Milosevic "trial" synopsis, 9--16/1/2004
1. Decisions concerning the "communication privileges" of Vojislav
Seselj and Slobodan Milosevic. (9/1/2004)
2. JANUARY 13, 2004: B-92 REPORTER TESTIFIES AGAINST MILOSEVIC
3. ANTE'S ANTICS: ANTE MARKOVIC ACT II - January 15, 2004
4. JANUARY 16, 2004: MUSLIM SOLDIER ACCUSES VRS OF FIRING SHELL AT
MARKALE
See the previous parts on Ante Markovic at:
Milosevic "trial" synopsis, October 16-30, 2003
http://it.groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/message/2922
Source: http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/
=== 1 ===
http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/news/icty010904.htm
Press Release . Communiqué de presse
(Exclusively for the use of the media. Not an official document)
REGISTRY
GREFFE
The Hague, 9 January 2004 CVO/P.I.S./814e
REGISTRY EXTENDS COMMUNICATION RESTRICTIONS ON DETAINEES
FROM THE TRIBUNAL’S DETENTION UNIT
On 8 January 2004, the Deputy Registrar of the Tribunal,
David Tolbert, issued two further Decisions concerning the
communication privileges of Vojislav Seselj and Slobodan Milosevic.
The Decisions were served on both Accused on 9 January 2004.
On 11 December 2003, the Deputy Registrar of the Tribunal
issued two Decisions concerning the rights of detainees in
the Tribunal’s Detention Unit to use communications privileges for the
purpose of political campaigning in the media (Please see
Press Release 810e). Both Decisions are due to expire on 10
January 2004.
Vojislav Seselj case
On 25 December 2003, Vojislav Seselj "flagrantly violated
the Decision" of 11 December 2003 which resulted in a
subsequent Decision from the Registrar, Hans Holthuis, on 29 December
2003 which prohibited "all communication via telephone between
the accused and any person(s) except his legal counsel (if
applicable) and diplomatic or consular representatives".
This decision is also due to expire on 10 January 2004.
In issuing today’s Decision, the Deputy Registrar considered
particularly that Vojislav Seselj had previously violated
the 11 December Decision which resulted in the 29 December 2003
Decision.
The Deputy Registrar decided, pursuant to Rules 60 and 63 of
the Rules of Detention, for a period of 30 days from 10
January 2004 to:
"Prohibit, unless otherwise authorised by the Commanding
Officer of the Detention Unit, all communication via
telephone and visits between the Accused with person(s) except for his
legal counsel (if applicable) and diplomatic or consular
representatives".
Slobodan Milosevic case
With regard to Slobodan Milosevic, the Deputy Registrar
considered, among other things, that "post-elections
associated activities will likely see the political party and the
supporters of the Accused seeking his further involvement in
post-elections political activities associated with the 28
December 2003 Serbian parliamentary elections" and "that
widespread media attention and coverage of the fact that
[the] Accused is facilitating, with ease, either an ongoing
Serbian parliamentary elections campaign or post-elections
political activities, each undermines the Tribunal’s mandate
to assist in the restoration and maintenance of peace in the
former Yugoslavia".
The Deputy Registrar decided, pursuant to Rules 60 and 63 of
the Rules of Detention, to extend the 11 December 2003
Decision for Slobodan Milosevic for a period of 30 days from 10
January 2004.
*****
See full texts of the Decisions by the Deputy Registrar
(Milosevic Case / Seselj Case)
=== 2 ===
http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/news/smorg011304.htm
MILOSEVIC "TRIAL" SYNOPSIS - JANUARY 13, 2004: B-92 REPORTER TESTIFIES
AGAINST MILOSEVIC
www.slobodan-milosevic.org - January 13, 2004
After a nearly month long break the so-called "trial" of Slobodan
Milosevic again resumed on Tuesday. With only 16 hearing days remaining
to present their case the prosecution called a former journalist of
the Belgrade radio station B-92 to testify.
Nenad Zafirovic worked for Radio B-92 covering the Bosnian and
Croatian wars. Mr. Zafirovic is a member of the Democratic Party (DS)
of the slain former Serbian prime minister, Zoran Djindjic.
According to Mr. Zafirovic, the atrocities committed in Bosnia and
Croatia were mainly committed by locals against other locals.
President Milosevic pointed out that the phenomenon Zafirovic was
describing is known as a civil war.
Even though Mr. Zafirovic was a 92-bis witness, it took the
prosecutor, Mr. Groome, the better part of an hour to examine him, and
even after the examination in chief there were still inaccuracies in
his witness statement that had to be corrected.
In Mr. Zafirovic's witness statement it said that Slobodan Milosevic,
Biljana Plavsic, and Radovan Karadzic had entered into a conspiracy to
provoke fighting in Bijeljina. According to Mr. Zafirovic this must
have been some sort of a mistranslation, because it simply wasn't
true. That is certainly one amazing mistranslation, and it highlights
the reason why testimony should never be admitted under Rule 89(F).
