|
Content
/ Colormap • Page 9323 • {1/110} (1)Wednesday, 4 April 2001 [Open Session]
--- Upon commencing at 9.22 a.m. (5) JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Good morning to the technical booth, the interpreters. Good morning to the staff of the registry, the counsel for the Prosecution, the counsel for the Defence. Good morning, General Krstic. We are resuming our hearing today, and I'm looking at the Defence (10)to learn from them who will be the witness for today. Mr. Visnjic. MR. VISNJIC: [Int.] Good morning, Your Honours. Good morning to my learned friends from the Prosecution. Your Honours, the Defence plans two witnesses for today. The first is our military expert, General Radinovic, who has already testified (15)here in court.
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] Mr. Usher, be kind enough to
bring in the witness. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Good morning, General Radinovic. (20)Can you hear me? THE WITNESS: [Int.] Yes, Your Honour.
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] We consider your testimony today
to be a continuation of the testimony you made last time, so I am
reminding you that you are testifying under oath, and having said that, I
(25)invite you to sit down. Thank you very much for coming. You will now be
MR. VISNJIC: [Int.] Thank you, Mr. President.
WITNESS: RADOVAN RADINOVIC • EXAMINED by Mr. Visnjic: • Q.: [Int.] Good morning, General. • A.: Good morning. • Q.: General Radinovic, can you tell Their Honours whether the Defence (10)has asked you, after your testimony in the Defence case, in the break that we had until the beginning of the Prosecution case to review some allegedly intercepted conversations and to interpret their contents? • A.: Yes. MR. VISNJIC: [Int.] Could I ask the usher to show the (15)witness Prosecution Exhibit 884, and also to prepare ... THE REGISTRAR: If you can give the registrar one second to locate it. MR. VISNJIC: [Int.] Mr. President, to save time, may I give the witness my copy of this exhibit? (20) JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Yes, Mr. Visnjic. I think that is a good idea. Thank you very much for your cooperation. I don't think that will be a problem. MR. VISNJIC: [Int.]
• Q.: General, we have before us Prosecution Exhibit 884 which the
(25)Prosecution contends is a conversation between Zivanovic, who is assumed
(5) • A.: The whole conversation? • Q.: Yes, if possible, please. • A.: X and Y are speaking. According to this document, X has been identified as Bogicevic and Y as Zivanovic. "Good morning." Y replies, "Good morning." "Is Zivanovic there?" "He is and who is asking for (10)him?" (X.:) Bogicevic from Belgrade. (Y.:) Just a moment. (Z.:) Hello? (X.:) Good morning...just a moment General, sir...someone for (15)you. (B.:) Hello. (Z.:) Yes. (B.:) Hi Zile. (Z.:) Hi Bogi. (20) (B.:) And good luck. Or a pleasantry like that. (Z.:) Thank you.
(B.:) Well I brought a truck...five tons of goods here in
Ljubovija.
(25)And Ljubovija is on the right bank of the Drina on the Serbian side, a
(Z.:) Yes. That's the same as if you were in Belgrade. (B.:) Well, what should we do now? That's what Triso told me. (Z.:) I beg your pardon? (5) (B.:) Triso told me so. (Z.:) Triso doesn't know anything about borders, man. If that's what he said, inform him and give it to him. (B.:) Are we going to bring anything? That is quite unintelligible. (10) (Z.:) Where? (B.:) Up there, at your place. (Z.:) I'm now in Belgrade. I liberated Srebrenica and now I have got a new duty. (B.:) Yes, yes... Good. (15) (Z.:) How are you doing? (B.:) Excellent. I'll come up there. (Z.:) I've nowhere else to go. (B.:) I'll come up there now to bring you some watermelons... so you can refresh yourself. (20) (Z.:) Okay. Okay. (B.:) Yes. (Z.:) How are my Serbian people? (B.:) Good. And then a word that can't be read. (25)
(Z.:) Everything is okay... Say hello to the Serbs.
(Z.:) Take care. (B.:) Goodbye. And that is the end of the conversation. (5) MR. VISNJIC: [Int.] Mr. President, for a better understanding, General Radinovic, on page 3, line 17 and 18, made a comment as to where the town of Ljubovija is, and I want to make this clear for the transcript. So page 3, lines 17 and 18, were General Radinovic's comments. (10) • Q.: General, what is relevant in this conversation in relation to all the events around Srebrenica and in relation to your previous testimony?
• A.: In the context of all the events that we are testifying about
here, and in the context of my previous testimony, there's only one
sentence that is relevant, and that is the 29th sentence, if I counted the
(15)lines correctly, in which General Zivanovic says, and allow me to quote:
"I liberated Srebrenica and now I have got a new duty," or, "I've been
given a new duty."
Why do I think that this is important for the events we are
discussing? Because in the first part of this sentence, General Zivanovic
(20)claims that he liberated Srebrenica, and in my judgement, thereby he
resolves all dilemmas as to who was in command of the forces engaged in
Krivaja 95, that is, in the operation for Srebrenica. He says he
liberated Srebrenica, and thereby he himself clearly states that he was in
command.
(25)And in the second part of the sentence, General Zivanovic declares
• Q.: General Radinovic, where was General Zivanovic when he was conducting this conversation, on the assumption that the conversation is (15)authentic, as well as its content? • A.: From what is said in the conversation, one could infer that he was in Belgrade, but that is not what the whole context tells us. This is clearly not in Belgrade. If he was in Belgrade, he would not be using this line, but another line, and Bogicevic, as a man who is doing (20)something for the needs of the Drina Corps, would not go all the way from Belgrade to Bosnia-Herzegovina without informing himself as to the whereabouts of General Zivanovic. Taking into consideration all the events that preceded this time when this conversation is assumed to have taken place, he is without doubt at the command post in Vlasenica. (25)
MR. VISNJIC:
[Int.] Thank you, General.
• Q.: General, I should take the liberty of reading out this conversation. It is a conversation between Uran, a person "X," and Colonel Cerovic. (10) (U.:) Uran (Obrad). (X.:) Uran. All right... You are connected. (U.:) Hello. (C.:) Uran. (U.:) How are you, boss? (15) (C.:) Well, okay. And how are you, Rade? (U.:) Not bad. Not bad. Listen, please. (C.:) Hello. (U.:) Listen. (C.:) Wait till I get to another phone. I can't hear a word you (20)are saying. (U.:) Go ahead. (C.:) I am listening. (U.:) Krstic in person ordered it and so did 01. (C.:) Yes. (25)
(U.:) This convoy bound for Kladanj ...
(U.:) (Interference). (C.:) All right. (U.:) (Interference) That no one has the right to do anything (5)(interference). (C.:) All right. (U.:) And also literally that we are to behave in a civilised fashion and that everyone is to behave like that so that nothing of the kind of problem we had before happens. (10) (C.:) All right. (U.:) Please call those public security stations, call the commanders of the units who are there, call everybody who is responsible for ensuring that everything runs smoothly and (unintelligible). (15) (C.:) All right. (U.:) That's it, boss. (C.:) When will they set out, Obrad? (U.:) I don't know. I can't tell you when they're leaving, but take measures immediately. (20) (C.:) Okay. (U.:) Take measures immediately. Call and be sure to know exactly to which persons you transmitted it, the most responsible ones, and following up implementation through the officer on duty. (25)
(C.:) All right.
(C.:) Cheers. (U.:) Sure. Good luck. General, according to the contention of the Prosecution, this (5)conversation was conducted on the 25th of July, 1995. Within the context of which events could we place this conversation? • A.: As far as I understand it, the time when this conversation was conducted should be set within the context of the events in Zepa, because on the 25th the evacuation of civilians from Zepa started. (10) • Q.: General Radinovic, allow me to read out a second conversation now, conducted, according to the Prosecution's submission, on the same day, that is, the 25th of July, at 1319 hours. The participants in this conversation are Colonel Cerovic and Djuric. (C.:) Milovan? (15)It is Defence Exhibit D168. (C.:) Milovan? (D.:) Djuric speaking. (C.:) Who? (D.:) Djuric. (20) (C.:) Ilija? (D.:) Yes. (C.:) So you are in your area of responsibility. (D.:) Yes.
(C.:) It must all be done without any stopping, without
(25)searches, even at the cost of shooting those who would try
(D.:) All right. (C.:) Now, be so kind as to call Markovic at the SUP and tell him that this is an order of the state president, that (5)together with us, in their area of responsibility, up there along their border with the people from Sokolac, they too are to deliver this safely to the guys in Sokolac. (D.:) All right. (10) (C.:) Do you understand? (D.:) (Inaudible). (C.:) Well, call me to say whether Markovic received the message. Call the officer on duty here. (D.:) All right. I think that he is in the field, he has other (15)tasks, but I will convey it there and I will call. (C.:) Well, all right. (D.:) All right. (C.:) Cheerio. General, taking into consideration that these two conversations (20)took place within a 20-minute time span on the same day, may I be free to conclude that they refer to the same subject, that is, the transport of the civilian population from Zepa? • A.: Yes, that is how I understand it.
