1 Tuesday, 11 October 2011
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 2.27 p.m.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Good afternoon to everyone.
6 Madam Registrar, would you please call the case.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Good afternoon, Your Honours. This is case
8 number IT-03-69-T, the Prosecutor versus Jovica Stanisic and
9 Franko Simatovic.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
11 I would first like to put on the record that on the
12 7th of October of this year the Chamber decided to grant addition of
13 Witness DST-083 to the Stanisic Defence 65 ter list, and the Chamber has
14 informed the parties of its decision in an informal communication. The
15 Chamber also instructed the Stanisic Defence to bring the witness to
16 The Hague if it was their only option following their current witness.
17 That's hereby put on the record.
18 Is there any procedural matter to be raised at this moment?
19 I do understand that the Prosecution would like to raise an 92
20 bis issue. The Chamber would prefer to hear any submissions in relation
21 to 92 bis issues not before the next break.
22 Mr. Jordash.
23 MR. JORDASH: Could I raise two issues, one relating to
24 Mr. Stanisic and one relating to the next witness.
25 Perhaps, if I may, it would be more appropriate to hear the one
1 about Mr. Stanisic in the absence of the witness.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Is the witness -- is not yet present?
3 MR. JORDASH: Oh, he's not there.
4 JUDGE ORIE: At least we --
5 MR. JORDASH: No.
6 JUDGE ORIE: -- we have not started, as a matter of fact, the
7 video conference. But I see that there is a video conference.
8 And could the representative of the Registry at the other end of
9 the line tell us whether the witness is in the videolink room.
10 THE REGISTRAR: [Via videolink] Good afternoon, Your Honours. No,
11 witness is in the waiting room in front of the videolink room, so only
12 the representative of the Registry is in the videolink room.
13 JUDGE ORIE: With a technician, I take it.
14 THE REGISTRAR: [Via videolink] Yes, Your Honour.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
16 Mr. Jordash.
17 MR. JORDASH: The issue, for Your Honours' information, on Friday
18 last, Mr. Stanisic fell unconscious for unspecified reasons in the
19 detention centre.
20 JUDGE ORIE: We have -- if I -- if you do not mind, to interrupt
21 you, we have received the most recent report by the reporting medical
22 officer, which refers to at least, a double side, not feeling well, it's
23 described in a little bit more detail, and the observations of the UNDU
24 staff added to that. You have not seen that?
25 MR. JORDASH: No, I haven't seen. We haven't received such a
2 JUDGE ORIE: Then perhaps I read the relevant part to the extent
3 we -- I think I've got it here. Yes, let me read it. It's dated the
4 11th of October, and the apparent paragraph 2 of the report says the
6 "Last Friday, Mr. Jovica Stanisic experienced problems with
7 speech and double vision during about one hour. This staff described his
8 comportment resembling that of a drunk. The medical officer examined him
9 as soon as possible, but the symptoms had subsided and the medical
10 officer could not find no abnormalities -- could find no abnormalities.
11 The medical officer has planned further neurological examination this
13 That is what the report says about what happened at least in this
14 respect last Friday.
15 MR. JORDASH: And I think Mr. Stanisic experienced that as a
16 period of unconsciousness. That's certainly how he reported it to me.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That's the reason why I read it, because the
18 language is slightly different. But that there was something
19 extraordinary is clear.
20 MR. JORDASH: Yes. And today he's not feeling terribly well, and
21 I raise that so that Your Honours are aware of it. And if it comes to
22 it, then I'll obviously raise it again and make the appropriate
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Yes, we expect you to be very alert on that.
25 And the Chamber, of course, will be alert on it as well.
1 That is on the record. There was a second issue you would like
2 to raise.
3 MR. JORDASH: The second issue relates to this next witness who,
4 I should say, I haven't met and I haven't seen or spoken to, but I'm
5 informed by my investigator that he would like to address the Chamber to
6 offer personal reasons concerning protective measures. And, as I
7 understand it, he would like to address you at the outset of his
8 testimony personally.
9 JUDGE ORIE: If you say the next witness, is that the witness who
10 will testify today, or?
11 MR. JORDASH: Today.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Yes.
13 MR. JORDASH: As I understand his request, he has experienced a
14 number of anonymous calls --
15 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. We'll then hear from that witness first what
16 the grounds are for an application for protective measures on personal
17 grounds, rather than grounds raised by the Republic of Serbia. And I
18 think we should do that in closed session.
19 Ms. Marcus.
20 MS. MARCUS: Yes, Your Honour, thank you. In addition to the
21 92 bis submissions, I have one very brief submission that I would like to
22 make. I would say it would be about 3 minutes. I would appreciate the
23 opportunity to make it today but any time that Your Honours see fit.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, then let's first see whether we can get started
25 with the videolink and hearing the testimony of the witness.
1 I am addressing, at this moment, Madam Registrar at the other
2 side of the videolink. Can you hear us, can you see us?
3 THE REGISTRAR: [Via videolink] Just a second, Your Honour.
4 Your Honour --
5 JUDGE ORIE: Could we move into closed session.
6 [Closed session]
11 Pages 14228-14233 redacted. Closed session.
1 [Open session]
2 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we're back in open session.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
4 Witness, you'll now be --
5 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Madam Registrar verified whether the witness
7 can be shown. There's no pseudonym, there's no protection of his
8 identity at this moment.
9 Witness, you'll first be examined by Mr. Jordash. And
10 Mr. Jordash is counsel for Mr. Stanisic.
11 Mr. Jordash, you may proceed.
12 Examination by Mr. Jordash:
13 Q. Good afternoon, Mr. Lekovic.
14 A. Good afternoon.
15 Q. For the record, please give your full name and date of birth.
16 A. My name is Milorad Lekovic. Born on the 2nd of January, 1948.
17 Q. Do you have, there, a copy of a document purporting to be your
18 statement arising from interviews on the 23rd and 31st of August, 2007;
19 5th of September, 2007; 7th of September, 2010; and September 2011?
20 MR. JORDASH: And it's, Your Honours, 1D05104.
21 THE REGISTRAR: [Via videolink] Your Honours, the Registry doesn't
22 have this document. The document was not provided [indiscernible].
23 MR. JORDASH:
24 Q. Do you have that document, Mr. Lekovic?
25 JUDGE ORIE: The Registrar informs us that the Registrar is not
1 able to give it to the witness because it doesn't have the document.
2 MR. JORDASH: Um, I don't know why that is, as I stand here. It
3 ought to have been.
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You didn't understand me.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Oh, then ...
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The documents that you mentioned,
7 by the dates you mentioned, based on the interviews made on those dates I
8 made a written statement, and the corroborating documents are enumerated,
9 and they have been provided. I hope we understand each other now.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, there's no -- Madam Registrar, what
11 Mr. Jordash, apparently under number --
12 MR. JORDASH: -- 1D05104 --
13 JUDGE ORIE: -- is seeking to be given to the witness is a
14 consolidated statement, and you are telling us that you have not received
15 any such statement?
16 THE REGISTRAR: [Via videolink] That's correct, Your Honours. I
17 have received -- I have received a set of documents provided by the
18 Defence, and they are numbers from D280 up to D290 MFI'd and one document
19 number 1D04886. That's all the documents that I have received from the
20 Defence, Your Honours.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Marcus.
22 MS. MARCUS: Yes, just perhaps to be helpful, I think that the
23 witness is saying he has it in his bag. But even if not, we are happy to
24 send something through PGP electronically to the Belgrade field office if
25 that would be of assistance. You can have your Case Manager contact ours
1 and --
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I have them in my bag.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, let's -- Madam Registrar, could you please
4 assist in showing to the camera, as detailed as possible, to start with,
5 first, the cover page of the English version of a witness statement, and
6 I see here the number of the filing for us here in The Hague is 34219.
7 Could that be shown to the camera. Madam Registrar in -- I mean, at the
8 other end of the line, yes, could the copy the witness has apparently in
9 his possession, could you ask the witness to provide it to you.
10 THE REGISTRAR: [Via videolink] Yes, Your Honour, but the witness
11 needs to be escorted to the witness room because his documents are not in
12 the videolink room.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then we wait for a second until the witness
14 returns with this written statement.
15 Could you assist the witness in getting it from the waiting room.
16 THE REGISTRAR: [Via videolink] Yes, Your Honour.
17 JUDGE ORIE: For the record, the witness leaves the videolink
18 room accompanied by the representative of the Registry.
