1 Thursday, 2 June 2011
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.04 a.m.
5 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours.
6 This is case IT-08-91-T, the Prosecutor versus Mico Stanisic and
7 Stojan Zupljanin.
8 JUDGE HALL: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
9 Good morning to everyone. May we have the appearances, please.
10 MR. HANNIS: Good morning, Your Honour. I'm Tom Hannis for the
11 Prosecution, along with Gerry Dobbyn, Milena [sic] Vilova, and our
12 Case Manager today is Indah Susanti.
13 I meant to say Marina Vilova, I'm sorry.
14 MR. ZECEVIC: Good morning, Your Honours. Slobodan Zecevic,
15 Slobodan Cvijetic, Eugene O'Sullivan, and Ms. Tatjana Savic appearing for
16 Stanisic Defence this morning. Thank you.
17 MR. KRGOVIC: Good morning, Your Honours. Dragan Krgovic and
18 Aleksandar Aleksic appearing for Zupljanin Defence.
19 JUDGE HALL: Thank you.
20 May the witness be escorted back to the stand, please.
21 [The witness takes the stand]
22 JUDGE HALL: Good morning to you, Mr. Andan. I give you the
23 usual reminder about your solemn declaration before Mr. Hannis continues.
24 Yes, Mr. Hannis.
25 MR. HANNIS: Thank you, Your Honour.
1 WITNESS: DRAGOMIR ANDAN [Resumed]
2 [Witness answered through interpreter]
3 Cross-examination by Mr. Hannis: [Continued]
4 Q. Good morning. Mr. Andan, I was curious about one thing. At the
5 beginning of the war when you eventually left Sarajevo and came over to
6 the Serbian MUP side, you first told us you were in Ilidza for a while
7 and then in Raca. As I understand it, most of your police career up to
8 then, you had worked in the Sarajevo area; is that correct?
9 A. Just a correction. I did not go to the Serbian MUP side. I
10 joined the MUP of Republika Srpska. All my pre-war career was in
11 Sarajevo, though.
12 Q. Given your experience and familiarity with the Sarajevo area,
13 were you surprised that you were sent to Brcko rather than being given
14 some assignment in the Sarajevo area?
15 A. No, I was not surprised because I had placed myself at their
16 disposal, and the assessment at that point in time was probably that I
17 should help out where the security situation was the most complex. As a
18 soldier and an officer, I accepted that and I went out to that
20 Q. Did it ever pass through your mind that perhaps Mr. Stanisic
21 didn't trust you in the Sarajevo area and wanted to send you somewhere
23 A. Oh, I think that Mr. Stanisic didn't even have time to think of
24 some Dragomir Andan. He had quite a few problems. He couldn't really be
25 giving me any thought. I've already explained this at the very outset:
1 I was given a task, and I went to Brcko. So I cannot say and I cannot
2 have any suspicions of that kind, whether he sent me to Brcko,
3 Mr. Stanisic, because of some lack of trust. Least of all did he have
4 any reason to think about me because he had so many problems to deal with
5 throughout Republika Srpska.
6 Q. Okay. Let's talk about Brcko again for a moment. You told us
7 while you were there you did have some dealings with the army. Did you
8 know a Captain Cuturic with the Eastern Bosnian Corps intelligence organ?
9 Did you ever meet him or know him?
10 A. I don't know how you understood this co-operation of mine or ours
11 with the authorities in Brcko, but I did tell you that several times I
12 had meetings with them. The first meeting took place at our request, and
13 we asked for part of the police force to be returned from the front line.
14 Then several times we talked about the security situation or we asked for
15 certain favours, as it were. So there wasn't any kind of intensive
16 co-operation underway, at least as far as I'm concerned.
17 As for Mr. Cuturic, this is the first time I hear of that
18 particular last name, if that is his last name.
19 MR. HANNIS: Could we show the witness Exhibit P154. I think
20 this is still an MFI exhibit.
21 Q. Mr. Andan, on the screen --
22 MR. ZECEVIC: [Microphone not activated]
23 MR. HANNIS: It's tab number 251 in the Prosecution binder.
24 Q. Mr. Andan, on the screen, in a moment, you'll see this document;
25 it's dated the 29th of September, 1992. And in a moment we'll see the
1 last page where the editor is a Captain First Class Simeun Cuturic. I
2 will tell you it's a -- it has a bit of a retrospective about events in
3 Brcko, and in particular it's talking about events in the period of May
4 through June at the facility called Luka.
5 MR. HANNIS: If we could go to the first page again.
6 Q. And he's describing briefly what happened after the bridges over
7 the Sava River had been destroyed. He says the town was flooded by
8 different "patriotic" orientated individuals who used "devotion to
9 Serbism" as an excuse for robberies, rapes, and, as a result of that,
10 murders for no justified reason. He mentions Mauzer and some of
11 Arkan's Men. Is that consistent with the information you learned about
12 what had happened in Brcko after the bridges were destroyed at the end of
13 April 1992?
14 A. Of course, if you wish to hear my comprehensive opinion of this
15 particular piece of information, I'd have to read out the whole report.
16 Q. In order to save time, what I'll do is perhaps give you the
17 report at the end of this first session and ask you to work during the
18 break again just to save us courtroom time.
19 Thank you. I will then turn to Bijeljina. We talked a bit about
20 Bijeljina before, and I want to ask you about the interview that I think
21 you read yesterday.
22 MR. HANNIS: I think the Registry officer may have a hard copy of
23 that. This is 65 ter 1967. It's our tab 308. If we could hand a hard
24 copy just of the newspaper article. Thank you.
25 Q. Mr. Andan, you told me yesterday you had a chance to read this
1 during one of the break, and it's an interview, I think in 1994, with
2 Predrag Jesuric, who you told us was at one time the chief of the CSB in
3 Bijeljina. Did you get a chance to read it?
4 A. Again a correction, as far as the interpretation is concerned.
5 It is "Jesuric" not "Jesovic." And I did have an opportunity reading
6 this interview.
7 Q. Thank you. I think I need to defend the translators. Probably
8 the problem you're having is that the interpreters are having a problem
9 with my pronunciation of the name and that's why it's not coming across
10 as you would expect it to. I'll try to do a better job.
11 In the newspaper article, Mr. Jesuric talks about his
12 relationship, his working relationship, with Mr. Savic, Mauzer, and at
13 page 2, my English, he mentioned Savic as the untouchable commander of
14 the planned and well-thought-out defence of the town, and says that all
15 the participants were subordinated to him and the Crisis Staff that
16 worked out of the SDS offices. Is that consistent with what you found in
17 Bijeljina when you went there?
18 A. I cannot speak about the period before my arrival there, but it
19 is obvious that when Mr. Davidovic and I arrived in Bijeljina, Mr. Mauzer
20 behaved exactly this way, as has already been described here. I've
21 already said that we had received instructions not to yield to any kind
22 of political pressure, to carry out our work professionally. And that is
23 how we came to Bijeljina. I'm primarily referring to Vukovic and myself.
24 My impression was after a while and after the clashes that we had
25 with Mr. Mauzer and after attending a meeting - now, was it the
1 Crisis Staff of the municipality or some other body? - Mr. Davidovic and
2 I were there anyway and Mr. Mauzer sat next to the chairman of that
3 meeting and of course everybody who took part in the debate first
4 addressed Mauzer and only then the chairman. So I understood what
5 Mr. Mauzer's role was. I think that he had expected us as members of the
6 Ministry of the Interior probably to come and report to him about our own
7 work. In my view, that is where the basic conflict was between
8 Mr. Mauzer on the one hand and on the other hand the police structures
9 that were carrying out their work in a lawful manner.
10 Q. And in your experience in Bijeljina, is it correct that the
11 problems were not only paramilitaries from outside, from Serbia, but
12 problems with the locals, in particular Mr. Savic, Mauzer, and his
13 forces? Wasn't that one of the biggest problems for you in Bijeljina?
14 A. You see, I have to say something by way of a small clarification.
15 Either during my direct examination or while I was being examined by you,
16 I mentioned that there was this formation of Mr. Blagojevic's and we did
17 have certain problems, individual problems, with members of the
18 Serb Radical Party. At first they did not want to respect the curfew,
19 and when they were drunk they would sometimes fire into the air. But we
20 did call Mr. Blagojevic in for an interview. We drew his attention to
21 the behaviour of his men. And I have to say that afterwards we didn't
22 have any problems with Blagojevic.
23 But we had an on-going conflict with Mauzer. And I know that the
24 second time when he surrounded the police station in Bijeljina, I mean
25 Mr. Mauzer, that Blagojevic's men wanted to make themselves available to
1 the Ministry of the Interior. We did not allow that. We did not allow
2 that. We said that we did not need any kind of help and that we would
3 try to resolve that in a lawful manner.
4 So there were problems with paramilitary formation in Brcko, but
5 Mauzer was our major problem.
6 Q. And we've heard from you before and seen from the documents that
7 this was being reported about. You were reporting up the chain about
8 Mauzer and the problems he was causing, weren't you?
9 A. Yes, yes. We were reporting to the local authorities and the
10 Ministry of the Interior. I don't know now whether in the information
11 that was sent on to Mr. Karadzic the problem of Mauzer was mentioned too,
12 but we did report about the problem with Mauzer. We did.
13 Q. But it appears that nothing was done about it. You didn't get
14 any support or direction from political authorities or from higher-ups to
15 do anything about Mr. Mauzer, did you?
16 A. From a formal and legal point of view, if we are going to look at
17 it that way, Mauzer was not supposed to have any kind of contact with the
18 political structures. As a military formation, he was supposed to be
19 under the command of the Eastern Bosnia Corps. And it was the commander
20 and his associates that were supposed to have greater responsibility in
21 this respect. We reported to them several times about what was going on.
22 The commander knew when Mauzer brought tanks to the police station in
24 In these talks, they kept promising us that they would deal with
25 the situation, that they would overcome these problems, and they just
1 said, Don't go into any kind of conflict. Of course, we could not avoid
2 doing our job. So I would have considered myself to be co-responsible if
3 I had turned my head the other way when Mauzer's forces were doing what
4 they were doing and if I said, Well, let them do whatever they were
5 doing. We asked the commander to have that problem resolved because from
6 a formal and legal point of view he was under the military.
7 On the other hand, he had every political support in the
8 Bijeljina municipality and from this interview that Mr. Jesuric gave to
9 Drago Vukovic, I see that that's exactly the way it was. I've put the
10 picture together.
11 So we on the one hand have one order from the ministry or
12 minister and that is implement the law, take care of public law and
13 order, prosecute criminals, et cetera. On the other hand we have this
14 armed force opposing all of that and we cannot deal with it, and we
15 informed the Ministry of the Interior about that as well, of course.
16 Q. And as I understand it, during your time in that area between
17 mid-June and mid-August 1992, as far as you know Mauzer and his Panthers
18 were never officially fully subordinated to the army; right? In spite of
19 the fact that Colonel Ilic had promised on more than one occasion that
20 they were going to do that, it never happened, as far as you know, during
21 the time you were there; right?
22 A. I told you yesterday, one of our proposals was to have
23 Mr. Mauzer's unit relocated from Obrijez, I think the name was, and to be
24 transferred to the barracks. In that way they would be under the control
25 of the military in some way, but that was not done. So I cannot talk
1 about that period -- I can only talk about that period, rather. I cannot
2 talk about what happened later. But that is what the situation was.
3 Q. Thank you. I want to ask you a question about Cedo Kljajic. I
4 believe it was between the time you first went to Brcko but before you
5 went to Zvornik for the Yellow Wasp operation. Do you recall an incident
6 when you and Mico Davidovic came across Mr. Kljajic doing something with
7 the driver's licence forms in Bijeljina?
8 A. Yes, I remember that.
9 Q. Tell us about it.
10 A. I think that Mr. Kljajic was filling out a traffic licence on a
11 typewriter. That came as a surprise to us. And I think that
12 Mico Davidovic reacted rather sharply. He can be quite rash. He said,
13 What are you doing, Cedo? Have you gone that low to type out a traffic
15 Q. And what did Mr. Kljajic say in response to that?
16 A. He didn't say anything. He was perplexed. He blushed, the two
17 of us left. I think that I took Mico by the hand and took him out. And
18 when we were in out in the hall, Mico said, Let me tell him, let me tell
19 him. And I said, Mico, let's go; we have other things to do downstairs.
20 And that's how it went.
21 Q. You don't know about any further conversation in which
22 Mr. Kljajic indicated that he needed to do something to supplement his
23 income, and this had to do with stolen or confiscated Golf vehicles that
24 were going to be taken to Serbia and sold?
25 A. This had nothing to do with a Golf. I heard about that later.
1 And I think it was Mr. Davidovic who told me about that, that some
2 soldier, whose last name was Ribin [phoen], I know full well, at some
3 check-point a BMW was taken away from him and it ended up at the car
4 market in Bubanj Potok near Belgrade. I was told that Mr. Kljajic's
5 driver had taken the BMW there to that car market and sold it, used car
7 Let me be quite clear. I did not document that in any way, but I
8 was informed by Davidovic. That was his information, everything that had
9 happened in Belgrade. I had no opportunity to check that out. Now, was
10 that just after the Zvornik action? At any rate, it's that period.
11 Q. All right. Let me show you another document.
12 MR. HANNIS: This is P -- I'm sorry, 1D97. I think it was the
13 Defence tab 76 or Prosecution tab 146.
14 Q. Mr. Andan, this is a document you were shown before. It's
15 actually a copy of the report you sent in about establishing law and
16 order in the area of the Bijeljina CSB.
