1 Wednesday, 1 April 2009
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The Accused Prlic and Coric not present]
5 --- Upon commencing at 8.59 a.m.
6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Registrar, kindly call the
7 case, please.
8 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. Good morning,
9 everyone in and around the courtroom.
10 This is case number IT-04-74-T, the Prosecutor versus
11 Prlic et al.
12 Thank you, Your Honours.
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you, Registrar.
14 Today is Wednesday. Good morning to the accused, to the Defence
15 counsel, and to all the OTP representatives. Good morning to all the
16 people assisting us, the usher, the Registrar, and the interpreters.
17 The Trial Chamber is going to hand down an oral decision by a
18 majority of views, and I will point out what my opinion is in this
20 Oral decision on the request for the addition of two items to the
21 65 ter list of the Stojic Defence.
22 On the 30th of March, 2009, the Stojic Defence filed a request
23 for the addition of two items to the 65 ter exhibit list, 2D02025 and
24 2D02026, with a view to submitting them to Witness Dragutin Cehulic. The
25 Prosecution and the other Defence teams did not file any objection to
1 such request.
2 The Trial Chamber recalls its practice; namely, that any document
3 requested to be added in a lately fashion must be essential to the party
4 wishing to submit the said document to the witness. In the view of the
5 majority of the Judges of the Trial Chamber, the two documents, which are
6 a compilation of other documents, are of very relative significance, in
7 that they pertain to the distribution of military equipment in Croatia
8 June 1992, which is a topic not challenged by the Prosecution. The Trial
9 Chamber has already heard enough evidence on the matter and, therefore,
10 decides, by a majority of Judges, to dismiss the request.
11 My own dissenting opinion is based on two grounds, one having to
12 do with the form and the other one goes to the merits of the request.
13 Regarding the former, I note that the two documents or exhibits, 2D02025
14 and 2D02026, are, in fact, but a compilation of a document already
15 admitted into evidence, among others as requested by the Prosecution
16 under P262 and P267, it being noticed that the above exhibits pertain to
17 delivery of weapons in 1992.
18 As to the merits, unlike the majority of the Judges of the
19 Trial Chamber, I am of the view that this topic is essential, and the
20 relevance is not a relative one, as was said in the majority decision;
21 but it is absolutely irrelevant [as interpreted] because it goes to the
22 very heart of the notion of joint criminal enterprise. Therefore, as far
23 as I am concerned, I saw no obstacle to the said exhibits being admitted,
24 because last Monday we discussed the -- we discussed basically identical
25 documents. It would be paradoxical if, on Monday, we had a given
1 situation and then on the -- on Wednesday we would be presented with a
2 different situation. So this was my view in the matter.
3 Registrar, I forgot you. I know you had an IC number for us.
4 THE REGISTRAR: Thank you very much, Your Honour.
5 2D has submitted its list of documents to be tendered through
6 Witness Milos
7 has also submitted its objections to the Prosecution's IC list of
8 exhibits tendered through Witness Andjelko Makar. This list shall be
9 given Exhibit IC00974.
10 Thank you, Your Honours.
11 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you, Registrar. I
12 believe Judge Prandler wants to make a correction.
13 JUDGE PRANDLER: I would only like to say that most probably
14 there was a mistake in translation. In the 20, 21 lines, where you said
15 "but it is absolutely irrelevant because it goes to the very heart of the
16 notion of a joint criminal enterprise." I believe you would have liked
17 to say that "but it is absolutely relevant because it goes to the very
18 heart of the notion of the JCE," so therefore I believe that it should be
20 Thank you.
21 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you, Judge Prandler, for
22 noting that I, indeed, said that it was absolutely relevant.
23 I believe the Prosecutor wants to say something.
24 Good morning.
25 MS. WEST: Good morning, Mr. President, Your Honours, everyone in
1 and around the courtroom.
2 Your Honours, the Prosecution would like to make a record
3 concerning the evidence expected to be given by the witness, Mr. Cehulic,
4 today, according to the summary that the Stojic Defence has provided.
5 The Prosecution's position is essentially the same as its
6 position stated this past Monday regarding Mr. Milos, as stated by
7 Prosecutor, Mr. Pieter Kruger. We reiterate again, Your Honours, that
8 the Prosecution does not dispute that arms were shipped from or through
10 during the period of 1992 to 1994. That is not disputed.
11 In the past few weeks, starting with Mr. Buljan, the Trial
12 Chamber has heard a number of witnesses talking about topics, times and
13 locations having very little or no relevance to this case.
14 For example, Mr. Buljan testified regarding pension benefits paid
15 to Muslim HVO soldiers in the Posavina. Mr. Majic testified about MTS
16 sent from the HVO to the ABiH to areas where the ABiH and the HVO
17 cooperated against the Serbs and at significant times of that
18 cooperation, that was Mostar, Posavina, and Sarajevo. Mr. Makar last
19 week testified about MTS received by the ABiH 2nd Corps from the HVO
20 primarily in the area under its control, including the Posavina corridor.
21 And this past Monday, Mr. Milos testified generically about Croatia
22 sending MTS to the ABiH without any specific information actually related
23 to this case. He did not identify any shipments going at any relevant
24 time to any relevant place charged in the indictment.
25 According to the Rule 65 ter summary --
1 THE INTERPRETER: Thank you for slowing down.
2 MS. WEST: Thank you.
3 According to the Rule 65 ter summary, the next witness, today's
4 witness, will testify to exactly the same as Monday's witness; that is,
5 from 1992 to 1994, this witness issued MTS upon orders with a destination
6 of ABiH. He will explain the procedure --
7 THE INTERPRETER: Could you please slow down. Thank you.
8 MS. WEST: -- and show the delivery slips. Indeed, the 65 ter
9 summaries from Monday's witness and today's witness are identical.
10 With respect, Your Honours, the expected testimony of this
11 witness is irrelevant to the indictment and does not relate to or advance
12 the search for truth as to any issue in dispute in this case. The
13 Prosecution, therefore, objects to receiving this evidence.
14 Thank you.
15 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you. Your objection is
16 now on record.
17 Ms. Nozica.
18 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Your Honours, given the statement
19 made by the Prosecutor, which is the same statement that we received on
20 Monday, the statement being the reason for us to go through another
21 selection process of our documents again, documents that we'll be showing
22 the witness; nevertheless and in view of the Prosecutor's objection, I
23 would like to refer to what Your Honour Judge Antonetti told us today
24 about the Chamber's ruling on admission into evidence.
25 We believe documents to be highly relevant for the joint criminal
1 enterprise. We believe the testimonies of all these witnesses to be
2 highly relevant, precisely in the light of the joint criminal enterprise
3 theory. Therefore, we believe the objection to be entirely unfounded.