The fact of the matter is that you simply can not trust the prosecutor
to write an accurate witness statement on behalf of the witness. All
of the evidence should be given live by the witness in the presence of
the accused. Evidence should not be given in the prosecutor's office
for them to manipulate as they please for the purpose of their case.
Mr. Zafirovic did his best to be a good witness for the prosecution.
He said that he saw Gen. Mladic and Mr. Krajisnik in Belgrade in the
area of Milosevic's office. Of course he didn't know what they were
doing there.
There was another time when he says he was in Radovan Karadzic's
office when Milosevic called, of course he was asked to leave, and so
he didn't know what the purpose of the call was.
Mr. Zafirovic claimed that President Milosevic was the man "in charge
of the Bosnian Serb delegation" at the Geneva talks. Of course his
claim wasn't based on any facts. He told Mr. Tapuskovic that all
decisions ultimately had to be made by the Bosnian Serbs themselves,
and that Karadzic was officially the one in charge. Zafirovic said
that he didn't know whether Milosevic could issue orders or make
decisions on behalf of the delegation or not. On the basis of what
then is he testifying? Apparently, as is typical of so many
prosecution witnesses, he's testifying on the basis of nothing.
In response to questions from President Milosevic, Mr. Zafirovic
confirmed that Milosevic only attended the meetings in Geneva at the
requests of Lord Owen, Mr. Vance, and Mr. Stoltenberg. President
Milosevic did not impose himself on those meetings. He was asked to
attend by the representatives of the international community so that
he could help to find a way to stop the war.
Even though Mr. Zafirovic didn't actually witness anything. He did
manage to directly contradict the testimony of Sead Omeragic.
Apparently Mr. Omeragic was lying when he claimed that Radio Bijeljina
had blocked the transmission of Fikret Abdic's speech. Because
according to Mr. Zafirovic that speech was broadcast, and the aim of
the speech was to calm down the population.
Some interesting information also came out about the infamous Ljubisa
Savic "Mauzer." Apparently, Mauzer was a member of the Democratic
Party. In fact he was even the president of the Democratic Party in
Republika Srpska.
The prosecution is fond of saying that Mauzer was "Milosevic's man."
In reality, Mauzer was opposed to Milosevic. Mauzer told the Belgrade
newspaper Vreme that when he was finished in Bosnia he would cross the
Drina and "take care of the communists."
At one point Mr. Groome asked Mr. Zafirovic if he was free to report
honestly and objectively about the events he observed in Bosnia and
Croatia. Mr. Zafirovic said that he was free to file honest and
objective reports and broadcast them in the media. At one point he
even broadcast reports calling Milosevic a liar with respect to the
war in Bosnia. It is worth noting here that if Slobodan Milosevic was
a real dictator that Mr. Zafirovic wouldn't have lived to see the next
day. Fortunately for Mr. Zafirovic Serbia had a free press and
Slobodan Milosevic was not a dictator.
Mr. Zafirovic trod over some old ground in his testimony. He had a tape
recording of President Milosevic's second speech to the Republika
Srpska assembly in Pale when Milosevic was trying to convince them to
accept the Vance-Owen plan. We have already seen this speech before,
President Milosevic gave this speech in response to objections to the
plan that had been raised by some of the deputies in the assembly.
Here is the text of the speech:
[START SPEECH]
I will try very briefly, but with the highest possible degree of
responsibility to say a few words. But before doing that, I wish to
convey to you my impressions. You spoke openly and from the heart. Most
of what you said related to the cruelties and injustices of war. In
the Serbian people, throughout their history, unfortunately there is
too -- there are too many truthful testimonies of the horrors of war.
However, all that we heard today regarding the testimony and the
horrors of war, all of this can be formed into one single argument and
a single statement and message, that the war should cease as soon as
possible, that the war should cease immediately.
However, let me go back to the question we are addressing today. The
question is not how much horrors -- how many horrors there were in
this war. This people has felt this on their own shoulders throughout
their history. The question today is whether we should consolidate what
has been achieved and through a peaceful process, under conditions of
security, achieve what remains to be done, what we call "outstanding
matters." There were many outstanding issues, but the plan envisaged
that those problems be addressed in negotiations.
So whether we should seek to address what we call 'outstanding
problems' through negotiation or should we destroy what has been
achieved at the expense of enormous sacrifice. That is the real issue
that this Assembly should decide. So the question, when talking about
the plan, is not whether we are departing from our goals. Of course
not.
The question is whether that plan represents the path towards the
ultimate goal. The plan is not the final fulfillment of the justified
demands of the Serbian people, but it certainly represents the path
towards the ultimate goal. But now we must make much more effort
through our wisdom and less bloodshed. I think that should be an
advantage, not a disadvantage. And this Assembly must have the courage
and self-confidence under these circumstances on the basis of the
plan, which must -- which is a sufficient basis to achieve our goal,
rather than committing a tragic error which will cruelly cut across or
put an obstacle on the way to success.
