Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 15629

 1                           Tuesday, 3 February 2009

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           [The witness entered court]

 5                           --- Upon commencing at 9.02 a.m.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Good morning to everyone.

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

 8             THE REGISTRAR:  Good morning, Your Honours.  Good morning to

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

10     Prosecutor versus Ante Gotovina, et al.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Registrar.

12             Mr. Lausic, I again would like it remind you that you're still

13     bound by the solemn declaration you've given at the beginning of your

14     testimony.

15             Mr. Kay, are you ready to proceed.

16             MR. KAY:  Thank you, Your Honour, yes.

17                           WITNESS:  MATE LAUSIC [Resumed]

18                           [Witness answered through interpreter]

19                           Cross-examination by Mr. Kay: [Continued]

20        Q.   Mr. Lausic, if we could look at another document concerning the

21     appointment of Mr. Orsulic and the rotation of the units in Knin.

22             MR. KAY:  That's Exhibit D1134, dated the 29th of August.

23        Q.   And I'm producing this to show you that as it pattern that's

24     repeated.  We looked at yesterday the 17th; we're now looking at the

25     29th.

Page 15630

 1             MR. KAY:  And Your Honour knows that we've had these documents in

 2     evidence, and I produce them during the cross-examination of

 3     Mr. Theunens, the whole range of these documents.  I don't propose to go

 4     through every one with the witness because it would be to no good effect

 5     or economical effect, but I do need to show him that it's a sequence.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  If you make a representative selection and

 7     then we could proceed.

 8             MR. KAY:  Thank you.

 9        Q.   I think you've understand what I've said then, Mr. Lausic, that

10     this is just to show you a further example.

11             There it is, Exhibit D1134.  As you can see, it's from

12     Commander Budimir of the 72nd, repeating that same 5th of August order

13     that we looked at yesterday, and the order is framed in very similar form

14     to the previous document with, in paragraph 2, Lieutenant Orsulic

15     selected as the commander.  But the officers beneath him are slightly

16     different.  Sergeant Podrug is a company NCO, has been added; star

17     Sergeant Brnic is this time the 2nd Platoon commander, instead of the

18     previous order it was a man called Vesevic and the traffic platoon was

19     previously a man called Begovic.  It is now Ante Pobric.

20             So the appointments changed that Commander Budimir was making

21     beneath Lieutenant Orsulic, but the rotation of the components of the

22     company remained the same.  And if we just turn to page 2 so that can you

23     see it's from Commander Budimir and where it was sent to.

24             Again, that continued for the next period, and we've put in

25     documents up till the end of November concerning this.

Page 15631

 1             And having shown you that, we will move from the rotation matter

 2     to now the daily reports, and you wanted to see the daily report

 3     yesterday for the 19th of August, and we've got that as a reference.

 4             MR. KAY:  It's 65 ter 6924.

 5        Q.   And this is the daily report from the 72nd Battalion duty

 6     service.  This document is similar to certain ones you've seen previously

 7     during your testimony.  We can see on the first page there's a crime

 8     report.  No need to look at the detail of that.

 9             If we look at the second page in English, but it's still the

10     first page in the Croatian language, further details of that crime.

11             MR. KAY:  We can now turn the Croatian language one to page 2.

12        Q.   Other events are described there, about four reporters being

13     detained, giving their identities.

14             MR. KAY:  Let's turn to page 3 in the English.

15        Q.   We can see further details there.  And then in the last page,

16     safety of military road traffic, we see the report there.

17             And the issue, just to refresh your memory, if you needed it from

18     yesterday, concerned that report that Lieutenant Orsulic had filed with

19     the military police administration, general military police department,

20     concerning the tour of various people from the Ministry of Defence, and I

21     asked you about that document.  It was Exhibit D791.  And you wanted to

22     look at the daily report for that day to see if there was any mention of

23     that matter in it, and it appears there is no mention of the tour by the

24     Ministry of Defence members on that day.

25             Is there any further comment that you'd like to add now?

Page 15632

 1        A.   This is the report of the duty service of the 72nd Military

 2     Police Battalion and not a daily report of the MP company in Knin.

 3        Q.   Would we have to look in the daily book of the Knin company to

 4     see if it is mentioned in there?  Would that be the appropriate step to

 5     take?

 6        A.   If you find it necessary.

 7        Q.   Thank you.  Just looking at this document, we can note who this

 8     daily report is sent to at the foot of it.

 9             MR. KAY:  Perhaps if you can turn the Croatian language version

10     to the next page.

11        Q.   And you see to whom this document is sent to.

12             MR. KAY:  And I now want to turn to 65 ter 5630.

13             The document I've just referred to is part of the Prosecution bar

14     table documents, Your Honour, which is why I'm not ...

15        Q.   Mr. Lausic, we've got the daily report here, as another example

16     of the 26th of September, 1995, from the duty service of the 72nd, we can

17     see here, of a crime reported in the first part.

18             I'd like us to just look at that because it concerns a Knin

19     military police company patrol, seeing and investigating a crime, and we

20     can see what it concerned without going into the detail, but it's the

21     fact of that happening and involving the Knin company.

22             We can also see a report for that day of violations of the Code

23     of Military Discipline, and that concerned something on that day when a

24     Knin military police company patrol discovered a Croatian military member

25     shooting his rifle into the air in Marsal Tito Street across from the

Page 15633

 1     Knin forward command post building.

 2             Page 2 in the English, we can see that a soldier was arrested by

 3     the local military police who seized his rifle, and he was submitted for

 4     criminal processing.  We can see the other events that happened on that

 5     day.

 6             And then if we turn to the end of this document, we can see to

 7     whom the document is delivered to; and, in particular, I want you to look

 8     at number 3, the Split garrison commander.

 9             MR. KAY:  And, again, Your Honour, without going through the 100

10     or so reports that we've had in evidence and bar table documents, we know

11     that all these reports reflect a similar ending.  And of the addressees,

12     it is the Split garrison commander who receives this report.

13        Q.   And the point I want to put to you is this:  That if this

14     information and breach of military discipline concerned the Knin military

15     police company who were reporting to General Cermak, or subordinated to

16     General Cermak, he would have received this information.  Isn't that

17     right?

18        A.   My order of the 14th of August, in item 14, and that's the order

19     we looked at before, which relates to the implementation of the military

20     police tasks in the areas of responsibility of MP units.

21             Item 14, in the last paragraph, regulates in very precise terms

22     that the military police company in Knin shall be subordinated to the

23     most senior commander of the Croatian army in its area of responsibility,

24     to which it -- to which it shall submit its daily report.

25        Q.   And, for reference, you are referring to Exhibit D47.

Page 15634

 1        A.   I don't know the number of the exhibit.  I'm referring to the

 2     order of the chief of the MP administration of the 14th of August.

 3        Q.   Yes, I say that for the record.

 4             So a report of this nature, if the Knin company was reporting to

 5     General Cermak, would have been sent to him.

 6        A.   The daily report of the military police company in Knin, that is,

 7     and not the daily report of the 72nd Military Battalion as a whole.  This

 8     daily report is sent to the commander of the Split Military District

 9     because the 72nd Battalion is stationed in Split.

10             MR. MISETIC:  Your Honour.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, Mr. Misetic.

12             MR. MISETIC:  I apologise for rising.  But the translation came

13     back in line 8, page 6 as "commander of the Split Military District," and

14     I believe if we could check on what the witness may have said.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Lausic, read a portion of your last answer and

16     see whether it is transcribed and translated with full accuracy.

17             You said:  "The daily report of the military police company in

18     Knin, that is, and not the daily report of the 72nd Military Battalion as

19     a whole.  This daily report is sent to the commander of," and then you

20     said, "Military District."  Which Military District?

21             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I apologise, Mr. President.  I said

22     that this daily report of the 72nd Battalion, as can be seen, is also

23     sent to the commander of the Split garrison, as listed under item 3 from

24     among the addressees.  It is sent there because the 72nd Battalion was

25     stationed in Split, and he, as the commander of the Split garrison,

Page 15635

 1     received that daily report.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  So, therefore, you say it's -- under 2 and 3,

 3     it is addressed, among others, to the Split Military District Commander

 4     and to the Split garrison commander.

 5             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Correct.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  You say that is because it's a report of the

 7     72nd Battalion as a whole; whereas, units within that battalion may have

 8     reported to others.

 9             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I only added that the daily report

10     of the 72nd Battalion was sent to the commander of the Split garrison,

11     because the 72nd Battalion was headquartered in Split; whereas, it had

12     dislocated companies in Zadar, Sibenik, Sinj, Knin, and Dubrovnik.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  And to whom would the daily report of the military

14     police company in Knin have been addressed?

15             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] According to my 14th of

16     August order, it was also sent to the commander of the Knin garrison, as

17     listed in the last paragraph of -- item 12, of my 14th of August order.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed, Mr. Kay.

19             MR. KAY:  Can we just go to Exhibit D47.

20        Q.   And this is back to your order, dated the 14th of August.

21             MR. KAY:  If we go to paragraph 12, which is page 3 in the

22     English.  Paragraph 12 is there in the Croatian language.  Page 4, I'm

23     sorry.

24        Q.   That's what paragraph 12 says there.

25             "The newly established military police units must be urgently

Page 15636

 1     provided with the necessary level of accommodation, logistics support,

 2     and documents for operations and training.  Members of the military

 3     police shall work rotating shifts every 20 days," et cetera.

 4             That does not say that they report to the garrison commander in

 5     Knin.

 6        A.   This is mentioned in item 14 of the order, in the last paragraph.

 7        Q.   It is not mentioned in paragraph 14 that they report to the

 8     garrison commander in Knin.

 9        A.   Correct.  To the most senior commander of the Croatian army, in

10     the area of responsibility.

11        Q.   If I can just recap something here in answer to Judge Orie's

12     question.  Judge Orie asked:

13             "And to whom would the daily report of the military police

14     company in Knin have been addressed?"

15             And the answer, interpreted for me, was:

16             "According to my 14th of August order, it was also sent to the

17     commander of the Knin garrison as listed in the last paragraph of item 12

18     of my 14th of August order."

19        A.   Yes.  I'm waiting for the question.

20        Q.   Yes.  I'm allowing it to be translated -- it's not only English

21     language, there are other languages.

22             That is not reference to that the reports would be sent to the

23     Knin garrison commander in paragraph 14.  That's right, isn't it?

24        A.   Correct, yes.

25        Q.   We've been looking at documents at two levels.  A level of

Page 15637

 1     documents communicated by you down to the battalions; and then documents

 2     beneath the battalion commander, down to the companies, which have not

 3     been referenced to you but are operating at a level below.  Isn't that

 4     right?

 5        A.   It is correct, yes.

 6        Q.   Am I right in saying that you did not know to whom the Knin

 7     company was actually reporting to?

 8        A.   Could you please clarify.  Are you saying that I didn't know?  Or

 9     that I was not aware of the fact to whom the commander of the Knin

10     battalion reported on a daily basis, of a Knin company?

11             THE INTERPRETER:  The interpreter's apology.

12             MR. KAY:

13        Q.   You did not know the identity to whom the Knin company commander

14     was reporting to?

15        A.   Correct.

16        Q.   You did not received daily reports of the Knin company --

17        A.   Correct.

18        Q.   [Previous translation continues]... because they went to the 72nd

19     headquarters, and the 72nd headquarters combined the daily reports of all

20     the companies and then sent a combined report to the military police

21     administration.  Is that right?

22        A.   Correct.  The summaries of all the most important reports, as I

23     have already explained, containing data either on the victim or the

24     perpetrators or the characteristics of the events.  We're talking about

25     summaries.

Page 15638

 1        Q.   When you were questioned by Mr. Foster and Mr. Morris and others

 2     from the investigation department of the OTP in May of 2004, the

 3     transcript we have says this:

 4             "For instance, they covered certain areas.  The military police

 5     company of the 71st Battalion in Knin was subordinated to the highest

 6     officer."

 7             It's page 12 in the B/C/S, Mr. Lausic.

 8             MR. KAY:  Page 13 in the English.  For reference purposes, it's

 9     page 13.

10        Q.   It's the first interview on the Friday.  Have you got that now,

11     Mr. Lausic?

12        A.   No, I haven't been able to locate that in my binder.  Can I

13     please have it on the screen.

14        Q.   Sure.  Is that the binder Mr. Foster gave you on the 25th?

15        A.   No.  These are documents that I was given on the 17th December,

16     2008.  This is actually the transcript of my interview as a suspect, and

17     also my statement provided as a prospective witness.  I don't know

18     whether what you are mentioning now are excerpts from the transcript --

19             JUDGE ORIE:  [Previous translation continues] ...

20             MR. KAY:  [Previous translation continues] ... yeah, because this

21     is important that you see what was said at the time.

