PRESIDING JUSTICE CARTER: It is the opinion of the Tribunal that the affidavits themselves are not admissible in evidence. However, the prosecution may inquire of the witness regarding conflicting statements or anything, or even refreshing his memory, but the evidence given by the witness himself will be the controlling evidence. To that extent the prosecution may use the affidavits.
MR. RAPP: If your Honors will permit, at this time I would like to refer to the identification No. 440-a, NOKW 611. I would like now to pass to the witness this particular document so that he can familiarize himself, and then after we have given the witness some time to look this document over, I would like to ask him a few questions in connection with that document.
DR. LATERNSER: Your Honor, I do not know whether it has been rightly translated, or whether I understood the ruling of the court differently. I understand that the things which have been stated in this affidavit may be touched upon by questions to the witness, but that the affidavit may not be submitted to him.
PRESIDING JUSTICE CARTER: I think the proper method would be to ask him about the conflicting statements that are in the affidavit. Read the part to him that is in apparent conflict, and have him harmonize it, if he can. I doubt if it is proper to hand him the entire affidavit at this time.
MR. RAPP: Your Honor, I was trying to avoid getting any part of the affidavit read into the record, - citing parts of the affidavit to him. I thought that it would be better to have the witness take a look at the affidavit, take the affidavit back, and then ask him some questions in relation to the answer he has given at that time. However, if your Honors feel that this is not satisfactory, I would be only too glad to follow your suggestion.
PRESIDING JUSTICE CARTER: I think if the defendants object, that we should sustain that objection.
DR. LATERNSER: I object, your Honor.
PRESIDING JUSTICE CARTER: Objection sustained.
DR. LATERNSER: Because it is my point of view, the witness at this moment -
DR. SAUTER: In addition to this objection, I want to point to something else. We have in this document, the two affidavits of the witness. The witness, as we have heard today, has been examined seven times by the Prosecution, and I take it that he gave seven affidavits, - not less than seven affidavits.
In my view it would be all right if we want to follow the procedure which has been suggested by the prosecution, that these seven or ten affidavits should be read, then we would not only see what is in two, but we shall see what is contained in all 7 affidavits, and then the Court can form a picture much easier regarding the value or absence of value of these affidavits. As long as only two records of interrogations are submitted, there only remains a fraction.
PRESIDING JUSTICE CARTER: The prosecution may interrogate the witness about any conflicting statements he made in these affidavits. When the defense cross-examine they can put in as many other parts of these affidavits as they see fit, but I think the prosecution can pursue its own methods. You may proceed.
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. RAPP:
Q. Witness, you have at one time, written in your own handwriting, a report about your activities in the Southeast theatre. I believe I shall go back to the German language.
You once wrote a document in your own handwriting. So far as I know, this document was not written here in Nurnberg. Is that correct?
A. Yes, that is correct. I once made a statement about the southeastern area, and that was the summer of 1946 in the camp of Zuffenhausen.
Q. And later, during your internment in Nurnberg, you wrote two affidavits, that is two, to be exact, here in Nurnberg?
A. So far as I remember, I believe three.
Q. I am talking about Nurnberg. Two or three, in Nurnberg, witness?
A. I believe three. There was an addendum. One affidavit to which I wrote a short addendum, and then a second affidavit.
Q. Witness, you told us some time ag**, in direct examination, that you were only competent for retaliation measures in Serbia. Is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. Witness, did the military commanders subordinate to you, -did they not in each and every single case, have to get permission to carry out the retaliation measures --- did they not?
DR. LATERNSER: I object. This is a leading question. The question is, did the military not have to have permission. It is impossible to cross examine their own witness. I must energetically protest against this procedure by the prosecution.
MR. RAPP: That is what the witness had already testified to previously this afternoon.
PRESIDING JUSTICE CARTER: Proceed with the question.
BY MR. RAPP:
Q. Will you kindly answer this question.
A. The military commanders were independent as regards to provisions on retaliation measures. They were generals of the Infantry, the artillery and Airforce, underoath, and they were for that reason, in the same manner as I myself; it was not the case that a military commander in Greece would have to get permission from me in order to carry out a retaliation measure which he found suitable.
Q. Witness, you are telling us now that on the strength of the fact that the military commanders subordinate to you were also generals, it is proved that for this reason they did not have to have your consent for the implementation of these measures; is that correct?
