⁸³⁷ Thursday, 25 March 2010

(Open session)

[The accused entered court]

--- Upon commencing at 2.18 p.m.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: Good afternoon to everybody. Before the witness is being brought in, the Chamber would like to raise a procedural matter.

Mr. Tolimir submitted on the 22nd of March his motion for an extension of the dead-line for filing a response to the Prosecution's motion for an order requiring the accused to provide sufficient particulars of his alibi defence. The motion was filed in English yesterday, and the Prosecution managed to respond already yesterday. The Prosecution doesn't object to this request.

The Chamber would like to issue a decision on this request orally.

The Chamber has reviewed Mr. Tolimir's request for a postponement of the dead-line to the 12th of April to file a response to the Prosecution's motion. It notes that the justification provided by the accused for this request is his need to focus on witnesses appearing in court, analysis of recently-disclosed material, and issues raised by the Prosecution's motion.

The Chamber is of the view that the request of Mr. Tolimir is justified. The motion to exceed the time-limit for the response is granted. The response should be filed by the 12th of April, 2010. Thank you. ⁸³⁸ The witness should be brought in.

[The witness takes the stand]

WITNESS: MEVLUDIN ORIC [Resumed]

[The witness answered through interpreter]

JUDGE FLUEGGE: Please sit down. Good afternoon.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Your Honour.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: Witness, I would like to remind you that the solemn declaration you made at the beginning of your evidence still applies.

Mr. Tolimir has some further questions for you. Please, Mr. Tolimir.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President. God's peace, and I bless all in the courtroom and all of those following the proceedings, and all those to whom these proceedings refer to in any way.

I would like to welcome the witness and continue where we left off.

Cross-examination by Mr. Tolimir: [Continued]

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could the Defence please play a video recording, 1D024. This is video footage that was recorded with amateur camera, and it's the review of the 28th Division in Srebrenica on the day of the forming of the staff of the forces in Srebrenica in May 1994. This is part of the 8th Operations Group of Srebrenica, which is part of the 2nd Corps of the B and H Army. ⁸³⁹ Since the witness was a member of that armed formation, he can perhaps provide information that is important for these proceedings before this Trial Chamber.

The video footage has been partially transcribed. Those parts are transcribed that we will be using in the courtroom, to the extent we require, in order to understand this video material. Even though the pictures are enough, we hope it will not be necessary to show the entire footage, but only certain excerpts. The entire footage is 43 minutes' long. We're going to show just portions of it to see when this footage was created.

Could we please play it from the beginning, from the beginning to 0.59 seconds. Thank you.

[Video-clip played]

THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I apologise. I didn't turn on the mike.

Q. First of all, you were a member of the 28th Division. This is indisputable, from your previous statements and testimony here, in the prior period and in previous testimony, so we will not dwell on that. First, can you identify and tell us the first and last name of the person reading out this order by Naser Oric, commanding certain soldiers. We will identify the others later. Thank you.

A. First of all, I was not at this review. I know that I was not there, definitely, because this was not an obligation. I don't know who was reading it. It was some of these clerks, so-called clerks, which is ⁸⁴⁰ what they were referred to in Tito's army. I don't know. I wasn't there. All those who wanted to go there could go.

Q. Thank you. We're satisfied with your answer. You say you don't know about the name of that, so we hope that this will be recorded in the transcript.

My second question is: What is implied with the expression "exceptional results achieved in combat"? Can you please explain that. Thank you.

A. Well, I really couldn't say. I'm not a combat expert, military expert. I don't know what that's about.

Q. Thank you. Can you please tell us, since a large number of names are being mentioned, it's a long list of names being read out - there's no need for us to look at all of that in the courtroom - but can you please tell us whether you're familiar with the soldiers and officers who were commended on the second anniversary of this particular unit in Srebrenica? Thank you.

A. I don't know about those who were commended. I know those who were in front. Ramiz was there, Naser. I know those people. I don't know the names; the names of the persons were read out, but the actual people were not shown, so I really do not know who they were.

Q. Thank you. Can you tell us, were you commended by Naser Oric? Thank you.

A. Yes, I did receive 10 days in prison because I was captured by the UNPROFOR in Buljim, and they captured my rifle. It wasn't my rifle, but it was the rifle of another soldier who was on the front-line, so ⁸⁴¹ this is what I received.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we play the second segment of this video footage, which is important for me to be able to put certain questions to this witness. The video segment is about three, three and a half minutes long, and it's from 10 minutes, 10 seconds; to 13 minutes, 32 seconds. That would be the segment that we would need to play. Thank you.

[Video-clip played]

THE INTERPRETER: The interpreters note that we have not been given the transcript of this video footage.

[Video-clip played]

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

Q. Witness, sir, at the very beginning of this segment, it says: "Gentlemen, soldiers, officers, salute to the homeland." Am I correct if I say that on review here are soldiers and officers who have been invited to salute the homeland? Thank you. Sir, can you tell us whether soldiers and senior officers are in the review?

A. Well, this is only one half of the division that is being shown here, the number that are reviewed. I don't know who are the commanders.

Q. I'm asking you -- I didn't ask you if they were commanders. I'm just asking you if these were soldiers and officers of the 28th Division. Can you answer that, please.

A. All I can see is Naser and all of these people around him. I don't know any the others. ⁸⁴²

Q. Thank you. Can you tell this Trial Chamber here whether the soldiers and officers of the 28th Division were being reviewed here. Yes or no. We're not asking you anything else.

A. Some of them probably were, yes, some of them. Those who were there were there. Those who were there were there. Those who weren't, weren't.

Q. All of those who were in the line, were they all members of the 28th Division? Thank you.

A. Well, what else can they be? They're not sheep. You can see that they're soldiers.

Q. Thank you, thank you, thank you. Those who were not in uniform, were they wearing any insignia or any other kind of sign or marking?

A. I don't know.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, thank you. Can we play the video material, and then we will continue with our questions. Can we play the it from 30th minute to 16 seconds; to 39 minute, 7 seconds. This is a very long segment, but perhaps it is the most significant one, as far as questions I'm going to put to the witness are concerned. Thank you.

[Video-clip played]

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

Q. Witness, sir, we have seen here two segments where the fighters of the 28th Division are in review. Can you tell us whether a large number of them are in civilian clothing or whether they're wearing uniforms. Thank you. ⁸⁴³

A. In civilian clothing, of course.

Q. Thank you. So most of them wore civilian clothing and not uniforms during combat? Thank you.

A. I don't see any combat here. I see a review of troops, and people are wearing predominantly civilian clothing. I don't know anything about anything else.

Q. This is a review of troops where they are being commended for their participation in combat in the Kladanj sector of the front, and Srebrenica, Zepa, and Vlasenica are part of the Kladanj front or the Kladanj sector; is that correct?

A. No. He was explaining what the Kladanj unit did in Kladanj, not what this unit did. This unit is being reviewed, but it didn't go into any combat. He was explaining what was happening in Kladanj, what the Kladanj unit had done. This is what he was explaining. You could hear that over the radio every day.

Q. He was explaining what the Kladanj unit did. But he was reading a commendation for results achieved in combat, and this is what he said, that soldiers are being commended for their achievements in battle. Do you agree with me or not? Thank you.

A. I don't know which combat you're talking about. He didn't actually say for which combat actions they're being commended.

Q. Thank you. He did not mention that, yes, but he did say that it was in combat. Thank you.

Now, we saw here, and you can confirm for the Trial Chamber because they do not understand the language that we speak, that orders ⁸⁴⁴ were given here and that before the image was frozen, they were discussing the events in the Kladanj front-line. Can you confirm that? Thank you.

A. Well, we had radios, and we could hear every day what was going on around Sarajevo, Tuzla, Kladanj, Olovo. So first he said that this was broadcast on the radio, and then that he also received information from the corps. One could hear, over the radio, daily what the unit had done in Kladanj or Sarajevo. We had that information on a daily basis.

Q. Thank you. Is the Kladanj unit actually your adjacent unit in your zone of operations and part of it?

A. Well, no, they are quite apart. Kladanj is 200 kilometres away.

Q. Which unit was closer to Vlasenica than your unit and the Kladanj unit? Thank you.

A. Well, there was no unit.

Q. So your units were the only ones who were actually in the area of responsibility in Vlasenica, so your unit and the Kladanj unit; correct?

A. What do you mean "operations in Vlasenica"? Well, first of all, there was the Milici and Srb towns. How could we have control over Vlasenica, which was behind these two towns. You couldn't even reach them.

Q. Thank you. We will come to that and see what kind of control they had.

Now, Witness, tell me, how frequent were these review of troops? Thank you.

A. Well, I don't know. I probably attended one of them. This was a ⁸⁴⁵ review of a company, but I didn't have time to go for reviews of divisions because I had a large plot of land, and I had to work on the land. I wasn't really very involved with all this.

Q. Thank you. Now, would you please tell the Trial Chamber, how can you actually differentiate between officers and regular soldiers when you observed this video?

A. Well, I can't really tell the difference at all because they were all in civilian clothes.

Q. Now, as a member of the 28th Division, did you have any kind of marking, any kind of patch or insignia that you wore, either in combat, in defence, or in reviews of troops like this?

A. No, we had nothing. The commander would come by the bunker or trench to see if anybody was wounded, in case we were in combat, to check whether we had enough ammunition, and so on.