22             It's 65 ter 7036.

23             MR. TIEGER:  May -- sorry.  I was wondering if Mr. Kay could

24     provide, in addition to page numbers, line references because I'm having

25     some difficulty finding that particular excerpt that he quoted.  And

Page 15639

 1     didn't flow if it is my inability to find it on the page, and the line

 2     reference would help.

 3             MR. KAY:  Well, page 13 of 58, 4965, and 65 ter -- can we go back

 4     a page in the English.  Can we go back a page in the Croatian.  Next page

 5     in the Croatian.  Other way, please.

 6                           [Defence counsel confer]

 7             MR. KAY:

 8        Q.   In the English version, wrongly put into your statement is 71st,

 9     instead of 72nd.  Can you see that?  You mentioned the 72nd, but it's

10     wrongly put into the English here for a reasoning with, in fact,

11     connected with Mr. Foster's question.  But we can just go through this.

12              "For instance they covered certain areas.  The military police

13     company of the 72nd Battalion in Knin was subordinated to the highest

14     officer, commander in its area of its [sic] responsibility, and its area

15     of responsibility, the area of the town of Knin and the surrounding

16     areas, and a platoon in Drnis and the Benkovac platoon.  And they deal

17     with it the same way, and they deal with all members in uniform of the

18     Croatian army, whether they deal with them through their own activity or

19     following reports of the civilian police, citizens, et cetera."

20             Mr. Foster said:  "So who was the 71st Battalion in Knin

21     subordinated to?"  Which we know is an error.

22             And then the next passage is:  "First of all, to the commander,"

23     the commander of the 72nd Battalion, it should be, "and the commander was

24     subordinated to the commander of the Military District."

25             In English, we have:  "All right," which doesn't appear there in

Page 15640

 1     the Croatian.

 2             MR. KAY:  Can we just move it up the page a bit on the English.

 3     The other way, sorry, it's my mistake.  Fine.

 4        Q.   We then have:  "Horizontally to the highest ranking commander, to

 5     the highest ranking commander of the Croatian army in its area of

 6     responsibility."

 7             MR. KAY:  If we turn to the next page of the English, please.

 8        Q.   Which we can see on the right, that that is part of the combined

 9     answer.

10             And then Mr. Foster says:  "So in Knin that would be

11     General Cermak, would it?"

12             And then your answer in the Croatian language, perhaps you could

13     just read that out.

14        A.   Excuse me, just to illustrate the dimensions of what I'm saying

15     and the problems in our functioning within the cooperation between the

16     Ministry of the Interior and ourselves.  On 7 August, I was -- I received

17     a telephone call at 1845 by Mr. Moric, the assistant minister, and he

18     told me that Mr. Smiljan Reljic who was in --

19        Q.   [Previous translation continues]... thank you very much.

20             We're looking at the --

21             MR. KAY:  Sorry, Your Honour.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed.

23             MR. KAY:

24        Q.   If we go back, then, if we can just scroll up the B/C/S higher up

25     the page, please, just stop there.  And if you could just read out what

Page 15641

 1     Mr. Foster said to you in B/C/S at line 9.

 2        A.    "Who was the 71st Battalion in Knin subordinated to?"

 3             I would like to say that this is completely wrongly defined

 4     issue, or question, rather.

 5        Q.   Yes.  If you could just read out your answer beneath that to his

 6     wrong question of the 71st Battalion in Knin.

 7        A.   I believed that he asked me who the company of the military

 8     police of the 72nd Battalion was subordinated to, the one that was

 9     stationed in Knin, and my answer to that was the following as under

10     bullet points 11, 12, 13, and 14:

11             "First of all, I meant the company of the MP in Knin was

12     subordinated to its commander, and that was the commander of the 72nd

13     Battalion.  And the commander of the 72nd Battalion was subordinated to

14     the commander of the Military District.  And in horizontal lines, and,

15     again, I'm talking about the company of the military police in Knin, to

16     the most supreme commander of the Croatian military in their area of

17     responsibility."

18        Q.   Thank you.

19             MR. KAY:  If the English could be turned to page -- the next

20     page, please.

21        Q.   If you could just read out in Croatian at line 16 what Mr. Foster

22     said.

23        A.   "In Knin it would be General Cermak, would it not?"

24        Q.   And then your answer at line 18.

25        A.    "Yes, that's true."  And then a break:  "And now to illustrate

Page 15642

 1     the dimensions of what I'm talking about and the problems of how we

 2     cooperate" --

 3        Q.   [Previous translation continues] ... stop there.  Thank you.

 4             You would agree that under the rules, as we discussed yesterday,

 5     your Article 9 rule of the military police concerns the highest ranking

 6     commander by function?

 7        A.   By function.

 8        Q.   Yeah.  Yes, that's right.  Yeah.

 9             That was not a part of your discussions with Mr. Foster, the

10     issue of highest ranking by function.  Isn't that right?

11        A.   Yes.  You can see that from the transcript.

12        Q.   You said earlier in your evidence this morning, you did not know,

13     and as a matter of fact, to whom the commander of the 7th Company, or the

14     Knin company, was reporting to.  Isn't that right?

15        A.   Yes, that's right.

16        Q.   And that was not, in fact, a question either that Mr. Foster

17     asked you, as to whom the 7th Company in Knin were reporting to.  Isn't

18     that right?

19        A.   I apologise, I wouldn't call it the 7th Company.  I would call it

20     the company of the military police in Knin, and as for the rest, I agree.

21     What I'm saying is that this company did not bear a numerical part of its

22     name, either at that time or later.

23        Q.   Just to make sure we're clear, then:  He did not ask the question

24     of you to whom or whether you knew to whom the Knin company was reporting

25     to in Knin?

Page 15643

 1        A.   As you can see from the transcript, the answer would be no.

 2        Q.   He, Mr. Foster, put the name "General Cermak" to you on the issue

 3     of the highest ranking commander in the area, but that was a hypothetical

 4     issue concerning the command and subordination of the Knin company,

 5     wasn't it?

 6        A.   That's correct, yes.

 7        Q.   Thank you.  We can move from there now to another section.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Kay, if you would allow me to ask a few

 9     clarifying questions.

10             Mr. Lausic, it is clear you have clearly responded to Mr. Kay's

11     question.  You did not know to whom the police, military police company

12     in Knin, was reporting.

13             Now, on the basis of your earlier instructions that reports

14     should be sent to the -- let me -- to the highest ranking commander in

15     the area, could you just list for me to whom you would expect -- under

16     your instructions, to whom you would expect the military police company

17     in Knin would report?  Whether they did is another matter but ...

18             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, if I'm not mistaken, I

19     already said last week that in Knin there was a specific situation which

20     reflected in the following:  In Knin there was a forward command post of

21     the Military District with the complete command, irrespective of the

22     fact, where, at any given moment, the commander of the Military District

23     was, the command of the Military District was in Knin.

24             The second specific characteristic was that the forward command

25     post of the 72nd Battalion of the military police was also in Knin.  Its

Page 15644

 1     main headquarters was in Split.  However, since it was active in the

 2     area, its command was in Knin at that moment.  And there was also the

 3     company of the military police, which was newly established and stationed

 4     in Knin.

 5             Daily reports issued by the 72nd Battalion, or, rather, its duty

 6     service as may be seen, was submitted to the command of the Military

 7     District Split.  It is only to be assumed, and I am just answering your

 8     question as to what my assumptions are.  It is assumed to that a

 9     battalion of the military police -- the company of the military police in

10     Knin did not send reports to the forward command post of the Military

11     District Split, its own daily reports, because the events, pursuant to

12     which the members of the company acted, were dealt with in the daily

13     reports of the 72nd MP Battalion.  And these reports were sent to the

14     command of the Military District.  It is to be assumed that their daily

15     reports were sent to the most senior officer in their area of

16     responsibility, and that would be the commander of the garrison there,

17     whose name was known and who was appointed as the garrison commander.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Let me stop you there for a second because we are

19     moving from 72nd Battalion to Knin company.

20             We have seen on the documents shown to you by Mr. Kay where you

21     said, These are not reports of the Knin company, that they were sent to

22     the Split -- the Military District command, Split, and to the garrison

23     commander in Split as well.

24             Now, I'd like you to focus on the company only.  The company in

25     Knin would -- if they would follow your instructions - if it is part of

Page 15645

 1     your instructions; if not, tell us - would report to whom exactly?  Who

 2     would be on the list of addressees?

 3             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The commander of the 72nd MP

 4     Battalion or, rather, its duty service.  That is the first step in the

 5     vertical ladder, to the commander of the Knin garrison, to the chief of

 6     the police station in Knin.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  You mention the commander of the Knin garrison.  Is

 8     that because you consider him to be the highest ranking military

 9     commander in the zone of responsibility?  Is that why you include him?

10             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Correct.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Whether they did or not, as you said to Mr. Kay, you

12     do not know; but that is what you expected them to do on the basis of

13     your instructions.

14             Please proceed, Mr. Kay.

15             MR. KAY:  With respect, Your Honour, I think the test is actually

16     different; it's highest ranking by function.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Where I said, Because you considered him to be the

18     highest ranking military commander, I meant to -- but let me --

19             MR. KAY:  I was going to ask --

20             JUDGE ORIE:  I withdraw that.  If you want to further explore --

21             MR. KAY:  I was going to deal with this, Your Honour.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  That's fine.  Because you used the wordings not

23     always with functional.  I think a lot of your questions it was, Did I

24     function --

25             MR. KAY:  If I've taken it from the order, it is without

Page 15646

 1     function.  If I'm dealing otherwise, it is by function.  And on the

 2     transcript they didn't use the term -- Your Honour will recollect that

 3     the original translation we had in the case was wrong, and that phrase

 4     "by function" was missing.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Now, I am aware of that.

 6             MR. KAY:  Sorry.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  And I was referring to just the text of item 14.  If

 8     you want to further explore the matter, please proceed.

 9             MR. KAY:  Sure.

10        Q.   In Knin, the highest ranking military commander by function in

11     the zone of responsibility is not the garrison commander.

12        A.   That's also true.  But I stressed the specific situation in Knin

13     as a provisional location where the forward command post of the

14     Military District was stationed; that's to say, the command of the

15     Military District.  We also have the forward command post of the

16     72nd Battalion stationed there.  We also have the command of the

17     commander of the Military District, and we have commanders of certain

18     units stationed in Knin.  Which units exactly, with which commanders

19     bearing which ranks, I don't know.  However, the logic I'm following, the

20     reasoning, is that the commander of the company in Knin whose activities

21     are already covered in the daily report sent to the commander of the

22     Military District, as we were able to see, his own daily report relating

23     to his company would be sent to the levels that I mentioned in answer to

24     His Honour's question; namely, the commander of the 72nd Battalion -- or,

25     rather, its duty service, the commander of the garrison, the chief of the

Page 15647

 1     police station in Knin, and probably some other levels within the company

 2     itself.

 3        Q.   So to make it clear, then, that's on a theoretical level.  You

 4     are saying that was an assumption.

 5        A.   I'm not speaking of the theory.  I'm telling you what my

 6     reasoning, my logic is.

 7        Q.   Very well.  Shall we just look at a document that may be of

 8     interest.

 9             MR. KAY:  It is an exhibit, D996.

10        Q.   This is a document dated the 16th of February, 1995.  It's from

11     the garrison commander in Split.  And it's addressed to the chief of

12     General Staff, General Bobetko, and it concerns the functioning of the

13     Split garrison.

14             Have you ever seen this document before, Mr. Lausic?

15        A.   I don't remember.

16        Q.   It will be important for you to have an opportunity to read it.

17     We have seen this already in court.  And if you read the first page --

18     tell us when you have read the first page, then we'll change over.

19        A.   Can we turn to the next page, please.

20        Q.   Thank you.

21             MR. KAY:  And in the English, please.

22             Next page, please.

23             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, please.

24             MR. KAY:

25        Q.   This document was sent just to General Bobetko, Chief of Staff,

Page 15648

 1     from Colonel Zoricic of the Split garrison.

 2             MR. KAY:  If we go back to the first page, because it's often

 3     difficult to take in all information quickly.

 4        Q.   This was February 1995, and it was critical of the establishment

 5     of the Split garrison as you can see.  And saying that there were

 6     problems, and we can see the terms of the letter there.

 7             MR. KAY:  If we now turn to page 2.

 8        Q.   One of the problems that he refers to, as we see in the second

 9     paragraph, is the authority of the garrison commander, garrison control

10     officer, and garrison duty officer.

11             "I have no authority over military police, and I do not even

12     cooperate with them, since the garrison institution has been ignored by

13     the 72nd Military Police Battalion commander.  Without the assistance and

14     possibility of using military police, it is impossible to reach the

15     required level of order and discipline."

