⁴⁸⁹⁷⁹

Tuesday, 28 February 2006

[Open session]

[The witness entered court]

[The accused entered court]

--- Upon commencing at 9.02 a.m.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Please continue, Mr. Milosevic.

WITNESS: SLOBODAN JARCEVIC [Resumed]

[Witness answered through interpreter]

THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please. Microphone, please.

JUDGE KWON: Microphone. Examination by Mr. Milosevic: [Continued]

Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Jarcevic, you were saying that you travelled to different negotiations and on different occasions. In view of the circumstances, could you travel from any other airport but the Belgrade airport?

A. Yes. For example, when we visited certain political parties -- these are not really negotiations but this was in Italy, and we travelled from Timisoara in Romania. And I think that twice when we travelled to Moscow we used the Timisoara airport.

THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: Could all other microphones please be switched off because we cannot hear the speakers. Thank you.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm sorry. Most often we travelled on UNPROFOR planes, then they took us directly from the Belgrade airport to Geneva. And from Budapest we used a plane to go to the United States via France. ⁴⁸⁹⁸⁰

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I'm sorry, something doesn't seem to be working here. This installation that usually works --

JUDGE ROBINSON: Can we have that attended to by the technical staff.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could I please ask the interpreters to say something so that I can check whether I can hear them. Yes. Thank you. It works now. All right. All right.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Could you please repeat what you said a few moments ago. Did you most often travel from Belgrade when you went on these trips?

A. Most often from Belgrade, primarily when we were taken by UNPROFOR. But I know that the Republic of Serbia or the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia lent its aircraft to UNPROFOR.

Q. That is not important. The point is that you travelled from Belgrade most often in view of the circumstances involved. Did your delegation ever visit me prior to going on some trip when you were all together?

A. Usually we did not pay any calls on you. I just know that once we came to your office, but several days before we went to the negotiations. We informed you that these negotiations would ensue. This was in March in Geneva. If you wish, I can repeat what we talked about then, the only things we talked about.

Q. Well, yes, you can. Go ahead.

A. Without going into our platform, because I hadn't even completed the platform for these negotiations yet, you did not really give us any ⁴⁸⁹⁸¹ suggestions in view of the methodology of negotiations. You only said a single sentence and that was sign the agreement. Reach an agreement with the Croats so that these children would not be killed at the borders on both sides. Nothing else. I didn't hear anything else from you then although I thought that we would discuss matters and agree on things. This was my first meeting with you before the important business that lay ahead of the government of the Republic of Serb Krajina because international negotiators promised that in Geneva we would reach an agreement that would lead to a final peace.

Q. Thank you, Mr. Jarcevic. Let us go back to Milan Babic's assertions here. He spoke on the 19th of November, 2002, transcript pages 13065 through 67 and 13501, 14104, 105. Approximately -- well, not approximately, but briefly, what he said that was the official reasons presented in the media in terms of the JNA intervening in order to separate the warring parties and deblocking garrisons, that that was not true and that actually it intervened in order to serve the purposes of my policy. What can you say about that, that the JNA did not intervene in order to separate the warring parties, to deblock the garrisons, but for other reasons?

A. If we look at this statement of Mr. Babic, then we have to see what the time is. That was 1991 and parts of 1992, while the Yugoslav People's Army was in the Republic of Serb Krajina. Certainly --

Q. Well, he said that it was sometime in 1991 when this happened.

A. I'm just trying to remind you that at that time in 1991 the Presidency of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia was still in ⁴⁸⁹⁸² place and that the key positions there were held by the representatives of Croatia and Slovenia, precisely because the top echelons of the Yugoslav People's Army were practically manned by Slovenes and Croats. There's another interesting thing I can tell you here. For example, all ambassadors in Europe were mostly from Croatia and Slovenia, whereas Serbia had its representative only in Great Britain. So you can imagine how this illegal import of weapons into Croatia took place. I'm sure that most of the heads of these embassies and consulates had already been prepared for the secession of their republics from Yugoslavia. The only conclusion that I can draw is that Babic has provided complete misinformation. You --

JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you very much. Please just concentrate on the question and don't digress.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. He said that the structure of the attacks was such that the police and the volunteers of the Krajina would be engaged in provocations and open gunfire individually at Croat settlements, and then the Croats would return fire and then this would give the JNA a pretext to intervene. And as he said, they would do that by using heavy artillery and different units under their command in order to attack Croat towns. Can you say anything about this? Is this correct?

A. That is not correct at all, because the Yugoslav People's Army did not have such assignments at all. It did not attack Croat towns in order to take them or in order to expel the Croat population from them. The only thing it did was protect the Serb people in the remaining part of the ⁴⁸⁹⁸³ former Croatia. And as far as we can see, 400.000 betrayed Serbs had nothing to do with the provocations that Babic is talking about, and yet again they had to leave their homes.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Just a minute. Can you tell us how, if at all, you became privy to the assignments of the Yugoslav People's Army.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. President, that was quite simple. Had the army had the kind of assignments as Babic says, it would have been no problem for them to reach the Italian border. You just have to resort to simple logic, not any special kind of information. The Croatian army was not a daunting force. It could not have stopped the Yugoslav army had it had the kind of assignments that Babic is saying it had.

JUDGE ROBINSON: So it's just a matter of logic and reasoning. You didn't have any specific information.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I had information as president -- or, rather, as minister in the government of the Republic of Serb Krajina. I know that often we complained about that.

JUDGE ROBINSON: You were a minister of what at the time? Foreign affairs?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, let me say this: As I informed you yesterday, I was foreign minister from October 1992 until April 1994, but I had information about the activities of the Yugoslav People's Army in 1991 in the area of the Republic of Serb Krajina.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Milosevic.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] ⁴⁸⁹⁸⁴

Q. Babic says, on transcript page 13234, that the provisions of the Vance Plan were not observed in Krajina.

A. Mr. President, I'm sorry --

Q. All right. All right. Go ahead.

A. Mr. President, yesterday we touched on that subject, the Vance Plan. The police of the Republic of Serb Krajina was supposed to have revolvers only or the kind of weapons worn on the hip, as defined there. However, there were large-scale aggressions of the Croat army, and Serbs were being disturbed every day across the border, and the police of the Krajina had to keep some automatic weapons. That's why Babic said that the Vance Plan had not been fully observed. And on the other hand, there was no peace, and that was a requirement of the Vance Plan, but Babic doesn't say a word about that.

Q. He said that what was prevented was the return of Croats and that Milosevic implicitly supported that, and so on and so forth. Do you know anything about this kind of prevention of the return of Croats?

A. Yes, Mr. President, I know a great deal. That is Resolution 762, which was passed in 1992. And that was the first one that referred to the return of Croats to the Republic of Serb Krajina. And then the government of the Republic of Serb Krajina asked for the Serb people who had been expelled - and there were far many more of them - to receive the same treatment. However, the Security Council remained silent on that.

Q. He said in -- on transcript page 12991, that the army of Republic of Serb Krajina was dependent on the army of Yugoslavia. Do you know anything about that? He claims that I appointed commanders. Do you know ⁴⁸⁹⁸⁵ anything about that?

A. Mr. President, when I was a member of the government of the Republic of Serb Krajina, the relations between the Republic of Serb Krajina and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia had all the characteristics of relations between any two countries. Of course, bearing in mind the specific situation involving a total blockade on the part of the rest of the world, and that is the situation that both countries had to face, so military cooperation, police cooperation, industry, economic relations; all of that was involved.

I would like to make you aware of yet another fact: Mr. Babic is objecting in terms of some relations that our army had with the army of Yugoslavia. However, we had relations in other fields as well. For example, the weather forecasters who were working in Knin tried to get information in Zagreb. The -- and the people from Zagreb, the Croats, did not even send these people their salaries. So then their weather station had to link itself up to Belgrade, and that is how they received their salaries. Then engineers, electrical engineers, everything had to go on functioning. It was only right for that to happen, because otherwise the population of the Krajina would face its death. Would that be right?

Q. Thank you. Slobodan Lazarevic testified here. Do you know Slobodan Lazarevic?

A. Yes, I met Mr. Lazarevic --

Q. Thank you. You know him. He stated here on transcript page 12310 and 309 that he talked to Dusan Rakic and Goran Hadzic before the conference in Norway, and that on that occasion they said to him that ⁴⁸⁹⁸⁶ allegedly "The Boss" - and they meant me by that - gave them direct and explicit orders not to get anything done at that meeting. Tell me now, were you at that meeting? Did you have this kind of knowledge?

A. Mr. President, I was not at this meeting with you.

Q. Well, they were not either. No, no. He wasn't either. He says that Hadzic and Rakic said to him that they had been with me and that I told them that they shouldn't get anything done in Norway. That's what I said to them before they went to Norway.

A. Mr. President, I started my answer right. I was not at the meeting with you and Mr. Hadzic and Mr. Rakic never told me that they had a meeting with you or that they did not have a meeting with you. I spoke about this yesterday. I talked about the secret negotiations in Norway. Our delegation, according to the draft that was offered by Vollebaek and that Croatia agreed on, our delegation was prepared to sign this agreement. So no one was exercising any influence over us, including you, because we are not the party that refused to sign the agreement.

Q. So you are not the party that refused to sign the agreement. You wanted to sign the agreement. That is what you know from Norway?

A. Yes.

Q. All right. And he stated here that before every peace conference he and others who took part in peace conferences would get together in Belgrade in order to get instructions from the Serbian government in the following way: The head of delegation would go to see me, and every representative from the delegation would meet with the Serb and federal ⁴⁸⁹⁸⁷ representatives of the other side. Somebody would meet up with people from my office, allegedly, and others would meet up with other people, and so on and so forth. Was that the way it was? Was that the way this witness described it? Is this correct?

A. In the case of all the negotiations, none of this happened. I was the one who prepared the platforms, as I explained to you yesterday.

Q. Did you participate in all the negotiations?

A. As I said, I participated in the most important ones. The only delegation I was not part of was the one that was supposed to negotiate in Topusko sometime in late 1993. These negotiations, however, fell through because the Croats launched untruths and said that it was the Serb side that was rejecting negotiations. After that, the meeting in Norway followed, and this always happened at the proposal of international mediators.

Q. This meeting in Topusko was supposed to take place on the territory of the Krajina, somewhere in the border belt. Is that where Topusko is? Could you explain where it is?

A. Topusko is in Kordun province, 30 kilometres, as the crow flies, from Zagreb. The Croats agreed to go there but then they had a change of heart, obviously, and found a pretext which was not based in fact because Djordje Bjegovic, the Prime Minister, said that they were about half an hour late and that the Croats used this as an excuse to tell their own public that the Serbs were not cooperating.

Q. This witness claims that during those meetings Goran Hadzic spoke to the president of the SRJ, Zoran Lilic, and then that he spoke in the ⁴⁸⁹⁸⁸ course of the meetings, depending on the topic, with the Chief of the General Staff Perisic, or with Stanisic. Tell us, please, whether this was Slobodan Lazarevic's position and that he had this kind of information available even had it happened.

A. Mr. President, President Hadzic never informed the government of any visit of that kind or of any kind of conclusions reached with the leadership of the Republic of Serbia, the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, or the police leaders. At cabinet sessions we never received any such reports. Mr. Lazarevic could not have been privy to what the government and the president were doing because his headquarters was in Topusko. If we look at the size of the Republic of Serb Krajina and Croatia, it's far away from Knin and very far away from the headquarters of Mr. Hadzic, who was on the western borders of Serbia.

Q. And what do you know about Lazarevic's activities in Topusko?

A. I met him at the Kordun Corps, and he was introduced to me as the corps interpreter. He was interpreting for our officers who didn't speak any foreign languages in contacts with the UNPROFOR commanders.

Q. Lazarevic also testified about what he observed when travelling in the direction of Knin. That's on the 29th of October, 2002, when he testified about that, when he was travelling towards Knin where barricades had been set up along the road during the so-called log revolution, and he saw many cars with Serb licence plates, non-local licence plates, which strengthened his conviction that what he thought had been a spontaneous revolution of the local Serbs was in fact something organised from Serbia.

A. Well, he's right in one thing, Mr. President: Half of Serbia was ⁴⁸⁹⁸⁹ in Dalmatia and those areas at the time because it was summertime, and you know that people in Serbia took their vacations and spent their holidays in that part of Yugoslavia. In 1991, Serbs or people from Serbia still used those roads to go for their holidays.

Q. And what do you know about any involvement of citizens of Serbia in the setting up of roadblocks? This was in 1990.

A. For heaven's sake, was any kind of impulse or incentive needed from abroad to get people to defend their homes and their families? I will read some excerpts from Croatian newspapers at the time, and you will see that in many towns Serb houses were being blown up, looted, or set fire to, as were Serbian shops.

JUDGE ROBINSON: I don't think we want to hear what the Serb peoples had to say on this. The question was what do you know about any involvement of citizens of Serbia in the setting up of roadblocks, but you have gone off on a tangent, as usual.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I do apologise if I'm doing that. Barricades were not a result of any kind of influence from Serbia. I think I've been clear on that.

JUDGE BONOMY: That wasn't -- that wasn't it. The question was the involvement of the citizens of Serbia in the setting up of roadblocks, not influence. Are you saying that there were no citizens of Serbia involved in setting up of roadblocks?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, they weren't. That can't be checked. Even today it's impossible to check that. I said that 2 million people in Serbia originated from that area. Perhaps somebody was visiting ⁴⁸⁹⁹⁰ his own brother and helped him to do that, I don't know.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Did you visit any of the roadblocks personally?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] At that time, I didn't say that. I was in Greece, in Thessaloniki, from April until September 1991, serving there.

JUDGE ROBINSON: [Previous translation continues] ... speak with confidence as to the involvement of citizens of Serbia in the roadblocks.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I have met many people who did participate in setting up the roadblocks. Mostly they were local people, from the area where the roadblocks were set up.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Milosevic.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. The witness stated here that on numerous occasions packages sent from Serbia to the Krajina, or shipments, contained weapons and military equipment, but they were mislabelled as humanitarian aid. Could this witness have informed himself about weapons and equipment being sent as humanitarian aid? Do you know anything about this?

A. No, I don't. I can't say whether his information was correct or whether he was simply deceiving this Court, but I have met many officers who spoke in similar terms about humanitarian aid, and that was in the UNPROFOR offices organisation. Through the Krajina and Bosnian Krajina they sent weapons to the Muslims in Bihac and even sold weapons to Croatian units. I can give you the name of the man who completed a study on this. He was a colonel. The Court may summon him, if it likes. He was in the army of Republika Srpska, a colonel. ⁴⁸⁹⁹¹

Q. Thank you, Mr. Jarcevic. Nikola Samardzic testified here. On page 11428 and 429 of the transcript, Samardzic says that the goal of the JNA was to take Slavonia and Western Srem and arrive at the Karlobag-Karlovac-Virovitica line. What do you know about this?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] But before you reply to my question, Mr. Robinson, I wish to draw your attention to the fact that what is called the log revolution happened in 1990, not in 1991, when he was in Greece, as he said, from April to September, if I remember correctly.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. My question was as follows: Samardzic says that the goal of the JNA was to take the Karlobag-Karlovac-Virovitica line. Do you know what the goal of the army was and if that was the goal?

