say that in the month of August 1994, you were mobilised, and after basic training, you were deployed in the infantry, and after that in the rocket platoon of the anti-aircraft defence. Is that right?
A. Yes. 30599
Q. That is in the army of Bosnia-Herzegovina; is that right?
A. Yes.
Q. Tell me, please, since you were mobilised as a minor, how many other minors were there who were mobilised in the army of Bosnia-Herzegovina?
A. I don't understand this question. Are you referring to the entire army?
Q. I don't mean the entire army. I don't think that you would know what the situation was in the entire army. I'm talking about what you know, about the situation in your unit, in your area, in your group.
A. I cannot give a precise answer to that.
Q. You don't have to give a precise answer, just give me a tentative figure. How many soldiers were there? How many of you were there?
A. This brigade had about 1.200 men. Now, perhaps there were between 50 and 100 peers of mine.
Q. All right. That means about 10 per cent of the personnel of the brigade were children, that is to say persons who were underage, minors. Tell me, do you know that in 1993 the Security Council of the UN passed a Resolution proclaiming Zepa, in addition to other areas in Bosnia-Herzegovina, a demilitarised zone and a safe area?
A. Yes.
Q. So in spite of that, in the area of Zepa, there was not only a unit that was there but actually mobilisation was carried out. You were mobilised in 1994; isn't that right?
A. Yes. 30600 BLANK PAGE 30601
Q. In paragraph 3 of your statement, you say that the war in Zepa started on the 4th of June, 1992, and in the following way, that, as you had put it, a small JNA unit came into town on -- under the pretext of delivering food to Mount Javor. That was in 1992; is that right?
A. Yes.
Q. Then your local commander, as far as I can see from your statement because I don't have any other information related to your statement, then your local commander realised that the members of the JNA were preparing to attack, although they did not attack anyone, so then he decided to ambush them in a section of the road that was very narrow, and the sides were steep, as you say. Is that right?
A. Yes. In those villages around Han Pijesak, the JNA fired from tanks and all other weapons, so this could not have been a reason why they would not go further with their armoured vehicles and men.
Q. I'm not going to talk about what you heard and what you were assuming. It was my understanding that they came, they did not attack you, you simply ambushed them on the road, and both sides of the road were steep, as you had put it here.
A. Yes.
Q. So the first armed conflict was actually this ambush that you had prepared.
A. Well, the first biggish one.
Q. So the first big armed conflict was when you, that is to say, the local unit that you had established in Zepa, placed an ambush against the JNA unit that was moving along the road. Then when that happened, you 30602 were only 14 years old. Tell me, how do you know about this? Did you participate in that?
A. No, I did not, but I know the people who were there, and they told me about it.
Q. Is it true that this unit, your unit, the unit you're talking of, was under the command of Avdo Palic? Is that right?
A. Not at the very beginning, but later on, yes.
Q. So he was the commander of that brigade, wasn't he?
A. Yes. Not at first, but later on, yes.
Q. And this unit was part of a larger detachment which had a different name, didn't it, Mr. 1619?
A. Yes.
Q. What was that larger unit and what was its name?
A. The 28th Division.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I really have to look at the transcript. I can't hear him.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. I see. That's the 28th Division of Naser Oric, isn't it?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, in view of the fact that you are testifying, among other things, about this attack on the JNA members when, according to you, the war started in the area of Srebrenica, do you remember what occurred during that attack?
A. Could you repeat the question?
Q. Are you hearing me well? 30603
A. Yes, but could you repeat the question? I didn't understand it.
Q. I was saying that since you are testifying about this ambush that you -- we have just established when the war in the Zepa area started, could you tell me what actually happened during that attack?
A. I can't as I wasn't there. I already said that I wasn't a participant, so I can't describe the details.
Q. I see. You don't know the details. But is it true that in that ambush set for the JNA 45 JNA soldiers were killed?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you know that in addition to those 45 soldiers who were killed, another 31 are still registered as missing? Do you know where those who are still missing were taken?
A. I'm not aware at all about the soldiers that went missing.
Q. Forty-five soldiers of the JNA were killed in that ambush, but another 31 are missing, and they were taken somewhere. You should know, as this is a small place. Where were they taken to?
A. I really am not aware of those 31 soldiers. I know nothing about them.
Q. Very well. If you don't know anything, we can move on. In paragraph 5, you say that your men were able to repel virtually all attacks; is that right?
A. This paragraph relates to that day in 1992 when the JNA was heading towards Zepa.
Q. But the brigade that you mention was already active there, wasn't it? 30604
A. It was just in the process of formation at the beginning of 1992, so the terrain contributed to all this.
Q. I see. You used the advantages of the terrain, the effect of surprise. You ambushed the JNA soldiers and killed 45 of them, but how strong was that unit then at that time?
A. I am unable to give you a number.
Q. Is it clear from this, Witness 1619, that it was not the Serbs who attacked you but you who attacked the JNA and killed 45 men in that first attack?
A. Before all this, maybe a month or two before it, we were blocked. Our electricity was cut off. The surrounding villages towards Rogatica had been torched. There was occasional shelling. So I think it's clear to you.
Q. From your statement, I see you say that you were able to defend the area and apparently there was some fire in two villages only. You mention those two cases of torchings in two villages.
A. Those were villages that were on the road taken by that unit. They were going from Han Pijesak and passing those villages as they went.
Q. Were there attacks on that unit from those villages as well?
A. No.
Q. So you know that.
A. From the stories of the people who fled from there to Zepa.
Q. Well, do you know, since you're claiming that, you're claiming to know that, do you know that in June, in the month of June, there were synchronised attacks by your forces on Serb villages; Agorovici [phoen], 30605 Simici, Presirici [phoen], Kozici, Pijesko [phoen], Borac, Vraselica [phoen]. These are all villages that you're familiar with, aren't they?
A. I heard only of Presirici, and they too are close to Rogatica and that's a long way away. We had no contact with them. That's way out.
Q. And do you know that when those attacks were carried out against all those villages, the people were killed, a large number of people were killed and their property looted, the villages burnt down. Even tombstones broken and destroyed and desecrated. This is a whole series of Serb villages in your immediate vicinity which these forces of yours attacked, just as they attacked this JNA column. Do you know of that?
A. I hear that for the first time from you. And after all, 40 or so kilometres is not the immediate vicinity.
Q. That applies to this one village that you said you knew. I'm not sure whether you said one or two villages.
A. I heard of the name of that village, but I never went there, and I hadn't heard of what you say happened.
Q. Very well. And do you know that this man, the man I mentioned, Avdo Palic, that you said was later the commander, that he attacked a Serb village called Borovina, which is also in the municipality of Han Pijesak on the 7th of August, 1992, and personally killed, among other Serbs that were killed there, he personally killed --
JUDGE MAY: How can the witness know about this? Do you know anything at all about this, Mr. 1619?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.
JUDGE MAY: There's no point asking him this sort of question. He 30606 BLANK PAGE 30607 knows nothing about it. He said that. You can call evidence about it in due course, but it's a waste of time asking witnesses who know nothing about it.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] How can you know in advance that the witness doesn't know anything about it?
JUDGE MAY: Because he's not the man you're talking about. Now, let's move on to something else.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The witness said that he knew that the commander was Avdo Palic, and I'm asking him a question about the person he said he knew and he admitted that he was the commander over there, so I'm asking whether he knows about the activities of that man that he knew.
JUDGE MAY: He's given you an answer. He doesn't. Maybe you want to ask him about what he's given evidence about if you challenge it. General Mladic, for instance. The massacre of his friends. You may want to challenge that evidence.
THE INTERPRETER: The microphone is not on. I'm afraid we can't hear.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] If the witness says -- I am saying I can't get an answer to a question until I put it to him, and if the witness says that he doesn't know, then he's answered the question. He knows this man. That's why I asked him this.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. Very well. Do you know that these attacks on Serb villages, which went on until the spring of 1993, and in paragraph 13 you say that the 30608 inhabitants of Zepa were left without water and electricity when Zepa was blocked early in 1992. Is that what you said?
A. Yes.
Q. Now explain to me, please, what kind of a blockade of Zepa are you talking about at the beginning of 1992 when you yourself said that the war started on the 4th of June, which means in the middle of that year, with the ambush, your ambush of this column of soldiers that you killed?
A. I said that the first larger conflict occurred on that occasion, but you're well aware when Serb autonomous regions started to be formed at the beginning of 1992. I already said that all approaches, all telephone lines, power supplies, and everything else was blocked, and refugees started coming in from Rogatica and Visegrad at the beginning of 1992.
Q. Very well. And how long were you without electricity, water, telephone lines, et cetera?
A. From 1992 onwards.
Q. From when in 1992? You say at the beginning of 1992.
A. I'm really not able to give you an exact date, but it was the very beginning of the year, the beginning of 1992.
Q. I see. But at the beginning of 1992, there was absolutely no conflicts in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Are you aware of that?
A. Would you repeat the question, please.
Q. I was saying do you -- are you aware that at the beginning of 1992 there were absolutely no conflicts in Bosnia-Herzegovina, and especially in your area?
A. In Bosnia and Herzegovina, as far as I know, there were sporadic 30609 clashes, I think in Bijeljina what happened happened, and around Zepa there were sporadic clashes and refugees from coming from Visegrad and Rogatica.
Q. Very well. There's no need to speak about dates then, because -- well, after all, you don't even have to know these things. Anyway, tell me, please, certainly you do know that in addition to Zepa, the neighbouring town of Srebrenica was proclaimed a demilitarised safe area.
A. Yes, I do know that.
Q. In paragraph 16, you say that in June 1995, you returned from Srebrenica to Zepa where you had attended additional military training; is that right?
A. Yes.
Q. So in Srebrenica, the command and the bulk of the units of the 28th Division were stationed. Isn't that right?
A. Yes.
Q. That is where the training centre was as well, the one you went to. How long did you attend training there?
A. I think for about 15 days or so.
Q. What kind of additional training was it?
A. I think you can see that from the statement.
Q. Sabotage reconnaissance. What is that?
A. No, no, it isn't that. It is training for anti-air defence.
Q. I see. So throughout that time since you were undergoing training and that was where the 28th Division was based, your brigade in Zepa, the 30610 centre in Srebrenica, throughout that time, units of the 28th Division were in that demilitarised zone of Srebrenica and Zepa; is that right?
A. Well, the boundaries of the demilitarised zone were smaller than the actual territory, which was - I don't know how to call it - in between the zones.
Q. Are you aware that those units of the 28th Division, which means your division, completely razed to the ground all the surrounding Serb villages and killed the entire Serb population?
A. No.
Q. Tell me, who was supposed to carry out the demilitarisation and the disarming of your forces? Was it the UN members who were there?
A. Yes.
Q. In paragraph 18, you say that in July 1995, after the fall of Srebrenica, Zepa was attacked, and UNPROFOR at the time, as you say, did nothing.
A. Yes.
Q. Now, explain, please, how could it have done anything when you yourself in that same paragraph say that at three checkpoints of theirs you seized their weapons and chased them to their base? Is that right, Mr. 1619?
A. Because when the attack on Zepa started, during the first couple of days they went to their shelters, and those who were at the checkpoint, they didn't do anything, even to report what was happening. So we came to the conclusion that they wouldn't do anything.
Q. So you seized their weapons from them, you disarmed the UNPROFOR 30611 officers and chased them back to their base.
A. We didn't chase them there. Their officer was there, and together with all the things they wanted to take with them, their personal belongings, they were driven to their base.
Q. You say that you escorted them back to their base. This is what you say in your statement, and I'm quoting you. So it is a polite way of saying that you disarmed them and took them to their base.
A. Yes, but we didn't chase them off, we didn't drive them out.
Q. Very well, you escorted them to their base. But actually, you snatched away their weapons, you didn't just take them.
A. The officer who was there, in agreement with our commander, they agreed amongst themselves that they -- he, too, should go and that the weapons should be taken away. There was no force used, no coercion. They just wanted to reach their main base and probably wait for the outcome of all those events.
Q. Tell me, please, is it true that the fighting around Zepa went on for all of ten days and that they were stopped when General Smith arrived, who then brought some order, agreement was reached for the wounded and the civilians to be taken out of Zepa; is that right?
A. Yes.
Q. So that means that it was only members of the army of Bosnia-Herzegovina who remained in Zepa; is that right?
A. Yes, on the mountains above Zepa.
Q. So everybody left except for the members of the army of Bosnia-Herzegovina. 30612 BLANK PAGE 30613 In paragraph 20, you say that Avdo Palic, your local brigade commander, surrendered on that occasion to the members of the army of Republika Srpska; is that right?
A. It wasn't only members of the army who had stayed back. There were also a number of civilians in the mountains, men who did not dare join these convoys and these trucks. They were afraid. A number of them stayed back together with the army. And as concerns what I said about the commander, I can explain what happened.
Q. Well, go ahead and explain.
A. When the last few buses left Zepa, on Mount Boksanica, that is to say on the road towards Rogatica, then the Serbs stopped these civilians. So it is true that they got out of Zepa, but they were stopped at Boksanica. And as I wrote in my statement - you can check that - then he surrendered.
Q. Why did this number of men that you refer to stay back? Why didn't they dare leave with the other civilians? Why didn't they join the evacuation?
A. Because they were afraid that they would be taken off the buses, as indeed happened with about 50 or so men who I found later in prison. They were taking wounded persons off buses and also older men, about 50 years old, who were suspected of having been members of the army. So they got them off the buses.
Q. All right. But is it correct, Mr. 1619, that Avdo Palic did not surrender? He was taken prisoner, rather, in this fighting with members of the army of Republika Srpska? 30614
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] What's the problem now? Now he has a problem? Microphone is on.