Will the Assembly opt for a reasonable or an unreasonable path? I
think no one needs to persuade this Assembly about. I think peace is
the reasonable, the sensible way. On the contrary, if the slogan is
spread about that the Serbs don't want peace, that could only justify
crimes against the Serbs, and this is something you should bear in
mind. When the road towards peace is being opened, you must explain to
the people that they -- why should they sacrifice their lives in even
crueler ways up to now? You cannot explain the reasons to the Serbian
people in Bosnia or in Serbia.
And let me say finally, one must sacrifice everything for the people
except the people. You cannot sacrifice the people. You do not have
the right to do that as an Assembly or as anyone else.
[END SPEECH]
Mr. Zafirovic's point in playing the tape of the above speech was that
Milosevic used the word "we." Milosevic speaks in the first person
plural. The normal person would think that Milosevic uses the term "we"
because he is speaking to other Serbs that he is together in the
assembly hall with. "We" in the assembly hall, and "we" as Serbs. It
is very simple, because peace is in the interest of all Serbs,
President Milosevic used the term "we."
Rather than seeing what is obvious to anybody who reads the speech,
Mr. Zafirovic saw a conspiracy. Zafirovic said that Milosevic used the
word "we" because he was directly involved in the war together with the
Bosnian Serbs.
Only at the Hague "Tribunal" could a speech calling for the ending of
a war, and the adoption of a peace plan be used as "evidence" that the
man who gave it is a war criminal.
After Mr. Zafirovic concluded his testimony, which amounted to
basically nothing, Mr. Nice brought up some administrative matters.
Mr. Nice has found his much sought after constitutional expert. He
found a German citizen who is working in Croatia to testify as an
"expert" about matters pertaining to the Constitution of Yugoslavia,
i.e., the legality of the succession of Bosnia, Croatia, and Slovenia,
the constitutionality of the changes to Kosovo's status in the late
80s, etc...
It is worth noting that these matters have already been dealt with by
the Constitutional Court of Yugoslavia. The successions were illegal,
and the changes to Kosovo's status were in line with the Serbian and
Yugoslav constitutions. These are matters that the real courts have
already decided. It isn't for some German testifying in a phony
"court" to second guess the decisions made by the legitimate legal
authorities in Yugoslavia.
Mr. Nice is also trying to exploit the fact that he is running out of
time to present his case, by trying to get the "judges" to impose
strict time limits on President Milosevic's cross-examinations. Mr.
Nice wants to call a maximum number of witnesses in a short amount of
time, while simultaneously trying to limit the time available for
cross-examination.
Maybe if Mr. Nice hadn't been already presenting his case for two
years one could understand his claims that he doesn't have enough time,
and maybe if Mr. Nice hadn't wasted so much time with witnesses like
Mr. Zafirovic he would have time now for the "important witnesses"
that he says he still has to call.
After Mr. Nice finished the "tribunal" took a recess and upon
completion of the recess immediately went into closed session to hear
"testimony" from a secret witness.
There is no hearing on Wednesday, but the "tribunal" will sit an extra
day on Friday to make up for the missed day.
=== 3 ===
http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/news/smorg011503.htm
MILOSEVIC "TRIAL" SYNOPSIS: ANTE'S ANTICS: ANTE MARKOVIC ACT II
www.slobodan-milosevic.org - January 15, 2004
June 15, 2004 – Ante Markovic made his return to The Hague “Tribunal”
today. He "excelled" as a witness for the prosecution. You could have
asked him what the cause of global warming was, and he would have told
you that it was Slobodan Milosevic’s fault.
The war in Slovenia was discussed at great length. Slobodan Milosevic
produced stenographic notes taken from Federal Executive Council
sessions, SFRY Presidency sessions, and Ante Markovic’s personal
calendar. From these documents it emerged that Ante Markovic himself
made the decision to engage the JNA in Slovenia.
Under the constitution of the SFRY, the JNA was under the command of
the federal presidency, but Ante Markovic violated the constitution
and ordered the JNA to take action in Slovenia.
Ante Markovic tried to say that Slobodan Milosevic is the one who
ordered the JNA to “invade” Slovenia, while at the same time claiming
that Milosevic was trying to kick Slovenia out of Yugoslavia.
Apparently Mr. Markovic thinks it is perfectly logical for Milosevic
to use the JNA to keep Slovenia in Yugoslavia by force, while he is at
the same time trying to get Slovenia to leave Yugoslavia. Which is it
Mr. Markovic does he want to force them to stay, or does he want them
to leave?
From the documents it emerges that even Kucan, accuses the Federal
Executive Council (i.e. Markovic) for the war in Slovenia. Of course it
is Kucan himself who is most responsible. 44 JNA soldiers lost their
lives and 184 were wounded when Slovenia attacked the JNA. Slovenia
did not keep its promise to the EC not to take unilateral actions, and
it ignored the ruling of the Constitutional Court of Yugoslavia which
struck down their succession as being illegal.
After accusing Milosevic of “invading” Slovenia with the JNA, Markovic
changed his story. He began to claim that it was some sort of big
mystery who could have issued these orders, and then he said that the
JNA didn't have orders at all that it decided all on its own what it
would do.
