Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 6734

 1                           Thursday, 2 July, 2009

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           --- Upon commencing at 9.02 a.m.

 5             JUDGE PARKER:  Good morning.  While the witness is being brought

 6     in, could I mention that in the oral decision given yesterday, I referred

 7     to the wrong two pages of the transcript.  It should have been pages 3

 8     and 4 to which access is granted.  And could I add that to speed things

 9     up and smooth the process, the Chamber has made available the relevant

10     documents to the Defence already.  So there's no need for any further

11     compliance with the order.

12                           [The witness takes the stand]

13             JUDGE PARKER:  Good morning.

14             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning.

15             JUDGE PARKER:  The affirmation you made to tell the truth still

16     applies.  And now for a change, it's Mr. Djurdjic who has some questions

17     for you.

18                           WITNESS:  LJUBINKO CVETIC [Resumed]

19                           [Witness answered through interpreter]

20                           Cross-examination by Mr. Djurdjic:

21        Q.   Good morning, Mr. Cvetic.

22        A.   Good morning.

23        Q.   My name is Veljko Djurdjic.  I'm a member of the Defence team of

24     the accused Vlastimir Djordjevic and here with me I have madam

25     Marie O'Leary and Mr. Popovic.

Page 6735

 1             Mr. Cvetic, both of us will have a problem today because both of

 2     us tend to speak rather quickly and to make things more difficult we both

 3     use the same language.  In order for us and the courtroom to be able to

 4     understand everything and in order for the transcript to be correct, I

 5     would kindly ask you and I will do this myself, please try to speak

 6     slowly and try to wait for me to finish so that we do not overlap.

 7        A.   All right.

 8        Q.   First of all, I would like to correct some things from

 9     yesterday's transcript where I believe that some things were entered

10     wrongly.  First of all, could you please tell me, between mid-1998 and

11     until the moment when you left SUP Kosovska Mitrovica, what was the

12     position of Mr. Vlastimir Djordjevic?

13        A.   He was assistant minister, that is, head of the public security

14     sector.

15        Q.   Thank you.  Another thing, at the staff meeting which was held, I

16     believe you said, on March the 8th, was there the Chief of the

17     General Staff of the Yugoslavia army?

18        A.   No.

19        Q.   Thank you.  And yet another thing, but I can't really translate

20     the question of Mr. Stamp, but I want to ask the following:  Could you

21     know on the 1st of July what kind of telegram were you going to receive

22     from the staff on the 10th of July?

23        A.   I couldn't.

24        Q.   Thank you.

25             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] All this is on page 6715 of the

Page 6736

 1     transcript and it regards the Exhibit P1054 and P1052.

 2        Q.   Thank you, Mr. Cvetic, for your answers.

 3        A.   You are welcome.

 4        Q.   Now, would I like to start from some legislation, some general

 5     acts that were in force in Ministry of the Interior in the

 6     Republic of Serbia during the relevant period.  Just to make sure,

 7     whenever I ask anything, it refers to the period between mid-1998 and the

 8     end of the war, and I will specify all the other time-periods.

 9        A.   When you are saying mid-1998, are you talking June 1998 until the

10     end of the period which I was present in the territory of

11     Kosovo and Metohija?

12        Q.   Yes.  And I will refer to any other time-periods.  I will specify

13     that.

14        A.   Thank you.

15             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we please have the

16     Exhibit P66.

17        Q.   Mr. Cvetic, this is the Law on Internal Affairs.  Page 1 in B/C/S

18     version and page 2 in the English version, Article 6, Mr. Cvetic.

19             Am I right to say that on the basis of this article, it was the

20     minister who decided on the formation of organisational units both in the

21     seat and he decided on the territories for which organisational units

22     were formed.

23        A.   Yes, but could I please check that we are talking about the law

24     that was in effect at the time, but when you said that -- what you said

25     is absolutely correct, but could we just check that this is the relevant

Page 6737

 1     act that was in effect that year because there were quite a lot of

 2     amendments.  So could I please see what is the number of the

 3     Official Gazette because I know what the number of the Official Gazette

 4     should be.

 5             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we please have the

 6     Court Officer scroll this up in order to check.  No, please, down, just a

 7     bit down.  No, no, could you please take it down so scroll down just a

 8     bit.  Scroll down.  Yes.  And now if you could go to the left.  Okay.

 9     Thank you.

10        Q.   So you can see that this is the Official Gazette of the

11     Republic of Serbia, 54/96?

12        A.   All right.

13        Q.   Can we proceed, Mr. Cvetic?

14        A.   Yes.

15        Q.   Can you please comment on Article 7.

16             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] If we could have Article 7 on the

17     screen.

18        A.   "The minister shall determine the manner in which the

19     Ministry of the Interior performs its duties and issue instructions for

20     their performance."  And yes, this is correct.

21        Q.   Thank you.  Am I right, Mr. Cvetic to say that upon the request

22     of the People's Assembly and the request of the president of the

23     republic, the minister reported on the work of the ministry and the

24     security situation in the republic?

25        A.   You are absolutely right.  Not only upon the request of the

Page 6738

 1     president of the republic and the Assembly, but also upon the request of

 2     the government of the Republic of Serbia.

 3        Q.   Thank you.  Yes, this is clear enough because the president, he

 4     was a member of the government.

 5             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we please have page 5 in the

 6     English version and page 2 in the B/C/S version.

 7        Q.   Mr. Cvetic, Article 18, 19, and 20, do they regulate the persons

 8     that were authorised officials, and also the rights of the uniformed

 9     members of the police?

10        A.   Yes.

11        Q.   Thank you.  I'm particularly interested in Article 20 if you

12     could comment on it.

13        A.   Article 20 stipulates as follows:

14             "An authorised official must perform duties relating to the

15     security of this republic, protection of the life and safety of citizens

16     and their property, prevention and detection of criminal offences and

17     apprehension of perpetrators, regardless whether or not he is on official

18     duty and whether or not he has been given such a task."

19             That is paragraph 1.  And paragraph 2 says:

20             "An authorised official must form the tasks referred to in

21     paragraph 1 of this Article even when his personal safety is at risk."

22             And this is all correct.  This is stipulated not only by law but

23     also by the regulation on public security service.

24             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] I apologise, a correction in the

25     transcript, line 5 on page 51 [sic], there should be "minister" instead

Page 6739

 1     of "president."

 2        Q.   Mr. Cvetic, since we have these provisions, there is no read to

 3     read them out, you can read them for yourself and possibly just comment

 4     or make certain explanations.

 5        A.   Yes, but I cannot comment on the text of the law.  I can simply

 6     say whether it was applied or not.  I'm not authorised to comment on any

 7     legislation.

 8        Q.   Well, this is exactly what I meant, whether you know if this was

 9     applied in practice.

10             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we now please see Article 28

11     in B/C/S; this is page 3.  And in the English version it's on page 9.

12        Q.   Mr. Cvetic, these are the provision on the reserve forces, so

13     Articles 28 and 29, and I believe there is some misunderstanding here, so

14     I would like to clarify this.  Could you please explain what reserve

15     forces really are in line with Articles 28 and 29 of this law?

16        A.   This means that in line with the act on systematisation of jobs

17     at the Ministry of the Interior, we had a certain number of police forces

18     and this applied to peacetimes.  However, given that at the level of the

19     republic the estimates of danger of risks were made, sometimes in certain

20     parts of the republic, or in the entire republic; the public security and

21     order could be at risk.  There could be a risk of inter-ethical conflicts

22     or the risk of terrorist attacks.

23             For that reason, still at peacetime, the peacetime forces would

24     be inefficient and this is why estimates were made on the necessities

25     concerning reserve forces.  So we had peacetime formation and we also had

Page 6740

 1     a schematic of the organisation and systematisation for peacetime; but we

 2     also had the schematic of organisation and systemisation for the period

 3     of imminent threat of war, state of war, and other extraordinary

 4     situations.  So the peacetime formation of the police would be

 5     replenished with certain number of people that belonged to the reserve

 6     forces.

 7             This replenishment was done through competent military

 8     territorial organisations in the following way:  The Secretariats were

 9     submitting their requests to the competent military territorial body, and

10     they stipulated the number of persons and of which particular specialties

11     they needed in order to replenish their units.  Once they replenished

12     their units with members of the reserve forces, the decision on the

13     engagement of these reserve forces was made by the minister.

14        Q.   Thank you.  The members of the reserve forces, until the moment

15     when they were engaged by the minister, were civilians carrying out their

16     regular civilian duties?

17        A.   Yes.

18        Q.   When engaged, these persons had had the same status as regular

19     police officers who were employed by MUP, so they were authorised

20     officials?

21        A.   Yes, they had the same authorities as active members of the

22     police.

23        Q.   Thank you.  Were they entitled to other things, such as health

24     care?

25        A.   Yes.

Page 6741

 1        Q.   Mr. Cvetic, we seem to be proceeding too quickly.

 2             So were they entitled to social -- to social entitlements, were

 3     they entitled to health care, reimbursement of per diems and so on?

 4        A.   Yes, they had the same entitlements as members of the active

 5     forces.  They even could have increased credit for the years of service

 6     and so some time in the future they could use this when their retirement

 7     was to be calculated.

 8        Q.   Thank you.  So I'll have to ask for that increased credit for my

 9     years of service?

10             JUDGE PARKER:  Mr. Djurdjic, while you are contemplating that

11     joyful prospect, could I correct a transcript which records your

12     correction incorrectly.  You mentioned much earlier that there was a

13     "president" recorded instead of "minister," in the transcript.  That

14     should have been at page 5, line 1.  Not as you are recorded as saying

15     line 5, page 21 -- 51.  With a bit of luck between us, we will now have

16     the minister in the right place.

17             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours.

18             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Just to add, the issue of these

19     reserve forces, if we want to complete the legislative stipulation

20     concerning this, there is yet another instruction.

21             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation]

22        Q.   Thank you, Mr. Witness, we will come to that later on because of

23     our procedure.  But can we now explain, members of the police reserve

24     squads, am I right to say that these persons did not have the status of

25     authorised officials pursuant to the Law on the Internal Affairs?

Page 6742

 1        A.   Yes.

 2        Q.   Would I be right in saying that these people do not have the same

 3     rights to salary, per diem, health insurance, and other insurance?

 4        A.   Yes.

 5        Q.   Is it fair to say that those are people who pursue their regular

 6     jobs, and in their place of residence carry out the defence of their

 7     population centres?

 8        A.   Yes.

 9        Q.   Is it correct that these people are not members of the

10     Ministry of the Interior?

11        A.   Yes.  Or rather, to be quite precise, they are not employed with

12     the Ministry of the Interior.

13        Q.   Just one last question on this:  When immobilisation call-up is

14     announced, do these people have to report to the units where they have a

15     wartime assignment?

16        A.   Yes.

17             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could you please show page 11 in

18     B/C/S.  Sorry, page 4 in B/C/S and page 11 in English.

19        Q.   Could you tell me something about this Article 33?

20        A.   Yes.  This provision of Article 33 of the Law on Internal Affairs

21     states that the employees of the Ministry of the Interior are obliged to

22     carry out all the orders of the minister except for those orders which

23     constitute a criminal offence.

24             This applies not only to the Ministry of the Interior.  This

25     applies to all the ministries in the Republic of Serbia and all this is

Page 6743

 1     governed by the law on the work of state authorities.  That means that

 2     employees in all the ministries are duty-bound to carry out all the

 3     orders of their superiors apart from those which constitute crimes.

 4             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we now have page 5 in B/C/S

 5     and page 16 in English.

 6        Q.   I'd like to know, Mr. Cvetic, about Articles 51, 52, and 53.

 7     These are the basic provisions governing disciplinary liability and

 8     disciplinary proceedings?

 9        A.   Yes.

10        Q.   They were later specified by the decree on disciplinary

11     proceedings and the wartime decree on the same?

12        A.   Yes.

13             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Now, we need page 17 of the

14     English version.

15             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, let me first explain

16     paragraph 1 of Article 56.  An employee shall be removed from the

17     Ministry of the Interior if criminal proceedings have been instituted

18     against him for criminal charges stipulated in Article 34, paragraph 1,

19     item 1 of this law.  So there is no other possibility.  The person shall

20     be removed.

