1 Wednesday, 19 October 2011
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 2.32 p.m.
5 THE REGISTRAR: Good afternoon, Your Honours. Good afternoon to
6 everyone in and around the courtroom.
7 This is case IT-08-91-T, the Prosecutor versus Mico Stanisic and
8 Stojan Zupljanin.
9 JUDGE HALL: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
10 Good afternoon to everyone. May we have the appearances, please.
11 MR. OLMSTED: Good afternoon, Your Honours. Matthew Olmsted and
12 Sebastiaan van Hooydonk for the Prosecution.
13 MR. ZECEVIC: Good afternoon, Your Honours. Slobodan Zecevic,
14 Slobodan Cvijetic, Ms. Deirdre Montgomery, and Ms. Tatjana Savic,
15 appearing for Stanisic Defence this afternoon.
16 MR. KRGOVIC: Good afternoon, Your Honours. Dragan Krgovic,
17 Aleksandar Aleksic, and Miroslav Cuskic, appearing for Zupljanin Defence.
18 JUDGE HALL: Thank you.
19 And if there's nothing to delay us, could we move immediately to
20 have the usher escort the witness back to the stand. Thank you.
21 [The witness takes the stand]
22 JUDGE HALL: Mr. Sajinovic, good afternoon to you. As we begin
23 another day of testimony, I remind you you're still on your oath.
24 WITNESS: GORAN SAJINOVIC [Resumed]
25 [Witness answered through interpreter]
1 JUDGE HALL: Yes, Mr. Olmsted, you may continue.
2 MR. OLMSTED: Thank you, Your Honours.
3 Cross-examination by Mr. Olmsted: [Continued]
4 Q. Mr. Sajinovic, did you and the other -- or the former member of
5 the Milos group who is the -- responsible for communications, did the two
6 of you have a conversation with Vojin Bera in June or July of 2010 about
7 the flow of intelligence information from Mr. Radulovic up the internal
8 chain of command of the RS MUP in 1992?
9 A. Mr. Prosecutor, I cannot remember talking with him about the
10 information that you mentioned. I don't think I did.
11 Q. Let's start with, did you and the other member of the Milos group
12 that I mentioned, did you have a conversation with Mr. Bera in around
13 June/July of 2010?
14 A. I honestly don't remember when was the last time I saw Mr. Bera.
15 I'm not sure that I ever talked to him in the last year or two. I don't
17 Now, as for the other member of the team, I see him on a daily
18 basis. He is a friend of mine, and he is my children's godfather.
19 Q. I'll try this one more time. You are, of course, aware that
20 Mr. Radulovic testified before this Tribunal last year. After his
21 testimony, did you have a conversation with Mr. Bera concerning that,
22 issues raised during that testimony?
23 A. Mr. Prosecutor, I'm going to repeat what I already said twice,
24 and I can tell you that I cannot remember. Frankly speaking, I don't
25 remember seeing Mr. Bera. It might have happened that I came across him
1 by accident, but what you are asking me specifically about, and the
2 conversation with him, this is something that I cannot remember.
3 Q. Then I'll have to move on.
4 Sir, you've testified that the Milos group was in Doboj in the
5 mid-May time-period. Does that mean that you arrived after the takeover
6 of Doboj town by the Serb forces?
7 A. That's right, Mr. Prosecutor.
8 Q. And for how long did you remain in Doboj?
9 A. I cannot remember exactly at this moment for how long we stayed
10 in Doboj. We were there, I don't know, a couple of days. Seven, ten,
11 days. I really cannot remember. It's been a long time ago. But I do
12 know that it was after the takeover that you referred to.
13 MR. OLMSTED: May we have on the screen 1D303, tab 10.
14 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
15 MR. OLMSTED:
16 Q. All right. We have in front of us a 12 May 1992 Milos report,
17 numbered 125/92. And if we can read -- it begins about halfway through:
18 "There is panic in Doboj and the town can hardly be expected to
19 keep its current status because an attack on it is being prepared from
20 the direction of Gracanica, Maglaj, Bosanski Brod and Tesanj. Since we
21 are reporting from Doboj please forward this urgently to the chief of the
22 Banja Luka CSB and request suggestions regarding our further status in
23 this area."
24 Mr. Sajinovic, you will agree that this is an example of
25 Mr. Radulovic, again, using Belgrade to communicate with Mr. Zupljanin?
1 A. Well, I recognise the document that I can see on the monitor as
2 being one of the documents produced by the Milos group.
3 Now, one can discern from the text where we were and that
4 Mr. Radulovic was asking some suggestions from Belgrade, just as you read
5 it. Everything is correct.
6 Q. Well, he's asking, not suggesting. He is asking Belgrade to
7 forward urgently to Mr. Zupljanin this message and request suggestions
8 regarding further status. So he is asking Belgrade to do something on
9 his behalf; isn't that correct?
10 A. He is asking Belgrade to relay the message to Mr. Zupljanin, just
11 as it says in the document.
12 Q. Do you recall what was the issue regarding your status in Doboj,
13 that he was wanting clarification from Mr. Zupljanin?
14 A. I really cannot remember, Mr. Prosecutor. It was a long time
15 ago. And this note is not helpful. I don't know what they were
16 specifically referring to.
17 Q. Let's look at 65 ter 20004. It's tab 12.
18 What we have in front of us is a 13 May 1992 Milos report,
19 132/92. Can you confirm this is one of the -- your team's reports?
20 A. Yes, I can. Yes, it's one of our reports.
21 Q. Now, this report was sent the very next day from the previous
22 report we just looked at. And it states that according to the latest
23 reports, there is no imminent danger of a direct attack on Doboj by
24 Croatian armed forces and Muslim armed forces although the security
25 situation is still difficult.
1 So will you agree that as it turned out, there was no attack
2 planned on Doboj at that time after all? In other words, what was stated
3 in the prior report of an attack that was about to happen, in fact,
4 turned out to be incorrect.
5 A. Of course I cannot agree. You are putting me in a certain
6 context as if I were on the side of Croats or the Muslims and that I knew
7 what was their plan. I really didn't know what their plans were, and,
8 therefore, I cannot agree with you.
9 Q. That's not what I'm suggesting. Mr. Radulovic here in this
10 report is indicating that the intelligence, now, was that no attack was
11 imminent, as of the very next day, there was no attack that was imminent;
12 is that correct?
13 A. Mr. Prosecutor, the fighting around Doboj happened 2 or 3
14 kilometres from Doboj, if I remember correctly. That means that every
15 minute virtually there was a possibility for the Serbian defence line to
16 be broken through and to have enemy forces entering the town. If that's
17 what you're asking me about.
18 Now, as for the report that we saw on the screens a moment ago,
19 it says clear that according to the latest information, which means at
20 the moment when the report was being written, there was no imminent
21 danger of attack. They even say the exact hour when this report was
22 produced which was not the common practice with our reports. That means
23 that on the 12th of May -- on 13th of May at 1200 hours, there was no
24 danger. Maybe the situation changed at 1300 hours.
25 Q. All right. Let's take a look at 65 ter 20122. This is tab 11.
1 So this is a 12 May 1992 Milos report numbered 126/92. I'm not
2 showing you them in chronological order because this one is actually the
3 date of the first Doboj document I showed you, and it reports:
4 "... an artillery attack on the Muslim village of Grapska, Doboj
5 municipality, caused very many civilian casualties, including children."
6 How far is Grapska from Doboj?
7 A. Well, you haven't shown me the reports in the chronological
8 order, the one was from 13 and now one is from the 12th.
9 Now, as for the village of Grapska, I'm not sure. It's not far
10 from Doboj, but I can't tell you how many kilometres. I wouldn't like to
11 speculate. Anyway, it's not far away.
12 Q. And being in Doboj, do you recall how the Muslim citizens who
13 remained in Doboj town reacted to the news of this attack on a nearby
14 village? How did they react?
15 A. As much as I try, I really cannot remember. I don't think that
16 everybody had all the information at the time. You're asking me about
17 the Muslims' reaction. I was in contact with all the citizens of Doboj
18 on a daily basis, regardless of their ethnicity, so I don't know,
19 although I've read this note, I really don't remember this incident of
20 shelling. I'm not familiar with that.
21 So, at this point in time, I really cannot remember. Therefore,
22 it would be very difficult for me to describe to you how they felt. The
23 situation was bad. There was no electricity. I don't know how relevant
24 the information was that was produced in the media. I don't know.
25 Q. But can you confirm this one of the Milos team reports?
1 JUDGE HALL: Sorry, Mr. Aleksic is on his feet.
2 MR. ALEKSIC: [Interpretation] I apologise to my learned friend
3 Mr. Olmsted. Just for the clarity of the transcript, page 6, line 16, it
4 is written "I was in contact." Although I think that the witness said
6 MR. OLMSTED: I'll clarify that matter. Thank you.
7 Q. Can you clarify, does -- just to make sure the transcript is
8 correct. It's not because we're accusing of you anything.
9 But can you confirm for us that were not, in fact, in contact
10 with all the citizens in Doboj town at the time?
11 A. Yes, that's what I said. And that is the truth.
12 Q. And can you confirm this document we have in front of us, that
13 this is one of the Milos team's reports. It's the format and it has the
14 handwriting that we expect.
