1 Thursday, 3 December 2009
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness takes the stand]
5 --- Upon commencing at 9.06 a.m.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning to everyone in and around the
8 Mr. Registrar, would you please call the case.
9 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. Good morning to
10 everyone in the courtroom. This is case number IT-06-90-T, the
11 Prosecutor versus Ante Gotovina et al.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
13 Mr. Kay, are you ready to start your cross-examination?
14 MR. KAY: Yes, Your Honour. Thank you.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Moric, I would like to remind you, as I did
16 yesterday, that you're still bound by the solemn declaration you have
17 given at the beginning your testimony. That is to say, that you will
18 speak the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
19 Mr. Kay, please proceed.
20 MR. KAY: Thank you, Your Honour.
21 WITNESS: JOSKO MORIC [Resumed]
22 [Witness answered through interpreter]
23 Cross-examination by Mr. Kay:
24 Q. Good morning, Mr. Moric.
25 A. Good morning.
1 Q. I'm going to ask you a series of questions which will be based on
2 your interview with the Office of the Prosecutor. And the first
3 questions I'm going to ask you about concern the planning for
4 Operation Oluja.
5 MR. KAY: So if we could have Exhibit D1842.
6 JUDGE ORIE: You're working from the revised version, Mr. Kay.
7 Is that ...
8 MR. KAY: Absolutely. It's the only one I know, Your Honour, I
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Well, others are struggling with --
11 MR. KAY: I will even do one better. E-court page 169.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
13 MR. KAY:
14 Q. Mr. Moric, on your right-hand side, a document will come up
15 concerning a series of questions from Mr. Foster to you on this matter.
16 MR. KAY: And if we just go further down the page. There we are.
17 Q. And you can see line 18 in your language, you give information
18 concerning a meeting that Mr. Jarnjak organised with some of his
19 assistants and heads of police administrations. And you discuss the
20 preparation of separate units.
21 I want to turn your attention now to a document, which is
22 Exhibit D409.
23 This is a document concerning meetings that were held on the
24 2nd of August, 1995. And the first page there lists various people who
25 were at a meeting in the Croatian defence ministry war room, and a series
1 of discussions were held by them.
2 MR. KAY: Let us now turn to page 5 of this document.
3 Q. And can you see at 1730 on the 2nd of August, there was a meeting
4 in the minister's office. There's Mr. Susak there, Mr. Jarnjak, and
5 yourself. And there was a discussion concerning issues between the
6 Ministry of Defence and Ministry of Interior, check-points, refugees.
7 There was a discussion about Operation Flash, as more places will be
8 occupied. It can't be the same model. Military police following the
9 front line, and civilian police entering the -- the populated areas.
10 MR. KAY: If we turn to the next page.
11 Q. Various matters concerning routes, highways, and Minister Jarnjak
12 referring to reception centres, interviews:
13 "All MUP reserve units are mobilized on the 3rd and
14 4th of August, 1995, and they enter the liberated regions and take over
16 "The police administration will be in Knin and Glina.
17 "The staff will be in the MUP."
18 And someone called Lackovic will be in the information staff.
19 Having referred you to these notes concerning this meeting, I
20 want to ask you matters now concerning Mr. Jarnjak's statement of the
21 intentions of the MUP that we see on page 6.
22 Firstly, on this date, the 2nd of August, had there been any
23 actual preparation concerning the establishment of the Kotar-Knin Police
25 A. Counsel, there was no special need, as far as I recall, to
1 discuss that issue then, because within the context of Operation Return,
2 the police stations were ready to send crews to return to that area
3 irrespective of whether the return process was to take place in a
4 peaceful manner or by having the territory liberated.
5 Q. So, at this stage, on the 2nd of August, Minister Jarnjak had
6 already in place the methods by which the MUP would take over power; is
7 that right?
8 A. Yesterday we had an opportunity to see that Operation Return was
9 initiated in January 1992, and that, as of that time, we began our
10 preparations to have the police return to the area, among other things,
11 in keeping with the Vance Plan.
12 Q. I'm interested in the phrase here, "take over power," which is
13 one that has been seen elsewhere, and as to what exactly that meant "take
14 over power"?
15 A. Given that this was uttered by the minister of the interior, it
16 can mean to assume authority within the context of authority of the MUP,
17 which directs the conduct of the police and other elements of the
18 Ministry of the Interior.
19 Q. And is it correct that the procedure, the plan that was devised,
20 was that after the military police had followed the military, that the
21 MUP would go in after the military police to take over power?
22 A. That is correct. But the police was not to take over power in
23 the full sense of the word. It was there to take on the responsibility
24 for the work that was within their remit. They were not there to take
25 over power.
1 Q. Yes. Thank you very much.
2 MR. KAY: If we can turn, now, to the next document, Exhibit D45.
3 Q. This document, Mr. Moric, concerns the records of a meeting that
4 was held on the next day, the 3rd of August. And these notes are dated
5 the 4th of August. And they were from the military police
6 administration, and they were sent to you and other senior members,
7 including Mr. Djurica of the Ministry of Interior. If you can see the
8 front page of the document there, records from working meeting held on
9 the 3rd of August, and they're signed by General Lausic of the military
11 MR. KAY: What I want to do is, if the Usher can go through to
12 page 3 of this document.
13 Q. And can you see that the topic of the meeting --
14 MR. KAY: Maybe the Croatian goes back a page. Yes, that's there
15 in the Croatian.
16 Q. Can you see there that the topic of the meeting was coordination
17 of the activities of the MUP, military police, and SIS in the period of
18 preparation and during the planned offensive actions of the
19 Croatian army.
20 And we see your team there.
21 MR. KAY: Next page in the English, please.
22 Q. And can you see the team from the military police.
23 And you open the meeting, in which you refer to the fundamental
24 principles of the operation of the police and military police in the
25 state of war, basing experiences on Western Slavonia, and that you and
1 General Lausic were aware of some negative experiences of the operation
2 in Western Slavonia, and you had the joint task to eliminate problems and
3 mistakes which were observed then. And you have to ensure full
4 cooperation an absolute carrying out of the tasks from their scope of
6 Now, if you could just refer there to what problems and mistakes
7 you and General Lausic had identified that were to be dealt with in the
9 A. The issue at hand are the problems. We experienced, in the
10 previous liberation operation of Flash, that is, lack of cooperation
11 between the military and civilian police. There was much time wasted
12 because of that and much efficiency as well.
13 Q. And by that, do you mean the military police and civilian police?
14 A. Yes, the military and civilian police.
15 Q. At this meeting on the 3rd of August, was it clear as between you
16 and General Lausic that General Lausic was responsible for the control of
17 the military to ensure that they did not commit crimes?
18 A. Counsel, it is clear, based on his job title; Mr. Lausic was the
19 chief of the military police administration. At that point in time, it
20 was clear to both of us, as well as to the entire Croatian public by that
22 Q. And the idea of having full cooperation, carrying out tasks
23 within the scope of your activities, is it right, required both you and
24 he to understand what was happening on the ground?
25 A. Certainly. We had to have reports an information from the field.
1 Q. Thank you. Let us now turn to a document much later in time but
2 would be worth looking at.
3 MR. KAY: That's Exhibit D595.
4 Q. And it's the notes of 18th of September concerning the meeting
5 between the military police and the civilian police at Plitvice. And
6 what we have here, Mr. Moric, are notes that were taken by the military
7 police administration.
8 Firstly, do you recollect having that meeting with your police
9 officers and the military police officers on the -- on the 13th --
10 15th of September at Plitvice?
11 A. I do recollect that a meeting was held. If I remember correctly
12 as well, it was upon my initiative. I asked that we meet there and in
13 that composition.
14 Q. Yes, you're correct.
15 MR. KAY: The Court has seen a document, Exhibit D594,
16 Your Honour, dated 13th of September, which is the matter that Mr. Moric
17 is referring to. I won't call it up.
18 If we can just look at what was dealt with at this meeting.
19 Perhaps if we can go to the next page.
20 Q. And this meeting was to discuss the lack of effective cooperation
21 between the military police and the civilian police; is that right?
22 A. In principle, it is. But the idea of the meeting was, first of
23 all, to use the information we had until then, to look into the state of
24 things, in general, and then analyse how to make it better. We were also
25 supposed to agree on how to do away with the causes of such a situation.
1 Q. Do you recollect if, prior to this meeting, there had previously
2 been such a large-scale meeting between the Ministry of Interior police
3 and the military police in the same way?
4 A. No, I can't recall that off the top of my head. But I do not
5 completely exclude that possibility either. There were daily contacts
6 between those in the military police administration and my co-workers, as
7 well as between General Lausic and myself.
8 Q. And do you know if there was contact between Minister Jarnjak and
9 the military police administration?
10 A. I am not sure I understood your question well.
11 If you're asking me whether the minister of the interior had
12 contacts with the MP administration in the Ministry of Defence, then my
13 answer would, in principle, be no. There was no reason for the minister
14 of the interior to do so.
15 Q. Thank you.
16 If we can look at the next page of the document and just run
17 through it, because we see a series of reports from the various police
19 MR. KAY: Next pages, please.
20 Q. And we also see reports from the military police battalions.
21 MR. KAY: Next page in the English, please. And next page in the
22 English. If we could scroll down the English; I'm trying to find -- yes.
23 If we can go back an English page and back a Croatian page, please.
24 Thank you. Ah, there we are. Thank you.
25 Q. Yeah, and it's just General Lausic's remarks there. If could you
1 just have a quick look at them.
2 And the question is this, and it's follow-up to what I asked
3 about the earlier document: Did General Lausic accept his responsibility
4 in relation to the control of military crime?
5 A. After having seen this document, I can tell you that it was
6 obvious that General Lausic realised the magnitude of the problem. But
7 in response to your question as to whether he assumed responsibility, I
8 can only tell you that he had that responsibility prior to the meeting
9 and after that, since it had been regulated by the legal framework of
10 both of the ministries involved.
11 Q. Thank you very much. And that now concludes that topic.
12 I'd like to, now, move to another passage of your interview.
13 MR. KAY: E-court page 185 in Exhibit D1842, please. And for
14 those using the revised copy, it's pages 71 of 70 -- 71 to 76. 71 of
15 pages 107.
16 Q. If we go down to the bottom of this page, please. And English
17 readers can see the question from Mr. Foster:
18 "Who was in control of Knin after the operation had been
20 And he takes it to run from the 4th of August to the
21 8th of August.
22 MR. KAY: Can we turn the page, please.
23 Q. You can see at the top of the page that is translated to you:
24 "So you mean after the 8th of August who was in control?"
25 Mr. Foster says:
1 "After the 8th August, there was considerable military personnel
2 still in that region and there was a General Cermak based at the
4 And then he puts the question after that sentence:
5 "I just want to know, who was the authority at that time?"
6 Further down the page, you give an answer:
7 "Who was in control would be everybody and nobody."
8 As you said, there was a lot of army there: reserves,
9 Home Guard.
10 MR. KAY: Turning to the next page.
11 Q. You refer to, there was the police, military police, citizens.
12 MR. KAY: Line 10 in the English, line 14 in the Croatian.
13 Q. Mr. Foster says:
14 "So we have Ante Gotovina ... in charge of military operations
15 for that area, a General, we also have another military general, Cermak.
16 Can you tell me who was in charge after the 8th?"
17 Line 20 in the English, 18:
18 "In which sense, you know who was in charge."
19 Mr. Foster gives his understanding that civilian control had been
20 returned to the region after the date in theory.
