Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 18916

 1                           Wednesday, 19 January 2011

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           --- Upon commencing at 9.06 a.m.

 5             THE REGISTRAR:  Good morning, Your Honours.  Good morning

 6     everyone in and around the courtroom.  This is case IT-08-91-T, the

 7     Prosecutor versus Mico Stanisic and Stojan Zupljanin.

 8             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you, Madam Registrar.  Good morning to

 9     everyone.  May we have the appearances please.

10             MS. KORNER:  Good morning, Your Honours.  Joanna Korner and

11     Crispian Smith for the Prosecution.

12             MR. ZECEVIC:  Good morning, Your Honours.  Slobodan Zecevic,

13     Slobodan Cvijetic, Eugene O'Sullivan, Ms. Tatjana Savic, Ms. Suzanna

14     Mohr, and Ms. Alexandra Laskowski appearing for Stanisic Defence this

15     morning.  Thank you.

16             MR. KRGOVIC:  Good morning, Your Honours.  Dragan Krgovic and

17     Aleksandar Aleksic appearing for Zupljanin Defence.

18             JUDGE HALL:  Before -- yes, Ms. Korner.

19             MS. KORNER:  Your Honour, I have a matter to raise, but I'll wait

20     until Your Honour has finish the --

21             JUDGE HALL:  I was just going to say before the witness was

22     returned to the stand, we were alert that you may have had a matter to

23     raise.

24             MS. KORNER:  Your Honour, I think we need to go into private

25     session for this.

Page 18917

 1             JUDGE HALL:  Yes.

 2                           [Private session]

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6   (redacted)

 7   (redacted)

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 18918











11 Page 18918 redacted. Private session.















Page 18919

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6   (redacted)

 7   (redacted)

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10                           [Open session]

11             THE REGISTRAR:  We are in open session, Your Honours.

12                           [The witness takes the stand]

13             JUDGE HALL:  Mr. Brown, good morning to you.  Again for the

14     record I remind you that you are still on your oath.  Yes, Mr. Zecevic.

15             MR. ZECEVIC:  Thank you, Your Honour.

16                           WITNESS:  EWAN BROWN [Resumed]

17                           Cross-examination by Mr. Zecevic:  [Continued]

18        Q.   [Interpretation] Good morning, Mr. Brown.

19        A.   Good morning, Mr. Zecevic.  Thank you.

20        Q.   Mr. Brown, your expert's report in items 239 to 256, you speak

21     about the co-operation between the military and the police.  Page 18718

22     of the transcript contains your analysis of a document P1787, which is

23     tab 34 in the Prosecution binder.  It's footnote 321, 348, 455, and 720.

24             I remind you that the discussion related to this document

25     pertained mostly to the issue of co-ordinated action.  Do you remember

Page 18920

 1     that?  Do you remember that you spoke with Ms. Korner about that topic?

 2        A.   Yes, I did.

 3        Q.   Mr. Brown, before we analyse this document, we are going to

 4     return to this document later, that's what I mean to say.  But before

 5     that I think we owe it to the Trial Chamber and all the participants here

 6     in the courtroom to explain what exactly "co-ordinated action" means.

 7     Mr. Brown, co-ordinated action is a military term that denotes a method

 8     of the execution of a joint task wherein two or more units act in

 9     co-ordination towards achievement of a task assigned by their superior

10     commander.  Would you agree with this definition?

11        A.   It's not solely a military term, I would argue, but it can be

12     used in a military context clearly.  And I would agree that it usually

13     means two or more units acting together in order to achieve a common

14     goal.  It doesn't necessarily mean to say that it couldn't be two units,

15     two organisations from different components, but I agree that there is a

16     co-ordination component.  There usually is multiple actors and they are

17     acting normally in concert to achieve a common aim or a common goal.

18        Q.   The essence is that the co-ordinated action is ordered by a

19     superior commander, isn't that so?

20        A.   Well, the actors involved can have their own command chain, and

21     as I maybe mentioned when we were discussing this previously, you can

22     have --

23        Q.   Mr. Brown, excuse me.  I have to interrupt you.  You did explain

24     that and that is not in dispute.  It is clear that the units have their

25     own chains of command, but the essence here, what I'm now asking you

Page 18921

 1     about is the following:  Somebody ordering a co-ordinated action of two

 2     units with two different chain of commands, that person, that individual

 3     or a command is superior to both those units then because that is the

 4     command that is in a position to order the co-ordinated action?

 5        A.   Well, in relation to the military unit taking part here, so this

 6     is a Kotor Varos light brigade unit, I would agree, yes, that I would

 7     imagine the corps command has instructed its subordinate formations to

 8     conduct operations.  What others who are taking part in the operation may

 9     or may have not been asked to do, I do not know, but in relation to this

10     military unit, I would suspect that its superior command has been made

11     aware or it has instructed this unit to conduct operations in that area.

12        Q.   Sir, let us take an example.  Let's take a look at P1787, tab 34.

13     That's the document that you spoke about with Ms. Korner.

14             Sir, this is a document dated 23rd of July, issued by the command

15     of the Light Infantry Brigade Kotor Varos.  I say that through this

16     document the command of the light infantry brigade as a superior command

17     orders its subordinated units defined in items 1 to 5 and item 8, orders

18     them to execute a certain task.  This document is signed by the commander

19     of the Light Infantry Brigade Kotor Varos who is Mr. Manojlo Tepic.  So

20     the command of the Light Partisan Brigade is the superior command to all

21     the units enumerated in items 5.1 to 5.8, would you agree with that?

22        A.   Yes, the companies that are under -- that form the core of the

23     light brigade.

24        Q.   Well, then, if we analyse this document, in particular its page 3

25     and onwards, we are going to see that out of 8 points in which the

Page 18922

 1     superior command of the Light Infantry Partisan Brigade Kotor Varos, that

 2     out of these 8 points, only in 5.2 and 5.3 we find units of the MUP.  So

 3     out of 8, you have MUP in two points and not in six points; is that

 4     correct?

 5        A.   There's also a reference in paragraph 11 in relation to security

 6     support so presumably his security staff, but also a reference, acting in

 7     concert with neighbours and the police forces on the ground.

 8        Q.   I know that, but now we are talking about the tasks assigned to

 9     the subordinated units, and that's item 5 in this order, isn't it?

10        A.   Yes, it would seem from the documents that the 2nd Infantry

11     Company, the pioneer platoon, and the security support staff of the

12     brigade have been given tasks to co-ordinate or have some form of

13     co-ordination with the local police.

14        Q.   When you answered a question posed by His Honour Judge Harhoff,

15     page 18727 [Realtime transcript read in error "18727"] of the transcript,

16     you said that this was a true subordination, resubordination of the

17     police units to the army and if that were the case, then you said that

18     you would have expected that they would have received specific and very

19     explicit tasks in this order.  Do you remember that you said something to

20     this effect?

21        A.   Yes, I would have expected if there was a police formation that

22     was subordinated directly to this brigade, that I would see that

23     replicated in one of the sub-formations and the tasks given to it.

24             MS. KORNER:  I am so sorry, can I have the page again of the

25     transcript?  It's come out as 1827.

Page 18923

 1             MR. ZECEVIC:  [Interpretation] 18721.  Judge Harhoff asked how

 2     about the legal structure and then ...

 3        Q.   Sir, so the tasks of the subordinated units, any task that would

 4     entail a co-ordinated action with the MUP units, we can find here only

 5     assigned to the two units, the pioneer platoon and the 2nd Infantry

 6     Company, is that true?

 7        A.   And the security support staff.  I'm presuming this brigade had

 8     some security personnel, security officers, security staff who conducted

 9     security tasks on behalf of the brigade, and they've also have a

10     highlighted role.  So those three components would seem to be the ones

11     that are -- have been given this role of ...

12        Q.   I accept that, I accept that.  It is obvious that the police

13     would have been involved with some sort of security aspect of this

14     situation.  However, I claim that items 5.2 and 5.3 give to the police a

15     very explicit and very specific task or tasks such as with part of your

16     forces acting in concert with the forces of the SJB Kotor Varos organised

17     checking of unknown individuals and foreigners entering the area.  So

18     now, I don't know when you say this is not specific, in what way is it

19     not specific?  Do you think that this order should also contain a

20     particular point where the check-point is to be set up in order to

21     control the entry of unknown persons and foreigners?  Do you think that

22     they should tell them the exact geographical point where the check point

23     should be and that only that would be sufficiently explicit and specific?

24        A.   I don't believe point 5.2, the tasks given there, are specific

25     tasks given to the police.  I think this is a section that gives the

Page 18924

 1     tasks to the 2nd Infantry Company, the 2nd Infantry Company is to

 2     organise the checking of unknown individuals and foreigners entering the

 3     area in concert with the police.  He is not instructing in this

 4     paragraph.  It doesn't read the police contingent are to do the

 5     following.  This paragraph refers to the tasks given to the 2nd Infantry

 6     Company, and I would imagine what has happened here is that there's been

 7     some co-ordination meeting where it's been agreed that both the 2nd

 8     Infantry Company will conduct the organised and checking of individuals

 9     and that the police will do the same.

10        Q.   Mr. Brown, with all due respect, I am kindly asking you to

11     respond to my questions.  The fact that you have your own understanding

12     of what might have happened, which falls into the realm of speculation,

13     this is contrary to what is written here.  What is written here it says

14     in a co-ordinated action with Kotor Varos SJB forces sets up control of

15     the entry of unknown persons and foreigners.  A moment ago we agreed the

16     meaning of the phrase "co-ordinated action."  Now I put it to you that

17     both in this case and some other cases that we are going to review, the

18     command of the Light Infantry Brigade ordering this co-ordinated action

19     is a superior command both to the 2nd Infantry Company of its own and to

20     the Kotor Varos SJB because this SJB, according to the law, was

21     resubordinated to the army for the purpose of executing this task?

22        A.   I think I'd have to disagree with you.

23        Q.   Thank you.  Let's move to the next document to demonstrate this.

24             MR. ZECEVIC:  [Interpretation] Can the witness please be shown 65

25     ter document 2624, tab 19 in the Prosecution binder.

Page 18925

 1        Q.   It's a directive of 6th of June 1992, issued by

 2     Lieutenant-General Ratko Mladic, and it's been issued by the Main Staff

 3     of the VRS.

 4             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] I apologise.  I've just been told

 5     that in the meantime this was entered into evidence and this is now

 6     P1794.

 7        Q.   You refer to this document in your statement given in July of

 8     2009, therefore I suppose that you have seen this document?

 9        A.   Yes, I hadn't seen this document when I wrote my report, but I

10     think it was one of the documents referenced when I made my statement or

11     reviewed some documents last year, I believe, or probably the year

12     before.

13        Q.   Would you be so kind to take a look at this document which is

14     entitled directive for further actions, and then in the first three or

15     four paragraphs it specifies and portrays the prevailing situation, and

16     in the remainder of the document we can read about the goals of this

17     operation listed under A, B, C, and D.  And then under item 5, they speak

18     about tasks of the units, so let's look at that.  That's on page 2 in

19     Serbian.  The last paragraph, item 5.  And I suppose it's the next page

20     in English as well.

21             Sir, what you can see here is that this is about the tasks of the

22     1st Krajina Corps, and General Ratko Mladic says the 1st Krajina Corps,

23     et cetera, in a co-ordinated action with the 2nd Krajina Corps and in a

24     co-ordinated action with East Bosnia Corps.  Unfortunately in the English

25     translation, it says in concert with the 2nd Krajina Corps and co-action,

Page 18926

 1     which means that this is the document that gave rise to the problem that

 2     we pointed out because the word "Sadjestvo" was first translated as in

 3     concert and then second time it was translated as co-action.  I think we

 4     have all agreed, including the CLSS, that the word "Sadjestvo" should

 5     always be translated as a co-ordinated action.  Can you see this, sir?