Q. Thank you. Now, you were an officer in this division. Could you tell this Trial Chamber, please, whether you're familiar with the provisions of the Geneva Conventions and whether you had undergone any type of training for Geneva Conventions.

A. I have never heard of Geneva Conventions, and I didn't know anything about that. And, in any case, if it was violated, the violations were on your side.

Q. Well -- thank you. Well, would you please speak before this Court in the language that is appropriate for a courtroom and use those terms.

Now, what is -- how could you tell that someone was an officer, ⁸⁴⁶ and actually tell the difference between them and a regular soldier? You were, you said, a team leader, a squad leader, and could you tell me, what was the system whereby you could actually differentiate?

A. Well, as I've already said, there were no markings, no badges, no insignia, nothing.

Q. Was it possible in combat for the enemy to actually discern between soldiers and officers based on your clothes and your uniforms?

A. I don't know about that.

THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter would request that the questioner and the witness pause between question and answer.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. We will pause.

Q. Do you know, Witness, as an officer, military officer at the time, are you familiar with an old rule of the Law on War, that it is necessary to differentiate -- to tell and to mark soldiers so that it is possible to differentiate between them and civilians?

A. No, I don't know anything about that.

Q. Thank you. If soldiers and civilians had the same kind of clothes, tell me, then, how was it possible -- in this period from 1992 to 1995, could you actually tell between a civilian who went scavenging for food and, for instance, a guard or someone who was on patrol, a soldier on patrol?

A. Well, I don't know that. That's what your soldiers were supposed to differentiate in Potocari, between elderly men and children. I mean, I wouldn't know how to differentiate -- I don't know how they were differentiated. ⁸⁴⁷

Q. Thank you. Now, the next question: Can you confirm that able-bodied men in Srebrenica had military -- whether they were conscripts and whether they had to report if they received a call-up from their superior command or their commander?

A. Well, probably that was the case, as required.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. Could we now please see the last portion of this video - it will be very brief - and then we will change topics and go to identification. This is from 39 minutes, 20 seconds; to 45 minutes, 15 seconds -- 41 minutes, 15 seconds.

[Video-clip played]

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. In order to facilitate our work here, we have actually selected a few images from the video and made photographs out of them, because we are going to be dealing with these individuals frequently, so I would now appreciate it if these photos, these photo frames, could be shown to the witness so that he can help us to identify those individuals. Could we now please first pull up 1D46 on the monitors. Thank you.

Q. Witness, could you please identify these three individuals that we can see in this frame?

A. I only know Naser Oric.

Q. Thank you. Would you please take that pencil and just write the initials of the individuals that you do know above them, above their heads. Thank you. And for those you don't know, just leave without any initials. ⁸⁴⁸

JUDGE FLUEGGE: One moment. The Court Officer will assist you. Everything is prepared.

THE WITNESS: [Marks]

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Witness. Could we now please admit this into evidence, this image with the markings. Thank you.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: Is it reserved? The marking disappeared on the screen. It is reserved. That will be received.

THE REGISTRAR: It will be D4, Your Honour.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. Could we now please show the witness 1D47. Thank you.

Q. Witness, do you recognise this person?

A. Yes. That's Commander Naser Oric.

Q. Thank you. Could you please write his initials, Mr. Naser Oric's initial, in a blank space that you can find on the photo. Thank you.

THE WITNESS: [Marks]

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I would like to tender this into evidence. Thank you.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: That will be received.

THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit D5, Your Honour.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. Could the witness now be shown 1D48, please. Thank you. Thank you.

Q. Witness, do you recognise this person in the photograph? And could you tell us what his role in the BH Army in Srebrenica was. Thank ⁸⁴⁹ you.

A. I'm not sure about this photo. There is a man who looks like him a bit, but I don't know if that's him. I'm not sure, and I can't really write anything down because I'm not 100 per cent sure.

Q. Thank you. Then why don't you just write "I don't know." Thank you.

A. [Marks]

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I would like to tender this into evidence, please.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: For the sake of the record, we would like to know by the interpreters, what does "Neznam" mean?

THE INTERPRETER: "I don't know," interpreter's note.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you. This marked photo will be received.

THE REGISTRAR: This will be Exhibit D6, Your Honours.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. The "Neznam" means that the witness does not know the person depicted in the photo. Thank you.

Could the witness now please be shown 1D49.

Q. Could the witness please tell the Trial Chamber if he knows who this person is and what his role in the BH Army was. Because we see that he was here in the company of the leading men of the 28th Division.

A. Well, I don't know. He may have been an interpreter with UNPROFOR.

Q. Thank you. Would you please write "I don't know" next to this person. ⁸⁵⁰

A. [Marks]

JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, are you tendering this?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, thank you. I failed to switch on my microphone, so you couldn't hear my request. Please, I'd like to tender it into evidence. Thank you.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: The marked photo with the word "Neznam" will be received.

THE REGISTRAR: This will be Exhibit D7, Your Honour.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. Could the witness now please be shown 1D50. Thank you. Thank you.

Q. Witness, tell us, please, do you know these individuals in the photo? If you do, would you please put, to the right of their head, their initials. Thank you.

A. I don't know who they are [marks].

Q. In that case, please just put the words "I don't know" next to this other individual as well.

A. [Marks]

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I would like to tender this photo into evidence, please.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: The photo is again marked in the same way and will be received.

THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit D8, Your Honour.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could the witness now please be shown 1D51. Thank you. ⁸⁵¹ Thank you.

Q. Witness, could you please tell us whether you know these two persons in the photo. If you do, would you please put their initials on the right-hand side of their -- of these -- of each individual. And if not, just write the words "I don't know."

A. I don't know them [marks].

Q. Could the witness now tell us -- this is a bad -- poor photo, but could the witness tell us what type of patch this person on the right-hand side has on his sleeve?

A. Well, all I can see is a white patch, but I can't distinguish anything on it, no letter, no nothing.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. I wish to tender this into evidence, please.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: It will be received.

THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit D9, Your Honour.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. Could the witness now please be shown 1D52. Thank you. 1D52, please. Thank you.

Thank you.

Q. Could the witness now please tell us who the individuals in the photos are, or, rather, who the individual to the right of Mr. Oric is and what his role in the 28th Division was. Thank you.

A. Well, this is a relative of mine, Naser Oric.

Q. Are both of them Naser Oric?

A. I don't know the other person [marks]. ⁸⁵²

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. I wish to tender this photograph into evidence, please.

THE REGISTRAR: This will be Exhibit D10, Your Honour.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I would appreciate if all these photos and the videotape, 1D0024, be tendered into evidence.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: The photos are already tendered, and they are exhibited. Mr. Tolimir, could you tell us a little bit more about the video? Who took the video, and when was it taken; do you know? Can you give us some information?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. This video footage was received from the Association of Serb Victims, and it was made by individuals in Srebrenica who were present during the review of troops of the 28th Division, where the commendations were read out. And in the first photo, we could see this individual because he was reading out the orders and the commendations. Thank you.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: These three parts of the video will be received as one exhibit.

THE REGISTRAR: It will be Exhibit D11, Your Honour.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. I would now like to show the witness 1D045. Thank you. Thank you.

Q. Witness, could you tell us who is depicted in this photo and what type of weapons does he have. Could you write, to the right of him, his initials, and below would you please write the type of weapon, if you know, that he's carrying. And if you don't, just say you don't know. ⁸⁵³

A. [Marks]

JUDGE FLUEGGE: Would you please answer the question orally. We see you're marking, but perhaps you can explain it.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. Yes, Your Honours. I apologise.

This is Naser Oric, and he doesn't -- and he has an M-84 rifle. Actually, it's a machine-gun.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours, and thank you, Witness.

Q. Could you tell us now, Witness, please, whether machine-guns were the type of weapon that had to be handed over to UNPROFOR?

A. Well, first of all, I don't even know when this photo was taken and whether UNPROFOR was already there.

Q. Thank you. Could you just tell me and answer my question, whether this weapon was actually subject to UNPROFOR obligations? And if not, we will just tender this into evidence. If you don't know the answer, just say so.

A. I don't know.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: My colleague has a question to the witness.

JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Witness, on this photograph, you said that the person who is carrying this weapon is Naser Oric. 4D10, you also spoke of a Naser Oric who apparently is a parent in your family. Is it the same Naser Oric who is the commander of the 28th Division, or is it -- are they two different persons?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, Naser was a commander. It's ⁸⁵⁴ one person. All the photographs depict him. But I did make a mistake, if I can correct that. I wrote "OM." I should have written "ON." Actually, "OM" are my initials.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. We'll let that stay in the transcript, if possible. Thank you, thank you.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: Of course, that is recorded correctly. There can't be any mistake. The marked photo will be received.

THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit D12, Your Honours.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you. Please carry on, Mr. Tolimir.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. Can we please show the witness photograph 1D43. Thank you.

Q. Could the witness please look at the photograph carefully and to tell us whether this is some kind of unit, or an established unit, or people from one establishment unit, and whether these are members of the 28th Division, among whom is also Naser Oric. Thank you.

A. I don't know who this is.

Q. Can you please look at the faces on this photograph and tell us if you know any of the people in this photograph?

A. I cannot, really. The picture is very blurry. You cannot really see very well. I don't know.

Q. Can you please look at the young man who is to the right of Naser Oric. Do you know him, on the photograph? Who is that? As you are looking, it would be to the left.

