1 Wednesday, 2 December 2009
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.03 a.m.
5 JUDGE PARKER: We continue with the evidence of Mr. Djordjevic
6 today. I won't bother to remind you each day, Mr. Djordjevic, but the
7 affirmation you made at the beginning applies throughout your evidence.
8 Yes, Mr. Djurdjic.
9 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. However,
10 before we proceed, I would like to say something. We have received a
11 document with a translation, so I would like to thank the translation
12 service for being so expeditious. It was a document that was marked for
13 identification as D397.
14 JUDGE PARKER: It will be now received as an exhibit,
15 Mr. Djurdjic.
16 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours.
17 WITNESS: VLASTIMIR DJORDJEVIC [Resumed]
18 [Witness answered through interpreter]
19 Examination by Mr. Djurdjic: [Continued]
20 Q. Mr. Djordjevic, now I would like to ask you to move on to
21 document number 34.
22 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we please have Exhibit P257
23 called up.
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is a decision made by the
25 minister of the interior, Vlajko Stojiljkovic. It was passed on the 18th
1 of June, 1998. It has to do with the establishment of the 124th
2 Intervention Brigade of the PJP. On the basis of the authority vested in
3 him on the basis of Article 6 of the Law on the Interior, the minister
4 made this decision and established the 124th Intervention Brigade. Its
5 tasks are spelled out here. First of all, how it was made up initially,
6 the intervention brigade, and then also what its tasks and duties are.
7 Also how it is put on the ready, also how they are professionally
8 trained, how the brigade is manned, and on page 2 of the same document we
9 see how and in which way the members of this brigade are going to be
10 listed in lists of establishment.
11 And there is the obligation to compile a document on the
12 establishment of this brigade that is supposed to contain attachments on
13 various bases.
14 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation]
15 Q. Thank you. Would you please tell us now who made decisions about
16 the engagement of the PJP units in Kosovo, to have them sent in Kosovo in
17 the first place?
18 A. In this decision and in regulations in general, the only
19 authorised person to order the assembling and engagement of the PJPs was
20 the minister of the interior or an official authorised by him. That is
21 what regulations say. Although I, as chief of the RJB, never received
22 any authority from him to use any PJP or part of any PJP to be sent out
23 on any mission whatsoever.
24 Q. Thank you. Was there a difference in procedure when PJPs are
25 being sent to Kosova-Metohija or on any other security mission?
1 A. The procedure was absolutely the same. After the minister would
2 make his decision, the service, or rather, the administration in charge
3 in the Ministry of the Interior would write up a dispatch ordering the
4 secretariats which part of the unit they would send to which area and
5 using which vehicles, how they will be dressed and so on. That was the
6 principle involved. So regardless of what their mission would be it was
7 the obligation of that administration only to provide a route for their
8 movement and to tell them who they are supposed to report to over there
9 and how they are supposed to be equipped.
10 Q. Who does the planning? Who issues tasks to the units that were
11 sent to Kosovo and Metohija?
12 A. Yesterday we talked about the obligations of these units and who
13 gives them their assignments, and we talked about situations, say, in
15 report to where they had been dispatched, and these units carry out tasks
16 in accordance with plans of those staffs or secretariats, if I can put it
17 that way, where they had been sent. So their tasks are planned, and that
18 institution where they had been sent gives them orders as to what to do.
19 If it's a secretariat, that is a secretariat where they had been sent or
20 where they were attached. And if they are being put at the disposal of a
21 staff, then their tasks are going to be planned by a staff. And the
22 staff will issue all orders in relation to the discharge of the tasks on
23 the basis of these plans.
24 Q. Thank you.
25 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we please have P132.
1 Q. In your binder it is document 35. Mr. Djordjevic, it is your
2 dispatch dated the 19th of June 1998, and could you please give us your
3 comments in respect of this dispatch that you had sent.
4 A. I sent this dispatch on the 19th of June 1998, that is to say
5 after the minister's decision had been made. Actually, this is not a
6 dispatch, it's a letter. So this is my letter sent to all Secretariats
7 of the Interior and enclosed is the minister's decision. Basically this
8 letter of mine informs the Secretariats of the Interior from the areas --
9 the area of Kosova-Metohija whose members actually made up this brigade.
10 I informed them that the minister had made his decision, and I provide
11 some kind of instructions about equal treatment on the part of all
12 secretariats when carrying out this decision. The entire documentation
13 of this 124th Intervention Brigade should be compiled in the same way in
14 all secretariats.
15 So practically this is an instruction that I'm giving them and in
16 this way I provide some detail.
17 Q. Thank you. You corrected me, and you said that this was a
18 letter. Who created the letter within the ministry?
19 A. All documents in relation to PJPs and all logistical work in
20 relation to these units in the Ministry of Interior were carried out by
21 the police administration. Thereby, it was the police administration
22 that had written up this letter too. They gave it to me to sign. They
23 attached the minister's decision to it, and distributed this document to
24 the secretariats that it pertained to.
25 Q. Thank you.
1 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could I now please have Defence
2 Exhibit D001-2948. For my colleagues from the Prosecution, it is 1453.
3 That's the 65 ter number from the Defence.
4 Q. Mr. Djordjevic, for you it is number 34. Actually, you've
5 already told us that in accordance with Article 6, the minister could
6 make decisions on the establishment of PJPs. I'm referring to the rules
7 on internal organisation. So could you please tell us in respect of this
8 decision how things functioned in practice? I mean, in terms of these
9 special anti-terrorist units?
10 A. This decision was based on the same authority given to him by
11 law, and it was passed on the 5th of April 1996 by minister Zoran
12 Sokolovic. You can see that on page 2 of this decision. In principle,
13 this decision, just like the previous one, contains the same obligations.
14 The first obligation is the minister's decision to establish a Special
15 Anti-terrorist Unit as a separate police unit, as a separate unit within
16 the RJB. Its headquarters are in Belgrade
17 So just something by way of clarification here, this decision
18 establishes that there is a Special Anti-terrorist Unit in the following
19 form: One unit with three headquarters, Belgrade, Novi Sad, and
20 Pristina. Up until then in the RJB, there had been three special units,
21 and they were attached to the secretariats in Novi Sad, the Novi Sad
22 secretariat, in Novi Sad
23 secretariat, and in Belgrade
24 linked to the police administration at the headquarters of the
25 secretariat. This decision, this document means that the minister pools
1 these three units and places them under one command. That is the command
2 of the Special Anti-terrorist Unit. Further on their tasks are spelled
3 out in this decision, how personnel will be deployed, and on page 2 of
4 this decision, you can see that all previous decisions are declared null
5 and void, those that regulated the activity of the special units.
6 Q. Thank you. Will you please tell us who made decisions on sending
7 the Special Anti-terrorist Unit out on mission or part of the unit?
8 A. Just like in the case of the PJPs, it was the minister who had
9 the authority to send the Special Anti-terrorist Unit out on a mission.
10 Q. Thank you. Can you tell us about equipment and training of the
11 anti-terrorist unit. How was that carried out? Who did that?
12 A. The anti-terrorist unit, established in this way, had within its
13 command persons who were involved in training. First of all, they had to
14 compile programmes of training drawing on worldwide and European
15 experience. Such a plan was approved by the officers in charge, and they
16 carried out this training according to such plans for various situations
17 for the purposes of which this unit had been established. It has to be
18 noted that this involved the air force too and also different hostage
19 situations, persons that had been barricaded, fighting terrorist groups,
20 and so on and so forth.
21 So all obligations that this unit had had to be studied in detail
22 on the basis of the programme adopted. They were supposed to train on
23 that basis too, and to be ready to act. As a rule, they were used for
24 the most complex security-related tasks. That is to say when another
25 unit from the ministry could not do this most complex work, then it would
1 be the Special Anti-terrorist Unit that would be engaged.
2 In this relation, there were special criteria for equipping the
3 Special Anti-terrorist Unit. They had special uniforms and also the
4 other weapons they required and other equipment they required. With
5 regard to this work and with regard to their equipment, they also had
6 logistical support from the police administration, and as for their
7 experience with the PJPs, that only contributed to the overall
8 preparations for the Special Anti-terrorist Unit, and for making them
9 more successful.
10 Q. Can you tell us who planned and who issued assignments to the
11 whole unit, or a part of a unit that was engaged in the territory of
12 Kosovo and Metohija?
13 A. For this unit as well as other attached and resubordinated units,
14 all the assignments and orders were given by the staff of the ministry.
15 And those who executed them directly on the ground were unit commanders
16 and their command staff.
17 Q. Thank you. Could you tell us about any activities that were
18 executed. Who did the unit commanders report to thereafter in Kosovo and
19 Metohija, I mean?
20 A. This unit, like all attached units, had to report to the
21 authority who issued them with the assignment, depending on the
22 territory. They would report to the staff that had given them the
24 Q. Could you clarify a little. You said that this unit had bases in
25 three places, what was the strength of these units, and perhaps if you
1 know the composition, how much of the personnel was actually operations
3 A. The strength of these units according to the rules was 80 men per
4 unit, that would mean 200 or 250 men in total. But a large number of men
5 within units were involved in logistical and other non-operative tasks.
6 Each of these three anti-terrorist units worked in groups or squads, and
7 I believe each of the groups had three to four units numbering ten men
8 each. So if you look at the total of the members of these anti-terrorist
9 units, half of them approximately were engaged in operations tasks and
10 the rest were dealing with the logistics and other work.
11 Q. With this kind of strength and distribution across centres in
12 1999 at the beginning of the war, was this the establishment for
13 anti-terrorist units?
14 A. We could see yesterday that towards the end of 1998 the minister
15 practically disbanded the Special Anti-terrorist Unit, that is the part
16 of it that was based in Novi Sad
17 practically consisted only of the unit in Belgrade and the one in
19 Q. Thank you. Could you go back to tab 32 now.
20 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] And can we call up again P357.
21 In English it would be page 8.
22 Q. And for you, Mr. Djordjevic, page 8 in B/C/S.
23 JUDGE PARKER: Did you mean to exhibit the last document,
24 Mr. Djurdjic?
25 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour, I do want
1 to tender it.
2 JUDGE PARKER: It will be received.
3 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit D401.
