1 Tuesday, 10 January 2012
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 2.19 p.m.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Good afternoon to everyone in and around this
6 courtroom. And on behalf of the Chamber, I wish you all the best for the
7 coming year, and I hope that you had some time to relax.
8 Madam Registrar, would you please call the case.
9 THE REGISTRAR: Good afternoon, Your Honours.
10 This is the case IT-03-69-T, The Prosecutor versus
11 Jovica Stanisic and Franko Simatovic.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
13 Before we continue with the cross-examination of Witness DFS-014.
14 There are a few procedural matters I would like to address.
15 The first is about the witness order in the week, this week,
16 beginning the 9th of January, 2012. On the last day of court before the
17 winter recess, the Simatovic Defence asked the Chamber to accommodate
18 Witness DFS-014 by recommencing his testimony in the week starting on the
19 16th of January, 2012, because of Orthodox Christmas and New Year, which
20 the witness observes. The Chamber was therefore requested not to sit in
21 the week of the 9th of January. The Chamber, through an informal
22 communication, informed the parties on the 21st of December, 2011, of its
23 decision that Witness DFS-014 should reappear on the 10th of January.
24 Due to its concerns about significant loss of court time, the Chamber
25 requested that the Defence bring a second witness to testify in that
1 week, once Witness DFS-014 had completed his testimony.
2 The Chamber also requested the Victims and Witness Section to
3 organise the Witness DFS-014's transport so as to least interfere with
4 his Orthodox Christmas celebrations.
5 As for the appearance of a second witness during that week, there
6 was further informal communication about the possibility of the
7 Stanisic Defence Witness Brown being called. However, after both the
8 Prosecution and the Stanisic Defence raised concerns about this option,
9 the Chamber decided not to pursue the matter further.
10 With both the Stanisic and the Simatovic Defence having pursued
11 other possible options to no avail, a second witness will not appear this
13 I'd like now move to the second item, which is the witness
14 scheduling for the upcoming weeks.
15 In an informal communication, the Chamber also requested that the
16 Simatovic and Stanisic Defence provide information today about the
17 scheduling of witnesses for the upcoming weeks. And, therefore, I'd like
18 to hear from the parties. The last update we received is the
19 6th of January, which says that Witness DFS-014 would testify this week.
20 And I'd like to know how much time the Stanisic Defence would need for
21 the cross-examination of DFS-014.
22 MR. JORDASH: Good afternoon, and Happy New Year to Your Honours.
23 One and a half hours, please.
24 JUDGE ORIE: One and a half hours.
25 Prosecution, any indication?
1 MR. GROOME: Not having heard the Stanisic cross-examination, I
2 anticipate two hours.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Two hours.
4 Then, for next week Witness DFS-013 and Witness DFS-001 have been
5 scheduled; three hours for examination-in-chief for both the witnesses.
6 Is that still as matters stand, Mr. Petrovic?
7 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Any indication about cross-examination of
9 Witness DFS-013?
10 MR. JORDASH: May I consider that and inform Your Honours at the
11 break, please.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
13 Mr. Groome.
14 MR. GROOME: It's difficult to say, Your Honour, but I would
15 anticipate approximately the same time as Mr. Petrovic takes.
16 JUDGE ORIE: That's another three hours.
17 Witness DFS-001, matters still -- still three hours,
18 Mr. Petrovic?
19 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, yes. Our final
20 proofing is still pending with the witness, so it is possible that the
21 time may be a bit shorter or a bit longer. But that would be
22 approximately the time that we have envisaged.
23 JUDGE ORIE: And for the Stanisic Defence, same request?
24 MR. JORDASH: Yes, please.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Groome, for the Prosecution?
1 MR. GROOME: Again, the same comment, Your Honour. I would
2 anticipate the same amount of time.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Then, for the week after that, Witness DFS-009,
4 Mr. Petrovic?
5 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I don't have a list
6 on me, but the time will not change. The witness has confirmed his
7 arrival. I would kindly ask you to leave the room to the Defence to
8 either increase or decrease the time closer to the day of the witness's
9 testimony and after our final proofing exercise is completing --
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Therefore, for that week, four hours is
12 reserved by the Simatovic Defence for Witness DFS-009. And on my list I
13 see that for Witness DFS-017 the same time has been claimed, four hours
14 as well.
15 We'll leave it for the time being.
16 Mr. Petrovic, Witness DFS-014, we had the experience that you've
17 covered quite some matters which were not in dispute. Would you, in
18 preparing for your next witnesses, keep that in mind very much. The
19 Chamber is not here to hear testimony about matters which are not in
20 dispute between the parties. And it was not only once, but it happened
21 more than once that I had to remind you of that during the
22 examination-in-chief of Witness DFS-014.
23 I leave it to that for the time being.
24 Could we receive soon, Mr. Petrovic, the follow-up, because we
25 have now covered the period up to and including 26th of January, and that
1 the Chamber is informed as soon as possible about the beginning of
3 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] We will do that, Your Honour.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Then, Mr. Petrovic, the Prosecution has filed an
5 urgent Prosecution motion to compel Simatovic Defence to provide
6 information about source materials used by its MUP expert, and motion for
7 extension of time to file a 94 bis response. In an informal
8 communication, the Chamber has requested you to submit your position not
9 later than by today.
10 Do you intend to make these submissions orally?
11 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. This is the way
12 I understood your instruction.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Then please proceed and tell the Chamber what the
14 position of the Simatovic Defence is.
15 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
16 First of all, I would like to say that our Defence is doing its
17 utmost to comply with the parts of the requests of our learned friends
18 from the Prosecution. Those requests are more or less founded, and we're
19 trying to comply with them. However, we should bear in mind the fact
20 that we're talking about an expert who has his team and who is trying to
21 deliver on what we have asked him to do. However, we cannot influence
22 his organisation of time and his priorities, although we have asked him
23 to do it in the shortest possible time and to do it fully and completely.
24 As far as Mr. Groome's request for an additional deadline, we do
25 not oppose to that. Our experts will be called at the end of the Defence
1 case. When we comply with our obligation, we believe that our learned
2 friends from the Prosecution will have ample time to prepare adequately
3 for the cross-examination.
4 In addition to that, we would kindly ask our learned friends from
5 the OTP to identify some parts of the report, based on the report, which
6 are not in dispute, some parts that may be accepted, or those parts that
7 don't have to be corroborated by other evidence. This would probably
8 reduce the number of documents that would accompany the report, and this
9 would also speed up the testimony of the witness and the acceptance and
10 the admittance of his report. Most of the sources which are still
11 missing at this moment are the sources that are relative to the
12 introductory part of the expert report and schedule number 1 that
13 accompanies the report. I'm sure that you have seen that
14 schedule number 1 is a historical overview of events.
