1 Wednesday, 8 October 2008
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.04 a.m.
5 JUDGE AGIUS: Good morning, Madam Registrar. Could you call the
6 case, please.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. This is case
8 IT-05-88-T, The Prosecutor versus Vujadin Popovic, et al.
9 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you so much, ma'am. All the accused are
10 present. Now, Prosecution it's Mr. McCloskey and Mr. Vanderpuye as
11 yesterday. From the Defence teams I noted the absence of Ms. Tapuskovic,
12 Mr. Nikolic, Mr. Bourgon, Mr. Petrusic and Mr. Haynes. I don't see the
13 witness in the courtroom, does that mean there is a preliminary or
14 something. Yes, Mr. Gosnell.
15 MR. GOSNELL: Just a brief scheduling note. One of the three
16 witnesses who was scheduled to testify for this week after the current
17 witness was denied a visa for entry into Holland.
18 JUDGE AGIUS: It never rains but pours, you know.
19 MR. GOSNELL: Which means we have one less witness than we
20 expected this week and so I would simply wish to notify the Chamber that
21 there is a possibility that we may be finishing earlier than expected on
22 Friday. Particularly in light of some of the discussions we've had with
23 the Defence about -- or the Prosecution about the length of
24 cross-examination of the current witness.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: All right, okay. Thank you for keeping the Trial
1 Chamber informed. If we can be of any assistance to you, please let us
2 know. Now, the witness.
3 [The witness entered court]
4 JUDGE AGIUS: Good morning, Professor. Welcome back.
5 Mr. Lazarevic will finish his examination-in-chief. Go ahead.
6 WITNESS: MLADEN BAJAGIC [Resumed]
7 [Witness answered through interpreter]
8 MR. LAZAREVIC: Good morning, Your Honours. Good morning
10 Examination by Mr. Lazarevic: [Continued]
11 Q. Good morning, Professor Bajagic.
12 A. Good morning.
13 Q. I hope you had a good rest after yesterday. And I'm convinced
14 that we will be able to finish your examination today. I am sure of
15 my -- on my own behalf, I don't know about the others but we will do our
16 best to finish your examination today.
17 A. Thank you.
18 Q. Yesterday we left it off with the topic of the education centre
19 in Mount Jahorina
20 questions to round the topic off. In your expert report, and I'm talking
21 about paragraph 163 which is Exhibit 4D499, you have stated that there
22 were actually two categories of military conscripts who had to be
23 educated in the education centre on Mount Jahorina
24 are recruits, young men who are being sent for compulsory military
25 service who were supposed to do it in the Ministry of the Interior.
1 That's the first category. And the second category, are deserters, i.e.,
2 military conscripts who were brought from Serbia and sent for education
3 pursuant to documents that we saw yesterday. I would like to look at
4 another document which is under tab 33 in your binder. This is Exhibit
6 While we are waiting for this to appear in e-court, I'm going to
7 say that this is information sent by the assistant commander Dusko Jevic.
8 The date is 13 July 1995
9 the Interior to the special police brigade at the Jahorina training camp.
10 This is actually a daily report as we have said. What I would like to
11 look at with regard to this document is the first paragraph thereof, the
12 last sentence. It says according to the list, 201 conscripts and 35
13 recruits doing their military service, so conscripts is here represented
14 by what abbreviation?
15 A. VO.
16 Q. 35 recruits doing their military service in the MUP are currently
17 staying at the Jahorina mission and training centre. Is that exactly
18 what you're talking about in your paragraph 163? Are these the two
19 categories that you mentioned?
20 A. Yes, these are the two categories of persons who were sent to the
21 Jahorina training camp.
22 Q. Very well, and now could you please look at paragraph 165 of your
23 expert report, you say in it that the deserters in the Jahorina training
24 camp had nothing but basic military training. The training that they had
25 to undergo, did it have anything to do with the education of MUP members,
1 especially members of the special police?
2 A. In my paragraph 165, I presented this fact and say that military
3 conscript training had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with what was
4 supposed to be education for any kind of engagement in the Ministry of
5 the Interior.
6 Q. Very well.
7 A. Especially it didn't have anything to do with the education of
8 future members of any special police unit because we know from various
9 experiences across the world that it takes a lot of time to train
10 somebody to become a member of a special police unit. In this case, a
11 special police brigade. It takes anything between one year and three
12 years for such education.
13 Q. And just one more question, a rather general one with regard to
14 this topic. We have already heard many times that when it comes to this
15 mixed unit that was placed under the command of Mr. Borovcanin
16 encompassed the second detachment of the special police Sekovic, the
17 first company of the Zvornik special units and a company of military
18 conscripts who had been in training at the Jahorina camp. Could you
19 please tell us what your conclusion was in your expert report with this
20 regard? Was this unit a unit with homogeneous nature?
21 A. In any case, this unit that Mr. Borovcanin received pursuant to
22 an order was not [Realtime transcript read in error "was"] homogeneous
23 because there were three different groups or members in that unit. It
24 was an ad hoc unit. One group were members of the special police
25 brigade, another group were members of the PJP, and the third part were
1 those who had arrived from the training camp who had never been in any
2 other education and they were only informed with the basic rules of
3 service at Jahorina training camp. This did not last more than 15 or 20
4 days and they were not prepared to act at a level that a homogenous unit
5 should have and they were not allowed to participate in any kind of
7 Q. Just for the record, I would like to say that when we are talking
8 about units that --
9 THE INTERPRETER: Could the counsel please slow down especially
10 when quoting numbers. Thank you.
11 MR. LAZAREVIC: [Interpretation]
12 Q. I would now like to -- yes. The exhibit that I mentioned is
13 4D337. This is order 64/95, but I did not think it necessary to show it
14 again because we have had several occasions to look at that particular
15 document that I was referring to in this particular question?
16 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Vanderpuye.
17 MR. VANDERPUYE: Thank you, Mr. President. I apologise for
18 intervention to my colleague, but I notice in page 5, it appears to be
19 line 5 that the witness's answer doesn't appear to reflect what he said
20 and it specifically refers to homogenous unit at that line, homogenous
21 unit should have and they were not allowed to participate in any kind of
22 activity, I don't believe that is what the witness actually testified to,
23 and so I wonder if my colleague could clarify that.
24 MR. LAZAREVIC: Yes, my colleague is right. I am grateful. I
25 believe that we all need to have a clear record on this.
1 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you.
2 MR. LAZAREVIC: [Interpretation]
3 Q. You see, Mr. Bajagic, in the transcript we have it that you were
4 talking about the unit composed of deserters and it says here in the
5 transcript that they were not allowed to participate in any form of
6 activity but I believe that you said that they were not adequately or
7 sufficiently trained do that?
8 A. I said that they were not adequately and sufficiently trained, I
9 didn't say that they were not allowed to be engaged.
10 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Vanderpuye.
11 MR. VANDERPUYE: Thank you, Mr. President. I appreciate that.
12 But it's still unclear as to what activity the witness is talking about.
13 I know that wasn't in the original answer but I would also ask if my
14 colleague would clarify that as well.
15 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you. Yes, Mr. Lazarevic.
16 MR. LAZAREVIC: [Interpretation] I believe it's clear now. It's
17 just -- activities were not mentioned at all in the witness's answer.
18 JUDGE AGIUS: They were not mentioned but this is precisely what
19 Mr. Vanderpuye is asking. Perhaps the witness can state exactly what
20 kind of activity/activities we were talking about or we could be talking
22 MR. LAZAREVIC: [Interpretation]
23 Q. Professor, I'll try and clarify this matter. When we are talking
24 about activities of this mixed unit, combat activities, were they
25 adequately trained to participate in such activities?
1 A. The part of the unit or members of that unit who had arrived from
2 the Jahorina training centre on mount Jahorina
3 trained. They were deserters, they were not adequately trained in order
4 to be able to respond to any such task. That would be my answer.
5 MR. LAZAREVIC: Is my colleague satisfied with the answer or do I
6 need further clarifications.
7 MR. VANDERPUYE: No, it's fine. If there's any cross, I'll
8 undertake it. Thanks.
9 MR. LAZAREVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
10 Q. Professor Bajagic, my next topic, since I believe that we have
11 exhausted the training centre on Jahorina is the training centre of the
12 MUP of the Republika Srpska in the period of immediate threat of war or
13 the conditions of war. I would like to go to that rather first. I would
14 like to say that we are talking about paragraphs between 169 and 195 of
15 your expert report.
16 In this regard, I would like you to look at the document under
17 tab 15. It is 4D413. I would like to look at a few articles of the law
18 on the implementation of the Law on the Interior during an immediate
19 threat of war or war.
20 Let's first look at Article 2. Looking at this article, could
21 you tell me whether pursuant to Article 2 when war is proclaimed or an
22 imminent threat of war, the Law on the Interior continues to be applied
23 unless differently specified by another law.
24 A. Yes. The provisions of other laws are applied unless this law
25 strictly specifies something else. The answer is yes. The provisions of
1 the Law on the Interior are still applied.
2 Q. Thank you very much. With this regard, in order to be as
3 expeditious as possible, I would like to look at Article 12 of the same
4 law. Article 12 defines and says that in addition to the special units
5 of the police, the Minister of the Interior can also establish other
6 special police units who will be engaged in combat. Please, could you
7 tell us pursuant to this law, these are the only two categories of police
8 units that appear in this law?
9 A. Yes. Special police units and specialised police units, that's
10 what is provided for by the law.
11 Q. Thank you very much. I will not dwell upon this point. I would
12 like to move on to the third chapter of your report, which is command and
13 control in the MUP of Republika Srpska. Again to be expeditious, I'd
14 like to say that before this Trial Chamber we have heard a lot about the
15 terms of command and control. I'll skip the terminology and the
16 determinants of the terms control command and management and I will move
17 on to the control and command in the police. I would just like to point
18 your attention to paragraphs between 196 and 205 of your expert report
19 which are on pages 54 to 57, or rather 53 to 56 in e-court. And I would
20 also like to say that in your expert report, you speak about the command
21 and control in police in general terms in paragraphs 206 and 226, I will
22 not further analyse these paragraphs in this examination-in-chief, I
23 would just like to analyse paragraph 228. Do you have that in front of
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. In your paragraph 228 you -- I apologise, you have analysed the
2 functions of command and control in the police and you mention nine
3 subfunctions. Just for the record could you please quote your nine
4 functions that you mention in this paragraph and that fall under command
5 and control?
6 A. Command and control implicate tasks and duties that supervising
7 officers and chiefs perform in the course of their work. These functions
8 are as follows: Under 1 monitoring and assessment. Number 2,
9 decision-making. Number 3, planning. 4, organising. 5, order issuing.
10 6, coordination. 7, controlling. 8, affirmation and representation.
11 And finally number 9, analysis and evaluation.
12 Q. Very well. You are now talking about control?
13 A. Yes, precisely so. I specified that this is control rather than
14 command. So this is control.
15 Q. I apologise, there seems to be -- it is okay. I'm just trying to
16 follow the record in order to make it absolutely clear to anybody who may
17 be reading it in the future. The next topic that you dealt with in your
18 expert report is the control of the police when performing special
19 security tasks. I'm not going to ask you anything about that. I would
20 just like to address everybody's attention to paragraphs 266 to 284 in
21 your expert report.
22 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction: Paragraphs 268 to
23 paragraph 284.
24 MR. LAZAREVIC: [Interpretation]
25 Q. I would like to look at paragraph 286 of your expert report
1 dealing with the control in the MUP of Republika Srpska at the level of
2 the police forces staff. In paragraph 286, you define the police force
3 staff. Could you please tell us how you define it in your own words?
4 A. In my paragraph 286, I say that the police force staff as an
5 organ of control and command in organ of police units is defined as a
6 provisional body which is activated when police units are engaged more
7 extensively in combat actions and in discharging more complex police
8 duties in special security circumstances.
9 Q. Very well. I would now like us to look at a document which is in
10 your binder under tab 36, and in e-court it is Exhibit 4D179. This is an
11 order, the date is 15 May 1992
12 by the Minister of the Interior of the then Serbian republic of Republika
13 Srpska Mr. Mico Stanisic. Do you have the document in front of you?
14 A. Yes, I do.
15 Q. I would like us to look at bullet point 9 in this document.
16 Could you please read that paragraph for us, and also who are the members
17 of the staff envisaged by this order?
18 A. This order speaks about the establishment of the staff, amongst
19 other things. And it says that in order to command and control the
20 overall forces of ministry staff shall be established comprising;
21 Minister of the Interior, as its commander; under secretary for public
22 security, deputy commander; under secretary for national security,
23 member. Assistant ministers for crime, police, communications, and
24 crypto protection, materiel and finance. These assistants are members.
25 Commander of the police detachment, member; deputy commander of the
1 police detachment, member; chiefs of security service centres, members,
2 and also chef de cabinet of the minister as the secretary. This would be
3 the full composition of the staff.
4 Q. Therefore this is the composition of the police force staff?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Thank you. The next document I would like us to analyse is your
7 tab 37. It is Exhibit 4D189. The date is the 25th of August 1992
8 to the chief of the public security station in Prijedor. The title is
9 "Instruction on the Training and use of Public Security Units in Banja
10 Luka or the Banja Luka CSB
11 document, items 3.1 and 3.2 which are on page 4 in your document.
