1 Tuesday, 17 December 2013
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness takes the stand]
5 --- Upon commencing at 9.04 a.m.
6 JUDGE KWON: Good morning, everyone.
7 Would the witness make the solemn declaration, please.
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare I will speak the
9 truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
10 JUDGE KWON: Thank you, Mr. Beara. Please be seated and make
11 yourself comfortable.
12 WITNESS: LJUBISA BEARA
13 [The witness answered through interpreter]
14 JUDGE KWON: Good morning, Mr. Beara.
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning, good morning.
16 JUDGE KWON: I seem to have a technical difficulty with my
18 I think it's okay, yes. Thank you.
19 Mr. Beara, although you know -- may I know this very well, but I
20 must draw your attention to a certain rule of evidence that we have here
21 at the Tribunal before you commence your evidence. That is, Rule 90(E).
22 You may object to answering any question under this rule from
23 Mr. Karadzic, the Prosecutor, or even from the Judges if you believe that
24 your answer might incriminate you in a criminal offence. In this
25 context, "incriminate" means saying something that might amount to an
1 admission of a criminal offence or saying something that might provide
2 evidence that you might have committed a criminal offence. However,
3 should you think that an answer might incriminate you and as a
4 consequence you refuse to answer the question, I must let you know that
5 the Tribunal has the power to compel you to answer the question; but in
6 that situation, the Tribunal would ensure that your testimony, compelled
7 under such circumstances, would not be used in any case that might be
8 laid against you for any offence, save and except the offence of giving
9 false testimony.
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I understand.
11 JUDGE KWON: Thank you, Mr. Beara.
12 Before we go on, I would like to counsel assisting Mr. Beara to
13 introduce himself for the record.
14 MR. OSTOJIC: Good morning, Mr. President, Your Honours. My name
15 is John Ostojic. I'm here on behalf of Mr. Ljubisa Beara.
16 JUDGE KWON: Thank you, Mr. Ostojic.
17 But, Mr. Robinson, I was informed before I entered the courtroom
18 that Mr. Beara hasn't been informed that cross-examination of -- his
19 cross-examination would be postponed after the recess.
20 MR. ROBINSON: I see. Well, I informed his counsel, and I don't
21 know from there what communication they had. But Mr. Ostojic was
23 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Beara, in order for the Prosecutor to have some
24 time to prepare for their cross-examination of you, the Chamber agreed
25 with the arrangements that were made between the parties so that your
1 cross-examination will be postponed after the recess. Do you understand
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I understand that. I found
4 out about that this morning. Mr. Ostojic told me about it this morning.
5 JUDGE KWON: Thank you. Yes.
6 Please proceed, Mr. Karadzic.
7 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. Good morning,
8 Your Excellencies. Good morning to all.
9 Examination by Mr. Karadzic:
10 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, Colonel Beara.
11 A. Good morning.
12 Q. I am waiting for the interpretation and I ask you also to pause
13 between question and answer. Thank you for having come. We don't want
14 anything to be lost in translation, so I am going to put a few questions
15 to you in the English language, slowly, carefully, and they will be
16 interpreted to you carefully.
17 A. Very well.
18 Q. I do apologise for this being in English, but it is going to be
19 interpreted properly.
20 [In English] Can you tell us what positions you held during your
21 military career?
22 A. I can.
23 Q. Do, please.
24 A. I graduated from the military naval academy in 1962, and then
25 first I served on the 11th Split destroyer. Then I was in Ploce on
1 minesweepers. I was a ship commander. After that unit of minesweepers
2 was dissolved, I was in Brijuni in the Guards Naval Detachment. That is
3 where I was admitted into the security service of the JNA. Then I served
4 in Pula, in Split, in the counter-intelligence group, and then in Boka as
5 chief of the security department of the 9th Naval Sector Kumbor. Then
6 again in Split as a desk officer at the security department. Then
7 assistant for security and staff affairs and assistant chief of security,
8 and then assistant chief of security for the military naval sector for
9 counter-intelligence. And ultimately, I was chief of the security
10 department of the command of the military naval district.
11 When - how do I put this? - when the tribal war started in
12 Bosnia, I was in Belgrade. I was there because the military naval
13 district no longer existed, and then they assigned me to the Army of
14 Republika Srpska. Over there, I was first chief of the security
15 department in the command of the Army of Republika Srpska, the Main Staff
16 of the Army of Republika Srpska. And then from 1995, I think, or maybe
17 1994, I can no longer remember, I was chief of administration -- well, it
18 was changed, this formation, the establishment was somewhat changed. And
19 I ended the war as chief of department, and I retired.
20 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: We can no longer hear the
21 witness. Could all other the microphones please be switched off. Thank
23 JUDGE KWON: The interpreters couldn't follow you. Could you
24 repeat from where -- from 1994, where you were chief of administration.
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] So I came to the VRS in
1 November 1992, 1991. Again, I don't know. And then I was chief of the
2 security department at the security intelligence sector of the Main Staff
3 of the VRS, the Army of Republika Srpska. And from 1994 or 1995, the
4 establishment changed and it wasn't the security department anymore. It
5 was the security administration. Then I was chief of that administration
6 until I retired. Or that is to say, until the Main Staff was dissolved
7 because then the General Staff was established, headed by General Pero
8 something - I no longer remember his last name - who was in Bijeljina.
9 Excuse me. I stayed in Crna Rijeka. We had built some facilities there,
10 and the idea was that we make a vacation facility there for the wives and
11 children of those who were killed during the war. And we built a
12 multi-storey building, there was a kitchen, a dining area, and so on and
13 so forth; however, this was not fully carried through. I actually
14 left -- I retired, and I don't know what happened afterwards.
15 JUDGE KWON: Sorry to interrupt you, Mr. Karadzic. The Chamber
16 needs to rise for ten minutes.
17 Court deputy, follow the Judges.
18 --- Break taken at 9.16 a.m.
19 --- On resuming at 9.26 a.m.
20 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Karadzic. Please continue.
21 THE ACCUSED: Thank you.
22 MR. KARADZIC:
23 Q. So please tell us, what was your position in the VRS in
24 July 1995?
25 A. I think that I said that just now. I was chief of the security
1 administration of the Main Staff of the Army of Republika Srpska.
2 Q. Thank you. Did you ever inform me, either orally or in writing,
3 that prisoners from Srebrenica would be, were being, or had been
5 A. Your Honours, I and my lawyer have received these questions
6 earlier. Mr. Ostojic, my lawyer, counselled me that I invoke 90(E) with
7 regard to this question, if possible.
8 [Trial Chamber confers]
9 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Ostojic, would you like to make any observation
10 in this regard?
11 MR. OSTOJIC: No, Your Honour, just to confirm that, yes, indeed,
12 we've discussed it, and Mr. Beara and both I and he would like to invoke
13 90(E) on this with respect to his testimony in that regard.
14 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
15 Mr. Robinson.
16 MR. ROBINSON: Thank you, Mr. President. We would ask that the
17 Trial Chamber compel Colonel Beara to answer this question and afford him
18 the full protections of Rule 90(E), assuring him that testimony compelled
19 in this way would not be used as evidence in a subsequent prosecution
20 against him for any offence other than false testimony.
21 JUDGE KWON: Would the Prosecution like to make an observation in
22 this regard?
23 MR. TIEGER: Only to note, Mr. President, that the reference to
24 "subsequent prosecution" seems to ignore what is likely to be the genuine
25 subject of the witness's focus and Mr. Ostojic's focus as well, and that
1 is the current proceedings and the appeal. So on the record, it appears
2 to be a bit misleading and I think that needed to be clarified.
3 JUDGE KWON: Could you be more specific, Mr. Tieger.
4 MR. TIEGER: Mr. Robinson mentioned, and I'm reading from the
5 transcript, "the full protections of Rule 90(E), assuring him that
6 testimony compelled in this way would not be used as evidence in the
7 subsequent prosecution" or perhaps he meant "any subsequent prosecution,"
8 I was simply indicating that the use of the word "subsequent" in these
9 circumstances seemed to ignore what was in fact the object of the
10 witness's and his counsel's concern, and that is the current proceeding.
11 I appreciate that the language is taken verbatim from the rule;
12 nevertheless, the rule may not specifically have contemplated this
13 situation. In any event, it seemed to create a potential area of
14 misunderstanding and I raised it for that reason.
15 JUDGE KWON: Would you like to add anything?
16 MR. ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. President. I was quoting directly from
17 the rule, but since the Appeals Chamber has decided in General Tolimir's
18 case that no statements made by the witness would be used in their appeal
19 proceedings, then that would also be applicable here.
20 JUDGE KWON: And you have nothing to add?
21 MR. TIEGER: No, Mr. President. We -- as obviously we weren't
22 the moving force behind calling this witness and given our other
23 responsibilities, we have not undertaken an exhaustive investigation of
24 the issues in law that may pertain to any questions that arise here, so
25 we have nothing beyond the comments I just made at this moment.
1 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
2 [Trial Chamber confers]
3 JUDGE KWON: The Chamber will rise for 15 minutes.
4 --- Break taken at 9.36 a.m.
5 --- On resuming at 10.32 a.m.
6 JUDGE KWON: The Chamber will now rule on the witness's request
7 to invoke Rule 90(E), not to respond to Mr. Karadzic's question as to the
8 witness's informing the accused about the execution of prisoners in
10 The Chamber has considered the arguments of the parties and has
11 decided to compel the witness to answer the question. The Chamber
12 reminds the witness of the protection afforded to him by Rule 90(E),
13 which was recently confirmed by the Appeals Chamber in the Tolimir case
14 on the 13th of November, 2013. This protection means that the witness
15 may be compelled to testify in this case due to the fact that any
16 self-incrimination question elicited in this case -- proceedings cannot
17 be directly or derivatively used against him in his own case. I said
18 "cannot be directly or derivatively used." Yes.
19 Mr. Beara, the Chamber is therefore instructing you to answer
20 Mr. Karadzic's question. The Chamber now invites the parties and the
21 counsel for witness to submit as to whether we should proceed in public
22 or private session.
23 Who shall I hear from first? Mr. Robinson.
24 MR. ROBINSON: We would ask to proceed in public session,
25 Mr. President.
1 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Tieger.
2 MR. TIEGER: Mr. President, in light of the language used by the
3 Chamber in reliance upon the decision of the Appeals Chamber, we think
4 it's very clear that the matter must proceed in private session in order
5 to maintain any level of control over the -- of access to those matters
6 such that the assurance offered the witness can be complied with. The --
7 the language of the underlying rule explicitly, 90(E), refers to the use
8 of evidence in subsequent proceedings. That presumably means by not only
9 this institution but others. If such control is to be maintained and the
10 cautionary language lent meaning, that means that it can't be distributed
11 internationally from the outset for use by anyone. And that's separate
12 from the issue of the relative meaning of derivative use versus direct
13 use. So we think it's very clear and we should proceed in private
15 Mr. Ostojic.
16 MR. OSTOJIC: Thank you, Mr. President, Your Honours. We take no
17 position with respect to this issue of whether it should be private or
18 public or open session, and we'll defer to Your Honours.
19 JUDGE KWON: Thank you, Mr. Ostojic.
20 [Trial Chamber confers]
21 JUDGE KWON: Having considered the submissions, the Chamber
22 considers it appropriate if we proceed in private session. The Chamber
23 will go into private session.
24 [Private session] [Confidentiality lifted by order of Chamber]
25 THE REGISTRAR: We are in private session, Your Honours.
1 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Beara, I take it you followed the proceedings.
2 Shall I ask Mr. Karadzic to repeat his question?
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] There is no need. I understood it
4 the first time.
5 JUDGE KWON: Thank you. Could you answer the question.
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] My lawyer and myself asked to be
7 allowed to invoke 90(E) because we thought that the question was actually
8 incriminating for myself. If I say that I didn't report to Mr. Karadzic,
9 that would mean that I knew but I didn't inform him. However, if I
10 told -- if I said that I didn't inform him, it would be the same. In
11 other words, I knew but I kept it a secret from him.
12 In the course of the trial against my group, we found a document
13 where it says clear that Mr. Karadzic should have been informed as to
14 what was going on in Srebrenica and around it. If necessary, I can give
15 you the name or the number of the document, Your Honours.
16 THE ACCUSED: Could I pose the question again? I didn't get the
17 answer, really.
18 JUDGE KWON: Yes, please ask your question again.
19 MR. KARADZIC:
20 Q. So the question is: Did you ever inform me either orally or in
21 writing that prisoners from Srebrenica would be, were being, or had been
23 A. May I answer?
24 JUDGE KWON: Please.
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Again, the answer is the same. How
1 could I inform you. Pursuant to the rules of subordination, that was not
2 possible. If I had known about it and if I didn't inform you, as I have
3 already told you, why didn't I? If I had known, I could not have
4 informed you because pursuant to the rules of subordination, I was not
5 linked to you in any way. But you knew it. Why are you asking me now?
6 Q. We'll come to that. Just to have answers of my five questions
7 and then we'll go.
8 Please. Next question would be: Did we ever speak during the
10 A. It was a long time ago. I know that I did see you from time to
11 time. Whether we spoke or not, again, we are talking about
12 subordination. I was far from you and you were even further away from
13 me. I don't think that we spoke. I did see you and I don't mean on TV,
14 I saw you in person. Now, as to whether you saw me or not, I don't know.
15 Q. Did -- during the war, did you ever author or read any VRS
16 document that indicated that prisoners from Srebrenica would be --
17 JUDGE KWON: Just a second. Just a second. I'm sorry to
18 interrupt you. But I wonder whether we have to repeat these questions in
19 private session. Whenever he invokes Rule 90(E), we go into private
21 Can I hear from the parties or Mr. Ostojic?
22 MR. OSTOJIC: Thank you, Mr. President and Your Honours. We
23 will, just so you know, with respect to question number five, I believe
24 invoke Rule 90(E). But with respect to the prior question that was
25 asked, we did not and that's why we didn't stand. The question for
1 number five has not yet been completed, but I believe from my
2 understanding with Mr. Beara that we would invoke Rule 90(E) for the
3 fifth question as well.
4 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
5 Please repeat your question, Mr. Karadzic.
6 MR. TIEGER: Excuse me, Mr. President. I don't know if that was
7 a -- that resolved the Court's concerns, but when the Court raised it, it
8 seemed to me it was raising a very obvious procedural point. We would
9 expect to be in open session for questions to be asked, then -- then the
10 witness invokes or doesn't invoke, and then depending on that
11 circumstance we move into private session.
12 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
13 MR. TIEGER: Given the emphasis by the Defence in particular on
14 the need for openness, but irrespective of that, just in terms of the way
15 one would normally expect to proceed, I think the Court's suggestion was
16 in keeping with conventional expectations.
17 JUDGE KWON: Yes. So should we go into open session and repeat
18 with question number four and go on with number five? Unless there is
19 any objection, we'll go back to open session.
20 [Open session]
21 THE REGISTRAR: We are in open session, Your Honours.
22 JUDGE KWON: Yes, we are now in open session.
23 Yes, Mr. Karadzic, please proceed with your next question.
24 MR. KARADZIC:
25 Q. Did we ever speak during the war?
1 A. As I've already said, we did see each other or, rather, I saw
2 you, but I don't think that we ever spoke.
3 Q. Thank you. During the war, did you ever author or read any
4 VRS document that indicated that prisoners from Srebrenica would be, were
5 being, or had been executed?
6 A. Is this a question for 90(E)? Would that fall under that rule?
7 Would the same thing apply as for the previous questions?
8 JUDGE KWON: Very well. The Chamber will go into private
10 [Private session] [Confidentiality lifted by order of Chamber]
11 THE REGISTRAR: We are in private session, Your Honours.
12 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Beara, likewise, the Chamber is compelling you
13 to answer the question with the full protection as provided in the Rules.
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I understand. I understand that.
15 A brief answer would be no. If any such document had been
16 produced, it would have surfaced by now. I believe that the Prosecutor
17 has obtained all sorts of papers, documents, orders, plans, and so on and
18 so forth. Therefore, my answer is this: I never authored an order of
19 that kind, nor did I ever see such an order in a written form. It is
20 also true that nobody ever orally ordered me any such thing, nor did I
21 hear anybody order anybody else any such thing. So this would be my
23 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
24 We'll go back to open session.
25 [Open session]
1 THE REGISTRAR: We are in open session, Your Honours.
2 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
3 Q. Thank you, Colonel.
4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I have no further questions,
5 Your Excellencies.
6 MR. ROBINSON: Excuse me, Mr. President. I would like to ask
7 that the answers of the matters that have been heard in private session
8 be reclassified as public in light of the witness's answers. There is
9 nothing his answers that would remotely incriminate him and therefore
10 subject him to any kind of foreign prosecution, and as a result, I
11 believe that it's in the interest of justice that these proceedings be
12 entirely public. Thank you.
13 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Tieger or Ms. Pack, do you have any observation?
14 MR. TIEGER: Well, only to note that -- that Mr. Robinson puts
15 that possible issue before us. I think given the matters involved, at a
16 minimum, we wouldn't want to jump to the conclusion that no one would be
17 interested in or could possibly use it. I would think that would be a
18 determination that would only be made by the Chamber with absolute
19 certainty and that would certainly require a much closer scrutiny of the
20 record than we have been able to do thus far.