15 Those parts of the report which, according to our view, are the
16 most important and which are probably in dispute and refer to the
17 majority of the evidence, those parts of the report have already been
18 filed. The least number of the sources that are still missing belong to
19 the parts which speak about the organisation and the functioning of the
20 state security of Serbia between 1991 and 1995 and those that are
21 relative to Franko Simatovic himself. The expert report is -- has 476
22 footnotes. At this moment, we are missing 45 documents. All the other
23 documents have already been admitted as P or D documents, or are
24 documents on the 65 ter lists either of the Prosecution or the Stanisic
25 Defence or on our 65 ter list.
1 We have entered P, D, and 65 ter documents in the report to help
2 all the parties. We have not provided our colleagues from the
3 Prosecution with that version because we wanted to finalize the procedure
4 to enter all the evidence and, thus, to avoid having several versions of
5 the expert report at the same time. However, if the Trial Chamber and
6 our learned friends from the OTP consider that that would be of some help
7 to them, we can submit a -- the version which is still not complete and
8 which might facilitate their preparation. However, having said that,
9 several versions may bring confusion into the whole matter. But if this
10 is the position of the Trial Chamber and the OTP, we can provide the
11 parties with the incomplete version and by -- having said that, I mean
12 that not all the documents have been entered.
13 45 documents are missing. All of them, except for six that we
14 are still awaiting, will be uploaded before the end of day tomorrow as 2D
15 documents, and those 2D markings will also be entered into the expert
16 report text. The 46 documents in question, or, rather, the 39 documents
17 in question will be submitted for translation and we will ask for urgency
18 in dealing with these documents for the benefit of the OTP.
19 I would like to say that the documents that are missing are legal
20 texts which are not in dispute, which are publicly available, but I'm not
21 saying this to diminish our responsibility or anything like that. I'm
22 just saying that as the text itself is concerned, they are not in
23 dispute. Their interpretation, however, may be in dispute. The
24 interpretation of legal text and other legal documents is exactly the
25 subject of our expert's testimony.
1 As for the attachments to the expert report, which is schedule 2,
2 there are seven graphs. They have been uploaded. They have been
3 translated. They can be found in the system. And they're readily
4 available to the parties as we speak.
5 In conclusion, I would like to say we know what our
6 responsibility is. We are doing or utmost to comply with it. And we
7 believe that we will be able to comply all of the requests of our
8 colleagues from the OTP in the shortest possible time.
9 JUDGE ORIE: If I understood the Prosecution well, Mr. Petrovic,
10 they said, Whether we can agree with the conclusions of the report, yes
11 or no, depends on the material underlying the report. Now, you're saying
12 if the Prosecution would already agree to some parts of the report, that
13 there would be less need to be provided with the underlying
14 documentation, which is putting the arguments upside down. That's one
16 The second one I'd like to make is, you say 45 or 39 documents
17 are still missing, but this is all publically available and these are all
18 legal texts. I must say that I'm a bit surprised. That if it's
19 publically available and these are legal texts, why are they not, then,
20 provided without any delay to the Prosecution? Is it about translations?
21 Because I didn't hear you say anything about translations.
22 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, when I said that they
23 were publicly available, I wanted to say that it is not our obligation to
24 provide them. It is our obligation -- what I was saying was that they're
25 not in dispute. What may be in dispute is their interpretation. The
1 parts of the expert report that are based on those texts may be in
2 dispute from the point of view of their interpretation but not from the
3 point of view of the source of those documents.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Now, you say only 45 are missing or 39 are still
5 missing. Does the Prosecution know by now which are the missing ones and
6 which are available?
7 Mr. Groome.
8 MR. GROOME: Your Honour, I would have to check with what
9 precision we know what the documents are actually missing. I know that a
10 substantial number of documents are missing, and it's a very sizeable
11 report so it really has hampered our ability to evaluate the report. And
12 I would note that the Chamber is correct. Our concern not is -- is not
13 insomuch our ability to cross-examine or prepare for cross-examination,
14 but is simply to fulfil our obligations under 94 bis and to let the
15 Chamber know whether we're going to contest the report itself.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Would it assist you if Mr. Petrovic would provide
17 with you a copy of the report in which D, P, and 65 ter numbers are
19 MR. GROOME: He has mentioned that many of them are. To the
20 extent that he can point that out to us, then that would obviate the need
21 for him to re-serve them on us. We can find them ourselves in the
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
24 Mr. Petrovic, this sounds like an invitation. And Mr. Groome
25 apparently is less concerned about being confused.
1 MR. GROOME: Yes, Your Honour. And the one other thing that I
2 would point out is that we would ask that the 30 days that we are
3 afforded under the Rules commence when Mr. Petrovic certifies to the
4 Chamber that he has served all these documents. We will, of course,
5 endeavour to evaluate the report in a shorter period and give our
6 response to it.
7 I would also acknowledge and thank Mr. Petrovic for his
8 commitment to provide drafts of the report. That may also assist us in
9 our evaluation of the report.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Then, having heard the parties, and the Stanisic
11 Defence may have -- may take no position in this? Or ...
12 MR. JORDASH: Exactly so, Your Honour. Yes.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Then I would be inclined to ...
14 [Trial Chamber confers]
15 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber decides that we leave it in the hands of
16 the parties for a while and therefore will not decide on the motion yet,
17 but the Chamber would appreciate if it would be informed as soon as
18 possible if the developments as more or less sketched by Mr. Petrovic
19 would not materialise.
20 MR. GROOME: Your Honour, so my silence is not misinterpreted:
21 Mr. Petrovic several times indicated that the documents were not in
22 dispute; until we've had a chance to see them and evaluate them, we
23 aren't able to say whether or not they are in dispute.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, that's clear. But you can live with the
25 situation where the Chamber postpones the decision on your motion in view
1 of the answer given by Mr. Petrovic.
2 MR. GROOME: Does that mean that the Chamber is not bound to --
3 or the Prosecution is not bound to file a response in the time specified
4 by Rule 94 bis?
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, that request, of course, would then be -- a
6 decision on that -- postponing a decision on that would not mean that you
7 are under an obligation to file within 30 days your position. That would
8 be -- if it ever comes to a final decision on the motion, if the matter
9 is not settled by the parties meanwhile, then you'll be excused for not
10 having filed within 30 days the -- response.
11 MR. GROOME: Thank you, Your Honour.
12 JUDGE ORIE: -- the response.
13 Then the next brief item is: On the 12th of December, 2011,
14 Serbia has requested protective measures for a number of documents. Now,
15 one of these documents has already been admitted into evidence as a
16 public exhibit, and accordingly, in order not to frustrate a possible
17 later decision granting protective measures, P992 is provisionally put
18 under seal.
19 Then, finally, I put on the record that the Chamber - and I take
20 it the parties are aware of it - has received notice that by the -- by
21 CMSS, that the guarantees by the Republic of Serbia necessary to give
22 effect to the Chamber's decision on the provisional release for
23 Mr. Simatovic, that those guarantees have not been received, and that for
24 that reason Mr. Simatovic has not left the Detention Unit and could not
25 spend time in Belgrade but had to stay in The Hague. The Chamber is, of
1 course, totally unaware of the reasons for it, but that's the situation.
2 It was one of the conditions under which the Chamber granted provisional
3 release for Mr. Simatovic.
