1 Wednesday, 28 October 2009
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 2.22 p.m.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Good afternoon to everyone.
6 Mr. Registrar, would you please call the case.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Good afternoon, Your Honours. Good afternoon to
8 everyone in and around the courtroom. This is case number
9 IT-06-90-T, the Prosecutor versus Ante Gotovina et al.
10 Thank you.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
12 The Chamber was informed that one of the parties would like to
13 raise a matter.
14 Mr. Misetic.
15 MR. MISETIC: Yes, Mr. President.
16 It's related to -- well, it will be in private session and it is
17 related to the upcoming witness. I understood, though, that there are
18 also something else that the Chamber wished to deal with procedurally
19 before we start.
20 JUDGE ORIE: I want to deal with a matter procedurally as well.
21 And that's -- you may not be surprised, scheduling for the weeks to come.
22 We could deal with that first, but I do not flow what -- if your
23 matter is related to the next witness, then --
24 MR. MISETIC: It is related somewhat to the next witness, so ...
25 JUDGE ORIE: Then we'll first deal with the scheduling.
1 The Chamber has received, Mr. Kay, the schedule for witnesses,
2 which goes until next week, Friday. Now, how realistic is our
3 expectation that we would finish by next Friday? Has there been
4 communication with the other parties so as to know more or less how much
5 time cross-examination would take so as to know whether you could, for
6 example, start with your second expert witness at the time you have on
7 your mind or ...
8 MR. KAY: Your Honour, we're just reviewing the witness list for
9 next week, because there may be one witness who issues have been dealt
10 with through other witnesses. And what I've done as we've gone through
11 this case is reviewed our listed witnesses to see whether -- what
12 challenges there have been, whether issues have been covered, and then
13 taken them off the list if there is no need to call people. I have taken
14 those decisions and I'm reviewing one for next week.
15 That schedule has been put together only from the available
16 information that I've had, as well as a bit of guess-work. My feeling is
17 that the last witness will be into the next week. I don't --
18 JUDGE ORIE: That means a spillover in the second week of
20 MR. KAY: Yes. And just to assist the Court as well, the Court
21 will be reminded we have 92 bis evidence as well to produce in the
22 proceedings as well as the fact that the Rule 68 matter as between the
23 OTP and the Defence is still ongoing and not concluded yet. That is --
24 that is not problematic because it will be the admitted facts or
25 adjudicated facts that are relied upon, depending upon the sources of
1 evidence. But it's something that eventually will have to come before
2 the Court and be entered on to the record, as well as we'll need a bit of
3 preparation time.
4 The Prosecution and Cermak Defence are in constant communication
5 about this every day as to the best way to handle matters, and I think
6 it's appreciated from the Prosecution side that there is actually more
7 material there that needs to be worked upon and dealt with. We took in
8 mind very much Your Honours' comments about the size of the filing that
9 we made, but we felt we had to make that filing to get something on the
10 table so that at least we were covered that far, and the Court could see
11 our intentions into relation to the evidence to be produced.
12 JUDGE ORIE: So we should prepare a Scenario A and Scenario B,
13 the one in which there is some spillover in the second week of November,
14 whereas in the other one we would conclude next week.
15 The reason I'm asking or I'm inquiring is, of course, because
16 usually if there is any delay it should be resolved to some extent by the
17 party who is calling the witness and who is presenting its case at that
18 time. But since we are at the end of the Cermak case means the beginning
19 of the Markac case and therefore -- have you -- there are a few matters
20 of great importance, first to receive, as soon as possible, realistic
21 time estimates for cross-examination of next week's witnesses so that we
22 can see whether -- how realistic it is to expect that you would be able
23 to conclude your case next week. Then, of course, the other matter still
24 outstanding to see whether that all fits within that one week, and, if
25 not, how many days it would, in the week after that. And then, of
1 course, the next question would be whether we would ask the
2 Markac Defence whether they could already start on the Thursday or
3 Friday, or -- or whether they would then prefer to start the week after
4 that. That would be the third week of November.
5 And then, of course, because I'm not only thinking about the few
6 weeks to come but also about third week of November, what would that mean
7 for the scheduling of the Markac Defence on the long-term, that is, the
8 recess period from mid-December until early January.
9 These are matters I -- we will have to consider. And we are
10 asking the co-operation of the parties to give us, as soon as possible,
11 insights on what we could expect to start with for the first two weeks,
12 and then, and I'm looking at you, Mr. Mikulicic, also then to know as
13 soon as possible what we could expect as far as the case presentation for
14 Mr. Markac is concerned.
15 MR. KAY: Yes, Your Honour, as we're going through matters, it
16 seems to me the spillover into the second week of November, I think, is
17 predictable now.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
19 MR. KAY: We've --
20 JUDGE ORIE: I didn't exclude yet for the possibility that we
21 could still finish next week, but I think I understood your message quite
23 MR. KAY: Yes.
24 JUDGE ORIE: And I think you understood my message quite well as
25 well. When I said what we need are two scenarios.
1 MR. KAY: Yes.
2 JUDGE ORIE: The one -- the optimistic one, and the other one --
3 you would say the realistic one, I would say the pessimistic one.
4 MR. KAY: Okay. Thank you, Your Honour.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Waespi.
6 MR. WAESPI: Yes, thank you, Mr. President.
7 In relation to the cross-examination estimates, from our side,
8 the two shorter factual witnesses, Monday, Tuesday, it's one session
9 each. And two experts to follow, it's four to six sessions each. And,
10 of course, I would appreciate if the Cermak Defence would tell us which
11 witnesses or which witness they will drop. I don't know need to repeat
12 that. There is an lot of preparation going on. For instance, for
13 Mr. Mesic, who has been dropped within a week before he was to call.
14 That with a huge witness to prepare.
15 So I'd like to know as soon as I can which witnesses is going to
16 be dropped.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, your observations further support the
18 expectation by Mr. Kay because four to six sessions each, average of
19 five, makes -- two times five is ten, which is already more than three
20 full days. Whereas, both for chief and cross, only three days have been
21 scheduled. And I'm not -- have not considered yet any cross-examination
22 by the -- by the other Defence teams.
23 So, therefore, I should perhaps forget about the word pessimistic
24 and talk into terms of realistic.
25 That is clear.
1 Could the Chamber receive -- not necessarily now but also as soon
2 as possible the estimates for cross-examination of both the witnesses of
3 fact and the expert witnesses for next week?
4 MR. KAY: If they could be sent to us, Your Honour, so that we
5 can put them in our table that we then send to the Trial Chamber.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
7 MR. KAY: Which gives us a helpful indication.
8 JUDGE ORIE: I would not have expected to leave you out of the
9 list of addressees, Mr. Kay.
10 That was the scheduling issue I wanted to raise.
11 Then we turn into private session.
12 [Private session]
11 Pages 23383-23384 redacted. Private session.
18 [Open session]
19 THE REGISTRAR: We're back in open session, Your Honours.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
21 Mr. Kay, are you ready to call your next witness?
22 MR. KAY: Yes, we are, Your Honour. Mr. Cetina, please.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
24 Madam Usher.
25 [The witness entered court]
1 JUDGE ORIE: Good afternoon, Mr. Cetina. Before you give
2 evidence, the Rules of Procedure and Evidence require that you make a
3 solemn declaration, of which the text is now being handed out to you by
4 Madam Usher.
5 May I invite you to take that solemn declaration.
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will
7 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you. Please be seated, Mr. Cetina.
9 Mr. Cetina, you will first be examined by Mr. Kay. Mr. Kay is
10 counsel for Mr. Cermak.
11 Please proceed.
12 MR. KAY: Thank you, Your Honour.
13 WITNESS: IVICA CETINA
14 [Witness answered through interpreter]
15 Examination by Mr. Kay:
16 Q. Good afternoon, Mr. Cetina.
17 A. Good afternoon.
18 Q. Mr. Cetina, I'd like you to look at the screen on your right and
19 to look at document that comes onto the screen.
20 MR. KAY: Can we have 2D00726.
21 Q. This is a statement that you gave to the Defence, and I would
22 like you to identify it.
23 Can you see there a copy of a witness statement that you gave to
24 the Defence.
25 MR. KAY: And if the Court would kindly move it up a little bit
2 Q. Do you identify your signature on that first page?
3 A. Yes, this is my signature.
4 Q. And is that a -- a first page of a statement that you gave to the
6 A. Yes.
7 MR. KAY: If we could look at the end of that statement.
8 Q. And you can see a date on the statement. And you can see a
9 signature. Do you identify that that is the date of a statement? If you
10 can give the date to the Court, because I can't read it from here.
11 A. Yes. The 26th of August, 2009.
12 Q. Thank you. And is that your signature at the end of the
14 A. Yes, it is.
15 Q. And do you confirm that that is a statement that you made to the
16 Defence; and when you signed that statement, did you read through it to
17 check that the information was true and correct?
18 A. Yes. I read it, and I confirm the contents.
19 Q. Thank you. Did you also sign a supplementary information sheet?
20 MR. KAY: If we could have 2D00776.
21 Q. And, again, another document will come on the screen, Mr. Cetina,
22 which I'd like you to identify.
23 Do you see there a document dated the 24th of October, 2009
24 that's the first page of the statement.
25 MR. KAY: Can you turn now to the second page of the statement,
2 And the third page.
3 Q. Do you identify there your signature with the date of the 26th of
4 October, 2009?
5 A. Yes, this is my signature.
6 Q. Did you read through what was written in this supplemental
7 information sheet before you signed that document?
8 A. Yes, I read it.
9 Q. And is the information contained within this supplemental
10 information sheet, to the best of your knowledge and belief, true and
12 A. Yes, they are true.
13 Q. This supplemental information sheet makes certain clarifications
14 and a correction to a statement that you gave to the
15 Office of the Prosecution; is that right?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Let's look at that statement now.
18 MR. KAY: And could we have on the screen, please, 2D00725.
19 Q. And I'm going to ask you some more questions about this document,
20 Mr. Cetina.
21 That is a copy of your statement to the
22 Office of the Prosecution. Do you confirm that you gave a statement to
23 the Office of the Prosecution?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. We notice that on the dates of interview it's recorded that you
1 were interviewed on the 10th and 11th of September, 2001. Are you able
2 to confirm those facts?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. And we also see that on the 25 and 26th of February, 2002, you
5 were also interviewed on those dates. Are you able to confirm those
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Now, we see on the statement various signatures on the first
9 page. Is your signature on that page?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And do you confirm that you signed this document?
12 A. Yes.
13 MR. KAY: If we could just now go to the end of that statement,
14 to page -- I think it's 16.
15 Q. We see there various signatures. Do you identify your signature
16 on that page, on the 26th of February, 2002?
17 A. I can't see it here. The document should be moved either to the
18 left or to the right, because I can't see my signature here.
19 Q. There are no other signatures on -- on that page. But your
20 signature's not on there.
21 MR. KAY:
22 Q. Can we go to the previous page, one page back?
23 A. Yes. Yes, here I can see my signature.
24 Q. Yes. And if could you just identify which one it is. Is it the
25 one next to where it says -- above the date?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Thank you.
3 MR. KAY: And if we can just have that as a single page shot now
4 so that we can see it.
5 Q. I want to ask you some questions now about this OTP interview.
6 First of all, do you speak English?
7 A. No.
8 Q. When you were interviewed on the four dates by the
9 Office of the Prosecution, what language did you speak in?
10 A. Croatian.
11 Q. And the investigators of the Office of the Prosecution, what
12 language did they speak in?