16             And we see other complaints and then his proposals.  And in

17     proposal 3:  "The garrison commander shall be given authority and one

18     military police company in the city of Split area shall be subordinated

19     to him."

20             Firstly, did General Bobetko ever refer this problem to you?

21        A.   I don't know.  I don't remember this particular problem.  I am

22     familiar with Colonel Zoricic, and I know that there were problems

23     between him personally and the commander of the 72nd Battalion.  The way

24     the information was conveyed to me, he was known to send requests to the

25     military police for matters that went beyond the scope of their activity.

Page 15649

 1             As for Colonel Zoricic, the order from the minister of defence

 2     and the chief of the Main Staff, General Bobetko, of the 27th

 3     August 1993, had in its enclosures the instructions regulating issues

 4     from the purview of garrisons where, in item 4, it is referred to the

 5     engagement of military police units in very precise terms.  And it is

 6     regulated in what way in cooperation with the military police was

 7     supposed to be established.

 8             The commander of the 72nd Battalion --

 9        Q.   [Previous translation continues] ... we will turn to those now

10     because we have them as an exhibit.  Exhibit D34.  Sorry to interrupt,

11     but I think it may assist the Court to know what the witness is referring

12     to.

13             This is it Exhibit D34, organisational order regarding work,

14     order, and discipline at garrison HQs and is the reference cited by the

15     garrison commander in Split in his letter.

16             MR. KAY:  It's 3035 -- or 8035.

17        Q.   You told us last week that you received this first on the 25th of

18     January with the documents that Mr. Foster gave you.  Is that right?

19        A.   Correct.

20        Q.   And was that the first time you had seen this document?

21        A.   I can't be certain about it.  I may have received it for my

22     information back then, although it's not stated here, but I saw it the

23     other day for the first time in the documentation that I was given.

24        Q.   Right.  If we just look at this carefully because it concerns the

25     setting up of the garrisons as we see in the headnote.  And the order to

Page 15650

 1     set up a comprehensive system of command, cooperation, and coordination

 2     at the level of garrison headquarters.  We can see paragraph 1 there.

 3     But it's paragraph 2 that I'd like you to look at carefully.  And it says

 4     this:

 5             "The garrison headquarters [sic] commands do not have an

 6     operational function and the right to issue orders to Croatian army

 7     units, except precisely prescribed authorities regarding work, order, and

 8     discipline at the garrison headquarters outside of barracks and other

 9     military facilities within the tasks provided by the rules of service of

10     the armed forces."

11             Now, do you note that there, that it says the garrison

12     headquarters commands don't have an operational function?  Did you know

13     that before, that that was one of the orders concerning the garrisons?

14        A.   Not in such precise terms, but I did know what the tasks of

15     garrison commanders were in accordance with the rules of service.

16        Q.   The tasks were set out in the 1992 rules of service, and we will

17     go back to look at them.  But this was the order, wouldn't you agree, as

18     to how the garrisons had to function?

19        A.   Yes, correct.

20        Q.   And the rules of service don't make that fact about the garrisons

21     not having an operational function.  It is not said in those terms in the

22     rules of service; do you agree?

23        A.   Lawyers should be better placed than me to make a proper

24     interpretation of the document; they drafted it.  My interpretation would

25     not have legal validity.

Page 15651

 1        Q.   Very well.  I'm stating a fact because we've looked at it, and

 2     it's often helpful to do that so that we have a base for the next

 3     question, if you understand.

 4             Now, in the orders that you issued and we looked at yesterday,

 5     most specifically the one on the 14th of August that refers to

 6     operational commands, Exhibit D47, daily operational commands, do you see

 7     that there is a problem between the orders issued by the military police

 8     and this function of the garrison here as set out in the 1993 order?

 9        A.   Yes.  It is there.  However, I have to say that the rules

10     governing the organisation and work of the military police as bylaws - in

11     other words, regulations inferior to legislation which serve as

12     provisions implementing legislation, in this case, the Law on Defence -

13     is a piece of regulation of an earlier date and, therefore, takes

14     supremacy in relation to operational orders.  Another thing is that the

15     rules governing the organisation and work of the military police were

16     passed in 1994 and antedates the 1993 order by date as well.  In those

17     rules, in Article 9, that is, daily operational command is mentioned on

18     the part of the most senior commander by function, commander of the

19     Croatian army, and let me be quite precise --

20        Q.   If you could read it -- read it out again because it's the word

21     "regular" that is it used, rather than "operational" in Article 9.  If

22     you read it out, Article 9.

23        A.   Article 9 of the rules governing the organisation and work of the

24     military police of the armed forces of the Republic of Croatia reads:

25     "The rules were adopted in February 1994 as bylaws.  In performing

Page 15652

 1     regular military police tasks, the military police units shall be

 2     subordinated to the commander of the Military District, commander of the

 3     Croatian navy, commander of the Croatian air force..."  That's just --

 4     or, rather, "to the most senior commander of the Croatian army by

 5     function in the area where the military police units operate or are

 6     active."

 7             Let me just add the following.  My interpretation of the rules as

 8     a piece of bylaws which has supremacy over the order, also in terms of

 9     dates -- or, rather, not my interpretation, but a proper interpretation

10     of the rules should be given by the lawyers.  This is my position in

11     relation to that on the basis of my legal knowledge and experience.

12             MR. KAY:  And, for the record, it was Exhibit P880 the witness

13     was referring to, Your Honour.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Kay.

15             MR. KAY:

16        Q.   And just looking at paragraph 2 here, we've looked at the

17     non-operational function.  But it says the garrison headquarters commands

18     don't have the right to issue orders to Croatian army units except

19     precisely prescribed authorities regarding, work, order, and discipline

20     at the garrison headquarters.

21             So, again, a -- were you not aware of that fact in 1995 and when

22     you were interviewed in 2004 about the --

23        A.   I did not see the order or the 1993 instructions.  I gave my

24     statement on the basis of the rules governing the organisation and work

25     of the military police and the orders which were issued pursuant to the

Page 15653

 1     rules.

 2        Q.   Yes.  When you were interviewed and your statement taken by

 3     Mr. Foster, Mr. Casey, Mr. Morris, and others, you had your documents

 4     that you had issued.  Is that correct?

 5        A.   What exactly are you referring to when you say "your documents"?

 6        Q.   The military police administration documents that you issued at

 7     this time as the chief.

 8        A.   Correct.  The ones that I obtained from the archive when I was

 9     preparing for the interview.

10        Q.   You were not asked to review other documents that we have looked

11     at in the course of your cross-examination.  Isn't that right?

12        A.   Right.

13        Q.   If we can look at number 4, because you referred to point 4, that

14     refers to the commanders of Military District and other commanders "shall

15     study the enclosed directive in a" --

16             I know you also were referring to number 4 of the instructions.

17     But ... we will look at that; don't worry.  This is an important --

18        A.   Fine.

19        Q.   This is an important -- number 4 as well.  And to be fair to you,

20     have you had the time to absorb all these -- all the detail in this

21     document?

22        A.   In what period do you mean?

23        Q.   Well, have you had time to look at this document carefully until

24     I've started asking questions about it?

25        A.   Just summarily.

Page 15654

 1        Q.   Yes, as we saw.

 2             Paragraph 4 here requires those commanders to study the

 3     directive, and based on specific circumstances, set out concrete tasks

 4     for garrison headquarters regarding work, order, and discipline and

 5     implementation of the prescribed tasks.

 6             Were you aware that the garrisons were going through a process of

 7     organisation and change in order for them to function properly?

 8        A.   My knowledge of the workings of the garrisons was quite

 9     superficial, save for Colonel Zoricic as the commander of the Split

10     garrison.  I don't recall any other garrison commanders at this time, I

11     must admit.  I remember him by - and this is only to put it mildly - some

12     of the peculiarities of his work mode.

13        Q.   Thank you.  Just so that we finish this page, just looking at

14     number 5, that there was a requirement that their work be monitored and

15     assessed to ensure that the situation encountered was taking all the

16     necessary measures for work, order, and discipline at the garrison to the

17     required level.

18             MR. KAY:  Your Honour, I can see the time, and we're turning no

19     the next section of this as I said we would, as the next phase of

20     questioning.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Then we'll already ask Mr. Lausic to leave the

22     courtroom.  Mr. Lausic, we'll have a break, and then I'll further

23     inquire.

24             MR. KAY:  Sure.

25                           [The witness stands down]

Page 15655

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Kay, your estimate was one day.  You started

 2     yesterday in the second session of the hearing.

 3             MR. KAY:  Your Honour, I'm on the last lap, and I think I would

 4     be finished within the next session, with the Court's leave.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, which makes it one and one third of a day.

 6             MR. KAY:  Yes.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  We'll consider that during the break.

 8             We will have a break, and we'll resume at five minutes to 11.00.

 9                           --- Recess taken at 10.30 a.m.

10                           [The witness entered court]

11                           --- On resuming at 11.02 a.m.

12                           [Trial Chamber confers]

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Kay, you may proceed.  Leave is granted for the

14     additional time you asked for.  However, if you would not use all of it,

15     that would certainly be appreciated.

16             Please proceed.

17             MR. KAY:  I'm much obliged, Your Honour, and I will bear that in

18     mind.  Thank you.

19        Q.   Mr. Lausic, we were looking at these organisational orders

20     regarding work, order, and discipline at garrison headquarters,

21     Exhibit D34.  And just to remind you, before the break, we looked at the

22     fact that this was setting up the garrisons' tasks that had to be done in

23     advance and review of the work that was being done.

24             Shall we go now to the instructions.

25             MR. KAY:  Page 3 in the English.  And it's instructions on

Page 15656

 1     regulating some issues within the jurisdiction of garrison headquarters.

 2        Q.   We can see in 1 that duties and tasks for garrison headquarters

 3     that are outside their original garrison headquarters due to temporary

 4     occupation of their territory, that they are able to perform at their

 5     current locations, prepare documents.

 6             Can we just look at one issue here, which may be an important

 7     issue for you to consider.  Until the 5th of August, of course, there was

 8     no garrison in Knin.  Isn't that right?

 9        A.   I wouldn't be able to give you an answer because I don't know.

10        Q.   This instruction here requires tasks to be devised to set up

11     garrisons that are outside the place where they have been designated.

12             If we go to number 4 here, which is the one you wanted to look

13     at.  It's the next page, and it's called "employing military police

14     units."  And it says:

15             "The ZM commander is required to arrange a procedure with the

16     closest unit of the military police of calling MP units and having them

17     intervene in the case of unrest, accidents, et cetera, when an MP unit is

18     indispensable to establish order and discipline in the area of the

19     garrison..."  headquarters.

20             What I want to put to you is this, that that is a written

21     procedure as to how the garrison should operate with the military police

22     if there is trouble in the garrison area which would be a written

23     protocol of how to respond to trouble.  Isn't that right?

24        A.   As I'm reading number 4 here, I can say that what you have just

25     put to me may be seen as arising from the contents of number 4.

Page 15657

 1        Q.   The next matter, next sentence we should look at is:

 2             "Also arrange for temporary employment of MP patrols to supervise

 3     work, discipline, and conduct of military personnel in public places."

 4             Just looking at that, that required the garrison commander to use

 5     temporary military police patrols to supervise what would be the rules of

 6     the garrison as to how people should behave in relation to their military

 7     conduct.  Is that right?

 8        A.   Yes.  This may be understood from bullet point 4, and it may be

 9     said that what you have just put to me is correct.

10        Q.   And this is because the garrisons were a place that the military

11     based itself, and there was a required level of behaviour of how the

12     military should behave in that area to enable it to be part of the town

13     or community.  Isn't that right?

14        A.   Yes.  Members of the Croatian army were duty-bound to comply with

15     all the rules that regulated the work in their units, discipline, the

16     discharge of certain duties, a whole host of regulations applied which

17     are contained in the collection of rules and regulations which were

18     applicable to the Croatian army at the time.  I'm talking about the

19     general rules of service in the armed forces.

20        Q.   If we go now to page 7 of the English, and it's paragraph 17,

21     which I think is on the next page in the Croatian language.

22             MR. KAY:  Oh, no, page after that in the Croatian language,

23     please.  If it can go -- if we can look at the top of the page in the

24     Croatian and go back a page in the Croatian to the bottom of the page.

25     Sorry about that.  It's -- ah, there it is.

Page 15658

 1        Q.   Can you see that, Mr. Lausic, point 17?

 2        A.   Yes, thank you.

 3        Q.   Yeah.  And you looked at that with Mr. Tieger.  And it's headed

 4     "regulating order, discipline and supervision of the conduct of military

 5     police."  And the garrison commander should lay down instructions on

 6     order, discipline, and supervision of the conduct.  And we can see it's

 7     uniform schedule of working hours, time of exchange of internal service

 8     organs, conducting of military personnel in public places, type of

 9     supervision, restricted locations, use of public transport.