A. I don't know. ⁸⁵⁵

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. Could we please ask the usher to take the hard copy of the photograph to the witness - it's the same as the one on the screen - to see whether he can recognise the person whose face is circled and who is positioned to the right of Naser Oric. Thank you.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: Before you do that, could the Chamber please see the photo, because you indicated that there's some markings on the photo. The photo, the hard copy -- the photo on the hard copy is different from the photo we see on the screen.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can you please look at the photograph. It's the same photograph that we're looking at on the screen, except it's a hard copy, and you can compare the photograph on the screen and the photograph that is in hard copy. Thank you.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: It is not the same photo. It might be the same photo, but you have added some markings, a circle around one head and some other markings, quite illegible. And, therefore, I think we must clarify the situation.

If you want the witness to mark that person who should be, in your understanding, Naser Oric, you should ask him, Mr. Tolimir, first.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. President, he recognised Naser Oric. I'm asking him to recognise the person to the right of Naser Oric. The person to the right of Naser Oric, I circled that person in red. And if the witness knows this person, I'm asking him to place the initials of that person above that person's head.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I don't even see ⁸⁵⁶ Naser Oric on the picture on the screen. I cannot recognise any face that is on the screen. And I wrote on the screen "I don't know." I cannot tell who is who here.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Oric, I take it that you don't recognise anybody in the photo, and nobody seems to be Naser Oric, in your understanding. Am I correct?

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, I don't see that here.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: In that case, Mr. Tolimir, I think it's not valid to show the hard copy with markings that stem from you.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President. Do you permit me, then, at the next session to show the same photograph without the markings that I made, and then we can see whether the witness can recognise the person in question? I only marked the face to indicate to the witness which person I was interested in and which person he should look at to see if he recognises that person. Thank you.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: I think there will be no problem if you have the identical photo in the hard copy without any markings. That can be prepared for the second session.

Please carry on, Mr. Tolimir.

[Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, first, are you tendering the admission of this photo on the screen with the marking?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, I would like to tender this photograph, and I would like this -- the words that the witness wrote, "I don't know," to be part of that exhibit. I would like to save that on ⁸⁵⁷ the photograph. Thank you.

Since we have 20 minutes before the break, Your Honour, is it okay if we take a break 20 minutes earlier?

JUDGE FLUEGGE: Just a moment.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: This marked photo on the screen will be received.

THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit D13, Your Honour.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: And I take it you want to have the first break now.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] If you wish, we can take the break now and bring the photograph at the beginning of the next session. All we are doing, actually, is moving the break forward, if you are -- if you agree to that. Thank you.

[Trial Chamber confers]

JUDGE FLUEGGE: In that case, we will adjourn now for our first technical break. We will resume at 10 minutes before 4.00.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

--- Recess taken at 3.20 p.m.

--- On resuming at 3.56 p.m.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: We apologise for the delay. We were occupied by another matter.

Please, Mr. Tolimir, continue with your questioning.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President. I would like to ask for the photograph now to be shown that we had asked the witness to look at earlier. This is D43, if it's clear. ⁸⁵⁸ If not, then perhaps he can look at the actual hard copy. Thank you.

Q. Witness, can you now clearly see the photograph, and do you recognise any of the persons that are on it? Thank you.

A. No, I don't recognise anyone.

Q. Do you recognise Naser Oric? Is that him in the middle?

A. No.

Q. Do you recognise these three people who are squatting in front of others? They are not standing, but they're squatting in the first row, one, two, three. In the middle, you see somebody that I am asserting is Naser, and then there are two people on each side -- or there's one person on each side of him. Do you recognise any of those two people?

A. No, I'm seeing them for the first time.

Q. Could you write on the photograph that you do not recognise the person sitting to the right of Naser? Can you write, "I don't know," "I don't know," I don't know," or, "I don't recognise the person," "I don't recognise the person," "I don't recognise the person," three times below each of the persons boots. Thank you.

A. [Marks]

JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, in your last question you suggested to the witness that the person in the middle is Naser Oric. He didn't say that. I just wanted to clarify that, and you now can see it on the screen.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President. I confirm that he didn't say that. Yes, he said that he didn't recognise the person. That is why I said that he should write, "I don't know," ⁸⁵⁹ underneath each of the three persons in the front. Thank you.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: Do you tender this?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, I would like to have this photograph tendered, please. Thank you.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: It will be received.

THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit D14, Your Honour.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: Please carry on.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation]

Q. Witness, sir, I would still like to look at 1D43. I would like to put one more question to you in relation to that photograph. Thank you.

We're waiting for 1D43 to appear again. Thank you. Thank you. We see the photograph.

Witness, please, do you at least recognise the weapons that these persons in the photograph are carrying? Do you know what kind of weapons they have? Thank you.

A. I can see on the right, at the end, the man is holding an automatic weapon.

Q. And do you see any other weapons there? Thank you.

A. Yes, I see automatic weapons.

Q. Are all the persons in uniform? Are they wearing military uniforms and boots? Thank you.

A. Yes.

Q. Do you see a hunting rifle on the photograph?

A. No. ⁸⁶⁰

Q. Thank you. Witness, do you know that on the 16th of July, 1995, you were recorded -- or on the 16th of July, 1995, in Nezuk? Thank you.

A. I didn't understand the question.

Q. I'm repeating the question. Do you happen to know that the camera recorded your image on the 16th of July, 1995, or on about that date, in Nezuk?

A. No, I don't.

Q. Sorry?

A. Still I didn't understand your question.

Q. Were you recorded by a camera in Nezuk?

A. Me?

Q. Yes or no, were you or weren't you?

A. No.

Q. Thank you.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we please play 1D054. This is video material. This is the footage provided to us from the Prosecution, and I'm grateful to the Prosecution for disclosing this material to us. The footage shows members from the Srebrenica 28th Division after the breakthrough.

Can we please play the material from 1 minute, 31 seconds; to 1 minute, 34 seconds, where it says: "Yes, there is ammunition. Very well, there is everything." Thank you.

[Video-clip played]

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. Can you now freeze the frame at 03.24 to 3.25. ⁸⁶¹

Q. Witness, can you tell us whether this is you in the photograph. Thank you.

A. No.

Q. Do you recognise this person in front of you?

A. No.

Q. [No interpretation]

JUDGE FLUEGGE: I think your microphone was not activated.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation]

Q. Can you please write on the photograph that you don't know these persons, if you don't know them. Thank you.

A. Your Honours, you cannot write on this.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, I'm told that the witness can't mark on this video. This is not possible. But we have it on the record, his comment. I think that is enough.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President. It's sufficient that this is recorded in the transcript, that the witness does not recognise the persons on the photograph or the frame that we are looking at right now.

The film goes on for a few minutes longer. It's about 6 minutes long. If we stay with this witness for a little bit longer, we can save time later in the cross-examination of other witnesses because there will be no more need to look at the entire video footage, but only the frames from this video material.

So I would like to put some more questions to the witness about this material. Thank you. ⁸⁶² Can you please play the footage, after which I'm going to put some questions to the witness.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: From the beginning or from that point we have seen? From the beginning.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President. From the beginning would be better so that we don't lose continuity, so that we can see that the frame that we looked at is an integral part of the footage. Thank you.

[Video-clip played]

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. I apologise because of the length of the video footage. This was footage of a column that was over 5 kilometres long. You could see weapons and people. I would just like to put a few more questions to the witness about this column. Thank you.

Q. Sir, Witness, did you recognise any of the persons in this column, and is this footage of the column recorded after the breakthrough?

A. I don't recognise anyone. I wasn't there. I don't even know where this was recorded.

Q. Thank you. Are these persons from Srebrenica?

A. I didn't ask them. I don't know whether they are from Srebrenica, or Bratunac, or Visegrad, or Vlasenica, or Zepa, or Rogatica. I didn't ask them. I don't know.

Q. Thank you. Can you please answer this: In your estimate, once you've seen this footage, are these able-bodied men who are subject to ⁸⁶³ military service?

A. I've seen more people there under 18 than over 18. There were children also, I mean young men of 17 or 18 years of age. You can also see women there.

Q. Your commander, in his statement, did tell us how many women there were. There were 10 women, according to him. By freezing these frames, we can count the number of persons and weapons. Did you see these people carrying weapons? Thank you.

A. Had they not had weapons, they wouldn't have been able to pass through. They passed through because they had weapons.

Q. Do civilians carry weapons as well, or do only military personnel have them?

A. I don't know. I mean, there are civilians and people in military uniforms.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. I would like to ask the Trial Chamber to photograph this witness because of his testimony. Perhaps the Prosecution can take a photograph of the witness. He's testifying publicly. We will have other witnesses. Perhaps it would be good to have a photograph of this witness, in the same way that one makes a photograph for a passport or an ID. I apologise to the interpreters. I'm going to repeat. I would like to ask for this witness to be photographed so that the Defence could carry out the required expertise. Perhaps the Prosecution can make a photograph of this witness. He's testifying in public. We're probably going to have video footage from this trial as ⁸⁶⁴ well.