 6        A.   Yes, this is the task set the corps.

 7        Q.   Sir, it is not in dispute that Ratko Mladic represents a higher

 8     command with regard to all the three corps, the 1st, the 2nd Krajina

 9     Corps, and the East Bosnia Corps?

10        A.   No, the Main Staff which Ratko Mladic headed sat above those

11     corps.

12        Q.   Sir, that's the point.  Only a superior command is entitled to

13     order a co-ordinated action to be carried out by units.  In this

14     particular instance, Ratko Mladic is not issuing an order to the 1st

15     Krajina Corps as could have been inferred from your interpretation of the

16     previous document, but rather issuing an order to the 1st, the 2nd

17     Krajina Corps, and the East Bosnia Corps; is that correct?

18        A.   I think the order is what it is.  It's a directive from the

19     command, the commander of the Main Staff, to subordinated corps, and

20     those corps are to co-operate in a large operation in the corridor, well,

21     there was Sarajevo as well, but that's what he is ordering.  But the

22     document is what it is.

23        Q.   But, sir, the essence is as follows:  In this document regardless

24     of the fact that initially the task is assigned to the 1st Krajina Corps,

25     the Main Staff of the VRS is giving an order to the 1st Krajina Corps and

Page 18927

 1     the 2nd Krajina Corps and the East Bosnia Corps instructing them to act

 2     in a co-ordinated action together; is that correct?

 3        A.   Yes.

 4        Q.   Very well.  So if in this case the co-ordinated action applies to

 5     all the listed units, why did you say with regard to the previous

 6     document that this did not apply to police units?

 7        A.   I'm a little bit unclear in your question.  There's --

 8     General Mladic is well within his right to ask, to order actually, his

 9     subordinate corps to co-ordinate together to conduct an operation in the

10     corridor.  The Kotor Varos Light Brigade orders its subordinate units in

11     that operation, the various companies and support functions and platoons,

12     to conduct operations, and one of the tasks it sets, one of its

13     subordinate formations, is to co-ordinate with the police in Kotor Varos.

14     I don't see that somehow the second one automatically implies that the

15     Kotor Varos Light Brigade therefore commands all the police.  I think

16     there are two different tasks going on, but in this one, in this

17     directive, Mladic is saying, and generally at the higher level the

18     instructions are more general and they are larger, a number of corps are

19     to co-operate together in order to conduct a large military operation.

20     Now, what would likely follow from that is that each corps would look at

21     the tasks set, look at the areas that it has to work with, have planning

22     meetings with the corps that they have been told to co-operate with to

23     come with up with a plan of action that would result in the execution of

24     this order.  Which I believe is what happened.

25        Q.   Sir, please concentrate on my question.  First of all in this

Page 18928

 1     directive, Ratko Mladic, if you read it, as a superior command is issuing

 2     an order to subordinate units to carry out a co-ordinated action

 3     specifying exactly the tasks, and I'm not going into details of those

 4     tasks.  Now, I put it to you, sir, that an entirely identical principle

 5     was applied in the tasks that we looked a moment ago assigned by the

 6     Kotor Varos Light Infantry Brigade, and the essence is that I'm telling

 7     you that when the command of Light Infantry Brigade says a co-ordinated

 8     action, that implies that at that point in time the police units are

 9     resubordinated to the army.  Due to that, the commander of the Light

10     Infantry Brigade can issue orders for co-ordinated actions to all units

11     and hence all these units are under his command, just as was the case in

12     the order issued by Ratko Mladic to the corps.

13             If you still disagree with me, I can show you another document

14     that would clarify the matter.

15        A.   I would disagree with you that the Kotor Varos Light Infantry

16     Brigade from this instruction has subordinated police units that it

17     commands and it is giving instructions to.  I do not see that from that

18     document, and I do not believe that the Mladic document is anything other

19     than a high level directive to subordinate corps to co-operate in the

20     execution of a large military task in the corridor and also in relation

21     to operations in Sarajevo.

22        Q.   Let us then look at a third document.  I have a whole host of

23     documents that can show that you are -- that you are not right.

24             MR. ZECEVIC:  [Interpretation] It's document 1D049216, that's the

25     tab 34, footnote 134.

Page 18929

 1             MS. KORNER:  Your Honour, I am going to object again, and

 2     particularly in the light of the matter I raised this morning, to

 3     comments and remarks such as "I can show you a whole host of documents

 4     that will show you are wrong."  That is pure comment.  He can put what

 5     documents he likes and then thereafter make submissions at the

 6     appropriate time.

 7             MR. ZECEVIC:  I apologise to Mr. Brown and to you, Ms. Korner.

 8     You are right.  It was inappropriate.

 9        Q.   [Interpretation] I apologise, Mr. Brown.

10        A.   No problem at all, sir.

11        Q.   Thank you very much.

12             [Interpretation] Mr. Brown, this document that you deal with in

13     your footnote 144 in your report is an order issued by the 1st Krajina

14     Corps dated the 31st of July, 1992, and this order was given by the 1st

15     Krajina Corps to its subordinate units as their superior command; is that

16     correct?

17        A.   Yes.  Have you got a tab for that, sir, or?

18        Q.   Tab 34 in the Defence binder, although I don't know if you have

19     that particular binder with you.

20        A.   I don't, sir.  I probably know this is a rather large document as

21     well.

22        Q.   It is.  I don't know if you prefer -- I promise that over the

23     break I'm going to prepare this document for you in English, and I don't

24     think it will be helpful if I gave you my copy in the Serbian, but you

25     are right and I'm going to instruct some people for all the documents

Page 18930

 1     that I intend to use in my cross-examination to be printed and hard

 2     copies given to you.

 3             Now, this document refers to the same issue, therefore I don't

 4     think you will have any difficulties in understanding both what is

 5     written in the document and my questions.  Now, let's go to page 6 where

 6     it reads "I have decided ..."  Actually, it's page 7, item 5.2, which

 7     starts with "I have decided ..."

 8             Item 5.2.  Tasks of subordinated units.

 9             MR. ZECEVIC:  [Interpretation] That's page 7 in Serbian, and it

10     is ERN number 0084-1213.  Since there are some pages inserted, it could

11     be then page 14.  Thank you.  That's the right page.

12        Q.   Now, sir, General Talic under item 5.2 refers to TG 2 and orders

13     Tactical Group 2 as follows:

14             "In coordination with Tactical Group 1 and Tactical Group 3

15     organises persistent and active defence applying massive barrier system,"

16     et cetera et cetera.

17             You can see this?

18        A.   Yes, I can see that, sir.

19        Q.   This means that here this section is entitled tasks of

20     subordinated units, so there is no doubt that Tactical Groups 1, 2, and 3

21     are the units subordinated to General Talic's command; isn't that right?

22        A.   Yes, that would seem so, sir.

23        Q.   Very well.  Let's move on.  Item 5.3 on the next page, it talks

24     about the tasks of Tactical Group 3, and it reads:

25             "In co-ordination with Tactical Group 2 and the Srbac Light

Page 18931

 1     Brigade organise the defence," et cetera.

 2             In this instance again, Tactical Group 3 that is receiving the

 3     order and the units TG 2 and the Srbac Light Brigade are again units

 4     subordinated ...  As I said, these units are yet again units subordinated

 5     to the General Talic's command; correct?

 6        A.   Yes, it would seem so.

 7        Q.   Okay.  5.6 on the next page.  Now we have a Combat Group 2 and it

 8     reads:

 9             "In co-ordination with the 1st Detachment" -- and this task is

10     being given to Combat Group 2, "In co-ordination with the 1st Detachment

11     of Posavina Brigade, part of the IBK forces, and MUP forces, block the

12     bridgehead established in the region of Orasje ..."

13             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] First of all, I can give you a hard

14     copy of this document in English if the Usher would be so kind to help.

15             THE WITNESS:  Thank you.

16             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation]

17        Q.   So we are talking about item 5.6.

18        A.   Yes, I see that on the screen, sir.

19        Q.   And what one can see here is again a task given to MUP forces to

20     take part in a co-ordinated action, and they are being given a very

21     explicit and clear tasks such as block the bridgehead in the region of

22     Orasje, then capture Orasje and a number of villages, and eventually

23     reach the Sava river and organise defence there.  You will agree with me

24     that there is no doubt that the MUP forces are subordinated to the army

25     in this particular instance, wouldn't you?

Page 18932

 1        A.   I would not agree with you, sir.  This section is an instruction

 2     to Combat Group 2.  Talic is ordering Combat Group 2 which is a

 3     subordinate unit of his corps.  He is not ordering the 1st Posavina

 4     brigade which I don't believe was part of his corps.  He is not ordering

 5     the East Bosnia Corps, nor is he ordering the MUP.  I believe what he is

 6     saying, he is ordering Combat Group 2 which is a subordinate formation to

 7     co-ordinate with these units which are not under his command in order to

 8     conduct this operation, I believe this is in the corridor area, and I

 9     would agree with you it would appear that the Posavina Brigade, the IBK

10     forces, and the MUP forces are involved in combat operations there.  But

11     what he is doing is he is telling Combat Group 2 who clearly are going to

12     be part of that operation, to co-ordinate with those other units in order

13     to execute this particular task in this particular area.

14             I don't know exactly where that is or whether it took place or

15     what planning meetings may have gone on as a result of that, but in

16     reading the document very briefly, I would have to say, General Talic is

17     ordering his subordinate formation Combat Group 2 to co-ordinate with

18     units that are not part of his corps, which would seem to be a recognised

19     military task which goes on all the time.

20        Q.   But, sir, Mr. Brown, if what you are saying is true, how do you

21     think, then, that this can function in reality?  What I mean is I as

22     General Talic, or I don't know who, issue an order to my subordinate unit

23     to carry out a co-ordinated action with units that are not under his

24     command and he expects them to execute this tasks.  Is this what you are

25     claiming?

Page 18933

 1        A.   I have to say from my military experience, this happens all the

 2     time.

 3        Q.   [In English] Okay.

 4        A.   Neighbouring formations are conducting operations, different

 5     formations and different command with the same objective.  It's happening

 6     now and it's happened in my military service, and I don't see this as an

 7     issue that surprises me.

 8        Q.   [Interpretation] But tell me this, sir:  In your view how is it

 9     possible then for the Combat Group 2 to execute a co-ordinated action

10     with East Bosnia Corps if they are not under the command of General

11     Talic?  One may expect the East Bosnian Corps to say no we are not going

12     to comply and also the MUP forces could have said that, they could have

13     just said no, these are not our tasks and our goals.

14        A.   Combat Group 2 is under General Talic's command.  Clearly Combat

15     Group 2, I don't know the details of the group and I don't know what its

16     task specifically, although you can read it from here, is, but clearly

17     Combat Group 2 has been given a task by General Talic as part of this

18     operation.  I would assume, I don't know the East Bosnia Corps and I

19     haven't seen the documents from the East Bosnia Corps, that it was

20     probably quite likely that this, a similar instruction was given to the

21     East Bosnia Corps in the same way the Directive 1 -- General Talic wrote

22     his own directive as part of that operation.  I would assume that a

23     larger directive came from the Main Staff which also went to the East

24     Bosnia Corps and that the East Bosnia Corps was to be part of a task in

25     relation to this wider, I believe, corridor area.

Page 18934

 1             But what would then happen, normally what happens, is there's

 2     some kind of planning process in which it is agreed which units are going

 3     to take part and what their roles and responsibilities will be.  So of

 4     course the East Bosnia Corps or the MUP could say we are not taking part

 5     in this, that's a different issue completely.  They might decide that the

 6     task that they'd been set is too great for the forces they have, but

 7     that's why you have these planning formations.  But I go back to my

 8     point, Combat Group 2 has been given instructions by General Talic to

 9     co-ordinate with units which do not fall under the 1st Krajina Corps

10     hierarchy.

