1 Monday, 18 April 2011
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.04 a.m.
5 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. Good morning to
6 everyone in and around the courtroom.
7 This is case IT-08-91-T, the Prosecutor versus Mico Stanisic and
8 Stojan Zupljanin.
9 JUDGE HALL: Good morning to everyone. Thank you,
10 Madam Registrar.
11 I see that according to the transcript, today, Monday, the 18th
12 of April, the accused entered court -- oh, the accused. Sorry, I was
13 thinking the witness. Okay. Thank you.
14 Yes, may we have the appearances, please.
15 MS. KORNER: Good morning, Your Honours. Joanna Korner,
16 Alex Demirdjian, and Crispian Smith for the Prosecution.
17 MR. ZECEVIC: Good morning, Your Honours. Slobodan Zecevic,
18 Slobodan Cvijetic, Eugene O'Sullivan, and Ms. Tatjana Savic appearing for
19 the Stanisic Defence this morning. Thank you.
20 MR. KRGOVIC: Good morning, Your Honours. Dragan Krgovic and
21 Aleksandar Aleksic appearing for Zupljanin Defence.
22 JUDGE HALL: Thank you.
23 Yes, we gather that the OTP has something to raise before the
24 witness resumes the -- his testimony.
25 MS. KORNER: Two short matters, Your Honour.
1 First is this. Going back, I had a gripping Sunday reading
2 through the transcripts of last week, and I noticed on Thursday, the
3 14th of April, the transcript seems to have a number of errors. But the
4 most important which I feel I ought to correct because it could have a
5 knock-on effect. This is during the course of the legal argument when I
6 was putting forward the Office of the Prosecutor's view. We were
7 discussing -- or I was discussing, I'm sorry, at page 19576, the various
8 documents that we had received from Mr. Bjelosevic. And at page 19577,
9 line 3, I'm recorded as saying:
10 "After the --" well, at line 1. "After the to-ing and fro-ing
11 over then-Colonel now General Lisic's documents and his book, and all
12 the" apparently indiscernible, "and we accept entirely buried in our
13 vaults," I'm now then recorded as saying, "Mr. Milosevic had, in fact,
14 given us way back in 2004 ..."
15 I did, of course, say Mr. Bjelosevic. I appreciate the names
16 sound the same. But it seems to me that is an error that should be
18 Your Honours, secondly, for the second matter, can I go into
19 private session, please.
20 JUDGE HALL: Yes.
21 [Private session]
11 Pages 19727-19728 redacted. Private session.
13 [Open session]
14 THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session, Your Honours.
15 MR. ZECEVIC: Just on the page 1, line 16, Mr. Cvijetic was not
16 recorded as present.
17 JUDGE HALL: Thank you.
18 Would the Usher please escort the witness back to the stand.
19 [The witness takes the stand]
20 JUDGE HALL: Good morning to you, sir. You may be seated.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning. Thank you.
22 JUDGE HALL: And, as usual, before Mr. Zecevic continues, I
23 remind you of your solemn declaration which you're still under.
24 Yes, Mr. Zecevic.
25 MR. ZECEVIC: Thank you, Your Honours.
1 WITNESS: ANDRIJA BJELOSEVIC [Resumed]
2 [Witness answered through interpreter]
3 Examination by Mr. Zecevic: [Continued]
4 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, Mr. Bjelosevic.
5 A. Good morning.
6 Q. Mr. Bjelosevic, could you please briefly explain to all of us the
7 procedure that was undertaken by the police in keeping with the
8 Law on Internal Affairs and regulations that regulated those issues, in
9 case information was received that an incident had taken place?
10 A. Upon receipt of such a report, firstly, the person who received
11 the report, usually it was the duty police officer, entered the most
12 essential data and then informed the duty officer. Usually it was the
13 duty operations officer, or, if the -- that was in the police station,
14 that would be the duty operations policeman. And in line with the
15 incident, and I'm speaking hypothetically, either it was a traffic
16 accident, or a disruption of public law and order, or a crime, the most
17 immediate patrol was sent to secure the area. Again, depending on the
18 type of crime, a team was established to carry out an on-site
20 If we're talking about the period of 1992, an investigating judge
21 and the prosecutor would be informed if the crime was of such a nature
22 that it was mandatory. And that was done in -- in cases of murder, in
23 cases of injuries or more substantial material damage.
24 Q. Mr. Bjelosevic, at what point you, and when you [as interpreted]
25 say "you" I mean the police, at what point could you establish that a
1 crime was committed in a certain case?
2 A. The initial information that was received was checked from its
3 very source. And then the qualified information was established when the
4 police was sent to the site of the incident.
5 Q. Thank you. Mr. Bjelosevic, in the course of 1992, from the
6 moment when the Security Services Centre was reinstated and became
7 operational again, did you file criminal reports against perpetrators of
8 crime in your Security Services Centre?
9 A. Yes. From the moment when the centre established its sections
10 and departments and when it started functioning along the lines of work,
11 I believe that everything functioned according to regulations, starting
12 with on-site investigations, creating documentation, i.e., opening a case
13 as an investigation case, informing investigative judges and prosecutors,
14 recording everything that was pertinent to the case. Reports were filed
15 both for unknown and known perpetrators. When the perpetrator was not
16 known, we continued to work towards elucidating the crime.
17 Q. Mr. Bjelosevic, was a distinction made in terms of the ethnicity
18 of victims as opposed to the ethnicity of perpetrators?
19 A. No. Those distinctions were never made. There were incidents in
20 our areas in which members of different ethnic groups were both victims
21 and perpetrators of certain crimes, and our approach was the same in all
22 those cases.
23 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Could the Usher please assist us
24 and provide Mr. Bjelosevic with this binder with documents.
25 Could the witness please be shown 1D356, tab 76. 1D356, tab 76.
1 Q. Mr. Bjelosevic, this is a criminal report by the Security
2 Services Centre in Doboj. The date is the 1st of August, 1992. Your
3 name is typed up. There is also a signature.
4 Could you please tell us whether you're familiar with this
5 document; and can you also explain things about this document, especially
6 in the right-hand side corner we see handwritten "additions."
7 Could you please explain that as well.
8 A. Yes. This is a criminal report against unknown perpetrators of
9 the crime of murder. Article 36 is quoted and so on and so forth. The
10 victim was Sejfudin Hadzimujic. You can tell by the name that the
11 person, the victim, was a Muslim.
12 The crime was committed on the 23rd of July. There's a short
13 description of the crime.
14 There's also evidence that is enclosed together with a criminal
15 report, and the Official Note that was drafted on the scene and photo
16 documentation which means that an on-site investigation had been carried
17 out. At the handwritten notes or additions, depict the word "records"
18 and there is a signature of Veljko Solaja, and there is also a log-book
19 number KU 5/92, which means that under that -- this number the whole file
20 was recorded in the centre.
21 As you can see, the investigating judge had been informed about
22 the incident. He had ordered that an autopsy be performed in the
23 pathology department. You -- and you can see from this criminal report
24 what the entire procedure looked like.
25 Q. Could you please tell us who Veljko Solaja is?
1 A. Veljko Solaja was an inspector who worked at the Security
2 Services Centre at the time. He was affiliated with the crime
3 department, and he was specialised in homicides.
4 Q. Thank you.
5 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Can the witness please be shown
6 1D357. 357. Tab 77.
7 Q. Sir, this is another criminal report. It bears the same date,
8 the 1st of August, 1992. On the second page, you will see the typed up
9 signature. There's are some additions here as well in the upper
10 right-hand side corner. Can you please confirm whether this criminal
11 report was filed by the Security Services Centre in Doboj; and can you
12 please explain the handwritten additions in the right-hand side corner?
13 A. This is also a document that was drafted at the Doboj
14 Security Services Centre. Can you see the number and the date. I signed
15 this criminal report. I signed this document.
16 From the document, you can see that the crime was allegedly
17 committed. There are suspicions that a crime was committed on the
18 17 July 1992, and that alleged crime was committed at the Begovic house
19 at Petko Djuric Street and so on and so forth.
20 What follows is a description of the crime where it says that
21 most probably at around 2230 hours on 17 July 1992, an unknown
22 perpetrator entered the Begovic house and that he committed the
23 aforementioned crime. Again, the persons involved in the crime were
25 The procedure was the same. An investigating judge was informed
1 and then, at the end, you can see the evidence that was attached with the
2 criminal report; the Official Note about the interview carried out with
3 Emir Begovic, Sabina Savic and Jusuf Savic [as interpreted]; photo
4 documentation of the on-site investigation. And as you can see, in this
5 case again, the bodies of the victims had been sent for autopsy.
6 Q. There's no need to go in so much detail because we can all see it
7 in the criminal report.
8 I would like to hear your comment of the handwritten additions.
9 Can you please tell us who did that?
10 A. As you can see, this was recorded and it says that this copy is
11 for the records, and the signature is that of Branislav Petricevic, who
12 at the time was an inspector in the crime department of the Security
13 Services Centre in Doboj.
14 Q. Thank you very much.
15 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] 1D362, tab 80, is the next document
16 I would like to call up.
17 Q. Sir, this is a criminal report dated the 3rd of August. On the
18 second page, you will see that your name is typed up. There's also your
19 signature. The document was drafted at the Doboj Security Services
21 This criminal report is against known perpetrators. Could you
22 please briefly tell us whether you remember this incident, whether that
23 criminal report was, indeed, drafted at your CSB. And again, in the
24 right-hand side corner, we see a handwritten entry.
25 A. Yes. This is, indeed, a document which was drafted at the
1 Security Services Centre. The document bears my signature. This is a
2 criminal report against known perpetrators, Vukasin Vukojevic and
3 Mirko Ninkovic. The crime in question, as described in this criminal
4 report, is murder, and the victims were Muslims and Croats.
5 All right. In the right-hand side upper corner, again, there's a
6 note that the criminal report has to be filed in the records and the
7 signature is that of Veljko Solaja.
8 Q. Thank you.
9 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Can we now look at 1D355, tab 246.
10 Q. This is also a criminal report. The date is the same. On
11 page 2, we can see Chief of Centre, Andrija Bjelosevic, as well as your
12 signature. And, again, in the upper right corner, we see some
14 Can you confirm that this is also a criminal report from your
15 centre, that you signed it, and could you explain what it is.
16 A. This is a document originated from the Security Services Centre.
17 It bears my signature. It's a criminal report against Zoran Ninkovic.
18 It relates to an act that was committed in the way that is described here
19 on the 31st of July, and the criminal report dates from the
20 3rd of August, 1992.
21 Q. Is this criminal report related to the previous one?
22 A. Yes. As you can see, the victim is Ivan Cigoj. He was listed as
23 the victim in the previous report. And we can see that the further
24 investigative work yielded new information. New facts were discovered
25 which means that the criminal report was then expanded to include this
1 person as well.
2 Q. Thank you.
3 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] The following document is 205D1,
4 tab 83.
5 Can we have the second page.
6 Q. This document is dated 5th of August, 1992. It also contains
7 typed words "Chief of Centre, Andrija Bjelosevic."
8 Can you confirm that this is your document, and can you explain
10 A. Yes. This is a document originating from the Security Services
11 Centre in Doboj and it bears my signature.
12 I remember this. This is a memo drafted by the policemen of the
13 public security station in Maglaj that was headquartered in Jablanica.
