1 Tuesday, 18 October 2011
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 2.19 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 IT-03-69-T, the Prosecutor versus Jovica Stanisic and Franko Simatovic.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
10 I would like to deal with a few procedural matters before we will
11 hear the continuation of the evidence of the witness.
12 First, Witness Vladimir Corbic testified on
13 Thursday, the 13th of October, 2011, and he also testified about an OS --
14 OCSE [sic] mission to Novi Pazar which took place in 1993. I refer to
15 transcript page 14405. If any of the parties have or could find an OSCE
16 report regarding this mission to Novi Pazar in 1993, the Chamber would be
17 interested in receiving it and most likely having it in evidence. That's
18 the first matter.
19 The second matter is, no summary, no 92 summary of Witness Corbic
20 was presented in court. The Stanisic Defence is invited to file the
21 summary of the witness.
22 As far as the report of Mr. Brown is concerned, I think the
23 dead-line formally still is at the 15th of October, which, of course, is
24 not realistic anymore.
25 Mr. Jordash, I think you requested to have it on the
1 1st of December of this year; is that still a realistic expectation?
2 MR. JORDASH: I think it is, yes.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then the dead-line for the submission of the
4 report of the expert Dr. Brown is hereby set at the
5 1st of December, 2011.
6 Finally, we'll hear the testimony of the witness who started his
7 testimony in early September today. The Chamber has considered whether
8 it should change the protective measures in relation to the new approach
9 of the Chamber. After some consideration, we have decided for various
10 reasons to leave it as it is, that is, that the witness will
11 provisionally give his testimony in closed session. There are too many
12 uncertainties, and the Chamber thought that it should proceed cautiously,
13 also because it's not informed about every details about the present
14 situation of the witness. Therefore, we'll not yet apply the new
15 approach on the remainder of the evidence for this witness.
16 Finally, Mr. Jordash, first of all, you -- this witness was
17 scheduled, I think, initially for three and a half hours and then you --
18 after we heard already three hours and 15 minutes, you said you'd need
19 another two and a half hours, which is far beyond your initial estimate.
20 Then we heard the estimates of the Simatovic Defence, two and a half to
21 three hours, and also the estimate of the Prosecution, also two and a
22 half hours, I think it was, Mr. Groome, or ...
23 MR. GROOME: It was three, Your Honour.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Three. The Chamber would urge the parties to see
25 whether they can each, for you, Mr. Jordash, conclude your
1 examination-in-chief in two sessions. That would be two and a half
2 hours, which is well beyond your original estimate, although not the full
3 two and a half hours, two and a half to three hours, I think I were
4 asking for. The Simatovic Defence is invited also to see whether it will
5 be able to conclude its cross-examination in two sessions, that's also
6 two and a half hours, and the same for the Prosecution.
7 Now, this would most likely not result in the witness to be
8 excused already on Wednesday, but rather on Tuesday, because the Chamber
9 may have some questions, there may be some questions in re-examination.
10 The Chamber, however, really intends to see whether we can conclude not
11 any later than by Thursday. And when I'm talking about two sessions, I
12 mean whole sessions. Mr. Jordash, this would mean that if you would
13 start the testimony of the witness at this very moment, that you would
14 have ten minutes in the third session today. That's ...
15 Then I have another question, but that's related to the upcoming
16 witnesses. Next witness would not be DST-060, but DST-036, who is
17 scheduled for one hour, if I'm not mistaken.
18 MR. JORDASH: That was with the expectation that we'd be able to
19 file a 92 ter statement, which I don't think we are going to be able to
20 with the late change of schedule.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. First of all, does it meet any -- so most
22 likely it would be wisest to start that witness then on next week,
23 Tuesday, isn't it?
24 MR. JORDASH: Or Wednesday. I don't think he's going to -- I
25 don' think I would be longer than two hours or two and a half, viva voce.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Would that mean that you have no other witnesses
2 following Witness DST-036 for next week?