11        Q.   Mr. Brown, with all due respect, honestly I can say that at one

12     point you have confirmed what I am alleging.  There should be a superior

13     command which sets out a task such as blocking a bridgehead in Orasje,

14     capture Orasje, and reach the river Sava and organise defence.  This must

15     be set by a superior command.  It is saying this to Talic, it is saying

16     the same thing to East Bosnia Corps and also to the 2nd Krajina Corps,

17     and then they pass on these orders to their subordinated units, including

18     the resubordinated units of the MUP, because there must be a higher level

19     command to issue this kind of order.  You yourself said that there was a

20     directive issued to that effect.  Therefore, what I'm trying this whole

21     time is to establish that a co-ordinated action involving a number of

22     units is something that can be ordered only by a superior command?

23        A.   The task given to Combat Group 2 clearly has been given by a

24     superior command.  It may well be that Combat Group 2 is the most

25     important unit taking part in this operation, but when General Talic has

Page 18935

 1     been given his instruction by the Main Staff and he has done his staff

 2     planning, he decides that Combat Group 2 has to fulfill this task.  And

 3     it may well be that he realises that there are other factors that in

 4     order for Combat Group 2 to succeed, that he requires additional support.

 5     He may, for example, feel that the flanks of Combat Group 2 are weak and

 6     that what he wants the East Bosnia Corps to do is to secure those flanks

 7     while Combat Group 2 take part in the operation.

 8             It may well be that when General Talic has done his appreciation,

 9     he realizes Combat Group 2 has to conduct this operation, but there are

10     problems that require some assistance from the MUP or from the Posavina

11     Brigade.  And so what he's -- but it could also be that the main player

12     in this is the East Bosnian Corps, but what he has done, he has -- he has

13     given instructions to Combat Group 2 and he has clearly appreciated that

14     there is a co-ordination requirement component involving these other

15     actors that needs to be resolved and that's what he's instructing Combat

16     Group 2 to do.

17        Q.   Mr. Brown, I'm asking about the principle of command and control

18     in the army, and you are talking to me about specific operations.  I'm

19     taking these examples in order to show what it was like in the real world

20     and in 1992 at that.  But basically I'm talking about the principle

21     involved.  Please focus, please respond to those questions.  I'm talking

22     about the principle.  In order for two units that have different commands

23     to take part in co-ordinated action, a superior command has to give them

24     an order for this co-ordinated action to both units involved and to set

25     their objective.  You go there together, don't you?  Is that right or is

Page 18936

 1     that not right?

 2        A.   I don't believe that is always the case.

 3             MR. ZECEVIC:  [Interpretation] Let us have a look at 5.11 of this

 4     document as well.

 5        Q.   We are still dealing with paragraph 5 where the late

 6     General Talic is setting the tasks for subordinated units.  And now 5.11

 7     pertains to the Banja Luka Light Brigade's group.  You do remember saying

 8     that Mr. Talic -- I think that was your position, that he asked the Main

 9     Staff to establish this command of this group of the Banja Luka Light

10     Brigade's group that was under the 1st Krajina Corps; right.

11        A.   That's right, yes.

12        Q.   Now, the light brigades, there's no dispute there, they are under

13     the Krajina Corps; that is to say, General Talic commands them and now is

14     giving them a task.  And this is what he says:

15             "In co-ordination with the MUP forces and the 1st Krajina Corps

16     units in the garrison, establish complete control" and so on and so

17     forth.

18             Now, this is what I'm putting to you:  That these are all the

19     units that he is giving an order to, the light brigades, the MUP forces,

20     and the units of the 1st Krajina Corps and the garrison, that all of

21     these units are subordinated to him and he is issuing them an order for

22     co-ordinated action?

23        A.   I wouldn't agree with you, sir.  He is ordering the Banja Luka

24     Light Brigade's group to co-ordinate with the MUP and other units in the

25     garrison to establish control.

Page 18937

 1        Q.   All right.

 2        A.   He is not ordering the MUP.  He is ordering the Banja Luka group

 3     of light brigades to co-ordinate with the MUP.

 4        Q.   All right.  Tell me then who is it that issues orders to the MUP

 5     forces to carry out this task, this very same task?  Who is ordering the

 6     MUP forces to carry out this very same task with the light brigade's

 7     group and the units of the 1st Krajina Corps and the garrison, who is it?

 8        A.   Well, I'm not an expert on the MUP and the chain of command of

 9     the MUP so I'm not sure, but I would --

10        Q.   Very well, thank you.  I mean, Mr. Brown, I put a question to you

11     and if you are say together me that you are not an expert and that you

12     cannot respond to that question, there's no need for us to waste any

13     time.

14        A.   I would say that there probably had to be some co-ordination

15     meeting with the senior MUP in Banja Luka, but I don't know the

16     structures or how that would function.

17        Q.   I know, but even if there were this kind of co-ordination, which

18     did not exist, somebody has to issue the order for that MUP organisation

19     to carry out this task, that Talic is ordering his own units to carry

20     out, isn't that right?  It has to be a higher command, a superior

21     command, do you agree with that?

22        A.   Yes, a higher police command, I would imagine.

23        Q.   And this higher police command, who is it issuing orders to them,

24     the General Staff?

25        A.   I would imagine there is a recognised chain of command in the MUP

Page 18938

 1     in the same way there was in a military, but I'm not an expert in that.

 2        Q.   I understand that, sir.  But now I'm asking you a question based

 3     on fundamental logic.  If somebody issued an order to Mr. Talic to carry

 4     out this task, and then in order to carry out the order that he was given

 5     he is issuing an order to his own subordinate units; right?

 6        A.   Yes, he is issuing an instruction here to [Overlapping

 7     speakers] ... Brigade.

 8        Q.   You agree with that, so if that is on the left-hand side, if I

 9     can put it that way, the army is on the left-hand side and on the

10     right-hand side it's the police, the MUP, and there had to be some kind

11     of a higher MUP command telling the lower MUP command that this task

12     should be carried out.  That's your position right?

13        A.   Not necessarily.  What might have happened here is that

14     General Talic, in order to, whatever he is doing for the Banja Luka --

15     secure Banja Luka for all intents and purposes, in his assessment when he

16     looks at that, he realises that the Banja Luka group of light brigades

17     needs to do certain things and he realises he hasn't got the manpower or

18     there are legal issues or it makes sense to have the police engaged in

19     that, there might have been a planning meeting at the Banja Luka level to

20     say can you assist in this, or we require your support in this, or we are

21     going to be conducting an operation here in this particular area at this

22     particular time, you need to be aware of this, is there anything that you

23     need to do in that regard, or can we have your support in that.  And it

24     may well be that that planning meeting is enough, or it may well be that

25     the MUP decide that no we have to have instructions from the senior

Page 18939

 1     level, or it may well be that this is a joint operation well known to the

 2     police and there is a similar type of instruction going on.  I don't

 3     know.  But what I do know is that General Talic clearly has identified a

 4     function and a role for the Banja Luka light brigades which in his

 5     assessment necessitates co-ordination with the police.  How that

 6     co-ordination occurred, what requests may have been made, and the chain

 7     of command from the MUP is out with my expertise.

 8        Q.   I fully agree, Mr. Brown, however, by the very logic of things

 9     somebody has to have authority over somebody else just as Talic has

10     authority over his subordinate units in order to instruct them to carry

11     out a particular task.  The way you are interpreting things to us seems

12     to show that Mr. Talic is establishing that he does not have enough

13     soldiers, that he needs MUP support, and that then he goes somewhere and

14     says please, give me a number of policemen so that we can carry out this

15     task.  And then somebody from the MUP says, no, I don't want to do that,

16     and then that task is not carried out, although the task was issued by

17     the supreme commander President Karadzic and it was then repeated by the

18     Chief of the General Staff Ratko Mladic.  So what do you think, if that

19     were the situation, what would happen to General Talic?  General Talic

20     would not carry out the task that he was assigned and what happens then?

21     He says to Ratko Mladic, sorry, Ratko, I could not carry out this task

22     because these guys from the MUP said we don't want to.  Do you seriously

23     believe that that is the way things work in war time and would there be

24     any logic for things to function that way?

25        A.   I'm not quite sure of your question.  All I can say is that from

Page 18940

 1     paragraph 5.11, General Talic is instructing his subordinate formations

 2     to establish complete control in the wider area of Banja Luka and in

 3     assessing that task and giving that task the brigade, he has set a role

 4     to co-ordinate with MUP forces.  And it may well be that that -- I would

 5     imagine the MUP are establishing check-points and doing functions in

 6     Banja Luka and he realises that that needs to be co-ordinated with the

 7     police.  That's my reading of this section.  How that co-ordination

 8     happened, what chains of command the police have is really not something

 9     I can comment on.

10        Q.   Okay.  Now we are going to try to explain that as well.  I would

11     like to move for this document to be admitted, 1D24126?

12             JUDGE HALL:  Admitted and marked.

13             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit 1D405, Your Honours.

14             THE WITNESS:  Are we finished with this, sir?

15             MR. ZECEVIC:  Yes.

16             THE WITNESS:  Thank you.

17             MR. ZECEVIC:  [Interpretation]

18        Q.   I mean, the problem is, Mr. Brown, that part of your paper that

19     the Prosecution is trying to get admitted has to do with co-operation, it

20     is entitled co-operation between the army and the police.  And what is

21     suggested there is that there was a certain way in which this

22     co-operation was carried out.  Although you are telling me that that was

23     not part of your expertise, due to the reasons that I've just mentioned,

24     namely this is included in your expert opinion that the Prosecution

25     wishes to have admitted into evidence here, I have to set some things

Page 18941

 1     straight here with you irrespective of your expertise.  After all, I

 2     think it was your duty to have a look at this documentation before you

 3     wrote this up or rather while you were writing it?

 4             MS. KORNER:  It's a speech and its an improper speech.  The

 5     witness is here to answer questions, his expertise he has always said is

 6     in the military side and the documents that relate to that.  The purpose

 7     of cross-examination is to ask questions, not to make speeches like that.

 8             JUDGE HALL:  Indeed, I note, Mr. Zecevic has continued to lapse

 9     into speeches, but we'll move on.

10             MR. ZECEVIC:  Okay, I just wanted to give an explanation before

11     the next set of document is given to -- is shown to the witness.  In all

12     fairness to the witness, that was the only purpose I tried to explain why

13     I'm going to show him these documents.

14             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Mr. Zecevic, are you moving on to something else

15     and thus leaving the issue of co-operation?

16             MR. ZECEVIC:  No, no, not at all, Your Honours.

17             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Thanks.

18             MR. ZECEVIC:  [Interpretation] Could the witness please be shown

19     1D46.  That is tab 154.

20        Q.   Sir, this is an order of the Ministry of the Interior.

21     Unfortunately --

22             MR. ZECEVIC:  Your Honours, in order to be fair to the witness, I

23     don't know if -- I assume that the witness has not seen a couple of the

24     documents which I need to present to him.  And I suggest the following:

25     That we adjourn at this point, that I make the photocopy of the English

Page 18942

 1     versions of these documents, provide the witness that he can consult them

 2     during the break, and then when we return we can continue.  That is my

 3     suggestion if it pleases the Court.

 4             JUDGE HALL:  Yes, that seems eminently sensible.  I suppose we

 5     should take our half-hour break.

 6             MR. ZECEVIC:  Yes, thank you very much, Your Honour.

 7             JUDGE HALL:  Yes.

 8                           [The witness stands down]

 9                           --- Recess taken at 10.17 a.m.

10                           --- On resuming at 11.23 a.m.

11             MS. KORNER:  Your Honours, we discussed over the break the length

12     of time that Mr. Brown is likely to be, and it seems to all of us that he

13     is still going to be here on Friday morning at the rate we are going.  I

14     just wonder if somebody perhaps could mention it to him of Your Honours,

15     so that if he has made any plans to get away, he may have to forget about

16     them.

17             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.

18             MR. ZECEVIC:  Your Honours, just one intervention in the

19     transcript at page 25 line 2, I offered the document, it's a 1D405 but

20     the identification number I think was recorded wrong.  It's a document

21     1D049216.  And that is the document 1D405.

22                           [The witness takes the stand]

23             JUDGE HALL:  Before Mr. Zecevic continues, two matters.

24     Notwithstanding the late start for this session, for the usual reasons we

25     would have to take a break before we rise for the day and after

Page 18943

 1     discussions with the Court Officer, we'll take that break at 12.30.

