1 Wednesday, 3 November 2010
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.04 a.m.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning to everyone in and around this
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. I think that we -- the
13 witness could be brought into the courtroom.
14 Meanwhile, I'd like to inquire with you, Mr. Weber, whether your
15 assessment of the time you'd need is still the same.
16 MR. WEBER: It is not, Your Honour. The Prosecution would
17 estimate approximately 45 minutes for redirect. This is based largely on
18 matters which arose after the Chamber last inquired as to my estimate
19 yesterday morning.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
21 [Trial Chamber confers]
22 JUDGE ORIE: Under those circumstances, Mr. Bakrac, the first
23 session plus 15 minutes; 45 minutes for Mr. Weber; and then we have,
24 although limited, time for questions by the Judges or further questions
25 by the Defence.
1 [The witness takes the stand]
2 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning, Mr. Theunens.
3 THE WITNESS: Good morning, Your Honours.
4 JUDGE ORIE: I'd like to remind you that, doesn't come as a
5 surprise, that you're still bound by the solemn declaration that you've
6 given at the beginning of your testimony. And Mr. Bakrac will now
7 continue his cross-examination.
8 Mr. Bakrac.
9 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. Good
10 morning to everyone in and around the courtroom.
11 WITNESS: REYNAUD THEUNENS [Resumed]
12 Cross-examination by Mr. Bakrac: [Continued]
13 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, Mr. Theunens.
14 A. Good morning, Mr. Bakrac.
15 Q. Mr. Theunens, yesterday we stopped when we were discussing a
16 document. You said that often times it's difficult to distinguish
17 between the Serbian Volunteer Guard and the Serbian Guard. I looked into
18 that --
19 A. Can I correct you, please. That's not what I said. I said that
20 the term "Serbian Guard" has been used -- I mean, I remember at least one
21 document where Serbian Guard was used for Serbian Volunteer Guard, but
22 otherwise I have not seen, at least on the basis of the documents I have
23 reviewed, confusion between these two very distinct groups. However, I
24 have also seen in the various documents I consulted in order to prepare
25 this report that the term "Srpska Garda" or "Serbian Guard" at least on
1 the basis of my experience is not always used for the group that was
2 affiliated with the SPO, the Serbian Renewal Movement of Vuk Draskovic,
3 i.e., that the term is also used for other groups.
4 Q. Very well, Mr. Theunens. So we can assume that the list we
5 looked at yesterday was probably related to the Serbian Guard which
6 belonged to the SPO, but you do allow for the possibility that it is a
7 different organisation which called itself the Serbian Guard; is my
8 understanding correct?
9 A. I would -- first, personally I would leave out the word
10 "probably." It can be the SPO-affiliated Serbian Guard; it can also be
11 another one. I would have to look into the document and try to find
12 related documents for that time-period, that region, in order to
13 establish the affiliation of that Serbian Guard.
14 Q. Fine, Mr. Theunens. We'll move on. I only consider it important
15 to look at financing sources.
16 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Let's look at a Prosecution
17 document, which is an exhibit, P1338.
18 Q. This is the 5th Corps command. General Vladimir Vukovic signed
19 the document. It's a strictly confidential document, encrypted, dated
20 the 8th of March, 1992. It deals with precisely the Serbian Guard.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Bakrac, is it a confidential document?
22 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I didn't see a
23 notification to that effect. I may be mistaken. It -- the contents say
24 that it's a confidential document, but I don't think it's a confidential
25 document in terms of it being shown in the courtroom.
1 MR. WEBER: It is okay to be public.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
3 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
4 Q. Mr. Theunens, the commander of the 2nd Military District is sent
5 a strictly confidential memo. Under item 1, Branislav Lainovic is
6 referred to, a civilian from Novi Sad, a resident at Nardnog Fronta
7 number 20.
8 Do you know who Branislav Lainovic was in the relevant
9 time-period? Or Branislav Lainovic, also known as Dugi.
10 A. I have no precise recollection, Your Honours. I believe that he
11 played a role in the recruitment of volunteers, but I cannot recall
12 exactly if that is the same Lainovic for which party or which
13 organisation he carried out his activities.
14 Q. Mr. Theunens, I put it to you that he did that for the Serbian
15 Renewal Movement and the Serbian Guard we referred to earlier on. We can
16 find the relevant paragraph. It's the last paragraph on page 1 in B/C/S.
17 In English, it's at the top of page 2.
18 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Can we have page 2, please.
19 Q. It's at the very top:
20 "In the second half of last year and in January of this year, at
21 the request of the SSNO first, second, third and political
22 administrations, I admitted Serb Guard groups that arrived at the battle
23 front on a number of occasions, assigning them to corps units, where they
24 carried out combat tasks under unified insignia and unity of command. I
25 deemed this kind of assistance only natural, as there have been similar
1 cases to this day."
2 Can we conclude on the basis of this document that the volunteers
3 of the Serbian Guard, that's to say the volunteers of the Serbian Renewal
4 Movement, with the help of the organisation of the SSNO and the army,
5 went to the front line as volunteers?
6 A. Your Honours, we discussed this document also with Mr. Jordash -
7 and it's also mentioned in my report on page 24 of part 3 - you have to
8 link what is at the top of page 2 with the bottom of page 1 and then look
9 at the context of the SFRY Presidency Order 73. And when we look at that
10 context, this document is consistent with the order, i.e., volunteers who
11 have been initially gathered or recorded by the Serbian Guard, they are
12 integrated in JNA units, and as it is stated at the end of the first
13 paragraph on page 2, "under unified insignia and integral," in military
14 terminology that would be single, under single, i.e., JNA command. And
15 that's exactly what Order 73 from the 10th of December, 1991, states.
16 Q. Yes, I was just about to ask you what the date of the
17 presidential order was. So that's the 10th of December, 1991; is that
19 A. Indeed. And it's P1088. And you can find it on pages 116 and
20 following, in part 1 of the report.
21 Q. Thank you, Mr. Theunens.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Your question was whether on the basis of this
23 document we could establish that the unit you mentioned went to the
24 frontline. Now, we got an answer which is about a totally different
25 thing, whether this is consistent with other documents. The one is a
1 factual question, the other one is -- the answer is about the consistency
2 and the explanation of what is explained in this document. Now, unless
3 you are not interested in the factual question itself, then we can move
4 on, but I just observe that what you asked is not what your answer was
6 THE WITNESS: The document -- Your Honours, I apologise for the
7 extensive answer, but I wanted to specify the question. And, okay, as
8 the first paragraph states, that in this particular situation, according
9 to the document, indeed, these volunteers were under the conditions set
10 out in that paragraph sent to the front line where they carried out
11 combat tasks.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
13 Please proceed.
14 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
15 Q. But, Mr. Theunens, you will agree that the document states, in
16 the second half of last year, i.e., 1991 and in January 1992; right?
17 JUDGE ORIE: It's the first paragraph of page 2, says that in the
18 second half year they were sent, yes.
19 MR. BAKRAC: [No interpretation]
20 THE WITNESS: That was my answer also.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I didn't --
22 MR. BAKRAC: [Overlapping speakers] ...
23 JUDGE ORIE: -- thought that you deviated in any way from what is
24 said here.
25 Please proceed.
1 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, can we call up 2D297.
2 Q. Mr. Theunens, this was one of the documents I gave you on the CD;
3 do you recognise it? It's the Ministry of the Interior of the
4 Republic of Serbia
5 and it's a report on the activities of the Serbian Guard in
6 Eastern Herzegovina
7 A. Indeed.
8 Q. The document has two pages and I'll try to summarise its
9 contents. The state security department establishes that the
10 Serbian Guard Volunteers, under the command of Osmajlic at the time in
11 Eastern Herzegovina
12 link up with the Defence structure in Eastern Herzegovina and with the
13 command of the eastern corps and that a staff was set up under the
14 functional command of Boro --
15 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter didn't catch the last name.
16 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
17 Q. -- who had been promoted recently to the rank of major of the
18 Army of Republika Srpska.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Could you repeat the last name which the
20 interpreters could not catch.
21 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. I said that this
22 particular staff of the Serbian Guard, specifically Zvonko Osmajlic as
23 its commander, were under the functional command of Boro Antelj, who had
24 just been promoted to the rank of major within the VRS.
25 Q. Have you come across information of this sort, i.e., that in this
1 particular period the Serbian Guard was active in this area of
3 A. Your Honours, I don't remember.
4 Q. Thank you. If you don't remember, that's fine.
5 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Can we now look at 2D257, please.
6 While we're waiting for it to appear on our screens, I will
7 identify the document, to use up the time that I have. So it's the
8 Serbian Republic
9 Majevica, Brcko municipality. 18th June, 1991, is the date. This is a
10 request for the purposes of the Brcko special unit. So it's a request
11 which was signed by Captain Sasa Vukojevic, the commander of the special
13 Q. Mr. Theunens, as we can see here, from their own municipality,
14 Brcko municipality, within the Serbian Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina,
15 they request camouflage uniforms of the American make, American belts,
16 and -- and dark red berets. I'm showing you this because it is the
17 Prosecution case that individuals wearing American uniforms were most
18 likely connected to the DB of Serbia which procured those for their
20 Can you tell me, while you were present in the territory of
22 tell us what they were like? And did you have information to the effect
23 that in Bosnia-Herzegovina their special units were being equipped or
24 provided with American uniforms and dark red berets?
25 A. Your Honours -- I mean, [indiscernible] answer the question, but
1 the document we have in front of us does not seem to be the document you
2 are talking about, because this document is dated 21st of June, 1992, and
3 at least on this page there's no reference to --
4 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I was looking at my
5 hard copy without paying attention to the screen. 2D257. Page 2. Yes,
6 in fact it's page 2 in e-court.
7 Q. We'll go back to page 1 later on and we'll see that it has to do
8 with the Army of Republika Srpska.
9 Or perhaps I should simplify my question, Mr. Theunens. While
10 you were drafting your report, did you come across information or
11 evidence indicating that there existed a special unit in Brcko which wore
12 red berets and American uniforms and was under the command of
13 Sasa Vukojevic?
14 A. I'm looking at the Brcko section of my report now. I cannot
15 answer your question as to whether or not there was a VRS special unit in
17 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Can we look at page 1 now, please.
18 Q. Do you allow for the possibility that such a unit did exist but
19 you simply overlooked it, and I don't mean it in any disrespectful way,
20 that you simply didn't have enough information about the existence of
21 such a unit while you were making your report? So we can see the heading
22 states the Army of Republika Srpska, Brcko special unit.
23 A. P1083, as it quoted on page 95 of part 3 of the report, discusses
24 a unit of red berets located in the Brcko district and its commanded by,
25 I quote, "so-called Ziko Crnogorac." And then the text continues,
1 stating that:
2 "... further operative work showed that those units were the
3 units under the command of the state security police of Serbia and that
4 their members were mostly from Serbia
5 That is the information I have found on the presence of a unit
6 that could be described as a special unit in the district -- in the
7 Brcko district, in 1992. But I --
8 Q. Mr. Theunens, that's precisely what my question is about. I am
9 confronting you with a piece of evidence referring to the Red Berets, to
10 a Brcko special unit, Sasa Vukojevic signed the document and he seeks to
11 obtain American uniforms from his municipality.
12 So my question is: On the basis of which information did you
13 arrive at the conclusion which is in your report that
14 Ziko Ivanovic Crnogorac was active in Brcko as were members of the MUP or
15 DB of the Republic of Serbia
17 And I'm asking you this now that I've confronted you with this
19 A. There's also P1085, which is footnote 288 in part 3 of the
20 report, which is a certificate signed by Zivojin Ivanovic or
21 Ziko Crnogorac, I mean the nickname, where he signs as the SAO Semberija
22 and Majevica unit for special purposes Brcko commander. So ideally I
23 would have the opportunity to conduct searches on Captain Sasa Vukojevic
24 in order to establish which unit he is commanding and whether or not it's
25 the same unit as the unit of Zivojin Ivanovic.