4 Apart from that, I do have to say one thing for the transcript,
5 to make sure it's recorded. There is a whole series of witnesses who
6 have been heard on this matter, as the Prosecutor claims, but they never
7 spoke about the weapons being sent only to areas in which the BH Army and
8 the HVO were not clashing. Quite the contrary, in fact. We have
9 produced documents from the relevant time, while clashes were continuing
10 between the BH Army and the HVO. Likewise, we have produced documents
11 that were sent to the BH Army, to their Visoko Logistics Base; and,
12 therefore, could be distributed to the 3rd Corps or the 4th Corps in an
13 area in which the HVO and the BH Army were clashing, this being the
14 reason that we believe the OTP's objection to be entirely unfounded.
15 Nevertheless, my understanding is the OTP objection is about
16 Mario Milos, Witness Mario Milos. The Chamber overruled this objection.
17 Therefore, I believe we can commence the examination of our next witness
18 today. The relevance is the same, the only difference being this witness
19 worked in a different depot, but his evidence will be essentially
20 focusing on the same subject as Mario Milos's.
21 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreters note, could all unnecessary
22 microphones be switched off, please.
23 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] In view of the testimony of
24 Mario Milos and all the documents that we showed him, we reduced the
25 number of documents that we would be showing this witness in order to
1 avoid a petition. For that reason, we believe that we shall be able to
2 keep this witness's evidence shorter than initially envisaged.
3 Thank you.
4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Please, usher, have the witness
5 brought in.
6 [The witness entered court]
7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Good morning, sir.
8 Please state your surname, first name, and date of birth.
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Dragutin Cehulic. The 8th of May,
11 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] What is your current
12 occupation, sir?
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I am retired.
14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Retired from the army?
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, that's right.
16 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] What was your rank when you
17 went into retirement?
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I was sergeant first class.
19 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Sir, have you had an
20 opportunity to testify before a court of law as to the events that took
21 place in the former Yugoslavia
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is my first time.
23 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Please read out the solemn
24 declaration handed over to you by the usher.
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will
1 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
2 WITNESS: DRAGUTIN CEHULIC
3 [The witness answered through interpreter]
4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you, sir. Please be
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Sir, let me give you some brief
9 You have been called by the Stojic Defence, and you are going to
10 answer questions put to you first by Ms. Nozica. You must have met with
11 her yesterday as part of the proofing session, preparing for this
12 testimony. Once she has finished asking questions, it may be that the
13 other Defence counsel have questions for you. You have four Judges in
14 front of you. If they think it's necessary, they too may ask questions
15 of you on specific topics dealt with by Ms. Nozica. You have
16 Madam Prosecutor on your right-hand side. She too may cross-examine you
17 if she deems it necessary.
18 Do endeavour to be precise in the answers you're about to give to
19 the questions put to you by Ms. Nozica. If you fail to understand any
20 question, do not hesitate to ask the one calling -- asking the questions
21 to rephrase it.
22 So these were my words of introduction to enable the testimony to
23 take place as smoothly as possible.
24 You have the floor, you may proceed, Ms. Nozica.
25 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Thank you very much, Your Honours.
1 Examination by Ms. Nozica:
2 Q. Good morning, Mr. Cehulic.
3 A. Good morning.
4 Q. I will briefly read back to you your personal details, such as
5 may be of relevance to your examination, and then we'll move on to the
6 examination itself.
7 It was in 1985 that you graduated from the secondary school. On
8 the 27th of July, 1991, you joined the Croatian Army as a volunteer;
10 A. Right.
11 Q. As of early May 1992, you worked as a warehouse-keeper in the
12 Precko depot in Zagreb
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. As of late 1993 --
15 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] One moment, please. Sorry for
16 interrupting you, Ms. Nozica.
17 You've just said something that was confirmed by the witness, but
18 I would like some light to be shed on this.
19 Witness, Ms. Nozica told you that you joined the army as a
20 volunteer on the 22nd of July, 1991, and she asked you whether that was
21 right and you confirmed it; line 11, page 9. When I heard this, a
22 question came to my mind. How is it that you were a volunteer whilst,
23 normally speaking, in a country soldiers are mobilised, they are not
24 being asked to be volunteers, they are mobilised into the army? Why were
25 you not mobilised? Why were you a volunteer? Could you explain the
1 difference to me, if any?
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, there is a difference. The
3 volunteers were those who volunteered to join the Croatian Army back in
4 1991. There were people who were mobilised, they received summons to
5 join the Croatian Army.
6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Your answer does
7 shed some light, but not entirely. Why were you not mobilised? Why did
8 the Croatian Army not mobilise you?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Because right at the outset, there
10 was no mobilisation. It all began by people volunteering to join
12 eventually mobilised and supposed to report to certain bodies of the
13 Republic of Croatia
14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] You have just said something,
15 and I believe this is the first time this has been said, but I think it
16 is useful. You said at the outset, in the beginning, there was no
17 mobilisation and people volunteered, and later there was mobilisation.
18 This is what you said, and your answer has been recorded, and now I
19 understand this issue of people being volunteers.
20 Thank you.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You're welcome, Your Honours.
22 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Thank you very much, Your Honour.
23 Q. Mr. Cehulic, as of May 1992, or, rather, between May 1992 and
24 mid-1993, you worked as a warehouseman in the Precko MTS military depot
25 in Zagreb
1 as Borongaj in Zagreb
2 Brijeg depot?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. The 1st of January, 2006, you retired; right?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. You confirmed this information to be true and accurate; right?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. We've now looked at your personal details, and we have seen that
9 as of May 1992, you were working at the MTS HV military depot at Precko
10 in Zagreb
11 there or, rather, before the start of the clashes between the HV and the
13 A. Before the start of the clashes with the JNA, there was a JNA
14 barracks there.
15 Q. Was there any MTS there?
16 A. No, not while it still belonged to the JNA.
17 Q. When did this location become a place where MTS was stored, in
18 actual fact?
19 A. January 1992.
20 Q. Was that after the Croatian Army took the barracks?
21 A. Yes, following that.
22 Q. What was your job, specifically, in that depot from May 1992
23 onwards? What was your professional capacity there?
24 A. I was one of the warehouse-keepers in charge of MTS, materiel and
25 equipment. That means I would take delivery of the equipment, I would
1 store the equipment, and then I would issue the equipment to units that
2 had put in requests.
3 Q. Last week, we had a witness who explained all about the
4 procedure, in terms of how MTS was issued. Could you please just confirm
5 to see whether the procedure at your own depot was identical? What was
6 the procedure like? How was MTS issued, in practical terms?
