Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 23557

 1                           Friday, 30 October 2009

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           [The witness takes the stand]

 5                           --- Upon commencing at 9.04 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. Cetina, I would like to remind you that you're still bound by

13     the solemn declaration that you have given at the beginning of your

14     testimony.

15             Ms. Mahindaratne, are you ready to continue your

16     cross-examination?

17             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Yes, Mr. President.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Then please proceed.

19             MR. MAHINDARATNE:  Thank you, Mr. President.

20                           WITNESS:  IVICA CETINA [Resumed]

21                           [Witness answered through interpreter]

22                           Cross-examination by Ms. Mahindaratne: [Continued]

23        Q.   Good morning, Mr. Cetina.

24        A.   Good morning.

25        Q.   Just two questions on the subject we were discussing last

Page 23558

 1     evening, you know, I showed you a document where you had sent a report of

 2     certain investigations carried out to General Cermak, and you couldn't

 3     recall why you had sent that document to him.

 4             Now, isn't it correct, Mr. Cetina, that if General Cermak asked

 5     you to carry out a specific task, let us say, for example, to carry out

 6     an investigation into a specific incident, you'd comply with that

 7     request, would you not?

 8        A.   If he provided me with information, then, yes.

 9        Q.   And once you had carried out that task that General Cermak had

10     asked to you carry out, would you --

11             MR. KAY:  Could we be very careful in our language here,

12     Your Honour, because there is a lot of heavy meaning within concern

13     words, such as "tasks" and the issue here.  And I notice the witness

14     answer, "if he provided me with information," and we know the -- the

15     police system of dealing with information.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  At the same time, Ms. Mahindaratne, you're --

17     let me -- let me try to rephrase your question and tell me, please, if

18     you would think that the question would be different.

19             Mr. Cetina, if Mr. Cermak would have asked you to carry out an

20     investigation and if he would have given you the information you needed

21     for that, and then, Ms. Mahindaratne, I take it that you wanted to ask

22     the witness whether he would then report back to Mr. Cermak about the

23     activities which Mr. Cetina would have developed as a result of being

24     asked to investigate.

25             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Exactly, Mr. President.  Thank you.

Page 23559

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

 2             Could you answer that question.

 3             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I would not advise him about that.

 4             MS. MAHINDARATNE:

 5        Q.   Why not?

 6        A.   Because I was not under an obligation of that kind.

 7        Q.   Very well.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Ms. Mahindaratne, perhaps we could do it in a more

 9     factual way.

10             Mr. Cetina, because some people even now and then do things,

11     although there is no obligation to do so, would have you considered to,

12     if being asked and if being provided with information to -- to

13     investigate a matter, even without being obliged to do so, would you

14     inform Mr. Cermak about the activities that you have -- you would have

15     developed as a result of what he asked you?

16             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] If he had asked me to inform him

17     and if it was important to him, then, yes.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  So the answer you earlier gave, that you would

19     not advise him about, is an answer which would not apply to all

20     circumstances.  If you would know that it was important for him, and if

21     you -- if he would have asked you to report back to him, then you would

22     have done so?

23             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Perhaps I can offer an explanation,

24     with your leave?

25             JUDGE ORIE:  I'd rather first have an answer to my question.

Page 23560

 1             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I would have informed him had he

 2     asked me to inform him.  Otherwise, in principle, I would not have.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Ms. Mahindaratne, please proceed.

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

 5             Mr. Registrar, may I have document D595, please.

 6        Q.   Mr. Cetina, this is a document that we -- that was discussed the

 7     day before yesterday in direct examination.

 8             Now, in your testimony, there was much discussion about

 9     co-operation of civilian police and military police in addressing crimes.

10     And you testified that you attended a meeting in Plitvice - pardon my

11     pronunciation if I didn't say it right - where the military police and

12     the civilian police and senior officers of the Ministry of Interior met

13     to discuss co-operation.

14             Now, these are minutes of that meeting.

15             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  And if we could move the -- the first

16     paragraph reads that -- recorded a meeting with representatives of RH MUP

17     was held on 15th September, 1995, at 1100 hours.  And the topic was:

18             "Analysis of the tasks carried out in a newly liberated part of

19     the Republic of Croatia during and after the Oluja/Storm operation."

20        Q.   And you have -- the assistant minister, Mr. Moric, was present.

21             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  And, Mr. Registrar, if you could just move to

22     page 2.

23        Q.   There we have, in paragraph 1:

24             "Mr. Moric opened the meeting with a short reference to 1991 and,

25     having given an introduction to the meeting subject, he gave the floor to

Page 23561

 1     the heads of the police administrations, who, in their presentations,

 2     passed on the information on number of committed criminal acts and

 3     measures taken against perpetrators of the said, and also spoke about

 4     problems of jurisdiction of state attorney's offices in the local

 5     communities in joint solving ... the crimes."

 6             And then the same page, right at the bottom, is your own address

 7     that is noted.

 8              "Mr. Cetina, chief of the police administration for Zadar and

 9     Knin, put the emphasis on that fact that the biggest part of that area

10     had been occupied.  The situation in this area, he divided into three

11     stages:  Stage 1, stay of the HV professional units; Stage 2, stay of

12     parts of the units which burnt houses and threatened with arms if tried

13     to be prevented from committing crimes; Stage 3, stay of civilians which

14     were taking property away on a massive scale."

15             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  And, Mr. Registrar, if you could move to the

16     next page.

17        Q.    "He also assessed the co-operation with the military police as

18     unsatisfactory, due to the insufficient number of military policemen."

19             Now, Mr. Cetina, those three stages that you described, do you

20     understand those three stages as three stages during which crimes were

21     committed?

22        A.   No.

23        Q.   Stage 2 and Stage 3, clearly, indicate crimes.  Can you tell us,

24     Stage 1, was -- what was the period of duration of Stage 1, that is, the

25     stay of professional units?  What was the duration of time from the point

Page 23562

 1     of -- from the completion of Operation Storm?

 2        A.   I cannot speak in terms of days, because I do not remember many

 3     things.

 4        Q.   Was there a distinct separation of the stay of the professional

 5     units as opposed to at least -- let me put it this way:  Was there a

 6     distinct separation from Stage 1 to Stage 2, or did they overlap?

 7        A.   It was my per perception that they overlapped.

 8        Q.   Okay.  Now, -- now, this Phase 2, Stage 2, you record a stay of

 9     parts of the units which "burnt houses and threatened with arms if tried

10     to prevent from committing crimes."

11             Now, yesterday, when Mr. Misetic questioned you, and I will take

12     you to that -- this is in the draft transcript, page 5.  Your question by

13     Mr. Misetic:

14             "Q.  Mr. Cetina, do you agree with me that the police had the

15     authority to detain members of the Croatian army at check-points, if, for

16     example, they were found to have looted items in their possession.  They

17     were allowed to detain them and then they were supposed to call in the

18     military police so that these individuals could be processed further in

19     the military crime justice system?"

20             And your answer was:

21             "A.  Yes, that's all right in theory.  But in practice, things

22     were different."

23             And then, further through that examination, the Bench asked you

24     some questions -- Presiding Judge asked you this question:

25             "When Mr. Misetic gave you a picture of what could happen at a

Page 23563

 1     check-point, he asked whether that was how the system worked, and you

 2     said:  'I could agree.  But in practice, it depended on the assessment of

 3     the police officers involved.  They were supposed to estimate whether

 4     this could lead to a conflict.'

 5             "What kind of conflict were you referring to?"

 6             And your answer was:

 7             "A conflict in the sense that such people could resist being

 8     identified.  We discussed that yesterday.  We insisted that at

 9     check-points, together with our police officers, there be the military

10     police as well."

11             And further on, the Presiding Judge asked you, Witness:

12             "You would say that if the civilian police would take action

13     against such a person under those circumstances, that whether or not to

14     do that would depend on their estimate on whether those persons would

15     accept such an intervention by the civilian police in the absence of the

16     military police.  Is that how I have to understand your answer?"

17             You said:

18             "Precisely."

19             Now, this second stage that you talk about where units were

20     committing crimes and threatened with arms -- let me just see -- the stay

21     of parts of the units which burnt houses and thereafter with arms tried

22     to be prevented from committing crimes.

23             Now, was that the type of conflict you were referring to

24     yesterday?

25        A.   I never said that no HV members were ever identified by the

Page 23564

 1     police, but it's simply the way things were in the field, for the most

 2     part.

 3        Q.   No, my question is this, Mr. Cetina.  Now, in saying -- now

 4     yesterday you said, of course, in law the civilian police could detain a

 5     HV member but in practice it did not happen.  And in response to the

 6     questions from the Bench you referred to the conflict.

 7             Now, my question to you is:  Is this the type of conflict that

 8     you referred to, as a possible consequence, if civilian police attempted

 9     to intervene to stop crimes committed by military personnel in the

10     absence of military police?

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Misetic.

12             MR. MISETIC:  I object to the form of the question,

13     Mr. President.  The witness did not state what Ms. Mahindaratne says he

14     stated in the second sentence of her question that "in practice it did

15     not happen."

16             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Let me tell you exactly what you said

17     Mr. Cetina.  You said --

18             JUDGE ORIE:  If you quote literally, then there will be no

19     problem, Ms. Mahindaratne.

20             MS. MAHINDARATNE:

21        Q.   When Mr. Misetic put that suggestion to you, you said:

22             "Yes, that's all right in theory, but in practice, things were

23     different."

24             And then further on you discuss a possible conflict situation.

25             Now my question to you is:  Although you say the civilian police

Page 23565

 1     had authority to detain HV, in practice it was different on the ground.

 2     Now, is this the reason why the civilian police could not apprehend

 3     members of the HV committing crimes in the absence of military police

 4     because if the civilian police tried to do that, members of the HV would

 5     threaten them with arms and there could be a possible conflict?

 6             Is that what you were referring to?

 7        A.   I must say that I never said that the police had the authority to

 8     detain HV members.  It could only retain them until further notice.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Cetina, even if this is correct, you certainly

10     have understood what the core of the question was.  Whether your

11     testimony of yesterday, that it depended on the assessment of the

12     civilian police officers, whether or not they would take the risk of a

13     conflict with HV members when intervening, whether that is to be

14     understood as a similar or the same thing as what you said during this

15     meeting, that during the second stage that - and let me literally,

16     because it disappeared from my screen - that "parts of units burnt houses

17     and threatened with arms, if tried to be prevented from committing

18     crimes."

19             That sounds rather similar as not accepting an intervention at

20     check-points, a risk of a conflict.

21             Now, are you talking about the same kind of things here at this

22     meeting as you told us yesterday about what would happen at check-points?

23             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't remember the conversation

24     going that way.  But it was only reasonable that if there was threat at a

25     certain check-point or danger of a quarrel, or a clash, that, in such a

Page 23566

 1     case, the police would choose not to intervene.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  And that were the kind of events you talked about

 3     during this is meeting as well.  Is that ...?

 4             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think so.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed, Ms. Mahindaratne.

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

 7             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. President.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, Mr. Misetic.

 9             MR. MISETIC:  If could I just state one thing, but if I could ask

10     if the witness understands English.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

12             Mr. Cetina, do you understand the English language?

13             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Would you please take your earphones off for a

15     second.

