1 Thursday, 18 March 2010
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.05 a.m.
5 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. This is case
6 IT-08-91-T, the Prosecutor versus Mico Stanisic and Stojan Zupljanin.
7 JUDGE HALL
8 Good morning to everyone.
9 May we have the appearances for today, please.
10 MS. KORNER: Good morning, Your Honours. Joanna Korner assisted
11 by Crispian Smith, Case Manager, for the Prosecution.
12 MR. ZECEVIC: Good morning, Your Honours. Slobodan Zecevic,
13 Slobodan Cvijetic, Eugene O'Sullivan, and Tatjana Savic appearing for
14 Stanisic Defence this morning. Thank you.
15 MR. KRGOVIC: Good morning, Your Honours. Dragan Krgovic and
16 Miroslav Cuskic for Zupljanin Defence.
17 JUDGE HALL
18 Would the Usher please -- sorry. Yes, Ms. Korner.
19 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, may I just mention before the witness
20 is brought in, the question of an exercise, which, unfortunately is going
21 take a little time. And can I explain to Your Honours what I -- spent
22 some time myself yesterday looking at.
23 Your Honours will recall that there were some questions that I
24 put to Mr. Tutus about the reports that he had put in against the special
25 police members. Then the document in 1993, the letter, which in fact
1 encapsulates most, if not all, of those reports, and a list of the
2 payroll for special police in August, plus a full list obviously compiled
3 later but attached to the same document of the special police.
4 Now, although Mr. Tutus had during the course of looking at the
5 documents actually identified two people who he said were still there
6 when he put in criminal reports, he didn't do that in court. And at that
7 stage I hadn't gone through the exercise which I did yesterday.
8 Mr. Krgovic equally objected to what I was saying.
9 So I have done the exercise.
10 Your Honour, can I put it this way, and I can demonstrate this to
11 Your Honours and with the witness. With -- with one exception, the --
12 the names against whom he put in complaints of criminal conduct in
13 June and July of 1992, appear on the payroll for August 1992, and in the
14 list of the full list of the special police, or -- whether it is full or
15 not, but it's a later list, those names appear again with what actually
16 seems to have happened to them.
17 In respect of the incident that -- as it were, seems to have
18 prompted this long report in 1993, which took place in this -- in -- I've
19 forgotten the name of the place it is. Karanovac. None of the -- the
20 earlier people appear except as members in the community and not actually
21 specifically alleged to have committed the offence, but they appear as
22 members of the special -- ex-special Banja Luka special police who live
23 in the community where the complaints have come.
24 Now, Your Honour, can I do that all with the witness but it means
25 going through a number of documents. And that will take clearly more
1 time than have I left. But -- obviously, I leave this in the hands of
2 Your Honours. I can do this exercise using a couple of examples or I can
3 do it in full, or I cannot do with the witness at all and simply show
4 Your Honours.
5 So that's why I'm raising it at this stage before I begin my --
6 my further examination-in-chief.
7 JUDGE HALL
8 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please, Your Honour.
9 JUDGE HALL
10 my own understanding.
11 We're talking about documents, the contents of which speak for
13 MS. KORNER: Yes.
14 JUDGE HALL
15 from these documents that overlap the period of the indictment such of
16 the -- in terms of names particularly, as are specific -- well, as are
17 relevant for our purposes.
18 MS. KORNER: The exercise -- the whole point of this line of
19 questioning and the exercise I'd done, Your Honour, is to demonstrate if
20 necessary to the witness, although we would say that he clearly knows
21 about that, however reluctant he is, that despite in some cases actual
22 criminal reports and in other cases we don't have criminal reports but
23 Official Notes, all of which are listed in his 1993 report, it would
24 appear, on the face of the documents, that no action was taken to remove
25 these people from the special police. Certainly not by August. And if
1 one looks at the document which is attached to it, one can see, which is
2 obviously a later document, 1993, that most of these people, as I say,
3 with one exception which is an interesting -- went on working in the
4 special police and went on to other jobs when it was disbanded.
5 JUDGE HARHOFF: All the documents to which you have referred,
6 Ms. Korner, have been admitted into evidence; is that correct.
7 MS. KORNER: They have.
8 JUDGE HARHOFF: Yes. Thanks.
9 MS. KORNER: Absolutely.
10 MR. KRGOVIC: If I may say something.
11 [Interpretation] Your Honours, in my cross-examination I will
12 deal precisely with these matters raised by the Prosecutor, so if the
13 document is self-explanatory, as far as the Defence position is
14 concerned, I do not mind if the Prosecutor wants to go through the
15 document with the witness, using a few examples.
16 But, of course, I will deal with it in cross-examination, of
17 course, trying to prove the opposite.
18 JUDGE HALL
19 [Trial Chamber confers]
20 JUDGE HALL
21 proceed in the ordinary manner, to elicit the foundation of evidence from
22 the witness, then we should be -- the matter should resolve itself.
23 We'll see how it goes. Because the -- what Mr. Krgovic has indicated
24 seems to be a helpful and practical method of solving the problem. But
25 the exercise is to get the evidence on the record from the witness who is
1 on the stand to explain the -- what happened in respect of these persons
2 against whom complaints were made.
3 MS. KORNER: Your Honour --
4 JUDGE HARHOFF: Before you answer. We are of the view that can
5 you use just a few examples.
6 MS. KORNER: Yes.
7 JUDGE HARHOFF: And then put the question to him of how he
8 interprets the fact that they were still in service in August, and that's
9 what we need.
10 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, well, that's helpful. I will pick a
11 couple of examples, then, and deal with it.
12 Your Honours, I -- I'm sorry. Because it is a -- because of
13 having to have the documents up, although we copied them in hard copy for
14 him so can he deal with it quicker, and I have three -- three more
15 documents which I need to put to this witness.
16 It's going to take longer than, I think, the ten minutes or so I
17 have left. That's all I'm asking, at this stage.
18 JUDGE HALL
19 MS. KORNER: Thank you.
20 [The witness takes the stand]
21 JUDGE HALL
22 Before Ms. Korner resumes her examination-in-chief, I remind you
23 you're still on your oath.
24 WITNESS: VLADIMIR TUTUS [Resumed]
25 [Witness answered through interpreter]
1 Examination by Ms. Korner: [Continued]
2 Q. Mr. Tutus, I want you, please, to have a look at a document which
3 is -- it's already an exhibit, P685.
4 This is an document dated the 9th of October, 1992, addressed to
5 all SJBs. It's a dispatch again, and it's got Stojan Zupljanin's
6 signature, passing on a memorandum from the Main Staff of the Army of the
7 Republika Srpska saying that:
8 "The Presidency has no information on crimes committed against
9 the Serbian people in the zone of responsibility of the
10 1st Krajina Corps ..."
11 Do you remember getting this document?
12 A. I believe I did, but I can't remember it.
13 Q. And all I want to ask you about is this: The zone of
14 responsibility of the 1st Krajina Corps, was that, although not entirely
15 completely, the area that covered Banja Luka and other municipalities,
16 such as Sanski Most, Kotor Varos, and the like?
17 A. I believe so. I don't know if that's the entire area; but,
18 generally speaking, yes.
19 Q. No, I agree. I mean, that there's more. Thank you very much.
20 That's all I want to ask you about that document.
21 Could you look now, please, at document 65 ter 75. I'm sorry,
22 it's going back to April.
23 MS. KORNER: Could we just look at the -- the -- it's the third
24 page, because of the way it's been copied, for some reason, in B/C/S, and
25 the second page in English.
1 Q. Again, is this a report sent both to the CSB and the Ministry of
2 the Interior signed by your chief of the crime section, Zoran Josic?
3 A. Correct.
4 Q. Yes. Well, I don't need to ask you anything more about the
5 contents. I just need to --
6 MS. KORNER: Your Honours, may that be admitted and marked,
8 JUDGE HALL
9 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P1093, Your Honours.
10 MS. KORNER:
11 Q. Next could you look, please, at a document marked 664,
12 65 ter 664.
13 MS. KORNER: I think we need to look at the second page -- well,
14 let's stick to the first page for the moment.
15 Q. This is a dispatch of the 18th of September addressed to SJBs, to
16 the MUP for information, and to the 1st and 2nd Krajina Corps, and to
17 leaders of all organisationals -- of organisational units.
18 Can you go -- can we go to the second page, please, in each.
19 Yeah, and we can see again that it goes under the name of
20 Stojan Zupljanin.
21 Then -- I think this is -- stay on the second page in B/C/S and I
22 think it's the last paragraph, but need to go back to the first page in
23 English, the last paragraph on -- in the English page. And I think it's
24 the last paragraph also in the B/C/S. It says:
25 "... we draw the attention of SJB chiefs" -- "to the attention of
1 SJB chiefs the fact that members of the active and reserve police forces
2 may be engaged in combat activities according to the principle of
3 resubordination to a superior army command only in the event that combat
4 activities are taking place on the territory covered by the designated
5 SJBs and with the approval of the chief ..."
6 This document was in September, Mr. Tutus. Do you know why
7 Mr. Zupljanin was reminding SJB chiefs of this?
8 A. I don't know.
9 Q. But it is a document you would have got?
10 A. I certainly did.
11 MS. KORNER: Then, Your Honours, may that be admitted and marked,
13 JUDGE HALL
14 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P1094, Your Honours.
15 MS. KORNER: And could you now go, please, to a document which is
16 already exhibited, P782.
17 Q. Is that a document signed by you with a stamp on it?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. It is dated the 24th of November. And it says:
20 "The following confiscated weapons are stored at this SJB," and
21 you then give a list.
22 Is that a list of all the weapons you confiscated and kept from
23 April 1992 or only from November?
24 A. I would first have to see the dispatch sent by the centre, the
25 reference number indicated here, and these are only weapons confiscated
1 under -- on the grounds indicated in items 1, 2, and 3. Administrative
2 proceedings and criminal proceedings. If a crime is involved, the weapon
3 is confiscated as evidence.
4 Q. Yes. All I'm asking what is the administrative procedure?
5 That's what you described that you were doing for disarmament, is it?
6 You remember we discussed the day before yesterday the disarming
7 of the population in compliance with the directive issued by the
8 Autonomous Region of Krajina, Assembly or Crisis Staff, and I'm -- just
9 want to know whether administrative procedure refers to that.
10 A. Well, I'm not sure that's what it means. There were some weapons
11 confiscated without any proceedings going on, so I don't know if such
12 weapons are included in any of the three categories. I don't think they
14 Q. If you were confiscating illegal weapons during this period,
15 would you launch a criminal proceedings against the person in possession?
16 In other words, put in a criminal report.
17 A. If there were elements of criminal liability we would certainly
18 file a criminal report. However, if it concerned a member of the VRS who
19 legally owned a weapon, as a member of the unit, and then illegally left
20 the unit together with a weapon, and then the army put out a bulletin,
21 because he was a deserter and thus illegally owned a weapon, or failed to
22 respond to mobilisation, then he was liable under the Law on
23 Territorial Defence, we would confiscated such a weapon. But that was
24 the responsibility of military organs, and in such cases, we did not
25 start any proceedings or file reports.
1 Q. Yes, but -- I'm asking at the moment about the procedure you
2 described whereby you were searching people's houses for illegal weapons.
3 And leave aside for the moment lawfully owned hunting rifles.
4 If you confiscated what you thought were illegal weapons, would
5 you put in a criminal report?
6 A. I want to say the following. We didn't go from house to house at
7 random and search them. We sought weapons on the basis of indicia,
8 evidence. You couldn't just enter someone's house if there was no
9 evidence that there were weapons illegally held there. And secondly, I
10 tried to explain that when you seize military weapons, well, I wasn't
11 referring to weapons owned by citizens legally. It concerned military
12 weapons legally given to them previously, but the security organs
13 illegally had them because they didn't respond to the mobilisation
15 I don't know if this answer is satisfactory or not.
16 Q. No. Can I ask the question again.
17 You told us the day before yesterday that you carried out, on the
18 basis of information, searches of people's houses to see whether they
19 possessed illegal weapons. That is to say, no permit and a weapon that
20 they had unlawfully.
21 Would you then file a criminal report against the person who was
22 in such possession? Very simple question.
23 A. If it was a military weapon, then the military organs were
25 Q. Yes, but even if it was a military weapon, you still had to file
1 a report, didn't you, and it was then a question for the prosecutor to
2 decide whether it went to the military court or stayed in the civil
4 Now, please, answer the question: Did you file criminal reports
5 against persons in possession of illegal weapons.
6 A. Yes. Yes, we did. But in some cases, the army did that too.
7 Q. Well, I'm talking about cases -- make this quite clear. I'm
8 talking about cases where members of your police conducted a search and
9 discovered that they -- what they believed to be an illegal weapon in
10 possession of a civilian, or someone who wasn't in the military, or the
11 police. Would you then file a criminal report?
12 A. Well, most frequently, yes. I don't see why we wouldn't do that.
13 Q. You may not see -- all right. I think --
14 JUDGE HARHOFF: Mr. Tutus, did you or did you not file reports in
15 such events?
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In principle, we did. But I cannot
17 now claim that in some cases that were the responsibility of the military
18 security organs and the military and judiciary, I can't say that we
19 didn't refer the case to them, and as a result, we didn't file a criminal
20 report. That's what I'm saying. In cases where we believed that it was
21 our responsibility to file a criminal report, we did so.
22 JUDGE HARHOFF: Thank you.
23 MS. KORNER:
24 Q. Yes. It wasn't your decision, was it, as a police officer, to
25 which court a case went? You filed a criminal report and it was the
1 decision of the prosecutor, was it not?