19 Any explanation as to why this document was not in the bundle, or
20 any challenge to whether it was?
21 MR. JORDASH: No, I think it wasn't. I think there's just been a
22 miscommunication between the Defence and the investigator in Belgrade. I
23 think both thought they were providing that document. Sorry, both
24 thought the other was providing the document. I do apologise.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, would you please be so kind to give a copy
1 of the statement to the representative of the Registry. Could the
2 representative of the Registry show this document as close to the camera
3 so that we can at least gain an impression of whether it could be the
4 same. One second, please. Yes, even a bit closer would assist,
5 Madam Registrar.
6 Yes, now I see we have apparently not the English version but the
7 B/C/S version. Could we move to the bottom of that.
8 MR. JORDASH: I think it's --
9 JUDGE ORIE: Let me see. It looks very much as if the copy which
10 is at this moment shown to the camera is -- and could we move to the
11 other part of the -- other bottom part, to the right bottom part. Yes,
12 there we see that initials are missing where we have those initials on
13 our copy. And these are the initials of other people being present.
14 Could we have a look at page 2 of the document. First the top,
15 then the bottom. Bottom, please. We see that -- and further to the
16 right bottom part, we see that on the second page all initials or
17 signatures are missing.
18 Madam Registrar, could you please have a look at the following
19 pages --
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. President, if I may be of
21 assistance. At the end, there is a sentence that reads that I read the
22 whole statement in the Serbian language and signed it.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Let's -- Mr. Lekovic --
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] And there is a signature.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lekovic, if you would please leave it to me at
1 this moment, the way in which I want to verify what we have in front of
3 Madam Registrar, could you confirm that on the pages 3, 4, 5, 6,
4 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, and 13 whether there are any initials in handwriting
5 or signatures.
6 THE REGISTRAR: [Via videolink] No, Your Honour.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Could you --
8 THE REGISTRAR: [Via videolink] The pages from 2 up to 13, there
9 are no initials or signatures.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Could the Chamber have a look at page 14. First,
11 top. Yes, it looks as if at least the signature of the witness appears
12 on page 14.
13 Could we have a look at page 15. There, a date and what appears
14 to be the signature of the --
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] 30th September and the signature.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And, Madam Registrar, could you please show us
17 the cover page in English.
18 THE REGISTRAR: [Via videolink] Your Honour, I have only a B/C/S
19 version of this document provided by the witness.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Then we leave matters as they are at this moment.
21 It appears at first sight that the B/C/S copy the witness brought
22 to the videolink room is of the same content as the B/C/S version that
23 was filed for the 92 ter application. I suggest to the parties that
24 Madam Registrar keeps a -- keeps the copy provided by the witness - at
25 any later stage, of course, Mr. Jordash, you can provide the witness with
1 another copy if you want to - but that we keep that one because that's
2 the one produced by the witness at this moment, that it can be compared
3 with the uploaded copy on the basis of which we will work, and can be
4 compared with the filed version attached to the 92 ter application, and
5 that we in this way establish exactly whether -- if the witness would
6 attest to his statement, whether he would attest to the same statement as
7 we have received.
8 Mr. Jordash, this is my suggestion.
9 MR. JORDASH: Yes, and I thank you. And apologies. And I'll
10 move forward with that in mind.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Marcus.
12 MS. MARCUS: I have no objections, Your Honour.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Then we proceed in the following way:
14 Witness, Mr. Lekovic, perhaps you'll receive, later, another copy
15 of your statement. But the one you just produced, are you willing to
16 leave that in the hands of Madam Registrar who is sitting next to you in
17 order to be taken to The Hague for comparison?
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, Mr. President, I agree
19 that can be done.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Then we proceed as suggested.
21 Mr. Jordash.
22 MR. JORDASH: Thank you.
23 Q. Mr. Lekovic, did you attend interviews on the dates which appear
24 on the front of the statement which we've just been discussing?
25 A. Yes. On the 23rd and 31st August, 2007; 5 September 2007;
1 7 September 2010; 16 and 28 September 2011; and the text was finalised on
2 the 30th, which I then signed.
3 Q. That's the 30th of September, is that?
4 A. So -- it's dated 30th September, 2011.
5 Q. Thank you. Did you have an opportunity to review the contents of
6 the statement and make any clarifications you wanted to make before
7 signing it? Sorry, let me --
8 A. I've read the statement in its entirety, and I participated in
9 its drafting, and I stand firmly behind the statement I've signed.
10 Q. Thank you. And are the contents in accordance with the truth?
11 A. Could you say that again?
12 Q. Are its contents in accordance with the truth?
13 A. Yes, this statement reflects the truth in the topic discussed,
14 the subject of the interview.
15 Q. And if you were asked the same questions again in substance, you
16 would give the same answers?
17 A. At the beginning of the statement, from item 1 through item 9,
18 the information is given in chronology about my career in the service.
19 And from item 10 through item 44 --
20 Q. [Previous translation continued] ... Mr. -- go on.
21 A. -- there are questions and answers regarding the subject of our
22 discussion, then and today, and I would give the same answers today.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Witness DST-052, the last question, whether you
24 would give the same answers, could have been answered by a simple "yes,"
25 and that we are always under time restraints. The content of the
1 statement is clear to us, so please focus very much your answers on the
2 questions that were put to you.
3 Then, finally, one additional question. You said: The statement
4 I signed. Did I understand you well that you recognised your signature
5 on the statement which is in front of you now?
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, the signature is mine. I
7 signed the statement.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Thank you for that.
9 In order to avoid that any paperwork will be mixed up, I would
10 suggest that if you have -- want to have the statement in front of you,
11 that you remove as good as possible all other paperwork on your desk, or
12 give the statement to Madam Registrar so that she keeps it and shows it
13 to you if need be.
14 Please proceed, Mr. Jordash.
15 MR. JORDASH:
16 Q. Mr. Witness, I want to go straight to your --
17 MR. JORDASH: Well, before I do, may I tender the statement?
18 Perhaps it should be MFI'd until the final checks have been carried out.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but a number could already be assigned to it.
20 It has been uploaded, Mr. Jordash?
21 MR. JORDASH: Yes, it has.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, it has been uploaded.
23 Madam Registrar, the number for the statement would be ...
24 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, the number for statement under
25 65 ter number 1D05104 will be D450, and that will be marked for
2 JUDGE ORIE: It's marked for identification.
3 Mr. Jordash, I have not specifically verified the statement on
4 any of the protected matters. Perhaps it would be wiser to have it
5 marked for identification under seal for the time being.
6 MR. JORDASH: Yes.
7 JUDGE ORIE: And that both parties check whether there's any
8 information in it protected so that -- which might need for a redacted
9 version to be prepared. Please proceed.
10 MR. JORDASH: Thank you.
11 JUDGE ORIE: And it's -- Madam Registrar, it's under seal at this
13 MR. JORDASH:
14 Q. Mr. Lekovic, I want to take you to your statement. Bear in mind
15 that your statement is now before the Court and we do not need to repeat
16 its contents. I'd like to ask you some questions, though, to clarify
17 your statement and also clarify issues relating to the commission. And
18 so we'll look at the statement and we'll look at the various underlying
19 documents. Do you follow me?
20 JUDGE ORIE: Just -- yes, before we proceed, there's one thing.
21 This witness was scheduled viva voce for two hours. It's now a
22 92 ter witness, which is supposed to save time. I invited the parties
23 last week to make a clear division of time. Has that been done for the
24 two days?
25 MR. JORDASH: I think it has. I think we expect to finish within
1 two days. I think there's been an exchange of estimates, and we
2 anticipate finishing tomorrow.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Especially because if you would have divided
4 the time available in its entirety for these two days, we've lost already
5 one hour. That's the only thing I'm a bit concerned about. So if
6 there's any need to review your estimates so in order to finish the
7 testimony of this witness in the -- either today or tomorrow, then I
8 would urge you to contact the other parties.
9 Meanwhile, please proceed.
10 MR. JORDASH:
11 Q. Mr. Lekovic, can I take you to paragraph 5 of your statement and
12 paragraph 8 and 9, and it deals with your appointment to the head of the
13 State Security Service for the city of Belgrade in November of 1988. And
14 in paragraph 5, you note:
15 "My appointment was the second case of an appointment of a person
16 from political structures to the position of a superior officer within
17 the SDB."
