Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 6088

 1                           Wednesday, 9 July 2008 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           --- Upon commencing at 9.15 a.m.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Good morning.

 6             Mr. Registrar, would you please call the case.

 7             THE REGISTRAR:  Good morning, Your Honours, good morning to

 8     everyone in the courtroom.  This is case number IT-06-90-T, the

 9     Prosecutor versus Ante Gotovina et al.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Registrar.

11             The Chamber apologises for the late start, this being due to the

12     fact that the Chamber wanted to further deliberate on the admission of

13     the statements of Mr. Janic.

14             The Chamber received courtesy copies of the positions taken by

15     the parties; that is, what the Gotovina Defence further would submit, as

16     the e-mail says.  We also have received a courtesy copy of the Markac

17     further submissions.  And we received a short note of the Prosecution in

18     response to, apparently, the Gotovina Defence submission.  I don't know

19     whether it also covers the Markac Defence.  I think only the Gotovina.

20             MR. TIEGER:  That's correct, Your Honours.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

22             The Chamber has considered this as the points of view, although,

23     Mr. Misetic, the e-mail of the Gotovina Defence reads that the further

24     submission would be as follows.  I didn't understand this to be that you

25     want to repeat it today, but you just submit it.

Page 6089

 1             Now, the Chamber has developed a system that e-mail exchanges of

 2     a purely practical nature can just be sent to the Chamber's staff.  If

 3     there's some substance in it, then it is put on the record but just

 4     referring to it.  These, however, are submissions which are of greater

 5     importance and therefore the Chamber invites the parties to the extent

 6     it's not done yet and whatever the format is but that this will be filed

 7     as submissions made to the Chamber and which the Chamber has also

 8     considered in reaching decisions.

 9             The issues are about admission into evidence of the statements by

10     the witness Janic.  That is one statement of 2004, and -- and the

11     transcript of an interview he has given when he still was a suspect at

12     the time in the presence of Mr. Nobilo.

13             The two have been marked for identification yesterday.  I have

14     forgotten about the numbers, but we could ...

15             MR. MIKULICIC:  It's 552 and 553, Your Honour.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  552 -- thank you, Mr. Mikulicic.

17             The Chamber has considered all the submissions, and has, of

18     course, read the statements, and the Chamber has decided to admit them

19     into evidence.  Exceptionally the Chamber will give the reasons for its

20     decision, in writing, in due course, because of the nature of the

21     objections made, the Chamber considers that we could not just say that we

22     admit them into evidence, that's it.  We will give the reasons in which,

23     of course the objections will be dealt with properly.

24             That, however, takes a bit of time, but the decision is that P552

25     and P553 are admitted into evidence.

Page 6090

 1             Is there any other matter at this moment which needs attention

 2     before we ask the usher to escort the witness into the courtroom.

 3             Mr. Misetic.

 4             MR. MISETIC:  Yes, Your Honour.  I just wanted to clarify

 5     procedurally or ask for the Court's guidance on how you wish to deal with

 6     it.

 7             This issue that we've dealt with concerning this witness on the

 8     statement concerns other witnesses that will be coming down the line as

 9     well.  And for that reason, we have taken no decision on what we wish to

10     do but under the interlocutory appeal rules there's been one decision

11     issued in writing issued by the Chamber yesterday and you've now

12     indicated there will be a future decision in writing.

13             Is it safe to safe to say that we can wait for that written

14     decision before taking any --

15             JUDGE ORIE:  That is -- I will consider this with my colleagues,

16     because we are -- of course, we're heading to the recess.  Of course, the

17     Chamber would like very much to have this decision delivered before the

18     recess.  We'll work hard on it.  But, as said before, some important

19     issues, legal issues have been raised in view of this.

20             We, the Chamber, of course, has the power to extend times, if you

21     request a certificate and if would you ask -- because that's what you

22     would need and if you ask for additional time to give the reasons for

23     that certificate, that might give you sufficient room and we'll consider

24     whether that would be a proper solution for -- I see that you -- the two

25     decisions are to some extent, of course, related.  You even related them

Page 6091

 1     in such a way that you even commented on a bit on the decision of

 2     yesterday, you consider this to be important for the decision.

 3             MR. MISETIC:  Today.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Today, yes, I have seen that.  I have also seen the

 5     response by the Prosecution to that.

 6             Let's not be -- over-formalistic.  The decision of yesterday

 7     stands anyhow; of course, it could not be denied that there is certain

 8     overlap in the matters.

 9             MR. MISETIC:  Thank you.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  And whether -- what is revisiting and what is giving

11     follow up, is not, at this moment, to be further discussed.

12             MR. MISETIC:  Thank you.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  We'll -- it is clear what your problem is.

14             Then, any other matter?

15             Ms. Mahindarante --

16             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  No, Mr. President.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  -- are you ready to continue the

18     examination-in-chief?

19             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Yes, Mr. President.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Usher.

21             The parties may have seen that some follow-up was given yesterday

22     as to give the technical facilities for the witness, if he wanted to do

23     that to review the interview and --

24             May I take it, Ms. Mahindaratne, that one of the first things

25     you'll do is to ask the witness whether there -- what corrections he'd

Page 6092

 1     like to make --

 2             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Yes, Mr. President.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  [Overlapping speakers]... statements.

 4                           [The witness entered court]

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Good morning.  Good morning, Mr. Janic.

 6             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  I would like to remind you that you are still bound

 8     by the solemn declaration that you gave yesterday at the beginning of

 9     your testimony.

10             I further would like to ask you the following.  I noted that,

11     apart from a binder you have got at this moment, I take it that that's

12     the binder with your interview, that you also have another notebook

13     present.  You're supposed not to consult anything without explicit

14     permission by this Chamber, and I take it that during your examination

15     reference may be made to your interview and/or statement and then, of

16     course, you can look at that so that you can follow the question and can

17     verify what actually is in the statement and what the transcript of the

18     interview is about.

19             Ms. Mahindaratne, are you ready?

20             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Yes, Mr. President.  Thank you, Mr. President.

21                           WITNESS:  ZDRAVKO JANIC [Resumed]

22                           [Witness answered through interpreter]

23                           Examination by Ms. Mahindaratne: [Continued]

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed.

25             MS. MAHINDARATNE:

Page 6093

 1        Q.   Good morning, Mr. Janic.

 2        A.   Good morning.

 3        Q.   Now, last --

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  By the way, I have forgotten one thing.  There was

 5     another request that was to add nine witness-related documents to the

 6     Rule 65 ter list.  I do not remember that there was any objection against

 7     that.

 8             I see no objection.  So that -- that motion is -- a motion filed

 9     on the 24th of June, 2008, to add the nine witness-related documents to

10     the Rule 65 ter list is granted, as requested.

11             Please proceed, Ms. Mahindaratne.

12             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Thank you, Mr. President.

13        Q.   Mr. Janic, yesterday after court adjourned, you were provided

14     with the transcripts of your interview conducted in 2005 as well as

15     your -- an English version and a B/C/S version of your statement provided

16     to the OTP into 2004.

17             Now, have you reviewed them overnight, as you were instructed to?

18        A.   I did.  I managed to go through it.  I -- I didn't look at every

19     single detail but I did take some notes.  Yes, I've had a look, in short.

20        Q.   And yesterday you said that with regard to your 2004 statement,

21     that is the first statement, there were a couple of minor translation

22     issues and you said that those did not, in fact, go to the gist -- the

23     substance of the statement.  Are you in a position to tell us today what

24     those translation inaccuracies are?

25        A.   Well, I can say now that I stand by both of the statements that I

Page 6094

 1     made and there are no errors that are substantial.  There may have been a

 2     couple of mistranslations, at least the way I see them, that suggest a

 3     different context from the one originally suggested.

 4             I can go and have a look at my notes.

 5             I do believe also that I should make a number of addenda to some

 6     of the statements that I made, because the ones that I originally made

 7     were not entirely complete.

 8        Q.   Mr. Janic, are you looking at some notes.  Are those notes that

 9     you prepared while reviewing your statements last night or what

10     exactly -- can you tell us what notes you're looking at right now?

11     You're looking at a black diary book right now.

12        A.   Yes.  For example, item 28.  It reads:  "We have no contact with

13     the military units."  And I said, "with our military units."

14             THE INTERPRETER:  Interpreter's note, one microphone at a time

15     while the speaker is speaking.  We can't hear the speaker.  Thank you.

16        A.   It further says that we came across no civilian villages during

17     our operation.  Well, all villages were civilian so I think this wording

18     is erroneous.

19             Item or paragraph 33 which says that the --

20             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  I just wanted to ensure that we're on the

21     correct paragraph, Mr. President.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, I think the witness is now referring to the

23     paragraphs in his 2004 statement, because there, I also see, "We did not

24     have any contact with the military units on our right flank," and what he

25     now adds to that is that he meant to say "with our military units."

Page 6095

 1             So we now move on to, you said, 33.

 2        A.   That's right.  That's right.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  [Previous translation continues] ... 22.  22.  Let

 4     me just -- 28.  28.  Please give us your further positions on 28.

 5             I'm now confusing matters.  22, you said.

 6             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] 28.  28.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

 8             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] May I continue?

 9             MS. MAHINDARATNE:

10        Q.   Yes, please.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Please go ahead.

12             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] My intervention about paragraph 28.

13     It reads here that:  "We did not come across any civilian villages."

14     This must be a mistranslation.  All villages are civilian, right?

15     Civilian and non-civilian.

16             And then on to paragraph 33.  It reads:  "The regular police had

17     already prepared groups of police officers."  Now this is a

18     mistranslation.  If you look at the operational area itself and the

19     second echelon, that is following the special police and the army, there

20     were police echelons of the blue, regular police.  The blues.  And their

21     task as soon as the special police and the military liberated a certain

22     area, they were to go in and establish civilian authorities and police

23     control over those areas for the purposes of safety and everything else.

24     So my statement was police units had been prepared or were at the ready,

25     not officers.  That's what I was talking about.  Officers are individuals

Page 6096

 1     and units number more men.  So that was the gist of this portion of my

 2     statement back then.

 3             I do have several other paragraphs with additional explanations

 4     which I might as well provide, when we come to appropriate questions.

 5             There is another error that I noticed, and that is paragraph 68.

 6     It reads:  "The Lucko unit was sent back to Zagreb and was no longer

 7     allowed to be involved in these operations."  That is not what I stated

 8     at that time.  It wasn't that it was not allowed.  It was simply not used

 9     again for reasons that I stated at a later stage in my 2005 statement.

10     Not reasons, actually, but I simply explained why this unit was no longer

11     used for the purposes of the search operation afterwards.  There is

12     therefore a mistranslation.  The allegation here is not quite accurate.

13             There is another one, paragraph 77.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Just to verify what you say, 68, we should

15     understand it as:  "I know that the Lucko unit was sent back to Zagreb"

16     after that and were not further involved in such operations in the

17     future.

18             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, they were simply not involved.

19     It's not that they weren't allowed to be involved.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  [Previous translation continues] ... that's clear.

21             If you have another error, please address it.

22             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] 77, the last sentence.  It reads:

23     "Crimes committed by military police were investigated by the military

24     police and serious crimes could be investigated in cooperation with the

25     civilian authorities.  Prosecution of a serious case would be undertaken

Page 6097

 1     by the ministry of justice."  Therefore, you know it is about the state

 2     prosecutor, so I think it's a mistranslation.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Before you correct it, could I invite you to speak a

 4     little bit slower, because the interpreters have really no chance to

 5     follow your speed of speech.

 6             THE WITNESS:  Okay.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  So you said that is a mistranslation.  Please tell

 8     us how we should read it.

 9             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] One should understand that

10     prosecuting was not done by the ministry of justice.  I'm not talking

11     about the ministry, I'm talking about the state prosecutor, the state

12     attorney.  The bodies in charge of prosecuting crimes that occur in the

13     line of duty.  It's not the ministry of justice that did this, so this is

14     a mistake.

15             These would be my technical suggestions about my 2004 statement.

16     When we go on discussing this, I do have several addenda to make which I

17     think should be made, but this is it as far as the technical observations

18     were concerned.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  May I then take it, Ms. Mahindaratne, that will you

20     put questions to the witness that, if these questions touch upon any of

21     the issues in which you consider, Mr. Janic, that something should be

22     added, you will do that at the time.  And at the end of the

23     examination-in-chief, you will be given an opportunity to tell us whether

24     things you thought of importance to add but were not yet touched upon,

25     that you will have an opportunity to add at the end of your

Page 6098

 1     examination-in-chief.

 2             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Yes, I will do, so Mr. President.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.  Please proceed.

 4             MS. MAHINDARATNE:

 5        Q.   Mr. Janic, do you recall when members of the Office of the

 6     Prosecutor met you for what was going to be a proofing session on

 7     6 May 2008.  You informed the members of the Office of the Prosecutor

 8     that you were now on the list of witnesses for the Defence for

 9     Mr. Markac, and you have provided a statement to the Defence.

10        A.   I remember that.  I said exactly what you now quoted.  I saw you

11     that time and there was another gentleman who was with you.

12        Q.   And do you recall when you said that I asked you if the statement

13     you had made to the Defence was different in content to the statements

14     you had made to the Office of the Prosecutor, and you, in fact, said that

15     there was only one truth and that you gave both parties the same version.

16        A.   Yes.

17        Q.   You also informed us at that stage that when we met you, you had

18     had a number of discussions with Defence counsel for Mr. Markac, with

19     regard to your potential testimony in this court.  Is that right?

20        A.   Yes.

21        Q.   Now, since you arrived here in The Hague, have you had any

22     discussions with any persons about your testimony; not after you came to

23     court yesterday, before?

24        A.   No.

25        Q.   Going to 1995, Mr. Janic, you were the chief of the

Page 6099

 1     anti-terrorist department of the special police during Operation Storm.

 2     Is that correct?

 3        A.   Yes.

 4        Q.   Now, during Operation Storm, what were the principle tasks the

 5     special police sector carried out?  And I'm referring particularly to the

 6     task of the anti-terrorist department.

 7        A.   I was simply part of the control structure in the special police,

 8     and we carried out certain tasks within the framework of Operation Oluja.

 9     My department was not something separate within the chain of command.  I

10     was working down one of the chains of command of the special police

11     during Operation Storm.

12        Q.   I think you misunderstood my question, Mr. Janic.

13             My question was:  What was the principle task of the special

14     police sector?  That is, what did the units of the anti-terrorist

15     department do during Operation Storm.  What was their responsibility and

16     were their operations?

17        A.   Yes, I understood your question to be about my section only, of

18     which I was head.  You were asking about the special police as a whole.

19     Is that right?

20        Q.   Yes.  I was asking about the 19 units within the anti-terrorist

21     department.

22        A.   [In English] Okay.  [Interpretation] Right.  It was a special

23     police sector, as you said.  It was one of the three components of the

24     Ministry of the Interior.  There was the crime police in internal

25     services of the Ministry of the Interior; there was the regular police;

Page 6100

 1     and the special police.  Those were the three components.

 2             As part of Operation Storm, the special police was given the task

 3     to work with the principle part of the whole operation, with the staff of

 4     the Croatian army, the special police were given their own area of

 5     responsibility as part of that operation.  And the tasks set were quite

 6     specific.  We were to work out of the Mount Velebit area, break through

 7     the enemy lines based on a plan produced by the Main Staff and we were to

 8     establish control over the Obrovac-Gracac road, over the Gracac-Gospic

 9     road, and also to simply liberate the occupied territory of the

10     Republic of Croatia, at least those parts within our area of

11     responsibility.