• Q.: In the previous conversation, the sentence that says, "Krstic
(25)personally has ordered it and so has O1," General, who could Krstic be in
• A.: If we look at the header, at the beginning of the conversation who the participants are, Uran and Zeric, Uran is the code-name for the forward command post of the Drina Corps. And in brackets it says "Obrad," (5)so I assume it was Obrad Vicic, Assistant Chief of Staff in the Drina Corps who, by nature of things, should have been at the time at the forward command post because this was taking place at the time of the Zepa operation. So in view of that fact, there is no question that it could be anyone else but General Krstic who was in command of the operative group (10)for Zepa at the time. • Q.: And who is 01, General? • A.: In marking persons by numbers in the chain of command in our army, in my army, and a similar practice was applied by the VRS, 01 is the code given to the Supreme Commander. (15) • Q.: And who was the Supreme Commander? • A.: The Supreme Commander of the army of Republika Srpska was Radovan Karadzic. • Q.: Does that fit into this second sentence from Exhibit 168 when Cerovic says to a certain Djuric, "Convey to him that this is an order of (20)the president of the state"?
• A.: Yes, that fully fits into the contents of the conversation
conducted 20 minutes earlier. Cerovic is conveying the message given to
him by Uran, and that is General Krstic. He is conveying to the person
who is to execute the order, that is Djuric, and he is giving greater
(25)emphasis to that order by saying that this is an order given by the
• Q.: General, in your testimony, a member of the investigating team of the Prosecution -- I'm sorry, in her testimony, Ms. Stefanie Frease stated that orders of this kind, such as were allegedly given by Krstic in this (5)conversation, were the consequence of the focussed attention of world public opinion on the events in Zepa, or rather, the events in the enclaves, and all this because the events in Srebrenica had already become known to the International Community. Would you agree with that? • A.: I do not agree that that prompted this order from Krstic, nor do I (10)consider it to be the main reason for this contact in this way. Of course, in the media there were various reports about these things. It had still not been established with certainty that this had happened, and it is very difficult to make any conclusions as to whether such information had reached the people who had participated in the Zepa (15)operation and particularly those in charge of that operation, whether such news had reached them at all, particularly in view of the circumstances under which they were conducting the operation, they had very little contact with public opinion in general. I couldn't allege that they hadn't heard anything, but certainly not to such an extent that they would (20)explain orders of this kind.
MR. VISNJIC:
[Int.] Could I ask the usher to give the
witness OTP 446, please.
Your Honours, this is a conversation between a person named as
Krstic and a certain Sobot conducted, according to the submission of the
(25)Prosecution, on the 12th of July, 1995, at 1305 hours. Mr. President, I
• Q.: So Krstic, Sobot: (K.:) How many buses have started out from down there? (5) (S.:) 20. (K.:) Fine, 20. (S.:) And the others are on the way? (K.:) On the road, good. (S.:) ... (10) (K.:) Put me back to the switchboard. Miss, put me through to the Vlasenica Brigade. (C.:) Yes. (K.:) This is Krstic. (C.:) Can I help you, General? (15) (K.:) Give me Kosrovic. (C.:) He's not here, he went somewhere. (K.:) Give me Savo, put me through to Savo. (S.:) How are you General? This is Savo. (K.:) Srpski, fuck it, how else. (20) (S.:) Congratulations, fuck ... (K.:) Get in touch with these guys from the MUP, that means you, your brigade and them. (S.:) I gave everything there is.
(K.:) Wait, slow down, man, secure the road, from the crossroad
(25)below, from where you are, 12 kilometres towards Drava and up
(S.:) To the tunnel? (K.:) Of course. (S.:) Okay. (5) (K.:) That's where they'll be disembarking. (S.:) Okay. (K.:) Take care nothing must happen to any of them. (S.:) Okay. (K.:) Is that clear? (10) (S.:) Yes, sir. (K.:) Until further notice, secure that part of the road. (S.:) Okay. (K.:) That's it chief, bye. (S.:) Bye. (15)General, the sentence, "Take care that --" in the translation it says, "Nothing must happen to them," Defence counsel says, "Not a hair must be touched on their heads," if we translate it literally, "No one's hair on his head may be touched." What kind of an order is that, General?
• A.: First of all, this is a saying, a metaphor. When you say, "Not a
(20)hair must be hurt on his head," it's the highest degree -- the greatest
emphasis on the protection of the safety of the person to whom this
applies, because as we know, we lose hairs from our heads all the time.
So when you say this, when you use this expression, it is a strict
requirement and it means that absolutely the slightest thing may not
(25)happen to that person.
(5) • Q.: General, if I say, "Nothing must happen to him," and then I say, "Not a hair may be harmed on their heads," by saying that, am I making this statement much stricter, giving it much greater emphasis? Am I right? • A.: Yes. (10) • Q.: General, on the 12th of July, 1995, the International Community was certainly not familiar with the events in Srebrenica as they occurred later? • A.: No, they were not aware of them. MR. VISNJIC: [Int.] Could the witness be given Defence (15)Exhibit 169 now, please. THE INTERPRETER: Could the exhibit be placed on the ELMO, please. MR. VISNJIC: [Int.] • Q.: General, sir, these are portions of the conversation that we've already discussed, the 12th of July conversation which quotes the alleged (20)statement made by General Krstic, and the conversations on the 25th of July in which, once again, orders are being quoted that General Krstic allegedly issued.
MR. VISNJIC:
[Int.] Mr. President, I should just like to
draw the attention of the Trial Chamber to the sentence uttered on the
(25)12th of July, that is to say, the translation is basically correct, but
• Q.: Now we have the statement of General Krstic allegedly on the 12th of July and on the 25th of July, his alleged sentences uttered on that (5)date. What does that indicate to you? • A.: These conversations, when you link them up, and this document, too, this indicates to me, this leads me to think that there was continuity of a persistent expression of General Krstic's resolute stand and proper conduct towards the civilian population. In the same way that (10)in combat documents he always strove to ensure that the civilian population was not the target of attack, so also in these particular documents, if these conversations are authentic, of course, General Krstic once again is striving for and issuing orders to his subordinates that civilian population cannot be the target of any kind of retaliation. (15) • Q.: General, sir, in Exhibit 167 there is a sentence which Uran says to Cerovic, and it says, it reads, "We must behave in a civilised manner and everybody must behave in that way so that nothing of the kind of problem we had before happens." What does that mean, General, sir?
• A.: It means that Colonel Cerovic, and Colonel Cerovic is the
(20)assistant for morale, legal issues, religious issues of the corps, that is
to say, Colonel Cerovic conveys -- is conveying an order which he himself
received. He is fully conscious of the fact that during the time that the
population left Srebrenica, they behaved in an uncivilised fashion, and he
draws attention to the fact that this should not happen again. And
(25)luckily, it did not happen again to the civilians.
MR. VISNJIC: [Int.] Mr. President, the Defence has no further questions. Just one more, actually, just one small question. • Q.: General, sir, when we gave you these conversations for comment, to (5)hear your comments, you explained to us that you didn't like to comment on intercepted conversations of this kind. Would you just repeat some of the reasons you gave for this to us; why do you not like to comment?
• A.: In my examination-in-chief when I testified before this august
Tribunal, I put forward the reasons. I said why, in the preparation for
(10)my expert finding, I did not use the intercepts and why I could not
consider them to be evidence and exhibits. And I wasn't happy that you
made me comment on the exhibits which I did not qualify as being exhibits
myself. I was not able to accept them as such, and thereby you made me
deviate from my stand of principle. But thank you for asking me that
(15)question now to be able to explain myself and to justify myself for doing
so before this Tribunal and all the distinguished people here.
For me, an intercepted conversation of any kind is only an
intimation of, an announcement of a possible -- of possible evidence, and
this must only be a source for quest; that is to say, you will have to
(20)enter into a quest for evidence which can bear out the hypothesis which
relates to the events that are being scrutinised.
For me to be able to consider an intercepted conversation instead
of just an illusion and intimation or a clue or hint, for me to be able to
accept that as a fact, as a confirmation of a fact, and thereby to
(25)consider these intercepted conversations as evidence and as an exhibit, I
(20) MR. VISNJIC: [Int.] Thank you, General, sir. Your Honours, the Defence has no further questions. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Thank you very much, Mr. Visnjic. General, how is your voice today? Is it better? (25)
• A.: Mr. President, thank you for inquiring about my voice. In Serbian
JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Very well. Would you like to take a break, having said that, before we continue? Shall we take a break before we come to your cross-examination, General Radinovic? Would you (10)like a break at this point? • A.: I can answer. I can go on answering. If I need a break for my throat, perhaps I'll ask for one. My Defence counsel asked to read the conversations. I would prefer not to have to read conversations. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Very well, General. Then we (15)shall continue. Mr. Cayley, it is your witness now. MR. CAYLEY: Good morning. Thank you, Mr. President, Your Honours. General, I have to say that I didn't think that we would ever be (20)reunited in this lifetime, but fate has its way and here we are again, but I think this will be a fairly short cross-examination. If the witness could be given Prosecutor's Exhibit 884, please. THE WITNESS: [Int.] Well, I hope you're happy to see me again. I hope it's not the other way around. I'm happy to see you. (25)
MR. CAYLEY: Of course, General. Of course I'm happy to see you.