14 It's a memo about the conduct of a certain soldier. Since this was a
15 person from the jurisdiction of the military organs, we forwarded this
16 memo to the military security organ in the command of the operations
17 group of Doboj, because they were supposed to act on it.
18 Q. Thank you.
19 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] If there is no objection, I would
20 like to tender this document.
21 JUDGE HALL: Admitted and marked.
22 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit 1D480, Your Honours.
23 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] The next document is 379D1, tab 87.
24 Q. Sir, are you familiar with this document?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. Is it a document originating in the Doboj Security Services
2 Centre, dated the 10th of August, 1992, and does it bear your signature?
3 A. Yes. It was sent to the public prosecutor's office. And you can
4 see that there is an enclosure and that was the Official Note drafted on
5 site where the fire broke out. And you can also see up there, "Records,
6 Veljko Solaja, inspector."
7 Q. Mr. Bjelosevic, could you explain why in this case this is an
8 Official Note; and what is the difference between Official Notes and
9 criminal reports?
10 A. An Official Note is a document containing descriptions of
11 information of things that were found, and, as such, this document is the
12 basis for further work. The information contained therein is then used
13 for further action. This document was sent to the public prosecutor's
14 office, and then it was that office that made the decision about what
15 ought to be done. As far as I can remember, they requested the police,
16 which, at the time was called milicija, to gather some supplemental
17 information related to this case.
18 Q. What kind of supplemental information? Can you explain that.
19 A. I cannot remember what it was in this specific case, but it was
20 the usual procedure. When the prosecutor begins his work, he can request
21 supplemental information about what he thinks is necessary for his work.
22 Q. All right. You do remember something about this. Do you know
23 what was the ethnicity of the victim?
24 A. Jozo Barukcic is a Croat.
25 Q. Thank you.
1 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] If there is no objection, I would
2 like to tender this document.
3 JUDGE HALL: Are the enclosure and attachments part of this
4 document, Mr. Zecevic? It refers to and attached Official Note, "We
5 enclose an Official Note ..."
6 MR. ZECEVIC: I'm sorry, we don't have the Official Note,
7 Your Honours. We just have this -- this document as -- as a cover sheet
8 sent to the Office of the Prosecutor in Doboj.
9 JUDGE HALL: So the -- we've heard the witness's testimony. How
10 does this piece of paper assist further beyond what the witness has said?
11 MR. ZECEVIC: Well, Your Honours, one of the issues in this
12 case --
13 Q. [Interpretation] Would you take off your headphones,
14 Mr. Bjelosevic.
15 MR. ZECEVIC: One of the issues in this case, Your Honours, is
16 the theory and the position of the Office of the Prosecutor that there
17 was a certain different approach of the -- of the police in 1992 in case
18 where the -- where the perpetrators are Serbs or unknown perpetrators,
19 and the victims are -- are of -- are non-Serbs.
20 Now, in this case, this unfortunate person lost his life in the
21 arsony or maybe it was -- maybe it wasn't the arsony, but just the fire
22 that caught his house.
23 Now, I would like to -- I would like to tender this document for
24 two reasons. One, because the witness explained what the Official Note
25 is, and I believe we have seen and we will see a number of these
1 documents in the future; and the second, I think it's relevant because it
2 shows that the police was conducting proper investigations in cases where
3 the victims were non-Serbs.
4 JUDGE HALL: I think I follow all of that, Mr. Zecevic. And if
5 the relevant enclosures were there, it would make perfect sense. My only
6 question is whether without that, whether we need this additional piece
7 of paper. Nothing much turns on it. It is just a question of reducing
8 in some small way the bulk of paper which comprise the exhibits.
9 MR. ZECEVIC: I understand, Your Honours. But, unfortunately, we
10 don't have the attachment to this document. And this document on the --
11 in this document, we see all the relevant issues that I -- that I was
12 just talking about. That is why I was offering it for -- to be admitted.
13 [Trial Chamber confers]
14 JUDGE HALL: Mr. Zecevic, is the -- can you question the witness
15 further on this to see what -- whether he could assist us in terms of
16 what was conveyed in this cover note?
17 MR. ZECEVIC: I understand. I will, Your Honours. Thank you.
18 JUDGE HALL: I'm relying on the fact that this is his -- that he
19 signed this one. So presumably he should -- so please pursue it.
20 MR. ZECEVIC:
21 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Bjelosevic, did you sign this document? Do
22 you know this document?
23 A. Yes, I know the document. This is my signature. And now, having
24 read it, I remember the event in question.
25 Q. Since this is the first, or the covering page of the document,
1 and we do not have this attachment, could you maybe try to cast your mind
2 back as much as you could and tell us what it was in this attachment in
3 the Official Note?
4 A. It's been a long time ago, and I really don't remember the
6 Q. Do you maybe remember what instructions you received from the
7 prosecutor's office, what additional information they requested?
8 A. I remember that they requested some further details that were
9 supposed to supplement the eye-witness statements, but I do not remember
10 the contents. I really don't remember that. I remember this case, and I
11 remember that we worked on it at the time.
12 Q. Do you remember whether a criminal report was finally submitted
13 in this case or not?
14 A. As far as I remember, it was.
15 JUDGE DELVOIE: Mr. Zecevic, perhaps I'll ask the witness.
16 Mr. Witness, can you explain, give the reason, probably the
17 obvious reason, why this is an Official Note and not a criminal report?
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I didn't receive the
20 JUDGE DELVOIE: Okay.
21 Mr. Bjelosevic, could you explain why, the reason, probably the
22 obvious reason, why this is an Official Note and not a criminal report?
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I didn't get the interpretation.
24 I can hear now.
25 JUDGE DELVOIE: Can you hear it now? Okay. So the question is:
1 Can you explain, can you give the -- probably the obvious reason, the
2 reason why this is an Official Note and not a criminal report.
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As far as I can remember this case,
4 when the policemen went on the site, it was established that the fire was
5 an accident. That was the first information.
6 Now, as to what happened later on, I really am not in the
7 position to claim anything. I think that the prosecutor requested
8 additional information. Now, whether it was -- it remained classified as
9 an accident or whether it was reclassified as an arson, I'm afraid that
10 I'm going to make a mistake if I say anything about it because I don't
11 remember the details. I think that certain misunderstandings between the
12 victim and his wife were also involved in this case, but I really don't
13 remember the details.
14 JUDGE DELVOIE: Okay. Thank you.
15 [Trial Chamber confers]
16 JUDGE HALL: Yes, I think you've taken it as far as you could,
17 Mr. Zecevic.
18 MR. ZECEVIC: I understand, Your Honours.
19 [Interpretation] P1340, tab 90.
20 Q. Mr. Bjelosevic, take a look at this document. It contains a
21 covering letter and a further two pages of a report. And when you see
22 the whole document, I'm going to ask you a question.
23 Do you remember having received this document in August 1992?
24 A. Yes, I remember. And although it is not stated here, this
25 document was compiled at my request because, at the time, there were
1 quite a few automobiles that were driven around by members of the army
2 and even the members of the milicija, and without proper documents at
3 that. So perhaps one could say that they were doing that illegally.
4 If I remember correctly, I wasn't actually satisfied with this
5 document. If I remember correctly, we actually had a discussion about
6 this. Because I asked for a specific reference to be made to the motor
7 vehicles that were available to the milicija, and I asked for the origin
8 of these vehicles to be stated. In listing these vehicles, as far as I
9 can remember, the members of the police from Banja Luka who are referred
10 to here, indeed, had taken a VAU [as interpreted] vehicle, as far as can
11 I remember. It wasn't a Passat, it was a Jetta. We asked for further
12 checks with regard to the matter and I don't know how all this was
13 brought to an end.
14 This is a Renault 5 that is being referred to here. It is a
15 vehicle that was at the basic court in Doboj, as far as I can remember.
16 And I know that, after that, there were proceedings instituted against
17 Slobodan Karagic, from Doboj, with regard to that vehicle. And so on and
18 so forth.
19 Not to go into each and every detail, but at the time, in that
20 chaos, as it was, that is something that did happen. Namely, that
21 vehicles were being seized from their owners and that what they would say
22 was that the vehicle had been mobilised. However, agreement between the
23 owner of the vehicle and the person who took the vehicle away from the
24 owner, that is one thing. However, that cannot be considered
25 mobilisation. Mobilisation meant that a vehicle would be taken and
1 registered at the Department for National Defence, that the owner be
2 issued a certificate to that effect, and when a vehicle is mobilised,
3 then the owner receives a proper certificate with which he can obtain
4 compensation if the vehicle is destroyed or damaged.
5 I insisted on that. I insisted that things be done that way.
6 Q. Thank you, Mr. Bjelosevic.
7 Could you please have a look at document 1D361, tab 97.
8 This is a criminal report dated the 24th of August. It has a
9 signature and a stamp. It is provided to the public prosecutor's office.
10 Could you please tell us whose document this is; are you familiar
11 with the document; and can you explain to us the handwritten portion at
12 the top of the page?
13 A. The document is of the CSB Doboj, and I recognise this document.
14 I signed it. My signature is at the end of the document.
15 As for the handwritten part, it has to do with records yet again.
16 I cannot recognise the signature now that is underneath the other
17 handwritten word, but it must be one of the inspectors.
18 Q. Thank you.
19 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] The next document is 380D1, tab 99.
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I remember this document.
21 It's a document from the Security Services Centre of Doboj. And
22 the date is there, and my signature is at the end of the document.
23 Perhaps I should explain this in a bit more detail.
24 In the area of Svjetlica, that is a settlement that dominates
25 over the town, as it were, it's on the right bank of the Bosna river,
1 there was unit there, a JNA unit, that was established sometime in the
2 beginning of 1992, I believe. I think that it only consisted of ethnic
3 Muslims. The commander of the unit was Durmic Mirsad, if I remember
4 correctly. That unit stayed on there. They practically held that area
5 under their control. It was not involved at the front line any further.
6 I think that when this particular incident occurred, Major Stankovic and
7 these other persons had set out to see this man called Durmic, to have a
8 meeting with him. Then they came across a land-mine, and the
9 consequences are described here.
10 It was a bit of a surprise, how come there were mines there if
11 the unit was part of the army, and if the agreement had been for them to
12 come there that way. But, anyway, that is the incident that is involved
14 Q. Tell me, in this case as well, was an Official Note compiled, or
15 were certain proceedings instituted, if you remember?
16 A. From our side - and when I say "our side," I mean the police -
17 only an Official Note was compiled. I'm not aware of what the military
18 organs actually did. I'm not aware of any details.
19 Q. Sir, you said to us last week when we were talking about the
20 shelling of Doboj -- actually, was this treated as a crime; and, if so,
21 which crime?
22 A. It was treated as a crime. It was treated as a crime against the
23 civilian population at that.
24 Q. Were criminal reports filed?
25 A. Yes, they were.
1 Q. During 1992, what about the use of shells and other explosive
2 devices? How was that treated? Was it treated as a crime; and, if so,
3 which crime?
4 A. Well, if we're talking about the use of artillery against the
5 town, then that is a crime. It is a crime against the civilian
6 population. Obviously that was the case here, in this case that you are
8 Q. And when hand-grenades are used and explosive devices that can
9 also be hand held, when such explosive devices were thrown, if I can put
10 it that way, was that treated as a crime; and, if so, which crime?