1 Q. But, Mr. Theunens, the unit of Zivojin Ivanovic and the evidence
2 you mention states "SAO Semberija and Majevica," the unit for special
3 purposes Brcko.
4 Where in this document do you find that this unit of
5 Zivojin Ivanovic's was a unit under the command of, affiliated to, or
6 whatever you like to term it, with the MUP of the Republic of Serbia
7 JUDGE ORIE: Let's try to get organised again.
8 There are apparently two issues. One is the evidence on which
9 Mr. Theunens concludes that the special-purposes unit he mentioned,
10 whether that's linked to the MUP of Serbia; that's one question. And
11 another question is whether the unit you are referring to in this
12 document is the same unit or a different unit.
13 Let's try to clearly separate those two questions. If it is the
14 same unit, the answers in relation to the links to the MUP of Serbia may
15 be relevant. If it is a different unit, then the answers for the one
16 unit would not apply for the other unit, and then, as Mr. Theunens said,
17 you would have to look into the -- any documentation on the special unit
18 which was commanded by Vukojevic.
19 That's -- the only thing at this moment I'm doing is trying to
20 clearly define what the questions are.
21 And, Mr. Bakrac, you introduce another unit and then you switch
22 to -- again to the unit Mr. Theunens dealt with where he says, I would
23 have to find out whether we are talking about two different units or
24 whether it's the same, and you are switching from the one to the other in
25 a bit of an unclear manner.
1 Could you please ask focused questions and clearly separate
2 separate issues.
3 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. Let me
4 formulate the question like this:
5 Q. From the document that you are referring to, 1085, from this
6 document signed by Zivojin Ivanovic, can you tell me how, on the basis of
7 this document, one can conclude that he commands a unit which has any
8 relation whatsoever with the MUP of the Republic of Serbia
9 A. I'm sorry, before I answer the question, I would just like to
10 clarify the document we have in front of us. It doesn't necessarily
11 state that Vukojevic is the commander. He signs for the command. Now,
12 we would first have to --
13 JUDGE ORIE: That's a detail which seems not to be of primary
14 relevance at this moment. It may be an element in deciding whether or
15 not we are talking about the same document, which certainly is a
17 Please proceed.
18 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honours. Now, P1085 is dated the
19 9th of July, 1992, and when we compare and we look at P1085 which indeed
20 does not mention MUP Serbia but we apply the methodology and we compare
21 it with P1083, well, in P1083 -- in P1083, Ziko Crnogorac is described or
22 identified as a commander of a unit of Red Berets whereby it is stated
23 that the units are under the command of the state security police of
25 And I haven't stated in my report that the the SAO Semberija and
1 Majevica units for special purposes of Brcko is a MUP Serbia unit, but
2 when we combine the two, we have, I believe, the same situation as we had
3 over the previous days, i.e., that units which are initially identified
4 as units of MUP Serbia, we see stamps stating that they are MUP Krajina
5 units, a few months later they are MUP RS units, but the unit itself, the
6 individuals, the commander, do not change. So it -- in my view, it's
7 just a matter of changing names for reasons --
8 Q. [Overlapping speakers] ...
9 A. Okay.
10 Q. But how do you know this, Mr. Theunens? Please give me at least
11 one reference that would serve as a basis for what you are saying now.
12 How can you claim this?
13 JUDGE ORIE: Claim what, Mr. Bakrac, that the composition
14 remained the same --
15 MR. BAKRAC: [Overlapping speakers] ...
16 JUDGE ORIE: -- or that Mr. Ivanovic -- [Overlapping speakers] ...
17 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] No, my apologies, Your Honour.
18 Q. That -- that the names only changed and that the composition
19 remained the same, if I understood you properly, and that functionally
20 they remained one in the the same thing but with a different name. How
21 do you know, and on the basis of what can you draw such a conclusion?
22 A. For example, when we looked yesterday at 2D269, I mean the
23 personnel file of Vasilije Mijovic, and I looked at the different
24 documents included in that file and we compare those with the other
25 documents that discuss involvement of Mijovic and people under his
1 command in operations in Croatia
2 the conclusion that it's the same unit. When I say "the composition
3 remains the same," I cannot claim that the name of each member remains
4 the same, but as is stated in P1083, that these units are manned or that
5 the members are mostly from Serbia
6 conclusion in my report, in fact these are MUP Serbia special units.
7 Q. Okay, Mr. Theunens, I have to move on. But now just to link up
8 documents, I will now go back to a document which we looked at yesterday,
9 that's P1083.
10 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Can we please have a look at the
11 second page and the penultimate paragraph.
12 Q. While we are waiting for the document to show up on the screen,
13 Mr. Theunens, you explained why in your report and you referred to a 2D
14 document which you only had a chance to see over the weekend and you say
15 that you draw your conclusion from that. So the 2D document referring to
16 Vasilije Mijovic is something you didn't have before the weekend, and you
17 didn't have it at your disposal when you are drafting your report?
18 A. It's correct that 2D269 I only had during the weekend, but 2D269
19 is a personnel file. Where there are different documents indicating the
20 activities of in this case Vasilije Mijovic over the years. And I could
21 link these documents with the other documents I had seen where -- I mean,
22 other documents are individual orders, situation reports, requests,
23 reports compiled by intelligence organs both from the JNA as well as from
24 the Ministry of the Interior of the Republika Srpska. And when you
25 combine all that, I mean, it's -- it becomes -- the picture becomes much
1 clearer. So 2D269 allowed me to obtain a much clearer picture than I
2 already had before but it corroborates -- or and it corroborates the
3 conclusions I had drawn in my report.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, for all clarity, P1083 is a confidential
6 Please proceed.
7 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
8 Q. Yes. Mr. Theunens, please look at the second paragraph.
9 "Operative work in the field," that is how it begins. Mr. Theunens,
10 please focus, as we are now focused on a specific issue. Focus on the
11 second paragraph where it says that the information is not sufficient and
12 needs to be checked, about the unit of Ziko Crnogorac, and it is
13 suggested that the real leader of Red Berets in the territory of
14 Republika Srpska was a man nicknamed Sasa. We have seen a document in
15 which Vukojevic, Sasa requests from his municipality American uniforms.
16 Can you see that in this document, please? And can this help you
17 to establish a connection?
18 It has not been recorded, but we can all read it. However for
19 the the needs of the record, it says there that the report states that
20 the information just needs to be collected and that this is just some
21 circumstantial evidence.
22 So would you agree with me that this person suspects that the
23 actual leader is one Sasa? I have presented you a document which has to
24 do with a commander called Sasa Vukojevic.
25 A. I do see the reference in the text to a Sasa, and I have
1 discussed a person nicknamed Sasa in my report, but this information does
2 not affect what is mentioned in relation to Zika Crnogorac.
3 Q. Thank you, Mr. Theunens. I have to move on in order to cover at
4 least what I believe I have to cover.
5 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] could we now please have a look at
7 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Weber.
8 MR. WEBER: This was a document that the Prosecution had no
9 notice of prior to yesterday. The Chamber did inquire with Mr. Bakrac as
10 to when he became aware of the use of this document.
11 JUDGE ORIE: His investigator.
12 MR. WEBER: And we -- yes. And we -- well, we did conduct
13 discussions with a language assistant. There -- this is a rather cryptic
14 report dealing -- and I don't want to say too much because of the witness
15 witness's presence, a rather cryptic report that deals with a
16 conversation had by Captain Dragan.
17 The available translation is only a partial translation. There
18 are many references that the Prosecution believes are important, would be
19 important for this witness's testimony, in order to ascertain what is
20 being said that are not reflected in the translation. The witness does
21 not speak B/C/S, and Prosecution believes that, one, it is prejudiced
22 because it was not provided with the complete translation; this affects
23 our ability to re-examine on this document because effectively, due to
24 the nature of the document and its content being a rather cryptic
25 conversation that mentions other important individuals that are not
1 reflected in the partial translation, we essentially have to make
2 representations as to what is being said, which we do not want to do.
3 And also it prevents the expert from reviewing the entire document and
4 providing the expert's opinion in the context of his entire report, since
5 a complete translation is not available.
6 So we also did check, and Mr. Laugel informed us that the
7 document was uploaded and available in e-court on the
8 29th of October, 2010, which would have been last Friday. We did receive
9 multiple notifications from the Simatovic Defence after that. The
10 document was not included in those notifications. We ask that the
11 Defence be not allowed to use this document.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Bakrac, when did you investigator get hold of
13 this document, and where does it come from?
14 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I used the break to
15 work, and I ordered my investigator to carry out certain investigative
16 measures, and I returned on the 25th to The Hague. And after that I
17 cannot remember, but I think that it was on the 27th or the 28th that I
18 received this document. I uploaded it immediately. And when I saw that
19 we have --
20 JUDGE ORIE: Why not just answer my question? You come with a
21 speech of half an hour. I asked when your investigator got hold of this
22 document. That was my question. Not on whether you sent him for --
23 that's a simple question. If you know, tell us; if you don't know, tell
24 us as well.
25 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes, I said that he came into the
1 possession of this document after the weekend, that is to say, in the
2 week beginning on the 25th of October.
3 JUDGE ORIE: You didn't say that. You said you received it after
4 the weekend, after you had given him instructions to investigate. Now,
5 whether those instructions to investigate resulted in this document to be
6 obtained, you didn't say anything about that. But let's leave that
7 alone. So could you tell us where the document comes from?
8 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, the source of this
9 document is a potential witness from AOS, which is American Intelligence
10 Service; it's an abbreviation for one section of it, as you will see
12 JUDGE ORIE: So you received it from a -- what you called a
13 potential witness. May I take it, then, a potential Defence witness?
14 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes. If you allow me, Your Honour,
15 because my time is running out, I can just read it. Let me not deal with
16 the contents, because later on we can all read what is in there, but
17 please allow me to --
18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Bakrac, have you not heard what is the major
19 concern of Mr. Weber? That he has only a partial translation, that the
20 witness is not in a position to review the whole of the document, and
21 that therefore we are more or less limping, we are handicapped.
22 That's -- I suggest that you -- let me just ...
23 [Trial Chamber confers]
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Bakrac, the Chamber does not allow you at this
25 moment to put a partial translation of a report which is available to the
1 Prosecution only since -- I'm talking now as relevant in days. But of
2 course, you now have knowledge of the content of parts of this document
3 and you can, without using this document, of course, you can put
4 questions to the witness which -- for which the answers may be relevant
5 at a later stage when you have a full translation and when you have given
6 proper notice to the Prosecution.
7 So the document is not banned forever, but not to be used at this
8 moment under those circumstances.
9 Please proceed. If you want to put questions --
10 MR. BAKRAC: [Overlapping speakers] ...
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please.
12 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour, please allow
13 me just one comment, and I hope that Mr. Weber will agree, because I did
14 discuss about this with Mr. Weber. I told him that we have some
15 documents which have not been translated, and Mr. Weber told me that it
16 would be useful for them to receive the B/C/S versions because they have
17 personnel in the OTP who speak the B/C/S, just for the record, but I will
18 move on.
19 So, Mr. Theunens -- I suppose I'm addressing Mr. Weber now, so as
20 to be faster: Does this also relate to the document 2D292, the same
22 MR. WEBER: Your Honour, the notice was a little bit different
23 with this, but if there's a partial translation and there's a question
24 being posed to the witness that may encompass greater knowledge or a
25 greater importance than just what is said in the document, we do object.
1 We believe it's unfair to give a partial translation to this witness and
2 ask him to make more general comments without reviewing the entire
4 JUDGE ORIE: Well, of course it all depends on what kind of
5 questions you put to a witness. If you have a partial translation, if
6 you want someone to look at stamps, for example, then a partial
7 translation, in itself, doesn't harm. But it much depends. But if you
8 want to go to the content of the document, if we have -- if there's --
9 parts are missing, then that's not the way to proceed.
