1 Tuesday, 2 November 2010
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness takes the stand]
5 --- Upon commencing at 9.04 a.m.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning to everyone.
7 Madam Registrar, would you please call the case.
8 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. Good morning
9 everyone in and around the courtroom.
10 This is case number IT-03-69-T, the Prosecutor versus
11 Jovica Stanisic and Franko Simatovic.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
13 Before we start, Mr. Theunens, I'd like to remind you again that
14 you're still bound by the solemn declaration given at the beginning of
15 your testimony.
16 I put on the record that although late yesterday after court you
17 were - and I'm developing a bad habit in this respect - that you were
18 instructed not to speak with anyone about your testimony.
19 Mr. Bakrac, are you ready to continue?
20 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. Thank you.
21 Good morning to everyone in and around the courtroom.
22 WITNESS: REYNAUD THEUNENS [Resumed]
23 Cross-examination by Mr. Bakrac: [Continued]
24 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, Mr. Theunens.
25 A. Good morning, Mr. Bakrac.
1 Q. Yesterday, before we adjourned, we discussed Arkan. I would like
2 to take it up from where we stopped. You were discussing a document
3 relating to the battle at Luzac. Earlier on, you told us that it was
4 your understanding that in combat operations Arkan was under JNA command.
5 I'm interested in page 2, so I'd like to show you a P exhibit, 1187.
6 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Can we call it up, please in
7 e-court. My apologies, it seems that we've got a wrong document. P1187.
8 Maybe I'm mistaken.
9 Q. Mr. Theunens, you must have seen this document because it is part
10 of your report. It's very short. This is consent or approval where
11 Milan Milovanovic agrees to the expenses of the Territorial Defence
12 centre for the training of volunteers, being reimbursed to the socially
13 owned enterprise Dalj, which will make the payment in a timely fashion
14 and cover the costs of the centre. We don't have the exact date, but we
15 can see that the document is from 1992; is that right?
16 A. There is a reference in the left top corner, indeed, to the
17 registration number of the document which indicates or would indicate
18 that it's from 1992, but I don't see any strong other indication.
19 Q. Very well. Mr. Theunens, we can agree that the -- there is the
20 stamp of the Ministry of Defence, but do you know who Milan Milovanovic
21 was at the time -- or I'm sorry, Milan Milanovic?
22 A. My understanding is that Milan Milanovic has been minister of
23 defence of the -- the SAO SBWS, but I'm not sure anymore whether he also
24 held that position once the SAO SBWS joined the Republic of Serbian
25 Krajina, I mean the self-declared Republic of Serbian Krajina, RSK, in
1 spring 1992.
2 Q. Very well, Mr. Theunens. So Ministry of Defence -- or, rather,
3 Defence Minister Milan
4 centre in Erdut -- or, rather, that that particular training centre is
5 one of the TO and that it seems to receive financing from private
6 companies present in the area.
7 Will you agree with me that this is what the document reflects?
8 A. This is what this document reflects, but the reality is more
9 complicated. And if you want, I can explain that.
10 Q. Perhaps later on. What I'm interested in is that this is the
11 document that you included in your report and that did you not have
12 reason to doubt it. This Erdut training centre for volunteers, is it the
13 one that was used by Zeljko Raznjatovic, Arkan, and the Serbian Volunteer
15 A. Indeed. But I would like just to add, in relation to the
16 financing of the training centre, there is, for example, P1078, which is
17 discussed on page 72 of part 2 of my report, where additional information
18 on the alleged financing of that training centre is provided. P1078 is a
19 1st Military District security organ's report.
20 And then let me just explain the reference to TO. In the
21 relevant legislation, i.e., the 1974 constitution and the 1982 Law on All
22 People's Defence, it is stated that the armed forces consists of the JNA
23 and the TO and that any armed structure that is not part of the JNA or
24 the police will be considered part of the TO. And I have indicated in my
25 report, in order to give a kind of a legal flavour to what was happening
1 as a part of this campaign or -- campaign -- or these activities to
2 regularise the status of volunteers, we see that quite often the name TO
3 is used whereas in fact we're talking about volunteers.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Apart from that, if I read the document, it is a bit
5 unclear that the socially-owned enterprise Dalj will pay for the
6 expenses. It reads:
7 "We hereby agree that the expenses of the Territorial Defence
8 centre will be reimbursed to the socially-owned enterprise Dalj which
9 will make the payment and the currency time-limit reimbursed to and
10 payments to be made by ..."
11 It may be my lack of understanding of the English language.
12 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] no, Your Honour, I think the
13 translation is perfectly fine. I can ask Mr. Theunens if he ever came
14 across information and if he knows that this is the case based on the
15 constitution that this company of Dalj is one that is present in
16 Eastern Slavonia
17 decision to finance the defence effort, and I'm referring to these
18 socially-owned and private companies.
19 Q. Will you agree with me?
20 A. I will reply by reading out what is included in P1078. And I'm
21 quoting from page 73 of part 2 of my report, where it states -- I mean,
22 the document states that:
23 "Arkan's training centre in Erdut is financed in various ways
24 which have not yet fully been analysed according to security organs,
25 adding that it is known that it is financed by the SPS, i.e., the
1 Serbian Socialist Party, from within the country and from abroad as well
2 as by numerous enterprises."
3 And then the Dalj farm is included or is mentioned as one of
4 these enterprises whereby, according to P1078, the Dalj farm is
5 contributing to the payment of the costs of the training centre on the
6 instructions of Mr. Goran Hadzic.
7 [Trial Chamber confers]
8 MR. WEBER: Your Honour, your microphone.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I'm just verifying whether my understanding
10 of -- if it would have read "will be reimbursed by," then I would expect
11 Dalj to contribute to the cost; but here it says "will be reimbursed to."
12 But it could be that my understanding of the English language is
13 insufficient in this respect. But I'd rather like to understand what I
15 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours --
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, could I -- perhaps could I seek the assistance
17 of native speaking persons.
18 Mr. Jordash, you're on your feet.
19 MR. JORDASH: Yes, I think Your Honour would be right but for the
20 last phrase "and cover the current costs of the centre," which clears up,
21 I think, any ambiguity.
22 JUDGE ORIE: I do understand; to be reimbursed, if something is
23 reimbursed to someone, that any costs he may have made will be paid back
24 to him. Which is, for me, a bit difficult to understand where on the
25 one-hand side it says "will be reimbursed to" and at the same time that
1 company covering the costs.
2 MR. JORDASH: I think that reimbursed is -- is an odd word and
3 not the right word in this context. And it sits uneasily with the last
4 phrase. But the last phrase, to me, clears up the ambiguity created by
5 the word reimbursed.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Of course, if the one contradicts the other a
7 bit, then it's a matter of which one will be the prevailing one. But I
8 do understand that you say that reimbursed sounds a bit odd in your ears
9 as well, which at least is of some consolation to me.
10 Mr. Weber, is -- perhaps we should have it checked as far as
11 translation is concerned, unless the original text is as ambiguous as the
13 MR. WEBER: Two things, Your Honours. One, with respect to the
14 text of the document, reimbursed could relate to past costs and then
15 there could be present costs; so these could be two separate matters.
16 Also, secondly, I believe there may be further evidence related to this
17 in this document and upcoming testimony.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Then we'll further look at it.
19 Please proceed.
20 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour --
21 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... nevertheless, if
22 someone would -- would verify the translation, whether it's ambiguity in
23 the original text or whether it's an imprecise translation. I think it
24 would be good to at least know that.
25 Please proceed.
1 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I can only add that I
2 agree with my learned friend Mr. Weber and his interpretation of the
3 matter, that it may relate to past and present costs. As far as we are
4 concerned, the expert witness has given a satisfactory answer.
5 Can we look at P1189 now, please. I'd only like to look at the
6 time-line. We looked at the document from December 1991 and we saw,
7 based on the stamp, that it was the TO training centre in Erdut.
8 Q. Have a look at another document which seems to have come from the
9 HQ of the training centre for volunteers, dated the 15th of May, 1992.
10 And we see the heading "Territorial Defence Centre for Special Training,"
11 and it is addressed to the municipal secretariat for health and social
12 protection, administration for veterans and invalids of war, and we see
13 Zeljko Arkan as the signatory.
14 So will you agree with me that also in the months of May 1992 the
15 Erdut training centre was a centre for -- a TO centre for volunteers?
16 The text even mentions that this is the TO training centre under
17 the command, or running, of Arkan. There's date which relates to
18 Ranko Strbac, but we can see that the centre was under the command of
19 Zeljko Raznjatovic, Arkan; it follows from the text itself.
20 A. Your Honours, to be precise, the September 1991 document we saw
21 yesterday had indeed a heading of "Special Training Centre for the
22 Territorial Defence of SBWS" as well as a stamp referring to a training
23 centre for volunteers. Here at the end we see -- I mean, the paragraph
24 that starts with "thus we acknowledge," it states that the person stayed
25 with the Serbian Volunteer Guard, Territorial Defence centre for special
1 training of SBWS, under command of Raznjatovic.
2 Again I repeat what I said earlier, that is, that the name "TO"
3 is only used to give what I would call a legal cover to these kind of
4 structures, as the legislation foresaw that any armed structure that is
5 not part of the JNA or the police is part of the TO.
6 I use this document in my report on page 75 of part 2 to indicate
7 that at least one member of the MUP Serbia, I mean the person indicated
8 in the document, was -- or underwent training, as well as he participated
9 in combat activities in SBWS, according to this document. And he
10 underwent --
11 Q. Mr. Theunens, I have two questions for you now. First, where did
12 you obtain information to the effect that Ranko Strbac was a member of
13 the MUP of Serbia
14 A. My conclusion is based on the fact that he has a personal
15 identification number according -- with the MUP Belgrade according to
16 this document.
17 Q. Then both I and my colleague Petrovic and Bosa Vulic, our
18 colleague, are all members of the MUP. I don't hold it against you;
19 perhaps you didn't go investigating the matter as far, or the translation
20 was wrong, but the identity paper number O88046 was issued by the MUP of
22 present it here - as well as the identity card of all my colleagues, was
23 issued by the MUP of Belgrade. So MUP features here as the authority
24 issuing the identity paper and does not testify to his membership of the
1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Bakrac, the simple question would have been:
2 Looking at the number of the identification, have you considered the
3 possibility that it was just issued by the MUP in Belgrade, instead of
4 indicating that someone was among the MUP Belgrade people?
5 That's a very simple question, takes approximately one-fourth of
6 the time you take, and we have an answer to that question.
7 THE WITNESS: Your Honours, I did not verify whether -- or I was
8 not in a position to verify whether this registration number was just a
9 common registration number for anyone who would obtain an ID number or an
10 ID card in -- from what appears to be MUP Belgrade, so --
11 JUDGE ORIE: So you have not considered that possibility --
12 THE WITNESS: No.
13 JUDGE ORIE: -- and your conclusion was based on an unverified
15 THE WITNESS: That is correct. And, of course, I would be -- I
16 would be willing to review it, if proven incorrect.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
18 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
19 Q. Mr. Theunens, you say, If it can be shown or let's see if it's
20 the case. Do you have any doubt in that regard or do you think we should
21 investigate the matter and substantiate this? Or perhaps we should give
22 you time until after the break for you to state your opinion on this.
23 A. I think I --
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Bakrac, the opinion is clear. The opinion is
25 that Mr. Theunens has not verified the matter you just raised. Now, it's
1 up to you whether to invite Mr. Theunens or to do anything. At this
2 moment, what he said is on loose grounds.
3 Please proceed.
4 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you. Thank you, Your Honour.
5 Q. Mr. Theunens, I would like to clarify another matter. If my
6 understanding is correct - if I'm mistaken, I apologise - in relation to
7 the document we looked at yesterday and the one we are looking at now,
8 you seemed to have referred to a difference in the heading or the stamps;
10 A. No, what I was saying, that the document you showed yesterday,
11 which is a December 1991 document, had a heading "Special Training Centre
12 of the TO of SBWS" as well as a stamp or another heading a bit lower on
13 the first page referring to a volunteer training centre. And just to be
14 complete, when the TO of the RSK is renamed or transformed into the PJM,
15 the Special Police or milicija units, the training centre becomes an RSK
16 MUP training centre, and this happens after May or after November 1992,
17 but the training centre and -- remains the same. It is just the name
18 that changes.
19 Q. Thank you, Mr. Theunens.
20 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Let us now look at a video-clip
21 which has to do with what we discussed earlier where Zeljko Raznjatovic,
22 Arkan, himself, speaks about the command or the body under whose command
23 he is. It's 2D324. And can we start from 01:42:28 to 01:42:52. So it's
24 half a minute.
25 I can see my learned friend on his feet.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Weber.
2 MR. WEBER: The Prosecution wants to put on the record that this
3 is one of the documents that it received notice of at -- on the
4 31st of October, 2010, at 5.44 p.m.
5 JUDGE ORIE: It's on the record.
6 Please proceed.
7 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. Can we have
8 the video-clip played.
9 [Video-clip played]
10 THE INTERPRETER: [Voiceover] "Your boys are executing all the
11 tasks. All I can say is the fact that they came by themselves
12 contributes a lot to that, that -- the fact that they are volunteers.
13 And I want to re-emphasise, you know, yourself, that we are under the
14 command of the Territorial Defence of the Serbian Autonomous Region of
16 itself is under the command of the armed forces of the
17 Yugoslav People's Army."
18 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
19 Q. In support of all the physical evidence, what just Arkan stated
20 about the structure under whose command they are or whom they belong to,
21 would you have anything to say which would challenge what we've just
22 heard in the footage?
23 A. Before I would be able to challenge the footage, I would have to
24 know when it was filmed and where it was filmed and about which specific
25 situation Mr. Raznjatovic was talking.
1 Q. Mr. Theunens, I will try to give you the appropriate references,
2 but in the meantime could we please move on.
3 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Let us look at P1070.
4 MR. WEBER: Your Honours.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Weber.
6 MR. WEBER: Just with respect to 2D234 that was just shown, the
7 Prosecution's a little bit confused. Is counsel not going further with
8 this, or are they going to be going further in terms of tendering this
9 exhibit. Because based on the answer it's unclear if they are intending
10 to go further with what's been presented.
11 JUDGE ORIE: If Mr. Bakrac doesn't give it any follow-up, then
12 it's irrelevant in the context of the testimony of this witness, I would
13 say. Unless any other link is established.
14 Please proceed, Mr. Bakrac.
15 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. I shall try to
16 find the time and the date when this was actually stated.
17 I think that we have the wrong document on the screen. I may
18 have misspoken. It is P1079 that I'm asking for. The 65 ter number is
20 Q. Mr. Theunens, I think that you already know this document. You
21 are looking at it now too.
22 A. Indeed I have mentioned that document. For example --
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. -- before we continue, the document is under
24 seal. I do not know whether this has any effect for the testimony.
25 Mr. Weber, I'm also looking at you.
1 MR. WEBER: I apologise for not catching it. If we could just
2 not have the document broadcast to the public.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, that's -- that was already -- Madam Registrar
4 was cautious enough to ... but I do not know whether this has any effect
5 on the -- on the testimony to be broadcasted.
6 MR. WEBER: I don't believe so. If there's reference to identity
7 of a source in the document, we'd ask that counsel refrain and the
8 witness refrain from expressing the identity of the source.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So would you please keep that in mind.
10 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. That was not my
11 intention anyway. As far as I understand things, this is information
12 provided by the security organ.
13 Q. Mr. Theunens, if I understand this document correctly, it has to
14 do with the mistreatment of volunteers of the JNA. However, if I
15 understand things correctly, and my question to you is whether you
16 understand it properly, namely the volunteers from Ruma, a few of them,
17 were transferred to Erdut as organised by Major Vuckovic from the
18 Ruma garrison, and they ended up at Arkan's training centre in Erdut?
19 A. If we could scroll down in the English document, please.
20 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] I think that what I am stating,
21 which is the essence of this document, is on the next page in English.
22 Q. Mr. Theunens?
23 A. Yes, could you -- I don't remember what the question is.
24 Q. Yes. My question is whether you agree that from this document
25 one can see that from Ruma, which is in the territory of Serbia
1 are volunteers coming, as organised by Major Vuckovic from the
2 Ruma garrison, and they're ending up at Arkan's training centre for the
4 A. Yes. With the additional comment that it appears to be rather in
5 a disorganised manner that they end up in Arkan's training centre.
6 Q. Yes, but what is relevant for me is that they leave Serbia
7 volunteers in the organisation of Major Vuckovic from the Ruma garrison;
8 isn't that right?
9 A. That is what this document states, yeah.
10 Q. Is it also correct - and that is important for me because we have
11 also been dealing with rumours here, in part - is it correct that these
12 persons who had claimed that they had been mistreated at Arkan's centre
13 also claimed that they had seen Arkan kill Ante Kedjo, a volunteer, and
14 that then when the security organs checked this it was established that
15 Ante Kedjo was alive and being treated at the Mitrovica hospital? Can
16 that also not be seen from this document?
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Bakrac, if a document says there was a report
18 that someone was killed, but that person was treated in hospital, what --
19 I mean, this Chamber can read, isn't it? If you want to draw our
20 attention to certain matters, fine. But unless you expect any specific
21 information, to receive such information from Mr. Theunens, but that's
22 what the document says, isn't it? You could also ask, Is it true that
23 the document is of this date, is it true that the document ... that's all
25 MR. BAKRAC: [Overlapping speakers] ...
1 JUDGE ORIE: Why spend time on asking questions which could be
2 answered by any person, unless there's any reason to believe that what is
3 in the document, for example, the date is incorrect, if you expect that
4 the witness would have any special knowledge about it? But otherwise,
5 it's just going through documents asking someone to read and then to say,
6 Is this what it says. Of course it says what it says.
7 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I understand. You are
8 the quite right. I do apologise to you. The first question was a long
9 one. But since we've been dealing with the document anyway and since
10 Mr. Theunens in his report relied on some unverified information, I just
11 wanted to illustrate for the Trial Chamber that sometimes it happens that
12 somebody says, like here two people said that Arkan killed such and such
13 a person, and ultimately this person proved to be alive and treated in
14 hospital. So I just wanted to draw the attention of the Trial Chamber to
15 cases like that.
16 JUDGE ORIE: The proper way of doing that is the following: The
17 first you would have asked Mr. Theunens, You agree with me that this
18 document demonstrates that sometimes rumours, upon verification, appeared
19 not to be true; that's one. Second, Do you have any specific knowledge
20 on this rumour. Third, Are you aware of any similar rumours which might
21 not reflect reality.
22 That's -- that's apparently what you want to establish. So
23 please then focus your questions on those matters.
24 Please proceed.
25 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. Thank you
1 very much indeed. Yes, that would have been a better course, and I put
2 all of this together into a complicated question that was unclear.
3 Q. Mr. Theunens, let me not repeat all of that. Can you respond to
4 that question - if not, we are going to move on - that His Honour, the
5 Presiding Judge, had just phrased and basically helped me in doing so?
6 A. Indeed. I mean, there's a lot of information in this report
7 about different issues and the data on the alleged killing whereby the
8 two volunteers do not claim that they saw, as you stated, they didn't see
9 Arkan kill the person, but they simply stated that he had killed --
10 allegedly killed that volunteer. That that information, after
11 verification, was incorrect. Now, one would also verify the other
12 information if one was to rely on the information included in the report
13 as part of the methodology I explained in the beginning.
14 Q. Thank you.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Do you have any specific information about this
16 incident which, upon verification, seemed to be --
17 THE WITNESS: No, Your Honours, I --
18 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Fine.
19 THE WITNESS: Okay.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Next question: Did you often find in the
21 documentation you reviewed or in any other source that rumours existed
22 which turned out to be not in accordance with reality? If you say it
23 seldom happened, we have an indication. If you say, Well, that's what I
24 found several times, then we would have an indication as well, or ...
25 THE WITNESS: Obviously there are a lot of rumours circulating
1 on, for example, alleged crimes. Now, I only discussed crimes when I had
2 what I considered reliable documents. And I always tried to look for
3 corroboration for these documents. So I only included such documents in
4 my report. And I -- for example, I refrained from using open-source
5 documents, in particular, open source documents prepared by what I would
6 call the opposing side.
7 Now, information is information. It's part of the intelligence
8 process or intelligence cycle. And, of course, it needs to be verified.
9 And sometimes it's explicitly mentioned. I mean, at one time it was
10 explicitly mentioned in one of the information reports that there was --
11 that the --
12 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Theunens, let me stop you. The simple question
13 was whether it -- what approximately the frequency was in finding
14 information in documents which by other sources were falsified, such as
15 here. Here it's even in the same document.
16 THE WITNESS: Yes. Yes, Your Honours. No, I -- as I tried to
17 explain, I find -- I found or identified a pattern in the different
18 documents I reviewed, and this pattern in relation to the activities of
19 the different volunteer groups are reflected in my report.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Bakrac.
21 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
22 Q. Mr. Theunens, we are going to analyse that. But for the time
23 being, we haven't got time to do that.
24 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Could we please view video-clip
25 2D166.1. For the record, Your Honours, this is -- this starts from 07:38
1 and goes up until 09:21
2 footage is from Slavonia
3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Weber.
4 MR. WEBER: The Prosecution want to put on the record that we
5 received notice of this on the 31st of October, 2010, at 5.44 p.m.
