1 Wednesday, 2 December 2009
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.04 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: Good morning. May we have the appearances today,
10 MR. DI FAZIO: Your Honours, my name is Di Fazio, I appear for
11 the Prosecution together with Ms. Korner, and our case manager this
12 morning is Jasmina Bosnjakovic.
13 MR. ZECEVIC: Good morning, Your Honours. Slobodan Zecevic,
14 Slobodan Cvijetic, and Eugene O'Sullivan appearing for Stanisic Defence.
15 Thank you.
16 MR. PANTELIC: Good morning, Your Honours. On behalf of
17 Zupljanin Defence, Igor Pantelic and Dragan Krgovic.
18 JUDGE HARHOFF: Good morning to everyone in and around the
19 courtroom. Before we bring in the witness, we have a small preliminary
20 matter to raise. It relates to the Prosecution's motion for addition of
21 a number of documents in relation to Christian Nielsen who we believe and
22 who we hope will be able to testify before the recess, the last witness
23 before Christmas, and according to the rules, the expiration of the time
24 limit for the Defence to respond, I think, is on the 14th of December.
25 That, however, would be probably quite late, probably at the moment when
1 Nielsen will be on the stand. So my question to the Defence teams is if
2 they would be good enough to indicate if they have objections to addition
3 of these documents, and if they have objections, could the Bench, on an
4 exceptional basis, ask the Defence counsels to expedite their filings so
5 that we can have the whole thing settled by the end of next week.
6 MR. ZECEVIC: Your Honours, we -- we received the batch 96 late
7 last night. I'm actually reviewing the documents right now.
8 It is my belief that we will -- we will provide, if we have any
9 objection, by end of this week. Thank you.
10 JUDGE HARHOFF: Thank you very much.
11 And Mr. Pantelic. Mr. Pantelic, do you --
12 MR. PANTELIC: Same position, Your Honour.
13 JUDGE HARHOFF: Thank you very much. That's very good of you.
14 Let's bring in the witness.
15 [The witness takes the stand]
16 WITNESS: ADIL DRAGANOVIC [Resumed]
17 [Witness answered through interpreter]
18 JUDGE HALL: Good morning, Mr. Draganovic. Before I invite
19 Mr. Cvijetic to complete his cross-examination, I remind you you're still
20 on your oath. Thank you.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning.
22 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Good morning, Your Honours.
23 Cross-examination by Mr. Cvijetic: [Continued]
24 Q. Good morning to Mr. Draganovic.
25 A. Good morning.
1 Q. Yesterday we mentioned an individual who had been killed in
2 Manjaca. His name is Omer Filipovic.
3 A. That's correct. His name was Omer Filipovic. Perhaps I in error
4 mentioned his brother's name.
5 Q. That's all right. Now, you testified about his death in the
6 earlier trial, so I won't dwell on this, but my question is this: Did
7 the competent military organs investigate the circumstances of his death
8 on the premises of Manjaca?
9 A. When he was killed, when Omer Filipovic was killed, and
10 Bender Esad, around 10.00 that morning, probably at the urging of the
11 camp commander, I observed and saw people in military uniforms coming to
12 conduct an investigation.
13 Q. That is sufficient. I will not dwell on Manjaca any longer.
14 Perhaps I interrupted you now, but thank you in any case. And I will not
15 really insist on Manjaca, but I would just have another issue that I
16 would like to raise about Manjaca.
17 You mentioned and you claim that 5.434 camp inmates actually went
18 through Manjaca. You claim that exact figure.
19 A. That's correct.
20 Q. You said that this was not information and statistics that you
21 had, rather, that it was something that another camp inmate from another
22 camp actually preserved. His name is Ibrahim Begovic. Am I correct?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. The figure that you came up with on the total number of inmates
25 in Manjaca you also did by actually judging how many pieces of bread, how
1 many slices of bread you had to prepare for any particular day. Does
2 that mean that you actually worked in the mess hall or the kitchen?
3 A. Yes. For a while I was employed or I worked in the kitchen.
4 Q. All right. I will not -- I will complete my questioning about
5 Manjaca now. It is not my intention to belittle the number of victims
6 that were there or in any way to show disrespect for their number. I am
7 not claiming that that was a hotel, and I do not wish in any way to try
8 and ease or actually relativise your impression and what you went through
9 in Manjaca, but I cannot agree with your claim that it was a death camp.
10 Namely, even the statistic that you came up with, which is an exact
11 figure, actually speaks to the contrary. If out of 5.434 inmates of that
12 total number, if I try to add up the figures that you mentioned
13 yesterday, the people who were killed and who died in -- in Manjaca, then
14 the figure that I come up is 99.75 per cent of inmates who actually
15 survived Manjaca. Fortunately you were one of them.
16 Would you agree with me that this factually contradicts what you
17 have claimed?
18 A. No, I don't agree with you, and if you like, I can explain.
19 Q. No, thank you. I've listened to your evidence here for seven or
20 so days, and let me put to you my conclusion and perhaps you can agree
21 with me.
22 MR. DI FAZIO: Sorry.
23 MR. CVIJETIC: Okay. Okay.
24 Q. [Interpretation] Over several days you spoke about your tragic
25 position, the very unfortunate conditions there, but let me just say what
1 I observed. Not knowing the number of people who were killed there, I
2 believe, judging your evidence, that at least 50 per cent of the inmates
3 had been killed, but I see that that's not the case. And this is not
4 something that I would like to insist on, and I don't want to actually
5 stir up some memories and the experience that you went through there, but
6 it is my responsibility as a Defence counsel to explore this.
7 A. Well, let me just mention a little thing that I failed to mention
8 yesterday of the -- when I spoke about the people who were killed there,
9 and maybe I made an error, using some names in error.
10 I mentioned the person Delalic, and I think I said Esad, but it
11 won't be Esad. I think it was actually Husein, his brother, Husein
12 de-Lalovic [as interpreted]. This was a Bosniak a police. There was
13 another person, Emir, his first name; his last name was Mulalic. He was
14 a Bosniak, a policeman, and I just wanted to add these names to the list
15 that I mentioned yesterday.
16 Q. Thank you. Well, what I would like to note here is that
17 optimists will probably work with a figure that I brought here and -- and
18 put forth here, and pessimists will probably use the figure that you've
19 actually pointed to, but we don't have to agree on this.
20 A. Well, let me just tell you that for the hundred days that I was
21 there, I faced death every single day, and for all these reasons I
22 mentioned that. The situation changed later in the camp, that's for
23 sure. But first hundred days while I was in the camp, every single day I
24 faced death, and not only me, but everyone else, and that is why I said
25 that at this time this was a death camp.
1 Q. Very well. Well, I said that I didn't want to stir up any
2 memories, but I just wanted to say that, you know, out of optimism, I
3 would mention this. And the Chinese have a saying. They say, "God knows
4 what good that will do." In other words. Had you stayed in Sanski Most
5 and not been in Manjaca, God knows what would have happened.
6 A. Well, I have to say that -- and I feel responsible before God and
7 before those people who actually survived and went through all this, it
8 is my duty to speak the truth here. And I also have to say it is not
9 easy for me to give evidence here against the man with whom I spent my
11 Q. I believe you are referring to Mr. Zupljanin, but let me tell you
12 now how optimistic he is about his situation at the detention unit. This
13 will -- I will go on a tangent, but just briefly.
14 Of the people who were killed, who died and who committed
15 suicide, both of our clients say that they enjoy -- or, rather, we enjoy
16 all the highest standards in the detention unit, but we complain because
17 we're not free. So it is possible in a situation like this to be
18 optimistic. Would you agree with me?
19 All right. I will move on to another topic. Yesterday, I
20 expected you to answer my question about the civilians, Serbs, who were
21 killed in 1995 in Sanski Most. I expected that you will tell me, while
22 giving evidence, that you're aware of this document and what your
23 position on this document was, but you said that you couldn't recall it,
24 so it is my responsibility now, and I've -- actually, this is what I owe
25 to the Trial Chamber and the Prosecution, I would like now to give you
1 the page and the transcript number. This --
2 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] So could we please have document
3 1D01-0370 up on the screens. Yes, that's it. Can we see it in English
4 as well.
5 Q. Sir, do you see the title of this -- this document? Can you
6 remember it? If not, just say so freely, and we're going to move to the
7 next page and then we can remind you of it.
8 A. I cannot recall.
9 Q. All right. Can we then please turn to page 2, the next page.
10 Mr. Draganovic, on this page 2 you can see that this is a publication.
11 You can see who published it, who published the preface. I assume you
12 know some of these people. For example, Mr. Krstan Simic is now a judge
13 in the Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, if I'm not
14 mistaken. Can you now see what document this is?
15 A. I did not have the opportunity to see this document.
16 Q. Very well. Can we then look at the next page, please. Can we
17 look at the following page in English as well, please.
18 Can you please read out these names so that I can see if you will
19 remember this now?
20 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please, could I just say something
21 before this proceeds any further. Your Honours, I first saw this
22 document this morning, and I've just cast my eye over it briefly. From
23 my initial look at the document, it seems to be a list of Serbs who --
24 who -- were killed in the Sanski Most area. Some of the names are
25 undated; many others are dated. Many of them relate to the period 1995,
1 1998, some from 1996. So they all seem to relate in the main, the
2 deaths, to the period that's right outside of our indictment period and
3 years after the events that we're dealing with here.
4 Now, if there's some other forensic issue other than tu quoque,
5 which is not really a forensic issue, but if there's some other issue
6 that's going to be addressed here using this document, then of course I
7 have got no objection. But if the purpose of this cross-examination is
8 simply to issue to the Trial Chamber and to the witness that a lot of
9 Serbs also were killed, then I've got an objection to this line of
11 JUDGE HALL: Mr. Cvijetic.
12 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Of course not. Of course not,
13 Your Honour. The Prosecutor must be patient so that I can put my
14 question in relation to this list. This is not a new document. This
15 document is Defence exhibit that was tendered and admitted in the
16 Brdjanin case. It had a different number, DP81B. It was admitted as an
17 exhibit, and this witness commented on the document. So my questions are
18 not directed for the purpose mentioned by the Prosecutor.
19 Q. Mr. Draganovic, my first question: Do you remember now --
20 JUDGE HALL: Mr. Cvijetic, notwithstanding that it was
21 exhibited -- that it was an exhibit in the earlier trial, the basis of
22 Mr. Di Fazio's objection is that so far such questions as you have asked
23 do not indicate on the face of it the relevance to this trial, and it is
24 that in respect of which I would invite your response before you proceed.
25 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I haven't even put my
1 question yet. I asked the witness if he now remembers whether he was
2 ever shown this document, and I'm going to tell you why. The witness
3 conducted investigations into war crimes when he returned to Sanski Most.
4 My questions have to do with investigations into war crimes on which he
5 really spoke about in detail. I cannot reveal to you in advance what I'm
6 going to ask the witness. I do not have the intention to follow the
7 tu quoque line of questioning. I want -- I have no intention at all. I
8 want to ask the witness directly, but first of all I must ask him if he
9 remembers whether this document was shown to him in the Brdjanin case.
10 JUDGE HALL: Proceed one step at a time, Mr. Cvijetic.
11 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] This is the first step.
12 Q. Do you now remember if this document was shown to you by my
13 learned friend Mr. Ackerman, who was a Defence counsel in that case?
14 A. I really cannot remember, because it's been a long time since
15 then, since that trial. Perhaps I saw that document as a witness here,
16 but I really cannot remember whether I did or didn't.
17 Q. Well, compared to yesterday, I do have a reference.
18 A. I -- excuse me, but if you're asking me about the names of these
19 people --
20 Q. I will ask you. I will ask you. Just one moment. Compared to
21 yesterday, I do have a reference. I'm going to tell you the page. I can
22 see my learned friend Mr. Di Fazio laughing, smiling. Any way, this is
23 page 953 of the transcript of the 23rd of May, 2000 --
24 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter did not catch the year.
25 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation]
1 Q. And this is your response to questions by my learned friend
2 Mr. Ackerman. So my question to you now is -- it's the 23rd of May,
3 2002. That's the date.
4 Sir, did you conduct investigations in these cases, and was
5 anyone charged or processed because of the deaths of these people?
6 A. I simply have no answer to your question now. I don't remember
7 the persons now. I don't even know. I don't remember what I said then,
8 because my recollection was fresher then. I would like you to remind me
9 what I said.
10 Q. All right. I'm going to tell you. On the page that I refer to,
11 amongst other things you said: "I am not sure --" you were speaking
12 about number 2, Pero Grubor.
13 "I am not sure. I think that I did conduct an investigation. I
14 think so, but I'm not 100 per cent sure."
15 A. All right. Very well.
16 Q. Have I reminded you now?
17 A. Yes, that's right.
18 Q. And that is correct.
19 A. And that is what I'm stating now. I do remember being at the
20 on-scene investigation when the body of Mr. Pero Grubor was found. I
21 identified the body, and conducted the investigation. I drafted a report
22 and I sent it to the appropriate organs.
23 Q. All right. What I'm interested in is this: Was anyone
24 prosecuted because of Pero Grubor or any other person from this list?
25 A. Well, you know very well which organs are authorised to prosecute
1 such things. Certain prosecutors' offices and certain prosecutors. I
2 don't know to this day if anybody was charged or not. There is a war
3 crimes department of the prosecutor's office in Sarajevo. There are
4 district and cantonal prosecutors' offices that are authorised to
5 prosecute such things, so I really cannot know that. I don't remember.
6 I have been a lawyer for the past five years. I really don't know.
7 Q. All right. Very well. Very well. I'm asking you this
8 because -- because you said -- you told me yesterday that you received a
9 document by the War Presidency of the municipality of Sanski Most to
10 conduct investigations into war crimes. Can you please interpret the
11 contents of that written document. What does it say? What exactly were
12 you supposed to do?
13 A. I think that you are trying to prove something incorrectly. I'm
14 going to say it again, and I said it yesterday, that I was authorised to
15 gather evidence on war crimes, and that is what I did. And I was
16 authorised to conduct certain investigative actions, and this is
17 something different from conducting an investigation. You would agree
18 with me. Conducting an investigation -- well, you know what that means.
19 Q. Did you keep evidence on the investigative actions that you
20 conducted in relation to this Pero Grubor?
