1 Monday, 2 March 2009
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 2.23 p.m.
5 JUDGE PARKER: Good afternoon. The witness could be brought in.
6 [The witness entered court]
7 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Djurdjic.
8 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] It doesn't seem to be working.
9 JUDGE PARKER: Good afternoon, sir. Would you please read aloud
10 the affirmation on the card that is now given to you.
11 I'm sorry, Mr. Djurdjic, you have a -- if you could just hold
12 that a moment. Just hold.
13 Yes, Mr. Djurdjic.
14 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] I apologise, Your Honour. I
15 didn't have the interpretation in the headphones. I didn't hear that you
16 had called the witness to come in. I just wanted to raise an issue left
17 over from last Wednesday in connection with the witnesses coming to
18 testify under subpoena; namely, the decision of the Chamber regarding
19 such -- the issuance of a subpoena has not reached us. Out of the nine
20 witnesses, for five a subpoena was suggested, and today we have a
21 proposal for another witness, an additional witness.
22 JUDGE PARKER: I ask you, Mr. Djurdjic, that we hold this and
23 finish the swearing-in of the present witness and allow him to sit down.
24 Thank you.
25 Sir, would you please read aloud the affirmation.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will
2 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
3 WITNESS: CASLAV GOLUBOVIC.
4 [Witness answered through interpreter]
5 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you. Would you please sit.
6 Now, Mr. Djurdjic.
7 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
8 As we are talking about confidential material, I would propose a
9 closed session, even though -- I'm in your hands, Your Honour, to decide
10 about this.
11 JUDGE PARKER: Closed.
12 [Private session]
11 Page 1654 redacted. Private session.
22 [Open session]
23 THE REGISTRAR: We are in open session, Your Honours.
24 JUDGE PARKER: I believe we're now in open session.
25 I believe Mr. Stamp has some questions for you.
1 Yes, Mr. Stamp.
2 MR. STAMP: Thank you very much, Your Honours. With your leave.
3 Examination by Mr. Stamp:
4 Q. Good afternoon, Mr. Golubovic.
5 A. Good afternoon.
6 Q. I would like you to state your name and your date of birth for
7 the record, if you will, please.
8 A. My name is Caslav Golubovic. I was born on the 15th of May,
10 Q. And in 1998 and 1999 you were the chief of the secretariat of the
11 interior for the area of Bor, the municipality of Bor, in Serbia
13 A. I was chief of the SUP
14 the whole district, not just the municipality of Bor.
15 Q. I see. And presently you are retired, I take it?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Now, do you recall giving a statement to investigators of the
18 Office of the Prosecution of this Tribunal on the 7th and 14th of August,
20 A. I do recall that. I was in the Tribunal offices.
21 Q. And that statement was read over to you in the Serbian language,
22 and you accepted it as your statement by signing it; is that correct?
23 A. Yes, correct.
24 Q. And since you have returned here, you have been here in The Hague
25 over the last few days, have you had an opportunity to review this
2 A. Yes, I did.
3 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Djurdjic.
4 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] I apologise, Your Honour. Maybe
5 I'm mistaken, but I believe that seven or eight, maybe ten days ago, we
6 received a Chamber ruling regarding a motion for a certain number of
7 witnesses to testify viva voce; and on that list we had the witness who
8 is present here today. And the Court allowed us -- allowed our motion
9 for him to testify viva voce. However, in the way Mr. Stamp has started
10 it appears as if he's going to introduce the statement under 92 ter. I
11 just wanted to intervene in time for you to correct me if I'm mistaken,
12 or are we talking about a 92 ter witness?
13 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Stamp.
14 MR. STAMP: I believe that the decision was that this witness's
15 evidence could be taken pursuant to 92 ter. I wish to just confirm that
16 by getting the decision right now.
17 [Trial Chamber confers]
18 MR. STAMP: I think the determination of this is in the
19 disposition of the judgement, that is, paragraph 19 -- sorry, of the
20 decision; and this decision is a decision of the 10th of February, 2009
21 And earlier in the decision reference is made to the -- all witnesses for
22 whom we made the application and I think the decision was that the --
23 the -- only the witnesses Cvetic, Vasiljevic, K84, and K86 shall be heard
24 in the ordinary way, by examination-in-chief.
25 JUDGE PARKER: Does that now accord with your recollection,
1 Mr. Djurdjic, now you've had a chance to check?
2 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] My assistant has just found the
3 decision, and I apologise.
4 JUDGE PARKER: I think that means yes.
5 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Yes, yes, it is my mistake, but
6 the reason is that we received the statements only yesterday, that is,
7 notification of those statements. So I thought that they would only be
8 used as evidence.
9 JUDGE PARKER: Carry on, please, Mr. Stamp.
10 MR. STAMP: Thank you, Your Honours.
11 Q. Yes, I think the last thing you were telling us, Mr. Golubovic,
12 was that you signed your statement of 2002 and that you reviewed it while
13 you were here.
14 In -- at page 3 of the English version of your statement you have
15 said -- maybe this is -- could we perhaps bring it up, this is the
16 document 65 ter number 05133. If we could turn to page 3 of the English,
17 and I think it's the corresponding -- the same page in the B/C/S copy.
18 You will see the first sentence of that page in Serbian refers to
19 ethnic Albanians. Is that expression correct, or is there a change you
20 want to make to that expression?
21 A. I think that we shouldn't have put ethnic Albanians but simply
22 Albanians. So I think what should be stated is that at issue we're
23 Albanians, because I never used the term "ethnic Albanians" but only
25 Q. Thank you very much.
1 Now, apart from that change is the contents of this statement
2 true to the best of your knowledge and belief; that is, would you make
3 the same answers if you were asked again about the contents?
4 A. I assume that the contents are correct and I would probably
5 provide the same answers, maybe using different words; but in substance,
6 the answers would be the same.
7 JUDGE PARKER: You tender the statement, do you, Mr. Stamp?
8 MR. STAMP: Yes, Your Honour. Thank you very much.
9 JUDGE PARKER: It will be received.
10 THE REGISTRAR: That will be P00352, Your Honours.
11 MR. STAMP:
12 Q. Did you, Mr. Golubovic, attend here in The Hague in -- on the
13 27th of November, 2006, and testified in the trial of Milutinovic and
15 A. Yes, I did.
16 Q. And have you had an opportunity, since you have returned here
17 over the last few days, to review the tape-recording -- audio-recording
18 of the evidence you gave, the questions you were asked and your answers?
19 A. Yes, I did have that opportunity in the course of last week, I
20 heard the tapes.
21 Q. And the answers you gave, are they true to the best of your
22 knowledge and belief, in the sense that they would remain the same if you
23 were asked those questions again?
24 A. I think they would be the same. I just said that I may have used
25 a couple of other words or expressed myself differently because I don't
1 know the exact wording I used, so maybe there would be some changes in
2 the order of the words or things like that. But regarding the facts, the
3 facts would remain the same.
4 Q. Thank you.
5 MR. STAMP: I tender that evidence, Your Honours, that it also be
6 received in evidence.
7 JUDGE PARKER: It will be received.
8 MR. STAMP: The 65 ter number is 05132.
9 THE REGISTRAR: That will be P00353, Your Honours.
10 JUDGE PARKER: Two did you say or 3?
11 THE REGISTRAR: P00353, Your Honours.
12 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.
13 MR. STAMP: Your Honours, I would like to bring up on the screen
14 a map of Serbia
15 the witness is speaking about. 0001, that's a 65 ter number and I think
16 I'm making an indication that it is now P2.
17 And I'd like to zoom to the right of the map just to cover -- if
18 you could zoom out a little bit more.
19 Q. Okay. This is -- let us just have a look at this first, Witness.
20 This is a part of eastern Serbia
21 is, where your SUP
22 please. Thank you very much. If ...
23 A. [Marks]
24 Q. And can you circle the area of Kladovo, which is the police
25 station that you speak of in your statement?
1 A. Only the municipality of Kladovo
2 entire municipality?
3 Q. The town.
4 A. [Marks]
5 Q. And can you make out the area of Tekija where the truck was found
6 in the Danube
7 A. [Marks]
8 Q. And the -- thank you very much.
9 MR. STAMP: So I think it's self-evident, Your Honours, because
10 the names of the places are there where he circled. I think the circling
11 is adequate identification of the places.
12 Q. Could you -- could you tell me, the blue line you see there is
13 the river Danube
14 A. Yes, it is. The Danube
15 additionally marked in red.
16 Q. Thank you.
17 MR. STAMP: Your Honours, could this be given an exhibit number
18 as well?
19 JUDGE PARKER: It will be received.
20 THE REGISTRAR: That will be P00354, Your Honours.
21 MR. STAMP:
22 Q. In your evidence in the Milutinovic trial, you told us that you
23 received information that there was a refrigerator truck in the Danube
24 and it contained some 20 to 30 bodies; that you went to the Kladovo
25 police station, where you were briefed by the police, and they told you
1 that the inscription on the truck indicated that the truck was from
2 Prizren, in Kosovo.
3 MR. STAMP: Just for the record, Your Honour, that is at
4 page 7411 of the transcript.
5 Q. You also said that you were told by the police who briefed you
6 that they were dressed in civilian clothing, also at page 7411 of the
7 transcript; and you were also told by the person who briefed you that
8 there were men and women, again 7411 of the transcript. And in your
9 statement and also in the transcript, in your statement particularly at
10 page 3, you said when you phoned your superior officer,
11 General Djordjevic, to report to him, you briefed him and told him
12 everything that you had been told by those persons who had briefed you at
13 the Kladovo police station; is that correct? Do you recall that?
14 A. I do, I recall.
15 Q. And you briefed him on all those things that I just mentioned
16 that you said you were told?
17 A. I stated as much at the trial, giving evidence, that the
18 information I received from the chief of the department at Kladovo and
19 others who were present at the meeting, that I passed on that information
20 to General Djordjevic; that is, the information that I had received I
21 passed on to the general over the phone.
22 Q. Thank you. And you said, later on in the night it was discovered
23 that there were more than 20 to 30 bodies in the truck, actually there
24 were approximately 50 more corpses in the truck.
25 When you spoke to General Djordjevic later on, did you brief him
1 as well on that?
2 A. Yes, most probably during the third or fourth conversation that
3 night I passed that on to him, but then I didn't call him from Kladovo
4 but from Tekija.
5 Q. I see. You said at page 4 of your statement and also in your
6 evidence, and that's transcript page 7417, that General Djordjevic
7 instructed you to have the lorry destroyed.
8 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Djurdjic.