13 A. English.
14 Q. And was there a translator to interpret the English into Croatian
15 and the Croatian into English?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. The statement that you signed, was it a statement in your own
18 language, Croatian, or was it a statement in the English language?
19 A. I signed it in Croatian.
20 Q. And the statement that you signed, did you read it yourself in
21 Croatian, or did anyone read it to you before you signed it? What was
22 the procedure: Did you read it for yourself or was it read to you?
23 A. I read it myself.
24 Q. Thank you.
25 Now, you've made certain clarifications and a correction to that
1 statement. Is the information otherwise in that statement to the
2 Office of the Prosecution information that is, to the best of your
3 knowledge and belief, true and correct?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. If I was to ask you in court today the same questions that caused
6 the answers that were put into the statements, subject to the
7 corrections, would you give the same answers today as the answers that
8 you gave on previous occasions?
9 A. Yes, save for the clarifications I made and to which I affixed my
11 Q. Thank you very much. And those have been noted.
12 MR. KAY: In those circumstances, Your Honour, may I make those
13 three document, starting, first of all, with 2D00726 an exhibit.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Should they be exhibited under one number or
15 preferably under three numbers?
16 Any preference?
17 MR. KAY: I think we've been giving separate numbers as we've
18 been dealing with matters, Your Honour.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
20 Mr. Registrar, could you -- so it would first be the statement
21 given do the Defence as the first one; the second one the supplemental
22 statement given to the Defence; and third one the statement to the OTP.
23 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honour. 65 ter document 2D00726 will
24 be assigned Exhibit D1743. 65 ter number 2D00776 will be assigned
25 Exhibit D1744. 65 ter number 2D00725 will be assigned Exhibit D1745.
1 Thank you.
2 MS. MAHINDARATNE: No objection, Mr. President.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Since there are no objections, D1743, D1744, D1745
4 are admitted into evidence.
5 Please proceed, Mr. Kay.
6 MR. KAY: There is a couple of matters that needed to be
7 identified within the statement to point out exhibit references.
8 Your Honour, first of all, in page 10 of the statement given to
9 the Office of the Prosecution, there is an document referred to as
10 0034-1846 to 60, that is D179, an exhibit under seal.
11 I hope that assists Your Honour in cross-referencing these
13 Then, again, at page 10 of the Prosecution statement, there is a
14 document referred to as 0035-7028 to 29. That is Exhibit D808.
15 Also on page 10, there is an document, 0035-6996 to 7. That is
16 Exhibit P271.
17 And now moving to another page, page 8, the third paragraph,
18 0308-4327 to 28, that is 65 ter number 2806, and I ask that that be made
19 an exhibit.
20 [Defence counsel confer]
21 MR. KAY: I'm told it is already come through as an exhibit as
22 P2649. That's happened in the interim, Your Honour.
23 The next reference is at the OTP witness statement, page 12,
24 paragraph 1, is a document 0035-6998 to 7000. That is 2D00727 on the
25 Defence 65 ter list. I ask that that be made an exhibit.
1 There was an application to add this to our 65 ter list. There
2 was no objection by the Prosecution on the 22nd of September.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Mahindaratne.
4 MS. MAHINDARATNE: No objection, Your Honours.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
6 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honours. This document becomes
7 Exhibit D1746. Thank you.
8 JUDGE ORIE: And is admitted into evidence.
9 Mr. Kay, if I may interrupt you, at page 8, the third paragraph,
10 the number you read appears on the record a bit different from what I see
11 in the text, but since it is the only number there and since it is
12 already P2649, I think there's no need to read that number again with all
13 the risks of confusion and errors.
14 Please proceed.
15 MR. KAY: I'm thankful, Your Honour.
16 The next matter is on paragraph 2 of page 12. There's a document
17 referred to as 0035-7076 to 7. That is document 2D00728 on the Defence
18 65 ter list. There's an application to add that to the 65 ter list with
19 no objection from the Prosecution on the 22nd of September.
20 Your Honour, may this be made an exhibit.
21 MS. MAHINDARATNE: No objection.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
23 THE REGISTRAR: This becomes Exhibit D1747. Thank you.
24 JUDGE ORIE: And is admitted into evidence.
25 Please proceed.
1 MR. KAY: And the last matter, in relation to this, Your Honour,
2 is a document in paragraph 3 of page 12, with the number 0035-7085 to 86.
3 That's on the Prosecution 65 ter list as 974. There's an application to
4 make that an exhibit.
5 MS. MAHINDARATNE: No objection.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
7 THE REGISTRAR: This becomes Exhibit D1748. Thank you.
8 JUDGE ORIE: And is admitted into evidence.
9 MR. KAY: I'm much obliged, Your Honour.
10 Your Honour, if I may now just give a brief summary of
11 Mr. Cetina's evidence before I ask him some further questions.
12 Mr. Cetina was the chief of the Zadar-Knin Police Administration,
13 appointed on the 1st of January, 1995, and the chief during
14 Operation Storm and until the year of 1995 to the end of the year.
15 He knew about Operation Storm about two days before it took
16 place, and he started preparations in relation to the military operation.
17 He was in Zadar when it commenced on the 4th of August, 1995.
18 On the second day of the operation, the 5th of August, 1995
19 Ministry of Interior appointed several people to the position of police
20 station commanders, and those appointments were made within the newly
21 created district of Kotar-Knin Police Administration. The chief
22 commander of that police administration was a man called Cedo Romanic,
23 and thereafter various police officers were appointed to the police
24 stations which made up the area of the Kotar-Knin Police Administration.
25 These police administrations were also assisted by coordinators appointed
1 by the Ministry of Interior from Zagreb
2 was was to provide support to the police administrations in taking on
3 these extra tasks caused by the conflict and the occupation of territory
4 that had previously been occupied by the Government of the
5 Republika Srpska Krajina.
6 During his work for Zadar-Knin Police Administration, Mr. Cetina
7 had many meetings with the military police. He had meetings with the
8 UNCIVPOL and other agencies of the UN, and on a few occasions, he met
9 General Cermak to discuss problems within the area. And his evidence is
10 that General Cermak condemned crimes that was happening and wanted to
11 ensure that these problems were stopped.
12 Your Honour, that is a brief summary of the evidence of
13 Mr. Cetina, but I anticipate that further details will become clear
14 during the course of his evidence, so I have not taken too long on this
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kay, may I ask you, you have told us what the
17 exhibit numbers were of documents shown to the witness on pages 8, 10,
18 three times 12, but on page 9, I find a document, a UN CIVPOL report,
19 where it is unclear to me whether that's already an exhibit or whether
20 you want to tender it into evidence as you did with some of the other
22 MR. KAY: Your Honour, that is already an exhibit and my
23 apologies for missing it out. It's Exhibit P270.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you. And that was 0035-6987 up to and
25 including last two digits 88 being P270. Thank you.
1 MR. KAY: Thank you, Your Honour, yes.
2 Q. Mr. Cetina, having concluded those formalities, I will now ask
3 you some questions.
4 The first matter I want to deal with concerns the situation
5 before Operation Oluja. At that time, as of the 1st of January, 1995
6 you were the chief of the Zadar-Knin Police Administration. That's
7 right, isn't it?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Operation Oluja happened on the 4th of August, 1995, and was
10 successfully concluded on the 5th of August, 1995, and we know from your
11 evidence that the Kotar-Knin Police Administration was formed on the
12 5th of August, with Cedo Romanic as its chief; is that correct?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. It's concerning the preparations for the Kotar-Knin Police
15 Administration that I now want to question you about.
16 Was the territory of the Kotar-Knin Police Administration the
17 territory that was previously occupied by the RSK?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Was any part of your territory, of the Zadar-Knin
20 Police Administration, also occupied by the RSK?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. So from the 5th of August, you, for the first time, had
23 jurisdiction over your entire area of responsibility; is that correct?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. In relation to your police administration territorial area, did
1 you have to open any new police stations that were subject to the
2 Zadar-Knin Police Administration?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. And which police stations were they?
5 A. They were police stations in Korenica, Obrovac, Donji Lapac,
6 Benkovac, Knin, Gracac.
7 Q. Cedo Romanic was appointed the chief of the Kotar-Knin Police
8 Administration on the 5th of August, 1995. Had there been any
9 preparations made prior to that date for someone to be appointed to the
10 position of chief of that police administration?
11 A. He was appointed by the ministry at its head office.
12 Q. Had any preparations been made before that date - so in June or
13 July or earlier months - to prepare him or anyone for that task?
14 A. No.
15 Q. The new police stations that were also opened had police
16 commanders in charge of them. Had any of them been prepared prior to the
17 liberation of the territory for taking on these positions in advance?
18 A. No.
19 Q. In relation to equipment for the police buildings at the police
20 stations, as well as in the Kotar-Knin Police Administration, had there
21 been any advance preparation or storage of equipment, such as computers,
22 office machinery, police equipment? Anything like that?
23 A. No.
24 Q. Had any of the police officers been identified in advance as to
25 who would be taking on positions within the police stations eventually?
1 Any of those police officers who worked there eventually, had any of them
2 been prepared or identified in advance with the work that they would
3 eventually be doing?
4 A. No.
5 Q. In relation to particular areas of police work, such as criminal
6 police investigation, technical equipment, had any of those police
7 stations or the Kotar-Knin Police Administration been provided in advance
8 with technical scientific equipment for police work?
9 A. No.
10 Q. Prior to Operation Storm, were you at a meeting chaired by
11 Mr. Moric, the assistant minister in the Ministry of Interior, on the
12 3rd of August? So the day before Operation Storm when preparations were
13 made for what was to happen.
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Were those preparations in respect of the police role during the
16 actual operation itself?
17 A. We were given general information to the effect that
18 Operation Storm would commence and that we should be prepared for it.
19 There were no specific preparations made.
20 Q. And perhaps if -- if you could describe the sort of preparations,
21 if any, that you took. What did you do as a result of that meeting on
22 the 3rd of August?
23 A. I returned to Zadar where I gathered the members of my specialist
24 team. I informed them of the imminent operation and told them that we
25 should get prepared for the return to that territory.
1 Q. Was there any planning that was done in advance for the situation
2 of check-points or areas of patrol?
3 A. No. Our primary objective was to reach the location and to get
4 settled in the police building.
5 Q. Did you have any information or knowledge in advance as to what
6 you might find when you got into the police station?
7 A. No.
8 Q. Was there any training or outlines done as to the kinds of tasks
9 that that police station would have to do when it started functioning?
10 A. Well, we referred to the rules of procedure that were generally
11 in place. And the law governing the police force.
12 Q. Now, in relation to coordinators who were appointed by the
13 Ministry of Interior, when were they appointed to assist the police
15 A. Very soon, after the beginning of Operation Storm.
16 Q. What exactly was the relationship between the Zadar-Knin
17 Police Administration and the Kotar-Knin Police Administration? Could
18 you describe how they existed together? Was the Zadar-Knin
19 Police Administration superior to Kotar-Knin? Could you describe for us
20 the relationship between the two.
21 A. At the beginning, in a way, yes, it was superior. However, the
22 Kotar-Knin Police Administration, -- or, rather, its chief, could
23 communicate with the ministry directly.
24 Q. We know from evidence in this court that on 6th of August,
25 Minister Jarnjak came down and opened the police station officially in
1 Knin. Were you present when that happened?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. And we've heard him on a TV transcript welcoming the new chief,
4 in relation to his work.
5 From -- from that moment, was Cedo Romanic the man in charge of
6 the police administration in Knin?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Are you able to tell us how many police officers he would have
9 had under his command when that police station was opened on the
10 6th of August?
