1 Friday, 2 October 2009
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.03 a.m.
5 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. Good morning
6 everyone in and around the courtroom. This is case IT-08-91-T, the
7 Prosecutor versus Mico Stanisic and Stojan Zupljanin.
8 JUDGE HALL: Thank you. Again may I have the appearances,
10 MS. KORNER: Your Honours, on behalf of the Prosecution it's
11 Joanna Korner, Alexis Demirdjian, and case manager Jasmina Bosnjakovic.
12 MR. ZECEVIC: Good morning, Your Honours. Appearing for
13 Stanisic Defence, Slobodan Zecevic and Slobodan Cvijetic on my right.
14 MR. PANTELIC: Good morning, Your Honours, for Zupljanin,
15 Igor Pantelic; Dragan Krgovic, co-counsel; Mr. Brent Hicks, legal
16 assistant attorney-at-law from Florida
17 manager. Thank you. As well as our client here as well.
18 JUDGE HALL: Thank you. Before we formally begin this morning's
19 session, I would wish on behalf of the Chamber and indeed on behalf of
20 counsel and the parties, to thank the interpreters for the -- their
21 indulgence yesterday. We appreciate that the events of yesterday would
22 have put a fair amount of pressure on them, and we are grateful to them
23 for accommodating us. Thank you.
24 Mr. Zecevic, we are given to understand that there are a number
25 of procedural matters that you wish to raise this morning before we
2 MR. ZECEVIC: That is correct, Your Honours, but there are two
3 really urgent matters which I think I should address right now. And the
4 rest of the matters we can -- we can deal with that in the course of the
5 day whenever it pleases the Court. It's a number of substantial matters,
6 and I can discuss with my colleague Ms. Joanna Korner and we agree that
7 this should be brought to the attention of the Trial Chamber.
8 Now, let me -- let me start very quickly with the two matters
9 which I -- which I wanted to raise this morning.
10 The first is yesterday decision on protective measures is a
11 matter of concern for the Defence. Namely, so far in this case, apart
12 from expert Robert Donia, all other witnesses have been under protective
13 measures, which is out of five witnesses, four have been under protective
14 measures. This is clearly in contrast to the right of the public and
15 fair trial which is guaranteed to our clients by the statute.
16 In this case, in this case of the coming witness, I believe
17 despite the comment that I made, and His Honour Judge Harhoff agreed with
18 that comment, the question was never asked. The question being why the
19 witness in -- by his own wish withdraw -- ask that the protective
20 measures for him will be withdrawn in the Karadzic case. And I checked
21 and I see that the decision of the Karadzic Chamber is still standing.
22 So therefore, despite the fact that he might not be called in the
23 Karadzic case as a witness, the decision on his protective measures still
24 stands, and I believe it is only right that the witness should be asked
25 that question why did he ask in the other case that the protective
1 measures be withdrawn in light of what he explained his concerns to us
3 So it is -- it is the position of the Defence that we would like
4 the Trial Chamber to reconsider that.
6 JUDGE HALL: I seem to recall that in the course of the
7 submissions yesterday that apart from the fact of the witness no longer
8 being in the Karadzic case, the distinction that was apparent was the, A,
9 perhaps tenuous but nevertheless an existing connection with Zupljanin.
10 MS. KORNER: Can we go into private session, please, while we
11 discuss this because I think it is going to discuss matters which will
12 disclose his identity.
13 JUDGE HALL: Yes. Thank you, Ms. Korner.
14 Yes, so we go into private session.
15 [Private session]
11 Pages 706-710 redacted. Private session.
19 [Open session]
20 THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session, Your Honours.
21 MR. ZECEVIC: Your Honours, the second matter is -- of concern is
22 the ruling of yesterday. We believe that the rules of conduct or the
23 guidelines have been altered as was set by the Trial Chamber.
24 Now, the situation as we understood yesterday's ruling is that
25 the Defence is expected to notify on the length of cross-examination of
1 the witness not less than 24 hours in advance. But that creates two
2 problems. The problem number one is we have no prior notice what
3 exhibits the calling party will use with the witness. It is not in the
4 pre-trial brief and nowhere else, as far as I can gather. On top, it's
5 contrary to the procedural guidelines which you -- which you gave us, the
6 guideline part 11 and part 12. The guideline 11 says that the rule is
7 72 hours before if it's over a hundred pages, and 48 hours if it's less
8 than a hundred pages. And the procedural guideline number 12, it says
9 that the final list, the calling party -- I will read:
10 "The calling party shall submit the final list of documents or
11 material to be used during examination-in-chief no later than 4.00 p.m.
12 on the working day prior to the testimony of the witness."
13 Before we get this information and be able to -- to assess that
14 information, we cannot give you, obviously, and I hope you understand
15 that it is impossible for the Defence to give an estimation of the length
16 of the cross-examination before this particular data is known to the
18 That is -- that is, in essence, my second submission,
19 Your Honour. Thank you very much.
20 MR. PANTELIC: Just for the record, we just discussed that
21 before, so Zupljanin Defence is also on the same line with the submission
22 of my colleague Zecevic. Thank you.
23 JUDGE HALL: Thank you, Counsel. It's a matter that the Chamber
24 will continue to consider. Thank you.
25 MS. KORNER: Sorry. Can I just say, I'm not able to see --
1 Mr. Zecevic did discuss this with me last night, and of course we will
2 help out as much as we can. We've given him the 65 ter documents that
3 are going to be used with the witness on Monday already. But for the
4 life of me I can't see how which documents are going to be used affects
5 their ability to tell us how long they're going to be in
6 cross-examination. We will tell them how long we are going to be in
7 examination-in-chief, and then they know what they want to cross-examine
8 on presumably, and therefore our documents -- for the life of me, I can't
9 see that, and I explained that to Mr. Zecevic last night.
10 JUDGE HALL: For the information of those persons -- for the
11 information of those persons seated in the gallery, the blinds are only
12 being lowered to allow a witness who has certain protective measures to
13 enter the courtroom. They will be raised as soon as he has taken his
15 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, while we're waiting for the witness,
16 we've printed out the list of abbreviations relating to the police. I
17 hope Your Honours have got a copy. It was attached to the pre-trial
19 Well, they're here. Can we hand them up now so at least
20 Your Honours have them in front of you.
21 [The witness takes the stand]
22 JUDGE HALL: Mr. Witness, you were sworn in yesterday, and I
23 remind you you're still on your oath.
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Very well.
25 WITNESS: WITNESS ST-27 [Resumed]
1 [Witness answered through interpreter]
2 Examination by Ms. Korner:
3 Q. Sir, I'm going to start by asking you to look at a piece of
4 paper, please. You will see on there there's a number, ST-27, and
5 underneath can you confirm that that's your name?
6 A. Yes, I can.
7 Q. As you were told yesterday by Their Honours, you will be known
8 purely by the witness number. Perhaps you'd just like to sign, though,
9 to confirm that's your name.
10 A. [Marks]
11 Q. Thank you very much.
12 MS. KORNER: Your Honours, in order to establish this witness's
13 background, may I ask that we go into private session.
14 JUDGE HALL: Yes.
15 MS. KORNER: Thank you.
16 [Private session]
11 Pages 715-718 redacted. Private session.
19 [Open session]
20 THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session.
21 MS. KORNER:
22 Q. Sir, I want to ask you a little bit -- not a lot, but how the
23 police operated, as I said, in pre-conflict Bosnia. Do you understand?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. First of all, is this correct: That there was, as it were, a
1 hierarchy of police for better -- want of a better word, police stations?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Can you just briefly explain to Their Honours how that hierarchy
4 worked from the top downwards.
5 A. There was a Republican Secretariat for the Interior at the level
6 of Bosnia-Herzegovina. Just below that were the various centres,
7 security services, the CSBs, below which there was a certain number of
8 police stations or public security stations.
9 Q. And was there anything lower than a public security station?
10 A. Certain public security stations had their departments or
12 Q. Did the -- I think in pre-war -- pre-conflict Bosnia there were
13 some nine CSBs; is that right?
14 A. I can't recall what the exact number was, but more or less each
15 larger town in Bosnia-Herzegovina had a CSB seat.
16 Q. All right. And can you tell us now about the reporting system?
17 How did that work? Who reported to whom?
18 A. Public security stations were answerable to the CSBs, and the
19 CSBs, in turn, reported to the ministry or the then-Republican
20 secretariat of the interior in Sarajevo
21 Q. How would the reporting take place? In other words, by what
23 A. By virtue of meetings, collegiums, in writing, by phone, by
24 facsimile [Realtime transcript read in error "e-mail"]
25 Q. In your police station, and as I say, don't tell us where that
1 was, how would reports be sent to the CSB?
2 A. By official mail, and some things were arranged over the phone or
3 by facsimile.