4 Mr. Jordash.
5 MR. JORDASH: And just for the record, Your Honour: We are, at
6 the moment, keeping things under advisement, in the sense that we didn't
7 receive any response from the Serbian government. And we are looking
8 into that and considering filing a motion. Of course, if -- we don't
9 submit that the Serbian government has to issue guarantees, but arguably,
10 the Serbian government has to respond, so we're looking into that.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We'll then wait what further steps you'll
13 Mr. Petrovic.
14 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I wanted to say that
15 when we received your decision about the temporary release of
16 Mr. Simatovic, we addressed the Government of the Republic of Serbia and
17 its institutions in writing, and we asked for formal reasons why they are
18 denying what we believe is their legal obligation and that is to provide
19 guarantees. Unfortunately, until this very day we have not received any
20 answer. We have not been given any reason why the legal obligation has
21 not been complied with and why Mr. Simatovic has not been given the
22 guarantees that, in our view, he is perfectly entitled to.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Petrovic, since you mentioned twice, or
24 you used the phrase "legal obligations," the Chamber, of course, and the
25 law of the Tribunal, finds no legal obligations. The Chamber can grant
1 provisional release under certain conditions, and the conditions are not
2 phrased in such a way in the law of the Tribunal that it is a legal
3 obligation, but that it is within the discretion of the state concerned
4 whether or not to grant those guarantees.
5 Again, whether there's any obligation under domestic law is a
6 different matter. But I would like to put clearly on the record that,
7 whether any legal obligations for Serbia do exist, that by not further
8 commenting on it, the Chamber does not accept that under the law of the
9 Tribunal such obligations do exist. I leave it open. If there will be
10 ever any further issue about it, then --
11 MR. PETROVIC: [No interpretation]
12 JUDGE ORIE: -- the Chamber, if -- if required, will determine
13 the matter, but, until now, the Chamber was not required to do so.
14 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, thank you for your
15 comment. Naturally, I didn't think that it was a matter of an obligation
16 based on the Rules of the Tribunal. It's based on the internal laws of
17 the Republic of Serbia. That's what I had in mind. According to the
18 constitution and the laws of Serbia, the Republic of Serbia had the
19 obligation to issue such guarantees. But naturally, on this occasion, we
20 will address the Chamber about the issue at an appropriate time.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. The Chamber refrains from any comments at this
22 moment on this matter.
23 Anything else to be raised?
24 If not, then could I ask Witness DFS-014 to be escorted into the
1 Are all the protective measures in place, Madam Registrar? That
2 is, face distortion, voice distortion, and pseudonym?
3 Mr. Jordash.
4 MR. JORDASH: I don't know, while the witness is being brought
5 in, whether I can update you in relation to our three outstanding
6 witnesses. I should have jumped up quicker. I'm sorry.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I think the witness will enter the courtroom in
8 a second. And if there -- it's about three witnesses, then we'll find,
9 later today or at least this week, we'll find time to hear your
11 MR. JORDASH: Thank you.
12 [The witness takes the stand]
13 JUDGE ORIE: Good afternoon, Witness DFS-014.
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Your Honours.
15 JUDGE ORIE: May I invite you to be seated.
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Since you started your testimony prior to the
18 recess, not very long ago, I think that it would be sufficient at this
19 moment to remind you that you're still bound by the solemn declaration
20 you've given. That is, that you'll speak the truth, the whole truth, and
21 nothing but the truth.
22 First of all, I would like to express the appreciation of the
23 Chamber, that finally you are willing to come back so soon after
24 Orthodox Christmas. We tried to do our utmost best to see whether your
25 travelling would interfere minimally in celebrating the
1 Orthodox Christmas. Nevertheless, I would like to express the
2 appreciation of the Chamber.
3 Witness DFS-014, may I remind you that during the
4 examination-in-chief and it happened a couple of times that through your
5 answers that there was a, although slight, risk of at least giving a clue
6 to identifying yourself, and I would like to emphasise again that if
7 there's anything in your answers which is creating a risk of undermining
8 your pseudonym, that you should ask for private session.
9 You'll now be cross-examined by Mr. Jordash. Mr. Jordash is
10 counsel for Mr. Stanisic.
11 You may proceed, Mr. Jordash.
12 MR. JORDASH: Thank you, Your Honours.
13 WITNESS: DFS-014 [Resumed]
14 [Witness answered through interpreter]
15 Cross-examination by Mr. Jordash:
16 Q. Good afternoon, Mr. Witness.
17 A. Good afternoon.
18 Q. I don't think there's anything that you've said so far which we
19 disagree with. I just want to seek some clarification on a number of
21 First issue is this: That you spoke about the calling up or the
22 mobilising of the reserve police force at the Knin Police Station in 1990
23 around the time of the erection of the roadblocks; do you recall that?
24 A. Yes, I do.
25 MR. JORDASH: That's, Your Honours, page 15772.
1 Q. And you spoke about the reserve force being paid by the companies
2 where they had been permanently -- or where they were permanently
3 employed; do you recall that?
4 A. Yes. Such were the rules throughout Yugoslavia that concerned
5 the reserve forces. When there are reserve forces, they would be
6 mobilized, and they would be paid by the companies that employed them.
7 Q. And throughout 1990, are you able to recall - and I'm talking
8 about a time when the roadblocks were being formed and Knin Police
9 Station had effectively become Serbian populated - can you recall the
10 ratio between the reserve police and the permanently employed police at
11 the Knin Police Station through 1990?
12 A. I don't fully understand you. What do you mean by "ratio" or
13 relationship? Are you talking about employment? What do you have in
14 mind exactly?
15 Q. Sorry, let me clarify that. Numbers. I'm looking at numbers.
16 How many police officers were at the Knin Police Station when you were
17 present, and how many were reserve and how many were fully employed?
18 A. Well, at the time, as far as I can remember, there were almost
19 70 authorised officials, not including civilians and women who had no
20 authority, and there was perhaps between 40 and 50 individuals who were
21 part of the reserve force. They had been called on the 17th of August,
22 around that time, 1990, and this force wasn't disbanded. They remained
23 on active duty throughout that period of time.
24 Q. Was there a point in time when the reserve force increased from
25 what it had been prior to these events revolving around the conflict?
1 A. Well, the number of reserve forces was increased as well as
2 active police officers. The number of active members was also increased
3 after the SUP in Krajina was established on the 5th of January, 1991.
4 The active police force was also increased in September 1990, throughout
5 that period of time, which is when many inspectors and police officers
6 from other stations in Croatia expressed certain wishes and asked to be
7 transferred to the police station in Knin. And this was authorised.
8 There was a particular event in September 1990.
9 Q. Let's just leave it there for now.
10 So is this a fair summary: Up until November 1990 the reserve
11 police in Knin were paid by their companies and the authorised police
12 were paid by the Croatian MUP directly from Zagreb? Is that correct?
13 A. That's correct.
14 Q. Now, in December of 1990 the situation changed because the
15 salaries stopped coming from Zagreb. Now, just dealing with the reserve
16 police post-November 1990, did they, the ones in Knin, continue to
17 receive their salaries from the companies in the Krajina, the companies
18 which had previously been paying their salaries?
19 A. Well, I stopped performing the duties I have already mentioned.
20 I wasn't really concerned about keeping track of things, but I know that
21 since money, funds were being collected for active police officers in the
22 station, for us, the active police officers, the reservists were still on
23 the salary rolls, payrolls of the companies they worked for. These
24 companies continued to work, and they paid their employees as well as the
25 reserve members of the police force of the Knin station.
1 Q. Now, in relation to the authorised active police officers, you've
2 spoken about voluntary donations.
