1 Wednesday, 8 February 2012
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness entered court]
5 --- Upon commencing at 9.04 a.m.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning to everyone in and around this
8 Madam Registrar, would you please call the case.
9 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, 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 Good morning to you, Mr. Draca, as well. I'd like to remind you,
14 as you may have noticed I always do in the morning, that you're still
15 bound by the solemn declaration you've given at the beginning of your
16 testimony. I even yesterday had to remind you of what the whole truth
17 was. Please keep that in mind.
18 Mr. Farr, if you're ready, the two hours you need will start now.
19 MR. FARR: Thank you, Your Honour.
20 WITNESS: ACO DRACA [Resumed]
21 [Witness answered through interpreter]
22 Cross-examination by Mr. Farr: [Continued]
23 Q. Good morning, Mr. Draca.
24 A. Good morning.
25 Q. I still have a number of topics to get through so I would ask you
1 to keep your answers as brief as possible while still providing a fair
2 answer. Is that okay?
3 A. All right.
4 Q. I'd like to turn to your evidence about Skabrnja and particularly
5 to the forces involved in the attack on Skabrnja.
6 At transcript page 16746, you described the forces you believed
7 to have participated in that attack. And you said:
8 "It was the 180th Motorised Brigade from Benkovac, reinforced
9 with one company of the TO Benkovac and was subordinated to the brigade
10 command which was under the command of the Yugoslav People's Army."
11 MR. FARR: Could we now please have Exhibit P2082 on the screen.
12 Q. Sir, this is an operative information from the Benkovac
13 Department of the SAO Krajina MUP SDB. It's dated 11 November, 1991,
14 when you were the head of the Benkovac SDB. It discusses events that
15 occurred on the 8th of November, 1991.
16 MR. FARR: And if we could have the bottom of the page in
17 English, and the middle of the page in B/C/S.
18 Q. And I'm interested in a portion that begins with the word:
19 "At about 1500 hours of the same day."
20 That portion reads:
21 "At about 1500 hours of the same day, to Benkovac TO Staff, there
22 arrived Colonel Kasum and Lieutenant-Colonel Vuletic with the retinue TO
23 Krajina staff members. Talking to the Benkovac STO, or TO staff
24 commander, Colonel Kasum made a very interesting remark. He claimed that
25 the special units which were in the phase of being created, including the
1 Benkovac SUP anti-terrorist unit, must carry out a special assignment in
2 a few days, and after that, the police organs would again be under the
3 commands of Krajina TO Staffs."
4 Sir, my question to you is just the following. The Benkovac SUP
5 was in the process of forming a special unit at this time; correct?
6 A. Yes. With a brief explanation.
7 These people were engage in regular police work, but those who
8 were younger among them would be assigned to the specialist
9 anti-terrorist platoon. But it was a small platoon, some 30 men.
10 MR. FARR: Can we now please have Exhibit P1212 on the screen.
11 Q. Sir, before you is the duty roster from the Benkovac police
12 station. The date of this document is 18 October 1991. That date
13 appears on the last page of the document.
14 The heading of the document indicates that the duty roster is
15 based on a new organisation introduced in the Benkovac SJB.
16 MR. FARR: Could we please have the bottom of page 8 of the B/C/S
17 and the middle of page 9 of the English translation.
18 Q. Sir, before us we have a list of 14 names with the heading:
19 "Special Unit." This is the special unit that you were just telling us
20 about; correct?
21 A. Precisely so.
22 Q. And the first name on the list is Goran Opacic. He was the head
23 of this special unit; correct?
24 A. Yes, for a while. But sometime in autumn of that year, he
25 transferred to the army. But I don't know which date exactly.
1 MR. FARR: Can we please have the next page in both languages and
2 the top half of each page initially.
3 Q. Sir, under the heading: "Military Police," I'm interested in the
4 name Milan Burza. Who was that?
5 A. He was an inspector at the Benkovac SUP even before the war. And
6 sometime in 1993, I think, he moved to state security.
7 MR. FARR: Could we now have the bottom half of that page,
9 Q. Under the heading: "In TO Units," in the second section, one of
10 the names we see is Bosko Drazic, the SJB chief. Is it correct that this
11 list indicates that Bosko Drazic had a role serving in or coordinating
12 with TO units?
13 A. That is correct. As indicated in the previous document, the
14 Krajina police was, in terms of hierarchy, within the command of the
15 TO command, where it came to military conflicts. Each chief of station
16 was, ex officio, a coordinator for the TO.
17 MR. FARR: Could we now have Exhibit P1209, please.
18 Q. Sir, this is an Official Note from Lieutenant Commander
19 Simo Rosic and Major Ostojic, dated the 8th of March, 1992. And it's
20 related to events in Skabrnja and Nadin. I'm going to read a short
21 portion of it, beginning at the beginning.
22 "Having conducted several IR, or interviews, talks with personal
23 and official contacts, and examined the unit's combat documentation, we
24 have found out the following about the killing of civilians in Skabrnja
25 and Nadin villages on 18 and 19 November 1991:
1 "All the collected data shows that the killings were committed by
2 the members of the Benkovac STO, that is Territorial Defence Staff,
3 special units, or units that fought under their command. These were
4 volunteers from Serbia and Opacic's group composed of combatants from
5 this area."
6 Sir, we've seen an Official Note from the Benkovac DB saying that
7 the -- that the Benkovac special unit was going to have to undertake
8 special tasks under the command of the TO. We've seen a list of the
9 members of the special unit with Goran Opacic at its head, and now we've
10 seen this JNA report stating that the data collected shows that Opacic's
11 group, fighting under the Benkovac TO command, committed killings.
12 The truth is that the Benkovac SUP special unit participated in
13 the attack on Skabrnja and participated in the killing of civilians
14 there; isn't that correct?
15 A. The first document is dated the 11th of November. That's to say,
16 seven days before the attack on Skabrnja. At that time, none of us knew
17 that an attack was impending on Skabrnja. So I don't know the colonels
18 who came from Knin, which tasks they were referring to. Knowing the
19 situation at the time, I doubt seriously that a colonel or a
20 lieutenant-colonel could order Opacic to do something of the sort
21 seven days ahead of the attack.
22 As far as Opacic's group is concerned, this Official Note was
23 written on the 8th of March, that's to say, three or four months after
24 Skabrnja. Simo Rosic, a naval captain, wrote it, who came from Pula to
25 help Major Ristic, a man who was not very familiar with our areas.
1 According to what I know about it, Goran Opacic was not involved in the
2 attack on Skabrnja. Every soldier in our area knew it.
3 Now, did he appear in the area afterwards when it was captured?
4 That I don't know. I can tell you, however, for sure, that Opacic was
5 not there on the day that the 180th Motorised Brigade conducted the
6 attack, together with the TO.
7 Q. Sir, Bosko Drazic also personally participated in the attack on
8 Skabrnja that day; isn't that correct?
9 A. It is possible. As you said, the police was within the
10 Territorial Defence. If they had been engaged by the Territorial
11 Defence, then the police did take part. I know that there was a TO
12 company. I don't know what -- who it was comprised of.
13 As far as Bosko Drazic is concerned, it is possible that he
14 assigned some of his men to the TO, but I really doubt that as the head
15 of the police station he would have participated in the attack and that
16 the army would have allowed him to.
17 Q. So just to make sure I understand you. You allow for the
18 possibility that members of the police in Benkovac participated in the
19 attack on Skabrnja on the 18th of November, 1991; is that correct?
20 A. That's correct.
21 Q. And, sir, is it also correct that Goran Opacic had been trained
22 at the Golubic camp?
23 A. Yes, he was in Golubic.
24 Q. Sir, just so you're clear, our position is that Goran Opacic and
25 Bosko Drazic both personally participated in the attack on that day.
1 They're your close colleagues and it's because they're your close
2 colleagues that you are unwilling to admit that they participated in the
3 attack and in these crimes.
4 If you'd like to respond to that.
5 A. Quite the contrary. We weren't close colleagues. I wanted
6 Drazic's removal because I didn't think he was doing his job properly
7 when it came to maintaining law and order.
8 As for Opacic, at the time the conflicts were starting out, we
9 weren't on good terms. So I cannot claim for Drazic whether he was there
10 or not because I don't know for sure. But I do know, for sure, that --
11 that Drazic -- or, rather, that Opacic wasn't there, and I can even
12 explain why I know that he wasn't there.
13 JUDGE ORIE: I think we'd like to hear the explanation of the
15 Please explain.
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] A day before the attack, I came
17 across him in the town of Benkovac. He told me himself that he would not
18 take part in the attack because he said that he had heard of a ploy by
19 which military security wanted to stab him in the back.
20 I asked him who his informant was because that would be a likely
21 indicator of the reliability of the information. He refused to disclose
22 the name. I went the following day to the barracks in the Benkovac
23 Command, as the attack progressed, to see what exactly was going on, and
24 I saw him outside the Benkovac barracks. So I'm talking about the
25 18th of November.
1 MR. FARR:
2 Q. Sir, whoever was involved in the attack on Skabrnja, we agree
3 about the fact that there was a horrible massacre there, that the
4 civilians were killed and that the village was more or less obliterated;
6 A. That's correct. We agree on that.
7 MR. FARR: Can we please have 65 ter 5596.3 on the screen. The
8 bottom of page 1 in both languages.
9 And if we could scroll to the -- yeah. Thanks. The bottom of
10 both page, yeah.
11 Q. Sir, this is an entry from one of Mladic's notebooks. You were
12 shown this portion on Tuesday, although you were shown a typed version of
13 the Serbian rather than the handwritten original.
14 Specifically, you were shown the portion of this entry where
15 Mladic wrote:
16 "180th Brigade to move to the okb, armoured battalion, a little
17 towards Skabrnja and Nadin - to erase that."
18 You were asked about what Colonel Mladic said at the meeting you
19 attended, and you said:
20 "My understanding was that the intention was to frighten them a
22 Now, we've just discussed the fact that what happened wasn't a
23 little bit of frightening but the destruction of a village and a
24 massacre. In other words, the so-called task written in Mr. Mladic's
25 notebook matches the task, to use his word, that was actually carried
2 Sir, the truth is, the plan was always to obliterate Skabrnja,
3 and you knew that before the attack; correct?
4 A. No, that's not correct. We weren't able to know that. We
5 weren't part of the military authority. Those who were acquainted with
6 the situation in 1991, to a small extent, knew that the JNA did not
7 disclose information or share it with the local civilian authorities.
8 As for the attack itself, was it planned ahead and was it planned
9 so as to produce such a large extent of destruction is something that I
10 am not able to know.
11 Q. Sir, you allow for the -- yeah.
12 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Petrovic.
14 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] The last sentence that the witness
15 said was not interpreted. Can it be repeated.
16 JUDGE ORIE: We'll ask him to repeat.
17 You said, Mr. Draca, that:
18 "... for the attack itself, was it planned ahead and was it
19 planned so as to produce such a large extent of destruction is something
20 that I'm not able to know."
21 Did you add anything then?
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think that I added, nor did the
23 Yugoslav People's Army ever share any such information with those who
24 were outside of its ranks, including the police and civilian authorities.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
1 MR. FARR:
2 Q. Sir, just so we're clear, you do allow for the possibility that
3 there was, in fact, a plan in advance to completely destroy the village.
4 You just say that you have no knowledge, one way or the other; correct?
5 A. Well, in principle, yes. I wasn't able to know the intentions
6 and plans of an organisation that I didn't work for.
7 MR. FARR: Your Honours, I tender this excerpt as a Prosecution
9 JUDGE ORIE: I hear of no objections.
10 Madam Registrar.
11 THE REGISTRAR: Document 5596 will receive number P3078,
12 Your Honours.
13 JUDGE ORIE: And is admitted into evidence.
14 Mr. Draca, could I ask you one question. The word "to erase" and
15 "to frighten," do we agree that these are totally different terms?
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I agree fully. But the term
17 that is written here in the diary was not the one that he used at the
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So you say what he wrote was not what he said.
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's correct.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Farr.