3 MR. JORDASH: No, we don't, unfortunately.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Okay. Whether the Chamber will hear that
5 evidence at all, of course, is still to be considered. We now have a new
6 witness. And since I'm unavailable next week, there is -- the other
7 judges have to consider whether they'll hear that evidence under
8 Rule 15 bis.
9 But before speculating on that: Mr. Groome, the change suggested
10 by the Stanisic Defence from Witness DST-060 to DST-036, does that cause
11 you any problems?
12 MR. GROOME: Your Honour, I spoke with Ms. Marcus before coming
13 to court today, and she will be here in a few minutes. She was prepared
14 to go forward with the witness, but she was not privy to this new
15 information that there would be no 92 ter statement. I'd have to revisit
16 the issue with her, but I would suggest, Your Honour, that we proceed.
17 And if there are applications to be made next week, then we would make
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, of course, but if -- especially if not all
20 three judges are there next week, of course to the extent we would know
21 already what complications there are, might make it easier for my
22 colleagues to decide whether hearing the evidence under Rule 15 bis would
23 be appropriate, yes or no.
24 MR. GROOME: Your Honour, I could discuss with Ms. Marcus during
25 first break and then come to the Chamber with a more informed opinion
1 about it.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Or tomorrow. But perhaps rather not wait
3 until next week because Mr. Jordash will have no know then, I think,
4 whether he would get a witness to The Hague. And from the practical
5 side, I think he would rather want to know this this week, rather than
6 waiting for any complications next week.
7 Yes, I see he's nodding "yes."
8 Then we'll hear the testimony. The remainder of the
9 examination-in-chief of the witness, we'll continue his testimony today
10 in closed session. I would like to go into closed session.
11 [Closed session] [Confidentiality partially lifted by order of the Chamber]
11 Pages 14477-14479 redacted. Closed session.
3 [The witness takes the stand]
4 MR. JORDASH: The only other thought that occurred to me was that
5 in relation to events in 1996, I might touch upon them, and they might,
6 from what ... I think Your Honour gets the point.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Very well. Yes.
8 Good afternoon, Witness DST-040. It has been quite awhile since
9 you started your testimony in this case, and for those reasons I would
10 like to invite you to again make a solemn declaration that you'll speak
11 the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
12 Could the text be handed out to the witness.
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will
14 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
15 WITNESS: DST-040 [Resumed]
16 [Witness answered through interpreter]
17 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, please be seated.
18 Before we continue your examination, witness, the Chamber is
19 aware that you are in a different situation compared to the situation you
20 were in when you started giving your testimony. We were informed that
21 you are detained at this moment, that you transferred as a detained
22 witness to The Hague. Now, since apparently a case is pending against
23 you, first of all I'd like to inform you about a specific rule which
24 applies in these proceedings. And I read it to you literally:
25 "A witness may object to making any statement which might tend to
1 incriminate the witness. The Chamber may, however, compel the witness to
2 answer the question. Testimony compelled in this way shall not be used
3 as evidence in a subsequent prosecution against the witness for any
4 offence other than false testimony."
5 Most important is the first part of this rule, that is, that you
6 may object if any question is asked where you think that answering that
7 question in accordance with the truth would tend to incriminate yourself.
8 If that would be the case, please address the Chamber and explain to us
9 that there is a reason that you would rather not answer that question.
10 This is the rule. I wanted to explain it to you. At the same time, the
11 Chamber is aware that counsel has been assigned to assist you on such
12 matters like self-incrimination, and the Chamber wonders whether you
13 would prefer to have counsel present in this courtroom so that if any
14 matter arises related to your right that you are under no obligation to
15 incriminate yourself, that you could consult with assigned lawyer.
16 Do you wish him to the present in this courtroom?
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Then we'll invite him to enter the courtroom and
19 take a position. I would like to add to this that counsel is not there
20 to advise you on what answers to give to questions, just to advise you on
21 your right not to answer questions if they would tend to incriminate
23 Could the assigned counsel be escorted into the courtroom.
24 Is there any way that that chair could be used for counsel to sit
25 just behind the witness?
1 Mr. Jordash, looking at the clock, the two sessions would be two
2 sessions plus 30 minutes most likely, if I anticipate that we start the
3 examination of the witness -- to continue the examination of the witness
4 in five minutes from now.