16             Mr. Misetic.

17             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. President, I wouldn't normally do this, but in

18     light of the fact that I anticipate we're going have an issue of -- of

19     time and we're going to try to complete this witness's testimony today, I

20     did want to state that if there's going to be an issue of whether the

21     police could act against HV members in this line of questioning, then I

22     will ask for some time in re-cross because I believe this issue has been

23     covered extensively through the trial with examples.

24             So I don't know if that's the case, but I did want to let the

25     Prosecution know that I will ask for time to put that to him if it's

Page 23567

 1     going to be an issue as to whether the civilian police not only had the

 2     authority to do it but actually was doing it at the time.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  We've heard the evidence the witness gave

 4     yesterday in respect of this.

 5             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Mr. President, I wasn't intending to explore

 6     deeply into this subject, I just wanted to do exactly what I just did

 7     just now.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Well, then please proceed.

 9             We'll ask the witness to put his earphones on again.

10             Mr. Cetina, could you ...

11             Please proceed, Ms. Mahindaratne.

12             MS. MAHINDARATNE:

13        Q.   Now, just one last question on that, Mr. Cetina.

14             Now, at this meeting you -- I'm sorry just going back.

15             Yesterday, repeatedly, you responded to Mr. Misetic that, in

16     practice, the civilian police did not or could not apprehend or address

17     crimes by military --

18             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  I'm sorry, Mr. President.  Let me just

19     withdraw that.  I don't want to get into a long debate.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

21             MS. MAHINDARATNE:

22        Q.   Mr. Cetina, now, according to these minutes, you have articulated

23     this problem at this meeting.  You have, in fact, said exactly that --

24     that this problem was that -- that members of the HV were committing

25     crimes and threatened with arms if they were -- if there was an attempt

Page 23568

 1     to prevent them.

 2             Now, at this meeting, there were members of the military police

 3     present, particularly the commander, Colonel Budimir, and we will go

 4     through what he said in the next page.

 5             Now, how did the military police respond to that statement you

 6     made?  Was there any further discussion on that matter?

 7        A.   I don't recall any further discussion.

 8        Q.   Did the police force attempt to address this issue with any

 9     members or any commanders of the HV, the fact that, when the police

10     attempted to prevent crime, the -- the units that were staying in the

11     area tried to respond with arms?

12             MR. MISETIC:  Your Honour, I object again.  That's not -- that's

13     a mischaracterisation of what is written in the document.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

15             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Let me rephrase, Mr. President.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, if you please perhaps use the exact language as

17     we find it in the minutes.

18             MS. MAHINDARATNE:

19        Q.   Now you have reported that, in the second stage, that the stay of

20     parts of the units which burnt houses and thereafter -- therefore with

21     arms if tried to prevent from committing crimes.  There are -- I'm sorry,

22     and threatened with arms if tried to prevent -- if tried to be prevented

23     from committing crimes.

24             Now this issue, where the units were burning houses --

25             MR. MISETIC:  Objection again, Mr. President.

Page 23569

 1             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  I'm not saying anything --

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Let's first allow Ms. Mahindaratne to carefully

 3     think about the phrasing of her question and to finish her question.

 4             MS. MAHINDARATNE:

 5        Q.   Now, was that issue placed before any commanders of the HV?

 6             MR. MISETIC:  Same objection, Mr. President.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  The issue was -- the issue as we find it in the

 8     minutes.

 9             MR. MISETIC:  Yes.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  That is apparently what Ms. Mahindaratne is talking

11     about.  And the question is whether this issue was placed before HV and

12     that's -- I do not see what's wrong with that question.

13             MR. MISETIC:  I'm just objecting -- to me, there is a distinction

14     between units --

15             JUDGE ORIE:  No, no.  The issue -- the issue as we find in the

16     minutes.

17             MR. MISETIC:  Okay.  That's fine.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  That's how I rephrase it --

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

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Was the issue as we find it in these minutes, where

21     it says that - and I'll -- the issue being that "parts of units that had

22     stayed which burnt houses and threatened with arms if tried to be

23     prevented from committing crimes."

24             Was that issue raised with HV commanders?

25             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I wasn't in touch with the

Page 23570

 1     commanders, and I, myself, did not raise that issue.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Are you aware of anyone else raising it with HV

 3     commanders?

 4             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed.

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

 7        Q.   Now, beyond raising this matter at this meeting in Plitvice on

 8     15th of September, what did you, as the head of the police administration

 9     of Zadar-Knin, do to address that problem?

10        A.   We informed our heads at the ministry who were present there and

11     tried to do our job as best we could, on our own.

12        Q.   Now, that problem that you reported here at this meeting, what

13     was the basis for your information?  Was that based on reports you have

14     received from your subordinate officers, the police commanders?

15        A.   This was an impression made on the basis of the reports we

16     received and forwarded to the ministry.

17        Q.   Now, were you informed as to how the civilian police on the

18     ground reacted in those particular situations, when they were threatened

19     with arms, when they tried to prevent crimes, by members of the HV?

20        A.   I've already said that the police, in the cases where they

21     assessed that a conflict might occur, refrained from reacting.

22        Q.   Now, moving on, Mr. Cetina.  Yesterday your testimony, or the day

23     before, during direct examination, your testimony was that you were aware

24     that there was a shortage of military police for patrols within the

25     Kotar-Knin Police Administration.

Page 23571

 1             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  This is at transcript page T23421 going to 2.

 2        Q.   In fact you had reported that at this meeting too.

 3             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  And, Mr. Registrar, if you could move to the

 4     next page, page 4.

 5             THE INTERPRETER:  The interpreters kindly ask Ms. Mahindaratne to

 6     speak into the microphone.  Thank you.

 7             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  My apologies.

 8             If we could move to page 4, yes.

 9        Q.   There we also have Colonel Budimir also speaking at this meeting,

10     and he reports -- said Colonel Mihael Budimir, commander of the

11     72nd Military Police Battalion, Split:

12             "Call attention to the spatially large area of responsibility

13     covered by the 72nd Military Police Battalion and did not agree with

14     opinions that there was not enough manpower.  The co-operation with the

15     MUP was disturbed but only in some individual cases.  State of security,

16     public order, and road traffic safety reached the satisfying level, and

17     with returns of civilian population in Knin, a problem with disposal of

18     rubbish occurred?"

19             Now, Mr. Budimir obviously does not agree with your opinion that

20     there was a shortage of manpower, of military personnel.  Would you --

21     wouldn't you agree with me that the commander of the 72nd Military Police

22     Battalion would know more about the manning levels within his battalion

23     than yourself?

24        A.   I cannot comment on what her [as interpreted] perception of the

25     matter was.

Page 23572

 1        Q.   I'm not asking to you comment, Mr. Cetina, my question is:

 2     Wouldn't you agree with me that the commander of the military police

 3     battalion would know more about his own manning levels than yourself?

 4        A.   Yes.

 5        Q.   And, in fact, on this subject, when Mr. Kay questioned you --

 6             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  And this is transcript page 23.429.

 7        Q.   "But this problem here, within the Kotar-Knin Police

 8     Administration concerning the number of military police, was that

 9     something that you were aware of at the time?"

10             And your responses is:

11             "Yes, in a way, yes.  Well, that means if an agreement had been

12     reached at a higher level, then, on the ground, they either acted as best

13     they could or had a shortage of men."

14             So is it correct, then, based on that answer -- would you agree

15     with me that your opinion on the manning levels of the military police

16     was based on the fact that there was no cooperation forthcoming from the

17     military police?  Was that the basis on which you concluded that they

18     were short-staffed?

19        A.   They didn't have a sufficient manning level.  My assessment was

20     that, in view of the number of check-points, they weren't able to provide

21     us with sufficient numbers of men to man the check-points.

22        Q.   Now, did Colonel Budimir ever inform you of that fact?  Did he

23     ever tell you, I can't send you these people because I don't have

24     sufficient men?

25        A.   I don't remember.  We set up check-points together.  For

Page 23573

 1     instance, we set up 15 check-points, and they sent their men only to

 2     three of them.

 3        Q.   So it is on that basis that you concluded that they were

 4     short-staffed, because they didn't send men to all 15?

 5        A.   Yes.

 6        Q.   Thank you.

 7             MR. KAY:  Your Honour, I do wonder about this line of

 8     cross-examinations.  We looked at a number of documents yesterday where

 9     it wasn't Mr. Budimir who was giving an explanation.  It was

10     Mr. Primorac, the deputy, there were other military police officers at

11     meetings.  Not only with the Zadar-Knin Police Administration but

12     Kotar-Knin Police Administrations, whose records were recorded.  And I

13     think the proper way of dealing with this, rather than putting

14     Mr. Budimir's name to the witness, would be if the Prosecution referred

15     to those recorded documents and statements by the military police

16     officers to the police.  Otherwise, a totally misleading impression is

17     given of the evidence.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Ms. Mahindaratne, apparently, has chosen a very

19     limited approach to this matter and, of course, the Chamber will

20     understand all the evidence in the context of which it was put to a

21     witness.

22             MR. KAY:  Yes.  In those circumstances, then, Your Honour, I

23     understand the position.

24             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Mr. President, I'm merely testing this -- the

25     knowledge of this witness, and --

Page 23574

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  I just told you that you apparently have chosen a

 2     certain approach, and the Chamber will, of course, evaluate the whole of

 3     the evidence.  And if this portion of the evidence is linked only -- not

 4     to all of the remainder, then the evidence should be understood in the

 5     context in which it was elicited by you from the witness.

 6             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Yes, Mr. President.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed.

 8             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Thank you.

 9        Q.   Mr. Cetina, moving on, let me take to you your statement given to

10     the OTP, and that's D1745.  In page 9, paragraph 4, this is what you say.

11     Perhaps if you want to follow your statement --

12             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Mr. Registrar, if you could just -- D1745.

13        Q.   This is what you say:

14             "The uniformed police were not often visiting the villages

15     situated at a distance from the main roads.  That is why the main sources

16     of information about the crimes committed in the villages were members of

17     the civilian protection and representatives of the international

18     organisations."

19             And then ...

20        A.   Where is that?

21        Q.   Do you see that?  In page ...

22             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Mr. Registrar, D1745.

23        Q.   I'm reading your statement given to the OTP, Mr. Cetina.

24             THE REGISTRAR:  B/C/S page number, please.

25             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  May I have a minute.

Page 23575

 1                           [Prosecution counsel confer]

 2             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  About page -- this is not the -- in the

 3     English, if you could get to page 9.  Let me just ... not this page.

 4             If I could have assistance from ...

 5             Mr. Registrar, if you could move to the next page, I think that

 6     might be ...

 7                           [Prosecution counsel confer]

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Ms. Mahindaratne, what about in the B/C/S version,

 9     page 7, the semi-last paragraph?

10             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Mr. Registrar, may I ...

11             Yes, that's --

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Would that be a suggestion?

13             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Yes, I think we need page 9 --

14             JUDGE ORIE:  In English.

15             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  In -- even in B/C/S, Mr. President.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  If you want to refer to the paragraph which starts

17     with "meetings with representatives," then I strongly suggest that you

18     look at page 7 in the B/C/S version, semi-last paragraph, starting at

19     "Sastanak s predstavnicima ..."  Don't ask me to further pronounce it.