21 JUDGE MORRISON: Well, further to that, Mr. Tieger, isn't this a
22 matter to be reconsidered at the conclusion of any cross-examination as
23 to his answers?
24 MR. TIEGER: That's a very good point, Your Honour.
25 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Ostojic.
1 MR. OSTOJIC: Thank you, Mr. President and Your Honours. We have
2 nothing to add on the point.
3 JUDGE KWON: Yes, we'll consider this issue when the
4 cross-examination will have been over.
5 But do we have any clue when we'll have the cross-examination of
6 this witness?
7 MR. ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. President. We have agreed on the date of
8 the 22nd of January for the cross-examination if that is suitable to the
10 JUDGE KWON: 22nd. Very well. Then we'll continue with the
11 cross-examination of Mr. Beara on the 22nd.
12 Mr. Beara, on behalf of the Chamber, I'd like to thank you for
13 your assistance.
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you. I understand. Thank
16 JUDGE KWON: The Chamber will have a break for about -- is
17 20 minutes sufficient for a break?
18 MR. ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. President.
1 JUDGE KWON: Let us see how it evolves. We'll have a break for
2 20 minutes.
3 --- Recess taken at 10.51 a.m.
4 [The witness stands down]
5 --- On resuming at 11.16 a.m.
6 [The witness takes the stand]
7 JUDGE KWON: Good morning, Mr. Stakic.
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning, Your Honours. Good
9 morning to the Prosecution, to Mr. Karadzic and his Defence team.
10 JUDGE KWON: And for the record, I note the presence of
11 Mr. Ostojic to assist Mr. Stakic.
12 Although the witness is present, I'd like to deal with three
14 Please bear with us, Mr. Stakic, for a moment.
15 The Chamber will first turn to the accused's "Precautionary
16 Rule 94 bis Notice: Marko Sladojevic," filed yesterday and on which the
17 Chamber heard oral submissions yesterday. The Chamber finds it
18 unnecessary to wait till the English translation will be completed. In
19 conclusion, the Chamber does not agree that Mr. Sladojevic should be
20 compared to Prosecution witnesses Jean-Rene Ruez and Dean Manning who
21 both participated on the ground and in investigations and exhumations and
22 who could testify as fact witnesses as to what they saw at the time and
23 the process through which the Prosecution evidence was collected. The
24 Chamber also recalls that Mrs. Hanson and Mr. Nielsen testified as expert
25 witnesses, and therefore the comparison with Mr. Sladojevic is
1 inadequate. Furthermore, the Chamber is of the view that Mr. Sladojevic,
2 in his report, seemed to have conducted the kind of analysis which is
3 typically addressed by parties in their final briefs or closing
4 arguments. The Chamber would not be assisted at all by allowing this
5 type of compilation from a team member of one of the parties to be
6 admitted on the record. The Chamber will therefore not allow
7 Mr. Sladojevic to be heard as a witness in these proceedings and will not
8 admit his study entitled, and I quote, "Thus Spoke Radovan Karadzic" into
10 Second, the Chamber is seized of the accused's request for oral
11 testimony during sentencing case, also filed yesterday. In this request,
12 the accused asked that the Chamber receive oral testimony during the
13 sentencing phase of his case and that such evidence be heard upon the
14 conclusion of any witnesses called by the Chamber. The Chamber recalls
15 that during the Status Conference of 3rd of September, 2012, it reminded
16 the Defence that the Defence 65 ter witness list should identify all the
17 witnesses it intended to call, including sentencing witnesses. In its, I
18 quote, "Decision on Time Allocated to the Accused for the Presentation of
19 his Case," issued on the 19th of September, 2012, the Chamber made it
20 clear that the 300 hours initially granted to him would be for the direct
21 examination and re-examination of all of his witnesses. This remains the
22 Chamber's position and no additional time will be granted to the accused
23 to present oral evidence related to sentencing.
24 It is for the accused to decide how to spend the remainder of his
25 time, and should he decide to spend all or some of his time on sentencing
1 matters, the Chamber would not interfere with that decision as long as it
2 considers the evidence to be of relevance. However, any such
3 sentencing-related evidence should be presented before the end of Defence
4 case and within the 325 hours allocated to the accused.
5 Third, the Chamber will issue its oral ruling on the "Mladic
6 Motion for Access to Trial Audio Recordings in Karadzic Case," filed
7 confidentially by the Mladic Defence on the 16th of December, 2013. In
8 this motion, the Mladic Defence requests access to all trial audio
9 recordings from the Karadzic case, noting that it has already been
10 granted access to closed and private session trial transcript from this
12 The Chamber notes that on the 16th of December, 2013, the
13 accused's legal advisor informed the Chamber and the parties via e-mail
14 that he would not be filing a response to this motion. The Chamber has
15 not heard from the Prosecution or the Registry but is of the view that it
16 can issue this oral decision nevertheless, particularly given the
17 submission in paragraph 6 of the motion in which the Mladic Defence
18 recounts the discussion it has had with the Registry on this issue.
19 As pointed out by the Mladic Defence, the Chamber recalls that,
20 on the 8th of November, 2012, it issued a decision allowing Mladic -
21 pursuant to Rules 54, 70, and 75 - access to all closed and private
22 session transcripts from this case which are not subject to Rule 70 or
23 delayed disclosure and which are produced in the pre-trial and trial
24 proceedings. Accordingly, given the broad access that Mladic Defence
25 already has to confidential information from this case, the Chamber will
1 grant the request outlined in the motion pursuant to the same Rules. The
2 Chamber reminds the Mladic Defence, the parties in this case, and the
3 Registry, that those parts of paragraph 20 of the access decision of the
4 8th of November, 2012, which apply to the transcripts of the proceedings,
5 shall also apply, mutatis mutandis, to the audio recordings.
6 Final, the Chamber notes that the Mladic Defence filed this
7 motion confidentially. The Chamber could discern no reason on the face
8 of the motion for its confidential status. It therefore orders the
9 Registry to reclassify it as public. The Registry is requested to
10 communicate this decision to the Mladic Defence.
11 Having said that, I would like Mr. Karadzic to proceed.
12 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
13 WITNESS: MILOMIR STAKIC [Resumed]
14 [Witness answered through interpreter]
15 Examination by Mr. Karadzic: [Continued]
16 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, Dr. Stakic.
17 A. Good morning.
18 Q. What I still need to do is read a short summary of your
19 statement, and then I will probably hand you over to the Prosecutor.
20 [In English] Dr. Milomir Stakic appeared on the SDS list for the
21 first multi-party elections in BH as an independent candidate. On
22 18th of November, 1990, he was elected deputy in the Prijedor Municipal
23 Assembly, and on the 4th of January, 1991, he was appointed
24 vice-president of the Assembly. He held the posts of president of the
25 Assembly of the Serbian people in Prijedor municipality, president of the
1 Prijedor municipality, and president of the Crisis Staff of Prijedor
3 After the multi-party elections of BH in 1990, the authorities in
4 Prijedor were constituted from members of the SDA, SDS, and HDZ, in
5 accordance with an agreement on the republican revel. On
6 4th of January, 1991, the new multi-party Assembly of the municipality of
7 Prijedor was constituted.
8 In September 1991, the Territorial Defence and the
9 5th Kozara Brigade were mobilised. This caused a great rift among the
10 peoples because Serbs responded to the mobilisation while the Muslims
11 largely avoided this obligation. When the SDA started calling on the
12 Muslims not to go into the army, the rift became for more pronounced.
13 A great influx of refugees occurred after the conflict in Croatia
14 started. These were refugees of Serbian ethnicity. The influx primarily
15 caused a great economic problem. In addition, it caused a great
16 commotion among the inhabitants of Prijedor, owing to the events in
17 World War II and the suffering of the Serbian people.
18 As of the autumn of 1991, there was more and more talk about the
19 illegal armament of the Muslims, while the Patriotic League and the
20 Green Berets had already been mentioned earlier. Throughout the autumn,
21 the SDS maintained contacts with the SDA and HDZ on both the political
22 party level and in the organs in which they worked together. However,
23 the increasing tension led to the foundation of the Serbian Municipal
24 Assembly of Prijedor and of the Prijedor SDS Crisis Staff on 7th of
25 January, 1992. The basic task of the Prijedor Crisis Staff was to follow
1 the situation and events in and around Prijedor which were significant to
2 the life of the citizens.
3 On 17th of January, 1992, a decision was reached for Prijedor to
4 join the Autonomous Region of Krajina since Banja Luka was the centre
5 towards which Prijedor gravitated economically and politically. The
6 municipalities never considered the ARK a creation whose documents should
7 be binding for the municipal authorities.
8 On 30th of April, Mr. Stakic learned from Simo Miskovic that
9 Alija Delimustafic ordered the MUP to commence combat operations. Given
10 the circumstances, it was decided that control ought to be taken of the
11 town and that should be done by storm in order to avoid bloodshed.
12 Everything was accomplished without a single bullet fired and none of the
13 inhabitants was killed or even wounded.
14 The basic goal of the authorities in Prijedor was to preserve
15 peace and avoid an armed conflict. However, already in the beginning of
16 May 1992, a Serbian policeman was killed. Nevertheless, the relatives of
17 the killed policeman opted for revenge and killed four persons of Muslim
18 ethnicity. This led to the introduction of a curfew and to a request to
19 surrender illegal weapons. This appeal referred also to the citizens of
20 Serbian ethnicity.
21 The next attack happened in Hambarine on 22nd of May, 1992. Two
22 days later, on 24th of May, an army column was again attacked on the
23 Banja Luka-Prijedor road, from the direction of Kozarac. On
24 30th of May, 1992, members of Muslim forces carried out an organised,
25 concentrated, and simultaneous attack against Prijedor, which was
1 successfully repelled.
2 During the fighting in Kozarac, a group of civilians turned up,
3 moving in the direction of the town. The army let them through. Due to
4 the large number of civilians in town, it was decided that they were --
5 they be directed towards Trnopolje.
6 The population started moving out from Prijedor already in
7 February and March 1992. The main reason for moving out were the
8 constant clashes, the lack of electric power, water, and basic food
9 provisions. Even after the main Muslim forces in the territory of
10 Prijedor had been dispersed, there were many small and large groups
11 remaining which constantly clashed with members of the VRS and the
12 police. Nevertheless, Muslims and Croats lived in the territory of
13 Prijedor throughout the entire war. It was never the plan of the
14 municipal authorities of Prijedor to be a single-ethnicity municipality.
15 Dr. Stakic met Dr. Karadzic several times during the war. He
16 never heard him advocating the deportation of the Muslims and the Croats,
17 or the creation of a mono-ethnic Serbian state.
18 And that's the summary. And at that moment I do not have
19 questions for Dr. Stakic.
20 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
21 Mr. Stakic, as you have noted, your evidence in chief in this
22 case has been admitted in writing; that is, through your written
23 statement. Now you'll be cross-examined by the representative of the
24 Office of the Prosecutor. I take it you understand that?
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I understand that.
1 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Ms. Gustafson.
2 MS. GUSTAFSON: Thank you, Your Honours. And good morning.
3 Cross-examination by Ms. Gustafson:
4 Q. And good morning, Dr. Stakic.
5 A. Good morning, madam.
6 Q. Dr. Stakic, in your statement you acknowledge that you knew at
7 the time of two major crimes committed by Bosnian Serb police and
8 military forces against non-Serbs in Prijedor. The first is the massacre
9 of dozens of Keraterm detainees by military, and that's at paragraph 24
10 of your statement; and the other one is another massacre of Muslims, this
11 time by police officers, Muslims who were leaving Prijedor in a convoy at
12 Koricanske Stijene, and that's at paragraph 30.
13 And my question, Dr. Stakic, is: Aside from what you knew then,
14 what you know now, as you sit here today, is that, in fact, the police
15 and the army committed far more crimes against Muslims and Croats in
16 Prijedor in 1992. They detained thousands of them in horrific conditions
17 where they were subjected to torture and mistreatment, killed hundreds
18 and hundreds of them, and destroyed their property on a massive scale.
19 You know that now as you sit here today; right?
20 THE ACCUSED: May I just warn that "killed hundreds and hundreds"
21 had been translated "thousands and thousands."
22 JUDGE KWON: If there's any difference, yes, it's "hundreds and
23 hundreds." Yes, shall we continue?
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] May I answer now?
25 MS. GUSTAFSON:
1 Q. Please.
2 A. When I gave a statement to the members of Mr. Karadzic's Defence
3 team, I stated this on the basis of the knowledge that I had then,
4 because these two things that happened were terrible. They are not less
5 terrible than the others, but all the other citizens of Prijedor heard
6 about that. It wasn't only me as president of the Municipal Assembly.
7 You do know that I was at this trial, and during that trial and over all
8 those years, although I'm in prison and I don't have much information
9 from the ground, but during that trial I found out about many other
10 crimes that did happen, unfortunately, in the municipality of Prijedor.
11 And I agree with what is written in the trial judgement and the appeals
12 judgement with regard to these crimes.
13 And may I say straight away, that I personally or my defence
14 during the trial before this court - my trial, that is - we never tried
15 to deny or underestimate these crimes. Quite simply, we showed that that
16 I was not a big player or the main player. I also agree with the
17 statement made by the Trial Chamber in paragraph 616 in the trial
18 judgement in my case. But again, may I say that I do not agree with
19 those parts where it says that I'm the person in charge and that I'm
20 responsible for all these crimes.
21 I would like to take this opportunity to express my profound
22 regret, which I did express during my own trial, for everything that was
23 done to my fellow citizens in that period of time.
24 Q. Thank you, Dr. Stakic. That was a helpful but somewhat
25 roundabout answer. I take it you agree with my summary of events in
1 Prijedor in 1992, that the police and the army committed mass crime
2 against Muslims and Croats in Prijedor, detentions, torture,
3 mistreatment, and killings; is that right?
4 A. I think perhaps I was a bit lengthy in my answer, but I did say
5 that these two crimes are horrible in themselves, but the other ones you
6 mention are even more horrific, and they really happened. All I can do
7 is express my regret, once again, that it happened. But as I was trying
8 to say, at that time I did not know of all these crimes that were going
10 Q. Thank you. Now at paragraph 16 of your statement, you describe
11 the 30th of April, 1992, SDS take-over of Prijedor as a reaction to a fax
12 from Mr. Delimustafic, dated the 29th of April, 1992. And at
13 paragraph 33, you deny that the take-over was prepared well in advance of
14 the 1st of May, 1992. And in fact, Dr. Stakic, the Prijedor SDS had been
15 planning the take-over of Prijedor well before the 29th of April and that
16 29th of April telex was simply a trigger which accelerated the timing of
17 the take-over; right?
18 A. At that moment, I was not aware that the SDS was planning any
20 MS. GUSTAFSON: If we could look at D1830, please.
21 Q. And as you can see, Dr. Stakic, these are the minutes of the SDS
22 Municipal Board dated the 23rd of April, 1992. And if you look at
23 point 5, towards the bottom of the page, it states a decision was taken
24 "to immediately start working on the take-over, the co-ordination with
25 the JNA, notwithstanding."
1 Now that reflects that the SDS was planning to take-over the
2 municipality well before receiving the 29th of April fax; right?
3 A. I can look at that paragraph, but I should like to ask you to
4 read the whole document. At the beginning there is a reference to who
5 took part in the discussion, and the names are listed. And you don't see
6 my name there. I can't say for sure whether I was at that session or
7 not, because I didn't attend all the sessions. But from this, you can't
8 see that I discussed anything. People were saying all sorts of things,
9 and when I myself was looking for documents, I found another record, a
10 longer one of that session, where Mr. Drljaca -- it's an extended
11 document, P0041716 is the number. And 0041719. Simo Drljaca says:
12 "We and Simo Miskovic were told today at the barracks that we
13 would be arrested."
14 And you see they are coming, and if somebody is threatening them
15 there, I don't see how that can be called co-operation.
16 Anyway, I'm just telling you my personal view. I had no
17 impression and no knowledge that any take-over is being prepared. And on
18 that day, 29 April, as I said in paragraph 16, I was in my office doing
19 my usual job as vice president of the Municipal Assembly. I stayed there
20 until 4.00 p.m. and then went home.
21 Q. Okay.
22 MS. GUSTAFSON: If we could have 65 ter 05787, please.
23 Q. And while that's coming up, Dr. Stakic, I see you have your
24 statement in front of you and some other documents, and I will be
25 referring to your statement so it's helpful that you have it. If you'd
1 like to refer to any other documents besides your statement, if you could
2 please inform us. Thank you.
3 A. Thank you.
4 Q. Now this is a 28th of April, 1994, "Kozarski Vjesnik" article,
5 which includes an interview with you. We can see your photo there.
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. If you could look to the bottom, the last paragraph at the very
8 bottom left-hand corner of the screen. If that could be blown up for
9 you. So that paragraph at the -- in the bottom left-hand corner, it
10 starts with you stating:
11 "What happened on the 30th of April, 1992, was only the final act
12 of a long-standing, but for the Serbs, perilous plan."
13 Now, this is what you told "Kozarski Vjesnik" about the
14 30th of April take-over, that it was the final act of a long-standing
15 plan; correct?
16 A. Let me read this. It says:
17 "What happened on the 30th of April was just the finale of a plan
18 long in the making fatal to the Serbs."
