Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 23211

 1                           Wednesday, 13 July 2011

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           --- Upon commencing at 2.18 p.m.

 5             THE REGISTRAR:  Good afternoon, Your Honours.  This is case

 6     number IT-08-91-T, the Prosecutor versus Mico Stanisic and

 7     Stojan Zupljanin.

 8             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you, Mr. Registrar.

 9             Good afternoon to everyone.  May we have the appearances, please.

10             MR. HANNIS:  Good afternoon, all.  I'm Tom Hannis along with

11     Crispian Smith for the Prosecution.

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

13     Slobodan Cvijetic, Eugene O'Sullivan, Ms. Tatjana Savic, and we are

14     joined with two interns, Ms. Louise Beck and Paul Derohannesian,

15     appearing for Stanisic Defence this afternoon.  Thank you.

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

17     Aleksandar Aleksic, appearing for Zupljanin Defence.

18             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.

19             Before we begin, there's a small housekeeping matter and this

20     relates to the, quote/unquote, informal request that we received,

21     Mr. Hannis, and what we've decided is that the -- we would take a

22     30-minute break from 5.30 so that would result in the third session being

23     abridged by 15 minutes.  Of course, all this is subject to the -- any

24     problems that the witness himself may have.  So we go from 2.15 to 3.15,

25     3.30 to 4.30, 4.45 to 5.30, and then the final session is from 6.00 to

Page 23212

 1     7.00.  Thank you.

 2             MR. ZECEVIC:  I announce that there is a small matter which I was

 3     requested by the Trial Chamber to address yesterday.

 4             JUDGE HALL:  Do we have to go into private session?

 5             MR. ZECEVIC:  I think so, Your Honours, because --

 6             JUDGE HALL:  Yes.

 7                           [Private session]

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 23213











11 Pages 23213-23215 redacted. Private session.















Page 23216

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6   (redacted)

 7                           [Open session]

 8             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, we're back in open session.  Thank

 9     you.

10                           [The witness takes the stand]

11             JUDGE HALL:  Good afternoon to you, Mr. Macar.  I give you the

12     usual reminder about your solemn declaration before I invite Mr. Hannis

13     to continue.

14             MR. HANNIS:  Thank you, Your Honour.

15                           WITNESS:  GORAN MACAR [Resumed]

16                           [Witness answered through interpreter]

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

18        Q.   Mr. Macar, when we left off yesterday, I think we'd been talking

19     about briefings and collegiums of the MUP that you attended in 1992.  And

20     in that connection, you had told Mr. Zecevic last week on 6th of

21     July that at these meetings you all reached some conclusions that the

22     influence of local bodies of government, the Crisis Staffs and the

23     War Presidencies, was "overbearingly influential" is the translation I

24     have of your term.  And I wondered, did you have knowledge of or can you

25     tell us any specific examples of a local police chief or an SJB receiving

Page 23217

 1     from a Crisis Staff and carrying out an order to do something illegal.

 2             Did you have any evidence that that was happening between the

 3     local Crisis Staffs and the local SJB and SJB chief?

 4        A.   I do not have information that SJB chiefs received orders to

 5     commit crimes.  I do have information, though, that SJBs were tasked to

 6     do something from the remit of municipal authorities.

 7        Q.   You said -- you also said in your answer that later on in the

 8     year when you were doing some of your inspections or your tours out in

 9     the field that -- that you were being told that some Crisis Staffs were

10     making decisions that police officers were to be sent to the front line.

11             Is that correct?

12        A.   Yes.

13        Q.   Do you have any document to show us where a Crisis Staff ordered

14     policemen to go to the front line?

15        A.   I don't have documents that show such orders.  But I remember an

16     example.  When we had a meeting with the representatives of the crime

17     enforcement services of the Sarajevo centre, I forgot which event

18     triggered it, but, anyway I asked the chief of the crime enforcement

19     service at Sokolac to explain, to give me some instructions, and he

20     looked at me with confusion, and he said to me, "Boss," that's they

21     called me, "Boss, I came from the front line yesterday."  And I asked

22     him, "What do you mean?"  I know that the crime enforcement service still

23     isn't fully manned.  And I -- I wanted to learn about the way things

24     went.

25             The Sokolac municipality was affected by combat activity in the

Page 23218

 1     direction of Olovo and the front line was pierced repeatedly.  The Crisis

 2     Staffs that -- which, at the time, took care of security issues demanded

 3     that the police be engaged at the front line.  And it's important for the

 4     Trial Chamber to know what the problem was with these engagements.  The

 5     VRS had 15 days of leave after 15 days on the front line; whereas, police

 6     officers, after one day of rest or even without any rest, after coming

 7     back from the front line had to go about their policing duties.  Based on

 8     this information and the way they were engaged - and I'm now referring

 9     only to crime enforcement - I told the minister that something must be

10     done about the way the police were sent to the front line, because if a

11     police officer is at the front line 15 days and goes about policing

12     duties in the following 15 days, it's very difficult to do his work

13     efficiently because he has no information about what went on in the

14     meantime, where he worked.  Because the crime situation in any given area

15     had to be monitored.

16             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Mr. Hannis.

17             MR. HANNIS:  Yes, Your Honour.

18             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Can I just inquire with the witness something

19     that he said a while ago, when you asked him whether he had examples of

20     either the SJB or the local police chief being asked or ordered by the

21     Crisis Staff to carry out something illegal.

22             Mr. Macar, you answered that you had no information that SJB

23     chiefs were being so asked but that you did have information that some

24     SJBs were tasked to do something from the remit of municipal authorities.

25     That's what you said.

Page 23219

 1             What -- what were those things that the Crisis Staffs will asked

 2     the SJBs to do?  Can you be more specific?

 3             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Let me first comment that I said in

 4     my statement that I didn't have information that SJB chiefs received

 5     orders to commit any crimes.  But what is outside the remit of an SJB,

 6     such as municipal services, providing security, or acting as couriers or

 7     running errands, receiving refugees and assisting in these segments;

 8     certainly, if a thousand people turn up somewhere, that's a problem.

 9     Although there was the Red Cross and other organisations.

10             So there were many administrative duties, much administrative

11     work, that had to be done by other structures, municipal bodies.

12             JUDGE HARHOFF:  There seems to be some misunderstanding here.

13     Because I thought that Mr. Hannis was asking you if you had any

14     information that SJBs, one way or another, would be engaged in illegal

15     activities because of orders or instructions or demands being made by the

16     Crisis Staffs.

17             So I just want to clarify a bit what sort of activities are we

18     talking about here?  Illegal activities, that is.

19             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Illegal activities or activities

20     contrary to the minister's orders are something that I can explain on the

21     example of Samac.

22             Our inspectors found out that, pursuant to the orders of the

23     Crisis Staff, some police were engaged to provide physical security for

24     the collection centre at Samac.  That was in contravention of all orders,

25     but it was ordered by the Samac Crisis Staff, and the police took part in

Page 23220

 1     that.  They were involved.

 2             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Just how was that illegal?

 3             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The army had the duty to provide

 4     security to such facilities, and the MUP had no need to do this kind of

 5     work.  Additionally, there were the minister's orders saying that police

 6     cannot be engaged to do something from the remit of the army, unless some

 7     police are resubordinated to the army in accordance with the procedures

 8     that were in place.  In other words, if those units were to join army

 9     units and then do this kind of work.

10             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Do you have other examples of illegal activities

11     done by the SJB at the instigation of Crisis Staffs?

12             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Towards the end of the year, I was

13     informed that it was similar in Prijedor.  Pursuant to the orders of the

14     Crisis Staff in a similar way, police forces were engaged, although they

15     had instructions or, rather, orders as to how they should conduct

16     themselves.

17             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Thank you, Mr. Macar.  I think this is as far as

18     I can get with this.

19             Back to you, Mr. Hannis.

20             MR. HANNIS:  Thank you, Your Honour.

21        Q.   Mr. Macar, let me ask, first, a couple of specifics about the

22     example you gave concerning Sokolac and the inspector who had been at the

23     front line.

24             When was that; do you recall what month in 1992?

25        A.   I think it was July.

Page 23221

 1        Q.   And who was the inspector?

 2        A.   If my memory serves me well, it was Mr. Borovcanin.

 3        Q.   Do you recall his first name?  We've got another Borovcanin who's

 4     an inspector.

 5        A.   I don't remember his first name, but I'm certain about his family

 6     name.

 7        Q.   Was there not some military command of the VRS that was working

 8     in the area of Sokolac at that time; and, if, so do you know which unit

 9     it was?

10        A.   Certainly there was a military unit in every municipality and it

11     had its command.  I don't know anything about their organisation or their

12     formation or structure or anything like that because that was outside my

13     remit.

14        Q.   The reason I ask is, wouldn't it have been the VRS that was

15     resubordinating a policeman who was going to the front line rather than

16     the Crisis Staff?

17        A.   When the front line is pierced in a war or when the enemy is

18     launching offensive operations, then the army reacts with all available

19     capacities.  They may or may not have enough reserves at that time.

20             The Crisis Staffs, being informed of the problems at the front

21     line, demanded that the police forces be engaged to the highest possible

22     extent.

23        Q.   All right.  Thank you.  I would like to show you the Law on

24     Internal Affairs and ask you about a provision in there relating to the

25     Crisis Staffs and the local police authorities.

Page 23222

 1             MR. HANNIS:  Could we look at Exhibit P530.  This was tab 3 of

 2     the Prosecution's list.  And if we could go to page 4, both the English

 3     and the B/C/S.

 4        Q.   Mr. Macar, I want to direct your attention on the screen --

 5        A.   I apologise, but --

 6        Q.   We'll blow it up --

 7        A.   -- this is poorly legible, and my eyesight isn't so good.

 8        Q.   We'll blow it up and hopefully you can see it.  I want to look at

 9     Article 27 in both English and B/C/S.

10             How's that?  Can you read it now?

11        A.   Yes.

12        Q.   My translation reads:

13             "In addition to the activities and tasks set out in the Rules on

14     the internal organisation of the ministry, a public security station

15     shall implement regulations passed by the municipal assembly and relating

16     to law and order ..."

17             So let me ask you:  Does that mean -- and, first, let me ask you

18     this question.

19             This talks about municipal assemblies.  But would you agree with

20     me that in times of imminent threat of war, or war, or a state of

21     emergency, that the Crisis Staffs stand in the place of municipal

22     assemblies.  Do you agree with that?

23        A.   Yes.

24        Q.   And so for purposes of this Article when it says "municipal

25     assembly" I'm talking about Crisis Staffs.

Page 23223

 1             The way I read that, it sounds as if the Crisis Staff passes a

 2     municipal ordnance or a regulation relating to law and order, then the

 3     public station shall implement that.  So if a Crisis Staff decides

 4     because of the war time situation that they need to have a curfew or they

 5     need someone to provide security at the hospital because you may have an

 6     enemy prisoner in the hospital being treated and you're afraid that

 7     locals may come in and cause a disturbance, that's something that shall

 8     be implemented by the police; right?

 9        A.   If I may be allowed to read this Article out loud ...

10        Q.   Well, I don't need you to.  I don't know if the Judges need to

11     you to.  We have got it on the screen.  We can all read it.

12             JUDGE HALL:  I am wondering whether the witness wants to do it

13     for his own comprehension.  If he's --

14             MR. HANNIS:  If that's the case, then I have no objection.

15             JUDGE HALL:  If it's convenient for him.

16             Then you may proceed, Mr. Macar.

17             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I will read just this part after

18     the coma after the word "ministry."