A. Yesterday I said that similar statements were nonsense. Had such a plan existed, it would have been implemented. The Croatian para-army could not have prevented the JNA from doing that.

Q. Witness Petar Kriste stated here - that's transcript 14837 to 92 - that Dubrovnik was attacked with the aim of creating a Greater Serbia and taking territory and not, as he said, in order to preserve the constitutional order. What do you think about this statement?

A. I think that this statement is just like the previous one. Had this been the plan, there would have been no problems for the JNA in taking Dubrovnik. There were many politicians who were in favour of something like that, because from the earliest times in history Dubrovnik has been a Serbian town. Even today the Croatian language is not spoken there. ⁴⁸⁹⁹²

Q. We won't go into historical explanations now, but was it the goal to take Dubrovnik in order to create a Greater Serbia?

A. No. That was not the goal. Had this been the goal, it would have been implemented.

Q. You said that you were not a member of any party but that you knew --

JUDGE ROBINSON: May I just ask you, what was the goal, then?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You're asking me? Excuse me, please. I apologise. The goal was as in any place where people were threatened in Yugoslavia; to protect the Serbian people. You know that about 2.200 Serbs were expelled from Dubrovnik before these battles that are mentioned here so often, and all of Western Herzegovina in the hinterland of Dubrovnik had been cleansed of Serbs. The Croatian army there razed to the ground an Orthodox monastery dating from the 14th century. Monasteries like this cannot be found anywhere else in Western Europe. And this was part of the goal to stop the army at the coast; and behind that line, the Serbs inhabited the area.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Milosevic.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Witness Stjepan Mesic, in his statement, said the following: In the beginning when the Serbian Democratic Party was established, it didn't seem that that party would, as he says, become so radical because it was advocating cultural autonomy. However, as time went by, it became clear that this party was being manipulated by Belgrade, which means that the regime of Slobodan Milosevic, and he personally, was manipulating them and ⁴⁸⁹⁹³ they were doing only those things that were leading to the creation of a Greater Serbia, an ethnically pure territory cleansed of the non-Serb population.

Tell me, what were the activities of the SDS, and is it correct to say that I manipulated them? Did the SDS leadership maintain any kind of contacts with me? What was that relationship like? Do you know anything about this?

A. Mr. President, I know that the two leading men in the SDS, Dr. Raskovic and Dr. Babic, were your political opponents. I don't know why this role is being ascribed to you, of participating in the founding of that party. I'm probably becoming a bit of a bore now, but I have to repeat once again that the setting up of that party was caused by the behaviour of the Croatian political parties and the expulsion of Serbs from the Croatian towns. That this party became more extreme later on than it had been at the beginning is absolutely not correct. In late 1993 and early 1994, new branches of that party emerged, and they participated in the first multi-party democratic elections under the auspices of the Security Council, and two parties came from that first party. One was led by Mr. Babic and the other by Mrs. Solaja, and Babic was elected to parliament. I think he had the majority. As the party was mainly under his leadership, this statement purports to say that he was your man, and I'm saying that he wasn't.

Q. Witness Mesic said in his statement that in areas where the Serb Democratic Party took power, the population had been fully cleansed of non-Serbs. That's page -- ⁴⁸⁹⁹⁴

THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter did not catch the page number.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] We have heard that 189.000 Croats had lived in the Krajina. I don't know how many remained, but I am absolutely sure that the departure of the Croats from the Republic of Srpska Krajina had been organised by the Croatian state in order to create the impression that the Serbs were expelling the non-Serb population.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Stjepan Mesic, in his statement, 10559 - that's the page number - during his cross-examination said that it was an exaggeration to say that there was an atmosphere of fear among the Serbs in Croatia, but he does accept that there were unseemly and unacceptable statements made and that that is a fact. There were also dismissals which were wrong, as he says, but the people who were dismissed were able to file lawsuits and they won their cases. How do you comment on this assessment of the situation in Croatia? Is it true?

A. No. It's completely untrue. Mr. Mesic passed over two facts, and this is something that had never happened anywhere else in the world. The nationality of the Serbs had been taken away from them by decree, which doesn't happen to -- to anyone anywhere else, even if they're criminals. Also, the tenancy rights of the Serbs were rendered null and void. They were not allowed to buy the apartments in which they had tenancy rights, and the homes of those who were expelled were immediately seized and taken away from them. This has never happened anywhere else in the world.

JUDGE ROBINSON: We'll adjourn for five minutes.

--- Break taken at 9.39 a.m. ⁴⁸⁹⁹⁵

--- On resuming at 9.45 a.m.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. Please continue, Mr. Milosevic.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Mr. Jarcevic, you didn't answer the second part of the question. He explained that the Serbs that were dismissed filed lawsuits and won them. Do you know about that?

A. Mr. President, I do know that those lawsuits were filed in recent years but not on a massive scale, not as commensurate with the violations that took place. People have lost their will to do so. And let me tell you, they would take out a permit in Serbia, written in Cyrillic, and the Croatians put it in a drawer and wait until the whole thing is written in the Latin script, which means that there was a great deal of delay, and those lawsuits started just this year.

Q. Mesic also said that it was true that there were crimes in Croatia and that he always asked for investigations to be launched and that the perpetrators be brought to justice, but that Croatia didn't have enough legal provisions, and then he won the elections because he wanted to see the rule of law prevail in Croatia.

Now, do you know that Croatia didn't have any rules, regulations, things like that, and that investigations were called for into the perpetrators of crimes? Do you know anything about that and may we have your comments?

A. Well, all I can say, Mr. President, is to say that I'm surprised to hear that the head of state, even if it is the State of Croatia, should speak in that way. He's a man who could have prevented all those crimes ⁴⁸⁹⁹⁶ from happening. He was always in the top echelons of the Croatian state, so that command responsibility should be applied to Mr. Mesic in this case as well.

Q. He said that when he was elected to the Presidency he believed and hoped that he would be able to solve the Yugoslav crisis through political means and that he could contribute to avoiding a war.

A. Mr. Mesic had a very good chance had he put in prison all the people who imported weapons in 1990 and 1991 in all the different ways that weapons were brought in. Then that wish would have been realised, if that was indeed the wish that he had.

Q. Mesic says that there were no camps in Croatia; is that right?

A. That's not right at all. In 1991, at the end of that year, or perhaps it was in 1992, there was an exhibition about the slaughtering of more than a hundred Serbs in Gospic. They were law abiding citizens. Many of them had signed what the Croatian authorities asked them to sign, that is to say -- saying -- writs saying that they were loyal to the Croatian authorities. They were all slaughtered, thrown into pits, as they had been in fascist Croatia in 1941. And furthermore, I can also tell you about the correspondence that I had with the Security Council about a particular camp after which most probably several hundred people were executed in Western Slavonia in a small village there, Marino Selo. And the Security Council -- well, we proposed this investigation and offered to dig up Ovcara. The Security Council gave up the idea because the blame had already been placed squarely -- or, rather, the blame was on the Croatian side rather than on the Serb side. ⁴⁸⁹⁹⁷

Q. Mesic said here that Croatia defended itself because the JNA, under my command, had attacked Croatian territory, and that nobody attacked the barracks but that they were blocked or put under siege to prevent them from being attacked. Do you know anything about that?

A. Mr. President, that's quite nonsensical. I don't know how to describe statements of that kind any more. Millions of people in the world saw the Croats attack the barracks in Split and strangle a young soldier from Macedonia. Now they wish to classify conduct of that kind as an international war. Then it was Croatia and Macedonia who should have been at war, because the first soldier killed was from Macedonia. But all the barracks in Croatia were attacked and, according to UN documents, the attacks on the barracks was termed an aggression.

Q. We heard Ruth Vollebaek here -- Knut Vollebaek, and he said that I exerted pressure on the Serbs in Knin to negotiate with the Croats at his proposal. Do you know anything about that? Just the facts, please.

A. Please, Mr. President, I didn't understand your question, nor do I know which time frame you're talking about.

Q. Well, I'm talking about the time that he conducted negotiations with you. And I'm talking about Knut Vollebaek. He said that I had exerted pressure on you for you to agree to negotiate with the Croats at his proposal. So he asked me to prevail upon you to agree to negotiate with the Croats.

Now, did you refuse to negotiate at any point?

A. I do apologise. Well, perhaps I'm being too fast for the interpreters, but let me say that Mr. Knut Vollebaek always had open doors ⁴⁸⁹⁹⁸ for negotiation with the government of Srpska Krajina. I do believe that he went to see you, and he most probably consulted you or informed you of his intentions, and it would be quite mad to suppose that you did not agree to have us negotiate.

Q. Yes, but I'm interested in an answer to this question: Was there any need for any pressure to be put on you for you to negotiate in view of the fact that your participation in all negotiations or, rather, the Serbian side and leadership in the Serbian regions, did it refuse to negotiate? Did it refuse to have matters settled? Did it refuse any offers that were made, and so on and so forth? What is your experience in view of the fact that you attended all the negotiations except those -- that one set of negotiations in Topusko which were never held?

A. There was no refusal on our part except for some wavering, and I omitted to say that yesterday, whether to negotiate on Croatian territory or not, but then we agreed to that too and went to Zagreb to negotiate. So we always agreed. It was just in one negotiations when I was not member of the government that there was a condition put on our side, and that was the beginning of 1995, when it was quite obvious that the Security Council would bring in a new Resolution pursuant to which the status of the peace forces in Yugoslavia would be changed, and in the Republic of Srpska Krajina, because up until then they were called the protection force, and we had from Stoltenberg a draft agreement stating that they would lose this status of protection forces but that they would be called something else, forces for boosting confidence or something like that. And this happened at a point when the American Ambassador Galbraith ⁴⁸⁹⁹⁹ came up with the famous Z-4 plan in Knin. And I already explained that it had been put forward a number of times before that but not under the name of Z-4. And it was not serious, because it related to negotiations between just two towns and the surrounding parts. And Martic said on that occasion, he told the American ambassador that we would negotiate, we would discuss the agreement when the same status was confirmed for United Nations forces as provided by the Vance Plan. However, this was used to put the blame on Martic and say that he was not cooperating.

Q. Thank you, Mr. Jarcevic. I have no further questions.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] That completes my examination-in-chief of this witness, Mr. Robinson.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you, Mr. Milosevic. Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Thank you, Your Honour. Cross-examination by Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff:

Q. Mr. Jarcevic, you were born in Bosnia; right?

A. Yes, that's right, and I said that; on the 2nd of February, 1942.

Q. Just answer my question, no additional information is needed. And you -- afterwards, you lived in, in particular in the period we are concerned about, you lived in Belgrade; right?

A. From 1970, yes.

Q. You mentioned already that from April to September 1991 you were in Greece, and my question is before April 1991, where were you? Before Greece, where were you stationed?

A. In 1990, I worked in the Foreign Affairs Ministry of the SFRY, in ⁴⁹⁰⁰⁰ the personnel department.

Q. Uh-huh. So you were in Belgrade before April 1991?

A. Yes.

Q. And after September 1991, were you in Belgrade or elsewhere?

A. I lived in Belgrade.

Q. And were you stationed after September 1991 in any other country for -- at least for times?

A. No.

Q. So in relation to the years 1990 to October 1992, you were never in the SAOs in Croatia; correct?

A. I apologise, but could you repeat that question?

Q. In the years 1990 to your assignment to the RSK in 1992, you never lived in the SAOs in Croatia.

A. No.

Q. And you also didn't travel there?

A. Of course I did. I played at the international chess tournament. Unless I'm very much mistaken, that was in March in 1991 in Pula.

Q. Pula, that's in Croatia. That's not in the SAOs, right? It's not in the SAOs. That's more in --

A. No, not in the SAO, but I was in Croatia.

Q. But in relation to what was going on in the SAOs in that period 1990 to mid-1992, you did not make any direct observations on the ground; correct?

A. No. I didn't even know anybody from the government of the Republic of Srpska Krajina. ⁴⁹⁰⁰¹

Q. And as you didn't know anybody from the governments in Knin or in Erdut, you cannot really help us with any -- any observation regarding their relations with Mr. Milosevic or his cabinet or any other government official in Serbia; right?

A. I didn't say I could. I could not.

Q. And you also cannot help us with matters related to the Serb TOs and police in the Krajina and in Eastern Slavonia --

JUDGE ROBINSON: I'm not sure what the answer was to that question, Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff.

Are you saying that you -- you would not be able to be of any assistance in relation to -- to Mr. Milosevic and his cabinet?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson, I said that at that time I didn't know a single leader in the Republic of Srpska Krajina, and therefore the fact would emerge that I cannot confirm whether they had any contacts with Mr. Milosevic or what kind at that time.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. Thank you.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF:

Q. And as you did not have any relation with these people in the Krajina or Eastern Slavonia, Baranja, and Western Srem, you cannot help us with matters related to their TOs or their police forces either; right?

A. Well, if you're asking for my assistance, then I can make my conclusions and give you my impressions and the impressions that the inhabitants of Serbia gained at that time, if you're interested in hearing that.

Q. I didn't ask you that. I actually asked -- I actually just wanted ⁴⁹⁰⁰² you to confirm that you cannot really help us there, in relation to the TOs or their subordination or coordination with the JNA and the like. For that period of time, you can't; right?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, yes.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I'm afraid that the witness doesn't understand the question properly, because you're using questions like "being of assistance." If you were to ask him whether he knows about it, then he would give you a yes or no answer, but "could you be of assistance," that is not in the spirit of our language and it's difficult for him to understand this expression. If you asked a simple does he know about something, he can say whether he does or not, but "could you be of assistance" and that kind of turn of phrase is difficult for him to understand because, according to what Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff is saying here, it would appear that the witness knows nothing about anything that went on in Krajina and that he just parachuted into the area like a foreign minister.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Jarcevic, what Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff is really putting to you is that you don't have any evidence to give this Court based on your direct knowledge, personal knowledge, in relation to the TOs or their subordination or coordination with the JNA. Do you accept that proposition?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, that's correct, Mr. Robinson.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF:

Q. Mr. Jarcevic, you were an official in the SFRY Ministry of Foreign ⁴⁹⁰⁰³ Affairs, as you told us. What did you do in the period from April 1992, when the SFRY did not exist any longer, until October 1992?

A. I worked in the Foreign Ministry, occupying the same post that I held beforehand. It was just the circumstances that changed and the structure within the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, because the cadres, the personnel from Slovenia and Croatia, started to leave in an organised fashion.

Q. Thank you. When -- when you became minister of foreign affairs of the RSK in October 1992, did you continue to live in Belgrade?

A. Yes, and I explained that yesterday. I said why.

Q. As I -- if I understand you correctly, you mentioned that the RSK Ministry of Foreign Affairs was actually located in Belgrade. Is that what you mean?

A. Yes.

Q. So even after October 1992, you did not go to Knin or Erdut; correct?

A. Of course I went, madam. I went officially at least once a week.

Q. But as you were living in Belgrade, you cannot really tell us, and you cannot -- you do not know what Mr. Lazarevic and the other local -- local officials were doing on a daily basis and with whom they met; right?