9 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] I apologise, Your Honours, but I
10 don't know whether this is the correct technique that is used by my
11 learned friend, Mr. Stamp. If he wants to give a summary of the
12 statement, that's fine, but let him introduce it as such. But this way,
13 interpreting it and drawing very important conclusions in a general
14 manner and asking the witness whether that is the case without the
15 witness being able to give -- to say his -- to speak his mind about these
16 things, I think this isn't right.
17 JUDGE PARKER: The concern of the Chamber is a slightly different
18 one, Mr. Stamp, but perhaps to similar effect. We have both the
19 statement and we have the transcript, and you're now effectively going
20 over parts of it and not eliciting anything new or additional. You're
21 simply getting parts of it you want --
22 MR. STAMP: Yes, Your Honour.
23 JUDGE PARKER: -- being mentioned again.
24 MR. STAMP: Yes, Your Honour, I don't think that is entirely
25 necessary. I was leading up to a question I wanted to ask him.
1 JUDGE PARKER: Well perhaps if you could move to the question
2 fairly quickly with as brief an introduction as possible.
3 MR. STAMP: Yes, Your Honour. I just realised through my friends
4 that I had forgotten to read the summary.
5 JUDGE PARKER: I'd been waiting for the moment.
6 MR. STAMP: I wonder if now is an appropriate time.
7 JUDGE PARKER: Very well.
8 MR. STAMP: Thank you very much, Your Honour.
9 For the record, I just now read a summary of the evidence
10 contained in this statement and the transcript of the witness's evidence.
11 In 1999 Mr. Golubovic was a chief of the secretariat for internal
12 affairs in Bor, Serbia
13 retirement in 2001. Mr. Golubovic will testify with respect to the
14 nature of the organisation -- sorry, to the nature and meaning of a
15 number of Ministry of Internal Affairs documents. Mr. Golubovic
16 testifies that on the evening of the 6th of April, 1999, he received a
17 telephone call from Mr. Tomo Miladinovic, the chief of the criminal
18 investigation section in the SUP
19 refrigerator truck containing corpses had been removed from the
20 Danube River
21 Tekija. He went to the police station in Kladovo and contacted the
22 Ministry of Interior -- or internal affairs in Belgrade where he spoke
23 with the accused Djordjevic, the head of the public security service.
24 General Djordjevic telephoned him back shortly thereafter and instructed
25 him that the bodies were to be removed from the refrigerator truck and
1 buried in Kladovo that night.
2 The head of internal affairs department for Kladovo, that is, the
3 department of internal affairs for Kladovo, Vukasin Sperlic and other
4 Kladovo police personnel were to organise the removal and burial of the
5 bodies by acquiring a truck, workers, and the necessary tools that were
6 needed. Mr. Golubovic conveyed these instructions and action was taken
7 that night to bring the refrigerator truck up from the edge of the river
8 and to remove the bodies. Mr. Golubovic phoned General Djordjevic later
9 that night and on at least two occasions and informed him that the job
10 couldn't be completed by morning. It was agreed that the bodies were to
11 be transported to Belgrade
12 witness. The driver of the witness Ljubinko Ursuljanovic drove the lorry
13 with the bodies to Belgrade
14 then took the lorry from him.
15 Mr. Golubovic testifies that during one of his telephone
16 conversations with General Djordjevic, the accused told him to have the
17 refrigerator lorry destroyed. The accused also told the witness that the
18 case was not to be made public or reported by the media. Mr. Golubovic
19 testifies also that he subsequently asked General Djordjevic to provide
20 him with money so that he could pay the workers for the work they had
21 done, he received that money, 10.000 dinars, and arranged for it to be
22 distributed to the workers.
23 That, Your Honours, is a brief summary of the evidence contained
24 in the statement. Thank you very much.
25 JUDGE PARKER: You mentioned you were heading toward a question.
1 MR. STAMP: Yes, Your Honour.
2 JUDGE PARKER: Are you wanting to pursue that?
3 MR. STAMP: Yes, Your Honour.
4 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.
5 MR. STAMP:
6 Q. You said that the chief of the -- the chief of the criminal
7 police department for the SUP
8 the truck in the Danube
9 what happened to that dispatch?
10 A. The dispatch was read out to me, I saw it later on, but I don't
11 know what happened to it later. And I acted in accordance with that
12 dispatch, and I called a briefing meeting at Kladovo. The dispatch had
13 arrived earlier, but this isn't part of my work, and I did not focus on
14 that. There was a defined policy who does what and communications lines
15 were sometimes down because there was bombing, et cetera, so it was only
16 then that that dispatch arrived.
17 Q. Do you know if the dispatch remained within the records or the
18 filing system of the Bor SUP
19 A. I do not remember -- I don't know, it may have, but it may not
20 have. It's been almost ten years since, and to me it didn't matter much.
21 And I haven't been in contact with these things for ten years. I don't
22 work there anymore. I don't know.
23 Q. Very well. You also indicated in your statement and evidence
24 that you contacted General Djordjevic and asked him for money to pay the
25 workers. Can you remember how long after the bodies had been sent off to
2 A. I didn't keep records on when I spoke to who at the time, but it
3 must have been during that night, or rather, in the early morning hours
4 of the 7th of April.
5 Q. And do you recall approximately how long after that, just
6 approximately if you don't remember precisely, you received the money?
7 A. I was at Bor when -- again, I assume, because I didn't know that
8 this would be happening so I didn't keep records, but four or five days
9 later or maybe a week later.
10 Q. Do you remember who brought the money?
11 A. Aleksic brought the money, I believe. He was called Cane, who --
12 he brought it from the ministry in Belgrade.
13 Q. Do you know which section of the ministry Aleksic worked at or
14 was attached to?
15 A. I believe that at the time Aleksic worked at the criminal police
16 administration. I'm not -- I can't give you more precise information,
17 but he was part of that administration.
18 Q. And who at that time was in charge of the criminal police
20 A. I think the head of the administration at the time was
21 General Ilic.
22 MR. STAMP: I'd like, with your leave, Your Honours, to move on
23 and to show the witness a document, 04129, and that is a 65 ter number.
24 And perhaps it would be easier for the witness if I handed him or
25 give him a copy in his language if I can find one.
1 Here you go. Thank you very much.
2 Q. If you look at the front of the document you see that it is
3 directed to all chiefs of the secretariat of interior, that is -- you are
4 one of the addressees. You see that?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. And if you turn and look at the end of the document, that's on
7 the second page, you will see that it is signed on behalf of
8 General Djordjevic; correct?
9 A. Yes. It says PO
10 assistant minister or for the assistant minister.
11 MR. STAMP: And if we could go back to the front of the document,
12 the first page.
13 Q. We see at the top the dispatch number 1268 and the date,
14 the 28th of June, 1998.
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Now, having looked at this document, can you just tell us briefly
17 what was the purpose of this order?
18 A. Well, I don't know if I can explain it well, but the purpose was
19 for all secretariats as well as the military itself had their own defence
20 plans in -- in peacetime too. But as in Kosovo at the time, there were
21 some security problems already. The ministry had to send a certain
22 number of personnel down to Kosovo and so did we. We can see here in
23 this dispatch that the ministry demands from all secretariats to deploy a
24 number of their personnel from special police units to go to Kosovo as a
25 part of detachments that were sent there. That is roughly the content of
1 this dispatch, and there are instructions on how it should be done and at
2 what time.
3 Q. And the second-to-last addressee on the front page you see there
4 is the MUP or the chief of the MUP headquarters in Pristina; do you see
6 A. Yes. It says: "The MUP headquarters in Pristina,
7 Chief of Staff. "
8 Q. Thank you.
9 MR. STAMP: Your Honours, could this document be received?
10 JUDGE PARKER: I believe it's already Exhibit P133.
11 MR. STAMP: Thank you very much, Your Honour.
12 JUDGE PARKER: And the transcript records line 11, page 17, that
13 it's dated the 28th of June; I think it's the 28th of July, 1998.
14 MR. STAMP: Indeed, Your Honour.
15 I'd now like to show the witness another document, this is 04094,
16 65 ter number 04094.
17 Q. Can you see that or would you like a hard copy?
18 MR. STAMP: Can I, with the assistance of the usher --
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, it may be better if I could
20 look at it on paper so you don't have to zoom-in on this.
21 MR. STAMP:
22 Q. On the face of it this is a dispatch of the 30th of July, 1999
23 sorry, the 30th of July, 1998, and it is stated that it is Re: The RJB's
24 dispatch number 1268 of the 28th of July, 1999 [sic], and at the bottom
25 it indicates that it is from the chief of the secretariat, Colonel Caslav
1 Golubovic. Can you briefly tell the Court what this document is about
2 and how it relates to the previous document I showed to you?
3 A. This is a document which two days after the reception of the
4 other document from the ministry was sent to the ministry. It says that
5 the Bor secretariat's obligation to send a certain number of police
6 officers has been executed and it says how many were summoned, how many
7 were -- were present, how many did not come, et cetera. So it's
8 basically a report about what has been done in accordance with the
9 dispatch that had come in earlier. And it says down there in the
10 signature line that the secretariat is represented by the head, that
11 being me, but there's no signature. So somebody most probably sent it
12 from the police department at Bor to the police department in Belgrade
13 and that was the current practice at the time and it must -- the original
14 must bear the signature of the one who actually sent it because the
15 previous dispatch had been received from the police administration in
17 administration. That is the brief content of this dispatch.
18 Q. Thank you. Can you just tell us approximately how often your SUP
19 was required to supply personnel to augment the PJP detachments in Kosovo
20 and Metohija in 1998 and how often in 1999?
21 JUDGE PARKER: Yes, Mr. Djurdjic, no previous mention of PJP
23 MR. STAMP: It's in the document, Your Honour, that the witness
24 says --
25 JUDGE PARKER: Not that.
1 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] No. I wanted to point out
2 something else. This question is not permissible because my learned
3 friend is saying that the number of members is increasing and this cannot
4 be seen from this dispatch nor can it be found in any statements given by
5 this witness at trial or in his written statements. So he -- the
6 question is: How many times did the number of personnel increase down
7 there. I heard this -- that is the interpretation I received. I'm not
8 looking at the document. The witness can explain what these dispatches
9 mean, but that has not been stated.
10 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Djurdjic is correct, Mr. Stamp. You've moved
11 from one event to asking a question about a number of events without the
12 witness making that connection first.
13 MR. STAMP: Very well, Your Honours.
14 Q. Was this the only time you were required to dispatch personnel to
15 Kosovo, and that is in 1998 and 1999 we are speaking about?
16 A. I have to say that we didn't send personnel. Only in 1998 and in
17 1999 the secretariat had -- each secretariat had its own unit, and then
18 every 15 days there was shifts and they went for the needs in Kosovo.