11 A. It was treated as the crime of causing general danger for the
12 public. And, now, if there were consequences, then that depended,
13 whether the result was death or not. But, anyway, it was treated as
14 causing general danger.
15 Q. Were criminal reports filed for the commission of such crimes?
16 A. Yes.
17 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Can we please look at 381D1,
18 tab 122.
19 Q. This is a criminal report submitted to the higher public
20 prosecutor's office in Doboj, the CSB. It has a signature and a stamp.
21 Could you please tell us whether you're familiar with the document. Can
22 you tell us who signed it; can you tell us more about it?
23 A. This is a document of the Doboj CSB. It was signed by the chief
24 of the public security sector, Mirko Stojcinovic. This is, indeed, his
25 signature; I can recognise it.
1 I also remember the incident itself, and you can see in the upper
2 right-hand corner what was added was "operative records," and underneath
3 that, the number 16/92, as the number of the register.
4 Q. If you remember the incident itself, or, on the basis of this
5 criminal report, can you tell us who the injured parties were in this
7 A. They were Muslims.
8 Q. Thank you, sir.
9 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] If there is no objection, I would
10 like to tender this document.
11 JUDGE HALL: Admitted and marked.
12 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit 1D481, Your Honours.
13 [Defence counsel confer]
14 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] The next document, 382D1, tab 128.
15 Q. Sir, this document is also a criminal report. The date is the
16 22nd of September, 1992. Your name is typewritten, as well as your
17 title. There is no signature. There is no stamp. And there is
18 something that is handwritten on the top of the document.
19 Tell me, are you familiar with the document; and could you please
20 explain what it was that is written here.
21 A. Yes. The document is from the Security Services Centre. You can
22 see the number of the register there on the top of the page. It is a
23 criminal report against perpetrators unknown. It has to do with a crime
24 committed against Smail Jukic, who is an ethnic Muslim.
25 In the upper right-hand corner, again, it says "operative
1 records." This means that this is a copy for those records, and then
2 there's a signature there and a number, 18/92.
3 Q. Thank you.
4 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] If there is no objection, I would
5 like to tender this document into evidence as well.
6 JUDGE HALL: Admitted and marked.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit 1D482, Your Honours.
8 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] The next document is 217D1,
9 tab 110.
10 Q. Sir, this document is dated the 10th of September, 1992. Your
11 name and surname are typed out at the end of the page. It also says
13 Do you remember the document; and can you tell us more about
14 this? First of all, is it your document from the CSB Doboj and who was
15 it sent to?
16 A. Yes. The document is from the CSB. It is a dispatch, and you
17 can see that it has to do with a crime that was committed when a military
18 unit passed through a certain area. They were going out to carry out a
19 combat task somewhere. And, in this case, it is Serbs who are the
20 injured party, this woman whose name was Draginja, and you can also see
21 the buildings that were fired at.
22 There were such incidents, generally speaking. That is to say,
23 that the perpetrators of these crimes did not really mind who this was
24 aimed against. This kind of thing did happen. I would like to say, once
25 again, that this area, the area of Doboj, and this is a settlement that
1 belongings to the Doboj municipality, was in total chaos all the time,
2 inter alia, because of the presence of these military units that took
3 turns there at the front line and also because of a large number of
4 refugees and so on.
5 Q. Do you remember whether in this particular case a criminal report
6 was filed?
7 A. This was within the purview of military bodies, and you can see
8 that this is just information and that several crimes or several
9 incidents, rather, are listed in here.
10 This was meant to be included in the MUP information bulletin.
11 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Unless there are objections, I
12 would like to tender this document.
13 MS. KORNER: Well, Your Honours, I mean, I haven't objected so
14 far, but at the moment I'm not clear to what issue this is going. It's
15 not a report -- or it's a report to the MUP. Doesn't appear to be an
16 investigation. Nothing.
17 MR. ZECEVIC: Well, I believe the witness explained and -- and
18 this is the report which -- which the witness said it was sent to the MUP
19 for the purposes of daily bulletin of the MUP of RS.
20 MS. KORNER: Your Honours, well, I don't think we're raising any
21 issue about whether Mr. Bjelosevic, at this stage, was reporting to his
22 superiors. In fact, the contrary.
23 [Trial Chamber confers]
24 JUDGE HALL: Mr. Zecevic, do I correctly assume, as was the case
25 with a number of items last week, that this is in the category of
1 illustrations. And assuming that to be the position, the -- there
2 would -- of necessity have to be a limited number of these because
3 there's an a point at which the utility is -- they have no utility, no
4 practical utility.
5 MR. ZECEVIC: Well, I must say that you -- you scare me,
6 Your Honours, when you say that that doesn't have a practical utility.
7 If --
8 JUDGE HALL: [Microphone not activated] ... merely illustrative.
9 MR. ZECEVIC: Perhaps the witness should remove his earphones.
10 Your Honours, one of the issues in this case is the notice of the
11 MUP of RS on the events that were happening in the field. And, I agree
12 this -- this particular document is illustrative about that. However, it
13 is illustrative about the overall situation again, and that is the
14 purpose why I offer this document.
15 But the previous documents, the criminal reports which I entered
16 into the evidence, you will remember that two days -- on Thursday, we had
17 a long discussion with Ms. Korner about the KU register, and,
18 therefore --
19 JUDGE HALL: If I might interrupt, the criminal report's in a
20 different category. They --
21 MR. ZECEVIC: I'm sorry, it was my misunderstanding, then.
22 That's why I said that I was scared when you say there's no practical
24 JUDGE HALL: But this appears to be a report of an incident
25 which, on the face of it, isn't criminal. And it is -- when I talk about
1 being merely illustrative, it is that category of documents to which --
2 in respect of which we have reservations about how many of these we need.
3 MR. ZECEVIC: But, Your Honours, with all due respect, I must
4 disagree with you. This is definitely a criminal -- this is a criminal
5 case. But what the witness said was that it wasn't within their
6 authority. It was the authority of the army, and -- and that is why
7 he -- he didn't took any measures because the -- the persons who
8 committed this are obviously the members of the military unit, both or
9 all three events which happened.
10 JUDGE HALL: So we'll admit it. Admitted and marked.
11 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit 1D483, Your Honours.
12 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] And the last document before the
14 Q. I apologise. Put on the microphones and put the headphones back
16 Are you receiving interpretation?
17 A. Yes.
18 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] 228D1, tab 125, is the last
19 document I would like to call up before the break.
20 Q. Sir, could you please look at the second page.
21 Do you remember this document? Is this your document? It is
22 dated the 19th of September, 1992. Could you just briefly tell us what
23 the document is about.
24 A. This is, indeed, a document issued by the Security Services
25 Centre. I can't give you the protocol number. The document bears my
1 signature. And this is an Official Note which was attached to the cover
2 letter, and it was sent to the Osinje Brigade command. I believe we have
3 already mentioned this brigade before during my testimony.
4 In the left-hand side corner, you have a note which says that
5 this is a copy which was archived. And if I'm not mistaken, this is
6 Mirko Blazanovic's signature. I'm not sure, but I believe that the
7 signature is indeed his. And the subject is the conduct of the brigade's
8 troops. We inform the command, asking them to take measures within their
9 purview, because those soldiers were under their authority, and they were
10 duty-bound to take measures in such cases.
11 Q. Was that a customary way you acted in cases when army troops were
12 involved in breaches of discipline or crimes? How did you report to the
13 army about the conduct of their members?
14 A. Yes, this was a customary manner we did it. At the time, I would
15 like to say the troops were under the authority of military prosecutor's
16 offices, military judges, or the command. The command had a right to
17 institute certain measures in case of minor breaches, and we were
18 duty-bound to inform them about any incidents that involved members of
19 the army.
20 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] I would like to tender this
21 document into evidence as well.
22 JUDGE HALL: Admitted and marked.
23 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit 1D484, Your Honours.
24 MR. ZECEVIC: Perhaps -- because I have another document, but
25 I -- I'm -- I might try to show it to the witness just to use up the
2 [Interpretation] 383D1 is the following document, at tab 147.
3 Q. Sir, please look at the document and tell us whether it was
4 drafted by yourself. What can you tell us about this document? Again,
5 in the right-hand side corner, we see handwritten additions, and I would
6 like to seek your explanation of those as well.
7 A. The document was issued by the Security Services Centre in Doboj.
8 It's a criminal report against a person whose name was Andro Deronja, who
9 committed the crime of murder. He killed his wife.
10 The typed-up name is my name, and I signed the document. And in
11 the right-hand side corner, this is an added handwritten note, which says
12 that this should be filed in the records. The person who signed that is
13 Veljko Solaja, whom we already mentioned. He was an inspector in the
14 crime department.
15 Q. Can you help us with the ethnic background of the victim?
16 A. I believe that both were Croats, both the perpetrator and the
17 victim. I'm not sure, but I would think so.
18 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] I would like to tender this
19 document into evidence, Your Honours.
20 JUDGE HALL: Admitted and marked.
21 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit 1D485, Your Honours.
22 JUDGE HALL: I must comment that in terms of the translated
23 document, in the second paragraph, I assume that the concept was that she
24 had died instantly, not momentarily.
25 So we take the break and resume in 20 minutes.
1 [The witness stands down]
2 --- Recess taken at 10.30 a.m.
3 --- On resuming at 10.55 a.m.
4 [The witness takes the stand]
5 MR. ZECEVIC: May I continue, Your Honours?
6 JUDGE HALL: Yes, Mr. Zecevic.
7 MR. ZECEVIC: Thank you very much.
8 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Bjelosevic, the following document I would
9 like to look at is 384D1, tab 148.
10 This is a criminal report dated 19 October 1992. Let's just wait
11 for the English translation to appear before we continue.
12 Your name is typed up at the bottom of the document. There's
13 also a signature. Could you please explain the nature of this document?
14 Did you sign it? Are you familiar with the document?
15 A. The document was issued by the Security Services Centre of Doboj.
16 It is a criminal report against unknown perpetrators. The victim of the
17 crime was Zulfo Ciric. He was a Muslim. My name is indeed typed up, but
18 on my behalf the document was signed by Mirko Stojcinovic, who was the
19 chief of the public security sector. In the right-hand side upper
20 corner, there's a number of the log-book and it also says that the
21 file -- the report has to be filed.
22 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Unless there are objections, I
23 would like to tender that document into evidence.
24 JUDGE HARHOFF: Mr. Zecevic, could we inquire from the witness if
25 he can tell us about the ethnicity of the victim.
1 MR. ZECEVIC: I believe the witness said, line 29 [sic], line 7,
2 he was a Muslim.
3 JUDGE HARHOFF: Sorry, I see that now. That's very good. Thank
4 you. Sorry.
5 JUDGE HALL: Admitted and marked.
6 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit 1D486, Your Honours.
7 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] The following document is 239D1,
8 tab 150.
9 Q. Sir, this is a document issued by the Security Services Centre in
10 Doboj. The date is 22nd October 1992. It has a signature and a stamp.
11 Could you please tell us whether this is your document? Are you familiar
12 with the document? And what is the document about?
13 A. This is the document originating in the Security Services Centre
14 in Doboj. It was addressed to the Ministry of the Interior; specifically
15 to the crime prevention administration. I signed the document.
16 This is a covering letter that also -- that accompanied the
17 decision and the order from the military court in Bijeljina, which, in
18 1992, had jurisdiction over Doboj. They requested the issuance of a
19 search circular for the persons listed.