22 MR. FARR: And, Your Honour, just so the record is clear, the
23 portion I just entered was 5596.3, rather than 5596.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar, does that cause you any problems or
25 is that ...
1 THE REGISTRAR: No, Your Honours. I will repeat.
2 So document 5596.3 will receive number P3078, Your Honours.
3 JUDGE ORIE: And that is the document that was admitted under
4 this number.
5 Please proceed.
6 MR. FARR:
7 Q. Sir, during your direct examination you also discussed the
8 murders of the civilians in Bruska in December of 1991 and the subsequent
9 investigation. I'd like to show you an entry from another -- actually, I
10 believe it's from the same notebook but a different portion a few days
11 after the murders and ask you a few questions.
12 MR. FARR: Could we please have P2934 on the screen. And, if
13 possible, I'd like the top of page 3 of the original with the
14 ERN J000-3755, and the top of page 3 of the English translation with the
15 ERN J000-3582-ET.
16 If we could please have page 3 of the English and of the B/C/S.
17 Q. Sir, for your information, this portion, this entry is dated
18 24 December 1991. And I'd like you to take a look at the portion next to
19 the entry for 1300 hours. It appears to say that it's recording
20 something about someone named Kero. And just for clarity, the words --
21 or the letters KS and then the word "Zadar" appear next to his name.
22 Does that indicate that Kero came from the Zadar Crisis Staff and, thus,
23 was a Croat?
24 A. I'm hearing that last name for the first time, but it's possible.
25 I'm not quite sure what that indicates.
1 Q. The entry says that Kero:
2 "... requests that 11 dead bodies of Bruska village inhabitants
3 be delivered to him, that they be enabled to evacuate approximately
4 2.000 inhabitants - Croats from Bruska, Rodaljice and other villages,
5 under the supervision of the European Community Mission."
6 Sir, the murder of 11 or so civilians in Bruska, including, as
7 you said, a Serb who was your relative, caused a great deal of fear among
8 the remaining Croatian civilians and caused a much greater number of
9 Croat civilians to wish to leave the area; correct?
10 A. Correct.
11 Q. And, in fact, this happened every time that crimes were committed
12 against civilians in the SAO Krajina. Every murder or other crime
13 against a --
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Petrovic.
15 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, instead of general
16 questions like this, I would ask for a specific question to be put, which
17 departure by citizens, which killings. We would like specific things
18 rather than general things which do not make it possible for the witness
19 to give a specific answer.
20 JUDGE ORIE: You may object to a question. If the question is so
21 general that the witness is unable to answer it because of this character
22 of the question, then the witness will tell us that he's -- that he's
23 unable to answer such a broad question. He has not done so yet.
24 At the same time, Mr. Farr, it might save you time as well, to
25 come to specifics as soon as possible.
1 Please proceed.
2 MR. FARR:
3 Q. Sir, during your direct examination, you testified about a number
4 of crimes committed against non-Serb civilians in the SAO Krajina. With
5 respect to Bruska, you've just confirmed that those crimes caused a much
6 larger number of Croat civilians to wish to flee.
7 With respect to all crimes against non-Serb civilians that you
8 have knowledge of, is it correct that the majority of those crimes caused
9 a much larger number of Croat civilians to wish to flee?
10 A. The way you put that just now can apply to all the peoples in all
11 of the wars. Unfortunately, you are correct.
12 When I say "unfortunately," what I mean is that there were a
13 large number of civilian casualties on all sides.
14 Q. And I don't know whether you'll be able to comment on this or
15 not, but is it the case that the purpose of the people who committed
16 these crimes was, in part, exactly that. In other words, these crimes
17 were committed with the goal of causing the Croat civilian population to
18 feel so insecure that they had no choice but to leave?
19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Jordash.
20 MR. JORDASH: Sorry, I would echo Mr. Petrovic's objection
21 earlier. I mean, if the witness says yes, does that mean he was aware
22 that one person's objective was to do that. Or if he says yes, is he
23 saying, "I was aware that everybody's objective" -- I mean the answer
24 is -- the question is general. The answer is inevitably general and
25 unhelpful, we would submit.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
2 Could you please split up. It's a whole line of reasoning for
3 which you asked the witness's confirmation, and even if he says, yes, or
4 if he says no -- especially when he says yes, we would not be certain
5 that he has included all the elements in your question so rather take
6 them one by one.
7 I see you're looking at the clock. Mr. Farr, that doesn't
8 justify to produce evidence which causes more problems than it resolves.
9 Please proceed.
10 MR. FARR: I understand, Your Honour, and it's my fault. That's
11 something that I should have put to the witness rather than -- rather
12 than asked him.
13 Q. Sir, it's our position that that's what happened. The people who
14 committed these crimes did so in part with the intention that it cause
15 Croat civilians to flee the SAO Krajina. If you have a comment. If not,
16 we can move on.
17 JUDGE ORIE: The question is whether you agree with the statement
18 of Mr. Farr.
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know if the Trial Chamber
20 is aware, but, in the meantime, the Croatian justice system processed the
21 perpetrator, because a number of victims survived, and they know who the
22 killer is. This is a very rough intelligent person from a remote area.
23 I simply cannot believe that this man had such grandiose ideas
24 regarding the commission of this crime.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Draca, the fact that a crime is investigated is
1 not necessarily an answer to what Mr. Farr put to you. Is that the
2 people, not just one single person, that committed these crimes did it
3 for the purposes as Mr. Farr told you.
4 Do you agree with that, or do you say "I don't know," or what --
5 what's your position in relation to that proposal by the Prosecution?
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I personally think that that was
7 not their motive, but, actually, I don't know. But, on the basis of what
8 I can estimate, I don't think that that was their motive.
9 JUDGE ORIE: That's an answer to the question.
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Political motive.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Farr.
12 MR. FARR:
13 Q. And, sir, you stand by that despite the fact that, according to
14 you, the purpose of the attack on Skabrnja was to scare people a little;
15 is that correct?
16 A. I don't know if I understood you correctly.
17 If you're talking about the topic that we had at the meeting, I
18 understood the intimidation to be -- to move the forward guards that were
19 on the road. This is how I understood that term of frightening them off
20 or intimidating them. But the attack was broader.
21 As he says in the diary, "shake them up a bit," "razmrdati"
22 [phoen]. It's a different term, to scare them a little bit.
23 Q. Sir, discussing the events -- or, rather, the investigation in
24 Bruska, at transcript page 16765, you stated:
25 "Yes, from the very start, there was a thorough investigation
1 conducted, and a dozen suspects were investigated. I was in contact with
2 public security and I was therefore privy to the course of the
4 Were any of those dozen suspects members of the Krajina police?
5 A. Only one was a member of the reserves for a few months, but when
6 the crime was actually committed, that person had not been coming to work
7 already for over a month, so he was no longer considered a member.
8 Q. In discussing the events in Bruska you said:
9 "There were no eye-witnesses. The villagers of Bruska who may
10 have had some information left for Zadar in the meantime and no
11 statements were taken from them."
12 That's at transcript page 16765.
13 You also mention oral information received from one of the
14 victims, a survivor, who was in the hospital.
15 Is it your position that no written statement was ever taken from
16 a survivor of the Bruska massacre?
17 A. I don't know if the survivor gave a written statement to the
18 military security organs. I'm not aware whether he did or not.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Farr, I feel an obligation to inform you that I
20 misspoke at the beginning of this session. You know that the last words
21 yesterday was: "One hour, Mr. Farr," and then you said, "yes."
22 So when I said two hours this morning, that was not exactly what
23 I had on my mind, and I see it from your smile that you were aware that
24 it was one hour instead of two.
25 MR. FARR: I didn't dare to hope, Your Honour.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Please proceed.
2 MR. FARR:
3 Q. Sir, you've just said you don't know if the survivor gave a
4 written statement to the military security organs. Do you know whether
5 any survivor ever gave a written statement to the Benkovac Public
6 Security Station, the station where you worked?
7 A. No. They were at the hospital in Knin later, and they were
9 The Benkovac SUP, I don't know if they took any statements. As
10 far as I know, I don't think that they did, but I really couldn't say
12 MR. FARR: Can we please have Exhibit P43 on the screen.
13 Q. Sir, this is an official record of the Knin SUP public security
14 service, Benkovac. As you can see, it's dated the 25th of December,
15 1991, four days after the events in Bruska.
16 MR. FARR: If we could scroll down to the bottom, please. Next
17 page in English. Apologies. Bottom in B/C/S.
18 Q. Sir, as you can see, this record was taken by Milan Burza, a man
19 who earlier today you identified as an inspector of the Benkovac SJB.
20 You also indicated that he was a member of state security from 1993.
21 MR. FARR: If we could go back to the first page in English,
23 Q. And I'm interested in the portion beginning with the words:
24 "It may have been around 2000 hours when we heart a knock at the
25 front door ..."
1 I'll read that portion now.
2 "It may have been around 2000 hours when we heard a knock at the
3 front door of our house. I got up from the table, went to the [sic] door
4 and asked who it was. An unfamiliar male voice responded: The police,
5 the police. Since I did not recognise the voice, I told Dragan to go and
6 see who that was. Dragan asked who it was, and the same unfamiliar voice
7 responded: The Krajina police. We heard a burst of gun-fire in front of
8 our door. And then our mother said we should flee."
9 Sir, it's true that this statement does not mention perpetrators
10 by name but this was certainly a sufficient basis to begin an
11 investigation as to whether the perpetrators were members of the Krajina
12 police; correct?
13 A. Didn't I say that there was an investigation carried out? That
14 included all the potential perpetrators from that area.
15 Q. Sir, you did say that. But a moment ago when I asked you whether
16 any of those individuals were members of the Krajina police, I believe
17 that you just said that there was one who was a reserve member who hadn't
18 been at his post. Was there any further follow-up on this statement?
19 A. No. I just said at the beginning, all the potential
20 perpetrators. And when we narrowed it down to these people, then we
21 understood that one of them was a former member of the reserve forces of
22 the police. When I say "former," what I mean is that by not coming to
23 work for more than a month, he willingly was no longer a member of the
25 So I have to say that during period everybody wore uniforms.
1 Everybody said that they were this or that. There were people who were
2 in the police for seven days and then did not appear for a year and then
3 continued to wear the uniform regardless of that. It wasn't really a
4 state with the rule of law that you would see in regular circumstances.
5 I also have to add that, had this not been organised by the
6 police of the Serbian Krajina, then their inspector would not have
7 written a report like this. Based on this, you can see the sincere
8 desire of the police to get to the bottom of this.
9 Q. Was it based on this report that you identified the reserve
10 member of the Krajina police as a potential suspect?
11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Petrovic.
12 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I would kindly ask
13 the question to be interpreted to the witness again because the B/C/S
14 interpretation was not quite correct.
15 JUDGE ORIE: At least you have an impression that there may have
16 been a mistake in the translation.
17 Let's slowly repeat the question. The question was, Mr. Draca,
18 whether you identified the reserve member of the Krajina police as a
19 potential suspect on the basis of this report, which is now on your
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, not on the basis of this
22 report. No.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Then may I take it that the question is on what
24 basis then?
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] On the basis of oral statements of
1 survivors taken individually. People were frightened. They were scared
2 to give statements, and we understood that. And you simply could not
3 force somebody to sign a statement that could potentially prompt some
4 kind of retaliation, and they couldn't say something that they were not
5 sure of. Simply, people had confidence in us and they said who they had
6 seen close to the village on that day, that morning, that evening. They
7 didn't have specific facts as indicating that somebody had been caught in
8 the middle of firing --
9 THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness please repeat what he said.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Could you please repeat. You said: "They didn't
11 have specifically facts as indicating that somebody had been caught in
12 the middle of firing ..."
13 What did you then add? Because the interpreters didn't catch it.
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I said that the facts were known
15 exclusively to the survivors. But they were already in hospital in Knin,
16 so they could not tell that to the rest of the inhabitants.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Did you then seriously investigate what may have
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I had a great desire to assist this
20 investigation but the public security service was conducting the
21 investigation, especially the inspectors from Knin because it was a major
22 incident. So I don't know all the details as to whether statements were
23 taken and in what form from people who were victims, who were wounded and
24 were at the Knin hospital. I assume that it's possible that such
25 statements were taken.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Would you agree with me that the first and very
2 important step in such an investigation would be to collect the
3 cartridges and the bullets found at the place where people had told you
4 that shots were fired.
