Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 14161

 1                           Friday, 7 October 2011

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           [The accused Stanisic appearing via videolink]

 5                           --- Upon commencing at 9.11 a.m.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Good morning to everyone.  Before I invite

 7     Madam Registrar to call the case, I'd like to verify whether the

 8     videolink with the United Nations Detention Unit is functioning well.

 9             Mr. Stanisic, I can see you.  Can you hear me?

10             THE ACCUSED STANISIC: [Microphone not activated]

11             JUDGE ORIE:  You are nodding yes, could you perhaps speak a bit

12     louder so that I know for sure that I can hear you as well.

13             THE ACCUSED STANISIC: [Microphone not activated]

14             JUDGE ORIE:  I'm not quite sure that -- let me just check.  Could

15     you please speak a few more words so that I'm certain that I can hear you

16     in the microphone, please.

17             THE ACCUSED STANISIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I can hear

18     you loud and clear.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, I receive now translation, so that means that

20     our interpreters can hear you.  Mr. Jordash, has the telephone line been

21     tested so that Mr. Stanisic, if he needs to contact you ...

22             MR. JORDASH:  There isn't a phone apparently.  I just checked

23     with the technician and apparently because it's a very temporary

24     situation a phone isn't available, which I wanted to flag up as a

25     potential issue.

Page 14162

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, because I was used to a telephone line to be

 2     there.

 3             Mr. Stanisic, if at any point in time you would like to consult

 4     with Mr. Jordash, and, Mr. Jordash, of course the same is true for you,

 5     then please make that clear so that there will be a confidential way of

 6     communicating and we would, if need be, we would interrupt the

 7     proceedings for that purpose.

 8             These are all the practicalities.  Madam Registrar --

 9             THE ACCUSED STANISIC: [Interpretation] I understand, Your Honour.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar, would you please call the case.

11             THE REGISTRAR:  Good morning, Your Honours.  This is case number

12     IT-03-69-T, the Prosecutor versus Jovica Stanisic and Franko Simatovic.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Madam Registrar.

14             Mr. Jordash, I did understand from your response that you do not

15     oppose against proceeding even when the telephone line is not available

16     constantly?

17             MR. JORDASH:  That's right.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.

19             Then if there are no other procedural matters, the witness could

20     be escorted into the courtroom.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  The Registry further explores about the availability

22     of telephone lines in need, if need be.

23             Mr. Weber, yesterday you indicated that you needed 15 minutes.  I

24     said that you would certainly not be granted more than 30 minutes which

25     is not an invitation to use 28 minutes, but rather 17.

Page 14163

 1             MR. WEBER:  Yes, Your Honour, and if it assists, I am going to

 2     resume with the document that we left off on, which is 65 ter 6270.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Perhaps we could have that then already on our

 4     screens.

 5             Now, I've forgotten one final thing, that is Rule 15 bis, Judge

 6     Picard is unavailable for urgent personal reasons.  I announced already

 7     yesterday that we might have to sit Rule 15 bis, Judge Gwaunza and

 8     myself, we have -- we are satisfied that it's in the interests of justice

 9     to proceed in her absence.  So, therefore, we ordered that the hearing of

10     the case continue in the absence of Judge Picard.

11                           [The witness takes the stand]

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Good morning, dobro jutro I should say, perhaps.

13     Good morning, Mr. Novakovic.  I would like to remind you that the solemn

14     declaration you've given at the beginning of your testimony is still

15     binding, that is that you'll speak the truth, the whole truth, and

16     nothing but the truth.

17             Mr. Weber will now continue his cross-examination.

18             Please proceed.

19                           WITNESS:  RADENKO NOVAKOVIC [Resumed]

20                           [Witness answered through interpreter]

21                           Cross-examination by Mr. Weber:  [Continued]

22             MR. WEBER:  If the Prosecution could please have page 3 of both

23     the B/C/S and the English versions of this report for the witness.

24        Q.   First of all, good morning, Mr. Novakovic.

25        A.   Good morning.

Page 14164

 1        Q.   We are going to continue with the document that we left off with

 2     yesterday, which is the report involving the six tasks that were being

 3     performed by the JATD during Operation Pauk.  Sir, if you could please

 4     read part 6, the sixth task of this report entitled "Conducted Sniping

 5     Operations."  The section here continues over the next page, so if you

 6     could please let us know when you need the next page in the B/C/S.

 7        A.   Yes, go ahead.  Yes.

 8        Q.   Were you aware that the Serbian DB was conducting sniping

 9     operations by day and night during Operation Pauk?

10        A.   I absolutely know nothing about that.  I've not seen anything

11     about that before.  This is the first time I see it in this document.

12        Q.   Did you have any knowledge that the Serbian DB carried out a

13     sniping operation against a house and a hotel using a submachine and a

14     90-millimetre hand-held OSA launcher, Osa launcher?

15        A.   No.

16        Q.   This report ends:

17             "A list of the special equipment issued follows:"

18             MR. WEBER:  Could the Prosecution please have page 5 of the

19     original document and page 4 of the English translation for the witness.

20        Q.   Mr. Novakovic, according to this list, the Serbian DB issued

21     Raja Bozovic an automatic pistol with 160 rounds, night vision goggles, a

22     sniper rifle, and a laser pointer.  Legija on this list was also provided

23     with a sniper rifle.  Based on your assignment did you know that the

24     Serbian DB was issuing weapons like this?

25        A.   No.

Page 14165

 1        Q.   The opinion that you expressed in your comment chart indicates

 2     Jovica Stanisic and the Serbian DB were gathering information and did not

 3     have the capacity or logistics to provide materiel assistance.  Based on

 4     what I've shown you, do you agree that this opinion is not accurate

 5     because you were not in a position to know this information?

 6        A.   The Defence have shown me these documents which show that

 7     operations were undergoing sometime in August 1994, and I provided

 8     comment on that information.  Sniper rifle doesn't mean that there was an

 9     operation undergoing.  I do not have that kind of military logic to be

10     able to comment upon this.  As far as I can see, these are things that

11     were issued in mid-November, equipment and ammo issued in mid-November.

12        Q.   I want to make sure that we would then understand your evidence

13     correctly.  Is it correct then that your comments were solely based on

14     two documents that were shown to you from August 1994 and that you don't

15     have knowledge of events that occurred from November onward in

16     Operation Pauk?

17        A.   I provided comments on four documents, those that were shown to

18     me and that are contained in the binder, and I provided my comments on

19     the contents of the documents.  As for the information as to what was

20     going on and what was subsequently noted here, I didn't know anything

21     about that.  I've not seen this before.

22             MR. WEBER:  The Prosecution at this time tenders 6270 into

23     evidence as a public exhibit.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  I hear of no objections.  Madam Registrar.

25             THE REGISTRAR:  The number would be P3024, Your Honours.

Page 14166

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Is admitted into evidence.  No need to have it under

 2     seal, Mr. Weber.

 3             MR. WEBER:  No, Your Honour.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed.

 5             MR. WEBER:  Your Honours, at this time the Prosecution re-tenders

 6     the four 1992 reports on the White Eagles.  These were 65 ter 6263 to

 7     6266 and we would tender those under seal.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar, the numbers would be.

 9             THE REGISTRAR:  6263 will receive number P3025.  6264 will

10     receive number P3026.  6265 will receive number P3027.  And 6266 will

11     receive number P3028, Your Honours.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  3025 up to -- before, I -- Mr. Petrovic.

13             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I apologise, my

14     reaction may be a bit belated.  Some of the documents, especially 6263,

15     have been redacted.  There has been redaction with regard to the

16     addressee, the signature, and I believe that there are other documents in

17     the group of the same kind and that's why I object to their admission,

18     because I think we should wait and we should be provided with the

19     unredacted versions of those documents before we are able to admit them

20     into evidence.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Weber.

22             MR. WEBER:  Your Honour, if the Prosecution possessed the

23     unredacted versions, those are the ones that we would have uploaded.  We

24     don't have them.  We asked that they be admitted based on the evidence

25     that has been offered by the witness and, of course, we are willing to

Page 14167

 1     inquire about obtaining unredacted versions of those documents.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Jordash.

 3             MR. JORDASH:  We are -- I don't know if Your Honour remembers the

 4     conversations we had many weeks ago about unredacted documents.  For

 5     Your Honours' information, we are about to file a Rule 54 motion in

 6     relation to our documents which remain redacted.  We would invite the

 7     Prosecution to do precisely the same with the documents that they rely

 8     upon.  We would submit a simple inquiry is clearly not enough.  What they

 9     need to do is what we have been urged to do which is to file a motion

10     pursuant to Rule 54.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  May I take it that you would include a motion under

12     Rule 54 to be included in your efforts to get unredacted copies,

13     Mr. Weber, if you don't have, if you are unsuccessful in getting them in

14     any other way.

15             MR. WEBER:  Your Honour, in all fairness to the Republic of

16     Serbia, I believe we should first request and see if they would provide

17     them, but then if for some reason that there's trouble with it, yes, of

18     course we'd follow through.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Perhaps you communicate with Mr. Jordash to see what

20     efforts have shown to be successful or unsuccessful so as not to waste

21     time and as to expedite matters.

22             MR. WEBER:  Your Honour, I believe the Prosecution may be able

23     to -- I don't know what the situation is with the Stanisic Defence, but

24     we are in contact and I believe we do have occasion to speak with them

25     even in the near future to attempt to resolve this.

Page 14168

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, we also had the experience that sometimes you

 2     were unsuccessful in these efforts, but, Mr. Jordash, every effort is

 3     included.  Yes.

 4             Then whether or not we finally would admitted, if we would not

 5     receive the unredacted copies is still to be seen, we'll mark them for

 6     identification at this moment.  Of course, the evidentiary value is not

 7     always totally destroyed if there are redacted copies, although the

 8     Chamber has insisted until now always on receiving unredacted copies.

 9     For that reason, for that reason alone, we will mark for identification,

10     under seal, P3025 up to and including P3028.