19 Now, whether the numbers were 30, 40, or 80, it depended on the
20 requirements. After 15 or 20 days, the personnel would return to the
21 secretariat, I'm talking about Bor, and then probably they would be
22 replaced by another unit and another number of people from a different
23 secretariat. This was all part of the plan of national defence and the
24 duties of the secretariat, with a view to ensuring a positive security
25 situation in Kosovo. So this was done even before 1998 and after it.
1 Now, how many people went there, this depended on the possibilities. The
2 smaller secretariats with smaller staff sent smaller numbers; and those
3 who were larger and had more personnel would send more. The secretariat
4 in Bor had this special unit which, even in peacetime, was designed for
5 the purpose of security assignments. So we see from this dispatch that
6 69 members from the reserve force, together with active officers were
7 sent there. As far as I remember, I think that our unit numbered about
8 90 -- close to that number. I can't remember exactly because this was a
9 long time ago. So a smaller number were went there in relation to the
10 strength of the unit.
11 Q. At the beginning of your answer you said this was in 1998 and
12 1999. Can you remember having regard to your answer about how many times
13 you were required to send personnel to Kosovo in 1999?
14 A. I'm unable to answer that question. I don't know how many times
15 in 1998 and before. As I said before, it wasn't only in 1998 and 1999
16 but earlier on as well. Now, how many times, I don't know. I just know
17 that the people who were sent there had shifts of 15 days. Now, they may
18 be coming from the secretariat in Bor or the secretariat in Zajecar.
19 They would spend 15 or 20 days there. Then they would come back, and
20 their place would be taken by others. So I don't know how many times
21 this took place.
22 Q. Very well. Thank you.
23 MR. STAMP: Could that one be received, Your Honours.
24 JUDGE PARKER: It will be received.
25 THE REGISTRAR: That will be P00355, Your Honours.
1 MR. STAMP: And with your leave and with the assistance of the
2 usher, could I show to the witness and could I ask that we bring up on
3 the screen document with the 65 ter number 4086, 04086.
4 JUDGE PARKER: Yes, Mr. Djurdjic.
5 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, if I read the summary
6 carefully regarding the points that this witness would be testifying
7 about, I do not see the connection with the document, or rather, what
8 circumstances he has testified about which would prompt this document
9 being shown to him. My understanding was that he was to testify about
10 the discovery of the refrigerator truck, the procedure that followed, and
11 the conversations he had with the general. Now we have here some
12 exhibits that are not linked to that statement, and this is a 92 ter
13 witness. If he was a live witness, then it would be normal for him to
14 testify about other issues as well.
15 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Stamp.
16 MR. STAMP: Your Honour, I think the notification indicated that
17 the witness was live/92 ter. And I do believe in the summary I read, I
18 indicated that he would testify in respect to the nature and meaning of a
19 number of documents emanating from the Ministry of the Interior. And I
20 can say that having regard to the time this is the last document that I
21 would show to him.
22 JUDGE PARKER: [Microphone not activated]
23 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please, Your Honour.
24 JUDGE PARKER: I'm sure both counsel are aware that notice is
25 required to be given of material evidence to be given; that doesn't mean
1 that notice is to be given of every single item, if some matter is minor
2 or incidental. I just make that observation to lessen the number of
3 times when it may be of concern to one counsel or another that specific
4 notice of a document has not been given. But in this case, I think what
5 is being done here, Mr. Djurdjic, is in accordance with the general
6 indication given in the notice you had.
7 So carry on, please, Mr. Stamp.
8 MR. STAMP: Thank you, Your Honour.
9 Q. Mr. Golubovic, you have had an opportunity to look at that
10 document briefly. On the face of it, it is dispatch number 312, dated
11 the 18th of February, 1999; and you see there that you are one of the
12 addressees. The second addressee is to all the chiefs of the SUPs. You
13 see that?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. And if you look at the last page of this document --
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. -- you can see who sent it, who issued it. Can you tell us who
18 issued it?
19 A. It says here assistant minister or chief of public security
20 department, Lieutenant-General Vlastimir Djordjevic. Most probably he is
21 the signatory because we don't see the letters PO. I don't know his
22 handwriting, but his signature should be there.
23 Q. Well, can you read the signature? Is that ...
24 A. I read what it says assistant minister, chief of public security
25 department, Lieutenant-General Vlastimir Djordjevic; and below that we
1 see handwriting, the first letter Dj, so most probably it is. I assume
2 that it was signed by General Djordjevic.
3 Q. Do you recall receiving and seeing this document while you were
4 still employed to the SUP
6 A. Ten years later for me to say that I remember exactly when I
7 received it and saw it, but I'm quite sure that it couldn't have bypassed
8 me because it was addressed to me as one of the 33 chiefs of the
9 secretariats in Serbia
10 certainly did take steps relating to what is stated in this document
11 because that was my duty and obligation.
12 Q. Was it mandatory that the addressees abide -- or obeyed the
13 instructions given in this document?
14 A. Certainly it was mandatory for all of us as part of the
15 organisation and the plans for All People's Defence, and as this was the
16 period prior to the bombing campaign and the aggression that was just a
17 month prior to that event, so we had to obey and we certainly did.
18 Q. I see. But if you look at the addressees you will see the last
19 addressee is the RDB, the state security department, and you will see it
20 says: "To the chief for information ..."
21 Would the -- would the chief of the RDB subordinated to
22 General Djordjevic or can you elaborate on that for us?
23 A. You're asking me --
24 Q. You said -- yes, please. Just to clarify something. You said
25 that all of the addressees were obliged to obey the instructions
1 contained in this document, but I see here that the last addressee, it is
2 sent to him for information and I note also that he was the chief of the
3 RDB. Can you explain that -- just clarify that for us?
4 A. I can explain. I realise now what you are asking me.
5 Mr. Prosecutor. It says here that a copy of this document was sent to
6 the head of the State Security Service for his information but not to
7 take the measures envisioned by this dispatch, for him to be informed,
8 and for him to know what is being done. So this is a normal relationship
9 between services to -- for them to coordinate. So I think the head of
10 the state security department was not subordinate to the head of the
11 public security department.
12 Q. Thank you. So, therefore, I take it that your evidence is, apart
13 from him the others were obliged to obey the instructions contained
15 A. Yes, each one within his own competencies, because here we also
16 have the staff of the ministry in Pristina, the commanders of these
17 detachments, each one of them had the obligation, not only pursuant to
18 this -- these instructions, but pursuant to the plans that were adopted
19 earlier on, they had to act in accordance with those plans and to take
20 security measures when the need arises.
21 Q. Thank you. I don't intend to take you through all of it, but if
22 we could look at page 3 in the English version, and I think it is page 3
23 on your document as well in Serbian; but it is item numbered 7 in the
24 document, paragraph numbered 7 in the document. It says:
25 "Through intensified intelligence and other measures at actions,
1 carry out the necessary checks, compile lists, and establish complete
2 control over voluntary" -- sorry, "over volunteer and paramilitary units
3 and their members."
4 In your SUP
5 A. I think there were no voluntary or paramilitary units within the.
6 territory of the secretariat. There may have been individual volunteers
7 who reported to someone else somewhere else to those units if any such
8 existed at all.
9 Q. Do you know where the volunteer and paramilitary units were?
10 A. No, I don't know, except what appeared later on in the media, but
11 I don't know.
12 Q. Very well. If we could move on to the last page of this
13 document, both int the English and the B/C/S version, it's a paragraph
14 numbered 7 -- sorry, numbered 17. It goes on 17:
15 "If members of the PJP are engaged outside the Secretariat's
16 territory, other Ministry employees and members of the police reserve
17 force who have not been employed in a PJP shall engaged in the
18 Secretariat's area to carry out tasks and assignments that come within
19 the Ministry's competence."
20 At that time leading up to and during the NATO intervention, did
21 you have or were there any members of the PJP in your SUP assigned to
22 Kosovo? And I'm just speaking of that period from the 18th of May to the
23 end of the NATO intervention -- I'm sorry, from the 18th of February,
24 1999, the date of this document, to the end of the NATO intervention?
25 A. I apologise, Mr. Prosecutor, could you repeat the question once
2 Q. I apologise. Were members of your SUP assigned to Kosovo in that
3 period, that is, policemen from your SUP?
4 A. You mean in the period just before the beginning of the
6 Q. And during the aggression.
7 A. Yes, they were. I told you a moment ago that every 15 days when
8 our turn came a part of the members of the special police units would go
9 there for these security assignments in Kosovo in the period prior to the
10 aggression and in the period during the aggression; but they were not
11 stationed there permanently but only for a certain period of time.
12 Q. Thank you very much, Mr. Golubovic.
13 MR. STAMP: Could that document be received in evidence,
14 Your Honours?
15 JUDGE PARKER: It will be received.
16 THE REGISTRAR: That will be P00356, Your Honours.
17 MR. STAMP: And that, may it please you, is the additional
18 questions I wanted to ask in addition the statement and the transcript.
19 May it please Your Honours.
20 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you very much, Mr. Stamp, and it's
21 encouraging to see that you finished within time.
22 MR. STAMP: I was trying very hard to ensure that we don't go
23 over the time --
24 JUDGE PARKER: We commend your efforts and are sure that you will
25 continue to show that spirit.
1 Looking at the time, it might be better for Mr. Djurdjic if we
2 had the adjournment now and you could then commence after the break.
3 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour, that would
4 suit the Defence very well. Thank you.
5 JUDGE PARKER: We'll have the first break now and resume at ten
6 minutes past 4.00.
7 --- Recess taken at 3.38 p.m.
8 --- On resuming at 4.10 p.m.
9 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Djurdjic.
10 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
11 Cross-examination by Mr. Djurdjic:
12 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Golubovic, my name is Veljko Djurdjic. I'm
13 a member of the Defence team for the accused, Vlastimir Djordjevic. My
14 assistants are here, Ms. Marie and Ms. Jelena Dzambazovic as members of
15 the team, and the lead counsel is working on the preparations for the
16 Defence case.
17 Mr. Golubovic, I would like to start from your statements at
18 today's proceedings and then we will look at the other evidence.
19 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] I'd like Exhibit 133 to be called
20 up on the e-court.
21 Q. Mr. Golubovic, would you agree with me if I say that this is a
22 typical logistic behaviour of the police administration regarding the
23 engagement and sending of units of the police by decision of the
25 A. I said a moment ago that this was a customary and regular
1 practice. We would receive instructions, and we would act in accordance
2 with those instructions.
3 Q. Thank you. Am I right in saying that we are talking about
4 sending units to an assignment outside the territory of their home
5 territory, of their home SUP
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Thank you. Am I right in saying that in this kind of dispatch
8 there is no indication about the activities of the unit that is being
9 sent into the field?