20     That seems to be the paragraph you were referring to in English on page

21     9.

22             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Yes.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  And it's already on the screen, so we don't have to

24     wait much longer.

25             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Yeah, it's already on the screen.  Thank you,

Page 23576

 1     Mr. President.  My apologies for not having the B/C/S page number.

 2        Q.   Do you see that, Mr. Cetina?

 3             And then, if we could go to the next page, page 10.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Let's first verify.

 5             Mr. Cetina, have you read that paragraph and have you followed

 6     the portion quoted by Ms. Mahindaratne?  "Sources of information ..."

 7             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes?

 9             Then let's now move to the next page then.

10             And please proceed, Ms. Mahindaratne.

11             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Thank you Mr. President.

12        Q.   Next page, Mr. Cetina, if you focus on that paragraph that starts

13     with "In respect of the UNCIVPOL ..." that is in the Croatian version

14     page 3 -- paragraph 3.

15             There are -- the last four sentence it is says -- last four

16     lines:

17             "Everything reported to us by the international organisations was

18     good for us, because we could investigates all that.  The information

19     from the monitors helped us because most of the murders were in remote

20     hamlets, not on the main roads.  The police were not going off the main

21     roads very much at that time."

22             That's your testimony.

23             Now, as I understand your evidence, the international

24     organisations were bringing in these reports to the police because they

25     were patrolling these areas -- those areas.  Isn't that correct?

Page 23577

 1        A.   Yes.

 2        Q.   So, now, if the international organisations and the civilian

 3     protection could patrol those areas, what was the problem for the

 4     civilian police to patrol those areas, particularly giving -- considering

 5     your own testimony that most of the murders were being committed in

 6     the -- those areas?

 7        A.   As I have already said, there weren't enough personnel to cover

 8     that vast an area.  The perception expressed here is that we used all

 9     sort of information that we came by from international organisations and

10     civilian protection.

11             Let me tell you that we did not rely only upon police information

12     in all these cases.

13        Q.   Mr. Cetina, your testimony is also that, when you went to

14     Kistanje, that Kistanje was already destroyed.  That is in the OTP

15     statement, for the record, page 14, the first paragraph.

16             And you said when you left -- went to Kistanje, that most

17     features were burnt before you got there.

18             Now, my question is:  When did you go to Kistanje for the first

19     time?

20        A.   Well, in the first several days I went through Kistanje, in fact,

21     in perhaps the ten days.

22        Q.   Can you be more specific.  When you say the first few days,

23     "first several days," what was the -- when was the first day you entered

24     Kistanje?  Was it the 5th, the 6th?

25        A.   Not on the 5th or the 6th.

Page 23578

 1        Q.   7th?

 2        A.   No.  Because in those days, I would come via Drnis, though I

 3     don't remember.

 4        Q.   Now, you said that "the first several days I went through

 5     Kistanje."  Could you give the Trial Chamber some idea as to around when.

 6     Is it after one week after the completion of the operation?

 7             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. President, I think that the completion of --

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  The witness has already answered that he is not

 9     certain about whether it was not on the 7th already.

10             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Very well, Mr. President.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  That was the last part of his answer.

12             MS. MAHINDARATNE:

13        Q.   Now, your testimony is that Kistanje was destroyed, you say,

14     during Storm.  What did you mean by that?  "During Storm."

15             What did you mean by that?

16        A.   Well, what I meant was that it didn't happen in a day.  It

17     happened over a period of time, a month or two.  I don't know.

18        Q.   Yes.  But you said, Mr. Cetina, that when you visited Kistanje

19     for the first time it was already destroyed.  So are you then able to

20     give us some idea as to, you know, whether you went to Kistanje after one

21     month, after two months, because I'm trying to give the Trial Chamber

22     some idea as to when you saw Kistanje as being completely destroyed.

23        A.   In the month and a half that I was there, I passed through

24     Kistanje on three or four occasions, and I can say that it happened over

25     a period of time, not all at once.

Page 23579

 1        Q.   So what did you do about Kistanje?  What type of investigations

 2     did you carry out to find out what the --

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Ms. Mahindaratne, wouldn't we first -- shouldn't we

 4     first try to find out exactly what the statement says.

 5             I read to you what your statement says:

 6             "In respect of Kistanje, as far as I know, it was destroyed

 7     during Storm.  When I first went there, it was already destroyed."

 8             Now, you just told us that you're not certain whether it was in

 9     these early day, whether it was already on the 7th - that is a

10     possibility, apparently.

11             Now to say, Kistanje was destroyed a period of two months, that

12     seems to contradict what we find in your statement, where you say "when I

13     first went there, it was already destroyed," and you consider it possible

14     that that was already on the 7th, passing through.  And that's the

15     language you used.

16             So could you please clarify this?

17             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. President, if I may.  If I could just call your

18     attention to page 21, paragraph 3 -- line 3, I should say.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  It's the last being:  "Though I don't remember."

20             MR. MISETIC:  If he could be asked to clarify that because I

21     think he -- as I understand it --

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Oh, let's --

23             You were asked about the 7th, you -- whether you had been in

24     Kistanje already.  And then you said:

25             "No.  Because in those days, I would come via Drnis."

Page 23580

 1             Though you do not remember.

 2             What did you not remember?

 3             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't remember passing through

 4     Kistanje -- or, rather, I definitely did not go through Kistanje the

 5     first time I travelled to Knin.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  But on the 7th, would you consider it possible

 7     that you went through Kistanje?

 8             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.  Because I did not go to Knin

 9     two times in a row.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  And, now, what did you not remember?

11             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't remember -- or, rather, I

12     believe that in the first ten days I did go to Kistanje once.  But when

13     was it?  Definitely not in the beginning.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Now, let's just -- let's take this as a starting

15     point.

16             If you went to Kistanje within the first ten days, although not

17     in the very first ones but perhaps the 11th or the 12th, and you say the

18     first time you came there, you went there, it was already destroyed.  And

19     now you tell us that the destruction took place over a period of two

20     month; whereas, your statement clearly suggests that the destruction was

21     already there when you came there for the first time, which, as you just

22     told us, would have been anywhere between the 7th, 8th, or the

23     13th, 14th of August.

24             Could you explain this, what seems, at first sight, to be a

25     contradiction.

Page 23581

 1             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I didn't count the houses that were

 2     burned or destroyed.  However, I can certainly say, from my memory, that

 3     the majority was destroyed in the first 10 to 15 days.  Then later on, I

 4     never stopped in Kistanje.  I merely passed through it.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  So what you're telling us is that most part of the

 6     destruction in Kistanje took place not over a period of two month, but

 7     within the first ten days, or perhaps ...

 8             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I would say that that's the

 9     closest to the truth.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Well, if there's any way to come closer, please tell

11     us.

12             Ms. Mahindaratne, you may proceed.

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

14        Q.   Now, Kistanje, Mr. Cetina, is within your area of responsibility.

15             Now, upon observing this destruction, what did you, as head of

16     the police administration, do to investigate as to what the causes of the

17     destruction were and who had committed that crime?

18        A.   Given that there were no eye-witnesses, it was very difficult to

19     uncover the perpetrators.

20        Q.   So was any investigation carried out at all?  Any on-site

21     investigations at all?

22        A.   Every piece of information that was helpful was checked.  The

23     better part of the information can be found at the police administration

24     in the relevant documentation.

25        Q.   Now, did you instruct your subordinate officers to call from the

Page 23582

 1     military any information as to what units were deployed in Kistanje

 2     during the period when it was possibly destroyed?

 3        A.   We had never had information to the effect that it was the army

 4     that perpetrated the deed.

 5        Q.   Mr. Cetina, now you're telling the Trial Chamber that most of the

 6     features in Kistanje were destroyed when you went.  And you know that a

 7     military operation had been conducted in the area.  Now, don't you think,

 8     as a police officer, one of the first steps either to find the potential

 9     perpetrators or potential witnesses, what you should have done was to

10     find out if there were any members of the military present in the

11     vicinity of the crime site?

12             Wouldn't that be a logical step to take in the course of an

13     investigation?

14        A.   No.  If something was damaged in a war operation, then it becomes

15     a different matter.  The police acts where crimes have been committed.

16        Q.   Now, in your mind, when you saw the destruction in Kistanje, what

17     did you conclude?  That it happened in a war operation or that it was a

18     crime?

19        A.   I am not an expert in war operations, but I could see that the

20     houses were set on fire and destroyed.  As for any other perception…

21     I cannot give you that.  Nor the way it was done or by whom - I don’t

22     know.

23        Q.   So were you -- what steps did you take - I'm asking you to tell

24     the Trial Chamber what steps did you take to find out as to who set these

25     houses on fire with Zoljas?  What kind of investigative steps did you

Page 23583

 1     take?

 2        A.   I apologise, there were set on fire by what?

 3        Q.   It has been written as "fire by Zoljas," and maybe I didn't

 4     pronounce -- Z-o-l-j-a-s.  That's your answer.

 5             Your answer was:

 6             "I am not an expert in war operations, but I could see that the

 7     houses were set on fire by Zoljas."

 8             And I believe that is a sort of weapon.

 9        A.   In the Croatian translation, I don't see where it says Zoljas.

10     Could you please indicate that.

11        Q.   Mr. Cetina --

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Cetina, your answer was translated that you

13     could see that - not in your statement but what you just told us - that

14     could you see that the houses were set on fire by Zoljas.  That's how

15     your answer to one of the previous questions was translated to us.

16             And you said:

17             "That's all can I tell you."

18             Mr. Kay, I'm referring to page 25, lines 19 and following.

19             MR. KAY:  I have information that the word "soldiers" was not

20     used -- "Zoljas," sorry.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, which --

22             Mr. Cetina, you answered:

23             "I am not an expert in war operations, but I could see that the

24     houses were set on fire by ..."

25             And what did you then say?

Page 23584

 1             You don't have to look at your screen.  If you just tell us what

 2     you -- one of the answers was.  And I quoted 95 per cent of your answer,

 3     and I asked you to repeat the word you then used.

 4             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I saw that they were damaged and

 5     set on fire.  I don't know what else to say.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  But you said something earlier.  You said:

 7             "I am not an expert ... but the only thing I can tell you is that

 8     they were set on fire by ..."

 9             By what?  By whom, by what?  By -- what did you then say?

10             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I didn't say by what means it was

11     done.  I went through the town and that is what I could see.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Do you remember that answer, which you -- the

13     answer starting with --

14             MR. KAY:  Your Honour, my -- I was actually having to deal with

15     something else at the time.  But I'm advised that nothing was said.  And

16     maybe this should be an instance where the tape is looked at.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, perhaps we should do that.

18             I'll ask it once again to clarify the issue -- to see whether we

19     can see -- clarify the issue without playing the audio or checking the

20     audio.

21             Let me just find it again.

22             I repeat question and the answer, although not complete, as it

23     was given to us in translation and in our transcript.

24             The question that was put to you by Ms. Mahindaratne reads on our

25     transcript as follows:

Page 23585

 1             "Now, in your mind, when you saw the destruction in Kistanje,

 2     what did you conclude?  That it happened in a war operation or that it

 3     was a crime?"