JUDGE MAY: Yes.
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] First and foremost, he did not surrender during the fighting, because a cease-fire had been signed during those days and he was down there involved in the negotiations together with members of UNPROFOR, and the Serbs quite simply took him out of the UNPROFOR base in Zepa.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. Did you see that?
A. No, but his escort was allowed to return to the Zepa mountains, and he's the one who told us what happened, because they sent him so that he'd talk everybody else into surrendering.
Q. Oh, they kept this Palic and they sent his escort back to the unit to inform the unit that everybody should surrender; is that right?
A. Yes.
Q. All right. Now you've clarified this for me. Tell me, you conveyed something to the deputy commander. This has to do with paragraph 20. You heard that one of members of the Ukrainian Battalion asked to speak to Palic, that he had been killed while attempting to flee, and you said that to the deputy commander; is that right?
A. Yes. I heard this conversation.
Q. What was the name of Palic's deputy?
A. Major Ramo Cardakovic.
Q. Was he one of the persons who were later in the woods in this 30615 group together with you? I'm not going to refer to any names in order to protect your identity. What happened to him? What happened to this deputy commander?
A. I don't know what happened. Later on, there was general disarray up there, so I don't know what happened.
Q. But there is no doubt that this message that came that this unit should surrender was not accepted and that the unit went on fighting; is that right? Even after Palic was taken prisoner, the unit went on fighting, right?
A. Yes, but people were waiting up there to hear what the outcome of the negotiations would be. So during the cease-fire, we were attacked.
Q. All right. Let's see now. Your father, who was also in the ranks of the army of Bosnia-Herzegovina, decided with the rest to go to Serbia; is that right?
A. It's not true that he was a member of the army of Bosnia-Herzegovina. That he decided to go to Serbia and surrender, that is correct, though.
Q. However, you did not want to go with him. You wanted to stay there and indeed you did stay there with another eight friends and you withdrew into the forest; is that right?
A. Yes.
Q. So did your father go to Serbia?
A. Yes.
Q. All right. He did not go by himself. Did he go with a considerable number of other people to Serbia too? 30616
A. Yes.
Q. With how many?
A. I don't know the exact number. A couple of hundred.
Q. All right. A couple of hundred. When you say "a couple of hundred" in Serbian, that means several hundred. It does not mean a couple as literally 200.
Tell me, when did you meet up with your father again?
A. The first time after that was in 1999.
Q. All right. Where was he during all this time after having gone to Serbia and until 1999 when you met up with him again?
A. In the United States of America.
Q. How long did he stay in Serbia?
A. Seven months.
Q. All right. Tell me, did he tell you how he was treated in Serbia; that he was treated decently, politely, that nobody mistreated him? Did he tell you about that?
A. Well, that was his own case, yes, but there were other cases too.
Q. All right. As for him himself, and he was probably not the only one, he was treated decently, properly, and there was no mistreatment involved; is that right?
A. Yes, but he was taken prisoner.
Q. You mean he was staying at some centre, and after that he was sent where he wanted to go and then he went to America; right? Is that right, Mr. 1619?
A. He did go to America, but he told me that this was decided by the 30617 Red Cross and the UNHCR. So they didn't have much choice.
Q. The UNHCR said where people could go depending on the receiving country, how many they were willing to take in, but it was his choice to leave Serbia, and nobody prevented him from leaving Serbia; is that right?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, whether he was allowed to go to Australia or America or Germany, that was not up to the Serbian authorities, as you know full well.
Tell me, please, you say in paragraph 21 -- I'm not going to mention all these names so we don't have to move into private session. I bear in mind the fact that this is a paragraph that should not be read out. So with a group of fellow combatants, you remained where you were; is that right?
A. Yes.
Q. And do you know, since -- since you have here one of these comrades of yours, this is the first one you mention in paragraph 21 -- let me check once again. Here it is. It's the end of paragraph 21 when you say this number of people, I'm not even going to say how many people were there, were, and now you mention the names. And the first name that is written here, the first name so that we don't have to move into private session, do you know that this person, on the 28th of August, 1992, in the village of Okruglo, near Rogatica, intercepted a passenger car in which Radenko Djelakovic [phoen] was as well as his daughter Sonija? So this was a man who was travelling with his daughter. And this person mentioned here killed both of them; do you know that? 30618 BLANK PAGE 30619
A. No, because I've already said, as for all these things that happened around Rogatica, I really don't know about that.
Q. You spent a long time together. It was not a big group. You did not hear from him about all the things he did?
A. First of all, it wasn't that we spent a long time together. We were together perhaps for three or four days, and this group was formed simply by chance up there in the mountains during this general disarray, as I said. So people simply stayed with the first person they came across. So I really don't know anything about this.
Q. The fourth person on this list after the brackets that we see here in the text, do you know that in 1992 in the village of Stitarevo he also committed a murder? The murdered man was called Nedzo Lindevic, from Trsevina. And he also seriously wounded another man. I'm just asking about people who were in your group.
A. I'm telling you yet again we were in that group together by chance. I do not know what happened in other towns. This man is from a different place altogether, so I'm telling you yet again that this group was simply formed by chance at that time, and we really didn't have all that time to get acquainted and to talk.
JUDGE MAY: In any event, even if it were true, these allegations, what's the relevance of it?
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] It is relevant, Mr. May, so that you would understand the situation in the area, in the area all the way to Bratunac. If you look at the map, you will see this easily. All the Serb villages were destroyed by Naser Oric's 28th Division. Everything was 30620 torched, everybody was killed.
JUDGE MAY: This is all defence. And is it in any way suggested that that in some way justified these men being killed, as this witness has set out in his statement? Is that what's being suggested?
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] No, of course it's not justified by that. Heaven forbid. A crime cannot justify another crime. I am talking about a situation in which you see that this conflict started. It started by an ambush aimed against a JNA column. An enormous number of soldiers were killed, 45 of them, ambushed. After that, they torched everything all around them, and that's how the conflict broke out. And now whether people were taken prisoner were killed, of course nobody can justify that. That's a shame.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. I'm not going to ask you now because you just said that this group was set up by chance to such an extent that you quite literally didn't know anybody from before?
A. I knew two men a bit better.
Q. These two men you knew a bit better, were you aware of the activities of the two in respect of the matters we were discussing just now?
A. Well, one of them was even younger than I was, as a matter of fact, and the other one was my age, and all the rest were older men. So of course I was more or less together with these two men.
Q. But you were all together in one brigade, one unit; is that right?
A. Yes. 30621
Q. Now I have to ask you about a relative of yours, so that would probably identify you.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] So, Mr. May, could we just move into closed session for a moment.
[Private session] (redacted)
(redacted) (redacted)
(redacted) (redacted)
(redacted) (redacted)
(redacted) (redacted)
(redacted) (redacted)
(redacted) (redacted)
(redacted)
[Open session]
THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. I will now ask you about your crossing in 1992. You crossed the Drina on the 5th of August; is that right?
A. In 1995. 30622
Q. I'm sorry. I misspoke. In 1995, yes. So you crossed the Drina on the 5th of August, 1995; is that right?
A. On the night of the 4th, yes.
Q. Where exactly did you cross the Drina?
A. As I was there only once in my whole life, that is on that occasion, I am not quite sure, but I think it's called Brusnicki Potok.
Q. That is the name of the place?
A. Yes, this canyon, this spot where we crossed.
Q. Did you cross the Drina using a bridge or did you swim over?
A. We built a raft.
Q. And you crossed to the other bank of the Drina; is that right?
A. Yes. And Serbia is on the other bank and not Bosnia and Herzegovina.
A. Not throughout. Not everywhere.
Q. On the other bank of the Drina, across the way from the place you mentioned, you say you were arrested by the police of the Republic of Serbia; is that right?
A. I already said that somewhere around the border.
Q. Well, that is the point. You crossed the Drina, and then on the other side of the Drina, where Serbia is, it is only natural that the police of the Republic of Serbia should guard its border on its bank. So you crossed the Drina illegally. As you say, you crossed in a raft, several of you, and then the police turned you back to the other bank, to the other side, because they didn't receive you; is that right?
A. That they turned us back, that is true. 30623
Q. And when they took you back, they crossed the Drina again; is that right?
A. I'm repeating: They didn't go back across the Drina. And also, where we crossed the Drina, it wasn't Serbia. You would have to walk for half a day to reach the border.
Q. Witness 1619, let us not go into that now, but in any event, the police, which you say was the police of the Republic of Serbia, arrested you on the other side of the Drina, which you had crossed illegally, and then they took you back and that's all. Tell me, they handed you over to the authorities on your own territory, is that right, after you had illegally entered Serbia?
A. Yes, they took us to Klasnik and handed us over to the local Serbs.
Q. Let me find the place in the statement. I saw somewhere, and I'm unable to find it now, but I saw that you said that they took you to their police station. They didn't take you to their police station, they took you back; isn't that right?
A. They took us back to Klasnik, to a camp, a base or whatever, of the local Serbs.
Q. But that's the closest location where any local authorities were to be found. And those men who took you back, did they go back to Serbia after that?
A. They left there. Where they went to, I don't know.
Q. They stopped you, they took you back, and then they left; is that right? 30624 BLANK PAGE 30625
A. Yes.
Q. So those men that you saw who were policemen from Serbia, they didn't beat you or mistreat you in any way? They didn't inflict any injuries, did they?
A. No, that's not right. They did mistreat us. They made us strip to our waist, they collected everything we had on us - money and jewellery and everything else - and only then did they take us down there to Klasnik.
Q. If these were policemen on the Serbian side, I find it difficult to believe that.
A. That's your problem.
Q. Tell me, did you say of them that they had White Eagles patches on their sleeves?
A. No. I said that regarding another group of soldiers who were in Klasnik.
JUDGE KWON: Just a second, Mr. Milosevic. If I can clarify this. Of course you may not answer, but Mr. Milosevic, do you agree, accept that these policemen are Serbian police who caught this group of people? I notice on the map, even if they crossed the river, it's not the border. So you accept that Serbian police are inside Bosnia and Herzegovina?
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I do not accept that the police of the Republic of Serbia was in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Mr. Kwon. I am sure that the police of the Republic of Serbia could only have been on the territory of the Republic of Serbia. That is why if you cross the Drina, you enter Serbia on this side, and they could have been arrested by the 30626 police of Republic of Serbia only in the Republic of Serbia. And even if -- so I'm answering your question though you don't insist I do so: Even in that case, if the police of the Republic of Serbia had been there, they would have taken them to their own police station, identified them, and treated them then accordingly, either as refugees or some kind of misplaced -- displaced persons.
So regarding your question whether the police of the Republic of Serbia was on the territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina, my answer is no, they weren't, nor could they be, nor would we have risked the lives of our men to cross to the other side where a war was being waged. There was only a single platoon of our police on the territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina about which I notified Owen and Stoltenberg in the Strpce station where a train was stopped and people taken off it. This is the Belgrade-Bar railway line, going from Belgrade to Bar, and for nine kilometres it runs through the territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Only for nine kilometres. And on that stretch, there is a small station called Strpce where the train never stops. However the train was stopped there, people taken off the train and killed. And this was done by some paramilitaries, and then we sent a police platoon there to secure the station.
JUDGE KWON: We've heard that. You can go on, Mr. Milosevic.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Kwon, because this was an exception, this is an exception that I informed Owen and Stoltenberg about, that we were securing our own train that was passing through that territory for a stretch of nine kilometres to protect it against 30627 paramilitaries of Republika Srpska, not Muslim units. They were not there.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. And now tell me, please -- I leave something out because I see my time is running out.
I was confused by what you said, that they took you to their police station. So that would mean that they took you to a Serbian police station if you were in Serbia, but they didn't take you to their police station if they were policemen from Serbia. They could have been Serbian policemen only on the territory of Serbia. So you were taken to the authorities on the territory of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina; is that right?
A. Yes.
Q. And then, as one of the Serbs told you, they called Milan Lukic, who arrived shortly after that and shook hands with all of you; is that right?
A. Yes.
Q. And this prompted you to think that the rumours about him were not true.
A. Yes.
Q. Is he from that area?
A. I think he is from the municipality of Visegrad.
Q. And then you say that seven men were killed from your group there and that Milan Lukic brought their uniforms and boots; is that right?
A. Yes. 30628
Q. The numbers don't quite coincide because it would now appear that there were more of you, but that is not important.
JUDGE MAY: Let's clarify to make it clear. How many men did you start off with, Witness?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Myself and another eight.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. So my understanding was, on the basis of what you said before, that you were eight in all.
A. Myself plus eight.
Q. And then this last one was killed, as you say, this -- the eighth one then. Let me not mention the names for your own protection that you have been granted. And you alone were allowed to live; is that right?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you know why, if all the others were killed, why you were left alive?
A. I don't know.
Q. Who killed these men, and why did he take their boots and uniforms?
A. You would have to ask them.
Q. And the people with Milan Lukic, you say that there was another man with the same surname; is that right?
A. Yes.
Q. He was a relative of his?
A. I can't say with certainty. 30629
Q. Was that man from Visegrad?
A. Yes.
Q. In paragraph 26, will you please clarify this for me. You say that a policeman in Visegrad asked you whether you knew who had brought you there; is that right?
A. Yes.
Q. Did you know who brought you there?
A. I did.
Q. Why did you say you didn't know?
A. I was scared. I was afraid of saying anything and of revealing knowing anything.
Q. You told him you didn't know, and then he explained to you that no one would hurt you. When did you actually learn, or, rather, when did you identify that person as being Milan Lukic; when he captured you or when? When did you identify him? Was it in Visegrad or before that?