4 JUDGE PARKER: And while that is being received, the Chamber
5 noted there appeared to be an obvious mistake on the heading of the first
6 page of the English translation which gave the date as 1999, whereas the
7 date in the original and at every other point in both the original and
8 the English translation was 1996. I just mention that so that if there
9 is any concern by counsel they will pick it up. But otherwise, the
10 Chamber will treat it as a 1996 document.
11 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you. Yes, I would like
12 that to be 1996, and we will have it corrected in English. Thank you for
13 pointing out my mistake.
14 Q. Mr. Djordjevic, could you look at Article 10 of the rules on
15 internal organisation and tell us a little about how it was done in
17 A. Pursuant to the powers granted under this article, chiefs of
18 sectors and also chiefs of secretariats had the authority to form
19 permanent or provisional staffs, commissions, Working Groups, and other
20 bodies using MUP personnel within the sector, and these bodies would be
21 tasked to deal with some more complex tasks, which required the
22 engagement of more than one organisational unit and a number of personnel
23 within the secretariat.
24 And chiefs of sectors and chiefs of secretariats were the point
25 staff to these bodies, issued tasks and dead-lines, stipulated what
1 they -- what their duties were. But regardless of the fact that the
2 chief of sector at the ministry had the power, the legal power in
3 conformity with the general principles of management of the ministry, I,
4 as chief of sector, would always draw up a proposal to set up such bodies
5 that I had the right to establish, and then I would go to the minister to
6 explain my proposal and my intentions. And the minister would then give
7 me permission to follow my proposal as it was or with certain amendments
8 he would suggest, and then only would I establish this group or staff.
9 As chief of sector, I was able to order a chief of a secretariat
10 to set up groups or commissions to deal with certain issues, and he would
11 follow my orders to execute such assignments under Article 10.
12 Therefore, as chief of sector, I was not able to form a single commission
13 without first informing the minister and getting approval from him.
14 Q. Thank you. Could you perhaps tell us about the history of the
15 establishment of staffs in Kosovo and Metohija, to the best of your
17 A. The security situation in Kosovo and Metohija was for a long time
18 very complex. There were periods of extreme complexity in the security
19 situation. But in 1981, there were large-scale protests and our priority
20 security task was to deal with them. At that time the federal Ministry
21 of the Interior, pursuant to a decision by the presidency established a
22 joint police detachment which was tasked to restore law and order that
23 had been largely disrupted by these destructive protests.
24 The staff of this detachment was made up of commanding officers
25 from the Secretariat of the Interior and each republic and also the
1 Autonomous Province of Vojvodina had the duty to follow the approved plan
2 and send a part of its forces to Kosovo. If I remember well, from all of
4 this personnel was under the command of the staff of this joint body.
5 They made plans and decided where and how to intervene.
6 This staff of the joint detachment under the command of the
7 federal Secretariat for the Interior was in operation until 1989, I
8 believe with this particular composition and structure. In 1989, I was
9 appointed commander of that joint police detachment. And while I was in
10 that position, the whole situation in Yugoslavia was destabilised, and
11 during my tenure, first the police units from Slovenia and then Croatia
12 stepped out of this joint force and the last ones to remain were
14 When they too left and when amendments were passed to the
15 constitution in Serbia
16 Republic of Yugoslavia
17 personnel from Serbia
18 down as well, and the staffs then continued to consist only from
19 personnel from Serbia
20 After this joint force fell apart, it was renamed several times,
21 but it continued to exist until 1999 executing whatever tasks were given
22 by the ministry, that is the minister. We must note here that before all
23 these changes occurred, there was a provincial Secretariat for Internal
24 Affairs, and after these changes the provincial secretary who was an
25 Albanian, and ethnic Albanian left that position and a greatest number of
1 members from the base of that provincial secretariat also left the force,
2 and then the ministry had to compensate for the disappearance of the
3 provincial secretariat.
4 Q. Will you tell me, when you made decisions to form these staffs,
5 which lines of work, or rather, personnel from which sectors would be
6 appointed to the staff?
7 A. These were made up only of members of the public security sector
8 because their job fell within public security affairs.
9 Q. Thank you.
10 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could I call up 65 ter P4479.
11 Perhaps Mr. Stamp could help us. I don't know if it was listed as a bar
12 table exhibit from the Prosecution. I don't know if it received a number
13 or not.
14 Q. It's number 37, Mr. Djordjevic. Your tab 37. This is your
15 decision of the 11th of June, 1997. Could you comment briefly. This is
16 not the right document on the screen.
17 A. Pursuant to Article 10 of these rules, on the 5th of April, 1996
18 I passed he decision to establish a staff of the Ministry of the Interior
19 for Kosovo and Metohija based in Pristina. In item 2 we see that the job
20 of the staff is to plan and undertake steps and activities, and then the
21 activities are listed. Basically the first task is to suppress armed
22 insurgency, the second task is to prevent civil unrest, the third task
23 was to prevent terrorism and some other complex assignments that needed
24 to be done in the area of Kosovo and Metohija.
25 The obligation of the staff under this decision was also to
1 render specialised assistance to the Secretariats of the Interior, to
2 issue orders to them, to control the execution of tasks, and by such a
3 way of organising and setting of this staff, a step was made, so to
4 speak, whereby I had translated delegates and certain authority to that
5 staff and made them responsible for these most complex duties.
6 Another of the tasks was also to be responsible for the work of
7 the secretariat whenever complex duties needed to be carried out. In
8 carrying out such complex work, the secretariats irrespective of such
9 complex duties were subordinated to the staff, to the staff set up in
10 this way.
11 In view of such obligations, the staff, the chief of the staff,
12 was directly responsible to me for the execution of these tasks, and he
13 reported to me in respect of everything, specifically in respect of the
14 tasks which are referred to in items 2 and 3 of this decision.
15 Q. Thank you.
16 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] I move to tender this exhibit.
17 JUDGE PARKER: It will be received.
18 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit D402.
19 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can I ask Mr. Stamp to check 65
20 ter 4271, whether that is correct.
21 Q. Mr. Djordjevic, it is tab 38 in your binder. No, it is not.
22 Mr. Djordjevic, please explain to us this decision of the 12th of
23 June 1997 designating the composition of the staff. Can you explain the
24 details for us. It is tab 38.
25 A. Yes. The previous decision was the decision setting up this
1 institution, i.e., staff. This following decision, which we now have on
2 the screen, is a decision on the staffing of the staff, the personnel
3 composition of it, designating the staff leader, the staff chief, and the
4 members by name, listed by name. That is the essence. That is the main
5 reason why this decision was brought, to assign these people to their
6 respective duties within the staff.
7 Q. Thank you. There were seven members, as we can see, of the
8 staff. How do you arrive at this specific staff structure and these
9 lines of works being represented on it?
10 A. At that particular point in time, the security situation in the
11 area of Kosovo was quite complicated. It was not that complex in fact,
12 so that the number of members within the staff and the specific
13 responsibilities within the staff were both reduced. That is why it
14 features a smaller number of members because account was always taken
15 when such decisions were being adopted, namely when staffs were being set
16 up and the extent of the staff and the personnel numbers, account was
17 always taken of the current situation and the tasks that the staff would
18 have to perform at the specific time.
19 Q. Thank you.
20 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] I want to tender this exhibit.
21 JUDGE PARKER: Is this a decision made by the present witness?
22 Can that be made clear.
23 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] I believe that he has said in his
24 response that this is actually the personnel composition as a follow-up
25 to the previous document by which of the staff had been set up.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, this was my decision, but as I
2 just said, I also prepared a proposal of this personnel scheme for the
3 staff. I presented it to the minister, and he fully agreed that we
4 should have such a personnel structure, and he primarily agreed to the
5 appointment of the staff leader.
6 I could never make my own decision to that effect and appoint
7 anybody as staff leader without a decision to that effect having been
8 brought by the minister. Even though according to the rules, I had the
9 powers to bring such a decision, but I have already explained the reasons
10 why this was done in this way.
11 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation]
12 Q. Tell us please, according to this decision who was the staff
13 leader? Where had he worked prior to that?
14 A. At that moment the leader of the staff was Aco Vesovic, assistant
15 chief of the administration for the traffic police of the headquarters of
16 the ministry who, shall I say, was not widely educated in terms of
17 interventions in mass demonstrations, large-scale riots or similar
18 incidents so that under 2 and 3 appointed as his assistants were people
19 who had completed the military academy and had experience in dealing with
20 such problems in work, leadership work, and had the necessary experience
21 in work with special police units.
22 Q. Thank you.
23 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we now see --
24 JUDGE PARKER: It will be received, Mr. Djurdjic.
25 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit D403.
1 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours. Can we
2 now please see Exhibit 4480 under the 65 ter list. That is the
3 Prosecution's exhibit.
4 Q. In your tab it is number 39. Mr. Djordjevic, this is a decision
5 of the 15th of January, 1998
6 in Pristina. Can you tell us how this document came about and why?
7 A. This decision in a way spells out in more detail the activities
8 of the staff, defines the obligations of the staff, and more precisely,
9 and the staff's tasks to co-ordinate, direct and bring into accord the
10 work of all the secretariats in the area of the Autonomous Province
11 Kosovo. Practically this is expanding in some respects of the
12 obligations that are contained in the basic original decision in its
13 Article 2.
14 The staff's task has also been expended to the effect that in
15 carrying out its work, it should fully co-operate also with the state
16 security department, with the Yugoslav army, with other state organs and
17 local self-government organs, which was not in the previous decision
18 because the situation that had obtained in early 1998 had started to
19 drastically deteriorate, and there were some other manifestations of
20 activities to which -- which were pointed out by this decision also, and
21 which the staff had to respond more adequately to, also by drawing on all
22 these other factors. Also through the system of co-operation and mutual
23 exchange of information.
24 Q. Thank you. The tasks listed under 1, are they all within the
25 public security department's ambit?
1 A. Yes, all these are tasks which are in keeping with the law where
2 the obligation of the public security department.
3 Q. Thank you. Could you issue tasks to members of the state
4 security department? Could you give them assignments?
5 A. No, I could not issue orders to the state security department. I
6 only could direct staffs or secretariats formed in this way to
7 co-operate, to exchange information on the specific security events or
8 incidents, but I could issue orders to my staff [Real-time translation
9 read in error "to myself"] but to state security department staff or to
10 the organisatory [as interpreted] units, I could not, I was not so
12 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours, I don't
13 know whether to ask for this exhibit to be admitted or to wait for the
14 bar table because this has been envisaged for the bar table. I'm seeking
15 your guidance.
