1 Tuesday, 11 May 2010
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.07 a.m.
5 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours.
6 Good morning to everyone in and around the courtroom.
7 This is case IT-08-91-T, the Prosecutor versus Mico Stanisic and
8 Stojan Zupljanin.
9 JUDGE HALL: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
10 Good morning to everyone.
11 May we have the appearances for today, please.
12 MR. DEMIRDJIAN: Good morning, Your Honours. On behalf of the
13 Prosecution, Alexis Demirdjian, with Joanna Korner, and Case Manager
14 Crispian Smith.
15 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Good morning, Your Honours. For
16 Mr. Stanisic, Mr. Cvijetic, Tatjana Savic, Ms. Deirdre Montgomery, and
17 Dominic Kennedy.
18 MR. PANTELIC: Good morning, Your Honours. For Zupljanin
19 Defence, Igor Pantelic and Dragan Krgovic.
20 [The witness takes the stand]
21 JUDGE HALL: Thank you. And if there is nothing to delay us, I
22 would invite Mr. Cvijetic to commence his cross-examination.
23 But before that I remind the witness that you're still on your
24 oath, sir.
25 Yes, Mr. Cvijetic.
1 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for the counsel, please.
2 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Give me a moment, Your Honours.
3 WITNESS: OBREN PETROVIC [Resumed]
4 [Witness answered through interpreter]
5 Cross-examination by Mr. Cvijetic:
6 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, Mr. Petrovic.
7 A. Good morning.
8 Q. My name is Slobodan Cvijetic, and I am counsel on the
9 Stanisic Defence team. I will have a couple of questions for you.
10 I will start where you left off yesterday, which was the
11 procedure for your removal from the post of the chief of police station;
12 is that right?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Yesterday you detailed the reasons behind your removal, and you
15 described for us how this all came about. What I still find unclear,
16 Mr. Petrovic, is what sort of procedure was actually initiated against
17 you, with a view to removing you from your post? We have the complete
18 Bench today, so could you please, for their benefit, briefly describe
19 this for us again, loud and clear. And can you please emphasise the
20 various documents you received leading up to your removal.
21 Have I made myself clear?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Can we hear how it was that you came to be removed from your
25 A. I think that it was after the meeting held in October, organised
1 by Colonel Lisica, that I was removed. I reviewed the document, though I
2 don't have it now. Later on, the letter was sent to the
3 Security Services Centre, since Mr. Andrija Bjelosevic was at this
4 meeting too, as were representatives of the municipality and deputies of
5 the Republika Srpska National Assembly, as far as I understood the
7 Q. What still remains unclear to me is the nature of the document
8 you seem to be referring to.
9 In the interviews with ICTY investigators, which were held a
10 while ago, you said in those interviews that these documents exist -- or
11 the document exists and that it can be found.
12 A. Well, I don't have the document, but an individual showed me this
13 proposal of the CSB addressed to the ministry, detailing the reasons for
14 my removal. It is a customary practice that if there are reasons for
15 your removal, then the chief of the centre would issue a proposal to the
16 minister for your removal, and this is what was done in my case.
17 Q. Did you receive the document on your removal from the minister?
18 A. Yes, I did, a dispatch.
19 Q. Do you have that dispatch?
20 A. I do. I gave it to the investigators.
21 Q. Do you recall the date the decision bears?
22 A. It was in early January 1993.
23 Q. Could that have been the 18th of January, 1993?
24 A. [No verbal response]
25 Q. Can you repeat your answer; it is not entered in the transcript.
1 A. Yes, that's possible.
2 JUDGE HALL: Mr. Cvijetic, can you assist us, please. Is this --
3 how is this going to be of assistance to the Chamber at the end of the
4 exercise? Where are we going?
5 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, if you haven't
6 forgotten, the witness stated yesterday that he was removed because he
7 was assisting the Muslims. You will recall that as the second reason for
8 his removal he cited his protection of Muslims. And I want to show that
9 this isn't true because both he and the police station he was in charge
10 of did not achieve the results as expected in that period and that was
11 the reason why he was removed, and not because he had allegedly helped
13 JUDGE HALL: Can't you challenge him directly on this? Wouldn't
14 it be of greater assistance if, that being your case, you move directly
15 to -- to that point?
16 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the witness doesn't
17 have a single argument lending support to what he says, and that's why I
18 have taken this road, and this is how I've approached the matter, and, by
19 your leave, I should like to proceed.
20 [Trial Chamber confers]
21 JUDGE HARHOFF: Mr. Cvijetic, I'm sorry, the point that you're
22 trying to make is -- is clear enough. I would concur with the
23 Presiding Judge, that you should just get at it straight away. But the
24 underlying question is really why and just how is it relevant that the
25 witness was dismissed for whatever reason [Microphone not activated].
1 What -- what kind of assistance will that bring to -- to the
2 trial against your client?
3 [Trial Chamber confers]
4 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I cannot but recall
5 the transcript of -- of the witness's testimony yesterday. He spent a
6 great deal of time explaining that he was removed because he had helped
7 Muslims. And you know that the indictment charges the clients with
8 discriminatory intent in relation to non-Serbs. And if this is why he
9 was removed, this is a qualification that could be taken against our
10 clients by Their Honours.
11 [Trial Chamber confers]
12 MR. DEMIRDJIAN: Your Honours.
13 If I may be of any assistance, I believe that this is a relevant
14 topic actually to the matters at hand. Our theory of the case is that
15 this individual was removed in his assistance, as he said, of Muslims and
16 that measures were not taken against other police chiefs who bore more
17 criminal responsibility.
18 So I believe that this might be a relevant one -- examination.
19 JUDGE HALL: We do appreciate that, Mr. Demirdjian and
20 Mr. Cvijetic. Our only question is, Why isn't it -- why don't you -- why
21 doesn't counsel move directly to it rather than take this circuitous
22 route? That's the only question that we have. We fully understand what
23 the challenge is.
24 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Well, nothing easier for me,
25 Your Honours, than to say -- to put to the witness that he is lying. But
1 I haven't done so in relation to any of the witnesses because my
2 jurisdiction prohibits me from doing so. In my jurisdiction, one needs
3 to present documents to the witness that prove the opposite, and -- and
4 this is the basis on which the Chamber will examine the matter.
5 If you prefer me to do so, I can put to the witness that he is
6 lying and just leave the matter at that. But will this convince the
7 Trial Chamber that the witness, indeed, is lying?
8 JUDGE HALL: Please proceed, Mr. Cvijetic; but, if possible,
9 short -- short-circuit your route. That's the only thing we're asking.
10 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] I understand, Your Honour.
11 Q. Witness, according to what you say, the help you provided to the
12 Muslims consisted of the fact that at the start of the war you set up a
13 multi-ethnic unit comprising Muslims as well.
14 Now, you also stated that these Muslims that you included in your
15 unit simply dispersed and fled as attacked by the army and you said that
16 this was taken -- held against you.
17 A. Well, I didn't say that this was taken against me. I set up this
18 unit at Sevarlije, but when this paramilitary unit or whoever it was
19 captured Sevarlije, they attacked the policemen and they simply took
20 their uniforms and weapons and crossed to the Federation.
21 Q. But you said to the investigators that this was the reason why
22 you were removed, that somebody thought of this incident at the end of
23 the year and cited this as the reason.
24 A. Well, I only said that there was a proposal from the centre for
25 my removal. Now, if you -- I did say that among the reasons cited, there
1 was also the reason that I failed to enforce law and order. But one of
2 these bullet points also included the fact that I mentioned. If you --
3 perhaps the best method would be to speak to the former chief of the
4 centre. You see, I think a year ago I saw this man who showed me the
5 very document that was sent to the minister.
6 Q. I put it to you that this document does not mention Muslims or
7 any sort of assistance you may have provided them at all; rather what is
8 mentioned is only the -- your failure to achieve any of the tasks that
9 were presented to the police station. What -- what you state to
10 substantiate your claims is merely the fact that you set up this
11 multi-ethnic unit in Sevarlije which dispersed when exposed to an attack
12 from the army and crossed to the side of the Federation. Or is it,
13 perhaps -- so can you please tell us, Is it because what you did in
14 April that you were removed at the end of that same year? Was it
15 somebody thought back about those events?
16 A. Well, you see, by that time, the police force had not yet been
17 fully formed --
18 Q. Can you just answer my question. Was this the reason you think
19 why you were removed?
20 A. If you can't signed the document in the Ministry of Interior, I
21 will locate the document which is entitled proposal for my removal.
22 Q. Very well. You haven't managed to persuade me of what you say,
23 but I will try to give you my view of the matter.
24 Do you know that the minister of the interior issued rules
25 governing disciplinary responsibility of the MUP staff of the
1 Serbian Republic
2 JUDGE HARHOFF: [Microphone not activated]
3 [Trial Chamber confers]
4 JUDGE DELVOIE: Mr. Cvijetic, you're referring to events in
5 April. What are you -- what events are you referring to?
6 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I'm quoting the
7 words of the witness who says that earlier on in the war he established a
8 multi-ethnic unit comprising Muslims and that at Sevarlije, as has just
9 been said, when they came under attack of another unit, he mentioned it,
10 the Muslims crossed over to the other side with their weapons and
11 equipment and that that was the reason why he was removed later, because
12 that was interpreted as his helping the Muslims. That is his statement.
13 JUDGE DELVOIE: Okay, thank you.
14 MR. DEMIRDJIAN: Your Honours, let me just place an objection on
15 the record also with the way the question was asked.
16 Mr. Cvijetic, you haven't managed to persuade me of that. I
17 don't think it is fair for a witness to be put that type of pressure of
18 having to persuade the Defence.
19 These type of comments are inappropriate in our view.
20 JUDGE HALL: I -- I did hear that statement, but I thought it was
21 just the way of his phrasing it, and I let it pass, Mr. Demirdjian.
22 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation]
23 Q. Mr. Petrovic, do you know that the minister of the interior
24 adopted a regulation on the disciplinary accountability of the employees
25 of the MUP of the Serbian Republic
1 A. I don't remember.
2 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Can we please see 1D54.
3 I'm afraid that the document is visible only on half the screen.
4 We won't be able to enlarge it. Could we please change that.
5 Could we just see the English version too.
6 I think this is the correct page in the Serbian version, but I
7 don't think the English page is right. This seems to be the title page
8 only. We have to go one further. Could we please zoom in.
9 Q. Can you read this first page, Mr. Petrovic?
10 A. Yes, sure.
11 Q. Here you can see that the minister, while this -- these
12 circumstances were -- prevailed, established disciplinary responsibility
13 of MUP staff. And the CSB chiefs, administration chiefs in the ministry,
14 and police detachment commanders took over the function of the first
15 instances disciplinary organ.
16 It goes on to say that the Ministry of Interior will rule on
17 appeals. Can you see that? It's in the second paragraph.
18 A. Yes, I can see that.
19 Q. Let us go to the first page of the document.
20 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Actually, in the following page of
21 the document.
22 Q. In these provisions, especially in Article 2, it --
23 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Could we display Article 2 in the
24 English version, please; it's on the next page.
25 Could we please turn to the following page in English, where a
1 list of these serious violations can be found.
2 Q. Until we were shown that, sir, here's a list of serious
3 violations of work duty and those which are characterised as lighter
4 violations, or less serious violations.
5 Can you see that?
6 A. Yes, I do.
7 Q. Under Article 4 --
8 THE INTERPRETER: Sorry, interpreter's correction: 3.
9 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Which is on the following page in
10 both linguistic versions, it seems. Let us just scroll down so we can
11 see Article 3 in English.
12 Q. Here's a list of disciplinary measures that can be imposed for
13 violating a work duty.
14 Can you see that?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. And here's an admonition, public admonition, and transfer to
17 other jobs for up to 12 years, fines, and termination of employment.
18 Can you see that?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Article 4 says that the chief of the CSB, among others, imposes
21 disciplinary measures for serious violations of work duty. And it's the
22 chief of the SJB who does so for minor violations.