19 So it means "fatal to the Serbs." I don't know how that was
20 translated into English. Because it relates to the fax that we received,
21 where they proclaimed the beginning of combat against Serb forces.
22 Q. And this statement you made reflects, does it not, not only the
23 advanced planning of the take-over but your knowledge of the fact that
24 that take-over was planned in advance; right?
25 A. I'm sorry. I don't know how this statement of mine was
1 translated into English. I would like the -- to ask the interpreters to
2 interpret it. I said:
3 "What happened on the 30th of April was just the finale of a plan
4 long in the making that was fatal to the Serbs."
5 "A plan," meaning prepared by the HDZ and the SDA and that they
6 revealed in the fax sent by the minister of the interior. I didn't say
7 here that Serbs had been preparing anything for a long time. And I say
8 further that they had been arming themselves secretly, sewing uniforms,
9 et cetera. And later on I got hold of some information seized by the
10 army and the police, documents from which we saw that they had indeed
11 been preparing a long time for that, and later on in the newspapers they
12 tried to deny that fax.
13 Q. Okay.
14 MS. GUSTAFSON: If we could go to the next page in the B/C/S and
15 stay on the same page in the English.
16 Q. And I'd like to direct your attention to the very top left-hand
17 corner in the B/C/S. And here you refer to the Muslims secretly arming
18 themselves, making uniforms with the symbol of the lily, building
19 strongholds in Kozara. Then you say:
20 "But we were not just sitting there idle. When we saw what they
21 were doing, we began to arm ourselves and to tell the party members what
22 they were planning to do to us and what has to be done to prevent 1941
23 happening all over again."
24 Now in your statement you emphasize the arming and organising
25 activities of the Muslim side, but you don't say anything about such
1 activities on the Serb side. But in this article, you acknowledged that
2 the Serbs were indeed arming themselves with your knowledge and support;
4 A. A moment ago I was able to see the date of this statement I made
5 to the press. What is the date?
6 Q. This is the 28th of April, 1994.
7 A. You know, I said a moment ago as well that when I was giving this
8 statement, I was trying to describe the knowledge that I had then in that
9 period, from January until October 1992. And this is 1994. During the
10 war, our officers spoke to the radio, to the newspapers, and our police
11 did too. And from the things they said, I learnt that they had also been
12 working to arm Serbian people. But that's something I learned later.
13 MS. GUSTAFSON: And if we could go to page --
14 JUDGE KWON: Just a second. Ms. Gustafson, do you agree that
15 English translation that we have is not correct? First page.
16 MS. GUSTAFSON: Well, I understood it to be slightly different,
17 but I didn't --
18 JUDGE KWON: It's not "Serb plan," it's "perilous plan to
19 Serbs" --
20 MS. GUSTAFSON: Yeah, "for the Serbs."
21 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
22 MS. GUSTAFSON: We will request a revision of this translation.
23 And if we could move to page 2 of the English and move down the
24 page, about two-thirds of the way down the page in the B/C/S, still on
25 the far left-hand side. And this is about a third of the way down in the
2 Q. You state here:
3 "We knew they were armed mainly with zoljas, infantry weapons,
4 and wasps, but we had better military potential and our lads were brave
5 and bold."
6 Now, here you acknowledged that the Serb side was better armed
7 than the Muslim side. And that's true as well, isn't it?
8 A. I can repeat once again: This is something I learned later. The
9 commander of the brigade which participated in the fighting gave an
10 interview describing which units took part, with what weapons and
11 equipment. So in 1994, I already knew about these things. But in March,
12 April, May 1992, I did not have that information because nobody owed it
13 to me to inform me, nor was I superior to the army or the police for them
14 to report to me about the equipment and assets they dispose of.
15 Q. Okay.
16 MS. GUSTAFSON: And if we could go back to page 1 of the English
17 and back up to the top of the page in the B/C/S.
18 Q. And this is about six lines down in the B/C/S and two-thirds of
19 the way down in the English. You state:
20 "On the direction of the central office of the SDS, we formed the
21 Serbian Assembly of Prijedor on 7th January 1992, and I became chairman."
22 Now, this is a reflection of the fact that you established the
23 Serbian Assembly in Prijedor pursuant to republic level SDS instructions;
24 in particular, the Variant A and B instructions; correct?
25 A. I said that in my statement. The SDS president convened the
1 session. I believe that was before this 7th of January. I believe it
2 was in December. And at that session, he showed us that document. The
3 document was not copied and distributed to everybody. He just showed it
4 to us and read it out, saying that there are Variants A and B. One of
5 them does not apply to us because we did not have the majority in the
6 Assembly. The other one applies to us, and we should follow that other
7 variant and organise the Serbian Assembly in that municipality.
8 Q. Thank you.
9 MS. GUSTAFSON: I tender this article.
10 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
11 MR. ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. President, the first two pages of this
12 would be admitted, but there is another article and the rest of it that
13 probably shouldn't be admitted.
14 MS. GUSTAFSON: Yes, that makes sense. Thank you.
15 JUDGE KWON: Yes. We'll admit this part of the article. Yes.
16 THE REGISTRAR: It receives Exhibit Number P6581, Your Honours.
17 MS. GUSTAFSON:
18 Q. Now, Dr. Stakic --
19 JUDGE KWON: Now, by the way --
20 MS. GUSTAFSON: I'm sorry.
21 JUDGE KWON: -- I take it the parties were informed of the
22 extended sitting schedule that was planned. Okay. It was just sent.
23 But you will stick to the three hours allocated to you, Ms. Gustafson?
24 MS. GUSTAFSON: Well, I -- I certainly intend to. It's always
25 difficult to predict these things with certainty, but I would note that
1 even with the three hours, it doesn't seem -- seems like it may be very
2 difficult to finish today.
3 JUDGE KWON: Please do your best to conclude your cross in three
4 hours. And I -- for the Defence, it will have less than 40 or 50 minutes
5 for the redirect, if we are to conclude Mr. Stakic's evidence today at
7 MR. ROBINSON: Between 40 and 50 minutes?
8 JUDGE KWON: My calculation, yes.
9 MR. ROBINSON: That should be okay.
10 JUDGE KWON: So we will sit until 4.00 today.
11 Let's continue.
12 MS. GUSTAFSON: Thank you.
13 Q. Dr. Stakic, at paragraph 18 you describe an attack on a military
14 vehicle carrying five VRS members in Hambarine on the 22nd of May, 1992.
15 And you describe a similar attack on Kozarac -- attacking Kozarac on the
16 24th of May. And you state: "These attacks were responded to."
17 Now, with respect to events in Hambarine, the Crisis Staff --
18 Prijedor Crisis Staff issued an ultimatum to hand over the alleged
19 perpetrators of this incident, and stated that if this ultimatum was not
20 complied with, the Crisis Staff was no longer willing to guarantee the
21 safety of the population -- the civilian population of the area; correct?
22 A. I agree with you and what's written in paragraph 18, with all due
23 respect. As for that other part, I don't know. To the best of my
24 knowledge, the Crisis Staff met for the first time on the 29th of May.
25 So it couldn't possibly issue this, nor was it within the purview of the
1 Crisis Staff. But maybe you have some other document saying the
2 contrary. But the fact is the Crisis Staff was established on the
3 29th of May at a regular Assembly session, and I don't remember that it
4 was convened specially because of these events.
5 MS. GUSTAFSON: And if we could go to P3485, please.
6 Q. And I'd like to direct your attention to the article at the top
7 right-hand side of this page in the B/C/S. And this is a 29th of May,
8 1992, "Kozarski Vjesnik" -- page from "Kozarski Vjesnik" which recites
9 public statements of the Crisis Staff. And this one on the top right is
10 a statement dated the 23rd of May, 1992. And the column -- in the column
11 on the far right-hand side - and in the English this is the last two
12 paragraphs on the first page - it states that:
13 "The Crisis Staff hereby orders the population of Hambarine local
14 commune and other local communes in the area ... to hand over the
15 perpetrators of this crime ... by Saturday, the 23rd of May."
16 And the final paragraph states:
17 "This crime has exhausted all dead-lines and promises and the
18 Crisis Staff no longer can, nor is it willing to, guarantee the security
19 of the population of the above-mentioned villages in this area."
20 A. I see now this article and it's signed "Crisis Staff." You know,
21 in the Crisis Staff we also had a press officer or something to that
22 effect who had the right -- not only had the right, but it was his job to
23 meet with the media and issue press releases. Sometimes he would sign
24 these releases "press officers," sometimes he would sign them
25 "Crisis Staff." But if you ever saw a decision of the Crisis Staff
1 itself, it's usually signed "president of the Crisis Staff" and my name
2 underneath, because I was the president. So this press release was made
3 by the press officer, because the army had also spoken to the radio on
4 the same day, and he made a statement on behalf of the Crisis Staff.
5 Also, a moment ago mobilisation was mentioned. The mobilisation
6 call-ups are signed by the minister of defence, and we at the municipal
7 level don't have the power to cancel it or prohibit it, but what we could
8 do is address the press and appeal on the radio to all able-bodied men
9 over 18 to respond to the call-up. So this is not a decision or the
10 opinion of the Crisis Staff. It's the opinion of the press officer.
11 Q. And, Dr. Stakic, when the perpetrators were not handed over by
12 the population of Hambarine, the army attacked the village, shelling the
13 village, attacking the population as a whole, and destroying the homes --
14 destroying homes of the Muslims who lived there; right?
15 A. I learned and heard that these things happened during those days,
16 but I cannot tell you anything more about the extent and the substance of
17 that operation because they had no obligation to keep me informed about
18 what was really going on on the ground.
19 Q. Now at paragraph 19 of your statement, you discuss the
20 30th of May attack against Prijedor town by Muslim forces, an attack
21 which you explained was repelled within a matter of hours. What you
22 don't state anywhere in your statement is that after this attack was
23 repelled, the army virtually destroyed the largely Muslim neighbourhood
24 of Stari Grad in Prijedor town; right?
25 A. You know what? As I described it here, that night I was in the
1 building of the Municipal Assembly when the attack started. I heard the
2 shooting. And at first, I thought it was soldiers shooting in the air,
3 as they usually do when they are going to the front line or coming back.
4 But then stronger explosions started, like grenades and even stronger,
5 around the Assembly building itself. Then I went into the hallway, and
6 the shooting was coming from the park, which was only 150 metres away
7 from the building. The few of us civilians who were in the building at
8 that time were not armed, but fortunately, outside the municipality
9 building there was a check-point manned by two or three soldiers or
10 policemen, I am not sure, who were armed.
11 And I don't know if you know what it looks like. Next to the
12 municipal building, there is the police station, and they also had
13 reserve policemen there who were armed. And shooting was heard from that
14 side as well. It lasted until about 9.00, when I saw a tank, a Serbian
15 tank between the SUP building and our building, and I saw troops coming
16 in, and then they moved towards the park, the new buildings, and the --
17 the buildings and the new hotel where the explosions were coming from.
18 And they started moving towards Stari Grad, the old town. I wasn't there
19 in the old town but I heard that it was considerably devastated. I don't
20 know if the army really had to respond that way and use that kind of
21 force. It's not up to me to judge. I'm not a soldier. I'm not
22 qualified. But at any rate, it was not my purpose to devastate and
23 destroy the town. There were socially owned buildings there, public
24 buildings, and there were Serb businesses and facilities that were
25 damaged or destroyed as well.
1 Q. You said that you "don't know if the army really had to respond
2 that way and use that kind of force. It's not up to me to judge. I'm
3 not a soldier." But in fact, you called a military expert in your case,
4 a US general, General Wilmot, and I'd like to remind you of what he said
5 in response to questions from your lawyer in your trial.
6 MS. GUSTAFSON: And this has been uploaded at 65 ter 25618.
7 Q. He was asked the question:
8 "Help me with this: Also the military at this point, did they
9 continue to pursue or were they in pursuit of the 'enemy' as a result of
10 the May 30th, 1992, attack upon the city/town of Prijedor?"
11 And he answered:
12 "Yes, they did pursue the attacking forces, but they also stopped
13 in I guess I would describe it as a suburb neighbourhood. I've never
14 been there so I don't know exactly how to describe it. Called Stari
15 Grad, is it? And they decimated that neighbourhood which is contrary to
16 the rules of land warfare and probably criminal action if one would take
17 a look at it, and if certain -- and if authorities would examine what
18 happened there, it was an atrocity, and something that the army should
19 have been brought to account on."
20 Now, that was what your defence military expert said about what
21 the army did in Stari Grad after they repelled this attack; correct?
22 A. Well, I don't remember exactly what he said, with all due
23 respect. I trust what you've said, that you're reading it out as he said
24 it. As you said yourself, he's a military expert. He can say that.
25 However, I cannot. I was not at the old town. I heard that it was
1 destroyed in that operation. And I said a moment ago I don't know
2 whether there was that use of force, this excessive use of force, as this
3 expert said, or whether it was proportionate. I really wouldn't want to
4 go into all of that.
5 You see, once again, I'm saying: I'm 50 years old now. At that
6 time, I was only 29 years old. I was just a new, inexperienced doctor,
7 politically unqualified, naive, not to speak of the military and the
8 police. These were not departments that were within my line of work. I
9 was not in charge of them on the basis of any documents, and especially
10 in view of my age and lack of experience, I could not have any kind of
11 supervision over the army or could I exert any kind of pressure over
13 I just tried here, this paragraph -- I just happened to be there,
14 so I'm speaking as a witness, and I saw what was happening around me.
15 Because later on I did find out, but I really didn't want to go into all
16 of that. Also, on the under -- on the other side, where the underpass
17 is, there were wounded people. And then the commander of the military
18 got killed near Kozarski Vjesnik, and also many policemen were killed at
19 the bridge. Later on I found out that the attackers had come over the
20 Sana because the bridge was guarded by the military and the police, and
21 they came from the direction of the old town. And apparently, they were
22 withdrawing at that point. But I'm telling you all of this as a citizen
23 who heard later about what was going on.
24 I don't want underestimate the report of that expert. Namely,
25 that what happened there did happen. I'm not trying to diminish it. I'm
1 not trying to deny it.
2 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
3 Ms. Gustafson, can you scroll back to lines 1 of this page,
4 page 36. It's part of your reading from that expert's testimony, "called
5 Stari Grad, is it," and the afterwards, probably because you read too
6 fast, something is missing, before you referred to criminal action. I
7 heard -- I remember something to the effect of that's contrary to warfare
8 or something? Could you read it again slowly?
9 MS. GUSTAFSON: Certainly.
10 "And they decimated that neighbourhood, which is contrary to the
11 rules of land warfare and probably criminal action ..."
12 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
13 MS. GUSTAFSON: Thank you.
14 Q. Now, Dr. Stakic, at paragraph 51 of your statement you comment on
15 adjudicated fact 1267, relating to the destruction of non-Serb
16 settlements, and you said that, as far as you were aware, it was not just
17 Muslim homes that were destroyed. And you gave the example of
18 Mr. Srdjo Srdic [phoen], a Serb, and you state that his house which was
19 in the immediate vicinity of the municipal building was damaged during
20 the combat activities.
21 Now, Mr. Srdic provided evidence about the destruction -- or the
22 damage to his home that the Defence has submitted, and this is what he
23 said about it.
24 "Mine was the only Serb house in Prijedor that was burnt down.
25 They wanted to kill me. They wanted to liquidate me. And the proof of
1 that is that they threw an explosive device on my balcony, and prior to
2 that they put 'SDA' on it. But this was not done by a Muslim."
3 MS. GUSTAFSON: And that's at D2265, page 24.
4 Q. Now it's clear from Mr. Srdic's evidence that his house wasn't
5 damaged in the course of combat. He was singled out among Serbs in
6 Prijedor and his home was specifically targeted for personal reasons;
8 A. I don't know about that statement of Mr. Srdic's. I remember
9 that he used to come to the Municipal Assembly. You know, down there at
10 the executive board, there is this department for property-related
11 matters. First of all, he wanted to prove that it was his house --
12 actually, he lived in another house. And this is a shop. It's right in
13 front of the Municipal Assembly building. It's not even 50 metres away.
14 I mean, I was not watching all the time because I sought shelter behind a
15 wall. I wasn't looking through the window. I didn't want to be hit
16 myself. I don't know whether it was hit by a Muslim tank or a Serb
17 zolja. I'm not going into all of that. But during that fighting, the
18 shop was damaged because these are houses that share walls. These are
19 not stand-alone houses. They're attached. You can see that if you go
20 out into the ground. It's 50 metres from the entrance into the
21 Municipal Assembly.
22 And here my answer pertains to that. I mean, I'm not denying
23 that -- well, Stari Grad, the old town, as far as I know, had a majority
24 Muslim population, and these houses were destroyed. I, as a human being,
25 can just express my regret for the fact that these buildings were
1 destroyed, as I did then. But Mr. Srdic came to speak to us and he said
2 that he would be seeking damages. Also, these people from Kozarac, a
3 delegation came to see me, and they came to report the damage that had
4 been sustained by their houses. Now, what he personally thinks, I really
5 wouldn't want to go into that.