 4             And your answer, as we find it on our screens, is as follows:

 5             "I am not an expert in war operations, but I could see that the

 6     houses were set on fire by ..."

 7             And then you used the word.

 8             And then you continued by saying:

 9             "That is all I can tell you.  I can't tell you anything about who

10     may have done it or anything else for that matter."

11             We do understand what you cannot tell us, but what was the one

12     thing that you said you could see?  That the houses were set on fire?

13             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Probably "destroyed."  I may have

14     said that word.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  I think we'll have to check the audio to find

16     out what exactly the answer was.

17             Please proceed, Ms. Mahindaratne.

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

19        Q.   Now, Mr. Cetina, in your statement given to the OTP, the

20     Office of the Prosecutor, you also go on to say that -- say this:

21             "I did unfortunately see burning houses."

22             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  This is the last page, for the record.

23        Q.   "We were in the field to familiarise ourselves with the

24     situation.  We did our very best to stop the looting and burning."

25             Now, my question is:  When you saw burning houses in the course

Page 23586

 1     of your visits in the field, what did you do?

 2        A.   As a rule, we always saw such houses from a distance.  I seldom

 3     passed by a house that was on flames at that very moment.

 4        Q.   Now, do I understand your answer to be that you -- the houses you

 5     saw burning were from a distance and that you didn't pass by those

 6     houses?  Is that what you're saying?

 7        A.   As a rule, I did not pass by a house at the moment, as it burned.

 8        Q.   So did you see them in a distance -- in the distance?  Is that

 9     what you're saying?  You saw the burning houses --

10        A.   Yes, yes.

11        Q.   So then you -- why were you were going near those houses?

12     Because they were burning or why?

13        A.   No.  I went to meetings.  I was on my way there, and I informed

14     those subordinated to me that they should check on the situation.

15        Q.   And then, thereafter, did you follow up and ask your subordinates

16     as to what -- whether they have checked, what they found, whether any

17     investigation has been initiated?

18        A.   In any case, given the staffing strength, they were supposed to

19     check what the situation was about.

20        Q.   Can you clarify that?  When you say, "in any case, given the

21     staffing strength," that's not my question to you.  Whether you followed

22     up your information to your subordinates -- did you call up your

23     subordinate officers and ask them what they had done, what investigative

24     steps they had taken, or you just left it at that.  Is that what you're

25     saying?

Page 23587

 1        A.   As a rule, I was supposed to be informed in the -- by their

 2     summary reports.  I did not have time to discuss each and every event

 3     with them.

 4        Q.   So I take your answer to be, no, that you did not follow up by

 5     ask -- by questioning them; is that correct?

 6        A.   No, it is not.  They did report to me.  But there were many

 7     events, and I definitely was not acquainted with each and every one of

 8     them.

 9        Q.   Can you give us a specific example of an instance where you saw a

10     burning house and you ordered one of your subordinate officers to go and

11     investigate?  I'm not asking you for date, time, but perhaps the name of

12     a subordinate officer you asked to investigate and the location of the

13     burning house?

14        A.   No, I can't give you that.  I don't remember.

15        Q.   Now, when you informed your subordinate officers, would that

16     information be recorded in the -- the log-books of the police stations?

17     You know, saying, Chief Cetina has informed that a house was burning at

18     such and such a location.  You know how it is recorded in the police

19     log-books.

20        A.   I don't know what they put into the log-books.  I did not check

21     such matters.

22        Q.   Moving on, Mr. Cetina.

23             Now, yesterday you were shown an order issued by the

24     Assistant Minister, Mr. Moric.

25             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  And, Mr. Registrar, if I could have D49 on the

Page 23588

 1     screen.

 2        Q.   And there was some discussion about a specific order contained in

 3     that document.  Sorry, it wasn't yesterday; day before.

 4             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  And, Mr. Registrar, if you could go to the

 5     next page.

 6        Q.   Now, looking at this order, you were, yesterday, questioned by

 7     the Presiding Judge on this particular order, with regard to point 2.

 8             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  If could you, on the Croatian version,

 9     Mr. Registrar, go to page 1.

10        Q.   And this is at transcript page 23415.  Now, with regard to this

11     order you were asked:

12             "My question was whether you then considered this order to be in

13     violation of the existing legislation."

14             Your response was:

15             "In a certain way, it is not, in fact, in accordance with the

16     law."

17             Again you were asked a question:

18             "So, in a certain way, it's a violation of the law."

19             You responded:

20             "In a way, yes."

21             Now -- you're shaking your head, Mr. Cetina.  Are you agreeing

22     with me or disagreeing with something I said?  I just merely read out to

23     you an exchange between yourself and the Presiding Judge the day before

24     yesterday.  I haven't asked you a question yet.

25        A.   My answer to the Judge's question was that, Yes, in a way it was

Page 23589

 1     a violation.

 2        Q.   That's correct.  That's what I was going ask you now.

 3             What you testified here is that the assistant minister has issued

 4     you and the other chiefs of the police administration an illegal order, a

 5     law in -- an order in contravention of the law.

 6             Now, this -- did you discuss that fact with the other officers of

 7     the Ministry of Interior, either with Mr. Moric himself or any other

 8     assistant ministers, or the minister, Mr. Jarnjak, the fact that you have

 9     received an illegal order, which you in fact testified that you ignored?

10             Did you discuss that matter?

11        A.   I don't recall discussing it with anyone.  But I was not bound by

12     that item.  The Law on the Interior states that once I receive an

13     official order, which would be illegal, I am under no obligation to

14     implement it.

15        Q.   That you have -- you categorically stated here.  But my question

16     is:  Was there any formal conversation at least between yourself and the

17     other colleagues, the other chiefs of police administration, as to how

18     you should respond or what to do about when you received an illegal order

19     from an assistant minister?

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Ms. Mahindaratne, the previous answer started:

21             "I don't recall discussing it with anyone."

22             That is an answer to your question.  Of course, if there is any

23     reason why you would want to put that question again, then can you can do

24     so.  But any reason --

25             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Yes, Mr. President, I note that.

Page 23590

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Then -- yes, then please proceed.

 2             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  I withdraw that question, Mr. President.

 3             I don't need this document any further, Mr. Registrar.

 4        Q.   Now, Mr. Cetina, I'm moving on to another area.

 5             Yesterday, Mr. Mikulicic questioned you about the special police.

 6     And you, in fact, have given a comprehensive statement about your

 7     authority over the special police.  And this is in your statement to the

 8     OTP.  This is what you say:

 9             "There were also so-called special police units.  They were not

10     under the command of the police administration but were directly

11     answerable to the MUP."

12             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  For the record, this is D1745, page 4,

13     paragraph 4.

14        Q.   "They had a different building, different uniforms, and they were

15     not doing regular police duties.  According to the law, in peacetime, the

16     professional tasks were the prevention of bigger unrest resolving,

17     hijacking, kidnapping, and similar jobs.  When I arrived in Zadar to take

18     up my post, such a unit already existed there.  I did not know what their

19     tasks were, if they had any, which they coordinated directly with the MUP

20     headquarters.  I personally was not involved in drafting their plans.

21             "The special police units had also existed in the former

22     Yugoslavia.  I believe their tasks were related to anti-terrorism and

23     hostage situations.  The commander of the special police units in Zadar

24     was Svemir Vrsaljko."  Pardon my pronunciation.  "I do not know how many

25     people were under his command.  I have never been informed about the

Page 23591

 1     special tasks undertaken by those special police units.  I never had any

 2     meetings with representatives of the special police units.  At the time

 3     of Storm, I had no control over the special police.  The police system

 4     that I was in was designed for peacetime, not wartime."

 5             Is that correct, that you had no control over the special police

 6     unit -- units?

 7        A.   In a way, yes.  They were professionally under the ministry, but

 8     were also a part of the Knin and Zadar Police Administration.

 9        Q.   Now, after the completion of the initial attack in

10     Operation Storm - and that would be 6th or 7th August - there were mop-up

11     operations carried out to clear the terrain by the special police forces.

12     Isn't that correct?

13        A.   Yes.

14        Q.   Now, as the head of the police administration, did you have any

15     role to play in those mop-up operation, either planning or deciding where

16     those operations were being carried out or issuing orders to the special

17     police units to carry out some of those mop-up operations?

18        A.   Not in terms of planning and organisation.

19        Q.   What was the role that you played in those mop-up operations?

20        A.   Perhaps I may have been informed that there was an ensuing

21     activity in a certain area, but I wasn't familiar with anything else.

22        Q.   Now, were you involved in issuing any orders to the special

23     police recording those mop-up operations?

24        A.   No.

25        Q.   Were you involved in issuing any orders to the special police

Page 23592

 1     units attached to your police administration which were deployed in the

 2     initial attack during the operation itself?

 3        A.   No.

 4        Q.   Now, would it be correct to say that the instances when you had

 5     authority over special police units attached to your police

 6     administration was when they were utilized to assist the regular police

 7     in carrying out the regular police work which were more peacetime duties.

 8        A.   In peacetime, in any case, they were used to resolve complex

 9     situations.

10        Q.   Yes, my question is:  Your authority, if at all, was used -- I'm

11     sorry, I withdraw that question.

12             Now, when you mentioned the word "complex situations," can you

13     clarify what you were talking about it?  Was it only during peacetime, or

14     were you involved in utilizing the special police for any wartime

15     activity?

16        A.   No.  I had such complex situations in mind which would entail a

17     degree of drain for which regular police were not trained.

18        Q.   For example, a hostage-taking situation or the stake-out that was

19     discussed yesterday?  That type of situation?

20        A.   Yes.  Hostage situations, certainly.

21        Q.   Now, yesterday you were questioned about your disciplinary

22     authority over employees of your police force.  Did you have disciplinary

23     authority over members of the special police forces?

24        A.   No.

25        Q.   Now, yesterday, referring to your disciplinary authority - this

Page 23593

 1     is at page 16 of yesterday's proceedings - Mr. Mikulicic asked you what

 2     type of disciplinary authority you had over your special police forces

 3     and you said -- this is what you said.  I will quote you.  You said:

 4             "My only power" -- this is at page 26, my apologies.

 5             "My only power was to file a request for the initiation of a

 6     disciplinary procedure."

 7             This is what you said with regard to your disciplinary authority

 8     over your police forces.

 9             Now, isn't it correct that if a member of the special police

10     forces committed an offence, that request for disciplinary procedures,

11     initiation of disciplinary procedures, had to be made by the commander of

12     the special police sector and not yourself?

13        A.   Yes, that's how it was.

14        Q.   Now --

15             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  May I have, Mr. Registrar, document D1762,

16     please.

17        Q.   Now, this is a document that was shown to you by Mr. Mikulicic

18     yesterday.  And it's from the assistant minister going to the police

19     administrations.  And it says:

20             "In case of an enemy attack on supervisory control points on

21     patrols as well as all intelligence security information, events or

22     occurrences, you are obliged to urgently inform the special police sector

23     on the special telephone."  And the numbers are given.

24             The reference there to the special police sector is to the

25     special police sector command, isn't it?  You're supposed to contact

Page 23594

 1     either Mr. Markac or Mr. Sacic.  Isn't that correct?

 2        A.   Yes, precisely.

 3        Q.   Thank you.

 4             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Mr. President, I note the time.  This would be

 5     a good time for a break, and I have very little time to take afterwards.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Then we will have a break, and we will resume

 7     at five minutes to 11.00.