19              "... a public security station shall implement regulations

20     passed by the municipal assembly ... relating to law and order ..."

21             Could you please bring it back.

22             "... and road safety," as part of the assessment of the situation

23     in the sphere of law and order, the municipal assembly or the Crisis

24     Staff may issue a decision prohibiting the opening or, rather, the

25     operation of various catering facilities or restricting their working

Page 23224

 1     hours, and the police - because this is a decision that pertains to law

 2     and order - has to act.  They have to act if a catering facility operates

 3     in contravention of this decision.  The same goes for road safety.  If a

 4     decision is issued that a -- trucks should not use a specific road, then

 5     traffic police must act.  Municipal decisions of this sort can be taken

 6     by the assembly, and other tasks that have nothing to do with law and

 7     order and road safety could not be assigned.

 8             MR. HANNIS:

 9        Q.   Well, then, isn't it a matter of interpretation of -- about

10     whether or not in the circumstances existing at the time a particular

11     measure has to do with law and order?

12        A.   Could you please clarify your question?

13        Q.   Well, would you agree that establishing a curfew could relate to

14     the law and order during the context of an imminent threat of war?

15        A.   I agree, based on the assessments of the public security

16     stations, about any disturbances of law and order, especially if it can

17     cause danger to general public or some other kind of danger, then a

18     curfew could be established, and the police was supposed to implement

19     this decision by stopping citizens who happened to be outside during the

20     curfew and to check what their reasons are, and file criminal -- or,

21     rather --

22             THE INTERPRETER:  Interpreter's correction:  Misdemeanour

23     reports, if necessary.

24             MR. HANNIS:

25        Q.   Okay.  Thank you.  Now, could you look at the phrase for me and

Page 23225

 1     tell me what you understand that to mean.  Because it says:

 2             "... regulations passed by the municipal assembly and relating to

 3     law and order and road safety ..."

 4             And then it says:  "... as well as other regulations in the

 5     domain of internal affairs ..."

 6             What does that mean?  Can you give me an example of a regulation

 7     that would be in the domain of internal affairs that doesn't relate to

 8     law and order and road safety?

 9        A.   Well, I can't really recall, and I don't want to speculate.  But

10     I actually read this in another way, that the municipal assembly cannot

11     issue decisions that are not in line with the Law on Internal Affairs.

12     Well, the municipal assembly can issue a -- decisions to discuss on a

13     monthly basis or every three months, every five months, or annually, the

14     security situation in its territory and that the public security stations

15     should report to it covering the period determined by the municipal

16     assembly.  It can be one month, three months, five months, and so on.  It

17     is up to the assembly to decide.

18        Q.   Let me follow on in this discussion about Crisis Staffs and the

19     local police.

20             You said one of the conclusions that you all at the ministry

21     collegiums reached was -- and this is at transcript page 22899, line 23:

22             "The heads of public security stations should, as a matter of

23     priority, inform the Crisis Staffs of their work."

24             Is that what you said?

25        A.   No, the -- that's not what I said, that this was a priority for

Page 23226

 1     them to report.  But in line with the decisions because, I noted a little

 2     while ago, it is only natural for the Crisis Staff to discuss security in

 3     the area, in the territory of its municipality and it is quite natural

 4     for the chief of the SJB to report about the work of the station itself

 5     and to take measures to improve the security situation.

 6        Q.   Well -- I wondered about that at the time when I read that answer

 7     on the transcript.  Did you mean to say that you, at the collegium, had

 8     concluded that the heads of public security stations should, as a matter

 9     of priority, inform the CSBs about their work instead of Crisis Staffs?

10        A.   I think that the translation is wrong and never a decision was

11     made at the collegium that these heads of the SJBs should inform anyone

12     about anything, report about anything.  That was not a topic at any of

13     the collegia.  When I spoke about that, I said that at the collegium we

14     would talk about the impact of the Crisis Staffs on the functioning of

15     the public security stations.  And now I would like to add that in some

16     municipalities, there were some problems that some people advocated at

17     the time because they did not understand the whole system.  Well, some

18     people in the municipal authorities wanted to impose military rule, to

19     suspend civil rule.  And in many municipalities there were problems of

20     this sort, and this definitely had an impact on the functioning of the

21     ministry.  They may have acted more as if they were part of a military

22     rule.  They brought together civilian and military aspects of power

23     together, and that is why the police was involved to such an excessive

24     extent in combat operations.

25        Q.   Okay.  Try and be patient with me here because I'm trying to

Page 23227

 1     clarify what you said last week, and all I have to go by is what is in

 2     the transcript in front of me.  And I'm still not sure, then, what you

 3     meant to say when you said:

 4             "One of our conclusions was this:  The heads of the public

 5     security station should, as a matter of priority, inform the Crisis Staff

 6     of their work."

 7             Now I understand you're saying, no, no, that was never said.  But

 8     you went on to say:

 9             "And for the most part, they weren't informing the Security

10     Services Centre or the ministry of the interior in situations where that

11     was required."

12             And then you say:

13             "There are two aspects to this.  One was a technical aspect.  It

14     was physically impossible to communicate with the centre, or the

15     minister, the HQ.  That is part of the reason why they had to communicate

16     with the Crisis Staffs."

17             Do you remember giving that answer to Mr. Zecevic last week, on

18     the 6th of July?  And if that's not correct, can you tell us what you

19     meant to say there?

20        A.   Well, I would like to hear an audio-recording of what I actually

21     said.  It seems to me that we were talking about the problems that the

22     Ministry of the Interior faced in its work, especially the SJBs and the

23     CSBs.

24             And I do think that I said, at the time, that the problems of

25     keeping the ministry headquarters and the minister informed and keeping

Page 23228

 1     the CSB informed by the SJBs were caused, for the most part, by technical

 2     problems that we had.  And that with some of the public security stations

 3     we would have a situation that the chiefs mainly kept the Crisis Staff

 4     informed rather than the relevant centre from which the reports would go

 5     onto the ministry or to report directly to the ministry.

 6             I think this is the gist of my evidence.

 7        Q.   Okay.  That makes sense to me.  And you know that in most places

 8     that I am aware of, the SJB chief, the local SJB chief, was a member or a

 9     participant in the local Crisis Staff.  Didn't you find that to be the

10     case in 1992 in the RS?

11        A.   I was not directly a member of anything, but the reports that we

12     received and the reports that we received from the collegium made it

13     clear to me that in conditions where the Crisis Staff assumes the role of

14     the municipal assembly, the chiefs report on the security situation in

15     the area covered by their SJB to the Crisis Staff.

16             Now, whether there were any SJB chiefs who were involved in the

17     Crisis Staffs, well, I can't really tell you that.

18        Q.   Well, do you personally know of any Crisis Staff in the

19     Republika Srpska in 1992 where the local SJB chief was not a member or

20     not a regular attendee of Crisis Staff meetings?

21             Can you tell me one municipality where that was the case?

22        A.   Well, I've just told you that I can't tell you whether there were

23     any, and if there were any, how many of them were involved in the Crisis

24     Staffs.  And according to the normal procedure, it would be normal for

25     the SJB chief to report to the Crisis Staff about any security problems

Page 23229

 1     because the Crisis Staffs assumed the role of the municipal assembly, and

 2     that would be fully in line with the provisions of the Law on Internal

 3     Affairs, because that's the security-related issues.

 4        Q.   Okay.  Thank you for that.  That reminds me I meant to ask you

 5     about one other provision of the Law on Internal Affairs.

 6             MR. HANNIS:  Again, if we could look at this document that's on

 7     the screen.  But if we could go to Article 31 which is, I think, on the

 8     same page.

 9        Q.   And Mr. Macar, I will ask you if this is it what you had in mind.

10     My English translation says:

11             "If so requested by the municipal assembly and its executive

12     committee, a Security Services Centre and a public security station shall

13     submit reports, information, and other data relating to the situation and

14     problems in the area ..."

15             Is that what you had in mind?

16        A.   Inter alia, yes.

17        Q.   Okay.  Thank you.  Were you aware that, apart from the

18     communications system that the MUP was using, that the -- the Presidency

19     and the government had access to a communications network that was

20     primarily based in Pale and it was sometimes called the republic

21     communications centre.

22             Did you know about that?

23        A.   No.

24        Q.   All right.  Thank you.  Related to the problem with local Crisis

25     Staffs having too much influence over the local police, at page 22900,

Page 23230

 1     you said:

 2             "Most of the people in leading positions, the chiefs and heads of

 3     public security stations were never appointed by the minister but,

 4     rather, by the local Crisis Staffs.  And that was probably one of the

 5     most important reasons why the Security Services Centres were unable to

 6     have a consistent subordination system, in terms of the way they

 7     functioned."

 8             Can you give me an approximate total number of how many SJB

 9     chiefs there were in the Republika Srpska in 1992?  Was it 50, 100; do

10     you know?

11        A.   Well, let me remind you of the list for September that I did.

12     There were 73 public security stations, which means that there were 73

13     public security station chiefs, commanders, chiefs of crime enforcement

14     sections and so on, and all the other elements that were necessary.

15        Q.   Okay.  Do you have any idea of that number of 73, how many of

16     those had not been appointed by the minister or were not subsequently

17     approved by the ministry?  Was it 10, 20; do you know?

18        A.   This would be a question for the chief of the legal affairs and

19     personnel service, because I did not have statistical data in my service.

20     But I do know that there were quite a few chiefs who had not been

21     appointed in accordance with the procedure of the Ministry of the

22     Interior, which required that the centres recommended them for the

23     appointment and then the ministry approved it, and that is why in 1992

24     attempts were made to re-establish procedure in line with the law and the

25     appropriate order of the minister in this sphere.

Page 23231

 1        Q.   Of the -- of the CSB chiefs, of which we understand there were

 2     five - Trebinje, Doboj, Sarajevo, Banja Luka, and Bijeljina - do you know

 3     how many of them had appointments from the minister in 1992?

 4        A.   He probably appointed all of those chiefs.  And their files show

 5     us whether he signed the appropriate decision or not.

 6        Q.   Thank you.  With regard to your answer where you said that

 7     security centres were unable to have consistent -- a consistent

 8     subordination system, for purposes of this question, don't -- don't

 9     include Teslic SJB and don't include Prijedor.

10             Apart from those two, can you give me any specific examples of a

11     SJB chief refusing to subordinate to his CSB and follow orders and

12     provide requested information, demand -- disband the special unit when

13     required to do so.

14             Can you tell me any other example?

15        A.   I have some examples where the leaders of the autonomous regions

16     disbanded the special units, if you're talking about the disbanding of

17     the special units and not -- and other issues.  But I'm not aware of any

18     other examples -- or, rather, I cannot recall any of them.  I probably

19     did get reports about that at our meetings, but I don't want to

20     speculate.

21        Q.   Okay.

22        A.   If we're talking about special units.

23        Q.   Thank you.

24             MR. HANNIS:  Your Honours, if we're still on the one-hour

25     schedule, I guess it's time for our first break.

Page 23232

 1             JUDGE HALL:  Yes.  So we resume in 15 minutes.

 2                           [The witness stands down]

 3                           --- Recess taken at 3.16 p.m.

 4                           --- On resuming at 3.42 p.m.