6 Q. Okay, now you're -- I'd like to ask you now about Trnopolje, the
7 facility you speak about in your statement. As I understand it, your
8 evidence is that during and after the attack on Kozarac, the civilians
9 fled the area, the army allowed them to pass. They arrived in Prijedor
10 town and then someone directed them to Trnopolje, which you refer to as a
11 holding centre. And that's paragraphs 18 and 22.
12 And so now as I understand it, your position is that this
13 movement of civilians out of Kozarac and to Trnopolje was a movement that
14 happened on their own, they moved on their own, and they moved
15 voluntarily to Trnopolje; is that right?
16 A. Can I read this once again and see what is written here? With
17 all due respect, I don't see that I say at any point that these people
18 voluntarily, and so on and so forth, madam. I'm saying here this
19 information that I received. I set out in the morning, I left my parents
20 house, and they live in the village of Mariska, and that is where I had
21 moved my wife and my young child. Why? Because there was no
22 electricity. My parents didn't have any electricity either but they live
23 in the country, so they have a well. They also have a stove that is
24 fired by wood. I'm sorry for saying all of this right now. And at the
25 check-point the police said: No, you cannot pass this way because there
1 is fighting underway. And then I took the roundabout way by Rakelici and
2 Cela. I arrived in Prijedor. By the time I got to work it was - I don't
3 know - about midday. And --
4 Q. I'm sorry to interrupt but my time is very limited and I think
5 you're more or less repeating what's in your statement. Let me try to
6 ask it in a clearer way. I think my question could have been clearer. I
7 take it your position is that the Muslims of Kozarac went -- ended up in
8 Trnopolje and they went there on their own. Nobody captured them and put
9 them there; is that right?
10 A. No, Madam, I do apologise, but that is not written in my
11 statement, that they did this voluntarily. I'm trying to explain to you
12 how it was that I found out about this. Because in some statement out
13 there, I mean, in some report that appeared later by the MUP, they claim
14 that the Crisis Staff founded Trnopolje, Omarska, and Keraterm, you know,
15 and they are not referring to any date or the number of that decision or
16 whatever. I'll telling you how it was that I learned about this. I'm
17 not saying it was voluntary at all.
18 There were operations going on there. It's the army then, that
19 there, at the front line, opened a passageway, if that's the right word,
20 and then they let these people get to town, because they had set out
21 towards town from Kozarac. And then, the people I worked with at the
22 Assembly told me that they had arrived during the night and that they
23 were staying in two buildings in town. And most of them were called upon
24 to stay with their relatives, friends. There were people with mixed
25 marriages and so on and so forth. I don't know who took these people in.
1 At one point in time, when the police realised that these buildings were
2 overcrowded, they took buses.
3 Once again, they asked these people whether anybody had some
4 private apartment or house to stay at with someone, and then they got
5 these other people who had fled from Kozarac from the fighting, and then
6 they channeled them towards Trnopolje.
7 I never said - and I don't want to say it now, too, and I don't
8 want this to be put to me - that they went voluntarily. What happened to
9 them is really sad and I regret it. But I'm not saying we did not make
10 any decision about this Trnopolje. We did not plan this Trnopolje. At
11 least, I did not take part in that and I'm not aware of any such thing.
12 I'm not saying then and I'm not saying now that they voluntarily left
13 their homes in order to go somewhere, even if you call it a holding
14 centre or whatever.
15 Q. Okay. Your position on that is now clear. Thank you. Now you
16 said that you never said they went voluntarily, "what happened to them is
17 really sad, and I regret it. But I'm not saying we did not make any
18 decision about this, Trnopolje. We did not plan this Trnopolje."
19 And what the Crisis Staff did do, Dr. Stakic, is control the
20 manner in which people could be released from Trnopolje, didn't it?
21 A. The Crisis Staff to control this? This Trnopolje was not under
22 the Crisis Staff. And as far as I know, Mr. Kuruzovic,
23 Slobodan Kuruzovic, was appointed on behalf of the army, and those who
24 appointed him were supposed to receive reports from him in terms of what
25 was going on in the centre. It's not that I was supposed to receive
1 reports or the Crisis Staff. It is a fact that people, but mainly from
2 the Red Cross, the local Red Cross that was down there, they did address
3 the Crisis Staff. But they were asking for assistance in terms of food,
4 medicine, medical supplies, and later on oil because they also organised
5 the transportation for these unfortunate people.
6 MS. GUSTAFSON: If we could go to P2915, please.
7 Q. And, Dr. Stakic, you can see that about two-thirds of the way
8 down the page there it says: A summary of conclusions, orders, and
9 decisions adopted by the Crisis Staff from the 29th of May to the
10 24th of July.
11 MS. GUSTAFSON: And if we could go to page 3 in both languages.
12 Q. And near the top in the B/C/S, in your -- towards the bottom in
13 the English, one of the conclusions it refers to is conclusion number
14 01-1-023-45/92 of the 2nd of July, 1992, forbidding the individual
15 release of persons from Trnopolje, Omarska, and Keraterm.
16 A moment ago you referred to the Red Cross coming to the
17 Crisis Staff asking for assistance in terms of food, medicine, and oil.
18 This decision summarised here reflects the Crisis Staff's control over
19 the manner in which people are released from this facility where you
20 acknowledge people were held in a very sad state. Isn't that right?
21 A. In this question of yours, there are several assertions, several
22 sub-questions, if you will, but I will try to answer as clear as
23 possible. First of all, to the best of my knowledge, then and now, as
24 far as Omarska and Keraterm are concerned, it was the police that was in
25 charge. As for Trnopolje, it was the army who was in charge. How come,
1 I do not know. I cannot explain.
2 Secondly, the Crisis Staff is a collective body. There were
3 11 of us there. I explained to you a moment ago when I said that I was
4 not present every time, because we would work one day and then I'd go
5 home and then I'd come again, and if you look at the decisions of the
6 Crisis Staff, you will see that only about 30 per cent were signed by me.
7 So even if I was absent, it was enough to have six members there to pass
8 a decision, out of the total of 11. This word "conclusion," that's not
9 an order. We could not issue orders to the army or to the police in
10 terms of what they would do there.
11 Now, this is some kind of opinion on my part. Sometimes, people
12 on the basis of certain interventions -- well, I know of
13 Dr. Beglerbegovic, I didn't even know that he had been arrested and it
14 just says that he released from Omarska because the people got together
15 and signed a petition for him to be released. And then I know about a
16 former football player from Partizan, they called the chief of SUP and
17 then he was released too. And so on.
18 To the best of my knowledge, it was the local Red Cross that
19 operated there and then later on the International Red Cross became
20 involved too. And they turned to us for this kind of logistical support
21 as I said a moment ago. I don't know what else I could really tell you
22 about this.
23 Q. Well, Dr. Stakic, you are insisting - and you've done that
24 several times, that you -- these facilities were not operated by the
25 Crisis Staff, Trnopolje was operated by the army, and that you couldn't
1 issue orders to them. But this conclusion reflects the understanding of
2 the Crisis Staff members at the time, that they had the power to forbid
3 the individual release of persons from Trnopolje, Omarska, and Keraterm;
5 A. Throughout all that time, and again I'm telling you that I could
6 not issue any orders to Mr. Drljaca to release somebody or to keep him
7 there. I claim that with full responsibility. I could have written an
8 order a day, but none of those orders would have been binding on anybody.
9 MS. GUSTAFSON: Do Your Honours wish to take the break now?
10 JUDGE KWON: Yes. Given the circumstances, the Chamber is minded
11 to reduce the lunch break to 40 minutes. We resume at 10 past 1.00.
12 --- Recess taken at 12.32 p.m.
13 [The witness stands down]
14 [The witness takes the stand]
15 --- On resuming at 1.12 p.m.
16 JUDGE KWON: Yes. Please continue, Ms. Gustafson.
17 MS. GUSTAFSON: Thank you, Your Honours.
18 And if I could have P2741, please.
19 Q. Dr. Stakic, this is a 2nd of June, 1992, Prijedor Crisis Staff
20 decision on the release of imprisoned persons. It orders the release of
21 various categories of persons, such as Serbs who have been imprisoned by
22 mistake, under Article 1; Article 4, all persons older than 60 for whom
23 an investigation has confirmed that they did not commit an offence, and a
24 few other categories. And in the last article which is on the next page
25 in the English it says that the public security station is in charge
1 implementing this decision, and the chief of SJB is personally
2 responsible for it. Now this -- if we go to the bottom of the page in
3 the B/C/S, this document is signed by you; correct?
4 A. Yes, this is my signature.
5 Q. Now, just before the break you said:
6 "I'm telling you that I could not issue any orders to Drljaca to
7 release somebody or keep him there."
8 That was at page 44. But this document demonstrates you doing
9 exactly that, you're ordering Drljaca to release certain categories of
10 prisoners; right?
11 A. Well, if you will allow me, this is what I wanted to say when
12 answering your previous question. Unfortunately, I was not the one who
13 established the Crisis Staff or the decided on its composition. However,
14 what I realised during my trial in 2002, the secretary of the
15 Municipal Assembly was not a member of that Crisis Staff. He was a
16 lawyer. When I saw that ten years later during my trial and now 20 years
17 later, I can see that some of the things were established without any
18 foundation in the prevalent law and that's how things were drafted.
19 Mr. Drljaca was a lawyer and he worked for the police. I didn't even
20 know that there were detained Serbs there. It was only when we received
21 that information from him that I learned it, that some of them were army
22 and police members as is written here, and they had not responded to the
23 mobilisation call.
24 And in keeping with that, our position was that they should not
25 be there. We wanted to avoid any problems in that centre. And it's a
1 fact. However, this is a decision, not an order. He could implement it
2 or not. As I have already told you, we had other examples of people who
3 were moving out after having moved into an apartment illegally. That's
4 when we sought assistance of the police. But it was not an order. It
5 was just a request on our part to seek the help of the police when it
6 came to moving those people out. And when you asked me just a while ago
7 about certain individuals, it did happen, you know, that individuals
8 would go to those centres and they would take people away for their own
9 personal gain in order to extort money from them --
10 Q. Dr. Stakic --
11 A. -- and even sadder than that --
12 Q. I'm sorry to interrupt you, I'm really not asking you about the
13 reasons why you issued this decision. Just the fact that it was issued,
14 and if you could really try to focus on my specific questions because of
15 my time limitations.
16 Now, you said in your answer:
17 "It was just a request on our part to seek the help of the
19 Now, this decision, as you can see in Article 6, states that the
20 public security station "shall be in charge of the implementation of this
21 decision and the chief of the public security station shall be deemed
22 personally responsible for it ..."
23 This is not phrased as a request, is it? This is phrased in
24 mandatory terms; right?
25 A. I'm not a lawyer, Madam, as you know. But when I look at the
1 title, it says "a decision," not "an order." And as far as I knew then
2 and now, Simo Drljaca was the person who was responsible. He behaved the
3 way he did, he reported to his superiors as to what he was doing. He did
4 not have to inform us. There are other decisions of ours and our
5 requests to which he responded. Most often he would tell us: Do your
6 job. Don't interfere with mine, gentlemen.
7 MS. GUSTAFSON: If we could go to P2637, please.
8 Q. Now, as you can see, this is a 1st of July, 1992, SJB document
9 sent to the Crisis Staff. And the reference -- it refers to two, what it
10 says "your documents," presumably Crisis Staff documents. And it states:
11 "In reference to your documents of the above numbers and dates,
12 we hereby inform you that ..."
13 And the first entry states that:
14 "Conclusion number 02-111-108/92, by which the release of
15 prisoners is prohibited is being fully observed."
16 Now this reflects, does it not, Mr. Drljaca's implementation of a
17 Crisis Staff decision prohibiting the release of prisoners and his report
18 back to the Crisis Staff to that effect?
19 A. I would like to repeat once again -- or, rather, you didn't allow
20 me to finish a minute ago. When it comes to those individuals, what we
21 meant was that those people, Serbs, if I may call them criminals, they
22 would go to those centres, they would take away individuals from there
23 for their own personal gain. They would extort cars from them and money.
24 And the saddest thing of all is that they would not return them. They
25 would kill them. That was our objection. It was not that we were
1 interfering with their work, that they were not allowed to release
3 And then if you'll allow me, look at the last conclusion with
4 regard to the establishment of the infamous intervention platoon.
5 Together with the military police they --
6 THE INTERPRETER: Mr. Stakic is reading too fast.
7 JUDGE KWON: [Overlapping speakers] ...
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Let me tell you immediately --
9 JUDGE KWON: Could you repeat. Together with the --
10 THE ACCUSED: Next page in English, please.
11 MS. GUSTAFSON: Yes, if we could go to the next page in the
12 English, to the top of the page. I think that's what Dr. Stakic is
13 referring to now.
14 Q. Dr. Stakic, I'm not sure what you're referring to --
15 A. [Overlapping speakers] ...
16 Q. I apologise for interrupting. I am not sure what paper you have
17 now in front of you, but if I could ask you to focus on the document
18 that's on the screen and answer the question -- answer the questions
19 relating to that document.
20 A. I'm looking at the same document, madam. In the Serbian version
21 the paragraph is at the bottom of the page, and it's about the order
22 dated 17 June, whereby Mr. Drljaca answers that an integrated
23 intervention platoon was established. And I claim with full
24 responsibility that I never learnt about its establishment. I was never
25 informed about that at all.
1 Q. Well, Dr. Stakic, this document is directed to the Crisis Staff,
2 and it states clearly that that intervention platoon was formed and gives
3 information on what it has been doing. Are you saying that you never
4 received this document that was addressed to the Crisis Staff?
5 A. No, I never said that I did not receive the document. I am
6 saying -- and I have something that you probably have as well. This is
7 an order by the Crisis Staff on the establishment of that intervention
8 platoon. The number is D2039. And another P0048598. This is the
9 original decision of the Crisis Staff. I don't know whether you are able
10 to broadcast the document.
11 Q. I'm not interested in that document at the moment, Dr. Stakic.
12 Let me ask you this: In your statement at paragraph 21, you said that
13 the Crisis Staff could not give orders either to the army or the police.
14 And at paragraph 24, you said that Drljaca's most frequent answer to you
15 and others in the Crisis Staff was to leave him alone to do his job and
16 that you do yours. And you've repeated that sentiment today.
17 This document paints a very different picture. It reflects the
18 SJB reporting directly to the Crisis Staff on the implementation of a
19 number of Crisis Staff decisions, such as the release of prisoners, the
20 intervention platoons, closing catering establishments, prohibitions on
21 shooting. This document is -- contradicts your position on the
22 Crisis Staff authority over the police, doesn't it?
23 A. With all due respect, I don't agree with that assertion. And I
24 am trying to ask you to read this document to see what was asked from
25 Mr. Drljaca, and then you look at his answer and you will see that his
1 answer is completely different. Answers to a different question -- or,
2 rather, his answer is not truthful. This is what I'm saying.
3 As MPs in the Assembly and the Crisis Staff was just a -- the
4 continuation of the Assembly. It was a small-scale Assembly, if I may
5 put it that way, and the chief of the public security station once a year
6 submitted a report to the Assembly about the security situation in the
7 municipality. Since the Assembly MPs asked me to ask Simo Drljaca to
8 write that report, he did it. But what I'm saying is that what he wrote
9 was one thing and his actions were different. It was requested from him
10 to establish a platoon composed of 20 members of the police and
11 20 members of the army. Look at his report. He did not establish a
12 mixed platoon. He claims that he has an intervention platoon which
13 co-operates with the army. And it's an entirely different thing. And
14 this is what I'm trying to say to you.
15 Once again, as far as I know, in Bosanska Krupa and in Samac, the
16 military and the police arrested the president of the municipality and
17 president of the Executive Board, and I have no information to the
18 contrary; i.e., that the president of the municipality arrested the chief
19 of the police or the commander of the -- of a unit. It was absolutely
20 impossible according to our legislation.
21 JUDGE KWON: Ms. Gustafson, this report from Drljaca about
22 prohibition of releasing prisoners is related to the conclusion we saw
23 earlier on today?
24 MS. GUSTAFSON: No, I think it's a different conclusion
25 related --
1 JUDGE KWON: Yes. Date is --
2 MS. GUSTAFSON: -- to the same subject.
3 JUDGE KWON: Date is different and the number is different.
4 MS. GUSTAFSON: Mm-hm. No, I was just addressing the witness's
5 claim that he couldn't issue any orders to Drljaca either to release or
6 detain prisoners, and both of these documents contradict that. But they
7 don't relate to the same decision. No, I agree.
8 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
9 MS. GUSTAFSON:
10 Q. Dr. Stakic, I'd like to go back to what you said in relation to
11 the Crisis Staff conclusion prohibiting the release of prisoners that's
12 reflected in this police document, and you said:
13 "When it comes to those individuals, what we meant was that these
14 people, Serbs, if I may call them criminals, they would go to those
15 centres, they would take away individuals from there for their own
16 personal gain. They would extort them -- or cars from them or money, and
17 the saddest thing of all was that they would not return them. They would
18 kill them. That was our objection. It was not that we were interfering
19 with their work, that they were not allowed to release prisoners."
20 That was at page 48.
21 So I take it that the Crisis Staff -- that you in the
22 Crisis Staff were aware at the time that people were going to centres
23 like Omarska, taking out prisoners, and killing them, yes?