23 Article 5 reads that the procedure can be initiated by any MUP
25 Do you understand that?
1 A. I do.
2 Q. The following provisions describe the procedure for -- actually,
3 the disciplinary procedure is outlined, where, in the first instance, the
4 parties have to be heard, and then a measure will be taken.
5 Mr. Petrovic, according to these rules, you could have been
6 removed from your position pursuant to the decision of the chief of the
7 CSB. And that decision -- or, rather, you could appeal that decision by
8 filing an appeal to the minister who is a second-instance body.
9 Was it that way?
10 A. Well, it probably was. But I was removed, pursuant to a
11 dispatch. There was no disciplinary procedure involved. That's it.
12 Q. You're saying that you saw that dispatch and that it says that
13 the minister is removing you.
14 A. Yes, that's what it says. And it finishes by saying that
15 disciplinary procedure shall be initiated or something like that.
16 Q. Is the reason for your removal stated?
17 A. No, it isn't.
18 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I would now like to
19 deal with that dispatch. Could we, therefore, see a document that -- or
20 whose translation we have been waiting for. It is 1D03-3251.
21 1D03- -- yes, this is it.
22 Q. Mr. Petrovic.
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. This is the dispatch. Can you identify it?
25 A. Yes, I can.
1 Q. Is it true that this is the very dispatch?
2 A. Yes, it is.
3 Q. I'll read the text. I'll ask the interpreters to interpret.
4 It's very short. We sent it for translation, but it isn't done yet.
5 The heading reads: Ministry of Internal Affairs, Bijeljina. And
6 then there is a number which is barely legible, but the date, as you
7 said, is the 18th of January, 1993.
8 Is that correct?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. The document was sent to the CSB of Doboj; is that correct?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. It goes on to say:
13 "Reference, your dispatch number 13/93."
14 And then the date isn't really legible. But it is clear that the
15 year is 1993. Can you see that?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. In paragraph 1, Mr. Stanisic says:
18 "Pursuant to your proposal concerning Milorad Novakovic, a
19 decision has been adopted to the effect that, as of 15 January 1993, he
20 is appointed to the position of chief of SJB Doboj."
21 Have I read this out correctly?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. In the following line, we can see that it says:
24 "The decision will be sent to you by regular mail."
25 And the last paragraph reads:
1 "As for the shortcomings in the work of the earlier chief of
2 SJB Doboj, Obren Petrovic, you shall act in accordance with the
3 provisions of the rules of disciplinary accountability."
4 And, finally, it is signed:
5 "Minister of the Interior, Mico Stanisic."
6 Have I read out this dispatch correctly?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Mr. Petrovic, with regard to you and any other staff of the
9 ministry, the minister implemented the rules that he passed himself, as
10 well as the law. And as we see, he didn't remove you, nor had -- did he
11 have the authority to do so. On the contrary. He demands that the rules
12 be applied in order to establish your possible accountability, and he
13 doesn't even go into the reasons for your removal.
14 Is this what this dispatch says?
15 A. Yes, that's what it says.
16 Q. It follows that the minister was in a position to learn about
17 your problem only if you were to appeal the disciplinary measure of
18 transfer to another position or termination of employment. And only then
19 would he possibly consider the reasons for your removal. Is that
21 A. Well, that's how it should have been.
22 Q. It follows from this that up until January 18th the disciplinary
23 file hadn't even made it to the minister because he demands that this be
24 done to enable him to act.
25 Furthermore, the only thing you hold against the minister -- he
1 said he may have listened to you as a human, as a -- as a person, right?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. And here's what I put to you: The minister cannot violate the
4 rules; and being the second-instance disciplinary body, he is not allowed
5 to anticipate the outcome of the disciplinary procedure in the first
6 instance. So he cannot even hear you until your appeal and your file
7 come to his desk.
8 Mr. Petrovic, you will agree with me, won't you, that the
9 minister doesn't deal with your cooperation with the Muslims or your help
10 to the Muslims here. Does that -- isn't that what follows from
11 this -- from this document?
12 A. No. This -- what you said cannot be found in the document.
13 Q. Mr. Petrovic, you told us that, practically speaking, you didn't
14 lose your job within the police force; you were just transferred to a
15 different job.
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. What tasks did you receive?
18 A. Inspector for aliens.
19 Q. Until when you first stayed at the police force?
20 A. Until the 4th of May, 1993.
21 Q. Did you continue working after that date? Were you in the police
22 force in 1994?
23 A. On the 27th of May. So, more than a year later.
24 27th of May 1994, I've started working again.
25 Q. Who received you back into the police force in 1994? Who was at
1 the head of the MUP at the time when you were received back?
2 A. I don't remember.
3 Q. In a conversation, you told me that you remembered that
4 Mr. Stanisic was appointed for the minister of the interior in 1994, and
5 that he even appointed you as a commander of a PJP unit.
6 A. I was appointed, but I wasn't seen by the minister. I didn't
7 have a conversation with him.
8 Q. But who appointed you, whose signature was on the document, who
9 appointed you to this PJP unit, commander's position?
10 A. It was based on the proposal of the commander of the centre,
11 Vaso Skondric, and it was the minister who was current minister at the
13 Q. Which one? Which minister?
14 A. If you say it was Stanisic, then it was Stanisic.
15 Q. I want to hear you saying it, that it was Mr. Stanisic.
16 A. Well, I don't remember.
17 Q. Well, I put it to you that in 1994 Mico Stanisic appointed to you
18 this position.
19 Mr. Petrovic, it is obvious that Mr. Stanisic did not find
20 anything wrong with your assistance to the Muslims and appointed you to
21 your post.
22 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I have a proposal
23 here. Since the witness recognised this document by Mico Stanisic and
24 the documents only needs a translation, I would like to ask for this
25 document to be MFI'd. We will notify the Chamber once the translation is
1 in. It's going to happen very soon. It's a very short document.
2 I have been told the translation will come in today, even.
3 JUDGE HALL: Yes, so it should be so marked.
4 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit 1D258, marked for identification,
5 Your Honours.
6 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
7 Q. Mr. Petrovic, let us go back to the beginning of your testimony
8 here during the direct examination. I would like to clear up the
9 conditions in Doboj in 1992, and I would like to ask you to help me clear
10 this up.
11 JUDGE HARHOFF: [Previous translation continues] ... before you
12 move on, there's some unclarity in the evidence that you have elicited
13 from the witness. I thought you told us earlier this morning that the
14 real reason why this witness was removed from his position as chief of
15 the SJB in Doboj was not as the witness claimed yesterday, that he had
16 been assisting Muslims, but, rather, for some other reasons. And I
17 understood your questions to be that the real reason was that this
18 witness was inefficient in his role as chief of the SJB.
19 Now, just now, a very short while ago, you came back to the issue
20 of whether or not he had assisted Muslims. And now you used that
21 argument to suggest that, in fact, Stanisic had, all along, been aware of
22 the fact that the witness had been helping Muslims but that he didn't
24 I don't know if I misunderstood you, but if this -- so then there
25 seems to be a contradiction in the two parts of your -- of the evidence
1 that you have received from this witness, so I kindly ask you to clarify.
2 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, what wasn't
3 translated to you, I made an allusion. I said that the minister did not
4 hold it against you, that was an allusion I was making. But what I
5 wanted to say it's obvious that he didn't even know the reasons, the
7 Tanja tells me that it wasn't translated, so I would like to ask
8 this to be entered into the transcript.
9 MS. KORNER: [Microphone not activated]
10 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Have I made it clear now,
11 Your Honour?
12 Q. Mr. Witness, do you remember that I told you that minister
13 obviously did not know even about the reasons? Did I say that?
14 A. When?
15 Q. When I said that Mr. Stanisic didn't hold it against you
16 and -- because he didn't even know that -- the reason was, just now.
17 A. I don't know exactly what words you have used.
18 MR. DEMIRDJIAN: At this point counsel is giving evidence here,
19 and he is saying that it wasn't translated. I believe, if we go a few
20 pages up, his comment was translated. He says:
21 "Mr. Petrovic, it is obvious that Mr. Stanisic did not find
22 anything wrong with your assistance to the Muslims and appointed you to
23 your post."
24 And then he moved on to his next question.
25 And that is at page 15, line 15. So I'm just as confused as to
1 where this is going. Because you're giving evidence and not the witness.
2 JUDGE HALL: Well, of course, the disadvantage that we have is
3 that we hear a question, which is interpreted, we hear an answer that's
4 interpreted, it is only as Mr. Cvijetic has now represented that there is
5 something that wasn't interpreted. So I suggest that if this is what he
6 is saying happened, then the question should be asked again to avoid, as
7 Mr. Demirdjian has just pointed out, the possibility of counsel giving
9 Sorry, Mr. Pantelic, you had something to add?
10 MR. PANTELIC: No, Your Honour, it's just a clarification from
11 transcript. It's page 16, line 24. My learned friend Mr. Cvijetic said
12 "allusion" but not "illusion," so it should be corrected.
13 JUDGE HALL: Thank you.
14 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Yes. And Tanja is telling me that
15 it was mistranslated, that the second part of my sentence was not
16 translated, the part where I said that he most probably didn't even know
17 about it. This is not my testimony. I'm just putting into the
18 transcript the parts of what I've asked and wasn't entered in. That was
19 all, Your Honours. It was a commentary by me. But the Prosecutor was
20 right, I shouldn't have testified.
21 May I continue, Your Honour?
22 JUDGE HALL: Yes, please.
23 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation]
24 Q. Mr. Petrovic, the town of Doboj
25 it - dark zone that was left out once the corridor was cut?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Banja Luka and the Republic of Serbian Krajina was also in that
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. The town of Doboj
6 was surrounded by Muslim and Croat forces from the three sides, and you
7 were only in contact with Banja Luka; is that correct?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. From what I've gathered from your testimony, the actual physical
10 communication, and also using other modes of communication with other
11 parts of the Republika Srpska and the ministry itself, Doboj established
12 such communication only in late July/beginning of August. Am I right?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. In Doboj, under such condition, several units came to -- to
15 Doboj. Major Stankovic; the Red Berets; paramilitary formations getting
16 set there; and also Colonel Lisica shows up, the man who was in command
17 of the operation of breakout?
18 A. Well, Colonel Lisica came only later, when the forces started
19 heading towards Brod. Initially it was Talic who was in command. There
20 was Martic's police and all these that you've listed, all the other
22 Q. Major Stankovic destroyed the organisation of the CSB and turns
23 stations of reserve police into detachments?
24 A. Well, he created the Doboj police detachment, using the
25 detachments established by him, military detachments, and then he
1 transferred these people, about 300 of them, into the police.
2 THE INTERPRETER: 1300. Correction, please.
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] And because without that we
4 wouldn't have even 200 policemen.
5 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation]
6 Q. The use of these very same units in combat activities was
7 something that he was ordering, and he claimed to be the commander of the
8 defence of Doboj. Is that correct?
9 A. Well, yes. These companies were organised in such a way that
10 they were positioned on front lines towards either Tuzla or Zenica or
11 Jahovac. These were the lines against Croatian forces. He believed that
12 since they were on these lines already, he can subordinate the companies,
13 individual companies. Depending on the operation. For instance, if it
14 was about Grapska, he would take the company that was in the vicinity of
15 Grapska and use it.
16 Q. I have a statement from your written statement where you are
17 saying that Red Berets also obeyed his orders. Am I right?
18 A. Yes, they did obey them.
19 Q. You told us yesterday that the Red Berets could resubordinate
20 part of the reserve police using his authority and then use it in combat
22 A. Yes. Based on Stankovic's order, they could have done so.
23 Q. Did the police have anything to do with paramilitary formations?
24 A. No, no, they didn't.
25 Q. You claim they didn't. Am I right?
1 A. No, they didn't.
2 Q. They didn't have any cooperation with the police -- or, rather,
3 the police with them?
4 A. No, they didn't.
5 Q. Occasionally they would even surround the CSB building, and you
6 had to ask Major Stankovic to intervene and to have you released?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Does that mean that they were under his authority, since they
9 obeyed him?