A. He didn't capture us. When he arrived, he introduced himself.
Q. So, I see. That's clear. He came and he introduced himself. Very well.
JUDGE MAY: You've got two minutes left, Mr. Milosevic.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I will hurry up.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. You mention a certain Zoran Neskovic. You say that he was the prison warden, then a Vujic, who took you to the prison in Rogatica. Were they also locals from the area?
A. Yes, from Rogatica. 30630 BLANK PAGE 30631
Q. And this Kusic you mention too, he is a man from the area, too, isn't he?
A. Yes.
Q. Were you in uniform, those of you who were in prison then, in that prison?
A. Which prison?
Q. When you were in the Rogatica prison, or generally when you were captured, were you wearing uniforms of the army of Bosnia and Herzegovina?
A. Not all of us.
Q. Did you have a uniform on?
A. Yes.
Q. And this young man who was younger than you, he was wearing a uniform too, wasn't he?
A. I'm not quite sure about that.
Q. And the third person mentioned, was he also a member of your unit?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, explain, please: You say that in the cell in the Rogatica prison, a drunk came in, a drunken man came in and said he was General Mladic.
A. Yes. I know it was him because I had seen him before on television, so I know it was him.
Q. In paragraph 35, you say that Mladic visited you another three times, on the 17th of November, the 18th of December, on the 11th of January, and that he was always drunk. Is it really possible that the commander of the army of Republika Srpska should come to visit you in 30632 Rogatica several times and that throughout he was drunk? It sounds improbable to me, so could you please explain on what grounds you came to the conclusion that it was indeed General Mladic? What was he looking for, coming to see you in the cell? Why did he come? Could you explain that? It's unbelievable. It simply sounds unbelievable, so I'd like you to explain.
A. First of all, we weren't friends for him to come and visit me personally. Each time he came, the commander, Rogatica commander, was always with him and they behaved as friends. And each time he toured the prison or camp, every time TV cameras were with him. Now, why he entered my cell each time, I really don't know, you'd have to ask him. But he didn't come to see me personally, he was just touring the facilities and he came into the cell. And it wasn't hard to see that he was drunk by the smell, the odour and his behaviour.
JUDGE MAY: Very well. That's two minutes. Yes, Mr. Tapuskovic. Questioned by Mr. Tapuskovic:
Q. [Interpretation] Witness, a moment ago you said that you knew Mladic because you'd seen him many times on television; is that right?
A. Television, the papers, et cetera, yes.
Q. But I'm going back to this just to clarify one matter, because here in paragraph 34 - will you look, please, at the Serbian version - you said: "On the 31st of August, we heard a lot of noise," and then you say, "Then a man came in whom I didn't know and who was drunk, and he introduced himself as General Mladic."
So your explanation in the statement is different. You said that 30633 somebody who came in was a person you didn't know. So could you explain that, please.
A. When he talked in, I didn't. I didn't immediately recognise him. But only when he started talking -- whenever somebody walked in, I had to look down, I had to bow my head. I didn't dare look anyone in their eyes, in their face. But when he started speaking, I immediately realised who he was.
Q. Thank you. Now look at paragraphs 4 and 5, please. You talk about the first clashes, and you mention the date of 4th of April, 1992, and in paragraph 5 you say that you were able to repel Serb attacks. And then you say that after those conflicts, bodies were exchanged. Were there casualties on both sides as early as that, and then bodies of the victims being exchanged? Could you explain to the Judges how many people were killed and how many bodies would be exchanged on those occasions?
A. The first case, as you can see, was when those bodies that were killed in 1992, there was a bus full of women and children that the Serbs were holding captive. Those were from Rogatica, the women and children, not from Zepa. And then that busload of women and children were exchanged for the bodies. They had no family or anyone. And then those were the bodies that our men were able to find.
Q. Whose bodies were they? Were they bodies of Muslim victims or both sides?
A. The bodies of Serb soldiers were exchanged, were given to the Serb side, and in return they gave us a bus full of women and children that were held captive in Rogatica. 30634
Q. Thank you. Just a few more points of clarification for Their Honours linked to paragraphs 16 and 17. In Srebrenica, in Zepa, you were during these critical events in June and July; right?
A. I was in Srebrenica, as I said already, for 15 days - I don't want to repeat myself - and also prior to these last events when it was relatively peaceful.
Q. But you were in Zepa when all these things were happening in July. You were both in Srebrenica and in Zepa?
A. Yes, yes.
Q. So this unit that you belonged to, you said a moment ago, numbered 1.500 men; is that right?
A. Maybe less, about 1.200.
Q. And the members of that military unit, were they all armed?
A. No.
Q. And how many were armed?
A. I'm really unable to say because I really don't know.
Q. Then what did the people who were unarmed do? What were they doing?
A. What weapons there were were used on the front lines, and people would take shifts, and they didn't have any particular activities, those who stayed down there.
Q. But in paragraph 16, in the middle of that paragraph, you say: "I had normal duties, and my position was on the front lines in front of the UN positions."
Does that mean that even on the front lines, in direct contact 30635 with representatives of the UN, there were people without weapons?
A. Could you repeat your question? I don't understand.
Q. Please, will you look what you say in paragraph 16. "I had normal duties, manning a position on the front lines in front of the UN positions." In those positions on the front lines, were there people without weapons?
A. I am unable to give you a very precise answer to that too.
Q. Well, what was happening on the front lines? Were there conflicts?
A. No.
Q. Well, did your units go outside the boundaries of the demilitarised zone?
A. Only if they went on foot, if people were travelling to Srebrenica and back.
Q. Tell me just this, please, if you can explain to the Judges regarding those events: How many victims were there among your fighters, among your combatants during those ten days of fighting, as you say?
A. I can't give you an exact figure, because there was general chaos afterwards, and --
Q. So you can't tell us exactly how many men from your unit, your friends, your co-combatants were killed out of the 1.500 men?
A. I can't.
Q. But approximately?
A. I'd really rather not make any assessments.
Q. Were there victims? 30636 BLANK PAGE 30637
A. Yes.
MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
MS. PACK: Your Honour, a couple of short questions. Could the map in fact be put on the ELMO. And if the witness could be passed a pen. A pen.
Re-examined by Ms. Pack:
Q. Witness, if you're able to, could you identify on the map that's been put on the ELMO just to the left of you, could you identify on that map, marked with an X, where it was approximately that you crossed the Drina. If you're not able to help, then please say so.
A. [Marks]
Q. Thank you. Witness, you were asked questions about your father and about his time in Serbia. He was kept there for some months, you said, before going to the United States. Do you know where he was kept?
A. I don't know exactly, but it was some camp in the village of Sljivovica. I don't know exactly where this is in Serbia.
JUDGE KWON: Just a second. If the witness can mark the place where his father had crossed the Drina River before. Can you locate it on the map?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, because perhaps five or six days before that, we had already parted. So I didn't know anything. I didn't even know whether he was alive or anything.
JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
MS. PACK:
Q. And just finally, was he free to leave the location at which he 30638 was kept or was he kept there as a prisoner?
A. He was a prisoner. He could not leave whenever he wanted to. Even his mail was censored, and things like that.
MS. PACK: Your Honour, I have no further questions.
JUDGE MAY: Do you want that marked map, Ms. Pack, to be exhibited?
MS. PACK: Yes, I would, Your Honour.
JUDGE MAY: Yes. That can be added as a tab to Exhibit 620, tab --
THE REGISTRAR: Tab 3, Your Honour.
JUDGE MAY: Tab 3. Thank you. Witness B-1619, that concludes your evidence. Thank you for coming to the Tribunal to give it. You are now free to go. You will just have to wait until the blinds are drawn before you do go. We will adjourn now for 20 minutes.
[The witness withdrew]
--- Recess taken at 10.39 a.m.
--- On resuming at 11.06 a.m.
[The witness entered court]
JUDGE MAY: Yes. Let the witness take the declaration.
MR. WAESPI: One moment, please, Your Honours, if I may.
JUDGE MAY: Yes.
MR. WAESPI: If we could briefly go into private session for a protective measure issue.
JUDGE MAY: Yes. Just take a seat. 30639
[Private session] (redacted)
(redacted) (redacted)
(redacted) (redacted)
(redacted) (redacted)
(redacted)
[Open session]
THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session.
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
JUDGE MAY: If you'd like to take a seat.
WITNESS: WITNESS B-1401
[Witness answered through interpreter]
JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Waespi.
MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President. Examined by Mr. Waespi:
Q. Good morning, Witness.
A. Good morning.
Q. If you could be shown a piece of paper with your name on it.
MR. WAESPI: And that's, Your Honours, the last exhibit, tab 11 of his package.
Q. Could you please confirm that this is your name. 30640
A. Yes, this is my name.
THE INTERPRETER: The interpreters note: Could the witness please be asked to speak louder and to come closer to the microphone. Thank you.
JUDGE MAY: You're being asked if you would, so the interpreters could hear, if you would come closer to the microphone and speak up so that we can hear.
Yes. We haven't yet got an exhibit number, I think, for this package. It may be convenient to deal with that now.
THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, 621.
JUDGE MAY: Yes.
MR. WAESPI:
Q. Now, Witness, I'm not sure whether the transcript has captured that you have confirmed that this was your name. Can you please do it again.
A. Yes, this is my name.
Q. Thank you very much, Witness. Now, did you testify in the Krstic trial on 13 April 2000?
A. Yes, I did.
MR. WAESPI: Mr. President, we would like to suggest that this package be admitted under 92 bis.
JUDGE MAY: Yes, it is.
MR. WAESPI: And with your permission, I'd like to read out a brief summary of the testimony of this witness.
This witness is a Bosnian Muslim who was only 17 years old when the Srebrenica enclave fell. Although many of Srebrenica's Muslims sought 30641 refuge at the UN base in Potocari, the witness fled into the woods because he feared for his life.
The witness joined a column of 1 to 2.000 mostly unarmed Muslim men who tried to escape through the woods towards Tuzla and eventually surrendered along the Bratunac-Konjevic Polje road. He was then taken to a meadow near Sandici where approximately 1.000 to 2.000 captured Muslim men gathered. They were guarded by soldiers, and one of them told the detained men that the soldiers were from Serbia. Shortly thereafter, another group of soldiers arrived and made the men clap their hands and sing "Long live the King, long live Serbia." Several hours later, the witness and the other men were taken on extremely overcrowded buses to Bratunac where they were forced to spend the night still packed onto these trucks with no food and very little water. The next day, on July 14, 1995, in the morning, the trucks continued to Zvornik and finally stopped at a location called Petkovci. Around 3.00 or 4.00 in the afternoon, the men were taken into a school building and crammed into classrooms under conditions perhaps even worse than on the trucks.
Once inside, soldiers forced the men to say, "This is Serb land, always was and always will be." They also shouted that Srebrenica had always been and always would be Serb. The Muslim detainees were so thirsty that they began to drink their own urine. As night fell, prisoners from other classrooms were taken out in groups of three to five and shots were heard in front of the school.
Eventually, soldiers began leading the Muslim prisoners out of the 30642 BLANK PAGE 30643 school, tying their hands and loading them on a big truck. As the witness left the school, he felt a sticky substance under his feet and saw a big pile of what he thought were killed prisoners from the school. The truck onto which the witness was loaded travelled for about five to ten minutes. After it stopped, men were taken off the truck in groups of five, and each time shots were heard. The men remaining on the bus tried to avoid getting off, knowing that they would be executed. Some people shouted, "Give us some water first and then kill us." And the witness felt sorry that he would die thirsty and was trying -- and tried to hide amongst the people as long as he could, like everybody else. He just wanted to live another second or two.
When the witness was eventually removed from the bus, from the truck, he was told to find a place by the Serb soldiers, and then he saw rows and rows of dead bodies. The witness and the other men reached an empty spot and were ordered by the soldiers to lie down. As the men tried to lie down, the soldiers opened fire. The witness was shot in the right side of his chest and lay suffering as the soldiers continued to line up and shoot prisoners for what the witness estimates to be anywhere from ten minutes to an hour.
As the witness lay bleeding, another group of prisoners was executed next to him, and he was hit once again in his left foot, and later he received another shot.
Once the shooting stopped, the witness heard the soldiers laughing and mocking the dead Muslims. Then he heard someone ordering a soldier to inspect the bodies to make sure no one had survived. The witness lay 30644 silently as a military boot stepped next to his face and then watched as the soldier fired a shot into the head of the man lying next to him. After the soldiers left, the witness escaped with another man who was wounded in the head. The two men helped each other with their teeth to untie their hands and climbed through the forest up to a hill to a spot that give them a view of the Petkovci dam area.
The next morning, from their vantage point on the hill, they saw a yellow loader collecting dead bodies and loading them onto a tractor or a truck. The witness saw a very large pile of bodies. After four days walking through the woods, the witness and his companion finally reached Muslim territory and safety. With your permission, Your Honours, I would like to ask the witness just a very few questions.
JUDGE MAY: Yes.
MR. WAESPI:
Q. Now, Witness, we heard that you escaped with your companion. Can you tell the Court how important this companion was for you.
A. Actually, I never would have even tried to run away. I was just waiting to die. I was suffering so badly. I was thinking of calling them to shoot me.
Actually, I would have been grateful to them had they killed me, I was suffering so badly. So if it hadn't been for this man, I never would have even tried to do this. He's the only one who knows how badly I suffered. Actually, I couldn't even walk. So then he'd leave me behind and then come back and beseech me to go on, but it was so hard for me to 30645 go on, it hurt so badly.