We are of the opinion, however, that an expertise will be the most efficient and most complete way, if we manage to do it with the help of a photograph such as ones that are taken for a passport or an ID card. The Defence will not make early conclusions, but we do have to make the adequate proofs that will be useful in the coming stages of the trial in order to confirm the basic suspicions or to remove all suspicions. Thank you very much.

May I have a decision about this from the Trial Chamber, a decision on this request? Thank you.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Thayer.

MR. THAYER: Just two brief points, Mr. President, and good afternoon.

The first is that General Tolimir may not be aware of this, but the proceedings are being videotaped, so there is a bank of videotape for every witness that's available. Should, for whatever reason, the Defence require a video still, that can be done. So I don't think we need to engage in expert photography to accomplish the request that General Tolimir has. I think we have the resources already at hand from the video booth.

Secondly, and this ties into Prosecution's question about exactly where General Tolimir is going with this line of questioning, that ties in, I presume, to his request for this photograph. I don't think it's any secret that what General Tolimir wants to do is compare a photograph of the witness to the photographic still that he has shown to the ⁸⁶⁵ Trial Chamber. If that is General Tolimir's position, then, under Rule 90, I think the witness, to be fair to the witness, should have the general's case put to him. And we, frankly, are unsure of what the general's case is, and thus what the point of this particular line of cross-examination is.

If it's the general's position that this witness was not at the Orahovac execution site and is lying about being at the Orahovac execution site on the 14th of July, because, according to the general, he's in Nezuk on the 16th of July, he should put that proposition to the witness and allow the witness the opportunity to answer the question. If the general has another theory, then that should be put to the witness as well, to be fair to the witness and to comply with Rule 90. And, again, these two issues, I think, tie to each other.

[Trial Chamber confers]

JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, you have heard what the Prosecutor said. The parties and the Chamber has access to the tape, the videotape of these recordings, and you can take one part of that. Then we have a picture of the witness. I think you could be satisfied, but I would like to ask you if you are satisfied with this provision.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. I said, for the transcript, a moment ago that we do have and will have the videotape, but our expert advised that the easiest way to produce an expertise is to actually have a photograph that is of the same quality as the photographs used for passports or IDs. So I would appreciate it if that kind of photo could be taken of this witness for those purposes. ⁸⁶⁶ And I leave it to you to decide. But as I've already said, neither I, nor my Defence, have any intention of claiming anything here, but we just want to have this expertise done. And I would thank you for -- and I also would like to thank my learned colleague for the information that he has provided.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: As this is a quite unusual request, we would propose that you make a written submission, and then we can deal with that in the proper way. But for the moment, as you can see here, I just received a photo from the videotape, very good quality. But for the moment, we won't decide any further about this topic. If you are really interested in that, we would look for such a submission by you. Please carry on with your questioning, Mr. Tolimir.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President. We will do as instructed by you, and we will submit a written motion.

Q. Witness, on this tape we heard one BH Army member say, and that's at 1.31 through 1.34, where he says: "We have ammunition, and we have everything." And here, before this Trial Chamber, you actually claimed that there were few weapons in Srebrenica, and that had there been any weapons, Srebrenica would not have fallen; is that correct? Did you say that?

A. Yes, I did. But what the soldier is saying here is something that he's saying in the free territory of Tuzla, and I didn't even see who it was exactly who said that. It could have been one of the Tuzla soldiers. They were in the free territory, and perhaps there were weapons there. But in Srebrenica, there were no weapons. ⁸⁶⁷

Q. Thank you. Well, I just wanted to hear from you, whether you, too, heard that. And on line 33 [as interpreted], line 21 and 22, you said:

"I don't know how Srebrenica fell or how Srebrenica could have fallen if we had had all these weapons."

Thank you. Now, since you also, during your testimony here, claimed that you are well acquainted with different types of weapons, could you please tell us what kind of weapons you could actually observe carried by the men in this column. Thank you.

A. Well, I could see there were semi-automatic rifles and one M-53 machine-gun, and there were also some hunting rifles.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. Could we now please see the tape, 9 minutes, 41 seconds. Thank you. At 9 minutes, 41 seconds. Thank you.

[Video-clip played]

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

Q. Could you tell us, please, this individual wearing the red T-shirt, what is the weapon that he is carrying? Thank you.

A. It's a PM.

Q. That is short for what? Could you tell the Trial Chamber what the name of this weapon is? Thank you.

A. Well, this is a machine-gun.

Q. Thank you. Would you tell us, please, while you were watching this video-clip, could you tell us, what are the weapons carried by the ⁸⁶⁸ people around this individual in the red T-shirt? Thank you.

A. Well, I can only see an automatic rifle, and nothing else.

Q. Thank you. But a moment ago, when you looked at this video-clip --

A. Well, yes, maybe every third or fourth or fifth person actually carries a gun, but you can see it here as well.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we please show the witness the video-clip at 1 minute, 30 seconds.

[Video-clip played]

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

Q. Now, you saw this a moment ago. What kind of weapons are these men carrying?

A. Automatic rifles.

Q. Thank you. Are these army or military weapons, or are they weapons that would be carried by civilians hunting?

A. Well, I can't see any civilians here. I see soldiers or troops from Tuzla, and they are armed.

Q. Thank you. This is a clip of this column that had managed to break through; correct or not?

A. I don't know.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could the Trial Chamber please admit the video-clip we've just seen into evidence, to admit it into evidence, please.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: I take it that you received this from the Prosecution. It was disclosed to you? Perhaps, Mr. Thayer, you can give ⁸⁶⁹ us some information.

MR. THAYER: Yes, Mr. President. As I think the witness has already testified, and as the Trial Chamber, itself, has seen, this footage has been disclosed to the Defence in various forms. Some of this footage was seen by the Trial Chamber a couple of days ago, and it does depict the movement of the column into the free area of Nezuk on or about the 16th of July. So you've seen portions of it a couple of days ago. You're seeing some of the same portions and some other portions today. But that's what we have, Nezuk troops and then the column coming up to meet them.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you very much. The portions we have seen today will be received.

THE REGISTRAR: It will be Exhibit D15, Your Honour.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: Please carry on, Mr. Tolimir.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President, and I thank my learned colleague for his explanation.

And I have another question for the witness.

Q. In your testimony in the Popovic case, on page 297 you say that Srebrenica was attacked and that people were mobilised in order to defend it. When Srebrenica was attacked, people mobilised again in order to defend themselves. Do you recall saying that?

A. Well, I probably did. I don't recall.

Q. Would you tell us, please, how many men were mobilised in Srebrenica, if you know, and for how many days was the fighting around Srebrenica going on? ⁸⁷⁰

A. Well, I don't know the number. I was not the one who mobilised them. But as I've already said, the fighting lasted about seven days, or, actually, the shelling of Srebrenica lasted about seven days. But I didn't mobilise those men, so I don't know that.

Q. Thank you. Could you tell me, please, is it possible to sustain fighting for seven days without having adequate weapons?

A. Well, it was no fighting, really. It was just shelling. They were shelling the town with artillery weapons. They never even tried to enter Srebrenica. And once our troops broke through, then, well, they entered Srebrenica.

Q. Could you please tell us --

THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter kindly requests that the accused repeats his question.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir and Mr. Oric, you're still overlapping many times so that the interpreters can't catch what you are saying. Please repeat your last question.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation]

Q. I would like Mr. Oric to tell the Trial Chamber whether he knows whether there were any places where the lines have been broken through around Srebrenica, other than along the axis where he said that they intervened near Crveni [as interpreted] Jadar. Thank you.

A. No, in the territory where I was and where I lived, there were no -- there was no shifting of the line; only around UNPROFOR.

Q. Thank you. Could you tell us, please, Witness --

JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Thayer. ⁸⁷¹

MR. THAYER: Thank you, Mr. President. Just to make the record clear in the future, I note that in the transcript there is a question about a location in General Tolimir's question. It's been recorded as "Crveni Jadar." I suspect that's not the location that General Tolimir had in mind, and it may be a transcription problem, but we need to, I think, clarify it just for the future.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: Please clarify that, on the request of the Prosecution.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. You can check the transcript, but I said "Zeleni Jadar," whether any other front-lines had been breached except at Zeleni Jadar.

Q. And could the witness please repeat his answer for the transcript. Thank you.

A. No.

Q. Thank you. Could now the witness tell us if he knows whether any of the civilians, women or children, were captured in villages around Srebrenica or in Srebrenica by the Serb Army. Thank you.

A. On my territory, there were no such instances.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. Could we now please pull up D1, page 8. In English, that would be on page 10. Thank you.

Q. You can see here in the first paragraph, line 8 -- in English, that's page 10, and in Serbian, page 8, document D1. Thank you. ERN number 0185-4526. In Serbian, that's the ERN number. ⁸⁷²

JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, the Chamber would be appreciative if you could tell us what kind of document is it, what we have on the screen.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President. This is an order issued by the deputy commander of Naser Oric, Ramiz, issued to the sabotage -- actually, this is his statement, and he states that he issued a task to the sabotage units, a member of which the witness was too. Thank you.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: For the sake of the transcript and for a better understanding of what you are putting to the witness, it would be helpful if we always could see the first page of the document and then the relevant page you want to deal with.

Could we perhaps see the first page of this document first. Mr. Thayer.

MR. THAYER: Mr. President, if I could just ask the witness to take his headphones off just for a brief moment, please. Just two things.