15 A. Yes. Concerning the format, the signature, and the handwriting,
16 I can recognise this document as the document of the Milos group.
17 Now, as far as the contents are concerned, I already said.
18 Q. May you please take off your headphones for a minute.
19 MR. OLMSTED: Your Honours, at this time, we would like to tender
20 these two exhibits into evidence as 65 ter 20004 and 20122.
21 MR. ALEKSIC: [Interpretation] No objection, Your Honour.
22 JUDGE HALL: Admitted and marked.
23 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibits P2401 and 2402, Your Honours.
24 MR. OLMSTED:
25 Q. Sir, you mentioned during your examination-in-chief that there
1 were about five SDB Banja Luka officers present in Doboj during this
2 period of May investigating and taking statements from people "involved
3 in fighting against the Serbian people."
4 I take it by that you meant you were questioning -- or they were
5 questioning non-Serbs?
6 A. Mr. Prosecutor, it is not true that this is what I said.
7 I said that, at the time, there was a group made up of five or
8 six members of the State Security Service in Doboj, and if I remember
9 correctly, in a private session, I even gave you three names of members
10 of that group. Now you're talking about two members. That's as far as
11 this is concerned.
12 Now, concerning their role and their activities while they were
13 transferred from Banja Luka to Doboj, I know that they conducted
14 interviews with people who were of interest for the service. And I think
15 that this is what I said and I'm repeating it today.
16 I allow for the possibility, though, that quite a few people of
17 those were non-Serbs, but if there were any Serbs who were of interest
18 for the security service, they would have been interviewed as well.
19 Q. But just to make sure I'm absolutely clear on this: These state
20 security inspectors, they were Banja Luka -- Banja Luka state security
21 inspectors who were transferred temporarily to Doboj to assist with
23 A. Yes. It's been translated to me that they were from Banja Luka
24 and that they were transferred temporarily to Banja Luka.
25 Okay. Yes, that's correct, if that's what you said. They were
1 the SDB members of Banja Luka, and they were, I might say, seconded to do
2 their duties temporarily in Doboj.
3 Q. And for how long were they engaging in these activities in Doboj;
4 if you recall?
5 A. I cannot remember exactly the duration of the period, but I know
6 that they stayed behind in Doboj after we'd left. I know that one of
7 those inspectors remained permanently in Doboj; that is to say, he got a
8 permanent job there and continued living and working there.
9 Q. And who -- if you know, who temporarily reassigned them to Doboj?
10 A. Mr. Prosecutor, I don't know that. I can only assume how the
11 procedure should have been implemented.
12 Q. It would have required Mr. Kesic's authorisation at the very
13 least; isn't that correct?
14 A. That is correct. That's what I meant when I said that I suppose
15 how it should have been. And I wouldn't say at least. I think that
16 Mr. Kesic's approval or authorisations would suffice, and also
17 Mr. Zivkovic's request was required, who was, at the time, the chief of
18 the state security in Doboj.
19 Q. And can you tell us why it was necessary for the CSB Banja Luka
20 to assist Doboj in conducting these interrogations?
21 A. Just like in case of the previous question that you asked me in
22 view of my position within the hierarchy, I can tell you that I really
23 don't know. I really want to be 100 percent sincere. I can tell you
24 what my opinion is, if you are interested to hear it.
25 Q. That's not necessary.
1 Do you know -- do you know if there were a significant, a large
2 number of non-Serbs who had been arrested and detained during this
3 time-period? Were you aware of that? And, of course, I'm speaking of
5 A. I can't tell you that. Whatever I would say, it would amount to
6 speculation. During our stay there, I never saw any kind of facility or
7 collection centre where those people were detained. I really don't know.
8 Q. Well, you were aware there was a Doboj prison right behind the
9 police building, or right -- right near it?
10 A. Yes, of course. It was quite close to the police station, the
11 Doboj prison.
12 Q. And were you aware that non-Serbs were being detained there
13 during this time-period, awaiting their interrogations?
14 A. I wasn't aware of that, but it makes complete sense to me to
15 detain people there, whatever their nationality is, who are to be
16 interrogated and processed. That was the case before the war, and this
17 prison serves the same purpose even nowadays.
18 The only thing I know about the prison, now that you mention it,
19 is something that I heard from Radulovic; that is, that 80 to 90 per cent
20 of the prison employees were non-Serbs. I think that we wrote some kind
21 of report in that respect.
22 Q. That was a report that you saw during proofing last week.
23 A. I saw that report, I don't know if it was in Banja Luka or in
24 The Hague, but I remember it, and I remember the contents.
25 Q. These state security inspectors from Banja Luka, where did they
1 conduct their interrogations? Was it at the CSB building?
2 A. Yes. That was in the CSB building and at the police station in
3 Doboj; but that's the same building.
4 Q. And do you recall who brought these non-Serbs in for their
5 interrogation by -- by the state security? Were they escorted in by
6 police officers?
7 A. If I remember correctly, the policemen from that police station
8 in Doboj brought them in. But, as I've said already, I was perhaps only
9 once or twice outside that building and inside that building during all
10 the time we were in Doboj.
11 Q. Now while these state security Banja Luka officials were in
12 Doboj, to whom were they submitting the reports of their activities?
13 A. Again, I can't be sure because I was not there when they
14 submitted those reports, but it would seem logical that they submitted
15 them to the chief of the state security in Doboj, because they came from
16 that area where they worked.
17 Q. Yes. But their supervisors were in Banja Luka. So would they
18 have to report on their daily activities back to Banja Luka so that --
19 that the -- their superiors in Banja Luka were aware of the activities
20 they were engaged in?
21 A. If you know that for a fact, then you must be right. I don't
23 It's not logical to me that they would report to their superiors
24 in Banja Luka while a war was going on because the practice was when
25 somebody is seconded to a different unit, the chief in that area becomes
1 in charge of them. The same worked in the army. When a member of a
2 military unit from Banja Luka was reassigned to a different unit in a
3 different area, the commander in that area became their superior. It's
4 possible, of course, these state security officers sometimes reported to
5 Banja Luka, back to Banja Luka, but I don't think that they would make
6 daily reports to them.
7 Q. What you just told us reassigning from one region to another --
8 oh, excuse me.
9 MR. ALEKSIC: [Interpretation] I really apologise to my learned
10 friend Mr. Olmsted, but it was not my intention to interrupt.
11 But page 11, last line, the witness said something quite
12 different from what was recorded. This thing about a military unit, I
13 don't think the witness said that.
14 Could Mr. Olmsted perhaps clarify with the witness what he
15 actually said.
16 MR. OLMSTED:
17 Q. Well, yes, I can do that.
18 I have been asked to clarify something you just said for the
20 You were talking about reassignment from one area to another.
21 Can repeat what you told us about that?
22 A. If you put the question again specifically, maybe it would be
23 easier to answer. But if you meant the reporting by the group of
24 operatives who were in Doboj, who had been reassigned from Banja Luka to
25 Doboj, I said it would seem to me that they would be reporting to the
1 state security chief, that is, the -- the line of work to which they
2 belonged but in that area, not the area from which they were reassigned.
3 And I used one example; namely, my colleagues, policemen, when they were
4 assigned to the front line, would fall under the command of the military
5 commander in whose area of responsibility they were. So during their
6 stint on the front line, they were no longer answerable to the chief of
7 police station. They were answerable to the commander in that area where
8 they were seconded. In this case, that would be the chief of the centre
9 for national security or state security, as you wish, in Doboj. If
10 that's what you meant.
11 Q. So you're drawing a parallel between an instance of being
12 resubordinated from the police to the military, to being temporarily sent
13 to another region to assist with interrogations. Is that what you're
14 trying to do?
15 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I apologise. It's not
16 an objection. But I have an observation.
17 The word used by the witness "otkomanda" was interpreted three
18 times in different ways. Once it was "transferred." The second time,
19 "reassigned." And the third time as "seconded." And I think that might
20 be a problem. I don't know definitively what the proper translation is
21 for the word he is using. And I think that it might be the problem in
22 the communication between the witness and Mr. Olmsted.
23 MR. OLMSTED: Well, let me put it this way.
24 Q. You don't know under what arrangements these state security
25 persons were sent from Banja Luka to Doboj, do you?
1 A. You already asked a similar question, and I told you my opinion,
2 and I told you what I know. I know they worked in Doboj at the
3 State Security Service, and they conducted interviews on the premises of
4 the State Security Service; that is to say, the state security sector in
6 Q. And you're not referring to any particular regulations as to what
7 happens when a police officer assists in another region with regard to
8 their chain of command. You can't direct us to any particular regulation
9 or law with regard to that?
10 A. The question is not crystal-clear to me, to be honest, but I was
11 trying to be frank and to explain. You -- you said a moment ago I was
12 trying to make some comparisons and parallels, which I'm not trying to
13 do. I'm just trying to explain how things worked at the time, in the
14 area where I worked, where I lived, where I spent time, because you said
15 it makes sense for colleagues who were in Doboj to report back to their
16 superiors in Banja Luka. The colleagues who were seconded from
17 Banja Luka to Doboj. I said it doesn't makes sense to me, and that's it.
18 Q. All right. I'm going move on.
19 You testified that members of the Banja Luka Special Police
20 Detachment provided security for these state security officers from
21 Banja Luka while they were in Doboj.
22 A. Yes, I did say something like that in response to a question
23 either from you or somebody from the Defence. At that time, there was
24 several members of the police unit -- the special police unit from
25 Banja Luka who were the security detail for the inspectors of the
1 State Security Service who were working in Doboj at the time.
2 Q. And, if you know, who within the CSB Banja Luka would have
3 assigned those special police officers that duty?