12             So this would be a generic description of our objectives and

13     tasks.  There were further individual objectives but this was the general

14     one.  The final objective being reaching the state border with Bosnia and

15     Herzegovina, which, by that time, would mean that we had been successful

16     in liberating our entire area of responsibility and re-establishing

17     Croatia's sovereignty throughout the area.

18        Q.   After the initial attack was completed, the special police was

19     used what is referred to as mop-up operations, isn't it, to search the

20     terrain?

21        A.   That's right.  There's one thing that I would like to say,

22     because when I look at the documents, I see the term "clean-up" being

23     used all the time.  And this is something that might connote ethnic

24     cleansing, especially to an untrained eye as it were.

25             There is something I need to explain about this.  This is police

Page 6101

 1     lingo, police jargon.  And when we say mop-up or clean-up, we mean

 2     searching an area in order to restore safety to an area that had

 3     previously been affected by war operations.  These were police actions

 4     and the objective was to restore safety to any area and clear the area of

 5     maybe some remaining minefields, enemy soldiers, weapons that were

 6     discarded, ordnance, mines, explosives, bombs, and so on and so forth.

 7        Q.   Mr. Janic, I'm sorry to interrupt.  It is understood I was -- I

 8     never suggested that.  It was a precursor to my next question.

 9             If I could take to you paragraph 4 of your 2004 statement.

10             Now, you state there that the role of the special police was the

11     same as it today, anti-terrorist protection, hostage situations,

12     protection of important individuals, helicopter unit, arresting dangerous

13     criminals, and cooperation with the police units.

14             That presupposes that members of the special police had powers to

15     arrest any person suspected of or being seen committing a crime.  Is that

16     correct?

17        A.   Members of the special police are police officers of the Ministry

18     of the Interior, and like any other police officer, they have a status of

19     an official with all the powers that comes with it, like any other police

20     officer.

21             So if there are any league grounds for taking action and

22     implementing these powers or taking these powers, they would have the

23     right to do it, but of course it must be done on a legal basis.  They

24     cannot do it on their own or without any cause.

25             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  May I call for document number 1816, please.

Page 6102

 1        Q.   Mr. Janic, you will see in a moment a document on the screen in

 2     front of you.  If you could also have the English version.

 3             I appreciate you might not have seen this document?

 4        A.   Yes, I have.

 5        Q.   You have seen this document.  And this is an order issued by the

 6     minister of interior, Mr. Jarnjak, setting up the command structure of

 7     the special police.  Is that correct?

 8             Mr. Janic, I asked you a question.  This is -- you said you're

 9     familiar with this document.  This document says that it is setting up a

10     structure in view of imminent operations to come and this is dated

11     22 July 1995.

12             Now, is the command structure or structure -- the hierarchy set

13     up here, does it accurately reflect the command structure that operated

14     during Operation Storm?

15        A.   No, it does not.  This was an order for a particular operation,

16     which was not carried out, but it was setting up readiness for a possible

17     operation which never actually took place before Operation Storm.  The

18     structure in Operation Storm, the command structure was different.  These

19     were special police units, one battalion strong in Zadar, and their

20     purpose was while our forces were in combat with Serbian forces on the

21     border.  And in view of the fact that our forces were withdrawn from

22     Zadar to the border, the defence line around Zadar were weakened so the

23     special police received an order that in the event of an attack around

24     Zadar, they should strengthen the defence lines and be there in case of

25     need, but it was not necessary and the forces that were set up under this

Page 6103

 1     order did not actually take any action.

 2             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Mr. President, may I move to tender this

 3     document into evidence, please.

 4             MR. MIKULICIC:  No objections.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Since there are no objections, Mr. Registrar, that

 6     would be number ...

 7             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, this becomes Exhibit number P554.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  P554 is admitted into evidence.

 9             MS. MAHINDARATNE:

10        Q.   Now, Mr. Janic, in paragraph 6, you say that:  "There were 19

11     special police units within the anti-terrorist department."

12             Were all those 19 units deployed in special -- during Operation

13     Storm?

14             MR. KUZMANOVIC:  Can that be scrolled down, please?  Is paragraph

15     6 in the Croatian or the English or -- are you still speaking of the same

16     letter?

17             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  No, I'm sorry.  I have moved on to paragraph 6

18     of the statement.  We can move out of this document.

19        Q.   If I could take you back to paragraph 6, Mr. Janic, of your

20     statement.  In paragraph 6 you refer to the 19 units of the special

21     police forces which were deployed in Operation Storm.

22        A.   Yes.

23        Q.   And if I may call document number 5305, please.

24             Mr. President, we have, for practical purposes, we have put

25     together a document setting out the 19 units, and given the source from

Page 6104

 1     where we've obtained that information.  Just for practical purposes to

 2     save time so that we do not have to go through each and every unit in

 3     court, and, in fact, I have sent that document to the Defence.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Are there any objections against the way in which

 5     Ms. Mahindaratne wants to proceed?

 6             MR. MIKULICIC:  No objections, Your Honour.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Ms. Mahindaratne, you may proceed as you suggest.

 8             MS. MAHINDARATNE:

 9        Q.   Mr. Janic, are those 19 units correct, the indicated units on

10     this document?

11        A.   Not quite.  But, in effect, it is from these towns.  They were

12     from these towns.

13             In order for this list to be complete and correct would be if you

14     said under 1 it should be the special police units of the police

15     administration Bjelovar-Bilogora.  But here it just says

16     Bjelovar-Bilogora, so it's incomplete.

17        Q.   Yes.  That was actually taking me to the next question which is:

18     Except for the Lucko unit which is indicated at number 9, all the other

19     units were units attached to the special police administration named

20     here, isn't it, so they would be known as special police unit as you just

21     suggested, Dubrovnik, Neretva, Istria, so on and so forth?

22        A.   Not the special police administration but the police

23     administration of a particular district because they were attached to the

24     police administration as part of that structure.  They were part of the

25     Bilogora -- for instance, the first one, the special unit of the police

Page 6105

 1     administration of the district of Bjelova-Bilogora.  So it was not part

 2     of the special police, it operated within the structure of the police

 3     administration in their area.

 4        Q.   Sorry, Mr. Janic, that's what I meant to say.  I used the words

 5     special police but what I meant was the police administration and you

 6     just correctly explained it.

 7             And while we're on this document, there's a reference to the unit

 8     at number 17, Vukovar-Srijem police administration.

 9             Before I ask that question, all these units also had code-names.

10     Isn't that correct?

11        A.   They did have some Monikers, they weren't really code-names.

12     Each unit would call itself something.  Sometimes they would use animal

13     words or names, but officially, those names did not exist.  The only

14     names which were official were what was in documents within the

15     Ministry of the Interior.  The other names did not really exist because

16     they were never written down.  Because it was wartime, everyone

17     identified with their unit in some way so they also gave their units some

18     names that were unofficial.

19        Q.   Now, the unit attached to the police administration of

20     Vukovar-Srijem was identified as Delta, wasn't it?

21        A.   Yes.

22        Q.   And that unit was based in -- pardon my pronunciation, Vinkovci.

23     Is that correct?

24        A.   Yes, that's correct.

25        Q.   May I call document number 2532, please?

Page 6106

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Ms. Mahindaratne, is it your intention to -- the

 2     list, to tender that.

 3             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Yes, Mr. President.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  I hear of no objections.

 5             Mr. Registrar.

 6             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, 65 ter 05305 becomes Exhibit number

 7     P555.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  P555 is admitted into evidence.  Nevertheless,

 9     Ms. Mahindaratne, I see on my screen a footnote but it doesn't really

10     appear.  Oh, I see it on my ...

11             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Yes, Mr. President, that is just --

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, I see it.  Thank you.  [Overlapping speakers]

13     ...

14             Please proceed.

15             MS. MAHINDARATNE:

16        Q.   Now, Mr. Janic, before we go on to the document that is just

17     coming up, if I could take to you paragraph 10 of your statement, this is

18     the statement of 2004.  You state that you received orders from -- you

19     said:  "We received our orders from the assistant minister Mladen Markac

20     who was head of the department for special police and would report to

21     that department.  Sometime in 1992 or 1993, the department for special

22     police changed to become the special police sector, which then was one of

23     the three branches of the Ministry of Interior, criminal police,

24     fundamental police and special police.  This situation remained until

25     2001 when it became the special police command."

Page 6107

 1             And -- if I could take you to paragraph 23 of your statement, you

 2     go on to say:  "The Main Staff of the Croatian army was in command of

 3     this military operation and during the course of the operation I received

 4     my orders from General Markac.  We in the special police coordinated with

 5     the military ... "

 6             The rest I don't need to read.

 7             Now, what we -- have you seen the document which is on your

 8     screen Mr. Janic?  It is, in fact, addressed to you.

 9        A.   If you allow me to comment on paragraph 10, because I would like

10     to add something, and I wasn't too precise, I noticed, so I would like to

11     explain further.  May I?

12        Q.   Yes, please.

13        A.   In Article 10 I said that I received orders from the assistant

14     minister, but in this phase he was the chief of a department.  He was not

15     assistant minister yet.  He became assistant minister in 1995.

16             At this time he was the chief of a department.  At one point he

17     became the chief of sector, and while he was the -- when he became

18     assistant minister I did not receive any orders from him but, rather,

19     from the chief of sector, who was my direct superior in the chain of

20     command.  In other words, I did not receive orders from the assistant

21     minister but from the -- my chief who was Mr. Sacic at the time, so I

22     just wanted to clarify this.  It doesn't really affect the substance but

23     I felt I needed to explain it.

24        Q.   Mr. Janic, you have a document in front of you which is an order

25     addressed to you, amongst others, issued by Mr. Markac.  Since this is an

Page 6108

 1     order addressed to you, you probably must have seen this.

 2             Are you familiar with this order?

 3        A.   Yes, I am.

 4        Q.   And this is an order issued by Mr. Markac for a mop-up operation

 5     soon after or I see this is the 28th of September, 1995.  This is

 6     pursuant to Operation Storm, isn't it?

 7        A.   Yes.

 8        Q.   And pursuant to this order, was this mop-up operation carried

 9     out?

10        A.   I can't say exactly now.  I'm sure it wasn't fully implemented.

11     In other words, that the entire area was searched.  But I do know that

12     later, in 1995, and beginning of 1996, the searches were not as intense,

13     so I'm not really sure at this point, but I'm sure that you have -- that

14     you have been able to reconstruct all these sweeps and searches, and I'm

15     not sure that they have all been implemented.  I know we did it in

16     Karlovac, in Petrova Gora --

17             THE INTERPRETER:  The interpreter did not hear the third place.

18        A.   -- the Plitvice waterfalls, but I cannot remember whether this

19     was implemented in all the other areas.  So I think it was planned in

20     order to determine what the liberated area was and based on that, to make

21     an assessment and once the assessment was made to see whether it was

22     necessary to carry out the searches or not.

23             So this was not really an order for searches, but, rather, for

24     carrying out a security assessment in order to carry out searches.

25             So I think that was in fact the gist of this order.

Page 6109

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Misetic.

 2             MR. MISETIC:  Yes, Your Honour.  At line -- at page 20, lines 14

 3     and 15, the question was posed and it says that:  "This document -- this

 4     is pursuant to Operation Storm, isn't it?"

 5             I don't see anything in the document.  Perhaps we can get a

 6     reference to this.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Ms. Mahindaratne, were you intending to give a

 8     time-frame or a causal relationship?  If the latter, pursuant to, suggest

 9     that there is.

10             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Causal relationship, Mr. President.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Causal relationship.  Then Mr. Misetic invites to

12     you give you -- to give us a factual basis for that.

13             May I take it that if it cannot be found in the document itself,

14     that you would object against leading?

15             MR. MISETIC:  I would, indeed, Your Honour.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

17             Ms. Mahindaratne.

18             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Yes, Mr. President.  Let me rephrase then.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Well, the question has been answered although not on

20     a specific issue whether this was pursuant to or not, so if you want to

21     revisit the matter do it in other words; and if you are satisfied with

22     the answer from a factual point of view on what this order was about and

23     what it was actually seeking to be done, then you can just move on and

24     then --

25             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  I will move on, Mr. President.

Page 6110

 1             MR. MISETIC:  Thank you, Your Honour.

 2             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  May I tender this document into evidence,

 3     please.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  I hear of no objections.

 5             Mr. Registrar.

 6             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, this becomes Exhibit number P556.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  P556 is admitted into evidence.

 8             Please proceed, Ms. Mahindaratne.

 9             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  May I call for document number 821, please.

10        Q.   And, Mr. Janic, we have a few more documents like that, but I

11     don't intend to go through all those documents with you.  I will just

12     show you one more document and we will move on.

13        A.   Well, I can resume here.  I see that in effect this is an

14     entirely identical order but this one refers to Sisak, the area of Sisak.

15     And in the meantime, I have thought about this a bit.  These are orders

16     for Karlovac and Sisak, the purpose being to carry out an assessment, a

17     security assessment of the area and once the assessment was made to

18     determine whether it was necessary to conduct searches or not.

19             In general, not much was done after the security assessment was

20     made except in Sisak, in the area of Zrinksa Gora, because I think in

21     1996 there were still problems there.  There were several attacks on

22     people.  There were some straggling soldiers who attacked villagers so

23     there was really a need to search that area.  And if you have enough

24     information, I assume that you know that this operation ended with a

25     suicide of a soldier who spent some two years there and he killed a man

Page 6111

 1     and in the end it turned out that this operation was justified.

 2        Q.   Mr. Janic, I just wanted to bear out the fact that -- as to

 3     whether you were familiar with the document.

 4             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Mr. President, I move this document into

 5     evidence.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  I hear of no objections.  Then, Mr. Registrar.

 7             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, this becomes Exhibit number P557.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  P557 is admitted into evidence.

 9             MS. MAHINDARATNE:

10        Q.   Mr. Janic, taking you back to your statement, if I could take you

11     to paragraph 52, you refer to the unit commander of the Lucko unit being

12     Mr. Turkalj and assistant commander being Mr. Celic.  And that's a

13     reference to Mr. Josip Celic, isn't it?

14        A.   That's correct.

15        Q.   Now, did all 19 units have the same structure?  Was there a

16     commander -- a unit commander and an assistant commander?

17        A.   They had a similar structure.  They were not all of the same

18     number.  Some had one or two assistants, but, in general, the structure

19     was the same, or rather similar.

20        Q.   Now when -- in the course of operations when you were in fact the

21     coordinator of operations, and your testimony, based on your statement is

22     that your principle task was to coordinate between the units, whom did

23     the unit commanders or the -- if it was an assistant commander who

24     commanded the operation, report to in the course of an operation?

25        A.   Do you mean Operation Storm, or the search operations following

Page 6112

 1     Operation Storm?

 2        Q.   [Previous translation continues] ... start off with the search

 3     operations.

 4        A.   They were -- they would report to the commander of the operation

 5     for that day.  For instance, if it was me, all the commanders would

 6     report to me, because I would command them on that particular day.

 7        Q.   And within the unit, how were the units structured?  Were there

 8     platoons and I think you use a different term, groups, isn't it?

 9        A.   Yes.

10             MR. KUZMANOVIC:  Your Honour, I'm sorry.  Are we talking about

11     same time-frame within Operation Storm or just in the search operations?