12 A. I found it.
13 Q. It is page 7 in the English e-court version. As for the use of
14 wartime units, well, that was the title that preceded these points. Can
15 you please comment 3.1 and 3.2?
16 A. This concerns the use of wartime units. Under 3.1 it says that
17 the Banja Luka CSB
18 Luka CSB
19 3.1. Under 3.2, it says that the commander, his deputy or chief, or the
20 Chief of Staff shall order -- I'll repeat.
21 3.2: The commander, his deputy or chief or the Chief of Staff
22 shall order the use of CSB
23 of the Serbian republic. The Ministry of the Interior of the Serbian
24 republic shall be informed of this as a matter of urgency. This means
25 the very top of the ministry [Realtime transcript read in error
1 "military"] will be notified.
2 Q. Very well. We have a designation of who has the commanding
3 authority over the use of wartime units; is that correct?
4 A. Yes.
5 MR. LAZAREVIC: A correction for the transcript. It's on page
6 11, line 25 said ministry will be notified. Line 23, I apologise. Says
7 at the very top the ministry will be notified.
8 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you, Mr. Lazarevic. All right, okay, thank
9 you. Let's proceed.
10 MR. LAZAREVIC: [Interpretation]
11 Q. Next is paragraph 289 in your expert report. In it you state
12 that given the centralised model of organisation of the RS MUP there was
13 a relation of hierarchy between the MUP police force staff of the RS and
14 the CJB staffs. Is it the same type of hierarchy which exists, as you've
15 already explained on your charts, between the MUP at headquarters and the
16 centres for public security?
17 A. I fail to understand your question.
18 Q. I apologise. I'll reformulate. I presume you have paragraph 289
19 of your report in front of you?
20 A. I do.
21 Q. Therein you state -- well, I wanted to draw a parallel between
22 the hierarchy concluding the MUP at headquarters and CSBs, and to see
23 whether the same kind of hierarchy exists between the RS MUP staff in
24 relation to the various CJB staffs.
25 A. Yes, the hierarchy is the same.
1 Q. Very well. Let us move on to the next topic, and that is the
2 regulations regulating the use of MUP units in wartime activities. We've
3 had occasion to see the law from 1994 which is the law on the
4 implementation of the Law on Internal Affairs. It is your tab 15. Let
5 us have a look at item 3.2, that is to say, Article 13, paragraph 2. It
6 is page 5 in e-court. In the English page 12.
7 MR. LAZAREVIC: It's 4D413. I apologise.
8 Q. [Interpretation] In item 2 of Article 13 it says that the
9 Ministry of the Interior controls police units through the police force
10 staffs at the headquarters; is that correct?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. And this ties in with the units of the police special police
13 units and specialized police units that we discussed?
14 A. Yes, that's correct.
15 Q. And this only refers to those units which were not resubordinated
16 in keeping with this regulation to the military unit within whose area of
17 responsibility they were engaged in combat?
18 A. Yes, this refers to the units of the police which acted
19 independently in pursuing their tasks and duties.
20 Q. Very well. The next document I'd like to have a look at is your
21 tab 38. In e-court it is 4D138. The date on the document is first the
22 29th of October 1994 and then the 31st of October 1994. MUP of the RS
24 A. This document, order was sent to all administrations of the state
25 security department and the public security department to all public
1 security centres, and to all state security department centres, to all
2 public security stations, and to the school of the interior in Banja
3 Luka. That is to say, to everyone.
4 Q. Thank you. I wanted to go briefly through the document. Sorry
5 to interrupt. Let us look at the preamble. What does it say?
6 A. It says that this is a very urgent document. Do you mean that?
7 Q. No, go on.
8 A. Well, it says in accordance with an order issued by the minister,
9 and the order of the president of the republic declaring a state of war.
10 It means that this order is created on the basis of the previous two
11 orders specified.
12 Q. And we see that it has to do with the proclamation of a state of
13 war in at least one part of the republic which is the AOR of the 2nd
14 Corps. Can you please look at item 1 of the order?
15 A. According to item 1 of the order, all public and state security
16 centres shall form joint staffs which will control all police forces in
17 their respective areas and will be subordinated to the police forces
18 command staff of the MUP of Republika Srpska. That is to say, the
19 headquarters at the seat of the ministry.
20 Q. According to the second paragraph of item 1, who is included in
21 such staffs?
22 A. The staffs comprise the following: Chief of the CJB as the head
23 of staff, then deputy chief of the CJB as deputy head of staff, chief of
24 the state security department centre as member. Next is chief of the
25 police department or sector as member. And then we have the commander.
1 Q. Yes, but that is because it spills over to the next page.
2 A. Yes. Commander of the PJP as member. Then chief of the crime
3 police sector as member. And chief of the communications department as
5 Q. And this document sets out the composition of such staffs?
6 A. Yes. This is the composition of such a staff at the level of a
7 public security centre.
8 Q. In relation to this document, let us look at its last paragraph.
9 Can you tell us what it prescribes?
10 A. It defines that any further operational or operative plan of all
11 staffs will be drafted by the Chief of Staff of the MUP of Republika
13 Q. Therefore, the Chief of Staff of the police forces of the RS is
14 assigned a function here specifying his authority in the order.
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. As regards the staffs, let us look at the next document which is
17 tab 39 in your binder. It is Exhibit 4D280. It is a dispatch, number
18 K/5-1-248/95 dated 1 June 1995
19 A. I see it.
20 Q. I believe you have the document in front of you.
21 A. I do.
22 Q. Let us see the distribution list.
23 A. The document was sent to the heads of the two departments, that
24 is to say, the state security and public security department, to the
25 staff of the police forces command in Bijeljina, to the special police
1 brigade at Jahorina, to the SJB at Pale, and then we have three police
2 stations and so on and so forth.
3 Q. Perhaps we can stop here. Let's look at who sent this dispatch.
4 A. It says that it was sent by minister Zivko Rakic.
5 Q. In the first paragraph it says that the minister is forming a
6 staff to command and control the police forces in Pale comprising the
7 following people, among other names we can see Mr. Borovcanin's name on
8 the list. I'm interested in particular in the last sentence of the
9 dispatch. Can you tell us what was the reason to establish this staff?
10 A. As we can see from the last sentence, this staff was formed in
11 view of the newly created complex security situation in the wider
12 location of Pale municipality as a consequence of the NATO bombardment.
13 Q. Very well. We are done with this document. Let us look next at
14 your tab 42. In e-court it is Exhibit 4D139. Do you have the document
15 before you?
16 A. I do.
17 Q. On the first page of the document the date is 17 June 1995. Sent
18 by head of office Nenad Radovic. It says: "Please find enclosed the
19 conclusions from the Minister of the Interior specialist staff meeting
20 held on 16 June 1995
21 office of the minister about their implementation."
22 I'd like us to look at the next page. The date there is the 16th
23 of June. We can see the conclusions from the specialist staff meeting
24 referred to on page 1. Let's look at item 1, subitem (4).
25 A. I can see it.
1 Q. What is this about? What conclusion was reached at this meeting?
2 A. The conclusion was that staff should be established to control
3 the police forces. Its seat would be in the Tron facility in Pale.
4 Q. Very well, let's move on to the following document which is under
5 tab 40 in your binder. This is Exhibit 4D140 dispatch number K/5 --
6 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction: K/P307/95 dated 19
7 June 1995.
8 MR. LAZAREVIC: [Interpretation]
9 Q. It is obvious that this document is connected with the previous
10 one. Could you please tell us in the first paragraph which starts with
11 "we wish to inform you that ..." What is this about?
12 A. It says that a staff has been formed to command police forces in
13 the zone in which a state of war has been declared and a list is given of
14 its composition.
15 Q. Very well.
16 A. There are seven names here, am I supposed to read them? I don't
17 think this would be necessary.
18 Q. Of course not, everybody can see it. But after the names it says
19 and it lists the duties of the Sarajevo CJB and the Srbinje [Realtime
20 transcript read in error "Serbia
21 what would these be, also these include the special brigade?
22 A. The Sarajevo
24 existence of that staff, i.e., that the staff has been established. And
25 also the command of the special police brigade is also duty-bound to
1 inform all special police detachments.
2 Q. Very well, we will continue and pursue this topic but I need to
3 make a correction in the transcript, which is on page 17, line 22, it
4 says here Serbia
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Very well. Let's look at the penultimate paragraph of this
7 dispatch which says the staff's headquarters are in the Tron facility in
8 Pale, is that correct?
9 A. This confirms that the conclusion reached at the ministry
10 meeting, i.e., one of the orders contained therein.
11 Q. When we are talking about this staff headquartered in Tron this
12 would be the same staff that effectively was in command of the police
13 forces or in control of the police forces in June 1995 as it is referred
14 to in paragraph 295 of your expert report. This would be the same staff?
15 A. Yes, there was no other staff established. It's the one and the
16 same staff.
17 Q. In order to simplify things for the Trial Chamber when it comes
18 to the staff, I would like us to look at the thing that can be found
19 under tab 72 in your binder, which is the schematic that can be found in
20 Exhibit 4D459. Do you have the schematic in front of you?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Could you please explain the schematic for us. Here we have two
23 types of lines. One is the lines of command or control responsibility
24 which is represented by a full line and the second schematic is
25 represented by a dotted line which depicts the line of cooperation or
1 influence. Wouldn't that be correct?
2 A. Yes. You are absolutely right there.
3 Q. Could you please provide some explanation. In the upper part of
4 this schematic there's the Supreme Command from which an arrow leads to
5 the line of command or control responsibility towards the minister.
6 A. In the upper part we have an elliptic circle depicting the words
7 Supreme Command and a line leading to the Minister of the Interior. We
8 also have a dotted line leading in the opposite direction which shows the
9 position of the Minister of the Interior in the Supreme Command as a
10 member of the Supreme Command. Further on we follow the line of command
11 under the minister, there is the staff of the police forces and again it
12 says here that the minister is also the commander and this staff also has
13 its chief and its members. We already spoke about that either yesterday
14 or the day before. We mentioned the exact composition of that staff.
15 And below that is special police brigade staff controls the units
16 of the Ministry of the Interior as one of the two components of the armed
17 forces, we are talking about the bolded square or rectangular. Further
18 on we have two lines leading towards the special police brigade in the
19 left lower corner and right of that and below the units of the Minister
20 of the Internal Affairs, we also have separate police units or PJPs.
21 Between the special police brigade and the separate police units
22 or PJPs, there is a dotted line with arrows on both ends of that line,
23 which implies that these two types of police units do engage in certain
24 form of cooperation but there is no other hierarchical or command or
25 subordination relationship between the two. In other words, they are at
1 an equal footing because they stand on the same line, so to speak.
2 Q. Very well then. Could you please explain the right part of this
3 schematic starting with the police forces staff. Could you please
4 explain the command line towards the public security centre?
5 A. There is a full line between the minister and the public security
6 sector and from there to the police administration which is only natural
7 given the organisational structure of the ministry.
8 From the police forces staff, there is a line on the right-hand
9 side leading to the public security centres. You see that it says the
10 commander of PJP which is only natural because the police forces staff
11 should have a control line leading to the commander of the PJP and the
12 chief of the public security centre and somewhat further to the left, we
13 also have a situation that from the public security sector there is a
14 line with very short arrows leading to the administration of the centre
15 of the public security centres because they are part of the sector of
16 public security, and we also have a very short dotted line from the
17 police administration towards public security centres and this represents
18 the model of cooperation and influence which is normal in planning and
19 some other activities that are undertaken by the two, which means that
20 the administration of the police as a professional organ within the
21 security sector has a capacity to be able to realise a form of
22 cooperation in professional terms and they have influence on the level
23 that implies the public security centres and this is what this schematic
25 Q. [Microphone not activated].
1 THE INTERPRETER: Off mic, the counsel is off mic.
2 MR. LAZAREVIC: [Interpretation] I believe that we will no longer
3 need this document.
4 JUDGE KWON: According to this schematic, the special police
5 brigade is directly subordinate to the units of the Ministry of Internal
6 Affairs but theoretically speaking but special police brigade is not a
7 subordinate organ of the unit of the MUP. Rather, it is directly
8 subordinate to the ministry or minister?
9 MR. LAZAREVIC: Your Honours, if maybe we can -- maybe we can
11 JUDGE KWON: I understand. I would understand the witness wanted
12 to emphasize the units of the ministry as one of the component of armed
13 forces. But if you look at the PJP in this schematic, while it is
14 directly subordinated to CJB or public security centre, it is also
15 directly subordinated to the minister or the units of The Ministry of
16 Internal Affairs. If you could clarify that.
17 MR. LAZAREVIC: Yes, I'll do my best.
18 Q. [Interpretation] We have already had an opportunity to talk about
19 the law on the application of the Law on the Interior or the Law on
20 Internal Affairs, and we have already emphasized that the minister
21 through the staff controls the police units that are engaged in combat.
22 Wouldn't that be correct?
23 A. Yes, absolutely correct.
24 Q. Now, if we look at the command line here in the schematic leading
25 from the minister, it leads across the police forces staff to the unions
1 of the Ministry of the Internal Affairs?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. And as far as I can understand, you have only separated the units
4 of the Ministry of the Internal Affairs into special police brigade of
5 the police and separate police units or PJPs in keeping with the law on
6 the application of the Law on Internal Affairs during an imminent threat
7 of war or war?