4 A. I didn't understand. Who from the CSB Banja Luka would be
5 assigned to that duty? The duty to provide security to these colleagues?
6 That would be the members of the special police unit. Perhaps this is a
7 confusion due to misinterpretation.
8 Q. Let me try the question one more time.
9 If you know, only if you know, can you tell us who within the CSB
10 Banja Luka leadership would have assigned those special police -- special
11 police officers to this duty to guard or protect the state security
12 officials in Doboj?
13 A. I understand the question now. The answer, however, is: I don't
14 know. Because you said in your question "only if you know." I don't
15 know. I can only tell you what I can guess.
16 Q. And -- yes, exactly.
17 And if I don't put that, "if you know" before every question just
18 assume it's there.
19 MR. OLMSTED: Can we have document ID FI 20-0185-ET on the
20 screen, please. This is tab 53. And, Your Honours, this is, in essence,
21 Exhibit 2D89, but it's the corrected translation that we are still
22 waiting for the final procedural resolution of it. But as we have to
23 show it to witnesses, I want to use it with this witness.
24 And there's also a B/C/S version link to it as well.
25 And I have been just told by my Case Manager that we need to ...
1 [Prosecution counsel confer]
2 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
3 MR. OLMSTED: The B/C/S version is FI 20-0185-1.
4 Now that we have both on the screen can we zoom into the names on
5 the list, the 17 or 18 or 15 names there.
6 Q. Mr. Sajinovic, I know that this list is a bit hard to read. But
7 can you tell us if you recognise any of these individuals as the special
8 police detachment members who were assigned to protect the Banja Luka
9 state security officers while they were in Doboj? And I understand that
10 it was only a few that were assigned to that particular task, but maybe
11 you could find those three or four individuals among these 15.
12 A. Mr. Prosecutor, out of these 15 names, I -- I just don't see 15.
13 If maybe we zoom in a little more. This is better.
14 Well, out of these 15 persons listed here, if I can correctly
15 make out the names and surnames, I recognise two or three as members of
16 the special police unit, special detachment.
17 Q. Yes. But my question to you is: Do you recognise the names of
18 the individuals who were in Doboj providing protection to the state
19 security inspectors in May of 1992?
20 Do you see their names on this list?
21 A. Well, Mr. Prosecutor, of course I didn't know the names of all
22 those people, but I can -- I can say that I've seen two or three of these
23 in Doboj. At least out of those whose names I can make out. People whom
24 I know personally.
25 Q. Can you give us -- there's a number next to each name. Can you
1 give us the number, the entry number, of the people you recognise?
2 A. Well, for instance, number 1. Number 13.
3 Q. Any others?
4 A. I know that number 2 was a member of the special police
5 detachment, but I don't remember seeing him in Doboj. And as for the
6 rest, I can't make out three, four, five of these names. And as far as
7 the others are concerned, I can't recognise their names as those of
8 members of the special police unit from Banja Luka.
9 Q. That's fine. I understand it's difficult to read. But at least
10 number 1 and number 13, those Banja Luka special detachment -- special
11 police detachment members were in Doboj providing protection in May of
13 A. Correct.
14 Q. Now if we can just scroll up and over to the right hand corner I
15 want to zoom in on the handwriting on the upper right-hand corner. Zoom
16 in as much as you can, because it is also a little bit difficult to read.
17 Now we see in the upper right-hand corner, we see the name
18 Slavica Komljenovic, C-o-m-l-y-e-n-o-v-i-c [sic]. She's up -- her name
19 is handwritten up there at the top. Who was she in 1992?
20 A. Mr. Prosecutor, this also indicates her job title. And I do know
21 that the lady with this name was a technical secretary at the CSB
22 Banja Luka, and I remember her name, Slava, Slavica. And her job title
23 reminded me of her.
24 Q. Can you read out for us her job title? Because it is not
25 presented well in the English translation.
1 A. You want me to read the whole heading?
2 Q. That would be great. That would be terrific.
3 A. "In the presence of the tek. Secretary of the CSB Banja Luka,
4 Slavica," and I don't really see how the last name read but it begins
5 with a K an ends in ovic. "... received column and somebody's
7 Q. And you knew the technical secretary at the CSB was
8 Slavica Komljenovic?
9 A. I repeat: I know there was a Slavica at the CSB who was the
10 technical secretary and I'm not sure I ever knew her surname. But if
11 that's written here, I have no reason to doubt it.
12 Q. And do you recognise the signature underneath it, whose signature
13 that belongs to?
14 A. No. Not at all.
15 MR. OLMSTED: Your Honours, I don't know where we stand on
16 this -- on this translation, but I guess we just leave it be for now. We
17 have it in the record under its document ID number if we need to
18 cross-reference it.
19 JUDGE HALL: Yes, because I understand that the problems haven't
20 been fully resolved yet.
21 MR. OLMSTED: Thank you, Your Honours.
22 Q. Now you also testified there were other members of the Banja Luka
23 Special Police Detachment in the Doboj region, and you would see them as
24 you came and went from the town.
25 A. Precisely.
1 MR. OLMSTED: Let's have P1337, tab 13, on the screen.
2 And let's take a look at the second page briefly.
3 Q. Sir, you can see this is a 17 May 1992 Milos report, numbered
4 133/92. I think you were shown this during your 2004 interview with
5 Investigator Nicolas Sebire. And at the time, you told him that this --
6 you didn't write this one, in particular?
7 A. In response to your question, I can identify this as a
8 Milos group report under that date. But I really can't remember what
9 your colleague showed me in 2004. But it's not a problem. You can ask
10 me whatever you want.
11 Now, if the question was whether I wrote this report ...
12 Q. That was the question. If we can turn back to the first page.
13 And if you need to take a look at it to refresh your memory, just --
14 A. Yes, that would be good.
15 Do I need to read the whole report?
16 Q. No. Just enough to -- to tell us whether it's correct that you
17 did not type this one.
18 A. Right, I didn't.
19 Q. I do want to draw your attention to the final sentences of the
20 first paragraph which read:
21 "Apart from visible injuries suffered by the arrested persons
22 there was appropriation of private property by those who were carrying
23 out the searches. Such behaviour met with the indignation and
24 condemnation of all honest citizens, and especially the mobilised Serbian
25 Territorial Defence members, who threatened to use arms against the
1 special forces from" --
2 THE INTERPRETER: Could the counsel please be asked to tell the
3 interpreters the reference in the B/C/S text.
4 MR. OLMSTED: In the B/C/S text, it's the first paragraph and
5 it's -- I'm reading the last two sentences.
6 THE INTERPRETER: Thank you.
7 MR. OLMSTED:
8 Q. "Such behaviour met with the indignation and condemnation of all
9 honest citizens, and especially the mobilised Serbian Territorial Defence
10 members, who threatened to use arms against the special forces from
11 Banja Luka and the special forces organised by a man called Bozovic."
12 Mr. Sajinovic, do you recall during this time-period
13 Mr. Radulovic telling you about the criminal behaviour of members of the
14 special police forces from Banja Luka while they were in Doboj?
15 A. Mr. Prosecutor, from that period, I recall hearing, not only from
16 Radulovic but from many other persons as well, that some kind of illegal
17 activities, if I may put it that way, were being carried out by groups
18 and individuals in the area of Doboj whilst we were there.
19 Q. But I am referring particularly to the members or certain
20 members - not all members, but certain members - of the special police
21 detachment from Banja Luka.
22 A. Yes, I spoke about this topic specifically with Radulovic as
23 well. The information that we had at the time was that there were lots
24 of stories going around about the deeds committed by members of the
25 special unit from Banja Luka. According to what we knew, the majority of
1 these activities were, in fact, committed by local criminals organised in
2 groups, as well as some individuals from Doboj and its surroundings. I
3 spoke about that yesterday.
4 What is interesting to note here is concerning this report that
5 we're looking at and the sentence that you just read, it says that they
6 even threatened to put up armed resistance, in inverted commas, "to the
7 specials of Banja Luka."
8 When you put inverted commas in the Serbian language, that
9 indicates not exactly what is quoted. Therefore, this leads me to
10 believe that there were such rumours but that they were not founded.
11 This is the only thing that I can conclude from this document and from
12 the talks I had with Radulovic at the time regarding those illegal
14 Q. Yes. But you didn't -- you didn't gather this intelligence.
15 This was Mr. Radulovic. So he is the person who knew exactly what he was
16 reporting here, obviously.
17 A. Yes, that's correct. As far as this is concerned, it's correct,
18 and as far as I can recall the conversation that I had with Radulovic
19 about this topic, and I heard it from him personally that everything that
20 happened in the area of Doboj was attributed to outsiders. In this
21 instance, those outsiders were members of the special police detachment
22 from Banja Luka and members of special unit volunteers from Serbia led by
23 Radojica Bozovic.
24 If I remember correctly, I spoke about this extensively
25 yesterday. And just briefly, not only in the Doboj area, it was typical
1 that if anyone tried to commit a crime, and happens even today, they
2 leave some trail in order to point or set up somebody else as a
3 perpetrator. At the time, Bozovic's Red Berets were in Doboj, would wear
4 hats that were worn by Mr. Talic's specials or the hats by -- worn by
5 people from Banja Luka. So every person, every peasant in every village
6 was able to see that although they were virtually illiterate,
8 JUDGE HALL: Before you move on, Mr. Olmsted, I would just wish
9 to point out to you that you have an hour remaining, a half of the first
10 session and then when we come back, you have a half-hour remaining.