• Q.: Now, this, General, is the intercept of the 15th of July. Your Honours, this is the intercept between Bogicevic and Zivanovic of the 15th of July. And I wanted you to concentrate on one (5)particular sentence, first of all, and that is the sentence which you alluded to last -- in your examination-in-chief, where Zivanovic states: "I liberated Srebrenica and now I've got a new duty." Now, General, you would agree with me that when Zivanovic was stating that he had liberated Srebrenica, this was pure bravado on his (10)part, was it not? • A.: Well, I can't agree with you there. It wasn't just bravado. And all my research testifies to the fact that General Zivanovic was right. He was actually saying that. And the whole concept -- when we speak of Srebrenica, we also use a metaphoric expression and say "the liberation of (15)Srebrenica," but here I think he is expressing his position and saying that he was commanding the Srebrenica operation. • Q.: General, this Court has heard evidence from an officer who was present at the forward headquarters at Pribicevac, from where the Srebrenica operation was being conducted, and that is Witness DB. And let (20)me read to you his testimony, and this is on page 7221, and the question from my learned friend, Mr. Harmon: " Q. Did it appear to you that General Zivanovic had an important role in commanding the operation against Srebrenica?
• A.: According to my recollection, he didn't interfere
(25)significantly with the command of the operation, but that the operation
• Q.: So up to the 9th, General Zivanovic did not play an important role in directing and commanding the attack? • A.: No." (5)Now, General, you would agree with me that an officer, senior VR officer, who was present at the forward headquarters would know far better than you who was commanding the operation to take Srebrenica?
• A.: Well, no, he doesn't know better than me. I know better than
him. It was a protected witness, so I'm not sure who the witness was.
(10)And for these purposes it's not essential either, although it would be
important to see what rank he held during the Srebrenica operation. But I
can conclude that General Zivanovic was commanding the forces at Zepa, and
I do so on the basis of relevant facts.
The first fact is that he signed the combat order for active
(15)operations of Krivaja 95, and you can take a look at the documents and
exhibits and you will find that that is so. Secondly, he himself in this
conversation says that he liberated Srebrenica. Thirdly, on the videotape
which was -- has become an exhibit here, Prosecution exhibit, General
Zivanovic can be seen, together with General Mladic, the Main Staff
(20)commander; General Krstic as the Chief of Staff of the Drina Corps; and
another group of officers from the Drina Corps. He was seen on the 11th
of July, upon entrance into Srebrenica. So there is no reason for us to
say that somebody else was in command and that not the de facto Corps
Commander, if there are no indices of that kind, official or unofficial
(25)documents to that effect.
• Q.: General, stop, stop, stop. You're not answering the question, and I'm not going to spend the next two hours with you not answering the (15)question. Would you agree with me that when General Zivanovic ceased to be the commander of the Drina Corps is an absolutely critical aspect of this case? Do you agree with that proposition? • A.: I don't think I can share your opinion and say -- put it that way. General Zivanovic received a decree on the 15th of July -- (20) • Q.: General, that's not the question I asked you. The question I asked you is this: Do you agree with me that in this case, the date upon which General Zivanovic ceased to be the commander of the Drina Corps is fundamental, it is a fundamental fact in this case? Do you agree with that proposition? (25)
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] Mr. Visnjic.
MR. VISNJIC: [Int.] I think the General is now being asked to make legal interpretations. Perhaps I'm wrong, but that is what it seems to me to be. (5) JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] General Radinovic is an expert witness, Mr. Visnjic, so he is able to give an opinion, and Mr. Cayley is asking him a question. We will have the General's answer to that question. Thank you. Please proceed, Mr. Cayley. (10) MR. CAYLEY: • Q.: General, is it or is it not an important part of this case the date upon which General Zivanovic ceased to be the commander of the Drina Corps? • A.: You mean this piece of paper or the whole case? (15) • Q.: Let me put it in a more straightforward fashion. I'm obviously not being clear about this. Do you agree with me, the document aside, generally speaking, do you agree with me that the date upon which General Zivanovic ceased to be the commander of the Drina Corps is an important fact in this entire case? Do you agree with that? (20) • A.: Yes, I agree. • Q.: General, did you meet with General Zivanovic in February or March of last year? • A.: I can't remember the exact date, but yes, I did meet with him.
• Q.: Let me read to you a question put to you by Her Honour Judge Wald,
(25)and your answer:
(5) • A.: Your Honour, no. JUDGE WALD: You didn't -- in your conversation with him, you didn't ask him, even though it was apparent in February or March, from the early pre-trial documents of the Prosecution, that this was a critical point for them? You didn't ask him when he stopped being commander? (10) • A.: I had no doubt in my mind that he was Drina Corps commander during the Srebrenica operation, and I focused my attention on that operation. JUDGE WALD: All right. Just to tie this down: You and he never discussed specifically when he said he stopped being commander. (15)That's what you just said; is that correct? • A.: We did not discuss it." And that is on page 8385 of the LiveNote transcript. General, don't you agree with me that it is somewhat ridiculous that you come here giving your opinions and interpretation on intercepts (20)when you had the opportunity to ask Zivanovic himself when he ceased to be the commander of the Drina Corps? • A.: Please don't use words of that kind. I have come here upon the request of the Defence to comment on the intercepts. As I say, I did so very unwillingly, for the reasons I put forward. (25)
• Q.: General, answer my question. Would any normal expert have asked
• A.: I had the document on the appointment of General Krstic and General Zivanovic, with the 15th of July date, and I considered that that is incontestable and that I would very easily be able to get to the (5)records and minutes of the handing over of duty and that this would be very easy to ascertain when one relinquished his command to the other. And the fact that I didn't ask at that particular point in time, it could have been a methodological mistake, but at that moment I didn't think that it was essential, important. I thought that we would see each other again (10)and be able to ascertain that question, and I thought the Prosecution had the document anyway and that it would be very easy to ascertain. Now, it turned out that the Prosecution did not have this document, and unfortunately I did not get the document either, whereas I thought that all the participants in this case had the document, that the (15)archives of the Drina Corps had it, that General Krstic and Zivanovic had this document, and in the cadres' department. But unfortunately that document doesn't seem to be anywhere. I haven't got it. So it was up to us to speculate from the 15th onwards. But there is the decree by the supreme commander saying that it could not have been before the 15th of (20)July. So for me that was an incontestable fact, something that I didn't think I needed to go into and check out when I saw General Zivanovic. • Q.: How long did you spend with General Zivanovic? • A.: Is that important for these proceedings? If it is, I can tell you that it was -- (25)
• Q.: General, I will decide what questions are important. Please just
• A.: I didn't count the hours, of course, but we spent a certain amount (5)of time before lunch and some time after lunch, which means, let's say, one working day, but I can't tell you the exact number of hours. And during that conversation of ours, I allowed General Zivanovic, gave him the opportunity, to tell me about the operative situation with respect to Srebrenica, which was the most important thing for me, and that is why (10)perhaps I omitted to go into some questions that are vital to this case. But there you have it. It was an omission, and I suppose many omissions are committed. • Q.: So you spent an entire day with General Zivanovic, and during that day you never asked him the date upon which he relinquished command of the (15)Drina Corps? • A.: No, I did not ask him. • Q.: It's a fact, isn't it, General, that he told you on that day that he relinquished command of the Drina Corps on the 13th [Realtime transcript read in error "15th"] of July? He told you, didn't he, on that (20)day, that that's the day he relinquished command? • A.: No. No. He didn't. Not even on that day. No, he didn't tell me about the 15th [as interpreted] • Q.: Let's move on. I'm not going to re-cross-examine you on all of the documents on this issue, because we'll be here for a week. (25)
MR. CAYLEY: If Prosecutor's Exhibit 30 could be made available.
JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Yes, we can actually have a break at this point. We will have a 20-minute break now, not a half-hour (5)break, but a 20-minute break only. --- Recess taken at 10.30 a.m. --- On resuming at 10.58 a.m. MR. CAYLEY: Mr. President, while the witness is being brought in, there needs to be a correction to the transcript. At line 21, my question (10)is stated, "It's a fact, isn't it, General, that he told you on that day that he relinquished command of the Drina Corps on the 15th of July." My question continues, and the witness answers no. In fact, I asked the witness, this is exactly what I said, "It's a fact, isn't it, General, that he told you on that day that he relinquished command of the Drina (15)Corps on the 13th of July." The rest of it is correct, it's just the date was incorrect, so I just correct that so the transcript is accurate. JUDGE RIAD: I noted it down "13." MR. CAYLEY: Thank you, Judge Riad. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] I, too, heard the 13th in the (20)interpretation. What did the Defence hear, so that we can hear the other party as well? MR. VISNJIC: [Int.] Mr. President, if the answer was no, then it's all the same to us. Yes, yes. The date was the 13th, actually, yes. (25)
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] Very well, then. The record
MR. CAYLEY: Thank you, Mr. President. • Q.: General, before you came here to give evidence today, knowing that (5)you would be speaking about the day on which Zivanovic relinquished command, did you get in contact with Zivanovic to discuss the matter with him before you testified? • A.: You mean for the purposes of this testimony? • Q.: Correct. (10) • A.: No. • Q.: So knowing full well it was important in November of last year, and knowing full well that it was important, absolutely critical in coming back here to give rejoinder evidence, you never made any attempt to contact General Zivanovic? (15) • A.: Yes, I did, but General Zivanovic is inaccessible. • Q.: Where is General Zivanovic, General? • A.: I don't know. • Q.: Let's move on. Now, General, you said in your examination-in-chief today that news of what had happened in the (20)Srebrenica enclave and the executions that had happened immediately after the taking of the territory was not well known enough by the 25th of July for those VRS individuals in Zepa to be aware of those facts. Do you recall saying that?
• A.: That's not exactly what I said. I said that there were news about
(25)it in the media; however, the question was whether the news could reach
• Q.: General, I'm going to just refer briefly to Prosecutor's Exhibit 30. It's the report of the Secretary-General on the fall of Srebrenica. (5)It's in English, but I know from your evidence last year that you have read this particular report, and let's see what His Excellency Kofi Annan says about the status of news about Srebrenica.
MR. CAYLEY: And I'm going to quote, Mr. Usher, from paragraph
388.
(10)And I will read sections of it, Your Honours. I'm not going to
read all of it, but I would direct you to paragraph 388 onwards of that
report on page 84.
Paragraph 388 reads as follows:
"As of 17 July," and it's referring to 17 July 1995, "the BSA
(15)continued to refuse --" Yes, that's fine, Mr. Usher "-- continued to
refuse to honour the agreements related to Srebrenica which Mladic had
entered into in Belgrade two days earlier. The special representative of
the Secretary-General reported to New York that day that the status and
location of unaccounted-for persons and possible detainees, especially
(20)draft-age males, remains a large gap in our database. Unconfirmed reports
provide accounts of detention centres, execution-style murder, rapes of
young women, and other atrocities."
We'll move to paragraph 389:
"The same day, one of the DutchBat soldiers, during his brief
(25)stay in Zagreb, upon return from Serb-held territory, was quoted as
• A.: I'm not sure that all of them heard those reports; and then,
(25)second, I am sure that many of them didn't know what had happened there.
MR. CAYLEY: Mr. Usher, it's on page 5 of the English version. I think my learned friend, Mr. Visnjic, has a comment, Your Honour. (10) JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Yes, Mr. Visnjic. Let us hear your comment.
MR. VISNJIC:
[Int.] Mr. President, this is a document
the Defence has objected to, that the document be used as evidence during
the testimony of Mr. Rick Butler. After we made this objection to the use
(15)of this document, the Prosecutor withdrew the document and no longer
wanted Mr. Butler to speak about it. This is an extensive document, both
in terms of its content and its length. And secondly, it does not refer
to the subject we are currently discussing and the subject which General
Radinovic testified about. It doesn't concern the facts alleged in the
(20)indictment either. And my learned colleague is now trying to tender this
into evidence in this way. This document was issued in 1992, and as I
have already indicated, it's a very large, extensive document. It's also
a very complex document, in view of its contents. Therefore,
Mr. President, I don't know if my learned colleague wishes to question the
(25)witness about this document. He can do so, but without explicit reference
JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Mr. Cayley.
MR. CAYLEY: Mr. President, I think there's two issues that my
learned friend has identified: First of all relevance, how is it relevant
(5)to General Radinovic's testimony; and second, admissibility. I'm going to
have to consult with my colleagues on the point of admissibility. I'll
clarify that with Mr. McCloskey. But as to relevance, the only section of
this document to which I wish to refer is that which concerns orders given
to the Drina Corps in respect of operations against Zepa. Now, General
(10)Radinovic himself has spoken specifically about events in Zepa, and I
believe that this particular document is relevant to that point. As to
admissibility, if you would give me a moment and I will just speak with
Mr. McCloskey. Thank you. (15)
MR. CAYLEY: Excuse me, Mr. President. My apologies. My
understanding is that the Defence have had this document since February of
2001, and it was disclosed to them in accordance with agreements that were
made between the Defence and the Prosecution to have continuing disclosure
of relevant material, material relevant to this case. It was excluded
(20)from Mr. Butler's -- or they made an objection to exclude it from
Mr. Butler's testimony, because when Mr. McCloskey had given a description
of Mr. Butler's evidence, the proposed evidence, this particular matter,
this document, the subject matter was inadvertently missed out from that
description. So the Defence essentially said: We were not on notice that
(25)he was going to testify about this matter, so we therefore object to this
JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Mr. Visnjic, do you wish to reply?
MR. VISNJIC:
[Int.] Yes, I do, Mr. President. The first
(5)and foremost reason for our objection to this document is the fact that it
refers to the events which took place in 1992, the events which have never
been the subject of the discussions before this Chamber in this case.
Second, we're dealing here with the events which require a broader
approach and detailed analysis. In our previous objection, we explained
(10)to the Court why we consider ourselves to be unprepared for the use of
this document. If the Prosecution wishes to use the documents from this
period of time, then the Defence must require additional time to prepare,
regardless of the fact to what extent the document needs to be used. So
we have to require additional time for preparation.
(15)Third, I still do not see the link, even in the paragraph that
Mr. Cayley wishes to use, I don't see the link with the testimony of
General Radinovic, except if we're not talking about Zepa as a link, which
is used in both cases.
So I think that by using the documentation from some other period
(20)of time, we will go far beyond the scope of this testimony, and we will
have to require additional time to prepare ourselves for the document.
The document has been disclosed to us, that is true, but some other
binders containing a large amount of documents have also been disclosed.
And in view of the subject of the testimony of General Radinovic, and also
(25)in view of the subject which was raised by the Prosecution, we are -- this
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] Let me consult with my
colleagues. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Mr. Cayley, we will hear your question, and then we will make a ruling whether or not we will hear the response. MR. CAYLEY: Thank you, Mr. President. (15) • Q.: General, do you have the page that I was speaking about in front of you, which is ... • A.: Yes, but it's a very poor copy. I can hardly see what it says. • Q.: Let me read to you paragraph D. MR. CAYLEY: And this, Mr. Usher, is on page 5 at the bottom so (20)the public can see it. • Q.: I'll read it, and this is an order from General Mladic to the Drina Corps: "From its present positions, its main forces shall persistently defend --"
• A.: I'm sorry, I haven't heard that portion of the text. I cannot see
(25)it on page 6 here.
• Q.: General, you have it in front of you now. I'll read it. "The Drina Corps: From its present positions, its main forces shall persistently defend Visegrad, Zvornik, and the corridor, while the rest of (5)its forces in the wider Podrinje region shall exhaust the enemy, inflict the heaviest possible losses on him and force him to leave the Birac, Zepa, and Gorazde areas together with the Muslim population. First offer the able-bodied and armed men to surrender, and if they refuse, destroy them. After that, unblock and repair the Konjevic Polje-Zvornik road, (10)make it fit for traffic, and stand by for intensive combat against infiltrated sabotage, terrorist, surprise, and ambush attacks and paramilitary groups." And I won't read the remainder. Now, General, this is an order from General Mladic from 1992, and you would agree with me that his intention then was that the civilian (15)population should be forced to leave the Zepa area, was it not, from this document?
