1 Monday, 12 April 2010
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 2.20 p.m.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Good afternoon to everyone in and around the
7 Madam Registrar, will you please call the case.
8 THE REGISTRAR: Good afternoon, Your Honours. Good afternoon
9 everyone in and around the courtroom.
10 This is the case IT-03-69-T. The Prosecutor versus
11 Jovica Stanisic and Franko Simatovic.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar. The Chamber was
13 informed that the Prosecution would like to address the Chamber in
14 private session. We turn into private session.
15 [Private session]
11 Pages 4151-4155 redacted. Private session.
14 [Open session]
15 THE REGISTRAR: We are in open session, Your Honours.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
17 The next witness who can be brought into the courtroom will
18 testify with protective measures of pseudonym, face distortion, and voice
19 distortion. I do understand that the voice distortion has been prepared.
20 MS. FRIEDMAN: The Prosecution calls JF-018.
21 [The witness entered court]
22 JUDGE ORIE: Good afternoon, Witness JF-018. Before you give
23 evidence in this court, the Rules of Procedure and Evidence require that
24 you make a solemn declaration that you will speak the truth, the whole
25 truth, and nothing but the truth. May I invite you to make that solemn
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will
3 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
4 WITNESS: JF-018
5 [Witness answered through interpreter]
6 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you. Please be seated.
7 Witness JF-018, because that's how we will address you, the
8 Chamber has decided that you will give your testimony under pseudonym,
9 that is, we'll not use your own name, we'll just call you Witness JF-018.
10 Further, your face cannot be seen by the outside world, neither can your
11 own voice be heard. The image of your face will be distorted. Your
12 voice will be distorted. However, the content of your testimony is
13 publicly available, but, again, without seeing your face, without hearing
14 your own voice, and without using your own name.
15 May I remind the parties that for voice distortion that it's
16 necessary to switch off your microphones once the witness starts
17 answering the questions.
18 Witness JF-018, you'll first be examined by Ms. Friedman.
19 Ms. Friedman is counsel for the Prosecution and is seated to your right
20 and will soon stand. Please proceed.
21 MS. FRIEDMAN: Thank you, Your Honour.
22 Examination by Ms. Friedman:
23 Q. Good afternoon, Witness.
24 A. Good afternoon.
25 MS. FRIEDMAN: Can I ask the Court Usher to please call up
1 65 ter 5276, which is the witness's pseudonym sheet.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Is there any technical problem? Because the
3 pseudonym sheet which is not to be shown to the public does not appear
4 yet on our screens.
5 MS. FRIEDMAN: Your Honour, if it would assist, I could provide a
6 hard copy to be shown to the witness.
7 JUDGE ORIE: That's perhaps preferable in order not to lose
8 any -- there we are. There we are, Ms. Friedman.
9 MS. FRIEDMAN: Thank you.
10 Q. Sir --
11 JUDGE ORIE: One second.
12 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
13 MS. FRIEDMAN: Could the document be enlarged a little bit for
14 the witness to see. Thank you. And I take it it is not being broadcast?
16 Q. Sir, would you take a look at the pseudonym sheet in front of you
17 on the screen before you, and if you direct your attention to where it
18 says witness name, is that your name?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. And where it says date of birth, is that your date of birth?
21 A. Yes.
22 MS. FRIEDMAN: Your Honours, I tender this into evidence under
24 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar, the pseudonym sheet would receive
25 number ...
1 THE REGISTRAR: This would be Exhibit P339, Your Honours.
2 JUDGE ORIE: P339 is admitted into evidence. Please proceed.
3 MS. FRIEDMAN:
4 Q. Sir, do you recall giving a statement to members of the Office of
5 the Prosecutor of the ICTY in relation to this case?
6 A. Yes.
7 MS. FRIEDMAN: I would now ask that 65 ter number 5274 be placed
8 on the monitor in front of the witness.
9 JUDGE ORIE: And not to be shown to the public.
10 MS. FRIEDMAN: Not to be shown to the public. Thank you.
11 JUDGE ORIE: I take it that the English is the original, although
12 usually we have both versions on our screen. Yes, we have.
13 MS. FRIEDMAN: They are now both on the screen.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
15 MS. FRIEDMAN:
16 Q. Sir, on the screen before you is a document purporting to be a
17 statement given by you on the 21st of January, 2001. Is this your
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Do you recognise any signatures on the bottom of the page in the
21 English version?
22 A. Yes, it is my signature.
23 MS. FRIEDMAN: I would ask that the Court Usher turn to page 4 of
24 the statement, please.
25 Q. And, sir, do you again recognise any signatures on the bottom of
1 the page?
2 A. Yes, my own.
3 Q. Have you had the opportunity to review this statement this past
4 weekend in your own language?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Is there any clarification you wish to make?
7 A. I have clarified a few things. I've made some changes to the
9 Q. Yes. On page 3 of your statement in the first full paragraph you
11 "As the building in Dalj was destroyed, we used the old Zadruga
13 Was the police building in Dalj destroyed?
14 A. No, it wasn't destroyed. It was just damaged.
15 Q. And on the same page in the last paragraph, you state that:
16 "... a group of armed men in camouflage uniforms arrived in a TAM
17 110 military truck."
18 Do you have anything to clarify with respect to this sentence?
19 A. They came in two trucks, or at least two trucks. There wasn't
20 just one truck.
21 Q. And having --
22 A. Could have been even more.
23 Q. Thank you. Having made these clarifications, do you affirm that
24 your statement is true and accurate to the best of your knowledge?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. If I were to ask you the same questions today as you were asked
2 during that interview, would you provide the same answers in substance?
3 A. I would.
4 MS. FRIEDMAN: Your Honours, the Prosecution tenders into
5 evidence 65 ter 5274, which is the statement of this witness dated
6 21 January 2001 bearing the English ERN 0200-0600 to be admitted under
8 JUDGE ORIE: Any objections?
9 In the absence of any objections, Madam Registrar, could you
10 please assign a number to the --
11 THE REGISTRAR: This would be Exhibit P340 under seal,
12 Your Honour.
13 JUDGE ORIE: P340 is admitted into evidence. I put on the record
14 that when you asked the witness to look at page 4 for his signature, that
15 as a matter of fact page 5 which also bears his signature was shown to
16 the witness. Both in hard copy and in e-court page numbering it was
17 page 5.
18 Please proceed.
19 MS. FRIEDMAN: Thank you, Your Honour. Now that the witness's
20 prior evidence has been tendered pursuant to Rule 92 ter, I would like to
21 read a summary of that evidence for the benefit of the public.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Please do so. You have explained the witness what
23 the purpose is, otherwise I will do it briefly.
24 Ms. Friedman will now summarise what is in your statement because
25 although no one can see your face, although no one can hear your voice,
1 and your identity is protected, nevertheless, the public is entitled to
2 know what the content is of your statement about which further questions
3 may be put to you.
4 Please proceed.
5 MS. FRIEDMAN: Thank you, Your Honour.
6 JF-018 has provided evidence that one day in early October 1991
7 he found out that a group of some 30 men were detained in one of the
8 rooms of the Zadruga building where the milicija was based. The witness
9 provides evidence about how several days later a group of Arkan's men
10 arrived armed at the Zadruga building and that he heard afterwards that
11 they had taken the prisoners away and killed them. After this incident,
12 Arkan was called to explain what had happened.
13 Q. JF-018, what I have read is only a summary, it does not serve as
14 your actual evidence. However, I would like to ask if you anything that
15 I have said is a mischaracterisation or a misstatement of your evidence?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Okay. It's recorded as saying yes that there is a misstatement
18 or mischaracterisation. Is that what you meant?
19 A. No, what you have read is accurate. This is an accurate, brief
20 description of what happened.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Friedman, seeking such verification where the
22 summary is now evidence, where the evidence is available, usually leads
23 to more confusion than to clarity, so therefore, I would encourage you to
24 refrain from the same. But it may be that in other Chambers, matters are
25 different. I never sought such a verification. Please proceed.
1 MS. FRIEDMAN: Thank you.
2 Q. Now, I'll ask you some additional questions. On page 3 of your
3 statement, the first paragraph which continues from the previous page,
4 you talk about the 1st of August, 1991, and state:
5 "In the afternoon, JNA trucks brought weapons and they were
6 distributed among Serb villagers."
7 How were these weapons distributed?
8 A. Everybody who was issued with a weapon had to sign a document
9 indicating the type of rifle that they were issued with.
14 Q. What ethnicity were the police officers at the time?
15 A. They were mostly Serbs.
16 Q. How many of these men were professional policemen before the war?
17 A. I don't know exactly how many. I knew of two of them, that they
18 were policemen before the war, but there may have been others. I'm sure
19 of those two.
20 Q. And how many shifts were there in each day?
21 A. Three shifts. The first one was from 6.00 in the morning until
22 2.00, the second one from 2.00
23 from 2200 hours to 6.00 in the morning again.
24 Q. Now, your answer is recorded as saying that the second shift was
25 from 2.00
1 between 20 and 22. Could you repeat again the times of the last two
2 shifts if there is a clarification to be made?
3 A. As I already stated, the second shift was from 2.00 until
4 2200 hours and the third from 2200 to 6.00, and we did not work every
5 day. We worked for two days then we were off, and then again we worked
6 for the next two days. And that's what I already stated in my statement.
7 Q. Thank you. Now, I would like to ask you about the setup of the
8 Zadruga building that the milicija was using. How many entrances were
9 there to this building?
10 A. Just one. And the building it surrounded with other buildings
11 from all sides.
12 Q. And if you enter the building in the direction of the offices,
13 would you pass directly by the room where the prisoners were kept when
14 there were prisoners?
15 A. Well, you could do it that way, but there was another room before
16 that, an ante-room as it were. First there was this first room through
17 which you had to go.
18 Q. You stated at page 3 of your statement in the last paragraph that
19 Arkan's unit was based in Erdut. Did you ever pass by their base?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. What, if anything, did you observe them doing?
22 A. Well, sometimes you could see them training, jogging, serving as
23 guards, and so on.
24 Q. Other than the incident in October 1991, which we'll talk about
25 shortly, are you aware of Arkan's men coming to Dalj at other times?
1 A. Well, they drove around. You could see them frequently driving
2 around. Sometimes they would intercept people, some older people who
3 wouldn't be in the shifts.
4 Q. What do you mean by them intercepting these people?
5 A. Well, older men did not go to the front line. They didn't take
6 part in combat. They would just serve as guards in the village and so
7 on. But Arkan's men would force them to go to the front line, they would
8 stop them and then they would beat them up because they didn't go to the
9 front line.
10 Q. Turning once again to the last paragraph of page 3 of your
11 statement, you state that Arkan's men:
12 "Were armed with automatic assault rifles."