2 A. The crime police did this. They would assess whether something
3 was the responsibility of the military organs or the civil organs. But
4 there were cases in which we had a report from the civilian prosecutor
5 and he would then refer it to the military prosecutor. Or, rather, we
6 would refer a case to the civilian prosecutor and the civilian prosecutor
7 would then refer it to the military prosecutor. There were such cases.
8 Q. Now, and can we just make -- can you just confirm whether this is
9 correct, that the Official Notes that we looked at about the activities
10 of the special police are not the same as criminal reports?
11 A. That's correct.
12 Q. In respect of some of the reports we looked at, and, in
13 particular, perhaps we can look at the one -- the first of these reports
14 against the special police.
15 MS. KORNER: Could we have a look, please, at ...
16 JUDGE DELVOIE: Ms. Korner, you say "report." Is it criminal
17 report you mean or is it Official Note?
18 MS. KORNER: A difference between -- did I not say "criminal
19 report"? I thought I did.
20 JUDGE DELVOIE: You say "report."
21 MS. KORNER: Oh, I -- sorry, no. Now I'm getting my -- yes, a
22 document. It's not a report. It's not a criminal report, this one.
23 JUDGE DELVOIE: It's an Official Note.
24 MS. KORNER: Yes.
25 [Prosecution counsel confer]
1 MS. KORNER: It's the one, in fact, that Judge Harhoff remarked
2 on yesterday and I ... okay, it's tab 19. Tab 19. What number is that?
3 P1081. Thank you.
4 [Trial Chamber confers]
5 MS. KORNER:
6 Q. While that is being sought, put up on the screen, Mr. Tutus, did
7 you have daily meetings with the chief of the crime police?
8 A. Yes. That was obligatory, and we also had meetings with the
9 police station commander almost on a daily basis, together with this
11 Q. Right. And wouldn't he then fill you in about arrests that had
12 been made for illegal possession of weapons?
13 A. He would fill us in with regard to more serious matters.
14 Q. All right. Now we've got this document up again on the screen.
15 4th of June, which on the first we looked at, which is not -- this is not
16 a criminal report, is it?
17 A. The document in front of me. Is that it?
18 Q. Yes.
19 A. It has to do with a dispatch in which we informed the MUP of the
20 Serbian Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina and CSB about certain events.
21 Q. Yes. What I want to know is, why, on the 4th of June, and we've
22 seen it with other such documents, you're sending it not only to the CSB
23 chief but also to the Ministry of the Interior? Because this is not a
24 result -- you don't refer to any requests from the minister of the --
25 Ministry of the Interior. This is your decision to send it also to
1 the -- the -- the Ministry of Interior.
2 Why was that?
3 A. Because I thought that it was a serious case and that it was
4 necessary for the Ministry of the Interior to be informed of it. That's
5 probably the reason.
6 Q. Because you only had the duty, didn't you, to report to the head
7 of the -- the chief of the CSB
8 MR. KRGOVIC: Objection. Leading.
9 MS. KORNER: I'll rephrase the question.
10 Q. To whom was it your duty to report?
11 A. To the CSB
12 interpreted], in accordance with the instructions that had been issued.
13 Q. And which instructions are you referring to?
14 THE INTERPRETER: On mutual information, the instructions on
15 mutual information.
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That document was in force before
17 the war in the former Socialist Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina. It
18 was signed by the former Secretariat for Internal Affairs, and the
19 document is called Instructions on Mutual, Current and Temporary
20 Information, or instruction. It told us when we had to inform the MUP
21 and the CSB
22 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] I apologise. Just a correction for
23 the transcript. Page 13, line 14 -- line 6 and 7, the Republika Srpska
24 is concerned, not the Republic of Serbia.
25 MS. KORNER: All right.
1 Q. Before I do what I'm afraid is going to be a rather boring
2 exercise, can I just ask you finally this on -- on Banja Luka.
3 During the course of 1992, whether a number of international
4 organisations which were either visiting in or had a base in Banja Luka?
5 A. Yes, they had their base in Banja Luka and they would go to
6 Banja Luka, to visit.
7 Q. The -- what was then called the European Community Monitoring
8 Mission, was that in Banja Luka?
9 A. If those are the people in white uniforms, then I believe that,
10 yes, they did visit. I think those are the people concerned.
11 Q. Yes. The UN High Commission for Refugees was that also -- did
12 that also have a base and people from that organisation visiting
13 Banja Luka?
14 A. I remember a visit by Mrs. Rehn, Ole [sic] Rehn, I think that's
15 the name. She would visit. She saw President Radic, and I was present
17 Q. In addition to that, did you receive a number of visits from
18 international journalists?
19 A. I didn't have the opportunity of speaking to international
20 journalists. I don't remember that. But there were frequent meetings
21 with President Radic. Foreign representatives would have meetings with
22 him, but as to whether there were journalists among them, I don't know.
23 Q. All right. Can we now finally and please do this rather boring
24 exercise, or a few examples.
25 Yesterday, day before yesterday, we looked at your -- sometimes
1 criminal reports, sometimes information reports about the behaviour of
2 members of the special police unit, largely in June and July.
3 Now, I'm going give you, because I think it may be easier for you
4 although we will bring it up on the screen as well, copies of, first of
5 all, the document which was your information in 1993, which is
6 Exhibit P628, and also a copy of the list, the payroll for August 1992
7 for the special police and a further, obviously later list which appears
8 to the full list of -- of the special police, which is document 1092.
9 Can you have them in -- we'll give them to you so it is easier
10 for you to follow this. But we will have to have it up on the screen for
11 the rest.
12 MS. KORNER: What we have done, Your Honours, and hopefully this
13 will make it easier, in Sanction we've got both documents up. I don't
14 know how people -- oh, I see -- yes, in English. We obviously can't do
15 this exercise side by side in B/C/S.
16 Q. Can we -- you start off this information, if you go to the second
17 page there, and if we go to the second page on -- yeah, thank you very
18 much, with this complaint that has come in 1993 from the Karanovac
19 community. And then you explain that you have had negative experiences
20 with members of the Banja Luka Security Services Centre special purposes.
21 MS. KORNER: Now can we go, then, please, in the English to page
22 3 of that document. And in the --
23 JUDGE DELVOIE: Ms. Korner.
24 MR. KRGOVIC: The accused cannot follow the transcript.
25 MS. KORNER: Well, there's no way of doing this, as I say -- I'm
1 sure that you have got hard copies in -- in -- in -- with you and if they
2 can be given to the accused. We can't -- there's no way of doing this so
3 that everybody can follow with four separate documents on the screen.
4 MR. ZECEVIC: Just in principle, it's -- this -- these accused
5 are on trial, so ... at least they should be able to -- to follow the
6 evidence. Thank you.
7 MS. KORNER: The only thing that is going to be followed is the
8 names and the names are the same in English. So I hope that they can
9 just look at the screen and see the names.
10 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, the problem is that
11 these lists have certain comments on them. There are certain notes made
12 on these lists and that is what is important in this particular case.
13 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
14 JUDGE HALL
15 We're advised that the documents may be printed out in B/C/S for
16 the benefit of the accused within a couple of minutes.
17 So while that's being done, I suppose Ms. Korner can continue,
18 and the accused will catch up. Mr. Krgovic, Mr. Zecevic, that shouldn't
19 be a problem, should it?
20 MR. ZECEVIC: Thank you, Your Honour, and I appreciate the help
21 of the Registry as well.
22 MS. KORNER:
23 Q. In paragraph 3 of this 1993 report there is a complaint relating
24 to the 2nd of June, 1992, of a beating and the man in question is said to
25 be Mr. Kajkut, who presumably is a relation of the Kajkut we talked
1 about -- well, he may not be. The name's obviously quite similar, but
2 anyhow. Member of the Banja Luka special police services detachment.
3 If you look then at number 10 on the payroll for August 1992,
4 there is Mr. Kajkut. Although it appears his money was collected by
5 somebody else with the same name.
6 MS. KORNER: Your Honours, in the original B/C/S, there are
7 signatures by each of these ...
8 Q. Do you agree?
9 A. Well, on the basis of the name and surname, it could be the same
10 person. But to identify him we need the other details. The date of
11 birth, father's name, and so on and so forth. Everything is possible,
12 you know. Perhaps there are several individuals with the same name, but
13 this seems to show that the same person is concerned.
14 Q. Did you put in a criminal report about this incident? Because
15 you don't refer to it in this summary; whereas, we'll see later you do
16 refer to criminal reports in other cases.
17 A. I can't remember individual reports. I don't know how this
18 ended. We probably did. There was no reason not to do so.
19 Q. Well, because -- would you describe this as a serious incident,
20 beating somebody?
21 A. Well, it's unlawful behaviour. As to how serious it is, well,
22 there were more serious incidents.
23 Q. And if we ... if you go on in that second document, please, to
24 the list of the special police detachment, the alphabetical one, you go
25 to number 116, you'll see there that he's a candidate for some course.
1 A. That's what it says.
2 Q. Yeah. Now, you make no reference to either any criminal
3 proceedings that were taken against him or, indeed, disciplinary
4 proceedings. Would you have expected, first, that criminal proceedings
5 would have been taken in this case?
6 A. Given what it says under -- are you referring to what it says
7 under item 3, information?
8 Q. I am. I am.
9 A. Well, I think criminal proceedings should have been instituted if
10 there was sufficient information, and this seems to show there was
11 sufficient information.
12 Q. What about disciplinary, if nothing else?
13 A. Yes, by all means.
14 Q. Would you retain as a member of your police force, in the SJB, a
15 person who had committed this kind of crime?
16 A. I didn't say he committed a crime. I would have checked
17 everything and tried to establish the truth on the basis of the relevant
19 Q. Yes -- no, if it was shown whether, for the purposes of -- of --
20 of criminal prosecution or disciplinary, that this man had done what is
21 said he did there, would have you kept him in your police force?
22 A. If it had been confirmed that this was correct, I wouldn't
23 [Realtime transcript read in error "would"] have kept him. But as far as
24 I know, he never completed a course of any kind.
25 Q. How do you know? Do you know this man?
1 A. Yes, I do.
2 Q. Well, then, was there a criminal proceedings against him?
3 A. Well, I can't remember exactly now. But I think so.
4 Q. The work --
5 MR. ZECEVIC: I'm so sorry to interrupt 19, 12, 13, page 19,
6 line 12 and 13. I believe the witness said, "I would not have -- I would
7 not have kept him." And it's recorded as he would have kept him.
8 I'm sorry, Ms. Korner. I don't want to interrupt.
9 MS. KORNER: That's fine. Thank you very much, Mr. Zecevic.
10 Q. But he still stayed in the special police?
11 MR. KRGOVIC: Objection. Leading. It does not appear from the
13 MS. KORNER: I'm sorry, in August of 1992 he is on the payroll.
14 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, the documents -- and
15 the Prosecution knows that the unit was disbanded on the 10th of August,
16 and that an agreement was reached. The witness will appear who will talk
17 about this. It was agreed that all members should receive their salaries
18 for August although they weren't in fact members of the special police in
19 August. That is the point of my objection. The Prosecution is aware of
20 that fact because there's a series of documents that demonstrate this.
21 So this is the reason for my objection. The witness is being led.
22 MS. KORNER: All right. Up until, and I accept entirely that the
23 order disbanding them came in the 10th of August, up until the 10th of
24 August, if this payroll is accurate, accept all that, it shows that this
25 gentleman was still in the special police for the rest of June,
1 presumably, July, and August.
2 Doesn't it?
3 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Are you asking me that question?
4 MS. KORNER: Yes, I am.
5 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Could the Prosecution refrain from
6 asking leading questions. What can the witness see on the basis of this
7 document. That's what he should be asked. He shouldn't be led. That's
8 the purpose of my objection.
9 JUDGE HALL
10 on Mr. Krgovic's initial objection which he has refined, because the --
11 one of the difficulties that I'm still thinking my way through,
12 Ms. Korner, and Mr. Krgovic, is that the question, on the face of it,
13 seems permissible notwithstanding that the Prosecution is asking of its
14 own witness a conclusion drawn from the document. But I -- but --
15 whereas technically, I suppose, it is leading, the -- it is necessary, in
16 my view, to elicit from the witness the -- his impression, for want of a
17 better word, of the accuracy of the normal inference that could be drawn
18 from the presence of the -- these names on the -- on -- on the payroll
19 sheet at the relevant moment.
20 So I'll permit Ms. Korner to go ahead.
21 MS. KORNER:
22 Q. Mr. Tutus, I am asking you, on the face of these documents does
23 it appear to you as an experienced police officer that, notwithstanding
24 this complaint, this gentleman remained in the special police until it
25 was wound up in August?
1 A. I don't know.
2 Q. Well, let's look at another one, shall we, as an example.
3 MS. KORNER: Can we look, please, at -- yes. It's paragraph 16
4 of this long report in 1993.
5 Q. And these are the people who actually appeared on the separate
6 information sheets that we saw.
7 Let's take -- can I say that it is our contention that
8 Mr. Cvetko Makivic stayed through but perhaps it's not -- he was driving
9 maybe in a stolen vehicle and behaved impudently.
10 But let's have a look at Mr. Gojko Racic. On the 20th of June,
11 and, again, this was a subject of a separate report, he threatened an
12 armed attack on the centre. I think you may remember this. He went in
13 and waved his pistol.
14 So if we look now, please, at the payroll again. Oh, it's the
15 first page of the other document, number 10 -- sorry, number 14. There
16 he is. Unless it's -- accepting entirely that there are two people, same
17 name, in the special police, signing for his pay.