20 Q. Was this the usual practice at the time, that was observed at the
22 A. Yes, that was the usual practice. If a military court requested
23 issuance of search circulars pertaining to certain persons, this would
24 normally be forwarded to this administration, and then the Ministry of
25 the Interior would issue a search circular through its central register.
1 Or, sometimes, it would be search pertaining to property.
2 Q. Mr. Bjelosevic, we can see in this document that it mentions an
3 order originating from a military court. Did the Ministry of the
4 Interior, or more specifically, the Security Services Centre, were they
5 also in a position to request a search to be performed; and, if so, how
6 did they do that?
7 A. Yes. If a need arose and there were such situations, centres and
8 stations could also request a search. They would follow the same
9 procedure, and a search circular would be issued, listing the names of
10 the persons that had to be found.
11 Q. Would you inform the Ministry of the Interior and its crime
12 prevention administration also in those cases?
13 A. Yes, that was the normal procedure. That's how it was done.
14 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] I would like to tender this
16 JUDGE HALL: Admitted and marked.
17 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit 1D487, Your Honours.
18 MS. KORNER: I'm sorry, so sorry, Your Honours, could I just have
19 the tab number again.
20 MR. ZECEVIC: The previous document. 150.
21 MS. KORNER: The one that is on the screen, yeah.
22 MR. ZECEVIC: 150.
23 [Interpretation] I would now like to take a look at tab 162.
24 It's 251D1.
25 Q. Mr. Bjelosevic, this document is, again, a document originating
1 from the Security Services Centre. The date is the 6th of November,
2 1992. It was sent to the Ministry of the Interior of Republika Srpska to
3 the Crime Prevention and Detection Administration.
4 On the second page, we can see your name typed, and I would like
5 you to tell us whether this is your document, whether you are familiar
6 with its contents, and also, again, on the first page, we see some
7 handwritten remarks, and I would like to hear your comments on them.
8 Thank you.
9 A. Yes, this is a document originating from the Security Services
10 Centre in Doboj. It was addressed to the Ministry of the Interior, as
11 you said, to the Crime Prevention and Detection Administration. It is
12 about searching for property that has been alienated from the territory
13 of the Zavidovici municipality. I signed this document. In the upper
14 right corner, we can see handwritten something that relates to
15 Petricevic, that is Branislav Petricevic, Inspector. He belonged to the
16 Crime Prevention Department. This is a recommendation by his boss, which
18 "Monitor activities in connection with this request."
19 And we can see the signature of the Crime Prevention Department,
20 Vojo Blagojevic.
21 Q. Thank you.
22 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] If there is no objection, I would
23 like to tender this document.
24 JUDGE HALL: Admitted and marked.
25 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit 1D488.
1 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Excuse me, we don't have the number
2 in the transcript.
3 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit 1D488. Thank you.
4 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Now I would like to take a look at
5 391D1, tab 164A.
6 Q. Could you please take a look at this document, sir. It comes
7 from the public security station in Teslic. The date is the 9th of
8 November, 1992. Are you familiar with this document; and can you comment
9 on it?
10 A. At that time, the public security station Teslic functioned
11 within the Security Services Centre in Banja Luka. I did not have a
12 chance to see this document at the time, but I can see the signature, and
13 that is the signature of Radomir Jokic, the chief of the station.
14 I also see the log number at the top, and I assume that this is a
15 document originating from the public security station in Teslic, because
16 this man was the chief of that station at the time.
17 Q. Can you see in this document who was the victim? More precisely,
18 what was the ethnicity of the victim and what was the ethnicity of the
20 A. Judging by the names, the perpetrators are obviously Serbs.
21 Hasan Kahrimanovic, the injured party, is obviously a Muslim.
22 Q. And what is the criminal offence alleged?
23 A. Arson, which is a crime against property.
24 Q. Thank you.
25 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] If there is no objection, I would
1 like to tender this document.
2 JUDGE HALL: Admitted and marked.
3 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit 1D489, Your Honours.
4 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] The following document is 385D1,
5 tab 194.
6 Q. Mr. Bjelosevic, this is a document coming from the
7 Security Services Centre in Doboj on the 3rd of December, 1992. It's a
8 criminal report submitted to the public prosecutor's office.
9 We can see your name typed in the signature block, and we can
10 also see your signature. Could you comment on this document? Did you
11 sign it? Is it your document? And what is it about?
12 A. Yes. This document comes from the Security Services Centre in
13 Doboj. It's a criminal report against an unidentified perpetrator
14 because there are reasonable grounds to suspect that he had committed the
15 crime of murder against Latif Suljkic from Doboj. Latif Suljkic was a
17 As you can see, attached are the documents that could be
18 considered evidence. They pertain to the interviews carried out with
19 Sefik Suljkic and Mihreta Terzic; they're also Muslims. I signed this
21 In the upper right-hand corner, you can see that it says
22 "Records," then there is the KU number, and that number is 31/92.
23 Q. Thank you.
24 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] If there is no objection, I would
25 like to tender this document.
1 JUDGE HALL: Admitted and marked.
2 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit 1D490.
3 JUDGE HARHOFF: Mr. Zecevic, could I ask you how many further
4 documents do you wish to have admitted to show that there was reporting
5 from the CSB in Doboj about crimes to the public prosecutor in Doboj?
6 Perhaps if you have a lot of them, we could group them all together and
7 have them admitted in one batch, rather than having to go through --
8 MR. ZECEVIC: Well, I mean --
9 JUDGE HARHOFF: They seem to be very similar these documents.
10 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes, they are criminal complaints filed by the
11 CSB Doboj to the public -- the district attorney in Doboj, and those are
12 the documents where the victims were non-Serbs. And --
13 JUDGE HARHOFF: How many more --
14 MR. ZECEVIC: I have two more. But I'm in the hands of
15 Your Honours. I can offer them ...
16 JUDGE HARHOFF: Yes, let me consult with my colleagues.
17 [Trial Chamber confers]
18 JUDGE HARHOFF: Mr. Zecevic, let's have the two documents now.
19 But if, in the rest of the documents that you wish to tender, you have
20 documents that could be batched together and admitted in one go, I think
21 that would save time and energy for all of us.
22 MR. ZECEVIC: I understand, Your Honours.
23 [Interpretation] The next document is 386D1, tab 210.
24 Q. Mr. Bjelosevic, this is a document from the Security Services
25 Centre in Doboj, dated the 23rd of December, 1992. Your name is typed at
1 the bottom under "Chief of Centre." There is no signature, however.
2 Can you confirm that this is your document, and do you maybe
3 remember anything else about it?
4 A. Yes. This is a document from the Security Services Centre in
5 Doboj. It was addressed to the public prosecutor's office in Doboj.
6 It's also a criminal report against an unidentified perpetrator against
7 Hasib Alicehajic and Muharem Alicehajic. They are Muslims who were
8 living in Doboj.
9 Attached to this document are also the Official Note and photo
10 documentation from the site. And in the upper right-hand corner, we can
11 see additional note that it was sent to the records, and the KU number is
13 Q. Thank you.
14 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] If there is no objection, I would
15 like to tender this document.
16 JUDGE HALL: Admitted and marked.
17 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit 1D491, Your Honours.
18 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Next document is 387D1, tab 212.
19 We have the document now. Let us just wait for the translation
20 as well.
21 Q. This is a criminal report as well, signed by Chief of Centre,
22 Andrija Bjelosevic. The date is the 28th of December, 1992. Tell me,
23 can you recognise the document? Is it your document? What can you tell
24 us about it.
25 A. Yes. It is a document of the CSB Doboj. I signed it. It
1 involves the crime of causing general danger. An unknown perpetrator
2 placed an explosive device at the door of the premises of Glas Komuna;
3 that was a regional newspaper company.
4 You can see that some documents here are attached that can be
5 used as evidence; Official Notes, photographic documentation, et cetera.
6 Again, in the upper right-hand corner, it says "evidencije," records.
7 However, you cannot see the number because when photocopying the
8 document, something was placed there.
9 Q. Thank you.
10 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] If there are no objections, I would
11 like to tender this document as well.
12 JUDGE HALL: Admitted and marked.
13 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit 1D492, Your Honours.
14 MR. ZECEVIC:
15 Q. [Interpretation] Sir, let us look at document 389D1, tab 215.
16 Sir, tell us whether you're familiar with this document; and, if
17 so, could you please explain it to us. Tell us what it is about.
18 A. This is a document that is an excerpt from the register of the
19 CSB Doboj. Criminal reports are registered in that document against
20 certain perpetrators.
21 Brief information is provided as to who the injured parties were
22 and who criminal reports were filed against. There are also some brief
23 remarks with regard to the status of the case file -- or, rather, further
24 measures that were being taken and so on. So this is an extract from
25 that register. I think that some of the criminal reports that are
1 referred to here were the ones that we looked at.
2 Q. On page 2, we can see numbers up to 11, and then there is an
3 additional remark, saying:
4 "Crimes solved subsequently in 1992."
5 Can you tell us what that is?
6 A. Yes. On-site investigations were carried out. Criminal reports
7 were filed. Work continued on shedding more light on the crimes
8 committed. When more information is compiled, then results are achieved.
9 So that is what is listed here, what the results achieved were, in terms
10 of finding the perpetrators, solving the cases, and so on, which shows
11 that the cases were live, as we say in police jargon. They were still
12 being worked on.
13 Q. Thank you.
14 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] If there are no objections, I would
15 like to tender this document.
16 MS. KORNER: I'm sorry, I'm still not altogether clear. Is this
17 a photocopy of parts of the register, or is it a specially produced
18 document? That's what I'm not clear on at the moment.
19 It is a document, according to the list that was given to the
20 Defence, by Mr. Bjelosevic.
21 MR. ZECEVIC:
22 Q. [Interpretation] I thought that you had provided sufficient
23 information, but could you please explain what kind of document this is
24 and on the basis of what it was compiled, for what needs.
25 A. I've already said that this is an extract from the register where
1 criminal reports are registered, as well as crimes that had been
3 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, I'm sorry, that is still not an answer
4 to the question.
5 What I'm asking is: Is this a photocopy of the actual entry as
6 it appears in the registers, or is it a specially typed up document, by
7 this witness or someone else, containing copies, if you like, or extracts
8 from the register. That's all I want to know.
9 MR. ZECEVIC:
10 Q. [Interpretation] Can you answer that question?
11 A. Yes. These are extracts from the register. This extract was
12 used for compiling an analysis for a meeting, for analysing the
13 information related to the documents from -- or to the incidents from
14 that period. I don't know whether that will do.
15 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Can I please show the next document
16 and then we'll go back to this one. I believe that it will be clearer
18 Can we look at 1D358. That is tab 245.
19 Q. Sir --
20 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Can we have page 2, actually.
21 Q. Mr. Bjelosevic, please have a look at the monitor. Perhaps you
22 can see it better. I think that it's better than the photocopy that you
24 Are you familiar with this document? And could you please
25 explain what this is.
1 A. Yes, that is the register, the criminal register. And this is
2 the prescribed form where records are kept of the crimes that had been
3 committed, the files -- the reports that had been filed and so on.
4 The extract that we referred to a moment ago was compiled on the
5 basis of this register.