8 A. Yes, that is correct.
9 Q. In other words, the minister also controls the special and
10 separate police units through the police forces staff?
11 A. The minister controls all police units through the police forces
12 staff according to this law.
13 Q. Irrespective of the nature of the police units, be it the special
14 police brigade which is under the direct command of the minister or
15 separate police units?
16 A. That's why the police forces staff has been established in the
17 first place.
18 Q. And at the same time the minister is also the commander of the
19 police forces staff; is that correct?
20 A. Yes, it is clear. Here below the minister it says commander, in
21 brackets, minister and I believe it is self-explanatory.
22 JUDGE KWON: If I can be more clear. So the thing is that the
23 minister can command and control PJP either directly or through CJB,
24 that's what the witness emphasized. Thank you.
25 MR. LAZAREVIC: [Interpretation] Very well.
1 Q. Let's move on to the next document which is under tab 41 in your
2 binder, and the exhibit number in e-court is 4D295. This is a decision
3 by the president of Republika Srpska on the proclamation of the state of
4 war in the zone of responsibility of the Sarajevo-Romanija Corps dated 17
5 June 1995. What I would like us to look at in particular is item 3 of
6 this decision.
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. What armed forces are referred to herein? In what zone, rather.
9 A. This is referring to the zone of the Sarajevo-Romanija Corps.
10 This decision on declaring a state of war provides that all armed forces
11 are duty-bound to take on necessary measures to achieve the defined aims
12 and in light of the date which is 17 June 1995, we know what had been
13 provided by the law dating from autumn 1994. We know what is implied by
14 armed forces. Armed forces imply two components, those are the Army of
15 Republika Srpska is the first component of the armed forces, and units of
16 the Ministry of the Interior as the second components of the armed
18 Q. Very well. Now, I would like to move on to the next document in
19 your binder. It is number 44 and in e-court it is 4D294. This is a
20 dispatch from the command of the Herzegovina Corps conveying the decision
21 of the president of Republika Srpska on the proclamation of a state of
22 war in the municipalities of [indiscernible], Srbinje, Cajnice, Ruda,
23 Visegrad, Gorazde and Rogatica. This dispatch bears the date of the 17
24 of June 1995 and now let's look at page 2 under bullet point 1.
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. Where were these municipalities, in the zone of what corps?
2 A. The municipalities listed in this document are in the zone of the
3 Drina Corps and parts of the zone of the Herzegovina Corps.
4 Q. With this regard, I would like us to look at the following
5 document which is number 45 in your binder, and in the e-court system it
6 is Exhibit number 4D340. This is a decision on declaring a state of war
7 in the municipalities of Srebrenica and Skelani. The date is 14 July
8 1995, and let's just look at the first bullet point of this decision.
9 A. I can see this. According to this decision, a state of war is
10 proclaimed in the territory of the municipalities of Srebrenica-Skelani.
11 Q. Is this document in relation with the previous one on declaring a
12 state of war in the municipalities falling in the AOR of the Drina
14 A. Yes. This is another decision on the declaration of a state of
15 war in one part of the RS territory.
16 Q. To conclude with this set of documents, the next one I'd like us
17 to look at is tab 46 in your binder. In e-court it is 4D351. The date
18 is the 28th of July 1995. Decision on the proclamation of a state of war
19 in the territory of the whole of Republika Srpska declared by president
20 of the republic Karadzic. Is this in relation with the previous two
22 A. Yes, it is. However, for the first time in this decision, a
23 state of war is being declared in the territory of the whole of Republika
25 Q. I have a few documents left that have to do with the declaration
1 of a state of war. This is tab 74 in your binder, whereas in e-court it
2 is 4D218.
3 A. I have the document.
4 Q. It is a decision on the establishment of war presidencies in the
5 municipalities during a state of war. Let's look at item 1.
6 A. I can see it.
7 Q. Very well. Have a look at item 4 as well whereby there is some
8 mention of cooperation on the part of the war presidencies.
9 A. Yes, it says that during the state of war --
10 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction, item 1.
11 THE WITNESS: -- that war presidencies will be established in the
12 municipalities of the Serbian city of Sarajevo. In item 4 certain
13 obligations of such presidencies are mentioned entailing standing and
14 direct cooperation with unit commands in the area of the municipalities
15 with a view to coordinating and informing all state institutions in the
16 territory of the given municipality in matters important for defence and
17 life of the population.
18 Q. Did war presidencies have any command competencies over say MUP
20 A. No. Although they were called war presidencies, these were
21 civilian organs. They had no authority over any structures of the MUP or
22 the army of the RS.
23 Q. Thank you. Let's go to tab 75 next. In e-court it is 4D354. It
24 is a dispatch from the office of the Minister of the Interior of the RS
25 dated the 2nd of August 1995. It was sent to all RJBs, CJBs, and SJBs.
1 Do you have the document?
2 A. I do.
3 Q. Let's look at the part of the document which says: "Pursuant to
4 these guidelines ..." What does this document refer to when mentioning
5 such guidelines?
6 A. It is in direct relation with my previous statement. From the
7 level of the ministry, this dispatch is being sent to those mentioned on
8 the distribution list stating that municipal war presidencies cannot
9 issue any orders to centres and stations of public security, since those
10 are MUP units and such are part of the Armed Forces of Republika Srpska.
11 Those forces are controlled by the minister, as stated herein. It is
12 also stressed by this dispatch that the minister executes the orders of
13 the president of the republic who is the Supreme Commander.
14 Q. Let us move to the next document next. It is your tab 47. In
15 e-court 4D247. It is an order signed for the minister Zivko Rakic who
16 was the then internal minister of the RS. The date is the 30th of March
17 1995. Let's have a look at the order. It talks about the first Jahorina
18 special police detachment to be sent in combat against sabotage and
19 terrorist groups in the area of Konjevic Polje?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. I'm interested in the second paragraph. It says that: "The
22 police forces staff of the Zvornik CJB is to control all the MUP forces
23 in executing a combat task along the axis Vlasenici-Zvornik."
24 A. I can see it.
25 Q. This document entitles the CJB centre with controlling all MUP
1 forces along that axis?
2 A. Yes, that's correct.
3 Q. In relation to that, let's have a look at another document which
4 is tab 48.
5 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Vanderpuye.
6 MR. VANDERPUYE: Thank you, Mr. President. I apologise again for
7 the intervention but it appears to me that the record is unclear that the
8 witness's conclusion that it entitles the police forces staff of the
9 Zvornik CJB to control all the MUP forces when that axis should be tied
10 to the particular order and the particular date. That is the assignment
11 that is specified in the order.
12 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay, I understand.
13 MR. VANDERPUYE: Thank you, Mr. President.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you. Yes, Mr. Lazarevic would you look into
15 that, please. I think Mr. Vanderpuye is right.
16 MR. LAZAREVIC: Yes, but the document is self-explanatory. It
17 says I think what are the capacity of the MUP staff from CJB Zvornik in
18 this respect in this very particular operation from March 1995. I'm not
19 suggesting anything other than that.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: No, no, I think --
21 MR. VANDERPUYE: That's fine, Mr. Lazarevic. I just want the
22 record to be clear.
23 JUDGE AGIUS: That's fine. Let's proceed then, please, thank
25 MR. LAZAREVIC: [Interpretation]
1 Q. Do you have the document before you? It should be your tab 48.
2 A. I do.
3 Q. It is 4D387. A dispatch sent from the CJB Zvornik sent by head
4 of centre Dragomir Vasic on the 21st of March 1995. As stipulated
5 therein, it says that the subject is a report from the meeting of the
6 centre police forces staff. I'm interested in the first paragraph. It
7 says: "Acting on your order, on the 21st of March 1995, a meeting of the
8 police forces staff of the Zvornik public security centre was held ... "
9 and then there is an analysis provided. We can conclude from the
10 document that on the 21st of March 1995, there had already been a police
11 forces staff at the Zvornik public security centre in existence?
12 A. Yes, that is obvious.
13 Q. Let's look at the next document. It is your tab 49. The Exhibit
14 number is 4D333. Do you have it in front of you?
15 A. I do.
16 Q. Very well. Briefly then it is a dispatch sent on the 9th of July
17 1995 sent from the public security centre in Zvornik. What was the
18 function or the capacity of Dragomir Vasic given the fact that he signed
19 the document?
20 A. Mr. Dragomir Vasic signed this as the staff commander of the
21 police forces of the public security centre in Zvornik.
22 Q. Very well. Let's look at the next document. It is your tab 50.
23 The date is the 10th of July 1995. Again we see that it was signed for
24 staff commander Dragomir Vasic but it was signed by someone else.
25 A. That is correct.
1 Q. Is this in relation to ...
2 A. Yes, we can see that the first one was the 9th of July, the
3 second was 10th of July. We see that the staff was in operation and the
4 documents were signed by Dragomir Vasic.
5 Q. Let's look at the next document. It is your tab 51, 4D339.
6 Another dispatch of the 12th of July 1995 sent from Zvornik and let's
7 look again at the signature block. Who signed the document and in what
9 A. It says Dragomir Vasic, he signed it as the staff commander of
10 the police forces of the public security centre in Zvornik.
11 Q. To round off the topic, we'll use the next document, which is tab
12 52. In e-court it is 4D --
13 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction: P66.
14 MR. LAZAREVIC: [Interpretation]
15 Q. The date is 1 August 1995
16 focus on the first paragraph which reads: "Pursuant to your dispatch, we
17 held a meeting of the war staff of the centre that has been in operation
18 as of the date of your order of the 21st of March 1995."
19 Based on the documents we just saw, it is obvious that the war
20 staff at the centre existed at that time. According to the documents we
21 saw, it began functioning at the latest on the 21st of March 1995, and it
22 was also operational in the month of August of 1995?
23 A. That is correct. These are the facts. It says here the 21st of
24 March. It means that it was the latest day as of which it started
25 operating and it lasted at least until August as referred to in the
1 documents. That is my conclusion, that the staff was in operation at
2 least during that period of time.
3 Q. In order to deal with all the issues that need to be clarified
4 thoroughly, I ask you this. This staff controlled all MUP units that
5 were in the territory of Zvornik
6 that were sent to various AORs and were under the command of the various
8 A. Yes, the police forces staff of the centre in Zvornik was the
9 controlling body of all police units that were in the territory of the
10 centre of Zvornik. All police units that were in the area were under the
11 command of that staff except of course for the units which were made part
12 of the army of the RS, which were of a different nature.
13 Q. Very well. To round off the topic of staffs, let's look at the
14 next document, which is your tab 53. In e-court it is 4D245. A dispatch
15 sent from the command of the staff of police forces. The date is the
16 25th of March 1995. Do you have it before you?
17 A. I do.
18 Q. According to this document, can we conclude that there were
19 certain problems with the procedure of police forces being engaged in
20 combat, as specified herein, it says that certain personnel in managerial
21 positions tried to bypass the prescribed procedure requesting the use of
22 police forces?
23 A. Judging by this document, I conclude that certain people tried to
24 bypass the prescribed procedure requesting and arranging for the police
25 forces in combat operations. In the latter part of the dispatch we can
1 see that minister Zivko Rakic is requesting that all engagement of MUP
2 forces in combat be arranged only through the main command of the police
3 forces of the MUP as the only body competent and responsible for such
5 Q. Very well.
6 MR. LAZAREVIC: I think I'll be able to finish within 20 to 25
7 minutes. This was a very serious topic and I really needed to cover it
9 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, we wouldn't restrain you in any way,
10 Mr. Lazarevic. We'll have a 25-minute break starting from now. Thank
12 --- Recess taken at 10.29 a.m.
13 --- On resuming at 10.58 a.m.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Lazarevic.
15 MR. LAZAREVIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
16 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Bajagic, I will do my utmost to move
17 speedily. In order to clarify a couple of things from your testimony
18 which -- concerning some things which took place this morning, let's go
19 back to your tab 47. It is 4D00247. Let us look at the distribution
20 list of this order.
21 A. This order was sent to the command of the special police brigade
22 to the command of the first detachment of the special police at Jahorina
23 and to the centre for training of police dogs and horses.
24 Q. And it transpires from this order as it does from the schematic
25 that we have already analysed, let's not go back to it, that there is the
1 first special police detachment as seated on Jahorina, is that correct?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. And this first detachment has nothing whatsoever to do with the
4 centre for education on Jahorina?
5 A. That's correct. It has nothing whatsoever to do -- the first
6 detachment has nothing whatsoever to do with it. It's just one of the
7 nine detachments of the special police brigade which is located on
8 Jahorina just like the centre was located on Jahorina, but these are two
9 different things.
10 Q. In other words, this is a geographical coincidence?
11 A. Yes, the same area.
12 Q. Very well, I believe and I hope that this is now clear, and now I
13 would like to move on to the next chapter in your expert report, which is
14 reporting in the Ministry of the Interior, and I would like us to look at
15 a document that is under tab 57 in your -- 54 in your binder.