Mr. President, yes, this is a statement of Ramiz Becirovic. We've seen this before. Mr. Becirovic is no longer living, just to clarify that.

Secondly, and I think we've been pretty flexible about these kinds of objections before, but embedded in the general's question to this witness was that the -- the suggestion that he was the commander of a sabotage unit, and we've heard, again I think a couple of times, that that is not the case; that he was the commander of a squad of 10 men. ⁸⁷³ And I wanted the witness to take off his headphones, but if the general has a basis for that, then fine, but that question should be put directly to the witness as a proposition and not sort of embedded as part of another question, because that has been an issue in the past. And I just note that for the record.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: Witness, you can take your earphones again. And from the impression that the witness understood what you were talking about, Mr. Thayer:

Mr. Tolimir, in the way that you are putting questions to the witness, please be careful. It could be sometimes understood as a leading question. And take into account what Mr. Thayer has just explained.

Please carry on.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. I was just reading the statements in the Popovic case, where a gentleman was responding to the questions, and when he was quoted something from Slobodna Dalmacija.

THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter did not catch the number of the document.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] This was quoted to him by a member of the Popovic Defence, whether he was in the sabotage unit, and he said that he was. And here I can read a part of his statement where he admitted in the newspapers, in the interview, that he was a commander of a sabotage unit.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, you should put questions to the witness. ⁸⁷⁴

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation]

Q. Witness, sir, did you give a statement to "Slobodna Dalmacija," and did you state in that interview or statement that you were a commander of a sabotage unit?

A. I don't remember if I did or not. And journalists can write what they wish.

Q. Thank you. Well, here I'm going to read it to you. Since you don't recall, I'm going to read back to you what you said, and you can say whether you said it or not. Thank you.

I quote --

THE INTERPRETER: Could the accused please tell us where he's reading from.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I'm reading from the "Nedina [phoen] Dalmacija." It's an interview given to "Slobodna Dalmacija," the Sunday edition, which is an exhibit in the Popovic case. Thank you.

THE INTERPRETER: The interpreters note, we do not have that.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I repeat: "On the eve of the fall of Srebrenica, I received an order, in view of the fact that I was the commander of a sabotage squad, to guard the UNPROFOR base above the villages of Jaglici and Susnjari. Namely, the UNPROFOR members tried to escape, and we were returning them back to the base with our Zoljas."

Thank you, I am finished with my quote.

Q. Witness, sir, do you recall giving such a statement, and do you ⁸⁷⁵ recall confirming that in the Popovic case? Thank you.

A. I said that I don't recall that, and journalists can write whatever they want. Whatever is easier for them, that's how they will write.

Q. All right. I'm going to remind you of another one of your statements in that same interview, in the same interview, where you say: "I spent about a month in Tuzla. We picked up 47 people who were carrying medicines and were going back to Srebrenica; Nurif Rizvanovic had 500 armed men, and he set off with us. Nurif was later liquidated by our men because it was assumed that he was a Serbian spy." Do you recall that statement? Do you remember that statement? You also mentioned that in the transcript in the Popovic case.

A. I don't remember stating that, and to whom. And as for Nurif, Nurif did not come with us.

Q. You said that in the same interview that I referred to. I just read back to you a little bit what you said before so that you can recognise your own interview. And you also said, in a trial here, that you went to get a doctor. Didn't you say that, you went to get the doctor?

A. I know I went to get a doctor, I do.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. Well, I see Mr. Thayer is wanting to say something.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Thayer.

MR. THAYER: Mr. President, I think if the witness is going to be questioned about an interview or a document, he should have the ⁸⁷⁶ opportunity to look at it. This was not on the list of exhibits. We're not going to stand on absolute formality. We know sometimes there are exhibits that are going to come out on an examination that maybe we don't have notice of. But if we are going to be showing the witness an interview and quote from parts of it, then I think the witness should have an opportunity to take a look at it and see whether he remembers it, whether he's got familiarity with it, and then be able to answer the question.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: I take it that the Prosecution was not notified about the use of this document.

MR. THAYER: No, Mr. President. I understand that things unfold during the course of a cross, but just to be fair to the witness.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you. You have it as a hard copy. We are, we were told, an e-court chamber, and the procedure should be followed.

Please carry on. I think it's not necessary for your questions to put these quotations to the witness. Just carry on asking questions, Mr. Tolimir.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President. I can give this for the witness to look at. There is an ERN number on this piece of paper as well. The Prosecutor can also look at it. I can provide it so that the witness can see what that is. I apologise to the Prosecutor. Thank you.

I would like to carry on with my questions.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: If that is in e-court, it could be called up on ⁸⁷⁷ the screen. If not, I think that is not the proper way because then, in that case, we don't have the proper record. You should continue your questioning without hard copies.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. Thank you, Mr. President.

We can move to the commander's order to the 28th Division, received by the sabotage units, if you permit us. We're going to move to the order issued by Ramiz Becirovic, who was the acting commander of the 28th Division before the attack on Srebrenica. Thank you. Thank you. This is document D1, page 8 in the Serbian. In English, it's page 10. Thank you. Can we please see that on the screen so that the witness could look at it. Thank you.

Q. Do you see page 8 in the Serbian of this document?

A. Are you asking me?

Q. Yes.

A. I see it. It's not in Serbian. I can see that it is written in the Latinic script.

Q. All right. Can you please read that?

A. Well, it's difficult.

Q. Because?

A. The letters are very small.

Q. I'm going to read to you what your commander, Ramiz Becirovic, said in his statement that he gave in Tuzla.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, could you indicate which part of this very long page you're referring to. ⁸⁷⁸

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. This is the statement given by Ramiz Becirovic on the 11th of August, 1995, in Tuzla. I'm now going to read line 8, in the first paragraph, to line 22. So lines 8 to line 22.

Mr. President, may I proceed? Thank you.

Q. Witness, I am quoting from the statement given by Ramiz Becirovic in Tuzla after he came out with the column. I quote: "From the command of the 2nd Corps, from the General Staff, an order was given that sabotage actions should attract the attention of the enemy, and in that way to carry out reconnaissance of the enemy along its depth in order to assist the action to de-blockade Sarajevo. I assigned several groups whose assignment it was to reconnoiter and to fire only if they must, and all the groups carried out their tasks of reconnaissance without combat, and they all returned. One group was going in the direction Kraglivode with the assignment of firing, and that is when they destroyed one weapon and killed three soldiers. One group was infiltrated in Rupovo Brdo, which was also firing and killed four Chetniks. This was all after my return to Srebrenica; namely, in June 1995. I issued the assignment that all sabotage reconnaissance platoons from the Zepa area should go into the Han Pogled and Han Pijesak and Sokolac sectors along the Han Pijesak-Vlasenica road. Pursuant to a decision by the commander of the 285th Brigade, nine groups were formed which were carrying out these assignments. These groups were in combat, and they destroyed about 60 Chetniks, while one group entered the village of Visnjica and set a few houses on fire." ⁸⁷⁹ Thank you. My question to the witness is: are you aware that sabotage groups were formed by the commander of Srebrenica in order to attack the neighbouring villages from Srebrenica and Zepa, and did this precede the attacks on Srebrenica and Zeleni Jadar? Thank you.

A. I don't know when this was, but that whole time that you are reading, you are reading "sabotage units." I was not in a sabotage unit. I was in a manoeuvre unit. I don't recall when this happened, in any case.

Q. Thank you. Will you please explain to the Trial Chamber what the difference was, in your brigade, between a sabotage unit and a manoeuvre unit.

A. Sabotage units carry out sabotage, while manoeuvring units manoeuvre and they cover the area between or among the UNPROFOR bunkers. The area was empty. This is what we were doing. We were preventing the Chetniks from entering that area and breaking through.

Q. Yes, thank you. Will you tell the Trial Chamber if this unit of yours participated in the attack on the UNPROFOR check-point? Thank you.

A. What UNPROFOR attack? That never happened.

Q. Thank you.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I just put this question, whether he took part in the attack on UNPROFOR. Please go ahead. I did not assert anything. Thank you.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Thayer.

MR. THAYER: Again, Mr. President, just so we have a clear record, General Tolimir referred to an UNPROFOR attack, and we don't have ⁸⁸⁰ a month or even a year that's referred to. If he's tying it to the document, then let's please tie it to the document, but it just came out as a general question, and so we have an answer that doesn't really make sense because the question, I think, is just too vague.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: But we have an answer of the witness.

MR. THAYER: We do.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, when you carry on now, please bear in mind that you make clear what you are talking about. Carry on, please.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. I asked clearly -- I want to tell the Prosecutor that in this question, I was referring to the event of the 11th in Zeleni Jadar about which the previous witness spoke, and this is in the transcript. But if it's necessary to repeat that, no problem. Thank you.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: It's not necessary that you repeat anything in the moment. Just ask questions to this witness. Continue.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

Q. Witness, do you remember what these groups did, in terms of what this deputy commander, Ramiz, is talking about in this statement of his from which I read and quoted to you, where he says that in one place 60 persons were killed and that others were destroyed? Is it true what Becirovic, Ramiz, says in his statement of the 11th of August, 1995? I'm talking about events that happened before the fall of Srebrenica and the attack on Zeleni Jadar.

A. I really don't know. I never heard of that. ⁸⁸¹

Q. Thank you. Now, tell me this: Have you heard that your unit had a task -- the following task: To engage from the demilitarised zone against the Republika Srpska Army and the civilian population in order to provide support to the operation that was ongoing around Sarajevo?