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, a serious on-scene
6 investigation was taken, by taking photographs, taking all sort of
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I'm talking about cartridges and bullets.
9 Were they collected, to your knowledge?
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. A large number of casings
11 were found, and you could see that the fire came from different kinds of
13 After that, there were interviews, and some facilities owned by
14 persons who were suspected were even interviewed [as interpreted]. But,
15 however, there was no forensics institute in the Krajina, so I think that
16 this was never sent to the institute in Belgrade. I don't know why. And
17 it was a question whether they would have accepted that at the time. So
18 we had no opportunity to thoroughly investigate the finger-prints and the
20 JUDGE ORIE: You could have secured the weapons of at least that
21 one suspect or other suspects; especially also weapons of the special
22 police unit members, isn't it? And, then, do the investigation at a
23 later stage.
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] All the places where searches were
25 conducted and interviews taken, the weapons were confiscated, as you
1 said, and placed in the security station in Knin.
2 I add probably, because I was not responsible for the
3 investigation and did not directly participate in it. We just were
4 involved on our own from time to time, so that I was not fully updated
5 about it.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Farr.
7 MR. FARR:
8 Q. And, sir, just to be clear, do you maintain your position that
9 you were never aware of this statement, despite the fact that Milan Burza
10 was an inspector in the Benkovac SJB and despite the fact that he worked
11 for state security, starting in 1993?
12 A. The statement was taken two years before he came to Benkovac.
13 Perhaps at that point in time I did know, but it's 20 years since then so
14 I cannot recall seeing it before, this statement. But I do know that
15 steps were taken. Actions were carried out.
16 Q. And, sir, just to clarify your last answer. You said it was
17 taken two years before he came to Benkovac. What you meant was two years
18 before he joined the state security in Benkovac, he had previously been
19 an inspector in the Benkovac police station; correct?
20 A. I'm sorry, I made a slip. Two years before he transferred to the
21 DB. He was a permanent resident of Benkovac. He lived there
23 MR. FARR: Could we please have 65 ter 4293 on the screen.
24 Q. Sir, this is a dispatch from Milan Martic to the SFRY Presidency,
25 the federal SUP, the Supreme Defence Council, Croatian MUP, and the
1 Serbian Republican SUP. And I'm just going to read the first paragraph.
2 It says:
3 "Based on verified information received by Serb Autonomous Region
4 of Krajina state security, that on 15 February 1991, the concentrated
5 special unit of MUP RH, with around 150 members in possession of vehicles
6 and armaments was thrown into Plitvicka Jezera, so Titova Korenica. They
7 represent the paramilitary formations in this region."
8 Sir, as I understand it, you didn't join the SAO Krajina DB for a
9 couple of months after this. But is it correct that this is one of the
10 kinds of information that the SAO Krajina DB gathered when you were a
11 member? Information about special units of the Croatian MUP.
12 A. That's correct.
13 Q. Skipping the next two paragraphs, I'll read beginning with the
15 "The possibility ..."
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Farr, I'm a bit puzzled by the language used in
17 this document. What you read was "thrown into Plitvicka Jezera." But it
18 reads: "... was --"
19 MR. FARR: Yeah, yeah.
20 JUDGE ORIE: "-- thrown in in Plitvicka Jezera ..."
21 MR. FARR: Which makes more sense.
22 JUDGE ORIE: That's -- there's some difficulty in understanding
23 the double "in," but you didn't quote it accurately.
24 MR. FARR: Yes, Your Honour. And perhaps we'll get the
25 translation confirmed.
1 Q. Sir, on that point, just very briefly, this document essentially
2 says that the Croatian special unit, the special unit of the Croatian
3 MUP, was put in the area of the Plitvice lakes; correct?
4 A. Yes, that's what the document reads.
5 Q. So now beginning with the paragraph that starts with the words:
6 "The possibility ..."
7 "The possibility of armed conflict with unpredictable
8 consequences is rather high unless the policemen withdraw from the
9 territory of SAO Krajina. Thus, and compatible with your constitutional
10 authorisations, we kindly ask and warn MUP RH Minister Boljkovac to take
11 appropriate steps to prevent the unwelcome consequences.
12 "If you do not follow the above written, we cannot be held
13 responsible for the consequences."
14 Sir, during your direct examination you gave a significant amount
15 of evidence regarding potential threats posed to the Serbs in Croatia by
16 the Croatian authorities. And to be clear, the Prosecution does not
17 contest much of that evidence. But this document shows the other side of
18 that story. This is a threat from Martic and the SAO Krajina authorities
19 to the authorities of the Republic of Croatia; correct?
20 A. This group was infiltrated into an area where 100 per cent of the
21 population were Serbs. You see that it was addressed to the MUP of the
22 Republic of Croatia, and the request is asking them to retreat from the
23 area because it would be a threat to everyone, including the Croats. The
24 only thing is that at the bottom he says that he cannot assume
25 responsibility for any consequences.
1 By the way, let me tell you that during World War II, the entire
2 male population was killed in that area, so to infiltrate people wearing
3 an insignia from 1941 must mean that you would know that something like
4 that would heighten tensions in the area.
5 Q. Sir, is it correct that Martic was determined that no armed force
6 loyal to the Croatian government would remain anywhere in the
7 SAO Krajina; is that correct?
8 A. That's correct.
9 MR. FARR: Your Honours, I tender this as a Prosecution exhibit.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.
11 THE REGISTRAR: Document 4293 will receive number P3079,
12 Your Honours.
13 JUDGE ORIE: P3079 is admitted into evidence.
14 MR. FARR:
15 Q. Sir, before I finish my examination, I'm going to tell you the
16 Prosecution position regarding you and your evidence so can you comment
17 on it, if you choose.
18 Our position is that you worked closely with and co-operated with
19 Mr. Stanisic and Mr. Simatovic over a period of months or years. You
20 supported the same goals as they did. They supported your activities and
21 you supported theirs. Because of this, and because of gratitude for your
22 job in the DB of Serbia, you wish to assist them as much as possible.
23 While some aspects of your testimony have been truthful, you have been
24 less than honest with the Court regarding certain matters that you think
25 may implicate Mr. Simatovic or Mr. Stanisic. In particular, you have
1 crafted your testimony to attempt to offer innocent explanations for
2 otherwise incriminating facts.
3 Would you like to comment or respond on that?
4 A. Yes, I would.
5 I do not deny for a second that as two services, we did have very
6 close co-operation at times, and at times there was no co-operation
7 whatsoever. But let me note that all the institutions in the
8 Republic of the Serbian Krajina had a similar sort of co-operation with
9 all their equivalents in Serbia. You have to understand that we are one
10 and the same people and they were our only ally in the war. Had we gone
11 on to join some -- or, rather, had we gone on to unite with them along
12 the lines of what we were discussing yesterday, well, I suppose there
13 would be something to document that.
14 As for my admittance into the Serbian DB, well, let me tell you
15 that it wasn't all bed and roses. I should have perhaps sought
16 employment elsewhere because I would have had a better pension.
17 Now, as for Mr. Stanisic [as interpreted], I didn't see him all
18 the way to Operation Pauk.
19 All my dealings with Mr. Stanisic cannot be described as close
20 co-operation. Not even in professional terms.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Petrovic.
22 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] The witness first explained when
23 he saw Mr. Simatovic and when -- and then the period during which he
24 didn't see him. That's page 25, line 24. And then he moved on to speak
25 of his contacts with Mr. Stanisic.
1 So before the witness proceeds with his answer, perhaps we should
2 have that corrected now.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Draca, did you include in your answer when you
4 saw Mr. Simatovic and during which period you didn't see him? If that's
5 the case, please tell us because it has not been translated to us.
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Since his departure in 1991, all
7 the way through to his arrival during Operation Pauk, that was the
8 three-year period.
9 And then, if I can just make one more point.
10 I am under the impression that somehow there is the wish to --
11 for me -- to induce me to say artificially that they were one and the
12 same service and there is no documentation, there are no archives that
13 could show that they weren't two services. I did say that,
14 unfortunately, I would have wished them to be one and the same service,
15 but that was not the case. And this was the case primarily for political
16 reasons. We were professionals serving those higher up and we didn't
17 have the powers to either unite or separate services.
18 MR. FARR: One further question, if I may, Your Honour.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, one more.
20 MR. FARR:
21 Q. Sir, you just said that, as I understood you, you understood --
22 you said that it was unfortunate that the two services were not one and
23 the same and that you would have wished that.
24 Why would you have wished that?
25 A. Because that would mean that the international community accepted
1 the reality of us not being able to live in the Republic of Croatia.
2 That would mean that the international community would allow our
3 unification with Republika Srpska or the Republic of Serbia because it --
4 everybody was well aware of the fact that as small as we were, we weren't
5 able to survive in the area on our own.
6 That's what I meant.
7 Q. Mr. Draca, thank you for answering my questions.
8 MR. FARR: Your Honour, no further questions.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Farr.
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Is there a suggestion to take the break now,
12 Mr. Jordash?
13 MR. JORDASH: There is a suggestion, please.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
15 We will take the break now, and we will resume at 20 minutes
16 to 11.00.
17 --- Recess taken at 10.12 a.m.
18 --- On resuming at 10.47 a.m.
19 JUDGE ORIE: I apologise for the late start.
20 Mr. Jordash, are you ready to --
21 MR. JORDASH: Your Honour, yes.
22 JUDGE ORIE: -- further examine the witness.
23 Further Cross-examination by Mr. Jordash:
24 Q. Just a few more questions just to seek some clarification, if I
25 can, Mr. Draca.
1 First of all, picking up from where Mr. Farr left off, and your
2 purported gratitude to Mr. Stanisic for the job he gave you.
3 What job did you take in the Serbian DB precisely?
4 A. I got the job of advisor in the Novi Sad centre. There were no
5 posts available in the Belgrade centre at the time.
6 Q. Advisor to who?
7 A. Advisor to the chief of the state security centre in Novi Sad,
8 which is roughly 100 kilometres away from Belgrade.
9 Q. With no operational contact with Stanisic; is that correct?
10 A. That's correct.
11 Q. Is it also correct that you've not been contacted by Mr. Stanisic
12 to give evidence on his behalf, neither has anybody from his Defence team
13 contacted you over the last five years; is that correct?
14 A. That's correct.
15 Q. Neither have you spoken to Mr. Stanisic over the last -- well,
16 since his arrest; is that correct?
17 A. That's correct. Earlier on, I said that I had not seen him since
18 1995, and the first time I saw him next was coming into the courtroom.
19 Q. And that's the first time -- no. Let me start that again.
20 So am I correct that you hadn't spoken to him since 1995?
21 A. That's correct.
22 Q. Now, you didn't speak to him either between 1991 and 1994; is
23 that correct?
24 A. I can't remember when it was exactly that Mr. Stanisic came to
25 visit the Plitvice Lakes National Park. I think it was 1994. So I
1 didn't speak to him before 1994.
2 Q. And was this, given your desire to unify the services, a source
3 of frustration for you? You have this position in the RSK DB. You're
4 not communicating, it seems, with the chief of the Serbian DB. What was
5 your opinion about that at the time?
6 A. I was realistic. And I knew that it was politically unfeasible.
7 So I wasn't particularly frustrated by it.
8 Q. Why was it politically unfeasible, in your view?
9 A. As the Prosecutor said, back in 1991, when Martic or the
10 Serbian National Council and the Krajina government sought unification
11 with Serbia, the parliament of the Republic of Serbia rejected the
12 initiative, and not once was the possibility of unification with the
13 Republic of Serbia mentioned again.
14 I knew that it was impossible through contacts with many
15 representatives of international missions in Knin because I saw that the
16 world did not support it. So I knew that it was unrealistic.