6 JUDGE ORIE: That's on the record.
7 Please proceed.
8 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I want the record to
9 reflect, in terms of this document and the previous one, that this is
10 video material that we received from the OTP. Could that please be
11 reflected in the record. We did perhaps provide notification a bit late,
12 but --
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That's on the record as well.
14 Please proceed.
15 Mr. Weber.
16 MR. WEBER: Just -- I don't mean to ensue a debate, but even
17 though that it comes from the Office of the Prosecutor, there's a large
18 volume of material --
19 JUDGE ORIE: Of course that's -- that's --
20 MR. WEBER: -- and we would appreciate notification --
21 JUDGE ORIE: [Overlapping speakers] ... Mr. Weber, that's exactly
22 the reason why I limited myself to saying that's on the record as well.
23 Of course the fact that it is part of your collection in itself does not
24 answer the question. No one expects you to have full, accurate, and
25 actual knowledge of all the documents that were disclosed to the Defence.
1 Please proceed.
2 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
3 Q. Mr. Theunens, let us please view this video-clip.
4 [Video-clip played]
5 THE INTERPRETER: [Voiceover] "How did the representatives of the
6 Croatian armed forces, whose crimes you have just seen, present
7 themselves on the eve of their surrender to the representatives of the
9 "They were already sacrificed and deceived by their leadership
10 which abandoned them in the lairs of Borovo Naselje and Vukovar and order
11 them to stay there and die. With no way out, they are emerging from
12 their mousetraps in search of salvation. And all this from the same
13 army, the JNA, which, until the day, before they slammed as being a
14 Chetnik-Bolshevik occupier and for which they lay and wait perfidiously
15 with snipers. Several commanders, low-ranking as they now claim, were
16 received by the commander of the Novi Sad Corps,
17 Major-General Andrija Biorcevic.
18 "We are doing our job, and you're doing yours. I feel for the
19 victims. If you are guilty, you will answer for it. If you are not
20 guilty, this is known.
21 "And now, as if somebody else, not them, had slaughtered
22 Darko Mirkovic and Mirkovic and Cvijeta Perlic from Borovo Naselje only
23 because they were Serbs. As if somebody else, not them, used a
24 Bunsen burner to burn the seriously wounded Djordje Vukicevic from the
25 village of Luzac. It is only now that they would talk as men, as human
1 beings, with the JNA general to explain, to promise, that they will
2 convince the other criminals not to die in vain, to save their skin as
3 well. If only, as they had humbly promised, they were also to put in an
4 effort to end the killing of people, you're people and our people."
5 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
6 Q. Mr. Theunens --
7 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] I keep forgetting, Your Honour, to
8 pause. I do apologise for that.
9 Q. Mr. Theunens, we discussed this, and during the direct and
10 re-direct you said that the Zeljko Raznjatovic, Arkan, was under the JNA
11 and combat operations. We see here our discussion with prisoners that is
12 conducted by Andrija Biorcevic, commander of the Novi Sad Corps. Could
13 you identify who it was sitting next to him during this conversation with
14 the prisoners?
15 Actually, let's deal with that first so that we can then move on.
16 On his left, did you see Zeljko Raznjatovic, Arkan?
17 A. Yes, I do, Your Honours.
18 Q. Mr. Theunens, does this go beyond your conclusions that it was
19 only in combat operations that Arkan was under the command of the JNA?
20 This is a conversation or an interview or an interrogation of Croatian
21 ZNGs, and Arkan is sitting right next to General Biorcevic, commander of
22 the Novi Sad
23 A. I would say it doesn't indicate anything. I mean, the seating
24 arrangements, here, for example, for this video, there's no possibility
25 to draw any conclusions as to what the command and control relations
1 were. Anyway, if we want to discussion the relations - and I even say
2 the personal relations - between General Biorcevic and
3 Zeljko Raznjatovic, I would like to refer to P1219, which is discussed on
4 page 94 of part 2 of the report.
5 Q. Mr. Theunens, I have only one more question in this regard. So
6 this is not a combat operation, this is --
7 JUDGE ORIE: First of all, you are now telling whether it's a
8 combat operation or not.
9 Mr. Theunens, when you testified about Arkan working in the JNA
10 command structures during combat operations, would you limit that to the
11 battle-field only, or would that include all the activities directly
12 related to such combat operations even after the direct combat
14 THE WITNESS: Your Honours, my conclusion is limited to the
15 activities that are a strict part of the combat operations, i.e., the
16 briefing prior to the launching of the combat operation, from then until
17 the end of the combat operation.
18 JUDGE ORIE: And would that include such type of activity -
19 which, by the way, I do not know whether this is why this was
20 broadcasted, why it was recorded at all - but would that include also a
21 kind of - how do you say that? - a kind of a briefing after the end of
22 the operations, or once the battle was fought they would go separate ways
23 and not even have a conversation with each other anymore?
24 THE WITNESS: They could still have a conversation afterwards,
25 but I haven't seen any -- any documents that indicate that Arkan was
1 subordinated to the JNA after the conclusion of specific combat
2 operations. I mean, just to end the answer, documentary evidence for the
3 activities of OG North - at least there is -- the documentary evidence
4 available to the OTP - is very scarce. We discussed the Luzac attack
5 yesterday, and I have the quote by General Biorcevic, and that's it.
6 Sorry, and the documents of military security organs where they state
7 that Arkan acts independently.
8 So that's the basis for my conclusion.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Bakrac.
10 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. Thank you,
11 Your Honour.
12 Q. Mr. Theunens --
13 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Could we now have P500 on our
15 Q. At one point yesterday you said that Arkan's centre in Erdut
16 changed, that it was the Territorial Defence at first and that it changed
17 later on. I would like us to have a look at this document. And could
18 you please explain to me, as a military expert, how you would interpret
19 this. Actually, have you seen this document before?
20 A. I believe so. I'm not sure.
21 Q. It's brief. Please have a look at it in detail.
22 JUDGE ORIE: This document also is under seal and not to be shown
23 to the public. Any reference to individuals, therefore, should not be
25 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
1 Q. Mr. Theunens, the document is brief. Could I please ask you to
2 focus on the document, and I'm going to put a question to you.
3 A. Okay.
4 Q. This is what I'm putting to you. This is how I read the
5 document, and you are going to tell me whether I'm right or not.
6 When the Serb Army of the Serb Republic
7 says here, in relation to this one person, that he was a soldier from the
8 21st of January to the 23rd of December, 1999, it says that the camp in
9 Erdut is growing into a military post and becoming part of the Army of
10 the Serb Republic
11 We have here this military post. The commander is
12 Colonel Milorad Ulemek, Erdut. Do you agree with my observation?
13 A. Not entirely. We know, for example, from P1244, that in
14 November 1992, the RSK political and military authorities implement a
15 decision to transform the Special Police, I mean, the PJM, which was
16 actually a re-badging of the Territorial Defence. They transformed this
17 Special Police into the SVK, so the Serbian Army of the Krajina. And we
18 see that even if the structure of these units remains unchanged, the name
19 is changed.
20 And in my view, this also applies to the training centre. Since
21 it's now given a military name, it should also have a military post
23 Q. Mr. Theunens, if I understood you correctly, this was the
24 sequence of events: The centre at Erdut commanded by Arkan at first, that
25 is to say at the end of 1991 and the beginning of 1992, was a
1 Territorial Defence centre; then when the government was established and
2 when the plan was implemented, the peace plan, then it became -- I mean,
3 that centre became a Special Police centre, or rather, after that, all of
4 that was brought together -- or, rather, it grew into the Army of the
5 Republic of the Serb Krajina?
6 A. Maybe to be more precise, there were a number of changes in the
7 name, not only of the training centre but also of military units in the
8 RSK because, as you know, the Vance Plan foresaw a demilitarisation and
9 disarming of all military structures, but the Serbs in the Krajina were
10 allowed to keep a police force. So in order to circumvent that, the TO,
11 which was still existing until early 1992, was renamed or re-batched into
12 Special Police. But then in the course of 1992 - and I think the first
13 decision was taken in May, which was implemented in November 1992 - the
14 PJM, units which were in fact re-batched TO units, were re-batched again
15 into military units. And that also applied to the training centre.
16 Q. We are discussing units of the Serbian Autonomous District of
17 SBWS, is that right, when we are talking about the changes that were
18 taking place?
19 A. No, this happened all over the RSK. I mean, the RSK was declared
20 end of 1991. And I believe that in February or March or April 1992 the
21 SAO SBWS joined the RSK. So at this moment in time, we're talking about
22 the RSK.
23 And this can be also found on pages 109 and 110 of part 2 of the
25 Q. I understand, Mr. Theunens. I have a very simple question: Did
1 you come across a single document -- we were looking at documents from
2 1994, and I'm going to show you a document -- documents from 1995. Did
3 you find a single document dating back to the period between 1991 and
4 1995 to the effect that the MUP of the Republic of Serbia
5 do with this camp or any sort of control over it?
6 A. I mean, there are, in my report, a number of information reports
7 from security organs from, I think, even from 1996, but I would have to
8 look into them, security organs of the VJ, making mention of the camp in
9 Erdut, but would I have to look in my report to find the exact reference.
10 There's just one point I would like to add to the document we see
12 JUDGE ORIE: Could we first receive a full answer to the
13 question. Did you find any -- I mean, what you said is that security
14 organs of the VJ were making -- were mentioned in the report, which, in
15 itself, doesn't establish anything to the MUP of Serbia, because that was
16 what the question was about.
17 THE WITNESS: Yeah.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Did you come across any document in which a link,
19 involvement, as Mr. Bakrac said, anything to do with between MUP and the
20 Erdut camp? MUP Serbia and the Erdut camp.
21 THE WITNESS: I mean, at this stage I don't recall, but I will
22 look during the break. And if I can identify a document in my report, I
23 will -- I would like to come back to you.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed Mr. Bakrac.
25 MR. WEBER: Your Honour, if I may.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Weber.
2 MR. WEBER: I know some of these questions are kind of like pop
3 quiz questions as to how many documents. The Prosecution has looked at
4 this and is able to provide lists. This would also be for the Chamber's
5 guidance, as to the documents that refer to it in the report. This would
6 also shorten possible re-examination of the witness.
7 JUDGE ORIE: If you would prepare such a list and if you would
8 provide a that to Mr. Bakrac, then we could see whether the Chamber could
9 use that as well and whether it would be a useful interim instrument to
10 focus questions to the -- to Mr. Theunens.
11 Please proceed, Mr. Bakrac.
12 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
13 Q. I want to make this quite clear. Outside of these organs of
14 security of the Army of Yugoslavia, I'd like to know whether there were
15 any others.
16 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Let's look at another document,
17 2D308. In the B/C/S it's page 1, and page 2 in English, item 2.
18 Q. I'll take you through it to make this quick. It is the
19 Operational Group 10. It's the 13th of October, 1995, combat order.
20 Under 2 it is stated:
21 "The units of OG-10, including the following:"
22 And now says, among others:
23 "Serbian Volunteer Guard squad, MUP, and 1/27 mtbr of the present
24 combat disposition," et cetera.
25 It's a rather longish document, so I've only directed you to what
1 I'm interested in. If you want to, you can look through the document to
2 see the context. And it was signed by Lieutenant-General Momir Talic.
3 You can look at the document if need be, and my question is: Did, in
4 1995, the then-commander Momir Talic, the then-commander of the
5 1st Krajina Corps, issue an order to the Serbian Volunteer Guard?
6 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Weber.
7 MR. WEBER: No objection to the question. Just if Mr. Bakrac
8 plans on tendering this document, if we could please be informed of the
9 origin of the document and where it originates from.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Bakrac, any ...
11 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, it is a document from
12 an OTP collection. I can see that it bears an ERN number. And that's
13 where my assistants found it. I can give you the ERN number. The first
14 page is 0130-8230 and the last page is 0130-8233.
15 MR. WEBER: Thank you for that information. We can further look
16 it up.
17 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honours, this --
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, let me just see. I do not see the ERN number,
19 Mr. Bakrac, but I take it that that will be verified.
20 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, it is possible that
21 when the document was scanned it was no longer visible. I have a B/C/S
22 version where it's fully visible. I can give a hard copy for
23 Their Honours and the Prosecution, or ...
24 JUDGE ORIE: If you would allow us to just briefly check that.
1 Please proceed.
2 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
3 Q. Mr. Theunens, do you agree with me that on the
4 13th of October, 1995, Commander Momir Talic used the Serbian Volunteer
5 Guard in combat operations?
6 A. Yes, that is what the document states. And I would just like to
7 add that it is dated two weeks after P289, which was the letter from
8 General Mladic to, among others, Radovan Karadzic in order to clarify the
9 situation of Zeljko Raznjatovic and his volunteers in the wider
10 Western Bosnia area.
11 JUDGE ORIE: I do not mind, Mr. Bakrac, but what you provided to
12 me at this moment with the ERN number on it seems to be a document which
13 is, as far as the typewritten part is concerned, approximately the same
14 but is not the same document because it contains -- the document on the
15 screen contains handwritten text which doesn't appear on the one you just
16 gave us. So the uploaded document is not the same, although it seems
17 that the typewritten part is -- seems to be the same, but it's not the
18 same document.
19 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. You are quite
20 right. It is puzzling because the poorer copy was sent to a detachment
21 of the Serbian Volunteer Guard, but I don't think that in essence this
22 changes anything. I am happy with the answer.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Bakrac --
24 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] There two same --
25 JUDGE ORIE: If I say I don't see an ERN number on it and without
1 apparently verifying, you say, Well, perhaps it's a matter of scanning.
2 It's not a matter of scanning; it's just a different document. So would
3 you please, before you answer such questions, first verify the accuracy
4 of the answer you're giving.
5 Please proceed.
6 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
7 Q. Mr. Theunens, please look at 2D316.
8 MR. WEBER: Just for the record, Prosecution received notice of
9 this document on 29 October 2010
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, that's on the record.
11 Please proceed.
12 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
13 Q. Mr. Theunens, we can see that the date is the
14 20th of September, 1995, MUP of the RS Bijeljina, Deputy Minister
15 Tomislav Kovac. It seems to be a dispatch.
16 Did you know that in September 1995 Mr. Tomislav Kovac was deputy
17 minister of the interior of Republika Srpska?
18 A. That is what the document states, yes.
19 Q. Does this dispatch refer to a decision issued by the president of
20 Republika Srpska on the 19th of September, 1995, whereby all the armed
21 forces are to be joined in the area of responsibility of the
22 1st and 2nd Corps, Krajina Corps? And if you look at the item 1
23 referring to Doboj, is it right that, pursuant to the president's
24 decision, Deputy Minister Tomislav Kovac issues this decision setting up
25 a joint staff which includes Zeljko Raznjatovic?
1 A. Zeljko Raznjatovic is mentioned on the heading, 2, "Prijedor."
2 But otherwise the document here states what you mention, what you
4 Q. Thank you, Mr. Theunens.
5 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] I see that Mr. President is still
6 looking at the document, may I move on to another document?
7 JUDGE ORIE: One second, please.
8 Please proceed.
9 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
10 Can we now look at 2D307.
11 Q. Mr. Theunens, look at the document. It's quite short. It says:
12 "Pursuant to Article 80 of the constitution of Republika Srpska,
13 Article 7 of the Law on Defence, and my order, Strictly Confidential
14 01-1775/95, dated 30 September ..."
15 It would appear that the president of the republic,
16 Dr. Radovan Karadzic, authorises this -- a special unit of the Ministry
17 of the Interior of Republika Srpska, namely the Tigers, to arrest all
18 deserters and fugitives from the armed forces of Republika Srpska, carry
19 out the necessary preparations with them, and hand them over to the
20 commands of the army in order for them to be sent into combat, in
21 addition to other forces of the military police and the police of the
22 Ministry of the Interior.
23 In your research, did you ever come across any statements or
24 evidence to the effect that Ranko -- that Zeljko Raznjatovic, Arkan, ever
25 chased after and captured any deserters and fugitives in order to take
1 them back to the battle-field in Republika Srpska, and I'm merely
2 interested in hearing from you whether you ever came across any such
4 A. I remember two distinct cases where Arkan was used to conduct
5 such activities. There is first -- there's information - but I have not
6 discussed it in my report - that after the Croatian incursion in the pink
7 zone in the wider area of Maslenica, Sector South, after
8 22nd of January, 1993, Arkan and a number of his volunteers were sent
9 from Erdut to the real lines of the SVK in the area in order to prevent
10 SVK soldiers from withdrawing, i.e., to force them to fight, because
11 obviously the soldiers were quite impressed or even scared of Arkan's
13 A second example - and there is a document on my report in that -
14 is that there is information that people who left the RSK after the
15 4th of August, 1995, including military personnel, and who tried to flee
16 to Serbia
17 were rounded up and brought to the -- to Arkan's training centre in Erdut
18 where they were held, maybe also trained, but where there were also,
19 according to the information I reviewed, cases of abuse. And this latter
20 activity would have taken place in cooperation with the MUP Serbia. And,
21 again, I will look during the break for the specific document reference,
22 because I have addressed that in my report.
23 Q. Thank you, Mr. Theunens.
24 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] I'm looking at the clock,
25 Your Honour, we seem to -- we have a difference schedule today, so would
1 this be the right time for the break?
2 JUDGE ORIE: I think it would.
3 Mr. Weber.
4 MR. WEBER: Your Honour, over the course of the break, with
5 respect to this document, 2D307, and any of the upcoming documents that
6 that Mr. Bakrac would like to use, if there's any question as to what --
7 the origin of the document, this document we would like to know where it
8 originated from. But if he could please inform us, that would be helpful
9 throughout the course of the remainder of the proceedings this morning
10 and today.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Bakrac, already for this document?
12 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I received the
13 document from my investigator. I will verify the source from which my
14 investigator obtained the document over the break.
15 JUDGE ORIE: We'll hear from you.
16 And we'll have a break, and we'll resume at quarter to 11.00.
17 But, yes, the first thing I'd like to do after the break is to
18 briefly, in the absence of the witness, discuss with you how the rest of
19 the day and tomorrow morning will look like.
20 [The witness stands down]
21 --- Recess taken at 10.21 a.m.
22 --- On resuming at 10.48 a.m.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I'd like to inquire with the parties. Today we
24 have one more morning session, three afternoon sessions. Tomorrow
25 morning we have also two sessions.
1 Mr. Bakrac, could you tell us already how much time you would
2 need so as to leave ...
3 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I would need far more
4 time than I know I realistically have. I will have to focus. But at any
5 rate, I know that I will need the morning session tomorrow. I know that
6 I need to leave time for Mr. Weber and his examination and the admission
7 of documents. We would need, based on the documents we have, two or
8 three more days, but of course realistically I know that what I need is
9 the first session tomorrow morning.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Weber, how much time would you need? Would the
11 one session do?
12 MR. WEBER: As of right now, the Prosecution would estimate
13 20 minutes.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Which might give you some additional time,
15 even, because we'll have to conclude tomorrow morning. The videolink is
16 scheduled for the afternoon.
17 MR. WEBER: Your Honour, and I prefaced it with "as of right
18 now," so I don't know what remaining matters may arise.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, of course. Yes. Having discussed this, could
20 the witness be escorted into the courtroom.
21 Mr. Bakrac, you often apologised when I made some observations or
22 remarks. I'm not seeking any apologies; I'm seeking focused questions.
23 And I tried to assist you now and then, and it really saves a lot of
25 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I'm grateful for your
1 assistance. I apologise, but I have to say yet again that you know the
2 difficult situation Mr. Petrovic and I are in and how we got into this
3 case and that we had to deal with a great number of documents over the
4 past years -- year, and you see the difficulty the OTP has in identifying
5 all the various documents in the vast database they have, and I really
6 tried to focus and go through the documents as expeditiously as I can. I
7 urge Their Honours to bare this in mind and see this as the underlying
8 reason for the difficulties I have.
9 [The witness takes the stand]
10 JUDGE ORIE: You may continue, Mr. Bakrac.
11 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
12 Q. Mr. Theunens, can we continue discussing the same topic as before
13 the break.
14 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Can we now have P1080 on our
16 Mr. President, I apologise, I am still supposed to tell you how I
17 obtained the document, as promised before the break. My investigator
18 told me that he received a photocopy of the document from a potential
19 witness of ours who was a member of the Serbian Volunteer Guard. At this
20 time, he does not wish his name to be mentioned, so I'd like the document
21 to be MFI'd until he will possibly appear as a witness here.
22 MR. WEBER: The Prosecution has no objection to that approach and
23 leaving it MFI'd. And with respect to the current document that's being
24 brought up, P1080, we see that that's a document to be under seal. If it
25 could not be broadcast, please.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I expect the parties - let's not spend too
2 much time on it - to prepare a list of documents, then, that are used for
3 the witness so that we can deal with them at -- in an expeditious way.
4 Please proceed.
5 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
6 Q. Mr. Theunens, we already have the relevant document on our
7 screen. I think that you included the document in your report. This
8 would appear to be a report of a collaborator called Trgovac on the
9 situation in RSK territory. It's a state security report, is it not?
10 A. I'm not sure. We would have to look at the heading and the end
11 of the document.
12 If we could just go -- scroll to the end, maybe there's a
13 signature or a stamp.
