1 Wednesday, 22 June 2011
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.06 a.m.
5 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. Good morning,
6 everyone in and around the courtroom. This is case IT-08-91-T, the
7 Prosecutor versus Mico Stanisic and Stojan Zupljanin.
8 JUDGE HALL: Thank you, Madam Registrar. Good morning to
10 May we take the appearances today, please.
11 MS. KORNER: Good morning, Your Honours. Joanna Korner and
12 Indah Susanti for the Prosecution.
13 MR. ZECEVIC: Good morning, Your Honours. Slobodan Zecevic,
14 Slobodan Cvijetic, Eugene O'Sullivan, Tatjana Savic -- Ms. Tatjana Savic
15 and we have two interns with us, Ms. Amanda Gruenhagen and
16 Mr. Fernando Dutra appearing for Stanisic Defence this morning. Thank
18 MR. KRGOVIC: Good morning, Your Honours. Dragan Krgovic and
19 Aleksandar Aleksic appearing for Zupljanin Defence.
20 JUDGE HALL: Thank you, we have been alerted by the Court Officer
21 that there are one or two housekeeping matters.
22 MS. KORNER: Your Honours, as far as we are concerned, it was
23 just to remove the MFI status from the document which has been marked
24 2358. We understand the Defence accept it was disclosed to them.
25 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes, we do, Your Honours.
1 JUDGE HALL: So the MFI qualification is removed.
2 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, the other matter was, of course, the
3 Sarajevo CSB chart was taken off by the witness but I think I'll have to
4 wait until he comes in to find out if he wants to make any alterations.
5 JUDGE HALL: Yes. So would the usher please escort the witness
6 back to the stand.
7 [The witness takes the stand]
8 JUDGE HALL: Good morning, to you, Mr. Tusevljak. Before
9 Ms. Korner continues, I remind you of your solemn declaration.
10 Yes, Ms. Korner.
11 WITNESS: SIMO TUSEVLJAK [Resumed]
12 [Witness answered through interpreter]
13 Cross-examination by Ms. Korner: [Continued]
14 Q. First of all, Mr. Tusevljak, you took away the diagram of the
15 CSB Sarajevo. So can I ask whether you want to make any alterations to
17 MS. KORNER: Perhaps we better have it up on the screen. It's
18 2355 MFI? Yeah.
19 Q. Do you say there's any information there which is inaccurate?
20 A. I entered some corrections there in relation to who was a member
21 of the Security Services Centre and for how long.
22 Q. All right. So it's just dates, is it, that you wanted to alter?
23 A. Yes, the dates. Not all of them were inspectors also, some were
24 mere employees.
25 Q. You said that before. Can you just -- I think we needed to
1 remove the word "inspector" from the forensic crime technicians; is that
3 MS. KORNER: Can we possibly zoom in, please, on the left-hand
4 side of this chart.
5 MR. ZECEVIC: I wonder if I may propose that we put it on the
6 ELMO the copy that the witness --
7 MS. KORNER: Yes.
8 MR. ZECEVIC: -- made the alterations and then he can explain
9 what alterations he made.
10 MS. KORNER: That seems a very sensible idea. Thank you,
11 Mr. Zecevic.
12 MR. ZECEVIC: And then after it was accepted, then you can reload
13 the new version.
14 MS. KORNER: Thank you.
15 Q. Right. I am afraid your writing, we discovered from when we were
16 given it, is not the easiest to read. Could you just tell us please what
17 you've written by the side of Mr. Rakic?
18 A. It says he was never a member of the Security Services Centre.
19 He was with the Rajlovac police station right from the very beginning.
20 Q. He was at Rajlovac, you say, and was never an inspector in the
21 CSB? All right. We'll check that.
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Mr. Pekic, he was a member of your staff, though?
24 A. I think only in April. After that he went over to the
25 National Security Service.
1 Q. All right. Mr. Mitrovic?
2 A. Mr. Mitrovic came sometime in July 1992. However, as soon as
3 late 1992 he went to the MUP school in Banja Luka. As a matter of fact
4 he still works there. So he was with the school from day one.
5 Q. Sorry, he did come to work for you in July 1992 and when do you
6 say he went to the school? Oh, late 1992. All right.
7 A. As early as late 1992, when the school was first established.
8 That should be easy enough to verify.
9 Q. Mr. Mihajlovic?
10 A. Mr. Mihajlovic arrived in October 1992, but early 1993 or
11 thereabouts, he was appointed chief at the Novo Sarajevo public security
12 station leaving my own station. I think his name is displayed on the
13 diagram of chiefs.
14 Q. Yes. All right. Don't worry about that because we are only
15 interested in what it looked like during 1992.
16 Mr. Sakota?
17 A. Pero Sakota left for the Banja Luka public security centre as
19 Q. Yes, but when?
20 A. 1992. I don't know the exact date but he too left.
21 Q. All right. But at some stage do you agree that from August 1992
22 he was working in the CSB and at some later stage went to Banja Luka?
23 A. Yes, as inspector, from August on he was a white collar crime
25 Q. All right. What do you say about Mr. -- the last one on that
1 list? Mr. Janjetovic?
2 A. Between June and the end of war, he was with the crime police of
3 the Security Services Centre working as a white collar crime inspector.
4 Q. Sorry, between June and the end of?
5 A. Until 1995. The end of war. He was with the crime police
6 department working as a chief of the white collar crime department, or
8 Q. So you mean he wasn't in -- he was in the CSB but not as part of
9 your unit?
10 A. I was chief of the white collar crime unit and the forensics unit
11 in the centre, and the general crime unit. There were a total of three.
12 Q. Then, I am sorry, what is the problem with him?
13 A. Nobody said there was a problem. I said he was there between
14 July and the end of the war.
15 Q. All right. I just want to know where you say it's inaccurate. I
16 don't need to know how long these people were working there, provided
17 they were working through 1992. Going to Mr. Lazic?
18 A. Savka Lazic, she worked from the very beginning with the RS MUP,
19 the crime police administration. So she was not one of my people.
20 Q. She didn't work for you, she was administration. All right. So
21 she's out, you say. Mr. Tesanovic?
22 A. Mr. Tesanovic, forensic technician, crime forensic technician.
23 Not an inspector, though.
24 Q. What about the next one, you've written something about
25 Mr. Bozovic?
1 A. As early as 1993 he went to the material and financial affairs
2 department, what we called the mat fin.
3 Q. Look. Listen for a moment, would you. I -- provided they worked
4 there in 1992, that's all I'm concerned about. Don't worry about what
5 happened to them in 1993.
6 What about the lady at -- oh, she was a typist, is there any
7 problem with her?
8 A. Yes, but she too left in 1992.
9 Q. Do you remember when?
10 A. No.
11 Q. All right. Now what about the third -- sorry, the fourth line
12 down, are you just complaining there that none of these people were
13 inspectors, or what?
14 A. Yes. [Indiscernible] were KDZ anti-sabotage detection, that's
15 what it means. They all went to the RS MUP as early as July 1992. So in
16 actual fact they were with us up until July that year. Sekula Micic
17 likewise was not with us. He was with the RS MUP the whole time. The
18 one thing missing in this diagram is Zoran Glusac who came sometime in
19 August 1992. And Zoran Sedanovic who also arrived in the latter half of
20 1992 to work as a general crime inspector. Another lad, Stankovic, I
21 can't remember his first name, came to the anti-sabotage department.
22 Q. All right. You've written something right at the -- you've
23 written those two names that we can see, what is the last thing you've
24 written on that diagram?
25 MR. ZECEVIC: Sorry, he just said, that's Stankovic, KDZ.
1 MS. KORNER: Oh, I see. All right.
2 MR. ZECEVIC: He explained that. But I think you missed the
3 first one, Sasa Blagojevic, there is a note there as well.
4 MS. KORNER: Where is that?
5 MR. ZECEVIC: The very first one on the left.
6 MS. KORNER:
7 Q. Yes. Can you tell us what that says?
8 A. In April 1992 he was in Gorazde for about two months and then as
9 soon as he came back, he left for Zvornik. After that he left the
10 RS MUP. And all of this happened in 1992.
11 Q. Are you saying Sasa Blagojevic never worked for the CSB Sarajevo
12 as one of your inspectors?
13 A. Only for that brief period when he was in Zvornik, and he went
14 there because his wife was pregnant. For family reasons, in other words.
15 So I didn't hear from him that often when he was in Zvornik, although
16 formally he worked with us.
17 Q. All right. So he may have been -- you are saying he was based in
18 Zvornik but he was actually one of your employees -- or one of your
20 A. Yes, he was on my list, but that was more intended to keep him
21 from being drafted by the VRS.
22 Q. Right.
23 MS. KORNER: Could we just go over to right side of the diagram
24 for a moment. Staying at the top, please. Yes, just there. Thank you.
25 Q. Could you tell us who was in charge of the department for --
1 MS. KORNER: It's very difficult to read and I haven't got a copy
2 here. No, to the -- slightly to the left, to the left, the left, please.
3 Thank you, stop.
4 Q. Of the department for analysis and information?
5 A. They were a special unit run by the chief of the Security
6 Services Centre.
7 Q. Yes, but who was in charge of that department? The name, if you
8 can remember?
9 A. Either Savo Sarac or Mihajlo Bajic. I'm not sure which of the
10 two. They are not included in this diagram.
11 Q. No, I know because we had some difficulty in finding who this
12 was. What about number 7, mat fin, or material finances. Do you know
13 who was in charge there?
14 A. At first Nikola Lopatic, and he was followed by Bozovic.
15 Q. And I suppose just to complete it, do you happen to remember who
16 was in charge of the fire department?
17 A. It was a single inspector there, Danilo Prove. He was both chief
18 and inspector, simply because there was no one else.
19 Q. All right. Thank you very much.
20 MS. KORNER: Your Honours, what we'll do is we'll check the
21 information against our sources and if we agree that what he says is
22 correct, we will re-alter the plan and then ask for it to be admitted in
23 full. Leave it as an MFI for the moment, and as Mr. Zecevic suggested,
24 replace it with a new chart.
25 JUDGE HALL: Very well.
1 MR. ZECEVIC: Could we have just a copy of the -- disclose the
2 copy of the document which the witness has made the alteration, please.
3 MS. KORNER: Yes, we'll photocopy -- can we have it back now and
4 we'll arrange for photocopies to be made.
5 Q. Now, I just want to return for one last time, Mr. Tusevljak, to
6 when Novo Sarajevo SJB came into existence. Yesterday when I put it to
7 you that it was on the 5th of April and I said it was a take-over, you
8 said it was never taken over because it moved into a different building,
9 but it wasn't the 5th of April. And at page 22516, I asked you:
10 "When did, in your opinion, the Novo Sarajevo station -- Novo
11 Sarajevo Serbian MUP SJB come into existence?"
12 And you said: "Sometime in mid-April."
13 I'd like you to have a look, please, now at a document which
14 is -- it's been given the 65 ter number 20212.
15 MR. ZECEVIC: [Microphone not activated] Can we have a tab?
16 MS. KORNER: Tab 62. Your Honours, it was added last night.
17 Q. This is a report on the operation of Novo Sarajevo SJB dated the
18 27th of December, sent to your CSB, and presumably at some stage you
19 would have seen this, Mr. Tusevljak, or at least it would have been
20 discussed at one of your collegium meetings.
21 A. I probably saw him, yes.
22 Q. Saw it, do you mean?
23 A. Yes, yes, if he was there at the collegium meeting.
24 Q. Right. Well, it's signed by Mr. Mihajlovic, if we go to the last
1 MR. ZECEVIC: Perhaps the witness can be given the hard copy.
2 MS. KORNER: Certainly.
3 Q. Did you know Mr. Mihajlovic?
4 A. Yes, I knew him.
5 Q. All right.
6 MS. KORNER: Can we go then, please, back to the first page.
7 Q. Novo Sarajevo SJB was formed on the 5th of April, 1992, so do now
8 accept that that is when it came into existence?
9 A. I don't agree about the date, the 5th of April. On the
10 5th of April, the school building at Vrace was taken by the MUP. It says
11 here that on the 5th of April, it was established with its seat at the
12 former centre for staff training in Vrace. So, in actual fact, could it
13 have been established in the staff training centre before the building
14 itself was taken, I don't think so.
15 Q. That was the day, as you told us, it was over the night of the
16 4th to the 5th of April that the Vrace school was seized, wasn't it?
17 A. No. When we spoke about the 4th and 5th of April, we spoke about
18 when it was taken by the Green Berets and the Patriotic League, the
19 public security station in Novo Sarajevo, I mean. And that's what we
20 were talking about, about the Novo Sarajevo public security station also
21 when we spoke about the murder of police officer Pero Petrovic.