21 No, no. You personally, did you keep it?
22 A. No. I had no reason to keep it personally. I did carry out
23 certain tasks. The documents are with the court or with the prosecutor's
24 office, reports on the investigation, and probably with the cantonal
25 Ministry of the Interior.
1 Q. Now that we're dealing with documents, can you please tell me,
2 these documents that are accompanying your testimony and which you
3 commented on, I noted carefully the documents that you said you found and
4 where you found them and where this document is being kept now. Before
5 this Trial Chamber I am asking you now where the originals of these
6 documents are that you talked about.
7 A. Which ones?
8 Q. These documents that you provided the Prosecution. Not the ones
9 that I just showed you now but these documents that we discussed.
10 A. Each individual document is in a certain location, and so for
11 each document I would have to tell you, if I remember, where it is, but
12 there is a trail. There is a record of the documents, and all the
13 institutions authorised to prosecute war crimes have such a chain of
15 Q. Sir, are all the documents being kept in one place, and can they
16 all be accessed in one place?
17 A. It depends on the documents we are talking about. I spoke about
18 that yesterday. I replied to a question by Mr. Pantelic, I think, that
19 one part of the documents was handed over to the cantonal prosecutor's
20 office. One was given the AID, one was handed over to the prosecutor's
21 office of Bosnia and Herzegovina --
22 THE INTERPRETER: And there was another that the interpreter did
23 not catch.
24 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation]
25 Q. In response to a question by my learned friend Mr. Ackerman of
1 the 23rd of May, 2002, you said that all the documents were in
2 Sanski Most and that you were keeping them, and you even promised my
3 learned friend Mr. Ackerman that if he were to send a defence
4 investigator -- team investigator, you would allow him to see these
5 documents with the permission of the court. I think this is what you
6 said. Is that correct?
7 A. That is correct. At that time when I gave the statement in 2002,
8 as you said, the original documents that were seen by this prosecutor's
9 office and by other organs, by other prosecuting organs in
10 Bosnia-Herzegovina, were in my possession. I was keeping the originals.
11 However, after that when I was supposed to leave the court, I handed
12 the -- or the documentation was handed over to the organs. Each specific
13 document that you are asking me about can be found. The original can be
14 found exactly where it is now.
15 Q. All right. Very well. Republika Srpska and the Federation of
16 Bosnia and Herzegovina --
17 JUDGE HALL: Mr. Cvijetic, the -- my question is in the context
18 of judicial economy. Could you assist as to how this line of questions
19 is relevant to what this Chamber would have to decide at the end of the
20 day in this trial?
21 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I am trying, amongst
22 other things, to check the authenticity of the documents that were
23 admitted as evidence. We intend to send our investigator to Sanski Most
24 to compare these documents with the originals to which the witness is
25 referring. This is the purpose of my questioning.
1 Q. And my last question that has to do with the documents is can we
2 get this written authorisation from the War Presidency that you have?
3 Can our investigators get that from you?
4 A. Well, you would have to request that from the Sanski Most
5 municipality. I don't have that paper now. I didn't think that I would
6 need to keep it.
7 Q. Well, I must remind you of your answer yesterday. You said that
8 you had it. When I told you that you had an oral and telephone
9 authorisation, you said that you had a written authorisation too.
10 A. There is a written authorisation, and this is why I'm saying that
11 the address to which you must send your request is the Sanski Most
12 municipality, the head of the municipality -- or, rather, the person who
13 was the head of the War Presidency was a witness here. His name is
14 Mr. Mirzet Karabeg. You must ask him.
15 Q. Well, I had the impression that you had at it home with you, but
16 perhaps I was mistaken.
17 A. All I have at home is my wife.
18 Q. Let me just tell you one more thing -- or ask you one more thing
19 about this written authorisation. Were there any restrictions in the
20 sense that you were to investigate only war crimes committed against
21 Muslims, or were you supposed to conduct investigations about all war
22 crimes that were committed?
23 A. I have already told you that I did not conduct investigations. I
24 just executed some investigative actions or tasks, and I'm just repeating
25 that again for I don't know how many times. Thus I carried out
1 investigative actions pursuant to the law and pursuant to what can be
2 referred to as grounded suspicion that a crime was committed.
3 Q. Very well. Although, I think you did not answer my questions, I
4 was specific, and my question referred to this authorisation from the
5 War Presidency.
6 A. Well, I was clear enough.
7 Q. Very well. I will move on to the next topic. Yesterday, in
8 answer to my learned colleague Pantelic's question --
9 MR. DI FAZIO: Sorry, I do apologise for interrupting. Just
10 before we forget now that we're moving on to another topic, what is to be
11 done with the document that was produced to the witness containing the
12 list of names, Serb, Serb names? That document that we -- or, I raised
13 an objection about, should at least be marked for identification. Just
14 so we have a record of what we're talking about.
15 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, this -- well, the
16 same thing -- the Prosecutor did the same thing yesterday, and he's
17 repeating. He's doing the same thing today. He is the one who is trying
18 to make a decision as to which documents I am going to tender. I am
19 going by the instructions issued by this Trial Chamber. If I put to a
20 witness a document and the witness does not recognise it, then I will not
21 tender it. Now this has happened already on a number of occasions, and
22 I'm not going to tender documents regarding which the witness says he
23 can't recall them, but they -- yes, they were put to him in the Brdjanin
24 case. So now the Prosecutor is trying to make me run counter to your
25 instructions and tender this document. Well -- but if you'd like me to,
1 I'll do it. So I am seeking to tender it, and let's see what you're
2 reaction is.
3 JUDGE HALL: May I suggest that as I recall we did yesterday, and
4 I think this is the basis Mr. Di Fazio's intervention, so that we have a
5 -- where the transcript is looked at, we don't have documents floating
6 out there, as it were. To maintain the link between the document and the
7 testimony as it runs, that we should at least mark it for identification,
8 and that's what we'll do in this case.
9 THE REGISTRAR: As exhibit 1D88 marked for identification,
10 Your Honours.
11 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Very well. Before I put the next
12 question to the witness, I would just like to draw your attention to
13 something that my colleague Eugene O'Sullivan said, who put the question
14 as to the fate of documents that had been tendered in the course of
15 cross-examination in the Brdjanin case.
16 I selected one of those documents. I assigned it a new number,
17 trying to get over the situation, but I think that your decision
18 regarding the admittance of some 100 or so documents is still uncertain,
19 and I'm not clear as to what happened with those documents.
20 Now, had those documents been admitted, we would not be facing
21 this problem now. Very well.
22 JUDGE HALL: That observation I can say I saw coming, but let's
23 move on.
24 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Very well.
25 Q. Mr. Draganovic, yesterday my colleague Pantelic showed you a
1 document that was signed by a certain Milos. I will not tell you more
2 about this right now, there will be other documents signed by this same
3 person, but you denied the contents, the truthfulness of the contents of
4 that document. I'll just remind you. There was mention there of the
5 presence of Green Berets, and so on and so forth.
6 A. Well, could you please put it on the screen again just to remind
8 Q. Well, I can ask my learned friend Mr. Pantelic to help me with
9 this if you insist that we give this document back to you, but in fact,
10 this document is not one of my documents. It is Mr. Pantelic's.
11 This is the document where Milos speaks about the presence of
12 Green Berets and their arming, and you said that this was incorrect. Can
13 you recall now?
14 A. Yes, I do. I remember it, but could you please put the document
15 again on the screen so that I can read through it one more time.
16 Q. Very well. If my learned friend can find that number, exhibit
17 number. I was not going to actually show you this document again. I
18 thought you would remember it. 2D21.
19 I do remember you asked for this to be enlarged so you could read
21 A. Yes, yes. I do remember that. And could it be enlarged again,
23 Q. Can you recall it now? Mr. Draganovic?
24 A. Well, yes. I'm reading it through.
25 Q. Well, don't tell me you've forgot the contents since yesterday.
1 A. No, I haven't forgotten it, but in fact in my view this is no
2 document. This is just some intelligence data that was probably
3 forwarded through special channels of the Ministry of the Interior.
4 Q. Mr. Draganovic, please. You commented on this document
5 yesterday. It is not my intention to put this document to you. I want
6 to show another document.
7 A. Well, my position is unchanged regarding this document.
8 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Could we now please have 65 ter
9 document 641. Very well. Perhaps we can just zoom out a bit so that we
10 can see the provenance of this document and so on.
11 Q. Now, please take a look at this document and see who the author
12 of it is. So you will agree with me this is the public security station
13 in Sanski Most; correct?
14 A. Well, please allow me to just read it.
15 Q. Mr. Draganovic.
16 A. Well, I'm waiting for your question.
17 Q. This information from the public security station sent to the
18 Banja Luka Security Services Centre relates to the number of weapons that
19 were surrendered or seized up until, as we can see the date on this
20 document, the 2nd of July, 1992. Now, would I like you to look at the
21 number of automatic rifles, semi-automatic rifles.
22 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Could we please scroll down the
23 document, because the Judges cannot see the statistics, the number. And
24 especially could we see the English versions, please. So now the Judges
25 can see it.
1 Q. And also the number -- the quantity of explosives, which is 3.140
3 Yesterday, you said in answer to Mr. Pantelic's question that
4 Muslims had hunting weapons at best. It was symbolic, really, their
5 arming. What is your reaction to this information coming from official
6 organs? So not from Milos. This document was produced by the public
7 security station.
8 A. This is a document that was prepared as sort of report by the
9 chief of the public -- of the public security, Vrucinic Mirko. Now, if
10 you're asking me about the content of this document, I can say that this
11 document, too, is incorrect, inaccurate, and it is aimed to be used for
12 propaganda purposes.
13 First of all, let me just tell you this: This document is dated,
14 if I'm not mistaken, the 2nd of July, 1992. Correct?
15 Q. Well, that's what it says there.
16 A. Well, could you please just scroll it up a bit. I can't see the
17 top part.
18 Q. Well, yes. It says there the 2nd of July.
19 A. Well, the greatest number of crimes in Sanski Most were committed
20 up until that date and in the course of the month of July, crimes against
22 Q. Well, Mr. Draganovic, could you please answer --
23 A. No, no. Let me just say this. There were 4.000 men, Muslim men,
24 arrested, and you can see the information here. You can see what it
1 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Well, I cannot question this
2 witness if he's just going to keep on talking.
3 JUDGE HALL: Counsel, Witness; question, answer. Please.
4 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation]
5 Q. Mr. Draganovic, would you please answer my question. So your
6 conclusion is that this, too, is a document aimed at propaganda and that
7 it contains inaccurate information; correct?
8 A. Exactly.
9 Q. Now let me put to you a bit of information, and I will ask you to
10 confirm it or deny it. You were an investigating judge, and once upon a
11 time I was a prosecutor. In peacetime the police would proclaim amnesty
12 for citizens who possessed weapons, and citizens then who possessed
13 illegal weapons, and they were given opportunity then to report and
14 surrender those weapons.
15 Now, you would agree with me that the number of weapons that were
16 surrendered was never even close to the actual number of weapons that was
17 out there in the field. Would you agree with me, with this conclusion of
18 mine? Just yes or no.
19 A. No.
20 Q. So you don't agree. Very well. Now, this information that you
21 see here, would the numbers be far larger if the weapons that were seized
22 by the military were included in this list?
23 A. Well, I don't know the exact information, data, but I know that
24 the Muslim people did not possess, did not have weapons.
25 Q. Very well. Well, they didn't have weapons, and this is
1 incorrect; right?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Mr. Draganovic, this is the -- I don't know what document this
4 is, but there are quite a few. There are quite a few that Mr. Pantelic
5 and I showed you, and you always claimed that they were incorrect, so it
6 is my impression that only the things that you are saying are correct,
7 that that's your position.
8 A. Well, that's not true. I will confirm what is correct and
9 accurate. Now, the information in this document is not correct, is not
10 accurate, and I -- I saw it immediately, the minute I set my eyes on it.
11 Q. Well, please, all right. You've said that, now let me move on to
12 another topic. Now, you are an attorney, too, so please bear with me.
13 Now, I would like to touch upon a topic that you've already broached
14 during your evidence when you said that in the course of 1991, after the
15 war broke out in -- after war broke out in Croatia, Muslim -- Muslims and
16 Croats, military conscripts, deserted en masse and refused to comply with
17 the call-up papers, especially when they had to go fight in Croatia;
19 A. Yes, that's correct.
20 Q. You also said -- you also said that you knew that at that time
21 the Criminal Code of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia was
22 still in effect, and it envisaged that this kind of conduct is a criminal
23 offence; correct?
24 A. Well, I can't remember saying that, but if that is what it says
25 in the transcript, then I did.
1 Q. Well, yes. It is in the transcript, but I'm asking you now. Was
2 this correct? Was the Criminal Code still in effect?
3 A. Yes, it was.
4 Q. Did the competent authorities actually take any measures to
5 prosecute these large numbers of conscripts who did not report when they
6 were called up?
7 A. Well, I do not know of any proceedings being instigated by the
8 military organs except in a few individual cases concerning individuals
9 who were transferred from Manjaca camp to the camp near Bijeljina. I
10 forget the name of that camp -- Batkovic.
11 Q. And yet you claim that your personal view is that this is not a
12 criminal offence. So if military conscripts are forced to participate in
13 a war and fight against a people, a nation, that this is not -- that this
14 is not really a criminal offence.
15 Have I interpreted your position correctly?
16 A. Well, I am here to testify about facts.
17 Q. Well -- but this is what you said. So is that your view?
18 A. Well, if that's what's in the transcript, the transcript of 2002
19 in the Talic-Brdjanin case, then that is what I said then, and that would
20 still be my position today.
21 Q. So your position is that the Muslim military conscripts, if they
22 were to go to Croatia, would actually take sides and -- take sides with
23 one and against another ethnic group, and that for this reason they --
24 this would not be appropriate. Would you tell me, is this the reason why
25 they didn't want to take part?
1 A. Well, I don't know if that was my answer, if that was verbatim
2 what I said in response to that question.
3 Q. Well, no. That's my question. Would that mean taking sides?
4 A. Well, I can't even begin to think about it.
5 Q. Well, what is your position?
6 A. Well, I didn't really understand your question.
7 Q. Well, all right. Why, according to you, did they refuse to
8 participate in that war?