17 MR. HANNIS: And if we could go to the last page.
18 Q. This is the one that had a handwritten note on it apparently from
19 Radovan Karadzic to the effect of, Keep up the good work, or, Keep on
20 enforcing the rule of law. When was the first time you ever saw that
21 part that's apparently written by Mr. Karadzic? Did you see it in 1992?
22 Did you only see it when you were interviewed in 2005 or when proofing
23 for testifying here?
24 A. I can't remember when I saw this note made by Mr. Karadzic. It
25 is possible that I saw it back in the analytical department of the
1 Republika Srpska MUP and that I made a copy for myself. I don't know the
2 exact date. It may have been before the interview with you or it may
3 have been in 2004. I was a director at the time, and somebody from the
4 analytical department told me about it. All the documents had already
5 been taken to The Hague Tribunal and I think that that was when I took a
6 copy of this document for myself.
7 Q. I take it from that you did not see it at any time in 1992;
9 A. Of course.
10 Q. Now, I apart from writing those nice, encouraging words, do you
11 personally know of anything that Mr. Karadzic did to support your efforts
12 in Bijeljina? For example, did he call the Bijeljina local political
13 leaders and encourage them to support what you were trying to do, as far
14 as you know?
15 A. I don't know. I don't know whether he spoke to anyone on the
16 basis of this memo of mine. I have no knowledge whether anybody from the
17 municipal government structure spoke to Mr. Karadzic in regard to this
19 Q. His note's dated the 2nd of August, 1992, and about three weeks
20 after this you had been suspended and removed from the MUP. Did
21 Mr. Karadzic do anything like he apparently did nor Malko Koroman to try
22 and keep you in your job? Apparently not; right?
23 A. Well, he did not have any obligation to do anything like that.
24 After all, he was the president of the republic and I was a member of the
25 Ministry of the Interior. My problem should have been resolved at the
1 level of the ministry. Mr. Karadzic also should not have interfered into
2 the issue of the replacement of Malko Koroman in Pale. That's my own
3 personal opinion. It's all something that had to be left within our
4 house, so to speak.
5 I don't know. If he went to speak to someone, he should have
6 spoken to the prime minister or the minister of the interior.
7 Q. Mr. Andan, I share your personal opinion about whether
8 Mr. Karadzic should have interfered in the matter of the replacement of
9 Mr. Koroman, but the fact is he did. And I suggest to you that one
10 reason why he did for Mr. Koroman and he did not for you, one possible
11 explanation is that what you were doing and what you had done was not
12 popular with the top leadership in the Republika Srpska, whereas what
13 Mr. Koroman had done wasn't a problem for them; would you agree that's
15 A. I don't know. I'm just asking myself if Malko Koroman had been
16 the commander of a police station in Rudo or in Gacko whether the
17 reaction would have been same. Mr. Karadzic lived in Pale. There was a
18 problem, an armed group had assembled around the police station. Pale is
19 a small town and he definitely must have seen it, and that is maybe the
20 reason why he reacted in the way that he reacted. If all this had
21 happened in Gacko or in Kljuc or in some other place, I don't know
22 whether he would have been informed about it at all. And then it would
23 have been up to the organs of the Ministry of the Interior to resolve the
25 So with all due respect, please do not think that I'm defending
1 anybody here, but I think that the place where it happened had something
2 to do with the fact that Mr. Karadzic reacted. I was a little bit
3 further away, and I assume that the flow of information was not as easy,
4 but the fact is that things happened to me that, well, that happened to
6 Q. And the fact is, Mr. Koroman not only wasn't replaced, he
7 eventually went on to become head inspector of the RS MUP, which I take
8 it is a promotion and a pay raise; right?
9 A. Well, you asked me yesterday about the salary. At the time, it
10 was maybe two or three packs of cigarettes. That's not important. Now
11 looking back with all the experience that I have, I think that they
12 created a space within which Mr. Koroman could be removed from Pale,
13 transferred to Bijeljina, and given a promotion. And I remember that
14 when he was transferred to Bijeljina he didn't do any hard work there.
15 It was all done in order to put another person there in order to calm
16 down certain structure and political authorities. I think that it was a
17 skillful manoeuvre that they managed to execute in order to avoid any
18 further armed rebellions or pressures on the police station, and that was
19 a way in which they had managed to resolve the problem.
20 Q. Okay. Thanks for that. Next I want to show you a document
21 related to Zvornik.
22 MR. HANNIS: This is Exhibit P337. It's tab 97 of the
23 Prosecution list.
24 Q. Mr. Andan, do you know where the municipality of Kalesija was? I
25 hope I pronounced that correctly, K-a-l-e-s-i-j-a.
1 A. Of course I know that.
2 Q. Where is it?
3 A. It's about 20 or 30 kilometres away from Zvornik in the direction
4 of Tuzla. 30, maybe 35. I think that that's the distance. Okay, let me
5 say around 30 kilometres towards Tuzla.
6 Q. Thank you. This document is dated the 29th of June. It appears
7 to come from Minister Mico Stanisic, although that signature looks more
8 like I think what we've had evidence about as being from Mr. Njegus.
9 It's directed from the minister to Zvornik Public Security Station saying
10 it's necessary that Zvornik allow the Kalesija SJB to use a certain car.
11 Was it -- was it normal for the minister to send something like this
12 directly to a public security station rather than going through the CSB?
13 Because most of the documents that we've seen emanating from the minister
14 go first to the CSBs which then disseminate them out to the SJBs. Isn't
15 that how it worked?
16 A. This is not the only example. There are other examples in which
17 somebody else signed the document on behalf of Mr. Stanisic. I would
18 call it a crisis of authority. The question is, if something like that
19 is sent by the chief of the centre, is the chief of the station going to
20 actually obey it. Well, somebody else signed this, but we have here the
21 minister's name, so people are definitely going to think, Oh, we now have
22 to obey the order coming straight from the minister. Of course, you're
23 quite correct when you're wondering why would the minister resolve
24 problems of Kalesija and vehicles in Kalesija, but I also know how things
25 functioned down there. There are many people who would say, Oh, what is
1 this person going do, what does this minster want to do? As I already
2 stated, there was a crisis of authority, because people, especially those
3 among soldiers who were the first to take up arms, would normally say
4 What? Where was he back in April 1992 when I took up arms and started
6 So I think that I have seen another similar document also
7 requesting an allocation of another impounded vehicle in a similar
8 manner. Of course, there was a practice that impounded vehicles could be
9 temporarily used, and I can tell you that that was the practice after the
10 war. You know, they would say, well, now we have this vehicle here and
11 let it be temporarily used in the police until we get a permanent
12 solution. Indeed for a while such vehicles would be given permanently to
13 the police. I'm not quite sure how this is regulated by law and I don't
14 know whether this happens in Western Europe, but, yes, there were cases
15 in which these vehicles were given to us for permanent use.
16 So I hope that my explanation is correct. I told you what I
17 think. I think that this is an example of the crisis of authority. I
18 will write it up and then there will be the minister's name. I think I
19 can claim here under full responsibility that Mr. Stanisic was not even
20 aware that this particular document had gone out.
21 Q. But you personally have no way of knowing whether or not he may
22 have discussed it with Mr. Njegus and given him authority to sign for
23 him; right?
24 A. Of course I cannot know that. But the man is here, he is alive.
25 I assume that he is going to say something about this. But looking back,
1 I have to say that I think that he probably did not know that this was
2 signed for him. Maybe it was signed by somebody from his office or one
3 of the chiefs of the operative departments.
4 Q. Do you know who Radomir Njegus was and what position he held in
5 June of 1992?
6 A. Of course I know Radomir Njegus. I think that in 1992 he was
7 assistant minister for personnel. I'm not sure what exact name of the
8 administration was.
9 Q. Okay. Let's move on to another topic. I want to discuss with
10 you a little bit about the Mico Stanisic's men or the Malovic unit. And
11 you looked at a bundle of photographs yesterday.
12 If we could have the usher hand those to you.
13 This is from Exhibit 65 ter 20145 at tab 318 of the
14 Prosecution's list. And I think you told us during the break you had
15 gone through and put little red stickies for me on those whom you
16 recognised as being members of Mr. Malovic's unit in 1992; is that right?
17 A. Yes, I was not entirely sure for one person whether I know him
18 privately or whether he was a member of the unit at the time, but I
19 marked everybody else. As far as I know, these are the persons that were
20 with Malovic at the time in Bijeljina.
21 Q. And if you could, I think the easiest way to do this, Mr. Andan,
22 is if you will tell us one by one. I see the one on top you have a red
23 sticky on. If you could give us the eight-digit number at the top of the
24 page, I think it's at the top of the page above each of the photographs.
25 If you could tell us that eight-digit number and the name of the person,
1 that will go into the record and then we'll know which ones you've picked
2 out for us.
3 A. First, Predrag Bartula. And then there is a numerical number at
4 the top: 06491588.
5 Q. Thank you. That's just right. Can you continue with any others
6 that you identified.
7 A. Milenko Samardzija, numerical number 06491590. Nenad Markovic,
8 numerical number 06491595. I'm not sure about this one. I told you that
9 I wasn't sure about one of them, did I see him in the unit or privately
10 in Sokolac. It's Milenko Ecimovic, numerical number 06491597. So maybe
11 he was, maybe he wasn't. Darko Arbinja, 06491598. Zeljko Maricic,
12 06491610. Ognjen Neskovic, 06491619. Dragoslav Markovic, 06491622. And
13 Slobodan Kezunovic, 06491626.
14 Q. Thank you, Mr. Andan.
15 MR. HANNIS: Your Honours, I would like to tender this exhibit.
16 I will tell you this has -- the entire document has more than just these
17 photographs. It was in response to a request for records from the
18 prosecutor's office in Bijeljina, which has this as part of their file
19 related to the case involving the murder of the three Muslim families
20 that we've talked about before. I don't need that other information, so
21 perhaps what I can do is restructure the exhibit with just the
22 photographs this witness has identified and then substitute that in
23 e-court, if that's agreeable with the Court and with the Defence
24 [Trial Chamber confers]
25 MR. ZECEVIC: Well, definitely ...
1 JUDGE HARHOFF: Mr. Hannis, could you explain to us what it is
2 you want to show with this exhibit other than what we have by way of the
3 witness's testimony.
4 MR. HANNIS: Well, Your Honour, I can link these names to names
5 in payroll list for Dusko Malovic's units which are already in evidence,
6 and then with that I have the link of a living witness who saw these
7 people as has identified them as members so we don't have confuse about
8 whether, Oh, well, that's somebody by the same name. And, you know, This
9 Bartula is not the same one that's on the payroll list.
10 MR. ZECEVIC: Your Honours, perhaps I can understand the motives
11 of Mr. Hannis to offer this, but I definitely object that the whole
12 document would be admitted. Because what was shown to the witness were
13 the photographs of the persons and their names, whatever is the
14 information contained in this documents, and he recognised that. The
15 rest, not a single question was asked about the rest of the document, and
16 there's some documentation for 2008 and so on and so forth. And
17 therefore I do object that the whole document is admitted.
18 However, Your Honours, we are not disputing the fact that these
19 persons which are in the actual transcript are or were according to the
20 witness members of this unit from Sokolac. We are not disputing that.
21 We never -- honestly, we never intended to dispute these facts, because
22 we think they are completely relevant, but that's another story.
23 JUDGE HALL: Sorry, I just want to be sure that I understand you.
24 In terms of the document, your objection is that it -- the whole document
25 not be admitted, or that if it comes in that the whole document be
2 MR. ZECEVIC: I'm sorry I wasn't clear. I object that the whole
3 document be admitted. However, I do not object and I do not contest the
4 fact that these photographs are from these persons and these photographs
5 which the ERN numbers which the witness read can be admitted in evidence
6 if Mr. Hannis insists after this.
7 JUDGE HALL: Thank you.
8 Mr. Hannis, following on from the question that Judge Harhoff
9 asked and having regard to Mr. Zecevic's concession, the -- whereas it
10 is -- I suppose I could understand your wanting to make sure that the
11 photographs remove any suggestion that would be made that the names,
12 notwithstanding the similarity of names of different individuals, having
13 regard to what Mr. Zecevic has said, is it necessary to go through this
14 complication of -- to go through an exercise which we now know would be a
15 somewhat complicated one?
16 MR. HANNIS: Well, Your Honours, in terms of the exercise, that's
17 the exercise I think the Prosecution has to do in restructuring the
18 exhibit, and that's not too complicated. We're happy to do that. The
19 saying is, a picture's worth a thousand words. This is not going to add
20 greatly to the burden on the Trial Court in terms of exhibits you have to
21 deal with. And I can see there's still a possibility there may be some
22 occasion with a future witness where it may be useful or helpful to have
23 a photograph of one of these individuals to show them and address some
24 question with them.
25 I think it's not too much to ask. I think it's relevant. And I
1 would again urge that you receive this document in the modified form that
2 we propose to make to address Mr. Zecevic's concerns about material other
3 than these photographs and the personal data for the persons pictured.
4 [Trial Chamber confers]
5 JUDGE HALL: So the decision of the Chamber is by majority,
6 Judge Harhoff dissenting, that the -- pending the modification which has
7 been offered by Mr. Hannis, that the six photographs would be marked for
9 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P2346, marked for identification,
10 Your Honours.
11 MR. HANNIS: Thank you, Your Honours. We'll make that change and
12 then notify Defence counsel or run it by them before we make the request
13 to substitute it in.