10 A. We never knew exactly where the unit would be except what it says
11 in the dispatch, that we ensure a certain number of personnel, the
12 logistics, the transportation, and so on.
13 Q. Thank you. Talking about logistics, let us try and explain to
14 the Chamber the police administration, or rather, the police department
15 in the SUP
16 from within the SUP
17 to be ready once the minister takes a decision to activate them; am I
19 A. Yes, you are.
20 Q. Thank you. Am I right when I say that upon sending a PJP unit
21 outside your own territory have no further information regarding the
22 activities of the unit and their assignments?
23 A. You are quite right. That is how it was. I rarely knew where
24 the unit was, except if certain individuals from the unit would call up
25 and contact their homes. As for their deployment in Kosovo, we were not
1 familiar with that.
2 Q. Am I right in saying that you received information only in the
3 event of disease, injury, or death of a member of the PJP sent from your
5 A. Yes, that is how it was.
6 Q. Thank you. Am I also right if I say that the material and
7 financial aspects of the engagement of that unit outside the secretariat
8 were realised within the secretariat from which they were sent?
9 A. Yes, their per diems were paid out there, everything else that
10 they needed.
11 Q. Would you agree then that all the activities that we have listed
12 and that were carried out within the framework of the SUP and the police
13 department, all this was logistic support for the units who performed
14 assignments determined by the minister and upon instructions from the
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Thank you. Evidence of this is also the fact that you referred
18 to, on the second page of this telegram, that somebody else signed this
19 telegram by authority of the name indicated?
20 A. That was the case with most of these dispatches and telegrams
21 that we received and those that we sent from the secretariat. I hardly
22 remember actually signing any telegram, though my title and my name was
23 printed on all of those dispatches. This was signed by someone working
24 in the police department and especially within the framework of defensive
25 preparations, that was the organisation and the procedure applied.
1 Q. Thank you.
2 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could I now have Exhibit PBR --
3 under 65 ter Prosecution P4086, though it was given an exhibit number
4 today, 350 I think. The decision dated the 18th of February, 1999
5 sorry, 356 in the e-court, please. Thank you.
6 Q. Mr. Golubovic, could we slowly look through this decision to see
7 what its purpose was, bearing in mind to whom it was addressed and the
8 time -- the timing of it. Mr. Golubovic, am I right in saying that this
9 dispatch was addressed to all SUPs in the territory of Serbia
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Thank you. Was the addressee also the staff of the ministry in
13 Pristina, the head of that staff?
14 A. Yes, that is what it says.
15 Q. Will you please confirm whether your head is indicated as a
17 A. Yes, that is what it says.
18 Q. As it says the chief of the SUP
19 the addressee is.
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Now, you read out under paragraph 3, maybe I'm wrong -- would you
22 read it now. The letters are very small for me where it says: To the
23 commander 1 to 35. On page 1 at the top, the heading, the addressee,
24 above RDB.
25 A. Yes, it says to SPP
1 Q. Could you translate that, what SPP stands for.
2 A. Station of border police. Border police stations, because they
3 also were attached to the secretariat. So a secretariat always had a
4 border station attached to it.
5 Q. Thank you, Mr. Golubovic. Am I right in saying that the
6 recipient is not a single unit of the PJP?
7 A. No, the police stations were not indicated.
8 Q. What I'm saying is that among the addressees there's not a single
9 PJP unit?
10 A. Yes, that's right.
11 Q. You explained, but this dispatch was sent to the head of a
12 different department of the ministry for his information so that he
13 should be familiarised with the measures being taken within the framework
14 of public security and in connection with the situation.
15 A. Yes, that is what I told the Prosecutor a moment ago, that this
16 was simply for his information so that he should know what was being done
17 in the public security secretariat.
18 Q. Thank you. Would you agree with me that members of the public
19 security could not issue orders to members of the state security and
20 vice versa, members of the state security could not issue instructions to
22 A. I agree.
23 Q. And would you agree with me that it was only the minister who
24 could combine the activities of the two departments and form special
25 bodies, including members of both departments, and that only he could
1 issue instructions to such bodies that he had formed?
2 A. I think only the minister because both the state security
3 department and the public security departments were, in terms of their
4 functions and organisations, quite separate. They were not one
5 institution, but they were within the framework of the ministry and under
6 the authority of the minister, of course, who combined the activities of
7 both those organisational units.
8 Q. Thank you. And this rule could only be changed by the minister
9 by his decision, who would also stipulate how this would function in
11 A. I think so, yes.
12 Q. Thank you. Mr. Golubovic, I'm not sure whether you can see this
13 properly or shall I give you a hard copy? Am I right - I'm putting it in
14 this way to speed things up - that this dispatch was addressed to the
15 addressees in view of the preparations for the -- for a possible
16 aggression, firstly; and secondly, to prevent the spreading of terrorist
17 activities to other parts of the republic; and also to mitigate the
18 possible consequences of the aggression; and to normalise living
19 conditions. So in addition to regular activities certain measures needed
20 to be taken, which were listed here; am I right?
21 A. Yes, you are, because that is what is stated in this dispatch.
22 Q. Thank you. Is there mention anywhere of any anti-terrorist
23 activities in Kosovo or the activities of any units in Kosovo?
24 A. No.
25 Q. Thank you. Let us move on. Mr. Golubovic, in any normal
1 country, does the Ministry of the Interior have plans for the eventuality
2 of war?
3 A. Most probably. I am not aware of what happens in other
4 countries, but in our country even in peacetime this was normal, as I
5 worked there for many years, regardless of the regimes in power, the
6 communist, or any other there were these defence plans.
7 Q. Thank you. And would you agree that those defence plans would
8 start from the ministry through the SUPs to the lowest-level
9 organisational units within the MUP?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Thank you. Is it normal that at a time when aggression against
12 the state is expected that preparational measures are taken to defend
13 against the aggression?
14 A. That should be normal.
15 Q. Thank you. Let me pass on to item 2, that is, that part about
16 the preparation of units for possible war is very short. Do you agree
17 that under item 2 what is said is a stronger engagement of all units of
18 the ministry, an intensification of activities, monitoring the movements
19 of NATO forces, especially from the territories of the former republics
20 of Macedonia
21 threaten security.
22 A. I agree, that's correct.
23 Q. Thank you. Does item 3 mention the planning and training of --
24 of supervisors for the implementation of wartime rules?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. Thank you. Does item 4 include the training of untrained members
2 of both active units and reserve units?
3 A. I don't have these items on the screen; I can't read them. Which
4 items did you mention?
5 Q. Item 4.
6 A. That's what we did before that too. We trained the reservists
7 possibly once a year, and the other activities were conducted with active
9 Q. Thank you. Does item 5 mention the selection of alternative
11 A. Yes, that's what we did in practice.
12 Q. Item 6 mentions the planning for the increase of beat duty
13 patrols, and other activities, doesn't it?
14 A. Yes, it does.
15 Q. Thank you. Now we've arrived at item 7 about which the
16 Prosecutor asked you. Am I right in saying that item 7 doesn't contain
17 any provisions about the use of volunteer and paramilitary units?
18 A. There's no mention of that. It only says that through
19 cooperative work and other measures and actions it should be checked
20 whether there are such units in the areas covered by the secretariat. I
21 have already said to the Prosecutor that in our area there were -- there
22 wasn't a single paramilitary or volunteer unit established; but there
23 must have been individuals who had reported outside the area of our
24 secretariat to participate in volunteer units, become members of those
25 units, but that there were no such individuals in our area.
1 Q. Thank you. Is it right that this stipulates preventive actions?
2 A. Yes, and we should report to our superior bodies if we observe
4 Q. Mr. Golubovic, am I right in saying that during the war at
5 Kosovo and Metohija there were no paramilitary units?
6 A. From my secretariat and as far as I know, there were none, none
7 from the secretariat of Bor.
8 Q. Am I right in saying that volunteers could be engaged during the
9 war in Kosovo and Metohija only through the procedures carried out by the
10 military bodies?
11 A. I remember that there were instructions for all the volunteers to
12 report to the secretariat of people's defence, but they didn't report to
13 us, not to the police. And as far as I know from the press and other
14 media, they were put under the control of the Army of Serbia or of
16 Q. Does item 9 foresee the planning and increased control and
17 regulation of traffic?
18 A. That is normal, that's part of our daily routine, it's only
19 intensified in extraordinary conditions.
20 Q. Does item 10 foresee the carrying out of preparations and checks
21 that all types of communication, cryptographic, data protection are
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. Thank you. Does item 13 say that checks must be carried out and
25 that must remain sure that there is sufficient equipment of the
2 A. Yes, they were also part of the secretariat of the interior.
3 Q. Thank you. Does it foresee in -- increased measures for the
4 protection against fire?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. So we needn't go on like this. So this is normal preparation for
7 wartime situation in case it should arise. And now let's move on to
8 item 17. Am I right in saying that this item instructs you for the
9 eventuality of the engagement of your PJP unit outside the area of your
10 secretariat the reserve forces of the police shall be deployed in a PJP?
11 A. That's what we did routinely when they were not there because we
12 would be left with a small number of staff in the secretariat, and that's
13 when we called in some of our reservists and these others who performed
14 similar tasks at the police.
15 Q. Thank you. So let us move from the abstract level down to
16 concrete things. Does that mean that a criminal police inspector,
17 usually dealing with homicide, say, would carry out the duties of a car
19 A. Yes, they would fill in the gaps as necessary.
20 Q. Thank you. Am I right in saying that item 18 instructs you to
21 cooperate with other state bodies and institutions to normalise life and
22 the mitigation of possible -- the possible consequences of aggression?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. Can we summarise this as follows, does this -- is it right to say
25 that this telegram doesn't contain anything peculiar to
1 Kosovo and Metohija but that it -- but rather, that it refers to the
2 overall situation in the Republic of Serbia
3 A. I think that is indeed the case.
4 Q. Thank you.
5 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Please call up Exhibit P57 from
6 e-court, which -- it's on page -- it's page 2. The -- it's page 1 of the
7 English version.
8 Q. Mr. Golubovic, you can now see on the screen a decision of the
9 Ministry of the Interior dated the 16th of June, 1998. We'll go back to
10 page 1, but I'm interested in item 2 now. I will read out to you to make
11 it easier for you.
12 A. I cannot see item 2.
13 Q. Now you can see it:
14 "It's the duty of the staff to plan, organise, and lead or
15 supervise the work and the engagement of the organisational units of the
16 ministry as well as the deployed and attached units to -- in combatting
17 terrorism in the area of the autonomous province of Kosovo and Metohija."
18 Am I right in saying, sir, that the minister by this decision
19 authorised the staff for the purpose of the combatting of terrorism in
20 the autonomous province of Kosovo
21 supervise the SUPs as well as other deployed and attached units?