9 A. Whom are you referring to?
10 Q. Well, military conscripts, Muslims and Croats when they were
11 called up to join the 6th Krajina Brigade to fight in Croatia in
12 Titova Korenica?
13 A. Well, there were at least -- the reasons were at least threefold.
14 There were at least three reasons.
15 Q. Well, tell us.
16 A. Well, the Republic of Croatia had already decided by that time to
17 declare independence, in other words, to become an independent state.
18 That's number one.
19 Two, I think that not even the military commands insisted at the
20 time that Bosniak -- or, rather, Muslim people and Croatian people go and
21 fight. I think they actually followed the principle of voluntary
22 participation, and I recall -- I have already given the first reason.
23 This is the second reason.
24 The third is the senselessness of the citizens of one state going
25 to war to another and to fight the same people, their own people, because
1 Croats in Bosnia and Croats in -- in Croatia are one people.
2 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] All right. Can we look at
4 Q. I'm waiting for the English, and then I can put the question to
6 Can you please look at the title page, Mr. Draganovic. First of
7 all, I'm interested, can you see up in the left-hand corner what it says?
8 A. Well, it's very difficult. The document is difficult to read.
9 If you have a hard copy, could you please show it to me.
10 Q. Yes, I can provide you with a hard copy.
11 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Could the usher please assist.
12 Q. Can you now see better? The date is the 8th of July, 1991. You
13 can see that up in the top right-hand corner, "Party of Democratic Action
14 of Sarajevo." And this is a list of candidates for training as special
15 forces in the MUP of the Republic of Croatia.
16 Can we please just look, because all that follows now is a list
17 with first and last names. Can you please look at the year and the final
18 number, at least on that list.
19 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Can we also have page by page on
20 the screen. Very well.
21 Q. Have you looked at it?
22 A. Yes, I've looked at the document.
23 Q. All right. Can we also look at the same thing in the English
24 version. Just go page by page.
25 MR. DI FAZIO: There is no page -- list of pages in English
1 because it's just -- they're just names, and they can be read just as
2 easily in B/C/S.
3 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Yes, of course. There is no text
4 to be translated. Okay. There is some text at the end, so can we now
5 look at the last page, please. Okay. All right. And can we check if
6 there is this last page in English? All right. Okay. This is the last
8 Q. Mr. Draganovic, what it says there is that the last -- "the list
9 ends with number 463. You will get more entries of this list in seven
10 days." And then there is a signature and a stamp. Did you seen that?
11 A. Yes, I've seen that.
12 Q. Here is my question: Mr. Draganovic, on that date and at that
13 time, Bosnia-Herzegovina had a ministry of internal -- yes, just listen
14 to me now and to my questions.
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. As part of the ministry, there was a school for policemen. If
17 you know, it was at Draca. Do you know anything about that?
18 A. That is correct.
19 Q. The school was attended by cadets, young future policemen, as
20 well as so-called course participants who were there in order to become
21 policemen at an accelerated rate; is that correct?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. And all that was under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of the
24 Internal Affairs; is that correct?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. How do you explain the fact that the democratic -- Party of
2 Democratic Action now was sending military conscript, and you can see
3 that by their date of birth, to Croatia to train there in some special
4 forces during the war?
5 A. I've never seen this document. I've never heard of anything like
6 it. I've never heard that a list of candidates existed for special
7 training in the Republic of Croatia and that they were sent by the Party
8 of Democratic Action in Sarajevo.
9 Q. Mr. Draganovic, I'm showing it to you.
10 A. I'm seeing it for the first time, and I never heard anything
11 about it.
12 Q. Do you doubt the accuracy of what is stated here?
13 A. Of course I do, because had anything like that happened, I would
14 have perhaps known something about it. But I see here --
15 Q. Mr. Draganovic, a specific question --
16 A. I see the wrong address for the Party of Democratic Action in
17 Sarajevo here.
18 Q. Just tell me whether this could also be a document of propaganda.
19 A. I don't know. I can't say anything about this document, because
20 I don't know anything about this document.
21 Q. All right. I'm going to tell you then, and you can please tell
22 me whether my assertion is correct. Muslim military conscripts under the
23 patronage of the Party of Democratic Action went to the front in Croatia
24 and returned with uniforms and weapons and entered units of the
25 Patriotic League and the Green Berets when they returned to Bosnia and
2 Is my assertion logical?
3 A. You are really asking me something that I don't know and
4 something that I cannot really say anything about.
5 Q. Well, let's say I am asserting, so please tell me whether this is
6 possible and logical.
7 A. I think that this is not correct what you have just asserted.
8 Q. All right. Just one moment. Let me finish.
9 It's possible that some citizens from Bosnia and Herzegovina were
10 in some Croatian units in the MUP of the Republic of Croatia, because
11 people went there and they were employed in the police.
12 Mr. Draganovic, my specific question --
13 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] I'm just trying to interrupt the
15 Q. My specific question and you answered, do you know if any -- if
16 there were organised groups going to Croatia in this manner? Do you know
17 anything about that?
18 A. No. As far as I know nothing like that happened.
19 Q. All right. We'll bring military experts before this
20 Trial Chamber. We will provide other lists, other information,
21 especially lists on the arming of Muslims from Croatia, from Romania, but
22 you say that you don't know anything about that; is that correct?
23 A. Look, perhaps I knew something, but you're not asking me.
24 Q. Well, I'm not going ask you. I'm going to move on. I have
25 another ten minutes, so permit me to put my next question to you.
1 Mr. Draganovic -- all right, we're going back to Sanski Most, 1992, which
2 is relevant to us, spring.
3 You said that you were arrested on the 25th of May and that
4 before that you were replaced as president of the court.
5 A. Expelled by force.
6 Q. Yes. Yes. That's what you said. I'm not denying that that is
7 what you said.
8 There were people being replaced in banks and the public
9 accounting service too.
10 A. Correct.
11 Q. For purposes of the Trial Chamber, let us just explain what the
12 public accounting service is. I am going to say, and you will confirm if
13 I said it correctly. That was the state financial institution through
14 which all the payments of social, state, and economic subjects was
15 carried out and which at the same time oversaw all the commercial
16 monetary transactions; is that correct?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. You, as the president, noticed this change, and you received an
19 order to change, I think, your account numbers and manner of payment.
20 Can you just please tell us exactly what it was that changed here?
21 A. What changed were the accounts, and all the payments were
22 directed from the SDK of Bosnia-Herzegovina, the public accounting
23 service of Bosnia-Herzegovina, to the public accounting service in
24 Banja Luka or Belgrade. The account numbers were changed.
25 Q. So funds no longer were flowing into Sarajevo. Is this correct?
1 A. After that change, there was no inflow or outflow of cash.
2 Q. Yes, this is what I'm talking about. All financial transactions
3 via Sarajevo were suspended.
4 A. That's right. All the payment transactions of that service were
6 Q. At that point in time Republika Srpska existed as a fact. It was
7 proclaimed on the 9th of January. On the 28th it received its
8 constitution and its regulations which called for such changes. Do you
9 consider that to be a legal act, a lawful act?
10 A. I must disappoint you with my answer.
11 Q. Yes, go ahead.
12 A. We're going back now again to differences in opinion.
13 Q. But just previously tell us. Was this, according to you, a
14 lawful act or not?
15 A. This was an unlawful act. This was a violation of the
16 constitution of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
17 Q. And this resulted in damage to the finances and the budget of the
18 Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
19 A. Well, I cannot say --
20 JUDGE HARHOFF: Mr. Cvijetic, I really have a hard time
21 understanding how this can possibly be relevant. Can you explain that to
23 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I'm trying to finish
24 the questioning of this witness with two documents about this and nothing
25 more. I'm just asking him whether he considers it to be a lawful act or
1 not, nothing more than that.
2 Q. According to you, Mr. Draganovic, this is not legal.
3 A. Yes. I've already given my answer to that question.
4 Q. All right.
5 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Can we please now show document
6 1D01-0355 to the witness.
7 Q. Do you recognise this document?
8 A. Can you please just zoom in a little bit.
9 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Can we zoom in on the copy, on the
10 left-hand side, please.
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] If you have a hard copy of that
12 decision, I would like to ask to look at it.
13 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation]
14 Q. Well, since time is running out, this is a decision about your
15 suspension as the president of the court. Do you know that?
16 A. Yes, yes, I know that.
17 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Can the court usher please assist.
18 Q. And can you start answering. How did this whole thing finish?
19 And I'm going to finish with your cross-examination. I'm not going to
20 bother you any more.
21 A. Look, I would need to explain the causes.
22 Q. No. I'm going to be specific. This is a cross-examination. I'm
23 going to be specific. Is it true that you were suspended? That is the
24 question. Yes or no?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. Is it correct that charges were issued against you? And they are
2 attached to this document. May I just look at the number. I'm sorry, I
3 just have to take the document back from you for a minute.
4 So you were suspended because a criminal report was issued
5 against you for a crime; is that correct?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Can I just see if the charges have a different number so that we
8 can look at that as well and then I will give it to you, I will give it
9 back to you.
10 The criminal report has a different number, so that is 1D01-0360.
12 Shall I give you this indictment now for you to look at it? You
13 probably know it, though.
14 A. Yes, I know it. There's no need.
15 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Can we scroll up the English copy
16 so that we can look at the description of the crime.
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, you can just ask what you
18 need to ask.
19 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation]
20 Q. I cannot until -- all right. What it says here in the indictment
21 is that you also redirected the funds intended for the budget of the
22 Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina and that those funds from the court
23 account, instead of the federation budget, you took out and used for
24 purposes specified in the indictment, and by doing that you caused damage
25 to the budget by appropriating funds in the amount of 187.961.2. Is that
1 what it says in the indictment?
2 A. It is incorrect.
3 Q. I'm saying is that what it says in the indictment?
4 A. No, it does not say that in the indictment.
5 Q. Well, then you tell us what it says.
6 A. You're putting the question. You ask me.
7 Q. All right. I'll put it again. It says as an official person
8 deliberately violated the provisions law by overstepping the boundaries
9 of his official position and caused damage to the canton budget in the
10 amount of 187.961.2.
11 THE INTERPRETER: I'm afraid the terms did not catch up.
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Not the federation but the canton.
13 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation]
14 Q. Yes. All right. Convertible dinars. All right. Is that
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. My last question to you now, Mr. Draganovic, is: Is this also
18 something that is falsified and that constitutes propaganda? Just
19 specifically yes or no, time is running out, it's going to be break now.
20 A. I really do not wish to answer such a question. It's a
21 provocative question, this is how I am taking it.
22 Q. All right, you don't have to answer. My last question. All
23 right. I'm telling the Court it's my last question.
24 Are you then competent to give your opinion about the lawfulness
25 of rechanneling funds from the Bosnia and Herzegovina budget to the
1 budget of Republika Srpska if you also are charged with a crime from the
2 sphere of -- of finances?
3 A. This is a financial violation that I committed, and I would
4 commit it again were I in the situation that I was in at that time again.
5 This indictment would never have been issued against me, had I before
6 that not conducted some investigative measures for serious corruption
7 against highly-positioned people in Sanski Most and the canton.
8 Q. Let me tell you, you don't have to defend yourself. Just wait,
9 just wait. It's finished. Wait, wait, I've run out of time. Wait,
10 enough, enough. You don't have to defend yourself before this Court.
11 A. Please repeat your question. I don't want to owe anybody a
13 Q. Just answer the question. You don't have to defend yourself.
14 A. I'm not defending myself at all. I would do the same thing
16 Q. Let me just give you my conclusion. You are not competent?
17 JUDGE HALL: Counsel and Witness, remember the interpreters,
19 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation]
20 Q. Well, we are wrapping up, so just let me put to you my final
22 A. Well, just please ask me. Put questions to me.
23 Q. Well, just allow me to give my final comment. Well, your final
24 remarks will be something that you will put in your final statement. Now
25 let me just finish with this. All the documents that I point -- that I
1 showed to you and Mr. Pantelic as well, for all of them you said that
2 they were inaccurate and that they just served propaganda purposes;
4 A. Well, that is not correct. All the documents that have been
5 shown by Mr. Pantelic and by you were not qualified in those terms by me.
6 I did refute or dispute their validity and their content, their accuracy,
7 and --
8 Q. Well, here's my final assessment. It is my view that you are not
9 competent to actually assess the validity of those documents and that you
10 are not competent to be a witness.
11 JUDGE HALL: Thank you, Mr. Cvijetic.
12 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I apologise. This
13 is the only document that I will seek to tender, because it directly
14 relates to the witness. He recognised it, identified it, but it bears
15 two different numbers, so... Well, perhaps I can help you with this, but
16 just let me look for it. Maybe the witness has it. All right. So one
17 of them was 1D01-0355, and the other one -- would you like to assign a
18 number to this document first?
19 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibits 1D89 and 1D90, Your Honours. The ERN
20 number of the second document is 1D01-0360.
21 MS. KORNER: Your Honours, may I just say one thing.
22 Mr. Di Fazio will re-examine, but I deplore counsel declining to let a
23 witness answer a question when he has put a serious allegation against
24 that witness and then doesn't give the witness a chance to explain it.
25 And second, I deplore remarks such as the final, not even,
2 "In my final assessment, it is my view that you are not competent
3 to assess the validity of those duties, and you are not competent to be a
5 It's an improper observation by counsel. It's not matter for
6 him. It's a matter for Your Honours in any event. But I think that is a
7 most improper way to end a cross-examination.
8 JUDGE HALL: So we resume in 20 minutes.
9 [The witness stands down]
10 --- Recess taken at 10.26 a.m.
11 --- On resuming at 10.53 a.m.
12 [The witness takes the stand]
13 JUDGE HALL: Yes, Mr. Di Fazio.
14 MR. DI FAZIO: Thank you.
15 Re-examination by Mr. Di Fazio:
16 Q. Mr. Draganovic, in order to get through this swiftly, I'd be
17 grateful if you'd try and keep your answers as brief as possible. I want
18 to deal with the last issue that Defence counsel raised with you, namely
19 the issue of the -- the charges from 2003. I'd like you to explain to
20 the Trial Chamber briefly, briefly and succinctly, what they were about.