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

 9                           --- On resuming at 10.59 a.m.

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

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

12        Q.   Mr. Cetina, in your statement given to the Defence --

13             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  And this is, for the record, D1743, in

14     paragraph 16.

15        Q.   -- you have addressed sanitation work and the burial procedures

16     involved.  And this is what you say.  This is at page 8 of the statement.

17     You said:

18             "The team for the clearing up of the terrain assessed objectively

19     whether the cause of death was murder or war operations.  There were

20     cases when it was reported to the police that a body had been found."

21             Now, first, a clarification, when you say "they assessed

22     objectively whether the cause of death was murder or war operations," by

23     the term "war operations," you mean whether a person had died in the

24     course of combat duty due to being caught up in a cross-fire or that type

25     of activity, as opposed to an execution.  Isn't that correct?  That's

Page 23595

 1     what you mean by "war operations"?

 2        A.   The general meaning of war operations.  I can't really go into

 3     the details, whether it was the cross-fire or whatever.

 4        Q.   Yes.  So what you mean is that a person had been killed in the

 5     course of combat as opposed to an execution.  Isn't that what you meant

 6     by that term?

 7        A.   Yes.

 8        Q.   Now, can you -- can you clarify to the Trial Chamber as to how

 9     exactly that determination was made.  What was the criteria that was

10     applied by the clearing-up teams in determining if a person had died in

11     the course of combat or otherwise?

12        A.   The Ministry of Interior issued instructions to the civilian

13     protection service or, rather, to the teams engaged in sanitisation about

14     the procedure they should follow.  I was not that involved in the issue

15     and was not familiar with their modus operandi.  They were within the

16     hierarchy of the Ministry of the Interior.

17        Q.   Now, wouldn't you agree with me that to arrive at that

18     determination as to what -- whether a person had died in the course of

19     combat or whether it's an a murder, it would necessarily require an

20     on-site investigation at the location where the body was recovered?

21        A.   An on-site investigation is part of an investigation, that's

22     right.  And if the case involved war operations, then there was no need

23     for on-site investigations.

24        Q.   Yes.  But even -- even to determine if a person had died in the

25     course of combat, wouldn't you require an on-site investigation?

Page 23596

 1     Otherwise, how would one determine as to what circumstances had led to

 2     the death?

 3        A.   This was done by the teams out in the field, and they made the

 4     relevant assessments.  I was not involved in specific cases, so I can't

 5     tell you more than I did.

 6        Q.   Now, to your knowledge, were on-site investigations conducted

 7     into every body that was discovered in the aftermath of Operation Storm?

 8        A.   On-site investigations within the meaning of the

 9     Law on Criminal Procedure, no, they were not.

10        Q.   And who directed that on-site investigations need not be carried

11     out?

12        A.   Mr. Zidovec drafted instruction as to the manner of the conduct

13     of the sanitisation of human bodies.  He was assistant minister.

14        Q.   Now, in your statement to the Defence you said this - and this is

15     in paragraph 16.  You say:

16             "The team for clearing up as a rule would include an officer of

17     the crime police, one officer each from all the services that are able to

18     make decisions, and a forensic pathologist."

19             Now what was the role of the officer from the crime police within

20     the sanitation teams?  What was his role?

21        A.   They were part of the team, and they were under strict

22     instructions from the ministry.  I cannot go into the details of it,

23     since I'm not familiar with them.

24        Q.   Mr. Cetina, the crime police in the Zadar-Knin Police

25     Administration comes under your jurisdiction - isn't it? - they're your

Page 23597

 1     subordinate officers.  Isn't that right?

 2        A.   Yes.

 3        Q.   Now, your subordinate officers are sent out to the field as part

 4     of a team, and is it your position that you didn't know what they were

 5     doing out there?  You didn't know why -- as to why your subordinate

 6     officers were made a part of a team?

 7        A.   No.  They were under the jurisdiction of the

 8     Ministry of the Interior.  And it was in this way that the teams were

 9     formed.

10        Q.   So you had no information at all from your crime police officers

11     as to what they were doing within the sanitation teams.  That's your

12     evidence?

13        A.   I knew the number of the individuals processed in the field, but

14     I did not discuss the details.

15        Q.   Now, were you aware that a decision had been taken, in fact, by

16     the crime police not to carry out on-site investigations in the course of

17     the sanitation work?

18             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  And I refer to, for the record,

19     evidence D234, D235, and D236, for the information of the Trial Chamber.

20        Q.   Are you aware that there was a decision not to carry out on-site

21     investigations prior to the disposal of the bodies?

22        A.   No.

23        Q.   Let me show you a document, Mr. Cetina.

24             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Mr. Registrar, may I have D235, please.

25        Q.   Do you notice, Mr. Cetina, that in paragraph 1 it says:

Page 23598

 1             "Since, in the area of the army activity, war operations are

 2     being conducted, it is crucial to carry out clearing up the terrain in

 3     that area and it is our task to carry out the identification of persons

 4     in the prescribed manner.  And it is not necessary to conduct on-site

 5     investigations.  Mr. Maric will carry out coordination of the above."

 6             Now, you didn't know about this?

 7        A.   No.  I was not aware of the minutes.

 8        Q.   Thank you.  Very well.

 9             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  May I have P2652, please, Mr. Registrar.

10        Q.   Now, you said that you were not involved in any substantial way

11     in the sanitation work.  But were you -- were you involved in exhuming

12     bodies that been disposed of in an incorrect manner?

13        A.   No, I was not.

14        Q.   Can you explain -- do you recognise the document that is on your

15     screen?

16        A.   I can see that it bears my signature.

17        Q.   You say you can see that it bears your signature, meaning you

18     don't recollect the document -- have you no recollection of this

19     document, or do you admit that it's a document written by you?  What are

20     you exactly saying when you say that it bears your signature?

21        A.   The document which does not have an actual signature of mine is a

22     coded message, and it contains a letter written by someone, I suppose it

23     was Mr. Batur, who signed documents on the sanitisation of human bodies

24     on my behalf.

25        Q.   Are you suggesting that Mr. Batur signed documents and you were

Page 23599

 1     not aware of the subject matter of this letter that he signed on your

 2     behalf?  Is that your position?

 3        A.   It could so happen that if I was not present in the police

 4     administration, and very often I was not, and he had to send a report to

 5     the Ministry of Interior.

 6        Q.   Now, Mr. Cetina, are you familiar at all with the content of this

 7     document, the subject matter of this document?  Do you know anything

 8     about it?

 9        A.   I don't remember.

10        Q.   Okay.  Moving on, Mr. Cetina.  Were you involved in monitoring

11     the collection centres in your area of responsibility, where civilians

12     and/or prisoners of war were kept?

13        A.   Yes, I was familiar with it.

14             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Mr. Registrar, can I have P904, please.

15        Q.   As you will see in a moment, Mr. Cetina, a document written by

16     you, relating to collection centres.  And you can already see the

17     Croatian version on your screen.  It's sent to Operation Povratak to the

18     Ministry of the Interior headquarters and your sending it in response in

19     relation to a document, telegram dated 4th August, 1994.  You -- this is

20     what you report:

21             "Up to 0500 hours on 6 August 1995, the following prisoners are

22     in the collection centre."

23             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  And then, Mr. Registrar, if we could move to

24     page 2.

25        Q.   Then have you a list of persons and the you say:

Page 23600

 1             "There are 135 elderly people and children in the holding

 2     centre."

 3             And there is further explanation, and you have signed this

 4     document.

 5             Now, we examined this document, Mr. Cetina.  First of all, let me

 6     ask you this:  Are you familiar with this document?

 7        A.   I am.  But I didn't sign it.  And I can see it now, that I

 8     didn't.

 9        Q.   Do you -- was it somebody who had signed this document on your

10     behalf?

11        A.   Somebody signed and was authorised to do so, but I can't

12     recognise the signature.

13        Q.   Now, Mr. Cetina, if someone signs a document on your behalf, do

14     you consider it as a document issued by you, or are you claiming -- are

15     you washing your hands of that document?

16        A.   No, I don't wash my hands of it.  I trusted my associates.

17        Q.   Then -- I can tell you that we've gone through this document and

18     amongst that first category of people where you say the following

19     prisoners are in the collection centre, there is a list of persons.

20     There are a number of elderly people recorded as prisoners there.  For

21     example, number 4, we're going by the dates of birth, number 6,

22     number 7, 8, 12, et cetera.

23             Now, can you explain to the Trial Chamber why elderly people were

24     being held as prisoners in these collection centres?

25        A.   I suppose that they were members of units or were known as

Page 23601

 1     perpetrators of criminal offences.

 2        Q.   Mr. Cetina, there is, at page -- number 8, for example, a person

 3     born in 1922 being held as a prisoner.  Is it your position that these

 4     elderly people were also considered as being members of units of the RSK?

 5     That your position?

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Ms. Mahindaratne, does it make any sense that where

 7     the witness said it was either for this reason or another reason then to

 8     go first through the one which seems to be less obvious?

 9             Why not ask the witness in what of the two categories this person

10     was, if he knows.

11             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Very well.  Yes, Mr. President.

12        Q.   You heard the question.  Of the two categories that you

13     mentioned, that they were either members of units or were known to be

14     perpetrators of criminal offences, are you able to, for example, say the

15     person, for example, registered at number 8, who was born in 1922, in

16     what capacity he was being held?

17        A.   In my view, the ages may not necessarily be significant when it

18     comes to these considerations.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Cetina, could you please answer the question.

20     Do you know the reason why this person born in 1922 was detained as a

21     prisoner?  Do you know?  If so, please tell us; if you don't know,

22     please, tell us as well.

23             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I told you what my opinion was, and

24     my answer to this question is no.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

Page 23602

 1             Please proceed.

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

 3        Q.   Then on the second page --

 4             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  And, Mr. Registrar, if you could go to page 2.

 5        Q.    -- you also record that there are 135 elderly people and

 6     children in the holding centre.

 7             Now, why were elderly people and children being kept in a holding

 8     centre?  And I'm using the term that you have used.  Can you explain to

 9     the Trial Chamber.

10             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. President --

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Word "kept" does not appear.

12             MR. MISETIC:  I'd also --

13             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Why would they --

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, that's apparently what you would like to ask

15     the witness.

16             Mr. Misetic.

17             MR. MISETIC:  I'd also ask that we check the translation of the

18     word "holding," because I think it is important to what the original

19     actually says, and it's a term that the Chamber will be familiar with.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Then could I invite --

21             I know that this is not the way to verify translations.  At the

22     same time, if we ask for a formal review of the translation, then the

23     witness might have been gone.  So let's, as a preliminary and exceptional

24     exercise, could I invite a native-speaking person -- or could I ask the

25     witness --

Page 23603

 1             Could you please slowly read the first sentence which comes after

 2     item 23 which apparently start with "u prihvatnom Centru ..."

 3             Could you read that line -- that sentence slowly.

 4             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] "In the reception centre, there are

 5     135 elderly persons and children."

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Ms. Mahindaratne, please proceed.