21             And the second paragraph says, An employee may be removed from

22     the ministry when criminal proceedings have been instituted against him

23     for criminal charges that are subject to prosecution ex officio, or when

24     disciplinary proceedings have been instituted against him for serious

25     violation of work obligations and duties.

Page 6744

 1             So it is up to the superior in this case to decide whether to

 2     remove the offender or not.  Whereas in the first paragraph, it says

 3     explicitly that the person has to be removed.

 4             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation]

 5        Q.   Now, let me go back a little.  When it is established that an

 6     employee of the Ministry of the Interior is guilty of a serious crime, am

 7     I right that this has nothing to do with remand in police custody that is

 8     decided in pre-indictment proceedings at the SUP or with the remand in

 9     custody in pre-trial proceedings?

10        A.   Correct.

11        Q.   Now, Article 72.

12             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Which is page 6 in B/C/S and 21 in

13     English.

14             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I'm very familiar with this

15     article.

16        Q.   This stipulates the basis for sending an employee of the MUP to

17     other organisational units?

18        A.   Yes.  But here in this provision, the reason, the basis for

19     sending -- for seconding an employee of the MUP elsewhere has to be

20     explicitly explained, otherwise in some cases it is up to the minister or

21     chief of section whether to do this with certain employees -- not do

22     this.

23             What I am trying to say?  A person who is sent to perform

24     security jobs in Kosovo and Metohija, in the decision to send that

25     person, it must be stated exactly for which period this is done, and the

Page 6745

 1     lawmaker says that this period may be at least 30 days but no more than

 2     one year.  More than one year would be contrary to the law.

 3             There was some decisions when this is specified and other

 4     decisions where it is not specified.

 5        Q.   Yes.  But every individual decision to send a person elsewhere

 6     could be appealed to the minister of the interior; correct?

 7        A.   Yes, but that's a different procedure.  What -- how this

 8     complaint is handled, we need to explain this until the end.  Usually

 9     when a decision is appealed, the appeal is unsuccessful.

10        Q.   Well, every decision can be appealed?

11        A.   Yes, but every decision could be appealed to the minister within

12     eight days.

13             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we now have P357.

14        Q.   This is the real -- clean version of the rules of the internal --

15     on the internal organisation of the Ministry of Interior that was in

16     effect at the time.  Do you agree it's the right one?

17        A.   Yes, although there were amendments later.

18        Q.   Yes, including in end 1999.  You have already explained

19     Article 2.  Article 3 is local jurisdiction of Secretariats; we won't go

20     through that.

21             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Let's move to Article 5, that's

22     page 6.  In fact, 8 in B/C/S; 8 in English it says.

23        Q.   Anyway, I'm interested in Article 5.  Could you comment on

24     Article 5.  I would like you to explain this bit, OUPs, Departments of

25     Internal Affairs and Secretariats do their work immediately in the

Page 6746

 1     territory where they are based?

 2        A.   Yes.  A Secretariat of Internal Affairs is established as an

 3     internal organisational unit to the Ministry of the Interior to handle

 4     Internal Affairs for a certain number of municipalities.  Territorially

 5     speaking, these were usually districts.

 6             Let's take a specific example.  The SUP Kosovska Mitrovica was

 7     organised to handle Internal Affairs in the district of

 8     Kosovska Mitrovica.  That was true of all the other districts and SUPs.

 9             Each Secretariat had smaller organisational units that were

10     called departments of Internal Affairs, and police stations in

11     municipalities.  What would this depend on?  On the size of the territory

12     and the complexity of the security situation.  If a municipality is

13     smaller and suffers from no major security problems, such municipalities

14     would have police stations.  But police stations were organisationally

15     linked, belonged to the Secretariat.

16        Q.   Could we now look at Article 6.

17        A.   Yes, and it's all correct.

18        Q.   So the minister of the interior was authorised to make decisions

19     to set up specialised and Special Police units, operations groups, and

20     other specialised units?

21        A.   Yes.  The minister could do it himself, or he could authorise

22     another person to do it; but the authorised person could not do it

23     without the minister's consent.

24        Q.   So even if this is done but an authorised person, the minister is

25     answerable?

Page 6747

 1        A.   Absolutely.  Because the person was acting on the authority of

 2     the minister.

 3             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we now look at Article 7.

 4     We have the right page in English, but in B/C/S I believe it's the next

 5     page.

 6             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't see well on this monitor,

 7     but I can suppose what it's about because I'm familiar with this subject.

 8             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we make it a bit larger.

 9             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

10             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation]

11        Q.   This article governs sectors and administrations in the ministry?

12        A.   Yes.  And their responsibilities.

13        Q.   Is it fair to say that since there are two sectors, public

14     security and state security, the only person above both is the minister?

15        A.   Yes.

16        Q.   Is it correct that members of one sector may not issue

17     assignments to members of the other sector?

18        A.   No, these sectors are completely separate.  These are completely

19     separate services with different methods of work.

20        Q.   Is it correct that only the minister by his own decision can

21     create a body involving members of both sectors and identify their

22     assignments and methods of work?

23        A.   Yes.

24        Q.   When you said that in 1998 an intersectorial body of the MUP was

25     formed, and you were talking about that in relation to Adem Jashari, am I

Page 6748

 1     right in saying that this decision was made by the minister?

 2        A.   The creation of an intersectorial body is the responsibility of

 3     the minister, and the minister appointed chief of the state security

 4     sector at the head of this body and his deputy was chief of the public

 5     security sector, Mr. Vlastimir Djordjevic.  And the chief of the state

 6     security sector was Jovica Stanisic.

 7             THE INTERPRETER:  Could counsel now repeat the numbers, please.

 8             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we now have page 9 in

 9     English and look at Article 9.

10        Q.   You should be an expert for this article.

11        A.   No, I could not call myself an expert, but I was working with

12     this for a long time.

13        Q.   Explain this Article 9, please.  Especially how it worked in

14     practice; practice is what I'm interested in.

15             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we zoom in a bit.  I am

16     sorry, I have not made a hard copy.  And Mr. Stamp won't give me a hard

17     copy, I suppose.

18        Q.   It's not long; you can answer.  We are waiting for you.

19        A.   Oh, I was waiting for your okay.  Every sector in the ministry,

20     every organisational unit in the ministry, was preparing, even during

21     peacetime, to act in the event of immediate threat of war, state of war,

22     and other contingencies.  Every sector, every organisational unit, and

23     every administration prepared its plan of defence.

24             This plan of defence contained the following:  A security

25     evaluation, plan of readiness, plan of mobilisation, plan of employment

Page 6749

 1     of forces and resources, plan of defence of population, plan of security

 2     measures, and plan of organisation of communications security, and plan

 3     of measures of alert.  This was done so that when immediate threat of war

 4     is proclaimed, the units can immediately start putting into effect these

 5     plans, and, of course, special assignments are also involved in emergency

 6     situations.

 7             To proclaim the state of immediate threat of war and the state of

 8     war was the exclusive right of the National Assembly, but every segment

 9     of the defence system made these plans of defence.

10        Q.   At the seat of the ministry, was there a particular

11     administration which had a particular unit dealing with this?

12        A.   At the seat of the ministry, there was a section for defence

13     planning.

14        Q.   What about every SUP?

15        A.   In every SUP there was a person in charge of that desk.  He was

16     called inspector for defence planning, defence preparations.  And this

17     was part of the police department which is a smaller unit.

18        Q.   Did these contingency plans arise from the defence plan?

19        A.   Yes.

20             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we now have a look at

21     Article 10.  This is all right in the English version, the page is all

22     right.

23        Q.   Let me just repeat my last question:  Were these contingency

24     plans made pursuant to the federal Law on Defence?

25        A.   Yes.

Page 6750

 1        Q.   Thank you.

 2             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we now take a look at

 3     Article 10.

 4        A.   Could I please add, not only law but there was a range of bylaws

 5     as well, different instructions, orders, methodological instructions, so

 6     there were quite a lot of regulations that belonged to bylaws.  They were

 7     different acts and different coordination that needed to be made between

 8     military territorial commands and different other bodies of authority.

 9        Q.   Thank you.  Mr. Cvetic, could you now take a look at Article 10,

10     please.

11        A.   Yes, and this is all correct, and this was applied in practice.

12        Q.   Am I right to say that this article which regulates the authority

13     of the chief of the sector or chief of Secretariat, that they could set

14     up permanent or ad hoc staffs, and it further on stipulates the

15     conditions under which this could be done?

16        A.   Yes, but in practice, chief of Secretariats had no need to set up

17     staffs, though the lawmaker provided for this possibility.  The

18     Secretariats usually set up commissions or Working Groups to analyse

19     certain situations or decide on measures and actives.

20        Q.   Thank you.  Could you please focus your attention on paragraph 2

21     now which talks about composition, tasks, dead-lines, powers, and other

22     conditions contained in paragraph 1 of this article.  So within the scope

23     of their activity or the order received from the minister, these could be

24     decided on by the chief of the sector.  And it goes on and says so they

25     have to include all this in a document and inform minister immediately?

Page 6751

 1        A.   That is correct.

 2        Q.   Later on we will in practice come back to this article on a

 3     number of occasions.

 4        A.   This was not merely practice.  This is the way in which it was

 5     stipulated by law.  In other ministries they had similar practice.

 6        Q.   Thank you.

 7             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we now take a look at

 8     Article 12, please.  It's on the same page in B/C/S version, and in the

 9     English version this is on the next page.

10        Q.   Mr. Cvetic, could you please tell us what this article actually

11     meant in practice?  What does it mean that Secretariats shall carry out

12     all tasks in the sphere of the ministry as established in these rules and

13     that they are responsible for the security situation in the area for

14     which they have been established?

15        A.   They were responsible for the security situation, for public law

16     and order situation pertaining to crime, traffic, also fire-fighting,

17     aliens, and also the situation pertaining to the -- to people exercising

18     their rights in front of various bodies of the ministry.

19        Q.   Thank you.

20        A.   But I'm talking about only one segment of the security, so I'm

21     only talking about public security here.

22        Q.   Yes, obviously these are the rules on the internal organisation

23     of the public security sector, and earlier on I believe it was stipulated

24     that the state security was to be stipulated in another set of rules.  Am

25     I right to say that?

Page 6752

 1        A.   Yes.

 2        Q.   Mr. Cvetic, could you please tell us what were the internal

 3     organisational units of the SUP Kosovska Mitrovica at the time when you

 4     were there?  I'm not talking about OUPs and police stations, I'm talking

 5     about the seat of SUP.

 6        A.   The internal organisational units of the SUP of

 7     Kosovska Mitrovica at its seat were at follows:  The police department,

 8     the Crime Police Department, the department for aliens and passports, the

 9     fire-fighting police department, and department for general and joined

10     affairs, and also we had a traffic police section.  Within the police

11     department, we also had a police station.

12        Q.   Thank you.  In order to save some time, let me ask you the

13     following:  Apart from carrying out duties pertaining to the

14     Internal Affairs in accordance with the law and the rules, what was your

15     relationship towards the local administration, local authorities

16     district, and so on?

17        A.   As a chief of the Secretariat, I was in contact with the head of

18     the district and presidents of municipalities.  And at these meetings and

19     in our mutual conducts, we obviously analysed the security situation in

20     the region.  And presidents of municipality shared some security related

21     problems with me, those that they had in their respective territories.

22             But presidents of municipalities and head of the district were

23     not authorised to issue any specific tasks to the chief of the

24     Secretariat.  However, they could ask from the chief of the Secretariat

25     to engage certain units, to secure certain facilities or certain roads;

Page 6753

 1     but the procedure for doing that was very clearly stipulated.

 2        Q.   Thank you.  It seems to me that in certain occasions when the

 3     conditions were met, when there were occurrences that were interesting

 4     for a specific territory, you were obliged to inform the chief of the

 5     specific district or president of the municipality about this?

 6        A.   Yes.  They received this on a daily basis, this information, the

 7     head of the district and presidents of the municipalities, they received

 8     it -- the head of district received it were SUP and presidents of

 9     municipalities received that from OUPs or police stations in their

10     respective municipalities.