6 Q. Let us clarify something for the transcript. What was the
7 abbreviated -- what was the abbreviation used for this register?
8 A. KU. Or K Upisnik; K register.
9 Q. Please have a look at page 5.
10 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Let us have that shown on the
12 Q. Sir, could you please explain this page 5. What is contained in
13 this form of the K register? And could you finally give us your comments
14 with regard to the writing in red.
15 If you would like to have something zoomed in, please tell us,
16 and we'll have it done.
17 A. As I said a moment ago, that is the form. The date of entry is
18 there, and the date when the entry is made, then who the injured parties
19 are, who the perpetrators are. And this is kept throughout the year. At
20 the end of a calendar year, it is concluded for that year, and that was,
21 indeed, done here, and that is what it says in red handwriting.
22 So for 1992, it says, "Up until number 37, including number 37,"
23 and then it goes on, in cycles.
24 Q. These numbers, the consecutive numbers that appear there in the
25 first column, do these numbers have anything to do with the numbers that
1 we saw on some criminal reports on, say, the criminal reports we looked
2 at a moment ago?
3 A. Of course. We saw that on every one of the criminal reports
4 there were numbers that said "KU" and a particular number. So that is
5 that number and it would be handwritten on each and every document. Then
6 that copy would be archived, and the number is identical.
7 Q. On this page, the date of the last entry is which date? If you
8 can see ...
9 A. If I can see it correctly, I think it's the 30th of December.
11 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
12 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Can we please go back to page 2.
13 Let us just see what the date of the first entry was.
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The 2nd of July, 1992.
15 MR. ZECEVIC:
16 Q. [Interpretation] The injured party, under number 1, is?
17 A. Hidic Sajda [phoen].
18 Q. What is the ethnicity of the lady who is the injured party?
19 A. An ethnic Muslim.
20 Q. Thank you. Mr. Bjelosevic, could you please tell us now how, on
21 the basis of this document, if I understood you correctly you said that,
22 that the previous document was compiled on the basis of this document.
23 Can you explain this to us? How was the previous document created?
24 A. It was created by taking information from this K register. And
25 then, if you collate the two, you will see that it is an exact reflection
1 of that. This is a survey that was made on the basis of this K register.
2 It clearly shows that that is the information that was extracted from
3 here, and the persons who were the injured parties are exactly those that
4 are described in the criminal reports. Also, as far as perpetrators are
5 concerned, it is exactly what was stated in those documents.
6 MS. KORNER: Your Honours, can I say straight away, that subject
7 to simply the witness saying when this document was prepared, I withdraw
8 my objection. It came up originally, if we go back, because the English
9 translation refers to something called the KP book. And for the life for
10 me, I didn't know what the KP book -- and now we can see it is a
11 mistyping of some kind or another.
12 So subject to the witness simply saying when this document was
13 produced, I have no further objection.
14 JUDGE HALL: And who did it and for what purpose.
15 MS. KORNER: Exactly, yes.
16 MR. ZECEVIC:
17 Q. [Interpretation] That is precisely what I wanted to ask you now.
18 For which purposes was this document compiled, if you know? Who
19 compiled it? 389D1, tab 215, is the document I'm referring to.
20 A. I can't remember the date with any degree of reliability.
21 However, it was drafted for an analysis, an analysis of crimes which had
22 been perpetrated, the injured parties, the perpetrators and so on and
23 so forth. I really can't remember the date when this was done.
24 Q. Can you remember the year when this was drafted and who the
25 author of the document was?
1 A. The author of the document could have been exclusively somebody
2 who was in charge of maintaining the records because nobody else had
3 access to those records.
4 Who precisely among them drafted this document, I don't know.
5 But it was one of the staff members who were in charge of the register,
6 who were recording crimes in the register, and it is obvious that an
7 analysis had to be done, and that in preparation for the meeting at which
8 the analysis would be carried out, the documents were prepared.
9 Q. And can you explain to us how was it regulated in practical
10 terms? You say that somebody was in charge of the records and the
11 register. Can you please be more precise and can you give us any of the
12 names, the names of people who in 1992 had access to those documents.
13 A. There was a -- an office or a desk officer who worked with the
14 register. It was part of that person's job description to maintain the
15 register. And the same thing is true today. I don't remember who it was
16 who was in charge of that office or who the desk officer was. It was a
17 long time ago. I don't remember really.
18 Q. When you say "this register," do you mean the KU register or
19 something else?
20 A. Yes, I mean the KU register. Somebody who was in charge of
21 maintaining the KU register, the criminal register.
22 Q. Was it just one person who was authorised in the Security
23 Services Centre to make entries into the register?
24 A. I believe that there were two people. Maybe initially there was
25 just one, and later, I believe that two persons had that authority. And
1 as the crime department expanded, the number of personnel increased, but
2 initially there was just one person.
3 Q. I don't know, Your Honours, whether you're satisfied with this
5 MS. KORNER: Well, it's about the third time of asking but he
6 still hasn't answer the question, asked again by Mr. Zecevic.
7 At least which year was this document brought into existence?
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can't say with any degree of
9 reliability. But it certainly wasn't done in 1992, because we can see
10 that everything that happened in 1992 is contained herein.
11 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, since all this data
12 can be found in the KU register anyway, in order to save time I will
13 withdraw my proposal. I thought that this might be a better overview.
14 Maybe it would be easier for us to have an overview on two pages rather
15 than to go through the entire register. However, since the witness is
16 not in a position to assist us any further, I will withdraw my proposal
17 to tender this document into evidence.
18 JUDGE HALL: Well, before you go that far, there is a question,
19 the answer to which I'm curious about, and I'm going to ask the question
21 Was it prepared for the -- Mr. Bjelosevic, was this summary or -
22 that's my word - prepared for the purpose of proceedings before this
23 Tribunal? Or was it for some internal purpose in -- in the country of
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It was prepared for the purpose of
1 proceedings, or perhaps to prepare for a future analysis of crimes. I
2 don't know. It -- it's all possible.
3 It -- in any case, the document is identical to the contents of
4 the KU register. When this document was drafted, what was its purpose?
5 I really can't remember, as I sit here today.
6 JUDGE HALL: In which case, Mr. Zecevic, perhaps we better leave
7 it with your withdrawal of your attempt to exhibit it.
8 JUDGE DELVOIE: Mr. Zecevic, can you remind us of the tab number
9 of that document, please.
10 MR. ZECEVIC: Document tab number is 215, Your Honours.
11 JUDGE DELVOIE: Thank you.
12 MR. ZECEVIC: So I'm withdrawing this -- the offer of this
13 document to be admitted. As I said already, this is already contained in
14 the previous documents and 1D358.
15 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for the counsel, please.
16 MR. ZECEVIC:
17 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Bjelosevic, according to what you know, the
18 KU register that we have just had a look at, was it regularly maintained
19 at the Doboj Security Services Centre?
20 A. Yes. From the moment the Doboj Security Services Centre was
21 assigned its elements in 1992, as of that time, that register was
22 regularly kept.
23 Q. I believe that you mentioned a month as well.
24 A. Mid-July, or, rather, the month of July 1992. I believe that is
25 rather precise.
1 Q. We saw just a moment ago a certain number underlined at the end
2 of the year. Do you remember the number?
3 A. I believe it was 37. I don't know if that's correct.
4 Q. Can you explain the significance of the number, 37, in the
5 KU register for the year 1992?
6 A. That means that the Security Services Centre, the crime
7 department, pursued that many cases that pertained to its authority.
8 That's how many cases were pursued and entered into the KU register.
9 I would like to say that public security stations dealt with
10 crimes that pertained to their own authority, and they also were
11 duty-bound to maintain their own KU registers.
12 Q. In other words, would you say that all public security stations,
13 the ones in the territory of your Security Services Centre, have that
14 same duty? Were they duty-bound to maintain KU registers or not?
15 A. Yes, they were. They were duty-bound to do that. There are
16 other records maintained by public security stations, but since we're
17 talking about the KU register, I would like to say that that record was
18 mandatory and they also had to keep a record of daily evidence -- events
19 and so on and so forth.
20 Q. You were talking about the authorities of the Security Services
21 Centre and the public security stations. What did you mean by that?
22 Just briefly.
23 A. In principle, Security Services Centres dealt with crimes for
24 which a higher court was authorised; whereas, public security stations
25 were -- dealt with crimes that were under the authority of basic courts.
1 So when we're talking about some more complicated and aggravated crimes,
2 it was the Security Services Centre that was in charge of investigating
3 and pursuing those crimes.
4 Q. When you say "Security Services Centre," was the abbreviation
6 A. Yes. That was the abbreviation, CSB.
7 Q. And when you mention public security stations, their abbreviation
8 was SJB.
9 A. Yes. The first letters of each of the three words, SJB.
10 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Can we now look at 261D1, tab 181.
11 Q. This is a dispatch sent by the Security Services Centre Doboj on
12 the 23rd of November. In the left-hand side corner, there is your name
13 typed up. Can you tell us whether you're familiar with this document,
14 whether you sent this document, and what is its background?
15 A. I remember the document because we had a problem. I have already
16 said that a number of stations, or, rather, the buildings where the
17 public security stations were housed had been torched or destroyed during
18 combat. And we did not have proper forms for each of the stations.
19 However, our public security stations received instructions or, rather,
20 their chiefs of Crime Prevention Departments were instructed to use
21 provisional notebooks. And here we are addressing the MUP and requesting
22 a certain number of proper forms so that they could be used for keeping
23 records, and everything that was provisionally recorded was going to be
24 copied into proper forms. This was a problem for Derventa, Modrica,
25 Brod, and for those public security stations that were in the part of the
1 territory around Maglaj, and so on and so forth.
2 Q. What particular form does this dispatch relate to,
3 Mr. Bjelosevic?
4 A. The KU register, the one that we saw just a while ago. The crime
6 We just had the -- that register on -- both on the monitor and in
7 my documents.
8 Q. Thank you.
9 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Unless there are objections, I
10 would like to tender this document.
11 JUDGE HALL: Admitted and marked.
12 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit 1D493, Your Honours.
13 MR. ZECEVIC:
14 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Bjelosevic, let us briefly go back to the
15 register, the KU -- or the crime register which you saw just a while ago.
16 On two occasions, we looked at it, and we saw that there were
17 37 entries for the year 1992. Do you have any information to the effect
18 that all crimes were entered which were within your authority during the
19 period that we already spoke about?
20 A. Yes. All crimes which were either reported to us or were
21 detected by police officers, all those crimes were registered, and they
22 were entered in the crime register.
23 Q. We saw in the previous document that some public security
24 stations faced problems with proper forms or -- or the lack thereof. Did
25 the same problem exist in the Doboj Security Services Centre?
1 A. During that period, we had forms that we can see here, and that
2 was done properly.
3 Q. Thank you.
4 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] One more document before we take
5 our next break. Can the witness please be shown P1893, tab 102.
6 Q. This is a Prosecutor's document which the Prosecutor tendered in
7 evidence. The date is 2nd of September, 1992. This is a cover letter,
8 as it were, drafted by the Security Services Centre. Your name is typed
9 up. The document has been signed. There is a stamp.
10 Are you familiar with the document? What is it about?
11 A. Yes, the document was drafted by the Security Services Centre in
12 Doboj. This is a cover letter, and the document is an activity report
13 covering the period from the 24th of August to the 31st of August, 1992.