3 Do you agree with this: that there was, post-November 1990 and
4 through 1991, a significant amount of humanitarian aid, including food
5 and money, coming into Knin which was used, in part, to finance the
7 A. Well, I remember that during that period of time we received
8 various kinds of foodstuff, flour, for example, and other provisions.
9 And this was sort of compensation instead of the salary that we didn't
10 receive at the time. We received such things from humanitarian sources.
11 I remember convoys coming from Semberija and Bijeljina. It was winter at
12 the time. It was cold. So there were humanitarian convoys that came
13 from the Banja Luka region, and a reception was organised on that
14 occasion. They would bring in flour, cabbage, meat, and so on and so
15 forth. And this was distributed to the population. And we also received
16 part of that humanitarian aid.
17 Q. So was there a period of time post-November 1990 that the police
18 did not receive a salary in terms of money but received instead only food
19 and other such items to allow them to continue working?
20 A. Well, I think that that was a two- or three-month period during
21 which we didn't receive any salaries, but we received assistance. The
22 first salaries we received were, I think, represented about 6.000 or
23 6 million and that was a lot lower than the average for employees of
24 certain companies in Knin.
25 Q. And was that money coming from voluntary donations from local
1 companies and also from the foreign diaspora?
2 A. Well, at the time, Radio Knin was increasingly active, and there
3 was a lot of information disseminated especially in the evening hours.
4 Information according to which a certain village had gathered a certain
5 sum of money for the SUP in Krajina, and this was to include the
6 Knin Police and Benkovac and Obrovac and perhaps funds were also
7 distributed in Lika later on. But they said that villages or companies
8 had amassed a certain amount of money. This would be brought to the Knin
9 station and handed over to us as our salaries.
10 Q. So is this the way it worked then, that the villages and the
11 towns which were populated by Serbians would collect donations themselves
12 from within their locality and elsewhere, and, at a certain point, it
13 would be brought to the Knin headquarters where it would then be
14 distributed to a number of entities and individuals, including the
16 A. Yes, you've summarized that quite correctly.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Jordash, would you please try -- the witness,
18 in-chief, said that he -- as far as he knew, they got their salaries from
19 donations. Now the witness says about what information was distributed,
20 et cetera. Could we try to find out exactly the concrete knowledge of
21 what actually was collected by the population and what the basis of his
22 knowledge is. Because, at this moment, it's all what he understood to be
23 the case rather than what details he knows about what really happened.
24 MR. JORDASH:
25 Q. Mr. Witness, I think you've heard what His Honour, the Judge,
1 just said.
2 Let's try to be as concrete as possible in terms of your
3 knowledge, what you knew, and how you knew it. Perhaps, for a moment,
4 let's go into private session, if we may.
5 JUDGE ORIE: We move into private session.
6 [Private session]
11 Pages 15868-15873 redacted. Private session.
17 [Open session]
18 THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session, Your Honours.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
20 MR. JORDASH:
21 Q. Now I want to move to another subject, which is the subject of
22 the JNA. And you've told us --
23 MR. JORDASH: At, Your Honours, page 15801.
24 Q. -- that at the beginning of September the JNA moved from playing
25 a buffer role to launching an offensive.
1 Did you understand your previous testimony correctly?
2 A. Yes, you understood my testimony correctly.
3 Q. How do you know this? How did you come by this information?
4 A. Well, I know because at the beginning of September the JNA
5 withdrew from the positions that I myself occupied because there was a
6 threat that their barracks in Sibenik and Zadar would be occupied. And
7 especially the barracks in Sibenik. That's why they organised convoys,
8 and they decided to launch an offensive in the direction of Sibenik to
9 lift the blockade from the barracks.
10 They had a lot of equipment, for example, tanks and cannons and
11 many other things like that, but they did not have enough infantry, which
12 is necessary to support tank operations. That's when they mobilized
13 people, to replenish their units. And people were mobilized from TO
14 units. They were called up to join the units of the JNA and they were
15 placed under the JNA command. After that, they never ever returned under
16 the command of the TO.
17 Q. I want to ask you -- I want to have you read a part of a diary,
18 the Mladic diary, and see if you can cast any light on some of the
19 information in there.
20 MR. JORDASH: Please, could we have 65 ter 5596 on the screen.
21 And I'm looking for page 37 of the English and 37 of the typed B/C/S.
22 Q. Now, you may not be familiar with these books. I don't know if
23 you've heard of them before, but these are accepted to be -- accepted by
24 the Prosecution and the Defence to be written by Mladic. And I want to
25 ask you if you can comment on any of the entries, or some of the entries.
1 This is an entry of the 31st of August, 1991. And if we -- we
2 don't have the B/C/S yet. Of the typed B/C/S, please.
3 THE REGISTRAR: We are looking for it.
4 MR. JORDASH: Oh, sorry, sorry.
5 THE REGISTRAR: There are several documents there.
6 MR. JORDASH:
7 Q. Perhaps, while that's coming up, I'll read part of it to you and
8 see if we can speed things up in that way?
9 The entry ...
10 MR. JORDASH: I've just been remind of the time. I don't know if
11 that is a convenient moment.
12 JUDGE ORIE: It is a convenient moment. It's 75 minutes after we
14 We'll take a break. And we resume at 4.00.
15 --- Recess taken at 3.30 p.m.
16 --- On resuming at 4.03 p.m.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Jordash, you may proceed.
18 MR. JORDASH: Thank you, Your Honour.
19 Can we -- I think we have the right page on the screen.
20 Q. And it's an entry relating to Saturday, the 31st of August, 1991.
21 And Mladic appears to be having talks with the SAOK, Mandinic.
22 And it's noted towards the bottom of the page under number five
23 that "the JNA units should disinfect the terrain and that the commanders
24 of the units which laid the minefields provide charts of the minefields
25 to the JNA in order for them to be cleared."
1 Were you aware or did you learn about the role of the JNA in this
2 regard at this time?
3 A. At that time, JNA units were deployed as buffers.
4 I remember the negotiations in question. They were in the place
5 where I am from. I was in the vicinity. I did not participate in the
6 negotiations, but I was not far away.
7 When it comes to bullet point 5, where it says that the
8 minefields should be cleared, this refers to a situation whereby a local
9 started walking or taking a shortcut towards the place where the
10 negotiations were taking place, and he hit a mine that had probably been
11 placed by the Croatian police. I believe that bullet point 5 refers to
12 that situation because it was then assumed that there were many such
13 mines. Those mines were supposed to removed. And I believe that bullet
14 point 5 reflects that particular event.
15 Q. You referred to "negotiations." Who are the negotiations
16 between; and what was the object of the negotiations as you understood
17 them to be?
18 A. As far as I can see here, the negotiations involved
19 representatives of the Serbian Autonomous Region of Krajina represented
20 by Neso Mandinic and the representatives of the Croatian MUP represented
21 by Mr. Juras.
22 Q. Mr. -- let me -- sorry.
23 A. Than was all with the mediation of the JNA.
24 However --
25 Q. Let me just stop you there.
1 Were you aware at the time, then, that the JNA was acting as the
2 mediator between these two opposing sides? Not just from looking at what
3 we have on the screen, but were you aware at that time?