14 Q. Mr. Andan, the last one we looked at is still on the screen, I
15 think. That's Slobodan Kezunovic. He was the deputy directly under
16 Mr. Malovic in this unit, wasn't he?
17 A. That's correct.
18 Q. Let me show you another exhibit related to the Malovic unit.
19 MR. HANNIS: It's 65 ter 3560 at tab 262. [Microphone not
20 activated] I've got a hard copy if the usher would assist. I'll hand it
21 to you --
22 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
23 MR. HANNIS: I've got a hard copy I would like to hand you with
24 the assistance of the usher.
25 Q. This is a report dated the 13th of October, 1992. If you go to
1 the last page, you see it comes from a senior investigator named
2 Goran Saric. Did you know him?
3 A. If it's the Goran Saric that was the commander of the
4 Special Forces of the Republika Srpska MUP, then I know him.
5 Q. Okay. He is reporting about some events that happened in the
6 area of Milici on or about the 1st of October, and he mentions the
7 Special Unit Malovic being in the area of Vlasenica on the 29th -- or,
8 I'm sorry, around the 29th or 30th of September, 1992.
9 I'm looking at page 2 of the English. I'm not sure where it is
10 in the B/C/S, but it's the paragraph that talks about "on October 3rd a
11 problem arose when special commander Boban did not want to get engaged
12 without Malovic."
13 Do you find that paragraph?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. I take it Boban in this context is probably Slobodan Kezunovic,
16 would you agree, because as the assistant commander, he would be the one
17 in charge when Malovic wasn't there?
18 MR. ZECEVIC: I believe it calls for speculation, Your Honours.
19 MR. HANNIS: Well, I think he's in a position to make a comment
20 and then Your Honours can decide how much weight to give it.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I cannot be certain that the man in
22 question is Slobodan Kezunovic. But based on this sentence, this is a
23 possible assumption. I cannot confirm that however. If the full name
24 were in the document, then I could confirm. But this is a nickname, so
25 maybe it's him, maybe it isn't.
1 MR. HANNIS:
2 Q. Okay. You know Boban is a nickname for Slobodan; correct?
3 A. I don't know that.
4 Q. You know Mr. Zecevic, Slobodan Zecevic, here, he goes by the
5 nickname of Boban; correct?
6 MR. ZECEVIC: That is correct, yes.
7 MR. HANNIS: I'll accept that as a stipulation without requiring
8 the witness to be put under oath.
9 MR. KRGOVIC: Anyway, Mr. Cvijetic is Slobodan but they call him
11 MR. HANNIS:
12 Q. No, my point is, Mr. Andan, that Boban is a common nickname for
13 persons named Slobodan; right?
14 JUDGE HALL: Mr. Hannis, having regard to the witness's answer
15 earlier, you've taken this as far as you can, haven't you?
16 MR. HANNIS: Well, Your Honour, if the witness could take his
17 headphones off, I'll make a comment.
18 Mr. Andan, could you remove your headphones. Thank you.
19 Your Honours, this was a small unit. Slobodan Kezunovic has been
20 identified as the deputy. I'll double check, I'm not sure there are any
21 other Slobans [sic] in the unit, and so therefore I would argue that
22 there is at least some logic to my position. There's also a reference
23 further on in this document to Boban and his unit, indicating it was a
24 Boban who was in position of authority within the Malovic unit and I'll
25 leave it at that.
1 The witness can put his headphones back on.
2 Q. Now, Mr. Andan, on Friday you were asked a question about your
3 experience with the Malovic unit when they were in the area in July --
4 June, July, August of 1992 and providing some assistance to you during
5 certain operations. You said, at page 21463:
6 "They went about their job very professionally. Whether anything
7 happened later, I don't know."
8 But since that time, since 1992, you did have occasion to hear
9 allegations that the Malovic unit had been involved allegedly in the
10 murders of three Muslim families in the municipality of Bijeljina; right?
11 A. I'll have to correct the first part of your sentence. They did
12 not provide assistance to us. They placed themselves at our disposal and
13 took part in all operations with us.
14 It is correct that I said that they acted very professionally
15 while we were working together, and it's also correct that I said that
16 one of the options discussed concerning the murders of the Sarajlic
17 family, as far as I remember, involved Mr. Malovic's name, whether
18 himself or with his unit. But one of the options or one of the
19 assumptions, rather, was that Mr. Malovic with his unit was involved in
20 the murder of that family.
21 Q. I'd like to show you Exhibit 65 ter 20141. This is tab 316 in
22 the Prosecution's list. And again I can hand you a hard copy.
23 Do you recognise this document? It's dated the
24 12th of December, 2007. It's an Official Note apparently of a
25 conversation you had with the Prosecutor's Office in the special
1 department for war crimes.
2 A. Mr. Hannis, I must say that the first allegation or the first
3 sentence in this Official Note is false. I remember the event and I
4 don't deny talking to the representatives of the OTP in Sarajevo, but I
5 did not enter the facilities of the BH Prosecutor's Office voluntarily.
6 I requested Mr. Jurcevic [phoen], the state prosecutor of BH, to receive
7 me, and as I have said, he did, and I offered him to go into detention
8 voluntarily due to the state I was in pursuant to the information sent
9 out by Carla del Ponte that I was part of an organised crime network and
10 that I was supporting Radovan Karadzic. I've described that already.
11 And at the end of the conversation, Mr. Jurcevic said that my problem was
12 not with the state Prosecutor's Office of BH but rather with the OHR. He
13 asked me if I was willing to go and talk to Ms. Bozidarka, I didn't
14 remember her name but I know that it was a woman, and I accepted. And
15 the conversation took place, that is correct.
16 And another remark with regard to the text. I told to this
17 person Bozidarka that one of the stories that had reached me, and it was
18 the most widespread, that Dusko Malovic or his unit took part in that
19 killing. That is the truth. So number one, I didn't go there
20 voluntarily; and secondly, I said that one of the versions or, rather,
21 the most common story was that involving Mr. Malovic.
22 I accept the rest of the text, but I had to make these
23 corrections. With all due respect for Bozidarka, if she wanted to have a
24 story involving me, then as a professional she should have taken my
25 statement which would have been asked --
1 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction: -- which I would have
2 signed --
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- at the end of that interview. I
4 hope that you agree with me.
5 MR. HANNIS:
6 Q. Okay. I see at the end the name is Bozidarka Dodik. Does that
7 refresh your memory as to her last name?
8 A. It means nothing to him [as interpreted]. I was beside myself at
9 the time. I only remember that it was a woman. I didn't care about the
11 Q. Have you seen this written Official Note before today?
12 A. I think so.
13 Q. Do you want to take a few minutes to read it, because I'm sort of
14 relying on what's said here as being what you actually said at the time.
15 So I need to ask you if you can confirm that, and I certainly want to
16 give you an opportunity to review it if you think you need to.
17 I see you finished reading. Do you have any comment? Please
18 tell me.
19 A. I did finish. I have another correction maybe. It is correct
20 that the chief prosecutor summoned me, but I didn't come voluntarily, I
21 went to see him for another matter. And I stand by what I have just
22 said, that one of the assumptions but the one that was most popular was
23 the version involving Mr. Malovic's unit. If I had had any specific
24 knowledge, I would have found a way to convey it to the authorities in
25 charge. I don't know what stage the investigation of the
1 state prosecutor's office is in, but I did say that one of the versions,
2 the one that was being mentioned most frequently, was the one involving
3 Mr. Malovic's unit.
4 There was also a press release by the radicals by which they
5 denied all that, and that's also what I said.
6 Q. But Ms. Bozidarka --
7 MR. HANNIS: Wait a second, I see Mr. Zecevic on his feet.
8 MR. ZECEVIC: Sorry, the last part of the answer was not recorded
9 properly. Perhaps witness can repeat his answer, because it is recorded
10 as: "There was also a press release by the radicals by which they denied
11 all that, and that is also what I said."
12 That is not what he said and then that's not what he said just
14 MR. HANNIS:
15 Q. Mr. Andan, you heard what Mr. Zecevic just said. It's my
16 understanding, from part of the case file, that there was a press release
17 by the radicals, by Mirko Blagojevic, at the time saying that
18 Malovic's men were responsible for these murders. Is that what you were
19 saying? What was the last part of your answer about the press release by
20 the radicals?
21 A. I think it was misinterpreted and that you also misunderstood
22 what I said at the end. I said that I stand by the last paragraph of
23 this Official Note, which says that the representatives of the
24 Serb Radical Party issued a press release over SIM Radio, which was a
25 broadcast that the Sarajlic family had been killed and that it was denied
1 by Mr. Tomislav Kovac. This last paragraph, I said that the radicals
2 conveyed that information and that it was denied by Mr. Kovac.
3 Q. And when you say last paragraph, you're talking about the last
4 paragraph on page 1 of your B/C/S version; correct? Because that's the
5 paragraph -- it's not the last paragraph in the entire Official Note, but
6 it's the last paragraph on that first page; right?
7 A. Yes, you're right. It's the last on the first page.
8 Q. Thank you. Now, what I -- I understand your position about
9 saying you didn't go voluntarily or on your own initiative as described
10 here, but did anyone coerce or did anyone torture you or make you some
11 promise, give you some reward for giving this statement? Bozidarka
12 didn't mistreat you to get you to give your statement, did she?
13 A. Of course she did not. I told you that Mr. Jurcevic asked me
14 after the interview if I was willing to go to the war crimes department
15 to talk to an investigator about something. He didn't really say exactly
16 what I was supposed to speak about. And I said, No problems, and I went
17 to Bozidarka's office. But I may be wrong in this, but this sounds --
18 sounded to me like that I came from Banja Luka and they wanted to
19 interrogate me about some circumstances or that I was there to give a
20 statement about some circumstances, both of which is wrong.
21 Q. Okay. A couple of questions. In the - one, two, three - fourth
22 paragraph on the first page, you're quoted or noted as having said that:
23 "In July 1992 the unit came from Sarajevo to Bijeljina at the
24 order of the then minister of the MUP of the RS Mico Stanisic, and that
25 they wore grey/white camouflage uniforms which is why they were called
2 "Woodpeckers" in English.
3 Do you remember yesterday I was asking you about nicknames and I
4 asked you if you heard the term "snowflakes" being used in connection
5 with this unit. Now here you're reported as referring to them as
6 woodpeckers. Is that a nickname you heard used for Malovic's unit?
7 A. I said yesterday that mostly they were called Malovic's men or
8 Mico's men. You said that they were called snowflakes and I said
9 woodpeckers. Now, I'm really not sure what they were called, nor do I
10 care much, but I know that the unit existed, it was commanded by Malovic
11 whose deputy was Kezunovic, and these are undisputed facts.
12 Q. One more question before the break. At the bottom of English
13 page 1, and for you I think it's near the top of page 2, says that you
15 "According to the MUP's organisation at the time, Dusko Malovic's
16 special unit was directly subordinate to Cedo Kljajic."
17 Is that correct, in September of 1992 at the time of the murders?
18 Is that your understanding?
19 A. I don't know if we understand each other properly, but as soon as
20 she left Pale, she was re-subordinated -- or rather, it was
21 re-subordinated to the highest-ranking officer and that was Cedo Kljajic,
22 and it was given at the disposal of Davidovic and me. He was the highest
23 ranking at the time and, of course, the unit was re-subordinated to him.
24 MR. HANNIS: Your Honours, I'd like to tender 65 ter 20141.
25 MR. ZECEVIC: Your Honours, we object. I believe the
1 Trial Chamber gave a ruling on the fresh evidence and just last week or
2 this week, I'm not sure anymore, maybe on Monday. So the Office of the
3 Prosecutor needs to fulfill a number of requirements in accordance with
4 the jurisprudence before they can be allowed to have this document or
5 these kind of documents admitted during the Defence case. Thank you.
6 [Trial Chamber confers]
7 JUDGE HALL: Do you have reply, Mr. Hannis?
8 MR. HANNIS: Your Honours, this -- I'm not sure when we received
9 it. Looking at the ERN 0649, that's a pretty high number, and that means
10 it's a fairly recently received document. I think it was -- I'm not sure
11 when we got it or when it was disclosed, but we didn't know it was
12 something we were going to use until we became aware that Mr. Andan was
13 going to be called as a witness. So it was not something -- by the
14 Defence. So it was not something we could have used earlier. I think
15 it's relevant. It's going to be important to you in deciding on the
16 evidence this witness has given. It will bear some weight on decisions
17 about what he says today to the extent that it may be different than what
18 he said in 2007. And, therefore, I think it's also relevant and
19 necessary for Your Honours in making final determinations in this case.
20 JUDGE HALL: Well, we will consider the issues and give our
21 decision when we return.
22 So we take the adjournment now, to come back in 20 minutes.
23 [The witness stands down]
24 --- Recess taken at 10.24 a.m.
25 --- On resuming at 10.55 a.m.
1 MR. HANNIS: Your Honours, have you reached a decision on my --
2 JUDGE HALL: Well, continuing where we left off at the break,
3 could -- inasmuch as this is your application, Mr. Hannis, can you assist
4 by telling us what this document is.
5 MR. HANNIS: Yes, Your Honour.
6 JUDGE HALL: And apart from that, when the Defence would have
7 learned about it, when it would have been disclosed to the Defence.