Of course it can be expected that Markovic would change his story,
because he was lying. Bora Jovic, who was at the time a member of the
Federal Presidency, has already testified that it was Markovic who
illegally issued orders to the JNA.
Slobodan Milosevic’s position in all of this business regarding
Slovenia was essentially neutral. He opposed their succession on the
grounds that it was illegal, but he was also against deploying the JNA
to force Slovenia to stay in Yugoslavia. Of course it’s just his
opinion, since contrary to Markovic’s stories he had no command over
the JNA.
In addition to explaining how Markovic violated the constitution and
issued orders to the JNA illegally, Jovic explained how Markovic
introduced a program whereby the Yugoslav dinar was convertible at a
ratio of 7 dinars for 1 deutschemark. Jovic explained that on the basis
of Markovic’s program citizens went out and converted their savings
into deutschemarks.
What happened according to Jovic was that Markovic raided the foreign
exchange reserves of the SFRY, and the citizens who had converted
their money into deutschemarks were unable to get their money back out
of the banks, and had to be issued what amounted to IOU’s by the state.
Jovic explained that Markovic used the money from the SFRY’s foreign
exchange reserves to pay Croatia’s debt. Markovic’s so-called
“economic reforms” were a scam that increased the SFRY’s debt many fold.
Even though Markovic almost single handedly destroyed the economy of
the SFRY, and caused countless citizens to lose their life savings, he
had the nerve to accuse Milosevic of “stealing” state funds. Something
that Milosevic did not do, and was not in a position to do in the
first place, since it was Markovic and the Federal Government who
controlled the money.
Ante’s antics were rather amusing. He had a flare for being dramatic.
He spoke of the explosion at Tudjman’s Banski Dvori palace in Zagreb.
Of course evidence has come to light since then which indicates that
the explosions were rigged for the benefit of Tudjman’s own political
purposes. None the less, Markovic insisted that a MiG-29 aircraft
(that he didn’t see) had bombed him, and that Milosevic must have been
behind it. To be honest I’m a little bit surprised he didn’t claim
Milosevic was flying the plane.
Ante Markovic humiliated himself. This is a man who remained silent
for 12 years, and if he had been a smart man he would have continued
to remain silent, and maintained at least some measure of his dignity.
=== 4 ===
http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/news/smorg011604.htm
MILOSEVIC "TRIAL" SYNOPSIS - JANUARY 16, 2004: MUSLIM SOLDIER ACCUSES
VRS OF FIRING SHELL AT MARKALE
www.slobodan-milosevic.org - January 22, 2004
FRIDAY, JANUARY 16, 2004 - The so-called "expert witness" Berko
Zecevic testified at the so-called "trial" of Slobodan Milosevic.
Mr. Zecevic was attached to the main staff of the ABiH. He was in
charge of the research and development of weaponry for the Muslim
forces. He also oversaw the production of weaponry for the Muslim
forces.
In spite of the fact that he has an obvious conflict of interest, Mr.
Zecevic wrote a report in which he concluded that the VRS fired the
shell that hit the Markale Market in Sarajevo on February 5, 1994.
In his so-called "expert report" he referred to Serbs in derogatory
terms calling them such names as "Chetniks" and "Aggressors."
Mr. Zecevic did not arrive at the Markale Market until after all of
the shell fragments had been removed, until after materials had been
dug out of the crater, and until after all of the debris had been
cleaned up.
It is worth noting that UN ballistics experts who arrived on the scene
immediately after the shell exploded have compiled two reports. One
report says that the Muslims fired the shell, and the other report says
that it can not be determined who fired the shell.
Apparently the UN's "tribunal" doesn't feel that the UN's reports are
good enough. So they went out and found an "expert" who was himself a
member of one of the warring factions, and who would naturally have an
interest in attributing this incident to the other side, which surprise
of all surprises is exactly what he did.
In spite of the fact that Mr. Zecevic's report was useless, because he
had no possibility of seeing the area of impact in its undisturbed
form, because he has a conflict of interest as a member of the ABiH,
and because he has exhibited racist tendencies towards Serbs through
the insulting names he called them in his report. In spite of all of
that the day wasn't a total waste of time.
Mr. Groome produced a number of documents during the examination in
chief which showed that the FRY was buying weapons and weapons
components from Republika Srpska in order to properly equip the VJ. Mr.
Zecevic even confirmed that the VJ needed to buy these weapons and
components from Republika Srpska, because no facilities in the FRY had
the ability to manufacture these things themselves.
This is quite the opposite of what has been presented by the
prosecution so far. So far the prosecution has tried to make it look
like everything came from the FRY to the Republika Srpska. But thanks
to these documents we see that many weapons were in fact going from
the Republika Srpska to the FRY.
The testimony of Ton Zwann is on the schedule for Monday, January
20th. All in all Berko Zecevic didn't prove useful for the prosecution.
Slobodan Milosevic has indicated that he will call competent experts
to testify so that the truth can be established about Markale once and
for all.