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

 8        Q.   Mr. Cetina, moving on to another area.

 9             In your testimony given to the OTP, you have addressed the case

10     of Varivode and Gosici, you know, as one of the crimes --

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Ms. Mahindaratne, if -- sorry for interrupting you.

12     Does this mean that you're not interested to hear from this witness why

13     135 elderly people and children were in a reception centre?

14             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Yes, Mr. President.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Okay.  Thank you.

16             Please proceed.

17             MS. MAHINDARATNE:

18        Q.   I'm sorry.  Going back to the issue we were discussing, the

19     Varivode and Gosici case, you have referred to as one of the crimes

20     solved by one of your officers.  And, in fact, you have said that it was

21     initiated by you and you're very proud of the outcome.

22             Isn't it correct that the principle basis on which the accused

23     were charged in relation to both those cases, Varivode and Gosici

24     murders, were their own confessions made to the investigating judge?

25        A.   I don't know what reached the investigating judge.  We are not a

Page 23604

 1     party appearing before the investigating judge.

 2        Q.   Mr. Cetina, this Trial Chamber has heard a lot of evidence of the

 3     Varivode and Gosici case, and, in fact, those judgements are also in

 4     evidence.

 5             Now, are you -- now have you, in fact, taken credit for that case

 6     as being one of the cases that you initiated and your officers solved.

 7             Now, are you then aware that the basis on which they were charged

 8     was the confessions made by the accused to the investigative judge?  Are

 9     you aware of that?

10        A.   I don't remember that.  In the preliminary proceedings, they did

11     make a confession, but I don't recall what happened from there on.

12        Q.   Now, are you aware that the trial court acquitted the accused in

13     relation to that case?  Are you aware of that?

14        A.   No.

15        Q.   Mr. Cetina, in the statement given to the OTP, you, in fact,

16     claim credit for these two cases.  And you're still -- now telling the

17     Trial Chamber that you don't even know the outcome of these cases.  Is

18     that what you are saying?  The basis on which the persons were charged.

19        A.   I am familiar with what happened until the end of the preliminary

20     proceedings.  Thereupon, I left Zadar and I didn't know what -- which

21     course the proceedings took.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Ms. Mahindaratne, I'm wondering what the relevance

23     is of knowing whether this witness rightly or wrongly claims any credit

24     for the work done in relation to this case.  Is that.

25             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  No, Mr. President, it's was just that there is

Page 23605

 1     evidence to the effect, before the Trial Chamber, that, in fact, that

 2     case has not -- was not, in fact, solved.  I'm just addressing Court to

 3     testimony of Witness Zganjer.  I don't know whether --

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  No, the only thing I'm asking, what is the relevance

 5     of whether this witness is right or wrong in claiming or at least saying

 6     that his service did a good job - whether it was a good job or bad job,

 7     we can consider that - but what's the relevance?

 8             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  It's the credibility of this witness,

 9     Mr. President, that I was testing.  But I will move on.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, please do so.

11             MS. MAHINDARATNE:

12        Q.   Mr. Cetina, I have only a couple more questions to you.  And I --

13             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  If we could have, Mr. Registrar, D1745.

14        Q.   That's the statement that you made to the Office of

15     the Prosecutor.  And this is in the English page 11, paragraph 4; and in

16     the Croatian version, page 9, paragraph 4.

17             Now, this is -- you talk about police -- authority of the police

18     officers in addressing crimes.

19              "The police were not allowed by law to search someone or their

20     vehicle without a court order.  You could stop and check someone in

21     civilian clothes, but you could not search that person.  If, for example,

22     the police pulled over a car and found a weapon in the trunk, and if they

23     did not have a court order, then the evidence would be dismissed for any

24     subsequent court proceedings."

25             And I'm trying to understand your testimony, Mr. Cetina.  Now,

Page 23606

 1     according to what you say, if a person in a vehicle, be it a civilian or

 2     a soldier, was stopped at a civilian police check-point, and if that

 3     civilian police officer could see that the vehicle was carrying goods,

 4     such as TVs and radios, suspected looted goods, are you saying that he

 5     cannot search the vehicle and take that into custody without a court

 6     order, or is that not what you meant -- meant to say in the statement?

 7        A.   I will try to answer it.

 8             If the object of a crime is visible, then this could be deemed as

 9     a checking procedure and would be valid before a court of law.  However,

10     if the evidence of a crime needs prior searching of the vehicle or the

11     premises, then this is something that requires a court order.

12        Q.   So, as such, according to what you say, the police had the --

13     there was no impediment for the police to take into custody looted goods,

14     if detected, at a civilian check-point.  Isn't that correct?

15        A.   Yes, that's -- yes.

16        Q.   Now, on -- I need -- just seeking further clarification -- a

17     similar one --

18             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  This is the same statement, page 14,

19     paragraph 2 in the English version, and in the Croatian version, page 11,

20     the last paragraph.

21        Q.   You said that:

22             "You ask about crimes and how they were recorded when complaints

23     were made to the MUP by civilians.  And if crimes were reported that were

24     committed by soldiers, then the person who reported the crime would have

25     been told that if soldiers were involved, it had to be reported to the

Page 23607

 1     military police.  Those were the applicable rules.  I concede that ...

 2     MUP could have recorded the reports.  I'm not denying.  But they did

 3     nothing wrong in saying that the matter be reported to the military

 4     police."

 5             So was it the case when a civilian goes to the nearest police

 6     station or to the nearest civilian policemen and reports that military --

 7     a member of the army or somebody in military uniform was seen in

 8     committing a crime, they would be asked to go and report the matter to

 9     the military police.  Is that what you're saying here?

10        A.   As a rule, this is what we did.  We would inform the military

11     police if there were indications that HV members may be suspected of

12     having committed a crime.

13        Q.   Okay.  I probably -- you're properly misunderstood here.

14             So what you're saying here is that you, the police, would then

15     inform the military police, not ask the complainant to go to the military

16     police?

17        A.   As a rule, yes.

18        Q.   Thank you for that.

19             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Mr. President, I have no further questions.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Ms. Mahindaratne.

21             Mr. Kay, any re-examination?

22             MR. KAY:  Yes, thank you, Your Honour.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  But before we do so, I would like to inform the

24     parties that at the request of the Chamber the famous "Zolja" line has

25     been reviewed and as a result - and this will be later confirmed in an

Page 23608

 1     official memo - but as matters stand now, what the witness said - and

 2     this is also for you, Mr. Cetina, because there was quite a bit of

 3     confusion about those lines.  As matters stand now, the Chamber

 4     understands that you said the following:

 5             "I am not an expert in war operations, but I could see that the

 6     houses were set on fire and destroyed.  As for any other perception, I

 7     cannot give you that, nor the way it was done or by whom, I don't know."

 8             Now, I was also informed that it took a while -- it needed

 9     listening a couple of times before -- in reviewing this text, those who

10     did this job were able to exactly hear and that there apparently was a

11     word which, at least, has a Z and an O in it as well, which may have

12     caused the confusion.  But I think now it's clear that all the questions

13     about Zoljas or soldiers, or whatever, are moot.

14             Please proceed.

15             MR. KAY:  I can claim no credit, as I was on the wrong track

16     totally at the time, and others informed me of the matter, Your Honour.

17     So I thank you them for their keen ears on the matter.

18             Re-examination now.

19                           Re-examination by Mr. Kay:

20        Q.   I'd like you to look at a document, please, Mr. Cetina.  It's

21     D1756.

22             THE INTERPRETER:  Mr. Kay, could you kindly get closer to the

23     microphone, please.  Thank you.

24             MR. KAY:

25        Q.   This is a letter that was sent from the International Committee

Page 23609

 1     of the Red Cross to General Cermak, and you can see your name is -- is

 2     written on the top in handwriting.  And the word "urgent."  "Mr. Cetina,

 3     urgent."

 4             And if we go -- if we could just look at the content of this

 5     page, the author is asking personal intervention:

 6             "We expect results of the investigation following our verbal and

 7     written reports.  We" -- and is reminding again about serious incidents

 8     reported to our personnel during visits to neighbouring villages.

 9             So this is the Red Cross, writing to General Cermak and expecting

10     results of investigation following our verbal and written reports.

11             And then we see, on the next page, a list of places:  Golubic,

12     the 6th of September; Ridjane; Ridjane; Varivode, with details from the

13     Red Cross.

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

15        Q.   Further details.  And at E, Zrmanja.  Again, all of which are

16     reports of crimes.

17             And then on the last page.

18             MR. KAY:  If we can turn to the last page.

19             We seem to have a problem on the screen, Your Honour.  I do.

20     Does anyone else?

21             There we are.  Thank you.

22        Q.   And you can see here in the last sentence:

23             "Thank you for your personal intervention, and in expectation of

24     results, send you our regards."

25             This letter, then, which has your name on it, came to

Page 23610

 1     General Cermak and is a list of serious crimes that had occurred which

 2     the Red Cross expected to have information about and results.

 3             Do you recollect receiving this document with these particular

 4     incidents as identified?

 5        A.   I apologise, but I am unable to see the last page you referred

 6     to.

 7        Q.   There's the -- oh.

 8             MR. KAY:  If it could be blown up a little bit.

 9        Q.   Can you read that now?

10        A.   No, I don't see the page at all.

11             MR. KAY:  There was something on our screens that indicated some

12     sort of problem.

13                           [Defence counsel confer]

14             MR. KAY:

15        Q.   This is the last page, signed by someone called Carmen Burger.

16     And as I pointed out, has the:

17             "Thank you for your personal intervention, and in expectation of

18     results ..."

19             Can you see that?  You can't see anything?

20             MR. KAY:  If can I have a hard copy while others ...

21             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Now I see it.

22             MR. KAY:  If can you still get it out, yeah.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  The witness sees it, he says.

24             MR. KAY:

25        Q.   Are you able to see it now?  Can you see the name Carmen Burger?

Page 23611

 1        A.   I can see it.

 2        Q.   Would you like to go back to the beginning of the document?

 3     Would that help you?  We've had an interruption here.

 4        A.   Please.

 5        Q.   Yes.

 6             MR. KAY:  If we could go back to the first page.  It's

 7     Exhibit D1756.  In Croatian, if anyone has got a Croatian language

 8     version.

 9        Q.   Can you see that on the screen now, the big screen?

10        A.   I can see it.

11        Q.   Yes.  Mr. Cetina, urgent, 7th of September, 1995.  Letter to

12     General Cermak.  And this letter "expects results of the investigation

13     following our verbal and written reports."

14             Do you recollect receiving this letter forwarded to you?

15        A.   Yes, I do.

16        Q.   Thank you.  And we've looked at what was inside the letter.

17             MR. KAY:  Can we turn now to P2649.

18        Q.   Can you see that, Mr. Cetina?  This is a letter dated the

19     10th of October.  It actually comes from you.  And it's for the attention

20     of General Cermak.  And it's in reply to the request of the

21     International Red Cross Organisation for submission of data on incidents.

22             "We hereby advise you we've completed the necessary checks

23     regarding each event mentioned in the letter."

24             And we see there the places set out:  Golubic; Ridjane; Ridjane;

25     Varivode.

Page 23612

 1             MR. KAY:  Page 2, please.

 2        Q.   Zrmanja.  And your response to each of those particular

 3     incidents -- for instance, if we look at Zrmanja, a thorough criminal

 4     investigation is being conducted into all the murders and with the object

 5     of identifying the unknown perpetrators.