18 MS. KORNER: And if you go then on in the long alphabetical list
19 to 197, although -- I'm sorry, I've got the wrong one. That's Radic --
20 sorry. It's -- I'm not quite sure about that one. Because I think the
21 names -- unless I can't read the ...
22 I cannot read the -- obviously the Cyrillic so ... oh, yes, 190.
23 Sorry. Thank you.
24 Q. He apparently got wounded at some stage.
25 A. It's written here that he was wounded and became disabled.
1 Q. Again, would you expect it that the man who came in to the Centar
2 police station, under your command, would be allowed to remain in the
3 special police, if nothing else?
4 A. If this document is correct, and if these reports are correct,
5 and if he, indeed, behaved in this way, then he -- there should have been
6 no place for him in the organs of internal affairs. But that's a matter
7 for the disciplinary court and the prosecutor. Reports should have been
8 investigated and then he should have been prosecuted, if necessary.
9 Q. You see, again, you don't refer to any number of any criminal
10 report you put in, under this paragraph. So did you put in a -- or did
11 your chief of crime police put in a crime report against this?
12 A. I don't know that. I think this is the product of some
13 Official Note or maybe a report by the operative duty officer. I -- I
14 see from this that he also behaved himself inappropriately in the centre.
15 What I mean is I don't know what the outcome was. Did we file it
16 to the CSB
17 Q. All right. Can we very quickly --
18 JUDGE HARHOFF: Mr. Tutus, can I ask you a question in this
20 If a member of your special police force had been involved in
21 some serious criminal activity, such as the example we have seen here
22 with Mr. Racic, and if that would imply that he would be released from
23 duty, at what moment would he then be released? Would that be by the
24 time a criminal report was filed to the prosecutor, or would it be
25 immediately after the incident, or would it not be until the moment when
1 he had finally been convicted, if, let's assume, that he was convicted.
2 So at which time would you dismiss your police officer?
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] First of all, we would have to know
4 if Gojko Racic was a member of the reserve force of the special
5 detachment of the CSB
6 time. If he was in the reserve, then the procedure would be short. He
7 could be taken off the schedule and placed at the disposal of the VRS.
8 However, if he was full-time employee --
9 JUDGE HARHOFF: Right away?
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, if he was a reserve member, he
11 could taken off the roster immediately. He would be stripped of his
12 weapons and placed at the disposal of the army.
13 However, if he was an employee, then disciplinary proceedings
14 would have to be taken, and then the prosecutor would have to decide in
15 an initiative that -- with the chief of the centre. This proposal by the
16 prosecutor would go before the disciplinary court which would decide on
17 the measures to be taken. That procedure is not so short.
18 He could also be temporarily suspended pending the completion of
19 disciplinary proceedings.
20 JUDGE HARHOFF: Thank you, sir.
21 MS. KORNER:
22 Q. And if you'd had a police officer in your command who had gone
23 into one of your stations and waved a gun, would you have suspended him,
24 pending the proceedings?
25 A. I would do precisely as I explained to the Judge. If he was a
1 reserve member, I would take him -- I would remove him immediately. If
2 he was an employee, I would initiate proceedings.
3 Q. Yes. And the question I asked was: If he was an employee, and
4 you initiated proceedings, would you suspend him, pending the outcome of
5 those proceedings?
6 A. Well, in our proposal to initiate disciplinary proceedings to the
7 chief of the centre we would include a proposal for temporary suspension.
8 If everything was confirmed, we would also ask for a temporary sanction.
9 Q. Can we very quickly -- and then I'll do one more after this --
10 JUDGE DELVOIE: Excuse me, Mrs. Korner, one more question.
11 Mr. Tutus, if a full-time employee was temporarily suspended
12 pending procedures, would he still be paid?
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] If I remember our regulations well
14 he would be receiving 50 per cent of the pay.
15 JUDGE DELVOIE: Thank you. Thank you.
16 MS. KORNER: Can we look at, please, the next paragraph, 18,
17 Mr. Marinko Marincic, who was -- again, we saw the report. He is
18 stealing petrol.
19 Q. Again, it doesn't refer to any criminal report being filed. If
20 we look on this occasion, it does not appear in the payroll for August.
21 But if we go to the list, the alphabetical list, and we go to 135, he is
22 the only one of the ones that we're going to go through who was actually
23 relieved of duty in June, for stealing petrol. Well, we don't know why
24 he was -- but the only allegation that we see made against him is that
25 this was stealing petrol. Do you agree?
1 A. I haven't yet identified which number it is in this report.
2 Q. I'm sorry. Number -- paragraph --
3 A. Did you say 11?
4 Q. paragraph 18 of your 1993 report.
5 A. Could you repeat the question now.
6 Q. Mr. Marinko Marincic, who we saw the full information report
7 before, he and some other people were caught decanting fuel. And if you
8 look at him, he does not appear in the August payroll. Yes, I made a
9 mistake. And, indeed, it shows that he was relieved of duty.
10 Is that right?
11 A. You're right, as far as this report is concerned. But whether he
12 was relieved of duty and why, I don't know. This report also says he
13 fled the scene and prevented us from collecting and seizing evidence.
14 And we probably filed this in a report to the CSB, because, according to
15 preliminary information, these persons were members of the special
17 Q. Yes. Now, finally, those four people who were taken out of the
18 prison in July. The whole incident is referred to in your report, I
19 think ... yes. If we look at paragraph 22, the -- the long list of
20 crimes as set out there. And these are -- do you agree, we looked at all
21 the documents around this. These are the people who you wouldn't release
22 but were then taken out of Tunjice prison effectively by force?
23 A. Correct.
24 Q. If we look, please, at the payroll for August, number 54, is
25 Mr. Dragojevic. Number 45 is Mr. Jokic.
1 A. Yes, yes.
2 Q. Yes. All right. And very quickly then, and that's the last
3 matter I'm going ask you, if you look at the list of payroll, the -- the
4 special police detachment list, number 40, Mr. Dragojevic who went off
5 to -- I'm not sure what this means, Simic, VP Simic, Captain Luka; and
6 number 77, Mr. Jokic, goes off to the same unit.
7 And it's right, isn't it, if you look at the last page of the
8 payroll for August, the two signatures that appear there are
9 Mr. Samardzija and Stojan Zupljanin. Page 7 of 20. That's it -- no, the
10 payroll for August. That's the ... yeah.
11 A. In my version, it's page 6. And that's correct. Those are the
13 Q. All right.
14 Finally, and this is the last question, did Mr. Zupljanin ever
15 attempt to replace you, Mr. Tutus?
16 A. I never heard that from him. Not from him personally.
17 Q. Who did you hear it from?
18 A. I heard it on one occasion in 1994. Minister Stanisic was
19 answering a question by President Radic in Bijeljina when he said
20 something like that.
21 Q. All right. Yes, thank you very much.
22 MS. KORNER: That's all I ask.
23 JUDGE HALL
24 Mr. Zecevic, it's eight minutes before the break, would you wish
25 to begin now or would you prefer to proceed uninterrupted?
1 MR. ZECEVIC: [Microphone not activated].
2 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
3 MR. ZECEVIC: I'm so sorry. Whatever please the Court --
4 JUDGE HALL
5 prefer to keep the regular patterns.
6 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes, okay. Definitely, Your Honours.
7 Cross-examination by Mr. Zecevic:
8 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, Mr. Tutus.
9 Mr. Tutus, you have been a member of the MUP since 1973; correct?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. So if I understood your CV, you spent your entire career in the
12 police. You joined the police force immediately after school.
13 A. Yes, after primary school, as a cadet, in Vrace, I completed high
14 school and later I joined the -- I joined the force. But that's not my
15 entire life. I still have some life ahead of me.
16 Q. I'm sorry, that's not how I meant it to sound. I'm talking about
17 until 1992, because that's the relevant time for the indictment.
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Mr. Tutus, you became chief of the public security station in
20 Banja Luka by decision of Minister Delimustafic in 1991; correct?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. If I remember your interview correctly, and the whole situation,
23 to the best of our understanding, there was a so-called inter-party
24 agreement among the national parties. And according to that agreement,
25 one of the points was that the parties divided among them the senior
1 positions within the Ministry of the Interior of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
2 Are you aware of that?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Your appointment, or, rather, nomination as chief of the public
5 security station Banja Luka followed after the proposal of the Serbian
6 Democratic Party, although you had not been and did not become later a
7 member of the SDS
8 A. Correct.
9 Q. Your appointment, if I may conclude, followed from the fact that
10 you were a professional policeman, and you were deserving of the
12 A. I think those who appointed me are better placed to answer that
14 Q. Thank you. From 1991, when you became chief of the public
15 security station, and I believe even before, I drew the impression from
16 your interview that you were rather disenchanted with the situation
17 within the Ministry of the Interior of the Socialist Republic of
19 A. Yes, I was rather dissatisfied.
20 Q. Just before your appointment, you went with other nominees to a
21 meeting with Mr. Avdo Hebib who was then charting the personnel policy of
22 the MUP of the Socialist Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina in Sarajevo;
24 A. Yes, there were several nominees.
25 Q. You were invited to that meeting. However, nobody received you.
1 You spent the entire day waiting at the Ministry of the Interior in
2 Sarajevo and nobody eventually received you.
3 A. We were sitting on the premises of the duty service for around
4 two or three hours. Then they handed us our IDs back. They told us we
5 are free to go back to Banja Luka. There was no one to receive us.
6 I took a break in Sarajevo. Then I returned, and with my
7 official ID, I entered the MUP again and went to see the
8 Assistant Minister Momcilo Mandic and told him the story.
9 Q. And when you complained to Mr. Momcilo Mandic, whom you had known
10 from high school; is that correct?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. When you explained to him, he eventually took you to see
13 Mr. Hebib, who was in charge of personnel policy at the MUP of the
14 Socialist Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and you ended up talking to
16 A. Yes, Momo was obviously unhappy with how things were going and he
17 accompanied me to the office of Mr. Avdo Hebib, who did conduct that
18 interview with me.
19 Q. You said in your interview that either on that occasion or at --
20 on some later occasion when you were again in Sarajevo, Mr. Mandic told
21 you that the problem of personnel policy at the MUP of the Socialist
22 Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina was extremely serious and that Muslim
23 staff is being hired outside of the staffing specification?
24 A. Yes, Momcilo said something to that effect, but I can't remember
25 if it was on that day or sometime later.
1 Q. Do you remember if he mentioned perhaps that in one day,
2 300 letters of appointments were handed to Muslim staff, new Muslim
4 A. I remember he said, Vlado, very weird things are going on here.
5 In the course of the night, after business hours, as many as 200 or
6 300 employees, Green Berets, stay on who were being hired into the MUP.
7 He mentioned the Green Berets and the Patriotic League.
8 Q. Thank you.
9 MR. ZECEVIC: I see the time, Your Honours, and I think this is
10 appropriate time to break. Thank you.
11 JUDGE HALL
12 [The witness stands down]
13 --- Recess taken at 10.26 a.m.
14 --- On resuming at 10.50 a.m.
15 [The witness takes the stand]
16 MR. ZECEVIC: May I continue, Your Honours.
17 JUDGE HALL
18 MR. ZECEVIC: Thank you very much.
19 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Tutus, if I have understood your testimony
20 correctly and the interview that you gave to the Prosecution, at the time
21 the SJB in Banja Luka, not only that SJB, didn't receive sufficient
22 equipment, uniforms, pistols from the MUP of the Socialist Republic of
23 Bosnia and Herzegovina; isn't that correct?
24 A. That's correct.
25 Q. I believe that you also emphasised the fact that you didn't have
1 a sufficient amount of vehicles. You didn't even have a single
2 four-wheel drive; is that correct?
3 A. That's correct.
4 Q. At the same period of time, your subordinate chiefs of police
5 stations in Mejdan and Budzak, if I remember your interview correctly, at
6 one point in time, in 1991, they went to Sarajevo on their own initiative
7 without even informing you of the fact; isn't that correct?
8 A. That's correct.
9 Q. And upon returning from Sarajevo, they both brought a new car
10 with them, one new car each, some equipment. They started doing work on
11 reconstructing the police station, Mejdan and Budzak. Is that correct?
12 A. Mejdan and Budzak, that's correct.
13 Q. If I have understood you correctly, you asked them to come and
14 speak to you. Could you briefly tell us what you discussed, when they
15 returned from Sarajevo and when you found out that they had been to
16 Sarajevo without having informed you of the fact. Could you briefly tell
17 us what the discussion was about.
18 A. It was at the beginning of 1992. On Friday, they took the train
19 to Sarajevo, and on Saturday and Sunday, they received a Volkswagen Golf
20 each from the Ministry of the Interior. I found out about this on
21 Monday. When other senior officers informed me of what had happened, I
22 called them into my office and asked them whether this was correct. They
23 showed me the documents for the goods. They showed me that they had
24 brought a Volkswagen Golf in each and they had also received some
25 equipment, shoes, shirts, uniforms, I'm not sure whether there were any
2 I asked them why they had done this without informing me. I said
3 that was an inappropriate way of proceeding in the MUP. They told me
4 they had gone to Sarajevo upon the authorisation of Chief Zupljanin. I
5 contacted Chief Zupljanin and he told me that it was correct, that he had
6 agreed to this. He had spoken to the minister about the matter. I think
7 that's what was said.
8 I then told him this was not right. How could they receive such
9 equipment? They said they went to see their own men. I said, What do
10 you mean? Which man, who? And then the commander of the Mejdan police
11 station said that he went to see Avdo Hebib on a party basis, and the
12 other person said that he went to see Kvesic, if I remember this
14 Then I ordered them to hand in the vehicles to the traffic police
15 centre because they needed it more than these two individuals, and that's
16 what they did.