11 MR. OLMSTED: Thank you, Your Honours.
12 Q. You testified that you saw CSB chief Andrija Bjelosevic in Doboj
13 one or twice. Can you tell us on what date, what occasions you saw him?
14 A. Mr. Prosecutor, I don't remember mentioning
15 Mr. Andrija Bjelosevic today. You say "you just said."
16 That's what I said maybe yesterday or the day before yesterday
17 but not today. I told you that I saw him once or twice. I cannot
18 remember. But that was during the period when we were in Doboj.
19 Q. And can you tell us on what occasions you saw him? Do you recall
20 the occasions? Did you see him at the CSB?
21 A. I think either outside or inside the building, and once I just
22 bumped into him in the street.
23 Q. You stated that Mr. Radulovic told you where Mr. Bjelosevic was
24 and that he was always at the Duge Njive area. Did Mr. Radulovic tell
25 you how he knew all this information?
1 A. Yes. You put it right. I remember that he was in the area of
2 Duge Njive. I remember asking this question because Bjelosevic was the
3 chief of the CSB Doboj at the time, and I asked Radulovic how come we
4 don't see him more often. And I'm trying to remember the exact name, but
5 I think it was a staff or -- or whatever of the Doboj operations group,
6 which was stationed in Duge Njive.
7 As I understood at the time, apparently his activity there was to
8 co-ordinate the defence of Doboj with the military commanders. I don't
9 know. This is just guess-work.
10 Anyway, that would be it, and I wouldn't like to speculate any
12 Q. And while he was away, were the Doboj police reporting to his
14 A. Mr. Prosecutor, I really didn't know, given my position, what the
15 hierarchy in Banja Luka was.
16 Now in you're asking me about the police, and I suppose you are
17 referring to the uniformed police, are you?
18 Q. I'm referring to the CSB police, yes.
19 A. Well, the Banja Luka CSB, and the organisation of any CSB was
20 similar, didn't have any police. Maybe they had some kind of dozen
21 police officers, but not exactly police officers. Those were inspectors.
22 So their duty was to carry out inspections of police stations.
23 Anyway, the police was in Banja Luka but I say the same
24 organisation was in place in Doboj, and people were organised within
25 various police stations.
1 Q. I want to move now to Prijedor. If we can have P --
2 MR. ALEKSIC: [Interpretation] I really apologise to my learned
3 friend. I don't intend to interrupt him.
4 23, 22, lines, the witness said, "I say the same organisation was
5 in place in Doboj." The witness said: In the public security station in
6 Doboj. And then he added that they were organised within various police
8 MR. OLMSTED:
9 Q. I guess we're going to have to ask you the question again just to
10 clarify the record because I didn't understand that interpretation.
11 Can you repeat --
12 A. Of course.
13 Q. Can you just repeat what you said with regard -- I assume what
14 you're saying is that CSB Doboj was organised the same way as CSB
15 Banja Luka, as far as the chain of command?
16 A. Yes, of course. That would be it.
17 Q. All right. Let's discuss Prijedor.
18 MR. OLMSTED: Let's have P1376 --
19 MR. ZECEVIC: I'm really sorry. If we are going to clarify this,
20 the answer of the witness, we must clarify it in its totality. And,
21 therefore, either -- either we clarify it or Mr. Olmsted should pose the
22 same question again, the question which he posed. Because right now in
23 the transcript, we are getting -- we have a recording of what -- of -- I
24 mean, adequate recording as to the answer of the witness.
25 Thank you. I'm sorry I interrupted.
1 MR. OLMSTED: All right. Let me see -- I guess we're going to
2 have to go back, and I'm going to have to go back to my prior question.
3 Q. My question -- my question that really originated this was while
4 Mr. Bjelosevic was away from the CSB, who was in charge -- who was this
5 charge of the CSB, and you were giving us a kind of explanation of how
6 essentially it was the same way.
7 Can you repeat your answer again in general? Because I think, at
8 this stage, I think we need to ask the question again.
9 A. My answer was that I didn't know who ran the CSB, although I
10 think that wasn't your question, but, never mind. I said that I didn't
11 know who was at the head of the CSB whilst Mr. Bjelosevic was away. If
12 I'm not wrong, you asked me to whom the police was reporting, and I asked
13 you, are you referring to the uniformed police, and you said, yes, that's
14 what you were referring to, and you were referring to the CSB police in
16 And then I said that, as far as I know, I drew a parallel between
17 the CSB Banja Luka and the CSB Doboj because they were organised in an
18 identical way and that applied to every CSB covered by the area of the
19 MUP of Republika Srpska. And I said that as far as I knew, the CSB did
20 not have police force. There were perhaps a dozen or so uniformed police
21 officers, but they were not actual police officers who were on the beat,
22 so to say, but, were, rather, sitting in offices and were doing the job
23 of police inspectors and each one of them had their own area of police
24 stations that they inspected. The police officers were within public
25 security stations and were organised within police stations in the area
1 covered by a specific CSB.
2 MR. OLMSTED: Is Defence counsel satisfied? Thank you. Let's
3 move on to Prijedor. May I have P1376, tab 15 on the screen.
4 Q. This is a 28 May 1992 Milos report numbered 162/92.
5 Now, according to this report, you were aware at the end of
6 May 1992 that, as it states here, a huge number of civilians from
7 Prijedor, men, women, children, and elderly, were arrested or
8 surrendered; is that correct?
9 A. This is one of the Milos reports, and it says what you just
10 quoted. Yes, that's one of the Milos reports; or, rather, one of
11 Mr. Radulovic's reports.
12 Q. Now, these civilians from Prijedor, they included the non-Serb
13 population from the villages in the Hambarine and Kozarac areas; is that
15 A. Well, I think one can say that that is correct.
16 Q. And where were these persons held? What were the primary
17 locations that they were held in?
18 A. As far as I know the situation in that period, nobody asked me
19 anything about this over the past two days. In addition to the reception
20 centres that I mentioned before, there was one also in the place which
21 is, I think, called Trnopolje. According to the information that I had
22 at the time, this is where the civilians were housed. They were put up
23 in this reception centre.
24 Q. Are you saying that none of them were housed at Omarska or
1 A. Are you referring to the civilians, the women, the children, that
2 we were just talking about?
3 Q. Well, this talks about men, women, children, and elderly. Are
4 you saying all those persons were in Trnopolje or were they also at
5 Omarska and Keraterm?
6 A. You have allow for a fact, Mr. Prosecutor, that I couldn't have
7 known where everybody was put up. We had information that there was
8 civilians housed in Trnopolje. Able-bodied men, conscripts, people who
9 were captured during combat operations were accommodated in Keraterm and
10 Omarska, as you mentioned, and I spoke about this yesterday and before
11 yesterday; that is to say, that the information that we had at the time
12 was that at those reception centres interviews being conducted with those
13 people in order to carry out screening for those for whom it was
14 established that were not responsible for being involved in armed
15 rebellion were eventually released from Omarska and Keraterm.
16 Now as for women, children, and elderly, I really cannot tell you
17 that I saw them at any of those locations visited by Mr. Radulovic and
18 myself. If need be, I can repeat that we spent a short time at Keraterm.
19 The detainees there were in the lower part of the building, in a big
20 hall, and we were in the administration building above. We were not at
21 all allowed access.
22 Now, judging by the look on your face, you want me to stop,
24 Q. Well, yes --
25 A. Mr. Prosecutor, it is difficult. I apologise. It is difficult
1 for me to talk about the year 1992 whilst are you smiling all the time.
2 This is really awkward for me.
3 Q. Please, don't read anything into my expressions. I do, however,
4 want you to try to keep to the question. You have given us a lot of
5 information that wasn't contained within my very simple question which is
6 that some of these civilians were actually held at Omarska and Keraterm,
7 and I can get from your answer that the answer is yes. And that's all
8 I'm trying to get at. But don't read anything into my expression beyond
10 A. My answer is no. And please forgive me if I avert my eyes from
11 you. You are really breaking my concentration and I really don't like
12 the expression on your face.
13 Q. You testified that you had intelligence information that
14 non-Serbs in Kozarac were organising into military units and that they
15 had an intention to take over militarily in the area. That was on --
16 during your examination-in-chief; do you recall that?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Can you clarify for us, by area did you mean the Prijedor
19 municipality or were you only referring to the Kozarac area?
20 A. I was referring to the municipality of Prijedor.
21 Q. You would agree that if that was, indeed, the non-Serbs'
22 intention, they were extremely outnumbered by the Serb forces at the
23 time, including the VRS, the TO, the police, and the paramilitary units?
24 A. I wouldn't agree with that. That's not correct.
25 Q. Do you recall that the 43rd Motorised Brigade was in Prijedor
1 during this time-period?
2 A. I don't recall. I wasn't very familiar with the military
3 organisation. Since I am expected to give brief answers, I might just
4 not mention that there was no, the Army of Republika Srpska at the time.