13 Can you provide any additional information about their weapons?
14 A. I don't know what to tell you. They had all kinds of weapons.
15 Very sophisticated. I even saw some Hecklers, some very sophisticated
17 Q. In your statement on page 3, last paragraph, you stated that one
18 night in early October 1991, at around 2215, a group of armed men arrived
19 at the police station. And you then clarified that they were
20 Arkan's men. Now, what did they say when they arrived?
21 A. They demanded that the prisoners be brought in.
22 Q. And what did the police -- what did you respond?
23 A. Well, we wouldn't let them take these people away because they
24 didn't have any papers on them, no documents, so we didn't want to let
25 this happen. We wouldn't surrender these men to them.
1 Q. And what did you do next?
2 A. Well, nothing. They left and then returned. They left. And
3 then we went on patrol in our vehicle. We just went about our regular
5 Q. On page 4 of your statement in the first full paragraph you state
7 "I learned from the duty officer that some of the prisoners that
8 had been detained in the milicija building were killed [Realtime
9 transcript read in error "trained"] by Zeljko Raznatovic, aka Arkan's
10 men, and their bodies were thrown into the Danube River
12 Did you see any prisoners in the building when you returned?
13 A. When we returned in the morning, we saw one of them. He was
14 sweeping the ground in front of the building.
15 Q. Why was he sweeping the ground?
16 A. Well, because there was blood outside the building.
17 Q. Do you know if he was part of the same group of prisoners?
18 A. Probably.
19 Q. Do you know what ethnicity he was?
20 A. I'm not sure. I don't know.
21 Q. On page 4 of your statement in the first full paragraph, you
23 "I believe that all of the milicija men from Dalj signed a
24 petition that condemned the incident."
25 Did you sign such a petition?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. On page 4 of your statement in the next paragraph you talk about
3 a gathering of civilians, milicija men, and members of the TO units where
4 Arkan arrived and held a speech. You state that you were on duty and did
5 not hear what exactly he said. Did you subsequently hear from others
6 what Arkan said?
7 A. They said that he admitted at this gathering that he had killed
8 those men.
9 Q. Thank you.
10 MS. FRIEDMAN: I have no further questions for the witness at
11 this time.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Ms. Friedman.
13 Sequence of cross-examination will be? Mr. Jordash will be the
14 first one.
15 MR. JORDASH: Yes, thank you.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Witness JF-018, you will now be cross-examined by
17 Mr. Jordash. Mr. Jordash is counsel for Mr. Stanisic.
18 You may proceed, Mr. Jordash.
19 MR. JORDASH: Thank you, Your Honour.
20 Cross-examination by Mr. Jordash:
21 Q. I have very few questions, Mr. Witness. Probably less than 10
22 minutes. I want to ask you, if I may, about the reaction of others to
23 Arkan's removal of the prisoners. Am I correct that the signing of the
24 petition by the militia men came about through a collective outrage at
25 what Arkan and his men had done?
1 A. Yes. Well, it wasn't just them, the policemen, who were
2 outraged; it was the population overall, the people there, because of
3 this incident.
4 Q. And when you say "the population overall," can you explain to the
5 Court who you are referring to? Who shared that outrage?
6 A. Well, for the most part I'm talking about the people from Dalj
7 because this happened in our village.
8 Q. And the majority of the people in Dalj were Serbian at that time?
9 A. Yes, a majority. But there were also some Croats.
10 Q. Do you know if other Serbians in other villages around Dalj also
11 were outraged or disapproved of Arkan's behaviour in removing the
12 prisoners and executing them?
13 A. I don't know, but most probably.
14 Q. Do you know if there were TO members in Dalj at around that time?
15 A. Yes, there were.
16 Q. Did they, as far as what you saw or heard, share your outrage at
17 what Arkan had done?
18 A. Yes, they did too.
19 Q. Did you hear at that time that Arkan was collaborating closely
20 with high-ranking members of the JNA?
21 A. No.
22 Q. You didn't hear that?
23 A. No.
24 Q. Did you hear that when he was summonsed -- sorry, let me start
25 that again. Who summonsed him to come and explain himself, do you know?
1 A. Well, someone from the command of the TO staff and the police
3 Q. When he came to the meeting, do you know if he came accompanied
4 by JNA officials?
5 A. No. I wasn't there when they arrived. We just saw their
6 vehicle, his vehicle, a jeep.
7 Q. Do you know why the TO or the militia didn't attempt to arrest
8 Arkan at that time?
9 A. Well, no one could do anything about Arkan at the time. He had
10 his own army. They called them the Serbian guard.
11 Q. Could I suggest that the TO and the militia and the civilians
12 couldn't do anything because Arkan was closely collaborating with the JNA
13 and they would, it was anticipated, prevent such an arrest?
14 A. That's possible.
15 MR. JORDASH: I've got no further questions. Thank you.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you. Could I invite the parties to look at
17 page 16, line 18. Ms. Friedman, I don't know whether you read "trained"
18 or not, and it is a mistake which will not be easily detected when the
19 transcript is corrected, but page 4 of the statement reads that some of
20 the prisoners that had been detained in the milicija building were
21 "killed" by Zeljko Raznatovic, also known as Arkan's men. And this, I
22 think, should be corrected in order to avoid confusion.
23 Mr. Bakrac or Mr. Petrovic, who is going to cross-examine the
25 Witness JF-018, you'll now be cross-examined by Mr. Bakrac.
1 Mr. Bakrac is counsel for Mr. Simatovic.
2 Please proceed, Mr. Bakrac.
3 Cross-examination by Mr. Bakrac:
4 Q. [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours.
5 Good afternoon, Witness.
6 A. Good afternoon.
7 Q. My learned colleague Mr. Jordash asked you about Arkan and his
8 men, and you described the incident on the critical evening in question.
9 My question is this: Were you at the police station building on the
10 evening when Arkan came with his men to the police station?
11 A. No. Only when his men came on that first occasion. Not on the
12 second occasion.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Bakrac, your question implied that Arkan came
14 with his men on the critical evening. If you wanted to refer to the
15 night of the 31st of July -- one second, please.
16 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
17 JUDGE ORIE: We are reminded again that we should switch off our
18 microphones when the witness answers the question.
19 Now, let me have a look. Now, you may have looked at the B/C/S
20 version as well, but I noticed that in the statement often reference is
21 made to Zeljko Raznatovic, also known as Arkan's men; that is ambiguous
22 because I understood it to be that Arkan's men, Arkan's real name being
23 Zeljko Raznatovic, came. Now, in your question you take a different
24 approach. You are talking about Arkan arriving with Arkan's men. I
25 don't know whether you understand it in a different way because from the
1 statement it appears to me that after the events, Arkan appeared and gave
2 a statement in the absence of the witness on the -- on a central place in
3 the village. I'm getting confused by your question, or did I
4 misunderstand you?
5 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour, perhaps I wasn't
6 precise enough. But what you are referring to is the second incident.
7 In other words, after the prisoners had been taken away as far as I
8 understood it, Arkan came and addressed those persons.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Bakrac, you were talking about that
10 critical night, I mean, no wonder that we get confused. If you would be
11 very precise in your questions.
12 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Very well.
13 Q. Witness, you don't know, in other words, the date of that
14 critical evening, or night, when the prisoners were taken away, those
15 prisoners who were later found dead? Is that correct?
16 A. I cannot recall the date exactly, but it was in August. But I
17 don't know exactly what day in August. I don't know if it was the 8th or
18 9th. I can't really remember.
19 Q. In other words, on that night, the date of which we don't know
20 exactly, when those prisoners were taken away, did Zeljko Raznatovic,
21 Arkan, come with his men or did some men come that you referred to as
22 Arkan's men?
23 A. I didn't even know Zeljko Raznatovic until I saw him on TV later
24 on. As for his men, they had insignia, they had a tiger patch, and it
25 said Serbian guards, and that's how I could tell that it was them. But I
1 didn't know him. I only saw him on TV later on. It was only his men who
2 were there.
3 Q. When they came, what did they do? Did they actually go into the
4 police building, police station building?
5 A. No. They stopped at the entrance. We did not allow them to come
6 in. They wanted to come in, but we wouldn't allow them to come in
7 because they didn't have any papers on them.
8 Q. In other words, you did not allow them to come in without the
9 proper paperwork. Now, in your statement, as far as -- or if I
10 understand you correctly, you said that members of Arkan's volunteer
11 guard used to come into the police building in Dalj; is that correct?
12 Earlier on?
13 A. Well, I don't really know, but I heard this from some other
14 people who also were patrolling in shifts, but it didn't happen while I
15 was there.
16 Q. But you did hear it from your men that earlier on they did come
17 in, probably they were permitted to come in?
18 A. I don't know. Probably.
19 Q. Witness, do you know, because you worked at the police at that
20 time, who it was who issued permits or passes? You said that you didn't
21 allow Arkan's men to come into the building without some papers or the
22 pass or permit. Now, who was it who actually issued these passes?
23 A. At the staff command, the Territorial Defence staff.
24 Q. So when we say the TO command staff, we mean the
25 Territorial Defence of Dalj that was subordinate to the
1 Territorial Defence staff of Baranja; correct? You are referring to the
2 local TO staff?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Witness, have you ever heard of Kozara, the boat Kozara?
5 A. No.
6 Q. Do you know that the army command was actually headquartered on a
7 boat that was moored some distance away from there?
8 A. No.
9 Q. On the critical night when the prisoners were taken away, did you
10 see Mr. Stricevic at the police station by any chance?
11 A. No.
12 Q. Do you know who Mr. Stricevic was?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Was he the commander of the local Special Police who dubbed
15 themselves the space police?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Did this police and Stricevic, were they also part of the
18 Baranja Territorial Defence?
19 A. I don't know about that. I'm not sure. I can't remember.
20 MR. BAKRAC: Witness, I just have one more question and then I
21 will complete with this part before the break, Your Honours. But I'm not
22 sure whether it should be asked in closed session. And out of an
23 abundance of caution, I would appreciate if we could move into private
25 JUDGE ORIE: We move into private session.
1 [Private session]
9 [Open session]
10 THE REGISTRAR: We are in open session, Your Honours.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
12 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
13 Q. Witness, there's just one last thing that I would like to ask you
14 about, if you can answer it. And if you don't know anything about it,
15 it's quite okay if you say I don't know. I would like to know what the
16 relationship was between the TO and the Army of the Republic of Serbian
17 Krajina in your area in the relevant period about which you are
18 testifying here, in other words, August/September 1991. I apologise, I
19 mean the JNA.
20 A. I am sorry, I didn't understand your question.
21 Q. Do you know what the relationship was between the TO, the local
22 Territorial Defence, and the JNA that came at that time to defend the
23 Serb people? And I'm referring to August and September 1991.
24 A. I believe that the TO was under the JNA command or it should have
25 been at least.
1 Q. And one more question, Mr. Witness, do you know who
2 Mr. Mile Paspalj was?
3 A. No.
4 Q. Very well. And really, my final question now, do you have any
5 knowledge about the fact that in the course of 1992 or 1993
6 Zeljko Raznatovic, Arkan, was a minister without a portfolio in the
7 government of the Republic of Serbian Krajina?