1. Decisions concerning the "communication privileges" of Vojislav
Seselj and Slobodan Milosevic. (9/1/2004)
2. JANUARY 13, 2004: B-92 REPORTER TESTIFIES AGAINST MILOSEVIC
3. ANTE'S ANTICS: ANTE MARKOVIC ACT II - January 15, 2004
4. JANUARY 16, 2004: MUSLIM SOLDIER ACCUSES VRS OF FIRING SHELL AT
MARKALE
See the previous parts on Ante Markovic at:
Milosevic "trial" synopsis, October 16-30, 2003
http://it.groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/message/2922
Source: http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/
=== 1 ===
http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/news/icty010904.htm
Press Release . Communiqué de presse
(Exclusively for the use of the media. Not an official document)
REGISTRY
GREFFE
The Hague, 9 January 2004 CVO/P.I.S./814e
REGISTRY EXTENDS COMMUNICATION RESTRICTIONS ON DETAINEES
FROM THE TRIBUNAL’S DETENTION UNIT
On 8 January 2004, the Deputy Registrar of the Tribunal,
David Tolbert, issued two further Decisions concerning the
communication privileges of Vojislav Seselj and Slobodan Milosevic.
The Decisions were served on both Accused on 9 January 2004.
On 11 December 2003, the Deputy Registrar of the Tribunal
issued two Decisions concerning the rights of detainees in
the Tribunal’s Detention Unit to use communications privileges for the
purpose of political campaigning in the media (Please see
Press Release 810e). Both Decisions are due to expire on 10
January 2004.
Vojislav Seselj case
On 25 December 2003, Vojislav Seselj "flagrantly violated
the Decision" of 11 December 2003 which resulted in a
subsequent Decision from the Registrar, Hans Holthuis, on 29 December
2003 which prohibited "all communication via telephone between
the accused and any person(s) except his legal counsel (if
applicable) and diplomatic or consular representatives".
This decision is also due to expire on 10 January 2004.
In issuing today’s Decision, the Deputy Registrar considered
particularly that Vojislav Seselj had previously violated
the 11 December Decision which resulted in the 29 December 2003
Decision.
The Deputy Registrar decided, pursuant to Rules 60 and 63 of
the Rules of Detention, for a period of 30 days from 10
January 2004 to:
"Prohibit, unless otherwise authorised by the Commanding
Officer of the Detention Unit, all communication via
telephone and visits between the Accused with person(s) except for his
legal counsel (if applicable) and diplomatic or consular
representatives".
Slobodan Milosevic case
With regard to Slobodan Milosevic, the Deputy Registrar
considered, among other things, that "post-elections
associated activities will likely see the political party and the
supporters of the Accused seeking his further involvement in
post-elections political activities associated with the 28
December 2003 Serbian parliamentary elections" and "that
widespread media attention and coverage of the fact that
[the] Accused is facilitating, with ease, either an ongoing
Serbian parliamentary elections campaign or post-elections
political activities, each undermines the Tribunal’s mandate
to assist in the restoration and maintenance of peace in the
former Yugoslavia".
The Deputy Registrar decided, pursuant to Rules 60 and 63 of
the Rules of Detention, to extend the 11 December 2003
Decision for Slobodan Milosevic for a period of 30 days from 10
January 2004.
*****
See full texts of the Decisions by the Deputy Registrar
(Milosevic Case / Seselj Case)
=== 2 ===
http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/news/smorg011304.htm
MILOSEVIC "TRIAL" SYNOPSIS - JANUARY 13, 2004: B-92 REPORTER TESTIFIES
AGAINST MILOSEVIC
www.slobodan-milosevic.org - January 13, 2004
After a nearly month long break the so-called "trial" of Slobodan
Milosevic again resumed on Tuesday. With only 16 hearing days remaining
to present their case the prosecution called a former journalist of
the Belgrade radio station B-92 to testify.
Nenad Zafirovic worked for Radio B-92 covering the Bosnian and
Croatian wars. Mr. Zafirovic is a member of the Democratic Party (DS)
of the slain former Serbian prime minister, Zoran Djindjic.
According to Mr. Zafirovic, the atrocities committed in Bosnia and
Croatia were mainly committed by locals against other locals.
President Milosevic pointed out that the phenomenon Zafirovic was
describing is known as a civil war.
Even though Mr. Zafirovic was a 92-bis witness, it took the
prosecutor, Mr. Groome, the better part of an hour to examine him, and
even after the examination in chief there were still inaccuracies in
his witness statement that had to be corrected.
In Mr. Zafirovic's witness statement it said that Slobodan Milosevic,
Biljana Plavsic, and Radovan Karadzic had entered into a conspiracy to
provoke fighting in Bijeljina. According to Mr. Zafirovic this must
have been some sort of a mistranslation, because it simply wasn't
true. That is certainly one amazing mistranslation, and it highlights
the reason why testimony should never be admitted under Rule 89(F).