18 When you say "an appointment from political structures," what
19 exactly do you mean by that?
20 A. I meant that the Government of Serbia, or, as it was called, the
21 Republic Executive Council of the Republic of Serbia, appointed me chief
22 of the State Security Service for the city of Belgrade, and it was only
23 the second time that somebody from outside the service was appointed to
24 that position.
25 Q. Did you have any experience --
1 A. Yes, sorry.
2 Q. Do you have any experience of state security business when you
3 were appointed?
4 A. No. After graduating from university, I went straight to the
5 school for reserve officers in Bileca. Then I was a "stagiaire." And
6 then I started working in the committee in Vozdovac as the senior
7 political advisor. Then I was --
8 Q. Mr. Lekovic, we have your CV in the statement. None of the posts
9 which are listed there, principally from 1 to 5 --
10 A. I'm not receiving interpretation.
11 Q. Let me try that again. We have your CV laid out in the
12 statement. Am I correct, then, from what you've just told us, that none
13 of those posts prior to November 1988 engaged you in any way with state
14 security business?
15 A. Yes. Not a single position which I occupied until then had
16 anything to do with state security, because the position was, and that
17 position was assumed after the 8th session when Ivan Stambolic was
18 replaced along with the Belgrade administration Dupar --
19 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, Witness, Witness, I'm going to stop you.
20 Why? Because the simple question was whether any of these functions had
21 to do anything with state security. I think you started your answer
22 with, "Yes. Not a single position which I occupied until then had
23 anything to do with state security," and then you started an explanation,
24 an explanation which was not asked from you. And if Mr. Jordash would
25 like to know an explanation, he will ask for it. So a simple "yes" would
1 have done already.
2 So, therefore, would you please careful listen to the question.
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I understand. I'll be more
5 JUDGE ORIE: And more confined in your answers.
6 Mr. Jordash.
7 MR. JORDASH: Thank you.
8 Q. Now, paragraph 8 of your statement refers to you being a member
9 of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia up until 1990. Did you hold a
10 function within that party at the time you became the head of the
11 State Security Service for the city of Belgrade?
12 A. No, I did not have any position in the party. I was president of
13 the Municipal Assembly of Vozdovac, elected on the 1st of April, 1986,
14 and from then on -- from that position I was appointed chief of the
15 State Security Service for Belgrade.
16 Q. Who was the head of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia at the
17 time you were appointed to the DB?
18 THE INTERPRETER: Could counsel please switch off microphone
19 whenever he's finished with a question.
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm not sure. Tito died in 1980,
21 and after him, from every republic, presidents of the central committee
22 of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia were elected, rotating every
24 MR. JORDASH:
25 Q. Was Milosevic in the party?
1 A. You mean at the time when I was appointed chief of the state
3 Q. Yes, I'm focusing on that appointment, and I'm interested in you
4 explaining to the Court how the party worked, inasmuch as it was able, to
5 have you in some way appointed to the state security? You follow my
7 A. Yes, I understand the question now.
8 Q. Did Milosevic have a position within that party?
9 A. Let me just tell you one thing. Because of certain things that
10 happened within the State Security Service for the city of Belgrade, the
11 stance was taken that the chief of the service should not be elected from
12 within the service but from the outside, because they had a certain
13 baggage, the State Security Service of Belgrade. There was a famous
14 satire published in the newspapers about --
15 Q. Mr. Lekovic, let me take you where I want you to go, please.
16 The stance -- you stay the stance was taken that the chief of the
17 service should not be from -- elect -- should not be elected from within
18 the service. Who took that stance?
19 A. That stance was taken at the level of the Republic of Serbia by
20 people who were charting personnel policy, as we called it then.
21 Q. And who at the level --
22 A. To be quite clear: If Lekovic had not been there, somebody else
23 would have been appointed chief of the State Security Service for the
24 city of Belgrade from the political structures.
25 Q. Who at the level of the Republic of Serbia was making these
2 A. At the level of Serbia there were certain bodies for preliminary
3 consultations, whereas specific decisions on appointments to state
4 authorities were made by the republic Executive Council, that is, the
5 republic government, following those consultations.
6 Q. Which were the bodies for the preliminary consultations?
7 A. Well, in this specific case, when consultations were conducted
8 for the appointment of the minister of the interior who was appointed in
9 March 1988, whereas I was appointed a little later, after being
10 officially appointed by the government on the 18th of October,
11 politicians from the republic political structures conducted
12 consultations, and those consultations involved discussions about several
13 nominees for each position. And from those shortlists one person would
14 eventually be appointed to each position.
15 Q. And when you say "political structures," are you talking about
16 political -- a political party or political parties? Be specific,
17 please. What are these political structures?
18 A. Well, at the time when the League of Communists existed, there
19 was also the Socialist Alliance of the Working People, which was an
20 umbrella organisation, the broadest one we had. There was the
21 trade union association, the president of the Republic of Serbia, the
22 president of the Executive Council, the president of the city assembly,
23 the president of the municipal party organisation. Those were the people
24 who took part in the debates preceding political appointments.
25 Q. And these people who you've just mentioned, these posts,
1 presidents of various entities, did they belong to one political party or
2 did they belong to different political parties?
3 A. Let's be clear: Before 1990, when the SPS was established, all
4 officials were members of the League of Communists.
5 On the 17 of July, 1990, there was the first congress of the SPS,
6 the Socialist Party of Serbia was thereby established, and the League of
7 Communists was discontinued and the socialist party was created instead.
8 During that period, from the year 1990 up to the creation of the
9 multi-party system, all the officials both in the republic and in the
10 city were members of the SPS.
11 Q. Which year was the multi-party system created?
12 A. The multi-party system, or political pluralism, as it is also
13 known, came into being in 1989 and 1990. The first multi-party elections
14 in Serbia took place on the 24th of December, 1990.
15 Q. Let me just clarify something. You've said that before 1990,
16 when the SPS was established, all officials were members of the
17 League of Communists. At the same time, you say you were the second
18 political appointment to the State Security of Serbia. Am I summarising
19 what you've said correctly?
20 A. Yes, but the first appointment was in 1966 after the
21 Brioni Plenum and the removal of Aleksandar Rankovic from position.
22 That's when a person from political structures was appointed into the
23 state security who was not an intelligence professional. You can find it
24 in the statement. You should have read my statement more carefully. I'm
25 sure you would have found it.
1 Q. I'm not asking you about 1966. I've read the statement. I know
2 it's in there. Listen to my question, if you would, Mr. Lekovic. What
3 I'm trying to --
4 A. Go ahead.
5 Q. What I'm trying to reconcile or have you explain is, on the one
6 hand you say that officials were all SPS and at the same time you say the
7 state security were not making appointments that were political other
8 than yours and one other at the time we are talking about, 1988.
9 A. Mr. Jordash, now I have been criticised again or you are putting
10 me in a situation where Mr. President might again criticise me for being
11 too verbose, but I have to expand on my answer if you want to understand
12 me properly.
13 At a meeting of the Government of Serbia on the 18th of October,
14 I was appointed. And then on the 1st of November, 1988, I took my
15 office. And from the position of the president of the municipality of
16 Vozdovac, I joined the state security of the city and I took my new
17 office as per the government decision.
18 We have to make a distinction here. The League of Communists,
19 when that existed, that was a mono-party system. When the SPS was
20 established on the 17th of July, 1990, that was the year when all the
21 political turmoil started. And the first multi-party election - I have
22 to repeat that - took place on the 24th of December, 1990.
23 It's very -- it's rather difficult to understand, especially by
24 anybody who did not live in our circumstances.
25 Q. Okay.
1 MR. JORDASH: Your Honour, I notice the time. Perhaps ...
2 JUDGE ORIE: You suggest to take a break.
3 MR. JORDASH: Yes.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Then we'll break. And we resume at 4.00.
5 --- Recess taken at 3.36 p.m.
6 --- On resuming at 4.10 p.m.
7 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Bakrac.