10 A. Well, since they obeyed him, it should mean that he was their
12 Q. The question was put to you about who was supplying the
13 Red Berets with weapons and ammunition. You said that it was the army.
14 A. Yes, the army. They had depots. They also formed detachments.
15 They armed them.
16 Q. And then we come to the following question: If all of them were
17 under the authority of the army, how is it possible that this unit of the
18 Red Berets was, for about a month or a month and a half, on the pay list
19 of the CSB?
20 Let me put it to you -- let me put my case to you, and you will
21 tell me whether you think it is possible.
22 The commander of the Red Berets and Major Stankovic could have
23 gone to the part of the service where the pay lists were being made an
24 order for these people to be put on the pay list, and you, in the police,
25 could not say no to that. Am I right?
1 A. The establishment of the detachments by Stankovic, based on the
2 conclusion of the Crisis Staff that everyone should receive their pay,
3 makes me conclude that people, even people who weren't part of SUP, were
4 receiving salary from us. Even the decision for payment for the month of
5 April --
6 Q. Let me just see if everything is in the transcript.
7 Mr. Petrovic, the point I'm trying to make is that the members of
8 the unit commanded by Rajo Bozovic, were never members of the police,
9 that is to say, of the public security centre, in formal and legal terms,
10 that is?
11 A. Well, in formal and legal terms, they weren't.
12 Q. The fact that they were on the payroll for a month and a half or
13 two is the result of what we've just been discussing and did not confer
14 upon them the status of authorised officials of the
15 Security Services Centre.
16 Am I right?
17 A. I believe that you are.
18 Q. You said yesterday that the funds for the salaries arrived from
20 case, the payroll could not have looked this way, because, after all,
21 they would also then be members of the Ministry of the Interior.
22 A. Well, yes. This only lasted for a month or two.
23 Q. You also said that the payroll for April is a bit controversial.
24 A. Yes, because there were different individuals who were on the
25 reserve police force.
1 Q. Mr. Petrovic, the last question on this topic that I have is a
2 very clear one: The payroll was, in fact, condoned by the Crisis Staff
3 who approved these funds for the payment of salaries?
4 A. Well, for the -- the remaining policemen, 250, there were no
5 salaries to be found, not even for the army --
6 THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness please repeat the last
7 sentence he said. And can the speakers please make a pause.
8 JUDGE HALL: The interpreters would wish the -- yeah.
9 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation]
10 Q. I will repeat my question, and can you please give us a brief
12 Did -- did the Crisis Staff condone this practice of payrolls by
13 approving funds for the salaries?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Mr. Petrovic, in addition to the units that I enumerated, there
16 were several other minor paramilitary formations present in the area.
17 They had different names and various uniforms, did they not?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. There was a paramilitary group called Kraljica, Queen; is that
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Preda's Wolves.
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. There were several units named after their leaders. There was
25 Dragan Ljubicic and several others. Is that right?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. You, Mr. Petrovic, were not in conflict with any of these unit,
3 starting from Stankovic to the Green Berets -- the Red Berets and
4 paramilitary formations, you personally. Is that right?
5 A. Well, I did not particularly agree with them, but I didn't have
6 any physical contacts with them either.
7 Q. You have anticipated my next question. The fact that you were
8 not in conflict with them does not necessarily mean that you agreed with
9 them or supported what they did; is that right?
10 A. I did not support what they were doing.
11 Q. Bearing in mind the extent to which the police was engaged in war
12 activities at the time, were you capable of standing up to all these
13 units and their orders, and were you able to prevent their activities, at
14 least for that period of a month and a half?
15 A. Well, not. We were not.
16 Q. Go ahead.
17 A. Because all the police force was deployed to the lines. And I
18 told you how that small number of policemen left behind at the police
19 station fared. They were beaten up too.
20 Q. You will agree with me, then, will you not, that, save for the
21 siege from the outside mounted by the Muslim and Croat forces, Doboj also
22 experienced some sort of a siege from within, where the police did not
23 have room for any sort of ordinary policing work; is that right?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Based on their geographical location, many of the police stations
1 belonging to the Security Services Centre were under the control of the
2 Croat and Muslim forces so that the very Security Services Centre boiled
3 down to, at best, a public security station of Doboj.
4 THE INTERPRETER: Can the witness repeat his answer, please.
5 JUDGE HARHOFF: Mr. Witness, would you please repeat your last
6 answer. The interpreters didn't get it.
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] There was Doboj, Teslic, and
9 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation]
10 Q. You will agree with me, then, that identical problems existed in
11 Teslic and Petrovo, as in Doboj; is that right?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Finally, on -- on this topic, let me say that for all practical
14 intents and purposes the centre in Doboj, with its chief
15 Andrija Bjelosevic, had only you and your station in Doboj, essentially,
16 through which he could have or -- or should have tried to enforce law and
17 order in Doboj; is that right?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. You said that in that period of time it was practically
20 impossible because you did not have the necessary clout. Am I right?
21 A. Well, we didn't have the clout, and there was the Banja Luka unit
22 that arrived immediately.
23 Q. At the time, you could only have received assistance from
24 Banja Luka, and not from the centre at Pale, right?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. In that period of time, Mr. Petrovic, you could have engaged in
2 law enforcement activities with how many men exactly? Tell us.
3 A. I don't think we had more than 20 policemen at the station.
4 Q. With as many policemen, you could not have secured your own
5 station either, could you have?
6 A. No.
7 Q. Orders from the chief of the Security Services Centre did reach
8 you, and in these orders he demanded that you take at least some sort of
9 action. And you, within the limits of what was possible, did try and
10 take some measures, did you not?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Before the break I have one more question to finish this off,
13 though I think you have already stated this.
14 None of the detention centres existing at the time were under the
15 control of the police; is that right?
16 A. Yes, that's right.
17 Q. You had a small room within your station, but my understanding is
18 that even the individuals you were entitled to hold in custody for up to
19 three days were transferred to the official district prison because the
20 conditions there were better; is that right?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. The unlawful activities of unlawful detention from that period of
23 time had nothing to do with the police force, did they?
24 A. No.
25 Q. Thank you.
1 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I would now like to
2 move onto a different topic, and I suggest that now would be the right
3 time for the break.
4 [The witness stands down]
5 --- Recess taken at 10.21 a.m.
6 --- On resuming at 10.52 a.m.
7 [The witness takes the stand]
8 JUDGE HALL: You may continue, Mr. Cvijetic.
9 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours.
10 Q. Mr. Petrovic, I will now start showing you some documents I would
11 like you to comment on.
12 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Could we please see 1D00-0700.
13 Q. Mr. Petrovic, this is a decision of the Crisis Staff of the
14 Serbian municipality of Doboj
15 that correct?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. I apologise, the written version was drafted on the 15th of June,
18 but in the first sentence we can see that it is basically a decision
19 taken at a meeting held on the 15th of May, 1992. I made a mistake.
20 Do you agree, is that what it says?
21 A. Yes, that's what it says.
22 Q. All items are interesting to us. Let us start with number 1.
23 It says:
24 "The chief of the public security station is tasked with ensuring
25 that all decisions and conclusions of the Crisis Staff relating to the
1 public security station are carried out within five days."
2 Mr. Petrovic, this seems to be applying to you, seems to be
3 referring to you. Is that correct?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. You will agree with me, won't you, when I say that obviously at
6 that moment the Crisis Staff is the highest authority in the territory of
7 Doboj municipality, which means that it can engage in doing your work?
8 A. Well, yes. The person signed here is Stankovic, the commander of
9 the defence of the town.
10 Q. You actually answered my question -- following question in
11 advance. I was about to ask that the most important decision in town
12 were taken by them, right?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. All right. Let's move on to item 2. It says:
15 The Crisis Staff of Doboj municipality requests that the chief of
16 the Doboj Security Centre to give reasons or explain all decisions of the
17 MUP relating to the organisation of the centre and the appointment of
18 personnel there.
19 You will agree with me, won't you, when I say that at that
20 moment, when there was no communication with the ministry, the
21 Crisis Staff started meddling with the work of the ministry, including
22 the appointments at the centre. Is that what follows from this item?
23 A. Well, it does follow from this decision.
24 Q. If we remind ourselves of that information note by
25 Andrija Bjelosevic, the chief, about how his assistant, Milan Savic, was
1 appointed, we see that what he wrote - namely, that he was appointed
2 purpose to a decision of the Crisis Staff - is indeed true. Is that
4 A. Yes, that's right.
5 Q. Let's pass on to item 3. Again, something for you. It says:
6 "The chief of the public security station is tasked with
7 compiling a list of appointed heads and inspectors and send it to the
8 Crisis Staff for approval."
9 The following paragraph reads:
10 "All appointments at the public security station are considered
11 temporary and shall remain in force until the situation has returned to
12 normal and the combat operations have ended."
13 In other words, the appointments of lower-ranking staff in your
14 station, the Crisis Staff's approval is required. That's what it says,
15 isn't it?
16 A. Yes, that's what it says.
17 Q. Thus, they are, in fact, limiting your legal authority to appoint
19 A. Under the law, I should have made a proposal for appointments to
20 the chief, and the chief was supposed to forward that to the minister.
21 Q. You will agree with me, won't you, when I say that this actually
22 breaks the decision-making chain in the MUP, doesn't it?
23 A. Yes, yes.
24 Q. Item 4. Here the Crisis Staff orders all groups and individuals
25 who are maintaining law and order in the area of the Serbian municipality
1 of Doboj to place themselves under the command of the chief - and I will
2 give my own account later on - that is, to you. And you are to --
3 THE INTERPRETER: Could counsel please repeat the last part?
4 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation]
5 Q. So the Crisis Staff goes on interfering with this decision-making
6 process in the MUP and assigns you tasks, right?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Then you are required to submit reports to the Crisis Staff in
9 the next paragraph, right?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And let us not quote every subsequent item. Anyway, all
12 subsequent items relate to the work of the SJBs, and tasks are assigned
13 to it. Can you see that?
14 A. Yes, I can see it.
15 THE INTERPRETER: We didn't hear the last sentence the witness
17 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation]
18 Q. Please repeat the last part of your answer and wait for the
19 interpretation to finish.
20 Say it now.
21 A. At the end, they also referred to the municipal prison.
22 Q. Yes. We've already received information from which it follows
23 that the prison warden submitted reports to the Crisis Staff and made
24 requests to them.
25 Mr. Petrovic, the Crisis Staff, among others, decided that a
1 curfew be imposed in the territory of the Serbian municipality of Doboj
2 in a certain time-period. Am I right?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. That decision applied to all citizens except for authorised
5 officials and persons working for bodies of special interest; is that
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. So the Crisis Staff gives tasks to the police to implement its
9 decision and control its -- its -- control the implementation.
10 A. After -- apart from the police, the Red Berets did so and the
11 military police.
12 Q. All right.
13 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Could we please see a document of
14 the Crisis Staff that has to do with this.
15 Your Honours, I apologise. This previous document, as it was
16 recognised by the witness, I will repeat that it is 1D00-0700. I seek to
17 tender it into evidence.
18 [Prosecution counsel confer]
19 JUDGE HALL: Admitted and marked.
20 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit 1D259, Your Honours.
21 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
22 Could we now please see 1D00-47 - correction - 4575. 4575.
23 Q. Do take a minute to read it so you can comment on it.
24 So, the Crisis Staff adopts a decision on rules governing law and
25 order in the Serbian municipality of Doboj
1 stipulates that moving or loitering outside the permitted hours - and
2 that is three hours a day; I believe it was from 8.00 till 11.00 - in the
3 morning, to get supplies, et cetera, was -- is considered a violation.
4 A. Well, the hours changed. Sometimes they would be extended; other
5 times, shortened.
6 Q. Apart from this, a violation is also staying in public places for
7 a longer time. We don't need to go into the details.
8 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Finally, could we please go to the
9 last page. Can we see Articles 4 and 5 in English. It should be on the
10 following page. Yes, here it's.