12             MS. MAHINDARATNE:

13        Q.   The search operations I just referred to, I'm referring to search

14     operations.

15        A.   Unit structures were -- from the time when the units were

16     established, they did not change.  They remained stable.  And I'm

17     referring now to a unit's structure.  Each unit had a commander, two or

18     three assistant commanders.  Below the assistant commanders were the

19     platoon leaders who commanded the platoons.  And then at the level of the

20     platoon leader, there were also instructors for special training.  They

21     were specialised in various areas, for instance, sharp shooting, divers,

22     alpinists who conducted training of men, but they also participated in a

23     particular operation because they were at officer level.

24             Below that, within platoons, there were group leaders, and these

25     groups consisted of special police members.  Let me just add that there

Page 6113

 1     were also deputy -- deputy group leaders, and there was a strictly

 2     defined vertical chain of command.

 3        Q.   Now, in a given mop-up operation, a search operation, if a unit

 4     was searching a particular area, and there are several platoons taking

 5     different lines, who would be commanding those separate platoons?  Would

 6     it be the special instructors?

 7        A.   The platoons were commanded either by the platoon commanders, if

 8     they took part in that particular operation on that day; or else by

 9     instructors.  It wasn't strictly defined that only the platoon commander

10     who was within the structure, the commander of that platoon that he would

11     have to command that particular operation, because people -- there was

12     rotation of men.  Sometimes they were ill or they were on leave.  So it

13     was possible that an instructor from the unit commanded a platoon

14     depending on the particular action.

15             They were all responsible for their own tasks and it was

16     considered that if a person was, let's say, a sharpshooter instructor

17     that he could command an action of -- a platoon in an action of 25 to 30

18     men, in which case he would be responsible for the men and he would be

19     responsible for that particular task.

20        Q.   And to whom would the person who commanded the platoon, be it a

21     special instructor or the platoon commander, report in the course of a

22     mop-up operation?

23        A.   They would report to the main commander of that unit.  Sometimes

24     that would be the unit commander; for instance, on a certain day, in a

25     certain operation, one unit participated in the operation, and it

Page 6114

 1     numbered 50 men and had two platoon commanders.  Sometimes this --

 2             THE INTERPRETER:  Could the witness please repeat the last

 3     portion of his answer.  He was speaking too fast.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  You're invited to repeat the last part of your

 5     answer, because your speed of speech is, again, too high.

 6             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I apologise, so I will repeat now.

 7             The units were commanded in such actions.  For such actions there

 8     would be a particular commander for each unit.  For instance, there would

 9     be a unit commander who would command an action, let's say, a search

10     operation, sometimes it would be a platoon commander, sometimes because

11     they would be -- they would be working in shifts, if it would be

12     commanded by the assistant commander.

13             In other words, in that particular case, everyone would report to

14     the assistant commander, because, in that particular action, he was the

15     main commander in that area.

16             MS. MAHINDARATNE:

17        Q.   Now, have you described the available communication system --

18     just available to the special police in the course of an operation at

19     paragraph 53.  If I could take to you paragraph 53 of your 2004

20     statement, which is P552.  And there you go on to say that:  "We had

21     Motorola radios for communications and I remained in contact with the

22     various units at all times.  The units would normally report to me at the

23     halfway point of the search and then just before they arrived at the

24     finish point.  At the finish point, we would have a one-minute debrief

25     and then we would head back to Gracac.  If nothing had happened during

Page 6115

 1     the search, then the commanders did not need to brief me and I would see

 2     them back at Gracac."

 3             And in fact, just before I go on to the -- to the question.  Now,

 4     that contact you referred to at the finish point, was that also with the

 5     persons who commanded the platoons or only with the unit commanders?  I'm

 6     referring to the one-minute debrief at the end of the operation.

 7        A.   This was only for unit commanders.  There were five units, say,

 8     if there were five units there were five men who met me.

 9        Q.   Now, Mr. Janic, I wish to take you to your transcripts of your

10     interview, which is P553, and I'm referring to transcript on 5307, the

11     first set of transcripts.

12             Mr. Janic, if you could look at the transcripts on your desk.

13             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  V000-5307.  65 ter is 5218; I beg your pardon,

14     Mr. Registrar.

15        Q.   And, Mr. Janic, if I could take you to --

16        A.   Can you tell me the page number again, please.

17        Q.   Yes, I beg your pardon.  Page 75.  And I'll just read out the

18     relevant part.

19             "So talking of communications, you as one of the overall

20     commanders, you had direct communications with people like the person in

21     charge of artillery and Mr. Sacic."  It goes on.  "And did you have

22     communication with other commanders that were involved in the actual

23     attack?"

24             "Yes."

25             Next page.  "What were you working on, Motorolas?"

Page 6116

 1             If you just skip the next few lines.  Your answer is right at the

 2     end and it is translated.  "For communication within, between the attack

 3     commanders, or with the staff, one channel of communication was used, and

 4     for the internal communication --"

 5             MR. KUZMANOVIC:  Can we have that on our screens, please.  We

 6     don't have access to the -- on our computers to 65 ter document, so if we

 7     could get to that portion of the screen, we'd appreciate it.  Thank you.

 8             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Mr. Kuzmanovic, the transcripts -- do you have

 9     copies of the transcripts?  I filed it with the 92 ter submission.

10             MR. KUZMANOVIC:  We do but at this table we don't have access to

11     anything in my -- other counsel at the other table have the material.  So

12     if we have it on the screen for us to see it, I appreciate it.  Thank

13     you.

14             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, unfortunately, the only thing that

15     is in e-court is the B/C/S translation of the transcript.

16             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Let me give a spare copy.  I might have a

17     spare copy of the transcript.  Mr. President, if I could have a minute?

18             JUDGE ORIE:  I don't think that there could be a B/C/S copy

19     because the transcripts give everything that is English, then B/C/S,

20     answer in B/C/S translated into English.  So, therefore, if there's any

21     way to get it on the screen ...

22             Yes.  I think, as a matter of fact we have page 76 on our screen

23     now.

24             MR. KUZMANOVIC:  It is now, Your Honour.  Thank you.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed.

Page 6117

 1             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Thank you, Mr. President.

 2        Q.   Mr. Janic let me read out:  "For communication between the attack

 3     commanders or with staff, one channel of communication was used and for

 4     the internal communication within one line of the attack, there was a

 5     different channel, so I had two actual Motorolas with me."

 6             So in the course of an operation, just to make it clear, was it

 7     that you could monitor the communication that was taking place within the

 8     unit which was out there in the field?

 9        A.   I see that you're confusing Operation Storm and the search

10     operation that followed.  If you look at the 2004 statement the portion

11     that you asked me about, that was about the search operation.  In the

12     2005 statement the relevant portion is about Operation Storm itself.

13     There were two systems and if you allow I would like to explain what the

14     communication system was in the Operation Storm and then what the

15     communication system was in the search operation that followed.

16             May I please be allowed to explain now?

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, Ms. Mahindaratne --

18             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] These are two entirely different

19     things.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  One thing, Ms. Mahindaratne.  I think, as a matter

21     of fact, on page 76 we find a reference to attack and not mopping-up

22     operations.  So what was said there seems to be related to

23     Operation Storm rather than to the operations that followed.

24             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Very well, Mr. President.  I will ask another

25     question and clarify it and move on, Mr. President.

Page 6118

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

 2             Mr. Janic, Ms. Mahindaratne will put other questions to you.

 3             Please proceed.

 4             MS. MAHINDARATNE:

 5        Q.   Mr. Janic, now in the course of a special police operation - I'm

 6     talking about a mop-up operation here - did you maintain contact through

 7     your Motorola that you had with the unit commanders who were out on the

 8     field?

 9        A.   Yes.  During the search operations, I only ever communicated

10     and -- with and coordinated these units through their commanders.  If

11     there were five units that I was working with, I had five people that I

12     was communicating with.  I was exercising control through these people

13     and they gave me feedback and what exactly was going on.  I wasn't in

14     touch with people within a certain unit.

15             Each of the units involved in any of the actions had their own

16     internal channels of communication, which I was not in on, in a manner of

17     speaking.  Even technically this was not possible.  It wasn't possible to

18     establish communication in this way given the fact that I was

19     communicating with commanders on a channel normally described as a

20     duplex.  This is a repeater connection and the range is far greater.

21     Whereas units, within their own structure, used the so-called simplex

22     which is a communication system that has no transmitter, it has no

23     repeater, and can only work between two sets of stations.  There is no

24     repeater magnifying the signal.  Therefore it is the lie of the land that

25     is very important for this type of communication and the lie of the land

Page 6119

 1     also imposes certain limitations on this type of communication.

 2             Therefore, my answer to you is:  During the search operations, I

 3     was in communication with unit commanders alone.

 4        Q.   And were the unit commanders in communication --

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  One moment.

 6             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  I'm sorry.

 7        Q.   And did the unit commanders maintain communication with the --

 8     the platoon commanders or the special instructors in the course of an

 9     operation, through the simplex system?

10        A.   Yes.  That was the only way.  They themselves were not in touch

11     with each of their men or physically near them.  They had to talk to

12     their subordinated officers, platoon commanders in this case, and from

13     them they received situation reports.  They had to go to them for that,

14     and they were in communication with these people by using this simplex

15     channel.

16        Q.   And at the -- or how did the platoon commanders or special

17     instructors report to the unit commanders?  Was it in writing or

18     verbally?  Logically, in the course of an operation, they can do it in

19     writing, but at the end of an operation did they submit written reports

20     to their unit commanders?

21        A.   I'm afraid I don't quite understand.  You mean platoon

22     commanders, did they submit reports to unit commanders?  Is that what

23     your question was about?

24        Q.   That's correct.  That was my question.

25        A.   Yes.  Needless to say, they were duty-bound to submit any reports

Page 6120

 1     and any steps they took along their own axis of operations and they

 2     submitted these reports to their own unit commander.  Needless to say,

 3     any unit commander knew exactly what had been done based alone on what a

 4     platoon commander told him.  When a platoon commander told him that

 5     certain steps had been taken or that certain events had occurred, then he

 6     knew or whenever the platoon said it's all right, nothing happened.  Then

 7     the unit commander would go back to me, nothing happened and everything

 8     was okay.

 9        Q.   And at the end of the day did the unit commanders, based on the

10     reports they received from the special instructors or the platoon

11     commanders submit written reports to you?

12        A.   Unit commanders?

13        Q.   That's correct.

14        A.   Yes, yes.  They would normally talk to me first.  They would

15     debrief me or I would debrief them on the ground, and as soon as they

16     were back in Gracac, they would file a written report.

17        Q.   Let me take you, Mr. Janic, to your interview, and that is 65 ter

18     number 5219.  This is the second set.  Page 96 to 98.  I'm sorry, page

19     97.  I was correct the first time.  It's page 96, Mr. President.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Ms. Mahindaratne, for reference at a later moment,

21     it would be better if you refer to the exhibit numbers rather than the 65

22     ter numbers, which will not be available or it needs a lot of ...

23             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Yes, Mr. President.  I will refer to it right

24     now.  It's just that Mr. Registrar needs the 65 ter number to call up the

25     document on e-court.  It's 65 ter number 553, the second set,

Page 6121

 1     Mr. President -- sorry, Exhibit number 553, the second set.  I have to

 2     keep referring to the 65 ter number, Mr. President, because I think

 3     Mr. Registrar requires it to bring it up on the e-court.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  If that is the case, I do not fully understand the

 5     system.

 6                           [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  I now understand that the exhibit number was

 8     assigned to a series of documents, which are known under their own 65 ter

 9     numbers.

10             Thank you.

11             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Yes, Mr. President.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed.

13             MS. MAHINDARATNE:

14        Q.   Mr. Janic, you go on to say:  "It was normal for the unit

15     commanders to report back to you on a daily basis on what had happened

16     during the search."

17             "Yes."

18             "First of all, they would verbally report to me in the field

19     itself and then they came to the headquarters where they actually had

20     equipment to write on then they would also write a written report."

21             Okay.  So the written report, would that -- you mention

22     equipment.  Would that just be a handwritten report or a typed report?

23             MR. KUZMANOVIC:  Scroll down, please, thank you.

24             MS. MAHINDARATNE:

25        Q.   Your answer is:  "It was handwritten and the report that I wrote

Page 6122

 1     was also handwritten and submitted it to members of the internal control

 2     who then based on this handwritten report would then write a report and

 3     it was typed."

 4             "Okay.  So based on your handwritten report, when the various

 5     commanders handed their handwritten reports to you, did you use to get a

 6     verbal report?"  And there is a conversation about it.

 7             And then around page 98, line 20:  "Yes.  And then I would submit

 8     all these together to the members of the internal control."

 9             "So you would submit your report together with the handwritten

10     reports from the commanders, would you?"

11             "Yes."

12             So, as you stated, what you would get from the unit commanders

13     would be a handwritten report based on which you would submit a

14     handwritten report to inner control, together with the handwritten

15     reports of the unit commanders, and then based on that, a typewritten

16     report would be submitted?

17        A.   Yes.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Ms. Mahindaratne, could you find a moment within the

19     next one or two minutes for a break?

20             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  I can, Mr. President, this is a good time

21     because I'm moving on to another --

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Another subject.

23             Then we will have a break, and we resume at 11.00.

24                           --- Recess taken at 10.33 a.m.

25                           --- On resuming at 11.03 a.m.

Page 6123

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Ms. Mahindaratne, you may proceed.

 2             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Thank you, Mr. President.

 3             Mr. Registrar, may I have document number 2465, please.

 4        Q.   Mr. Janic, let me take you to your 2004 statement; that is P552.

 5     If I could take you to paragraph 49.  You refer to being the coordinator

 6     for a series of searches, including a village called Grubori.

 7             Now, we have here in front of you on the screen, Mr. Janic, a

 8     document which is an order issued by chief of special police sector,

 9     Mr. Sacic, Zeljko Sacic, dated 24 August 1995 and it's addressed to the

10     commander of the Lucko unit.

11             Now, the -- the operation that you referred to in paragraph 49,

12     was it an operation conducted pursuant to this order that you see on the

13     screen?  I know the order -- the operation included other units, but

14     the -- the operation which included Lucko unit, was it pursuant to this

15     order?  Are you familiar with this document that's on the screen?

16        A.   Yes, I am.

17             As far as I know, in relation to this order, the unit was called

18     up, because on the 25th and 26th of August, there was a special operation

19     that was organised which had to do with securing the route that the

20     train, the so-called Freedom Train from Zagreb to Split was supposed to

21     take.  I think that is why the unit was called in, to secure that route

22     for that train to travel safely.  That train carried President Tudjman or

23     the high-ranking state official, Zagreb-based diplomats and therefore it

24     was necessary to secure the area.

25             First thing that we did was search the area and as the train was

Page 6124

 1     passing through, we spent that time securing the actual route that the

 2     train took on its way to Split.

 3        Q.   Mr. Janic, the document refers to the operation.  It is named

 4     Oluja-Obruc.  Now, was that the name given to the special police mop-up

 5     operations carried out after the completion of the initial attack in

 6     Operation Storm?

 7        A.   As far as I remember, the name itself, Oluja-Obruc stems from an

 8     order by the commander of the Main Staff of the Croatian army,

 9     Mr. Cervenko, who was the staff general.  There was this first search

10     operation following Oluja.  This entailed the search of Petrova Gora, the

11     objective being the same as all the other search operations.  The

12     objective being to restore safety to all these areas.  It was called

13     Oluja-Obruc and then by default, as it were, all the other operations

14     that followed kept the name, Oluja-Obruc.