The fact of the matter is that you simply can not trust the prosecutor
to write an accurate witness statement on behalf of the witness. All
of the evidence should be given live by the witness in the presence of
the accused. Evidence should not be given in the prosecutor's office
for them to manipulate as they please for the purpose of their case.
Mr. Zafirovic did his best to be a good witness for the prosecution.
He said that he saw Gen. Mladic and Mr. Krajisnik in Belgrade in the
area of Milosevic's office. Of course he didn't know what they were
doing there.
There was another time when he says he was in Radovan Karadzic's
office when Milosevic called, of course he was asked to leave, and so
he didn't know what the purpose of the call was.
Mr. Zafirovic claimed that President Milosevic was the man "in charge
of the Bosnian Serb delegation" at the Geneva talks. Of course his
claim wasn't based on any facts. He told Mr. Tapuskovic that all
decisions ultimately had to be made by the Bosnian Serbs themselves,
and that Karadzic was officially the one in charge. Zafirovic said
that he didn't know whether Milosevic could issue orders or make
decisions on behalf of the delegation or not. On the basis of what
then is he testifying? Apparently, as is typical of so many
prosecution witnesses, he's testifying on the basis of nothing.
In response to questions from President Milosevic, Mr. Zafirovic
confirmed that Milosevic only attended the meetings in Geneva at the
requests of Lord Owen, Mr. Vance, and Mr. Stoltenberg. President
Milosevic did not impose himself on those meetings. He was asked to
attend by the representatives of the international community so that
he could help to find a way to stop the war.
Even though Mr. Zafirovic didn't actually witness anything. He did
manage to directly contradict the testimony of Sead Omeragic.
Apparently Mr. Omeragic was lying when he claimed that Radio Bijeljina
had blocked the transmission of Fikret Abdic's speech. Because
according to Mr. Zafirovic that speech was broadcast, and the aim of
the speech was to calm down the population.
Some interesting information also came out about the infamous Ljubisa
Savic "Mauzer." Apparently, Mauzer was a member of the Democratic
Party. In fact he was even the president of the Democratic Party in
Republika Srpska.
The prosecution is fond of saying that Mauzer was "Milosevic's man."
In reality, Mauzer was opposed to Milosevic. Mauzer told the Belgrade
newspaper Vreme that when he was finished in Bosnia he would cross the
Drina and "take care of the communists."
At one point Mr. Groome asked Mr. Zafirovic if he was free to report
honestly and objectively about the events he observed in Bosnia and
Croatia. Mr. Zafirovic said that he was free to file honest and
objective reports and broadcast them in the media. At one point he
even broadcast reports calling Milosevic a liar with respect to the
war in Bosnia. It is worth noting here that if Slobodan Milosevic was
a real dictator that Mr. Zafirovic wouldn't have lived to see the next
day. Fortunately for Mr. Zafirovic Serbia had a free press and
Slobodan Milosevic was not a dictator.
Mr. Zafirovic trod over some old ground in his testimony. He had a tape
recording of President Milosevic's second speech to the Republika
Srpska assembly in Pale when Milosevic was trying to convince them to
accept the Vance-Owen plan. We have already seen this speech before,
President Milosevic gave this speech in response to objections to the
plan that had been raised by some of the deputies in the assembly.
Here is the text of the speech:
[START SPEECH]
I will try very briefly, but with the highest possible degree of
responsibility to say a few words. But before doing that, I wish to
convey to you my impressions. You spoke openly and from the heart. Most
of what you said related to the cruelties and injustices of war. In
the Serbian people, throughout their history, unfortunately there is
too -- there are too many truthful testimonies of the horrors of war.
However, all that we heard today regarding the testimony and the
horrors of war, all of this can be formed into one single argument and
a single statement and message, that the war should cease as soon as
possible, that the war should cease immediately.
However, let me go back to the question we are addressing today. The
question is not how much horrors -- how many horrors there were in
this war. This people has felt this on their own shoulders throughout
their history. The question today is whether we should consolidate what
has been achieved and through a peaceful process, under conditions of
security, achieve what remains to be done, what we call "outstanding
matters." There were many outstanding issues, but the plan envisaged
that those problems be addressed in negotiations.
So whether we should seek to address what we call 'outstanding
problems' through negotiation or should we destroy what has been
achieved at the expense of enormous sacrifice. That is the real issue
that this Assembly should decide. So the question, when talking about
the plan, is not whether we are departing from our goals. Of course
not.
The question is whether that plan represents the path towards the
ultimate goal. The plan is not the final fulfillment of the justified
demands of the Serbian people, but it certainly represents the path
towards the ultimate goal. But now we must make much more effort
through our wisdom and less bloodshed. I think that should be an
advantage, not a disadvantage. And this Assembly must have the courage
and self-confidence under these circumstances on the basis of the
plan, which must -- which is a sufficient basis to achieve our goal,
rather than committing a tragic error which will cruelly cut across or
put an obstacle on the way to success.