5 MR. JORDASH: Thank you.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Is there any headphone left that could be plugged
7 into the socket for counsel? And could the OTP assist the choice of the
9 MS. MARCUS: We'll do that, Your Honour.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
11 Good afternoon. One second, please. Mr. Cepic, I do understand
12 that you have been assigned to Mr. Krsmanovic in order to assist him in
13 dealing with matters related to his right not to incriminate himself when
14 testifying as a witness. Is that well understood?
15 MR. CEPIC: Good afternoon, Mr. President. Good afternoon,
16 Your Honours. That's correct, Your Honour.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Then your role will be limited to that aspect. I
18 already explained to the witness Rule 90(E). I read it to him. I also
19 informed him that if he would wish to consult you on those matters, that
20 he is free to do so. And, of course, you can advise him on those
21 matters. I also informed him that he's not supposed to seek any advice
22 on any other matter because the answers to be given by the witness, that
23 is not something I think you could advise him on. It's mainly that he
24 needs your assistance or may need your assistance in his protection
25 against self-incrimination. That is also the reason why I asked you to
1 sit on that chair, because I would like to avoid that there's any direct
2 eye contact at this moment. If there's any matter which would be
3 relevant for the protection against self-incrimination, of course, you
4 may address the witness, but apart from that -- and the witness may
5 consult you, but apart from that, I would like to avoid any contact,
6 including eye contact, between the witness and yourself.
7 Did you have an opportunity to explain to the witness your role
8 and the protection against self-incrimination as contained in the rules?
9 MR. CEPIC: Yes, Your Honour. We had a meeting this morning in
10 United Nations Detention Unit. I explained him my role and I present him
11 the copy of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence and the
12 Statute of Tribunal and also inform him about his duties as the witness
13 and other relevant issues regarding to this testimony.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you very much, Mr. Cepic. Please be seated.
15 I think, then, that there's nothing at this moment which would keep us
16 from continuing the examination-in-chief of the witness.
17 Mr. Jordash, are you ready?
18 MR. JORDASH: Your Honour, yes.
19 JUDGE ORIE: And my estimate was exact. Please proceed.
11 Pages 14484-14499 redacted. Closed session.
23 MR. JORDASH: P1084, please. Your Honours, page 7 of the chart.
24 THE REGISTRAR: Document is under seal, Your Honours.
25 MR. JORDASH: Thank you.
1 Q. Now, we're moving forward to 1995. And whilst that's coming up,
2 can you indicate from the best of your recollection how many members of
3 the permanent force of the JATD there was in -- by the end of 1993?
4 A. In 1993, coincides with a period when the unit was being set up.
5 I don't know exactly how many people were transferred, but I don't think
6 that there were more than 30 at that time.
7 Q. And what about reserve members at that point in time?
8 A. Members of the reserve force didn't -- never became permanent
9 members of the unit. They were engaged from time to time. They were
10 kept on the list because of the training. And once they finished their
11 training, some of the men were selected to replenish the
12 active-force units.
13 Q. And how did you keep track of who was in the reserve force of the
15 A. The reserve force of the JATD was the concern of the deputy
16 commander of the unit. He was the one who had the lists of their names.
17 As a matter of principle, a member of the reserve force had his file,
18 together with his military records, kept with the MUP department that was
19 responsible for defence preparations. There was an entire department
20 that was responsible for that. As a rule, a member of the reserve force
21 had his personal file transferred to the department of reserve
22 preparations, and he was a member of the reserve force of the ministry.
23 And that principle functioned across the MUP.
24 Q. But how would he, the member of the reserve force who had his
25 file in the department of reserve preparations, I think you said
1 department of war preparations previously, how would that person end up
2 as a member of the --
3 A. Oh, yes, that's one in the same thing.
4 Q. How would that person end up on the reserve list of the JATD?
5 What would be the process?
6 A. You have to bear in mind that from 1993 onwards there was an
7 on-going process of training of the men who sought to be -- become
8 members of the unit. I don't know whether I've told you already that of
9 the 100 to 120 people who actually started the training, just a few
10 finished the training successfully and thus became either reserve members
11 or active members. All the others, due to various reasons, did not meet
12 the criteria or they dropped out, they did not finish the training
13 process, and so on and so forth.