11 Q. In Article 4, you see that fines are imposed for violations of
12 law and order.
13 You will agree with me, won't you, that there is no distinction
14 made in this decision between citizens based on their ethnicity. So it
15 applied to all citizens, right?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. So it also applied to Serbs, didn't it?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. I'll ask you, as a police officer with much experience: This
20 measure was motivated by practical and security-related reasons, right?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. It wasn't safe to move about Doboj in that period, due to the
23 constant shelling. And this also enabled the police to control the town
24 easier in a certain period, right?
25 A. Yes.
1 JUDGE HARHOFF: Mr. Cvijetic, I noticed that in the title of this
2 document the order seemed to be restricted to the Serbian municipality of
3 Doboj. Since you are raising the issue of the territorial extension of
4 this decision, you might just check this out with the witness.
5 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] I'm afraid I do not understand.
6 JUDGE HARHOFF: You --
7 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] I can ask the witness directly.
8 JUDGE HARHOFF: You raised the issue of whether this issue
9 applied to all citizens, including Serbs. And my comment to that was
10 that since the decision appears to be limited in its territorial
11 extension, then it might be that in the non-Serb part of the Doboj
12 municipality the decision did not bind anyone. Meaning that the decision
13 would only bind people living within the Serbian part of the Doboj
14 municipality, and, of course, it would apply to Serbs living there and
15 possibly also to whichever Muslims or Croats have -- remained.
16 So you are raising, really, the issue of whether or not this
17 decision would apply outside the Serbian part of the Doboj municipality.
18 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, you have answered
19 the question already. But I actually meant the same that you're saying.
20 Q. But we can ask the witness to which territory this decision
21 applied and whether it applied to all citizens in the Serbian
22 municipality of Doboj, regardless of their ethnicity.
23 A. The Serbian municipality included the entire town and applied to
24 all citizens.
25 Q. Regardless of their ethnicity?
1 A. Regardless of their ethnicity.
2 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, since the witness is
3 familiar with this decision, and, to some extent, he had to implement it,
4 I seek to tender it into evidence.
5 JUDGE HALL: Admitted and marked.
6 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit 1D260, Your Honours.
7 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] In the -- oh, shall we call up
8 1D00-2327, as a follow-up on the document we've looked at before.
9 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for the counsel, please.
10 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation]
11 Q. Mr. Petrovic, this is an order from the chief of the
12 Security Services Centre, Doboj, to the public security station in Doboj,
13 where, in the preamble, it is stated, Due to the increasing number of
14 public complaints regarding raids by persons wearing blue uniforms into
15 homes in Doboj at night, searches conducted without appropriate warrants,
16 harassment, appropriation of money and so on, persons being taken away,
17 the chief hereby orders, under 1, that the public security station in
18 Doboj should gather all the various notices by citizens and other
19 information on these developments and investigate how founded these
20 complaints, indeed, were?
21 Do you see that?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. In item 2, the chief orders that control at check-points be
24 stepped up. And goes on to say that while curfew is in force, only
25 official vehicles may move about if they are issued with an appropriate
1 order from an authorised official from the public security centre, or
2 station; whereas, other vehicles should be excluded from traffic and the
3 individuals who were in the vehicle should be taken into custody for as
4 long as the curfew is in force.
5 Do you see that?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Other measures are also proposed with a view to enforcing law and
8 order, and they are contained in items 3 and 4. We can read them, but I
9 think it's enough to confirm that you can see them here.
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. I suppose that you did receive this order. It does state you
12 among the addressees.
13 A. I probably did.
14 Q. It was an obligation on your part, and I suppose you did act upon
16 A. Yes, I did.
17 Q. What strikes me here is that not even members of the police
18 station or centre can move about unless they are furnished with
19 appropriate orders or documents.
20 Is that your interpretation of item 2 as well? Can you read it,
22 A. Yes, it is.
23 Q. And you are aware of this order of his and the containing
25 A. Well, it's been a long time, but from what I can see, that's it.
1 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, if the OTP has no
2 objection to make, the witness is familiar with the document and was
3 aware of, and I wish to tender it into evidence.
4 JUDGE HALL: Mr. Cvijetic, I eventually appreciated that the
5 previous document was being tendered in support of the Defence case that
6 the curfew was of universal application and wasn't confined to non-Serbs.
7 I am not sure I appreciate what this document adds, why we would need to
8 exhibit this.
9 Could you assist me, please.
10 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, this is another
11 document that I'm using to show how restrictive the measure was that it
12 even applied to policemen who could only move about the town if they had
13 an appropriate written order to that effect, issued by their superiors.
14 So I'm seeking to tender this to show the strict nature of the
15 measure concerned.
16 This other document, therefore, has its value independently as
17 well, and not just as supplementing the earlier document.
18 [Trial Chamber confers]
19 JUDGE HALL: We, by majority, rule that it may be admitted and
21 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit 1D261, Your Honours.
22 JUDGE DELVOIE: Mr. Cvijetic, I have a question in relation to
23 adjudicated facts. The evidence you're eliciting from the witness about
24 the curfew being applicable to everybody, is this a challenge of
25 adjudicated fact 1268? Sorry, 12 -- yes, 1268.
1 Is it?
2 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. And this isn't
3 the first witness through whom we have been challenging this fact. I
4 believe it's the third, in fact.
5 JUDGE DELVOIE: Well, but this -- the order -- or the dispatch
6 you're referring to is of the 12th of September, if I'm not wrong; is
7 that right?
8 MS. KORNER: Yes [Microphone not activated].
9 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Yes.
10 JUDGE DELVOIE: And the date in the adjudicated fact is the
11 3rd of May of 1992.
12 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the earlier document
13 was dated in May. The Crisis Staff decision bears the date of May,
14 and ... the 15th of May. Can you see it? I'm talking about the earlier
16 JUDGE DELVOIE: I can't see that. You have to help me.
17 [Trial Chamber confers]
18 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] 1D00-700.
19 MR. DEMIRDJIAN: [Previous translation continues] ...
20 JUDGE DELVOIE: Okay. Thank you.
21 MR. DEMIRDJIAN: Just for the record, that document is dated the
22 15th of June, not 15th of May. I know it refers to another decision of
23 the 15th of May, but the header indicates 15th of June. Right.
24 JUDGE HARHOFF: But, Mr. Cvijetic, I still don't understand. The
25 question that was raised by Judge Delvoie was whether a document which is
1 dated the 12th of September, 1992, was introduced to challenge the
2 adjudicated facts 1268, which refers to a situation taking place on the
3 3rd of May, 1992.
4 So there seems to be a difference in time here of several months.
5 So I'm not sure that I agree with you that the document from
6 September could challenge the situation that was existing in Doboj in
7 early May 1992.
8 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] I agree with you in part,
9 Your Honour.
10 I said that this document has its independent value, regardless
11 of all the earlier documents and the imposition of curfew. However,
12 curfew was a standing measure that apparently was in force in
13 September as well. This document indicates how the measure was
14 implemented and who it applied to. That's the gist. And all of these
15 documents taken together will indicate the continuity of the measure of
16 curfew, imposition of measures to punish violations; and when we put all
17 these documents together, they will lead us to a conclusion about the
18 character of curfew and the way it was applied.
19 I've already explained the basis on which I wish to tender this
20 document into evidence. It has its independent value. The witness
21 commented on it. It relates to his station and his centre.
22 JUDGE HARHOFF: I accept -- I accept this. But in all fairness
23 to the witness, I think that you would then have to go through the same
24 exercise that we did earlier on with another witness, to check whether
25 these laissez-passers or documents were issued to all citizens or only to
1 Serbs. I mean, you remember the discussion we had at the time. And if
2 you want to use this document as a means to challenge the adjudicated
3 fact, then I think you -- you have to -- to do it thoroughly.
4 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] I will seek assistance from the
5 witness, and I will put questions to him directly.
6 Q. Mr. Petrovic, at the time the curfew was not in force, could all
7 the citizens of Doboj municipality, regardless of their ethnicity, move
8 freely about the town?
9 A. Not when the curfew was in force.
10 Q. My question concerned the hours outside of the curfew.
11 A. Yes. They could move freely when the curfew was not in force,
12 but that was only for a short period of time.
13 Q. Outside the curfew, were they required to carry along any sort of
15 A. Not initially, and this relates to the period right after the
16 3rd of May, the dates that the -- His Honour referred to. It was on the
17 4th and 5th and 6th. During this earlier period, people were taken into
18 custody. It was only later on that the curfew was introduced and nobody
19 could move about, and only those could move about who had special
20 laissez-passers. They were Serbs, Croats, Muslims who were charged with
21 essential services, who worked on special duties.
22 Q. Therefore, when the curfew was in force, those who had permits,
23 appropriate permits, be they Muslims, Croats, or Serbs, they could move
24 about the town freely; is that right?
25 A. Yes, they could.
1 Q. The part where you said who worked was not entered.
2 A. Yes. Who worked for specific companies and were under a work
4 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Does -- Your Honour, does this
5 answer your question?
6 JUDGE HARHOFF: Yes. I guess the issue boils down to the
7 question of whether, to the witness's knowledge, there was, at any time,
8 a situation in which laissez-passers or similar documents were handed out
9 only to Serbs and not to Croats and Muslims in Doboj.
10 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation]
11 Q. Mr. Petrovic, are you aware of such a situation as described by
12 His Honour?
13 A. When this practice of issuing permits or laissez-passers
14 started - I don't know when it was - they were issued to the Serbs
15 because most of the Serbs were indeed manning the army and the police.
16 To the Bosniaks, those who worked in companies, they were also issued
17 with laissez-passers, as were Croats. If these individuals were not
18 engaged in any such duties, they were not issued with laissez-passers.
19 JUDGE HARHOFF: Thanks.
20 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation]
21 Q. Thank you, Mr. Petrovic.
22 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] I would, therefore, like to have
23 this document admitted into evidence.
24 Can we have a ruling on this? I'll repeat the number, 1D00-
25 JUDGE HALL: [Previous translation continues] ... it's admitted.
1 MR. CVIJETIC: Okay. [Interpretation] Very well.
2 Can we now call up document 1D00-0251.
3 Q. Mr. Petrovic, we have a regular combat report of the command of
4 the 1st Krajina Corps which was sent to the Main Staff of the Army of the
5 Serbian Republic
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Military information is listed therein, describing the situation
8 at the front lines, and this isn't something of interest to me. What I
9 find relevant is the last page of the document.
10 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Can we have that. It's page 3 in
11 the B/C/S version, and, of course, the last page in the English.
12 We need the earlier page in English. We'd like to see item 9. I
13 see we don't have the last page in the B/C/S.
14 Can we have items 9 in both versions. Yes, and have the English
15 scrolled down. Thank you.
16 Q. Mr. Petrovic, the 1st Krajina Corps command states as follows,
17 and I'm reading the second sentence:
18 One police battalion has joined the Doboj Operational Group in
19 keeping with your order. They reported on the afternoon of the
20 11th June.
21 Mr. Petrovic, this seems to confirm what you said; that's to say,
22 that we have an order of the Main
23 a police battalion was attached to the Doboj Operational Group. Is that
25 A. Yes. Can I explain?
1 Q. I will put a question to you, so we'll get to that.
2 Can you briefly tell me, what happens when such a police unit
3 joins a military one? What becomes of the unit and its members? Can you
4 explain this.
5 A. They are subordinated --
6 Q. Go ahead.
7 A. They are subordinated to military units. In this case, it
8 involved preparations for breaching the corridor or breaking through the
9 corridor, which means that they practically subordinated the entire Doboj
10 police unit for the purposes of breaking through the corridor. Their
11 justification for it was, I suppose, that the line along the centre of
12 Doboj was one kilometre long, so they probably thought that by this token
13 Doboj was part of the combat zone, and the police needed to get involved
14 in these war operations. That was their explanation from the start.