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] Before we hear the response, let
me consult with my colleagues for the ruling. (20)
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] The Chamber notes that even the
Defence has asked questions regarding this period of time. The Chamber
has also asked questions concerning the same time framework in order to
understand the situation in Srebrenica. The Chamber and the parties
considered some previous events in previous periods of time as well. So
(25)there was a time which preceded the relevant times, and it is necessary
• A.: Would you please repeat the question? (5) MR. CAYLEY: • Q.: Of course, General. Based on this document where General Mladic states, essentially, "Force him," the enemy, "to leave the Birac, Zepa, and Gorazde areas together with the Muslim population," General Mladic in 1992 intended that the Muslim population leave the Zepa area based on this (10)document, didn't he, General? • A.: The population in general, regardless of their ethnicity, left the territories which were under the control of the other party. It is a normal consequence of a civil war. And this is what happened throughout Bosnia and Herzegovina throughout that period of time. (15) • Q.: General, that's not the question, that is not the question I'm asking you. If you can't answer the question, say, "I don't want to answer the question; I don't understand the question." Based on this order, would you agree with me that it was General Mladic's intention that the Muslim population should leave Zepa? (20) • A.: The express character of this order of General Mladic was intended for the enemy to leave the area, to force the enemy to leave the area. The order concerns the enemy, not the population, but General Mladic knows that the population would leave as well because that is what happened throughout Bosnia and Herzegovina. (25)
• Q.: So when General Mladic says, and I quote, "Force him to leave the
• A.: No. I'm referring to what he explicitly requests, that is, to (5)force the enemy to leave the area, not the civilian population. And the civilian population expresses -- the civilian population decides for themselves whether to leave the area or not, because that is what happened in Srebrenica as well. • Q.: General, the order speaks for itself, so we can move on. (10) MR. CAYLEY: If I could have D167, please, Defence Exhibit 167, Defence Exhibit 168, and Prosecutor's Exhibit 364, volume 2, the intercept from the 25th of July of 1995. • Q.: Now, General, this is the document that you've already referred to, and the particular part that I am interested in is where Colonel (15)Cerovic states -- one question before this: Who was Colonel Cerovic? • A.: Colonel Cerovic was the assistant commander for politics, morale of the Drina Corps. He was the assistant commander to the Drina Corps Commander.
• Q.: Now, the paragraph that I'm interested in is halfway down, and in
(20)your version -- you have a typed version, I think, and I will read it, and
hopefully you can catch up in the Serbian version where I am. It's about
halfway down. And Cerovic says "all right," and then after that Uran or
Obrad, Colonel Vicic, Chief of Operations in the Drina Corps, says, "And
also literally that we are to behave in civilised fashion and that
(25)everybody is to behave like that so that nothing of the kind of problem we
• A.: Yes. • Q.: Now, General, you would agree with me that the problem that he is talking about is the murder of -- or at least, the international press (5)finding out about the murder of thousands of Muslim men after the fall of the Srebrenica enclave. That's the little problem that he's referring to, isn't he, General? • A.: No. No, that is not how I understand it. I'm not saying that that didn't happen, what you're saying, because it has been established in (10)this case. It's just that this text and this message explicitly concerns the behaviour of the -- towards the column of civilians so that the problems which had taken place in Srebrenica would be avoided. • Q.: Now, General, if Colonel Vicic is aware of problems of uncivilised behaviour within the Drina Corps, and if Colonel Cerovic is aware of (15)uncivilised behaviour in the Drina Corps, it would be fair to say that everybody else in the Drina Corps command was aware by the 25th of July of uncivilised behaviour within the Drina Corps; would you agree with that? • A.: Well, yes, I might agree with you that many of them knew. MR. CAYLEY: Do we have Prosecutor's Exhibit 364? This is, Your (20)Honours, 364, volume 2, it's an intercept of the 25th of July. It's the same date as these two conversations that Colonel Cerovic has, and I will read most of it through, not all of it. And it is a conversation between General Milan Gvero and a certain Subara whose location couldn't be determined. (25)
• Q.: First of all, General Radinovic, who is General Milan Gvero in
• A.: General Milan Gvero was the assistant commander of the Main Staff for morale, politics, and religious affairs. • Q.: So he was Cerovic's direct superior? He was doing the same job as (5)Colonel Cerovic but in the Main Staff? • A.: Yes. He worked in the Main Staff in the same affairs as Colonel Cerovic, but there is no direct chain of command link because he is subordinated to his commander. • Q.: But they were both morale, legal, and religious affairs officers? (10) • A.: Yes. • Q.: Now, let me read this conversation, and as I say, I'm not going to read all of it. (S.:) May God be with you, General, sir. How are you? (G.:) Oh, Subara, fine, how are you? (15) (S.:) I'm calling to tell you to watch out what you're doing over there with Zepa, not to let it be like Srebrenica, because there is talk that they slaughtered and rampaged there. (G.:) They're lying, man, they're lying. (20) (S.:) Well I know. But watch out. That's why it would be good, there's this guy, Peter Arnett, he's there.
(G.:) Subara, everything's been agreed, an agreement was signed
last night. We're going to allow everything. If they're
smart, the ICRC will control it and an UNPROFOR representative
(25)will also be present.
(G.:) But those of military age won't be able to go. They'll go to reception centres and they'll be registered. We're doing everything in compliance with international laws of war. (5) (S.:) Great. That's good. (G.:) Okay. Thank you for the reminder, but that's how it's being done. (S.:) Yes, that's smart, because they criticised us badly for Srebrenica. (10) (G.:) They're just making things up. What else can they do? There's nothing else they can do but lie. (S.:) We also made a mistake by not bringing in journalists. (G.:) We didn't make a mistake. We didn't. And I'm not going to read the rest. If Mr. Visnjic wishes to (15)refer to it in your re-examination, he can. Now, General, the little problem that Colonel Cerovic is talking about and the orders which General Krstic gave are a direct result of this, aren't they? The VRS knew by the 25th of July that the world knew what had happened in Srebrenica; isn't that right? (20) • A.: They knew, more or less, but the point is whether the people in Zepa could have known, in view of the situation. I never said that nobody knew, but I'm sure that many did not know.
• Q.: General, the reason that orders were given to behave in a
civilised manner in Zepa were because everybody knew in the VRS that the
(25)world knew that thousands of people had been murdered after the fall of
• A.: You have Krstic's order of the 12th, when no one was killed, when he requested that nobody should have a hair missing from his head, without any pressure of public opinion. (5) • Q.: General, if we can -- JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Mr. Cayley, excuse me for interrupting you. You have already exceeded the time of the examination-in-chief, so perhaps you could try and organise your questions so as to try and complete your cross-examination soon. (10) MR. CAYLEY: I will, Mr. President. I will be finished within the next 10 or 15 minutes. • Q.: General, let's go to that particular exhibit, Prosecutor's Exhibit 446, which is the particular intercept that you're talking about, and this is the exhibit between Krstic and Sobot. Now, first of all, General, you (15)would agree with me that General Krstic is giving orders over the radio? Would you agree with that? Over the telephone, over the radio, he's giving orders? • A.: Orders are not given over the telephone; orders are given in a certain format and in a certain procedure. It is messages that are sent (20)by telephone. • Q.: Is he giving some form of instruction over the telephone? • A.: Yes.
• Q.: Now, you'll see, halfway down, that General Krstic says, "Get in
touch with these guys from the MUP, Ministry of Interior. That means you,
(25)your brigade, and them."
• A.: No, he's not giving instructions to members of MUP, because if (5)they were direct instructions by Krstic, he would have called MUP representatives to tell them. He gave instructions to his brigade commander, a brigade commander of the Drina Corps, to get in touch with MUP and to ensure regular conditions for the evacuation of civilians from Srebrenica. So he's not addressing himself directly to them, but via his (10)brigade commander. • Q.: So he's telling -- Krstic is telling his brigade to tell the MUP to do something; isn't he, General? • A.: To get in touch with them and to cooperate with respect to the organisation of transport, and that means traffic control on the road from (15)Tisca to Kladanj. • Q.: General, you'll also see in this intercept that Krstic asks for Kosoric, Lieutenant Colonel Kosoric. Now, you will recall that it is the Prosecutor's case that Lieutenant Colonel Kosoric led the first convoy out of Srebrenica to Vlasenica, to the point of exchange, and you would agree (20)with me that this intercept in fact corroborates that view. Because this intercept indicates that on the 12th of July, Kosoric moved from Srebrenica to the Luka school area, to the tunnel where the Muslim population crossed into Muslim-controlled area; would you agree with that?
• A.: No, I do not agree with you. I don't think that is the Kosoric
(25)you are referring to, but rather a Kosoric who is chief of the
• Q.: Now, General, finally what I wanted to ask you about is this: The
Defence provided to the Prosecution a very brief summary of what you were
to testify about today, and I will read that to you. Mr. Visnjic has that
in front of him, and it says this about your evidence:
(10)"The witness shall, in the frame of the time that those
conversations were allegedly held," and this is referring to the
intercepts, "according to the statements of the OTP witnesses, put those
conversations in context." That's what I want to emphasise: "Put those
conversations in context with the events and with the position General
(15)Krstic held."
Now, you stated to the Judges during your examination-in-chief
today that you had been reluctant to give evidence in respect of the
intercepts, and you gave a number of reasons why you were reluctant to
give evidence.