When that military boot stopped right by me, I thought, They're going to kill me now, and I wanted to be killed then because I really couldn't take it any longer. But I didn't dare call out to them.
Q. Now, we also heard that you were wounded a second time and a third time. Can you describe to Their Honours how that occurred.
A. Well, you said that it was a bus but it was actually trucks that we were on. So shooting was heard, and it was quite clear to everyone that this was the end. So people didn't want to get off. Serb soldiers were yelling, saying that we had to get off or otherwise they'd come and get us. We were all hiding behind each other. So I had to get off too. When I came there, they told us to choose our place. I didn't know what place they meant. And as I got closer, I saw that there were rows of corpses there. Everything happened so fast. And I thought I'd die soon, I wouldn't suffer. And I thought my mama will never know where I am. And some of the soldiers said that we'd fall then and then the firing started.
I just know that I was hit on the right side, in the right arm. I really cannot remember the moment when I was actually hit. I felt the stench of gunpowder. There were bullets flying all around me, hitting other people, and I was just waiting for the next one to hit me. When the next row was hit, then a bullet hit me in the foot. That hurt the worst. I wish I could have screamed, but I didn't dare to. The man next to me was moaning so badly as he was dying, that he was heard a great deal. That's why perhaps the soldier didn't hear me. 30646 He came and he simply shot the man next to me in the head. So when he -- they probably used tracer bullets. I still have -- fragmentation bullets, actually, and two of them grazed me on the neck, and I was wondering, My goodness, why don't I just die?
Q. Witness, let me briefly ask you about your father. Was he with you when you left the enclave towards the woods?
A. He was with me at first, but later on we got lost. I lost him, actually. I was holding onto him. So when all of this commotion started and this chaos, I got lost. I was on my own.
Q. Did you see him again?
A. No, never.
Q. Was your uncle with you at that time as well?
A. Well, I found him later. Actually, I found him several times and lost him several times. Later on, I found him, and he was probably killed too. His daughter was only a year old then.
Q. And a final question: We heard that you didn't want to go to the UN base in Potocari because you feared for your life. Can you explain to the Judges what you meant by that.
A. Well, actually when the attack on Srebrenica started, and actually even before that, it became obvious that UNPROFOR could not protect us. Actually, they were dancing to the tune of the Serbs, something like that. I was close to the line, close to the UNPROFOR points, and I saw that as soon as the Serbs started shooting, UNPROFOR would leave, even before the refugees started pouring in. So I decided not to go to UNPROFOR. Perhaps my chance of surviving was greater if I went through 30647 the woods, and perhaps more people survived among those who went through the woods.
Two relatives of mine, or, rather, quite a few of them, but the two I saw right there when we parted, they went to the military base. Both of them were killed, and one was exhumed a year ago. Many of my relatives -- actually, none of my close relatives really survived. All of them were killed regardless of whether they went through the woods or to the UNPROFOR base.
Q. And my last question is: Are you surprised to what has happened to you and your colleagues in July 1995, having lived in the Srebrenica enclave for a while as a refugee?
A. In actual fact, I wasn't surprised. It's the same thing that awaited us in 1992, but we managed to flee. In 1992, also in the beginning of May, the Serb army torched our house, and we escaped thanks to our neighbour. However, it was the same fate that awaited us there, like in Vlasenica and elsewhere. So it was just this killing of ours that was postponed. Perhaps I would have not lost my life myself, but most Muslims were killed, and my father was killed too. And I'm not saying this just like that. I'm saying it on the basis of what happened to my neighbours who decided to stay on, who did not want to flee. They were all killed.
MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President. I have no further questions.
JUDGE KWON: If the witness could give the year of his birth, in open session or in private session, either. 30648 BLANK PAGE 30649
MR. WAESPI: Yes. I would prefer private session, please.
[Private session] (redacted)
(redacted) (redacted)
(redacted) (redacted)
[Open session]
THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session.
JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Milosevic. Cross-examined by Mr. Milosevic:
Q. [Interpretation] Mr. 1401, you gave a few statements about the events that you're testifying about; is that right?
A. Yes.
Q. You gave the first statement on the 19th of July, 1995, to the command of the 246th Mountain Brigade, to the security organ of the army of Bosnia-Herzegovina; is that right?
A. Yes.
Q. And you gave your second statement to the state security service in Tuzla of the Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina, on the 31st of July, 1995.
A. Yes.
Q. Finally, you gave a statement to the investigators, first on the 12th and 13th of August, 1995, and then on the 19th of August, 1996, and brief notes on the 4th of January and the 1st of September, 1999. But in order to handle this better, perhaps we can call the statement to the 30650 investigators the third statement. Is that right?
A. Well, I know approximately all the statements that I gave. And then when you show me the statement, then I can tell you, well, yes, that's my statement.
Q. I assume that they are yours because I received them from the opposite side.
A. Well, then they are.
Q. I think so because they bear their numbers as well. In the beginning of the month of July 1995 when the conflict broke out in Srebrenica, you were a minor; is that right?
A. Yes.
Q. Until then, with your parents and your sisters, you lived at Slapovci, a refugee centre near Tuzla, seven or eight kilometres away?
A. Slapovici is the name.
Q. Please correct me if I make a mistake because I am not familiar with these localities so mistakes are possible.
A. All right.
Q. With your family, when the conflict broke out, you went towards Suceska; is that right?
A. Yes.
Q. And you stayed in the village of Viogor; is that right?
A. Yes.
Q. Where there were a large number of people from Srebrenica and the surrounding area; is that right?
A. Yes. 30651
Q. In this third statement, I am referring to the statement given to the investigators --
A. Yes.
Q. -- in August 1995, in paragraph 2 you've said that your father said to you then that you should decide for yourself whether you want to go with the column of women and children to the UNPROFOR base in Potocari or to stay with the other military-aged men and try to reach the liberated territory. Is that what you stated?
A. Yes.
Q. However, in your first statement, given on the 19th of July, 1995, as well as your second statement, of the 31st of July, 1995, you stated that then somebody issued an order that all military-aged men and able-bodied men go to Jaglici and Susnjari and further on to Tuzla; is that right?
A. Could you just repeat what you said just now, this last sentence, what you said?
Q. I'm just trying to establish the following: A few minutes ago, you confirmed to me what it says in the statement given to the investigators, that your father said to you that you should decide for yourself.
A. Yes, yes.
Q. And in the first statement, of the 19th of July, and the second statement, of the 31st of July, you say, and now I'm quoting you, that: "Somebody then issued an order for all military men capable of serving in the military to set off towards Jaglici and Susnjari and then carry on 30652 towards Tuzla."
A. I don't understand. What's in dispute? I mean, what are you trying to ask me?
Q. I'm just trying to establish whether, as you said in the statement to the investigators, whether you decided on your own because your father told you to decide on your own and then you went where you went in accordance with your own decision or was this based on an order that was issued, which is on the first page of your first statement, somewhere around the middle of the page. Somebody -- someone issued the order for all men of serving -- capable in serving in the military or, rather, all men to set out towards Jaglici and Susnjari and then to carry on towards Tuzla.
A. I'll explain. I think -- it's not that I strictly said that somebody issued an order. Actually, we heard that someone had issued an order, or, rather, that someone had said that all military-age able-bodied men should go, or that would be a good thing, something like that. And what my father said to me, that has nothing to do with these orders. He said that I could decide for myself. Everybody could decide for themselves whether they would go there, to Potocari, or somewhere else. So we heard that an order had been issued but it wasn't a strict order. Everybody decided for themselves.
Q. I don't want to hurt you in any way in view of what you've been through, but I just want to establish what actually happened. So I'm just asking you about the facts and what you said. And also, you say in your own statement: "In Viogor, after one day, my mother and three sisters 30653 went towards Potocari, hoping that they would find protection in the UNPROFOR camp, and I, together with my army, went on orders from the command of the army of Bosnia-Herzegovina." That's what it says quite literally. "Together with all other able-bodied men I went to Susnjari. At Susnjari there was a line-up of about 15.000 men." Is that what you stated in this statement?
A. All the details are not covered in the statement. Two or three pages are not sufficient for me to say everything. And depending on what the investigators asked me, I answered, so I may not have remembered all the details. You can have a look when I gave the statement, as soon as I crossed into that territory. Maybe I didn't remember all the details. We had heard that somebody had issued the orders. Probably the army of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Not the Serbs, surely. Who else could have given such an order?
Q. In this second statement of yours which you gave to the state security service in Tuzla on the 31st of July, you say that upon orders of the army command together with the others, you enter Susnjari and you lined up together with the other 15.000 men; is that right?
A. All these statements are correct. All you're saying is correct, only some statements have more details, another one has less details, but it is all true. We heard it. I didn't receive a piece of document, a piece of paper with the order on it or a document, but we heard that the command had issued such an order and that is what I said.
Q. And then there was a lineup. You were lined up; is that right?
A. It didn't go as smoothly as it is stated in the statement. There 30654 BLANK PAGE 30655 were a large number of civilians there. You're trying to say that these were soldiers, but it wasn't so.
Q. Witness, I'm not trying to say anything, I'm just trying to establish the truth. So there was a line-up, and there were some 15.000 of you lining up there; is that right?
A. Actually, I and the civilians and many others had decided to go there, and it was only later on, after the line-up, that the civilians were the last. So the army didn't really let us go. Maybe all the details are not given there. The army told us to stay last. That is what I heard, at least. There were crowds there. There was shelling. There was general confusion. I even got lost. I lost my father, then I'd find him again, because I was trying to move on together with the army, but the soldiers would chase us away.
Q. I understand that, but let's clear up one point. A witness testified before you from the same area who was mobilised to the army of Bosnia and Herzegovina who was also underage. Were you a member of the army of Bosnia-Herzegovina or not?
A. I would have been happy to be one, and if I had a weapon, this probably wouldn't have happened in this way. I may have got killed in the woods somewhere, but not like this.
Q. I see. So you just joined this military column; is that right?
A. Yes, of course.
Q. How many civilians were there attached to that military column?
A. It's difficult to estimate. There were many people, but there were far more civilians than soldiers. I could see by the weapons, 30656 whether they were carrying a weapon or not.
Q. Was your father at the time a member of the 284th Brigade?
A. I'll have to explain that. Actually, my father was a member of the brigade until Srebrenica was demilitarised. When it was demilitarised, he was no longer a soldier. He may have formally been a soldier on paper, but he didn't have a weapon. Throughout the period of conflict, when the attack on Srebrenica started, he was with us, with us children and my mother. He never went to the front line. So that's the kind of soldier he was.
Q. And who was his commander? Who was in command of the 284th Brigade?
A. I don't know. I don't know which brigade it is. I just recalled and I said it. I remember him saying that he was in that brigade, but I can't remember who was the commander and where the brigade was, because the area was demilitarised.
Q. I understand that, but as far as I know, even though it was a safe area and proclaimed to be demilitarised, Naser Oric's 28th Division was there in Srebrenica, wasn't it?
A. Yes, maybe. I can't talk about that at any length, but I'll tell you as much as I know.
Q. But you know that, don't you?
A. Yes, I heard that. I didn't see the army acting.
Q. Now, tell me, please --
A. Can I just add something? This 28th Division, after the demilitarisation, may have been there only formally, because they were 30657 condemned to failure anyway even before that. And when the weapons were taken away, I think they really existed only in form and not in reality, not a unit that could have done any harm to anyone.
Q. Now, tell me, please, this column that was lined up and set off, its aim was to break its way through to Tuzla; is that right?
A. Yes.
Q. In your first statement as well as in your second statement, you say that that column, close to the village of Kamenica, was ambushed by Serb forces, as you say; is that right?
A. Could you repeat that, please?
Q. You say this in both your first and second statement, that close to the village of Kamenica the column was ambushed by Serb forces, as you say; is that right?
A. Just a moment, please. There aren't enough details there, but I'll explain everything. Everything is right, but let me just add something.
The column wasn't moving smoothly. The shelling had started much earlier on, and there were many killed, and there were many people who went mad. So it wasn't ambushed all at once. This happened later.
Q. You say that, "The column was broken up and divided into two and that a large number of people were killed there or seriously wounded and that there was widespread panic so that I, too, was separated from my father and I only had my Uncle Dzemal next to me." So there was a conflict there. The place is called Siljkovici. In brackets it says Kamenica. I'm just reading from your statement. And 30658 that is where the column was divided up. There were many casualties, many people dead and many wounded and widespread panic.
A. Let me just add, the statement is an abbreviated version of things, but let me explain. The column went quietly for a short time. After that, it was constantly exposed to shelling. The column continued. They picked up the wounded as they could, and then the real shelling became so heavy that it was not possible to move forward. And I assume the column was broken off, I couldn't see it from the air or anything, I wasn't in a plane.
Q. But that is when the fighting started between the Serb forces and your forces, is that right, in that column?
A. We could hear the shooting in front of us all the time, and there were shells falling around us. There were many dead people. There was a conflict in front of us. And as I reached the spot, I saw that there were a large number of people killed.
Q. So that was the battle that took place before you reached it?
A. Yes. We reached there afterwards, once the army had passed, so we stayed behind there. So I remember when a man wanted to join the soldier, the soldier wouldn't let them. They would chase them away. "You can't do that," they would say. But there were many people wounded. There were a lot of us, and they wouldn't let us go with them because the army couldn't pass either because there were many people wounded. There was a lot of yelling and shouting and screaming.
Q. So the army broke through and left you behind; is that right?
A. They tried to save themselves. Otherwise, if they had taken all 30659 of us with them, I don't think anyone would have survived.