14 Q. No, Mr. Theunens, there are initials at the end of the document.
15 Let's do it this way: Under item 78, or under paragraph 78, you deal
16 with this topic. This is section 3, paragraph 299; and in section 2 --
17 chapter 2, section 2, paragraphs 232, 235; and in part 2, section 4,
18 paragraph 414; and in part 3, section 3, paragraphs 200, 265 and 267. So
19 obviously you referred to this document repeatedly throughout your
21 A. Yes, I've used this report. Just to clarify, the paragraph
22 numbers obviously refer to the B/C/S translation, because I don't use
23 this numbering in my English original.
24 Q. Yes, I apologise. In -- at any rate, there were some seven or
25 eight paragraphs -- no, I'm sorry, my mistake. I was referring to
2 So you referred to this document seven or eight times. Is it
3 your evidence now that you reviewed this document but you don't know
4 whose document it is, you don't have a position on it as to what the
5 purpose of the document was?
6 A. Your Honours, in my report, I identified it as a VJ intelligence
7 report, and that conclusion must have been based on the summary I could
8 find in the databases which provide, among other things, the origin of
9 the document. But if it is established that it is a document from the
10 state security, obviously I stand corrected.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Weber.
12 MR. WEBER: Your Honour, this document was included in the
13 Prosecution's first bar table motion received pursuant to RFA 219 which
14 are documents which include intelligence reports prepared by the
15 counter-intelligence services of the JNA VJ.
16 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour, I can confirm the
17 same, since I've verified it.
18 Q. I first wanted us to establish that you referred to the document
19 which originated from intelligence organs.
20 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] And let's go back to page 1 in the
21 B/C/S, please. It's the end of page 1 in English. It's the sixth
22 paragraph from the top. Can we have page 2 in English.
23 Q. The paragraph reads:
24 "The next unit is SDG, Serbian Volunteer Guard, led by Arkan.
25 There are around 250 of them. They are accommodated in the recreation
1 centre right next to the bridge, and there are almost 4.000 people from
2 Krajina there. His men are all in the camp, and the men from Krajina are
3 all on the front lines. Arkan is with the army and Perisic and is
4 obeying only Colonel Jovanovic. He came into conflict with
5 General Bora Ivanovic and they are not on speaking terms."
6 Therefore, a VJ security organ states, as it would appear here,
7 that Arkan is with the army and Perisic and listens or complies only with
8 what Colonel Jovanovic says.
9 Who is Colonel Jovanovic, aka "zmija" or snake, if you know,
10 based on the research conducted?
11 A. There was a Colonel Jovanovic who was, at one moment in time, I
12 think before General Loncar, in the command of the SBWS 11th Corps, i.e.,
13 the SVK unit in Eastern Slavonia, but I cannot confirm whether this is
14 the same Jovanovic.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Weber.
16 MR. WEBER: Your Honour, just if counsel could specifically refer
17 to which Jovanovic he is referring to, because I see in the document
18 there's two Jovanovic, a Miodrag and also a Zvezdan. The Miodrag appears
19 on the first page.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, if that resolves the matter, because --
21 [overlapping speakers] ...
22 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, Miodrag Jovanovic, aka
23 zmija, snake.
24 THE WITNESS: I mean, it doesn't clarify or it doesn't bring back
25 my memory.
1 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
2 Q. Very well. Thank you, Mr. Theunens. Let's not dwell on this,
3 and move to the next page.
4 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] In English -- that's page 3 in
5 English and 2 in B/C/S. The paragraph starts as follows. Can we look at
6 the bottom of the page. Can we scroll the English down. No, it's the
7 next page in English, page 4, the first paragraph.
8 Q. This is what this particular intelligence source states:
9 "I've already said that Arkan was with the army, that he knew
10 that his Legija was a man of the DB of Serbia, but Arkan says, 'Goran,
11 I'm not a naive man, I know I will get killed, but first I want to kill
12 15.000 Croats, and that's why I'm here. If the Republic of the Serbian
13 Krajina falls into the hands of the Croats, I can't go back to Serbia
14 they will kill me there.'"
15 And then he reiterates he very much obeys Colonel Jovanovic.
16 Mr. Theunens, this document dates from September 1995. I put it
17 to you that sometime in 1995 Legija was recruited by the state security
18 service and in 1996 he became a part of the unit for special operations
19 too. So I put it to you that Arkan is informed herein of the fact that a
20 man of his was recruited by the DB and that therefore he says, Goran, I'm
21 not a naive person; I know that I will get killed.
22 My understanding of this is that Arkan professes not to be a
23 stupid person and that he was aware of the fact that a man, his -- one of
24 his men, had been recruited by the DB. So my understanding of what he
25 says would be that he had nothing to do, whatsoever, with the DB because,
1 number one, he would not be informed of it, and number two, he would say,
2 Well, yes, I belonged to the DB as well.
3 Would you read into this paragraph the same way I am doing?
4 A. Not necessarily because as I mentioned during the previous days
5 the activities and operations we have been discussing were -- I mean, it
6 was -- attempts were undertaken to keep the allegiance of the different
7 groups that were involved and, more specifically, to keep the involvement
8 or the role of the authorities of the Republic of Serbia
9 secret, so there's no need for Arkan to publicise any links he had with
10 the DB, because it would be -- actually it could be used against him.
11 Q. However, the Army of Yugoslavia, a security organ of the Army of
13 army and that he only listens to Colonel Jovanovic. And then this very
14 same organ says to Arkan, warns him, that one of his men was recruited by
15 the DB.
16 Why would he be hiding that from the security organ, that he was
17 a member of the DB or that he had links to the DB?
18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Bakrac, it's the same question as the last one.
19 It has been answered.
20 If you want to add anything to your question [sic], feel free to
21 do so, Mr. Theunens.
22 If not, could you please put your next question to the witness.
23 THE WITNESS: No, I was just looking in my report, Your Honours,
24 because there are much earlier documents linking a Legija, I mean, with
25 real name Milorad Ulemek, to the Ministry of Interior of Republic of
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now Mr. Bakrac is not asking for a chronology
3 of that but just why Arkan would have not told that, and you have
4 answered that question. If you want to add anything to that, please do
6 Mr. Weber.
7 THE WITNESS: No, Your Honours.
8 MR. WEBER: Your Honour, and we skipped the first page of this
9 document, but just so it's on the record, there is reference to Legija on
10 the first page, at the bottom of the translation. Very bottom half.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, that's clear.
12 Please proceed.
13 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
14 Q. Thank you, Mr. Theunens.
15 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Could we now please have a look at
17 Q. So, when you were discussing the attack on Zvornik, if I remember
18 correctly, you said that in the attack in Zvornik it was only the
19 Serb Volunteer Guard that actively participated in it.
20 Zeljko Raznjatovic Arkan's guard and that the Army of Yugoslavia played a
21 passive role.
22 Please have a look at this document and tell me, since it's a
23 Prosecution document as well, whether you had an opportunity of seeing it
25 A. I don't think you accurately quote me because, as you would see
1 in my report, there were also elements of the TO Loznica, and Loznica is
2 located in the Republic of Serbia
3 group known as the Yellow Wasps who participated in the take-over of
4 Zvornik. And my conclusion in relation to the JNA was based on the
5 documents of the 17th Corps I reviewed.
6 Q. So here is the document, document of the 17th Corps, since you
7 said that they were passive, you see here a document of the 17th Corps
8 right in front of you, so please read it and see what was going on.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Weber.
10 MR. WEBER: Your Honour, the Prosecution's question's also
11 directly focused on activities between the 6th and the 10th of April. I
12 see this document is dated the 10th, discussing activities that follow.
13 JUDGE ORIE: That's on the record, although it might not be the
14 appropriate way of introducing it, Mr. Weber; re-examination is. Rather
15 than intervening in the cross-examination.
16 Please proceed.
17 THE WITNESS: Again, the conclusion on the -- what I call the
18 passive role of the JNA during the take-over is based on the documents of
19 the 17th Corps I reviewed, and they refer to the 7th, the 8th, and the
20 9th of -- of April. I mean, if you look in my report, page 61, part 3,
21 there is a reference --
22 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
23 Q. Mr. Theunens --
24 A. [Previous translation continues] ... there is a reference to
25 P1392, which obviously talks about involvement of the JNA, including
1 Arkan there, in fighting on the 11th. But that's, for me, after the
2 actual take-over.
3 Q. Mr. Theunens, you are talking about the 6th of April; I am
4 talking about a document dated a few days before that. Quite simply, we
5 do not have documents of the 17th Corps that would corroborate either
6 participation or non-participation before the 10th. Non-participation or
7 participation in combat operations in Zvornik, I mean.
8 Is that correct?
9 A. We discussed these documents. We have P1388, for example, where
10 the 17th Corps command discusses the situation in Zvornik on the
11 9th of April. They also talk about their activities. But there is no
12 information in that situational report on any participation of the 17th
13 Corps of its subordinate units in the take-over, as it took place on the
14 8th, 9th of April.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Could I ask one clarifying question. When you
16 earlier said about involvement of the JNA prior or after, did you include
17 air force? Because this seems to be specific to the extent that
18 air-strikes are requested for.
19 THE WITNESS: That is correct, Your Honours. I don't dispute the
20 document. But the take-over took place -- I mean, it started on the 8th,
21 and on the 9th it was finalised. And there was, of course, an aftermath.
22 And the whole discussion about the reports of the 17th Corps consists of
23 or is -- yeah, consists of the fact that in the reports covering the
24 8th and the 9th of April, the 17th Corps does not mention, based on my
25 review, any active involvement during those days in combat operations in
1 Zvornik. But again --
2 JUDGE ORIE: It's not a direct answer to my question, whether you
3 had considered the air force as well, but --
4 THE WITNESS: I'm sorry, Your Honours. I had -- I considered the
5 documents I had in front of me for the -- I mean, for those days, 8 and 9
6 and before. I don't remember that there was a specific air force
7 document, but, again, the conclusions were based on these documents. And
8 obviously I have seen this document before, I believe, but I don't think
9 I referred it -- I've referred to it in my report. But P1392 also talks
10 about combat operations in the wider Zvornik area, involving the JNA and
12 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Bakrac.
13 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
14 Q. Mr. Theunens, you say that there is no information. If there is
15 no information, does that necessarily mean that the 17th Corps did not
16 take active participation on the 7th, 8th, and 9th in the liberation of
18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Bakrac, I think Mr. Theunens explained to us in
19 his previous answer what his position is, that in the reporting of the
20 17th Corps, that nothing is said about participation and the take-over of
21 any combat activity in relation to Zvornik.
22 Of course, if you do not mention, there are several options:
23 Either there's no reporting, then the absence of any information is of
24 limited weight; either there is reporting, but that doesn't mention it.
25 Then you have two options: Either it did not take place; or it has not
1 been mentioned, although it did take place.
2 I mean, this is all logic. So whether this means this yes or no,
3 please ask Mr. Theunens whether he has any specific reasons to believe
4 that despite that there was reporting, that no mention was made, whether
5 there's any other indication he may have that they were not or whether
6 they were involved. Because that's the -- these are the questions which
7 seem to be relevant in this context.
8 Please proceed.
9 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
10 Q. Mr. Theunens, let's do it this way. According to military
11 doctrine, you're a military expert and you have been working as one.
12 Arkan's Volunteer Guard, can though do anything in the zone of
13 responsibility of the 17th Corps without the approval and knowledge of
14 the 17th Corps?
15 A. This is a question we have addressed earlier. It all depends of
16 the situation in the area of Zvornik. Are there combat operations
17 ongoing; yes or no? But I understand from the documents I have reviewed
18 is that there are still, for example, functioning civilian authorities
19 prior to the take-over. In the wider area there is civilian police.
20 Indeed the 17th Corps is conducting a number of activities, but they
21 cannot be -- they are not, in my view, combat activities.
22 The reports you showed yesterday, there was no mentioning made of
23 a front line in the area of Zvornik. So in the absence of specific
24 documents indicating that Arkan is subordinated to the JNA, one cannot
25 conclude what his relation with the 17th Corps at that stage is.
1 And just to finish, P1392 mentions Arkan's or members of
2 Arkan's Group as forces of the 1st Military District under the section of
3 losses. Now, that is on the 11th of April, and that would indicate that
4 then Arkan's people are considered forces of the 1st Military District.
5 But -- and just to finish, the 17th Corps is part of the 2nd Military
7 Q. So if people from the 1st Military District operate in the area
8 of the 17th Corps, that is, from a different military district, can they
9 do that, in your view, without the approval and knowledge of the
10 17th Corps?
11 A. The situation is different. If you look at P1392 - all that's
12 discussed on page 61 of part 3 of my report - the members of
13 Arkan's Group are in the area of Mali Zvornik which is on the Serbian
14 side of the border, i.e., in the zone of responsibility of the
15 1st Military District.
16 Q. And when they cross the Drina
17 responsibility of the 2nd Military District or, rather, the 17th Corps;
19 A. Yes, but in a [indiscernible] military district -- military
20 doctrine, I'm sorry, this should happen, such a movement should happen in
21 accordance with orders that have been given. I haven't seen such orders.
22 Q. All right. Now I'm going to help you. I think that you did see
23 something, and that is -- let me just find it.
24 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I have to check. I'm
25 not sure, but I'd rather err on the side of caution. I would like to
1 present a 92 bis statement, so I'm not sure whether it's a protected
2 witness. In order to be cautious, I would like to ask for private
4 JUDGE ORIE: We move into private session.
5 [Private session]
2 [Open session]
3 THE REGISTRAR: We are back in open session, Your Honours.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
5 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Could we please have page -- the end
6 of page 2 and the beginning of page 3 in B/C/S. Actually in English, I
7 beg your pardon.
8 Q. Can you see this paragraph that starts with --
9 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Actually, what I need here is the
10 next page, the third page. My mistake. Page 3 in English.
11 Q. For the sake of time, I'm just going to read this out to you,
12 this paragraph:
13 "In the morning hours, people started gathering in front of the
14 police station, asking to kill these four men. I decided to move the
15 four men to different rooms within the police station, and I also
16 provided them with guards to protect them. In the morning, around 6.00,
17 about 20 people were standing outside the police station, and later on
18 the number increased. About 10.00 in the morning, I got a telephone call
19 from a man who introduced himself as Captain Marko. He requested me to
20 take these four men out from town and to hand them over to the army. I
21 told him that it was very risky because of all the shooting in Zvornik.
22 "The attack on Zvornik started around 9.30 the same morning, on
23 the 8th of April, 1992. About 1300 hours, Colonel Boskovic from the
24 headquarters in Belgrade
25 the four men since they were military policemen. I know that those two
1 who were not twins were the military policemen. I asked Boskovic about
2 the twins; he did not know who they were, and he was not interested in
3 them either. Boskovic phoned me one more time during the day, and I
4 informed him that everything was okay with the four men. I cannot recall
5 at what time Boskovic phoned me the second time.
6 "I also received a phone call from General be Jankovic from
8 town. I answered him that it was very risky, and I suggested to him, as
9 I had suggested to all the others who had phoned me, to bring a police
10 car, 'Marica,' to transport the prisoners to the bridge between
12 Mr. Theunens, do you agree that statement reflects what you wrote
13 about the arrest of four persons, including Ulemek, nicknamed Legija?
14 A. The thing that is common, that it both concerns an arrest of four
15 men on the 8th of April, but this document doesn't mention names.
16 Q. Sir, in your statement did you refer to the Vuckovic brothers?
17 Vojin Vuckovic and Dusan Vuckovic, twins?
18 A. Indeed, I referred to the two Vuckovic brothers.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Let's try to keep matters short. Is there anything
20 in this story which would not fit into the four people arrested as you
21 described it?
22 THE WITNESS: Your Honours, the reference to military policemen
23 is -- does not correspond with the statement Vojin Vuckovic gave, i.e.,
24 it does not correspond with P1190, because he identifies Ulemek as a
25 member of Zeljko Raznjatovic's Volunteer Guard, and I haven't seen any
1 information indicating that Vojin and Dusan -- okay, the twins are not
2 mentioned, but the fourth person, Zoran Rankic, was a former official or
3 was -- has been an official in the Serbian Radical Party War Staff until
4 December 1991. I have not seen information that he was a military
5 policemen, so that's the difference I see.
6 JUDGE ORIE: There are differences, only to a limited extent
8 THE WITNESS: Exactly, Your Honours.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
10 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
11 Q. Witness, can you tell me -- actually, it says here we will go on
12 doing this, and so on and so forth. Let's not waste any time. This
13 witness who's a Muslim and a policeman, he said that he was called by
14 General Jankovic from Tuzla
15 Do you know who General Jankovic from Tuzla was and what position
16 he held on the 8th of April, 1992?
17 A. Yes. General Savo Jankovic was the commander of the
18 17th JNA Corps at that time.
19 Q. Will you agree with me that General Savo Jankovic, commander of
20 the 17th Corps on the 8th of April, when you say the attack on Zvornik
21 started, called the police, asking them to release -- well, there are
22 differences there, but he is saying that it was two military policemen
23 who had obviously gone to Zvornik with his knowledge.
24 Do you agree with that?
25 A. I don't think that the document states that General Jankovic
1 stated that these are -- that these were military policemen. I'm reading
2 it again, but I don't see -- I didn't see that.
3 JUDGE ORIE: No, no, let's, again, try to keep matters clear.
4 Are you asking Mr. Theunens to interpret this statement, or are you
5 asking Mr. Theunens whether he has any additional knowledge about a phone
6 call made by General Savo Jankovic?
7 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] No, Your Honour. I'll put it this
8 way: This witness says that General Jankovic was the commander of the
9 17th Corps, and on the 8th of April when the attack on Zvornik started,
10 he asked whether it was possible to take these four men out of town.
11 Q. Does that indicate to you that the commander of the 17th Corps
12 knew on 8th of April that four persons were in Zvornik, that they were
13 arrested? And was he, as commander of the 17th Corps, urging for them to
14 be released?
15 A. The document states that Jankovic called the witness and asked
16 the witness about the possibility to take the four men out of town. So
17 that implies that he knew about the situation with these four people,
18 four men.
19 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
20 Q. Thank you, Mr. Theunens. Just one more question in relation to
21 that: Do you know who Colonel Boskovic is, from the headquarters in
23 A. I'm familiar with the Nedeljko Boskovic, but I thought he was a
24 general. And he was, at that moment in time, chief of the security
25 administration. But, again, I'm confused by the rank, because the chief
1 of the security administration should be a general.
2 Q. Thank you, witness. Now I'd like to ask you a question and then
3 we'll see whether it is necessary to deal with some other documents as
4 well. We see that one of these four men was Ulemek, Legija, we saw that
5 you said that one of them was Zoran Rankic from the Serb Radical Party,
6 now I'm interested in the Vuckovic brothers from the Yellow Wasps.
7 Do you have any proof and do you have any indication of these
8 people having any relations whatsoever with the MUP of the
9 Republic of Serbia
10 A. The documents I have reviewed do not allow to draw such a
11 conclusion, so they do not indicate any linkage between the Vuckovic
12 brothers and the MUP of the Republic of Serbia
13 Q. Thank you, Mr. Theunens. I would now like to ask that we move on
14 to a new topic, and that is Captain Dragan, or, rather,
15 Dragan Vasiljkovic, or Daniel Snedden.
16 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Could we please have a look at
18 Your Honour, since this document is one that I received at the
19 very last moment from the investigator, we only translated the part that
20 we would like to deal with. We are going to provide it to the CLSS so
21 that it can be fully translated. Actually, it has already been given to
22 them by my assistant. So with your leave, I would just like us to have a
23 look at those parts that we had marked, because the document has six
25 JUDGE ORIE: Could you tell us when your investigator received
1 the document, Mr. Bakrac?
2 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, he sent it to me during
3 the weekend. I really don't know. I can check that as well. I did not
4 check when he obtained the document, but he sent it to me during the
5 weekend. And it's during the weekend that we made an effort, since the
6 CLSS was not working, that we translated parts of it.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Could you please, at a later stage, provide
8 this information. You want to put -- have it put on the record that you
9 object against using this document without a full translation.
10 Mr. Weber, is that --
11 MR. WEBER: More than that. We object to the use of the document
12 period. We have no notice of it. It was not included even in the very
13 last notification on the 31st of October, 2010. We've received a list of
14 exhibits yesterday just at the start of court; I do not see 2D319 a part
15 of those exhibits. Overall, we've been notified of over 128 documents by
16 the Simatovic Defence in six separate e-mails, so we do not even see this
18 So at this time, without even the Prosecution having an
19 opportunity to look at the document, we at least request that it not be
20 used at this time and that we have an opportunity to look at it before
21 further presenting any views on it.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Bakrac, what about using it tomorrow morning,
23 which at least leaves some time to the Prosecution and also enables them
24 to consult with language assistants in order to see what the remainder of
25 the [Overlapping speakers] ...
1 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I do thank you for your
2 understanding. And of course it would only be civilised for us to agree
3 with that. After all, that is a constructive proposal. I'm going to
4 leave Captain Dragan for the end of my examination so that the
5 Prosecution can familiarise themselves with that topic. So I am going to
6 move on to yet another topic now, and I'll deal with this one tomorrow
8 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
9 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
10 Q. Witness, let's have a look at this -- or, actually, do you know
11 the name of Radojica Bozovic?
12 A. Yes, I do, Your Honours.
13 Q. What is your view of his position -- or, rather, no. Let me
14 rephrase this.
15 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Let's look at 2D65.