22 Q. No, my fault.
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. Yes. I'm talking about the school was actually taken over by the
25 forces of the Serbian MUP, in particular Mr. Karisik and other people, on
1 the night of the 4th to the 5th of April, wasn't it?
2 A. No, that didn't happen that night. It happened in broad daylight
3 on the 5th of April, I think sometime in the afternoon. It was past
4 noon, I'm certain about that. I wasn't myself at Vrace but I know that
5 this happened in broad daylight and not under cover of the night.
6 Q. All right. So for whatever reason, Mr. Mihajlovic has either
7 deliberately put a wrong date or made a mistake. And you are absolutely
8 right because it says it was established in four different locations,
9 Grbavica, Vrace, Lukavica, and the Vrace educational centre. And just
10 further on this, police officers of the Vrace police detachment were
11 engaged in traffic control at the post on the intersection of, that must
12 be Bosanski Surbat Street -- and I can say Bjelosevic but this one,
13 Bjelopoljska Street, and they held the position on the Jewish cemetery
14 line; that is, they were constantly involved in combat operations. Is
15 that accurate as far as you are aware?
16 A. Yes.
17 MS. KORNER: Your Honours, this was disclosed. It's an earlier
18 disclosed document and I ask that it be admitted and marked, please.
19 MR. ZECEVIC: I have the objection on the same basis as I
20 articulated yesterday, Your Honours.
21 [Trial Chamber confers]
22 JUDGE HALL: Ms. Korner, could you assist us as to why you are
23 seeking to tender this, is it merely the question of the date?
24 MS. KORNER: No, there's two matters. Firstly the date and where
25 the station was, and secondly, the activities of the part of the
1 Novo Sarajevo police station at the Jewish cemetery for a reason that
2 will become apparent a little later today.
3 MR. ZECEVIC: Perhaps if I can suggest then that we -- that the
4 document be MFI'd until we see the reason which will become apparent
5 later today.
6 JUDGE HALL: We would adopt Mr. Zecevic's suggestion and mark it
7 for identification.
8 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P2359, marked for identification,
9 Your Honours.
10 MS. KORNER:
11 Q. All right. I want to return briefly to the question of
12 communications which we discussed at some length yesterday,
13 Mr. Tusevljak. At page 2272 -- sorry, 22272 of your evidence, which
14 would have been on Thursday of last week, you stated that all the
15 communications with all the police stations in the territory of the
16 Birac region were severed. You were asked by Mr. Zecevic could you list
17 the stations that you were referring to, and you said Skelani, Bratunac,
18 Zvornik, Milici, Sekovici, and you said the communications were cut off.
19 Now -- and at a later stage you said that you had never received
20 any information towards Zvornik until you had the meeting in the
21 26th of July with the heads of the crime departments.
22 Now, first, are you actually asserting that it was impossible for
23 any of those police stations to be reached?
24 A. Physically one could reach the stations, that is, it was possible
25 to drive there. We were talking about communications. For instance, if
1 I want to send a dispatch, there used to be a procedure in the MUP and
2 one of my employees would take this dispatch to the communication centre
3 and then it would be dispatched further on. So that used to be the
4 standard procedure in the police. At the time if there were any similar
5 dispatches, they would have to be taken there, so to speak, on foot. If
6 somebody would happen to go that way, he would take the dispatch. I
7 think that at the time there was no organised courier service, so I spoke
8 about the problems related to communications. I didn't mean to say that
9 it was physically impossible to reach those police stations.
10 Q. All right. Because at this time even early on, the telephones
11 were still working, weren't they?
12 A. Telephones from Lukavica were cut off. The only phones that were
13 functioning at the time were the phones at Pale - just one minute - and
14 in Lukavica because the switchboard was in Sarajevo and it burned on the
15 2nd of May, or thereabouts. Then it was possible to communicate only
16 locally from that point on. And I can tell you that all the way until
17 the end of war, I could not call anybody outside that area unless I used
18 the phone in the chief of the -- in the office of the chief of the centre
19 because there was a hot line that used some other routing and sometimes
20 we were able to use it.
21 Q. I want to come back to that, but was that a hot line that enabled
22 the chief of the centre to reach MUP headquarters and other police
23 stations, other SJBs?
24 A. No, I think it was only for communicating with the military.
25 Q. Right. Because the military -- I see what you mean. You could
1 route a call through the military communications installations; is that
3 A. I don't know. Maybe the chief was able to do that. We were not
4 able to do that. It was his link with the corps command and the
5 commanders of the brigade -- brigades. I don't know what the level was
6 and I don't know whether he was able to use this line for some other
7 purposes. I myself never used this line in any other way.
8 Q. You've just said, "and I can tell you that all the way until the
9 end of the war, I could not call anybody outside that area unless I used
10 the phone in the chief's office ..."
11 So from that, we understood that you did use the phone. Are you
12 now saying you never used it?
13 A. I think it's a matter of incorrect interpretation. I said that I
14 did not use the phone.
15 Q. You did now. All right. But, I'm sorry, going back to the
16 original point I started before you mentioned the hot line --
17 MR. ZECEVIC: Sorry, can you just establish the time-frame.
18 MS. KORNER: Yes. I'm going to.
19 Q. You said telephones in Lukavica were cut off. You didn't move to
20 Lukavica until July, did you?
21 A. We went to Lukavica in July. But the same situation was also in
22 the school at Vrace. There were almost no telephones there.
23 Q. But is that right, because when the school was taken over didn't
24 you have all the equipment taken over that belonged to the school? You
25 had telephones, didn't you, at Vrace?
1 A. I said that I arrived at Vrace sometime in mid-May, not before
2 that. So what kind of equipment was found there and what were the
3 capabilities in April, I really don't know. I'm only talking about the
4 time when I began working in the Security Services Centre and I'm only
5 talking about what I had at my disposal.
6 Q. Sorry, Mr. Tusevljak. You arrived in May. Are you saying that
7 when you got there in May there was no capability of making telephone
8 calls from Vrace?
9 A. I don't know, maybe there were some phones in the communication
10 centre itself. But there were no phones that worked in our offices. We
11 didn't have the possibility to call anybody else except maybe Lukavica, I
12 think the numbers began with 4 or 6, so we could only call that far.
13 Q. At that period, Mr. Stanisic, the minister, was also based at
14 Vrace, wasn't he?
15 A. Yes, that's where the headquarters of the MUP was.
16 Q. Yes. You say you didn't know about intercepts during the period
17 but you found out about them since through your new job. Are you aware
18 that there are a number of intercepted conversations coming from Vraca to
19 various places and likewise from various places to Vraca?
20 A. Yes, I know that. I know it now and I know that it pertains only
21 to one line, one telephone number that was in the communication centre.
22 Q. Right. So you obviously studied them quite carefully.
23 So clearly there was at least one telephone in operation at
25 A. Probably, yes. That's what I saw from the intercept. But at the
1 time I did not have access to that phone.
2 Q. Why not?
3 A. Well, I couldn't just walk into the MUP or the communication
4 centre just like that simply to say I wanted to make a phone call.
5 Q. An official phone call, why not?
6 A. I probably had no need at the time to request an official phone
7 call. With whom?
8 Q. Well, that's different. It's no good making these assertions,
9 Mr. Tusevljak, unless you actually tried and failed. If you never tried
10 to make a phone call, then you have no idea what telephone equipment was
11 available, have you?
12 A. Well, I'm telling you that I don't know. We spoke about one
13 phone. I read some of the intercepts simply because I had a chance to
14 read those intercepts in relation to my current job.
15 Q. I understand that. All right. I don't want to pursue this. Can
16 we just for a moment return to Zvornik. You later said that you had --
17 that Zvornik, which came under the CSB Sarajevo, you never received any
18 communications from them. Isn't it right that, in fact, originally
19 Zvornik was attached to the CSB Bijeljina and then was altered to
20 Sarajevo officially?
21 A. I don't know when the centre was in Bijeljina and when it was
22 returned to Sarajevo. I think that our centre was called Romanija-Birac
23 and the name was chosen precisely because it comprised a police station
24 within the area of Romanija and the area of Birac, and Zvornik is in the
25 area of Birac.
1 Q. All right. Could you have a look, please, at a couple of
2 documents which predate your meeting in July.
3 MS. KORNER: First of all, could we have up P329 which is at
4 tab 4D.
5 Q. That's a document dated the 3rd of June, addressed to the
6 Security Services Centre in Bijeljina, responding to a document, in fact,
7 from you of the 16th of May -- sorry, from you, I mean the Sarajevo
8 Security Services Centre, "pursuant to the aforementioned document, we
9 submit here with a daily report on the current and security-related
10 incidents on the 2nd of June," territory of Zvornik which is to be
11 forwarded to the Sarajevo CSB. I don't know whether -- would you have
12 got copies of the daily reports or seen the daily reports that came from
14 A. No. No, my service did not receive those daily reports.
15 Q. All right. So when you said there was no communication with
16 Zvornik, what you are saying is that you, your service did not get
17 reports from them; is that right?
18 A. I didn't say that there were no communications whatsoever. You
19 can see it from this. If you read this document, you can clearly see
20 that the public security station -- centre in Sarajevo sent a document on
21 the 15th of June [as interpreted] and the reply by the public security
22 station was sent on the 3rd of June. So it's 17 days between the
23 two events.
24 Q. No. No, I don't think --
25 MR. ZECEVIC: I am sorry, there is --
1 MS. KORNER: It's May.
2 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes, it's 16th of May, not 15th of June.
3 Line 10 -- 9 and 10, 17. Page 17.
4 MS. KORNER:
5 Q. Yes. That's when there was -- this was an instruction, wasn't
6 it, I think we may have it somewhere, I have to look for it, that went
7 out to all security stations explaining that there should be daily
8 reports sent on the security situation; that's right, isn't it?
9 A. Yes. However, I have to explain a few things here, if I am
10 permitted to do so?
11 Q. Yes.
12 A. This document drafted by the public security station in Zvornik,
13 if it arrived in the Security Services Centre in Sarajevo, if it arrived.
14 Here where you find the number in this corner, it was Zoran Cvijetic, the
15 chief of the centre, who wrote Drago, Simo, Bajic and this would confirm
16 that the document actually reached the chief of the centre. And we see
17 no such thing on this document.
18 Maybe you'll recall that when the Defence showed me some
19 documents, I would always read out whatever was written in the upper
20 corner. So it is not possible established from this document that it
21 ever reached the Security Services Centre in Sarajevo.
22 Q. All right. Well let's have a look at the next one, shall we,
24 MS. KORNER: Document 3 -- Exhibit 330, which is at tab 4E.
25 Q. The last one we saw sent the daily report on the 3rd for the
1 events of the 2nd of June. This one is dated the 4th of June, and does
2 that have a stamp on it showing that it was received apparently by
3 Bijeljina on the 4th of June at 10.36?
4 A. Yes, but there's no Sarajevo here.
5 Q. All right. So your assertion is, is it, that there's no evidence
6 that these documents from Zvornik ever reached the CSB at Sarajevo?
7 A. I wouldn't know about that. I merely explained that a document
8 arriving in the Security Services Centre, just like this one, has the
9 stamp confirming that it arrived in Bijeljina. Somebody would put the
10 same kind of stamp at the communication in Vrace or later on in Lukavica.
11 And when the document reaches the chief of the centre, who received all
12 the mail arriving to all the departments, he would normally initial it
13 and he would leave some trace signifying who was in charge of processing
14 that mail. Or if it didn't reach him, then there would be no initials.
15 MR. ZECEVIC: Ms. Korner, for the clarity of this document, can
16 you just direct the witness to read the stamp on the right side. Who
17 received this document.
18 MS. KORNER: I've said Bijeljina.
19 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes, but who in Bijeljina.
20 MS. KORNER: I see, you are right.
21 Q. The National Defence Secretariat, according to the translation.
22 Is that right, Mr. Tusevljak?
23 A. Yes, it says National Defence Secretariat, which means that they
24 were the ones who received this document.
25 Q. All right. Well, of course it depends where the copy comes from,
1 I agree.
2 MS. KORNER: Sorry, can we go back to the previous document for a
3 moment, which is 329. Exhibit P329. Can we highlight the fax at the
4 top, please.
5 Q. Can you read what that says, Mr. Tusevljak, please? You may have
6 to go a bit --
7 A. What I can see here tells me that it was sent to the fax number
8 0758 and so on from the number that begins with 076. I wouldn't know
9 what was the receiving fax and what was the sending fax. I think it was
10 Zvornik. I think this used to be the area code for Zvornik and Tuzla,
11 while 076 was the area code of Bijeljina. The area code of Sarajevo was
13 Q. Right. So it's sent out -- it's originally sent to the fax
14 number 075; is that right? Because we can see the time 12.19, and then
15 apparently it's sent on to a different number beginning 076 at 12.25. Do
16 you agree?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. All right. So clearly some communications existed, didn't they,
19 even in June, the beginning of June?