10             Again, this refers to regulations as to how people should behave

11     in the area so that good order and discipline is maintained by military

12     personnel.  Isn't that right?

13        A.   As I'm reading this text, I can say that what you just stated is

14     correct.

15        Q.   Yes.  And what we've been looking at in relation to the garrison

16     orders and rules and instructions are all matters that would be relevant

17     to a stable and peacetime situation.  Isn't that right?

18        A.   I would not be able to give a precise answer to your question

19     because in 1991 or therefrom, we were in war.  And the specific

20     characteristics of the Croatian theatre of war was reflected in the fact

21     that over 1000 kilometres of the front line, in its entire length almost,

22     went along the urban settlements and settled areas or, rather, along

23     their borders, or even intersected those urban areas like in Vinkovci,

24     Gospic, Zadar, Karlovac, Sisak, and so on and so forth.  And the

25     characteristics of towns in the Republic of Croatia where the units of

Page 15659

 1     the Croatian army were deployed was the fact that they were all very

 2     close to the front line, so we cannot talk about a peacetime or areas

 3     that were not affected by war.

 4        Q.   Taking Knin in August to November 1995, the circumstances in Knin

 5     at that time were not a normal set of circumstances.  Would you agree?

 6        A.   Absolutely.  After having been liberated, immediately thereafter,

 7     Knin was a town to which refugees were returning.  They would come to

 8     visit their destroyed houses.  Many of them had been mobilized into the

 9     units of the Croatian army.  They wore Croatian army uniforms.  Many wore

10     Croatian army uniforms, although officially they did not belong to the

11     ranks of the Croatian army.  One would say that this was a neuralgic

12     location from the point of view of safety of all aspects, if we're

13     talking about security of an area.

14        Q.   Thank you.  If we could now go to Exhibit D32, which is the

15     service regulations you referred to in 1992.  And they were the ones

16     produced by Mr. Foster in the interview.  Page 11 in the English, and

17     we're looking at paragraph 50 onwards, under the heading:  "Garrison."

18             I believe we've got a copy there, Mr. Lausic.  Is that right?

19        A.   Just bear with me for a moment.

20        Q.   Of course.

21        A.   Correct, I do have the document in handwritten version.  I took

22     this document immediately before I came to this Tribunal to provide my

23     testimony as a witness.

24        Q.   Thank you.  It's page 17 in the Croatian version.  We've got that

25     there.

Page 15660

 1             Shall we have a look at this because it's referred to you -- in

 2     your statement.  We see number 50 about the garrison.

 3              And then number 52:

 4             "The garrison commander is responsible for placement, order,

 5     discipline, and service in the garrison.  All units and institutions

 6     within the garrison are subordinate to the garrison commander in matters

 7     of order, discipline, and service."

 8             Now, the order we've been looking at from 1993 of organisation

 9     and work in the garrison expresses the role of the garrison commander

10     differently, don't you agree?  Exhibit D34, when we've looked at

11     paragraph 2.

12        A.   Yes, I can confirm this.

13        Q.   Yes.

14        A.   However, I would like to emphasise once again, in order to be

15     able to provide a precise answer -- answers, you will have to consult

16     legal experts.  I am providing my answers based on my own knowledge and

17     familiarity with the law and on my experience.  So my opinion should not

18     be taken as an opinion of a legal expert who would be able to give you a

19     proper implementation of these regulations and bylaws.

20        Q.   I understand that, and the point I want to make to you is that

21     how these rules concerning the garrison were developed were such that

22     they took the form of the rules within that order that we looked at

23     earlier in 1993.  And the power of the garrison commander over units and

24     institutions within the garrison concerned those rules that he had to

25     draft and prescribe, setting out how people should behave within the

Page 15661

 1     garrison.  Do you agree?

 2        A.   I can only agree that this was to be found in the 1993 order, as

 3     one of the items of that order.

 4             MR. KAY:  Just taking instructions, Your Honour, from my

 5     colleagues on matters that need to be covered.

 6                           [Defence counsel confer]

 7             MR. KAY:

 8        Q.   Thank you very much, in relation to that.

 9             In your statement, you said that General Cermak, if he saw a

10     crime, would have a responsibility to report it to the Military District

11     Commander.  Do you recollect that in your statement?

12        A.   I don't know whether you quoted the transcript correctly, whether

13     you quoted my words from the transcript correctly.

14        Q.   Yes, I have.  And what I wanted to put to you is this:  That

15     General Cermak could also refer that -- refer a matter, if he had seen a

16     crime, to the military police.  That would be an appropriate way of him

17     referring something that had gone on, that was a crime, to refer it to

18     the military police.  That would be appropriate.

19        A.   The obligation to report crimes is something that every citizen

20     of Croatia has according to penal code.  So it doesn't apply only to

21     members of the Croatian army.  Pursuant to the penal code of the Republic

22     of Croatia, every citizen is duty-bound to report a crime of which they

23     learn and which are prosecuted, ex officio.

24        Q.   And that could be carried out in the same way by any staff of

25     General Cermak also reporting the matter on, so that if there had been a

Page 15662

 1     crime brought to his attention and then a subordinate of his or an

 2     officer working with him reported it to the military police or the civil

 3     police, that that would be a correct way of proceeding.  Isn't that

 4     right?

 5        A.   Absolutely.

 6        Q.   He did not have a duty as a garrison commander to investigate a

 7     crime.

 8        A.   How do you mean?  You mean crime investigation?

 9        Q.   Yes.  If a subordinate of his committed a crime, he had a duty to

10     deal with the act of his subordinate.  That is right, isn't it?

11        A.   Yes, it is.  But he was not under any obligation to carry out a

12     proper crime investigation.  He only had to -- reported his suspicion

13     that somebody was involved in the commission of a crime, and then the

14     investigation is carried out by -- either by military police, or civil

15     police if the suspect is a civilian.

16        Q.   And looking, as we have, at those documents today, it is right,

17     is it not, that they do not establish that the military police company in

18     Knin was under the day-to-day command of General Cermak?

19        A.   You can see it in my document of the 14th of August, my order

20     issued to the company commander to subordinate him to the highest

21     commander there.  And by that order, I give the company commander

22     instruction to report to that person, to the highest commander, on a

23     daily basis.

24        Q.   And one other matter I want to deal with:  General Cermak phoned

25     you on one occasion whilst he was in Knin.  Is that correct?

Page 15663

 1        A.   I think that I stated that there was one telephone conversation

 2     in relation to securing a warehouse or something like that.

 3        Q.   Did General Cermak, in fact, in that conversation that he had

 4     with you ask you to send more military police to the region to help

 5     keeping the law and order?

 6        A.   I don't remember such a conversation taking place.

 7        Q.   Is it correct, though, that in fact further reinforcements of

 8     military police were sent to Knin to supplement the troops of the

 9     72nd Battalion from other battalions of the military police in other

10     parts of Croatia?

11        A.   Yes.  We saw that yesterday, where, in addition to the members of

12     the 73rd Battalion who had been at the disposal of the 72nd Battalion as

13     reinforcements from day one, I also sent the armoured vehicles with crews

14     from the 67th, in order to reinforce the company in Knin.

15             THE INTERPRETER:  The interpreter isn't sure about the

16     battalion's numerical designation.

17             MR. KAY:

18        Q.   We looked at that yesterday.  It was from the 66th.  Isn't that

19     right?

20        A.   Yes, I said as much.

21        Q.   Yes.  Thank you.

22             MR. KAY:  I'm much obliged.  I've finished my questions now, Your

23     Honour.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Kay.

25             Mr. Mikulicic, will be it you or Mr. Kuzmanovic who

Page 15664

 1     cross-examines Mr. Lausic?

 2             Mr. Lausic, you will now be cross-examined by Mr. Mikulicic.

 3     Mr. Mikulicic is counsel for Mr. Markac.

 4                           Cross-examination by Mr. Mikulicic:

 5        Q.   [Interpretation] Good morning, Mr. Lausic.

 6        A.   Good morning, Mr. Mikulicic.

 7        Q.   At the start of my examination, I should like to refer to your

 8     answer of last week when Mr. Misetic asked you about the state policy in

 9     relation to the overall events related to Operation Storm.

10             Your answer can be found in the transcript at page 15596, line

11     16, where you answered in the following way:  You said that the state

12     policy was reflected in the order which you received as early as at the

13     first meeting which was held on the 2nd of August in the war room.  The

14     meeting with Mr. Susak in the preparatory stage of Operation Storm was

15     the occasion when the minister said that the military police had to be

16     energetic in its activities and its preventative efforts.

17             You also said that the state policy was also reflected in the

18     efforts you made, you, as the most senior representative an officer of

19     the military police, as well as the Ministry of Interior, which could be

20     seen in numerous documents.

21             Mr. Lausic --

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Tieger.

23             MR. TIEGER:  I'm sorry, I am at page 15596 and don't see that

24     reference.  Perhaps that was --

25             MR. MIKULICIC: [Microphone not activated] [In English] Line 16.

Page 15665

 1     It is an answer in my -- state policy was reflected in the order which I

 2     received as early -- at first meeting on the 2nd of August in the war

 3     room.

 4             So maybe I --

 5             THE INTERPRETER:  Could Mr. Mikulicic please speak closer to the

 6     microphone, please.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Mikulicic, would you please come closer to the

 8     microphone.

 9             MR. MIKULICIC:  Yes.  I will try to arrange this, Your Honour.

10     Or maybe I should use another microphone.  Like this, is it better?

11             THE INTERPRETER:  Thank you very much.  The interpreters are

12     thanking you.  But please turn-off the microphone to the right, then.

13             MR. MIKULICIC:  So should I repeat what I said.

14             I was referring to the transcript on the page 15596, line 16th.

15     And where the answer of Mr. Lausic begins with, "in my view, the state

16     policy," and so on.

17             MR. TIEGER:  I don't know if anyone else has this opened.  I have

18     a printed version of the transcripts, and at 15596 that's not the

19     reference.  I can try turning --

20             MR. MIKULICIC:  It is a transcript from 30 of January.  Well, I

21     will check.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  The page you are referring to, 15596, is on the 2nd

23     of February.  So there we have already a small problem.  You have --

24     apparently, you are quoting.  Now our search engines allow us to search

25     for --

Page 15666

 1             MR. MISETIC:  It's page 15512, beginning at line 16.

 2             MR. MIKULICIC:  Okay.  My mistake.  I apologise.  I'm not good

 3     with the figures, Your Honour.

 4             THE INTERPRETER:  Could the right-hand microphone of

 5     Mr. Mikulicic please be turned off.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  You're requested to switch off at least the

 7     right-hand microphone, but I don't see that -- I don't see that it is --

 8             MR. MIKULICIC:  Only the left one is switched on, Your Honour, on

 9     my desk.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  If everyone else switches off all the

11     microphones, we'll see what happens when just the left one is open.

12             MR. MIKULICIC:  I just turned on my -- I turn-off my left

13     microphone.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  There seems to a lot noise when that microphone is

15     open.

16             MR. MIKULICIC:  Well, it goes beyond my technical experience,

17     Your Honour.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Don't rely too much on mine.  Could you perhaps use

19     the other microphone for a second and see whether the sound is any

20     better.  So switch off the left one and use the right one.

21             MR. MIKULICIC:  Is it better now?

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, I think all the -- do you call that rumble,

23     or ... that disappears.  So perhaps if you could rearrange your --

24             MR. MIKULICIC:  I will try to do.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed.

Page 15667

 1             MR. MIKULICIC:  Okay.  Finish with all technical problem.

 2        Q.   [Interpretation] Mr. Lausic, regardless of the technical

 3     difficulties we have experienced in the meantime, do you recall this part

 4     of your testimony?

 5        A.   Correct.  I confirm it fully.  This was in answer to the question

 6     of what I understood as the state policy, which is something I referred

 7     to at a meeting with my commanders, if I'm not mistaken.

 8        Q.   Mr. Lausic, I did not tell you this at the start.  Since we both

 9     speak the same language, we should be mindful of the fact that we have to

10     make a pause between question and answer so that the interpreters can do

11     their job.

12        A.   There should be no problem there.

13        Q.   Mr. Lausic, you were a high-ranking official in the military

14     police.  You were the chief of the military police administration.

15     However, you held another important function, and that was that you were

16     the chief of security for the president of the Republic, unofficially

17     since 1991 when you were summoned, and officially as of 1992.  Is that

18     right?