10 MR. WEBER: Thank you, Your Honour. That was the Prosecution's
12 MR. JORDASH: Your Honour, I would -- I don't know if
13 Your Honours are aware, but we receive partial translations of many
14 documents on an on-going basis from the Prosecution.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. If it is well in advance and if you have an
16 opportunity to check. I mean, we have to find a fair balance between not
17 overburdening our CLSS and so that if it's a matter of efficiency it's
18 fine; but if you come with a document half a day before, if the witness
19 has no opportunity to look at the whole of the document; especially for
20 this witness that's important. I'm not saying that under all
21 circumstances partial translations are not admissible. I'm just saying
22 that under the present circumstances, in relation to these documents,
23 notice given only half a day before a witness who is used to go through
24 the documents in its entirety, if -- that's -- these are circumstances.
25 And, again, this document is not banned, but not to be used at this
1 moment with this witness where questions which are related to the content
2 of whatever documents you have a partial translation of, of course, can
3 be put to the witness.
4 MR. JORDASH: Your Honour, I just wanted the full picture to be
5 known to the Court.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, now we have the full picture.
7 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you. Thank you.
8 Q. As my time is running out, Mr. Theunens, let us have a look at
9 2D295. And while we are waiting for it to show up on the screen, I will
10 suggest to you that I wanted to present to you two documents from the
11 state security administration. One is a document dated the
12 15th of April, 1991, and the other one dated the 15th of August, 1991
13 which the second department of the state security service, the
14 abbreviation for which is AOS, which is American Operative Service, with
15 which Franko Simatovic was involved, was tasked to follow Daniel Snedden,
16 to follow his contacts, and follow the activities of this person through
17 intelligence work.
18 Now, please have a look at this document dated the
19 15th of August, 1991. Would you agree with me that the minister of the
20 the interior, Zoran Sokolovic made this decision to secretly wire-tap the
21 telephone in a privately-owned apartment used by Daniel Snedden, who is
22 an Australian citizen? And as far as you know and based on your
23 investigations, does this have to do with Captain Dragan, also known as
24 Dragan Vasiljkovic?
25 A. Could we just scroll the English translation to the bottom.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Is there any dispute about Mr. Snedden to be
2 identical with Captain Dragan?
3 MR. WEBER: No, Your Honour.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
5 THE WITNESS: The document states what you -- what you just said.
6 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
7 Q. Thank you, Mr. Theunens. Please let us move on to the next
8 document, and that will be 2D317. So we have seen that in the month of
9 August the minister -- and there was an earlier decision suggesting that
10 since April the American Intelligence Service was monitoring
11 Daniel Snedden. Now we have a document dated the 8th of November, 1991
12 It's 2D317.
13 JUDGE ORIE: The earlier document, is that the document which we
14 just decided that we would not use that?
15 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] No, Your Honours. This is a
16 document which I think there is no reason not to use. But I wanted to
17 show two previous similar documents which we will use earlier, because
18 Mr. Weber objected. And this one, 2D295, is a document which I believe
19 OTP does not object to at all.
20 MR. WEBER: Your Honours, if counsel could just --
21 JUDGE ORIE: Let's -- let's --
22 Mr. Bakrac, you said: "So we have seen that in the month of
23 August the minister -- and there was an earlier decision" - and I think
24 you said document - "suggesting that since April the American
25 Intelligence Service was monitoring Daniel Snedden."
1 Which document you had on your mind when you referred to this
2 early decision?
3 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, the document from
4 April is a document that we agreed I could not use, so I just wanted to
5 mention that there was an earlier minister's decision by which --
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I want to know, if you are talking about the
7 earlier decision, which document are you talking about? The document
8 which shows that the American Intelligence Service was monitoring
9 Daniel Snedden, what's the number of it?
10 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, Your Honours, just to
11 clarify, maybe I was not clear because I wished to speed up.
12 This was the Serbian state security service and a group which was
13 called American Intelligence Service or the American Group. It was the
14 one that monitored Snedden.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Do you have a document ID or exhibit number or
16 anything? I understood your observation to refer to the document we just
17 had on our screen earlier with the -- the -- you said you received
18 through your investigators from a potential witness. Was that the
19 document you're referring to?
20 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, please allow me to read
21 this. 2D317 is a document that the Prosecutor objected to. It has to do
22 with wire-tapping Daniel Snedden. And the first sentence says: "Pursuant
23 to a decision of the minister of the interior of the Republic of Serbia
24 number 01-233/1/91 of the 3rd of April, 1991." This has been translated,
25 Your Honour. There is a minister's decision dated the 3rd of --
1 JUDGE ORIE: Are you referring to the document of which we only
2 had a partial translation and which we said you couldn't use? Are you
3 referring to that document, Mr. Bakrac? A yes or a no, please.
4 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] No. I'm not referring to that
5 document now because my learned friend objected. I'm referring to
6 document 2D295.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Could we have that on the screen so that I
8 know what we are talking about.
9 MR. WEBER: Your Honour requested the document ID, the April
10 decision - that was the one that we objected to - it's 2D319.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And 2D239 -- 237 is ... have we seen that
13 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Bakrac.
15 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, the document was not
16 on the screen, but from 2D319 one can see that on the 3rd of April, 1991
17 was issued the first order of the minister of the interior to wire-tap
18 Daniel Snedden. These orders or decisions are renewed, and now I will
19 present to you a decision from the month of April by which the same
20 measure is applied, that is to say, wire-tapping.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Bakrac, don't refer to documents which we
22 haven't seen; that's one. Give us an opportunity to look at documents.
23 Second, don't refer to the content of documents of which we decided that
24 they should not be used at this moment.
25 Please proceed.
1 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Very well. 2D295.
2 Q. Mr. Theunens, can we conclude, based on this document, that the
3 minister of the interior issued an order to the effect that
4 Daniel Snedden, i.e., Captain Dragan, should be monitored and
6 A. I mean, to be precise, it talks about monitoring a telephone
7 number and a flat that is used by Snedden. That's what the document
9 Q. Very well, thank you. Mr. Theunens, let's move on.
10 Please have a look at 2D317 now. And please read through it.
11 2D317. I'll try to summarise it. I don't think you have the document in
12 your report and therefore there's no need for you to look into your
13 report. You can look at it on your screen.
14 Have you had a look, sir?
15 A. Yes, indeed. And I would like to see the bottom of the page or
16 the next page, if there is.
17 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes, please. In the Serbian
18 language as well, or in the B/C/S, we want to see the signature and
20 Q. Mr. Theunens, have you read the document?
21 A. Yes, I did.
22 Q. This is a document filed with the Ministry of Defence on the
23 8 of November, 1991. Is it fair to say that the document indicates that
24 Captain Dragan was, by minister Lieutenant-General Tomislav Simovic,
25 hired to prepare volunteers and to seek from the Serbian TO command to
1 resolve his status?
2 A. Could I please see the first page again, just to make sure that
3 there's no misunderstanding.
4 Q. Sure. Please have a look. I want to direct your attention to
5 the prior approval, prior -- general consent from the chief of the
6 general staff of the SFRY armed forces and the president of the Republic
7 of Serbia
8 Captain Dragan?
9 JUDGE ORIE: I can answer that question: It's no.
10 Please proceed.
11 THE WITNESS: And to answer your previous question, I see this --
12 this document more as a proposal or a suggestion by the minister --
13 JUDGE ORIE: Let's -- let's try to keep matters short.
14 Apparently Mr. Bakrac wants to show this document to seek your approval
15 that it's the Ministry of Defence which seeks the assistance of
16 Captain Dragan in recruitment of volunteers and that the MUP is not
17 mentioned in this document. And, of course, the underlying suggestion,
18 which is a totally different one, is that, therefore, Captain Dragan had
19 nothing to do with the MUP, but that's a different matter. This document
20 doesn't say so. We read in this document as I said.
21 Is that, Mr. Bakrac, what you wanted to establish, at least what
22 you wanted to elicit as evidence from the witness?
23 Then we can proceed.
24 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. Now that
25 Mr. Theunens has seen the document, does it change his position with
1 regard to the relationship between Captain Dragan and Frenki Simatovic.
2 Because of an error on my part, I can't put a question to him in relation
3 to the other two documents.
4 Q. But does it change your position that Frenki Simatovic and
5 Captain Dragan were in the Krajina to pursue the same tasks, or do you
6 stand by your position?
7 A. Your Honours, I stand on my position, and I also refer to P1069
8 and P1066, which provide additional information on relations between
9 Dragan and the Ministry of Defence of the Republic of Serbia
10 JUDGE ORIE: Next question, please, Mr. Bakrac.
11 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
12 Q. Therefore Mr. Theunens, I put it to you that your report is
13 inaccurate in this part too. Captain Dragan was hired by the army, and
14 the MUP of Serbia, that's to say, the state security, had been monitoring
15 his activities from April when he returned from abroad.
16 Will you agree with my statement?
17 A. I agree with the second part of your statement, that he has been
18 monitored. And that is also corroborated by P1062 which is discussed in
19 my report on page 95/96 of part 1 of the report, so.
20 Q. Mr. Theunens, let's look at D107. It's an exhibit.
21 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, my question was not
22 interpreted correctly, or perhaps I puzzled the interpreters. At any
23 rate, my question was that Captain Dragan was hired by the JNA and the TO
24 and that the MUP of Serbia, state security department, had for a period
25 of time been monitoring his activities as part of their intelligence
2 Q. Will you agree with my suggestion?
3 JUDGE ORIE: As a matter of fact that, from the answer, that
4 that's the way in which he understood the question, the way in which the
5 interpreters spoke. Therefore, hired by the army, monitored by the MUP.
6 THE WITNESS: Indeed. I mean, I agree with Your Honours, my
7 answer does not change.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
9 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. Can we have
10 D107 now. I don't think we have it on our screens yet. Or perhaps my
11 assistant has mislabelled the document.
12 THE REGISTRAR: D107 is on the screens.
13 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] D is what I'm looking for.
14 THE REGISTRAR: [Overlapping speakers] ... 2D107.
15 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Perhaps I wasn't ... it's D107.
16 It's an admitted document. It's an exhibit.
17 JUDGE ORIE: What we have at this moment on the screen is
18 2D00107, which apparently is not the document Mr. Bakrac is asking for.
19 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
20 Q. Look at the document, Mr. Theunens. It's a document from the OTP
21 database. I'm interested in the section of your report concerning the
22 Knin Krajina in the second half of 19 --
23 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter isn't sure of the year.
24 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
25 Q. Did you know, when you were doing your report, that
1 Mr. Milan Babic was, on the 9th of October, 1991 - and this is something
2 that's important for our indictment - issuing an order whereby all the
3 police units in the territory of the Serbian Autonomous Region of the
4 Krajina were re-subordinated to the Territorial Defence command?
5 A. I believe I have seen this document before, and it is part of
6 what I considered the power struggle between Mr. Milan Babic and
7 Mr. Milan Martic whereby Milan Babic issued a lot of orders which, when
8 put into context, create an impression that he is attempting to impose
9 his authority; whereas, in reality, it -- Milan Martic has more, what I
10 would call de facto authority, whereas Babic tries to confirm his de jure
12 Q. Mr. Theunens, rather than having a political discussion now, I
13 will have a very simple question for you, since I've run out of time:
14 Tell me, do you know, do you have reasons to doubt that this Babic's
15 order had not been implemented?
16 A. There is, for example, the -- there is the -- the -- I wanted to
17 refer to the situation in Kijevo, but that's in August 1991 where
18 actually the milicija or the MUP of the SAO Krajina is directly
19 subordinated to the JNA and no mention is made of the TO.