14 This activity report --
15 Q. Let us see page number 2, then.
16 A. Yes. The activity report shows what the Crime Prevention
17 Department did during that week. And in the second paragraph, towards
18 the end of it, you can see that the -- in each specific case, we
19 established the elements and so on and so forth. Which means that there
20 had been a meeting. What follows is the activities that were taken with
21 this record. There is the structure of all the crimes that were
22 committed, and then a breakdown by crimes, the total number of crimes
23 committed by known perpetrators, by unknown perpetrators, and so on and
24 so forth. And then there is reference to the things that were within the
25 purview of uniformed police that pertain to the disruptions of law and
1 order, and so on and so forth.
2 Q. Just briefly, let us explain. This report issued by the
3 Security Services Centre was sent, as we saw on the first page, to the
4 Ministry of the Interior. Would you say that this report encompasses all
5 public security stations, including the Security Services Centre in Doboj
6 or not?
7 A. It does, all of them. You can see that from the text itself,
8 from the description. Because they list what happened in each of the
9 municipalities covered by the station.
10 Q. And this is a weekly report. It covers the period of one week.
11 A. Yes. This is a weekly report, and my signature is both on the
12 covering letter and the document itself, the report itself.
13 Q. Let us just clarify one more thing. When it says "(a), crime,"
14 it means that there were 48 criminal offences committed, out of which 37
15 by unknown perpetrators.
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Now let us take a look at 214D1, tab 103.
18 Take a look at the second page. You will find your name typed
19 there, as well as a stamp and a signature. This document comes from the
20 Security Services Centre in Doboj. The date is the 4th of September,
21 1992, and it is addressed to the Ministry of the Interior,
22 Crime Prevention Administration.
23 Is this your document; and what is it about?
24 A. This is a document originating from the Security Services Centre
25 in Doboj. We can all see the date. And this is a monthly report. It
1 covers the period between the 1st of August and the 31st of August, 1992.
2 I signed this document, and it shows the structure and the number of
3 criminal offences, and you also have the breakdown regarding the
5 On the first page we see a handwritten note, "V. Pero." This is
6 Petar Vujicic. He was the head of the analytical department. So
7 obviously this is a copy that ended up in the analytical department.
8 Q. Analytical department of?
9 A. Of the Ministry of the Interior, at the headquarters.
10 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I see what the time
11 is. I have one or two more questions related to this document. Should I
12 pose those questions after the break?
13 JUDGE HALL: If they're short questions, let's deal with it now.
14 MR. ZECEVIC:
15 Q. [Interpretation] Sir, bearing in mind this document, and bearing
16 in mind your recollections, could you tell us what was the most frequent
17 kind of criminal offences committed in this period?
18 A. The most frequent criminal offences were offences against
19 property. By far. This is a characteristic of that period. You have to
20 bear in mind the general situation. There were thousands and thousands
21 of refugees. They were looking for accommodation for themselves and
22 their families, and this was especially true when people started
23 returning to their houses which have been destroyed.
24 Q. In this document - just a second - the fifth paragraph, you refer
25 to analysis. Do you maybe remember what this is about?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Could you be brief, please.
3 A. I'll be brief.
4 There was an order issued by Minister Stanisic. He requested an
5 analysis to be submitted to the Ministry of the Interior that would
6 contain, among other things, elements of war crimes, if any. And this
7 paragraph simply refers to the fact that we made this analysis and that
8 certain inspectors visited our headquarters, and they controlled our work
9 in this regard.
10 Q. Thank you.
11 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] If there is no objection, I would
12 like to tender the document.
13 [In English] I'm sorry?
14 JUDGE HALL: Admitted and marked.
15 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit 1D494, Your Honours.
16 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. Now I see
17 the time.
18 JUDGE HALL: So we take the break and resume in 20 minutes.
19 [The witness stands down]
20 --- Recess taken at 12.09 p.m.
21 --- On resuming at 12.31 p.m.
22 [The witness takes the stand]
23 MR. ZECEVIC: May I continue, Your Honours?
24 JUDGE HALL: Yes, please.
25 MR. ZECEVIC: Thank you.
1 [Interpretation] Can we have the following document, 226D1,
2 tab 124.
3 Q. Mr. Bjelosevic, on the second page of this document, at the
4 bottom, we see your name typed, Chief of Centre, Andrija Bjelosevic, as
5 well as your signature. The document originates from the Security
6 Services Centre in Doboj, and it is addressed to the Ministry of the
7 Interior of Republika Srpska, and the administrations are listed.
8 First of all, can you confirm that this is your document; and
9 then can you explain it.
10 A. Yes. This document originates from the Security Services Centre
11 in Doboj. The date we can all see. It's a weekly report that was sent
12 to the Ministry of the Interior. More specifically, police
13 administration and the prevention -- Crime Prevention Administration. It
14 bears my signature.
15 This report refers to two lines of work, as you can see: The
16 crime and the police affairs. And then you see the breakdown, known
17 perpetrators, unknown perpetrators and so on.
18 Q. Could you briefly comment on (a), crime; can you confirm the
19 numbers, total crimes committed, known and unknown perpetrators; and can
20 you also explain the comment given in the last sentence?
21 A. The total number of crimes committed is 51; known perpetrators,
22 10; unknown perpetrators, 41. You can see, again, that most of them are
23 crimes against property. 29 thefts; 8 aggravated thefts, et cetera.
24 So you can see that most of them are crimes against property.
25 Q. Sir, does this report cover all the public security stations and
1 the CSB in Doboj?
2 A. Yes. This is a cumulative report that contains all the data
3 pertaining to the areas of all the stations and the centre itself.
4 Q. Could you comment on something on the second page. If we take a
5 look at the first paragraph, and then we see various dash points listing
6 measures and activities undertaken by the employees of the MUP. I'm
7 interested in the fifth bullet point, where it says:
8 "Seven reports were submitted to the prosecutor's office
10 What is this all about?
11 A. This relates to criminal offences and the criminal reports. So
12 these are the acts that were subject of criminal reports and that are now
13 already being processed by the prosecutor offices.
14 Q. Thank you.
15 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] If there is no objection, I would
16 like to tender this document.
17 JUDGE HALL: Admitted and marked.
18 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit 1D495, Your Honours.
19 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Tab 130, 232D1.
20 Q. The date of the document is the 24th of September, 1992. On the
21 second page, we find the signature and the stamp. And on the first page,
22 we see some handwritten comments.
23 A. This is also a document originating from the Security Services
24 Centre in Doboj.
25 Q. Just a moment, please. Just a second. I have to check
2 [Defence counsel confer]
3 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] I apologise, Your Honour. We
4 received one copy of this document from the Prosecution, so we uploaded
5 this copy into the e-court -- or, no, the other way around. The copy
6 that I have here is the copy that we received from the Prosecution, and
7 what we see in e-court is our copy. My copy bears number 0360-8239;
8 that's ERN number. And the following page is 240. My copy bears both
9 the stamp and the signature, and it also has some handwritten note on the
10 first page. In order not to complicate things, since the documents are
11 identical, maybe it would be best if the witness commented on the
12 document that we see on the screens, because we are interested in its
14 JUDGE HALL: Yes, please, go ahead.
15 MR. ZECEVIC:
16 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Bjelosevic, tell us whether this is your
17 document, and could you please explain it.
18 A. I see the first page on the screen now. Yes, this is a document
19 originating from the Security Services Centre in Doboj.
20 Q. Do you want to see the second page so that you can take a look at
21 the signature?
22 A. Yes, please.
23 All right. It's my signature.
24 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Can we now go back to the first
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It's a weekly report that was sent
2 to the Ministry of the Interior, more specifically, to the Police Affairs
3 Administration and the Crime Prevention Administration. It covers the
4 period between the 13th and the 20th September, 1992. Again, it covers
5 both crime and police affairs.
6 If you take a look at the breakdown of criminal offences, you
7 will see that the total number of crimes committed is 68. However, now,
8 it's 46 by known perpetrators and 22 by unknown perpetrators. This
9 reflects a progress in discovery of perpetrators. Still, the list is
10 dominated by crimes against property. 60 thefts, three aggravated
11 thefts. You can also see the number of on-site investigations that were
13 Can we have now the next page?
14 MR. ZECEVIC:
15 Q. [Interpretation] Could you first explain, or, rather, give us
16 your opinion, what is the reason for the difference that we can observe
17 here, the difference between known and unknown perpetrators? I'm
18 referring to the fact that the number of known perpetrators is higher
20 A. Whenever there is a significant increase in the percentage of
21 perpetrators who were discovered, it means that the police was doing
22 their job well. Of course, it could also be circumstances that work to
23 the effect that a higher number of perpetrators were discovered. But I
24 can tell you that, as time went on, the work was more serious, more
25 thorough. Evidence was gathered, and all this enabled the increase in
1 the number.
2 Q. Thank you.
3 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] If there is no objection, I would
4 like to tender this document.
5 JUDGE HALL: Admitted and marked.
6 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit 1D496, Your Honours.
7 JUDGE HALL: Mr. Zecevic, if I might return to a suggestion made
8 by Judge Harhoff earlier today, is there a possibility of a batch of
9 these like documents?
10 MR. ZECEVIC: Well, Your Honours, I only -- I only admitted
11 three documents, the reports, and I only wanted to show the increase of
12 the known perpetrators versus unknown perpetrators, and that's the last
13 report that I have.
14 JUDGE HALL: I see. I see. Thanks.
15 MR. ZECEVIC:
16 Q. [Interpretation] The next document is 18D1, tab 68A.
17 A. Excuse me, I didn't hear the number, the tab number.
18 Q. The tab number is 68A.
19 Are you familiar with this document and can you comment on it?
20 A. This is the daily event bulletin containing information from the
21 territory of the Security Services Centre in Doboj. This report covers
22 the situation at the battlefield, saying that a part of the Derventa
23 municipality, Bijelo Brdo, and the Bosanski Brod municipality are places
24 where fighting is still going on, and there are still some enemy
25 strongholds remaining. It also says that enemy forces are still
1 operating from Tesanj, and then it gives the assessment of the danger,
2 and so on and so forth.
3 So here we can see information taped in the informative bulletin
4 from the Security Services Centre in Doboj. When the communications
5 lines were working, this was regularly sent to the Ministry of the
6 Interior to be included in their informative bulletin.
7 Q. This handwritten comment that we can see at the top of the page,
8 do you maybe recognise the handwriting?
9 A. I cannot recognise the handwriting. It says, "Daily report
10 number 69, 18 July," and so on and so forth.
11 Q. In the second paragraph, it talks about the robberies being
12 committed in Derventa, Modrica and Odzak; in other words, the recently
13 liberated territories.
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Is this information in any way related to the reports that we
16 were looking at a moment ago? Yes or no.
17 A. Yes. Those numbers contain this information. And I have to
18 emphasise that the territories of those municipalities were the
19 territories with very difficult situation. And when those territories
20 were liberated, people went back to their property only to find it
21 destroyed, plundered, and burned down. They tried to recover whatever
22 they could, which then led to an increase in robberies and crimes against
24 Q. Please just give me a comment on the last sentence in that
25 second paragraph.
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. In relation to documentation.