21 What was it that you were supposed to have done, and explain to the
22 Trial Chamber so that they understand what the indictment laid against
23 you was about.
24 A. Your Honours, I conducted some investigations against some highly
25 placed officials, political officials, and also people who were in power
1 in the Sanski Most canton and in the federation. This was the first
2 serious case charging someone with aggravated corruption, and
3 unfortunately I was the one who was to conduct it.
4 I wouldn't want to mention of names of these individuals here,
5 but as for the indictment against me, it was politically motivated. The
6 description in the indictment is the result of the work of a commission
7 of the Una Sana canton government which oversaw or inspected my work in
8 the court, Sanski Most court.
9 When I conducted these investigations - and this lasted over a
10 period of time - it was my responsibility in the course of this work to
11 provide funding for the court so that it could be in operation, and of
12 course some of the fees, the court fees, I ordered to be channeled to the
13 court account in order to cover the costs and the expenses that the court
14 had. This was done by other presidents of the courts both in our cantons
15 and in the federation, because under the law on court fees of the
16 Una Sana canton, it is envisaged or it is specified that these fees are
17 to be used by the court itself, and this revenue is to provide for its
18 material and financial needs. And I even had verbal approval from the
19 minister of justice to proceed in this way.
20 However, I have to mention here that the funds of the Sana Una
21 canton that were specified in the budget and allocated for the purposes
22 of the work of the court that I presided over had not been provided over
23 a long period before that, and there were even occasions where in six
24 months I would not receive any funding for the work of the court, not a
25 single mark. So I resorted to this method in order to provide for the
1 funding for the work of the court.
2 However, as for the charges regarding donations, that -- they are
3 correct. I actually used funds from another account, and in fact, even
4 after the war when the Sanski Most municipality was liberated and life
5 was beginning to get back to normal in that municipality and people were
6 beginning to come back, on several occasions I actually allocated small
7 sums of money to certain sports organisations in the area. Others did
8 the same thing, and I don't really consider this a major violation,
9 because these, too, were organisations of general social benefit.
10 These charges would never have been brought against me had I not
11 at this time or thereabout, within the court system in our canton,
12 criticised sharply certain decisions regarding payments of war salaries
13 to certain officials, and in this manner, in fact, I came in conflict
14 with some of these individuals who were the main actors in this whole
15 operation. So in fact then I was charged in order to --
16 Q. Thank you.
17 A. -- in order to place me at a disadvantage when new members were
18 to be elected in the judicial organs.
19 Q. All right. Well, we don't want to go into it chapter and verse,
20 and thanks for that explanation, but the essence is that you were moving
21 funds from one place to another for the purposes of the court, nothing to
22 do with you personally; correct?
23 And that applies to the donations that didn't involve your
24 personal enrichment in any way? The sports clubs.
25 A. Exactly.
1 Q. All right. And -- I'm sorry.
2 JUDGE HARHOFF: Was the witness ever convicted for --
3 MR. DI FAZIO: I'm going to ask.
4 Q. And finally, and you heard His Honour's question, what was the
5 outcome of this charge laid against you? And again, brevity, if you
6 don't mind.
7 A. I was convicted [realtime transcript read in error "conflicted"].
8 However, I appealed, and my appeal was accepted by the Supreme Court of
9 the federation, and this case was forwarded to another court to retry it.
10 Over six years nobody acted on this, but I had a problem with
11 that because I wanted this to be brought to an end. So I went to Livno
12 and asked the judge there to call a trial for this. I actually admitted
13 that I had committed this financial violation, and I was fined, so I paid
14 about 4.500 German marks in order to pay for that fine.
15 MR. ZECEVIC: I'm sorry, Your Honours. 37, 24, I believe the
16 witness said that he pled guilty to the charges and was fined
17 accordingly. But maybe my learned friend can -- I wasn't actually
18 listening to the English interpretation, so maybe my colleague can
19 clarify this with the witness.
20 MR. DI FAZIO: Well, the witness --
21 MR. PANTELIC: And sorry, while we are on the same topic, just a
22 correction to the transcript. It's page 37, line 19. Instead of I was
23 conflicted, witness said I was convicted.
24 MR. DI FAZIO: All right.
25 Q. Anyway, you admitted the financial violation, and did that amount
1 in essence to a guilty plea?
2 A. That's correct. As the president of the court, I admitted this,
3 you understand, but that had nothing to do with my position as judge, if
4 would you agree with me.
5 Q. Okay. Thank you for that explanation. Another document that you
6 were shown in cross-examination was a document containing lists of --
7 lists of people, young men who were sent to -- to Croatia, and during the
8 course of that cross-examination, in fact at page 20 -- 27, counsel
9 announced that they were going to do various things, provide lists and
10 other information, et cetera. And then at the end of that said that:
11 "You don't know anything about that," presumably talking about either the
12 document or the issue of sending young men to Croatia. And you said,
13 "Look, perhaps I knew something, but you're not asking me."
14 Is there anything that you want to say to the Trial Chamber about
15 that particular issue?
16 A. I was going to say that some people did go to the Republic of
17 Croatia. They actually applied there for work at the police of the
18 Republic of Croatia. They applied for a job there. These were people
19 who had been in the police force -- or, rather, they were the
20 National Guards. That's what the units were referred to as. And I do
21 not preclude the possibility that there were some people, both Bosniak
22 and Croat, from the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina who were members
23 of those police structures. As for the army of the Republic of Croatia,
24 I really have no information or knowledge as to that, as to the
25 participation of Bosnians and their membership in the army of the
1 Republic of Croatia. I had no information to that effect or that any
2 training was actually conducted, and this is the first time that I
3 actually hear of it. And I believe and think that this is not actually
4 accurate, this list that I saw.
5 Q. Okay. When the document was shown to you, and if you need to
6 look at it again just say so, just say so because we can do that, but
7 when the document was shown to you, you had some misgivings about the
8 address. The address on the document is "Party of Democratic Action,
9 Sarajevo, Marsala Tito Street, number 7." What is it about that address
10 that causes misgivings, if any?
11 A. I would appreciate it if I could see the document one more time,
12 if I could be shown it. I think that it consisted of 13 pages.
13 Q. It's a long list, and it can be shown --
14 A. Inclusive, the 13th page being the last page.
15 MR. DI FAZIO: It's ID00-4681. It's a Defence document, so ...
16 and unless I'm wrong, it wasn't even marked for identification, so
17 perhaps it -- at this point it should be. I'm not -- I won't be seeking
18 to tender it.
19 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] I thought I could help with
20 providing this document. That's the only reason I got up.
21 MR. DI FAZIO: Okay. I just need the B/C/S. Thanks.
22 Q. So perhaps if we can just look at the top left-hand corner.
23 That's the address on the document.
24 A. It is my view that this document is really inaccurate, because
25 why would the Party of Democratic Action of Bosnia and Herzegovina
1 compile a list of candidates for training in special MUP forces? There
2 is no foundation in any regulations or any law or in the platform of that
3 party that would provide for that, and I really consider this list to be
4 planted, as it were, by the Defence, that this is falsified, that this is
5 a forgery.
6 Q. Okay. So if I understand your evidence correctly, it's the
7 actual content of the document, what it says, rather than anything to do
8 with the format of the document or the address. Do I understand you
10 A. Yes, certainly, but the address also is incorrect, the address on
11 the first page, the address of the Party of Democratic Action.
12 Q. Do you know what it should be? Have you got any idea what it
13 should be or not?
14 A. I can't remember the name of the street now, but I'm certain that
15 this was not the street.
16 Q. Thank you.
17 MR. DI FAZIO: Your Honours, I apologise. I'm not quite sure
18 what the status of this document is. But at this stage, it should at
19 lease -- well, I'm not seeking to tender it, but it should be marked for
21 JUDGE HALL: Well, if it hasn't yet been marked, then we -- so
23 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P424, marked for identification,
24 Your Honours.
25 MR. DI FAZIO: Thank you. All right.
1 MR. ZECEVIC: I'm sorry. This is 1D document. I don't know
2 if -- I think it might create a problem in the future, because if -- I
3 mean, if the Prosecution wants to tender this document as an MFI
4 document --
5 MR. DI FAZIO: No, no, it's -- being marked for identification
6 doesn't mean it's evidence in this case. It's merely marked.
7 MR. ZECEVIC: I understand, but we are going to seek to tender
8 this document in the future. That is why I'm suggesting that this
9 document be given a 1D number.
10 MR. DI FAZIO: Oh, I see. I've got no objection.
11 MR. ZECEVIC: And MFI'd for identification.
12 MR. DI FAZIO: No problem at all. As long as it's marked by
13 someone, I don't mind.
14 JUDGE HARHOFF: But my understanding was that your team did not
15 wish to tender this document.
16 MR. ZECEVIC: No, Your Honours, we wish to tender this document,
17 but this witness says that he doesn't recognise the document. He says
18 that it's a forgery. He just said that it's a forgery. So -- so my
19 colleague, Mr. Cvijetic, and I, myself, didn't thought that it was
20 appropriate that we introduce it through this witness. So -- but we will
21 definitely introduce this document. This is a significant document for
22 our defence. And we have other documents that back up this -- this
23 document as well.
24 [Trial Chamber confers]
25 JUDGE HALL: For the avoidance of confusion, we'll just leave it
1 with the MFI number that we have indicated, that has been assigned.
2 MR. DI FAZIO: Thank you, Your Honours.
3 Q. Right. Last Thursday, the 26th of November, you were being
4 cross-examined about the visit of Mr. Zupljanin to Manjaca, and it was
5 put to you that -- this question was put to you. first you were asked
6 about a gentleman named Zarko Tole, a Croatian military man, and you --
7 and you said you remember him and you remember he was in Manjaca with
8 you. And you were asked:
9 "Do you know that he was a colleague of Mr. Zupljanin's from
10 before the war, and Mr. Zupljanin visited him on that occasion? Do you
11 know that?"
12 And you said:
13 "No, I don't really know that. I don't know anything about the
15 So you can't comment on that, and it's your evidence that
16 Mr. Zupljanin only went once time to Manjaca.
17 What about other police officer who came to Manjaca, did they
18 come along to visit old friends who were being held in Manjaca? Was that
19 a common thing? Social visit?
20 A. Well, unfortunately I have to say that no one came to pay social
21 visits to anyone. We, the inmates who were in the camp, we had all lost
22 our friends, the friends that we had till recently before that. So there
23 were no visits, nor would they have been possible.
24 I've already said that a number of members of the military and
25 the police came to the camp, members of the Autonomous Region of
1 Krajina -- or, rather, the then so-called Serbian Republic. Some of
2 these people, of course, I knew because for many years I had gone to
3 school and then university and then through work I knew some of these
4 people. However, there were no social visits to anyone in the camp, to
5 the best of my knowledge, and I would have known and could have known
6 because I worked in the kitchen and I was in the open, as it were, day
7 in, day out, and I could always know when somebody was called out to come
8 out or when somebody was looking for them.
9 Q. I'm grateful to you for that answer. Thank you.
10 You were also asked on that Thursday about a number of
11 personalities, police personalities. This is at 3928 in the transcript.
12 I just wanted to see what you say about the positions of various
14 Firstly you said that when you were taken to Manjaca, the -- you
15 were escorted by a gentleman, a warden named Vujanic, Vujanic, and then
16 you said he was actually commander of the police station. Do you know
17 what his first name was?
18 A. His name was Drago Vujanic.
19 Q. Okay.
20 A. However, I would just like to make a correction, perhaps, to the
21 interpretation. He was not the police commander. Rather, he was the
22 commander, komandir in B/C/S, of the police prison, a prison warden. And
23 as far as I recall, during that brief period he was a police commander --
24 or, rather, an assistant police commander, komandir in B/C/S, at the
25 public security station in Sanski Most.
1 Q. All right. And you also mentioned a gentleman named
2 Milan Ivanic -- rather, the question was put to you that if you knew that
3 Milan Ivanic was commander of the police station, you said he was an
4 assistant chief of police, and then again you repeat that had
5 Mr. Drago Vujanic was the chief. So who was the chief at the time that
6 you were arrested and put into prison?
7 A. I have to be precise here when referring to the official titles
8 of those individuals. The chief of the police, in other words, the first
9 man at the public security station in Sanski Most was Mirko Vrucinic. So
10 he was the head or the chief of all police sectors. Everyone else was
11 his subordinate. The police commander, komandir in B/C/S, was a Bosniak,
12 Enver Burnic, who was arrested at the same time that I was, and he hasn't
13 been seen since. So when Bosniaks and Croats were expelled from the
14 public security station, and I'm referring here to police officers, I was
15 no longer aware of the positions of those people who had been assigned to
16 certain leading positions.
17 Q. Okay. Thank you.
18 A. [No interpretation]
19 Q. That's fine. Thanks for that explanation. During the course of
20 the cross-examination over the last few days, there's been mention of an
21 organisation known as Green Berets. I want you to explain to the
22 Trial Chamber, again briefly and again succinctly, what exactly and who
23 were the Green Berets in 1992?
24 A. As for the Green Berets in Sanski Most there's really nothing
25 much that I can say about them because --
1 Q. You misunderstand me. I'm going to ask you about that. That's
2 another issue, okay.
3 A. I apologise.
4 Q. [Overlapping speakers]... Sanski Most eventually. But what I --
5 I just want a general explanation. Someone listening to your testimony
6 wouldn't have known what precisely this organisation is, Green Berets.
7 So explain. Who were they? Not in reference to Sanski Most or your
8 person experiences, but just generally, who were they?
9 A. The Green Berets were, if I may say so, a regular military
10 complement of the Territorial Defence of the Republic of Bosnia and
11 Herzegovina. That was their position in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
12 Q. All right. Thank you. During -- during the course of
13 cross-examination you were asked about the Green Berets, and you said at
14 3968, that in fact there were no Green Berets in -- in Sanski Most.
15 Earlier, however, you had been asked, at 3962, about a Green Berets
16 training ground at a place called Golaja, and you gave an answer saying
17 that that related to Bosniaks who were surrounded in the villages of
18 Vrpolje, Hrustovo, and Pljevci, and that you'd heard about that
19 particular episode while you were at Manjaca. Now, I don't want to go
20 into the details of the episode of what happened at Vrpolje, Pljevci, and
21 Manjaca. What I want to know is when you were talking about those events
22 at Vrpolje, Pljevci, and Manjaca, were any Green Berets involved?