21 Line 28. And then he goes back to:
22 "...two generals in the region, military generals, and a lot of
23 military there."
24 MR. KAY: If we go to the next page.
25 Q. He asks what your understanding was the situation there. It was
1 clearly confused, who should have been in control, who should have been
2 working down there.
3 You go into the detail on page 74 concerning Storm.
4 MR. KAY: Page 75.
5 Q. You say at line 9 in the English, 5 in the Croatian:
6 "When you said that the civilian authority returned, you probably
7 also referred to emissaries from the government who were sent there in an
8 attempt to organise civil governance, civil authority in that area."
9 A. I do not see this text.
10 Q. Line 20 -- line 5 on page 75.
11 Can you see line 5 there? Is that it there? Yes.
12 Line 24 in the English, 28 in the Croatian:
13 "I understand, of course, there was still ongoing military
15 Mr. Foster said his understanding was it was completed by the
16 8th or 9th.
17 And then the next page, line 1 in Croatian, 6 in English:
18 "We also understand that there was also reflections of the
19 operation which required the presence of the military in the area. Lot
20 of work for the military still, even for special police."
21 And so we get to the point. Line 11 in the English, 15 in the
23 "So my question, again, is, in your view, who in practice, in
24 de facto, who was, do you think, in control of the Knin region after the
25 main operation had been completed?"
1 And you go back to the original answer you gave on page 72,
2 line -- not exactly, but in similar terms, line 31 in the English,
3 29 in the Croatian.
4 MR. KAY: No, page 76, please.
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I cannot see this text.
6 MR. KAY: Sorry, we've ... there we are.
7 Q. Can you see there?
8 MR. KAY: No. We need the second interview up, sorry. We're on
9 the -- we switched ...
10 [Defence counsel confer]
11 MR. KAY: E-court 190. Well done. That's it. Sorry, it's
12 probably my confusion. Yes, that's probably --
13 My learned friend, Mr. Mikulicic, suggests that the witness be
14 given a hard copy, Your Honour, which might facilitate his manoeuvring
15 through the documents. I have had witnesses say to me it is often hard
16 to see on the screen.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
18 MR. KAY: Might be a good aid, if the Court agreed.
19 JUDGE ORIE: There's no objection against that, I would say.
20 We can avoid the -- any confusion by -- apart from looking at the
21 pages at the end, also to look at the previous number. We have 4892,
22 which is the first part; 4893, which is the second part; and 4894, which
23 is the third part as far as numbering is concerned. They have been
24 combined and uploaded in its entirety. But if we would look not only at
25 the page number at the end but also whether it is preceded by a 2, a 3,
1 or a 4, that would certainly already avoid further confusion.
2 MR. KAY: Yes. Yes.
3 JUDGE ORIE: But a hard copy would not be a bad idea, I would
5 MR. KAY: Thank you very much. Mr. Mikulicic has come to the --
6 JUDGE ORIE: I take, it, Mr. Mikulicic that you provide a clean
7 copy from what I see. If there are any annotations in it, I would rather
8 have a ...
9 [Trial Chamber and Legal Officer confer]
10 MR. MIKULICIC: Perhaps there are, Your Honour.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And I don't know whether you are working from
12 the revised or unrevised version, but --
13 MR. MIKULICIC: This is a revised version, Your Honour.
14 JUDGE ORIE: It's a revised version. But if there is a clean
15 copy of the revised version anywhere, and if not, it may be created.
16 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Mr. President, I do have a clean copy.
17 However, there is timings marked -- Timings vis-à-vis the video
18 recording. So it's -- [Overlapping speakers] ...
19 JUDGE ORIE: If that would not cause any problem -- [Overlapping
20 speakers] ...
21 MR. KAY: Your Honour, I -- I'm not worried about any marks that
22 there may be on it at all.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but, of course, if the Chamber is not aware of
24 what the witness has before him, then ...
25 Then you are invited to provide it to the witness,
1 Ms. Mahindaratne, and take care that you have another copy for yourself.
2 MR. KAY: Thank you very much to my learned friend.
3 We're on page 76 of 107, Madam Usher, which is the second
4 interview, 4893.
5 THE WITNESS: Thank you.
6 MR. KAY:
7 Q. After that, does that help?
8 A. [Interpretation] Thanks so much.
9 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... we're down at line 31. And
10 as I said, you go to -- you say:
11 "Everybody a little but then nobody."
12 And it's about this issue of de facto control that Mr. Foster was
13 asking about that I'm now going to ask you a series of questions,
14 Mr. Moric.
15 Do you recollect the President visiting Knin as well as Gospic,
16 Karlovac, Split on the railway --
17 A. [No interpretation]
18 Q. -- in what was called the train of freedom?
19 A. Yes, I remember that.
20 Q. And that was an event that took place on the 26th of August.
21 A. Excuse me? Did you ask me whether it was on that date?
22 Q. Yeah, do you recollect that it was on the 26th of August?
23 A. I'm not certain about the exact date, but I do remember the
25 Q. And you were on a committee concerning OA, Operation Action,
1 Knin 95, which was the title given for the security of that journey.
2 A. Yes, I was.
3 Q. Thank you. That particular issue concerned all the various
4 parties concerned in security working together to provide security for
5 the day to ensure that there was no trouble; is that correct?
6 A. Yes, that is correct. If there is a document relating to this,
7 then we could see who were all the parties involved in it.
8 Q. We're going to go through a series of documents now, relating to
9 this, and seeing the military police, military, and the civilian police,
10 who was making decisions, how, in effective, security was provided.
11 So the first document I want to look at is where this is planned.
12 MR. KAY: At 65 ter 887, please.
13 Q. Which is a record of a meeting held at the presidential palace on
14 20th of August, 1995.
15 MR. KAY: And If we could just see the first page of that so
16 everyone knows what it is.
17 Q. And we will be moving to page 30, which is where discussion of
18 the trip from Zagreb
19 MR. KAY: And the Court there can see part of the planning, that
20 there was to be a celebration, and what was behind this particular
22 Q. And then on page 31 in the English. In the Croatian, I am stuck;
23 I am sorry about that. Page 31 in the English shows that there was a
24 discussion made -- launched by Mr. Mudrinic:
25 "We'll have to concern ourselves with security. We will find a
2 And Mr. Susak says:
3 "We'll take care of that. Don't worry."
4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kay, in think that we should have the relevant
5 portion --
6 MR. KAY: Yes.
7 JUDGE ORIE: -- available to the witness as well, because
8 otherwise he cannot follow your reading.
9 MR. KAY: Yes, this is the one lengthy document I have,
10 Your Honour, and in the Croatian -- I don't know if a Croatian speaker
11 can help me. I -- page 31 of the English, where Mr. Susak agrees he'll
12 take care of security.
13 JUDGE ORIE: As a matter of fact, I do not think that this is the
14 right -- well ... no, this seems not to be the place.
15 MR. KAY: Yes, sorry, Your Honour.
16 B/C/S, page 60. Thank you. Sorry, there is my fault for doing
17 with this. But, Your Honour, I'm doing this because it's an important
18 issue, and I want to take the Court -- much has been made of this event,
19 and I want to take the Court through it so the Court is aware of
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But the witness --
22 MR. KAY: Yes.
23 JUDGE ORIE: -- at least, should be able to follow your reading.
24 MR. KAY: Of course.
25 JUDGE ORIE: And I think we're now on the right page. So --
1 MR. Kay: Thank you.
2 JUDGE ORIE: -- therefore, let's proceed.
3 MR. KAY:
4 Q. My apologies, Mr. Moric, it was only a few words we were looking
5 for. But they're there on the page, and we do that so that you can see
7 Was there, thereafter, discussions between the
8 Ministry of Interior and Ministry of Defence concerning the security
9 planned for the security of the President's train.
10 A. I do not remember exactly whether there was any discussion or
11 not. But judging by the context and the way we worked until that point,
12 I suppose that there was such a discussion.
13 Q. Thank you.
14 MR. KAY: Your Honour, there's more detail here about this
15 planning of this journey, which the Court my find important, because
16 great significance has been attached to -- to the -- the visit. And I
17 ask that this transcript be -- be made an exhibit.
18 MS. MAHINDARATNE: No objection.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Then, Mr. Registrar.
20 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that becomes Exhibit D1849.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kay, this document is how long?
22 MR. KAY: 54 pages.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And what is -- is it, in its entirety,
24 relevant, because otherwise we have another --
25 MR. KAY: The passages that are relevant, unless Your Honours
1 want to see how discussions take place. You have seen concern
2 transcripts, and if you want to see ordinary transcripts, there's ones
3 like this. But from pages 30 until the end is reference to the train and
4 how it comes about and how it's planned and what the purpose of the visit
6 JUDGE ORIE: That's a major portion of the document, then,
8 MR. KAY: Yes.
9 JUDGE ORIE: So under those circumstances, I would not insist on
10 making a further selection. Although it is now clearly on the record
11 that it's mainly for pages 30 and the following pages.
12 MR. KAY: Yes.
13 JUDGE ORIE: That's what you focused on.
14 MR. KAY: Yes, Your Honour.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Under those circumstances, the D1849 is admitted
16 into evidence.
17 MR. KAY: Thank you.
18 If we can turn, now, to 65 ter 5007.
19 Q. This is a document dated the 23rd of August from the office of
20 the minister, signed by Mr. Jarnjak, going to the police administrations,
21 police department, and referring to the train of freedom on the
22 26th of August. And saying, undertaking measures and activities
23 following under the jurisdiction of internal affairs, we are hereby
24 opening a joint security action of the Ministry of Interior and
25 Ministry of Defence with the code-name Knin 95.
1 "MUP staff will be in charge of planning, implementing, and
2 monitoring the implementation of the measures and activities that fall
3 under the jurisdiction of internal affairs."
4 And if we turn to page 2 in the English, we can see the decision.
5 And page 2 in -- turning from Knin 95, page 2 in the Croatian, that a
6 staff is set up that included yourself.
7 Do you recollect that, Mr. Moric?
8 A. Yes, counsel, I remember that.
9 Q. And this was the operative action known as Knin 95 that then went
10 into various activities concerning the security that was to be provided;
11 is that right?
12 A. Yes, that is correct.
13 Q. We can just look at a parallel document.
14 MR. KAY: If we go to --
15 May this document be made an exhibit, please, Your Honour.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Mahindaratne.
17 MS. MAHINDARATNE: No objection.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
19 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that becomes Exhibit D1850.
20 JUDGE ORIE: D1850 is admitted into evidence.
21 MR. KAY: If we go to 2D18-1213.
22 Q. This is a document dated the 22nd of August from the
23 Croatian army Main Staff. And it concerns employment of forces for
24 Knin 95, with the purpose of timely and complete securing of the travel
25 of the President. And there is an order listing the commands of
1 Military Districts and various others who are involved.
2 Page 2 in the English, page 2 in the Croatian, there was a
3 requirement to coordinate and agree upon the occupation and securing of
4 the railway line with military police units and Ministry of Interior
6 MR. KAY: And if we just go through the rest of the document so
7 that people can see what is contained within it. The next page in
9 Control and implementation of the order, coordination of duties.
10 And we see to whom this document is delivered to.
11 Q. And is it right, Mr. Moric, that the civilian police and military
12 police did coordinate, in relation to the security matters on this
14 A. Yes, counsel, they did coordinate.
15 MR. KAY: Your Honour, may this document be made an exhibit,
17 MS. MAHINDARATNE: No objection.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
19 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that becomes Exhibit D1851.