15             This was a document issued by the chief of the Main Staff.  This

16     was an order to the special police to search the Petrova Gora area.  I

17     remember the name because this was the first such document mentioning

18     that name or moniker, if you like, and then it simply went on like that,

19     by default as it were, and then it was applied to other operations too.

20             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Mr. President, may I tender this document into

21     evidence, please.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  No objections.

23             Mr. Registrar.

24             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, this becomes Exhibit number P558.

25             MS. MAHINDARATNE:

Page 6125

 1        Q.   I just want you to --

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  P558 is admitted into evidence.

 3             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Thank you, Mr. President.

 4        Q.   Mr. Janic, I just want -- before we go off this document I just

 5     want to you take note that according to this order it is indicated that

 6     the engagement to last around seven days.  That is -- that from that

 7     point onwards, Lucko unit is being asked to be engaged in special police

 8     mop-up operations for seven days from that point or could you clarify

 9     what that means.

10        A.   That's what it says but as for the deadlines, the number of men

11     involved or the number of days a certain unit that would be involved, all

12     this was not something that was set in stone.  For example, I was an

13     operative on the ground and I was in charge of certain tasks.  If any of

14     the following tasks required a smaller number of people, of men than the

15     number of men that I had in Gracac, then I would simply release some

16     units.  I would let them go, let them leave.  And if you have this

17     seven-day specification it could have meant seven.  It could have meant

18     10.  It could have meant 14, depending.

19             There was no need to abide blindly by anything that any

20     particular order stated in relation to a certain operation.  For example,

21     I see a number of men here being specified as 65 and I know for a fact

22     that a unit came with 40 men for this particular action.  This wasn't

23     something that was set in stone.  And it is not something that was

24     strictly complied with.  There were a lot of things to take into account.

25     This had been after the completion of most of the war operations.  There

Page 6126

 1     were a lot of wounded and sick men.  Some of them were on sick-leave

 2     therefore the numbers didn't really count as such.

 3             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  I'm sorry to interrupt.  I'm under a time

 4     constraint and I would be grateful if you could keep your responses as

 5     short as possible.

 6        A.   [In English] Mm-hm, okay.  Okay, okay.

 7        Q.   In paragraph 49, the paragraph that we just referred to, you

 8     mentioned that there was six units involved in this operation, and you're

 9     referring to the Plavno area.  And you go on to say:  "There were seven

10     packages including the maps for each of the commanders and one for myself

11     as coordinator."

12             So beyond the Lucko unit, were there other five units involved in

13     the operation in Plavno area?  Is that what you're saying?

14        A.   [Interpretation] Yes.

15        Q.   And would there would be similar orders issued to those other

16     five units like this?

17        A.   Probably.  But this doesn't necessarily mean that all the units

18     arrived on the same day.  Some of the units may have been in the area

19     since the completion of Operation Storm.  Maybe they had never gone back

20     to base, as it were, to begin with.

21             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Mr. Registrar, may I call for document number

22     772, and that's a map.

23        Q.   Now, Mr. Janic, while that document comes up on in screen, in

24     paragraph 49 you refer to receiving a map.  You say:  "There were ...

25     package including maps."

Page 6127

 1             And did that map indicate the area that was to be searched and

 2     what units would be searching those areas?

 3        A.   I think so.

 4             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Mr. Registrar, could we focus on that main

 5     area where there -- there are letters in red.

 6        Q.   Now, Mr. Janic, to save time I will quickly ask you questions

 7     about this map and you could respond.

 8             There are not quite horizontal but lines going from a

 9     north-westerly direction to south-easterly, slanting those lines.  Do

10     those lines indicate the axis of the search operations?

11        A.   Yes.

12        Q.   And at the beginning of those lines, there are some letters in

13     red.  I'm not referring to the figures, I'm referring to the alphabetical

14     letters.  And if you look from the map from the north-westerly direction

15     towards south-easterly, it starts at the top "OS."  Does that refer to

16     the unit Osijek?  For the record, O-s-i-j-e-k?

17        A.   Yes, that is the unit.

18        Q.   And thereafter, the next unit is "ATJ."  That is the Lucko unit?

19        A.   Yes.

20        Q.   The next unit is "ST."  Is that Split?

21        A.   That's right.

22        Q.   The next is "SB" and that would be Brod Posavina.  For the

23     record, B-r-o-d P-o --

24        A.   Slavonski Brod, yes.

25        Q.   And the next one is "ZG," that would be Zagreb?

Page 6128

 1        A.   That's right, Zagreb.

 2        Q.   And the next one is "SIKT."  And could you tell us what that unit

 3     is?  I'm unable to pronounce it.

 4        A.   That is probably Sisak Kutina.  Probably, I think that's what it

 5     is.

 6        Q.   Thank you for that.  Now the Lucko unit axis goes right through

 7     Grubori, doesn't it?

 8             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  If you could focus, Mr. Registrar, on that

 9     area -- no, if you go up a little.  Yes.  There is a figure number 17.

10     Yes, that area.

11        Q.   Now the Lucko unit's path goes right through the Grubori village,

12     doesn't it?

13        A.   Yes.

14             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Mr. President, may I tender this map in

15     evidence, please.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  I hear of no objections.

17             Mr. Registrar.

18             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, this becomes Exhibit number P559.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  P559 is admitted into evidence.

20             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Thank you, Mr. President.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Could I ask one clarifying question to the

22     witness.

23             The previous document we saw about the seven days' engagement

24     where you said not necessarily to be seven days.  Now, you related that

25     to the train, and you referred to the 25th and the 26th of August.

Page 6129

 1             Now, looking at the period of time indicated which, as you said,

 2     could be longer, depends on how much people you would need, on the 24th,

 3     seven days, that brings you to the 31st, which is far beyond the dates

 4     you mentioned in relation to the train, which was the 25th and 26th.

 5             So how strict or how strong is that relation with the train in

 6     this order?

 7             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, it is related.  I know,

 8     because I was there and I was in charge of securing this route, and I

 9     know that the Lucko unit was called up for the train.  I wasn't in

10     Zagreb, so maybe there was a bit of a lack of a coordination, and maybe

11     the person who was in Zagreb issued an order of a general nature that is

12     normally what is sent to all other units.  But as far as I know, and I

13     know personally that we were called up there in order to secure the route

14     for the Freedom Train.  As far as I know that's what it was, and I was

15     the commander on these days, so my knowledge should be correct.

16             I don't have any other information in respect of that, and all I

17     can say is what I've just said.  Because this was the highest level

18     security in a zone that was not completely secure, it was logical to

19     assign this unit.  Where you had the highest level of government

20     officials, it was normal to have a highest level security unit called to

21     provide security.

22             That's what I know about that.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  But could you then further illustrate for us

24     how you provided that security for the train.  Were you located near the

25     rail track -- I mean, what should I understand the security to --

Page 6130

 1             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, in simplest terms this --

 2     what we did is what is generally done in such cases, so you had security

 3     in the immediate vicinity of the tracks but also in-depth security

 4     covering a certain area left and right of the tracks.  And, of course,

 5     all along the route in what was once temporarily occupied territory.  So

 6     from the moment where that -- where that territory began we would have

 7     our men, up to the end of the route in the formerly occupied territory.

 8             The police had to provide security for this train to pass

 9     through.  We were not the only police units, the special police.  There

10     were also many regular police there with a large number of men.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.

12             Please proceed, Ms. Mahindaratne.

13             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Thank you, Mr. President.

14             Mr. Registrar, may I call document number 740, please.

15        Q.   Mr. Janic, while the document is being brought up, you provided a

16     copy of your report that you submitted regarding this operation to the

17     Office of the Prosecutor, did you not, at the initial interview?

18        A.   Yes, that's right.

19        Q.   Now, is this the report that you provided to the Office of the

20     Prosecutor?

21        A.   Yes.  This is the report that I provided to the Prosecutor,

22     while -- during the suspect interview in Zagreb.

23        Q.   Actually, perhaps to remind you, Mr. Janic, you provided this

24     document to the Office of the Prosecutor, in fact, in 2004 at the witness

25     interview.  If you see paragraph 58 of your statement of 2004, you marked

Page 6131

 1     it as ZJ/2?

 2        A.   [In English] Okay.

 3        Q.   I just wanted to point that out to you.

 4        A.   [In English] Okay.

 5        Q.   Now, did you base this report on the reports -- written reports

 6     submitted to you by the unit commanders who conducted the operation in

 7     Plavno on 25th August?

 8        A.   [Interpretation] Yes.  It was based on oral reports, the

 9     debriefings, and then following that, they also submitted written reports

10     in Gracac on the basis of which I compiled my report.

11             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  If we just move on to page 2 of both B/C/S and

12     the English translation, to the report on Lucko unit's activities for

13     25th August, what is recorded there is that the search of the terrain was

14     carried out by 45 policemen along with Djurici village, Orlovac and

15     places are indicated.  During the search there was no fire contact and no

16     MTS was found.

17             Do you recall the report submitted to you by Mr. Celic who was

18     the commander of the Lucko unit, at least the assistant commander who

19     commanded the operation on 25th, his report to have this same report,

20     include the same report?  Was it consistent with this?

21        A.   Yes.

22        Q.   Now, I just want to just point out one other thing and we will

23     come to it later on in relation to another document.  In page 1, I'm

24     sorry, Mr. Registrar, to go back on page 1 of both the English and the

25     B/C/S.  With regard to the report of Zagreb police administration unit,

Page 6132

 1     it says:  "In Pasici village, a suspicion male person was found and

 2     handed over to the regular police force for criminal processing."

 3             I just wanted to know that's because we will come to it later on.

 4     Now in this report, in relation to all the units, it is recorded that

 5     there was no fire contact.  Can you explain what fire contact is?

 6        A.   Where?  Where do you mean, do you mean the Zagreb unit?

 7        Q.   No.  I meant in relation to each of these units the report is

 8     that there was no fire contact.  I just wanted you to explain what fire

 9     contact meant.

10        A.   That meant that on that day, on the 25th, according to the

11     reports of all the six unit commanders who carried out the search on that

12     day, according to their reports, none of these units had fire contact.

13     In other words, they did not clash with the terrorists, with the enemy

14     and so on, with anyone.  There was no fighting.  And according to the

15     commander's reports, that's how it was and that's what I put in my

16     report.

17             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Mr. President, I move to tender this document

18     into evidence.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  No objections, Mr. Registrar.

20             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, this becomes Exhibit number P560.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  P560 is admitted into evidence.

22             MS. MAHINDARATNE:

23        Q.   Mr. Janic, let me take you to paragraph 53 of your 2004

24     statement, P552.  There you refer to the operation taking place and

25     around the fourth line you say:  "When the search began, the drivers

Page 6133

 1     would stay with the vehicles and then drive around to pick up the unit at

 2     the completion of the search."

 3             Now, did your units who took part on -- in this operation, travel

 4     in a convoy of vehicles on that day?

 5        A.   Do you mean at arrival there or our departure towards the end

 6     point?  I didn't quite understand.  Would you please repeat your

 7     question.

 8        Q.   Yeah.  At whatever end, was there a convoy, a number of vehicles

 9     logically you would have used, isn't it, to transport the troops from the

10     base to the field and back?

11        A.   Each unit went separately on its own.  There were -- if there

12     were six units that would mean that there were six columns.  If we were

13     all to move together we would block traffic.  Each unit went on its own.

14     We knew the times when we were supposed to be at the destination and we

15     had to abide by that schedule, and we did not get there in one column.

16        Q.   I was actually -- when I referred to the vehicles, I was

17     referring to the vehicles within a unit.  For instance, Lucko unit would

18     have travelled in several vehicles, isn't it, 45 men?

19        A.   Yes, probably.  That's how it should have been.  I did not see

20     this for myself because I didn't travel with them but I know that that's

21     how it was normally done, so I suppose that they, too, came in one

22     column.

23        Q.   Let me show you, Mr. Janic, a clip of a video of some vehicles

24     and could you identify them as you might recognise them, just if you

25     could take a look at this.

Page 6134

 1             Can you tell us if the vehicles shown there are similar to the

 2     vehicles in which the special police units travelled, you know, while

 3     they were on operations, mop-up operations.

 4                           [Videotape played]

 5        A.   Yes, these were the types of vehicles that we used.  About like

 6     this.

 7             I can't see the registration plates and I can't be certain that

 8     these are police vehicles but this is the type of vehicle that we used,

 9     although we weren't the only ones.  If I could see the plates, I could

10     tell you for sure whether these were police vehicles in fact.

11             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Mr. President, for the record, this is P28

12     that I just played.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

14             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  And that really, in fact, brings me to my next

15     document.

16        Q.   Mr. Janic, we do have confirmation that they are in fact vehicles

17     used by the Lucko unit.

18             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  May I call, Mr. Registrar, document number

19     671, please.

20        Q.   Mr. Janic, we had the number -- the number plates were seen and

21     recorded and later identified as vehicles used by the Lucko unit on 25th

22     August.

23        A.   I cannot comment on this.

24             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  This is just a bar table submission,

25     Mr. President.  I don't intend to ask any questions from the witness

Page 6135

 1     about these documents.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  In your question, you refer to use and here we

 3     find the vehicles to be located in.

 4             But since the witness said that if he would look at the licence

 5     plate, he could confirm or deny that these were vehicles used by your

 6     unit, in this document you find the licence plate numbers.

 7             Could you have a look at them and then ...

 8             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is a letter from the chief of

 9     the car pool in the Ministry of Interior.  These are vehicles that were

10     used in 1995.  They had these licence plates and they were assigned to

11     certain units.  I see that some were in -- assigned to the Lucko unit,

12     but I can't see the connection, really, between these plates in this

13     document that would point to these same vehicles being there on that

14     particular day.  If I -- if I could see it on the photographs --

15             JUDGE ORIE:  [Previous translation continues] ... don't worry

16     about that.  I mean, these numbers were not directly taken from the

17     photographs but were recorded by -- so therefore -- but just if this

18     would be the number plates, could you confirm that these, then, are the

19     vehicles that your unit used?

20             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, if it says so in this

21     official document, it means that these licence plates were used by this

22     unit.  I did not quite understand your question.  I don't understand what

23     you mean.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Earlier you said:  "If I could see the numbers, then

25     I could confirm that these were vehicles used by us."  Now here are the

Page 6136

 1     numbers, although not directly visible on the photographs, but at least

 2     numbers that were recorded.

 3             Now, on the basis of these numbers, can you confirm what

 4     apparently is also confirmed in this letter, that these were vehicles

 5     used by your unit?  Or at least that the numbers were assigned to

 6     vehicles of your unit.

 7             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, let me explain it this way.

 8     Lucko, at this time, had about 30 vehicles and I'm not sure whether these

 9     particular vehicles with these plates were in the field then.  I cannot

10     really confirm that.  The units was in the field, it had certain vehicles

11     at its disposal, what the plates were and which particular vehicles, I

12     really can't tell.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, I see that.  The numbers you find in this

14     letter where you earlier said, If I would have the numbers, I would know

15     whether these were police vehicles used.  Is -- looking at these numbers

16     could you confirm that these were police vehicles?

17             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] These plates were police plates

18     used on police vehicles, 010, 0319, that is a plate of a police vehicle.