16 MR. WEBER: For the record, the Prosecution received notice of
17 this document on 31st of October, 2010, at 5.44 p.m.
18 JUDGE ORIE: It's on the record.
19 Please proceed.
20 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
21 Q. Mr. Theunens, this isn't a long document. Please read through
23 So have you seen this document before?
24 A. I'm not sure whether I've seen that document, but I'm familiar
25 with another document that indicates that at a certain moment in time
1 Radojica Bozovic, also known as Kobas [phoen], holds an assignment in the
2 Doboj CSB, i.e., the police of the Republika Srpska in
4 Q. So this is yet another document which shows that as of the
5 13th of January, 1993, the minister of the interior of Republika Srpska,
6 Mico Stanisic, pursuant to the rules governing the internal organisation
7 and work of the Ministry of the Interior of Republika Srpska, assigns
8 Mr. Radojica Bozovic to a post; is that right?
9 A. I'm not sure what you mean by "yet another document." But -- I
10 mean, Radojica Bozovic is one of the individuals - you can see throughout
11 parts 2 and part 3 of the report - who are at one -- in the beginning,
12 active in the training centre in Pajzos. Then subsequently - and I can
13 give you references if you want them - they are identified as members of
14 the Red Berets or even commanders of a Red Beret unit, for example in
15 Doboj. And he's also extensively mentioned in the Pauk diary, which
16 discusses the participation of sub-units of the special-purpose unit of
17 the MUP of the Republic of Serbia
18 So this is one document that shows an assignment held by Bozovic
19 at one moment in time.
20 Q. Therefore you will agree with me that we can see from this
21 document that he was assigned to the post of the commander of a police
22 detachment of a Special Police brigade for Doboj; is that right?
23 JUDGE ORIE: I think the witness has answered that question
24 already. We've now spent four minute, well over four minutes, to
25 establish what already in the first answer was clear, that Mr. Theunens
1 seems not to disagree that Bozovic was appointed in this position on that
2 date. That took us now four, close to five minutes. Quite not
4 Please proceed.
5 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
6 Q. Mr. Theunens, you have just said that Mr. Bozovic was also
7 mentioned in the Pauk operation as belonging to a subordinated unit.
8 Let me just check my notes.
9 When you discussed the Pauk operation, you said to my learned
10 friend Mr. Weber that Radojica Bozovic was subordinated to the
11 Pauk command in 1995 and that Pauk was predominantly composed of MUP
12 members. And that's at page 71 of the transcript of the 26th of October
13 of this year?
14 A. Yes, and he --
15 Q. What is the basis for your statement that Pauk was composed
16 mostly of MUP members? And which MUP, ultimately?
17 A. The Pauk command was a mixed structure whereby there were
18 officers of the SVK, part of it, the chief of the Pauk command was an SVK
19 officer, but there were also senior members of the MUP Serbia involved as
20 commanders of sub-units. Radojica Bozovic, also known as Kobas, for
21 example, signs a document as the commander of --
22 Q. Mr. Theunens, please, we will come to that. My question was, I
23 think, quite clear and specific. Based on what evidence did you arrive
24 at the conclusion that Pauk was mostly composed of MUP members?
25 JUDGE ORIE: Apparently you start your answer by indicating that
1 there were sub-commanders from the MUP. Mr. Bakrac is interested in the
2 quantitative statement that most members. Could you please focus on
4 Mr. Weber.
5 MR. WEBER: Your Honour, I just -- the Prosecution would ask that
6 the witness just be allowed to provide his answers. There's over
7 30 pages in the report on the Pauk command, so possibly a very
8 open-ended, broad question as it appears on 51, line 20 --
9 JUDGE ORIE: I did not mind Mr. Bakrac here intervening because
10 the witness - and it's not for the first time - was not yet very focused.
11 Therefore I repeat the question. It is about -- let me phrase that
12 again. It is about mostly composed of MUP members, which I do understand
13 to be more than half.
14 Please proceed.
15 THE WITNESS: I have not made a quantitative analysis of the
16 composition of the Pauk command; but as I stated, the commander of -- or
17 the chief of the Pauk command is an SVK officer. The command of
18 tactical 2 was Legija, a member of MUP Serbia --
19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Theunens, I'll read to you what your testimony
20 was at page 8111:
21 "In the Pauk command which was active in western
22 Bosnia-Herzegovina between November 1994 and August 1995, and as is
23 discussed in the report, Pauk was predominantly manned by members of the
24 Ministry of Interior of the Republic of Serbia
25 special-purpose unit."
1 Did you want to express by "predominantly" that they were not in
2 the majority?
3 THE WITNESS: Actually, Your Honours, I --
4 JUDGE ORIE: Because you say you did not make any quantitative
6 THE WITNESS: No. No, Your Honours, I tried to summarise the
7 quantitative aspect as well as the qualitative aspect, i.e., that the
8 number of senior positions or positions I considered serious, senior,
9 like, for example, the commands of tactical groups --
10 JUDGE ORIE: Let's then keep matters short. You did not intend
11 to say that it was by the majority manned in a quantitative way, which
12 Mr. Bakrac may lead you to either rephrase your question or to put
13 another question to the witness.
14 Please proceed.
15 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
16 Q. Witness, let's look at Exhibit D47. D47. This is a document of
17 the National Defence of Western Bosnia, Supreme Command. The date is
18 3 March 1995
19 a list of military personnel envisaged to be present at the reception.
20 So the first seven are chiefs of the Supreme Command, and then we
21 have, under 7, Mile Novakovic, commander of Pauk.
22 Can you tell us what position did Mile Novakovic have prior to
23 and on the 3rd of March, 1995?
24 A. He was a lieutenant-general in the SVK, and I believe that he was
25 Chief of Staff, so not chief of defence staff but Chief of Staff of the
1 SVK. But not simultaneously with the position he held in Pauk.
2 Q. Very well. Tell me, Cedo Bulat, chief of the Pauk command, what
3 was his position before and during this time?
4 A. Yeah, it should be Chief of Staff of the Pauk command. And he
5 was the -- I mean, that's also in footnote 407 in part 2 of the report,
6 command of the 21st SVK Corps, Kordun Corps of the SVK. That was the
7 position he held in 1994.
8 Q. Latinovic, chief of logistics of Pauk, did you learn who this
9 individual was and what position he held?
10 A. Yes. I mean all that is explained on page 131 of part 2 of the
11 report, where these individuals are clearly identified as SVK officers.
12 Q. So the top echelons of the Pauk command were all members of the
13 SVK; is that right?
14 A. I think that would only be a partial conclusion; but because the
15 other documents I have included in that section demonstrate that they
16 receive instructions, I cannot state permanently but there are a number
17 of examples indicating that, for example, Novakovic has to speak to
18 Jovica, whereby the last name is not given, or has to go to Belgrade to
19 meet Jovica, indicating to me that senior officials of the Ministry of
20 Interior of the Republic of Serbia
21 to a Frenki in the Pauk log-book, D47 - that these officials play a
22 leading role in issuing instructions to the military command of the
23 Pauk command.
24 Q. Very well. We'll be going through two or three documents now and
25 then you'll tell me if you stand by this position of yours.
1 Before we look at the next document, can you tell me if you know
2 how many corps participated in the Pauk operation, and which armies did
3 they come from?
4 Can I be of assistance, did the -- I'm sorry.
5 A. If you allow me to look in my report, and I try my best to answer
6 your question.
7 It is my understanding that Pauk involves units,
8 recently-established units, of the Autonomous Province of Western Bosnia
9 as well as of the SVK. There is information that they are also units or
10 sub-units of the special-purpose unit of the MUP of the Republic of
12 unit is regularly identified as the Skorpions. And overall, Pauk
13 co-ordinated its operations with the units in the -- on the other side of
14 the Bihac pocket of the VRS.
15 Q. Mr. Theunens, I apologise if I didn't notice it; did you mention
16 the Army of Republika Srpska? You did. Yes, I can see it now.
17 You said that they co-ordinated, but I'm asking you if units of
18 the Army of Republika Srpska participated in the operation.
19 Perhaps I can refer you to General Milovanovic and his statement,
20 to assist you.
21 A. I mean, I have not seen specific documents on identifying which
22 units of the SVK were -- I'll rephrase that because -- I mean, I try to
23 be very specific. In a sense, I do remember that, for example, units of
24 the SVK would provide fire support, but my recollection is that they did
25 it from the territory they held in Croatia
1 covered in my report, but - I went to the --
2 JUDGE ORIE: Let me see whether -- the question was about the
3 Army of the Republika Srpska. Let me just ... and the answer seems to be
4 focusing on --
5 THE WITNESS: I misunderstood.
6 JUDGE ORIE: -- the Army of the Serbian Krajina.
7 THE WITNESS: I apologise.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Would you please reread the question, whether units
9 of the Army of Republika Srpska participated in the operation.
10 THE WITNESS: Yeah. I recollect that there was co-ordination, as
11 I mentioned earlier, with -- I mean, between the VRS, who were on the
12 western side of the enclave, the Bihac -- enclave of Bihac pocket, with
13 the Pauk command. But I cannot establish whether that was a permanent
14 co-ordination. But I know that during specific operations this
15 co-ordination took place.
16 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Have you finished your answer,
17 Mr. Theunens?
18 THE WITNESS: Yes, I have.
19 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I'm looking at the
20 clock. And I'd only like to spend two minutes on a document, because you
21 mentioned the units belonging to Slobodan Medic, aka Boca, that's to say,
22 Skorpions, as participating in the Pauk operation.
23 Can we call up 2D253. And we'll go back to documents relating to
24 Pauk in the afternoon session. 2D253, please.
25 Q. It's a very short document, please read it, and we'll have your
1 comments on it.
2 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] 2D253.
3 THE WITNESS: It will have been helpful if the two -- I mean, if
4 the stamp in blue had been translated. Maybe it's on the second page; I
5 don't know if there's a second page.
6 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
7 Q. Mr. Theunens, I'll assist you. It's a stamp by the municipality
8 of Palilula of 1999 whereby the authenticity of the photocopy is
9 verified. And we can have its translation on page 2. So, hereby, the
10 municipality of Palilula certifies to the fact that --
11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Bakrac, I think it would take Mr. Theunens
12 approximately two seconds to read what is on the second page.
13 Mr. Theunens, you've seen it it's verification stamp.
14 THE WITNESS: Thank you, Your Honours.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
16 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
17 Q. Mr. Theunens, we are out of time already. Please tell us, do you
18 have any knowledge about Boca Medic on the 13th of April, 1993, in
19 Djeletovci, together with his unit, was under a military command and part
20 of a military post, or do you have any -- any information to that effect?
21 A. Your Honours, this refers to what I stated earlier, that in the
22 territory held by the RSK, between the acceptance of the Vance Plan early
23 1992 and November 1992, several steps are undertaken to circumvent the
24 demilitarisation and demobilisation stipulations of that Vance Plan by
25 first transforming the TO into PJM; and then subsequently, the PJM, at
1 the latest by November 1992, is transformed into the SVK. And this also
2 applies to the training centre in Erdut, as we saw earlier, as well as --
3 actually, there was no military installation in Djeletovci. Medic was
4 guarding and participating in the exploitation of the oil fields at
5 Djeletovci, whereby the oil was pumped from Djeletovci towards the
6 refinery in Pancevo in Serbia
7 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. --
8 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
9 Q. Sir, Mr. Theunens, one other question, please --
10 JUDGE ORIE: No, Mr. Bakrac. You said you needed one minute to
11 12.00, you said you needed two minutes, you've now taken five minutes.
12 We adjourn. And any further questions can be put to Mr. Theunens this
14 We resume at 2.30 in this same courtroom.
15 --- Recess taken at 12.05 p.m.
16 --- On resuming at 2.35 p.m.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Before we continue, I'd like to briefly address one
18 matter, which is the following: Mr. Simatovic, I do understand that
19 there was some confusion about you being transported to the UNDU during
20 this lunch break. This may have been caused by the fact that the Chamber
21 usually does not intervene in any way with transportation. The only
22 reason why the Chamber took up this matter with the Registry was because
23 of the condition of Mr. Stanisic. And for scheduling purposes, we
24 inquired into what time it would take, and we also consulted with
25 Mr. Jordash; that apparently has created an impression that the Chamber
1 was not interested in you being transport to the UNDU, which, of course,
2 was not the case, although we would have left it to the normal routine.
3 Whereas for Mr. Stanisic it requires a bit of separate attention. And
4 that if that confused those responsible for the transportation, that is
5 regrettable, but I was informed that finally the transportation was
6 arranged for.
7 I thought it would be good to explain to you that, why we paid
8 attention to the matter for Mr. Stanisic and not for you, because we had
9 to take into account, for example. And we had to consult with
10 Mr. Jordash on the matter as well.
11 Then, Mr. Bakrac, are you ready to continue?
12 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. Thank you.
13 Q. Mr. Theunens, at the end of the last session we were discussing
14 an issue, and for some reason I was unable to call up that last page of
15 the transcript, but it appears to me that you said that when UNPROFOR
16 came to Slavonia
17 cadre of the establishment of some of the units; is my understanding
19 A. Your Honours, I discuss the Vance Plan, because that's what we
20 are talking about, in part 2 of my report, where I explain, okay, the key
21 characteristics of the Vance Plan, and one of the --
22 JUDGE ORIE: Before we continue, let's try to keep as focused as
24 I understood the testimony of Mr. Theunens to be that not the
25 character changed but, rather, the names given changed. That's how I
1 understood his testimony.
2 Mr. Theunens, did I understand your testimony well?
3 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honours. That is the --
4 JUDGE ORIE: We discussed it twice today, indeed.
5 THE WITNESS: The practical expression of the changes that
6 occurred, or the practical reflection.
7 JUDGE ORIE: So not the character changed, but the names given to
8 the institution changed.
9 Please proceed.
10 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
11 Q. Mr. Theunens, if after the Vance Plan there had to follow a
12 demilitarisation, is it not more logical, then, for military names or
13 titles to change into police ones rather than vice-versa?
14 A. I mean, a demilitarisation is not so much concerned by names, but
15 it's concerned by the level of mobilisation of forces, as well as the
16 activities of these forces and the location of their weapons.
17 Q. Bearing in mind the Vance Plan, the military post in Djeletovci,
18 was it contrary to the provisions you just referred to concerning the
19 storage of weapons and the like?
20 A. I have not addressed this in my report, but for my work in
21 UNPROFOR, my understanding is that Djeletovci was not used as a
22 recognised weapons storage site in that part of Sector East. And when I
23 use the term "recognised weapons storage site," for the implementation of
24 the Vance Plan, a number of weapons storage sites with a so-called
25 dual-key system were established within the territory covered by the
1 UNPAs, the United Nations Protected Areas. And the dual key refers to
2 UNPROFOR as well as the local Serb structures.
3 Q. In respect of the base in Djeletovci, did UNPROFOR take any sort
4 of measures?
5 A. Your Honours, I'm not aware of any specific measures taken by
6 UNPROFOR in relation to the base in Djeletovci.
7 Q. [Overlapping speakers] ...
8 A. Sorry -- I'm sorry. Just to complete, except for reporting, if
9 there were violations.
10 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] My apologies, Mr. Theunens.
11 And, Your Honours, I had to briefly consult my client. Can we
12 now move into private session for a question that was put in direct
13 examination in private session as well.
14 JUDGE ORIE: We move into private session.
15 [Private session]
11 Page 8637 redacted. Private session.
7 [Open session]
8 THE REGISTRAR: We're back in open session, Your Honours.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
10 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
11 Q. Mr. Theunens, before the break, we spoke of the Pauk operation.
12 I'd like us to look at a document, namely 2D51. It's a document from the
13 Main Staff of the Army of Republika Srpska sent to the commands of the
14 1st and 2nd Corps and the Serbian Army of the Krajina for their
15 information. The dispatch was sent by Deputy Commander
16 Lieutenant-Colonel Manojlo Milovanovic. It was filed with the command of
17 the 1st Krajina Corps in July of 1994.
18 Please look at the document, and I'll draw your attention to two
19 issues. If you wish to read through for the sake of the context, I'll
20 wait. Do you see item 2 there?
21 A. I do. It's my impression that this is the same document as P381,
22 which is discussed on page 127 of part 2 of my report. The only
23 difference being that the registration number -- and there may be a typo
24 there, but here it says 02/274. Okay, the slash in my copy has been
25 replaced by a 1. But I think that's just a typo. But it should be the
1 same document. And I see item 2.
2 Q. Yes, Mr. Theunens, my apologies. That's perhaps why I omitted to
3 identify the document. But let's look at item 2. It reads:
4 "Pursuant to an agreement between the Army of Yugoslavia, the
5 Army of Republika Srpska, the Serbian Army of Krajina, and the armed
6 forces of Western Bosnia, Directive 6 issued by the Supreme Command of
7 the armed forces of the RS, dated the 11th of November, 1993, the
8 agreement concluded in Vojnic on the 24th of June, 1994, between the
9 representatives of VRS, SVK, and military representatives of
10 Western Bosnia, the VRS had as its task the commencement of offensive
11 actions on the 10th of July, 1994, in the direction of the Una river in
12 order to link up the forces of the 5th Corps of the so-called BH army in
13 order to reach the right bank of the Una and thus take control over the
14 Cazinska Krajina, together with the forces of the Western Bosnia
16 My question is, does this concern the Pauk operation?
17 A. Your Honours, there is no direct reference to Pauk even if it
18 concerns the same area of operations. Una 1994 is a predecessor of the
19 operations that were led by the Pauk command.
20 Q. Mr. Theunens, the agreement I referred to just now, among all
21 these sides, did you find among them the MUP of the Republic of Serbia
22 A. Well, I discussed this document on page 127, 128 of part 2 of my
23 report, and on the next page you see a reference to P1285, which refers
24 to a meeting on I would call the higher level, involving senior
25 representatives of the SVK, VJ, the AP WB, as well as
1 Mr. Slobodan Milosevic and Mr. Jovica Stanisic, to organise military
2 support to Fikret Abdic and the AP WB. And this is how command and
3 control would work. So first there is a political decision-making
4 process; and then, as we see in this specific combat order, the military
5 command levels use the political instruction in order to develop military
6 plans whereby they establish specific missions for specific units.
7 Q. But, Mr. Theunens, if my understanding of what you said to us
8 before the break is correct, you said that the MUP of the Republic of
10 correct me if I'm wrong.
11 A. I answered this question. I mean, this is Una 1994. Una 1994 on
12 the basis of this document does not include any references to the MUP of
13 the Republic of Serbia
14 that we see clear references to what I would call senior officials of the
15 MUP of the Republic of Serbia
16 operations led by the Pauk command. But this is Una 1994; it's something
17 else; it's the predecessor.
18 Q. Mr. Theunens, if I understand you correctly, you said, in support
19 of the statement you've repeated just now, that Mile Novakovic, the
20 commander of the Pauk command, went to Belgrade to see an individual by
21 the name of Jovica. Correct me if I'm wrong. It is on this basis that
22 you draw the conclusion to the effect that the MUP had a commanding role
23 to play in this operation.
24 A. This is just one of the references I used. I also used the SVK
25 security organs report P382, which is discussed on page 133 of part 2 of
1 the report.
2 Q. Mr. Theunens, now that you're referring to this, can you tell me
3 specifically what was it in that document that led you to conclude that
4 the MUP of Serbia had a commanding role in the Pauk operation?
5 A. I mean, I look at documents in a context. P382 covers a visit by
6 Mr. Jovica Stanisic to the Krajina - if I'm not wrong, it's Petrovac
7 Gora - but it's the -- he visits and he has a meeting with senior
8 officers of the SVK.
9 There is also reference in P382 - and that's on page 134 of
10 part 2 of my report - to a meeting that Mr. Stanisic has with
11 Milan Martic and General Novakovic who -- and I didn't mention that this
12 morning, but who, according to P8 -- 382, was retired at that moment.
13 And this meeting takes place on the 13th of November. And this is,
14 again, what I would call -- it's part of the command and control, but a
15 decision-making process where first political instructions are developed
16 which are subsequently put into action by the units --
17 Q. Sir --
18 A. And just to finish, okay, there's no doubt that, as I explained
19 in page 131, that there were a number of SVK officers in the
20 Pauk command, but we have seen the document -- one document earlier, the
21 invitation, and we can also look at D47 where there are at least two
22 tactical group commanders who are individuals who, according to other
23 documents, are identified as senior members of the MUP Serbia. And I'm
24 referring that to Milorad Ulemek, also known as Legija, and Kobac.
25 Q. Mr. Theunens, you told us this repeatedly, and it is up
1 Their Honours to adjudicate these facts. It is yours to state them and
2 ours to challenge them. Tactical group is one of a lower-ranking
3 formations; is it not?
4 A. It depends of the situation. I mean, I have not been established
5 to see how many forces were involved -- excuse me. I've not been able to
6 establish how many forces were subordinated to the Pauk command. Now,
7 we're talking about a very local conflict; it's only occurring on the
8 front line between the AP WB and the 5th Corps. As far as I understand
9 the situation, the tactical group was the immediate echelon below the
10 command of Pauk. And they were actually conducting the operations.
11 Q. Mr. Theunens, if I told you that four or five corps participated
12 in it, what would be -- what sort of formation would a tactical group be
13 then, in view of the strength, a higher level or a lower-level structure?