9 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] With your leave, Mr. Petrovic and
10 myself have consulted our client and we would like to voice our concerns
11 with regard to the testimony of this witness and whether his testimony
12 can finish in the course of the day today or by the end of the day
13 tomorrow. We would like to say for the record that we will not have any
14 questions in cross-examination unless a question is prompted by the
15 Prosecution's cross-examination, in which case we will seek
16 clarification. Otherwise, we will not have any questions for this
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I'm a bit surprised by the expression that you
19 voice your concerns, because you are removing any concerns all others in
20 this courtroom might have. That seems to be the situation. Thank you
21 very much for assisting, Mr. Bakrac.
22 Ms. Marcus.
23 MS. MARCUS: Thank you, Your Honour. I just wanted to mention
24 that we've sent -- after the request by the Defence, we sent through both
25 the B/C/S and English versions on a secure e-mail to the Belgrade field
1 office. And although I believe that the Registrar who's there cannot
2 receive it directly, we have sent it to somebody in the office whom I
3 hope will provide it, if that's of any assistance.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, although I suggest that we do not engage in a
5 new exercise to compare. But as matters stand now, I think we should be
6 able to resolve -- not to say that it's very helpful, because the -- now
7 at least a copy is available, and we could even invite Madam Registrar at
8 the other side already to do the comparison.
9 Is this understood by the Registry at the other side -- at the
10 other end of the videolink?
11 THE REGISTRAR: [Via videolink] Yes, Your Honours, would you like
12 me to compare the documents?
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. If you would do so, not necessarily
14 immediately but before we start tomorrow, so that you see whether the
15 copy you received from the witness is, as far as the text is concerned,
16 of course, we have noticed already that there are differences in
17 signatures and initials on the various pages, but whether, as far as the
18 text is concerned, the two versions are identical.
19 THE REGISTRAR: [Via videolink] Yes, Your Honour. I would just
20 like to put on the record I haven't received yet --
21 JUDGE ORIE: No, but --
22 THE REGISTRAR: [Via videolink] -- by e-mail, anything. But as
23 soon as I receive, I will do that.
24 JUDGE ORIE: That's what I hinted at. Thank you.
25 Mr. Jordash, please proceed.
1 MR. JORDASH: Thank you.
2 Q. Mr. Lekovic, I want to try to move quickly through this section
3 we've been discussing concerning your appointment through political
4 structures. Are you familiar with the 8th session of the
5 Communist League of Serbia in 1987?
6 A. Yes, I'm familiar with it, but I don't know what to say next.
7 Shall we perhaps go into private session if you want me to answer any
8 questions about it? You can ask me anything you want.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Witness DST-052, even without your invitation
10 Mr. Jordash knows that he can ask you whatever he ... the answer,
11 therefore, is "yes." And then you wait for the next question. And then
12 if there's any need to go into private session, although I do not see yet
13 any of the criteria being met ...
14 Please proceed, Mr. Jordash.
15 MR. JORDASH:
16 Q. Did Milosevic attend that session?
17 A. Not only did he attend the session, he chaired it all the time.
18 Q. What was -- apart from him being the chair, did he hold any other
19 function or position at that point relevant to that session?
20 A. The most relevant position he held at the time was that of the
21 president of the League of Communists. And he was also the president of
22 the central committee of the League of Communists.
23 Q. Was Stambolic present at the session?
24 A. Yes, Ivan Stambolic was also present.
25 Q. What position did he hold at the time?
1 A. Ivan Stambolic was the president of the central committee of the
2 League of Communists before Milosevic. And then when Milosevic was
3 elected the president of the central committee, then Ivan Stambolic was
4 elected president of the Serbian Presidency. Which means that at the
5 time of the 8th session Buce Pavlovic [phoen], the president of the city
6 board of the League of Communists of Belgrade, was the president of the
7 SRS of Serbia, and Stambolic was removed at the 8th session.
8 Q. How was it that Stambolic was removed? Did Milosevic play a part
9 in that removal?
10 A. We have to look at two different aspects here. Milosevic chaired
11 the session. The session lasted two days and two nights without any
12 breaks. Zoran Sokolovic read the main speech. There was a debate and a
13 vote, and a majority of the members of the central committee supported
14 Milosevic's concept. And Mr. Stambolic won not more than six votes. And
15 as a result of that, he was degraded as a member of the League of
17 Immediately after that, he was removed from the state office that
18 he had held until then.
19 Q. And what happened to Milosevic as a consequence of what happened
20 at that session or as a consequence of the removal of Stambolic?
21 A. Nothing happened to Milosevic. He remained in his position. And
22 his position as a result of that became even stronger. He became number
23 one person in both the political structures as well as in the state
25 Q. What position did Sokolovic hold at the time of this session?
1 A. Zoran Sokolovic at the time was the secretary.
2 Are you able to follow what I'm saying?
3 Q. I beg your pardon, Mr. Lekovic. I was just consulting with a
4 colleague. Please go ahead. Excuse my rudeness.
5 A. No, no, no, I just want the two of us to understand each other
7 Zoran Sokolovic, or, rather, the president of the party is the
8 number one position in the League of Communists, and Sokolovic was number
9 one -- number two person and he held number two position. He was the one
10 who read the keynote address at the session when Ivan Stambolic and
11 Buce Pavlovic or Dragisa Pavlovic, also known as Guce [phoen], were both
12 removed from their positions.
13 Q. Were you present at the session?
14 A. No, I was not a member of the central committee. At the time I
15 was the president of the municipality of Vozdovac. The entire session
16 was aired on TV. Everybody could follow. There was a great deal of
17 interest in the session and its outcome, so I was one of those who
18 followed the session with a great deal of interest.
19 Q. We'll come to some of these names later. But Janackovic, was he
21 A. At the 8th session? Believe me, I don't know.
22 Q. Okay. Fair enough. Let's now --
23 A. Please, please, can we go into private session just for a moment,
24 a minute or two.
25 JUDGE ORIE: We move into private session.
1 [Private session] [Confidentiality lifted by order of the Chamber]
2 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we are in private session.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
4 We are in private session at this moment, Mr. Lekovic,
5 therefore --
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Then I can answer the question or
7 not? I wanted to go into private session to explain why.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lekovic, the question was -- let me see. One --
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Whether Zoran Janackovic was one of
10 the --
11 JUDGE ORIE: One second. The question was whether Janackovic was
12 present at the 8th session. Your answer was "I don't know."
13 I do not know whether Mr. Jordash is seeking any further
14 explanation --
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] But I wanted to say something to
16 provide you with --
17 JUDGE ORIE: Well --
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I wanted to say something.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but you are --
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I wanted to say that
21 Zoran Janackovic was a lawyer who was previously the secretary of the
22 Assembly of Serbia and then he was the president of the regional party
23 organisation in eastern Serbia, and he may have been present at the
24 8th session but I don't know whether he was or not. So I can actually
25 not answer the question with either yes or no. I can only say that he
1 was not a member of the central committee or the central board. That's
2 as much as I know.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, one --
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- because the 8th session was
5 organised --
6 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lekovic, Mr. Lekovic --
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Go ahead.
8 JUDGE ORIE: We moved into private session where you had answered
9 the question and the further explanation seems not to be of -- why you do
10 not know is not of a primary interest. The fact that you don't know.
11 And we accept if you don't know something, then you don't know. That
12 doesn't need any further explanation. If Mr. Jordash would like --
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Very well, thank you.
14 JUDGE ORIE: -- would like any further explanation as to the
15 functions held by Mr. Janackovic, he'll ask you for it. Most likely
16 there's no need to go into private session.
17 May I urge you again to focus your answer on the questions. If
18 you've answered the question and if you think that you could further
19 explain, wait whether any explanation is further sought by the party that
20 did put the question to you.
21 We move into open session.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Jordash --
23 [Open session]
24 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we are back in open session.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
1 Please proceed, Mr. Jordash.
2 MR. JORDASH:
3 Q. Okay. Mr. Lekovic, let's try to wrap up this particular subject
4 because I want to spend the remainder of the time speaking about the
6 Firstly, which entity or which persons do you say were
7 responsible for your appointment to the state security in 1988?
8 A. Responsible?
9 Q. Yes. You were appointed, as you've told us, by the political
10 structures. Can you put a name on the entity or a name on the
11 individuals who you say were most responsible for that appointment?