14 When somebody expressed their wish to either start the training
15 process, or to join the unit, in other words, then his personal file, as
16 a rule, would be transferred to the department responsible for defence
17 preparations, although that was not always the case. That was done only
18 to allow the military command not to engage that particular person for
19 their own purposes.
20 Q. Let's try to be a bit more concrete, DST-040, please.
21 Vaso Mijovic ends up working as a reserve force at a given point in time.
22 How might that have happened?
23 A. Vaso Mijovic -- let me put it this way: If somebody was a member
24 of the reserve force, that doesn't mean that he was constantly engaged.
25 Members the reserve force were only engaged from time to time, and they
1 were engaged for a limited period of time at a time.
2 Q. I think we know that. I think you've testified to that. I think
3 that's clear.
4 What I'm interested in is how they might then be, let's say,
5 re-activated on to the reserve force to be employed or engaged for a
6 particular point in time. How might that happen?
7 A. We don't have to be specific. We can talk about just anybody.
8 If a person was needed, he was invited to participate in an activity.
9 For example, when the training process started or when the situation
10 became more complex, in that case the unit commander or the deputy unit
11 commander engaged such individuals for either training or for other
12 purposes that the service deemed important. As a rule, the unit had to
13 send out written summons, but that was done very rarely. It was mostly
14 upon oral summons or an oral invitation that an individual would be
15 engaged for a limited period of time.
16 Q. Thank you. As far as your --
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Jordash, could I ask one question.
18 The question was about and your answer was about people being
19 called to either training of other purposes. Could you call anyone who
20 was not trained yet for the unit, for other reasons than for training?
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] A person could be summoned if that
22 person had a skill which was otherwise non-existent in the unit, like
23 someone specialised in communications or in the medical field or similar.
24 It wasn't simply a matter of training. It could also include a
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So without being specifically trained for the
2 unit, he could be called because of his special skills he would have?
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Now, earlier Mr. Jordash asked you how Mr. Mijovic
5 finally ended up in the unit, now and then, as a reserve. You have told
6 us in more general terms that people could be summoned or called. Do you
7 have any specific knowledge about Mr. Mijovic?
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know anything about his
9 skills and I don't know how he was engaged. I know that from time to
10 time his name appeared on the per diem lists and was part of their
11 reserve force, but I don't know how he was engaged.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Jordash.
13 MR. JORDASH:
14 Q. As far as you were aware, did Mr. Stanisic have anything to do
15 with the engagement of reserve forces? When I say "anything to do," I
16 mean any direct hands-on involvement.
17 A. I think that reserve engagements didn't go as high up as that
18 level. The deputy commander and the operational part of the service made
19 assessments as to whether additional forces were required in a specific
20 point in time. That is why --
21 JUDGE ORIE: You started, with your answer, "I think that ..."
22 Do you have any specific knowledge? Do you know whether or not
23 it went up that high?
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, no, I don't have any knowledge.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Jordash.
1 MR. JORDASH:
2 Q. Let's have a look at P1081, see if you know anything about this.
3 MR. JORDASH: Under seal, please.
4 Q. Do you know anything about Vaso Mijovic and his special purposes
5 unit, MUP special purposes unit, operating in Bratunac in 1993?
6 A. I don't. At that time, until mid-1993, I was in the public
7 security sector; that is why I'm not familiar with any such activities in
8 the area.
9 Q. Let's go back to P1084, 1995, when you were involved with the
11 A. I didn't understand the question. Could you repeat, please?
12 Q. Have a look at the document. Do you know anything about
13 Mijovic's presence in the Republika Srpska in 1995? As far as you were
14 aware, did this have anything to do with the JATD?
15 A. To my knowledge, it has nothing to do with the JATD. I am
16 completely ignorant of this document. My knowledge doesn't go as far as
18 Q. Is there a reason for that? Would you expect to know if Mijovic
19 was working for the JATD in 1995 in the Republika Srpska?