Will the Assembly opt for a reasonable or an unreasonable path? I
think no one needs to persuade this Assembly about. I think peace is
the reasonable, the sensible way. On the contrary, if the slogan is
spread about that the Serbs don't want peace, that could only justify
crimes against the Serbs, and this is something you should bear in
mind. When the road towards peace is being opened, you must explain to
the people that they -- why should they sacrifice their lives in even
crueler ways up to now? You cannot explain the reasons to the Serbian
people in Bosnia or in Serbia.
And let me say finally, one must sacrifice everything for the people
except the people. You cannot sacrifice the people. You do not have
the right to do that as an Assembly or as anyone else.
[END SPEECH]
Mr. Zafirovic's point in playing the tape of the above speech was that
Milosevic used the word "we." Milosevic speaks in the first person
plural. The normal person would think that Milosevic uses the term "we"
because he is speaking to other Serbs that he is together in the
assembly hall with. "We" in the assembly hall, and "we" as Serbs. It
is very simple, because peace is in the interest of all Serbs,
President Milosevic used the term "we."
Rather than seeing what is obvious to anybody who reads the speech,
Mr. Zafirovic saw a conspiracy. Zafirovic said that Milosevic used the
word "we" because he was directly involved in the war together with the
Bosnian Serbs.
Only at the Hague "Tribunal" could a speech calling for the ending of
a war, and the adoption of a peace plan be used as "evidence" that the
man who gave it is a war criminal.
After Mr. Zafirovic concluded his testimony, which amounted to
basically nothing, Mr. Nice brought up some administrative matters.
Mr. Nice has found his much sought after constitutional expert. He
found a German citizen who is working in Croatia to testify as an
"expert" about matters pertaining to the Constitution of Yugoslavia,
i.e., the legality of the succession of Bosnia, Croatia, and Slovenia,
the constitutionality of the changes to Kosovo's status in the late
80s, etc...
It is worth noting that these matters have already been dealt with by
the Constitutional Court of Yugoslavia. The successions were illegal,
and the changes to Kosovo's status were in line with the Serbian and
Yugoslav constitutions. These are matters that the real courts have
already decided. It isn't for some German testifying in a phony
"court" to second guess the decisions made by the legitimate legal
authorities in Yugoslavia.
Mr. Nice is also trying to exploit the fact that he is running out of
time to present his case, by trying to get the "judges" to impose
strict time limits on President Milosevic's cross-examinations. Mr.
Nice wants to call a maximum number of witnesses in a short amount of
time, while simultaneously trying to limit the time available for
cross-examination.
Maybe if Mr. Nice hadn't been already presenting his case for two
years one could understand his claims that he doesn't have enough time,
and maybe if Mr. Nice hadn't wasted so much time with witnesses like
Mr. Zafirovic he would have time now for the "important witnesses"
that he says he still has to call.
After Mr. Nice finished the "tribunal" took a recess and upon
completion of the recess immediately went into closed session to hear
"testimony" from a secret witness.
There is no hearing on Wednesday, but the "tribunal" will sit an extra
day on Friday to make up for the missed day.
=== 3 ===
http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/news/smorg011503.htm
MILOSEVIC "TRIAL" SYNOPSIS: ANTE'S ANTICS: ANTE MARKOVIC ACT II
www.slobodan-milosevic.org - January 15, 2004
June 15, 2004 – Ante Markovic made his return to The Hague “Tribunal”
today. He "excelled" as a witness for the prosecution. You could have
asked him what the cause of global warming was, and he would have told
you that it was Slobodan Milosevic’s fault.
The war in Slovenia was discussed at great length. Slobodan Milosevic
produced stenographic notes taken from Federal Executive Council
sessions, SFRY Presidency sessions, and Ante Markovic’s personal
calendar. From these documents it emerged that Ante Markovic himself
made the decision to engage the JNA in Slovenia.
Under the constitution of the SFRY, the JNA was under the command of
the federal presidency, but Ante Markovic violated the constitution
and ordered the JNA to take action in Slovenia.
Ante Markovic tried to say that Slobodan Milosevic is the one who
ordered the JNA to “invade” Slovenia, while at the same time claiming
that Milosevic was trying to kick Slovenia out of Yugoslavia.
Apparently Mr. Markovic thinks it is perfectly logical for Milosevic
to use the JNA to keep Slovenia in Yugoslavia by force, while he is at
the same time trying to get Slovenia to leave Yugoslavia. Which is it
Mr. Markovic does he want to force them to stay, or does he want them
to leave?
From the documents it emerges that even Kucan, accuses the Federal
Executive Council (i.e. Markovic) for the war in Slovenia. Of course it
is Kucan himself who is most responsible. 44 JNA soldiers lost their
lives and 184 were wounded when Slovenia attacked the JNA. Slovenia
did not keep its promise to the EC not to take unilateral actions, and
it ignored the ruling of the Constitutional Court of Yugoslavia which
struck down their succession as being illegal.
After accusing Milosevic of “invading” Slovenia with the JNA, Markovic
changed his story. He began to claim that it was some sort of big
mystery who could have issued these orders, and then he said that the
JNA didn't have orders at all that it decided all on its own what it
would do.