23 A. There were some local people there who decided not to surrender,
24 and they withdrew. They wanted to defend their village which was in the
25 general area of Vrpolje. These people had the status of an organised
1 force, a Territorial Defence and Green Berets, but only in that area of
2 the Sanski Most municipality. But I've already said, however, that in
3 Sanski Most itself, in the town itself and in its suburbs, there was
4 really no organising of any kind, nor were there any Green Berets except
5 for those who were in Vrpolje village where the local people
6 self-organised, as it were. They refused to surrender when they were
7 called to do so by the police and the army and the Serbian authorities.
8 They put up an armed resistance, and thanks to them and their sacrifice
9 they actually took about 46 soldiers as prisoners, soldiers of the
10 6th Krajina Brigade, and they began negotiations with the command of the
11 6th Krajina Brigade. These negotiations were conducted on the 2nd or 3rd
12 of June, 1992, and they -- the outcome was a peaceful resolution, and
13 this group was allowed to leave in an organised manner on buses for the
14 free territory of Bihac under UNPROFOR escort, and then the prisoners
15 would be released, because these prisoners were on the buses with them.
16 This was done without any glitches. This exchange was actually
17 carried out with the help of the UNPROFOR, and all these men had some
18 weapons with them. They surrendered these weapons to the UNPROFOR when
19 they crossed over to the territory of the Bihac district.
20 Q. Yes.
21 A. These people were assigned, or there were -- they were -- their
22 status was recognised as members of the fighters of Bosnia and
24 Q. Were they commonly known or spoken about as Green Berets?
25 A. The Serb radio and the Serb command referred to them as
1 Green Berets at that time. The status in that sense was regulated by
2 those people only after the war, pursuant to certain legal procedures.
3 Q. Thank you. Now, on the 1st of -- Tuesday, the 1st of December,
4 well, yesterday, in fact, you were being asked questions -- anyway, in
5 the course of one of your answers, and this is at 3967, you said this:
6 "I'd like to note here that over those 15 to 20 days in
7 Sanski Most some 18.000 people of Bosniak nationality were expelled from
8 Sanski Most. This was up until the second half of August. And of that
9 number over 4.000 men, Muslim and Croat, had already been detained in
10 camps and detention facilities."
11 And you went on to say that numerous Muslim and Croatian villages
12 had been completely cleansed, houses burnt down, some villages completely
14 A. That is correct.
15 Q. Then later, at 3990, you said that you didn't know the exact
16 numbers of Serbs who were now living in Sanski Most and that -- that you
17 had arrived at that figure of 18.000 by looking at Executive Board
18 reports of the Serbian municipality of Sanski Most.
19 I want to show you some other figures concerning level --
20 population levels of ethnicity in Sanski Most.
21 MR. DI FAZIO: Can the witness be shown 65 ter 283.
22 Q. Okay. Now, we can see from the front -- the front of this
23 document that this is a Republika Srpska Ministry of the Interior
25 MR. KRGOVIC: Your Honour, can you see the date? I think it's
1 irrelevant. It's not for the relevant period of indictment.
2 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes, we can, and I will. And it's dated May 1993.
3 You can scroll down and you will see that date. You see? May 1993.
4 Q. And I want you to look at item IV in the document. So it will be
5 IV in the B/C/S and IV in the English. And the English, it's on page 2,
6 so I suppose it's -- yes. There we go.
7 So you see there the figures for --
8 A. I see them, yes. It says --
9 Q. Okay.
10 A. -- Sanski Most area -- may I continue?
11 Q. You don't have to read it out. But the figures that we see
12 there, numbers of Muslims and Croats that have moved out together amount
13 to 27.000; and numbers of Serbs who have moved in amount to 5.000. No --
14 A. That is correct.
15 Q. Just bear with me. That document, of course, it's dated
16 May 1993, so it must relate to information presumably that existed before
17 May of 1993. Now, have you got any reason to quibble with those figures?
18 Have you got any reason to disagree with what the Ministry of the
19 Interior figures tell us?
20 MR. KRGOVIC: Your Honour, this is calling for speculation.
21 Presumably exist before May of 1993. I mean, this document from 1993.
22 MR. DI FAZIO: Sorry, I understand that, and I'm not suggest it's
23 a perfect document, but it's -- it's a Ministry of the Interior document
24 purporting to give figures on ethnic movements in various municipalities.
25 And it -- it seems highly probative. The fact that it's May 1993 --
1 given what we all know of historical events, it can only be talking about
2 the events of 1992 and population movements that occurred in that time.
3 What else could it be?
4 JUDGE HALL: Mr. Krgovic, there seems to me to be a logic about
5 Mr. Di Fazio's explanation.
6 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour, but you will
7 see -- yes, Your Honour. But you will see during the proceedings that
8 most of the expulsions are in 1993. So this document doesn't say how
9 many people left the Sanski Most municipality area in 1992. We can just
10 speculate about the number during the first five months, and then how
11 many in 1992. The witness is not a demographic expert so that he could
12 confirm or say something like that. In any case, we will have
13 Ms. Ewa Tabeau testify about the movement of the population in that
14 period. This document has to do exclusively with 1993, and we cannot
15 establish on the basis of this document how many people left in 1992 and
16 how many left in the first five months of 1993.
17 MR. DI FAZIO: Well, the witness said 18.000 himself. I can give
18 you the quote from his evidence. He said --
19 JUDGE HARHOFF: Mr. Di Fazio, do you have any information to
20 suggest whether this document is cumulative or temporarily limited?
21 MR. DI FAZIO: No. It's -- I've no -- no information suggesting
22 matters one way or the other. The document speaks for itself. It's
23 presumably been prepared with some degree of attention to detail. Where
24 there's data that is not applicable or unavailable relating to Serbs, for
25 instance, it says so. It doesn't claim to be perfect. For example, in
1 Prijedor it says only about 14.000 Serbs moved in. It's not meant to be
2 a document that is presumably by the authors. It wasn't meant to be a
3 document made with demographic precision.
4 JUDGE HARHOFF: I understand.
5 MR. DI FAZIO: That's not the point of it. But taken together
6 with the evidence of this witness, that, well, if he says 18.000 moved
7 out and here you've got a police document saying 24.000 moved out, I
8 wondered if there was any disagreement by this witness.
9 JUDGE HARHOFF: The point as I understood it made by
10 Counsel Krgovic was that this only applies to 1993 and that there might
11 be different figures for 1992. So that is why I asked you whether this
12 was cumulative, meaning that it would cover the number of persons who had
13 left Sanski Most up to and including May 1993.
14 MR. DI FAZIO: Well, the point made by Mr. Krgovic is -- can't be
15 founded, at least from what I can see of the document. This is no --
16 no -- because it's not, as you say, temporarily demarcated. We don't
17 know if this is talking about May of 1993 or going all the way back.
18 Given the numbers --
19 JUDGE HARHOFF: Let's move on.
20 MR. DI FAZIO: I'd like to tender the document.
21 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, the Defence objects
22 to the admission of this document. First of all, it is outside of the
23 time period covered by the indictment, and then you cannot see from it to
24 which period it refers. It refers to 1993. I don't know how much this
25 document can help the Trial Chamber. You've heard the witness who gave
1 his assessment, but there are other ways to establish the number of
2 citizens who left the Sanski Most municipality, and it's not possible to
3 do that through this document. I don't know how much this document can
4 assist the Trial Chamber in that manner.
5 MR. DI FAZIO: Can I just ask one or two more questions that
6 might assist you in deciding this issue, of the witness. Just one or two
7 if Your Honours don't mind.
8 Q. How many Muslims were living in Sanski Most before the outbreak
9 of war -- or at least let me ask, before April of 1992 what were the
10 demographics? Have you got any idea?
11 A. I spoke about the ethnic composition of the municipality in my
12 testimony. As far as I can remember, the total number of the population
13 was about 61.000 inhabitants in Sanski Most municipality. There is an
14 exact figure mentioned in the testimony, but it's about 61.000. Of that,
15 the majority population were Bosniaks, Muslims, and they accounted for
16 29.000 in the municipality of Sanski Most. Approximately it's 29.000. I
17 remember that, because I was also the president of the municipal
18 electoral commission, and this list from 1991 was used, so I remember
20 MR. DI FAZIO: Your Honours, given that evidence, 29.000 Muslims,
21 April of 1992. He says 18.000 moved out. This, on the face of it,
22 police document says 24.000, all Muslims and Croats, by at least May of
23 1993 had moved out. Now, the numbers marry, and the document more or
24 less marries up to reflect the witness's evidence. For that reason it
25 should be tendered.
1 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, do I not wish to
2 repeat the objection stated by my learned friend Mr. Krgovic. I have a
3 principled problem, a general problem. I think that it is not in
4 accordance with the proceedings before this Tribunal to introduce new
5 evidence during the re-examination. If this is done, the Defence must be
6 given the opportunity to cross the witness on the basis of that document,
7 and I think that as a -- it is absolutely unacceptable to introduce such
8 a -- such a way of presenting documents and of introducing evidence
9 during the re-examination. Thank you.
10 MR. PANTELIC: And, Your Honours, just a very short submission.
11 This witness confirmed during my cross-examination that he is not
12 demographic expert. So I really don't know why we are wasting such a
13 time on that issue. Mrs. Ewa Tabeau, demographic expert for OTP, will
14 come as a witness. We shall have our expert, and then we shall clarify
15 all this stuff.
16 Mr. Draganovic is a layperson to discuss with him these -- these
18 [Trial Chamber confers]
19 JUDGE HALL: We'll mark the document for identification.
20 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit --
21 JUDGE HALL: Pending the testimony of the demographer.
22 THE REGISTRAR: That is Exhibit P425 marked for identification,
23 Your Honours.
24 MR. DI FAZIO: Very well. And just to keep matters going on this
25 topic, can the witness be shown 65 ter 292, please.
1 Q. The -- perhaps we'll just very briefly look at the front page.
2 Again, this is a Ministry of Internal Affairs --
3 JUDGE HALL: Mr. Krgovic has an intervention.
4 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes, Your Honour. I'm sorry, I didn't see him.
5 MR. KRGOVIC: Yes, same problem. This is period 1991 to 1995.
6 So how this document can help?
7 MR. DI FAZIO: There's, in this case, I can't remember how many
8 adjudicated facts dealing with population movements as a result of the
9 war. As my learned friends from the Defence --
10 MR. KRGOVIC: There is zero. There is no adjudicated facts.
11 MR. DI FAZIO: I beg to differ. But I don't have the adjudicated
12 facts on front of me, but in any event, notwithstanding that, it's a
13 matter of common knowledge that there was large population movements as a
14 result of the war. This is what these documents deal with. How can it
15 be said that they're irrelevant?
16 MR. KRGOVIC: Your Honour, in this case -- I turn to Serbian.
17 [Interpretation] In this case, Your Honour, in reference to my
18 client there is no decision on adjudicated facts. So referring to this
19 document and referring to that particular aspect is absolutely
21 MR. DI FAZIO: There are, for Mr. Stanisic, at least.
22 JUDGE HARHOFF: Can we perhaps cut through this. As far as the
23 Bench views this matter, the issue of the movements was raised during
24 cross-examination, so I think it is acceptable that the Prosecution
25 brings up the matter during re-examination in response to the answers
1 given by the witness during cross-examination. So that settles the issue
2 of whether it is acceptable to bring up the matter of the movements of
4 Secondly, on the issue of whether this is relevant, as we have
5 said many times before, this is a matter that the Chamber will decide in
6 the end. So let's see what we can make out of it.
7 MR. DI FAZIO: Thank you, Your Honours.
8 Q. So the document is Ministry of Internal Affairs. It's an
9 overview, as you can see. It relates to period 1991 to 1995, presumably
10 published or prepared in Banja Luka in February 1995.
11 I'd like to go to item number 11. It's the same in B/C/S, and
12 should also be item number 11 in the English. It's on page 8. I
13 apologise for not knowing the exact B/C/S page, but it's item 11. And
14 obviously relates to Sanski Most.
15 Okay. There you can see some figures. You've got the 1991
16 figures of ethnic distribution in Sanski Most. Serbs 25.000-odd, Muslims
17 28.000-odd, Croats 4.000-odd, and so on.
18 Now, you said that you were on the, I think, electoral
20 A. [No interpretation]
21 Q. Given that experience and your background in Sanski Most and what
22 you know about the population -- populations in Sanski Most, do you have
23 any reason to disagree with those figures that you see there for 1991?
24 A. I would just like to look at the numbers more carefully.
25 Sanski Most, 1991, 25.000, and then the percentages. All right. How
1 much are Muslims? Twenty-eight thousand. Yes, this information is
2 absolutely accurate. It's accurate. 1991 is as it's stated here. And I
3 think that this data is absolutely accurate.
4 Q. And then we can see the picture according to this police document
5 in 1995. Have you got any reasons to disagree with the figures there?
6 A. Just one moment, please. I do agree with this data. I agree,
7 because I know that about 4.000 stayed, and this was information that was
8 also at the disposal of the humanitarian organisations. So these people
9 were receiving humanitarian aid. And then sometime in September or
10 perhaps earlier, about 2.000 again were expelled to Central Bosnia, and
11 then a larger part of the half that remained was engaged on work duty and
12 were engaged on the front in different sectors. So from late 1991, the
13 army of Republika -- of Bosnia and Herzegovina, when they entered
14 Sanski Most, found 560 inhabitants of Muslim ethnicity. And I cannot
15 remember how many Croats there were, but it was quite a small number.
16 MR. PANTELIC: We have to disregard this answer of the witness
17 because in my cross-examination on my question when I ask him, How many
18 Serbs were in 1995 when this witness came back to Sanski Most, he said, I
19 don't know. So now he knows how many Muslim and Croats were there, and
20 on my question he doesn't know how many Serbs were in 1995 in
21 Sanski Most. This is -- this is unbelievable. Please disregard this
22 answer. This is unbelievable, Your Honour.