14 A. I think this is a speculative question because you said that four
15 or five corps participated; do you mean the corps in their entirety, or
16 elements of the corps? And if yes, a document that would highlight what
17 elements of the corps would participate would maybe make it easier for me
18 to answer your question.
19 Q. Mr. Theunens, I will be guided by your logic and ask you the
20 following: --
21 JUDGE ORIE: It's not a matter logic. It's a matter of facts.
22 We earlier, as you said, established that -- at least we heard that five
23 corps participated. If I say that a class of pupils participate in a
24 race, then that could be that three out of those pupils participate or
25 the whole of the class; that has not been established. So therefore,
1 it's not a matter of about logic. It's first of all a matter about
3 Please proceed.
4 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.
5 Q. I will ask you about facts. The basis on which you conclude that
6 the MUP was in command of the operation was the meeting between
7 Jovica Stanisic, Milan
8 exactly was discussed at this meeting? Do you have any facts to that
10 A. I mean, if you look at my report, my conclusion is not only based
11 on P382, but also on the diary, as well as other documents that are
12 quoted in the section on Pauk.
13 Now, P382 provides an account of the meeting as provided by
14 Colonel Smiljanic to the chief of the security organs of the SVK,
15 Colonel Rade Raseta, at the time.
16 Q. Please, I don't have time enough to go through the Pauk diary.
17 Can you give me references from that document where we can find the facts
18 based on which you conclude that Jovica Stanisic showed to have a
19 commanding role in the Pauk operation at this particular meeting?
20 A. I haven't written in my report that Mr. Jovica Stanisic has a
21 commanding role in the Pauk operation. However, P382, according to P382,
22 Mr. Stanisic represents the Government of the Republic of Serbia
23 Pauk command post. I don't claim that he is there in permanence, because
24 when I then link that information with the information in the Pauk diary,
25 there are entries, for example, footnote 417, an entry for the
1 19th of November, 8.00 in the morning. It says that Novakovic, OG Pauk,
2 has to go and see Jovica at 11.00.
3 On the 22nd of November, at 1655 - that's footnote 418 - there is
4 an entry indicating that Pauk has to report to Belgrade; he knows to
6 Q. So it is on the basis of these two facts that you conclude that
7 the MUP -- well, fine you didn't say that it was Jovica Stanisic who
8 played a commanding role, but that the MUP played a commanding role in
9 Pauk. Is that your evidence now? Command and control --
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Weber.
11 MR. WEBER: Your Honour, the Prosecution just want to put on the
12 record that, for reference, at footnotes 415 through 420, reference
13 specific entries from the Pauk diary.
14 THE WITNESS: I didn't use the expression --
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Yes. That that's --
16 I do not see what the comment. It's clear that the footnotes
17 refer to the -- because that appears from -- it says entry, entry, entry;
18 and entry is usually used in the context of a log or -- and we see that
19 in 415 - it may perhaps not specifically say ... yes, 416 clearly refers
20 to the operative diary of the Pauk command. So I think it was perfectly
22 Now --
23 MR. WEBER: The only reason I brought it up was in response to
24 page 67, the question at line 18, just -- Mr. Bakrac was: "Can you give
25 me references from that document," referring to the Pauk diary, which we
1 can find facts that relate to it.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Well, it seems that whatever the reason may
3 have been, there's no confusion about that, what these footnotes stand
5 Mr. Bakrac, I have one tiny little thing, which is the following:
6 You moved in your questioning from documents showing that Mr. Stanisic
7 played a commanding role during that meeting, and then later you were
8 talking about a commanding role in the operation. Could we please be
9 very accurate in this respect, whether you are talking about the meeting
10 or whether you are talking about the Pauk operation.
11 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I was discussing the
12 meeting. And I wanted Mr. Theunens to tell me what it is on the basis of
13 that meeting that made him conclude that either Jovica Stanisic or the
14 Serbian MUP played a commanding role.
15 THE WITNESS: I have tried to explain - I can do it for a third
16 time - that I didn't just draw conclusions on one document. The
17 documents have to be considered in context. If you read my report, you
18 will not find any suggestion that Mr. Jovica Stanisic is in command of
19 Operation Pauk on the basis of P382. I mean, another document which
20 shows he's -- the level of interest Mr. Stanisic has for the upcoming
21 operations is P308, where he is reported visiting and meeting
22 General Talic, the commander of the 1st Krajina Corps of the VRS, and
23 where, according to the report that was compiled by security organs of
24 the 1KK, he, i.e., Mr. Jovica Stanisic, had provided -- or he boldly
25 stated that he had provided forces strong enough to ensure the liberation
1 of Velika Kladusa and Fikret Abdic's return there but that he needed to
2 synchronise this task with the forces of the VRS and the SVK. Yeah,
3 there it stands for Supreme Command staff.
4 Q. [Overlapping speakers] ...
5 A. I draw conclusions on the basis of documents, and I look at
6 documents in context, as I have explained in the methodology I have
7 applied. P308 can be found on page 135 of part 2 of the report.
8 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Could we please bring up P308.
9 P308, please.
10 Q. While we're waiting for it, sir, if I understood correctly, I
11 believe you said that Mr. Jovica Stanisic has showed a degree of
12 interest; isn't that a completely different indication from what you say
13 when you based your conclusion that it was Jovica Stanisic or Serbian MUP
14 who had a commanding role in Operation Pauk?
15 Here is P308. Perhaps we can see what it is in that document
16 that makes you conclude anything about Jovica Stanisic's commanding role.
17 A. Again, I have not stated in my report that Mr. Jovica Stanisic
18 commanded Pauk. I have given you a few references indicating that the
19 person who holds the military command of Pauk is -- reports to a Jovica,
20 whereby it's my conclusion that it's Jovica -- Mr. Jovica Stanisic, and
21 that there are a number of senior officials of the MUP of Serbia playing
22 a commanding role in the Pauk command as commands of tactical groups.
23 Now, this is not the P308 I'm referring to, unless there's an
24 error in the -- in the P number.
25 MR. WEBER: I think there might be an error in the P number. I'm
1 checking it right now.
2 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Apologies, Your Honours. I'm ready
3 to drop this document, unless you want to see it particularly. It seems
4 that I've lost quite some time on it, and that was not my original plan.
5 Perhaps later on.
6 MR. WEBER: Your Honour, I apologise, that's the Prosecution's
7 fault. I believe it's P380. P380. We will note that -- this and make
8 the corrections.
9 JUDGE ORIE: You mean in the reports by the --
10 MR. WEBER: The footnote in the report is incorrect. It should
11 be P380, based on the reference in the chart that was filed by the
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
14 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
15 Q. Mr. Theunens --
16 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, may I continue?
17 JUDGE ORIE: You may continue. And since you lost your time as a
18 result of a mistake by the Prosecution, if you would want to spend five
19 or six or seven additional minutes on 380, you are invited to do so. So
20 it's only fair that you are not the -- well, victim is a big word, but at
21 least that you're not having any prejudice from the mistake.
22 Please proceed.
23 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, thank you. We will
24 check P380. I focused in my questioning on this footnote, but I will
25 make that check during the break.
1 Q. Mr. Theunens, we saw that there were two tactical groups, and you
2 say that there was some participation by senior officials of the Serbian
3 MUP in those groups. What made you conclude that? What document did you
4 refer to when you said that there was an involvement of senior officials
5 of the Serbian MUP?
6 A. The two individual -- I mean the two main individuals I
7 considered are Radojica Bozovic, also known as Kobac, and I've seen
8 documents where he's identified as a colonel. Now, at least in military
9 doctrine, a colonel is a senior officer.
10 Another individual is Milorad Ulemek, also known as -- as Legija.
11 There I don't remember the exact rank, but I based my conclusion or the
12 use of the words senior on the fact that, I mean, the ranks these people
13 held and/or the position during the conduct of operations. So command of
14 a tactical group, in this context, is not a junior officer.
15 Q. Mr. Theunens, are you trying to tell us that in the Serbian state
16 security in 1993 and 1994 there were ranks?
17 A. I mean, the people I have mentioned - and there's also others we
18 have seen, Slobodan Medic - is identified -- I mean, they use ranks to
19 identify themselves. Now, whether these ranks applied --
20 Q. Mr. Theunens, I'm asking you, since that was obviously the
21 information you had, did you double-check that information? And can you
22 testify before this Court that in the relevant period of time in 1993,
23 1994, and 1995, the officials of the Serbian state security service had
24 ranks? Did you try to ascertain that or not? It's a simple question.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Let's try to get to the core of the issue. The
1 issue apparently being whether senior MUP officials were playing a role
2 in Operation Pauk.
3 Now, in the report we find that Bozovic was commander of the TG 3
4 and was involved as such in Pauk, and for Ulemek he is described as
5 commander of the Tactical Group 2; and Mr. Theunens says they both were
6 MUP officials. He explained that by their rank or by their position -
7 and I take it that that's a reference to Tactical Group 2 and 3 - that
8 they could not consider to be anything else than senior officials or
9 senior-ranking officials.
10 Now, whether or not they held certain ranks in the MUP seems not
11 to be the core of the problem. The core of the problem is whether MUP
12 officials played a role at a higher level in commanders of technical
13 groups in Operation Pauk.
14 Now, we can spend another hour on the ranks in the MUP. At this
15 moment - it seems it could be important for other purposes - but for what
16 we are talking about at this moment, the ranks seems not to be of great
17 importance for what apparently is the core of the testimony. Unless you
18 have any specific questions why, despite the fact that, as Mr. Theunens
19 tells us, there were commanders of the Tactical Groups 2 and 3 in Pauk,
20 whether that rank in the MUP would change the picture he had given,
21 unless you have questions for that, I'd like you to again focus on what
22 seems to be the core of this part of the testimony.
23 Please proceed.
24 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, by your leave, one
25 minute to respond. We dispute the fact that at the time the two persons
1 in question were members of the Serbian DB, during the time relevant to
2 the indictment.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Then let's --
4 MR. BAKRAC: [Overlapping speakers] ...
5 JUDGE ORIE: Then apart from ranks, let's then -- if you dispute
6 that, let's -- where Mr. Theunens only qualifies them as MUP officials,
7 apparently you want to demonstrate that - I don't know - whether they
8 were MUP officials or not, but certainly not DB officials. Let's then
9 focus on that issue. That was not clear for me up until this moment,
10 Mr. Bakrac.
11 Please proceed.
12 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. Precisely
14 Q. I, therefore, have a simple question for you, Mr. Theunens: Did
15 you check whether at that time there were any ranks in the state security
16 service? And I'm referring to the employees of the state security
17 service. Did they have ranks?
18 A. Your Honours, as was indicated in the beginning of my testimony,
19 I have not analysed the structure of the MUP of the Republic of Serbia
20 so I'm not able to answer that question.
21 Q. Very well. Mr. Theunens, a moment ago I showed you 2D65. We saw
22 that on the 13th of January, 1993, the minister of the interior of
23 Republika Srpska, Mico Stanisic, issued a decision on the appointment of
24 Radojica Bozovic to the position of the Special Brigade police platoon
25 commander for the area of the Security Services Centre in Doboj.
1 What document do you assert that Radojica Bozovic, in 1994, when
2 he was a member of the tactical group in Operation Pauk, was a member of
3 the Serbian state security service?
4 A. I have not put in my report that Bozovic is, when he is serving
5 is commander of TG 3, is a member of the state security service. The
6 documents I reviewed only allowed to establish that they were officials
7 of the Ministry of Interior of the Republic of Serbia
8 Q. On the basis of what document did you ascertain that
9 Radojica Bozovic was an official of the Ministry of the Interior of
11 mean specifically during Operation Pauk.
12 A. I based my conclusion on the positions held prior to Pauk by
13 Mr. Bozovic and I mean throughout the conflict in Croatia and
14 Bosnia-Herzegovina, whereby we know that on the basis of P1080 he was in
15 May 1992 in Pajzos. In May -- excuse me. After May 1992, he was in
16 Doboj. P1439 also refers to his presence in Doboj. End of 1992/early
17 1993, he is reported in Skelani, according to P1441 and P399. And these
18 earlier assignments were again based on the documents I reviewed. In my
19 view, assignments in the MUP of Serbia.
20 I didn't see the document you showed me by Mico Stanisic. Now,
21 it would be a document that would be important to look at in the context
22 of the other documents in order to see whether it was just a
23 regularisation, i.e., to create the impression that Mr. Bozovic was
24 indeed an employee of the MUP of the Republika Srpska, whereas in fact he
25 was still an employee of the MUP of Serbia; or whether, on the other
1 hand, as you tried -- as you suggest, that he was serving full time - if
2 I can say so - exclusively in the MUP of the RS of Republika Srpska.
3 Q. Mr. Theunens, with all due respect, did you work for the
4 Prosecutor until recently - the Prosecutor of this Tribunal - perhaps
5 until last year or two -- until two years ago?
6 JUDGE ORIE: Is there any dispute about that?
7 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] No.
8 JUDGE ORIE: It's part of the CV, isn't it?
9 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
10 Q. Mr. Theunens, is it possible that -- well, we'll go on to prove
11 that, but let's say, for the sake of the argument, that Radojica Bozovic
12 in 1993 was a member of the Serbian MUP reserve, does that necessarily
13 make us conclude that in 1994, during Operation Pauk, he was a senior or
14 high-ranking official of the Serbian MUP?
15 A. We would have to look at the specific documents and see whether
16 there are any documents that indicate his transfer from the the MUP --
17 Q. Mr. Theunens --
18 A. His transfer from the MUP Serbia to the MUP RS.
19 Q. Mr. Theunens, I'm asking you, did you come across a piece of
20 evidence or document which would prove, and I mean a specific written
21 document, proving that Radojica Bozovic was in the Serbian MUP at all, at
22 any time, and especially in 1994 and 1995?
23 And please be specific in your answer because I'm wasting an
24 awful lot of time. We have a some of things to prove, hence I'd like you
25 to be specific.
1 A. I have not seen a specific document except for --
2 Q. Thank you, Mr. Theunens. Oh, sorry. Sorry.
3 A. I didn't really finish my answer, but --
4 Q. I apologise.
5 A. I don't -- I haven't -- I mean, it's not reflected in my
6 document -- in my report, at least. I don't remember seeing a specific
7 document indicating the -- whether or not Mr. Bozovic was in 1994 or 1995
8 a member of the MUP Serbia.
9 Q. Thank you, Mr. Theunens. Another question concerning
10 Mr. Ulemek, Legija.
11 MR. WEBER: Your Honour, I just want to point out there are
12 documents that refer to him being --
13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Weber, you are supposed not to comment on the
14 evidence given by the witness. You should refrain from doing that. Is
15 that clear to you? If there's anything, if you want to point out certain
16 documents, you either do it later when submitting argument, or in
17 re-examination you refresh the memory of the witness, but not commenting
18 during the course of the cross-examination; is that clear?
19 MR. WEBER: Very clear.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
21 Please proceed.
22 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
23 Q. Mr. Theunens, in 1996, Milorad Ulemek, Legija, was appointed
24 commander of the unit for special operations. Do you have any documents
25 or any piece of evidence that would prove that Milorad Ulemek, Legija,
1 prior to 1996, was a high-ranking official of the Serbian MUP?
2 A. His name is mentioned, I mean, Milorad Ulemek, or Legija, is
3 mentioned in a number of security or information reports by security
4 organs of the JNA VJ. I'm just trying to locate it.
5 Q. Mr. Theunens, perhaps I can be of assistance. There is a single
6 document in existence that you put forth from the security organs in 1995
7 where there is a suspicion that Mr. Ulemek, aka Legija, was in any
8 relationship with the state security service, and I believe I showed you
9 that document.
10 A. I will look during the break whether there's other documents.
11 Q. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Theunens. I thank you very much.
12 Let us move on to another two exhibits relating to Pauk.
13 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Could we please see 2D55.
14 JUDGE ORIE: While waiting for that document, for you,
15 Mr. Bakrac, it's the same. It's, I think, appreciated if you ask
16 Mr. Theunens whether it would be of any assistance. You give him the
17 number of the document, but then starting summarising the document is not
18 for counsel to do. It's helpful if you say, Did you want to refer to ...
19 and then you give the name of the document, and then Mr. Theunens will
20 have a look at the document or it will refresh his memory, and then he'll
21 give the answers to the questions.
22 Please proceed.
23 We are looking now at 2D55.
24 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
25 Q. Mr. Theunens, have a look at this document dated June 24, 1995,
1 the Military Post 9139 Kostanica.
2 "On the 20th of June, 1995, in the AP ZB, active operations were
3 carried out for the successful completion of the task issued by the
4 commander of the Main Staff of the SVK. He commended all members who
5 participated in its completion. We are hereby sending you the full text
6 of the telegram of commendation.
7 "The entire operations group headed by
8 Lieutenant-General Milan Novakovic is commended, signed by
9 Lieutenant-General Milan Mrksic, commander."
10 Did you have occasion to see this document before? And it is an
11 OTP document.
12 A. Yes, because I believe this document is -- was included in the
13 CD, or DVD, you gave me earlier.
14 Q. Does this document enable us to conclude anything about the
15 command structure of Operation Pauk?
16 A. The document confirms that Lieutenant-General Mile Novakovic has
17 the -- there it says "headed," but has the military command over the
18 Pauk operations group.
19 Q. Mr. Theunens, could we have a brief look at 2D57, please.
20 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, for the record, the document is
21 D70, marked for identification.
22 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
23 Q. Mr. Theunens, this is also document with ERN number which we were
24 able to identify from the batch disclosed to us. On the stamp, it says:
25 Republic of Serbian Krajina, Main Staff of the Serbian army. Decision
1 and order on preparations for combat operations.
2 Have a look at item 3, please.
3 "The Pauk command shall carry out preparations to go on to the
4 attack, taking on the TG of the first echelon and bringing them into the
5 attack along the selected axes. In this connection, the Pauk command
6 shall carry out reconnaissance and collect the necessary information
7 about the forces of the 5th Corps and the terrain and forward the
8 information to TG commanders during reconnaissance. The Pauk command
9 shall mobilise all its combat units."
10 Therefore we see that the tactical groups were included. Can we
11 clearly discern from this document who was in command of Operation Pauk?
12 It was signed by commander Lieutenant-General Mrksic. We can see that on
13 the next page.
14 A. Yeah, this document shows that -- I think it's from June 1995.
15 Or is it May? If you go back to the top again of the first page.
16 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes, please.
17 THE WITNESS: The document shows that on the 30th of May, 1995,
18 Mile Mrksic, as the command of the SVK, issues orders to ... to -- I
19 mean, to the corps of the SVK, as is mentioned in the first paragraph
20 under "I hereby order." And he also issues instructions to the
21 Pauk command.
22 Q. Thank you, Mr. Theunens.
23 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Could we please move on to the next
24 document, which is 2D71. It is dated 9 March 1995.
25 Q. It is General Mladic's commendation drafted and signed by
1 assistant commander for morale who says:
2 "Commendation of VRS units for successful combat operations. For
3 the admirable courage exhibited by the soldiers, for the professional
4 leadership and command, for determination, heroism, and the results
5 achieved during the combat operations, and the successful smashing of the
6 offence of the 5th Corps of the Muslim army at the proposal of
7 Lieutenant-General Mile Novakovic, SVK commander, I hereby commend,
8 number 1, the Mauzer combat group of the 1st Bijeljina Light Infantry
9 Brigade of the Eastern Bosnian Corps."
10 Have you had occasion to peruse this document?
11 A. Yeah, it's also on the CD you gave me.
12 Q. Mr. Theunens, here we also see that the Army of Republika Srpska
13 and General Mladic commends for command and control, it seems, in the
14 Pauk operation, in dispersing the 5th Corps and breaking down their
15 offensive; do you agree?
16 A. No, there's no reference -- there's no specific reference to what
17 you suggest, i.e., that Mladic commends for command and control. It
18 seems in --
19 Q. [Overlapping speakers] ...
20 A. Maybe if you rephrase the question, then it's easy for me to
22 Q. Well, I'm just reading, but it seems we do not understand this.
23 For the admirable courage exhibited by the soldiers, for the professional
24 command and control ...
25 JUDGE ORIE: I think what keeps you apart is that Mr. Theunens
1 tells us that there's no specific reference to the Pauk operation. So
2 therefore the appropriate question would be whether there's any reason to
3 believe that this commendation is related to activities deployed in the
4 Pauk Operation. That seems to be the first question.
5 Could you answer that --
6 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes.
7 JUDGE ORIE: -- either on the basis of the document itself or on
8 the basis of any other knowledge you may or may not have.
9 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, if you allow me to
10 assist. Under item 3, we can see what was the area. The 5th Corps in
11 the area of Velika Kladusa on the 5th and 6th of March, 1995.
12 THE WITNESS: I understand your question now. The document seen
13 in context, i.e., time and location, suggests that the units mentioned
14 under command, I mean the numbers 1, 2, and 3, participated in operations
15 in the Velika Kladusa area as part of efforts or combat operations to,
16 what is called smashing the offensive of the 5th ABiH Corps.
17 And a link is made with Lieutenant-General Mile Novakovic, who is
18 identified as SVK commander. I haven't seen in the Pauk diary -- I don't
19 remember seeing in the Pauk diary a clear reference to -- or reference to
20 the units of the VRS, but there were instances where operations were
21 taking place during the time-period Pauk existed on both sides, I would
22 say, of the enclave, whereby units led by or commanded by Pauk were
23 putting pressure on the 5th Corps from the north, and units of the VRS
24 were putting pressure on the 5th Corps from the south.