A. Well, that's not a clear question at all. I can know what Mr. Lazarevic did at the point in time when I was involved in certain affairs.

Q. You saw Mr. Lazarevic when you met him on negotiations and the like, when you went abroad and elsewhere, but you did not observe what he ⁴⁹⁰⁰⁴ was doing in the region when he met Mr. Hadzic and others. You don't know that because you were not there; right?

A. Well, madam, I said that he lived in Kordun and that Hadzic was a long way away from him and that his affairs in Kordun related to officers, not heads of state.

Q. Mr. Jarcevic, you actually -- you were the liaison person between the RSK and the Belgrade authorities; right? That was your main purpose of your office in Belgrade; correct?

A. No. You're very wrong on that score, madam. That's not how it was.

Q. Who suggested you for the position, for the RSK position?

A. Well, I'll answer that question if the Trial Chamber and Mr. Robinson allow me to explain it, because you can't have a short answer to a question like that.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, go ahead.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I was a member of the Association of Serbs from Bosnia-Herzegovina, and as I've already said, as we -- I was one of the few babies that survived in my generation. We were very much afraid for the destiny of our people in the Krajina. And what happened once was that a doctor came to see me, Dr. Nikic. He was a man from the neighbouring village next to me. His name was Stanislav Nikic. And he had attended the medical military academy in Belgrade, and he happened to learn that the Croats were preparing to slaughter people in Bosnia and in the place of Livno and a village near Duvno, and he said, "Slobodan, we have to save our people. And this year Portugal is the chair for the ⁴⁹⁰⁰⁵ European Community, and you have to call up the Portuguese ambassador." At that point in time, many of us Serbs from Bosnia rallied together, and I did indeed call up the ambassador. I'm sorry that I've forgotten his name and surname now, but that was in 1992. And I said, "Mr. Ambassador, the Croatian army, on the basis of our information, is preparing to slaughter a whole village in the Duvno municipality and the village -- name of the village is Rascani." And I said they were also preparing a pogrom and slaughter of the majority population in the town of Livno because the centre of the town of Livno was inhabited by Serbs. And these two municipalities, in the Second World War, were -- 72 per cent were slaughtered during World War II in one of these places and 89 per cent in another.

He was very nice, he said just spell out for us the names of those places in English --

JUDGE ROBINSON: I've allowed you to give an answer to the question, not in an abbreviated form, but you are carrying on much too long. Please get to the point.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I did warn you that this would be the point in time when I decided to take up the post of foreign minister of Krajina, because people came to realise this, they saw what was happening, and we saved the people in those parts. And everything -- everybody congratulated me.

And the ambassador said, "Mr. Jarcevic, my school friend is the foreign minister of Portugal, and I'll call the ambassador in Zagreb tomorrow, and our ambassador will go and see Tudjman straight away the ⁴⁹⁰⁰⁶ next day, and he will prevail upon him not to touch those people over there." And that was the decisive moment. And the Serbs who listened to that telephone conversation that I had put me forward for the post of foreign minister.

Well, there you have it. It wasn't too long an explanation.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF:

Q. Mr. Jarcevic, you didn't know the people that -- the authorities in the Krajina or in Erdut. They didn't know you either. So my question is: The Serbs -- which Serbs proposed you? Not the ones from the region; right? Other Serbs.

A. Well, I've told you; the Serbs from Bosnia, Bosnian Krajina.

Q. Mr. Jarcevic, you claimed that no Croats were expelled from Serbia or persecuted in Serbia during the events. That's what you said yesterday. And I would like to put to you a report of the UN. It's --

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Your Honours, it's an exhibit used earlier in these proceedings. It's Exhibit 771. It's in the English language, and we could put it on the ELMO. It's -- please go ahead. I would like to have on the ELMO paragraph 123. It's on page 34. Page 34, paragraph 123.

Q. Mr. Jarcevic, this is a report of the General Assembly -- for the General Assembly of the 14th of November, 1992. On page 34, it deals with events in Vojvodina, and it says here in paragraph 123: "The outbreak of fighting --"

JUDGE ROBINSON: Can the picture be improved? Apparently it can't be done. ⁴⁹⁰⁰⁷

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF:

Q. Then I will read parts of it. "The outbreak of fighting in neighbouring parts of Croatia and the influx of Serbian refugees coincided with an increase in incidents of harassment and violence against non-Serbs in Vojvodina, including rape, shootings, death threats, the use of explosives against homes and churches, and forcible eviction." And a little bit further down in that same paragraph, it says: "The report cites the example of Hrtkovci where 500 refugee families, including 350 former servicemen, were resettled in May 1992. A campaign of intimidation and harassment took place, including beatings and culminating in the death of one person and the departure of 600 persons who sought refuge in Croatia."

And on the next page, in paragraph 124, it continues: "The town of Novi Slankamen has also been the scene of many violent incidents. A Catholic cultural centre was destroyed and a Roman Catholic Church was damaged in 1991, a number of Croatian homes were damaged by machine-gun fire or explosives, one person was raped, and many others were beaten or threatened. In the city of Sombor, explosives damaged a church on the night of the 31st of December, 1991 - 1 January 1992, and two nights later two Croatian restaurants and the home of a leader of a Croatian political party were damaged by explosives. These crimes were announced on the local radio by the paramilitary leader Arkan. Ethnic Croatians have been told that they must leave by a certain date, under threat of death. In Subotica, where Hungarians are the largest ethnic group, religious sites have been attacked of Hungarians or vandalised repeatedly since 1991. The ⁴⁹⁰⁰⁸ cathedral was damaged by explosives. An attempt was made to burn a religious school, a monastery in Bac, classified as ..." and so forth and so forth.

And it says in the next paragraph: "Local authorities and political leaders who met with the delegation indicated that an estimate of 90.000 Croats and Hungarians and other minorities have fled Vojvodina." Mr. Jarcevic, you were living in Serbia, and so you must know about these events, don't you?

A. Madam, I grew up in Vojvodina. I got to Vojvodina when I was age 4, and I am perfectly familiar with the situation in that province. This is my question to your question: The structure of government of the Republic of Serbia did not participate in this. On the contrary, they prevented possible incidents from breaking out and that could have had even worse consequences than the ones that you've been reading about now. Allow me just to say one more thing: Honest people, even from the office in Hrtkovci, gave the authorities of Serbia information to the effect that most of the inhabitants of this village had close cooperation with the HDZ, collected money, and sent that money to arm Croatian paramilitaries. Of course that kind of behaviour caused a reaction on the part of those who were coming in from Croatia as refugees. I believe that the proportions of these crimes are minimal because the organs of Serbia and Yugoslavia managed to stop and prevent what could have happened had it been in the hands of the volunteers and people who had come from Croatia. May I just add one more thing? As opposed to Croatia, where the entire state structure took part in the persecution of Serbs -- ⁴⁹⁰⁰⁹

Q. [Previous translation continues] ...

A. All right.

Q. Mr. Jarcevic, we also had a witness --

MR. KAY: Can I intervene? The Prosecution took three and a half to four minutes to put that question, which was a very detailed passage from a UN text, probably has very, very marginal relevance to the case in this trial. It's 1992, a report of November 1992. This witness is dealing with Croatia, which is a passage of the indictment from August 1991 to June 1992. We're moving off into Vojvodina. If time is that valuable for the Prosecution, as they continually assert, perhaps we should be dealing with more relevant materials rather than reading out long passages of text and then trying to stop the witness from answering it in full.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Kay. I'll take note of that.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Your Honour --

JUDGE ROBINSON: Why did you raise Vojvodina?

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: I raised Vojvodina because this witness told us during the examination-in-chief that no Croat was harmed in Serbia and that there was no persecution of Croats in Serbia, and that is not true. And this witness should know it, because he was there, and he actually says he knows very well about Vojvodina. And when we -- when we speak about -- about the importance of these events for the trial, of course the Croatia indictment deals only with the years 1991 and 1992, but this is a joint trial, and how the JCE cooperated throughout the years 1990 to 1999, that's a key issue in this case, and this is what we are also talking ⁴⁹⁰¹⁰ about. When we speak about Croatia, it is about the relationships of people spanning the whole period of time. And I will deal -- I will deal with this witness as he does not really know about what was going on in Croatia in 1991 and parts of 1992. I will mostly deal with events that are not in Croatia at that time.

JUDGE ROBINSON: He did want to add one more thing. What was it that you wanted to say? You indicated earlier that you wanted to say something else, and I'll hear it briefly.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, let me just repeat: The government structures of Serbia and Yugoslavia were just preventing possible tragedies. It is a sheer miracle that this was not even on a larger scale. Nothing more to add.

JUDGE ROBINSON: We heard that from you already. Yes.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Yes.

Q. Mr. Jarcevic, we also heard a witness, and it's witness C-047, who were actually in the region, in Vojvodina, during the events, and he told us --

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: And, Your Honour, it's the witness speaking about Hrtkovci and the other events at T21578, T21641. Basically that's the most parts of it.

Q. And this witness actually told us that the persecution campaigns in Subotica and Hrtkovci took part after Mr. Vojislav Seselj rallied in these places and that the authorities did not prevent these things from happening. What do you say to this? Is that also what you heard?

A. Madam, Seselj did not have any influence over the spread of any ⁴⁹⁰¹¹ kind of crime in Serbia. He was just calling for the defence of the imperiled Serb people.

Q. I would like to ask you in relation to another passage of that same report, because you mentioned the media and the role of the media in Serbia. It's again Exhibit 771. Could it be put on the ELMO. And it's page 28, paragraphs 95 and 96.

You mentioned, Mr. Jarcevic, in your examination-in-chief that the media in Serbia were rather moderate when they reported about the events in Croatia and elsewhere, and I would like to quote findings from the UN, from the report.

It says here in paragraph 95: "The government-controlled electronic media and press have engaged in a one-sided and nationalistic propaganda campaign. The official media have done nothing to distance themselves from the politics of intolerance, and, as a result, have fed the fires of hatred."

And a little bit further down, in paragraph 96, it says: "It has been observed that quite often facts are distorted, data falsified, and sometimes atrocities invented or deliberately exposed in order to contribute to an atmosphere of mutual hatred. Media are using offensive and abusive appellations. The activities of various international bodies are presented in a false light, and the atmosphere of siege has been created." And so on.

That, Mr. -- What do you say? This is completely different from what you told us, Mr. Jarcevic.

A. Madam, this report does not correspond to the truth. Could you ⁴⁹⁰¹² imagine the expulsion of 400.000 Serbs from Croatia? That was not even registered properly in Serbia. It's only now that people are finding out about this. And what about the UN report? Why did it never provide this kind of information except for Boutros-Ghali's report dated the 15th of May, 1993? And that is a report that was incomplete, at that.

Q. In relation to that same exhibit, would you please -- Usher, would you please put page 25 on the ELMO. It's paragraph 78. Mr. Jarcevic, you also mentioned the Vance Plan and how the Croatian side violated it, and I would like to put something to you about the Serb side. And as you were at that time already the minister of foreign affairs, you may be able to tell us. It's dealing with Sector South here in this paragraph 78. That's the Knin Krajina. It says here: "In Sector South, part of the so-called 'Republic of Krajina' local authorities practised discrimination."

And then further down: "This is of great certain of United Nations staff who collect evidence of murders, robberies, looting, and other forms of criminal violence often related to ethnic cleansing, where in accordance with a mandate, such evidence is transferred to the local authorities. The latter are reluctant to take action if not overtly uncooperative. UNPROFOR officials explained that Serbian militia which were to be disbanded have, in many cases, simply 'changed uniforms,' often working under the auspices of such groups as the Special Police, Border Police, or Multi-purpose Brigades. Until demilitarisation has been completed, UNPROFOR officials believe they cannot guarantee the security either of refugees hoping to return or of the remaining minority ⁴⁹⁰¹³ populations."

Mr. Jarcevic, this is happening now at a time when you were the foreign minister of the RSK. This did happen, didn't it?

A. Madam, have I not explained that very nicely? Did I not explain it nicely yesterday? Our police could not have remained without automatic weapons. That is primarily what it has to do about. And we had a meeting with Cyrus Vance in November in Knin, and then Mr. Martic explained that all these units that are mentioned here exist in any other state. In terms of equipping the Ministry of the Interior, we did not really deviate from --

Q. Let me stop you here. This paragraph that I read out was only partly about the violation of the Vance Plan regarding demilitarisation. It was also about ethnic cleansing practices conducted by the Serbs. And just to add to this --

Usher, would you please put on the ELMO paragraph 83. That's the next page, related to Sector East, Eastern Slavonia, Baranja, and Western Srem.

It says here: "Ethnic cleansing continues to be carried out by militias and local Serbian authorities. The few Croatians, Hungarians, Ukrainians and Slovaks who have not yet left voluntarily are faced with persistent, and often extremely violent, forms of intimidation." The next paragraph: "Catholic churches have been destroyed in an attempt to erase all forms of non-Serbian institutions." Mr. Jarcevic, my question to you is: That's true. Ethnic cleansing took place at that time, and you know about it; correct? ⁴⁹⁰¹⁴

A. Ethnic cleansing was not carried out by the organs of the Republic of the Serb Krajina. There were criminals and criminals were prosecuted, for the most part.

With the permission of the Chamber, I would like to place a document on the overhead projector where you can see that a man who killed Croats was arrested in Sector South that we have just been discussing.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Your Honour, that can be done in re-examination, I think.

JUDGE ROBINSON: I would agree with that. If Mr. Milosevic wishes to raise that --

MR. KAY: I was going to say just his answer to a question. It was a question which had about three questions within it, and he was told off for responding to a different part of the question. He then wants to answer that other question, and he's got a document to prove it. In my submission, he -- with Your Honours' leave, he would be entitled to respond to it in that way and then the Prosecutor has to deal with the information that he is advancing as part of his response. It's for the Prosecutor to then deal with the witness's answer in cross-examination.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Very well. I'll allow you to introduce the document.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You see, this is the Territorial Defence of the Republic of the Serb Krajina providing the following information: That on the 17th -- can't really see it; right? I beg your pardon.

"On the 11th of March, 1992, in Skabrnja, five locals of Croat ⁴⁹⁰¹⁵ ethnicity were killed whereas in Gornja Zemunik four locals also of Croat ethnicity. One person, Maricic Boze Stevo, an ethnic Serb, is suspected of having committed all of this, from Zemunik Gornji. The suspect is a member of the 3rd Brigade of the Territorial Defence of Benkovac. The mentioned person was brought into custody at the public security station in Benkovac. We still do not have information about the names of the victims. The motives for the commission of the crime are still something that we do not know.

"Two Catholic churches were destroyed as well in the village of Perusic and Podgradje, the south-eastern part of our municipalities. The churches were almost completely destroyed, and also some graves were demolished." Oh, I thought I was reading slower. I do apologise.