16 THE INTERPRETER: The Interpreter's correction.
17 MR. LAZAREVIC: [Interpretation]
18 Q. This is 4D193 in e-court. This is an instruction on urgent
19 ongoing and statistical reporting. This is a rather comprehensive
20 document. My question to you is this: The basic document that regulates
21 the issue of reporting within the Ministry of the Interior?
22 A. Yes. This is the basic document in the form of an instruction
23 about all forms of reporting within the Republika Srpska MUP.
24 Q. In order to speed things along, I would like us to look at your
25 expert report, paragraph 304 in your expert report. The Exhibit number
1 is 4D499. In keeping with this instruction that we have just seen in
2 e-court, could you please tell us firstly in paragraph 304 you have
3 explained the notion of urgent reporting. What are the two types of
4 urgent reporting within the Ministry of the Interior?
5 A. Among the four main aspects of reporting in the Ministry of the
6 Interior of Republika Srpska, one of them is urgent reporting which can
7 be carried out in two ways. The first one would be written reporting by
8 way of documents also known as dispatches, and secondly, orally by way of
9 means of communications, mostly telephone.
10 Q. Very well, let's move on to paragraph 308 on the following page
11 of your expert report. Here you deal with current and ongoing or
12 occasional reporting. Could you please tell us in keeping with the book
13 of rules that we have just had an opportunity to look at, what would be
14 the definition of current reporting as opposed to occasional reporting?
15 A. These are two aspects of reporting within the MUP. The first one
16 is current reporting which implies written information or sending of
17 written information about one or several security events and measures
18 that were undertaken with respect to any of these events.
19 On the other hand, the written information can be collective
20 analysis or overviews, as well as all forms of urgent reporting. On the
21 other hand, occasional reporting is carried out in the form of various
22 types of analyses and reports about certain incidents or events or a
23 single event, phenomenon or integral information submitted by the
24 regional organs of the interior and I'm referring here to public security
25 centres and stations. As well as some other information that concern the
1 activities of the Ministry of the Interior.
2 Q. Now let's move on to paragraph 310 of your expert report which is
3 statistical reporting. And just briefly in keeping with this
4 instruction, what are the forms or aspects of statistical reporting and
5 how is statistical reporting carried out?
6 A. Statistical report is carried out by means of sending various
7 reports on previously designed statistical forms. There are several
8 forms of statistical reporting. Under 1 it would be regular reporting,
9 under number 2 it would be monthly, number 3 would be quarterly, number 4
10 would be half yearly, and number 5 would be annual statistical reporting.
11 Q. Very well. And now I would like to ask you this: Based on the
12 documents that you perused and analysed would you say that there were
13 some problems with the application of this instruction when it comes to
14 the reporting within the MUP of Republika Srpska?
15 A. In the last paragraphs of this chapter of my expert report I have
16 mentioned some examples of operation from the established procedure which
17 is defined by the instruction on reporting and informing. I'm talking
18 about several or just a few situations that I have singled out based on
19 the documents that I had an occasion to use when drafting my report.
20 Q. Very well. These are the two or three documents that I would
21 like us now to see. First of all, let's look at tab 55 in your binder.
22 In e-court this is 4D204. This is a dispatch by the assistant minister
23 Tomislav Kovac dated 24 July 1993
24 chiefs. I would like to draw your attention to the first paragraph
25 starting with the words "public security stations". Could you please
1 read the sentence starting with the words "public security stations do
2 not submit their reports in time or not at all and they in turn do not
3 report to the MUP headquarters"?
4 A. I can see that.
5 Q. Does this refer to the reporting procedure envisaged by the
6 instruction from the public security stations to the security services
7 centres and then to the MUP headquarters?
8 A. Yes, this is how things should have been in keeping with the
9 instruction. However, some omissions in the procedure have been noticed
10 and addressed here.
11 Q. Very well. And now let's look at the second paragraph, referring
12 to an order that is being issued to the chiefs mentioned in the dispatch.
13 It says here that public security stations are hereby ordered that as of
14 1st of August 1993, and can you please look at the rest of the sentence,
15 "... daily informed the authorised CSBs about security events in their
16 areas, and the centres will then process information received from the
17 stations in the form of a 'daily bulletins' and deliver them by dispatch
18 to the MUP by no later than 2400 hours of the day in question." Is this
19 what you've just spoken about in regard to the procedure?
20 A. Yes. This is just another reinforcement of the order issued to
21 the public security stations and security services centres asking them to
22 adhere to the procedure on future reporting starting with the 1st of
23 August 1993.
24 Q. Very well then. Let's look at the penultimate paragraph of the
1 A. It says here that the SJBs and centres are still obliged to
2 inform the MUP about certain important occurrences as soon as they learn
3 about such occurrences.
4 Q. And now, the last paragraph of this dispatch. According to this
5 dispatch, who will be responsible for the execution of this assignment?
6 A. The SJB chiefs and the CSB
7 the execution of this order.
8 Q. The next document that I would like us to look at should be under
9 tab 56 in your binder. These are the provisions of the instruction on
10 all kinds of reporting and other documents. The date is 19 April 1995,
11 and let's not go and repeat the addressees. Just below that, there's
12 something that I would like to look at. The sentence starts with the
13 words: "We are drawing your attention once again ..." I apologise, this
14 is Exhibit 4D256.
15 A. Yes, I can see that.
16 Q. It says here reiterate the need to strictly observing reporting
17 regulations. Would this confirm what you've already spoken about?
18 A. Yes, this confirms that there have been occurrences when
19 instructions were not observed, and attention is once again drawn to the
20 need to obey the procedure when it comes to all sorts of reporting, i.e.,
21 the instruction that we just looked at.
22 Q. And now, let's look at the last document that I've prepared for
23 the examination-in-chief with regard to the topic of informing and
24 reporting in the MUP. It's under tab 57 in your binder, and this is
25 Exhibit 4D273 in the e-court system.
1 A. Yes, I can see that.
2 Q. This is another dispatch by minister Zivko Rakic bearing the date
3 25 -- 20 of September 1995. It is clear who the addressees are. Let's
4 look at the first paragraph for the time being, the starting words are:
5 "We hereby inform you of the need for consistent implementation of the
6 instruction on urgent, current, occasional and statistical reporting."
7 Does this point to the fact?
8 A. Yes, it does. This is already the third situation that I became
9 aware of. Dispatches sent to reiterate the need to strictly observe the
11 Q. Let's look at the last paragraph of this dispatch, what does it
13 A. It says here that the dispatch is to be considered an amendment
14 to the previously mentioned instruction and it also says here that a
15 failure to abide by all the provisions of that instruction shall
16 constitute a violation of duty within the Ministry of the Interior.
17 Q. Very well then. Let's on move on to the next -- actually the
18 last part of your expert report dealing with ranks and functional
19 insignia in the MUP of Republika Srpska, my general first question is
20 this: When it comes to ranks and functional insignia in the MUP can they
21 be compared with the military ranks and functional insignia? I
22 apologise. There are no functional insignia in the military at all so
23 just dealing with ranks.
24 A. According to what I could conclude drafting my report and
25 otherwise ranks and functional insignia in the Ministry of the Interior
1 including the Ministry of the Interior of Republika Srpska differ from
2 the ranks in the Armed Forces, i.e., the military.
3 Q. Very well. Let's look at your tab 58 which is Exhibit 4D103.
4 This is an order on uniform functions and insignia in the police. Number
5 is 404/76-92 dated 21 October 1992
6 wearing of uniforms and functional insignia in the MUP. Let's
7 immediately go to page 20 in B/C/S or page 10 in the English version of
8 this document.
9 You have them on the screen in front of you?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Are these the functional insignia worn by the police?
12 A. Yes. These are insignia of positions or functional insignia in
13 the Ministry of the Interior.
14 Q. Very well. And now can we look at Article 13 of this decree. In
15 e-court this is on pages 9 and 10 in B/C/S and on pages 5 and 6 in
16 English. As may be seen in the title, the chapter deals with functions
17 and functional insignia. I'm not going to go into the details of all of
18 these functions. I would just like to ask you this: According to this
19 decree, there are no ranks of captain major, captain or lieutenant in the
21 A. You are right. Functional insignia do not imply the use of those
22 particular terms.
23 Q. In order to explain the genesis of functional relationships and
24 ranks, I would like us to look at the following document which concerns
25 this particular matter. This is the law on the promulgation of the law
1 on amendments to the Law of Interior dated 31st of December 1994. In
2 your case this is tab 59. On page 2 we can see Article 1178 [as
3 interpreted]. This is on page 2 of the B/C/S version and in English it
4 is on page 3. What can you tell us about that?
5 A. I apologise, could you please repeat the number of this article?
6 Q. 1178 [as interpreted]. This is Exhibit number 208 in e-court,
7 page 2 in B/C/S, page 3 in English.
8 A. Article 117A speaks about the introduction of ranks in the
9 ministry for authorised officials, that is to say, for several categories
10 of authorised officials.
11 Q. Let us move on to the next tab in your binder. It is number 60.
12 It is 4D279. While we are waiting for the English version, tell us this,
13 please, this regulation, in its lower right-hand corner includes
14 corrections to the law on the amendments to the Law on Internal Affairs,
15 isn't that so?
16 A. Yes. There were several corrections and amendments to the law.
17 Q. The date is the 28th of May 1995?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. The next document I'd like us to look at is your tab 61. It is
20 4D259. Decision on the establishment of ranks and functions and
21 promotion to police ranks of authorised officials of the MUP. The number
22 is 01-713/95 dated the 20th of April 1995. Let's have a look at Article
23 25. It is the last article. In its final provisions it says that the
24 Minister of the Interior within 30 days following the decision will issue
25 the table of ranks for authorised officials?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Therefore the deadline was set at 30 days?
3 A. Yes, 30 days.
4 Q. Very well. Were there any problems in the field when
5 implementing this task of conferring the ranks?
6 A. I presume there was a problem. All of the events in the first
7 and the second half of 1995 must have slowed down the implementation of
8 all administrative acts put in force by the ministry as regards such
9 administrative nature tasks which had to be implemented in the field.
10 Q. Let us move to the next document. It is tab 62. Exhibit 4D243.
11 It is a dispatch of minister Zivko Rakic. The date is 14 of March 1995.
12 In item 1 it says that on the 18th of March 1995 there will be a session
13 of the expanded collegium of the MUP. Let us look at the agenda. It's
14 item 3.
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. What is it about?
17 A. Among other items on the agenda of the meeting of the expanded
18 collegium of the ministry, the item 3 should have been dedicated to
19 information on the draft decision on the establishment of ranks in the
21 Q. Let's look at the next document. It is 63 in your binder.
22 Exhibit 4D257. It is another dispatch by minister Zivko Rakic. The date
23 is the 19th of April 1995.
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. The beginning of the dispatch says: "In order to amend the rules
1 on job specification and assignment of lowest and highest ranks for each
2 post of authorised official at the Ministry of the Interior, I hereby
3 appoint the following commission ..." And we have five members listed.
4 A. Yes. The commission was being formed in order to amend the rules
5 on job specification and assignment of ranks. According to the document,
6 the commission had five members.
7 Q. Let's look at the penultimate paragraph, what is the deadline set
8 for the proposal?
9 A. It is the 30th of April 1995.
10 Q. Let us have the next document. It is your tab 64. Exhibit 4D77.
11 Do you have it in front of you?
12 A. I do.
13 Q. Have a look at the date of the document.
14 A. We can see that the number is strictly confidential K/P-101695.
15 The date is 2 August 1995
16 Q. I see another date, the date when the document was received which
17 is the 15th of August 1995.
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Subject is regulations on the classification of tasks and duties
20 in the Ministry of the Interior directed at lower organisational units?
21 A. Yes, that's correct.
22 Q. Therefore on 15 August, they still did not have the new
23 regulations on the classifications of tasks and duties based on which
24 they could pursue that exercise in their units?
25 A. Yes. This document points to the fact that by mid-August, there
1 had been no application of the regulations under classifications of tasks
2 because it had to be in keeping with all of the documentation of the MUP
3 that had to do with the classification of tasks and duties. This
4 document was sent to all employees of the MUP for information.
5 THE INTERPRETER: The counsel is off mic.
6 MR. LAZAREVIC: [Interpretation]
7 Q. A few last questions about the documents you analysed. When were
8 the ranks finally confirmed in the Ministry of the Interior of Republika
10 A. The timing was rather slow. In the end, the ranks were regulated
11 as late as October 1995.
12 Q. Very well. Let's look at the last two documents. The first is
13 your tab 65. Exhibit 4D361. Let us look at the date of the document.
14 It is the 20th of October 1995. Is that so?
15 A. Yes, it is.
16 Q. According to this decision, on early promotion to higher rank, it
17 is obvious that a Mr. Borovcanin was early promoted to the rank of
18 colonel, but his first established rank had been that of major?
19 A. That is correct.
20 Q. The last document I wanted to look at is tab 66. It is 4D531.
21 It is a decree number 01-197/97 of the RS president Biljana Plavsic dated
22 the 21st of April 1997. By this decree Colonel Ljubomir Borovcanin is
23 being promoted early to the rank of police major-general?
24 A. That is correct.
25 MR. LAZAREVIC: Thank you, Mr. Bajagic, I have no further
1 questions for you.
2 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you, Mr. Lazarevic. Mr. Zivanovic.