Q. And in this breakthrough, there were a large number of dead; is that right?
A. Yes. Yes, when I reached that spot, I saw many dead people. But even before, there were many bodies left behind in the woods because no one could help them. This hurt me. I -- this moved me. There was a young man crying and begging not to be left behind, but he couldn't be picked up. People were just trying to save their lives because there were shells falling all around.
Q. I understand. So actually, the greatest part of the military column broke through. Some were killed. Those who were not killed or wounded managed to break through, and they left you behind; is that right? They couldn't take you with them.
A. There were far more wounded, I would say, than dead. A part of the army, maybe the first part, was cut off. So maybe a part of the army clashed with the Serbs. They were broken up. But the largest part may have reached close to free territory, and they had to fight their way through. You know, 15.000 men going one behind another makes an enormous column.
Q. Yes, I understand that. But the part closer to the front line managed to break through, and the part that was further away from the front line didn't manage; is that right?
A. Let me just say the column was moving. The soldiers were up in front. I assume so. Maybe there have been one, two, 3.000 men with weapons, and they were up front. And when the column was broken into two, 30660 BLANK PAGE 30661 most of them stayed behind. Some of them broke through, then were killed. Those were soldiers, but others were civilians. Maybe one or two were armed.
Q. There must have been more than 3.000 soldiers, as you say.
A. I didn't say 3.000. I said one, two, 3.000. But I don't believe that there were more. Maybe on paper there may have been many soldiers who were registered as such. Like my father. There may have been many more like that. But you can't say that they were soldiers.
Q. I'm just trying to establish the facts. So do you really believe that there couldn't have been more than 3.000 men with weapons?
A. I don't believe so.
Q. I see. But on paper there were more, you say. You can't see that on the spot, as the column is moving, who is a soldier on paper.
A. After the demilitarisation of the area, they may have still been recorded as soldiers, but they weren't really soldiers.
Q. So according to the best of your knowledge, there were not more than 3.000 armed men in that column.
A. Maybe even fewer than that.
Q. Since you say that on that occasion a large number of people were killed, there was a lot of panic, let us just have a look at the first statement of the 19th of July when you describe what happened after that. You say that, "In the woods where I was with the others, I stayed for one day and one night. Throughout that time, the Chetniks kept shelling the place with Pragas, self-propelled anti-aircraft guns and anti-aircraft machine-guns and other weapons. That day people started arguing and 30662 killing each other. Some wanted to surrender and others did not." Was that how it was?
A. I have to add something. So this column, this army, they were maybe ten or 15 kilometres in front of us. So we remained there, surrounded. I assume we were surrounded. We didn't dare go anywhere. And the soldiers were calling out over the loudspeaker for us to surrender. Before that, there was shelling all the time. There were many people there. And when they started calling and telling us to surrender on the loudspeaker, and they said, "You will be escorted in accordance with the Geneva Conventions. If you don't surrender, you will be killed." The shelling had stopped then. And some people didn't wouldn't to go. Actually, some were in -- actually, it was just chaos. There were a lot of people wounded. People were dying. People were hallucinating. You could see men going crazy. They were yelling at night and -- this was a consequence of the conflict. When the Serbs were calling on us to surrender, the people who didn't want to would kill themselves. There weren't that many who did that, we didn't all go and kill ourselves. A few. I saw two or three cases of suicide.
Q. And you say they started quarreling amongst themselves and killing each other. So they were clashing -- clashes amongst them.
A. Yes. They started arguing, but not killing each other, I meant killing themselves. I don't know in which statement I said this. I didn't see anyone killing someone else there.
Q. I'm examining you only on the basis of the written statements received from the other side, and you say at the beginning of the second 30663 page of the statement I'm quoting from: "In the woods I was in with the other men, I stayed for one day and one night, and throughout that time the Chetniks were shelling the place with Pragas, PAMs, and other weapons. That day, people started arguing amongst themselves and killing each other. Some wanted to surrender and others did not. At one point a column headed towards the village of Sandici, and my cousin and I joined that column."
That's what I'm asking you about.
A. So what are you asking me?
Q. In your second statement, you say that, "In Kamenica, a large number of people were killed and many were wounded by shells. A certain number of our men committed suicide." Is that true?
A. It is true, but let me add something. So a part of the people decided to surrender. We were in the woods. We didn't know where we were, in fact. We were lost. And the previous day and all night until morning, there was shelling. There was fighting and shooting. That morning, it was quiet, and we were treading over the dead, the wounded. And when they started calling out, people didn't want to surrender until about 3.00. Those who did decide, they joined this column. Others who didn't, some fled. I saw one or two, three cases of people killing themselves. That's as many as I saw. But this is negligible compared to the number killed. There were far more wounded people. So many stayed behind in the woods.
Q. I understand that, but there was also a clash amongst the people there themselves. 30664
A. Will you tell me where exactly I say that they were killing each other. Which statement?
Q. It is in the first statement, on page 2. At the top of the page, in the fourth line, you say exactly, and I'm quoting you: "They started arguing and killing each other or amongst themselves." It is at the beginning of the second page. You say: "They started arguing amongst themselves and killing each other."
A. They started quarreling, yes, but they didn't kill each other. It may have happened if that had gone on, but I didn't see anyone kill anyone else.
Q. I'm just telling you what it says here.
A. I understand what I'm reading. You're trying to persuade me that I said one thing, but this sentence is rather ambiguous, and it can be interpreted in two different ways.
Q. You said that the army had gone forward, in front, and that the people who stayed in the woods were those who had joined the army. And if they were shooting, they must have been armed. Did you have any weapons there among the part of the column that you say consisted of civilians?
A. I told you, the army had almost passed through, and when the column was cut in half, virtually all the civilians stayed behind and maybe a small part of the army. I didn't see Serb soldiers. They were shelling so hard that -- harder than any time before. Maybe in 1993, at the beginning of the war. So the army had almost passed through.
Q. But what you considered to be the whole army, though the whole column was virtually, consisted of able-bodied men following that order 30665 and there were a few of you who still had weapons.
A. Maybe that is how it had been planned, that everyone should go, but army was up front, and they left first. So one could say that we were disappointed. We stayed behind them. And when the Serb army cut the column in two, those who remained were virtually all civilians. So most of the soldiers had passed through, but maybe a few were left behind. Maybe a part of the army stayed behind.
Q. I'm asking you now about those who remained after the main body of the army left. How many among those who remained were armed?
A. I don't know. Perhaps I happened to see someone with weapons but they did not surrender later. They fled. I saw people who didn't want to surrender, who simply fled. They didn't want to go and surrender. They simply went in a different direction, through the woods or something. And perhaps some of them who stayed behind did not surrender either. Not everybody wanted to surrender.
Q. All right. I see that in the statement you gave to the investigators you make no mention of these incidents of interfighting, interkilling among the members of the army of Bosnia-Herzegovina. Did you mention this to the investigators at all or did they simply decide to leave it out? I assume that you told them the same things that you said in the first two statements.
A. I gave this statement or, rather, these two statements that you insist upon immediately after my survival, and I gave these statements to the investigators much later. So perhaps I did not remember all the details, but you keep insisting on them killing each other, killing each 30666 other, and you keep insisting on it. It is ambiguous. I mean, I meant that they were committing suicide. People were killing themselves in that sense, but your way of putting it is that we were killing each other in the sense of some people killing other people.
Q. Well, you said that a lot of people got killed during the fighting during the breakthrough, that a large number got killed there.
JUDGE MAY: No. I think you've exhausted this topic. You've been over and over it sufficiently.
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] May I just add one more thing, just one more thing?
JUDGE MAY: Yes.
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Actually, we cannot call this a breakthrough. When the Serb army severed that column, most of them were civilians. I recognised so many neighbours. So it cannot be called a breakthrough when they cut through this column, then they surrounded the civilians. Perhaps there was a soldier or two there from that column that they had broken up, yes.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. Mr. 1401, they could not have known whether you were civilians or not. You were part of this column that was fighting them; is that right? How could they know from a distance whether you were, because you were a part of the column consisting of able-bodied men, and you were asked to surrender in accordance with the Geneva Conventions, so they considered you to be the military.
A. Well, later on, too. You can understand this any way you want. I 30667 don't know what they considered us to be, but they planned to kill us, to kill all of us.
Q. What they were planning then will certainly have to be established, but tell me, please -- actually, just one more thing quite specific. Did this happen on the 12th of July?
A. Can I just add one more thing? Well, while the army was passing there, there was no conflict. It could be seen very well. There are meadows after the forest, and you can see very well whether it's military or civilians. The Serbs did not kill those who had went ahead -- who had gone ahead. Only when the remainder came, that's when they cut through the column and started killing people. But the army had already passed ahead.
Q. Oh, are you trying to say that they allowed the army to pass without fighting and then they started shooting and killing you?
A. Well, there would have been a conflict in that case, and then some of them would have gotten killed too. So that's what I saw and that's what I infer on the basis of what I saw.
Q. Tell me, was this on the 12th of July? I'm asking you this because of some other witnesses who testified here. I just want to establish the date. Was this on the 12th of July?
A. On the 11th we set out, and we spent the night in the forest, and the next day was the 12th when they called --
Q. Since you spent a day and night in that forest, on the following day, that is to say on the 13th of July, is that right, together with 600 other members of that group of yours on the road between Kasaba and 30668 Bratunac, you surrendered to the Serb forces; is that right?
A. Yes.
Q. All right. You say in your first statement: "As we were getting out to the asphalt road linking Kasaba and Bratunac, the Chetniks placed a tank there, a transporter, and we all came down onto the asphalt with our hands up. At that point the Chetniks took all our belongings; money, guns, and other valuables." Is that right? That's what is written here.
A. Yes.
Q. In your second statement, you say: "After a day and night spent in the forest, we went to the asphalt road where the bridge we saw Chetniks with tanks and APCs who ordered us to raise our hands and drop the grenades, pistols, and German marks we had or we would be killed. We all obeyed their order."
So when they issued the order, you surrendered your weapons. That means that you did have weapons.
A. Well, that's the way it looks when -- if the soldiers were saying it, but they were saying that the soldier -- the soldiers were saying that people who had weapons should surrender them, or those who had knives or razors or something. But nobody had a weapon. I don't remember seeing anyone with a weapon.
Q. To hand over weapons that you did not have?
A. Wait a minute.
Q. You came across them, they asked you to surrender and to lay your weapons down, but you claim that you had no weapons; is that it?
A. The same thing happened in my village in 1992. People surrendered 30669 their weapons and yet again they were asking for weapons. They just kept asking for weapons without any reason for doing so. Perhaps they were afraid that somebody had a pistol in their jackets or in their bags or something like that. That's what they were afraid of.
Q. Oh, so that's what they were afraid of. They could not see whether you had any weapons or not. Wasn't it visible? It was in broad daylight. They say surrender your weapons, and don't they see that you don't have any weapons?
A. They said that we should leave all our things, whoever had money. "Don't you let us find a razor on any one of you." Perhaps they thought that somebody had a pistol in the pockets of their coats or something but I didn't see anybody with a rifle or something.
Q. I'm not insisting on you saying something that you said you did not see. So tell me now, do you know that in the ranks of the army of Bosnia-Herzegovina, in that area, there was a considerable number of persons who were underage who had been mobilised?
A. Just one more thing that I wish to add in response to the other question, then I'm going to answer this question. I already told you that some soldiers in the forest who had rifles simply left. They didn't even surrender. Perhaps there was a soldier or two or something like that. But I didn't see anybody like that with me. There was no one like that where I was.
Q. All right. Tell me, please, do you know how many minors were mobilised into the army of Bosnia-Herzegovina?
A. I don't know about the number of minors or whether there were any 30670 minors. Perhaps there were, perhaps there weren't, but I don't know. Let me just add one more thing. Actually, nobody was forced to go into the army because people did not have any weapons. I mean, even people who were of age and who were able-bodied did not have weapons. People would have liked to have been in the army perhaps. Perhaps I would have liked to have been in the army too because that would have given me greater chance of survival.
Q. I'll try to go through all of this as fast I can, all of these questions. Please, tell me, since we stated at the beginning that 15.000 of you set out after the line-up, then this conflict occurred, the army broke through and part of you stayed behind. During this breakthrough, how many people actually got killed? What is your estimate? Out of the 15.000 of you who had set out, how many people got killed?
A. Not everybody was killed there. I didn't see all the persons who were killed, so this is a very approximate estimate. Perhaps I saw about 500 men. One person was lying by a beech tree, and then one person was without a face, and -- well, say about 500. I don't know. I mean, I didn't look through the entire forest. I was only in part of the forest.
Q. But in the part of the forest that you saw, during that breakthrough, about 500 men were killed, or perhaps more. That's what you said; right?
A. Yes.
Q. And that pertains to the part of the forest that you saw.
A. Yes. Because I know that I was walking across bodies. There were so many people killed, and then also they were victims of shells, because 30671 you would see people without faces, hands, whatever.
Q. You say that the soldiers who took you prisoner then introduced themselves and they said that they were from Serbia. Is that what you're saying? That was my understanding --
A. Yes.
Q. -- on the basis of the summary. So they introduced themselves to you and said they were from Serbia.
A. Yes, when we were lined up down there, where they lined us up there and when they took our things away. Then we ran for about two or three kilometres, I don't know exactly, with our hands up. And then we came to a meadow where there was a tank where there were a lot of soldiers. I mean, I wasn't the first one to get there, there were others who had already arrived, and there were probably people there on the meadow even beforehand, and there was a burned Muslim village there that had been burned, I don't know when, before that. So --
Q. Just a moment, please.
A. We came to the meadow and a soldier stood there in front, and I heard this very well. He had something on his head, and he said, "We are from Serbia." He was really full of himself. It's not only that. He started lecturing us there. He was acting really smart. I remembered some of this, but usually I did not listen, and I was with my head down.