12 A. There were interviews with potential candidates. There were a
13 number of candidates running for the State Security Service of the city
14 of Belgrade. I was among the interviewees. And then there were
15 consultations of sorts. I asked my comrades or the gentlemen who
16 participated in that interview not to be mentioned as a candidate before
17 the bodies who were supposed to make that decision because that was not
18 my area of interest, and I had different plans for the future --
19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lekovic --
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- based on what I had been doing
21 until then.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lekovic, the question was not what plans you had
23 for the future. The question simply was whether you could name
24 institutions or persons who were responsible, that is, who decided or
25 were directly involved in a decision to appoint you. That was the
1 question. And could you please answer that question.
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Okay. The shortest answer would be
3 this: Dr. Rados Smiljkovic, the then-president of the city board of the
4 League of Communists of Belgrade, interviewed me. He assumed the
5 position after the 8th session. He was the one who discussed things with
6 me. And then I was interviewed by the new republican secretary
7 Mr. Radmilo Bogdanovic, who replaced Lalovic, who was removed from the
8 position as secretary after the 8th session.
9 After that, there was a board composed of certain persons, and I
10 have to say their names now. That interview did not concern only my
11 position but also other issues. One of them was the appointment of the
12 secretary of the state security of the city of Belgrade. So the persons
13 who were present at that interview were --
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lekovic, I again invite you not to tell us for
15 what other appointments persons may have been responsible. Let's keep
16 matters short. You were interviewed by Mr. Mirkovic [phoen] --
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] But this is about me. You're
18 asking me a direct question. I'm talking about myself.
19 JUDGE ORIE: The question --
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] What Mirkovic?
21 JUDGE ORIE: The question was --
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Dr. Rados Smiljkovic.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. The question was: Who was directly involved
24 or responsible for your appointment. You told us that you were
25 interviewed by Mirkovic. You were interviewed by -- the other person was
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] And he asked me whether I -- I
3 accepted. And then there was a session of the Government of Serbia, the
4 Executive Board of Serbia, where a decision was made on the
5 18 of October, and my CV was read out and it was said that Mr. Lekovic
6 would thereby be appointed the chief of the state security of Belgrade
7 and the assistant minister of the interior of Serbia, and that
8 development closed the circle.
9 JUDGE ORIE: That's an answer to the question.
10 Please proceed.
11 MR. JORDASH: Thank you.
12 Q. You mentioned a board with certain persons on it, the Executive
13 Board of Serbia where a decision was made. Who was on the
14 Executive Board of Serbia?
15 A. It's not an executive committee; it was the co-ordinating body
16 for personnel issues that conducted consultations.
17 Q. Who was on it?
18 A. I've just said the people who occupied positions at that moment,
19 and I can name those who were there at that time.
20 Q. Would you please. Yes, please.
21 A. President of the Presidency of Serbia.
22 Q. Name?
23 A. President of the Assembly of Serbia, president of the
24 government --
25 Q. [Previous translation continued] ... Mr. Lekovic --
1 A. -- president of the central committee, president of the --
2 Q. Mr. Lekovic, could you give some names, not the positions, the
3 names, please.
4 A. I had started. Those present, before it was put to the executive
5 committee for a final decision: Petar Gracanin; Slobodan Milosevic;
7 Dr. Bogdan Trifunovic; the republic secretary at that time,
8 Radmilo Bogdanovic; and Aleksandar Bakocevic, president of the city
9 government; and Rados Smiljkovic. Those people made the final decision
10 in those consultations, and then that would be passed on to formalise the
12 Q. Thank you. Why was it, Mr. Lekovic, that those who made the
13 decision to place a political appointee within the DB, why was it that
14 they wanted to do that?
15 A. Well, an assessment was made, but certain disruptions had
16 occurred in the work of the service for Belgrade, because the head of the
17 State Security Service of the city is my number one. Then there was the
18 assistant republic secretary, then the member of the collegium, chief of
19 the State Security Service of Serbia, member of the administration for
20 Belgrade --
21 THE INTERPRETER: And another person the interpreter didn't hear.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The assessment was made that the
23 service had certain bad baggage because of disruptions and certain bad
24 methods used. And there was that satire published --
25 Q. [Previous translation continued] ... no, Mr. Lekovic.
1 Mr. Lekovic, please, please --
2 A. -- in the media concerning the academician --
3 Q. Mr. Lekovic, could you be concrete about the bad baggage that was
4 perceived by these political structures?
5 A. About whom or about what?
6 Q. You mentioned bad baggage. I'm trying to work out -- I'm trying
7 to have you explain in concrete terms, and briefly, if you would, why the
8 political structures perceived it was important to have a political man
9 in such an important position as the chief of the Belgrade centre.
10 Would you like to explain that in two or three sentences, please.
11 A. Well, there was that baggage, as I said. Anyway, I explained
12 that the head of the service for Belgrade was also a member of various
13 other bodies and had various other duties, and the stance was taken that
14 it should be a person from outside the service. And if it hadn't been
15 me, it would be somebody else. But, again, an outsider to the service.
16 Q. Why? Why, Mr. Lekovic? Why?
17 A. What? Well, I did not apply for an open vacancy. I was
18 proposed, and the Government of Serbia appointed me. I did not apply for
19 the position.
20 Q. What were you told to do within the service? Were you expected
21 by these political structures to do something?
22 A. I don't know what you mean. But if you mean that I was supposed
23 to do something on behalf of the political structures, they did not need
24 that. But it was said during the consultations that it should be a
25 newcomer to the service, a younger person, but with a certain experience,
1 that has some renown in Belgrade, that they know the organisation and the
2 structure of the authorities and how the system works, that this person
3 should be able to establish -- to set up a team, to be able to manage it,
4 and to be able to gather around him capable people. But nothing specific
5 was asked of me during the consultations, nor was it politically
6 conditioned upon doing something that I should become a nominee.
7 Q. You tell us at paragraph 11 of your statement that Stanisic,
8 Jovica Stanisic, had been envisaged for the post that you took. Why was
9 he passed over in favour of you?
10 A. You did not understand item 10. I explain, in item 10, when
11 Mr. Stanisic and I first met and on what occasion and why. And in
12 item 12 --
13 Q. Please, I'm looking at paragraph 11 where you say --
14 A. I'm coming to that.
15 Q. Yeah, well, I want to go straight there. Please listen to my
16 question, if you would.
17 A. Yes, please.
18 Q. You say, based on a conversation with a member of the service,
19 you knew that Stanisic had been envisaged for the post that you took.
20 The question I'm asking is: Why was it you were the preferred appointee
21 or appointment rather than Stanisic?
22 A. This is not well phrased. The thing is --
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lekovic, Mr. Lekovic, would you first answer the
24 question before you --
25 THE WITNESS: [No interpretation]
1 JUDGE ORIE: But, Mr. Lekovic, would you first try to answer the
2 question before criticising it.
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, please, Mr. President, I'm
4 not criticizing the question. I just want to give the necessary
5 explanation to understand my answer. And the answer is as follows: I
6 had information that Jovica Stanisic, as one of the most prominent people
7 in the service and one of the best professionals, had been envisaged to
8 become chief of the service for the city of Belgrade after the
9 8th session. And if the post was to be filled by a man from the service,
10 I was told that it was going to be Jovica Stanisic because he was
11 designed to take that place. But I did not threaten him in any way --
12 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lekovic --
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- by occupying the position,
14 because it was not a vacancy openly announced.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lekovic, I'm again going stop you. The question
16 was not whether Mr. Stanisic would have appointed if someone of the
17 service would have been appointed. The question is why you were
18 appointed rather than Mr. Stanisic, who, as I -- as we read in your
19 statement, had been envisaged for the post as well. That's the question.
20 Could you please answer that question.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, I could answer your question
22 with a question. I did not come instead of Stanisic, because all this
23 took place at the same time. Stanisic was not appointed to that place,
24 to that post, and then removed so that I could come. There were
25 discussions about various nominees and various arrangements for that
1 post, both inside and outside the service. And, again, I'm saying,
2 because it was decided it should be a man from outside the service, if it
3 hadn't been me, it would have been someone else, because there had been
4 other candidates.
5 If they had decided to put in a man from the service --
6 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lekovic --
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- then I think, and I was told, it
8 would be Stanisic.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lekovic --
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Or perhaps you don't understand
11 what I'm trying to say.
12 JUDGE ORIE: I think I fully understand what you're trying to
13 say. My problem is not that I do not understand it, but my problem is
14 that you're saying far more than what you're asked.