16 JUDGE PARKER: Strike while the opportunity presents,
17 Mr. Djurdjic. Tender it.
18 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Then I ask for it to be admitted
19 into evidence. I can see that colleague Stamp is not all too
20 enthusiastic about my proposal, but whether it's a P or a D, as long as
21 it's in the file, it makes no difference. I believe he would probably be
22 using it in the cross, I believe.
23 JUDGE PARKER: Received as a D exhibit.
24 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit D404.
25 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Now they are telling me line 13,
1 page 17, it should say, I could issue orders to my units, not to myself.
2 Please correct that.
3 Can we please now see P704. Exhibit P704.
4 Q. That is tab 40 in your binder, Mr. Djordjevic, which is a letter
5 by you, I believe.
6 A. Yes, it is a letter dated the 23rd of January, 1998. In view of
7 the adverse development of the security situation, I again issued
8 instructions to the staff as well as to the Secretariats of the Interior
9 in the area of the Autonomous Province of Kosovo and Metohija with the
10 basic tasks also referred to in the previous decisions, but what is
11 specific about this letter is contained on page 2.
12 Q. Please wait for all this to also appear on the screen so that it
13 can be followed by the Trial Chamber and the Prosecution.
14 A. So in view of the negative development of the security situation,
15 according to this letter, the staff was also charged with the obligation
16 of training organisational units to intervene, to act in the execution of
17 special security tasks. And then it goes on to list the training of
18 which secretariats, of which units, and also that the staff with its
19 capacities should contribute to equipping all these factors, all these
20 structures for future security tasks to be able to discharge them.
21 Thus what is specific is that additional training is being
22 ordered, and the organisation of such training courses in Kosovo and
23 Metohija, in the Autonomous Province of Kosovo
24 Q. Thank you.
25 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we now see Exhibit D100 which
1 is tab 41 in your binder.
2 Q. But please, when we move on -- when you move to the second page,
3 please pause for a minute so that we could have it brought up on the
4 screen so that everybody can see it while you speak.
5 Mr. Djordjevic, now, this is a decision of the 15th of May, 1998,
6 signed by you. It is also a decision on the formation of a staff.
7 A. Yes. It is the same principle as previously. On the 15th of
8 May, I brought a decision to set up this staff in Pristina with similar
9 mandate as those in the previous decisions, although the security
10 situation, one could say continued to develop in a negative direction and
11 we were confronted with serious security challenges. But in agreement
12 with the minister, this decision whereunder this staff was formed was
13 practically adopted in the same manner as before.
14 Now, why was it adopted on the 15th of May, 1998? Because as a
15 rule, these staffs in the personnel sense were set up for a year and
16 assigned for a period of a year since the term of the previous staff was
17 about to expire, it was to be replaced in this way.
18 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you. Could we now please
19 have a look at exhibit -- yes, yes, it is an exhibit. P760.
20 Q. It is tab 42 in your binder, Mr. Djordjevic. It is a decision
21 dated the 11th of June, 1998, on the composition of the staff.
22 A. Yes, this is a decision concerning the appointment of the members
23 of the staff and the leader of the staff. We had a previous decision or
24 previous decisions, rather, that involved seven or eight members on the
25 staff, whereas this decision involves 14 or 15. In agreement with the
1 minister and in view of the security situation at that point in time, we
2 agreed to establish a staff involving this personnel. That is to say
3 headed by Sreten Lukic, then his deputy would be Djinovic, and then there
4 were the other members of the staff, not to go into all the names. So
5 from that moment onwards when this staff was established, duties were
6 taken over from the previous leader of the staff in Pristina and the new
7 members of the staff familiarised themselves with the preparations and
8 tasks involved practically taking over from the previous staff.
9 Q. Thank you. In this decision -- actually, were all these persons
10 personnel from the RJB?
11 A. Yes, all of these are members of the public security, and the
12 chiefs of the secretariats and the territory of the Autonomous Province
13 of Kosovo and Metohija are also members of the broader composition of the
15 Q. Thank you.
16 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Now, I would like to ask for P57,
18 Q. Mr. Djordjevic, in your binder it is tab 43. This is a decision
19 dated the 16th of June, 1998. It is a document of minister Vlajko
20 Stojiljkovic, and it has to do with the establishment of the ministry
21 staff for combatting terrorism.
22 What do you know about the bringing of this decision and its
24 A. The situation in the territory of Kosova-Metohija irrespective of
25 various activities that had been underway because in the meantime parts
1 of the province had been blocked and there were special activities of
2 Special Forces and special staffs, and these tasks had been carried out
3 but regardless of the fact that traffic was established on the roads
4 where traffic had previously been stopped by the terrorist groups, the
5 overall situation in Kosovo and Metohija, according to various estimates,
6 was moving towards becoming an even more complex one.
7 The minister's assessment was that a staff consisting of the
8 members that we referred to just a few moments ago would not be
9 sufficient to successfully respond to the obligations that the Ministry
10 of the Interior had in resolving very serious security-related tasks and
12 In accordance with these assessments of his, he made a decision
13 to establish one staff of the ministry, and that this staff should
14 involve the RJB and the SDB, and in this way, it would involve both
15 departments. So that in view of the fact that there was terrorism on the
16 ground, both services had to be active in order to complete the work that
17 lay ahead of them.
18 On the basis of this right of his, and in view of the security
19 assessment of developments on the ground, he decided to appoint
20 Major-General Sreten Lukic as head of this staff. David Gajic was to be
21 his deputy. At that point in time and for years before that, he had been
22 in Kosovo, and he was co-ordinator for the state security there.
23 In addition to public security personnel, the staff was to
24 include members of the state security too. Also, as we can see on page 2
25 of the document -- could we please have page 2.
1 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we please have a look at
2 the second page. Could you please wait a moment. [In English] Please
3 second page. This is third page on the English version.
4 JUDGE PARKER: The English has only two pages, Mr. Djurdjic.
5 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] I beg your pardon, could we
6 please go back to page 1 then. Thank you. I have something for the
7 transcript, page 21, line 23. It shouldn't just say major, it should say
8 major general.
9 Q. Please go on.
10 A. Yes, in addition to these individual members of the staff the
11 minister appointed in terms of the wider composition the staff, the
12 chiefs of the centres of state security from the territory of the
13 Autonomous Province of Kosova-Metohija. On the basis of my previous
14 decision, only the chiefs of SUP
15 members of the wider composition of the staff. Whereas in this decision,
16 the minister fully brings together both services and gives them the task
17 of combatting terrorism in the territory of the Autonomous Province of
18 Kosova-Metohija. That is the basic and almost exclusive task of this
19 staff. That is to say, combatting terrorism and fully bringing together
20 all the capacities of both services. That is to say, the state security
21 and the public security departments.
22 Q. Thank you. I'd like to ask you something else now. In terms of
23 lines of work, or rather not lines of work, in relation to tasks carried
24 out by assistants in these different sectors, is there any difference in
25 relation to the previous decisions that you had made?
1 A. In view of the situation that was to be expected, the staff
2 involved the commanders of the special units of the RJB and the SDB such
3 as Zivko Trajkovic, the commander of the Special Anti-terrorist Unit of
4 the RJB; and Milorad Lukovic, commander of the unit for special
5 operations of the RDB, the state security.
6 Q. Thank you. Could you explain Roman numeral II to us now,
7 paragraph 2, in addition to this basic task that we see here, and that is
8 combatting terrorism?
9 A. Roman numeral II means that the staff plans, organises, and
10 controls the work and engagement of organisational units of the ministry
11 and also of sent and attached units in suppressing terrorism in the AP of
12 Kosovo and Metohija. That is to say, it is the duty of the staff to
13 involve all capacities of the Ministry of the Interior. That is to say,
14 the state security and the public security, to bring them together within
15 the same plan under the same leadership, and in terms of the same
16 engagement in carrying out anti-terrorist activities.
17 Q. Thank you. What about this second paragraph?
18 A. This is what the basic task is, what I mentioned a few moments
19 ago from paragraph 1, under Roman numeral II, that is. And in addition
20 to that, the staff had the duty to plan, organise, and direct and
21 co-ordinate the work of organisational units of the ministry in
22 Kosova-Metohija in carrying out more complex special security operations.
23 So the difference between the first paragraph and this second
24 paragraph lies in the following: In anti-terrorist activities, the staff
25 should plan, organise, and control in the sense of leadership. Whereas
1 in the case of these other tasks, there is a lesser degree of obligation.
2 They plan, organise, and direct and co-ordinate the work of units. Since
3 these are security related tasks of lesser importance, the staff is there
4 as a body that directs or channels the work of organisational units of
5 the ministry.
6 Q. Thank you. Tell us, what are these more complex special security
8 A. These can be duties and tasks from the domain of work of public
9 security first and foremost, and they have to do, for instance, with drug
10 trafficking, arms smuggling, and other complex operations where the
11 participation of two or more secretariats was required. If a particular
12 development was taking place in the territory of two or more
13 secretariats, then the staff was there to co-ordinate the activity among
14 two or more secretariats.
15 Q. Thank you. Tell me, the head of the staff that was established
16 on the 16th of June, was he responsible to you for the work of the staff?
17 Did he report to you about the work of the staff?
18 A. There was a very clear obligation on the basis of Roman numeral
20 the state of security, the head of the staff is responsible to the
21 minister, reports to the minister, and reports to him about
22 security-related incidents, measures taken, and the result of such
23 measures. In this way, through this kind of organisation of the staff
24 and this kind of responsibility, in view of the fact that this activity
25 of the staff involves both services, the minister of the interior, as for
1 this particular work and planning and organising anti-terrorist
2 activities, he practically is vesting these powers in the staff, taking
3 them away from public security and state security. And in this way he
4 links it directly to himself.
5 Q. Thank you. Regardless of such solutions that we have seen just
6 now that you referred to just now, what was the situation like in terms
7 of your previous solutions?
8 A. We see that on the page where we see the minister's signature.
9 In paragraph 6 he says that as this decision enters into force,
10 practically all previous decisions of mine become null and void,
11 decisions made in the previous period in 1998 and before that. So he is
12 basically annulling all previous decisions and all decisions previously
13 made by the chief of the RJB become null and void. That's to say they
14 are non-existent from that moment onwards.