Q. I understand that, 1401. I heard just now when your summary was read that these soldiers made you shout Long live the King and things like that. Is that right? 30672
A. When this soldier gave this lecture -- or, rather, the wounded were there in front, perhaps I was smaller so I couldn't see them very well, but later on when I was boarding the truck I did not see them. He said, "You see these comrades of yours? You should have surrendered earlier. You're going to be exchanged when your authorities ask for you. You're going to the hangar in Bratunac now." And then he said, mockingly, "You're not getting any dinner." It seemed ridiculous. There were so many of our men who were killed there, we were all terrified, and he's saying you're not getting any dinner. But he was laughing probably because he knew what lay in store for us.
And when we lay there on the ground with our abdomens on the ground and we had to shout "Long live the King" and it resounded through the valley and our hands were up -- I haven't finished.
Q. You don't have to give me the entire description now but isn't it clear to you these could not have been soldiers from Serbia who were forcing you to shout "Long live the King"?
A. I cannot confirm that they are from Serbia or that they're not from Serbia, but the fact is -- the fact is that the soldiers said that. And the fact is that we shouted that while they were probably killing the wounded, because later on I saw a soldier shooting at the house. And my uncle who was there said that a man was missing, a man who they probably took away. So they probably killed the wounded over there.
Q. All right. But you just confirmed this, that these soldiers that you thought were from Serbia, they told you to shout "Long live the King."
A. I didn't think anything. The soldiers said, "We are from Serbia." 30673 I'm not saying anything what I think; I heard this very well.
Q. But he said that and then he forced you to shout "Long live the King." Now tell me, please, from Kamenica you were transferred by trucks, as you said in your statements given to the investigators, you were transferred to Bratunac, and you spent the night there, one night, on trucks; is that right?
A. Yes.
Q. On trucks where it said Tuzlatrans. That's what was written on the trucks. So it couldn't have been anybody from Serbia.
A. Oh, just a moment, please. That's not what was written on all the trucks. On one of the trucks it said Tuzlatrans. It's not to say that the trucks were from Tuzla and that we were going to Tuzla. It probably belonged to a company. It just happened to be there. It happened to be in their hands.
Q. And then from Bratunac they transferred you by trucks again to a place where, as you said in your statement given to the investigators, that you did not know where this place was, but you do know that this was a school. That's what you said in your statement given to the investigators: "They transferred us somewhere but we did not know where." However, in your first statement, dated the 31st of July 1995, you say, "On the following day they drove us in trucks towards Konjevic Polje and then to Zvornik and Karakaj. And after that they allegedly went to Tuzla. Underneath the tarpaulin I saw that they took us to a school in Petkovci." So that is a quotation from your second statement. Please, explain this to me now: How is it possible that in your 30674 previous statement you said that as you were looking through the tarpaulin you managed to notice that you were in front of the school in Petkovci whereas in your statement that you gave later to the investigators you said that you did not know where they took you to.
A. Just a moment. I'll explain. Actually, we didn't know where they were taking us and I did not know it was a school when we were in front of the school, but later, when I entered the school, I saw it was a school. Later on, when I was taken into the school, I saw blackboards where children write and I saw the kind of floor you have in a school, and desks. It looked like a school.
Q. I'm just asking you the following: You saw this later, and in the statement given to the organs of Bosnia-Herzegovina on the 31st of July 1995, you said that they brought you --
JUDGE MAY: Does it really matter? Does it really matter when he found out it was a school? It's not disputed apparently that it was a school.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] That's not the point. The point is, Mr. May, that in the statement given to the investigators later, much later, he says - this is on page 7, paragraphs 1 through 5 - that he was not in a position to say where the school was. And in the previous statement, he already knew that this was the school in Petkovci, according to what the witness himself is saying.
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Which statement? In which statement?
JUDGE MAY: [Previous translation continues]... let the witness 30675 clarify the point.
You can deal with it without looking at the statement, Mr. Witness. Just tell us, when did you find out it was a school, and when did you find out it was in Petkovci?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] After we entered the school. Before that, we did not know that it was a school, but after we got into the school, we saw blackboards, and there was even writing on the blackboards. And perhaps I heard it from the people there too. There were things written on the blackboards. Perhaps I didn't notice all of it, but afterwards, after entering the school, I realised that it was a school.
JUDGE MAY: Just a moment. We're going to adjourn in a minute, but let's clarify this. When did you find out that it was in Petkovci?
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know. I don't know whether that is what is written here, that I found out that very moment, but I've remembered just now. After we escaped, when we reached the free territory, people were saying where we were as we were going through these villages. They were saying, aha, it could be this or it could be that. But then when we entered this place, we knew it was a school. So I remember that we were talking to people and they said, aha, that could be it, that could be Petkovci. And afterwards, I went there with the investigators, so I confirmed that that was it.
JUDGE MAY: It's now time to adjourn. And just -- we are going to adjourn now for 20 minutes, and Witness 1401, please don't speak to anybody about your evidence until it's over. So don't speak to anybody, and that includes the Prosecution, during the break. We will adjourn for 30676 20 minutes.
Perhaps I might draw the attention of the Prosecution to this, that we cannot sit beyond the usual time this afternoon. We have obviously some more cross-examination, ten minutes or so, of this witness. It's a question of whether you want to start the next witness or not. I doubt we'll finish him in the time.
MR. GROOME: Your Honour, we have an administrative matter to introduce some of the 92 bis packages for witnesses without cross. Maybe perhaps that's the best way to proceed.
JUDGE MAY: Yes. And Mr. Nice has some matter he wishes to introduce too.
MR. GROOME: Yes, Your Honour.
JUDGE MAY: It may be better to deal with that, and if we finish early, I don't think there will be any complaint. Yes, we will adjourn now. Twenty minutes.
--- Recess taken at 12.17 p.m.
--- On resuming at 12.45 p.m.
JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Milosevic. You've got another ten minutes.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I'll do my best to complete my examination in those ten minutes, Mr. May.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. Let us just clear up this, Mr. 1401. I'm going to read out this sentence from your statement, because the point here is not the school itself but Petkovci. That is the point of my question. You say in your statement, and this is the one given on the 31st of July, on page 2: "I 30677 saw under the canvas that they had brought us to a school in Petkovci." So under the canvas you managed to see that they had brought you to a school in Petkovci. And in your statement to the investigators, you're unable to identify that school.
JUDGE MAY: I think he's explained that this was information which he got later.
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. May, the school in Petkovci is mentioned in the statement given on the 31st of July, and the statement to the investigators was 12 days later. So in the statement he made on the 31st of July, he says, and I've quoted accurately, that he saw that they had been brought in front of the school in Petkovci, and 12 days later he doesn't know where they were brought to.
So what you say would be quite logical if the events were in opposite sequence, but this statement given to the investigators was 12 days later in which he doesn't know where they were taken.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. So can you explain that, Witness 1401?
A. I can. Once we had reached free territory, that is before I gave this statement, any statement, people were talking about where we were. So I knew definitively that we had been in Petkovci on the basis of what people were saying. Later on, when I made that statement, maybe I didn't mention it because I wasn't something I knew, but it was information I got from others. And the person who survived with me, maybe he knew. I'm not quite sure, he may have known. We may have discussed it on the way, but it was such a long time ago, I'm not quite sure. And after all this, the 30678 statements came. So I may have said we were taken to a school, but people were saying that the school was in Petkovci. So maybe in one statement I didn't mention it, and in another I did. But the other person who survived knows much more about that school, and I spoke to him about it, but I can't remember all these details.
Q. I don't wish to bother you any further with those questions, though you said that under the canvas you saw that you were brought to a school in Petkovci.
A. Where does it say that?
Q. Please take your statement from the 31st of July. The 12th line from the top, and I'm reading you the whole sentence from the full stop to the full stop. "I saw under the canvas that they had brought us to a school in Petkovci," full stop. That is what it says, 12th line from the top, page 2, in your statement of the 31st of July. Twelve days later, talking to the investigators, you don't know where you were taken. It says clearly Petkovci. "I saw under the canvas that we had been brought to the school in Petkovci."
A. Doesn't it say here to a school? It doesn't say which.
Q. Yes, but it says in Petkovci.
A. But on the basis of other information. I couldn't go into all these details.
Q. Never mind. I think you've given us sufficient explanation.
A. Maybe I wasn't a hundred per cent sure. I described to the investigators that it was a school and everything.
Q. I hope what you're saying is clear to anyone listening. 30679 Now, tell me, please, you reached that school, according to what you told the investigators, on the 14th of July. Is that right?
A. Yes.
Q. And on the 15th of July, the next day, you survived the execution that you describe. Is that right?
A. Actually, it was during the night. I'm not sure if it was the 14th or the 15th; it may or been before midnight or after midnight; it was during the night.
Q. This execution that you described was survived also --
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. May, I don't know if I may mention the name of that person. If not, let's go into private session, please.
JUDGE MAY: We'll go into private session.
[Private session] (redacted)
(redacted) (redacted)
(redacted) (redacted)
(redacted) (redacted)
(redacted) (redacted)
(redacted)
[Open session] 30680
THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. Tell me -- I only have a few more questions for you. Do you know who carried out the execution that you managed to survive?
A. I not sure who did it.
Q. Are you able to give us a description of any kind of the persons who executed you and the others, or who shot at you and the others?
A. I can't remember all the details. Probably it was the Bosnian Serb army, but I can't confirm that. I remember a detail in front of the school when they forced us off the trucks. When we were beaten up in front of the school, everyone had to stand and be beaten. And when the man in front of me was waiting for his turn to come to be beaten, to be beaten with rifle butts and so on, the soldier asked him, "Do you know me?" And he said as follows: "Of course I know, brother." And then the soldier said, "Who do you know?" He hit him with his rifle in his stomach and then they started stamping on him and beating him up, as if he wasn't supposed to know him. Then I heard that that man was from Zvornicka Kamenica and that he used to be a colleague of his sometime in the past.
Q. You mentioned that on that occasion you heard that one of those men was called Jovo. Can you tell me, did you hear any other name or surname of a person who was there, anyone who was there? Because the only fact I managed to find was that you mentioned that you heard somebody being called Jovo. Can you remember any other name, first or last, of anyone?
A. I cannot give you any name. I didn't know anyone. There were 30681 probably people who recognised the soldiers where the shooting took place. This happened during the night. You will never be able to understand the circumstances, the feeling one has when you're taken out to be executed. I just remember that one name. There may have been others mentioned, but I haven't remembered them.
Q. Do you have any knowledge as to how many people were shot dead on that occasion, according to what you have told us?
A. It is hard to make an estimate. I was crawling over the bodies during the night. It was night-time. And when we reached the canal and untied each other, it was only from the other hill that we saw the loader loading bodies onto a tractor. The one who survived with me knows better because I was in pain. I was wounded, I was suffering. And I know that there were many people, as there was a loader being used, and I think I pointed in another trial where this was, but it is difficult to tell how many there were.
Q. But you must have had some impression as to how many of you there were in the truck.
A. That doesn't mean that there was just one truckload of people that were executed.
Q. Did you see any other trucks?
A. I couldn't see from the school whether there was a truck in front of us. After us came a tractor or a truck, because you can't see during the night. You could just see the nights. And when they reached the spot, we heard them firing shots. We don't know whether they were killing people or doing something else, but not with the same intensity or 30682 frequency as when I was shot at.
Q. I'm trying to establish some sort of a figure. Could you assist how many people were executed, to the best of your knowledge, on that occasion?
A. It is very hard to say. I know that most of the people from the school were killed. We could see that. I don't know how many classrooms there were full of men, but when they were taken out, they were probably all killed. Because you could hear when they said, "Ten people come out," then you heard bursts of fire. My classroom was the last. I don't know whether that was the last truck too.
Q. How many of you were there in that classroom?
A. The classroom was full. Maybe as many as on the truck, maybe more, I don't know. I can't say. It was full. We were sitting on top of each other.
Q. I see. You can't tell me that either. Now, tell me, when did you find out that this execution that you're testifying about was carried out at the location Brnjice Djulici? I apologise if I'm mispronouncing the names of those locations. I don't know whether my notes are correct. Brnjice; is that right?
A. I knew earlier on. It's not far from Karakaj. I used to go to Glinica and I knew that there was a dam there and some waterway, but I don't know what it looked like. And I assumed, I wasn't sure, but later on when we crossed into free territory and talking amongst ourselves, this man and woman that we saw, they told us.
Q. Witness 1401, my question was when did you find out. So you 30683 learned that when you crossed into free territory; is that right?
A. We didn't talk about that. Maybe this man who survived with me may have known before, but I assumed that, and later on I found out exactly. But this was before I made the statement.
Q. I'm asking you when did you find out what the location was?
A. When I crossed over.
Q. When you crossed over into free territory?
A. Yes.
Q. Fine. Now, tell me, please, did you know that before the investigators took you to that spot for you to identify it, or did you establish that when they took you there to the spot?
A. I assumed that that was it. People told me later on, "That is the dam near Karakaj, Djulici." And I later went with the investigators to confirm that that was the spot.
Q. Is that where the school in Petkovci is?
A. Not that close by. Petkovci is another village. I didn't know about Petkovci.
Q. If you were detained in the school in Petkovci and then taken out and executed -- so you were executed in front of the school in Petkovci.