20 A. I'm not familiar with that.
21 Q. My question is slightly different to that. Would you have
22 expected to know if he was working for the JATD in the MUP -- sorry, in
23 the Republika Srpska in 1995 July?
24 A. By sheer nature of things, I should have had such knowledge.
25 Unless he was on a very specific task which was not at the level of the
1 unit. Otherwise, I should have been familiar with it, although I have no
2 knowledge about this.
11 Pages 14507-14511 redacted. Closed session.
19 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] The document number is P1084.
20 Q. And while we're waiting for the document to appear on the screen,
21 witness, you have already testified about what you know about
22 Vasilije Mijovic and his engagement, and there's no dilemma there.
23 There's just one detail from the document that strikes me and I wanted to
24 clarify it with you.
25 This is a dispatch which says that the commander
1 Colonel Vasilije Mijovic, and the date of the dispatch is 19 July 1995.
2 My question for you, Mr. DST-040, is this: In July 1995 in the state
3 security sector, did anybody have ranks? Did ranks exist at the time in
4 the state security sector?
5 A. No.
6 Q. To your best recollection, do you know when ranks were first
7 introduced in the state security sector?
8 A. I believe that that was sometime in late or -- I don't know. In
9 2000 or thereabouts, but I really don't know.
10 Q. Thank you, witness. And now I would like us to go back to
11 something else. I will follow your statement and I will seek certain
12 clarifications following your statement.
11 Pages 14514-14524 redacted. Closed session.
2 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] First of all, let's have a look at
3 65 ter 5609. In B/C/S, page 91, as well as in the English version.
4 Q. It's an entry. We'll see later on what entries and diaries are
5 accurate, but in order to move speedily along, I'll tell you that it
6 concerns a meeting where Operation Pauk was discussed.
7 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] I'm still waiting for page 91. I
8 found a transcribed text for ease of reference, page 91 of the
9 transcribed text in e-court. We have it in English but we need the same
10 page 91 in the B/C/S. Yes.
11 Q. Witness, I'll tell you that this page concerns a meeting where
12 Operation Pauk was discussed. This is what is stated in the diary, and
13 later on we'll check it for accuracy. It says here:
14 "Stanisic: I have an idea. If you agree to consolidate FA," I
15 suppose Fikret Abdic," and his army.
16 "We can't do that without the help of the Yugoslav Army.
17 "We could form a unit, the rank of a battalion, provide artillery
18 support and radio reconnaissance ..."
19 Do you know that the JATD went to Pljesevica as part of
20 Operation Pauk as part of radio reconnaissance or surveillance?
21 A. What I do know is that the unit provided security for the
22 facilities at Petrova Gora. It was also at the facility at Pljesevica
23 providing security. Another part of our men who were attached worked on
24 radio reconnaissance. It was a different -- another group of people.
25 Q. When you say "another group of people," do you have in mind
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. If I understood you well, you're saying that part of the JATD
4 provided security for the facilities at Pljesevica and Petrova Gora,
5 where the communication centres were with radio surveillance equipment,
6 and some members of the RDB technicians worked in the centres themselves;
8 A. Yes.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Bakrac, Madam Registrar informs me that
10 65 ter 5609 consists of four documents under the same number. So if you
11 would intend to tender this document, it should be clarified which
12 document exactly you had on your mind.
13 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Understood, Your Honour. I will ask
14 my colleague to take care of that before the end of our sitting today or
15 before I conclude my cross-examination. Thank you.
16 Q. Witness, if I understood you correctly, during your several stays
17 at Petrova Gora you saw Franko Simatovic a few times, and briefly only;
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. And you could observe that he stayed at the facilities where the
21 radio reconnaissance equipment was at the communications centre?
22 A. Yes. When I was there, I was accommodated a bit further away
23 from the facility at Petrova Gora by some two and a half or three
24 kilometres. It was outside the electronic surveillance facility.