(20)Now, when you testified last December, you also gave the Court a
number of reasons in your re-examination as to why you felt you couldn't
give evidence about the intercepts, and I want to read the third reason to
you, and this is what you said at page 8448:
"Third, it was impossible for me to follow the context in which
(25)the conversations took place, and first of all I have in mind of the
• A.: You mean I have made a turnabout? (10) • Q.: Exactly. • A.: Copernicus? With full responsibility for any inconsistency in my methodology, I have come, upon instructions of the Defence counsel, to comment on the intercepts, but under the proviso that I do not consider intercepts to be evidence. That position applies to all intercepts, (15)including those I commented on today. How much probative value you will give to this, it's not up to me to judge. I will comment on any other intercepts that you may ask me to comment on, but under this reservation. MR. CAYLEY: Your Honour, I have no further questions for the witness. Thank you. (20) JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Thank you very much, Mr. Cayley. Mr. Visnjic for any re-examination, please. MR. VISNJIC: [Int.] Yes, I do have some additional questions, Mr. President. (25)
• RE-EXAMINED by Mr. Visnjic:
• A.: Which conversations? I didn't understand. (5) • Q.: I'm referring to Uran, Cerovic, and Bogicevic, these three conversations. • A.: You are right. They were not shown to me then. • Q.: General, was the reason for it the fact that the Prosecution disclosed some of those conversations only in January 2001 and that the (10)Uran/Cerovic intercept was in notebooks and it was not used by the Prosecution in the Prosecution case? • A.: Yes. • Q.: Could I now ask you to go back to Prosecution Exhibit 446, the Krstic/Sobot conversation. I think it is in front of you. General (15)Radinovic, Kosoric, who is mentioned in this conversation, is his name Mile, the commander of the Vlasenica Brigade in the relevant period? • A.: Yes. • Q.: General Radinovic, this person called Savo, who is also mentioned here and who General Krstic is asking for -- actually, could you tell us (20)who Savo is? • A.: He's the assistant for logistics of the commander of the Vlasenica Brigade. • Q.: Is his name Sava Celikovic? • A.: Yes. (25)
• Q.: Is General Krstic apparently contacting the Vlasenica Brigade here
• A.: Yes. In this intercept he's asking for Kosoric, but he's told he's not there, and then Savo replies, his assistant for logistics. (5) • Q.: General Radinovic, the Prosecutor has raised a question that you did not testify about in the examination-in-chief, but I didn't want to object for the umpteenth time, and that is the question of the relationship between the MUP and the Drina Corps. MR. VISNJIC: [Int.] Could the witness be shown, please, (10)Defence Exhibit D165. • Q.: General Radinovic, will you please look at page 2 of this document. • A.: Let me just see who is in the header. • Q.: You have seen this document before, haven't you? (15) • A.: Yes. • Q.: When did you see it for the first time? • A.: During the preparations for this testimony. • Q.: Could you tell us how many days ago? • A.: Shall we say three days ago. (20) • Q.: Could you tell Their Honours -- could you explain the content of the second page of this document, without actually quoting from it, and could you place it in the context of the relationship between the MUP and the Drina Corps.
• A.: This document was transmitted on the 12th of July, 1995, and we
(25)see the time indicated here, 2210, I think it is, if I see it well. It
(20) • Q.: General Radinovic, who secured the Konjevic Polje-Bratunac road, according to your finding? • A.: According to my finding, the Konjevic Polje-Bratunac communication was secured by a special brigade of the MUP of Republika Srpska. • Q.: When we say "secured," does that mean on the dates -- (25)
MR. CAYLEY: Mr. President I'm going to object.
MR. CAYLEY: I'm going to object to further questioning on this unless I'm given opportunity to do re-cross-examination on the witness. He's now speaking about matters which he did not address either in his (5)examination-in-chief or cross-examination, that is, the control of the road between Bratunac and Konjevic Polje. I merely referred to an instruction given to the MUP in an intercept, and now my learned friend is essentially trying to get evidence in, in re-examination which he didn't want to ask the General about in his examination-in-chief. (10)So if I'm given the opportunity to re-cross on this point, that is fine; otherwise, I would request that the Court directs Mr. Visnjic to concentrate purely on the issue that I raised in my cross-examination and not to expand it out by virtue of this document. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Mr. Visnjic? (15)Mr. Visnjic, let me remind you anyway that on page 45, line 23 of the LiveNote, you yourself admitted that this question of the relationship between the MUP and the Drina Corps was raised for the first time by Mr. Cayley, so in a sense, he should have had additional questions. But the Chamber feels that you should be able to continue with your questions, (20)but if there are things going outside re-examination, it would be fair for Mr. Cayley to have the opportunity to cross-examine, in a certain sense. What is your opinion?
MR. VISNJIC:
[Int.] Mr. President, as far as we have
been able to understand, Mr. Cayley opened the door to this issue. I do
(25)not wish to expand. If we're talking about the Bratunac-Konjevic Polje
JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] That is true, Mr. Visnjic. We (10)agree, but we're applying the principle here of giving equal treatment to the parties and the equality of arms of the parties. It is true that Mr. Cayley opened the door so you have the right to enter that door, but it is also true that after that, Mr. Cayley has the right to put additional questions. (15)So the Chamber is saying, you can continue with your questions, because it is in the interests of justice that you be able to ask all your questions, but giving the chance to Mr. Cayley to respond. So you may choose: Either you continue with your questions and Mr. Cayley will be able to comment, or you don't have any more questions and then Mr. Cayley (20)will not have the right to come back to it, either. MR. VISNJIC: [Int.] Mr. President, I'm afraid that we are a little short of time, so I think we'll stop there. I shall just ask General Radinovic a very general question raised by Mr. Cayley.
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] Please proceed, then. That is
(25)up to you. It's your choice.
• Q.: Mr. Radinovic, is there a written document whereby the Drina Corps is issuing orders to the MUP? Have you seen any such document? • A.: No, I have not seen any such document. (5) • Q.: General Radinovic, my learned friend Mr. Cayley asked you about your conversations with General Zivanovic. How many conversations were there? • A.: One. • Q.: You said that you discussed operational issues linked to Krivaja (10)95? • A.: Yes. • Q.: Did you cover all the issues? Did you have an exhaustive discussion on that particular issue?
• A.: No, of course we didn't exhaust the issue. General Zivanovic
(15)spoke in principled terms, though I knew what the operation was, its
scope, the forces participating, but I wanted to hear it from the man who
was on the spot and who I assumed knew the most about it.
And we ended our conversation regarding the concept, the
effectives -- the main objectives, and axes, all the things that come
(20)under a description of an operation. I was particularly interested in the
immediate cause, the operational cause for the operation because I
couldn't put my finger on it. I couldn't find the directive, the document
from which it would be possible to see that clearly, and I asked General
Zivanovic for us to consider that particular problem at another meeting.
(25)And he promised that he would familiarise me with the main operational
• Q.: So after your first meeting, the agreement between you was that you would get together once again when General Zivanovic would show you or hand over to you certain documents, but since that first meeting you were not able to get in touch with him; is that correct? (10) • A.: Yes, quite correct. • Q.: Thank you. One further question in that connection. General Radinovic, at the time you were in touch with General Zivanovic, had the trial already started of this case? • A.: I'm afraid I cannot give you a precise answer, but I personally (15)was just embarking upon preparations. I don't know whether the trial had actually begun in the sense of pre-trial hearings. I think you did have some contacts because I already had received documents from the Prosecution. • Q.: Thank you. For how long did you testify in the courtroom (20)regarding the operational circumstances connected to the Krivaja 95 operations? • A.: I'm not quite sure, but I think it must have been three or four days. • Q.: Thank you. (25)
MR. VISNJIC:
[Int.] Mr. President, I have one further
JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] But Mr. Visnjic, when do you think you could call back General Radinovic to address this topic? MR. VISNJIC: [Int.] Mr. President, that's a rather (10)difficult question, but I think by the end of the day we'll be able to decide whether we need to call him back or not, and then perhaps we could notify Your Honours about that tomorrow. It's a rather broad and complicated topic over which I should like to consult the General. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] But the Prosecutor used only one (15)paragraph of that document, I think. MR. VISNJIC: [Int.] That is true, Mr. President, but the question was a rather broad one, so I have to be cautious. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Mr. Cayley, do you have a response to this? (20)
MR. CAYLEY: Yes, I do, Mr. President. I think, to be frank and
fair, the question was a very simple one, a very precise one, and a very
straightforward one. It was simply whether or not General Mladic had
ordered that the civilian population be forced out of Zepa. Those are the
words that I quoted, and I asked the General as an expert whether he
(25)thought that General Mladic actually meant that. You heard his response.
JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Mr. Visnjic, would you like to respond? MR. VISNJIC: [Int.] I would, Mr. President. (20) JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Then quickly, please; otherwise, we'll be in a vicious circle.
MR. VISNJIC:
[Int.] First, Mr. President, the use of
these intercepts was resorted to when the Prosecution witnesses identified
them with respect to date.
(25)Second, it was not the intention of the Defence to show how the
(15)
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] One moment, please. The Judges
will confer.