5 According to the information that we had, these forces that we discussed
6 in Prijedor were much better organised. As for the so-called Serbian
7 forces and the Serbian population living in the area, laid all their
8 hopes in the JNA.
9 Q. Were you aware that the 5th Kozara Light Infantry Brigade was in
10 this -- if you know whether the 5th Kozara Light Infantry Brigade was in
11 Prijedor at this time?
12 A. I didn't know that.
13 Q. Were you aware that the 6th Sana Brigade from the Sanski Most
14 adjoining municipality was in the area, if you do know; yes or no?
15 JUDGE HARHOFF: I think the witness has expressed the view that
16 he was unfamiliar with the presence of the military formations. So
17 please move on.
18 MR. OLMSTED: Very well.
19 Q. Were you aware there was a Serb Territorial Defence organised in
20 Prijedor during this time headed by Slobodan Kuruzovic?
21 A. Mr. Prosecutor, believe me, that I didn't know. And I really
22 don't recognise the name that you have just given me.
23 MR. OLMSTED: Let's have P1388, tab 25, on the screen.
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Could you please enlarge it a bit.
25 MR. OLMSTED:
1 Q. This is a 11 July 1992 Milos report, numbered 271/92. The last
2 two sentences are what I'm interesting in. It says:
3 "The killing of civilians in Doboj, Teslic, and Kozarac are not
4 in favour of the Serbian dignity and the honour of the Serbian army.
5 Then it goes on to ask:
6 "Please explain to us what are the interests of the Serbs in
7 creating in a violent manner ethnically cleansed entities and how we
8 should position ourselves," et cetera, et cetera.
9 Sir, the report doesn't mention it, but we could include
10 civilians in Hambarine and Brezovo as well to this list.
11 A. I wouldn't take it upon myself to include anyone, Mr. Prosecutor.
12 This document speaks about the people who perished irrespective of their
13 ethnicity. This is a very emotion subject. I don't want to categorise
14 any people.
15 As for the killing of people in Teslic, that's the only incident
16 that I am aware of. We wrote about it. We arrested the group of the
17 Serbs who committed the crime. We processed them. And that was it.
18 JUDGE HALL: Mr. Olmsted, could you assist me by -- as to
19 identifying what the question was? Because you -- you read portions of
20 the report to the witness and then you declared the report doesn't
21 mention [indiscernible] so-and-so.
22 Where is the question?
23 MR. OLMSTED: That was the question. That -- it -- could it as
24 well include those two areas that aren't mentioned in this report, where
25 a large number of civilians were killed during this time-period.
1 JUDGE HALL: Mr. Zecevic, had you an objection.
2 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes, I'm sorry, Your Honours, I just noticed when
3 Mr. Olmsted was reading from the -- from the translation of the -- of
4 this document, that the translation is somewhat not correct.
5 It contains "ethnically cleansed entities" and that doesn't
6 appear in the original at all.
7 Therefore, we would request that this document be re-sent to --
8 CLSS so we can have the proper translation. It might turn to be an
9 important issue in this case, I guess.
10 [Trial Chamber confers]
11 JUDGE HALL: Mr. Sajinovic, you had your hand up. Yes, you
12 wanted to say something?
13 MR. ZECEVIC: I think the witness wants some water.
14 JUDGE HALL: Yes. We are about to take the break shortly, but
15 the --
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's right.
17 JUDGE HALL: The Chamber would ask to you read out from the B/C/S
18 that you would have, the relevant portion.
19 And, Mr. Zecevic, if you would follow along, and we'd see what
20 the -- what the interpreters say.
21 MR. OLMSTED: And I think we're dealing with the last sentence in
22 the document.
23 JUDGE HALL: Did the usher ...
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm sorry, Your Honours, do I need
25 to read this?
1 As Mr. Prosecutor says, this is the last sentence then. The last
2 sentence reads in the Serbian version that I have:
3 "Please explain to us what the interests of the Serbs in creating
4 in a violent manner ethnically compact areas and how we should position
5 ourselves with regard to the manifestations and the perpetrators of such
7 JUDGE HALL: Mr. Zecevic, is your concern -- are your concerns
8 resolved? Or do we -- we now have on the record what the witness says
9 that the documents says in B/C/S. Should we nevertheless still send this
10 for -- to be retranslated?
11 MR. ZECEVIC: Well, Your Honours, it is -- this translation is
12 somewhat in between, I'm afraid, what the -- what the original says and
13 what is the previous translation.
14 Therefore, I would respectively ask that the document be sent to
15 CLSS just -- it's a one -- it's a one -- one sentence only. Thank you
16 very much.
17 JUDGE HALL: Yes.
18 And we'll take the adjournment and return for the -- so
19 Mr. Olmsted can complete his cross-examination. Thank you.
20 [The witness stands down]
21 --- Recess taken at 4.01 p.m.
22 --- On resuming at 4.33 p.m.
23 [The witness takes the stand]
24 MR. OLMSTED: Thank you, Your Honour.
25 May we have 65 ter 10191 on the screen, please. That's tab 30.
1 Q. Sir, this is a 7 September 1992 Milos report, numbered 372/92.
2 Can you confirm this is one of the team's reports?
3 A. Yes. The format is consistent with the reports of the
4 Milos group.
5 Q. Do you recall typing up this one, in particular?
6 A. I think I did this. In any case, I recognise the text.
7 Q. I'm just going to read the first two sentences.
8 It says:
9 "According to our source, VAL, and a large number of contacts
10 with citizens, we have the information that the security situation in the
11 Prijedor area is still [sic] quite difficult and rather chaotic. In this
12 area, buildings are still unnecessarily destroyed and citizens of Muslim
13 and Croatian nationality forcibly expelled, even killed."
14 After the events we were talking about before the break, in
15 Kozarac and Hambarine in May and early June 1992, the situation didn't
16 improve for the non-Serb population in Prijedor, did it? In fact, as
17 this report indicates, they were being -- continued to it be killed and
18 expelled, even into September 1992.
19 A. Well, as for the content of the report, it does say something
20 like that what you've just read. But whether that happened, as I said
21 when we discussed another report, it relates to that date and that
22 period. You say continued to be. I don't know whether it continued to
23 be. Whether it was continuous. But you can see the pseudonym on this
24 report. So it was a source of Mr. Radulovic's.
25 Q. Yes, I choice the word continued because I was reading the second
1 sentence I read, which was:
2 "In this area buildings are still unnecessarily destroyed and
3 citizens of Muslim and Croatian nationality forcibly expelled."
4 So I read the "still" in the report, as meaning it was a
5 continuing thing. Do you see that?
6 A. I do.
7 Q. Later on in the report it mentions information or stories about
8 mass graves.
9 Were you -- did you have any information about those mass graves,
10 or was this solely information that Mr. Radulovic had?
11 A. Excuse me. I did not have such information, and talking to
12 Mr. Radulovic, I never heard that he had such information either. It
13 says here that especially dangerous are stories about those locations of
14 mass graves. And I agree, that such stories are dangerous, so I cannot
15 confirm that it was correct and that some specific locations are meant.
16 I really can't answer this. Sorry.
17 MR. OLMSTED: Your Honour, may this be admitted into evidence.
18 MR. ALEKSIC: [Interpretation] No objection.
19 JUDGE HALL: Admitted and marked.
20 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P2403, Your Honours.
21 MR. OLMSTED: May we have 65 ter 282 - this is tab 49 - on the
23 Q. I'm not a 100 per cent sure, but I think you had a look at this
24 document back in 2004. It's a sector -- line of work 01. So line 01,
25 state security sector, Banja Luka, survey of activities of the SNB sector
1 Banja Luka based on the line of work for 01 for the period April 1992 to
2 April 1993.
3 MR. OLMSTED: Could we turn to page 2 of, I think, both the
4 English and the B/C/S.
5 Q. And I want to look at the paragraph with the handwriting to the
6 left of it.
7 And in paragraph reads:
8 "In such a situation, the operative composition of this sector's
9 SNB is actively engaged in the investigations of ... detained persons,"
10 and then lists the municipalities: "... Prijedor, Bosanski Novi, Kljuc,
11 Sanski Most, Mrkonjic Grad, Doboj, Bihac, Petrovac, Glamoc, Gradiska,
12 Kotor Varos, and somewhat later, Jajce?"
13 If we could scroll to the left there's some handwriting. Do you
14 recognise that handwriting?
15 A. I do.
16 Q. Who does it belong to?
17 A. Mr. Vojin Bera.
18 Q. And since that handwriting does not appear in the English
19 version, can you just read what it says?
20 A. "Doboj and Banja Luka."
21 Before Doboj, I believe there is a letter, C, in Cyrillic, or
22 similar. But I'm not sure. But what I clearly see is "Doboj and
23 Banja Luka."
24 Q. And were you aware that Vojin Bera was co-ordinator of the state
25 security officers who were sent to the various detention facilities
1 around the region in 1992 to conduct interrogations?
2 A. No, I didn't know that.
3 Q. We've already talked about Doboj and a little bit about Prijedor.
4 Were you aware that there's state security officials who were engaged in
5 interrogations of non-Serb detains in Kljuc, Sanski Most, and
6 Kotor Varos?
7 A. As for other places, or, rather, the places you've just
8 mentioned, I knew that in those areas there was a presence of the
9 operatives of state security, operatives who were responsible for those
10 areas. And in peacetime, in the time of former Yugoslavia, the
11 State Security Service and all the other state institutions had
12 contingency plans for natural disasters, war, immediate threat of war
13 and, of course, the State Security Service had those plans as well.