15 [Defence counsel confer]
16 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation]
17 Q. I think that what you said was that the entire police force in
18 Doboj became part of this military unit manning the Doboj lines; is that
20 Go ahead.
21 A. In this case, the entire police force was engaged, because it had
22 to do with the opening up of the corridor. And I spoke also of
23 individual cases where, depending on the operation, they would be
24 engaging a company.
25 Q. The battalion, as well as the police officer in -- presumably in
1 command of it, joined a military unit?
2 A. Yes. Bosko Djukic was at the head of this unit and led the unit
3 in this particular assignment.
4 Q. Do you know to which military commander he was resubordinated, if
5 you know?
6 A. Well, I don't know. I know that he was in the staff where the
7 commander was Alic, but I don't know which brigade that was.
8 Q. Can you please confirm that you are familiar with this order and
9 that you're familiar with the resubordination, because the entire police
10 force of Doboj was involved.
11 A. I do know of resubordination. I don't know of the order itself,
12 but I do know at the time of the corridor the entire force was
14 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I would like to
15 tender this document into evidence, unless this is an objection, because
16 the witness knows enough about the contents of the document.
17 JUDGE HALL: Again, I'm not sure I see why.
18 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, we have discussed
19 with the witness - the witness volunteered information as well - about
20 the conditions in Doboj at the time, what may have caused such
21 conditions. He talked about how it was impossible to carry out regular
22 police work in town itself at the time when combat operations were in
24 This document confirms, to a degree, his claims and explains them
1 JUDGE HALL: But as I understand, even when you're putting this
2 document to the witness, you were dealing with one phrase in a lengthy
3 document which, as I understand your questions, are -- are -- you find
4 some assistance in, but I -- I don't see how the document is sufficiently
5 relevant for our purposes.
6 [Trial Chamber confers]
7 JUDGE HALL: And the witness doesn't know about this particular
8 document. He knows about this -- the situation of subordination, but he
9 doesn't know about this particular document.
10 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I'll be accepting
11 your suggestion, and I'll change my proposal.
12 I would like to ask for this document to be marked for
13 identification, because one of the coming witnesses will be a military
14 expert and then we'll use him to give a comment on the document in its
15 entirety. And as far as this element which related to the police, I
16 think it was useful to have this witness comment on it, and I would
17 tender it into evidence but marked for identification, please.
18 Thank you.
19 JUDGE HALL: So marked.
20 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit 1D262, marked for identification,
21 Your Honours.
22 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Let us move to the next document,
23 1D00-2363, please.
24 Q. Mr. Petrovic, what we see here is the reaction by the chief of
25 the CSB to the issue of use of police in combat activities. He's
1 practically protesting against it with the operation group command. He
2 is asking for the withdrawal of the police from combat operations because
3 the security situation in the Serbian municipality of Doboj
4 Modrica is poor, which can be seen through increase of serious crimes
5 such as murders, robberies, and similar.
6 And then, in the second paragraph, he points out who is
7 responsible for such crimes: conscripts, uniformed personnel. And makes
8 a proposal that civilian police should coordinate with military police in
9 order to suppress the crime.
10 Can you see this?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Are you aware of this initiative of your chief, whereby he wanted
13 to withdraw the police from combat operation? Do you know that the
14 minister also asked for -- for it?
15 A. Yes. I can see from the document.
16 JUDGE DELVOIE: Mr. Cvijetic, there were two questions. I have
17 had one answer. To which of the two persons [sic] does that answer
19 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation]
20 Q. Sir, let me separate the two questions.
21 Do you know if the attempts by your chief of centre aimed at
22 withdrawing the police from combat operations; are you -- were you
23 informed about that?
24 A. Well, most probably I was, but this was 18 years ago.
25 Q. This as a result of this document.
1 A. Well, from the document I can see that he had asked for the
2 police to be withdrawn from combat operation, military operations.
3 Q. You, as the chief of public security station, did you support
4 this initiative? Did you also need police officers to help you in
5 carrying out your regular duties?
6 A. From the very beginning we stressed that it's necessary for the
7 police to do their part of the work.
8 Q. Your requests were, therefore, built into this request by the
10 A. I think so.
11 Q. The second part of the question, as Judge Delvoie insisted, was:
12 Did you also receive requests from the minister asking for a withdrawal
13 of police from combat operations to carry out regular duties?
14 A. I can't remember that.
15 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, as far as the
16 initiative by the chief of centre, I believe that this witness gave
17 enough verification of the document. I would like to ask for the
18 document to be tendered into evidence.
19 MR. DEMIRDJIAN: Your Honours, could we ask where this document
20 comes from. Because at the bottom of this document it seems to be a
21 compilation, and we see a page 137. And this is repeated with a number
22 of other documents that the Defence seek to show. So can we find out
23 where this comes from.
24 [Defence counsel confer]
25 MR. DEMIRDJIAN: And to assist the Judges, perhaps if the usher
1 could scroll down to the bottom of the B/C/S version.
2 [Defence counsel confer]
3 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, this document, as
4 well as others that will follow, we've received from the team for
5 investigation of war crimes based on our request dated
6 16 of October, 2007. We will submit this document to the Prosecution.
7 [Prosecution counsel confer]
8 MR. DEMIRDJIAN: Well, if that's the case, it would be more
9 appropriate to have the whole book, rather than just one page. It might
10 be of assistance.
11 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] We are already in correspondence
12 with the OTP. We are attempting to put all the documents that we
13 received from this team and put them on one list. We have a date for
14 this document already.
15 MS. KORNER: Your Honours, I'm not seeking to take over, but the
16 document saga here, as you know, is a long running one between the
17 Defence and us. The Defence can't extract one page from a book and then
18 decline to give us the rest of the pages. We are formally now requesting
19 that we be supplied with the whole book from which this is page 137.
20 JUDGE HALL: So we need take no action now even in terms of
21 considering marking this until the -- the whole matter of how this -- the
22 document of which this is a page is sorted out.
23 [Defence counsel confer]
24 MR. ZECEVIC: Your Honours, if I may intervene.
25 There is no book. I don't know where Ms. Korner came up with
1 the -- with the suggestion that this is a book. Somebody wrote 137 on
2 the document. I don't know what it stands for. I -- I really don't know
3 what it stands for.
4 We received the document on our request. We will provide the
5 Prosecutor with the official request and the official document, how we
6 received this document, from whom we received it, and than is the batch.
7 And we are using this document with this witness, and we are offering
8 it -- for it to be marked and admitted.
9 There's no -- I don't understand what book are we talking about
10 at all. But we can clarify this in the next break with our friends from
11 the OTP.
12 MS. KORNER: Well, yes, Your Honours, I agree. We needn't take
13 this further, but it's no good in saying we received it with page 137; if
14 that's right, where are the other 136? In what form was this document
15 received? And, yes, can we see the original, please.
16 And at this stage I think it would be safer - can I put it this
17 way, Your Honour - were this document only to be marked MFI.
18 JUDGE HALL: If that would simply matters, yes, it would be so
19 marked. And perhaps the -- I may have added confusion by using the -- by
20 adding the term "book."
21 But it seems -- I take Mr. Zecevic's point that he can only deal
22 with what he has been given. And it's merely a -- once the communication
23 is sorted out between both sides - and we -- we would all know where we
24 are going forward for this - but, for the time being, the document will
25 be marked for identification.
1 MR. DEMIRDJIAN: Yes. One detail, Your Honours. The issue of
2 the book.
3 Can we scroll to the left of the B/C/S version. You can see
4 that -- a bit more, please.
5 You can see that it's a photocopy from a book. That's what was
6 meant by "the book." Do you see, the page breaks. Yes. And so this is
7 not an original document; it's a photocopy from a book, a compilation.
8 THE REGISTRAR: So the exhibit will be 1D263, marked for
9 identification, Your Honours.
10 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] May I continue, Your Honours?
11 JUDGE HALL: Yes, please.
12 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Can we have, please, document
14 [Defence counsel confer]
15 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation]
16 Q. Mr. Petrovic, what we have here is the response to the request
17 issued by your chief where, in its second part, we can see a sentence
18 saying the withdrawal of police is not authorised because, if I do so,
19 the front will soon reach Doboj and you will not have any territory under
20 your control.
21 Can you see it?
22 A. Yes. Thank you.
23 Q. In his ultimate sentence, he says:
24 "We welcome all forms of cooperation and assistance between the
25 military police and the police forces."
1 Can you see that?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. So, Mr. Petrovic, your chief obviously cannot withdraw the police
4 from combat operations without authorisation of the military commander,
5 and that can be seen from his answer?
6 A. Yes.
7 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Bearing in mind the comments from
8 before, I will not tender -- I will not move to tender this document,
9 only in the respect that it can be MFI'd maybe.
10 MR. DEMIRDJIAN: Your Honours, this is not a document that the
11 document has seen. It does not emanate from the MUP. He cannot say how
12 this document was drafted; we have the same objection about the source.
13 But in addition to this, the witness can not recognise this document.
14 JUDGE HALL: Unless I'm missing something, this seems to be a --
15 if not a part, a continuation of the previous document. Because as
16 Judge Delvoie pointed out, the -- in the B/C/S version, the page number
17 138 appears at the bottom. It seems to be that -- for the same reasons
18 that the previous document was marked for identification, that this
19 would -- should similarly -- not should, could similarly be marked.
20 MR. DEMIRDJIAN: Could be marked, as long as we have that on the
22 [Prosecution counsel confer]
23 JUDGE HALL: Yes.
24 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit 1D264, marked for identification,
25 Your Honours.
1 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Can we have, please, document
3 Q. Mr. Petrovic, your chief reacted by saying - and we can see that
4 in paragraph 2 - that he was surprised by the content of the order.
5 And then in the second paragraph you will find the sentence where
6 it is stated:
7 "Well, I was issuing for approval -- when I was issuing approval
8 for engagement of police in combat without my consent or an order by the
9 minister of the interior, there was looting and disorder behind the
11 And we then see a list of things that were taking place. Can you
12 see this?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. As we can see here, your chief keeps on insisting on withdrawal
15 of police from combat operations, but it doesn't seem to have effect.
16 A. It seems so.
17 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] In accordance with your ruling, we
18 can see here this is a string of documents, a correspondence between
19 military command and the police. I would like to ask for this document
20 to be MFI'd, the document that was -- originated in the CSB.
21 JUDGE DELVOIE: Mr. Cvijetic, can I ask - I can't see it on the
22 screen - but is it page 139?
23 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Yes.
24 JUDGE DELVOIE: Thank you.
25 MR. DEMIRDJIAN: Same caveat, same objection, Your Honours.
1 JUDGE HALL: Marked for identification.
2 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit 1D265, marked for identification,
3 Your Honours.
4 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
5 Could we now see the following document, 1D00-0345.
6 Q. Mr. Petrovic, this is an order of the group of operations to
7 establish a mixed battalion, comprised of a company of military police, a
8 company of police from Doboj and Teslic.
9 We can see that this military order appoints
10 Mr. Andrija Bjelosevic commander of the company, and his deputy is
11 Lieutenant Stijepan Pepic. Can you see it?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. In paragraph 3 there is even a combat order to attack along an
14 axis mentioned here. Can you see that?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. You'll agree with me when I say, won't you, that your chief seems
17 to have re-worded for his activity to pull out the police by being
18 mobilised and sent off to the front line. Is that your impression?
19 A. Yes, that's my impression.
20 Q. Do you know that he was drafted and sent to the front line with
21 this unit and that he took part in combat activities?
22 A. I don't remember, but I can see here that this, indeed, happened.
23 Q. Obviously you know nothing about this document, right?
24 A. I don't remember.
25 Q. Very well.
1 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I will not tender
2 this document because it does not emanate from the CSB.
3 [Prosecution counsel confer]
4 [Defence counsel confer]
5 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Could we please see the following
6 document, 1D00 --
7 JUDGE HALL: Mr. Cvijetic, it's just a few seconds before the
8 time for the break. Would you wish to reserve opening with this document
9 until we return?
10 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] I agree with you, Your Honours.
11 [The witness stands down]
12 --- Recess taken at 12.05 p.m.
13 --- On resuming at 12.31 p.m.