17 Q. Let me just clarify something. The chief of the police station
18 in Mejdan was a Muslim and a SDA party member, is that correct, that's
19 why he went to see Avdo Hebib?
20 A. You say "chief." We're talking about the commanders of these
21 police stations. But, yes, what you have said is correct.
22 Q. And the commander of the Budzak police station was a Croat, and
23 he went to see Branko Kvesic, who was one of the leaders of the MUP in
24 the Socialist Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina. He was appointed by
25 the HDZ. Is that correct?
1 A. Yes. And if it's not a problem to add this, when I found out
2 about all of this, I sent him a letter and I informed the minister of the
3 interior of the matter, the deputy minister of the interior, the
4 assistant of the minister for crime, and the chief of the CSB. In that
5 letter, I expressed my dissatisfaction with the procedure and I said that
6 the Banja Luka SJB had a lot of problems with materiel and equipment.
7 Q. The dispatch, the letter you sent to the Ministry of the Interior
8 of the Socialist Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, in which you
9 complained about such appropriation for personal needs, such
10 appropriation of equipment, such a way of providing police stations with
11 equipment, well, did you ever receive an explanation or an answer to that
12 dispatch that you sent?
13 A. No, I didn't.
14 Q. Wouldn't it be true to say that -- well, the commanders of the
15 Mejdan and Budzak police stations were Muslims and Croats, but the
16 commander of the Centar police station was a Serb. Isn't that correct?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. And in your interview I think you said you asked these two men,
19 when you asked them to come and speak to you, on Monday, when you found
20 out that they had been in Sarajevo, you asked them why they hadn't taken
21 the commander of the Centar police station with them. Isn't that
23 A. Yes, that's correct.
24 Q. What did they answer?
25 A. Well, they both said that they went to see their men in the MUP.
1 Q. Thank you. Tell me if I have understood the matter correctly,
2 these police stations or, rather, the commanders of the police stations
3 in Mejdan and Budzak also started renovating those police stations. They
4 started painting them and so on.
5 A. They obtained certain equipment, some paint that had been brought
6 into the police station. I was then informed of the fact and then I
7 phoned them and prohibited that they started receiving this from certain
8 donors. That was not appropriate.
9 Q. At the time did you have the impression that there was
10 discrimination, a certain amount of discrimination against Serbian staff
11 in the MUP of the Socialist Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina and in
12 SJBs or, rather, in police stations headed by Serbs?
13 A. Well, I would say it was a difficult situation in the -- within
14 the Ministry of the Interior.
15 Q. But you would agree with me that there were certain differences
16 when it came to treating Serb staff in police stations, police stations
17 and SJBs headed by Serbs. They weren't treated in the same way as staff
18 who were of Muslim or Croat nationality?
19 A. Obviously there was a party influence within the Ministry of the
20 Interior. That was quite obvious.
21 Q. Thank you. Isn't it true that towards the end of 1991, or,
22 rather, in 1992, a decision was taken on separating the municipalities of
23 Stari Grad and Ivanjska in the territory of the town of Banja Luka. Do
24 you remember that?
25 A. As far as I have understood you, a decision was taken. Is that
2 Q. Yes?
3 A. No. Before the war broke out there was an initiative in
4 Banja Luka according to which the municipality of Banja Luka should be
5 broken down in an administrative sense and divided into a number of
6 municipalities. And that was still current four or five years ago. Then
7 after the multi-party elections, individual political parties wanted to
8 again divide Banja Luka into a number of municipalities, and the town
9 assembly was against this idea and they did not permit it.
10 Q. Is it true that this was a joint initiative of the SDA and HDZ
11 parties, a joint initiative to form the municipalities of Stari Grad,
12 Bronzan and Mejdan, Krupa, Vrbas, Stricici, and Ivanjska in the territory
13 of Banja Luka.
14 A. Yes, more or less. Instead of Stari Grad, I think they mentioned
15 Mejdan as one of the possible municipalities.
16 Q. Isn't it true that if the municipalities were reorganised in that
17 way, some of the newly formed municipalities would then have one of the
18 peoples in the majority. The Muslim people or the Croat people would be
19 in the majority in that case. Isn't that right?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Thank you. At the time, the situation in Krajina, in terms of
22 security, was very difficult; isn't that correct?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. If I have understood your comments in your interview correctly,
25 there was a certain amount of psychoses that was the result of the
1 shelling of certain towns. Gradiska, for example, and Brod from the
2 territory of Croatia. And many Serbian refugees had arrived from the
3 territory of Croatia and this caused a certain amount of tension, certain
4 difficulties. Isn't that correct?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. At the time you know that the SDA party sent candidates that it
7 selected, Muslim candidates, of course, to be trained in the MUP of the
8 Republic of Croatia. Are you aware of this?
9 A. I heard about this, but I have no direct information about it.
10 Q. You remember that in a decision, or, rather, an order from
11 Minister Delimustafic the reserve of police force was mobilised in
12 September 1991?
13 A. That's correct.
14 Q. Isn't it true that you arrived at the conclusion that the SDA,
15 or, rather, the Ministry of the Interior, was trying to form an army from
16 the police in that manner; isn't that correct?
17 A. Yes, that was quite obvious.
18 Q. Could you please provide us with a detailed explanation - I think
19 this will also assist the Chamber and everyone else in the courtroom -
20 how is the reserve police force mobilised?
21 Could you briefly explain this for us.
22 A. Well, the reserve police force is mobilised in extraordinary
23 circumstances, when there is an imminent threat of war and in the course
24 of war. The minister of the interior has to issue an order for their
1 Q. For someone to become a member of the reserve police force in the
2 former Yugoslavia, in the SFRY, it was obligatory to perform one's
3 military service; isn't that correct?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. The Secretariat of -- municipal secretariats for municipal
6 defence, for All People's Defence had to send young men of 18 and over to
7 do their military service. It was their responsibility. Isn't that
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. After they had completed their military service, the person who
11 had completed his military service would then bring in his case file from
12 the unit that he was a member of and there was evidence of the fact that
13 the person had certain training, specialist knowledge, obtained in the
14 course of his military training. This was called VES.
15 A. Yes, that's what it was called. But what you call the case file,
16 I think they were called unit files and they were sent from military
17 units to the ministry.
18 Q. So someone who completed his military service would then return
19 to his place of domicile and would have to report to the municipal organ,
20 the municipal military organ of national defence that had sent that
21 person to serve in the army and the person would have to inform that body
22 that his military training had been completed. Documents would be
23 produced to that effect, and at that point in time, that Secretariat for
24 National Defence would categorise that person as a member of the military
25 reserve force. Isn't that correct?
1 A. Yes, that's correct. He would be inscribed as a conscript.
2 Q. When the police need certain reserve policemen, with certain
3 specialities, then the SJB or the CSB
4 for national defence with a request to, for example, provide the
5 personnel files for certain individuals you needed and to have them
6 transferred to the police reserve force from the military reserve force.
7 Is that correct?
8 A. That's correct. May I add an explanation?
9 Q. Please let us observe pauses between questions and answers to
10 avoid problems with the record.
11 A. As far as transfers are concerned from military departments to
12 the police, certain vetting is -- is needed. If we needed 20 men, we
13 would ask for 30 and then we would choose those who have no criminal
14 records and who pass our field screening, et cetera.
15 Q. You anticipated another question I wanted to ask.
16 So you would ask for a larger number than you actually needed.
17 The Secretariat for National Defence would provide you with a certain
18 number of candidates according to the specialities you required, and then
19 you would conduct screening, and only those who meet the requirements to
20 become members of the reserve police would be chosen. And then you would
21 inform the military department and the Secretariat for National Defence
22 that you would transfer that particular number of men who satisfy all the
23 criteria to the reserve police force.
24 A. Yes, that's correct.
25 Q. And then these men continued to be on file as reserve policemen
1 attached to a public security station on a particular list; correct?
2 A. Correct. With a proviso that these men would undergo certain
3 training, according to the plan adopted by the Ministry of the Interior.
4 The training plan.
5 Q. And this professional training is refreshed at certain intervals?
6 A. Yes. A programme would be reviewed and adopted every year, and
7 it would be implemented every year.
8 Q. In situations like the one you were facing, with the immediate
9 threat of war and high security risks, you, in the police, regardless of
10 the already-existing reserve police force, if you needed an additional
11 number of reserve policemen, you would again, as we described, approach
12 the municipal Secretariat for National Defence and would again ask for a
13 new list of candidates; correct?
14 A. Yes, that's right.
15 Q. Thank you.
16 [Defence counsel confer]
17 MR. ZECEVIC:
18 Q. [Interpretation] When these men become reserve policemen, when
19 they are transferred to the reserve police force, their individual
20 personnel files would be transferred to the archive of the MUP; that is,
21 of the particular public security station.
22 A. That's right.
23 Q. Thank you very much. We will now move to a different subject.
24 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I don't know if any
25 outstanding questions remain regarding the reserve and the transfer of
1 reserve soldiers to the reserve police force. Is there anything further
2 I need to clarify for the Chamber?
3 JUDGE HALL
5 MR. ZECEVIC: Thank you very much.
6 [Defence counsel confer]
7 MR. ZECEVIC:
8 Q. [Interpretation] My colleague reminds me about one fact that is
9 still important to clarify.
10 At the moment when, for whatever reason, you take off a certain
11 individual from the list of your reserve police, you return his personal
12 file to the municipal Secretariat for National Defence and you inform
13 them that he had been taken off the roster of the reserve police and that
14 he is back at their disposal.
15 A. That's right. We would inform them there is no further need for
16 that person's engagement.
17 Q. Thank you. On the first day of your examination-in-chief, my
18 learned friend asked you about the meeting in Banja Luka of
19 11 February 1992. It's 1D135. And the tab number, according to the list
20 we provided, is 126.
21 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, we have prepared two
22 binders of hard-copy documents for the witness, and since the witness
23 does not have good eye-sight, it is up to him to choose whether he would
24 be viewing documents in hard copy or on the monitor. I thought would be
25 fair to give him the paper.
1 JUDGE HALL
2 your assistance.
3 MR. ZECEVIC:
4 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Tutus, now have you copies of all of the
5 documents before you. This is one number 126. I believe it's in binder
6 number 2.
7 Can we proceed?
8 A. Please go ahead.
9 Q. If I understood your evidence correctly, you had never seen this
10 record of the meeting before.
11 A. I saw it when it was shown to me by the Prosecution.
12 Q. You couldn't even remember that meeting specifically, so we won't
13 go through it.
14 However, on page 4 of that document, there is a record of your
15 contribution to the discussion. And I believe when the Prosecution
16 showed that you document, you said you could not remember everything
17 accurately but as far as the facts you presented, such as that you were
18 lacking an all-terrain vehicle, et cetera, you confirmed that that was,
19 indeed, the situation.
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Mr. Tutus, do you remember, on page 2, the contribution of
22 Mr. Stanisic is summarised, and in the second paragraph on that page,
23 page 2, it says:
24 "From this meeting, it is needed to collect a minimum of
25 outstanding requests to be sent to Minister Delimustafic with a
1 reasonable deadline to deal with them."
2 Do you remember that there was, indeed, a suggestion that the
3 demands made at the meeting should be submitted to the minister so that
4 the outstanding issues be resolved within a reasonable time?
5 A. Right now I can't remember, but I don't see any reason why that
6 shouldn't be right.
7 Q. You will agree with me, won't you, that this document
8 demonstrates the seriousness and the complexity of security problems that
9 existed at the time in the Socialist Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina?
10 A. I agree.
11 Q. Especially within the MUP of the Socialist Republic of Bosnia and
12 Herzegovina, bearing in mind what we discussed at the very beginning, the
13 situations that you witnessed personally, those trips to Sarajevo,
14 et cetera?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. The next document is tab 1, P527, also shown to you by my learned
17 friend. Tab 1 in the first binder.
18 A. Which number?
19 Q. One.
20 It's a letter dated 13 February 1992. On the right-hand side,
21 you see the number of the document.
22 A. Yes, I can see it.
23 Q. You remember that Ms. Korner showed you this document.
24 A. I do.
25 Q. Mr. Tutus, when you commented this document in response to
1 Ms. Korner's question, you said it also reflects the complexity of the
2 problems that existed at the time at the MUP of the Socialist Republic of
3 Bosnia-Herzegovina. Do you remember that comment?
4 A. Yes, I do.
5 Q. What I want to know, Mr. Tutus, although you were not a recipient
6 of this document, judging by its format, it looks like an official
7 dispatch sent by the MUP of the Socialist Republic of Bosnia and
9 A. It looks official.
10 Q. Each and every official dispatch of the MUP of the
11 Socialist Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina is copied to the archives of
12 the same MUP; correct?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. That is governed by the rules of the service.
15 A. Correct.
16 Q. If there is an official dispatch sent by the regular channels of
17 communication, by teletype, then it's certainly not a secret dispatch, is
19 A. You're right.
20 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] May I now ask for P323, tab 3.
21 Q. It's a dispatch dated 31st March 1992, signed by
22 Assistant Minister of the Interior, Momcilo Mandic.
23 A. Which number did you say?
24 Q. Tab 3.
25 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] P353, I'm sorry. Binder 1, tab 3.
1 Q. Mr. Tutus, I did not want to confuse you; I wanted to help you.
2 But if you find it easier, look at the monitor.
3 A. No, I'm fine.
4 Q. Thank you.
5 This document was shown to you earlier by Ms. Korner, and you
6 confirmed that you had received this document.