20 A. But we cannot see the existence of any communication with
21 Sarajevo. This testifies to the communication between Zvornik and
22 Bijeljina, but we cannot find Sarajevo anywhere here and we are talking
23 about the Sarajevo centre, aren't we?
24 Q. Yes. You understand of course, don't you, Mr. Tusevljak, because
25 of your experience in investigation, that it depends where the copy that
1 is seized comes from, doesn't it, as to what it can show? Do you agree
2 with that, Mr. Tusevljak, as an investigator?
3 A. Yes, but then I can only speculate as to where this document was
4 seized. I don't know that.
5 Q. I accept that. All right. Now, can we move from, please,
6 communications generally to the composition of the police in the
7 CSB Sarajevo. You were asked to look, please, at the Defence document
8 which is 1D331, which, I believe, was document number 2 in the bundle
9 that you were handed. No. All right. I think you were asked to look at
10 it, but -- it's obvious I got the wrong note. Yeah, that's the document
11 I want.
12 Now, there is your department -- or there is the setup for
13 May 1992, and as you pointed out, there's yourself for your department
14 and three inspectors. Now, Sasa Blagojevic, was he actually working
15 there in May because you appeared to say that he was in Zvornik?
16 A. No, Sasa Blagojevic was in Gorazde in May. That's what I wrote.
17 His parents took shelter in a village up there, together with his
18 brother, and he went there and he was in that area until the BiH army or
19 the then Territorial Defence took his village and some other villages
20 there and he came back sometime in June.
21 Q. All right. I am sorry, but he was working for you, wasn't he?
22 He wasn't working for any other department in any other SJB?
23 A. I'm trying to explain, he was on my list formally, but physically
24 he was not involved in doing the actual work.
25 Q. But then why was he being paid, may I ask, if he wasn't actually
1 doing a stroke of work for you or for the CSB in May?
2 A. I was trying to explain this, wasn't I.
3 Q. [Microphone not activated]
4 A. We all fled Sarajevo, none of us had anything to go on. Nobody
5 even had a pair of shoes, shirts on our backs, a piece of bread, nothing,
6 yet we all had families to look after. And to refuse to grant someone
7 the 65.000 dinars, which was a pitiful sum of money, it would have been
8 an awful thing for me to do, to ask someone to go on working without
9 paying them. None of them even knew at the time where they would be
10 spending the night, didn't have roofs over their heads.
11 From your present standpoint, it's probably difficult for you to
12 understand. I know how I felt at the time. I know the situation of my
13 own family back in April or May. We were shifting between three or four
14 different locations. I had no idea where my two brothers were. My
15 parents had fled to a cottage somewhere in some village or the other. I
16 was trying to make ends meet. I was trying to survive, to fight the next
17 day. The least of all my concerns was the actual policing, the actual
18 police work. It was actually about sheer survival. I think the same
19 applied to everyone else whose names you can see on this list. All the
20 people listed here are refugees and none of them had a chance at the time
21 to stay in their own homes and the same thing applied to their wives and
22 to their children. They were all refugees.
23 Q. No, no, don't go on, Mr. Tusevljak. It was a simple question.
24 You've now explained for the second time that the payments in April were
25 for, as you put it, humanitarian reasons, and you are saying the same for
1 the payments in May. Is it right also that Mr. Zeljko Rakic did no work
2 for you in May?
3 A. Yes, as I said, he fled Sarajevo with his wife and two children
4 and went to --
5 Q. No, stop. Did he do any police work for which he was entitled to
6 payment in May?
7 A. No.
8 Q. Did Mr. Petko Pekic do any police work for which he was entitled
9 to payment in May?
10 A. Perhaps he wrote a dispatch or two at the time because he was at
11 the Vraca school.
12 Q. So in May, none of you, as you've put it, had the slightest
13 interest in police work but got paid for it?
14 A. We did very little actual policing, police work, but yes, we were
15 paid for it. There's another thing, I don't know if we received anything
16 after this salary. If there was another salary, it would have amounted
17 to 5 euro in today's money. So when we talk about the actual amounts,
18 5 euro, we used this to feed ourselves, to have breakfast, lunch, it was
19 soup-kitchen like. We ate whatever they gave us and we wore whatever we
20 were given. The shirts, the t-shirts, the shoes, or boots or whatever,
21 we -- our own livelihood depended on whether there was a cauldron in
22 which we could cook something. The restaurants weren't operating.
23 Q. Yes.
24 MS. KORNER: [Microphone not activated] Would Your Honours give me
25 one moment.
1 Q. Of course, and I hear the reasons which you give for this, what
2 you have just told the Court was effectively a fraud on the MUP, wasn't
3 it? People being paid for work they had never done? That's right, isn't
4 it, Mr. Tusevljak?
5 A. No, I disagree with you altogether. It appears that you are not
6 willing to lend an ear to my reasons. If you want me to go through them
7 again, I'll be happy to do that for you.
8 Q. No, I absolutely do not want you to. You are saying you didn't
9 have anywhere to live, sleep, your families had fled, and all the rest of
10 it, and you needed money, but you were only supposed to be getting money
11 for work done, weren't you?
12 JUDGE HALL: Unless this goes to credibility again, Ms. Korner,
13 do we need to explore this further? The witness has given an
14 explanation. We needn't get sidetracked into this ancillary matter.
15 MS. KORNER: There's a good reason, Your Honour. It goes to some
16 of the evidence he later gave.
17 Q. Do you agree that by taking payment for work not done, that is a
19 A. I'm trying to take you back to that time, I'm making an earnest
20 effort, what it was like in 1992. If you want to discuss the features of
21 a potential crime based on the Criminal Code that applied at the time, we
22 can go back to legal matters and discuss that in that framework.
23 Q. No. No, Mr. Tusevljak. I appreciate you say you had reasons for
24 it that you've gone into at length, but I'm simply asking you whether
25 that isn't -- as a police officer who discussed law with Mr. Zecevic,
1 that may be mitigation, you understand the word, but it's actually a
2 criminal offence, isn't it, to claim money for work done when the work
3 has not been done? That's all I'm asking, yes or no?
4 A. In this case, no.
5 Q. Because, you see, it would come under the characteristic,
6 wouldn't it, of the sort of disciplinary offence at the very least and
7 criminal offence for which police officers should have been removed, as
8 you've explained?
9 A. This is May 1992 we are talking about. I'm doing my best to
10 explain that the situation was nothing like February 1992, for example,
11 or even March 1992. I don't know how one of you would have responded in
12 that situation. If you had to go there and see the wife of one of your
13 officers carrying two small children, cradling them in her arms, with
14 nowhere to sleep, no nappies to use, no milk, so if this is fraud, may I
15 then please answer for it. My conscience is perfectly clear.
16 Q. Yes. Well, I'm not going to pursue this any further given your
18 MS. KORNER: Can we have a look, please -- I only started to deal
19 with the number of people who were actually there. Can we now move,
20 please, to document 20203 at tab 6F.
21 Now, this is the payroll for July at the Romanija-Birac CSB.
22 Could we go to the second page, please.
23 Q. By that stage there's yourself and 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
24 inspectors? 10 inspectors. There's somebody written in by hand.
25 A. Yes, but again I need to explain. The only inspector here is me,
1 the chief of the crime unit, Blagojevic, Sasa, inspector.
2 Momcilo Janjetovic is also an inspector. He was head of the white collar
3 crime unit. And Ljubinko Mitrovic, those are the only inspectors.
4 Q. Well, why are they -- sorry. What are the rest of them, then?
5 A. Mandic, Branko, KDZ. Seslija, Miro, KDZ. Savic, Dragan,
6 forensics. Lazic, Savka, Milosevic, Slavko, KDZ. And Sekula Micic,
7 forensics. Mirjana Regoje, secretary.
8 Q. Where do you see that? I can't see that for the moment. The
9 last name. Right. Well, first of all, what is KDZ, I forget?
10 A. KDZ, anti-sabotage protection. If there is a device that is
11 found that didn't go off, then these are the people sent out. The
12 protection people, as we call them, who go to the scene to dismantle the
13 explosive. Or if an area needs checking for explosive devices --
14 Q. I don't need -- I just wanted to know what it stood for, thank
15 you very much. I don't need an explanation of what the anti-terrorist
16 lot do.
17 Why are they all shown, then, as inspectors when you say they are
19 A. I don't know. I don't know who typed this up, but if you look at
20 their appointment decisions when they were appointed to their posts, it
21 should be easy enough to tell what they did.
22 Q. Yes, I'm sure you got them, but never mind that. If they are not
23 inspectors why are they all signing as inspectors, because everyone seems
24 to sign for these salaries? Forget that, you can't answer that question
25 as to why they didn't change.
1 All right. So out of this --
2 A. May I?
3 Q. Forget that. No, it was a silly question. I don't see how you
4 can answer it, because you don't know why they would have signed without
5 changing their designation.
6 So out of these listed nine people or eight people plus one
7 secretary, no, nine people, you say four of them worked for you; is that
9 MR. ZECEVIC: Sorry --
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, the others worked for me too.
11 They just weren't inspectors. They were from the anti-sabotage units or
12 from the forensics, but I was their superior as well.
13 MS. KORNER:
14 Q. So, can we just run through the ones -- was Mr. Blagojevic
15 actually working for you at the CSB in July?
16 A. As you see, he didn't even sign for the salary. His signature is
17 not there.
18 Q. That's not an answer. Was he working for you at the CSB in July?
19 A. As I said, if he had been there, if he had not been in Gorazde,
20 he would have signed up for the salary, which he didn't.
21 Q. Sorry, he may not have signed it but it's ticked, and I think if
22 we added it all up we'd find it came to 543.500 dinar. Whether he signed
23 for it or not, are you -- are you saying he never took the salary this
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. How do you know?
2 A. You see, this huge tick here, it starts next to my name and then
3 goes all the way down to the last name almost.
4 Q. Yes?
5 A. There was someone who did this on behalf of the whole crime
6 police unit. Someone picked up the whole sum on behalf of the unit. I'm
7 not sure whose signature that is. And then this someone distributed the
8 salaries to the people who put their names there, who signed here, and
9 the same applies to the lower half of the document. Someone did this on
10 behalf of the entire department. These people didn't go one by one to
11 the mat fin to pick up their salaries. Only one person went, picked up
12 the entire amount and then divvied up whoever he could find.
13 Q. But I'm sorry, are you saying it was this person who then
14 obtained the signatures where we can see them to the side? The person
15 who picked up all the money? Or are you saying that all the signatures
16 are done by one person?
17 A. No, this person got the money and then whoever they could track
18 down, whoever they could give their salaries to, these people would then
19 sign for it.
20 Q. You don't appear to have signed for it, does that mean you didn't
21 get the money?
22 A. Probably not. My salary is not there.
23 Q. I am sorry, it's got you down --
24 A. I'm just looking at it now.
25 Q. It's got you down to get 19.000 dinars?
1 A. Yes, I don't know, but at the time I think this amounted to a
2 grand total of 10 Deutschemark, 5 euro.
3 Q. What it may amount -- we've heard a number of -- no,
4 Mr. Tusevljak, just wait, please. We've heard a number of people
5 describe how much the dinar was worth. Forgetting what its actual worth
6 was, did you or did you not take your salary at that month?
7 A. Probably not, my signature isn't there. I couldn't possibly have
8 been given the money until I signed for it.
9 Q. Well, didn't you go and say "where is my money" to this bloke,
10 whoever it was, who picked up the money?
11 A. I don't know. I can't remember. If I collected a salary, I
12 would have signed for it like everybody else.
13 Q. All right. Do we understand that Mr. Blagojevic, whether or not
14 he picked up his money, was still not at the centre and still with his
15 family in Gorazde in July?
16 A. Yes, I think that was the case.
17 MS. KORNER: Your Honours, may I ask that this be marked and
18 admitted, please. I am sorry, it hasn't got a translation, I'm not sure
19 it needs them because all the documents are the same of these mat fin
21 MR. ZECEVIC: We object, Your Honours, for the same reasons as we
22 articulated yesterday. I don't need, I believe, to explain again.
23 MS. KORNER: Your Honours, the importance of this document is
24 that it shows on the face of it and apparently accurately in some
25 respects who was said to be working in the CSB at the time. And this is
1 obviously -- in this particular department at a time when it is being
2 said they had insufficient manpower to investigate.