THE INTERPRETER: The interpreters cannot hear the speaker. Thank you.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Perhaps it would be useful, Mr. Robinson, if this would be on the overhead projector. This document has not been translated previously, and then the interpreters can see what they are interpreting and then the rest of us can have a look as well and so on.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, please put it on the overhead projector. Mr. Jarcevic, can you tell us what this document is? Where does it come from?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This document speaks about crimes that --

JUDGE ROBINSON: What is its official status? Does it have one? ⁴⁹⁰¹⁶

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It is a report of the military organs of the Republic of Serb Krajina. It can be seen that such crimes were not committed by state structures. On the contrary, the man was arrested and prosecuted. You cannot really shift the blame now to the government of the Republic of the Serb Krajina in terms of something that was committed by an individual. Had we organised that, then the perpetrator would have been hidden.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF:

Q. Mr. Jarcevic, where does it say in the document that the person was convicted or even indicted? Does it say that anywhere in that document?

A. Madam, in the archives of the Republic of Serb Krajina, all of that exists. It was all seized and taken to Zagreb. This is one of the very few documents that was kept from the area that you're interested in. You've just started reading about the eastern part of the Krajina now. A man was convicted to several years in prison, a man who killed several Croats and one or two Hungarians, if I'm not mistaken. He was tried by the court of the Republic of the Serb Krajina. Due to our lack of archives now, I cannot bring you these documents, and I cannot bring you the judgement, but you can obtain all of that in Zagreb.

Q. Mr. Jarcevic, what sentence did this man get? How -- for what was he convicted? Do you know that? Do you know that this report really resulted in a conviction?

JUDGE ROBINSON: Or in a trial?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, let me tell you. The Republic ⁴⁹⁰¹⁷ of the Serb Krajina functioned under those very difficult circumstances as a state. Nevertheless, there were many trials in Krajina. I cannot tell you about each and every individual trial; I dealt in other matters. But you have a minister of justice in Krajina. There was one, there was another one, there was yet a third one. You can call them and they can testify.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: I think we can move on, Your Honour.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, please move on.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF:

Q. Mr. Jarcevic, you --

JUDGE ROBINSON: Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff, it's time for the break. We will adjourn for 20 minutes.

--- Recess taken at 10.33 a.m.

--- On resuming at 10.55 a.m.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Please continue, Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Thank you, Your Honour.

Q. Mr. Jarcevic, during your testimony, you gave some population figures regarding Serbs in Croatia, and you said, inter alia, that according to your findings, 1 million Serbs lived in Croatia. And I would like to put to you some statistics. The first item is from the population statistics from the Croatian Statistical Institute, and it's in the Croatian language, but the population figures on the third page speak for themselves. So when they are on the ELMO, it's easy for everyone to understand.

Could we please have the third page on the ELMO. It's the ⁴⁹⁰¹⁸ statistical report related to the census of 1991, and it also shows the other years. And we have here, when we look under Srbi, we have here the figures for the Serbs, and it says here for 1991, 581.000 and some -- and a few. And a little bit further down in relation to the percentages, it says Srbi, 12.2 per cent. That's actually the same figures that Mr. Kostic, who testified not long before you, also spoke about. How -- how -- your figure of 1 million Serbs, that is not reflected here, and you don't have any foundation for that; right? No official foundation.

A. Yes, madam. I have to say that this is written in the Serbian language because the Croats are the only people in the world who have renounced their language. It hasn't been used for over a hundred years. This official data, as I said yesterday, is a falsification. It doesn't represent the Serb -- the figures accurately. Mario Nobilo, the Croatian ambassador, actually denied this information when he said that 251 -- 251.000 Serbs lived in the Krajina and another number lived somewhere else, and if you add all this up, you will find the correct number.

I have also mentioned that the number of Siptars in Kosovo has been exaggerated by two and a half times. This was the Yugoslavia in which non-Serb cadres were preparing its dissolution. My name is Jarcevic.

Q. I would like to put to you also another source relating to the official source relating to the figures, and that is actually the Yugoslav survey from 1992 that was produced in the Statistical Institute in Belgrade. ⁴⁹⁰¹⁹ And please also put on the ELMO the second page of this document. As you can see, Mr. Jarcevic, we have that same figure for 1991 census for the Serbs, and the same percentage again.

A. I repeat: I do not trust these percentages. They were taken over from Croatia. As I said yesterday, at republican level, censuses were falsified by reducing the numbers of Serbs.

JUDGE BONOMY: What about -- what about this publication? It's from an institute --

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't trust it.

JUDGE BONOMY: It's by an institute founded by the Assembly of the FRY.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is information taken over from Zagreb. As for the information from Zagreb, I've already told you everything about it three times.

JUDGE BONOMY: I understand that. I'm not asking you about that at the moment. I'm asking you about this document called the Yugoslav Survey, and I'd be grateful if you'd concentrate on that. Can you tell me why you don't trust this publication.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I said yesterday that we in Knin looked at these figures and arrived at a number of Serbs amounting to a little over a million.

JUDGE BONOMY: [Previous translation continues] ... Mr. Jarcevic. That's a point about the accuracy of the figures. What is it you say makes you not trust this publication? Is it anything other than the inaccuracy you maintain in the figures? ⁴⁹⁰²⁰

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think you have understood me. We verified this information in Knin and arrived at other figures. Of course we don't have our archives now.

JUDGE BONOMY: I'll ask it differently: Do you know this publication?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

JUDGE BONOMY: Do you have any other reason for doubting that it's a genuine -- that it would make a genuine attempt to reflect statistics accurately?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Statistical information in this publication is what it is, but I do not believe that the number of Serbs is the number published in this publication. I think I've been quite clear. I don't know what else to say. Just as I don't believe that 1.700.000 Siptars lived in Kosovo and Metohija.

JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF:

Q. With the help of the usher, I would like to put to you another statistic from that same Yugoslav Survey Institute situated in Belgrade, and now it is from 1997. And the second page, please. The second page of this report, statistical report. And it's about the structure of the -- and the numbers of the persons -- war affected persons by former place of residence. And I would like you to look at table V in the middle of that page 95, as it says. We have here from Croatia the persons affected by the war, and we have here a figure from the UNPAs of 284.007, and from other parts of Croatia of 52.992. ⁴⁹⁰²¹ Mr. Jarcevic, these figures have nothing to do with what you told us about; that is, 471.000 Serbs living in Croatian towns and 400.000 expelled of these.

And -- yes. That's basically this. What you told us about who was expelled from the towns, it is not reflected in these figures here, is it?

A. Madam, it is reflected in the document issued by Boutros Boutros-Ghali on the 15th of May. There is a document here, handed over by Mr. Milosevic, showing that only in Yugoslavia and the UN protected areas 251.000 Serbs were expelled. That's his figure, not mine. As for the figure of 471.000, that's the figure provided by the Croatian ambassador. I only noted those figures; they don't come from me. As for the statistical information published by Serbia or the former Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, which is now the state of Serbia and Montenegro, the state union, don't trust those figures, because all those who in the meantime have taken Serbian and Montenegrin citizenship or gone to third countries were immediately erased from the lists of refugees.

Last year in May, the Government of Republika Srpska in exile handed over a letter to President Kostunica, Tadic, and the speaker of parliament, asking for this practice to be stopped. Otherwise, no information will exist any longer about Croatia expelling anyone. This is the trap into which you have now fallen.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Would you just remind us of the document from Boutros Boutros-Ghali which you say support the figures that you gave. ⁴⁹⁰²² What document is that?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is a report by Boutros Boutros-Ghali to the Security Council of the 15th of May, 1993, and it relates to the period from 1990 to early 1993. In English, it's page 4.

JUDGE ROBINSON: I'm trying to determine what to do with this document from Boutros Boutros-Ghali.

Mr. Kay? We should have it in evidence.

JUDGE KWON: Tab 18.

JUDGE ROBINSON: What is the paragraph of that document that you say supports?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think it's on page 4 of the text in English, and Mr. Milosevic has the text in Serbian.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: I may be mistaken, but I don't see any figures of that kind in this report, and I ...

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Here it is. Page 4, line 1.

MR. KAY: Tab 16, I think, is -- of Exhibit 338. I think that's where we are, according to my notes, when the witness gave evidence that Serbs started to leave from 1990 and 271.000 [sic] Serbs had fled from the Krajina, as noted in the UN Secretary-General's report of May 1993. At that stage in his evidence, he was dealing with Exhibit 338, tab 16.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] 251.

JUDGE BONOMY: Page 1.

JUDGE ROBINSON: It's tab 16?

JUDGE BONOMY: Yes, tab 16, page 1.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Your Honour in tab 18 -- ⁴⁹⁰²³

JUDGE ROBINSON: Apparently it's tab 16, Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: It's also -- I just found it also in tab 18. It's paragraph 10, and we find in this paragraph 10 also the figures of people fleeing to Serbia, and it's named here -- it's said 251.000.

Q. But, Mr. Jarcevic, these figures that are in that report, they actually match the findings of the Yugoslav Survey Institute. They also mention here 284.000 from the UNPAs, and 52.000 from the other parts. And if you look on the next page, the next page, this institute actually looks even more closely at these population moves, and you find here a table VI where it is divided according to years, and the years 1991, 1992, and 1993, are selected here as well as the year 1995. And you see that these figures are much, much lower than what you claim. Can you help us with that? And it's now a Yugoslav institute controlled by the Yugoslav state. It's nothing to do with the Croats.

A. Madam, I have told you what the practice was. Anyone who took the citizenship of Serbia and Montenegro was no longer considered a refugee. Tens of thousands of people who at the time of this census were there went to foreign countries, such as Canada, Australia, and so on. None of these countries gave us the information we asked for in 1993. The number of people who fled to those countries is not less than the numbers who fled to Serbia. You don't have those figures, just as I never had them.

Q. Mr. Jarcevic, this is a table -- both tables deal not with refugees but war affected persons by former place of residence. It's not just refugees. It's -- that's at least my understanding of this report.

A. Madam, I haven't invented anything. I put forward two figures; ⁴⁹⁰²⁴ the one provide by the Croatian Ambassador Nobilo whose document I don't have because it was seized by the Croatian police, and the Ghali report. If 251.000 Serbs were expelled from two areas which were suffering from sanctions, where there were no jobs and no possibility of new life, how many people then fled to countries which were providing better conditions and which were issuing visas to such people in those years with a very short and simple procedure? Then you can imagine the extent of the crimes against the Serbs in Croatia if you consider all these other aspects that are not contained in the document you are showing us.

Q. Mr. -- Mr. Jarcevic, do you accept that the data that are compiled here in this Yugoslav survey are actually prepared by the official bodies of the Yugoslav state, and they're acting according to the guidelines for preparing statistics? Do you accept that?

A. Madam, I do not accept that this information contains all the facts about the Serb people expelled from Croatia. It doesn't mention the Serbs who fled to Canada, for example. That's why these figures cannot represent the whole issue of Serbs from Croatia. Ask Australia, Canada, the USA, Germany. As I said yesterday, the Germans said they would not forcibly send those Serbs back to Croatia, but they regretted the fact that they had the greatest expenses and costs in Europe because of these refugees, and this information is not contained here. I can't be any clearer than that.

Q. Mr. Jarcevic, are you aware that the state commission that prepares the census and that actually reviews the results, that this commission in Belgrade monitors the taking of the censuses in the -- all ⁴⁹⁰²⁵ through Yugoslavia? Were you aware of that?

A. Of course I am, madam, but I've told you what methods they used. Anyone who took citizenship, and many were forced to do so, were no longer -- was no longer included in the figures you are reading out. And the same goes for third countries. While I don't have the right to ask you questions, but --

Q. Mr. Jarcevic, I obviously didn't make myself understood. I was now referring to the census data in general that we spoke about before we came to these other figures. The ones for the survey in 1991, were you aware that the state commission monitored -- from Belgrade, monitored the census-taking throughout the former Yugoslavia and thus the Croatian government or, rather, officials acted accordingly? Do you know that?

A. I know that, madam, but the Yugoslav organs did not monitor anything in other republics. They simply took for granted what the republican statistical organisations provided them with.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Your Honours, I would like to tender those three documents into evidence, because the witness has dealt with it -- with them and knows about them.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, they're admitted.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF:

Q. Mr. Jarcevic, you also dealt with the document tab 13 of the Defence exhibit. Can we please have it again on the ELMO. That was the document related to Marica Varicak.

A. Varicak.

Q. Yes. ⁴⁹⁰²⁶

JUDGE ROBINSON: Would you give the documents a number, please, those just admitted.

THE REGISTRAR: From the Croatian Statistical Institute for 1991 will be Exhibit 956.

The extract from the Yugoslav Survey for 1992 will be Exhibit 957. And the extract from the Yugoslav Survey for 1997 will be 958.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF:

Q. Mr. Jarcevic, looking at Defence Exhibit 338, tab 13, that's now on the ELMO, and we don't have a translation, but is it correct that nowhere in this document there is an indication that the 21 incidents of explosions or the 381 incidents from 1991 on explosions and 673 incidents of 1992, nowhere in this document is a reference that the victims or the property -- that the owners of the property were Serbs; right? There's no indication here.

A. Madam, I expressed my opinion about this yesterday. Let me just tell you that Marica Varicak is a Serb from Lika. This is an area that was part of the Republic of Serbian Krajina. She resided in Zadar, and she was one of the 28.000 Serbs expelled from that town. This document was used during court proceedings to demonstrate that Serb houses were demolished. Marica Varicak --

Q. You don't need to repeat what you have told us about the case of Marica Varicak. Nowhere in this document, in this, except for the head Marica Varicak, is the ethnicity of the owner mentioned of any of these other incidents; correct? It doesn't say in these two paragraphs dealing with the figures of 21, 318 [sic], or 673, it doesn't mention the ⁴⁹⁰²⁷ ethnicity of the owners; right?

A. Well, of course they're not mentioned. This area was controlled by the Croats. We won't conclude that it was Croatian houses that were demolished. It was only Serb houses that were demolished.

Q. In that municipality of Zadar, there are also the villages Skabrnja and Nadin; correct? They were part of Zadar municipality, and they could be in that figures, too; right?

A. Yes, but I can't answer that question. The organ that issued this document would most probably be able to tell you. Among these incidents, there may have been Croatian buildings, but they were mainly in Zadar. Zadar was one of the towns that was destroyed in Croatia mainly because companies and Serb houses dominated -- predominated in the centre of Zadar. A year later, there was only grass growing there, as if a park had been planned there. I have a friend who had a house in Zadar, and he says he now has an English lawn on the site of his house. I cannot tell you whether this includes areas which were partly in the Republic of Serbian Krajina, because as you know, in 1993, on the 22nd of January, the Croats perpetrated an aggression there, and then they burnt and destroyed --

Q. Let me stop you here. We are digressing again from the issue we are talking about.

This is a document related to these incidents of explosion and damage in the municipality of Zadar, and I asked you whether Skabrnja and Nadin would be included, and your answer, if I understand you correctly, is yes, you wouldn't know that. Just -- ⁴⁹⁰²⁸

A. I cannot answer that question. I don't know, because this was issued for more than one court proceeding, and I was not able to know what these court proceedings were about.

Q. And Zadar was also shelled by the JNA; correct? And so damages could also be caused by this shelling, isn't it?

A. Yes, but it doesn't say anything about shelling here. It only speaks of fires and explosions. Explosions, well, bombs have to be planted. I don't think that shelling can be described as explosions.