8 MR. HANNIS: Your Honours, I think the Defence, as far as getting
9 it from us, only got it when Mr. Andan took the stand to testify, because
10 it was a new document that we added on our list of documents to use with
11 this witness.
12 [The witness takes the stand]
13 JUDGE HALL: And when was it added?
14 MR. HANNIS: Before he started to testify. It was in our
15 original list at tab 312, which we filed the minute he started to
17 JUDGE HALL: And the first part of the question, in summary, what
18 is the document?
19 MR. HANNIS: Yes, Your Honours. This is something we received
20 from the prosecutor's office in Bosnia. I think it's part of a file.
21 It's related to Exhibit P1543, which is already in evidence, which is
22 from the prosecutor's office in Bijeljina. The investigation involving
23 the murder of the three Muslim families. So it's related to that case
25 And as you can see, we say it's important and relevant for you
1 because it goes to a number of contested issues in the case. The
2 position of the Malovic unit, under whose authority were they, and this
3 is a disputed issue. The Prosecution's taken the position that they were
4 directly subordinated to Mr. Stanisic. The Defence has said otherwise.
5 We have some evidence to that effect. This witness has said that when
6 they arrived they were temporarily subordinated to him and Mr. Davidovic.
7 In this statement in 2007 he says they were directly subordinate to
8 Mr. Kljajic. So it goes to that issue.
9 JUDGE HALL: Sorry, Mr. Hannis.
10 Mr. Andan, could you take your headphones off, please.
12 MR. HANNIS: And there are parts of it, too, that I would argue
13 should be before you in terms of judging his credibility, because I think
14 some of what he says here is contradicted by other documents already in
15 the case or to be in before I finish with him.
16 JUDGE HALL: You said something -- before you -- in terms of
17 judging his credibility, is that the primary purpose of this document?
18 MR. HANNIS: No, it's not the primary purpose.
19 JUDGE HALL: [Microphone not activated] We have some questions for
20 Mr. Zecevic. I just wanted to know if there's anything else you want to
21 add, Mr. Hannis.
22 MR. HANNIS: Not at this time. I was just going to argue some of
23 the law to you. We filed a motion yesterday concerning some of the
24 documents for Mr. Bjelosevic where we set out the applicable law, and I
25 think the Judges are familiar with that, but if you want to have a
1 convenient place to look at it, that's in our filing from yesterday.
2 JUDGE HALL: Thank you.
3 Mr. Zecevic, this is a document which, if I might summarise
4 Mr. Hannis's position, as I understand it, that was disclosed to the --
5 well, was notified to the Defence as soon as they learned that this
6 witness was testifying. Could you expand on your -- the basis of your
7 objection to its admissibility.
8 MR. ZECEVIC: Your Honours, first of all, the document was not
9 disclosed to us at the moment when the Office of the Prosecutor was aware
10 of the -- of Mr. Andan testifying in this case for the Defence.
11 MR. HANNIS: That's correct, Your Honour. What I was saying was
12 they were notified when he took the stand and began testifying. Not when
13 we got their 65 ter list.
14 JUDGE DELVOIE: When -- Mr. Hannis, when did the Office of the
15 Prosecution got this document?
16 MR. HANNIS: [Microphone not activated] We received this document
17 in 2009.
18 JUDGE DELVOIE: In 2009. Thank you.
19 MR. HANNIS: [Microphone not activated] I think May of 2009.
20 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
21 JUDGE HALL: Thank you.
22 Please continue, Mr. Zecevic.
23 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes. Your Honours, that's number one.
24 The number two, again, brings us back to our request made to the
25 Office of the Prosecutor on -- based on Rule 66(B), where we requested
1 all the documents pertaining to all our witnesses.
2 The third thing is, if this document was a part of the file which
3 is already in the -- as Mr. Hannis said, it is connected, because the
4 part of the exhibits is the file which was received probably in 2009 and
5 which was compiled by the Office of the Prosecutor in Sarajevo in 2009
6 concerning the murder of Sarajlic family in Bijeljina. Now, the whole
7 file, what Office of the Prosecutor thought or relied on, is already an
8 exhibit in the case.
9 Now, this document was a part of the file. It was taken out
10 because it's an Official Note created by the Prosecutor. It's not signed
11 by the witness. So, therefore, that goes to the -- to the position of
12 the Office of the Prosecutor concerning the Official Notes that we
13 discussed some time ago, if Your Honours can recollect about the contents
14 of the official notes.
15 What my -- if my recollection is correct, the Official Note was
16 admitted on the purpose that -- that not for the truth of its content,
17 but for the fact that the Official Note was taken. Because the Office of
18 the Prosecutor was against the admittance of such documents because they
19 say there might have been, for whatever reasons, not accurate description
20 of what the person said. Now, if that standard apply for Official Notes,
21 then it should apply for this Official Note as well, because it's not
22 signed by the witness. In any case --
23 JUDGE HALL: If I might just hold you at that point, Mr. Zecevic.
24 If - and I underline if - it is being offered merely for the fact of its
25 existence, as contrast to the truth of its contents, what prejudice is
1 there to the Defence?
2 MR. ZECEVIC: There is no prejudice to the Defence if it's
3 offered for the pure existence of this document. It is not disputed at
4 all. But what -- if it -- if this would be a document which the
5 Office of the Prosecutor offers concerning the credibility of the witness
6 and not for the truth of its contents, we wouldn't object. But
7 Mr. Hannis said its primary goal is to admit this document for the
8 alleged truth of its contents.
9 And we say, Your Honours, the Office of the Prosecutor had this
10 document in their possession. If they thought it was a document which
11 could further their case, they would have offered it when they offered
12 the whole case file received from the Office of the Prosecutor in 2009.
13 And it has been admitted, despite our objection. We objected to that
14 document being admitted because we say it's irrelevant for the issues of
15 this case because this incident is not in the indictment.
16 But nonetheless we stay on the position that at this point in
17 time and in this -- during the Defence case the Office of the Prosecutor
18 should not be allowed, according to the jurisprudence, existing
19 jurisprudence of this Tribunal, should not be allowed to enter this fresh
20 evidence because they cannot fulfill the requirements set by the
21 jurisprudence. Thank you.
22 [Trial Chamber confers]
23 JUDGE DELVOIE: Mr. Zecevic, we didn't have the chance to read
24 the document in entirety. What would be the prejudice to the Defence if
25 it comes in for the truth of the contents? I'm referring to what the
1 Appeal Chamber decision is learning us as how we should deal with this,
2 if there is prejudice and if that prejudice can be remedied.
3 MR. ZECEVIC: Well, the prejudice would be that, Your Honours,
4 since this document was drafted by somebody else, it might not contain
5 the actual wording of what the witness said during --
6 JUDGE HALL: But he's accepted the contents.
7 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes, he accepted the contents. But I'm not sure if
8 that means that he is accepting all the way how it was put on the
9 document, you see, Your Honours, because it's a bit different than what
10 his testimony is, and that is going be the prejudice for the Defence. In
11 my opinion. Otherwise the Office of the Prosecutor would not be
12 insisting on admitting this document, I guess.
13 JUDGE HARHOFF: Could I just add, Mr. Zecevic, that in my view,
14 at least, there would be a difference between an Official Note taken by a
15 warden in a detention camp where one of the detainees is being
16 interviewed by the warden on the one hand, and on the other hand an
17 Official Note such as this one where someone like the witness is being
18 called to give an explanation of some events that took place in the past.
19 So, I mean, the fact that this is an Official Note does not necessarily
20 preclude it from being tendered into evidence for its contents. I mean,
21 I think that there's a difference between different types of
22 Official Notes.
23 MR. ZECEVIC: With all due respect, Your Honours, I do agree that
24 there is -- that it's significantly -- there is a difference when it
25 comes to the context when and under which circumstances the Official Note
1 was created. I do agree with that.
2 But as a matter -- I thought that the -- that the ruling of the
3 Trial Chamber was a principal one, that the Official Note is created by a
4 third person saying -- noting what somebody else said and that because of
5 these reasons -- I mean, according to the objection -- if my recollection
6 serves me well, according to the objection of the Office of the
7 Prosecutor. Because if you remember, Your Honours, at that point we had
8 even the Official Notes which were signed by the persons giving -- giving
9 the statement. It was created by some office -- police officers and the
10 person, at the end, signed. So I agree, there are different kinds of
11 Official Notes, yes.
12 [Trial Chamber confers]
13 JUDGE HALL: The -- sorry, you wanted to add something,
14 Mr. Hannis?
15 MR. HANNIS: I did, Your Honour. I wanted to clarify something
16 that Mr. Zecevic had said at line 30 -- page 32, line 10, because he
17 said: "Now, this document was a part of the file. It was taken out
18 because it's an Official Note ..." I think that's incorrect. The
19 official file that we already put into evidence concerning this case is
20 Exhibit P1543. It's the criminal file from the Bijeljina District
21 Prosecution Office. And I believe the date on that document when we
22 received it was 14 April 2005, is the date on that package. So this
23 Official Note given by Mr. Andan on 12 December 2007 could not have been
24 a part of that package. So it doesn't -- I think it's important for you
25 to know that.
1 And also, again, I think it's an important document. It's
2 relevant to some issues, some of these contested issues. As you know,
3 evidence is a living thing, and this changes in the course of the case.
4 At the beginning of the case, we had certain evidence we felt made it
5 clear that Dusko Malovic's unit was directly subordinate to
6 Mr. Mico Stanisic. So certain were we that we put that in our chart that
7 you have with Dusko Malovic's unit out to the side from Mr. Stanisic.
8 Over the course of the case, there's been a series of challenges
9 to that, and that is one reason that we felt it necessary, when we got
10 the opportunity with the witness of some knowledge about that, to try and
11 bolster the evidence that's already in the case through this witness.
12 Now, absent a showing of prejudice more than you've heard so far,
13 we think the remedy is to allow this in. Certain matters can be
14 addressed on cross-examination. And we think that's the appropriate
15 remedy, rather than barring the evidence. Thank you.
16 MR. ZECEVIC: Just one clarification, Your Honours. When I said
17 what Mr. Hannis correctly cited in the transcript, I was referring to his
18 words on page 30, line 2:
19 "Yes, Your Honours. This is something we received from the
20 prosecutor's office in Bosnia. I think it's part of a file."
21 Thank you.
22 [Trial Chamber confers]
23 JUDGE HALL: For the reasons as we understand them that
24 Mr. Hannis, in his most recent intervention, has given, we are
25 unanimously of the view that we are surprised as to why this document was
1 not disclosed to the Defence at an earlier stage.
2 But notwithstanding that reservation, which, as I said, we all
3 share, and it is such that the majority of the Bench, Judge Harhoff
4 dissenting, Judge Harhoff's dissent being based on that various
5 reservation which I mentioned earlier, we are satisfied that the document
6 is such that it may be admitted having regard to the fact that the
7 witness has adopted the contents in his testimony and we see no prejudice
8 to the Defence which cannot be remedied in the way that Mr. Hannis has
9 suggested, by cross-examination -- when the time comes to re-examine.
10 And therefore the document, as I said, by a majority, is admitted into
12 THE REGISTRAR: 65 ter 20141 shall be given Exhibit P2347,
13 Your Honours.
14 MR. HANNIS: Thank you, Your Honours.
15 May the witness put his headphones back on.
16 Q. Mr. Andan, I want to show you one more document related to the
17 Malovic unit.
18 MR. HANNIS: This is 65 ter 20146, tab 312 of the Prosecution's
20 Q. And with the usher's help, I'd like to hand you a hard copy.
21 Mr. Andan, just have a look at that. But while you're looking,
22 let me ask you a question. Do you know a man named Ljubomir Borovcanin
23 who worked in the RS Police?
24 A. I did not know him up until 1995. I think it was in 1995 that I
25 first met him.
1 Q. Okay. Do you know if he was working in the Police Administration
2 of the RS MUP in 1996?
3 A. I don't know. I wasn't working there at the time.
4 Q. When you knew him in 1995, do you know what position he held or
5 what section he worked in?
6 A. I think he was assistant commander of the Special Forces of the
7 MUP of Republika Srpska. I think.
8 Q. Okay.
9 A. If I may, just one more intervention. I think it would be
10 important for the Trial Chamber as well.
11 Very often, special units are mentioned. According to the
12 regulations and laws governing the Ministry of the Interior of
13 Republika Srpska, there was just this one special unit. Let me not go
14 into an explanation now, but you know, Mr. Hannis, how a person becomes a
15 member of the Special Forces and what kind of training is required and
16 how many years it takes.
17 All these other special units that are being mentioned are
18 self-styled special units. Specifically, Dusko Malovic's unit had
19 nothing special about them except that they were big guys, as we say in
20 Mount Romanija. So they hadn't been through any kind of training or
21 anything. The only special unit that I acknowledge and recognise was the
22 unit that was commanded by Mr. Karisik and later Goran Savic that was the
23 special unit of the MUP of Republika Srpska. These others just call
24 themselves special, and believe me they were not different from any unit
25 in any way, except that they had a certain status within the army or the
2 Q. Well, as a matter of fact, Mr. Malovic's unit had special status
3 within the police; right? They were called the Special Platoon on
4 payroll documents. Did you know that? The Special Police Platoon?
5 A. I don't know what they called them. But I tried to explain to
6 you just now what special meant. You know how long it takes to train
7 Special Forces. At least four years of intensive training and then three
8 more years in a unit so that someone would be a qualified Special Forces
9 member. In our part of the world then, someone would just put on a
10 uniform and call himself a Special Forces guy.