7 A. We would receive an order from the Defence Ministry, and then we
8 would go to the Technical and Traffic Administration of the Defence
9 Ministry, and then there would be a request for certain equipment. A
10 person would have to obtain this request and then go straight to our
11 depot. The request would be handed over to the foreman to the head of
12 the depot, who would then submit this to or pass this on to one of the
13 warehouse-keepers who were working there. It was based on this request
14 that equipment was issued. And then there was a receipt to go with that,
15 stating specific quantities issued to certain people, and this was always
16 in keeping with their requests.
17 Q. What about this receipt; did it normally state the name of the
18 person taking delivery?
19 A. Yes, that's right. I would also sign any receipt whenever I was
20 the person in charge of issuing equipment.
21 Q. Mr. Cehulic, what about MTS being issued during your time at the
22 Precko depot? Was it ever issued for the benefit of the BH Army?
23 A. Yes, it was.
24 Q. How did you know, having received a request, that certain
25 equipment was on its way to the BH Army or was being issued for the
1 purposes of the BH Army?
2 A. As I said before, the commander would be the first to receive any
3 request, and then this request or his contacts at the Ministry would tell
4 him that a certain amount of equipment being requested was being issued
5 for the BH Army. That was before we had met the logisticians and the
6 drivers who came to get the actual equipment, and once we had met them,
7 we knew each and every one of them by name and could easily identify
9 Q. You mean you knew whose drivers they were and they were taking
10 equipment back to Bosnia-Herzegovina; right?
11 A. Yes, we new they were drivers in the employ of the BH Army.
12 Q. Mr. Cehulic, during your time at the depot, did you not meet most
13 of the logisticians and drivers who came to get MTS for the purposes of
14 the BH Army?
15 A. Yes, I met all of those who came to our depot.
16 Q. I do hope you have the documents in front of you, sir. You
17 should have a binder. If not, could the usher please assist us. We'll
18 be looking at two orders briefly, something that we have addressed
19 already. First of all, P00262.
20 Tell me as soon as you've got that, sir.
21 A. I've got it.
22 Q. Mr. Cehulic, is this not the kind of order issued by the Defence
23 Ministry of the Republic of Croatia
24 A. Yes, that's the one.
25 Q. Talking about this order, it mentions that Mr. Fehim Nuhbegovic
1 would be taking over some equipment. Did you know this person?
2 A. Yes, I knew this person.
3 Q. And who was this person working for, Mr. Cehulic? Who was he
4 taking over this equipment on behalf of?
5 A. He was doing that for the BH Army.
6 Q. Can we please go to the next one now, P00267.
7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] One moment.
8 Witness, I shall ask you a question because it so happens that I
9 did my military service as a store-keeper, so it is a subject I am
10 familiar with.
11 I see here that you delivered 2.000 AK-47s. That's quite a
12 number of rifles. You also delivered RPG-7, 50 of these. So when I
13 looked at these figures, I realised that this depot must have been quite
14 a large one. Was it a large depot, a small depot? What was it like?
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It was a small depot, but there was
16 a large flow, entry and exit of goods, if you can understand what I'm
17 trying to say. A lot of goods were issued and a lot of goods came in, so
18 MTS in the depot were recorded.
19 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] So the turnover was high. If
20 you have 2.000 rifles, how many crates does this amount to?
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] 200.
22 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] 200 crates. Right. To load
23 200 crates, you need several trucks, I assume; don't you?
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's correct, yes.
25 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] When Mr. Fehim Nuhbegovic came,
1 he undoubtedly came with a number of trucks?
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, he came with a number of
3 trucks. He didn't come on his own. There were drivers who came with
5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] A short question which has
6 never been put: When the members of the ABiH came, were they in plain
7 clothes or were they wearing military uniforms?
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] They were always in civilian
10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] And what about the number
11 plates of these trucks; were these civilian or military?
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Always civilian.
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Did you know anything about the
14 fact that the ABiH was taking the necessary precautions for this not to
15 be known? Do you know whether this was anything which was done under
16 cover or not?
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It was no secret about supplying
18 the BH Army.
19 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.
20 One moment. I believe there are some questions.
21 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Ms. Nozica, I apologise for
23 Witness, I see the order here which is signed by
24 Colonel-General Ivan Cermak. Were you accustomed to checking these
25 orders, and did you always make sure that you, yourself, saw the orders
1 in question?
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As I said, this order which you see
3 before you, P267, was the order with which one went to the Technical and
4 Traffic Administration. The administration then drew up request forms.
5 Unfortunately, we don't have those documents here. Based on those
6 request forms, they were able to take delivery of certain MTS. That was
7 sufficient proof that we were authorised to issue the MTS to them, but
8 without that they could not get anything from us, not a single bullet,
10 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Thank you very much, because I can
11 see that this document was addressed to Mr. Vragotuk. I thought that
12 this might be you.
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. Vragotuk was the chief of the
14 Technical Service in the Technical and Traffic Administration. He was an
15 employee of that administration. He was the one who drew up the request
16 forms and signed them, the request forms that then were taken to the
18 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.
19 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Mr. Cehulic, I am asking the question. I would
20 like to know from you whether, apart from the fact that this MTS went to
21 the ABiH, you had any further information as to where, within the ABiH,
22 it would be taken.
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, our task was only to issue the
24 MTS, but where they took the MTS was no longer our concern or our job.
25 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Thank you. Mr. Cehulic, do you know someone
1 called Mario Milos?
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I do. He also worked in a
4 JUDGE TRECHSEL: But he worked in a different depot as compared
5 to you?
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, that's correct. He worked in
7 a different depot.
8 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Now, can you tell us, Mr. Cehulic, this
9 document, P00262, did it go to you, your depot, or did it go to another
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This document was sent to my depot.
12 How do I know this? I know this by the documentation attached to it.
13 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Thank you.
14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] One moment.
15 Witness, this document you have before you on the screen, which
16 everyone has on their screen, when one looks at this document nothing, at
17 first sight, leads one to believe that these are weapons delivered to the
18 Army of Bosnia-Herzegovina, because Mr. Fehim Nuhbegovic, who is the
19 person who is going to take delivery of these weapons, strangely enough,
20 it says here bulk and figures, 3283109 [as interpreted]. In the B/C/S
21 version -- in the translation, there's a mistake. It says "10" instead
22 of "09," so that's a detail. Then it says "Zagreb" alongside that. This
23 document indicates that this is to be shipped to the southern front-line.
24 Can you give us an explanation for this?
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Is that a question for me?
1 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, yes. It's not Ms. Nozica.