 2             The second thing, Mr. Brown, counsel, plural, have asked me to

 3     alert you that their sense of the progress of your cross-examination,

 4     continued cross-examination, re-examination, means that your testimony

 5     is -- will certainly extend into Friday.  So that such arrangements as

 6     you would have made, you could bear that in mind.  Thank you.

 7             Yes, Mr. Zecevic.

 8             THE WITNESS:  Sorry, Your Honour, is it likely to finish on

 9     Friday or is it likely to extend after that?  I only say because I have

10     some commitments which I would like to sort of honour this weekend.

11             JUDGE HALL:  My impression from what counsel -- of what counsel

12     said is that it will finish on Friday, but could I have counsel

13     confirmation on that?

14             MR. ZECEVIC:  Your Honours, I will endeavour to finish today, but

15     I might really have a little bit of time tomorrow, and it is my

16     assessment that knowing what we discussed between us, I believe that it

17     is very likely that the witness -- Mr. Brown will finish on Friday, that

18     is only from the point of the counsels.  Of course, if the Trial Chamber

19     has the questions, that's a different matter, of course.

20                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

21             JUDGE HALL:  And I'm reminded that we have a firm fixture for

22     videolink on Monday.  So it appears, Mr. Brown, that every effort will be

23     made to ensure that your testimony is completed by Friday.  Thank you.

24             THE WITNESS:  I appreciate that.

25             JUDGE HALL:  Yes, Mr. Zecevic.

Page 18944

 1             MR. ZECEVIC:  Thank you.

 2        Q.   [Interpretation] Mr. Brown, in order to put everything into the

 3     right context could you be shown again 1D004042; that is, the Law on

 4     Total National Defence that we looked at yesterday.  We commented on it,

 5     too.

 6             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] It's Article 104 that I would like

 7     to see.  I'm not sure what page that is in e-court.  I'll try.  It's page

 8     18 and 67.  It's 18 in Serbian and 67 in English.

 9        Q.   Mr. Brown, Article 104 says in paragraph 2:

10             "During its engagement for combat activities in the armed forces,

11     the police shall be under the command of the authorised officer in charge

12     of the combat activity."

13             And in paragraph 1, it says that:

14             "The police may also be used for carrying out combat activities

15     for the armed forces in accordance with the law."

16               Remember that we looked at it yesterday and commented upon it?

17        A.   Yes, that's what it says in the Law of All People's Defence.

18        Q.   That is the law that was in force at the time in the territory of

19     Republika Srpska; right?

20        A.   I'm not a legal expert, but I don't believe that was.  The RS

21     began to implement and issue their own instructions and laws, so I'm not

22     sure that 1982 Law on All People's Defence was still functioning in

23     relation to Republika Srpska or Bosnia at that time but again I defer to

24     a constitutional legal expert, but in my view I don't think this law was,

25     certainly de facto, did not seem to be in operation.

Page 18945

 1        Q.   Sir, there is the constitution of Republika Srpska and the Law on

 2     the Implementation of the Constitution.  It's a constitutional law on the

 3     implementation of the constitution; however, let's not comment upon that

 4     now because this goes beyond your expertise.  It is contained in the

 5     documents that make up our legal library.

 6             MR. ZECEVIC:  [Interpretation] Could the witness now be shown

 7     1D146, tab 154.  1D46, I apologise.  That's the document that we had a

 8     few moments ago.

 9        Q.   Sir, let me ask you something before we move on to this document.

10     It is a fact, isn't it, that when we looked at those directives of the

11     Main Staff that were signed by General Ratko Mladic, these directives

12     were sent only to army units; right?

13        A.   I would have to check the distribution but I think they did only

14     go to the corps.  I don't know if they also went to the Presidency or

15     other people above him, but in terms of going down I think it was only to

16     the corps headquarters.

17        Q.   I don't want us to waste time now so I'm not going to show you

18     these documents.

19             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] However, for the purposes of the

20     transcript, it is P1780 and P -- just a moment, please, P1794.  In both

21     documents, or rather it is obvious on the basis of both documents that

22     this was only sent to the units of the Army of Republika Srpska.

23        Q.   Sir, another general question before I move on to the original

24     question that I wanted to put.  You know that in Republika Srpska the

25     supreme commander was the president, Mr. Karadzic, and that according to

Page 18946

 1     the Law on the Army, he was the only one who had the right of command and

 2     that he could transfer that right to the Chief of the Main Staff,

 3     General Ratko Mladic, you do know that, don't you?

 4        A.   I am aware of the Law of the Army.  I would like to refresh

 5     myself if that's exactly the case, but in general I think that's probably

 6     true, whether it's the president of the Presidency or whether it's the

 7     president, I am not sure I would have to refresh myself, but clearly the

 8     president of the Presidency had that function.

 9        Q.   All right.  Sir, in this document, paragraph 7, that's a document

10     of the ministry dated the 15th of May, 1992.  I don't know whether you've

11     seen it before, however, on page 2 in paragraph 7, subparagraph 3, it

12     says:

13             "While participating in combat operations, the units of the

14     ministry shall be subordinated to the command of the armed forces," which

15     is in accordance with the Law on Total National Defence which we saw a

16     few moments ago; right?

17        A.   Well, not exactly.  The language is slightly different.  I think

18     in the setting aside the issue of whether the Law on All People's Defence

19     was relevant -- in 1982 was relevant at this time, I think Article 104

20     says they may be subordinate or they may be involved in combat

21     operations.  Here this -- sorry.

22        Q.   Yes, but when they are carrying out combat operations they are

23     subordinated to the officer in charge, that is what the law says; right?

24        A.   That's what 104 says, yes.

25        Q.   Very well.  So this order simply copied the text of the law in

Page 18947

 1     this part; right?

 2        A.   I can't say whether they copied it or whether they used it as a

 3     guide or whether it was something different.

 4        Q.   I accept that.  Sir, during the direct examination you looked at

 5     P1789, that is Prosecution tab 24.  Number 24.  That is an order of the

 6     command to the 1st Krajina Corps dated the 19th of June, 1992.  It is

 7     footnote 357 in your expert opinion, and you analysed this briefly with

 8     Ms. Korner, if I remember correctly.  Is that right?

 9        A.   Yes, I think Ms. Korner mentioned in reference this document.

10        Q.   Sir, this is what this order says.  Use of police in armed combat

11     operations, and then it says:

12             "Order:

13             "In the zone of responsibility of the 1st Krajina Corps, there

14     are different ways in which the police can be used in armed combat

15     operations in order to overcome the problems involved.  I hereby issue

16     the following order."

17             And then Mr. Talic says in paragraph 1 what the general tasks are

18     that the police is carrying out in accordance with the Law on the

19     Interior.  Do you agree with what I've read out so far?

20        A.   The document seems to reflect that, yes.

21        Q.   However, in paragraph 2 as opposed to the interpretation that was

22     given during your direct examination, Mr. Talic says:

23             "The police may be used in direct combat operations on the front

24     only exceptionally when it is necessary to hold and strengthen the front

25     line until the arrival of military units."

Page 18948

 1             And then paragraph 3:

 2             "In other cases," I emphasise that part, "In other cases it is

 3     necessary to inform the chief of the Security Services Centre and receive

 4     his approval."

 5             Sir, this document seems to indicate the following:  First of

 6     all, in the preamble it says that there are different ways in which the

 7     police can be used and because of this variety of ways in which the

 8     police can be used, Mr. Talic is issuing this order.  Do you agree with

 9     me up to this point?

10        A.   That's what he has written here, yes.

11        Q.   In paragraphs 2 and 3 in essence Mr. Talic says:  For direct

12     combat operations, the police may be used without informing MUP organs

13     and without receiving their approval if that is what the situation is at

14     the front line.  In all other cases, however, it is necessary to inform

15     the MUP organs and to receive their approval; right?

16        A.   That's what he has written in the document, yes, sir.

17        Q.   So there's a clear distinction, isn't there, between a situation

18     when the military due to its own opinion for the needs that exist in the

19     front line may engage the police, and on the basis of this it seems that

20     Mr. Talic is saying that in that case it is not necessary to ask for

21     anyone's approval or to provide information to that effect to anyone;

22     whereas, in all other cases for carrying out planned operations, that is,

23     one has to provide information to that effect to the ministry and to ask

24     for their approval.  Isn't that right?

25        A.   Yes, I would read this as bearing in mind the context of the

Page 18949

 1     time, and this comes in the middle of the corridor operation, but this is

 2     relating to front line, I think I maybe have mentioned this in direct,

 3     front line combat tasks, for example, that were occurring in the corps at

 4     that time in the corridor, and that in exceptional circumstances,

 5     presumably he means here if there is a weakness in the front line or if

 6     there's a counter-attack by the enemy formation, that in exceptional

 7     circumstances police can be used, but there are limitations and that they

 8     are to hold and strengthen the front prior to the arrival of military

 9     units.  So in essence it's to plug a front line if there is a problem.

10     And in other cases, informing chief of CSB -- an approval by the CSB is

11     required, presumably reflecting some of the documents and the situation

12     as seem to have been in late May when there are, I think, General Talic

13     made a passing instruction that police had -- you know, that authority

14     had to be sought from the CSB.

15             So I read this document in the context of what was happening in

16     the corridor and in the context that if the front is weak or there is a

17     problem there, that police in exceptional circumstances can be used but

18     they are to be used in essence in a limited way until the arrival of

19     military formations.

20        Q.   Sir, Mr. Brown, this document is dated the 19th of June, but it

21     does not refer to the corridor at all, you can see that from the document

22     itself.  On the other hand, the front line does not exist only at the

23     corridor, right?  There is a front line on the western side of the

24     Krajina, Skender Vakuf, Kljuic, Kotor Varos, isn't that right?

25        A.   Yes, I mean the main -- the main combat, if you like, front that

Page 18950

 1     Talic was concerned about at this time was especially the corridor, and I

 2     accept you are right there was a front line with central Bosnia which

 3     there was, if you like, combat activities against Croatian forces in

 4     central Bosnia so that was an area that he was concerned with as well.

 5        Q.   However, less than 12 days after this document, on the 1st of

 6     June, 1992, the very same General Talic and the same command of the

 7     Krajina Corps issue a new order, 1D049057.  In your report, the footnote

 8     is 358 and the Defence tab is number 14.

 9        A.   Can you check the tab again sir because I don't have that as

10     number 13.

11        Q.   Defence tab 14, Defence, not the Prosecution.  I think that this

12     document should be included in the documents you received during the

13     break that had been photocopied for you.

14        A.   That's right, I think it is here.

15        Q.   Sir, this document is also one of the documents that you

16     commented with Ms. Korner.  On page 2, item 11, the third paragraph from

17     the bottom in Serbian, I think that is the next page in English.  It

18     says:

19             "As determined by in this order the exclusive right to command

20     and employee units rest with the zone commander."

21             And further on:

22             "In the conduct of combat activities, all," and I emphasise, "all

23     police forces shall be placed under the command of the zone commander who

24     shall decide how they are used."

25             Sir, in your report, 2.50, page 82, you yourself say that this

Page 18951

 1     order of the 1st of July is obviously contrary to the instruction of the

 2     19th of June, 1992, the document we've just looked at; is that right.

 3        A.   Well, the document on its own with that instruction, I think I

 4     highlight it in the report, seems to be a change, it's not necessarily

 5     contrary, I guess, but it seems to indicate at least at that time and in

 6     this instruction a change from one that requires the approval of the CSB

 7     and a procedure by which police are to -- can be used in combat

 8     operations.  Why this came about, I do not know.  I do not know if there

 9     was some agreement that had been reached.  I don't know what the

10     discussions were prior to this.  I can't say.  But as I think I highlight

11     in the reports, it's the only document actually I saw in the Krajina

12     Corps that referenced this.

13        Q.   That's what you said on page 18732.  You said that that was the

14     only document that you saw with such clear formulation.  You said

15     something to that effect.  However, may I give you another suggestion in

16     this enumeration of things that gave rise to this document.  You will

17     agree that there is also a possibility that this document is the first in

18     a series of documents that we are going to look at which actually

19     reflects the legal situation which army had not respected up to that

20     point, or maybe they hadn't respected it in full?