20 JUDGE ORIE: D1851 is admitted into evidence.
21 MR. KAY: Thank you.
22 The next document is 2D00377. And this is from the third aspect,
23 the military police administration, from Major-General Lausic, on Knin
24 95, dated 23rd of August. In fact, to General Lausic from Major Juric of
25 the military police administration. And it concerns various tasks and
1 planning for Knin 95 and who was to take part.
2 Q. And, Mr. Moric, presumably you would not have seen this document,
3 but it is part of the strategic planning that you would have expected
4 from the military police; is that right?
5 A. Yes. This is a military document drafted in the military police
6 administration and, therefore, I haven't seen it. It was not submitted
7 to me. But I understand, on the basis of our joint work, that this was
8 prepared at the level of management of operative activities relating to
9 this operation.
10 MR. KAY: Your Honour, may this document be made an exhibit,
12 MS. MAHINDARATNE: No objection.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
14 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that becomes Exhibit D1852.
15 JUDGE ORIE: D1852 is admitted into evidence.
16 MR. KAY: Your Honour, I have a whole series of documents, in a
17 chain, relating to this. What I propose to do, with the Court's guidance
18 and consent, because they will not have been documents that Mr. Moric
19 will have seen, but just to take the Court through the numbers so that in
20 an economic use of Court time the issue that we're getting to concerning
21 de facto control and how this is relevant can be seen, as opposed to just
22 a simple question being asked by me but can be put into a documentary
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kay, I -- so you're not seeking Mr. Moric's
25 comment on these documents?
1 MR. KAY: I will at the end, because I will put to him the
2 various MUP documents, but there are documents from the other agencies,
3 such as the military. And the relevance of this, Your Honour, is that
4 Mr. Cermak's not mentioned in any of them as having any role, and that's
5 why this issue is being considered, as the Court might expect.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And now, do you want Mr. Moric to read them or
7 to go through them or just to bar table them? It is not entirely clear
8 what you have on your mind. Because if you want to bar table them, then
9 we expect a short description of relevance and then a joint filing with
10 the Prosecution.
11 Now, if you are seeking any comment or -- from Mr. Moric, then,
12 of course, he first would have had an opportunity to read them, which can
13 be done by providing him with hard copies and invite him to read them
14 over the break. It's not entirely clear what -- what you intend to do.
15 If, at the end, your only question would be, Did you see on any
16 of these documents the name of Mr. Cermak, then I think we could do
17 without, because even the Chamber is able to see whether the name of
18 Mr. Cermak appears anywhere. That -- I mean, the reading of the witness
19 is not any better than the reading of the Chamber and the reading of the
21 So it's not entirely clear how would you like to deal with that.
22 MR. KAY: Your Honour, what I'm going to do is put the MUP
23 documents to the witness because they are things he knows about. They
24 concern his subordinates. But on the way, so that the Court has the full
25 context and to make my point, to be frank, I would -- I was going to
1 refer to various documents which are on the list circulated by our
2 Defence team so that the Court has the reference for them --
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
4 MR. KAY: -- and then bar table them as Your Honour suggested.
5 That was the route I was going take. But I was going to put the sequence
6 now so that any -- if Your Honour -- I think Your Honour may be better
7 helped by me doing that here.
8 JUDGE ORIE: That's --
9 MR. KAY: To follow --
10 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Mahindaratne, I'm looking at you. Finally, what
11 Mr. Kay apparently will do is will put the MUP documents to the
12 witness -- not MUP documents; he will just refer to them and he will bar
13 table them, but already, in anticipation of the bar table submission,
14 already --
15 MR. KAY: Yes.
16 JUDGE ORIE: -- tell the Court about the existence of these
17 documents and what they approximately are about.
18 Any problem?
19 MS. MAHINDARATNE: I have no objection to that, Mr. President.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Then you may proceed in the way suggested and
21 discuss --
22 MR. KEHOE: Just by way of clarification, we will do the normal
23 spreadsheet for the bar table submission.
24 MR. KAY: Yes, yes.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, that' what I said. The joint filing if it will
1 finally be bar tabled. But in anticipation to the bar table submission,
2 Mr. Kay will already -- well, more or less briefly describe or announce
3 them as being in assistance and to be bar tabled.
4 MR. KAY: Yes.
5 Your Honour, I do that because it's often difficult to follow
6 this in the transcript and make the linkage. And I hope it's helpful to
7 the Court.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kay, we agreed already to do it. So that you
9 explained that it is worth doing it, that is implied.
10 MR. KAY: Yes, thank you very much, Your Honour.
11 The next document dated the 23rd of August is exhibited already,
12 Exhibit D773, and concerns the engagement of forces for the Knin 95 task.
13 The next document is from the -- is 2D00498, which we will seek
14 to make an exhibit in the bar table, which is from the
15 Split Military District, Knin forward command post to the 72nd. Again,
16 concerning Operation Knin.
17 The next one is 2D18-1197, dated the 24th of August, on Knin 95,
18 from the Operations Group West command, again concerning Knin 95 and the
19 various battalions and regiments -- brigades, regiments, to whom this is
20 copied, including those within paragraph 7 of the indictment.
21 And then the 24th of August, from the military police
22 administration, 2D00769. Knin 95, sent to the Military District
23 companies and battalions, including the 72nd, with their tasks for what
24 they called Operation Goran as well.
25 The next one is 2D00298, dated the 24th of August, military
1 police administration from Major Juric to General Lausic concerning
3 Q. And the next document is from the Kotar-Knin Police
4 Administration, dated the 24th of August, which I would like you to see.
5 MR. KAY: 2D18-1218.
6 Q. If you can look at this, Mr. Moric. This is from a plan,
7 security assessment, written by Mr. Sikirica, and approved by Mr. Mijic
8 who was the commander of the Knin Police Station and concerns the
9 security assessment being made by them in Knin for the visit of the
10 president. You can see there what is written.
11 Page 2, technical details of the number of -- of policemen.
12 Page 3, again, the technical details.
13 And at the end of the document, you can see who it was signed by.
14 Just looking at this document, does this indicate, then, the role
15 within this operation, Knin 95, of, at the top level, as you, as an
16 assistant minister, having passed information and duties down the line,
17 seeing on the ground at the Knin Police Station, the preparations being
18 made there. Is this the correct way by which the police was using its
20 A. Before I answer, could I kindly ask to be allowed to see the
21 first page of the document again?
22 Q. Okay.
23 MR. KAY: If we can go back to page 1.
24 A. Thank you very much.
25 Counsel, this document was drafted by the commander of the Knin
1 Police Station. He sent it to his own police administration in Knin.
2 The duty to produce such documents per police station and police
3 administration follows from the document issued by Minister Jarnjak,
4 having established the Operation Knin 95 and having prescribed specific
5 duties and tasks for the police stations and administrations.
6 Q. Thank you.
7 MR. KAY: May this document be made an exhibit, Your Honour.
8 MS. MAHINDARATNE: No objection.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
10 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that becomes Exhibit D1853.
11 JUDGE ORIE: And is admitted into evidence.
12 MR. KAY: Thank you.
13 The next document is also a MUP document, 2D1812105. 1205,
14 sorry. 2D18-1205, dated the 25th of August, 1995, Zadar-Knin Police
16 Q. You can see, on the first page, the telegram and order and
17 security plan that this is based upon, and its implementation plan for
18 securing the train station area in Knin.
19 MR. KAY: And if we go to the last page, because the details of
20 how that security was to be delivered to can be seen at the end. It's
21 signed by Mr. Cetina.
22 Q. Staff of Action Knin 95. Would that have included you,
23 Mr. Moric?
24 A. In keeping with the initial document from the minister announcing
25 the operation, and my answer is, yes, I was a member of the staff.
1 Q. Thank you.
2 If we just go back to the first page to see what security was the
3 certain of the police, the type of things. Security evaluation, in
4 paragraph 1:
5 "After the military police Operation Storm, life in the town is
6 gradually normalising, but from a security point of view the presence and
7 activities of rebel Serbian paramilitary members are still noticed."
8 Just as a statement there, concerning security, was that an issue
9 that you were aware of at the time as being a security concern?
10 A. Certainly. We were aware of this. If you are asking me
11 personally, I can tell you that I was definitely aware of certain
12 different types of risks in that area at that time.
13 Q. If we look at the second paragraph, the town being visited by
14 various people, foreigners, refugees, inquisitive individuals, members of
15 intelligence services from foreign countries, government and
16 non-government organisations and bodies.
17 Just looking at that security evaluation, was that area of
18 security concern something you were aware of?
19 A. Yes, I was, Counsel. I was aware of those security concerns as
20 they had existed before that and in some other areas as well.
21 Q. And point 3, the UNCRO base, a confluence of few hundred people
22 of Serbian origin, among them 62 persons sought in respect of suspicion
23 of committing crimes against Croatia
24 international law.
25 Is that something that you were aware of as being a security
1 concern in Knin at the time?
2 A. Yes. As you can see, by virtue of this official document, the
3 regular police sector was advised of this. Therefore, I was aware of it.
4 MR. KAY: Your Honour, may this document be made an exhibit,
6 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Mahindaratne.
7 MS. MAHINDARATNE: No objection.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
9 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that becomes Exhibit D1854.
10 JUDGE ORIE: D1854 is admitted into evidence.
11 MR. KAY:
12 Q. If we go to the next document I want to show you, 2D18-1221,
13 dated the 25th of August, Zadar-Knin Police Administration. Again,
14 concerning the president's trip.
15 A security plan is outlined. I just want us to look at this.
16 Security assessment, extremely complex political and security situation.
17 It refers, in paragraph (a), to paramilitary formations; (b), to mentally
18 incompetent persons or drug addicts.
19 If we go to the next page, outlines the operative measures, tasks
20 of police stations.
21 If we go to page 3, further operative tasks and who is
22 responsible for those tasks.
23 Down at the bottom --
24 MR. KAY: If we can raise the pages.
25 Q. -- operative technical department is referred to.
1 MR. KAY: Page 3 in the Croatian -- the next page in the
2 Croatian, page 4, please, unless it's further down.
3 Q. Mr. Romanic is chief of the security. On this page, we can see
4 the other tasks.
5 Paragraph 9, control. Knin Police Station Chief Cedo Romanic in
6 complete charge of security.
7 Stipe Sikirica, assistant security chief.
8 MR. KAY: If we go to the last page.
9 Q. Zadar-Knin Police Administration and other police stations are to
10 whom this document is delivered signed by Mr. Bitanga, Cetina, and
11 Inspector Vickovic.
12 Again, this is on-the-ground police planning and issuing of
13 responsibility. Is that right, Mr. Moric?
14 A. It is. In the previous example, we saw a document outlining the
15 plans of a single police station. Here, we see a document outlining the
16 planning for an entire police administration.
17 Q. Thank you.
18 MR. KAY: The next document which will be bar tabled,
19 Your Honour --
20 May that document be made an exhibit.
21 MS. MAHINDARATNE: No objection.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
23 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that becomes Exhibit D1855.
24 JUDGE ORIE: D1855 is admitted into evidence.
25 MR. KAY: The next document which will be bar tabled,
1 Your Honour, is 2D00092, dated the 25th of August, 1995; military police
2 administration, sent to General Lausic, and report on the tasks of the
3 military police administration and units in Knin 95 and all their levels
4 of engagement. It refers to the companies and battalions, including the
5 72nd, and describes what they were doing.
6 The next document which will be bar tabled -- actually, no. I'm
7 going to call this one up. D563, please. Exhibit D563. It's dated the
8 25th of August, 1995. It's from the head of security staff, General Cuk.