A. They took us by truck to the dam.
Q. I see. They took you in a truck from Petkovci to the dam. And you learnt about the spot when the investigators took you there to identify it; is that right?
A. You keep saying, and I am telling you, I knew -- I assumed that it was the dam there in Karakaj. Later, I learnt from others, once we had 30684 crossed, when we reached this village, when we said where we had been, when we described the spot, then they said what it was. I later just went to confirm it with the investigators, and I confirmed that that was the spot. It may have another name, I don't know what the name is, but I took them to that spot.
JUDGE MAY: This must be your last question, Mr. Milosevic. You've had well over ten minutes.
MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. I understood that you were wounded, because you explained that, but in your first statement, of the 15th of July, you said that you were wounded in the stomach area, and in your second statement in the chest, the lower arm of your right hand. Where exactly were you wounded?
A. I was wounded on the right side - you can call it whatever you like - and in my right arm. You can call it the right side of my chest or whatever. So the investigators carried out detailed examinations and took all the documents and the X-rays. You can call it as you like. You can look at the X-rays.
Q. You said in your first statement that you were wounded in the stomach. Afterwards, you said in the chest, and that is why I'm inquiring, because I only just received the binder with the photographs, which I haven't had time to look at, and that's why I asked you to explain for me.
A. I don't know whether that is really important, whether it was the stomach or the chest, but anyway it was my right side.
Q. Thank you, Witness 1401. 30685
THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. May. I managed within the time limit.
MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I would like to make something clear. The statements that Mr. Milosevic showed the witness here were translated into English over here. In addition to those two statements and those that the witness gave to the investigators, and that is the only thing that I will be dealing with, there is yet another statement given to the investigative judge in Tuzla, and in this part of the world it was the investigative judges who were always the most professional of all in terms of conducting such investigations. 348/95 is the number that was assigned by that court of that document, that is.
Questioned by Mr. Tapuskovic:
Q. [Interpretation] So do you remember, sir, that this statement that you gave on the 24th of July, 1995, to the investigative judge, is yet another statement that you gave, that you signed, and do you recall these things that you mentioned in that statement?
A. I remembered that I gave a statement to judges, but I have forgotten the date, and I've forgotten the year even. So I signed it when I gave it. So that's it.
Q. Please look at the first page.
A. There seems to be something wrong.
Q. You'll see it can be found. There are a few pages there, and now I'm going to show you a few things from that page that is in front of you. Tell me, is that what you said to the investigative judge then? "We heard 30686 that UNPROFOR from that elevation that it held then withdrew towards Srebrenica." Do you remember having stated that?
A. That's my statement. That's true, yes.
Q. Then you move on to say that you went to the village of Viogor. You explained that, I won't take you back to all of that. But then you say there, "In that village, we heard that members of our army made the Chetniks go back to their initial positions, and then our people withdrew again, that is to say our forces had fallen back to their earlier positions." Is that to say that there were conflicts there too and that there were casualties?
A. Let me just add a few more details. All of this is correct.
Q. Oh, all of this is correct.
A. Let me just add something. The place that we came to, it's ten or 15 kilometres away from where the fighting was going on. It's a hill, some heights that are very far away. But where we were, there was no fighting.
Q. All right. But what is stated here is the way it was.
A. Could you please read this out to me again?
Q. "There we first heard that members of our army had pushed the Chetniks back to their initial positions and soon after that they had retreated again, that is that our forces had fallen back to their earlier positions."
A. Oh, what we heard about the army, it did not pertain to us. It pertained to the Zeleni Jadar road.
Q. But there was fighting between the members of the army of 30687 Bosnia-Herzegovina who removed the Chetniks, as you had put it, from their positions and they took them again and then there was fighting there.
A. Yes, that's what we heard.
Q. And then a few sentences later, you say: "In the morning we heard from the army that it was expected that NATO aeroplanes would bomb the Serb forces and tanks and that our forces were planning to execute a counter-attack if that happened in order to retake the lost positions." That means that you heard that from the representatives of the army of Bosnia-Herzegovina that that is what would happen.
A. I think the statement is brief, so that's why not only details were included. I gave the statement to the judges perhaps for two or three hours.
THE INTERPRETER: Could Mr. Tapuskovic please not overlap the witness. The interpreter could not hear the question.
THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] We saw that there were civilians there and we saw that there were military people there, so that's what happened.
MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. And this is what you said and this is what you testified to here: "I saw that NATO aircraft were flying over and dropping bombs. But the bombs fell beside the tanks." Is that right?
A. It can be seen even if it is far away. I did not see the actual bombs, I saw the smoke from the areas where the bombs were actually falling and we saw the aeroplanes.
Q. But you didn't see the bombs. 30688
A. How could I see the bombs? They were so far away.
Q. Did you hear them, at least?
A. Well, explosions were heard and shells, so perhaps it was hard to distinguish between the two --
JUDGE MAY: Could you slow down so the interpreters have time.
MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation]
Q. Mr. Witness, you said that you saw this here with your very own eyes.
A. Well, I saw this smoke where it is most probable that the bombs fell, but I couldn't see the bombs themselves.
Q. Well, look a bit further down. I'm not going to go back to what was already dealt with. And you say that in accordance with the order issued by the command of the army of Bosnia-Herzegovina, there were 15.000 men lined up there, and you said, "We crossed the Chetnik line" and then the name of the place is illegible. It says Buglic or --
A. Buljim.
Q. Oh, I see. And then you say: "From there --" or, rather, "It is there that we crossed the Chetnik lines." Is that where there was a breakthrough or what happened?
A. That's where the front line was, somewhere around there. But I already said earlier on that the Serb army did not even clash with the BH army because they had already left.
Q. Here you said that you went across the line.
A. But there were trenches there. It's a fact that that's where the Chetnik line was. 30689
Q. And then you arrived in the village of Kamenica, as you put it here, that belongs to the village of Pobudje in Bratunac municipality. "At the entrance to Kamenica we ran into a Chetnik ambush." Is that what happened?
A. When there are so many people involved, when it's 5.000 or 2.000 people going, and when you hear gunfire, I mean, it wasn't that I was looking at all this from an aeroplane.
Q. But you put this very clearly. Could you just tell me whether it was the way you described it here.
A. But it's not marked here. I don't know where I said it. Which page is it?
Q. It's all on the first page. All of this is on the first page, towards the end. You mentioned the number of people who were in that column, and then you say, we crossed the Chetnik column at such-and-such a place and then we were ambushed.
A. It's a short statement. So not all details were mentioned. I gave a statement to The Hague investigators for two days whereas I spoke to these judges for two hours. So I don't see what you don't find very clear here.
Q. I'm not saying anything. I'm saying that it's all very clear to me. I just thought that you should tell the Trial Chamber whether this is what happened, and if so, tell us, please, it says here that you saw 300 to 500 persons who had been killed. All of that happened before you were taken prisoner; is that right?
A. Let me just say something. Well, it's a fact that the Serb lines 30690 were around Srebrenica. We did not have a highway. We could not have gone along a highway. So this is a fact. And what is in dispute? The Serb army had probably left when we crossed the line.
Q. All right. Did you give the figure involving the persons who were killed? They were killed before you were taken prisoner?
A. Yes, yes.
Q. In your statement that you gave on the 12th and 13th of August, 1995, that is to say only a few days after this statement, so this is page 9, in response to the investigator's question, you said: "Later on I saw --" the last sentence. It's the last sentence on page 9. "Later on I saw that I had more -- several cuts on my neck and right hand. I don't know whether I was grazed by bullets or rocks."
A. Yes.
Q. And a few minutes ago when answering the Prosecutor's question, you said that you were hit in the left foot. Is that right?
A. Just a moment, please.
Q. And then two more times, in addition, to the left foot. That's what you said a few minutes ago when you were answering the Prosecutor's questions.
A. May I explain? All this happened during the night, and it was probably fragmentation bullets that were used, and I still have, on the right side and in my right foot and in my right arm, some leftover pieces.
Q. With all due respect, Witness, could you please explain to the Judges something which is difficult to explain in any other way but one, because in this statement you gave to the investigative judge, the one 30691 that you looked at a few minutes ago, please look at page 3 towards the end: "I was wounded by Chetnik gunfire coming from an automatic rifle, in the lower right arm and in the right side of the chest." How is it possible for one and the same thing to be described in different ways, especially wounds that you can show people? How can you explain that in so many different ways? Could you just explain that to the Judges, please.
A. Just a moment, please. Well, you expect me to say the very same thing in every statement, the very same sentence, but it's just worded a bit differently. So I was hit by this fragmentation ammunition. I assume that that's what it was. Later on, the investigators saw the X-rays, too, and -- but there was this burst of gunfire, yes, I know that. Fragmentation bullets too. After the X-rays were taken, I realised that it was fragmentation ammunition.
MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I think that these three statements that were all translated into English should be admitted into evidence, because they may be of relevance when you are assessing this witness's statement. I have copies of all three.
JUDGE MAY: In the presence of the witness, and he should hear this, that I am not assisted by accounts which it's said may vary. It's easy to show long after the very traumatic events that a witness may or may not have given this account in one statement and may have given a slightly different account in another. I don't think it's been disputed that this witness has been injured. We've seen the photographs. I think in fairness to him, that should be said. 30692 But we'll certainly admit these statements for what it's worth. Yes.
MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, just two words, please. What I did and what I tried to present here before you for the witness to explain is something I'm doing because it's the way things have to be done, and I think that these are things that have to be assessed very carefully. Of course I have all due respect for what people have experienced, and it is hard for us to ask someone to explain everything the same way every time, but this basic piece of information, where someone was actually wounded, this basic tragic event cannot be recounted in different ways on different occasions.
JUDGE ROBINSON: Unless you're really suggesting that the incident did not take place and that this gentleman was not hit at all, then what really is the purpose of that line of cross-examination? Whether he was hit in the stomach or in the chest or on the right or the left. If you're really saying the incident didn't take place and that he is lying, then you should put that squarely to him.
MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour Judge Robinson, I really should not have to explain this a countless number of times. It will certainly be for you to assess.
JUDGE MAY: I'm going to interrupt you, Mr. Tapuskovic, because you are answering the Judge, and you're not dealing with the matter with what I suggest is the thought that it requires.
Now, I don't think we'll continue this argument. You've heard what we've said about it. We are not assisted by this line of 30693 questioning. Not even Mr. Milosevic has said that this witness wasn't injured. I don't really think it's right for you to suggest it.
MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] I do not wish to enter a polemic with regard to this. If every witness who comes here has to be accepted a priori, then I believe that my cross-examination did not serve any purpose whatsoever, and then in future I will allow Mr. Kay to do this every time. I will have to proceed in this manner if I see that there are contradictory elements in different statements. I am not doing anything but indicating that there are contradictions in different statements given by the same witness. If I cannot do that, as someone who has been doing that all his life, then in the future I'm going to avoid doing this altogether.
JUDGE ROBINSON: I have been assisted by your cross-examination in the past. Just now I wasn't, and I've explained why.
MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
THE REGISTRAR: Your Honour, the three statements will be Court Exhibit 26, please.
JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Waespi, anything you want to ask?
MR. WAESPI: Just one point in relation to these exhibits: They should be under seal.
JUDGE MAY: Yes, of course.
MR. WAESPI: And I only have one question to the witness. Re-examined by Mr. Waespi:
Q. You were challenged by Mr. Milosevic about the words of the person at Sandici meadow who said, "We are from Serbia." Can you tell us how 30694 sure you are that these were his words?
A. Were they the words of that soldier? Is that what you mean? Is that your question?
Q. You told us that it was a soldier who told you that -- and I quote you, "We are from Serbia." And you were questioned about that by Mr. Milosevic. Can you tell us whether these were really his words or not?
A. Yes. The soldier really did say, and I'm quoting, "We are from Serbia." And then he went on saying where we'd go and what we were supposed to do, that we would not get dinner, things like that, but I remember that very well. Those were his words.
MR. WAESPI: That's all, Mr. President. Questioned by the Court:
JUDGE ROBINSON: Witness B-1401, you were 17 years old when this incident took place. You lost your father. I'd like to ask you, how have you managed in the past eight years? What are you doing now? Was your education affected? Just tell us how you have survived in the past eight years.
Private session, please.
[Private session] (redacted)
(redacted) (redacted)
(redacted) (redacted) 30695 (redacted)
(redacted) (redacted)
(redacted) (redacted)
(redacted) (redacted)
[Open session]
THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session.
JUDGE MAY: Witness B-1401, thank you for coming to the Tribunal to give this evidence. I'm sorry that, not surprisingly, it's an upsetting experience, but it's very important, of course, that this evidence is given, as it has been. So we're grateful to you for coming. You are, of course, free to go now, but would you just wait a moment until the blinds are drawn.
Let the witness go. Thank you.
[The witness withdrew]
JUDGE MAY: Yes. Another matter has arisen. We've got a query for the record about the dates of these latest statements for the record. It may be the registrar could deal with it.
THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honour. Court Exhibit 25 will be under seal for the record. Tab 1 is the statement dated the 31st of July, 1995. Tab 2 is the statement dated the 19th of July, 1995. And tab 3, Your Honours, is the statement dated the 24th of July, 1995, all under seal.
JUDGE KWON: Court Exhibit 26. 30696
THE REGISTRAR: Excuse me, Your Honours. Court Exhibit 26.
JUDGE MAY: The next issue concerns the admission of the book and the like in relation to General Clark, Exhibit 617. We make it plain that it is not admitted, nor is the extract tab 4 admitted. The book tab 3,, the extract and the chart, none of those are admitted. We have been asked to admit The New Yorker article to which reference was made, as a Defence Exhibit. It has been handed in but we must examine it first to decide whether to admit it or not.