4 A. One could assume that. I knew it, actually. In that area,
5 immediately before that, perhaps a month before, there was an incident
6 which involved the local population and the representatives of the
7 Croatian police. That incident resulted in some people wounded, and JNA
8 units arrived thereafter in order to curb the situation, and they placed
9 themselves as a buffer between us and the Croatian forces.
10 At that time, Mr. Mladic arrived. He was colonel at the time. I
11 remember his visit. And when he arrived, he would go to the Croatian
12 side and he would warn them through the bull horn not shoot, that there
13 would be negotiations, that he had come to visit the line, and that he
14 was the one who had been tasked with stopping the conflict in the area.
15 That's what he was telling them.
16 Q. That was a month before this entry. Were you aware of Mladic's
17 position at the time of this entry? Had he expressed similar views? Had
18 he behaved in similar ways, as far as you knew?
19 A. I know that at that time Colonel Mladic was also the
20 Chief of Staff of the 9th Corps of the JNA. He played a neutral role.
21 He tried to separate the warring parties. And in that sense, two tanks,
22 two transporters, and some JNA infantry were deployed between our
23 positions and Croatian positions.
24 Q. Okay. Let's move on in the diary to page 41 at the bottom, which
25 is four pages on. And we'll see there what was apparently, according to
1 Mladic, agreed during these negotiations.
2 The following was adopted in ten points. One - and I'm looking
3 at the bottom of the page - the withdrawal of all Martic's formations
4 from the Sibenik municipality, unconditional - going over the page -
5 adherence to the cease-fire from Drnis to the village of Pristeg. Ensure
6 simul-- number two: Ensure simultaneous return of Serbs and Croats to
7 their villages.
8 And if we -- rather than going through each and every one, if we
9 could then turn to number 6, which is a agreement dependant upon the
10 fulfilment of 1 to 5. If the agreed is implemented, JNA units must be
11 pulled out to the barracks and all their activities reduced to regular
13 Were you aware of this agreement being reached; and were you
14 aware that it was agreed that the JNA would be able to return to normal
15 activities if the two sides implemented the agreement?
16 A. There were stories to that effect. The agreements should have
17 been complied with. And there were stories amongst ourselves, amongst
18 those who lived in the area, about the agreement and about its
19 implementation. However, that never took off the ground. That never
20 came to fruition because a conflict broke out immediately, and its
21 intensity only stepped up.
22 Q. But from what you knew - you agree with this - that both sides
23 who were part of this negotiation, looked at this point in time, end of
24 August, to the JNA to help to broker an agreement, bring about a
25 cease-fire; is that correct?
1 A. I agree with that. I agree that the JNA should have played the
2 key role. And that would have been in favour of us surrendering our
3 weapons and the Croatian police leaving the area and also surrendering
4 their weapons. The Croatian police should never have returned to the
5 area, but that came to nothing. Actually, the conflict was intensified a
6 few days later.
7 Q. Now let's move forward in this notebook to the
8 19th of September, 1991.
9 MR. JORDASH: And the top of the page is 0668-2799. And it's 65
10 ter 5596. So we're in the same book. And it's page 72 at the bottom of
11 the page that I'm interested in, relating to the 19th of September.
12 I beg your pardon, sorry, it's -- no. No, that's right. That's
14 Q. Now, if we just -- if you just read that page. This is, again,
15 Mladic notebook, and he's making notes reflecting things which, it seems,
16 need to be done at this point in time, 19th of September, 1991.
17 And if we go over the page to where Mladic is recording, it
18 seems, his own speech. And Mladic is saying, for example:
19 "Corps commander's working map on the table and a person to be in
20 charge of it.
21 "That the commander be periodically informed on the situation on
22 the front.
23 "During the day we will be using the consultation method, and
24 once a day we will hold collegium meetings."
25 Then over the page, under the reference "war diary":
1 "Each order and request issued by the commander are to be written
3 "You will work in your offices.
4 "That a press centre be set up.
5 "That a mobilisation plan be initiated in the operations centre.
6 "That mobilisation progress reports be delivered.
7 "Orders in the corps are issued by the commander and the
8 assistant commander for logistics and, in my absence, by the Chief of
10 And then over the page, under the title "situation":
11 "Mobilisation is our first task. Work on that tonight. A
12 company may be composed of three platoons, battalions and two companies."
13 Now, I suggest, Mr. Witness, that this is reflective of a sudden
14 move towards an offensive -- offensive actions by the JNA. Did you see
15 anything on the ground to reflect what this diary appears to say
16 concerning mobilisation, concerning getting -- commencing a war diary and
17 so on, on the 19th of September?
18 A. I can't say I remember the exact date now, whether it was the
19 19th of September or not, but I did know that mobilisation was being
20 carried out and that it was necessary to do some more intensively,
21 because the battalion command and the command of the JNA units was in the
22 other village, in the vicinity where I was, and occasionally we had
23 meetings. I would go and present the situation. I knew that the unit
24 commander would say that Mladic wasn't happy with the situation with
25 regard to the discipline of the army and so on and so forth. He wasn't
1 happy. Fire would be opened on JNA members. And it was said that the
2 Croatian side couldn't be trusted. At the time it was necessary to
3 remove the blockade of the barracks in Sibenik, and the JNA then took the
4 decision to open up two axes of advance; one in direction of Sibenik, one
5 from Drnis and the other from Vodice. And then these columns were
6 formed. This offence towards Sibenik was a surprise for us. The
7 situation and the combat escalated there, and it was beginning to look
8 like a real war.
9 Q. And you say that "Mladic wasn't happy with the situation with
10 regard to the discipline of the army and so on and so forth." How do you
11 know that?
12 A. Well, because I went to the command of the unit. The unit was
13 the size of a battalion, and I co-operated with it. And we were in the
14 immediate vicinity of the troops as well. And at the time the troops
15 also counted on our assistance, because they feared a breakthrough on the
16 part of the Croatian units towards themselves and towards ourselves. And
17 at the -- in the army at the time there were also soldiers from Kosovo.
18 There were Muslims from Bosnia. There were Croats as well. And at the
19 time they would desert. They would lay down their arms and cross over to
20 the other side, flee to the other side. I know that the commander said
21 that it was necessary to mobilise local people whom they could trust and
22 who would play the role for which they had been designated, who would
23 carry out orders that were issued to them. Every now and then, several
24 soldiers would desert. Albanians, Muslims, and Croats would desert and
25 they would flee from the army.
1 Q. And was one of the things that Mladic wasn't happy with was it
2 the unity of command? Mladic wanted, at this point in time, the JNA
3 having entered the war, to bring about unity of command of the various
4 military formations in the region?
5 A. Well, at the time, I think Spiro Nikovic was at the head of the
6 corps. He didn't show much interest for peace in the area. At least he
7 didn't take certain measures. And during that period of time Mladic was
8 more active. The people liked to listen to Mladic. Nikovic didn't even
9 go into the field. And soon after that the corps commander in the area
10 was replaced. Certain offensive operations were carried out by the JNA
11 in the direction of Sibenik and Zadar. And throughout the front line of
12 100 kilometres or so covered by the Knin Corps there was such a
14 MR. JORDASH: If we move on in the book, in the Mladic diary, to
15 page 155, the bottom. At the top is 0668-2799. And it relates to
16 28th of September, 1991.