9 And the Court will see, from the previous documents, he was in fact in
10 overall charge of this operation. And the Court can see on the first
11 page the details of the implementation plan of the itinerary, where the
12 train is to stop, meetings that were held.
13 If we turn to page 2. Chief of the Main Staff, referring to
14 coordination of the Ministry of Defence military police, and the regular
15 police force providing security. We can see the details.
16 Page 3, military police administration and what their role is.
17 Page 4, Ministry of Defence and Security Information Service, and
18 the Ministry of Interior.
19 Q. And we can see there the security staff formed, which included
20 you, Mr. Moric.
21 Can you see in that paragraph there the tasks that were to be
22 undertaken by the Ministry of Interior, the security to be provided.
23 A. I see those tasks. Those were regular, routine tasks of the
24 police in cases when our President or a foreign official travelled
25 throughout Croatia
1 MR. KAY: If we go to the next page, page 5.
2 Croatian Guards Corps. The 4th Special Guards Battalion providing the
3 personal protection for the President. Other guards corps carrying out
4 security. We can see General Cuk named as head of the security staff.
5 Travelling with the -- General Lausic. And at the bottom of the page:
6 "All Ministry of Defence and Ministry of Interior units in their
7 areas of responsibility will be subordinated to the security staff for
8 the duration of Knin 95."
9 And then we can see on the last page to whom this was delivered,
10 including Mr. Jarnjak.
11 Q. And is that how this situation was implemented, with all the
12 different areas of security concerns operating within their own
13 jurisdictions? The military police, civilian police, the security
14 services, all operating according to their own lines?
15 A. Of course. That's how it was supposed to be. That is why each
16 ministry, within its own remit, coordinated its own organisational units
17 in the field.
18 This document speaks about mutual coordination and cooperation at
19 the level of the various services and ministries.
20 Q. Thank you.
21 MR. KAY: The next document is 2D18-1216. I'm trying to finish
22 this topic, Your Honour, before the break, with the Court's leave.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Leave is granted.
24 MR. KAY: Thank you.
25 Q. This is a document dated the 26th of August, Kotar-Knin Police
1 Administration, sent to the Zadar-Knin Police Administration, concerning
2 the security evaluation on that day regarding the travel of the
4 We see the security evaluation.
5 Q. Can you just look at that, please? It says:
6 "The state of security in the area of Kotar-Knin Police
7 Administration is very complex due to the recent liberation of
8 the ... area from many years of occupation."
9 And it refers to military formations retreating to the woods and
10 that it was necessary to additionally secure location and properties in
11 the liberated areas, and, therefore, there is the security plan.
12 Is that state of security as outlined there something that you
13 would have agreed with at the time, Mr. Moric?
14 A. Yes, I did agree at the time.
15 Q. Thank you. And page 2, we can see that this is from Mr. Romanic.
16 MR. KAY: Your Honour, I ask that this be made an exhibit,
18 MS. MAHINDARATNE: No objection.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
20 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that becomes Exhibit D1856.
21 JUDGE ORIE: And is admitted into evidence.
22 MR. KAY: Your Honour, the last document I'm referring to here to
23 be bar tabled is 2D00395, dated 30th of August from the military police
24 administration. It was the final breakdown and report on the military
25 police during Knin 95. Goes into their details there. And in accordance
1 with all the other military police documents and the other documents
2 referred to, none of them refer to General Cermak at all.
3 Q. One question then remains, Mr. Moric. In relation to your
4 answer, when you were asked who was in control, "it would be everybody
5 and nobody."
6 What did you mean by that?
7 A. Counsel, the question was not specific, so I understood that it
8 had to do with an attempt to establish who was, generally speaking, in
9 charge principally. However, at the time, considering the legal system,
10 but also, in fact, there was no such position. There were several
11 persons who were the principal ones in charge but each of them in his own
12 area. For instance, if the question was who was the main man in charge
13 in terms of the police or civilian authorities or so on, then I could
14 have provided a specific answer to such a specific question.
15 Q. Thank you.
16 MR. KAY: Your Honour, it's time for the break now.
17 JUDGE ORIE: We'll have a break, and we will resume at 11.00.
18 --- Recess taken at 10.35 a.m.
19 --- On resuming at 11.04 a.m.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Before we continue, Mr. Kay, I would like to inform
21 the parties that, as they are aware that two of the Judges in this case
22 are sitting in another case as well, which has slowly resumed. And
23 although we still have to consider how we will do that at the long-term,
24 but, earlier, we took off one day from the Gotovina case, and, in turn,
25 were sitting two days on the other case.
1 Now, since there's a lot of work to be done in the weeks to come,
2 the Chamber has decided that, for next week, that we would give up our
3 session on the 11th of December, Friday, which would better fit in the
4 programme of the Judges who are sitting on two cases, who would have,
5 otherwise, seven sessions, and now we reduce that to six.
6 And we do understand that this meets another concern of one of
7 the parties as well, which is -- I take it as a side effect, appreciated
8 as being very welcome.
9 MR. MISETIC: Yes, it is, Mr. President. Thank you.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
11 Then, Mr. Kay, are you ready to proceed?
12 MR. KAY: Thank you, Your Honour.
13 Q. Can we go back to your interview, please, Mr. Moric,
14 Exhibit D1842, and turn to e-court page 191, page 77 of 4893.
15 And reflecting your last answer, Mr. Moric, in fact, Mr. Foster's
17 "Who was the highest authority there, in your opinion?"
18 Just looking at that as a question, as it took up a lot of your
19 interview on -- on this issue, in your role as chief of the fundamental
20 police, receiving reports daily from the liberated area, was this
21 approach by Mr. Foster an accurate approach, trying to define someone as
22 being the highest authority?
23 A. Mr. Counsel, I suppose that, by questions of this kind,
24 Mr. Foster wanted to elicit a specific answer the way he envisaged it,
25 but, unfortunately, unfortunately for him, matters stood differently, and
1 he could not get such an answer because such an answer would not have
2 reflected the actual situation.
3 Q. Thank you. I'd like to move a little bit further down the page
4 to line 16.
5 MR. KAY: And I would like the Court to pay attention to the
6 English at line 19 as, just looking at it, I can see a problem in the
7 interpretation there, because I notice, from my limited knowledge,
9 Q. If you could just read out slowly what you said at line 16,
10 please, Mr. Moric, "Recimo ..." if you read out that sentence.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Aloud, please.
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] "For instance, I'm talking
13 sincerely, it was never in any way clear to me the role that
14 General Cermak had."
15 That's what's recorded there.
16 MR. KAY:
17 Q. Thank you.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, it seems that the "nije," which appears
19 twice ...
20 MR. KAY: I won't go any further than that, Your Honour.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Well, this is how it was translated at the time. So
22 there is no need at this moment to revise the transcript, because it
23 would obscure that the words were wrongly translated at the time.
24 Please proceed.
25 MR. KAY: Yes, thank you, Your Honour.
1 Q. And you state, at line 23 in English, 21 the Croatian, was he
2 military commander or was he a civilian administrator.
3 25 Croatian, 28 English:
4 In some cases, you could see that he is dealing with civilian
5 matters and in some cases you could see that has military authority.
6 MR. KAY: If we turn over the page.
7 Q. "And I personally don't know how his role was legally defined."
8 If I can ask you a question here. You knew General Cermak was a
9 General; is that right?
10 A. Yes, that was a generally known fact. So I knew it from the
11 general context.
12 Q. Did you know to what position he was appointed in the military?
13 A. No, I didn't know what his position within the military structure
14 was, apart from the fact that I was aware that he was a general.
15 Q. And did you know when he was appointed to a position involving
17 A. No one officially informed me about the appointment of
18 General Cermak. I learned that from the media. And if I remember well,
19 I think it was certainly in the first half of the month of August, to my
20 best recollection.
21 Q. Thank you. And did you know if he had any military role before
22 being appointed to any position he had in Knin? Did you know what he was
23 doing before?
24 A. Excuse me, Counsel, if I understand properly, you wish to ask me
25 whether I knew what Mr. Cermak was doing before his appointment in the
1 military, in the Croatian army?
2 Q. Yes.
3 A. The answer to your question is: I didn't know, nor did I notice
4 that he had any role in the Croatian army before he was appointed to his
5 post in Knin.
6 Q. Thank you. Staying, then, on page 78, Mr. Foster asked you what
7 sort of matters you were aware that he was dealing with; line 4, English,
8 line 7 Croatian.
9 And at line 10 in Croatian and line 17, line 17, you refer to
10 meetings "with my colleagues ... he was very concerned about the security
11 condition in that area ... he insisted ... things are solved, he was
12 concerned with ... improving general security conditions of the
13 area ... also, he dealt with some purely economy matters, like trying to
14 gather the cattle ... purely economical, economy matters, and on the
15 other side, he was a general."
16 If we can just look at that there. Did any of your subordinates
17 report back to you that they had attended meetings held by Mr. Cermak?
18 A. I do not remember written reports, but I do remember that some of
19 my associates proposed to me that it would be good if police
20 representatives were present at the meetings held by Mr. Cermak with
21 representatives of various international organisations, so that, on the
22 basis of the presence at the meetings, we would be aware of the context,
23 what the subject of discussion was, and what, on the basis of exchange of
24 various information between Mr. Cermak and the representatives of
25 international organisations, the police could possibly do in order to
1 improve the security situation.
2 Q. From what you knew, did Mr. Cermak have any role in relation to
3 the workings of the police, how they operated, what they did? Did he
4 have any control over the local police?
5 A. I'm sorry, Counsel, when you use the word "local," do you mean
6 civilian police?
7 Q. Yes, sorry, that's my mistake. I mean the Kotar-Knin Police
8 Station, Knin Police Station.
9 A. No. Mr. Cermak formally, legally, or in fact, was not within the
10 subordination and organised police structure; or, more specifically, he
11 could not affect the work of civilian police either in the formal legal
12 sense or in fact.
13 Q. How many times in August did you have meetings with your police
14 officers who were working down in the Knin area?
15 A. Do you mean how many times did I personally meet the police
16 management in the area of Knin?
17 Q. Yes, be it Mr. Romanic, Mr. Djurica, Mr. Cetina, Mr. Cipci,
18 Mr. Mihic. How many times did you meet the policeman on the ground, who
19 were on the ground, in the Knin area?
20 A. Unfortunately, I do not remember how many times I met with them;
21 but I was in daily contact with them, and we communicated in various
23 Q. And what form of daily contact was there? What do you mean?
24 What form of communication did you have with them?
25 A. I communicated with them by using secure phone lines which are
1 typical for the police telecommunications infrastructure, as well as
2 through an exchange of letters, through data-protected cryptograms, and
3 in other ways.
4 Q. And did you have face-to-face meetings as well? And I'm talking
5 here about August, September, the first two months.
6 A. I do not remember whether I had any such meetings or not, but it
7 is more probable that I did than that I didn't.
8 Q. Just taking August, how many times did you visit Knin?
9 A. I'm certain that I went there once, but it doesn't mean that I
10 didn't go some more times. But it's certain that I went there once.
11 Q. And can you remember the occasion when you went there now? Can
12 you remember what occasion that was?
13 A. If I remember properly, I went there when the police station in
14 Knin was opened, that is to say, returned to us, and when the staff were
15 introduced to this work. And then, on the following day, if I'm not
16 mistaken, the President visited Knin, and so, at the same time, I used my
17 stay in the area to coordinate the duties relating to the Knin 95 action
18 that we discussed quite a lot today.