21        A.   Well, I'm not a legal expert but I think I can say that prior to

22     this this was not what was happening.  Prior to this instruction, I did

23     not see that zone commanders were -- had police units placed under their

24     command, they were in essence deciding how they were going to be used.  I

25     didn't see that in any of the mobilisation instructions or establishment

Page 18952

 1     instructions being required by General Talic.  I didn't see that in any

 2     of the combat reports that that was happening, and I didn't see that in

 3     things like directive that had common relation to the corridor.  So

 4     certainly prior to the 1st of July, I did not see that happening.  I have

 5     to say --

 6        Q.   All right.

 7        A.   -- that post the 1st of July I didn't see it happening either.

 8        Q.   All right.  We are going to take a look at it now.

 9             MR. ZECEVIC:  [Interpretation] I would like this document to be

10     admitted into evidence.

11             JUDGE HALL:  Admitted and marked.

12             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit 1D406, Your Honours.

13             MR. ZECEVIC:  [Interpretation] 1D049057, tab 14, footnote number

14     358 in the expert report.

15        Q.   Sir, I'm going to show you document 1D99.  That is the order by

16     the supreme commander that bears the same date, 1st of July.  Could the

17     usher please assist you, I think that this is one of the documents that

18     we had added to our list subsequently and it may have not been

19     photocopied for you.  It's just a single page.  I think that it won't be

20     a problem for you to take a look at it now.  That's 1D99.

21             Here you can see that the president of the Presidency,

22     Mr. Karadzic, on the 1st of July, 1992, says:

23             "On the basis of my constitutional powers as the supreme public

24     commander of the armed forces of the Serbian Republic of Bosnia and

25     Herzegovina and on behalf of the Presidency of the SR Bosnia and

Page 18953

 1     Herzegovina, I hereby issue the following order," and what he is ordering

 2     is that two platoons of police forces should be resubordinated to a

 3     military unit.  Do you see this?

 4             MS. KORNER:  Special Police.  Sorry, Your Honour, I'm reading

 5     Special Police, is that right?

 6             MR. ZECEVIC:  [Interpretation] Special Police is also part of the

 7     police.  It's a brigade within the Ministry of the Interior.  I don't

 8     think that there is a need to burden the witness with those details right

 9     now.  The details that he doesn't know enough about, but that's certainly

10     not in dispute.

11             THE WITNESS:  That's what the document says, so yes.

12             MR. ZECEVIC:  [Interpretation]

13        Q.   All right.  Now I'm going to show you the following document,

14     1D100.  That's an intervention or rather a memo sent by the minister

15     about this order given by the supreme commander.  Tab 145.

16        A.   Is that one within the binder that was given me at the break,

17     sir?

18        Q.   [In English] That is correct, yes.  [Interpretation] That's a

19     document by the minister dated the 6th of July, 1992.

20        A.   I'm not sure I have that one, sir.

21        Q.   I'm sure that the copies have been given to you, but you can take

22     a look at it on the screen in front of you.  It's just a single page.  In

23     this document which refers to the previous document - that is the order

24     by the supreme commander about the resubordination, specifically two

25     platoons from the Special Police brigade of the Serbian MUP - the

Page 18954

 1     minister asks and reports that the order had been executed in accordance

 2     with the law and the constitution, that they had been resubordinated to

 3     the Sarajevo Romanija Corps, however, because of the need for them to

 4     carry out their tasks in accordance with the Law on the Interior, he

 5     requests that these policemen should be returned in order to perform

 6     their normal duties.  Do you see that?

 7        A.   Yes, I think he clearly feels a need to come back to perform

 8     other duty and the tasks should be given to the army, I believe, is that

 9     my reading of the document?  I think that seems to happen.

10        Q.   Exactly.  Sir, the next document is 1D76 dated 19th of July.

11             MS. KORNER:  Tab?

12             MR. ZECEVIC:  [Interpretation] Tab 146.

13        Q.   And that's a memo sent from MUP and signed by Mr. Mico Stanisic.

14     And here it says that during the first meeting of the MUP collegium held

15     on the 11th of July, 1992, it was concluded that briefings should be

16     prepared for a meeting with army representatives.  And then further on

17     under (b) it says that:

18             "Data information regarding police involvement in those combat

19     actions where their involvement was not necessary should be gathered."

20             And then it says it should include the number of policemen

21     involved in combat actions break down by month, April to July, and for

22     the sake of comparison, the number of policemen who continue to work at

23     their regular jobs within the domain of the MUP during the same time.

24             Sir, this document shows us that on the 11th of July on the first

25     collegium of the MUP of Republika Srpska meeting of their executives, a

Page 18955

 1     problem arose related to the involvement of the police with the military

 2     and their inability -- the inability of the police because of the lack of

 3     manpower to perform the normal duties defined by law.  And that is why

 4     they request first, to solve the situation, to clear it with the army,

 5     and second, they want to have data that they could use in support of

 6     their request.  Do you agree with that?

 7        A.   Well, clearly the issue of the amount of time that the police are

 8     spending in combat operations would seem to be a concern there, and what

 9     they want to do is to find out facts on the ground about what is the

10     case; how many policemen were involved and how many were not while doing

11     presumably regular police jobs.

12        Q.   All right.  I'm aware that you didn't see these documents in

13     sufficient quantities and that is the reason that I cannot continue with

14     my questioning about this.

15        A.   Well, this is the first time I've seen the document, so I've only

16     just had a brief overview of them.

17        Q.   That's why I'm going to show you something else in order to

18     illustrate that the situation which was very problematic and caused

19     concern to the MUP of Republika Srpska, that this situation continued.

20     I'm going to show you P1094, that's footnote 360.  That's a document that

21     you looked at before.  This is a document coming from the CSB in Banja

22     Luka signed by Mr. Zupljanin.  Tab 52.

23             Okay.  I think I also got it on the ...  This document also

24     speaks about the resubordination of the organs and members of the MUP to

25     the army in its last paragraph, and they relate the wording of the law

Page 18956

 1     and the contents of the order of the 15th of May, which we looked at,

 2     saying that the police members may be engaged in combat activities

 3     according to the principle of resubordination to the superior army

 4     command; is that right?

 5        A.   Yes, and that they can't be used in territories outside their own

 6     areas.

 7        Q.   Sir, it is obvious that there isn't a unity of opinion between

 8     the police and the military about the number of the members of the MUP

 9     that had been resubordinated to the army during that period, which is for

10     the most of 1992.  So notwithstanding the law and the orders that we have

11     examined, this problem was obviously an acute one.

12             In order to illustrate that, I'm going to show you P427, item 8.

13     It's tab number 7.  That's a document that you received during the break.

14     And that is information of the Ministry of the Interior dated 17th July,

15     1992.  It was addressed to the president of the Presidency and the prime

16     minister.  At the very beginning, page 3 of this document, I think this

17     is the previous page in English, you can see the following in the second

18     paragraph in Serbian beginning with the words "first of all."  Excuse me,

19     I can't find it in English.  The page that I need has number 0324-6857.

20     That's the corresponding page to our Serbian page.

21             Page 2, second paragraph from the bottom they tell me.  Yes, I

22     found it, yes.  Here the ministry points out to the supreme commander and

23     the prime minister that there is a problem, and they say this has mostly

24     to do with the fact that the police are still on the first combat lines,

25     for instance 100 per cent in Herzegovina, over 70 per cent in the Doboj

Page 18957

 1     region, et cetera, although this was justified at the beginning, and that

 2     there had been some talks of them being included into the military police

 3     during the combat activities.

 4             MS. KORNER:  I am sorry, could you read the whole paragraph

 5     there, please.

 6             MR. ZECEVIC:  Ms. Korner, I'm reading the whole paragraph in

 7     Serbian.

 8             MS. KORNER:  Well, it's completely -- it's coming out differently

 9     in English from what's on the screen.

10             MR. ZECEVIC:  I am really sorry.  [Interpretation] One of the

11     participants in the debate described this graphically questioning the

12     legitimacy of the police because "the army is in the streets controlling

13     traffic, and police are in the trenches."

14             MS. KORNER:  Your Honours, there is a problem here because

15     there's quite a significant part in the English translation which we are

16     all looking at which has not come out in the translation from what

17     Mr. Zecevic read out.  After the words:  "This was justified in the

18     beginning, or that the army keeps civilian police within its ranks after

19     their agreed engagement" is how the translation is in English and has not

20     been translated from what Mr. Zecevic read out, which is why I asked him

21     to read the whole paragraph.  Now, whether that's because the translators

22     couldn't keep up with the speed, I don't know.

23             MR. ZECEVIC:  [Interpretation] I'm going to read it again.

24             MS. KORNER:  Slowly.

25             MR. ZECEVIC:  [Interpretation]

Page 18958

 1        Q.   "This has mostly to do with the fact that the police are still on

 2     the first combat lines, 100 per cent in Herzegovina, over 70 per cent in

 3     the Doboj region, although this was justified at the beginning, or that

 4     the army keeps civilian police within its ranks after their agreed

 5     engagement in combat activities as part of military police units:  All

 6     this affects the discharge of their regular duties and tasks."

 7             And I think that the rest was interpreted properly.

 8             Sir, this shows another problem or rather the identical problem

 9     that the police is trying to suggest to the supreme commander and the

10     prime minister, and that is that because of the engagement of the police

11     forces on front lines, they are unable to carry out their normal duties

12     defined by the law; is that right?

13        A.   Well, it would seem to be a problem that once the police had

14     agreed to dispatch policemen to combat zones, that the army was keeping

15     them there and that in some areas that this was a problem, so I agree,

16     certainly, this looks like an issue that they are concerned with.

17        Q.   In essence, it means that there is no agreement because if there

18     is an agreement -- or maybe that there is an agreement which is not being

19     observed?

20        A.   Yes, it would seem that there clearly has been the agreement that

21     the process should be that there's a co-ordination, there's an agreement

22     for how many need to go, and presumably for how long, and that in some

23     cases, I mean, I can't talk about Herzegovina, I don't know that area at

24     all, but Doboj I know was a big conflict zone, became more prevalent in

25     the corridor operations, and that in that area the military are not, at

Page 18959

 1     least at face value, not honouring that agreement there.

 2        Q.   I'm going to show you a concrete example.  Now that you mentioned

 3     the area of Doboj, the Doboj municipality, it is also mentioned in this

 4     document.

 5             MR. ZECEVIC:  [Interpretation] Can we show 1D263 to the witness.

 6     It's tab 82.

 7        Q.   This is a document written by the chief of the centre and it is

 8     addressed to the operations group command of the Serbian Army.  Single

 9     page.  It's just one page.  You see that it is dated 2nd of October,

10     1992, and in the document, the chief of the centre informs that due to

11     the security situation in the area of the Serbian municipalities of

12     Doboj, Derventa, and Modrica, they are forced to withdraw the police from

13     the front line on the 4th of October, 1992.  Then he gives the reasoning.

14     He says that he hopes that the Serbian Army operations group command will

15     correctly understand the reasons because of which he is forced to

16     withdraw the police from the battle-field.  Do you see that?

17        A.   Yes, I do, sir.

18        Q.   So this is perfectly in line with the document that we just

19     looked at which said that 70 per cent of the police in the Doboj region

20     is engaged on the battle-field.  It seems that it was precisely the

21     security situation within the territory that made the police to withdraw

22     their members from the battle-field; is that so?

23        A.   Well, the 70 per cent bit I'm not sure you can necessarily draw,

24     because I think that instruction is some months before so this is a

25     little bit later, but clearly they -- there are these other issues that

Page 18960

 1     they want to -- appear to want to deal with and so they want to withdraw

 2     their police.  Presumably these are municipalities that were successfully

 3     taken in operation corridor, Derventa, Modrica, and the likes.