11 A. About 100, if I remember correctly.
12 Q. And those police officers were coming into a new police
13 administration. Are you able to tell us where they came from?
14 A. They came from all over Croatia
15 to cover the area ourselves.
16 Q. And the types of police officers that were within the
17 Kotar-Knin Police Administration from that day, where were they drawn
18 from? What types of officers were they? Ordinary police, or were they
19 investigators, or administration? What type of police people were they?
20 A. They were the so-called ordinary or uniformed police.
21 Q. At the start, did Kotar-Knin Police Administration have a
22 criminal investigation service, its own?
23 A. No.
24 Q. In relation to criminal investigation service, where would the
25 Kotar-Knin Police Administration have obtained that service? Which --
1 where would they have got it from?
2 A. The Zadar-Knin Police Administration had a crime department
3 within it.
4 Q. And, again, just as part of background, how many police officers
5 were within your police administration overall, are you able to tell us
6 that, in 1995?
7 A. Well, the Zadar-Knin Police Administration, before it entered
8 this territory, there were about 500. And afterwards, another 500, which
9 makes it a thousand.
10 Q. And so we have the picture. How many of those officers were
11 involved in the criminal investigation service?
12 A. About 40 to 50. I can't say for sure.
13 Q. After Operation Storm, was that number of police in the criminal
14 investigation service increased within your police administration, or did
15 it remain the same?
16 A. It remained the same.
17 Q. Now, for matters such as recording crimes and detailing what
18 steps had to be taken in relation to crimes, how did the
19 Kotar-Knin Police Administration operate? How did it deal with such
21 A. They would take note of the event that had happened, provide
22 security for the site, and assess whether they needed to call in the
23 criminal police or not.
24 Q. Now, were the numbers of the police available to the
25 Kotar-Knin Police Administration increased from that initial 100?
1 A. As far as I remember, no.
2 Q. Are you able to tell us, in terms of kilometres, first of all,
3 what size of area your police administration, when it occupied all its
4 territory, covered? How big was it?
5 A. It was the largest police administration in the country at the
6 time, in terms of territory, but I really can't tell you how many
7 kilometre it covered.
8 Q. Now, after Operation Storm, is it correct that the minister of
9 the interior sent down various senior officers to assist both you, as
10 well as Mr. Romanic, in the Kotar-Knin Police Administration?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. One, in particular, I want to ask you questions about is
13 Mr. Djurica. Was he an assistant minister?
14 A. He was -- well, he wasn't the assistant minister. He was the
15 chief of the police sector of the uniformed police in the ministry. And
16 he was the principal coordinator for the
17 Kotar-Knin Police Administration.
18 Q. Thank you. And did he provide assistance to both you and
19 Mr. Romanic?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Did you have enough police to deal with the problems after
22 Operation Storm within your police administration?
23 A. No.
24 Q. Did Mr. Romanic, at the Kotar-Knin Police Administration, did he
25 have enough police to deal with the problems after Operation Storm in his
1 police administration?
2 A. No.
3 Q. And did you explain that to Mr. Djurica or any other senior
4 figure from the Ministry of Interior?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. And what was the reaction from your superiors?
7 A. Well, they mostly said that they would help and that they would
8 increase the number of personnel, vehicles, and resources generally.
9 Q. Did that happen? Were the numbers of personnel sufficiently
10 increased to help you?
11 A. No.
12 Q. And what about equipment, such as vehicles? Were -- were enough
13 vehicles to patrol provided to you?
14 A. Well, they were modest.
15 Q. Was the scale of the problem that was faced after Operation Storm
16 adequately planned for by the Ministry of Interior?
17 A. No. Because the situation could not have been foreseen.
18 Q. Now, I want to ask you now some -- some other questions, and that
19 concerns your contact with the military police.
20 Prior to Operation Storm, did you have contact as the chief of
21 the police administration with the Croatian military police?
22 A. No.
23 Q. If you could have a look at a -- a document, P493.
24 And on this right-hand screen again, Mr. Cetina, you'll see a
25 document coming up. It's dated the 3rd of August, 1995. It's from the
1 Ministry of the Interior, and it's sent to the police administrations,
2 including Zadar-Knin. And it concerns co-operation with military police.
3 And it says:
4 "In accordance with the agreed procedure in relation to
5 representatives of the Ministry of Defence, military police, in order to
6 ensure coordinated and harmonised joint action in the newly liberated
7 part of the Republic of Croatia
8 An order is issued that you were to establish contacts with the
9 military police units within the police administration and agree on
10 harmonised action in the implementation of tasks?
11 First of all, do you recognise this document?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Did you take any steps in relation to this order which was from
14 Mr. Moric, the assistant minister, as of the 3rd of August, before
15 Operation Storm, did you establish contact with the military police units
16 in your area?
17 A. It was the chiefs of the departments that were subordinated to me
18 who would have done things like that. They were initial contacts, the
19 first steps, without any meetings having taken place.
20 Q. So if could you just explain how you organised your
21 Zadar-Knin Police Administration. You were the chief. How you organised
22 then these contacts within point 1 with the military police. Who were
23 your subordinates who contacted the military police, at what level, what
24 did they do? If you could just explain that to us.
25 A. It was the chief the police department, the uniformed police,
1 that is, Mr. Bitanga was his name, and he contacted the military police
2 in the area.
3 Q. And which military police was -- was that? If you could identify
4 them, what the unit was.
5 A. As far as I remember, it was the 71st and 72nd Battalion, and
6 they were headquartered in Rijeka
7 Q. So how did you deal with this with Mr. Bitanga? What did you --
8 did you explain anything to him, how did you get him to implement this
9 order from Mr. Moric?
10 A. Well, he knew the commanders beforehand, and so they would get in
11 touch and agree on further co-operation.
12 Q. Thank you.
13 MR. KAY: If we can turn now to document D1283.
14 Q. Another document, Mr. Cetina. It's dated the
15 4th of August, 1995. It's from the 72nd Military Police Battalion,
16 3rd Company, Zadar. It's a report to commander. And you can see that it
17 says that a meeting was held on the 3rd of August on the premises of the
18 72nd Military Police Battalion with a Major Ivan Juric. And -- who
19 issued certain orders in connection with the Croatian military
21 And we see in the second paragraphs that contact was established,
22 including with the chiefs of the Zadar-Knin Police Administration. And
23 this document is from a Captain Viktor Grancaric.
24 First of all, do you know Commander Grancaric, of the 3rd Company
25 in Zadar of the military police?
1 A. No. He wasn't at that level of command. He was at the level of
2 command of Chief Bitanga.
3 Q. So the meeting that's referred to here, when it says "chiefs of
4 the Zadar-Knin Police Administration," would that have been, then,
5 Mr. Bitanga's level below you?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. And if we just go to the second page of the document in the
8 English, we'll see a list of places. Can you see there some various
9 place names. And it says: two military policemen, two employees of the
10 Zadar-Knin Police Administration, establish check-points with the
11 military police.
12 Was that the decision that Mr. Bitanga would have taken, in
14 A. Yes, he could have made a decision like that.
15 Q. Thank you.
16 MR. KAY: If we can just go to another document, 65 ter 2310.
17 Q. This is a report from Mr. Grancaric, Captain Grancaric, of the
18 72nd Military Police, 3rd Company, Zadar, it's dated the
19 10th of August, 1995. And it refers to -- in the report from the
20 3rd till 9th of August, and it says in the first sentence:
21 "After meetings with the coordinator of the military police,
22 Major Ivan Juric, the head of the Zadar-Knin Police Administration,
23 commander of the operation group, Colonel Mladen Fuzul, head of SIS. And
24 it goes on to refer to issuing tasks.
25 It's just this matter here I wanted to ask you about, where --
1 first of all, Major Juric, did you ever meet a coordinator for the
2 military police from the military police administration,
3 Major Ivan Juric?
4 A. Possibly once, but I don't really remember. He might have been
5 at Plitvice, that meeting that was held there later on.
6 Q. Thank you. Where it refers to the head of the Zadar-Knin
7 Police Administration and goes on to refer to Colonel Fuzul, would that
8 have been you identified there in this report?
9 A. I think this is wrong. I think that was the chief from the Knin
10 administration. I don't remember having attended that meeting myself.
11 Q. Thank you very much. I want to turn now to another exhibit.
12 MR. KAY: It's -- can I make that an exhibit. Yes.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, let's first deal with that then.
14 Ms. Mahindaratne.
15 MS. MAHINDARATNE: No objections, Mr. President.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
17 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this document becomes
18 Exhibit D1749. Thank you.
19 JUDGE ORIE: D1749 is admitted into evidence.
20 Mr. Kay, I'm looking at the clock. It's a bit earlier, but since
21 you're moving to another document, we'll have to take the break rather
22 strict at 3.45.
23 MR. KAY: Let's take it now, Your Honour.
24 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Mr. President, before that, may I just -- so
25 that the -- it's line -- page 30, line 19 there is a correction. It's
1 just the way the name is written Major Juric is written with D-j-u-r-i-c.
2 I believe it should be J-u-r-i-c, being sure that the record is clear.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, you know that usually the transcript is
4 reviewed after the court hearings. If you have any such technical
5 remark, the best of dealing with it is to write it down on a piece of
6 paper and give it to the transcriber so that it's, for certain, that it
7 appears appropriate. But, nevertheless, thanks for your accuracy,
8 Ms. Mahindaratne.
9 We will have a -- no, let me first ask Madam Usher to escort the
10 witness out of the courtroom.
11 We will have a break, Mr. Cetina, and we would like to see you
12 back in approximately 25 minutes.
13 [The witness stands down]
14 JUDGE ORIE: We talked about scheduling for next week. The
15 Chamber has received the time estimates for this witness, and it seems
16 that, if everyone behaves very disciplined, that there would be a fair
17 possibility to conclude the evidence of this witness on Friday, so that
18 he doesn't have to stay over the weekend. The parties are urged and
19 encouraged to -- not only to stick to their time-limits - we lost in the
20 beginning some time on procedural matters - but also, if possible, to
21 leave some time for Chamber's questions as well.
22 We will have a break, and we will resume at ten minutes
23 past 4.00.
24 --- Recess taken at 3.43 p.m.
25 [The witness takes the stand]
1 --- On resuming at 4.13 p.m.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kay, please proceed.
3 MR. KAY: Thank you, Your Honour.
4 May we have Exhibit D46, please. Letter from Mr. Moric to
5 General Lausic of the military police administration on the
6 10th of August, 1995.
7 Q. Can you look at this letter, please, Mr. Cetina.
8 Mr. Moric writes:
9 "According to reports from the field, and in particular the
10 territories of Lika-Senj and Zadar-Knin Police Administrations and
11 Vojnic and Vrginmost areas, cases are being noted of individual
12 Croatian army members on liberated territory stealing movable property
13 and burning houses and killing the cattle that strays around the area."
14 And it refers to a lack of co-operation at check-points and
15 roadblocks between the MUP police and military police members.
16 First of all, what had you communicated to Mr. Moric about what
17 was happening in the field?
18 A. According to the vertical chain of command, we sent daily reports
19 on the events we noted in the field.
20 Q. And were these day reports summaries of what your police stations
21 were receiving as reports?
22 A. Yes. These were collated reports that were sent on a daily basis
23 to the headquarters of the ministry, and all the police administrations
24 affected by Operation Storm had to do it.