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, it's like this: This order,
3 as you will see for yourself when you see the record of issued MTS, was
4 an order pursuant to which a request form was filled in in the Technical
5 and Traffic Administration; and there was more than one such request form
6 because we did not have this whole list of MTS in our depot. Some of it
7 was in other depots, so the order was divided between two or three
8 request forms. I don't know precisely how many. Some of the MTS
9 mentioned in this order, as you will see in the record of MTS that were
10 issued, were issued from the depot in which I worked, in the quantities
11 listed here. That's the only explanation I can give, but I don't have
12 the request forms.
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Another question of
14 a technical nature. I'd like to get back to the issue of the rifles.
15 You said that there were 200 crates. I have loaded weapons into crates,
16 so I know how this works. So when Mr. Fehim Nuhbegovic came to pick up
17 his 200 crates, did he open up all the crates to count the weapons or did
18 he trust you?
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The crates were sealed, each crate
20 had the seal, so it was not necessary to open it. He might have opened
21 one or two just to make a spot check, but he didn't open each and every
22 crate because they were sealed, and the seals were untouched.
23 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] The crates were sealed with
24 wax? Were there wax seals on the crates or were there just screws on the
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It was not a wax seal, but a lead
3 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Lead seals, you mean?
4 THE WITNESS: [No interpretation]
5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Another question, but you might
6 not be the right person to answer this. But since we now have this
7 document on the screen, since we've heard other experts on the matter,
8 well, since these weapons were going to cross the border of the Republic
9 of Croatia
10 remember, were there any customs officers on the Croatian border?
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I really don't know that. How this
12 came about, I really don't know.
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] You don't know. Right.
14 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Mr. Cehulic, a while ago you have spoken of
15 orders which were too large to be filled by one warehouse. I am not
16 quite sure whether I understood correctly.
17 This order that you have -- that we have before us, is that one
18 which was split up so that several warehouses would deliver part of it,
19 or shall I understand that this entirely went to the warehouse where you
20 worked and all the delivery came from that warehouse?
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, you're right, this order was
22 split up amongst several request forms. The MTS were taken from more
23 than one depot.
24 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Which means, then, in fact, that you did not
25 deliver 2.000 automatic rifles, but only part of that, to take just this
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As regards rifles, I issued 1.500
3 of them pursuant to this order. I presume that the remainder were issued
4 in another depot.
5 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Who decided that you would deliver 1.500?
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The Technical and Traffic
7 Administration in the Ministry of Defence decided. Every evening, they
8 received an inventory. They knew what MTS were in each depot, so they
9 had precise records on the quantities currently in each depot. Based on
10 that, they were able to decide how many rifles I would issue and how many
11 would be issued by somebody else.
12 JUDGE TRECHSEL: And have I understood this correctly, there is
13 no documentation of this decision of the Technical and Traffic
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Unfortunately, we don't have the
16 request forms, that's correct.
17 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Thank you.
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You're welcome.
19 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours.
20 Q. Mr. Cehulic, I see a lot of questions have been put about this,
21 so let's clarify.
22 You said that the Ministry of Defence of the Republic of Croatia
23 issued an order. That's the sort of order we see here; is that correct?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. The gentleman to whom the order was addressed worked in the
1 Technical and Traffic Administration, so the order was sent there; is
2 that correct?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. After that, the Technical and Traffic Administration would draw
5 up a request form?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. That request form would arrive in your depot, you would receive
8 it, and pursuant to that request you would draw up a record of MTS
9 issued; is that correct?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Mr. Cehulic, in your work, when somebody arrived with a request,
12 did you contact other depots if you, yourself, did not have sufficient
13 MTS? Did you warehouse employees communicate among yourselves if you did
14 not have sufficient MTS to fulfill a particular request?
15 A. Yes, always.
16 Q. In spite of the fact that the Technical and Traffic
17 Administration had an overview of the MTS available, did it sometimes
18 happen that when you received a request, you did not have sufficient MTS
19 and then you would send the people over to another depot?
20 A. Yes, that happened to me personally on several occasions.
21 Q. Mr. Cehulic, what happened in such cases? You would have a
22 request listing certain MTS, for example, something copied from this
23 order; but you, for example, did not have enough AK-47 rifles, you would
24 have only 1.500, and the request would be for 2.000. What then would you
25 do? Would you issue the number you had available or would you do
1 something else?
2 A. In such a case, we would issue as many rifles as we had
3 available. I would draw up a record, hand it to the man who came to pick
4 up the goods. In the meantime, I would communicate with the employees of
5 other depots, the depots where MTS of this sort were available. I would
6 then issue the MTS I had available, and then the two records of items
7 issued would be attached to the request and sent to the Ministry of
9 Q. So your record of issued MTS would say "1.500 rifles." The other
10 depot employee in the other depot would issue a record that 500 rifles
11 were issued. There would be no new request form, but the two records of
12 items issued would be attached to the one request and sent to the
14 A. Yes.
15 THE INTERPRETER: Could the speakers please slow down, please,
16 and make a pause between question and answer.
17 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] I am being told to slow down. Very
19 Q. I've already moved on to the next document, P00267, which is an
20 order again. This is almost identical to the previous one, only the MTS
21 and the date are different, and here again Mr. Fehim Nuhbegovic is
22 mentioned. You say he was the logistics man of the BH Army; is that
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. And that he came to collect the MTS in your depot. We'll deal
1 with this order later on to see what it was that you issued from your
2 depot pursuant to this, but now, Mr. Cehulic, please tell me whether you
3 remember some other names of logistics men who came to your depot to take
4 delivery of MTS for the needs of the BH Army. I'm not asking you about
5 drivers. I'm asking you about warehouse employees.
6 A. From the BH Army?
7 Q. Yes, from the BH Army.
8 A. Their logistics men who came to us are Seta Sujab and Mr. -- his
9 name escapes me.
10 Q. All right. Maybe you'll remember it later on. It may come back
11 to you.
12 Now look at the next document, please, 2D0009.
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, we were looking at
14 document P267. My attention was drawn by the uniforms and the boots. In
15 this document, it states that there should be a thousand uniforms and a
16 thousand boots delivered. Does this mean that the uniforms of the
17 Croatian Army were the same as the uniforms that were about to be given
18 to the soldiers of the ABiH Army? Were these identical uniforms?
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, they were the same uniforms,
21 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Were these uniforms of the
22 former Yugoslavia
23 that had been sent from the USA
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] They were camouflage uniforms, new
1 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Where had these been made?
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I really don't know that. They
3 were in boxes which we were not allowed to open. We received orders
4 which simply said these are camouflage uniforms.
5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.
6 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation]
7 Q. Could you now look at document 2D0009. Have you found it?
8 A. Yes, I have.
9 Q. Yes. Mr. Cehulic, you're probably not familiar with this
10 document. You saw it for the first time during the proofing session.