4 Q. Firstly, how often would the report have to be made to the CSB in
6 A. I think it happened every three months, semi-annually and
8 Q. So those were reports of what?
9 A. On the situation concerning security in the respective areas of
10 police stations, then the traffic issues, crime issues, et cetera.
11 Q. So that was really, what, a survey of what happened over the
12 previous three months or whatever it was?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. So what would be reported a daily -- well, firstly, was there
15 daily reporting?
16 A. Only when there were important events. In such cases each public
17 security station was duty-bound to report such events to their CSBs, even
18 on a daily basis if needed.
19 Q. And what sort of -- can you just give us an example of a daily
20 event that might have to be reported? I'm sorry, an important event.
21 A. Well, say if a serious crime had taken place, then it would be
22 reported to the CSB, and they then decided whether they would engage
23 their own forces or provide certain equipment that they had at their
24 disposal which was absent in the various police stations and which might
25 help in shedding light on that particular crime.
1 Q. What was discipline like in the police then? In other words, was
2 it strongly enforced or was it fairly relaxed?
3 A. It was strongly enforced.
4 Q. If the head of the SJB received an order from the chief of the
5 CSB, what would happen if he didn't obey that order?
6 A. He would probably suspended and disciplinary proceedings would be
8 Q. You told us there were meetings that were held. How often were
9 those meetings held? Were they regular, or were they only for special
11 A. As far as I know, the regular security meetings for the
12 respective CSBs would follow after each of the reports that would be
13 sent, quarterly, semi-annually, or annually, or whenever the CSB or their
14 heads deemed it necessary.
15 Q. And one final thing on this reporting of serious crime and the
16 like. Were there any consequences if there was a failure to report a
17 serious crime that had taken place in -- in the area in which you were
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. And what were those consequences?
21 A. Disciplinary liability.
22 Q. If a police officer committed a crime himself, what would happen
23 to him?
24 A. He would be processed much as any other citizen would. The
25 service would do its part of the work.
1 Q. In pre-conflict Bosnia
2 where a police officer who committed a crime was not actually arrested
3 and processed and prosecuted but was sent into -- to the army?
4 A. No.
5 Q. Now, I just want to ask you a little bit about the appointment of
6 chiefs. First of all, of the CSBs. Who appointed the chief of the CSB?
7 A. The republican secretary, that is to say the minister of the
9 Q. And then the chief of the SJB. Who appointed him?
10 A. The same. It all came from the ministry, from Sarajevo. At that
11 time it was called the republican secretariat.
12 Q. I want to move to after the 1990 elections, when the three
13 nationalist parties effectively won the seats in the Assembly. Did
14 that --
15 MR. PANTELIC: Sorry. For the sake of clarity, I think my
16 learned friend should ask witness what is his opinion about the
17 determination of the nature of the parties, whether they're national,
18 nationalist, or ordinary party, because this particular word "nationalist
19 party" might be of importance for the case which goes in the another
20 area. Thank you.
21 JUDGE HALL: Mr. Pantelic, I would have thought this would be a
22 matter for cross-examination. It's for the Prosecution how to lead the
23 evidence on which he wishes to rely.
24 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, Your Honour, my intervention was to simply in
25 order to limit the time, not to waste too much time of the Trial Chamber,
1 you know, to speed up things. But I will clarify that in
2 cross-examination. Thank you so much.
3 MR. ZECEVIC: I'm sorry, I didn't want to interrupt my colleague,
4 but have an intervention in the in the transcript. Page 18, line 17, it
5 says e-mail, but I'm sure the witness says "telefax" or "telex" because
6 e-mail didn't exist at the time. Thank you. That's 18, line 17.
7 JUDGE HALL: Thank you.
8 MS. KORNER: I'm sure that's right, Mr. Zecevic. Thank you.
9 [Indiscernible] Mr. Pantelic. I didn't think there was any dispute that
10 the three parties who won were nationalist.
11 Q. All right. After the 1990 elections, what effect, if any, did
12 that have on how heads of police stations, SJBs, let's stick to for the
13 moment, were appointed?
14 A. At the very outset, nothing changed. But later on,
15 unfortunately, things worsened and people were being replaced because
16 they were not of, how should I put it? Appropriate ethnicity.
17 Q. Before 1990, did the appointments have anything to do with the
18 ethnicity? In other words, was there a division between the three
19 nationalities -- [Microphone not activated]
20 A. As far as I know, the so-called ethnic key was used so as to have
21 equal representation of the three ethnic communities, although I don't
22 think that was the decisive factor.
23 Q. Now, you told us that after the elections people were being
24 replaced because they weren't of appropriate ethnicity. Can we stick to
25 your police station. How was the ethnic -- what was the ethnic divide
2 A. The commander of the SJB was a Muslim. The chief was a Serb, and
3 I was assistant as a Croat.
4 Q. Did the -- in the appointment of -- of the chiefs, did the local
5 political parties have any say in who was appointing who -- who was
7 A. Yes. They usually approved the proposals.
8 Q. Could they make the appointments themselves or did those
9 appointments have to be made by the minister of the interior?
10 A. Nothing could happen without the knowledge of the minister of the
12 Q. All right. Can we now move, please, to -- you've talked about --
13 began to talk about the changes that happened. How did those changes
14 manifest themselves after the election in your particular police station?
15 A. The commander of the public security station was removed from
16 duty, and for a while I was acting commander of the public security
17 station in his place, and then the chief called me at one occasion and
18 told me (redacted)
20 MS. KORNER: Can we just for safety's sake go into private
21 session for the next question.
22 JUDGE HALL: Yes. We move into private session.
23 [Private session]
11 Page 726 redacted. Private session.
4 [Open session]
5 THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session, Your Honours.
6 MS. KORNER:
7 Q. All right. You told us -- we're back so that the public can hear
8 you, sir.
9 You told us that the chief of the public security station
10 replaced the head of the public security -- commander. That would be the
11 commander. But what ethnicity was the man who had been replaced?
12 A. He was a Muslim.
13 Q. Now, did you remain at this police station where you told us
14 there was already this removal going on, or did you move?
15 A. No. I took over the duties of commander. This is what the chief
16 told me. And this went on for two or three months.
17 Q. You told us earlier whilst we were in private session that you --
18 in March of 1992 you moved to another police station. Can you tell us
19 why you did that?
20 A. I've already mentioned it. Sometime in March 1992, the chief of
21 the SJB called me to his office and told me he couldn't guarantee my
22 security and that I should leave the station.
23 Q. And your move was to a station in a different municipality; is
24 that right?
25 A. No.
1 Q. No.
2 A. I didn't move to a different station. I was without a job for a
3 while, and then representatives of the HDZ political party came and they
4 offered me a post in the municipal secretariat in the municipality. I
5 said that I was looking for a lasting solution in Croatia, but that in
6 the meantime I would help them as much as I could.
7 Q. All right. Now, can I ask you whether there were any signs that
8 the -- there were changes coming about in -- in the police station? For
9 example, in uniform.
10 A. Yes. I heard from colleagues who had remained at work, because
11 in the meantime I had left the organisation. They had to change their
12 uniforms, the insignia. Instead of the five-pointed star, they had to
13 place the Serbian tricolour flag.
14 Q. And what about the writing on the uniforms? Did that change at
16 A. Yes. They had to wear some sort of insignia. I don't remember
17 it was on the left or the right shoulder, but perhaps it was on both
18 shoulders. It was sign "Milicija" in the Cyrillic script.
19 Q. And what had it been before?
20 A. Earlier it was the same word, "Milicija," but it was in the Latin
22 Q. And this is what you were told by someone who had remained in the
23 police station?
24 A. Yes. But I also saw that on the streets.
25 Q. When you were offered your next post, as you've told us, did you
1 start work in the police station there?
2 A. Not at the police station but at the Municipal Secretariat for
3 National Defence, but the seat of the secretariat was in the same
4 building where the police station was.
5 Q. And can you just briefly explain what the Secretariat for
6 National Defence did?
7 A. Well, those jobs are still not quite clear to me. I didn't have
8 enough time to actually really get into the intricacies of it, but they
9 dealt with military issues, mobilisation tasks. The alerting centre was
10 part of the secretariat, co-operation with the military districts and
11 administrative tasks, civilian protection, and it also closely
12 co-operated with the Territorial Defence.
13 Q. And again I apologise, I should have asked you this before:
14 Apart from regular police was there also a reserve police force?
15 A. Yes, there was a reserve police force which could be used as per
17 Q. And who would become police reservists?
18 A. Citizens who were not in the regular police force but were part
19 of the defence organisation and were assigned to the reserve police
21 Q. The Territorial Defence, was that again people who had done their
22 JNA service and who were then reservists, as it were, for the army?
23 A. The Territorial Defence is a separate structural unit which had a
24 certain number of people who were there as professionals and then they
25 would engage the reserve military forces as part of the
1 Territorial Defence.
2 MS. KORNER: Right. Can I just again quickly for the next
3 question go into private session, please.