25 Q. Thank you, witness.
1 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Could we please have a look at
3 Q. While we are waiting for it: Witness, did you know that during
4 Operation Pauk an electronic reconnaissance aircraft was shot down?
5 A. I am not familiar with that piece of information.
6 Q. Thank you.
7 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I was going to read a
8 brief portion from an intercept and I wanted to rely on this document
9 only to set a foundation, a basis, for my next question which would be
10 whether the witness is familiar with the facts mentioned therein, and for
11 the time being I will not seek to tender it. It reads:
12 The 13th of April, 1994, at 11.55. Assistant defence minister of
13 the RS Milan Milanovic, Mrgud, came back from Velika Kladusa where he
14 personally led 120 members of the special battalion providing security to
15 the NIK Djeletovci.
16 The NIK is, I presume, the oil company of the Krajina.
17 In the fields Milovanovic [as interpreted] connected the units of
18 Colonel Aleksandar Legija, (Special Forces from the 101st Centre Erdut),
19 and of a certain Ljuba and a certain Bozovic. Mrgud is planning another
20 visit to the area of Velika Kladusa on the 18th of April, 1995, in order
21 to deliver fuel, uniforms, and other material and equipment to the
22 paramilitary formations of the RSK.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Groome.
24 MR. GROOME: Could I ask that Mr. Bakrac at this stage identify
25 what is the document. He said it was an intercept, but when I see it
1 read, it doesn't appear to be the typical format we'd expect for an
2 intercept. So I would appreciate it if he could identify the document.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Bakrac.
4 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, it comes from a
5 collection of Croatian intercepts. This is a retelling of the intercept
6 made by the person who tapped the conversation. I simply wanted to rely
7 on this document as a basis for my question, and I will not seek to
8 tender it. It is an OTP document from the Croatian collection of
9 intercepts. This is obviously a summary of what the operative could hear
10 when listening in on that conversation.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Groome.
12 MR. GROOME: If it is an OTP document, I would appreciate the
13 ERN number if that's available, this way way I can have sight of the
15 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Mr. Groome, I think it's on the
16 screen. I will check. I think it says 0415-0883.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, and you're not seeking at this moment to tender
18 it. Mr. Groome, that assist you sufficiently?
19 MR. GROOME: Yes, thank you.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Then please proceed, Mr. Bakrac.
21 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
22 Q. DST-040, when you were there, did you experience anything of this
23 nature? Did you see or observe any of the things mentioned in this
25 A. No.
1 Q. Thank you, witness. Witness, let's look at another document.
2 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] It is 2D890.
3 Your Honours, I owe you a brief explanation. This is another OTP
4 document. It seems that it was wrongly placed or uploaded. It begins
5 with one page and then the second page appears on page 16 and a third on
6 page 17. By your leave, I wanted to ask the witness to look at the first
7 page and then go to page 16, which is actually page 2 of this document,
8 and then to move on to page 17.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Is there any explanation for this odd sequence of
11 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, this is how it was
12 disclosed to us by the OTP. I must confess that I expected to
13 cross-examine tomorrow as well and that in the meantime I would have time
14 to consult Mr. Groome. I didn't want to change the sequence of pages by
15 myself and do it in a different way than it was disclosed to us. That is
16 why I'm presenting it in this manner in the courtroom.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. It is a redacted document. Apparently the
18 sequence of pages is not in accordance with logic. But not knowing what
19 the content of the document is, I cannot -- and you said the second page
20 after the first page is -- the second page was at page ...
21 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] It is page 16 in e-court,
22 Your Honour.
23 JUDGE ORIE: 16. Let me see whether that corresponds with
24 ERN numbers. 16. Well, it's -- let's have a look. And the third one,
25 Mr. Bakrac, was ...
1 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] On the next page, page 17.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Well, I can't verify it at this very moment. What
3 about the translation. Is the translation shedding any --
4 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, we still have no
5 translation. I wanted to show the document to the witness to see if he
6 is familiar with it. If not, I see Mr. Groome on his feet, maybe perhaps
7 he can assist.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Groome.