Of course it can be expected that Markovic would change his story,
because he was lying. Bora Jovic, who was at the time a member of the
Federal Presidency, has already testified that it was Markovic who
illegally issued orders to the JNA.
Slobodan Milosevic’s position in all of this business regarding
Slovenia was essentially neutral. He opposed their succession on the
grounds that it was illegal, but he was also against deploying the JNA
to force Slovenia to stay in Yugoslavia. Of course it’s just his
opinion, since contrary to Markovic’s stories he had no command over
the JNA.
In addition to explaining how Markovic violated the constitution and
issued orders to the JNA illegally, Jovic explained how Markovic
introduced a program whereby the Yugoslav dinar was convertible at a
ratio of 7 dinars for 1 deutschemark. Jovic explained that on the basis
of Markovic’s program citizens went out and converted their savings
into deutschemarks.
What happened according to Jovic was that Markovic raided the foreign
exchange reserves of the SFRY, and the citizens who had converted
their money into deutschemarks were unable to get their money back out
of the banks, and had to be issued what amounted to IOU’s by the state.
Jovic explained that Markovic used the money from the SFRY’s foreign
exchange reserves to pay Croatia’s debt. Markovic’s so-called
“economic reforms” were a scam that increased the SFRY’s debt many fold.
Even though Markovic almost single handedly destroyed the economy of
the SFRY, and caused countless citizens to lose their life savings, he
had the nerve to accuse Milosevic of “stealing” state funds. Something
that Milosevic did not do, and was not in a position to do in the
first place, since it was Markovic and the Federal Government who
controlled the money.
Ante’s antics were rather amusing. He had a flare for being dramatic.
He spoke of the explosion at Tudjman’s Banski Dvori palace in Zagreb.
Of course evidence has come to light since then which indicates that
the explosions were rigged for the benefit of Tudjman’s own political
purposes. None the less, Markovic insisted that a MiG-29 aircraft
(that he didn’t see) had bombed him, and that Milosevic must have been
behind it. To be honest I’m a little bit surprised he didn’t claim
Milosevic was flying the plane.
Ante Markovic humiliated himself. This is a man who remained silent
for 12 years, and if he had been a smart man he would have continued
to remain silent, and maintained at least some measure of his dignity.
=== 4 ===
http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/news/smorg011604.htm
MILOSEVIC "TRIAL" SYNOPSIS - JANUARY 16, 2004: MUSLIM SOLDIER ACCUSES
VRS OF FIRING SHELL AT MARKALE
www.slobodan-milosevic.org - January 22, 2004
FRIDAY, JANUARY 16, 2004 - The so-called "expert witness" Berko
Zecevic testified at the so-called "trial" of Slobodan Milosevic.
Mr. Zecevic was attached to the main staff of the ABiH. He was in
charge of the research and development of weaponry for the Muslim
forces. He also oversaw the production of weaponry for the Muslim
forces.
In spite of the fact that he has an obvious conflict of interest, Mr.
Zecevic wrote a report in which he concluded that the VRS fired the
shell that hit the Markale Market in Sarajevo on February 5, 1994.
In his so-called "expert report" he referred to Serbs in derogatory
terms calling them such names as "Chetniks" and "Aggressors."
Mr. Zecevic did not arrive at the Markale Market until after all of
the shell fragments had been removed, until after materials had been
dug out of the crater, and until after all of the debris had been
cleaned up.
It is worth noting that UN ballistics experts who arrived on the scene
immediately after the shell exploded have compiled two reports. One
report says that the Muslims fired the shell, and the other report says
that it can not be determined who fired the shell.
Apparently the UN's "tribunal" doesn't feel that the UN's reports are
good enough. So they went out and found an "expert" who was himself a
member of one of the warring factions, and who would naturally have an
interest in attributing this incident to the other side, which surprise
of all surprises is exactly what he did.
In spite of the fact that Mr. Zecevic's report was useless, because he
had no possibility of seeing the area of impact in its undisturbed
form, because he has a conflict of interest as a member of the ABiH,
and because he has exhibited racist tendencies towards Serbs through
the insulting names he called them in his report. In spite of all of
that the day wasn't a total waste of time.
Mr. Groome produced a number of documents during the examination in
chief which showed that the FRY was buying weapons and weapons
components from Republika Srpska in order to properly equip the VJ. Mr.
Zecevic even confirmed that the VJ needed to buy these weapons and
components from Republika Srpska, because no facilities in the FRY had
the ability to manufacture these things themselves.
This is quite the opposite of what has been presented by the
prosecution so far. So far the prosecution has tried to make it look
like everything came from the FRY to the Republika Srpska. But thanks
to these documents we see that many weapons were in fact going from
the Republika Srpska to the FRY.
The testimony of Ton Zwann is on the schedule for Monday, January
20th. All in all Berko Zecevic didn't prove useful for the prosecution.
Slobodan Milosevic has indicated that he will call competent experts
to testify so that the truth can be established about Markale once and
for all.