8 A. No, I'm not aware of that.
9 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours. I have no
10 further questions for this witness.
11 [Trial Chamber confers]
12 Questioned by the Court:
13 JUDGE ORIE: I have one question for you. You told us - that was
14 the last question put to you by Ms. Friedman - that you heard from others
15 that Arkan would have admitted at the gathering that he had killed those
16 men. Do you remember who it were that told you this? Did you know the
17 persons who told you what Arkan had said?
18 A. He said that himself in front of the hundreds of people who were
19 there. I don't know who said it exactly but everybody was talking about
20 that because everybody had heard.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Were these people you knew? Were these
22 colleagues, neighbours, this kind of -- what do I have to understand it?
23 It was the talk of the town, is that what you intend to say?
24 A. Yes.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And was the talk of the town about what had
1 happened, or did everyone also talk about what Arkan had said about what
2 had happened?
3 A. Both.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you for those answers.
5 Ms. Friedman, any re-examination?
6 MS. FRIEDMAN: Just one short matter, Your Honour.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
8 Re-examination by Ms. Friedman:
9 Q. Sir, at page 23 of today's transcript, line 20, you were asked if
10 you know who Stricevic was, and you said yes. I wanted to ask you if you
11 were every introduced to Milorad Stricevic?
12 A. No. I knew him by sight. I used to see him around the village
13 at the time. I may have exchanged a word or two with him, but I'm not
15 Q. Did you know him before the conflict?
16 A. No.
17 Q. Thank you.
18 MS. FRIEDMAN: I have no further questions.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you. Have the questions from the Bench or the
20 questions of re-examination triggered any need for further questions?
21 Witness JF-018, this then concludes your testimony. I would like
22 to thank you very much for coming a long way to The Hague and for having
23 answered the questions that were put to you by the parties and by the
24 Bench, and I wish you a safe trip home again. You are excused.
25 Could the witness be escorted out of the courtroom.
1 [The witness withdrew]
10 JUDGE ORIE: Then I suggest that we take the break now. We'll
11 have a break for half an hour and we'll resume at five minutes past 4.00.
12 --- Recess taken at 3.36 p.m.
13 --- On resuming at 4.10 p.m.
14 [The witness entered court]
15 JUDGE ORIE: Good afternoon, Witness.
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good afternoon.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Before you give evidence, the Rules of Procedure and
18 Evidence require that you make a solemn declaration that you'll speak the
19 truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
20 Mr. Usher, could you please hand out the solemn declaration to
21 the witness.
22 And may I invite you to make that solemn declaration.
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will
24 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
25 WITNESS: JF-036
1 [Witness answered through interpreter]
2 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you. Please be seated.
3 Mr. Hoffmann, any matter we should deal with in private session?
4 MR. HOFFMANN: Yes, Your Honours.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please, then let's go into private session.
6 [Private session]
11 Page 4180 redacted. Private session.
10 [Open session]
11 THE REGISTRAR: We are in open session, Your Honours.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
13 Mr. Hoffmann, you may proceed.
14 MR. HOFFMANN: Thank you, Your Honours.
15 Examination by Mr. Hoffmann:
16 Q. Good afternoon, Witness. The Court has ordered certain
17 protective measures with respect to you and your evidence here today.
18 These include the use of a pseudonym, face and voice distortion. I will
19 not refer you to by your name but instead by your pseudonym JF-036.
20 MR. HOFFMANN: And I would like to ask the Court Usher to bring
21 up the pseudonym sheet which is 65 ter 5277 on the screen, not to be
23 Q. And, Witness, if I can ask you to look at the name that is
24 displayed on this pseudonym sheet and the date of birth, if both are
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. And as you can see, a number of persons are listed on this sheet
3 as well as locations that you can refer to by number or letters in public
4 session instead of using the real names, and I would ask the Court Usher
5 to hand out a paper copy of this sheet so you have this at hand if need
7 MR. HOFFMANN: Your Honours, the Prosecution tenders this
8 pseudonym sheet into evidence under seal.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar, that would be number ...
10 THE REGISTRAR: This would be Exhibit P341 under seal,
11 Your Honour.
12 JUDGE ORIE: P341 is admitted under seal.
13 Please proceed.
14 MR. HOFFMANN: Thank you.
15 I would then ask that we see 65 ter 5136 on the screen, not to be
16 broadcast again. It's an ICTY witness statement of this witness dated
17 10 March and 2nd May 2001
18 Q. Sir, on the screen before you, you see a document purporting to
19 be a statement that you gave to the ICTY in March and May 2001. Do you
20 recall giving such a statement to the ICTY?
21 A. Yes.
22 MR. HOFFMANN: And if we can please go to page 17 in the English
24 Q. Witness, do you recognise your own signature on this statement?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. And did you have an opportunity to review this statement in your
2 own language prior to testifying today?
3 A. Yes.
4 MR. HOFFMANN: And if we could briefly look at page 21 in the
5 original and page 18 in the translation. It is chart 3 which is attached
6 to the statement.
7 Q. Sir, this chart refers to the time-period 1993 to 1996. Is it
8 correct that you would like to clarify that this chart refers to that
9 time-period but that you are not sure if all the persons mentioned in
10 this chart had their position as indicated for the full time-period
11 between 1993 and 1996?
12 A. Well, at one point in that period between 1991 and 1996 they were
13 in the position as shown here on this chart.
14 Q. Thank you. And with that clarification, did your statement that
15 you signed in 2001 accurately reflect what you told the Office of the
16 Prosecutor at the time?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. And if you were asked the same questions today in court that you
19 were asked in 2001, would you give the same answers in substance?
20 A. Yes.
21 MR. HOFFMANN: Your Honours, at this time the Prosecution would
22 ask that the prior statement of this witness from 2001 be admitted into
23 evidence under seal, that is, 65 ter 5136.
24 JUDGE ORIE: I hear of no objections.
25 Madam Registrar.
1 THE REGISTRAR: This will be Exhibit P342 under seal,
2 Your Honour.
3 JUDGE ORIE: P342 is admitted under seal.
4 MR. HOFFMANN:
5 Q. Sir, now that your written statement is admitted into evidence,
6 I'm going to read out a short summary of your written statement for the
7 benefit of the public. This will not be considered as evidence, however,
8 I ask you to carefully listen to the summary.
9 Witness JF-036 gives evidence about operations of the militia, of
10 the so-called SAO SBWS. He describes the influence of the SDS Baranja
11 before the war started in the municipalities and describes a meeting of
12 the commanders of the local Serb Territorial Defence headquarter in
13 Jagodnjak which was attended by leaders of the SDS in Baranja. At this
14 meeting, the TO discussed with which units would participate in an attack
15 on Bilje. The role and organisation of the so-called crisis committees
16 in Baranja is explained. The SDS leadership directed the appointment of
17 the local crisis committees' presidents. The crisis committees also
18 handled the property left behind by refugees who fled the area.
19 Before the JNA took over the territory of Baranja
20 people that were affiliated with a counter intelligence group KOG of the
21 2nd JNA Administration obtained weapons and they were arming the Serb
22 population. The weapons they were getting were old fashioned and were
23 stored for a long time. The weapons were brought in civilian trucks,
24 concealed among other goods, and then distributed in Baranja beginning in
25 May 1991 but not to all villages at the same time. In the villages, the
1 SDS members were in charge of the distribution.
2 The witness describes the role and organisation of the state
3 security DB centre of Beli Manastir after October 1991 as well as the
4 chain of command of the police and DB in the SAO Slavonia, Baranja, and
5 Western Srem up to Goran Hadzic. The arrival in the region of
6 representatives of the DB from Sombor in September 1991 is explained. In
7 addition to the local chain of command, the DB centre Beli Manastir had
8 also a chain of command towards the Serbian Ministry of Interior in
10 in Baranja. Kostic was able to deliver exclusive weapons to important
11 individuals to bribe them, including Heckler Koch, Smith & Wessons,
12 silencers, and similar weapons. Kostic had the final say about what was
13 reported to Belgrade
14 The witness also gives evidence about the arrest of non-Serb
15 people in Baranja in the second half of 1991. The reasons for the
16 arrests were various, for example, being Croat, being a member of the
17 HDZ, being wealthy, or for revenge. The arrested people would be
18 escorted to Beli Manastir and detained in the prison located in the
19 basement of the militia building. They were often mistreated there. The
20 SUP Beli Manastir organised the transport of the detainees to Dalj and
21 Borovo in order to be exchanged. In all, the witness is aware of some
22 50 to 80 people who were arrested and transported to Dalj and Borovo,
23 some of whom were later released, but a large number of them disappeared.
24 The witness also gives evidence about the activities of the unit
25 for anti-terrorist operations, JATD, based in Tito's castle in Tikves in
1 the national park of Kopacki Rit. Members of this special unit began
2 operating in Baranja in early 1992. They wore red berets and green
3 camouflage uniforms of a different pattern than the one used by the JNA.
4 They were armed with automatic assault rifles without straps and
5 had belts made of special material and not made of leather. They used
6 Motorola walkie-talkies. They reported to the DB of the Republic of
8 villagers from Grabovac. And finally the witness states that when the
9 re-integration of the region was inevitable, the DB Belgrade controlled
10 the transport of property from the SAO region towards Serbia. He
11 testifies about how the head of the JATD Vasilije Mijovic who had been
12 sent from Belgrade
13 criminals to work for him.
14 Q. Sir, I'll continue with a number of questions now. At page 4 of
15 your statement which is now Exhibit P342 in the English version of page 3
16 in B/C/S of your statement you state that the Territorial Defence TO of
17 your region reported to Zagreb
18 war, but after the elections in 1990, the chain of command had to change,
19 you said. Can you explain to the Court which chain of command applied to
20 the TO in the SAO SBWS from 1991 onwards?
21 A. After the conflict broke out between Serbs and Croats, there was
22 a physical breakdown in all communications. Reports were no longer sent,
23 the two opposing enemy sides never reported to each other about any of
24 their plans. To put it simply, Baranja is a territory with a single
25 territorial Defence staff in Beli Manastir had to rely on Serbia because
1 that was there only geographical physical connection.
2 Q. And did the Serb autonomous region of Slavonia, Baranja,
3 Western Srem, the SAO SBWS, have its own organs, institutions, and a
5 A. The autonomous province did have its Assembly and organs of
7 Q. And can you tell the Court if within the SAO the laws of Croatia
8 still applied?
9 A. [Overlapping speakers] ... there were no longer applied. The
10 Croatian laws no longer applied there.
11 Q. Further at page 3 of your statement, Exhibit P342, you talk about
12 the Serb Crisis Staff in the region, especially in the villages, and at
13 the end of the relevant paragraph, you state that these Serb Crisis Staff
14 also handled the property that was left behind by refugees. Can you
15 explain how that property of refugees who left was handled in the region?