14 [Trial Chamber confers]
15 [Defence counsel confer]
16 JUDGE HALL: Mr. Cvijetic, before you proceed, the Bench has two
17 questions of you, one connected with the other. I'll raise -- I'll
18 formulate the first question; then Judge Delvoie, the question that's
19 connected with that.
20 And my question is that inasmuch as the -- as we understand the
21 case - and we use the word "case" to mean what both sides are
22 saying - there is no dispute as to the fact of the subordination of the
23 police to the military at some point, and then, of course, certain things
24 that would logically flow from this.
25 What is the utility of this series of documents which you seem to
1 have telegraphed that there are more to come, because I think there were,
2 like, three that we had marked for identification, and there are more to
3 come, and how does this assist us?
4 But before you formulate an answer to that, Judge Delvoie has a
5 connected question.
6 JUDGE DELVOIE: My question is about the adjudicated facts. As
7 you may have noticed, I try to follow what is adjudicate and so on, and
8 the Trial Chamber would very much appreciate it, very much be assisted,
9 if you challenge an adjudicated fact, that you say so, that you announce
10 the fact that are you challenging an adjudicated fact. That would be
11 very helpful. Thank you.
12 MS. KORNER: Your Honours, before Mr. Cvijetic answers, can I
13 just deal -- I'm taking over because this is a more general question
14 connected with the case as a whole.
15 To deal with the first question. Your Honours, the Prosecution's
16 case is there is resubordination in times of combat. The Defence case as
17 we understand it is that wherever the military are there's
18 resubordination to -- by the police -- of the police to the military. We
19 do not accept that. That is a bone of contention. And a major bone of
21 The second matter is this. We did many eons ago now say that the
22 Defence should be required, once adjudicated facts were granted or when
23 we thought they were granted, to say in -- not just as it comes up but
24 which ones they were actually going to dispute by way of evidence, and we
25 suggest that's something that should happen. Because as it is coming out
1 piecemeal in this way, we don't know what evidence we've got to call to
2 deal with what we assumed were adjudicated facts and accepted. But under
3 the Lukic decision, as you know, at the last moment it transpired that
4 the Defence were challenging adjudicated facts and the Prosecution were
5 not allowed to the call evidence to deal with it.
6 And so as His Honour Judge Delvoie says, I don't think it's good
7 enough simply as it comes up for the Defence to say, We're challenging
8 it, as has happened at the moment. We've got to know, literally, by the
9 end of this month because clearly we are going to have to file - and
10 we're working on it at the moment - matters -- sorry, an application to
11 call evidence about matters which are no longer the subject of
12 adjudicated facts.
13 So from that point of view, may I say Judge Delvoie's point is a
14 good one, but I think it has to go further than letting us know as it
16 JUDGE HALL: Thank you. Unless Mr. Cvijetic thinks that he has
17 been ambushed, having been made aware of the Trial Chamber's concerns,
18 this is something that he would consider, and we -- we could expect a
19 considered response in the not-too-distant future.
20 Could the witness be escorted back to the stand, please.
21 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I don't feel
22 ambushed in any way, and I accept your suggestion about announcing the
23 challenging of adjudicated facts. And there's no problem about
24 that -- with that.
25 As for the legal relevance of the issue of resubordination, no
1 comment of mine is required now because Ms. Korner has spoken about that.
2 We represent opposed parties, and we must present evidence to support our
4 [The witness takes the stand]
5 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, before I start --
6 continue examining the witness, I would like to inform you that we have,
7 in the meantime, procured a document of the cabinet of Republika Srpska
8 date 16 October 2007
9 document, under numbers 77, 78, and 79, these very documents are listed
10 which were marked for identification, because we could not prove their
11 origin. And I will read which -- which documents these are.
12 The documents are: 1D263, MFI; 1D264, MFI; and 1D265 MFI. And
13 this document we received from the cabinet was also forwarded to the OTP.
14 Therefore, it is our submission that these documents no longer
15 have MFI status but, rather, be admitted as Defence exhibits.
16 MR. DEMIRDJIAN: Your Honours, there are two matters here. First
17 of all, yes, we did receive a letter, but it's in Cyrillic. So at this
18 moment I cannot read this document. But on a good-faith basis, I assume
19 this was received from the Government of Republika Srpska or one of their
20 organs. So once I am able to read it, I will be able to give you further
21 submissions. That's number one.
22 Number 2. It's not that we're saying there is any misconduct or
23 misbehaviour on the part of the Defence in relation to the document; what
24 we are saying is really that the source of the document itself seems to
25 be of a dubious character. It seems to be coming from a photocopies of a
1 book or compilation; I don't know. What we're interested in knowing is:
2 Where is the original? Because this seems to be a photocopy of an
3 original. And we don't know if the original exists. We don't know if
4 the original has been tampered with or not. We don't know what it is
6 JUDGE HARHOFF: Before Mr. Cvijetic answers, could I just get
7 back to the contention that was raised by Ms. Korner, because I'm not
8 sure I fully understood the gist of it.
9 Ms. Korner is quoted as having said that the Prosecution's case
10 is that there is resubordination in times of combat; whereas the Defence
11 case is that there's resubordination by the police of the police to the
12 military wherever the military is.
13 I'm not sure I understand fully the -- the difference of this
14 point of contention. I would like the parties to clarify.
15 MS. KORNER: Does Your Honour want to hear from me or
16 Mr. Cvijetic on this?
17 JUDGE HARHOFF: Both of you.
18 MS. KORNER: I'll come around so that I can hopefully ...
19 Your Honours, as I understand the Defence case, and it's one of
20 the problems -- of course, and it wasn't spelled out anywhere before this
21 case started, but it has been emerging through --
22 THE INTERPRETER: Would the counsel please speak into the
24 MS. KORNER: I'll come forward, Your Honours.
25 As has been put to the witnesses is that if the military are
1 stationed in an area, regardless of whether it is a front line, in other
2 words there is actual fighting going on of any sort, the police are
3 resubordinated to the military. If I'm wrong, then I have no doubt that
4 Defence counsel will correct me.
5 In other words, they are obliged to follow the orders issued by
6 the military, completely overriding their own chain of command within the
7 police. That is, as I understand it, the Defence.
8 And that's where --
9 JUDGE HARHOFF: Regardless of any combat taking place in the
11 MS. KORNER: Exactly. That is -- that is my understanding of the
12 Defence case as it has been put. Regardless of whether there is combat
13 going on, actual fighting between opposing forces, once the military is
14 in an area, the police line of authority is subordinated to the military.
15 And that is where the major disagreement comes.
16 We say the only times that the police are resubordinated to the
17 military - and we say that's what the evidence shows, regardless of
18 what's being put by the documentation - is in times of actual combat,
19 fighting, where police units are taken along -- up to the military.
20 And if I'm wrong on that, then I think the Defence out to correct
21 this now.
22 JUDGE HARHOFF: Mr. Cvijetic or Mr. Zecevic, would either one of
23 you wish to reply.
24 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, the law is clear on
25 this. First, under international conventions and regulations, after the
1 state of -- imminent threat of war or the state of war have been
2 proclaimed, the entirety territory of Republika Srpska has become a
3 combat zone.
4 MR. DEMIRDJIAN: He should explain what the position is, but he
5 is giving evidence.
6 [Defence counsel confer]
7 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] I'm trying to state my position,
8 but I'm being interrupted.
9 My position is that the entire Republika Srpska was a combat
10 zone. That means that all police officers who get orders to carry out a
11 military task from a military commander in any part of the territory of
12 the RS are resubordinated to the military command. That is our position.
13 And that's in accordance with the law and the conventions.
14 MR. PANTELIC: And in addition to what my learned friend said,
15 especially in light of the fact of the imminent state of war which was
16 declared, mid-of April and confirmed on 12th of May, 1992, at the
17 Assembly session in Banja Luka.
18 Thank you.
19 JUDGE HARHOFF: But can I just offer a third interpretation here.
20 I have not discussed this with my colleagues, so I'm speaking clearly and
21 truly and only on my own behalf now, and that is that it was my
22 understanding that resubordination of -- of police forces to the armed
23 force could take place upon a request from the army; but short of any
24 such request, the police continued its activities. Whether or not there
25 was combat activities in the area, if the army didn't request
1 re-enforcement by police forces, then there was no resubordination.
2 And as I understand it, there were sometimes situations in which
3 the army was strong enough and didn't need it, didn't need support from
4 the police and therefore didn't ask for it. And where the police wasn't
5 asked to resubordinate any of its forces, the police force remained
6 intact in the area.
7 Is this misunderstood? And if it is, then I would wish to have
8 it clarified right away.
9 Hold on a minute.
10 [Trial Chamber confers]
11 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, may I just say, the witness, of course,
12 is sitting here. I don't know whether this is going to impact on
13 cross-examination, but he ought to take his earphones off.
14 JUDGE HARHOFF: Mr. Petrovic --
15 MS. KORNER: [Overlapping speakers] ...
16 JUDGE HARHOFF: -- would you be good enough to take your earphones
18 MS. KORNER: No, but -- see, that wouldn't help. Of course,
19 Mr. Cvijetic is speaking in the native language of the witness.
20 JUDGE HARHOFF: Speak in English.
21 [Trial Chamber and Legal Officer confer]
22 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour --
23 JUDGE HARHOFF: Mr. Cvijetic, I think that both parties have made
24 their case -- have stated their case, and maybe this is not the correct
25 moment to go in any further detail with this matter.
1 So I suggest that we proceed.
2 JUDGE HALL: If I may return to Mr. Demirdjian's two points.
3 The second, as I recall it, in terms of the quality, for want of
4 a better word, of the material on which the Defence is relying, to repeat
5 what I would have said earlier, Mr. Zecevic, Mr. Cvijetic, can only deal
6 with what they have. And there was a photocopy of some unknown --
7 the -- that may, at the end of the day, go to what weight would be
8 attached to it because of the -- of any doubt that may be cast on its
10 So the -- so that second point is not one that would cause --
11 that should cause any pause in terms of the ability of the Defence to
12 make use of this.
13 As for the first point, of course, it must necessarily follow
14 that until the documents are interpreted -- are translated so that the
15 Prosecution can formally state their position, then they must remain
16 marked for identification.
17 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, can I -- I'm sorry to keep coming back
18 to this, but it is of some importance. For reasons I needn't trouble
19 Your Honours with, we've given certain information to the Defence about
20 one of their documents. Your Honours, our concern is this: This is --
21 and I know Your Honours - His Honour Judge Harhoff doesn't like it
22 much - but it's a document case. Most of our -- our evidence is -- is
23 documentary. It's therefore important that if documents come into
24 evidence, either side is able, as far as is possible, to establish the
25 provenance of the document.
1 What is happening here -- Mr. Zecevic, of course, is perfectly
2 entitled to ask any time for us to show where our documents come from,
3 and we're always prepared to do that. Most of the documents have been
4 used in other cases, so it hasn't arisen. Some of the documents that are
5 appearing now have never appeared before in any other case. It's vital,
6 we would submit to Your Honours, that the Defence make proper inquiries
7 of their investigator or of the centre for Serbian war crime -- for
8 investigation into war crimes against Serbs or for -- from -- from the
9 MUP as to what the original of a document is.
10 At the moment, they cannot tell us.
11 JUDGE HALL: In so far as they could.
12 MS. KORNER: Yes.
13 JUDGE HALL: The --
14 MS. KORNER: But they're not telling us, Your Honour. They're
15 simply saying, My investigator got it. And they have a duty, we would
16 submit -- or if it comes from the war crimes centre, to say, if this is
17 clearly as it is, three pages from a book, what is the original book, and
18 can we see the rest of it. And they're not doing that. And,
19 Your Honours, we say that's why we're objecting, at the moment, to these
20 documents being anything other than marked for identification, whether or
21 not they've got translations.
22 JUDGE HALL: I follow that, Ms. Korner. The -- I confess that
23 before the -- I became involved in this matter, the idea of items,
24 quote/unquote, falling off the back of a truck was limited to a certain
25 type of criminal case. But it appears that many of the documents fall in
1 that category, and we just have to see where we go.