 5             JUDGE HALL:  While the witness is on his way in, there is a

 6     matter which both as an issue of courtesy and efficiency, I should have

 7     brought to the attention of counsel today.  Counsel may have picked this

 8     up from other sources, but in terms of the resumption of the present

 9     trial after the break, it is now projected that the other trial in which

10     this is running in parallel would run for three weeks and, therefore,

11     the -- counsel would recall that we had previously projected a two

12     week/two week alternate sittings.  What is now expected to happen is that

13     the other matter will run for three weeks, then we will resume this case

14     on the 5th of September for three weeks, and, thereafter, the two

15     week/two week plan would -- we would revert to the two week/two week

16     originally planned.  And any alarm that counsel may feel would be

17     relieved then on reflection, you would realise, we probably are at the

18     end of the day in a better position than we would have been with the two

19     week/two week arrangement.

20             So, therefore, any rumours you have heard to effect that, I have

21     now confirmed.

22             Thank you.

23                           [The witness takes the stand]

24             MR. HANNIS:  Thank you for that, Your Honour.

25        Q.   Mr. Macar, the next topic that Mr. Zecevic took you to was asking

Page 23233

 1     you about the fact that we'd had in this trial a number of documents

 2     suggesting that war crimes committed against Serbs were singled out

 3     for -- for priority on investigations, et cetera.

 4             And he showed you, and I think I talked with you earlier about

 5     that document from the federal Ministry of the Interior in -- from the

 6     Federal Republic of Yugoslavia in April 1992, where they were requesting

 7     from your newly created MUP information about war crimes and

 8     international law crimes where Serbs and other ethnicities were the

 9     victims.

10             Do you recall that document and that discussion?

11        A.   Yes, and I would like to see it.

12        Q.   Okay.  Well, I can -- I can show it to you in a minute.  If I

13     recall what number it was, but I don't recall off the top of my head.

14             While we try to find that, let me ask you a related question.  In

15     your answer, you said:

16             "In 1992 there was much propaganda.  The Serbs were represented

17     in various ways, very bad ways, which you probably know.  The Ministry of

18     Foreign Affairs wanted to present the situation on the ground as

19     realistically as possible."

20             Do you recall that answer?

21        A.   Yes, there was propaganda of the other side.  That propaganda,

22     for a great part, was not founded on facts.  Anything not on any

23     information that we had.

24             But what exactly is your question you want me to answer?

25        Q.   I wanted to show you another document that I think is related to

Page 23234

 1     the one that we looked at before.  Let me show you that now while I'm

 2     still trying to found the old one.  And this one is P173.  This is

 3     tab 111.

 4             MR. HANNIS:  Your Honours, this is one that the Prosecution just

 5     e-mailed this morning, one of two additional documents we wanted to add

 6     for use.

 7        Q.   And, Mr. Macar, this is a document dated the 16th of May, 1992 to

 8     the various Security Services Centres.  It has Mr. Stanisic's name and a

 9     signature on it.

10             And you'll see the number of this, Witness, is a strictly

11     confidential document.  This is the 01-2/92.  And in the first

12     paragraph he makes reference to a task resulting from the order by the

13     minister, strictly confidential number 01-1, dated the 15th of May.

14             I will remind that you 01-1/92 strictly confidential was the one

15     where Mr. Stanisic is talking about creating war units in the ministry.

16     You remember us looking at that one?

17        A.   I remember when we were explaining this strictly confidential

18     tag.

19        Q.   Okay.  I want to look at page 2 of the B/C/S, and it's page 3 of

20     the English.  It's Roman numeral IV, war crimes.  It says:

21             "Measures and activities conducted to document war crimes.  These

22     activities must involve collection of information and documents on war

23     crimes against the Serbs.  This implies conducting an on-site

24     investigation with the entire team in all cases of crimes against the

25     Serbs."

Page 23235

 1             And at the end of paragraph you will see it says:

 2             "In order to send copies to the federal SUP and the Federal

 3     Secretariat of the interior of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia."

 4             This to me seemed to be related to that other document that we

 5     had seen from the Federal Secretariat.

 6             MR. ZECEVIC:  I'm -- I'm sorry, I -- I note that there might be a

 7     mistake in the translation.  Perhaps the witness can -- can read the very

 8     first sentence that you -- the very first two sentences that you wrote --

 9     that you -- that you read from -- from the translation, so we can have

10     the accurate translation of what is said in the document.  Thank you.

11             MR. HANNIS:

12        Q.   Yes, Mr. Macar, maybe you can help me out.  I have read what I

13     have in English in front of me.  But it is a suggestion that that's in

14     error.

15             So could you please read the first few lines of paragraph Roman

16     numeral IV?

17        A.   Paragraph IV, war crimes:

18             "Take measures and activities to document war crimes.  These

19     activities must involve collection and -- of information and documents on

20     war crimes against Serbs."

21             THE INTERPRETER:  Interpreter's note:  The witness did not read

22     out the first sentence as it is printed in the document.

23             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Do I -- need I continue?

24             MR. ZECEVIC:  The interpreters interpreted exactly as it is

25     stated in the translation.  However, I insist that they interpret what

Page 23236

 1     they hear and not look at the translation what is written.  It is similar

 2     but it's very different you see, Your Honours, because there is no word

 3     "must" ever mentioned anywhere.

 4             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Mr. Zecevic, we just got word from the

 5     interpreters that apparently what the witness read out was not similar to

 6     what is in the B/C/S text.  So maybe we should try once again.

 7             MR. HANNIS:  Your Honours, I'm a bit puzzled by this.  I heard

 8     the interpreters over the headphones say that the witness did not read

 9     out what is printed on the page.

10             THE INTERPRETER:  It's the first word of the first sentence.

11             MR. HANNIS:

12        Q.   Mr. Macar, could you repeat for us that exercise and start from

13     the first -- first word under war crimes.

14             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] "Take measures and activities to

15     document war crimes.  These activities need to involve information and

16     documents about war crimes against Serbs."

17             THE INTERPRETER:  Interpreter's note:  The witness again did not

18     read out the first sentence as printed in the document.  The first word.

19             MR. HANNIS:  Well, Your Honours, I think even at that, the gist

20     is generally the same.  However, I would request that we submit this to

21     CLSS for a revised translation, since this one is a draft translation.

22        Q.   But, Mr. Macar, the point I want to make is, this is a direction

23     to document war crimes against Serbs; correct?

24        A.   My understanding of this document is that measures are being

25     taken and activities were under way to document war crimes, as stated in

Page 23237

 1     the first sentence.  Without making a distinction between war crimes

 2     against Serbs, Croats, Muslims, or anybody else.

 3        Q.   Well, how can you --

 4        A.   And in the next --

 5        Q.   Wait.  Wait.  How can you say that, sir?  Because it says "war

 6     crimes against Serbs."  It doesn't say "all war crimes," or "war crimes

 7     generally," or "war crimes against all ethnicities."  It says "war crimes

 8     against Serbs"; right?

 9        A.   No.  If I may finish.

10        Q.   No, no, please.  Show me where it says "against anyone besides

11     Serbs."  It says "against Serbs," doesn't it?  It doesn't talk about war

12     crimes against any other group; right?  Can you answer that "yes" or

13     "no"?

14        A.   No.  If I may, Your Honours, I'll be glad to finish my answer.

15        Q.   Your Honours, I would request that you ask him to answer my

16     question which calls for a yes or no answer.

17             JUDGE HALL:  But, Mr. Hannis, your question, your original

18     question was whether this is direction so-and-so correct.  And he began

19     by saying his understanding is, and he went on.

20             So having posed the question the way that you did, you mightn't

21     be satisfied with his explanation but can he only answer according to his

22     understanding.  So he should be permitted to complete the question as he

23     understands it.

24             MR. HANNIS:  Well, Your Honour, my first question was:

25             "Is this a direction to document war crimes against Serbs;

Page 23238

 1     correct?"

 2             And then he said his understanding was it was to document war

 3     crimes without making distinction.  And then my question was:

 4             "How can you say that, sir?  It doesn't say 'all war crimes.'"

 5             So my question is now what does the document say on its face.

 6             JUDGE HALL:  And the witness is about to explain his

 7     understanding.  Now you may come back to this if you aren't satisfied

 8     with his answer.

 9             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] May I, Your Honours?

10             JUDGE HALL:  Yes, please continue.

11             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In the first sentence, it is

12     clearly stated "take measures and activities to document war crimes."

13             The second sentence follows, and it reads:  "These activities

14     must -- need to involve the collection of information and documents about

15     war crimes against Serbs."

16             The first sentence means that war crimes must be documented.  And

17     I believe it's clear enough.  And the second sentence says that, as part

18     of this work on documenting war crime, information and documents must be

19     collected that have to do with war crimes committed against Serbs.

20             MR. HANNIS:

21        Q.   Okay.  Can you read the next sentence for us, please, so I'm sure

22     I'm working from a correct translation.

23        A.   The sentence saying that information and documents must be

24     collected about war crimes against Serbs, and it is continued like this:

25     "This implies conducting an on-site investigation with the entire team in

Page 23239

 1     all cases of crimes against Serbs ..."

 2        Q.   Thank you.  You can stop there.

 3             Is it your understanding of that phrase that it does not require

 4     an on-site investigation with the entire team when the war crime was not

 5     against Serbs.

 6             Isn't that the logical inference?

 7        A.   No, it is like this.  According to the Law on Internal Affairs

 8     and the Law on Criminal Procedure, it is clear how the organs of the

 9     interior proceed.

10             In the second part, which mentions crimes against Serbs, does not

11     mean that the same procedure should not be applied in case of crimes

12     against other ethnicities.

13        Q.   Well, then, why is it being specifically pointed out that in all

14     cases of crimes against the Serbs, there should be an on-site

15     investigation with the entire team, if an on-site investigation with the

16     entire team is standard procedure for all cases?  Why is it needed to be

17     said that this applies to cases of crimes against the Serbs, unless

18     there's some reason to make a special emphasis?

19        A.   I absolutely do not understand this document as something that

20     states that a different procedure should be applied in case of crimes

21     against members of other ethnicities.

22             I don't know who wrote this document on behalf of the ministry,

23     but I can say that in May 1992, there was a rampant campaign against the

24     Serbs in the media and somebody from the ministry may have requested some

25     material to present the situation on the ground as different.

Page 23240

 1        Q.   I understand that, and I think you've said that before, that --

 2     and because of the perceived campaign to portray Serbs in a bad light,

 3     the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Presidency and the FRY were

 4     interested in trying to counteract that perception.  But in doing so, I

 5     suggest to you, Mr. Macar, that the emphasis was more on public relations

 6     than actually solving crimes against non-Serbs.

 7             Isn't that what happened?

 8        A.   I disagree with your statement.

 9        Q.   I understand.  We do disagree.

10             Let me show you --

11             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Hannis, before you go to another document,

12     Mr. Macar, could I ask you to read, ones again, the two first phrases of

13     this document under -- under the title "War Crime."  I want -- I want to

14     listen to the French translation.

15             Would do you that for me?

16             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] "Take measures and activities to

17     document war crimes."  End of sentence.  "These activities must need to

18     involve the collection of information and documents about war crimes

19     against Serbs."

20             And if I may?

21             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Thank you very much.

22             MR. HANNIS:

23        Q.   Mr. Macar, I'd like you to look at --

24             JUDGE DELVOIE:  [Microphone not activated] If -- if Mr. Macar

25     wants to add something, please do, Mr. Macar.