24 A. We had information to that effect. And that was our attempt to
25 appeal to those people there to do their job. If those people -- those
1 wretched people were detained and if they were being interrogated as they
2 claimed, they shouldn't allow such things to happen. I'm sure that you
3 have a document because I've seen it during my trial. I had a report
4 from Simo Drljaca - not me, but the Assembly - in which he claimed that
5 only two individuals were killed in Omarska; i.e., not killed but died of
6 natural causes, you know. And he signed that report. It was an official
8 I wasn't there. I couldn't go there. I -- I did not have the
9 means to carry out my own investigation. What could I do at the moment
10 or what can I do now? I can just express my regret for not having
11 resigned. Eventually I did. I did resign and my resignation was adopted
12 in January 1993. That was one of the ways I expressed my
13 dissatisfaction. Maybe I should have done it earlier when I first
14 realised that there was nothing I could do to prevent all those things
15 from happening.
16 Q. So at paragraph 24 of your witness statement, when you -- where
17 you say that "at the time I knew about two natural deaths that occurred
18 at the Omarska centre but that is the only thing I know with regard to
19 Omarska," that's not really true, is it, because you're saying now that
20 you knew that people were -- Serbs were taking prisoners away and killing
21 them; right?
22 A. I can only repeat word for word what I have just stated. This is
23 what I received. I provided my statement based on what I received from
24 Mr. Drljaca as an official report about how many people died there, but
25 we knew that from Keraterm and Trnopolje - and Trnopolje was the least
1 protected of all - people would be taken away by armed individuals. I
2 don't know how many people were taken away. I don't know who did it.
3 But it did happen and this was our attempt to appeal to the police and to
4 the security over there not to allow those things.
5 Q. Now at paragraph 20 of your statement, you refer to the decision
6 on the organisation and work of Crisis Staff, which is P3536. And
7 Article 2 of that decision says that the Crisis Staff's responsibilities
8 included co-ordinating the protection of safety of people and property.
9 Now that accurately reflects the Crisis Staff's responsibilities towards
10 the safety and security of citizens of Prijedor; right?
11 A. Do you have that document from which you quoted? Can I see it?
12 I don't have any doubts that the way you quoted was correct, but I'd like
13 to see the document.
14 Q. Yes.
15 MS. GUSTAFSON: If we can go to P3536, please.
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] What was the article that you
18 MS. GUSTAFSON:
19 Q. It's Article 2, which refers to the Crisis Staff's responsibility
20 for, among other things, co-ordinating the protection of safety of people
21 and property. You agree that that was among the Crisis Staff's
23 A. You know what, madam? The Crisis Staff or the presidency -- and
24 the term "presidency" was reinstated. I don't know why the term
25 "Crisis Staff" was introduced in the first place or at least I don't
1 understand that. These are the remains of the communist system. At that
2 time, we couldn't change the documents based on which such bodies were
3 established. And within that system, the entire population was military.
4 We were all soldiers. We were all duty-bound to participate in the
5 country's defence. We -- and this is why things were drafted the way
6 they were. Without any clear instructions to the effect that the
7 Crisis Staff was subordinate to the police or the army. The term used
8 here is "co-ordination," but according to what I know, the Crisis Staff
9 was not subordinate -- superior to the police forces and certainly not
10 the military forces.
11 Q. Okay. At the beginning of your testimony, you stated at page 24:
12 "I also agree with the statement made by the Trial Chamber in
13 paragraph 616 of the trial judgement.
14 And that paragraph states that:
15 "The Trial Chamber does not believe that the conscious object of
16 Dr. Stakic's participation in the creation and maintenance of this
17 environment of impunity was to kill the non-Serb citizens of Prijedor
18 municipality. However, it is satisfied that Dr. Stakic, in his various
19 positions, acted in the knowledge that the existence of such an
20 environment would in all likelihood result in killings, and that he
21 reconciled himself to and made peace with this probable outcome. He
22 consequently participated with the requisite dolus eventualis and
23 therefore incurs criminal responsibility for all the killings in
24 paragraphs 44 and 47 of the indictment, which the Trial Chamber has found
25 to be proven."
1 So I take it from your agreement with this paragraph that you
2 were aware at the time that the environment in Prijedor was extremely --
3 an extremely dangerous one for the non-Serb population, an environment
4 which would in all likelihood result in killings of members of this
5 population; right?
6 A. I'm sorry. I don't know if it's in the trial transcript, but I
7 said I agree with the initial sentence, the first sentence. However,
8 where the Trial Chamber found that I was not aware that all non-Serbs
9 were being killed, I agree about that part. But I don't agree, as I said
10 before, with those passages in the judgement that say that I was a major
11 player and decision maker.
12 As for the knowledge I gained over the past 20 years in France
13 and the US, where I served my sentence, in those places a mayor can
14 appoint the local chief of police. That's very different from our
15 equivalent of mayor who had no competence over the army or the police.
16 And I also want to add, when I was 29 and had just graduated from
17 medical school, I was politically illiterate and I certainly had no
18 personal authority to achieve something like that; whereas the
19 regulations and the laws certainly didn't allow me to do that. As for
20 the killings, unfortunately I learned about them later when they had
21 already happened. And I can only say, once again, that I am sincerely
22 sorry for everything that had happened to my fellow citizens in that
23 period. And now looking back and thinking what could I have done, the
24 only answer I come up with is that I could have resigned. I could have
25 done that in July or August when I first found out about these events,
1 but I don't want to deny --
2 Q. I'm sorry to interrupt you, but your answer is moving away from
3 the question. My time is very limited and I would like to ask you to
4 please focus on my questions.
5 Earlier today you said:
6 "We did not plan this Trnopolje. Trnopolje, at least I did not
7 take part in that and I'm not aware of any such thing."
8 That's page 41. And at paragraph 23 of your statement you said:
9 "As far as investigation centres Keraterm and Omarska are
10 concerned, the Crisis Staff did not participate in the formation of these
12 But in fact, all three of these centres were formed according to
13 a decision of the civilian authorities in Prijedor; right?
14 A. I read that in the report by Mr. Drljaca where he claimed that
15 those centres had been established based on decisions of the
16 Crisis Staff. However, he never says which decisions, which date, which
17 numbers, where he -- whereas he had legal training. He could have given
18 references. Therefore, I stand by my earlier response, that I believe
19 the Crisis Staff did not establish these centres.
20 MS. GUSTAFSON: If we could go to 65 ter 40126, please.
21 JUDGE KWON: While we are waiting for the document, Ms. Gustafson
22 and Mr. Robinson, the document we saw in the -- by the number
23 Exhibit P2915, which is the summary of conclusions taken by the
24 Crisis Staff in the year of 1992, I note that it was admitted only for
25 the -- some limited purpose. It was admitted for the -- only as a source
1 document of Ms. Hanson. I think we can now admit it in full.
2 Any objection, Mr. Robinson?
3 MR. ROBINSON: No, Mr. President.
4 JUDGE KWON: Yes. We'll do so.
5 THE REGISTRAR: It receives Exhibit P6582, Your Honours -- no.
6 JUDGE KWON: No, it will be received, 2915, but it was fully
7 admitted, not only as a source document. Yes. Thank you.
8 MS. GUSTAFSON:
9 Q. And, Dr. Stakic, this is a transcript of a video-recorded
10 interview with you. And it states -- you state near the beginning that
11 you've been president of the Municipal Assembly for six or seven months,
12 which would put the timing of this interview sometime around late 1992.
13 Now, do you recall giving a video-recorded interview to an
14 English-speaking reporter who had a translator with him around this time,
15 late 1992?
16 A. There was more than one foreign reporter who came. I don't
17 remember all of them. I'm looking at this document now. It's very
18 possible, especially if it was recorded, that it was my interview.
19 Q. Okay.
20 MS. GUSTAFSON: If we could go to page 2 in both languages,
22 Q. And if I could direct your attention, Dr. Stakic, to about
23 two-thirds of the way down the page in your language. This is about
24 halfway down in English, where you're speaking and you state:
25 "These places, such as Omarska, Keraterm, and Trnopolje, were a
1 necessity in a given moment and were formed according to a decision of
2 the civilian authorities in Prijedor."
3 And the reporter asks you:
4 "So those three camps, or how are they ...?"
5 And then you interrupt and say:
6 "Reception centres."
7 The reporter says:
8 "... reception centres were formed according to the decision of
9 your civilian authorities?"
10 And you answer:
11 "Yes, yes."
12 Now, a moment ago when I put to you that you these centres were
13 established by the civilian authorities, you said you read that in
14 Drljaca's report. And in fact, this is what you stated at the time to
15 the reporter; right?
16 A. When I mentioned Drljaca's report a moment ago, he claimed that
17 it was the Crisis Staff that established them, not the civilian
18 authorities. As for this interview, I said there were military
19 authorities and civilian authorities. The army had its own military
20 police, military courts, military remand prisons; whereas the civilian
21 authorities, apart from the Municipal Assembly and the Executive Board,
22 they had the municipal court, the civilian police. All these were bodies
23 of civilian authorities, at least as I understand it.
24 Q. Well, when I asked you the question I said:
25 "These centres were formed according to a decision of the
1 civilian authorities in Prijedor; right?"
2 And you didn't say, "Yes, yes," like you said in this interview.
3 You said, "I read that in a report by Mr. Drljaca," and you went on to
4 deny the accuracy of that report; right?
5 A. What you just said, no, I did not answer that way. I don't know
6 how it was interpreted to you.
7 JUDGE KWON: So do you agree that those reception centres were
8 formed according to a decision of the civilian authorities in Prijedor?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I am trying to tell
10 you what I understood, what I understand by "civilian authorities,"
11 because there is a division where we live into military authorities and
12 civilian authorities. And I'm repeating: The military has its troops
13 for military intervention, military police, military courts, et cetera;
14 whereas the civilian authorities are the Municipal Assembly, the
15 Executive Board, the municipal court, the civilian prosecutor's office,
16 the civilian public defender, and the civilian police. And it is the
17 civilian police that opened these centres because the civilian police is
18 a part of the civilian authorities.
19 MS. GUSTAFSON: And if we could go to page 5 in the English and
20 page 6 in the B/C/S, please.
21 Q. And, Dr. Stakic, if I could direct your attention to a passage
22 approximately two-thirds of the way down the page, and roughly the same
23 place in the English, in fact. And this again is you speaking. You're
24 giving quite a long statement here. And about in the middle of it you
1 "Those of us who have lived here for centuries, I mean the Serbs
2 and the other peoples, I also mean the Muslims, who were created
3 artificially, who were against the Serbs in the previous two wars, while
4 the Serbs were on the side of the allies both times."
5 Now, this statement of yours that the Muslims were artificially
6 created, that's an offensive and discriminatory remark towards Muslims,
7 isn't it?
8 A. I am not a faultless man. I never said I was. I am not without
9 blame, and I'm not looking to wash myself of all that I've done here.
10 But you must take into account that this was wartime. There was
11 propaganda on both sides, and I probably stated something like this being
12 carried away. What I meant was that from the Ottoman Empire's time, in
13 our territory, the Muslims used to be Serbs who converted during Ottoman
14 times to the Muslim faith. I am sorry now for anyone whom I offended
15 with this statement, and nowadays I certainly would not allow myself to
16 say something ugly like that.
17 Q. So you said it was ugly. You agree it's discriminatory and
18 offensive; right?
19 A. Well, if you put it like that, it could be offensive. But please
20 look at some other passages in this text where I said that our objective
21 is to work for peace and --
22 Q. Dr. Stakic --
23 A. -- after the establishing of peace, we will continue to live
25 Q. I am not asking you about other passages. I'm asking you about
1 this passage. You agree that this is offensive and discriminatory
2 towards Muslims?
3 A. Now I really don't know anymore what you want from me. I told
4 you it was a mistake that I said this, and I'm really sorry about it and
5 I agree with you that it sounds offensive. But please, just in order not
6 to take it all out of context, you could quote some other things that I
8 MS. GUSTAFSON: Could we go to page 7 of the English and page 9
9 of the B/C/S, please.
10 Q. And this is right at the top of the page in the B/C/S and the
11 middle of the page in the English. You're being asked about the Muslims
12 who used to live in Kozarac. And you say:
13 "Well, Trnopolje was mainly filled with Muslims from Kozarac. A
14 good part of those extremists were from Kozarac and they went to
15 Trnopolje. The 1500 and some men who were moved with the help of the
16 International Red Cross to Karlovac were mostly from Kozarac."
17 And then a few lines down you say:
18 "The rest, because their family homes had been destroyed, were
19 accommodated either in the territory of Prijedor municipality or went,
20 were transferred to ... some did go to Central Bosnia ... those who
21 expressed this wish. We organised buses and a train for them, and this
22 was for free, just that they go, so that there should be no casualties,
23 that that genocide that we have already been blamed for in Europe should
24 not occur."
25 Now, when you said you organised buses and trains for Muslims
1 from Trnopolje to transport them to Central Bosnia, are you referring to
2 the municipal authorities? When you say "we organised buses and trains,"
3 is that something the municipal authorities did?
4 A. No, ma'am. That's not what I meant then and I don't mean it now.
5 I meant the Red Cross that was there and organised it, and we just
6 provided assistance at their request in transport and fuel.
7 Q. So you provided the buses, the trains, and the fuel, the
8 municipal authorities?
9 A. No. You must understand one thing: Under the Law On
10 All People's Defence, the army and the police are entitled to commandeer
11 all means of transport, all the vehicles from all businesses, including
12 bus companies and railway companies. They have the right to commandeer
13 vehicles or trains or take over one entire enterprise, one entire company
14 under that law. I'm telling you, it's not us who organised that. I'm
15 telling you that the Red Cross approached us to provide fuel. They
16 usually approached the Executive Board or perhaps the Crisis Staff, and
17 we tried to accommodate them because they had already agreed with the
18 ICRC, that's the way they explained it, they had agreed all the routes,
19 et cetera, and we just had to provide assistance in that one aspect.
20 JUDGE KWON: By the way, have we assigned an exhibit number for
21 this witness's Rule 92 ter statement?
22 MR. ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. President. It was done as part of the
23 associated exhibits package that was given to us, and it's D4195.
24 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
25 MS. GUSTAFSON:
1 Q. And, Dr. Stakic, you said you did this, you organised the
2 transport so that there should be no casualties and in order to avoid a
3 genocide. You are acknowledging here that the non-Serb population risked
4 their lives by staying in Prijedor, weren't you?
5 A. You mentioned genocide and you didn't finish the sentence:
6 "... genocide for which we have already been blamed in Europe."
7 I'm telling you again I have information now, from reading
8 materials during my own trial, showing that certain groups of these
9 extremists had been captured around Kozara in the hills of Kurevo in 1994
10 and even 1995. But Serbs, either soldiers or policemen, raided those
11 areas, and on their own initiative, in addition to the regular police and
12 army operations, they searched the houses of those people, looted, took
13 their property --
14 Q. Dr. Stakic --
15 A. -- and we had no means of protecting --
16 Q. I'm sorry to interrupt you, but you're not answering my question.
17 You're talking about events in 1994 and 1995. This interview was around
18 late 1992, and you're talking about the Muslims from Kozarac. And you
20 "We organised buses and trains for them, just so that they go, so
21 that there should be no casualties, that that genocide that we have
22 already been blamed for in Europe should not occur."
23 Now, those are your words, and by those words you are
24 acknowledging that the non-Serbs who stayed in Prijedor did so at risk of
25 their lives; right?
1 A. I can only repeat once again, it's not us who organised it. It's
2 the Red Cross. I agree with you insofar as you say that in that period
3 it was very risky to live in Prijedor, for all the citizens, and it was
4 especially risky for Muslims.
5 I must add that it is regrettable they had to leave. But from a
6 humane point of view, I still believe that they were better off, those
7 who left and had a chance to return, than those who were killed. I'm not
8 saying it was a good thing they had to go. It was a humiliation. But as
9 our people say, as long as you live, you have a chance to start anew and
10 rebuild your life.
11 MS. GUSTAFSON: If we could go to page 8 of the English and
12 page 10 of the B/C/S, please.
13 Q. And this is right near the top of the page in your language.
14 It's near the middle of the page in the English. And you're being asked
15 to respond to Western press allegations about ethnic cleansing. And in
16 the course of your answer, you said:
17 "I have already said at the beginning that most of them are
18 leaving now partly for political reasons, but more for economic reasons.
19 Because we are currently all endangered here. I once had a salary
20 equivalent to 1.000 German marks. Now, as the mayor, I have 60 marks,
21 and I am a subtenant, and my wife is unemployed, and so on ... so that
22 these ... not only the Muslims are endangered here."
23 Now at this point in time you have acknowledged that you knew
24 that there had been at least two massacres of Muslims in Prijedor, one at
25 Keraterm and one at Koricanske Stijene. You've acknowledged earlier
1 today that you knew non-Serbs were being taken out of camps and murdered.
2 And a moment ago you explained that it was an especially risky
3 environment for Muslims. Now comparing the situation of Muslims in
4 Prijedor to your own, your reduction in salary, your status as a
5 subtenant, and your wife's employment status, and saying that "we are all
6 endangered here," that is a deeply misleading and cynical comment of
7 yours, isn't it?
8 A. I am going to try to continue believing that you mean well and
9 that you are seriously trying to understand the way I saw the situation
10 and that I was not cynical or sarcastic. Maybe this was inappropriate,
11 this comparison of salaries. You call me "mayor," although that's not a
12 proper translation. I was the president of the local Assembly, and I
13 would appreciate it if you would stop interpreting it that way.