3 MR. ZECEVIC: Your Honours, the Office of the Prosecutor produced
4 the chart. It was given to the witness. It lists all the people. We
5 agreed with that. It lists all the people with the explanation, who are
6 the inspectors, who are other people, whether they are KDZ or something
7 else. It was the document that we saw earlier this morning. So if this
8 document is for the same purpose.
9 JUDGE HALL: Except, Mr. Zecevic, that -- well, we aren't going
10 to revisit the arguments that we had yesterday about "fresh evidence,"
11 but this is a document which is -- which must be read alongside the
12 document which you referred, and it's something which the Chamber is
13 going to have to assess at the end of the exercise. And as I understand,
14 even if one were to accept fully the witness's explanation about the
15 means of covering persons in pallor circumstances, what Ms. Korner is
16 relying on is that whatever the motive was, you had this list of persons,
17 so therefore that qualifies anything else in the chart. And to that
18 extent it seems to me that it's relevant and indeed probative.
19 MR. ZECEVIC: I understand, Your Honours.
20 MS. KORNER: Well, Your Honours, I want -- [Microphone not
22 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for Ms. Korner, please.
23 MS. KORNER: I don't know why it should be MFI'd, unless
24 Your Honours want me to get a translation of it. I don't think it's
1 JUDGE HALL: I don't think a translation is necessary. So it
2 will be admitted and marked.
3 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P2360, Your Honours.
4 MS. KORNER: Your Honours -- do Your Honours want to take -- I'm
5 going to ask one more document on this topic and then I see that it's
6 time for the adjournment more or less.
7 JUDGE HALL: [Microphone not activated] ... in two minutes?
8 MS. KORNER: Try to. Could we have a look please at 20172.
9 That's document 20 in our bundle.
10 Q. Right. This is August now. "List of workers," and I emphasise,
11 "who performed duties in the CSB in August 1992 and who need to be paid
12 for this month."
13 MS. KORNER: Can we go, please, to the second page in B/C/S. And
14 it's the third page in English. I don't know why we had this one
15 translated and not the other one.
16 Q. It's virtually the same list as July, Mr. Tusevljak. On this
17 occasion, however, did you sign for your 21.000 dinars?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Did Mr. Blagojevic sign for his 19.000 dinars?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Was Mr. Blagojevic by then actually working for your department?
22 A. Yes, he started working, as I said, he left for Zvornik.
23 Q. When?
24 A. I can't remember the month but I think by this time he had left
25 already. August perhaps.
1 Q. In July he is still in Gorazde. In August he is actually in
2 Zvornik, so he is not working for you either in August?
3 A. Well, he was on my list. I think Sasa Blagojevic sent us one or
4 two or three reports about touring those police stations. There's a
5 report from Vlasenica. I think he was present during inspections in
6 Zvornik, something do with some crimes.
7 Q. And so again, just remind us, please, of this list which appears
8 to show you as having 3, 6, 9 -- 10 inspectors. Which are the ones that
9 actually worked for you? Just give us the numbers.
10 A. 19, 24, 26, and 28.
11 Q. Yes.
12 MS. KORNER: Yes. Thank you very much.
13 Your Honours, may that also be admitted and marked. And that's
14 the end of this topic.
15 JUDGE HALL: Mr. Zecevic, you would wish to record your objection
16 for the record, I take it.
17 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes, yes.
18 JUDGE HALL: The document is admitted and marked.
19 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P2361, Your Honours.
20 JUDGE HALL: And we take the morning break, return in 20 minutes.
21 [The witness stands down]
22 --- Recess taken at 10.28 a.m.
23 --- On resuming at 10.57 a.m.
24 [The witness takes the stand]
25 MS. KORNER:
1 Q. Mr. Tusevljak, just a couple of other questions on this business
2 of who was actually working at the CSB. The last document we looked at,
3 which has just been admitted, the August payroll is signed off by
4 Mr. Cvijetic. I don't know if it's on the screen or not. It's gone. It
5 doesn't matter.
6 Did Mr. Cvijetic know that people who were receiving payment
7 weren't actually working?
8 MS. KORNER: We need to go to the last page of the document.
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I stated all those whose names are
10 on the list, with the exception of Sasa Blagojevic who was in Zvornik,
11 worked in the Security Services Centre, which means that they performed
12 their functions. However, I would like to emphasise that there is only
13 one general crime prevention inspector here and two white collar crime
15 MS. KORNER:
16 Q. Yes, I'm sorry, you misunderstand me. We can see definitely that
17 Mr. Cvijetic signed off on this salary payroll, sorry, I'm not sure of on
18 the earlier ones, but Mr. Cvijetic would have to sign, wouldn't he, to
19 say that the people should receive the payment?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. When Mr. Cvijetic signed off, would he have known that, for
22 example, going back to July or earlier, that the people who were
23 receiving payment would not have actually worked? For example, let's
24 take Mr. Blagojevic in Gorazde?
25 A. Absolutely. He knew about it. We discussed it and he also knew
1 the reasons for which they received their salaries and he absolutely
2 agreed with.
3 Q. And was this something also that Mico Stanisic, as the minister
4 present in the complex, would have known?
5 MR. ZECEVIC: Can we have the basis for that question.
6 MS. KORNER: I'm asking it. I'll repeat the question.
7 MR. ZECEVIC: Well, the basis for the fact that Mico Stanisic was
8 present in the complex, Ms. Korner.
9 MS. KORNER: I'm asking the question. If I'm not allowed to ask
10 the question, then I'm not allowed to ask the question.
11 MR. ZECEVIC: I think you should establish first whether --
12 JUDGE HALL: I thought the present in the complex was
13 parenthetical, but I would have assumed the basis of the question is as
14 the minister by ordinary ministerial responsibility. Ms. Korner.
15 MS. KORNER: Absolutely. Your Honour, I don't see any reason for
16 giving the basis of the question, but clearly the ministerial
17 responsibility to his paymasters, if nothing else.
18 Q. So, Mr. Tusevljak, would Mr. Stanisic as the minister have known
20 A. I don't know.
21 Q. But you see, you've told us that Mr. Cvijetic discussed matters
22 with the minister, wouldn't he have had to discuss something as important
23 as that with the minister?
24 A. It's only an assumption. I know what were the topics of my
25 conversations with Mr. Cvijetic, but what he spoke about with the
1 minister, I wouldn't know, because I was not present at any of their
3 Q. Yes, but you -- I am sorry, Mr. Cvijetic [sic], you gave
4 evidence, and I'll come back to that later, earlier, that Mr. Cvijetic
5 had informed you about his discussions with the minister and that's how
6 you knew about it, and I'll come back to the actual matter that was
8 Now, was it right, from your dealings with Mr. Cvijetic, that
9 matters of importance he had to raise with the minister?
10 A. If it was important matters, I assume that probably
11 Zoran Cvijetic had to discuss it with the minister. However, about this
12 specific topic, I know nothing.
13 Q. You say you assume. Mr. Cvijetic told you, didn't he, that he
14 would discuss matters with the minister?
15 A. Some matters, yes, but this particular matter, I don't know
16 whether Mr. Cvijetic spoke to the minister about the salaries and
17 payrolls. I really don't know that.
18 Q. Were you aware, if you weren't say no, that there was
19 considerable discussion about how the MUP was to be financed altogether,
20 discussion in government circles?
21 A. I don't know. At the time I had absolutely no possibility to
22 follow the discussions within the government.
23 Q. Right. And one final question which may seem slightly out of
24 context, which it is, did you by any chance know a man named Kenan Delic,
25 an inspector who worked at Sarajevo airport?
1 A. I believe he was the assistant or the deputy commander of the
2 traffic police station before the war, and even before that he used to an
3 inspector in charge of aliens, foreigners, but I think that that might be
5 Q. Right. So he was a obviously a Muslim with a name like that; is
6 that right? Or maybe not.
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. You say he worked -- sorry. Sorry. Was that that he was at the
9 airport or not? You say he was the assistant or deputy commander of the
10 traffic police station. Is that at the airport?
11 A. Not the traffic police. Possibly the airport police. I know him
12 from the time when he was inspector in charge of aliens in the city SUP.
13 Q. Thank you. Now, can I move, please, to the question of these
14 Golf investigations --
15 JUDGE HARHOFF: Ms. Korner, before we move on to the Golf
16 incidents, could I just ask the witness about one thing relating to this
17 matter of having people on the payroll who actually did not work for the
18 MUP, because I'm curious to know and I'm trying to understand how this
19 came about. Was Mr. Cvijetic's reasons to allow payment to people who he
20 knew did no longer work for the MUP, did he do so out of -- out of what
21 really? What was his reasons? Why was it so widely accepted apparently
22 that it was legitimate or considered to be legitimate to continue to pay
23 people although they were no longer working? What was the underlying
24 understanding of this? Are you able to clarify and do you understand my
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] We are talking here about the very
2 beginning of the war, April, May, and June, and we are also talking about
3 two or mostly three names. The reasons were exclusively humanitarian.
4 Mr. Cvijetic or myself or Drago Borovcanin, who was chief of the police
5 department, considered that this was the only way to provide at least
6 some assistance to those people.
7 If you look at subsequent payrolls, beginning in September and
8 onwards, you will not find a single person not actually performing work,
9 so you have to bear in mind that the payrolls have changed. In April,
10 May and June we have certain names on the payrolls and the underlying
11 reason was that those people, who left all their property in Sarajevo and
12 left with their families and arrived on the territory controlled by
13 Republika Srpska, who were without any accommodation and in big trouble,
14 they needed some help in order to overcome this personal crisis. Those
15 people who did not work in the MUP later on were removed from payrolls
16 and then later on they did not receive any salaries.
17 So the only reason for all this was purely humanitarian. Nothing
19 JUDGE HARHOFF: Thank you. This clarifies a part of the question
20 that I had. The remaining part of my question is whether the people who
21 now suddenly found themselves with no home and no jobs and no means of
22 subsistence, were they old MUP members? I mean, were they offered this
23 option because of their previous engagement with the MUP or would it also
24 sometimes include, say, a friend who had nothing to do with the MUP but
25 who just happened to find himself or herself in very unfortunate
1 circumstances and who were then being offered some assistance by the MUP?
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. They are all employees of the
3 Ministry of the Interior of the Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina. They all
4 belonged to the BiH MUP. And then they left it either on the 4th of
5 April or subsequently they were driven out from the MUP. And then they
6 arrived in the territory under the control of Republika Srpska. So they
7 are all former employees of the Ministry of the Interior of Bosnia and
8 Herzegovina. There is not a single person on the list who was not the
9 member of the police before the war broke out. It's only them. Only
10 they received some money.
11 JUDGE HARHOFF: Thank you for this clarification.
12 Back to you, Ms. Korner.
13 MS. KORNER: All right.
14 Q. I want to deal with the topic -- [Microphone not activated].
15 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
16 MS. KORNER: Sorry.
17 Q. I want to deal now, Mr. Tusevljak, with the topic of these thefts
18 of the Golfs from the TAS factory in Vogosca. I think it's right that
19 over the course of the months that these investigations went on,
20 something like more than 100 police officers were involved in these
21 investigations; is that right?
22 A. No, I don't think it was 100 policemen. Not nearly that number.
23 Q. Well, I'll check but I have a feeling that's the number that you
24 gave us when you were interviewed, but I'll check that and come back to
1 And there were two major reasons, weren't there, why this
2 investigation was actually ordered by the highest levels, wasn't it, and
3 the government itself?
4 A. Yes, we received the assignment from the ministry.
5 Q. And I'll show you a document in a minute that shows you it went
6 as high as the government, but, first, the cars that were stolen, there
7 were a lot of them and they were valuable cars, that's right, isn't it?
8 All brand new Golfs?
9 A. Yes, I assume that was the reason. The vehicles were brand new.
10 Q. And although originally it appears that the factory had been
11 attacked by the Bosniaks or the army of ABiH, whatever, the TO, I think,
12 they didn't take very many, we'll look at the report, and thereafter,
13 because Vogosca was taken over by the Serbs, the factory fell into Serb
14 hands. And that's right, isn't it?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. And of course if it had remained, if all the Golfs hadn't been
17 stolen like this, that represented a valuable source of income, didn't
18 it, for the government of the Serbian Republic?
19 A. I don't understand the question.
20 Q. Well, if the factory which had produced all these brand new Golfs
21 now came into possession of the Serbian -- the Serbian Republic in Bosnia
22 and Herzegovina, the sale of those cars represented quite a large amount
23 of income for the government, didn't it?
24 A. Well, if the government sold them, then, of course, they were
25 valuable vehicles.