Page 23241

 1             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] What I understand in the Serbian

 2     language is the following:  There are two activities in this request.

 3     One is to take measures and activities to document war crimes; and,

 4     secondly, as part of these activities, war crimes against Serbs should be

 5     documented, and documentation is sought to complete it all.  That's how I

 6     understand it in Serbian.  And that's how I originally understood this

 7     document and not as a distinction or discrimination to deal only with one

 8     group of crimes, or one type of crimes.

 9             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Thank you.

10                           [Trial Chamber confers]

11             MR. HANNIS:

12        Q.   Now, Mr. Macar, I'd like to show you --

13             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Just one moment, Mr. Hannis.

14             MR. HANNIS:  Sorry, Your Honour.

15                           [Trial Chamber confers]

16                           [Defence counsel confer]

17             JUDGE HALL:  Mr. Macar, there's a question which Mr. Hannis put

18     to you and to which I believe I understood your answer, but I'm going to

19     phrase this slightly differently.  And it is this:  Appreciating, as you

20     have explained, that this directive about taking measures would have been

21     of general application, why was it necessary, in this paragraph and the

22     portions that Mr. Hannis has cited, to specify any particular ethnic

23     group; in this case, Serbs?

24             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I believe that two or three times

25     during the examination by the Defence I was explaining that there was

Page 23242

 1     constant pressure or there were constant requests made to the ministry to

 2     submit, among others, information about the suffering of the Serbian

 3     people in all of Bosnia-Herzegovina, not only in the RS.  Not only dry

 4     information was sought to be presented to international representatives

 5     and so on, and then what followed, there was additional elaboration that,

 6     among all the crimes, there were also crimes against Serbs and as

 7     evidence there are medical documents, photographs, or other documents,

 8     such as witness statements, and so on, to serve as an illustration to

 9     counteract that propaganda, and vividly show that crimes had been

10     committed against the Serbian people in all of Bosnia-Herzegovina.

11             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you, sir.

12             Yes, Mr. Hannis.

13             MR. HANNIS:  Thank you, Your Honours.

14        Q.   Before we leave this document, then, let me point you to two

15     things.

16             The end of that paragraph says, in my English translation:

17             "... in order to send copies to the Federal Secretariat of the

18     Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, among other things?"

19             So this information, one of the purposes of gathering it is to

20     send it to the Federal Secretariat of the Interior in Belgrade; correct?

21        A.   It says here:

22             "Among other things, in order to submit copies to the federal

23     SUP."

24             And, as far as I know, at least as far as the crime enforcement

25     administration is concerned, I don't remember that such information was

Page 23243

 1     sent to that secretariat in 1992.  Whether or not it was done by another

 2     service, I don't know.  But the crime enforcement administration

 3     certainly did not compile such material for this purpose.

 4        Q.   Okay.

 5             MR. HANNIS:  And to put it all into context, could we go back to

 6     page 1 in both English and B/C/S.

 7        Q.   In that first paragraph, halfway through, my English translation

 8     reads:

 9             "And in order to collect documentation on the crimes against the

10     Serbian population (for prosecution and to accurately inform the local

11     and international public), fax reports must be submitted daily to the

12     ministry ..."

13             Doesn't that also indicate that the emphasis here is on crimes

14     committed against Serbs?  Wasn't that the priority?

15        A.   Well, I wouldn't understand this as setting a priority.  It's an

16     explanation why -- it was explained later, in fact, and it says quite

17     clearly here:  "In order to inform" -- just a moment, "... the domestic

18     and international public."

19             So this is the reason why the other part was explained.  It would

20     be much more logical.  It would appear to be much more logical if we had

21     seen this first, because it's an explanation of the other segment.

22        Q.   Thank you, Mr. Macar.  And now, you had asked to see the document

23     that I think this relates to.  And that is 1D635, Defence tab 14.

24             I'll show that to you and just to make sure that's what we were

25     trying to talk about.

Page 23244

 1             And while it's coming up, I will tell you it's dated 22nd of

 2     April, 1992, from the federal Ministry of the Interior.  Or that Federal

 3     Secretariat of the Interior; I'm sorry.

 4             Do you remember seeing that one the other day?  Because I had a

 5     discussion with you then about why there was a distinction about crimes

 6     committed against Serbs and other ethnicities.

 7             Do you recall this document now?

 8        A.   I recall the document, yes.

 9        Q.   Would you agree with me that the last one we just looked at from

10     the RS MUP, Mr. Mico Stanisic, appears to be a response partly to this

11     request for information about war crimes and other genocide and

12     international law crimes committed against Serbs?  Don't those two seem

13     to be related, this document and that one?

14        A.   Well, I would not agree with this part, that only Serbs were the

15     victims.

16        Q.   My question is:  As of 22 April 1992, the newly created Republika

17     Srpska, or I guess at that time, it was called the Serbian -- the

18     Republic of the Serbs in Bosnia-Herzegovina.  I'm sorry, I can't keep

19     track of all the names.  But your newly created republic was not a part

20     of the FRY, was it?

21        A.   Well, you can see that the decision that was made at the session

22     of the federal council of the 18th of March, the decision was made on the

23     establishment, scope, and composition of the state commission for

24     collection of data for the verification of war crimes, crimes of

25     genocide, and so on and so forth.

Page 23245

 1        Q.   I understand that the commission was created before the conflict

 2     began in Bosnia.  But as of the 22nd of April, isn't it fair to say you

 3     had no legal obligation to provide this information to the FRY; right?

 4        A.   Well, as for whether we had a legal obligation, I am a crime

 5     policeman.  I wouldn't like to go into that.  I think it's something for

 6     a -- law scholars to answer.  And as I've already told you, I don't know

 7     whether in 1992 - I'm now talking about the crime police - crime

 8     enforcement administration, that we submitted any reports.  Now whether

 9     anyone submitted such reports on behalf of the ministry, I can't tell you

10     that, I don't know.

11        Q.   You would agree with me, though, wouldn't you, that in April of

12     1992 you guys had plenty of problems more serious than sending a report

13     to a country that you didn't have a legal obligation to send anything to.

14     You were in a war fighting for your very existence; right?

15        A.   In April, I did have problems much greater than the ones

16     described in this document.  Where to find accommodation for my family,

17     how to make ends meet for my family, and, as far as I can remember, this

18     was the beginning of the war, and I can tell you that I myself and 90

19     per cent of my colleagues were convinced that something would happen to

20     prevent the situation that existed in the field and that the combat

21     operations, the fighting, would not continue.  Because I, my family, and

22     most of my colleagues, and I think the Serb people as a whole, did not

23     want the war.  We don't -- didn't want the fighting to continue.  That's

24     what I can say about this --

25        Q.   Okay.

Page 23246

 1        A.   -- topic.

 2        Q.   Let me show you Exhibit P625.

 3             MR. HANNIS:  This is tab 63 from the Prosecution's list.

 4        Q.   And just looking at the first page, this is dated January 1993

 5     and appears to be to the annual report on the work of the RS MUP for the

 6     period April to December 1992.

 7             Have you ever seen this report before?

 8        A.   This report was discussed at a collegium meeting in 1993.  I

 9     would like to have a copy in the Serbian language too, a hard copy,

10     because it's very difficult for me to read because of the position.

11        Q.   I see Mr. Zecevic helpfully has one available.  If the usher

12     could hand it to you.  Thank you.

13             And I want to go to page 14 of the English, and in e-court, the

14     B/C/S is e-court page 20.  I think for you, Mr. Macar, in the hard copy,

15     the page number you need to be looking for at the bottom is page 17.

16             And, actually, if you look back to page 16 on the previous page,

17     you'll see a portion underlined.  My English translation says:

18             "The work of the service for crime prevention and detection ..."

19             MR. HANNIS:  I think we need to go back one page in e-court.

20             No, we're on the right page; I'm sorry.

21        Q.   Do you see that?

22        A.   The footnote?

23        Q.   No, I'm sorry, on the left-hand page.  It says page -- 16 at the

24     bottom.

25        A.   16.

Page 23247

 1        Q.   Yeah.  And you see the underline heading:  "The Work of the

 2     Service for Crime Prevention and Detection."

 3             That's your administration; right?

 4        A.   Yes.

 5        Q.   Now, at this time, in December 1992, I think when information for

 6     this report would have been collected, you were at least, de facto,

 7     acting head of that administration; correct?

 8        A.   Yes, you could put it that way.

 9        Q.   And do you recall, were you involved in any way in providing the

10     information that went into this report?

11        A.   The report was drafted on the basis of the information that we

12     received from the ground.

13        Q.   I understand.

14        A.   From our remit.

15        Q.   And I -- I think I've heard testimony that this report was

16     actually prepared by people in the -- in the 10th Administration, the

17     analysis people; is that correct?  That Mr. Vujic's [sic] administration.

18        A.   Vujicic.

19        Q.   Is that right?  Were they the ones who would have put this

20     together?

21        A.   Well, yes.  Based on the information that came in from the

22     centres and the SJBs, this was all put together into this report.

23        Q.   And how did it work in terms of creating the final product?

24     Because you were the acting head of that administration, did you get to

25     see the draft of what was being said about the work being done by the

Page 23248

 1     crime police and make any changes or additions?  Did you have a chance to

 2     do that?

 3        A.   Based on the information that was submitted by the CSB and what

 4     the administration had been doing in 1992, an overview of the whole

 5     situation, this was all submitted to the analysis section where the

 6     report was drafted.  At least that's how it was done at the time.

 7        Q.   And if, after the report is written, you read the part that

 8     pertains to your administration and you see something that's not correct,

 9     do you have an opportunity to make a change or have a supplement filed so

10     that there's an accurate picture of your section's work, your

11     administration's work?

12        A.   If this report was drafted in late January for the collegium, as

13     it existed at the time, well, I did not have an opportunity to review it

14     because in February 1993 I spent 90 per cent of my time in Belgrade

15     because my wife was there for her first surgery.  My late wife.  So I

16     can't really tell you.

17             I see that this is January, and that this is a draft version, so

18     it may have been completed in February.

19        Q.   Thank you.

20             MR. HANNIS:  Your Honours, I note that it's time for our next

21     break.

22             JUDGE HALL:  15 minutes.

23                           [Trial Chamber confers]

24                           [The witness stands down]

25                           --- Recess taken at 4.30 p.m.

Page 23249

 1                           --- On resuming at 4.47 p.m.

 2                           [The witness takes the stand]

 3             MR. HANNIS:  If we could return to the MUP annual report.

 4        Q.   And, Mr. Macar, I'll going to read a couple of sections and ask

 5     if -- if they're accurate or if you would agree.  On that page where we

 6     have the heading for the work of the crime prevention, paragraph says:

 7             "In the first stage, at the beginning of April, the main activity

 8     was the evacuation of crime prevention officers from the MUP of the

 9     former Bosnia and Herzegovina to Vrace and the setting up the operational

10     groups and crime departments in public security stations in the area of

11     Republika Srpska."

12             And would you agree with that?  Is that accurate?

13        A.   Well, had I drafted this document myself or reviewed it, I would

14     not have described this stage in April in those terms.  And I can be more

15     specific.

16        Q.   Well, let me ask you a question first.

17             I understand you say you wouldn't agree with it, but is it

18     inaccurate?  I understand you may have written it differently.  But as

19     it's phrased, is that not true and correct?