17 Q. And I just want you to read this bit, the second half of the
18 page, just to get some context. Where Mladic writes:
19 "Invite to a planned meeting someone from the 5th air force
20 command and anti-aircraft defence to be given targets in Zadar."
21 And then over the page. In the B/C/S --
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Jordash.
23 MR. JORDASH: -- it's page 156. Apologies.
24 Q. And if we -- once you've read that, we can go over the page.
25 A. That's fine.
1 Q. And we can see over the page at number 5, I'm hoping, where
2 Mladic notes that President Babic has a meeting with presidents of
3 municipalities being scheduled - and for when - regarding mobilisation.
4 And then under that you see a reference to General Spiro, who I
5 think you've just mentioned, getting in touch with Milan Babic, or Milan
6 Babic to get in touch with General Spiro.
7 Do you know if Spiro had been actually in touch with Babic before
8 this, or was this at the time when the real co-ordination began?
9 A. I don't know anything about contact between General Spiro and
10 Milan Babic. I know nothing about them having contact. So with regard
11 to this comment, there's nothing I can say about it.
12 Q. That's fair enough. Let's go over to the page and see number 16,
13 where, as part of this list of things which Mladic seems to be suggesting
14 should happen, we have number 16, where it says -- sorry. Let's -- let's
15 go -- forget about that. I'm sorry about that.
16 MR. JORDASH: Let's go instead to page 307, the same document,
17 which is 0668-2799. 308 in B/C/S. This is the -- an entry for the
18 16th of -- 6th of November, 1991. And we see, at this point, there
19 appears to be some, according to Mladic, some kind of unity of command
20 amongst all these groups.
21 Are you able to say, from where you were working and living,
22 approximately when this type of unity of command existed within the
23 Krajina? And when I say "this type," I mean under the command of the
24 JNA, all these forces which we see listed here, being subordinated to, at
25 least -- at least on paper, supposed to be subordinated to?
1 A. Well, with regard to the place and time, the place I was at the
2 time, I can say that in my area you could already feel this in September
3 and October. And at the beginning of November, on the 1st of November or
4 the 2nd of November, 1991, only some leaders or commanders stayed behind.
5 They no longer had any troops. All the men from the TO had been
6 transferred to JNA units. As far as co-operation is concerned at the
7 time, well, open co-operation commenced between the SAO Krajina militia
8 and the JNA. That was at the beginning of November 1991. There were
9 such cases prior to that date as well. But during this period of time,
10 this was done openly.
11 Q. Thank you. Now I want to move to a time when you --
12 MR. JORDASH: Perhaps we should go into private, please.
13 JUDGE ORIE: We move into private session.
14 [Private session]
11 Pages 15886-15902 redacted. Private session.
10 [Open session]
11 THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session, Your Honours.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
13 Witness DFS-014, you'll now be cross-examined by Mr. Groome.
14 Mr. Groome is counsel for the Prosecution.
15 Mr. Groome, you may proceed.
16 MR. GROOME: Thank you, Your Honour.
17 Cross-examination by Mr. Groome:
18 Q. DFS-014, before I ask a number of questions that I have for you
19 today, I want to clarify some points or some evidence that you provided
20 just before the break.
21 And the first question I would have in that regard: Is the
22 Bogunovic you're speaking about Momcilo Bogunovic?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. He's no longer alive, is he?
25 A. Yes, he's deceased. He's no longer alive.
1 Q. Now, my information is that he died the 1st of February in 1993,
2 just around the time that you were giving evidence about meetings that
3 you attended in -- with him and others. Does that agree with your
4 information about when he died?
5 A. Well, I assume that the date that you have which relates to his
6 death is the correct one.
7 Q. Do you know how he died?
8 A. I know he was killed during a breakthrough. A sniper bullet hit
9 him in the aorta and he bled to death. He -- his escort also died as a
10 result of sniper fire. And there was a problem when it came to
11 extracting the bodies.
12 Q. Now, is this the same -- or do you know if this is the same
13 Momcilo Bogunovic who was the commander of JNA forces when they entered
14 Skabrnja on the 19th of November, 1991?
15 A. I assume that the same individual is concerned, the one who was
16 involved in Skabrnja in 1991, and who was also involved in a 1993 event.
17 Q. Now, earlier today you said that Bogunovic actually gave orders
18 to Captain Dragan and Arkan. And then, at transcript 50, you said
19 Bogunovic's orders were in writing and they were entered in the book of
21 Do you recall giving that evidence?
22 A. Yes, I do.
23 Q. Can you recall a specific operation or a date in which there was
24 an order, a written order by Bogunovic, that gave an express order to
25 Arkan or Captain Dragan?
1 A. Well, I can't mention any concrete situations now, but Arkan
2 appeared in the territory of Benkovac around the 24th or
3 25th of January, 1993. And at the time, I -- I think I have to put
4 things this way. We are in open session, after all.
5 JUDGE ORIE: If you would prefer to go into private session, then
6 we will move into private session.
7 MR. GROOME:
8 Q. Do you --
9 JUDGE ORIE: I think out of an abundance of caution we move into
10 private session.
11 [Private session]
11 Page 15906 redacted. Private session.
8 [Open session]
9 THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session, Your Honours.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
11 MR. GROOME:
12 Q. In your testimony earlier today, you spoke about an interaction
13 you had with Captain Dragan and his deputies, and my impression of that
14 was that it was plentiful. You had numerous occasions in which you spoke
15 with Captain Dragan and his deputies.
16 Did I understand your evidence correctly?
17 A. Well, there were a number of meetings. I'm not quite sure what
18 "a lot of" means. This is all relative. But there were a number of
19 meetings between myself and Captain Dragan.
20 Q. And how about his deputies. Did you have interaction with his
22 A. Well, I knew some of them. I would meet some of them.
23 Q. Can you please tell us the names of the deputies who you can
25 A. Well, as far as I can remember, there was -- or, rather, there
1 were two brothers, called Bozic. One Bozic was a deputy for a certain
2 period of time. And then there was captain. Captain ... I can't
3 remember his surname now. If I saw his name amongst a number of
4 surnames, I'd remember, because I would meet him at that time. You have
5 to understand that during the war-time period, during this five-year
6 period, I met a lot of people. And there were a lot of events. And I
7 can't remember all of this. But I did know them. I knew the Bozic
8 brothers. One of them was his deputy in charge of the -- the camp.
9 MR. GROOME: Before I ask to return to private session, could I
10 confirm that 6342 is now available?
11 THE REGISTRAR: Yes.
12 MR. GROOME: Your Honour, could I ask that we go into private
13 session, please.
14 JUDGE ORIE: We move into private session.
15 [Private session]
11 Pages 15909-15916 redacted. Private session.
1 [Open session]
2 THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session, Your Honours.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
4 MR. GROOME:
5 Q. DFS-014, in preparation for your testimony, the Simatovic Defence
6 is required by the Rules of this Court to provide a written summary of
7 what they expect your evidence to be. It is ordinarily drafted after the
8 party speaks with the witness. Your summary, provided to us on the
9 6th of June, 2011, has an assertion in it, and I would like to clarify
10 whether this assertion is accurate.