16 A. One of the tasks of the Crisis Staff was to make a record of all
17 those and to seal all the property that was left behind the refugees by
18 those who fled the villages. This was done by the Crisis Staff of every
19 community or of every village or town.
20 Q. And what happened to that sealed property at any later stage, if
21 you know?
22 A. Later on, that property was given to refugees who had fled the
23 rest of Croatia
24 other refugees who needed to be accommodated there.
25 Q. Sir, from 1991 to 1995, how many official border crossings were
1 there between the Republic of Serbia
2 A. The Danube
3 bridges: Batina, Erdut, and Ilok. And those were the only official
4 crossing points.
5 MR. HOFFMANN: Your Honours, just for your information, all these
6 places can be found on map 18 in the Court binder which is Exhibit P9.
7 Q. Sir, in your statement, and that is at pages 11 and 12 in English
8 and page 9 in B/C/S, you have mentioned a number of non-Serbs who were
9 arrested in Baranja and then deported to Slavonia and later went missing.
10 You mentioned, for example, the following persons: Ivan Zelember,
11 Rudolf Jukic, Erne or Ernest Baca, Karlo Rajic, and Simon Mihajlo. Do
12 you have any information about their fate as of today?
13 A. Well, some are still considered missing. And as for the others,
14 it is known that they were killed, they were never exchanged for
15 incarcerated Serbs as had been expected.
16 Q. In your statement you state that about 50 to 80 people were
17 arrested and then transported to Slavonia and just for the record in the
18 relevant section in your statement you referred to non-Serbs. Were these
19 50 to 80 people that were arrested all of non-Serb ethnicity, if you
21 A. Yes.
22 MR. HOFFMANN: Your Honours, just for the record and for your
23 information, some of these persons mentioned are in fact victims of the
24 charged killings in this case. Ivan Zelember is listed as a victim under
25 paragraph 36 of the third amended indictment and Rudolf Jukic, Ernest
1 Baca, Karlo Rajic, and Simon Mihajlo are listed as victims in
2 paragraph 37 of the indictment.
3 Q. Sir, in your statement - that is in English on page 13, B/C/S
4 page 10 and 11 - you describe how a special unit was operating in Baranja
5 in early 1992, a unit that was called JATD. You state that they had a
6 base at Tito's castle in Tikves and the national park called Kopacki Rit.
7 My question to you: Did that special unit go by any specific name or
8 nickname at the time?
9 A. The unit members wore red berets and those red berets gave them
10 the name.
11 Q. Did you ever have any personal contacts, official or unofficial,
12 with members of that unit in 1992?
13 A. I had a few unofficial contacts, they would drop by in our office
14 in the morning to have a cup of coffee or a refreshment, that's all.
15 Q. In your statement further on, on the same reference, you state
16 that the JATD did report to the Serbian state security, the DB. My
17 question to you is: Why do you say that?
18 A. They did not communicate with us through official channels. We
19 did not co-operate in terms of intelligence services. They arrived with
20 representatives of the state security of Serbia who introduced some of
21 them to us and we accepted them as a unit that belonged neither to the
22 Baranja TO nor to the JNA, so we accepted them as representatives of the
23 state security of Serbia
24 MR. HOFFMANN: I would like to ask that we see Exhibit P9 on the
25 screen, that is the map 18 from the Court binder, and that shows the area
1 of the SAO SBWS.
2 Q. Witness, you have mentioned that the red berets or the JATD had a
3 camp at Tikves in Tito's castle. Would you please, with the
4 Court Usher's help, mark the location on this map with a red cross,
6 A. [Marks]
7 Q. I would then ask that you please also put your pseudonym and
8 today's date maybe in the right corner of the map.
9 A. [Marks]
10 Q. Thank you, Witness.
11 MR. HOFFMANN: Your Honours, the Prosecution tenders this map
12 Exhibit P9 as marked by this witness into evidence. Again, it's a map of
13 the region of the SAO SBWS, and the witness indicated Tikves on this map,
14 a place where the Red Berets had a camp in 1992.
15 JUDGE ORIE: I hear of no objections.
16 Madam Registrar.
17 THE REGISTRAR: This would be Exhibit P343, Your Honours.
18 JUDGE ORIE: To be admitted - let me see what -- one second.
19 Yes, can be admitted as a public document. Therefore P343 is admitted
20 into evidence.
21 MR. HOFFMANN:
22 Q. Sir, in your statement, that is at page 7 in English, page 6 in
23 B/C/S --
24 JUDGE ORIE: Before we continue, Mr. Hoffmann, you earlier dealt
25 with their names listed on page 11, and then the witness said -- I was a
1 bit confused by this list of names, also if you look at the top line of
2 page 12, because - and I'm asking you a specific question,
3 Witness JF-036 - you've say I personally know a number of people who were
4 transported to Dalj and Borovo and later on went missing. Now, you dealt
5 with all those on page 11 apart from one, and then on page 12 at the top
6 a name is mentioned and there you say, I saw him after the war. He
7 survived as he managed to be exchanged. Two years ago he died.
8 Which means that apparently you are listing persons indicate that
9 they went missing although apparently not all of them went missing or
10 temporarily missing because one was exchanged. Now, if you don't say
11 from those you mentioned, that is Baca, Rajic, Simon, Jukic, and
12 Zelember, you said some are still considered missing and others we know
13 died. Could you tell us which one you know have died and which ones you
14 mentioned are still considered to be missing? Let's take them one by
15 one. Baca.
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm not sure about him. I believe
17 that he has gone missing. That he is still on the missing persons list.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Missing up until today? Yes?
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] [Overlapping speakers] ... yes.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Rajic, Karlo.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Likewise.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Simon, Mihajlo.
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Again the same.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Jukic, Rudolf.
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] He is still missing as well.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Zelember, Ivan.
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I believe that he was killed.
3 JUDGE ORIE: And why do you believe that?
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, you know, I'm not sure. I
5 believe that I have heard from somebody that he was killed. That is a
6 common knowledge. But I'm not a hundred per cent sure that I'm right
7 when I say that.
8 JUDGE ORIE: So effectively you say all of those mentioned by
9 Mr. Hoffmann are still missing apart from Mr. Zelember where there are
10 indications, although you are not able to further specify, that he died?
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
13 Please proceed.
14 MR. HOFFMANN: Thank you, Your Honours.
15 Q. Sir, in your statement at page 7 English and page 6 in B/C/S you
16 give evidence about Radoslav Kostic, how he was appointed by the state
17 security DB as a key person for Baranja, and that he reported directly to
19 officially or unofficially, Radislav Kostic in 1991 in Baranja?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Can you describe any of those occasions when you saw him?
22 A. He frequently came over to our offices. He came to see the
23 person under number 1 listed here. He came both officially and
24 unofficially. He would come in whenever he pleased. Sometimes that
25 happened on several days in a row and sometimes he would show up after
1 five to seven days. So it wasn't a regular -- these weren't regular
2 visits. But he did visit frequently.
3 Q. Have you personally attended any such meetings with Kostic?
4 A. No.
5 Q. Do you have any knowledge about what kind of meetings these were
6 that he did attend?
7 A. Among other things, we submitted our reports to the chief who
8 collected them and frequently he would say Kostic is coming over so I
9 would send it forward through him. And then when he came, he described
10 what the situation was like and information that he was actually -- that
11 he received from Kostic.
12 MR. HOFFMANN: Your Honours, at this point in time the
13 Prosecution would like to tender two reports compiled by Radoslav Kostic
14 in April 1991 into evidence. This is 65 ter 4298 with ERN 0608-4135 to
15 0608-4136. That Exhibit is part of the first Bar table motion filed on
16 25 November 2009
18 document from the Bar table because the witness has no direct knowledge
19 of this particular document.
20 JUDGE ORIE: So you are doing it at this moment because the
21 context is there. Any objections? No objections.
22 Madam Registrar, the two reports.
23 THE REGISTRAR: 65 ter 4298 becomes Exhibit P344, Your Honours.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, the two reports under one 65 ter number P344,
25 two reports are admitted into evidence.
1 MR. HOFFMANN: Thank you, Your Honours.
2 Q. Sir, in your statement, and I'm now referring to page 15, you
3 refer to the JATD commanded by Vaso Mijovic and you refer to a time when
4 the reintegration was inevitable. What year did Mijovic come to the area
5 of Baranja?
6 A. That was in 1995 sometime mid-year. I couldn't be more precise
7 about the date, so it was in 1995 about middle of the year.
8 Q. And did that unit, the JATD under Mijovic, go by any name or
10 A. They also had red caps and we kept calling them still the
11 Red Berets.
12 Q. And did you come across any members of the JATD or the Red Berets
13 in 1995 yourself?
14 A. Unofficially, yes.
15 Q. And how frequent would that be?
16 A. Well, it was impossible not to run into them because they had
17 check-points. Sometimes they stopped us, sometimes they didn't. In
18 other words, they had the check-point on the road that I had to take and
19 they stopped vehicles. So you couldn't pass on that road without
20 actually seeing them.
21 Q. Do you know what the purpose of their presence in 1995 was?
22 A. Well, in my view, there were several reasons for their presence.
23 First of all, after a certain time, they actually conducted mobilisation
24 and trained their men. The second reason was this: After
25 Operation Storm, the Croatian Operation Storm, the civilian population,
1 the people, were very scared; and in order to stop people from leaving
2 Baranja, they did this. So these would be some of the reasons for their
3 presence there.
4 Q. Are you aware of any camps the JATD or the Red Berets under
5 Mijovic had in the area of Baranja in 1995?
6 A. As far as I know, his staff was in Bilje village in another
7 castle, and the training camps for the training of those mobilised
8 recruits were in the place under A and also at Petrovo Selo which was a
9 place not far from the Hungarian border.
10 Q. And just for the record, if you refer to the place under A you
11 are referring to the pseudonym sheet in front of you; correct?
12 A. Correct, yes.
13 Q. You have mentioned two training camps. Can you tell the Court
14 who was trained at these two camps?
15 A. Well, at these training camps they trained young men who had
16 turned 18, because during that war there was no regular classic training
17 for young men, and it was the first time on this occasion during the war
18 that somebody actually began training young men for military service in
19 an organised manner.
20 Q. In your statement, and it's still page 15 in English, you state
21 that the Belgrade DB organised a transfer of property. Can you explain
22 what you mean by "transfer of property"?
23 A. In the aftermath of Operation Storm it became more or less clear
24 to everyone that Croatia
25 reintegration recover the territory where we were active, and it was
1 decided that state property, machines, equipment, wheat, corn, grain, and
2 so on, that it be transferred to Serbia. In other words, material goods
3 were being transferred. Because there were these check-points controlled
4 by the Red Berets controlling all the traffic towards the border, they
5 also checked or controlled the export or transfer of these material goods
6 out of the area.
7 Q. Sir, in your statement if you refer to the Belgrade DB, do you
8 refer to the local state security of the city of Belgrade, or do you
9 refer to the Serbian state security?