11             Please proceed.

12             MR. WEBER:  The Prosecution indicated that it would return with

13     further information on Exhibit P3018, a proposal for awards dated 6 May

14     1996.  This was 65 ter 1D5061.  The Prosecution further reviewed the

15     names and submits there are no names that require protection and the

16     document can become public.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar, the status of P3018 therefore

18     changes into public.  Please proceed.

19             MR. WEBER:  Lastly, Your Honours, as I stated at the outset of

20     this witness's evidence we have a number of outstanding requests to the

21     government of Serbia with respect to materials.  We did receive some

22     preliminary information during the course of the examination of the

23     witness which I did try to formulate some general questions to the

24     witness on.  However, we did not have those materials and we have not

25     received them yet.  They appear to contain relevant information.  This

Page 14169

 1     may likely cause the witness to be recalled in the future.  In addition

 2     to this circumstance, we stand by our submissions regarding the lack of

 3     disclosure and notice for several aspects of this witness's evidence.  We

 4     will further look into these matters and evaluate the circumstances and

 5     any prejudice to the Prosecution.  With that in mind, the Prosecution

 6     would ask that the Chamber instruct the witness not to discuss his

 7     testimony with anyone pending a recall.

 8             With that, Your Honour, the Prosecution has no further questions.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Any objections against the request from Mr. Weber.

10             MR. JORDASH:  No objections.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  And, Mr. Petrovic, apparently you are sharing the

12     view of Mr. Jordash.

13             Mr. Weber --

14                           [Trial Chamber confers]

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Weber, at the same time -- well, first of all

16     the Chamber will give the instruction as you asked us to do.  You said

17     you have not received documents, you have some information.  You are

18     expected at this point in time to do everything you reasonably can do,

19     and of course if circumstances, including the material you have received,

20     do not allow for certain further examination, then of course we will

21     consider a request for a recall of this witness, but please be aware that

22     what you can do now you are supposed to do now.

23             MR. WEBER:  Your Honour, I fully understand that, and the

24     Prosecution did try to do its best.  We received very minimal, a

25     paragraph of some general information from -- that was provided through

Page 14170

 1     an opportunity with BIA, there's a large quantity of documents and we

 2     have not obtained those documents.  So I was severely limited in some

 3     basic information that I could provide without having that material.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  I see your point and it is accepted.  I'll give the

 5     instruction to the witness before he leaves this courtroom.

 6             Mr. Petrovic, any further questions for the witness.

 7             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I'd ask for your

 8     leave to put several questions to Mr. Novakovic.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, Mr. Novakovic, Mr. Petrovic will have some

10     further questions for you, listen carefully and please answer them.

11             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  And make a break between question and answer, but

13     also between answer and question, Mr. Petrovic.

14             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours.  We will

15     do our best and I speak also on behalf of Mr. Novakovic.

16                           Further Cross-examination by Mr. Petrovic:

17        Q.   [Interpretation] Mr. Novakovic, as of the setting up of the

18     2nd Administration in 1992 through to the end of 1993, is it true that

19     Marko Lazovic was the head of the 2nd Administration in that period, if

20     you know?

21        A.   Yes.

22        Q.   Are you aware that after Marko Lazovic, it was Zoran Mijatovic

23     who became head of the 2nd Administration in 1994?

24        A.   Yes.

25        Q.   Do you know that Franko Simatovic had never been appointed as

Page 14171

 1     head of the 2nd Administration, rather he was acting chief of the

 2     2nd Administration; right?

 3        A.   Precisely so.

 4        Q.   Witness, a short question regarding the criminal procedure as it

 5     was applied in Serbia at the time.  Members of the Ministry of the

 6     Interior were authorised to file a criminal report.  Would there follow

 7     any criminal proceedings thereafter is something that is out of their

 8     hands; right?

 9        A.   That's correct.

10             MR. PETROVIC:  Bear with me for a moment, Your Honours.

11                           [Defence counsel confer]

12             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation]

13        Q.   Mr. Witness, at the time you worked for the Uzice centre, did you

14     ever receive information about extremists and their activities in Bosnia

15     and Croatia from the services in Bosnia, Croatia, the Republic of Serbian

16     Krajina, and Republika Srpska, was there any sort of communication in

17     place?

18        A.   Between 1992 and?

19        Q.   Your departure from the Uzice centre.

20        A.   I'm not aware of it having happened in the Uzice centre.

21        Q.   Thank you.

22             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Can we now have a look at

23     Exhibit P3019.

24             THE REGISTRAR:  This is confidential document, Your Honours.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Therefore not to be shown to the public.

Page 14172

 1             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation].

 2        Q.   Mr. Witness, yesterday you looked at this document while being

 3     examined by my learned friend.  It is an Official Note by RDB members.

 4     There is mention made of an automatic rifle be provided on the order of

 5     Bojovic, et cetera, et cetera.  This is my question:  This is

 6     intelligence obtained from the conversation with Djurovic.  Was that

 7     information checked?  Is what is contained here what Djurovic said and

 8     what the official noted and of which the official did not ask that it be

 9     verified?

10        A.   That's precisely so because there is no reference made to a

11     source other than Djurovic and the interview with him.

12        Q.   And nowhere in this note is there a mention made of the

13     information having been checked anywhere; right?

14        A.   Precisely so.

15        Q.   Tell me, please, professionally speaking, what is the importance

16     of the note?  What follows once such a note has been drawn up?  What is

17     required for a piece of information to be checked and used further on?

18        A.   Professionally speaking, this is initial information that needs

19     further processing based on the means available.  Based on whether this

20     sort of activity is recurrent and whether there is urgent need of it

21     being discontinued, et cetera.

22        Q.   Thank you, witness.

23             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Can we now have a look at 1D5062,

24     please.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  We ask one follow-up question exactly in relation to

Page 14173

 1     this document, the note about Mr. Djurovic.  You told us that the

 2     document doesn't say anything about verification of the information

 3     contained in this Official Note.  Do you have any personal knowledge

 4     whether at a later stage verification took place or not, or are you just

 5     unaware and are you commenting on what you see in this document?

 6             THE REGISTRAR:  This document is preassigned number D429,

 7     Your Honours, and temporary under seal.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  That's the document which comes on the screen now,

 9     not to be shown to the public.  I'm still talking about the Djurovic

10     document.  Do you have any personal knowledge on whether in the follow-up

11     whether further processing the information was verified or not?

12             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As can be seen in the heading of

13     that earlier document, these are problems along the third line of work

14     and I was supposed to be commenting on it.  I was charged with

15     counter-intelligence affairs, whereas this subject matter was dealt with

16     by my colleagues who were charged with extremism and I had nothing to do

17     with that.  So I would say that I assume that the information was checked

18     subsequently.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, but you have no personal knowledge about that,

20     so we are just focusing on this one.

21             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, I don't.  No.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.

23             Please proceed, Mr. Petrovic.

24             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

25        Q.   Witness, please, look at the document.  You had occasion to see

Page 14174

 1     it over the past couple of days.  Do you know that under the

 2     constitutional system of the Republic of Serbia, the Presidency of the

 3     Republic of Serbia as an institution existed until the adoption of the

 4     1990 constitution?

 5        A.   Well, I can't really tell you with any certainty what the year

 6     was.

 7        Q.   Very well.  If I were to tell you that this is a form that was

 8     produced in an earlier period and which was used for the payment of

 9     per diems, would you agree with such a statement?

10        A.   Well, I could, yes, I could agree.  It was yesterday or the day

11     before yesterday that I said that I am no expert for financial matters.

12     I'm not familiar with forms of this type.  What I can tell you is that I

13     presume on the basis of the heading that the per diems were paid out in

14     accordance with the decision of the Presidency of the Republic of Serbia.

15     And of course, it does not state when this decision was taken by the

16     Presidency, but it was paid to PJM members.

17        Q.   Thank you, witness.  Can you clarify for us, the PJM within the

18     system of the interior of the Internal Affairs of the Republic of Serbia

19     fell under public security and their competence, did they not?

20        A.   Yes.

21        Q.   Thank you, witness.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Jordash.

23             MR. JORDASH:  I don't know if everyone else can hear Mr. Stanisic

24     speaking.  I wonder if he ought to be told that his voice can be heard

25     just in case he discusses any confidential information.

Page 14175

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  I can't hear him at this moment because

 2     whatever he would say would first go to the interpreters, but perhaps

 3     it's good, Mr. Stanisic, that you are aware that the microphone in the

 4     room where you are is constantly open.  I see your lips moving, although

 5     I do not hear what you say, but please be aware that it might be caught

 6     by the microphone before you.

 7             Now, I also see that the microphone sign in the left bottom

 8     corner -- yes, Mr. Stanisic, in addition to what I just said, I would

 9     like to inform you that you cannot call Mr. Jordash but if you would like

10     to consult with Mr. Jordash, you can ask for a communication through the

11     videolink and then Mr. Jordash will call you on an extension which will

12     be given to you, Mr. Jordash, by Madam Registrar.  Perhaps you are aware

13     of it already, but otherwise, the number is available.  Internal phone

14     line.

15             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I have one question

16     left for this witness and for that I would need us to move into private

17     session or closed session.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Then we move into -- private session will do?

19             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Move into private session.

21     [Private session]    [Confidentiality lifted by order of the Chamber]

22             THE REGISTRAR:  We are in private session, Your Honours.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Madam Registrar.

24             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

25        Q.   Mr. Witness, have you testified before this Tribunal earlier, and

Page 14176

 1     if so, in what case?

 2        A.   I testified in 2008 in the case against the accused Milan Lukic.

 3     I was called to appear by the Prosecution.

 4        Q.   Did you testify as a Prosecution witness in that case?

 5        A.   Well, my only request --

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Weber.