4 JUDGE HALL: Yes.
5 [Private session]
11 Page 731 redacted. Private session.
1 [Open session]
2 THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session, Your Honours.
3 MS. KORNER:
4 Q. Whilst you were working for the Secretary Of National Defence,
5 was there any kind of military presence in the municipality?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. How active at this stage, let's say, around March of 1992,
8 April 1992
9 A. They were not active in that area. They were just present. The
10 reserve force was engaged, and they were assigned to -- or deployed to
11 several locations.
12 Q. Was there any kind of mobilisation that took place at that stage?
13 A. Yes. There was a mobilisation which was carried out without my
14 knowledge, because the Banja Luka Military District usurped the
15 mobilisation sector which should have been working within the
16 secretariat. But this was done without my knowledge, so I did lodge a
17 protest with some people at the military district but without any
19 Q. When the mobilisation, which was carried out without your
20 knowledge, took place, who was mobilised?
21 A. Everyone was mobilised. I don't know if it was the entire
22 reserve force, but if you're thinking about ethnic classification, they
23 were all mobilised. Some -- actually a major part of the Croat and
24 Muslim population refused to respond to the mobilisation call-up.
25 Q. All right. Can I next ask you about weapons. In your
1 municipality, were there weapons kept for the Territorial Defence?
2 A. No.
3 Q. Where were the weapons kept? I suppose, actually --
15 JUDGE HALL: Yes.
16 MS. KORNER: Before it goes out. Thank you.
17 Q. At this period, and if you can be careful, sir, about not
18 mentioning, I know it's difficult, not mentioning the name of the
19 municipality, were you aware of any arms being acquired by private
21 A. I am not aware personally, but there were stories going around
22 that some individuals were obtaining arms.
23 Q. All right. When you say some individuals, of what -- any
24 particular ethnicity?
25 A. All three ethnicities were mentioned, but from the things that
1 reached me, it seems that weapons were bought from Serbs by Muslims and
2 Croats. I don't know what quantities were involved though.
3 Q. You say that weapons were bought from Serbs by Muslims and
4 Croats. Why from Serbs?
5 A. They were the only ones at the time who had weapons and the
6 possibility to obtain them in an illegal manner.
7 Q. And what was that? Why were the only ones who had weapons and
8 the possibility to obtain them?
9 A. The weapons, the military weapons, were monitored by the Serb
10 forces, and that's how they obtain them. I don't know if this was with
11 somebody's knowledge or they were stealing them. In any case, they were
12 reselling them, and this is how it was happening.
13 Q. All right. Now, did you become aware of the events - and I'm
14 moving now to April and May - that were taking place elsewhere in
15 neighbouring municipalities?
16 A. I knew that there was some military movements under way.
17 Q. Did you become aware of the changes -- well, let's -- I don't
18 think there can be any dispute about this. Did you become aware of the
19 declaration of the Serbian Republic
20 A. Yes. I found out from the media. You could hear about it on the
21 radio, television.
22 Q. All right. And I'm going -- I'm going to ask you -- I'll go back
23 and -- I'm sorry, we have to go back to private session for the actual
24 names, but I wanted to ask you about some meetings you had with a
25 military commander. Did you have meetings around this period, in May,
1 with a military commander?
2 [Private session]
11 Page 736 redacted. Private session.
15 [Open session]
16 THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session, Your Honours.
17 [The witness stands down]
18 --- Recess taken at 10.30 a.m.
19 --- On resuming at 10.56 a.m.
20 MS. KORNER: Your Honours, before the witness comes back into
21 court, can I just mention that we've received a medical report for
22 Witness ST-203. It's been instantly translated, but I've had it read by
23 our acting interpreter, case manager, it does say he's not fit to travel.
24 We'll hand it in at the next break. We've also taken the opportunity at
25 this break to discuss timings of witnesses, and it would seem on the
1 timings of the witnesses arranged for next week, we would be asking for
2 the videolink on Tuesday week, not Monday, as originally. And we're
3 simply giving you advanced notification so that if you'd be kind enough
4 at the end of today's proceedings to make a decision.
5 JUDGE HALL: Tuesday week would put you within the time that --
6 for required notice that the rules require?
7 MS. KORNER: No, it won't, but we're hoping that you can -- it's
8 not within ten days. Today is Friday. It would just, just about make
10 JUDGE HALL: Mr. Zecevic, Mr. Pantelic, do you have a view on
12 MR. ZECEVIC: Well, we don't have any problem with -- with that
13 if the -- if the witness appears on the -- on Tuesday via videolink, none
14 whatsoever. We discussed with Ms. Korner already during the break.
15 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, I can confirm this submission, yes.
16 JUDGE HALL: Thank you.
17 [Trial Chamber confers]
18 JUDGE HALL: So we would rule on that this afternoon. Yes,
19 Ms. Korner.
20 MS. KORNER: Thank you very much. Then the witness can come
21 back. I've indicated, sorry, to both my learned friends that --
22 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
23 MS. KORNER: Your Honours, I've indicated to my learned friends
24 that I hope to finish this witness within the next hour, thereby, I hope,
25 saving one hour.
1 [The witness takes the stand]
2 MS. KORNER: Your Honours, could we go into private session again
3 for two or three questions and then we can go back into open.
4 [Private session]
12 [Open session]
13 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we're back in open session.
14 MS. KORNER:
15 Q. You've told us you were on your way to work on this day. What
16 actually happened to you?
17 A. I was stopped in the place I just mentioned by some uniformed
18 personnel. I don't know whether it was the regular or reserve force of
19 the military. In any case, they wore camouflage uniforms. They asked
20 for my ID. They asked me for weapons. I told them I didn't have any.
21 One of them seems to have (redacted)
25 Q. Pause there for a moment, please.
1 MS. KORNER: Sorry. Can we have that redacted, please. Line 7
2 and 8.
3 Q. Sir, the -- the building that they took you to, and don't mention
4 the name of it, what sort of a building was that?
5 A. It's a building belonging to a company. I suppose they had their
6 offices there.
10 A. No.
11 Q. Now, this building that they took you to, was anybody else there
12 in the building, or was it just you on your own?
13 A. I didn't see anyone. I don't know whether there was anyone else
14 in the building. In any case, I was alone in the room.
15 Q. And how long were you kept there?
16 A. Between 6.30 or 7.00 a.m.
17 Q. All right. Were there guards there?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Were you able -- you -- you told us the people who stopped you
20 wore camouflage uniforms. Are you able to say what kind of uniforms they
21 were? In other words, police or military?
22 A. Military olive-drab uniforms.
23 Q. And did any of the guards say anything to you whilst you were
24 there about what was happening elsewhere?
25 A. No one told me anything. When I asked that I be allowed to go
1 into the town to help alleviate the situation if anything strange was
2 going on, then one of them told me to lie low because it was better for
3 me to do so since there was something going on in town which was not good
4 and it would not have been good for me to be there.
5 Q. All right. Now, you told us you were kept there till 4.00 in the
6 afternoon --
7 MS. KORNER: And I'm sorry, we do need to go into private session
8 for the following.
9 JUDGE HALL: Yes, private session.
10 MS. KORNER:
11 Q. Again, sir, people cannot hear what you're saying so --
12 THE REGISTRAR: Just is second.
13 [Private session]
11 Pages 743-747 redacted. Private session.
21 [Open session]
22 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we're back in open session.
23 MS. KORNER:
24 Q. Yes. We reached the stage where you had been transferred from
25 the building where you were first taken to after you'd been stopped, and
1 you're now in a building elsewhere, and you've explained how you were
2 against the wall, people passing were beaten -- beating you.
3 How long were you kept against the wall?
6 (redacted). We just spoke briefly there, and
7 then he ordered those people there not to touch me and that I didn't have
8 to be against the wall anymore and that I had to stay there for the
9 interview. And I said I didn't know why I was there. There's nothing
10 particular, no reason. So I did have to stay there, and then he said I
11 would be released.
12 MS. KORNER: Your Honours, I think that's all right. I'm not
13 going to ask him.
14 Q. The person who spoke to you, was they the police?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. So you were kept there for about an hour, and what happened to
17 you after that?
18 A. After that I just stood there without having to lean on the wall.
19 I stood in one place. I was not allowed to move. If I just happened to
20 bend down or my knees bent a little bit, I would receive a blow or
21 something like that. And I spent about an hour there. It was perhaps
22 10.00 or 11.00 at night when I was taken to an office - I don't recall
24 MS. KORNER: I think we better just, I'm sorry, for safety's
25 sake, just for a minute, go into private session. And could that be
1 redacted, please.
2 JUDGE HALL: Yes, private session.
3 MS. KORNER:
4 Q. All right.
5 [Private session]
8 [Open session]
9 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we're back in open session.