A. Yes. There is a regulation that the ordering of retaliation measures may be ordered independently from the regional commanders upwards.
Q. Witness, did you ever during your preliminary interrogation, tell us in writing, and under oath, that before every execution, your personal consent would have to be obtained?
DR. LATERNSER: I object to this question. It is not -- it is inadmissible because it is a leading question in direct examination.
PRESIDING JUSTICE CARTER: I think you should quote what he said and ask if he did not make that statement; quote from his affidavit; give him an opportunity to affirm or deny or explain, as he sees fit.
It seems to me, that is the way you should proceed.
MR. RAPP: Very well, your Honors.
I am going to read to you, witness, the paragraph to which I refer. I would like to put another question to you.
Did you at any time order that whole villages, whole communities were to be burned down?
A. In my recollection I have emphasized that frequently, that I did not burn down a single community which I had ordered to be burned down, but I believe it is possible that in a battle perhaps, by the police, by the Bulgarians, communities were, against my will, burned down, or at least houses were burned down, which I was told only later.
Q. Witness, did you in your capacity as military commander southeast, at any time, -- did you reserve to yourself the right or rather the vote right regarding the executions carried out in areas of other military commanders?
A. It never got to that.
Q. Why not?
A. Because I cannot remember that the military commanders in Greece or Albania, --- that is these two military commanders, -- reported any greater major retaliation measures to me.
Q. You said that you received daily reports from the military commanders; is that right?
A. Those were very brief reports which we received daily, comprising about three to four lines regarding the Albanian or the Croatian area, that is, not very detailed reports. The detailed daily reports went, as far as I remember, to the local tactical departments. That was in the case of the Military Commander Greece, the Army Group E, and in Albania. During my time I probably never got as far as retaliation measures by the Plenipotentiary General.
Q. Did Army Group F ever order any retaliation measures?
A. The Army Group F, in the summer of 1944 on the first of July--that was the date of the receipt of this order--gave a collective retaliation order for the entire Southeast area which was harmonized in relation to my staff and with our experiences regarding retaliation measures. These experiences were used by the Army Group.
Q. Witness, now I would like to quote from your document to which I directed your attention previously.
DR. LATERNSER: This is an admissible. I object to this quotation. I object to this document's being quoted. The Witness may, at the most, be asked, in order to show the way to the Prosecution, "What did you say on the so and so of May, etc.?"
PRESIDING JUDGE CARTER: I think the Prosecution is entitled to ask the Witness if on such and such a date and if on such an occasion he didn't make the following statement in writing and then quote the statement, as long as the affidavit is not to be in conflict with his testimony. I think, to this extent, the Prosecution may use the affidavit.
MR. RAPP: Your Honors, that's all we had in mind.
PRESIDING JUDGE CARTER: All right; you may proceed on this basis.
MR. RAPP: We have a document before us which was written by you on the 15th of July 1946 in the Internment Camp No. 78. This document to which I refer bears on the top the words, "Felber, Hans, General of Infantry No. 365-D-/35, Statement About my Activity" I quote: "Military Commander Southeast." I quote and ask you whether on Page 22 and Page 24 respectively, you wrote the following lines: "Retaliation Measures: From the OKW: Whereas in other occupied countries special directives were decided on regarding retaliations measures, the collective retaliation order of Hitler is known. That in case of ambushes we should take the most severe measures. The burning down of villages, the shooting of hostages, that is, for every killed German soldier, 50; for every wounded native of Germany, graduated figures according to the importance of the person." These had been laid down as directive. Now, another question, Witness: Are these, so far, your own statements?
DR. LATERNSER: Your Honor, it is my duty to object to such a procedure in direct examination. And I shall object therefore on every question which is put in this way, and I shall repeat it. We are now in direct examination. The witness, can, at the most, be asked, Your Honor, "Were you interrogated on such and such a date, and what did you say on such and such a date?" And only in this manner can we ascertain what the witness knows today. In this proceeding it is only necessary to know what the witness knows today. And for this reason it is forbidden that a witness use any notes. The reason for this is that the Court may only want to find out what the witness knows now and not what he had written sometime.
I repeat, it is my duty to object to such a procedure.
PRESIDING JUDGE CARTER: We'll let the witness answer the question.