 4        Q.   Can you tell me this, we commented somewhat on this yesterday,

 5     and we said that Colonel Slavko Lisica was the commander of the

 6     operations group of the Serbian Army.  Do you remember that?

 7        A.   Yes, I forget if it was Tactical Group 1 or 3, but he was

 8     tactical group commander in that area.

 9        Q.   Just as an example, I'm going to show to you document 1D264 --

10             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Before we leave this document, I would like to

11     ask a question.

12             Mr. Brown, if this -- in this instance there would have been a

13     formal resubordination decision as we saw a few documents ago coming from

14     the highest echelons of the republic, could then the police - and here

15     it's signed for the chief of the centre - unilaterally withdraw the

16     resubordinated units from the army?  Was it in his power to do so if

17     there was a formal resubordination decision?

18             THE WITNESS:  From my experience much of that would depend on the

19     agreement that was made prior to the operation being conducted.  I don't

20     doubt that the police could in certain circumstances be subordinated to

21     military formations.  I didn't see much of it.  Most of it was in

22     relation to co-operation and on-going operations where they would seem to

23     play their part.  But a lot of it would be dependent on what was agreed

24     prior to the inclusion of these police in the military operations and

25     that would undoubtedly involve agreement with superior commands in both.

Page 18961

 1     So I can't tell you whether for this particular operation the police that

 2     were involved in the tactical group that was in Doboj, which presumably

 3     was related to on-going operations in expanding the corridor and control

 4     of territory in that area, I can't tell you from this document whether

 5     the police were allowed to unilaterally withdraw.  It may, for example,

 6     have been that the agreement to involve the police, setting aside what

 7     they were going to do specifically, but the agreement had a time-period

 8     that they were to be subordinated for a period, and at the end of that

 9     period they were to withdraw, and if the military kept them, the

10     commander might have been well within his rights to remove them.  So much

11     depends on what the agreement was and that's what happens in planning

12     meetings and co-ordination meetings.

13             JUDGE DELVOIE:  So what you are saying is that resubordination

14     decisions, as they can follow from the law, are made on the basis of

15     agreements between the police and the military?

16             THE WITNESS:  I would expect they would be.  It might be

17     different if it was related to military formations, because clearly

18     they're -- the Law on the Army, unity of command, but even in relation

19     to, from my experience, where other army units are resubordinated, they

20     usually are agreed periods of time, roles and responsibilities, some

21     issues don't necessarily, you know, for example, disciplinary issues may

22     not apply.  But in relation to police, I would imagine there is a

23     planning component and there's an agreement in relation to what these

24     police will do and how long they will be there for.

25             JUDGE DELVOIE:  And agreed by whom?

Page 18962

 1             THE WITNESS:  Agreed by the -- through the police chain and

 2     through the police command and agreed through the military chain.

 3             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Thank you.

 4             MR. ZECEVIC:  [Interpretation]

 5        Q.   We are now going to look at document 1D264, which is in fact a

 6     response to the letter that we have just seen.  It was sent by the

 7     commander, Colonel Lisica, and in which there's a detailed explanation of

 8     the relationship between the chief of the public security centre and the

 9     commander of the Doboj tactical group.  We've seen that the previous

10     document was dated the 2nd October, and this one is dated the 3rd

11     October.  And it is entitled "Withdrawing of Police Force from Combat

12     Operations -  Response" sent to Doboj CSB, and the commander, Colonel

13     Lisica, says as follows:

14             "I have understood your proposal and I underline your proposal

15     regarding the withdrawal of police forces from combat operations."

16             And then he goes on to say two or three sentences down:

17             "I do not authorise the withdrawal of the police forces."

18             So, sir, it is obvious who the superior commanding officer is in

19     this situation, isn't it?

20        A.   Well, he clearly doesn't believe that they should be withdrawn

21     and he authorises it in his opinion they shouldn't be withdrawn.  He

22     doesn't order in this respect or make it clear that these police are to

23     be ordered to stay, but clearly he believes that they shouldn't and he

24     has a disagreement between the two and he authorises that they shouldn't

25     be, so they are presumably within his unit and clearly there's a tension

Page 18963

 1     between the two.

 2        Q.   Sir, we are both reading from the same document.  How explicit

 3     should one be in an order issued by a superior officer if he says quite

 4     clearly and unequivocally I do not authorise the withdrawal of the

 5     police?  He is writing to the CSB Doboj chief and says, I have considered

 6     your proposal and I do not allow and I do not authorise.  Sir, it is

 7     quite clear that Colonel Lisica in this situation is a direct superior

 8     officer, and it's up to him whether the police would be pulled out of

 9     combat operations or not; is that correct?

10        A.   Well, he clearly believes he has that authority, yes.

11        Q.   Thank you.

12             MR. ZECEVIC:  [Interpretation] Your Honours, I move that both

13     this document 1D263 and 264 have the designation MFI removed from them.

14             MS. KORNER:  Your Honours may not recall, but these two documents

15     were the subject of some considerable discussion a very long time ago.

16     The page numbers go from in the transcript 9949 through to 53 because

17     it's evident, and this was the discussion that was raised, that these

18     documents which have not been seen by the OTP before, come from some kind

19     of a bound book.  You may -- I think the discussion may come back to you

20     when you look at the bottom of -- we need the -- yeah.  And

21     Mr. Demirdjian who was dealing with this dealt with -- we said we

22     objected to this until we knew where these documents came from and it was

23     not sufficient to assert that it was given to them, to the Defence by

24     this organisation for co-operation in war crimes in Banja Luka.

25             Your Honours will recall, for example, when Mr. Krgovic tried to

Page 18964

 1     produce these maps and it turned out they were documents that had been

 2     produced at a later stage.  Until such time as the Defence give us

 3     chapter and verse as to where these documents actually were obtained from

 4     by this centre which all they have to do was ask and get the response, we

 5     object to their admission in evidence.

 6             Furthermore, this witness cannot comment other than to say that

 7     he has read, as Mr. Zecevic put it, what he read, he can give no further

 8     useful or indeed relevant evidence.  What's happened now is that both

 9     Mr. Zecevic and the witness have been commenting on what they see.  So,

10     as I say, at this stage we still object.

11             MR. ZECEVIC:  [Interpretation] Your Honours, Mr. Brown is an OTP

12     expert witness, I do agree that his area of expertise are military

13     issues; however, his expert report as I said many times deals with the

14     problems of co-operation between the military and the police.  We heard

15     that many times and he commented on this both during examination-in-chief

16     and cross-examination.  Therefore, I think it is completely appropriate

17     to have certain documents that relate to these specific issues to be

18     tendered through this witness.

19             Now, as for what Ms. Korner is saying, the fact is that the OTP

20     objected to the admission of these documents at one point in time.  After

21     that, we furnished the OTP with a document of the Ministry of the

22     Interior of Republika Srpska stemming from the office of the minister.

23     It's a document dated 16th of October, 2007.  It's a document produced by

24     the government of Republika Srpska, and the government organ which is

25     called the Republican Secretariat for Relations with the International

Page 18965

 1     Criminal Tribunal in The Hague for Investigation of War Crimes.  So we

 2     are talking about a government secretariat which is an integral part of

 3     the government of Republika Srpska.

 4             In this document they enumerate all the documents that they

 5     provided and that includes 1D263 and 264 and they feature under 77 and 78

 6     in their letter.  What Ms. Korner is suggesting that we request the

 7     Government of Republika Srpska to supply us with information as to the

 8     provenance of these documents and things of that nature.  First of all,

 9     we are not able to extract this kind of information from the Government

10     of Republika Srpska because we are simply a Defence team who is kindly

11     asking this secretariat to do them a favour, and the same applies to the

12     Committee for Co-operation with the ICTY in Belgrade, the republican

13     secretariat of Republika Srpska, and a whole plethora of similar organs

14     that exist in Bosnia-Herzegovina and Croatia.  Therefore, first of all,

15     we are not capable of producing this, and, on the other hand, these

16     organs have no reason whatsoever to accommodate our request.

17             After all, I don't think this is our obligation at all.  We

18     received this document from an official organ.  If the OTP have an issue

19     with this, they should address it with this particular organ because the

20     OTP, I think, enjoys more authority that any Defence team and therefore I

21     move for this document to be tendered into evidence.

22             MS. KORNER:  Your Honour, this is simply nonsense.  It is not

23     good enough to say we got these documents and that is it, and that is all

24     we have to establish from this, whatever it is, the republican

25     secretariat for relations.  We say if the Defence want a document entered

Page 18966

 1     into evidence which is challenged, the onus is on the Defence to

 2     establish that this document is genuine and where it comes from.  And it

 3     costs nothing, nor do we accept for one moment, that the Defence cannot

 4     do what exactly what we did, which is ask them where does this document

 5     come from, what is this page 36 of.  That's all they had to ask, and they

 6     didn't.  And so we say until such time as they establish that this is a

 7     genuine document which comes from a collection of some sort, it should

 8     not be admitted into evidence.

 9             JUDGE HALL:  Did I understand, Mr. Zecevic, correctly, that since

10     this issue was first raised, that there has been provided a letter of

11     some sort from the agency which had the custody of this document.

12             MS. KORNER:  Yes.  It simply says:  Here is a list of the

13     documents we sent you, full stop.  And we have said over and over again

14     to Mr. Zecevic and Mr. Krgovic, that's not good enough.  If we ask you

15     where does this document come from, it is not the slightest good telling

16     us that it comes from the centre for co-operation or from the liaison

17     officer between the Republika Srpska and the Tribunal.  We actually mean

18     that you need to show us where does this -- and the Trial Chamber, what

19     is this page 36 of?  We asked that at the time and we've never ever

20     received a response.

21                           [Trial Chamber confers]

22             MS. KORNER:  And Your Honour, can I make the points why I'm

23     taking this point, it's because it is -- it could be potentially

24     misleading to the Trial Chamber, particularly when you see something like

25     this.  There's other correspondence surrounding this which may throw a

Page 18967

 1     completely different light on matters.

 2             MR. ZECEVIC:  I don't think that was proper, Ms. Korner, because

 3     if you have some documents, you should have notified us about it that

 4     that would at least give any doubt that this is -- that these documents

 5     are not authentic or whatever you are trying to suggest.

 6             MS. KORNER:  Your Honours, I'm not trying to suggest --

 7             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Mr. Zecevic -- hold on a minute.  One question

 8     that needs to be put at least is to Mr. Zecevic, and the question is

 9     this:  Do you know what the title of the publication is in which this

10     document appears?  I mean, if I see correctly on the page, this is page

11     138 of a book apparently, and the document is a photocopy from the book.

12     Do you know the title of the book?

13             MR. ZECEVIC:  Your Honours, I don't have any indication nor I can

14     say that this is a book.  That might be as long as -- as far as I'm

15     concerned, that might be the archive of the 3rd Tactical Group in Doboj,

16     and maybe it was archived like this and given the pages.  I really don't

17     know.  Nor I believe that the -- that the republican secretariat will

18     ever indulge me in giving me any kind of information about that

19     because --

20             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Did you try?

21             MR. ZECEVIC:  Your Honours, I am asking them for help to give me.

22     I don't have -- I don't have resources nor I have -- nor do I have the

23     investigators in the field.  The only means how can I get some documents

24     is either from the disclosure of the Office of the Prosecutor or by

25     assistance of the relevant state, I underline, state organs in the

Page 18968

 1     region, not Republika Srpska but all others.  I don't have other means of

 2     getting any documents.  And if I am asking them to help me, I cannot go

 3     over there and ask them, well, this is not good enough, I need you to

 4     tell me who is the person who got this, give me the whole chain of

 5     custody.  I simply cannot do that, Your Honours.  I am sorry.

 6             MS. KORNER:  Your Honours, the answer to your question is no,

 7     Mr. Zecevic hasn't tried.  But, I'm sorry, can I make it clear, I'm not

 8     suggesting that Mr. Zecevic is deliberately trying to mislead the Court.