10 A. I refer to the state security of Serbia.
11 Q. Did you personally meet or see officially or unofficially
12 Vasilije Mijovic in Beli Manastir or elsewhere in Baranja in 1995?
13 A. Yes, there were unofficial meetings.
14 Q. Do you remember any specific occasion when you saw him?
15 A. When the young men who were being trained were being actually
16 matriculated, when there was the celebration where they graduated,
17 Mijovic addressed these young men in a meeting which was attended both by
18 the young trainees and their family members, friends, and so on, so there
19 was a large group of people there, and he addressed the local people, the
20 parents of these young men, and impressed them as a strategic thinker and
21 someone who would take care of these young men, who were to take part in
22 the defence in the remaining Serbian parts on the territory of the
23 Republic of Croatia
24 Q. Was there, if any, relationship between the JATD and the local
25 police in Baranja?
1 A. As far as I know, there was no mutual co-operation. Mijovic's
2 unit was independent; it had an agenda of its own. Whereas the local
3 police had their own tasks.
4 Q. In your statement, and we are still at page 15 in English, you
5 state that Vasilije Mijovic was sent to the region to put the situation
6 under full control of the Belgrade DB. Can you tell the Court how did
7 you learn about that?
8 A. Well, in the context of that statement in view of the fact that
9 Mijovic was the one who conducted the mobilisation and who actually had
10 control of all traffic in and out of Baranja and also because at the time
11 the chief of the DB centre was actually replaced by the Serbian DB, in
12 other words, the entire leadership was actually appointed by the
13 Serbian DB.
14 Q. In your statement you also mention a number of names, people you
15 say were criminals and who worked for Mijovic. In that context you often
16 mention stolen cars. Do you have any personal knowledge of any activity
17 with regard to the stolen cars?
18 A. Yes, but it's not just cars. I think in my statement I mentioned
19 vehicles. In other words, cars, trucks, motor bikes, all-terrain
20 vehicles, so that's what I meant.
21 Q. And do you have any personal knowledge about the registration
22 process for these stolen cars or stolen vehicles?
23 A. Most of these vehicles were registered in a very abbreviated
24 procedure, and licences were issued where the owners themselves would
25 fill out forms. In other words, the forms were blank and all you had to
1 do was just fill out the information relating to the vehicle itself and
2 the driver or owner.
3 Q. Was Mijovic and his unit involved in that process, to the best of
4 your knowledge?
5 A. Individuals, yes.
6 Q. Among the names that you mentioned who worked for Vaso Mijovic is
7 a certain Predrag Radetic. Do you recall if he went by any nickname?
8 A. His nickname was "Brada."
9 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: "Beard" in Serbian.
10 MR. HOFFMANN:
11 Q. And what was his relation with Mijovic?
12 A. Well, Mijovic was his witness at his wedding. He was married in
13 Baranja and Mijovic was his witness.
14 Q. Is that what you refer to in the Serbian language as "kum"?
15 A. Yes. So he was the witness at his wedding.
16 Q. Sir, are you familiar with a company called Remont in
17 Beli Manastir? It's spelled R-e-m-o-n-t.
18 A. Yes. Remont is a large company and one of its activities was
19 repair and maintenance of all kinds of machines and equipment. There was
20 also a workshop which inspected vehicles. In other words, the paperwork
21 for a vehicle would be entered at the workshop there. They would enter
22 the information on the vehicle identification number, colour of the
23 vehicle, type of vehicle, and so on, and all this paperwork would finally
24 end up at the police where the vehicle would be registered.
25 Q. To your knowledge, was this company Remont in any way involved in
1 the registration process for the stolen cars and vehicles that you
2 mentioned before?
3 A. Without Remont, no vehicle would be issued any registration
4 papers by the police.
5 MR. HOFFMANN: I would ask that we see the next Prosecution
6 exhibit, 65 ter 1706 on the screen. It bears ERN 0306-6887 to 0306-6894
7 in English. It is a report on the abuse of positions by members of the
8 JATD in Baranja and attached are a number of forms that are partly dated
9 September, October, or November 1995.
10 Q. Sir, did you have a chance to review this document prior to your
11 testimony today?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. And judging by your own knowledge, what you just testified now,
14 would you say that the information contained in that document seems to be
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. And Mijovic is listed as a commander of a unit for anti-terrorist
18 operations. Is that consistent with your own knowledge?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. This report mentions a certain Gavric - and that's in English on
21 page 2 and I believe in B/C/S at the end of page 1. A certain Gavric,
22 G-a-v-r-i-c, is mentioned whose car was allegedly taken away by Mijovic
23 and his men. And then this Gavric was finally forced to join the unit.
24 Are you familiar with this person by name Gavric?
25 A. I don't know a person by the name of Gavric. But looking at the
1 description of the event described here, I believe that it should
2 actually be a nickname Gavro. That is not really a name but, rather, the
3 pet name for Zeljko Milovanovic, aka Gavro.
4 Q. Is that the same Zeljko Milovanovic, aka Gavro, that you mention
5 in your statement at page 15 of the original?
6 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, objection.
7 Mr. Hoffmann's question -- I have an objection to his question because
8 Mr. -- the witness said that he doesn't know who this Gavric person is
9 and he is just assuming that it could be Gavro. And now my learned
10 colleague is trying to suggest that this was the same person that he
11 mentioned in his statement, and I believe that this is a leading
12 question. The witness was clear, he doesn't know the Gavric, and he is
13 just assuming that it might -- that this might actually refer to a
14 nickname Gavro.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hoffmann, wouldn't it be good to explore the
16 factual basis on which the witness made his assumptions or statements
17 before we ask him whether a person as described Mr. Gavric, which could
18 well be Mr. Gavro, and then I talked about a Mr. Gavro ... so to find the
19 factual basis for what seem to be conclusions.
20 MR. HOFFMANN: Yes, Your Honour. I think he did indicate that he
21 looked at what was described in this incident which is why he made that
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
24 MR. HOFFMANN: And, of course, I didn't want to change that, but
25 he did mention a certain Gavro.
1 JUDGE ORIE: But even if you look at the incident, then I would
2 like to know what he looked at exactly. If you say, well, this incident
3 looks very much as what I'm familiar with a certain person does. I hear
4 someone shouting and I say, Well, it must be he and he, this person,
5 because I know that he is often shouting. Nevertheless, that might not
6 be conclusive. So we do not even know exactly what the incident the
7 witness referred to as a basis for his assumptions.
8 So if you would explore that, that would be preferable.
9 MR. HOFFMANN: Yes, Your Honour.
10 Q. Witness, you have mentioned a certain Zeljko Milovanovic, aka
11 Gavro. What do you know about him being involved with the Mijovic unit?
12 A. We have just mentioned the fact that Mijovic tried to put under
13 his control all criminals in Baranja. Zeljko Milovanovic was at the top
14 of that criminal berg, and he was a very capable criminal, and he
15 resisted the longest to Mijovic's attempt. He fled, he hid, Mijovic was
16 looking for him for days in order to woo him over to his side.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Please, proceed, Mr. Hoffmann. Yes, I'm thinking,
18 but it has not led to any conclusion or question yet. Please proceed.
19 If I try to switch off my microphone. I know what happened, the map was
20 on the priority button which -- where it should not be. Please proceed.
21 MR. HOFFMANN: Thank you, Your Honour. Your Honours, the
22 Prosecution tenders this Exhibit 16 -- 1706 into evidence.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Jordash.
24 MR. JORDASH: We object to the admission of the exhibit on two
25 grounds. One is authenticity. We don't have any explanation as to the
1 origins of this document, who produced it, who sent it to the -- well,
2 first of all, who sent it to the Prosecution, where it came from, who
3 drafted it, nothing which indicates this is anything other than a
5 As to relevance, we would submit the following: Firstly, the
6 contents appear to deal with what is a form of criminality which on the
7 face of it isn't related to this indictment. Secondly, in that vein, the
8 witness hasn't been able to properly identify this document or the
9 contents of the document, and the discussion that's just taken place
10 concerning Gavric is a good illustration of that lack of identification.
11 The description of Gavric in this document and the events concerning
12 Gavric are somewhat different, we would submit, to that described at
13 page 15 of the witness's statement.
14 In the witness's statement, P342, Gavric is clearly identified.
15 He is clearly identified by name. He is clearly identified as a local
16 criminal. He is clearly identified as someone who Mijovic was attempting
17 to have work for him in the capacity of a continuation of criminal
18 activity such as the vehicle business described.
19 In this proposed exhibit, Gavric first of all is a different
20 name. Secondly, the description, we would submit, bears little relation
21 to that in the statement, simply the identification of Mijovic beating up
22 a man called Gavric and forcing him to become a member of the JATD unit.
23 Somewhat different, we would submit. Those are our submissions.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hoffmann --
25 Yes, Mr. Bakrac.
1 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I don't know whether I
2 should add something before Mr. Hoffmann can reply to both of our
3 submissions. I agree with what Mr. Jordash has just said, and I
4 subscribe to his words fully. I would like to say that in addition to
5 this document not having a date, a signature, the title explanation looks
6 as if this is an excerpt from an entirely different document. Therefore,
7 I totally agree with my learned friend and I object to the admission of
8 this document into evidence and especially to the admission of the
9 document though this particular witness.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Your colleague doesn't say that it's an excerpt from
11 another document but that it's a forgery, but -- or at least that there's
12 nothing to believe that it's anything else than a forgery, which is
13 short, it's a short -- he said it's likely a forgery.
14 Mr. Hoffmann, could you shed some light, first of all, on the
15 provenance of this document.
16 MR. HOFFMANN: Certainly, Your Honours. This document has
17 actually been provided by Zoran Lilic who's former president of the
18 Republic of Yugoslavia
19 interviewed for the Milosevic case in which he testified publicly. And
20 this document was provided in December 2001 to the Office of the
22 Insofar as to the origin of this document, of course there is no
23 dispute about it that this particular document, those two pages, have no
24 official letterhead or stamp or signature. I do invite the Chamber to
25 look at the following pages from page 3 onwards where we do see a number
1 of official forms that are attached to this document.
2 And in terms of the arguments about the contents of this
3 document, I submit that it's -- the large majority of this document
4 completely in line with what the witness testified today. It does talk
5 about the JATD being active in Baranja. It does talk about Mijovic being
6 commander. It does mention Mijovic's men nicknamed Brada, the same
7 person that the witness mentioned today. The document talks about the
8 smuggling and re-sale of stolen cars through Mijovic and his men, again
9 absolutely what the witness testified to today. And finally it does
10 mention the registration process and the involvement of the Remont
11 company, again something the witness just testified to. And those
12 attachments are actually attachments from the Remont company and relate
13 to individual vehicles. And I think at least on one of them, I think
14 it's on page 3 of the document, even the name Mijovic is mentioned.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Bakrac.