9 MR. GROOME: Your Honour, may I suggest that we deal with this
10 tomorrow. I believe we have a translation. I can work with Mr. Bakrac
11 to sort out if there has been some confusion in the uploading and may
12 avoid the use of time now.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Bakrac, I see that at least page 16 is a
14 page 2 and 17 is a page 3. Where there are some blue markings on 17, is
15 that -- where does that come from? Was that there originally? Or ...
16 The first paragraph on page 3 is --
17 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] No, Your Honour, that is how it was
18 uploaded, I believe. I will check with my Case Manager. I think this is
19 how it was uploaded by the OTP, although I am not positive about that.
20 Another thing, Your Honour: There is a possibility that I
21 conclude today before the end of the session. Does this cause any
22 problems or can I resume tomorrow, then, with this? I just wanted to
23 inform you of that possibility, given that Mr. Groome suggested that we
24 dealt with this by tomorrow, we just need to have that possibility open.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Groome, on the basis of an assumption that
1 Mr. Bakrac has carefully looked at the document and that the proper
2 sequence of pages 1, 2, and 3 is e-court pages 1, 16, and 17, would you
3 at this moment object to Mr. Bakrac proceeding as he suggests, or would
4 you insist on him to wait until tomorrow? If this way --
5 MR. GROOME: I would not, Your Honour. I will accept that. If I
6 find differently, I'll discuss it with Mr. Bakrac before tomorrow.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Bakrac, you may proceed. And for the time
8 being, counting is 1, 16, 17. Please proceed.
9 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
10 Q. Witness, I don't know if you had enough time to peruse page 1.
11 Do you need any additional time?
12 A. I did read through it, but I'm not familiar with the document
14 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Let's go, then, to page 2. Or
15 page 16 in e-court. The previous page, page 2. Or page 16 in e-court.
16 Q. Have you read it? Now that you saw the entire document, can you
17 tell us if you are familiar with it?
18 A. I'm not. I see it for the first time. It's a kind of report.
19 Some of the events do ring a bell. It reminds me of something I heard at
20 the time. I left Ilok in 1992, in mid-1992. Any events in Ilok after
21 that is something that I have no direct knowledge of, only the things I
22 could hear about.
23 Later on when I arrived in the unit in 1993, I heard that there
24 had been different events in Ilok following 1992 and that those events
25 were ascribed to the Red Berets. Some people like Ilija Vuckovic, who is
1 mentioned in the document, are the people that I heard about. I heard
2 about him specifically.
3 Q. Was Ilija Vuckovic a member of this PJP unit of the RSK?
4 A. I don't know. I heard about him for the first time in 1992 when
5 I was in the police station in Ilok. I don't know what unit he belonged
6 to. I think he was part of the RSK establishment, but I'm not sure. I
7 heard about him for the first time there.
8 Q. Do you know that the operative staff was set up and that its task
9 was to implement certain activities with a view to eliminating negative
10 developments in the area?
11 A. In 1992, in the second half of that year, I was in Hrtkovci, in
12 the staff of --
13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Bakrac, not knowing what this document is about,
14 apart from that, it is a kind of a report. You put the question to the
15 witness: "Do you know that the operative staff" - and, of course, the
16 first thing that the Chamber asks itself is, operative staff of
17 what? - "was set up" - when? where? - "and that its task was to implement
18 certain activities" - were they very specific? - "with a view to
19 eliminating negative developments in the area?"
20 How could you possibly think that the Chamber is even able to
21 understand the question?
22 Now, irrespective of whether the witness would understand that,
23 we are totally lost on the matter, not knowing what the document is
24 about. So, therefore, would you please ask focussed questions and in
25 such a way that the Chamber know what the question is about so that we
1 hopefully also know what the answer is about.
11 Pages 14534-14548 redacted. Closed session.
2 [Open session]
3 THE REGISTRAR: We are in open session, Your Honours.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
5 We adjourn for the day. And we resume tomorrow, Wednesday, the
6 19th of October, quarter past 2.00 in this same Courtroom II.
7 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.04 p.m.,
8 to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 19th day of
9 October, 2011 at 2.15 p.m.