10 MS. KORNER: All right.
11 Q. Now, sir, the public can now hear you. So you said that a man
12 approached you whom you knew whilst you were standing in this corridor.
13 What did he do?
14 A. He was a member of the police force. We went to the police
15 academy together. I think he had the rank of inspector. I don't know
16 exactly what he was doing.
17 Q. When he approached you, what did he say to you?
18 A. We greeted each other. He asked me what I was doing there. I
19 said I didn't know. I had no idea that I was brought there. He said all
21 Q. Can I stop you there. We'd moved on from that.
22 You told us that this man came up to you, not who you were at
23 school with but later after that, somebody you also knew. Did he give
24 you anything, the second man?
25 A. Another man came up to me, but that was when I was taken upstairs
1 to one of the officers -- offices. I also knew this man from before. He
2 gave me some sort of paper with the explanation that it's night, it's
3 late, they will continue tomorrow, but I should sign this paper. And
4 from what I was able to read quickly then, it was saying that I had been
5 arrested and that I was being charged for some sort of armed insurgency.
6 I refused to sign the paper.
7 Q. Had you taken part in any kind of armed insurgency?
8 A. No.
9 Q. All right. So you refused to sign the piece of paper. Were you
10 further questioned that day or not?
11 A. No. I was taken to prison after that.
12 Q. All right. The following day were you brought back to that
13 building from the prison?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. And before you were brought back and whilst you were at the
16 prison, did anything happen to you there?
17 A. Before I was placed in the prison. Up until the time that I
18 reached the prison I was standing in the corridor, and I received I don't
19 know how many blows all over my body. Once I came to the prison, before
20 I was put into a cell I was beaten just like the other two persons who
21 came with me, and I was taken to solitary confinement.
22 Q. All right. And were the other two persons who came with you
23 those who you mentioned had been in the van at the time of the arrest?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. How were you beaten before you were put into a cell? With what,
1 and ...
2 A. We were beaten by fists. We were kicked. We were hit with bats.
3 And then when I was taken to solitary confinement, then this one person
4 there continued to punch me and kick me. He hit me a couple of times
5 with his pistol, but at one point he pushed the pistol into my mouth. He
6 damaged one of my teeth. I still have the marks of that. He threatened
7 that he would kill me with a knife. It's some sort of knife which I
8 understood had been seized, and it was used to kill somebody. And then
9 he would pass judgement on me.
10 I mean, in that atmosphere of fear I wasn't really paying
11 attention. I tried to block the force of the blows by standing to one
12 side or the other. I tried to evade the blows.
13 Q. Was it just this one person there, or were there more people
14 there while this was happening?
15 A. No, he was alone. While I was in the solitary confinement. When
16 we were beaten, we were together in the prison corridor. Then there were
17 several of them who were beating not only me but the other two people as
19 Q. All right. You told us you were taken back the next day to the
20 building where you'd been standing against the wall. What happened to
21 you during that time when you were back at the building?
22 A. I was taken to one of the offices. I was approached by a person
23 who introduced himself as an inspector. The conversation began on the
24 topic of some weapons, obtaining weapons. Since I had no idea about this
25 and I didn't take part in any kind of weapon procurement or any kind of
1 organisation, the conversation went round in circles a few times. Things
2 were repeated. Then the person went to another room. He returned. I
3 don't remember if it was on the same day or the next day when I was
4 brought in again.
5 He told me that he didn't know why I was there, that he would
6 prefer to release me, which I did ask for, but then I was told that there
7 was some kind of Crisis Staff in the area of the municipality where I was
8 arrested, and this Crisis Staff wouldn't permit something like that to
9 happen. That's what I heard.
10 Q. That's what the person who was interrogating you told you.
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. If you just very carefully listen to the question. Did you
13 know -- had you -- sorry. Frame the question properly.
14 Was this person interrogating you someone you had met before?
15 A. No.
16 Q. Were you able to find out, though, of what nationality he was?
17 A. No. He told me his first and last name. He told me that he was
18 allegedly a Croat. I don't know if he was or not, if he gave me his
19 correct name. I don't know.
20 Q. Okay. Now, you told us -- you said a moment ago that you don't
21 remember whether it was on the same day or the next day. How many days
22 were you taken back and forth to this building where you were questioned?
23 A. I think this went on for five or six days.
24 Q. The other two people who you had been arrested with in the sense
25 of you were together, were they also being taken back and forth?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Were you interrogated together or separately?
3 A. Separately.
4 Q. Was there any repetition of what had happened to you that first
5 night at the prison, in other words, the beatings?
6 A. The beating wasn't like that, but I really couldn't say exactly.
7 A lot of time has passed since then. I don't remember if there was any
8 beating after that.
9 Q. All right. Did you have any injuries as a result of -- of the
10 beating you received? Apart from your tooth, any other injuries?
11 A. Other than bruises and the haematoma, no.
12 Q. Were you given any kind of medical treatment for the injury to
13 your tooth?
14 A. No.
15 Q. Whilst you were at the prison, could you hear what was happening
16 in other cells?
17 A. While I was in solitary confinement I heard screams, moans.
18 Evidently people were getting beaten there. I don't know who was doing
19 the beating and who was getting beaten, I wasn't there, but other
20 prisoners talked about this later when I was transferred to a cell where
21 there were more prisoners who were there serving their sentence. I guess
22 the civilians who had committed certain crimes had already been there.
23 They had nothing to do with the war.
24 Q. How long a period did you remain in that prison being taken for
25 interrogation? You said you went back five or six days for questioning.
1 Did you stay in the prison longer than the questioning those four or five
2 days, or after those four or five days were you moved?
3 A. After those few days that we spent in the prison, after the
4 interrogations were finished, we were transferred to the --
5 Q. Okay, just --
6 A. -- elementary school.
7 Q. Just for one moment can we go into private session, and you tell
8 us where that was.
9 JUDGE HALL: Yes.
10 MS. KORNER: Sorry about this, Your Honour. I know it's
11 irritating, but it's one of the problems.
12 [Private session]
24 [Open session]
25 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we're back in open session.
1 MS. KORNER:
2 Q. We're back in public again, sir. So you were taken to this
3 elementary school with the other people that you mentioned, and you said
4 you were taken to a bathroom.
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. How big roughly?
7 A. There were a couple of showers there, water taps. I don't know.
8 Perhaps it was 3 X 4 or 4 X 4. It was a room of some 10 to 12 square
9 metres. I don't know.
10 Q. And were the three of you kept together, or were you separated?
11 A. We stayed together.
12 Q. Did anything happen to you when you got to that bathroom?
13 A. As we entered the bathroom, these so-called Specials had formed a
14 gauntlet which we had to pass through where we did receive a substantial
16 Q. All right. Let's deal with the Specials, as you call them. What
17 do you mean by Specials?
18 A. These are special units set up at that time. They were call
19 Specijalci, and since I'm from the same profession I can say they were
20 far from being Specials. That was just a group of savages.
21 Q. All right. You say you were from the same profession. Does that
22 mean these were police officers, allegedly?
23 A. Yes. These were special units of theirs, and they were wearing
24 camouflage uniforms of predominantly dark and light blue colours rather
25 than olive-drab colours. It was that combination.
1 Q. Do you know where the --
2 JUDGE HARHOFF: Mrs. Korner, what's --
3 Mr. Witness, what is the significance of the colour? You
4 mentioned that the camouflage uniforms that these men were wearing were
5 blueish somehow, with mixed blue colours, and that was different from the
6 green and brown camouflage uniforms.
7 Now, the significance of the blue colour in these camouflage
8 uniform, was that that these people in the gauntlets were employed with
9 the police?
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. They were engaged by the
11 police. I don't know if these were regular or reserve forces, because
12 they were set up as some sort of separate unit, and they wore this
13 uniform to differentiate themselves from the army. The army wore
14 olive-drab uniforms.
15 MS. KORNER:
16 Q. Other than their uniforms, was there anything else to indicate
17 that they were some kind of police officers? Were they -- sorry.
18 A. No, nothing special.
19 Q. Were they carrying anything which indicated that they were
21 A. They had their sidearms. They had handcuffs, long-barrelled
23 Q. You've told us that you knew about these so-called Specials. Had
24 you seen the Special Police before?
25 A. Like that, no.
1 Q. When you say "Like that, no," what do you mean by that?
2 A. I did not see that type of uniform before, and also I'm not going
3 to comment on their conduct.
4 Q. No. Well, that's -- leaving aside their conduct, if you hadn't
5 seen that sort of uniform before, how did you know it was a police
7 A. When we were there the whole time and in the course of the
8 conversation, we understood that these were some sort of special units
9 that had nothing to do with the regular police force.
10 Q. So this is what you learnt from them.
11 A. Yes. That is how they addressed one another and talked amongst
12 one another, and you could conclude that these were some sort of special
13 units. I'm not sure whether they were composed from the regular police
14 forces. I kind of doubt that, but it's possible.