11 I'll say briefly that this is an exhibit, and it's a letter from the
12 Embassy of the Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina from July 1993, addressed
13 to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Croatia
14 the Republic of Croatia
15 the Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina
16 Military and Economic Representative Office in Zagreb and in the
17 Logistics Department of the Supreme Command Staff of the Armed Forces of
18 Bosnia-Herzegovina in Zagreb
19 Department of the Supreme Staff of the BH Armed Forces in Zagreb
20 persons were appointed, please look at this list and tell us which of
21 these persons came to your depot.
22 A. I've already mentioned Seta Sujab and Mr. Enver Beslagic. I am
23 absolutely sure that these two came to my depot. I know them personally.
24 Q. This is the logistical staff of the Supreme Command Staff of the
25 BH Armed Forces in Zagreb
1 number 3 and number 6; is that correct? These persons came to your
2 depot; is that correct.
3 A. Yes, it is.
4 Q. Well, we started talking about the orders issued by warehouse
5 employees when dispatching MTS. Before we come to these records, could
6 you explain to Their Honours how many employees worked in your warehouse?
7 Their names are on the receipts or records of issued material.
8 A. Josip Mazul, Vlado Vuksic, Stjepan Sovec, Ilija Brkic,
9 Franjo Banovac.
10 Q. Just please slow down for the record. Stjepan --
11 A. Sovec.
12 Q. Continue.
13 A. Franjo Banovac, Branko Pustak.
14 Q. And that would be it?
15 A. Yes, that would be it.
16 Q. Now look at document 2D13 --
17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Sir, I have seen something in
18 this document which I'm interested in. This is something I discover,
19 even though it's been discussed already, but this is a material proof of
20 the fact that the ABiH had a logistics department in Split. Is that
21 something you were aware of, that the ABiH had some people in Split
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, but not immediately. I
23 learned that later on. We didn't know that from the first day.
24 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] When were you made aware of
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I learned that when we talked among
2 ourselves in 1994, or 1995, perhaps, not before that.
3 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] If the ABiH had a logistics
4 centre, there's a question that comes to mind instantly. Why was it
5 necessary to come to Zagreb
6 to go to the Logistics Centre that could have been replenished by the
7 other depots? Do you have an explanation to give us for this?
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I cannot tell you much about that,
9 because I don't know what the Logistics Centre in Split was like. Did
10 they have special buildings that they used for storing ammunition? I
11 didn't know that. Did they have sufficient room to store certain
12 quantities? I really don't know.
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I'm going to ask you the same
14 question as I asked of the witness on Monday.
15 As far as you can remember, did your warehouse supply weapons and
16 other equipment throughout the year 1993?
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can only guarantee anything in
18 relation to 1992. That was my time at the depot. Anything I tell you
19 about 1993 is based on hearsay, but I think that was the case.
20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] You have just said that you
21 worked in that depot in 1992, but where were you in 1993?
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In 1993, I was at the Borongaj
23 barracks. It's another HV barracks.
24 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] And you were not a warehouse
25 employee in that barracks?
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I was, but I wasn't in charge
2 of weaponry. I was in charge of general equipment, such as uniforms,
3 military boots, that sort of thing.
4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] So am I to understand in 1992,
5 as a warehouse-keeper, in your warehouse you supplied weapons, munitions,
6 and other equipment to the ABiH; but in 1993, you can't say anything
7 about that here because you were no longer in that depot? Am I to
8 understand your testimony in that way?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's right.
10 THE COURT: Very well. Thank you.
11 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
12 Q. I would like to go back briefly to the previous document, 2D0009.
13 Mr. Cehulic, if I understand you correctly, you confirmed that only those
14 logisticians came to your depot who were from the Zagreb Logistics Base,
15 Seta Sujab and Enver Beslagic?
16 A. Yes, and their drivers came later on, too.
17 Q. Thank you very much. Can we please now go to 2D01332.
18 Before we move on to the receipts, Witness, what we see here is
19 an overview of equipment issued for special purposes throughout 1992. It
20 reads, "Information on equipment issued for the needs of the BH Army."
21 This overview comprises seven different sections. We see quantities
22 specified here of equipment delivered to the BH Army in 1992. Based on
23 the quantities reflected here, and the receipts attached to this which
24 you have seen, as well as your experience as an employee of the depot,
25 would these quantities reflected here tally with those actually issued
1 from your depot?
2 A. I have to say these quantities are laughable. We, at our depot,
3 issued at least twice as much equipment than the quantities specified
4 here. We spent some time looking at the receipts yesterday, as well as
5 this overview, and there are quite a number of quantities here that don't
6 tally. If you'd like me to, I could specify.
7 Q. First of all, I would ask you to be more specific. Perhaps I
8 misunderstand what you're trying to say. What are you trying to say?
9 The overview reflects smaller quantities than you actually issued; is
10 that what you're trying to say?
11 A. Yes, smaller by far.
12 Q. You're talking about your own depot. All right. Can I please
13 ask you to tell me which specific quantities reflected here in this
14 overview are you referring to?
15 A. I've come across several such quantities. You do know that the
16 documentation is not complete. There was a lot more than just this. For
17 example, number 15, sniper SSG, that's page 2, sniper rifle, SSG, I'll
18 just take a moment to mark this.
19 Q. In my copy that is section 3, right, number 15. Go on, please.
20 A. It reads a total of 29 rifles were issued. Nevertheless, based
21 on the receipts, only those that we have here, a total of 49, were in
22 fact issued, the discrepancy being a total of 20 rifles, in this case; so
23 this information is not accurate. Then the next thing we see there is
24 the machine-gun, that's page 1 of section 3 --
25 Q. Page 1, section 3?
1 A. Yes, towards the bottom of the page.
2 Q. It reads "Infantry weapons number 3"?
3 A. Yes, indeed, infantry weapons. What it says is that a single
4 machine-gun was issued, whereas, in fact, two were. That's another
5 example, and there's a number of these. I could go on.
6 Q. In the attachment, we see the receipts, based on which we can
7 ascertain exactly what sort of equipment or weaponry was issued from your
9 A. Yes, indeed.
10 Q. Just in order to focus on one thing, can you tell us about any
11 other depots that you knew of that were issuing the same kind of MTS at
12 the time? The quantities here seem to be smaller than those actually
13 issued from your depot, but can you tell me about any other Zagreb-based
14 depots issuing the same sort of MTS at the time?
15 A. Duboki Jarak and certain quantities were issued by
16 Varazdin Brijeg.
17 Q. Mr. Cehulic, we have a total of 77 receipts attached to this
18 overview. During our proofing, did you look at all of these? Let's not
19 do these one at a time now. We shall bring up certain examples, but in
20 order to avoid going through the entire list, can you confirm you've gone
21 through all of these?