19        A.   I will have to correct you.  I became chief of security for the

20     president of the Republic in January 1991 as a member of the Ministry of

21     Interior, since, at that time, the Croatian army was not yet in

22     existence.  It was only on the 1st of December, 1991, that I was

23     appointed by the president of the Republic to the newly established

24     military police administration within the Ministry of Defence of the

25     Republic of Croatia pursuant to an oral decision of the president of the

Page 15668

 1     Republic, and a written decision on appointment to that particular

 2     position was given to me in February 1992, if I'm not mistaken.  However

 3     -- however, let me note that as the chief of the military police

 4     administration, I remained, until the death of the president, a member of

 5     the security staff of the office for national security, and, as such, I

 6     was involved in the application of security measures for the president of

 7     the Republic.

 8        Q.   Thank you for this precise answer, Mr. Lausic.

 9             In fact, it was my intention to ask you this:  In that capacity

10     you held, you were oftentimes in a position to be in the presence of the

11     highest ranking representatives of both the civilian and military

12     authorities in Croatia.  Is that right?

13        A.   You could put it that way.

14        Q.   Did you ever, Mr. Lausic, on such occasions, and I mean you

15     personally, receive an order, either formally or informally, that the

16     citizens of Serb ethnicity in the Republic of Croatia should be

17     mistreated, harassed, that crime at their expense should be tolerated,

18     that arson or theft should be tolerated or even encouraged with a view to

19     causing their departure from the Republic of Croatia -- or, rather, with

20     a view to driving them out of Croatia?

21        A.   In my answer, I will be focussing on two individuals only, namely

22     the president of the Republic, Dr. Franjo Tudjman, and the Minister of

23     Defence, Mr. Gojko Susak.  Throughout the time, including the period when

24     I was the chief of security for the president of the Republic, in the

25     course of 1991 through to the time when Minister Susak died in 1998 and

Page 15669

 1     when President Tudjman died in 1999, I had never received from these two

 2     individuals an order or anything else in any other form to the effect

 3     that I would be asked to do something contrary to my notions of work

 4     ethic, my world view, my professionalism, as an individual who, 20 years

 5     previously, was always a man representing the law.  Quite the contrary.

 6     In every occasion where I spoke to Minister Susak and referred to such

 7     conduct of members of the Croatian army as was -- as constituted

 8     misconduct or even criminal conduct, Minister Susak's reaction to such

 9     reports on my part was vehement.  He asked that the police take energetic

10     action in investigations, that it cooperate closely with the Ministry of

11     the Interior.  He asked that every incident of opportunist behaviour be

12     reported him, be it that on the part of the Croatian army officers or on

13     the part of the colleagues from the Ministry of the Interior, and there

14     were such cases.

15             MR. MIKULICIC:  I would kindly ask Madam Registrar to pull up

16     65 ter 1838, please.

17        Q.   [Interpretation] Mr. Lausic, you've just mentioned Minister Susak

18     and his attitude towards this issue.

19             On the screen in front you, you can see an order issued by

20     Defence Minister Gojko Susak on 25th September, 1993 [Realtime transcript

21     read in error "1992"].

22             In this order under 1, Minister Susak orders the military police

23     administration to urgently take all necessary operative action to

24     discover the perpetrators in the ranks of the HV of any criminal offences

25     which may have been committed during the execution of set tasks in the

Page 15670

 1     Gospic area in September 1993 [Realtime transcript read in error "1992"].

 2             Would this order, as a matter of fact, be a reflection of the

 3     minister's position, with regard to the issues that you have just spoken

 4     about?

 5        A.   Yes.  This is an example in a written form.  He issued a written

 6     order to take all operative action necessary.  However, those who knew

 7     Minister Susak also knew that he was not a man of many words but that his

 8     facial expression told it all.  He was not a man who would cover -- try

 9     to cover his actions up with written orders.  His oral order accompanied

10     by his facial expressions, which left no doubt in anybody's mind as to

11     what he was thinking at that moment when he was issuing his orders, meant

12     a lot more than any written order at moments.

13        Q.   Thank you for your answer, Mr. Lausic.

14             MR. MIKULICIC: [Previous translation continues] ... exhibit which

15     was MFI'd as P2164, but I would like to tender it into the evidence.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Tieger.

17             MR. TIEGER:  Well, I have no objection.  I'm not just sure if

18     there is any particular extraneous reason for the MFI.  Assuming there

19     wasn't, then I don't have any objections; that is, it may have been MFIed

20     in the normal course of business or they may have a particular reason I'm

21     not aware of at the moment.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  I should check that as well.  But at least if this

23     exhibit marked for identification, if we have to decide on admission,

24     there is no objection on your side, Mr. Mikulicic.

25             MR. MIKULICIC:  On the contrary, Your Honour.

Page 15671

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  On the contrary, yes.

 2             MR. MIKULICIC:  Thank you.

 3             MR. KUZMANOVIC:  Your Honour, just for the record, page 41, line

 4     12, it should be 1993, September 1993.  I think there is another

 5     reference to 1992 as well, earlier in the transcript.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  And the document was certainly 25th of

 7     September, 1993, yes.  That's then corrected.

 8             You may proceed.

 9             MR. MIKULICIC:  Thank you, Your Honour.

10        Q.   [Interpretation] Mr. Lausic, you have just said that when talking

11     about the prevention of all forms of illegal action, you held, before

12     Operation Storm and after Operation Storm, meetings with the

13     representatives of the Ministry of the Interior.

14             Would that be a correct answer?

15        A.   When I assumed the duties as the chief of the military police

16     administration, as one of my fundamental duties that I imposed upon

17     myself and upon my associates was close cooperation with the Ministry of

18     Interior, and I did that for three fundamental reasons.

19             It was a fact that in 1992 and thereafter, there was some

20     antagonism between members of the Ministry of the Interior and members of

21     the Croatian army.  What I'm saying is that the first ones who joined the

22     defence of the state in 1991 were members of the Ministry of Interior.

23     They were the only armed establishments in Croatia at that time.

24             And then the Ministry of the Interior issued an order in 1992,

25     and pursuant to that order, members of the civil police changed combat

Page 15672

 1     and camouflage uniforms and put on their blue uniforms and went back to

 2     their fundamental peacing activities and maintenance of law and order.

 3     At the same time only members of the special police of the Ministry of

 4     the Interior remained engaged in combat.  This was the origin of

 5     antagonism between members of the Croatian army and members of the civil

 6     police.

 7             My first task, therefore, was to try and curb any expressions of

 8     antagonism through the joint work of the military police and the civil

 9     police.  The aim was to influence members of the military police, and I

10     have already said that the professionalism of the members of the military

11     police was at a very low level at that time.  Their equipment level was

12     at an even lower -- even lower level, so that the cooperation was

13     supposed to deal with both antagonism and lead to the process of direct

14     education of members of the military police.  And also it went a long way

15     in providing assistance in specialist equipment, especially for the crime

16     prevention police.  And in that joint action, we were stronger in dealing

17     with some incidents and situations that, in some cases, were even seen to

18     be very dramatic.

19             So what I can say is that cooperation with the Ministry of

20     Interior was, from day one, a must in my work, and it was my pleasure to

21     able to establish that cooperation at my levels of communication and that

22     I met with support and assistance.  And I have in mind two assistant

23     ministers of the interior, one of them was the assistant for general

24     police, Mr. Moric; and the assistant for crime police, Mr. Benko, with

25     whom I had already cooperated or, rather, I started my police career with

Page 15673

 1     the two of them.

 2        Q.   Thank you for your answer, Mr. Lausic.

 3             When you were talking about these meetings and preparations, they

 4     started even before Operation Storm was launched.  I'm referring to

 5     number 173 in your witness statement of 2003.  You said there that on the

 6     3rd of August, on the eve of the launching of Operation Storm, a meeting

 7     was held at the Ministry of the Interior and the following persons

 8     attended, and then you go on to list all of them.  And that the main

 9     subject of that meeting was cooperation in the engagement of military and

10     civil police in the events that would ensue thereafter.

11             Is that correct, Mr. Lausic?

12        A.   Yes, it is.

13        Q.   I would now ask you, since we have seen a number of documents

14     throughout your testimony and the testimony much of some other persons in

15     this courtroom, that there were a lot of efforts invested into ensuring

16     law and order in the newly liberated territories after Operation Storm.

17     However, there also a lot of problems with the implementation of those

18     ideas and efforts on the ground.  You yourself mentioned some of those

19     problems that you were faced with in the implementation of your ideas.

20     First of all, it was a large and relatively inaccessible terrain.  Would

21     that be correct?

22        A.   Yes.  If I'm not mistaken, over 7.000 square kilometres of the

23     newly liberated area infested with mines and other explosives, not very

24     well accessible and riddled with hundreds of other bigger and smaller

25     problems.

Page 15674

 1        Q.   Correct me if I'm wrong, but I would also like to say that a

 2     major problem for the newly established civil authorities in the area was

 3     the fact that that area had been under occupation for four years outside

 4     of the system of the regular civilian powers, and I'm referring here to

 5     the Ministry of Interior.  Is that correct, Mr. Lausic?

 6        A.   Yes, you're absolutely right.

 7        Q.   You've also said just a minute ago that that there was another

 8     situation regarding the numbers, and I'm not talking about absolute

 9     figures but also in relative terms, that there was not enough educated

10     police officers.  In that case you cooperated with the Ministry of

11     Interior, especially with the crime prevention police.  Is that correct?

12        A.   Before we embarked on the process of educating officers and

13     non-commissioned officers of crime prevention police, and you know that

14     this happened only in the second half of 1992, when, from the Ministry of

15     the Interior, a person who joined the administration, was Mr. Ante Gugic,

16     Assistant Minister for crime police department, and he was the one who

17     embarked on a mission to educate policemen and to equip them.

18             However, before that, as soon as he assumed -- as soon as I

19     assumed the duty, I held a meeting with the chief of the police academy

20     of the Ministry of Interior, Mr. Josko Arnovic [phoen], and we agreed at

21     that meeting that he would organise courses and the courses would be held

22     at the police academy for future members of the civil police and that I

23     would ask him to give me an allotment of places on those courses and I

24     would send my men, members of the military police, to such courses, and

25     they would learn about policing at that those courses.

Page 15675

 1        Q.   I agree with you, Mr. Lausic, and objectively, there was a lack

 2     of policemen, and they were not well-educated, and this was a fact.

 3     However, the situation got better gradually.

 4        A.   Yes, it did get better gradually.  We had a higher number of

 5     policemen who had received formal education at higher schools of

 6     education and universities, and also, the level of professional policing

 7     became higher.

 8             In the second half of 1992, I established an educational centre

 9     of the military police which exists to this very day as part of the

10     military police regiment.  This institution applied different models of

11     training, in order to provide students with different police work

12     specialties and subspecialties.

13        Q.   Thank you.

14             MR. MIKULICIC: [Previous translation continues] ...

15     Madam Registrar to show us D567, please.

16        Q.   [Interpretation] To follow up on what you were just saying,

17     Mr. Lausic, I will show you a document bearing your signature of the 16th

18     of September, 1995.  This is an analysis of the use of the military

19     police of the armed forces of the Republic of Croatia in Operation Storm.

20     I don't think I have to ask you if you're familiar with the document

21     since you're its author.

22        A.   Yes.

23        Q.   Let us quickly go through the document, in view of the positions

24     you expressed.

25             Let's look at page 2 of the document, second paragraph.  Which

Page 15676

 1     says that the anti-terrorist units of the military police were being

 2     prepared through training for attacks and mop-up operations from the

 3     remaining groups, individuals, and firing points.

 4             Mr. Lausic, we discussed military police units at great length,

 5     and I would kindly ask you to describe the tasks of military police units

 6     in a few words.

 7        A.   I will try to put it as succinctly as possible.

 8             Now what were the causes and purposes of setting up

 9     anti-terrorist units within the MP units?  In August of 1992, on the

10     order of the chief of the Main Staff, General Bobetko, and with the

11     approval of the minister of defence, the joint forces of the military

12     police were engaged in combat aimed at liberating the hinterland of

13     Dubrovnik.  Unfortunately, I had members of the military police wounded

14     or killed in the course of these activities.

15             I made an analysis of the action that was carried out, and at the

16     level of the ministry -- of the military police administration, we

17     concluded that it was not appropriate or advisable to deploy the military

18     policemen who carried out their regular military police tasks to combat

19     activities because of the inferior level of their training and expertise

20     required for the conduct of what are purely combat activities.  As a

21     follow-up, in June 1993, we carried out a selection with the consent of

22     the minister of defence of members of the military policemen and set up

23     anti-terrorist units of the military police.  Their tasks consisted

24     solely of the following two:  Dealing with difficult situations as

25     authorised officials of the military police, and by that time, we had

Page 15677

 1     been faced with hostage situations within the Croatian army, and with

 2     very difficult incidents involving the use of arms, explosives.

 3             The second task was combat, should the military police be issued

 4     with such an order.  Their level was going up throughout the time, and I

 5     have the pleasure of telling you that many of their members who are still

 6     active can be found in the missions in Afghanistan and in other places

 7     where the Croatian army is sent for missions.