3 A. Yes. When the police, or the milicija, as it was known at the
4 time, would try to prevent this plunder, very often people based
5 aggressively, and they drew weapons. These cases were documented. And
6 may I also add that what happened was that in some cases that were all
7 too frequent, when people in uniform, the military, were transporting
8 certain goods in cars, and when the police would stop them, then they
9 would show permits given to them by their commands, allowing them to take
10 some goods for themselves. Wherever possible, I tried to obtain
11 telefaxes so when there was electricity, then we could photocopy those
12 permits and document the fact that goods were being taken away that way.
13 Q. Thank you.
14 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] If there are no objections, I would
15 like to tender this document into evidence as well.
16 JUDGE HALL: Admitted and marked.
17 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit 1D497.
18 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, can I just ask if he knows whose
19 writing that is at the top? If you look at the original.
20 MR. ZECEVIC: I asked, and he said he doesn't.
21 MS. KORNER: Oh, I see. I'm sorry, I missed that.
22 MR. ZECEVIC: And this is the document we received ...
23 [Interpretation] The next document is 651D1, tab 137.
24 Q. Sir, let us look at page 2. Could you please give us your
25 comment as to whether are you familiar with this document and whether you
1 know what this is all about.
2 A. It's a document from the municipality of Samac. It was signed by
3 the president of the War Presidency, Dr. Blagoje Simic. You can see that
4 it has to do with providing consent for the participation of volunteers
5 from Serbia in a certain operation directed at Orasje.
6 Q. Can we please have page 1. I'm sorry.
7 A. I would like to recall another thing. The municipality of Samac,
8 or, rather, their War Presidency, had a bit of a claim on the
9 municipality of Odzak as well, invoking some kind of referendum of
10 certain local communes. However, since there was a military
11 administration in place, there was quite a bit of misunderstanding
12 between the military command and the War Presidency of Samac.
13 In Article 5 of this decision, you can see that permission is
14 being given for members of this volunteer unit to gain possession of
15 certain items. And it says: "Passenger cars, technical goods,
16 clothing," and so on.
17 This just confirms what I have been trying to say time and again
18 in order for Their Honours to try to understand what the situation was at
19 the time. It was a state of true chaos where powers were entwined,
20 Crisis Staffs tried to retain some of their powers through the
21 War Presidencies, and it was exceptionally, exceptionally difficult to
22 work in a lawful manner.
23 Q. Thank you. What is the date of this document?
24 A. "At a session held on 4th of October, 1992," et cetera.
25 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] If there are no objections, I would
1 like to tender this document as well.
2 JUDGE HARHOFF: Before we get that far, could I just ask about
3 the -- the underlying work or the underlying structure of this, which is
4 a bit unclear to me.
5 The War Presidency is requesting authorisation to allow
6 volunteers to take part in a military operation against -- or in the
7 territory of Orasje. Now, who is the addressee of this?
8 Mr. Witness, can you help us out here? What is the underlying
9 work method here? What's happening here in this document?
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As you can see, I don't know what
11 the translation is, but this decision does allow, allow - that is what it
12 literally says - the civilian authorities of the municipality of Samac
13 are allowing this, an agreement with the relevant commands of the army.
14 They don't say which one. They say that what is allowed is the
15 participation of volunteers in the operation directed at Orasje.
16 Article 5 of this decision says:
17 "While carrying out the operation to free the territory of Orasje
18 municipality," it says in capital letters, "every member of the Serbian
19 volunteer unit is hereby ALLOWED," in capital letters, "to gain
20 possession of items seized from the enemy," et cetera.
21 So they are not asking for permission or consent. They are
22 allowing them to do it.
23 JUDGE HARHOFF: Thank you for this clarification, but it raises
24 to me at least two questions. One is: Why would the civilian authority
25 be entitled to allow volunteers to be put under the command of the army?
1 That's my first question.
2 My second question is: Why would the civilian authority of the
3 Crisis Staff, as it is, allow volunteers to commit crimes? To seize
4 property illegally.
5 Let's take my two questions one at a time. First of all, what is
6 the relation between the Crisis Staff and [Overlapping speakers] ...
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Oh, I did understand the question.
8 I did understand the question. It is quite clear. But I don't
9 know the answer to that question myself. Believe me. I find that
10 completely -- well, let me allow myself to say this. It goes beyond the
11 law, and it goes beyond reason, if you can put it that way.
12 JUDGE HARHOFF: But was it the normal way of proceeding in
13 instances where volunteers were put under the command of -- of the -- of
14 the army?
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. This is -- this is the
16 War Presidency assuming powers that are far too great.
17 Your Honours, in order to clarify the situation for you to see
18 what it was actually like, may I say that I, with my co-workers, went to
19 the municipality of Samac after the inspectors of the CSB Doboj visited
20 the public security station of Samac and inspected their mode of work,
21 and, in the process, discovered a great many irregularities. I knew that
22 Chief Todorovic had been appointed by the Crisis Staff sometime in
23 April 1992, of course, without any kind of consultations with the centre
24 or any consent coming from the centre. Then I went with my co-workers to
25 try to reach agreement with them, to have that man replaced from that
1 position, because work was not being carried out properly.
2 What I experienced then was a most unpleasant situation. It came
3 precisely from Mr. Simic. He reacted very arrogantly to what I had set
4 out to say. He said to me, "Where were you in April when we had fierce
5 clashes with the enemy here? We appointed Todorovic, and he is going to
6 be the chief of the public security station."
7 And he also put a question to me, asking me what my inspectors
8 were doing in the municipality of Odzak. He told me to be careful,
9 saying that I could fare worse than in Teslic. After those words, I
10 asked my co-workers to go back to Doboj with me.
11 JUDGE HARHOFF: And for the second question that I put to you,
12 the authorisation to loot?
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, no reasonable person can
14 understand that. I truly cannot understand that.
15 JUDGE HARHOFF: Thank you.
16 Back to you, Mr. Zecevic.
17 JUDGE HALL: The document is admitted and marked.
18 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit 1D498, Your Honours.
19 MR. ZECEVIC: I was of impression that, Your Honour,
20 Judge Delvoie, wanted to -- no. I'm sorry.
21 [Interpretation] Your Honours, now I have a number of documents
22 that are documents that deal with identical questions. The documents
23 themselves are not identical in form, but they are all a type of approval
24 or permit given by certain military commanders to soldiers to carry
25 certain goods out of territories where war operations were under way. I
1 have a total of 11 such documents confirming this. I don't know how the
2 Trial Chamber wishes me to proceed. I would now like to show the witness
3 one of these documents, if the Trial Chamber agrees, and if the
4 Prosecutor agrees, so that we can hear the witness's comment.
5 [Trial Chamber confers]
6 JUDGE HALL: So please proceed as you have indicated,
7 Mr. Zecevic. You could begin with one or two, and ...
8 MR. ZECEVIC: Thank you very much, Your Honours.
9 [Interpretation] 548D1, tab 78, is the number of the document.
10 Q. Mr. Bjelosevic, this is a certificate from Tactical Group 3.
11 Colonel Slavko Lisica is the signatory. Are you familiar with this
12 document; and what can you tell us about it?
13 A. I'm familiar with the document. This is a document that the
14 police at the check-point took from the person who drove those things
15 that are listed in here. However, I would like to offer a short comment,
16 if I may.
17 There's a drastic difference between this and what the
18 War Presidency of Samac municipality approved. As you can see from the
19 wording of the certificate, the person in question was a combatant who
20 fled from Western Slavonia, who lost everything there. In order to be
21 able to join the army as a combatant, and there are other such cases that
22 I'm familiar with, in order for him to be a member of the unit and to
23 fight, he has to have some bare essentials for his family. And here you
24 see what the command approves for him to take home.
25 Where the things came from, I really don't know. However, the
1 command did issue a certificate allowing him to drive all that and to
2 secure relatively good living conditions for his family. I don't know
3 whether this was taken from houses or from some storages, I don't know.
4 But it is very clear what the certificate refers to.
5 Q. It seems to me that you said at the very beginning - I don't know
6 if I understood you properly - you say that the police at the check-point
7 took this document. Did the police take the document or -- I believe
8 that you mentioned copy machine and fax machine at the check-points. I
9 don't know whether the document was copied or taken from the person.
10 A. Some documents were taken, and their originals remained in the
11 centre, and a certain number was copied, where conditions were in place
12 for a fax machine to be used. There were no photocopiers at the time.
13 When there was electricity we made photocopies. I remember that there
14 are documents in their original form as well as in copies.
15 Q. Thank you.
16 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, since all these
17 documents actually illustrate the point, I would like to tender just one
18 document in order not to burden the case file with an excessive number of
19 documents. I would like to tender perhaps this one and maybe another one
20 after this. Unless there are objections by the Prosecution.
21 MS. KORNER: Well, Your Honour, firstly, Mr. Zecevic said to him,
22 "I believe you mentioned photocopying or fax facilities at the
23 check-points." I saw no such assertion by the witness.
24 But for the moment I'd like to know, if I may, and this, of
25 course, is difficult because of the so-called author, where this document
1 actually was obtained by the Defence from? It doesn't appear to come
2 from Colonel Lisica's book. And it's not on their list of ones provided
3 by Bjelosevic.
4 MR. ZECEVIC: Well, Ms. Korner, we provided you with a list of
5 the provenance of the documents. This is a document which we received
6 from the witness.
7 MS. KORNER: No. That's why I asked. It's not.
8 MR. ZECEVIC: I'm sorry. I'm -- you will have to deal with
9 Ms. Savic about that. I'm sorry.
10 MS. KORNER: All right. I'm sorry. If I understand there is an
11 error - I'm delighted to see that even Ms. Savic can make errors from
12 time to time - that's fine.
13 As regards the suggestion that this should be put in and none of
14 the others, Your Honours, I think it's a matter for Your Honours. I'm
15 not taking any point.
16 MR. ZECEVIC: And the second thing, Your Honours, page 58, 13,
17 these cases were documented and may I also -- it starts at line 8:
18 "These cases were documented. And may I also add that what
19 happened was that in some cases that were all too frequent, when people
20 in uniform, the military, were transporting certain goods in cars, and
21 when the police would stop them, then they would show permits given to
22 them by their commands, allowing them to take some goods for themselves.
23 Wherever possible, I tried to obtain telefaxes so when there was
24 electricity, then we could photocopy those permits and documents. The
25 fact that good -- and document the fact that goods were being taken away
1 that way."
2 That was the reference. So it's --
3 MS. KORNER: [Overlapping speakers] ... [Microphone not
5 MR. ZECEVIC: -- page 58. So I don't know where we are now,
6 whether there was an opposition ...
7 [Trial Chamber confers]
8 JUDGE HALL: Yes, so we'll take this one. And you say you have
9 another one to put in. Yes, Mr. Zecevic.
10 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honour, this document, 65 ter 5481, will
11 become Exhibit 1D499.
12 MR. ZECEVIC: Thank you.
13 Q. [Interpretation] 549D1 is the following document I would like to
14 look at with you. That's tab 79. The following document in that
16 This again is a document signed by -- or, rather, Colonel
17 Slavko Lisica's name is typed up. I don't know whether the signature is
18 his. And the document bears the date 3rd August 1992.
19 Can you tell us something about the document?
20 A. Yes. This is another of the documents whereby people are allowed
21 to be assisted -- to fallen or injured -- or, rather, people are allowed
22 to transport certain things and there's a list of those things that
23 people can transport. Those are usually household essentials. Again,
24 this was checked at the check-point and documented. And so on and so
1 Q. Thank you.
2 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Unless there are objections, I
3 would like to tender this document as well.