11        Q.   Thank you.

12             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we now have the Exhibit P69.

13        Q.   Mr. Cvetic, this is the law on state administration.  Article 43.

14             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] In English this is on page 2, and

15     in B/C/S this is on page 4.

16        Q.   Mr. Witness --

17        A.   I apologise, I can't see this.

18             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] We have both versions in English.

19     Could we please have B/C/S version on one side.

20        Q.   But let me read out Article 43 for you, it stipulates as follows:

21             "The minister shall exercise the rights and duties specified in

22     the constitution and the law and shall be in charge of the work of his

23     ministry in conformity with this law."

24        A.   This is absolutely true, and this applied to all the ministries

25     in the Republic of Serbia.

Page 6754

 1        Q.   Thank you.  Am I right to say that Article 44 specifies that the

 2     minister was to organise and ensure the lawful and effective performance

 3     of tasks and that he was to decide on the rights, duties, and

 4     responsibilities of employees?

 5        A.   Yes, that is correct.

 6        Q.   And this is the basis for the adoption of the rules on

 7     disciplinary responsibility, disciplinary procedures, and some other

 8     rules which could be only adopted by the minister in MUP for example?

 9        A.   Yes.

10        Q.   Thank you.  In Article 44, paragraph 2, it also specifies that

11     the minister was responsible for carrying out the function that he has

12     been entrusted and for the work of the ministry?

13        A.   I can't see that on my monitor.

14             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we please have the following

15     page in B/C/S.

16             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.  Since minister was a member

17     of the government, he answered to the government.

18             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation]

19        Q.   Thank you.  Now, could you please take a look at Article 46.  Am

20     I right to say that this article stipulates, or rather, regulates the

21     status of assistant ministers; and in the second paragraph, it stipulates

22     who shall appoint the minister?

23        A.   Yes, this was done by the government following the proposal of

24     the minister.

25        Q.   Another thing, the minister was to determine in which particular

Page 6755

 1     areas his assistants were to assist him?

 2        A.   The minister decided which particular assistants were going to

 3     help him in which areas of his responsibilities, and he proposed these

 4     ministers to the government, and the government could appoint them.

 5        Q.   Thank you.

 6        A.   Usually these were the key areas, key sectors, and the assistant

 7     ministers were appointed for the most significant sectors.  As a rule,

 8     not always, but this was up to the estimate and up to the decision of

 9     each single minister.

10        Q.   Thank you.  But it seems to me that the decision of the

11     government on the appointment of the assistant ministers did not specify

12     for which particular sector or area the assistant minister was to be

13     tasked.  This was up to the decision of the minister which was taken

14     later on?

15        A.   I can't really answer that.  I can't really say anything about

16     these decisions.

17        Q.   Okay.  I believe there's just another article that I find

18     interesting here, it is Article 69 of this law.

19             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] In B/C/S this is on page 6.

20        Q.   Actually, this is a general article about all the units of the

21     administration saying that the decision was to be made about individual

22     appointments, so I believe that this is an article that's relevant for

23     different acts that were adopted at MUP.

24        A.   Yes, and if any other law -- unless any specific law relevant for

25     the particular area stipulated otherwise.

Page 6756

 1        Q.   All right.  It seems to me that on page 21, line 19, it says --

 2     it should be "assistant minister."

 3             MR. STAMP:  Your Honours, as we don't have paragraph 69 in

 4     English and since it is a very short paragraph, perhaps the witness could

 5     be asked to read it slowly so that whatever he is commenting on could be

 6     on the record.

 7             JUDGE PARKER:  Thank you.  A good idea.

 8             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation]

 9        Q.   Mr. Witness, can you now see Article 69?

10        A.   "The decision shall be used to decide on individual

11     administrative and other individual issues in line with the law and other

12     regulations."

13             What does this mean?  In administrative procedure and in line

14     with the law, the administrative procedure was to be carried out in line

15     with the law on administrative procedure which is a different law from

16     this one.

17             Here it is simply a possibilities provided to use decision to

18     decide on individual administrative matters and other individual matters

19     but in line with the law, and this is the law on administrative procedure

20     or other regulations.  And the administrative procedure in the Republic

21     of Serbia was regulated by the law on general administrative procedure.

22        Q.   Thank you.

23             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we now have 1049.  P1049.

24        Q.   Witness, let's go back to criminal liability in the MUP and the

25     relevant decree.  You told us yesterday that when a member of the MUP

Page 6757

 1     commits a crime, the administration and his chief are informed.  Did it

 2     ever happen to you that you did not get approval to prosecute a member of

 3     the MUP who was guilty of a serious offence?

 4        A.   It only happened in the case of less serious offences.

 5        Q.   I was only asking about the serious offence.  On what basis did

 6     you ask for approval from the chief of sector?

 7        A.   Well, this is a good question.  Until 1992, chiefs of

 8     Secretariats could do this independently.  In 1992, when the public

 9     security sector got Radovan Stojicic for the chief, employees of the

10     Secretariats, chiefs of Secretariats, became treated as people on

11     assignment, and they had no independence in decision-making.

12             Prior to 1992, chiefs of Secretariats were appointed by the

13     minister with the approval of the government, and they had certain

14     latitude of independence.  And in 1992, when Mr. Radovan Stojicic became

15     chief of that sector, he made a decision called decision on assignments,

16     and chiefs of Secretariats became assigned employees just like any other

17     employees.  And chiefs of Secretariats were no longer able to take any

18     action.  They could not even move a person from one job within the

19     Secretariat to another job.  They could not start any sort of proceedings

20     before they asked chief of sector for approval.

21             This approval was later given by heads of administrations.

22     Chiefs of Secretariats at the time were not allowed to inform the media

23     about any incidents, security incidents, in their territory before they

24     got approval from the chief of sector.

25             This was ordered by a dispatch that Mr. Stojicic sent to all

Page 6758

 1     Secretariats.  And this is why we had to seek approval from sector chief

 2     or from heads of administration.

 3        Q.   Let me get this right.  He was deputy minister, Mr. Stojicic;

 4     right?

 5        A.   Yes, he was deputy minister and sector chief.

 6        Q.   But -- and in the absence of the minister, he stood in for the

 7     minister and had all the minister's powers?

 8        A.   Yes, in the minister's absence, he exercised all the minister's

 9     powers and responsibilities.

10        Q.   And normally the deputy minister and the -- the

11     deputy [as interpreted] minister does not have any other authority except

12     the authority delegated to him by the minister?

13        A.   The situation is a bit different when he is at the same time

14     sector chief.

15             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] In says in the transcript "deputy

16     minister."  It should be "assistant minister."  Lines 23 and 24.

17        Q.   Mr. Cvetic, we do have to slow down a bit, both of us, because we

18     waste more time on correcting the record than we save time by speaking

19     fast.

20             In practice, for serious violations of work obligations, did it

21     ever happen to you that you did not get approval to continue proceedings?

22        A.   Not in relation to serious violations.

23        Q.   Thank you.  Now, during the war, a decree on Internal Affairs in

24     the state of war was adopted, and you acted pursuant to that decree?

25        A.   I believe it was adopted sometime in early April, if I remember

Page 6759

 1     correctly.  I had to act under that decree for a very short time.  I was

 2     chief of SUP until the 16th.  After the 16th, all this legislation and

 3     everything that had to do with the work of the SUP of Kosovska Mitrovica

 4     was no longer of great interest to me, and I believe the reason is

 5     understandable.

 6        Q.   During the war with this decree, the rules on disciplinary

 7     accountability changed and the chiefs of SUPs were authorised to start

 8     and conduct first instance proceedings, disciplinary proceedings?

 9        A.   Yes, but this decree was adopted on the 7th or the 8th of April,

10     and by the time it got handed down to the SUPs, I did not have much time

11     to deal with it.

12             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we now have D101.

13        Q.   Mr. Cvetic, I think we've mentioned this a moment ago.  This is

14     the instruction on the performance of Internal Affairs for reserve forces

15     of the ministry?

16        A.   Yes, these instructions were signed -- this directive was signed

17     by the minister himself.

18        Q.   But is it also true that in addition to this directive, the

19     minister also issued orders to call up and engage reserve personnel

20     biannually, I believe?

21        A.   Well, reserve personnel could not be called up at all until the

22     relevant order by the minister was issued.

23             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we now have D103.

24        Q.   Mr. Cvetic, is this the order you just mentioned?  This one is

25     dated 25 December, 1998.

Page 6760

 1        A.   Yes.

 2             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we now have P52, please.

 3        Q.   Mr. Cvetic, could you explain to us the significance of this

 4     instruction in the practical work of law enforcement officials?

 5        A.   Of course.  Every police station in the territory of the

 6     Republic of Serbia determined the necessary number of sectors.  Sectors

 7     could be of the first category or other.  Thus, the police station

 8     commander would suggest to divide the territory of the station into

 9     sectors.  This proposal goes to the competent administration of the

10     ministry.  When the competent administration issues its approval,

11     approves the proposal, then these sectors are identified on the territory

12     of the police station.

13             In order to carry out police work in a certain sector, a

14     directive or instructions were needed.  And this is precisely

15     instructions on the organisation and implementation of law enforcement

16     activities in the security sector.  Various law enforcement activities in

17     the security sector are identified, and it is also specified what should

18     be in the file, in the dossier of the security sector.

19             Every sector had its own dossier, and this dossier was prepared

20     by the leader of the security sector.  So every security sector had a

21     leader appointed to it, and this leader was followed by a certain number

22     of policemen.  They constantly monitored the security situation in their

23     sector and informed the police station commander.  The police station

24     commander would then identify further necessary activities.

25        Q.   Thank you.  While we are talking about this, could you tell us

Page 6761

 1     what is considered to be regular police work, regular security work, and

 2     what would be special or extraordinary security work?

 3        A.   Well, regular security work would be in peacetime, no major

 4     disorders, no major demonstrations or inter-ethnic clashes, no

 5     particularly grave crimes with elements of violence.  In different

 6     conditions, if all these indicators are higher, then those would be

 7     extraordinary circumstances.

 8             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we now have D1004-1902.

 9        Q.   Mr. Cvetic, you will soon see on the screen the instruction on

10     information and reporting.  Unfortunately, we don't have a translation.

11     We still haven't received it.

12             Could you tell us how informing and reporting was regulated in

13     the Ministry of the Interior?

14        A.   Yes.  This was adopted in 1994 by the minister, and this governs

15     internal sharing of information within the Ministry of Interior.  And as

16     far as internal -- sorry, external informing is concerned, it is

17     specified what kind of information can be given by chiefs of SUP to

18     outside parties, other agencies, and the media.

19        Q.   Is it about informing and reporting on security incidents to be

20     submitted to certain identified beneficiaries?

21        A.   Yes.

22        Q.   Is it right that unlike the army the police reports incidents and

23     phenomena, whereas the army reports on activities?

24        A.   Well, you see, you can put it that way, conditionally speaking,

25     even among theoreticians there are various interpretations of this.

Page 6762

 1        Q.   We won't go into that.

 2        A.   Conditionally speaking, you could say that this was a difference.

 3        Q.   Could you tell us, informed by the practice, what did daily

 4     reporting mean?

 5        A.   Every Secretariat of Internal Affairs in the territory of Serbia

 6     would register, record everything, current incidents and phenomena in the

 7     field of security for the past 24 hours.  This would have to do with law

 8     and order, general crime, economic crimes, violent crime, organised

 9     crime, traffic safety, and other areas related to security.

10             All the police departments and police stations would submit these

11     reports to the duty service at the seat of the ministry.  The chief of

12     the duty service would record all this in the log-book of daily

13     incidents.  From this log-book of daily incidents, the most important

14     incidents are extracted to be included in the summary of the most

15     important incidents, and this daily report is submitted to the operation

16     centre.

17             If an incident is extremely important and needs to be reported

18     immediately, that incident would not wait to be entered into this daily

19     bulletin.  Instead, a dispatch is sent immediately to the competent

20     administration in the ministry.  And later on when the time comes, it

21     also becomes part of the daily bulletin.