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] The Chamber is going to make a
compromise in the interests of the parties, that is, that it will give
(20)Mr. Visnjic the opportunity of calling back the witness at the end of
today's day, by close of business today, not tomorrow, but to state this
today, in order to ask questions. If you do have questions, Mr. Visnjic,
on this issue, you can ask the General at the end of today's day. That is
the ruling of the Chamber. We must profit with the General's presence
(25)here.
JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] We still have the Judges' question, and Judge Wald rightfully reminded me of that. So shall we go (5)ahead with the Judges' questions now before we adjourn for lunch. Judge Fouad Riad has the floor. • QUESTIONED by the Court: JUDGE RIAD: General Radinovic, welcome back. I would like to have the benefit of your expertise to clarify a few things in my mind. (10)I'll start with the last thing you were talking about, which is the order of General Mladic of 1992. I'm not interested in the order, which apparently is still under discussion; I'm interested in your answer. You said that it was -- when the order concerned, of course, the fact that the Muslim population should also be forced to leave Zepa with the fighters, (15)you said, "The population had to decide for itself whether to leave or not, and that's what happened also in Srebrenica." Now, when you say the population had to decide for itself, don't you, as not only academician, as also a man of the ground, know that -- don't you agree that the population can be forced, indirectly, by (20)some kind of terror, by the way of knowing what might happen to them if they stay, even if you don't tell them to leave? What do you think?
• A.: Yes, I allow for that possibility, that the decision can be
motivated by fear, and in civil wars that is a normal occurrence. That is
what happens. The population looks for protection from its own army and
(25)its own authorities. As soon as the army of another entity takes control,
JUDGE RIAD: I'm not speaking of happiness. The fact that just a (5)few houses would be burnt and a few shots gone in, don't you think - not even in former Yugoslavia; in history - if just terror has been expanded and the knowledge that that would happen to them, isn't that an indirect way of forcing them to leave, and that that's what happens usually, as you said, in civil wars? (10) • A.: In civil wars, yes, that is what happened. That's what happened in Bosnia-Herzegovina as well. JUDGE RIAD: The second thing concerns the announcement of General Zivanovic that he liberated Srebrenica and he is now doing other things, he is now called to do other things. Also -- I won't discuss the fact (15)that it's a bravado or not, because of course it's a question of context. It might be a bravado if he wanted to challenge the people who discarded him and there might have been a conflict which you could tell us about. But I'm also interested in your answer. You said, "There is no reason for us to say that somebody else was in command and not the de facto Corps (20)Commander." Now, here it's a question of presumption. What is more evident: that the official commander is the man who is in power or that the de facto commander, whom -- I mean, you said your research indicated. Did your research indicate who was the de facto commander?
• A.: Yes. The de facto commander in this case, de jure and de facto,
(25)is the commander of the Drina Corps, and the commander of the Drina Corps
(5) JUDGE RIAD: You said he was the commander, the de facto and de jure, both? • A.: Yes. JUDGE RIAD: But in your answer you said, "There is no reason to consider that somebody else than the de facto Corps Commander." You (10)insisted that he was de facto. Did your research lead you that he was de facto? • A.: Yes. Yes. JUDGE RIAD: Until what date? • A.: During the Krivaja 95 operation, throughout the duration of the (15)Krivaja 95 operation. And I talked about him as the de facto commander of the Drina Corps that day, and he showed me a map and explained his decision, the combat positions, and both -- and the formations and the structure of forces. He spoke to me about all that with a map in front of him, as the commander who commanded the forces and who knew the (20)situation. Otherwise I wouldn't have talked to him, had he not declared himself personally as being the commander. And from what he told me about the operation, I was quite convinced that he was in command of the forces, because he spoke about it in a highly competent and professional manner. JUDGE RIAD: So he was your only source of information about that? (25)
• A.: No. All the officers of the VRS and the Drina Corps that I talked
JUDGE RIAD: And you had any documents or just verbal confirmations? (5) • A.: I have a document. He signed the order for Srebrenica, the order for combat operations for Krivaja 95. The Corps Commander signed that. And there are a series of other communications that he entered into up until the 11th of July, including the entrance into Srebrenica with the commander of the Main Staff and part of his command, on the videotape that (10)we have as a document, as an exhibit in this case. JUDGE RIAD: Thank you, General. Thank you very much. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Thank you very much, Judge Fouad Riad. Madam Judge Wald has the floor. (15) JUDGE WALD: Thank you. General Radinovic, as to the Prosecutor's Exhibit 446, which was the July 12th intercept, do you have that available? We've been talking about it. It's the "don't harm a hair on their heads" intercept. And again, reiterating that, it occurred, the intercept, on July 12th. Is it your reading of that intercept that the (20)admonition, "Don't let anything happen to them" or "Don't let a hair on their head be hurt," applies to the people who were evacuated on the buses from Potocari to Kladanj? Is that your interpretation of that intercept? • A.: Yes, and that can be seen from the whole context, not only from that sentence, but from the whole document. (25)
JUDGE WALD: Right. I agree with you, but I wanted to get your
• A.: Yes. I was thinking of the people in the transport column, not the people that were going on foot in a column after the Drina Corps. (20)
JUDGE WALD: Well, I appreciate your clearing that up, because the
word "column" has been used consistently in these proceedings, primarily
to refer to the column of men that were following with parts of the Muslim
army through there.
So that would it be fair, then, to say that both 446 and 167,
(25)which we've just discussed, when they contain admonitions, one by General
• A.: Yes. JUDGE WALD: Okay. Now, the second question is a little broader, but I'm very interested, as both a military person and a professor, in your answer. You gave us extensive discussion of why you were (10)uncomfortable in having to give interpretations of intercepts. I'm just wondering what critical difference you see between the kind of intercepts that we have had in this case and other kinds of evidence which occur in all kinds of cases. For instance, people have to give, and especially in this Tribunal, although I'm not too used to it in my own country, (15)hearsay. You know, a witness gets on and says, "I overheard a conversation between X and Y, and I heard X say -- but I couldn't hear the answer. I could only hear what X said," and that sort of hearsay. Or notes; people scribble down notes of conversations and later on the notes are put in evidence. Why do you think it's so intrinsically less reliable (20)to be considering intercepts than those other kinds of incomplete and not perfectly attenuated, perfectly calibrated evidence that all of us get every day in other kinds of court proceedings? You don't -- if you have a brief answer, that's fine, but I was just interested in your observation.
• A.: I'll answer that briefly. I belong to a profession which uses the
(25)method of inter-subjective examination of all evidence and facts upon
JUDGE WALD: Okay, thank you. Now, I have a question about intercept 884. This is the one -- the first intercept that dealt with Bogicevic and Zivanovic. (15)You told us an interesting basis for your interpretation of that intercept, namely, that the word "now" in your language, the word "now" has a much more particularised meaning than -- certainly than it has in our language, and that your interpretation of "now" in this context means just at this minute, but not before now -- or not before the particular (20)time at which the speaker is speaking. Is that right? • A.: Yes, immediately before the time the speaker is speaking.
JUDGE WALD: Right, right. I understood that part. Now, the part
that I need to ask you about is, does that same word "now" mean this
moment that I'm in right now as opposed to in the future, say, something a
(25)week from now?
• A.: The word "now" in the Serbian language really means a very limited time. Now, if I am -- I'm saying this, when I am saying it, it is at the time that I'm saying it. If I say, "It's arrived now," it means it's arrived precisely at this particular precise moment. (10) JUDGE WALD: Fine, you've answered that part of my question, so let me just give you the follow-up as it might apply to 884, and Zivanovic -- I don't have the intercept, can I -- • A.: I'm not hearing you. I'm not getting the interpretation now. JUDGE WALD: I say that your answer might apply to the intercept (15)that I talked to, to 884. When General Zivanovic says in that intercept, "I have a new duty now," does that, in your view, mean that his new duty, whatever it is, is right now at the time; he has that duty right then and there at the time he is speaking? Not a duty which he may have to take up a week from now or two weeks from now, but he has that duty right at that (20)moment? • A.: He is talking about the duty which he has just received and which he is to take over.
JUDGE WALD: Right away, now. He says, "I have a new duty now,"
so if "now" has that instantaneous meaning that you just told us, then he
(25)has that duty to take up right then and there?