11 JUDGE HALL: Mr. Andan, I understand the thrust of your evidence,
12 that there was nothing special about these groups, whatever they call
13 themselves, but when you say that they had a certain status within the
14 police, could you expand on that, please.
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. President, again, I'm going
16 back to what is regulated by the law. During the war, there was just one
17 special unit in the Ministry of the Interior and that was the unit that
18 was commanded by Mr. Karisik and later Mr. Savic. Even that unit was not
19 fully special, because certain members of the Ministry of the Interior
20 were being attached to it every now and then, so they hadn't been through
21 any kind of Special Forces training except for perhaps one platoon of
22 that unit that had undergone such training before the war and they were,
23 before the war, within the special unit of the MUP of Bosnia-Herzegovina.
24 There were some units that called themselves special. Also, in
25 our documents you can see that there was this special unit of
1 Mico Davidovic's from the federal SUP. That's not correct either. These
2 are young men who primarily provided security to individuals and
3 facilities in the Republic of Serbia, so they were ordinary policemen.
4 Within the federal SUP there was a brigade that provided security for
5 public gatherings, public events, big sports matches, et cetera. And
6 then there was also security for embassies and other buildings.
7 Individuals who were on the move were secured by another unit.
8 In our documents it says, for example, a special unit came from the
9 federal SUP. It was not special in any way, believe me, except that it
10 was the first time that I saw some weapons that they had brought in.
11 That's what made them special in my eyes, and they were special because
12 they had discipline and an internal establishment that did not allow for
13 any kind of unruly or disorderly behaviour.
14 I don't know if I've managed to paint the right picture for you,
15 but, anyway, self-styled special units, self-styled Special Forces, were
16 in abundance, both in the police and the military. While I was still at
17 the Ministry of the Interior at one of our meetings, I intervened with
18 Mr. Kljajic and I said very often every police station claims to have a
19 special unit. I complained because a unit that was established as soon
20 as I left Brcko was again called a special unit. It was just an
21 intervention platoon. It was only special because it went to intervene
22 in certain cases when public law and order were disrupted, so they did
23 not have patrol duty, beat duty, they were there to intervene on the spot
24 if the regular police could not get a job done.
25 Again I'm saying the Special Police was the one that was led by
1 Milenko Karisik and later on by Goran Savic, although later on it became
2 something different yet again because other policemen were included in
3 that unit who had not undergone that kind of Special Forces training.
4 They were trained for their regular work but not for Special Forces.
5 JUDGE HALL: Thank you, sir.
6 Yes, Mr. Hannis.
7 MR. HANNIS: Thank you.
8 In light of that, Mr. Andan, I think I need to show you another
9 document before I continue with what we had on the screen at the moment.
10 Can we show the witness Exhibit P796. This is at tab 280 of the
11 Prosecution's list.
12 Q. [Microphone not activated] Mr. Andan, this is a document in
13 evidence. It's a --
14 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for the Prosecution.
15 MR. HANNIS: Sorry.
16 Q. This is a document in evidence. It's a payroll list for the
17 month of April 1992, and it is for the special station -- for the police
18 station Special Platoon at the Serbian MUP, and you'll see number one is
19 the commander Dusko Malovic and the names of some of the same people that
20 you talked about when you identified some of the photographs. You see
21 that? It's referred to as the special platoon at the Serbian MUP; right?
22 A. Yes, this document says that it's a special platoon, but I still
23 stand by what I said: This was no special platoon. Perhaps it was
24 treated somewhat differently.
25 Q. Okay. I understand your position. You see name number 3 on this
1 list is Zeljko Tosic?
2 A. Yes, I see that.
3 Q. Okay. Let me show you one more.
4 MR. HANNIS: This is Exhibit P984. It's at tab 276.
5 Q. This is another payroll, Mr. Andan. And this is for the month of
6 October 1992. Special Platoon Sokolac. Dusko Malovic is number one on
7 the list. I see number two is Boban Kezunovic. And number 25 is
8 Zeljko Tosic. Do you see that?
9 A. Yes, I see that.
10 Q. Thank you.
11 MR. HANNIS: Now, could we go back to 65 ter 20146.
12 Q. This is the one we started to look at before, Mr. Andan, and it
13 relates to some personnel issue concerning Zeljko Tosic. And after the
14 cover page, take a look at the next document, which is a document from
15 the chief of administration in the RS Public Security addressing the
16 issue of the status of Zeljko Tosic.
17 And in there he's indicating that the SJB, and apparently that's
18 SJB Sokolac, does not have the required information on Tosic because he
19 was a member of the Special Police Unit platoon strength formed in
20 Sokolac. It goes on to say it's well known that this independent unit
21 was first led by Dule Markovic or Malovic and then by Slobodan Kezunovic.
22 Among other tasks, this unit provided security and escort to the
23 minister. That was part of the task of Malovic's unit, wasn't it, to
24 provide security for Mr. Stanisic?
25 MR. ZECEVIC: Can you please specify the time, Mr. Hannis.
1 MR. HANNIS:
2 Q. In 1992, wasn't that part of the duties of Dusko Malovic and his
4 A. I cannot confirm this. The months of June, July, and August,
5 Mr. Malovic and his unit spent that period of time in Bijeljina, so they
6 couldn't have been at two places at the same time. Whether something
7 similar to this took place later, I don't know. Maybe I'm not
8 100 per cent correct about this, but I don't think that Mr. Stanisic
9 remained there longer than the end of 1992. And anyway, my post was the
10 place where I could not have been informed about the decisions of the
11 administration. Look, is this signed by Ljubisa Borovcanin? I told you
12 that I only met him in 2005.
13 Q. I'm sorry, I thought you said 1995 originally, as the date when
14 you met Mr. Borovcanin. Was that incorrect?
15 A. I think I said 1995.
16 Q. But you've seen the payroll list, that there were somewhere in
17 the neighbourhood of 25, 26, 28 members of Mr. Malovic's unit. You
18 picked out, I think, something like eight or nine photographs from those
19 that you were shown. Isn't it possible that a portion of Mr. Malovic's
20 unit was not in Bijeljina with you but were with the minister wherever he
21 was providing security? You can't account for all 26 members of the unit
22 every day between mid-June and mid-August 1992, can you?
23 MR. ZECEVIC: I believe this calls for speculation. I
24 understand, I must say, Mr. Hannis's frustration, but I believe the
25 witness gave his testimony very clearly during the direct and on cross
1 about the number of the members of the unit that were in Bijeljina. So I
2 don't think that this is a proper question.
3 I'm not sure that's correct. If I could have a page citation
4 where he testified to a specific number and the fact that they were there
5 every day between mid-June and mid-August, then I'll stand corrected.
6 But I'm certain that was not the testimony.
7 MR. ZECEVIC: Well, I will provide you with the exact reference.
8 But on two occasions, the witness confirmed the number of the members of
9 the Malovic's unit that came to Bijeljina and were re-subordinated to his
10 and Mico Davidovic's command.
11 JUDGE HALL: In any event, Mr. Hannis, any question that begins
12 with "isn't it possible," you're starting down the road which is not
13 likely to produce a helpful answer.
14 MR. HANNIS: Well, then, I guess I need to rephrase my question.
15 Q. My question is: You don't know where all 26 members of
16 Mr. Malovic's unit were every day between mid-June and mid-August 1992,
17 do you?
18 A. I have to make a brief introduction. It is true that I said --
19 Q. Sorry, can you just answer the question and then you can explain.
20 But that's a simple question. You don't know, do you? Because sometimes
21 were with Mico Davidovic meeting with the army, and sometimes you were
22 somewhere else. You don't know where every one of Malovic's unit were
23 for every day between mid-June and mid-August, you couldn't; right?
24 A. I can state with some certainty that they took part in all our
25 actions in their full complement. We had mixed patrols that worked
1 during the curfew, and it was every evening that between seven and ten of
2 them were assigned to various areas in order to check the situation
3 during the curfew. I cannot say that some of them did not have a sick
4 leave or maybe a family visit, but I know that they were in all our
5 actions and that they took part in full complement.
6 One more thing. I answered the question and now you should allow
7 me to say one more thing. I said that they were re-subordinated to
8 Mr. Davidovic and myself while the actions and operations were carried
9 out. But you have to bear in mind that their superior was Cedo Kljajic.
10 He called Malovic to attend a meeting, as he called me and Mr. Davidovic.
11 So he could not have been completely re-subordinated to Davidovic because
12 he came from another country to provide assistance.
13 JUDGE DELVOIE: Mr. Andan, I'm sorry, but I don't seem to
14 understand the last part of your answer. "He could not have been
15 completely re-subordinated to Davidovic." Who is "he"? Do you mean
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Malovic. I was referring to
18 Mr. Malovic. I attempted to explain that they were re-subordinated to
19 Mr. Davidovic and me. Dusko Malovic's unit was re-subordinated to
20 Davidovic and me during the operations that were carried out in the
21 field. But nominally, formally, their immediate superior in Bijeljina at
22 the time was the undersecretary for public security, Mr. Cedo Kljajic.
23 JUDGE DELVOIE: Thank you.
24 MR. HANNIS:
25 Q. As I recall your testimony on direct, you said you encountered
1 Mr. Malovic for the first time when he came to Bijeljina; is that
3 A. That's correct.
4 Q. In when, June or July 1992?
5 A. You have to excuse my dates again, but it was when he arrived.
6 June or July, I think.
7 Q. And when you say his full component [sic] took part in every
8 action you engaged in, how did you know what his full component was,
9 because you only met him when I arrived in Bijeljina with however many
10 people he arrived with? How did you know that those who came on that
11 first date were the full component or only some lesser part of his entire
13 A. Mr. Hannis, as far as I know, he was a non-commissioned officer
14 in the JNA. The rules and regulations that he had learned in the army,
15 he applied in the unit as well. Every time an operation was carried out,
16 his subordinate would report to him and inform him whether any of the
17 members were sick or absent. So as I stated during examination-in-chief,
18 as you call it, they were a strengthened platoon, 20 to 25 people. Maybe
19 I even stated once or twice 30 people. I did not count them. That is
20 true. However, when we are all lined up, then we have first the report
21 on the manpower, then we have the report on any possible problems, and
22 that's exactly the same procedure followed by Mr. Malovic's unit.
23 So don't ask me to specify whether there were 19 or 23 of them.
24 But what I heard when they were about to carry out an operation was that
25 nobody was absent and that they were ready to carry out the operation.
1 Q. Could you have a look at the document in front of you.
2 MR. HANNIS: And it's page 4 in the English, and I believe it's
3 maybe the fourth page for you. Yeah.
4 JUDGE DELVOIE: Mr. Hannis.
5 MR. HANNIS: Yes.
6 JUDGE DELVOIE: Before we go to that, I'd like to ask one more
7 follow-up question.
8 Mr. Andan, you told us that nominally, formally, their immediate
9 superior in Bijeljina at the time was the undersecretary for public
10 security, Mr. Kljajic. How was that? Could you explain that to me or
11 remind me?
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I will try to explain. He comes
13 from a different organisational unit. And I should specify one more
14 thing. We did not request Mr. Kljajic to send us Dusko Malovic's unit to
15 Bijeljina. No. We requested reinforcements because it was our
16 assessment that the existing forces at the disposal of Mr. Davidovic, and
17 that was a part of the unit that I had formed in Bijeljina from
18 policemen, that this was insufficient to cover our needs in the field.
19 So we requested Mr. Kljajic to send us reinforcement through the ministry
20 and the minister. And then a few days later, Mr. Malovic arrived in
21 Bijeljina with his unit. And of course it was only natural that
22 according to the hierarchy, he should report to the undersecretary who
23 was the most senior officer in the institution.
24 So it doesn't mean that Mr. Malovic was transferred by the
25 decision of the minister to the area of the security centre in Bijeljina.
1 He was told to report to the undersecretary Kljajic. And then he would
2 be issued assignments and tasks that he was supposed to carry out. So I
3 couldn't be his superior because I was an inspector in the police.
4 Mico Davidovic couldn't be his superior because he came from another
5 country. Mr. Kljajic was the highest ranking officer in the police
6 station at the moment. He was the undersecretary for public security.
7 He was an employee of the Ministry of the Interior. So it is only
8 logical that Mr. Kljajic was responsible and a superior to Mr. Malovic,
9 who I arrived in Bijeljina at that moment.
10 JUDGE DELVOIE: It's just that I'm a little bit confused,
11 Mr. Andan, about where Mr. Kljajic was at that moment. You said he was
12 the highest ranking officer in the police station at the moment. In
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I was referring to Bijeljina.
15 Absolutely. He was in Bijeljina. He was with us.
16 JUDGE DELVOIE: Okay. Thank you.
17 MR. HANNIS:
18 Q. Sorry, Mr. Andan, I have to find a -- follow up on something in
19 your answer to be sure it's interpreted correctly. Page 47, line 15,
20 it's translated as:
21 "So it doesn't mean that Mr. Malovic was transferred by the
22 decision of the minister to the area of the security centre in Bijeljina.
23 He was told to report to the undersecretary Kljajic. And then he would
24 be issued assignments ..."
25 Who was he told by? Wasn't Mr. Stanisic the only one that could
1 have sent him there and directed him to Kljajic?
2 A. Let me explain. When I said that, I meant to say that the
3 minister did not issue a decision whereby he would be transferred to
4 another organisational unit. There was no decision which would assign
5 him from that point on to the security services in Bijeljina. He came
6 from the seat of the ministry to Bijeljina. It can happen in two ways.