7 A. Well, I can't remember exactly, but if I confirmed, I did.
8 Q. But you're certainly familiar with the substance.
9 A. Yes, I am.
10 Q. After that, my learned friend Ms. Korner showed you another
11 document, a dispatch from the minister, Alija Delimustafic, 1D136, tab 4.
12 That's the next document for you. 1D136 of the same date.
13 A. Let me see.
14 Q. You remember giving comments on this document to Ms. Korner?
15 A. Yes. Yes, I do.
16 Q. My learned friend Ms. Korner asked you if you had done anything
17 about this document from Alija Delimustafic; do you remember that?
18 A. Yes, I do.
19 Q. And you answered that you had not done anything particular about
20 that document. However, on page 72 of your interview, and earlier in
21 your evidence here, you did hold meetings about these documents we looked
22 at, dated 31st March 1992. You did go with one of your assistants to
23 special meetings, to the police station Mejdan and the Budzak police
24 station, both.
25 A. Yes, that's correct.
1 Q. I think that it was your evidence here, too, that at the meeting,
2 first in Budzak where the commander of the police station was a Croat,
3 once you've explained to them the situation that had arisen, as a result
4 of the decision to divide the MUP, some of the policemen of Croat
5 ethnicity asked you if that meant that they were supposed to work with
6 criminals, and your response was that this was not going to happen while
7 you were there.
8 You had invited them to stay in their jobs and join the MUP of
9 the Serbian Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina. Is that right?
10 A. Yes. A handful of them refused to sign the solemn declaration
11 and left the premises.
12 Q. At page 72 of your interview, and I only wish you to confirm that
13 this is, indeed, what -- the way I'm going paraphrase it now.
14 MS. KORNER: I just want to know where the word "a handful" only
15 refused appear.
16 MR. ZECEVIC: Well, Ms. Korner it's the answer of the -- of the
17 witness. It wasn't -- it wasn't suggested by me.
18 MS. KORNER: I'm sorry, I thought you were quoting the -- the
19 answer in the interview that the witness gave. And I can't see the words
20 "a handful" anywhere.
21 MR. ZECEVIC: No, the -- no, it is 45, 22, the witness answer
23 "Yes, a handful of them refused to sign the solemn declaration
24 and left the premises."
25 MS. KORNER: I see. So you weren't saying that's what he said in
2 MR. ZECEVIC: No. That is the answer of the witness.
3 MS. KORNER: No, no, I just wanted to know whether you were
4 putting that from the interview.
5 MR. ZECEVIC: No.
6 Q. [Interpretation] In your interview, you said:
7 "I was asked by one of the policemen in Budzak, Chief, are you
8 going to guarantee that criminals would not be working with us?" And you
10 "Yes, I can give you that guarantee for as long as I am the
12 "And the Croat, who I believe was from Ivanjska, said, If you
13 give us that guarantee, then we will trust you and stay with you."
14 And that's what you've just confirmed a moment ago. Is that
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. The interview goes on to say:
18 "The commander of the police station stood up and said, and I
19 will paraphrase to the best of my recollection: I will not have the
20 three-colour insignia on my cap. How am I going to go to the villages
21 inhabited with Croats with such a uniform? What would they tell me? And
22 I am calling upon all of those who share my view to leave the meeting. A
23 couple of them stood up and left with him. All the rest stayed at the
24 meeting, and I closed it. There were no problems. The soldiers -- those
25 who had weapons returned them and that's how it was."
1 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter notes that the three-colour
2 insignia was the Serbian three-colour insignia.
3 MR. ZECEVIC: I'm sorry, I don't see that the witness answer was
5 Q. [Interpretation] Will you please repeat your answer. It is not
6 reflected in the transcript.
7 A. Yes, that's how it was.
8 Q. Thank you. At page 68 of your interview, in answer to a question
9 put by the OTP, you presented certain percentages as to how many of all
10 the members of the public security station Banja Luka of Muslim and Croat
11 ethnicities, and we're including the Centar, Mejdan and Budzak police
12 stations into that station, had remained in the area.
13 Do you recall that?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Your answer at the time was that of all the Croat members of the
16 public security station Banja Luka who, on the 31st of March, when the
17 MUP was divided, were working for the MUP, 73 per cent agreed to stay
18 with the MUP of the Serbian Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina. Is that
20 A. Yes, precisely. Of all the Croats -- I don't need to go on
21 explaining if the matter is clear.
22 Q. But you may clarify, just in case. In other words, if there were
23 100 of them, let's say, 73 stayed in their job.
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. And 27 left MUP or, rather, refused to work for the MUP of the
1 Serbian Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Compared to the number of Muslims, the percentage was 61; is that
4 right? Do you recall that?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Is that piece of information correct?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Let us clarify this fully. Of 100 Muslims who worked there,
9 61 agreed to go on working for the MUP of the Serbian Republic of
11 A. Yes, by way of an example.
12 Q. Yes, just an example.
13 MS. KORNER: I think we should make it clear, though, that this
14 comes from an article in "Glas" where he is quoted, and we should have
15 the date as well, and I think the document should go in. It's an article
16 from "Glas" dated the 24th of April.
17 MR. ZECEVIC: Well, Ms. Korner, I don't intend to use the
18 newspaper articles because you know my --
19 MS. KORNER: Then you can't use -- you can't have it both ways.
20 MR. ZECEVIC: No, no, no, but I have -- I have asked the witness
21 and he confirmed these -- these numbers. I don't see why would I
22 additionally need to put an article on that.
23 MS. KORNER: Because it is not clear from the question and answer
24 that these are answers that he gave to a reporter as quoted by a
25 reporter. I don't believe he has any other document to support this
2 MR. ZECEVIC: This is not based on a document. This is based on
3 his knowledge and he -- in his interview on page 68, he -- I will read
4 the --
5 MS. KORNER: Yes, could you read the question at line 3 on
6 page 68.
7 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes, and he said this is true.
8 MS. KORNER: Yes.
9 MR. ZECEVIC: The question was -- for the illustration
10 73 per cent of the Croat and 65 Muslim -- 65 -- 61 per cent of the Muslim
11 of -- of the existing number of employees have agreed to -- to -- to --
12 to stay. And he says that's true.
13 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, what is actually put to him is -- by
14 the investigator, Let me show you a -- well, it's a "Glas" article dated
15 the 24th of April, 1992, written by Mr. Kopanja, entitled: "Lies for War
17 And then it's put to him that: "You apparently declare to the
18 journalist" and then the figures are put, and he agrees with that.
19 That's what he said to the journalist.
20 So it is not quite the same thing. Can I -- that's the
21 difference I'm trying to draw.
22 MR. ZECEVIC: Okay. Let me rephrase my questions.
23 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Tutus, do you recall as the truth that
24 73 per cent of Croats, members of the MUP of the Socialist Republic of
25 Bosnia-Herzegovina, after the 1st of April, agreed to stay on in the MUP
1 of the Serbian Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina? Yes or no, to the best of
2 your recollection.
3 A. I'd very much like to see an article or anything else that might
4 substantiate it, but I have no reason to doubt the information if it was
5 published, as it was.
6 MR. ZECEVIC: I'm sorry, Your Honours, I don't have the
7 reference. I don't have a problem if -- that we show the document to the
8 witness. If -- if Ms. Korner can help with me with that, I would
9 appreciate. Or over the break I can provide this document.
10 MS. KORNER: [Microphone not activated] ... I mean, that it is
11 not that he was quoting statistics. It's -- this is the -- the
12 journalist says, "This is what you said," and he says, "I agree." So
13 that's the only small point I'm trying to make.
14 JUDGE HALL
15 answer that, notwithstanding that the source of this was this article in
16 "Glas," that he -- effectively adopted it, the figures, and made them his
17 own. But now I'm not sure as to ...
18 It probably may be necessary, if -- if this is an important point
19 to go back to the source material.
20 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes, Your Honours, I will prepare the document
21 after the break, and then I will revisit the issue with the witness. If
22 that pleases the Court. Thank you.
23 Q. [Interpretation] Now that the issue of newspaper articles has
24 been raised, two days ago, my learned friend showed you the 4th of April,
25 1992, "Glas" article, which is P536. You don't have it in the binder
1 there, but you will see it on the monitor.
2 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] This it P536.
3 Q. You commented on the article, which was published about the SOS
4 action in Banja Luka. Do you recall that?
5 A. Yes, I do.
6 Q. As I was preparing my questions for you, I noticed that, on
7 page 1 of the document, at the very bottom, it is stated that all the
8 members of the Islamic faith were to receive greetings on the occasion of
9 the Bajram festivities, and this has not been translated into English.
10 Do you see this?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. To all the members of Islamic faith and what follows is a
13 "Mubarek Bajram, Mubarek Olsun," which is probably the expression used on
14 the occasion of the Bajram feast. Is that right.
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. There were several questions put in relation to the reasons
17 behind or the motivations behind this event between the 4th and the
18 5th of April, 1992, in Banja Luka. I would like to take you back to
19 page 1.
20 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] And I would like the top part to be
21 shown to the witness.
22 Q. Where the very article describes the reasons prompting the event.
23 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Could we please turn to the left.
25 Q. As can you see, it states here the motivation for the action is
1 Jerko Doko's address, a minister in the government of the
2 Bosnia-Herzegovina, and his statement that the reservists were waging a
3 private war and placing themselves outside the law. In other words, the
5 Do you recall the statement by Jerko Doko made in April 1992?
6 A. As far as I remember, Jerko Doko was the minister of defence in
7 the government of Bosnia-Herzegovina. During this period of time a
8 dispatch was sent to the heads of public security stations, where we were
9 asked to take out unit dossiers from the various offices for national
10 defence in order to prevent the JNA from mobilising people. We felt that
11 this did not fall within our competence, to engage in such activities.
12 Q. If I'm well informed, Mr. Jerko Doko was a Croat and a member of
13 the HDZ, was he not?
14 A. I don't know if he was member of the HDZ or not, but I do believe
15 that he was a Croat and the minister of defence of Bosnia-Herzegovina.
16 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Can the witness be shown page 2 of
17 the article.
18 Could we zoom in on the top part of it.
19 Q. Here, again, in this box, it is stated that the blockade of the
20 Banja Luka area carried out by the "Serbian Defence Forces," in inverted
21 commas, is the result of the address by Jerko Doko, minister of defence
22 of Bosnia-Herzegovina, to the National Assembly of Banja Luka, who had
23 accused of -- who had accused the reservists of waging a private war. Is
24 this what you've been referring to a moment ago?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. Thank you. At one point the Prosecutor asked you if you had
2 participated in the negotiations with the Serb Defence Forces, et cetera,
3 and you -- your answer was negative.
4 At the very bottom it is stated that after several hours of
5 negotiations where members of the Crisis Staff of Banja Luka and members
6 of the Banija Luka Corps, the JNA, and of -- and the AR Krajina took
7 part --
9 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Can you please not move the article
10 because we were focussing on the middle of the page in order for the
11 witness to follow. Right. Thank you. I will have to read it anew. Can
12 the page -- can we turn to the left of the page a bit so that we can see
13 the start of the column. Thank you.
14 Q. It is stated:
15 "After several hours of negotiations between representatives of
16 the Crisis Staff of Banja Luka, Territorial Defence, the JNA's
17 Banija Luka Corps, and institutions of lawful authorities in Banja Luka,
18 the demands put forth," et cetera. Not even the newspaper article seems
19 to mention that MUP representatives, representatives of the CSB,
20 participated in this in any way.
21 A. It is my statement that I did not take part in this at all.
22 Q. Thank you.
23 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Could the witness now be shown a
24 video that has already been seen. It's the parade dated the 13th of May.
25 P1080 is the number.
1 Q. But before we show the video, could you please comment on
3 The 13th of May, in the former Yugoslavia, was the date of the
4 so-called Security Day. Members of the security services celebrated this
5 day. Members of the MUP and members of military security celebrated this
6 day. Isn't that correct?
7 A. Yes, that's correct.
8 With your permission, festivities were large-scale festivities.
9 There were large-scale gatherings that were held in various towns, in
10 different towns every year, and I'm proud to be able to say that I
11 participated in most of those gatherings, most of those celebrations,
12 well, for at least ten or 15 years.
13 Q. And these assemblies, so to speak, were held both at the federal
14 level and at the level of all the republics and regions in the former
15 Socialist Federative Republic of Yugoslavia; isn't that correct?
16 A. Yes. From the level of municipalities right up to the federal
18 Q. And it was customary for the Republican Secretariat for the
19 interior -- the republican secretary for the interior, that would now
20 correspond to the role of minister, it was customary for that person to
21 inspect the members of the security services. An appropriate speech
22 would be given. Then there were versus cultural and artistic programmes,
23 sports events and so on and so forth.
24 That was the nature of the celebrations. Isn't that correct?
25 A. Yes, that's correct.
1 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Could we now please show the video.
3 I apologise, I didn't think that it was for us to show the video.
4 I haven't prepared that, so I will do so during the break. I do
6 Mr. Smith says that he will be kind enough to show it for our
8 Thank you.
9 Q. My question concerns the end. You can continue showing it. In
10 the course of your testimony, you confirmed that this equipment -- this
11 military equipment, they are military vehicles we can see here. That was
12 in response to a question from Ms. Korner.
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Towards the end --
15 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Could Mr. Smith show the part where
16 the helicopters appear.
17 JUDGE HARHOFF: Mr. Zecevic, I also had this question for the
18 witness about these APCs that are driving down on the street, and I
19 wonder if it is possible to -- to go back and try and enlarge the white
20 script that is on one of the blue APCs, I think, the second or the third.