19     But I can't tell whether this particular vehicle was there on that day.

20     I -- there is no way I could know that.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  I see that.

22             Please proceed, Ms. Mahindaratne.

23             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Mr. President, may I tender this document into

24     evidence, please.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  No objections.  Then Mr. Registrar.

Page 6137

 1             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, this becomes Exhibit number P561.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  P561 is admitted into evidence.

 3             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Mr. Registrar, may I call document 5223 and

 4     that is a similar document, Mr. President, I will just tender it into

 5     evidence.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Let's have a look at the document.  Do you want to

 7     put any question to the witness in relation to this document?

 8             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  No, Mr. President.  It's a similar document,

 9     another identification of one vehicle.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Any objections against admission, more or

11     less --

12             MR. MIKULICIC:  If we could see the document.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  It's on the screen now.  At least I have it on

14     my screen.

15             MR. MIKULICIC:  No objections, Your Honour.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar.

17             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit number P562, Your Honours.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  P562 is admitted into evidence.

19             Please proceed.

20             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Mr. Registrar, may I call document number 746,

21     please.

22        Q.   Mr. Janic, while the document comes up, if I could take you to

23     paragraph 63 of your 2004 statement.  That is P552.  You say:  "During

24     the preparation for my interview today, I searched through the archives

25     in relation to this operation," and you're referring to the operation in

Page 6138

 1     Plavno valley on 25th August.  "And I had also spoken to Josip Celic

 2     after he had been interviewed.  During that search, I found a handwritten

 3     report written by Celic which was different to the report that Celic

 4     submitted to me on 25th August 1995.  I say different, because it

 5     referred to the operation in Grubori and stated that there had been a

 6     conflict with remaining soldiers of the Krajina army and that some

 7     civilians, including elderly ladies were killed.  I do not recall any

 8     mention of a prisoner being taken."

 9             Mr. Janic, is this the report that you saw in the archives in

10     2004 which you say was different to the original report submitted to you

11     by Mr. Celic?

12        A.   Yes.

13        Q.   Now, before seeing this report in the archives, were you ever

14     informed of this version of events by any person?

15        A.   No.

16        Q.   Now I'd like you to take note, Mr. Janic, and we will come to

17     this later on that this report includes a reference to two special

18     instructors Franjo Drljo and Bozo Krajina.  I'm just pointing that out

19     and we will come to that later on.

20             Now --

21             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Mr. President, may I just tender this document

22     into evidence, please, Mr. President.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  No objections.  Mr. Registrar.

24             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit number P563, Your Honours.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  P563 is admitted into evidence.

Page 6139

 1             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Thank you, Mr. President.

 2        Q.   Now, Mr. Janic, when you searched the archives for your

 3     preparations, did you see your report, that is the report that we just

 4     saw this morning, which is P558 -- I'm sorry.  P560.  And let me tell you

 5     what you have said about it.

 6             If I could take you to your interview in 2005.  That is 5309.

 7     P553, the third transcript, 5309.  Page 109.  Mr. Janic, that's the third

 8     set.

 9             The question goes:  "When you say you went to the archive and you

10     couldn't find the report which Mr. Celic had submitted to you, can you

11     tell me actually how you went through the archives?  Are all the

12     documents relating to the Plavno operation kept in one particular file

13     but there is not a huge bunch of these documents there are five or six

14     reports were held, kept in one binder so."

15             Going on to the next page --

16             MR. KUZMANOVIC:  Your Honour, we don't have that.  It just came

17     on the screen.  Thank you.

18             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Can we move to the next page, page 110.

19             MR. KUZMANOVIC:  If you don't mind, if you could wait for it to

20     come up on the screen for us to be able to follow.  Thank you.

21             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  I'm sorry.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  For very practical purposes, if you receive

23     electronic copies of filings including attachments if you copy them to

24     whatever you have available but I see you are not using laptops on which

25     you could easily reproduce them.

Page 6140

 1             And also do I understand that you have no access to the -- to

 2     what is called on my screen Legal 2005 which allows you access to all the

 3     documents that were uploaded?

 4             MR. KUZMANOVIC:  Correct, Your Honour.  I'm sorry to interrupt.

 5     The situation here at this table is that we only have what is shown to

 6     the witness at this table.  We don't have the other screens, we don't

 7     have access to LiveNote, we don't have access to the Ringtail or

 8     anything.  So, that's why -- I don't want to print -- the transcript's

 9     very long --

10             JUDGE ORIE:  I do understand.  I'm just trying to understand what

11     your problem is and to see how we could -- Mr. Registrar, could at any

12     point could we find out whether optimal use is made of all the three

13     screens of which, apparently, only one is available for ...

14             MR. MIKULICIC:  This is the benefit of Courtroom II, Your Honour.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, yes.  I'm trying to do my utmost best always

16     to -- not to avoid Courtroom II.

17             MR. KUZMANOVIC:  We definitely understand, Your Honour.  It's

18     just at this table and it is just difficult here.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

20             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Mr. President, during the break I'll see if we

21     have a spare copy back in the office and I'll try to bring that down.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Then let's proceed.

23             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  If we move to page 110 --

24        Q.   You say:  "It is not a big binder and this binder which did not

25     contain my report or Celic's report, original report, it only contained

Page 6141

 1     this new report that I have never seen before."

 2             MR. MISETIC:  Your Honour, again if we could get a page

 3     reference.  That is not on my page 110.

 4             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  It is on page 110 of the revised --

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Last couple of lines, isn't that true.  No, it says:

 6     "It only contained this new report that I have never seen before,"

 7     appears on my copy on the fourth line from the bottom on page 110.  And,

 8     of course, we should be in 5309 and not in 5308 or 5307, if we are

 9     talking about the third portion.

10             MR. MISETIC:  I see the problem now.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  You see that the transcript, on the top of the page,

12     you always find a reference to either 5307, 5308 or 5309.

13             MR. MISETIC:  My apologies, Your Honour.  Thank you.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed.

15             MS. MAHINDARATNE:

16        Q.   Then you go on to say:  "This new report that I have never seen

17     before and which contained information that was new for me and it's just

18     a sheer luck that have I kept my report, you know, for all these years so

19     that's why it exists still."

20             So the report that you handed over to the OTP is the -- is from

21     the copy that you kept personally, in your personal custody and you did

22     not see a copy -- or the original of that report in the archives?

23        A.   Maybe the context is not quite right.  When I said this about

24     sheer luck, this is not quite what I meant.  I simply didn't submit my

25     report.  I showed my report and then based on my report, another report

Page 6142

 1     was drawn up by the internal control people and submitted to the

 2     Main Staff.  I took my own copy back.  I placed it in my folder and I

 3     never handed it over because I always keep my reports.  That's why I have

 4     my copy.  No one else could have had it since it was with me, throughout.

 5             It couldn't have been in that binder.  I never handed my copy

 6     over.  I kept it for myself.

 7        Q.   Mr. Janic, but -- we'll come to that in a moment as to what did

 8     you with your reports.

 9             I will come to that later, Mr. Janic.

10             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  But, for the time being, Mr. President -- I'm

11     sorry.  Mr. Registrar, can I have document number 741, please.

12        Q.   Now, your testimony, Mr. Janic, was that the unit commander

13     submitted handwritten reports and they were then typed by the inner

14     control before sending them on.

15             And, in fact, taking you back to what you said about your report,

16     your testimony so far has been that you submitted your report to internal

17     control branch along with the handwritten reports of the unit commanders.

18             So, in your statement and your transcripts, and so far what you

19     stated in the morning is that you submitted your report to the internal

20     control, together with the handwritten reports of the unit commanders.

21     That's what you said this morning, isn't it?

22        A.   That's right.  They gave reports to me, and then I would submit

23     this.  We're talking about the internal control.  Formally speaking, this

24     was a headquarters of the special police in Gracac.  Technically, the

25     internal control people were in charge.

Page 6143

 1             Formally, I handed over the reports to the staff at Gracac.

 2        Q.   And your handwritten report, too, was handed over to the staff at

 3     Gracac?

 4        A.   Yes.  For them to use my report to base their report on and then

 5     I would have my copy back and keep it.  It wasn't really a strict as

 6     perhaps you think it was.  I took the option of handing my copy to them

 7     so they could use it to draft their report.  I would then get my own copy

 8     back and put it away.

 9        Q.   Mr. Janic, let me take you to what you said about this -- for

10     practical reasons let me just deal with this document first so that we

11     don't have to go to and fro.

12             This is the identical report from Mr. Janic but a typed version,

13     isn't it?  The document that we saw the handwritten report a moment ago.

14             MR. KUZMANOVIC:  I believe you said report from Mr. Janic.  It is

15     a report from --

16             MS. MAHINDARATNE:

17        Q.   I'm sorry, a report from Mr. Celic.  We saw just before P561 --

18     I'm sorry, P563.  That is the report from -- the handwritten report from

19     Mr. Celic.  Now, this is the typed version?

20             MR. MIKULICIC:  Sorry to interrupt.  If we have possibility to

21     see the written report on the screen as well so the witness could

22     compare.

23             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  We just saw it.

24             MR. MIKULICIC:  Yeah, we did, but it is not on the screen right

25     now.  We could only --

Page 6144

 1             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Very well.  I think it is up to Mr. Registrar

 2     as to how to do that.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar, would it be possible to have -- I

 4     think it was -- yes.  Now we have in the B/C/S, we have the -- that's

 5     P563 then, I think, yes.

 6             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  And if we could have the B/C/S version of 741

 7     so that the witness could compare.

 8        Q.   Mr. Janic, the typed version, with the exception of the last

 9     line, from the handwritten version being omitted, the typed version is

10     identical to this report, isn't it?

11        A.   As far as I can see, yes.

12        Q.   So this would indicate that this is -- Mr. Celic's handwritten

13     report is being typed and submitted by internal control branch.  The

14     typed version would indicate, as you said this morning, that it has been

15     prepared at the internal control branch.  Is that correct?

16        A.   Not quite.  Celic, on the 25th, the afternoon of the 25th

17     submitted to me, both his oral and written reports, based on which I

18     drafted my own report.  What I see here is not what happened.  I don't

19     know about this happening.

20        Q.   I'm not talking about the fact, just scenario.  What I would say

21     is a report, a handwritten report is typed at the stage of the internal

22     control branch, isn't it?

23        A.   I have no idea about that.

24        Q.   Very well.

25             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Mr. President, may I tender this document into

Page 6145

 1     evidence.  I just want to note for the record that the last line on the

 2     typed report, the last line from the handwritten version is missing in

 3     the typed report.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, no objections.

 5             Mr. Registrar.

 6             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit number P564, Your Honours.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  P564 is admitted into evidence.

 8             MS. MAHINDARATNE:

 9        Q.   Mr. Janic, with regard to what you said about the -- as to what

10     happens when you submitted your report to internal control branch, let me

11     take to you your interview transcripts, and that's the second part, 5308,

12     page 96.

13             MR. MIKULICIC:  I could only say in this moment that the report

14     was not submitted to the inner control which is not said on the top of

15     the document but to the staff of the Oluja-Obruc operation.  So I would

16     like if --

17             JUDGE ORIE:  I think that Ms. Mahindaratne referred to earlier

18     testimony on where reports were sent.

19             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  That is so, Mr. President, I'm referring to --

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Whether that is specifically true for this document,

21     of course, is still another matter but that was the usual way in which

22     reports were handled.

23             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Yes, Mr. President.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed.

25             MS. MAHINDARATNE:

Page 6146

 1        Q.   Mr. Janic, let me take you to page 96 of 5308.  Actually, let me

 2     take you to page 98, the relevant part, you've dealt with the reports.

 3     You say:  "Yes, and then I would submit all these together to the members

 4     of the internal control."  Yes.  Then there is a discussion about what

 5     happens with those reports.

 6             And if you go to page 100:  "Okay, but handwritten reports,

 7     namely, the ones submitted to you and yours, what would happen to them

 8     afterwards?  They remained within the inner control and would they

 9     eventually be archived?"

10             "Yes."

11             "And have you looked in the archives at any time since then to

12     see that any of your reports are there?"

13             "Yes.  I actually gave you my report last time I saw you.  Yes."

14     Now you're referring to the copy that you gave.  "But this is the only

15     report I found, I have found one report and a copy of which I have given

16     to you."  That is with regard to another copy.  You said that you didn't

17     see your own report and the report of Mr. Celic.

18             "That's right."

19             "But obviously during the course --" and then there is another

20     conversation.

21             Now, your report, as you said in your interview, your report and

22     the handwritten reports were submitted to inner control branch, according

23     to what you say here, and archived, weren't they?

24             MR. MISETIC:  This is a matter of procedure and the way the

25     question was phrased there.  I believe we're getting into impeachment of

Page 6147

 1     the Prosecution's own witness.  That question was not posed as a

 2     clarification but, rather, as impeachment which I think is improper on

 3     direct examination.  If she wants to clarify something, I think it should

 4     be specifically pointed out which portion of the statement she thinks

 5     needs clarification and then ask the witness to clarify whether something

 6     that he said before is inconsistent with that.

 7             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Mr. President, may I just refresh the memory

 8     of the witness, you know?

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  I think we are not yet at the point of impeachment.

10     I think that Ms. Mahindaratne is entitled to, well, whether to refresh a

11     memory but at least to point at a matter where the statement and the

12     testimony are not fully congruent.

13             Please proceed.

14             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Thank you, Mr. President.

15        Q.   Mr. Janic, if you could clarify your statement here as we

16     understand it, since you're clearly saying that you submit your report to

17     the inner control branch and they are archived.  And this is what have

18     you said on record.  Perhaps -- I appreciate it has been some time.  You

19     know, it has been 13 years so I just want to point that out to refresh

20     your memory.

21        A.   Yes, in principle, that was the case.  I didn't submit all of the

22     reports.  Sometimes, depending on the situation, I would just hold the

23     occasional report back.  There were no strict rules regarding this.  It

24     wasn't set in stone.  There was no book of rules, no set of rules, for

25     this.  In most cases I was the highest ranking man at the staff.  So,

Page 6148

 1     more often than not, I did as I saw fit.  I would submit a report, I

 2     would hold another one back, so I stated here that I submitted reports.

 3     Yes, indeed.  I did submit a lot of reports but by no means all of them.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Could I just seek some clarification.

 5             You earlier said that if you would have submitted a report, it

 6     would be returned to you and then you kept it.  Now, and that is also

 7     where you said that it is not by chance but that is what happened.

 8             Now, in this statement you say handwritten reports would stay

 9     with the internal or inner control.  Do you remember what actually

10     happened with the report we saw earlier, the report you produced, whether

11     that was returned to you.

12             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think I took that one back.  That

13     day.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  So you submitted it and you got it or took it

15     then back after -- was it your understanding -- was it your understanding

16     that your report was processed in the way reports usually were processed;

17     that is, to be the basis for the production of reports further and higher

18     up?

19             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, that's right.  You see, my

20     report only mattered to the extent that it was used to draft another

21     report at the special police staff in Gracac.  That was then used for the

22     benefit of the Main Staff of the Croatian army; that was the purpose of

23     my report.  As soon as that was drafted and e-mailed to the Main Staff,

24     the purpose of my report no longer mattered because the main report had

25     now been dispatched.  It was identical to my report.  It had different

Page 6149

 1     headings, different signatures.  The name on the document was different.