7 One way is for the minister to issue a decision, remove him from the
8 complement of the manpower of the ministry, and transfer him to
9 Bijeljina. He is thereby put at the dispose of the security centre in
10 Bijeljina. He reports to the chief and says, By the decision of the
11 minister, I'm now transferred and assigned to Bijeljina. So that's one
13 And the other way is what happened with Mr. Malovic. I didn't
14 explicitly say that Mr. Stanisic ordered him to be transferred there. I
15 said we asked Mr. Kljajic to send us assistance. He spoke to someone in
16 the ministry, whether it was Mr. Stanisic or not, I don't know, but he
17 did speak to somebody who was most probably on a higher position than
18 himself. And after a few days, Dusko Malovic's unit appeared in
19 Bijeljina. That's what I said, Mr. Hannis. Maybe it was a bit confusing
20 for you, but I am trying to explain everything quite clearly. I was
21 trying to explain the situation at the time.
22 Q. Okay. Let me --
23 JUDGE DELVOIE: One more, Mr. Hannis, please.
24 MR. HANNIS: Yes. Certainly.
25 JUDGE DELVOIE: Mr. Andan, is part of the confusion in our minds
1 perhaps the difference between the public security ... Mr. Kljajic is
2 public security, yes? Undersecretary for public security?
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's correct.
4 JUDGE DELVOIE: The centre is public security as well, the centre
5 in Bijeljina?
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's correct. It's a lower
7 organisational unit in relation to the position that Kljajic held.
8 JUDGE DELVOIE: Okay. Thank you.
9 MR. HANNIS: I guess I need to ask a question following that up
11 Q. It's my understanding that the centre in Bijeljina, though, a
12 CSB, is a centre for both public security and state security; right? The
13 CSBs have both public and state security or national security components?
14 A. I think you're right. The organisational structure was taken
15 over from the pre-war structure. So the Security Services Centre headed
16 by the chief also had within its structure the state security department.
17 Q. Thank you. Now, if we could go back to the document that's on
18 the screen.
19 MR. HANNIS: If we could go to the last page in B/C/S and page 6
20 of the English.
21 Q. This is a letter apparently from Zeljko Tosic concerning
22 personnel matters, and in his letter he says:
23 "With the outbreak of war time operations in Bosnia and
24 Herzegovina, I joined the special platoon, the police in Sokolac, on
25 16 May 1992, regarding which I am in possession of a decision number"
1 such and such. "The platoon itself operated within the cabinet of the
3 MR. HANNIS: I see Mr. Zecevic on his feet.
4 MR. ZECEVIC: Well, again I have to object, Your Honour. He's
5 reading -- Mr. Hannis is reading from the document which has nothing to
6 do with the witness. It's the statement by some third person. I don't
7 think that's -- according to the -- the rulings in this case so far, it
8 wasn't allowed to be done. Thank you.
9 MR. HANNIS: Well, I'm reading it as a preface to asking him a
10 question, and I think it's something we've done for a long time in this
12 JUDGE HALL: I was about to say, I was waiting to hear the
13 question, Mr. Zecevic.
14 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes, but, Your Honours, he can -- Mr. Hannis can
15 pose the question without the reading from --
16 JUDGE HALL: [Microphone not activated] ... ah, sorry, I -- yes,
17 thanks. I take your point.
18 Yes, Mr. Hannis, you remember that we would have settled this --
19 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
20 JUDGE HALL: -- would have settled this some time ago, that in a
21 case such as this, you don't read the document into the record. You
22 invite the witness to read it and then ask your question.
23 MR. HANNIS: I will.
24 Q. You see that first paragraph on that page, in the letter from
25 Mr. Tosic?
1 A. Yes, I see.
2 Q. Isn't it true that the Special Platoon Sokolac,
3 Mr. Malovic's unit, was within the cabinet of the minister? You saw
4 those payroll documents.
5 A. On the basis of this document, I cannot comment on the issue
6 whether it was like that or not. It is true that the document says that
7 he was there. That's what this person says, that he was in a special
8 unit attached to the cabinet. But I have no other document stating that
9 such and such unit belonged to the cabinet of the minister of the
10 interior. And I don't think I am a competent witness to confirm
11 something about this. These are matters that I'm not entirely familiar
13 Q. Okay.
14 MR. HANNIS: And if we could go to page 4 of the English and
15 page -- I believe it's page 4 of the B/C/S.
16 Q. It's a document dated the 16th of May, 1992, which is a decision
17 temporarily assigning Mr. Tosic. That appears to be the document that's
18 referred to in paragraph 1 of his letter; right?
19 A. Yes, but there's a difference. I don't see that this is in the
20 office in the cabinet of the minister of the interior. The decision
21 simply says that he is assigned to the Special Platoon of the Serb MUP in
22 Sokolac. That's what it says here. So this is yet another document that
23 does not contain the claim that this was a special unit attached to the
24 cabinet of the minister of the interior. It is true that there is a
25 signature of Mr. Stanisic, but look what it says here, "in the
1 Special Platoon of the Serb MUP Sokolac."
2 Q. I agree. I think it needs to be related and read with all the
3 documents that come with it and the other documents concerning the
4 special platoon.
5 MR. HANNIS: Your Honours, I would tender 65 ter 20146.
6 MR. ZECEVIC: Well, Your Honours, perhaps the witness can take
7 the phones off -- his ... Thank you.
8 I do object, Your Honours. First of all, we claim that this
9 document is not authentic. We challenge the authenticity of this
10 document. If you look at the page 4 and the part which Mr. Hannis read
11 on the record, despite my objection, it is abundantly clear that the
12 document was typed and signed by one Tosic, Zeljko. There is a line
13 added. Theres a line added by the handwriting which says "this unit was
14 performing tasks under the cabinet of the minister."
15 Now, not only was this added obviously by handwriting, but if you
16 compare, Your Honours, Mr. Tosic writes in Latinic, his signature is
17 Latin, and the entry in the document is Cyrillic, the handwriting is
18 Cyrillic. So with all due respect, Your Honours, we do object that this
19 document goes in, because despite all our previous objections concerning
20 the fresh evidence and all that, it stays as well. But this, this is --
21 this document, obviously, we challenge the authenticity of this document.
22 Thank you.
23 [Trial Chamber confers]
24 MR. HANNIS: If I may add something for the Court's information
25 in terms of our MIF which is our internal document about where we got
1 this document from. This a document received on the 30th of March, 2009,
2 from Milorad Barasin. Mr. Barasin is the Prosecutor, the chief
3 prosecutor, in the State Court of Bosnia-Herzegovina. The document
4 itself, each of the three documents contain signatures, stamps, and
5 seals, and they appear to all be referring to each other, so they do
6 appear to be part of one package.
7 The handwriting, Your Honour, I don't have an explanation for
8 that, but I think you can see this is a request for some kind of relief
9 about a personal matter. The handwriting, I suggest, is likely that of
10 someone in the office dealing with the request and making their comment
11 about whether it should be approved. But I say that's matter that should
12 go to weight rather than admissibility of the document. I don't think
13 there's a genuine contest presented to the authenticity at this point.
14 JUDGE HALL: Do you have anything to say about what appears to us
15 as the lack of nexus between this document and the witness who is on the
16 stand in regard to what his answer has been, his testimony has been?
17 MR. HANNIS: Your Honours, I agree, he doesn't know much about
18 that, although he did see Mr. Tosic's names on the payroll slips, but we
19 can all do the same. I can't do that, so perhaps I should file a
20 bar table motion to seek to admit it, rather than try to admit it through
21 him. But I ask him to comment in the event that he might know something
22 about this one, but it appears, I think, Mr. Tosic is not one of the
23 individuals for whom we had a photograph and so we don't have that link.
24 JUDGE HALL: So the basis of what we have there is insufficient
25 to admit this document through this witness, so we needn't even concern
1 ourselves with the other aspect Mr. Zecevic has raised.
2 MR. HANNIS: All right, Your Honour, I'll try and deal with it in
3 another way later on.
4 JUDGE HALL: Sorry, Mr. Zecevic.
5 MR. ZECEVIC: Just one matter that raises a big concern with the
6 Defence. I believe I heard Mr. Hannis talking about the bar table at
7 this point. I don't believe --
8 JUDGE HALL: I heard that and you heard that, but we needn't
9 exercise our minds about that at this stage, Mr. Zecevic.
10 MR. ZECEVIC: Thank you.
11 JUDGE HALL: Before we take the break: Mr. Andan, could you ...
12 Do we gather that the air conditioning is making you
13 uncomfortable? Is there something that should be addressed during the
14 break? Is it in this room or in the waiting room?
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, they stepped up the air
16 condition. It wasn't -- it wasn't so strong in the morning. And I do
17 mind such strong air condition in the courtroom.
18 JUDGE HALL: There is -- we said day before yesterday, there has
19 historically been a problem in this courtroom. And one of the things
20 that we noticed before the first break is that there was insufficient air
21 coming in. And apparently in an attempt to correct that, they've --
22 where the witness-stand is, you appear to be under a draft. So I'll see
23 whether during the break the Court Officers can make the necessary
24 inquiries so that everybody is at least comfortable.
25 So we come back in 20 minutes.
1 [The witness stands down]
2 --- Recess taken at 12.05 p.m.
3 --- On resuming at 12.30 p.m.
4 JUDGE HALL: While the witness is on his way in, we understand,
5 Mr. Hannis, that you estimate you would be another 40 minutes or so with
7 MR. HANNIS: I think that's right, Your Honours. I thought I
8 might be done before we took the break, but we had some extended
9 discussions, so that's why I've run over into this session. But I'm
10 certain I will be done before the end of the day, I'm hoping within about
11 40 minutes.
12 JUDGE HALL: And Mr. Zecevic, you'll begin immediately, and how
13 long do you think you would be?
14 MR. ZECEVIC: Well, Your Honours, I have perhaps 10 questions
15 from this witness, at this point. I don't know how much ... depends what
16 happens in the last session. So I assume one hour, roughly, but depends
17 on the witness's answers, of course.
18 JUDGE HALL: Thank you.
19 [The witness takes the stand]
20 MR. HANNIS:
21 Q. Mr. Andan, I'm going to move to the last topic I have with you,
22 and it relates to your suspension and removal from the MUP.
23 I want to show you first 65 ter 015D1. This is tab 109 of the
24 Prosecution's list.
25 Mr. Andan, you talked before about what you referred to as the
1 Sword of Damocles hanging over your head in reference to a poker machine.
2 You recognise the documents on the screen?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Is this the note reflecting the authorisation you had from
5 Cedo Kljajic to take out and use that poker machine that we've had a lot
6 of talk about?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. And your signature on the right-hand side of the page?
9 A. That is correct.
10 Q. Whose on the left, if you know?
11 A. I can't remember now, but he was in charge of the deposit storage
12 at the Bijeljina SJB.
13 MR. HANNIS: Let me show you another one. 65 ter 178D1.
14 Tab 224.
15 Q. The one coming up now is apparently dated the
16 28th of August, 1992. It says you returned one Jollycard poker machine
17 that had been issued to you on the 4th of July.
18 Is that your signature on the left?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. And on the right we see Milorad Lovre. Who was he?
21 A. He was the man in charge of the deposit storage.
22 Q. And the 28th of July -- 28th of August, 1992, was this done after
23 you had had the conversation with Mr. Kovac when he told you you weren't
24 needed anymore?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. Thank you.
2 MR. HANNIS: Next I'd like to show you 65 ter 024D1, tab 214.
3 Q. There are three pages to this exhibit. The first one is dated
4 the 19th of August signed by Cedo Kljajic about sending a bus and a
5 driver for the needs of the special unit.
6 Was this related to the planned operation in Foca that you told
7 us you were going to head up?
8 A. Yes, this is it.
9 MR. HANNIS: And if we can go to the second page.
10 Q. This is also dated the 19th, signed by Mr. Stanisic, it appears.
11 Addressed to the Serbian MUP and the Montenegro MUP requesting permission
12 for travel through the territory of Serbia and Montenegro on 21 August.
13 This, too, was part of the planned operation in Foca?
14 A. That is correct.
15 Q. And the last one in this exhibit is also dated the
16 19th of August, apparently has the signature of the undersecretary of
17 national security, Dragan Kijac, scheduling a working meeting on the
18 20th of August.
19 This also relates to that Foca operation that you were going to
20 lead; correct?
21 A. That is correct. Only the name is not "Kijac"; it is "Kijac."
22 And this is not his signature. Somebody signed on his behalf.
23 MR. ZECEVIC: I note, Your Honours, on page 57/21, the witness's
24 answer was not recorded after Mr. Hannis's question that ends on 57/21.
25 The witness's answer was not recorded. I think he confirmed.
1 MR. HANNIS:
2 Q. Yes, Mr. Andan, I had asked you if that document by Mico Stanisic
3 to Serbia and to Montenegro was part of the Foca operation and I thought
4 I heard you say yes, but it wasn't recorded in the transcript. Can you
5 confirm that you did answer in the affirmative?
6 A. Yes, yes, twice.
7 Q. And I understand this last one you were looking at does appear to
8 have signed for Mr. Kijac by someone else, but does a working meeting
9 refer to the operation you were going to lead up going to Foca?
10 A. That is correct.
11 Q. And I forgot if you told us, how many men were going to be in
12 this special unit that was going to Foca?
13 A. Well, let's leave aside this special aspect. It was a unit
14 composed of workers of the CSB Bijeljina, and I think that it may have
15 had up to 30 police officers.