14 Within the State Security Service, there were war time departments, and
15 that means, towns, or, rather, municipalities covered by a particular
16 centre of state security. There was one operative officer of
17 State Security Service in charge of each war time department; for
18 instance, the war time section of Kljuc, or Kotor Varos, or whatever.
19 Now, what they did and who they investigated, I don't know. They
20 were our colleagues working on an equal footing with us, and the object
21 of our interest were not colleagues from the same service. You know what
22 the object of our interest was.
23 Q. Can we please turn to page 5 in the English and the B/C/S.
24 And I'm interested in the bottom paragraph. It starts out --
25 well, before the numbered paragraphs it states:
1 "Bearing in mind only certain ... elements in the estimation and
2 in accordance with realistic possibilities, this department has focussed
3 on the following things ..."
4 And the first -- and I'm just going to summarise them. I'm not
5 going to read them all out.
6 But the first relates to discovering the pillars of intelligence,
7 propaganda and activities among foreign citizens.
8 The second, which is on page 2 of the English, is the gathering
9 of information about activities of the UNPROFOR members?
10 The third priority is organising of new immigration for the
11 purpose of monitoring terrorist activity towards the RS, Serbs, and
12 Serbian clubs abroad.
13 The fourth is gathering of information about forces, locations,
14 deployment, et cetera, of enemy formations.
15 And, finally, the fifth is discovering of criminal acts against
16 humanity committed against the Serb population in some regions.
17 Can you tell us, just within the structure of the state security,
18 who set these priorities?
19 A. You must believe me, Mr. Prosecutor, when I say that I could not
20 answer your question with any certainty. I could make conjectures again,
21 but you've made it quite clear you don't want me to.
22 Q. That's correct. And thank you for just keeping it at that.
23 With regard to this last objection -- objective, which is
24 discovering of criminal acts against humanity committed against the Serb
25 population in some regions, can you tell us, would this encompass crimes
1 committed against Serbs in the Autonomous Region of Krajina?
2 A. Have you to show me where that is. I can't see it. The last
3 thing I see is: "Gathering information ..."
4 Q. I apologise. Can we turn the page in the B/C/S version. I
5 apologise for that. Number 5 is on the second -- on the next page,
6 page 6. And if you look under number 5, it's what I just read and I just
7 want to confirm that that included state security inspectors looking into
8 such crimes committed in the ARK, the Autonomous Region of Krajina, as
9 well as perhaps Doboj region and elsewhere.
10 A. Since this is a report by the Banja Luka sector of the state
11 security, I conclude that this refers to the area covered by the state
12 security sector in Banja Luka.
13 Q. Thank you.
14 MR. OLMSTED: Your Honour, may this be admitted into evidence?
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Excuse me, Your Honour.
16 Mr. Prosecutor, looking at this document, I've been thinking, and
17 I remember I was shown this by your colleague in 2004, and that's fine.
18 But I would appreciate it if you could show me this document page by page
19 on the screen, or perhaps you have a hard copy. It is very important,
20 and you will hear the reasons, Your Honours, why.
21 I remember that I've said this to the investigator at the time,
22 certain observations of mine, and I think this is very important.
23 JUDGE HALL: Do you have a hard copy available that you may show
24 the witness?
25 MR. OLMSTED: Let me see if I have an unmarked copy.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Hard copy would be even better.
2 Thank you, Your Honours.
3 MR. OLMSTED: He can use this one, I think. It's a little bit
4 marked up.
5 Q. But just ignore any blue pen mark on it.
6 A. It's not a problem. I just want to see the printed version.
7 Thank you again for enabling me to look at this document, and I'm
8 very happy, indeed, that I have recalled this document.
9 I'm not going to go into the contents at this time. The
10 Prosecutor has read out certain passages that he interested in, and
11 that's fine, I'm not going to comment on that. But one thing I noticed
12 in 2004 is this: The first page of the document, the second page, the
13 third page, the fourth page, the fifth page of the document, and the
14 sixth page of the document were typed on one and the same typewriter.
15 The font is the same, and even a layman can see it's one and the same
16 typewriter. What's interesting is, at the bottom of the sixth page, the
17 text does not end. Instead, there is a comma, and the text continued on
18 page 7 in a different typewriter, using a different font, different
19 letters, and the seventh, eighth, and ninth page were typed on a
20 different typewriter. I expressed my doubts about the authenticity of
21 this document in 2004, and I express them again for the reasons that I've
23 Since this is an overview or a survey of certain activities on
24 page 6, in paragraph 6, it says, "As a result, based on the gathered
25 information, in the form of notes," et cetera, "the service of national
1 security was sent," and then blanks, so many, it doesn't say how many,
2 Official Notes, so many communications, so many reports. So these are
3 blanks. I explained to the investigator at the time in detail - I don't
4 want to go into detail here now - but I believe that is somebody's
5 attempt to misrepresent things by leaving blank the place for the number.
6 I don't know what it is about, but I can't understand why at least two
7 different typewriters were used.
8 Thank you again. I hope I have been of assistance, and I
9 apologise for using a few extra minutes of the Prosecutor's time.
10 Q. No problem and thank you for your assistance. Can you remove
11 your headphones for a minute while we resolve this issue.
12 A. All right.
13 JUDGE HALL: Mr. Olmsted, Mr. Aleksic was about to say something
14 on your application. But before I hear from him, could I understand for
15 what purpose you seek to tender this document?
16 MR. OLMSTED: Well, the purpose is -- is obviously the content
17 and the -- particularly the areas I just covered that are in this report.
18 As -- are we concerned about the authenticity or the contents,
19 Your Honours? The relevance or the -- or the -- authenticity?
20 JUDGE HALL: Both now, having regard to the witness's
22 MR. OLMSTED: Okay. The relevance is because it speaks about the
23 activities of line 01 at the state security sector in Banja Luka for the
24 period of -- from April 1992 through April 1993. So it does cover
25 entirely the indictment period.
1 And it discusses their activities, their priorities during that
2 time-period. And I haven't read all those parts of it, but it also talks
3 about the detention facilities in Prijedor, and et cetera.
4 As far as the authenticity is concerned, of course, this witness
5 is not an expert on -- on documents, he expresses opinion, of course, as
6 to what it is. It could very well be a draft of a report that is
7 eventually sent. He did authenticate the handwriting of Vojin Bera, who,
8 at the time, during this period, was the head of line 01. So whatever
9 stage in the drafting this was, at one point it was in the hands of
10 Mr. Bera, who would have been the one who would have authorised this
12 And so we say that there's enough to authenticate it for purposes
13 of admission in this case.
14 [Trial Chamber confers]
15 JUDGE HALL: Mr. Aleksic, do you have something to contribute to
16 this discussion?
17 MR. ALEKSIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. Thank you.
18 In addition to what the witness has said and what Mr. Olmsted
19 said the witness identified, this document has nine pages, and the
20 witness recognised two words in it that he says were written by Mr. Bera.
21 The document does not bear a number, does not bear the name of the
23 What I see this as is a draft version. You can see in item 5
24 that lines are left blank for some things to be written in. Also,
25 Mr. Olmsted asked the witness if he knows that Mr. Bera was the
1 co-ordinator. The witness answered in the negative. Then the Prosecutor
2 asked if he was aware if operatives from the state security from
3 Banja Luka went to work in other centres. The witness says: I don't
5 So in addition to all the formal deficiencies of this document,
6 the witness confirmed none of the major elements of this document,
7 nothing important.
8 That's what I wanted to say, Your Honours.
9 [Trial Chamber confers]
10 JUDGE HALL: Mr. Olmsted, what the Chamber doesn't understand is
11 what exactly this is and what -- what its origin is. And to whom was it
12 directed. None of that is apparent from the document itself, and the
13 witness is unable to assist.
14 MR. OLMSTED: Well, Your Honours, the title page tells you what
15 it is. It's a survey of activities of the SNB sector Banja Luka based on
16 the line of work 01, for the period April 1992 to April 1993. And it
17 has, at the top, it says it comes from the CSB Banja Luka, state security
18 sector and it even has a date, 12 April 1993. And -- up to the right it
19 says line of work, 01.
20 And we've heard evidence that line 01 within the state security
21 sector in Banja Luka was under Vojin Bera during this time-period. And
22 this is a report on their activities. And we've heard that among their
23 activities were sending state security inspectors to detention facilities
24 to interrogate detainees, and that's included in this report. This gives
25 us information as to what their priorities were during this time-period,
1 what kind of work they were doing. This is part of the CSB Banja Luka.
2 Now whether it is a draft or not, this witness obviously can't
3 provide any information on that. But drafts can be admitted into
4 evidence. We're not saying that this made it to the hands of anyone up
5 the chain of command. It is dated 1993. So that is not necessary
6 relevant for us, but what was relevant for us is the information that's
7 contained within it. And we submit that the handwriting of Vojin Bera,
8 the head of this section, on the page, and his handwritten notes on the
9 page shows that he was reviewing this. So this must have been something
10 he was considering and reviewing as to his line of work.