21 I'm not sure if it says "policija," but it looks to me as if it
23 MR. ZECEVIC: [Microphone not activated].
24 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for counsel, please.
25 JUDGE HARHOFF: Even better. Then can we see it, if it's
2 MR. ZECEVIC: [Microphone not activated].
3 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for counsel, please.
4 MR. ZECEVIC: I'm sorry. Can I return back, because this is a
5 perfect spot for what I want to show to the witness on this and then I
6 will return. If it pleases the Court.
7 Q. [Interpretation] Sir, the helicopters were a subject of
8 discussion and you confirmed that the Banja Luka CSB, before 1992, had
9 one helicopter which -- well, you said there was a heli-port and you said
10 that the helicopter was used for the needs of the MUP or, rather, the
12 A. That's correct. That helicopter was obtained for the needs of
13 the municipal secretariat for internal affairs, which later back the SJB.
14 And later, this all became part of the CSB. It was all integrated at a
15 later stage.
16 Q. But it is true to say that that helicopter isn't one of these
17 helicopters because the helicopter that the Banja Luka CSB had before
18 1992 was taken to Sarajevo. Isn't that correct? That's what you said?
19 A. I don't know how this was done. I don't know whether it was
20 handed over or sold. I don't know how this was done, but I know that we
21 lost the helicopter.
22 Q. Have a look at the photograph on the screen now, please. Isn't
23 it true that when you have a look at the tail-end of the helicopter, you
24 can see a red star, a five-pointed star, and that's the symbol of the
25 JNA, isn't it?
1 A. I believe so.
2 MR. ZECEVIC: If we can further play the video.
3 [Video-clip played]
4 MR. ZECEVIC: Stop here. Sorry. If can you just return here.
5 Yeah, here.
6 Q. [Interpretation] Can you see it now?
7 A. Yes, can I see that very clearly.
8 Q. Isn't it correct to say that that is the symbol used by the JNA?
9 A. Yes, that's the five-pointed star.
10 Q. Thank you.
11 MR. ZECEVIC: Okay. Mr. Smith, I appreciate your help very much
12 but can we go back now for -- for the -- to this -- to the very beginning
13 for the purposes of the question for -- Judge Harhoff posed. Yeah.
14 Can you stop here? Would it be -- well, maybe -- maybe a further
15 on a bit. Yeah, here.
16 Q. [Interpretation] Can you see that it says "milicija" here in the
17 Cyrillic script?
18 A. Yes, can I see that.
19 MR. ZECEVIC: Your Honours, would you want me to -- I have
20 another question on this matter and maybe later if you would like me to
21 pursue the matter any further.
22 JUDGE HARHOFF: I won't. Please move on.
23 MR. ZECEVIC:
24 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Tutus, isn't it true to say that these -- as
25 you say, military vehicles, and I agree with that description, these
1 military vehicles were quite recently painted blue. You can see that.
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Even the wheels were painted blue?
4 A. Yes, I agree.
5 Q. Would you agree with me, or you would agree with me, would you
6 not, that these vehicles and this entire parade was in fact held for
7 propaganda purposes. The vehicles were used for propaganda purposes and
8 the parade was held for propaganda purposes?
9 A. I couldn't say so. I think the purpose was to demonstrate force
10 and to demonstrate, for the benefit of the citizens, that the situation
11 was secure, et cetera.
12 Q. That's what I meant by propaganda purposes as well. Thank you.
13 I said that that's what I meant when I said propaganda purposes
14 as well.
15 Let's go back to 1D150 now. 1D151. These are documents that you
16 will find in the second binder. 130 and 131 are the numbers in your
18 This is document 1D150, signed by the minister for internal
19 affairs, Alija Delimustafic. It was forwarded to all CSBs, to public
20 security stations, and it has to do with an order issued by the commander
21 of the Territorial Defence Staff of the Republic of Bosnia and
22 Herzegovina, dated the 29th of April, 1992. It's an order on
23 implementing a Presidency decision, in fact.
24 Do you remember this document?
25 A. Yes, I do.
1 Q. Amongst other things, under item 1 the document states the
3 "All roads in the territory of the [Realtime transcript read in
4 error "Republic of Serbia"] Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina being used
5 by units of the former JNA for pulling out materiel and equipment are to
6 be completely blocked in direct coordination with the Ministry of the
8 Item 2: "Larger areas with military installations, et cetera."
9 Item 3: "Unannounced convoys of former JNA units and convoys
10 without MUP escorts shall not be allowed to leave the barracks, et
12 Item 4 says: "Urgently plan and launch combat activities
13 throughout the territory of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and
14 these activities are to be coordinated with the Territorial Defence
15 staffs of the region, districts and the Republic of Bosnia and
16 Herzegovina ..."
17 Do you remember this?
18 A. Yes, I do.
19 Q. You would agree with me that this document is, in fact, an order
20 on starting a war.
21 A. Well, that's not what I would say. My opinion is that this order
22 was supposed to cause a conflict between the JNA on the one side and the
23 police and the Territorial Defence on the other. And that's what I said
24 with regard to that transcript. I said there were ugly dispatches from
25 the MUP. This is one of the ugliest ones that I received.
1 Q. Thank you.
2 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] As an objection to the transcript,
3 page 58, line 14, it says the Republic of Serbia, but the Republic of
4 Bosnia and Herzegovina is concerned. That's what it says in the document
6 JUDGE HALL
7 something else, it's 12.05.
8 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes.
9 JUDGE HALL
10 MR. ZECEVIC: Thank you very much.
11 JUDGE HALL
12 [The witness stands down]
13 --- Recess taken at 12.05 p.m.
14 --- On resuming at 12.32 p.m.
15 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
16 [The witness takes the stand]
17 MR. ZECEVIC: May I --
18 JUDGE HALL
19 MR. ZECEVIC: Thank you.
20 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Tutus, let us conclude our discussion on
21 this document concerning Alija Delimustafic and the 29th of April.
22 You said that, in your view, the document, had paved the way to a
23 conflict between the JNA, TO, and the police. And the truth of the
24 matter is that the conflict did take place, did it not?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. Thank you. We will have to go back to the issue we discussed at
2 the start of my examination concerning the percentages of Muslims and
3 Croats who remained with the MUP of the Serbian Republic of
4 Bosnia-Herzegovina after the MUP had separated on the 31st of March.
5 We prepared the article from "Glas."
6 MR. ZECEVIC: If the Usher would be so kind to -- to give the
7 copy of the document to the witness.
8 Your Honours, may I just inform the Court that it has been
9 uploaded in the e-court. It is 1D03-2165.
10 JUDGE HARHOFF: Thank you [Microphone not activated]
11 MR. ZECEVIC: You're welcome, Your Honours.
12 Q. [Interpretation] As can you see, sir, this is an article from
13 "Glas"; page 2 of the 24th of April, 1992.
14 In the box, the text refers to strong reactions to some
15 statements by Muharem Krzic, president of the Party of Democratic Action
16 for Banja Luka. The last four paragraphs relate your statement. I
18 "Krzic's statements have provoked strong reactions in the Banja
19 Luka public station -- security station as well?"
20 And then let's skip a bit. And here, apparently your words are
22 "Mr. Muharem Krzic has for a while now systematically been
23 attacking the CSB
24 thought-out fabrications in order to create an atmosphere of war in
25 these -- in this area."
1 And then you go on to say that Mr. Krzic does not hesitate to use
2 any sort of means to demean the SJB.
3 So, he stated that out of the 105 policemen, only 7 Muslims and
4 6 Croats were employed. Although the public at large knows that such
5 statements are pure fabrications and lies.
6 "'For illustration's sake,'" you go on to say, "'the loyalty
7 oath,'" and when you say the "loyalty oath," I suppose you're referring
8 to the solemn declaration, "'to the Serbian Republic of
9 Bosnia-Herzegovina had so far been signed by 73 per cent of Croats and
10 61 per cent of Muslims of the overall number of members of our SJB,'
11 Vladimir Tutus stated, the chief of the SJB Banja Luka."
12 Mr. Tutus, do you recall stating this and do you stand by what
13 you said at the time?
14 A. Yes, I do.
15 Q. What strikes me is that Mr. Muharem Krzic, the president of the
16 SDA Banja Luka, as early as the 18th of March, stated that only seven
17 Muslims and six Croats were employed for the Banja Luka SJB. And this is
18 something that was referred to here. The 18th of March precedes the date
19 of the separation of the MUP, does it not?
20 A. Yes.
21 MR. ZECEVIC: I hope this satisfies the -- the issue of knowledge
22 of this witness concerning the percentages of Muslim and Croat workers in
23 the -- who remained in -- in MUP of Republika Srpska.
24 JUDGE HARHOFF: It certainly does, Mr. Zecevic. Although one
25 little question could be added to the questions that you have put.
1 Namely, how long did the two gentlemen stay in office in the SJBs that we
2 discussed earlier this morning? There was specific reference made to two
3 named chiefs of SDBs -- SJBs, one was a Croat and the other was a Muslim,
4 who stayed in office, who stayed and continued to serve as chief of the
5 SJB, even after they had not signed the -- the declaration and even after
6 the MUP was split.
7 So my question was -- that's very good, that proves your point,
8 but how long did they continue to stay in office? Right through the end
9 of the conflict?
10 MR. ZECEVIC: I'm sorry, Your Honours, if I may remind you.
11 First of all, it refers to commanders of the police stations, Mejdan and
12 Budzak, and I believe the witness has said that on this meeting, when he
13 went over there, both of them resigned on that particular meeting and
14 they didn't stay. Both of them. Both commanders of Mejdan and Budzak
15 have resigned and they didn't stay on the force after the 31st of March,
16 but can I --
17 JUDGE HARHOFF: No, no --
18 MR. ZECEVIC: -- ask the witness to confirm that.
19 JUDGE HARHOFF: You are right. I was wrong. My recollection
20 simply fooled me here. So you don't need to pursue.
21 Thank you very much.
22 MR. ZECEVIC: Thank you, Your Honours.
23 MS. KORNER: Your Honours, I would suggest that this now needs to
24 be an exhibit, the whole article, because the context is important.
25 MR. ZECEVIC: Your Honours, you know the position of the
1 Stanisic Defence concerning newspaper articles. I don't think that --
2 that the document needs to be exhibited and neither will we offer it for
3 exhibit, because I believe the witness sufficiently stated that it his
4 recollection and that he stays by this.
5 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, no. I mean, with respect, that can't
6 be right. The context of all of this is important. That's why I raised
7 the question of the fact that it came from a newspaper article. The
8 Defence are using newspaper articles when it suits them and other
9 newspaper articles are admitted into evidence as exhibits, and indeed the
10 witness said that's what he said and he stands by it.
11 So it is an accurate quote.
12 JUDGE HALL
13 Mr. Zecevic has said, is what the witness has testified to here so what's
14 the --
15 MS. KORNER: Well, no, Your Honour, that's not right, and with
16 respect. What he says is this accurately quotes what he says. In -- in
17 the submission of the Prosecution, the context of this whole quote is
18 important and the context is given by the article. And articles are
19 admissible in -- in evidence and have been so admitted.
20 JUDGE HALL
21 talking in terms of this specific article, having regard to the testimony
22 that we have heard, I -- I -- I am still at a loss as to why, in the
23 Prosecution's view, it needs be exhibited.
24 On the other hand, I don't see any harm to it being exhibited
25 having regard to the fact that articles have been exhibited. So ...
1 MS. KORNER: Well, Your Honour, I don't mind. If Mr. Zecevic
2 won't ask formally for to it to be exhibited in his case, then I'm going
3 do so in reexamination.
4 MR. ZECEVIC: Your Honours, I definitely will not offer this
5 document because we take the principled position out of -- as a
6 principle. So -- but I don't object that Ms. Korner uses in the
7 cross-examination [sic] and offers it to -- for -- to evidence. Thank
9 JUDGE HALL
10 MR. ZECEVIC: May I continue, Your Honour.
11 JUDGE HALL
12 MR. ZECEVIC: Thank you.
13 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Tutus, I would now like to discuss the work
14 of the Banja Luka public security station which you were at the head of
15 in 1992, since this is relevant for our case.
16 In the course of your testimony, you said, on several occasions,
17 that communications in the course of 1992 - that's to say, as of the
18 month of April onwards - with the Ministry of the Interior, were quite
19 difficult. Is that right?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Your communication with the SCB [as interpreted] Banja Luka was
22 not difficult since you were housed in the same building. Is that right?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. However, the communication with the ministry did experience
25 problems, as you said. Is it not the case that even in physical terms,
1 Krajina had been cut off up until the month of July from the rest of
2 Bosnia-Herzegovina? Is that right?
3 A. Yes.
4 MS. KORNER: Can I just assist Mr. Zecevic in the transcript for
5 once. The question: "Your communication," it was translated as "SCB
6 but it's clearly you were saying CSB
7 housed in the same building. Is that correct?"
8 Well, no word has come out in the transcript but I'm assuming you
9 said "CSB
10 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes. I said, "Your communication with the CSB
11 Banja Luka," yes. Thank you, Ms. Korner.
12 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Tutus, I would like to -- you to look at
13 document 65 ter 227, which is behind tab 37. This is a dispatch of the
14 public security station of Banja Luka, chief of department, Mr. Josic
15 signed it, and the date is the 21st of August, 1992.