 7             MR. WEBER:  Your Honour, I just want to flag this.  This was

 8     something that if raised earlier, the Prosecution would have had further

 9     examination on.  So I just wanted to note that for the record, that this

10     questioning, even out of the gate here, could trigger further questioning

11     by the Prosecution or we'd ask leave for further questioning on this.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  We'll see what happens.  At the same time,

13     Mr. Weber, the Chamber was not informed about any earlier testimony, I

14     think, of this witness before this Tribunal.  Of course it sheds some

15     light on exploring the background of the witness, et cetera, if you have

16     used him as a witness before, if you have called him as a witness before,

17     I take it that you have interviewed him and that, for example, things

18     like the existence of criminal records, et cetera, has been verified at

19     the time.

20             MR. WEBER:  There would be some circumstances that we would raise

21     and this is outside the scope of the cross-examination that was by the

22     Prosecution.  It was not raised during that.  So --

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, but that was not the point I was -- what I was

24     doing, as a matter of fact, is I was establishing that due to contacts

25     the Prosecution will have had earlier with this witness, that perhaps

Page 14177

 1     there is already more information about him known to the OTP such as, I

 2     take it that you don't call a witness without knowing even about whether

 3     he has a criminal record or not, that you have certainly explored

 4     something about this witness, wouldn't it be?

 5             MR. WEBER:  Your Honour, the witness -- the Prosecution will not

 6     describe as co-operative beforehand.  He didn't -- refused to meet with

 7     us, the information that we had was limited to Official Note and one

 8     other report with respect to Milan Lukic, and he didn't meet with us when

 9     he came to The Hague and he was called, and he asked to be a Chamber

10     witness, and those were the circumstances.

11             MR. JORDASH:  Sorry.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  That, of course, is not a complete answer.  You say

13     we had difficulties in exploring the background, may be true, may not be

14     true, but you certainly have made efforts and what you could obtain

15     without the co-operation of the witness, I take it that you would have

16     obtained that.

17             MR. WEBER:  It was very limited.  We asked -- it was very

18     limited.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  So the answer is yes, although it was very limited.

20             MR. WEBER:  Correct, Your Honour.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.  Mr. Jordash.

22             MR. JORDASH:  Sorry, I just wanted to ensure that there's no

23     misconception.  Whilst the witness did refuse to meet with the

24     Prosecution, he also refused to meet with the Defence.  His wish was to

25     be a, as he described it, an impartial Chamber witness, but in the end

Page 14178

 1     what he was a Prosecution witness.  So that I think is important to --

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  I take it that you want to say that he was called by

 3     the Prosecution, to that extent he was a Prosecution witness.

 4             MR. JORDASH:  Yes.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  At the same time, the characterisation as a

 6     Prosecution witness if someone refuses to talk with the calling party

 7     prior to giving testimony is not a normal Prosecution witness.

 8             MR. JORDASH:  No, that's right.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  So there are limits in there.  Of course, if a party

10     calls a witness, a Chamber witness is -- we usually leave it to the

11     parties even if there are difficulties first to call witnesses, and

12     usually Chamber witnesses are considered those witnesses called by the

13     Chamber where the parties, for whatever reason, finally decide not to

14     call that witness, whether or not co-operative, but that's usually what

15     we qualify as Chamber witnesses in this Tribunal.  The attitude of the

16     witness, and that's, I think, what Mr. Weber draws our attention to, was

17     one that he would not -- he would prefer not to be affiliated to one of

18     the parties in the case but rather to come without such preparation with

19     one of the parties or any affiliation with one of the parties.  That's

20     how I understand the observations made by Mr. Weber, although finally it

21     was the Prosecution who called him.

22             MR. JORDASH:  Yes, and he was led by Mr. Groome in direct

23     examination and relied upon by the Prosecution.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

25             MR. WEBER:  Your Honour, we accept what Mr. Jordash said, that's

Page 14179

 1     accurate as to the circumstances and, really, if there's any cross on

 2     this, we don't dispute what was just said.  Those were the circumstances.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  So I take it that from my observations, not being

 4     contradicted, that I have a proper understanding of what both Prosecution

 5     and Defence has submitted.

 6             Mr. Petrovic.

 7             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, just one more

 8     question.

 9        Q.   Did you provide a signed statement to the representatives of the

10     OTP of this Tribunal?

11        A.   When they invited me to provide a statement, I signed the

12     statement and my only request with regard to my appearance at the trial

13     was not to be a witness either for the Prosecution or the Defence.  I

14     wanted to be the Chamber witness.

15             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.  I have no

16     further questions.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Then, Mr. Weber, this is a new element which comes

18     up.  Could you give us an indication as to whether this would trigger all

19     kind of additional questioning or ...

20             MR. WEBER:  It would not if the parties were to agree that the

21     witness did not appear voluntarily to provide a statement, that he was

22     subpoenaed to do so and the scope of the subpoena indicated that it was

23     limited to a discussion of specific documents in the Lukic case.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Any dispute about this.

25             MR. JORDASH:  No dispute about that, perhaps, though, the

Page 14180

 1     Prosecution would, perhaps not now, but at least indicate therefore what

 2     investigation they did conduct into this witness having decided to call

 3     him, having located him and having sought a subpoena, that implies a

 4     certain level of inquiry which may be important in the future in terms of

 5     any application to recall.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Then I would, as a matter of fact, I would invite

 7     the Prosecution to keep all the material available, but as long as

 8     there's no such request, I would say let's not anticipate -- let's

 9     prepare for such a situation but let's not yet at this moment do this

10     exercise and rather wait until you've made up your minds on a potential

11     recall.  Would you agree with that, Mr. -- because I immediately

12     responded to Mr. Jordash without giving you an opportunity to.

13             MR. WEBER:  The Prosecution is willing to proceed in that manner.

14     We would disagree with what Mr. Jordash just said in terms of the

15     opportunity that we were provided.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.

17             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour --

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Petrovic -- it is queuing before the microphones

19     at this moment.  Mr. Petrovic.

20             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, just one remark with

21     regard to your previous question.  I cannot say anything about the nature

22     of the relationship between the witness and the OTP.  I just have a

23     comment.  The witness has obviously shown a level of co-operativeness

24     with the Prosecution just based on the fact that he provided a statement

25     and signed it.

Page 14181

 1             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I apologise, may I say something?

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  As a matter of fact, whether the glass is half full

 3     or half empty, Mr. Petrovic, that is something we could discuss for the

 4     next century.  The Prosecution has emphasised that they needed a subpoena

 5     to get him there for limited purposes for a statement, so co-operative

 6     attitude or non-co-operative attitude, let's think about the glass half

 7     full or half empty.  That's clear.

 8             Mr. Jordash, you are -- any further questions for this witness?

 9             MR. JORDASH:  Yes, please.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Novakovic, Mr. Jordash will now further examine

11     you.

12             Please proceed, Mr. Jordash.

13             MR. JORDASH:  Thank you.

14                           Re-examination by Mr. Jordash:

15        Q.   It was suggested to you by my learned friend by the Prosecution

16     that if during Operation Tomson the --

17             MR. JORDASH:  We are in private session apparently, Your Honour.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, we shouldn't be in private session.  Can we

19     return into open session.

20                           [Open session]

21             THE REGISTRAR:  We are in open session, Your Honours.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Madam Registrar.

23             MR. JORDASH:

24        Q.   It was suggested to you by the Prosecution that if during

25     Operation Tomson you came across the name of somebody in the JATD, then

Page 14182

 1     any investigation into that person for extremism or the like would come

 2     to a halt.  Are you aware of any record or central database or --

 3             MR. WEBER:  If we could please just have -- is that a direct

 4     quote?

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Let's first listen to the question and then you have

 6     an opportunity to object.

 7             Mr. Novakovic, don't answer the question yet.  First Mr. Jordash

 8     will phrase his question, then Mr. Weber will say something, and only

 9     after that you are invited to answer or perhaps not to answer the

10     question.

11             MR. JORDASH:

12        Q.   Are you aware of any record or central database or something

13     similar which you had access to at that time which recorded all the names

14     of those in the JATD?  Did you have access to any such database?

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Weber.

16             MR. WEBER:  Your Honour, I think the question actually stands

17     independent and fine without the reference to the submission that was

18     earlier, so I have no objection to the question as posed.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, I think the introduction was a reference to the

20     evidence that triggered you to put this question to the witness.

21             MR. JORDASH:  The position that the Prosecution --

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Okay.  Did you have any database, any such database,

23     Mr. Novakovic, did you or did you not have it?

24             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know, and if there was any

25     such database, it was not accessible to me.

Page 14183

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed, Mr. Jordash.

 2             MR. JORDASH:  Could we have, please, on the screen, P3027.

 3        Q.   I want to deal with the suggestion that the DB didn't take action

 4     against the White Eagles until 1994.  We can see this document which

 5     you've been shown, the 27th of August, 1992, and as we know, it's a

 6     document recording an Official Note of an interview with information

 7     about the White Eagles.

 8             MR. JORDASH:  Could we go, please, to the last page.  Page 2.

 9        Q.   And we can see there at the end of the document:

10             "We informed the CJB about the announced extremist actions of the

11     White Eagles from Priboj, in order for the appropriate measures to be

12     taken."

13             In light of this Official Note of interview and the information

14     within, what might such appropriate measures have encompassed?

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Weber.

16             MR. WEBER:  Objection.  Calls for speculation.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Well, we don't know yet.  There a risk of

18     speculation.  Perhaps you phrase the question in such a way first,

19     concrete, whether the witness has any knowledge about what kind of action

20     was envisaged, and then perhaps in what general terms, what kind of -- so

21     we go from the concrete to the more general question.

22             MR. JORDASH:  Certainly.

23        Q.   You hadn't seen this document before, but having seen the

24     document, do you have any independent recollection of the information

25     contained within and what, if any, measures were taken by the public

Page 14184

 1     security in relation to the information in August of 1992?