22 A. Yes, down to the very last one.
23 Q. Mr. Cehulic, can you confirm that these are receipts reflecting
24 the issuing of MTS from your own depot, the one at which you were working
25 back in 1992?
1 A. Yes, I can confirm that.
2 Q. Mr. Cehulic, can you also confirm that these are receipts that
3 you signed in your capacity as a warehouseman, you or one of your fellow
4 warehouse-keepers whose names you mentioned before?
5 A. Yes, indeed, I can confirm that.
6 Q. Can you confirm that this was equipment that was issued for the
7 purposes of the BH Army?
8 A. Yes, indeed, that is the equipment that we're talking about.
9 Q. I'm looking at the receipts, and I see the names of people who
10 took over or took delivery of this equipment. What exactly was recorded
11 there, the name of the logistician in charge or the driver?
12 A. In most of these, we see the driver's name.
13 Q. Fine. Finally, I would like to briefly move on -- or, rather,
14 there is something I would like to explain, but for the Chamber's
16 We submitted a motion for the admission of two documents that
17 would facilitate our work in this courtroom, and that's why we put the
18 orders and the receipts together. Other than that, I'm talking about
19 receipts that were shown to this witness or the previous witness.
20 Nevertheless, some issues have been raised about what exactly the witness
21 issued himself, according to P262.
22 Therefore, Mr. Cehulic, I would like to ask you to please go back
23 to the beginning of your binder and locate P00262. His Honour
24 Judge Antonetti asked you whether you were the person who issued the
25 quantity of rifles specified here, a total of 2.000 rifles.
1 We'll just have to wait because I believe we can bring this up in
2 e-court, so we'll have to do it that way. Can we please have 2D01332.
3 The relevant page is 2D710677. The other one, please, in e-court. The
4 witness can't handle both copies at the same time physically. This would
5 be receipt 273. That is [indiscernible] provision, and I think the
6 witness might find that easier to deal with. It's about to come up, the
7 receipt. There it is, 273.
8 So we were looking at P00262. The order said that an amount of
9 2.000 rifles was to be issued, and 250.000 6.72-millimetre bullets. Can
10 you please confirm to the Chamber, based on this order and the first two
11 paragraphs, is that what the receipt is based on? We did look at the
12 date, and the date is the 15th of June, 1992, and the receipt is dated
13 the 16th of June, 1992. We're talking about discrepancies in terms of
14 quantity. Therefore, could you please explain to the Chamber whether we
15 are talking about this order and why these discrepancies arose?
16 A. Yes, that is the order we're talking about. The quantity is much
17 smaller because probably there was no equipment left in the depot. They
18 had to go to another depot for the remaining equipment that was to be
19 issued, and this is something that we explained already.
20 Q. And what about the bullets? 250.000 was the amount requested,
21 and 263.000 pieces were issued. Did discrepancies such as this one
22 sometimes occur in relation to amounts specified in an order or a
23 request, and why did such discrepancies arise?
24 A. The reason was a very simple one. I was talking before about the
25 quicker the flow of equipment or maybe there was a change that was made
1 to the original request because an order came later on, so it wasn't
2 250.000 but 263.200 instead. There is a possibility that this was the
3 last remaining equipment, so it was dealt with in order to make room for
4 some new equipment, simply because there wasn't that much room in the
5 depot itself.
6 Q. Mr. Cehulic, if I understand you correctly, your receipt was, as
7 a matter of fact, the authoritative document as to the quantities of
8 equipment issued for the needs of the BH Army; right?
9 A. Yes, that was always the last document to be drawn up, and the
10 figures were always the most accurate ones. Before that stage, there
11 could have been an order, several receipts, or one receipt and several
12 orders, not necessarily tallying.
13 Q. Yes, I understand now, but let us try to make this even more
14 specific. Let us move on to the next order. Again, if you could please
15 go back to the beginning of your binder, this is P00267. It's the order
16 dated the 18th of June, 1992. It says "1.500 rifles"; is that right?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. This is about to come up in e-court, the document. You will soon
19 be looking at receipt number 288. This is 2D01332. The relevant page is
20 2D710684. Have you got that?
21 A. Not yet.
22 Q. All right. 288. There we go. Do you see that now?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. You have an order in front of you. "Rifles, 1.500." Could you
25 please look at the first thing there. Did you issue this quantity of
1 rifles based on this order?
2 A. Yes, we did.
3 Q. Please look at number 2 now this order, 7.62 ammunition,
4 4.000 pieces. That's what it says, "4.400," more specifically. Why the
6 A. Because of packaging. We didn't break up cases of ammunition.
7 We would just ship entire cases; hence, the discrepancy.
8 Q. Number 3 reads "Snipers, 79," and here at number 4, again we see
9 the word "sniper," so is this the same MTS that's specified in the
10 original order?
11 A. Yes, indeed, it is.
12 Q. Can you please look at number 5 in the order. It says "BR 091."
13 Again at number 5, do we see the same quantity?
14 A. Yes, that's the quantity. Again, some more equipment was issued
15 because of the original packaging.
16 Q. His Honour asked you about the boots and the uniforms from order
17 number 17. Do we see these same boots and uniforms or, rather, uniforms,
18 just uniforms, mentioned here?
19 A. No, no boots, just uniforms. We see the uniforms here, but as
20 far as I could tell, they were not actually mentioned in the overview.
21 Q. Can you please just repeat that?
22 A. We see the uniforms reflected in the receipts, the uniforms that
23 were issued for the BH Army. Nevertheless, these same uniforms are not
24 reflected in the overview that we were looking at a while ago.
25 Q. You are talking about the overview of the equipment, MTS, that
1 was issued for the needs of the BH Army; you are talking about that,
2 aren't you?
3 A. Yes, indeed, I am.
4 Q. For the sake of the transcript, the document number is 2D01332.
5 So that's what we were talking about, and we didn't see the uniforms
6 reflected there in that document, did we?
7 The next thing I would like to ask you is this: You said
8 something about several receipts being issued based on one and the same
9 order. Therefore, can you now please look at the following -- we've seen
10 six paragraphs or items here in this order, and could you now please go
11 to receipt number 290. It's about to come up in e-court, you'll soon
12 see. The number is 2D710679. It was produced on the same day.
13 Let me point this out, that the first one was signed by one
14 warehouse-keeper and the next one was signed by a different
15 warehouse-keeper on the same day from the same depot, and yet we have two
16 different signatures. Even the request number is the request. For the
17 sake of the transcript, the number is 521.
18 Can you please just explain why we see a different signature on
19 the other one, and we're talking about the same equipment from the
20 original order? Number 7, for example, number 6, number 8, number 9,
21 number 10, number 14, and number 15. This can be cross-referenced to the
22 order. So why do we see a new name turn up there all of a sudden, a new
23 warehouse-keeper and new receipts?