20        A.   No.  First of all, the headquarters of the Ministry of the

21     Interior, as we have already stated so many times, in the Buducnost

22     building what you asked me about Kalovita Brda.  And in April, the

23     ministry, now whether it was on the 20th or sometime in April, moved to

24     the building in Vrace, in mid-April, or after the 20th of April, it was

25     in the building in Vrace.  And I would like to correct this:  The

Page 23250

 1     evacuation of the crime prevention officers from the MUP of the former

 2     Bosnia-Herzegovina, I would disagree with this.

 3        Q.   Well, remind us again:  Where were you between the 3rd of

 4     April and the 19th or 20th of April?  Where were you personally located?

 5        A.   Well, as I have already stated, in Sokolac until my late wife and

 6     my children, my family, left for Belgrade.

 7        Q.   So you weren't at Vrace in the first couple of the weeks of the

 8     war, so you don't know who was there, do you?

 9        A.   Since I know most of the members of the crime enforcement service

10     from the Sarajevo area, I had an opportunity to learn how and when they

11     left their places of residence, not the MUP, because from Sunday or

12     Monday, 90 per cent of those employees could not do it because of the

13     fighting and because of their concern for their families.  They could not

14     go to work, because this is what the situation in the town was like.  For

15     most of them, in particular the operatives who lived in the suburbs of

16     Sarajevo, there were quite a few of them, it was impossible for them to

17     go to work, physically impossible, to MUP.  That's why I disagree with

18     this phrase, "evacuation from the MUP."  If it said gathering the

19     employees who had fled the parts of Sarajevo held by the other side,

20     well, then, I would agree with that, and that's how I would phrase it,

21     because that is a fact.

22             And if I could ask you, since I see that this is a draft version,

23     I would like to ask whether we have the final version, because I can see

24     that this is the draft version.  That's what it says on the front page.

25     Because a final version would bear an appropriate number.  Here where it

Page 23251

 1     says strictly confidential, copy number, you would have the number.

 2        Q.   Mr. Macar, this is the version we have.  I don't have another

 3     version to show you.

 4             But I want to ask you, I'm not sure I understand your

 5     disagreement.  This document says:  "... evacuation of crime prevention

 6     officers from the MUP of the former Bosnia and Herzegovina."

 7             I take that to mean that Serb -- Serb policemen who had been

 8     working in the joint MUP before the conflict started were evacuated to

 9     Vrace.

10             You disagree with that?  You don't know that Mr. Planojevic went

11     to Vrace briefly in early April?

12        A.   I don't know when Mr. Planojevic was in Vrace.  But I wanted to

13     know where he was when he left for Vrace and that was definitely not --

14     he was definitely not in the office where he worked, and I don't believe

15     that on the 6th of April he was in his office and that he was able to go

16     to Vrace.  The terminology used here "evacuation of crime prevention

17     officers from MUP" at the time when the two warring factions already had

18     taken their positions and when it was basically impossible to pass

19     through, I failed to see how anyone could evacuate them.

20             Now, the Serb side organised the evacuation.  Well, in that

21     period, it was only possible to use your connections, your friends, among

22     the Croats in Stup to cross from the area where Serbs were in the

23     majority, and those were isolated cases.  I'm talking about citizens in

24     general who wanted to cross.

25        Q.   Okay.  I understand your disagreement.  Let me move to the next

Page 23252

 1     paragraph and read you a sentence there.

 2              "The second stage was characterised by the relocation of the MUP

 3     of Republika Srpska to Pale municipality."

 4             Would you agree with that?

 5        A.   If I had written this, I would have said the MUP in the

 6     headquarters, not of the entire MUP, but the MUP that existed in the

 7     headquarters that was located in Vrace.  So it was not the entire MUP

 8     that was moved to Pale.  The minister, with the rump administrations, if

 9     I can call them that, moved from Vrace to Pale.

10        Q.   And skipping the next sentence, to the third sentence in that

11     paragraph said:

12             "This period of the UZSK," that's the crime prevention and

13     detection administration, as I understand it, "was not characterised by

14     organised criminal operative work."

15             You would agree with that, wouldn't you?  You weren't able to

16     carrying on your general organised operative work in this early second

17     stage?

18        A.   Here, where it says that this period of the UZSK was not

19     characterised by organised criminal operative work, this means that the

20     crime enforcement administration was supposed to be set up with the

21     appropriate personnel and equipment, and, as we have already said,

22     because of the shortage of personnel and equipment, the administration

23     was not set up and it was unable to perform its function.

24        Q.   Next paragraph says:

25             "The third stage began with the relocation of the MUP

Page 23253

 1     headquarters to Bijeljina."

 2             That's accurate, isn't it?  That was the next stage for MUP

 3     headquarters, was the move from Pale to Bijeljina?

 4        A.   Yes.

 5        Q.   And then it says:

 6             "Only then was the criminal police administration, with organised

 7     and planned work on the tasks of crime prevention and detection, actually

 8     set up and posts filled."

 9             And then there's a footnote with some more information about

10     that.

11             Is that accurate?

12        A.   My explanation for this part, had I been involved in the drafting

13     of the report, it -- I would say it was only then that the activities

14     commenced to set up the crime enforcement administration, and it started

15     taking shape.  And from this, it would appear that, once the headquarters

16     moved to Bijeljina, everything was done, and this was not a process that

17     could be completed on the day of the move or within five days of the

18     move, definitely.  And that is why I fear that this is just a draft

19     version that was amended at a later stage.

20        Q.   By whom?  Do you remember making any changes to this draft

21     report?  Who would have amended this?

22        A.   I see that this is January.  That's when this draft version was

23     produced, and it was probably finalized in February.  And as I have

24     already said, in February, I was absent.  I only came to Bijeljina very

25     seldom, in order to obtain medicines for my wife.

Page 23254

 1        Q.   So if this section of the report dealing with your administration

 2     was amended sometime after this was written and it wasn't done by you,

 3     who would it have been?  Did you have a deputy or somebody immediately

 4     covering for you when you were gone?

 5        A.   I said I didn't know.  At the beginning of the question, I said I

 6     didn't know if it had been changed.  This was a draft.  Whether or not

 7     anybody changed it, I don't know.  That would be speculation.

 8             The Trial Chamber had the opportunity to see yesterday, based on

 9     a document that was presented, that we were able to look into the

10     archives of the crime police.  I wanted to prepare and make sure that I

11     can give adequate answers based on documents, and I would have found

12     documents there that pertain to the crime enforcement administration.

13             Unfortunately, I must inform the Trial Chamber that the request

14     was never acted upon because I only found out almost half a year after my

15     inquiry that the top officials of the MUP were afraid that somebody would

16     be accused of aiding and abetting war criminals.  It would have been

17     helpful to me, though, and good for both the Defence and the Prosecution,

18     because I would have been able to find my way through the documents

19     better than anybody else, and I would have been able to observe whether

20     there was anything missing and check the continuity.

21        Q.   Okay.  I share your despair about not having a complete set of

22     documents.

23             Let me ask you about the next paragraph.  It says:

24             "In this period, the criminal inspectors visited all the CSBs and

25     SJBs and had meetings where they gave instructions for carrying out

Page 23255

 1     concrete operative activities."

 2             Is that right?  I know you were trying to visit all the CSBs and

 3     SJBs with the available personnel during the last part of 1992.

 4        A.   I disagree with the part that says that the focus of the

 5     operative work in CSBs and SJBs was" --

 6        Q.   Mr. Macar, Mr. Macar, you're reading ahead.  I wasn't asking you

 7     about that sentence yet.  You're awfully anxious to get to that part

 8     about the Serbs, but my question was the first sentence about your

 9     inspectors visiting all the CSBs and SJBs.  Is that part accurate?  We'll

10     get to the next one in a minute.

11        A.   It's absolutely inaccurate.

12        Q.   Well, you told us previously that your inspectors went out and

13     visited many CSBs and SJBs in the latter half of 1992; right?

14        A.   I said that they visited some centres and some stations.  Not

15     many stations.  The reports clearly show which ones we did not visit,

16     especially the 24 stations from the area covered by the Banja Luka

17     centre.  Some of the stations belonging to the Sarajevo and Trebinje

18     centres also remained unvisited.

19        Q.   Now we'll get not next sentence which says:

20             "The focus of the operative work in CSBs and SJBs was on

21     detection, documenting, and reporting members of the enemy army who had

22     committed acts of genocide against the Serbian people, torched or

23     destroyed immovable property, cultural and religious monuments, and other

24     assets."

25             That's correct, isn't it?  A focus of the work, the operative

Page 23256

 1     work in the CSBs and SJBs, was about crimes against the Serbian people.

 2        A.   Among others.  I would never say the focus of operative work.

 3     Yes, one of the tasks was to submit reports about members of the enemy

 4     army that had committed crimes against the Serbian people, and this

 5     applies to combat zones.

 6             The focus of the operative work of CSBs and SJBs certainly wasn't

 7     only on this, on such matters.

 8        Q.   If we could go over one page in both the English and the B/C/S.

 9     Actually, I think it may be on your page number 18, Mr. Macar.  Yes.  You

10     see there's a paragraph is that said:

11             "The administration" -- sorry.  "The administration has, in

12     particular, provided expert assistance and direct operative engagement to

13     take measures and activities in investigating criminal activities in the

14     work organisation TAS in Vogosca since the beginning of war operations."

15             That investigation about the stolen cars and the stolen Golf

16     vehicles from Vogosca took a big part deal of your administration's time

17     in 1992, didn't it?

18        A.   No.  I can elaborate.

19        Q.   Let me ask you this question first and then you can elaborate.

20             Can you name me three other investigations that your

21     administration did in 1992 that took more time, more men, more resources

22     than the TAS investigation?

23        A.   First of all, the work of crime enforcement isn't measured by the

24     amount of time spent on something.  The TAS case went on throughout the

25     war and continued after its end.  All centres had their own remit and

Page 23257

 1     conducted checks in their area.  At the beginning, when the Sarajevo

 2     centre initiated these activities and took them over and took part in all

 3     meetings about how they should proceed, everybody was checking operative

 4     information in their respective areas, and it is the task of crime

 5     enforcement, since, towards the end of the year, we were able to reach

 6     agreement with the Serbian MUP, the MUP of Serbia, to forward information

 7     to them about vehicles that were supposed to be stolen from the TAS

 8     factory.  That doesn't mean that all the operatives worked 24 hours a day

 9     on that case.  There were operative workers who checked some information

10     and that information was obtained during four years of the war and even

11     after the war, I think.

12        Q.   I don't think you answered my question, though.  Could you tell

13     me three other investigations that your administration did that took more

14     time and more resources than the TAS investigation.

15             Can you name one?

16        A.   I will answer briefly.

17             First of all, this was not an investigation of the

18     administration.  The administration assisted the Sarajevo CSB in the

19     operative implementation of the TAS case.  And when an operation is

20     conducted, especially about stolen cars, the information is forwarded to

21     other centres and stations where there was possibly information that they

22     were registered based on forged documents.  That is, all stations through

23     their administrative and legal departments checked whether vehicles with

24     certain engine numbers and VINs were registered in their area.