16 Q. And from the intelligence you had, how many people were you going
17 to be trying to arrest or deal with in Foca? How big a group was that?
18 A. According to the intelligence we had, the information that the
19 MUP had, 15 to 20 people were rampaging in Foca. There may have been
20 some additional people, but these 15 to 20 men were led by a certain Pedo
21 or Pedolino, whatever his nickname was.
22 Q. Now, we understand from your evidence that this didn't happen,
23 you didn't go to Foca. Was that because you decided not to go? Or was
24 it because permission from Serbia and Montenegro to travel through their
25 territory didn't come through? Or why did it not happen?
1 A. I have already answered this question. I said that as far as I
2 can remember, we received a written reply from the Serbian MUP stating
3 that they did not approve of our passage through their territory in this
4 formation, whereas a reply from the Montenegrin MUP never arrived. So
5 there was no way we could have gone to Foca.
6 Q. And you also told us that you received some information from
7 Mr. Davidovic that there was some sort of plan to ambush your group and
8 kill you; correct?
9 A. That is correct.
10 Q. When you learned that information, did you -- did you go see
11 Mr. Stanisic about that or talk to Mr. Kovac or Mr. Kljajic or anybody in
12 the RS MUP about that intelligence?
13 A. I think that was a discussion not with Kovac and not with
14 Stanisic but I talked to Kljajic.
15 Q. I'm sorry, did you say Kijac or Kljajic?
16 A. Kljajic.
17 Q. And what did you tell him about that? Did you ask him questions
18 or just inform him of what you heard?
19 A. I didn't hear that, Mr. Hannis. There was a dispatch from the
20 federal SUP and Mr. Kljajic was familiar with it. He also knew.
21 Q. And was it after that dispatch that Mr. Kovac told you you were
22 no longer needed?
23 A. No, that was before.
24 MR. HANNIS: I want to show you an exhibit, P1269. This is
25 tab 38.
1 Q. Mr. Andan, I don't know if you will have seen this one before.
2 It's the record of a meeting of the Collegium of the MUP on the
3 9th of September, 1992.
4 A. I didn't have a chance to see this because I wasn't a Collegium
6 Q. Okay. I understand. I didn't know if you might have been shown
7 it at any time during proofing or one of your interviews.
8 MR. HANNIS: I'd like to go to page 6 of the English.
9 Q. And in the B/C/S on your screen, Mr. Andan, we need to go to
10 page 3. At the very bottom of the page in B/C/S and near the middle of
11 the English, there's an entry that says:
12 "It was concluded that the following be carried out as part of
13 the discussion of personnel issues:
14 "1. Dragan Andan temporarily suspended for illegal use of poker
15 machines discovered by the Working Group which had been appointed by the
17 Do you know anything about that? It appears my English
18 translation says poker machines in the plural. Do you know what this
19 Working Group was and what that's referring to?
20 A. No, I didn't know about the Working Group or its conclusion. If
21 they consider that a Working Group, all right, but I considered them to
22 be a commission that audited the hand-over that I performed before my --
23 before leaving the ministry, and it was headed by Mr. Macar.
24 Q. Okay. I know dates aren't your strong point, but please keep in
25 mind for the next few minutes that this meeting was on the
1 9th of September, 1992.
2 MR. HANNIS: But before I go to another document, could we go to
3 the next page in B/C/S.
4 Q. Mr. Andan, at the very top of this page we see "number 2,
5 Danilo Vukovic, temporarily suspended for unbecoming behaviour and
6 reckless endangerment."
7 Is this the Danilo Vukovic who had originally gone out with you
8 to Brcko and Bijeljina?
9 A. Yes, this is the same Danilo Vukovic. And I know why he was
10 suspended. If you want me, I can say why.
11 Q. I don't at the moment. I'm trying to hurry and finish with you.
12 But maybe I'm come back to it.
13 I want to show you next 65 ter 031D1.
14 MR. HANNIS: And I'm not sure what tab this is, Your Honour,
15 because this was not originally on my list. This one and the next one,
16 030D1, were two that I notified the Defence and the Trial Chambers by
17 e-mail that I wished to use with the witness. It only came up during his
18 last day of direct testimony. And I sent e-mails -- or Mr. Smith, for
19 me, sent e-mails to the Defence and to the Legal Officers, I think,
20 indicating that I wanted to use these two documents. So I don't have a
21 tab number for you.
22 Q. Mr. Andan, have you ever seen this document before? It's dated
23 the 11th of September, 1992.
24 A. I have never received this document.
25 Q. It's entitled "Decision," and it says "Dragan Andan is hereby
1 temporarily suspended as of the 11th of September." It gives a statement
2 of reasons and it has the partial signature that appears to be
3 Mico Stanisic's. I know you testified earlier in the week that you never
4 saw any written documents relating to your suspension, so -- and looking
5 at it now, that doesn't refresh your memory about whether you ever had a
6 written document about your suspension? Because we see on the bottom
7 left it says "send to above-named person," so it appears you should have
8 received a copy.
9 A. Why isn't it circled? Because that was the practice. When the
10 above-named person received a copy, then the number would be circled, and
11 we see it isn't. So I stand by what I said; I never received this
13 Q. Okay. In terms of the disciplinary proceedings and the rules
14 that were in effect at the time, was the minister of the interior able to
15 initiate disciplinary proceedings, do you know?
16 A. I tried to explain yesterday, but I can do it again. Of course
17 he could, he had the authority to instigate disciplinary proceedings
18 against anybody in the MUP, but in my case it wasn't necessary for the
19 minister to do so. The chief of my organisational unit, and that is the
20 chief of the police administration, Mr. Kovac, was the one whose duty it
21 was. And I can repeat that Mr. Kovac shifted this to the minister in an
22 insidious manner, without real need. Why he did so, I don't know. But
23 there was no need for him to pass this decision on to the minister,
24 because my chief of administration was perfectly able to do that himself.
25 Q. Okay. Under "Statement of Reasons" you'll see it says "in his
1 request number 09/2511 of 11 September" --
2 MR. ZECEVIC: I believe the witness explained on at least three
3 times that he never received the document.
4 MR. HANNIS: But I'm asking this question to ask a question about
5 the process.
6 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes, but do please ask the question and don't cite
7 the document which he never saw.
8 MR. HANNIS: Are you saying this is not an authentic document?
9 Your Honours, this is a document that was placed in the e-court
10 by the Defence.
11 JUDGE HALL: I think Mr. Zecevic's point is that the witness says
12 he didn't receive it, so that the -- I don't know exactly what your
13 question is going to be, of course, but --
14 MR. HANNIS: I'll try and ask it a different way, perhaps.
15 Q. This document says that the reason for this decision is because
16 the minister of the interior had filed a request for disciplinary
17 proceedings. So in effect doesn't that mean that Mr. Stanisic is
18 deciding on a request that Mr. Stanisic himself made; right?
19 A. I don't know if I understood you, but I have already tried to
21 Maybe it isn't fully clear to you, but the minister can launch
22 disciplinary proceedings and suspend any employee in the MUP. That's
23 part of his legal authority. He was probably misinformed by somebody
24 about the whole situation. Where, how, I don't know. But my question
25 again is, why didn't Kovac do it? He talked to me, and you see that the
1 decision is dated September 11th, but it doesn't mention that I requested
2 a meeting with Mr. Kovac and said to him what I said. I hope I don't
3 have to repeat. And it says here that I can appeal this decision within
4 15 days, but how do I do that? I never received it.
5 JUDGE HALL: Mr. Andan, what I understand Mr. Hannis's question
6 to be, and indeed it is something that struck me when I looked at the
7 document, is whether as a matter of the usual procedure it is possible
8 for the minister to both initiate the request and to make the decision.
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I believe that was procedurally
11 But I must return to my first point. I don't want to go into the
12 subsequent procedure, but I did try to explain. Why didn't Mr. Kovac do
13 that? because I was his subordinate. Why did he shift it --
14 JUDGE HALL: Yes, we understand what you've said about that.
15 Yes, Mr. Hannis, please continue.
16 MR. HANNIS: Thank you.
17 Q. Yes, Mr. Andan, Judge Hall made the point I was trying to get to,
18 is that in effect it appears that Mr. Stanisic was acting both as the
19 prosecutor initiating the proceedings and as the judge who decided on the
20 proceedings requested to be initiated.
21 As for the appeal, if you had gotten notice of the appeal, to
22 whom could you appeal a decision on discipline by the minister? Who
23 could you appeal to, do you know, under the rules?
24 A. He did adopt this decision about my suspension and a decision
25 about the initiation of disciplinary proceedings, but he is not a judge.
1 There is a disciplinary judge, or, rather, a disciplinary body that
2 consists of a number of people. This should have been forwarded to some
3 other people as well, that is, the disciplinary judge and to the chief of
4 my organisational unit for him to know that I'm suspended. The chief of
5 my organisational unit tells me to leave the secretariat without a piece
6 of paper of any kind and then I see this decision here.
7 I could have appealed to the one who issued this decision. As
8 some sort of a small-time lawyer, maybe that's how I understand it. But
9 I can appeal to the minister and state my reasons. However, once the
10 disciplinary proceedings are underway, they are conducted by the
11 disciplinary judge and, well, what the final outcome would have been, of
12 course, is something I cannot know.
13 Q. Okay.
14 MR. HANNIS: Let's go to a related document. 65 ter --
15 JUDGE DELVOIE: Mr. Hannis.
16 MR. HANNIS: Yes.
17 JUDGE DELVOIE: Unless I'm wrong, you were talking about two
18 documents here, and we only saw one.
19 MR. HANNIS: I'm going to the second one right now.
20 JUDGE DELVOIE: Okay. Thank you.
21 MR. HANNIS: 65 ter 030D1.
22 Q. Mr. Andan, this is number 09-25-11, also dated the
23 11th of September, also signed by Mr. Stanisic apparently, and it's
24 stamped. This is the request to initiate proceedings against you. Now,
25 the question I have - under "statement of reasons" it talks about you
1 having requisitioned a gambling machine, and under evidence it says
2 "Dragan Andan" --
3 MR. ZECEVIC: Sorry. I'm sorry, I have to object. The first
4 question, I believe the proper question, would be to ask the witness if
5 he received this document again. And if he didn't receive, then you
6 shouldn't cite the document. Thank you.
7 MR. HANNIS:
8 Q. Mr. Andan, have you seen this document before today?
9 A. No, I haven't. And I would like to see Mr. Stanisic's signature
10 if he's the one who filed this request. Is this document signed?
11 MR. HANNIS: If we could go to the bottom the page in B/C/S.
12 Q. Do you see the stamp and the signature?
13 A. Yes. But I never received this document, and this is the first
14 time I see it. I'm asking because I have a document that I was able to
15 obtain but it was not signed by Mr. Stanisic or stamped.
16 Q. And this document and the last one we looked at, neither one of
17 them was shown to you during your proofing with Mr. Zecevic?
18 A. They were not. I do apologise to Mr. Zecevic as well, but, no,
19 this has not been shown to me.
20 Q. Did you -- you told us before that, I think, you didn't speak to
21 Mr. Stanisic in 1992 after the last time you spoke with him at
22 Bosanska Vila in Belgrade in August, before the would-be Foca operation;
24 A. As far as I can remember, I think that is correct. And I think
25 that I talked to Mr. Stanisic the next time in 1994 at the Kikinda
1 building in Pale. I said yesterday -- well, perhaps my wording was too
2 strong yesterday when I said that I was angry at Mr. Stanisic. It's not
3 that I'm angry at Mr. Stanisic, but I haven't forgiven him either for not
4 having found enough time to receive me and for me to explain what that
5 was all about. And I did ask to be received by Mr. Stanisic through his
6 secretary in Pale.
7 I said yesterday that I received a variety of answers. Yes, we
8 know, we'll call you back; leave your telephone number, the minister is
9 on a trip; the minister is here; the minister is there. And that's how
10 it went.
11 After staying in Bijeljina for a month, I went to another
12 organisational unit, that is to say, the military.
13 Q. Okay.
14 MR. HANNIS: Can we go back to page 1 of the B/C/S.
15 Q. I know you told us that, but according to Mr. Stanisic on the
16 document that's in front of you, you confessed to him on the
17 11th of September, apparently, in the presence of Dusko Malovic and
18 Sinisa Karan; is that not true? You see where it says that?
19 A. No, this is not correct. This is not correct. You have
20 Sinisa Karan. You can talk to him. And I claim with full responsibility
21 that this was not the case. Mr. Stanisic is right here. So if court
22 procedure allows him to do so, ask him.
23 Q. Do you have any explanation or idea why Mr. Stanisic would sign a
24 document that says something like this when it didn't happen?
25 MR. ZECEVIC: Your Honours, with all due respect, this is even
1 more than speculation, I would say.
2 MR. HANNIS: No, he may be in a position to know whether or not
3 there's a motive for someone to falsify a document against him. The
4 objection -- it goes to weight, but not whether he can render an opinion
5 about who might have something in for him sufficient to cause them to
6 forge a document, because that's what he's saying is that this is not a
7 true document.
8 JUDGE HALL: I'm troubled by the question, but I suppose you have
9 a point, Mr. Hannis. It's --
10 MR. HANNIS: Should I ask the question this way:
11 Q. Mr. Andan, do you know anybody who would go to the trouble of
12 trying to forge a document like this about you supposedly confessing on
13 the gambling machines?