 2        A.   I saw this document yesterday.  However, what I see at the end of

 3     the document is something that shows that the state security sector

 4     informed public security sector about certain activities, and then the

 5     latter would step up their activities by way of patrols, interviews with

 6     the population, longer duration of stay in the area that is indicated as

 7     a possible hub of terrorist activities.  Here there's reference to four

 8     facilities owned by Muslims, a village with the Muslim population and so

 9     on and so forth.

10             So this is the only way that the state security sector could

11     prompt the public security sector to patrol the area as much as possible

12     and to surveil the area as much as possible while pursuing their

13     operative activities.

14        Q.   Now, I just want to be clear about making the distinction between

15     what you know happened in relation to the White Eagles, and what you are

16     inferring must have happened from your knowledge of documents such as

17     this with information that was being passed to the public security.

18             So firstly, in August of 1992, did you have -- sorry, let me

19     start that again.  Did you have any knowledge of what measures were being

20     taken by the public security in August of 1992 in relation to the

21     White Eagles and their activities?

22        A.   I did not have any specific information about that.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Let's -- Mr. Jordash, there's another matter that

24     came to my mind, please correct me whether I'm wrong, I'm also addressing

25     Mr. Weber, the issue about action taken only in 1994 in relation to

Page 14185

 1     matters that happened in 1992 was about -- and please correct me when I

 2     misunderstood the issue, I'm just defining the issue, nothing more.  I'm

 3     not expressing any opinion or judgement about it.  But I think the issue

 4     was that the Prosecution sought to establish that where the reports

 5     indicated that crimes had already been committed, that no investigation,

 6     prosecution, adjudication was started until 1994.  Whereas the document

 7     we are looking now at this moment is about information that crimes or at

 8     least certain activities may develop.  And I see -- I'm not saying that

 9     it's not relevant what you are talking about, but that there's a

10     distinction between investigating crimes that have been reported as

11     already been committed, compared to activities which are announced and

12     where you take measures whatever those measures will be.  I see a

13     distinction there because you introduce this matter now as something,

14     that's actually the way you introduced it, to more or less challenge what

15     the Prosecution sought to establish that no action was taken until 1994.

16     Whereas I see that the circumstances in which action was taken is

17     different in the two situations, the one crimes already reported to have

18     been committed, and here activities, but whether I should call them

19     crimes or not I leave that open, but still to take place and I think even

20     scheduled for the 28th of August, where the document dates from the

21     27th of August.

22             MR. JORDASH:  Well --

23             JUDGE ORIE:  I'm just asking you whether my understanding of the

24     issues -- I'm not going to stop you, but whether my understanding of the

25     issues to be different in this respect, whether you share that or whether

Page 14186

 1     you do not share that because then I have to ask myself why I don't

 2     understand the issues raised by the parties.

 3             Mr. Weber.

 4             MR. WEBER:  Your Honour, the Prosecution believes the Chamber is

 5     correctly interpreting what the Prosecution was using the evidence for.

 6     The only second component to it that we would add is not only the

 7     knowledge of the fact that crimes were committed, but then when action

 8     was taken, the action was not taken against those crimes but for

 9     different crimes.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Okay.  But it was the follow-up of crimes already

11     committed.

12             MR. JORDASH:  Sorry, could I just -- it's probably me, but just

13     if I could be clear what the Prosecution are alleging.  Are the

14     Prosecution alleging that the White Eagles committed crimes in 1991 and

15     1992 and 1993 and the DB was aware of those crimes and failed to take

16     action, does that summarise the Prosecution position?

17             MR. WEBER:  The Defence is raising Operation Tomson as one of its

18     defences.  In rebuttal of Operation Tomson, Mr. Jordash has made a number

19     of submissions as to the way in which this was implemented, how it was

20     implemented, so we are offering that evidence to rebut what the Defence

21     has put forward in terms of the DB acted -- showed certain concerns, that

22     these concerns were egalitarian between a bunch of different ethnic

23     groups, that they acted as --

24             JUDGE ORIE:  That's another aspect of what you raise, but I think

25     that your main rebuttal was if this was the reaction, it was not only

Page 14187

 1     incomplete, but it was also two years after the events.

 2             MR. WEBER:  Yes.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  And the events, the reporting on the events was

 4     about events that had taken place already, whereas here we are looking at

 5     a report on events still to take place so therefore the measures could

 6     hardly be to investigate the crimes because if there were any crimes,

 7     they were not yet committed, they were just announced.  That's what I

 8     wanted to --

 9             MR. JORDASH:  Yes.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  From your "yes" I take it that you agree at least

11     with the analysis of the situation.

12             MR. JORDASH:  Yes --

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.

14             MR. JORDASH:  -- and I hope that the position will become clear

15     or clearer.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, please proceed.

17             MR. JORDASH:

18        Q.   Let's just return to this document briefly, Mr. Novakovic.  When

19     you look at the Official Note or unofficial note such as this were there

20     observation that the writer of the note informed the public security

21     about announced extremist actions, are you able to just give us a quick

22     rundown, a quick list of what such an author might anticipate the public

23     security would do, or would have done at that point in time?

24        A.   Talking from practice, when the public security sector in charge

25     of the relevant area is informed about possible threats, the public

Page 14188

 1     security sector then steps up control measures, patrols, interviews with

 2     people, checking information provided to them.  All that means that the

 3     territory will be controlled in the upcoming period when activities are

 4     expected to take place.

 5             Here reference is made to Operation Tomson.  I would like to say

 6     something about that.  Operation Tomson was carried out by the Republic

 7     of Serbia on the territory of Serbia.  The document that we referred to

 8     yesterday dealing with Operation Tomson, the one shown to me by

 9     Mr. Weber, is an amalgamated document that speaks to the state security

10     sector activities from 1992 through 1995.  In that document, you can see

11     what was done and what needs to be done in the future, and these are

12     separate documents and in general terms, all these documents have been

13     incorporated into the amalgamated document.

14        Q.   Okay.  Let me -- my time is limited so I want to just focus you

15     if I can.  Thank you for the information, though.

16             MR. JORDASH:  Could we have 1D03220.

17        Q.   Just take your time to look at this.  I don't think you've seen

18     it, or maybe you have, but we haven't shown it to you.  Do you -- have

19     you seen this before?  Have a look.

20        A.   No.

21        Q.   Okay.  Just take a few moments to glimpse through it and see what

22     it is.  15th of May, 1991, Zajecar state security, 3rd Administration.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  While the witness reads, Mr. Weber.

24             MR. WEBER:  Objection, foundation.  At this time the witness has

25     never seen the document before.  We are now discussing a new document in

Page 14189

 1     a different area and region and this should have been led in chief, and I

 2     did not discuss certain events.  I focused on this witness's

 3     administration and experience, security sector and we would object to

 4     proceeding in this way.  Using the document in this fashion may be

 5     leading.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Weber, you don't know yet what the question is.

 7     Perhaps Mr. Jordash wants to establish that the witness can read, isn't

 8     it?  That is still a possibility.  Or that -- let's object to questions

 9     when we have questions.

10             Mr. Jordash, I do not expect you to establish that because that

11     was clear already.

12             MR. JORDASH:

13        Q.   You can see there in the -- I'm particularly interested in the

14     comment in the last paragraph relating to the White Eagles.  And let me

15     just focus you on the following:

16             "Earlier we obtained the information about an alleged plan to

17     form a volunteer detachment in the Majdanpek area, so now we do not rule

18     out the possibility of receiving the idea to form such a detachment.

19     Especially now by Milanovic and Radivojevic or Radojevic, because on his

20     return from" --

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Jordash, you really need to pronounce it, the

22     names are so similar.  The first one you referred to Zoran Radivojevic or

23     Radojevic because otherwise the transcript will be very difficult to

24     read.

25             MR. JORDASH:  Thank you.

Page 14190

 1        Q.   "Because on his return from Borovo Selo, Misko Milanovic told our

 2     agent that they had received the task of finding two volunteers each to

 3     take part in any new action.  This assumption is supported by the

 4     information we have about the existence of a number of supporters of the

 5     Beli Orlovi, White Eagles, youth organisation of the SCP Serbian Chetnik

 6     Movement in the Majdanpek area.  It cannot be categorised as a

 7     paramilitary unit now, but at the initiative of extremists, they may go

 8     on to arm the organisation."

 9             Is that information anything that you are able to comment on,

10     that the view of the State Security Service in May of 1991, that the

11     organisation of the White Eagles was not armed at that point?

12        A.   I've not seen this document before.  I can see that it was

13     drafted by the Zajecar centre, that it was sent to the

14     3rd Administration, and they're referring to a document from the office

15     the secretary by which this information was sought.  This points to the

16     fact that during that period of time that there were organisational

17     measures being dealt with, but in the last sentence it is stated that

18     this is a youth organisation of the Serbian Chetnik Movement but that it

19     was still not a paramilitary formation, but that it was possible that

20     they were dealing with the arming of extremists.  I'm basing this on the

21     information that was available to the centre at the time.

22        Q.   Did you have any information of a similar kind in 1991?

23        A.   Well, this was a subject of interest in the territories of Priboj

24     and Prijepolje where the activities were going on when the activities of

25     the White Eagles were launched in our area.  The White Eagles appeared

Page 14191

 1     everywhere in every area as --

 2        Q.   And when they appeared in 1991, how did they appear, in which

 3     sense --

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Jordash, please, first of all, the appropriate

 5     way of dealing with the matter would have been that you ask the witness

 6     whether he knows anything about the activities of the Beli Orlovi youth

 7     organisation which is, of course, we are not focusing until now on the

 8     youth organisation, so first to explore that.  Now, let's try to remain

 9     concrete.  What happens if the football hooligans enter Belgium?  I mean,

10     these kind of questions, please focus and aim at obtaining concrete

11     information.