23 MR. DI FAZIO: Mr. Pantelic can put that into his submissions at
24 the appropriate juncture. If Your Honours please, I'd like to tender the
25 document, and if you're not with me, have it marked for identification,
1 and I have no further questions.
2 JUDGE HALL: Again for the reasons that we gave for the last
3 document, we mark this for identification.
4 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P426, marked for identification,
5 Your Honours.
6 JUDGE HALL: Mr. Draganovic, your testimony's now at an end. You
7 are released as a witness. We thank you for your attendance to give
8 evidence, and we wish you a safe journey back to your home. Thank you,
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you very much. It was a
12 [The witness withdrew]
13 JUDGE HALL: Yes, Mr. Pantelic.
14 MR. PANTELIC: Your Honours, with your permission during this
15 time when next witness is entering, for the record I must -- I'm little
16 bit -- it's completely other issue than this. I'm a bit tired with
17 complaining about the working conditions in this courtroom. Your Honour,
18 for the record, I kindly ask the relevant departments of the Tribunal to
19 have a fair approach with regard to the courtroom schedules. I think
20 certain principles should be followed. For example, the priority should
21 be for the joinder case with four, five, or six defendants in terms of
22 scheduling of courtrooms, and then the same principle should be followed
23 for -- for the other cases.
24 Here in this courtroom we don't have enough working space for
25 both Defence teams. For example, today Stanisic Defence is using four
1 working space; and we, only two. We need at certain stage to bring our
2 legal consultant and case manager. So we simply don't have enough
3 computers in this courtroom.
4 Please do your best to inform relevant departments that --
5 because at the other -- on the other hand, I know, looking at the
6 tentative schedule, there are empty -- empty courtrooms, Courtroom I and
7 Courtroom III at certain days, when we are sitting here and the other two
8 courtrooms are free. So on several occasions, I raised that matter and
9 nothing is happening.
10 And finally, Your Honour, we are facing on a permanent basis
11 another problem, that is the temperature in this courtroom, Your Honour,
12 and I raised that on many occasions and my learned friend Ms. Korner also
13 raised that. The situation is that the part of Prosecution is under a
14 better air conditions than our part. My special watch, Your Honour, with
15 the temperature shows me that here now we have 25.3 degrees celsius,
16 25.3 degrees. We are all in our robes. Can you imagine if are outside,
17 you know, sitting in the cafe in the robes at 25.3 degrees. It's
18 unbearable, Your Honour. We don't have fresh air. And also this is a
19 very important matter. This is a very risky environment in terms of new
20 flu that is all around. So please do -- do what you can, Your Honours.
21 Thank you so much.
22 JUDGE HARHOFF: Thank you, Mr. Pantelic. I hope trust you notify
23 the fact that by virtue of the difference in heights, the temperature up
24 here where the Judges are sitting is probably even higher, but we will
25 sustain the hardship of sitting up here.
1 The issue, I think, is clear. CMSS, is, as far as we are
2 informed, perfectly aware of the fact that all Chambers seem to prefer to
3 sit in Courtroom I or III, rather than to sit in this courtroom. So I
4 think that CMSS is actually trying to schedule hearings in this -- in
5 this courtroom only when there is no other option.
6 It comes at the price of sitting in afternoon sessions, because
7 there is a contradicting preference also expressed by all Chambers that
8 they wish -- that they prefer to sit in the morning. And if you have
9 noticed, I think this trial has gone on so far almost exclusively in
10 morning sessions. We have been lucky to escape afternoon sessions. And
11 the price for that is that sometimes we have to sit in Courtroom II.
12 As far as the temperature is concerned, we can regulate it.
13 There is a possibility that the temperature can be turned down, and you
14 will certainly recall from your experience here, that sometimes it can be
15 freezing cold in this courtroom as well. So let's just live by what we
16 have. Thanks.
17 MR. HANNIS: Just to complete the record, Your Honour, I would
18 like to borrow Mr. Pantelic's watch for the next session and set it over
19 here because it's very cold on this side, and I dread to think about the
20 cold being turned up. We'd be happy to swap maybe halfway through the
22 JUDGE HALL: Anyway, we will take the break now, and at the
23 resumption we would -- we would call the next witness.
24 --- Recess taken at 11.59 a.m.
25 --- On resuming at 12.25 p.m.
1 MR. ZECEVIC: Your Honours, before the -- before the witness
2 comes in, I was just reminded that I forgot to introduce
3 Miss Deirdre Montgomery, our legal assistant. At the start of the actual
4 last session she entered the court, and I missed that, I'm sorry.
5 MR. HANNIS: I guess I should indicate that I came in during the
6 last session and Mrs. Korner went out. I'm Tom Hannis, Your Honour. And
7 while we are waiting, Mr. Pantelic did kindly loan me his watch and I
8 would indicate that since he gave it to me ten minutes ago, the
9 temperature now has dropped to 23.2.
10 Our next witness is ST-110, Your Honours, Milan Trbojevic.
11 MR. PANTELIC: From this submission it seems to me that
12 Trial Chamber is in the best position in terms of temperature.
13 [The witness entered court]
14 WITNESS: MILAN TRBOJEVIC
15 [Witness answered through interpreter]
16 JUDGE HALL: Yes, please proceed.
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will
18 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
19 JUDGE HALL: Thank you. You may be seated.
20 Good afternoon, sir. Could you begin by telling us your name,
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Your Honours. My
23 name is Milan Trbojevic.
24 JUDGE HALL: And what is your date of birth, Mr. Trbojevic?
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I was born on the 26th of December,
2 JUDGE HALL: And what is your profession?
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I am a lawyer, and I work currently
4 as an attorney-at-law.
5 JUDGE HALL: And what is your ethnicity?
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Serb.
7 JUDGE HALL: Yes. Well, we note that from the rule under which
8 you are giving evidence that you have, in fact, testified before this
9 Tribunal previously, and moreover, being a lawyer, you would be familiar
10 with the process of the court, so the -- we would begin, of course, with
11 the side calling you, in this case the Prosecution. Then we will move to
12 cross-examination, and there may be re-examination, and after this, the
13 Chamber itself may have some questions. So with that, I would ask Mr. --
14 I would invite Mr. Hannis to begin.
15 MR. HANNIS: Thank you, Your Honours.
16 Examination by Mr. Hannis:
17 Q. Good afternoon, sir. You indicated that you had previously
18 testified at this Tribunal, and I believe that was in the Krajisnik case.
19 Prior to coming to court, did you have an opportunity to review your
20 prior testimony in that case?
21 A. Yes, I did.
22 Q. And having done so, were you satisfied that it was an accurate
23 record of your evidence, and if you were asked the same questions today,
24 would you give the same answers?
25 A. Yes, I would give the same answers, and as far as I could hear
1 the audio recording, I have no objections and no -- nothing to say about
2 any inaccuracies.
3 Q. Thank you, sir.
4 MR. HANNIS: Your Honours, we would move to tender his
5 transcripts. There are six days of testimony. The 4th through the 8th
6 of April, 2005, as well as the 15th of April, and the associated
7 documents in the 92 ter package.
8 JUDGE HALL: Admitted and marked.
9 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P427.1 through P427.27, Your Honours.
10 MR. HANNIS: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
11 Q. Mr. Trbojevic, we know that you were a lawyer. Could you give us
12 a little brief background about what you were doing in 1991 and early
13 1992. In addition to working as a lawyer, I understand you worked as a
14 judge. Is that correct?
15 A. In 1991 I was an attorney-at-law. I was a judge up until 1990.
16 So in 1991 I began to work as an attorney-at-law, and also in early 1992
17 I did the same. I was in the same profession.
18 Q. And I see that you were also engaged in politics and were a
19 member of the Assembly in Bosnia and Herzegovina?
20 A. I was a member of the Assembly of the -- of Bosnia and
21 Herzegovina. I was elected as a deputy of the SDS, although I was not a
22 member of the SDS. I had to put my signature on signing that I agreed to
23 be on their election list, and I -- and thus I became deputy.
24 THE REGISTRAR: I apologise for interrupting. In addition to
25 what has just been tendered, I understand that one of the exhibits
1 pertaining to this witness 92 ter package has already been marked for
2 identification, and it is P165.
3 JUDGE HALL: Thank you.
4 MR. HANNIS: Thank you.
5 Q. Mr. Trbojevic, in 1992 did you become a member of the government
6 of the Bosnian -- of the Bosnian Serb Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina?
7 A. I became a member of the government at the end of May 1992. In
8 early April the fighting began in Sarajevo town, and a number of people,
9 a -- who were in the leadership actually moved from the town to Pale. I
10 also had to leave Sarajevo, so I happened to be in Pale as well. And
11 Mr. Branko Djeric, who was the prime minister then, offered a position
12 for me. He offered that I stay in Pale and that I be co-opted into this
14 Soon thereafter Mr. Karadzic, as president of the Presidency,
15 decided that my -- on my appointment as the vice-president of the
16 government, or maybe this was verified in early June by the Assembly, I'm
17 not really sure any more how it went, but this is approximately the
19 MR. HANNIS: And, Your Honours, just for a matter of guidance and
20 my learned friends, I intend primarily to show this witness a number of
21 government session minutes, and I'm going to go in chronological order.
22 The list I submitted, I think, had originally some 75 documents on it,
23 but because most of those are discussed in his prior testimony, I'm only
24 going to show him about 25 of that original list.
25 Q. Mr. Trbojevic, the first one I want to show you is what has
1 already been marked as Exhibit P224. And that will appear on the screen
2 in front you in a moment. It's the 20th session of the government, a
3 meeting held on 3 June 1992.
4 MR. HANNIS: And if we could, I'd like to go directly to page 2
5 in both the English and the B/C/S.
6 Q. When you have it on your screen, I'm going to ask you about item
7 number 1. We're talking about the government being informed about
8 current issues. And the second paragraph says:
9 "The government has especially been informed about the lifting of
10 the blockade from the Marsal Tito barracks. They have expressed
11 dissatisfaction with the fact that the Serbian party is not participating
12 in the negotiations because of the fact that has been especially
13 emphasised, Serbian people is most directly interested in lifting the
14 blockade ..."
15 And the last paragraph:
16 "It's been especially emphasised that none has the right to
17 negotiate the issues of importance for the Serbian people without the
18 legal and legitimate representatives of the Serbian people. Serbian
19 people will not allow anyone to behave like that regardless of who that
20 might be."
21 Do you know who that's referring to in this discussion? Who was
22 negotiating about the blockade of the barracks on behalf of the Serbian
23 people who the government apparently did not think should be doing that?
24 Do you know?
25 A. Well, first of all, I cannot really read what's on the screen
1 right now. I have a problem. I can only see portions of the text.
2 As for the lifting of the blockade of the barracks, as far as I
3 can recall --
4 Q. I can hand you a hard copy that might be easier for you to read.
5 A. Yes, it would be easier.
6 Q. Thank you.
7 A. I don't know who negotiated the lifting of the blockade of the
8 barracks. As far as I can recall, this was done by some officers from
9 Belgrade. Now, which particular officers I don't really know, but I
10 think they were still the Yugoslav army or whatever the official name of
11 the army was. They were the ones who negotiated this. And I don't know
12 that anyone participated in the negotiations from our part, but if that's
13 actually how it was, I don't know, because this was an issue that was not
14 within my, as it were, purview.
15 Q. When you say officers from Belgrade, are you referring to members
16 of the JNA or ...
17 A. Yes. Yes. I remember seeing on television this column leaving
18 the barracks and planes overflying, and I know that up on Pale we were
19 commenting on this and how a large quantity of weapons remained for the
20 Muslims to use in the town, but that's -- that's about it.
21 Q. If you could go to page 3.
22 MR. HANNIS: And it's page 3 of the English as well.
23 Q. Above item number 3, four paragraphs up, there's a paragraph that
25 "Report about the work of the National Security Service should
1 be prepared and submitted to the government for adopting. Responsible:
2 The Ministry of Interior."
3 Do you know why the government was requesting a report about the
4 work of the National Security Service?
5 A. To be honest, I don't. Surely the government did need to know
6 what was going on in every sense including national security, but how
7 close or how secretive this service, the State Security Service was and
8 how secretive had it had to be, I really don't know about that to this
9 day, whether that kind of report had to be forwarded to government, or
10 presented to the government, and what format I don't really know, but I
11 can see from this text here that it was supposed to be done and
13 Q. Thank you. Tell us how long did you work in your position as the
14 deputy prime minister. From -- from May when you started it until when?
15 A. Professor Djeric resigned around the 20-something November in
16 Zvornik at an Assembly session, and this meant that the government was
17 dissolved, and -- but we remained in our posts up until January when the
18 next government was put together.
19 Q. So from -- from the time of this meeting on the 3rd of June until
20 you left the government, did you ever receive a report from the Ministry
21 of the Interior about the work of the National Security Service?
22 A. I don't think that I ever saw such a report myself. I do not
23 rule out the possibility that it was contained in a batch of materials,
24 but I don't think that I saw anything like that.
25 Q. Thank you. The next item says:
1 "A procedure for determining war crimes should be initiated.
2 Responsible: The Ministry of The Interior and the committee for war
3 crimes formed by the government."
4 My first question is who, if you know, was on the committee for
5 war crimes?
6 A. I don't know. I know that the government appointed a commission
7 for establishing war crimes against the Serbian people sometime in the
8 spring of 1993. I was, I think, it seems the president of that
9 commission. However, that is the next government, not the one that we
10 are discussing. And it's a different story, actually. That commission
11 did not manage to meet and set itself up. Then in May or June 1992 --
12 actually, I don't know if there was any commission like that.
13 Q. And in your answer you mentioned a commission for establishing
14 war crimes against the Serbian people that was set up sometime in the
15 spring of 1993. Was this commission for war crimes only against the
16 Serbian people or against non-Serbs as well, or do you know?
17 A. Yes. This was for crimes against the Serbian people. But I said
18 it was never constituted, because in my deepest conviction the intention
19 was not for it to work. Mr. Karadzic told me personally that I would be
20 the president of that commission, and a couple of times I talked with
21 Mr. Krajisnik about how are we going to organise this commission. Where
22 are we going to have it sit? How are we going to work? How are we going
23 to explain to the regional police forces that the commission is to be
24 supplied with relevant material? But this was really never rounded off.