14 A. I cannot pretend to be a sorcerer, whether somebody would have
15 done something or would not have done something. I told you yesterday, I
16 had an open conflict with Mr. Kovac, but I still cannot say that Kovac
17 wrote this up and planted it against me. I'm not going to pretend to be
18 an old woman who is a sorceress here. I claim with full responsibility
19 as a 60-year-old man that this is not correct. We have established all
20 the facts, you are establishing all the facts, and I have never received
21 either one of these decisions.
22 Did someone do this on purpose so that I would leave the MUP as
23 soon as possible? Obviously that was the case, because I was really
24 bothering someone, wasn't I?
25 When I say someone, I'm not referring to Mr. Stanisic. And if
1 you ask me who that someone is, I'm going to tell you specifically who it
3 Q. Who?
4 A. Tomislav Kovac.
5 Q. You already told us before how I think some years ago, maybe
6 2005, Mr. Kovac made a written submission to the then minister of the
7 interior alleging that you and Mico Davidovic had tried to kill him and
8 other bad things; right?
9 A. I don't remember that I said that he made a written submission to
10 the minister of the interior, but I did say that he filed a criminal
11 report against me with the public prosecutor's office in Bijeljina.
12 Perhaps you have some document in which he filed a submission to the
13 minister of the interior, or some kind of complaint, but I did say before
14 this Trial Chamber that he sent a criminal report to the prosecutor's
15 office in Bijeljina, containing an allegation that I am trying to have
16 him assassinated by the Zemun mafia that was on the run. That was it.
17 I was interrogated about that and then I was given a decision on
18 the cessation of the investigation involved, that is to say that there
19 were no elements for conducting an investigation.
20 Q. Thank you.
21 MR. HANNIS: Your Honours, I would like to tender these two
22 documents, and I would also indicate, in terms of provenance, even though
23 these were put into e-court by the Defence, they are OTP documents and
24 the MIF information sheet says that these documents were received by one
25 of our investigators from Mr. Tomo Kovac.
1 MR. ZECEVIC: Well, the witness never received these documents.
2 They refer to him, but the witness specifically said that one of the
3 documents contains untrue assertions. He confirmed, on question -- on
4 question by Mr. Hannis, he confirmed who might be -- he didn't want to
5 speculate, but he said there is a person who has the interest of that.
6 Now we understand that that same person provided this document to the
7 Office of the Prosecutor. It is on our 65 ter list, but it was put
8 before we did have the opportunity to discuss -- to review that document
9 and get the instructions from our client.
10 Now, when I interviewed, proofed, Mr. Andan, he said he never
11 received, so I didn't bother to show him these documents because he said
12 he never received any document about his demotion or sacking from the
13 MUP. That is the situation. And I don't see any basis for admitting
14 this document to exhibit.
15 [Trial Chamber confers]
16 JUDGE HALL: Mr. Hannis, you may think that we are about to put
17 you on the spot - and you would not be incorrect - with that question I'm
18 about to ask: For what purpose does the Prosecution seek to tender this
19 as an exhibit? Is it for the purpose of the credibility of the witness
20 or otherwise?
21 MR. HANNIS: Well, both, Your Honour, because I don't think you
22 can make that ultimate decision yet, on the credibility of this witness,
23 until you've heard more evidence about this. And also because it relates
24 to what I say --
25 I should ask the witness to take his headphones off. Sorry.
1 JUDGE HALL: Mr. Andan, could you remove your headphones, please.
2 MR. HANNIS: One of the Prosecution's view of this is that
3 Mr. Andan was treated the way he was partly because he stepped on some
4 toes by carrying out the actions he did, that certain members of the
5 leadership in the political structure, as well as police and military,
6 didn't like what Mr. Andan and Mr. Mico Davidovic were doing. And that's
7 part of the reason he was dismissed. The poker machine seems a
8 relatively minor reason to suspend this career policeman in light of what
9 he'd done and what others didn't do. So that's part of the reason that I
10 think it's importance to deal with this suspension.
11 This is dated the 11th of September, but Mr. Andan was told by
12 Mr. Kovac some days before that that he was out. So this just appears to
13 be a formality to cover what was already being done in real life. And
14 this is two days after the September 9th meeting of the collegium where
15 he was on for being temporarily suspended on the agenda.
16 So -- and I guess that's my argument for the moment.
17 And also, I guess I did want to float one thing out to you in
18 connection with this, is that under Rule 98, Your Honours have the
19 authority to direct a party to call additional evidence, and you have
20 authority to call witnesses on your own motion. And we suggest that
21 Mr. Kovac may be a witness that you want to have called at some point
22 before this case is over.
23 MR. ZECEVIC: Your Honours, I must say, I'm a bit confused. Is
24 this a motion by Mr. Hannis to re-open the case or a motion for rebuttal
25 evidence? If either of this is the case, then it's not appropriate time,
1 and we would like to be heard on that. And I still maintain my
2 objection, Your Honours.
3 JUDGE HALL: Thank you.
4 [Trial Chamber confers]
5 JUDGE HALL: The evidence about these documents is that whereas
6 the witness denies receipt of the documents, the documents are clearly
7 about the witness and the -- sorry ... and about facts that he doesn't
8 deny because there's clearly the background of some goings-on which
9 culminated in his dismissal, and for that reason we allow the documents
10 in as exhibits. So they may be admitted and marked.
11 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, therefore 65 ter 31D1 will become
12 Exhibit P2348, and 65 ter 30D1 will become P2349. Thank you.
13 MR. HANNIS: Thank you, Your Honours.
14 Q. Mr. Andan, I need to go back to Exhibit P2347. This is --
15 JUDGE DELVOIE: Mr. Hannis.
16 MR. HANNIS: Yes.
17 JUDGE DELVOIE: Can you allow me one clarification question.
18 Mr. Andan, you said, about the first of those two documents --
19 We can perhaps have it on the screen again, 31 -- 031D1.
20 You said that you never received this document and then you add
21 "I have a document that I was able to obtain, but it was not signed by
22 Mr. Stanisic."
23 Was that this document but without the signature? Something
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You didn't understand me well then.
1 May I say straightaway, I did not receive either one of these documents.
2 Sometime in 2005, in the MUP archives, I found another document
3 without Mr. Stanisic's signature. 2005. Just a moment, this is a
4 decision on temporary suspension. I've never seen this. Never.
5 As for the request to initiate disciplinary proceedings, I saw
6 that in 2005 when I found it in the MUP archives.
7 JUDGE DELVOIE: So the request - that's the second document that
8 was shown to you - you found that in the -- in the MUP archives, without
9 the signature of Mr. Stanisic. Is that what you're saying?
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In 2005. In 2005 I found it. So
11 the decision on suspension or the request on initiating disciplinary
12 proceedings I have never received either one in 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995,
13 never. I never received the decision or the request to initiate
14 disciplinary proceedings.
15 JUDGE DELVOIE: I understand, Mr. Andan. You never received it,
16 it was never notified to you, but you found it in the archives in 2005
17 without Mr. Stanisic's signature; right?
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The second document. Not this
19 document, but the other one. I have not found this one.
20 JUDGE DELVOIE: The second document in which it is stated that
21 you confessed in the presence of two other persons to Mr. Stanisic what
22 was said in the document, that's the document you find in the -- found in
23 the archives?
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's right. That's right. I
25 found it in 2005 in the MUP archives.
1 JUDGE DELVOIE: And I suppose that upset you at that moment,
2 reading this.
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Of course it did upset me.
4 However, it was all over and I could not have done anything
5 retroactively. Enough time had elapsed to prevent me from doing anything
6 about it. If you allow me, I will just say one more thing, please.
7 Since it is my credibility that is at stake, I am going to
8 present before this Trial Chamber just one thing that happened and that
9 is true. I'm conveying a conversation between myself and
10 Dragan Okuka, nicknamed Crni.
11 The year is 2006. That's right, yes. When we talked in
12 connection with what I had found in the archives, and that's what he said
13 to me then. I quote: I went to a bakery in Bijela near Herceg-Novi that
14 is owned by Tomo Kovac. Tomo brought me in to show me machines that bake
15 bread and inter alia he showed me one of these machines and said, I
16 bought this machine in Hungary and it cost me such and such amount of
17 money. And I said to him, Tomo, why are you lying to me? You see that
18 this is the machine that fell when we were stealing it from the state
19 bakery in Rajlovac. Now you judge my credibility and his.
20 JUDGE DELVOIE: Thank you.
21 MR. HANNIS:
22 Q. Mr. Andan, I need to show you P2347 again. This is the
23 Official Note by Bosa Darko Dodik from 12 December 2007, and I have a
25 In the third paragraph on the first page, in the interview
1 Dragan Andan said he'd been commander until such and such a date, that he
2 was "forced out and that he had a decision on suspension from duties
3 which he could show if necessary."
4 What document were you referring to there in 2007? Is that some
5 document different than these two we were looking at about discipline in
6 September of 1992?
7 A. Of course, I meant to offer the document that I found in the MUP
8 archives in 2005. That is the decision on initiating disciplinary
9 proceedings. I've already said that it did not have a signature, but I
10 can offer it.
11 Q. Okay. I just wanted to confirm that was the same one you were
12 telling Judge Delvoie about.
13 Do you have that document still, the one you found in the
14 archives in 2005?
15 A. I have it at home. If necessary, I can send it to you.
16 Q. [Microphone not activated] ... would you be willing, after you go
17 home --
18 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for Mr. Hannis, please.
19 MR. HANNIS:
20 Q. Would you be willing, after you go home, to furnish a copy of
21 that or the original of that to Victim/Witness or some representative of
22 the Chambers so that they could have a look at it? Any problem with
24 A. Absolutely no problem whatsoever. You are going to give me the
25 address to which I should have this sent.
1 JUDGE HALL: Sorry, before we go on, now I'm confused. I
2 thought, before Judge Delvoie had asked the questions that he did, I
3 thought we were talking about a third document. Judge Delvoie having --
4 by the time Judge Delvoie was finished, I thought it was settled that
5 what he was talking about is another version of the second document that
6 we saw that has been exhibited. Are we -- having regard to the witness's
7 answer to your question, are we back to the possibility of a third
9 MR. HANNIS: Your Honours, I think it's the document regarding
10 the request to initiate disciplinary proceedings, same as the one we have
11 except without the signature of Mr. Stanisic.
12 Q. Is that correct, Mr. Andan?
13 A. Absolutely.
14 Q. And I suppose without the stamp or the seal as well; right?
15 A. Right about that too.
16 Q. Okay. Otherwise the typed stuff is all the same?
17 JUDGE HALL: But that would remain to be seen.
18 MR. HANNIS: If he knows.
19 JUDGE HALL: Do I understand the evidence to be at this point,
20 Mr. Andan, that the document you have at home is, unlike the document
21 that -- to which you testified earlier, one without a signature? Just
22 concentrate on the signature question now. That is your evidence, isn't
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I hereby state that I have a
25 decision on initiating disciplinary proceedings, that is, this document
1 number 2, without a signature and without a seal.
2 JUDGE HALL: Thank you. So it seems to me that because it
3 doesn't have a signature and a seal, once we have it in hand, a
4 comparison's going to have to be made as to whether it's a third document
5 or just a second version, different version, of the second document.
6 Thank you.
7 MR. HANNIS: Yes, Your Honour. And I would request that the
8 Trial Chamber, through the Registry, somehow make those arrangements so
9 that it can be received. I would be happy to do it, but I think it's
10 probably best to go through a neutral party rather than through the
11 Defence or through me.
12 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
13 JUDGE HALL: So the -- it is -- the Chamber orders VWS to contact
14 the witness after he would have been released and returned to his home,
15 and the -- to have the document sent on to the Chamber. Thank you.
16 MR. HANNIS: Thank you, Your Honours.
17 Q. Mr. Andan, the last one I want to show you is 65 ter 1447.
18 MR. HANNIS: It's tab 313, Your Honours.
19 Q. And, Mr. Andan, I know you've seen this one before. It's a
20 newspaper interview of you by a woman named Sasa Bizic. My English
21 translation says it's called "The Sting of the Yellow Wasp."
22 And I understand when you were interviewed by the OTP in 2006, I
23 believe in Banja Luka, you confirmed that the contents of this were
24 accurate; is that right?
25 A. Yes, this is an interview that I gave to Sasa Bizic.
1 Q. Yes, and do you recall confirming to the OTP investigators who
2 interviewed you in Banja Luka that you had read it and it was accurate?
3 A. If that's what I said, then that's it. I cannot remember what I
4 said to him. Right now I cannot remember. But I'm expecting you to put
5 a question and then I'll be in a position to answer.
6 Q. Well, depending on your answer to the question about whether it's
7 accurate or not, I may not have any questions.
8 MR. HANNIS: I propose, Your Honours, because it's rather
9 lengthy, that we recess for the day, I give him a copy to read, and then
10 depending on what his answer is about whether it's accurate or whether he
11 has any changes, then I may have no more questions in the morning, or I
12 may have a few if he says something is not correct. And then I have
13 nothing else. I don't know how best else to deal with the remaining
14 15 minutes.
15 JUDGE HALL: Yes, very well. That seems to be the most efficient
16 way of dealing with matters. So we take the adjournment to -- and I
17 think that you would have seen from the later schedule that we are back
18 in this courtroom tomorrow morning.
19 [The witness stands down]
20 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.31 p.m.,
21 to be reconvened on Friday, the 3rd day
22 of June 2011, at 9.00 a.m.