A. My manoeuvre unit never was issued any assignment to open fire or anything of that sort, so it is absolutely out of the question that anyone ordered us to shoot. How could we shoot when UNPROFOR was there? That would mean that we would have to actually clash with UNPROFOR. We actually hid our weapons from UNPROFOR in order to be able to maintain that line.

THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter requests that the accused repeat his question.

THE WITNESS: [No interpretation]

JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, the interpreter did not catch your question because it was again an overlapping. Look on the screen, on the transcript, and you can see that.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President. I will repeat my question.

Q. Witness, did you take part in capturing the UNPROFOR check-point at Jaglici on the 11th of July, 1995?

A. No. UNPROFOR actually fled that check-point, and we just went there in order to keep -- to defend that line. And there was no clash with the UNPROFOR. The women were trying to stop them from leaving.

Q. Thank you. Did you actually secure the positions that had been deserted by UNPROFOR? ⁸⁸²

A. Yes. That's what I've just said.

Q. Thank you. Have you heard that an UNPROFOR member was killed in Srebrenica on the 11th of July, and what can you tell us about that? Thank you.

A. I can't tell you anything about it because I don't know. I was not in Srebrenica.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Thayer.

MR. THAYER: I don't think there's going to be any dispute that the death of the UNPROFOR soldier occurred on the 8th of July. I don't think there's any dispute. Unless General Tolimir has some basis to ask a question that there was another UNPROFOR soldier killed on the 11th, I think we either need to correct the record or provide some further information about some killing on the 11th of July.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Thayer, the accused is not giving evidence. He's putting questions.

MR. THAYER: I understand, Mr. President, but the questions need to have an accurate, I think, basis of fact to be able to put to the witness. And, again, I don't think there's any dispute that there was only one soldier killed, and that was on the 8th. Just so we have a clear, accurate record, again, if there's evidence that somebody was killed on the 11th, then that should be brought out, but -- and I think we're going to be in agreement. I don't know whether it's a slip of the tongue or something else, but if we're talking about the 11th, that's completely new -- a new suggestion that we haven't heard ever.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you for that. ⁸⁸³ Mr. Tolimir, carry on.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.

Q. Witness, you confirmed in Popovic, on transcript page 977, that at the moment when you surrendered, you had with you -- in fact, that you said that you were a civilian, that you represented yourself as a civilian. Is that correct? Thank you.

A. Well, I didn't make any representations. I was wearing civilian clothes.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: The interpreters don't catch your question if you immediately start your next question before the answer is translated.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.

Q. Witness, would you answer my question. Did you consider yourself to be a civilian only because you were wearing civilian clothes, or were you still -- did you still enjoy the status of a BH soldier?

A. Well, I was in civilian clothes, and I had no weapons. Now, what the interpretation of that would be, that depends on who's interpreting it.

Q. Thank you, Witness. Tell me, please, did you have any ID on you? Thank you.

A. No, because I didn't take anything with me. I was not at home when Srebrenica fell. I was at Jaglici, and that's where I set out from. I didn't even go home before that.

Q. Thank you. Witness, tell us, please, was it standard practice in ⁸⁸⁴ your unit not to carry any IDs on you? Thank you.

A. I'm not sure I understood your question.

Q. Well, did your unit actually, as a matter of course, not carry any documents, its members not carry any documents on the day?

A. Well, no, I didn't even know that Srebrenica would fall on that day. I was at Jaglici. I hadn't taken any documents with me before that. And when I set out, I didn't even know -- I didn't go back to Srebrenica in order to get the documents.

Q. Was it standard practice in your division, when a unit went out to carry out an assignment, that people wouldn't have their or take their IDs with them?

A. Well, there was no such practice, but I know that most men did not have IDs because there was no use for it. Who was going to check for IDs? You don't expect that they would do it on the border. They would just go out to the front-line to defend it, so they didn't need their IDs.

Q. Thank you. In the Popovic case, on page 97 of the transcript, you said that at the moment when you were surrendering, you had actually tossed away the hand-grenades that you had with you and the weapon that you had with you. You said that you had actually dropped them?

A. Well, yes, the hand-grenades, actually, I dropped them. I didn't throw them away or anything. They just got -- they were hooked on to my belt, and then as I was actually crawling and trying to get across, they got unhooked, and that's how they fell out.

Q. Well, tell me, when was that? Was that on the day when you set ⁸⁸⁵ out to break through, or where was it?

A. Well, no, it wasn't a breakthrough; it was an ambush at Kamenica.

Q. Could you tell us what day this was on? Thank you.

A. It was on the 12th of July, in the evening.

Q. Thank you. Was the column -- did the column actually form then, and did the column set out from Sandici? Thank you.

A. I don't know which column you're referring to. Later on, there were quite a few columns.

Q. Thank you. Did you say to the OTP in your statement that the column was formed in Sandici, and did you say that Commander Becirovic addressed you, that he spoke to the -- addressed the column through a bullhorn? Thank you.

A. Well, no. The column was formed in Kamenica. A group of us who were there, we just formed a column in order to pull out the wounded, so that when we set out, we ran into ambush, and they opened fire on us again, and we dispersed. The wounded remained in the field there, so -- and that's it. There was no other column or anything.

Q. Did the commander address the column in Susnjari? Because that's what you said in your statement -- in the Popovic trial.

A. I don't recall saying that about the bullhorn or megaphone.

Q. Thank you. Could you tell us, please, do you consider yourself to be armed if you had with you hand-grenades? Thank you.

A. Well, you could say that, for self-defence purposes.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. Could we now show the witness document 1D0017, page 2 in the Serbian language and page 3 in ⁸⁸⁶ English. This is a statement provided by this witness to the BH MUP in Tuzla on the 22nd of July, 1995. Thank you.

Q. Can you see this document?

A. Yes.

Q. Would you now take a look at the last sentence -- the last line on page 2 of the B/C/S version.

At one point, one of the prisoners said that the Chetnik leader, Radovan Karadzic, made an appearance -- showed up for a moment at the window of the gymnasium:

"I did not see him personally, but many of the people in the gym confirmed that."

My question: Witness, tell us, please, why did you state this in your statement when you were not an eye-witness and where you actually just conveyed something that somebody else had said or seen? Thank you.

A. Well, maybe there was an error made when it was written down. Karadzic did not show up at the window, but at the door of the gym, and maybe there was -- maybe this was just written down in error as it is.

Q. Very well, thank you. Could you tell us, please, at what time and on what day did you see Radovan Karadzic at the door? Thank you.

A. I cannot tell you the exact time because I didn't have a watch, and that was on the 14th, the same day that I was taken to the execution site where I was shot at. I didn't have a watch, so I couldn't tell you what time it was.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. Could we now please see the first page of this document, the same page -- the same page in the ⁸⁸⁷ English translation as well.

Q. In your statement, in English and in Serbian, you say: "The aggression on Srebrenica, when it started I was in the village of Lehovici, precisely on 6 July 1995, at the hands of SDS members and the Yugoslav Army."

Do you stand by what you said then? Thank you.

A. Well, first of all, I want to say that I speak Bosnian and not Serbian. And, yes, I did -- I do stand by what I said then. We were attacked by both the SDS, the Serbian SDS, and the Yugoslav Army.

Q. Well, could you please tell this Trial Chamber how it was. What does that mean, you were attacked by the SDS? Is that something that you knew, yourself, or that you heard from someone?

A. Well, the SDS was in power then, and they were the one who started this war, so who else could it have been?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. Could the witness now be shown his statement to this Tribunal. That's document 1D108 [as interpreted]. I'd like page 4 to be shown to the witness, and in English that's page 5.

Thank you.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, could you please repeat the number.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. The number is 1D18. Thank you.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation]

Q. Mr. Oric, can you see the document before you? ⁸⁸⁸

A. Yes.

Q. You mention here -- you state that you were captured. That's in the third paragraph in the B/C/S translation. You were captured by JNA soldiers, and there was a Bosnian Serb Chetnik with them. Is that what you stated? Thank you.

A. I was captured by Serb soldiers. Serbs, they captured me. And when we were held in the warehouse, then an officer who had a star came; he addressed us.

Q. Well, what did this officer tell you at the warehouse? Thank you.

A. He asked us where our rifles were, where we had left them, and to go and get them.

Q. What led you to the conclusion that this was a JNA officer, as you said, although the JNA did not exist anymore at the time?

A. Well, some people claim that to this day there is JNA. What do you mean, it didn't exist? I mean, these people were accused of the operation against Sarajevo. But I recognised him because he spoke in the Serbian accent from Serbia, which differs from the Bosnian accent, and also I could see that he had rank insignia on his shoulder.

Q. Could you say what you saw? What type of insignia did you see on his shoulder patch? Could you tell us?

A. Well, I just told you, I couldn't really see clearly what it was, but I did see a shoulder patch. I did not dare get up and stare at him. I was sitting, and he was standing in front of me.

Q. Could you tell me if he was wearing a camouflage uniform or some ⁸⁸⁹ other kind of uniform?

A. Well, the shirt was the shirt that was used by the real Yugoslav Army. I know because I served in the army for four months.