19 Q. During your time dealing with your subordinates - August,
20 September - did you have any reports that they had to defer to
21 General Cermak on matters of law and order or security?
22 A. Excuse me, Counsel. Did I properly understand that your question
23 is whether I received any reports from my associates in which they
24 informed me that they had to - and I emphasise "had to" - contact
25 Mr. Cermak relating to the security situation?
1 Was that your question?
2 Q. Yes.
3 A. No, could I not receive any such reports because the people from
4 the police couldn't have had such an obligation, so it is excluded that
5 they -- as a possibility, that they had to report to General Cermak.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kay, perhaps --
7 Witness, you're saying what should or could not be the case.
8 What Mr. Kay asked is whether, as a fact, you did receive any such thing.
9 Whether it was illegal, whether in accordance with the rules, whether it
10 was not in accordance with the rules.
11 So the first question is whether you did receive any reports of
12 the kind described by Mr. Kay; and then if you want to explain why it is
13 very logical that you didn't receive them, fine. But we should not mix
14 up the two things.
15 I do understand from your explanation also that did you not
16 actually receive any such reports as described by Mr. Kay.
17 Is that correct?
18 Mr. Kay, could you, in your questions, if you receive such an
19 answer, could you always clearly verify whether the witness has answered
20 your question in a factual sense or in a rather normative sense.
21 MR. KAY: Yes, Your Honour. There was a problem, I'm told, as
23 MR. MIKULICIC: Your Honour, there is obviously a problem with
24 the translation. I'm referring to the page 38 and line 20 to 22 where
25 Mr. Moric was talking about the obligation. And he -- he said something
1 else that is written in the transcript where --
2 JUDGE ORIE: Well, we are going to verify whether he said
3 anything else.
4 MR. MIKULICIC: Okay.
5 MR. KAY: Yeah.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
7 MR. KAY: It's a very important matter as well in its --
8 JUDGE ORIE: What -- as usual, what we are seeking to verify his
9 answer, what we could do, Mr. Kay, is to read the answer as it was
10 translated to us; then it will be translated back to the witness. And
11 then ask him whether that is it what he said, or what he intended to say.
12 I leave it your hands.
13 MR. KAY: Yes.
14 Q. Mr. Moric, can I just go back a little bit.
15 You asked me whether you understood my question about whether
16 Mr. Cermak received any reports from your associates, "in which they
17 informed me that they had to - and I emphasise "had to" - contact
18 Mr. Cermak relating to the security situation."
19 And I said:
20 "That was my question."
21 Perhaps if you could repeat your answer to that again.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, now, Mr. Kay, there is one other thing that
23 bothers me a bit: You said "in which they informed me." I don't take it
24 that you are referring to any reports, in which you were informed about
25 anything. No. But that's how you -- how it appears on the transcript
1 and that's how you read it just a second ago.
2 Could you please --
3 MR. KAY: We're getting very confused here.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Oh -- no, let me see -- yes.
5 MR. KAY: [Overlapping speakers] ... what I'm doing, sir, is I
6 intend to --
7 JUDGE ORIE: No, no. It is my -- I made a mistake.
8 MR. KAY: Yes.
9 MR. ORIE: I'm sorry. Yes, you were rephrasing -- you were
10 repeating the question put to you by Mr. Moric --
11 MR. KAY: Yes.
12 JUDGE ORIE: -- on his understanding, and in that context "me"
13 is, Mr. Moric.
14 MR. KAY: Yes.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I made a mistake. I apologise for that,
16 because the last thing I want to do is to add to the confusion.
17 Could you please resume.
18 MR. KAY:
19 Q. I will repeat the question, Mr. Moric, because we've had an issue
21 Did any of your subordinates report to you that they had to defer
22 to Mr. Cermak's authority?
23 A. No. No one reported to me about that.
24 Q. And I don't mean that in a de jure sense but as a matter of fact,
25 that they, in fact, had to report to Mr. Cermak in any way.
1 A. This is how I understood your question, Counsel. They did not
2 report to me that they had to defer to General Cermak in any way
4 Q. Thank you.
5 MR. KAY: And I hope, Your Honour, that clears up the ambiguity
6 at page 38, line 21, for the record.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
8 MR. KAY:
9 Q. You mentioned Mr. -- or one of your colleagues requesting to
10 attend meetings.
11 MR. KAY: Can we look at Exhibit D589, please.
12 Q. You mention meetings that Mr. Cermak went to with the
13 internationals, Mr. Moric. We're looking at a document dated the
14 28th of August, 1995. It's from the Zadar-Knin Police Administration to
15 you. It's from Mr. Tomurad, the coordinator who took over the role of
16 Mr. Djurica. We can see that it concerns persons in military uniforms on
17 the first page.
18 If we look at page 2, it concerns:
19 "I also deem it necessary to achieve an agreement according to
20 which the chief of the Zadar-Knin Police Administration, or the
21 Knin ... police administration ... may be present at the
22 meetings ... General Cermak holds with ... UNCRO, UNCIVPOL, and other
23 international organisations in Knin so as to ensure that the police are
24 informed about all agreements and conclusions reached, which will enable
25 them to organise and plan tasks and duties from their purview
2 Signed by Mr. Tomurad.
3 Was that what you were thinking of when you referred to the fact
4 some time ago that one of your colleagues had said that they would like
5 to attend the meetings with the internationals?
6 A. Exactly. I had in mind this document, in which it is proposed
7 that an agreement about this should be reached.
8 Q. And as you read Mr. Tomurad's suggestion here, the purpose of why
9 he was wanting this, are you able to explain?
10 A. I think that the purpose of his proposal is set out here in his
11 explanation; namely, he proposed that a rule should be established, that,
12 from these levels of police responsibility, certain representatives
13 should be present at the meetings which General Cermak held with the
14 representatives of the international peacekeeping mission, including
15 their civilian police and other international institutions, so that the
16 police would be informed about the agreements reached and could organise
17 and plan the duties from within its pursue in accordance with them.
18 In other words, such meetings were held without any police
19 representatives being present so that it could not be known at the local
20 level what was the context of the agreements reached with the
21 representatives of international organisations.
22 Q. And does this statement here indicate to you that the police were
23 in charge of organising their own work and planning their own tasks and
24 duties, when Mr. Tomurad wrote:
25 "... which will enable them to organise and plan tasks and duties
1 from their purview accordingly."?
2 A. This has to do with any potential tasks and duties from the
3 police purview which may come out of certain proposals to be put forward
4 by representatives of international organisations at their meetings with
5 Mr. Cermak, such as to provide security along the routes of movement for
6 them, as well as other types of security assistance and assistance in
7 general to their work.
8 This was supposed to be in keeping with the previously arranged
9 set-up between the Government of the Republic of Croatia
10 charge of the international mission.
11 Q. Again, going to another issue concerning the local fundamental
12 police, the police on the ground in Knin, did any of them report to you
13 that Mr. Cermak was telling them not to investigate crimes?
14 A. No one reported to me about that.
15 Q. Did any of them say Mr. Cermak was telling them to allow crimes
16 to happen, to ensure the Serbs didn't get to the -- remain in the region?
17 A. No. No one of told me that.
18 Q. I'm just going on through the interview.
19 MR. KAY: Page 78, which is e-court 192 of Exhibit D1482 [sic].
20 Page 78 of 4893.
21 Q. Line 25 of the English, line 31 of the Croatian, Mr. Foster says
22 what he was told by his -- by the coordinators and your chief of police
23 administration that there were daily meetings called by General Cermak to
24 which one of them or sometimes both or all of them had to attend and
25 report to General Cermak which seems strange, the civilian police would
1 be reporting to a military general.
2 MR. KAY: And page 5 of the next page, which we're on, page --
3 line 13 -- sorry, line 5 of the next page, which we're on. Line 13 in
4 the English.
5 Q. "Yes, but they were never obliged to do that. They would
6 never ... he wasn't their boss ... he could not give them orders ... so
7 to come to meetings and to give them reports, I believe they did so
8 because they were at the same time [sic] at the same time and they were
9 trying to achieve something, but legally, you know, they could have told
10 him, We don't care if you want us at that meeting; we are not coming."
11 Were you aware, through any information you had at the time, that
12 your officers on the ground attended daily meetings Mr. Cermak held in
13 Knin? Were you aware of that at the time?
14 A. I had information that Mr. Cermak was holding meetings, although
15 the information did not indicate that it was a daily occurrence. I still
16 believe it did not take place on a daily basis. The answer I gave at
17 that time to the investigators reflects my opinion about those meetings
18 as they took place.
19 Q. Was there any information you had that anything about such
20 meetings were negative for law and order?
21 A. No, I did not have any such information. And the information I
22 had was not regular in nature about the meetings themselves. I only knew
23 that they took place, although I didn't know how frequently. From the
24 point of view of my management of -- over the police, it was unimportant.
25 That is why I never asked for any reports from those meetings and never
1 received any.
2 Q. If we just continue through the interview, line 28, Mr. Foster
3 gives his understanding.
4 If we go to page 80, line 1, that's interpreted to you. And we
5 see your answer at line 6 in the Croatian, line 13 in the English. I
6 won't repeat that, then, as we've dealt with that. The remaining
7 passages of the interview there.
8 I want to now move to page 84 and page 89, e-court 198.
9 MR. KAY: Down at the bottom, please. Line 30 in the English.
10 Q. And we see Mr. Foster referring to:
11 "... your coordinators would report to your senior coordinators
12 that uniformed people were committing crimes, serious crimes in the
13 region. What was done about it or what could be done about it at the
14 level of Mr. Franjo, Tomurad, or yourself?"
15 MR. KAY: If we turn to the next page, please, e-court 199.
16 Q. And we see there that it's translated to you.
17 Line 14 about -- you reply about the professional policemen, in
18 the English, line 10 in the Croatian.
19 And then line 19 in the Croatian, line 23 in the English:
20 "And we decided to do things that could be done immediately,
21 which are on the local level ask for the activity of the military police
22 and on a [sic] different level for me to act."
23 Is that correct, then, that you did receive reports of crimes
24 happening in the liberated areas and you took steps to try and stop those
1 A. It is correct, Counsel. I received reports about crimes taking
2 place, the perpetrators of which, were people in uniforms, military
3 uniforms. But, as we were able to glean from the documents we used
4 yesterday, unfortunately, some of them also wore police uniforms. It is
5 true that, based on those documents - that is, reports - I did everything
6 possible up to trying to come up with solutions which may cause conflict
7 of authority, or overlaps of authority. All that in order to prevent
8 that, or to stop it.
9 Q. The reports that you were getting, if you could, perhaps, explain
10 how the system worked from down on the ground in, say, the Knin area,
11 with the Zadar-Knin Police Administration, Kotar-Knin Police
12 Administration, how did the information get to you at the ministry of
13 what was happening?
14 A. The information arrived following the principle of internal
15 organisation and subordination, i.e., via mutually prescribed
16 responsibilities. For example, the police station in Knin reported on
17 all relevant events from their own remit, in particular, in the field of
18 security, to their police administration of Knin-Kotar. The police
19 administration of Knin-Kotar sent reports to the ministry.
20 If we used the example of my responsibility, in the sense of
21 managing the work of the basic-duty police, the reports from the police
22 administration of Knin-Kotar were addressed to either one of the
23 departments within the police sector or to the sector itself and its
24 head, Mr. Franjo, or to me personally.