22 A. That's what it reads and that's most probably how it was.
23 Q. Thank you. Does this second paragraph of item 2 say that:
24 "Apart from these tasks, the staff also had to plan, organise,
25 direct, and coordinate the work of the organisational units of the
1 ministry in Kosovo and Metohija in the carrying out of more complex and
2 special security tasks"?
3 A. Yes, well that's what it says.
4 Q. A minute ago we spoke about the relationship between the two
5 departments. So before we return to page 1, here, after the part where
6 certain individuals are mentioned by name, it reads: "For the member of
7 the broader staff," or rather, "the chiefs of the SUPs of the centres and
8 departments of RDB in the area of Kosovo and Metohija are also appointed
9 members of the staff."
10 THE INTERPRETER: Could the Defence counsel please repeat the
11 last part of his question; we didn't catch that.
12 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation]
13 Q. Is it true that ...
14 I will repeat the question. I seem to have gone fast. Am I
15 right in saying that this paragraph says that the organisational units of
16 public and state security in Kosovo and Metohija are also parts of the
17 broad -- broader staff?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Am I right in saying that only the minister could establish a
20 staff comprising people from both departments and determine how they will
21 organise and to who they will report?
22 A. Under the law and other regulations he coordinated the activities
23 of both these departments, both state security and public security.
24 Q. Is it true -- is it correct that item 3 says that:
25 "The work of the staff and the security situation from the
1 framework of the duties of the staff, the Chief of Staff will report to
2 the minister"?
3 A. Yes, that's what it says.
4 Q. Thank you. Just one more thing. Am I right in saying that
5 item 6 states that the minister orders all previous decisions to be
6 overruled by this decision?
7 A. Yes, that's what it says.
8 Q. Thank you.
9 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we now please put the
10 following document on the screen, Exhibit P67 in e-court.
11 Q. Mr. Golubovic, this is a decision of the minister dated
12 the 31st of May, 1999, about the establishment of the military staff for
13 the suppression of terrorism. I would like to focus your attention on
14 page 3 of the decision, the last page, that is, the very end. Does this
15 paragraph say that the minister ordered this decision to overrule the
16 decision dated June the 16th?
17 A. Yes, that's what it says.
18 Q. Thank you. I don't want to continue reading this decision
19 because it is identical to the previous one.
20 Mr. Golubovic, please take a look at Exhibit P75 from e-court.
21 Mr. Golubovic, can you see that this is a decision by the minister -- by
22 Minister Stojiljkovic, dated 4 June 1997, by which Bosko Petric is
23 appointed chief of the secretariat of the interior in Pristina in effect
24 of 15th of June, 1997, and for a term of two years?
25 A. Yes, I saw it.
1 Q. Thank you. Do tell me, please, the last paragraph, the minister
2 orders that one copy be forwarded to the persons in question; one to the
3 secretariat where he used to work; another to the secretariat where he's
4 being sent; and another to the legal department of this ministry?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Am I right in saying that this was forwarded to the legal
7 department of this ministry to regulate the status of the person in
8 question because he is sent from one organisational unit to the other?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Thank you.
11 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we now please call up
12 Exhibit P78 from e-court.
13 Q. Mr. Golubovic, am I right if I say that by this decision of the
14 15th of April, 1999, the minister, Vlajko Stojiljkovic, in the case of
15 Vucina Janijicevic is appointing him to head of the secretariat in
16 Kosovska Mitrovica -- Vucina Janijicevic is being appointed to the
17 Kosovska Mitrovica secretariat of the interior.
18 A. Yes, that is what it says.
19 Q. Let me ask you, Mr. Golubovic, the minister has the right,
20 according to law, to apply prescribed methods of leadership which he
21 himself has prescribed, and to amend them and to decide about certain
22 competencies of other persons. In this particular case because of the
23 significance of the security situation in Kosovo, the minister himself
24 decided on the appointment of the chief of the department of the
1 A. Yes, that was what happened in practice. He could dismiss a
2 chief, he could transform him to another secretariat, he could give him
3 different assignments within the territory of Serbia
4 Q. Thank you.
5 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Under the list of 65 ter
6 Prosecution Exhibit P01879, please.
7 Q. Mr. Golubovic, is it right that by this decision the minister,
8 Vlajko Stojiljkovic, is appointing Colonel Dusan Gavranic to the position
9 of chief of the SUP
11 A. [No interpretation]
12 Q. Thank you. And do you know that Mr. Gavranic, before being sent
13 there, was the chief of the SUP
14 A. Yes, I am aware of that.
15 Q. So a chief of SUP
16 is being sent by the minister to Kosovo?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Thank you.
19 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, could this document
20 be admitted into evidence, please?
21 JUDGE PARKER: It will be received.
22 THE REGISTRAR: That will be D00038, Your Honours.
23 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
24 Q. I would now like to move on to laws, as you have a degree in law
25 and you have passed the examination for judges.
1 A. Yes, but I haven't been involved in those activities for a long
3 Q. Yes, but we'll be dealing about police regulations now, which you
4 are familiar with.
5 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could I have Exhibit 166 [as
6 interpreted] to be called up in the e-court, please.
7 Q. Let me tell you in the meantime, Mr. Golubovic, this is the
8 Law on Internal Affairs --
9 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I'm being told that
10 the transcript is incorrect. It says 166, and it should be P66.
11 Q. Let me draw your attention to Article 7 of this law, page 2 of
12 the English version. Am I right, Mr. Golubovic, that the minister
13 determines the manner in which the Ministry of the Interior performs its
14 duties and issues instructions for their performance?
15 A. Yes, all the instructions and guide-lines were prescribed by the
17 Q. Thank you. Is it right to say that the minister reports on his
18 work only at the request to the National Assembly and to the president of
19 the Republic of Serbia
20 A. That was how it was according to the law.
21 Q. Thank you.
22 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we now move on to Article 27.
23 It is page 9 of the English version. Page -- in the Serbian text it is
24 page 3 and page 9 of the English version, Article 27. These are
25 provisions regarding reserve forces.
1 Q. Is it right to say that in case of an imminent threat of war or
2 war the Ministry of the Interior should be brought up to strength with
3 conscripts from the reserve force of the ministry?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Am I right in saying that when the conditions were fulfilled, the
6 minister could decide that even in peacetime the reserve force should be
7 engaged to perform certain duties within the terms of reference of the
8 Ministry of the Interior?
9 A. Yes, we had such cases in practice.
10 Q. Am I right in saying that this is regulated by Article 28 of this
11 law and that those persons who are engaged from the reserve forces when
12 performing these duties have the status of authorised officials?
13 A. Yes, they wore a uniform, and they were given instructions from
14 their superiors in the police.
15 Q. Am I right in saying that they were entitled to remuneration and
16 other social insurance entitlements while they were engaged for these
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Was it customary to train the reserve force within the plan?
20 A. Yes, they were engaged for training also and for performing
21 certain tasks, so they were engaged on those two grounds.
22 Q. Thank you.
23 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Let us now examine page 21 and 22
24 of the English version and page 6 of the Serbian version, Article 72.
25 Q. Mr. Golubovic, am I right in saying that by virtue of this
1 article it is possible to assign MUP members from one organisational unit
2 to go to other organisational units within the territory of the
3 Republic of Serbia
4 these duties from 30 days up to one year?
5 A. Yes, we had such cases in practice.
6 Q. Would you agree with me that this was the basis for the minister
7 to send certain individuals to work in Kosovo and Metohija or upon his
8 authorisation another person on his behalf?
9 A. Yes, in the secretariat in Bor we had several cases when persons
10 were assigned to assist in Prizren, and I can't remember what other town,
11 but they would go there for 15 days or 30 days on the basis of a decision
12 from the minister.
13 Q. Thank you.
14 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we now -- could the usher
15 assist us and put on the ELMO P69.
16 Q. Mr. Golubovic, this is the law on the state administration which
17 was also applied to organs of the Ministry of the Interior; you will
18 agree with me?
19 A. Yes.
20 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we see page 4 in the Serbian
21 version and page 2 of the English version.
22 Q. And Article 43 of this law which prescribes that: The minister
23 in accordance with the law is in charge of the ministry?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. And Article 44 says that the minister shall organise a lawful
1 performance of duties and decide about the rights and duties of the
2 employees -- rights, duties, and responsibilities of the employees?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Thank you. In paragraph 2 of this article it is stated that the
5 minister shall be responsible for carrying out the function for which he
6 has been entrusted and for the work of the ministry, so he is the
7 responsible official, isn't he?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Thank you. Now, Article 46, Mr. Golubovic, says that assistant
10 ministers shall be appointed in the ministry to head certain departments
11 and carry out tasks specified in the document on job organisation and
12 planning and other duties which the minister may entrust to them. And
13 paragraph 2 says that the assistant ministers shall be appointed by the
15 Would you agree with me that the assistant ministers were
16 appointed persons by the government?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Would you agree with me that those appointed persons were --
19 defined the areas in which they would assist the minister by the
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Would you agree with me that there are no limitations regarding
23 the determination of activities that individual assistants will assist
24 him with?
25 A. I assume that you are right.
1 Q. Thank you. Am I right in saying that there are no higher- or
2 lower-level assistant ministers but that they are persons of equal
4 A. I think so. Now, it's another matter whether someone has a more-
5 or less-important job, but they were all treated on equal footing.
6 Q. The job of the assistant minister is to assist the minister with
7 regard to certain issues determined by the minister; am I right?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. And for the activities for which he has been appointed as an
11 A. Yes, but we've seen that the minister determines those areas and
12 that he's appointed by the government.
13 Q. Am I right that one assistant minister cannot issue orders to
14 another assistant minister, in view of the fact that they can receive
15 instructions for their work only from the minister?
16 A. That is how it should be.
17 Q. Thank you.
18 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we now call up exhibit --
19 Defence Exhibit D0020357, if it could be called up, please.
20 Q. Mr. Golubovic, it is the rules on the internal organisation of
21 the Ministry of the Interior and the revised version, and it came into
22 force on the 31st of December, 1997.
23 Mr. Golubovic, let us first explain. These rules actually
24 pertain only to the department of public security because Article 2 says
25 that special rules will be adopted for other departments; is that
2 A. I can see only the front page. I can't see anything else.
3 Q. I will read out page 1 to you:
4 "Republic of Serbia
5 highly confidential -- strictly confidential.
6 "Rules on the internal organisation of the Ministry of the
7 Interior, revised version," and it says, "Belgrade
8 31st of December, 1997.