3 MR. ZIVANOVIC: I shan't cross-examine this witness, thank you.
4 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you. Mr. Ostojic.
5 MR. OSTOJIC: I do have a few questions, Mr. President, if I may.
6 I would need the podium.
7 Cross-examination by Mr. Ostojic:
8 Q. Good morning, professor. My name is John Ostojic. I represent a
9 gentleman who is a colonel in the VRS in 1995 by the name of Ljubisa
10 Beara. How are you?
11 A. Good morning to you, too.
12 Q. I have a couple of questions and just bear with me here. First,
13 I'd like to ask you about your CV ever so briefly. I noticed that you
14 worked in the MUP in Serbia
15 CV, so if you could just give me those dates again that would be helpful.
16 If you turn to your CV and I'll direct you exactly to the section I'm
17 referring to. Under the employment it says MUP of the Republic of Serbia
18 police academy assistant intern and assistant. What year was that?
19 A. It was from September 1996, I was hired as an intern assistant at
20 the police academy which had certain organisational functional ties with
21 the ministry of the Internal Affairs. That is why I referred to the MUP.
22 Q. The one below that sir, it says state security service of the MUP
23 of the Republic of Serbia
24 research centre, lecture?
25 A. It was not the state security service but the state security
1 department. I taught there intelligence and counterintelligence at their
2 educational centre. I was there as a lecturer.
3 Q. What years?
4 A. I think it was in 2002.
5 Q. Now, because what I'd like to go and focus some of my questions
6 to you on the issue of reporting and the obligations of MUP personnel to
7 report things that they may have seen or heard. But I'd like to know
8 first if the same reporting requirements that you discuss in your rather
9 exhaustive report also are similar to those that are in Serbia. Are they
10 the same or do the rules change from Serbia to the Republika Srpska, if
11 you know, in 1995?
12 A. I never had occasion to study any rules of reporting for the
13 Republic of Serbia
14 different areas as a lecturer. I never analysed any documents referring
15 to the Republic of Serbia
16 Q. Okay. Because in your report you talk and you make some
17 comparisons to Great Britain and what their rules and obligations may be,
18 as well as the United States of America. Are you telling me that you
19 don't know what the reporting requirements are of MUP personnel from the
20 Republic of Serbia
21 A. The examples of Great Britain, Germany and Croatia
22 were there as regards to administrative police activities, and it was
23 specific to this report. I analysed those only so as to be able to
24 provide a comparative view. As for reporting and informing, I never read
25 any manuals for the MUP of Serbia because I was never operationally
1 involved with the MUP of Serbia. I do believe, however, that for the
2 most part, they are similar to the similar regulations of the countries
3 and its environs in times of peace. In Serbia, there was no state of
4 national necessity as it was the case with Republika Srpska.
5 Q. And I'll move away from that subject. Thank you. Sir, I'd like
6 us to look at a couple of documents, but first I want to ask you, because
7 you looked at some documents from a person by the name of Dragomir Vasic.
8 Are you familiar or have you seen documents from Dragomir Vasic where he
9 reports that there was no cooperation from the VRS in July of 1995?
10 A. I don't know precisely. Perhaps I could look at the document and
11 then offer a comment.
12 Q. We'll get to the document in a second. Are you aware that
13 Dragomir Vasic also in July of 1995 reports to his superior in the MUP
14 that there was no assistance from the VRS? Are you aware of that?
15 A. When drafting the report, I read a plethora of documents but it
16 doesn't necessarily mean that all are being referred to in the report
17 itself. I stress again, if we are talking about a specific document,
18 please let me have a look at it and then I may provide you with a
20 Q. And I will. You will get a chance to look at it and I would
21 appreciate your comment on it, but I just wanted to know if you were
22 familiar with it just generally speaking or if you have a recollection of
23 it. Now, are you familiar at all or do you recall seeing a document
24 where -- go ahead.
25 A. Well, probably there were some. Some were singled out in my
1 report as well. But without the specific document at hand, I can't
2 provide anything more precise than this, any conclusions.
3 Q. I understand that. And are you aware that Dragomir Vasic also in
4 a report in July, I think 13th, of 1995 states that the MUP was acting
5 alone in certain operations or in a certain operation. Are you aware of
7 MR. LAZAREVIC: I would just like to be fair to the witness.
8 This is an expert witness. He was talking about procedures. He was
9 talking about laws and rules which were in application at the time. He
10 didn't talk at all about any particular events. So if I don't know what
11 kind of -- if my colleague is trying to impeach the witness's credibility
12 with this.
13 MR. OSTOJIC: Of course not, of course not. I am just asking him
14 if he recalls it and my next question is to ask the Court to place P62 on
15 the screen. But I wanted to know if he has an independent recollection
16 of it, but if he speaks of procedures he should also know the procedures
17 if there was a detachment from MUP and the VRS at any time, specifically
18 in July of 1995.
19 JUDGE AGIUS: Let me consult with my colleagues.
20 [Trial Chamber confers]
21 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. Mr. Ostojic, you need to put the document
22 and any other documents that you have to the witness and ask him directly
23 on those documents.
24 MR. OSTOJIC: Oh, okay. Thank you, Mr. President. Can we have
25 P62, please, on the e-court.
1 Q. Professor, we have both or soon the English version as well but
2 you are looking at the B/C/S version of this document that's dated the
3 13th of July 1995. We'll give you an opportunity to review it. Let me
4 know when you've had that chance.
5 A. Yes, I've read the document.
6 Q. Because the next document I think follows this document but just
7 maybe you could help me. If you see the number on the top where it says
8 actually "number" in B/C/S, it's 282/95. Do you see that?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Do you know what that means?
11 A. This is the year and probably the document number and the
12 document was sent that year from an organisational unit.
13 Q. Now, having read this document, to whom is Dragomir Vasic sending
14 this report to?
15 A. To the MUP of Republika Srpska to the office of the minister at
16 Pale or also to the police forces staff in Bijeljina as well as to the
17 public security department. There are three addressees or at least that
18 is what is indicated here.
19 Q. And I think you said "or" and it was correctly typed out but I
20 think you meant "and" also to the police forces staff in Bijeljina,
21 right, it's "and," not that he is sending it to one or the other, he is
22 sending it to all three; correct?
23 A. Yes. To the police forces staff in Bijeljina, to the office of
24 the minister in Pale, and to the public security department.
25 Q. Okay. Now, I want to really focus on the second paragraph in
1 this Exhibit P62 and there's several words maybe you could help me with.
2 You see in the first sentence it states: "We have no cooperation or
3 assistance from the VRS ... " Do you see that?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. We had no cooperation and no assistance with the VRS in doing
6 what, sir? Well, read on.
7 MR. LAZAREVIC: I have to object at this point. I mean, these
8 are facts that Mr. Bajagic simply -- in my humble opinion he really
9 cannot testify about these particular events. As for the formal right,
10 as for to whom it was sent, as to everything about the facts, he is not a
11 factual witness and he is not aware of anything of the kind.
12 JUDGE AGIUS: Do you wish to reply, Mr. Ostojic?
13 MR. OSTOJIC: No, not really.
14 [Trial Chamber confers]
15 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. Vanderpuye.
16 MR. VANDERPUYE: Thank you, Mr. President, I appreciate that. I
17 do support Mr. Ostojic's position with respect to this matter. This
18 document contains a specific content which I think is the witness
19 entitled to opine about concerning the appropriate subject matter for the
20 reporting requirements which he has identified in this case, and I
21 support Mr. Ostojic in that application.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you. Our decision is as follows: Assuming
23 all -- or assuming that the witness is in a position to answer this
24 question, he must limit himself to the generics, you answer within a
25 generic way without going into specifics for the time being, unless you
1 are asked for them.
2 MR. OSTOJIC: I'm not sure I fully understand but I'll try my
3 best here, Mr. President.
4 JUDGE AGIUS: Let's see whether he is in a position to answer
5 your question to start with.
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] At the first reading of this
7 document, I can see that Mr. Dragomir Vasic has noticed some problems,
8 but I wouldn't be able to engage in any further analysis because in my
9 expert report I did not deal with any facts or relationships on the
10 ground. My main concern was the legal framework, that was the subject of
11 my analysis. However, I can say based on logic that there were problems,
12 but I wouldn't be able to tell you what problems those were.
13 MR. OSTOJIC:
14 Q. Okay. Well, Mr. Vasic goes on and says the problems he expects
15 he is going to have, but we won't ask you that fact. Let's keep it a
16 little generic. When Dragomir Vasic creates these reports and those that
17 you reviewed, they are required to be honest and factual, are they not?
18 MR. LAZAREVIC: I don't know how this witness can answer this
19 thing. I mean, whether Mr. --
20 JUDGE AGIUS: He could answer it based on his experience.
21 MR. OSTOJIC: Generically, I mean generally speaking do you --
22 MR. LAZAREVIC: Otherwise --
23 JUDGE AGIUS: He could have information which in his mind could
24 cast doubts on the reliability of this document and the author of the --
25 and its author. But it's up to you to tell us whether you have
1 sufficient information to be able to answer Mr. Ostojic's question.
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know anything about
3 Dragomir Vasic, save for what I could read about what he was at a given
4 moment in the public security centre. I don't know anything else to be
5 able to tell you whether he was honest or dishonest, sincere or not
6 sincere. I don't know how you put it. I don't know anything about that.
7 I only know and that is what I said in my report when I spoke about the
8 modalities of informing and reporting that somebody who was in charge of
9 the centre, the chief of that centre was duty-bound to inform the top
10 echelons at the ministry about any possible events or occurrences and
11 that's all. I don't know whether this is a satisfactory answer, sir.
12 MR. OSTOJIC:
13 Q. It is what it is. Let me ask you this, sir, if he reports or --
14 strike that.
15 You spent a lot of time in your report and your testimony these
16 couple of days talking about how there was this special unit that was
17 moved over under the auspices purportedly of the VRS. Did you find
18 anywhere in any of the documents, other than the one you are looking at,
19 that the MUP was working alone? Did you find those words by anybody that
20 they made that declaration, as opposed to with the VRS?
21 But to be fair to you, I invite you to look at that document and
22 again that second paragraph and it's in the second to the last line of
23 that paragraph.
24 JUDGE AGIUS: I see that the witness may have some difficulties
25 in reading the documents. Could we zoom in the B/C/S. Okay. All right.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] According to Mr. Dragomir Vasic's
2 words, in the sentence that the MUP is independent in the section, the
3 answer would be yes. But that's the only thing I can see in this
5 Q. Well, based on your experience and work in this case, what does
6 it mean when MUP works alone? Is that going back to the structures that
7 you've highlighted when they are not directed to go back or not directed
8 to attach themselves as a combat group with the VRS?
9 A. There were several situations so far when we have stated that the
10 units of the Ministry of the Interior were parts of the Armed Forces.
11 That certain units or parts of these units in particular situations acted
12 in concert with the Army of Republika Srpska. According to the principle
13 of resubordination and the other part of those units could act pursuant
14 to the orders of the Supreme Command which were conveyed via the Minister
15 of the Interior as a commander of the staff of the Armed Forces of the
16 ministry, which means that not all the units acted as parts of the army.
17 There were some parts of the units or some units that were engaged along
18 the lines of command from the top of the ministry to the public security
19 stations depending on the situations on the ground.
20 Q. Professor, what you are telling me is theoretical and I
21 understand that and it's based upon the laws and the regulations that
22 you've highlighted for us these last few days, but I'm talking about
23 factually speaking looking at this document, if we accept it as being
24 true that here is a guy Dragomir Vasic reporting to the MUP, and I can
25 tell you, although you probably know this, there was no response from the
1 minister of interior denying that MUP should be working alone or
2 questioning whether or not MUP is working alone, but take that as a given
3 for my hypothetical, what does it mean when he says MUP is working alone?
4 MR. LAZAREVIC: It's a call for speculation. Obvious one.
5 [Trial Chamber confers]
6 JUDGE AGIUS: Can you answer this question or not? Because if
7 you can only speculate, then we don't need it, we don't need your answer.
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I cannot provide any further
9 explanations. I've already said everything I know.
10 MR. OSTOJIC:
11 Q. Okay, Professor. Let me try with this Exhibit, P886. If we
12 could have both the English and the B/C/S version up. As it's being
13 brought up I'll just give you a little background on it. It's a letter
14 or a report from Dragomir Vasic dated the 13th of July 1995. I'm going
15 to ask to you see what the serial number is on top or the number we refer
16 to, because the one we just looked at was 282/95, which was Exhibit P62,
17 this is P886, and just give us that number, if you could see it.
18 A. Yes, throughout 1995. But the last digit in the number is 3, I
20 Q. Looks like --
21 A. Or I could assume that it could also be 8. It could be either 3
22 or 8. I can't see the first one fully, it's not clear. It's not
24 Q. And in English also they were not sure so they put a question
25 mark 83/95, and that's fair. I just wanted to know if you could see it.
1 But it would seem that this report follows the prior one in any event
2 because it talks about the same thing and I'd like you to read it but to
3 direct your attention again to the first paragraph where it talks about
4 what the army was doing and they were continuing towards Zepa and then it
5 goes on to say "... and leaving all other work to the MUP as follows."
6 We'll get into the things below that but I wanted you to focus on that
7 sentence there.