20 I haven't seen any documents indicating that we only had units of
21 the SAO Krajina TO and units of the milicija conducting combat operations
22 during fall 1991. The documents I discuss in my report all concerned
23 combat operations under JNA command whereby elements of -- I mean,
24 depending on the area, elements of the TO, of the SAO Krajina, and/or the
25 police --
1 Q. Mr. Theunens --
2 A. Do you want me to answer the question?
3 JUDGE ORIE: The question was whether the -- you have reasons to
4 believe that the order was not implemented. Let's first establish
5 whether you have such reasons, yes or no; and then we can further ask for
6 those reasons. I think in your answer you said something about a
7 struggle for --
8 THE WITNESS: Yes. Yes, Your Honours.
9 JUDGE ORIE: -- for power, and that -- that apparently - that's at
10 least how I understood your answer - that might have been a reason not to
11 automatically believe that the order was implemented, because you
12 referred to a series of orders in that context.
13 Is that well understood?
14 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honours. That is well understood.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
16 Please focus the further questions, Mr. Bakrac.
17 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
18 Q. Mr. Theunens, did TO and police units - I just wanted to cut this
19 short; I don't have time - in the ensuing fighting in the second half of
20 1991 in the area of the Knin Krajina act under the command of the Army of
21 the -- or, rather, the Yugoslav People's Army at the time as per orders
22 on the attacks on Sibenik, Zadar, et cetera?
23 A. Yes, as I explained in my report. I mean, we have to look at the
24 specific documents for the specific combat operations. I mean, when I
25 mean "documents," the orders and the reports about the execution, and
1 there we see how the units operated. And I have included a number of
2 document indicating indeed that MUP of the SAO Krajina and TO of the
3 SAO Krajina, when they participated in combat operations with the JNA,
4 operated under JNA command.
5 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I'm looking at the
7 Q. Thank you, Mr. Theunens.
8 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] I count on the 15 minutes that I
9 suppose I still have, and I need to look at my notes and then stream-line
10 the questions I still have for Mr. Theunens.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. You have your 15 minutes after the break.
12 We'll take a break, and we resume at quarter to 11.00.
13 --- Recess taken at 10.18 a.m.
14 --- On resuming at 10.48 a.m.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Bakrac, please proceed.
16 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
17 Q. Mr. Theunens, my learned friend Mr. Weber asked you in his direct
18 examination on the 25th to give your comments on some reports,
19 specifically P1121 and P1122. Because my time is running out, I will not
20 be calling them up. But do you remember P1122 being a report between the
21 5th and the 6th of August of 1991, the Serbian Autonomous Province of
22 Krajina, the TO Krajina staff, and an order is given to the secretary of
23 the SUP of SAO Krajina, the organ of security, the TO commander, and,
24 finally, it says Frenki; these are the addressees. Is there any need for
25 us to call it up, or do you recall -- do you remember it?
1 A. I remember the document, and an excerpt can be found on page 36
2 of part 1 of the report.
3 Q. Thank you, Mr. Theunens. We can see here that reports are sent
4 to various institutions and that the last addressee is indicated as
5 Frenki, without any supplementary information. And I think that this is
6 within operative intelligence duties that this report is sent to
7 Frenki Simatovic. And I think the same relates or applies to P1121,
8 dated the 15th of July, 1991. Will you agree with me on that score?
9 I suggest that if Franko Simatovic had been institutionalised as
10 part of an organ or an institution, in that case the text would not have
11 simply read "Frenki." Can you agree with me?
12 A. I'm not entirely sure I understand your question, but --
13 JUDGE ORIE: Could I -- could I try to rephrase it.
14 THE WITNESS: Yeah.
15 JUDGE ORIE: If a document is address to the "Frenki," which is
16 apparently uncommon for an institutional address, would you agree with
17 that and with the suggestion that if it would have been addressed to an
18 institution, it would not have been addressed to "Frenki"?
19 THE WITNESS: It would have been more usual to put the full name
20 of Frenki as well as the name of the institution. Because there are
21 other circumstances, for example - and I will try to be short - but in
22 1994, during the latter half of 1994, the RSK sends reports on the
23 situation in the AP WB - and I mean, by that, by RSK; I think it's the
24 Main Staff of the SVK - to a number of addressees, including the minister
25 of interior of the Republic of Serbia
1 of Jovica Stanisic is indicated.
2 The same applies to intelligence reports of the VRS intelligence
3 and security administration in the course of 1994, and that can be found
4 in part 3 of the report.
5 So what I'm saying is you would expect the name of the
6 institution. And if you want to address it to a particular individual in
7 the institution, you use his real name and not a nickname.
8 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
9 Q. Thank you, Mr. Theunens. Let's look at P1123 now, please. The
10 date -- and this is another report from the Serbian Autonomous Province
11 of Krajina, the Main Staff of the Krajina TO, and the date is
12 17 September 1991
14 Did you ever come across a document, outside of the ones you
15 mentioned, which were dated after August 1991 and were sent to Frenki
16 from the SAO Krajina, in addition to the ones we saw from the months of
17 July and August 1991?
18 A. I would first like to answer your first suggestion, when you say
19 the report is not addressed to Frenki. It is correct that the addressee
20 list does not mention the name "Frenki," but it mentions ODB, so the
21 state security office, without indicating which one. I haven't drawn any
22 conclusions on that because I know there was an SAO Krajina -- or
23 attempts, there were attempts, of an SAO Krajina DB, but I'm not sure to
24 what extent that was operational.
25 So -- and, secondly, I have not seen any other documents for the
1 time-period you indicate that mention the name Frenki in the addressee
3 Q. Thank you, Mr. Theunens. A follow-up question on this document:
4 The Serbian Autonomous District of Krajina, the Main Staff of the
5 Krajina TO, and it is sent to the supreme commander of the armed forces
6 of the SAO Krajina, the commander of the armed forces of SAO Krajina, and
7 the chief of the SAO Krajina TO, and the state security organ; you will
8 agree with me that it is only logical for this state security organ to
9 refer to the state security organ of the Krajina if we look at all the
10 other addressees in the document?
11 I can refresh your memory or suggest that P1122, P1121 also have
12 listed as an addressee "ODB," that's to say, state security organ; and my
13 suggestion is that this must relate to the Krajina state security organ
14 rather than state security of the Republic of Serbia
15 A. It's possible. I'm not able to -- as I explained in my previous
16 answer, I'm not able to draw a definite conclusion.
17 Q. Thank you, Mr. Theunens. Please look at 2D294. We'll wait for
18 it to appear. In direct examination you said - and you'll correct me if
19 I'm wrong --
20 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]So 2D294, please.
21 Q. You said that in this period - and I'm waiting for your
22 translation - it's the 14th of July, 1991 - that there were no commanders
23 or there was no TO commander. Have a look and you'll see that it's
24 Major Dragisic Milan who signed in the capacity of the TO commander.
25 Are you familiar with this?
1 That same TO commander issued an order to the Golubic storage
2 facility that for the purposes of the Glina TO, a certain amount of
3 weapons were to be set aside.
4 MR. WEBER: Objection. Counsel is testifying. If he could just
5 direct his questions towards the material in front of him.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Could you rephrase your question, Mr. Bakrac.
7 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes.
8 Q. Mr. Theunens, do you agree with my suggestion that on the
9 14th of July -- or, rather, in the month of July of 1991 in the area of
10 the SAO Krajina there was a Territorial Defence under the command of
11 commander Dragisic who issued an order that the Golubic storage facility
12 should set aside a certain amount of weapons for the purposes of the
13 Glina TO?
14 A. Could we just scroll down to the bottom of the English. Yeah, I
15 can see that, but I have not seen the document before, and my reply
16 during examination was based on the decision, including P959, whereby
17 Milan Babic appoints a commander for the SAO Krajina TO. And, again,
18 based on the other documents I have reviewed, my conclusion is that only
19 in September -- excuse me, only end of September a commander for the SAO
20 Krajina TO staff is appointed.
21 I would have to look in -- I mean, since I haven't seen this
22 document before, I would have to look in the actual competencies of this
23 Major Milan Dragisic. Again, at first glance, it would be unusual to
24 have a major as the commander of the TO of an area as large as the
25 SAO Krajina, knowing that the person who is appointed end of September -
1 and the decision dates from 5th of October - is a retired general of the
2 JNA. Excuse me, is it lieutenant-colonel? Okay, indeed. And he was
3 replaced by a colonel later. But it would be unusual to have a major in
4 that position.
5 Q. But Mr. Theunens, you are now talking about the rank, but wasn't
6 Milan Martic at one point appointed as the commander of the
7 Territorial Defence of SAO Krajina -- or, rather, the minister of defence
8 of SAO Krajina? Did he hold the rank and did he have the proper
9 qualifications for such a position?
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Bakrac, it seems to me that the focus of your
11 question was not about ranks but about an order being given to set aside,
12 et cetera, et cetera.
13 Now, Mr. Theunens, not surprisingly, focuses on the ranks; that's
14 part of his expertise. And instead of taking him back to what you really
15 wanted to know, you follow him in a discussion on ranks. That's at least
16 how I analyse your questioning. If that's what you want, please go
17 ahead. If, however, it is your intention to get to the core of this
18 document apart from ranks, please do so as well.
19 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] No. Thank you, Your Honour.
20 Q. Mr. Theunens, have you heard of the Alfa Training Centre in
21 Bruska, and was it something that you looked into?
22 A. Indeed, Your Honours, I have heard of the Alfa Training Centre in
23 Bruska. And there must be documents in part 1 or part 2 of the report
24 discussing the training centre. I'm just trying to locate them now. But
25 maybe Mr. Bakrac can help me.
1 Q. Mr. Theunens, as I only have two or three minutes at my disposal,
2 I will first ask you if there is anything we do not agree about. Would
3 you agree with me that the 107th Training Centre Alfa was a training
4 centre of the Army of the Republic of Serbian Krajina from its foundation
5 in 1993 all the way to 1995?
6 A. I have a recollection that the training centre already existed
7 prior to the establishment of the SVK, but I'm trying to locate a
8 document to substantiate this conclusion.
9 Q. I do not remember that this is included in your report. If it
10 is, please tell me what is the evidence which shows that the Alfa centre
11 in Bruska had existed even before the forming of the Army of the Republic
12 of Serbian Krajina?
13 A. I can't answer the question now, but I have a recollection -- but
14 if -- I mean, if my recollection is correct, it's in my report, because I
15 do believe that I have included at least a document, one document, on the
16 Alfa Training Centre.
17 Q. Mr. Theunens, I will try to refresh your memory, as my time is
18 running out. Perhaps we might resolve the dilemma. I'm not talking
19 about Golubic; I'm talking about the Alfa centre in Bruska. And I
20 suggest to you that there is not a one single document or piece of
21 evidence in your report which would suggest that the Alfa centre in
22 Bruska had existed before the formation of the Army of the Republic of
23 Serbian Krajina.
24 Due to a lack of time, I would offer the following documents
25 which testify to the fact that between 1993 and 1995 the Alfa centre in
1 Bruska was a centre of the Army of Republic of Serbian Krajina. These
2 are 2D267, 2D247, 2D248, D71, 2D249, 2D286, and Defence also has other
3 documents but as we do not have enough time, it is sufficient to list
4 these and draw the Trial Chamber's attention to these documents which
5 clearly show whose centre this was and when it was founded.