14 When I was going to work and coming back, I had to keep a
15 document on me, a document issued by the Secretariat for
16 National Defence, regarding work obligation. Without that document, any
17 policeman, civilian or military, could have arrested me and sent me
18 directly to the front. I had no time to say at all in this interview,
19 but I want to tell you that several times I was intercepted by armed
20 members of the Serbian police or army who had bloodshot eyes, maybe from
21 drinking, I don't know, they would put a gun barrel through the windows
22 of my car and say, "You keep driving around town here, having fun, while
23 I have to fight," and it would all end in their trying to wheedle out
24 some drink or cigarettes from me. I couldn't even report them. I didn't
25 know their names. They did not have badges with names. They did not
1 have anything on their uniforms. I could not identified them. I tried
2 to report them but that's always the answer I got: If you don't know
3 their names, then we can't do anything. Maybe this reference to my
4 salary was not a good idea, but I did not ...
5 Q. Dr. Stakic, you said in your answer:
6 "I had no time to say it all in this interview ..."
7 Are you seriously contending that you failed to mention the fact
8 that Muslims had been massacred by the police and the army in Prijedor in
9 1992, that they had been taken out of camps and killed because you didn't
10 have enough time?
11 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May I ask for a reference? Where
12 was it established that this was done by the army and the police? The
13 man said nicely that individuals were taking out people.
14 MS. GUSTAFSON: I was referring to the two massacres in the
15 statements that were committed by the army and the police.
16 JUDGE KWON: Do you remember the question, Mr. Stakic? Can you
17 answer the question?
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I do apologise. Could the question
19 please be repeated for me now.
20 MS. GUSTAFSON:
21 Q. Certainly. Dr. Stakic, in your earlier answer you said:
22 "I had no time to say at all in this interview ..."
23 And my question was: Are you seriously contending that that you
24 failed to mention the fact that Muslims had been massacred by the police
25 and army in Prijedor in 1992 and that they had been taken out of camps
1 and killed because you didn't have enough time?
2 A. Madam, distinguished Prosecutor, I know that you were trained for
3 this, and I am not an expert so I cannot judge how you're doing your job.
4 I think you're doing it well. But you asked me about 60 marks and asked
5 about the tenants. And I said here, in response to this journalist's
6 concrete question, I could not tell him about all the things that I had
7 experienced. That I did not feel safe. My life was not safe either. It
8 wasn't only the Muslims. I'm not saying and I'm not trying to say that
9 they were not more imperilled, but if you have that in the interview do
10 find it and see what it was that I answered in respect of massacres. I
11 am not trying to deny that. I'm not trying to diminish it. Really.
12 Could you please -- well, I tried to answer the journalist's questions.
13 MS. GUSTAFSON: I tender this interview, please.
14 JUDGE KWON: Yes. We'll receive it.
15 THE REGISTRAR: It receives Exhibit Number P6582, Your Honours.
16 MS. GUSTAFSON: And if we could go to 65 ter 40633, please.
17 Q. And, Dr. Stakic, this is a transcript of another video-recorded
18 interview of you around the same time, January 1993, with a foreign
19 journalist, where you are being asked primarily about the Geneva plan.
20 MS. GUSTAFSON: And if we could go to page 2 of this document in
21 both languages. This is at the top of the page.
22 Q. Where you're speaking, it says MS. And you're talking about the
23 plan agreed to in Geneva, and you say:
24 "And third, European monitors should come to the field to
25 determine the factual state of affairs, so they don't make maps,
1 projections, and constitutions based on the propaganda from Vatican and
2 Tehran. One needs to come to Prijedor, see who lives here, who works,
3 what they do, what their activities are, go to Krupa on Una, to Novi, to
4 Sanski Most. I am talking about cities that are of interest here. To
5 determine, to determine, to see what the situation really is, who lives
6 here, and what they are doing. Then they should go away, take a week,
7 and draw new maps."
8 Now, here you are promoting the division of territory based on
9 the factual situation on the ground at the time, based on who is actually
10 living in Prijedor, Sanski Most, Bosanski Novi, Krupa, and this would, of
11 course, favour the Serbs given the drastic reduction in the Muslim and
12 Croat population in these areas since the start of the war; right?
13 A. With all due respect, I don't think -- I don't agree with you on
14 this interpretation. First of all, as you can see, I'm supporting that
15 agreement in Geneva; that is to say, that people accepted to talk in the
16 first place. Which would mean that the war could be brought to an end by
17 way of talks. Also, I do not mention in any way that Muslims and Croats
18 should not live there. And finally, I don't know what year this was,
19 this Geneva Agreement, but finally there was the Dayton Agreement. And
20 it did bring about this final delineation into two entities. However, it
21 did not say that only Serbs should live in the Serb entity; rather, the
22 Muslims and Croats and everybody else should live there too.
23 Q. This is January 1993, and in January 1993, Dr. Stakic, there were
24 very few Muslims and Croats in Prijedor and the other places you mention
25 here, Krupa, Novi, Sanski Most; right?
1 A. I don't know how many there were, but I did not say -- it's not
2 written here anywhere that they should come and take that situation and
3 that the people who had been expelled from there should not be allowed to
4 return. I just welcomed and I wished that that agreement had been signed
5 in 1993. As far as I know, the Serb side was in favour of that and not
6 everybody was satisfied. To this day, not everybody is satisfied with
7 the Dayton Agreement, but it is my profound belief that it is better.
8 Any peace agreement is better than war.
9 Also, in 1996, I had the opportunity of taking part in its
10 implementation, especially paragraph 7, concerning the return of
11 displaced persons to their properties. So if there was a delineation,
12 and I said that I agree with the Geneva Agreement, that there should be a
13 delineation, I did not say that a territory should be cleansed of a
14 particular people.
15 Q. And you keep saying that you're just supporting the agreement in
16 Geneva, but you're taking issue with maps based on propaganda from the
17 Vatican and Tehran and you're asserting that those maps should be drawn
18 on the factual situation based on who was living in these places now;
19 right? You're making claims about the how the territory should be
21 A. I don't see that it is written there now on the basis of the
22 factual situation. Sorry, I really don't see that, at least not in the
23 Serbian version. I'm saying that I agree that there should be this
24 delineation and that all people should have the right to live at their
25 homes, regardless of whether they are on this or that side of the line.
1 And now I touched upon propaganda. It was coming from Belgrade,
2 Sarajevo, Zagreb. Perhaps I went a bit too far there. After all, I was
3 not in Dayton. But regarding what I learned, it's been almost 20 years
4 now since Dayton. These maps were agreed upon and changed and altered.
5 And finally when they were established, believe me, not a single side was
6 fully satisfied with them. They all have their objections with regard to
8 MS. GUSTAFSON: If we could go to page 4 in both languages,
9 please. And this is near the middle of the page in English and about
10 halfway down as well as in the B/C/S.
11 Q. So again, this is a lengthy passage where you're speaking,
12 Dr. Stakic, and you say in the second line of that long answer you say:
13 "Islam, i.e., jihad has won because a great number of Muslims
14 from this region emigrated and went to Germany, i.e., the whole of
15 Europe. Why do I mention this? Because all these Muslims from this
16 region could have chosen to go to Zenica, Sarajevo, Travnik or
17 Western Europe. They chose Western Europe and they wouldn't leave here.
18 They wouldn't even hear Zenica mentioned or Travnik. They wouldn't even
19 go to Croatia. They know they are not welcome there. On the contrary,
20 they go to Europe, for economic reasons and the reasons preached to them
21 by jihad."
22 Now, again, Dr. Stakic, you knew at this point in time that
23 Muslims had been massacred, that they had been taken out of camps and
24 killed, and that this was an especially risky environment for non-Serbs.
25 But you don't say any of this. You claim that Muslims left Prijedor
1 during 1992 for economic reasons and the reasons preached to them by
2 jihad. Again, you were trying to mislead this journalist about the real
3 reasons for the Muslims leaving Prijedor; right?
4 A. With all due respect, I do not fully agree with your assertion.
5 It is a fact that crimes were committed. It is a fact that they were
6 expelled from their homes and thereby compelled to leave the area.
7 However, you can find these documents that I'm aware of. I didn't bring
8 them here because I didn't know about that. During my trial, at one
9 point, either just when Trnopolje was being closed or after it had been
10 closed, a new wave of civilians, Muslim civilians came to Trnopolje
11 because they saw their chance there of leaving Prijedor. I agree with
12 that part, that most of them left out of fear and so on and so forth, but
13 what I'm saying here, where they were going and where they wanted to go,
14 of course they wanted to go to Europe where there was no war rather than
15 Croatia and Bosnia. Bosnia, the part under the control of the Croat
16 forces, and they would be drafted into their army and they would have to
17 fight there. And life was miserable there, too. And when I say jihad,
18 Islam, that should not be equated.
19 Part of them - how do I put this? - are extremists, like in any
20 nation, and they obviously tried to profit from all of that, too. And I
21 know from the experience of people who came to see me, and they were
22 asking about -- about what was going on in either places. And from
23 Bosanski Novi, a group of Muslims left in co-operation with the UNHCR.
24 They were in Croatia at the time, Dvor na Uni - do you know the geography
25 there? It's on the Una river - and through Croatia they went to Western
1 Europe. And then a delegation came to see me, and they asked me how I
2 could bring them into touch with these representatives of the UNHCR so
3 that they do not go in the organisation of the Red Cross and others
4 towards Zenica and Travnik. I am telling you about all of this from my
5 very own experience.
6 Q. Dr. Stakic, in your answer you said, "It is a fact that they were
7 expelled from their homes and thereby compelled to leave the area." And
8 you said, "I agree with that part that most of them left out of fear and
9 so on and so forth ..."
10 So when you said at paragraph 26 of your statement that "the main
11 reason for moving out was the constant fighting, the lack of electric
12 power, water, and basic food provisions," that's not true, is it, because
13 you're acknowledging here that most of them left out of fear, that people
14 were expelled and compelled to leave the area; right?
15 A. I -- even when I talked to the gentlemen from Mr. Karadzic's
16 Defence, you know, we had this extensive discussion and then they would
17 summarise my answer into a few sentences. I am not saying that they
18 wrote anything that is not true, but they summarised. You see the next
19 sentence here, "The war was no longer near the municipality. It was in
20 the territory of the municipality itself." The very fact that there is a
21 war going on. You know that. Who is safe in a war? Not to mention now
22 what is going on in Syria. Somebody is rooting for one side and others
23 are rooting for the other side, but it is civilians who are falling
24 victim on both sides and from both sides. But in addition to that, there
25 were economic reasons, a lack of electricity, water, food, and so on and
1 so forth. But as I already mentioned, war was no longer only in the
2 vicinity, in Krupa, in Croatia, and so on, but it was right there in
4 JUDGE MORRISON: Ms. Gustafson, this is simply my view. It
5 occurred to me that if I was a person who had just come into the public
6 gallery and listened to a good percentage of the questions, one might be
7 mistaken that Dr. Stakic was the person who was on trial rather than
8 Dr. Karadzic. I don't make this as a criticism of you, but I make it as
9 an observation as to how much of this is really useful to the issues that
10 are before the Trial Chamber.
11 MS. GUSTAFSON: Well, Your Honours, I would respond with two
12 points. Firstly, I think a lot of this goes to credibility. The second
13 point would be that, in the indictment -- I mean, Dr. Stakic plays a role
14 in the indictment either as a tool or as a member of the JCE. He's
15 obviously connected to Dr. Karadzic through his position, and I would
16 leave it at that. I'm about to move on to another topic in any event.
17 JUDGE MORRISON: It's much easier to observe a cross-examination
18 than it is to do one. I've been in that position many a time myself in
19 the past. But it seems to me that the two issues that you raise, that of
20 credibility and joint enterprise, could be dealt with in a much smaller
22 MS. GUSTAFSON: Thank you, Your Honour.
23 Q. Dr. Stakic, at paragraph 14 you said that the Prijedor municipal
24 authorities had no contact or communication with the Pale authorities
25 until the corridor breakthrough. And I'd like you to clarify when this
1 communication blockade began according to you.
2 A. I cannot say what the date was exactly, but it was sometime in
3 the month of May, when the joint forces of the Croats and Muslims severed
4 the road going from Banja Luka to Bijeljina and thereby to the Republic
5 of Serbia. I really do apologise. I cannot tell you what the exact date
6 would be, but I think it was the month of May. And then up until the end
7 of June, the beginning of July, to the best of my knowledge, when the
8 Army of Republika Srpska managed to liberate the road or the corridor, as
9 they called it, thereby -- I mean, in my view and to the best of my
10 knowledge, telephone lines were reestablished because we could speak to
11 Belgrade. And also, the power supply was somewhat improved. Also,
12 vehicles started moving along and --
13 Q. Dr. Stakic --
14 A. -- I said there that we, the municipal authorities, did not have
15 any communication, that I did not have any communication. Because the
16 paragraph says further on whether the police and the army were able to
17 communicate, I really do not know.
18 Q. I thank you. And again, I'd like to ask you to please focus to
19 the precise question I asked.
20 MS. GUSTAFSON: If we could go to P3537, please.
21 MR. ROBINSON: Mr. President, with respect to 65 ter 40633, the
22 interview, is that going to be tendered?
23 MS. GUSTAFSON: Sorry, yes, I do tender that, the first -- the
24 part of the interview that relates to Dr. Stakic. I think it's the first
25 four pages in both languages.
1 MR. ROBINSON: No objection.
2 JUDGE KWON: Yes, we will receive it.
3 THE REGISTRAR: It receives Exhibit P6583, Your Honours.
4 JUDGE KWON: The first part, not including Penny Marshall part.
5 MR. ROBINSON: That's correct, the first four pages which -- yes.
6 JUDGE KWON: What -- are we admitting only -- the only page that
7 was shown to the witness? Four pages.
8 MR. ROBINSON: I think there were multiple pages shown to the
9 witness but --
10 JUDGE KWON: Oh, yes.
11 MR. ROBINSON: -- there's only four pages in which he's being
12 interviewed and then the next two pages of the English transcript
13 involves someone else's interview.
14 JUDGE KWON: Very well. As in the previous case, we will admit
15 them all. Let's continue.
16 Q. Dr. Stakic, this is in 22nd of May, 1992, Prijedor Crisis Staff
17 decision on mobilisation, and you can see in the preamble it says:
18 "Pursuant to the decision of the Serbian Republic of Bosnia and
19 Herzegovina about the general public mobilisation of forces and materiel
20 in the republic."
21 And indeed, the Chamber has received in evidence a Presidency
22 mobilisation decision from the 20th of May; that's P3919. So I take it
23 that whatever communication difficulties you had, you did receive the
24 republic level decision on mobilisation as indicated in this decision;
25 right? On the -- in May 1992.
1 A. Honoured Prosecutor, to the best of my recollection, general
2 mobilisation -- well, if I'm not talking about the one at the level of
3 the former Yugoslavia that was in 1991. General mobilisation was
4 declared by the Republika Srpska or the Serb Republic of
5 Bosnia-Herzegovina, whatever it was called, in the month of April, if I'm
6 not mistaken. And we are just invoking that decision. As I said a
7 moment ago, we could not forbid anything. We are appealing to the
8 citizenry to respond to this decision that had already been made at a
9 higher level and that is compulsory for all citizens, of course.
10 MS. GUSTAFSON: If we could go to P3919, please.
11 JUDGE KWON: Before we see that document, can we go into private
12 session briefly. Yes. We can upload the document in the meantime.
13 [Private session]
11 Page 45275 redacted. Private session.
7 [Open session]
8 THE REGISTRAR: We are in open session, Your Honours.
9 MS. GUSTAFSON:
10 Q. And, Dr. Stakic, here you can see the decision issued by
11 Dr. Karadzic as president of the Presidency on general public
12 mobilisation of forces and resources in the republic, dated the
13 20th of May, 1992. A moment ago, you said that to the best of your
14 recollection, the general mobilisation was declared by the
15 Republika Srpska in the month of April.
16 Now, does this remind you of the general mobilisation decision
17 issued by the Presidency just two days before the Prijedor Crisis Staff
18 issued its mobilisation decision?
19 A. I don't remember having seen this decision at all. And there is
20 no reason to have this sent to me, as president of the
21 Municipal Assembly. I really do not recall having seen this.
22 MS. GUSTAFSON: Now, if we can go back to P3537.
23 Q. In your statement at paragraph 39, in discussing adjudicated
24 fact 1029, you state that the Prijedor Crisis Staff met for the first
25 time on the 29th of May, 1992, and you repeated that claim today in your
2 Now, if you could look again at the preamble of this
3 22nd of May Crisis Staff decision, it states that this decision was
4 reached at the meeting held on the 22nd of May. So in fact, the
5 Prijedor Crisis Staff did meet before the 29th of May, didn't it?
6 A. Can this be moved a bit up? It does say the Crisis Staff here,
7 and the date is 22nd May. However, earlier I claimed that there were no
8 sessions before the 29th of May. Why did I claim that? If you look at
9 the minutes of the Assembly sessions that were recorded from July or
10 August 1992, where all the decisions of the Crisis Staff were adopted,
11 and those decisions were made between 22 May and 17 July. So this may be
12 a mistake. Maybe it was the Council for National Defence, and maybe it
13 was mistyped as the Crisis Staff. This is just my assumption.