22        Q.   So the daily bulletin shows everything important that happened in

23     the territory of the SUP in the past 24 hours?

24        A.   No, only the most important things.  Lots of things happen every

25     day.

Page 6763

 1        Q.   You worked in conformity with this instruction; right?

 2        A.   Yes.

 3        Q.   So you submitted daily reports also to the MUP staff in Pristina?

 4        A.   Yes.

 5        Q.   I got some linguistic suggestions.  When you say "events" it is

 6     being interpreted into English as "incident" and my associates suggest

 7     that it should be "event."

 8             JUDGE PARKER:  The witness will say what he believes should be

 9     said.  The official interpreters will interpret it as they think it

10     appropriate.  If you want to dispute a particular interpretation, you

11     should raise it, and we will go through the process of reviewing the

12     tape.  But off the cuff suggestions for changing the words is not really

13     going to be a practical way, Mr. Djurdjic, of dealing with this.  I hope

14     that will guide you.

15             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours.  I did

16     not know about that rule.  Because when I speak to a witness in Serbian,

17     I understand what he is saying.

18        Q.   We have been talking about reporting to the MUP staff.  Did you

19     also submit these reports to them?

20        A.   Yes.

21        Q.   Did you submit to them any other reports other than this daily

22     bulletin that you submitted to the MUP?

23        A.   Chiefs of Secretariats had to report to the head of the MUP staff

24     every morning, and to inform him of all current events and incidents that

25     were not covered by the bulletin.

Page 6764

 1             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Let us perhaps mark this document

 2     for identification pending translation.

 3             JUDGE PARKER:  You've mentioned a number, Exhibit D1004, I think,

 4     when introducing this document.  Is that a 65 ter number?

 5                           [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

 6             JUDGE PARKER:  It will be received as an exhibit.

 7             THE REGISTRAR:  Exhibit D232, Your Honours.

 8             JUDGE PARKER:  I should have said marked for identification

 9     pending translation, of course.

10             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.  I believe

11     it's time for the break.

12             JUDGE PARKER:  Yes, we will have the first break and resume

13     at 11.00.

14                           [The witness stands down]

15                           --- Recess taken at 10.30 a.m.

16                           --- On resuming at 11.02 a.m.

17                           [The witness takes the stand]

18             JUDGE PARKER:  Yes, Mr. Djurdjic.

19             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours.  Could I

20     please have the Exhibit 1036.

21        Q.   Mr. Cvetic, this is a decision whereby you were sent to the

22     SUP Kosovska Mitrovica to perform the tasks and duties of chief of

23     Kosovska Mitrovica Secretariat as of 1st of January, 1997.  Am I right to

24     say that this decision was made by Mr. Radovan Stojicic who was chief of

25     the sector at the time?

Page 6765

 1        A.   Yes.

 2        Q.   Am I right to say that he made this decision with his authority

 3     of an assistant minister?

 4        A.   Yes.  And chief of sector as well.

 5        Q.   I'm interested in the following paragraph where it says:  "

 6             While performing the aforementioned tasks ..."

 7             And then here we have the entitlements that you had, salary and

 8     so on?

 9        A.   Yes, this was pursuant to the law up to 50 per cent of the

10     monthly pay and so on.

11        Q.   Okay.  And how were your per diems paid out, through which body?

12        A.   Through the Secretariat in Mitrovica, and 50 per cent through the

13     Secretariat in Kragujevac.

14        Q.   Thank you.  Are you talking about the salary?

15        A.   Salary, and 50 per cent in Kragujevac and per diems in Mitrovica.

16        Q.   Thank you.  Once again I'll have to correct something in the

17     transcript.  This decision was made by the deputy minister, who at the

18     time was chief of public security sector Mr. Radovan Stojicic?

19        A.   Yes.

20        Q.   And everything else I previously asked, your answer would have

21     been the same?

22        A.   Yes.

23             JUDGE PARKER:  Did you mean deputy minister or assistant

24     minister?  I see it's translated here as "deputy minister," that's what

25     you mean?  Just keeping you consistent, Mr. Djurdjic.

Page 6766

 1             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Mr. Djurdjic, thank you.  Well,

 2     this is exactly what I asked, Mr. Stojicic was deputy minister and chief

 3     of the sector at the time when this decision was made.  Later on we will

 4     show a different decision.

 5             Could we please see the Exhibit P77.

 6        Q.   Mr. Witness, now we'll see this in the English as well, all

 7     right.  This is the decision on the termination of your tasks and duties

 8     dated 15th of April, 1999.  Was this decision made by the authority of

 9     the minister?  Is it stated here?

10        A.   Yes.

11        Q.   At the very end of this decision, can you see that this decision

12     was made by the assistant minister chief of sector?

13        A.   Yes.

14        Q.   Could you now tell us what is the difference between the

15     assistant minister and the deputy minister in this particular function?

16        A.   The deputy minister stood in for the minister at the time when he

17     was absent and he had all the rights and obligations of minister.

18     Whereas an assistant minister did not have these rights and obligations.

19     He was only charged with one specific sector within the ministry.

20        Q.   Thank you.

21             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we now see the Exhibit P78.

22        Q.   Mr. Cvetic, this is a decision dated April the 15th on

23     Lieutenant-Colonel Vucina Janicijevic being appointed chief of

24     Secretariat in Kosovska Mitrovica; am I right?

25        A.   Yes.

Page 6767

 1        Q.   Am I right to say that this decision was made by

 2     Minister Mr. Vlajko Stojiljkovic?

 3        A.   Yes.

 4        Q.   At the time when all of this was happening, so when you receive

 5     the decision stating that you have completed your tasks and

 6     Mr. Vucinjevic [as interpreted] was appointed, do you remember that this

 7     decision on the fact that you were terminated at this position was made

 8     at the level of the ministry?

 9        A.   Yes.

10        Q.   Thank you.

11             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we please see the

12     Exhibit P75.

13        Q.   Mr. Cvetic, this is the decision on the assignment of

14     Mr. Bosko Petric to perform duties and tasks of chief of Secretariat in

15     Pristina, and it was made by the minister; am I right?

16        A.   Yes.

17        Q.   Thank you.

18             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we please see the

19     Exhibit P79.

20        Q.   Mr. Cvetic, am I right to say that the decision of the

21     15th of April, 1999, on the termination of the tasks in Pristina was made

22     by the assistant minister chief of public security sector at the time,

23     Mr. Vlastimir Djordjevic, upon the authority or authorisation of the

24     minister?

25        A.   Yes.

Page 6768

 1        Q.   So on the basis of these documents, am I right to say that

 2     whenever such a decision was made by an assistant minister, it was made

 3     upon the authorisation of the minister?

 4        A.   In these cases, yes.

 5        Q.   Thank you.  Yesterday, we mentioned Momcilo Stojanovic.  Could

 6     you please repeat, as far as you know, what was his position with his

 7     staff in Pristina?

 8        A.   In late October, early November 1998, he came to the MUP staff in

 9     Pristina.  In early 1999, given that in the previous year the

10     Ministry of the Interior had a plan of housing, construction of housing

11     facilities in Kosovo and Metohija in order to resolve the housing

12     situation of the employees of the ministry.  According to that plan, in

13     the territory of SUP in Kosovska Mitrovica a building was supposed to be

14     constructed with between 30 and 50 apartments.  So he came to SUP in

15     Kosovska Mitrovica to talk to the contractors in relation to the

16     construction of this building.  And on basis of this, I can assume that

17     he was in charge of these housing issues.

18        Q.   Thank you.  Did you hear that he was sent there also in order to

19     arrange the business premises that were used for human resources purposes

20     and some other personnel functions?

21        A.   Well, one could conclude that since he carried out the tasks

22     pertaining to housing, so these were investments, so possibly he was also

23     in charge of maintenance of facilities in which different organs of the

24     police in Kosovo and Metohija were situated.

25        Q.   Thank you.

Page 6769

 1             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation]  Could we please see the

 2     Exhibit D99.

 3        Q.   I believe you haven't seen this decision before.

 4        A.   No.  This is the very first time I can see this decision.

 5             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we please see the second page

 6     of this decision.

 7        Q.   Mr. Cvetic, do you recognise this signature of the minister?

 8        A.   Yes, this is his signature.

 9        Q.   Thank you.  Could you please take a look at item 3 of this

10     decision.

11        A.   Yes.

12        Q.   In order not to come back, under items 3 and 4 we can see what

13     were the tasks that he was supposed to assist in?

14        A.   Yes.  This is what the decision states, but I answered previously

15     what was it that he dealt with when he came to the

16     Secretariat in Kosovska Mitrovica.  I wasn't aware of this decision.

17        Q.   All right.

18             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we please go back to page 1.

19        Q.   Am I right to say that under this item 1,

20     General Momcilo Stojanovic was assigned as a member of the staff to fight

21     terrorism in the territory of autonomous province of Kosovo and Metohija?

22        A.   Yes.

23        Q.   And here it says:

24             "Pursuant to the decision to establish the ministry staff for the

25     prevention of terrorism DT 01 ..."  number and so on?

Page 6770

 1        A.   Yes, that is correct, but while I was in the territory of

 2     Kosovo and Metohija, I did not see this decision; I did not even know

 3     that this particular staff was established.

 4        Q.   All right.  But then these tasks under 1 also include the task

 5     that you mention, housing; and item 2 mention other tasks as well?

 6        A.   Yes, indeed, because these are similar tasks.  They all pertain

 7     to investment, regular maintenance, and investment into new facilities.

 8     This is all rather similar.

 9        Q.   Thank you.  Since you worked in this organisation for years, in

10     this particular decision nothing -- there's no mention of salary which is

11     normally included in decisions of this type?

12        A.   No, but these persons mentioned in this decision most probably

13     had a decision on being sent somewhere which encompassed provisions on

14     salary, so possibly it wasn't necessary to repeat the same provisions

15     here.

16        Q.   Okay.  Thank you.  This date, there, is 2nd of October, 1998; is

17     that correct?

18        A.   Yes.

19             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we please now see the

20     Exhibit P1044.

21        Q.   Witness, you saw this decision yesterday.  It was shown to you.

22     It's dated 5 October, 1998.  It's signed by assistant minister chief of

23     sector, Vlastimir Djordjevic.  It's the decision to send

24     General Momcilo Stojanovic to perform a security job in the autonomous

25     province of Kosovo-Metohija on the the authority of the minister?

Page 6771

 1        A.   Yes.

 2        Q.   Do you agree with me that the salary stipulated in this decision

 3     and this decision was in fact made to be submitted to the financial

 4     services section so that these benefits can be received, the financial

 5     services section always receives such decision?

 6        A.   Yes, and this decision, that kind of decisions, are always

 7     submitted also to the personnel services.

 8        Q.   But in the previous decision we did not have this salary

 9     provision?

10        A.   It wasn't necessary because the decision to send someone already

11     included provisions about salary.

12        Q.   Yes.  But the decision of the minister was dated 2nd of October,

13     and this one is dated the 5th October?

14        A.   Yes, but it's practically the same thing.

15        Q.   So you agree that this decision dated the 5th is in fact a

16     follow-up of the 2nd of October decision?

17        A.   Yes, basically.

18             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we now have D38.

19        Q.   Mr. Cvetic, is it the decision to send Colonel Dusan Gavranic to

20     perform to the job of chief of SUP Gnjilane, this was done on December

21     17, 1998, and the decision was made by Minister Vlajko Stojiljkovic?

22        A.   Yes.

23        Q.   Mr. Cvetic, do you know perhaps Dragan Bozovic?

24        A.   Yes.

25             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we see Exhibit P259.

Page 6772

 1        Q.   Mr. Cvetic, do you recognise the signature of

 2     Vlajko Stojiljkovic, and do you recognise this format?

 3        A.   Yes.

 4        Q.   Is it the case that by this decision, the minister sends

 5     Colonel Dragan Bozovic to the MUP staff in Pristina to a security related

 6     position?

 7        A.   Yes, we see that from the heading.  From the preamble.

 8        Q.   Is it the case that under Roman numeral III, it is envisaged that

 9     for his work, Colonel Bozovic shall be accountable to the head of the MUP

10     staff?