25 Q. Just so that we now how the system worked, did individual police
1 stations report to your police administration and then did you send the
2 information to Zagreb
3 A. Precisely so. Precisely so.
4 Q. Thank you.
5 MR. KAY: If we can look at D49 next, Exhibit D49, please.
6 Q. This also comes from Mr. Moric. It's dated the 18th of August
7 and goes to your police administration as well as to the Knin police
8 station. And we see there, again, the paragraph:
9 "Written and oral reports by police stations and police
10 administrations shows [sic] that there are daily cases of torching houses
11 and illegal taking away of people's movable property in areas liberated
12 in Operation Storm."
13 And then it refers to individuals wearing Croatian army uniforms.
14 And it goes into an order. And it's that I want to look at.
15 Point 1 of the order says:
16 "Police administration chiefs must immediately convene a meeting
17 with commanders of military police battalions to inform them of the
18 problem and of the decision to put a stop to it ..."
19 Did you convene a meeting with the commanders of the military
20 police battalions in your police administration?
21 A. I passed the order from the ministry down to the chief of the
22 uniformed police department, Mr. Bitanga.
23 Q. And did you give Mr. Bitanga any instructions as to what to do?
24 A. The order is quite clear and self-explanatory.
25 Q. So is it a -- did you give him a copy of this order?
1 A. The competent chief would receive every single order which came
2 from the ministry.
3 Q. Was it only Mr. Bitanga that you gave this to, or was there any
4 other of your chiefs within your police administration whom you also
5 passed it on to?
6 A. It is highly likely that we gave it to the Kotar-Knin
7 Police Administration and to the police stations.
8 Q. In point 2, Mr. Moric requires that:
9 "The meeting must be informed of the decision that cases of
10 torching of houses and ... taking of ... property ... will not be
11 operatively investigated, but a stop must be put to cases of this type as
12 of today ..."
13 Are you able to explain what that meant to you?
14 A. Well, I don't know what Mr. Moric meant by it. However, by that
15 date, we had already processed a certain number of cases and had already
16 confiscated the property that had been appropriated.
17 Q. Did this part of the order have any effect on how you conducted
18 your police operations?
19 A. No. To the best of our abilities, we had already been abiding by
20 and implementing the Law on Criminal Procedure and the Criminal Code.
21 Q. In point 3, it says:
22 "... commanders of military police battalions are to be requested
23 that mixed barrier check-points and mixed patrols of civilian and
24 military police be set up in all populated areas where there are members
25 of the Croatian army ... and the check-points and patrols will ...
1 prevent the ... problems."
2 Did you have, at that time, a system of joint check-points and
3 joint patrols with the military police within your police administration?
4 A. We had always set up the necessary check-points independently.
5 It was difficult to come to an agreement with the military police because
6 their forces were far weaker.
7 Q. Are you able to give a figure as to how many military police
8 officers there were within your police administration?
9 A. I can't remember. I don't know the figures. Fewer, at any -- by
10 all means, fewer.
11 Q. And what about in Kotar-Knin Police Administration?
12 A. The same applied to that -- to that administration.
13 Q. Thank you.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kay, may I seek a clarification of one of the
15 previous answers.
16 Mr. Cetina, Mr. Kay asked you whether the -- whether the part of
17 the order where it said that it should be stopped, stealing and such kind
18 of things, you said that it had no effect and how you conducted your
19 police stations because, to the best of your abilities, you already been
20 abiding and implementing the Law on Criminal Procedure and the
21 Criminal Code.
22 In your previous answer, you said that you had already processed
23 a certain number of cases and had already confiscated the property that
24 had been appropriated.
25 Now, it's not entirely clear to me what you meant by "we had
1 already been abiding and implementing the Law on Criminal Procedure and
2 the Criminal Code."
3 Would that mean that you would continue any investigation that
4 had started already?
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] From the early days, as far as we
6 were able to, in every case where a person was stopped in a vehicle with
7 misappropriated goods, we took the proper course of action. In that
8 context, the order issued by Mr. Moric did not add anything new to our
9 activity, did not mean anything specific.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Could you be concrete. If there was car, you found
11 a car with misappropriated goods, you took the proper course of action.
12 What would that mean?
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This means that the vehicle and the
14 goods, if they were stolen, were confiscated and a criminal report was
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now, if you would receive a report from
17 someone who said, Well, last week this and this happened; I was -- my
18 property was stolen, would you then further investigate that?
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] If there was the required degree of
20 suspicion, yes.
21 JUDGE ORIE: So you just ignored the order that torching of
22 houses and taking of property should not be operatively investigated.
23 You ignored that order?
24 Is that how I have to understand it?
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Correct. We were acting in
1 accordance with the Law on the Interior and the Law on
2 Criminal Procedure.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Did you ever respond to that order in a way
4 that you would not obey to it but that you would do what you were
5 supposed to do under the legislation which was effective at the time?
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] There was no need for such a
7 response, because the laws that I referred to had supremacy over the
9 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Kay.
10 MR. KAY: And dealing with one matter arising from that --
11 Q. Did you say the Law on Criminal Procedure and the Law on
12 Internal Affairs, rather than the Criminal Code? It was translated as
13 the Criminal Code, but did you say Law on Internal Affairs? Page 35,
14 line 7.
15 A. I said the Law on Internal Affairs and the Law on
16 Criminal Procedure.
17 Q. Yes. And it's the Law on Internal Affairs that requires you to
18 act as soon as you have information concerning a crime?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Thank you.
21 JUDGE ORIE: One more question in this respect.
22 Mr. Cetina, do I understand your testimony well that you say that
23 this order actually is in violation of the law was in effect at the time?
24 Because it orders you to do something which you say, We couldn't do that
25 because the law tells us to do otherwise.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Whenever the law envisaged such a
2 course of procedure, that was the way we proceeded.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But that was not my question. My question was
4 whether you then considered this order to be in violation of the existing
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In a certain way, it is not, in
7 fact, in accordance with the law.
8 JUDGE ORIE: So, in a certain way, it's a violation of the law.
9 That's ...
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In a way, yes.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
12 Please proceed, Mr. Kay.
13 MR. KAY: Thank you. Can we go to Exhibit D584, please.
14 Q. This is a document from you, Mr. Cetina, dated the
15 19th of August, 1995. And it concerns the document we've just been
16 looking at from Mr. Moric. And it says:
17 "Please be informed that we had a meeting on the
18 16th of August, 1995 with the Deputy Commander of the 72nd Battalion of
19 the military police, Mr. Primorac, and on the 17th of August, 1995
20 the commander of the 71st Battalion of the military police, Mr. Matanic,
21 during which the tasks from your telegram ... were elaborated. Please
22 note that the Deputy Commander and the Commander of the military police
23 pointed out that coordinated action at all check-points was impossible
24 due to the lack of personnel."
25 Firstly, was that a meeting that you personally had, or was it,
1 again, Mr. Bitanga?
2 A. As far as I remember, I think it was Mr. Bitanga who chaired the
4 Q. And did he report this to you about the military police having
5 lack of personnel?
6 A. Yes, absolutely.
7 Q. Thank you.
8 MR. KAY: If we can go to Exhibit D1071.
9 Q. This is from the commander of the 72nd Military Police Battalion,
10 Major Budimir, dated the 19th of August, 1995, and it goes to the chief
11 of the military police administration, General Lausic. And it concerns a
12 similar order to Mr. Moric's that Mr. Lausic had made concerning
13 co-operation. And it's his report to him. We can see in paragraph 1:
14 Coordination meeting with Mr. Radalj, head of police sector in
16 Do you know Mr. Radalj of the Split-Dalmatia Police?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. And was his position the equivalent of Mr. Bitanga's?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. In Sinj we can see coordination meeting with Mr. Bilobrk. And in
21 number 3, Sibenik, again, a coordination meeting. We can see about the
22 matters raised there.
23 And then in number 4, it says a coordinating meeting was not held
24 in Zadar-Knin Police Administration, because, according to Mr. Cetina,
25 head of the police administration, he orders to establish contact at the
1 level of command of the military police battalion, 71 and 72, and no
2 orders on establishing contact at lower levels. Also, he said he would
3 organise a meeting at the level of commands of these two military police
4 battalions, which carry out military and police tasks in the territory of
5 the police administration.
6 Do you have a comment to make on that point made by
7 Commander Budimir concerning your contact with the command of the
8 71st and the 72nd?
9 A. This is precisely what I said a moment ago. In other words, that
10 it was Chief Bitanga who was supposed to make that contact.
11 Q. Thank you.
12 MR. KAY: Can I now turn to Exhibit D50.
13 Q. This is another order from Mr. Moric to the police
14 administrations on the 22nd of August, 1995, and concerns that order we
15 saw on the 18th of August. And he sets out his order of the linking with
16 the military police to stop houses being burnt, property being taken.
17 The letter sent to the military police administration describing the
18 issue and what the military police administration had asked the
19 battalions to do. And then he asked for the problem at the state level
20 to be monitored, and he was to be informed by reports about co-operation
21 with the military police, and it's sent out, 1, 2, 3, and 4, the types of
22 co-operation and information that he wanted. And in 5, 6, 7, and in the
23 next page in the English, statistics concerning investigations, crimes,
24 and how many perpetrators were wearing Croatian military uniform and how
25 many have abused the uniform, and with a date for the reports.
1 Did you take steps, as a result of receiving this order, to
2 monitor these matters?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Thank you.
5 MR. KAY: If we could go to another document, at Exhibit D586.
6 Q. This is from Mr. Moric to General Lausic of the military police
7 administration. And it, again, discusses further the issue that we have
8 been looking at. And we can see in the second paragraph that information
9 had been received about the demobilisation of a certain number of
10 conscripts has begun and more extensive -- probably meaning
11 demobilisation can be expected, and then describing what problems could
12 be happening. And he makes proposals in relation to dealing with this
14 If I can ask you this: Demobilisation of troops from the
15 Croatian army after the liberation of the occupied territories, did that
16 have an effect upon crime within your police administration?
17 A. I presume so. These individuals hailed from the territory.
18 Q. Are you able to describe what happened, then, in relation to
19 conscripts being demobilised? What effect did that have within your
20 police administration?
21 A. I believe to this day that these were individuals who had
22 probably kept or held on to quite an amount of weapons and to their
23 uniforms, that they were the ones who committed the crimes that were the
24 subject of our reports to the ministry.
25 Q. Thank you.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Misetic.
12 MR. MISETIC: Mr. President, may we go into private session for a
13 minute, please.
14 JUDGE ORIE: We move into private session.
15 [Private session]
11 Page 23420 redacted. Private session.
19 [Open session]
20 THE REGISTRAR: We're back in open session, Your Honours.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
22 MR. KAY: Yes. Just looking at this document, there are problems
23 mentioned within this document that there are still no foot patrols due
24 to lack of military policemen who still cannot join up.
25 Q. Was that something you were aware of, Mr. Cetina, about the
1 shortage of military police for patrols within
2 Kotar-Knin Police Administration?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. And in the fourth paragraph, it refers to during joint meetings
5 we've learned that members of the military police at command are located
6 at the outermost boundaries of our security zone. And it mentions Dabar
7 and a number of other places which are beyond my linguistic skills, but
8 I'll pick out the ones I can pronounce: Drnis, Otric, Mostine,
9 Vrlika-Kijevo, et cetera. We can see the places there.
10 Are you able to comment on that particular problem of military
11 police being at the outermost boundaries of the territory of the
12 Kotar-Knin Police Administration?
13 A. All I can say is that they did not stick to the agreement reached
14 with us. Now, the reason why they were up at those positions, I really
15 don't know what that was.
16 Q. Did you know anything about those places listed in this document,
17 whether they had any significance in relation to the -- what the military
18 was doing and the needs of the military police to be in those places?