16 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. Could my
17 learned friend Mr. Hoffmann tell us whether this document was received
18 from Mr. Lilic as a separate document, just two pages, or whether it was
19 part of a bigger document or part of another document? If it was
20 received as a part of a different document, then we would very much like
21 to see the entire document. What I'm after is to find out whether only
22 these two pages have been handed over by Mr. Lilic.
23 MR. HOFFMANN: May I just respond on this very quickly.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, unless you want to add something to this
25 question, Mr. Jordash.
1 MR. JORDASH: As regards Mr. Lilic, I could add one thing which
2 is - and so far from the Defence perspective we don't take a position on
3 this - but I would, for point of information, submit to the Trial Chamber
4 that Mr. Lilic was put forward in the Milosevic case as a witness who
5 could not -- who the Prosecution did not necessarily rely upon completely
6 for the truth of what he was saying - let me put that differently - that
7 they couldn't necessarily put him forward as a witness of truth. That's
8 the way he was put forward by Mr. Nice.
9 JUDGE ORIE: But then apparently in some respects --
10 MR. JORDASH: In some respects he could.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, because otherwise you could call him as a
12 witness if -- so Mr. Nice apparently then was not convinced that every
13 respect he would speak the truth.
14 Mr. Hoffmann.
15 MR. HOFFMANN: Well, first of all, I cannot talk on behalf of
16 Mr. Geoffrey Nice and what was said at the time. All I have at my hand is
17 currently the information that this document was provided as such by
18 Mr. Zoran Lilic including the attachments which are also part of this
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, not as part of a bigger document. I think the
21 Chamber needs some time to -- because the issue apparently is whether
22 this is a truthful forgery, isn't it, that the testimony is that these
23 were all false documents to be filled in by persons themselves, so
24 therefore, not the real documents. That's at least what I understood
25 from the witness, that through the Remont company that you would just
1 produce some paperwork. So what we are actually looking at at this
2 moment is whether these are the real forgeries or that they are not. Is
3 that more or less ...
4 MR. HOFFMANN: In a way, yes, they were forgeries then, but of
5 course as such they would be authentic exhibits in this case.
6 [Overlapping speakers] ...
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. No, no, I see these are authentic, in your
8 view, authentic examples of forged documents. Okay. We'll have --
9 perhaps we have to look at -- there's -- of course there's another matter
10 remaining, Mr. Hoffmann. You asked the witness, Is that the same
11 Zeljko Milovanovic also known as Gavro that you mentioned in your
12 statement, page 15 of the original.
13 Could you tell me where on page 15 the witness mentions
14 Zeljko Milovanovic also known as Gavro?
15 MR. HOFFMANN: I have to correct that, in fact, it does say only
16 Gavro Milovanovic.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, so what you introduce in your question is that
18 Gavro is a nickname which is then, by the way, that's not supported in
19 any way by the statement. Second, that Gavro is the same as Gavric. And
20 then I asked you to explore the factual basis on which such conclusions
21 were made. And, well, you moved rather quickly to tendering the document
22 rather than to positively responding to my invitation.
23 MR. HOFFMANN: If I may just add on that, I think actually
24 whether or not this Gavric is the same person that the witness described
25 as Zeljko Milovanovic, aka Gavro, I think is, for the admission of this
1 document, certainly of minor importance because it's one of the examples
2 how Mijovic unit operated in Baranja. He clearly stated, and there is no
3 dispute about that, that he doesn't know a name by Gavric, he only then
4 said this may well be Zeljko Milovanovic Gavro. And only on that second
5 name that he mentioned, I wanted to clarify if that is the same person
6 that he mentions or if there are two Zeljko Milovanovic, aka Gavro.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, so you say that the core of the relevance is
8 not the identity, the Gavro/Gavric issue but it's, rather, the
9 functioning of the - what was the name of that company again? - Remont
10 company irrespective of -- and that's what the witness testified about.
11 So then the authenticity of the document remains.
12 Any further comments?
13 MR. JORDASH: Yes, I would reiterate our objection concerning
14 relevance to the indictment. This is 1995. This is criminality which is
15 a long way away from what the indictment alleges. And we would submit
16 that simply adducing evidence of criminality by those who during the
17 indictment period are said to have been members of the DB isn't a
18 sufficient indication of relevance.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hoffmann.
20 MR. HOFFMANN: Very briefly, Your Honours, A, the indictment does
21 cover the period from 1991 to 1995 in terms of persecution, deportation,
22 forcible transfer. It does to a large extent concern these special units
23 of the Serbian state security otherwise known as Red Berets or the JATD.
24 We have here a member, a high ranking member, of as we say, Mijovic. If
25 there would be no dispute in this trial about Vasilije Mijovic being a
1 member of the Serbian state security being sent to the region on behalf
2 of the Serbian state security, we could probably do without this
3 document, but at this point in time we have to prove every single puzzle
4 in this piece, and that is part of it. Plus, the relevance, I think,
5 also stems from that this evident, this document, clearly corroborates
6 what the witness has testified which just adds to the relevance.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So, therefore, you say it's the link of
8 Mijovic to the Serbian state security rather than that he may have
9 misbehaved, that he was not an angel in his private life as a -- in
11 MR. HOFFMANN: And if I may add, the person of Vasilije Mijovic
12 will pop up at different parts of this trial in different crime basis and
13 especially he does play a crucial role when it comes to the events in
14 July 1995 in Trnovo where a number of documents and witnesses will talk
15 about his role. And even more so we have to prove that link between the
16 person Mijovic and the two accused.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Mijovic being linked or being a member of the
18 Serbian the state security?
19 MR. JORDASH: If my learned friends are suggesting that this type
20 of criminality which, as I understand the Prosecution submissions on
21 this, concerns criminality against Serbians, if that is not to be relied
22 upon by the Prosecution in support of the indictment but what they are
23 seeking to do is to link Mijovic to the accused, then we withdraw the
24 objection on that point.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Bakrac, what is your view on that matter?
1 Apparently we are trying to focus on what the possible probative value
2 is. And I do understand that stealing a car doesn't mean stealing a car
3 from someone from another ethnicity. So if that's taken out as a
4 relevant matter and you said the core of your problem was to link
5 Mr. Mijovic to the Serbian state security, then it seems that we are
6 close to not too much disagreement.
7 But, Mr. Bakrac, now, you.
8 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] I agree with Mr. Jordash has just
9 said. If you look at the statement a little bit better, you will see
10 that the witness also mentions cars that had arrived from western Europe,
11 so they had nothing whatsoever to do with the cars that had been seised
12 by members of another ethnic group. And at the end of the day you will
13 see that we have already offered some pieces of evidence, and you will
14 see that during our cross-examination, showing that different property
15 and vehicles had been taken away from criminals and the record was kept
16 of that.
17 This document certainly has to be marked for identification, but
18 we do not agree that this document should be admitted into evidence.
19 When you look at the evidence offered by the Defence, I believe that we
20 can re-open the issue of this document and discuss it further.
21 [Trial Chamber confers]
22 JUDGE ORIE: From what the Chamber understands is that where the
23 cars were stolen and from whom is not the vital probative element in this
24 document. Secondly, it seems, but correct me when I'm wrong, that the
25 Defence is relatively relaxed if it comes to establishing a link between
1 Mijovic and the Serbian state security because then they even give up
2 their objection against the documents which would be a forgery, so that's
3 very generous, or at least there's nothing which indicates that it's not
4 a forgery. But at least there seems to be not a major dispute about what
5 you are seeking to establish primarily through this document and what the
6 Defence is, well, willing to accept.
7 I do not know exactly what you are accepting, so therefore you
8 are invited to see whether you can come to an agreement on those matters.
9 And then, Mr. Hoffmann, then we can do two things. If you come to an
10 agreement, you could either for the time being withdraw the document, or
11 leave it as marked for identification, which means that for the month to
12 come we have now and then to have a look at it again and to see whether
13 we have resolved matters on such as authenticity. And may I invite the
14 parties to see what is possible in this respect and then at this moment
15 no decision yet is taken, not even on the status of this document, before
16 you have met with the Defence.
17 And the other matters while you said the person is not Gavric,
18 Gavro, that seems not to be really an important matter.
19 Mr. Bakrac.
20 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I apologise, I may
21 have misunderstood you. I am trying to listen the interpretation and to
22 look at the transcript at the same time. I did not understand that
23 Mr. Jordash said that this document could establish a link and that we
24 would agree to this document establishing a link between Vasiljevic and
25 the DBR of the Republic of Serbia
1 and if that's the way Mr. Jordash said, then our position is different.
2 We don't think that a link can be established between the DBR Serbia and
3 Vasilije Mijovic by means of this document. Our position is not the
4 same. It's contrary.
5 MR. JORDASH: Perhaps I can clarify. I did say that we withdraw
6 the objection on that particular point. We stick by the objection to
8 JUDGE ORIE: Now matters really become complex.
9 MR. JORDASH: Sorry, Your Honour, to interrupt. My client would
10 like to use the restroom if that's possible.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, we are at the time where we would have a break
12 anyhow. So let's think about and most likely the outcome will be - but I
13 have to discuss it with my colleagues - to have the document MFI'd.
14 MR. HOFFMANN: Just for Your Honours' information, I would make
15 one more comment before the break. And I've indicated that to both
16 Defence teams I would like, at a later stage, to actually tender
17 basically from the Bar table a few excerpts from the personnel files from
18 the state security of Serbia
19 that earlier with the Defence. I have no clear indication yet as to
20 whether there are any objections, but it's in the same context of Mijovic
21 and the Serbian state security.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Let's have a break first. We'll have a break
23 and resume at five minutes past 6.00.
24 --- Recess taken at 5.37 p.m.
25 --- On resuming at 6.11 p.m.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Hoffmann.
2 MR. HOFFMANN: Very quickly, Your Honours, I have briefly
3 discussed with the Defence again during the break. There is no change in
4 position so to say. There are still objections to the document
5 admission. While on our side we would ask that this document be tendered
6 into evidence, I think we have --
7 JUDGE ORIE: You don't have to ask us whether it be tendered,
8 that's for you to do, and then we'll decide on whether it will be
9 admitted or not. You still tender it.
10 MR. HOFFMANN: Point taken, Your Honour.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
12 [Trial Chamber confers]
13 JUDGE ORIE: The document will be assigned a number. It will be
14 marked for identification. The Chamber will first have a closer look at
15 it and then see whether it can decide -- whether it can decide at this
16 moment about admission, whether or not after having asked for further
17 submissions by the parties.
18 Madam Registrar.
19 THE REGISTRAR: This will be Exhibit P345, marked for
20 identification, Your Honour.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
22 Please proceed.
23 MR. HOFFMANN: Thank you, Your Honour.
24 I would then ask that we see the next exhibit on the screen, that
25 is, 65 ter 4809. It's a newspaper article from 31st July, 1995.