25 It never started to function. Then co-operation on the assembling of
1 documents on war crimes was established with the institute in Belgrade.
2 I've forgotten the name of the institute or the name of the person who
3 headed it, but he co-operated with organs in Bosnia and Herzegovina,
4 namely Republika Srpska, and with members from the Ministry of Justice
5 and people from the MUP in this matter.
6 Q. Thank you. I want to turn now to another meeting. This one
7 occurred on the 13th of June, and --
8 MR. HANNIS: I'm sorry I may need help from the Registry officer.
9 I think this was part of the 92 ter package it was 65 ter number 1190,
10 and I don't know what exhibit number that has now. Or perhaps it wasn't
11 part of the 92 ter package, and I want to just show it now. 1190.
12 Q. And again, Mr. Trbojevic, are you more comfortable working with a
13 hard copy?
14 A. Yes, I would like one. It's a little bit too far for glasses,
15 this one.
16 Q. I'll ask the usher to help me, and I'll trade you for the one you
17 were just using. You'll see in a second that this is a meeting, as I
18 said, on the 13th of June. It's headed as the 27th session, and it has a
19 list of the persons attending. I note that apparently Professor Djeric
20 was absent, and as deputy minister you presided over the meeting. Is
21 that correct?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. And the point I wanted to ask you about here is on the very last
24 page, page 5 of the English. Just above the signatures of the secretary
25 and yourself. Two paragraphs -- or two bullet points up. It says:
1 "The government indicated the need for establishing the bodies
2 and taking over of the authority in newly captured areas, which is one of
3 the predispositions for keeping those areas within the republic."
4 Is that a reference to geographical territories that had been
5 taken over militarily by the Bosnian Serb forces?
6 A. Well, it is formulated like that here as if it was about forming
7 the organs in newly captured territories. I really couldn't tell you
8 which specific areas that referred to. There were no particular
9 instructions as to how to form the organs of authority in these newly
10 captured areas because all the areas were with mixed population. There
11 was no area where the Serbian units or Serbian organs of power were
12 entering for the first time. These were municipalities where already a
13 series of organs were existing and functioning already. So the
14 government pointed out to this need and then people discussed about it,
15 but I don't know what was the immediate reason for this being talked
17 Q. Beyond identifying the need for establishing the bodies and
18 taking over authority in those areas, what was done to see that happen?
19 Did the government establish any committees or propose any action? Do
20 you know what happened?
21 A. As far as I know, nothing. I don't know that the government sent
22 a body or a person that would organise the situation in the field.
23 Nothing like that happened.
24 Q. Okay. The next bullet point, the last in this minute says:
25 "The government has postponed the consideration of the request by
1 the Ministry of the Interior to barter the steel from 'Metalka' for
2 food ..."
3 Do you know what that was about? How was the Ministry of the
4 Interior involved in trading steel for food?
5 A. I don't remember the specifics of the situation, but generally I
6 know that steel was discussed and that it should be dispatched somewhere,
7 most probably to Serbia, and that some food would be given in return, and
8 I think that there is a dispatch on that where it was said that the
9 Ministry of the Interior cannot be involved in trade, and I think here
10 that they're talking about essential reserves, strategic reserves, and it
11 probably had to be done in that form.
12 I don't know who's firm Metalka is. I don't know what quantities
13 were involved. I know that there was conversation on this topic and how
14 inappropriate it was for the Ministry of the Interior to be appearing in
15 any actions where delivery of goods was involved.
16 Q. Thank you. It goes on to say:
17 "... it was concluded that the matter should be examined and put
18 under the jurisdiction of the taking over the commodity reserves."
19 Do you know what ministry in the government was responsible for
20 the commodity reserves?
21 A. It was the ministry of trade and procurement. I think that was
22 its full official title. I don't know who was the director of the
23 directorate for commodity reserves. I don't remember. I remember the
24 person, the face, but I don't remember the name. Probably it does appear
25 in the documents.
1 Q. Thank you. I would like --
2 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
3 MR. HANNIS: I'm sorry. I would like to tender 1190 at this
5 JUDGE HALL: I understand this is part of the 92 ter -- this
6 already has a number.
7 MR. HANNIS: Okay. I thought it might, but I wasn't sure. Can
8 we have for the record which number it is?
9 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P427.10.
10 MR. HANNIS: Thank you.
11 Q. The next one I want to show you is P231, and, Mr. Trbojevic,
12 this -- I will again give you a hard copy because that seems to be easier
13 for you.
14 This is a meeting on the 16th of June, 1992, designated the 29th
15 session of the government. The only item I wanted to ask you about in
16 this one is item number 6.
17 MR. HANNIS: It's on page 3 of the English.
18 Q. And that has to do with the government giving its support to the
19 draft concept of the wartime information system in the Serb republic of
21 MR. HANNIS: I think we'll have to go to either page 2 or 3 of
22 the B/C/S as well. What we've got on the screen now is the agenda which
23 includes item number 6, but I need to see the full commentary about item
24 number 6.
25 Q. And in the English, fourth paragraph down it indicates a working
1 group's been established to define and analyse the concept of an
2 information centre with you, Mr. Trbojevic, being designated the group
3 leader to work with Bogdan Subotic, the minister of Defence; and
4 Momcilo Mandic, the minister of justice.
5 Can you tell us, then, did this working group manage to get
6 together and do anything about creating an information centre?
7 A. I think that this group never actually met, sat down as a group
8 and reviewed any material or generated any material, nothing ever
9 materialised out of that. All of us here, the only person who actually
10 had some contact in terms of information tasks was Velibor Ostojic. I
11 think he was the minister of information. That was his official post,
12 and he had some people who worked, listened to the radio, the television,
13 followed the press, and wrote what he required. I don't know about
14 Bogdan Subotic and the military, how much they worked with those
15 information centres. I heard that they were such information centres,
16 but I don't know. I think that Momcilo Mandic and I did not really join
17 in any of that work.
18 MR. HANNIS: If we can go to page 6 of the English.
19 Q. And for you, Mr. Trbojevic, it's page 5 of the B/C/S. And if you
20 could go up three bullet points from the bottom. My English says:
21 "The Order on Treatment of War Prisoners. It was decided that it
22 would be released in the media."
23 Do you know who issued that order on the treatment of war
25 A. I cannot remember that I remembered, but it had to have been
1 written by the defence minister, because if it refers to prisoners, then
2 he was the only person who could have written anything on that matter.
3 Q. And do you know why it was decided to release it into the media?
4 A. I don't know to tell you the truth, but there was some logic to
5 present ourselves in nice and good colours, so probably the order was
6 written pursuant to the conventions from the laws on war, and that was
7 probably the sense in publishing that.
8 Q. Thank you.
9 MR. HANNIS: Your Honours, the document referred to there has
10 65 ter number 148, which I believe may have a P number now. And I just
11 bring that to your attention. I'm not going to show that to the witness.
12 He talked about it in his Krajisnik testimony, but I just wanted to make
13 a reference to it now since we were looking at it.
14 JUDGE HALL: The Registry confirms that, Mr. Hannis.
15 MR. HANNIS: Could she indicate the number for my record?
16 THE REGISTRAR: I apologise. It's Exhibit P427.7.
17 MR. HANNIS: Thank you. And I apologise for not having caught up
18 with the markings.
19 Q. The next meeting I would like to show you --
20 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
21 MR. HANNIS:
22 Q. The next meeting I'd like to show you, Mr. Trbojevic, is
23 Exhibit P232. And again I can hand you a hard copy with the help of the
25 We see -- we see you're present at this session, and I want to
1 ask you about item number 10, which I believe is at page 5 in the B/C/S.
2 And the first paragraph there at the very top of your page is translated
4 "It's been concluded that the Ministry of the Interior prepare a
5 report on the work of the National Security Service and the Public
6 Security Service and propose measures for a more efficient functioning."
7 In the first one we looked at we saw that there was a direction
8 to the Ministry of interior to prepare a report on the work of the
9 National Security Service, and you told us you never saw such a report if
10 it did come in. But how about this: This also calls for one about both
11 national and public security. Do you know if that report was ever
12 prepared by the ministry of the interior and delivered to the government?
13 A. I received a report or reports by the Ministry of the Interior.
14 I don't know in what period. I don't know whether that -- that contained
15 this part that concerns state security, but I did see some reports, yes.
16 That is definitely so. I even saw a report in which the Ministry of the
17 Interior, with a copy being sent to the Presidency or -- there is a copy
18 sent to the government, and the original goes to the Presidency. I don't
19 know. But I did see some reports, and I can confirm that there were some
21 Q. Did you ever see a report from the Ministry of the Interior dated
22 around the 17th of July in which Mr. Stanisic had reported that the army
23 and the Crisis Staffs were directing that non-Serb civilians be -- be
24 taken into custody, apparently for the purposes of future exchange? Did
25 you ever see such a report?
1 A. I really could state with a high degree of certainty that I did
2 not, because had I read it, I would have remembered that as something
3 that I would not have expected. So I think such an assertion that there
4 was an order to arrest members of other ethnic groups and to use them for
5 exchanges, I would tend to say that I did not see them.
6 Q. Let me take you to the last page of this document in both English
7 and B/C/S. There's -- there's a list of people under a couple of
8 regions, and your name is listed as number 1 under the "Serb Autonomous
9 district of Eastern Herzegovina," and it appears from the earlier text
10 that these were work groups that were supposed to go out to the assigned
11 regions and try and help establish more efficient working at that level.
12 Do you recall being named as a member of the work group for
13 Eastern Herzegovina?
14 A. There was no work group for Eastern Herzegovina. I was appointed
15 as commissioner in Eastern Herzegovina, and I went to the Trebinje
16 municipality, Nevesinje and Gacko, on those duties. And then again I
17 went to Herzegovina with the director of the commodity reserves whose
18 name I cannot remember, because they needed to make a decision on the
19 sale of some aluminum that was pulled out of Mostar, and so on. But if
20 that has to do with this previous question about the exchanges of
21 citizens, we didn't do anything on that particular matter, and there was
22 no commission in that sense.
23 Q. And do you recall on what date approximately you were in Trebinje
24 in connection with that trip?
25 A. It was probably summer, June or July. We went by helicopter. It
1 was nice weather.
2 Q. And the last paragraph in this document says:
3 "The government has concluded that all measures being taken
4 promptly for a more efficient work of the Republic Commission for the
5 exchange of prisoners. With regard to this fact, it is necessary to
6 secure the accommodation and other conditions according to a previous
7 decision of the government. (The ministry of justice is in charge)."
8 Do you recall what that previous decision of the government was
9 relating to the work of the republic commission for exchange of
11 A. I know that in the material that was shown to me while preparing
12 for my testimony, I saw that Rajko Colovic submitted his resignation to
13 the post of the president of the commission for exchanges. After that,
14 the president of that commission was a Captain Dragan. I keep forgetting
15 his last name. I think his last name was Bulajic. And as far as I know,
16 all those exchanges were actually under the auspices of the military
17 organs. I don't know that the government adopted any decisions as to
18 these should be exchanged, these should not be exchanged, these should be
19 exchanged more dearly, and these more cheaply. I don't remember any
20 single conversation on that topic, and I don't think that I saw any
21 decision in that sense. But I do know that the commissions functioned as
22 part of the corps.
23 Q. Okay. And the Ministry of Justice was also involved with the
24 commission for exchange; correct?
25 A. I don't know if they did anything specific. The ministry of
1 justice does have a service that monitors the prisons, so I don't know
2 whether because of that it did have a certain amount of contact with this
3 particular area, but if we're talking about prisoners of war, I don't
4 know that Mandic or Avlijas were inspectors for monitoring the
5 implementation of sanctions.
6 Q. What about the Ministry of the Interior? Do you know if they had
7 any role or involvement in connection with the commission for exchange of
9 A. What I can tell you about that is generally what I think about
10 that, but when we're talking about prisoners -- prisons, existing prisons
11 that had to do with the district courts, there were guards there guarding
12 persons who had been taken into custody, and the guards are from the
13 ranks of the police force, and any entrance has to be carried out with
14 the assistance of the police. When we're talking about prisoner-of-war
15 camps, I don't know if the civilian police did or did not and to what
16 extent co-operated in activities of the military police, and the guards
17 from the ranks of the military is something that I can only speculate
19 Q. You became aware at some time in 1992, didn't you, that in
20 addition to regular prisoners of war, that is captured fighting men, that
21 there were non-Serb civilians who were being detained and exchanged.
22 A. I don't know specifically how I could answer that question. It
23 was found out that permission was granted for international journalists
24 and groups to enter Manjaca, and they were permitted to enter Prijedor,
25 Omarska. We even saw footage with a bunch of people who don't look like
1 fighters. This is, I think, my initial information, and I think
2 that's -- that's what it was. So that could be when I found out that
3 there were civilians, because I saw women also in Prijedor, children, so
4 on. That could be the extent of my official knowledge on that matter.
5 Actually, what I knew about it. I don't know that I had any official
6 sources or channels to get information.
7 Q. Well, what about unofficial? Did you have any unofficial
8 knowledge or unofficial sources?
9 A. See, at the time I was Pale, this was summer 1992. We were still
10 in Pale without telephone connections, practically without communication
11 with any particular area. I don't have any business contacts with anyone
12 anywhere. You couldn't get to Banja Luka until the corridor was broken
13 through sometime in July, I think. I came to Banja Luka in late
14 November 1992, and that's when I began to mix and mingle with the
15 citizens, and that was when I was able to hear some things. Before that,
16 really, no.
17 Q. Okay. Thank you. I'd like to now move to Exhibit P233, and I'll
18 trade you hard copies again with the help of the usher. This next one,
19 Mr. Trbojevic, is a meeting on the 27th of June, 1992. It's the
20 31st session of the government.
21 And the first thing, could you, when you have it, look at the
22 first page where it lists persons attending. I have a question about one
23 of the names.
24 In the second paragraph listing attendees, there's a Slobodan
25 Belasevic in the place of Momcilo Mandic. Is that the name you mentioned
1 earlier as someone who you thought was working with the commission for
3 A. I think his name was Slobodan Verlasevic, and I believe this was
4 a colleague who was a misdemeanours judge before the war in Sarajevo, and
5 it is possible that this is a reference to him, but I can't recall
6 really. I don't remember meeting him there.