Q. So he had an old shirt of the JNA, whereas the JNA ceased to exist and the Army of Yugoslavia was formed?

A. Yes, he had the old uniform on.

Q. Well, other than the fact that he spoke in the Serbian accent and the uniform -- the shirt that he wore, was there anything else that led you to the conclusion that he was a JNA member?

A. Well, one of the soldiers addressed him and said that he didn't know anything about what was to happen to us, that his job was just to guard us, to capture us. That was their task. They had come there only to capture us. And he, too, spoke in the Serbian dialect. He didn't speak Bosnian, and I know that because I worked for a while in Serbia. So when he said that their task was to capture them and send them -- capture us and send us to Bratunac, nothing more.

Q. Thank you. Could you tell me whether there was still some specimens of old uniforms in Srebrenica that were used by the former JNA and issued by them?

A. I don't know. I really don't know that.

Q. What did the TO in Srebrenica wear before the war? Thank you.

A. The TO before the war? I don't know who was in the TO, I don't know what the TO was, I don't know what their uniforms were like. Well, I know the blue uniforms that they wore in the factories. I don't know that. ⁸⁹⁰

Q. Were you a military conscript before the war?

A. No, because I did not complete the military term of duty. I was returned after four months.

Q. Are you aware that all military conscripts, regardless of whether they were fit for duty or not, received a rucksack with equipment and a uniform?

A. No, I didn't know that. I never received that.

Q. Do you know whether anyone in Srebrenica was issued with a rucksack and a uniform of the former JNA that was kept in the TO warehouses?

A. Well, I cannot really say that I went around all the flats to look at what -- who had what. I don't know where this TO was.

Q. All right, thank you. I think you responded to the question as far as you're able to, and the Trial Chamber knows they have the insignia of all the former militaries in the former Yugoslavia in their material. I have it here, but we're not going to waste any more time on that. We have that, the Prosecutor has that, everybody has that. Witness, can you please just tell me this: Is it possible, perhaps, that the Serbian soldiers kept the uniforms they were issued by the JNA, or did they throw it out after the JNA withdrew from Tuzla? Thank you.

A. I don't know. I really don't know if they threw them away or not.

THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, Your Honour.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: We will have our second break now. We adjourn, ⁸⁹¹ and we will resume at five minutes to 6.00, and then you can continue with your questions.

MR. THAYER: Mr. President.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Thayer.

MR. THAYER: If I may just ask one question for our witness planning purposes.

If we could get some estimate, please, from the Defence about how much more cross, because we've had a witness who's been sitting in the witness room for some time, and if we're going to continue through the rest of the day, we'd just as soon liberate the witness.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: I was prepared to raise the question at the end of today's sitting, because we didn't get any indication from the Defence about the length of the cross-examination. And for planning purposes for parties and for the Chamber, it would be very helpful if the accused, the Defence, would comply with our order of the 24th of February in this respect.

Could you give an estimation -- indication if you will continue the whole day and perhaps even next week with this witness?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I think that we will be able to finish with this witness today. I have a total of 117 questions. Last time, at the end of the hearing, I said that I did not manage to put all my questions, and how many questions I had left. Thank you.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: I think, in this case, we can't be of the opinion that the next witness could be called today. That is for the Prosecution. ⁸⁹² Thank you. We adjourn and resume five minutes before 6.00.

--- Recess taken at 5.25 p.m.

--- On resuming at 5.57 p.m.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, during the last session you -- we have seen two statements on the screen, but you were not tendering them. Perhaps it was an omission, but perhaps you don't want to have them tendered.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. I do not want to ask for anything other than the things that I've already asked to be tendered. Thank you.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you very much. Then please carry on with your questions.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you very much, Mr. President.

Q. Witness, sir, can you briefly reply if you know that in 1993, the government of Alija Izetbegovic charged Yugoslavia before the International Court of Justice and not against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia?

A. I don't know that.

Q. All right. Since you don't know, we're not going to be dealing with that question anymore.

During your testimony, did you speak about who attacked Srebrenica? You spoke about the SDS and Yugoslavia attacking Srebrenica. Was anything like that suggested to you?

THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness please repeat his answer.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I said that without anybody's ⁸⁹³ prompting. I don't know if that was correctly written or not.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation]

Q. Was it also suggested to you to say in your statement that you also saw Mladic and Karadzic or not? Thank you.

A. No, I didn't say I saw Karadzic. I did see Mladic in the sports hall, yes.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation]

Q. When you provided your statement to the Tribunal, were you warned that the JNA does not exist anymore and that the military operation in 1995 was not carried out by the Yugoslav People's Army or the Army of Yugoslavia, but the Army of Republika Srpska?

A. I didn't say that. Perhaps it was written like that by mistake. I didn't say that. What's in the statement about the police, what I said about the Konjevic Polje and them being there, which I could tell by the way they spoke and by their ranks, this is something that I assumed.

Q. All right. You assumed that, but you are not sure. Thank you, thank you.

You said, and the Prosecutor also said that in the summary of your testimony, that you arrived in Nezuk on the 21st of July, 1995. My question is: Would you personally believe the testimony of two witnesses who disagree about one very important thing, about the events that, by their nature, cannot be forgotten? The witness who testified before you, I will not tell his name because he was a protected witness, said that ⁸⁹⁴ you came to Nezuk on the 19th of July, and you said the 21st of July. And we saw here, on this photograph, that the column arrived on the 16th, so what is the accurate fact here, then? Thank you.

A. Well, all of that can be shown. On the 21st, in the morning, I came to Nezuk by myself, and I was found by our soldiers, the person who survived together with me and who --

Q. Please can you not speak the names out. I apologise to the interpreters.

A. Well, I don't have to say the names of people who were travelling with me. They were going with me, but we came to this bunker. They had left already on the 20th. I was going in the opposite side, so on the 21st, I -- they found me in a creek. They were, on the 20th, going along the road, and they said, Whoever was there, the Chetniks, our people, whoever, we cannot go further. So they went along the road, and they immediately encountered our barricade that was on the road. This was on the 20th, at night. They said that I had left, that I had gone in the opposite direction, but they were expecting me to come alone on the 21st.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Witness. Can the witness be shown 1D032. This is a document of the Main Staff of the B and H Army, of the 17th of February, 1995, which was sent urgently to the Command of the 2nd Corps, the Command of the 8th Operations Group Srebrenica, and the Command of the 1st Zepa Brigade. Thank you.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: Would you please repeat the number of this document. ⁸⁹⁵

THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: And again with the microphone, please.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The document is 1D32. Thank you.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. I can see that the document is here. I'm being told so by my legal advisor. As a member of the B and H Army in Srebrenica, the witness could respond to some of my questions in relation to the contents of this document. And I can see that this document can also be used in order to get some answers from the witness.

Q. On page 832, line 21 to 23, the document says that there were no preparations before the operation to capture Srebrenica began. He says, I quote:

"People were working in the fields, and they were busy with their homes. They were working in the fields, and their only duty was, for example, like it was in my case, to patrol in the area." In this document -- I didn't ask for this document to be shown. 1D32, it says, I quote:

"According to our information --" We are talking about paragraph 2:

"We estimate that the aggressor will start offensive combat operations with the aim of completely over-powering the Milici-Podravanje road and then attempt to capture the territory of the demilitarised zones."

I don't need to read further. I just want to read what is ⁸⁹⁶ relevant for this question that I am about to put to the witness, which says -- the document says, regarding the development of the situation about the Zepa and Srebrenica -- it's actually on page 1 of the B/C/S and the Serbian. I'm don't want to read the whole document. I'm going to only quote three segments from the order. Thank you. Have you seen that?

A. Yes.

Q. Thank you. I'm reading the document 1D32, just a part of the order:

"I order," first of all, "place the OG units on full combat readiness, securing entirely readiness for a successful reaction to actions by the aggressor."

THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness [as interpreted] please be asked to tell the interpreters where he's reading.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation]

Q. "3. The forces that you are placing in full combat readiness and other measures that you undertake should be taken in strict secrecy in order to prevent the arguments of the aggressor in relation to violation of agreements on the demilitarised zone, protected zone." All of this says in the English -- is said in the English on page 2. My legal advisor is telling me that this is not being shown correctly in the English.

Can you please show us page 2 in the English version?

JUDGE FLUEGGE: We have it now on the screen.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President. ⁸⁹⁷

Q. Witness, we saw in your testimony in the Popovic case that you referred to mobilisation for purposes of the defence of Srebrenica; is that correct? Was there a mobilisation carried out? Thank you.

A. Yes.

Q. We also saw that you were armed and that while surrendering, you represented yourself as a civilian; is that correct?

A. I did not have a rifle. I did not introduce myself as a civilian. I mean, I didn't say anything. It was up to whoever was looking at it.

Q. Did the B and H Army members in Srebrenica wear clothing without any recognisable and visible insignia?

A. We didn't have any insignia at all.

Q. In your statements and testimony here -- actually, in your testimony here today and yesterday before the Trial Chamber, did you say that there was no military preparation carried out in Srebrenica for activities and support to Sarajevo? Yes or no. Thank you.

A. The demobilisation [as interpreted] was carried out when there was an attack on Srebrenica. I don't know for any other mobilisation.

Q. When I asked you a little bit earlier, 20 minutes ago, whether your unit participated in those preparations pursuant to that order by Becirovic, you said that you hadn't -- you didn't know anything about that and that they did not. Is that correct?