 2     It wasn't mine and the address was the Main Staff.  My report by this

 3     time ceased to matter and sometimes I would have my own copy back and

 4     sometimes I just left it there.  That would be my explanation.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  So if we're talking about reports, we're talking

 6     about content and we're talking about the physical documents.  Do I

 7     understand your testimony to be that you passed the document to internal

 8     control, that then the content would be processed in new reports, other

 9     physical documents, and that after that, either your original handwritten

10     report would stay with the inner control, or would be returned to you and

11     then to be kept by you?

12             Thank you.

13             Please proceed, Ms. Mahindaratne.

14             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That is right, Your Honour.

15             MS. MAHINDARATNE:

16        Q.   Now, Mr. Janic, if, in fact, the report for this particular day

17     was given back to you, that presupposes that you would have the original

18     of this report, isn't it, and not copy?

19        A.   I think the copy that I handed over to you was based on the

20     original.  Yes.  I do have the original in my possession, yes.

21             I think I even showed to you back in 2004.  Not you personally

22     but whoever was there at the time.

23        Q.   Are you able to produce the original to Court?

24        A.   I don't have it on me, if that's what you mean.  I do have it

25     back in Zagreb, but I am -- I haven't taken it along for my evidence

Page 6150

 1     here.  I'm not entirely certain that what I have in my possession is the

 2     original of that document, but I'm inclined to believe so.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Ms. Mahindaratne, I think it might be of importance

 4     to know whether the original is still in the hands of the witness.  And I

 5     would like to invite you to check in Zagreb whether you have the original

 6     there, and I would like to instruct you then to give it.  I don't know

 7     what would be the most appropriate person to give it to, Mr. Registrar,

 8     you'll receive further instructions on that.

 9             So you have to -- if you have the original, you should keep it

10     and follow the instructions, which doesn't mean that it is lost for you

11     but at least it is available for inspection by the parties and by the

12     Court.

13             THE WITNESS: [In English] Okay.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.

15             Please proceed, Ms. Mahindaratne.

16             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Thank you, Mr. President.

17             Mr. Registrar, can I call up document number 739, please.

18        Q.   Mr. Janic, this is a third report that has come into the

19     possession of the Office of the Prosecutor on the 25th of August incident

20     and that is also purportedly issued by Mr. Celic.  And the content are

21     identical with the exception that this has an additional paragraph, that

22     is paragraph 2.  It says:  "An order was received from the chief of the

23     terrorism department regarding civilians who are encountered in this area

24     and their treatment in accordance with international law.  On my part I

25     issued an order to everybody to treat civilians according to

Page 6151

 1     international law, identify them and take them to safe areas."

 2             You also, for the record, you note it is a typed report.

 3             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Mr. President, I don't wish to ask any

 4     questions.  May I submit this into evidence.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  No objections.

 6             Mr. Registrar.

 7             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] May I?

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, you may comment on it but let's first complete

 9     the formalities.

10             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, this becomes Exhibit number P565.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  P565 is admitted into evidence.

12             Please, Mr. Janic, tell us what you'd like to tell us.

13             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] About paragraph 2, I was going to

14     say that the day before the operation, on the 24th, it was particularly

15     brought to our notice about the Plavno valley, that there was still many

16     people there who remained in the area as opposed to most of the

17     population who had left for Serbia.  There was still a large number of

18     people remaining in the valley.  Our attention was drawn to that fact.

19     Unlike other areas, most of which were waste and deserted, there were

20     still lots of people living there.  Just for us to know, just for us to

21     take into account, just in case we encountered those people to make sure

22     we knew they were there.  The UN had a list of those people, they were

23     taking care of them and they were supplying them with food.  Just in case

24     we saw anyone moving ahead of us in the village as units were moving

25     through, just so they knew what was going on.  Just so it never even

Page 6152

 1     crossed their minds that this was some sort of an activity but, rather,

 2     people remaining in the valley.  So this was specially brought to our

 3     attention, and there were particular orders about this so that we were

 4     mindful of the fact in order to avoid any possible incidents.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Ms. Mahindaratne.

 6             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Thank you, Mr. President.

 7        Q.   Now, Mr. Janic, what we saw was -- we saw three reports dated

 8     25th August which contained a version completely different to your

 9     original report on the day's activities for the Lucko unit.  And I'd like

10     you to take a look at your interview transcripts, page 25, the third set,

11     5309, of P533 -- I'm sorry, 553.

12             If we move on to page 25 -- I think it is on the screen now.

13             Let me -- have you found the place, Mr. Janic?

14        A.   Yes.

15        Q.   You go on to say this.  You were asked the question:  "During the

16     course of the day as the commander of the search were you at any time

17     notified that any kind of resistance of conflict had taken place?"

18             "No."

19             "And all the time you've been within the special police have you

20     never known an incident where sort of terrorists have been encountered

21     where it has not been reported back to the command?"

22             You say:  "No, never."

23             And as we can see, looking at this map that we're been referring

24     to today, looking at the map to the left flank of the Lucko unit

25     anti-terrorist unit.  I believe the special police from Osijek police

Page 6153

 1     administration.  Yes.

 2             And to the right flank, I think we said earlier that was Split.

 3             And then you're asked a question:  "If during the course of a

 4     normal search such as this if terrorists were encountered, would you

 5     normally notify either through your commander or through some other means

 6     the units on your flank to warn them?"

 7             And I'll read the English translation.  You say:  "Entire forces

 8     of the entire operation would be regrouped to concentrate in that -- on

 9     that soon, to cut off all possible exits and to, in a way, neutralize the

10     threat that this, that these people, person, posed."

11             At paragraph -- page 29, if you move on to the next page,

12     Mr. Registrar.

13             "And if you had encountered terrorists and some managed to

14     escape, you would certainly alert, amongst others, the people that would

15     be at finish point because you are flushing them possibly in that

16     direction?"

17             "Of course.  I mean, there were no significant forces, forces at

18     the final point because they were mostly drivers.  Of course, there were

19     check-points every -- every few at certain distance just because of such

20     possibilities but there won't be some sort of random behaviour.  If

21     terrorists were encountered, then the entire operation, all the forces in

22     this operation would be reorganised in order to act on that threat."

23             "And that would, I assume, be commanded by yourself?  You would

24     delegate who was to go where, would you?"

25             "Yes."

Page 6154

 1             "So at the end of the search you said you weren't made aware

 2     during the search that anything had happened?"

 3             "Yes."

 4             Now, Mr. Janic --

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Ms. Mahindaratne.

 6             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  I'm sorry, Mr. President.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  You may proceed.

 8             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Thank you, Mr. President.

 9        Q.   Now, Mr. Janic, based on what you knew of -- now what you knew

10     happened on 25th August in the Plavno valley operation, were you

11     surprised to see Mr. Celic's report of this new version?

12        A.   Well, when I first set eyes on it, yes.  I can't say I wasn't.

13        Q.   Did you ever ask Mr. Celic as to why a different report of this

14     nature had been submitted without your knowledge, when, you being the

15     operation commander, you had no idea about anything of this nature?

16        A.   I never asked.

17        Q.   Why not, Mr. Janic?  Wouldn't it be logical to ask him if you saw

18     something different to what he submitted to you originally?

19        A.   You see, all of this was going on back in 2004.  There was a

20     certain time lag between the two things, quite a long one, actually.

21     Meanwhile, there had been thousands of other problems and things to deal

22     with.  I simply didn't feel a need inside me to go see him and ask him

23     about that.

24        Q.   Moving on, Mr. Janic.

25             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Mr. Registrar, can I call up document number

Page 6155

 1     350, please.

 2        Q.   Mr. Janic, now, were you at any time after operation -- I'm

 3     sorry, after the 25th of August, asked to submit a report or questioned

 4     by Mr. Markac or Mr. Sacic or any other authority within the special

 5     police?

 6        A.   No, never.  I never discussed this with anyone except with the

 7     investigators in 2004, 2005.  In other words, I never discussed this with

 8     Mr. Sacic or Mr. Markac.

 9        Q.   Were you ever informed by Mr. Celic or any other special

10     instructors within the Lucko unit that after the 25th of August there was

11     some inquiry about this operation?

12        A.   No, I'm not familiar with that.

13        Q.   Now, Mr. Janic, have you ever seen this order that is on the

14     screen right now?  It's an order dated 1st September 1995 issued by

15     Mr. Turkalj, the commander of the Lucko unit, addressed to Mr. Celic and

16     the four special training instructors involved in the 25th

17     August operation in Plavno valley?

18        A.   I have never seen this report, or, rather, this order.  I have

19     never seen it.

20        Q.   And it is an order pursuant to the order of the assistant

21     minister of the interior, Mr. Mladen Markac, regarding events during the

22     terrain search and it says 26th August here, in Grubori village.

23             Now I know there was an operation on the 26th.  The operation

24     involving Grubori village, was it on the 25th or the 26th?

25        A.   On the 25th.

Page 6156

 1        Q.   So we can take this as a mistake.  And the next paragraph it

 2     says:  "You must submit a full report of actions by groups under your

 3     command and of any slain and captured enemy soldiers and any civilian

 4     victims during the terrain clearing operation.  And you must also submit

 5     a list of the names of men in your group?"

 6             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Mr. President, may I tender this document into

 7     evidence, please.

 8             MR. MIKULICIC:  No objections, Your Honour, apart from the

 9     conclusion of Ms. Mahindaratne that it was obviously mistaken, the date.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, the conclusions of Ms. Mahindaratne are not

11     evidence.  It's the document which is sought to be admitted.

12             Mr. Registrar.

13             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, this becomes Exhibit number P566.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  P566 is admitted into evidence.

15             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Mr. Registrar, may I call up document number

16     3417, please.

17        Q.   Mr. Janic, English version is still not there.  But, Mr. Janic,

18     you can see the B/C/S version while the English translation comes up.

19             Can you tell me, have you seen this report before or the fact

20     that Mr. Turkalj submitted reports of Mr. Celic and three special

21     instructors --

22        A.   No, I haven't seen it, nor do I know about it.

23        Q.   Now, in this report, it is recorded in the last line that special

24     training instructor Franjo Drljo did not submit a report.

25             Now we saw from the evidence before that Mr. Drljo was also

Page 6157

 1     involved in the Plavno operation.  Now were you aware that Mr. Drljo had

 2     been asked to submit a report?  Now we just in fact saw Mr. Turkalj's

 3     order about it, that he had refused to submit a report, did you know

 4     about such a situation?

 5        A.   No.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Ms. Mahindaratne, you said that he refused to a

 7     submit a report.  This document tell us that he did not submit a report.

 8             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  I'm sorry, Mr. President I will rephrase it.

 9     It's already on record --

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Well, I think -- I think it is not of that

11     importance to now put again the question to the witness.  It is just to

12     encourage to you to be as precise as possible and not give

13     interpretations which find no direct support in the text itself.

14             Please proceed.

15             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Yes, Mr. President.  My apologies.

16        Q.   Now, Mr. Janic, can you tell us if your subordinate commander is

17     ordered to submit a report and he does not submit the report, would there

18     be some consequence from that action?

19        A.   Which commander do you mean?  The unit commander, the commander

20     who commanded the unit who was supposed to report to me, or someone else?

21     Because in the context in which you have framed your question, that's

22     what I understood.

23        Q.   Let me make it clear.  If the unit commander, now in this case

24     the commander of the unit Mr. Turkalj, orders a special instructor to

25     submit a report and he does not submit the report, what happens?  Is

Page 6158

 1     there some consequence ensuing that, from that action?

 2        A.   Well, there certainly should be some consequence, and this would

 3     be one of the breaches of discipline, and in case this posed a problem,

 4     the unit commander would, within his powers move to take disciplinary

 5     action against that person.  Now I don't know if the claim is that the

 6     person refused to obey the order, then the commander would have to move

 7     to take disciplinary action.  But whether he has done that or not, I

 8     don't know.

 9             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  May I move this document into evidence,

10     Mr. President.

11             MR. MIKULICIC:  No objection.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Since there is no objection, Mr. Registrar.

13             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, this becomes Exhibit number P567.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  P567 is admitted into evidence.

15             Please proceed.

16             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  May I call up document number 738, please.

17        Q.   Now, Mr. Janic, while that document comes up, after the 25th

18     August operation in the Plavno area, did you see any written reports by

19     any special instructors?

20             I see you're looking at the screen now.

21        A.   In the days following the operation, I did not see any reports,

22     and the platoon commanders did not submit reports.  I saw this report for

23     the first time in 2004 or 2005, when I was interviewed, and when requests

24     were sent to the ministry or via the ministry to me where I was supposed

25     to hand over some documents and that is the time when I saw some of the

Page 6159

 1     reports, including this one.  Before that, never.

 2        Q.   Now, Mr. Janic, you said that platoon commanders did not submit

 3     reports.  Can you clarify that, because I asked that question earlier,

 4     and I think perhaps we were not clear as to what we were talking about.

 5             Are you suggesting that platoon commanders, special instructors

 6     did not submit written reports.  Is that what you said?

 7        A.   Yes, exactly.  In most actions that we carried out, platoon

 8     commanders did not submit written reports at the end of the day after an

 9     action to their commander.  Rather, they briefed the commanders orally.

10     So if there were five platoons and five platoon commanders, all these

11     five platoon commanders would report orally at the end of the day and say

12     the action went on in such-and-such a way.  And then -- and then it was

13     at the end of the day, it was unified and submitted to me and then I

14     would further send it to the staff, the headquarters and so on.

15             So this was the procedure.

16             I can say that there were no occasions when it was necessary to

17     submit a special report because of some specific event on that a

18     particular day, but generally speaking, they did not submit written

19     reports.

20        Q.   Now, this document is dated 25th August 1995, and it's typed.

21             Now, at any time, Mr. Janic, did the special instructor and I

22     think you kept referring to platoon commander, just for clarity of the

23     record, when I say platoon commander, in a given instance, if a platoon

24     is commanded by a special instructor in an operation, what you said

25     applied to the special instructor too.  Isn't that correct?

Page 6160

 1        A.   Yes, yes.

 2        Q.   Now, at any time did this particular special instructor inform

 3     you of this version of events?

 4        A.   No.  I did not have any physical contact or any other contact,

 5     radio contact with them.  As in most other cases like that, I

 6     communicated with the Lucko unit via their commander, Mr. Celic.  So I

 7     did not personally have contacts with platoon commanders.

 8        Q.   Now, according to this report, with the 12 men and including the

 9     special instructor, these 13 men never entered Grubori, according to this

10     report, and there is no reference to any houses catching fire or people

11     getting killed in the cross-fire, which were reported in Mr. Celic's

12     report.

13             And I want to ask you:  In this report, there is reference to

14     three special instructors.  It says:  "We were --" sorry, three groups.

15     It says:  "The mop-up of the terrain of remaining Chetnik groups in the

16     area.  At the initial position we held a brief meeting with the assistant

17     commander of the Lucko unit, Mr. Celic, and we split into three groups."

18             Now we saw in Mr. Turkalj's order it was addressed to four

19     special instructors.  Are you aware as to how many groups were involved

20     in the Plavno valley operation within the Lucko unit?

21        A.   No, I don't know.  The unit was assigned its area of operation

22     and from the beginning to the end, from the initial to the final point of

23     their area of responsibilities, I did not go into detail as to how they

24     would carry out the searches.  I left it up to them and their commander

25     to decide the tactics of the search, which columns, which groups and so

Page 6161

 1     on.  I did not go into that detail, and as a commander, I did not tell

 2     them how to go about it.  So --

 3             THE INTERPRETER:  The interpreter did not hear the last words of

 4     the witness.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Could you please repeat your last words which were

 6     not caught by the interpreters.