15 Q. Had you ever seen any parade involving men wearing this colour of
16 uniform? On television news or anything like that.
17 A. I really cannot be certain. It's possible that I did see them.
18 I think that I did see them on television, but that was the first time
19 that I had actually seen them for real.
20 Q. Right. Well, let's go back to, as you've described it, the
21 gauntlet. Can I ask you to give us a little more detail about what
22 actually happened to you and your -- the other two men. What did they do
23 to you?
24 A. As we were passing through the gauntlet we were punched, kicked,
25 hit by rifle butts, bats. We were beaten until we reached the bathroom.
1 Once we entered the bathroom they continued to beat us, and then they
2 left us alone.
3 Q. Did you -- it may be obvious, but did you recognise any of the
4 people there. Just answer it yes or not, because if it's yes, we'll have
5 to go into private session.
6 A. No, I didn't recognise anyone.
7 Q. Now, how long were you kept in the -- that elementary school?
8 A. Some 10 to 15 days. I don't know the exact length of time.
9 Q. During those 10 to 15 days were you beaten again?
10 A. Yes, several times.
11 Q. Did you suffer injuries as a result of those beatings?
12 A. During one of the beatings I lost my consciousness. I fainted
13 from the blows. I didn't break anything, but I had bruises all over my
15 Q. What about food and water? Were you given those?
16 A. We did receive minimal amounts. One of the local -- locals, a
17 Serb who evidently disagreed with this whole stupidity that was going on
18 and probably knowing -- I assume that he knew one of the two people who
19 were there detained with me, because he couldn't have known me because I
20 had left that area a long time ago, he would sneak in food for us that he
21 would leave on the window, cigarettes, plum brandy, things like that.
22 JUDGE HARHOFF: Mr. Witness, you said that you were beaten while
23 you were still held in this building several times. And my question is
24 just, were it the same group of people in blue camouflage uniforms that
25 did the beatings?
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I couldn't really say because I
2 didn't know any of the people who were there. They could have been the
3 same people or different people. I don't know exactly who these people
4 were individually.
5 JUDGE HARHOFF: No. Thank you, but how were they dressed? Were
6 they also wearing blue camouflage uniforms?
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
8 MS. KORNER:
9 Q. Was there anybody else forming part of these people who were
10 beating you who were wearing other kinds of uniforms, or was it always
11 the blue camouflage?
12 A. They always wore the blue camouflage uniforms.
13 Q. Now, again can you just answer this yes or no: Whilst you were
14 at the school, did some people come to the school whom you recognised?
15 A. Yes.
16 MS. KORNER: Sorry, private session for just a couple of
18 JUDGE HALL: Yes, private session.
19 [Private session]
11 Page 762 redacted. Private session.
24 [Open session]
25 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we're back in open session.
1 MS. KORNER:
2 Q. So you told us that you received visitors, and you've explained
3 what they did whilst you were at this elementary school. Can you tell us
4 how long altogether did you remain at the elementary school?
5 A. Between 10 and 15 days.
6 Q. Then were you taken back to the prison in the town that you've
7 originally told us about?
8 A. Yes. We were taken back to the civilian prison where we spent
9 some four or four and a half months.
10 Q. And from there were you transferred to another prison, as you've
11 told us, which was in fact a military prison?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Now, during the course of this imprisonment, were you charged
14 with any kind of offence?
15 A. Yes. On one occasion I was taken to either a court or a military
16 prosecutor's office where an indictment against me was read out. It said
17 something to the extent that I was being charged with the commission of
18 the crime of organising an armed rebellion against illegally elected
20 Q. Leaving aside the legality of the authorities, had you --
21 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction: Page 61, line 17,
22 against the legally elected authorities.
23 MR. ZECEVIC: He said legally elected authorities, and that's
24 what he confirmed just now.
25 MS. KORNER: That's right. I heard him say that as well.
1 Q. Had you -- had you organised any kind of armed rebellion?
2 A. No.
3 Q. You've told us you were taken to a court or a military
4 prosecutor's office. Did you ever have a trial?
5 A. On that one occasion when I was taken there, the indictment was
6 shown to me. I provided a statement. My attorney, who was appointed
7 ex officio, was present as well, and that's it.
8 Q. Did you ever discover the name of the person who was showing the
10 A. He introduced himself, and later on I received a document with
11 his name on it.
12 Q. All right. Are you able to remember the name now, or would you
13 need to see the document?
14 A. I think I can say his name. May I?
15 Q. Yes. I don't think there's any problem if you'd like to say his
17 A. Svetozar Davidovic.
18 Q. Were you ever told that you'd been convicted or were being
19 sentenced or anything?
20 A. No. Quite the contrary. On one occasion I received a decision
21 of sorts which said that the military prosecutor's office conducted an
22 investigation and failed to establish the existence of any elements of
23 the crime that I was being charged with and that I should be released.
24 There was quite a fascinating legal remedy towards the end of the
25 document which read that the party, the accused party has no right to
1 appeal the decision given that the party had waived that right, whatever
2 that meant.
3 Q. Had you waived any rights that you were aware of?
4 A. No. On the day of exchange, it was then that I received that
5 piece of paper. I was forced to sign a sheet of paper, an A4 paper,
6 which was blank. I signed it, and I have no idea what they subsequently
7 put on that sheet of paper.
8 Q. All right. Before we come to your exchange, you've told us you
9 were taken to a military prison. How long were you kept there for?
11 A. Maybe a month or a few days more or less than that. I don't know
13 Q. What was your treatment like in that place?
14 A. During the transfer from the civilian to the military prison, all
15 three of us received gruesome beating by the military and the judiciary
16 police. We were beaten in the civilian as well as in the military
18 In the military prison, after that, we were beaten on a few other
19 occasions in the room where we were accommodated. After I was taken to
20 see the military prosecutor --
21 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction: After the beatings,
22 I was taken to the military prosecutor's office.
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] [Previous translation continues]...
24 And I complained to him. The prosecutor said that this was not to have
25 happened, and that he should see -- he will see to it. At that time I
1 just thought they were playing the good cop/bad cop game with me, but
2 indeed a colonel arrived later with a Serbian accent and apologised for
3 what had happened. And indeed in the 20-some days after that while I was
4 still in the camp no one touched me. They even provided some newspapers
5 and books.
6 MS. KORNER:
7 Q. Were you and the two other people that you've throughout who were
8 effectively arrested the same day and together, did you remain together
9 throughout the period of your incarceration?
10 A. No. We were separated in the civilian prison as well as in the
11 military prison for a while, although a certain portion of the time spent
12 in the military prison we did spend together.
13 Q. Whilst you were in the two prisons, the civilian and military,
14 were there other people that you knew being brought in as prisoners?
15 A. No. I didn't know those people. With time I learned of a
16 person's name who was also detained there in one of the cells, but that
17 is all.
18 Q. What I'm trying to get at is the people who were being brought
19 in, of what nationality were they?
20 A. Firstly and -- first and foremost it was Muslims and Croats.
21 While we were in the civilian prison, some people were brought into my
22 cell in different periods. To be precise, there were three Serbs who
23 were brought in. One was from the area of Gradiska, Bosanska Gradiska.
24 Allegedly he was charged with selling weapons to the Muslims. There was
25 another one who was brought in from Prijedor because allegedly he had
1 killed another Serb. And a third came in from Bosanski Novi. He may
2 have been a part of a group which had committed certain crimes, and then
3 they were brought in.
4 Q. Do you know crimes against whom?
5 A. In discussion with that person, because we talked in the cell, he
6 boasted of killing Muslims and Croats. I don't know whether that was
7 true or whether he was just boasting. I don't know.
8 Q. All right. And finally, sir, you've told us you were exchanged.
9 Do you know when you were exchanged?
10 A. On the 28th of November, 1992.
11 Q. So from the 11th of June until the 28th of November you were in
13 A. Yes.
14 MS. KORNER: Those are the questions I ask.
15 Thank you very much, sir.
16 JUDGE HALL: Thank you, Ms. Korner.
17 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
18 JUDGE HALL: As you commence your cross-examination, you will
19 bear in mind that we are scheduled for a break in about five minutes.
20 MR. CVIJETIC: Okay.
21 Cross-examination by Mr. Cvijetic:
22 Q. [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Your Honours.
23 Good afternoon, Witness. My name is Slobodan Cvijetic. I'm an
24 attorney-at-law, and I'm a co-counsel for Mr. Mico Stanisic.
25 In this introductory portion, I wanted to deal with certain
1 answers you gave to the Prosecutor. In my cross-examination, I have to
2 deal with what you have testified to during your testimony.
3 One question to start with: In the tripartite division of power
4 and parliamentary systems where we have the legislative, judicial,
5 executive branches, you will agree with me that the police belongs to the
6 executive branch? Do you agree with me? You have to utter a spoken
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. You will agree with me that the police is part of the state
10 administration, the state apparatus providing for the functioning of that
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. In order for such a state organ to function, certain state
14 administration regulations apply.