 8        Q.   Thank you for your answer.  Mr. Lausic, as a policeman of many

 9     years, you must be familiar with the structure of the Ministry of the

10     Interior, and you must, therefore, be familiar with the role of the

11     special police within the Ministry of the Interior.  And correct me if

12     I'm wrong:  Would it be fair to say that the combat unit of the

13     anti-terrorist military police units was a match for the special units of

14     the Ministry of the Interior, in terms of the tasks given to them, the

15     level of training, and the circumstances and tasks to be carried out by

16     these units?

17        A.   I can confirm that fully, and I can tell you that there was

18     always this sort of healthy competitive relationship and a certain degree

19     of envy vis-a-vis the members of the special police whom we regarded as

20     brothers in arms, though brothers who were better armed and better

21     trained than we were.

22        Q.   Do you remember what sort of uniform members of the

23     anti-terrorist unit of the military police wore?

24        A.   Uniforms changed, if I'm not mistaken.

25        Q.   I'm specifically referring to Operation Storm.

Page 15678

 1        A.   Let me put it in general terms.  The uniform consisted of green

 2     overalls, green fatigues, combat fatigues, which came complete with what

 3     we referred to as "the green gear," unlike other members of the police

 4     who carried what we referred to as "the white gear."  Members of the

 5     anti-terrorist units had that particular green gear.

 6             However, I do allow for the possibility - and this was something

 7     that I was able to observe on the ground - that some of the members of

 8     these units also wore the combat camouflage uniform.  And almost as a

 9     rule, they would have over their green fatigues a camouflage vest.

10     However, the clothing differed, and what I referred to is only, generally

11     speaking, what can be described as the uniform of the anti-terrorist

12     units.

13        Q.   In view of what you have just said, and I suppose you know what

14     sort of uniforms special police forces of the Ministry of Interior wore,

15     is it possible to say that a person who is not privy to these details

16     might mistake members of these two particular sets of units.  That's to

17     say, to mistake special units for anti-terrorist units and vice versa?

18        A.   All members of the special police units had black berets with two

19     insignia:  One was a rounded emblem of the military police, and the other

20     emblem which was that of the anti-terrorist police, which was a stylised

21     image of a falcon within a coat of arms.  The same sort of insignia was

22     sewn onto the left sleeve of the fatigues; whereas there was the standard

23     patch of the members of the military police of the Croatian army on the

24     right sleeve.

25             THE INTERPRETER:  The interpreter misspoke.  The description

Page 15679

 1     refers to the anti-terrorist units.

 2             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The special police members had the

 3     patch which consisted of three intersecting lightening bolts.

 4             MR. MIKULICIC:

 5        Q.   [Interpretation] Mr. Lausic, my questions arose from your

 6     testimony -- or, rather, the testimony in general that we were able to

 7     hear in the courtroom so far, where international UN monitors and other

 8     witnesses had different views on the topic.

 9             Let me, therefore, ask you the following:  In your testimony so

10     far, you spoke of Major Juric as one of the officers who was supposed to

11     serve as your eyes and ears, as you put it, to be acquainted with the

12     situation on the ground.  It is true, is it not, that Major Juric was a

13     member of the military police?

14        A.   Yes.  At the time he held the position of chief of one of the

15     departments of the military police administration.

16        Q.   Did Major Juric have any sort of powers in relation to members of

17     the special police of the Ministry of the Interior?

18        A.   Absolutely not.

19        Q.   Let me present to you the testimony of Mr. Philip Berikoff who

20     testified on the 1st of September, 2008, in this courtroom, which at page

21     7602, line 23, where he said that, in his view still today, the special

22     police was involved in some operations around Kistanje, because on

23     numerous occasions I, personally, met up with Major Ivan Juric from the

24     military police.  On numerous occasions, he wore the grey uniform of the

25     special police, which led me to assume that Major Juric also controlled a

Page 15680

 1     number of various police units, as well as the forces of the special

 2     police.  In fact, him wearing that grey uniform led me to assume that

 3     there must have been a presence of the special police in the area as

 4     well.

 5             How would you comment on these assumptions by Mr. Berikoff and

 6     there view of your earlier answers?

 7        A.   It's absolutely incorrect that Major Juric should have any sort

 8     of powers over members of the special police.  Even the grey colour of

 9     his uniform is something that was never seen in the Croatian army.  It

10     never existed.

11        Q.   Thank you.  Let us go back to the document we have on our

12     screens, which is the analysis of the use of the military police.

13             Let us focus on the statistics contained therein, specifically at

14     page 8 of the Croatian version.  This is the ERN number 413.

15             There it is stated that the military crime police in cooperation

16     with the crime police of the Ministry of Interior carried out criminal

17     investigations in respect of 321 criminal offences.  Next, the numbers of

18     murders and deaths and arsons and mining and other criminal offences are

19     listed.

20             It is also stated that out of the known perpetrators, 79 were

21     members of the Croatian army, whereas 274 were civilians.

22             At page 9, the document lists the measures that were taken, in

23     order to raise the general level of security.  I will not be going into

24     details in that regard.

25             Is this not in fact an indicator of the efforts made by the

Page 15681

 1     military police in this narrow area pursuant to the order of

 2     Minister Susak dating back to 3rd August, 1995, which was still at the

 3     preparatory stage for Operation Storm?

 4        A.   I will try to answer this in a single sentence that I am known to

 5     say when some of my acquaintances or friends ask me about how my case, in

 6     relation The Hague Tribunal, would end, and they have been asking me that

 7     ever since 2004.

 8             My answer consists of one sentence only.  All my professional and

 9     intellectual efforts -- I invested all my professional and intellectual

10     efforts in order to -- to take all that to my first subordinate levels,

11     in order to make sure that it is conveyed down to the last military

12     policeman, so that, together with the colleagues from the Ministry of

13     Interior, and this is something that could be seen from a number of

14     documents which I issued as orders, the orders could be used to change

15     the methods and tactics of action in order to reinforce certain areas

16     whilst highlighting the need for energetic action.  And I don't think a

17     policeman need be told twice what energetic means, zero tolerance.  And

18     another must was the cooperation with the colleagues from the Ministry of

19     Interior in order to prevent to the greatest possible extent and

20     ultimately to investigate and process all the threats to the security of

21     the citizens of the Republic of Croatia.

22             Now, how efficient were we?  Well, given the resources we had,

23     given the level of training and education we had achieved by that time,

24     given the problems faced -- given the problems that the mobilised

25     policemen faced who could not be demobilized because of their social

Page 15682

 1     welfare since it was the only means of their subsistence, given the

 2     civilian authority which was unable to become fully operational in the

 3     newly liberated area, and given hundreds of other problems.  But nobody

 4     can deny one thing, and this is why, when I was answering a question by

 5     His Honour the Presiding Judge, I said that my testimony, regardless of

 6     the form it may have or the capacity in which I give it as a suspect, a

 7     witness, or subsequently perhaps even in the capacity of an accused, that

 8     my testimony would always be the same.

 9        Q.   Thank you, Mr. Lausic.  So can we with agree, then, can't we,

10     that you, as the head of the military police and as we go even lower

11     towards the lower echelon, you did your best to prevent any crimes and

12     illegal actions.  Wouldn't that be correct?

13        A.   Yes.  I am a bit hurt when I heard a sarcastic remark by

14     Mr. Misetic.

15        Q.   Mr. Lausic, let's leave this to the end.  You will be given an

16     opportunity by the president of the Trial Chamber to say a few words.

17     But let's focus on what I'm trying to achieve here --

18             MR. MIKULICIC: [Previous translation continues] ... break now.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Before we do so.  Yes, Mr. Mikulicic, we'll have a

20     break now.  I noted that questions easily take two minutes or more,

21     whereas answers of five minutes are not uncommon.  That is not the most

22     efficient way of cross-examining a witness and to get focussed answers on

23     matters you'd like to bring to the attention of the Chamber, could you

24     please keep that in mind, if we resume after the break.

25             We'll have a break, and we'll resume at five minutes to 1.00.

Page 15683

 1                           --- Recess taken at 12.34 p.m.

 2                           --- On resuming at 1.00 p.m.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Before we continue, I'd like to briefly address the

 4     parties on the following matter.  The reasons why we're not sitting in

 5     this case on Thursday and Friday do not exist anymore.  Now, the Chamber

 6     is fully aware that since this was announced well in advance that many

 7     people might have made arrangements which make them unavailable.

 8     Nevertheless, the Chamber -- we have the same problems among the Judges.

 9     Nevertheless, the Chamber would like to be informed whether it is totally

10     impossible to sit on Thursday or Friday or whether there are any

11     possibilities still left, because there are courtrooms, there are -- I'm

12     -- we don't have to -- we don't need to hear your answer immediately.  If

13     you would send an e-mail to Mr. Nilsson.

14             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. President, if I could just briefly tell that

15     you Mr. Kehoe and I, in fact, do have other plans related to this case

16     for Thursday and Friday, and we will not be in The Hague at that point.

17     But it is my understanding in communication from Mr. Hedaraly

18     yesterday -- I don't know if I can say this publicly or not.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  I don't know what you were going to say, so you have

20     rely upon your own conscience.

21             MR. MISETIC:  It's my understanding because of witness scheduling

22     issues, let me put it that way, we will not be sitting on Monday and

23     Tuesday of next week, and, therefore, it may be an opportunity concerning

24     tomorrow's witness to push him back to Monday and Tuesday if that makes

25     sense.

Page 15684

 1             MR. KEHOE:  Mr. President, in conjunction with that because that

 2     issue tomorrow is one that we have been addressing.  We have filed one

 3     motion, and we are filing another motion concerning the exhibits because

 4     it relates back to the appellate chamber decision that needs to be

 5     reconciled before we move ahead.  Because, frankly, Your Honour, I know

 6     we have not addressed that because there hasn't been time, but I would

 7     say well over -- approximately three quarters of those exhibits bear on

 8     that decision.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  I'm fully aware of the -- of course, the

10     Chamber is working on it as well.

11             Mr. Tieger.

12             MR. TIEGER:  Yes, Your Honour.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  I don't know what your position is, but it

14     seems that the Gotovina Defence is not available, both counsel and

15     co-counsel are not there, so that makes it impossible, of course, no one

16     can be blamed for making his plans if it is it announced that we will not

17     sit.  That seems to be an obstacle which is impossible or almost

18     impossible - we do not know yet - to surmount.  But, the parties, if they

19     could sit together and see what could be done as far as Monday and

20     Tuesday is concerned, that, of course, will be appreciated.

21             MR. TIEGER:  The parties have been in contact, Your Honour.  I'm,

22     of course, not sure what can be done beyond what has been communicated to

23     the Court, but obviously we'll do our best to stay -- to do what can be

24     done under the circumstances.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  But that knowledge, of course, might also give

Page 15685

 1     some flexibility and avoid that witnesses are coming and have to wait for

 2     three or four days before -- perhaps a small portion of their testimony

 3     is still to be given then and perhaps to postpone arrival.  But I have

 4     got no idea about the practical arrangements made for the witnesses to

 5     come, so I leave it entirely in your hands.

 6             MR. TIEGER:  Thank you, Your Honour.  And to the extent it is

 7     helpful, we'll try to keep the Senior Legal Officer advised and work

 8     toward whatever arrangements can be made.  Because of the status of the

 9     case, the opportunities for adjustment are more limited and --

10             JUDGE ORIE:  The Chamber is aware of that.

11             Mr. Mikulicic, are you ready to continue?  The Chamber has in

12     mind -- I don't know whether you said you needed one session.  You've

13     taken approximately a half.  There is also request to deal with

14     scheduling issues to make oral submissions on that.  I don't know how

15     much time will you need for that.

16             MR. MIKULICIC:  Your Honour, just to be precise, I will need that

17     in that circumstances for finishing my cross, not more than ten minutes.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Ten minutes.

19             Mr. Tieger, could you tell us how much time would you need.

20             MR. TIEGER:  I'm estimating 15 to 20, Your Honour.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  That brings oral submissions on scheduling in

22     jeopardy.

23             MR. TIEGER:  I might be less, but I understand the problem.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Okay.  Let's proceed.

25             MR. MIKULICIC:

Page 15686

 1        Q.   [Interpretation] Mr. Lausic, let's dwell upon this topic that

 2     we've already started discussing, and that was the issue of you having

 3     encountered situations among the top echelons of the Croatian government

 4     that illegal conduct would be favoured, and you provided an extensive

 5     answer.

 6             To follow up on that, did you ever notice that at the lower

 7     operative levels, there were some attempts of the sort, i.e., were there

 8     cases when illegal actions were not punished?  Was there some of an

 9     agreement to that effect among the lower level of command of the Croatian

10     armed forces?

