US Colonel Says Oric a Gentleman
Witness speaks of Bosnian commander’s cooperation with NATO forces.
US Colonel Says Oric a Gentleman
Witness speaks of Bosnian commander’s cooperation with NATO forces.
A US army colonel appearing this week as the last defence witness in the trial of Srebrenica commander Naser Oric testified that the accused had provided “valuable information” to the NATO-led peacekeeping forces who were deployed in Bosnia after the end of the war.
When asked why he had agreed to come and testify in Oric’s defence, the Colonel John Fenzel said, “He was always honest, he was always forthcoming, he was always a gentleman in the help he provided to us.”
Oric is charged with four counts of violations of the laws or customs of war for his alleged leadership of Muslim fighters in attacks on over 50 Serb villages in the Srebrenica region between 1992 and 1993.
Fenzel, who gave evidence in the presence of legal representatives from the US embassy in The Hague, told the court that he had arranged to have weekly meetings with Oric while stationed with SFOR troops in Tuzla in eastern Bosnia.
During these encounters, the accused had spoken about demonstrations, marches and riots which were about to occur in Bosnia, “events that could represent a threat to governance”, said Fenzel. According to the witness, Oric’s “extensive understanding of the country” had enabled SFOR to maintain better control of the situation in region.
Fenzel also recalled that Oric, who was concerned by rumours of his imminent arrest, had expressed a willingness to surrender himself voluntarily to the Hague tribunal. According to the colonel, “[Oric] said that they didn’t need to launch a special investigation to capture him, all they needed to do was to call him up.”
However, in cross-examination, prosecutor Gramsci Di Fazio raised questions about how the accused had come to obtain the detailed information he was communicating to the colonel. Di Fazio asked what Oric’s occupation had been in 1998, and Fenzel answered that he was “running his own construction company”.
“It wasn’t his employment in the construction industry that provided [the intelligence], was it?” Di Fazio asked dryly.
The trial will continue pending the judges’ decision on whether the prosecution will be allowed to present further evidence against the accused in the rebuttal procedure. Presiding Judge Carmel Agius told the parties that the chamber would announce their ruling on this issue sometime next week.
Helen Warrell is an IWPR reporter in The Hague.
When asked why he had agreed to come and testify in Oric’s defence, the Colonel John Fenzel said, “He was always honest, he was always forthcoming, he was always a gentleman in the help he provided to us.”
Oric is charged with four counts of violations of the laws or customs of war for his alleged leadership of Muslim fighters in attacks on over 50 Serb villages in the Srebrenica region between 1992 and 1993.
Fenzel, who gave evidence in the presence of legal representatives from the US embassy in The Hague, told the court that he had arranged to have weekly meetings with Oric while stationed with SFOR troops in Tuzla in eastern Bosnia.
During these encounters, the accused had spoken about demonstrations, marches and riots which were about to occur in Bosnia, “events that could represent a threat to governance”, said Fenzel. According to the witness, Oric’s “extensive understanding of the country” had enabled SFOR to maintain better control of the situation in region.
Fenzel also recalled that Oric, who was concerned by rumours of his imminent arrest, had expressed a willingness to surrender himself voluntarily to the Hague tribunal. According to the colonel, “[Oric] said that they didn’t need to launch a special investigation to capture him, all they needed to do was to call him up.”
However, in cross-examination, prosecutor Gramsci Di Fazio raised questions about how the accused had come to obtain the detailed information he was communicating to the colonel. Di Fazio asked what Oric’s occupation had been in 1998, and Fenzel answered that he was “running his own construction company”.
“It wasn’t his employment in the construction industry that provided [the intelligence], was it?” Di Fazio asked dryly.
The trial will continue pending the judges’ decision on whether the prosecution will be allowed to present further evidence against the accused in the rebuttal procedure. Presiding Judge Carmel Agius told the parties that the chamber would announce their ruling on this issue sometime next week.
Helen Warrell is an IWPR reporter in The Hague.