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Among others, this includes the law on state administration?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Law on the general administrative procedure?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. By way of example, if a citizen turns to the CSB or a police
21 station or the ministry with a request, without going into the different
22 types of requests such as changing place of residence, issuing a new ID,
23 and so on and so forth, that is decided within --
24 THE INTERPRETER: Could the counsel please slow down.
25 JUDGE HARHOFF: Mr. Cvijetic, it's very good that you are able to
1 speak the same language as the witness so that you can communicate
2 freely, but the interpreters have to be able to follow you, and unless we
3 are able to understand what you're saying, then this is all for no good
4 reason. So please slow down.
5 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Well, I've already been cautioned
6 twice by my learned colleague Mr. Zecevic for the very same reason.
7 Q. You will agree with me that in the hierarchy of managing and
8 supervising a state body, the minister of interior or the minister of
9 defence, since you were defence secretary, manages and supervises such a
10 state organ?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. You've already answered to Ms. Korner that if a policeman or any
13 other official of the Ministry of the Interior and the police committed
14 an offence contrary to his orders and duties, that person is then
15 included in any disciplinary proceedings; is that correct?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Does the same apply to all other employees of all other state
18 administration bodies, for example, the Secretariat of National Defence,
19 the Registrar's Office in a municipality, et cetera? Does the same type
20 of procedure apply if they do not follow the duties and tasks assigned to
22 A. I believe so.
23 Q. Another thing that Ms. Korner asked you. You mentioned the issue
24 of reporting. You spoke of the line of reporting within the Ministry of
25 the Interior. Perhaps we can just offer some further clarification.
1 Was reporting done per departments?
2 A. Yes.
3 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I believe you have
4 cautioned me of the time.
5 [The witness stands down]
6 --- Recess taken at 12.20 p.m.
7 --- On resuming at 12.49 p.m.
8 JUDGE HARHOFF: Mrs. Korner, may I ask you, you mentioned at the
9 last session that some documents that you wanted to put to the witness
10 were not included in your 65 ter list, so we MFI'd them.
11 MS. KORNER: Yes.
12 JUDGE HARHOFF: My question is, yet, they seem to have a 65 ter
13 number. How come -- yes?
14 MS. KORNER: I asked the case manager the same thing. I think
15 they're just allocated a number as far as I understand it. Because I was
16 going to simply refer to the ERN numbers, but they don't become exhibits.
17 Is that -- yeah. They're just given -- if any documents are going to be
18 referred to, despite the fact that they're not on our 65 ter list, they
19 are just given a number which is not really a 65 ter number. It just a
20 -- it is an identification number, but we're just following through. So,
21 I mean, that's the best I can do. I'm not altogether clear myself.
22 JUDGE HARHOFF: So the 65 ter number is not a 65 ter number.
23 MS. KORNER: It's not a real 65 ter number. It's an imaginary
24 65 ter number. Can I put it that way?
25 JUDGE HARHOFF: Very inventive. Thanks.
1 MS. KORNER: Can I just mention. I'm told there is no prospect
2 of this witness finishing today. I gather the Stanisic team is going to
3 take up the rest of the time. I forgot to tell him, I wonder if
4 Your Honours would be kind enough, that he will have to stay over the
5 weekend, but he cannot speak to any members of the OTP. I just forgot to
6 mention that myself. Or anybody, really.
7 [The witness takes the stand]
8 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, may I continue?
9 JUDGE HALL: Yes.
10 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
11 Q. Witness, we stopped as we were talking about reporting along the
12 line the of the work, so could you please explain these line of work or,
13 as we call them, their departments?
14 A. You mean within the police, the Ministry of Internal Affairs?
15 Q. Yes. We're talking about the MUP the whole time.
16 A. As I said, the MUP was at the top with a seat in Sarajevo. Then
17 you had the security services centres, and below them were the public
18 security stations. So each CSB had a number of SJBs. I don't know how
19 many, depends on the structure of the MUP how they did that.
20 Q. And in that organisation as you presented it to us, were there
21 any departments and those lines of work? I'm trying to help you. Was
22 there a police department, public security department, traffic
23 department, criminal investigations, and did they have their own lines of
24 work? This is the kind of thing that I was thinking of.
25 A. There was sectors, sections within the ministry, and you had
1 similar things within the public security centres, and the public
2 security stations themselves had criminal investigations units, traffic,
3 and so on.
4 Q. I'm asking you that precisely. Did this -- each of those lines
5 report up along its own line of reporting, ending at the assistant or
6 deputy minister in charge of that department? For example, the criminal
7 investigation units, they had their own line of reporting. This is what
8 I was thinking of. Is it correct what I'm saying?
9 A. Yes, that's how it should have functioned. I don't know if it
10 actually did or not.
11 Q. My colleague Mr. Zecevic has drawn my attention to the fact that
12 because my speed, a question was missed out and even an answer. I'm
13 going to repeat that, and of course I expect the same answer. I actually
14 asked you if, conditionally speaking, the police, because when I say the
15 police I'm thinking about the whole MUP, so if the Ministry of Internal
16 Affairs and the centre and the police station is addressed by a citizen
17 with a request to have a passport issued, ID card, report to a place of
18 residence, or sign out of a particular place of residence, the decision
19 on that request was made on the basis of the rules of general
20 administrative proceedings, a certificate would be issued to him which he
21 would have the right to appeal, and so on and so forth.
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. That part is not there. So let us go back now. I'm now going to
24 back to the top of the ministry that you were dealing with. At one point
25 during your testimony you said, and there's no reason for us not to
1 confirm that there after multi-party elections, the Minister of Internal
2 Affairs of Bosnia-Herzegovina was Alija Delimustafic, is that correct, a
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. The minister of defence Jerko Doko was a Croat?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. I was asking you because -- not really because of their
8 ethnicity, but they were both civilians, if I'm not mistaken.
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. And they ran their organs as organs of administration; is that
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. For purposes of administration and management, they adopted
14 general regulations dealing with organisational personnel and other
15 matters so that their organs would function within the system of state
16 administration; is that correct?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. You would agree with me that the Ministry of Internal Affairs is
19 specific in that it has its uniformed part, it has persons with special
20 authority. They don't necessarily have to wear uniforms, but these can
21 be inspectors with special powers; is that correct?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. And these special powers - I'm not going to enumerate them -
24 comprise, for example, that in certain situations they can apply force,
25 they can deprive certain citizens of freedom or -- these powers are
1 derived on the basis of the law; is that correct?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. And that special law that is applied in the MUP is the Law on
4 Internal Affairs, is it not?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. So can I conclude, and I think that you would agree with me, that
7 when - and you were an inspector yourself - when a policeman is supposed
8 to detain or arrest somebody for committing a crime or for being
9 suspected of committing a crime, they arrest that person on the basis of
10 the law and the powers that are entrusted to them according to the law.
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. And they are obliged to say that they are arresting them in the
13 name of the law, and they are obliged also to inform them of their rights
14 that they have under the law.
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. You would agree with me that there is no order required for this
17 procedure from the MUP because they are an official with these powers
18 granted to them under the law?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. A remark to the transcript, so he does not need an order from the
21 minister and not the ministry. I hope the witness understood. I would
22 just like to have this corrected in the transcript.
23 And now that we're talking about officials with powers, sir, in
24 response to a question by the Prosecutor, What is your rank, you replied
25 that you were an inspector. I'm going to try to clarify that. Is
1 inspector a title? I think that it is. Am I correct?
2 A. Yes, it is.
3 Q. I just wanted to correct that for the purposes of the
5 Can we call that a functional designation? I think that that is
6 how it's described.
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Now I'm going to move to another topic, sir. In response to
9 questions by Madam Prosecutor Ms. Korner, she dealt with that a little
10 bit, but I would like to go into further detail. We're talking about
11 appointments at the Ministry of Internal Affairs. You spoke about a
12 regular procedure of appointment within the MUP, and if it's not a
13 problem for you, if you can just briefly remind us how, according to the
14 law, these appointments should be effected.
15 A. All appointments would be subject to agreement of the MUP
16 headquarters in Sarajevo
17 policeman at the time in the SJB or a chief. The difference is in that
18 when we're talking about management posts --
19 Q. I apologise. I'm going to ask you about that later, so don't
20 rush ahead. So I have received an answer from you that I was interested
22 I would just like to digress slightly. The Ministry of Internal
23 Affairs employs administrative personnel as well as policemen and
24 authorised officials. Can you please tell me how one would become an
25 employee of the MUP, regardless of at what level, in the administrative
2 A. There would be a vacancy announced. If these were some special
3 posts perhaps no vacancy would need to be announced. The candidates
4 would pass some tests, and that would be that.