19 A. No, I have no knowledge of that.
20 Q. The coordination between the Kotar-Knin Police Administration and
21 the 72nd Military Police Battalion, was that something you knew about at
22 the time? Did you discuss that with Mr. Romanic?
23 A. Yes, I did discuss it with him.
24 Q. And what did he describe his co-operation as being with the 72nd?
25 What type of co-operation did he have?
1 A. He didn't have proper co-operation, and, in fact, we had agreed
2 that he should report directly about that, report to the
3 Ministry of Internal Affairs. And he had the right and duty to do that.
4 Q. Thank you.
5 MR. KAY: If we can go to Exhibit P498.
6 Q. This is a report from you to Mr. Moric on the 24th of August
7 concerning your co-operation. And we can see in the second
8 paragraph that you say:
9 "The co-operation between police administrations, police
10 stations, and branch ... stations is ... satisfactory."
11 You don't have major complaints. There are still some cases of
12 house burning, destruction of houses, removal of property, but to a
13 lesser extent than was the case before the 18th of August. The
14 perpetrators of these acts are, for the most part, persons in
15 Croatian army uniforms, civilians, and there are also a few cases of
16 police personnel who appear in uniform.
17 The phrase "of persons in Croatian army uniforms," what did you
18 mean by that?
19 A. If we weren't able to identify the persons or, rather, the
20 individuals who had insignia of the Croatian army, then this is how we
21 would describe them, or refer to them.
22 Q. So could civilians wearing Croatian army uniforms with insignia
23 fall into that category of persons?
24 A. If we were able to establish their identity, then, yes.
25 Q. It says here further on that:
1 "The military police is to a maximum degree involved in criminal
2 investigation. They deal with uniformed persons while other cases are
3 dealt with by civilian police personnel."
4 Could you say what you meant by that?
5 A. Well, what I can say is this. Once it was established that an
6 individual was officially a member of the Croatian army, then it was our
7 duty, and we insisted upon, having the crime police of the military
8 police be included in the case.
9 Q. Did you know how many crime police of the military police were
10 in -- were within your territorial area?
11 A. No.
12 Q. If we look down here at the -- at cases "and following an
13 investigation, 15 civilian perpetrators, four in civilian police uniforms
14 identified, we don't have exact information about members of the HV since
15 they are being handled by the military police ..."
16 Did you keep any figures on the numbers of HV personnel that were
17 handed over to the military police?
18 A. I don't remember keeping that kind of record.
19 Q. Thank you.
20 MR. KAY: Thank you. If we can go to Exhibit D589.
21 Q. This is a report by you dated the 28th of August. Again, to
22 Mr. Moric on the same matter. It concerns treatment of persons in
23 military uniforms. It says:
24 "During the past several days, a significant number of persons
25 wearing Croatian army uniforms, carrying long and short-barrelled arms,
1 driving in cars and other vehicles with civilian registration plates have
2 been observed on patrols ..."
3 Now, that piece of information there, about "persons wearing
4 Croatian army uniforms being in cars and other vehicles with civilian
5 registration plates," what type of people were they?
6 A. I'd like to see the lower half of this document, please.
7 Q. Yes, of course.
8 A. I can't see who signed it. Yes, it was signed by
9 Mr. Marijan Tomurad.
10 Q. And Mr. Tomurad, his position was what, within the
11 Zadar-Knin Police Administration?
12 A. He was the deputy. He replaced Mr. Djurica as main coordinator.
13 Q. Yeah. So that piece of information there about persons wearing
14 Croatian army uniforms but being in cars and other vehicles with civilian
15 registration plates, were those serving HV soldiers, or were there any
16 other type of other person?
17 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Mr. President, may I -- there is one, I think,
18 important -- actually, two words -- a phrase that was omitted from the
19 question. If the -- if Mr. Registrar could take the document to the --
20 to the previous page, the first page.
21 JUDGE ORIE: If you could -- if could you just draw the attention
22 of Mr. Kay to where --
23 MR. KAY: I can deal with it, Your Honour.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
25 MS. MAHINDARATNE: I think Mr. Kay is aware.
1 MR. KAY: Yeah, I can see -- thank you. It says significant
2 number of persons wearing HV Croatian army uniforms of various units
3 carrying long and short-barrelled arms, driving in cars and other
4 vehicles with civilian registration plates.
5 Q. My question is, Mr. Cetina, is: Who were these people? Are they
6 able to be identified?
7 A. This document was signed by Mr. Tomurad.
8 Q. Are you able do comment on -- on what he was observing there and
9 writing in this report to Mr. Moric?
10 A. Well, yes, I can comment. It was probably on the basis of the
11 information that he had, whether gained personally or information
12 received from others, other police chiefs, that this was a problem that
13 they were facing. That is to say that persons wearing uniforms were
14 moving around, bearing weapons, and moving around in vehicles.
15 Q. Further on in this report, in the last paragraph, it says:
16 "I also deem it necessary to achieve an agreement according do
17 which the chief of the Zadar-Knin Police Administration, or the
18 Knin district police administration, or persons authorised by them, may
19 be present at the meetings that General Cermak holds with members of the
20 UNCRO, UNCIVPOL, and other international organisations in Knin, so as to
21 ensure that the police are informed about all agreements and conclusions
22 reached which will enable them to organise and plan tasks and duties from
23 their purview, accordingly."
24 Are you able to explain to what this refers?
25 A. This was a good proposal on the part of Mr. Tomurad. And the
1 police was very much interested in receiving all manner of information
2 about crimes and, by the same token, information from UNCRO and UNCIVPOL.
3 And since we knew that Mr. Cermak was holding meetings, he did not have
4 any authorisation to manage police procedure. We thought that it was
5 necessary for one of us to be there and to take over the information from
6 members of UNCRO and UNCIVPOL. And that was the sole motive.
7 Q. Thank you. Were you aware that whilst Mr. Moric was making these
8 orders to the police administrations on co-operation and coordination
9 that, in a parallel way, General Lausic was also making similar orders of
10 co-operation and coordination to the Military Police Battalions?
11 MS. MAHINDARATNE: I object, Mr. President, leading question.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kay, the question was leading.
13 MR. KAY: Well, yes. I don't particularly see any problem
14 arising from it. I mean, I think sometimes evidence is to be taken in a
15 reasonable way. I'm asking if he was aware of any reports from
16 General Lausic to --
17 JUDGE ORIE: Well, there was more in your question, Mr. Kay. But
18 if you would rephrase it, then -- it's -- and, at the same time,
19 Ms. Mahindaratne is reminded that objecting on the basis of leading
20 should be limited to where it really makes a difference.
21 Please proceed.
22 MR. KAY: Yes. Well, shall we look at a document, then,
23 Exhibit D1072.
24 Q. It's dated the 30th of August from General Lausic of the military
25 police administration to the military police battalions. Its subject is
1 coordination meetings with members of the MUP regarding more effective
2 co-operation. And in this report -- this order, he requires daily
3 exchange of daily reports.
4 Were you aware of steps being taken by General Lausic in which he
5 was making these kinds of orders to his military police battalions?
6 A. I've never seen this document before. But I assumed, that - just
7 like Mr. Moric - this was sent to, or certainly orders were sent out to,
8 in this way.
9 Q. Yes, thank you.
10 MR. KAY: Can we now turn to Exhibit P499.
11 JUDGE ORIE: While we're awaiting for it to appear, you earlier
12 quoted, Mr. Kay, from P498. And that was about the 15 civilians and
13 where the document says "and four in civilian police uniform," it's now
14 as a comma which could give it quite a different meaning.
15 So, therefore, could I insist on very precise quoting. You know
16 what I mean?
17 MR. KAY: Yes, Your Honour.
18 JUDGE ORIE: It says 15 -- if you say comma four it could be
19 understood as "four of which," whereas if it's a "and four" then that has
20 a different meaning and that's the reason why I'm -- it's not very vital
21 for your question because your question finally resulted in something
22 else, but I'd rather have that as precise as possible.
23 MR. KAY: I don't think I mentioned "comma," Your Honour.
24 JUDGE ORIE: You didn't mention "comma," but you did not read
25 "and," from what I remember, and that has caused it to appear in the
1 transcript as "comma."
2 MR. KAY: I apologise, Your Honour.
3 P499 is under seal.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Then it should not be shown to the public, and I
5 take it then that you'll consider the confidential character of the
6 document in your questioning.
7 Please proceed.
8 MR. KAY: Of course, Your Honour.
9 Q. The 1st of September, 1995, from the Kotar-Knin Police
10 Administration and sent to Mr. Moric in Zagreb, further to those orders
11 of his for reports. And it says:
12 "Please be informed we had holding joint meetings can the
13 commanders of the 72nd Battalion of the military police in the area
14 covered by the Knin district police administration. Military police
15 personnel have not been included in the joint work at check-points. They
16 act only on their own orders.
17 The last line of the security zone:
18 "Coordination and joint co-operation are inadequate. The
19 commanders are unable to allocate the necessary number of personnel to
20 have a permanent physical presence at check-points, and they only agree
21 to act on our reports when the perpetrators are members of the Croatian
22 army, who they also deal with at our request."
23 But this problem here, within the Kotar-Knin
24 Police Administration concerning the number of military police, was that
25 something that you were aware of at the time?
1 A. Yes, in a way, yes. Well, that means that if an agreement had
2 been reached at a higher level, then, on the ground, they either acted as
3 best they could or had a shortage of men.
4 Q. So what was your expectation as between the co-operation being
5 ordered by Mr. Moric, as well as the co-operation being ordered by the
6 military police administration, General Lausic? What was your
7 expectation from the military police?
8 A. Well, the expectations were that they should -- we should man the
9 check-points jointly. That is to say, to have the necessary number of
10 men, the number that we had agreed upon, and to implement that.
11 However, in practice, that happened very rarely.
12 Q. Thank you.
13 MR. KAY: If we could go to 2D00783.
14 Your Honour, may I have leave to add this to the
15 Rule 65 ter list?
16 MS. MAHINDARATNE: No objection.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Leave is granted.
18 MR. KAY: Thank you.
19 Q. It's a document signed for you by Mr. Kardum dated the
20 1st of September, and it's sent to all police stations with a deadline
21 for commanders. And this document goes to Kotar-Knin
22 Police Administration, Gambiroza Zvonko, every commander is to deliver a
23 report on these tasks. And then we see:
24 "For the purpose of stopping houses been burnt and other people's
25 removal property being taken away ... it is being ordered to link the VP
1 with the PU and PPs in order to solve this problem."
2 And then:
3 "In order to monitor the problem at the police administration
4 level ..."
5 These points are set out concerning co-operation and statistics.
6 And then a written report was required to be sent to the deputy chief of
7 the basic crime police section at Zadar-Knin Police Administration?
8 Firstly who was the deputy chief of the basic crime section at
9 Zadar-Knin Police Administration?
10 A. Formally, it did not have a deputy; although a person was
11 assigned to -- to the post, and I can't remember who it was.
12 Q. And what was to happen with this information that was being sent?
13 A. This is precisely the information that we collected from police
14 stations and which we were duty-bound to forward to the
15 Ministry of the Interior.
16 Q. Thank you.
17 MR. KAY: If we look now at the next page in this document,
18 page 3 -- or page 2 in the -- page 2 in the Croatian --
19 Q. We can see from the 6th Police Station in Benkovac, dated the
20 2nd of September, from Mr. Saponja, and it refers to co-operation between
21 the police station in Benkovac and the military police as being good as
22 efficient. And complaints and poor co-operation have not been present.