6 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] As my time has run out now,
7 Your Honours.
8 THE WITNESS: I mean, just to add, there is P1178, which is
9 discussed on page -- on, excuse me, part 2 of page 69 which links
10 Dragan -- or which identifies Captain Dragan as the commander of the
11 Alfa Training Centre, but it's an -- it's an undated report. Based on
12 the context, it would be from after 1994. But, indeed, later, it has --
13 I mean, at that time-period, it has a military post number. And now when
14 I stand corrected it's -- I mean, document -- yeah, footnote 189 - but
15 there's no P number - states that the training centre was established on
16 the 25th of June, 1993.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Bakrac --
18 MR. BAKRAC: [No interpretation]
19 JUDGE ORIE: -- I take it that -- I suggest to the parties - on
20 this I'm addressing both Mr. Weber and you and perhaps Mr. Jordash as
21 well - that you prepare a kind of a spreadsheet with all the documents,
22 some of them you have now referred to them, we have not seen them, that
23 we do it as if all of the documents were bar table documents. That may
24 be the most practical way of proceeding, that we have any objections in
25 partial translations, whatever, what has been used, that we put that in a
1 kind of a table, comments of the other parties, and then we'll decide on
3 Mr. Weber.
4 MR. WEBER: Your Honour, the Prosecution was going to suggest
5 that same course today.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That's -- well, I should have waited for you
8 Mr. Bakrac, you are referring now to a couple of documents; you
9 could include them on your list as well. Because it's clear that you say
10 these documents contradict what the expert said in his report about the
11 Alfa centre.
12 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, thank you. I have
13 shortened my examination. I have more documents, but I respect the time
14 allotted to me, even though there are numerous other documents. If you
15 would allow me to ask just one additional question, but we should move
16 into a private session for that.
17 JUDGE ORIE: One second, first of all, before we move into
18 private session. If you have other documents which you wanted to have
19 put to the witness, the structure of your questioning very often was,
20 Have you considered this document; and then that's a document which in
21 your view suggests something which is deviating from what the expert
22 said. And often the expert said, Well, that may be true that this
23 document says this or doesn't say it, but I have set out in my report the
24 reasons why I came to a different conclusion. That's the general
25 structure of the questioning.
1 I suggest to you that if there were other documents you would
2 have wanted to put to the witness, that you could still consider them to
3 include them in the table; to clearly indicate that they have not been
4 put to the witness but that you want, for example, to bar table them; and
5 that, in the explanation of the relevance, you refer to "contradicts
6 conclusion page so and so, Theunens's report." Then we have a context
7 and we can still decide. And of course then the Prosecution can object
8 to it or not, but then we have -- we finally achieve the fullest set of
9 acceptable documentation for the Chamber to rely on.
10 That is my suggestion to you.
11 You want to go into private session for one final question. You
12 know one is one.
13 We move into private session.
14 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] But, Your Honours, I do not know the
15 answer. Perhaps the answer might trigger the need to ask more questions,
16 but I will ask just one.
17 [Private session]
11 Page 8753 redacted. Private session.
3 [Open session]
4 THE REGISTRAR: We are in open session, Your Honours.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
6 45 minutes for you, Mr. Weber.
7 MR. WEBER: Thank you, Your Honour.
8 Re-examination by Mr. Weber:
9 Q. Mr. Theunens, on page 91 to page 109 of yesterday's transcript,
10 you were asked questions related to Vasilije Mijovic. On page 91,
11 lines 24, to page 92, line 4, you indicated that you reviewed
12 65 ter 2D269 which is now admitted as P1585. You also made reference to
13 this exhibit here today. With respect to this exhibit, when you've
14 discussed it -- and yesterday you stated a number of documents were
15 included that provide information on the different assignments of
16 Mr. Mijovic held between 1991 and 1995 time-period. The Prosecution
17 today would like to start by discussing some of the additional documents
18 which were not presented to you so far during your testimony.
19 MR. WEBER: If the Prosecution could please have page 20 of the
20 B/C/S original and page 19 of the English translation of Exhibit P1585.
21 Q. Mr. Theunens, the document that is now appearing before you is a
22 report from the Republic of Serbia MUP, Belgrade Secretariat, dated
23 15 December 1996
24 JUDGE ORIE: Could we have page 20 B/C/S; page 19 English.
25 MR. WEBER: And, Your Honour, I apologise. Could this document
1 not be broadcast to the public.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Not to be made public.
3 Please proceed, Mr. Weber.
4 MR. WEBER:
5 Q. Directing your attention to the fourth paragraph in the document
6 that begins "having discussed the matter thoroughly ..." is there any
7 information in this paragraph which describes the employment of
8 Mr. Mijovic with the MUP of Serbia
9 A. Indeed. The paragraph states that Mr. Mijovic is employed at the
10 Republic of Serbian MUP, second division, state security service, under
11 Jovica Stanisic. And, okay, I will not read it all out -- out all the
12 details, but then there's a reference to a MUP Serbia identity card which
13 was issued 21st of July, 1992.
14 MR. WEBER: Could the Prosecution please have page 32 of the
15 B/C/S and page 30 of the English translation of this Exhibit.
16 Q. Mr. Theunens, this is an Official Note dated 29 June 1993 from
17 the Republic of Serbia MUP police station for border crossing control in
19 described on the 29th of June, 1993, the same date of this document?
20 A. I mean, summarised, it's a report by a policeman who was at the
21 border crossing there and who encountered difficulties with Mr. Mijovic,
22 who was driving an Audi 80 vehicle with what appears to be an official
23 licence plate and he was trying to enter FRY from Bosnia-Herzegovina.
24 And I think he refused to be checked or he made problems when he -- when
25 the policeman insisted on checking him or the vehicle.
1 Q. You say that there was an official reference to an official
2 licence plate; how do you know that?
3 A. I mean the M 601 896. Now, I'm not able here to say -- I'm not
4 an expert in licence plates, whether it's a MUP Serbia or a MUP RS
5 licence plate.
6 Q. According to this document, what occurred after Mijovic produced
7 his official ID card?
8 A. Following a question whether -- as to whether he had weapons,
9 Mijovic replied that he had various weapons and explosive devices.
10 Q. What does this Official Note demonstrate?
11 A. Well, there are various interpretations possible, but it shows,
12 okay, that Mijovic was travelling from Bosnia-Herzegovina to -- to FRY on
13 board of an -- what I saw as an official vehicle, I mean, of a private
14 nature but still officially registered, with weapons and explosives on
15 board, and he refuses to be checked by a regular policeman at the border
17 MR. WEBER: Could the Prosecution please have page 22 of the
18 B/C/S and English of this exhibit.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Weber, could you -- the last question, what the
20 the Official Note demonstrates, was not focused. And resulted in an
21 answer which brought us nothing new compared to what we had heard
23 Please proceed.
24 MR. WEBER:
25 Q. Mr. Theunens, in light of the cross-examination questions that
1 were posed to you about the role of the MUP in the border, what does this
2 document demonstrate to you specifically?
3 A. It shows that at least at the date of the document the MUP of the
4 Republic of Serbia
5 moving from Bosnia-Herzegovina, so from the territory held by the
6 Bosnian Serbs towards Serbia
7 Q. Mr. Theunens, this is a candidate questionnaire dated
8 11 December 1995
9 Directing your attention to the entry for "job position and information
10 on career in the service to date," what does Vasilije Mijovic himself
11 indicate as the answer in this questionnaire?
12 A. He states that since 1991 he is in the JATD. And my conclusion
13 is this is the JATD of the MUP of Republic of Serbia.
14 Q. In this questionnaire at all, does Mr. Mijovic say he was
15 re-assigned or transferred or subordinated to another institution?
16 A. Maybe if we can -- I mean, on this, what I see on the screen,
17 not; but if we move downwards, no, there's -- I don't see such a --
18 JUDGE ORIE: [Overlapping speakers] ... it's many pages, this
19 document. I invite the parties to agree on whether it says or doesn't
20 say that he moved to any other -- when reading the document, which I did
21 once, I didn't find any such reference to it.
22 Please proceed.
23 MR. WEBER:
24 Q. With respect to the last three documents that I showed you today
25 and in the context of the exhibits shown to you by the Defence yesterday
1 and the documents referenced in your report, could you please tell us
2 what your opinion would be on Mr. Mijovic's employment between 1991 and
4 A. I will repeat what I stated yesterday and even also this morning
5 that between 1991 and 1995, in this case we are looking at
6 Vasilije Mijovic, he is an employee of the MUP Serbia, even if there are
7 documents suggesting that the units he's commanding during the
8 time-period belong to local Serb MUP. Some documents are RSK MUP or
9 SAO Krajina MUP, other documents Republika Srpska MUP. But, in fact, he
10 is always a member of the MUP Serbia.
11 Q. One last document that I would like to discuss with you based on
12 what you just said in your last answer ...
13 MR. WEBER: Could the Prosecution please have page 29 of the
14 B/C/S and page 27 of the English of this exhibit.
15 Q. Mr. Theunens, this is a list of personnel who have Krajina MUP ID
16 cards. For the record, could you please read off the first four names on
17 this list.
18 A. Number one, Zivojin Ivanovic; number 2, Radojica Bozovic;
19 number 3, Nikola Loncar; number 4, Vasilije Mijovic.
20 Q. In the context of the opinion that you just expressed on page 43,
21 lines 6 through 12 of today's transcript, could you please tell us what
22 this document indicates?
23 A. Ideally I would have to see the same forms for these three other
24 individuals as we did for Vasilije Mijovic, but in the absence of that, I
25 would still conclude that also these other people, again, based on the
1 documents I have reviewed during the preparation of my report, that also
2 these three other individuals are members of the MUP Serbia throughout
3 the relevant time-period, even if there are other documents that
4 associate them with local MUP - I mean, SAO Krajina, RSK, or
5 RS MUP - during that time-period.
6 Q. On page 74, line 10, to page 77, line 7 of yesterday's
7 transcript, you were asked questions about Radojica Raja Bozovic. On
8 page 76, lines 8 to 11, you were asked whether you came across a piece of
9 evidence or a document proving that Raja Bozovic was in the Serbian MUP
10 at all at any time and especially in 1994 and 1995.
11 In the course of this examination, you were shown 65 ter 2D65
12 which the Defence submitted indicates that Mr. Bozovic was a part of the
13 RS MUP. The Prosecution would like to discuss with you another Defence
14 exhibit that was provided to you on the CD --
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. --
16 MR. WEBER: I haven't even said what the exhibit is. If we could
17 at least --
18 MR. JORDASH: [Overlapping speakers] ... I'm going to say that
19 could Mr. Stanisic go to the restroom?
20 MR. WEBER: I apologise, Mr. Jordash.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, would -- I take that he we prefer that we
22 continue, or?
23 MR. JORDASH: We can continue, Your Honour.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, yes. Then, thank you. Because we would stop
25 if Mr. Stanisic would insist on that or even asked for that, Mr. Jordash.
1 Please proceed, Mr. Weber.
2 MR. WEBER:
3 Q. The Prosecution would like to discuss with you another exhibit
4 that was provided to you in notice to the Prosecution by the
5 Simatovic Defence for your cross-examination but not discussed with you
6 throughout your testimony.
7 MR. WEBER: Could the Prosecution please have 65 ter 2D268. This
8 is the JSO personnel file of Raja Bozovic.
9 Q. Mr. Theunens, did you have occasion --
10 JUDGE ORIE: Not to be shown to the public?
11 MR. WEBER: Your Honour, thank you for reminding me. If we could
12 please not broadcast to the public.
13 Q. Mr. Theunens, did you have occasion to review this file and the
14 materials that were provided to you by the Simatovic Defence?
15 A. I did, and I didn't remember the exact contents of this file or
16 this document when answering the question yesterday in relation to
17 1994/1995 documents on Radojica Bozovic.
18 MR. WEBER: Could the Prosecution please have page 8 of the B/C/S
19 and page 7 of the English translation.
20 Q. This document that now appears before you is a recommendation for
21 hiring from the JATD Deputy Commander Milan Radonjic. Could you please
22 tell us what the first paragraph of this document indicates?
23 A. It's a proposal to -- that is submitted. A proposal submitted to
24 hire Radojica Bozovic pursuant to a decision of the minister of interior
25 of the republic. And this decision dates the 4th of August, 1993
1 the specific nature of the position he is proposed for is indicated.
2 Q. According to this document, does it indicate that he is -- that's
3 with respect to a permanent employee position?
4 A. Yeah, I missed that, I'm sorry. It's a permanent employee
5 position in the ATD of the RDB.
6 MR. WEBER: Could the Prosecution please have page 9 of the B/C/S
7 and page 8 of the English translation of this exhibit.