5 Q. And how would a person become a uniformed policeman?
6 A. At the time I was working there, a vacancy would be announced for
7 admissions to the police high school or secondary school. Certain tests,
8 physical and aptitude tests would be conducted, and then there would be a
9 selection process, and those who were accepted to the high school would
10 eventually become policemen.
11 Q. Very well. All right. Now we have clarified the regular legal
12 procedure. But you would agree with me, would you not, that following
13 the multi-party elections there was some changes, and that meant that
14 politics began to interfere in appointments at the MUP. Am I correct?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. You would agree with me that I'm to call them the winning
17 parties, I'm not going to -- so I'm talking about the SDA, the SDS, and
18 the HDZ, among other things, showed a certain interest for specific posts
19 within the MUP; is that correct?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. After the multi-party elections, these personnel combinations
22 began to occur. Am I correct?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. The parties began to push forward their own people into the
25 MUP -- or within the MUP at practically all levels; is that correct?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Was this policy so far advanced that they -- that even affected
3 the reserve police forces in order for the parties to find a place for as
4 many as possible of their supporters in different positions?
5 A. Yes, this is possible.
6 Q. Witness, sir, in this way wasn't there a danger that the Ministry
7 of Internal Affairs would have employed people who, according to the
8 regular procedure, would not meet the requirements for employment at the
10 A. Yes, there was that possibility.
11 Q. Would it be possible for the reserve police forces in this way to
12 accommodate many individuals who did not meet even the elementary
13 requirements to become policemen? Perhaps some of them even had criminal
14 records or were previously prosecuted. Did you have information about
16 A. I don't have specific information, but there was such a
17 possibility as the number of these people suddenly increased.
18 Q. So you would agree with me that the number of the reserve police
19 force suddenly expanded, and you allow for the possibility that among the
20 people who became members were people who had criminal records and such.
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Witness, pursuant to the law, would it be up to the Minister of
23 Internal Affairs to order that such persons be removed from the reserve
24 police forces? Would that be something that would be in accordance to
25 the law?
1 A. Yes. I would think so, yes, in adhering to the proper procedure.
2 Q. If we're talking about the imminent danger of war, and we're
3 talking about military conscripts according to their state of health and
4 date of birth, perhaps it would be convenient to place them at the
5 disposal of the military authorities?
6 A. In that situation, yes.
7 JUDGE HARHOFF: Mr. Witness, can I just ask you a question to
8 supplement the question by counsel. Do you know if any screening was
9 made of the new police recruits of their criminal background? I mean,
10 was it possible at the time to -- to ensure that new recruits to the
11 reserve police force and to the police force did not have a criminal
12 background? Was it -- my question is: Was it possible and, if so, was
13 it done?
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It was possible to check that if
15 somebody wanted to do that, but I don't know if it was actually done.
16 JUDGE HARHOFF: Thank you.
17 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation]
18 Q. I'm going to continue since I know how long you were in the
19 police. This policy of accepting such people, did it continue for as
20 long as you remained in the police?
21 A. For as long as I was in the police, no one was accepted in the
22 regular forces, outside of the regular procedure, let me put it that way,
23 but I think in the area where I was, that's all I can talk about, not the
24 area where I had been detained but in the area where I worked in the
25 police, up until the time before I left that area, no one was accepted
1 into the ranks outside of the framework of the rules, but ...
2 Q. I was thinking more about the reserve forces. Do you have
3 information about that?
4 A. No, I don't.
5 Q. I'm going to continue about the order to get rid of such people
6 from the ranks of the police. If on the basis of legal procedure such
7 persons were removed and placed at the disposal of the military, were
8 they then practically exonerated from their criminal responsibility and
9 not punished for what they had done?
10 A. No.
11 Q. Did the MUP minister have the power to exonerate them? Not only
12 them but any other citizen and allow them to evade the responsibility for
13 what they had done?
14 A. No, I don't [Realtime transcript read in error "done"] think that
15 he could have done that.
16 Q. You would agree with me, and you also said yourself that if a
17 policeman happened to commit some crime you would treat him just like any
18 other citizen. You would prosecute him or allow the authorised
19 prosecutorial bodies to deal with him.
20 Does that also apply to the dismissed reserve policemen? Would
21 they also be subject to the same procedure? Or if they had already been
22 put through this procedure by the prosecutor and the courts, would the
23 proceedings then continue?
24 A. In normal times, yes, that would be so.
25 MR. PANTELIC: I'm sorry for interruption. Correction to
1 transcript, please. Page 77, line 7. I think it should be clarified.
2 Witness said I do not think. Thank you.
3 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation]
4 Q. Witness, following the multi-party elections, you would agree
5 with me, as you said, that politics began to interfere. And perhaps you
6 would agree with my conclusion that in a way that is how the regular
7 appointment system within the MUP was disrupted with this interference or
8 meddling of politics.
9 A. To a certain extent, yes.
10 Q. Now I would like to draw your attention to one more new thing
11 that emerged on the political scene of Bosnia and Herzegovina
12 Crisis Staffs appeared, namely. How do you see them? How would you
13 define them? I know what your testimony was in other cases, but I would
14 like to hear you now say that. How do you define them, and how do you
15 see -- view the fact that they started to appear?
16 A. When I just learned about the existence of these Crisis Staffs, I
17 was already arrested. So I considered them as kind of staffs that would
18 deal with certain matters at the level of the municipality within that
19 structure, something like that. However, in the meantime I saw a piece
20 of paper about some law being adopted. I don't know what it's called.
21 Adopted in Republika Srpska or Republika Srpska Bosnia and Herzegovina
22 and I read that, and on the basis of what I read I came to the conclusion
23 that this Crisis Staff was superior, and it was -- it ranked above the
24 police itself, above police forces, which was anachronistic as far as I'm
25 concerned. I don't know whoever adopted that, but what do I know.
1 Q. Well, I believe that you identified -- you testified identically
2 in a different case, and you used the exact same term, anachronistic.
3 Would you say it was more a question of an abnormal situation? Would you
4 agree with me?
5 A. Well, yes, certainly. I don't see the reason for such a body to
6 exist because this area was already regulated in the law on national
7 defence, through the Territorial Defence, through the army, and so on.
8 Q. So would you agree with me then that we have one more form of
9 disruption of the whole system of decision-making, of control and
10 management of the MUP through this existence of the Crisis Staffs? Would
11 you agree with me?
12 A. With the structure in this way of these Crisis Staffs and the way
13 that was regulated, everything had become disrupted. The to-date system
14 was disrupted.
15 Q. Witness, there will be expert witnesses appearing here who will
16 deal with Crisis Staffs, so we don't need to go into more detail about
17 their -- the way they were formed and their ambit, but I would like to
18 have your answers to a couple of documents.
19 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] I would like the witness to see
20 document 65 ter 690. Can we look at page 2, please. Second page,
21 please. This is just the title page of the document. Thank you very
22 much. And can the witness look at the Croatian version.
23 Q. Witness, do you see the document? Can you read it from the
25 A. I'm trying to.
1 MS. KORNER: Can we go into private session. This has come up.
2 JUDGE HALL: Yes.
3 [Private session]
12 [Open session]
13 THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session, Your Honours.
14 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I prepared myself for
15 this examination, cautioning myself on my notes that I shouldn't address
16 this witness by his name but by his pseudonym. So I do have this in
18 Your Honours, I seek to tender the document I showed to the
20 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, technically he can't do that because
21 this witness was actually locked up at the time that this document was
22 produced, and he can't do anything about it. However, if it helps, it's
23 certainly a document that's going to come in through another witness. So
24 whether it comes in now -- I'm not sure that -- are you trying to make it
25 a Defence exhibit? Oh, all right. It's just going to complicate
1 matters, that's all.
2 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] May I explain, Your Honour?
3 Your Honours, I'm discussing with the witness the impact or
4 influence of Crisis Staffs on the work of police organs, and they're
5 basically meddling with all the functions of the Ministry of the
6 Interior. An example of this are the documents that I'm seeking to
7 tender through this witness. Therefore, I believe this is sufficiently
8 relevant for you to have it admitted. Otherwise, if I may add, we could
9 have tendered this as our exhibit, but that would mean duplicating it
10 with the Prosecution.
11 [Trial Chamber confers]
12 JUDGE HALL: One of the things that we have difficulty
13 appreciating is the nexus between this particular document and the
14 witness. We appreciate -- pardon me. We appreciate what Ms. Korner says
15 about this document coming in at a later stage, but can this witness
16 properly speak to this document which was created -- which he didn't
17 create and which was created at a time when - thanks - when he had no
18 control over his personal circumstances?
19 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I have provided an
20 explanation as to why I believe this to be a good example of our
21 assertions concerning the behaviour of Crisis Staffs and their
22 relations -- their relationship to the Ministry of Interior as confirmed
23 by the witness. If you believe that this witness is not the best witness
24 to tender his document through, I will do it with another witness, but if
25 I may, I would just like to have the witness comment on this document
1 without me tendering it. Do you agree with that proposal of mine?