15 I do understand that whatever may have --
16 THE WITNESS: [No interpretation]
17 JUDGE ORIE: Could you please -- could you please let me
18 finish. -- whatever may have been decisive in appointing you, that you
19 say it's for certain that someone had to be appointed outside the
20 service, and that was the reason why Mr. Stanisic was not appointed,
21 because he was from inside the service. Is that your answer?
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Is that my what?
23 JUDGE ORIE: Whether that is your answer to the question. But I
24 put it a bit short.
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Is the question finished?
1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Jordash, put your next question to the witness,
3 MR. JORDASH: Certainly.
4 Q. Let me ask a question then: Why was it that the political
5 structures wanted somebody from outside the service, rather than inside
6 the service, to take that post?
7 A. I don't know how to explain that. That's the shortest answer.
8 Q. Okay. Let's move on then. Let's try a different question. Try
9 to assist the Court, if you would, Mr. Lekovic. Paragraph 12 of your
10 statement notes:
11 "When Zoran Janackovic became the head of the service,
12 Jovica Stanisic was bypassed whenever that was possible."
13 Why was that?
14 A. It was not only my impression. It was an impression shared by
15 others in the service. Because I had been already in the service when
16 Zoran Janackovic became the head of the service for Serbia.
17 Q. Why was that? Answer the question directly if you would, please.
18 A. You know who is best place to answer that question?
19 Zoran Janackovic. But from what I know and from what I could see,
20 Jovica was an assistant. There is the chief of the service, assistant
21 chief, and two deputies. Jovica was in charge of counter-intelligence,
22 and those were people both in the head office at the Serbian level and
23 Belgrade who had the impression that Janackovic was passing
24 Jovica Stanisic over because he was in awe, in a way, of his high
25 professionalism. He wanted at the same time to use him as a professional
1 but also to play down, somehow, his abilities.
2 Q. Let's move -- thank you for the answer. Let's move to the
4 Why was it that Janackovic wanted to remove Stanisic from the
6 A. Janackovic was appointed chief of the service in a very turbulent
7 time, when a number of parties were founded on the political scene of
8 Serbia. He was feeling a bit inferior to the post he was occupying and
9 the duties involved, and we all noticed that he wanted to marginalise
10 Jovica Stanisic and to dominate, which he couldn't do because he was not
11 up to that post. And Jovica Stanisic was a better man than both him and
12 the other deputies. And I and other people in the service noticed that.
13 That's why Janackovic first tried to sideline and then to remove Stanisic
15 Q. Did Janackovic come from within the service or from outside the
17 A. We've been through this before, but Janackovic was appointed by
18 the government as a man from outside the service. He came to that post
19 from another political position, so he was also an outsider to the
21 Q. Now, briefly, Mr. Lekovic, what powers did the commission have?
22 THE REGISTRAR: [Via videolink] [No interpretation]
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The formal decision to set up the
24 commission adopted --
25 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar at the other side of the videolink,
1 you apparently intervened in a language which was not translated to us,
2 but may I take it that you kept the witness off from consulting any piece
3 of paper, is that ...
4 THE REGISTRAR: [Via videolink] Yes, Your Honour.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
6 THE REGISTRAR: [Via videolink] Witness wanted to consult another
7 piece of paper. I just advised him that if he wants to consult another
8 piece of paper, he needs to ask for permission from the Chamber.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And that's the right instruction.
10 Mr. Lekovic, if you want to consult any piece of paper, you
11 should address the Court, ask for permission, and then under those
12 circumstances tell us --
13 THE WITNESS: [No interpretation] ...
14 JUDGE ORIE: Would you -- Mr. Lekovic, what about waiting until
15 I've finished what I wanted --
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Sorry, I didn't know that.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. The instruction therefore is as you were told
18 by the representative of the Registry.
19 Please proceed.
20 MR. JORDASH:
21 Q. Mr. Lekovic, what is it you wanted to look at just a moment ago?
22 So we can be clear.
23 A. Could you let me just look at the formal decision to set up that
24 commission, to be able to better answer your question?
25 Q. Please, have a look at the decision.
1 MR. JORDASH: And this, I think, is D00280 [Realtime translation
2 read in error "D0028 T"] MFI.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar, Mr. Jordash has meanwhile invited
4 the witness to look at what appears to be the formal decision which did
5 set up that commission. You can take that document, and it is D28 MFI'd.
6 Mr. Lekovic, you can consult that decision.
7 THE REGISTRAR: [Via videolink] I apologise, Your Honour. D280
8 MFI'd? Was it correct number?
9 JUDGE ORIE: No, I think it was on the transcript D0028.
10 THE REGISTRAR: [Via videolink] I apologise, Your Honour, I only
11 have --
12 MR. JORDASH: [Overlapping speakers] ... Your Honour was right,
13 it's 280.
14 THE REGISTRAR: [Via videolink] -- 00 --
15 JUDGE ORIE: 280. D280 is the document the witness will now
17 You see, Mr. Lekovic, any document to be consulted will be
18 provided to you primarily by the representative of the Registry.
19 MR. JORDASH:
20 Q. So let's ask some questions, Mr. Witness. Are you familiar with
21 Article 58 of the Rules of the Organisation and Work of the
22 State Security Service of Serbia? A simple "yes" or "no" will suffice,
23 in the first instance. Are you familiar with that rule or not?
24 Mr. Lekovic, are you familiar with that rule or not?
25 A. Sorry, I didn't understand you were asking me [as interpreted].
1 First of all, I wanted to see the decision adopted on the
2 2nd of April, 1991. Just briefly, to answer the question by Mr. Wayne,
3 that commission was set up for the purpose of establishing whether an
4 authorised officer communicated in an unauthorised way or conveyed or
5 made available to another person information --
6 JUDGE ORIE: Is this what you -- you asked the witness something
8 MR. JORDASH: Yes.
9 MR. Lekovic, we --
10 JUDGE ORIE: And could we -- at the same time, could we have on
11 our screens the English version as well.
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The previous question regarding the
13 decision --
14 MR. JORDASH:
15 Q. Mr. Lekovic, let me, as I said before, point you to the
16 information that I hope will assist the Court. We are going to run out
17 of time else, okay?
18 MR. JORDASH: Okay. Apparently in order to have the B/C/S
19 version on the screen -- sorry, the English version, we will need to call
20 up 1D04871.
21 Q. Now, Mr. Lekovic, the question I asked is: What powers did the
22 commission have? Now, we can see from the documentation, page 2, certain
23 powers that the commission had, such as inspecting all available --
24 sorry, the B/C/S page 1, English page 2. Inspect all available and
25 necessary documents, interview employees of the service, provide all
1 material evidence, and so on. In order to achieve those requirements,
2 what powers did the commission have? For example, powers of summonsing,
3 things like that.
4 A. Since these purposes listed in the decision about the
5 establishment of the commission and its composition were rather general
6 and vague, the commission adopted the conclusion at its first meeting
7 that we should talk to the republic secretary and give him a list of
8 questions that need to be clarified and that were controversial. We
9 agreed on those questions at the commission meeting and talked to the
10 republic secretary for three hours. That discussion was audio recorded
11 and the tape is available, with minutes that are attached.
12 Q. Mr. Lekovic, did the commission have powers to summons documents
13 or summons people in order to clarify the circumstances that the
14 commission was investigating?
15 A. The first meeting of the commission was held --
16 Q. Mr. Lekovic, please. Did the commission -- and answer the
17 question directly, please. Did the commission have powers to summons
18 people or documents?
19 A. It had powers to require documents from the administration for
20 analysis, both from the service for Belgrade and the head office of the
22 Q. Did it have powers to --
23 A. Yes, the commission had those powers.
24 Q. Did it have powers to place intercepts or to instigate the
25 placing of intercepts to gather further evidence?
1 A. Under 3 of the decision, the tasks were not elaborated. The
2 commission did not engage in the application of those measures. We did
3 not intercept conversations therefore. As a commission, we did not
4 resort to those means.
5 Q. Let me take you to paragraph 28 of your statement. The statement
6 begins -- this is 1D05104:
7 "When the decision was issued, the commission members were
8 appointed and a task was set. Jovica Stanisic was not suspended,
9 although chief of the SDB, Zoran Janackovic, had already marginalised
10 him. This meant that he would not be given any current or special tasks
11 and that Jovica Stanisic was not in a position to issue tasks and
12 assignments to operatives."