Q. But shelling can actually cause fire; right?

A. Well, yes, fires, yes, but not explosive -- not shelling. Explosives planted by hand. I'm not a strategic expert or a soldier, but my general education allows me to make that kind of conclusion.

Q. Mr. Jarcevic, you got aware at some point in time of the killing of about 260 people from the Vukovar Hospital; correct?

A. Correct, madam. And I'd like us to talk about that matter.

Q. You actually wrote a letter to the Mothers of Vukovar, Association of Mothers of Vukovar, and I would like to put this letter to you and to everyone else.

Mr. Jarcevic, is this your letter that you wrote to the Association Vukovar Mothers in relation to the missing?

A. In relation to the missing persons, yes, this is a letter that we sent from Zagreb when we were negotiating, just before the agreement of the 29th of March, 1994, was signed. And I took part in drafting the letter, although somebody else signed in my place, but I can give you a sample of my signature if need be. The mothers asked whether in Serbia ⁴⁹⁰²⁹ there were any detained Croatian soldiers, and by this we told them that in Serbia, or in Yugoslavia, there were no prisoners, no people who were -- had been taken prisoner, and if there were any, we would help them to have them freed.

We did not speak about people who -- any people who were killed or buried in the famous or infamous mass grave at Ovcara, but we can discuss that too.

Q. But, Mr. Jasarevic -- Jarcevic, sorry. Mr. Jarcevic, you knew that the mothers of Vukovar were actually looking for the missing, and you did not indicate in this letter that there was a mass grave. This is a letter from 1994, and you knew at that time, you were aware that there was a mass grave at Ovcara, didn't you?

A. Yes, that's an excellent question, madam. The Croatian government and Security Council rejected our proposal in 1993 to dig up Ovcara and to identify the bodies. And this rejection of that proposal is contained in a letter from the High Commissioner of Canada to the UN, William Fenrick, to the Security Council. I can tell you of the correspondence that we had with him over a six-month period.

I was the man who in 1993, sometime in May, unless I'm very much mistaken, offered to dig up Ovcara.

Q. Mr. Jarcevic, let's go through these step-by-step. We heard evidence from Professor Dr. Strinovic, and it's transcript page 17938 and 17038. He mentioned that the first gravesite was actually discovered in Ovcara in 1992. And he further told us that the exhumations started in 1993, but that the exhumations were stopped by the Serb side and could ⁴⁹⁰³⁰ only conclude in 1996. Is he correct in saying that?

A. No, that's not correct at all. There's a Security Council letter addressed to Prime Minister Bjegovic, which states that there would be no digging up in Ovcara, according to plan, or in Marino Selo, which are Serb graves, because there is no money in the Security Council to do so. That is literally what they said.

Q. Let me just ask you this: Is it correct that the first trace of the gravesite was discovered in 1992? Do you know that?

A. In view of the fact that I had a meeting with William Fenrick in the Yugoslavia Hotel in Belgrade, the fact is that before that year 1993, Fenrick had information about that mass grave and he was astounded when I told him, without consulting the head of state who was from the area, so without consulting the Prime Minister, that I guaranteed the digging up of the mass grave, and at that point in time he just couldn't believe it. I confirmed this to him in writing.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Your Honour, we have to return now to the Exhibit 771. That's the Security Council report of 7th of November, 1992. And please put on the ELMO paragraph 86.

Q. Mr. Jarcevic, just look at the ELMO where there is said that: "... the forensic expert accompanying the Special Rapporteur on his second mission located a potential mass gravesite approximately 2 kilometres south-east of the farming village of Ovcara ..." The grave is then described a little bit more, and also the -- the consideration that it may be the disappeared from the Vukovar Hospital. And there is also mention that the Special Rapporteur had requested that UNPROFOR provide ⁴⁹⁰³¹ round-the-clock protection of the gravesite, and there is also mention that the Special Rapporteur had informed the commission of experts recently about this.

So it was actually the UN who discovered the mass grave and then guarded it and informed Mr. Fenrick or the commission of experts. Isn't that right?

A. Mr. Fenrick came to see me to ask the government of the Republika Srpska Krajina permission to dig up the grave, and I granted that permission straight away. I think I made myself clear. But let me repeat for a third time: We asked as a reciprocation that the graves of the Serbs be dig out in Marino Selo, Marin's Village, in Slavonia, and he didn't adhere to that promise, and I'll ask -- explain why.

Q. Let me put what Mr. Fenrick actually declared publicly to you. And it's an exhibit not yet in this case. It's a new exhibit.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Sorry, Your Honour. I just was reminded that the letter from Mothers of Vukovar, the answer, should be exhibited, his answer.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, it's exhibited.

THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit 959.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: And just for the usher, it is the page --

Q. Just so to explain to you, Mr. Jarcevic, it is a cable with attachments from the UN related to the Ovcara gravesite from the 25th of February, 1995. In this cable is included an interoffice memorandum about how the negotiations were conducted, and actually on page 2 of that memorandum there is mentioned the discussions that were held with you in ⁴⁹⁰³² 1993. It says here -- it starts with -- when I look at the first, at the interoffice memorandum, it says on the first page, last line: "The investigation had been on the agenda of the commission of experts since late 1992." Then it is mentioned that they took -- they undertook detailed preparation to excavate the site between December 1992 and September 1993. The preparation included obtaining all assurances on the 23rd of April, 1993, from Mr. Jarcevic, the foreign minister. Is that how you remember it too?

A. Yes. That was at the Yugoslavia Hotel.

Q. And it says here in that same paragraph: "After the written authorisation had been received, the commission sent the 60-strong excavation team to the former Yugoslavia. Subsequently, during October 1993, the local authorities denied knowledge of the Knin authorisation and became increasingly obstructive ..."

It's not money missing at the UN side. It is the local authorities obstructing the work of the commission. Can you help us with that? Why were they opposed?

A. Madam, this is the first time I'm hearing this piece of information. I never heard of anything like this before, and it cannot be correct at all. Even if somebody did obstruct on the part of the local authorities, the government of Srpska Krajina would have to have been informed about it, because I'm quite sure that that what Fenrick promised me was never brought to completion. And there are several letters that we have kept in the Republic of Srpska Krajina, and I think that President Milosevic's associates do in fact have a letter where it says that because ⁴⁹⁰³³ of the lack of money, they would be putting a stop to the digging up of both localities, both sites. And we proposed our own pathologist. They never called him to join the team, although they did record his name. His name was Zeljko Karan and he was from Banja Luka, pathologist from Banja Luka. I can go on if you're interested in hearing more about this.

Q. I'd like to go with you further through this memorandum of the UN in relation how the exhumation went along. And it says here in the next paragraph: "On 15 and 16 October 1993, the Commission received 'Decrees' from Knin authorising the excavation provided that the medico-legal examination did not take place in Croatia," and the UN agreed to this. Then it continues: "On the 22 October 1993, Colonel Milanovic informed the commission that despite all previous written assurances, the excavation was to be postponed until an overall political solution had been found to the situation in the former Yugoslavia." Now, tell me, why would you need to have a political solution to excavate a gravesite? Why was that suddenly a condition?

A. Please believe me when I say that this is the first time I hear of this. And why would a letter coming from Fenrick to the government of the Srpska Krajina, why did it not contain this fact? We would certainly have reacted.

So in his letter it says because of a lack of money, there will not be the digging up of both gravesites. And I think that this Court will receive a letter, will be shown a letter to that effect. I'll do my best to find it.

Now, Bastion [phoen], who was the deputy of Mr. Fenrick, didn't ⁴⁹⁰³⁴ want to go to Belgrade and interview a man who was the sole survivor of the execution in Marino Selo. He said he wasn't interested.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Who has this letter, Mr. Jarcevic?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I have a copy of it at home, and I will send the letter to you at the first -- earliest opportunity. The letter is from Fenrick to the Prime Minister Bjegovic.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Your Honour, I have more documents here.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Don't send to it to me. Send it to the accused or his associates.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF:

Q. Among those documents that I have here related to Ovcara there is no such letter that you mentioned but there is a press release. And please could you put the press release of the 2nd of November - it's enclosure number 3 - on the ELMO. And it is actually, according to this document, it seems to come from Mr. Fenrick. And he explains how -- how he prepared for the execution of the excavation and how he got first the permits to do that. And then he says on the second page of this press release: "However, in October 1993, after the arrival in the former Yugoslavia of the persons mentioned above, some local representatives of the Knin administration in the Ovcara area began to create obstacles for the Commission's project, in particular, Colonel Milanovic." And he also continues to write on the next page that: "The Commission, however, firmly believes that the truth about the Ovcara mass grave is impossible to hide regardless of what obstacles are currently put in the way of the investigation. ⁴⁹⁰³⁵ "The Commission further deplores this delay for humanitarian reasons since the identification of the remains would alleviate the anxieties of the families of disappeared persons." And he says also in the last line that: "... the attitude of the Government of Croatia was positive and helpful." He does not mention any problems with money, and he does also not mention any reciprocity with the exhumations in Ovcara and the other gravesites; correct?

A. Well, I'm surprised to hear that, because along with this fact or information that he hasn't got enough money, he said that the commission would be disbanded, and that's what happened, unless I'm mistaken, at the beginning of 1994. He just said orally that the Tribunal in The Hague would continue what they should have done.

Q. And we look at enclosure number 4. That's indeed a letter from you of the 6th November 1993, and it relates, obviously, to the press release of Mr. Fenrick. And you say here in paragraph 2: "The RSK has granted permission for the Ovcara venture on condition that a concurrent excavation of mass graves in Marino Selo and Pakrakca Poljana in Western Slavonia was also implemented in that -- in the presence of the team of Krajina forensics."

You bring forward here a reciprocity between excavation in two mass graves. That's not mentioned in any of the documents by the UN. Why did you write that?

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Milosevic?

THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please. ⁴⁹⁰³⁶

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] What Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff claims is not correct. It's not correct that the United Nations do not mention in any of the documents, do not mention this. So she's asking the witness the wrong question, an incorrect question, because in the memorandum that she quoted a moment ago, UNPROFOR interoffice memorandum that she quoted from a moment ago, just one paragraph lower down from the paragraph she quoted from, and she was quoting from page 2, a paragraph beginning with, "On the 15th and 16th of October 1993, the commission ..." et cetera, et cetera, received a decree from Knin. In the following paragraph it already says this in the document, the UN document. It says that Jarcevic sent a letter to Fenrick in which it says, and you can read it for yourselves, Jarcevic's quotation: "I must most strongly remind you that the government of RSK has granted permission for Ovcara venture on condition that a concurrent excavation of mass graves in Marino Selo and Pakracka Poljana (Western Slavonia within Sector West, where he alleges 2.500 Serb bodies) were also implemented, and in the [In English] ... presence of a team of Krajina forensic experts. It was naturally agreed that a team of Croatian forensic experts should be present at Ovcara." [Interpretation] So that we can see clearly that in the UN document mention is in fact made of what in her question Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff says is not mentioned and she's putting that to Mr. Jarcevic.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Your Honour, I --

JUDGE ROBINSON: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Milosevic.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Your Honour, in this -- this first document ⁴⁹⁰³⁷ that Mr. Milosevic just referred to, that's the summary of the events, and I was not completing this summary of events but took actually the letters that we had attached to. So what they are actually referring to is just the letter that I just put to Mr. Jarcevic and ask him why did he, in November 1993, for the first time mention that there was an agreement. And that's exactly what is mentioned in this report here, that he -- or on the 6th November, as it says here, wrote this letter. And in the -- it's -- in the report summarising what was going on, it says actually -- a comment of the author of the report is that he has no means verifying the accuracy of the statements of Mr. Jarcevic in his letter. And I was just putting this to Mr. Jarcevic. I asked him why on the 6th of November did he bring this forward.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Jarcevic, please answer.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Madam, those conditions were mentioned in the Yugoslavia Hotel when I first met Fenrick, our first meeting. He told us orally that he accepted the conditions, and you know that there are oral agreements which have as much value as written agreements do, and I'm quite certain that we are lacking documents here in which that is stated before the date that you're specifying. Let me repeat that our archives were seized by the Croatian police. However, the documents can be found, I'm sure, in New York.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF:

Q. Mr. Jarcevic, Mr. Fenrick, in his press release of the 2nd of November, does not mention this fact, but let me just ask you this: Why do you insist on a degree of reciprocity in the investigation of mass ⁴⁹⁰³⁸ graves? What does one mass grave have to do with the other?

A. Thank you for that question. We informed Mr. Fenrick of about 70 mass graves of Serbs in Knin. I'm sorry, I meant to say in Croatia. So it's quite logical that the United Nations do not have the right to deal with the crimes of just one party, one side. They have to look at the crimes of both sides, to care about them. And so Fenrick, with an explanation from our part, said all right, we're going to dig up for the moment just this one in Western Slavonia. And I can tell you also what Fenrick also explained to us later on, what he told us later. He said he found empty graves with no bodies after a certain time had passed and when the commission was about to be disbanded.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Your Honour, I would like to tender these documents, this group of documents into evidence. It's --

JUDGE BONOMY: Just before you do that.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Yes.

JUDGE BONOMY: I see that there was a recommendation in the end that the ICTY should consider approaching the Croatian government and Knin authorities with a view to having the two exhumations carried out. Did the Office of the Prosecutor follow that up?

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: I don't know that, Your Honour. I don't know.

JUDGE BONOMY: You surely understand the point the witness is making about even-handed investigation, and I just wondered if that had happened.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: The Prosecution did not -- did usually ask ⁴⁹⁰³⁹ other authorities to do such things, and I'm not aware that these other mass graves -- these other graves were done by the commission of expert. I will try to find an answer to that, Your Honour, but at the moment, off the top of my head, I don't know that.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, we'll admit the documents.

THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit 960.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Mr. Jarcevic, you spoke about your participation in negotiations with the Croatian authorities, and you actually referred mostly to these global political questions. However, you also had negotiations on, as I see -- I have here a press release from the 15th of December, 1992, and it just refers to the fact that the Croatian government has proposed through UNPROFOR the normalisation of relations with the Republic of Serbian Krajina related to the opening of roads, establishing of rail transport, power plants, bridges, and those kind of things. Negotiation on these more practical and economical facts took matters -- took the place, right, of what their proposal, the Croats' proposal. Is that correct?

A. Madam, the contents of this was something that all the meetings dealt with, whether directly with the Croatian delegation or with the mediators like Thornberry, but on our side we asked that roads be opened from Slovenia to Hungary. We wanted an exit into the world.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Yes. Could this be exhibited, Your Honour?

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, it's exhibited.

THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit 961.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: ⁴⁹⁰⁴⁰

Q. And before we go into a few very specific negotiations, I would like to put to you something that you said at that time about your counterpart on the Croatian side, and first of all I would like to put to you an exhibit from the newspaper Glas Srpski of the 14th and 15th January 1993.

A. Let me have a look.

Q. It's called "Reaction of Slobodan Jarcevic, RSK Minister of Foreign Affairs." And the headline is "Danger for the RSK." And it says here in the first point under the headline, it says: "I hope the world will realise that all the evil that has come upon the former Yugoslavia comes from Croatia and the artificial Muslim creation, which both initiated the war in an attempt to destroy the Serbian people." That was your view at that time; right?