17 Q. Now, you've been quite clear that, if the Prosecution were to
18 investigate the archives, they would not find any document to support
19 their conclusion that there was a unification of the RSK DB and the
20 Serbian DB. And we'll leave that to them.
21 But what kind of documentation might there be if what the
22 Prosecution said was true was, in fact, true?
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Farr.
24 MR. FARR: Your Honour, there's not really an objection to the
25 question per se. But it's a mischaracterisation of the Prosecution case.
1 What we said was that they were functioning almost as a single service
2 and that plans and preparations had been made to unify the services.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Jordash.
4 MR. JORDASH: Well, it's -- it -- I think that's a second
5 characterisation by the Prosecution. I mean, we had two days ago for the
6 first time a --
7 JUDGE ORIE: If we have -- if it's on transcript, then if there
8 is any dispute about how it was said, then we should rely on what we find
9 in the transcript. If you have the source, then please use it, or take
10 your time to find it. But --
11 MR. JORDASH: Your Honour, I take Mr. Farr's comment and I'll --
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
13 MR. JORDASH: -- work with that.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Okay.
15 MR. JORDASH:
16 Q. Plans and preparations had been made to unify the services,
17 according to the Prosecution. Would you agree with me that if there had
18 been plans and preparations to unify the services, there would have been
19 such things as discussions and documents indicating the organ -- proposed
20 organisation for the unification? Documents dealing with the number of
21 people that the new organisation was supposed to engage? The type and
22 number of posts that the new organisation was supposed to engage? Things
23 like that.
24 Would you agree with me that those things would be the type of
25 plans and preparations that would be necessary in light of an intention
1 to unify two state services?
2 A. Yes. Had such plans been made, that would have made up for
3 voluminous documentation. But I assert that there were no such
4 documents, there is not a single witness who would say that there were
5 initiatives to unify the services, let alone anything more than that.
6 Q. Well, we'll leave that there and leave that to the Prosecution.
7 Let me pick up on some issues concerning Martic and Kojic and
9 On the 2nd of February, at page 16890 of the transcript, you
10 noted that Martic had discussed his idea that there were DB operatives in
11 the Krajina and that you all thought it unacceptable that they should be
12 present in your area without you knowing about it.
13 Why was that considered unacceptable?
14 A. I didn't understand you completely. You said DB operatives of
15 the Krajina? Something like that? I don't understand the question.
16 Q. Let me read you what you said.
17 The question was from Mr. Farr:
18 "Did you ever come across any information indicating that the
19 State Security Department of the MUP of Serbia controlled any armed
20 forces inside the RSK?"
21 Your answer:
22 "I don't have information to that effect. Although the frequent
23 subject of discussions were various groups introducing themselves, and
24 Martic at some point did say that these people should be talked to so
25 that we could establish whether they were really members of the DB of the
1 Republic of Serbia. He thought it unacceptable that they should be
2 present in our area without us knowing about it."
3 Was that Martic's view, individual view?
4 A. Yes, precisely as I put it. This was also an official position
5 of the RSK government as well as Martic's, that nobody should be able to
6 come to our area without having announced their arrival and let alone
7 carry on any sort of actions. And that concerned everyone, be they our
8 friends or not.
9 Q. And did Martic become, from 1991 onwards, increasingly paranoid
10 about the presence of DB members in the Krajina working against him?
11 A. Yes, precisely so. And you've put it well.
12 Q. And we saw that, eventually, he was contacting Milosevic,
13 accusing Kostic and Kojic, who he increasingly focussed upon, as DB
14 members working against him; is that correct?
15 A. Yes, that's correct. He did accuse them.
16 Q. Now you spoke, on the 2nd of February - Your Honours, page 16892
17 onwards - about two government bodies or two government meetings, the
18 Supreme Defence Council and the briefings. The briefings being the
19 larger group containing around 50 people; correct?
20 A. That's correct.
21 Q. And you told us that the Supreme Defence Council was,
22 effectively, the paramount decision-making body in the RSK at the time?
23 A. That's correct. Where it concerned the fields of defence and
25 Q. Basically anything to do with military operations was the
1 business of the Supreme Defence Council.
2 A. Yes. In principle, yes.
3 Q. In practice?
4 A. Well, it would often happen that the Main Staff carried out an
5 action and then informed the Supreme Defence Council about it
7 THE INTERPRETER: Can the witness repeat what he just said.
8 MR. JORDASH:
9 Q. Can you repeat what you just said. The translator didn't pick it
10 up, Mr. Draca.
11 A. I said that the Supreme Defence Council was not a body which had
12 as one of its powers to verify plans and actions of the Main Staff. The
13 Supreme Defence Council would, in most cases, hear out the situation and
14 the events in the fields of security and defence. At times, the
15 Main Staff would come out with a plan and inform the Supreme Defence
16 Council, but the Main Staff would proceed regardless of whether an
17 approval was given by the council. In other words, the council could not
18 give any sort of approvals or deny any sort of approvals to the
19 Main Staff.
20 Q. Who was in the Main Staff, please?
21 A. Army commander, Chief of Staff, and their deputies. I can name
22 them, if necessary.
23 Q. Yes. Please do.
24 A. The period up to 1993, in autumn, there was General
25 Mile Novakovic who was replaced by General Mile Celeketic up until the
1 fall of the Krajina. Or, I'm sorry, no. He was removed after
2 Operation Flash in Western Slavonia. And the last two months of the
3 existence of the Krajina, there was General Mile Mrksic. He was the
4 commander of the Main Staff.
5 Q. Thank you. Now, the briefings, what kind of decisions were made
6 at the briefings?
7 A. The briefings were attended by many lower-ranking commanding
8 officers. Well, the command would report as well as the minister of the
9 interior on the general security-related situation. Issues were raised
10 about all the threats to security. At times, guide-lines and tasks would
11 be issued to counter or improve the situation.
12 Q. Now, you said, page 16898, in relation to a question by Mr. Farr,
13 as to whether Ilija Kojic or Kostic attended the briefings, and you said:
14 "No, they did not attend. I cannot remember if they ever
15 attended any briefings like that, simply because it's a little bit too
16 far for them to get organised and to come to that meeting. That was the
17 only reason."
18 So my question is: Kojic and Kostic were not part of the
19 Supreme Defence Council, they were not part of the Main Staff, they
20 didn't go to the briefings. What did they do in their sphere of
21 influence or authority?
22 A. As far as I remember, Ilija Kojic was deputy minister of the
23 interior for Eastern Slavonia and Baranja. Rade Kostic was assistant to
24 the minister. There's a difference between the two positions. He was in
25 charge of the area of Baranja.
1 Q. But they appear not to have had any decision-making authority
2 other the -- let's call it the Martic/Knin government or the Main Staff
3 or the Supreme Defence Council. Was their sphere of influence, then,
4 limited within a very limited region, the one that you've just described?
5 A. That's correct.
6 Q. I want to ask you - this is my last subject, I hope - about --
7 could I -- about a particular document.
8 MR. JORDASH: D398, please. Could we have that on the screen.
9 THE REGISTRAR: This is a confidential document, Your Honours.
10 MR. JORDASH: Thank you.
11 Q. Could you just have a look at this document and read through it
12 just to see if you are able to assist with any of the contents.
13 MR. JORDASH: Could we go to the next page, please.
14 Q. Please indicate when you want to go to the next page.
15 A. We can move on to the next page.
16 Next page, please.
17 I've read it.
18 Q. Were you aware at the time of this attempt by Arkan, Bozic and
19 others to try to remove Kojic from his post?
20 A. Yes. That was widely known in Krajina. This was in February of
21 1992. I don't think I worked there. Or I'm not sure that I was there.
22 I didn't see the date. Which was the date?
23 Q. 19th of February, 1993, is the date of the document.
24 A. Yes, yes, I was working then.
25 Q. Do you know what Martic's position was? Do you know if he either
1 intervened to protect Kojic or supported the attempt to remove him or
2 remained neutral?
3 A. He did not remain neutral. He supported Kojic and wanted him to
4 stay. But, as it says here, this was considered to be a conflict between
5 Martic and Babic which was very intense at the time, so a reflection of
6 that conflict was first felt in Slavonia.
7 Q. And, at some point, then, Martic's view changed and he wanted to
8 get rid of Kojic. Do you know when that could be timed to, when that
9 might have been, in relation to this incident?
10 A. At this time Martic was still minister of the interior. Only
11 when he became the president of the republic did he embark on a conflict
12 with Kojic and seek his replacement. But, as we know, this was later.
13 Let's say a year after this.
14 Q. Thank you.
15 MR. JORDASH: Could we have on the screen, please, 1D1588.
16 There are redactions on this document. We have asked the --
17 perhaps it should be under -- private, please.
18 We have asked the Serbian --
19 JUDGE ORIE: You'd like to go into private session?
20 MR. JORDASH: Yes, please.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We move into private session.
22 [Private session]
11 Page 17051 redacted. Private session.
5 [Open session]
6 MR. JORDASH: And this document perhaps should not be shown to
7 the public.
8 THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session, Your Honours.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
10 MR. JORDASH:
11 Q. Before I move to this next document, Mr. Draca, was there
12 anything in the paragraph that you read a moment ago in the previous
13 document that you did not recognise as common viewpoints being expressed
14 at the time, politically, within your service, and so on?
15 A. Everything that is stated in that article is something that was
16 known to me but also to the general public. For the most part.
17 Q. Thank you. Now, this is another state security report dated the
18 27th of February, 1995. And I'm interested -- and it's from the Novi Sad
19 centre and I'm interested in the second paragraph where it notes:
20 "Circles close to Martic are launching comments that one should
21 not trust people 'connected' to Belgrade because their goal is to
22 separate this area from the RSK. In order to disable these intentions,
23 as it is stated, Martic is using military formation under Medic,
24 Slobodan, aka Boco, and supporters of Miroljub Vujovic."
25 Do you know anything about Martic responding to what he perceived
1 to be a military threat from the likes of Kostic and Kojic by aligning
2 himself with other military formations, such as the Skorpions and such as
3 those revolving around Vujovic?
4 A. First of all, I have to say here that Martic was constantly
5 paranoid about conspiracies that Slavonia and Baranja would separate from
6 the rest of the Krajina and join the Republic of Serbia, even though we
7 tried to convince him often that this was not possible. But he would not
8 give this up, and everything that would happen up in that area he would
9 connect and ask to see if the Serbian DB had anything to do with that.
10 This situation referred to in this paragraph is accurate.
11 Q. And do you know about Martic -- or did you hear about Martic
12 visiting the Skorpions and seeking their assistance to -- as some form of
13 security for him?
14 A. Yes. He tried to talk with him, but I don't know what the
15 results of that were because all of us down there were against that,
16 against including them in his personal security. But he did try.
17 Q. And just to complete this, we've heard a lot about Kostic and
18 Kojic and this -- their perhaps the Prosecution would term it a special
19 unit or a military formation or whatever it was, did Martic ever complain
20 that militarily they'd done anything other than operate a roadblock at
21 Tovarnik, the border with Serbia?
22 A. That's correct. That was often the topic of what he said about
23 that region and the conflicts with the local leadership there. That's
24 something that he would talk about.
25 Q. So his complaint about Kostic and Kojic militarily was that they
1 stopped him at the roadblock at Tovarnik. That was what their so-called
2 unit was responsible for, according to Martic; is that right?
3 A. That is right.
4 Q. Thank you very much, Mr. Draca.
5 MR. JORDASH: Thank you, Your Honours.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Jordash.
7 Mr. Petrovic, any further questions?
8 MR. JORDASH: Sorry. Sorry, may I tender the last two documents,
10 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.
11 THE REGISTRAR: Document 1D1588 will receive number D688,
12 Your Honours.
13 And document 1D5299 will receive number D689, Your Honours.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Farr.
15 MR. FARR: Your Honour, we have an objection to both, pending
16 receipt of information on provenance, and an objection to 1D1588, now
17 marked as D688, pending the removal of the redactions.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Petrovic.
19 Yes. Provenance for the first one, Mr. Jordash.
20 MR. JORDASH: May they be MFI'd, and we'll send the Prosecution
21 the relevant information.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Then, one second, please.