11 The summary said:
12 "In light of his position," and then it gave your position, "this
13 witness will be able to disclose his knowledge of the reasons and nature
14 of Franko Simatovic's visits to Knin in the period from the end of
15 May until the end of August 1991."
16 My first question is: Is that accurate? Do you believe you are
17 able to provide that type of information between May and August of 1991?
18 A. At that time, from the end of May until August, I did not come
19 across Franko Simatovic anywhere.
20 Q. With respect to your evidence given here today, did you not give
21 evidence that you left the area in early June and then went on and
22 engaged in a business enterprise that had really nothing to do with your
23 prior employment?
6 [Private session]
11 Pages 15919-15925 redacted. Private session.
19 [Open session]
20 THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session, Your Honours.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
22 MR. GROOME:
23 Q. In your direct evidence on the 15th of December, you gave some
24 evidence about Arkan. I'd like to read the question and answer and then
25 ask you my own follow-up question.
1 At transcript pages 15812 to -13, you were asked the following
3 "When Arkan arrived with his unit, who did he report to upon his
4 arrival in Benkovac?"
5 "A. I don't know exactly. I do know that he, with his unit, was
6 accommodated in a hotel in Benkovac," and then you continue to give more
7 information about the hotel.
8 Do you recall being asked that question and giving that answer?
9 A. I recall that.
10 Q. At that time, did you make any inquiry into who sent Arkan to the
11 Knin or who he reported to?
12 A. No. I never thought that I should make any inquiries about Arkan
13 and how he had come to be there. It was a war-struck area, and most of
14 the issues concerning that war area were issues that were dealt with by
15 the military command.
16 Q. I'm not suggesting you had an obligation to. I'm just simply
17 asking whether you did.
18 And can I ask the same question with respect to Captain Dragan:
19 Once you learned of his presence in the area, did you make any inquiry
20 about who sent him or who he was to report to?
21 A. No, no, I never asked any questions. I never sought any answers.
22 Q. And, finally, with respect to Mr. Simatovic: Once you had heard
23 that he was in the area, did he make any additional inquiries to
24 determine who sent him and what exactly his business was there?
25 A. No, never. I never asked that. I never sought to establish any
1 such thing.
2 Q. So any information that you're able to provide this Trial Chamber
3 in this regard is the result of a passive process, that is to say that
4 over the course of your work and your travels you came into possession of
5 different pieces of information which you remembered and you've recounted
6 here in court during your evidence; is that correct?
7 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I object. I'm not
8 clear about this line of questioning and about this particular answer --
9 question. What does this question actually mean?
10 JUDGE ORIE: Well, I think what -- the line of questioning is not
11 something to object to unless good reasons are given for that.
12 MR. GROOME: Your Honour, I'll rephrase the -- [Overlapping
13 speakers] ...
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I would suggest that.
15 Please proceed.
16 MR. GROOME:
17 Q. Mr. Petrovic does not understand what I'm asking, so I'm going to
18 ask the question in a different way in the event that perhaps you don't
19 understand either.
20 Whatever information you know about Arkan, about Captain Dragan,
21 about Franko Simatovic wasn't the result of any active investigation or
22 inquiry that you did, it was simply information you picked up along the
23 way in an informal way; is that not correct?
24 A. That's not correct. Given my observations, my experience, what I
25 perceived, well, these are things that I experienced. I'm telling you
1 about my experience. I didn't speak about these things at a distance of
2 100 kilometres. I was an active participant in the events. But I didn't
3 carry out the investigations into when such and such a commander
4 appeared, when such and such a volunteer appeared, who sent certain
5 individuals elsewhere. But what I have spoken about is my personal
7 I experienced the conflict between the Serbs and the Croats in my
8 area, where Mladic was a colonel, where tanks were active as well as the
9 air force. There was an attack on Sibenik and on Zadar in the 1990s and
10 an attack on Benkovac and Obrovac in 1995. There were other experiences.
11 So these are all these experiences that I am referring to. And in the
12 course of that period of time I met those people. I slept in the hotel
13 where Arkan was present. I met this captain, Captain Dragan. These are
14 experiences of mine. These aren't rumours. It's not hearsay. It's --
15 these are things that I observed myself. These are things I actually
17 Q. How confident are you that you have a complete picture of what
18 Arkan was doing there, what Captain Dragan was doing there, what
19 Simatovic was doing there?
20 How confident are you that you have a complete understanding of
21 what was taking place?
22 A. Well, I don't have a hundred per cent precise information about
23 everything that took place, but I'm sure that I know many things. And I
24 have told you about these things that I have experienced. I know a lot
25 more than the common man in that area at the time knew. And I have
1 related my experiences to you in a precise way. I have provided you with
2 my information. So I would say that 95 per cent of what I have informed
3 you of is information that is precise.
4 Q. Given all of what you've told us so far, I would like to explore
5 for a few minutes the likelihood that if the State Security Service was
6 operating in the Knin area, whether it is something you would have become
7 aware of during the time that you spent there.
8 Now, would you agree with me that the State Security Service of
9 Serbia, and any country for that matter, their activities, for the most
10 part, are covert, secret activities? Would you agree with that?
11 A. Yes. If they were active, it must have been covert. But when I
12 arrived in the 1990s at the place where I worked in Knin, I was warned by
13 my superior from Zagreb and from the State Security Service of Croatia.
14 I was also told by my leaders in Sibenik and Zagreb that I should be
15 careful about certain things. They said that they'd give me information;
16 I would give them information if I knew they were present in the area at
17 the time. So throughout that period of time when I was down there, even
18 when the events were at a very intense stage, I would certainly have
19 known more things, if things were the way you say they were.
20 Q. Now, this Chamber has heard substantial evidence on internal
21 rules, procedures, and practices of the State Security Service designed
22 to keep information confidential, keep it from the public.
23 Do you have any information that would indicate that the Serbian
24 State Security Service followed a different practice while they were in
25 the Knin area.
1 A. No, I have no such information about that.
2 Q. This Chamber has also heard substantial evidence on internal
3 procedures and practices designed to compartmentalise information from
4 other members of the Serbian State Security Service who did not have a
5 need to know that information, only the personnel which were approved to
6 have access to information had that access.
7 Do you have any information that would indicate the Serbian state
8 security followed a different practice in Knin?
9 A. No, I don't have any such information.
10 Q. Sir, if you acknowledge that the Serbian State Security Service,
11 as a general practice, operated secretly and that you did not conduct any
12 active inquiry, do you admit that the information that you have is
13 somewhat limited?
14 A. When I appeared in Knin, I represented the central authorities of
15 Croatia from Zagreb and I acted and implemented their orders, and this
16 contradicts what you have been saying. Don't you think that if I was
17 carrying out such orders I would have been attacked by that service from
18 Serbia or by some of their associates from the Knin area? Don't you
19 think I would have been under pressure from them.
20 MR. GROOME: Your Honour, could I --
21 JUDGE ORIE: Could I just ...
22 You testified that you heard from -- most likely from colleagues
23 that there was MUP people, some Frenki in the area in 1991, and asked
24 about any further knowledge, you say, I don't know anything about it.