11        A.   Yes.  This is written in paragraph 3 of this decision.

12             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we now see P82, please.

13        Q.   Mr. Cvetic, is it the case that this decision, adopted by the

14     assistant minister public security sector chief, Vlastimir Djordjevic, is

15     a decision to send Colonel Miroslav Mijatovic -- sorry, it's the decision

16     to terminate Colonel Miroslav Mijatovic as department chief in the police

17     administration?

18        A.   Yes.

19        Q.   Did the Assistant Minister Djordjevic take this decision on the

20     authority of the minister?

21        A.   Yes.

22        Q.   Thank you.

23             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we now see P80.

24        Q.   Mr. Cvetic, this is a decision to terminate the assignment of

25     Colonel Milenko Arsenijevic also taken by Vlastimir Djordjevic, assistant

Page 6773

 1     minister, on the 1st of April, 1999.  Is it also taken on the authority

 2     of the minister?

 3        A.   You are not right because this is not on the termination.  It is

 4     the decision to send.

 5        Q.   All right.  Thank you.

 6             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we now have P144.

 7        Q.   Just for the record, Mr. Cvetic, the previous decision, P80, to

 8     send Milenko Arsenijevic was taken by public [Realtime transcript read in

 9     error "state"] security sector chief assistant minister, Vlastimir

10     Djordjevic?

11        A.   No, no.  You said state security sector, and it's public security

12     sector.

13        Q.   On the authority of the Ministry of the Interior on the

14     1st of April, 1999?

15        A.   Yes.

16        Q.   Now we see a decision to terminate captain Milan Cankovic on the

17     position of special security related tasks taken on the 30th of May,

18     1999.  It's again taken by the assistant minister sector chief,

19     Colonel-General Vlastimir Djordjevic, on the authority of the minister?

20        A.   Correct.

21        Q.   You did see Mr. Milan Cankovic at the staff during your tenure?

22        A.   Yes, I saw him, and we spoke on the phone.

23        Q.   Do you know that he was chief of communications?

24        A.   Where?

25        Q.   At the staff?

Page 6774

 1        A.   Assistant Chief of Staff for radio communications.

 2        Q.   That's what you know?

 3        A.   And I believe that's contained in the decision to establish the

 4     staff which we can see because that material is available.

 5        Q.   Mr. Cvetic, we'll come to that.  But let me ask you:  If

 6     General Djordjevic sent Mr. Cankovic there by virtue of the decision you

 7     spoke about from June 1999, that was his original authority; right?  His

 8     inherent powers?

 9        A.   No, it was the decision to set up the staff.

10        Q.   And that was in accordance with the rules?

11        A.   Yes.

12        Q.   Now, why does the minister take the decision to terminate the

13     person?

14        A.   Well, you see, the chief of sector is able to take all decisions

15     on the authority of the minister, including decisions to send and

16     decisions to terminate; and the minister can do the same.  That means,

17     what I'm trying to say is this:  The minister of the interior is at the

18     head of the ministry, and he controls the work of the ministry in its

19     entirety.  And he is accountable and responsible for the overall state of

20     affairs in the ministry.  The minister of the interior is therefore the

21     most responsible persons for all the affairs of the ministry.  For

22     certain areas of work, he can authorise other persons to decide in his

23     name.

24        Q.   You are completely right, but now we are on the ground.  If the

25     chief of the public security sector was authorised to take the decision

Page 6775

 1     to set up the staff under the rules of internal organisation, was he

 2     really authorised?  Did he have the power?

 3        A.   Yes.

 4        Q.   That's the power he has under the rules?

 5        A.   Yes.

 6        Q.   Why would he then take the decision to terminate Milan Cankovic

 7     on the authority of the minister?

 8        A.   Well, he, chief of sector, or the minister, in order to pull out

 9     a person from Kosovo and Metohija, they have to issue a decision.  A

10     decision can be withdrawn only if a decision existed to send somebody.

11        Q.   I don't know if you understood my question.  If the chief of

12     sector had powers inherent in his office it to send someone, why did he

13     need the authority of the minister to withdraw the person?

14        A.   I don't know what happened in the case of this Cankovic.

15        Q.   Let us then see --

16        A.   I don't know these things, and I cannot claim anything with any

17     certainty.  I can only speak about specific situations.  I don't know

18     whether he had blanco authority.

19        Q.   We are not talking about blanco authority.

20             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Let's see D100.

21        Q.   Mr. Cvetic, if we look at the preamble of this decision, what

22     legal grounds are cited here?

23        A.   It says:

24             "Pursuant to Article 10 of The Rules on the Internal

25     Organisation."

Page 6776

 1        Q.   So based on that, the chief of sector is authorised to form

 2     staffs?

 3        A.   Yes.  Staffs, commissions, and other working bodies, but this

 4     does not include this staff, or may include that particular staff.  It

 5     all depends on interpretation.

 6        Q.   So did he form the staff under this decision, this decision to

 7     set up the staff in Pristina?

 8        A.   Yes.

 9        Q.   And we see the missions of that staff formulated?

10        A.   Yes.

11        Q.   Under (a) that is to suppress terrorism and armed insurgency?

12        A.   Yes.

13        Q.   And then we see the following points, (b), (c), (d), et cetera?

14        A.   Yes.  In sub-item (a), the provision should be read in the

15     context of the task from para 2 because it's the task of the staff to

16     plan, organise, and guide.  Each word carries a particular meaning.  And

17     to coordinate the work of Secretariats and stations of border police in

18     the territory of Kosova-Metohija in performing for complex and important

19     duties and assignments that involve column(a) the suppression of,

20     [indiscernible], disorder, terrorism, and armed insurgence.

21        Q.   You are right; I'm not interpreting this.  I'm just saying that

22     these tasks are identified for the staff.

23             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Now, let us turn the page in

24     B/C/S.

25        Q.   Let's look at para 5.  To whom, according to this paragraph, was

Page 6777

 1     the head of staff answerable?

 2        A.   For his own work and the work of the staff, the head of staff is

 3     answerable to the chief of the public security sector.

 4        Q.   And he is answerable for the status of public security, public is

 5     very important?

 6        A.   Well, he could not be answerable for any other situation, even if

 7     someone wanted him to be because he is heading the public security

 8     sector.

 9        Q.   Now look at para 6.

10        A.   Yes.  "The staff leader shall inform" -- "shall report to the

11     chief of the public security sector any significant security incidents,

12     the measures undertaken, and the results of those measures."

13             This should be actually expanded to say "significant events in

14     the area of public security."  That would be more precise.  But since the

15     chief of the public security sector is concerned, he can only be

16     answerable for the situation in public security sector.

17        Q.   [No interpretation]

18             THE INTERPRETER:  Could counsel please repeat this.

19             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation]

20        Q.   Para 3 envisages technical assistance to be lent to

21     organisational units of the ministry in Kosovo and Metohija?

22        A.   Yes.

23        Q.   And the relevant decision on appointments will be made in due

24     course?

25        A.   Yes, and that decision was made on the 11th of June, 1998.

Page 6778

 1             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we now see P760.

 2        Q.   Mr. Cvetic, this is a decision on the appointment of members of

 3     the staff.  I believe it was made on 11th of June, 1998.  We will see

 4     that later on on the next page.  But, Mr. Cvetic, was this decision also

 5     made pursuant to Article 10 of the rules?

 6        A.   Yes.  In the preamble of this decision, we can see that it was

 7     made pursuant to Article 10 of the rules on the internal organisation of

 8     the ministry.

 9        Q.   Thank you.  Under item 1, would this decision

10     Major-General Sreten Lukic was appointed staff leader; is that correct?

11        A.   Yes.

12        Q.   Under item 2 Lieutenant-Colonel Radoslav Dinovic, assistant chief

13     of the SUP in Smederevo, was appointed deputy leader of the staff; is

14     that correct?

15        A.   Yes.

16        Q.   Was Radoslav Dinovic really deputy leader of the staff from this

17     moment onwards?

18        A.   Radoslav Dinovic came as deputy leader of the staff in 1997 in

19     June of 1997 when Colonel Mijatovic was withdrawn from the position of

20     the leader of the staff and assistant chief of traffic police

21     administration Colonel Aco Vasovic was appointed leader of the staff.  At

22     that time, Mr. Radoslav Dinovic was appointed deputy leader and we would

23     normally call him deputy Chief of Staff.

24        Q.   Okay.  That was before, but with this decision we can see the

25     relevant time is 1998?

Page 6779

 1        A.   Yes, he was still chief -- deputy Chief of Staff, but he remained

 2     in that position for a very brief period of time.

 3        Q.   Goran Radosavljevic was appointed assistant leader of the staff

 4     for interventions; is that correct?

 5        A.   Yes.

 6        Q.   Major Zarko Brakovic was appointed assistant staff leader for

 7     police affairs?

 8        A.   Yes.

 9        Q.   In the second half of 1998 and while you were there, was he

10     indeed an assistant leader of the staff?

11        A.   Well, in reality he carried out three different tasks; he had

12     three areas of responsibility.  He was at the staff an assistant leader

13     of the staff for police affairs, in SUP Pristina he was head of the

14     police department, and he was also commander of the -- of a PJP

15     detachment and later commander of 124th Detachment.

16        Q.   Okay.  But I'm just asking about members of the staff.  So could

17     you see him at all the meetings of the staff when the staff members were

18     present including the SUP chiefs or?

19        A.   Very rarely did it happen for the staff meeting to take place

20     with all the members that are listed in this decision.  Normally it will

21     just be some members of the staff that are relevant for the specific

22     topic discussed that were present at the meeting.  So Zarko Brakovic

23     attending the meetings depending on the contents discussed.

24        Q.   All right.  But can you believe me that Mr. Brakovic told us that

25     he never received this decision and that he was not a member of the staff

Page 6780

 1     starting with this date and until the end of the war?

 2        A.   As far as I can remember, he was in the staff.  And as I told

 3     you, he carried out three duties.  He had three groups of

 4     responsibilities.  So he was head of the police department, commander of

 5     a detachment, and member of the staff.  So he can always tell you that at

 6     a given moment of time, he did not carry out one duty but another one.

 7        Q.   Thank you.  But I believe the witnesses tell us the truth when

 8     they come before this court?

 9        A.   Obviously everything that I'm saying here I'm saying on the basis

10     of the information that I had.

11        Q.   Undoubtedly, Mr. Cvetic.

12             Major Miodrag Rsumovic was supposed to be a coordinator for

13     white-collar crime.  Could you see him in the period from mid-1998 until

14     the end of the period that you spent there?

15        A.   I saw him until mid-1998, but when we started with anti-terrorist

16     actions and onwards, I couldn't see him attending any of the staff

17     meetings because white-collar crime was not a topic discussed by the

18     staff, but we rather discussed the issues pertaining to anti-terrorist

19     operations.  So his attendance was not required.

20             Before that period, I saw him in person and he personally would

21     come to the SUP Kosovska Mitrovica to see the head of department for

22     fighting white-collar crime at SUP Kosovska Mitrovica, and this is where

23     I saw him.

24        Q.   Thank you.  Novica Zdravkovic was appointed coordinator of

25     general crime.  Did you see him?

Page 6781

 1        A.   Yes.

 2        Q.   Did you also see Major Radovan Vucurevic who by this decision

 3     appointed assistant leader of the staff for border police aliens?

 4        A.   I heard about him, but I do not know him in person.

 5        Q.   Thank you, we'll come to that later.

 6             Milan Cankovic was appointed assistant leader of the staff for

 7     radio communication?

 8        A.   Yes, I said that already.

 9        Q.   [No interpretation]

10             THE INTERPRETER:  If the counsel could kindly repeat the last

11     name.

12             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, in the second half of 1998 I

13     can't claim with certainty that he was present at the meetings, but he

14     was present at the meetings before that time.  Because the issues

15     discussed in the second half of June 1998 until the end September 1998

16     during the time of anti-terrorist actions, different persons attending

17     the meetings because different issues were discussed.

18             JUDGE PARKER:  You are leaping too far ahead.  You will notice at

19     about line 15 that your whole question was missed.  You were asked to

20     repeat the question.  We've got the answer.  We don't know the question.