JUDGE WALD: I think -- I don't have it in front of us, but at (5)least as it was spoken or as my notes suggest, it was, "I have a new duty now." All right, I understand your interpretation, but I wanted to make sure how your reading of the word "now" would apply to both sides of that equation. My final question to you is, I just wanted to go back and clear up (10)when I asked you the prior question when you said a column of civilians, you meant a column of transport of the civilians. Do you know from your research whether or not the VRS, any of the people that you talked to in the VRS, considered the actual column that was moving through the woods as military or civilian in part? (15) • A.: Everybody I talked to considered that column to be a military column. JUDGE WALD: All right. Thank you. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Thank you, Judge Wald. General Radinovic, when you say that as regards the intercepted (20)conversations you are a doubting Thomas, do you also consider yourself to be a doubting Thomas when it comes to your attitude as a researcher? When you start researching an issue, do you still consider yourself to be a doubting Thomas in the sense that it is your approach, methodological approach to the issue? (25)
• A.: Well, I abide by the principle of the so-called methodological
JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] If I understand you correctly, General, you told us that the intercepted conversations can only be used (5)as a hint, an indication, which may point to a corroboration of evidence. Do I understand you correctly? • A.: Yes, it has to be corroborated. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Have you done that? In respect of an intercepted conversation, have you tried to corroborate that hint, (10)as you say it, as an exercise? • A.: Mr. President, I was not in a position to do that because I did not have the tapes, and without comparing each and every transcript with the tape recording, I don't think it would be possible to establish the correspondence between the two. (15)And second, which is perhaps even more important, I'm not an expert for such type of analysis. I do not have adequate knowledge which would enable me to verify the authenticity of the transcripts, that is, the correspondence of the transcripts and the tape-recordings. It is a preliminary procedure that has to be applied. (20) JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Thank you, General. Another question as regards the document of handover of duty between General Zivanovic and General Krstic, could they, too, be subject of this attitude of yours, the attitude of a doubting Thomas, as you said?
• A.: No, they could not, because the handover document is signed by
(25)both individuals concerned, and the superior officer is the one who
JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Thank you. When did you first (5)meet with General Zivanovic? When was the first time in your life that you met General Zivanovic? • A.: I couldn't answer your question. I have been a university professor for quite some time, so he may have been one of the students, one of the listeners of these lectures. But I -- all I can tell you is (10)that I did not meet him personally before I started preparing myself for this testimony. So the encounter that I told you about here as part of my testimony was actually the first encounter of myself and General Zivanovic. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] So that was the first time you (15)met General Zivanovic? • A.: Yes. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] I have one other question for you, General. How many hours did you spend with General Zivanovic? • A.: I think that the counsel for the Defence -- of the Prosecution (20)asked me about that, and I said that I spent some time with him before the lunch and then after the lunch as well, couple of hours in the morning and couple of hours in the evening.
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] Yes, I know that somebody asked
that question, but my question is more specific. Do you remember when you
(25)arrived and when you left? Do you remember the time of the day?
(5) JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Did you have lunch together or separately? • A.: Yes, we had lunch together. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Thank you very much, General Radinovic. We still don't know whether you will be coming back or not (10)this afternoon, but if you're not coming back, let me thank you once again for having testified here, but as I said, it's possible that you will come back once again this afternoon. THE WITNESS: [Int.] Thank you, too, Your Honour.
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] Let me ask the usher to
(15)accompany you out of the courtroom. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] We will have our 50-minute break at this point. --- Recess taken at 12.35 p.m. (20) --- On resuming at 1.29 p.m. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Mr. Visnjic.
MR. VISNJIC:
[Int.] Mr. President, the Defence would
like to tender Exhibits 167A and B, 168A and B, and 169. As regards the
first Exhibit, 169, the Defence wishes to note for the Chamber that the
(25)document was produced by the Defence, but since the Prosecution has agreed
(10) JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Yes, Mr. Cayley. MR. CAYLEY: Thank you, Mr. President. We have no objections to any of the Defence Exhibits 167, 168, and 169, and we would merely apply for admission into evidence of Prosecution's Exhibit 883, that being the document about which there was some discussion this morning, the directive (15)for operations number 4. It was the document that I quoted from. I anticipate that my learned friend will have some comments to make about this particular matter, and I will respond to what he has to say about the admission of this document. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Mr. Visnjic, let us hear you on (20)883.
MR. VISNJIC:
[Int.] Mr. President, the Defence objects
to the admission of this document into evidence in this case for the
following reasons. There's quite a few of them, actually. First of all,
so far the Prosecutor has not disclosed to the Defence any proof as to the
(25)authenticity of this document, nor were we able to ascertain the
JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] I will give the floor to Mr. Cayley to reply. Mr. Cayley.
MR. CAYLEY: Thank you, Mr. President, Your Honours. I will use
(10)the order that Mr. Visnjic gave, essentially, his points, I'll use them as
subheadings and try to respond in the same order.
The first point that my learned friend made was that there has
been no foundation as to authenticity in respect of this particular
document, and in the break I acquainted myself with the history of this
(15)particular document, and I can give you that now; it's brief.
This particular document was part of the Krajina Corps collection
which is a document that was seized by the Office of the Prosecutor. It
was a set of documents that was seized by the Office of the Prosecutor in
1998. As you can imagine, we have hundreds of thousands of documents, and
(20)the decision on whether to translate any particular document from a
collection is made by generally a very brief review of the entire set of
documents, and then documents are chosen from that set.
This particular document was not translated until December of the
year 2000, and when its relevance to this case became apparent in January
(25)of 2000
[sic], it was disclosed to the Defence and I addressed that with
(10) JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] I don't think that there has been anything new, Mr. Visnjic, from Mr. Cayley. Do you wish to add something to what he has just argued? MR. VISNJIC: [Int.] Yes, I do, Mr. President. I'll be very brief. (15) JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Yes, please try to be very brief, because we are wasting our hearing time, witness time.
MR. VISNJIC:
[Int.] Thank you, Mr. President.
The Prosecutor has told us that it received the document in 1998.
I can understand the claim that it is an important document. It is a
(20)directive. It was signed by General Mladic and issued by the Main Staff
of the army. I cannot accept the explanation that this document had to
wait a very long time to be translated. It is true that it is not a very
long document, but it is a complex document, because it addresses the
overall situation in the territory of Republika Srpska in terms of
(25)military strategy in 1992.
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] Thank you very much,
Mr. Visnjic. I will consult with my colleagues. I don't know whether
(20)they have any questions. No.
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] The Chamber believes that the
document has certain aspects which are identical to the documents that we
are currently analysing in order to decide whether they will be admitted
(25)or not, so the Chamber will postpone the assessment of this document for
MR. VISNJIC: [Int.] Mr. President, we have decided not to call the witness back for the reasons that I have just argued. (15) JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Very well, Mr. Visnjic. So you're now going to call another witness. I think you have a witness waiting? MR. VISNJIC: [Int.] You're quite right, Mr. President. I would like to ask a very brief private session at this point, please. (20)
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] Yes. Let us move into private
session for a few moments.
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] We are in public session.
(25)For the benefit of the public, the Chamber wishes to notify the
(10)
MR. CAYLEY: Your Honour, Mr. McCloskey will be taking this
witness, so if I can excuse myself from the courtroom now after the
departure of Dr. Radinovic and the fact that he's no longer going to be
coming back, we hope.
JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] I think that in order to (10)facilitate the discussion, we have to take into account the fact that this proposal which I have given in closed session should be treated as a public proposal. Do you agree with that? MR. HARMON: I do, Mr. President. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Mr. Petrusic? (15) MR. PETRUSIC: [Int.] Yes, Mr. President.
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] So the record is therefore
automatically corrected. Whatever proposal has been given in response to
the Prosecution application, it was given in public session.
The Prosecutor has requested the reopening of the case in order to
(20)have these reports submitted and admitted into evidence. The Defence
initially objected to the admission of the reports in question; however,
the Chamber believes that a solution could be found, a solution which
would enable us to respect, globally speaking, the calendar and the
schedule which has been in place for a very long time.
(25)We can proceed in the following manner: The expert reports
MR. HARMON: Mr. President, the reason I was hesitating is because
in listening to the decision of the Trial Chamber, there was mention of
(25)four reports, four expert reports, and in our submission that we filed in
JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] First of all, it was simply a proposal, a suggestion by the Chamber, Mr. Harmon. We have to hear the (10)response of the parties. If you agree with this proposal, it will be easy to change the conditional way of speaking which we used into an affirmative one. And you're quite right, the summary of Mr. Manning should be included as what we did with the reports because it functions as a guide through the overall text, and it has to be considered as part of (15)the four reports. So with this remark, you can perhaps now tell us if you agree or not. MR. HARMON: Yes, Mr. President. We agree with the proposal Your Honour has made. JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] Thank you, Mr. Harmon. (20)Mr. Petrusic? MR. PETRUSIC: [Int.] We have no objections, Mr. President, to your proposal.
JUDGE RODRIGUES:
[Int.] So without wasting any more
time, we can change the conditional tense which was used in our proposal
(25)into an affirmative tense. So this was, then, the decision of the Chamber
JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Int.] So there are no other questions (5)to be addressed today. I propose that we adjourn for the day, if the parties don't have anything else to bring up. We will come back tomorrow at 9.20 to continue with our work. Mr. Visnjic, any questions? No. So we will see each other tomorrow at 9.20 again. (10) --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 3.29 p.m., to be reconvened on Thursday, the 5th day of April, 2001, at 9.20 a.m. |