25 In the police reporting methodology, an addressee is chosen,
1 depending on the assessment of the person sending the report and to which
2 level that report should be sent to, depending on the significance and
3 the scope of the problem that is being reported. That does not mean,
4 though, that if there is something wrong about the way something was
5 reported, corrections could not be made. Additions to the report may be
6 sought or a change in the address list.
7 Q. Did you act only on police reports, or did you act also from any
8 information that the minister may pass to you?
9 A. Operational management of the police is always based on the
10 information of security trends or developments in a certain area. For me
11 in order to manage the most relevant information was that received from
12 the field. Of course, in the daily work of the minister of the interior,
13 he may have a need to hear of certain reports to exchange positions or
14 share information with his assistant, which was myself.
15 Q. Did you have information passed on to you by the minister, from
16 what he knew, that crimes were occurring in the liberated territories?
17 A. Factually speaking, as the situation was at the time, I don't
18 know how it could have been that the minister would be better informed
19 than I was. I don't recall any such instances. It is also customary
20 that, at the level of the ministers and their collegiums, no specific
21 issues are discussed. Only security trends.
22 Q. Thank you.
23 MR. KAY: Can we look at a document now, Exhibit D46, please.
24 Q. And this is a document sent by you, Mr. Moric, to the chief of
25 military police, Major-General Lausic, on the 10th of August, 1995
1 is a letter. And it states:
2 "According to reports from the field ..." and you mention
3 Lika-Senj, Zadar-Knin, Vojnic, Vrginmost. "Cases are being noted of
4 individual Croatian army members on liberated territory
5 stealing ... burning ... killing cattle ..."
6 You mention lack of cooperation. And you state:
7 "While understanding the size and nature of the tasks that you
8 have to contend with, we kindly ask you to take measures to eliminate
9 these things."
10 From the information you received about what was happening in the
11 field, was this an appropriate method of dealing with the problem that
12 had been reported to you?
13 A. Yes. If I had received a report on similar issues, it would have
14 been only logical for me to report this to the relevant address, where
15 those who were supposed to deal with that problem were. In this
16 instance, that relevant address was the MP administration and its chief.
17 Q. This letter is dated the 10th of August. Did you also discuss
18 this matter face-to-face at a meeting with General Lausic at this time?
19 A. I don't recall having a meeting with him about this information.
20 However, we did meet frequently, and we had daily communication. In our
21 daily contacts, the chief of the MP administration and I discussed these
22 or similar matters which were indicative of the trends and of the
23 direction in which events could take place.
24 Q. Did he give any explanation to you as to how he was dealing with
25 these matters?
1 A. Certainly. He provided explanations. In principle, he was a
2 dedicated person, like myself, decisive in his intention to put a stop to
3 such similar events.
4 In the context of our cooperation, we never experienced a
5 conflict in the sense that we would reject each other's invitation for
6 cooperation within our purviews.
7 Q. Thank you.
8 MR. KAY: If we could look, now, at Exhibit D48.
9 Q. This is a further document written by you, Mr. Moric, to
10 General Lausic. And it concerns the reports that you had been receiving
11 from your police stations and police administrations; of houses being
12 burnt; people's property stolen.
13 And in this letter, it states:
14 "The perpetrators of these acts, in most cases, are persons
15 wearing Croatian Army uniforms. Our information points to these persons
16 who are formally and in effect members of the Croatian Army, but that
17 there are also persons who are not members of the Croatian Army ...
18 abusing the ... uniform."
19 And you conclude that the joint work of the civilian and military
20 police has not produced results. And you ask that another agreement on a
21 new method of joint work in order to eliminate these problems be made.
22 In relation to this letter that you wrote to General Lausic, what
23 steps were then taken as a new method of joint work, to eliminate
25 A. As in the previous cases when I warned about the existence of
1 that problem, I believe my learned friend, Mr. Lausic, reacted by having
2 ordered the units of the military police to step up coordination and
3 cooperation with the civilian police. Based on the previous practice and
4 having learned from our previous experiences that the military police had
5 difficulty following the pace of the civilian police, because they were
6 not as well educated and as efficiently organised, as well as being short
7 of staff and not as mobile, I can refer you to my document of the
8 18th of August, which we saw yesterday, in which, in one of its
9 paragraphs, inter alia, I am trying to resolve the situation by actually
10 asking of the police force to undertake some of the jobs of the military
11 police, thus risking a conflict of authority.
12 The intention was to compensate for the shortcomings in our
13 cooperation with the military police.
14 Q. At this stage, by the 17th of August, 1995, did you have actual
15 data that you could rely upon for the conclusions as to the identities of
16 perpetrators? Did you have a way of collecting and storing information
17 of identities of perpetrators at this time?
18 A. Mr. Counsel, I believe that I received reports and that we have
19 already seen that from the documents, and here I refer, in this document,
20 to reports from police stations and administrations, because that was the
21 chain of reporting. And it is mentioned in these reports who the
22 perpetrators of crimes were but not by name; rather, by category.
23 Personally I had no reason not to trust these reports from police
24 stations and administrations; and, unfortunately, the later developments
25 confirmed that the reports, which mention the categories of perpetrators,
1 were correct.
2 Q. Thank you.
3 MR. KAY: Just for the Court's purposes, the document we looked
4 at -- the witness referred to is Exhibit D49 that he referred to as the
5 document yesterday.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, please proceed.
7 MR. KAY:
8 Q. I won't look at that document now, as you looked at it yesterday,
9 Mr. Moric. I will turn to another document, Exhibit D588.
10 This is another document issued by you, Mr. Moric, to the heads
11 of your police administrations dated the 22nd of August. And it refers
13 "After liberation of a large territory ... the return of military
14 units to barracks ... and after partial demobilisation of conscripts,
15 concern quantities of weapons," referring to ammunition, mine,
16 explosives, "were brought to the previously free territory of the
18 And you assess the quantity of this material will be larger after
19 complete demobilisation of the planned number of consequences. They
20 could be used in breaching the peace and endangering safety, used for
21 attacks. And you refer your police administrations to carry out tasks
22 ordered in July of 1993.
23 First of all, could you -- are you able to remember what those
24 tasks were which you refer to in this document?
25 A. Unfortunately, I do not remember. But just trying to draw a
1 logical conclusion, I could say that these were probably tasks relating
2 to the police paying attention in its daily work on places where public
3 rallies were being held, when celebrations were made, and where it could
4 be particularly dangerous if weapons or mines or explosives brought from
5 the areas covered by Operation Storm were used. But I'm not certain that
6 this is what it's all about.
7 Q. This is now just over two weeks after the liberation of the
8 previously occupied territories. What problems were you facing at this
9 time regarding crimes that were being committed?
10 Let me make that a less general question. Were you able to see
11 or understand what was causing crimes, who was causing crimes at this
13 A. The crime police was in charge of processing crimes, and, as you
14 know, in every specific case, it is only the criminal investigation that
15 might shed light on the motives. So it's difficult for me to answer
16 specifically to your question. But from the point of view of my remit,
17 that is to say, managing the work of regular police, the data I found to
18 be relevant was that these kinds of crimes were being committed, that the
19 perpetrators belonged to the categories as noted in the earlier document,
20 and it was important for me to monitor the trends, whether there was an
21 increase or a decrease, in the number of such crimes.
22 But, generally speaking, it is well known that, in principle, the
23 crimes relating to property are caused by a will to gain something
25 Q. Were you ever in receipt of data that enabled you to conclude
1 that this was organised, that the crime was being organised to take
3 A. No. There was no intelligence that would indicate that any of
4 these crimes were committed in an organised way. And criminal
5 investigations would have helped to establish such an information.
6 On the other hand, in these days, as we could see yesterday, I
7 was briefed, as was only natural by our secret services as well, and if
8 the criminal investigations did not indicate something of the kind, then
9 I believe that secret services would have indicated to me that there was
10 some sort of organisation that directed crimes being committed on the
11 liberated territories.
12 However, more important than that was to see, as we call it, the
13 modus operandi, that is to say, the way in which these crimes were
14 committed, whether these were just individual acts of persons who
15 committed those crimes, or possibly whether these were groups of two or
16 several people but not any sort of organisation.
17 Q. Mr. Foster was asking you questions in your interview about
18 people higher up in authority planning it. Did you have any information
19 or any indication at the time that people in positions of authority had
20 planned that these crimes took place?
21 A. That is correct. Mr. Foster, while discussing several subjects,
22 suggested the possible answer, but the facts are relevant.
23 No, I am not aware that anyone would ever have considered
24 organising such unlawful acts, nor did I ever feel an atmosphere that
25 lead me to conclude that possibly, at high state levels, there was
1 indifference to these developments. Quite the contrary.
2 There was no indifference. But at the level of the ministers of
3 the interior, the defence, and justice with whom I was in occasional
4 contact at the time, I could see that they were worried because of such
5 developments and that they wished that this be changed.
6 And by the logic of the duty that I was discharging, I
7 particularly felt personal pressure because, considering my remit of duty
8 within the legal system and considering the previous logic, the
9 expectations were greater, in terms of the regular police, in terms of
10 preventing the commission of such crimes.
11 So, in brief, I was exposed to enormous pressure.
12 Q. Let us now look at Exhibit D592.
13 This is a document written by you, Mr. Moric, on the
14 6th of September, 1995, for the attention of Mr. Lausic. And it encloses
15 two Official Notes in connection with activities which should be of
16 concern to us both. You ask for measures to be taken and to be informed
17 about them.
18 MR. KAY: If we then turn to the next page.
19 Q. They are notes derived from Knin -- Kotar-Knin Police
20 Administration. In fact, they were Official Notes signed by the
21 Deputy Chief, Mr. Gambiroza. They concern specific instances involving
22 soldiers and what happened, and what they were doing is explained in the
23 note. I have no need to go into that.
24 MR. KAY: If we can turn to the next page, please, in the
25 English, and -- thank you.
1 Q. The Official Note, the second one, again, from Mr. Gambiroza at
2 Knin Police Administration, concerning, again, matters that he had seen
3 concerning Croatian army soldiers, what was happening, who it was.
4 MR. KAY: If we turn the next page in the English.
5 Q. This matter was reported to the 72nd Battalion, and why the note
6 was submitted.
7 Having seen this document, Mr. Moric, first of all, do you
8 recollect it as a document?
9 A. I am not sure which of the three have you in mind, or do have you
10 in mind all three documents?
11 Q. All three. Do you recollect this instance of Mr. Gambiroza
12 sending you these Official Notes and then you sending them to Mr. Lausic?
13 A. Frankly, I do not remember how these reports were sent and
14 forwarded and how they reached me. But from my letter to the chief of
15 the military police administration, it is clear that the reports did
16 reach me, because I'm saying in the letter that I'm submitting them to
17 him, and I'm asking him to try to resolve this together. But I believe
18 that if we have a look at the text of my letter --
19 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... back to the beginning,
20 page 1.
21 A. Yes. In the second paragraph, I asked for measures to be taken
22 to prevent such occurrences. So not just that we should try to resolve
23 these two specific cases, but that measures be taken to prevent such
24 occurrences; therefore, that this trend should be stopped.
25 Q. This comes from Knin Police Administration. Was this a -- a
1 usual or unusual way of you receiving information?
2 A. I believe that this was submitted in accordance with the
3 reporting principle which I explained in my answer to one of your
4 previous questions.
5 Q. Thank you.
6 MR. KAY: Your Honour, that's probably a convenient moment.
7 JUDGE ORIE: It is, Mr. Kay.
8 We'll have a break, and we'll resume at a quarter to 1.00.
9 --- Recess taken at 12.25 p.m.