MR. RAPP: Witness, would you answer my question?
A. Yes, this sentence was written by me at the time.
Q. "In the Fuehrer Headquarters when introduced to his duties before he took up his new duties, the Military Commander Southeast was expressly asked to keep to this order as emphasized already. The new Military Commander Southeast took up his duties with an attitude which contravened such retaliation measures, and a special case, during the first weeks, gave an opportunity to put these views to a test." Are these then your statements?
A. Yes.
DR. LATERNSER: Dr. Laternser, Your Honor, it is again my duty to object to this question.
PRESIDING JUDGE CARTER: Overruled.
MR. RAPP: I quote from Page 23 and want to ask you at the end of my quotation whether this is what you deposed. "The Supreme Directive of the Military Commander Southeast, who was aware of his enormous responsibility just in this field, it has always been to lead the struggle in a soldierly and humane manner and that was taking over responsibility in the Serbian area. Through the newly organized Military Commander Southeast a thorough change in the execution of retaliation measures would take place. The implementation of the Hitler quota, retaliation measures was, in spite of knowing that we would thus deviate from the Fuehrer order from the collectives. This was now taken over by a purely soldierly and German procedure. Many lives may thus have been saved." Witness, are these your depositions?
A. Yes.
Q. And you remember that you talked your position as Military Commander Southeast. Why, in your capacity as Military Commander Southeast, did you have influence on the way and manner of the retaliation measures when, is as you said this afternoon, the Military Commanders were not subordinate to you in this respect?
DR. LATERNSER: Dr. Laternser, Your Honor, I also object to this question. That is a suggestive question which is not admissible in his direct examination.
PRESIDING JUDGE CARTER: You may answer the question.
MR. RAPP: You may answer the question.
A. I did write this formula at the time, clearly recognizing that it merely concerned the activity of the commanders in the Serbian area. And this formula, I did not want to have the conditions in Greece and Albania included. In order to put it quite clearly it only concerned what happened to Serbia in this formula.
PRESIDING JUDGE CARTER: We will recess until 9:30 tomorrow morning.
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal will be in recess until 9:30 tomorrow morning.
(THE COURT RECESSED AT 1630, to RESUME SESSION TUESDAY, 12 August 1947, at 0930)
Official Transcript of the American Military Tribunal in the matter of the United States of America vs. Wilhelm List, et al, defendants, sitting at Nurnberg, Germany, on 12 August 1947, 0930-1630, Justice Wennerstrum presiding.
THE MARSHAL: Persons in the Courtroom will please find their seats.
The Honorable, the Judges of Military Tribunal V. Military Tribunal V is not in session. God save the United States of America and this Honorable Tribunal.
There will be order in the Court.
May it please your Honors, all defendants are present in the Courtroom.
The persons in the courtroom will be seated.
PRESIDENT WENNERSTRUM: You may proceed, Mr. Rapp.
MR. RAPP: Thank you, Your Honor.
HANS GUSTAV FELBER - Resumed DIRECT EXAMINATION (Continued) BY MR. RAPP:
Q. Witness, yesterday during the examination you were asked whether you had at any time ordered that the able-bodied population or a number of the able-bodied population in Serbia, had been transported to Germany on your orders, for forced labor. Witness, thereupon, if I remember rightly, you answered that it did not conform with the facts since you yourself wanted this kind of population as a cultural worker for harvest and for any other kind of agricultural or industrial work, -- that you wanted this part of the population. Is that right, witness?
A. Yes. indeed.
MR. RAPP: Your Honors, if you permit, I would like to call your attention to Document Book No. 18, at this time, please. I am referring to NOKW 717, Exhibit 435, I believe it is on page 22 of the English, page 26 of the German document book. If your Honors permit, I would like now to ask the assistant secretary general to hand me the original of this exhibit.
I am referring to, so that I may show this exhibit to the witness. Is this agreeable, your Honors?
PRESIDENT WENNERSTRUM: It may be handed to the prosecutor.
MR. RAPP: I have asked the assistant Secretary General very early this morning to be sure that we have the original exhibits here. I do now know whether or not they have arrived as yet.
SECRETARY GENERAL: The Courier is on his way, Sir.
MR. RAPP: Shall I go on, your Honor, to the next question, and we can come back as soon as the exhibit has arrived?