11 JUDGE DELVOIE: Mr. Witness, could you, anyhow -- oh, yeah,
13 Mr. Witness, could you in any way support Mr. Aleksic's
14 allegation that this could be a draft?
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, my answer would be
16 yes, I can fully confirm that this was a draft, at best. When I say "at
17 best," I was referring to what I spoke about earlier. And the indication
18 of that are the lines on page 6 in the Serbian, item 5. So all the
19 numbers are lacking, the number of reports, et cetera.
20 [Trial Chamber confers]
21 JUDGE HALL: The document is admitted and marked.
22 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P2404, Your Honours.
23 MR. OLMSTED:
24 Q. Mr. Sajinovic, you'll be happy to hear I'm very near to the end.
25 I just want to clarify just a couple of things that came up during your
1 examination that I don't think are going to be controversial.
2 If we can have P1369, tab 3, on the screen, please.
3 And had you a chance to look at this, I believe, when Mr. Aleksic
4 was asking you questions.
5 I'm not going to ask you any questions about the content. What
6 I'm interested in is if you look at the bottom, the reference number is
7 49/92. Do you see that?
8 A. Yes, I do, Mr. Prosecutor.
9 Q. And you see that the date of this Milos report is 2 April 1992.
10 A. That's right.
11 Q. Okay. Remember that, and let's take a look at 1D293.
12 JUDGE DELVOIE: Tab number, please.
13 MR. KRGOVIC: Tab number.
14 MR. OLMSTED: It was a Defence -- it was your tab, so if you
15 could help us out, that would be great. I didn't write down the tab.
16 It's a Defence document.
17 Q. But for purposes of this, you won't need to see the hard copy. I
18 just want you to look at the reference number on this one. Now, this one
19 is reference number 53/92. Do you see that?
20 A. Yes, I do. Of course.
21 Q. Now this one doesn't have a date on it. But can we draw the
22 conclusion that since its reference number is subsequent to the reference
23 number of the previous document, that this one was written after that.
24 In other words, the reference numbers are sequential: The first number
25 being the number of the report, and the second number being the year.
1 A. Yes, you are right. What you said last that first comes the
2 number of the report and then the year.
3 Now when you asked me whether I would be able to draw a
4 conclusion, if I understood you correctly, whether this document preceded
5 the previous one, according to the number, that could be the case. But I
6 have equally seen quite a few documents of ours without any number or
7 date on them. And when I was giving my answers the day before yesterday,
8 I said that one of my colleagues whose handwriting I identified here used
9 to establish this register in 1994. So I cannot say with any degree of
10 certainty whether this document was produced earlier.
11 Just let me tell you that I didn't read the contents. I was just
12 focussing on the form and the format.
13 Q. And that's exactly what I want you to focus on. But just to
14 clarify: The one we looked at before had the reference number 49/92
15 while this one has the reference number 53/92. So I was asking you
16 whether this meant that the one in front of us came after the previous
17 one, because it's later -- it's a higher reference number, indicating
18 that it was further along in the reporting cycle.
19 A. I gave you an answer. According to the number that you quoted,
20 it would only make sense that it came later. However, I cannot confirm
21 that for the reasons that I gave you. There is no date, and, as I said,
22 I've seen many reports of ours missing numbers and dates, et cetera.
23 So, whatever you say makes sense; but also whatever I say makes
24 sense. I am under oath, and, therefore, I cannot claim with any
25 certainty that this document was produced after the first one. But the
1 format is consistent.
2 Q. Thank you. And I think you've already testified that the person
3 who maintained these files was the third member of the Milos team, who
4 was responsible for communications.
5 A. Precisely so. What I told you is the truth.
6 Q. Final clarification. If we can have 2D84 on the screen.
7 MR. ALEKSIC: [Interpretation] It's our tab 10.
8 MR. OLMSTED: Thank you. Thank you for your assistance.
9 Q. And had you a chance to look at this during your examination.
10 And I just want to draw your attention to the end of the document, the
11 last two sentences. It says:
12 "Please keep Becirevic in custody until our arrival so that we
13 can conduct a detailed interview concerning these and other
15 Can you confirm with us, is that Dzemo Becirevic? Is that the
16 person you are referring to there?
17 A. Yes, that's the man.
18 Q. And can you tell us, you -- this is requesting that he be held in
19 custody until you arrive. Where was he being held?
20 A. You should first ask the question: Who held him; and then the
22 I can only deduce something about who held him in custody, but I
23 don't know anything about the location.
24 Q. Okay. Could you answer who was holding him?
25 A. Judging by the language of the document, I would say that this
1 gentleman was in custody in Serbia, which means that, according to this
2 document, he was kept in custody by the RDB members in Serbia.
3 Q. And by RDB, you mean the Serbian MUP. That -- the security
4 services within the Serbian MUP.
5 A. When I say RDB, stands for State Security Department.
6 Q. And it says hold him until we conduct a detailed interview.
7 Do I take it that you did not go out to Serbia to conduct this
8 interview if it, in fact, occurred?
9 A. I don't know. I myself didn't go, and I don't remember whether
10 Mr. Radulovic went. I'm not aware of that.
11 When we discussed a similar note -- I'm sorry, no. I misspoke.
12 So, I don't remember, and I don't know if Mr. Radulovic went.
13 Q. All right. And maybe the note you're thinking about, let's turn
14 to 2D86.
15 MR. OLMSTED: And perhaps my learned friend can help me with the
16 tab number on that one.
17 MR. ALEKSIC: [Interpretation] Tab 12.
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I didn't understand which
19 particular note you were referring to.
20 MR. OLMSTED:
21 Q. Well, just take a look at this one. You were shown this one as
22 well during your examination. I'm not sure if it was by Mr. Aleksic or
23 by Mr. Cvijetic. But do you recall taking a look at this document during
24 your testimony here?
25 A. Yes, I do.
1 Q. I'm interested in the first paragraph at the very end. It says
2 that a statement was taken from Dzemo Becirevic at -- in September 1992
3 at the premises of the VIZ in Banja Luka. I understand by VIZ that's a
4 military prison.
5 Can you tell me, is that Mali Logor or is that some other
6 facility in Banja Luka?
7 A. Mr. Prosecutor, you are right. Is this abbreviation stands for
8 the military remand prison.
9 As far as I know, such prison existed within the compound of the
10 Mali Logor barracks in Banja Luka, but I really don't know whether the
11 military had such prisons elsewhere.
12 Q. And can you tell us how Mr. Becirevic was transferred from Serbia
13 back to Banja Luka; if you know?
14 A. I really don't know. I really cannot comment on this. Whether
15 he was transferred or not, and, if so, how, I don't know.
16 Q. Did you take part in this interview of him at the Mali Logor
17 prison? I take it by your answer you probably didn't because you're not
18 quite sure of the name.
19 A. On behalf of what? I'm not sure. But you are right. I didn't
20 take part in this interview. All I know is that this gentleman was
21 interviewed on several occasions, and I think that I did take part in one
22 or two, but not at this location that is mentioned here.
23 Q. At which location did you interview him at?
24 A. On the premises of the National Security Centre in Banja Luka.
25 Q. So at the CSB building.
1 A. Yes. The State Security Service was within the CSB building in
2 Banja Luka in 1992.
3 MR. OLMSTED: Your Honours, no further questions.
4 JUDGE HALL: Mr. Aleksic.
5 MR. ALEKSIC: [Interpretation] I have no questions.
6 JUDGE DELVOIE: Could we have P1384 on the screen, please.
7 [Trial Chamber and Legal Officer confer]
8 Questioned by the Court:
9 JUDGE DELVOIE: Mr. Witness, I have a problem with this document,
10 and perhaps -- perhaps it's only a translation issue.
11 It is Mr. Radulovic sending a message to Chief Zupljanin, who,
12 you told us, was in Belgrade. And it's about replenishment and
13 reinforcing the reserve force with "one company of 80 well-trained and
14 well-equipped soldiers whose status is unclear in the moment because they
15 do not belong either to the Serbian army or to the reserve police force.
16 Their engagement in the reserve police would also be good for
17 preventative reasons, since individuals from this company or the entire
18 company have got out of control and become a paramilitary formation."
19 Now, I don't know -- I'm not asking about what you know about
20 this. I'm asking you what it is in the B/C/S text. What company is the
21 B/C/S text talking about? A police company? A police unit that became a
22 paramilitary formation, or a military unit that became a military
24 What does the B/C/S text of this document tell us?
25 A. Your Honours, concerning the text of this document, you are
1 absolutely right.
2 If I hadn't been familiar with what was happening in that area, I
3 wouldn't have been able to understand what is written here and what
4 you're asking me about. The unit mentioned here was a military unit,
5 which was part of the Teslic Brigade --
6 JUDGE DELVOIE: That's your knowledge, right? That's not in the
7 text. That's your knowledge.
8 A. Yes, that's my knowledge. But, as you, yourself, said, if you
9 allow me, the text says that they should be attached or become members of
10 the reserve police. This excludes the possibility that this was a unit
11 that was already part of the police -- police force.
12 Next thing, it says that it is possible that they would get out
13 of control and become a paramilitary formation. As I read this text,
14 they haven't become a paramilitary formation yet. If you had a
15 commander, you had a company of men who were armed, I understand this
16 text to mean that this was a military unit. And the knowledge that I
17 have about this period was that Mr. Josic [phoen], the commander of this
18 company, was an active-duty serviceman in the army.