11        A.   I will try and be succinct in answering your question, but I

12     believe that I have already answered your question in my testimony so

13     far.

14             I believe that at the lower command levels in the Croatian army,

15     and when I say that, I mean primarily non-commissioned officers and

16     lower-ranking officers, there was a rather tolerant attitude towards a

17     lack of discipline among the troops.  However, this tolerant attitude did

18     not arise from -- and I'm convinced that did not arise from any orders,

19     but, rather, that as individuals, they hailed from the same body of

20     people over whom they were in command at that moment, and against the

21     principles of professionalism, they instilled emotions into their

22     decision-making process.  They did that to empathize in a way with

23     perpetrators of illegal actions as people who could not avoid the traps

24     of their own frustrations, the traps of their own emotions as those who

25     had suffered in the war and who had been persecuted during the war.

Page 15687

 1        Q.   Thank you very much for this answer, Mr. Lausic, and now I would

 2     like to move on to another very brief topic, and this is the position of

 3     the special police in the events.

 4             I have looked at numerous reports of the military police,

 5     numerous analyses.  Correct me if I'm wrong, I have never encountered any

 6     information pointing to the fact that members of the special police of

 7     the Ministry of the Interior were considered either responsible or caught

 8     red-handed in the commission of crimes.

 9             Do you have any different information than the information that I

10     gained by looking at the documentation available to me?

11        A.   I don't have anything that would jog my memory about an event

12     that was dealt with by the crime police about any incidents which

13     involved members of the special police of the Ministry of the Interior.

14        Q.   Thank you very much for your answers, Mr. Lausic.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Mikulicic.

16             Mr. Tieger.

17             MR. TIEGER:  Thank you, Your Honour.

18                           Re-examination by Mr. Tieger:

19        Q.   Good afternoon, Mr. Lausic.  Just a few questions, if I may.

20        A.   Good afternoon, Mr. Tieger.

21        Q.   There was some discussion earlier today, and perhaps, if I recall

22     correctly in earlier sessions, concerning the language of Article 9 and

23     the question of most senior HV commander versus highest HV commander by

24     function.

25             So I wanted to ask you if you could explain to the Court what the

Page 15688

 1     difference is between the most senior HV commander in an area of

 2     responsibility and the highest HV commander by function, if you know.

 3        A.   My answer will be my opinion.  As for the correct interpretation,

 4     you would have to talk to legal experts.

 5             In all the militaries of the world, including the Croatian army,

 6     the rank worn by a person, the patch representing that rank that they

 7     wear on their shoulders -- or let me put it this way.  A star more does

 8     not necessarily mean that that person can be in command of one star less

 9     or lower down the chain.

10             There are situations when an officer with a lower rank is

11     appointed to a higher position than another officer with a higher rank.

12     By virtue of that, the duty that that person discharges implies that that

13     person is the highest ranking officer in a unit or in an area of

14     responsibility.  Sometimes it goes by rank, and sometimes it goes by the

15     function that a person holds.  But, as I say, as for the proper

16     interpretation, you would have to consult experts.  This is my

17     interpretation, and I base my explanation on the situations that I

18     encountered in practice.

19        Q.   I'd like to turn now to some questions that you were asked last

20     Thursday, the 29th, and this is at about page 15391, in that area.

21             You were asked questions about the section for prevention of

22     general offences, whether or not the head of that section was

23     subordinated to the chief of crime investigation, and then whether or not

24     the chief of crime investigation was subordinated to you.  And then you

25     were asked whether the same organisational structure existed within the

Page 15689

 1     battalions themselves; that is, whether, within battalions there was a

 2     chief of crime investigation and a separate crime investigation section

 3     and separate sections.

 4             At that time you indicated you wanted to see the establishment

 5     manual of a battalion which was contained in the systemisation document,

 6     in order to be precise about structure and numbers and so forth.  I'm not

 7     going ask you for precise details that might require the manual, but I

 8     want to ask you some general questions concerning that issue.

 9             First of all, you have explained at length, or discussed at

10     length, Articles 8 and 9 and explained the nature of subordination of the

11     military police battalions to the commanders of districts pursuant to

12     Article 9, and I wanted to ask you whether or not that included all

13     members of the military police within those battalions, including crime

14     investigation police.

15        A.   Absolutely.  A battalion in all of its segments, i.e., in all of

16     its specialities and subspecialities.

17             MR. TIEGER:  If I could quickly call up 65 ter 706.

18        Q.   That's a document dated the 22nd of September, 1995, from the

19     department of the crime investigation military police, signed by chief

20     major Milas and sent to the commander of the 72nd Military Police

21     Battalion, Colonel Budimir.

22             MR. MISETIC:  Sorry to interrupt.  Was this part of the bar table

23     submission?

24             MR. TIEGER:  It was not.

25             MR. MISETIC:  Has been disclosed to us Something you were going

Page 15690

 1     to use?

 2             MR. TIEGER:  Actually, no, I don't believe it has.

 3             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. President, I'm, again, not going be able to

 4     re-cross given that I have had no notice that this exhibit was going to

 5     be used.  And in order to be able to put things back in the proper

 6     context as the Court might have noted from my cross-examination, I need

 7     some time to prepare documents.  I would object to the fact that even in

 8     e-mail, there has been no disclosure that there was an intent to use this

 9     document in redirect.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Tieger.

11             MR. TIEGER:  Well, Your Honour, I could -- one of two choices:  I

12     could withdraw the document; we could bar table it later.  I thought it

13     would be helpful in this context to raise it, or --

14             MR. MISETIC:  [Overlapping speakers] ...  I would prefer that

15     because then it will give me an opportunity to bar table our documents,

16     but I won't get the opportunity if he puts it to the witness to put mine

17     to the witness, and so I would prefer it be bar-tabled.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  You have read the document.

19             MR. MISETIC:  As a matter of fact, I have not.  So I would have

20     to look through it.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Wouldn't it be wise to just -- not to say that the

22     Chamber will close its eyes, but that you at least read for a second what

23     is there and whether it causes you the problems you expect they will

24     cause you.

25             MR. MISETIC:  The issue is, I can read the document, but I don't

Page 15691

 1     know what the question is going to be, and so I wanted to object before

 2     we get into questions.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Yes.  I -- I do understand that.

 4             Of course, the Chamber would prefer -- I mean, bar table

 5     documents are not the preferred way of receiving evidence.  That's the

 6     reason why I'm asking you to --

 7             MR. MISETIC:  Yes, Mr. President, but I would take a look right

 8     now, but I will also note it that -- obviously, I don't think I need to

 9     state that it's not preferred to not disclose -- [Overlapping

10     speakers] ...

11             JUDGE ORIE:  [Overlapping speakers] ...  I do not know --

12             MR. MISETIC:  [Overlapping speakers] ...  reason for the

13     exercise.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, I do not know when it came up.  Of course, I

15     have not seen the document either.

16             Mr. Tieger, if -- of course, another way of dealing with the

17     matter is that you -- that you phrase the question you'd like to --

18             MR. TIEGER:  Sure.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  And then not to ask the witness at this moment to

20     answer the question so that Mr. Misetic is informed to the fullest

21     possible -- and then we will hear whether he still objects.

22             MR. TIEGER:  [Overlapping speakers] ...  I do understand, Your

23     Honour, and if I were Mr. Misetic, I probably would have made the same

24     objection, so I understand what the point is.  So let me -- I can either

25     phrase the question now in general to the Court or put to the witness.  I

Page 15692

 1     don't care either way.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  No.  If you tell Mr. Misetic here, open in court,

 3     what question you would like to put to the witness in relation to this

 4     document, then the Chamber will -- earlier said, well, the Chamber will

 5     close its eyes, now, it will certainly not close its ears at this moment.

 6             MR. TIEGER:  Basically whether or not this document is a example

 7     or reflection of the fact that the crime investigation police were part

 8     of the 72nd Battalion.

 9             MR. MISETIC:  I think we'll stipulate to that, so there's no

10     problem.

11             MR. TIEGER:  Okay.  Done.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  That's done.

13             Then please proceed, Mr. Tieger.

14             MR. TIEGER:  Thank you, Your Honour.

15        Q.   Mr. Lausic, you also discussed earlier in your testimony at 15253

16     the fact that military police battalion commanders and company commanders

17     had to report to Military District Commanders on tasks and activities.

18     And a similar question, did those tasks and activities about the

19     battalions and in this case the 72nd Battalion include the tasks and

20     activities of the criminal investigation police within the battalion?

21             MR. MISETIC:  Your Honour, I'm sorry to object.  If we could just

22     in the question -- what reports are we specifically talking about?  I

23     mean, it's ...

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Tieger, is there any way you could include this

25     in your question?

Page 15693

 1             MR. TIEGER:  Let me read specifically from the excerpt to which I

 2     referred earlier.

 3        Q.   At page 15253, the following question was asked and answered.

 4             "Question:  Were the Military District -- military police

 5     battalion commanders and the company commanders supposed to provide the

 6     Military District Commanders with information about their execution of

 7     military police tasks pursuant to Article 10?

 8             "Answer:  Absolutely so.  They had to report on all of their

 9     activities; that is to say, within each reporting period, they had to

10     report on everything they had done."

11             And my question, Mr. President, and, Mr. Lausic, in particular,

12     was whether or not that answer included also the tasks and activities of

13     the criminal investigation police.

14             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. President, my objection is that that excerpt

15     comes from Mr. Tieger's direct examination, so it is not something that

16     arose in cross.  The second issue is if he could, again, be more precise

17     in terms of what specifically, when he says "report," what reports are we

18     talking about?

19             MR. TIEGER:  [Overlapping speakers] ...

20             MR. MISETIC:  [Overlapping speakers] ...  My first objection

21     would be that it's not -- if it's not something that arose out of cross

22     but out of his direct.

23             MR. TIEGER:  Let me clarify that, Your Honour.

24             I indicated the nature of the issue that arose in cross.  I

25     simply turned to that earlier excerpt from direct in order to focus the

Page 15694

 1     question and hopefully to expedite it.  It does not seem to have done so.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  You may put the question to the witness.  You

 3     are invited to specify your question in relations to the reports, and I

 4     noticed that on line 9 and on line 10, I find "[Overlapping

 5     speakers] ..."

 6             Please proceed.

 7             MR. TIEGER:  And my apologies for that, Your Honour.

 8        Q.   Mr. Lausic, again, I have directed your attention to the question

 9     of reports.  Can you tell us, please, to what extent the Military

10     District Commanders were to be advised of the tasks and activities of the

11     criminal investigation police, within that area of responsibility?

12        A.   When it comes to daily reporting -- or, rather, daily reports -

13     and we have seen some examples here - different groups of tasks and

14     duties carried out over the past 24 hours are mentioned.

15             Firstly, under the title:  "Crime," that paragraph deals with the

16     events that had to do with the commission of various crimes, as well as

17     the investigations which had either been launched or had already been

18     completed.

19             So this paragraph or the first part of every report speaks about

20     the activities of crime police within the military police unit, as well

21     as of the activities of the crime police over the past 24 hours.

22        Q.   And in the interests of time, Mr. Lausic, I want to move to an

23     issue that was raised on Friday, when questions were asked about what a

24     military commander was required to do in the face of information about

25     criminal activity or other forms of misconduct by his troops.

Page 15695

 1             And I believe you explained -- and that can be found at -- in the

 2     -- I don't know if it was beginning at, or that was the heart of that

 3     discussion.  But at or near 15533, I think you explained what would have

 4     to be done and what actions -- and that such actions had to be taken

 5     without awaiting the end of court proceedings for that particular

 6     offence.  This was an exchange during which you and Mr. Misetic

 7     explicitly disagreed.  He brought your attention to Article 15 of the

 8     rules on organisation and work of the military police.  Then you

 9     explained that the disciplinary proceedings are always conducted by the

10     commander, either through a disciplinary investigation at the end of

11     which, if a minor breach of discipline -- disciplinary measures --

12     disciplinary measures imposed or where a major breach of discipline is

13     involved, then there are disciplinary charges brought.

14             You continued -- I think that's at 15536.  And then at 15538 you

15     indicated that if there are reasons to suspect there were breaches of

16     discipline or rules of service, that is an obligation on to itself for

17     the commander to initiate disciplinary proceedings, as well irrespective

18     of what kind of information he received from the military police.  And

19     then there's a discussion in that case about a specific case.

20             Any that, I think, was the nature of the discussion, and --

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Let's -- do you remember the discussion --

22     Mr. Misetic, I see that --

23             Do you remember the discussion?  Well, it was not a discussion.

24     It was question and answers on what still had a memory military commander

25     had to do.  If you have that clearly in your memory, then we can perhaps

Page 15696

 1     do without a summary.