PRESIDENT WENNERSTRUM: If you will, please.
MR. RAPP: In order to save time.
Q. Witness, yesterday you were asked whether there had been socalled "hostages camps" in Serbia, and I believe that you answered: "During my time I did not know anything of a hostage camp". Is that correct?
A. Yes, with the qualification that a collective camp of the higher SS and Police Leader in Croatia was supposed to have been in Semlin as I was told by people, but personally I did not know anything about it.
Q. If your Honors please, I refer you to document book 17, - this is NOKW 174, Exhibit 410, your Honors will find this on page 55, I believe, and German defense counsel on page 41. There again, with your Honors' permission, I would like to put the original exhibit to the witness as soon as it arrives.
PRESIDENT WENNERSTRUM: You may do so. Will you give the page again?
MR. RAPP: Page 55 of the English, your Honor, NOKW 174, Exhibit 410.
PRESIDENT WENNERSTRUM: You may proceed.
MR. RAPP: I believe the original exhibits have arrived. The first exhibit, Assistant Secretary General, I need, would be Exhibit 535.
Q. Witness, coming back in detail to your statement yesterday, I want to read that part of the document of which we are talking, and I am reading this in English and would ask the Court interpreter to translate this, because I have the English document book in front of me.
"During the operation in Belgrade", I am citing from page 22, your Honor, "against these who broke their work contract, 86 persons were arrested and transferred for labor employment to the Reich."
Witness, did you read this in the document yourself?
DR. LATERNSER: I must object to this translation. I would like to ask that the original German text be translated which reads as follows:
"Bei Aktienen in Belgrad gegen Arbeitsvertragsbruechige wurden 86 Personen festgenemmen, die dem Arbeitseinsatz im Reich zugefuehrt worden."
I would now ask for a new English translation.
PRESIDENT WENNERSTRUM: It may be handed to the translators. I do not see what way it particularly affects the witness here.
TRANSLATOR JACOBSOHN: The translation of this paragraph which is on page 22 of the English document book, and just below the center reads as follows:
"During the operation in Belgrade, against those who broke their work agreement, 86 persona were arrested and will be transferred for labor employment to the Reich."
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. RAPP: (Continued) Witness, was this document which I have just show to you, signed by you?
A. No, this was not signed by me, and was not initialed by me either. I might be possible, therefore, that I never had any knowledge of it personally.
Q. Who has signed this document, witness?
A. The chief of the General Staff, Colonel von Geitner has signed it.
Q. This was your chief?
A. Yes.
BY MR. RAPP:
Q. Have you got any other explanations to this document?
A. May I say something to the concept of "people who break their work agreements?"
Q. Witness, I don't want to interrupt you, and I don't want to deprive you of the right to go on. Now, it is a question whether these people were transported to Germany for labor employment or not. Yesterday you told us no. What is your answer today, witness?
A. I could only find an interpretation that here it was a case of people who in their work in Serbia were not of sufficient value, and it may be that as a kind of punishment, since they did not want to work in Serbia, they were sent to Germany. I believe that in this case here it is an exception to the procedure.
Q. Thank you. Your Honors, the next question and document to be put to the witness is Exhibit No. 410, Document Book 17, Page 55-page 41 in the German Document Book. Page 55, Document book 17, Exhibit 410. This is the question the witness already answered that he did not know of any hostage camp in Serbia, with the possible exception of the hostage camp in Croatia which he heard about from the Higher SS and Police leader, which was supposed to have been in Croatia.
(MR. RAPP HANDS DOCUMENT TO THE WITNESS) I read from the document:
"As revenge for the surprise attack on the village of Duplja west of Weisskirchen on 30 Aug 43, in which 3 Volksdeutsche members of the Banat State Guard and one community official were murdered and the community records were set on fire, 160 communist reprisal prisoners are to be shot. The utilization of the bandit members confined in the Gross-Betschkerek hostage camp for execution and of women, so far as they are convicted bandit helpers, is approved. Completion of the action is to be reported by enclosure of one copy of the publication. Military Commander Southeast, Ia No. *4/43, sgd. Felber." Witness, do you know about this exhibit?
A. It is a document which is not counter-signed by me personally, nor is it signed by me, it only bears my signed signature. It might be possible that I had no knowledge of this document personally. In any case it cannot serve as proof. Personally I don't know anything of this hostage camp Gross-Betschkerek.