23 D688 and D689 are marked for identification.
24 Mr. Petrovic, are you --
25 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
1 JUDGE ORIE: Both under seal.
2 Mr. Petrovic.
3 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
4 Re-examination by Mr. Petrovic:
5 Q. [Interpretation] Good day, Mr. Draca. Just a few more questions
6 in order to clarify some of your answers over these past couple of days.
7 You mentioned that you attended meetings of the Supreme Defence
8 Council of the Krajina. You also mentioned the time when you attended
9 those meetings. Are you able to tell us what sort of decisions were
10 adopted, if any decisions were adopted, at these SDC meetings? What sort
11 of decisions were they, if you're able to help us with this, please.
12 A. I cannot say that some official decisions were adopted there, but
13 mostly they were adopted by consensus, plans that had to do with security
14 and defence.
15 Q. Who had the decision-making right at the SDC?
16 A. Exclusively President Martic. As the president of the republic,
17 his was the last word, the final word.
18 Q. You said that you participated in these meetings as an associate
19 member. You, as the deputy and chief of the department at that time, did
20 you have the right to influence or amend decisions that were adopted at
21 this body?
22 A. No, I did not have that right. No.
23 Q. Witness, you mentioned several times that Eastern Slavonia was
24 specific in relation to the rest of the Krajina and that they were
25 allowed to make some decisions independently. Are you able to explain
1 why Eastern Slavonia was specific in relation to the rest of the Krajina?
2 A. Well, it was specific because it did not physically link up with
3 the rest of the Krajina. I've already mentioned here that you needed to
4 cross through two states and 6-, 700 kilometres in order to reach
5 Slavonia and Baranja. Then, it was also specific by the fact that it was
6 much richer by its economy, resources. Materially it was richer than the
7 Krajina. And thirdly, it was specific because directly all of its
8 boundaries touched on the Republic of Serbia, meaning that they lived
9 normally. And in that way they traded, they bought things, they educated
10 their children in a different way than the other part of the Krajina
11 where we lived. And because of that, Martic constantly had this fear
12 that they would secede from the Krajina and that is why he often was
13 opposed to Slavonia and Eastern Baranja independently making decisions,
14 and later, this was covered by legal documents.
15 Q. Are you able to tell us what sort of decisions were adopted
16 independently? From which sphere?
17 A. These decisions were adopted from all areas, except perhaps in
18 matters of the Main Staff. The 11th Corps was directly involved in that,
19 and the army much more respected these conventions than the civilian
20 structures did.
21 Q. Witness, sir, you were asked about the exchange of intelligence
22 with the 2nd Administration, and in responding to these questions, you
23 said that you exchanged information with other administrations as well.
24 Are you able to tell us first which these other DB administrations in the
25 Republic of Serbia did you exchange intelligence? If you know.
1 A. The 1st and the 3rd Administration.
2 Q. Are you able to tell us what sort of information was exchanged
3 with the 1st Administration?
4 A. It mostly referred to counter-intelligence. We would inform that
5 a person that we treated as a subject would be leaving and taking up
6 residence in Serbia, for example.
7 Q. And why would this information be important to the
8 1st Administration of the Serbian DB?
9 A. Because, according to the classification then, that
10 administration was dealing with that type of work: Counter-intelligence,
12 Q. You mentioned -- are you able to tell us, actually, how you would
13 obtain information that would be of importance for the
14 counter-intelligence service of the Serbian DB?
15 A. There are measures and methods in the work of the DB, and I think
16 it would be too long to explain that, but by work in the field, we would
17 process persons of interest and then we would see whether a certain
18 person was really working for some foreign intelligence service or not.
19 And then if that person were to leave our territory and go to a different
20 area, we would then inform the Republic of Serbia about that.
21 During the war, such persons moved around a lot.
22 Q. Are you able to give us some examples? Do you know of any cases
23 or subjects and some specific situations which would be of interest in
24 the counter-intelligence area that you kept the 1st Administration
25 informed about?
1 A. I could give a lot of examples. I can recall many of them but I
2 don't know -- these people are still working today in Croatia, Serbia,
3 Bosnia-Herzegovina, so I don't know if I can mention examples in open
5 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, with your leave, I
6 would now like to move into private session so that the witness could
7 give us this kind of information.
8 JUDGE ORIE: We move into private session.
9 [Private session]
11 Pages 17059-17062 redacted. Private session.
3 [Open session]
4 THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session, Your Honours.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
6 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
7 I'd like us to look at P3076.
8 Q. You reviewed the document yesterday with my learned friend.
9 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Let's look at page 2. Page 2,
11 Q. Witness --
12 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] And page 3 in English, please.
13 Page 2 in B/C/S.
14 Q. Witness, the report makes mention of 118 different reports,
15 dispatches, letters and Official Notes.
16 Can you tell us what is the difference between the various
17 categories of correspondence? What are dispatches? What are letters?
18 And what are Official Notes?
19 A. A dispatch is an urgent report about an event, an individual, or
21 A letter, or a memorandum, is a letter whereby you are officially
22 seeking something or giving an overview of the situation.
23 An Official Note is an official document sent by a service to
24 another in order to gain access to full information.
25 Q. Witness, reference is made here to 118 different reports. In
1 fact, they amount to two weekly reports on average?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. At the time you headed the service, how many dispatches, letters,
4 Official Notes and other forms of correspondence were produced on a
5 weekly basis at that time?
6 A. I cannot confirm if this is realistic, this number of 118. But I
7 can't see whether it says RDB here or not.
8 JUDGE ORIE: I don't think that you were asked to give your
9 assessment on whether it was realistic or not. You were asked what the
10 average number of weekly communications were when you were in charge.
11 Could you please answer that question.
12 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] If I may clarify, Your Honour.
13 Maybe my question wasn't understood properly.
14 Q. What I meant is, within your service, internally how many
15 dispatches, notes or reports did you produce in a week?
16 A. You mean all together? Not just for the RDB of Serbia but all
18 Q. I'm not asking you about the RDB of Serbia at all. I'm asking
19 you now about your service and what the average weekly production of such
20 documents was.
21 A. Well, that was a huge number, over 200 letters a week. We had
22 seven centres and four branches.
23 THE INTERPRETER: And the interpreter didn't catch plus what was
24 the last bit.
25 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation]
1 Q. You say 200 documents. What categories; can you tell us?
2 A. Well, documents as mentioned here. Dispatches, memos,
3 Official Notes, plus monthly overviews, exchanges of information between
4 the various centres, et cetera.
5 Q. Thank you, Witness.
6 With Their Honours' leave, can you explain your puzzlement
7 surrounding the 2nd Administration of the MUP? What was it that you
8 wanted to clarify on this issue?
9 A. May I?
10 Q. Go ahead, Witness.
11 A. Well, I noticed that there's -- this says the 2nd Administration
12 of the MUP of Serbia. This sort of formulation doesn't hold. I'm afraid
13 that this was an error and that these 118 various reports apply to all
14 the administrations across the board. It doesn't say in this letter
15 here, but we had a great many memos and dispatches to the public
16 security. Far fewer to the RDB, although there were, and the
17 correspondence of this sort has not been mentioned here at all. If you
18 see, the next sentence says 28 reports of the RDB of the MUP of
19 Republika Srpska, and that's properly recorded.
20 I don't know if you understand what I mean.
21 Q. Yes. Thank you, Witness.
22 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Can we look at the last page of
23 the document, please.
24 Q. It has to do with the budget at the disposal of your service for
25 the year 1993.
1 It reads that the RDB had at its disposal 27.000 marks of which
2 15.000 were funds earmarked for the purchase of vehicles. It also reads
3 that 9.000 German marks were allocated to the centres.
4 What were the expenses covered in these centres, and how many
5 employees did these centres have; if you know.
6 A. We had the total of seven centres. Glina, Vojnic, Korenica,
7 Knin, Okucani, Beli Manastir, and Vukovar, with branches at Benkovac,
8 Srb Lapac and Darda. Funds, which were few, really, were provided to the
9 centres for their overhead expenses, in fact, for, if you will, tyres for
10 their vehicles to all sorts of other material, including office
11 stationery, et cetera.
12 Q. Do the 9.000 also involve travel expenses and other necessities?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. It reads here that the remainder of 3.000 marks was used by the
16 What is meant here? What were the expenses covered by the
17 3.000 marks in 1993?
18 A. The department is headed by the chief. There's the deputy, the
19 assistant heads of various administrations, and analysis. In other
20 words, it's not a centre. And expenses were used in similar ways as they
21 were in centres, for the same purposes.
22 Q. How do you view the capabilities of your service in the view of
23 the funds that they had? Were they successful in performing their role?
24 A. Technically speaking, capabilities were next to none. But our
25 work was based on operative work mainly.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Petrovic, one element of your previous answer --
2 previous question was not answered.
3 How many employees were covered by this budget?
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I forgot to say that.
5 Roughly 150 employees at that point in time, in 1994.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Does that mean that the budget we are talking
7 about doesn't cover any salaries?
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. The salaries were separate,
9 directly from the Government of the Republic of the Serbian Krajina.
10 That's where we received our monthly salaries from.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So budget is limited and -- that's clear.
12 Please proceed, Mr. Petrovic.
13 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
14 * Q. Witness, do you know -- in 1993, to which year this report
15 refers, do you know who was or who were the chiefs of the
16 2nd Administration of the Serbian RDB?
17 MR. FARR: Objection, Your Honour.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
19 MR. FARR: This definitely doesn't arise from cross, and
20 Mr. Petrovic had the opportunity to ask that on direct, if he were
21 inclined to do so.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Petrovic.
23 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, my learned friend
24 during his cross-examination suggested that all the reports were sent to
25 the 2nd Administration. The case of the Prosecution is that the chief of
1 * the 2nd Administration is my client, and I'm asking if the witness knows
2 who the chief of that administration was at that time.
3 JUDGE ORIE: It is no use to ask the question anymore because you
4 have answered it already for the witness, isn't it? So whether he knew
5 or not who it was, where you said a second ago that it was your client,
6 that seems then to be answered.
7 Please proceed.
8 No, I must say I'm re-reading now the transcript. It might have
9 been unfair, because you said the case of the Prosecution is. So,
10 therefore, the witness can answer the question. I apologise for the
11 mistake I made.
12 Were you aware who was the chief of the 2nd Administration in
13 that year?
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That year, there were two chiefs.
15 When we linked up again, as I said earlier, during Maslenica, with the
16 2nd Administration, the chief was Mr. Zoran Mijatovic. Shortly after
17 that he was replaced. I don't know why. And then I think after that the
18 chief was Dragan Filipovic. Actually, I don't think. I know he was.
19 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour --
20 JUDGE ORIE: Again, apologies. My earlier ruling was a wrong
22 Please proceed.
23 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, thank you.
24 I would just like to redact this part of the transcript because I
25 should have put this question in private session because it refers to
1 * former employees. This would be in line with your instruction.
2 Your Honour, should I carry on, or is this perhaps a good time
3 for the break?
4 JUDGE ORIE: Let me just ...
5 Yes. First of all, the redaction should be made.
6 Now, how much time would you still need, Mr. Petrovic?
7 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] About 45 minutes, if you permit,
8 Your Honour. Perhaps a minute or so more because a lot of topics were
9 opened in the cross-examination by my learned friend, Mr. Farr.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I would ...
11 [Trial Chamber confers]
12 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Petrovic, since there may be some questions from
13 the Bench as well, and since Mr. Farr may have some additional questions
14 as well, you said yesterday we'll easily finish within -- or at least we
15 will finish. Therefore, I would invite you to seek to reduce your
16 45 minutes to the extent possible, that is, if you could bring it down to
17 35 or not more than 40, then we would not have to rely on the benevolence
18 of interpreters, security, technicians, by ending, always, five or
19 seven minutes after the quarter to 2.00.
20 So, therefore, you are invited to try to reduce it.
21 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I apologise, but I
22 would just like to receive instructions from you. The next witness is
23 already here. Should we release him or should he stay, just to be on the
24 safe side?
25 JUDGE ORIE: For how much time was he scheduled, Mr. Bakrac? I
1 don't have it on the top of my mind.