1 Q. It is a newspaper article from the magazine or newspaper
2 "Nasa Borba" and the headline reads "when liberators loot." And the
3 Prosecution received this article actually in response to an RFA 1333
4 from the Republic of Serbia
5 of the OTP when screening some of the archives provided by the Serbian DB
6 earlier on and then was submitted by Serbia with that response.
7 Sir, you have testified about the issue of stolen cars and the
8 involvement of Mijovic's unit in this process in 1995 in Baranja. Did
9 you have a chance to review this article prior to testifying today?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And did you also look at the report about the Salajic family
12 which is in B/C/S starting on the second page and in English in the
13 second paragraph on the first page. Are you familiar with the Salajic
15 A. Yes, I know the family Salajic.
16 Q. And have you heard anything about how this family was approached
17 and their cars were taken away?
18 A. Well, I heard about that incident. This is an old family, well
19 off, from Jagodnjak village.
20 Q. And in the part about the Salajic family, it does read that
21 someone mentions that the unit was allegedly stationed at Bilje. Do you
22 know of any unit that was stationed at that time in Bilje?
23 A. At the time, the only unit, the command unit, was the
24 Vaso Mijovic unit at the time stationed in Bilje. We already mentioned
25 earlier that they were at an old castle in Bilje.
1 MR. HOFFMANN: And if we can please go to page 4 of the English
2 translation and back to page 1 of the B/C/S.
3 Q. There is a text box in the original on page 1 headed "Who is
4 Colonel Mijovic." And it does read in the article, and I quote:
5 "When Vasilije Mijovic came to Baranja, he freely introduced
6 himself as Colonel of the UDBA," that is the state security
7 administration, "sent personally by Slobodan Milosevic and Jovica
8 Stanisic, chief of the Serbian state security, to establish order."
9 Sir, is that information consistent with your own knowledge and
10 experience in Baranja in 1995?
11 A. Well, Mr. Mijovic had that kind of attitude. He saw himself as
12 an authority, and he liked to be in the limelight. And I think that he
13 wasn't described quite truthfully.
14 MR. HOFFMANN: Your Honours, the Prosecution tenders this article
15 from the 31st July, 1995, 65 ter 4809, into evidence.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Jordash.
17 MR. JORDASH: We don't object as such, although could I kindly
18 request that we have a clarification of the last answer, please,
19 before ...
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Jordash, the same thing came into my mind.
21 You said that he wasn't described quite truthfully. Could you tell us in
22 what respect you consider the description of Mr. Mijovic not being
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I did not say that it was not
25 truthful; I actually said that it was fairly described. I agree with the
1 description given here.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Jordash.
3 MR. JORDASH: No objection.
4 JUDGE ORIE: And same for the Simatovic Defence?
5 In the absence of any objections, is it to establish that this
6 was said about Mr. Mijovic or do you consider it also an element or at
7 least a probative value as to the truth of its content?
8 MR. HOFFMANN: Well, it's, of course, in the first place, a
9 newspaper article from the time that just reports as such. It does
10 corroborate what the witness says, and it does refer to what allegedly
11 Mr. Mijovic himself said when he appeared in Baranja.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. In the absence of any objections,
13 Madam Registrar, the number would be ...
14 THE REGISTRAR: 65 ter 4809 becomes Exhibit P346, Your Honours.
15 JUDGE ORIE: P346 is admitted into evidence.
16 Please proceed.
17 MR. HOFFMANN: And just for the transcript, it was 65 ter 4809.
18 Q. Witness, in the same context in your statement at page 7 you also
19 refer to members of the Serbian state security from Sombor which is in
20 Vojvodina in Serbia
21 number of names in your statement. I would ask you now look at a number
22 of lists of persons and see if you recognise any of the names on that
24 MR. HOFFMANN: And I would ask that we see first 65 ter 5004.1.
25 It is a redacted version of that exhibit to be shown on the screen. It
1 is a payment record seised from the Serbian state security for the JATD
2 in October 1995, and according to the requested protective measures of
4 as the two following ones are also part of the first Bar table motion of
5 the Prosecution of 25 November 2009
6 46 in both languages first.
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Could you please zoom in a bit.
8 MR. HOFFMANN:
9 Q. If you just carefully review the names starting with number 1
10 down to the end of the list and tell us if you know any of these persons
11 by number and name.
12 A. Under number 1, Vasilije Mijovic.
13 Q. Just indicate when you are done with that list we can go to the
14 next page which is actually in reverse order so it would be page 45.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Could we first hear from the witness. You invited
16 him to say when he was done and then we immediately moved to the next
17 page. So let's go back to the first page. We just move back to the
18 first page, the page we saw before, with number -- Mijovic under
19 number 1. One second.
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Under number 1 and --
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Could we enlarge a bit.
22 Could you take your time and tell us whether apart from
23 Mr. Mijovic whether you recognise any other name on that list.
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No more names on the first page,
25 the one that's on the monitors now.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Then we now move to the next page.
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, I can't see any names I know
4 MR. HOFFMANN: And finally, if we can then go to page 44 of this
5 exhibit in both languages.
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Under 81, Radmila Spanovic. 88,
7 both the first and last names are familiar, Jovan Opacic. I knew a
8 person by that name who was from Beli Manastir. Number 92, Predrag
9 Radetic. 110, Jovica Zivanov. 111, Jovo Ralic. 112, Dusko Salajic.
10 116, Zeljko Milovanovic. 119, Damir Matausek and no one else on this
12 MR. HOFFMANN:
13 Q. Thank you, can you tell us who was Radmila Spanovic, number 81 on
14 this list?
15 A. Radmila Spanovic worked for a while for the state security at a
16 Beli Manastir centre. She worked there as a secretary. Before that, she
17 worked for the police and then she was transferred to the state security.
18 Q. Number 111, Jovo Ralic, who was he?
19 A. Jovo Ralic are the -- that's the first and last name of an
20 operative from the Sombor state security service.
21 Q. And we had some discussion before the break about
22 Zeljko Milovanovic. Did that person go by any nickname?
23 A. Well, that is Gavro.
24 Q. And the last person you mentioned, Damir Matausek, number 119.
25 Did he also go by any nickname?
1 A. His nickname was Hipi. "Hipik" in Serbian.
2 Q. Thank you.
3 MR. HOFFMANN: I would then ask that we see the next of such
4 lists, 65 ter 5007.1 on the screen. It is a similar document from the
5 Serbian state security. Now for the second half of October 1995 for the
6 JATD. And I'll ask that we look at first page 45 of that document.
7 JUDGE ORIE: We again remind the parties to switch off the
8 microphones once the witness speaks.
9 MR. HOFFMANN: Page 45, please.
10 Q. Sir, the same question, if you please carefully review that list
11 before we turn to the next page and if you can identify any name and
12 number on this list?
13 A. Number 3, Vasilije Mijovic. Predrag Radetic under 16. And
14 nobody else.
15 MR. HOFFMANN: If we can then please turn to the next page, page
16 46 of the document.
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] 53, Jovan Opacic. 56, Radmila
18 Spanovic. 59, Jovica Zivanov, and Jovo Ralic under 60. 65, Zeljko
19 Milovanovic. 68, Damir Matausek. And nobody else on this page.
20 MR. HOFFMANN: And finally on this document if we can please go
21 to page 27.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] 21, Milan Tosic. And that's it.
23 MR. HOFFMANN:
24 Q. Can you tell us who Milan Tosic was?
25 A. Milan Tosic was deputy chief of the state security centre in
1 Sombor for a while.
2 Q. Thank you.
3 MR. HOFFMANN: And finally, I would ask that we go to
4 65 ter 5006.1 at page 60.
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] 21, Milan Tosic.
6 Q. Thank you.
7 MR. HOFFMANN: Your Honours, I would ask that all these three
8 DB per diem payment records be admitted into evidence. The redacted
9 versions are 65 ter 5004.1, 5006.1, and 5007.1. The unredacted versions
10 have the respected 65 ter numbers without that suffix. And those should
11 be admitted under seal.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, you are seeking admission of the unredacted
13 versions because I think it was this Chamber was not very fond of having
14 two versions of the same document in evidence.
15 MR. HOFFMANN: We certainly leave that in the discretion of the
16 Chamber, in the case of the previous witness JF-005 I think the Chamber
17 actually did admit two versions, one public, one under seal. I don't
18 know if you recall. I think Your Honours were reminded the last time
19 when we had that issue by your own staff that there is actually a
20 decision which stated it should be done that way because that question
21 was also raised last time and then you were, I think, referred to the
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, then I must have -- two weeks out of court is
24 apparently not a good thing for a presiding judge. I hope it was for the
25 others. We'll have numbers assigned. But first, any objections?
1 MR. JORDASH: There is an objection on the basis of relevance.
2 Whilst we understand the relevance of Mijovic appearing on a list which
3 purports to be a list of JATD members, what we haven't been provided with
4 is an indication of the significance of most of the names. Maybe it's a
5 simple inquiry to make of the Prosecution. Do they say that every person
6 on this list was within the JATD unit in Baranja? Do they say this list
7 applied across the board, across the Croatia and Bosnia
8 matter of trying to seek some clarification as to the significance of
9 this list. And particularly the names which the witness has identified.
10 If I can just pick out one, the name of Radmila Spanovic, the
11 secretary, appears in this list. The Prosecution case is that the JATD
12 was some kind of special militarised unit, and if we take that witness's
13 evidence at face value, then now this specialised unit has a secretary.
14 And so it's really just trying to seek some clarification as to the exact
15 relevance of these lists to the Prosecution case.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Bakrac.
17 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I agree with my
18 learned friend, and I would like to say this: Obviously the witness has
19 told us that, for example, Jovo Ralic was an operative in the Sombor
20 state security. Obviously the list contains the names of many people who
21 had nothing to do with the anti-terrorist unit. Second of all, this is
22 not a payroll. This is a list of daily allowances that could have been
23 paid on any basis. So we challenge the relevance.
24 As I've been looking at maybe 200 pages of these lists, I notice
25 that each list should be finished with a signature and a stamp. There is
1 one such list, but it seems that every list is a list -- a separate list.
2 Maybe my learned friend Hoffmann can help me. So, for example, the list
3 doesn't start with 23 as it should, after number 22 on the previous list,
4 but it starts with number 1. So we don't know what lists apply to who
5 these people are and in what respect were the daily allowances paid. And
6 I don't think that this witness is able to tell us all that.
7 [Trial Chamber confers]
8 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber is aware that of course, in relation to
9 this list, there may be a lot of questions remaining, but at this moment
10 it cannot be said that these lists do not meet the requirements of
11 relevance. Not to say that every item and every entry on the list that
12 the relevance is already clear, but it cannot be said that these lists
13 lack relevant or probative value and still to be seen what exactly can be
14 proven by those lists or not. But, therefore, the Chamber denies the
16 Madam Registrar, the numbers to be assigned would be ...
17 THE REGISTRAR: 65 ter 5004 becomes Exhibit P347. 65 ter 5006
18 becomes Exhibit P348. 65 ter 5007 becomes Exhibit P349, Your Honours.