Q. Where is Gross-Betschkerek?
A. Gross-Betschkerek is situated in the Banat.
Q. I mean is it in Croatia or in Serbia?
A. No, it is a camp. That is, if Gross-Betschkerek is in the Banat, it is in Serbia.
Q. Who was the Chief of the Airway Headquarters? That is, the Commander of the Airway Headquarters in Gross-Betschkerek?
A. I believe his name was Captain Ameluneu.
Q. Weren't you personally?
A. No, it was not me.
Q. Now, what does "signed Felber" mean?
A. From time to time orders were issued which had been reported orally which, however, I could not sign personally because I was, at the time the orders was issued, officially on duty somewhere else. It has also happened that such orders were issued by my deputy, of which I gained knowledge later on. Occasionally, in the course of business, he had forgotten to tell me about it. Generally speaking, however, the order with a signed signature equivalent was an order signed by me personally. The responsibility of the whole duties in my staff I also bear, as Commander in Chief.
Q. Witness, I asked you yesterday what kind of methods were used in order to actually test that the hostages taken were so-called Communists. Do you remember this question?
A. Yes.
Q. Your answer, as far as I recollect was this: "We had no possibility for doing this because the staff of the Higher SS and Police Leader never showed their cards."
Is that right?
A. Yes.
Q. And you told us in connection with this: that "This situation from the autumn of 1943 onwards changed, "and I asked you then how hostages were taken after the autumn of 1943. And you told me "The taking of hostages took place even then only through the Higher SS and Police Leader." And then you related a story which took place in October, 1943 where you got wind of the tricks of the deputy of the Higher SS and Police Leader. Is that correct, witness?
A. Yes.
Q. If Your Honors please, we will refer to Document Book 17, NOKW-162, Exhibit No. 412 and NOKW-174, Exhibit No. 410 of Document Book 17. The first exhibit, your Honors, will be found on Page 60 of your document book. The second reference will be found on Page 56 of your document book. German defense counsel, the first reference is on page 46 of your document book; the second reference, I believe, is on page 42 of your document book. I shall read from NOKW-162, Exhibit No. 412, on page 60: "Danube Security Staff, For Information: Administrative Sub-Area Headquarters 809. Arrests of suspects from Petrovo Selo as hostages approved up to 50. Only such persons may be arrested who, if necessary, may be shot to death also. Safekeeping must be guaranteed. The liability of the hostages is to be announced publicly. Military Commander Southeast, Ia, No. 228/43 secret of 18.10.43, (signed) Felber." Witness, did you sign this document?
A. Yes, it bears my signature.
Q. Would you like to give an explanation to this document?
A. I can remember looking at this document about the taking of hostages at this place even in October 1943, and they were carried out by departments subordinate to me. That is, not only by the Police Leader. It is not a case of Communists but of hostages generally. I did not remember this fact.
Q. Witness, I asked you further yesterday in what manner executions ordered by you were carried out. You said the execution took place by a directive given to the Higher Police and SS Leader, the troops, at least in the Serbian area, did not take part in any carrying out of retaliation measures. You do not know then, witness, how the execution was in fact carried out?
A. No.
Q. Meissner, who was otherwise very open, he knew how to hide this very discreetly?
A. Yes.
Q. Can you remember these questions and answers?
A. Yes.
Your Honors, please turn first to Document Book XVII. I have references which I would like to put to the witness. This first one is NOKW 174, on page 53; it is page 39 in German; Exhibit 410. That is Document Book XVII, your Honors. The next reference is NOKW-044, Document Book XVII; Exhibit 418; that is page 102; it is on pages 73 and 74 in German. Then NOKW 675; Exhibit 429; Document Book XVIII. Your Honors will find it on page 7 of the Document Book, Defense Counsel on page 8. The first document is Exhibit 429. I shall read the paragraph I have reference to:
"Page 4 of the original). War Diary, Military Commander Southeast, Chief Ia, 1-30th April 1944:
"The hanging of the convicted bandit Jaksic in Losnica applied for by the Feldkommandantur 816 Administrative Sub Area Headquarters----"
It is in the German Document Book No. XVIII, on page 8, 9 and 10. The part I am quoting is actually on page 10. Did the interpreter find that? Thank you. I will repeat this for the record, Your Honors.