2 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Three and a half hours, Your Honour,
3 and I'm assure we will not exceed that time. Perhaps I will also try to
4 shorten it a bit, if I manage to.
5 [Trial Chamber confers]
6 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Farr, as matters stand now, how much time would
7 you need?
8 MR. FARR: Five to ten minutes, Your Honour.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Five to ten minutes.
10 [Trial Chamber confers]
11 JUDGE ORIE: The Bench will discuss whether the witness should
12 remain stand by. As soon as we have made up our mind, the -- you'll be
13 informed immediately, Mr. Bakrac.
14 We take a break, and we'll resume at 12.30.
15 --- Recess taken at 12.02 p.m.
16 --- On resuming at 12.32 p.m.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Petrovic, please proceed.
18 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
19 Can we show the witness D672, please.
20 Q. And while we're waiting for the document to be shown, Witness, I
21 would just ask you for short answers because I have a lot of questions
22 and we would all like to complete your testimony as soon as possible. So
23 then could you please try to focus your answers to the direct questions.
24 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] D672, please.
25 Q. Witness, you looked at this document a few times over the past
1 few days.
2 Could you please look at the first paragraph, which talks about
3 the conflict or clash between Babic and Martic. You told us that this
4 document was sent to the members of the Serbian National Council, Babic,
5 Martic and others.
6 In your service, is it customary and does it happen that
7 information is drafted where information is mentioned that refers to the
8 actual recipient of the information? This is information that is
9 received from associates or in some other way.
10 A. Yes, absolutely. Of course, this is particularly true if there
11 are several recipients of the same document.
12 Q. This part of it, where it talks about the military complex,
13 military affairs. It says that this is an improvisation by Martic which
14 was opposed by Babic. What do you understand this term to mean, early
16 A. There was a general assessment that Martic brought out the units
17 too early to exercise training with which Babic disagreed.
18 Q. Witness, you were asked whether information that you exchanged
19 with the Republic of Serbia SDB was reaching President Milosevic. Could
20 you please explain technically about information exchanged from one
21 operative with another? Who receives this information first?
22 A. If it's an operative from one of the centres, then it goes to the
23 centre first. Then the centre sends it to the authorised administration
24 along the appropriate professional line. In exceptional circumstances,
25 if the administration thinks it is urgent, would take it straight to the
1 chief or to one of the deputies. Otherwise, the information is sent to
2 analysis, where so-called extreme information is drafted, and that is
3 verified later by the chief or the head of the service. And only like
4 that would the document be sent outside the service.
5 Q. So the operative who provided the information, the information
6 would go to users outside of the service. How many processing steps does
7 that information have to pass? What would be the usual number of steps
8 it would have to go through?
9 A. Usually it would pass through three or four processing steps.
10 Q. Witness, you mentioned how you exchanged information with the
11 Serbian DB. Do you have direct knowledge about what the Serbian DB did
12 with that information? Did it act upon that information further? Do you
13 have information about that?
14 A. No, I don't have information about that.
15 Q. Do you know if this information was provided to the
16 Government of the Republic of Serbia?
17 A. I don't know.
18 Q. And do you know if the information that you exchanged reached
19 President Milosevic or any other high-ranking official in the Republic of
20 Serbia at the time?
21 A. I don't know that.
22 Q. At the time, when you were the chief of the service, do you know
23 if the public security service also sent information to its counter-parts
24 in the Republic of Serbia?
25 A. I do know that they did send this information to them, yes.
1 Q. And do you know if the Main Staff of the Serbian Army of the
2 Krajina sent information to anyone in the Republic of Serbia or the
3 Federal Republic of Yugoslavia; and if yes, to whom?
4 A. I know this. They sent information to the defence ministry.
5 Q. In the Serbian Army of the Krajina, were there any officers who
6 served in the Army of Yugoslavia and were deployed in the units of the
7 Serbian Army of the Krajina; do you know of any such cases?
8 A. Yes. There were such officers. I know about that. They were
9 born in the Republic of Serbian Krajina, and this was after the JNA fell
11 Q. And do you know if these officers --
12 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
13 Q. -- if these officers submitted information to their security
14 officers in the appropriate units of the Army of Yugoslavia which they
15 had links with?
16 A. I don't know if this was done directly or through the Main Staff
17 in Knin, its security sector. But, in any event, yes.
18 Q. And do you know if the military security service had its
19 associates and sources of information in the Krajina area at the time
20 that you were chief?
21 A. Yes, they did. I -- I know that they did.
22 Q. Are we talking about the military security service of the
23 Army of Yugoslavia?
24 A. Yes, that is correct.
25 Q. And do you know if the military security service associates
1 reported to whom they sent information from the area of the Krajina?
2 A. I don't have that information. I don't know whom their
3 information was passed along to.
4 If you're thinking of the Army of Yugoslavia in Belgrade, I don't
5 know whom they informed, in turn.
6 Q. You know that the military service had associates in the Krajina
7 area. Are you able to tell us, without mentioning names, in which
8 structures did the military security structure had its associates?
9 A. Mostly among the ranks of the units and the officer cadre in the
11 Q. Did information that had to do with command and control of the
12 Serbian Army of the Krajina go through your administration?
13 A. No, never, when it had to do with any kind of decision-making or
15 Q. Did information go through or was it exchanged through your
16 department that had to do with the command and control of the police in
17 the Krajina?
18 A. No, that never was the case.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Petrovic, the Chamber is a bit concerned about
20 moving away quite a bit from what was raised in cross-examination. So
21 could you please stick a bit closer to what was done in
23 Please proceed.
24 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] I will. Thank you, Your Honour.
25 Q. Witness, sir, you mentioned a meeting that you had with Mladic
1 just before the events in Skabrnja. You mentioned that this was a
2 meeting of the War Presidency.
3 Of those people who attended the meeting, did any of them, other
4 than the JNA officers at that point in time, did any of you want or
5 propose or believe that an attack on Skabrnja was necessary?
6 A. Absolutely not. That was something we could not have proposed in
7 any event.
8 Q. Why were you not in a position to suggest anything like that?
9 A. Well, these were briefings where we were just shortly informed by
10 the command about the situation in the field and about various kinds of
11 needs where we could help one another. As for command, especially during
12 the period of the Yugoslav People's Army, that is something that we could
13 not have any influence on, in any case, because, at the time, the JNA
14 still had its own line of coordination.
15 Q. And the decision to attack Skabrnja, was that adopted
16 collectively, perhaps at this meeting that you attended, where Mladic was
17 also present? Did the members of the Presidency make a collective
18 decision to take part or to order the attack on Skabrnja that occurred
20 A. No, that is absolutely not possible.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Farr.
22 MR. FARR: I withdraw my objection, Your Honour.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
24 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
25 Q. Witness, at one point, in response to questions put by my learned
1 friend, this is at page 16939, when asked if you had co-ordinated or
2 co-operated with military or civilian authorities in military activities,
3 you said that you co-operated only in matters where powers of military
4 and civilian authorities overlapped.
5 Which were these matters, where powers of military and civilian
6 authorities overlapped?
7 A. There were several such matters. For instance, there were a
8 great many Serbian refugees from Zadar who had not been registered
9 anywhere. They didn't have any documents whatsoever. Oftentimes the
10 army would apply to us to check the identity of these persons.
11 There were issues related to the exchange of intelligence and
12 counter-intelligence, where the army suspected that an individual was
13 carrying out intelligence work for a country, but we were not able to
14 have any sort of coordination with them in terms of command.
15 Q. As part of the civilian authorities, were you able to interfere
16 with command issues? I'm asking you about 1991 and the period between
17 1993 and 1995.
18 A. None of the two periods were we empowered to interfere with such
20 Q. At page 16940, you speak of the attack on Krajina in early 1993
21 and your attempts to seek assistance from your colleagues from
22 Republika Srpska.
23 Tell us, Witness, if you know, did the highest state authorities
24 of Krajina also seek assistance on the same issue from anyone, be it
25 military or any other sort of assistance?
1 A. Yes. We felt at great risk because we had no army. That was
2 under the Vance Plan. At the time, using their official connections as
3 well as private ones, the civilian authorities tried to obtain whatever
4 assistance was possible.
5 Q. Martic was minister of the interior at the time. Do you know if
6 he sought assistance from anyone in that situation?
7 A. Yes, he did.
8 Q. Can you tell us - if you know - who he sought that assistance
10 A. I think that I talked about it. He asked Assistant Minister of
11 Defence Milanovic to get in touch with Arkan. He called directly
12 Karadzic at Pale to see if he could spare a unit or two. The Army of
13 Republika Srpska was involved in operations of their own at the time and
14 were unable to send any reinforcements in terms of units, but Martic
15 managed to secure the presence of a unit called Wolves from Vucjak. They
16 were the strength of a brigade, and they came from Republika Srpska.
17 Q. Sir, do you know who the president of the RSK at the time was;
18 and, if so -- and if you know, was he engaged in these efforts to obtain
19 assistance for the RSK in early 1993?
20 A. Goran Hadzic was the RSK president at the time, and he, too, was
21 involved in these efforts.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Petrovic, could I ask the witness --
23 The strength of a brigade, and brigades are not of the same
24 strength in all systems. What is the approximate number you would
25 consider the strength of a brigade?
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In war activities in the RSK, at
2 least in that period of time, the brigade -- a brigade was considered to
3 have at least two battalions which would be up to 1.000 men. And the
4 unit that I referred to had roughly up to 1.000.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
6 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
7 Q. Witness, do you know who led the brigade that you referred to?
8 Namely, the Wolves of Vucjak?
9 A. Yes, I do. Their commander was Veljko Milankovic and he killed
10 [as interpreted] during that same action, Operation Maslenica. He was
11 from Republika Srpska.
12 Q. Thank you, Witness.
13 Yesterday my learned friend showed you a report which said that
14 Martic was not given access to Eastern Slavonia.
15 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] My colleagues have directed my
16 attention to a problem in the transcript.
17 Q. What happened to Veljko Milankovic in respect of Operation
19 A. He killed while commanding his own unit in that part of -- he was
20 killed while commanding that unit in that area.
21 Q. You were shown P987 yesterday by my learned friend, and you said
22 that it was from the 11th Corps command that Martic was given information
23 which stated the reasons why. And you also referred to a conflict
24 between Martic and Hadzic that existed at the time. Can you briefly
25 describe that conflict for us.
1 A. Well, in short, Martic won the presidential elections. I don't
2 have time enough to explain the genesis of this difference or
3 disagreement between them which was present and, at some point, came to a
4 head. Probably Hadzic wanted to make a show of the influence he had over
5 the police, and that's why he staged this drama for him at the border.
6 Ultimately, he was let through, but he just wanted to make this show of
8 Q. Thank you.
9 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Can we look at P3077.
11 Q. Witness, you were shown this document yesterday by my colleague.
12 And you said that the information contained therein was not of military
13 nature but was provided by an agent.
14 How can you tell by looking at the document that this is a piece
15 of information that had come from an agent, as you put it yesterday?
16 A. It is in the nature of the work of the service to recruit agents
17 from the other side. If the document says, We have intelligence or
18 information from an area which is under the control of the enemy, this
19 means that the service had its own contact or man on the other side who
20 could report on the size of units. That would be my conclusion as a
22 Q. Witness, can this type of information be obtained through
23 technical means? If you know.
24 A. Yes. By monitoring various types of communications.
25 Q. Mention is made of a helicopter attack which had to be carried
1 out near the Danube and Bogojevo, the Bogojevo bridge and Bezdan bridge.
2 Do you know the location of the two bridges?
3 A. It is on the very border with the Republic of Serbia. That's to
4 say the border between Slavonia and the Republic of Serbia. It is deep
5 within the RSK territory when it comes to East Slavonia.
6 Q. Witness, what is the importance of this piece of information when
7 it comes to the security of the Republic of Serbia? Can you make an
8 assessment of that?
9 A. Of course. It is very important for its security because halfway
10 along the bridge, you enter the territory of the Republic of Serbia.