A. No, I don't know about that. But when there was the attack on Srebrenica, then we were all mobilised to hold the lines.

Q. Was it your duty to maintain the secrecy of confidential military ⁸⁹⁸ orders and plans that were issued for purposes of the preparation for combat activities?

A. No, I didn't receive anything secret, nor was it my duty to maintain the secrecy of such documents, and I don't know anything about any operations.

Q. Can you please give us your comments on this order? For example, paragraph 3, I'm repeating it in case you forgot:

"Bringing units to full combat readiness and other measures must be taken under strict secrecy in order to eliminate any grounds on the aggressor's part for violations of the agreement on the demilitarised zone (protected zone)."

Thank you. Can you please comment what was being asked here in this particular order by the General Staff of the Army of Bosnia and Herzegovina, from your forces and from your operations group.

A. I'm not a military expert to be able to answer that question. This is the first time that I see this document, and I know nothing about these things, and I don't know how to comment on it. I was never entrusted any secrets to keep, nor do I know about any secrets.

Q. Thank you. Can you tell me, please, did you wear civilian clothes because there were no uniforms or because this zone enjoyed the status of a protected area?

A. Well, it is -- the reason is that we didn't have uniforms. You showed me a paper stating that 600 uniforms were sent for a division. Now, you know the number of men in a division. You could not really dress 10.000 men in 600 uniforms. ⁸⁹⁹

Q. Thank you. Does demilitarisation also -- did it also imply that all conscripts should be demilitarised -- demobilised?

A. Yes, and that was done.

Q. Is that the reason why most of them were in civilian clothes, and since they did not hand over their uniforms to UNPROFOR, what happened to those uniforms?

A. Well, when UNPROFOR first arrived, we didn't even have six uniforms. They only came later by helicopter, as you said, in 1995 or so. As for UNPROFOR, it had arrived there in 1993, and there weren't any uniforms then. As for the uniforms you were mentioning, they were probably distributed to some other units. I did not see any.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, thank you, but I was just quoting an order that was sent by Rasim Delic via Hajrulahovic to Izetbegovic. Thank you.

Could we now please see 1D38, a "New York Times" article of 30th May 1996 which is entitled "A Witness to a War Crime May Refuse to Testify."

While we are waiting for the document to come up, I would like to tender the document that I just showed to the witness into evidence. Thank you.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: It will be received.

THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit D16, Your Honour.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. Do we have the document before us? We will only use the first and fifth paragraph. This takes us in the English language, and I will read the translation into Serbian ⁹⁰⁰ to the witness. I quote -- or, rather, I'm translating: "A key witness in the war crimes case against the Bosnian Serb military commander said Wednesday that because he had been given no protection by the International War Crimes Tribunal or the Bosnian government, he might refuse to testify out of fear that he or a member of his family would be killed by Serbian assassins."

Q. My question -- and I apologise, there was another sentence here which said:

"I can't believe that they can't find a place for me and my family that is safe."

And that's the end of the quotation. Witness, is this something that you stated? Thank you.

A. I don't remember.

Q. Thank you. As you don't remember, could you tell us this: You testified in several cases before this Tribunal; is that correct?

A. Yes.

Q. Because of that, were you subject to any attacks, and who was it that actually threatened your security, and which Serbian assassins are you referring to?

A. Well, there were never any attacks against me. And as for what is said here, I don't really recall. And I have no idea how the interpreter or translator translated it, but I don't remember this, as I said.

Q. So you don't remember saying that you were afraid of Serbian assassins, and there were no threats issued to you, and you weren't in ⁹⁰¹ any way in danger; correct?

A. Well, yes, there were no threats, but, yes, I was afraid; not too frightened, but it's normal for a person to be frightened. That's the reason why I don't really go to Republika Srpska, I don't go about Republika Srpska.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we see document 1D25. This is an interview with this witness on the 4th of January, 1998, and also an interview with the witness on the 18th of October, 1998. Do we have it before us? Thank you.

Q. In this report, it says, and I quote: "Mevludin Oric confirmed that he is willing to come to The Hague to testify. He had told a newspaper that he would not, but that was only because he was irritated by the authorities who had not given him proper support. He is fully aware of the importance of his testimony." My question is this: Is what I've just quoted correct? And I've quoted an information report -- an interview conducted with you by an OTP investigator. And is what was published in "The New York Times" correct?

A. Well, about the article in "The New York Times," I don't know about that. About for what I said here, that I was irritated by my own government, that's true, because they never offered any kind of assistance ever.

Q. Very well. So you did not expect to be a protected witness here; you were actually referring to financial support? Have I understood what you just said properly?

A. Well, yes, I did say that I would testify as a public witness. ⁹⁰² And as for the authorities and what I stated there, that had to do with financial assistance.

Q. Thank you. Now, do you consider -- do you feel that the Government of Bosnia and Herzegovina owes you to reimburse you financially for your testimony -- testifying here in The Hague?

A. Well, I think they should, on behalf of all those people who did not survive, and I have, and they should provide some kind of support to me and my family.

Q. Was there any pressure by the OTP on you to testify before this Tribunal?

A. No, never.

Q. In the statement that I quoted a moment earlier, when you said that you couldn't believe that neither the Tribunal or the BH government could provide a safe place for you, were you referring to a place where you would relocate with your family? Thank you.

A. Well, at the time when I stated that, I had great financial difficulties, but many things have changed since then, and it is now a bit better. But at the time in 1998, it wasn't good.

Q. Thank you. Now, can you tell me, please, did you ever receive any kind of remuneration or financial assistance for testifying before this Tribunal? And if so, what kind of -- what amount was that?

A. Well, no, there was no financial support. I just got per diem for coming here. And as for the per diem, that was what I got or get, and I would get the same thing if I were to work for this organisation. So I -- I get the same amount that I would get for my work in Bosnia. ⁹⁰³

Q. Thank you. Does the Tribunal actually remunerate you, or how does that work?

A. Well, I don't know. But when I come here to The Hague, I get the per diems. As for my government, they don't provide for anything.

Q. And during the proofing session before you appeared as a witness for the first time before this Tribunal, did you get any remuneration from the BH government or any other international organisation?

A. I wish I had, but, no, nobody would give me anything.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Witness, for your answers, and I have no further questions in this cross-examination. I thank you, and I thank everyone else for their support today and for their understanding.

Thank you, Mr. President. And I would like to tender this statement into evidence, the interview -- the newspaper interview, and the information report. Or, rather, this information report has already been entered into evidence. In other words, 1D32 and 1D25, I tender both of these into evidence. Thank you.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: 1D32 is already an exhibit, we have received it already. The article from the "The New York Times," we didn't see any translation on the screen. I don't know if there is any in B/C/S.

[Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

JUDGE FLUEGGE: We will receive the information report of the 11th of October, 1998, which we have on the screen.

THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit D17, Your Honour.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: To avoid misunderstandings, we saw "The New York ⁹⁰⁴ Times" article on the screen in English. Do you tender that?

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President. Yes, if you so decide, I would like to tender that too.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: Is there any translation into B/C/S? Your microphone is off.

THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. At this point in time, we do not have a translation. We only have the portion that we quoted. We do not have a translation into B/C/S. Thank you.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: That article will be marked for identification.

THE REGISTRAR: That will be D18, marked for identification, Your Honour.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you, and thank you, Mr. Tolimir. Mr. Thayer, do you have re-examination?

MR. THAYER: I do not, Mr. President.

[Trial Chamber confers] Questioned by the Court:

JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Oric, perhaps I missed something, but I would like to take you back to page 65 of today's transcript, line 10 to 12, and I would -- no, sorry, it was the wrong quotation. Just a moment. On page 61, lines 3 to 4, we have on the record in the transcript the following sentence, I quote:

"The demobilisation was carried out when there was an attack on Srebrenica. I don't know for any other mobilisation." Are you talking about demobilisation or mobilisation? Could you please clarify that? ⁹⁰⁵

A. Yes. There was mobilisation when the attack on Srebrenica began, so on that very first day people were mobilised, and they were supposed to be deployed along the front-line from which the UNPROFOR troops had withdrawn. And as for the other mobilisations that the accused mentioned, I don't know anything about that, about the sabotage and special units being mobilised.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you very much. That is clear now. Mr. Oric, the Chamber would like to thank you for your attendance today and the last day of the hearing last week. Thank you very much -- or the beginning of this week. Thank you very much that you could make it to come here again to The Hague. You are free now to return to your normal activities, and we are -- all of us would like to thank you. All the best, thanks.

THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: The Court Officer will show you out.

[The witness withdrew]

JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Thayer, unexpectedly we are at the end of this evidence now, a little bit earlier than expected. I suppose you have sent back the next witness for today.

MR. THAYER: Yes, we did, Mr. President.

JUDGE FLUEGGE: In that case, we have to adjourn now and resume on Monday, I think in the afternoon, if I'm not mistaken. Mr. Tolimir, the Chamber would be grateful if you could provide us with information about the length of anticipated cross-examination of the next witnesses which are scheduled for next week and especially for ⁹⁰⁶ the witnesses scheduled for April.

Thank you very much. We adjourn and resume on Monday.

--- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 6.30 p.m., to be reconvened on Monday, the 29th day of March,

2010, at 2.15 p.m.