25        Q.   Okay, Mr. Macar.  We'll move onto something else.

Page 23258

 1             You were asked --

 2             MR. ZECEVIC:  I'm sorry, but perhaps it's a misunderstanding,

 3     because I'm listening and I see that the witness is not answering your --

 4     your question at all, and he keeps -- he keeps giving explanation about

 5     the TAS, and that was not the question, and ... I wonder, because I don't

 6     have my earphones, I don't know what -- what -- what was the translation

 7     that he got.  Maybe he is confused about the contents of your question,

 8     Mr. Hannis.

 9             MR. HANNIS:  I don't think it's a very confusing question.

10        Q.   Mr. Macar, did you not understand?  I was asking you if you could

11     name -- well, first, I asked if you could name three other cases

12     investigated in 1992 that took more time and more resources than the TAS

13     case; and when you seemed to have difficulty answering that, I asked you

14     if you could name one case that took more time and resources?

15             Do you understand that question; and can you answer it?

16        A.   Security Services Centres and public security stations were

17     working on solving all sorts of crimes observed in their area.  How can

18     you measure how much time was invested into solving, I don't know, the

19     Yellow Wasps case, or case A, or case B?  We assessed these things based

20     on how difficult it was to apply the relevant methods to collect

21     information and evidence and not based on the time used to obtain them.

22             I believe that this may be clearer.

23             And this is mentioned in the context of economic crime, because

24     an economic operator was harmed.

25        Q.   I don't want to spend any more time on this, Mr. Macar.  But the

Page 23259

 1     Yellow Wasps, you could have some measure of how much time was spent on

 2     that case but counting up, what, 14 operatives did 59 interviews over a

 3     period of seven days and come up with a rough estimate of how much time

 4     was spent on the case; right?

 5             I see you shaking your head no.  I'll take that as a no and move

 6     on.

 7             You were asked about what happens when -- when the police file a

 8     criminal report, send a case to the prosecutor's office.  And you pointed

 9     out that the characterisation of a crime depended on the evidence and

10     that the prosecutor could change the classification of a crime if he or

11     she thought that was appropriate.

12             Do you personally know of any case where the MUP submitted it as

13     a war crime and the prosecutor changed the designation to something else

14     that was not a war crime?

15             Did that ever happen in 1992?

16        A.   We didn't have insight in the subsequent activities of the

17     prosecutor's office; that is, we don't know whether the prosecutors

18     changed the classification of a crime.  So I have no relevant information

19     because their work was not open for inspection by us.

20        Q.   You've mentioned a lot about the problems with Crisis Staffs and

21     their independence from the higher level of government.  You were aware

22     that there was a transition beginning in June 1992.  The Crisis Staffs

23     were disbanded and replaced by, first, War Presidencies, for a day or

24     two, was what was in the -- in the legislation, but then it was changed

25     to War Commissions.

Page 23260

 1             You knew about that change in June of 1992?

 2        A.   There were amendments to the laws, but I cannot specify how the

 3     dynamics of that process went.

 4        Q.   And did you know that one of the changes from Crisis Staffs to

 5     War Commissions was that the War Commission established in a municipality

 6     included some representative from the republic level government?  For

 7     example, in Zvornik, when they created a War Commission at the end of

 8     June, beginning of July, Dragan Djekanovic, a republic minister, was a

 9     member of the War Commission.

10             Did you know about that facet of War Commissions?

11        A.   No, I didn't.  I took no interest in that.

12        Q.   Could you see how that was one way in which the central

13     government, the republic government, was trying to get better control

14     over those local municipal authorities, to make sure that what was being

15     done at the local level was consistent with what they wanted to do from

16     the republic level.  Seems a logical way to go about it; would you agree?

17        A.   I could speculate about it.  But since I didn't attend government

18     sessions, nor did I follow the implementation of their decisions, I'd

19     rather not.

20        Q.   Now, regarding Crisis Staffs and -- and local situations, at page

21     22912, you mentioned that there was an incident which took place in

22     Prijedor sometime in November that caused me to look into the situation

23     and the conduct of senior staff members.

24             When you say an incident in November, are you talking about the

25     occurrence when you went to Prijedor and had that brief meeting with

Page 23261

 1     Mr. Drljaca when he basically sent you and your colleagues away?  Is that

 2     the incident you were talking about there?

 3        A.   Yes.  That's the only time in 1992 when I was in Prijedor.

 4        Q.   Okay.  I assumed it was.  I just wanted to be sure there wasn't

 5     some second incident.

 6             And you were shown, in connection with this, Exhibit -- well,

 7     65 ter number 619D1.  That's Defence tab 57.  And it was a list of

 8     conclusions and decisions by the Crisis Staff and the Prijedor Executive

 9     Committee relating to the SJB.

10             I can give you -- oh, do you have the tab there?  I think it's

11     tab 57 in your binder.

12        A.   Just let me take a look at the number.

13        Q.   You recall looking at that one before?

14        A.   Yes.

15        Q.   Now, for example, number 4 on the first page talks about a

16     conclusion of 30 June.  And the second paragraph under number 4 talks

17     about company directors are supposed to be responsible for implementing

18     this conclusion relating to the ownership of socially owned flats that

19     had been vacated.

20             And then it says:

21             "The chief of the SJB and the regional command shall be obliged

22     to take the most rigorous measures against any members of the police or

23     military who have broken into flats."

24             Now, there is nothing wrong with the Crisis Staff or the

25     municipal assembly asking the chief of police to take measures against

Page 23262

 1     policemen who have broken into flats; right?  That's not interfering with

 2     the work of the police, is it, to ask them to basically do the job of the

 3     police?

 4        A.   The public security station, under the Law on Internal Affairs

 5     and the Law on Criminal Procedure, is duty-bound, because, under these

 6     two laws, it must act.  And if they have information that a member of

 7     that station has broken into an apartment, they must take measures to

 8     file a criminal complaint and initiate the procedure to suspend these

 9     members.  But that isn't done pursuant to such a conclusion.  That's

10     regular procedure.  I believe that if the municipality had information

11     that somebody had done something like that, they could submit according

12     information, but a public security station works pursuant to the

13     provisions of the Law on Internal Affairs.

14        Q.   Well, I guess I would say, at best this measure by the municipal

15     assembly or by the Crisis Staff is unnecessary, but it's not really an

16     inference with the work of the police, is it?  It's just asking them to

17     do what they're supposed to do under their own law.

18             Is it your position that this is meddling and interfering with

19     the work of the police?

20        A.   It's interesting that the municipality is giving orders to the

21     SJB through this conclusion, ordering it to act under the Law on Internal

22     Affairs.

23             If they had an information, then there's a procedure in place how

24     that information is -- is submitted, or forwarded.  I've already

25     explained how a public security station is supposed to act.

Page 23263

 1        Q.   Okay.  Thank you.

 2             MR. HANNIS:  Your Honours, I note it's time for our next break.

 3             JUDGE HALL:  Mr. Macar, because -- in order to accommodate

 4     certain commitments that counsel have, this is a slightly shorter

 5     session.  We have a longer break, so we would resume in a half-hour.

 6             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That would suit me.  Thank you.

 7                           --- Recess taken at 5.29 p.m.

 8                           --- On resuming at 6.02 p.m.

 9                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

10             MR. HANNIS:

11        Q.   I just want to ask you one more question about this Defence

12     tab 57, 65 ter 619D1.  It seems we have something different on the screen

13     at the moment.

14             I think it's -- it's at the bottom of page 1 in the English, and

15     for you, Mr. Macar, it's item number 1 under the heading:  "A Summary of

16     Conclusions, Orders and Decisions from 29 May to 24 July."

17             The first one order number such and such of 5 June forbidding the

18     unauthorised firing of fire-arms on municipal territory, and it says the

19     competent organs of the military police and SJB organs are tasked with

20     implementing this order.

21             Now we looked earlier at Article 27 and the Law on Internal

22     Affairs, which says that SJBs are -- shall implement regulations passed

23     by municipal assemblies or Crisis Staffs related to law and order.

24             Would you agree with me that forbidding the unauthorised firing

25     of fire-arms on the municipal territory is something related to law and

Page 23264

 1     order?

 2        A.   Yes.  But it had nothing to do with the Crisis Staff, the

 3     executive function of the authorities in the municipality.  This is a

 4     typical example.  If you discharge a -- fire-arms, this causes public

 5     danger, and this is sanctioned in the Law on Criminal Procedure and the

 6     Criminal Code, where organs of the interior routinely intervene because

 7     this is within their purview, within their jurisdiction.

 8             Or it's the military police that has -- intervene if it is within

 9     their jurisdiction.  And as all the other items listed here, this is yet

10     another example of assuming this -- the functions on the part of the

11     executive branch, the Crisis Staff, or the Executive Board, and you could

12     see that in the previous examples where they issued orders to the

13     military and demanded reports from them, and routinely reports are

14     received from the public security station and reports are filed, listing

15     all the -- all such cases, and --

16             THE INTERPRETER:  Could the witness please repeat the last part

17     of his answer.

18             MR. HANNIS:

19        Q.   I held my hand up because the interpreters requested that you

20     repeat the last part of your answer.  I'm afraid that you've gotten away

21     from them again.

22        A.   I don't know how far they got.

23        Q.   Neither do I.  But let me ask you this:  I'm not sure if you

24     disagree with me or not.  It seems to me that this kind of ordnance or

25     regulation passed by the Crisis Staff is something that is related to law

Page 23265

 1     and order.  And under Article 27, the public security station shall

 2     implement it, according to the Law on Internal Affairs.

 3             Do you -- do you have some quarrel with that?  How is this

 4     interfering with the work of the public security station?

 5        A.   I don't have a problem with that.  The Crisis Staff had a problem

 6     with that.  Things that are regulated by the Law on Public Law and Order,

 7     the Law on Criminal Procedure is not under the jurisdiction of the Crisis

 8     Staff.  Or, rather, it cannot make decisions about those elements that

 9     have already been regulated by a law.

10        Q.   Can you point to me some law that says that the Crisis Staff or

11     the municipal assembly can't pass a local municipal ordinance that may

12     already be regulated by law?  Where does it say that?

13        A.   The Law on Public Law and Order, the Law on Misdemeanours, the

14     Law on Criminal Procedure, regulated crimes and misdemeanours which are

15     dealt with by the organs of the interior.

16             And now imagine a situation where somebody gets mixed up as

17     regards their role, and they say, No crimes shall be committed in the

18     territory of my municipality.  Yet you have such a provision in the

19     relevant law already.  And in this sense, this is in line with the way in

20     which administrative organs function.  It is ridiculous for a Crisis

21     Staff to issue an order prohibiting the discharging of fire-arms when

22     there is such a provision already in the law.  The law already prohibits

23     it.

24        Q.   Well, I'm not sure.  Let me give you an example and ask you to

25     compare it to your experience.  In my jurisdiction where I grew up, there

Page 23266

 1     would be a federal law against the sale of marijuana, and that would

 2     cover the whole United States.  And there would be a state law in the

 3     state of Arizona that prohibited the sale of marijuana, and there might

 4     be a city ordnance in Phoenix Arizona prohibiting the sale of marijuana.

 5             Now why is it a problem for the municipality to pass a regulation

 6     even though there may already be something in the RS Criminal Code or the

 7     federal Yugoslavia Criminal Code?  Where is there a provision that says

 8     the municipality cannot pass a local ordnance banning the same kind of

 9     conduct?  Can you give me a specific statutory or constitutional

10     provision that says that's not permitted?