25 Now, I have no specific knowledge of -- or no knowledge of this
1 specific operation which seems to be referred to here.
2 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
3 Q. Thank you, Mr. Theunens, but let me just ask you, as you made
4 reference to this in your report, the combat group Mauzer, what did you
5 find about them? Where did they belong? Whose members were they, and
6 where were they from?
7 A. In this document, they are identified as a sub-unit of the 1st
8 Bijeljina Light Infantry Brigade of the Eastern Bosnian Corps, the VRS.
9 Now, Mauzer was mentioned, or a person with the nickname Mauzer was
10 mentioned, in relation to take-over operations. I'm not sure anymore
11 whether it was Bijeljina or Bosanski Samac. I mean in the spring 1992.
12 It was actually Brcko; and Ljubisa Sabac is his real name. But there is,
13 at least, a Mauzer with -- I mean, whose real name was Ljubisa Sabac.
14 Q. You mentioned re-subordination, but what I can read here in the
15 original document is the Mauzer combat group of the 1st Bijeljina Light
16 Infantry Brigade. So as I understand the document, they were part of the
17 composition of the 1st Bijeljina Light Infantry Brigade.
18 JUDGE ORIE: It may be a translation issue. I don't think that
19 anything that you just said contradicts what Mr. Theunens said. So
20 therefore I did not hear of any re-subordination. It's --
21 THE WITNESS: Yeah, in the document mentioning this, Mauzer is
22 D83, which is discussed on page 93 of part 3 of the report.
23 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
24 Q. Mr. Theunens, would you make a connection between Mauzer and his
25 group and the MUP of the Republic of Serbia
1 A. I'm just going through the report, whether I have any reference
2 on that.
3 No, I cannot identify such a reference of any connections between
4 Mauzer's -- of Mauzer and his group and the MUP of the Republic of
6 Q. Thank you, Mr. Theunens.
7 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I would move to
8 another subject, that is to say, another personality. I see that we have
9 two or three minutes remaining until the break, but maybe this would be a
10 good moment to begin the break, a bit earlier than usual, because I am
11 about to move to another topic.
12 JUDGE ORIE: We'll then have a break now, and we'll resume at ten
13 minutes past 4.00.
14 --- Recess taken at 3.43 p.m.
15 --- On resuming at 4.14 p.m.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Bakrac, please proceed.
17 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
18 Q. Mr. Theunens, I'd like to discuss a different topic now, namely
19 an individual by the name of Zivojin Ivanovic. You referred to him in
20 your report. Do you know who he is?
21 A. Indeed I refer to a Zivojin Ivanovic, also known a Crnogorac.
22 And I have referred to P -- I mean, more specifically, to P569 and to
23 P1085 to discuss his role.
24 Q. We'll get back to the two documents you relied upon. First I'd
25 like us to look at other documents.
1 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Let's first look at a Prosecution
2 document, P1085.
3 Q. And I believe you reference it in report.
4 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Can we call it up in e-court.
5 Q. Is this the document you had in mind?
6 A. Indeed, that's the document I have in mind.
7 Q. Mr. Theunens, look at the heading. It reads: SAO Semberija and
8 Majevica, special-purpose unit Brcko, 9 July 1992.
9 This is a certificate confirming that one Joco Stevanovic, a
10 member of the special-purpose unit ... this is a certificate confirming
11 his membership, that is. So commander is Zivojin Ivanovic.
12 Can we conclude on the basis of this document that commander
13 Zivojin Ivanovic was a member of the special-purpose unit of the
14 SAO Semberija and Majevica headquartered in Brcko?
15 A. If we look at this document in isolation, I would agree with you;
16 but - and, again, in my report, this is discussed part 3, page 95.
17 Another document, P569, is a certificate Zivojin Ivanovic signs as
18 commander of the unit for special purposes of the MUP of Serbia.
19 There's also a P1083 that links a Zika Crnogorac, and based on
20 the different nicknames I conclude that this is the same person as
21 Zivojin Ivanovic, linking Ivanovic to the MUP of the Republic of Serbia
22 Whereby P1083 is even more specific, talking about the state security
23 police of Serbia
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Bakrac, the Registrar took care that the
25 document will not be shown to the public. It would have been appropriate
1 that you mentioned this, or at least that it was a confidential document.
2 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] I beg your pardon, Your Honour. I
3 wasn't paying attention to that.
4 Q. Witness, let's look at 2D313.
5 Mr. Theunens, it is my suggestion that Zivojin Ivanovic, the --
6 is the individual we see on this photograph, and that he, Zika Crnogorac,
7 had the official identity paper indicating that he was a member of the
8 republican secretariat of the interior of Bosnia-Herzegovina as of the
9 1st of February, 1992.
10 A. Yeah, that is what this document states.
11 Q. In order for us to round off this topic, I'd like to show you
12 several other documents.
13 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Can we look at 2D301, please. I can
14 see that Mr. Weber is on his feet.
15 JUDGE ORIE: He is on his feet.
16 Yes, Mr. Weber.
17 MR. WEBER: With respect to 2D313, I see it as a colour
18 photocopy. If the Simatovic Defence has the ability to produce the
19 original, the Prosecution would request it.
20 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, we do not keep the
21 originals with us. I will try to provide the Prosecution with the
22 original of this document in due time.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
24 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
25 Q. Mr. Theunens, we saw the Brcko document dated the
1 9th of July, 1992. Now this is a document dated the 15th of May, 1993.
2 The command of the Bratunac Light Infantry Brigade, on the
3 15th of May, 1993, in Bratunac, re-subordinated special units of the MUP
4 to the command of the Bratunac Light Infantry Brigade. Order:
5 "In order to solve the newly-arisen problems in the area of
6 responsibility of the Bratunac Light Infantry Brigade and based on the
7 instructions from the command of the DK," there follows the number, "and
8 pursuant to the order by the commander of the VRS dated 13 May 1993, I
9 hereby order the Republika Srpska special-purpose unit of the MUP under
10 the command of Zivojin Ivanovic, aka Zika Crnogorac, to be
11 re-subordinated to the command of the Bratunac Light Brigade."
12 Is this the one -- one and the same Zivojin Ivanovic whom you
13 claim was the member of -- a member of the MUP of the Republic of Serbia
14 A. The document talks about the same person, but it's not my claim.
15 I mean, I refer to P1061 and also, and more specifically, P569, whereby
16 P569 is a certificate which is signed by Zivojin Ivanovic. And the text
17 states that he signed as the command of the unit for special purposes of
18 the MUP Serbia
19 So what we can see is that Mr. Ivanovic, throughout the conflict,
20 occupies different positions.
21 Q. [Overlapping speakers] ...
22 A. He goes from MUP Serbia to what appears in the previous document,
23 MUP RS. And maybe afterwards he returns to MUP Serbia.
24 Q. Thank you, Mr. Theunens. Let's look at two documents now. They
25 also come from a collection of Prosecution documents. I don't know if
1 you've had an opportunity to look at them before.
2 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Let's first look at document --
3 let's chronologically look at 65 ter 4814 first.
4 Q. Mr. Theunens, I assume you have had an opportunity to look at
5 this document before. We have the heading read: Republic of Serbia
6 Ministry of the Interior, State Security Department, RDB Centre Novi Sad
7 About conversations which took place between the 5th and the
8 16th of November, 1992, and it is on the 17th of November, 1992, that
9 this particular officer filed his report.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Weber.
11 MR. WEBER: Could this document not be broadcast to the public
12 due to the pending protective measures request.
13 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] I presume that the next document I
14 will be showing will also require the same precautions, so let's bear
15 that in mind.
16 Q. Mr. Theunens, let's look at page 3 in B/C/S.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Just for the record, the instruction is not to show
18 it to the public.
19 Please proceed.
20 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] I think it's page 3 in English, the
21 bottom of the page. The paragraph starting with the words "on the
22 12th of November."
23 Q. Do you see the paragraph? It reads:
3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Weber.
4 MR. WEBER: Could we please have the redaction of the operative's
5 name that was just mentioned on the record.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
7 Madam Registrar, on from the source till thus.
8 Please proceed.
9 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
10 Q. Mr. Theunens, have you seen this document before?
11 A. Maybe it was on the CD you gave me prior to the weekend, but I
12 have no other recollection of having seen the document before.
13 Q. Do you agree that this particular document from the OTP
14 collection, where the state security department monitors Kajmak, also
15 speaks of Zivojin Ivanovic as a member of --
16 THE INTERPRETER: Can the -- Mr. Bakrac please repeat the last
17 part of his sentence.
18 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] My apologies.
19 Q. Does this document indicate that the state security department in
20 the Kajmak operation monitoring a certain individual showed that Zivojin
21 Ivanovic is a member of the DB of Republika Srpska?
22 A. No, it doesn't show that. A presumption is made, but a
23 presumption is like a presumption; it's not a confirmation. And, again,
24 I refer to P569 and P1061, which indicate a relation, professional
25 relation, between Zika or Zivojin Ivanovic, also known at Crnogorac, and
1 the MUP of Republic of Serbia
2 Q. Mr. Theunens, there is a document you're referring to, and in the
3 continuation of our case we will be referring to the source of that
4 document. At any rate, I will be showing you Prosecution documents which
5 you haven't seen or haven't been shown and which may lead you to draw a
6 different conclusion.
7 A. It's not so much a matter, I think, of documents I haven't been
8 shown. It may be that these documents became available to the OTP after
9 the report was finished and filed.
10 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Very well. Let's look at another
11 report which is not to be broadcast to the public either. This is 65
12 ter 4812, dated the 4th of January, 1993. Again the heading reads: "The
13 Republic of Serbia
14 RDB Centre, Novi Sad
16 Let's look at page 3 in B/C/S and page 3 in English.
17 Q. The paragraph should start with the following words: "According
18 to our source ..."
19 JUDGE ORIE: That's page 2 in English, Mr. Bakrac.
20 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Page 2. Yes, Your Honour.
21 Q. It's paragraph 2 on this page:
22 "According to our source, on 26 December 1992, Kajmak received
23 information from Zivojin Ivanovic, a Krajina DB member, that he was
24 leaving for Kosovo. Kajmak told him that he had transferred 54 million
25 to his account and added that Ivanovic would have to find a cunning way
1 to withdraw the money."
2 So this isn't an assumption; it is stated that Ivanovic was a
3 member of the DB Krajina; is that right?
4 A. That is what this document states. And if we then apply the
5 methodology that I have explained earlier during my testimony, we compare
6 these different documents and again we apply the process - reliability of
7 the source, credibility of the information - and we see that there is a
8 contradiction, unless there is deliberate confusion created about the
9 professional allegiance of Zivojin Ivanovic. Which, again, in the
10 context of the issues we are discussing, i.e., there was a high degree of
11 secrecy in relation to the participation of members of the MUP Serbia in
12 the conflict in Croatia
13 create confusion or deception would not be unusual in that context.
14 Q. Mr. Theunens, I am putting it to you that this is a TKTR source,
15 in other words, wire-tapping a conversation over the phone. It was
16 listed as state secret and extremism. Can you tell me, what would be the
17 reason for a member of the DB centre of Novi Sad to submit a report to
18 his superiors and make the whole story surrounding Zivojin Ivanovic, a
19 member of that same DB, muddy and foggy? What would be the reason for
20 doing so by using a telephone conversation?
21 A. I mean, the document doesn't look like a transcript of a
22 telephone conversation, at least the page I have in front of me. And to
23 answer your question, I don't state that it's the member of the DB
24 Novi Sad
25 foggy picture, but that it's Ivanovic and his superiors within the
1 MUP Serbia who are doing so. And it would not be unusual that then
2 lower-level members of the DB would not be fully aware of the reality.
3 And just to finish --
4 Q. [Overlapping speakers] ...
5 A. No, and just to finish --
6 JUDGE ORIE: Let's -- let's just -- do you know any specific
7 reasons, or are we just guessing on what the reasons might be on the
8 basis of your experience?
9 THE WITNESS: Your Honours, I don't know any specific reasons,
10 but I find it surprising that the document states a Krajina DB member
11 where I don't remember seeing any documents within the OTP collections
12 that link Zivojin Ivanovic to the DB Krajina.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Could we cut it short. The information is as
14 reliable as the source in this respect is? Could be low, could be high,
15 not knowing who the source is?
16 THE WITNESS: I mean, even as we discussed earlier, a reliable
17 source can provide information of low credibility and vice-versa.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Therefore I said reliable in this respect.
19 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honours.
20 JUDGE ORIE: And --
21 MR. BAKRAC: [Overlapping speakers] ...
22 JUDGE ORIE: -- I do understand that there's no -- there's not any
23 other documentary evidence which would confirm Zivojin Ivanovic to be a
24 Krajina DB member?
25 THE WITNESS: Based on my recollection; yes, Your Honours.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
2 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
3 Q. I've shown you an identity paper and an order earlier on. This
4 is some new evidence that you haven't seen before. Just look at where
5 the -- it is written TKTR source. And do you know what this acronym
6 stands for? It's on page 1 of the document.
7 A. You just explained it has to do with information collected
8 through the interception of telephone communication; monitoring of
9 telephone calls it says in the document, so.
10 Q. Thank you, Mr. Theunens. Let's discuss another individual now
11 who you tie in with the MUP of Serbia in your report in this time-period.
12 This is Vasa or Vasilije Mijovic; do you remember him?
13 A. Indeed. I have -- I mean, there is information, P - I
14 think - 1061, that links him to the special-purpose unit of the
15 MUP Serbia, and then there are other documents, P1083 and P1081, that
16 mention -- that identify him as commander of a Red Berets unit in the
17 Bratunac area after May 1992.
18 And I've also seen a document, P1084, that's from July 1995, that
19 identifies him as the commander of the JATD of the Republic of Serbia
20 And on the CD you gave me, there was 2D269, where I think there
21 was a kind of a -- not a personnel file, but it seems to be a file of an
22 investigation, where a number of documents were included that provide
23 information on the different assignments Mr. Mijovic held between the
24 1991 and 1995 time-period.
25 Q. Mr. Theunens, could you now have a look at the first document
1 that you referred to; that's 1061. That's the unsigned document of the
2 security organ. Which provides a report on --
3 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Can we now please have a look at
5 Q. The heading says:
6 "Special-purpose unit, Republic of Serbian Krajina
7 Ilok, 19th July 1992
9 "Whereby it is ordered that the deputy commander,
10 Vasilije Mijovic travels on official business to visit a part of our
11 combat units which carries out combat operations in the territory of the
12 Trebinje municipality."
13 And then the use of an official vehicle is approved, and it is
14 signed by the commander of the unit Zivojin Ivanovic.
15 Is it correct that it follows from this order that on the
16 19th of July, 1992, Zivojin Ivanovic was the deputy commander of the
17 special-purposes unit of the Republic of Serbian Krajina? I mean that
18 Mijovic was the deputy of Zivojin Ivanovic.
19 A. That is what this document states. And, again, looking at the
20 context, we see that the same individuals are, according to the
21 documents, apparently affiliated to different Serb MUPs. Based on my
22 research, they all start as MUP Republic of Serbia; then some of them are
23 identified as members - apparently, here, now - Krajina RSK MUP; and then
24 we see them appear again in the MUP RS. And it's interesting to follow
25 their career path between the 1991 and 1995 time-period.
1 Just to finish, I would also like to mention that it's quite
2 remarkable that a unit of the Krajina MUP RSK would participate in
3 fighting in the Trebinje area which is located in south-eastern
4 Bosnia-Herzegovina. In order to travel to Trebinje, he would have to
5 travel via Serbia
6 Bosnia-Herzegovina, at least not over land.
7 Q. Why was it not possible to travel overland from Ilok to
9 A. I mean without going through Bosnia
10 through Serbia
11 don't think that would have been possible, since when you look at the
12 limit of Sector East on the -- call it on western, the southwestern side
13 there were Croatian forces, and I don't think they would have allowed a
14 member of -- call it the Krajina MUP or the MUP Serbia to cross over the
15 territory of the Republic of Croatia
16 Q. Mr. Theunens, can we now please have a look at another document.
17 This one was dated the 19th of July, 1992. And the other document is
18 2D296, dating from February 1993.
19 Mr. Theunens, we see here that it's the command of the
20 1st Bratunac Brigade. The date is the 21st of February, 1993.
21 Engagement of soldiers of the Republika Srpska special-purpose unit in
22 Bratunac to the special-purpose unit and addressed to Major Mijovic.
23 "Order," it says. This document is an order by which, as far as I
24 understand, the command of the Bratunac Brigade issues a task to the
25 special-purpose unit and practically re-subordinates it. Is this also
1 the way that you understand this document? And I have in mind
2 Republika Srpska when I'm saying all this.
3 A. Indeed that is what the document states.
4 Q. Thank you, Mr. Theunens. I would now return to a document for
5 which you suggested that it was a document on the basis of which you draw
6 a conclusion -- it is one of such documents from which you draw a
7 conclusion that this person was a member of the MUP of
8 Republic of Serbia
9 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Can we please see P1081.
10 Q. Because this is the one you referred to. And I will ask you to
11 show me where exactly one can see in this document that -- that this is a
12 member of the MUP of the Republic of Serbia
13 document seems to show that the command of the Bratunac Light Infantry
14 Brigade re-subordinates the special-purpose unit of the MUP to the
15 command of the Bratunac Light Infantry Brigade, and this is in accordance
16 with the previous document which I presented to you; therefore, I cannot
17 see in this document that there is a connection with the MUP of the
18 Republic of Serbia
19 A. I agree you if you look at this document in isolation. But as I
20 explained earlier, the document has to be seen in the context of other
21 documents, for example, P1083, as well as P1084. And, again, 2D269 on
22 the CD you provided me, I have a recollection that on the
23 English page 14, there is an entry in a table stating that
24 Vasilije Mijovic has been sent to Bratunac by the RDB. And my
25 understanding was that this 2D269 actually refers to the RDB of the
1 Republic of Serbia
2 unsigned security organ's report.
3 Q. Mr. Theunens, let us have a look at the first document which you
4 referred to in your answer to my question. Let us look at it again.
5 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] It's P1083.
6 Q. So can you please show to me in this document -- so can you
7 please tell me, on the basis of this document, where is the source for
8 the notion following from this report?
9 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Can you please specifically focus on
10 the last big paragraph in this document. And for this purpose, could we
11 please show the next page on the screen.
12 Q. I hope that you will agree with me that there is no source here,
13 there is no trace. What was the basis and source on the basis of which
14 someone drafted this report? Who was questioned by the person, who
15 drafted this report, or which documents he reviewed in order to obtain
16 this particular information?
17 A. I don't think that there's a specific requirement to include
18 source references or footnotes in such a report. It's a report compiled
19 by the chief of the public security centre in Bijeljina,
20 29th of June, 2004. And he provides information.
21 What is interesting, that is, information provided in 2004, is --
22 Q. Excuse me.
23 A. -- is consistent, I mean -- consistent -- corroborates
24 information provided in P1061.
25 Q. Mr. Theunens.
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Please focus. I think you are making a being mistake. This is
3 not a report written by the chief of the security centre, but I believe
4 that it is addressed to him, to the chief of the security centre
6 A. We should look at the last page to see whether we see a signature
8 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes, can we please see page 2.
9 It just says: "drafted by Dejan Joksimovic."
10 Can we now please have a look -- report drafted by
11 Dejan Joksimovic.
12 Can we please have a look at the first page so we can see who
13 this was addressed to.
14 Q. It is addressed, as far as I can see, to the chief of public
15 security centre in Bijeljina.
16 A. I would have to check that because -- yeah, my understanding is
17 that it's drafted by him, but I would have to check, I mean, if -- I can
18 stand corrected if -- I would have to check what the position was of
19 Dejan Maksimovic [sic] at the time he signed the report. Excuse me,
20 Dejan Joksimovic.
21 Q. All right, Mr. Theunens, I just wanted to compare the documents
22 from which you drew your conclusions with the documents that I have.
23 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Can we now please have a look at
25 JUDGE ORIE: Just for my understanding, do I understand well that
1 apart from to whom it was addressed, that it originated apparently from
2 that same service?
3 THE WITNESS: Exactly, Your Honours. So if an error was made,
4 the error would have been that I identified the person who signed the
5 report as the chief of the public security centre in Bijeljina.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Because the letterhead on which the
7 information is written down is the public security centre of Bijeljina.
8 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honours, but it was an
9 error. And I wanted to clarify this with Mr. Theunens so that we could
10 see --
11 JUDGE ORIE: I thought that instead of dealing with all these
12 details that the main point you apparently wanted to make is that the
13 source of the information on page 2 is not specified, is that -- so that
14 whatever the document says, that you say, It's difficult to verify
15 because you don't know who gave this information?
16 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honours. That's it
17 precisely. I'm comparing the document on the basis of which the report
18 was drafted, and I'm presenting my own documents which show where these
19 persons belong to Mr. Theunens.