16 This is in response to the -- to the CSB Banja Luka dispatch of
17 the 19th of August. Can you see that?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. The information has been given, I suppose, in response to a
20 request from the CSB
21 in detention between the 1st of January, 1992, and the 20th of August,
23 A. That's right.
24 Q. It is stated here that the -- that detention was imposed by the
25 public security station against 172 individuals; is that right?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. It goes on to say that the individuals who were placed in
3 detention up to -- through -- three days were within the time-limit of
4 72 hours turned over to the -- to the -- investigating judge having
5 jurisdiction, together with reports and criminal reports. Do you see
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. And according to your section chief, there was not a single
9 complaint filed against the work of the section in placing individuals in
10 detention in the course of the said period. Do you see that?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Was that, indeed, the situation in the Banja Luka SJB as
13 reflected here?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. This section chief, Zoran Josic, was the chief of the crime
16 police section, was he not, of the CID
17 A. Yes, that's right.
18 Q. In other words, you are familiar with the information contained
19 in this document and you confirm it, do you not?
20 A. Yes.
21 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Can I tender this document into
22 evidence, please.
23 JUDGE HALL
24 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit 1D197, Your Honours.
25 JUDGE DELVOIE: Mr. Zecevic --
1 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes?
2 JUDGE DELVOIE: -- you have these documents two times in your
3 binder, under tab 37 and tab 108. May I suppose that is a simple
5 MR. ZECEVIC: Definitely, Your Honours. But we have been listing
6 all the documents and we acknowledge that there was some duplicates, and
7 we're not offering them. Thank you very much.
8 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Tutus, the results of the SJB in 1992, its
9 performance, compared to the performance of the same station in 1991 was,
10 objectively speaking, identical or even improved.
11 A. No, it wasn't identical. It was improved.
12 Q. Can you clarify, please.
13 A. As far as I remember, more than 50 per cent of the criminal cases
14 were resolved, even though the overall number of crimes increased. I
15 think that the station had to deal with over a thousand crimes, which was
16 much more than in the previous period.
17 Q. I'm not sure I understood you correctly. My understanding was
18 that you said that in 1992 there were a thousand crimes that the --
19 overall number of crimes had been increased by 1.000 compared to 1991.
20 A. Yes. There were more cases in 1992, and the station had to
21 address these cases with the same number of staff.
22 Q. To make matters quite clear, you know that we have to have this
23 interpreted and we're having difficulties with the transcript.
24 So if in 1991, as an example, there were 500 crimes, in 1992,
25 there were 1.500 and you had the same staff levels in the public security
1 station Banja Luka.
2 A. Yes. Yes, we were dealing with thousands of offences.
3 Q. Thank you. Can you please turn to tab 67, 1D00-1257. This is an
4 operative work-plan of the Banja Luka CSB. It is classified as an
5 official secret. The date is the 25th of May, 1992. The preamble refers
6 to it being based on the instruction on conducting affairs in crime
7 prevention and detection, which had been applied since 1982 but was still
8 in application in the MUP of the Serbian Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina.
9 Is that right?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. At page 5 of the operative work-plan, as will you see, it is
12 stated that the plan was drafted by the inspectors of the OZSK section
13 inspectors. I don't know if you recognise the signature in the left-hand
15 A. Yes, I recognise it.
16 Q. Whose signature is it under the chief of section?
17 A. Chief of the general crime section, Zivko Bojic.
18 Q. And on the right-hand side, under "Approved"?
19 A. Chief of centre, Stojan Zupljanin.
20 Q. You are aware of the existence of this document, this operative
21 work-plan. I suppose it involved also your staff at the public security
22 station Banja Luka.
23 A. Yes. I remember that we consulted and agreed this activity with
24 the chief of the centre.
25 Q. Let us go through this document briefly. Again, back to page 1.
1 We read that in the period of less than two months, from 2 or
2 3 April 1992 until the 25th of May, armed groups and individuals
3 committed 51 robberies. And it lists all the kinds of robberies that
4 were committed.
5 And then it says from mid-August, I suppose it's August 1991,
6 there were 76 incidents involving explosives.
7 Can you see that?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Remember when we talked about robberies? It confirms what you
10 said. By comparison, only nine robberies were committed in 1991, and now
11 just in two months there are 51.
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. And at the bottom of page 1, it says there indicia that the
14 persons are linked to a number of murders and attempted murders, such as
15 the murder of Mirsad Sabic and the attempted murder of certain
16 Slobodan Tesanjovic. It says also what is needed to be done, to deal
17 with these crimes, to shed light on these cases.
18 1, to establish a list of criminals who were engaged in SOS units
19 through the mediation of a certain person nicknamed Canak.
20 Can you see that?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. And then under (b): "Arrest Mladen Josic."
23 Under (c): Identify a man named Ratko Keser. And then in
24 item 2, disarm and arrest the group led by Brane Palackovic, in brackets,
25 VP military post, where they are posted, et cetera. And then we have
1 several persons enumerated. It also says disarm the group from
2 Starcevica, and so on and so forth. It goes on to item (g), all the
3 various measures envisaged by this operative work-plan.
4 Can you see that?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Would you agree with me that these measures, under 1, and 2, from
7 (a) to (g), that end on page 3, have for the most part been carried out,
8 to the best of your recollection?
9 A. The plan was implemented and I know that there had been arrests
10 and remands in custody.
11 Q. On page 3, there is another reference to the case of the murder
12 of Sabic, Mirsad. I suppose it's a Muslim.
13 A. Correct.
14 Q. And towards the bottom of that page, there's a new reference to
15 explosions and the investigation of a series of explosions committed by a
16 group led by Vedran Mandic.
17 You remember that Ms. Korner showed you some documentation
18 concerning this Vedran Mandic.
19 A. I remember.
20 MS. KORNER: Sorry, to be accurate, I didn't show him
21 documentation. I asked him about the attack on the police station and he
22 mentioned him.
23 MR. ZECEVIC: I'm sorry, Ms. Korner. I -- you mentioned
24 Mr. Vedran Mandic. That was the point.
25 Q. [Interpretation] On the last page, page 5 of this document, it
1 says that within the framework of the operative work-plan, in
2 paragraph 2, that investigation is ongoing concerning the explosion at
3 the Arnaudija mosque, and certain operative information is mentioned.
4 A. Which passage?
5 Q. Paragraph 2. It says work to investigate the explosion around
6 the mosque Arnaudija. It says according to operative information, the
7 explosive was detonated by a certain Milomir Cutkovic, nicknamed Piga,
8 and another person. And it refers also to a note made on the 23rd of
9 March, 1992.
10 A. I see that.
11 Q. Do you remember this case about the explosion at the mosque?
12 A. I do.
13 Q. In the next paragraph it says:
14 "In view of the fact that these individuals were in a way
15 self-organised in the guise of membership in the SOS, that they are
16 well-armed, and that some of them were mobilised by the JNA, their arrest
17 should be carried out by members of the special police detachment,
18 together with the military police."
19 Can you see that?
20 A. I see that.
21 Q. And in conclusion, it says, I quote:
22 "As long as the military prosecution office and the military
23 court are not finally established, the plan cannot be implemented because
24 most of the offenders are conscripts and members of the former TO, which
25 is why civilian courts and prosecutors refuse to take up these cases."
1 Do you remember that?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Do you remember facing this problem at the time because the
4 military prosecutor's office was not operating?
5 A. Yes. There were such problems.
6 Q. And finally, it says the plan would be amended and expanded as
7 needed in the course of each separate operation.
8 Can you see that?
9 A. Yes, I can see that.
10 Q. In an attachment to this document, we have a list. In fact, a
11 table with a breakdown of various crimes committed. I believe it's
12 page 6 in e-court, 6 and onwards. It contains the sequential number, the
13 location of the crime, the type of crime, time of perpetration, injured
14 parties, items stolen, and possible perpetrators.
15 And then under number 2 is a certain injured party, Enes Nurkic.
16 Can you see that on page 1? Robberies committed by uniformed persons.
17 The injured party is Enes Nurkic.
18 A. Which number?
19 Q. Number 2. I suppose it's a Muslim.
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Sulejman Huskic, number 3?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Also Muslim?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Number 4, Nermin Osmic also?
1 A. You mean, Nermina.
2 Q. Muslim?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. 6, 7 and 8 are also all Muslims?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. And number 11, Fikret Velic, also a Muslim citizen?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. All these were documented robberies against injured parties of
9 Muslim ethnicities -- ethnicity in the territory of Banja Luka between
10 the 2nd of April and 25 May 1992. Correct?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. On the next page, under numbers 13, 14, 15 -- or, rather, 13 and
13 14, I believe, are Muslims; 15 is Ivica Paponja [phoen], I suppose a
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. The same applies to number 21 and number 22. Croats and Muslims.
17 Do you agree?
18 A. Yes, I agree.
19 Q. On the next page we have, in handwriting, names of injured
20 parties are added. 31, the last name is Sotric.
21 A. Marzada Sabic.
22 Q. And 32, Denis Hamidovic or Haridovic. Can you see that?
23 A. Yes. Hamidzic, I think.
24 Q. Both of them are Muslims.
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. On the next page, numbers 36, 37, and 38, Mahmutovic Spahic,
2 Midhat Obradovac, and number 40, Muslija Dzevad, also Muslims?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. So if I understand this correctly, the conclusion that simply
5 imposes itself from this operative work-plan is that the CSB Banja Luka
6 and the public security station of Banja Luka were documenting and
7 proceeding on all cases, regardless of the identity and ethnicity of the
8 injured parties.
9 A. Yes, of course.
10 Q. And this is in keeping with your legal obligation under the
11 Law on Internal Affairs of Republika Srpska?
12 A. Of course.
13 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] I would like to tender this
14 document, if there is no objection.
15 JUDGE HALL
16 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit 1D198, Your Honours.
17 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation]
18 Q. Now, just to show that this operative work-plan was not simply a
19 dead letter on paper, we will show some of the documents that resulted
20 from the implementation of this plan.
21 Open, please, 84. The document is 1D00-1837. It's a letter from
22 the Security Services Centre, signed by chief of sector Djuro Bulic,
23 submitted on 6 July 1992 to the public prosecutor's office in Banja Luka.
24 It reports on proceedings by the CSB
25 A. It was not actually signed by Djuro Bulic. It was signed by the
1 chief of the centre.
2 Q. You recognise Mr. Zupljanin's signature?
3 A. Correct.
4 Q. On the next page, you will see in this document a decision to
5 remind -- to remand in custody - and the date is 3rd July 1992 - to
6 remand in custody Dragan Javorac, Mladen Josic and some other persons?
7 A. Yes, I can see it.
8 Q. If you remember the previous document we were looking at, in the
9 item 2, (a), it says disarm and arrest the group led by a certain
10 Brano Jackovac [as interpreted], including Dragan Javorac, one
11 Milasinovic and some other persons on this same list. Do you remember
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. And on page 2 of this decision to remand in custody, signed by
15 Mr. Zupljanin, on page 2 in the reasoning it says:
16 "There are grounds for suspicion that the detained persons, in a
17 group and individually, committed 37 crimes of robbery, murder,
18 extortion, causing public danger, and others ..."
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. I don't think it is in dispute that all these persons remanded in
21 custody herewith are of Serb ethnicity.
22 A. I think so.
23 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] If there is no objection, I would
24 like to tender this document too.
25 MS. KORNER: Well, yes and no. I mean, the answer is -- the
1 witness never asked whether he has ever seen the document before. And
2 also could I know where the document emanates from it? It's not, as I
3 understand it, a document that comes from our collection.
4 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] We received this document from
5 Republika Srpska. Just a moment. What is the exact name? The team for
6 the investigation of war crimes of Republika Srpska.
7 Ms. Korner, I am certain that this document, first of all, must
8 be in the archives of the CSB
9 archive. And, second, since it went to the public prosecutor's office,
10 must be at the public prosecutor's office of Banja Luka, I can claim with
11 near certainty that -- that it is in your collection.
12 MS. KORNER: Well, I'm sure Mr. Zecevic can claim it is in our
13 collection, but at the moment there's nothing to show that we have ever
14 laid eyes on this one before, and we have turned over the whole of the
16 comment further on that.
17 My real question is whether this witness is the proper witness
18 for this document to go through because, as I understand it, I believe
19 the answer to the question which he hasn't been asked would be he has
20 never seen this document before.
21 And there are other witnesses coming who will deal with the
22 prosecution of offences. I mean, that's the only thing I raise.
23 MR. ZECEVIC: Well, Your Honours, I can ask the witness if he --
24 if can he confirm the document.
25 JUDGE HALL
1 MR. ZECEVIC: Thank you.
2 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Tutus, have you previously seen this
3 document, and can you confirm your information about whether these
4 individuals were really detained as part of this operation?
5 A. Are you referring to the decision on detention?
6 Q. Yes, all these documents and the letter to the public
7 prosecutor's office that was signed by Mr. Zupljanin, as you say?
8 A. I personally have not seen the decision on detention or the
9 letter to the prosecutor's office. But as for the work-plan and the
10 previous agreements, the chief of the centre had that. I was in
11 attendance as well as the head of the crime service, Zivko Bojic. And
12 Zoran Josic, the head of the crime service, was also present and we
13 wanted to clarify this plan. I know there were certain activities that
14 were engaged and some individuals were detained. But I haven't
15 previously seen this decision.
16 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, for the sake of the
17 transcript, perhaps this document could be marked for identification now.
18 And then we could see whether Ms. Korner has any comments to make a
19 little later.
20 MS. KORNER: [Microphone not activated] ... no objection to that
21 course, Your Honour.
22 JUDGE HALL
23 MR. ZECEVIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
24 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit 1D199, marked
25 for identification.