9 "The activities from the purview of the Ministry of the Interior,
10 that is, public security, personal safety of the citizens, the prevention
11 of crimes and the catching of the perpetrators of crimes, providing
12 security at public gatherings, the safety of traffic, the control of the
13 passing of the state border, the control of movement in the -- along the
14 borders, control of the movement of foreigners, control of the possession
15 of fire-arms, as well as the control over the -- over explosive devices,
16 fire-fighting, citizenship, numbers of citizens, and other activities as
17 is set out by the law, and the basic organisational unit is the
18 department of public security."
19 Is that right?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Now, Article 3 describes local jurisdiction of the secretariats
22 of the interior. Let me explain because I didn't finish earlier, that
23 the Bor secretariat was in charge of the municipalities of Kladovo,
24 Majdanpek, and Negotin?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. Speaking about your secretariat, would it be right to say that in
2 your territory you had departments of the interior at Kladovo, Negotin,
3 and Majdanpek; and the secretariat carried out these tasks directly for
5 A. For Bor, yes.
6 Q. Would it be right to say that the minister had authority to
7 establish separate and special police units, operational groups, and
8 other units?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. He also set out tasks, dead-lines for their execution of powers,
11 and rights and obligations of the members of all -- of other units?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Thank you. Would it be right to say that Article 9 of these
14 rules says that:
15 "The department, in accordance with the plans, should conduct
16 preparations in the case of imminent threat of war and in war should
17 report to the -- to the bodies of the republic and cooperate with other
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Is this the basis for the decision taken in February 1999?
21 A. Yes, I believe that these were the -- this was the approach that
22 was also to be found in the former Law on All People's Defence.
23 Q. Article 10 says:
24 "The chief of a department may establish permanent and/or ad hoc
25 staffs, task forces, and other working groups made up of Ministry
1 employees within the department and if so required carry out certain more
2 complex assignments. The composition task dead-lines and other
3 conditions as for paragraph 1 will be defined by the head of the
4 department or the secretariat, of which the minister is to be informed
5 immediately; is that correct.
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Do you know that before the minister adopted the decision dated
8 June 16th, 1998
9 departments passed decisions about the establishment of staffs in the
10 territory of KiM?
11 A. I cannot remember directly, but most probably some of the work
12 was carried out by the heads of departments; but the heads of the
13 secretariats also carried out such tasks.
14 Q. Is it correct that the minister, in June 1998 or in May 1999,
15 took such decisions because in the staff he combined both departments and
16 only he was authorised to give instructions to both departments and the
17 heads of those reported exclusively to him?
18 A. Yes.
19 MR. STAMP: Your Honours, may I ask --
20 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Stamp.
21 MR. STAMP: May I ask for two minutes to step outside if the
22 court could pause.
23 JUDGE PARKER: Certainly, Mr. Stamp.
24 MR. STAMP: Thank you.
25 JUDGE PARKER: I'm sure Mr. Djurdjic would not mind waiting.
1 [Trial Chamber confers]
2 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you, Mr. Djurdjic.
3 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours. I would
4 like to tender these -- this set of rules into evidence.
5 JUDGE PARKER: The rules of the Law on State Administration, is
6 that correct, or rules on the internal organisation of the Ministry of
7 the Interior? I believe it's a 48-page document; is that correct?
8 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honours. I can tell you
9 exactly -- it is 45 pages long in the Serbian version and the English
10 version --
11 JUDGE PARKER: Are we going to need any more of it than you have
12 dealt with in cross-examination, Mr. Djurdjic?
13 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, this exhibit is
14 translated into English in its entirety. It was done in the
15 Milutinovic et al trial, so there is a translation already.
16 JUDGE PARKER: I'm not questioning that. We have a translation.
17 My concern is whether we need to have 48 pages.
18 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] No, we don't need them. I would
19 only like to tender those articles that I -- that I referred to when
20 hearing the witness -- into evidence. I'm speaking about Article 1;
21 Article 2; Article 3, item 2; Article 7; Article 9; Article 10; and --
22 and that would be all.
23 JUDGE PARKER: What I think we will do, Mr. Djurdjic, is note
24 your motion to admit perhaps Articles 1 to 10; we will hear Mr. Stamp's
25 re-examination in case he needs to refer to any other provisions, and
1 then we'll receive the articles that appear relevant to the case.
2 Carry on.
3 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours.
4 Q. Witness, am I right in saying that the minister adopted a
5 decision on the establishment of separate police units on
6 August the 1st, 1993
7 A. Most probably. I don't remember, but most likely.
8 Q. Thank you. Am I right in saying that the tasks and duties of the
9 separate police units under the decision of the minister were to preserve
10 law and order at public gatherings, the carrying out of measures of
11 regular and special security, and the establishment of law and order if
12 it is seriously infringed upon, then the -- acting against rebel groups
13 and other groups that threaten the security of the republic and the
14 public order?
15 A. Yes, that was the use of the units in case of need.
16 Q. This could be active only upon the order of the minister?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Thank you. Am I right in saying that the police departments in
19 the SUPs and the police administration of the ministry carried out
20 logistical activities, administrative and technical activities, financial
21 activities, and other activities for these units to be ready to carry out
22 their tasks?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. Let me return to something else about these units, namely, the
25 members of these units that were sent outside the territory of the
1 secretariat. If a member of the PJP from your secretariat who had been
2 sent to carry out tasks outside the territory of the secretariat commit a
3 crime or a minor offence, what would the procedure have been?
4 A. Disciplinary procedure would be launched against that member in
5 their -- in the secretariat to which they belonged upon the request of
6 the commander of the unit where he was at the time when he committed that
7 crime or minor offence.
8 Q. Could you launch disciplinary proceedings in case there was no
10 A. No.
11 Q. Could you launch proceedings if you didn't know of a crime
13 A. Well, if we didn't know, we couldn't of course.
14 Q. Am I right in saying that you have never been informed of the
15 planning and use of the PJP unit that was sent outside your territory?
16 A. On rare occasions we may have known, but mostly they would be
17 sent to a detachment and then they would carry out their mission.
18 Sometimes we would learn of their whereabouts.
19 Q. Am I right in saying that in your annual reports you were not
20 able to mention the tasks and activities that your units sent outside
21 your territory were carrying out; rather, you were only in a position to
22 speak about the time-frame and the number of persons sent to such other
23 places and their possible injuries, deaths, and other events?
24 A. Yes, because we didn't know what they were doing down there or
25 where they were doing it.
1 Q. In simple terms, those units were not under your control?
2 A. When they were outside the territory of the secretariat, they
3 were not.
4 Q. Am I right when I say that the chief of the public security
5 department could not suspend or overrule a decision of the minister
6 regarding the deployment of the unit?
7 A. I assume he could not because he was lower in rank.
8 Q. Thank you. Could your deputy in Bor suspend any decision of
10 A. No, he could not.
11 Q. Thank you. Mr. Golubovic, reading these statements of yours and
12 the transcript, I came to the conclusion that from 1982 you were an
13 employee of the Ministry of the Interior; am I right?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Before that you worked in the legal affairs department of the
16 mining company Bor and you were a chief also in the SUP of Zajecar?
17 A. First in the SUP
18 and then again in the SUP
19 Q. Thank you. I believe that you were the chief of the SUP with the
20 most years of service in the SUP
21 A. Yes, most probably.
22 Q. Am I right, Mr. Golubovic, when I say that on the 6th of April,
23 1999, when you left and went to Kladovo, you called up the
24 Ministry of the Interior to inform them of the event which you had been
25 informed about and that calling up the ministry you came across the head
1 of the department who was in a MUP building?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Can I infer from that that had the head of department not been
4 there you would have informed someone else about the events?
5 A. Yes, certainly. If I was unable to reach the chief of the
6 department, I would have called one of the other senior officials in the
8 Q. Thank you. Am I right that the first reports that you received
9 said that a refrigerator truck had been found in the Danube and that it
10 contained bodies and that these were there as a result of a traffic
12 A. Can I give you a slightly different answer? The first reports
13 were -- referred to a traffic accident without any mention of the
14 victims. And when the refrigerator truck was opened on the 6th, then the
15 reference was to bodies. So on the 5th there was no mention of bodies;
16 it was assumed there were bodies, but we didn't know. And on the 6th it
17 was already known that there were bodies there.
18 Q. Did the Kladovo police take all the necessary procedures
19 prescribed by law when the refrigerator truck was found in the Danube
20 A. According to information I received and reviewing the
21 regulations, I think that they did undertake all the necessary measures.
22 I'm saying this because some of the measures should have been done by the
23 judiciary, by the court, and not the police, so that the police in
24 Kladovo did do everything that was within its terms of reference.
25 Q. That's why I'm saying that the procedures prescribed by law for
1 the police in Kladovo were fulfilled?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Am I right when I say that when informing General Djordjevic you
4 infer -- you concluded that he was surprised and that he heard of this
5 for the first time?
6 A. That is what I said. I think this is in the transcript, that the
7 general was surprised when I informed him of this and that that is
8 perhaps why he said that he would call me back to tell me what to do. So
9 that was my impression based on his reaction. I was not in his presence
10 to be able to see this, but what I could conclude on the basis of our
11 telephone conversation, I think he was surprised.
12 Q. Thank you. Am I right when I say that General Djordjevic told
13 you that he would call you back in 15 minutes, and when he did call you
14 he said that he was conveying the instructions of the minister?
15 A. He did call back in 10 or 15 minutes. He didn't say that he was
16 acting on instructions of the minister but he said that the minister said
17 that such and such a thing should be done, he had ordered this.
18 Q. Thank you. But am I right, Mr. Golubovic, that the order was to
19 implement the procedure in Kladovo, that is, in the territory of the SUP
20 of Bor prescribed by law?
21 A. He didn't give any special order, but the assumption was that the
22 procedure had to be observed.
23 Q. Mr. Golubovic, let me ask you, I know that you knew that the
24 investigating judge of the municipal court in Kladovo was present as well
25 as the deputy municipal prosecutor. But were you informed that on
1 the 6th of April, Dr. Trajkovic was also present who was from the medical
2 centre in Kladovo, the coroner, who was there to examine the bodies, and
3 that coffins were brought there too for them to be transported to a
4 certain institute?
5 A. Yes, I was told that from the public utility company a certain
6 number of coffins had been loaded on to a truck, but I wasn't told that
7 the doctor was there. I didn't know that. Maybe they omitted to tell me
8 that, so I didn't know that Dr. Trajkovic was there.
9 Q. Thank you.
10 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, in view of the
11 previous break, can I continue or is it time for the break?
12 JUDGE PARKER: I think we -- are you expecting to be long,
13 Mr. Djurdjic?
14 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Yes, rather longer, but not too
15 long. I think the regular break is at a quarter to 6.00, but we started
16 a little earlier because I asked you to allow me to have that time for
18 JUDGE PARKER: We will adjourn now and commence again at ten
19 minutes past 6.00, Mr. Djurdjic.