 6             So looking at this chain of events, was Mr. Cermak ordering you

 7     to investigate; or was he doing something else, in relation to the

 8     information provided to him by the Red Cross?

 9             Perhaps you can describe it.

10        A.   We did not see it as an order.  He simply requested notification,

11     given that the original request was put in by the ICRC.

12        Q.   Was Mr. Cermak doing anything wrong by forwarding this

13     information to you?

14        A.   No.

15        Q.   Was he putting himself in a position whereby he was commanding

16     you?

17        A.   No.

18             MR. KAY:  If we just go and look, then, at one of the incidents.

19     If we can -- which was referred to as being the Simo Dokic matter.

20             If we go to 65 ter 2D00770.

21        Q.   This predates the response to Mr. Cermak, but it's from the crime

22     police department to the 72nd Police Department, dated 18th of September.

23             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Mr. President, I hate to interrupt, by I

24     wonder whether we could have the English document also on the screen.  I

25     hope I'm not creating any trouble for the Registrar.

Page 23613

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  We have some trouble in showing all the documents on

 2     the screen, and that's why, as Mr. Registrar informed me, we have found a

 3     kind of a solution which, first of all, serves the witness to have

 4     access.

 5             Ms. Mahindaratne, I take it that this is a released document in

 6     e-court by the Defence which you can consult.

 7             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  I will follow -- I will follow through my own

 8     personal --

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  And, of course, the Chamber is a bit

10     handicapped here as well but ...

11             Please proceed.

12             MR. KAY:  I will just repeat the number if it helps people,

13     65 ter 2D00770.

14        Q.   I'm just giving people a bit of time, Mr. Cetina, to find an

15     English version of the document because we have some technical problems.

16             And can you see this document from your crime police department

17     written to the 72nd Battalion before that response you gave to

18     Mr. Cermak, requesting the identification of persons suspected of being

19     involved in one of the previous incidents?

20             Do you identify that as a letter from your crime police

21     department?

22        A.   Yes, I do.

23             MR. KAY:  Your Honour, may this document be exhibited, please.

24             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  No objection.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar.

Page 23614

 1             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, that will become Exhibit D1765.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  And is admitted into evidence.

 3             Please proceed.

 4             MR. KAY:  If we can go now to 65 ter 2D00774.

 5        Q.   This is a document dated the 18th of September from the crime

 6     police department of the police station in Knin under

 7     Zadar-Knin Police Administration.  And it's an on-site investigation

 8     report, containing the date of the 18th of September, compiled on behalf

 9     of the police station.

10             MR. KAY:  If we turn to the next page.

11        Q.   We can see during the on-site investigation the official

12     established the following:  The fact of the investigation at the Dokici

13     hamlet; the site was not secured and has changed because a number of

14     people and vehicles passed along the street during the course of the

15     night and day; reference to empty bullet shells; photographs by

16     technicians; and time of completion.

17             Is that a correct on-site investigation report from the crime

18     police department at Knin police station?

19        A.   Yes.

20             MR. KAY:  Your Honour, might this be made an exhibit, please.

21             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  No objection.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar.

23             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, that becomes Exhibit D1766.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  And is admitted into evidence.

25             MR. KAY:  And if we could go now to 2D00773.

Page 23615

 1        Q.   From Zadar-Knin Police Administration, 7th Police Station, Knin.

 2     14th of November, 1995.  A document to the municipal public prosecutor in

 3     Zadar.  Criminal report against an unknown perpetrator concerning

 4     Simo Dokic, whom we've seen in the original letter from Carmen Burger.

 5     And then giving details of what happened.

 6             MR. KAY:  If we turn to the next page.

 7        Q.   We see documents that were attached, including that notification

 8     of the identity of military personnel of the 72nd Battalion that was sent

 9     to the military police of the Knin Company.  And we see this was sent by

10     Mr. Gambiroza, the commander of the Knin police station.

11             Is this a correct procedure of a criminal report?

12        A.   This is a complete and regular procedure.

13        Q.   At this stage, of course, Knin police station was under the

14     Zadar-Knin Police Administration, rather than the Kotar-Knin

15     Police Administration; is that right?

16        A.   Yes.

17        Q.   Thank you.

18             MR. KAY:  Your Honour, may this document be made an exhibit.

19             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  No objection.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar.

21             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, that will become Exhibit D1767.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  And is admitted into evidence.

23             MR. KAY:

24        Q.   Now, in this procedure, which originated from the letter of

25     Carmen Burger that was passed on to you by -- by General Cermak, beyond

Page 23616

 1     that passing on of the information, did General Cermak have any role to

 2     play in relation to this case or any of the other cases that were listed

 3     within the letter?  Any official role?

 4        A.   No.

 5        Q.   Did he have any unofficial role, any role that was outside the

 6     system, whereby he was in any way part of the process?

 7        A.   No.

 8        Q.   Thank you.

 9             When Mr. Cermak sent a letter such as that to you, was he giving

10     you a task?  And by a "task," I mean a specific -- a command?

11        A.   No.

12        Q.   Did you have any obligation to report back to him?  We see your

13     letter concerning the information about the cases.  Did you have any

14     obligation to send that to him?

15        A.   No.

16        Q.   The purpose of sending that to him in the letter that you sent

17     was for what reason?

18        A.   It was just to inform him.

19        Q.   Did you yourself have meetings with the lady, Carmen Burger, of

20     the International Committee of the Red Cross?

21        A.   No.

22        Q.   You described having meetings with -- or your police

23     administration and you having meetings with UNCIVPOL.  Was the Red Cross

24     involved with those UNCIVPOL meetings in any way?

25        A.   No, I don't remember that.

Page 23617

 1        Q.   Thank you.

 2             In relation to those cases within Carmen Burger's letter that was

 3     sent on to you, could Mr. Cermak order you to investigate those ten or so

 4     cases?

 5        A.   No.

 6        Q.   In passing on that information, is -- is Mr. Cermak fulfilling

 7     any sort of duty or role under the Law on Criminal Procedure of the

 8     Republic of Croatia?

 9        A.   Regarding the law, he enjoyed the same status as an ordinary

10     citizen would.

11        Q.   And are you familiar with Article 142 of the

12     Law of Criminal Procedure of the Republic of Croatia?

13        A.   Yes, I am.

14        Q.   And what does that say?

15        A.   It says - at least as far as I can recall - that all information

16     about crimes should be forwarded by citizens, and institutions are

17     obliged to advise the competent authorities.  That is to say, the state

18     prosecutor's office.

19             MR. KAY:  If we could just have a look that on the screen.

20             Oh, D1568, Exhibit D1568.  Page 3 in the translation.  We have

21     extracts.

22             If we could have it in the -- is it possible to get it in the

23     Croatian on the screens?  Page 31 in the Croatian.

24        Q.   And it's in subclause (1):

25             "If there are reasonable grounds to suspect that a crime which is

Page 23618

 1     prosecuted ex officio has been committed.  Internal affairs organs shall

 2     be required to take the necessary measures to find the perpetrator."

 3             And we see the rest of it:  to detect, et cetera, gather all

 4     information which may be of use for the successful conduct of criminal

 5     proceedings.

 6             MR. KAY:  I haven't read it all out there.

 7        Q.   And what General Cermak was doing there, passing on information

 8     to you, does that then cause the police to be in the position of being

 9     able to suspect that a crime has been committed?

10        A.   Yes.

11             MR. KAY:  Keeping, in the Croatian, section 140 there, but going

12     back in the English one page.

13        Q.   Article 140:

14             "In order to uphold social self-protection, citizens should

15     report crimes which are prosecuted ex officio."

16             Is that the duty, then, that you were referring to, civilians, or

17     people, having the duty to pass on information about crimes?

18        A.   Yes.

19        Q.   Thank you.

20             MR. KAY:  If we can go now to P2650.

21        Q.   This is a document that was shown to you and about which you were

22     asked questions.  It's dated the 11th of October, 1995.  And we see the

23     place Bijelina.  And we see the names Dragomir Cotra, Obrad Opacic,

24     someone else Opacic; and the scene of the crime was investigated by an

25     investigating judge; three cartridge cases were found; autopsies

Page 23619

 1     established and gun-shot wounds in the head.  And that is signed by you.

 2     And this was sent to General Cermak.

 3             Do you recollect being asked questions about that yesterday?

 4        A.   Yes.

 5        Q.   Can you recollect why this letter was written to General Cermak

 6     with this information within it?

 7        A.   I cannot.  But it is possible that it was due to a request from

 8     an international institution.  But I don't remember.

 9        Q.   Thank you.

10             Would there be any other reason why you would be informing

11     General Cermak about a particular crime scene?

12        A.   No.

13        Q.   Would writing a letter like this be part of any official

14     procedure of reporting?

15        A.   No.

16        Q.   Did you appreciate at the time that the international

17     organisations were putting great pressure on General Cermak for

18     information --

19             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Mr. President --

20             MR. KAY: -- and results.

21             MS. MAHINDARATNE: -- I object to that question.  That's leading.

22     And this is not a matter that --

23             JUDGE ORIE:  I haven't heard the question yet, to be quite

24     honest.  Mr. Kay started asking about awareness.

25             Was that your question, Mr. Kay?

Page 23620

 1             MR. KAY:  I will put it even clearer.

 2        Q.   Did you know that the international community were putting great

 3     pressure on General Cermak for information, if he could help them provide

 4     it, concerning particular crimes?

 5        A.   Yes.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Ms. Mahindaratne.

 7             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  He has already answered, Mr. President.  My

 8     point was that, for one thing --

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

10             MS. MAHINDARATNE -- it was previously leading, but then the

11     second thing, that it doesn't arise from questions asked during

12     cross-examination.

13             MR. KAY:  Well, it certainly does because look, let's be frank

14     about this, this single letter here has been helped up as some kind of

15     reporting procedure of the police to Mr. Cermak, and --

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  How closely it relates to it.  Let's -- is

17     this a matter of great dispute, first of all, whether the international

18     community was -- was seeking information from Mr. Cermak?  I mean,

19     whether you, then, should use the word "pressure" or not is another

20     matter.

21             Is that in dispute, Ms. Mahindaratne?

22             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  No, Mr. President.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  So, therefore, we are asking the witness about his

24     knowledge of a fact which is in itself not in dispute.

25             So let's see, then, what the follow-up questions are.

Page 23621

 1             MR. KAY:  Yes, and to be frank, Your Honour, this one

 2     document - and I was looking very carefully at the questions by my

 3     learned friend, anticipating in several months' time how this could be a

 4     phrased in the context of a final brief - and the word "tasks" was being

 5     used, "reports."  All these --

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Let's move on, Mr. Kay, and let's see what your next

 7     question is.

 8             MR. KAY:  Yes, thank you.

 9             Let's now go to 2D00784.

10        Q.   This is from the crime police department of the

11     Zadar-Knin Police Administration.  A criminal report had been filed on

12     the 14th of October.  And between the 20th of September and

13     1st of October an unidentified perpetrator, or perpetrators, had

14     committed a crime - the crime of murder, in fact - against two

15     unidentified men, one woman, in Bijelina; details are given.  And on the

16     10th of October, an on-site investigation had taken place with members of

17     the crime police and the investigating judge.