11        A.   First of all, the Crisis Staff issues an order, and in its order

12     it charges the organs of the SJB and the military police with performing

13     tasks that are within their purview under the law.  The municipal

14     assembly itself cannot task -- cannot issue decisions that are already

15     regulated by a number of laws, such as the Law on Criminal Procedure,

16     Criminal Code, Law on Misdemeanour.  They cannot issue orders that are

17     covered by those laws, and it -- apparently we have totally different

18     legal systems.

19        Q.   Well, you keep telling me that they cannot but you haven't been

20     able to tell me the place where I can find that law.  Is it in the

21     constitution of the Republika Srpska?  Is it in the Criminal Code?  Can

22     you give me -- cite me an article, a law, a number, where I can go look

23     it up?

24        A.   Try and find the Law on State Administration which regulates the

25     actions of all the relevant organs from the state all the way down to the

Page 23267

 1     municipality, and you can read there what the government is in charge of,

 2     what the Executive Board in the municipality is in charge of, and you

 3     will see that they are not authorised to issue this kind of order.

 4             This tells us more about the way in which the executive board

 5     actually operated because they assumed all the legislative power.  They

 6     controlled the army and the police.  They assumed power over them in

 7     contravention of the regular procedure because in the chain of command,

 8     the chain of reporting in the MUP, that's how the reports were supposed

 9     to go.  They were not supposed to report to the Crisis Staff.

10        Q.   Okay.  One final question on this and then I'll move to another

11     topic.

12             You saw Article 27 which said that public security stations shall

13     implement regulations passed by the municipal assembly relating to law

14     and order, traffic safety, and other matters falling within the purview

15     of internal affairs.  Are you saying that Article means the municipal

16     assembly, or the Crisis Staff, can only pass regulations that cover

17     matters that aren't covered by some other already-existing law?  Is that

18     is that how you read Article 27 of the Law on Internal Affairs?

19        A.   Yes.

20        Q.   Okay.

21        A.   Yes.

22        Q.   Thank you.  Now, you talked about the problem related to the

23     non-existence of judicial bodies, prosecutors in particular, in the early

24     months of the war in 1992 and some of the consequences of that.  Would

25     you agree with me that one of the consequences of this lack of

Page 23268

 1     prosecutors and judges was that -- both civilian and military prosecutors

 2     and judges was that hundreds, indeed, thousands of non-Serbs, were being

 3     held in detention for months in inhumane conditions and oftentimes

 4     guarded by police personnel.  That was one of the problems from having no

 5     judges and prosecutors; right?

 6        A.   If you're looking for a causal link that because there were no

 7     prosecutors and judges, what was it again you said?  Which number did you

 8     mention, of persons?

 9        Q.   Hundreds or even thousands.

10        A.   The collection centres, or whichever way they may be defined,

11     were within the remit of the military bodies.  Whatever happened there is

12     because somebody came to those collection centres or because they were

13     kept in a certain area.  I wouldn't link the problem of prosecutors'

14     offices to this matter, or vice versa.

15        Q.   Well, isn't one of the reasons that those people stayed in

16     detention was because there was no judge or no prosecutor to prosecute

17     the case and the authorities, military, civilian, and police authorities

18     of the RS, were unwilling to release those people.  That's what was

19     happening across the Republika Srpska in the early months of the war in

20     1992.  Wasn't it?

21        A.   Well, talking about the detention, that was the phrase you used,

22     if there were people suspected of committing crimes they couldn't be

23     processed for objective reasons.  If that was the reason for their

24     detention, well, we, from the Ministry of the Interior, because there --

25     unfortunately, there were no prosecutor's offices, released those persons

Page 23269

 1     after three days, even though suspected of murder or burglary and robbery

 2     and so on which caused great dissatisfaction, especially in those places

 3     or neighbourhoods where those people were from, and all that negative

 4     energy was directed at the Ministry of the Interior.

 5        Q.   I think I've run in a problem sometime in using the term

 6     "detention" or "detained," because I understand with the -- with you and

 7     other police witnesses, that has a very specific meaning for you.

 8             What I'm talking about here are the civilians, non-Serb

 9     civilians, who are put in some sort of facility, whether it's a

10     collection centre or a detention facility or a camp, and they're not free

11     to leave and, yet, they're not being charged with any crime, and they're

12     kept for more than three days.  And I'm saying part of that problem was

13     because the authorities didn't know what to do with them but they didn't

14     want to release them.

15             That did happen in the early months of 1992 in the RS, didn't it?

16        A.   I wasn't aware of that during the early months.  I didn't know

17     the reasons for their detention, nor did I know where they were detained.

18     At least my administration didn't have any pertinent information.

19             We can only speculate about the reasons being for some persons

20     suspected of committing crimes that -- and supposed that they were kept

21     longer than three days which is contrary to the laws and regulations.  I

22     didn't have information about the reasons for detention.  Only in late

23     1992, I heard of the existence of some centres such as Prijedor or there

24     were reports from -- from Samac about a facility where a certain number

25     of persons was detained.

Page 23270

 1             But those matters basically weren't within the remit of the

 2     police so I couldn't say more about them.

 3        Q.   Well, I suggest to you that perhaps you didn't know in July of

 4     1992, but others in the MUP higher ups did know.  And to support that, I

 5     want to show you Exhibit P160.  This is tab 20.  And this is about the

 6     meeting in Belgrade on the 11th of July, 1992.

 7             MR. HANNIS:  I'm sorry, Mr. Zecevic did you want to --

 8             MR. ZECEVIC:  Yes, there were two things.  One thing is on page

 9     55, line 11, there should be a witness's answer was recorded as part of

10     your question.  So that is one thing.

11             And the second thing is I would like to propose that the previous

12     document, which -- which the -- which the witness commented upon be

13     admitted into evidence because I see there is no -- there is no

14     opposition from the -- from the Office of the Prosecutor, and I showed

15     the document to the -- to the witness and, therefore, I think, because

16     the witness commented on the document, that we should have the document

17     exhibited.

18             It is number 619D1.

19             MR. HANNIS:  That's correct, Your Honour.  I have no objection.

20     Mr. Zecevic showed it but didn't offer, but now I have directed the

21     witness to a couple specific provisions.  I have no objection to it being

22     admitted.

23             JUDGE HALL:  So it's admitted and marked.

24             THE REGISTRAR:  As 1D661, Your Honours.

25             MR. HANNIS:

Page 23271

 1        Q.   Mr. Macar, you will see on the screen the cover page for this

 2     document about the meeting in Belgrade.  And I understand you did not

 3     attend that meeting.  I believe Mr. Planojevic was still the head of the

 4     administration, and that was the last one of these meetings he attended.

 5        A.   As I have already stated, I was not present.

 6        Q.   During -- during your proofing or previous interviews, were you

 7     ever shown this document; do you recall?

 8        A.   I wasn't.  At least I don't recall.

 9        Q.   Okay.  I just want to show you one particular paragraph.  It's at

10     page 7 of the English in e-court and page 8 of the B/C/S.  And the

11     paragraph I want to ask you about Mr. Zupljanin is addressing the group,

12     and I think it's the --

13        A.   I apologise, could I get a hard copy?

14        Q.   Yes.  I think I can hand you the page anyway.

15             Mr. Zupljanin speaking saying:

16             "The army and Crisis Staffs or War Presidencies are requesting

17     that as many Muslims as possible are gathered and they are leaving these

18     undefined camps up to the internal affairs organs.  Conditions in these

19     camps are bad.  There is no food.  Some individuals do not observe

20     international norms because, among other things, such collection centres

21     are not adequate or there are other reasons ..."

22             So it appears that the RS MUP leadership was aware of this

23     situation as of at least July 11th, and the problem with these undefined

24     camps.

25             Mr. Planojevic didn't tell you about this after the July 11th

Page 23272

 1     meeting?

 2        A.   I don't remember that I had the opportunity to see this report.

 3     Because I cannot see the whole document, probably Mr. Zupljanin relates

 4     in it that he had information that the army and the Crisis Staffs or

 5     War Presidencies are demanding that as many Muslims as possible be

 6     collected and taken to some camps.  Whether that was, indeed, done or

 7     not, I cannot say.

 8        Q.   Do you know that one of the reasons that was being done was that

 9     civilian prisoners or detainees or hostages like that could be exchanged

10     for Serbs who were being held by the Muslims or the Croats on the other

11     side of the conflict?

12             Were you aware of that?

13        A.   No, I wasn't, not in 1992.  I didn't know that there were such

14     exchanges.

15             Talking about the Sarajevo area where I stayed, I knew that,

16     through certain structures and if you had money, you could organise for

17     somebody to leave a certain area.  But I am not aware of such exchanges

18     as this taking place.

19        Q.   And did you never hear about the republic commission for the

20     exchange of war prisoners and killed soldiers and others?  Were you aware

21     of the existence of that exchange commission in 1992?

22        A.   I know that there was a commission for the exchange of prisoners

23     of war and the bodies of killed persons.

24        Q.   Did you know a MUP employee named Slobodan Markovic who worked on

25     that commission?

Page 23273

 1        A.   Slightly.

 2        Q.   Okay.  But you didn't realise that the commission was exchanging

 3     not only dead soldiers and prisoners of war but civilians as well?

 4        A.   I was not familiar with the organisation or the powers of the

 5     commission apart from the fact that there was a commission called this or

 6     that, and I didn't have the opportunity to cooperate with them or to know

 7     anything about their activities.

 8        Q.   Okay.  I don't have any more questions about that document for

 9     you at the moment.

10             Do you recall a -- a big international furor in the media in the

11     first week of August 1992, when certain information and pictures were

12     circulated about non-Serbs detained in places like Omarska and Manjaca?

13     Do you remember that?

14        A.   No.  But I must explain how come.

15             Unfortunately, after leaving Sarajevo and moving to Bijeljina, I

16     got a new apartment, unfurnished, and I had to buy stuff.  And only after

17     1998 [as interpreted] was I in the position to buy a regular TV set and a

18     small radio.  And there were no printed media available, especially not

19     international media from which I could get such an information.  This is

20     meant more as an illustration.

21             MR. ZECEVIC:  [Previous translation continues] ...

22             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

23             MR. HANNIS:

24        Q.   Yes, I see you're confirming Mr. Zecevic's remark that it was

25     only after 1993 that you were able to buy a regular TV set and radio; is

Page 23274

 1     that right.

 2        A.   I had the opportunity to buy a TV set only in 1993, and I did so

 3     in a nearby place.

 4        Q.   Are you telling me in August 1992 you didn't know anything about

 5     those detainees in Manjaca and Omarska and all the international press

 6     furor about those camps in Prijedor?  You must have heard about it.

 7        A.   As you know, in August 1992 up until 3 September, I was in

 8     Bijeljina carrying out a specified task, and I was active in respect of

 9     the Yellow Wasps so that I didn't have the chance to learn that,

10     especially not from the international media.  I couldn't follow those

11     media.  Some of us, because simply the shortage of electricity, or for

12     the lack of basic technical means.

13        Q.   Well, were you not aware of Prime Minister Djeric's announcement

14     or reaction on the 7th of August, 1992 responding to a CNN report about

15     Omarska and Manjaca?  You didn't hear about that through your police

16     friends or official reports or local media?

17        A.   That's what I'm saying.  I was dedicated to that aspect and on

18     the storey, or the two storeys where we worked, I don't think there was a

19     single radio set, but certainly not in the office where I spent time with

20     my colleagues.  So I couldn't hear anything from the local media, and I'm

21     utterly unfamiliar with the document that Mr. Djeric published or sent to

22     somebody.