 2             MR. TIEGER:  Sorry.  And if I could call up P1007 quickly,

 3     please.

 4        Q.   I'm asking to be brought up on the screen, Mr. Lausic, the Code

 5     of Military Discipline.  I just wanted to bring your attention quickly to

 6     a couple of provisions.

 7             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. President, if I could just put on the record,

 8     and it may assist Mr. Tieger in terms of what I understand our discussion

 9     was about.  And Mr. Tieger said it was about criminal activities, and, in

10     fact, the discussion, and I think the witness will confirm, was about

11     disciplinary infractions that may have led to the criminal activities,

12     and that and that the commanders duty concerning the disciplinary

13     violations that may have --

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Well, now Mr. Tieger was stopped in summarising.

15     Let's then -- I said we can perhaps do without summary, and the witness,

16     in an earlier answer, seemed even to be able to repeat a question almost

17     literally that was put to him one of the previous days, so, therefore, at

18     this moment, unless any other indication will appear, the Chamber

19     understands that the witness remembers that series of questions and

20     answers.

21             Please proceed, Mr. Tieger.

22             MR. TIEGER:  Thank you, Your Honour.

23        Q.   I just want to bring your attention quickly to three provisions

24     within the Code.

25             First Article 19, which is found at page 7 of the English, and

Page 15697

 1     I ...

 2             Article 19, Mr. Lausic, if you -- it's on the screen.  I'll just

 3     read the first part:

 4             "Superior officers shall decide the disciplinary responsibility

 5     of their subordinates in accordance with prescribed procedure and shall

 6     hand down disciplinary measures as authorised by this Code."

 7             If we could turn quickly to Article 22:

 8             "The commander of a brigade or corps or more senior commanders

 9     shall be empowered to pronounce all disciplinary measures prescribed

10     under this Code."

11             And then quickly to Article 61, if we may.

12             And Article 61 states:

13             "On learning of a disciplinary violation by a subordinate, the

14     superior officer in the position of company commander, a corresponding

15     position or higher, must immediately take all necessary measures to

16     collect relevant evidence and inform his superior officer."

17             Mr. Lausic, my question was simply whether or not those

18     provisions were -- are consistent with the explanation you were providing

19     about the role and responsibilities of a commander who learns about acts

20     of misconduct, including crimes.

21        A.   I think that my answer is fully consistent with the Articles

22     you've just presented here.

23        Q.   And, finally, if we could turn quickly to 65 ter 5670.

24             MR. MISETIC:  I'm sorry.  If I could just inquire again.

25             MR. TIEGER:  Yes.  [Overlapping speakers] ...

Page 15698

 1             MR. MISETIC:  Okay.  Thanks.

 2             MR. TIEGER:

 3        Q.   Mr. Lausic, 65 ter 5670 is a document dated the 8th of September,

 4     1995.  It's issued and signed by General Gotovina.  And it is an order

 5     putting in force listed measures against all perpetrators who forcefully

 6     seized flats and refused to move out, indicating that the 4th Guards

 7     Brigade commanding officer shall impose disciplinary measures under his

 8     authority and that the 72nd Military Police Battalion commanding officer

 9     shall file criminal charges through his specialist staff to the military

10     prosecutor's office in Split.  The distribution on this was to the 4th

11     Guards Brigade, the 72nd Military Police Battalion.

12             And, Mr. Lausic, is this consistent with your understanding of

13     the powers of a Military District Commander in the face of information

14     concerning misconduct or criminal events?

15        A.   Correct.

16             MR. TIEGER:  Thank you, Your Honour.  I tender that document.

17             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. President, I believe it is already in evidence,

18     and it was extensively discussed through the witness Botteri.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Then there is it no need to tender it.

20             No further questions.

21             MR. TIEGER:  I'm sorry, Your Honour.  That's correct.  No further

22     questions.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.

24             The Chamber has no questions for you at this moment, but I think

25     I promised you to give you an opportunity to add anything you

Page 15699

 1     considered --

 2             Yes.

 3             MR. MISETIC:  Shall I recross after he finishes or ...

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  That's what I had in mind.  I hadn't forgotten.

 5     Yes.  I thought would make more sense once he had added anything.

 6             So if there's anything you would like to add.  You say, That's

 7     important; we missed it.  You should now then have an opportunity to do

 8     so.  This is not an invitation for long speeches but just to bring to our

 9     attention what you consider really necessary.

10             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.

11             In my answers to the questions put to me by Mr. Mikulicic, I said

12     what I meant to say in my final word, in fact.  Throughout my career,

13     especially throughout the career during which I was the chief of the MP

14     administration, which in fact lasted for 12 years, five years of working

15     on the development of the military police, and eight years of my efforts

16     to try and raise that particular element of the armed forces to a higher

17     level, I can only say that, at the end of that military career, during

18     which I held the same position was a time during which the military

19     police as the first armed force to take part in the IFOR operation in

20     Afghanistan, where it is still present alongside NATO members for which

21     participation, it was highly commended.  These men, who are now [Realtime

22     transcript read in error "These men, who are not to be found..."] to be

23     found in Afghanistan, were the same individuals who had to be made

24     soldiers between 1991 and 1995.  They had to be trained as soldiers and

25     had to advance their knowledge and specialties they had after the war.  I

Page 15700

 1     am quite proud of that, and I believe that all these documents clearly

 2     show what sort of efforts I invested into that process.

 3             Thank you very much.  There's nothing to add.

 4             MR. MIKULICIC: [Previous translation continues] ... The

 5     transcript, page 70, line 3, the witness said that "all those men are now

 6     to be found in Afghanistan," not "are not to be found."

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  That's how I understood it.  That you say that

 8     they are serving in Afghanistan.

 9             Mr. Misetic.

10             MR. MISETIC:  Yes, Mr. President.  Briefly if we could return to

11     P1007, Madam Registrar.

12                           Further cross-examination by Mr. Misetic:

13             MR. MISETIC:  And if we could go to page 5 in the B/C/S and page

14     10 in the English, please.  I'm interested in Article 31 which I think is

15     at the top in the B/C/S.

16        Q.   Mr. Lausic, you can start to read that.  Mr. Tieger showed you a

17     few Articles of the Code of Military Discipline.  I'd like to show you

18     Article 31, and ask you to read that.

19             It says:

20             "In situations where the authorised officer finds that the

21     offence against military discipline is also a criminal offence, the case

22     should [sic] be sent via regular channels to the authorised prosecutor.

23     If he thinks that it is in the interests of the service, he shall also

24     initiate disciplinary proceedings [sic]."

25             Is that consistent with your understanding of the rights and

Page 15701

 1     duties of a commander in the event that a -- what could be characterized

 2     as a disciplinary offence is also characterized as a criminal offence?

 3        A.   We have to distinguish between the crimes upon which the crime

 4     police acts as the primary service to react to one's report of a crime in

 5     order to ascertain the existence of the grounds for suspicion that a

 6     crime was committed and informs the commander of that particular event.

 7             Article 31 states that the duty to file a criminal report is one

 8     of every officer of the Croatian army, where he makes an assessment to

 9     the effect that a crime was indeed committed.  He forwards the case to

10     the military prosecutor.  The military prosecutor, as you most certainly

11     know, under the Croatian legislation, can forward the case that he

12     received from an officer of the Croatian army to the military police in

13     order to carry out preliminary proceedings with the aim of establishing

14     certain facts.  Once they establish the facts, the case is returned to

15     the military prosecutor to make subsequent decisions.

16             So we have the criminal offences that the military crime police

17     will process, and we have crimes which are initiated by the officer of a

18     given unit of the Croatian army through his lawyer and sent to the --

19     further on to the prosecutor.

20        Q.   Okay.

21             MR. MISETIC:  Quickly, if we could go back to 65 ter 5670,

22     please, Madam Registrar.

23        Q.   Now, you were shown this order.  In the preamble,

24     General Gotovina refers to the fact that he is issuing this order based

25     on an order that he, himself, has received from General Cervenko.  Do you

Page 15702

 1     have any knowledge of what General Cervenko had ordered in his order to

 2     General Gotovina?

 3        A.   No.  I'm not familiar with this order.  However, the problem of

 4     forced entry into apartments was a problem that was present always in the

 5     Croatian army, and we reported on that problem to the highest levels.

 6        Q.   And finally in terms of the work of the crime police, I think we

 7     went through this at some length about OA Varivode, but the day-to-day

 8     investigations being conducted by the crime police of the 72nd Military

 9     Police Battalion, the status of ongoing investigations, et cetera, would

10     be reported to Mr. Budimir but would also go up the vertical line to the

11     crime police section in the military police administration.  Correct?

12        A.   I'm not sure that I can give you a precise answer.  In other

13     words, I don't fully understand the question.

14             Do you mean to say that the military crime police sections

15     attached to battalions are, in professional terms, vertically

16     subordinated to the military crime police department of the MP

17     administration?  Yes, of course.  Similarly, other specialties and

18     subspecialties have that subordination.

19        Q.   My question is they would -- in addition to the fact they were

20     subordinated, they would also send written reports to the vertical line

21     in the administration, pursuant to the fact that they were subordinated

22     professionally to them.  Correct?

23        A.   They were not professionally subordinated.  You have to

24     distinguish the professional vertical line of subordination.  The crime

25     -- the military crime police section of the 72nd Battalion and the chief

Page 15703

 1     of that section is always subordinated to the commander of the

 2     72nd Battalion, according to all the different aspects from his purview.

 3             However, the professional vertical line, through which he seeks

 4     advice, consultations, or suggestions is the chief of the department of

 5     the military crime police within the MP administration.  And only he, as

 6     an expert, can provide him with an answer of this professional nature.

 7     The commander of the 72nd Battalion is not a crime expert, and can he

 8     only get that sort of expertise through that professional vertical line

 9     of subordination.

10        Q.   Thank you.  To be very precise, though, would the crime police

11     head in the section of the 72nd send reports to the crime police chief in

12     the MP administration in Zagreb?

13        A.   He would probably do that through the commander of the

14     72nd Battalion to me, as the chief of the military police administration.

15             MR. MISETIC:  Thank you, Mr. President.

16             Thank you.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Then this concludes your testimony.

18             I have one question for you, Mr. Mikulicic.  You put to the

19     witness the order dated the 25th of September, 1993.  Are you going to

20     submit the -- present to this Chamber the response as well?

21             MR. MISETIC:  Thank you for reminding me, Your Honour.  I just

22     forgot this.  I would like to tender it into the evidence.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  But my question was, whether you were also

24     going to present to us the response that came because there was a

25     time-limit set, seven days from the 25th of September, 1993, whether we

Page 15704

 1     get a report with a long list of all the crimes discovered and

 2     investigated, or whether it was just a response saying nothing happened.

 3             Do you have the response?  Could bar table it, perhaps.

 4             MR. MIKULICIC:  Yes.  Maybe this is also a part of the OTP bar

 5     table, Your Honour, so ...

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  1993.

 7             MR. MISETIC:  Yes.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Okay.  That was not on my mind.  Thank you very

 9     much.

10             Mr. Lausic, the parties, a little bit less, the Chamber, has kept

11     you busy for quite some days.  I would like to thank you very much for

12     coming and for having answered all the questions that were put to you by

13     the parties, and by the Bench, and I wish you a safe trip home again.

14             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Usher, could you escort Mr. Lausic out of the

16     courtroom.

17             I suggest to the parties that oral submissions on scheduling

18     issues, which, if I looked at it well, are mainly focussing on the time

19     between 98 bis submissions and the start of the Defence case, more than

20     on the other scheduling aspects, that we'll deal with that tomorrow

21     morning.

22             Could I hear how much time that would take approximately.

23                           [The witness withdrew]

24             MR. CAYLEY:  Yes.  Your Honour, just to emphasise very quickly,

25     there wasn't disagreement amongst the parties, but they just had

Page 15705

 1     different points that they wanted to raise by the Court which were

 2     individual to [indiscernible].  I suspect it will be very brief, between

 3     five and ten minutes for all three of us.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  For all three you.  This is dangerous to schedule

 5     such a matter in the early morning hours, but, well, I will be very

 6     generous, 11 minutes are granted.

 7             MR. TIEGER:  Your Honour, excuse me, very quickly.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

 9             MR. TIEGER:  Very minor.  We looked at 65 ter 5670 on e-court.

10     It's still indicated as a 65 ter document.  We'll check it, and raise it

11     with the Court to see which it is.

12             MR. MISETIC:  It is P2209, and it might be a duplicate in

13     e-court.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, that's what Madam Registrar informs me as well.

15             We adjourn for the day, and we will resume tomorrow, Wednesday,

16     the 4th of February, at 9.00 in the morning, in this same courtroom, I.

17                            --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.53 p.m.,

18                           to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 4th day of

19                           February, 2009, at 9.00 a.m.