MR. GROOME: Yes, Your Honour.
JUDGE MAY: Thank you. We'll deal with that after the adjournment. I don't know if you've seen this, you have this article, Mr. Nice.
MR. NICE: We do. Have we received it?
MR. GROOME: We have, Your Honour.
JUDGE MAY: It's in fact the whole article. So we'll have to think about that. You may have some views about it.
[Trial Chamber confers]
JUDGE MAY: Apparently some would wish to exhibit this document, but perhaps you can assist what the Prosecution view about that.
MR. GROOME: Your Honour, the portion I believe that it's being admitted for is the comment by Mr. General Hugh Shelton. Clearly, it's extrinsic evidence going to the credibility of a witness; that is, it's going a little bit beyond what is normally accepted as proof. That quote was put, that passage was put to the witness, he dealt with it, and to introduce additional evidence so remotely related to the witness's 30697 credibility, the Prosecution would submit is not warranted. It's based upon information that we have that the context of General Hugh Shelton's comments also would be relevant if the Chamber was to give -- admit that and give it serious consideration and we would want to put that before you, but again it becomes further and further more remote from the issues that this Chamber must face in this trial.
JUDGE MAY: The only part which he was asked about was Shelton's -- or General Shelton's comment, I should say. On the second page, I can see that. But the article seems to be a very much more wide-ranging article about the witness. It seems to go very much further than anything else.
Yes. What is being suggested to my right, if I might say so, is to admit that portion, and I certainly would think that would be right. It's a comment that we've heard and we have admitted other evidence in response.
MR. GROOME: Yes, Your Honour.
JUDGE MAY: Yes. Well, we'll admit the section, the paragraph perhaps, concerning retired General Shelton. I will mark it here for the registrar.
THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, Defence Exhibit 223.
MR. GROOME: Your Honour, by the Chamber's decision of the 23rd of November, 2003, transcripts and related exhibits of seven witnesses who testified in previous cases before the Tribunal in relation to events in Sanski Most were admitted without cross-examination. The order was conditional on the Prosecution submitting redacted transcripts of these 30698 witnesses' testimony which excluded passages referring to the JNA. The redacted transcripts were submitted on the 1st of December, 2003 and the Prosecution at this time would like to formally tender the 92 bis packages of the witnesses to the Court.
The first package the Prosecution would like to tender has to do with the witness Radzif Begic. It is not a protected witness but was referred to as B-1042 in the Prosecution's submissions, and this is a binder of seven tabbed exhibits and none are required to be under seal.
JUDGE MAY: We'll give this the next number.
THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, 622.
MR. GROOME: The next witness, Your Honour, is B-1044. The Prosecution is tendering a binder of eight tabbed exhibits and is requesting that the seal that was extended to tabs 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, and 8 be continued in this trial.
THE REGISTRAR: 623, Your Honours, partially under seal.
MR. GROOME: With respect to witness --
JUDGE MAY: Sorry to interrupt, but these are all Sanski Most, aren't they?
MR. GROOME: Yes, Your Honour. With respect to Witness B-1088, this is a binder of three tabbed exhibits. The Prosecution request it all be placed under seal.
THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, 624 under seal.
MR. GROOME: With respect to the next witness, the witness's name is Sakib Mujic. It was not a protected witness but was referred to as B-1377. In Prosecution's submissions, this binder of three exhibits, all 30699 may be tendered publicly.
THE REGISTRAR: 625, Your Honour.
MR. GROOME: The next witness is B-1611. This binder of six tabbed exhibits, the Prosecution request that they all be tendered under seal.
THE REGISTRAR: 626 under seal.
MR. GROOME: The next witness is Besim Islamcevic. This witness is not a protected witness and all the six tabbed exhibits may be tendered publicly.
THE REGISTRAR: 627.
MR. GROOME: The final Sanski Most witness is Witness B-1684. There's a binder of three exhibits. The Prosecution requests that tabs 1 and 3 be tendered under seal.
THE REGISTRAR: 628 partially under seal.
MR. GROOME: Your Honour, in addition, following this Trial Chamber's decision of the 9th of December, 2003, in which it granted admission of the statements of three witnesses pursuant to Rule 92 bis (C), we would ask to tender the following exhibits publicly: The statement of Ivan Rastija. These exhibits, Your Honour, the Prosecution are tendering as three separate exhibits.
THE REGISTRAR: So the exhibit for Ivan Rastija is 629.
MR. GROOME: The next is the statement of Bosko Brkic.
THE REGISTRAR: 630, Your Honour.
MR. GROOME: And finally the statement of Stana Albert.
THE REGISTRAR: 631, Your Honours. 30700
JUDGE MAY: Yes.
MR. NICE: A few matters, if I may. First: Version 7 of the witness schedule. Could I distribute that straight away. It's as up-to-date as can be. We will have to reschedule the two witnesses we weren't able to take this week. The first two weeks in the New Year seemingly forecast correctly that we start on the 13th. Those first two weeks are, I think, pretty certain although there may be time freed up if applications for witnesses to be taken without cross-examination are granted. The last three weeks which have -- will obviously require adjustment depending on how long earlier witnesses take and whether there's slippage of the kind that's happened to a degree in the last month or so. You will see that there are still some witnesses underneath the table marked as witnesses to be scheduled. We will return to that issue in due course at the beginning the year, but I hope this is a helpful document, planning forward.
The next document for distribution comes in two forms, one for everybody and one ex parte. It sets out what we -- what efforts we've made to get a constitutional law expert for the Kosovo section of the case. Can I distribute, then, the first version which is for everybody, for everybody; certainly for the accused and the amicus. That's exactly the document that the accused has, but here's an ex parte version which simply adds in the names for Your Honours because we haven't been able to check with the experts whether they are content for their names to be known to all. And you'll see that the list comes in three parts. First you have those contacted experts from the former 30701 Yugoslavia between the period September to December 2003. Then the third sheet is contacted legal experts outside the former Yugoslavia, and then there's the last sheet with the earlier contacts which led nowhere in early -- in early 2002.
The dilemma we face is that pretty nearly all our efforts are falling on not barren but unyielding ground. The reasons given are set out in the Comments column. You've heard me say earlier that there appeared to be or there was expressed fear. These are the publicly given reasons, and you can see what they are.
We are -- at the moment we have one person of possible potential, but this is outside the former Yugoslavia, and in an issue of this particular kind, we suspect that there may be a significant dividend to the Chamber in having someone from the former Yugoslavia to deal with this issue.
You will see on that second sheet contacted legal experts outside the former Yugoslavia, number 5 has expressed interest, but nevertheless he's not from the former Yugoslavia.
Your Honour, we've tried, with the leave of the Court, to add to the pressure of our own invitation by saying that the Court might be prepared to summon a witness and that didn't work either. Not summon but to call on a witness to come and help. We weren't suggesting a formal summons. And we are left in the position of having to keep trying or, alternatively - and I say this with some diffidence - alternatively to invite the Chamber to consider or to reconsider the position about the earlier expert. The question here is whether anyone we can get from 30702 outside the former Yugoslavia will bring a quality or dividend to his evidence that would exceed what would be in the judgement of the Trial Chamber lost by allowing the matter to be dealt with by the witness whose report has already been served and who was indeed an expert on this particular area.
Your Honour, I don't ask for anything other than you take note of our position at the moment and perhaps have a chance to think about it, and we'll return to it in the New Year. But we are aware, particularly in light of the observations by His Honour Judge Robinson, that this is not something that we can do without, probably, if the Chamber is to make a proper and full judgement on all relevant matters. This is an important issue, and we understand that.
It may also be that it's, to be quite candid, an issue of some controversial nature in the former Yugoslavia. It's not necessarily an easy legal issue, maybe it's an issue that has different approaches depending on where you come from, and that may be one of the reasons it's been hard for us to find someone to deal with it.
JUDGE MAY: You will continue your efforts to find someone.
MR. NICE: Oh, yes.
JUDGE MAY: Even from outside.
MR. NICE: From outside. We've got to make a decision as to whether to invite number 5 on the second list to start preparing a report, but we do have pretty serious reservations about getting a non-former Yugoslav native to deal with this issue.
JUDGE MAY: I know time is going against us, but we'll just very 30703 briefly deal with this. I'm not sure that I follow that approach.
[Trial Chamber confers]
JUDGE MAY: We can tell you now that we're not minded to change our minds about this.
MR. NICE: No, no.
JUDGE MAY: So that line of inquiry, if I put it to you, is cut off. We should never cut anything off totally, but that is our view. But we would be interested, if I could put it this way, in somebody who is independent and from outside, if you would pursue that.
MR. NICE: We'll pursue number 5 on this too.
JUDGE MAY: Yes, if you would, time being, of course, of the essence.
MR. NICE: Yes, absolutely. And you'll see that we've made extraordinary efforts and it's been a very large problem.
JUDGE MAY: Yes.
MR. NICE: Couple of other things. I know we've only literally got a minute left.
Fill-box documents of the kind we've provided periodically are in the process of development, not least as development that's going to be compatible with the CaseMap software that we know some of the Chamber is enthusiastic to use. We've intended to provide an updated version for everyone at this point of the year. I'm not sure that that's practical or desirable. We're intending to provide, at their request, the amicus with the presentation version of the Croatian fill-box document in whatever shape it is because that's the area of evidence they are working on, I 30704 understand, at the moment. We will be responsive to any other requests but otherwise would hope to be able to provide a running version of the fill-box documents in about the middle of January for all three indictments, if that's, I hope, helpful.
There will be no further Rule 68 report. It was originally expected that we'd be filing a report now because we would have concluded our evidence now, but unless anybody presses to us to the contrary, we'll leave the final 68 report until the end of the case, the end of the Prosecution case.
Annotated intercepts in the way -- annotated in the way that the Chamber required are in a state of development. We have various options. One would be to wait until the Croatian intercepts are introduced if and when the witness has been called to deal with it and present a comprehensive schedule. The alternative would be to present the present intercepts, annotated as to their significance, by about the middle of January.
JUDGE MAY: I would be inclined to do the latter.
MR. NICE: Very well, that will be done. And they will be gathered together -- they will be presented to you in a way that you can sort them electronically in various ways - you can either have them chronologically or by subject heading - so that rather than having to work through 200 and more intercepts, trying to identify which ones are to be admitted on grounds of relevance -- or not to be excluded on grounds of relevance, then having to say well, haven't we had one of those two pages back, you'll be able to group them in ways that we hope will make your 30705 task easier.
Mentioning that brings us to the topic of analysis of these documents. You will see on the witness schedule we've moved the possible witness Tromp down below the line for the time being so that she's not on the schedule. It's going to be, of course, our decision ultimately what we do, but we will be assisted -- well, what we apply for, because Ms. Tromp, at the moment, has been rejected by the Chamber, but if the Chamber is at any time able to help us with whether it would be assisted by an analyst or whether it would rather have the matter, all the matter of argument, perhaps a view it will be better able to take when it's seen the schedule, that will assist us, and assist us in our use of the remaining time.
You've already had the exhibit list broken down so as to know exactly how many exhibits there are. It's something that you wanted. That's been provided. We've promised that we will provide a running list of exhibits to be produced, the residual exhibits to be produced through the investigator O'Donnell so as not to burden the Chamber, the accused and the amicus with a huge quantity of material without forecast that it's coming. The work on identifying the exhibits we will produce and those which we will discard is well under way, I understand from Mr. Groome, and we should be in a position to provide you with some working material for that last substantial exercise of evidence production at the beginning of the New Year.
Your Honour, there's one other point of some significance. CaseMap software, in other Chambers where it's being used by the Chamber 30706 and by the parties, there has already, I think, been the practice developing of identifying the issues by which the material can be sorted on a collective basis. I don't mean a collective basis in the sense that everybody puts their heads together, but the parties are directed, I think, to identify the issues for review by the Chamber and the other parties. That was something we planned to do right at the beginning, you may remember, or possibly His Honour Judge Kwon may remember because I think that CaseMap is something that he may be more familiar with. We hope to have our own proposed list of CaseMap issues by which material may be sorted very soon, and if we can present it to you at some stage, perhaps even before we sit in January, in writing, for contributions as to how the list might be amended, we will do so. I don't know if that's helpful and I don't know if the amicus will find that helpful as well or the accused and his associates. The accused, of course, is always invited, or his associates are invited by us through the Chamber to contribute to these exercises. We have to say we think it would help him if he could identify any other issues that we've missed by which he would like this material to be sorted, but it's ultimately up to him.
Those are the only administrative matters I have to make. With your indulgence, I'd say one other thing comprising two parts and without having given you notice that I was going to say this, but I can't help but observe that Mr. Abtahi's last day in this court was, I think, yesterday in this Chamber and I have to record that he's been a wonderful professional companion, not only in this case but in the previous case where he was 30707 working for Your Honours, and I should also inform you that Ms. Wee, who is in court today, is returning to Australia, and anybody who has seen the case managers, of which she is one of three, do their work, know what an enormous contribution they make quietly and with very great industry to the work of this Tribunal.
I regret the fact that we shall lose both of those people and wish them well.
JUDGE MAY: I'm sure those final remarks will be gratefully received and indeed deserved fully.
We will then adjourn until -- I shall be reminded of the date in January. Is it the 12th?
JUDGE KWON: 13th. Tuesday.
JUDGE MAY: Tuesday the 13th of January. We will adjourn until then.
--- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.51 p.m., to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 13th day of
January, 2004, at 9.00 a.m.