21             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] [No interpretation]

22             THE INTERPRETER:  [Microphone not activated]

23             JUDGE PARKER:  Mr. Djurdjic, I see your microphone is switched on

24     but the interpreter didn't hear what you said.  I am afraid you'll have

25     to start again.

Page 6782

 1             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I -- this is the

 2     second time that I have to repeat this question.  I apologise.  Okay, we

 3     have to repeat this.

 4        Q.   Mr. Cvetic, I'm reading from this decision, and then I'm asking

 5     whether the persons mentioned in this decision were seen by you in the

 6     period between the -- after the second half of 1998 at the staff.  We all

 7     know what is written in the decision; this is not contested.  I'm just

 8     asking whether you saw Milos Deretic in the second half of 1998 until the

 9     period when you left Kosovska Mitrovica at the end of April 1999?

10        A.   What do you mean "at the staff"?

11        Q.   I'm asking at the meetings held in the staff?

12        A.   Sometimes he was there, sometimes he wasn't.  Depending on the

13     issues that were discussed at the meetings, there are minutes which -- of

14     these meetings which list all the attendees of these meetings.

15             Usually there were chiefs of Secretariats but not always.

16     Obviously commanders of PJPs, but not all always.  The SAJ commanders,

17     but again not always.  And some other persons from the ministry or from

18     the staff.

19             The meetings were attended by those persons that were charged

20     with the current issues, the issues that were discussed by the particular

21     meeting so that were included in the agenda of that meeting.  And the

22     staff as such did not have a single rumour facility where all the members

23     of the staff would be present.  Rather, they carried out their regular

24     duties, and when needed, they would be invited to come for a meeting.  It

25     was only the staff leader and his deputy who actually sat there, who had

Page 6783

 1     their positions there.

 2        Q.   Thank you.  Mr. Cvetic, could you believe me that Milos Deretic,

 3     when he was a witness here, he told us that he never received this

 4     decision and that he was not a member of the staff pursuant to this

 5     decision in the period between mid-1998 and the end of 1999?

 6        A.   Well, I'm saying that pursuant to this decision, he was; but I'm

 7     not saying that he was presents at the meetings of the staff after this

 8     particular time.

 9        Q.   Okay.  Then maybe it was a misunderstanding.

10        A.   But he was sometimes at the meetings of the staff possibly before

11     this period.  I know that I saw him there, but possibly not in line with

12     this particular decision.

13        Q.   Thank you.  That is exactly what I'm trying to clarify.  The next

14     person is Miroslav Krajcic an assistant in charge of quarter master?

15        A.   Yes, and he was also -- he also had the duty at the SUP in

16     Pristina.

17        Q.   Gojko Celebic who was assistant leader of the staff for

18     logistics?

19        A.   I heard about him, but I do not know him in person.

20        Q.   Dobrasin Krdzic who was in charge of medical issues?

21        A.   Again, I know about him.

22        Q.   And also we have another person, Rasko Milenkovic, who was in

23     charge of surveillance analysis or assistant leader of the staff for

24     surveillance analysis?

25        A.   I heard about him, but I can't remember his face.

Page 6784

 1        Q.   Thank you.  Item 2 of this decision states that the members of

 2     the expanded staff were going to be the heads of Secretariats of -- in

 3     the autonomous province of Kosovo and Metohija?

 4        A.   That is correct, this is what is stipulated under item 2.

 5        Q.   Thank you.

 6        A.   But I have to provide an explanation here.

 7        Q.   Go ahead.

 8        A.   These heads of Secretariats were members of the expanded staff,

 9     but they did not have any individual duties in the staff, because members

10     of the staff normally have to have specific duties so their respective

11     areas of responsibility and it needs to be clarified who they answer to.

12        Q.   Thank you.  I can agree with you, but here it is simply mentioned

13     that you were members of the expanded staff.

14        A.   Yes, well, if the Chamber can allow me to make a parallel:  It is

15     similar to the former constitution of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia

16     which stated that any citizen who, with a weapon or otherwise, could

17     contribute to the defence from the aggressor was considered to be a

18     member of the armed force, well this stipulation in reality meant nothing

19     at all because it wasn't specific enough.

20             So this is something very similar.

21        Q.   Thank you.

22             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we kindly see the

23     Exhibit P57.

24        Q.   Mr. Cvetic, this is a decision that you didn't see prior to

25     yesterday, although the Prosecution knew about it, even the last time you

Page 6785

 1     witnessed here, and the Defence team also knew about this the last time

 2     you witnessed here.

 3        A.   Nobody ever asked any questions concerning this decision.

 4        Q.   Well, this is why I'm going to do it right now.  You said that

 5     undoubtedly this was a decision made by Mr. Vlajko Stojiljkovic?

 6        A.   Can I see the last page.

 7        Q.   Well, this is what you said yesterday.

 8        A.   Yes, but there are so many different decision, so could I just

 9     see the signature.  Yes, Minister Vlajko Stojiljkovic, and I can

10     recognise this signature.

11        Q.   Thank you.  Okay.  Let us then start from the end of this

12     document in order to save some time.  In item 6 is it true that the

13     minister decided that the decisions to establish a staff of

14     21st of April, 15th of May, and 11th of June ceased to be in effect?

15        A.   Yes, but this makes no sense because this is not in

16     correspondence to the actual situation on the ground.

17        Q.   Thank you.

18             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we go back to page 1 now.

19        Q.   Am I right to say that this decision was made on the

20     June the 16th, 1998?

21        A.   Yes.

22        Q.   Thank you.  Am I right to say that within this decision,

23     Sreten Lukic was also appointed leader of the staff?

24        A.   Yes, but leader of the staff for suppression of terrorism.

25        Q.   Yes.

Page 6786

 1        A.   I'm pointing this out because he was leader of the MUP staff in

 2     Pristina.  And while he was in Pristina, all the time he was leader of

 3     the MUP staff.  And while I was SUP chief, I was invited to the meetings

 4     of the MUP staff in Pristina, and not to the meetings of the staff for

 5     the suppression of terrorism.

 6             So the logical question can be raised, how come that chief of

 7     Secretariats and commanders could attend meetings of the MUP staff in

 8     Pristina if that staff was already abolished?

 9        Q.   So you think that it was abolished?  Well let us proceed.

10        A.   Well, you showed that to me.  You showed me the decision whereby

11     that staff was abolished.

12        Q.   Well, we will not draw any conclusions.  It is up to the Chamber

13     to draw the conclusions.  But according to this decision, was David Gajic

14     appointed deputy leader of the staff?

15        A.   Yes.

16        Q.   And was Radoslav Dinovic appointed assistant leader of the staff?

17        A.   Yes.

18        Q.   And he was in charge of interventions and operational planning?

19        A.   Yes.

20        Q.   And under the previous decision, Radoslav Dinovic was an

21     assistant leader of the staff?

22        A.   Yes.

23        Q.   Milorad Lukovic was an assistant head of special operations?

24        A.   Yes.

25        Q.   Am I right to say that he was employed by state security section?

Page 6787

 1        A.   Yes.

 2        Q.   Now we have as the chief of JSO [as interpreted], Mr. Trajkovic?

 3        A.   Yes.

 4        Q.   Special anti-terrorist units --

 5             THE INTERPRETER:  Sorry SAJ, not JSO.

 6             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation]

 7        Q.   -- there was a decision taken in June 1999.  We did not have this

 8     position until then?

 9        A.   No, we had an appointment for interventions.

10        Q.   This is an appointment for special anti-terrorist units?

11        A.   Yes.

12        Q.   Now, we have Major Goran Radosavljevic as assistant head of

13     Special Police units?

14        A.   He was in the previous staff for interventions.

15             THE INTERPRETER:  Could the speakers stop overlapping, please.

16     They are speaking at the same time the witness is answering before the

17     question has finished.  We cannot follow in this way.

18             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation]

19        Q.   Now, we Mr. Lukovic he is in both decisions concerning mechanised

20     units, but he is now assistant?

21        A.   I don't have the second page, but I know that he was -- I know

22     the person, and I know he was in charge of the work you mentioned.

23        Q.   Yes, but as a coordinator?  Assistant chief of staff for

24     mechanised units in the first decision as well?

25        A.   Yes.

Page 6788

 1        Q.   Then we have Novica Zdravkovic; he is now in charge of criminal

 2     investigations and operations?

 3        A.   Yes.

 4        Q.   And he was coordinator for general crime earlier?

 5        A.   Yes.

 6        Q.   Now we have Radovan Vucurevic, border affairs and foreign

 7     nationals.  He was also on the previous decision?

 8        A.   I don't know him.  I heard of him.

 9        Q.   Then we have Milorad Rajicic; he was in both appointments, the

10     first and the second one.  And he is assistant.

11             And then we have Milan Cankovic, chief of communications, he was

12     also on the previous decision?

13        A.   Yes.

14        Q.   And then we have Dobrasin Krdzic as chief of medical corps in

15     both decisions?

16        A.   Yes.

17        Q.   Do you see that Milos Deretic, Gojko Celebic, Zarko Brakovic, and

18     Miodrag Rsumovic are missing from this decision?

19        A.   Yes.

20        Q.   Thank you.

21        A.   But this could be interpreted in another way.  What you ask me,

22     the answer is yes.

23        Q.   But let me put another question:  Does this decision include

24     people from both public security and state security?

25        A.   There's only one person from state security.  And now I see the

Page 6789

 1     expanded staff also includes head of centres from state security.

 2        Q.   This decision involving members of both sectors, this decision

 3     could only be taken by the minister of the interior?

 4        A.   Yes.

 5        Q.   Am I right that in para 2 of this decision, please look at it,

 6     the minister stipulated that the task of the staff is to plan, organise,

 7     guide, and employ organisational units of the ministry, and also the

 8     seconded and attached units to suppress terrorism in the province of

 9     Kosovo-Metohija?

10        A.   That's written in this decision.

11        Q.   And in the next paragraph of para 2, the staff plans, organises,

12     and guides the work of organisational units in performing more complex

13     security tasks?

14        A.   Secretariats are meant here.

15        Q.   Now, in para 3, what did the minister envisage?

16        A.   That the head of staff should be answerable to the minister for

17     the state of affairs in their purview, and to report to the minister on

18     all the activities, measures taken, and the outcome.

19        Q.   And the minister did not make this available to you?

20        A.   No.

21             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Let's look at page 3.

22        Q.   Mr. Cvetic -- I said para 3, right?  Can you tell me, to whom was

23     this decision delivered?  What does it say?

24        A.   The decision says that the decision was sent to the head, the

25     deputy, and members of the staff as well as the minister's office.

Page 6790

 1        Q.   Thank you.  In your work, regardless of this decision, nothing

 2     changed, did it?

 3        A.   No, it didn't.

 4        Q.   But the relations between the staff and the head and the superior

 5     have changed with this decision on intersectorial activities?

 6        A.   [No interpretation]

 7             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we have P67.

 8        Q.   Mr. Cvetic, just repeat your last answer.

 9        A.   I answered "yes" because that follows from the material that has

10     been shown to me.

11        Q.   Now we are on P67.  Mr. Cvetic, have you got the gist of page 1?

12        A.   Yes, but at that time I wasn't --

13        Q.   I know you were not.  Let's go on.  This is dated

14     31st of May, 1999.  It's the decision to establish the ministry staff for

15     the suppression of terrorism.  And in para 1 we see the full title, The

16     Staff for the Suppression of Terrorism in Kosovo and Metohija based in

17     Pristina?

18        A.   Yes.

19        Q.   And again Sreten Lukic, now lieutenant-general is appointed head

20     of staff?

21        A.   I believe he got this decision as of 13th of May, 1999.

22        Q.   And we see Mr. Milenko Arsenijevic here, even during your tenure,

23     he was member of the staff for awhile, Colonel Milenko Arsenijevic?

24        A.   Yes.

25             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we move to page 2.

Page 6791

 1        Q.   Blagoje Pesic was on the earlier staff as well; right?

 2        A.   Captain Pesic was in charge of reserve police squads at the staff

 3     in Pristina.

 4        Q.   Witness, by virtue of this decision dated 31st of May,

 5     Sreten Lukic is again appointed head of staff for the suppression of

 6     terrorism in Pristina?