12             MR. JORDASH:

13        Q.   Do you know when the White Eagles started to arm themselves?

14        A.   As far as I know, in the territory of my centre, in the territory

15     of Priboj where their activities was the most intense, they started

16     arming themselves in 1992, when the war started in the territory of

17     Bosnia.  That's my opinion.  That's as much as I know about the whole

18     thing.

19             MR. JORDASH:  Could I tender this as an exhibit, please,

20     Your Honour.

21             MR. WEBER:  We have no objection for it being marked for

22     identification pending some further information on origin.  We would like

23     to see the RFA.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Could you tell us something about the origin.

25             MR. JORDASH:  At this point no, but I can have our Case

Page 14192

 1     Manager --

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Then it will be marked for identification.

 3     Madam Registrar, the number would be.

 4             THE REGISTRAR:  This would be D448, Your Honours.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  D448 is admitted into evidence.  Mr. Jordash, I'm

 6     looking at the clock.  I do not know, it's not mainly to limit your time,

 7     but on whether one extended session by five or seven minutes would do or

 8     whether we need to continue after a break anyhow?

 9             MR. JORDASH:  I would like another 20 minutes.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Another 20 minutes.  Then I think you are stepping

11     beyond the time I gave you yesterday, but we'll verify that during the

12     break.  You need a break anyhow.

13             We'll have a break and we'll resume at 10 minutes to 11.00, but

14     before doing so, I would first like to verify with Mr. Stanisic whether

15     at this moment there's any need for consultation and whether there are

16     any other wishes as far as he is concerned.  If you nod no, Mr. Stanisic,

17     then I'll put that on the record, and if you confirm that you need

18     further consultation, I'll put that on the record as well.

19             THE INTERPRETER:  Interpreters can't hear Mr. Stanisic.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  The interpreters cannot hear you.  Could you speak

21     closer to a -- I think the microphone is switched off, from what I see on

22     my screen.  Could it be switched on first of all.  On the left bottom of

23     my screen it says "far" and then there's a microphone with a -- it's

24     stricken through in red.

25             THE ACCUSED STANISIC: [Interpretation]  Your Honour, I have tried

Page 14193

 1     on several occasions to communicate with the Defence, but I did not

 2     succeed.  I don't know whether you can hear me now?

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Stanisic, I can hear you now, and apparently

 4     there is a problem with the microphone being closed on your side of the

 5     communication.  I suggest that Mr. Jordash will call you under the number

 6     that will be given to him by Madam Registrar.  And, Mr. Jordash, is there

 7     any way that you or your team could keep an eye on the microphone,

 8     because earlier we said the microphone is open, please be aware that

 9     everyone can hear you, which apparently led to closing the microphone.

10     But of course if you want it to be in touch with us, then you should open

11     it again because otherwise the interpreters do not receive any audio from

12     the UNDU.

13             Mr. Stanisic, is it clear that if you want to contact

14     Mr. Jordash, that you should take care that the microphone is open and,

15     otherwise, I'm not constantly looking at the video from the UNDU.

16     Therefore, perhaps someone could keep a close eye on any attempts by

17     Mr. Stanisic to reach Mr. Jordash.

18             I, for the time being, leave it, Mr. Jordash, to a telephone

19     conversation you may have with Mr. Stanisic during the break, and we'll

20     resume at ten minutes to 11.00, but only after I have urged the parties

21     to provide the material for the videolink on Tuesday in relation to

22     DST-052 by today to the Registry because it has to be copied, it has to

23     be taken to the place of the videolink, and if you provide it at any

24     later stage, there is no guarantee that it can be processed and copied

25     and therefore be used during the videolink.

Page 14194

 1             Then there is one other matter for which we'll go into private

 2     session immediately after the break.  We resume but then in the beginning

 3     for three minutes without the witness and we will move in private session

 4     at ten minutes to 11.00.

 5                           [The witness stands down]

 6                           --- Recess taken at 10.23 a.m.

 7                           --- On resuming at 10.59 a.m.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Jordash, did you have an opportunity to consult,

 9     to speak with Mr. Stanisic and raise any additional matter?

10             MR. JORDASH:  No -- I did communicate with him.  He provided some

11     instructions and I'm ready to go.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Then we move into private session for a

13     moment.

14                           [Private session]

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 14195

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6   (redacted)

 7   (redacted)

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13                           [Open session]

14             THE REGISTRAR:  We are in open session, Your Honours.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Madam Registrar.

16             Mr. Jordash.

17             MR. JORDASH:  Your Honour, can I just raise one issue, which is

18     just for Your Honours's information in relation to the Rule 54

19     application that we will file I think today.  One of the requests is for

20     the DB's annual reports which we hope will deal with some of these

21     subjects and assist with clarifying some of the issues about what the DB

22     did and when they did it.  Unfortunately, until we receive those, we are

23     somewhat hampered in relation to, for example, these issues in terms of

24     getting the full picture about what the DB was doing in relation to the

25     White Eagles.

Page 14196

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  When did you for the first time ask for these annual

 2     reports?

 3             MR. JORDASH:  Off the top of my head I don't know, but I know it

 4     was several years ago.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Several years ago, yes, that's what one would expect

 6     to be done.

 7             MR. JORDASH:  Yes.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  At the same time, it's a pity that you have not

 9     sought at any earlier stage an order to be issued because we are close --

10     coming closer and closer to the end of your case and, of course, the

11     Chamber is concerned if you are unable to -- to investigate relevant

12     material and to present it to the Chamber if that research would make you

13     believe that it is relevant material.  It's still very late.

14                           [The witness takes the stand]

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Novakovic, Mr. Jordash will now put some more

16     questions to you and most likely will be done in half an hour

17     approximately.  So it will be a short session.  Mr. Jordash, please

18     proceed.

19             MR. JORDASH:  Thank you.

20        Q.   Mr. Novakovic, please keep your answers as brief as possible so I

21     can get through the material as quickly as possible.

22             MR. JORDASH:  Please can we have on the screen 1D01006.

23        Q.   You mentioned before the break about the White Eagles starting to

24     carry weapons sometime in 1991.  When in 1991, beginning, middle, or end?

25        A.   I think it was towards the end of 1991.  I think, I am not sure.

Page 14197

 1        Q.   And as far as you are aware, was action taken by either the

 2     public security or the state security in relation to that carrying of

 3     weapons within Serbia?

 4        A.   In the territory of Serbia, anyone found carrying weapons,

 5     especially long-barrelled weapons, military ones, would be detained.

 6     That was our practice.

 7        Q.   Let me just have you pay some attention to the document on the

 8     screen.  2nd of August, 1995, Operation Tomson report from the

 9     Sremska Mitrovica state security.  And the first two paragraphs are

10     pertinent to this subject.  The paragraphs note two essential facts.

11     One, that the White Eagles seem to, according to this report, morph or

12     change into these other formations such as the Serbian Chetnik Movement,

13     and, two, that in the early stages of the war, the White Eagles avoided

14     bringing weapons into the FRY and did not expose themselves as a

15     paramilitary organisation or formation.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Weber.

17             MR. WEBER:  I don't know if there's a question, but this is

18     leading.  He is summarised a document and is paraphrasing it and asking a

19     witness whether or not he agrees.

20             MR. JORDASH:  I've not asked a question.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Then now think well about your question,

22     Mr. Jordash, because you might be in trouble.

23             MR. JORDASH:  Well, I'm going to ask the witness whether he has a

24     comment to make upon this particular report and its contents, which I

25     think is common practice.

Page 14198

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, although always first explore with the witness,

 2     we are talking about a specific time-frame, we are talking about an area,

 3     isn't it.  There is -- whether he knows about the report.  We first

 4     explore what the witness knows without just reading the report and say I

 5     think it will be right or I think it will not be right.  Apart from that,

 6     of course, much of this information of a very general character and that

 7     requires quite a bit to establish what the witness -- whether the witness

 8     really is able to have an overview over all the events, whereas we had a

 9     lengthy examination of the witness on what he knew exactly about what

10     happened in the next street and in the next village.  So, therefore,

11     please first explore, but let's proceed at this moment as you suggest.

12             Any comment?

13             MR. JORDASH:

14        Q.   Mr. Novakovic, any comment?

15        A.   I see this document from the centre of the state security in

16     Sremska Mitrovica, which is close to the area of Bosnia and Herzegovina

17     and Croatia.  The war had begun in Croatia much earlier than in Bosnia.

18     That is characteristic that the White Eagles appear on the ground and

19     they are armed especially -- exactly at the moment when the war begins.

20     They are using this occasion to go to the war as volunteers and then come

21     back to Serbia with their weapons.  That's my general comment about the

22     distinction between these two areas, the centre in Uzice and the centre

23     in Mitrovica.  I worked in Uzice.

24        Q.   Can I ask you this:  Were you able within the Uzice centre to, at

25     any stage from 1991 to 1995, define who was in the White Eagles, what the

Page 14199

 1     membership was, the numbers, the identities of the members?

 2        A.   In that period it was established and the amalgamated document

 3     that speaks to the Operation Tomson defines this precisely and it says

 4     that in 1994 the work of that organisation was broken.  The commander of

 5     the White Eagles was the subject of our intensive work and that implied

 6     significant measures on the ground.  It also mentions other individuals.

 7     That document specifies what was done in 1992, 1993, 1994.  It's a

 8     document that speaks of the achievements, the results of our work, and

 9     further directions we intend to pursue.

10        Q.   Are you able to identify now the time when the DB, the Uzice

11     centre had a clear picture of who the White Eagles were and the

12     identities of the members?  Are you able to recall roughly which year

13     that information was obtained in some depth with some detail?

14        A.   I was not working on this myself.  It could have been 1993 when

15     the activities of these people became known in some detail.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  I'm going to stop you there.  If you say it could

17     have been 1993, that means, as you started your answer, that you are not

18     working on the matter, you have no detailed knowledge about it, and what

19     could be, Mr. Jordash, is not what assists the Chamber.