2 JUDGE HALL: But to what end? Comment on it to what end?
3 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
4 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] To shed some light on this issue,
5 to see whether the witness is denying or confirming some of the things we
6 have been discussing in cross-examination.
7 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, can I assist. This witness has told
8 the Court that he doesn't know anything about Crisis Staffs except he was
9 shown on a document in the last trial. This witness cannot comment at
10 all on a document he hasn't seen, on a topic he doesn't know anything
11 about. There are going to be many other witnesses, including the
12 signatory to this document, who my learned friend can ask questions
14 JUDGE HALL: It seems to us that you have taken this witness as
15 far as you can with this document.
16 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Very well, Your Honour. Let's
17 move on.
18 Q. In principle, then, I will just ask the witness whether he has
19 any information about the Crisis Staffs meddling with the affairs of the
20 Ministry of Interior and to what extent.
21 A. I don't know. I don't have such information.
22 Q. You mentioned a moment ago that you read some documents from
23 which you concluded that the Crisis Staffs basically became the principal
24 organs deciding on everything possible, even in things which fell under
25 the competence of the Ministry of the Interior. Is that correct?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Not only the Ministry of the Interior but even national defence
3 matters or All People's Defence matters.
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Hence you won't be surprised if say that they even decided on the
6 appointments of certain police station commanders, about mobilisation and
7 similar issues.
8 A. I don't know anything about the functioning of the Crisis Staffs.
9 However, I have read the particular document, regulation on the remit of
10 the Crisis Staffs, and based on that I conclude that this may well have
11 been the situation.
12 Q. Can you also agree with me if I say that they even appointed --
13 or established certain police stations, not only their commanders?
14 A. I don't understand. That they established new police stations?
15 Q. I have a document to that effect, but I'm not allowed to show it
16 to you. But would you be surprised if you learned that they did things
17 like that as well?
18 A. Anything is possible when a system breaks down.
19 Q. Very well. Then in principle, we can agree that this system, the
20 police system, as well as the system of managing, supervising, and
21 appointing was further undermined by the appearance of the Crisis Staffs?
22 Am I correct in presuming that?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. After having worked for the police, you began working in one of
25 the organs tasked with national defence.
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. And in a way, you are competent enough to answer several
3 questions from that domain. Can you tell me, what is the system of
4 command in the armed forces as you have been describing it in the
5 previous cases? For example, the principle of singleness of command or
6 unity of command, what does it mean?
7 A. I seem to recall having learned about it in the police high
8 school, if that's the principle of singleness of command. In a state of
9 imminent threat of war or a state of war, the police would be a component
10 which under such circumstances fell under the armed forces system. This
11 in turn means that the supreme commander was the then-Presidency of the
12 SFRY, and the system existed all the way from the top down to the units
13 at grass-root level. As for any further functioning of the system, I am
14 not familiar with that.
15 Q. I wouldn't expect it from you. I just wanted to ask you about
16 this pyramid, pyramid of decision-making and command in the armed forces.
17 At the top of the pyramid, as you say, was the collective
18 Presidency of the SFRY, but not as the Presidency but as the supreme
19 commander of the armed forces; correct?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. You also mentioned that this ensured that there is civilian
22 control over the armed forces.
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. Below the supreme commander there was the staff of the armed
25 forces with its chief. Is that so?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Further down the pyramid we have the various military units
3 without going into the detail now. Do you agree with that?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. The gist of my question is whether the pyramid could have two
6 tops. We know of the Egyptian ones. They only have one. But what about
7 this one?
8 A. This one, too, could only have one top. If there was another,
9 that must have been a paramilitary top.
10 Q. It seems you strike at the heart of my argument. The principle
11 of singleness of command includes only one top. If there is another top
12 the entire defence system caves in; is that correct?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. A question or two about the Ministry of the Interior next.
15 What happens if the Supreme Command decides that some police
16 forces be engaged in combat activities?
17 A. It was their right to do so under the then-constitution and laws,
18 and indeed this could be implemented.
19 Q. What is the statute -- the status of such police units and their
20 commanders which are made part of the armed forces?
21 A. They enjoy the same status as other members of the armed forces.
22 Q. You will agree then that their separate police authority ceases
23 to exist. They become members of the armed forces under the command of
24 their commanders [as interpreted].
25 A. Yes.
1 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] An intervention for the
2 transcript. It should be their military commanders instead of commanders
3 only. This is what the witness said.
4 Q. Witness, when such police forces are included into the armed
5 forces, that decision needs to be based by the supreme commander.
6 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction: Needs to be made by
7 the supreme commander.
8 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation]
9 Q. Do you agree?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. The entire police structure, then, needs to adapt itself to the
12 new situation, i.e., they need to implement that decision.
13 A. Yes. It's an order. It needs to be followed through. No doubt
14 about that.
15 Q. Witness, do you know what "resubordination" means?
16 A. I can suppose, I can venture a guess, but I hear it for the first
18 Q. Does the fact of subordinating police forces to the armed forces
19 can be determined resubordination? Am I making myself clear?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Witness, we come into the domain of the application of the law on
22 All People's Defence. Do you agree with me?
23 A. Yes.
24 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for counsel.
25 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, could we please show
1 1D004042 to the witness.
2 MS. KORNER: Your Honours, while that's happening, can I just
3 remind Your Honours that there should be time at the end. Thank you very
5 JUDGE HALL: Counsel, it is clear that we're not going to be able
6 to --
7 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
8 JUDGE HALL: It is clear that we're not going to be able to
9 complete the cross-examination of this witness today, so having regard to
10 the number of procedural matters to which we must return, we think this
11 would be a convenient point to excuse the witness.
12 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] I agree, Your Honour. But if you
13 don't mind, I would like to finish with this document, and I will
14 probably need a minute or two only.
15 JUDGE HALL: Please proceed.
16 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Could we go to paragraph 104 of
17 this law, please.
18 MS. KORNER: Could we just -- I'm so sorry. Could we just
19 identify that this is the old law, not the Republika Srpska law. This is
20 the Bosnia-Herzegovina, pre-the conflict.
21 JUDGE HALL: Counsel, perhaps we should pick this up on Monday.
23 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Certainly, Your Honour. We'll
24 continue on Monday.
25 JUDGE HALL: Mr. Witness, I have an explanation and a caution for
1 you. The explanation is that it is regretted that you're going to be
2 inconvenienced by having to remain in The Hague over the weekend. As you
3 would have heard me indicate to counsel, it is simply impossible to
4 complete your cross-examination in the time available this afternoon, so
5 it is regrettable that you will have to remain here over the weekend to
6 return on Monday.
7 The caution is this: You are now in the witness box, sworn as a
8 witness, and therefore you cannot have contact with counsel on either
9 side until you are released by the Court. Furthermore, in your
10 conversation with anybody other than counsel, you can't discuss your
11 testimony in this matter.
12 Do you understand what I have said?
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I do.
14 JUDGE HALL: Thank you. So the witness may now be excused until
15 Monday morning.
16 [The witness stands down]
17 JUDGE DELVOIE: First of all, on the matter of the videolink, the
18 motion for this one witness is granted.
19 MS. KORNER: Thank you very much.
20 JUDGE DELVOIE: Then there is another matter. On the 25th of
21 September, the Prosecution filed a motion seeking to amend its exhibit
22 list to add three photographic presentation of crime sites. Neither
23 Defence has yet responded to this motion. The photographic presentation
24 which relates to the municipality of Kotor Varos was created in
25 August 29. The two other presentations are currently being created by
1 the Prosecution, the Trail Chamber considers that the Prosecution has
2 acted diligently in producing this presentation and that it's in the
3 interest of justice that the Prosecution's exhibit list be amended to
4 include them.
5 And issues as to admissibility will be addressed at the time the
6 document is tendered.
7 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, the last matter is the two witnesses
8 who are coming -- who are scheduled to come on Monday of next week. We
9 applied way back in, I think, February to have them as 92 ter. Can we --
10 February of last year. Can we have a decision on those two witnesses,
12 [Trial Chamber and senior legal officer confer]
13 MS. KORNER: I overheard that, I'm afraid, but -- but,
14 Your Honour, I think something formally needs to be said. I mean --
15 JUDGE HARHOFF: Yes. And this is what we'll say. Look at the
16 clock, it's already over our time. We have to stop in order to protect
17 the interests of the interpreters, so we will rule on this, this
18 afternoon, and you'll be told the results.
19 JUDGE HALL: So we take the adjournment to Monday afternoon in
20 this courtroom. I trust everyone has a safe weekend.
21 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.49 p.m.
22 to be reconvened on Monday, the 5th day
23 of October, 2009, at 2.15 p.m.