8 A. I can see the bottom part of the document.
9 Q. I think he is asking to see the bottom part. Thank you.
10 A. Okay. It's fine, I've seen the document, yes.
11 Q. I want to focus on paragraph number 2 of this document for a
12 moment, where Dragomir Vasic after saying everything is being left -- all
13 the work is being left for MUP, he talks about "... killing of about
14 8.000 Muslim soldiers whom we blocked in the woods near Konjevic Polje.
15 Fighting is going on. This job is being done solely by MUP units." Do
16 you see that?
17 A. Yes, I can see this as item 2.
18 Q. Well, generically speaking, I guess, if a MUP person such as
19 Dragomir Vasic reports to his superior, and I know you went through this
20 analysis of I think it was horizontal, vertical and diagonal reporting,
21 and we will get to that in a little bit, but when he makes this report,
22 is he reporting it in all three-ways, horizontally, vertically, and
24 A. I don't know. I cannot put myself in the head of Mr. Dragomir
25 Vasic. I really don't know.
1 Q. I'm not asking you to do that because we are talking generic now.
2 Is he required to report it in those three manners, vertically,
3 horizontally, and diagonally? I mean we could also look at the top of
4 that page and see whom he really sends this report to, can we not, and
5 then deduce from that that indeed he does do it all three ways? But
6 let's talk generically, and you tell me, sir, do you think that he is
7 required to send it in those three manners?
8 A. This is not what is requested from him. He is duty-bound to
9 abide by the instruction on reporting within the Ministry of the
10 Interior. This is his duty. There should be no particular special
11 requests or orders upon him to do it.
12 Q. And I --
13 A. And this is just one type or kind of reporting.
14 Q. Now, I want to not backtrack, but now put it maybe in more focus.
15 If we could look at 4D339, please. And as it's being brought up, I'll
16 just let you know that this is also a report from Dragomir Vasic but from
17 the day before. And you are welcome to read the whole report, sir, if
18 you wish, but really I want to focus on the three subparagraphs in the
19 second half of this report which bear the numbers 1, 2, and 3. Do you
20 see that?
21 Again, this is one day before this discussion we had about
22 where Dragomir Vasic says no cooperation, no assistance on the 13th, they
23 are working alone. I want to look at those three paragraphs and really
24 highlight the fact that in paragraphs 1 and 3 he mentions actions that
25 were undertaken that were in cooperation with the VRS, but on number 2 he
1 clearly doesn't state that; correct?
2 A. Yes. I've read all the three items. If you are referring to the
3 lower part of the dispatch under 1, 2 and 3. Under 2 it says that one --
4 and it is only natural, my only comment can be general. These are some
5 special security tasks dealing with providing security for roads. This
6 is not an exclusively combat task. And number 2 speaks about the
7 engagement of certain units of the Ministry of the Interior in
8 cooperation of the units of the VRS. This is what I see. And this is
9 something that Mr. Dragomir Vasic reports about and sends a report to
10 others. These are general facts. I can see that there is cooperation.
11 I can see that one part of the unit is independent and that its other
12 part is in cooperation with the army. This is all I can say. None of
13 these facts, facts about the traffic, roads, some of these settlements,
14 none of it, this is too familiar to me and there's nothing in particular,
15 no particular conclusion I can draw upon reading this.
16 Q. Okay. Well, let me just then at the very least try to correct
17 the record, because on page 54, lines 25 and then proceeding on page 55,
18 lines 1 and 2, they recorded you as saying that paragraph number 2
19 indicates that there was cooperation with respect to this operation with
20 the VRS, but plainly, sir, that's not accurate and I'm not suggesting
21 that you said it wrong. I'm just suggesting perhaps it was just recorded
23 With respect to the ambushes in number 2, there is no language
24 whatsoever that indicates there was any cooperation with the VRS;
1 A. It is obvious it transpires from item 2, however.
2 Q. I just wanted to correct the record because I think they misheard
3 you, that's all, and so I'm not challenging you on it and I think it's
4 pretty obvious myself.
5 A. Very well then.
6 Q. Thanks. I read your report and I really had a little trouble
7 with a couple of paragraphs and I want to direct your attention if I may
8 to paragraph 256 which is on page 65 of your report. And I think it may
9 be, sir, that it was translated, with all due respect, somewhat awkwardly
10 but I don't know what your point was in the next ten paragraphs. It
11 says, and I'll read it: "Information in the police understands in
12 general sense a planned set of the procedures by which is gathered,
13 processed (analysis, classification, checking, and uniting) the
14 information relating to: Security situation, phenomenon, and events, the
15 work and results of the police station work, and the situation in the
16 police station." I read this, honestly, 20 times. I don't understand
17 what you are trying to say here. And I apologise for having to ask you.
18 A. Are we talking about paragraph 256?
19 Q. Correct.
20 A. This means that informing implies a group of procedure intended
21 to collect, process, safeguard, use and provide security information and
22 data which relate to what, security situation, events, occurrences, the
23 work of the police stations and situation in the police station. I don't
24 know what is not clear. In parentheses --
25 THE INTERPRETER: This is too fast for the interpreter and we
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The processing of any kind of
3 information implies --
4 MR. OSTOJIC:
5 Q. Excuse me. The translators just give us an indication you may be
6 speaking too fast. I'm not going to cut you off and just before you
7 answer if I can just make a preliminary -- I'm not, sir, challenging you
8 on this. I just wanted to understand it and honestly in English it's a
9 little difficult to understand the way it's written so I'm just trying to
10 have you help me fully understand it. But if you can please just speak a
11 little slower, that may help all of us to understand it.
12 A. Very well, I'll try to be as clear as possible.
13 JUDGE AGIUS: I don't think we are going to waste much time. I
14 think that the problem with paragraph 256, the translation into English;
15 otherwise I think if you read it a second time, it's sufficient to
16 understand what it means.
17 MR. OSTOJIC: Okay, I'll move on, Mr. President.
18 JUDGE KWON: Excuse me, excuse me. The paragraph 256 as it
19 appears in the monitor is different from what I have as a final or
20 translation. I think this is an unofficial translation, and this is
21 different from what I have in hard copies. Probably this is older
23 MR. OSTOJIC: Honourable Judge Kwon, I'll take a look at it that.
24 I wanted clarification on this one paragraph because it begins a process
25 of other things, but I -- we'll look at that again.
1 JUDGE PROST: And, Mr. Ostojic, if you look at the one that's in
2 e-court, it reads differently from what you read out as well, so I think
3 it may be a translation issue.
4 MR. OSTOJIC: Fair enough.
5 MR. LAZAREVIC: Maybe I can just explain, one Mr. Bajagic filed
6 his report in B/C/S, it was unofficially translated by the Defence in
7 order to comply to Trial Chamber's order regarding deadlines for filing
8 the reports. After that the CLSS provided with their official
9 translation which is in the EDS
10 MR. OSTOJIC: That's very fair. I apologise for that.
11 JUDGE AGIUS: Let's proceed.
12 MR. OSTOJIC: Thank you, sir. I just wanted to understand it
13 because I didn't.
14 Q. Now, if we look at paragraph 260 of your report on that same
15 page, and I am working with the apparently non-updated version, but it
16 doesn't matter. I'm not going to pick on the language. You say within
17 information reporting has a special place. Pretty much the same. Why
18 and how does it have a special place?
19 A. Yes. Reporting is one of the actions within the system of
20 informing. It implies informing starting with the bottom to the top and
21 as a rule reports are sent about a concrete task, the implementation of a
22 concrete task that had been given to members of the police, either
23 uniformed police, crime prevention police and so on and so forth. Or, if
24 an order has been issued to the members of the police to carry out a task
25 immediately upon the completion of the task, they have to report about
1 the status of the task, whether it has been fully completed, partly
2 completed, so this is an activity by way of which lower levels report to
3 the higher levels within the hierarchy of command.
4 Q. Well, we -- it's like the reports we saw from Dragomir Vasic
5 reporting to the minister; correct?
6 A. Yes, that would be one of the forms of reporting.
7 Q. Now, these reports, they are required to be clear and precise;
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. And also they are required to be a fair and adequate reflection
11 of what is transpiring, is it not?
12 A. In general terms the answer would be yes, of course.
13 Q. Now, when I look at your paragraph 262, you also talk about
14 elements from the environment in the second line, I hope, at least in my
15 copy. I just wanted you to explain it to me because I didn't fully
16 understand it.
17 A. It has to do with a head of a certain organisational unit in the
18 ministry represents that unit before the higher organisational levels, as
19 well as in communication with the organisations at the same level and
20 below. He represents his organisational unit before the other
21 organisational levels within the police system. It can be, as I said,
22 internally, meaning inside the ministry, and externally if there is a
23 possibility for the head of a certain level organisation of the ministry
24 for him to meet representatives of some other institutions. On such
25 occasions, he is also there to speak on behalf of his organisational
1 unit. I tried to make this as clear as possible.
2 Q. Well, generally speaking, what types of information are required
3 or mandated to be put in such reports that you are referring to, both the
4 external and internal, and I don't know that it really matters, but
5 really during the state of war or imminent threat of war? What type of
6 information are they required to report?
7 A. Internal representation is quite different from external
8 representation especially when we are talking about the MUP. Internally
9 it can include anything that is of importance for the conducting of tasks
10 and duties of the police. External representation doesn't deal with such
11 issues. External representation is representing a certain part of the
12 ministry when communicating with some other ministries or bodies during
13 meetings. Therefore the facts discussed at such meetings are not the
14 same as would be during an internal representation event. This would be
15 a global information with far less details.
16 Q. Okay. Well, let's talk about like if there was an ambush or a
17 legitimate combat engagement that was going on in July of 1995. What
18 would the reporting requirements be in the MUP now, just in the MUP, as
19 to what kind of information should be contained within that report to
20 their superiors?
21 A. Important information needed to be included in order to report to
22 a higher level of management within the MUP.
23 Q. Okay. And now --
24 A. Anything that would be necessary for efficient functioning in the
1 Q. Certainly one of the things they would possibly report - I'll let
2 you answer it - is if there were any casualties or wounded of MUP
3 personnel; correct?
4 A. Yes, of course.
5 Q. And I agree of course it would be. And also they would highlight
6 where certain MUP units were acting alone or acting in conjunction with
7 some other groups, would it not? That would be significant to report to
8 your superior?
9 A. I presume so.
10 Q. You are the expert though, so you help me with that. They would
11 also report, would they not, if they were involved in any operations such
12 as ambushes or capturing or killing the enemy combatants, would they not?
13 MR. LAZAREVIC: Your Honours, maybe I'm a bit late with my
14 objection but I believe that this asks for some incomplete hypothetical
16 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Mr. Ostojic, do you wish to move on?
17 MR. OSTOJIC: Fair enough.
18 Q. Just describe for me, if you will, what you meant on paragraph
19 256 when you talked about the information representation relating to
20 phenomenon and events, if we could just scroll down so I could see it
21 because I'm not sure if it's translated that way again, the English
23 JUDGE KWON: Next page.
24 MR. OSTOJIC:
25 Q. What do you mean by that, what events and what phenomenon?
1 A. Yes. I hereby say security situation, events, and phenomenon.
2 Well, that includes anything that takes place in a given territory that
3 is of importance for the functioning of the MUP units as one of the
4 security actors or subjects.
5 Q. I'm not sure if you said it right but I thought I heard it in
6 B/C/S and it's recorded as being any, but you are saying everything,
7 right, as opposed to anything? Although it may be a slight difference.
8 They are supposed to report on everything, are they not, Professor?
9 MR. LAZAREVIC: I apologise, this question is not clear. Who is
10 Mr. Ostojic referring it?
11 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Ostojic.
12 MR. OSTOJIC:
13 Q. It's pretty obvious I think if the Professor in his report sets
14 forth that there are certain requirements that go in three different
15 manners both vertically and horizontally, so whoever is preparing the
16 report such as Dragomir Vasic, but we don't want to include him right now
17 in this, but any of the people who are either the -- in the CJP or PJP or
18 SJP, whatever those centres are, are they required to report and what are
19 they required to put in their report, that's all I'm trying to get from
20 you. I think it's in your report but I just wanted to know in a war
21 situation what types of things are they really supposed to report?
22 A. As I stated in paragraph 256, that these are occurrences and
23 events. I've primarily had those in mind which are important for the
24 security in the territory and anything else that can be important for the
25 work and functioning of the Ministry of the Interior. In that regard, I
1 wrote the security information, what does it mean to inform? That means
2 that the security situation can be reported as improving or
3 deteriorating. Then there are developments and events that the number of
4 traffic accidents increased and so on and so forth. This information and
5 representation, generally speaking, refers to information being
6 circulated through the police bodies not only at times of war but also at
7 peacetime and during imminent threat of war. As for such particular
8 information should include that exact period, I can't say. I can only
9 speak hypothetically. It is impossible for me to answer that because I
10 have no such specific experience with those modes of reporting.
11 Q. All right. Thank you very much. Professor, I have no further
13 JUDGE AGIUS: Ms. Nikolic.
14 MS. NIKOLIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours. I have no
15 questions for this witness.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: Madam Fauveau?
17 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President ...