A. To this day, madam.

Q. And a little but further down here, it says: "Jarcevic reiterated the view that a 'monster state,' which once already existed, was again being created in the territory of the former Bosnia and Herzegovina ..." What do you mean by "monster state that already -- that once already existed"?

A. The answer is very simple, madam: It cannot have a joint coat of arms, a joint language, a common flag, and I don't know what else you want.

Q. You say a little bit further down: "Judging by all, the form of federation or confederation with Croatia is being envisaged for RSK which is unacceptable for us." ⁴⁹⁰⁴¹ So you actually always strived for statehood of the RSK and the RS; correct?

A. Yes. That was our ultimate objective because of our historical experience. As for the Croatian proposals, as I've said, it only had to do with two towns and their surroundings. And as I said, we always rejected that.

Q. I would like to go now to another of --

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Your Honour, could that be exhibited? I would like to tender this.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, it's exhibited.

THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit 962, Your Honours.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF:

Q. And by the way, I forgot to ask you: You mentioned the Muslims being an artificial -- Muslim nation being an artificial creation. Do you still think that? Is that still your point of view?

A. Absolutely. All Muslims in Bosnia-Herzegovina are ethnic Serbs.

Q. I have here another newspaper article, also from Glas Srpski from 15 February 1993, and it has the headline: "Forbidden words: 'Co-existence' and Autonomy!" "Co-existence" is in converted commas, and it's actually the Croatian word for co-existence; right?

A. You are wrong, madam. That is a Serb word. The Croatian language hasn't been used for the past 100 years. It was called the Kajkavian dialect in scholarly circuits, but that was a mistake and they just took for state use a pure language, the pure Serbian language, and they've spoiled it a bit in order to give the expression of the existence of two ⁴⁹⁰⁴² languages. Croatian is the only language which is not under the protection of UNESCO, although UNESCO takes care of 6.000 different languages in the world that are about to become extinct.

Q. Mr. Jarcevic, this is a -- actually the opinion or report about a delegation of the RSK, and it's mentioned who was part of it, and I see your name here, too, and it says here on -- I have -- it's in the last column. It's the last column in the Serbian, and in the English it's on the second page, the top paragraph. It says here: "... we have recently refuted Mr. Owen's statement that we are going to those talks for reasons of the establishment of some sort of 'co-existence' and autonomy of the Republic of Croatia. That is not why we are going there, and precisely those two words, 'co-existence' and autonomy, will be permanently banned during the negotiations!"

Mr. Jarcevic, does it mean that those sayings were proposed to you, offered to you, co-existence and autonomy, and you didn't -- you rejected this?

A. Madam, I'm telling you for the fifth time: Co-existence and autonomy only in two towns, and that would escalate to totally senseless proportions in 1993. And the Z-4 plan in 1994 when for those two municipalities, two towns, they envisaged money, a flag, an army, a parliament, a coat of arms, and participation in the Croatian authorities. So two-thirds of the Republic of Serb Krajina would have been excluded. It would have automatically become part of Croatia and probably the inhabitants of those areas would have fared the same way as the inhabitants of Zagreb, Split, Dubrovnik and Sisak fared: They were all ⁴⁹⁰⁴³ expelled.

Q. Just another and the last quote from that period in relation to Croatia I would now like to put to you, and that's a letter that you wrote to Aleksa Buha from the RS, Republika Srpska.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: And Your Honour, could the previous article be exhibited, please?

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, it's admitted.

THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit 963, Your Honours.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF:

Q. And we have here -- Mr. Jarcevic, this is a letter that you wrote to Mr. Buha, and we have it translated. However, this letter was read out in an Assembly session of the 11th of September, 1993 in the Republika Srpska Assembly. Do you recall that you wrote such a letter to Mr. Buha and do you know that it was read out and applauded to?

A. Yes.

Q. And I just want to quote one little section of it, and it is on --

A. Just go ahead, bravely.

Q. It's basically in the middle of your letter, and it says here -- it's on the bottom of first page, Your Honour, in the translation, last few lines: "We must not make the same mistake today as we did so many times before. Serbian Knights must be on Serbian borders. The villain, who was taught from his childhood to exterminate the Serbian people, must not step on Serbian land. Too much of our land was taken away from us during this century for us to be able to give up even one inch of it now." That's really a quite -- I would call this hate speech, or a very ⁴⁹⁰⁴⁴ nasty propaganda remark, Mr. Jarcevic; glorifying the Serbs and demonising the Croats, isn't it?

A. Madam, the genocide over the Serbs in the camps of death, how can you describe it in other terms? Try. Try for yourself. Tell us. 700.000 Serbs killed in the Jasenovac camp. That's what I had in mind.

Q. But you were saying this, Mr. Jarcevic, you were saying this about the people you were supposed to negotiate an agreement with. How can you as a foreign minister use such a language? That cannot allow for results in negotiations, can it?

A. What I said does not look like hate speech at all. If you wish, I can paraphrase something that was stated by the Croats and what they even published in newspapers for children, and that is going to horrify you. Here I'm talking about Serb land that has to be in a Serb country, and that is the view I espouse to the present day, madam.

Q. Serbian borders. You speak about the Serbian borders. Where would they be?

A. Madam, I know that this is a provocative question. You think that I shall not agree to say that Serb borders are where the Serb language is spoken and where the Serb people live and where half of the Serbs were exterminated, like in Kordun, from 1941 to 1945. Not a single country has the right to take up a territory where it committed genocide, Croatia least of all. And they hold these lands until the present day.

JUDGE BONOMY: Can I -- Mr. Jarcevic, can I ask you a quite different question about the same document. Assuming that you've finished with it, Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff. ⁴⁹⁰⁴⁵

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Yes.

JUDGE BONOMY: If you look much nearer the beginning, about ten lines into the letter, certainly in the English version, you write: "Nobody questions the noble intention of the Serbian army, which wants to put a stop to wartime looters." Then a little below that you talk about something having an impact on the weakening of the spirit and faith in Serbian arms and Serbian state, and then something's missing. And then go down about another ten lines, and you say: "Statesmen and journalists in the world write only about the rebellion of the Serbian army in Banja Luka ..."

What did you mean to refer to by the Serbian army and Serbian arms?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The Serb army is called the Serb army to this day in Republika Srpska. This was an event that I didn't even understand at that time. There was a conflict between the leaders of Republika Srpska and even military officers. I wrote a letter, and I requested that this be pacified, that a solution be found, because everybody was talking about it. And I was referring then to the Serbs expelled from Croatia, that nobody was taking care of them, that nobody was writing about them, and we are surprised how come it is only today that this is being talked about.

JUDGE BONOMY: I wonder if that's really what you're saying, Mr. Jarcevic. Just go back to near the beginning again, just before the first reference I gave you. You say: "The Serbian people in Krajina need help. Every Serb must provide it. I write this letter to you so that you ⁴⁹⁰⁴⁶ can communicate to the officers and soldiers in Banja Luka that the Serbian people face a possible defeat."

Now, who do you mean by "the officers and soldiers in Banja Luka"?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, I've said a few moments ago that there was a conflict in the top echelons of the military, in the corps that was stationed in Banja Luka. I don't know about the details, I don't know about the reasons, but it was unpleasant to read about that in the world media when the problems of the Serb people were something completely different rather than mutual squabbling.

JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm sorry. May I just add something? When I said that Krajina was in danger, I was actually alluding to the fact that there is not a single people in the world, if they were to be attacked, say, from the north, that the people living in the south would say, "Do we care about our people in the north?" No way. And that is the kind of thing that was being expected, I assume.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Thank you, Your Honour. I -- I would like this to be -- I would like to tender this into evidence, this letter.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, it's admitted.

THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit 964, Your Honours.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF:

Q. In relation to the negotiations, I only want briefly to touch on the negotiations in Norway, Mr. Jarcevic, and I would like to quote from what Mr. Vollebaek actually told the Court on the 8th of July, 2002, pages 7636 through to 7638. He actually -- as he said, you said you allowed for ⁴⁹⁰⁴⁷ the possibility that he was in contact with Mr. Milosevic, and he actually told us about a meeting that he had in relation to the preparation of the negotiations in Norway, and he actually met Mr. Milosevic, and he said the following: "And I asked for his help, and he said that he would assist me because he felt that it would be difficult for the Croats to fight two fronts at the same time, and according to him it was more important to fight the Muslims than the Serbs. The Croats should be able to fight the Muslims, and in order for the Croats to fight the Muslims, the Serbs should kind of step back and let the Croats fight the Muslims." Did Mr. Milosevic express this view not only to Vollebaek but also to the delegation or members of the delegation of the RSK? Do you know that?

A. As for Mr. Milosevic, he never spoke to me or to other people when I was present about where the Serbs should be in the conflict between the Muslims and the Croats, and I'm surprised that Vollebaek is confusing that subject with this other subject at hand.

Q. Mr. Vollebaek, on page 7638, says the following, and it's again -- it's still on the meeting with Mr. Milosevic. He says: "And then in order to let the Croats concentrate, so to say, on the Muslims, he - Milosevic - would ask the government in Knin to participate in the talks that we were going to have in Norway and then for the time being at least not pursue military activities."

This is what he said he would do, Mr. Jarcevic, and this is actually what Mr. Lazarevic told us about when he testified and spoke about the meeting that Hadzic and this other Rakic had with Milosevic. Do ⁴⁹⁰⁴⁸ you still deny that?

A. Madam, this statement of Vollebaek's is more than naive. If the Croats had attached that kind of importance to these negotiations, they would have signed the agreement. But they refused it. What does that mean, being in Norway for two days, about ten 10 people from one side and ten people from the other side? Did they win any battle against the Muslims by going to Norway? None of this is correct, because the negotiations had nothing whatsoever to do with the Muslim-Croat conflict.

Q. Mr. Jarcevic, do you allow for the possibility that Mr. Milosevic said such things to Mr. Vollebaek at that time?

A. I don't want to engage in guesswork, madam. Please free me from that kind of responsibility. I can just say, as far as Vollebaek is concerned, that he is a man who is not to be trusted. I'm just going to tell you about another particular case which will make you believe what I said about that man's character. If you wish, I will tell you about this. He stole my bag at the airport. If you wish, I can bring you an interview about that that was published in a magazine after we returned. I threatened to take him to court, and he brought my bag from Zagreb, and he never even met me, just brought the bag and left it there.

Q. I would like to continue to quote from that same page, and this is something that Mr. Vollebaek tells the Court at that time and which is actually confirming again what Mr. Lazarevic said. "Well, we were under the impression that the government in Knin was heavily supported, strongly supported, by the government in Belgrade and then, in casu, then President Milosevic. We knew that members of the Knin government went to Belgrade ⁴⁹⁰⁴⁹ very often, and we thought and presumed that President Milosevic had strong influence on the government in Knin. And since the representatives of the Knin government then went to Norway for these talks, later on I was strengthened in my belief that there was an influence from Belgrade on the government of Knin."

Do you deny that there was such an influence?

A. There was an influence in terms of peace. We heard that. He certainly advised us in that direction; peace, not war. As for these talks of theirs, I repeat that I am not aware of any such thing. Nothing like that was conveyed to me.

Q. And I --

MR. KAY: Can I just come in on one matter? It would certainly help the Defence if a question such as that could be put in the framework of the timing of the indictment from August 1991 to June 1992. The context of Mr. Vollebaek's evidence and that of Lazarevic in relation to period is obviously very important, but a distinction may well have to be made in terms of period for the counts of the indictment, and that is something that I raise because it is of importance to the Defence to know exactly what evidence is being relied upon in the cross-examination of a witness, and to what effect.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff, what period are you speaking of?

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: I'm speaking of the period of 1993. There is no doubt about that. I mean -- and I mean I'm a little bit surprised about this remark, because we are dealing with three indictments covering ⁴⁹⁰⁵⁰ that whole period but we are not having the witness coming three times. He is here now, and we will address everything that relates to all three indictments with the witness. This is what I'm talking about, and if the case of the Prosecution is that Mr. Milosevic had actually a strong grip on the leadership of the Republika Srpska Krajina from 1990 onwards, this is of course important that it continued to be like this throughout the whole period until 1995.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Just clarify the particular period in relation to the evidence when you ask the question.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: But it was actually -- we had discussed the Norway negotiation in 1993. That's why I didn't give -- bring the witness through all these remarks.

JUDGE BONOMY: Well, I'm not entirely sure I follow your point about the link between or among the three indictments, because the Bosnian indictment doesn't include the witnesses that -- or the personnel we've principally been concerned about, does it?

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Yes.

JUDGE BONOMY: As part of the joint criminal enterprise?

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Yes, the JCE members are actually the same except for that additional ones come into the play, that is Mr. -- General Mladic and Mr. Karadzic and Mr. Krajisnik. It's the same JCE, just evolving.

JUDGE ROBINSON: It's time to take the break. We will adjourn.

JUDGE BONOMY: Just as an example: There is no reference to Babic in the Bosnian indictment, is there? ⁴⁹⁰⁵¹

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No. That's correct, Your Honour, because Babic was ousted in 1991 because he didn't, according to our evidence, obey Mr. Milosevic.

JUDGE BONOMY: No reference to Bulatovic.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Bulatovic? I'm not sure. I think Bulatovic is --

JUDGE BONOMY: There are, I would suggest, differences. No reference to Seselj. Oh, yes, there is. Sorry.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Your Honour, the position of the Prosecution is that it is one JCE evolving over times when personnel was ousted or -- or left this JCE for other reasons. So ...

JUDGE ROBINSON: Very well. We will adjourn for 20 minutes.

--- Recess taken at 12.20 p.m.

--- On resuming at 12.45 p.m.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Please continue, Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Thank you, Your Honour.

Q. Mr. Jarcevic, did you also take part in negotiations in 1995 with Ambassador Galbraith?

A. Madam, when in 1995?

Q. In -- in the negotiations related to the Z-4 plan up to May 1995.

A. No. And I said that I didn't, and I also explained in what situation and at what time that plan was offered.

Q. Then I don't need to ask these questions. You were relieved from your position as the foreign minister of the RSK when -- when exactly and why? ⁴⁹⁰⁵²

A. I don't know the exact date, but it was in April 1994, as Dr. Milan Babic had won the majority in parliament. He was appointed minister of foreign affairs, and I handed over my duty to him in Knin.

Q. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Jarcevic. Mr. Jarcevic, I have here a document --

A. Yes.

Q. I have here a document that appoints you to a position. Just -- just briefly, according to a decision of the 2nd of May, 1994, Mr. Milan Martic appoints you to his advisor for foreign policy.

A. He asked me to take up that job, explaining that he knew Dr. Babic and that he would do nothing in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Therefore, he asked me to do part of the affairs in -- with foreign countries as part of his office. And as you can see, I agreed.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Could that be accepted?

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, it's accepted.

THE REGISTRAR: Your Honour, that will be Exhibit 965.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF:

Q. Yes. And, Mr. Jarcevic, when you took up this position, did you then move to Knin or did you continue to be in Belgrade and in that office of the RSK in Belgrade?