20             MR. JORDASH:  Certainly.

21        Q.   Mr. Novakovic, let's just put this exhibit to the side.  I just

22     want to ask you about a finding in the Lukic judgement, paragraph 78, the

23     judgement from this court, and paragraph 78 notes that there has been no

24     convincing evidence presented to the Trial Chamber as to Milan Lukic and

25     Sredoje Lukic's membership of the White Eagles or Avengers or any linkage

Page 14200

 1     between the White Eagles or Avengers and any of the crimes with which

 2     Milan Lukic and Sredoje Lukic are charged.  So the finding of this court

 3     was that the Prosecution haven't established Lukic was a member of the

 4     White Eagles.  Were you aware of that finding?

 5             MR. WEBER:  Objection.  First of all, leading and also this is

 6     very misleading way of doing this.  There is lots of evidence presented

 7     in the Lukic case which this witness is not privy to and to present all

 8     that that's related to that and then have the witness comment on that, he

 9     would need much more additional information, so at this time we would

10     object to using that in this way.  We believe that if the Defence does

11     want to seek adjudication of facts that were found in different

12     judgements, they have a vehicle to do so.

13             MR. JORDASH:  Your Honour, the Prosecution have made much

14     suggestion that the state security didn't do enough in relation to

15     prosecuting Milan Lukic as a member of the White Eagles.  It's

16     significant, we would say, that the Prosecution in this court were

17     unable -- notwithstanding a trial lasting nearly two years and all the

18     resources at their fingertips were not able to establish Milan Lukic's

19     membership of the White Eagles.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Let me read again your question.  Well, the only

21     question that's put to you at this moment, would you please restrict your

22     answer to that, whether you were aware of a finding in a judgement,

23     paragraph 78, about the membership of Milan Lukic and Sredoje Lukic of

24     the White Eagles?  Are you aware of that finding in a case that was

25     brought against these two persons?

Page 14201

 1             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I was not aware.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Jordash, that's an answer to your question.

 3             MR. JORDASH:  I'll leave it there.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  You'll leave it there.  Please proceed.

 5             MR. JORDASH:

 6        Q.   Let me move to another subject, Mr. Witness.  Pauk, you've been

 7     shown evidence relating to the DB's alleged contribution to the military

 8     operation Pauk.  Are you aware of any criminal purpose that existed in

 9     relation to the objectives for Operation Pauk?

10        A.   Criminal?

11        Q.   Yes, do you know if there was, from what you observed in your

12     presence there, from your information gathered, whether their objectives

13     of Operation Pauk included any criminal purpose?

14        A.   I don't know about that from my point of view.  I saw that those

15     activities were unfolding in order to get the refugees to return from the

16     RSK to Bosnia.

17        Q.   You've been shown evidence of the participation of some members

18     of the JATD in Operation Pauk.  Are you able to provide any evidence

19     concerning the number of corps, military corps, which took part in

20     Operation Pauk?

21        A.   Absolutely not.  I did not have access to such information.  I

22     did not have any insight into military matters or contacts with the army.

23        Q.   Thank you.  Did you observe any crimes being committed during

24     Operation Pauk?

25        A.   I did not have any contact with that.

Page 14202

 1        Q.   Thank you.  The last subject.  I want to ask you about Ilok.  You

 2     were shown a document purporting to be the -- part of or the personal

 3     file of a man the Prosecution say was called or nicknamed Pupe, Nikola

 4     Pupovac, and the Prosecution suggest he is a member of the Serbian MUP,

 5     special purposes unit in Ilok.

 6             MR. JORDASH:  Could we have on the screen please, 1D05095.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Weber.

 8             MR. WEBER:  Your Honour, just the way it's been going, I do know

 9     what this exhibit is.  It's not on their exhibit list but it does come

10     from the Prosecution.  I ask that a foundation be laid with what his

11     knowledge of Ilok is before the document is even being shown.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Foundation for any questions, yes, well,

13     Mr. Jordash, I -- although Mr. Weber is on his feet usually very early,

14     which is sometimes good, we know what the witness said about what he

15     learned about a person by the short name Pupe during an interview and I

16     think the witness also told us that that is all he knows.  So therefore,

17     if you want to put documents to the witness and to ask him to further

18     consider or comment, perhaps it would be good that you, knowing what the

19     document is about, first explore whether the witness has any knowledge on

20     the matters contained in that document apart from reading it and then

21     gaining for the first time in his life the information you want to ask

22     questions about.

23             MR. JORDASH:  Well, Your Honour, the way in which the Prosecution

24     dealt with this was to put to the witness Mr. Pupovac's alleged personal

25     file -- I see Mr. Weber is on his feet again.

Page 14203

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, but he certainly will allow you to finish your

 2     sentence.

 3             MR. JORDASH:  And what we'd like to do is put to the witness

 4     various other personnel files which relate to 1992 Ilok special purposes

 5     unit MUP Krajina, not MUP Serbia, and go through the same process that

 6     the Prosecution went through.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, isn't it true when the Prosecution tried to

 8     establish that Mr. Pupovac was a member of that, we stopped the

 9     Prosecution doing that and said that it was inappropriate where the

10     witness doesn't know anything else to draw conclusions from documentation

11     that -- is my recollection right that I in rather strong wordings said

12     that this is not what would assist the Chamber, to ask the witness to

13     interpret and to evaluate pieces of evidence he was totally unaware of,

14     and where the only thing he knew is that Mr. Lukic once referred to Pupe.

15             Now, the same would apply to you.  The Prosecution has tried to

16     do that.  I think that the Chamber has in rather strong words said that

17     this is really what we did not expect a party to do.  We would not expect

18     you to do a similar thing either, and if you say, well, it's unfair

19     because they started already doing it and we don't get even a chance to

20     make that mistake, then I would -- you have to accept that if it was

21     useless for the Prosecution to do, it will be useless for you to do as

22     well.  Again, this is a kind of a general warning not knowing what kind

23     of questions and what kind of material you are going to put to the

24     witness.

25             Mr. Weber.

Page 14204

 1             MR. GROOME:  Your Honour, one comment and potential solution.

 2     With respect to this, there's a big difference between the Prosecution

 3     leading something and the Defence now having to in an open-ended fashion

 4     direct examination elicit evidence, so what we did in a leading fashion

 5     we'd also add would be improper now to do and suggest to the witness.

 6     Possible solution:  There are documents that the Defence have uploaded,

 7     individual selected documents from entire personnel files of ten

 8     different individuals.  We believe that it would be fine if the Defence

 9     wanted to upload the entire personnel files of each of these ten

10     individuals in the -- with complete translations because there are

11     documents that further put into the context the selected documents by the

12     Defence, that would ensure that there is no misleading nature to taking a

13     individual document out of context for the other documents of the file.

14     And then with respect to these ten individuals, it would be necessary to

15     properly place these ten individuals into the context to have two

16     additional files, and those would be the files.  So we would not oppose

17     if the Defence wanted to do that and introduce evidence in that fashion,

18     the admission of the files in their entirety.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Well, I see that you are, where we yesterday said

20     that the way in which you proceeded was not assisting the Chamber, that

21     you are making an utmost effort to assist Mr. Jordash, but let's see what

22     Mr. Jordash thinks about it.

23             MR. JORDASH:  I think the Prosecution -- well, I'm grateful for

24     the suggestion.  I hope they don't mind if we decline.  The Prosecution's

25     approach has been throughout this case to select documents from the DB

Page 14205

 1     files and put them forward in support of their case.  It's not been the

 2     practice to put every single document that they have, and that's the way

 3     they've proceeded, and what my learned friend is doing now is --

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Let me try to cut it short.  Mr. Jordash, I get the

 5     impression that what you'd like to do is to bring to the attention of the

 6     Chamber that there are documents in the personnel files of persons or a

 7     person where that person is linked to an organisation of an other state

 8     than Serbia.

 9             MR. JORDASH:  Yes.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  And now, of course this Chamber had heard evidence

11     on how you can be subordinated to one organisation or to another, and

12     that sometimes at least some witnesses told us that that was also linked

13     to the mission you were on.  I mean, I leave that open on what evaluation

14     is.  If you want to establish that, do we need the witness for that, or

15     could you agree with Mr. Weber that such a document or two or three or

16     four documents where you want to draw our attention to because it gives a

17     heading which links the person to another one, if the witness knows

18     anything about it, fine.  If not, why not establish that such documents

19     do exist and that you may interpret those documents in a different way

20     than Mr. Weber does.  That's another matter.  But that's apparently what

21     you want to bring to your attention.

22             From my observation only, you may understand that it is already

23     now brought to my attention that they exist.  If you agree on that, we'll

24     have a look at it and that's --

25             MR. JORDASH:  Your Honour, I agree.  There's no need to make an

Page 14206

 1     elephant out of a mosquito.  We can just indicate to Your Honour what the

 2     documents are in response to the Pupovac document.  We don't actually

 3     probably need the witness.  We can bar table them with Your Honour's

 4     leave.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Weber.

 6             MR. WEBER:  Your Honour, we would believe the most efficient

 7     manner to do that is that if they are seeking individual documents from

 8     these files, we would like the Chamber to be privy to the entire ones.

 9     So if we could select additional documents in there --

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Jordash, Mr. Weber says if you extract one

11     document from such a personnel file, that you might miss the whole of the

12     picture.  You want to draw our attention that at least such documents do

13     exist and are found this those files.  Would you oppose to then for the

14     context -- then submit the whole of that file in which at least one or

15     perhaps more documents are found which certainly go in a direction away

16     from Serbia?