15 Q. Tell me, in terms of equipping units, providing them with
16 weapons, what was the situation like in that respect? Units that were in
17 Kosovo or that had been sent to Kosovo, the secretariats as well.
18 A. The obligations were the same as previously. However, all units
19 sent and attached to the staff from the RJB were being sent by the
20 appropriate police administration in the RJB. As for the state security,
21 it was the appropriate services from within the state security.
22 Also with regard to the personal rights enjoyed by members of the
23 staff that came from public security, most often on the basis of this
24 decision, I would pass decisions regulating their rights derived from
25 employment. They have to do with their salaries and their general income
1 and other relevant matters.
2 Q. Thank you.
3 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we now call up D99.
4 Q. It's your tab 44.
5 A. I forgot to say in the previous decision the minister had taken
6 appointing members of the staff. It is said that at the request of the
7 staff, other personnel of the Ministry of the Interior can also be sent
8 to perform certain work at the staff. What I mean to say is that this is
9 not -- these decisions and appointments are not engraved in stone. Other
10 personnel can also be included, and therefore, on the 2nd of October,
11 1998, the minister points to the staff also Major-General Momcilo
12 Stojanovic, assistant chief of the public security sector and gives him
13 specific tasks that were not directly linked with anti-terrorist
14 activities, the decision specifies his tasks. It's mainly logistics and
15 providing the prerequisites for the work of organisational units of the
16 MUP, construction of certain installations, or housing for employees of
17 the secretariat.
18 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you. Your Honours, I
19 believe it's time for the break.
20 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you, Mr. Djurdjic. We'll take the first
21 break now and resume at 11.00.
22 --- Recess taken at 10.28 a.m.
23 --- On resuming at 11.03 a.m.
24 JUDGE PARKER: Yes, Mr. Djurdjic.
25 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
1 Q. Let me ask you one question about this decision of the minister
2 dated 16th June 1998
3 prevention of terrorism of the MUP report to you as chief of sector about
4 their work?
5 A. All duties of the staff were subject to reporting to the
6 minister. They were answerable to the minister for everything, including
7 reporting, therefore, the staff never reported to me about their work. I
8 did not receive such information from them.
9 Let me just add about this decision, I don't think we finished
10 with it before the break concerning Momcilo Stojanovic and his
11 appointment to the staff. Pursuant to the minister's decision, that
12 staff could have new personnel appointed to it, additional personnel,
13 such as in the case of Momcilo Stojanovic. But as I, as chief of the
14 public security sector, did not have the powers to send to the staff or
15 appoint to the staff any other member of the MUP except those approved by
16 the minister. Everything concerning the staff was within the purview of
17 the minister. It was up to him to decide on the personnel and make every
18 other decision.
19 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we now call up P1044.
20 Q. In your binder it's tab 45.
21 A. This decision I signed after I returned from Kosovo. And like
22 with any other decision addressed to staff members, it concerns only
23 their rights and entitlements arising from employment. Therefore, under
24 this decision the salary of Momcilo Stojanovic was increased, and he
25 enjoyed all the other benefits enjoyed by any other member of the staff.
1 I could make this decision only pursuant to the decision on
2 appointment made by the minister. All the other decisions concerning
3 rights and benefits I signed myself.
4 Q. This decision that we are looking at now, did you make it based
5 on your inherent powers?
6 A. I could make these decisions only on the authority of the
7 minister. That is clearly stated in the preamble of this decision and
8 any other decision.
9 Q. You just told us that you made this decision concerning legal and
10 employment rights pursuant to the minister's decision. And yesterday you
11 told us that you made certain decisions on the termination of secondment
12 for some members of the staff. Was that also one of the powers that you
13 had in your position?
14 A. I made those decisions also on the authority of the minister
15 because prior to that, the minister decided to appointment a certain
16 person to a certain position and to terminate the person who occupied
17 that position before. If that position was chief of the secretariat, for
18 instance, I would make that decision pursuant to the minister's decision.
19 My decisions, therefore, followed only upon the minister's
21 Q. Thank you.
22 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we have P259.
23 Q. It's your tab 46. Just take it easy, please, we need to have it
24 on the screen first.
25 Mr. Djordjevic, we see here the minister's decision dated 21 May
1 1999. Could you give us your comments.
2 A. On the 21st of May, 1999, the minister decided to appoint Dragan
3 Bozovic, deputy chief of the MUP staff for the suppression of terrorism,
4 made him responsible and answerable to the chief of the staff for the
5 tasks that he had issued him with. And any decision related to the
6 minister's prior decisions were submitted to the leader of the staff
7 concerned and the office of the minister. Thus, none of these decisions
8 were submitted to the leaders of any of either service.
9 Q. Did you make a proposal to the minister to second Mr. Bozovic to
10 be deputy chief of the MUP staff for the suppression of terrorism in
12 A. No, no, it was not up to me to decide on the staffing of the
13 staff. The staff talked directly to the minister and then the minister
14 would make a decision.
15 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we now have D010-0603. For
16 the Prosecution. It's 1785. That's the 65 ter number.
17 Q. And it's your tab 47, Mr. Djordjevic. As far as I can see, this
18 is your decision dated 21 May 1999
19 security tasks in the territory of Kosovo
20 preceded this decision?
21 A. It's the same with prior decisions. It followed the minister's
22 decision, and it was made on his authority to regulate certain rights and
23 benefits arising from employment such as salary and other matters.
24 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you. Is there anything the
25 Chamber wants to ask? If not, I would like to tender this document.
1 JUDGE PARKER: The problem is we query whether the document on
2 the screen is the one that you and the witness are talking about.
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, we would need the next
5 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, you are quite right.
6 What we see on the screens now, that was P259. And I asked for
7 D010-0603. Is the English version correct? No. No, this is the
8 decision of Vlajko Stojiljkovic.
9 MR. STAMP: I think there is an error in the -- in uploading to
10 e-court. I think the decision he wants to refer to is at page 3 -- 2 and
11 3 of D010-0605, so they combine the two documents in this one. I think
12 the first page of what is before the Court should be severed.
13 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you to my learned friend,
14 Mr. Stamp. Thank you, Your Honours. This is the document that we have
15 discussed, which is the decision of the accused dated the 21st of May,
16 1999. The date is the same, also the 21st of May, 1999.
17 JUDGE PARKER: So it's not Exhibit P259. You wish now to tender
18 this as an exhibit?
19 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] We just need to clarify
20 something, yes. As exhibit -- unless it was already admitted, and I'm
21 not sure about this, I think that Mr. Stamp told me that P259 contains
22 both documents. If that is not the case, then I ask that this document
23 D010-0603 in the Serbian version and -05 in the English version be
24 admitted into evidence.
25 JUDGE PARKER: It will be received.
1 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit D405.
2 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Now I would like to call 65 ter
3 OTP document 4101.
4 Q. This is your tab 48, sir.
5 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] And again, I would like to ask
6 Mr. Stamp to help me and say whether this document is included in the bar
7 table motion by the OTP. We can use it if it has already been admitted.
8 4101 is the OTP 65 ter number.
9 Q. Mr. Djordjevic, did you receive this document? I think this is a
10 document and not a dispatch dated the 28th of May, 1999, from the MUP
11 staff for suppression of terrorism in Pristina.
12 A. I don't remember whether I received this document. If I did,
13 then I was not competent to act pursuant to this document, and I
14 forwarded this document to the person who was responsible, who was
15 competent, which was the minister. This means that if I indeed received
16 this, then I simply forwarded it to the minister.
17 This document is a bit unclear to me, precisely when it comes to
18 appointing Dragan Bozovic, deputy head of the staff, because in the
19 earlier document we saw that on the 21st of May, 1999, pursuant to the
20 decision of the minister, he had already been appointed deputy head or
21 leader of the staff. Whereas in this document, we see that chief of the
22 RJB is being sent a proposal for Dragan Bozovic to be appointed deputy
23 leader of the staff even though this had already been completed and
24 finalised two weeks prior to that pursuant to the minister's order. But
25 in any rate, I did not act pursuant to this document. My duty was to
1 forward this to the minister, and following this the minister adopted
2 appropriate enactments.
3 Q. Thank you. For the purposes of the record, who was the person
4 authorised to make a decision pursuant to this document?
5 A. The only person authorised and competent to do so was the
7 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you. Could we tender this
8 into evidence, please.
9 JUDGE PARKER: Who signed this document? We don't see that on
10 the screen.
11 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] This document has a signature
12 that reads S. Lukic. Do you see the second page of the English version.
13 I think that you can see that Sreten Lukic signed it. We didn't turn to
14 the other page in any of the versions. I think you can see it on the
15 screen now.
16 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you. The document will be received.
17 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit D406.
18 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] If I understood the interpreters,
19 I think, Your Honours, you did not have your microphone on, and I don't
20 know whether this was recorded in the transcript.
21 Now, could we have P67, please.
22 Q. In your binder, that's tab 49, Mr. Djordjevic. Just take it
23 easy, we need to see the document in both versions. Mr. Djordjevic, this
24 is a decision dated the 31st of May, 1999, on establishment of the staff
25 of the ministry for the suppression of terrorism, and if we turn to the
1 third page.
2 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we see the third page right
3 away, please, and that's the second page in the English version.
4 Q. So if we turn to this page, we'll see that this document was
5 signed by Vlajko Stojiljkovic. Could you comment on this decision of the
6 minister, please.
7 A. Earlier we have said that as a rule the staff had existed for
8 about a year in this composition, and that after that year passed a new
9 decision was supposed to be adopted specifying the new composition of the
10 staff. One year after the first decision, which was sometime in
11 mid-June, you can see here on the 31st of May, 1999, the minister adopted
12 a new decision on establishing the staff of the ministry for the
13 suppression of terrorism, he designated the head of the staff and its
14 members as well as other duties and tasks which are specified on
15 subsequent pages but which are identical to the ones listed in the
16 decision from June of the previous year.
17 Q. Mr. Djordjevic, apart from the personnel changes in this
18 decision, are all other points regulated in the same way as in the
19 previous decision from the 16th of June of the year before that?
20 A. Well, while we are on the first page let me give a few comments
21 about the composition. The minister fully abided by the proposal that we
22 saw earlier which he had received from the head of the staff when it
23 comes to personnel who was to be on this staff, members of the staff.