20 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] And I'll speed things up. Thank
21 you. I'll be as quick as I can.
22 --- Recess taken at 5.40 p.m.
23 [The witness stands down]
24 --- On resuming at 6.13 p.m.
25 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours -- oh, the
1 witness isn't here.
2 [The witness takes the stand]
3 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Djurdjic.
4 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours.
5 Q. Mr. Golubovic, a moment ago we mentioned the investigating judge
6 and the deputy prosecutor. Am I right that the district public
7 prosecutor in Negotin and the investigating judge in Negotin were also
8 informed about the event after the investigating judge of the municipal
9 court and the deputy municipal public prosecutor said that they were not
10 competent for the further procedure?
11 A. Yes, I think the municipal prosecutor and the investigating judge
12 informed their counterparts over there, plus the service in Kladovo
13 informed the investigating judge in Negotin.
14 Q. Am I right when I say that not a single competent prosecutor or
15 investigating judge gave instructions or authorisation for you to carry
16 out an on-site inspection or to carry out further investigative work?
17 A. As far as I'm informed, they refused to take any further
18 measures, I'm referring to the municipal prosecutor and investigating
19 judge, and they stated that they were not competent when they saw the
20 number of bodies in the refrigerator truck and that this was within the
21 competence of the district court.
22 Q. Am I right in saying that your SUP or the units subordinated to
23 you do not have the legal facilities to influence the judicial bodies or
24 the investigating judge or the prosecutors in the municipality or the
25 district to do their work?
1 A. You're right, we cannot instruct them to do something that is not
2 regulated by law.
3 Q. Thank you. Am I right when I say that General Djordjevic did not
4 say that the degree of confidentiality should be determined at the level
5 of a state secret?
6 A. You are right.
7 Q. Thank you. Am I right when I say that General Djordjevic was
8 informed about all the steps taken that we have discussed and that he
9 told you just not to make any statements for the media, so as not to
10 avoid further disturbance.
11 A. When we spoke our conversation went along those lines. It was
12 stated that this information should be kept confidential in view of the
13 state of war, in view of the closeness of the Romanian border, and so
14 that the population should not be further disturbed by this. That was
15 the conversation that we had regarding keeping that information closed,
16 but no one said that it should be a state secret and how could it be when
17 the people of Tekija saw this and they were present there.
18 Q. Am I right that this did not apply to the state organs or
19 judicial organs because they were already informed and au courant about
20 the whole thing?
21 A. They were not told even not to broadcast the information;
22 nevertheless, to keep it a state secret.
23 Q. Am I right if I say that the whole procedure of identification
24 and post mortem investigation would have been done if the number of
25 bodies was 30 that the same procedure would be applied?
1 A. Most probably, though we didn't have the capacity to carry this
2 out in one night. This is a large number. And had the judicial organs
3 taken over their part of the work then it would have been completed there
4 on the ground.
5 Q. Am I right when I say that an on-site inspection was carried out
6 by the investigating judge. Had it been done, then you would have been
7 obliged to follow his instructions regarding the further procedure with
8 the bodies?
9 A. According to the Law on Criminal Proceedings, the investigating
10 judge is in charge of the on-site inspection; and he gives instructions
11 to the police and others what is to be done, whether there would be a
12 post mortem, whether we would just secure the site, and we also secure
13 the evidence, if any; that is what is prescribed by law.
14 Q. Thank you. Am I right in saying that in your telephone
15 conversation which you had about 2230 hours with General Djordjevic and
16 when you informed him that you were not able technically to carry out
17 this work nor do you have an institution to do the forensic examinations,
18 that in that conversation General Djordjevic abided by his original
19 instruction that you carry out the procedure?
20 A. I think that when we first discussed this --
21 Q. No, I'm talking about your conversation on 11.30 at night. Well,
22 that must have been the first or second conversation from Tekija.
23 A. No, it is the third, maybe the third overall, but it was the
24 second from Tekija. That is what we discussed, and initially he was in
25 favour of everything being done; but when I explained what the problems
1 were and the difficulties in a subsequent conversation, he agreed; and we
2 acted in accordance with that agreement.
3 Q. You have moved further. It was only at 2.00 a.m. when you said
4 that work had been stopped and that you were no longer able to continue
5 working, General Djordjevic accepted your initiative for the bodies to be
6 transported to Belgrade
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Mr. Golubovic, you have a great deal of experience as a
9 policeman, and you're also a lawyer. Have you heard in your career of an
10 official note being made without it being signed by the person preparing
12 A. It is the practice in the police whoever prepares an official
13 note to sign it, that is customary.
14 Q. Will you give me a direct answer. Is it possible to make an
15 official note without signing it?
16 A. Yes, that's what I said.
17 Q. I just want you to be explicit. Let me move on. Even when
18 several persons take part in an action and then an official note is
19 drafted, either the person in charge of that group or another person that
20 he authorises has to sign that official note for the official note to
21 have any legal effect?
22 A. Yes, that is so.
23 Q. Thank you. Is it correct that official notes drafted by the SUP
24 or the MUP or the police cannot be used in criminal proceedings as
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Thank you. An official note is important for operational work
3 and for investigative bodies before the trial begins under our
4 Law on Criminal Procedure; isn't that right?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Thank you. Is it correct, sir, that it was not established how
7 the refrigerator truck got into the Danube, where it had come from, and
8 who had organised the transport of the bodies?
9 A. That is correct. We had no relevant data, and we couldn't find
10 that out.
11 Q. Is it correct that the task force, when they spoke to you, were
12 not interested in the manner of the -- of the truck falling into the
14 A. I cannot remember all the details, but nobody certainly insisted
15 on that nor was there actually mention of that.
16 Q. Thank you. Is it correct that you, when you were at Tekija and
17 went to the site of the incident, did not see the truck where the bodies
19 A. That is correct.
20 Q. Is it correct that all these activities took place at night
21 because of the imminent bombing and due to the fact that the site was
22 only a kilometre or less away from the border with Romania and that there
23 were military vessels anchored nearby?
24 A. That's correct.
25 Q. Is it correct that you told no one that there was an on-site
1 police investigation going on and that the bodies were being
3 A. That is correct. At a trial, I don't think -- I don't know if it
4 was the Milosevic trial, I said that I didn't forbid anyone to take
5 photographs, and I said that I wasn't at the site itself.
6 Q. Is it correct that the -- that staff of the OUP Kladovo conducted
7 all activities on the 6th of April and that you only arrived there around
8 8.30 or 9.00 p.m. at Kladovo?
9 A. That's correct.
10 Q. And you were in no position to issue orders for the period
11 preceding your arrival?
12 A. That is correct.
13 Q. Is it correct that with the crime technician Bosko Radojkovic,
14 that you did not have a conversation with him on the
15 6th and 7th of April?
16 A. I didn't speak to him, but I saw him after the first conversation
17 with the general at his office and when the head of the OUP instructed
18 him what to do with regard to the transportation of the bodies. And
19 maybe he also went to the office because some people did go in there and
20 came out and informed the others who were around to inform us what had
21 been done, that is possible. But we didn't have a conversation really.
22 Q. Is it correct that the possibility of burying the bodies in a
23 pit, in a nearby pit, was discussed at all?
24 A. When General Djordjevic communicated to us that the minister said
25 that the bodies should be buried, several of us were present at the time,
1 maybe that was -- there was such options put forward, bury them here or
2 there or something like that. Possibly -- it may not have been the chief
3 of the OUP, but possibly somebody else present.
4 Q. But that was not really officially considered?
5 A. No, it certainly was not officially considered.
6 Q. Do you know that -- of anyone making a suggestion to hand over
7 the truck to the Komunalac public utility company?
8 A. On the following day it was taken to that company, it was towed
9 there, and it stayed there for two or three days. That's the information
10 that I got anyway.
11 Q. Yes, but I asked you -- I didn't ask you whether it was taken
12 elsewhere but whether it should be given to Komunalac to be taken
13 possession of it.
14 A. No, there was some ideas of [indiscernible] going there, et
15 cetera, but that was really out of the question.
16 Q. Mr. Golubovic, as the chief of the SUP at Bor, did you go to
17 briefings at the ministry in Belgrade
18 A. Yes, when there was need, I do think concerning the wartime
20 Q. No, before the war.
21 A. Yes, I did.
22 Q. Was it usual practice for chiefs of SUP to go to Belgrade
23 brief the minister?
24 A. Yes, approximately once a month we did have such briefings for
25 the minister or possibly such briefings may have been more frequent in
1 case of extraordinary events. But generally speaking, we had such
2 briefings once a month.
3 Q. Is it correct that you first briefed the minister about the
4 safety and security in the territory of your SUP and that at these
5 meetings that the minister issued you instructions and orders?
6 A. At these briefings what was done first was the heads of
7 administrations to refer about their activities. We followed and then
8 the minister took decisions that were binding on us.
9 Q. And these decisions, were they sent to you in writing after these
10 meetings or briefings with the minister?
11 A. Mostly, yes.
12 Q. Thank you. Let me ask you, do you know that in December 1998 the
13 minister adopted a decision about the establishment of a collective body,
14 a council?
15 A. I don't know the details, but I believe there was such a council,
16 and I think it was operational in 1999 and in 2000 also. It wasn't the
17 meeting that I mentioned including us as chiefs of SUPs, but another
18 collective body.
19 Q. Thank you. Do you know that this -- that the minister had a list
20 of persons who were obliged to come and others who were -- who were
21 invited according to need?
22 A. I don't know.
23 Q. Do you know that the decision I mentioned envisaged persons in
24 charge of public and state security to be present at the sessions of that
1 A. It may have been the case, but I don't know the details.
2 Q. When you're mentioning the minister's meetings with the chiefs of
3 SUPs from all over Serbia
4 state security?
5 A. I believe that they were not present, but possibly at one the
6 head of the department of state security was present. I'm not sure, but
7 during that period of a year or two, toward the end. Whether it was in
8 1998, I'm not sure, but I believe that once the head of that department
9 was present. But otherwise there were only the chiefs of the SUPs.
10 Q. You said that there was such -- one such occasion, but do you
11 know that Mr. Radomir Markovic was assistant minister for criminal police
12 until December 1998?
13 A. Yes, I know that, but that's why I'm saying I believe that I saw
15 Q. But then he was assistant for public safety, and later on when he
16 was appointed head of department of state security?