"The hanging of the convicted bandit Jaksic in Losnica applied for by the Feldkommandantur 816 Administrative Sub Area Headquarters is approved. The population is to be informed in a proper manner of the reason for the execution."
Q. Witness, do you recognize this document?
A. This document is not known to me. It seems to be an excerpt from the war diary and in any case I cannot remember to have had knowledge of these two occurrences.
Q. Have you got anything to add to what you said about this document?
A. Yes, I would think that in this special case where a bandit was clearly proven to be guilty as an especial exception the Administrative Sub Area Headquarters had asked for his execution in order to cause a corresponding impression in the population. It appeared in any case that there could have been no question of retaliation measures in the collective sense and likewise I can explain the second case of the second Sub Area Headquarters as an exceptional case concerning Mihajlovic, people who by this burning of their houses or of those people who participated in the attack, one made use of these people if the sub-marine pistol loss was not too great.
Q. You were Military Commander Southeast at that time. Is that correct?
A. Until April I was in Belgrade.
Q. Witness, were you, during that time, Military Commander Southeast?
A. Yes.
The next document, your Honor, will be NOKW 174 on page 53 of your document book; on pages 38 and 39 of the German Document Book and this is Document Book XVII, your Honor. The Exhibit number is 410. I shall read this document I am having reference to.
"To: 610th Administrative Sub-Area Headquarters:
Reference: Your teletype of 31 August 1943.
"400 D.M. reprisal prisoners are to be shot as revenge for the surprise attack on the security detachment of the 21st Auxiliary Police Company in Stragari, in which 3 members of the company were killed and 5 missing who did not return after expiration of the established time period. Reprisal prisoners lacking are to be furnished by the Commander of the Security Police.
"The burning down of Stragari as a reprisal measure is to reported in the proclamation.
"Completion of the action is to be reported.
Military Commander Southeast.
Signed Felber."
Q. Witness, do you recognize this exhibit?
A. Yes. It bears my initial.
Q. What have you got to say in connection with this exhibit?
A. The incident in itself I cannot recall. The case of an occurrence which took place on the third day of my presence in the Balkans. At that time I was not in a position to look through all these things during those first days there. In any case the contents of this order contradicts my views on these matters.
Q. Witness, you know that we are talking specifically about the manner in which retaliation measures were carried out and you told us yesterday that you did not know that, since this was a matter for the higher SS and police leader. I am talking here not specifically of the ratio which has been used here. Do you understand me, witness?
A. Yes.
Your Honors, turn now please to page 102, Exhibit 418, NOKW-044; it is on pages 73 and 74 of the German Document Book.
MR. RAPP: Your Honor, this is a rather voluminous German document, and I am trying to find for the witness the part I have reference to, and I beg Your Honors' indulgence for one minute, possibly.
THE PRESIDENT: Take your time.
MR. RAPP: I am having reference to the daily report under the 22nd November 1943. Do the interpreters have the reference on pages 73 and 74 of the German? Thank you.
This is a copy of a teletype, Military Commander Southeast, dated 22.11.43, Daily report 22.11.43, Serbia.
"According to Serbian sources no signs of DM and circles close to him breaking with the allies are recognizable. The continuous attacks on German Wehrmacht automobiles on the main road northwest of Kragujevac are carried out by Cetnik band which wishes to force the release of band members captured by the Serbian Volunteer Corps. These will be hanged on the spot in the course of reprisal measures."
Q Witness, during this time which appears here in this document, the date, were you at this time Military Commander Southeast?
A Yes, in November I was Military Commander Southeast.
Q Just a minute, Witness, and how long had you been Military Commander Southeast at that date?
A Three months.
Q Now, what can you tell us in connection with this document?
A I recall, this incident, I believe, this section here was part of a road, a main road from Belgrade-Nish to Greece, where again and again at the same spot in certain periods surprise attacks on motor cars, and bandits of the Wehrmacht took place, and I believe it is possible that here in order to make an example, DM bandits were in fact hanged at this spot, but this can only have been an exception. Personally, details regarding this case are not known to me.
Q Witness, on the basis of the exhibits which you have now seen, the Military Commander Southeast was informed about the methods regarding the carrying out of the executions, is that correct?