1 MR. ZECEVIC: Thank you very much.
2 Q. [Interpretation] The following document that I would like to show
3 you is 79, tab 79. 1D00-1723 is the number of the document.
4 It's a criminal report dated the 25th of June, 1992, sent to the
5 public prosecutor's office, signed by the chief of the centre,
6 Mr. Stojan Zupljanin. It has to do with criminal proceedings instituted
7 against Branko Palackovic and several other unidentified perpetrators for
8 six crimes against general security. The description says that on a
9 number of occasions in April, they inflicted damage on restaurants and
10 other facilities, and this was done by -- owned by Muslims and Albanians.
11 Mahmut Ganic, Limani Safik, Hidic Refik are mentioned. The citizen
12 Kemal, Duzel Irfan, and so on.
13 Do you remember from the operations plan that one of the items
14 had to do with arresting the group led by Palackovic, Branko. Do you
16 A. Yes, I do.
17 Q. Do you remember that Mr. Palackovic was arrested?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. In 1992?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. I assume that this criminal report and all the documents attached
22 to it are documents you are not familiar with. You haven't seen them?
23 A. No, I haven't.
24 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] For this reason I would suggest
25 that this document also be marked for identification. If there are no
2 JUDGE HALL
3 MS. KORNER: No [Microphone not activated].
4 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit 1D200, marked
5 for identification.
6 MR. ZECEVIC:
7 Q. [Interpretation] Could you please have a look at document 76,
8 tab 76, 1D00-1503 is the number of the document.
9 This document is a criminal report dated the 23rd of June, 1992.
10 And yet again, it's a criminal report filed against Palackovic, Brane
11 Palackovic and his group that consists of 14 known and over 15 unknown
12 individuals. But in this case, it concerns 37 crimes listed in the -- in
13 the charges on page 3 in the e-court system and in your document.
14 Can you see that?
15 A. Yes, I can.
16 Q. Since you have already previously confirmed that you know that
17 Mr. Brane Palackovic was arrested, as well as his group, I assume that
18 this also concerns this document. Isn't that correct?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Have a look at page 3. You have the handwritten number 03 that
21 has been added, and then it says that on that occasion they physically
22 injured Kobilj, Dzevad. And afterwards, a certain Sinisa Milovic used a
23 pistol with which he killed Mustafa Smailagic, the son of Zaim, born in
24 1942, in Banja Luka.
25 Can you see that?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. In both cases, Muslims were the injured parties; isn't that
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Item 2, it says Obradovac Midhat was -- had his papers controlled
6 and about 270.000 dinars were confiscated from him. Can you see that
7 under item 2?
8 A. Yes, I can.
9 Q. Again, this is Muslim who is the injured party; isn't that
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Then under item 3, Enis Mahmutovic's papers were checked, after
13 which some of his money was taken, 120.000 dinars, 200 Swiss francs,
14 50 German marks. His vehicle was confiscated, and he was hit with a
15 rifle, with a rifle-butt. This person is also a Muslim person. He is
16 the injured party. Isn't that correct?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Items 4 and 5 on the following page, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and up to
19 12, up to item 12, all these individuals are Muslims, all these injured
20 parties are Muslims. Zulic Enver, Laha Marija, Kemal Duzel,
21 Sjenica Jelenko, Muharem Sibic, Alija Bojic, son of Hasan.
22 A. Jelenko Sjenica, that's the perpetrator.
23 Q. I apologise.
24 A. Duzel, Kemal, yes; Zulic, Enver, yes.
25 Q. So as not to waste any time, if you have a look at this document,
1 the injured parties are mainly Muslims and Croats but there are also some
2 injured parties who are Serbs. And one crime report covers all of them.
3 One crime report against Brane Palackovic and his group. Is that
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Since this criminal report was sent from the CSB and it was
7 signed by the chief of the centre, Stojan Zupljanin, I assume that this
8 document as well as the documents attached to the criminal report are not
9 documents that you have already seen. Is that correct?
10 A. I haven't seen them. But I'm looking for the end of the criminal
12 Q. The end of the report is on page 12.
13 A. Yes, you're quite right, the chief of the centre signed it.
14 Q. Thank you.
15 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] If there are no objections, I
16 would like to request that this document also be marked for
18 JUDGE HALL
19 MR. ZECEVIC: Thank you.
20 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit 1D201, marked for
21 identification, Your Honours.
22 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
23 Q. When we had a look at the operative plan, do you remember that
24 reference was made to fires, to planting explosive devices and so on and
25 so forth. Please have a look at tab 89. 1D00-5252 is the number. It's
1 a document dated the 15th of July, 1992, signed by the chief of the
2 centre, and the title is: "An analysis of fires in the Territory of the
3 Municipality of Banja Luka for the first six months of the year 1992."
4 A. Yes, I can see that.
5 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] 1D00-5252. We have the English
6 version up on the screen. Yes, thank you.
7 Q. On page 3 of this document, it says that a total of 43 fires were
8 caused; 17 were intentionally caused; 16 caused by accident; and in the
9 case of ten fires, the reasons for these fires are unknown.
10 Item 4 of this document, the last sentence says that the
11 ethnicity of the owners of damaged facilities -- well, 8 Muslims
12 [Realtime transcript read in error "militaries"], five Croats, one Serb,
13 and three others. That's the ethnicity of the injured parties.
14 Can you see that?
15 A. Yes, I can.
16 Q. On the last page --
17 A. This is the second page not the third page.
18 Q. Very well. And on the last page of the document, it says the
19 employees of the crime service in the CSB have identified the
20 perpetrators of two cases of arson at the Centar kebab restaurant owned
21 by Safik Limani, and [indiscernible] florist shop owned by Mahmut Ganic,
22 and a criminal report regarding this has been submitted against
23 Brane Palackovic. Can you see this?
24 A. Yes, I did.
25 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] On page 81, line 8, when I was
1 referring to the document and to the ethnicity of the owners of certain
2 buildings that were destroyed, I said that there were eight Muslims,
3 five Croats, one Serb, and three others. I see it says "eight
4 militaries" here. This is obviously a mistake.
5 Q. Have you seen this document entitled "Analysis of fires"?
6 A. I can't remember but it was probably received.
7 Q. Well, given that the CSB
8 forward such reports to all SJBs. Isn't that correct?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. But since you can't remember --
11 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] If there are no objections, I would
12 also suggest that we mark this document for identification.
13 JUDGE HALL
14 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit 1D202, marked for
15 identification, Your Honours.
16 MR. ZECEVIC:
17 Q. [Interpretation] To illustrate what we have been discussing, I
18 have in mind, in fact, your claim that, in 1992, the SJB and CSB in
19 Banja Luka processed all crimes regardless of the ethnicity of the
20 victims or the perpetrators.
21 Please have a look at document under tab 61. 1D03-1775 is the
22 number of the document. It's a report on the arrest -- on the arrest of
23 certain individuals. 17th of April, 1992, is the date. Signed by
24 Mr. Stojan Zupljanin, the chief of the centre. He is informing the
25 investigative judge that in accordance with the Law on Criminal
1 Procedure, detention has been ordered for up to three days for
2 Damir Halilovic, son of Bajro because there are grounds to believe that
3 he committed the crime of murder.
4 Can you see that?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. On the following page, it's page 2 in the e-court system, we have
7 the crime report against Halilovic, Damir, because it is suspected that
8 he committed the crime of murder against Enis Krkic. Enis Krkic, son of
9 Hajro, born on the 3rd of November, 1950, in Banja Luka.
10 Can you see that?
11 A. Yes, I can.
12 Q. Sir, in this case, the perpetrator in the crime are Muslims?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. And this crime was processed in accordance with the Code on
15 Criminal Procedure?
16 A. That's correct.
17 Q. Tell me, in the documents I can see that this case was mainly
18 dealt with - it's on page 5 of the document - by an authorised official.
19 It's an Official Note. It was signed by a certain -- it's page 5, if you
20 have a look at the whole document. Page 5. It's an Official Note signed
21 by an authorised official whose name is Adem Alisa?
22 A. I can see that.
23 Q. Do you know this person, Mr. Alisa? He was probably an
25 A. Yes, that's correct. He was an inspector in the crime
2 Q. And Muslim?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. On the 17th of April, 1992?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Thank you.
7 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] If there are no objections.
8 Q. And I assume that you haven't previously seen this document since
9 it was signed by the chief of the CSB
10 A. Yes, yes. Well, I didn't look at such documents.
11 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] So if there are no objections, I
12 would also like to request that this document be marked for
14 JUDGE HALL
15 THE REGISTRAR: This will be Exhibit 1D203, marked for
16 identification, Your Honours.
17 MR. ZECEVIC:
18 Q. [Interpretation] Please have a look at the document under tab 62
19 now. 1D00-5478 is the number of the document. It's a crime report.
20 On page 2 you will see that this report was filed by the
21 Banja Luka SJB. Your chief of the department, Zoran Josic, signed it.
22 Have a look at the following page. It was provided to the public
23 prosecutor's office in Banja Luka.
24 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] 1D5478. 5478. Or is it 5978; I do
1 Q. It's a criminal report against Jasmin Hajric.
2 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Sorry, 5978. Thank you.
3 Q. Can you see this criminal report?
4 A. Yes, I can see it.
5 Q. The criminal report says that he's a recidivist, a person who had
6 been recorded at the public security station before as bent on crime.
7 A. Yes, it says so.
8 Q. And in the form of the criminal report, he says -- it says he is
9 a fugitive.
10 A. I can't see that.
11 Q. You see his personal details. It says where he served in the
12 army, Bileca and Bitolj, rank sergeant, and then he says, Currently at
14 A. Yes, I can see it.
15 Q. Jasmin Hajic is without doubt a Muslim, as the criminal report
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. And it's filed against him for the crime of robbery against
19 Niko Cosic, aged 73. From the pocket of this man's shirt, Jasmin Hajric
20 took a sum of money. You remember that?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Niko Cosic could be a Croat, judging by the last name?
23 A. Yes, it is certainly a Croat.
24 Q. Thank you. Since this is a document of the public security
25 station Banja Luka, signed by your chief of section, chief of department,
1 Zoran Josic --
2 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] I hope there is no objection to the
3 admission of this document.
4 JUDGE HALL
5 MR. ZECEVIC: Thank you.
6 THE REGISTRAR: This will be Exhibit 1D204, Your Honours.
7 MR. ZECEVIC:
8 Q. [Interpretation] Now please turn to tab 63. The document is
9 1D00-5968, dated 18 May 1992.
10 It's a record of on-site investigation sent to the public
11 prosecutor's office with the Official Note attached, signed by department
12 chief, Zoran Josic.
13 Can you see the document?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. It's a case where the injured party is Zlatko Milovac. I suppose
16 a Serb.
17 A. I'm not sure.
18 Q. The incident happened at 1.00 a.m. in Banja Luka when
19 unidentified perpetrators using automatic fire-arms caused damage to a
20 private business called Ring in Banja Luka.
21 You see that?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. You will see on the last page of the document is the
24 Official Note made by an authorised officer on the 14th of April,
25 April 1992, from a certain Teufik Dzambegovic - I believe a Muslim - who
1 was a security guard in this catering establishment that was targeted,
2 and he who was on the scene.
3 A. Yes, can I see that.
4 Q. So in this case, the injured party is either a Serb or a Croat,
5 and the unidentified perpetrators were in camouflage uniform.
6 A. Yes.
7 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] If there is no objection, since
8 this is a document of your public security station, I would like to
9 tender it.
10 JUDGE HALL
11 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit 1D205, Your Honours.
12 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] I'm sorry.
13 The next tab is 68. 1D00-6660.
14 Sorry. Let's move to 70. 1D00-1291. I apologise for this.
15 Q. Again, it's a report on arrest and conveyance, dated
16 18 June 1992. The signature is that of chief of the centre,
17 Stojan Zupljanin, submitted to the security services centre in
18 Banja Luka. And it's a report and the arrest and conveyance of a certain
19 Dragoslav Kuzmic, father's name Milorad, mother's name Savka. Obviously
20 a Serb; right?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. And is he suspected as an accomplice in the crime of murder
23 perpetrated by four unidentified persons, three of them in camouflage
24 uniform, when Mustafa Smailagic, son of Zaim, was shot dead with two
1 You remember in the operative work-plan one of the items was to
2 establish the identity of perpetrators of the murder of this person
3 Smailagic Mustafa?
4 A. Yes, I think remember.
5 Q. Mustafa Smailagic is obviously indisputably a Muslim?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. And this document, the criminal report is dated 18 June 1992;
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Thank you very much. Since this document, the criminal report
11 and the attached documentation emanate from the chief of the centre, I
12 don't suppose you have seen it before.
13 A. No, I haven't.
14 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] I suggest that this document be
16 JUDGE HALL
17 THE REGISTRAR: This will be Exhibit 1D206, marked for
18 identification, Your Honours.
19 MR. ZECEVIC:
20 Q. [Interpretation] Now I should kindly to ask you to open tab 72.
21 JUDGE HALL
22 line of questions before the time for the adjournment in less than a
23 minute, so ...
24 MR. ZECEVIC: I understand, Your Honours. I was trying to be
25 as -- as -- as -- as possible to use as much time as I can. But I
1 understand and I follow. Thank you very much.
2 JUDGE HALL
3 if memory serves, in Courtroom III, at 2.15 tomorrow afternoon.
4 Mr. Tutus, I remind you of what I would have said earlier about
5 not communicating with anyone during the adjournment.
6 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.45 p.m.,
7 to be reconvened on Friday, the 19th day of March,
8 2010, at 2.15 p.m.