 7             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Uh-huh.  I said I was not the one

 8     who decided on the tactics to be used by a unit within its area of

 9     responsibility.  That would be decided by the commander of the unit

10     himself who would decide on the tactics to be used in carrying out the

11     searches.  He would do it independently, and I felt that they had

12     sufficient experience to know what kind of methods to use, whether they

13     would use groups or lines or columns, convoys, I don't know.  I didn't go

14     into those details.  Whether they were groups, I wouldn't know that

15     either.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.  I am looking at the clock.

17             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Yes, Mr. President.  I note it, Mr. President.

18     One question and I'll tender this document, and then we could --

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Please do so.

20             MS. MAHINDARATNE:

21        Q.   Mr. Janic, I just want to point out three names which will be

22     relevant in regard to a document that will come up very soon, and that's

23     at number 5, Zdravko Lancar -- I beg your pardon for my pronunciation.

24     It's L-a-n-c-a-r.  At number 7, Ante Jurdenic; and at number 12,

25     Adolf Krizmanic.

Page 6162

 1             I just want you to take note of those three names, Mr. Janic, for

 2     reference later on.

 3             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Mr. President, may I tender this document into

 4     evidence.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  No objections.

 6             Mr. Registrar.

 7             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, this becomes Exhibit number P568.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  P568 is admitted into evidence.

 9             We will have a break and resume at five minutes to 1.00.

10                           --- Recess taken at 12.34 p.m.

11                           --- On resuming at 12.57 p.m.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Before we continue, Ms. Mahindaratne, I would like

13     to briefly address the Defence.  There is a motion pending which asks for

14     videolink for two witnesses.  In view of the time needed to prepare for a

15     videolink, the Chamber wonders whether we could get a quick response,

16     whether there is any objection to that request to hear the testimony of

17     those witnesses.  I take it you're aware of --

18             MR. MISETIC:  I'm aware of the motion, Your Honour, I have not

19     actually spent a lot of time thinking about it.  If we could get back to

20     the Chamber tomorrow and I'll let you know what our position is.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Kay.

22             MR. KAY:  We filed this morning and we have no opposition.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

24             MR. MIKULICIC:  We do not have any opposition either.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Then, Mr. Misetic, we're waiting for you then.

Page 6163

 1             MR. MISETIC:  It is related to one of the witnesses.  I don't

 2     have an objection to the second witness --

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Then, of course, I would have to know which

 4     one.

 5             MR. MISETIC:  Correct.  If you wish to know, I'll let you know

 6     now which is -- I don't know if she is a protected witness or not which

 7     is why I didn't mention the name.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  That's also the reason why I was uncertain,

 9     and you never know whether witnesses finally are seeking protection or

10     not.  So therefore --

11             MR. MISETIC:  Correct.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  -- would it be possible to review the matter and

13     especially since preparation takes sometime, if it would be possible for

14     you to even informally take a position --

15             MR. MISETIC:  Yes, Your Honour.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  -- this afternoon, that would be appreciated.   Yes.

17     Then Mr. Nilsson would know --

18             MR. MISETIC:  That's fine, Your Honour.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  -- what to do.

20             MR. KUZMANOVIC:  Your Honour, I just wanted to thank -- we got

21     copies of the transcript for Mr. Kehoe and myself.  Just thank the

22     Prosecution for that.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, Ms. Mahindaratne.

24             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Yes, Mr. President.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed.

Page 6164

 1             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Mr. President, there are a number of documents

 2     that I intend just to make bar table submissions and not go through the

 3     witness.  I will -- if I could have, Mr. Registrar, document number 752.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Ms. Mahindaratne, if you do not go through these

 5     documents with the witness and if you want to tender them from the bar

 6     table, why spend time on it in court, or would you like the witness to

 7     look at it or...

 8             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Yes, Mr. President.  I believe the witness --

 9     it might just be necessary for the witness to at least --

10             JUDGE ORIE:  We'll see what questions you would have, even if you

11     would not go through it.

12             MS. MAHINDARATNE:

13        Q.   Mr. Janic, this is a report from the same special instructor

14     identical report to what we saw before with an additional paragraph.  I'm

15     not going to ask you any questions.  I just wanted to show you since you

16     were the operations commander and ask if you had anything to offer?

17             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Mr. President, may I tender this document into

18     evidence, please.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  But if you offer the witness something, then

20     at least you should give him time to read the document, isn't it?

21             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Yes, Mr. President.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Otherwise it doesn't make much sense.

23             Are you familiar with this document?

24             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I've just read it.  I have no

25     comment on it, nor anything to add to it.

Page 6165

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Then it is now tendered into evidence.

 2             No objections.

 3             Then Mr. Registrar.

 4             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, this becomes Exhibit number P569.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  P569 is admitted into evidence.

 6             Please proceed.

 7             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  May I call up document number 757, please.

 8        Q.   While that document is being brought up, Mr. Janic, did you know

 9     of a special instructor called by that name, Stjepan Zinic, was in within

10     the Lucko unit?  Are you familiar with that name?

11        A.   The name is familiar.  It's Stjepan Zinic.

12        Q.   We have a further report from -- dated 25th August by a second

13     special instructor, Mr. Bozo Krajina.  Are you familiar with that person?

14     Was he a special instructor within the Lucko unit?

15        A.   Yes, I know the man.  He was instructor of the unit -- within the

16     unit.

17             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Mr. President, may I tender this document into

18     evidence, please.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  No objections.

20             Mr. Registrar.

21             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit number P570, Your Honours.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  P570 is admitted into evidence.

23             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  May I call up document number 742, please.  It

24     is a report by the same special instructor with an additional paragraph.

25             Mr. President, may I tender this document into evidence, please.

Page 6166

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Here again, I think we should have a -- at

 2     least a chance to see it.  It's now on our screen.  We have the ... yes.

 3     No objection.

 4             Mr. Registrar.

 5             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit number P571, Your Honours.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  P571 is admitted into evidence.

 7             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  May I call up document number 771, please.

 8        Q.   Now I would have a question for you on this document, Mr. Janic.

 9     If could you take a look at this.

10             First question:  Are you familiar with the person,

11     Mr. Branko Balunovic as being a special instructor within the Lucko unit?

12        A.   Balunovic

13        Q.   I'm sorry.  Yes?

14        A.   Yes, I know him.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Ms. Mahindaratne, if I look at my left screen -- no

16     no, it's fine.

17             Please proceed.

18             MS. MAHINDARATNE:

19        Q.   Now according to this report, he reports that the groups under

20     the leadership of instructors Bozo Krajina and Franjo Drljo faced

21     resistance in the hamlet of Grubori.  And if you note, I don't know

22     whether you recall, I asked you in relation to a previous document to

23     take notes of three names, Zdravko Lancar, Ante Jurdenic and

24     Adolf Krizmanic.  Now those three names are listed here as -- if we could

25     go down, at number 3, and if we could move -- and on the English one to

Page 6167

 1     next page.  At number 6, Ante Jurdenic; and at number 7, Adolf Krizmanic.

 2             Now is it possible for the same members, same men, to be in three

 3     platoons -- two platoons of the same unit in the course of one operation.

 4     This is in relation to the Grubori operation, the Plavno valley operation

 5     on 25th August.  Three persons are listed under two groups.  Is that

 6     possible?

 7        A.   Well, obviously there has been some mess-up.  Someone who wrote

 8     down the list of names of men in his groups probably made a mistake.

 9     They couldn't physically be in two places.

10        Q.   And I'd like to you take note of the signature on this document,

11     Mr. Janic, which will be relevant in relation to the next document we

12     see.

13             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  May I please move this document into evidence,

14     please, Mr. President.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  No objections.

16             Mr. Registrar.

17             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit number P572, Your Honours.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  P572 is admitted into evidence.

19             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Mr. Registrar, can I have document number 768,

20     please.

21        Q.   This is also a report by Mr. Balunovic with that extra paragraph.

22     What I'd like to -- you to note, Mr. Janic, is the difference between the

23     two signatures.

24             MR. MAHINDARATNE:  I don't know whether it is possible,

25     Mr. Registrar, to have P572 and this document, the B/C/S versions, on the

Page 6168

 1     same -- on the screen together.

 2        Q.   Do you note a distinct difference in the signatures?

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Ms. Mahindaratne, what if the witness says no?  What

 4     do you expect the Chamber to do?

 5             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Yes, I should have left it for submissions.

 6     I'm sorry, Mr. President.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Of course, you could ask whether the witness

 8     recognises one of the signatures.  That would be a question that might

 9     assist.  Of course, I would not know the answer.

10             MS. MAHINDARATNE:

11        Q.   Mr. Janic, do you recognise any one of these signatures as being

12     the authentic signature of Mr. Balunovic?

13        A.   No, I don't.  I think you probably need an expert witness here

14     who could establish whether this was -- and which signature is actually

15     his.  I can't really tell, and I don't know if they're authentic.

16             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Mr. President, I move this document into

17     evidence, please.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Before we do so, if you have got one second for me.

19             Ms. Mahindaratne, I see above the signatures I see in the one

20     document, "ISO Branko Balunovic, v.r."  The v.r. are not appearing in the

21     other document.  Now I'm just checking on whether we have any -- let me

22     just check what we find in the English translations as a difference.

23             Perhaps v.r. could be -- could be perhaps easier explained if you

24     would not oppose that I ask those who speak --

25             MR. MIKULICIC:  Maybe I could be of assistance, Your Honour.

Page 6169

 1     V.r. means "by own hand."  So that means that signature is under the

 2     typed name put by own hand of the man who is signed the document.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Not necessarily to be the person whose name

 4     appears there or is it just the opposite way?

 5             MR. MIKULICIC:  No, just the opposite way.  V.r. means by own

 6     hand.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Which means that, I would say, in the primary

 8     school handwriting more or less that would be the original.

 9             MR. MIKULICIC:  Yes.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  And the other one would be ...

11             MR. MIKULICIC:  Who knows.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Well, at least we have an additional puzzle

13     but there is no objection against admission of the document into

14     evidence.

15             Mr. Registrar.

16             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, this becomes Exhibit number P573.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  P573 is admitted into evidence.  And that's the

18     document without the v.r.

19             Please proceed.

20             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Thank you, Mr. President.

21        Q.   Now, Mr. Janic, when you went to the archives in 2004, or

22     subsequently, did you see these documents of the three special

23     instructors in the archives?

24        A.   Yes, I did.

25             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  May I call for document number 745, please.

Page 6170

 1        Q.   Now, Mr. Janic, this is a report on the completion of assignment

 2     for 24th August.  And this is dated 25th August.  Submitted by

 3     Mladen Markac, or under the name of Mladen Markac to the chief of

 4     Main Staff of the HV.

 5             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  If we could go to second page, Mr. Janic could

 6     see under whose authority the document has been issued.  Page 3 on the

 7     English version.

 8        Q.   Now, would this report have -- would this be based on a report

 9     submitted by you.  First let me ask you a question:  Were the coordinator

10     for the operation on 24th August?  Did you command a mop-up operation on

11     the 24th?

12             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  If we go to the first page of the B/C/S

13     version, perhaps Mr. Janic can follow the report.

14             MR. MIKULICIC:  If I may suggest, maybe it will be wise to let

15     the witness read the whole document and then he could probably answer all

16     the questions.

17             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  That's what I suggested that we could do.

18             MR. MIKULICIC:  Okay.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Janic, could you please inform us once you have

20     gone through the first page so that we move to the second.

21             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I think I was commander that

22     day.

23             MS. MAHINDARATNE:

24        Q.   And would this report be based on a report submitted by you for

25     that activities of that day?

Page 6171

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Before, Ms. Mahindaratne, there was a suggestion

 2     that the witness would read the whole of the document first and I invited

 3     him to tell us if had gone through the first page.

 4             Do you feel a need to read the whole of the document, in order to

 5     answer --

 6             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I've read it.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, you read it.  You read more quickly that I can.

 8             Please proceed.

 9             MS. MAHINDARATNE:

10        Q.   Mr. Janic, would this report be based on a report submitted by

11     you?

12        A.   Yes.  This report was produced by the head of staff, he was

13     normally someone from internal control, he drafted this report based on

14     my report.  The headers were changed.  It was typewritten and e-mailed to

15     the Main Staff.  It reads:  "Commander Mladen Markac," but more often

16     than not he wasn't there nor was the report ever signed.  It was always

17     e-mailed so it was formal purposes that this was always there,

18     Commander Mladen Markac.  He would go everyday - I'm not sure if it was

19     the mornings or the evenings - to the Main Staff.  It is not as if the

20     general bade his time there waiting for this to be signed but, rather, as

21     soon as they would technically produce this report for the Main Staff,

22     they would simply dispatch it and mail it there.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Mikulicic.

24             MR. MIKULICIC:  I just notice some misinterpretation in the

25     translation.  That would be in line 2 -- line 3, I'm sorry.

Page 6172

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  If you have concerns about the interpretation, you

 2     could ask the witness to repeat his answer, or to read the -- but not to

 3     say what the right translation would be.

 4             MR. MIKULICIC:  Of course.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  We could ask the witness.

 6             MR. MIKULICIC:  It is concern to the -- well, this is a third

 7     line, where witness mentioned so it was translated the head of staff.

 8     But he was telling something else.

 9             So could we -- could Ms. Mahindaratne --

10             THE WITNESS: [No interpretation]

11             MR. MIKULICIC:  Yes, that's the word that the witness been using

12     so --

13             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Leader of staff, not head of staff.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Leader of staff.

15             MS. MAHINDARATNE:

16        Q.   Mr. Janic, who do you refer to as the leader of staff?

17        A.   Yes.

18        Q.   No, my question was whom do you refer to as leader, who was the

19     person.

20        A.   I think I've said that before, normally it was someone from

21     internal control.  One of their functions was also leader of staff

22     technical leader of staff.  It wasn't like in a movie.  This was a modest

23     operation.  There were normally two or three men who were involved in

24     this.  So the person producing that report could probably be termed the

25     technical leader of staff.

Page 6173

 1        Q.   Now -- so based on what you just said, the fact that Mr. Markac's

 2     signature or his seal is not on a document which is being forwarded to

 3     his, you know, to the chief of Main Staff or some authority does not --

 4     it's not considered as improper within the practice of the special

 5     police.  Is that correct?

 6        A.   That's right.  These reports were submitted by e-mail.  It wasn't

 7     possible to physically sign them or indeed to stamp them.  That's how it

 8     was.  That's how it worked.

 9        Q.   That does not, for instance, render the authenticity of the

10     document questionable.

11             MR. KUZMANOVIC:  This particular document or any document?

12             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  I'm asking about generally reports going under

13     Mr. Markac's name without his signature or the seal.

14             MR. KUZMANOVIC:  I think we need to speak about a particular

15     document and not talk about things that he doesn't know or hasn't seen.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Well, you can ask the question in general terms on

17     the basis of the experience this witness may have had with several

18     documents and you can focus your question on a single document; both

19     questions are admissible.

20             Ms. Mahindaratne, it seems that you were heading for the general

21     question.  Perhaps you repeat it for the witness.

22             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Yes, Mr. President.

23        Q.   Mr. Janic, could you -- let me repeat my question.  The fact that

24     Mr. Markac's signature or his seal is not on a report sent under his

25     name, does that render the authenticity of that document questionable, in

Page 6174

 1     your mind?