18 JUDGE AGIUS: Go ahead.
19 Cross-examination by Ms. Fauveau:
20 Q. [Interpretation] I am Natasha Fauveau-Ivanovic. I represent
21 General Miletic. I wish to ask you a few questions which are
22 theoretical. You spoke on the 6th of October, on first day of your
23 testimony on the task of the police, in particular the task which the
24 police accomplish when there is an threat of imminent war and you also
25 spoke a moment or two ago of those tasks in particular, the traffic
1 regulation, special regulation of traffic. I would like you to look at
2 the document 5D1318. We do not have an official translation of this
3 document, but we have a draft translation which I have here, and I have a
4 hard copy for the member of the Chamber.
5 So this document is an order from the Ministry of the Interior
6 which concerns stopping the traffic on the Sokolac on the 26 June 1995
7 and what I would like you to do is to read this document and also tell us
8 if this order -- the task given by the police in this order fits in the
9 normal task of the police in the situation which is described here, that
10 is to say, in a situation where you have sabotage groups and terrorist
11 groups which have come into the territory.
12 A. This is one of the tasks of the police. The police has authority
13 to implement such tasks, special security circumstances. We can see what
14 is being requested from the order and we see that it doesn't entail any
15 combat but regulating the traffic, setting up a checkpoint and
16 controlling the traffic on certain roads. These are special security
17 circumstances because of the terrorist groups. But it is a non-combat
18 administrative activity on the part of the police.
19 Q. Activities which or so it means stopping the traffic on that
20 particular road, this is what can be read in the first sentence of the
22 A. Precisely so. To stop the traffic on a particular road.
23 According to the law on the application of the Law on Internal Affairs
24 from 1994, the authorities of the police in the state of imminent threat
25 of war or in the state of war. One of the authorities described is this
2 THE INTERPRETER: Ms. Fauveau needs to wait for the English
3 translation to finish, please.
4 MR. LAZAREVIC: I need to apologise to Madam Fauveau. I really
5 hate to interrupt someone cross-examining, but we still haven't received
6 the list of documents which are to be used in the cross-examination of
7 the Defence or the translation of these documents. Maybe she can take
8 care of that.
9 JUDGE AGIUS: We have received it. So I don't know what to tell
10 you, Mr. Lazarevic. But to my knowledge it has been circulated. The
11 other thing is the interpreters drew our attention to tell you that you
12 need to wait until the English translation is finished before you proceed
13 with your question, please, Madam Fauveau.
14 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Yes, thank you.
15 MR. LAZAREVIC: I apologise.
16 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation]
17 Q. I would like now to show you document 51319 for which there is an
18 official translation. Sir, I don't want to ask anything about the
19 contents of the document but the only thing I'm interested in is to know
20 whether this document which it's a document which in the province of the
21 state security, I think, is this document based on information obtained
22 by the intelligence services? Is this type of information coming,
23 rather, from intelligence sources?
24 JUDGE AGIUS: That means if you are in a position to tell us,
25 please. If you are not, don't speculate.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It is quite clear from the very
2 same abbreviation, the RDB which is the state security department, that
3 this information arrived from that direction and is of intelligence or
4 counterintelligence nature.
5 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation]
6 Q. Thank you very much, this is quite sufficient for what I wish to
7 know. Could one say indeed that the activities of the intelligence
8 services or the principle main [indiscernible] in the sector of the state
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. I wish to ask you a few questions concerning the engagement of
12 police units in activities in combats. You spoke about this yesterday.
13 I don't think you need to repeat what was already said. I wish you to
14 see document 5D1320. We still have here an unofficial translation here,
15 and we have a hard copy translation for the members of the Chamber.
16 Here we have a document from the Ministry of Interior
17 transmitting, forwarding a dispatch from the staff of the army of the
18 Republika Srpska. You explained to us yesterday all the procedure for
19 the engagement of police units in the combat activities. Could you
20 simply have a look at this document, one-page document, and tell us
21 whether this procedure was conforming to the procedure prescribed by law,
22 by the law?
23 A. Yes, we can see that the president of the republic did order the
24 units to be used and that it was requested that certain units be put
25 under the 14th, but I don't know what the abbreviation stands for.
1 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreters apologise. Under the commander's
2 request -- the speakers should not overlap and they should wait for the
3 English translation. Thank you very much.
4 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] I apologise to the interpreters.
5 Q. Sir, this is my fault. I interrupted you and therefore you
6 couldn't hear. Could you please repeat the last part of your answer.
7 Does this document show that the procedure was conforming to the
8 procedure which the law had provided for?
9 A. Yes, the president of the republic ordered it and it was followed
10 up according to the established procedure.
11 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I see that it's time
12 for the break but I only need a couple of minutes. Could I continue and
14 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, I would suggest that you do that and we have
15 the break after that. Thank you.
16 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.
17 Q. Lastly, I would like to examine the document 1321. This is still
18 dealing with the same topic that is the engagement of police units in
19 combat. Again I have an unofficial translation for the Chamber.
20 While we are waiting, could you have a look at the document,
21 perhaps we need to have a zoom.
22 A. I read the document.
23 Q. According to this document, the public security centre in Zvornik
24 sent on June 21st a unit to the front where the Republika Srpska was
25 having -- was losing soldiers and they sent a dispatch and another unit
1 was sent from Zvornik. Do you agree that according to this document, you
2 cannot see that there was any request coming from the army so that these
3 units be sent to fight side by side with the army of the Republika
5 A. I can't see from the document that there were any written
6 requests. It probably all took place in the field presumably. However,
7 the police forces staff commander of the CSB in Zvornik according to some
8 legal provisions has the right to engage certain units but he urgently
9 needs to notify the minister and the police forces staff at headquarters.
10 It was probably due to a certain situation in the field. I do know what
11 the law states as to what the public security centre commander of the
12 police forces staff can do, he can do it but he needs to urgently report
13 to the ministry and headquarters. This is all I can tell you.
14 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Thank you very much. I have no
15 further questions.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you. Mr. Krgovic or Mr. Josse, do you have
17 any questions for this witness?
18 MR. JOSSE: We don't.
19 JUDGE AGIUS: And Mr. Sarapa?
20 MR. SARAPA: Briefly, Your Honour.
21 JUDGE AGIUS: You have some questions?
22 MR. SARAPA: Yes.
23 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. All right. We'll have your questions
24 immediately after the break, and then -- do you wish to state something,
25 Mr. Lazarevic?
1 MR. LAZAREVIC: No, Your Honour, not really, yes.
2 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. Thank you. How long do you think you
3 will be cross-examining this witness?
4 MR. VANDERPUYE: Well, I'll confer with Mr. McCloskey, but I
5 anticipate about half an hour to 40 minutes. I don't know if we can make
6 it but I'll do my best, Mr. President.
7 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
8 MR. LAZAREVIC: I can release the witness who is waiting here
9 since the morning.
10 JUDGE AGIUS: This is why I have asked the question. As it is,
11 shall we send the witness. For the rest of this week you've got this
12 next witness and another one.
13 MR. LAZAREVIC: And another one.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: And another one. All right. Can you just make me
15 a rough calculation, okay, I will ask my staff to do it. How long they
16 will be testifying. Okay. We'll have a 25-minute break.
17 --- Recess taken at 12.34 p.m.
18 --- On resuming at 1.02 p.m.
19 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. Mr. Sarapa. For the record, we have now the
20 company of Mr. Bourgon. Yes, Mr. Sarapa.
21 MR. SARAPA: Thank you.
22 Cross-examination by Mr. Sarapa:
23 Q. [Interpretation] I'm Djorde Sarapa and I represent Vinko
24 Pandurevic. Dr. Bajagic, I have just one question for you. Members of
25 the security and intelligence organs and services of the Army of
1 Republika Srpska had legal authorities in acting within their purview
2 which were adequate to the authorities of members of the MUP of Republika
3 Srpska within the department of state security. Please tell us what
4 authorities were those when it comes to the members of the MUP of
5 Republika Srpska within the state security department?
6 A. May I start?
7 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, go ahead.
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know whether the
9 authorities were the same because I never analysed that matter. And as
10 far as the state security department is concerned, that element of the
11 Ministry of the Interior had a task to collect information, i.e.,
12 intelligence and counterintelligence that concerned the security of
13 Republika Srpska and the implementation of its interest. This is in very
14 general terms.
15 Q. And in operative sense, would you please be more precise?
16 A. Yes, I can try. Collecting intelligence and counterintelligence
17 by all methods known to all intelligence and counterintelligence services
18 in the world. I can give you their list.
19 Q. Please do.
20 A. Collection of intelligence from human sources or human
21 intelligence as it is theoretically known, collection of intelligence
22 from open sources, or open search intelligence. Collection of
23 intelligence by technical methods in a narrow and broader sense, method
24 of collaboration or cooperation with informants, and all the other
25 scientific methods that are normally used in the processing of
1 intelligence and counterintelligence. In general terms, those are
2 methods of intelligence services and security department applied all
3 these matters when it came to collecting intelligence within its purview.
4 MR. SARAPA: [Interpretation] Thank you, I have no further
6 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you. Mr. Vanderpuye.
7 MR. VANDERPUYE: Thank you Mr. President. Good afternoon to you,
8 good afternoon, Your Honours. Good afternoon to my colleagues and good
9 afternoon to you, Dr. Bajagic.
10 Cross-examination by Mr. Vanderpuye:
11 Q. My name is Kweku Vanderpuye on behalf of the Prosecution. I'm
12 going to put some questions to you in relation to your direct examination
13 as well as your cross-examination by some of my colleagues in the
14 Defence. If there's anything I ask you that is not clear, please let me
15 know. I'll do my best to try and clarify things so that we can
16 understand each other a little bit better. I hope to be able to finish
17 with you so let's get right to it.
18 You said, I believe in your direct examination that you were an
19 operative in the national security service which then became the public
20 security state security service, is that right, and that was in 1992 that
21 you began there?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. All right. And during the course of the war, is that where you
24 were -- well, tell us where you were and what you did.
25 A. I worked as an operative which means I was a professional in the
1 service which was the national security service first and then became the
2 skate security service. In more concrete terms, if you are asking me for
3 the region, I was posted in Sarajevo
4 collection of intelligence and counterintelligence as any operative will
5 do, and this was within the purview of the state security department and
6 this purview had legal foundations. It was regulated by law.
7 Q. And during the period of that period of time, you tell us who was
8 the Minister of the Interior?
9 A. Are you referring to the entire period that I spent working in
10 the department?
11 Q. If I could ask you that and then I will be more specific.
12 A. I'll try and remember. There were some shakeups in the
13 organisation. The first minister I believe was Mico Stanisic at the very
14 beginning in 1992 and I would not be able to follow the right sequence.
15 I know that at one point it was Zivko Rakic. I know that at some other
16 point it was another gentleman whom I can't remember. I can't remember
17 his name. I believe that his family name was Adzic. I don't know when
18 he was in office and I also know that about the time when I was leaving
19 the state security sector and the Ministry of the Interior, Dragan Kijac
20 was about to be appointed or just took up the position and this is all I
21 can remember.
22 Q. Do you remember if a Zivko Rakic was the Minister of the Interior
23 in 1995 at any point?
24 A. I really can't remember but since we have analysed certain
25 documents, I believe that he is referred to as the Minister of the
1 Interior, Republika Srpska in office in 1995.
2 Q. Okay. And in relation to that, do you recognise the name of
3 Tomislav Kovac?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Do you know what his position was in July 1995?
6 A. I believe that Tomislav Kovac was deputy minister of the interior
7 of Republika Srpska.
8 Q. Thank you for that. Now, you know that during the course of the
9 war, 1995, there was a front in Sarajevo
10 the Sarajevo-Romanija Corps; right?
11 A. Yes. Well ...
12 Q. And you came into that information I take it, during the course
13 of your employment in the state security service; right?
14 A. Well, yes. I was in the territory of Sarajevo
15 everybody else knew that Sarajevo
16 Sarajevo-Romanija Corps.
17 Q. And with respect to your knowledge of how the state security
18 service operated, was it the case that the state security service shared
19 information with other organs, such as the public security service,
20 public security sectors, police directorate, and so on and so forth?
21 A. I'm sure of that but I personally did not have the right to share
22 any information. The information was sent to my supervisors and further
23 up to the top of the state security. I never participated in any
24 exchange of information. I had to act in keeping with the rules of the
25 service. But I'm sure that there was cooperation. It is only natural
1 that information was exchanged.
2 Q. Is the nature of the information that is exchanged information
3 that is gathered on the ground, for example, through operatives with the
4 state security?
5 A. Not only that. This included information gathered through
6 operatives, but this is not the only way intelligence was collected.
7 There are other ways as well.
8 Q. Well, in particular I'm interested in knowing how the
9 intelligence was shared and with whom it was shared from the state
10 security services. So if you could, just briefly tell us with what
11 agencies, what organs in information was shared?
12 A. As an operative, I could send the intelligence that I collected
13 to my supervisors. As for them, who they shared the intelligence with
14 according to the rules of service or how the exchange took place with the
15 state security services from the top to the public security, I really
16 don't know how it went, whether it was daily, weekly monthly. I
17 personally was not in a position to participate in the exchange of
18 information of intelligence at the level at which I operated.
19 Q. Well, it is the case that you've given lectures in respect of
20 intelligence practices, no?