 7        A.   Yes.

 8        Q.   Now, we see on page 2, in this decision the minister appoints

 9     Miroslav Deretic chief of communications; correct?

10        A.   Yes.

11        Q.   Is it the case that members of the expanded staff under this

12     decision and the previous decision include heads of centres of RDB, the

13     state security sector?

14        A.   Yes.

15        Q.   This decision is also a decision on an intersectorial staff;

16     right?

17        A.   Yes.

18             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] I apologise to the interpreters.

19             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation]  So do I.

20             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation]

21        Q.   The task of the staff under Roman numeral II is the same as in

22     the decision of the 16th of June, 1998?

23        A.   Yes.

24        Q.   The accountability and responsibility of heads of staff is

25     formulated in the same way, their responsibilities for the work of the

Page 6792

 1     staff that is?

 2        A.   Yes.

 3             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we now move to the last

 4     page, page 3.

 5        Q.   By virtue of this decision dated 31st of May, 1999, did the

 6     minister render null and void the decision to establish the staff for the

 7     suppression of terrorism, DT 01 number so and so of the

 8     16th of June, 1998?

 9        A.   Yes, that's what we see here.

10        Q.   This decision was sent to the head of staff, the deputy, the

11     assistants, members of the staff, and the minister's office?

12        A.   That's also written.

13        Q.   Thank you, Mr. Cvetic.  Just one more point.

14             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we go back to page 1 in B/C/S,

15     please.

16        Q.   Mr. Cvetic, was this decision taken by the minister of the

17     interior pursuant to Article 7 of the Law on the Interior?

18        A.   Yes.

19             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] I don't know if I am allowed to

20     give the witness a hard copy to look up the legal basis for the decision.

21             Can we have P57.

22             MR. STAMP:  I saw that it was marked and highlighted and that is

23     why I was indicating no, but if it is to look up the legal basis, I have

24     no objection to him being shown it.

25             JUDGE PARKER:  Mr. Djurdjic, if it's for that one purpose, the

Page 6793

 1     witness may see your document.  But otherwise, it is heavily marked, and

 2     he shouldn't have it during your cross-examination.

 3             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] He just needs to look up if it's

 4     indeed Article 7 in the preamble.

 5             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, it is Article 7, and on the

 6     basis of that Article 7, the minister was entitled to take this decision.

 7             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. Cvetic.

 8        Q.   Mr. Cvetic, in view of your previous position, I want to go

 9     together with you through various dispatches, some sent by the minister,

10     some sent through the public security sector down to your

11     SUP Kosovska Mitrovica.

12             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we see for that purpose,

13     D004-1572, please.

14        Q.   Mr. Cvetic, do you remember this dispatch from

15     Minister Stojiljkovic?

16        A.   I do.

17        Q.   Could you tell us, what was the political and security situation

18     at the time when you received this dispatch?

19        A.   The situation was difficult and very complex.  Terrorist attacks

20     had escalated in the entire territory of Kosovo.  A large number of

21     policemen had been killed or seriously or lightly injured.  There were

22     attacks on the army, Serbs, Albanians loyal to the state of Serbia.

23     There had been numerous attacks on the installations of the army and the

24     Ministry of Interior.  Roads were unsafe or completely unpassable for

25     traffic.  One could not move safely across the territory of Kosovo,

Page 6794

 1     especially not at night.  All movement on the territory of Kosovo was

 2     practically restricted.

 3             So the situation was indeed very complex.  The territory of

 4     Kosovo was no longer under the control of the authorities of Serbia, that

 5     is the Ministry of the Interior.  Parts of the territory had been

 6     captured by the terrorists, and the terrorists controlled various

 7     population centres.  By that time, they had already started taking hold

 8     of individual businesses and enterprises.

 9        Q.   I see that in this dispatch, you are informed that the

10     Kosovo Diplomatic Mission would start to work soon in keeping with the

11     Milosevic-Yeltsin Agreement?

12        A.   Yes.

13        Q.   I think that's the time when the Pristina-Pec road was cut off.

14     Was it at that time or later?

15        A.   I think it was later in July.  But the road what was unsafe even

16     at this time.  Traffic was made very very difficult.

17        Q.   What was the situation with roads in the territory of the SUP of

18     Kosovska Mitrovica?

19        A.   Very hard.  It was the hardest in the territory of Srbica which

20     belongs to the area of Drenica, so that the road from Srbica via Rakos,

21     Rudnik, and Padaliste to Pec, or rather, Istok and Pec, was frequently

22     blocked and unsafe.  On that a road, a large number of terrorist attacks

23     were launched against the police, against public transportation, and

24     there were kidnappings of passengers.  For a while, that road was

25     completely blocked.

Page 6795

 1        Q.   Thank you, Mr. Cvetic.

 2             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I would like to

 3     tender this document.

 4             JUDGE PARKER:  What is its date?

 5             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] 17th of June, 1998.  But my

 6     infallible assistant, Ms. Marie O'Leary, wants to remind me of something.

 7     That we tender only pages 2 and 3 because page 1 is ...

 8                           [Defence counsel confer]

 9             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] I would like to tender this

10     document into evidence.

11             JUDGE PARKER:  It will be received.

12             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit D233, Your Honours.

13             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Just one thing, please.  Could I

14     have page 2 because this is a dispatch, and attached is a joint statement

15     by President Milosevic and Mr. Yeltsin, and the statement of the

16     prime minister, which is referred to in the dispatch.

17             JUDGE PARKER:  You are looking at me, Mr. Djurdjic.  What are you

18     wanting me to do?

19             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] I'm waiting for to you receive

20     this document.

21             JUDGE PARKER:  It's been received as Exhibit D233.

22             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.  We have time for

23     another document.  65 ter 04079.

24        Q.   Do you remember this dispatch, Mr. Cvetic?

25        A.   Yes.

Page 6796

 1        Q.   I forgot to ask you a moment ago, the first dispatch we

 2     discussed, it was sent by the minister to the MUP staff and to the SUPs

 3     in Pristina, Gnjilane, Urosevac, Kosovska Mitrovica, Djakovica, Pec, to

 4     chiefs?

 5        A.   Yes, to SUP chiefs in Kosovo.

 6        Q.   And this document we're looking at now, it was sent to all the

 7     SUPs in Serbia and all these other addressees?

 8        A.   Yes.  In the state security and the public security sector.

 9             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we see page 3 in B/C/S.

10        Q.   This is signed Minister Vlajko Stojiljkovic?

11        A.   Yes.

12        Q.   Is it correct that this Dispatch 2 mentions the

13     diplomatic mission that is about to start working?

14        A.   Yes, and the international humanitarian organisations.

15             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] May I tender this document.

16             JUDGE PARKER:  It will be received.

17             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit D234, Your Honours.

18             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, it may be time for

19     the break.

20             JUDGE PARKER:  Very well.  We will have the second break, and we

21     resume at 1.00.

22                           --- Recess taken at 12.29 p.m.

23                           [The witness stands down]

24                           --- On resuming at 1.02 p.m.

25                           [The witness takes the stand]

Page 6797

 1             JUDGE PARKER:  Yes, Mr. Djurdjic.

 2             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours.

 3        Q.   Mr. Cvetic, it seems that by time we are getting more and more

 4     tired, but we are nonetheless talking more and more quickly, so please

 5     let us try to slow down so that everybody can follow our conversation.

 6             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we please see the document 200

 7     -- sorry, D001-2922.

 8        Q.   Mr. Cvetic, can you recognise the format of this document, and is

 9     this the signature of Mr. Stojiljkovic?

10        A.   Yes.

11        Q.   Mr. Cvetic, this was sent to the staff, MUP staff in Pristina,

12     but after this date, you received this agreement on the

13     OSCE Verification Mission; is that correct?

14        A.   Yes.

15             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] I would like to tender this

16     document into evidence.

17             JUDGE PARKER:  It will be received.

18             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit D235, Your Honours.

19             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we kindly see the

20     Exhibit D208.

21        Q.   Mr. Cvetic, this is the decision on the formation of the MUP

22     collegium of 4th of December, 1998.  In order not to waste time, we will

23     see the signature later on, and you will be able to confirm whether you

24     can recognise the signature or not.

25             Here we can see that the decision was made to set up a collegium,

Page 6798

 1     and we have a list of persons that were going to be the members of this

 2     collegium.

 3        A.   Yes.

 4        Q.   Mr. Cvetic, under item 1 we can see

 5     Colonel-General Vlastimir Djordjevic, assistant minister and chief of

 6     public security department; is that correct?

 7        A.   Yes.

 8        Q.   Item 2, Colonel-General Radomir Markovic, assistant minister and

 9     chief of state security department; is that correct?

10        A.   Yes.

11        Q.   And under three, Major-General Nikola Curcic who was assistant

12     minister and deputy chef of RDB and director of the security institute,

13     so all three functions?

14        A.   Yes.

15        Q.   And under 4, Lieutenant-General Obrad Stevanovic, assistant

16     minister?

17        A.   Yes.

18        Q.   So at this moment on 4th of December, we can see that some

19     persons held different functions and some others held only one, i.e.,

20     they were assistant ministers?

21        A.   Yes, this is what this decision stipulates.

22             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we kindly see page 2 of this

23     document.

24        Q.   Here we can see additional two members:  chief of the crime

25     police, Dragan Ilic, and chief of SUP of the Internal Affairs in

Page 6799

 1     Belgrade, Mr. Duric; is that correct?

 2        A.   Yes.

 3        Q.   Under item 3, we can see who was to attend these collegium,

 4     Mr. Krstic as chief of the analysis administration, who was supposed to

 5     take minutes, and also Captain Pantovic?

 6        A.   Yes, Danilo Pantovic; that is correct.

 7        Q.   And upon an invitation by the minister, other persons could

 8     attend, whoever he wanted to invite?

 9        A.   Yes.

10        Q.   Can you recognise the signature of Mr. Stojiljkovic?

11        A.   I cannot see it on my screen.  Yes.

12        Q.   Thank you.

13             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] This document has already been

14     admitted into evidence, so we can proceed.

15             JUDGE PARKER:  Do you know the exhibit number, Mr. Djurdjic?

16             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Yes.  D208.

17             JUDGE PARKER:  Thank you.

18             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] I would kindly ask for the

19     document D002-0343.

20             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] If I may, Your Honours, to

21     supplement what I was saying.  Even earlier there was a collegium of the

22     minister of the interior; so in this decision, I cannot see that the

23     previous decision was terminated so that the effect of the previous

24     decision on the collegium of the minister was terminated for this one.

25             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation]

Page 6800

 1        Q.   Thank you.  Mr. Cvetic, can you see this dispatch, and can you

 2     recognise it?

 3        A.   Yes.

 4        Q.   Later on, when we turn the leaf you will be able to see the

 5     signature, so it was dispatch sent by the minister to the MUP staff in

 6     Pristina and all the SUPs in the territory of Kosovo and Metohija; is

 7     that correct?

 8        A.   Yes.

 9             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we see the following page of

10     this document.

11             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, this is the signature of

12     Minister Vlajko Stojiljkovic.

13             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation].

14        Q.   Mr. Cvetic, am I right to say that with this dispatch, the

15     minister informed members of MUP in the territory of Kosovo and Metohija

16     that if attacked, they could undertake measures to defend themselves, if

17     attacked by terrorists?

18        A.   So the minister didn't need to inform them about this because the

19     Law on the Interior stipulated the authorities of authorised officials;

20     and if an authorised official was to be attacked, then the authorised

21     official was supposed to react to this attack, so this was the task of

22     any authorised official as stipulated by law.  However, when we are

23     talking about terrorist activities, individual police officers were not

24     allowed to undertake any measures regardless of the legislative

25     provisions, without an approval of the MUP staff or the ministry to

Page 6801

 1     undertake certain anti-terrorist actions.

 2             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.  Can we please tender

 3     this document into evidence.

 4             JUDGE PARKER:  Yes.

 5             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit D236, Your Honours.

 6             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we please have D004-1579.