1 Q. And the other part of this was that it was a major public
2 scandal, wasn't it, that these Golfs were being driven to Serbia, for
4 A. Yes, but I'm not sure what you want from me.
5 Q. I'm just asking you, on the face of it, why so much time was
6 spent investigating these thefts. Not only time but manpower. And one
7 of the other aspects was that it would appear that government ministers
8 were helping themselves to these cars; that's right, isn't it?
9 A. I believe that some of the vehicles were registered as belonging
10 to the government of Republika Srpska.
11 Q. All right. Well, let's just have a look at some of the documents
12 on this, please. Could you please have a look at 1D82, which is
13 document 12 in the Prosecution bundle.
14 MS. KORNER: Sorry, my fault, 1D182, sorry, not 82. 1D182. In
15 fact, it may also be in the Defence bundle, because I think you looked at
17 MR. ZECEVIC: If it would be helpful, it's document number 2 in
18 Defence binder.
19 MS. KORNER: Thank you. I think Mr. Tusevljak can see it.
20 Q. Right. This is the note already on the 16th of July which you
21 made, if we go to the second page, together with Mr. Mitrovic.
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Go back to the first page, did you actually go down to Vogosca to
24 do this or did you just make the note from the information provided by
25 Mr. Mitrovic?
1 A. No, I went to Vogosca myself, together with Mitrovic.
2 Q. And there we see that the description that the factory had been
3 apparently attacked by Green Berets on the 17th or thereabouts in April,
4 and then thereafter had been taken over by the Serb -- Serbs but had not
5 been properly secured.
6 And then if we go down to the second -- sorry, the third
7 paragraph, the last sentence -- first of all it says that on 20th of
8 June, the War Presidency had passed a decision prohibiting the taking of
9 the vehicles, then Mr. Tintor -- before that, Mr. Tintor had agreed that
10 vehicles could be taken. And then finally this: Kopravica said before
11 the War Presidency passed the decision, he had ordered, and by "he" it's,
12 I think, meant to be Mr. Tintor, six Golf vehicles be given for the needs
13 of the government of the SR -- of the Serbian Republic of
14 Bosnia-Herzegovina and the vehicles were sent directly to the prime
16 So that's the information that you got at that stage; is that
18 A. Yes. In this Official Note we simply wrote down the factual
19 situation as told to us.
20 Q. And this was sent to the CSB, but was this something of
21 sufficient importance that it would have gone to the minister?
22 A. This went to the chief of the Security Services Centre. Whether
23 he forwarded it, I don't know, but this was written for the chief of the
24 Security Services Centre.
25 Q. Yes, but you told us that at these collegium meetings that were
1 held every morning, matters of importance were discussed and you saw
2 documents and reports that were going to go to the minister because they
3 were discussed. Was this one of them that was discussed?
4 A. It was discussed and this document was probably drafted at the
5 request of the Ministry of the Interior.
6 Q. Right. And when it was discussed, did Mr. Cvijetic say, right,
7 we'll send this up to the minister himself because these thefts are such
8 a major crime?
9 A. When the minister of the interior of Republika Srpska is
10 informed, it is always important to specify whether it goes straight to
11 the minister or to some of the departments or services. It could have
12 been sent to the police department or some other department or personally
13 to the minister, but it is impossible for me to establish this without
14 the cover letter that would have been sent to Sarajevo. So it's only the
15 covering letter where you can find the information about to whom the
16 chief of the centre said this. If it did go to the ministry, it is
17 probable that the minister himself would have been apprised of it.
18 Q. So that's that document.
19 MS. KORNER: Now can you have a look at one shortly after which
20 is, please, 1D93 at tab 17A of the Prosecution bundle.
21 Q. Now, this is - if we go to the second page, please, in the B/C/S/
22 and English - a document signed by Mr. Macar. Is that the gentleman to
23 whom you reported?
24 A. Yes. He was the chief of the administration. He wasn't
25 co-ordinator yet, he was chief of administration at the time.
1 Q. All right.
2 MR. ZECEVIC: Sorry, I am sorry, I believe the witness should
3 repeat his answer because it wasn't recorded as he said it.
4 MS. KORNER: Okay.
5 MR. ZECEVIC: It was recorded quite differently.
6 Q. All right. The question was: Was Mr. Macar the man to whom you
7 reported, could you repeat your answer quite slowly, please, so that we
8 get the correct interpretation?
9 A. At the time we submitted our reports to Planojevic, who was chief
10 of the crime prevention administration, and within this administration
11 Goran Macar was only a co-ordinator.
12 Q. Right.
13 A. And when Dobrivoje Planojevic left his post, when he was
14 replaced, it was then that Goran Macar was appointed to that post but I'm
15 not sure in which month it happened.
16 Q. Right. Thank you. Now, this document is sent to the chiefs of
17 13 SJBs that came within the purview of the CSB Sarajevo; is that right?
18 A. I would like to see the first page again.
19 Q. Oh, I'm so sorry, yes.
20 MS. KORNER: Could we go back to the first page.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, you can see that the crime
22 prevention administration sent the dispatch directly to the police
23 stations and the CSB of Romanija-Birac received this dispatch only as an
25 Q. So this was at that stage being taken up by someone who was at
1 the headquarters of the MUP; is that right?
2 A. Correct, the crime prevention administration.
3 Q. Thank you.
4 MS. KORNER: Can we move then, please, to 1D83, tab 24. Sorry,
5 I've done it again, 1D183. I keep leaving out the 1.
6 Q. Can we just stay there for a moment -- [Microphone not
8 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
9 MS. KORNER:
10 Q. Can we just stay there for a moment. Who is Pero Vujicic?
11 A. Pero Vujicic was an old member of the state security service. I
12 think he worked in the analytics department before the war, and in the
13 Republika Srpska MUP, I think that at the beginning he was in the office
14 of the minister and later on chief of the analytical department. He may
15 have stayed on that post until the end of the war but I'm not quite sure
16 about that.
17 Q. All right.
18 MS. KORNER: Now, if we go to the next page -- [Microphone not
19 activated] -- in English and in B/C/S, please.
20 Q. This is a document again addressed -- this is a document
21 addressed again to the SJBs and also to you for information and this
22 is --
23 MS. KORNER: If we go to the last page, please, again, on each.
24 Again, Mr. Macar, and if you go back to the second page.
25 Q. A few days after his last -- it's about, well, a week, maybe
1 eight days, he is actually reminding the SJB chiefs about the TAS
2 information he wants, isn't he?
3 A. Yes. This is an urgent document. They are asking them to
4 respond quickly, and it's pursuant to the same dispatch.
5 Q. So clearly from your knowledge of the procedures --
6 MR. ZECEVIC: It was recorded: "This is an urgent document.
7 They are asking him to respond quickly, and it's pursuant to the same
8 dispatch." That is not what the witness said.
9 MS. KORNER:
10 Q. Just repeat your answer. My question was that Mr. Macar is
11 reminding the SJB chiefs of his dispatch, and what did you say to that?
12 You said it was urgent, an urgent document?
13 A. I said it said we have an urgency, meaning that a response should
14 be accelerated to a previously sent out dispatch.
15 Q. Right. So do you agree from your knowledge of these type of
16 dispatches this was considered to be a really important matter?
17 A. I assume in this case the Assembly of the Serbian People of the
18 Republic of BiH probably sent a request to the government providing a
19 dead-line by which they were to forward this information to the Assembly.
20 There was probably an issue for the delegates or something like that.
21 Q. All right.
22 MS. KORNER: Let's move then, please, to document P245 at tab 27A
23 of the Prosecution bundle. And you'll see what I think you are referring
24 to. Did I give the number? Yes.
25 Q. This is actually the government minutes as opposed to the
1 Assembly, and it's 9th of August, so it's actually after this reminder
2 from Mr. Macar.
3 MS. KORNER: Could you go in English, please, to the sixth page,
4 and in B/C/S it's the sixth page as well.
5 Q. "The minister of the interior is due to help Vogosca municipality
6 with the war booty of TAS Vogosca company. The decree on war booty
7 handling procedures is to be implemented in this and other cases."
8 So, do you understand that to mean, Mr. Tusevljak, that the
9 motorcars from the TAS factory, as I put to you, were considered to be
10 the property of the Serbian government as "war booty"?
11 A. I see the government conclusions for the first time. I just know
12 that when we seized the vehicles, our duty was to hand them over to what
13 I think was called the commodity reserves commission or something like
15 Q. Well, you know what the expression "war booty" meant, didn't you,
16 because there are all sorts of decrees issued about war booty, weren't
18 A. Yes, but I never received or indeed read a single one.
19 Q. Well, your minister, Mico Stanisic, issued a number of directions
20 about that, didn't he?
21 A. But only responsibility in relation to the seized goods seized
22 from people who couldn't prove their ownership. In cases where owners
23 were found, we were to return these to their rightful owners. If no
24 owners could be tracked down, we were to hands these things over to the
25 directorate for -- what was it, I said it a minute ago, the commodity
1 reserves directorate.
2 Q. Are you saying you do remember seeing directives issued by
3 Mico Stanisic about this?
4 A. No, only what we received from the crime police administration.
5 Q. Well, we may have to come back to that tomorrow. Anyhow, can we
6 go back to this document, please. Do you agree from reading that that,
7 as I put to you, the government of the Serbian Republic considered the
8 motorcars that were at the TAS factory to be something to which they were
10 A. That's what it says. That is the government's conclusion.
11 Q. And then the next conclusion:
12 "The Ministry of the Interior is due to implement an earlier
13 government conclusion, preparing a report about the circumstances
14 surrounding the theft of Golf cars from the TAS factory."
15 And that is what you understood to be the case, was it, that you
16 were obliged to prepare -- you, by "you" I mean the police, were obliged
17 to prepare this report?
18 A. Well, you can tell that by looking at the dispatch. You showed
19 two of those a minute ago, in fact.
20 Q. Now, I want to move, please, to the document that you were shown
21 by Mr. Zecevic some days ago, which is in tab 173 of the Defence bundle.
22 It's 932D1. Just reminding ourselves that this document says that the
23 Ministry of the Interior is to help the Vogosca municipality. And this
24 is in August.
25 Now, you were asked about it this in connection with what you
1 described as the -- the ineffectiveness of the Vogosca police station,
2 SJB, and it was this order that was to send the various police officers
3 from various other SJBs within the CSB Romanija-Birac to Vogosca, and
4 they need to be experienced.
5 Wasn't it, in fact, the direct result of the government's order
6 that the Ministry of the Interior should go on investigating -- should
7 send assistance to Vogosca to go on investigating these TAS thefts, that
8 those experienced police officers were sent there?
9 A. No. These police officers were sent there to take some action
10 with regard to the public order. They were probably operating at
11 check-points just on the way out of the TAS factory, or the roads leading
12 out of Vogosca. At the exit points to each and every municipality, there
13 were either military or police check-points at the time. As for the
14 criminal investigation, this would have been handled by crime police
15 inspectors. When you look at this order, you don't see a single crime
16 police inspector being dispatched to the area. I do believe there should
17 be reports available, however, filed by these crime police inspectors who
18 at roughly the same time were also in the general Vogosca area pursuing
19 this line of investigation.
20 Q. Right. Okay. I'm perfectly prepared to accept that,
21 Mr. Tusevljak. These experienced police officers were there to operate
22 at the check-points to stop further vehicles going from TAS?
23 A. This is September. I'm not even sure how many vehicles remained
24 within the actual compound by this time. A lot of time had elapsed since
25 April, between April and September, in addition to which there were some
1 other things there. The general situation throughout that municipality
2 was a cause for concern. It was quite worrisome. By this time I think
3 very few Golf cars remained.
4 Q. You said that one of them was the check -- they were probably
5 operating at check-points just on the way out of the TAS factory or the
6 roads leading out of Vogosca. Wouldn't that have been to stop whatever
7 was remaining from being removed?
8 A. Probably to keep more vehicles from leaving the area, unless,
9 according to my information by September -- I'm not even sure there
10 remained a single vehicle on that plateau.
11 Q. You say it's got nothing to do with what the government was
12 saying in August about the Ministry of the Interior helping Vogosca
13 municipality. How are you able to say that? Do you know for a fact that
14 Mr. Cvijetic didn't receive an order from Mr. Stanisic to send these
16 A. Surely an order came from the Ministry of the Interior and these
17 police officers were off to give the people in Vogosca municipality a
18 hand, but not in the sense of an investigation being launched. It was
19 just in order to improve the security situation as it was at the time
20 throughout the area.
21 Q. And then I think the final document I want you to look at on the
22 Golf theft, please, is a document which is at, just check the numbers, I
23 think it's been given a 65 ter number 3095 and it should be at tab 16 of
24 our bundle.
25 MS. KORNER: No, sorry, wrong one. I think it is, sorry, Defence
1 document again 1D579 and it's tab 8 in the Defence bundle. Tab 28, I am
2 so sorry. Here we are in November of 1992. Can we go to the last page,
3 please, in both English and B/C/S.