25 Now, I have some difficulties in fully appreciating your answer.
1 If Mr. Groome asked you would you admit that your information is somewhat
2 limited, now you start explaining to us that your information was not
3 somewhat limited because otherwise you would have ... and then there
4 comes a whole theory. But fact, listening to your testimony, is that you
5 say, "I heard about the presence of MUP, some Frenki. I don't know
6 anything about who sent them, what they were there for," et cetera. And
7 then to say, "No, my knowledge was not in any way limited" is difficult
8 to reconcile, isn't it?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You are right.
10 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ...
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You formulate your questions
12 differently, and it's easier for me to understand the questions you put
13 to me. That's not the case for the Prosecution. It's true that I heard
14 that in the area of Krajina or in Knin in 1991 I heard about the presence
15 of Frenki from the Serbian MUP. I don't know whether anyone else was
16 present in the area, anyone else from the Serbian State Security Service.
17 I'm also sure that I don't have a 100 per cent correct information or
19 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... yes. If you do
20 not know anything about it apart from the person being present in the
21 area, then to say that it's -- you do not have the 100 per cent correct
22 information, that seems to be logical.
23 Mr. Groome.
24 MR. JORDASH: Sorry to --
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
1 MR. JORDASH: -- jump up. But I would object to the way the
2 Prosecution are proceeding. I mean, perhaps the witness could take his
3 headphones off for a moment.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Could you take off your headphones for a second.
5 MR. JORDASH: We're dealing in abstract. If the Serbian DB were
6 there and they've just wondering around in Knin for a couple of days, the
7 witness may have complete knowledge. His testimony may cover the whole
8 activity of the Serbian DB. Alternatively, the Prosecution theory, that
9 the DB had a special unit which was commanding 5.000 soldiers, and so on
10 and so forth, the witness's answer is going to be completely different.
11 Why doesn't the Prosecution put their case so the witness can
12 say, "Yes, I would have known this" or "No, I wouldn't have known that,"
13 rather than dancing around the subject?
14 JUDGE ORIE: To the extent the witness says that he doesn't have
15 full information or that his knowledge may be limited, to draw any
16 conclusions from such testimony takes a careful analysis. And the
17 Chamber will make that analysis. And if it is left all vague, then this
18 may have an impact on the analysis and the conclusions. If that is what
19 you wanted to address.
20 MR. JORDASH: Yes, it is. Thank you.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Could you please put on your earphones again. Yes.
22 Mr. Groome, it is both the question put by Mr. Jordash more or
23 less to you, and my answer may be of some guidance.
24 Please proceed.
25 MR. GROOME:
1 Q. Sir, the record records you as having said just a few moments
2 ago: "It's true that I heard that in the area of the Krajina or in Knin
3 in 1991 I heard about the presence of Frenki from the Serbian MUP."
4 That's at line -- page 82.
5 Is that accurate? Is it -- is the information about Frenki's
6 presence something that you received from members of the Serbian MUP?
7 A. No, I didn't hear that from a member of the MUP in Serbia. I
8 heard it from colleagues from the MUP in the Republic of Serbian Krajina.
9 Q. In fact, in your evidence last December you testified that no one
10 from the Serbian MUP ever came to see you; is that correct?
11 A. I don't know. No representatives of the Serbian MUP came at the
12 time in an official capacity.
13 Q. I remind you that we're in open --
14 JUDGE ORIE: Because we -- first I would like to clarify one
15 matter. And I again would like to -- the witness to take his earphones
17 Is my understanding of the English language correct, that the
18 line "I heard about the presence of Frenki from the Serbian MUP" is an
19 ambiguous line which could mean either I heard about the presence of
20 Frenki from someone of the Serbian MUP who told me that, or it could mean
21 I heard about the presence of Frenki who was, in my information, linked
22 to the Serbian MUP?
23 Mr. Groome, I'd like to avoid whatever misunderstandings which
24 may result from ambiguous language. And also because I do not know what
25 the original words of the witness would have been, if he used the one, it
1 could be translated as from a member of the -- Frenki from the Serbian
2 MUP, or if he said the other, it may be translated in the same way, and,
3 therefore, I intervened for a second.
4 MR. GROOME: Your Honour, that's precisely why I asked the
5 question, because it seemed to be at odds with what the witness had said
6 five, ten minutes ago. So I wanted to give him an opportunity to
7 clarify. He had said earlier today that he heard it from his colleagues.
8 And this was ambiguous.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Yes, you just wanted to take him back to his
10 original answer. At least you wanted to avoid that this new answer could
11 be misunderstood --
12 MR. GROOME: Exactly, Your Honour.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
14 Then could you please put your earphones on again.
15 Yes, the best way of asking would have been: Did you mean this
16 or did you mean that? That's --
17 Please proceed.
18 MR. GROOME:
19 Q. In your evidence, you make repeated statements that you did not
20 hear of activities by Frenki Simatovic, that you did not see him. Is it
21 not correct that you simply were not fully informed about his activities
22 during that period?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. So it's quite possible that he could have been doing all sorts of
25 things that you simply have no knowledge about?
1 A. It's possible.
2 Q. I would like now to explore this issue from the perspective of
3 the Serbian State Security Service and whether at that time they would
4 have considered you to be someone they would feel comfortable sharing
5 secret information with. And this will involve questions about what they
6 knew about you.
7 MR. GROOME: And I'm going to ask that we go into private session
8 to discuss this area.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Perhaps before we do so, I'm looking at the
10 clock. I don't know whether starting this line of questioning at three
11 minutes to 7.00 would be wise, Mr. Groome.
12 MR. GROOME: I think it would be wiser to take it up fresh in the
13 morning, Your Honour.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Yes, then I would first like to instruct the
16 We'll continue tomorrow, Witness DFS-014, and that will be
17 tomorrow in the morning, at 9.00 in this same courtroom. And I'd like to
18 instruct you that you should not speak or communicate with anyone about
19 your testimony, whether given either in December or this year, or
20 testimony still to be given.
21 And before we adjourn, I would invite the usher already to
22 accompany you out of the courtroom.
23 [The witness stands down]
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Groome, may I express some concern about what
25 you announced that you would do. Because to ask the witness why others
1 would consider it wiser not to inform the witness about all kind of
2 things he says he was not informed about might be an exercise which may
3 become more argumentative than eliciting knowledge from the witness.
4 I express this concern, leave it to you to think it over until
5 tomorrow morning, 9.00.
6 MR. GROOME: I'll just say at this juncture, Your Honour, that my
7 line of questioning will be based on his prior testimony where he gave
8 evidence about how people saw him and how he saw others there.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. As long as we keep it factual and as long --
10 I said I expressed some concerns; of course, I do not know what the
11 questions will be. But you would agree with me that there is a risk,
12 perhaps not with you, but if you only are aware of what you announced you
13 would do, that there is a risk that you end up in guessing about what
14 other people might have thought about what to do and what not to do.
15 MR. GROOME: I can assure the Court that I have no intention of
16 doing any such thing.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Then we can adjourn.
18 We adjourn for the day. And we resume tomorrow, Wednesday, the
19 11th of January of this year, 2012, 9.00 in the morning, same courtroom,
21 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.01 p.m.,
22 to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 11th day of
23 January, 2012, at 9.00 a.m.