24 A. We have two receipts here and two warehousemen. Work at the
25 depot was divided between several different persons in order to speed the
1 whole procedure up, equipment coming in and equipment leaving our depot,
2 and that was all because we didn't have much room in there. You see two
3 receipts that followed the same order and the same request, but signed by
4 two different warehouse-keepers. Why was this the case? Because each
5 person working there was in charge of a particular type of weaponry in
6 order to make sure that the equipment was loaded and shipped off as
7 quickly as possible.
8 Q. Can we now look at receipt 294, which is in relation to the same
9 order. The document number is 2D710686. Have a look, please.
10 Again, this is about the same request, 521. The equipment here
11 is reflected in the order as 121311. We can look at that. A grenade
12 launcher, 120, and the 82 type. That's number 11. And then the
13 60-millimetre type.
14 Mr. Cehulic, again, this was signed by Mr. Vuksic, who signed the
15 previous receipt as well, but this is on the next day, right, the 19th of
16 June, 1992? His Honour Judge Antonetti asked you about lorries and
17 whether that's what this was about, and why a third receipt was based on
18 this same order a day after the first two.
19 A. Yes. This receipt was produced slightly later because they
20 didn't have sufficient lorries to ship this equipment, so we had to wait
21 until the next day, when a new lorry came, and then the remaining
22 equipment based on the previous request, the request of the previous day,
23 could be shipped. So the receipt was drawn up not before the day the
24 equipment could actually be shipped.
25 Q. Mr. Cehulic, we've gone through all these receipts, the three
1 receipts, together for equipment leaving your depot, P00 --
2 THE INTERPRETER: Could counsel please repeat the number. Thank
4 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] P00267.
5 Q. Do you agree that if we look at these three receipts, all of the
6 equipment was issued, with the exception of the boots? That was the only
7 thing we didn't find in that order?
8 A. Yes, I agree.
9 Q. And, finally, to wrap this up, a question, Mr. Cehulic. You
10 spent quite some time working there. We've looked at a total of 77
11 receipts. You've gone through them all, and you've been able to confirm
12 that these were weapons and MTS issued by your depot. And then we looked
13 at the overview. You claimed that greater quantities were issued from
14 your depot for the needs of the BH Army, and on top of that, MTS was
15 issued for their purposes from other depots. Finally --
16 THE INTERPRETER: Could counsel please rephrase the last part of
17 the question.
18 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation]
19 Q. Finally, based on your experience, was more equipment issued for
20 the purposes of the BH Army or less equipment than reflected in these
21 receipts that you have been looking at? I'm talking about document
23 A. Far more equipment was issued than reflected in this document.
24 This is only a very small fraction of what was issued.
25 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Mr. Cehulic, thank you very much.
1 Your Honours, thank you very much. This concludes my
3 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, I have a follow-up
4 question, a technical question.
5 I see Draganov, that was number 16, 2D1332, you issued 20 items.
6 We all know this is a high-precision rifle. It can be 800 to 1200 metres
7 in reach, as mentioned here. Now, I guess these rifles were in a crate,
8 but there is a number on each and every rifle. Did your depot write down
9 the numbers for those rifles or was it not done at all?
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The rifle numbers were not
11 recorded, not at the outset. Later on, when the procedure was
12 computerised, they were recorded, but not before that time.
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Earlier on, I asked you where
14 the rifles came from. Draganov rifles were manufactured in the former
15 USSR, weren't they?
16 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] My apologies, Your Honours. We're
17 not receiving any interpretation, or the witness isn't.
18 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I shall repeat the question.
19 I asked you previously where the rifles came from. You were not
20 able to answer my question. When I noticed that they were Draganov
21 rifles, I believe they were manufactured in the former USSR. Weren't
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, that's right. Where did our
24 rifles come from? Well, there is one thing that I can tell you. Most of
25 the equipment -- and I'm not going into the issue of quantity now, but
1 this is something that I found when I came to work at the depot. Most of
2 the equipment and weaponry had been captured from the former JNA, seized
3 when their barracks throughout Croatia were seized. This was back in
4 1992. And you know that the JNA was well equipped. They had plenty of
5 weapons across their barracks.
6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] You are, therefore, telling us
7 that the weapons belonged to the former JNA and had been seized by
8 Croatia in the JNA barracks.
9 The time has come for a break. Do the other Defence teams have
10 questions? 3D?
11 MS. PINTER: [Interpretation] Your Honours, one question from the
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.
14 Let's have a break now. We shall reconvene in 20 minutes' time.
15 --- Recess taken at 10.30 a.m.
16 --- On resuming at 10.52 a.m.
17 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Your Honours, before the other
18 Defence teams begin, I have a question.
19 We showed the witness 2D1332. That is a document which contains,
20 as we said, 77 receipts, which the witness confirmed were receipts by
21 which MTS were sent from his depot for the needs of the BH Army. I only
22 wish to ask Your Honours whether it is necessary, in order for this
23 document to be admitted into evidence, to present to the witness each and
24 every receipt number. Do we have to go through them all or is it
25 sufficient that the witness confirmed that he had seen them all and that
1 he can confirm that these were MTS issued by him or warehouse-keepers
2 working in his depot?
3 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Ms. Nozica, first of all, you'd
4 finished, you had finished. If I remember correctly, the witness said
5 that he saw all the receipts with you. What can we add to that?
6 [Trial Chamber confers]
7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] The Trial Chamber sets aside
8 the issue you have just raised, because it recalls that when the
9 Prosecutor had shown a whole series of documents relating to soldiers
10 that were working outside, these were civilians that were prisoners or
11 soldiers that were prisoners who were working outside, the Trial Chamber
12 had dismissed the documents. So it's a matter of understanding whether
13 the Prosecution witness had seen all the documents, one after the other;
14 whereas in this case, the witness says that these have been seen one by
15 one. Anyway, we'll see.
16 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I will ask you to give
17 me the possibility of reading them out. I'm still within my time, and no
18 other cross-examination has started, so let me list these 77 documents.
19 We have 77 receipt numbers to go through.
20 [Trial Chamber confers]
21 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Scott.
22 MR. SCOTT: Good morning, Your Honours, all of you, and all those
23 in and around the courtroom.
24 Just very briefly, Your Honours, the Court just mentioned -- and
25 whatever my position might be, if we were writing on a clean slate, so to
1 speak, just to be consistent and again as the Chamber just noted, the
2 Prosecution attempted to do this with a number of witnesses and were
3 consistently told that we could not do that; so we would object to the
4 Defence being treated any different than the Prosecution in this respect.
5 We tried that with a number of witnesses, including Mr. Praljak from the
6 prison, the Heliodrom and others, and the Trial Chamber repeatedly ruled
7 that we were not able to proceed in this fashion. So we would simply ask
8 that the Prosecution and the Defence be treated in a similar fashion.