24 And then on the second page of the document, the tasks and duties of the
25 staff remain the same. The head of the staff has the same responsibility
1 vis-a-vis the minister, so the duties and obligations from the previous
2 decision were copied in this decision.
3 Q. Thank you. I wanted now to turn to the decisions on appointments
4 from June of 1998 that we saw earlier, your decisions.
5 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] If we could go back to tab 42,
6 which is P760.
7 Q. Mr. Djordjevic, I would like us to compare this decision of yours
8 with the decision on appointment issued by the minister, so that's your
9 tab 42 and 43. In your decision, Sreten Lukic was appointed head of the
10 staff, a leader of the staff. Was this identical in the minister's
11 decision too?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. All right. Now so as not to lose too much time, in your decision
14 under item 4 we see Major Zarko Brakovic who was to be assistant head of
15 staff for police affairs. Is he mentioned in the minister's decision of
16 the 16th of June, Mr. Zarko Brakovic?
17 A. No, he isn't.
18 Q. Then under item 6 of your decision, we see Mr. Miodrag Rsumovic,
19 which in your decision was appointed assistant for financial crimes,
20 white-collar crimes. Is he mentioned in the minister's decision as a
21 member of the staff?
22 A. No.
23 Q. All right. Under item 10, we see Milos Deretic, who was supposed
24 to be assistant head of staff for wire communications. Is he mentioned
25 in the minister's decision? Is he appointed in that decision?
1 A. In this decision he is appointed as a member of the staff as head
2 of communications.
3 Q. In your decision?
4 A. No, in the decision of the minister. And in my decision, he was
5 an expert for communications in charge of communication systems.
6 Q. Who are you talking about?
7 A. Milos
8 Q. Where do you see Milos Deretic in the decision of 16th of June?
9 A. On page 2.
10 Q. Which decision are you reading? Your decision?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. My question is, do you see that gentleman's name in the
13 minister's decision, which is under tab 44, the minister's decision?
14 MR. STAMP: Minister's decision of what date?
15 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] 16th of June 1998.
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That is tab 43 in my binder. There
17 is no mention of Milos Deretic here in the minister's document.
18 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you. Mr. Stamp, I'm
19 comparing the decision of the head of the department of the 11th of June
20 and the minister's decision of the 16th of June.
21 Q. Now, in your decision of the 11th of June under item 12 we see
22 Gojko Celebic. Do you also see the gentleman's name in the minister's
24 A. No.
25 Q. Thank you. Now, Mr. Djordjevic, could we turn to the 16th of
1 June decision. We see that David Gajic is appointed deputy head of
2 staff. In your decision of 11th of June, is David Gajic listed as a
3 member of the staff?
4 A. No, because he comes from a different department.
5 Q. Thank you. The third name from the top we see assistant head of
6 staff for special operations Milorad Lukovic. Is he listed in your
7 decision as a member of the staff?
8 A. He works for the state security, and I had no power to appoint
9 him member of the staff.
10 Q. Thank you. And then underneath Mr. Lukovic, we see assistant
11 head of staff for special anti-terrorist units, Lieutenant-Colonel Zivko
12 Trajkovic. Is Mr. Trajkovic mentioned in your decision as a member of
13 the staff?
14 A. No, he isn't.
15 Q. Thank you.
16 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we now see D232, please.
17 Q. Mr. Djordjevic, we have before us the instruction on information
18 and reporting of the Ministry of the Interior. Could you please give us
19 brief explanations on this instruction and how it was implemented?
20 A. As we have mentioned earlier, the minister of the interior
21 adopted internal enactments regulating the work within the Ministry of
22 the Interior. This instruction is one such enactment. The instruction
23 regulates the issue of information and reporting within the Ministry of
24 the Interior. It deals, or rather, it describes what urgent information
25 is, daily regular providing information, monthly reporting, and annual
1 one. And an integral part of this are security-related events concerning
2 which information was provided. Therefore, this instruction, first of
3 all, deals with providing information and reporting on regular routine
4 tasks that are carried out within the Ministry of the Interior.
5 Q. Thank you. Could you now explain to us how this rule was applied
6 in practice?
7 A. This book of rules regulates how the Ministry of the Interior
8 deals on a daily basis with security-related information, events, and so
9 on. Through established organisational units of the ministry,
10 information was provided from the lowest organs and organisational units
11 of the ministry up to the top level, the seat of the ministry, and then
12 further on from the ministry to the units and members on the ground who
13 were supposed to receive certain instructions on how this or that was to
14 be done or improved.
15 This means that if there was a security-related event which took
16 place in the territory of a municipality and it fell within the category
17 of events covered by this instruction, then the duty service of that
18 municipal organ was to convey that information to the duty service of the
19 regional organ who in turn was to convey that information to the duty
20 operation centre at the seat of the ministry.
21 This information is transmitted urgently by telephone at that.
22 Of course, if that is what is envisaged. After this urgent information
23 along the line up to the top, what follows is more detailed information
24 about the event concerned and measures taken. Then there's more detailed
25 information provided through dispatches and later on through daily
1 information which was the obligation of every secretariat. They were
2 supposed to send it to the ministry and to the duty operation centres.
3 So with regard to such events or incidents that are reported on urgently
4 during the day, at the end of the day full reports are compiled in detail
5 in the territory of the secretariat about what happened in the territory
6 of the secretariat, and then this daily survey of security-related
7 incidents is provided to the duty operation centre.
8 The duty operation centre in this way receives reports, daily
9 reports, from all secretariats in the territory of Serbia
10 a few sentences about the most important things that happened, and all
11 these daily reports are sent to the analytics department of the ministry,
12 that is at the seat the ministry. And then this administration after
13 processing the matter and processing all the reports of all secretariats
14 sends return information to all the SUPs about the most important
15 security-related incidents that had taken place in the territory of the
16 republic. In this way all secretariats are informed about things that
17 happened outside their own territory, but that are important and are
18 events that organisational units within the ministry need to know about.
19 That is what I had to say about this urgent information and daily
20 information. And that would be it. Regular information about certain
21 security aspects can be periodical at the request of one of the lines of
22 work from headquarters depending on the security subject matter involved,
23 the administration can ask territorial Secretariats of the Interior to
24 inform them about something additionally, and that is what they do then.
25 In addition to these regular reports, there were monthly reports
1 that were compiled and then the department of analytics at the seat of
2 the ministry would compile these monthly reports on the basis of
3 everything that had happened during the previous month. They would
4 compile a survey consisting of a smaller number of incidents, and the
5 users of this monthly information on the security situation in Serbia
6 were specified, and they were provided copies.
7 Q. Thank you. In terms the subject matter involved, what was the
8 subject of information provided on the basis of these rules, can you tell
10 A. I've already said that these were reports about regular
11 security-related events and also some extraordinary events like natural
12 disasters, protests of citizens, et cetera. But conditionally speaking,
13 these are regular security-related events and incidents. All these
14 events concerning which there was a duty to report starting from the
15 lowest ranking organs up to the top organs was the list of such events,
16 and then it depended on the particular subjects that were dealt with by
17 the ministry, so it has to do with all the domains of the work, all the
18 lines of work within the ministry. Traffic control, movement of
19 foreigners, and so on and so forth, so there were particular fields where
20 there was the duty to inform regularly.
21 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] D004-2904, that is what I'd like
22 to see now so that the Judges and the Prosecutor could see that list.
23 D004-2904. That's the first page of the English version of that list.
24 Q. Mr. Djordjevic, what you told us about --
25 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] P67. That's it. I'm sorry.
1 P67. That's it.
2 Q. Now, how do I give you the page reference?
3 A. I have it.
4 Q. You have it in Serbian. That's fine. Whereas this is -- no, no.
5 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] D232. I am sorry. It's the
6 rules. It's the rules. The list starts on page D004-2904 of the English
7 version. Yes, yes, right. We have it now, thank you. That's where the
8 list starts.
9 Q. What are the events and incidents that need to be reported about,
10 that's the English version. And, Mr. Djordjevic, you look at what you
11 have, the Serbian version. So what is number 1? What is the field under
12 number 1, and later on there's a specific reference to it as one of the
13 subjects that need to be reported on.
14 A. I've already explained that it has to do with reporting about all
15 fields that the public security sector deals with, so the first one is
16 crime prevention. First it's classical crime; murder, robbery, and the
17 like. The next field after classical crime, as it were, is white-collar
19 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Just a moment, please. Could we
20 have a look at the second page.
21 Q. Please go ahead. We have it now.
22 A. B, white-collar crimes. And then there are types of crimes
23 listed with a specific reference to what the ministry is supposed to be
24 informed of.
25 Q. Thank you.
1 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we please have the next
2 page in English now, please. The next page.
3 Q. Please proceed, Mr. Djordjevic.
4 A. Now, under V it says, Irrespective of the crime concerned. It
5 says, Other events that have nothing to do with the previously listed
6 crimes. Then the next field is public law and order, so after crime, the
7 next line of work in the public security sector is public law and order,
8 and then there is a specific reference to events that have to do with
9 disruptions of public law and order, more significant disruptions, that
11 Q. Thank you.
12 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we please have the next
13 page in the English version now, please.
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The next field is traffic safety,
15 and there is also the obligation to report on all traffic accidents in
16 the territory of the secretariat and other events that have to do with
17 safe traffic or consequences related thereto.
18 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation]
19 Q. Thank you. Next page, please.
20 A. The next field rather are border affairs, that is to say,
21 everything that has to do with possible border incidents or events
22 related to securing the state border. And within this line of work there
23 is information that has to do with the stay and movement of foreigners.
24 And incidents that occurred involving foreigners one way or the other.
25 Q. Thank you.
1 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] And could we have the next page
2 of the English version. Thank you.
3 Q. Could we now move on?
4 A. Yes. Within the same line of work in the ministry, there is a
5 reference to passports, travel documents.
6 Q. That's clear. How about numbers 5 and 6?
7 A. Yes, yes, the next field is the field of fires and explosions and
8 other extraordinary events in relation to different kinds of disasters
9 and also the activity of fire-fighting units. These reports involve all
10 events and incidents in all the lines of work of public security, or
11 rather the ministry.
12 Q. Mr. Djordjevic, thank you.
13 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we now please have document
14 D005-0046. From my colleagues from the Prosecution, it is 1454 according
15 to the 65 ter list provided by the Defence.