4 Q. Mr. Cvijetic's report and he is still making suggestions about
5 what is to be done in respect of TAS, the continuation of activities
6 related to this action is secured through the RS MUP for the vehicles
7 that were transferred to -- sorry, it's not on -- you have to go back
8 one page in B/C/S. Do you see paragraph on the bottom, "Our centre
9 proposes," and then activities to be co-ordinated with other CSBs and the
10 RS to find the vehicles. Criminal reports, activity relating to the
11 submitting of criminal reports to competent prosecutor's offices against
12 the persons from whom the vehicles have been confiscated, persons who
13 have stolen to be expedited, inquiries on the ground, intelligence work,
14 and [indiscernible].
15 Now, was that a report that Mr. Cvijetic discussed with you or
16 discussed with the collegium?
17 A. Yes, this is a report that was within the framework of the
18 Security Services Centre.
19 Q. Okay. Now, okay. I can't find the bit in the interview where
20 you told us about how many police officers were involved. Overall, over
21 this period of months between July and at least November and onwards, how
22 many police officers would you estimate were involved in these on-going
24 A. Well, the first thing you need to know is this: The Sarajevo
25 Security Services Centre sometime in July, or in late July, sent out a
1 circular dispatch containing the TAS listing. This was a list
2 enumerating all the vehicles that remained on the plateau there. We
3 forwarded those lists to all of the stations and all of the centres,
4 Security Services Centres, in the MUP. It was up to them to forward
5 these in turn to their own stations. The lists were also dispatched to
6 border crossings. Based on those lists, the vehicle numbers and the
7 engine numbers, the police in Zvornik, Bijeljina and Banja Luka, could
8 use this when checking vehicles. If they came across a vehicle that was
9 on the TAS list, the vehicle would immediately be seized.
10 It was along these lines that a huge number of operatives were
11 involved. If, say, there was someone in Banja Luka or in Bijeljina who
12 suspected that they were dealing with the vehicle that had been stolen
13 from the TAS factory, they would have checked the engine number, the
14 vehicle number that's stated on the list in order to ascertain whether
15 they were dealing with a stolen vehicle or not. The RS MUP, the crime
16 department forwarded this same kind of list to the federal MUP including
17 the police of Serbia and the police of Montenegro. The overall objective
18 being to track down as many of those vehicles as possible and persons who
19 had stolen them were to face charges. That being the objective, as this
20 report clearly shows.
21 Q. And I'll ask you --
22 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
23 MS. KORNER: Sorry.
24 Q. I'll ask you my original question. Overall, how many police
25 officers and what time of -- number of hours were spent by the RS MUP
1 during this period and later in investigating the thefts from the TAS
3 A. Whenever a vehicle like this was caught at any of the
4 check-points, it would be seized, and then the crime police would take
5 steps about that vehicle, regardless of the area. I'm trying to explain
6 the following: At no time were there 100 people whose only task was to
7 deal with these TAS vehicles. It was just one of the daily
8 responsibilities, so the inspectors who were busy dealing with these
9 stolen vehicles, dealing with theft or robbery, whenever they came across
10 a vehicle like this would take appropriate steps, but that wasn't the
11 only thing that they were supposed to be dealing with.
12 Q. Well, let's try to get at it this way: From what you said, first
13 there were the investigations carried out at the actual factory itself;
15 A. Yes, as shown by our report. Interviews were conducted at the
17 Q. Exactly. A number of police officers conducted interviews. Then
18 there were presumably police officers delegated to try and trace where
19 these cars had gone to?
20 A. I think it was only the operative group from the centre,
21 including, I think, maybe two inspectors from the administration.
22 Q. And then, as you put it, these lists were sent out and from
23 check-points and everything like that, if a car was apprehended, there
24 had to be interviews carried out with the owner of the car to see how he
25 got it, filing of reports, and possibly filing of criminal charges; is
1 that right?
2 A. Yes, that's right. Such vehicles would be seized and a criminal
3 report would be filed.
4 Q. So it wouldn't be unfair, would it, to say that -- leave aside
5 numbers of police officers, thousands of man-hours must have been spent
6 on this particular exercise?
7 A. No, not even close. Not even close. When I say a dispatch, this
8 is something that tells you everything you need to know about the
9 operative setup. At the time this was one of their daily
11 I could tell you something for the sake of comparison. You have
12 a person, there's an arrest warrant issued to arrest that person. The
13 moment the warrant is issued, all the police check-points and stations
14 are told about the arrest warrant being out. The moment the police track
15 this person down as part of their regular day-to-day activities, the
16 person is duly handed over to the body that was original issuer of the
17 arrest warrant.
18 This situation was very much the same. It wasn't just the TAS
19 vehicles that we were after. There were other vehicles that were on the
20 list because citizens had previously filed reports about other vehicles
21 being stolen. So there were vehicles that were stolen different ways and
22 different situations not just the TAS factory, and the procedure applied
23 in these cases was always the same. When the vehicle like that was
24 apprehended, the circumstances of ownership would be examined and if any
25 indication was found that the vehicle had been stolen, a report would be
1 filed with the relevant prosecutor, so it was more or less a matter of
2 standard procedure, you might say, and not thousands and thousands of
3 man-hours being wasted.
4 Q. I didn't say being wasted. I said being expended. How many
5 hours -- are you prepared to hazard a guess, sorry, as to how many hours
6 would have been spent on this overall investigation?
7 MR. ZECEVIC: I think this has gone as far as it could. This is
8 pure speculation, we are talking about. Ms. Korner is asking about
9 thousands of hours, the witness is saying not even close and this is pure
10 speculation, and the witness explained what he was talking about, so
11 there can be no mention of any hours on that particular issue.
12 JUDGE HALL: Ms. Korner, I'm inclined to agree with Mr. Zecevic
13 here. What is the -- what do you hope to obtain that you haven't yet
14 gotten from this witness on this point?
15 MS. KORNER: Right.
16 Q. Would you agree, Mr. Tusevljak, that this particular task,
17 however, was a priority between at least July and the end of November for
18 the CSB Sarajevo?
19 A. I'm not sure it was a priority or not, but if you looked at the
20 number of our inspectors, you saw how many there were, two crime -- white
21 collar crime inspectors were busy doing this.
22 Q. And the point of all this, isn't it, Mr. Tusevljak, is this, I'm
23 sorry it's been such a grind: Don't you think that with the limited
24 resources that you say were available to the CSB Sarajevo and the SJBs,
25 it would have been better to devote those resources to the prevention of
1 killings, of beatings, of looting of non-Serb property? Don't you think
2 that would have been better?
3 A. That was, as a matter of fact, done during this period of time as
4 well. I'm talking about the period when the centre had begun operating
5 already, July, August, September, October, whenever things like these
6 happened throughout the area, the police would take it up.
7 Q. But you see, that is not right, is it, Mr. Tusevljak. You
8 devoted so much resources to these Golfs for the reasons I've explained
9 that you did not, did you, your centre, properly investigate what might
10 be described as crimes against persons let alone try to catch the
12 A. I don't understand. What resources did we devote? Do you think
13 that we got some money to do all this in order to perform all those
14 investigations? No, not a penny. So if this dispatch that originated in
15 my office went some place, I did not follow it. I didn't go anywhere.
16 The operative person simply wrote the report. The report went to the
17 police stations as you were able to see. The police stations were then
18 duty-bound to deliver a written response to us.
19 In 1992, in 1993 we had no funds, no operative resources in the
20 sense that I was able to go some place and that my breakfast, lunch, and
21 dinner would be paid for, or my accommodation. It was only up to me to
22 secure all this myself.
23 Q. Sorry, Mr. Tusevljak, I will interrupt because that's -- it's a
24 misunderstanding, it's a mistranslation. I don't mean financial
25 resources, I don't mean money being given to you. What I'm suggesting to
1 you by resources is the police officers and the time they spent
2 investigating, that's what I mean by resources, not money.
3 A. But I stated that in my department I had two white collar crime
4 inspectors. Besides them I had two more general crime inspectors, and
5 just take a look at the area covered by the Security Services Centre, how
6 many hundreds of kilometres.
7 Q. Mr. Tusevljak, can I say, I don't blame you for this because we
8 can see the instructions to concentrate on this came from higher up, came
9 from the government via the minister, via Mr. Cvijetic. So what I'm
10 suggesting is, but as a matter of reality, would it not have been better
11 for the time and manpower that was devoted to investigating the Golf
12 thefts would have been spent investigating other crimes?
13 A. I have to repeat once again. Investigation is conducted by
14 persons who have nothing to do with general crime prevention or war
15 crimes or any other crimes. That investigation is conducted by people
16 who are in charge of white collar crime. Serious fraud office.
17 Q. Yes. All right.
18 MS. KORNER: [Microphone not activated] Your Honours, that's
19 probably a good time. I've finished on this topic.
20 JUDGE HALL: Yes, we return in 20 minutes.
21 [The witness stands down]
22 --- Recess taken at 12.04 p.m.
23 --- On resuming at 12.26 p.m.
24 MS. KORNER: Your Honours, while the witness is coming back,
25 could I just ask that at the end of today we could have five minutes just
1 to raise something. It's not an argument, it's just a matter that
2 affects Mr. Krgovic's witnesses.
3 JUDGE HALL: Of course, Ms. Korner.
4 MS. KORNER: Thank you very much.
5 [The witness takes the stand]
6 [Trial Chamber confers]
7 MS. KORNER:
8 Q. Mr. Tusevljak, just one last question about the Golf saga. Do
9 you remember telling us in interview that you had worked on this
10 investigation from 1992 -- from about June/July 1992 but for a number of
11 years in fact?
12 A. Yes, until the end of the war. Until 1995. The investigation
13 went on. It was also continued later on; that is to say, whenever one of
14 the vehicles would have been found, it would have been confiscated and a
15 criminal report would have been filed.
16 Q. All right. I want to move to a different topic, and that's the
17 involvement of police in looking after persons who had been arrested or
18 brought in sometimes by the army, sometimes by other police. You were
19 aware, were you, during 1992 that police were, in fact, operating
20 detention facilities?
21 A. No.
22 Q. Not at all?
23 A. That police were operating detention facilities? No. There's
24 only one thing, wherever there were detention facilities within police
25 stations, it was possible for the police to keep them up to 72 hours in
1 such facilities. But prisons?
2 Q. Outside the proper prison system, police were concerned in
3 holding prisoners in places which were not SJBs and not proper
4 Ministry of Justice prison facilities, were you aware of that?
5 A. No.
6 Q. You went to the July 11th meeting that was held in Belgrade,
7 didn't you?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Do you not recall, for example, Mr. Zupljanin talking about the
10 camps in Prijedor?
11 A. I really do not remember who said what at that meeting. When the
12 Defence showed me certain documents and told me that I spoke about some
13 topics, I was not able to remember until I was a shown the transcript of
14 my words. So I really cannot remember who spoke about what at that
15 collegium meeting. It was the first time that we left the area of
16 Sarajevo, left the war behind, and we were very joyful that we managed to
17 find ourselves in Belgrade at all.
18 Q. But it was one of the major things that Mr. Zupljanin was talking
19 about, wasn't it, started off virtually by that? You say you don't
20 remember a word about what was said about those camps in Prijedor?
21 A. No, I'm telling you now, I wasn't able to remember that I spoke
22 at the meeting until the transcript of the meeting was read out to me.
23 So I'm truly unable to remember what was said by which centre chief. I
24 probably wasn't even listening too hard because there was no need for me
25 to do that. I'm speaking quite honestly. I was unable to remember my
1 own words, let alone other people's words, at the meeting. Looking back
2 from this vantage point, 19 or 20 years later, now when I read some
3 things, I am able to remember but not without it.
4 Q. Well, do you remember all the publicity at the beginning of
5 August about Omarska, Trnopolje, and other places?
6 A. No, I'm telling you, we knew via media sometimes when we were
7 able to see news, if there was electricity, so we knew there were some
8 sort of camps over there, but exactly who or what or where I really
9 didn't know that because that was far away from where I was.
10 Q. Pale was, however, a place that was not only close to you but
11 accessible, wasn't it?
12 A. Yes, I was able to go to Pale.
13 Q. Did you never discover that people were being held by the police
14 in Pale? By "people" I mean non-Serbs.
15 A. I know that up there in Pale there was something but I did not
16 know who was securing that, whether it was the police or the army that
18 Q. Well, didn't you think you ought to find out if Pale SJB was
19 involved in this?
20 A. At the time I did not have any such duty and I did not have any
21 such need. If we are talking about April, May, June, I was still not
22 performing those duties. I had no such duty and I couldn't simply go
23 around from station to station asking people what they were doing.