13 First of all, when you mentioned current tasks, what precisely
14 did you mean?
15 A. Well, Jovica was assistant for counter-intelligence. Before the
16 commission was set up, he was fully engaged and he had a lot of room to
17 talk to chiefs of administrations and to chiefs of units and to give them
18 certain tasks and assignments. When the commission was set up and when
19 Janackovic held the first meeting with us, after that a vacuum happened
20 in communication between Jovica's assistant for counter-intelligence and
21 the rest of the team, and we realised that the communication between the
22 two men was interrupted, which was not logical at all.
23 Q. What do you mean when you say, Mr. Lekovic, that the
24 communication was interrupted? Did Mr. Stanisic, after the commencement
25 of the commission, attend meetings with Janackovic?
1 A. When the commission was officially set up and when it started
2 operating, we noted that Janackovic avoided normal conversation with
3 Mr. Stanisic at the working meetings and collegium meetings chaired by
4 him. They didn't even greet each other as they had before. He
5 marginalised Jovica both at meetings, in discussions, and at the moments
6 when conclusions had to be finalised.
7 Q. What kind of conclusions was Mr. Stanisic marginalised from?
8 A. Well, when -- every collegium meeting held in the office of the
9 republican secretary or the city administration obviously deals with a
10 certain number of issues, and all those who were invited or who were
11 members of the relevant body had the right to take part in the debate and
12 propose conclusions. However, from the moment the commission was set up
13 and started operating, Janackovic closed the doors to Jovica. He didn't
14 even give him any chance to propose anything at the meetings of the
15 collegium. And we all had the impression that the intention was to
16 demonstrate that the commission had been set up precisely because of
18 The other members who were very familiar with the matter found
19 that simply ridiculous and quite unacceptable.
20 Q. Returning to paragraph 28. When you say, "Jovica Stanisic was
21 not in a position to issue tasks and assignments to operatives," what
22 kind of tasks and assignments did you have in mind?
23 A. Well, the impression was -- the overall impression was that the
24 chief simply wanted to get rid of Jovica. He didn't want him to be
25 there. He didn't want him to communicate with other chiefs of
1 administrations and operatives. And with that, he was prevented from
2 assigning every-day tasks to operatives and participate in consultations.
3 Operatives and some chiefs of administrations even stopped coming to
4 Jovica's office for advice, suggestions, or to share a problem which had
5 been normal until then. Stanisic was an experienced person and everybody
6 had sought his opinion before that, and in that sense Stanisic was cut
7 off. He was blocked, as it were, in the performance of his duties.
8 Q. And, Mr. Lekovic, how do you know this? What's your source of
9 knowledge for these comments?
10 A. The chief of the administration of the city of Belgrade was a
11 member of the collegium of the chiefs of services of Serbia. By virtue
12 of my offices, I went to the headquarters of the service and I observed
13 that the atmosphere changed as soon as the commission was set up. I
14 spotted certain trends in the behaviour of the people, and especially
15 Janackovic's conduct as the chief of service. People found his conduct
16 quite odd and especially his insistence on speeding up the work of the
17 commission. All the things were done within a week, which was close to a
18 miracle because of the complexity of the problem, the overall issues, and
19 the methods of the work employed by the commission.
20 Q. How long did the situation last wherein Janackovic marginalised
21 Stanisic in the way you describe?
22 A. To a certain extent, he tried to push him away even before the
23 commission was set up. That's why he insisted on the republican
24 secretary issuing the decision on the setting up of the commission,
25 because that would have had a different weight and different
1 implications, as it were.
2 He didn't want to set up the commission as the chief of the
3 service if the information was leaked only from his service. And nobody
4 from the public security sector was a member of the commission, only the
5 five of us who were members of the service. The commission was set up at
6 the level of the minister of the interior, and the republican secretary
7 issued decision on the setting up of the commission upon Janackovic's
9 MR. JORDASH: Can I just take instructions. Would you wait a
10 moment, Mr. Lekovic.
11 [Defence counsel and Accused Stanisic confer]
12 MR. JORDASH: Thank you, Your Honour.
13 Q. Mr. Lekovic, how long did the situation last wherein Janackovic
14 marginalised Stanisic in the way you describe? That's the question.
15 A. Yes, yes, yes. I didn't fully answer your question, but,
16 Mr. Wayne, look, this started even before the commission was set up. And
17 then the secretary took some convincing to set up the commission. And
18 when the secretary accepted to issue a decision on the setting up of the
19 commission and its tasks, then he rushed in to holding meetings of the
20 commission himself instead of the secretary of state. He briefed us, he
21 issued us orders, and he insisted on everything being done as fast as
22 possible, and the results be issued in a written form --
23 Q. How long?
24 A. -- so it started even before the commission was set --
25 Q. How long, Mr. Lekovic? We know when it started. We know what
1 you say happened. We don't know how long.
2 THE INTERPRETER: Could the speakers please be asked not to
3 overlap. Could the witness please be asked not to speak while somebody
4 else in the courtroom is speaking.
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] From the 2nd of April when the
6 decision was issued on the setting up of the commission, throughout
7 April, May, June, July, August, September, sometime until the beginning
8 of the month of October.
9 MR. JORDASH:
10 Q. Thank you. Are you aware, during that time, of any state
11 security task that Stanisic did perform?
12 A. Could you please repeat your question?
13 Q. You've told us that Mr. Stanisic was marginalised, that he
14 didn't -- he wasn't given jobs by Janackovic, and so on. Do you know if
15 he did any state security task during the time from April until October,
16 the beginning of October?
17 A. I have to provide you with some detail. A piece of news was
18 heard that there were rumours that Janackovic wanted Jovica Stanisic to
19 take a leave of absence while the commission was in operation. We saw
20 that Janackovic did not give any assignments to Jovica Stanisic because
21 there were no communication channels between the two of them.
22 Jovica Stanisic, as far as he was concerned, did not even have to turn up
23 for work. We were all there. The Belgrade administration shares the
24 same building with the headquarters of the service, and we could see
25 every day where people were and how people behaved both in the
1 headquarters as well as in the administration. And as far as Janackovic
2 was concerned, Jovica Stanisic did not even have to turn up for work.
3 Q. Thank you. Now, we can see from your statement and the
4 underlying documents that the commission investigated whether Stanisic
5 had divulged state security secrets to a journalist. Did Janackovic give
6 any instructions or did anyone from within the service give instructions
7 concerning what information Stanisic was permitted to know during the
8 course of the commission?
9 A. There was a lot of pressure on the commission members and the
10 commission itself, the speed of its work, and to concentrate on
11 Jovica Stanisic as if the commission had been set up solely for him. The
12 chief of service, Mr. Janackovic, mentioned two objects, Lari and Paloma.
13 And according to what he said, they were elements for the commission to
14 define that in its work and to look at Jovica's responsibility and
15 culpability and to apply certain measures and sanctions on Jovica, which
16 is what Janackovic had always wanted.
17 Q. Okay. We'll come to those two objects shortly. But was there
18 any position taken during the course of the commission concerning whether
19 Stanisic was entitled to receive state security secrets?
20 A. From whom? What do you mean, Mr. Wayne? From whom was he
21 supposed to receive state secrets?
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Jordash --
23 MR. JORDASH: Perhaps --
24 JUDGE ORIE: -- I'll give it a try.
25 Mr. Lekovic, was Mr. Stanisic, when the commission was working,
1 entitled to have access to the same information as he had before the
2 commission started its work?
3 And when I'm talking about information, I'm talking about state
4 security information which was part and parcel of the job he did.
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] We have to note that
6 Jovica Stanisic, from the moment the commission was set up and it started
7 working and in the course of its work and even when the commission issued
8 its report, still held his office and he was never moved or suspended
9 from that office, from that position. He came to work from time to time,
10 he had the same powers that he always had, but his room for manoeuvre was
11 somehow limited, and his powers were limited. According -- on the order
12 of the chief of service, certain information and intelligence was given
13 to him and not to Jovica Stanisic as the assistant chief for that area.
14 Q. Thank you.
15 MR. JORDASH: I've had a note passed to me saying a break.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, then we'll take a break. We have been informed
17 by Mr. Bakrac that he has no questions if nothing will be triggered by
18 the Prosecution. Ms.