 2        A.   Not the one that I'm looking at.  This was the established

 3     practice.  Reports were sent from Gracac to the Main Staff.  There was no

 4     way to sign them or to stamp them simply because they were invariably

 5     e-mailed.  As to any other kind of correspondence exchanged between the

 6     general anyone else, I know that there was always a signature and a

 7     stamp.   But this is about reporting from Gracac to the staff.  This was

 8     always e-mailed to the Main Staff.  There was no signature there, and

 9     there was no stamp there.  There was an automatic thing.  The technical

10     leader of the Gracac staff would submit such reports on a daily basis.

11     There were as many reports as the searches that were conducted and they

12     were always unsigned, because they were e-mailed.

13             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Mr. President, may I tender this document into

14     evidence.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  No objections.  Then the number would be,

16     Mr. Registrar.

17             THE REGISTRAR:  Exhibit number P574, Your Honours.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  P574 is admitted into evidence.

19             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Mr. Registrar, may I call document number

20     1848, please.

21        Q.   Mr. Janic, do you note -- this is a report submitted by -- for

22     the activities of 25th August.  And you could go through the first page.

23     Then we'll move on to the next page.  And you will see under whose

24     authority it has been issued, who has signed it.

25             This is identical to the -- to your report that we tendered in

Page 6175

 1     evidence this morning, P560, isn't it?

 2        A.   As far as can I see, yes.

 3        Q.   So this would be the report that you said would be submitted

 4     based on your report, onward from the point that you handed it over to

 5     inner control branch?

 6        A.   Yes.

 7             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  And if we could move to page 2, Mr. Janic

 8     could take a look at this report.

 9        Q.   You can you see that it is going under the authority of

10     Mr. Markac.  And, in fact, Mr. Markac's signature is there.

11             Do you recognise his signature, Mr. Janic?

12        A.   It's been a long time since I last saw his signature.  It might

13     be, but I can't be positive.

14        Q.   Now -- I'm sorry, Mr. Registrar, if we could go back to page 1.

15     We see on the top of this report there is an indication that it has been

16     cancelled.  There's a handwritten notation saying it is cancelled.

17             Can you explain what that means?  Does that mean that this report

18     has been submitted and been withdrawn, or it's been written and

19     cancelled?  Can you please explain, since you would be the person who

20     could explain this.

21        A.   I'm sorry, I can't.  I didn't produce the report myself.  I

22     didn't submit this report, nor did I look closely at it.  Whenever I

23     submitted my report, that was all I had to do for that day and then I

24     would just move on and therefore I'm unable to explain this.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Misetic.

Page 6176

 1             MR. MISETIC:  I'm sorry, Your Honour.  I'm looking at the

 2     original document and I can't find the word cancelled, so ...

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Storno, would that ...

 4             MR. MISETIC:  Storno.  Okay.  Thank you.

 5             MS. MAHINDARATNE:

 6        Q.   Mr. Janic, I didn't ask you if you knew about this document.  My

 7     question was when a report within the special police had a handwritten

 8     indication that it was cancelled, what did that mean?  Who could cancel a

 9     report?  Now this report bears Mr. Markac's signature.  Who could then

10     cancel the report once Mr. Markac has signed the report?

11        A.   I have no idea.  I had nothing to do with this.  It certainly

12     wasn't for me.  Who was it, it's not something that I can tell.

13             MR. MIKULICIC:  If could I assist the Chamber.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Mikulicic.

15             MR. MIKULICIC:  I can recognise the handwriting text on the

16     original document which is not --

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  But --

18             MR. MIKULICIC: -- translated --

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Well, it is reported as illegible on the

20     translation.

21             Ms. Mahindaratne, you see that we have the word Storno above

22     the -- the address and we have some handwritten -- handwriting below it

23     with two - how do you say that, exclamation marks.

24             If -- shall we do a contest who can read best.  Mr. Mikulicic, if

25     could you read what is there, then we could.

Page 6177

 1             MR. MIKULICIC:  It is written non-valid.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Could you please tell us.

 3             MR. MIKULICIC:  In Croatian it is written "nevazece."

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  And then could we here from the interpreters

 5     that if "nevazece" would be pronounced, that you would then translate as

 6     invalid.

 7             THE INTERPRETER:  Invalid, yes.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Then one puzzle appears to have been resolved.

 9             Ms. Mahindaratne.

10             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  I tender this document into evidence,

11     Mr. President.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, I take it after you have thanked Mr. Mikulicic

13     for --

14             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  I'm sorry, Mr. President, thank you.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Now, Mr. Mikulicic, any objections?  No.  No

16     objections.

17             Yes, only on the handwriting.

18             Mr. Registrar.

19             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, this is becomes Exhibit number

20     P575.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  P575 is admitted into evidence.

22             MS. MAHINDARATNE:

23        Q.   Now, Mr. Janic, were you ever informed at any stage by Mr. Markac

24     or any person in the inner control branch that the report that you

25     submitted was incorrect and that, therefore, the report which was

Page 6178

 1     submitted based on your report had to be cancelled or withdrawn or

 2     anything to that effect?

 3        A.   No.  I never spoke to the general or any of the staff leaders

 4     about this.

 5        Q.   And if in fact a report that you submitted was considered to be

 6     incorrect, would you expect to be informed of that or at least inquired

 7     about it, by somebody, either within the inner control branch or

 8     Mr. Markac, or Mr. Sacic?

 9        A.   Well, there definitely would have been people asking questions if

10     something in my report was factually inaccurate or a situation

11     mis-described, as it were.  This would require further clarification, but

12     no one asked any questions which led me to believe that my report for

13     that day was now all done and dusted.  The next day meant a new job for

14     me.

15             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Mr. Registrar, may I call up document number

16     1853, please.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Ms. Mahadaratne, one question in relation to the

18     last document we've seen.  Will the Chamber hear any further evidence on

19     to what this has been attachment 6, as the document tells, and whether

20     there was any further -- whether the 0907 and the -- well, what is in the

21     translation considered to be a signature, but at least some kind of a --

22     a letter or something, what that means.  Will the Chamber hear any

23     further evidence on that?

24             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  No, Mr. President.  If you're referring to the

25     handwritten text on the top of this -- is that what you're referring to

Page 6179

 1     Mr. President?

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  I'm referring to the two portions of handwritten

 3     text that we have not dealt with yet.  That is, first, that is attachment

 4     6, and if you find a document and if it is attached -- if it called an

 5     attachment, then, of course, the first question is attached to what.

 6             We also find, you see that also in the translation, a kind of

 7     a -- it looks like a P or something like that with 0907 under it.

 8             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Yes, Mr. President.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Which might be - I'm not saying it is - but that

10     comes to my mind that might be a  reference to a date, for example, or

11     someone authorising something.  That's not uncommon.

12             Therefore, I asked myself whether the Chamber would receive

13     evidence on these elements of this document in the future.

14             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  No, Mr. President.  At this stage we do not

15     have any evidence to indicate what that is.  These documents have been

16     sent to us in response to a request for assistance, separately not with

17     the attachments.  Not in the regular order these documents would have

18     been in the archives or wherever they were in its original form.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.

20             Please proceed.

21             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Thank you, Mr. President.

22             Mr. Registrar, if I could call document number 1853.

23        Q.   Mr. Janic, this is a second report being issued under

24     Mr. Markac's authority on the operation for 25th August.

25             Have you seen this document before?

Page 6180

 1        A.   Yes, I have, but at a later stage.  I didn't see it back in 1995.

 2     It wasn't until sometime later that I saw it.

 3        Q.   Can you tell us when you saw it and where?

 4        A.   I think in 2004, when I was going through all these documents to

 5     do with this.

 6        Q.   Did you see this in the archives or somewhere else?

 7        A.   Yes, yes, that's where.

 8        Q.   And just so we don't waste too much of time, do you note,

 9     Mr. Janic, that the report in relation to the five other units except the

10     Lucko unit is the same as Mr. Markac's previous report that we just

11     looked at, with the exception of the report for Mr. -- for Lucko unit?

12             MR. MIKULICIC:  I believe this is something for the Chamber to

13     decide.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Even a matter the parties could agree upon

15     that the one text does not contain a certain portion.  I mean, that -- I

16     think you could put the question to everyone who can read.

17             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Very well, Mr. President.  I will move on.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

19             MS. MAHINDARATNE:

20        Q.   Do you note, Mr. Janic, the report on the Lucko unit.  In the

21     B/C/S version, it is at the bottom; English version on page 2.

22        A.   Yes, I see that.

23             MR. KUZMANOVIC:  Thank you.

24             MS. MAHINDARATNE:

25        Q.   Now, at any stage did Mr. Markac discuss these events with you,

Page 6181

 1     this particular version of events with you?

 2        A.   No, never.

 3        Q.   Did Mr. Sacic discuss this particular version of events with you?

 4        A.   No, not he either.

 5             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Mr. President I move this document into

 6     evidence,

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  No objection.  Mr. Registrar.

 8             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit number P576, Your Honours.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  P576 is admitted into evidence.

10             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Mr. Registrar, can I call document number

11     5221, please.

12        Q.   Mr. Janic, while the -- the document is already up on the screen,

13     if I could take you to paragraph 11 of your statement, 2004 statement.

14     You refer to there being 15-day reports which would explain what the unit

15     had done in the previous 15 days.

16             Now what we have here is a report going from 21st August to -- if

17     you go to the last page and we don't have to -- not yet.  It is the 3rd

18     September.  It is a 14-day period.

19             Is this the type of report that you referred, in terms of 15-day

20     report for all the units?

21        A.   Well, I have never seen this document.  The report that I was

22     talking about was more extensive.  You probably have a copy of those as

23     well.  It was more extensive.  It told you about everything that a unit

24     did, all of its tasks that it carried out.  It wasn't just about war

25     operations, as it were, but also about their tasks in their own county.

Page 6182

 1     Any information regarding training problems, to do with vehicles,

 2     logistics, that sort of thing.  That kind of report would be more

 3     extensive.  It talked about all the segments of a unit's work and there

 4     would always be a section about any disciplinary steps taken against any

 5     individual members of a given unit.  It's certainly more extensive, more

 6     elaborate than the kind that I'm looking at now, which, by the way, [as I

 7     said, I have never seen this before.

 8        Q.   Do you know who composed this report?

 9        A.   No.

10             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Can we just move on to page 5 in both English

11     and B/C/S versions, please.

12        Q.   Now, there's a report for 25th August for all the units that

13     participated in the operation on 25th August.  If you note the column

14     Lucko unit, the information that's there is consistent with the report

15     you submitted, isn't it?  The line for Lucko unit is at number 6.

16             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  If you could just go down, Mr. Registrar.

17        Q.   That data is consistent with the report that you submitted it?

18        A.   Yes, that's right.

19             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Mr. President, I tender this document into

20     evidence.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  No objections.  Then Mr. Registrar.

22             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit number P577, Your Honours.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  P577 is admitted into evidence.

24             Ms. Mahindaratne I'm looking at the clock.  We have to finish in

25     two minutes.  Could you give us an indication as --

Page 6183

 1             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  I could just call one last document, Mr.

 2     President, and tender it into evidence.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Would that conclude, then, your

 4     examination-in-chief?

 5             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  No, Mr. President.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  How much time would you still need?

 7             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  I think I believe, Mr. President, about two

 8     hours more.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Then I will have a look at your original

10     estimate which was four hours and I will ask Mr. Registrar to give me the

11     full details of how much time you used until now.

12             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Mr. President, I was under the impression that

13     we had estimated five hours.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Well, then I just checked that.  Let me then --

15             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  I beg your pardon if I have made a mistake.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  No I'm not saying -- I may have made a mistake or

17     perhaps even others may have made a mistake.  For me, we will verify the

18     time you indicated, and Mr. Registrar never makes a mistake so I will ask

19     him how much time you have used until now.

20             Please, then, take your last two minutes.

21             Please proceed.

22             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  May I call Exhibit number P505, please.

23        Q.   Mr. Janic, while that document is coming up, were you ever asked

24     by the minister of the interior or any official of the Ministry of

25     Interior to submit a report regarding the events in Grubori at any stage,

Page 6184

 1     perhaps in 2004 or 2001, or any stage?

 2        A.   No.

 3        Q.   Now, have you seen this report?  And -- before.  In fact, I think

 4     this report was shown to you at the interview.

 5        A.   I'm not certain, but I don't think so.  I don't think so.

 6        Q.   This is an report issued under the authority of Mr. Markac.  And

 7     if we could --

 8             MR. MIKULICIC:  Supposingly.

 9             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Under the authority.  I didn't say issued by

10     him.

11        Q.   Do you note the version in that regarding the Grubori events,

12     have you ever been informed of this particular version of events?

13        A.   No.  This strikes me as unbelievable.  Therefore, my answer is

14     no.

15        Q.   Now, Mr. Janic, are you aware that sometime in 2001, the county

16     prosecutor for Sibenik initiated an investigation into the Grubori

17     incident.  You yourself was, in fact, asked to provide certain material.

18        A.   What is the question?

19             MR. MAHINDARATNE:  Mr. President, I have just been told that it

20     is 1345.  Do we adjourn at this stage or do we --

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, we do adjourn at this stage but you said you

22     needed to put one document to the witness and put one question and I was

23     waiting for that to be finished.

24             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  I already did that, Mr. President.  We do --

25     this would it be for the day, Mr. President.  I assume.

Page 6185

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Then we will adjourn.

 2             First of all, please communicate with the Chamber staff if the

 3     information is not correct.  I do understand that on the revised witness

 4     list that four hours was scheduled for this witness; that's one.

 5             Second, three minutes ago you had used three hours and 41

 6     minutes, which means that you have used now three hours and 44 minutes.

 7     Therefore, I would invite you and encourage you to seek a way such that

 8     you stay within your time-limits and report tomorrow morning to the

 9     Chamber to what extent you think you will be able to do that so the

10     Chamber will consider how much time will further be granted.

11             Then, Mr. Janic, I'd like to instruct you, as I did yesterday,

12     again, that you should not speak with anyone, whomever it is, about your

13     testimony, whether already given or still to be given.  I further inform

14     the Defence, and, of course, if it is not unrelated, that Mr. Janic has

15     indicated that he would very much like to leave on Friday.  We will see

16     what is possible but also to keep in mind to what extent it will be

17     possible to finish cross-examination by Friday.

18             Mr. Misetic.

19             MR. MISETIC:  Your Honour, at this point we have no questions for

20     him.  I'm not sure about the Cermak Defence.

21             MR. CAYLEY:  Your Honour, we're waiting to see how things develop

22     and then we can give you a better idea tomorrow, but it would not be very

23     long at all.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Mikulicic, I can imagine that you have some

25     questions for the witness.  Could you give us an indication as to how

Page 6186

 1     much time you'd need.

 2             MR. MIKULICIC:  Well, a few questions, of course.  And that means

 3     I will probably have six hours.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Six hours.  From what I hear now, it should be

 5     possible to finish your testimony this week, Mr. Janic.  We're trying to

 6     do our utmost best but, at the same time, you will understand that this

 7     Chamber has to guarantee a fair trial to the accused and, therefore, is

 8     not unlimited in its managerial tasks.

 9             We will adjourn for the day and we'll resume tomorrow, the 10th

10     of July, 9.00 in the morning, same courtroom.

11                            --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.49 p.m.,

12                           to be reconvened on Thursday, the 10th day of July,

13                           2008, at 9.00 a.m.