24 Q. All right. I'd like you to have a look, please, at a document
25 which is P999 at -- yes, P999 at tab 24A of our bundle.
1 This is a document issued on the 9th of August, 1992, by Mr. --
2 from the CSB Sarajevo.
3 MS. KORNER: And if we go to the second page, please, in both
4 English and B/C/S.
5 Q. Signed by Mr. Cvijetic; correct?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. And then if we go back to the front page, please, as you can see,
8 this particular copy which was recovered appears to have been received by
9 the SJB in Milici. Would you agree with that?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And it's Mr. Cvijetic passing on an order to the SJBs in respect
12 of a report on the Serbian authorities' treatment of and conduct towards
13 prisoners of war and the living conditions of prisoners in prisons in
14 applicable municipalities, and then over the page.
15 MS. KORNER: In English, sorry, over the page. Next page.
16 Q. "All public security stations are required to act in accordance
17 with the conclusions of the Presidency. All senior CSB officers are
18 ordered to release civilian-category persons immediately, which
19 implicitly entails all persons, irrespective of age, who have not been
20 members of enemy formations. And we particularly wish to stress the
21 Ministry of the Interior alone is the competent body for taking measures
22 against civilians.
23 Now, presumably when Mr. Stanisic's original dispatch was
24 received, Mr. Cvijetic discussed it with the collegium?
25 A. This is a dispatch that had merely been forwarded by the centre
1 chief. The dispatch arrived from the MUP of the Republika Srpska and it
2 was forwarded in its original form. You will be able to see that most
3 often if a dispatch bears marking "Strictly confidential," you can see
4 that right below the stamp, in such activities we people from public
5 security did not take any part. This was normally done by the state
6 security sector. So we may have talked about it, but we couldn't have
7 discussed it very much because you can see clearly that it wasn't us. It
8 wasn't 02, it wasn't me or somebody else. None of us received this
9 dispatch for further action.
10 Q. No, but you've said over and over again and I'll read back to you
11 each time when I queried how you knew about a document, that documents of
12 importance were discussed with everybody, with all senior members of the
13 CSB at these daily collegium meetings. Now, is it your assertion,
14 Mr. Tusevljak, that this particular one was never discussed with you,
15 went straight to the chiefs of the SJBs?
16 A. I believe that this was sent directly to the chiefs of public
17 security stations. I do not remember that we discussed this document.
18 Because this is just a copy of another document. Zoran Cvijetic merely
19 added the introductory paragraph and then retyped the contents of another
20 document, a document mentioned in the first paragraph. So it's something
21 different from the situation in which on collegium meetings we discussed
22 some important topic and then drafted a dispatch of our own.
23 Q. Right. So let me just understand this, Mr. Tusevljak. This
24 particular document, despite the fact that it was clearly important,
25 despite the fact that it refers to all senior CSB officers, was never,
1 ever discussed and you knew nothing about it?
2 A. I don't remember reading this document at the time because it did
3 not reach me. I really don't remember. I can see from the contents of
4 this document that it relates to a dispatch that had been received from
5 the MUP of Republika Srpska and then subsequently forwarded to police
7 Q. Yes, but Mr. Stanisic's original dispatch made it the
8 responsibility of all senior CSB officers, all senior CSB officers are
9 ordered to release civilian-category persons. Now, you were a senior CSB
10 officer, weren't you?
11 A. As I've already said, I was chief of general crime and I was not
12 informed of this. I believe that this relates to public security
13 stations and not Security Services Centres.
14 Q. Yes. I'll repeat the question. Were you a senior CSB officer?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Are you really telling the Court the truth when you say this
17 particular dispatch you were wholly unaware of the contents?
18 A. I cannot remember receiving this dispatch for further action.
19 Q. All right. Let's have a look at another document on the same
20 lines, please.
21 MS. KORNER: Can we have a look, please, at document ... let's
22 have a look, please, at the document which is at 6A, please, of the
23 bundle. It is P743.
24 Q. Now, first I should have asked you, have you seen this document
25 before, signed by Colonel Sipcic then, although I think he was probably a
1 general by then. Sipcic.
2 A. No.
3 Q. Did you know Colonel or General Sipcic?
4 A. No, I never met him.
5 Q. Do you know who he was there?
6 A. Well, it says here that he was the commander. I think it means
7 that he was the commander of the 1st Romanija Corps or something like
9 Q. Yes, I'm asking you whether from your own experiences over
10 five years in Sarajevo, whether you had heard of this gentleman, not what
11 you can read from the document?
12 A. I heard of Tomislav Sipcic and I said that. I heard that he was
13 the first commander.
14 Q. Now, it's talking about combat -- this is dated 17th of June and
15 he is talking about combat actions in Dobrinja. At item 4 he talks about
16 the Ilidza MUP mopping up a couple of streets. And he's complaining that
17 instead of putting in 210 police they only had about 40, and some Serbian
18 Radical Party volunteers were under their command. Now Ilidza came under
19 the CSB Sarajevo. Did you know police had taken in some SRS volunteers?
20 A. No.
21 Q. And then can we go over the page, this is the part I want to ask
22 you about, 6 in English. Sorry, it's on the screen now. Just over the
23 page in English.
24 "The treatment of the civilian population: SRK units are pulling
25 out civilians and taking them to the Lukavica barracks ..." Pausing
1 there for a moment, Lukavica barracks were right next door, were they
2 not, to where the MUP eventually moved to in July?
3 A. Well, Lukavica is a small place. The barracks had its own
4 perimeter and we, the centre security service, were at --
5 THE INTERPRETER: A place that the interpreter did not catch.
6 MS. KORNER:
7 Q. Could you just repeat where you, the MUP, were? The interpreter
8 didn't catch that.
9 A. The MUP or, rather, the centre of security services was in a
10 factory, right next to it is the Lukavica barracks, maybe 2 or
11 3 kilometres.
12 Q. Right. "Pulling out civilians, taking them to Lukavica barracks,
13 and the prisoners to the Kula KPD. SRBH MUP is classifying civilians
14 according to their ethnicity. So Serbs and Croats are being put together
15 and Muslims are being separated from them. The MUP members stated that
16 the Muslims had huge losses."
17 Now, the fact that the MUP at Kula or Novo Sarajevo, whichever it
18 was, was classifying prisoners, was something that would have been
19 reported, would it not, to you, you, the -- by "you" I mean the CSB
21 A. No, I was not informed about this. Nobody informed me about
23 Q. So they were deliberately withholding, were they, from you or
24 from the -- well, I am sorry, let me rewind that question.
25 When you say "you," you mean you personally. Do you know whether
1 or not Mr. Cvijetic was informed of this?
2 A. I don't know that, but I myself was not informed about this
3 military action.
4 Q. I'm not talking about the military action so much. I'm talking
5 about the involvement of the MUP in Kula in classifying these civilians?
6 MR. ZECEVIC: I am sorry, but I would like the basis, that
7 Ms. Korner provides the basis for this question because what comes from
8 the document is not giving the basis to say that this was done by Kula.
9 MS. KORNER: All right. I assumed, but you are quite right, it's
10 an assumption --
11 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes, because there is a point after KPD Kula, it's
12 the first -- it's the first sentence and then there is a second sentence.
13 MS. KORNER:
14 Q. Whether it was Kula or Novo Sarajevo or whichever SJB dealing
15 with this -- sorry, I've now lost -- do you know whether or not
16 Mr. Cvijetic was informed that the MUP were involved in classifying
18 A. I truly don't know that. I'm merely saying that I did not take
19 part in those military operations, that I was not present there, and that
20 I don't know whether Mr. Cvijetic was informed about it or not. I cannot
21 speak about it.
22 Q. This has got nothing to go the military operation -- well, it
23 has, I suppose, because that's how they were there, but I'm talking about
24 the activities of the MUP in classifying prisoners. Now, in order to
25 classify them, presumably you had to ask them questions, would you agree
1 with that?
2 A. I'm telling you that I did not take part in it. So if somebody
3 classified them, then that somebody asked questions, yes, of course, but
4 I know nothing about it.
5 Q. And if a police officer is questioning somebody, isn't he doing
6 operative work?
7 A. This has nothing to do with operative work. This is merely
8 collecting identifying data for an individual. Any policeman in the
9 street can ask you for ID. It has nothing do with operative work. Any
10 policeman asking for ID can find the ethnicity that's mentioned in the
11 document, but it has nothing to do with operative work.
12 Q. If you question somebody to see if they have been involved in
13 what you -- what is described in many documents as armed rebellion
14 against the Serb state, in your view is that classified as operative
16 A. No, that's investigative activity. That's taking a statement as
17 part of an investigation.
18 Q. All right. So your evidence is that throughout the whole period
19 of 1992, you were wholly unaware of police involvement in holding
20 prisoners either in Sarajevo, in the Sarajevo area or outside it, that's
21 what it comes to, is it?
22 A. I only know about the area where I could physically arrive. That
23 is the area of Sarajevo. Outside of the area where I could physically
24 come, I cannot claim anything, whether something did or did not happen.
25 Q. No, you could travel, we've established that, and did travel to
1 Vogosca, to Pale, and other places. Is it your evidence, however,
2 that -- well, I think you've said that already.
3 All right. I want to move, please, to the question of
4 disciplinary procedures. And we established yesterday that you
5 personally had no dealings with disciplinary procedures in 1992, but what
6 you had to say about it at pages 22305 -- you were asked by Mr. Zecevic
7 at page 22305 about members of the interior that committed criminal
8 offences, were they treated in the same manner as all persons or treated
9 differently. And you gave an answer that they were treated in the same
10 manner as all other persons, besides filing an official report there
11 would also be disciplinary proceedings. Mr. Zecevic then asked you
12 depending on whether the criminal offence or grave breach of work duty
13 was committed against a non-Serb victim, as opposed to the situation when
14 the victims of crimes -- victims of criminal offences or those grave
15 breaches were of Serb ethnicity. Then you answered they received --
16 question is a bit odd but anyhow, they received the same treatment
17 regardless of the victim of the criminal offence. "Are you sure about
18 it?" "Yes, why wouldn't I be."
19 Then you went on to describe that in 1992, the entire management
20 of the public security station in Pale was also replaced. And I want to
21 ask you about Pale in a moment.
22 MS. KORNER: Could we have a look, please, first of all, at
23 document --
24 Q. And this is one of the occasions, although you had nothing to do
25 with it, I should add, you said all of this was discussed by Mr. Cvijetic
1 in the morning of the meetings.
2 MS. KORNER: Document, please, 20171. Tab 19.
3 Q. Now, this is addressed to you, Mr. Tusevljak, personally, from,
4 if we go to the next page, I think actually the third page in English --
5 no, second page in English, from Mr. Koroman; correct?
6 A. Yes, someone signed it on his behalf, but he was the station
8 Q. Right. And he is apparently responding to some memorandum of
9 yours of the 27th of June?
10 A. Yes, that's right.
11 Q. And giving you some information about a particular case?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. And looking at the content of this, can you recall what your
14 memorandum was asking him about?
15 A. I don't know. This was supposed to be a circular one sent out to
16 all the public security stations, just like what we discussed before.
17 There was a dispatch following that meeting where there was a request to
18 take steps regarding the war crimes and then some interviews were
19 conducted and these statements taken. So this is about a case of murder
20 in Sarajevo.
21 Q. Yes. Now, can I just ask you, was Mr. Koroman a friend of yours?
22 Were you friendly with him?
23 A. No. I first met Mr. Koroman sometime in May or just after at
24 Pale. I never previously set eyes on him.
25 Q. No, I understand that. You told us you first met him, but did
1 you become friendly with him, is what I'm asking you?
2 A. No, we never became really friends, not today either.
3 MS. KORNER: Your Honours, may I ask that this be for the moment
4 marked for identification because it's going to come into a separate
5 category that I want to ask about.
6 JUDGE HALL: Marked pending what?
7 MS. KORNER: Some further questions I'm going to ask probably
8 tomorrow at this rate.
9 MR. ZECEVIC: Well, that would give us the opportunity to check
10 because we have -- I have a note here that this document was never
11 priorly disclosed to us, but we have to check because it could be that
12 the ERN number that is wrong.
13 JUDGE HALL: So it's marked for identification.
14 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P2362, marked for identification,
15 Your Honours.
16 MS. KORNER: Right. Can we now look, please, at document --
17 Your Honours, this one is under seal, so it shouldn't go on the screen.
18 It's P1461 at tab 40A. Sorry, I've got the -- actually, no,
19 Your Honours, I'm sorry. I do want to come back to that but it's the
20 wrong thing at the moment. I've got the wrong number. Yes, sorry, it's
21 41A. Sorry, which is P1462, under seal.