14 You know that if this was a Crisis Staff meeting, then this
15 decision would have made it to all the collective decisions of the
16 Crisis Staff. There would have been a document containing all the
17 decisions of the Crisis Staff including this one.
18 MS. GUSTAFSON: If we could go to 65 ter 10949, please.
19 Q. And, Dr. Stakic, this again is from the 25th of September, 1992,
20 issue of "Kozarski Vjesnik," and the article I'd like to direct you to is
21 the one in the middle and of the top of the page, "Milicija nije vojska,"
22 and the article describes a meeting held on the 18th of September, 1992,
23 with policemen who had returned from Han Pijesak with the municipal
24 authorities, including you. Now, without getting into the details of
25 that meeting at the moment, do you remember holding this meeting with the
1 policemen who had returned from Han Pijesak around this time,
2 mid-September 1992, to address a series of demands that they were making?
3 A. I don't remember the date but I do remember the meeting. It
4 happened before, soldiers or police members would deflect [as
5 interpreted] from the front line, but this was a bigger group which is
6 why I remembered this event. I don't know if it was an entire unit, but
7 it was a large group in any case, which is why I remember the event.
8 Q. Okay. And if I could direct your attention to the very bottom of
9 the left-hand column of this article. And this is at the very bottom --
10 it starts at the very bottom of the page in the English and moves onto
11 the next page, and it says -- it's referring to the sixth demand of the
12 police members. It says:
13 "In their sixth demand," and if we could turn the page in the
14 English, "the policemen wanted to know why the prisoners from Keraterm,
15 Omarska and Trnopolje had been released. Stakic indicated the two key
16 reasons which had motivated the government in Pale to make such a
17 decision: Pressure from international public opinion and official
18 policy, and the steep cost of maintaining the prisons."
19 Now it's correct, is it not, as this article indicates, that the
20 decision to close down Omarska and Keraterm was made by the government in
21 Pale, yes?
22 A. I did not see this decision, but I did see and I heard that a
23 decision was made by the Ministry of the Interior to close them down.
24 Simo Drljaca kept on repeating that he couldn't do that and that he
25 received promises from the army that they would open another prison or a
1 reception centre, as they were called, so a prison was opened in Manjaca.
2 And as a result of that, there were no longer reasons to keep the other
3 two open and to keep the people there. Those who were found to be guilty
4 of war crimes could be transferred to Manjaca and the others were
5 released. This is what I know. I can't claim that I saw a decision to
6 that effect.
7 MS. GUSTAFSON: If I could tender this article and move on to
8 65 ter 18416.
9 JUDGE KWON: Yes, we'll admit this.
10 THE REGISTRAR: It receives Exhibit Number P6584, Your Honours.
11 MS. GUSTAFSON: And does the Chamber wish to take a break now?
12 JUDGE KWON: Yes, we'll have a break for 20 minutes and resume at
13 five past 3.00.
14 --- Recess taken at 2.46 p.m.
15 [The witness stands down]
16 [The witness takes the stand]
17 --- On resuming at 3.07 p.m.
18 JUDGE KWON: Please continue.
19 MS. GUSTAFSON: Thank you, Your Honour. And if I could have
20 65 ter 18416, please.
21 Q. And, Dr. Stakic, you can see that this is a 22nd of August, 1992,
22 "Srna" press release titled: "Investigating centre in Omarska
23 abolished." And it states that:
24 "The government authorities in Prijedor inform that the
25 investigating centre in Omarska had been closed down in the course of the
1 day, and the open camp in Trnopolje given to the authority of the
2 Red Cross, according to the decision of the Presidency of
3 Republika Srpska."
4 Now, just before the break you said that you had heard that the
5 minister of the interior made a decision to close down Omarska and
6 Keraterm. Does this press release remind you that this was in fact a
7 Presidency decision?
8 A. I can say that this is what I can read here. I can't, however,
9 say that this is correct or not. Whoever drafted this and signed it
10 could perhaps tell you what the news is based on. I apologise, I can't
11 tell you. I can read as well as you, but I can't confirm that this is
12 true because I never saw a decision to that effect.
13 Q. Who informed you that it was the -- that the decision to close
14 down Omarska and Keraterm came from the Pale authorities? How did you
15 learn that?
16 A. Mr. Drljaca said that finally a camp was open in Manjaca for
17 prisoners of war. From the very beginning, he claimed that an
18 institution of that kind should be run by the military, not by the
19 police, and that finally that institution was opened, and that as a
20 result of that, the centres would be closed down, and that the prisoners
21 who, according to them, were guilty of a crime, would be transferred to
22 Manjaca. I don't know who he received that information from, whether it
23 was from his own minister or from somebody else. I really wouldn't know.
24 Q. And this press release says that during the course of that day,
25 which was the 22nd of August, Omarska had been closed down and that
1 Trnopolje had been handed over to the authority of the Red Cross. And is
2 that information consistent with your knowledge at the time?
3 A. I can't remember the exact date, with all due respect. However,
4 it was about that time in August.
5 Q. Thank you.
6 MS. GUSTAFSON: I tender this news release.
7 JUDGE KWON: Yes. We'll receive it.
8 THE REGISTRAR: It receives Exhibit Number P6585, Your Honours.
9 MS. GUSTAFSON:
10 Q. Now, Dr. Stakic, in the course of your meetings with the
11 Karadzic Defence or with your own attorney, did you become aware that
12 Dr. Karadzic has presented evidence in his defence that it was the
13 Prijedor Crisis Staff that was responsible for the mass killings of
14 non-Serbs, the destruction of their homes, and the drastic reduction of
15 the non-Serb population in 1992?
16 And I refer to D2265, page 59, as well as pages 50, 56, and 57.
17 MR. ROBINSON: Excuse me, Mr. President. This may be a technical
18 objection but it is of some importance, and that is that I don't believe
19 that any conversations he had with his own attorney is something that
20 should be within the scope of her question as it would be privileged.
21 MS. GUSTAFSON: Well, I can just ask the question generally.
22 Q. Did you learn that information, Dr. Stakic, that Dr. Karadzic has
23 presented evidence in his defence that it's the Prijedor Crisis Staff
24 that's responsible for all the crimes against non-Serbs in Prijedor in
1 A. No, I didn't hear that. This is the first time I hear it.
2 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could the Prosecutor please call up
3 the document and could she refrain from asking questions without showing
4 him corroborating documents.
5 JUDGE KWON: I think it's for the purpose of reference to the
6 parties, for the benefit of the parties.
7 Please continue.
8 MS. GUSTAFSON: Thank you, Your Honour.
9 Q. Now you agreed at the outset of your testimony that the police
10 and army committed mass crime against Muslims and Croats in Prijedor in
11 1992, detention, torture, killings, et cetera, and that was at page 24.
12 And you made clear your position that you were not a big player or the
13 main player. And that was also at page 24.
14 Now, you would agree, I take it, that Dr. Karadzic, the president
15 and Supreme Commander, had far greater authority over the police and the
16 army than you, president of the Crisis Staff; right?
17 A. With all due respect to you and this Tribunal, I don't think that
18 I am the right person to qualify him as the person most responsible for
19 everything. I'm here as a witness, albeit a Defence witness. However,
20 I'm here to give the Trial Chamber my own view of the situation at the
21 time in order to help the Trial Chamber shed light on the developments.
22 I believe that Mr. Karadzic has a good Defence team and that they will
23 help him defend himself. If I mentioned the military and the police
24 here, I meant the local forces. I know that there was a hierarchy, a
25 vertical hierarchy and that they were duty-bound to report to their
1 superiors according to that vertical hierarchy. What reports they sent,
2 how they sent them, I wouldn't know, but -- because that information
3 reached me.
4 Q. Thank you, Dr. Stakic. I have nothing further.
5 JUDGE KWON: Thank you, Ms. Gustafson.
6 Yes, Mr. Karadzic.
7 THE ACCUSED: I am sorry. I wanted one page and I forgot.
8 Re-examination by Mr. Karadzic:
9 Q. [Interpretation] Dr. Stakic, on page 73 of today's transcript, it
10 was suggested that you were a member of the joint criminal enterprise
11 together with me. Were you with me in a joint criminal enterprise of any
12 kind --
13 MS. GUSTAFSON: Sorry, sorry. That was not a question to the
14 witness. It's perfectly clear I was responding to a comment from the
16 JUDGE MORRISON: Dr. Karadzic, it's perfectly plain that that was
17 an answer from Ms. Gustafson to the query that I raised. It was not a
18 question to the witness.
19 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well, I apologise. But the
20 way I see it, the Prosecutor doesn't do anything without a reason.
21 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
22 Q. On pages 71 and 72, it was suggested that you should accept that
23 Muslims and Croats were expelled and forced to leave from Prijedor
25 MS. GUSTAFSON: Sorry, again, those were the witness's words. It
1 wasn't put to him that he should accept that. Let's just make sure we're
2 not mischaracterising his evidence.
3 JUDGE KWON: Could you reformulate your question.
4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, I'll do my best.
5 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
6 Q. Dr. Stakic, were Muslims and Croats expelled? Were they forced
7 to leave? If that was the case, who did that? What forced them to
9 A. As I have already stated, both in my statement and earlier today
10 in the course of my testimony, which is recorded on the transcript, as
11 war approached Prijedor and when war operations started in earnest in the
12 municipality of Prijedor, and as I have repeated several times here, as a
13 result of that the rate of crime went up, there was looting, theft, and
14 people started moving out of their houses. Not all of them but a lot of
15 them did. Temporarily, they were accommodated in Trnopolje, and then
16 later, with the help of the Red Cross, they went to some other parts of
17 Bosnia-Herzegovina and further afield. Further afield.
18 One more thing that I didn't say here and now it has just
19 occurred to me, I remember that I saw certain documents issued by the
20 Ministry of Health, if I'm not mistaken. They were signed by
21 Dr. Kalinic, and I don't know what his position was at the time, but I
22 know that together with the Muslim and Croatian representatives he signed
23 a document on the free movement of the civilian population, which meant
24 that they were free to cross from one side of the front line to the other
25 side. I would like to add that.
1 Q. Thank you. Lines 1, 2, and 3 on page 72. It says clearly:
2 [In English] "... that's not true, is it, because you are
3 acknowledging here that most of them left out of fear, that people were
4 expelled and compelled to leave the area; right?"
5 [Interpretation] I'm asking you, Dr. Stakic, did somebody go to
6 their homes? Did somebody force them to leave their homes? Or was it
7 indeed the case this they were afraid and that's why they fled? Just
8 like you told us? What you said in paragraph 26 --
9 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Karadzic -- Mr. Karadzic, that's a leading
10 question, very much.
11 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I'll rephrase.
12 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
13 Q. Is it true that they were expelled like it was suggested and that
14 they were forced to leave?
15 MS. GUSTAFSON: Sorry, not only is it leading --
16 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
17 MS. GUSTAFSON: -- but Dr. Karadzic was reading from my follow-up
18 question, which referred back to the witness's assertion that this is
19 exactly what happened. So this whole exercise is misleading.
20 JUDGE KWON: You may refer to his answers.
21 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. I will move on and then
22 I'll see what I'm going to do with this.
23 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
24 Q. On page 66, it was suggested that you accepted the fact that the
25 police and the army committed massacres. You were aware that there were
1 killings and that there was, indeed, a massacre, or rather, a mass
2 killing in Keraterm and another one at Koricanske Stijene. Did you
3 accept the fact that it had been planned by the military and the police;
4 or if not, did you know who did that? If you agree that this was a
5 planned effort by the military and the police, then the answer is yes;
6 but if not, can you tell us who did it and how?
7 A. Can I start answering or should I wait?
8 JUDGE KWON: Yes, please.
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It is true that I answered that I
10 was aware of the fact that massacres indeed took place, but the
11 Prosecutor did not have any follow-up questions. But now I can answer
12 your question. When I say the police and the military, I mean that in
13 these two specific cases I had my views or, rather, I had information
14 that was conveyed to me.
15 As for the killings of those wretched people in Keraterm, it was
16 the local battalion and reservists who were responsible for those.
17 Allegedly, they did it because several Serbian soldiers were killed at
18 the front line and in retaliation they burst into Keraterm and killed
19 those innocent people. Neither then nor now have I heard that it was
20 organised by the command of those troops or somebody else of that kind.
21 I even heard that Mr. Drljaca said, because he was angry and because
22 there were police officers who were supposed to guard those people and
23 those men wanted to take it on the police, so Mr. Drljaca said that he
24 would take it up with the army. I don't know what happened next because
25 I don't have any information to that effect.
1 And the next big shame inflicted not only upon me and the Serbs
2 from Prijedor but the entire Serbian population was the case of
3 Koricanske Stijene. I repeat once again, those people from Trnopolje
4 were allowed to link up with their families. It was the Red Cross that
5 enabled them to do that. And the police and the military were supposed
6 to make arrangements with this other side to open the passage for the
7 convoy of buses. Those policemen, and it is not up to me to be the judge
8 of them, but I can say that they were not humans because not only did
9 they rob those poor people but they also executed them. I condemn that
10 as a human being, as a person.
11 I'd like to say this: I'm not Mr. Drljaca's advocate. I don't
12 want to defend him. We were at odds at times because he had a strong
13 personality. Sometimes he was harsh in his comport. But when I learned
14 about that event I called him about a document because, you know, us
15 civilians had to have an approval from the military district and from the
16 police to pass through that corridor. So I called him and he was in a
17 very bad mood, and he said: Now you call me when my police officers had
18 done something really, really unprecedentedly stupid. I'll call you
20 So what I'm saying is that I wouldn't say that somebody had a
21 plan to do that. At least I wasn't aware of any such plan. This is what
22 I know.
23 Q. Thank you. You were asked about investigation centres and a
24 reference was made to Omarska and so on and so forth. You were asked
25 about the civilian authorities that set it up. Can you tell me how come
1 that your police did not carry out investigations in the detention unit
2 that existed in the public security station?
3 A. I am sorry, I did not understand your question. Why didn't the
4 police do what?
5 Q. This was mis-recorded and this was misinterpreted. What I wanted
6 to say is this: The last document says that Omarska was an investigation
7 centre. I'm asking you this: If Omarska was an investigation centre and
8 if all the investigations were carried out there, how come that the
9 police did not detain people in their own existing detention unit which
10 existed in the police station?
11 MS. GUSTAFSON: Sorry.
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I understand now.
13 MS. GUSTAFSON: Sorry. The question assumes that there were no
14 detentions and investigations at the Prijedor police station. I don't
15 have any -- I don't have the evidence at my fingertips, but I am quite
16 sure that that is not the case. So the question, I think, should be
17 rephrased or a preliminary question asked.
18 JUDGE KWON: Yes, I agree that you can reformulate your question.
19 I didn't follow it as well.
20 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
21 Q. Dr. Stakic, was there a detention unit attached to the MUP in
23 A. To the best of my knowledge, yes. But I don't know. I don't
24 know for how many people, five, six, ten, not more than that, because
25 local criminals and drunkards would be detained there temporarily and
1 then they would be taken to prison.
2 Q. Thank you.
3 A. I do apologise, Dr. Karadzic, and Your Honours, either because of
4 what I have on my ears and I also hear the spoken word, I heard "your
5 police" a moment ago.
6 Q. The Prijedor police.
7 A. Yes. I assume that that was just a slip of the tongue on your
8 part, but please, I would like to --
9 Q. I do apologise. The size of this detention unit, does it have
10 anything to do with using Omarska for investigations?
11 A. Well, you know, I cannot say anything unequivocally here because,
12 as I've already said, that's not my line of work. But knowing that in
13 Omarska there were many more people -- I saw during the trial that
14 3.000 people went through Omarska. That figure is telling enough. And
15 knowing that this detention unit could take only five or six people, on
16 the basis of that, I can conclude -- infer, rather - it's deduction,
17 isn't it? - that it was impossible.
18 Q. Thank you. You were asked or, rather, it was established, it was
19 stated that Muslims and Croats lived in a risky environment. That's on
20 page 55. Can you tell us when this environment became risky in terms of
22 A. Well, if you allow me, Your Honours, I remember in my case it was
23 repeated time and again that on the 1st of May different campaigns
24 started, killings, that there was a lack of safety and security and so
25 on. I would say now that only after Hambarine on the 20th of May,
1 especially Kozarac, the 24th of May, when the Muslim extremists dared
2 attack the army, thereby entering a direct conflict with the army, then
3 there was fighting. And then after that, this true situation of war and
4 crisis and fear and everything else started.
5 Q. Thank you. In line 3, I believe you said on the 22nd of May
6 rather than the 20th of May?
7 A. The 22nd of May.
8 Q. Hambarine.
9 A. Yes. And on the 24th Kozarac.
10 Q. Thank you. Can you tell us why it did not become dangerous
11 already on the 6th of April as it became in Sarajevo?