4 JUDGE HALL: [Microphone not activated] ... admitted and marked.
5 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit 1D500, Your Honours.
6 JUDGE DELVOIE: Mr. Zecevic, would you have another one that is
7 not signed by Colonel Lisica but by somebody else?
8 MR. ZECEVIC: I said, Your Honours, I have 11 so ...
9 JUDGE DELVOIE: Unless they're all from Colonel Lisica.
10 MR. ZECEVIC: No, no, no, they are not. They are not. I will
11 show another --
12 JUDGE DELVOIE: Another unit, I mean.
13 MR. ZECEVIC: I'm sorry?
14 JUDGE DELVOIE: Another unit.
15 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes.
16 [Interpretation] 531D1, tab 146.
17 Q. This is a document which was signed by the Municipal Defence
18 Commander KIK, which probably stands for Captain First Class,
19 Pero Stojakovic. The date I believe is the 9th October 1992. The name
20 is typed up. I'm not sure about the signature. Can you comment upon
21 this document?
22 A. Yes. This document was issued by the command of the
23 Municipal Defence of Derventa. It is entitled as "Approval."
24 Kalenderovci local commune is granted approval to transport machinery, as
25 listed in this document. Captain First Class Pero Stojakovic signed this
1 document. He was the commander of the Municipal Defence Command, and the
2 institution in question is the craftsmen guild, who were supposed to
3 organise work in Derventa if they received the machinery. I don't know
4 where the machinery was from, but I'm familiar with the document.
5 Q. Is this one of the documents that was found at a check-point by
6 the police?
7 A. Yes, it was found at a police check-point.
8 Q. Thank you.
9 MR. ZECEVIC: May I have this document exhibited also?
10 JUDGE HARHOFF: Yes. Who is the beneficiary of this approval?
11 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] The witness can answer.
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The local commune, the Kalenderovci
13 local commune, as can you see it here. And the machinery was intended
14 for the association of craftsmen or small businesses, the craftsmen
15 guild. That association was supposed to safe-guard the machinery, first
16 of all, and later on, if they needed the machinery, if the machinery was
17 assigned to them, they could use that machinery to organise their own
19 If you look at the first paragraph, you will see that it says
21 "Approval is hereby granted to the Kalenderovci local commune,
22 Gornji Detlak branch, to remove the following machinery in order to
23 protect it, and later, should it be assigned to them for the formation of
24 a craftsmen's guild."
25 In other words, initially they were they were supposed to
1 safe-guard it and in a later stage, if possible, the machinery could also
2 be used for their production.
3 I believe that sometime later the machinery was returned to the
4 factory from which it -- it had originally been removed.
5 JUDGE HARHOFF: Thank you for this clarification.
6 I guess my question was -- or my concern was that in the previous
7 documents that Counsel Zecevic showed to us, it was Colonel Lisica who
8 authorised a combatant under his command to seize war booty, which makes
9 sense, because obviously the colonel would have had jurisdiction over the
10 soldier. But here it's different. Here is another officer of the army
11 who is authorising a local commune to seize property. But let's just
12 take it at face value and not spend any more time on this. But it's an
13 interesting mix of powers back and forth.
14 JUDGE HALL: So we'll admit this and mark this document.
15 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit 1D501, Your Honours.
16 MR. ZECEVIC: Thank you.
17 [Interpretation] Can the witness please be shown 278D1, which is
18 at tab 199.
19 Can we look at the second page of the document. The typed-up
20 signature is that of Andrija Bjelosevic, the chief of centre. However,
21 there is also the word "za," or "for," and somebody's signature.
22 Q. Can you please comment upon this document, Mr. Bjelosevic. What
23 is this document about? What kind of information is provided? What is
24 this document?
25 A. This is information that was submitted to the Ministry of the
1 Interior to the Crime Prevention Department at the ministry's request,
2 because you can see a link between their dispatch dated the 30th of
3 November, 1992. Certain information is provided to the ministry. The
4 document was signed by Mirko Stojcinovic, the chief of the public
5 security centre in the services -- Security Services Centre of Doboj.
6 And I'm familiar with this document. The document was drafted at the
7 administration's request.
8 Q. Could you please clarify the numbers. For example, at the very
9 beginning, the number of dead persons, what period does the figure, this
10 one and all the other ones in the document, refer to?
11 A. I suppose that this was -- for the period ending with the
12 30th of November, 1992. Information was requested about the number of
13 dead, the structure of those dead persons, how many were civilians, how
14 many were military, how many members of the service there were, and when
15 it says "the service" what is meant is the MUP, men, women, and so on and
16 so forth. So this is the information that was available to us at the
17 time. The total number of dead was provided for the period ending in --
18 on the 30th of November, 1992. It is possible that the figures relate to
19 some other period, but we would have to locate the relevant dispatch, and
20 there you will find a clear instruction.
21 Q. Besides providing the number of persons, this document also
22 provides some other facts. Am I right? This document also provides some
23 other facts. Not only just the number of persons and the number of
24 crimes; right?
25 A. There's a reference to destroyed and damaged buildings, both
1 privately owned and socially owned.
2 Q. Could you please have a look and tell us whether there is any
3 reference to places of worship?
4 I think that it is the first tab after material damage from the
5 top of the page.
6 A. On the first page?
7 Q. Yes, on the first page.
8 A. I assume that it has all been included, but I really do not seem
9 to be able to find it right now.
10 Q. It says: "In order to establish the material damage sustained by
11 material ..."
12 A. Yes, yes. Yes, yes. Everything is referred to. 12 sabotages,
13 six of which were bridges, four religious buildings, and two against
14 railway -- railroads. And then it says in parentheses:
15 "Information received from," et cetera.
16 Q. At any rate, this document was sent by your chief of public
17 security sector to the MUP of Republika Srpska to the department for
18 crime prevention in Bijeljina. Was it sent with your knowledge and with
19 your approval?
20 A. Yes, I know when this information was being collected I was
21 probably somewhere out in the field, and Chief Stojcinovic signed it,
22 which was quite all right.
23 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] If there are no objections, I would
24 like to move for this document to be admitted into evidence.
25 JUDGE HALL: Admitted and marked.
1 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit 1D502, Your Honours.
2 MR. ZECEVIC:
3 Q. [Interpretation] The next document I would like to show you is
4 203D1, tab 81.
5 MR. ZECEVIC: Just one intervention in the transcript,
6 Your Honours. Page 71, line 11, should be my question.
7 Q. [Interpretation] Sir, this is a document dated the 3rd of August,
8 I believe, 1992. What is typewritten towards the bottom of the page is
9 Chief of the Centre, Andrija Bjelosevic. Can you tell us whether this
10 is, indeed, your document, whether you're familiar with it?
11 A. Yes. This is a document from the CSB Doboj, and it was sent to
12 the public security stations in the territory of the centre. This
13 document is based on a meeting held in the Ministry of the Interior and
14 the documents -- and the positions that were taken then. And what was
15 agreed upon at that meeting, or the collegium, what was asked for by the
16 minister, what his instructions were, and I'm dealing with this on the
17 ground. I'm saying what should be done in the future with regard to
18 reinforcing the service. And I say that a document is being drafted,
19 rules on the internal staffing of the MUP, and then there are further
20 suggestions as to how new personnel should be admitted.
21 Q. Did you sign this document?
22 A. Yes. This is a document that I signed.
23 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] If there are no objections, I would
24 like to tender this document as well.
25 JUDGE HALL: Admitted and marked.
1 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit 1D503, Your Honours.
2 MR. ZECEVIC: I think it should be 504. Because previous one was
3 503. I'm sorry. I am a bit confused.
4 [Interpretation] Another document. The date is the same.
5 20481 -- 204D1, tab 82.
6 Q. Sir, this document is also dated the 3rd of August, 1992,
7 submitted to all public security stations, to the chief, signed by
8 Andrija Bjelosevic, chief of the centre.
9 Can you confirm whether this is a document of yours and whether
10 you remember what it pertains to; and can you explain to us what this was
12 A. The document is from the CSB Doboj. The date is the one stated.
13 And the signature at the end of the document is mine.
14 This was sent to all the public security stations in the
15 territory of the centre. Certain information is being requested.
16 Information that has to do with the functioning of administrative
17 matters. It has to do with personal documents and related issues. As
18 you can see, personal identification cards, personal names, registration
19 of permanent and temporary residence, citizenship, official registers,
20 personal identification numbers, registration of motor vehicles,
21 procuring, owning and carrying weapons and ammunition, refugees, issuing
22 personal documents to refugees, state border crossing control, and so on.
23 Q. Tell me, did you have any problems with the records pertaining to
24 these documents, or is this about something else?
25 A. We had problems with possession of these forms, especially in the
1 area of Derventa, Modrica, Brod, Odzak later. Because in Derventa, Brod
2 and Modrica, buildings had burned down, buildings where the public
3 security stations were, so documentation was destroyed and the actual
4 forms as well.
5 I would like to note that these forms, already in the beginning
6 of April, when the self-styled territorials took over the station of
7 Derventa, on that occasion, all these forms were simply taken away. That
8 was the objective, actually, to record all the problems involved and to
9 submit that to the MUP. We discussed that problem at the collegium
10 meeting of the 11th of June, and what followed was a document, a letter
11 from the ministry, along those lines.
12 Q. Thank you.
13 MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] If there are no objections, I would
14 like to tender this document as well.
15 JUDGE HARHOFF: What do you intend to show with this document,
16 Mr. Zecevic?
17 MR. ZECEVIC: Your Honours, what I intend to show is that, on the
18 11th of July, there was a collegium, the first collegium. One of the
19 matters discussed was this particular issue, the problem with the
20 administrative matters which the MUP is also working as a part of their
21 duties in accordance with the law, and also the problem of
22 misappropriation of these forms which are specific forms and which have
23 been stolen or burned or -- and the -- the possibility of misuse of
24 these -- or forgery of these documents.
25 And as witness acknowledged, there was also one -- one order sent
1 from the MUP in that respect, and this is showing that the CSB is
2 following the order from the MUP and from -- and the conclusion decided
3 upon on the 11th of July, they are actually performing their duty and
4 sending this request to their SJBs in the territory. That is the reason.
5 JUDGE HARHOFF: But, surely, that would not be a surprise, would
6 it? That a CSB is following orders from the MUP on civilian and
7 administrative matters?
8 MR. ZECEVIC: Well, Your Honours, this is to illustrate that the
9 CSBs were performing the duties of -- agreed upon on the 11th of
10 July collegium. And I think it's very relevant. Not only this, this is
11 showing them -- the administrative matters, but also all other aspects of
12 the conclusions reached on the 11th of July collegium meeting.
13 [Trial Chamber confers]
14 JUDGE HALL: Admitted and marked.
15 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit 1D504, Your Honours.
16 MR. ZECEVIC: Thank you, Your Honours.
17 I see the time, Your Honours.
18 JUDGE HALL: Yes.
19 MR. ZECEVIC: Thank you.
20 Q. [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. Bjelosevic.
21 JUDGE HALL: So we take the adjournment for today, to resume in
22 this courtroom tomorrow morning at 9.00.
23 [The witness stands down]
24 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.47 p.m.,
25 to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 19th day of April,
1 2011, at 9.00 a.m.