19 Marcus, how much time would you need?
20 MS. MARCUS: Your Honour, for the moment I'll have to stick by my
21 original estimate, which was between two to two and a half hours. I
22 would say two sessions.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Jordash, I do not know how much more time you
24 need at this moment. We come close to the point where we are in
25 dangerous waters, that is, running out of time, unless you say, No, those
1 two sessions are fully available for Ms. Marcus tomorrow or even later
2 today, part of it.
3 MR. JORDASH: I would hope to finish almost all of it today, with
4 maybe just a slight slip-over until tomorrow, maybe of 20 minutes.
5 JUDGE ORIE: But then we are -- I mean, that is hardly any time
6 for the Chamber --
7 MR. JORDASH: I'll finish today, Your Honour.
8 JUDGE ORIE: You'll finish today. And we'll then immediately
9 take a break in order to -- we are -- we resume at ten minutes to 6.00.
10 [Witness stands down]
11 --- Recess taken at 5.23 p.m.
12 --- On resuming at 5.56 p.m.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Marcus, you asked for -- to address the Court.
14 If it would be because you are seeking an extension of time for
15 responding to the 92 bis motion of DST-071, please tell me.
16 MS. MARCUS: It's also, Your Honour, because I wanted to seek
17 leave to make an oral response with respect to DST-070 and DST-072.
18 Those are also 92 bis witnesses.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. An extension of time for 71?
20 MS. MARCUS: One week after the filing of a corrigendum, which
21 the Defence asserts would be by the 13th of October.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Jordash, any objection against an extension of
23 time for the response to DST-071?
24 MR. JORDASH: No, Your Honour.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Bakrac? You're wisely -- yes, yes, Mr. Bakrac,
1 I wondered whether you would --
2 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] No, Your Honour.
3 JUDGE ORIE: That request is granted. You have one week on from
4 the filing of the corrigendum.
5 Oral submissions, how much time would you need?
6 MS. MARCUS: Maybe ten minutes or so. Maybe a little bit more.
7 I mean, with your leave, I can make the submission tomorrow. But today
8 is the dead-line. But if the Chamber so orders, of course, I can make
9 that submission tomorrow.
10 JUDGE ORIE: We give an extension of time of one day to
11 Ms. Marcus so that we first try to conclude the evidence of this witness.
12 I would, at this point in time, Ms. Marcus, I would really prefer that.
13 Yes, extension of time of one day is granted, and we'll see further
14 tomorrow whether it needs two days.
15 MS. MARCUS: Thank you, Your Honour.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you very much. And my apologies for perhaps
17 putting a lot of pressure on these matters.
18 Could the witness please be escorted into the courtroom.
19 Ms. Marcus, again, without the pressure, I would have given you
20 an hour.
21 MS. MARCUS: Understood, Your Honour.
22 [The witness takes the stand]
23 MR. JORDASH:
24 Q. Mr. Lekovic, can you hear me?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. Would you please have a look at D00283, and the 65 ter number is
2 1D04874. This is -- looks as though it's a letter which went to various
3 services requesting that they as part of this investigation also conduct
4 their own investigations; is that right?
5 JUDGE ORIE: This document is not to be shown to the public,
6 Mr. Jordash.
7 MR. JORDASH: Your Honour, thank you.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, if it has already been shown, we need a
9 redaction. It has not yet been shown.
10 Please proceed.
11 If you ask specific questions about it, should we move into
12 private session?
13 MR. JORDASH: Yes, although I think we can avoid mentioning
14 names, I hope. Names of individuals.
15 JUDGE ORIE: But if the document in itself is under seal, I don't
16 have a clear recollection of what reasons it exactly was.
17 MR. JORDASH: Neither do I, so perhaps --
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, perhaps out of an abundance of caution we move
19 into private session, and what you've said until now seems not to be of a
20 kind to require a redaction. But it's your exhibit, Mr. Jordash.
21 MR. JORDASH: I think that Your Honour is right. I don't think
22 so far any redaction is required.
23 JUDGE ORIE: I leave it in your hands as matters stand now, and
24 we move into private session.
25 [Private session]
11 Pages 14281-14292 redacted. Private session.
21 [Open session]
22 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we are back in open session.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
24 MR. JORDASH:
25 Q. Mr. Lekovic, you -- I want to return to the issue of
1 depoliticization of the service. How did Stanisic go about that process?
2 A. Firstly, SPS cells were not set up within the state service
3 either in the organisational units either -- or in the administration for
4 Belgrade or in the headquarters of the service. Secondly, even if
5 somebody was in favour of the SPS, or even a member of the SPS or some
6 other party, they were not supposed to demonstrate that openly at work.
7 And thirdly, the same criteria were to be applied in the work,
8 irrespective of what political party was being investigated or which
9 official thereof.
10 Q. When you speak of SPS cells, what are you describing?
11 THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness sit closer to the microphone
12 or could the microphone be brought closer to the witness. The
13 interpreters have a problem hearing him.
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Every political party has its
15 platform, has its bodies, elected bodies, as well as local organisations
16 at lower levels. The method of the party's work is regulated by the
17 statute of the party. These would be local cells or boards of the SPS in
18 local communes, in companies, and institutions. There were people who
19 were civil servants, but they were not allowed to display their party
20 loyalty at work. They could only do that at their place of residence.
21 They could set up their boards and assist board meetings at their place
22 of residence. They were not supposed to openly display their loyalty or
23 affiliation to a political party at work.
24 JUDGE ORIE: I did not see any action taken upon the request of
25 the interpreters to have the microphone be closer to the witness. I
1 don't know whether this was ... I now see that action is taken.
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Do you want me to repeat my answer?
3 JUDGE ORIE: No, I don't think there's any need for that, but
4 there was request for you to come closer to the microphone or the
5 microphone come closer to you.
6 THE REGISTRAR: [Via videolink] It was done, Your Honour.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, thank you.
8 Please proceed.
9 MR. JORDASH:
10 Q. Mr. Lekovic, when you speak of Mr. Stanisic fighting to
11 depoliticize the State Security Service, which period are you referring
13 A. I'm referring to a period towards the end of 1990. On the
14 17 of July, 1990, there was the founding congress of the SPS. And then
15 in September there were last meetings of the League of Communists. It
16 was then said that the party organisations of the League of Communists
17 were being disbanded, that people could go to local party offices to get
18 hold of their documents, and from then on there would be the SPS instead
19 of the League of Communists. This was the watershed moment when the
20 wheels were put in motion in order to depoliticize the State Security
22 Q. Could you say the year again when you say Mr. Stanisic was
23 fighting to depoliticize the party -- the State Security Service.
24 A. We are talking about the three or four last months of 1990. And
25 then in the upcoming period when things had to be proven to the general
1 public, and to the citizens to show that the service was finally
2 depoliticized, that people who were in the service were not politically
3 engaged in any of the political parties, and also that the State Security
4 Service put a ban on setting up a local party board.
5 Q. Do you know what Mr. Stanisic's position was when he took over as
6 chief of the state security in relation to these issues?
7 A. I beg your pardon, what issues?
8 Q. Depoliticization of the State Security Service.
9 A. He did not have a political role to play.
10 Q. And what about his position in relation to politics within the
12 A. What position do you have in mind? I find your question a bit
13 odd. His position was for the service to do its work, to be a
14 professional service and to only do those things for which it was
15 originally set up and for which it existed. Nothing more than that.
16 Q. Were there any SPS units or cells within the DB after Stanisic
17 took over as chief?
18 A. As far as I know, there were no cells or boards or units or
19 branches of the SPS.
20 Q. Now, two quick subjects or quick issues in relation to your
21 Official Note. Could you turn, please, to page 6 of the English and
22 page 6 of the B/C/S.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Is that not to be shown --
24 MR. JORDASH: Not to the shown to the public, please.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Not to be shown to the public. Do we need to move
1 into private session?
2 MR. JORDASH: It's probably best, Your Honour, yes, please.
3 JUDGE ORIE: We move into private session.
4 [Private session]
11 Pages 14298-14300 redacted. Private session.
13 [Open session]
14 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we are back in open session.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
16 Mr. Lekovic, we would like to see you back tomorrow morning, the
17 12th of October, at 9.00 in the morning, and then we'll further hear your
18 testimony through a videolink from this Courtroom II.
19 We stand adjourned.
20 [The witness stands down]
21 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.05 p.m.,
22 to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 12th day of
23 October, 2011 at 9.00 a.m.