8 The Prosecution notes that a similar document has already been
9 admitted. I can provide the P number at a break.
10 Q. Mr. Theunens, this is a request for operative vetting dated
11 28 February 1992
13 information contained in this document?
14 A. The document mentions the name Radojica Bozovic, and according to
15 the document he is -- on the 28th of February, 1992, he is an employee of
16 the revenue administration in the municipality of Tito Grad
17 Q. Does this document indicate what unit the vetting is on behalf?
18 A. Indeed. It's on behalf of the special unit of the -- of the MUP
19 of Republic of Serbia
20 Q. And according to the document, who is indicated as the signatory?
21 A. The chief of the SDB state security service Jovica Stanisic.
22 MR. WEBER: Could the Prosecution please have page 5 of the B/C/S
23 and page 4 of the English translation.
24 Q. Mr. Theunens, could you please just take a second and look at
25 this document and then identify it for the record.
1 A. Well, I mean, the title, Your Honours, the title is clear; it's a
2 background-check report on Radojica Bozovic, and it's dated
3 27th of October, 1993, state security service, Podgorica sector, i.e.,
4 the Republic of Montenegro
6 MR. WEBER: Could the Prosecution please have page 6 of the B/C/S
7 and page 5 of the English translation. It is the next page of this
8 report. Specifically if we could have the lower half of the English
10 Q. Does the last paragraph above the section 3 of this document
11 indicate who requested the background check on Raja Bozovic?
12 A. Indeed, Your Honours, sector 2 of the SDB, in view of Bozovic's
13 candidacy for employment in the MUP Serbia.
12 MR. WEBER:
13 Q. "According to sources, he was wounded several times, especially
14 during the fighting in Bosnia and Herzegovina, in which he stayed the
15 longest. According to the information at our disposal, Radojica is
16 currently staying at a camp (Karadordjevo has been mentioned) where he is
17 involved in training and preparing Special Forces. According to an
18 unverified source, this is a paramilitary formation belonging to one of
19 the parties."
20 Mr. Theunens, could you please analyse this information and the
21 information in the two previous documents I showed you today in the
22 context of the exhibits you cite in your report concerning Raja Bozovic?
23 A. Your Honours, it's a similar situation as we discussed with
24 Vasilije Mijovic. Obviously the reports have to be seen in context, and,
25 for example, I haven't seen many references that Bozovic is identified as
1 Crnogorac, his usual nickname is Kobac; but overall the information,
2 i.e., on the presence in Croatia
3 combat operations, is coherent with documents provided by other sources I
4 have included in my report, as well as the information on his membership
5 of the MUP Serbia
6 MR. WEBER: With respect to this exhibit, on page 68 of the B/C/S
7 version of 2D268, appears a document with Defence ERN 2D00-3324. The ERN
8 assigned by the ICTY Evidence Unit is also visible on this document as
9 0609-0241. The Prosecution observes that this personnel file consists of
10 71 pages, and this -- only this one document in the personnel file is not
11 present in the uploaded translation. The Prosecution does have this
12 document available and translated, and we ask that we call up
13 65 ter 5161.
14 Q. Mr. Theunens, as you have not been able to --
15 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Bakrac.
17 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] It's a document from 1998 which is
18 why it wasn't admitted. I don't know if it's relevant for a document
19 relating to 1998 ...
20 JUDGE ORIE: Listen to the questions and see.
21 Mr. Weber, you are now aware of the doubts as to the relevance,
22 due to the year.
23 Please proceed.
24 MR. WEBER:
25 Q. Mr. Theunens, as you have not seen a translation of this
1 document, could you please just take a moment and read through the
2 document and let the Chamber know when you've read it.
3 A. I've read through the document, Your Honours.
4 Q. This document is a Republic of Serbia Ministry of Internal
5 Affairs Department of State Security JSO document dated 18 April 1998.
6 It relates to the proposal to decorate five members of the detachment.
7 On page 72, lines 9 through 10 of yesterday's transcript, it was
8 put to you whether or not individuals in the state security may have had
10 Does this document indicate who it is signed by?
11 A. It is signed by a Colonel Radojica Bozovic.
12 Q. According to Raja Bozovic --
13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Weber, you misrepresent --
14 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour.
15 JUDGE ORIE: -- yesterday. I think the issue was whether at a
16 certain point in time they had ranks, and that point in time was not
18 MR. WEBER: Your Honour, I understand that, and I'm going to
19 other date references contained in the document.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Then, Mr. Bakrac, this meets your concerns, I take
22 Please proceed.
23 MR. WEBER:
24 Q. According to Raja Bozovic, does he mention when the MUP reserve
25 forces were first established in this document?
1 A. Your Honours, he states that they have been members of the
2 MUP reserve since 1991. And then it follows: "... , that is, since the
3 unit" --
4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Weber, it's just reading. It says:
5 "Since 1991, that is, since the unit was first established."
6 So that's clear. I usually answer the questions which are just a
7 matter of reading.
8 MR. WEBER:
9 Q. Mr. Theunens, does this --
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Bakrac.
11 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, just to be fair, I
12 won't have much time for re-examination. Reference is made to somebody
13 who isn't either Bozovic or Mijovic. They are apparently members of a
14 MUP, but which MUP, particularly, is not specified. These are certain
15 individuals who are said to have been members of the MUP in 1991, but we
16 don't have either Ivanovic, Bozovic, Mijovic, or anyone else here.
17 JUDGE ORIE: At the same time, on the top of this document, it
18 appears that it originates from the Republic of Serbia Ministry of
19 Internal Affairs. So apparently they are, for whatever reason, playing a
20 role in this matter.
21 Please proceed, Mr. Weber.
22 MR. WEBER:
23 Q. Mr. Theunens, I brought up this date reference at the end of the
24 first paragraph because in context of the reference to the anniversary on
25 the 4th of May, which appears earlier in the text, in the other exhibits
1 that you reviewed in your report, particularly section 9 of P1075, what
2 is your analysis of the existence of the special-purpose units or MUP
3 units of the state -- of the MUP of Serbia?
4 A. Your Honours, at this moment in time I cannot give a precise
5 date, but there are various documents, especially in sections 2 and 3 of
6 the report, that mention special-purpose units of the MUP of the Republic
7 of Serbia
8 the Republic of Serbia
9 onwards. But I cannot give you a precise date as to the establishment of
10 that unit.
11 Q. Thank you, Mr. Theunens.
12 MR. WEBER: The Prosecution would tender 2D268 into --
13 JUDGE ORIE: We'll deal with all of the documents together in the
14 table, isn't it, Mr. Weber?
15 MR. WEBER: I mean, Your Honour, we can do that, of course.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, that's -- otherwise it's takes time now.
17 Please proceed.
18 MR. WEBER: In order to save is little bit more time, as the
19 Prosecution mentioned yesterday, we would like to at least draw the
20 Chamber's attention to some additional documents. Instead of going
21 through 22 more exhibits --
22 JUDGE ORIE: Is that --
23 MR. WEBER: -- the Prosecution has prepared a list which we can
24 provide to the Chamber after the examination and discussing it with the
1 JUDGE ORIE: Is that material which is already in evidence?
2 MR. WEBER: It is material that is referenced in Mr. Theunens's
3 report. There are some documents which are being opposed.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Any objection against ...
5 Apparently you want to draw our attention to certain documents
6 which are directly related to questions put to the witness, is that --
7 and where you thought that he may have overlooked certain documents which
8 provide useful information on the question, is that, Mr. Weber, what you
9 intend to do?
10 MR. WEBER: Yes, Your Honour. And the direct reference would be
11 at page 8467 of the transcript --
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
13 MR. WEBER: -- in the examination by the Stanisic Defence as to
14 documents relating between Arkan and the SDB and also the MUP of Serbia.
15 Just those documents.
16 JUDGE ORIE: That seems to be practical, of course. At any later
17 stages of the proceedings, of course, you could argue that the
18 information given by the expert witness should be completed by looking at
19 other documents as well, but you now clearly put it in this context.
20 MR. WEBER: That's correct, Your Honour. And that's all we're
22 JUDGE ORIE: Any objections against proceeding this way?
23 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, we should first have a
24 look at the list. But I would like the Trial Chamber to caution the
25 Prosecutor that he should not be testifying and supplementing
1 Mr. Theunens's evidence with his submissions and evidence.
2 I think you observed yesterday that Mr. Weber tried to underpin
3 Mr. Theunens's testimony by referring to certain evidence. And as for
4 the list, I should like to first have a look at it.
5 JUDGE ORIE: I do understand that you want to have a look at this
6 list. What I did yesterday was mainly asking Mr. Weber not to intervene
7 during the cross-examination for those purposes, not that he could not
8 draw the attention of the Chamber to certain documents which would shed
9 additional light on certain matters which were subject of the
11 Mr. Jordash.
12 MR. JORDASH: Could I suggest the following, Your Honours: That
13 I would wish to have a break to consider what questions I would like to
14 ask Mr. Theunens in response to the Bozovic and Mijovic re-examination.
15 I don't anticipate that the questions I would like to ask would take
16 longer than 10 minute, but I could certainly do it more efficiently if I
17 could sit down and look at what Mr. Weber has just done, which has
18 completely took me by surprise.
19 And perhaps in the break, if Your Honours are with me on that, we
20 could discuss what Mr. Weber wants to do in relation to this latest
21 suggestion. Because, in relation to the suggestion, if what my learned
22 friend is seeking to do is to say, Well, Mr. Theunens has given a report,
23 he's provided a title and underneath the title offered his support for
24 that proposition, but we the Prosecution now want to say you must look
25 elsewhere in the report in addition to that ... so it's to find
1 additional support for Mr. Theunens' particular proposition; we would
2 oppose that approach. And perhaps we can discuss it outside of court and
3 find out what Mr. Weber wants to do.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I'm a bit concerned - it's quarter to 12.00,
5 Mr. Jordash - if you want to have a break now, and I take it that
6 Mr. Stanisic would prefer to be transferred back to the UNDU at 12.00, as
8 First of all, I -- I'll discuss with my colleagues whether I
9 agree with you that if Mr. Theunens says, Well, I don't know exactly
10 where or don't remember any documents there and there, whether Mr. Weber
11 would not be in a position to say, but we could assist the Chamber by
12 pointing at certain documents, that's --
13 MR. JORDASH: I certainly don't oppose that. What I oppose is
14 this: If Mr. Theunens hasn't been able to find a particular reference,
15 of course it's only fair that -- and right, that Your Honours have that
16 pointed out to you. But if Mr. Theunens has come along and written a
17 report which says the Serbian MUP are connected to Arkan, this is how I
18 approach the issue, these are the exhibits which I rely upon; the Defence
19 have come along and then said, well, those exhibits don't support that
20 proposition. And then my learned friends have then gone back to the
21 report and gone to a different part of the report and found other
22 exhibits --
23 JUDGE ORIE: We don't have to -- we don't need Mr. Theunens for
24 that at this moment, because you are objecting against a way of
25 proceeding --
1 MR. JORDASH: Yes.
2 JUDGE ORIE: -- by the Prosecution. We can consider that, whether
3 we would agree with that or not.
4 MR. JORDASH: Yes, I mean, either Mr. Theunens has done that
5 analysis and listed the analysis under the proposition or he hasn't.
6 Whether there's other support for his proposition --
7 JUDGE ORIE: [Overlapping speakers] ... well --
8 MR. WEBER: [Overlapping speakers] ... well, Your Honours,
9 just to --
10 MR. JORDASH: -- then that's another issue.
11 JUDGE ORIE: It's -- it's clear you object to the way in which
12 the Prosecution, apart from the questioning of Mr. Theunens, wishes to
13 proceed on these matters. That's clear.
14 MR. WEBER: Your Honour, if -- just to make it short, we're just
15 talking about providing a list. And we rely on what the report says and
16 what the documents say; that's it.