2 MS. KORNER: Well, Your Honour, can I -- I have said this over
3 and over again, and -- but that's my objection at the moment to -- to
4 some of these documents.
5 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I apologise, but I
6 really have to respond to this.
7 Your Honour, I think that the comments from the Prosecution are,
8 to put it mildly, unfair. The Prosecution is well aware that the sources
9 we draw upon in preparing our Defence and the sources where we get the
10 documents are very limited. I have neither the possibility or authority
11 or staff, nor do any of other -- of the other members of the Defence
12 team, to approach an official agency and ask them about the source of a
14 I approached an official agency which has the authority to
15 provide me with documents. I receive documents from this agency and rely
16 upon them as authentic documents. It is, of course, up to me to decide
17 whether I'm going use them and whether they support my case or not, but
18 any investigation that would go further than that is something that I
19 have neither the intention nor the power of doing.
20 If Madam Korner finds the sources of the documents that we have
21 suspicious and she has the list of all these sources, let her approach
22 the relevant official agencies and inquire after the sources. This is
23 absolutely not the task of the Defence. And I'm absolutely opposed to
25 Specifically, Your Honour, most of the documents we have come
1 from the Prosecution, including the document that Madam Korner referred
2 to herself a moment ago. This is a document we received from the
3 Prosecution. The document that she provided us with yesterday with
4 comments on them already has an MFI number.
5 We are now in a situation where I am supposed to be suspicious
6 even of the documents I receive from the Prosecution. If this is the
7 case, Your Honour, then we will be going through such situations on a
8 daily basis. Every time a document is produced by either of the parties,
9 we will have to inquire after the origin of the document, and this will
10 lead us nowhere.
11 I really did not have reason to suspect that all these documents
12 that the Prosecution obtained were indeed documents that could be relied
13 upon, but the same is true of the Defence. The Defence does not have the
14 resources, possibilities, or staff to verify the authenticity of these
15 documents or their sources. If this should be done, however, then we
16 will have to go back to the beginning of the case.
17 MR. PANTELIC: [Previous translation continues] ... submission our
18 learned friend Mr. Zecevic.
19 MS. KORNER: I'm sorry, but -- I know this is distracting from
20 where we ought to be going, but, Your Honours, it's not incumbent upon
21 the Prosecution to do the investigations. It's the Defence who are
22 inviting Your Honours to rely on the truth and accuracy and provenance of
23 these documents. It is their obligation to make sure that that is
24 catered for if we raise a query. Now, most time, we don't; but every now
25 and again, we do. And this particular book is one of them. And I'm not
1 going to go into the document Mr. Zecevic has referred to. It's not one
2 of our documents. It does bear a Prosecution number because by - I won't
3 say by mistake - but because it was referred to by the Prosecution by
4 the -- I'm sorry, by the Defence and didn't get a number. We had it
5 marked for identification. But, Your Honours, that's a separate matter
6 which may need further discussion.
7 But as the general principle of the matter, if the Defence want
8 documents admitted and the Prosecution raise a query, it is their
9 obligation to be able to provide the information as to the actual source
10 and whether or not it is authentic. Because they're the people that are
11 asking you to rely on the documents.
12 JUDGE HALL: Thank you.
13 To bring this matter to an end, it seems to me that - and I speak
14 entirely for myself - that the -- what I understand the position of the
15 Defence now to be is that they have the certificate - my word - of the
16 cabinet of the -- of the -- of the country -- of the city of origin of
17 this, that that is as far as they can reasonably be expected to go.
18 So -- sorry.
19 [Trial Chamber confers]
20 [Prosecution counsel confer]
21 JUDGE HALL: So everything is marked for identification --
22 remains marked for identification at this point.
23 Please continue with your cross-examination, Mr. Cvijetic.
24 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Can we call up -- or can we call
25 up the next document which is 1D00-0343.
1 Q. Mr. Petrovic, this is yet another order from Colonel Lisica where
2 elements of the police force are sought to be resubordinated.
3 One hundred policemen from the Doboj force are being requested.
4 Do you see that?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. They are issued with a combat assignment. And under 3 it is
7 stated he shall hold a person responsible for this order, the chief,
8 Andrija Bjelosevic, and you, yourself, sir.
9 Do you know of this order?
10 A. Well, I see it now.
11 Q. Mr. Petrovic, what would happen if you and Mr. Bjelosevic simply
12 disregarded the order or refused to implement it? What would happen?
13 A. We would be arrested.
14 Q. Who would arrest you?
15 A. The military police of Colonel Lisica.
16 Q. Let us recall the Criminal Code, pursuant to which refusal to
17 carry out a military order in a state of a declared imminent threat of
18 war is a serious offence, is it not?
19 A. Well, knowing Colonel Lisica as I do, whatever the law said, we
20 would end up in prison.
21 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Sir, since this order refers,
22 among others, also to the witness present here, in accordance with the
23 earlier position you stated, can we have this document marked for
25 JUDGE HALL: Yes.
1 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit 1D266, marked for identification,
2 Your Honours.
3 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation]
4 Q. Mr. Petrovic, the last document of the batch, which I want to use
5 merely to confirm what you said about the partial resubordination of the
6 police force.
7 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] This is document 1D00-0332.
8 Q. Mr. Petrovic, in this order, Colonel Lisica dispatches a unit of
9 the Doboj police to a battle-field in the area of another municipality,
10 i.e., Derventa. Please have a look at this. And they are to join the
11 Bosanski Brod Battalion.
12 Can you see that?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Under item 4, again, the responsibility for the implementation of
15 order lies with the centre and the public security
16 station [as interpreted].
17 Do you see that?
18 A. I do.
19 Q. So from one zone, the zone of Doboj, this unit is dispatched to
20 another zone, wherever needed, wherever they're needed to carry out
21 military assignments. Is that correct?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Thank you.
24 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I'd like to move for
25 this document to be MFI'd for the very same reasons as with the previous
2 JUDGE HALL: Despite the -- having trod this well-worn path now,
3 Mr. Cvijetic, I'm wholly unable to appreciate how this, in any way,
4 assists the issue. Isn't this just another piece of paper that we're
5 adding to the pile? I ...
6 This particular document really seems, to me, to be beyond the
7 pale. If you could show me how this falls in the same category as the
8 previous documents that we marked for identification ...
9 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, pursuant to orders
10 by the military commander, a battalion is established attached to
11 Bosanski Brod. Bosanski Brod is a municipality that's outside of the
12 Doboj area. Police is being sent there to carry out military
13 assignments. All this as a part of a claim concerning a combat zone.
14 And what we are claiming is that the Republika Srpska immediately after
15 the proclamation of immediate threat of war has become a combat zone in
16 its totality. And military organs were able to send police units to
17 carry out military combat assignments in any part of Republika Srpska.
18 This order had to be obeyed, and the sanctions, if it wouldn't be, were
19 very strict.
20 JUDGE HALL: Very well. So marked for identification.
21 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit D1D267, marked for identification,
22 Your Honours.
23 MR. DEMIRDJIAN: Your Honour, one item for the transcript. I
24 don't know if this is a problem with translation, but page 66, line 2, is
25 recorded that Mr. Cvijetic said:
1 "Under item 4, again, the responsibility for the implementation
2 of the order lies with the centre and the public security station."
3 Now, the document at item 4 does not say "public security
4 station." From the English translation that I have in front of me, it
5 says "the chief of Doboj region, public security service."
6 I don't know if there is a problem with either translations.
7 Maybe it can be clarified.
8 JUDGE HALL: Mr. Cvijetic, perhaps -- I don't -- I don't myself
9 see the difference, the mere change of -- difference between "service"
10 and "station." But to the extent that it may be relevant, perhaps
11 Mr. Cvijetic may wish to have the witness speak -- speak to this.
12 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] It's very simply, Your Honours.
13 The colonel used an improbable word where he is using -- or formula where
14 he is implying both the service and the stations. He is saying
15 Mr. Bjelosevic, who is chief of public security service, although
16 Mr. Bjelosevic was chief of centre. And that got me wrong-tracked. I do
17 agree with the Prosecutor. He was referring to the centre only, but it
18 was typed wrongly.
19 JUDGE HALL: [Previous translation continues] ...
20 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation]
21 Q. Mr. Petrovic, before I show you some further orders that -- that
22 had been sent from the CSB Doboj to you by chief of centre,
23 Andrija Bjelosevic, and before we go through the reports drafted by the
24 inspectors and the persons sent from the Ministry of Interior for the
25 purpose of verifying the situation in the Doboj centre and station, I
1 would like to go, rather quickly, through a few orders by the minister of
2 the interior so that we would be able to understand the requests that
3 were sent and the orders aimed at removing the shortcomings in the area
4 covered by the CSB.
5 Thus --
6 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Can we have, please,
7 document 1D76.
8 Q. Please read this order. You've been asked already about this
9 meeting held on the 11th of July in Belgrade
10 mistaken, that you don't know anything about it.
11 A. That's correct.
12 Q. After the meeting or the collegium, the minister, based on
13 information received from the ground, drafted this order asking for
14 information concerning the activities of paramilitary formations.
15 You can find that under small (a).
16 Then under (b), data and information regarding police involvement
17 in combat operations.
18 We have covered this second topic extensively today.
19 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] I would like to ask to move to the
20 following page in both versions, please.
21 Q. Furthermore, information related to prevention and detection of
23 Then information concerning collection camps.
24 Then operation of military judiciary authorities, and so forth.
25 I assume you're not familiar with this order?
1 A. I don't remember it.
2 Q. But you could have found out about the assignments stated in this
3 order only after the members of the Ministry of Interior managed to
4 physically enter the place where they were stored. You were shown the
5 transcripts yesterday by the Prosecutor. Do you remember that?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. I would like to show to you another order by the minister.
8 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] It's 1D49.
9 Q. As you can see, this order is dated 23rd of October.
10 In item number 1, the minister orders all active-duty police
11 members to withdraw from combat operations and the reserve police force
12 members to be made available.
13 Can you see that?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Item number 2 will later on be of interest to us.
16 The minister is here ordering that the number of the reserve
17 police force members be reduced and that it should be 1:2 ratio.
18 Can you see that?
19 And then the excess, to call it like that, of reserve police
20 members to be put at the disposal of the VRS?
21 A. I can see that.
22 Q. In second paragraph of item number 2, the minister even
23 authorises chiefs to inform the military commands that they are no longer
24 obliged to provide police force members for participation in combat
25 operations, except in municipalities which are directly affected by
1 combat activities.
2 Can you see that in the second paragraph?
3 A. Yes.
4 [Trial Chamber confers]
5 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation]
6 Q. Later we'll be discussing the documents that did reach you, where
7 you were asked to reduce the number of reserve police members. Do you
8 remember receiving such documents?
9 A. I think so.
10 Q. Let me show you another order by the minister.
11 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] 1D76. 176.
12 I don't know whether this is the document. No, this is an
13 earlier document. Yes, this one.
14 Q. This order dated 27th of July, 1992, in item number 1, the
15 minister asks for the optimal number of members of security services to
16 be determined based on the criteria prescribed by the Law on
17 Internal Affairs and the rules mentioned in the document.
18 And in item number 2, he recalls an earlier order of his, asking
19 for all those who have committed crimes and/or are criminal
20 investigations instigated against them to be removed from the force.
21 Can you see that?
22 A. [No verbal response]
23 Q. Three, then there is discussion about this surplus of police
24 forces to be put at the disposal of the army.
25 And under 4, he is asking for all special units formed during the
1 war in areas of Security Services Centres to be disbanded and placed
2 under the command of the Army of the Serbian Republic?
3 Can you see that?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. In this same item, we can see that a detachment of the ministry
6 police was established in the centre and that all those interested and
7 all those who meet the criteria may apply for membership in the
9 Do you see that?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. On the following page --
12 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Can we have the following page,
14 Q. Item 7, the minister orders that all paramilitary formations
15 should be removed from the areas that are not under the control of the
16 Army of the Serbian Republic
17 Do you see that?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. And in the subsequent items, he reiterates his positions about
20 the modes of police work.