17 A. But that's why I said that people from state security were not
18 present, but I believe that on one occasion -- but I really don't
19 remember because it's been more than ten years, so that on one occasion a
20 representative of state security may have been present, but not more
22 Q. Thank you. During the war, that is, starting from
23 January 1st, 1999
24 meetings or briefings in the MUP take place and what did you -- what was
25 the content of the briefing?
1 A. Well, one of the ways to go about it was to hold meetings of that
2 collective council and the other was the -- along the official lines of
3 communication via dispatches. And most times there was the briefings
4 over the phone regarding technical issues.
5 Q. Thank you --
6 A. But that was before the war, but your previous question referred
7 to the war period from January of 1999 until the 24th of March.
8 Q. But according to the indictment, the wartime conditions were in
9 place starting from the 1st of January, 1999. And what about the period
10 after March 24th?
11 A. After that date, communication was more difficult because all the
12 bodies, including us and the SUPs, moved to other locations, so
13 communication was more difficult. And I believe that it was on the 2nd
14 or 3rd of April that the building of the ministry was bombed, so that
15 communication was much more difficult so that we communicated mostly over
16 the phone or in direct contact when somebody went to Belgrade.
17 Q. Is it correct that the analyses of administration informed you
18 about current events in Serbia
19 was ever made of anti-terrorist activities in Kosovo and Metohija?
20 A. I cannot remember the details of all that included in all that
21 information, but there was such information -- I mean, information
22 received from the analyses administration. But I cannot give detailed
23 information about the content because it was long ago.
24 Q. Okay. If you don't remember, you don't remember. That's all
1 I'm interested to hear whether you can tell us anything about the
2 way the minister, Stojiljkovic, ran the ministry. Do you know anything
3 about that?
4 A. I wasn't with the minister often, so I can't really tell. But
5 when he made a decision, he demanded that the decision be implemented,
6 but how he ran the ministry, I really couldn't tell you because I wasn't
7 present there. I know that our chief of the SUP made us carry out his
8 orders without discussion.
9 Q. Thank you. Can you tell me what kind of relationship he had with
10 other high officials in Serbia
12 A. Well, that's a question --
13 Q. But only if you know; if you don't know, say so freely.
14 A. I really cannot answer that because I would have to be subjective
15 and possibly say something wrong, so I cannot really assess his
17 Q. I only have one more question about the money that was paid. Was
18 it regular procedure to pay people who carried out activities instructed
19 by the MUP?
20 A. It was regular procedure, but the money really was -- was -- it
21 was a small amount. It may have -- in today's terms it would have been
22 about 200 Euros.
23 Q. Was that anything illegal?
24 A. No.
25 Q. Were they coming for that purpose or to bring the money?
1 A. For that purpose.
2 Q. Can you give us anything -- give you -- state your opinion about
3 General Djordjevic, even though he's present?
4 A. I've known him since the 1980s when he worked at the SUP in
5 Zajecar and later on I came to the SUP
7 believe that he held a number of positions because ministers rotated
8 rather often. I believe that he didn't have a high standing with the
9 then-Minister Stojiljkovic. He helped me a lot with my work at the SUP
10 at Bor and he -- we had good official relations. I didn't enjoy special
11 treatment except for the opportunity to have a cup of coffee with him
12 when I went to Belgrade
13 out his duties in the police in a correct fashion; that's my opinion,
15 Q. Thank you. And my last question: As a high police official, did
16 you ever hear or did you ever receive an order to evict Albanian
17 civilians from Kosovo, that they should be terrorised, that their
18 property should be taken away, their houses burnt, that they should be
19 driven out of Kosovo or to tolerate such things?
20 A. No, I never heard of that, and I didn't know of such incidents.
21 Bor was a multi-ethnic municipality, and at the time during the first
22 demonstrations in the 1980s there were -- there were many Albanians at
23 Bor and we -- we, the police, were always ordered to protect their shops,
24 so as to avoid any detrimental consequences. So that's how we functioned
25 at Bor, which was a multi-ethnic town. I can say as much for sure, and I
1 don't know about other areas.
2 Q. Thank you, Mr. Golubovic, for answering my questions.
3 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours. I am
4 done with this witness.
5 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you, Mr. Djurdjic.
6 Mr. Stamp.
7 MR. STAMP: Thank you, Your Honours.
8 Re-examination by Mr. Stamp:
9 Q. If we could just take things from the last going back to the
10 beginning of your questioning. You said that Stojiljkovic did not have a
11 high standing -- sorry, you said that the accused, Mr. Djordjevic, did
12 not have a high standing with the minister Stojiljkovic. Can you say how
13 he conducted himself in respect to orders that he might have received
14 from the minister?
15 A. I said that he didn't have a high standing because in those days
16 he held one position then he moved to another, and my impression was that
17 he was not included in all the events, if I can put it that way, and all
18 the agreements reached at that level --
19 Q. What I'm asking you is this. I'm not asking you for your
20 impressions. I'm just asking you based on your position, did
21 Mr. Djordjevic in his relations with the minister obey his orders or not?
22 A. He acted in accordance with his own competencies. He never
23 issued an order that was not lawful --
24 Q. That's not what I'm asking you --
25 A. Now, whether that was in every respect in accordance with the
1 order of the minister, I don't know. I expressed a personal opinion
2 regarding Mr. Djordjevic because I was asked to do so by Defence counsel.
3 That is my personal opinion; it need not necessarily be correct, it is my
4 personal opinion. It's nothing official nor is it proof of anything.
5 Q. Very well, that's your impression. You said under the law the
6 investigative judge with jurisdiction over events to be investigated
7 would give instructions as to what needs to be done. In the particular
8 circumstances that you were faced on the 6th of April when a truck had
9 been located with several dozens of dead bodies, would it be normal for
10 the police to ship away the dead bodies without an order to do so from
11 the investigative judge?
12 A. Under normal circumstances, that would most probably not take
13 place; but in view of the circumstances, I don't know what the reasons
14 were that the court did not wish to join in. They refused to do it, so
15 we had no other possibility. We couldn't leave that refrigerator truck
16 with the bodies inside by the road and wait for the court to appear, and
17 we did not have the ability to force them to do that nor could we order
18 them to do that. It was their decision.
19 Q. Yes. I'm asking you about transporting the body outside of the
20 municipality. Is that something that you would normally be empowered to
21 do without getting an order from the judge?
22 A. We would do what the court, the investigating judge, tells us to
23 do; that is what the police does, follows instructions from the
24 investigating judge. If he orders a post mortem, they provide a
25 pathologist and we secure the site and we act according to his
1 instructions, especially the prosecutor gives us instructions and we
2 follow them.
3 Q. Now, in an absence of instructions from the prosecution or the
4 prosecutor or the investigating judge, why did you send the bodies to
6 A. I said that we couldn't keep them there by the road, we couldn't
7 carry it out, the autopsy, the pathological examinations to establish the
8 cause of death, the time of death, et cetera. We didn't have the
9 capacity to do that. I said that in the territory of our SUP we didn't
10 have a single pathologist. The fact that this doctor appeared with the
11 judge, he's not a pathologist. It's necessary for the doctor to be there
12 to simply establish the deaths, but the cause of death is established by
13 a pathologist.
14 And we didn't have the capacity to do this even for 20 men, not
15 to mention the number that we had to do the autopsy and everything else.
16 This is something that takes time, and we would have to bring experts
17 from Belgrade
18 and Belgrade
19 we didn't have any objective possibility to carry this out on the spot.
20 Perhaps if we had some other facilities and if a team were to arrive from
21 the outside we might have done it, but on the ground we were not able to
22 do it.
23 Q. Having sent the bodies to Belgrade, and in your statement and in
24 your evidence you said you did that on the basis of instructions you got
25 from Mr. Djordjevic. Do you know if any investigations like autopsies
1 were carried out once the bodies arrived in Belgrade?
2 A. I stated in my earlier statements that I didn't know. I simply
3 did the part of the job that was ours. We sent them away, and I didn't
4 inquire any further because I had other things to take care of as the
5 head of the department, and this was no longer the object of my interest.
6 Q. I see. How many times have you had a case in your SUP with 80
7 bodies, dead bodies, turning up in a truck -- or, scratch the question.
8 I'll move on.
9 You said just now in answer to a question from my friend that
10 initially Mr. Djordjevic was in favour of doing everything, and then you
11 were saying this was probably the second or third time, you weren't sure.
12 What I want to ask you is this: When you first spoke to
13 General Djordjevic, is it -- and that is from the police station in
14 Kladovo --
15 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Djurdjic.
16 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. The
17 introduction to the question is an arbitrary construction that is
18 ungrounded, but I do not object to the question. Can the question be put
19 without the introduction when we heard some incorrect interpretations of
20 my questions.
21 JUDGE PARKER: Perhaps you could put your question again, please,
22 Mr. Stamp.
23 MR. STAMP: Yes, Your Honour.
24 Q. The question is this: You said at one stage initially he was in
25 favour of doing everything. Now, I want to know if by that you mean
1 initially in the course of the second conversation or the first or the
2 third conversation?
3 A. As far as I understand the question, though it is not absolutely
4 clear to me, I said that in the first conversation I just informed him
5 what had happened and what I had heard from others. Ten or 15 minutes
6 later the general called and gave instructions that the bodies that were
7 found should be buried in Kladovo because the number was 20 to 30 and
8 that this was the instructions or order because we would usually say the
9 minister ordered when I conveyed a message to someone else I said such
10 and such ordered this. So this was in the first conversation. I didn't
11 quite understand your question.
12 Q. Very well. I think you have answered. I really wanted to ask
13 you about the first conversation what was said, and I think you have
14 answered that.
15 MR. STAMP: Could we bring back the rules on the internal
16 organisation of the MUP, and I think that is a document, I'm not sure if
17 it had been given an exhibit number or we were waiting until
18 re-examination, D0020357.
19 Q. Article 13 thereof, it's on page 9 in the English --
20 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Stamp, I'm afraid time is going to beat us.
21 There may be other matters that require attention, but we've reached 7.00
22 so that we must ask you to continue tomorrow when --
23 MR. STAMP: Very well, Your Honour.
24 JUDGE PARKER: -- we proceed.
25 That's unfortunate, but we have run out of time. I would mention
1 that tomorrow because the courtroom in which we were to sit is required
2 for a hearing in the Karadzic case, we will not be able to commence until
3 3.45. So our commencement will be delayed until 3.45, and when we
4 conclude the evidence of the witness tomorrow, we will need to deal with
5 the question of the documentary exhibit that Mr. Djurdjic wants to
6 tender, the --
7 MR. STAMP: Very well.
8 JUDGE PARKER: So I'm sorry then, but we must now adjourn, and we
9 resume tomorrow at 3.45.
10 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.01 p.m.
11 to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 3rd day of
12 March, 2009, at 3.45 p.m.