16 Q. Mr. Djordjevic, it is your tab 51. Just a moment, please.
17 Right, yes, we have it. Mr. Djordjevic, can you tell us what this
18 document is. This document dated the 23rd of April, 1999.
19 A. This is a dispatch dated the 23rd of April, and the analytics
20 department of the ministry, or rather, of the public security department
21 is providing return information to the Secretariats of the Interior.
22 They are actually sending a daily review of current events and
23 occurrences relating to public security for the previous day, that is to
24 say, the 22nd of April.
25 I've already said that all secretariats provide the ministry with
1 reports for the previous day, or rather, daily surveys of events and
2 occurrences. And then on that basis, the analytics department processes
3 all of that and then sends return information by way of a review of
4 events that took place in the territory of all of Serbia so that all the
5 secretariats would be informed about security-related events and
6 incidents in respect of the previous day throughout the territory of the
7 Republic of Serbia
8 Q. Thank you.
9 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could this document please be
10 admitted into evidence.
11 JUDGE PARKER: It will be received.
12 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit D407.
13 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we please have document
14 D005-0053. For my colleagues from the Prosecution, it is 65 ter number
15 1455 of the Defence.
16 Q. And for you, Mr. Djordjevic, it is tab 52. Just tell me,
17 Mr. Djordjevic, did you receive these reports, these daily reports that
18 we are looking at right now?
19 A. Yes, all the daily reports. I received all of them. Well, not
20 in the original sense but by way of a cross-section. At any rate, I was
21 informed about everything. As I've already said, this is a dispatch that
22 was sent to the secretariats on the 24th of April, and it contains a
23 survey of events and incidents that took place on the previous day. Also
24 it is sent to all secretariats and the MUP staff in Pristina.
25 Q. Thank you.
1 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could this document please be
2 admitted into evidence.
3 JUDGE PARKER: It will be received.
4 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit D408.
5 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we please have document
6 D005-0059. The 65 ter number is 1456.
7 Q. And for you it is tab 53, Mr. Djordjevic. And then let me ask
8 you something, Mr. Djordjevic, this report, it contains all the knowledge
9 that the Ministry of the Interior has, in Belgrade that is, in respect of
10 the previous day and for the territory of Serbia
11 A. Yes. This feedback information for secretariats could only be
12 drawn up this way. And it's based on the reports from secretariats, so
13 if secretariats failed to include something in their report, then this
14 administration could not take it into account and send feedback to
15 secretariats. This administration received initial reports, analysed
16 them, and then sent this back to secretariats.
17 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you. I would like to
18 tender this.
19 JUDGE PARKER: It will be received.
20 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit D409.
21 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you. Can we now have
22 D005-0065. Number 65 ter 895.
23 Q. What we see here is a daily overview for the 26th of April, 1999
24 Let me ask you, did ministry in this way provide feedback to all
25 secretariats in the territory of Serbia
1 MR. STAMP: May I just ask what date is it on the document which
2 the witness is looking at?
3 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] The report is for the 26th, and
4 the overview is made on the 27th. You see it says, Public security
5 related incidents and occurrences for the 26th of April, 1999.
6 The document on the screen, that's what we are discussing,
7 Mr. Stamp. Just a moment, Mr. Djordjevic.
8 I don't know if it's properly translated, but the title of this
9 document says:
10 "Daily overview of topical occurrences and events related to
11 public security for 26 April 1999
12 Can we go on, Mr. Stamp?
13 MR. STAMP: Well, is the witness being shown the document which
14 is on the screen, because now -- I thought I understood but now I see a
15 different, now you say a different topic to the one that I see.
16 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Mr. Stamp, we are dealing with
17 the same series of documents that the administration for analysis -- it
18 just concerns a different day. On the 27 they are reporting about the
20 Q. Mr. Djordjevic, my question was, was it in this way that the
21 Ministry of the Interior informed Secretariats For Internal Affairs in
22 the whole territory of Serbia
23 day that were security related?
24 A. Yes. We can see clearly. It's addressed to Secretariats of the
25 Interior, all, 1 through 33. They are the recipients of this
2 Q. Thank you.
3 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] May I tender this.
4 JUDGE PARKER: It will be received.
5 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit D410.
6 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can I now ask for D005-0075.
7 It's 65 ter 1457.
8 Q. Your tab 55, Mr. Djordjevic. Just a moment, Mr. Djordjevic.
9 This is a report from the analysis administration dated 28 April 1999
10 about the 27 April concerning occurrences that are interesting from the
11 public security point of view. We see in all of these reports that they
12 were also sent to the staff of the MUP in Pristina, to the head of the
13 staff. Could you tell us why you also sent this report to the head of
14 the MUP staff?
15 A. Well, first of all, it covers incidents and events that the staff
16 had already been informed about, and it had even provided some of this
17 information in the first place. And second, because of the importance of
18 the staff. The minister wanted them kept abreast of all the
19 security-related events and incidents in the rest of the territory of the
20 republic. That's why they were given this feedback information.
21 Q. Thank you.
22 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] May I tender this, please.
23 JUDGE PARKER: Yes.
24 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit D411.
25 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we now have D009-0791. 65
1 ter 1768.
2 Q. For you, Mr. Djordjevic, tab 56.
3 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] The last document of this kind,
4 Your Honours.
5 Q. The same type of document as those. Let me just ask you again --
6 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Do we have a translation? We do.
7 Q. Mr. Djordjevic, about the submission of these reports to the
8 staff as well, in addition to the anti-terrorist activity that the staff
9 was tasked with pursuant to the minister's decision, did the minister
10 place in the staff's purview any other tasks?
11 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Just before you answer, the
12 translation is number D010-4277. We have only the Serbian. Yes, that's
13 it. 14 May.
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] We saw a moment ago in that
15 decision that the principal task of the staff was anti-terrorist activity
16 and tasks related to that, but in the second paragraph, the staff was
17 also given the task to lend assistance to secretariats and to become
18 engaged in more complex security-related events, so in this report some
19 of such complex security-related incidents are listed, and the staff is,
20 therefore, informed and their involvement is required.
21 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you. Can this document be
22 admitted, please.
23 JUDGE PARKER: Yes.
24 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit D412.
25 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we now have P1041.
1 Q. Mr. Djordjevic, it's your tab 57. Just wait until we get the
2 English. This is a letter or a report from the staff dated 21 October
3 1998. Who is the recipient?
4 A. On the 21st of October, 1998, this letter was sent from the staff
5 to secretariats in the Autonomous Province of Kosovo and Metohija, all
6 the secretariats.
7 Q. To whom at the secretariats?
8 A. To the chief. It contains certain responsibilities.
9 Q. Wait a moment.
10 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can I have page 2 in English and
11 in Serbian. I don't think page 2 in English contains the beginning that
12 we need. Could we go back in English to page 1 to see the beginning of
13 this item. Yes, number 1.
14 Q. Subparagraph (b) deals with what?
15 A. The secretariats, or rather, the chiefs of SUPs, are instructed
16 to produce daily and urgent reports that are more precise and give more
17 detail about the following events: First, terrorist acts. Second,
18 police actions executed. Three, movements of the police force within
19 Kosovo and beyond. And four, any particular interest expressed by the
20 OSCE Mission
21 Q. Thank you. Did this information later reach you along your line
22 of communication in the ministry?
23 A. Let me first say something about this document dated 21 October,
24 that is after the signing of that agreement and the stipulation of
25 various obligations of the MUP towards the mission. That document also
1 stipulated that the MUP staff should be informed of all the things that
2 must be reported to the OSCE verifying mission -- sorry, to the
3 Verification Mission
4 daily and urgent reports only covering item (b) 1, that is terrorist
5 acts. Points 2, 3, and 4 on this page, the MUP staff received
6 information from chiefs of SUPs and communicated them to the Verification
8 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we now call up D284.
9 Q. Mr. Djordjevic, before we move on to this document, could you
10 tell us whether this information under 2, 3, and 4, since you did not
11 receive it, who did receive it?
12 A. This information --
13 MR. STAMP: [Overlapping speakers] ... I can't recall the witness
14 saying that he did not receive it. He was asked, Did you receive it, and
15 he did not answer that question. And this is leading.
16 JUDGE PARKER: That accords with my recollection as well,
17 Mr. Djurdjic.
18 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] What I remember, Your Honour, is
19 that the witness said that information under points 2, 3, and 4 were not
20 received by him at the ministry. I'm asking if he knows whether anyone
21 else received it and who. If it's leading, I'll moving on.
22 JUDGE PARKER: You are, and that is not my recollection of what
23 the witness said. It may have been in your mind to follow that line, but
24 I don't think it occurred.
25 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] My mistake, Your Honour.
1 Q. Mr. Djordjevic, you said that the staff received information from
2 the secretariats covered in items 2, 3, and 4. Did you receive
3 information from the staff specified in items 2, 3, and 4?
4 A. I've said that clearly in my previous answer, but I'll repeat.
5 Within daily and urgent reports, the Ministry of the Interior in
6 subparagraph (b) of that previous page we saw, was only informed about
7 terrorist acts covered in item 1. Information pertaining to 2, 3, and 4,
8 was provided only to the MUP staff in Pristina, and the MUP staff in
9 Pristina used it in their communication with the KVM because the MUP
10 staff had the responsibility to inform the Verification Mission of all
11 these events. Nobody within the ministry was informed about the movement
12 of units and other things covered in items 2, 3, and 4. It was a very --
13 it was on a need-to-know basis and needed to be communicated to the KVM.
14 Q. We see an overview of security-related incidents, events, and
15 information from the staff from the 14th of March, 1999, covering the
16 period from 6.00 --
17 MR. STAMP: Can I just inquire, is this on the list of documents
18 notified? I can't seem to find it anywhere. Well, I'm told it is. My
20 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] I think it's on the screen. It's
21 already on the screen, that document. If we could only see the top of
22 the page, it says 14 March. I think I said before, and I'm sorry if I
23 didn't, that it's D284. And if we look at page 1 of this document we
24 should see the date 14 March 1999
25 Serbian now. Can we now see the English, page 1. The number should end
1 with 512. Is it clear now? So it's a report dated 14 March 1999.