17             MR. JORDASH:  Your Honour, I think the -- I'll need to check

18     this, but I think the answer will be we won't object.  What we do object

19     to, though, is the shifting position of the Prosecution who up until now

20     when its favoured them, they have been happy to select documents, but now

21     that it favours the Defence, they want the whole document, but --

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Okay.  You can ask for contextualisation and then we

23     would approach it in a similar way, but of course, most important at this

24     very moment is, can the witness add anything to that or not.  I am afraid

25     that he might not be able to do it.  If you have any reason to believe

Page 14207

 1     that that is different, then I suggest that you put questions to the

 2     witness in relation to that perhaps before even showing the document,

 3     inquire whether he has any knowledge.  If he has any, then the document

 4     can be put to him, I would say.  And if the witness has no knowledge, to

 5     find another way of bringing to the attention of the Chamber that where

 6     the Prosecution is linking Mr. Pupovac to the --

 7             THE ACCUSED STANISIC: [Interpretation] May I help you, Jordash?

 8             MR. JORDASH:  Probably best we do it confidentially, Mr.

 9     Stanisic.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Do I understand that if Mr. Stanisic would

11     like to --

12             THE ACCUSED STANISIC: [Interpretation] May I help you, Jordash?

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Stanisic, I give an opportunity to Mr. Jordash

14     to give a call to you and you will then be able to decide what you want

15     to bring to the attention of Mr. Jordash and whether Mr. Jordash finds it

16     wise then to bring it to the attention of the Chamber.  You have an

17     opportunity to call.  Madam Registrar has the number.

18             MR. JORDASH:  Could I say this as well, Your Honour, that as far

19     as I'm concerned, Your Honours' approach is the better one.  I don't

20     intend to put the documents to the witness.  We'll bar table either the

21     documents we want or we'll go along with the Prosecution's suggestion and

22     put in the whole file, but we won't detain the witness on this issue

23     anymore, and that will be, subject to Mr. Stanisic's instructions, the

24     end of my re-examination.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.  Then I think it would be wise to verify

Page 14208

 1     whether those are Mr. Stanisic's instructions.  I give you a moment to

 2     make that phone contact with him.

 3             MR. JORDASH:  Thank you, I think I'll have to use that phone

 4     there, Your Honour.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Since you are speaking English, don't speak too

 6     loud, Mr. Jordash, or use a phone somewhere else in the building.

 7             MR. JORDASH:  I'll try here so that the Court isn't disturbed.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  I'll keep my earphones on so we'll not hear you.

 9             MR. JORDASH:  But will Mr. Weber, though.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  He will put his earphones on as well.  Mr. Weber,

11     isn't it, we are closing our eyes for whatever Mr. Jordash tells ...

12                           [Defence counsel confer]

13             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] We can hear Mr. Stanisic.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  One second.  Mr. Jordash, I do understand you are

15     now going to call Mr. Stanisic.  It's important at the beginning of your

16     telephone conversation that you emphasise that Mr. Stanisic should switch

17     off the microphone which links him to this courtroom, otherwise we would

18     be privy of all the details of your conversation.

19             MR. JORDASH:  I do.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  We wait for a second until Mr. Jordash returns.

21                           [Defence counsel confer]

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Jordash.

23             MR. JORDASH:  I would like to ask one question and I'd like to

24     ask the witness the question concerning the nature of the document, the

25     format of the document.

Page 14209

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Fine.

 2             MR. JORDASH:  That's it.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Weber, I take it that you've expressed some

 4     concerns about using documents, but here it's apparently a matter of

 5     possible authenticity issue or -- yes, and I think that's --

 6             MR. WEBER:  We agree, they are authentic.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, but whether you agree or whether you disagree

 8     with Mr. Jordash will become clear if we have heard his question and

 9     perhaps the answer to it.

10             MR. WEBER:  Your Honour, if that's going to be the case, we ask

11     that the question be posed in a very open-ended fashion and that any

12     comments be restricted to not contain anything about the substance of the

13     document.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Jordash has heard your request, and Mr. Jordash

15     is aware that he is using a document for the first time to that extent

16     finds himself in examining the witness in chief.

17             Please proceed, Mr. Jordash.

18             MR. JORDASH:  Could we have please on the screen 1D05095.

19             MR. WEBER:  I am sorry, but I do not think that this was one of

20     the ones that we even got notice of.  I have 1D5083 to 1D5092.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Jordash.

22             MR. JORDASH:  We have provided notice, but just to save time

23     let's go then to 1D05083.

24             MR. WEBER:  Your Honour, if we could just have it noted for the

25     record that at this time we are not being put in a position to use other

Page 14210

 1     materials in these files due to the timing and the fact that the other

 2     materials are not uploaded.

 3             MR. JORDASH:  These were notified to the Prosecution yesterday.

 4     And they are uploaded and they come from the Prosecution's own files.

 5             MR. WEBER:  Your Honour, the Defence had an opportunity to

 6     conduct a very lengthy direct examination over four hours --

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  If there's any specific question in relation to

 8     this -- we'll consider any request for one or two additional questions in

 9     relation to this.

10             Mr. Jordash.

11             MR. JORDASH:

12        Q.   Mr. Novakovic, you've been in the -- you were in the DB for in

13     excess of 20 years, and what I want to ask you about is the format of

14     this document and whether you've seen this type of document and its

15     heading and its format during your time in the Serbian DB, emanating from

16     the Serbian DB?

17             JUDGE ORIE:  We ask the witness now whether he is familiar with,

18     whether he has seen before this or similar documents.

19             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I've never in my life seen a

20     document like this before.  I think -- I see this refers to the MUP of

21     Krajina.

22             MR. JORDASH:

23        Q.   Forget for a moment its actual contents.  Have you seen the

24     format before?  Does this document -- sorry, let me start that again.  Is

25     this --

Page 14211

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Jordash, please be clear when you are talking

 2     about format.  Format is usually a standard form of a document.  Now, you

 3     say apart from the content, there's not much specific and standard in

 4     here in you've never seen such a document before, so you should be very

 5     clear on what exactly you then mean by format, because if you say it's

 6     typewritten with the name of the authority to which it relates to the

 7     left top corner, I could tell you that I've seen a million documents of

 8     such kind.  Whether there's any specific format in that at all is the

 9     first question that came to my mind.  This witness has never seen this or

10     any similar document before in his life.  Could you please, if you have

11     any additional questions, be very focused on what exactly you mean and to

12     phrase your question with well-defined terms.

13             MR. JORDASH:  Your Honour, yes.  May I just consult with

14     Mr. Petrovic.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, please do so.

16                           [Defence counsel confer]

17             MR. JORDASH:

18        Q.   This is a document which purports to be a request to be admitted

19     into a service.  Have you ever seen a request to be admitted into the

20     Serbian DB?

21        A.   I did.  I have, but that has nothing to do with this.

22        Q.   And the document you've seen, requests to be admitted into the DB

23     service, could you describe how they differ from the document on the

24     screen?

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. -- that's already leading.  You suggest that

Page 14212

 1     there's a difference.  They could be the same.

 2             MR. JORDASH:  The witness said he had nothing to do -- I'll

 3     rephrase the question, if Your Honour thinks its leading.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

 5             MR. JORDASH:

 6        Q.   The documents that you've seen --

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Let's -- you said you have seen requests to be

 8     admitted in the DB of Serbia.  Could you tell us when did you see that?

 9             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Primarily in the last stage of my

10     work in the service.  The last period of my work in the sector before

11     retirement.  Before that, people were not admitted based on requests.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  So in the later stages you say they were admitted

13     upon request?

14             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, in the last stage.  First of

15     all from the establishment of the security information agency onwards

16     until -- before that it was the service who would usually contact

17     potential recruits.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Could you tell us when you said "from the

19     establishment of the security information agency onwards," could you give

20     that a date, a time-frame, month, year?

21             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Recruiting younger people in the

22     BIA's interest in expanding began with a democratisation of society, that

23     would mean from 2001 onwards.  When open announcements on the BIA website

24     were made.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  You say requests to be admitted into the

Page 14213

 1     service in relation to Serbia, you know that from after the year 2000 and

 2     not from any earlier year?

 3             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm telling you that requests as a

 4     way to apply for a vacancy is something that I know about from 2001, when

 5     vacancies were announced openly on the website, and then people were able

 6     to contact the agency in this way.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Jordash, any further questions?

 8             MR. JORDASH:

 9        Q.   What was the procedure, if you know, in 1992 for recruitment of

10     members of the DB?

11        A.   The procedure was that the service itself identified persons in

12     whom they had an interest.  They would be interviewed, and after the

13     interview, the conclusion would be made if the candidate was fit for

14     working in the service.  And if the service decided that the candidate

15     was fit, the candidate was asked to write a CV.

16             MR. JORDASH:  Thank you, I've got nothing further.  Thank you,

17     Mr. Novakovic.  Thank you, Your Honours.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Jordash.

19                           [Trial Chamber confers]

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Weber, have the questions by Mr. Jordash

21     triggered any need to further questions.

22             MR. WEBER:  Yes, Your Honour, I would like to show one document

23     based on the last questions and also ask the witness if he is also

24     equally unfamiliar with something.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, yes, there may be a lot of material where we

Page 14214

 1     could ask the witness whether he is unfamiliar with it, then I have a --

 2     yes, please.

 3             MR. WEBER:  Could the Prosecution please have 65 ter 6272,

 4     page 12 of the B/C/S original and page 14 of the English translation.

 5                           Further Cross-examination by Mr. Weber:

 6        Q.   Sir, could you please take a look at the document that's before

 7     you, and my question directly relates to the formatting, not the content,

 8     but are you also unfamiliar or are you familiar with a heading or format

 9     used like this by the Serbian DB based on your experiences through your

10     employment?

11        A.   I'm absolutely not familiar with this.

12             MR. WEBER:  Your Honour, the Prosecution would just -- I believe

13     the rest of it the witness isn't needed for.  We would ask that

14     Prosecution 65 ter 6272 and 6271 be considered in conjunction with any

15     submissions related to the documents.

16             MR. JORDASH:  I don't know the full contents of this document, I

17     haven't had a chance to review it.  We haven't been notified of it.  We

18     would like the opportunity to see it first before advancing a position.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Petrovic.