21 Can you see that?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. This order reached you, again, indirectly, through orders issued
24 by the chief of the CSB and through the persons from the ministry who
25 came to carry out the control. I assume you remember some of these
2 A. We received this order through the chief of the centre.
3 Q. Thank you. I'll show you another order.
4 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] 1D55.
5 Q. This order is something whereby the minister prescribes the
6 detention of holding people in custody of three days. He is stating that
7 this must be done exclusively within the regulation prescribed, and
8 prohibits any misuse. Also, describing how the premises where these
9 people would be detained should look like. It's under 1.
10 You can see that, don't you -- can't you?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Two, the security of collection centres shall be the direct
13 responsibility of the Serbian army, and if they do not have enough men
14 for these duty, the members of reserve police should be engaged.
15 Can you see that?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Mr. Petrovic, we've been through just -- several of these orders
18 with the intention of making it easier to understand some of the
19 documents from your areas and the reasons of their adoption.
20 I would like to show you now a document from your area, issued by
21 your station.
22 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] It's 1D03-3159.
23 I'm waiting for the English version. Is this document maybe
24 still waiting for the translation? Oh, there is a translation.
25 [Trial Chamber confers]
1 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
2 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] May I continue, Your Honours?
3 JUDGE HALL: [Previous translation continues] ...
4 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation]
5 Q. Mr. Petrovic, on page 1, I think I see your signature. There's
6 your name.
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Is it your signature?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Is it your document?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Let us comment on it. You are referring to a document you
13 received from the CSB on the 6th of October, 1992. Can you see it? And
14 you are requested that you should see to it that the reserve police
15 stations should start functioning, and you informed the centre that did
16 you so.
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Let us move on to the following page to see how you did it.
19 Mr. Petrovic, you were saying yesterday that in the case of war
20 or in imminent threat of war, reserve police stations are established in
21 some parts of the municipality, right?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. That was -- there were provisions to that effect in military
24 rules and regulations and police rules and regulations, even before the
25 war, right?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. And that -- such provisions were also to be found in the rules
3 and regulations of the Republika Srpska, right?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Yesterday you explained that Major Stankovic turned all these
6 stations into detachments to be able to use them for military purposes.
7 Did I understand your explanation that you gave yesterday correctly?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. You will agree with me when I say, won't you, that this
10 detrimentally affected the organisation of the MUP, the way it was
11 envisaged by the rules and regulations; correct?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. This was noticed on the occasion of a check carried out by the
14 MUP, and you received the task to adapt the actual situation to the law.
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. And it follows from this document that you actually did that,
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. This document of yours basically says that the organisation
20 established by Major Stankovic, that is, the existence of detachments,
21 should cease to exist and that the orders should go from the CSB, in
22 accordance with the existing rules and regulations, right?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. Thank you.
25 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I believe that there
1 can be no doubt about this. This is a document which emanates from the
2 witness, and I believe it can be admitted into evidence.
3 [Trial Chamber confers]
4 JUDGE HALL: Admitted and marked.
5 MR. DEMIRDJIAN: Your Honours, I do have one comment in relation
6 to Mr. Cvijetic's last sentence. Page 75, line 2, says that this
7 document says that the organisation established by Major Stankovic, that
8 is, the existence of detachments, should cease to exist.
9 Although this could be clarified by the witness, I don't agree
10 that the document says that. The document only establishes the reserve
11 police stations.
12 So just for the interpretation of this document ...
13 JUDGE HALL: Well, I don't know that we need become entangled in
14 that because the document says what it says. And no doubt at the end of
15 the exercise submissions and arguments will be made as to what the effect
16 of the contents of the document. So the witness's -- what counsel puts
17 to a witness about what a document says is of minimal use in that regard.
18 THE REGISTRAR: So the document will be Exhibit 1D268,
19 Your Honours.
20 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Very well.
21 I will now move on to the following document, which is 1D01-0341.
22 JUDGE HALL: Before you move on, Mr. Cvijetic. Returning to
23 Mr. Demirdjian's intervention, I suppose I should add to what I would
24 have said, that it is entirely possible and proper for counsel to put to
25 a witness what his understanding of the document was, even if it appears
1 to be at variance with what was on the face of document, especially where
2 in this case the witness would have himself acted on the basis of his
3 understanding, which doesn't seem to have arisen here. But I just wanted
4 to modify and clarify my general observation earlier.
5 Yes, Mr. Cvijetic.
6 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours. That
7 would have been my remark, but I didn't have time to reply to the
9 Q. Mr. Petrovic, this is a document from November 1992. It is
10 signed by the chief of the centre, Andrija Bjelosevic, and other centre
11 staff with their respective positions indicated below. And in the
12 introduction we see that it's an -- it's an activity plan of the
13 department for police duties.
14 Can you see that?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. What I'm interested in is item 1. It says that it must be
17 established whether or not in organisational units of the centre there
18 are members of the reserve police force who have not served in the
19 military or who have a criminal file, except for crimes related to
20 traffic safety and so on.
21 Mr. Petrovic, this reminds you of one of those orders of the
22 minister of the interior where he demands that it must be established
23 whether or not some persons committed crimes, right?
24 A. Well, yes, I guess so. The centre probably was acting pursuant
25 to orders from the minister.
1 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Could we turn to the following
2 page, please.
3 Q. Here the inspector states that he did the job in November. And
4 in paragraph 2 he says that he established the number of reserve police
5 force members who had -- have not served in the military, as well as the
6 number of those convicted of crimes which makes them not eligible for
7 working for the Ministry of Interior.
8 Can you see that in paragraph 2?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. On page 3, there's a list of these persons.
11 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Could we please show page 3.
12 Q. In the first section, there are those convicted of -- for crimes.
13 And there are even references to the articles of the relevant laws and
14 their verdicts. And in the latter section, there is a list of those who
15 have not served in the military.
16 Mr. Petrovic, this plan of work and these conclusions regarding
17 the state of affairs, were they drafted in keeping with the instructions
18 given by the minister of the interior?
19 A. I believe so.
20 Q. In other words, you mean that these orders were carried out?
21 A. Yes, I think so.
22 Q. Very well.
23 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, this may be a
24 convenient time to adjourn. Although, I have a document now which I
25 might be able to finish in ten minutes. But I am in your hands,
1 Your Honours.
2 JUDGE HALL: Sorry, Ms. Korner, you have something to say on this
4 MS. KORNER: Only if Your Honours are going to - I just wanted to
5 mention - come back to adjudicated facts for a moment. I thought -- I
6 didn't realise Your Honours were still considering Mr. Cvijetic's offer
7 to stop now.
8 JUDGE HALL: [Microphone not activated] ... said it would take
9 about ten minutes --
10 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
11 JUDGE HALL: Inasmuch as he says it would take about ten minutes
12 to open on this new document, perhaps it would be advisable to take the
13 adjournment now. And then we can deal with your point.
14 MS. KORNER: Yes.
15 JUDGE HALL: [Microphone not activated]
16 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for the Judge, please.
17 JUDGE HALL: Sorry.
18 Mr. Petrovic, we are to take the adjournment for today. Your
19 cross-examination will continue tomorrow morning. We continue at 9.00 in
20 this courtroom.
21 The Court will not adjourn immediately. We have an
22 administrative matter with -- housekeeping matter with which to deal. So
23 the usher will now escort you from the courtroom. And I remind you what
24 I said yesterday about not discussing the case. Thank you.
25 [The witness stands down]
1 JUDGE HALL: Yes, Ms. Korner.
2 MS. KORNER: Thank you, Your Honour. Your Honours, I am a bit
3 concerned -- and now that Judge Delvoie has seised the adjudicated facts
4 as they are with such vigor, because we did raise it on the 12th of June,
5 I have been reminded by Mr. Smith that during the Status Conference then
6 I said that we're a bit concerned about the suggestion that seems to be
7 happening at the moment that there is going to be a challenge to the
8 adjudicated facts which have already been ruled on and which the
9 Trial Chamber has accepted - or so we thought at the time, in
10 parentheses. And in the light of the Lukic case, if there is to be such
11 a challenge, perhaps that is something that ought to be indicated in the
12 briefs submitted by the Defence so that we all know where we are.
13 And Judge Harhoff said I would assume that to be raised by the
14 Defence teams.
15 Now, Your Honours, the reality is, like so many other things, it
16 sort of disappeared into the general morass. But we would invite
17 Your Honours, really, to make an order that such adjudicated facts as we
18 have, if they are to be challenged, then we really ought to be told in
19 writing by the Defence as soon as possible so that we know exactly where
20 we are, everybody now knows what their case is. So we would really
21 invite Your Honours to do that.
22 That's the first thing.
23 The second thing, can I deal --
24 JUDGE HALL: Sorry. For my own edification, Ms. Korner, in
25 previous cases has such a requirement been imposed on the side
1 challenging adjudicated facts?
2 MS. KORNER: I don't -- Your Honours, to be quite honest, I don't
3 know. And -- but I think the first time that it actually emerged as an
4 issue was in the Lukic case, which finished, I think, shortly before or
5 after this case had already begun.
6 So that -- Your Honours, to answer, I don't if that -- ever
7 that's -- that's happened before, but I don't equally know whether once
8 an adjudicated fact has been granted there's been this kind of challenge.
9 So that's -- I mean, so the simple is, I don't know, but I can
10 find out quite easily.
11 JUDGE HALL: You had a second point.
12 MS. KORNER: Yes, second point is simply on timing, Your Honour.
13 Perhaps we could inquire of Mr. Cvijetic how much longer he is going to
14 be, because on Monday we have a journalist testifying. He has just
15 confirmed that. And his work schedule is such that he literally needs to
16 start on Monday. And then we have a videolink witness on Wednesday, in
17 any event, of next week. So I would quite like to know, because we've
18 got another potentially two witnesses this week, how much longer
19 Mr. Cvijetic is going to be.
20 And then Mr. Pantelic or Mr. Krgovic.
21 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I believe that I
22 need one more session to finish with this witness.
23 MR. KRGOVIC: Your Honour, I don't think that we have any
24 cross-examination for this witness.
25 JUDGE HALL: Thank you.
1 MR. ZECEVIC: Would you like -- Your Honours, you would like me
2 to answer the first point by Ms. Korner at this point or should I do that
4 JUDGE HALL: [Microphone not activated]
5 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
6 JUDGE HALL: Well, if you are able to speak to it briefly now,
7 but we would understand that you would like to think about it.
8 MR. ZECEVIC: Well, I can comment briefly on it, but if you want
9 me to give you a bit complexed submission on this, I would do that,
10 rather, tomorrow morning, if possible.
11 JUDGE HALL: I wouldn't have used the word "complex," myself; but
12 I prefer to use the word "considered," because I appreciate that this is
13 something that you would not have been alerted to beforehand and would be
14 more useful if you have the opportunity to reflect on it for a few hours
15 before you assist us with your suggestions in this regard.
16 MR. ZECEVIC: Thank you very much. I understand. And it is my
17 English, because I used the word "complex," Your Honours, "considered" is
18 a very appropriate word which I wanted to say.
19 Thank you very much.
20 MR. PANTELIC: Just for the record, Your Honours. The position
21 of Zupljanin Defence regarding adjudicated facts is the following: We
22 are challenging every single adjudicated fact. End of story. Just for
23 the record. We don't want to make any other submission.
24 JUDGE HALL: Thank you, Mr. Pantelic.
25 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, just to make the
1 Prosecutor's life easier, with regard to the witness that is about to
2 come, we are sure to challenge each and every adjudicated fact from
3 that -- from that testimony and the statement.
4 JUDGE HALL: And so our path --
5 MR. KRGOVIC: Teslic.
6 JUDGE HALL: And so our path is well laid out for us.
7 Thank you. We now rise until tomorrow morning.
8 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.47 p.m.
9 to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 12th day of
10 May, 2010, at 9.00 a.m.