2 Q. Mr. Djordjevic, did you get this summary of security-related
3 events that the staff sent to the ministry in Belgrade?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. It lists also the topics covered in the report?
6 A. Yes, we can see here what events and incidents the staff reports
7 about, reports -- informs the top leadership of the ministry. In a way
8 this is double-track channel of informing because this summary, which the
9 staff compiled and then dispatched to the ministry leadership was
10 received by him from the secretariat in his area. The secretariats were
11 under the obligation to inform the operations centre in the ministry
12 about these same events, but in view of the fact that the staff was
13 responsible for the security situation in Kosovo and Metohija, the staff
14 made a sort of a cross-section, a recap of everything that had happened
15 in this field, the most important security-related events, and sent a
16 report to the leadership of the Ministry of the Interior.
17 This summary of security-related -- security-relevant incidents
18 for the previous day encompassed terrorist attacks, terrorist
19 provocations, the number of apprehended persons, police, army, et cetera.
20 The grave crimes perpetrated, more serious traffic accidents, fires and
22 Q. Thank you.
23 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we now see document
24 D004-1896. For our colleagues from the Prosecution, it is 1458 according
25 to the 65 ter Defence list.
1 Q. And your tab, Mr. Djordjevic, is 59. Mr. Djordjevic, this is a
2 report of the Kosovska Mitrovica SUP of the 17th of January addressed to
3 the staff of the ministry to the head of the staff. Can you comment
4 briefly on the topics that we see before us?
5 A. This is an obligation which the head of the secretariat fulfills
6 according to the letter from the staff which we discussed a while ago
7 dated the 21st of October, so acting upon that order and the relevant
8 points in that order, he submits a report on the 17th of January 1999
9 the staff. And it is precisely his report that in subparagraph (1)
10 refers to terrorist attacks and provocations. Actually, it stated that
11 there were no terrorist acts on that particular day, and in subparagraphs
12 (2) and (3) it refers to movements of units in his area -- he refers to
13 movements of units in his area, so that the staff might be informed of it
14 and on its part inform the Verification Mission about it in keeping with
15 its undertakings.
16 Q. Thank you. Does he also submit this report to somebody else
17 apart from -- to the staff in the ministry?
18 A. No. This letter or this patch which was forwarded, was forwarded
19 in keeping with the previous order, and it referred to only the ministry
20 staff. So this document reached only the ministry staff.
21 Q. Thank you.
22 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] May this exhibit, i.e., document
23 be tendered.
24 JUDGE PARKER: Yes.
25 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit D413.
1 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we now see document
2 D004-1775, please. According to the Defence 65 ter list, it is 1774.
3 Q. For you, Mr. Djordjevic, it is 59A, the tab. This is also a
4 dispatch from the SUP
5 dated the 18th of January. Can you tell us all the addressees to whom
6 this was addressed, this dispatch?
7 A. Secretariats of the Interior from the territory of the Autonomous
8 Province of Kosovo
9 report on security-related events at the same time to the staff of the
10 ministry in Pristina and to the MUP of the Republic of Serbia
11 operations centre. Namely, everything according to the -- as according
12 to the instructions on reporting and informing.
13 They were to inform on all these events, and they did so inform
14 the operation centre in Belgrade
15 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you. I move that this
16 exhibit be admitted into evidence.
17 JUDGE PARKER: It will be received.
18 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit D414.
19 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we now see document
20 D004-1777. D004-1777. For the colleagues from the Prosecution, it is
21 1773 of the Defence 65 ter list.
22 Q. And for you, Mr. Djordjevic, it is 65B. Just a minute until we
23 see it on the screen.
24 Mr. Djordjevic, here we again have a dispatch of the SUP of
25 Kosovska Mitrovica 18 January 1999, dispatch number 627. To whom was
1 this send and what was its subject, can you tell us, please?
2 A. This is an obligation that we have already referred to, namely
3 the secretariat in Kosovska Mitrovica was to inform the MUP staff in
4 Pristina and the operation centre in Belgrade of security-related
5 incidents and events for the previous day. Fortunately here we see that
6 practically there had been no security-related events on the day
7 preceding the day of the dispatch apart from the two referred to, and
8 these events were always reported to the staff whether 15 or 2, as in
9 this case, the staff of the ministry as well as the operation centre in
11 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you. May this be also
12 admitted, please.
13 JUDGE PARKER: Yes, it will be received.
14 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit D415.
15 JUDGE PARKER: It would appear to be a convenient time,
16 Mr. Djurdjic. We'll resume at 1.00.
17 --- Recess taken at 12.29 p.m.
18 --- On resuming at 1.02 p.m.
19 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Djurdjic.
20 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours. Can we
21 see document D004-1782. According to the 65 ter Defence list, it is
23 Q. And in your binder, Mr. Djordjevic, it is 59C. Now, we have a
24 daily report of the 17th of January, 1999, of the Kosovska Mitrovica
25 police department. To whom was this addressed, Mr. Djordjevic, this
2 A. This report dated 17th of January, 1999, was sent simultaneously
3 to the MUP staff in Pristina and the operation centre of the MUP of the
4 Republic of Serbia
5 Q. Thank you. Mr. Djordjevic, does this daily report contain
6 planned anti-terrorist activities, and does it contain a report on
7 executed anti-terrorist activities or on the future plans of activities
8 of the police?
9 A. This daily report comprises the customary incidents and practices
10 in keeping with instructions on reporting and informing. It does not
11 contain any planned anti-terrorist activities, nor does it contain any
12 post-mission completed activity reports.
13 Q. Thank you.
14 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] I move that this document be
15 admitted into evidence.
16 JUDGE PARKER: It will be received.
17 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit D416.
18 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we now see Exhibit P0157 [as
20 Q. Mr. Djordjevic, it is your tab number 60. Here we have a
21 dispatch dated the 1st of April 1999. It is a staff dispatch. To whom
22 is it addressed? To whom is this document addressed?
23 A. This is an order of the staff of the MUP in Pristina dated the
24 1st of April, 1999, addressed to the secretariats in Kosovo and Metohija.
25 The heads of the secretariats are instructed to inform in respect of the
1 situation that had just developed and which concerned the campaign, the
2 bombing by NATO forces. This dispatch made it incumbent upon the chiefs
3 of the secretariats to inform the staff of the MUP about the bombing, the
4 actual place, the date, the hours, and item 2, chiefs of secretariats are
5 instructed to place special emphasis on terrorist attacks directed at MUP
6 and Yugoslav army facilities, personnel and facilities. Under item 3 it
7 focuses on serious crimes committed. And it also instructs the
8 addressees to inform the staff about refugees, ethnic Albanians, and of
9 other ethnic communities from the territory of the autonomous province.
10 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you. Can we now see.
11 Exhibit P701, please.
12 Q. Mr. Djordjevic, your tab number is 61. This is a summary of
13 security-related events incidents and intelligence recorded between 600
14 hours on the 24th of April and 1800 hours -- 600 hours on the 25th of
15 April 1999, and it is by the MUP staff. To whom did the MUP staff submit
16 these summaries, Mr. Djordjevic?
17 A. This is a report, or rather, a summary of security-related events
18 and incidents which was submitted on the 25th of April from the staff --
19 from the ministry staff, and it relates to the events on the previous
20 day. It is addressed to the minister, to the chief of the public
21 security department, to the chief of the state security department, and
22 to the chief of the analysis administration. This summary covers
23 precisely the previously mentioned data on the air campaign by NATO
24 forces on terrorist forces -- on terrorist attacks, and on serious crimes
25 as referred to in the previous instructions by the staff, so according to
1 those instructions the secretariat submitted those reports to the staff,
2 and the MUP staff is then forwarding these to other officials and to the
3 chiefs that I already indicated as well as to the administration for
5 All the events which are covered in this summary report had
6 already been conveyed to the MUP via the regular channel of information,
7 namely the duty information services in the municipalities, in the
8 regions, and in the operation centre on duty, duty operation centre. In
9 other words, the staff of the ministry in this particular letter just
10 recapitulated some of these events and informed the addressees of them.
11 Q. Thank you. Did these reports contain plans for carrying out
12 anti-terrorist activity, and do they contain reports about anti-terrorist
13 activities that had already been carried out?
14 A. In this report, there is no reference to plans of anti-terrorist
15 action, or is there any mention of the results of such anti-terrorist
17 Q. Thank you. Mr. Djordjevic, from the 16th of June, 1998
18 MUP staff for combatting terrorism in Kosovo and Metohija was established
19 and then throughout 1998 and 1999 until the end of the war, did you
20 receive from the staff or from the SUPs in Kosovo reports and information
21 about planned anti-terrorist activities, reports about activities,
22 anti-terrorist activities that had already been carried out, or about
23 plans concerning police activity during these anti-terrorist activities?
24 A. During the time concerned, I did not receive a single report, a
25 single piece of information, a single plan from the staff of the MUP for
1 combatting terrorism, which would relate to these terrorist, or rather,
2 anti-terrorist activities, or did I receive from any of the secretariats
3 in that area any information about where terrorists were, what the plan
4 was in relation to them, and what the consequences were in relation to
5 terrorists and other things.
6 Q. Thank you. Mr. Djordjevic, during a certain part of 1998, I'm
7 referring to the latter half of 1998, were you in Pristina while
8 terrorist activity was planned, while the global plan was being
10 A. Yes, I was there.
11 Q. While you were in Pristina, did you receive written reports about
12 that activity, or were you informed in some other way?
13 A. I, as chief of the RJB, did not receive any reports about the
14 activities of the staff either in 1998 or in 1999. However, my role in
15 1998 was different when compared to 1999, but I believe that will be
16 clarified here as we move along. However, in 1998 or later, the staff
17 did not submit any reports to me about planned activities or in terms of
18 the activities that had been carried out.
19 Q. Thank you, I just wanted to clarify that. I wanted to clarify
20 what it was that you had said.
21 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I have concluded
22 this topic, but I would like to say that in relation to the previous
23 document that we used, the transcript mentions the wrong number. It
24 should be number 1057. The reference is wrong in the transcript. It
25 says P0157. So the page is 55, line 20. Instead of P1057, it should say
2 Mr. Djordjevic -- or rather, Your Honours, could we please have
3 P66 called up. In English we'd like to have a look at page 5. Please,
4 so in relation to the previous document, instead of 0157, it should say
6 Q. Mr. Djordjevic, I would now like to move on to --
7 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Well, this is not my page 5.