20 Here is 2D299. It is --
21 THE WITNESS: Maybe just to clarify my answer to the previous
22 question. It's not an academic study where you would indeed look for
23 source references and check the reliability and the level of these source
24 references. It could well be that there is an issue of source protection
25 which is not unusual in the context of such reports and that therefore
1 the specific sources for the specific elements of information were not
2 identified as such in the document.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Theunens, there may be many reasons. You
4 just mentioned one of them. The fact is, what is stated in this
5 information and that we do not have the identity of the source available
6 to us. What that means, in terms of reliability, what that means in the
7 context of the whole of the evidence is still to be seen.
8 Please proceed.
9 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours.
10 Q. Mr. Theunens, please have a look at this document. It was signed
11 by commander Vasilije Mijovic. The heading says: "Special unit for
12 special purposes of Republika Srpska, Bratunac, the 19th of April, 1993
13 And it says: "By an order of the commander at the special unit, the
14 following soldiers are discharged from this unit." And then it's listed
15 who these soldiers are because of conduct unbecoming to a soldier.
16 We can see that there is a signature by Colonel Vukusic who is
17 the commander from the Bratunac military post.
18 Can we conclude on the basis of this document that this
19 special-purposes unit of Republika Srpska was in Bratunac in the month of
20 April 1993 and that it was re-subordinated to the Bratunac Brigade?
21 A. I think the document deals with the issues of the removal of
22 soldiers. But, I mean, according to the document, Vasilije Mijovic signs
23 as the commander of a special MUP unit of the Republika Srpska on that
25 Q. Thank you, Mr. Theunens.
1 Can we now please have a look at the next document. This one is
2 a document dating from April 1993, and the following document dates from
3 the month of May 1993. It is 2D300, drafted by the commander of the
4 1st Light Infantry Brigade in Bratunac. Cvjetin Vuksic, which states the
5 opinion on the work and activities of commander Vasilije Mijovic.
6 Please have a look at this document first.
7 A. Yeah, the question could be raised, Where did commander -- I mean
8 the first two lines. Where did commander Vasilije Mijovic, when he
9 arrived in Bratunac on the 16 January 1993
10 Special Forces, where did he come from?
11 Q. Mr. Theunens, I have shown you some documents from July 1992
12 which show that Vasilije Mijovic had been in Ilok as a member of the
13 special-purpose unit of the MUP of Republika Srpska Krajina.
14 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] It is 2D315.
15 Q. I believe you recall the document. And moving on in a
16 chronological order, trying to indicate the movements of Mr. Mijovic.
17 A. Yes, I remember that document. And my understanding of the
18 reference to Ilok is the reference to the trading centre in Pajzos where,
19 according to various reports we have seen, members of the MUP Serbia were
20 involved in training, at least during the latter half of 1991, were
21 involved in training Serbian volunteers.
22 Q. Mr. Theunens, I have to waste yet more time and go back to 2D315
23 to ask you to indicate for us where Pajzos is mentioned.
24 JUDGE ORIE: It's not mentioned. That's clearly what
25 Mr. Theunens said. He understands the reference to Ilok as ...
1 So it doesn't mention that. Mr. Theunens gives his
3 Now, the issue raised here might be an interesting one. What we
4 see is the special unit of the -- of the, as you indicated, he came
5 from -- he was the Krajina -- let me just check whether it was the
6 Krajina special-purpose unit of the Krajina MUP, I think it was,
7 travelling to Trebinje, which is in a totally different part of the
9 Mr. Theunens raised the question what the Krajina MUP special
10 unit would do in Trebinje, which is at a long distance and totally out of
11 the territorial scope of where you would expect such a unit. And I think
12 the same matter now appears here to some extent; someone coming with his
13 unit to Bratunac. And your suggestion was that we would learn from the
14 previous documents where he came from, which does not yet explain why
15 such a unit would travel both to Trebinje, where they are supposed to be
16 engaged in combat activities, and now to Bratunac.
17 Are you going to -- this puzzle which Mr. Theunens more or less
18 put on our table, is it your information to clarify this issue at any
20 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, should I fail, I merely
21 wanted to get a comment from Mr. Theunens. I don't have it at hand, but
22 I can show you later on that there was an agreement published in the
23 Official Gazette between Republika Srpska Krajina and the RS on
24 co-operation in all aspects of military and police co-operation.
25 Unfortunately, I don't have it here, but I might be able to show
1 it to you tomorrow.
2 JUDGE ORIE: It might clarify matters.
3 Mr. Theunens, are you aware of such an agreement?
4 THE WITNESS: I know of a political agreement called the
5 Prijedor Agreement; I think it's from the latter half of 1992. But I
6 would have to look in my report what it exactly concerned.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Is that what you were referring to as well, Mr. --
8 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I don't dare say
9 anything in advance. I will have to check first when the agreement was
10 signed and published in the Official Gazette.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Because we now see Mr. Mijovic travelling
12 around at various places in the Republika Srpska and you say this could
13 be explained, perhaps, by agreement. It might assist the Chamber to have
14 a look at that agreement sooner or later.
15 Please proceed.
16 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
17 Q. Mr. Theunens, let's look at 2D284 next, which is ...
18 Here we see assistant commander Colonel Milutin Skocajic, from
19 the Drina Corps command, re-subordinates the MUP special-purposes unit
20 under the command of the Bratunac Light Infantry Brigade. It seems that
21 it is Vasilije Mijovic's unit.
22 A. Indeed that is stated in paragraph 1 where the unit is identified
23 as a MUP special-purposes unit.
24 Q. Thank you.
25 Let's look at another June 1993 document. It is a dispatch of
1 the Drina Corps command.
2 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] That is 2D303. 2D303.
3 Q. Mr. Theunens, here the command of the Drina Corps, in late June
4 or even in early July 1993, ordered that the commander of the
5 Bratunac Light Infantry Brigade should immediately prepare his
6 reconnaissance and sabotage unit commanded by Mijovic to be ready to
7 carry out the ordered tasks. Can we clearly conclude, on the basis of
8 this order, that the reconnaissance and sabotage unit - and we saw
9 already how it was transformed from the special-purpose unit to the
10 reconnaissance and sabotage unit - does it enable us to see whether, in
11 June 1993, it was commanded by the Drina Corps, or, rather, the
12 Bratunac Light Infantry Brigade?
13 A. At least, I mean, for a number of tasks identified in the
14 document, upcoming tasks, I mean, the -- the unit of Mijovic is
15 identified as a reconnaissance and sabotage unit. And according to this
16 document, this reconnaissance and sabotage unit, under the command of
17 Mijovic, is part of the Bratunac Light Infantry Brigade.
18 Q. Thank you, Mr. Theunens. While we are on the topic of the
19 Bratunac Brigade, I'd like us to have a look at some documents concerning
20 Radivoje Tesic.
21 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction: Borivoje Tesic.
22 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
23 Q. Do you know who that is?
24 JUDGE ORIE: Could we -- could I seek some clarification.
25 What -- what I see is that in your questions you very much focus on where
1 in this case the unit under the command of Mijovic appears and under
2 whose command they then are engaged in operations or operational
4 Now, Mr. Theunens raised the question a couple of times that
5 the -- an interesting question is where they came from. You said, Well,
6 it will show that it has to be in with the special unit of the Krajina
7 MUP, but Mr. Theunens also said, in 2D269, you can see that they were
8 sent by the RDB.
9 I'd like to have a look to complete the picture at that document
10 and understand what Mr. Theunens meant and to show us what is in that
11 document that gives the clue he refers to. Could we have --
12 Yes, Mr. Theunens.
13 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honours. 2D269 talks about the
14 individual --
15 JUDGE ORIE: [Overlapping speakers] ... let's -- let's -- let's
16 look at it.
17 THE WITNESS: Okay. Yep.
18 JUDGE ORIE: We haven't seen -- we haven't had it on our screen
19 yet, did we? 2D269. You said it was a report which --
20 THE WITNESS: It's 42 pages; it's a kind of a file on
21 Vasilije Mijovic.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That's what you indicated earlier. Could you
23 take us to the --
24 THE WITNESS: Yes.
25 JUDGE ORIE: -- that part in the document which sheds some light
1 on what you -- to which you refer to earlier.
2 THE WITNESS: It's English page 14.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Weber.
4 MR. WEBER: Your Honour --
5 JUDGE ORIE: Is this a --
6 MR. WEBER: Your Honour, out of caution, this is a personnel file
7 that relates to RFA -- [Overlapping speakers] ...
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, and not to be shown to the public. Not to the
9 shown to the public. You said page --
10 THE WITNESS: 14, Your Honours. One, four.
11 JUDGE ORIE: 14. Could we have a look at it.
12 THE WITNESS: And --
13 JUDGE ORIE: Could you tell us exactly what you were referring
15 THE WITNESS: Your Honours, this -- the page 14, there is a kind
16 of a table, I think. I also notice that -- again, I haven't written down
17 all the references, but in some documents --
18 JUDGE ORIE: Well, let's have a look. Page 14 is no table, as
19 far as I'm aware of.
20 THE WITNESS: Is this page 14?
21 JUDGE ORIE: This is page 14 of 2D01-1029. Whether that's the
22 document 2D269, I do not know, but.
23 THE WITNESS: Sorry, I touched the screen again. But it's a --
24 it's on the table -- it's at the bottom, the information I'm looking for.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Okay.
1 THE WITNESS: It says:
2 "We have information that Stevanovic knows Mijovic from the
3 territory of Bratunac, when Mijovic was sent there by the RDB, via
4 Rade Rakonjac from Belgrade
5 And my conclusion there was that Mijovic was sent by the RDB of
6 the Republic of Serbia
7 I have also noticed that in some of the translations the Republic
8 of Serbia
9 i.e., the Republic of Serbia
11 JUDGE ORIE: Now, is it originally an English document, because
12 then Republic of Serbia
13 Republika Srpska. If, however, the original says Republika Srpska, then
14 of course it would be just the opposite, isn't it?
15 THE WITNESS: Yeah, I mis -- sorry, I misexpressed myself. It
16 was that Republika Srbija is translated into Republika Srpska. So from
17 Serbian to English translated in something else.
18 JUDGE ORIE: So you say this is a document in which you find a
19 reference of Mr. Mijovic being sent by the RDB to Bratunac?
20 THE WITNESS: Indeed, the last paragraph.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes --
22 MR. BAKRAC: [Overlapping speakers] ...
23 JUDGE ORIE: -- it's part of the picture.
25 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, perhaps this may be an
1 issue of translation. In the Serbian original version, I don't see in
2 the last sentence whether it refers to Stevanovic or Mijovic in the
3 Serbian language. Reading from the Serbian version, it seems to me that
4 it refers to Stevanovic.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Let's -- that should be verified. The English is
6 perfectly clear in -- knows Mijovic from the territory of Bratunac
7 Mijovic was sent there by the RDB.
8 If that is a wrong translation, then that's an important thing to
9 be corrected because that's apparently the basis on which Mr. Theunens
10 tells us that Mijovic might have been sent by the RDB. If not, then
11 Mr. Stevanovic would have been sent there by the RDB.
12 Could we try to verify this over the next break. You certainly
13 have people, and it's just two or three words.
14 Mr. Weber, I take it that you will also have an opportunity to
15 verify the translation in respect of who was sent by the RDB to Bratunac.
16 Please proceed, Mr. --
17 And I'm looking at the clock. I think it would be time for a
18 break. And we would then, after the break, have another 17 minutes
20 THE WITNESS: Your Honours.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. --
22 THE WITNESS: Just one second. The Prijedor declaration -- I
23 mean, when we talk about the co-operation between the RS, or the
24 Bosnian Serbs, and the Krajina Serbs, it is P1275, but it doesn't deal
25 with details like police or military co-operation, the Prijedor
1 declaration from 31st October, 1992.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you for that information.
3 And we'll have a break. And we resume at ten minutes to 6.00.
4 --- Recess taken at 5.21 p.m.
5 --- On resuming at 5.56 p.m.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Before we continue, have the parties made an effort
7 in order to verify the translation about who was sent it to Bratunac,
8 Mr. Stevanovic or Mr. Mijovic?
9 MR. WEBER: Your Honour, the Prosecution sees that the document,
10 the translation provided, appears to be through CLSS. We did talk to a
11 language assistant over the break and had a relatively quick translation
12 provided of the sentence. The translation that we were provided says:
13 "We have information that Stevanovic has been connected to
14 Mijovic since the period when he, using a pronoun, stayed in the area of
15 Bratunac as ordered by the RDB and which was done through mediation of
16 Rade Rakonjac from Belgrade
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That means it's not entirely clear who the
18 "he" is; is that ...
19 MR. WEBER: That was the understanding of also the language
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
22 Mr. Bakrac.
23 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. This accurately,
24 we believe, reflects the Serbian original.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Now, this document, it's not in evidence;
1 nevertheless, Mr. Theunens relied on it.
2 Mr. Theunens, was this among the documents you were provided with
3 by ...
4 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honours, this is one of the documents on
5 the CD, and -- I was provided before the weekend. And I didn't reply on
6 this document for my report. In my report, I relied on the documents --
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
8 THE WITNESS: -- I mentioned earlier. But this document, I mean,
9 the translation I had in front of me, corroborated what was, for example,
10 mentioned in P10 - is it now 61 or 60? - I forgot.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Could you briefly describe what the document
12 is about. You said it was a larger document. What is the gist of the --
13 is it one document, is it ... because this seems to be a two-page part of
14 the document. Is it a collection? Could you give us ...
15 THE WITNESS: 2D269 in -- on the CD, is a -- the scanned version
16 of a folder with, on the cover page, the name Vasilije Mijovic, and then
17 there are 42 page consisting of different documents which in majority
18 consists of information reports on Vasilije Mijovic. But I believe also
19 there are documents, for example, indicating that he received a beret.
20 There's also documents - if I'm not wrong, because there were many
21 documents on the CD - related to weapons permits, or that he received a
22 weapon, and so on.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Weber, is the document new for the Prosecution,
24 or ...
25 MR. WEBER: No, Your Honour. And I'll be cautious, and I can
1 provide information if the Chamber would like me to.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Do we -- we do it in public session?
3 MR. WEBER: That's fine.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please.
5 MR. WEBER: The Prosecution received the document that is before
6 you pursuant to RFA 1382 from the Republic of Serbia
7 Vasilije, Vaso, Mijovic's DB JSO personnel file, consisting of the
8 40-plus pages that are before you.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Now, we spent a lot of time on whether he was
10 related to the MUP, yes or no, whether he was reserve, which is something
11 you suggested, Mr. Bakrac. Wouldn't it be the best to have this material
12 available and to have it in evidence?
13 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, it is a Prosecution
14 document, and I believe they would seek to tender it. But in any case,
15 as Mr. Theunens said, it's a voluminous document of 40-plus pages, and I
16 left it for the end, although I've made very little use of it. In any
17 case, I see no problem of having that admitted.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Weber?
19 MR. WEBER: We have no objection to having it admitted.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Any party soliciting to tender it or otherwise, or
21 should the Chamber call for it to be produced?
22 MR. WEBER: The Prosecution, at this time, tenders 2D269 into
24 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar, the number would be ...
25 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit P01585.
1 JUDGE ORIE: And, in the absence of any objections, is admitted
2 into evidence.
3 Please proceed.
4 THE WITNESS: Your Honours --
5 MR. BAKRAC: [Overlapping speakers] ...
6 THE WITNESS: -- sorry, if you allow me --
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
8 THE WITNESS: There were a number of documents, and I believe
9 also in this one, where I said earlier where the original said "MUP
11 be cautious --
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
13 THE WITNESS: -- with the translations.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Weber, have you made paid attention to that
15 comment already?
16 MR. WEBER: We're having that checked, based on the witness's
17 comment in the last section. What is a way of proceeding, we can send it
18 out to CLSS to just confirm what the actual translation is.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Most specifically on those matters. And then also
20 specifically on what is found on what appears to be page 14, I think it
21 was. Yes, 14 in e-court out of 42.
22 Please proceed, Mr. Bakrac.
23 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
24 Q. Mr. Theunens, before the break, I asked you whether the name of
25 Lieutenant-Colonel Borivoje Tesic rings a bell.
1 A. Indeed he does, Your Honours. He was a battalion commander in
2 1991 in the guards motorised brigade. And during the operations of
3 OG South in the Vukovar area, he was the commander of an assault
4 attachment, if I'm not wrong, which consisted of forces of his battalion
5 as well as Serbian volunteers.
6 And I've also seen the document indicating this is -- yeah,
7 there's no P number in my report, but on -- on -- in this third part on
8 page 109 where he's identified as the commander -- no, as an officer who
9 is serving, I'm sorry, in the Bratunac Brigade command on
10 27 of November, 1992.
11 And just to be complete, when I say "guards motorised brigade,"
12 it is the guards motorised brigade of the JNA.
13 Q. Thank you, Mr. Theunens. You provided me with more information
14 than I expected.
15 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Could we please see 2D285 next.
16 Q. I apologise for my previous remark. I'm not trying to sound
17 ironic; I just wanted to say that I wanted to follow the topic of the
18 Bratunac Brigade and, hence, the information you provided assisted me.
19 This is a document of the command of the Bratunac Brigade, dated
20 the 25th of November, 1992. It is a report for that day, submitted to
21 the Drina Corps command.
22 Have a look at items 5 and 6. First of all, perhaps you can
23 explain something to me. It says:
24 "The billeting party from Vukovar was here yesterday. They are
25 arriving on the 26th, 27th, and 28th November, 1992. I kindly ask that
1 you plan the forthcoming mission from 2 December 1992 onwards because of
2 the preparations I have to make together with them."
3 Can you enlighten us? Can you explain what this billeting party
4 from Vukovar is?
5 A. Your Honours, my understanding is that this is a group of people
6 coming from Vukovar to prepare the arrival of volunteers, Serbian
7 volunteers from Vukovar, in order to become a member of the unit of
8 Lieutenant-Colonel Borivoje Tesic, who, not withstanding that he was a VJ
9 officer, at that moment is participating in the combat activities on the
10 territory of Bosnia-Herzegovina as a member of the VRS.
11 Q. Thank you, Mr. Theunens.
12 Let's look at item 6 next.
13 "I also kindly ask that you use your authority to help the
14 7th Novi Sad
15 area, because if they are not allowed to come, they will leave that part
16 of the front of their own accord."
17 Then it says that your influence could be used to ensure and
18 enable further work.
19 In your research, did you come across this 7th Novi Sad Company
20 from that particular military post; and if so, can you tell us what it's
22 A. I'm familiar, Your Honours, with one additional document; it's
23 the one on page 109, part 3 of my report, which mentions this volunteers
24 company. I would have to check the VP number again to see what kind of
25 unit is specified in Brcko. Brcko was under Serbian control at the time.
1 There's also information that there was a training centre used by
2 individuals or units known as Red Berets. I mean, you can find it in the
3 Brcko section. But I would have to check the VP number in order to find
4 out which location in Brcko these people who, based on the name,
5 originate from Novi Sad
7 Q. Mr. Theunens, can we please have a look at the next document,
8 which is 2D288. It's a dispatch from Borivoje Tesic. This one was dated
9 the 25th of November, 1992, and this one was sent on two days later, the
10 27th of November, 1992. It's short, and I will read it to you:
11 "On several occasions I addressed you to send more personnel from
12 the previously mentioned 7th Novi Sad Volunteers Company but" --
13 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] I apologise, I think that out of an
14 abundance of caution perhaps this document should not be broadcast. And
15 perhaps we should even move to a private session because our next witness
16 is mentioned here, and I'm not sure if any protective measures will be
17 applied to him.
18 JUDGE ORIE: We move into private session.
19 [Private session]
11 Pages 8692-8693 redacted. Private session.
19 [Open session]
20 THE REGISTRAR: We are back in open session, Your Honours.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
22 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
23 Q. Mr. Theunens, I wish to deal with a part of your report which has
24 to do with Bosanski Samac. Please have a look at this document. And let
25 us first say whether it is correct that in the night between the 16th and
1 the 17th of April, 1992, there was combat in and around Bosanski Samac
2 and that Bosanski Samac was captured by the 17th Corps?
3 A. I mean, just to be more precise, the document states that the --
4 that "all vital facilities in Bosanski Samac were captured by forces of
5 Tactical Group 17, units of the Serb Territorial Defence, and the
6 police." That's my understanding. I quoted that document on page 76 of
7 part 3 of the report.
8 Q. Well, they say in the report that the forces of Tactical Group
9 17, units of the Serb Territorial Defence, and the police participated in
10 this attack. Would you agree with me that this document reflects that
11 these were the units of the local Territorial Defence and local police in
12 addition to this Tactical Group 17?
13 A. Yes, it says Srpska TO. Okay, I pushed -- and milicija. I have
14 no reason to doubt about what you say.
15 Q. Thank you, Mr. Theunens.
16 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Can we now please have a look at
17 Prosecution document P1413.
18 And before I open the document, I have to say that the
19 Prosecution made an error, I'm certain unintentionally, when the document
20 was downloaded, and as a result of this, the pages are mixed. So page 2
21 is first, and it is followed by page 1. So we should first have a look
22 at page number 2 which is actually page 1 of this document. And this is
23 page number 2 in e-court. Yes.
24 Q. Mr. Theunens, please have a look at this. The document is dated
25 the 7th of May. The command of the 17th Tactical Group, which we have
1 mentioned, issues an order for combat on the 7th May, 1992, to the
2 Lugar command.
3 Are you familiar with this document?
4 A. Yes, I am, because this document is also mentioned -- I mean,
5 it's also mentioned on page 76 of part 3 of the report.