20             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, we would also make

21     our position clearer in detail which we are not able to do now, but we

22     have a general comment about what we call personnel files here.  There is

23     a major dilemma whether these are indeed personnel files or collections

24     of material that were developed and kept for an entirely different

25     purpose.  We will discuss this later on in the case, but for the moment I

Page 14215

 1     would like to make this distinction in terminology clear.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, I think we have no definition yet of what

 3     exactly a personnel file is but it's certainly a collection of documents

 4     in relation to a person, and whether there's then a personnel file and

 5     who put it together, that's a matter that the parties have ample

 6     opportunity to further discuss.

 7             Let me see, have numbers -- has a number been assigned to the

 8     previous one.  Do you tender that one, the one where the witness said he

 9     had never seen that before --

10             MR. JORDASH:  Yes, please.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Then I take it that you would like to have the other

12     two documents to be in evidence as well, Mr. Weber.

13             MR. WEBER:  Well, Your Honour, we'd ask that the -- for the other

14     document that was used by the Defence that the entire file be uploaded.

15     We'd have no objection to the admission of it with the entire file, and

16     then we would ask for 65 ter 6271 and 72 to be admitted to further put

17     that into context, and in all fairness to the Defence, I believe they

18     should have an opportunity to review the files.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Let's keep matters short at this moment.  What I'm

20     going to do, I'm going to ask the Registrar to assign a number to the one

21     document taken from what you say was a personnel file, we mark it for

22     identification, we ask the parties to seek an agreement on what

23     contextualisation they would like to have.  If you agree on it, we'll

24     then consider to have the one document replaced by the series or the

25     whole file in accordance with your agreement, and at the same time I'll

Page 14216

 1     ask the Registrar to assign numbers to the other two documents.  So we --

 2     at this moment there are three individual documents which will be

 3     assigned numbers, they will be marked for identification, and whether

 4     that first one will later be replaced by a broader file or a series of

 5     documents, we'll hear from you whether you could agree on that or not.

 6     If not, the Chamber will decide on whether the whole of the file will be

 7     admitted in addition to the one document filed, or a selected series of

 8     it.  We'll see that, but that's how we are going to proceed.

 9             MR. JORDASH:  Your Honour, without detaining the Court, there are

10     375 files altogether and we are at this point in time considering how

11     best to present that material to Your Honours without overloading

12     Your Honours but presenting a fair picture of what those files contain.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  To the extent the parties can agree -- could agree

14     on what would be a representative sample of such files, of course, we

15     would welcome any such agreement and then we'll decide.

16             MR. JORDASH:  Your Honour, yes.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar, the three documents which we have

18     seen, the first one was the request for being admitted into the RSK unit

19     was number, could you please tell us the 65 ter number and then that

20     number assigned to it.

21             MR. JORDASH:  I think it was 1D05083.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  And that receives number?

23             THE REGISTRAR:  Number D449, Your Honours.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  And that should be under seal, not under seal.  I

25     think we dealt with it in open court.

Page 14217

 1             MR. JORDASH:  Yes, strictly speaking, because there's the name of

 2     somebody who I don't know might have ended up working for some

 3     intelligence service.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  We do not know either, so it's ...

 5             MR. WEBER:  Your Honour, with respect to the Prosecution two

 6     65 ter numbers, it's the entire files not just the document, just to make

 7     the Chamber aware of that.  And the document that was shown was okay to

 8     be broadcast but we would ask that the 65 ter numbers be under seal.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, so now there is confusion about the parties at

10     what 1D05083 stands for, that's only the one document.  Yes.  And then we

11     have two other documents and you are hereby instructed, Mr. Weber, as

12     matters stand now, to upload either under this number or on any other

13     number the two documents, the requests for admission, but now to the

14     Serbian organisation, to say so, separate for the time being, waiting for

15     any agreement between the parties, you may revisit the question and have

16     the entire file uploaded if there is no agreement with the Defence.  So

17     you reserve that right.  But those two documents and do we know which one

18     exactly they are?

19             MR. WEBER:  Your Honour, I've used the specific page of 6272 in

20     court which was page 12 of the original B/C/S and page 14 of the English

21     in e-court, so we can replace under a point 1 that specific page.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

23             MR. WEBER:  With respect to the other --

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Page -- Madam Registrar, is it sufficiently clear to

25     you although not uploaded as such?

Page 14218

 1             THE REGISTRAR:  I'll try to repeat.  So the page 12 in original,

 2     14 in English translation of current 65 ter 6272, that will be uploaded

 3     as 6272.1, 65 ter number, will receive a number, P3029, Your Honours.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  And is marked for identification.  And that one page

 5     needs to be under seal, not to be under seal.

 6             MR. WEBER:  It does not need to be under seal.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  No, it does not need to be under seal.  Yes.

 8             MR. WEBER:  With respect to the other one, the Prosecution is --

 9     there's one entity being discussed and another entity being discussed and

10     the other file puts into context the two.  So there's a document in that

11     that is not being offered because it's an admission for active service so

12     we would --

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Apparently the witness -- I take it that this

14     witness will not be able to tell us anything about it.  Apparently the

15     parties want to draw to our attention the various type of documents found

16     in files of which Mr. Petrovic says it's unsure whether we could call

17     them personnel files, but at least they are in there, and that the issue

18     you want to draw our attention to is that it's how to enter a service

19     from what state, what is the method in being employed, and the second is

20     in what organisation, was it a Serbian organisation, was it an SRK

21     organisation, in which the people were employed, the people to which

22     these files relate.  That's the issue.  And then I take it that apart

23     from any authenticity challenges, et cetera, that the parties could reach

24     an agreement to inform the Chamber in such a way that it assists us in

25     whatever direction but in better understanding what documents are there,

Page 14219

 1     what they say, and of course then we'll have to evaluate what findings

 2     they -- what kind of findings they would justify the Chamber to make.  Is

 3     that --

 4             MR. JORDASH:  Yes.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  No further questions?

 6             MR. WEBER:  No, Your Honour.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Novakovic, we have -- we appreciate very much

 8     that you came to The Hague, that you've answered all the questions you

 9     have, apart from that you have -- well, you have been a witness not only

10     telling us your testimony but also a witness of what happens in this

11     court on all kind of procedural matters.  I would like to thank you very

12     much for coming to The Hague, for having answered the questions that were

13     put to you by the parties and by the Bench, and I wish you a safe return

14     home, luckily and hopefully even before the weekend rather than after the

15     weekend.

16             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.  With your leave, I

17     would like to address the Court, please.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Well, please you may briefly address the Court but

19     since I do not know what you are going to say, it might be that at a

20     moment I say please stop it.  Please proceed.

21       *      THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It is about my previous stay here

22     in The Hague in 2008 because there was some discourse with this regard

23     just awhile ago.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  This was a matter I think we dealt with in private

25     session and I think it's not appropriate.  If you -- I'd rather leave it

Page 14220

 1     out.  Unless you say there is a something important for us to know, then

 2     we move into private session first.

 3             THE WITNESS: [Inter*pretation] I would kindly ask you --

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  One second.

 5     [Private session]   [Confidentiality lifted by order of the Chamber]

 6             THE REGISTRAR:  We are in private session, Your Honours.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Madam Registrar.

 8             One second.

 9                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Novakovic, we are in private session.  What

11     would you like to tell us?

12             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I will be literally short.  In 2008

13     I was invited by the district court in Belgrade, court for war crimes,

14     and this was done through the agency that I worked on.  They wanted me to

15     come to the premises of the court in Belgrade for an interview.  I

16     voluntarily responded and I went to the office, and on two or three

17     occasions, I spoke to the inspectors' representative representing the

18     Prosecutor's Office.  What I'm saying is that I went voluntarily in

19     keeping with the decision on the co-operation between Serbia and

20     The Hague Tribunal, the only request that I had at the time was this:

21     I -- they drafted a statement, I signed the statement and my only

22     requirement was to testify not as a Defence or a Prosecution witness, but

23     as a Chamber witness.  And this is the only truth about the whole event.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  I think that we have dealt with this matter before.

25     There seems to be no disagreement among the parties about what in that

Page 14221

 1     respect happened.  Some of the terms are a bit unclear of when you are a

 2     Chamber witness, I think we have set out the matter in sufficient detail,

 3     there's no dispute about it, so I would like again to leave it to that.

 4             We move again into open session.

 5                           [Open session]

 6             THE REGISTRAR:  We are in open session, Your Honour.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Madam Registrar.

 8             Mr. Novakovic, again, I wish you a safe return home again.  We

 9     adjourn and we will --

10                           [Trial Chamber confers]

11             JUDGE ORIE:  But before we adjourn, Mr. Novakovic, you may have

12     noticed that the Prosecution does not exclude for the possibility that

13     they would ask you or to call you again to testify.  That's uncertain at

14     this moment.  But out of caution, I would like to instruct you that until

15     that matter has been clarified, so either you are recalled or you receive

16     a message that you will not be recalled, that up until that moment, that

17     you would not speak with anyone about your testimony as you've given it

18     before the Tribunal or any testimony still to be given in the future.  So

19     please don't communicate or speak about it.

20             We -- that's clear to you now.  I take it?

21             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  We adjourn and we'll resume on Tuesday -- my agenda

23     is slightly different now, Tuesday will be the 10th -- 11th of October at

24     9.00 in the morning -- someone has changed my agenda programme in my

25     computer so I'm a bit lost.  Tuesday, the 11th of October, quarter past

Page 14222

 1     2.00, Courtroom II.

 2                           --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 12.05 p.m.,

 3                           to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 11th day of

 4                           October, 2011, at 2.15 p.m.






















* The bold and italicised text was previously confidential pursuant to a redaction order of the Chamber. The status of this redaction order has been changed from confidential to public per Chamber's decision of 14 June 2012.

* The bold and italicised text was previously confidential pursuant to a redaction order of the Chamber. The status of this redaction order has been changed from confidential to public per Chamber's decision of 14 June 2012.