A. I remained in Belgrade. I changed offices because President Martic had his own office about six kilometres away from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. This was all in Belgrade. And that was the distance, more or less.

Q. Thank you. We had previously mentioned that the negotiations with ⁴⁹⁰⁵³ the Croats, when they started in 1992 and throughout the -- when they lasted, also included economic agreements, and they actually did result in some improvements; correct?

A. To a very small extent, madam, because the Croats did not want to use the Maslenica bridge as we offered them before my arrival. I'm referring to the government of the Republic of Srpska Krajina in 1992. And it's interesting to note that on the 22nd of January, 1993, these negotiations were to continue, and two commissions were to meet. I don't know in what village exactly, in Ravni Kotari, and as usual, on that day Croatia perpetrated an aggression.

Q. Mr. Jarcevic, the -- as a result of these negotiations, the highway Zagreb-Belgrade was opened in winter 1994, was it -- was it not?

A. Yes. This is one of the results that seemed to promise agreement could be reached in other areas as well. Krajina was whole-heartedly in favour of it. I know that. The Prime Minister at the time was Mr. Nikolic, and Rade Tanga was the minister of defence. He was the first to drive down the motorway from Western Slavonia to Vukovar through Croatian territory.

Q. And this -- this highway was actually closed in 1995 three times by Mr. Milan Martic, was it not?

A. Madam, I don't know all the details about the temporary closure. You can't say it was closed or that the Republic of Srpska Krajina gave up on the agreement that he had signed. However, it was temporarily closed for not longer than 24 or 48 hours, I think. There was some kind of misunderstanding, but I can't tell you anything about it. ⁴⁹⁰⁵⁴

Q. How come you can't? You don't know the details of this?

A. No, I don't know the details, believe me.

Q. Would you accept that the attack on -- of the -- of the Croats in May 1995 on Western Slavonia was actually caused or triggered by the action of Milan Martic in relation to the highway? Would you accept that?

A. No, I couldn't accept that. In March we had a document about the Croatian attack which was to take place on the 1st of May. We received it from the NATO headquarters in Brussels. Secretly, of course. We don't even know who sent it to us. And it was long before the highway was closed.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: I would like to play to the witness an intercept, a conversation. For the -- for the video booth, it's on Sanction.

THE INTERPRETER: Could the interpreters have a precise reference, please.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: For the interpreter, it's cassette number 15, side A, conversation between Mr. Milosevic and Goran Hadzic.

[Audiotape played]

THE INTERPRETER: "[Voiceover] Let me tell you something. I've had telephone contacts both with the Russians and the Americans and with Akashi. They have stopped all combat activities. Celeketic even confirmed to Perisic that all combat activities had been stopped and that the Croats are not fighting any more. But they committed horrible crimes there. They shelled Zagreb, they shelled Sisak, Karlovac. They hit the children's hospital in Zagreb, butchered 15 children, and in general, ⁴⁹⁰⁵⁵ everything that is happening is a result of Martic's wilful conduct. He closed the motorway on his own initiative three times, without the consent of the Krajina government, and even when we organised everything in order for it to reopen he said no, therefore, this other guy decided to drive him out.

"He is crazy. He cannot get along with anybody at all. "I think that he needs to be replaced. Because of his wilful conduct that has caused so many casualties. "Well, I don't know how this thing is here any more ... I don't know that. Are you at work tomorrow?

"I'm going to be at work. "I would call ... Do have anything planned? "Well, I'll probably have something, but do call. "I'll call around 1000 hours or 10.30.

"But do call, I want to hear from you. "Okay. Good-bye.

"Good-bye."

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF:

Q. Mr. Jarcevic, this is Mr. Milosevic speaking to Goran Hadzic. Actually they are speaking about the shelling of Zagreb, and Mr. Milosevic is actually saying that Martic closed the motorway three times and that basically triggered the attack by the Croats. Could you please comment on this.

A. Yes, I can. Croatia would have attacked us even had the highway not been closed. As I told you, we held in our hands the plan for the ⁴⁹⁰⁵⁶ Croatian attack which we received from the NATO centre in Brussels. We don't know who sent it to us. I don't even know the people who brought it to us. The attack was planned to take place on the 1st of May. That's what the report said. And it was well known that the Serb leaders could not agree among themselves. Whatever conversation you intercept, you will hear things like this, even with other participants in the conversation. However, this particular conversation that you've asked me to comment on simply shows that the Serbs did not have a unified single plan in connection with the Republic of Srpska Krajina. The Prosecution, however, claims that it had and that the plan was to create some kind of Greater Serbia. This intercept demonstrates the opposite.

Q. Mr. Jarcevic, Mr. Milosevic says here: "We organised everything in order to reopen the highway." "We"; that implies actually him being involved in that action. Do you know that he was doing this, that he was negotiating and preparing those things?

A. I cannot interpret what Mr. Milosevic was saying. He's here. But I assume that when he uttered that sentence he was thinking of the Serbian nation as a whole, and all of us were holding some kind of office in that nation. I can assume, if you'll permit me to go on, that perhaps he was not aware of every detail that had to do with this conflict around the highway, especially if he was being informed by Mr. Hadzic who was having serious arguments with the head of state Milan Martic at the time.

JUDGE BONOMY: Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff, the reference to shelling of Zagreb, who is it suggested was responsible for that?

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Milan Martic, Your Honour. ⁴⁹⁰⁵⁷

JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: He speaks about Milan Martic's wilful conduct, and the witness will probably confirm that Mr. Martic ordered the shelling of Zagreb, Sisak, and Karlovac.

Q. Can you confirm that?

A. Madam, it's a sin to mention those few rockets when thousands of rockets were fired at Serbian towns. I think I had a document in my hand showing that if Croatia attacked the Republic of Serbian Krajina, all military weapons were to be used against military facilities in Croatia. In Bosanska Gradiska, for instance, on the 1st of May the Croats bombarded the town in the neighbouring country and killed a lot of refugees who had fled from Croatia.

Q. Mr. Jarcevic, we do not have time to speak about the -- these other matters that you just referred to. We -- the question was --

JUDGE ROBINSON: I take it -- I take it, Mr. Jarcevic, that you have confirmed that Milan Martic ordered the shelling of Zagreb, Sisak, and Karlovac.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. Presiding Judge, I guarantee that this was the strategy of the General Staff. What else can one do to an enemy but to retaliate with the same kind of means? I'm not saying that anyone, including Martic, issued an order that civilian targets be fired on. Were we supposed to throw chocolate at them?

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: In this context, to make it even more clear for Your Honours I have another intercept that I would like to play. It's related again to the same time period, that is the 3rd of May, 1995, and ⁴⁹⁰⁵⁸ this time it's again on Sanction. And for the interpreters, it's conversation -- conversation 68, Perisic and Milosevic talking. And we hear only two parts of this intercept, which is quite a lengthy one.

[Audiotape played]

THE INTERPRETER: "[Voiceover] I've just received written confirmation that Clinton personally talked to Tudjman. Of course privately over the telephone, and that he said he would make him pay if he continues with the animosities and start retreating there. Therefore, this has been confirmed. He received a bloody threat, but this Tihomir Dinic just told me that Stankov, this Stankov of ours, you know, he's now there with him in the Executive Committee, that he spoke with Martic. Martic told him that something was done again against the Serbs on Psunj Mountain and that that was why Akashi went there. He does not have any other choice but to shell Zagreb again, so please call Celeketic and draw his attention to it. You heard Tudjman last night. If they shell Zagreb, by any chance, he would not allow that retreat or anything else. He has 6.000 people in the encirclement and he is jerking around here by wanting to shell Zagreb, kill the civilians, and cause a reaction. That's number one. Call Celeketic and forbid him to -- and forbid him to do it and tell him not to even think about it. Akashi went there. Everything will be fixed and he should not do anything stupid. Due to the shelling of Zagreb, Martic was not in Zagreb the day before yesterday but he was in Zagreb only yesterday, so it is absolutely out of the question and he mustn't do that. Secondly ..."

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Yes. And this continues, this intercept ⁴⁹⁰⁵⁹ continues, and I would like to have just the next bit played, as indicated.

[Audiotape played]

THE INTERPRETER: "[Voiceover] Call Celeketic and forbid him to do that. Tell him not to even think about it. Akashi went there. Everything will be fixed and he should not do anything stupid. Due to the shelling of Zagreb, Martic was -- he was not in Zagreb the day before yesterday but only yesterday. So it is absolutely out of the question. He mustn't do that. Secondly, Martic said to this Pankov that he arranged yesterday with Karadzic in Banja Luka that these people from 'Republika Srpska' were to attack somewhere to take something. They don't mean Croats but to attack and take something there in their own battlefield. That would be very bad, because I have already received a report from the Greek. I will read it to you. Just a moment."

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: That should be -- can you please stop it? Yes. Thank you.

Q. Mr. -- Mr. Jarcevic, this is now a conversation on -- of the 3rd of May again, between Perisic and Milosevic, and actually Mr. Milosevic asked General Perisic to actually request Celeketic not to shell Zagreb. And did -- my question is: Did -- do you know whether the shelling of Zagreb then stopped?

A. I don't know what you want me to say. You see, this conversation shows to what extent the people participating in it were advocating peace rather than war. It was Croatia that was waging war.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Please answer the question which was: Do you ⁴⁹⁰⁶⁰ know whether the shelling of Zagreb then stopped?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know when it stopped, whether before or after this conversation, but it did stop.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you. Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF:

Q. Mr. Jarcevic, were you aware of the close relationship between the commanders of the VJ and the RSK -- the SVK, sorry, the army of the RSK. Were you aware of this, that one could basically order another?

A. No. I don't believe they could issue orders. They could take each other's opinion into account. For two reasons: Firstly, they had gone to school together and they knew each other; and secondly, they were members of the same nation.

Q. Mr. Jarcevic, I would like to put to you another --

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Your Honour, I forgot to ask, could these two intercepts be admitted?

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.

JUDGE KWON: They were not exhibits?

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No, they are not yet exhibits.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, they're admitted.

THE REGISTRAR: Your Honour, the first intercept between Mr. Milosevic and Goran Hadzic will be Exhibit 966. And the second, between Momcilo Perisic and Mr. Milosevic, will be Exhibit 967.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF:

Q. Mr. Jarcevic --

JUDGE ROBINSON: Just a minute, please, Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff. ⁴⁹⁰⁶¹

[Trial Chamber confers]

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Yes.

Q. Mr. Jarcevic, would you know details about the military cooperation between the VJ and the SVK? Are you knowledgeable on this topic?

A. I don't know a lot about it, but I can give you a conclusion. In every branch, we had relations with the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.

Q. Wait. Wait. I don't want a conclusion. I actually was thinking about putting to you some documents, and I was just wondering whether you dealt with, in your office in Belgrade, whether as a foreign minister or in your capacity as advisor, with such military requests from the RSK organs to the VJ or Belgrade ministries. Would they come over your desk?

A. Let me take a look. I'll be quite sincere, madam.

Q. I just wanted to avoid to put something to you that you never would have dealt with. Okay. The first document is -- it's --

A. If you know that I've never seen these documents, then don't show them to me.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: This is -- it's not an exhibit yet, Your Honour.

Q. It's a request of the president of the RSK of the 21st of July, 1994, to the president of Yugoslavia and the president of Serbia and Chief of Staff of the Yugoslav army in relation to recruitment and equipment for the SVK.

First of all, do you know -- it's a request by Mr. Milan Martic, ⁴⁹⁰⁶² whose advisor you were at that time. Do you know about these requests that he made to the three organs?

A. May I just enter a correction? I was advisor for foreign affairs.

Q. Yes. Yes. Thank you.

A. I never saw materials of this sort, and I can tell you a little joke. I used to inquire with military personnel about the preparations for the defence of the Krajina, but the response I got was always the same: This is not like in communist times. Everybody should mind his own business, so you look after diplomacy.

Q. Okay. And what it says here in this document, "The planned development and strengthening of the SVK is directly related to the supply of MTS by the VJ, as agreed." Could you help us with who agreed about what and when?

A. I don't know who agreed on this, but by your leave, as I said, in every area, the two countries cooperated. The Republika Srpska Krajina, whether one wants to admit it or not, was a real state at that time.

Q. And in relation to page 10 of -- in the English, it also refers to the request for cluster rockets for the Orkan multiple-launch rocket systems. Do you know whether the RSK army received multiple-launch rocket systems from the VJ?

A. Madam, I really don't know, but the officers always assured me that Krajina was well-armed. That was all the information I had. It was very general.

Q. And do you know that these cluster rockets were actually used for the shelling of Zagreb? Do you know that? ⁴⁹⁰⁶³

A. Madam, I really don't know anything about rockets, and to this day I'm not sure what a cluster bomb is.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff, I don't know whether this line of questioning is productive.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: That's correct. And I don't want to tender the document either.

Q. Let's just briefly move to the office of the RSK in Belgrade. The office that you worked in as a minister of foreign affairs, who owned this premises?

A. The owner of premises I think was the city of Belgrade, but I'm not sure.

Q. I would like to put to you Exhibit 352, tab 152. Mr. Jarcevic, it is an order by Chief of Staff of the VJ, General Zivota Panic. It is a military matter, and I only put it to you because the office of the Republic of Serbian Krajina in Belgrade is mentioned here in point 4 of the first page of this document. Can we put it on the ELMO, the first page? It's an order directed to the accepting and initiating conscript soldiers into the army of the Republic of Serbian Krajina, and it says in relation to the office of the RSK: "The assignment of the conscript soldiers will be performed by the Government's Office of the RSK in Belgrade ... and cooperation must be established with them." When it says here "must be established with them," is that you or who?

A. Yes, madam. At that point in time it's me, and I'm telling you it's the 27th of January, five days after the bloody aggression of Croatia against the Republic of Srpska Krajina, which is why I gave an office to ⁴⁹⁰⁶⁴ the minister for foreign affairs, so that Colonel Rade Tanga, who was later to become the minister of defence and director of the university, or the dean, could list the volunteers who were turning up from everywhere, even from abroad. We asked the government of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia to assist us in recruiting citizens of the Republic of Srpska Krajina who wanted to volunteer to go to the borders of their homeland.

Q. And who exactly made this agreement? You and who else?

A. I just sent instructions to the government of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and I don't remember anything else. They phoned me up to tell me that I -- we could send our recruits, and it was in the office that the names were taken down, but nobody was forced and nobody in the federal organs of Yugoslavia went collecting up the young men and bringing them to my -- our office. It was all on a volunteer basis, regardless of what it says in the text.

Q. Another document, and that's related -- it's Exhibit 327, tab 9. And please put the first page on the ELMO. Mr. Jarcevic, it is a meeting held by the president of the -- hosted by -- sorry, hosted by the president of the Republic of Serbia of the 12th of November, 1992. I see that you are -- were not one of the participants in this meeting. However, did you learn about the meeting as you were the foreign minister at that time? Do you know about that meeting, about financing the police and the army of the RSK?

A. This meeting is not one I knew about, but let me repeat: The two states did have relationships at all levels, in all fields. So you mustn't understand this as being financing by Yugoslavia of the army of ⁴⁹⁰⁶⁵ Republika Srpska Krajina. The goods went on the markets of both countries, and finances were also calculated as they would be in either of the two states.