6 Q. Would you agree with me that the Lugar command refers to a person
7 called Slobodan Miljkovic, aka Lugar, who was a member of the
8 Serbian Radical Party?
9 A. The document indeed refers to a -- I mean, Lugar. I've seen
10 Lugar associated with Slobodan Miljkovic. I'm not sure whether in my
11 report I established that he was a member of the SRS, but I have no
12 reason to doubt about what you state. I have no reason to doubt about
13 it. Because I know - sorry to be a bit confusing, but I'm reading my
14 report at the same time - P1422 refers on -- refers to the participation
15 of SRS volunteers in the take-over of Bosanski Samac, so I agree with
17 Q. Thank you, Mr. Theunens.
18 Let us now have a look at the third page of this document. It is
19 also, once again, the command of the Tactical Group 17 which issues an
20 order for combat to the Leva Kolona, which is left column command. And
21 please focus on item 2 which says that the commander of this left column
22 would be a man named Crni.
23 Would you agree with me that this Crni refers to
24 Dragan Djordjevic, who was also known by his nickname Crni?
25 A. Indeed. And that's also how I have discussed him, for example,
1 on page 78 of part 3 of my report, referring, for example, to P1417,
2 which is his interrogation by the Banja Luka Military Court.
3 Q. Yes, Mr. Theunens, we will get to that. I'm just moving step by
4 step. Can we see from these two documents that both Lugar and Crni were
5 under the command of the 17th Tactical Group?
6 A. I mean, indeed at the time indicated for these -- I mean for
7 these orders, and the operations that are ordered by these orders, indeed
8 tactical -- the Lugar Group and the Crni Group, or the Leva Kolona, as
9 you called the latter, are subordinated to Tactical Group 17.
10 Q. Thank you, Mr. Theunens.
11 Let us now have a look at P1419 as well. It is a document dated
12 the 3rd of July, 1992, and it is a regular combat report. I'm only
13 interested in the person who signed it; it was the Chief of Staff of the
14 Posavina Brigade, Major Srecko Radovanovic. Is it the
15 Srecko Radovanovic, also known as Debeli, and also a member of the
16 Serbian Radical Party?
17 A. Yes, Your Honours, that is my conclusion also on the basis of
18 P1399 discussed on page 79 of part 3 of the report.
19 Q. He was also a member of a brigade, the Posavina Brigade, of the
20 Army of Republika Srpska; correct? He was the Chief of Staff there?
21 A. At that moment in time, yes.
22 Q. Mr. Theunens, let us now please have a look at another
23 Prosecution document, P1427.
24 While the document shows up on the screen, I will tell you or,
25 rather, remind you what that is about. It is a judgement of a military
1 court in Banja Luka dated the 6th of February, 1993, against the
2 Accused Djordjevic, Dragan, aka Crni; Miljkovic, Slobodan, aka Lugar; and
3 eight other persons. It is not necessary to mention the names of all of
5 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Can we please have a look at the end
6 of page 2 in B/C/S, which is the end -- or, rather, the beginning of
7 page 2 in English.
8 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, for the record, the document is
9 under seal, and it's not being broadcast.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
11 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
12 Q. Mr. Theunens, have a look at this. Under item 10, it says:
13 "All the accused are members of the Army of Republika Srpska."
14 Is that what the document states?
15 JUDGE ORIE: I can answer that question. That's what the
16 document states, Mr. Bakrac. Yes.
17 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
18 Q. Mr. Theunens, before passing a judgement, should a military court
19 in Banja Luka or any other court establish clearly and undoubtedly
20 whether the accused are members of a certain organisation? Would you
21 agree with that? And that this is of importance for --
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Bakrac, I can answer that question as well.
23 Isn't it? Because if you say it is in a judgement, then you should
24 verify whether it's true or not, unless it's just part of the indictment.
25 But you can spend 15 minutes on discussing that.
1 Mr. Theunens, any specific knowledge in this respect?
2 THE WITNESS: I mean, I will not comment on the judgement, but in
3 this section on Bosanski Samac, you see -- you can find another -- see
4 other documents that actually shed light on --
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but at this moment we -- Mr. Bakrac is there to
6 ask questions. And if I can answer them, I'll answer them; and if I
7 can't answer them, I'll ask you to answer them.
8 Please proceed.
9 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
10 Q. Mr. Theunens.
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Mr. Theunens, please be so kind as to tell me, do you draw the
13 conclusion that these persons - that is to say Dragan Djordjevic, Crni;
14 Slobodan Miljkovic, aka Lugar; and Srecko Radovanovic, aka Debeli - were
15 connected with the MUP of the Republic of Serbia
16 A. In my report, I have attempted to explain the connection of
17 Dragan Djordjevic, also known as Crni, to the MUP of the Republic of
20 Q. Can you tell us what are the documents which would substantiate
21 this conclusion?
22 A. There is, for example -- I mean, let's look at page 80 of part 3.
23 There is a reference or quotation from P1416 that -- I mean, the story
24 with Crni is -- is -- I will not try to explain it in detail because it's
25 a bit complicated. He participates in the take-over, and then he is
1 arrested at the end of August. And according to P1416, he leaves
2 Bosanski Samac with his group for the Republika -- Republic of Serbia
3 sorry. But then, according to the same document, early October, they
4 want him back. And in order to have Crni and his group back, the
5 Presidency of the Samac municipality has to agree, or agrees, with the
6 MUP of the Republic of Serbia
7 There's other documents, and that's on page -- there's other
8 documents linking him to the training centre in Pajzos; that's P1417.
9 And, again, I have discussed Pajzos at different sections in my report.
10 It's the training centre in the vicinity of Ilok which was manned by
11 members of the special-purpose unit of the Republic of Serbia
12 moments in time.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. -- I'm looking at the clock. We need another
14 break before we -- oh, no, no. I'm sorry. I am -- I'm mistaken. Sorry.
15 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
16 Q. Mr. Theunens, I'm interested in the following. I saw the
17 document that you referred to, and I saw that you referred to it, and my
18 learned friend Mr. Weber also gave you a document of the Serbian Radical
19 Party foundation Assembly. Do you know that at the court in
20 Bosanski Samac three final judgements were passed in relation to events
21 and members who are concerned here, and did you take this into account
22 while drafting your report?
23 A. I don't remember seeing the three final judgements that were,
24 according to you, pronounced by the court in Bosanski Samac.
25 Q. Yes, there were some judgements where a plea agreement was made.
1 Do you know anything about the judgement against Blagoje Simic, and did
2 you take that one into account while drafting the part of your report
3 which relates to Bosanski Samac? Instead of what was said at the moment
4 when Serbian Radical Party was established.
5 A. I mean, I'm not familiar with these -- with these judgements.
6 And P1416 is not a document of the Serb Radical Party; it's a document of
7 the MUP Bijeljina, of the RS MUP Bijeljina.
8 Q. Yes, Mr. Theunens, I agree. But I believe that in your report
9 you made some comments, and I think that during the examination-in-chief
10 Mr. Weber also presented to you a document - just bear with me for a
11 moment, please. It is a document connected to Bosanski Samac which also
12 has to do with certain sources from the Serbian Radical Party.
13 Yes, it is P1422. The founding Assembly of Serbian Radical Party
14 in Kragujevac --
15 THE INTERPRETER: Could the counsel please repeat the exact date.
16 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
17 Q. It's a report from the foundation Assembly of the Serbian Radical
18 Party. It's something you incorporated into your report, and you
19 commented on the events in Bosanski Samac and these persons, but you did
20 not take into account in your report that there is at least one final
21 judgement in this court, relating to the events that you are discussing
22 in your report. Is that correct?
23 A. If you explain -- if you show me the judgement and the relevant
24 parts, I can answer your question. But now I'm a bit confused by -- by
25 your proposition.
1 Q. No, Mr. Theunens, I'm just asking you. I'm interested in your
2 methodology and the manner in which you produced your report. So I'm
3 just asking you whether you were aware of this judgement and then
4 disregarded it, or you did not know about this judgement at all and then
5 that was the reason why you did not take it into account at all while you
6 were drafting your report?
7 A. I have answered the question, Your Honours. I'm not familiar
8 with the judgements you are making reference to.
9 JUDGE ORIE: That's a clear answer.
10 Please proceed.
11 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
12 Q. Thank you, Mr. Theunens. That's correct.
13 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Now, let us please have a look at
15 Q. Before we see it on the screen, tell me whether you made any
16 connection between Slobodan Miljkovic, Lugar, and the state security of
17 the Republic of Serbia
18 A. No, I have not made such a connection. You asked that earlier.
19 I made a connection between Crni, Dragan Djordjevic, and the Ministry of
20 the Interior of the Republic of Serbia
21 Q. Thank you, Mr. Theunens. Since we have this document on the
22 screen -- well, I will drop some of my questions. But since you
23 mentioned a moment ago that they returned, Crni's and Lugar's Group left
24 Bosanski Samac and then returned --
25 A. I mentioned, I'm sorry, I mentioned that Crni's Group returned.
1 I'm not able -- or I haven't established that for Lugar's Group. Maybe
2 they did, maybe they didn't; but at least the documents I reviewed
3 allowed to draw that conclusion for Crni. And, again, I refer to P1416
4 for that as the basis of my conclusion.
5 Q. Thank you, Mr. Theunens. Then I misunderstood, and this will
6 actually save us some time.
7 Let me ask you this: Do you know the person by the name of
8 Mitar Maksimovic, aka Manda?
9 A. Indeed, Your Honours. He is an individual who was proclaimed
10 Chetnik Vojvoda by Vojislav Seselj in the -- between 1992 and 1994 for
11 his contribution as of -- I believe, as a volunteer in the
12 Serbian Radical Party, his contribution in combat operations. And I do
13 remember Bosnia-Herzegovina; I'm not sure what Croatia is concerned. But
14 I can check.
15 Q. Yes, Mr. Theunens, it does include Croatia as well, but I'd like
16 to focus on the part I'm interested in.
17 Was this Manda a local representative of the Serb Radical Party
18 from the municipality of Ugljevik
19 A. It's possible. I don't remember at this stage.
20 Q. Do you recall that this volunteer group of his from Ugljevik was
21 nicknamed Manda's Lions and that they sported red berets?
22 A. I don't remember hearing the name Manda's Lions, and I don't
23 remember what kind of berets they had.
24 Q. Mr. Theunens, let's look at the document which may refresh your
25 memory; if not, we'll move on.
1 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] In any case, could we please have
3 Q. I believe you also referred to it in your report. Perhaps you
4 can tell us what your understanding was about who this document refers
6 A. I found a section in my report; it's on section -- sorry, part 3,
7 page 94, and I have referred to that document. I just stated that there
8 was a Red Berets unit in Ugljevik at the time, but I didn't draw any
9 conclusion as to the allegiance or subordination of that group.
10 Q. We have this exhibit whereby we can see that the Presidency of
11 the Municipal Assembly of Ugljevik is addressing the corps command of the
12 Serbian Republic
13 Eastern Bosnian Corps masking that the Red Beret units should be
14 dislocated from Ugljevik due to an epidemic in Ugljevik as well as the
16 Is it clear from this document that the unit in question was
17 under the command of the Eastern Bosnia Corps?
18 A. I would just first like to highlight a translation error. It
19 states 24th of April in the English version; it should be 24th of June.
20 And then to answer your question --
21 Q. You're correct.
22 A. Because otherwise there would be confusion about the existence of
23 the Eastern Bosnia Corps.
24 The document doesn't allow to draw a conclusion on the relation
25 between the corps command and this red beret unit. Officially - and I
1 refer to the -- what I would call the Tolimir document -- but, no, that
2 intervenes later, I'm sorry. That was P383, but that only arrives
3 28 of July. But, officially, all units should be subordinated to the
4 military, i.e., to the VRS, but we know, for example, from P383, that
5 that was problematic, and that there were areas - and again you have to
6 look at specific documents for specific areas at specific time periods in
7 order to be able to determine where there were problems with the
8 subordination. And, again, to come back to this document, isolated from
9 other documents, it doesn't allow to draw a conclusion.
10 Q. Thank you, Mr. Theunens.
11 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] I'm striving to conclude the
12 questions I've had planned for today, and for that purpose could we have
13 a look at 2D230, please.
14 Q. Please have look at item 5. There is a mention of certain
15 Radivoje Bozic, 27 years old, from Brcko. Member of the SDS paramilitary
16 formation of red berets. And then item 6, Radojica Bozic, from Brezik,
17 Brcko municipality, also a member of the SDS paramilitary formation of
18 the red berets.
19 Have you seen this document previously?
20 A. No, Your Honours, I don't remember seeing it. I see it's
21 compiled by the Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina Ministry of the Interior,
22 4th of January, 1993, yeah. I don't -- I'm not sure whether it was
23 included on -- in the CD you provided me. Maybe it was and -- but I
24 haven't seen it before. I think.
25 Q. Mr. Theunens, in any case, do you agree that in Brcko there was a
1 military -- paramilitary formation of the SDS called the Red Berets?
2 A. I will start referring to the methodology. This is a document
3 which is compiled by what I would call the opposing side, i.e., the
4 Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina, who are in conflict at the time with the
5 Bosnian Serbs. So that always -- that would call for caution when using
6 the information included in that report.
7 Now, I have information included in my report originating from
8 page 94, 95 of part 2, P1083 and P -- sorry, P1083, which is a document
9 compiled by -- I mean, we saw the document today by the public security
10 centre in Bijeljina which identifies a unit of red berets in the Brcko
11 district. Now, I don't know whether we are talking about the same units
12 here, but that is the closest reference I have to a red beret unit in the
13 Brcko area whereby I would attach more credibility to the information
14 from --
15 Q. [Overlapping speakers] ...
16 A. Sorry. I would attach more credibility to the information
17 provided by the MUP of Republika Srpska than to a document prepared by
18 the Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina at that moment in time, knowing that
19 there isn't more between the two.
20 Q. Mr. Theunens, I apologise, but I'm running out of time. And I'm
21 trying to connect a number of things. And you always say that there
22 should be a degree of caution that is exercised. For that purpose, I'd
23 like to show you a Prosecution document which is a survey or a
25 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] It is on the 65 ter list, number
2 Q. Have a look at the second page, please. In particular,
3 information on wounding. So you should remember the name of
4 Radivoje Bozic, the red berets, the paramilitary formation of the SDS,
5 and then look at the information provided on the wounding.
6 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] We still don't have it in the
8 Q. But in item 1 it says date and place of joining the unit, title
9 of the unit, and the unit commander.
10 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] We are still awaiting the English
11 translation. It is the Roman numeral III, item 1.
12 Q. You see here it says date and place of enlistment and the unit --
13 name of the unit, and commander's name. It says: 1 May 1992, Brcko,
14 special unit, Captain Rade Bozic.
15 Does this tally with the document of Bosnia-Herzegovina where it
16 says Radivoje Bozic from Brcko, the red berets?
17 A. I'm sorry, could you give me the source or the origin of this
18 document, the one that is now in front of us?
19 Q. It is a Prosecution document from the Captain Dragan batch, in
20 terms of assistance to all those who had been wounded in the territory of
22 with relation to Zivojin Jovanovic [as interpreted] in your report.
23 Does the exercise of comparing these documents confirm the
24 veracity of the Bosnia-Herzegovina report about the existence of the
1 A. I'm not sure whether you understand the methodology I have tried
2 to explain. I mean, to answer your question in a brief manner, what
3 these documents have in common is that they both mention Rade Bozic and
4 they both mention the location Brcko. That's it.
5 Q. Thank you, Mr. Theunens. You have discussed the methodology, and
6 I was hoping that you could draw conclusions on the basis of what I
7 presented to you, but this answer suffices. I'll move on.
8 Did you know that in Banja Luka there were the Serb defence
9 forces in existence, the abbreviation was SOS, and they, too, wore green
10 beret -- red berets?
11 A. Indeed I remember that such units existed there. And I think you
12 will see in my report that when I was not able to establish the
13 subordination or the affiliation of a unit identified as a red berets
14 unit, I didn't try to speculate to make such a link. If I linked -- or
15 whenever I linked a red beret unit to the MUP of the Republic of Serbia
16 it was on the basis of conclusions I drew, again based on the context of
17 other documents whereby I was very --
18 Q. Mr. Theunens, I apologise, but this is sufficient. We only have
19 eight minutes left. There is a reason why I showed you the document with
20 the red berets from Brcko and why I asked you about Banja Luka and the
21 SOS formation.
22 We should now go back to document number 1083, the report from
23 Bijeljina. I'd like to address the reliability of that document.
24 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Could we please have 1083, page 2 in
25 both versions.
1 Q. Have a look at the last paragraph. The person drafting the note
2 says something which even you know is incorrect. He says:
3 "Concerning the SOS paramilitary formation, it is unknown whether
4 they were in the territory of Bosnia-Herzegovina."
5 Does this bring into question the authenticity of the information
6 provided in the document, in this document?
7 Mr. Theunens, you saved me some time. I do have a number of
8 documents supporting the thesis of the existence of the SOS and the fact
9 that they were in Banja Luka and wore red berets. I have a number of
10 such documents.
11 A. I would -- it's not so much a question of authenticity of the
12 document. You could ask some questions about the overall reliability.
13 But as I mentioned earlier -- I mean, the reliability of the source. But
14 as I mentioned earlier, you look at the information that is included in
15 the report and then you assess or attempt to assess its credibility on
16 the basis of existing knowledge or, i.e., the -- on the basis of other
17 documents as well as -- as well as the context. This last --
18 Q. [Overlapping speakers] ...
19 A. Sorry. These last two lines, indeed, there is sufficient
20 information that puts that last sentence into question.
21 Q. Thank you, Mr. Theunens.
22 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Before I wrap things up for today,
23 could we please have 2D318. It is also a document which came with a
24 batch of documents disclosed to us by the Prosecution.
25 Q. I'd like to touch upon the topic of the Serbian Guard. Have a
1 look at that document, please.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Before we continue, Mr. Bakrac, you referred, in
3 P1083, I think, to the SOS unknown, you challenged the reliability,
4 although you mentioned authenticity. Where exactly do I find reference
5 to the SOS? You said page 2; I have difficulties in finding it.
6 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Page 2, the last paragraph,
7 Your Honours. I apologise, I misspoke when I said authenticity. I had
8 reliability in mind. The last paragraph of the text.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, last paragraph says:
10 "In relation to the formation called Serbian defending forces,
11 SDF, there are no information that they were at the territory of BiH
12 Let's look in the original because it may well be that it's
13 called the SOS. Let me have a look.
14 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honours, the abbreviation
15 you referred to is in the English translation, the SDF.
16 JUDGE ORIE: I see now that it's the SOS in the Cyrillic original
17 which is mentioned there. Thank you.
18 Please proceed.
19 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
20 Q. This is the last document, Mr. Theunens, before we all retire for
21 the night. It says:
22 "Republika Srpska Assembly of the Serb municipality of Olovo
23 Department of the Ministry of Defence."
24 The date is 14 October 1993
25 Serb Guard from Kikinda who were paid an allowance in German marks,
1 signed by head of the department Dusan Zugic.
2 Have you had occasion to refer to this document when you were
3 provided the documents from the Prosecution that you were to use for your
5 A. I need to correct this. I mean, I've explained from the
6 beginning that all the documents included in this report were selected by
7 me on the basis of searches I and only I have conducted. So I was not
8 given any specific documents by the Prosecution in order to prepare my
10 I don't remember seeing this document.
11 Q. Thank you, Mr. Theunens. I apologise if I misunderstood. I had
12 no ill intent in mind.
13 In any case, can we see from this document, at least from one
14 example, that the members of local authorities from Republika Srpska
15 financed the volunteers of the SDS -- of the Serb Guard, who had arrived
16 in that area from Kikinda?
17 A. Yes, I'm just not sure whether this is the Serbian Guard of the
18 Serbian Renewal Movement, i.e., the SPO, of Vuk Draskovic. It may well
19 be, but I've seen various documents using the term "Serbian Guard"
20 whereby it was not always possible to establish whether this was the
21 Serbian Guard, as I said earlier, linked to Draskovic, the SPO, or not.
22 So I can't establish that here.
23 Q. Thank you, Mr. Theunens.
24 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] I'm looking at the clock,
25 Your Honour.
1 JUDGE ORIE: It's time, Mr. Bakrac.
2 Nothing else then. I just want to remind you that, Mr. Jordash,
3 there was an issue. Look at page 8.075 and following about evidence
4 given in private session. I think I gave an opportunity to the parties
5 and also to Mr. Theunens to further make submissions on that. If you
6 would like to do that, don't forget to do it and prepare for it tomorrow.
7 Also in view of what the witness said, could you please also
8 suggest how to resolve the matter, if you want to change anything at this
10 So, therefore, could you please -- could you, Mr. Bakrac, and
11 could Mr. Theunens and also Mr. Weber, consider that matter overnight.
12 You remember the issue, I take it?
13 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honours.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Then we'll hear from you tomorrow.
15 I'd like to instruct you and not forget it, Mr. Theunens, that
16 you should not speak or communicate in any other way with anyone about
17 your testimony, whether given already or still to be given.
18 We resume tomorrow, the 3rd of November, at 9.00 in the morning,
19 in this same courtroom, II.
20 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.04 p.m.
21 to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 3rd day of
22 November, 2010, at 9.00 a.m.