11 Should any sort of attack be carried out on these bridges, that would
12 mean an important threat to the security of Republic of Serbia.
13 Q. So why does, then, the RDB of the Republic of Serbia send this
14 sort of information to your service?
15 A. Well, as I tried to explain yesterday, in order that we may be
16 able to forward the information to the Main Staff, and that they may
17 timely respond to the situation and mount a defence.
18 Q. You were repeatedly asked about the difference between a piece of
19 intelligence and military information. That's to say, between a piece of
20 intelligence which is relevant to your service and any other service in
21 that line of business and a piece of military information.
22 A. Well, as far as can I remember my discussion with the Prosecution
23 about it yesterday, we were talking about military issues and
24 intelligence issues. Since there was a war on, 95 per cent of the
25 information forwarded was of this nature, but nowhere, neither did we or
1 the DB of Serbia in any of the information we forwarded proposed to the
2 army what sort of measures they should take based on the document we
3 forwarded. We forwarded the information. It was up to their staff to
4 gauge if the information was relevant and if it should be acted on or
5 not. That's it.
6 Q. This is one of the potential sources of information. Do you know
7 if the military staff of either the RSK army or the 11th Corps, they had
8 many sources and what sort of sources did they have at their disposal in
9 using their units?
10 A. Well, the army had their own military service. That was their
11 first source of information.
12 The second source would be organisations of similar nature.
13 JUDGE ORIE: You're moving away again, Mr. Petrovic.
14 Please get back on track.
15 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Can the witness answer this
16 question and then I would move to a different topic? Or should we move
17 on now?
18 JUDGE ORIE: I think the last question was already moving away
19 from. So if you would have your, then, final few questions so that we
20 could stop at ten minutes past 1.00.
21 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
22 Q. Witness, let me ask you this: Do you know who Daniel Snedden is?
23 A. Yes, I know. That's the name used by Captain Dragan right after
24 his arrival in Krajina.
25 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Can D576 be shown to the witness.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Farr.
2 MR. FARR: Your Honour, I think in the context of this witness's
3 evidence on this particular topic, showing him the document would be
4 unduly leading.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Could you please, first, put a question to the
6 witness before he looks at the document, Mr. --
7 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation]
8 Q. Witness, I wanted to ask you about the format of the letter
9 because the contents were already discussed.
10 But I can ask you this, Witness. Did you know that the
11 State Security Department of the Republic of Serbia conducted the
12 operative processing of Daniel Snedden?
13 A. I wasn't aware of it during our first contacts, right after I met
14 him, until Mr. Simatovic told me so.
15 Q. Witness, when operative processing is conducting -- or, rather,
16 when you operatively processed Daniel Snedden, did Mr. Simatovic tell you
17 what the reasons behind this were?
18 MR. FARR: Objection, Your Honour.
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Can I speak about this?
20 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Farr.
21 MR. FARR: Not arising from cross, Your Honour.
22 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, with all due
23 respect, I do believe it arises from cross-examination. The Prosecutor
24 put several questions about what it was that Mr. Simatovic had told the
25 witness to pay special attention to when it came to the activities of
1 Dragan Vasiljkovic in the field. There were more than one question
2 addressed to the witness.
3 JUDGE ORIE: The witness may answer the question. But, again,
4 Mr. Petrovic, this is not an invitation to move away -- too far away from
5 what was raised in cross.
6 Please proceed.
7 So the question was, Witness -- the question was: What did
8 Mr. Simatovic tell you what the reasons behind the operative processing
9 of Daniel Snedden were?
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] He told me that there was --
11 were -- were -- there was suspicion that he was working for an
12 intelligence service.
13 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] May we move into private session?
14 JUDGE ORIE: We move into private session.
15 [Private session]
22 [Open session]
23 THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session, Your Honours.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Petrovic.
25 And thank you, Madam Registrar.
1 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
2 Q. On page 17005, my learned friend asked you whether the Simatovic
3 was a channel of communication between you and Belgrade. You as the
4 Krajina. Do you know at all to whom Simatovic gave information that he
5 obtained in the Krajina through his intelligence work?
6 A. I'm not aware to whom specifically he passed on this information.
7 Q. And do you know, according to the rules of service, to whom this
8 information was supposed to be submitted?
9 A. To analysis and, as needed, as I said, to the chief of service or
10 the administration. And primarily to the group that was processing a
11 certain person and to the analytical team that was overseeing or
12 following that.
13 Q. And, Witness, do you know what the quality of the information was
14 that Simatovic gathered and as an intelligence person in the Krajina
15 which he sent to his superiors in Belgrade?
16 Do you know anything about that?
17 A. I don't know anything about that. I didn't have the opportunity
18 to see that.
19 MR. FARR: That's a very material matter that could have been
20 raised in direct. The witness says he doesn't know so I have no
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
23 A couple of minutes more to go, Mr. Petrovic. And please remain
24 within the area of relevance from cross-examination. Of course, you can
25 link everything to everything, if you wish, but that's not what you are
1 expected to do.
2 Please proceed.
3 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation]
4 Q. Witness, do you know, in this period until August 1991, while
5 Simatovic was at intelligence jobs in the Krajina, how many other lines
6 of communication existed between the SAO Krajina and Belgrade? The
7 political authorities, the state authorities, the state organs and so on.
8 Do you know anything about that?
9 A. Yes. There was a large number of them at that time. At that
10 time in Belgrade there was a lot of concern about whether there will be
11 war or not. So that the political leadership that came to the forefront
12 in that situation, the TO staffs and all of that, there was a high
13 frequency of communication with Belgrade.
14 Q. Witness, just two or three more questions.
15 My colleague asked you if you know about the motives for the
16 crimes in Nadin and Bruska. Did you have any information as to the
17 motives for the crime in Nadin? Did you find anything out about that
18 during the investigation?
19 A. The investigation was conducted by the military intelligence. I
20 wasn't present personally so I can just guess as to the motives, based on
21 what people said who participated in the meeting. The first thing was
22 the casualties of the negotiators there. I talked about that on the
23 first or second day. The second thing is the large number of those
24 killed and the victims. When I say "large number," it's not such a large
25 number inasmuch as these were needless victims. On that road, a lot of
1 people were killed from sniper fire from Skabrnja. But that was not
3 Q. Witness, I asked you about Nadin. Do you know anything about
5 A. Yes. Nadin, specifically that is about looting. The crime there
6 happened after the operation exit -- after the operation ended.
7 Q. Do you know anything as to the motives of the crime in Bruska?
8 Did you find out anything about that during the investigation?
9 A. It was established during the investigation, or at least this was
10 suggested by the inhabitants of the village of Bruska, two people that I
11 referred to while we discussed that, that they had been in conflict from
12 before with one of those killed and they thought that that was the
13 motive. Even the inhabitants of that village at that point in time did
14 not believe that politics had anything to do with what happened there.
15 Q. Witness, two last questions --
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Petrovic, you said two to three questions.
17 There have been now three questions. One more question.
18 If you make it a very short one, I will consider the second.
19 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation]
20 Q. Did you receive a retirement pension ever, Witness?
21 A. No.
22 JUDGE ORIE: If you have another such short question,
23 Mr. Petrovic, please put it to the witness.
24 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation]
25 Q. Witness, sir, do you know why, as I understand it, you waited
1 five years for your request for Serbian citizenship to be resolved?
2 A. I already explained that. I think there are technical reasons
3 for that because that was something that took a long time and was slow to
4 resolve during that period.
5 Q. Witness, thank you very much for your patience and your time.
6 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] I have no further questions.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Petrovic.
8 I have a few questions before Mr. Farr will be given an
10 [Trial Chamber confers]
11 Questioned by the Court:
12 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Draca, you -- when initially asked about the
13 forces that participated in the Skabrnja operation, you said it was the
14 180th Motorised Brigade, reinforced by a company of the Benkovac TO.
15 Could you describe that company of the Benkovac TO? How many
16 people? Where did they come from?
17 A. According to the earlier constitution of the former Yugoslavia,
18 the only other armed force along the JNA was the Territorial Defence.
19 Thus, a number of the mobilisation cards referred to the TO. This was
20 also the case for the Benkovac TO staff. They did the mobilisation and
21 summoned those people. I think they had a total of three companies.
22 They added one company to the 180th Benkovac Brigade at the time, which
23 numbered some 100 to 120 men.
24 JUDGE ORIE: And that would not comprise any special police unit
25 which would be subordinated to the TO for that specific purpose?
1 A. Yes, I forgot to add that.
2 After the Serbian National Council was founded, it decided that
3 the police was not -- not provided under the earlier SFRY constitution is
4 that the police be part of the TO staff, so, if needed, they could engage
5 additional forces from among the ranks of the police.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Now, about the TO company which participated to
7 reinforce the 180th Motorised Brigade, again, composition. Would that
8 include police forces?
9 Perhaps I should say: Did that include police forces?
10 A. I think it did, but I don't know the extent. But, in any case,
11 these special police forces from Benkovac could not allocate more than
12 20 people.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But were they subordinated to the TO at that
14 point in time? For this purpose.
15 A. Correct. They were subordinated to the TO in military-type
17 JUDGE ORIE: No. I'm talking about this Skabrnja action. Is
18 that where the special police forces were subordinated to the TO and part
19 of that TO company that reinforced the 180th Motorised Brigade?
20 A. That is correct, yes.
21 JUDGE ORIE: So when you earlier said that you could not exclude
22 for the possibility, you apparently intended to say or -- that they did
24 A. I wanted to say that I know for sure that there was a TO company.
25 But I don't know precisely if the police and in what numbers participated
1 within that TO company.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Although your previous answers indicate that
3 they were a part with whatever numbers, part of the TO company. I think
4 my questions were rather precise and so were your answers.
5 A. Perhaps we didn't understand each other. I think was thinking of
6 use in general. But specifically, when we're talking about the attack on
7 Skabrnja, what I can remember is that perhaps they -- they did
8 participate, but I don't know the numbers.
9 I have to clarify something else. For the TO to come to the
10 Benkovac barracks, for example, the army would frequently say, You're not
11 needed in such numbers and you can return half the men. So that is why I
12 don't know if the unit in its entirety took part with them in that action
13 because there were cases when they would be turned back.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, when you answered:
15 "They were subordinated to the TO in military-type actions," I
17 "No. I'm talking about this Skabrnja action. Is that where the
18 special police forces were subordinated to the TO and part of that TO
19 company that reinforced the 180th Motorised Brigade?"
20 So I focussed the question specifically on Skabrnja.
21 Your answer was:
22 "That is correct, yes."
23 Any further comment to that answer?
24 A. I don't have any other comments other than what I stated just a
25 little bit before. That's the only reason. I don't know anything more
2 JUDGE ORIE: Could you tell us a bit more about the ploy
3 Mr. Opacic talked about the eve before the Skabrnja -- before the attack
4 on Skabrnja?
5 A. He said that he would not appear at the barracks in the morning.
6 Actually, he was supposed to even go that evening. Because he had
7 information that there was a conspiracy for him to be killed from the
8 back by the military security. He refused to say where he got this
9 information from. There were a number of people present so that it -- we
10 were even told or it was even said that this could have been interpreted
11 as cowardice. However, he was persistent in not going. And it's really
12 generally known that the next day, the following day, he did not turn up
13 when the attack began.
14 JUDGE ORIE: But didn't you say that you saw him in the barracks
15 that day? Which explained why he was not in Skabrnja.
16 A. No. I said that the conversation took place in the evening. The
17 following day, I went to the barracks to see if I can have some
18 information as to what was happening in that area and I met him in front
19 of the command where, for some reason, he was waiting to be received by
20 the commander at his request.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. You saw him outside the Benkovac barracks.
22 That's ...
23 A. That's correct.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Now, how far are the Benkovac barracks away from
25 Skabrnja? Distance.
1 A. About 20 kilometres.
2 JUDGE ORIE: So the mere fact that someone is in Benkovac does
3 not exclude for the possibility that that person would have been in or
4 near Skabrnja or that same day.