19 JUDGE DELVOIE: Thank you very much.
20 JUDGE HARHOFF: Mr. Sajinovic, could I just follow up on the
21 question put by Judge Delvoie.
22 And ask you: What was the result? Was that unit eventually
23 resubordinated or transferred to the police?
24 A. Your Honours, this unit remained as part of the Teslic Brigade.
25 In other words, it maintained the status of a military unit. The
1 commander of this unit, as far as I know, left the area of
2 Republika Srpska after a certain period of time and went to work in the
3 Army of Serbia, or Yugoslavia, or whatever it was called at the time.
4 JUDGE DELVOIE: One other question, as far as I'm concerned.
5 It's about the -- the topic of training people in police training
6 centres in Croatia, before the war. You remember we talked about that?
7 Men were sent by the SDA to police training centre in Croatia, while
8 there was a centre in the republic itself; right? That was the topic.
9 My question is: They were sent by the SDA. Who paid those men
10 while under training? Were they paid with public funds?
11 A. Your Honours, I don't know anything about that. Whatever I tell
12 you would be in the domain of speculation.
13 So at the time when we acquired this knowledge -- I'm sorry. For
14 us, this aspect of what were the sources of payment was not of interest
15 to us. We were just interested in the fact that those people were being
16 trained and prepared for war.
17 JUDGE DELVOIE: And your answer to a question in that -- in that
18 regard was that this fact would be a violation of the current legislation
19 of Bosnia and Herzegovina and of Yugoslavia. It would be an illegal
21 Why is that?
22 A. Your Honours, by the very fact that these men hadn't undergone
23 certain security vetting procedures as prescribed by the law when people
24 were recruited for police force and the fact that they were being sent to
25 another state and not to regular police centres, as far as we know, and
1 you, yourself, noticed this, there was regular police school in
2 Bosnia-Herzegovina who trained policemen, and this evidently constituted
3 the breach of the law and an illegal activity.
4 JUDGE DELVOIE: My question still remains: What -- what is there
5 that -- and I agree, it's a rather theoretical question. But what is
6 there that prevents a private organisation, like a political party or
7 whoever, to send people for -- for certain trainings; it be police
8 training, it be security training, it be whatever. Is there any law
9 against that?
10 A. Your Honour, as far as I know, a law like that existed and still
11 exists, because not a single political party or any other organisation
12 except organisations responsible for carrying out certain activities such
13 as security agencies and the police force were prohibited by law from
14 creating their own armies and sending people to that kind of training.
15 That's what I know.
16 JUDGE DELVOIE: Thank you.
17 JUDGE HARHOFF: Thank you, Mr. Sajinovic. I have one question to
18 you that partly falls in line with the question just put to you by
19 Judge Delvoie.
20 If I could ask the Registrar to pull up for us on the screen,
21 Exhibit P2503.
22 That will show to be the Milos report from September 1992. And
23 it raises an issue about members of the Serbian armed forces or units
24 that were acting without the consent of the Supreme Command of the
25 Serbian army. You will see that -- ah, there it is on the screen. And
1 if you'd just take time to run through it.
2 A. Certainly.
3 Yes, a moment ago I was answering the Prosecutor's questions on
4 this document.
5 JUDGE HARHOFF: Right. My question, Mr. Sajinovic, is about the
6 reference to the members of the Serbian armed units that were apparently
7 active in the area around Prijedor. And what Mr. Radulovic writes here
8 in his report is that there were allegations that the -- these members of
9 the Serbian armed units were acting and undertaking measures without the
10 consent of the Supreme Command of the Serbian army.
11 Now my question is, if you can explain to us what the relations
12 were between the Serbian army and the VRS? Because if my recollection
13 serves me correct, I think that the VRS was established sometime in
14 May 1992, and this dispatch is from September; That is to say, that long
15 after the VRS was established in May, you have Serbian forces that were
16 active in Bosnia.
17 Are you able to explain to us what the -- what the -- what the
18 relations were between these two armies, or were the Serbian armed forces
19 under the VRS control or were they under, still, the Supreme Command of
20 the Serbian army in Belgrade's authority; do you know?
21 A. Your Honours, I will very gladly answer your questions, or,
22 rather, I would, but I'm not very qualified to talk about the
23 relationship between one army and the other. I'm not very well informed
24 about that.
25 But concerning the document on the screen, it reads at one point
1 "without the consent of the Supreme Command of the Serbian army."
2 I think you misread this as implying that members of the
3 Army of Serbia were present in this area. I, however, read this
4 document, and I'm sure about this, as a reference by Mr. Radulovic to
5 members of the army of the Serbian army in Bosnia and Herzegovina, or the
6 Serbian units in the Serbian Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina, if I
7 understood your question.
8 JUDGE HARHOFF: You certainly did, because the way that I would
9 read the English translation of this document would suggest that the
10 soldiers of which this dispatch makes reference to were Serbian armed
11 units under the command of the Serbian army.
12 It doesn't say that it was under the Supreme Command of the
13 Bosnian Serbian army.
14 Maybe can you read out that sentence for us and we can check for
15 an immediate interpretation. Please? Read it out from the B/C/S
17 A. Of course, I'll read it aloud.
18 But as I've said, knowing the situation at the time in that area,
19 and working with Radulovic, and having seen this document, I understand
20 that it means members of the Serbian Army of Republika Srpska. And I'm
21 beginning to read now:
22 "In this area, buildings are still being unnecessarily destroyed
23 and citizens of Muslim and Croatian nationality are forcibly expelled,
24 even killed. All this has brought a lot of fear and anxiety even into
25 the Serbian homes in this area and the feeling is increasing that members
1 of the Serbian armed units are acting and undertaking measures without
2 the consent of the Supreme Command of the Serb army. The political
3 structures within the Serbian republic or the Serb republic and the
4 general interests of the Serbian people."
5 Should I read on
6 JUDGE HARHOFF: No, thank you very much for this. So it is only
7 when we apply your interpretation to this document that we can fully
8 understand that what Mr. Radulovic was making reference to was indeed the
10 A. Your Honour, if you allow me just one more thing, very briefly.
11 Speaking of the same document. When I read a moment ago, I didn't want
12 to interrupt, not to confuse the interpreters, but you see it says, "In
13 this area, all this has brought a lot of fear even into the Serbian
15 JUDGE HARHOFF: Thank you. There seems to be a technical problem
16 with the transcript so if you could just pause for a couple of minutes.
17 A. Certainly.
18 JUDGE HARHOFF: Thank you for your patience. I think we're back
19 with the system running.
20 Could you please repeat your answer.
21 A. Gladly.
22 Your Honour, I understood this passage you mentioned very well.
23 I understood this reference to the Serbian army, and I also understood
24 that you -- sorry, the document disappeared from the screen again.
25 I understood that you read it as members of the
1 Army of the Republic of Serbia. But I'm pointing out that the same
2 passage says at one point "all this has brought a lot of fear and anxiety
3 even into the Serbian homes."
4 And in that case, that -- in your understanding, that would mean
5 the homes of the nationals of Serbia in this area, which is definitely
6 not true. This means that Serbian homes in Republika Srpska and the
7 Serbian Army of Republika Srpska.
8 That's all. I hope I have made myself clear.
9 JUDGE HARHOFF: You have indeed. Thank you very much. I have no
10 further questions to you.
11 JUDGE HALL: Mr. Sajinovic, that brings your -- sorry. That
12 brings your testimony to an end. Thankfully a few days early than we
13 had anticipated when you started on Monday.
14 So you are now released. We thank you for your assistance and we
15 wish you a safe journey back to your home.
16 So the usher would escort you. Thank you, sir.
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. To
18 conclude, I would like to thank the Trial Chamber, the Office of the
19 Prosecutor, and the Defence teams. I want to say that I've done my best
20 to contribute to the proving of the truth, and I hope I succeeded. And
21 in the future, whenever you deem necessary, I am prepared to come again
22 and tell you whatever I can.
23 Thank you again. I wish you success in your work.
24 JUDGE HALL: Thank you, sir.
25 [The witness withdrew]
1 JUDGE HALL: Following on our indication yesterday about the
2 possibility of three days being available next week, we await reports on
3 the success of Mr. Krgovic's attempts to fill this gap. In the absence
4 of that, at the rising of the Court today, we will reconvene in this
5 courtroom on Tuesday, the 8th of November.
6 So parties should keep alert to watching the e-mail traffic to
7 see whether we will be coming in, in advance of that, to take advance of
8 the three days next week.
9 Yes, Mr. Olmsted.
10 MR. OLMSTED: Just an administrative matter.
11 On the first day of this witness's testimony, Monday, he was
12 shown a document, P1370.1 in private session, and at the end of that, the
13 Prosecution moved to have that portion of the transcript in open session,
14 but I did not provide the transcript references and that is needed by the
16 It is T.25156, line 19, to T.25160, line 22. If that could be
17 made in open session because the document -- the portions of the document
18 that were redacted were not raised during the witness's testimony and
19 therefore there's no reason for that to be in closed -- private session.
20 JUDGE HALL: Thank you.
21 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
22 JUDGE HALL: So ordered.
23 [Trial Chamber confers]
24 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 5.46 p.m.