23 And then it refers to reports concerning the setting of family houses on
24 fire of people who are of Serbian origin, as well as reports about
25 demolition and taking away other people's property, although in less
1 proportion, and the ... police is undertaking necessary measures.
2 And returning the figures of five arson, two serious larceny, as
3 on-site investigations completed, and that -- this was being delivered to
5 So what would happen with this information, Mr. Cetina?
6 A. The information was processed and sent to the
7 Ministry of the Interior, as part of one compound report.
8 Q. Just taking that police station in Benkovac, are you able to say,
9 for instance, how many police officers worked at a police station such as
11 A. As far as I remember, between 70 -- anything between 70, 80,
12 or 90.
13 Q. And the area that it covered? Are you able to help us with that?
14 A. I don't know what the size of the area was, but it was an area
15 that bordered with the Zadar territory. It is closer to Zadar than to
16 Knin and other places.
17 Q. Thank you.
18 MR. KAY: May that document be made an exhibit, please,
19 Your Honour.
20 MS. MAHINDARATNE: No objection.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
22 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this document becomes
23 Exhibit D1750. Thank you.
24 JUDGE ORIE: D1750 is admitted into evidence.
25 MR. KAY: Can we go to Exhibit D576, please.
1 Q. This is a document from you. It's a report, as requested from
2 the original order of Mr. Moric. It's dated the 2nd of September and
3 concerns burning houses, removal of property. And it refers to the
4 co-operation of the police with the military police "is inadequate in the
5 entire area."
6 And that this issue was analysed at a meeting of the
7 Knin district police station commanders and the MUP coordinator on the
8 30th of August in Gracac.
9 Can you tell us, was that a meeting with the military police, or
10 was it a meeting just of the civil police?
11 A. I can't remember at this point. However, it -- it is probable
12 that the police ourselves, we, ourselves, held the meeting on our own.
13 Q. And it took place in Gracac with the MUP coordinator. Who was
14 that, on the 30th of August?
15 A. I would have to rely on what the text says because I don't
16 remember. It is in the plural, all the coordinators who were present in
17 the police stations located in the liberated territory.
18 Q. So it was all the police station commanders, as well as
19 coordinators were at this meeting; is that right?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. As the text shows, there was criticism of the military police and
22 the shortages of units of the 71st and of the 72nd. How was this
23 criticism of the military police dealt with? What -- here you are at a
24 meeting of the civilian police. You identify this problem in their
25 performance. What was done about it?
1 A. We could inform the ministry thereof, and we didn't have any
2 other option.
3 Q. At this time, your police administration had also been ordered to
4 have meetings with the military police commanders. Were your problems
5 and criticisms expressed directly to the military police by your police
7 A. Always at the meetings, we raised the problems that we had
8 informed the ministry of in writing.
9 Q. Thank you.
10 MR. KAY: If we turn now to Exhibit P2206.
11 Q. This is a report, analysis, submitted by the military police
12 administration, on the 12th of September, 1995, and sent to the military
13 police battalions, including the 71st and 72nd. And it's an analysis by
14 them of the co-operation between the MUP and the military police between
15 the 22nd of August and 31st of August.
16 MR. KAY: Can we turn to page 4 in the English and page 4 in the
17 Croatian where we see the comment on the Zadar-Knin Police Administration
18 that has been put in this report.
19 Q. And it's written here "Zadar-Knin Police Administration."
20 And it says:
21 "The co-operation is not satisfactory, and quite inadequate in
22 the area of Knin, Obrovac, and Gracac, where they have not been included
23 at the check-points."
24 Looking at that comment, what would you say about that assertion
25 that you weren't in -- your police administration wasn't including the
1 military police at the check-points?
2 A. This is the first time I am seeing this. Well, of course, the
3 ministry forwarded all the information they received from us to the
4 military police administration.
5 Q. Well, was it right that your police weren't including the
6 military police at check-points?
7 A. Well, we would have been glad and content had they manned all the
8 check-points that were necessary. This isn't correct that we didn't
9 include them.
10 Q. After the Zadar-Knin Police Administration, it deals with the
11 Knin Police Administration, although we've seen the area of Knin has
12 already been referred to. And it says, on page 5 of the English:
13 "Knin police administration. The problem of co-operation is the
14 same as Zadar-Knin Police Administration."
15 Would you care to comment on that, whether the Knin police
16 administration was also not including the military police on
18 Is that right?
19 A. They would surely have included them, had they provided the
20 necessary men.
21 Q. Thank you.
22 MR. KAY: If we go to D581, Exhibit D581.
23 Q. Another report by you to Mr. Moric on the subject of
24 co-operation, dated the 12th of September, 1995. It says here the
25 co-operation between the various police administrations, stations, is
1 decent but inadequate. Problems occur in the implementation of
2 agreements because there is no co-operation.
3 MR. KAY: We've got the wrong document on the screen.
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This isn't the right document.
5 MR. KAY: Exhibit D581. There we are. That's the English.
6 Q. This is your report to Mr. Moric on co-operation. And it -- it
7 refers to eliminating problems at daily meetings between the police
9 "Personnel of the military police are short of personnel ... some
10 check-points do not have a presence."
11 Again, was that because you were not including them at
12 check-points, or because they didn't have enough personnel?
13 A. No. We would certainly have included them, had they provided the
14 necessary personnel.
15 Q. Thank you. Was there a meeting that you attended in a hotel at
16 the Plitvice Lakes
17 the MUP and the military police?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Did you express there your view about the problems with
20 co-operation with the military police in your area?
21 A. Yes.
22 MR. KAY: If we can look at Exhibit D595 and turn to page 4 of
23 the English, page 3 of the Croatian.
24 Q. We can see Colonel Budimir refers to the large area covered by
25 the 72nd Military Police and didn't agree with opinions that there was
1 not enough manpower. I won't ask about that.
2 But the area covered by the 72nd Military Police, are you able to
3 help us with that? What was the extent of their territorial
5 A. The structure and the area of responsibility of the military
6 police was not organised in the same way as that of the police.
7 Therefore, the areas covered by the 71st and the 72nd Battalions coincide
8 with the territories of the entire Splitsko-Dalmatinska,
9 Zadarsko-Kninska, Licko-Sinjska, and Primorsko-Gorinska
10 Police Administrations. I do believe, indeed, that they did not have
11 enough personnel to cover the entire territory.
12 Q. Thank you.
13 MR. KAY: If we can now look at another document which is on the
14 same subject but a different topic, Exhibit D802.
15 Q. And this is a record from the military police administration
16 concerning Operative Action Varivode between the 6th of October and
17 10th of October, 1995. This report is dated the 11th of October. And we
18 can see that there was a meeting of people involved in Operative Action
19 Varivode at the Zadar-Knin Police Administration, which included yourself
20 and Mr. Bitanga and other members of the MUP, as well as, on behalf of
21 the military police administration, Colonel Kozic, Major Ivan Juric,
22 Captain Eluga [phoen]. And I now want to ask you about this particular
24 What was Operative Action Varivode? How did that come about?
25 A. It was an action carried out in connection with the criminal
1 investigation for the suspected murders in the places of Varivode and
3 Q. Was this a joint initiative between the MUP and the military
5 A. I suppose so, because senior officers of the military police and
6 the civilian police force were engaged.
7 Q. Had any similar initiative to this happened before?
8 A. No.
9 MR. KAY: If we look at the document, we can see, on page 2 in
10 the English, Chief Djurica in the Zadar-Knin Police Administration. And
11 if we can have page 2 of the Croatian.
12 Q. Discuss the current general security situation in the field and
13 measures undertaken, and specific points are -- are made of how the
14 military police and MUP are to work, staff of ordinary and special police
15 with check-points. And it's set out, further on, about patrol cars. And
16 it has a goal. And if we turn to page 3 in the English, we can see the
17 level of discussion and specific details that are referred to.
18 And as a result of the check-points, we see a number of figures,
19 of people who are checked, vehicles searched.
20 Page 4 of the English. Details of arrests that were -- were
21 made, people warned, what was confiscated. And we can see the detail of
22 how things operated.
23 What sort of area did Operation Varivode cover? Was it
24 throughout the Zadar-Knin Police Administration, or was it in a more
25 local position? What did it cover?
1 A. In fact, one could say that it was the first step leading to a
2 higher quality co-operation between the military police and the civilian
3 police, and it led to the resolution of these criminal cases.
4 Q. Could these measures have been applied throughout the whole of
5 the area of your police administration?
6 A. Absolutely, yes. With this sort of organisation.
7 Q. Are you able to comment at all as to why it didn't happen before
8 between the MUP and the military police, that you operated in -- in this
9 way, as you did with Varivode?
10 A. In my view, the sole reason was the absence of co-operation --
11 the fact that no co-operation was forthcoming from the military police.
12 Q. Thank you.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kay, I'm looking at the clock.
14 MR. KAY: Yes, I have just finished this matter as well,
15 Your Honour. That is a convenient moment.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then I would -- first I would like to ask
17 Madam Usher to escort Mr. Cetina out of the courtroom.
18 We will have a break, Mr. Cetina. We'd like to see you back in
19 20 to 25 minutes.
20 [The witness stands down]
21 JUDGE ORIE: And I would like to deliver the Chamber's reasons
22 for its decision to hear Witness Akashi's testimony via video-conference
24 On the 24th of August, 2009, the Gotovina Defence orally
25 requested to hear the Witness Akashi's testimony via video-conference
1 link. This request was made in private session and the public is hereby
2 informed of it.
3 The Gotovina Defence argued that video-conference link testimony
4 for Witness Akashi would be in the interests of its client's rights to a
5 expeditious trial, also considering the age of the witness and the
6 distance he would have to travel to come to The Hague. These submissions
7 can be found at transcript pages 20.725.
8 On the 25th of August, 2009, the Prosecution orally responded,
9 not objecting to the Gotovina Defence's request. On the same day, the
10 Chamber granted the request an ordered that Witness Akashi's testimony be
11 heard via video-conference link. The public was informed of this
12 decision on 15th September, 2009. And this can be found at transcript
13 page 21.616. Witness Akashi
14 the 15th and the 16th of September.
15 According to Rule 81 bis of the Tribunal's Rules of
16 Procedure and Evidence, a Chamber may order that proceedings be conducted
17 by way of a video-conference link if it is consistent with the interests
18 of justice. The jurisprudence of this Tribunal has identified three
19 criteria to guide the exercise of the Chamber acting pursuant to this
20 Rule. Those criteria are: The witness is unable or has good reasons to
21 be unwilling to come to the seat of the Tribunal; the witness's testimony
22 is sufficiently important to make it unfair to the requesting party to
23 proceed without it; and the accused are not prejudiced in the exercise of
24 their rights to confront the witness. However, after considering all
25 relevant factors in a particular case, the ultimate determination to be
1 made when considering a request for video-conference link testimony is
2 whether it would be consistent with the interests of justice.
3 Witness Akashi
4 representative to the former Yugoslavia
5 area during the time-frame covered by the indictment. Accordingly, the
6 Chamber found that the witness's testimony would be sufficiently
7 important to make it unfair to the requesting party to proceed without
8 it. Furthermore, the Chamber found that the accused would not be
9 materially prejudiced in the exercise of their rights to confront the
10 witness if video-conference link were granted.
11 Although the Chamber did not find that Witness Akashi was unable
12 or unwilling for good reasons to come to The Hague, it considered the
13 witness's age, the distance he would have to travel to come to The Hague
14 and the fact that the Gotovina Defence case was scheduled to be concluded
15 by early September 2009. The Chamber found the amount of time,
16 resources, and effort it would take to arrange for Witness Akashi's
17 appearance in The Hague
18 of the trial.