19 JUDGE ORIE: P347 up to and including P349 are admitted into
20 evidence. And then the redacted versions I'll have a closer look at what
21 the Chamber decided earlier, but, of course, that is a matter of
22 administrative -- yes, it's a matter of administration and has no
23 substance. So, therefore, that will be -- we'll look at that and act
25 Please proceed.
1 MR. HOFFMANN: Your Honours, if I may, those should be admitted
2 under seal because those are the unredacted ones.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, the unredacted ones. And these are the
4 unredacted ones admitted under seal, P347, P348, and P349.
5 MR. HOFFMANN: Thank you, Your Honours. As I indicated prior to
6 the break, the Prosecution would like to tender a few parts of the DB
7 personnel file for Vasilije Mijovic. Basically in the context of this
8 witness testimony about Mijovic but from the Bar table and with no
9 further questions to be put to this witness. We --
10 JUDGE ORIE: Is the Defences aware of what these documents are?
11 MR. HOFFMANN: Yes, they have been included in the respective
12 notification for this witness.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Usually if we have, well, I think, the context
14 is clear here so that we would not urge you at this moment to create a
15 kind of a table. It is all about documents from the personnel file of
16 Mr. Mijovic.
17 Mr. Jordash.
18 MR. JORDASH: I'm not -- I'm not altogether sure which ones the
19 Prosecution are now indicating. I think -- I don't think there's going
20 to be much dispute, but I would like to be sure which ones are included,
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
23 MR. HOFFMANN: Certainly. Those are currently five excerpts.
24 Those are Exhibit 65 ter 4469, it is a receipt signed by Mr. Mijovic that
25 he received a red beret and a badge for the red beret. It is then
1 65 ter 4930, a document that in fact relates to the Kula camp video,
2 Exhibit P61. We then have 65 ter 4932, a certificate that Mijovic was a
3 member of the JATD of the Serbian state security signed by
5 the accused Franko Simatovic from a local police station to return a
6 weapon that was seised from Mr. Mijovic. And finally 65 ter 5165. This
7 is a document that includes personal details of the candidate being
8 Mijovic where it is stated that he served in the unit since 1991.
9 Now, I want to add, actually, one matter on this exhibit. These
10 are currently only excerpts from the file. We have been notified by the
11 Simatovic Defence of a number of exhibits they may want to use during
12 their cross-examination. In light of some of those documents, as well,
13 maybe in the interest of the Chamber, we could also offer to tender the
14 whole personnel file as one exhibit, if that would be preferred. I think
15 it's a total number of about 40 pages. All have been translated and
17 JUDGE ORIE: Not having seen it, the Chamber has no clear
18 preference. I mean, it depends what the other documents tell us. So,
19 therefore, if we will come close to the whole of the 40 pages by all
20 those documents to be tendered by the Defence, then it makes sense to
21 have it in its entirety. But otherwise --
22 MR. HOFFMANN: Just to clarify, Your Honours, I didn't indicate
23 that the Defence is actually tendering parts of it, but they tendered
24 some other documents and it may be then for us to tender other parts to
25 put the Defence documents into context, let's put it that way.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but this Chamber is not very much in favour of
2 having more in evidence that is -- but we would have to decide on the
3 relevance of all those other documents. Not even knowing what they are,
4 I think this is to be preferred. Any objections against the five
5 documents, the five excerpts mentioned by Mr. Hoffmann?
6 MR. JORDASH: I think only an objection insofar as the
7 description of Exhibit 5164 which my learned friend just described, I
8 think, as --
9 JUDGE ORIE: Well, the description is not evidence. It's on the
10 record. And if you carefully look at how it is introduced in e-court,
11 and the description, and to try to agree with Mr. Hoffmann what would be
12 the right description, it not being evidence, the evidence is the
14 MR. JORDASH: No objection.
15 JUDGE ORIE: No objections.
16 Then, Madam Registrar, let me just refer to the 65 --
17 Mr. Bakrac.
18 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honours. I apologise, I
19 may have not reacted well in time, however when it comes to
20 65 ter document 4469, I challenge the authenticity of this document. It
21 is not clear who handed it over. Maybe we should have it on the screen.
22 There is a stamp in the left corner of the Republic of Serbia
23 the document was never recorded in the files. And there is just one
24 signature without a stamp standing for the person who handed it over. We
25 challenge the authenticity of the 65 ter document 4469.
1 As far as document 4932, document on 65 ter list is concerned --
2 JUDGE ORIE: One moment. Could we have 65 ter 4469 on the
4 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] If you look at the left-hand side
5 corner, you will see a stamp of the Ministry of the Interior, but there's
6 no number for the file. There is no date when the document was filed.
7 And when it says "handed over" or "received by," there is a signature but
8 the stamp is missing, although it was customary. In the right-hand side,
9 there is a file number and a date, but it is not clear where these
10 originate from.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Anything else on the authenticity?
12 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] No, Your Honour. This could have
13 been typed up by anybody.
14 [Trial Chamber confers]
15 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, with your leave, for
16 the sake of comparison, if we look at the following document that the
17 Defence doesn't challenge, it is 65 ter 4932, you will see that there is
18 a number, a date, and Milan Radonjic's signature, and a stamp --
19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Bakrac, if you do not ask it to be shown on the
20 screen, I do not see anything at all. So if you would please ask for the
21 documents to be shown on the screen so that we are able to do what you
22 suggest we should do.
23 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour, the second
24 document that was tendered by the Prosecution, and I don't challenge that
25 document at all, in the left-hand-side corner you will see the same stamp
1 by the Ministry of the Interior containing a number --
2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Bakrac, what I expect you to do -- the second
3 document to be shown on the screen. So could we have 65 ter 4932 on the
4 screen. Then we can at least look at it.
5 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I have it on my screen
6 so it is there unless I've given you the wrong number.
7 JUDGE ORIE: No, it's -- I see it now as well. So you would say
8 the stamp in the first document is without any numbers and dates filled
9 in in the stamp, and here it is.
10 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes. And here everything is by the
11 book. According to regulations there is a stamp and there is a stamp and
12 the signature of the person who issued the document.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
14 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] As far as 65 ter 5164 document is
15 concerned, it is -- it was issued in 1997 and signed by Franko Simatovic.
16 So we do not challenge the authenticity of this document. However, the
17 Defence does challenge the relevance of the document. The document was
18 issued in 1997 which is beyond the scope of the indictment, and it says
19 here that a rifle was seised which was property of the state security
20 sector. It doesn't say here how Mr. Mijovic got by it. It doesn't say
21 that Mr. Mijovic was a member of the state security sector. The only
22 thing that is mentioned in here is that the rifle in question is indeed
23 property of the state security sector and this is the crux of our
24 objections and that's why we challenge the document.
25 JUDGE ORIE: And it was received by Mr. Mijovic?
1 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] No, Your Honours. Obviously there
2 is a --
3 JUDGE ORIE: Then we need to have a look at it because that's the
4 way in which --
5 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] 65 --
6 JUDGE ORIE: Then -- because that's how it was described by
7 Mr. Hoffmann.
8 Could we have 5164, 65 ter 5164 on the screen.
9 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, now we have it on the
10 screen. And if you look at the heading, you will see that this was
11 issued by the Ministry of the Interior, the second administration. There
12 is a date. We don't challenge the authenticity, but we do challenge the
13 relevance of this document.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, we haven't -- at least, I have no English
15 translation yet. Yes.
16 Any further objections, Mr. Bakrac?
17 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] No, Your Honour. No.
18 [Trial Chamber confers]
19 JUDGE ORIE: The objections are denied in relation to 65 ter 4469
20 where the authenticity is challenged. The Chamber sees at this moment in
21 relation to that document no reason to order further evidence of its
22 authenticity. This is not to say that a lack of authenticity cannot be
23 argued by the parties, but at this moment the Chamber does not see on the
24 basis of the submissions made any reason to order further investigations
25 into the authenticity of the document. All the other documents, the
1 issues raised, are more to the weight to be given to that evidence than
2 to admissibility.
3 Madam Registrar, I'll go through the numbers one by one.
4 65 ter 4469 would be ...
5 THE REGISTRAR: This would be P350, Your Honour.
6 JUDGE ORIE: And is admitted into evidence. The next one:
7 65 ter 4930.
8 THE REGISTRAR: This would be Exhibit P351, Your Honour.
9 JUDGE ORIE: P351 is admitted into evidence. 65 ter 4932.
10 THE REGISTRAR: This would be Exhibit P352, Your Honour.
11 JUDGE ORIE: P352 is admitted into evidence. 65 ter 5164.
12 THE REGISTRAR: This would be Exhibit P353, Your Honour.
13 JUDGE ORIE: P353 is admitted into evidence. 65 ter 5165.
14 THE REGISTRAR: This would be Exhibit P354, Your Honour.
15 JUDGE ORIE: P354 is admitted into evidence.
16 I'm looking at the clock. Mr. Hoffmann, the indication was that
17 you would need two hours, we have now spent two sessions. Where are we?
18 MR. HOFFMANN: Yes, Your Honour, I am aware of the time. There
19 is one exhibit that is left, it's a video; and I would ask the permission
20 to -- at the beginning of the next session.
21 JUDGE ORIE: How much time would that take?
22 MR. HOFFMANN: There are three clips of total 12 minutes with a
23 very few questions to the witness.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, so that would take close to 20 minutes.
25 How much time would the Stanisic Defence team need for cross.
1 MR. JORDASH: I think somewhere between an hour and a half and
2 two hours.
3 JUDGE ORIE: That is a little bit over one session.
4 Mr. Bakrac.
5 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, we will need about the
6 same time. But I hope that Mr. Jordash and I will manage to agree not to
7 overlap, and I hope that we will be able to finished with this witness
8 tomorrow. But from where I am at the moment, I believe that I will need
9 anything between an hour and a half to two hours.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. For tomorrow, Mr. Hoffmann, 20 minutes for
11 you. Then what remains is if Mr. Jordash and Mr. Bakrac would sit
12 together and see to what extent they could stream-line, then I would say,
13 to start with, each of you the time of a little bit over one session,
14 that's 80 minutes approximately, 75 minutes is a full session. 80
15 minutes approximately. Then we have two hours and 40 minutes, three
16 hours. And if there are any Chamber questions. That's guidance for the
17 parties for tomorrow. Of course, you never know in advance how matters
19 Witness 36, we would like to see you back tomorrow in the
20 afternoon, and instruct you that you should meanwhile not speak with
21 anyone about your testimony, whether that is testimony that you've given
22 already today or whether that's testimony still to be given tomorrow. Is
23 that clear?
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, it is.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Then we would like to see you back tomorrow, Tuesday
1 the 13th of April, quarter past 2.00 in this same Courtroom II.
2 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.07 p.m.
3 to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 13th day.
4 of April, 2010, at 2.15 p.m.