9 Thank you.
10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.
11 Ms. Nozica, the Trial Chamber, after having deliberated,
12 authorises you to give the numbers of the receipts. That will take a few
13 minutes, but you may say that out of these 77 documents, the following
14 numbers have been reviewed by the witness.
15 MR. SCOTT: Excuse me, Your Honour, but before that's done, I
16 just repeat our objection. That's exactly what we were refused to do,
17 and I would like to have some understanding why the Defence is allowed to
18 do something that the Defence [sic] was not allowed to do.
19 Thank you, Your Honour.
20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] For the time being, the Trial
21 Chamber has not ruled. It is just asking Ms. Nozica to provide it with
22 these numbers.
23 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. I think there is
24 a difference. My client insisted on this, because of previous decisions,
25 I felt if the witness had said he had looked through all these documents,
1 but in any case I will read out all these receipts and ask the witness to
2 confirm whether these are his receipts. Number 7 --
3 JUDGE TRECHSEL: For the record, I would like to state that I
4 oppose this. I think this is completely irrelevant and a total loss of
5 time. It does not add anything at all to the establishment of any
6 relevant fact.
7 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
8 In you view of the fact that the Chamber has issued its decision,
9 I agree with you, because the document was shown to the witness in its
11 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] One moment, Ms. Nozica.
12 Judge Trechsel is against this. I personally, and
13 Judge Prandler, feel that you can give the numbers, but the
14 Trial Chamber's ruling is another question. So just provide us with the
16 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
17 That's number 7, receipt number 7, number 17, number 18, 56, 78,
18 134, 176, 211, 229, 236, 238, 244, 248, 273, 280, 290, 291, 285, 286,
19 287, 288, 293, 294, 297, 307, 308, 401, 398, 441, 442, 313, 314, 315 --
20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Ms. Nozica, there might be a
21 mistake. 398, 441, and then after that I see 422 or 482?
22 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] 482. My mistake. Thank you,
23 Your Honours.
24 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.
25 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] After 315 is 448, 449, 317, 455,
1 319, 326, 476, 332, 335, 529, 352, 510, 354, 501, 538, 539, 540, 385,
2 387, 545, 437, 441, 464, 447, 655, 700, 705, 711, 716, 718, 723, 761,
3 762, 772, 775, 779, 781, 796, 814, and 819.
4 Q. Witness, have you looked at all these receipts as I was reading
5 them out?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Were they all issued in your depot?
8 A. Yes, they were.
9 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. That
10 completes it now.
11 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.
13 MS. PINTER: [Interpretation] Your Honours, General Praljak has a
14 question regarding the depots.
15 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.
16 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] Good morning, Your Honours.
17 Good morning, Mr. Cehulic.
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning, General.
19 Cross-examination by Mr. Praljak:
20 Q. [Interpretation] While you were working in Borongaj in 1993, do
21 you have any knowledge that apart from the regular depot in which you
22 worked, "regular" in quotation marks, there was another part of the depot
23 where weapons, bullets, and other necessities of war were put in tins,
24 especially to be sent to Bihac and later on to other parts of
1 A. Yes, General, I heard something about that, but I did not see it
2 myself. I heard about it, but I cannot confirm with any certainty that
3 this was the case because I did not see it myself.
4 Q. I know you couldn't see that because it was kept secret from you,
5 but you did hear that something like that existed?
6 A. Yes, I did.
7 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. Cehulic.
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You're welcome.
9 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, the Defence of
10 General Petkovic has no questions for this witness.
11 MS. TOMASEGOVIC TOMIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, no
12 questions. Thank you.
13 MR. IBRISIMOVIC: [Interpretation] No questions, Mr. President.
14 Thank you.
15 MS. TOMANOVIC: [Interpretation] The Defence of Dr. Prlic has no
16 questions for this witness. Thank you.
17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.
18 The Prosecution.
19 MS. WEST: Mr. President, the Prosecution has no questions.
20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.
21 Sir, your testimony has just come to a close. I thank you for
22 having come at the request of the Stojic Defence to help us get closer to
23 the truth. I wish you a safe journey home.
24 I shall ask the Registrar to escort you out of the courtroom.
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
1 [The witness withdrew]
2 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Ms. Nozica, we will have your
3 next witness tomorrow. Your witness is ready? Is he or she?
4 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. The witness is
5 arriving today. Because of the technical problems yesterday, we could
6 not have the witness brought yesterday and prepared for today. The
7 witness is arriving today and will be ready in the courtroom tomorrow
8 morning. I only wish to inform Your Honours that next week we have two
9 witnesses. One is scheduled for Monday and Tuesday, for two hours, and
10 the last witness before this break is scheduled for Wednesday. However,
11 as the first witness might be finished earlier, we asked for the second
12 witness to be brought here on Monday also so that should we manage to
13 finish the first witness earlier, we can bring in the second witness on
14 Tuesday, that is, if there is sufficient time.
15 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well, which means that we
16 can have a few days' rest after that because we have heard witnesses
17 since the beginning of January. So we can have a little breather and
18 resume after that with Witness Zubak, who has been scheduled for the
19 20th of April.
20 Mr. Praljak.
21 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I have quite
22 a different question.
23 As I will soon be sitting in the witness's seat and will be
24 testifying for a long time, two weeks, hoping that Your Honours will ask
25 me even more questions than envisaged, I would like to ask whether, in
1 that time, my wife and my son may visit me, or am I not allowed any
2 visits at all?
3 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] The Trial Chamber will confer,
4 but as a Judge, I don't see why your wife and your son cannot come and
5 see you. That seems fairly obvious. One moment.
6 MS. PINTER: [Interpretation] There is no interpretation,
7 Your Honours.
8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] So it's working.
9 The Trial Chamber will deliberate on the matter, but, personally,
10 I don't see why your wife and your son can't come and see you during this
12 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] Thank you, but I would like
13 to have a precise answer in order to avoid any misunderstandings and to
14 be -- to avoid being pronounced guilty of something I did not know about.
15 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] The Bench will deliberate and
16 let you know, on Monday, what their view on the matter is, so we will
17 tell you this on Monday.
18 Does the Prosecution have anything to raise? Mr. Scott?
19 MR. SCOTT: No, Your Honour. Thank you very much. Thank you.
20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] What about the other Defence
21 teams? No issues to be raised?
22 I thank everyone, and we shall meet again on Monday at a quarter
23 past 2.00.
--- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 11.11 a.m.
25 to be reconvened on Thursday, the 2nd day of April,
1 2009, at 9.00 a.m.