17 JUDGE ORIE: We'll see. We'll see what will -- what will be
18 presented to us.
19 MR. WEBER: Your Honour, the Prosecution did have one last
21 JUDGE ORIE: One last matter, yes.
22 MR. WEBER: And it's a matter that I believe we need to address
23 over the break too. With respect to Mr. Theunens's report, we would just
24 like to formally tender it again on the record. It's P1575. We need to
25 upload a corrected version which we will do under 65 ter 5811.1.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, that's a technicality. No decision has yet
2 been taken.
3 Mr. Jordash.
4 MR. JORDASH: Your Honours, we would ask that we be allowed to
5 make written submissions on the admissibility of this report. In light
6 of -- we've asked the Prosecution, and Mr. Theunens cannot -- or
7 testifies that he cannot remember what work he did on the Stanisic case.
8 We are waiting for the Prosecution to respond, once they've searched
9 their records, to find out Mr. Theunens' involvement with the
10 Stanisic case outside of the compilation of the report.
11 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber has no problems in receiving written
12 submissions on this issue.
13 Mr. Weber.
14 Thank you.
15 MR. WEBER: Your Honour, it would be useful in that situation if
16 the Defence could be expressing what their objection is. So we're
17 just -- it's a very large report that's 426 pages. If they could do that
18 in writing initially and then have us have the opportunity to respond, it
19 would be, I think, more efficient than --
20 JUDGE ORIE: I -- yes, of course, it goes without saying
21 Mr. Jordash is still waiting for certain information. Once he has
22 received that information, I take it that he'll make his submissions and
23 then we'll -- written submissions, and there will be an opportunity for
24 you to respond. So I can imagine that in the beginning you would be
25 very -- very short and then that the bulk of your argument would come in
1 response to what Mr. Jordash wants to raise. That seems fair to me.
2 MR. JORDASH: Yes, we -- we accept that.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Bakrac.
4 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes. I agree, Your Honour. I can
5 see that Mr. Weber is seated, and I'd like Their Honours to allow me
6 between 10 to 15 minutes because Mr. Weber has raised certain issues that
7 call for re-cross examination.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Weber, may I take it that you've put all the
9 questions to the witness you intended to put to the witness?
10 MR. WEBER: That's correct, Your Honour. But we -- we would
11 object to a re-cross examination on these documents, especially by the
12 Simatovic Defence on the fact that the Simatovic Defence put questions to
13 the witness related to these individuals and these were documents that
14 were provided to him by the Simatovic Defence in the course of his review
15 for his testimony.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, let's see whether --
17 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, may I respond. My
18 time was limited. These are 78 documents. Did I have time to go through
19 all these documents with Mr. Theunens? I did say that I choice those
20 that were a priority to me. And these are all Prosecution documents.
21 Mr. Weber did not raise issues with relation to these documents
22 either in his direct nor did I in my cross do so, but he did so in
23 re-examination, and I don't think it's fair for him to oppose to me
24 having a chance to do so in my re-cross.
25 JUDGE ORIE: I think that Mr. Weber specifically addressed the
1 Mijovic and, to a lesser extent, the Bozovic personnel file, so that
2 certainly is a matter to the extent you have not dealt with that, which,
3 as far as Mr. Mijovic is concerned, is -- by the way, is P1585, formerly
4 known as 2D269 which was admitted into evidence and not under seal.
5 MR. WEBER: Your Honour, I thought that at the time it was clear
6 that we -- that the document not be broadcast. I don't think we put on
7 the record at the time that it was under seal.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Then P1585, the status now changes; it's
9 admitted under seal.
10 Mr. Jordash.
11 MR. JORDASH: Only in a brief response that we, the
12 Stanisic Defence, did not deal with Mijovic or Bozovic during our
14 JUDGE ORIE: That's -- that's different. Mijovic was introduced,
15 although not the whole of P1585. Mr. Weber then later found other parts.
16 MR. JORDASH: Yes.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Now, you asked for 10 minutes, and then I'm -- are
18 there any questions you could put to the witness now, or do you need this
19 break? Because we are scheduled to start a videolink this afternoon, and
20 the last thing I could -- well, I would say not dream of, but the real
21 nightmare, certainly for Mr. Theunens, would be to be re-called at a
22 later stage.
23 MR. JORDASH: Is it possible just to pause for 10 minutes? It
24 would just --
25 JUDGE ORIE: I don't know whether we have -- first of all,
1 Mr. Stanisic. We specifically scheduled a meeting today to take into
2 account as well the interests of Mr. Stanisic, that there would be
3 sufficient time to return to the UNDU because a normal two half-day
4 session takes more time.
5 MR. JORDASH: Your Honour, I can try to proceed now as
6 efficiently as possible.
7 JUDGE ORIE: If you would please try to do so, and then we'll see
8 at the end where we are.
9 Please proceed.
10 MR. JORDASH: Could we have, please, on e-court 65 ter 4257.
11 Further Cross-examination by Mr. Jordash:
12 Q. What is going to appear on e-court, Mr. Theunens, is a second
13 request for a check on Bozovic, which is to be found in Bozovic's
14 personnel file. This is the one that Mr. Weber didn't put to you. The
15 one you saw was a request for background -- for a background check dated
16 in 1992, but there is another check which is dated -- sorry, there's
17 another request dated the 16th of August, 1993.
18 MR. WEBER: Your Honour, I just want to correct the -- one, that
19 we ask that the document not be broadcast; two, that this is just from a
20 different individual's personnel file.
21 JUDGE ORIE: It's a different individual.
22 MR. WEBER: I'm not objecting to the line of questioning though.
23 I understand where Mr. Jordash is going.
24 MR. JORDASH: Sorry, could we have 4257 on e-court.
25 Q. Perhaps I can try to shortcut this. I think it's fair to say,
1 Mr. Theunens, that there's nothing in Bozovic's file, personnel file,
2 which indicates that the vetting or the background check that was
3 conducted by the Serbian MUP was completed until 1993. And there's
4 nothing in the background -- sorry, there's nothing in the personnel file
5 which indicates that he was employed until after the background check had
6 been completed. Does that in any way --
7 A. Is this a memory test? I mean, I would like to have the copy of
8 the personnel file in order to check. I don't remember -- I mean --
9 Q. [Overlapping speakers] ... but you don't --
10 A. -- there are 192 documents on the CD. I --
11 Q. But you don't know what I'm going to ask you yet, so ...
12 A. No, but, I mean, I try to understand your question, and in order
13 to understand and to understand your assumptions, I would want to compare
14 them with the document.
15 Q. They're not -- I'm just telling you --
16 JUDGE ORIE: Let's first -- let's first wait what the question of
17 Mr. Jordash is. Does that in any way, yes?
18 MR. JORDASH:
19 Q. On the other hand, we have a document, which we've seen and was
20 put to you by Mr. Weber, where Mr. Bozovic was asserting that he was
21 employed since 1991, and you recall that? We've dealt with it about
22 15 minutes ago. Correct?
23 A. He put it in his personal application form. Now --
24 Q. Yeah.
25 A. -- I have no reason to doubt that it's incorrect. Because if
1 it's incorrect, I would, on the basis of the background checks, I don't
2 think that a candidate who would lie about his pass would still be
3 accepted. I mean, I don't know how it goes into the MUP Serbia, but
4 that's how it works in the UN, at least.
5 Q. Does the --
6 A. And other organisations I've worked for.
7 Q. Does the contradiction between what is contained in the personnel
8 file and the assertion by Bozovic not give rise, in your mind, to any
9 doubt as to Mr. Bozovic's assertion?
10 A. I can only answer the question, Your Honours, if I had the
11 opportunity to look at the file at its entirety in order to identify any
12 possible inconsistencies.
13 Q. Well, I've given you the inconsistency. And if I'm wrong about
14 that, my learned friend Mr. Weber will tell you I'm wrong. There is that
15 inconsistency, and I'm asking you consider it and say whether that in any
16 way makes you reflect on what Mr. Bozovic asserted about his employment
17 since 1991. If you don't want to, that's fine. We can move on.
18 A. It's not a question of wanting; it's a question of -- I try my
19 best to answer your questions, but you put something forward to me, I
20 want to check it. That's how I -- that's -- that's my job as analyst.
21 And in order to be able to check it, I would have to look at the whole
22 file again. And --
23 JUDGE ORIE: As a matter of fact, Mr. Jordash, what you are more
24 or less asking, although with a special eye for Mr. Theunens, is to more
25 or less evaluate the evidence on this matter, which is, of course, fine
1 if an expert does that. Of course, the Chamber has do that as well, if
2 there are certain inconsistencies.
3 Now, what we are therefore seeking at this moment is whether
4 Mr. Theunens has any knowledge at this moment which would allow him to
5 immediately answer and say, No, for this and this reason I consider this
6 inconsistency to be decided in favour of A or B. That's apparently what
7 you're asking him.
8 MR. JORDASH: Yes.
9 JUDGE ORIE: And I understand his answer to be that, I would need
10 to go through all of it, but I do agree that there is some inconsistency
11 which certainly has drawn the attention of the Chamber to that.
12 MR. JORDASH: Could I -- Your Honour, I take the point. Could I
13 just ask then for -- I can shortcut this. Could I just have a moment.
14 [Defence counsel confer]
15 MR. JORDASH:
16 Q. I don't know if you have this knowledge or not, but can you think
17 of any employment benefit which might arise or which might be affected by
18 a claim post facto of being employed for a longer period of time in the
19 Serbian MUP? Let me simplify it. In 1995, can you think of any benefit
20 which might arise or --
21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Jordash, let's -- what apparently you want to
22 know is could it have any advantage in lying about your employment --
23 MR. JORDASH: Right.
24 JUDGE ORIE: -- pensions, whatever. You could think of that, at
25 least the Chamber could think of that.
1 Do you ever any specific knowledge in this context what kind of
2 benefit someone would have by cheating upon his past in the service?
3 MR. JORDASH:
4 Q. That's the point.
5 A. There are always people who try to outsmart the system, but I
6 would expect the system to verify this kind of information because
7 apparently there seems to be or there could be an incentive for some less
8 honest people to try to be -- to try to outsmart the system. But, I
9 mean, that's why there is a system, and that's why there are background
10 checks, to check, among other things, the information candidates provide.
11 Because I can imagine if you apply for a --
12 JUDGE ORIE: This is a rather general -- this is, I would say,
13 common knowledge.
14 THE WITNESS: Yeah.
15 JUDGE ORIE: It's also common knowledge that if you have
16 accomplices at the right place that you should -- certainly should not
17 deviate from what the fraud is. But then you need others as well.
18 You say it's not that easy, it takes a bit, to defraud -- in
19 order to get those benefits, in order to defraud the system?
20 THE WITNESS: I mean, my understanding of MUP Serbia - and I
21 haven't analysed it in detail I have to admit I - but I would expect that
22 they would be in a position to verify information of candidates for
23 sensitive positions like memberships or membership of a specialised unit
24 like the special-purpose unit.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Next question, Mr. Jordash.
1 MR. JORDASH: No further questions, thank you.
2 JUDGE ORIE: No further questions.
3 Mr. Bakrac, if you can finish in a couple of minutes, because
4 then we don't have to take any specific measures. Otherwise, we'll have
5 to inquire whether Mr. Stanisic and Simatovic wanted to leave and return
6 to the UNDU at this moment. But if it's just a matter of a couple of
7 minutes, then we could give it a try.
8 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I'll try and focus on
9 the documents that Mr. Weber referred to.
10 Can we have P1585. It's page 32 in B/C/S and page 30 in English.
11 JUDGE ORIE: That's the document about the incident at the
12 border, the matters raised being the licence plates and ... yes.
13 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Please put -- Mr. Theunens will remember, so please
15 immediately put your focused question to him.
16 Further Cross-examination by Mr. Bakrac:
17 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Theunens, it reads here that
18 Vasilije Mijovic introduced himself and said he was a member of the DB.
19 Can you find information therein as to which state security he was a
20 member of?