22 Q. Now, this is apparently a memorandum from Mr. Micic. I can hear
23 from the interpreters. The chief of the crime investigation service in
24 Pale. You knew him, I take it?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. It's addressed to Mr. Cvijetic. Can we take it that as this
2 related -- as this came from the chief of the crime investigation
3 service, he would have consulted you about it?
4 A. I spoke with Stepjan Micic on several occasions. I think I even
5 received information in writing from him about what was being done over
6 at the Pale public security station.
7 Q. Yes. And what Mr. Micic was complaining about, and we see there
8 was a later memorandum, was that Mr. Koroman and Mr. Skobo had shouted at
9 him; is that right?
10 A. Yes, I'm reading it now.
11 MS. KORNER: If we move, then, please, to document P1457, which
12 is at 46A.
13 Q. Now, is this a document you would have seen, it's the record of
14 the hand-over by Mr. Koroman to Mr. Petko Pekic, the new chief, in
15 February of 1993?
16 A. I've never seen these minutes before, but I know that
17 Malko Koroman, the chief, was dismissed and that Petko Pekic took up that
19 Q. And that happened in 1993?
20 A. Yes, that happened in 1993.
21 Q. Were you aware that Mr. Micic went to speak personally to the
22 minister about the behaviour of Mr. Koroman?
23 A. I don't know whether he spoke to the minister. I know he spoke
24 to me several times in 1992.
25 MS. KORNER: And let's have the -- finally the report, which is
1 document 2 -- just a moment, yes, 2716. 65 ter 2716. Tab 48. If we go
2 to the last page in each, English and B/C/S, it's dated the 12th of May,
3 1993. A report signed by Mr. Micic. If we go back to the first page,
5 Q. Did you get this report?
6 A. I think so. I should have. If it reached the Security Services
7 Centre and Mr. Cvijetic, he must have informed me about it.
8 Q. Just look at the beginning of this:
9 "Since last year, 1992, in the work of the criminal service, some
10 negative things occurred in connection with a number of employees, such
11 as grave violations of duty, involvement in criminal activities,
12 et cetera, and it has been going on till this very day, because the head
13 of that time Malko Koroman, and the responsibility staff in the CSB,
14 primarily Simo Tusevljak, did not have an intention to prevent such
15 things, although they were informed about them."
16 Is it right that you were informed about involvement, grave
17 violations of duty, and involvement in criminal activities by members of
18 the Pale SJB?
19 A. Yes, but prior to this, there should be another report that
20 Stepjan Micic sent to me. Based on that report, I spoke to the chief of
21 the Security Services Centre in order to have a commission set up by the
22 MUP and the centre so that an analysis -- a report might be drawn up
23 analysing the work of that police station as a whole. This piece of
24 analysis should be somewhere or, rather, in their files.
25 I had no reason regarding Malko Koroman or indeed any other
1 member of the crime police working at the station at the time. I didn't
2 know them personally and they weren't my friends. I only met them
3 through my work, and I know that as soon as the commission finished
4 working and the police station chief was removed, some of the crime
5 inspectors left the crime police unit because they could no longer do
6 those jobs. Others were punished. And I think two of the crime
7 inspectors cited here were punished by having to work at the public
8 security station of Banja Luka.
9 What were my options or powers? The law did not allow me to file
10 any disciplinary reports. The only situation that this could have been
11 the case in was in relation to the workers whose names you saw in that
12 table, on that list, those working directly in my department. As for the
13 disciplinary responsibility, raising any issues about that would have
14 been up to Stepjan Micic, those were his employees, and he should have
15 launched an initiative through the police station chief which is quite
16 obviously something that he never did. Although I advised him to do just
17 that from day one when he first spoke to me about this.
18 Q. Let's pause for a moment there, please. You just said a moment
19 ago that having received an earlier report apparently that Mr. Micic sent
20 to you, you spoke to the chief of the centre to have a commission set up.
21 Did Mr. Cvijetic set up a commission?
22 A. I think so. Actually, I'm certain the commission operated and
23 controlled the activities of that police station. It was based on that
24 commission's findings that Malko Koroman was replaced and the operatives
25 were sent off elsewhere.
1 Q. You see, in 1993, Mr. -- in May of 1993, Mr. Micic is complaining
2 that nothing was done. Is he wrong, then?
3 A. I think he is wrong. A new chief had arrived with whom he worked
4 before the war in the traffic police unit. They knew each other quite
5 well. When the centre chief spoke to Micic, they discussed the possible
6 appointment of this person and I think Micic was fully in agreement with
7 the proposal.
8 Q. You see, the point that I'm trying to make, to cut a long story
9 short, is this: No disciplinary proceedings were ever taken against
10 Mr. Koroman, were they? He was simply side-lined?
11 A. He was removed from duty and demoted to inspector. I don't know
12 why no disciplinary steps were taken against him. It had nothing to do
13 with my job. The only person allowed to start disciplinary proceedings
14 at the time would have been the chief of the Security Services Centre
15 because he was his direct superior.
16 Q. I accept that entirely. But, you see, you gave evidence when
17 Mr. Zecevic was asking you questions about what the procedures were and
18 whether they were implemented, and you said they were as a result of the
19 minister's order. Now, I'm pointing out to you, Mr. Tusevljak, that from
20 a case that you personally were involved in which on the face of it
21 should have required disciplinary proceedings, shouldn't it?
22 A. Yes, but it wasn't up to me to start that, to trigger that. What
23 I triggered was the start of the investigation, but it wasn't up to me to
24 propose any disciplinary steps or start disciplinary proceedings. The
25 only thing that mattered to me was to use those reports that I had
1 received from that police station to initiate an investigation into the
2 work of that police station and to inform the chief of the
3 Security Services Centre about the results of that investigation. It was
4 the responsibility of the chief to take the final decision on any steps
5 to be taken. I'm sorry now that we don't have the investigation results
6 here now. If we had those available, we could study what further steps
7 were taken. All we have is the letter by the police chief.
8 Q. You see what you said about -- and I repeat, sorry,
9 Mr. Tusevljak, I'm not suggesting that for one moment that you should
10 have been taking these disciplinary procedures. As you say, it should
11 have been Mr. Cvijetic and/or the minister. But what you said about
12 this --
13 MR. ZECEVIC: I am sorry, Ms. Korner, this is a clear
14 misinterpretation of what the witness said. He said only his immediate
15 superior chief of the CSB, and you now added minister. Where was -- I
16 don't know where it came from.
17 MS. KORNER: I tell you what -- I'm not going to -- sorry. I'm
18 not going to [indiscernible].
19 Q. What you said about this, Mr. Tusevljak, at page 22309 -- 22308,
20 it was -- you were asked:
21 "Do you remember whether there was any mention at one of these
22 collegium meetings of problems of the situation at the public security
23 station in Pale?"
24 "A. Yes, because we received quite a bit of information
25 regarding the situation in the public security station."
1 And then you were asked:
2 "What about the chief, did they make any comments on the
3 work ...?"
4 You said:
5 "Yes, comments were made with regard to the work of that public
6 security station and its chief."
7 "Q. At these meetings including the late chief Zoran Cvijetic,
8 did anyone say anything or mention anything or any kind of measures and
9 had to be taken in this regard or that he intended to take in this
11 "A. Chief Zoran Cvijetic insisted in the Ministry of the
12 Interior that the chief in Pale be replaced."
13 "Q. How come you know that?"
14 "A. I was present myself when Mr. Zoran Cvijetic asked for
16 "Q. Who from the ministry was asked?
17 "A. The top personnel of the Ministry of the Interior, so
18 probably the minister or one of his assistants."
19 "Well, you say he was there together with him," Mr. Zecevic
20 asked, "were you present or what?"
21 "A. Mr. Cvijetic talked to me personally about that and he said
22 he insisted on his removal."
23 Now, can we go back to this particular document. You said two
24 inspectors mentioned there were being punished by being sent to
25 Banja Luka. That's Mr. Hrsum and Mr. --
1 A. No, not those. Another two. I think Hrsum left the crime police
2 unit altogether at the time.
3 Q. Okay. Was he disciplined to your knowledge?
4 A. Not as far as I know, but if someone leaves the service
5 altogether, you can't discipline them, can you? You can impose
6 disciplinary measures on those people alone who are still with you,
8 Q. Do you know if any criminal proceedings were ever taken against
10 A. Not as far as I know.
11 Q. Right. So who were the two inspectors who were moved as a
12 punishment to Banja Luka?
13 A. Mumovic and Kablar, if I remember correctly.
14 Q. I hesitate to ask but why was it a punishment to go to
15 Banja Luka?
16 A. Well, the distance between Pale and Banja Luka was 600 kilometres
17 and they were sent there to work as ordinary police officers at a
18 check-point so those weren't technical tasks in keeping with their level
19 of training. They were sent there to man a check-point and that
20 constituted punishment.
21 Q. And were any disciplinary proceedings taken against them that you
22 know of?
23 A. Not as far as I know. No such initiative arose by the crime
24 police chief, that's their own chief, or indeed the police station chief.
25 Q. All right.
1 MS. KORNER: Your Honours, may that be admitted and marked,
2 please. That is disclosed.
15 [Private session]
11 Pages 22645-22648 redacted. Private session.
2 [Open session]
3 THE REGISTRAR: We are in open session, Your Honours.
4 JUDGE HALL: Mr. Tusevljak, again we have certain procedural
5 matters with which to deal so I would invite the usher to escort you out
6 ahead of us taking the adjournment today. We will continue taking your
7 cross-examination in the morning. Thank you.
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
9 [The witness stands down]
10 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, it's just this, it concerns
11 Mr. Krgovic's witness, although the Zupljanin Defence witnesses.
12 Sometime ago as we did with Mr. Stanisic's witnesses we made a formal
13 request to know which one of these witnesses would allow us to interview
14 them. I can't find the exact date but I think Mr. Krgovic can confirm it
15 was quite a long time ago now. I reminded him of this recently and I
16 reminded him again today. We've heard nothing yet. And the importance
17 is this: There is, of course, no requirement for a Defence witness to
18 agree to be interviewed by us, though we have the right to ask. But
19 particularly with the 92 bis witnesses, if they decline, well, that is
20 maybe a factor that Your Honours might be wishing to take into account
21 when making the decision whether or not they should attend for
22 cross-examination, and so, therefore, Your Honour, that's why I'm raising
23 it with Your Honours because I know Your Honours said you were going to
24 deal with that matter this week. I'm obviously making the formal
25 request, and as I say it's been weeks for that information to be given to
1 us by Friday now at the latest.
2 JUDGE HALL: I had always assumed, of course, that the protocols
3 that exist for communicating this information back and forth does not
4 involve the active intervention of the Chamber, but you are putting your
5 request on the record so that Mr. Krgovic could again put on the record
6 his response.
7 Yes, Mr. Krgovic.
8 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour, I checked the
9 mail that Ms. Korner -- and I can tell you that it did not reach me, only
10 on the 9th of June when Ms. Korner submitted the request we became aware
11 of her earlier e-mail. So I have to say that in the past few weeks this
12 particular issue was not of a very high priority for us. We were trying
13 still to find witnesses, and particularly the witnesses who would be
14 prepared to come to testify as soon as possible. So we haven't finished
15 with that yet. Some of the witnesses have been contacted already. When
16 we have the complete list we are going to forward it to the Prosecutor's
17 Office and then they will be able to see which witnesses are ready to
18 speak to the Prosecutor. We are going to send that memo to the OTP as
19 soon as we have all the info. I know that for some of the witnesses, but
20 some of them have not been asked that question yet.
21 JUDGE HALL: May I have a moment, please.
22 [Trial Chamber confers]
23 JUDGE HALL: The slight, I suppose, problem, is as good a word as
24 any, which the Chamber is considering is how does it -- qua Chamber
25 become informed of the fact that some of these witnesses may not be
1 amenable to meeting with the Prosecution because ordinarily the -- that
2 information would inform the Prosecution of their response to the motion.
3 So from what we understand your present state of knowledge to be,
4 Mr. Krgovic, it would be useful if in terms of those that you know are
5 not so inclined, if you could communicate that to the Prosecution, I
6 suppose, and they would -- who would do what is necessary to bring it
7 formally before the Chamber --
8 MS. KORNER: We would make the formal application that
9 Your Honours take that into consideration before you rule on whether
10 witnesses should be ordered to attend.
11 [Trial Chamber confers]
12 JUDGE HALL: Thank you. And if there's nothing else, we take the
13 adjournment until tomorrow.
14 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.44 p.m.,
15 to be reconvened on Thursday, the 23rd day of
16 June, 2011, at 9.00 a.m.