 7        Q.   Could you briefly comment on this.  This is a dispatch that was

 8     sent to all the chiefs of SUPs in the territory of Serbia and also to the

 9     staff in Pristina and border police stations.

10        A.   Yes, this was simply a relayed decision of the government of the

11     Republic of Serbia as to what was supposed to happen after the

12     declaration of the state of the imminent threat of war.

13        Q.   And the date is 24th of March, 1999?

14        A.   Yes.  This is when the aggression started.

15             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we please tender this document

16     into evidence.

17             JUDGE PARKER:  Yes.

18             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit D237, Your Honours.

19             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.  Can we please see the

20     Exhibit D002-354.

21             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Can we possibly enlarge this.

22     Okay.

23             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation]

24        Q.   This is a dispatch dated 25th of March, 1999, sent by the

25     minister to all SUPs and to the staff and to the organisational units of

Page 6802

 1     the public security sector in the seat.  Do you remember this?

 2        A.   Well, this copy is rather illegible, so I can't really comment on

 3     it unless I can see it in a hard copy version, so I would kindly ask to

 4     see it in a hard copy version.

 5        Q.   Well, I underlined certain parts of the text, so I'm not sure

 6     that it will be appropriate.

 7             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, could you please

 8     advise me on that.  I didn't write anything, but I did highlight certain

 9     parts of the text.

10             JUDGE PARKER:  Any objection, Mr. Stamp?

11             MR. STAMP:  No, Your Honours.

12             JUDGE PARKER:  Pass it over, Mr. Djurdjic.

13             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you very much, Mr. Stamp.

14             JUDGE PARKER:  I take it there is not yet a translation?

15             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] No, the translation is pending.

16     We gave very many documents to be translated.  A majority of those have

17     been translated already, but there is a small number that is still

18     pending translation.

19             JUDGE PARKER:  Thank you.

20             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I can remember this dispatch.

21     It followed the proclamation of the state of war, and it concerned the

22     measures that had to be undertaken following the proclamation of the

23     state of war.

24             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.  Could we please mark

25     this document for identification in order to be included into evidence

Page 6803

 1     once we have the translation.

 2             JUDGE PARKER:  It will be marked.

 3             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit D238 marked for identification,

 4     Your Honours.

 5             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.  [Microphone not

 6     activated] Could I please have the document D004-1592.

 7        Q.   Witness, do you remember -- actually, you can't remember, you

 8     haven't seen it yet.

 9             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we please see the second

10     page of this document.

11        Q.   Witness, this is a dispatch of the MUP staff sent to all the SUPs

12     and do you remember -- and also detachment commanders.  Do you remember

13     this dispatch dated 15th of July, 1998?

14        A.   Yes.

15        Q.   Can you please tell us, what was the situation like at the time

16     when you received this dispatch?

17        A.   Are you talking about the security situation?  Well, the

18     situation was similar to the one I described previously.

19        Q.   Thank you.  At this time, was there already danger that certain,

20     sort of, imminent danger -- that certain populated areas could be taken

21     over by the forces of the KLA?

22        A.   Yes.  I said that certain companies were already taken over and

23     obviously they attempted to put certain inhabited areas under their

24     control as well.

25             But I would like to say the following:  This is a dispatch of the

Page 6804

 1     staff of the ministry.  So the staff of the ministry existed on

 2     July the 15th because previously we can see a document proving that there

 3     was a decision from June of that year which abolished this staff.

 4             So as chief of SUP, I received dispatches from the MUP staff in

 5     Pristina and at this time, the MUP staff in Pristina was in operation.

 6     It wasn't abolished.

 7        Q.   Thank you.  Under item 3, what is the instruction of the staff?

 8        A.   "During the operations, fire exclusively at targets outside

 9     populated places or where it is known reliably that there are no

10     civilians."

11        Q.   So the instruction of the staff was to take care about the

12     civilians?

13        A.   Generally speaking, yes.  This was a general position, to take

14     care about the civilians, but on the ground, there were also some

15     problems.

16        Q.   Thank you.

17             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could I please have this document

18     tendered into evidence.

19             JUDGE PARKER:  It will be received.

20             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit D239, Your Honours.

21             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

22        Q.   Mr. Cvetic, these anti-terrorist activities, were they prescribed

23     by this dispatch?

24        A.   Well, these were the preparations for the anti-terrorist

25     activities.  The anti-terrorist activities initiated on July the 25th, so

Page 6805

 1     this was the face of preparations.

 2        Q.   Thank you.  But under item 1 it says, In the period from the 14th

 3     to the 20th of July, plan, organise, and carry out active combat

 4     operations from a distance against terrorist forces?

 5        A.   Well, yes.

 6        Q.   All right.  So item 1 stipulates as follows:  In the period from

 7     the 14th to the 20th of July, plan, organise, and carry out combat

 8     operations against terrorist forces?

 9        A.   Yes, this is what item 1 stipulates, but anti-terrorist

10     activities commenced on 25th of July.

11        Q.   Those were planned activities, but from the 14th until the 27th,

12     these activities are to be carried out?

13        A.   Yes, that's what it says.  But who, with what resources and

14     objectives, that's not written.  This is just the general formulation.

15             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation]  D109, please.

16        Q.   Look at paragraph 3, please.  How did it work in practice?

17        A.   Yes, it worked like this:  Since personnel from Secretariats of

18     Internal Affairs was deployed in Kosovo and Metohija within PJP units and

19     other special units, in the event that a police officer was killed, we,

20     chiefs of SUPs were obliged to report to the Secretariats from whose

21     territory this personnel came.

22        Q.   Is it the case that the anti-terrorist operations were not

23     planned, organised, and carried out from the 16th of June until the

24     1st of May, 1999, while you were there?

25        A.   That was exclusively in the jurisdiction of the MUP staff.  The

Page 6806

 1     Secretariats didn't do this job, but, of course, they provided certain

 2     information.

 3             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation]  D108, please.

 4        Q.   Mr. Cvetic, I'd like to know about this dispatch that you now see

 5     on the screen, and that the staff sent to all the SUPs and chiefs of SUPs

 6     and unit commanders in Kosovska Mitrovica.  Did you have this

 7     information?

 8        A.   No, as chief of SUP, I did not have this information.

 9        Q.   In criminal investigations, did you act pursuant to the orders

10     given here?

11        A.   Yes.  We applied this to all the persons who needed to be

12     investigated and interviewed.

13             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] 65 ter 04124.

14        Q.   Mr. Cvetic, this is again a dispatch from the staff addressed to

15     all SUPs in Kosovo.  Is this a format you recognise?

16        A.   Yes.

17        Q.   Did you have any knowledge or did you take any action pursuant to

18     paragraph 1 concerning the issuing of documents?

19        A.   I remember that members of the Siptar ethnic community, as stated

20     in this dispatch, did not carry personal identification documents.  I'm

21     not aware that these documents were destroyed.  That I do not know, but I

22     do know they did not carry IDs.

23        Q.   Regarding this filling in and destruction of bunkers and trenches

24     in the territory of Kosovska Mitrovica, do you know that the work was

25     done?  Did the SUP take any steps?

Page 6807

 1        A.   This is a dispatch dated 9 August, 1998.  And in the territory

 2     covered by SUP Kosovska Mitrovica, I'm not aware of any locations that

 3     were cleared from terrorists and later backfilled by construction

 4     machines.  We did engage construction machinery to build protective

 5     shelters and other things that PJP units needed.

 6             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can I please tender this document.

 7             JUDGE PARKER:  It will be received.

 8             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit D240, Your Honours.

 9             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] D001-2923.

10        Q.   Mr. Cvetic, do you recognise this format?

11        A.   Yes.

12        Q.   The staff addresses the minister requesting that means of

13     communication be supplied?

14        A.   Correct.

15             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] I'll tender this document into

16     evidence.

17             JUDGE PARKER:  Do we have the correct document?  It's a newspaper

18     order.

19             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, it's not a newspaper

20     order.  It's a letter from the staff to the ministry asking that these

21     newspapers be supplied to ensure adequate daily information.

22             JUDGE PARKER:  I'm sure it will be central to our decision,

23     Mr. Djurdjic.  It will be received.

24             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit D241, Your Honours.

25             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we now have D004-1599.  Can we

Page 6808

 1     have page 2, please.

 2        Q.   Mr. Cvetic, this is another dispatch from the staff dated

 3     16 September, 1998, to detachment -- to the chiefs of SUP and detachment

 4     commanders.  Did you receive this dispatch?

 5        A.   Yes.  And this issue raised here was often emphasised at staff

 6     meetings.

 7             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] I would like to tender this

 8     document now.

 9             JUDGE PARKER:  It will be received.

10             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit D242, Your Honours.

11             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] D004-1603, please.  Page 2.

12        Q.   I see here that this went to Djakovica.  Is this again a format

13     you recognise?

14        A.   Yes.

15        Q.   Do you remember this dispatch perhaps?

16        A.   Of course I do.

17        Q.   Anything particular you want to add?

18        A.   Nothing particular, but we acted in accordance with this dispatch

19     and put up check-points.

20             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] I would like to tender this

21     document too.

22             JUDGE PARKER:  It will be received.

23             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit D243, Your Honours.

24             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] D004-1607, please.  Page 2.

25        Q.   This is a dispatch from the staff sent to chiefs of SUPs in KiM,

Page 6809

 1     29 September, 1998, do you remember it?

 2        A.   Yes.

 3        Q.   Mr. Cvetic, I'd like you to cast your mind back to this period

 4     and illegal possession of weapons.  You told us yesterday that according

 5     to the law on weapons and ammunition there was a ban in place on the

 6     possession of long arms by civilians and there were no licenses issued

 7     for that type of weapons?

 8        A.   Yes.

 9        Q.   This calls for voluntary surrender of such weapons from missing

10     in Amnesty.  How was this carried out in Kosovska Mitrovica?

11        A.   You see, even earlier it was emphasised at staff meetings that in

12     certain villages, especially after 1996 and 1997 after the well known

13     events in Albanian, large quantities of weapons from armouries in Albania

14     had been smuggled into the territory of Kosovo.  And many villages,

15     especially in the Decane district, Drenica district, and Shala district

16     had that sort of weapons.

17             At that time, a corridor was established across the Junik

18     mountains, Djakovica, Decane, Glodjane, and Jablanica, Drenica,

19     Cicavica, leading to Bajgora; that is, along the Kosovo border from south

20     to the north.

21             At staff meetings, and this dispatch orders the same, it was

22     ordered that Secretariats should look into the situation in their own

23     areas and see how many such weapons had been smuggled in from Albania.

24     Those were Chinese-made weapons, usually automatic rifles, semi-automatic

25     rifles, hand-held launchers, and RPGs.

Page 6810

 1             In order to Amnesty the citizens and free them of criminal

 2     liability, it was agreed at that time to call on the citizens to

 3     surrender such weapons voluntarily at the level of villages and at the

 4     area of Mahalas.  They could simply leave their weapons at a designated

 5     site without leaving their names or any personal information on the

 6     condition that the weapon had not been involved in any crime.

 7             In Kosovska Mitrovica, we did not do a lot of work.  In fact, we

 8     did not perform too well in this area; but some other Secretariats did,

 9     especially those in the border area.

10        Q.   Thank you.

11             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we now have this document

12     admitted.

13             JUDGE PARKER:  Yes.

14             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit D244, Your Honours.

15             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Now, D004-1825, please.  We'll get

16     page 1.

17        Q.   I think you've already answered my question on this document.

18     It's dated 2nd October, a dispatch from the staff to SUP chiefs in

19     Kosovo.  They inform you of the Amnesty.

20             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I would like to have

21     this document admitted with your leave.

22             JUDGE PARKER:  Is there a translation?

23             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] No, I didn't know.  I'm sorry.

24             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit D245 marked for identification,

25     Your Honours.

Page 6811

 1             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.  I think

 2     we have come to the time for adjournment for today.

 3             JUDGE PARKER:  You are well over halfway, are you, Mr. Djurdjic?

 4     We will adjourn now.  We resume tomorrow morning at 9.00 a.m.

 5                           --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.44 p.m.,

 6                           to be reconvened on Friday, the 3rd day of

 7                           July, 2009, at 9.00 a.m.