19 According, and recalling that there was no objections to the
20 request, the Chamber was satisfied that it would ultimately be consistent
21 with the interests of justice to hear Witness Akashi's testimony via
22 video-conference link.
23 And this concludes the Chamber's reasons on this decision.
24 We will have a break, and we will resume at ten minutes
25 past 6.00.
1 --- Recess taken at 5.48 p.m.
2 [The witness takes the stand]
3 --- On resuming at 6.11 p.m.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kay, you may proceed.
5 MR. KAY: Thank you, Your Honour.
6 Q. Mr. Cetina, if we could go to a document now, 2D00487. The first
7 page of this document is dated the 12th of October.
8 MR. KAY: But, in fact, we'll go to the second page, please.
9 Page after that, page 3. Or is it page 2? It should be page 2. The
10 next page, please. Page 2 in the Croatian, page 3 in English.
11 Your Honour, this document, at the beginning, has a date on the
12 12th of October.
13 Q. We can see here, dated the -- on the second page, the 30th of
14 August, and it's to the police administrations of Knin through
15 Zadar-Knin, and to Zadar-Knin, and it's from Franjo Djurica. And it's
16 the rules for the joint work of the MUP and UNCIVPOL.
17 And we can see here that the letter refers to UNCRO UNCIVPOL
18 leadership and rules that were developed with the MUP and the Croatian
19 police that were adopted by the leadership and the special envoy,
20 Secretary-General of the UN, Mr. Akashi. And these rules are being sent
21 out on this date, the 30th of August.
22 If we go to the next page, we go to a document headed:
23 "Operational Directives for the Joint Work of the Police."
24 Your Honour, the Court will recognise this as Exhibit P282, and
25 I'm using this document, it's included within it. It's a linked document
1 to this, Your Honour, Exhibit D240 and D53.
2 This concerns joint co-operation between UNCIVPOL and the MUP.
3 We can see here in point 2, Mr. Romanic is -- is mentioned, as well as
4 Mr. Bijelic of the Glina Police Department. And it concerns UNCIVPOL
5 working with the MUP.
6 And in paragraph 4, we can see that problems would be resolved by
7 Mr. Bitanga of Zadar-Knin Police Department.
8 And further on, on the fifth point, that if Mr. Bitanga and
9 Mr. Bobetko can't, Mr. Franjo Djurica would solve problems. And it
10 refers to patrols jointly between UNCIVPOL and the MUP.
11 Mr. Cetina, do you recollect this initiative between your police
12 administration and UNCIVPOL concerning joint procedures to monitor and
13 patrol, in relation to crimes and finding out information?
14 A. Yes. In principle, I do remember. But I don't remember the
15 details, of course, not about the joint patrols.
16 Q. Can you tell us what connection the Zadar-Knin had with -- with
17 UNCIVPOL? When did communication between UNCIVPOL and your police
18 administration start?
19 A. The first contacts, practical contacts, were between and among my
20 colleagues in Knin. So Knin and the police stations.
21 Q. And then between your police administration and UNCIVPOL? Can
22 you recollect how long after Operation Storm that you had a joint
23 initiative with them?
24 A. Roughly 15 to 20 days or a month went by before we had the first
25 meetings with representatives of UNCRO and UNCIVPOL.
1 Q. And were those meetings helpful? What was your attitude towards
3 A. Our attitude at the beginning was that any information was
4 welcome, from any institution or individual. Any information coming into
5 the police was seen as useful.
6 Q. Thank you.
7 MR. KAY: Your Honour, may this document be made an exhibit.
8 MS. MAHINDARATNE: No objection.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
10 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this document becomes
11 Exhibit D1751. Thank you.
12 JUDGE ORIE: D1751 is admitted into evidence.
13 MR. KAY: I now want to turn to another document, which is
14 Exhibit P245. And it's the minutes of a meeting between UNCIVPOL and
15 Mr. Romanic at the Knin police station.
16 Q. And we can see here that the police structure was discussed with
17 Mr. Romanic, as to the organisation. The CIVPOL structure was discussed,
18 and the agreement we've just been looking at on the joint initiative,
19 Exhibit P282, was discussed. A question of the number of Serbs was
21 MR. KAY: And then if we go to page 2 of the English and page 2
22 of the Croatian.
23 Q. Shootings in the street were raised between UNCIVPOL and
24 Mr. Romanic, and they had a discussion on that and about the police being
25 at the UNCRO camp gate.
1 And then murder cases was raised, and this is what I wanted to
2 direct your attention to. Mr. Romanic was asked about information of
3 certain murder cases observed by the HRAT and CIVPOL during the period
4 after Operation Storm. Mr. Romanic stated that all kind of investigation
5 in the area was going on in Zadar.
6 "The leader of this investigation is Mr. Ive Kardum, whom CIVPOL
7 should address in this matter."
8 And I want you to consider that and comment on it. Was
9 Zadar-Knin Police Administration responsible for all the murder
10 investigations within the Kotar-Knin Police Administration?
11 A. Yes, there was the crime police department coordinated with the
12 headquarters within the ministry.
13 Q. Did the Kotar-Knin Police Administration have a team of police
14 available to them to investigate any murders within that police
16 A. That was the only department that was led by Mr. Kardum.
17 Q. So for any murder investigation, Mr. Romanic had to turn and
18 refer the matter to Mr. Kardum; is that right?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Thank you.
21 MR. KAY: Just turning now to 65 ter 4620.
22 Q. This is a document from Mr. Elleby, in fact, as the Knin police
23 commander, and it concerns the killing of Sava Babic on the
24 5th of September and refers to the detail of what the UNMO had seen, and
1 "The civilian police is requesting to supervise the investigation
2 of the killing and be present during the investigation of the Croatian
3 police at the scene of the crime."
4 We can see that document. It's probably not a document you've
5 seen before. Is that right?
6 A. Yes, that is right.
7 Q. Yeah --
8 MR. KAY: And I'm only producing it to have a chain of events,
9 Your Honour.
10 Your Honour, may this document be made an exhibit?
11 MS. MAHINDARATNE: No objection.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
13 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this document becomes
14 Exhibit D1752. Thank you.
15 MR. KAY: If we can turn now --
16 JUDGE ORIE: And is admitted into evidence.
17 MR. KAY: I'm sorry, Your Honour.
18 Can we turn now to Exhibit D230. And this is a letter from
19 Mr. Romanic dated 6th September, 1995, sent to the Zadar-Knin
20 Police Administration, criminal police department. And it concerns the
21 Sava Babic murder that was raised by Mr. Elleby in that memo.
22 Q. And he states that following the finding of the killed
23 Sava Babic, UNCIVPOL have requested the civilian police of Knin district
24 police administration, information on the circumstances of her death, and
25 what measures were taken and in what way the on-site investigation was
1 carried out.
2 Was that a correct procedure adopted by Mr. Romanic, in relation
3 to this matter?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Thank you.
6 Did your police administration receive information from the
7 Kotar-Knin Police Administration of crimes that were being brought to
8 their attention in reports by the UNCIVPOL?
9 A. Yes.
10 MR. KAY: If we can look here at Exhibit P253.
11 Q. This is a document sent by the commander of Knin UNCIVPOL,
12 Mr. Romassev, on the 8th of September, 1995. And he lists crimes that
13 were happening. Included within this list of crimes are also killings
14 and bodies, and we can see the nature of the information that was being
15 given by him to the commander of Knin police station.
16 What should the commander of the Knin police station have done
17 with this information received by him from UNCIVPOL?
18 A. As a rule, he should send on the report to the crime department
19 of the police.
20 Q. And of which police administration would that have been?
21 A. The Zadar-Knin Police Administration.
22 Q. Thank you.
23 MR. KAY: If we go to another document now, 2D00246.
24 Q. It's dated the 12th of September, 1995, Knin Police
25 Administration. Sent to the Zadar-Knin Police Administration, duty
1 operations section. Again, information provided by members of UNCRO.
2 We can see, on the 12th of September, 1995, chief of Knin
3 district police administration received information, it says here, from
4 the ZP, Military District of the Croatian Army in Knin, stating that
5 members of UNCRO had found two unknown female bodies, gives the details,
6 and cites the place Brgud in Kistanje municipality. And they stated that
7 the women had die a violent death.
8 We go to the next page of the English, and it refers to a car
9 patrol being sent to the scene. No bodies were found. And at the end,
10 it says:
11 "We will keep you informed about new information in a timely
13 So Knin reporting in that way to Zadar-Knin on the information
14 provided by UNCRO, was that the correct procedure for dealing with this
16 A. Yes.
17 MR. KAY: Your Honour, might this document be made an exhibit,
19 MS. MAHINDARATNE: No objection.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
21 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this document becomes
22 Exhibit D1753. Thank you.
23 JUDGE ORIE: And is admitted into evidence.
24 MR. KAY: Your Honour, to save court time, similar document to
25 the one we've looked at earlier of the report is Exhibit P262, where
1 Mr. Romassev, again, reports crimes to the Knin police station. I don't
2 go into the detail of that, as I think it will be repetitious, unless the
3 Court would require me to.
4 JUDGE ORIE: I take it you want to --
5 MR. KAY: Thank you, Your Honour.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, to just submit it to the Court.
7 MR. KAY: Yes. Just for reference purposes, Exhibit P262.
8 Can we now go to Exhibit D179. And for information purposes,
9 Exhibit P262 includes to reference to that murder in Brgud on the
10 12th of September, 1995.
11 D179 is under seal so should not be shown to the public.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, that's clear.
13 MR. KAY: Thank you.
14 Q. Could you look at this document, please, Mr. Cetina. It's from
15 Mr. Elleby, chief of UNCIVPOL in Sector South, and it was sent to you on
16 the 19th of September. And it concerns murders committed since the
17 4th of August, 1995. And Mr. Elleby attaches a list of all murders
18 reported to UNCIVPOL since the 4th of August, requesting information on
19 the progress of investigations, names of suspects, arrests, charges, any
20 convictions obtained, and requesting to see the files and to discuss the
21 same in a future meeting.
22 We'll just have a look at the pages of that.
23 MR. KAY: If we can turn to page 2 of the English and the
25 Q. We see here listed are various murders on various occasions, or
1 bodies that were found.
2 Do you recollect receiving this report from Mr. Elleby, in
3 relation to these killings within this report?
4 A. Yes, I remember that.
5 Q. At the end of the report, there's a schedule of 44 names.
6 MR. KAY: Perhaps if we can just turn to the next page, again, to
7 see the details.
8 Q. Were all these murders as listed within this report within your
9 police administration?
10 A. Yes.
11 MR. KAY: Can we turn to the next page.
12 Q. Go through it again. And the next page, just so that can you see
13 the details. And then the page after that. And then turn over again
14 until we get to the schedule at the end. If we can continue through.
15 There we are. If we can just go to the schedule at the end.
16 What did you do about this report when you received it on the
17 19th of September?
18 A. First of all, I have to say that it's a list of persons who,
19 quite certainly, lost their lives during the war operations, or most of
20 them. And you can see that if you look at the dates when they were
21 found. Part of those persons were certainly murdered as well, that is to
22 say, the crime of murder had been committed against them.
23 Now, this list was sent to the crime police department.
24 Q. Do you know if these killings had been registered with the crime
25 police already, so that investigations had already started on these
1 killings? Do you know what the situation was?