10 --- On resuming at 12.51 p.m.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kay, please proceed.
12 MR. KAY: Thank you, Your Honour.
13 Q. Just following on to a different area now.
14 MR. KAY: If we go back to Exhibit D1842, please. And if we turn
15 to page 199, which is where we were, and then turn to the next page,
16 page -- e-court, 200, 86 of 107 of 4893.
17 Q. We see on this page at line 5 in the English, line 1 in the
18 Croatian language, your reference to being in daily contact with
19 General Lausic. You refer to the Plitvice meeting. We have looked at
20 that issue.
21 MR. KAY: If we could turn to the next page, please, 201. Dealt
22 with military police issues.
23 Turn to page 202. Page 203 in e-court, please.
24 Q. And this is the next subject, Mr. Moric, I want to turn to in
25 your interview, so moving away from General Lausic and the military
1 police. And it's when you're asked for why the problem went on for as
2 long as it did.
3 Mr. Foster mentions two military generals in the region. And
4 you, at line 23 in the Croatian, line 25 say:
5 "There is rather a simple answer. Can I go back to the map?"
6 And if we turn to page 204 of your interview, we can see that you
7 start describing the -- the particular area.
8 Mr. Moric, why this crime could not be controlled is something
9 you were asked in this interview. I'm going to ask you again, as to
10 reasons you may have or be able to give, as to why this crime could not
12 A. Firstly, in the answer to your question, I should start from the
13 general context relating to the area. It is well known that, after
14 military operations, war military operations, there is always a certain
15 period of confusion until all the mechanisms of authority are
17 Next, the size and the geopolitical position of the area in which
18 Operation Storm took place also had a significant role. If I remember
19 properly, I think it's 11.000 square kilometres of space, behind which
20 there is about 400 kilometres of the state border with Bosnia-Herzegovina
21 and including areas in which, on the other side of the border, were
22 territories under the control of Republika Srpska. So 11.000 square
23 kilometres is a vast area in which, after the military operation, the
24 legal system conceived for peacetime is to be applied. One of the
25 problems was also the factual situation following the war which was in
1 conflict with the legal system designed for peacetime.
2 In addition to that, various categories of people entered this
3 area or spent some time there. There were straggling paramilitaries or
4 members of the para-police, or they would infiltrate the area later from
5 the territory of the neighbouring state.
6 Then there were also the citizens of the Republic of Croatia
7 held the citizenship of Croatia
8 remained there after the Operation Storm. Then ethnic Croats who were
9 also Croatian citizens spontaneously were returning to the area, as they
10 could freely do that, and come back to the areas where they had not been
11 for four years or longer. Upon their return, they would, as a rule, find
12 their property destroyed.
13 As I said in one of my answers to your questions today, and as
14 one can see from the documents about the -- about the assessments of the
15 security situation in the area made by police stations and
16 administrations, in addition to everything that I listed so far,
17 activities of various intelligence services were also observed in the
18 area, including, according to the information which I was receiving from
19 our secret services, the remaining elements of the secret services of the
20 previous authorities in the area, and including the services of the
21 country with which we were not officially at war but, in fact, were.
22 So in addition to everything that is typical for areas following
23 military operations and everything else that I mentioned, the situation
24 was certainly such that it fostered developments of this kind. However,
25 all eyes were turned to the regular police, because, on the basis of the
1 legal system, it was responsible for prevention, that is to say, the
2 general security, and prevention of crimes, including military police,
3 which, according to its responsibility, was responsible for that, in
4 terms of military personnel or any other persons who visually looked like
5 military personnel until the moment when it was established that they
6 were, in fact, not soldiers.
7 Q. Thank you for that answer.
8 MR. KAY: If we turn to e-court page 206.
9 Q. After you have described the area, you mentioned some 40.000 men
10 would be needed to have some sort of concrete control of the area.
11 Did the Ministry of Interior have 40.000 policemen for the
12 liberated area?
13 A. Mr. Counsel, I believe that you wrongly interpreted one detail
14 from my interview with the investigators, or at least it was not my
15 intention to say so. Namely, I was not categorical in the sense that
16 40.000 men would have been sufficient. Quite the contrary. I wanted to
17 tell the investigators that not even 40.000 men would have been enough.
18 And we can easily get to this information, if we look at the
19 typical way that police is organised in its activities. Namely, if we
20 were to deploy one policeman on every kilometre to the area of 11.000
21 square kilometres because of the configuration of the terrain, they
22 couldn't even see one another. And as I explained yesterday, if we were
23 to work in four shifts, in which case everyone would work eight hours,
24 then, four times 11.000 is 44, and if we burden them so as to work
25 12 hours a day so that they would work in three shifts, that means that
1 we would have 36.000.
2 So what I wanted to say was that even 40.000 would not have been
3 enough. And a direct answer to your question, did we have so many men?
4 Unfortunately, we did not.
5 Q. Thank you. You asked for data to be supplied from the various
6 police administrations as to what they had been able to report and
7 investigate after your order on the 18th of August; is that correct?
8 A. Yes. You could say that it was so. Namely, when it was clear
9 that we were faced with a spate of negative events, as I said, it was
10 clear that we had to respond to that situation, which included requests
11 for people to work beyond the limits of their abilities, that is to say,
12 of the powers they were invested with.
13 Q. If we go to Exhibit D573, this is a response to a request for
14 data by you in an order dated the 22nd of August. This document is from
15 the Sibenik Police Administration dated the 24th of August, and it
16 outlines seven topics that you had asked to be reported upon.
17 MR. KAY: And that's Exhibit D50 that caused that, Your Honour,
18 to link up this matter.
19 Q. And if we can just look at the responses that were given to you.
20 Cooperation with the police administration and police stations
21 were inadequate.
22 Is there any comment you could make about that, about inadequacy
23 of cooperation between the Sibenik Police Administration here and its
24 police stations?
25 A. Excuse me, I believe you meant the cooperation between the
1 civilian police and the military police, rather than the police
2 administration of Sibenik and police stations, as you said.
3 Q. I have, in paragraph 1 of the English translation here:
4 "Cooperation within the police administration Sibenik and the
5 police stations on the territory of this administration is inadequate."
6 Perhaps could you read out so that we can -- paragraph 1 of
7 this -- number 1. Can you read that out, in the Croatian?
8 A. Yes, are you right. I see it now. So I apologise.
9 This is what it says. However, I believe that this was a
10 misunderstanding. It would be clearer if we could see the document -- my
11 document dated the 18th, because, as far as I remember, under item 1, I
12 requested that cooperation with military police be assessed. And then,
13 in this document, they report to me that that cooperation of the Sibenik
14 Police Administration and the police stations in the area is inadequate.
15 So that was the cooperation I had in mind, the cooperation with
16 military police, if I remember my own document properly.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kay, it seems from paragraph 2, if that is
18 directly related to paragraph 1, that there may be a mistake in the first
20 MR. KAY: Yes.
21 Q. And we can see paragraph 2 there, about cooperation with the
22 72nd Battalion. I'm going look at this, actually, for another reason,
23 which is --
24 MR. KAY: If we turn to page 2 of the English, and down at the
25 bottom of page 1 of the Croatian.
1 Q. We're looking at paragraph 7, Mr. Moric. Can you see that?
2 36 perpetrators of crimes identified of which five are members of the
3 Croatian army in uniform and the others are civilians.
4 A. Yes, I can see that.
5 Q. So five out of 36 being military or -- or HV in uniform, while
6 others are civilians.
7 In relation to this kind of data, how was it used or studied?
8 What did you do with it?
9 A. It is clear, from the manner of reporting, that, at the level of
10 the assistant minister, specific cases were not analysed but just
11 tendencies so that, on the basis of tendencies, decisions could be made
12 about directing, prevention, and managing the work of the regular police.
13 On the basis of such information, at my level, I made an
14 assessment as to whether we had the cooperation of the military police to
15 the degree that was necessary, considering the situation. And when the
16 conclusion was that the cooperation was not satisfactory, then I would
17 intervene with the heads of the military police.
18 But I think that, if you allow, it is important to notice two
19 other details in this document.
20 Q. Yes. Please tell us.
21 A. In item 3, it is reported that there are still cases of burning,
22 destruction, and illegal removal of movable property in the liberated
23 areas but to a smaller extent. And I think that it is important to
24 notice here that the problem is decreasing.
25 And under item 6, it states that in all cases, a criminal
1 investigation of the crimes is conducted. I am reported [as interpreted]
2 about the tendencies here, and I am only reported about criminal
3 investigation and processing in the context of the necessary assistance
4 that the regular police should provide with crime police duties. So they
5 do not report to me as the assistant minister who is responsible for the
6 work of the crime police.
7 Q. Thank you. We know this was in response to your telegram of the
8 22nd of August; Exhibit D50. And if we look at number 5, paragraph 5, we
9 see that from the time of receipt of the telegram until today, the
10 24th - so that's two days - 21 on-site investigations were carried out.
11 And it describes the type of cases.
12 You were looking at trends. This number of on-site
13 investigations by the Sibenik Police Administration, was that a quantity
14 that showed they were under-investigating, or was that a high quantity,
15 or was that a quantity you would have expected they could have coped with
16 to investigate?
17 A. I said yesterday that, unfortunately, we were undoubtedly faced
18 with a spate of negative events. When I said that, I wanted to emphasise
19 by this formulation that there was an unusually large number of such
20 cases. And in this context, if, in two days, we had 21 on-site
21 investigations conducted in cases like these with life and property were
22 endangered or other people's movable property was stolen, then it has to
23 be emphasised that this is to be contrasted with peacetime. It was a
24 great problem. And in this context, we were concerned, because we
25 wondered when we would reach the level of security that would be at the
1 normal level in areas where no military operations had been conducted.
2 And this was an area where all of this was happening in the wake of the
3 military operation.
4 Q. So looking at it, did 21 on-site investigations give you a figure
5 that Sibenik Police Administration was not doing its job, or did it give
6 you a figure that showed it was doing its job?
7 A. Of course, it looked as if they were doing their work properly
8 under the conditions that were implying a burden that was several times
9 higher than under normal circumstances, and one should take into account
10 the fact that this area was just a part of the area of responsibility of
11 the Sibenik Police Administration. It was also in charge of areas where
12 there had been no military activity, that is to say, that were not
13 covered by the Operation Storm, and there they also had to carry out
14 their regular police duties and regular police work.
15 Q. Was the territory of the Sibenik Police Administration increased
16 after Operation Storm to include areas that had previously been occupied?
17 A. Yes, certainly.
18 Q. And in normal times, would this police administration expect to
19 be dealing with 21 on-site investigations in two days, or would that be
20 more than its usual number?
21 A. This figure put into a routine police work framework in the area
22 of the Sibenik Police Administration at the time, and concerning the type
23 of crimes, would have occurred within a six-month period or even within a
24 one-year period.
25 Generally speaking, the police administration may have been able
1 to conduct 20 or 21 on-site investigations on other types of crimes, such
2 as burglaries, breaking and entry, traffic accidents with significant
3 property damage and wounded or killed people in such accidents. If we
4 take that into account, then perhaps this figure would be valid for a
5 full month. But if we take into account these specific crimes, that
6 would have covered a much longer period of time.
7 Q. Thank you.
8 MR. KAY: Let's go to Exhibit D575.
9 Q. This is the next report from Sibenik Police Administration,
10 1st of September, 1995, arising from a request by you, again, for data.