5 Would you agree with that?
6 A. On the occasion, he was waiting for the commander to explain to
7 him why he didn't come. He didn't look like a person who had just
8 returned from the line. I cannot know if he left that afternoon. We
9 waited together for about an hour perhaps, and the attack was well under
10 way. So I don't really believe that he went to Skabrnja in the
11 afternoon. And it's something I would have heard about from other
12 sources as well.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you for those answers.
14 Mr. Farr, you said you need five to ten minutes. Eight minutes
15 would be good.
16 MR. FARR: Thank you, Your Honour.
17 Further Cross-examination by Mr. Farr:
18 Q. Sir, during your further direct examination by Mr. Petrovic, he
19 asked you a question about the exchange of information between the RSK DB
20 and the Serbian DB. This is at page 57. That question was specifically:
21 "You were asked whether information that you exchanged with the
22 Republic of Serbia DB was reaching President Milosevic. Could you please
23 explain technically about information exchanged from one operative with
24 another? Who receives this information first?"
25 Your answer was:
1 "If it's an operative from one of the centres, then it goes to
2 the centre first. Then the centre sends it to the authorised
3 administration along the appropriate professional line. In exceptional
4 circumstances, if the administration thinks it is urgent, would take it
5 straight to the chief or to one of the deputies. Otherwise, the
6 information is sent to analysis where so-called extreme information is
7 drafted and that is verified later by the chief or the head of the
8 service. And only like that would the document be sent outside the
10 Sir, were you describing the way the RSK DB works or the way the
11 Serbian DB works?
12 A. The DB functioned in the same way before the war and during the
13 war. And this applied both to our DB and the Serbian DB.
14 So based on my previous work and experiences, and based on my
15 work in the BIA, that's how I know about it. That's how I was talking
16 about it.
17 Q. You told us that there were seven regional DB centres in the
18 RSK DB. Did they ever send reports directly to Mr. Stanisic at exactly
19 the same time and in exactly the same way they sent reports to you?
20 A. No, it shouldn't be like that. The centre is obliged to send it
21 to the administration in Knin.
22 Q. So it's your evidence that the reports would have gone through
23 your administration in Knin and then to the Serbian DB?
24 A. Yes, that is the rule.
25 Q. And when sent to the Serbian DB - correct me if I'm wrong - your
1 evidence is that they would not have been sent directly to Mr. Stanisic
2 but, rather, they would have been sent through the process that you've
4 Is that your evidence?
5 MR. JORDASH: Sorry, I do object to this.
6 First of all, the witness has been asked about this before and
7 has given very clear answers.
8 And, secondly, the way that the Prosecution are approaching it is
9 likely to, I think, lead to a certain confusion on the record. Because
10 Mr. Farr is mixing theory with practice, or theory with actuality, and I
11 think if he is to be permitted to continue, he ought to make it clear
12 which he is dealing with.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Farr, could you rephrase your question in such a
14 way that it meets the concerns.
15 And perhaps Mr. Petrovic has some concerns as well.
16 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Just one sentence, Your Honour.
17 Which reports are we talking about? By the way the question is
18 put, it arises that the centre in Glina is an organisational centre of
19 the Serbian DB so that everything it prepares and organises, it sends it
21 So it has to be clear whether the question would imply or include
22 everything that is being sent or just some reports that are being sent.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Farr, please rephrase.
24 MR. FARR:
25 Q. Sir, would the -- Mr. Petrovic just used the example of Glina.
1 Would the RSK DB centre in Glina ever sent a report directly to
2 Mr. Stanisic, Mr. Jovica Stanisic?
3 A. Perhaps there were some such instances, but I don't know if that
4 would go exactly to Mr. Stanisic. It covered a long period of time.
5 Let's say it's a weekend, it is an urgent dispatch. I would be informed
6 about it without engaging the urgent services.
7 THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness please slow down and repeat
8 what is he saying.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, could you please --
10 You said you would be informed about it without engaging the
11 urgent services.
12 And what did you then say?
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I said that, at some points in
14 time, because of urgency, in order not to have to raise the urgent
15 services, the encryption operator, I would orally instruct the centres to
16 pass the dispatch on to Republika Srpska, the Serbian RDB, the army,
17 without sending the original document to Knin. If we felt that the
18 situation at hand was urgent.
19 At this point in time I really cannot remember in terms of a
20 thousand documents to what extent and in which specific situation this
21 procedure was employed.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Farr.
23 MR. FARR:
24 Q. I guess the essence of my question -- well, perhaps let's call up
25 a document. It's P2462.
1 MR. FARR: And we should move into private session, Your Honour.
2 JUDGE ORIE: We move into private session.
3 [Private session]
11 Page 17097 redacted. Private session.
2 [Open session]
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Let me just add that the document
4 doesn't even have a reference number under which it was filed.
5 THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session, Your Honours.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Authenticity issues are to be raised by the parties,
7 and we have heard your comment. It's on the record.
8 Mr. Draca, we have concluded your testimony in this court. I
9 would like to thank you very much for coming to The Hague and for quite
10 many days and for having answered all the questions that were put to you
11 by the parties and by the Bench, and wish you a safe trip home again.
12 And I hope that you will be home soon so that can you assist those who
13 are in need of your assistance at this moment under the present weather
15 You may follow the usher.
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
17 [The witness withdrew]
18 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Usher, could you escort the other witness into
19 the courtroom.
20 Meanwhile, I put on the record that when D576 was shown to the
21 witness, it was not clear that that's a document which is MFI'd. The
22 same is true for P3077. That's hereby on the record.
23 Mr. Farr, the Defence tendered a document which you say is
24 already marked for identification as D689 or ...
25 MR. FARR: No, Your Honour. They tendered a document which was
1 MFI'd as D689 --
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
3 MR. FARR: -- and our position -- we object to that on the basis
4 of authenticity pending receipt of information on provenance. If it is
5 it admitted, we would like to have 5298 -- 65 ter 1D05298 admitted as
6 well for context. It's from the same centre. It's one month previously.
7 They're closely related documents.
8 I just wanted to put that the on the record, Your Honour. It
9 doesn't call for a decision at this moment.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So that the Defence can think about it.
11 MR. FARR: And if I may, one further matter, Your Honour.
12 JUDGE ORIE: I'd rather not. If it can wait. Unless it's so
13 urgent that it couldn't wait.
14 [The witness entered court]
15 JUDGE ORIE: Good afternoon, witness, Mr. Gagic, I take it.
16 Before you give evidence, the Rules of Procedure and Evidence
17 require you to make a solemn declaration. The text is now given to you.
18 Could you make that declaration.
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will
20 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Gagic. Please be seated.
22 Mr. Gagic, we'll spend only very short today in court. We'll
23 continue tomorrow. But you have been waiting most of the morning, I take
24 it. We regret that, but the previous testimony still had to be
1 You'll first be examined by Mr. Bakrac. Mr. Bakrac is counsel
2 for Mr. Simatovic.
3 Mr. Bakrac, you may proceed.
4 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
5 WITNESS: GVOZDEN GAGIC
6 [Witness answered through interpreter]
7 Examination by Mr. Bakrac:
8 Q. [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Mr. Gagic.
9 A. Good afternoon.
10 Q. For the sake of the transcript, can you please tell us your full
11 name --
12 THE INTERPRETER: Can the witness please repeat.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Could you come a bit closer to the microphone.
14 Could you speak clearly and not too fast. So your name, please.
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Gvozden Gagic.
16 MR. BAKRAC:
17 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Gagic, let us be mindful that we shouldn't
18 create problems for the interpreters since we speak the same language.
19 When I put my question to you do not answer right away. Rather, wait for
20 the interpretation to end, which you will see on your screen, and then
21 proceed to give your answer.
22 Can you please tell us the date and place of your birth?
23 A. I was born on the 17th of June, 1954, in the village of Madjere,
24 the municipality of Razanj, in the Republic of Serbia.
25 Q. Can you tell us your present occupation?
1 A. Pensioner.
2 Q. Can you tell us briefly what sort of schooling you have
4 A. I completed the electrical engineering high school, the two-year
5 degree in criminology, and I have a degree in defectology.
6 Q. Upon completing your studies in defectology and obtaining a
7 degree, where did you take employment?
8 A. Right upon graduation, I got employed in the MUP of Serbia, the
9 Secretariat of the Interior in Belgrade.
10 Q. Can you tell us briefly what your career path in the MUP was from
11 the moment you took employment there up until 1990? Be brief, please.
12 A. I was charged with the prevention of delinquence, thereupon
13 working against white-collar crime, and then moving on to scene-of-crime
15 Q. When you say scene-of-crime examination, can you tell us what it
16 involves and when you performed these duties?
17 A. It was between 1988 and 1989 that I was charged with these
18 duties, and the on-site investigation or scene-of-crime examination has
19 to do with precisely scenes of crime, any sort of violent crimes,
20 murders, but also fires. At any rate, anything that would involve some
21 sort of criminal investigation.
22 Q. In early 1991, which position were you occupying, and where?
23 A. In early 1991, I began working in the SUP of Belgrade in the
24 service for the prevention of violent and sex crimes. My apologies,
25 actually. Can I correct myself?
1 That was not in early 1991. That was in early 1992. Whereas, in
2 early 1991, I was head of department for the prevention of
3 property-related crime.
4 Q. Can you tell us what title did you have at that moment in time in
5 early 1991?
6 A. I was head of the department for the prevention of
7 property-related crime, and, as such, by virtue of my position, I was
8 independent inspector.
9 Q. Did there come a time in the service, in the public security
10 service, that ranks were introduced?
11 A. The public security department did introduce ranks but that
12 happened at a later date. In 1994, or possibly in late 1993.
13 Q. Thank you, Mr. Gagic.
14 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I see the time. I can
15 stop here, with your leave.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Gagic, we only had a brief moment in court.
17 We'll continue tomorrow at - let me see - at 9.00 in the morning in this
18 same courtroom, II. I would like to instruct you that you should not
19 speak or communicate in any other way about your testimony, whether
20 that's the little bit of testimony given today or the testimony still to
21 come. Most likely we'll not conclude your evidence tomorrow. Would you
22 be available to stay over until the beginning of next week to continue
23 your examination?
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. If need be, I can stay.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you for that answer.
1 You may follow the usher.
2 [The witness stands down]
3 JUDGE ORIE: For the parties, if witnesses have to stay over the
4 weekend, we might even to consider to sit on Monday so as to shorten the
5 necessary stay of the witnesses. I say we are considering this. If
6 there would be any comment by the parties on, for example, sitting on
7 Monday, Monday afternoon, we'd like to hear as soon as possible.
8 MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I think it would be
9 fair to let you know at this time, precisely for timing purposes, that
10 obviously the witness will have to stay over the weekend and be here for
11 one day at least. And from what I understand, DFS-071 will be here next
13 I was checking the situation in Serbia. Now the witness we
14 scheduled for February -- well, both of the witnesses are from
15 Bajina Basta and Tara Mount, and before next Thursday, we will not be
16 able to bring in any witnesses, but Their Honours should know that these
17 two witnesses will be able to fill the next week.
18 Then next Thursday, we will be able to bring in witnesses for the
19 week after.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Your observations are put on the record.
21 We'll either, out of court today, in informal communications with the
22 parties, further consider the scheduling for next week, or we might even
23 continue tomorrow to say a few words about that. We leave it to that at
24 this moment, having already stolen some of the time of those assisting
1 We adjourn for the day, and we'll resume tomorrow, Thursday, the
2 9th of the February, at 9.00 in the morning, this same courtroom, II.
3 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.48 p.m.,
4 to be reconvened on Thursday, the 9th day of
5 February, 2012, at 9.00 a.m.
* The bold and italicised text was previously confidential pursuant to a redaction order of the Chamber. The status of this redaction order has been changed from confidential to public per Chamber's oral decision of 7 June 2012.
* The bold and italicised text was previously confidential pursuant to a redaction order of the Chamber. The status of this redaction order has been changed from confidential to public per Chamber's oral decision of 7 June 2012.
* The bold and italicised text was previously confidential pursuant to a redaction order of the Chamber. The status of this redaction order has been changed from confidential to public per Chamber's oral decision of 7 June 2012.