23        Q.   Do you recall when Mr. Tomo Kovac got his position in the

24     ministry as an assistant for police administration for the uniformed

25     police?  Do you recall what month that was?

Page 23275

 1        A.   No, I cannot say with certainty.

 2        Q.   And do you recall when he first came to Bijeljina?

 3        A.   I believe that it was September, maybe early October.  But I

 4     think it was September.  That's more likely.  Mid-September possibly.

 5     But I'm not fully certain.

 6        Q.   Okay.  And you attended the MUP collegium or the extended meeting

 7     in Trebinje on the 20th of August, 1992; right?

 8        A.   Yes.

 9        Q.   And you attended a similar meeting on the 9th of September, on

10     Mount Jahorina?

11        A.   Yes.

12        Q.   And the one on October 3rd in Bijeljina?

13        A.   I think so.  But I'd have to see the document so as not to

14     conjecture.  But I think I was there.

15        Q.   And was there no discussion of this situation about the camps and

16     the civilian detainees at any of those collegiums?

17        A.   I cannot be sure that it was in September.  But I found out that

18     a commission had been established of the Banja Luka centre, and it

19     conducted some checks with regard to the existence of these collection

20     centres.

21        Q.   So was that the first time you think you heard about the

22     situation that had existed in Prijedor and Omarska and Manjaca?

23        A.   As I've already said, up until that time - and I think it was

24     September when I first heard of the existence of collection centres - and

25     that a commission had been set up to check some information but not

Page 23276

 1     before that.

 2        Q.   Okay.  Now, I think you told us before that you sometimes

 3     attended sessions of the Bosnian Serb Assembly in 1992; is that right?

 4        A.   I did go to assembly sessions.  In 1992, I may have attended one,

 5     but from early 1993 until the end, I attended most every session.  But if

 6     you're referring to a specific session, do remind me by stating the place

 7     where it was held, because only thus can I be certain.

 8        Q.   I understand.  Let me ask you about six or eight sessions in

 9     1992.

10             I think you already said you did not attend the May 12th session

11     in Banja Luka?

12        A.   No, I did not.

13        Q.   Okay.  How about the 17th Session which was held 24 through 26

14     July at the Hotel Bistrica in Jahorina?

15        A.   I cannot be sure if I was there in July.  But I did attend one

16     towards the end of the year.

17             Perhaps I can help you some more.  Being present at an assembly

18     session does not mean being there for three days or sitting in because my

19     role was limited to those items on the agenda that had to do with crime

20     enforcement.  Perhaps there was -- there was a question of a member of

21     the assembly and then a reply had to be given or perhaps information had

22     to be presented or something like that.

23        Q.   I understand that.  That makes sense to me.  I'm just trying to

24     find out which ones you might have attended to focus on those, if I have

25     a question.  But it appears that in most of the assembly sessions, there

Page 23277

 1     was at least some discussion of police-related security matters.

 2             How about 11 August 1992 in Pale?  Did you attend that one?

 3        A.   No, I did not.  As you know, I was in Bijeljina.

 4        Q.   All right.  Well, there was one the next day in Banja Luka, so I

 5     assume you didn't attend that one either.

 6             How about the 14th and 15th of the September in Bijeljina?

 7        A.   No.

 8        Q.   I -- are you uncomfortable?

 9        A.   I can go on.  I'm just making myself more comfortable.

10        Q.   Okay.

11        A.   In early September, I think it was around the 3rd, we went to

12     Pale upon the orders of the minister.  I don't remember whether we went

13     to Bijeljina and back.  But with regard to the Yellow Wasps, there was an

14     order which I remember, pursuant to which we went to Pale in early

15     September.  It may have happened that I went there to carry out a

16     specific task, but I don't remember that.  And I'm -- really don't

17     believe it was the case.

18        Q.   Okay.  How about the end of October, 30/31 October, 1 November,

19     in Prijedor?

20        A.   I didn't attend the session in Prijedor.

21        Q.   How about the one in Zvornik?  23 and 24 November.

22        A.   I think that either you or Mr. Zecevic have asked me about that

23     before, and I answered in the negative.

24        Q.   And one last one in 1992.  17 December, Jahorina mountain.

25        A.   It's possible that I was present.  Possibly the agenda could jog

Page 23278

 1     my memory, if there was an item on it that had to do with the ministry.

 2        Q.   I'll have to come back to that later to check for specific items

 3     related to the ministry.

 4             Now, you talked about a document, Exhibit 1D98.  It's tab 20.

 5     Defence tab 20.  I think it's in your binder, yes.  It's a document from

 6     the prime minister.  I think we have evidence that it was actually signed

 7     by the deputy prime minister, Mr. Trbojevic for Mr. Djeric.  It's dated

 8     25th of May, 1992, and addressed personally to Mr. Kljajic, asking for a

 9     report from the ministry about the situation at TAS, the car factory in

10     Vogosca.

11        A.   Could you just tell me under what number is it?

12        Q.   Tab 20, I believe.  2-0.  If I wrote the note down correctly.

13     That looks like it.

14             I think that you commented that it was unusual that it was

15     directed to Mr. Kljajic, the under-secretary for public security instead

16     of to Mr. Stanisic, the minister; is that right?

17        A.   Yes.

18        Q.   Do you think that one of the reasons that Mr. Djeric,

19     Mr. Trbojevic, did that was because at that time there was some suspicion

20     that Mr. Stanisic may have been involved in that matter?

21        A.   As a man and as a policeman with long experience behind me, based

22     on what I know, I cannot believe that Mr. Djeric and least of all

23     Mr. Trbojevic could think that Mr. Stanisic, who has a reputation as a

24     fair and honest police officer, could be involved in something like that.

25     So I can't see how this may have occurred to them.

Page 23279

 1             I know that their relations were bad, but the rule was in the

 2     pre-war Bosnia and Herzegovina, when the ministry -- when one ministry

 3     addresses another ministry or if the government addresses a ministry,

 4     then the correspondence is addressed to the minister and not to some of

 5     the lower-ranked personnel.  That was the general rule.  And if there is

 6     any suspicion that one of the ministers, the commission was established,

 7     the government could establish a commission to investigate any suspicions

 8     about the minister.  That is why I find it quite strange or perhaps this

 9     is just a remark on your part.

10        Q.   No, I thought you agreed with me that it was strange that it was

11     directed to Mr. Kljajic instead of to the minister and I was asking if

12     that might not be a reason.

13             Do you have some other explanation?  Was Mr. Kljajic a personally

14     very close friend of Mr. Djeric?  Do you have some other explanation why

15     this was directed in what we agree is an unusual way?

16        A.   The reason why it was sent to Mr. Kljajic, well, I can't say that

17     with 100 per cent certainty.  I know that there were some problems

18     between Mr. Djeric and Mr. Stanisic.  And it seems to me that in my

19     answer to Mr. Zecevic I gave an explanation to support my opinion.

20        Q.   But you haven't answered my question:  Do you know of any close

21     personal relationship -- oh, would you like to take a break?

22        A.   Not a break.  I wanted to answer you.

23        Q.   Oh, okay.  Okay.  I guess -- and one of my questions was --

24     and were Kljajic and Djeric close personal friends, and that's why he

25     might have sent it to Kljajic instead of Mico Stanisic.  Do you know?

Page 23280

 1        A.   I did not know that they were close friends.  And to my mind,

 2     this is a typical example of an attempt to subvert the chain of command

 3     by bypassing the minister of the interior and by sending a document, a

 4     letter, especially of this kind, to the minister's subordinate.

 5        Q.   Let me ask you about your testimony at page 22923.  You talked

 6     about how in May 1992 you and Mr. Planojevic were sent to Kula by the

 7     minister.

 8             Do you remember that?

 9        A.   Yes.

10        Q.   Okay.  And apparently somebody in the government or maybe the

11     Red Cross had received information about persons being detained there,

12     some civilians, and you were to go check it out.

13             Why -- why you and Planojevic?  You're fairly high up in the

14     system.  Do you know why you were chosen for this what seems like routine

15     task?

16        A.   I cannot recall, but I think it was Mr. Planojevic who spoke to

17     the minister, and since at that time in Vrace we had some fuel in a

18     vehicle; I think it was my car.  Now, I don't know if it was

19     Mr. Planojevic who made this suggestion or whether it was I.  It was

20     maybe 15 or 20 minutes drive, given the conditions.  We decided to go

21     there.  It was nothing special, really.  In my car, I think we had fuel

22     because there were problems with the cars and with fuel and so on, and we

23     simply decided to go.  We could have appointed one of our associates,

24     tasked them to go, and the fact that the minister demanded urgent

25     corroboration or confirmation of this information that he received from

Page 23281

 1     somebody in the government, that there were civilians in Dobrinja who

 2     were moving, withdrawing together with the Territorial Defence from those

 3     lines after the fighting ended.

 4        Q.   And it turns out these were non-Serb civilians who had been

 5     brought in, I think, by TO, Serb TO forces, after some of the combat in

 6     the area of Dobrinja; right?

 7        A.   Of mixed ethnic background, or, rather, there were people from

 8     various ethnic groups.  They were not all non-Serbs.  And in this general

 9     chaos the information that we received that after the fighting, while the

10     fighting went on, and as the units were retreating, the people were

11     following.  They were retreating together with them.  That was the

12     information that we got.  And they brought them there because they didn't

13     know where else to bring them.  They couldn't have brought them back

14     because the fighting was still going on in the broader area of Doboj,

15     Butmir, whatever those neighbourhoods are called.

16        Q.   While they were there, who was guarding them; do you know?

17        A.   Well, I can't really say whether they were guarded or not.  As we

18     were approaching the duty station, most of them were outside.  I don't

19     know if they were smoking or whatever it is they were doing while we were

20     approaching the duty officer to ask him about this information.

21        Q.   Why wasn't this a matter for somebody from the military or the

22     Ministry of Justice, rather than you in the police?

23        A.   Well, it was probably a quicker response from a session attended

24     by the minister.  He received information, and I don't know if anyone

25     asked him to do anything.  I can't speculate.  And since at the time we

Page 23282

 1     were in Vrace and sessions of the government were held in Pale, he simply

 2     called for urgent information by way of confirmation whether this was

 3     actually the fact.  Now, I really don't know why nobody thought to notify

 4     the army to do that.

 5        Q.   Thank you.

 6             MR. HANNIS:  Your Honours I'm ready to move onto another topic.

 7     This might be an appropriate pause for today.

 8             JUDGE HALL:  So we take the adjournment, to reconvene tomorrow --

 9             Yes, Mr. O'Sullivan.

10              MR. O'SULLIVAN:  The witness can be accused, Your Honour.

11             JUDGE HALL:  Yes.  Mr. Macar, we have a procedural matter before

12     we rise, so the usher will escort you out ahead of us.

13                           [The witness stands down]

14             MR. O'SULLIVAN:  Yes, Your Honours.  There's just one very

15     important matter.  I refer you to transcript 12791, that was the 13th of

16     July, 2010, and we will all recall on that day, a year ago, that we

17     couldn't believe that Mr. Hannis was turning 39.  Today we are equally

18     amazed that he is only turning 40, but we wish him all the best on this

19     special day.

20             JUDGE HALL:  And the Chamber joins in that sentiment.

21             MR. HANNIS:  Thank you.

22                            --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 6.58 p.m.,

23                           to be reconvened on Thursday, the 14th day of July,

24                           2011, at 2.15 p.m.