11 And we can see what it deals with in paragraph 1.
12 If we turn to paragraph 2 of the document, we can see a comment
13 on the VP units in paragraph 2. Lack of personnel. We can see, in
14 paragraph 3, incidents, the type of incidents. And we can see the figure
15 between, in paragraph 5, 22nd to the 31st of August,
16 48 on-site investigations carried out as a total.
17 Again, taking that period of nine days,
18 48 on-site investigations, is that a lot for the Sibenik Police
20 A. For this type of crimes, that is to say, stealing other people's
21 property and arson, this is far too many, in relation to their regular
22 routine police work in peacetime.
23 Q. The capacity of the police administration to have more
24 investigators within their criminal police department to carry out
25 on-site investigations, was that possible to expand, to provide the
1 appropriate police to carry out the investigations?
2 A. I think my colleague, assistant minister in charge of the crime
3 police, did so. He increased the number of crime policemen in the
4 territory of these police administrations, although I do not recall the
5 exact figures and which areas specifically. It is easy to see that those
6 police administrations and stations needed any kind of assistance at that
8 MR. KAY: If we go to page 3 of the English to paragraph 7.
9 Q. You can see it in the Croatian on the first page.
10 38 perpetrators, eight members of the HV; rest are civilians. We see it
11 signed by the chief of the police administration.
12 I want to put these questions, now, to you:
13 Could you have done more to prevent crime? Could you have done
14 more to expand your police?
15 A. Counsel, yesterday we discussed the number of policemen we
16 brought in from the two-thirds of the territory that was free whom we
17 sent to the area liberated in Operation Storm. We undertook the risk of
18 having too few in the area where there were three and a half million of
19 Croatian citizens, also running the risk of seeing the number of crimes
20 proportionally increase in that area. We simply weighed the benefits
21 against the damage.
22 We concluded that the damage in the free areas were to be -- was
23 to be far less than choosing not to intervene in the territory liberated
24 in Operation Storm. Hence, I believe we did our utmost. The people we
25 sent into that territory to assist had to bear an additional burden, by
1 having introduced the new shift change, that is to say, three shifts per
2 day, which meant that he had to work in excess of eight hours per day.
3 In my document of the 18th of August, I consciously opened up the
4 possibility for the civilian police, in cases of absence of the military
5 police, to enter the area of the military police purview. We
6 objectively, excessively burdened our personnel. And on top of all that,
7 we asked them to possibly overstep the boundaries of their purview.
8 Q. Thank you.
9 MR. KAY: If we could just look at another document, 65 ter
10 2D00485 from the --
11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kay, when waiting for this document, I'd like
12 to --
13 I'd like to know -- have a bit more of an answer on a question
14 which I think implicitly was put to you, but perhaps I may not have
15 understood the answer.
16 Mr. Kay has put to you 21 on-site investigations in two days; and
17 from other document, it appears 48 on-site investigations in nine days.
18 And he asked, Does that mean that the job was not done.
19 I have not received a clear answer. You said it is far too many,
20 and you told us that you would need at least so-and-so many days, if not
21 a month, for doing the same job.
22 Now, there are a few possibilities. The one is that it's a --
23 impossible to do 21 on-site investigations in two days, which means that
24 either they were not done, or they were done in such a sloppy way that it
25 could not be taken seriously, or whatever other explanation you may have.
1 Same for the 48 on-site investigations in nine days, an average of seven
2 a day, how many policemen were there available ...
3 So I would like to know how you interpret this. Do you interpret
4 this as -- well, we did it, but it must have been done in an improper way
5 because you can't do it properly in such a limited time, or do you have
6 any other explanation that it was exaggerated or perhaps 10 percent was
7 done properly and the remaining 90 per cent was done properly. Whatever.
8 Could you give us a clear answer to the matter? You said it was
9 far too many for such a number of days.
10 [Defence counsel confer]
11 JUDGE ORIE: And if you don't know, then please tell us as well.
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I know the answer.
13 Then I must have misunderstood counsel in his question. I thought he was
14 asking me whether the number of crimes and the structure of crimes in
15 that period was much in excess to what would otherwise be expected in
16 peacetime. That is why I said there far too many, especially in terms of
17 types of crime.
18 In peacetime, some of the crimes of that type would not have
19 taken place anyhow. That was the thrust of my answer.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now, I do not know whether you understood
21 Mr. Kay's answer [sic] correctly. If so, then I take it that you have
22 answered the question.
23 But, then, I have added a question to the question that was put
24 to you by Mr. Kay. But perhaps Mr. Kay clarifies what he intended to
1 MR. KAY: I'm grateful to Your Honour. Thank you very much.
2 Q. What I'm talking about is the capacity of the police
3 administration to deal with 21 on-site investigations in that many days.
4 Perhaps we start, first of all, with who attends an on-site
5 investigation. Who does an on-site investigation? Perhaps you could
6 list the people you would expect to see.
7 A. The civilian police is duty-bound to secure the scene of crime in
8 order to preserve any traces of the crime.
9 Q. [Previous translation continues]... sorry. Don't put the jobs.
10 Let have the people. Forget the jobs; we know the jobs actually. We
11 have other -- just tell me the people who attend an on-site
12 investigations --
13 JUDGE ORIE: And primarily the number of people which were
14 employed by the persons reporting. Yes.
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the number of people,
16 of course, depends on the type of crime involved and the size of the
17 location. But, in principle, when there is an on-site investigation,
18 that involves the basic-duty police and the crime police simultaneously.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Then, perhaps, on average, how many duty police, how
20 many crime police?
21 The time of the -- the type of crimes we're talking about here.
22 MR. KAY: Take the burning of a house, as an example, if I may,
23 Your Honour.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, although minority and those numbered, isn't it?
25 MR. KAY: Yeah.
1 JUDGE ORIE: But -- most -- okay.
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, if we use that example
3 there should be at least three basic-duty policemen and two crime
4 policemen plus a scene-of-crime officer or a crime technician that. That
5 would also depend, of course, on the location and the way the crime was
6 perpetrated, including the area size.
7 MR. KAY:
8 Q. Would the investigating judge attend?
9 A. That is correct. I did not mention him, because he is not part
10 of the Ministry of the Interior. But, in any case, an investigating
11 judge should be called in. Under the then-Law on Criminal Procedure, an
12 investigation is directed by a judge. And it is also clearly defined as
13 an investigating activity.
14 Q. Yeah, so what I need is not just Ministry of Interior, but it's
15 all the people who would attend an on-site investigation in the Croatian
16 system at that time.
17 Does the investigating judge come on his own, or is there any
18 other official staff?
19 A. In principle, he or she would not come alone. They always have
20 an assistant as well as technical personnel that accompany him.
21 In principle, there would be at least two people: the judge and
22 an assistant who would be there for technical assistance, transport,
23 bringing in equipment, and so on and so forth.
24 Q. Thank you. I think it may assist the Court if you tell them,
25 now, in relation to a looting where a house has had its contents taken
1 away, or some of its content, let's say, fridges, or a fridge, furniture;
2 and there's an on-site investigation.
3 In relation to, then, the theft of removal property, how many
4 people from the Ministry of Interior would attend?
5 A. Counsel, I understand your question, and I hope you understand
6 that that depends on the scope or size of the crime, the size of the
7 house, the number of items taken away. It also depends on the initial
8 report based on which an assessment is made of a possible number of
10 We have to assess whether a single person could take the items
11 away or whether there must have been assistance.
12 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... you say it
13 depends on the circumstances; that's perfectly understood, on average.
14 And could we go how many basic police officers would be, on average,
15 attend a on-site investigation in relation to stealing private property?
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] If we use the example of a house,
17 then that would be at least two basic-duty policemen and also at least
18 two crime policemen.
19 If we speak on average, then I would be prone to say three
20 regular-duty policemen, three crime policemen. And if we add the
21 investigating judge on top of that, plus his assistants -- assistant, I
22 would say there would be three of them as well.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Now, in your experience, an on-site investigation in
24 relation to arson would take approximately how much time? From arrival
25 of all those, until they leave. Again, on average; arson case.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, speaking from
2 experience, unfortunately, mostly in the cases of arson, an on-site
3 investigation is made somewhat easier, no matter how harsh that may
4 sound, because most of the traces would have been destroyed anyhow.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Explanations may come later, but I would first like
6 to have an on-average time of such an on-site investigation; arson.
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] On, average, Your Honour, it would
8 last between one and a half and two hours. But what would take the most
9 time would be to ascertain the way in which that arson was committed.
10 One would need to carry out expert analysis afterwards.
11 JUDGE ORIE: I do understand all that. But we are focussing, at
12 this moment, on on-site investigations, as reported, that had taken
14 Same question for theft of private property. On average, from
15 arrival of those in attendance, up till them leaving the place - and I do
16 understand that you need time for transportation as well - for a --
17 private property being stolen; an on-site investigation. On average, how
18 much time?
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That would take longer, because one
20 needs to look -- locate and fix any existing traces, including the
21 so-called papillary lines. I would guess that it would take between
22 three and four hours.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kay, please proceed. I think we're trying to
24 find out the same information.
25 MR. KAY: We are -- we certainly are, Your Honour, and I'm
1 grateful for Your Honour's assistance.
2 Q. An on-site investigation, does that include just the work at the
3 place, the scene of the crime, or is there further work involved in the
4 neighbourhood of the crime within those time estimates? For instance,
5 going to other houses in the village or in the location to see if someone
6 is there, to speak to them, finding people in the fields nearby?
7 Can you describe exactly what an on-site investigation is now,
8 having given us that information?
9 A. Counsel, I am not a crime expert, but I can speak from experience
10 and try to answer as clearly as possible.
11 It is very difficult to take an average for a standardised
12 procedure in locations of such crimes, but frequently, in practice, such
13 measures are needed to actually shed light on the crime itself and to
14 detect the perpetrator.
15 If one wants to catch such a perpetrator, one needs to undertake
16 a number of measures and activities beyond the location itself. This
17 includes the settlement itself, as well as going to other settlements or
18 towns. And it would largely depend on the type of information you
19 gather. This may entail long-distance travel even, although not
21 Q. Do these average times that you've been able to give us - and we
22 appreciate that they're average - do they include work outside the
23 immediate area as part of the on-site investigation, or is there further
24 time needed for other work outside the immediate area?
25 A. I understood His Honour's question as having referred to the
1 location itself. That is to say, what would be the average time to
2 investigate a crime on location and not to conclude the entire criminal
3 investigation in order to close the case.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kay, I know that you've -- you're not finished
5 yet with this.
6 I'm looking at the clock, however. We have to adjourn for the
8 Could you give us an estimate on how much time would you still
10 MR. KAY: Your Honour, one session, and I will be done tomorrow.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Which means that you're going over the three
13 MR. KAY: I am, with apologies, Your Honour. But we have
14 travelled at a fast pace, I would say, in my own defence. If I should
15 defend myself. And we've covered many, many issues which, I think - in
16 our submission - are relevant to this case, and particularly the Defence
17 of Mr. Cermak.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kay, I will discuss with my colleagues whether
19 there is any case to answer.
20 MR. KAY: Thank you.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Moric, I give you the same instructions as I
22 gave you yesterday and the day before, that is, that you should not speak
23 with anyone about your testimony. And we'd like to see you back tomorrow
24 morning at 9.00.
25 Because we adjourn for the day, and we will resume tomorrow,
1 Friday, the 4th of December, 9.00 in the morning, in this same
2 courtroom, III
3 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.47 p.m.
4 to be reconvened on Friday, the 4th day of
5 December, 2009, at 9.00 a.m.