 9     We don't have -- we haven't been shown what was the request by the

10     Defence which produced these documents, what is the wording of the

11     request, and that's the problem.

12                           [Trial Chamber confers]

13             JUDGE HALL:  We thank counsel for their assistance.  It seems to

14     us that as far as the status of these documents are being moved from --

15     being marked for identification where the last objection was taken to

16     where they are now, that the Defence has not done what, in the Chamber's

17     view, they could have done and ought to have done to satisfy the Chamber

18     as to the authenticity of these documents, and one of the things that is

19     startling is, as Ms. Korner has pointed out, that we have it in the

20     original as page number which suggested is one of -- either out of a book

21     or one of a series.

22             So the letter to which Mr. Zecevic has referred, it may be a

23     start, but it does not in the Chamber's view advance the evidential

24     status of these documents beyond where we were when this was last

25     canvassed.  So they remain marked for identification, and it is up to the

Page 18969

 1     Defence to, if they wish to rely on these as matters of evidence, to do

 2     some further investigation or to have those who had the custody of these

 3     documents provide information as to the -- their origin, and the

 4     publication or whatever the file is from which it comes.  138 may be a

 5     folder in a file, we don't know what it is.

 6             MR. ZECEVIC:  I understand, Your Honours.  We will send -- we

 7     will sends the letter accordingly as instructed.  And we will provide, if

 8     we may, this of paragraph of the transcript in order to support our

 9     request.

10             JUDGE HALL:  And we are passed the time when I indicated we would

11     have to take a break, so we would rise now and resume in 20 minutes.

12                           [The witness stands down]

13                           --- Recess taken at 12.39 p.m.

14                           --- On resuming at 1.03 p.m.

15                           [The witness takes the stand]

16             MR. ZECEVIC:  [Interpretation]

17        Q.   Mr. Brown, in order to provide additional illustration of what we

18     were discussing earlier, I need to show you some other documents as well.

19     Therefore, could the witness please be shown 1D002315, which is tab 77,

20     i.e., one of the documents printed for you for your benefit during the

21     break.

22             Sir, this is a letter sent by the Security Services Centre of

23     Doboj under number 295/1/92.  I think it's dated 10th of September, 1992.

24     In this letter, the centre chief is conveying to the SJB an order issued

25     by the army operations group, and here he says:

Page 18970

 1             "Enclosed please find an order of the Serbian Army Operations

 2     Group, confidential number 1345.1/92 of 8 September 1992, for the purpose

 3     of its implementation."

 4             And he is quoting the order, and then he says:

 5             "Start implementing the order immediately and continuously and

 6     inform this centre of the measures taken and the results achieved by 17th

 7     September 1992," signed the chief of the centre.

 8             Now, sir, one can see from this document that the CSB is

 9     conveying orders of army operations groups within the system of public

10     security stations that are subordinated to it; is that correct?

11        A.   I don't read it that subordination necessarily is there at all.

12     I think the military order has clearly been received or and under what

13     measures, I don't know that occurred.  I don't know what the military

14     order itself said, but the content would appear to be that there are

15     individuals with uniforms or people are misusing uniforms and they want

16     to stop that, and that it may well have been that the military commander

17     expressed an unease with that, passed an order down his own chain of

18     command, but also included, you know, discussions or meetings with the

19     police to say this will also be an issue that you can help resolve.

20     Without seeing the initial order, I don't necessarily say that you can

21     somehow say that there was that subordinate chain, but clearly they are

22     working in co-operation to try and sort out a problem which they have

23     identified, which I may have to read that little bit, but presumably it's

24     the misuse of uniforms.

25        Q.   Sir, it says very clearly here we are sending an order related to

Page 18971

 1     the operations group in order to have it carried out.  So it's the order

 2     of the operations group.  Do you agree?

 3        A.   Yes, but the order might be a military order instructing only

 4     military personnel, I may say military police in this case, or other

 5     units, and the police are simply passing that on and saying what I want

 6     you to do is to help the military in this respect.  Now, it may well be

 7     that the police are on the distribution list for the military order, but

 8     without seeing it, I can't say that.  But I don't think you can draw the

 9     inference necessarily.  The only way you can look at this is that there

10     is a subordinate relationship between the military passing a direct order

11     to the police for its passage down the chain of command.  I can't say

12     that without seeing the initial military instruction.

13        Q.   Unfortunately, we don't have that and I do accept your answer as

14     far as that is concerned.

15             MR. ZECEVIC:  [Interpretation] Could the witness please be shown

16     1D267.  That is tab 126.  Again it was marked for identification.  Your

17     Honours, just perhaps we can -- the previous document can be MFI'd in

18     order that we just keep the track of the documents which were -- have

19     been shown to the witness.

20             JUDGE HALL:  Yes, Mr. Zecevic.

21             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, this will become 1D407 marked for

22     identification.

23             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Was that tab 77, Mr. Zecevic?

24             MR. ZECEVIC:  That is correct, tabulator 77.

25             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honour, just for the record, the ERN number

Page 18972

 1     1D00-2315.

 2             MR. ZECEVIC:  Thank you.

 3        Q.   [Interpretation] Sir, this is a document of commander Lisica,

 4     Slavko of Operations Group 3.  He signed the document.  I think the date

 5     is the 7th of October, 1992, and this has to do with the organisation and

 6     establishment of the public security system in the town of Bosanska Novi.

 7     And this is what it says here, in paragraph 2:

 8             "A platoon from the Derventa public security station led by

 9     commander Radmilo Sljivic who has been provisionally appointed deputy

10     chief of Bosanski Brod public security service, will join the strength of

11     the Bosanski Brod battalion.  A platoon from Doboj municipality will also

12     join," I underline that again, a -- so "a platoon from Doboj municipality

13     will also join the strength of the battalion."

14             Mr. Brown, this paragraph number 2 unequivocally shows that the

15     Derventa platoon was resubordinated to the Bosanski Brod battalion and

16     also the platoon from the public security station of Doboj.

17     Colonel Lisica obviously appointed a commander as well for this platoon

18     in Derventa.  Do you agree?

19        A.   It would seem a platoon, he is ordering a platoon from the

20     Derventa public security station, as you say.  It may well been that this

21     is one of these examples where it's recently liberated territory, as they

22     often called it.  Bosanski Brod was one of the key municipalities in the

23     operation corridor and its seizure allowed the corridor could be secured,

24     and maybe this is -- and Commander Lisica may well have been, I guess, a

25     tactical group commander in that area.  And so it probably relates to the

Page 18973

 1     initial -- some initial establishment in that area, I guess.

 2        Q.   Sir, there's no doubt that paragraph 2 shows that the Derventa

 3     platoon is resubordinated and, in addition to that, a platoon from the

 4     Doboj public security station, so there's two platoons right?

 5        A.   Well, it doesn't make it clear from the Doboj whether it's an SJB

 6     or whether it's some other platoon, but at least from the translation it

 7     doesn't necessarily say whose provisionally appointed the commander,

 8     whether it's Lisica or whether it's someone else, but it's clear that the

 9     platoon would seem to be working in that area.

10        Q.   I accept your answer because the translation is inadequate in my

11     view.  I'm going to read the last sentence once again.  I think that we

12     are going send this translation to have it supervised because in my view

13     it does not reflect the original exactly.  This is what the original

14     says:

15             "Also, the battalion should include," I under line that, "include

16     a platoon from the public security station of SO Doboj."

17        A.   Actually, I just see that on the translation, sorry, the original

18     does say SO Doboj, so I assume that means, as you --

19        Q.   Thank you.  I see that this document has also been MFI'd, I

20     assume that Ms. Korner has the same objection that she had already raised

21     in relation to the previous document.  However --

22             MS. KORNER:  Yes, these are all -- all these particular set of

23     documents where we see Lisica and Bjelosevic are all part and parcel of

24     the same set that was put to the witness via Mr. Cvijetic, and the same

25     problem arose and all the Defence are unable to tell us where these

Page 18974

 1     documents come from, so the answer shortly is yes, for the moment we do

 2     object.

 3             MR. ZECEVIC:  Okay.

 4             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Zecevic, before you move on to another

 5     document.  Mr. Brown, would you say that without the word being used, the

 6     word "re-subordination" being used, this has to be seen as a

 7     re-subordination order?

 8             THE WITNESS:  Yeah.  It would seem at face value.  I don't know

 9     the circumstances surrounding or any other, but it seems that there may

10     have been an agreement that this could happen, you know, prior to this,

11     may have been communications with the higher police formation allowing

12     this, but it would seem that Lisica, that this police platoon is being

13     placed under the authority of that battalion.

14             JUDGE DELVOIE:  What strikes here as well is under number 4,

15     brief Mr. Andrija Bjelosevic, chief of the Doboj region, on this order,

16     so this is not -- this is really an order to do something?

17             THE WITNESS:  Yes.  It is stated that.  Now, it may well be that

18     Mr. Bjelosevic in a previous meeting agreed that this was to happen, and

19     what he is doing he is carrying that out, that agreement, and now he is

20     wanting to brief him that this has happened and, oh, by the way we need

21     some additional -- make sure they have some uniforms, so that --

22             JUDGE DELVOIE:  But now, the agreement you don't read anything

23     about an agreement in this document, is that right?  This document is

24     only an order, it has nothing to do -- well, there is perhaps an

25     agreement on the basis on it, but you can't read that in this document,

Page 18975

 1     is that right?

 2             THE WITNESS:  No, you can clearly read that there is a

 3     relationship to a higher police unit with the name in the bottom at

 4     paragraph 4, but the document itself doesn't say whether there was an

 5     agreement.  It doesn't say that there wasn't an agreement.

 6             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Okay.  Thank you.

 7             MR. ZECEVIC:  [Interpretation]

 8        Q.   Mr. Brown, this order of Mr. Lisica's that we analysed, we

 9     analysed its paragraph 2, says in paragraph 4:

10             "Brief Mr. Andrija Bjelosevic on this order.  He is the chief of

11     the Doboj region of the public security service.  As far as he is able,

12     uniforms and communication equipment will be supplied by him, and

13     Bosanski Brod municipality will provide assistance and the engagement of

14     some state security service operatives."

15             It is obvious that Lisica is instructing his subordinates that

16     Mr. Andrija Bjelosevic should be made aware of this order, which seems to

17     suggest that until that point, Mr. Bjelosevic did not know anything about

18     this order; right?

19        A.   I don't think you can read it like that at all.  You could read

20     this that an agreement has happened, an agreement was made.  Mr. Lisica

21     or Colonel Lisica issued an order for it to be executed, and then that's

22     been notified back up the police chain.  You could also read it the way

23     that you read it.  So it's not clear from the document on its own.

24        Q.   I agree.  Thank you.  Let us have a look at another document.

25     1D003666.  Tab 84.

Page 18976

 1             MR. ZECEVIC:  [Interpretation] Your Honours, I've just received

 2     information from my colleague in relation to the objection that had just

 3     been raised by Ms. Korner in relation to the previous document 1D266.  I

 4     beg your pardon.  No, it's one of the documents that are yet to come, I'm

 5     sorry.

 6        Q.   Sir, 1D003666 is the document we see now.  That is a document

 7     dated the 3rd of November, 1992.  The chief of the MUP centre of

 8     Republika Srpska is hereby informing the ministry that Nenad Milicic, a

 9     certain Nenad Milicic, commander of the Bosanski Brod battalion, upon the

10     liberation of Bosanski Brod was appointed by Colonel Slavko Lisica,

11     commander of TG 3, as acting chief of the Bosanski Brod public security

12     station, on the 2nd of November, 1992.  Further on, it says that the

13     centre, or rather, the head of the centre has some information to the

14     effect that Mr. Milicic had engaged in some kind of illicit activity.  So

15     we see from this document as we did from the previous one that it's not

16     only that Colonel Lisica or the army is ordering the use of police units,

17     but as a matter of fact, they or he is appointing a chief of a public

18     security station?