Q. So I just would like to turn to the next exhibit. That's 327, tab 14. It is -- it's a letter to Milan Martic -- from -- by Milan Martic to Mr. Milosevic, Mr. Sainovic, and Zoran Sokolovic, and it's again about funds for the MUP of the RSK of the 28th of April, 1993. Were you aware about -- of this request and that the money actually came? It's about the salaries of the police.

A. As for this document, I didn't know about it. I am seeing it for the first time. But in documents of this kind, you don't have all the facts relating to the economic relations of the two states. Serbia owed a lot to Krajina, and you won't be able to find this in this type of document.

Q. But you were aware that the police in the RSK was financed by Serbia?

A. That's not correct, madam. They were financed from the budget of the Republic of Srpska Krajina.

Q. This is here a letter, if you look at it, to the officials, including Mr. Milosevic, of the Republic of Serbia, and they ask for assistance in the payment of salaries. I understood that you said these were -- those kind of things were done.

A. Madam, all I want to say is that the Republic of Serbia, or the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, owed the Republic of Srpska Krajina certain monies which might have been used for these salaries. If you ⁴⁹⁰⁶⁶ like, I can tell you about the economic situation and trade relations between the two countries and then you'll be able to understand that I'm speaking the truth.

Q. Actually, at the moment we don't have much time left, Mr. Jarcevic, so I can't really -- we can't go into these details. One -- one letter I would like to put to you, and that's actually something that you wrote and so you may perhaps know better about it. And it's not an exhibit yet, Your Honour. If you put it on the ELMO, please.

A. This is not my letter, madam.

Q. It says -- it says here, "Jarcevic, counsellor to the president --"

A. I have received a letter that is addressed to Slobodan Milosevic.

Q. Sorry. Sorry, sir. Yes. You were given the wrong letter. I have skipped several documents and didn't tell Ms. Dicklich correctly. It is here a request or, rather, a letter that you write to Mr. Jovica Stanisic on the 24th of July, 1994. And it says here: "President Martic instructed me to organise the arrival of the Commission of the Union of Cossacks' armies of Russia and abroad, together with you." And can you -- you are writing here to Mr. Stanisic. Can you say why do that and what was agreed between Mr. Martic and Mr. Stanisic?

A. Well, madam, who else could I contact but the organs of the state on whose territory the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is active and the office of the Republic of Srpska Krajina? It is not us who can see to the arrival of foreigners at the airport of the Federal Republic of ⁴⁹⁰⁶⁷ Yugoslavia. That wasn't up to us. Nor can we issue orders to staff at the airport and the security staff as to what their job should be. So we asked the representative of the Republic of Serbia from the Ministry of the Interior to assist us and see that the delegation of Cossacks from Russia arrive in Belgrade, that we take it over, and take it to Krajina. Had we been in Paris, by any chance, then this letter would have been sent to the Ministry of the Interior of France.

Q. It says here in this letter: "We need to have talks with them and to sign a contract on cooperation of RSK and RS with this organisation." So it was a joint action of the RSK and the RS, supported then by MUP Serbia? Is that what it means?

A. No, he did not lend support. You can see he was surprised by my letter, but they didn't tell us -- or they didn't say that they weren't meddling in our internal affairs. They didn't say go ahead or don't go ahead.

I visited Moscow myself and the Cossack organisation without a single man from the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.

Q. We're not talking about Yugoslavia. We're talking about the MUP of Serbia. Stanisic would actually assist Mr. Milan Martic in all matters related to police; correct?

A. You're asking the question in an incorrect way. I say it is the authority of the MUP of Serbia in Belgrade at the airport. I have to respect that. Imagine if I went to France to Orly airport without asking anybody and then to invite guests there who might arrive and fly in without any visas, for that matter, whereas this is a very simple ⁴⁹⁰⁶⁸ diplomatic step. There's nothing secret there.

Q. Mr. Jarcevic --

A. Nothing puzzling.

Q. -- how long did the RSK office in Belgrade exist, or does it still exist?

A. Until -- well, the office of President Martic, until the 26th of February, 1996. At the present time, the government of the Republic of Srpska Krajina has an office there and the exiled government, together with the exiled Assembly, is active, and we showed you yesterday support by 28 deputies from the parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe who signed a request by which Croatia should be returned to its two-nation state status. So that is a success scored by the government in exile of the Republic of Srpska Krajina. Or, on the other hand, the understanding shown by the world towards the suffering that nobody had understood thus far.

Q. My last question to you, Mr. Jarcevic: Are you a member of this RSK government in exile?

A. Yes, a counsellor or advisor in the government but no longer a minister.

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Your Honour, no further questions. Oh, yes. I would like to ask this last document that's the letter from Mr. Jarcevic be admitted into evidence.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, it will be admitted.

THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit 968.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, re-examination? ⁴⁹⁰⁶⁹

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Robinson. Re-examination by Mr. Milosevic:

Q. [Interpretation] Just let's take this in the right order. Mr. Jarcevic from the beginning Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff asked you something about your activities linked to the suffering of the people in the western part of what was once Yugoslavia, and you explained that you were a member of the Association of Serbs from Bosnia; is that right?

A. Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Q. What did you say?

A. I said from Bosnia-Herzegovina.

Q. Right, from Bosnia-Herzegovina. Is that what you said?

A. Yes.

Q. Now, since at the beginning of your testimony when you introduced yourself you explained to us that you were one of the rare babies to have survived the Ustasha slaughter, and during that, was Bosnia-Herzegovina a component part of the Independent State of Croatia?

A. Yes, and the Serb Muslims were -- were proclaimed the flower of the Muslim nation --

THE INTERPRETER: Of the Croatian nation, interpreter's apology.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Now tell me: Was there a difference between the Ustashas' attitude toward Serbs, depending on territory, whether it was Bosnia or Herzegovina or whatever?

A. No, equal treatment. And a few days ago I saw a document found in the archives of Sarajevo. It was an order by the State of Croatia to ⁴⁹⁰⁷⁰ kill, first of all, people between the ages of 30 and 50 and then children up to the age of ten. I was in that category, the latter category, and it was just by chance that I happened to survive. Many of my friends say what a pity.

Q. Now, at that time, in 1991, 2, and 3, when you became minister, did you differentiate with respect to the suffering of Serbs in Bosnia and in Croatia?

A. No. It was the same, the intimations were the same as they were in 1941.

Q. Thank you.

A. You're welcome.

Q. Now, the next question Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff asked you, and in presenting certain United Nations documents here, was linked to the alleged persecution of Croats in Serbia. Because you said that there was no such persecution, and you quite rightly said that, because this one case that happened in Hrtkovci seems to be played here again and again, brought up again and again.

Now, in connection with that you were also asked something with respect to a document of some kind. You were shown it at the beginning. The 17th of November, 1992, was the date. A very long document. I'm not going to use it in its entirety. I'd just to highlight certain portions and ask you about them. Have you got the document in front of you? It is the 17th of November. It says: "Human rights questions: Human rights situation and reports of the special rapporteurs and representatives." Have you got that? ⁴⁹⁰⁷¹

MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: It's Exhibit 771, Your Honours.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you, Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know if you mean a report of the United Nations on human rights.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Yes, the United Nations report, I said at the outset. It's the thickest document that you were provided with and you were given it at the beginning.

A. Yes. And what are you asking about it now?

Q. Take a look at paragraph 94, which was not quoted. You explained that the subject was incidents which were caused by the refugees from Croatia. That's what you've said.

A. Yes.

Q. Now take a look at what it says in paragraph 94. Do you have paragraph 94 in front of you?

A. I haven't found 94, no. [In English] 94, find me.

Q. Paragraphs are numbered in order. It's easy to find them, I believe. Have you found it now?

A. [Interpretation] Yes. Serbia and Montenegro received 500.000 refugees.

Q. It says: "[In English] It should also not be forgotten that Serbia and Montenegro have received some 500.000 refugees from Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, and Slovenia."

[Interpretation] And then there's another line: "[In English] The economic sanctions imposed by the United Nations in accordance with its ⁴⁹⁰⁷² charter have also had effect upon the everyday life of people." [Interpretation] And so on. Now, in this report by the United Nations, could we see this figure of 500.000 refugees already at that time? The number included in the November report.

A. If I might be allowed to add, at that point in time the United Nations are introducing the most terrible sanctions against Yugoslavia and the Republic of Srpska Krajina. And if I may state my own personal opinion, this is the dark side of our civilisation.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Did you answer the question? Did you answer -- you have not --

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I did, yes. The president asked me what the situation was like with these 500.000 refugees.

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Now take a look at paragraph 123, point 123, which speaks of the following or, rather, it's about -- more about what Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff asked you. And you said that the refugees caused the incident. Was that common knowledge? That's my question to you. Was that known at the time to the international organisations and the UN? What does paragraph 123 state? "[In English] The outbreak of fighting in neighbouring parts of Croatia and the influx of Serbian refugees coincided with an increase in incidents of harassment and violence against non-Serbs in Vojvodina." [Interpretation] And then a few lines on they quote our government and say: "[In English] In recent special report to the human rights committee, the federal government, stated [no interpretation] Some of these people fleeing from conflict in the hope of saving their lives and ⁴⁹⁰⁷³ those of their families have arrived in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, bringing with them their weapons, resolve to set up a new home even if it means using force to achieve their aim at the expense of the people belonging to non-Serb nations -" [Interpretation] in bracket - "[In English] Croats and others, whom they regard as enemies simply because they do not belong to the Serb nation."

[Interpretation] So that is a report by our government quoted here, and then we have a quotation or, rather, Hrtkovci are quoted, are mentioned, Hrtkovci.

And four lines on, what does it say here? "[In English] The government indicates that the Serbian Ministry of the Interior has begun an inquiry to determine whether there was any complicity by local authorities in these events that large quantity of weapons and explosives have been seized and that a number of individuals have been charged with criminal offences, including homicide."

[Interpretation] Do you know that that was the only killing then?

A. Mr. President, I really don't know how many killings there were, but this report is one I've never seen before, and I'm very happy to have confirmed what it says in it.

Q. Do you know, Mr. Jarcevic, that the people who perpetrated the killing in Hrtkovci were arrested and taken to trial, that single killing?

A. Well, it's not my fault that I don't know about it.

Q. All right, fine. Let's move on. You went on to answer questions put to you by Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff and quoted a document from which we can see that in Republika Srpska Krajina there was also persecution of ⁴⁹⁰⁷⁴ individuals who had -- or prosecutions of individuals who had committed crimes against Croats. You quoted that.

A. Yes.

Q. So in that document that quoted, did it say that five Croats had been killed, as far as I remember - I haven't got the document in front of me - and that it also gave the name of the suspect who was arrested?

A. Yes, and information that he was apprehended.

Q. And it stated that the man was a Serb?

A. Yes.

Q. That he was apprehended by the Krajina authorities?

A. Yes.

Q. And then we had other examples?

A. Yes.

Q. So now, what do you know about this? Did the Republic of Srpska Krajina function as a state ruled by law and prosecuted crimes perpetrated on its territory without discrimination, and here we can say that it is prosecuting people for committing crimes against Croats?

A. Yes, and there were many similar cases. I can't quote them all now because, as I say, the archives are to be found in Zagreb today, so I can't look them up.

Q. Well, I assume that they do have certain facts and figures that can be found, but anyway, Mr. Jarcevic, Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff -- well, thank you for your answer, but Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff then challenged your assertions in connection with your findings and attitude and position in Krajina about the population structure there. ⁴⁹⁰⁷⁵ I'm not going to use three documents, I'm just going to use the first document, which is the population census of households, apartments and so on of the Republican Institute for Statistics for Croatia, and the year is 1992. Please take up that document, have a look at the report. She showed you the third page of it, and the document has a total of three pages, in fact. You were shown page 3 where we can see the figures. Have you found the document?

A. Yes, I've received it. Go ahead, please.

Q. Take a look at -- well, we can see the 48, 53, 61, 71, 81, and 91 population census.

A. Yes.

Q. And take a look here. In 1971, it has -- says 626.789 Serbs, and in 1991 5 -- 581.663.

A. Yes.

Q. Now, have a look at when this figure occurs in the 9 -- in the 1971 census and then in the 1981 census.

A. Let me find those figures.

Q. Yes. Follow that column for 1981. How many Yugoslavs were there that year? 379.000, and in the previous census there were only 84.000. What happened there?

A. Well, many Serbs declared themselves as Yugoslavs, and I've already stated that. About 80 per cent of them, in fact.

Q. What did you say? 80 per cent of Serbs declared themselves as Yugoslavs whereas they were Serbs; is that what you're saying?

A. Yes. Those are the estimates. And many researchers in Belgrade ⁴⁹⁰⁷⁶ agree with those estimates.

Q. Now, if we were to add that number to the 531.000 minus 20 per cent, that would make it about 831.000 Serbs in Croatia.

A. Yes, and I said about a million.

Q. Do these figures indicate that?

A. Yes, sir, and I'm sorry that they didn't believe me when I said it. I didn't know that I should do the calculations and sums as you've just done them.

Q. Well, they're just figures, nothing other than that here.

A. Yes. I said in general terms a million-plus Yugoslavs.

Q. Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff put on the overhead projector the document you provided about the police report from Zadar relating to the number of fires and explosions. I'm sure you'll remember. I won't have it placed on the overhead projector again. We've already had a look at it twice; when I presented it and when Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff presented it.

A. Yes.

Q. Now, do you know about a phenomenon that was termed the crystal night in Zadar?

A. Yes. It was a pogrom of the Serbs similar to the one that took place in Zagreb, and I apologise to go back in history again, but it happened in 1902.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Last question, Mr. Milosevic [microphone not activated].

MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

Q. Mr. Jarcevic, is it probable that those hundreds of explosions and ⁴⁹⁰⁷⁷ houses, is it possible that it was the Serbs blowing up Croat houses, or was it destruction of Serb houses and fires and explosions blowing up Serb houses?

A. Since all -- it was only the Serbs that filed lawsuits for this there, might have been one or two against Croats in the Republic of Srpska Krajina, but for the most part these were Serb houses, Serb villas, Serb shops and other facilities and including fisheries, et cetera.

THE INTERPRETER: Could the speaker please slow down. Thank you.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, I'm going to stop. The interpreter is asking you to slow down, but we're going to adjourn for today and we'll resume tomorrow at 9.00.

MR. NICE: Your Honour. Your Honours, just one -- one observation.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.

MR. NICE: The next witness, Ms. Mahon. There are no exhibits for her. The 65 ter summary is exiguous in the extreme. It says almost nothing. If there is any way that the accused, by providing an advance notice -- she's an English witness, so any notes that she and he have made will be in English, if there are any notes that can be provided so that we know the scope of her evidence, this would be of great assistance and would more likely guarantee her conclusion tomorrow so that there is no question of her coming back next week.

JUDGE ROBINSON: Very well. We will adjourn until tomorrow at 9.00.

--- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.45 p.m., ⁴⁹⁰⁷⁸ to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 1st day of March, 2006, at 9.00 a.m.