12 A. We still had a joint Assembly that was established on the basis
13 of the interparty agreement at the republican level reached between the
14 HDZ and the SDS. It was violated, to the best of my knowledge, in
15 autumn 1991 when the SDA and HDZ MPs outvoted the SDS and they left the
16 Assembly. We continued to work together on local levels. Because you
17 know what it's like, the houses are mixed. There were hardly any hamlets
18 that were purely Muslim or purely Serb, and especially the population in
19 town itself. And you can see that from the transcripts of the joint
20 Assembly. We tried to keep it together. We didn't succeed, but we
21 called upon Muslim assemblymen from the SDA, saying that we should reach
22 an agreement at local level in order to share power, all with a view to
23 preserving the peace.
24 Although -- well, you mentioned Sarajevo, but I would like to
25 mention municipalities that are closer to Prijedor. It already started
1 in Bosanska Krupa and Sanski Most, in April, also, to the best of my
2 recollection. And in Prijedor there was no war.
3 Q. Thank you. Also you were asked and you gave an answer. You said
4 the Muslims could go to Central Bosnia and that they could go to Germany.
5 Did the Muslims have an opportunity to stay on in Prijedor itself? Were
6 there agreements about the transformation of Prijedor where they would
7 exercise authority over themselves?
8 MS. GUSTAFSON: Sorry, if we could just specify the time-period
9 with this question?
10 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
11 Q. Before the conflict broke out, was it only Central Bosnia and
12 Germany or did they have a third option, Prijedor itself?
13 A. They could stay in Prijedor and a number of them did stay on
14 throughout the war. Truth to tell we are dealing with 1992 here, but I
15 would like to say something. A large number, I don't know exactly how
16 many, Muslims left in 1995 when -- how do I put this? When there was
17 this major influx of Serbs, the Serb population from the Krajina that was
18 flooding in. Also, they could establish their own municipality and
19 declare their own territory, and then also even after the take-over of
20 power on the 1st of May, and that can be seen from documents. There was
21 a mixed police force as well, and they were told they could take part in
22 this local commune. And in Kozarac the entire police stayed on. And
23 there were no problems whatsoever all the way up until the 24th of May.
24 That is to say, I agree they did have that option. In those areas where
25 they were the majority population, they could stay on.
1 Q. The transcript does not say Ljubija and that's the location. You
2 mentioned it together with Kozarac; right?
3 A. Yes, Ljubija, Kozarac, that's what I mentioned, two enclaves.
4 And they're not small, between 10- and 12.000 inhabitants.
5 Q. Thank you. It was suggested to you that you spoke about the life
6 of Muslims in Prijedor and that already by the end of 1992 there were
7 very few Muslims left. Can you tell us how come this happened then, that
8 I was pressured in the autumn of 1994 to release 80 trucks full of
9 Muslims per day and that they stayed on, and how come there were
10 thousands of Muslims left in 1994, and by the end of 1995 there were
11 several thousand --
12 MS. GUSTAFSON: Sorry --
13 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
14 Q. -- Muslims in Prijedor?
15 MS. GUSTAFSON: -- this is all leading. It hasn't been
16 established that the witness knows anything about these assertions about
17 trucks and thousands of Muslims in 1994. Those foundational questions
18 have to be asked before these ones.
19 JUDGE KWON: Could you rephrase your question? Otherwise, we
20 need to go back to the page where he spoke about this.
21 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, yes. I'm sorry. I'm going to
23 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
24 Q. It was suggested to you that you spoke to journalists about the
25 life of Muslims in Prijedor, although you knew that then, at the end of
1 1992, there were very few Muslims left in Prijedor. Is that correct,
2 that at the end of 1992 there were very few Muslims left in Prijedor?
3 A. I think that I said to the Prosecutor that there was no official
4 census at the time, but I would like to repeat what I said a moment ago;
5 that is that when the Dayton Agreement was signed - that is to say, in
6 December 1995 - there were still some Muslims in Prijedor. And I
7 mentioned a moment ago as well that when tens of thousands and hundreds
8 of thousands, Serb refugees, came to Prijedor and went through Prijedor,
9 quite a few Muslims also left Prijedor. That's the period of August and
10 September 1995. And I still claim that a number of them stayed on. I
11 cannot say exactly what the numbers involved are or the percentage, but I
12 do know some people who lived there, worked there, I saw them in the
13 building and they were in town. The population was mixed. Cela,
14 Donji Jakupovici, those were Muslims neighbourhoods. And these
15 enclaves -- people from these enclaves did not move out at all.
16 Q. Thank you. Were there Muslims and Croats on our police force?
17 A. To the best of my knowledge, yes. As for exact numbers, I
18 wouldn't know, but there were some. That can be checked, too. In the
19 veterans organisation.
20 Q. Thank you. Tell me, generally speaking, what did this depend on;
21 namely, that some Muslims could stay and others felt threatened or were
22 detained or interrogated or were just leaving Prijedor? What was
23 decisive in that respect? Your will, the will of your local authorities
24 and the army and the police to group Muslims or --
25 JUDGE KWON: You're just losing your time.
1 MS. GUSTAFSON: And not stopping with a non-leading question and
2 having to add -- add to the question that makes it leading, it's
4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, as briefly as possible: How
5 come some of them could stay on and others could not? If the systemic
6 approach was that the Muslims should disappear, how come some can stay
7 and others do not stay. It is a perfectly legitimate question.
8 JUDGE KWON: No. Let's go back to the part which was dealt with
9 and start from there.
10 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, the beginning is there. The
11 Prosecutor suggested that Dr. Stakic deceived the journalist, speaking
12 about the life of Muslims in Prijedor although he knew --
13 JUDGE KWON: Then upload that document and ask your question
14 based upon the cross-examination.
15 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I don't know what the document is
16 now, but I know that it's in the transcript, that it was put to him that
17 I intentionally misled or deceived the journalist. But I'm going to
18 abandon the topic in order to save time.
19 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
20 Q. Dr. Stakic, on page 51, yet again it was discussed whether you
21 could issue orders to the army or the police. Even if you did send an
22 order to the army or the police, what would happen to that kind of order?
23 A. Well, now that you've put that question, I'll answer by telling
24 you about something that I experienced in 1993 when I was no longer
25 president and when I was replaced by another gentleman, and I did have
1 some objections. The local committee of the party was objecting,
2 actually. They said that I am not influencing the army and the police
3 sufficiently. They actually wanted to have all assemblymen and all
4 members of the SDS freed of military obligation and military duty, and I
5 said we cannot do that. We can pass an Assembly decision, but they don't
6 have to observe that.
7 Now I'm going back to what I was saying, when this new president
8 came from that stream, that is to say, these people who thought that they
9 could -- or, rather, that I as president could have issued orders. I and
10 the late Dr. Kovacevic were sitting there. We had a colleague from
11 Belgrade who had come to perform some operations on some children so that
12 we wouldn't have to take them there. So it so happened that
13 Mr. Pero Colic, commander of the Prijedor Brigade, entered that
14 restaurant and said, "Look at the document that I got a few days ago from
15 the president of the municipality, where he says, 'I, president of the
16 municipality, hereby order Pero Colic ..." and so on and so forth," and
17 this man says I was wondering whether I should send the military police
18 to arrest him and take him to the front. But what prevailed was that we
19 shouldn't heighten tensions any further, so I gave up. Who does this man
20 think he is? Well, so much for that. That's what it would have meant,
21 if I even did write an order to him. I hope I was clear.
22 Q. Thank you. On page 42 it was suggested to you that the
23 Crisis Staff decided who would be released but not the way in which they
24 would be released. Could you tell us you did not allow these group
25 releases? What's the distinction between individual releases and group
2 A. I tried to explain that but I'll try to once again. The police
3 were assuring us, at least, and perhaps you'll see that, too. They got
4 all these lawyers busy, 40, 60 lawyers from their services, from the
5 court and I don't know from what other places. And they were
6 interrogating these detained persons, and they decided who was guilty and
7 who was not guilty, who would be sent to Trnopolje and who would be
8 released. Now, what was it that made us try to intervene? Precisely
9 that, that Serb criminals decided to enter these centres. And I don't
10 know how they did it there. Were they in cahoots with the guards or did
11 they deceive them, but they took people out. It wasn't groups. They
12 would go there and ask for particular individuals by name and surname,
13 and they said that they would return them, that they just needed to reach
14 some kind of agreement. Usually it had to do with extortion, to get
15 money from them or immovable property, if they had any. And the most
16 regrettable thing was that afterwards they would kill these people.
17 After this kind of knowledge, after we heard about this, we tried
18 to appeal to the police to prevent that kind of thing from happening and
19 not allowing such individuals to enter such centres in the first place.
20 Q. It was also suggested to you on page 33 or perhaps 34 that the
21 Muslim population in "celina" was attacked, and mention was also made of
22 Stari Grad.
23 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could the witness please be shown
24 65 ter 20209. And the reference for what I said about the journalist is
25 page 17, lines 13 through 18.
1 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction: Page 70, seventy.
2 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] One of the texts has been
3 translated. Can we get the English translation. This is dealing with
4 the consequences of the attack or removing the consequences of attack.
5 Yes. This is it. Everybody can see it.
6 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
7 Q. But I'm asking you to look at the very short text in the upper
8 right-hand side corner. Apologies, this is on the 5th of June, 1995 [as
9 interpreted]. What does it say on the upper right-hand corner?
10 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can you zoom in on that part?
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Attackers came from Stari Grad. Do
12 you me to read just this or should I continue?
13 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
14 Q. Maybe you could give us your own summary.
15 A. At 4.30 this morning, members of Muslim paramilitary formations
16 carried out an attack from various directions and from various areas, and
17 in particular from the direction of Stari Grad, Pecani, and Tukova --
18 THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness please slow down.
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] And they attacked the facilities of
20 the Municipal Assembly of Prijedor, the police station, Prijedor hotel,
21 the city bridge on the Sana.
22 JUDGE KWON: Just a second.
23 Yes, continue, please.
24 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
25 Q. Could you please tell us whether you accepted the Prosecutor's
1 suggestion that the population in "celina" in Stari Grad was attacked?
2 A. No, I would not describe it that way. I tried to answer the
3 Prosecutor's question by answering why they hadn't crossed the bridge on
4 the Sana, because there is only one bridge on the Sana that was opened at
5 the moment because it was secure. There was a police and military
6 check-point there. And as for the Prijedor hotel, where one part of that
7 unit was billeted, they didn't go from there. They went down the stream
8 of the Sana and they arrived in the centre. When they were withdrawing,
9 they took the same route, whereas the troops followed them.
10 Q. Thank you. A few interventions --
11 JUDGE KWON: It's purely my personal observation, but I find it
12 strange that you base your questions in your re-examination on the
13 question put by the Prosecutor during her cross-examination, not on the
14 answers given by the witness.
15 MS. GUSTAFSON: And if I could just add, Your Honour, that the
16 question was "whether you accepted the Prosecutor's suggestion that the
17 population in 'celina' in Stari Grad was attacked." What I put to him
18 was that after the attacking force was repelled, the army destroyed the
20 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
21 MS. GUSTAFSON: So it's also not an accurate characterisation.
22 JUDGE KWON: Please continue, Mr. Karadzic.
23 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Excellencies, the witnesses are
24 used to our system, and they cannot be mindful of the tricks in the
25 questions, and I cannot intervene during the cross-examination and that's
1 why I'm asking.
2 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] "Celina" is not a place. "Celina"
3 is the word for entire population. It's not a place. It's not a
4 location. So when a witness confirms something without this --
5 JUDGE KWON: Please, please.
6 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The witness did say you're very
7 skillful in what you do because he sensed that the questions were tricky.
8 Okay. Very well, then.
9 MS. GUSTAFSON: Totally inappropriate.
10 JUDGE KWON: Let's move on.
11 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] What is inappropriate is the fact
12 that we are being tried in such a system.
13 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
14 Q. Can we now see the removal of consequences through a glance and
15 tell us whether this is corresponds to what you knew about the situation
16 at the time. This document or, rather, this text.
17 A. Do you want me to read it aloud?
18 Q. No, no, just look at it. Could we look at the very short
19 paragraph: At the meeting of the Crisis Staff, problems of the
20 temporarily resettled population was considered after they took refuge in
21 some of the camps in order to save [indiscernible] from war operations?
22 What camp did the author have in mind?
23 A. I suppose that he had in mind Trnopolje because Keraterm and
24 Omarska were places where people were put to be investigated after having
25 been arrested during combat. And as for Trnopolje, as I've already told
1 you, people would go there to seek shelter. And then when the Red Cross
2 started organising their departure, it was allowed for the people to join
3 their families up there.
4 Q. What is the meaning of the term "those who moved out
6 A. I've already answered a question to that effect. The document
7 was signed by all the three parties, and in that document there was a
8 reference to temporarily moving out during the war while the population
9 was in danger as a result of war operations, and I personally accepted
10 that. And I thought once some day when peace was restored, that all
11 those who wanted to return would be able to return to their homes. And
12 this is indeed what is happening, what is still happening, in accordance
13 with the Dayton Accords, as far as I know.
14 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Excellencies, I would like to
15 tender this document but we would also request the part on Stari Grad to
16 be translated, the part that Dr. Stakic started reading out.
17 JUDGE KWON: I am not sure which part you made Mr. Stakic read
18 out in addition to those that have been already translated. Shall we
19 mark it for identification, pending English translation?
20 THE REGISTRAR: It receives MFI D4203, Your Honours.
21 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Ms. Gustafson.
22 MS. GUSTAFSON: Just to put on the record now that I'm not sure
23 exactly what Dr. Karadzic is referring to. I may have objections when
24 this is translated because at this point I just can't.
25 JUDGE KWON: Very well. That's the purpose of marking for
2 Do you have more questions, Mr. Karadzic?
3 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I will finish on time, your
4 Excellencies. I have a few short questions. Can this entire document be
5 tendered? We would like to have all the text because they could be of
6 much help to the Trial Chamber if Dr. Stakic confirms that that is what
7 indeed happened at the time and that "Kozarski Vjesnik" accurately
8 conveyed news of the situation.
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] With all due respect, we did not
10 meddle with the editorial policy of "Kozarski Vjesnik," and now you have
11 not given me an opportunity to read all that. However, the parts that I
12 read, I can agree with them.
13 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
14 Q. Thank you. You said that at first there was no communication but
15 you still managed to receive certain instructions.
16 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I would like to remind the
17 participants of the fact that P02716 on page 22 says that during the
18 first 45 days, we did not have any contacts, and this is from a meeting
19 with the leadership of Prijedor. We can call it up if you wish --
20 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
21 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation] Do you --
22 MS. GUSTAFSON: If he wants to call up a document, that's fine.
23 But this preliminary exposition on what the document says is
25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The document has been admitted.
1 I'm just asking the doctor whether it is true whether there were to
2 contacts and whether that corresponds to what he experienced.
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I said to the -- I apologise to
4 everybody and to the interpreters. Can I be allowed to answer?
5 JUDGE KWON: What? I don't remember what the question was.
6 MS. GUSTAFSON: The question appears to have been based on P2716,
7 so I think as an initial step that should be called up.
8 JUDGE KWON: So before we see the document, what is your
9 question, Mr. Karadzic?
10 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I asked Dr. Stakic, since during
11 cross-examination his contention that there had been no contacts was
12 challenged and some instructions were shown, I am now asking Dr. Stakic,
13 considering that at that first meeting we had noted that there had been
14 no meetings, that was page 2716 -- that was P2716, page 22. I am asking
15 him now if that's consistent with what he knows.
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I agree with you. I answered the
17 same to the lady from the Prosecution. Although, I didn't have the exact
18 number of days that we hadn't seen each other. I don't know exactly how
19 soon the corridor was closed. But I know that I had no contact with you,
20 personally. Nor did the others, I believe, because we in Bosnian Krajina
21 were not able to reach anyone outside by phone. And I also added that I
22 don't know whether the army or the police had some communications of
23 their own.
24 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
25 Q. And my last question. Evidence was led in the form of evidence
1 of Witness Srdjo Srdic in 2002 that it was the Crisis Staff that
2 organised it all --
3 THE INTERPRETER: Could Mr. Karadzic repeat the last part of his
5 JUDGE KWON: Just a second, just a second. Could you repeat your
6 last sentence again for the benefit of the interpreters.
7 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I wanted to ask Dr. Stakic -- I
8 cannot show this document of three or four passages that the Prosecution
10 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
11 Q. I'm just asking how old he was, Srdjo Srdic, in 2002?
12 A. I think over 70.
13 Q. Thank you. I cannot clear that up now because we have no time.
14 Thank you, Dr. Stakic, for coming here and for your evidence. I have no
15 further questions.
16 JUDGE KWON: Thank you, Mr. Stakic. That concludes your
17 evidence. On behalf of the Chamber, I would like to thank you for your
18 coming to The Hague to give it. You are free to go.
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours. I thank
20 the ladies and gentlemen of the Prosecution and Mr. Karadzic and his
21 Defence team. I hope that I managed to give some contribution at least
22 to your efforts to shed light on the events of 1992. It's up to you, of
23 course. Thank you and goodbye.
24 JUDGE KWON: Our thanks also go to Mr. Ostojic for your
25 assistance. Thank you very much. I appreciate it. And I also
1 appreciate the kind indulgence of the staff and the interpreters and
2 everybody involved.
3 Hearing is adjourned.
4 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 4.07 p.m.,
5 to be reconvened on Wednesday, the
6 18th day of December, 2013, at 9.00 a.m.