7 Q. Okay. Do you know if he was working in the Ministry of Justice
8 in late June 1992?
9 A. I really don't. I don't recall seeing him, although it says here
10 that we attended the same session. He sort of disappeared from view, as
11 it were, and I haven't seen him sense.
12 Q. Could we go to page 5 in both the English and the B/C/S. At the
13 very bottom of the page for you, Mr. Trbojevic.
14 MR. HANNIS: And near the bottom for us in English.
15 Q. It says:
16 "Due to the information that there is a variety of centres for
17 military training, the government has concluded that these centres have
18 to be legalised and put under a uniformed command or have to be
20 Do you know what the problem was with this, that -- that it came
21 to the government's attention and there was a conclusion that the centres
22 had to be legalised? What can you tell us about that?
23 A. I don't know anything about this. I have no idea what centres
24 for military training this refers to, nor did anyone point this out as a
25 problem, nor do I remember that the government decided to legalise them
1 or to dissolve them. I don't know anything about this.
2 Q. You never heard mention of a Captain Dragan or Red Berets in
3 connection with this matter?
4 A. Well, I have heard of Captain Dragan, but he was not mentioned as
5 someone who was involved with anything in Republika Srpska. As far as I
6 know, he conducted training in Croatia, but that's as far as I know about
7 it, and I really learned of this, and then I read about it in the papers.
8 Q. Okay. Thank you. If you could go to the next page in your
9 B/C/S, at the very top.
10 MR. HANNIS: And we're still on page 5 in the English.
11 Q. "It has been agreed that this matter be discussed at talks with
12 the army Main Staff."
13 Do you recall the results of any discussion with the army
14 Main Staff about these training centres?
15 A. Well, I've already said I can't recall any discussions on any
16 type of centres, and this could only -- this is only something that
17 perhaps the minister of defence could tell you based on the information
18 he had at his disposal. As for me, I didn't know of any centres then or
19 later, especially not of any centres that had anything -- that didn't
20 have anything to do with our Main Staff. So there's really nothing I can
21 add to this.
22 Q. Continuing on from there:
23 "The government has entrusted the Ministry of the Interior with
24 taking --" and we have to go to page 6 in the English, you're still on
25 the same page, Mr. Trbojevic.
1 " -- with taking away the illegally obtained assets, cancelling
2 all temporary vehicle registrations, except the ones registered for the
3 work of state organs, institutions, and organisations."
4 Do you recall what that was about? What assets had been
5 illegally obtained and by whom?
6 A. Well, there were rumours about legally obtained assets aplenty,
7 and here they specifically mentioned vehicles that were registered, that
8 the registrations had to be verified. There were various companies or
9 enterprises, both public and private who were involved in this, and the
10 government was here trying to actually put some order into all this so
11 that the office for war reserves could know what they had at their
13 As for war booty and what was obtained in that way, that was
14 really something that could not quite be worked out under the
16 Q. Thank you. And the next -- the very next point:
17 "Mico Stanisic, minister of interior, is to go to Bijeljina at
18 once and solve the questions raised regarding the work of the Centre for
19 Security in the autonomous region of Semberija."
20 Do you recall what the questions raised were regarding the work
21 of that security centre?
22 A. Well, I know that the Ministry of the Interior was in Bijeljina.
23 Why in Bijeljina, I don't really know. But before the republic ministry
24 took up headquarters in Bijeljina, I don't know what their problems could
25 have been. I'm referring to the portion of the police that was referred
1 to as SAO Semberija, which is what this conclusion would be about. I
2 don't know what the issue was or how it was resolved, but I do know that
3 in the final instance the Ministry of the Interior was headquartered in
5 Q. Did you ever see a report from a Ministry of Interior, I think he
6 held the position of inspector at the time, named Dragan Andan regarding
7 work he'd done between late May and, I think the 12th or 17th of June,
8 that pointed out problems in that area? Did you ever see that report?
9 A. No, I didn't. I didn't have it in my hands, nor do I know what
10 it contained.
11 Q. Do you know whether or not Mr. Stanisic actually did go to
12 Bijeljina shortly after this meeting where it was said that he is to go
13 at once?
14 A. I don't know that.
15 Q. Did you at any subsequent government session ever hear him report
16 back to the government about what might have happened in connection with
17 those problems in Bijeljina?
18 A. I don't know that I heard about it. I'm not saying that he did
19 not report to the government, but -- to the Assembly, but I really don't
20 recall it. I don't know what it would have been about.
21 Q. Thank you. Next I'd like to go to exhibit 427.12, and I'll hand
22 you another hard copy, Mr. Trbojevic. That will be with you in a moment.
23 It's dated the 29th of June in Pale, and the 33rd session of the
24 government. And the only item I want to ask you about concerning this
25 meeting is item number 11. It should be page 5 of the English and the
1 last page of the B/C/S for you.
2 It's current issues, and it indicates:
3 "Rajko Colovic, president of the central commission for the
4 exchange of war prisoners has been dismissed from his post as president."
5 And I think you mentioned that earlier. Do you know why he was
6 dismissed? Can you tell us about that?
7 A. Yes. Well, I did see a piece of paper where it said that he was
8 submitting his resignation or asking to be relieved, and here I can see
9 that the president of the central commission here was appointed --
10 Slobodan Avlijas was appointed as the president, and Mladen Mandic, but I
11 don't know that they've actually accomplished anything or done anything
12 in that respect, nor have I heard any shred of information that they had
13 anything to do with exchanges.
14 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter is not sure that that is the
15 word that the witness used.
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Whether this was one of the
17 proposals that had never actually been followed through, which is
18 probably -- most probably the case, I don't know, but I think that
19 neither Avlijas nor Mandic actually did that.
20 Q. Let me ask you a couple things. The interpretation indicated the
21 interpreter wasn't sure they got the correct word, and I don't know if
22 that referred to your answer about saying you -- "Nor have I heard any
23 shred of information that he," I think that refers to Avlijas, "had
24 anything to do with exchanges." Is what you said, "shred of
1 A. Well, yes. There's only a slight difference. I didn't hear any
2 information that he did anything or had anything to do with exchanges,
3 either Mandic or Avlijas. I'm not actually claiming this with absolute
4 certainty. It is possible that they did do something in that respect,
5 but I really did not hear of that.
6 Q. I wasn't certain from your answer whether you were saying the
7 the commission itself didn't do any work about exchanges after this 29th
8 of June, or whether you were merely saying that, as far as you know,
9 those two gentlemen, Avlijas --
10 A. Those two gentlemen.
11 Q. And Mr. Mladen Mandic, how is he related to Momcilo Mandic?
12 A. As far as I know, they're brothers.
13 Q. Thank you. I want to move next to a meeting on the 4th of July.
14 This is exhibit P236. And again I can give you a hard copy. Thank you.
15 When you have that in hand in a moment, you'll see it's -- the
16 minutes are for a meeting on the 4th of July, 1992. It's the 36th
17 session. You are listed as being present.
18 I want to ask you a term about terminology, I guess.
19 MR. HANNIS: If we could go to page 2 of the English.
20 Q. And it's page 2 for you, sir. It's at item number 6. Well,
21 actually, I guess it's the agenda. And number 6 says:
22 "Some questions regarding the introduction of the war regime."
23 It's my understanding that at this time, July 1992, in the
24 Bosnian Serb Republic or the Republika Srpska, at this time there was --
25 there had been declared an imminent state -- or a state of imminent
1 threat of war; is that correct?
2 A. Imminent threat of war, yes, that was proclaimed by a decision
3 that was signed by Mrs. Plavsic and Mr. Koljevic.
4 Q. And in 1992 in that territory was there ever declared a state of
6 A. In this early period, I think not. There was some pressure
7 exerted by the army and the General Staff -- the Main Staff. They were
8 claiming that it was necessary to declare the state of war, so that the
9 conscripts had to be held to a higher standard, disciplinary standard,
10 when call-up papers were sent to them. Also regarding the possibility of
11 using military companies if needed, and so on and so forth. But the
12 government opposed that, resisted that, feeling and viewing the situation
13 with a more optimistic eye, trying to resolve the war situation as
14 quickly as possible, and also in an attempt to regulate the various
15 relationships between different government agencies. And there was a
16 fear that -- and we feared -- we didn't want the military authorities to
17 get involved in this and to regulate all the areas of life and
18 government. And there was no inclination to introduce a state of war
19 because we felt that this would lead to total anarchy, and that was the
20 position of a few members of the government, including myself. We felt
21 that this was not necessary, and that is why we opposed it.
22 The state of war was introduced for the first time in the area of
23 responsibility of the 2nd Krajina Corps, but I can't tell you exactly
24 when. Later on, it was also declared, I think on the entire territory
25 or -- I'm not really sure anymore, but looking at some of these cases, I
1 know that Karadzic, President Karadzic, did this. He declared a state of
2 war without having the proper authorisation for it, empowerment, but I
3 don't know any -- of anything else.
4 Q. And when did that happen, if you recall?
5 A. I don't know. These decisions were published. I don't know now
6 when exactly this was.
7 Q. Who under the constitution and the laws in effect at that time
8 had the authority to declare a state of war in -- in the
9 Republika Srpska? If you know.
10 A. Well, off the top of my head, I couldn't really say. I did look
11 at this once, and I think you have it written down somewhere during one
12 of the questioning. Whether the Assembly it was or -- I don't know.
13 Q. Still on page 2, bottom of page 2 in the English, there's number
14 2 under item 1. It says:
15 "It has been concluded that all ministries propose a general
16 concept on the war regime, as well as the regime of each ministry by
17 Monday (6th July)."
18 Can you explain to me what that term "war regime" means in this
19 context? Is that the manner of working, or what does it refer to?
20 A. Well, that's something comparable to extraordinary circumstances.
21 So there were rules as to how things were to be done under extraordinary
22 circumstances. There would have to be round-the-clock duty service. You
23 couldn't leave the building without getting approval of that, when you
24 could see clients and when not, and so on and so forth. So that is what
25 is referred to here.
1 The regimen, as it were, was in relation to the fact that there
2 were all kinds of threats from all sides all around us, and in that
3 situation this was an attempt to actually establish the rules of conduct.
4 Some ministries wrote those out, those rules, some didn't. I don't know
5 how it all transpired, but this effort to declare the state of war was a
6 constant effort. There was a set of laws that was proposed to one -- to
7 the Assembly on one of the sessions. This was a situation where imminent
8 threat of war was actually made tantamount to the state of war, and a
9 couple of us actually resisted this. I left. I walked out of this
10 session because I felt that this was inappropriate, that this was
11 actually undermining the state behind the front lines and -- but these
12 laws were passed, and they actually caused a lot of damage. And then
13 later on for years this was discussed one after another, all these items.
14 Q. Well, if -- I'll ask you a question. If you can perhaps help me
15 understand the difference it made. Whether it was a state of imminent
16 threat of war or a state of war or a state of really bad things were
17 happening, how did that -- how did that change how life worked by the
18 title? I mean, what was the difference between an imminent -- state of
19 imminent threat of war and a state of war? What difference did that make
20 in how the government worked, or how the Presidency worked, how the
21 Assembly worked? Can you explain that for us about that.
22 A. Well, the term the "imminent threat of war" and the "state of
23 war," those terms are really military or diplomatic terms. They had more
24 to do with the military or diplomacy than with interior policies. Of
25 course there had to be a system of regulations that would kick in, as it
1 were, and become applicable in place of the normal regulations that would
2 apply under peacetime conditions. So they would kick in when the state
3 of war is declared.
4 And as for the interior, the competence of the interior organs,
5 the police, the administration organs, assemblies and so on, they could
6 all be actually put to work under different -- a different set of rules
7 so that their work could be regulated in a different manner, and so on
8 and so forth, whereas the discussion on the use of property and the
9 seizure of vehicles or various machines that belonged to different
10 companies, up all the way to the funds that the banks had, the monies
11 that the banks had at their disposal. All of this could be then put to
12 use for the war effort, whereas this could not be done in peacetime,
13 because in wartime you knew exactly who the authorised signatory was in
14 order to use certain assets.
15 Q. And in a state of war who would that be, the authorised
17 A. Well, that would be the organ that is given that authority,
18 whatever was proclaimed as that organ. For instance, the unit that would
19 be in that area would have the authority. So it didn't have to negotiate
20 their position with anyone. They could appoint someone by force, as it
21 were, to be, say, a manager of a certain company. So this would be
22 something that the commanders would be authorised to do.
23 Q. Military commanders.
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Thank you. One last item in this document. It's on page 4 of
1 the B/C/S, and it begins at the bottom of page 4 in the English. Item
2 number 8, Mr. Trbojevic, says:
3 "The question has been raised whether there are agreed criteria
4 regarding the moving out of the Muslim's population from the territory of
5 the Serb republic of BH.
6 "It has been concluded that the government has not until now had
7 a point of view on this matter. The Ministry of the Interior is
8 entrusted with preparing," on to page of the English, "information on
9 this issue that the government would consider and take the appropriate
11 Do you recall the discussion about this, criteria regarding the
12 moving out of the Muslims?
13 A. No, there was no such discussion.
14 Q. And did the Ministry of Interior prepare information on that
15 issue for the government to consider and take a standpoint?
16 A. I don't know that I've seen such a report.
17 Q. Thank you.
18 MR. HANNIS: Your Honours, I know it's a minute or two early, but
19 this is an appropriate place for me to break, and I would like, on the
20 record, to indicate I'm returning Mr. Pantelic's watch to him. The
21 temperature now on this side is now 20.9 degrees.
22 JUDGE HALL: Mr. Trbojevic, we are at the point where we must
23 take the adjournment for today. We will resume in this courtroom at 9.00
24 tomorrow morning. And there is a caution which I'm obliged to give you,
25 although from your past experience you know it quite well, namely that
1 that having been sworn as a witness, you cannot communicate with the
2 lawyers from either side, nor can you discuss your testimony with anyone
3 outside of the courtroom.
4 So we resume tomorrow morning at 9.00.
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I'm aware of it. Thank you.
6 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.44 p.m.,
7 to be reconvened on Thursday, the 3rd day
8 of December, 2009, at 9.00 a.m.