8 It's the right document. However, in the Serbian version we would need
9 Article 53. So let's have a look at page 3 in the English version, one
10 page further. I need it from 49 onwards. Yes. One more page, yes,
11 fine, excellent, excellent in Serbian. However, one page further we
12 should look at Article 49 actually. Ah, yes, that's it.
13 Q. Since we are moving on to the question of disciplinary
14 responsibility in the MUP, Mr. Djordjevic, we have before us the Law on
15 the Interior, so I would appreciate it if you could tell us about the
16 basic institutes prescribed here. How did this work in practice?
17 A. I have here the decree on disciplinary responsibility.
18 Q. No, no, we are looking at your tab 18.
19 A. Ah, 18.
20 Q. Find it, Mr. Djordjevic. Article 49.
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. How is this carried out in practice? Let us start with the
23 general principles stipulated in this law.
24 A. According to the Law on Internal Affairs of the Republic of
1 That is to say, that elements are established of serious breaches of work
2 duties. This law in Article 52, envisages measures that can be taken.
3 Also in Article 51, we see what the measures are for less serious
4 infringements. For the most part, these are general measures that are
5 elaborated later on through the decree on disciplinary proceedings. In
6 this field, there is also a disciplinary court, and its role and duties
7 are stated here. Also there is the appeal proceedings and in general the
8 Law on the Interior provides for all of this, and it is later on
9 specified in greater detail in the relevant decree.
10 Q. Thank you.
11 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] P1049, please. Could I have that
12 document now.
13 Q. Mr. Djordjevic -- let us just see the document first actually. A
14 few moments ago you mentioned to us this decree on disciplinary
15 responsibility in the MUP. So could you tell us a bit more about this.
16 How is this decree carried out in practice?
17 A. This decree regulates in detail disciplinary proceedings for
18 minor breaches of work duty and disciplinary proceedings in case of
19 serious breaches. There is specific reference as to what superior
20 officers should do once they find out, about any one of these breaches,
21 that is. And then the proceedings are dealt with before the disciplinary
22 court, and then the higher disciplinary court until all these proceedings
23 take place.
24 So in cases of minor breaches and serious breaches, the immediate
25 superior after finding out about the said breach, that is to say, if an
1 employee from his organisational unit committed the said breach, he then
2 interviews the responsible employee and conducts the preliminary
3 proceedings. On that basis, he gains his own impression as to whether
4 it's a minor breach or a serious breach.
5 Afterwards, he makes his own proposal to the head of the organ
6 concerned for the initiation of disciplinary proceedings. After that,
7 the head of the organ, that is to say the chief of the secretariat or the
8 chief of the administration concerned, initiates disciplinary proceedings
9 by filing his own request. This is submitted to the disciplinary
10 prosecutor, and then the disciplinary prosecutor through disciplinary
11 proceedings presents evidence concerning the responsibility of the
12 responsible employee.
13 Q. Thank you. Disciplinary responsibility of MUP employees is
14 regulated in this document. What was the situation with MUP employees
15 when crimes are committed that have to be prosecuted ex officio?
16 A. In these situations action was taken, like in the case of any
17 perpetrator of a criminal offence, an investigation is carried out, the
18 perpetrator would be detained, and all other measures would be taken like
19 in the case of any other perpetrator. As for his status in the organ,
20 his superior officer can propose the measure of suspending the said
21 person from the work organisation or the work unit until the disciplinary
22 proceedings are completed, or criminal proceedings. But the same can be
23 done in the case of disciplinary proceedings.
24 At any rate, in respect of all criminal offences committed by MUP
25 employees, this was the action that was taken. That is to say, they were
1 treated like any other citizen.
2 Q. Thank you. There is one more thing that I would like to clarify.
3 Just a moment, please, I'd like to find the relevant article, I do
4 apologise. I've just remembered something.
5 Mr. Djordjevic, can you explain Article 45 to us of the Law on
6 Internal Affairs. Before criminal proceedings are completed --
7 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, P66. [In English]
8 page 14.
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Article 45 of the Law on Internal
10 Affairs says that an employee of the Ministry of the Interior shall have
11 his employment terminated if a final judgement had been handed down
12 convicting him of a criminal offence referred to in Article 34, and also
13 his employment may be terminated if he no longer fulfills or if it is
14 later established that he has not fulfilled any of the conditions for
15 appointment to the state organs or the conditions laid down in Article
16 44. We said that the said person could be suspended until the completion
17 of criminal proceedings. If he is convicted of criminal offences under
18 Article 34, paragraph 1, these are crimes against the constitutional
19 order, or other crimes. Then, according to this article, a decision is
20 passed on the termination of his employment.
21 There were situations when criminal proceedings would last for a
22 very long time, and the ministry wanted practically to rid itself of the
23 employee who committed such offences and then these proceedings can take
24 two or three years perhaps, and then this other part, the latter part of
25 the Article 45 is applied. So his employment is terminated that way
1 because at that given point in time criminal proceedings were taking
2 place against him, and that is an impediment for employment. So even
3 before the final judgement was passed, we in this way got rid of
4 employees who had committed crimes.
5 Q. Let us just clarify this. This is to say that this article was
6 applied as a special institute apart from the disciplinary proceedings
7 that could be initiated?
8 A. Yes, yes, this is a separate matter altogether. A disciplinary
9 court can impose a measure that would imply termination of employment, so
10 he would be laid off on the basis of such a decision of the disciplinary
11 court. Whereas in this situation, the said person's employment can be
12 terminated even before there is such a ruling.
13 Q. Mr. Djordjevic, as chief of the RJB, while you were acting chief
14 and chief later, did you make it impossible in any way to carry out
15 proceedings against any employee of the Ministry of the Interior?
16 A. We in the ministry wanted the practice of the secretariat on the
17 ground to be the same in terms of breaches of work duty. So we didn't
18 want to have a situation when people would be treated differently in
19 different secretariats, that is why we asked secretariats to inform us
20 about what it is that employees had done, and they should practically ask
21 for our approval for filing criminal reports if the said persons had
22 committed criminal offences. This was a procedural matter. The chiefs
23 of SUPs required that, and the proposal of the chief of the secretariat
24 concerned would always be taken into account. That is to say,
25 proceedings would be initiated and responsibility for policemen was never
1 stopped or halted in any way from the ministry itself.
2 Q. Thank you.
3 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we now have P47.
4 Q. Mr. Djordjevic, it's 63 in your tabs. This is the decree of the
5 7th of April 1999, decree on Internal Affairs during a state of war. Can
6 you tell us as of the 7th of April 1999 when this came into force, what
7 changes were introduced by this decree, and how did it work in practice?
8 A. This decree envisaged some additional serious violations that can
9 be committed by an employee of the ministry in a state of war, and it
10 also stipulates sanctions for such violations. This decree makes
11 disciplinary proceedings more urgent by abbreviating certain procedural
12 actions and superiors could immediately discipline subordinates,
13 especially for less serious violations.
14 In view the state of war, it was the intent of the lawmaker to
15 make disciplining easier and quicker.
16 Q. Mr. Djordjevic, I'd like to ask you this about the decree, who
17 made decisions under this decree? Who made decisions about serious
18 violations of the military obligation?
19 A. The head of the organisational unit, that is chiefs of
20 secretariats and administrations. In addition to this decree on Internal
21 Affairs, I believe we also sent to the secretariat some additional
22 instructions explaining this in more detail. These supplementary
23 instructions authorised chiefs of secretariats to make decisions in
24 disciplinary proceedings.
25 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you. Can we now have D281.
1 Q. It's 64 in your tabs. Could you give us your comments. We see
2 it's 9 December 1998
4 A. Yes. It's typical for what I describe before. A police station
5 in Zubin Potok is part of the secretariat for Internal Affairs of
6 Kosovska Mitrovica. The commander of the police station in Zubin Potok
7 sends to the head of secretariat in Kosovska Mitrovica a disciplinary
8 report against an employee of the police station Zubin Potok. This is
9 the first step in this procedure, and after this the chief of the
10 secretariat designates a disciplinary court, and the disciplinary court
11 then takes over and finalises the disciplinary proceedings.
12 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we now have D008-5248. It's
13 1087 on the 65 ter list.
14 Q. Your tab 65. Just a moment, this is 26 March 1999 when the war
15 had already started but before the decree. Could you comment.
16 A. This is a very peculiar situation that deserves an explanation.
17 This is a request that the chief of SUP in Bor makes to institute
18 disciplinary proceedings again an employee who committed a violation
19 while he was working outside the secretariat as a member of the special
20 police unit, because on the 29th of -- on the 20th of March, 1999, in
21 Vucitrn, he committed a violation of his official duty.
22 Now, what happens in such situations? Disciplinary liability was
23 incurred at the secretariat even though the special police units were
24 working outside the territory of the secretariat. So the duty remains
25 with the chief of the secretariat to take action. The leader of the unit
1 under whose command the policeman was working submits after the failed
2 mission, a report to his chief proposing that disciplinary action be
3 taken and that is followed up on.
4 The commanding officer even before disciplinary proceedings are
5 started can remove the policeman from the unit and send him back to his
6 original secretariat if the violation was serious, accompanied by a
7 report describing his offence, and proposed measures to be taken either
8 in disciplinary or in criminal proceedings. This is a peculiar situation
9 when the person is working outside the secretariat as part of another
11 Q. We are on very interesting ground now, Mr. Djordjevic. From this
12 document we've just seen, when a decision was taken to engage an employee
13 in a PJP unit, any disciplinary infraction that he commits as part of the
14 PJP is subject to disciplinary action in the secretariat from which he
15 was sent?
16 A. Yes, that is the specific feature of this rule. The commanding
17 officer --
18 Q. You've explained that already. Thank you.
19 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we have this document
20 admitted into evidence, please.
21 JUDGE PARKER: Yes, Mr. Djurdjic.
22 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit D417.
23 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. Now I
24 have a long document that I want to show to the witness, but maybe the
25 time is running out. Perhaps it's better to do it tomorrow.
1 JUDGE PARKER: Very well. We will not then continue further
2 today. We will resume at 9.00 tomorrow morning. We will now adjourn.
3 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.44 p.m.
4 to be reconvened on Thursday, the 3rd day of
5 December, 2009, at 9.00 a.m.