21 A. Of course.
22 Q. You published in that area, isn't that true? Think you said you
23 have over 50 publications?
24 A. Of course. Precisely so, yes. Particularly dealing with the
25 process of collection of intelligence. Not every work of mine deals with
1 that, but the main body of my work is concerned with that particular
3 Q. Well --
4 A. I can give you more specific details about the entire process of
5 collecting intelligence.
6 Q. No, I'm not interested in the specific details of how -- well, I
7 am but I don't think I have time to get into that. But what I'd like to
8 know specifically is in the context of your experience and your expertise
9 in the area of intelligence work, what agencies corresponded with the
10 state security services in terms of sharing information?
11 A. Surely it would be the public security department through the
12 office of the minister and the minister himself. And surely it would be
13 through the department of state security that other agencies which were
14 provided for by the law to deal with the protection of security in
15 Republika Srpska.
16 Q. All right. So in the context of security, it is the case that
17 the state security service or sector would provide information to the
18 public security department, right, and the public security department
19 would forward that information within its own chain? That's correct,
20 isn't it?
21 A. I would sooner say that within the office of the minister, the
22 head of the department of state security would brief the Minister of the
23 Interior and the chief of the public security department, and whether
24 things were done in a similar way at lower levels both of the RDB and the
25 security services centres following some specific set of instructions, I
1 really wouldn't be able to tell you.
2 Q. Within say, for example, the CJB in Zvornik, now, is there --
3 sorry, the CSB
4 well, could that particular service share information with the public
5 security sector of that division?
6 A. I don't think that you have worded your question well, but I'm
7 still getting the drift. If you are referring to Zvornik, you are
8 talking about the relationship between the security services centre and
9 the public security centre. I'm not sure that I got the meaning right.
10 I'm sorry.
11 Q. What I'm talking about is I'm talking about the public security
12 centre in Zvornik. That's the CJB. Did they receive information from
13 the intelligence -- did they receive information from state security?
14 A. I suppose so because the state security informs public security
15 and then this goes to the CJB in Zvornik. That was the line that
16 communication went down on, so I suppose the answer would be yes.
17 Q. All right. Can you tell us who was the head of state security in
19 A. I can't remember the name. I wouldn't be able to tell you for
20 most of the chiefs. I could probably remember the person in Sarajevo
21 but no, not for Zvornik.
22 Q. And did state security have a parallel or similar chain down from
23 the regional to the municipal and to the local, as you've indicated
24 public security did?
25 A. We can say that it is similar, but it is still very specific
1 because every intelligence and counterintelligence service is
2 particularly engaged in protecting its information system and channels.
3 I'm sure that the manners of internal exchange of information was
4 different in the state security. I believe that they followed much
5 stricter rules.
6 Q. Are you saying you don't actually know whether or not the state
7 security services were organised on a regional and municipal level, or
8 are you saying that you just don't know who in particular was working
9 say, for example, in July 1995?
10 A. Oh, I thought you asked me about informing so I would like to
11 confirm that the state security service was organised at the regional and
12 territorial levels in state security centres and departments thereof.
13 For example, the headquarters of the state security is one thing. The
14 centre of the state security centre in Sarajevo is one step below
15 according to the territorial system of organisation. And there would
16 also be a department or several departments within the regional centre.
17 But the departments did not consign with municipalities. For example one
18 department could comprise two municipalities or just one.
19 Q. Do you know the name Sinisa Glogovac?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Tell us who he is.
22 A. He was a member of the state security department just like me
23 from 1992 to 1992 [as interpreted] and he worked for the state security
24 services of the Socialist Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina even before
25 the war.
1 Q. And what is reflected in the record page 77, line 9 is that he
2 worked from 92 to 92, but I'm sure that can't be right. So I wonder if
3 you could just clarify that?
4 A. It should be 1995, the second year should be 1995.
5 Q. And in 1995, do you know where he was working?
6 A. I don't know exactly where he was working in 1995, in which
7 department or centre, which of these he was affiliated with.
8 Q. Are you familiar with the name Vitomir Tomic?
9 A. No.
10 Q. All right. Now, you indicated that you were assigned to work in
13 A. Yes, that's correct, because I also resided in Sarajevo. To be
14 more precise, I resided in the municipality of Ilidza
15 Q. I'd like to show you a document if I could in e-court. 65 ter
16 3792. Just to let you know, I guess while it's being loaded in e-court,
17 this is a document that was written by Ljubisa Borovcanin and it's dated
18 30 June 1995
19 can see in this document it's dated the 30th of June 1995. The number of
20 it is 114/95 and it's directed to the Minister of the Interior for
21 information. It's also directed to the head of RJB. It's directed to
22 the police forces headquarters from Pale. It's directed to the police
23 force headquarters chief of Bijeljina MUP, and the police forces
24 headquarters of Vogosca.
25 Now, in this document you can see the first paragraph he talks
1 about having informed these organs or individuals about a situation in
2 the field in the zone of responsibility kept by five of our PJP companies
3 and one company comprised of MUP members. What he talks about if you
4 look further down the document, is he lists several units. He says, "We
5 emphasize that the unit came to the field in the following order: One
6 Trebinje PJP company, one MUP company in the headquarters, one Bijeljina
7 CJB PJP company, one Srbinje PJP company, one Banja Luka PJP company.
8 Just above his signature he talks about the current situation in the
9 field, the level of moral, the PJP members are firmly holding the
10 achieved positions. In the context of this document, can you tell us who
11 it is -- well, who is in charge of these PJP companies?
12 A. According to what I can see in the heading, could we go back to
13 the top of the document. We have the units and on the top we have the
14 police forces staff. This in turn means that these units were put under
15 that particular staff.
16 Q. Just above his signature he talks about how they are holding
17 their achieved positions. Is that suggesting that these units are
18 engaged in combat?
19 A. When we are talking about positions occupied, that's probably
20 what they had in mind.
21 Q. And that being the case, it would make sense that those units
22 would be subordinated to the VRS corps in that area. Does that make
24 A. It could make sense but there are two situations in which MUP
25 units can be engaged in a time of war. They can act independently, and
1 they can act as a part of the VRS based on the principle of
2 resubordination. I see nothing here that would make me able to conclude
3 which of these two actually took place.
4 Q. All right. Well, under Article 14 of the law on implementation
5 of the Law of Internal Affairs, if they were engaged in combat they would
6 be under the immediate command of Mr. Borovcanin; right?
7 A. If engaged in combat and if it was indeed the units mentioned
9 Q. All right. And --
10 A. That would be my general conclusion based on the document. If
11 they participated in combat, it is known that they were subordinated to
12 the above-mentioned police reserves force. However, from the document,
13 you can't see whether these units were resubordinated to the VRS or
14 whether they acted independently. I truly can't argue either way based
15 on the information I have.
16 Q. All right. Well, let me show you another document, if I could.
17 Thank you, that's 3794. This, as you can see, is another report, and it
18 is authored by Mr. Borovcanin. Was directed to the Ministry of the
19 Interior, deputy minister in Bijeljina, Pale police staff directed to the
20 commander, Vogosca police force staff and it says Janja special police
21 brigade, it's dated 1st of July 1995. In this document you can see that
22 it says refers to activities commenced the previous day which were
23 continued at the Trnovo battle field on 30th of July 1995 and he talks
24 about a combat group which included 5th Special Police Detachment. He
25 talks about two platoons from the Kajman detachment, Plavi, and Skorpija,
1 Serbian MUP attacked the facility in Lucevik. He continues on it and
2 says in the middle of this document, the problem of respecting the
3 agreement with the RSK Sarajevo-Romanija Corps over joint actions in
4 overtaking lines is still present, and then in the end of the document he
5 talks about the situation with respect to the special police brigade
6 forces and he says they are exhausted and proposes withdrawal of some of
7 them to the home base. Now, in this respect can you tell us who would
8 have been in command of the Serbian MUP?
9 A. I don't understand.
10 Q. All right. Let me back up then. In the context of this
11 particular document, is it apparent to you who is in charge of these
12 units, who commands these units?
13 A. As far as I can tell, these units acted in concert and it is
14 stipulated which units took part in individual operations. However, I
15 can't see who was in direct command of those units. This is one type of
16 informing in which it is explained what took place during the course of a
17 single day in a given area, but it doesn't necessarily mean that all the
18 units referred to were commanded by a single person. The document is not
19 clear in that regard.
20 Q. All right. But from the document, it is certainly a possibility
21 that the person that is making the report is in charge of these units?
22 It's possible?
23 MR. LAZAREVIC: I believe it's a call for speculation. I believe
24 the witness already said it's not clear from the document.
25 MR. VANDERPUYE: Mr. President.
1 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Vanderpuye.
2 MR. VANDERPUYE: The question is specific as to the content and
3 the nature of the communication. So I think that he is perfectly within
4 his expertise to opine on the possibility, given the nature of the
5 document, the content of the document, as to whether or not the author of
6 the document is possibly in charge of these units.
7 JUDGE AGIUS: We think the witness can answer the question. As
8 far as he knows obviously. But the question being asked is based on his
9 knowledge whether there is this possibility or not. It's not
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I wouldn't want to speculate. As I
12 said, the document is unclear in that regard.
13 MR. VANDERPUYE:
14 Q. Well, in terms of the content of the document, it is consistent
15 with a commanding officer, the nature of that information is consistent
16 with the type of information that would be included in a document that
17 is -- a report that is made by a commanding officer, isn't it?
18 A. It may be, but reports are not drafted solely by commanders and
19 commanding officers. Reports are drafted also by services. If you have
20 in mind all of the different types of informing that can be in place.
21 This is a dispatch. Or an information sheet of sorts. I don't know what
22 to call it exactly. Yes, it could be done by the commander, but also by
24 Q. All right. Well, it would be consistent that a commander would
25 have a duty to report what the situation concerning the conduct in a
1 battle field would be, right, to his superiors?
2 A. That is right.
3 Q. It would be consistent for a commander to report to his superiors
4 what his expectations are with respect to the mission that he has been
5 assigned to carry out and when he expected it would be completed; right?
6 A. Well, yes, it can contain all those elements, but it is difficult
7 to give an assessment of when a given task is to be concluded in such war
9 Q. Well, in the interest of time, I guess I will leave that be and
10 I'm move on, as we've only got about five minutes left. Let me just ask
11 you before I leave this area, how is it that we have Serbian MUP that are
12 included among these units, if you can tell, based upon this report?
13 A. I can't say. I read it but I can't say how and in what way it
14 took place. These are specific facts that I would need. I can't say
15 where that came from.
16 Q. Well, I'm not asking about that specifically. You know, and
17 you've commented in your expertise upon the role and the duties of the
18 deputy commander of the special police brigade, in this case it was
19 Mr. Borovcanin, and you know the mechanisms by which he may exercise
20 supervision over MUP units that are in his charge, in his chain of
21 command. So I'm asking you in a general, in a more general sense, how is
22 it that, and when I say Serbian MUP, I mean MUP from the former -- from
23 the FRY, how is it that they are assigned or they appear in this document
24 in relation to the activities carried out by other members of the MUP in
1 A. I answered already that I don't know. You should ask the person
2 who made the decision for such units to be in the field. I have no
3 ability to answer in any other way.
4 Q. All right. So you are not familiar with at least mechanistically
5 as a method of organisation how it is that this could occur, at least in
6 a theoretical sense?
7 A. If you have in mind the mechanisms that existed between the
8 Republika Srpska and the Serbian MUP, then I truly don't know what sort
9 of mechanisms there were. I was just a simply operative at the time.
10 These things had to be decided on by the top echelon, by the highest
12 Q. All right. Could I look at 65 ter 57, please.
13 Sorry, in relation to my last question, you indicated that
14 these -- the mechanism by which these Serbian MUP might find themselves
15 in the circumstances indicated if Mr. Borovcanin's report, you said that
16 that had to be -- that's a matter that had to be decided by the top
17 echelon by the highest ranks, is that right, of government, I take it?
18 A. Probably, yes.
19 Q. And by government, that could mean the civilian government, it
20 could mean the army; right?
21 A. I mean the top level at which such a decision can be made or such
22 ways of cooperation instituted.
23 Q. That could be done through the Main Staff of the army; right? I
24 should say the VRS so the record is clear.
25 A. I truly don't know.
1 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... presidency?
2 A. I truly don't know what organ that would be. The top of the
3 state, we know what that is.
4 Q. All right.
5 MR. VANDERPUYE: Mr. President, we are going until 2.00, right?
6 JUDGE AGIUS: No.
7 MR. VANDERPUYE: We're not. Is it possible that I could continue
8 for a -- or should we --
9 JUDGE AGIUS: There is a sitting.
10 MR. VANDERPUYE: All right.
11 JUDGE AGIUS: How much longer do you have?
12 MR. VANDERPUYE: I have about 15 minutes or so. I don't think I
13 can make it shorter.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: I am afraid, Professor, we haven't finished. Don't
15 blame anyone in particular. We have to continue tomorrow morning. Now,
16 I wouldn't like to stay another 15 minutes because that would compromise
17 things for the next Trial Chamber, will make things difficult. So let's
18 adjourn now until tomorrow morning at 9.00. Thank you.
19 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at
20 1.46 p.m.
21 day of October 2008, at 9.00 a.m.