19        A.   I can only say that that's what the document would seem to say.

20     I don't know the circumstances around it.  It may well be that, you know,

21     in the immediacy of the liberation of Bosanski Brod, he as tactical group

22     commander appointed that position out with his authority or with the

23     authority of the municipalities, but it would seem from this document on

24     its own that that's what he is purported to have done.

25        Q.   Thank you.

Page 18977

 1             MR. ZECEVIC:  [Interpretation] May this document also be marked

 2     for identification, please.

 3             JUDGE HALL:  So marked.

 4             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit 1D408 marked for identification, Your

 5     Honours.

 6             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Mr. Brown, I'm slightly puzzled about this.  I

 7     think we've come across this once before, haven't we, with Mr. Zecevic's

 8     cross-examination, namely that an army commander is appointing another

 9     military person as chief of an SJB, chief of a MUP station.  That appears

10     to me to be quite a far reaching authority which goes way beyond the mere

11     question of resubordination of police units to join a military operation

12     or combat operation under the army's control, so how are we to understand

13     this fact that suddenly we have to do with exercise of a power that would

14     greatly seem to exceed the need for the military to have police units

15     resubordinated under its control.  What are we dealing with here?  Do you

16     know where this authority comes from or why?

17             THE WITNESS:  It does seem unusual to me, sir, I haven't seen

18     this before.  I think the context of where this is occurring is possibly

19     important in that this is newly liberated territories, and it may well be

20     that Colonel Lisica thinks he has the authority in an area where there is

21     no municipality authority already established that he can do this.  It's

22     one of the issues I think Mr. Zecevic was discussing yesterday.  And it

23     may well be that Colonel Lisica is way overstepping his boundary and

24     thinks he can do that but in reality shouldn't have.  Could be another

25     option.  But I think the context of where this is occurring probably sits

Page 18978

 1     centrally to where it is.  This is Bosanski Brod, this was not a

 2     territory that was controlled by the Serbs, it was taken in Operation

 3     Corridor, possibly Slavko Lisica was the tactical group commander that

 4     took that territory, and he felt that, you know, in lieu of no organising

 5     or organised municipality because it was Croat, I believe, I'm not sure

 6     exactly, that he felt that he had the authority to do that.  He may well

 7     have just overstepped his authority and appointed someone he knew.  But I

 8     can't tell you because it's not an area I know well, full operations in

 9     the corridor was not something I delved in great detail in, and this is

10     one document that stands on its own, but I do think the context of where

11     it's occurring and the time it's occurring is possibly important.

12             I don't see that type of thing happening in the municipalities in

13     May, June, July, where it's Crisis Staffs already functioning, where

14     there's, you know, police/military civilian engagement, operations are

15     quick and over, you know, quickly.  I think the context of this is

16     probably where it occurs and the time it occurs and that it was a

17     territory that was not, you know, it was I believe it was a Croat-held

18     territory that was taken in the operation.

19             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Thank you.

20             MR. ZECEVIC:  [Interpretation]

21        Q.   Sir, I'm' going to remind you of a document that is in relation

22     to the question put by His Honour.  We looked at it a few moments ago.

23     It is dated the 1st of July, 1992.  1D406, tab 14.  Prosecution tab 14.

24     May I remind you that Mr. Talic was saying what the areas of

25     responsibility were and you were saying that the language is very

Page 18979

 1     explicit; namely, that all police forces shall be placed under the

 2     command of the commander of the zone.  Do you remember that document?

 3        A.   Yes, I do, sir.

 4        Q.   It is possible that Mr. Lisica derives his authority from this

 5     document as well.  However, I must say that I do agree with you that

 6     basically he is overstepping his regular authority?

 7        A.   I would have to go through the document to see whether Colonel

 8     Lisica was in command there.  It may well be this is a document he

 9     justified that action, bearing in mind this was sometime prior to this,

10     and I don't see in many instances the document the 1st of July being

11     implemented in areas.  I can't tell you whether Slavko Lisica did use

12     this or whether he just believed that in zones that they are taking

13     territory that he, as a tactical group commander, could make such

14     appointments.

15        Q.   In order for us to show that this does not pertain only to

16     Operation Corridor or any other particular operation, I'm going to show

17     you another document, 1D000341.  Tab 128.  That is one of the documents

18     that is from the same period, but from a different territory.  It

19     pertains to a document that the commander of the 1st Battalion of the

20     Serb army in the village of Osmace.  This commander issued an order.  I

21     don't know if you are aware of the fact that Osmaci is a village between

22     Zvornik and Tuzla in Eastern Bosnia?

23        A.   I am not aware of that, sir.

24        Q.   In this order which, in my view, resembles that instruction of

25     Mr. Talic's of the 19th of June, although it is outside his area of

Page 18980

 1     responsibility, now, this is what it says:

 2             "Owing to the serious situation at the front line, until further

 3     notice, the Osmaci civilian police will not perform duties at the

 4     check-point or any other type of assignment except at a front line

 5     position.  Muster them immediately and transport them to the front line.

 6     At the front line, place these personnel under the command of the platoon

 7     commander."

 8             Sir, this order could hardly be more explicit.  This order on the

 9     re-subordination of the police.

10        A.   I'm not sure who this order is going to, it doesn't have a

11     distribution list.  It doesn't say --

12             MS. KORNER:  Your Honour, the difficulty about -- sorry

13     Mr. Brown, the difficulty about taking these documents in isolation from

14     completely outside the area of this case is that we simply don't know

15     what the background is, and I'm not sure how much assistance that Your

16     Honours are going to get from this.  And short of start of looking

17     through all the collections relating to all the other corps, which is

18     going to add immeasurably to the evidence in this case, as I say I'm not

19     sure how helpful this is.

20             MR. ZECEVIC:  Well, Your Honours, I'm not sure if I correctly

21     understand Ms. Korner.  I thought that the indictment covers the

22     territory of Zvornik municipality.  If that is not the case, well, maybe

23     we are to expect the amendment of the indictment.  Maybe Ms. Korner is

24     withdrawing the municipality of Zvornik from the indictment.  This is

25     clearly a relevant, it is November 1992, it concerns the area of Zvornik.

Page 18981

 1     I appreciate that the witness has not seen this document, but since, as I

 2     explained already, the witness is an expert and in his area -- and in his

 3     report, he deals with the co-operation of police and the army, I think

 4     that is a sufficient ground for him to be shown this document.

 5             JUDGE HALL:  Yes, Mr. Zecevic.  Please proceed.

 6             MR. ZECEVIC:  Thank you.

 7             JUDGE HALL:  And if -- I would require two minutes before we wind

 8     up for the day, and I would remind you, Mr. Zecevic, that having

 9     requested five hours for cross-examination, at this point you have, you

10     are at 5 hours and 57 minutes.

11             MR. ZECEVIC:  I understand, Your Honours.  I'm really sorry, but

12     I have maybe less than six or eight documents to show to this witness and

13     then I will finish my cross-examination.

14             JUDGE HALL:  Yes.

15             MR. ZECEVIC:  May I ask that this document be MFI'd.

16             JUDGE HALL:  Yes.

17             THE REGISTRAR:  Exhibit 1D409 marked for identification, Your

18     Honours.

19             MR. ZECEVIC:  [Interpretation] We are going back to

20     Colonel Lisica's document now, 1D266, tab 129.

21             THE WITNESS:  Sir, did you want me to comment on this previous

22     document or not?

23             MR. ZECEVIC:  By all means.  I'm sorry, I thought you did comment

24     it.  Sir, you said "I'm not sure where this order is going to, it doesn't

25     have distribution list."

Page 18982

 1             THE WITNESS:  No, it doesn't have a distribution list, and I

 2     don't think I can draw any contextual analysis from that single document.

 3     It doesn't give you whether there was an agreement beforehand or what

 4     discussions had gone on in relation this and there's no distribution

 5     list, so I'm not sure if can say much more.

 6             MS. KORNER:  Your Honour, I also see it's not a document that

 7     appears to come from us, so I wonder if I could ask where this comes

 8     from.  I mean, this is simply an inquiry, which corps.

 9             MR. ZECEVIC:  It is number 18 on the list which was provided to

10     you on the 11th of May, 2009.

11             MS. KORNER:  So it's another document that you can't give any

12     further information about?

13             MR. ZECEVIC:  Well, Ms. Korner, you asked for us to give you the

14     provenance of the document, we provided the provenance of the document by

15     the list which was provided to you by the government secretariat of

16     Republika Srpska.  If there is anything else that you would specifically

17     need for this document, then you should say so and we will try to oblige

18     you with that.

19        Q.   [Interpretation] In any case, sir, is it a fact, isn't it, that

20     this order could be interpreted as a direct subordination regardless of

21     any speculation about whether there is an agreement in existence or not,

22     but if you place this into the context, bearing in mind the order by

23     Mr. Talic of the 19th of June -- I can remind you, if you want, you spoke

24     about him, that's why I thought that it wouldn't be necessary.  It's

25     P1789.  Prosecution tab 24.

Page 18983

 1             You will recall that Mr. Talic on the 19th of June in that order

 2     says:

 3             "For immediate combat action at the front line, the police may be

 4     used only exceptionally.  If it is necessary to maintain the front until

 5     the arrival of the military units.  In all other cases, it is necessary

 6     to inform and obtain an approval from the chief of the centre of security

 7     centre."

 8             Do you remember that?

 9        A.   I do, and that was referring to units in his command.  I don't

10     believe the one that you've shown me reflects that.  It may well have

11     been there was a very similar instruction from the East Bosnia Corps to

12     that effect.

13        Q.   That was exactly my suggestion.  That instruction was in force in

14     the whole of territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina, regardless of whether

15     it pertains to the 1st Krajina Corps or the Eastern Bosnia Corps or some

16     other unit.

17             MR. ZECEVIC:  I see the time.  Perhaps this is an appropriate

18     moment.

19             JUDGE HALL:  Yes, thank you.

20             MR. ZECEVIC:  Thank you.

21             JUDGE HALL:  So, Mr. Brown, you are excused for the day and we

22     will resume tomorrow morning at 9.00.

23             THE WITNESS:  Thank you, sir.

24                           [The witness stands down]

25             JUDGE HALL:  I will be very brief.  At the beginning of today's

Page 18984

 1     proceedings, Ms. Korner, the Prosecution, sought clarification of the

 2     certain portion of the decision which we would have delivered yesterday,

 3     and while we are -- while it is regrettable that the language does not

 4     appear as clear to the reader, especially the Prosecution who has raised

 5     it, we took the advantage during the break to look at what we said

 6     yesterday and we merely repeat paragraphs 20 and 21 of the ruling, and I

 7     would say that -- and I would emphasise, the first sentence in paragraph

 8     21:

 9             "In light of the above, the Trial Chamber found that the

10     Prosecution had not shown good cause for its request."

11             And we don't see the need to revisit this matter further.  Thank

12     you.  So we take the adjournment to tomorrow morning at --

13             MS. KORNER:  Sorry, Your Honours.  I know it's probably just me,

14     but you are saying -- all I want is a simple, if I may, respectfully ask,

15     you are telling us we asked too late?  Is that the -- because there is a

16     real difference between any future action we take.  If that's the

17     gravamen of your ruling, that we should have asked before, that's all I'm

18     asking for.

19             JUDGE HALL:  Of course you would -- you, having heard what we

20     say, will advise yourself accordingly, Ms. Korner.

21             MS. KORNER:  Well, you just said you repeated it.  It really --

22     I'm sorry to persist in this, but there is a difference between saying

23     you applied too late and a difference between saying we are satisfied

24     that the evidence that there is is evidence on which we are going to rely

25     and we don't need anymore.

Page 18985

 1             JUDGE HARHOFF:  That's not what the ruling said.

 2             MS. KORNER:  Thank you.

 3             JUDGE HARHOFF:  The ruling emphasises the fact that it was not

 4     new information.

 5             MS. KORNER:  Yes, thank you.

 6                           --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.46 p.m.

 7                           to be reconvened on Thursday, the 20th day of

 8                           January, 2011, at 9.00 a.m.