21 A. Could you tell me which line? I'm trying to find the DB.
22 Q. I will try to find it in English. It's line 8 in the second
24 [In English] "At the request ..."
25 JUDGE ORIE: He said that he was a major in the state security.
1 THE WITNESS: I see it now, yes. Mm-hm.
2 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
3 Q. In answer to Mr. Weber's question, you said that this was proof
4 of the fact that he was a major in the Serbian state security. Do you --
5 can you find it anywhere in this document where it is stated here that
6 he's a major in the Serbian state security?
7 A. I don't think we discussed that part with Mr. Weber. I mean --
8 JUDGE ORIE: We'll check that. We'll check that.
9 Next question, please.
10 We'll see what the testimony of Mr. Theunens exactly was. I'll
11 take care of that.
12 THE WITNESS: He states that he is a major in the state security.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
14 THE WITNESS: Now, we could speculate why he says that, but, I
15 mean, I don't think that will be of great assistance.
16 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]
17 Q. Mr. Theunens --
18 JUDGE ORIE: Please wait for the next question.
19 Mr. Bakrac, please proceed. I'll check exactly what Mr. Theunens
20 said about it.
21 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
22 Q. Mr. Theunens, let's look at P488 now.
23 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Pages 5 and 6 in B/C/S. And pages 6
24 and 7 in English.
25 Q. Look at page 1. To proceed fast, I'll say that it's the official
1 identification Socialist Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina.
2 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Can we have page 2. So this is an
3 ID paper dated the 21st of March. Can we have page 2, which is pages 6
4 and 7 in English. Pages 6 and 7 in English. It's pages 6 and 7 in
5 English. Can we have the next page in English, please.
6 Q. Can you see that on the 20th of January, 1992,
7 Mr. Vasilije Mijovic was in possession of an official ID of the MUP of
8 Bosnia-Herzegovina? In other words, sometime before the events Mr. Weber
9 discussed with you.
10 A. I mean, this document states, indeed, the 20th of January, that
11 he has an ID with the Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina. But I think the
12 other document refers to something like November or May 1993, the
13 crossing incident, when we have a totally different situation on the
14 ground. I don't think he would have tried to pass -- I mean, based on my
15 understanding of the situation, I don't think that Mr. Mijovic would have
16 tried to pass the crossing in Mali Zvornik towards Serbia or FRY with
17 showing identity card of the Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina.
18 JUDGE ORIE: But that's just assumption.
19 THE WITNESS: But that's based on my understanding of the
20 situation, Your Honours.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Bakrac, I tried to verify in the transcript
22 whether any question was put or whether anything was said about an
23 answer, Mr. Mijovic saying that he was a major in the state security. I
24 did not find any reference to that at all. So, therefore, if you want to
25 revisit it, you will have to indicate exactly what -- where the witness
1 testified about being a major. It, however, draws our attention that
2 apparently in 1993, in this report --
3 MR. BAKRAC: [Overlapping speakers] ...
4 JUDGE ORIE: -- someone was said to have this rank in the state
5 security, which might need additional attention. Because if there were
6 no ranks, it may cast some doubt. It also -- it's possible that another
7 conclusion should be drawn that there were ranks at the time. We'll
8 carefully consider that.
9 Please proceed.
10 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
11 Q. Mr. Theunens, let's go back to P1585 now, page 22. This is what
12 Mr. Weber showed you.
13 JUDGE ORIE: We are talking about the application form, the
14 candidate details. Could you already phrase your first question, Mr. --
15 and I mean while we are waiting for it to appear on our screen.
16 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes.
17 Q. Mr. Theunens, this is information relating to candidates.
18 Mr. Weber showed you what the situation was in the -- in JPAG in -- as of
19 1991. Do you -- is this a unit of the MUP of the Republic of Serbia
20 your mind, or do you allow for the possibility that it may be a unit from
21 a different republic?
22 A. I haven't analysed the police structures of the different
23 republics in detail, but if it would have been the JATD of another
24 republic, I would have expected that he would have indicated of which
25 republic this JATD was. And again --
1 Q. Let's move on because we have to do this fast.
2 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Can we have page 28 to see where and
3 when the request was made, -- or the application. Can we have the last
4 page which is page 28 in English.
5 Q. To proceed quickly, the date is 11 December 1995, in Bijela.
6 Vasilije Mijovic signed it. Do you know where Bijela is? You were in
7 that area, and you may be familiar with it.
8 A. I mean, I know a Bijela in Baranja or close to Baranja, there was
9 a crossing, but maybe there is also another Bijela. I can't see the
10 English translation anymore, unfortunately. I touched the screen.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. To your knowledge you know one -- of one
12 Bijela in Baranja.
13 Please proceed.
14 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honours. In Croatia.
15 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. I have two
16 brief questions. 2D268, please. We want to go back to the issue of
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, could you already put the question when we are
19 waiting for the document.
20 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, it's 268, page 8 in
21 B/C/S and 7 in English.
22 Q. What we had on our screens was a proposal to admit Bozovic.
23 Since this is a proposal by Jovica Stanisic, do you know if Bozovic was
24 indeed admitted on this proposal; and if so, when?
25 So we have Milan
1 Interior and says - look at it - that the anti-terrorist unit was set up
2 on the 4th of August, 1993; whereas in the earlier document by
3 Vasilije Mijovic, we saw JATD from 1991. In my mind, it suggests that
4 this is a different unit; so that's point one.
5 Point two: Do you know if Radojica Bozovic was indeed admitted
6 based on this proposal; and if so, when?
7 A. Your Honours, I mean, there's at least two question, but I don't
8 read this document as if the anti-terrorist unit was established on the
9 4th of August.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Let's -- the Chamber has the establishment of the
11 JATD has been -- let's not -- the simple question is -- but Mr. Bakrac
12 complicates matters a bit, is whether you know whether he was admitted;
13 yes or no?
14 THE WITNESS: No, Your Honours, I mean, I would have to look at
15 the whole file.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Then -- yes.
17 Next question, please.
18 MR. BAKRAC: [No Interpretation]
19 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
20 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] I have two more questions,
21 Your Honour, and I'll finish. Can we move to page 9.
22 Q. Mr. Theunens, this is a request for Podgorica, Tito Grad, from
23 1992 for the vetting of certain individuals. Do you know when the
24 vetting was conducted and if it resulted in Radojica Bozovic and these
25 other individuals being employed in the state security; and if so, when?
1 JUDGE ORIE: If you know, please tell us; if you don't know,
2 please tell us as well.
3 THE WITNESS: Your Honours, I don't know. I mean, we would have
4 to look at the rest of the personnel file in order to establish that.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, you can't answer that question at this moment.
6 Please, next question.
7 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] My understanding was that
8 Mr. Theunens looked at all the personnel files I gave him on a CD over
9 the weekend. Page 5 in B/C/S and 4 in English is the one we should look
10 at next.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Bakrac, we do not expect Mr. Theunens to have
12 learned by heart all of the content of those documents. If there is any
13 other document you have provided to him which gives clearer indication on
14 the matter, then the Chamber certainly will look at it. But we can't
15 require the impossible from this witness at this moment.
16 Please, next question.
17 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour, I
19 Q. Mr. Weber showed you this document. It's a report on a
20 background check or vetting from Radojica Bozovic. And it was in
21 October 1993 that the response came from Podgorica.
22 Do you know if, after this vetting report, Radojica Bozovic was
23 employed in state security; and if so, when?
24 A. Same answer as to your previous question.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Bakrac, this was your last question?
1 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Then there's one thing which we have to finalise,
3 not necessarily in the presence of the accused. I'm a bit concerned that
4 transportation would become difficult if we do not allow the -- the
5 remaining issue is the public character of small parts of the evidence of
6 Mr. Theunens. Perhaps you ask Mr. -- if Mr. Stanisic and Simatovic would
7 prefer to leave at this moment in order to not jeopardise their transfer
8 to the UNDU.
9 MR. JORDASH: Thank you, yes.
10 [The accused withdrew]
11 JUDGE ORIE: I invite the parties to think about the character of
12 the evidence given in private session on the 26th of October.
13 Mr. Bakrac, when you earlier referred to the 25th, I understood
14 that to be the 26th. Pages 8075 and, after that, 8100 in both cases and
15 following. Is there any intention to make submissions so as to change to
16 the status of - it was only a small portion about --
17 And perhaps we should turn into private session for that.
18 MR. JORDASH: Your Honour, I would ask that the Prosecution
19 explain the basis for the -- for it to remain in private.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Weber, it's about a small portion of the
21 testimony. It is about, I think, the log revolution, but also the
22 involvement in smuggling and -- I think, by a UN official of which the
23 nationality was mentioned.
24 But let's move into private session.
25 MR. WEBER: Your Honour, but even before going there, our
1 position would be that it should remain in private session. But we would
2 like the opportunity to actually discuss the matter with Mr. Theunens
3 after his testimony, because I do not know what the consequences may or
4 may not be.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Is that acceptable that since now we are not talking
6 about the content of the testimony anymore, but we are talking about the
7 reasons why matters should remain confidential or not, that the --
8 Mr. Weber has an opportunity to briefly discuss it with Mr. Theunens,
9 that we later then hear submissions, most likely oral submissions, on the
10 matter, and that then we'll finally decide? It seems not to be a vital
11 and core issue in the whole of the case.
12 MR. JORDASH: We agree.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Bakrac, you agree as well? You agree as well?
14 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] I do. Thank you. Sorry.
15 JUDGE ORIE: I'm a bit hesitant to accept that someone who
16 remains silent has agreed to what was said.
17 Mr. Theunens, this concludes your testimony. You'll have an
18 opportunity to speak about the matter we just raised with Mr. Weber.
19 We'll take seriously into consideration whatever reasons there are to
20 leave matters as they are at this moment or to change the status of that
21 part of your testimony.
22 We've kept you busy for quite a while, it must -- I take it that,
23 having worked for quite a while in this institution, you must have felt
24 at home; but, nevertheless, it might have been a bit long. And perhaps
25 you have a new home these days. Therefore, I would like to thank you
1 very much not only for coming but also for staying for such a long time
2 with us. And I wish you a safe return home to your -- to the place what
3 is your home now.
4 THE WITNESS: Thank you very much, Your Honours.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
6 Could Mr. Theunens be escorted out of the courtroom.
7 [The witness withdrew]
8 JUDGE ORIE: Are there any matters to be urgently raised before
9 we adjourn? Because we'll -- we'd like to see you back in two hours and
10 four minutes from now. Any matters?
11 Could I ask the parties to see to it to find a practical
12 arrangement for all the documents which we have left undecided at this
13 moment, to see whether you can agree. If not, then, of course, the
14 Chamber will see whether the suggestions it made will become rulings.
15 We adjourn and we resume at 2.30 this afternoon.
16 --- Luncheon recess taken at 12.27 p.m.
17 --- On resuming at 2.44 p.m.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Good afternoon to everyone. We start this afternoon
19 in open session. I failed to -- when adjourning, I failed to move into
20 open session again. I hereby inform the public that where we should have
21 returned into open session was at the moment where I thanked Mr. Theunens
22 for coming and for answering the questions and he then was excused.
23 Having said this, we turn into closed session because we'll hear the
24 evidence of the next witness in closed session.
25 [Closed session]
11 Pages 8790-8867 redacted. Closed session.
8 [Open session]
9 THE REGISTRAR: We are in open session, Your Honours.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
11 I would like to invite the parties to prepare the tables for the
12 document used with the previous witness. If there are any further
13 submissions to be made in relation to the admissibility of the last
14 witness, the Chamber would like to receive them on shortest notice, that
15 is, not later than by next week, Wednesday. We adjourn until Tuesday the
16 9th of November, quarter past 2.00, Courtroom II.
17 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.08 p.m.
18 to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 9th day of
19 November, 2010, at 2.15 p.m.