2 A. I don't remember now, but I'm certain that certain investigations
3 had been started. Others could not have been started because the bodies
4 of these individuals were moved through the sanitisation of the terrain.
5 Q. Do you know what the crime police were able to do to respond to
6 this report?
7 A. It could only have compared the data it had with the inquiries
8 that had -- or investigations that had been started.
9 Q. Was there a response to Mr. Elleby's request for information and
11 A. I am certain that Mr. Elleby was informed of it orally. I'm not
12 sure about written information though.
13 Q. Thank you.
14 MR. KAY: If we can turn over the page again so that we go to the
15 next page of the list, which is the full number. And then the next page,
16 again, where we have statistics. The next page of the Croatian. There.
17 And if we can turn over again to another part of the report, to the next
18 page, which is headed:
19 "Human rights violations since the 4th of August, 1995
20 And there listed on several pages are, again, various details.
21 Some of them murders, some looting, some assaults, some discoveries of
23 Q. What happened to this information headed:
24 "Human rights violations since the 4th of August 1995
25 A. I don't recall seeing this information.
1 Q. Very well. That's fine.
2 MR. KAY: If we go now to P270.
3 Q. This is another UNCIVPOL document.
4 MR. KAY: That's not -- no, that's -- the document on the right
5 on my screen isn't the right -- that's right now, yeah. Exhibit P270.
6 Q. This is a record of a meeting on the 3rd of October at the
7 Zadar police headquarters, where Mr. Benko, Mr. Nadj, yourself, and a
8 Mr. Hissink, and others were present. And concerned the murder of nine
9 inhabitants in the hamlet of Varivode.
10 MR. KAY: And if we turn to the next page.
11 Q. We see that the details of that particular matter recorded,
12 including the police being informed on the 28th of September, and that an
13 investigation was started early in the morning of the
14 29th of September and what happened. And Mr. Marijan Benko and
15 Mr. Ivan Nadj are responsible for the special commission and in charge
16 for the investigation.
17 What was the special commission?
18 A. In fact, following all these various events that had escalated,
19 and once the ministry was informed of all the details, I suppose that the
20 minister and his assistants decided that they should play a more active
21 role in the investigation and that they should join the Zadar-Knin Police
22 Administration in the effort to resolve the murder.
23 Q. And were there a series of meetings between members of the
24 Zadar-Knin Police Administration and UNCIVPOL dealing with the
25 investigation into the Varivode killings?
1 A. As far as I remember, the police was busy working on it
3 Q. And did you pass information on to UNCIVPOL to keep them informed
4 as that -- that joint co-operation agreement required?
5 A. As far as I remember, we certainly informed them of the
6 resolution of the criminal case orally at a meeting.
7 Q. Thank you.
8 MR. KAY: If we can look at 2D00728. This is a -- it's now
9 D1747. Thank you.
10 Q. This is the minutes of the meeting by UNCIVPOL with Zadar-Knin
11 police authorities, including yourself, in which details of murder cases
12 are revealed and forwarded to the Zadar regional court and criminal
13 proceedings, including the Varivode case. And on page 2 of the English
14 we can see the special investigation team of the interior ministry
15 continues to investigate the most serious cases in Zadar-Knin area of
16 responsibility, and you were given an updated list of incidents recorded
17 by UNCIVPOL.
18 This information that you were giving out to UNCIVPOL concerning
19 the investigations and the criminal proceedings, was that information you
20 could give out to anybody? Was that information generally revealed by
21 your police administration?
22 A. We could not provide that sort of information to just anyone.
23 Q. Thank you. That's all I ask about that.
24 MR. KAY: Your Honour, there are further documents that I have
25 relating to the ongoing relationship between UNCIVPOL and the Zadar-Knin
1 Police Administration concerning the Varivode case, as well as other
2 investigations. Rather than going through that same detail, which is
3 self-explanatory, I propose to bar table that with the Court's approval.
4 [Trial Chamber confers]
5 JUDGE ORIE: At this moment, the Chamber does not oppose such a
6 course of action, although there may be some concerns that we might lose
7 sight on details on these matters which can be relevant.
8 MR. KAY: Shall I give the documents I've got, because they've
9 all been disclosed, and then we can exhibit them, and then the chain will
10 be there for the Court.
11 If I call up 2D00781 and seek leave to add it to the 65 ter list.
12 MS. MAHINDARATNE: No objection.
13 JUDGE ORIE: And leave is granted to add it to the 65 ter list.
14 MR. KAY: And, Your Honour, may I exhibit this document. It's
15 dated the 31st of October and on the Varivode series of meetings.
16 MS. MAHINDARATNE: No objection, Mr. President.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
18 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this document becomes
19 Exhibit D1754. Thank you.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar. D1754 is admitted into
22 MR. KAY: 2D00782. May I have leave to add it to the
23 65 ter exhibit list.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Is this going to be a long list, Mr. Kay?
25 MR. KAY: No.
1 JUDGE ORIE: If it's short, then we can continue. Otherwise I
2 suggest that you write down the numbers and that we then deal with them
3 in a quicker way. But you just mentioned 2D00782.
4 MR. KAY: 2.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Any objections?
6 MS. MAHINDARATNE: No objections.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Leave is granted, and I take that you want to tender
8 it into evidence?
9 MR. KAY: Yes, thank you.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
11 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this document becomes
12 Exhibit D1755. Thank you.
13 JUDGE ORIE: And is admitted into evidence.
14 MR. KAY: And for reference purposes, the next exhibit that the
15 Court would like to keep an eye on is Exhibit P280, which is a final
16 report by UNCIVPOL on the matter.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Thank you for this guidance, Mr. Kay.
18 MR. KAY: Thank you, Your Honour, yes.
19 I'm conscious of the time, Your Honour, and I'm just seeing
20 whether I need to introduce any documents in relation to some other
21 matters which can be connected together concerning passing on of
23 If we could have 65 ter 2D00771.
24 Q. This is a document from the International Committee of the
25 Red Cross, and we can see handwritten on it, Mr. Cetina, it's dated
1 Knin, the 7th of September. It's sent to General Cermak. And it
2 concerns crimes that were referred to by the Red Cross from a lady called
3 Carmen Burger.
4 MR. KAY: And if we turn to the next page of the document --
5 Q. We can see a list of crimes, including someone called
6 Milica Dokic, Simon Dukic, Varivode. And this document goes on to refer
7 to other cases. If you could just have a look at them, page by page.
8 Did you receive information from General Cermak that had been
9 referred to him by the International Committee of the Red Cross of crimes
10 that they had been referred to and were concerned about? Did you receive
11 information from Mr. Cermak of reports that were given to him?
12 A. As a rule, such reports did reach us. However, it is possible
13 that I didn't see some of them, due to my presence on the grounds.
14 Still, they would have been received by the chiefs of the departments.
15 Q. Thank you.
16 MR. KAY: Your Honour, may this document be made an exhibit,
18 MS. MAHINDARATNE: No objection.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
20 THE REGISTRAR: This document becomes Exhibit D1756. Thank you.
21 JUDGE ORIE: And is admitted into evidence.
22 MR. KAY: Your Honour, in relation to the name Simo Dukic, there
23 are internal police documents we've discovered which are a complicated
24 series of documents to go through that I would propose to bar table as
25 the story becomes self-evident and the Court has been used to receiving
1 information in this way, either through witnesses or the bar table.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, if it is introduced in the way bar table
3 documents should be introduced, and you should briefly point to the
4 relevance and briefly describe the documents.
5 MR. KAY: Yes. If we could just turn now to P2649.
6 Q. This is a document which was sent by you to General Cermak in
7 reply to a request of the International Red Cross organisation for
8 submission of data on incidents that occurred in the area of Knin:
9 "We hereby advise you we have completed the necessary checks
10 regarding each event mentioned in the ICRC letter and established the
11 following ..."
12 And then we see a response.
13 MR. KAY: And if we can turn to the second page.
14 Q. Again, this is a document sent by you to General Cermak. And to
15 obtain this information that you sent to General Cermak, where would you
16 have obtained it from?
17 A. We sent this response, because it was in relation to a request
18 from the ICRC, and that's why we sent it. And we sent it only as
20 Q. Thank you.
21 MR. KAY: Your Honour, there are --
22 JUDGE ORIE: I'm looking at the clock, Mr. Kay.
23 MR. KAY: Yes, I can finish now my questioning of the witness,
24 but can I tell the Court there are other documents like this that are
25 self-evident and speak to themselves. And what I propose is that I put
1 them into the chain for the Court and bar table them, because no further
2 purpose would be served in expending further court time on it.
3 JUDGE ORIE: The question is what the witness could tell us in
4 addition to what the documents already tell us.
5 MR. KAY: Yes.
6 JUDGE ORIE: And this, then, would conclude your
8 MR. KAY: Yes, this would conclude my examination.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Then I will have one or two questions for the
10 witness before we adjourn.
11 Mr. Cetina, you remember that a document was shown in which it
12 was described that UNCRO had reported two bodies found in Brgud and that
13 a police car was sent, bodies were not found, and that it would be
14 further investigated the next day. The report dates from the
15 12th of September, and the report of these bodies was also received on
16 the 12th of September, whereas then on the 13th of September, a further
17 investigation would be -- would take place.
18 Do you have any recollection of that specific incident? Is there
19 any explanation that where UNCRO reports, on the 12th of September, that
20 two human corpses are found, that if the police sends a car over there,
21 that they do not find any bodies?
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The only one is that they were
23 unable to find the exact location, since the policemen were not locals.
24 MR. KAY: Can I assist, Your Honour, because these two
25 documents -- I have two documents relevant to this within this collection
1 here --
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. If you --
3 MR. KAY: -- which I hope informs the Court.
4 Can we see 2D00775. This is an on-site investigation report
5 compiled on 14th of September, 1995, in Brgud on finding the bodies of
6 two unidentified women. And there is the investigating judge and the
8 Your Honour, may I make this document an exhibit.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, that's -- unless Ms. Mahindaratne has --
10 MS. MAHINDARATNE: No objection.
11 JUDGE ORIE: No objection. Mr. Registrar.
12 THE REGISTRAR: This becomes Exhibit D1757. Thank you.
13 JUDGE ORIE: And is admitted into evidence.
14 MR. KAY: And to assist the Court further, 2D00772.
15 This is a document dated the 5th of October, 1995, from the crime
16 police Department of Zadar-Knin. And it concerns an on-site
17 investigation. And the document is signed by Mr. Kardum and gives
18 various details of cause of death, et cetera.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
20 MR. KAY: May I make this document an exhibit, please,
21 Your Honour.
22 MS. MAHINDARATNE: No objection.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
24 THE REGISTRAR: This becomes Exhibit D1758. Thank you.
25 JUDGE ORIE: D1758 is admitted into evidence.
1 Then we adjourn.
2 MR. KAY: [Overlapping speakers] ...
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, thank you very much, Mr. Kay.
4 We'll then adjourn for the day.
5 Mr. Cetina, we'd like to see you back tomorrow, tomorrow in the
6 afternoon, quarter past 2.00 in this same courtroom.
7 We adjourn, and we resume on --
8 [Trial Chamber confers]
9 JUDGE ORIE: My colleague reminds me, Mr. Cetina, that I should
10 instruct you that you should not speak with anyone about the testimony
11 you have given already or the testimony still to be given in the days to
13 We adjourn for the day, and we resume tomorrow, Thursday, the
14 29th of October, at quarter past 2.00, Courtroom III.
15 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.05 p.m.
16 to be reconvened on Thursday, the 29th day
17 of October, 2009, at 2.15 p.m.