18             MR. KAY:  If we turn to page 2.

19        Q.   External examination.  We see what the pathologist discovered and

20     that members of the police administration are investigating.  The matter

21     is signed by Mr. Kardum.

22             Just so it's clear, has Mr. Cermak got any role to play in

23     relation to this crime investigation and its procedure at all?

24        A.   No.

25        Q.   So is the letter of the 11th of October any form of official

Page 23622

 1     document within the criminal procedure?

 2        A.   No.

 3        Q.   And so did you have to send this document to him, if he had

 4     supplied you with any information about the crime?

 5        A.   No.

 6        Q.   And are you able to say what the purpose of writing him such a

 7     letter would have been?

 8        A.   I don't remember, really.

 9             MR. KAY:  Your Honour, may I make this document an exhibit,

10     please.

11             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  No objections.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar.

13             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, that will become Exhibit D1768.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  And is admitted into evidence.

15             MR. KAY:  Your Honour, I have here a whole file on this matter,

16     which we would bar table, giving the details of the investigation with

17     photographs.  No purpose would be served, I anticipate, in going through

18     this.  It's something that my team have found, and we will send it to the

19     Prosecution and bar table it, and in the fullness of time, hopefully it

20     will come before Your Honours.  If that meets the Court's approval in

21     dealing with this matter at this stage.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  One second, please.

23                           [Trial Chamber confers]

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, Mr. Kay, that's fine.  As far as the Chamber is

25     concerned.

Page 23623

 1             MR. KAY:  Yes, it is untranslated material, but since it was a --

 2     a matter raised, it is an incident, and it may be of interest to the

 3     Court.  We will submit it for translation, and I think that may -- unless

 4     the OTP have a copy of these documents translated already, I don't know.

 5     But I just inform the Court about that.

 6             Thank you.

 7                           [Defence counsel confer]

 8             MR. KAY:

 9        Q.   Just one other area I want to ask you questions about.  And that

10     concerns this meeting in Plitvice on the 15th of September at the

11     Hotel Jezera, and members of the Ministry of Interior military police

12     were there.

13             What was the purpose of that meeting?

14        A.   The purpose of the meeting was, together with the heads of the

15     military police, departments of the ministry, and heads of the

16     departments of the Ministry of Interior, to agree on how to act jointly

17     in the relevant area, given that the -- their cooperation up to that

18     point had not been satisfactory.

19        Q.   You were asked questions about that.  But at this meeting, did

20     anyone from any of the groups of the military police,

21     Ministry of Interior ever say, Well, to sort out law and order in this

22     area, it's General Cermak you've got to speak to.  He's the man who can

23     control it.

24             Did anyone ever suggest General Cermak as being someone who could

25     deal with this?

Page 23624

 1        A.   No.

 2        Q.   Did anyone ever suggest that General Cermak should deal with

 3     this?

 4        A.   No.

 5        Q.   Did anyone suggest that it was General Cermak's responsibility to

 6     deal with this?

 7        A.   No.

 8        Q.   Aside of Plitvice, in all the other meetings that you had - and

 9     we've seen in various documents some of them - did anyone ever suggest

10     that it was General Cermak's responsibility to deal with these crimes

11     that were happening?

12        A.   No.

13        Q.   Did anyone ever suggest that General Cermak should deal with

14     these crimes that were happening, at any of those meetings?

15        A.   No.

16        Q.   There's one other document I'd like to you look at, please.  You

17     were asked questions about freedom of movement, and questions were asked

18     about a document, D499.  We don't have to have that on the screen.

19             And it was put to you:

20             "If the civilian police were not involved in restricting the

21     movement of monitors, why would Mr. Moric have issued an order?"

22             And it that's document.

23             MR. KAY:  Can we look at 65 ter 4420, please.  This is the

24     Prosecution 65 ter.

25        Q.   It's dated 8th of August, 1995.  It's from Mr. Moric to the

Page 23625

 1     police administrations saying Zadar-Knin doesn't include Kotar-Knin.  And

 2     its subject is:

 3             "Arrival of reporters and public figures in the liberated area."

 4             And the first part of the order concerns reporters without

 5     necessary permissions in the area of Petrinja and Plitvice Lakes, but

 6     permission from the Ministry of Defence and Ministry of Interior is

 7     needed for other liberated areas.

 8             And in paragraph 2 of the order it refers:

 9             "When distinguished and generally known public persons enter the

10     liberated area, you must consult the duty operations of the

11     Ministry of Interior Operation Return staff, and for all other persons,

12     access to the liberated area is prohibited until further notice."

13             Do you recollect this particular order?

14        A.   Yes.

15        Q.   And in relation to this order, what did you -- you do?

16        A.   We were duty-bound to forward it down to the lower-level police

17     units.  That's to say, the police stations.  And that's what we did.

18        Q.   No mention here of UNCRO, or the ECMM, or other international

19     organisations.  Could you comment on that?

20        A.   My understanding was, and our understanding was that this had to

21     do with the individuals who were likely to come to the area, since this

22     was shortly after the operation itself.  And that their access was

23     prohibited for reasons of their own safety.

24        Q.   Thank you.

25             MR. KAY:  May this document be made an exhibit, Your Honour.

Page 23626

 1             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  No objection.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar.

 3             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, that becomes Exhibit D1769.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  D1769 is admitted into evidence.

 5             MR. KAY:  Your Honour, I have no further questions in

 6     re-examination.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Kay.

 8             Mr. Mikulicic.

 9             MR. MIKULICIC:  Yes, Your Honour I will have a couple of

10     questions.  But I'm looking at the clock and thinking of whether maybe it

11     will be more convenient to have a break now and then --

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  If it would take more than five minutes --

13             MR. MIKULICIC:  Yes, Your Honour, it will be.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Could I also inquire already with you, Mr. Misetic.

15             MR. MISETIC:  Yes, I'll have 20 minutes or so, Mr. President.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  20 minutes.  We will first have a break, but I would

17     first like to invite Madam Usher to escort Mr. Cetina out of the

18     courtroom.

19                           [The witness stands down]

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Kay, I have one small issue in relation to the

21     questions that were put to the witness in relation to the Brgud event,

22     where two unidentified ladies were found.

23             D1753 was put to the witness; that is, a report in which it's

24     stated that a -- information was received about two bodies, that a police

25     car was sent there, that they had not found any bodies, and that a

Page 23627

 1     thorough search would be made on the morning of the 13th.  And this is

 2     all dated the 12th.

 3             Now, I asked the witness about any reason why these bodies could

 4     not be found, because in P261 we see that on the 13th, in the late

 5     afternoon, that the presence of these bodies is again reported - not,

 6     this time, by UNCRO - but -- and then you say well, look at -- I have

 7     some documents in my -- in the documents I intend to bar table and then

 8     you did that immediately, D1757 and D1758, the one being a crime report

 9     and the other report on an inside investigation.

10             Now, I take it that the whole exercise from both sides is to

11     thoroughly explore how serious information was dealt with and how

12     adequate police investigations were done.  What is missing, in my attempt

13     to get a full picture of what happened, is the morning of the 13th,

14     because we see on the 12th bodies are there, send a police car, cannot

15     find any bodies, but we'll thoroughly investigate the terrain tomorrow

16     morning.  And then on the -- by the end of the 13th, it is reported that

17     two bodies are there.  And then on the 14th we get the on-site

18     investigation.

19             One of the missing parts in this story is what may have happened

20     on the morning of the 13th, what the results of the announced thorough

21     investigation in the terrain would have been, which, of course, also may

22     have some relevance in how quickly one responded, was one -- information

23     sufficient to take it very seriously or would one wait until the second

24     one?  That, apparently, is the issue the parties are struggling with or

25     with disputing about.

Page 23628

 1             Is there any information about what happened on the morning of

 2     the 13th, which might complete the picture?

 3             MR. KAY:  Your Honours, I've said on several occasions we attempt

 4     to put together everything we can, and I think that the Court must

 5     appreciate that we are dealing with incomplete records, generally, in

 6     this case.  To expect, as one would in one's own jurisdiction if one was

 7     dealing with a case current this year, that the whole documentary trail

 8     is alive and present is simply not possible in this case.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  I'm not blaming you for not having it.  But what I'm

10     telling you is that -- that we seriously looked at the evidentiary -- the

11     documentary evidentiary material, as we have it now, and that there is

12     something missing.  And I'm just inquiring in whether -- that morning of

13     the 13th, whether there is any material that could fill in what seems to

14     be, at least in time, a gap.

15             MR. KAY:  I didn't take it any further with this witness because

16     it's to the crime police department.  I anticipated the answers would be

17     given.  And the witness, dealing, who could have dealt with this --

18             JUDGE ORIE:  I would not primarily expect the witness to tell us

19     anything about it, because he already said that he was guessing --

20             MR. KAY:  Yes.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  -- why on the 12th they could not find the bodies in

22     familiarity with the terrain.

23             Ms. Mahindaratne.

24             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Mr. President, I will have our database

25     examined to see if we can find any material to close that gap.

Page 23629

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, because if it's -- it may be clear to the

 2     parties that if it comes to an assessment or a judgement on the adequacy

 3     of responses, that details often are important.

 4             We'll have a break, and we will resume at ten minutes to 1.00.

 5                           --- Recess taken at 12.29 p.m.

 6                           [The witness takes the stand]

 7                           --- On resuming at 12.53 a.m.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Misetic.

 9             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. President, we have had a chance in the break

10     with respect to your last question about that incident, and we have

11     located an Official Note on the 13th concerning all the measures they

12     took.  We will have that translated and submitted to the Chamber.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, that assists because it completes the picture.

14     Thank you very much for your assistance, Mr. Misetic.

15             Mr. Mikulicic.

16             MR. MIKULICIC:  With your permission, Your Honour, we change our

17     order of our re-cross, so I will go first.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Okay.  Don't make a lot of fuss about that.

19             MR. MIKULICIC:  Thank you.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed.

21             MR. MIKULICIC:  Thank you.

22                           Further Cross-examination by Mr. Mikulicic:

23        Q.   Mr. Cetina, the basic task of the police in the territory of the

24     Republic of Croatia was regulated by the Law on the Interior.  Correct?

25        A.   Yes.

Page 23630

 1        Q.   For ease of reference, it is the Law on Internal Affairs, which

 2     was admitted and is now D1077.  So as not to waste any Court time, I will

 3     simply refer to two articles of that Article -- of that law.

 4             In Article 21 of that law, it is stated that, within the

 5     ministry, organisational units of are being set up to carry out policing

 6     tasks.  And these specific organisations were to be called police

 7     administration.

 8             Is it correct, Mr. Cetina - is it not? - that, under the law,

 9     there was a uniformed system of police administrations covering the

10     territory of the Republic of Croatia with the same authorities and duties

11     under the law.  Is that correct?

12        A.   Yes.

13        Q.   By virtue of Article 24 of that law, for special security

14     reasons, in order to keep law and order, or in cases of natural disasters

15     and outbreaks of disease, special units of the Ministry of Interior were

16     to be established.

17             Mr. Cetina, I know that in Croatia, back home, laws are changed

18     frequently and it is difficult to keep track sometimes.  But I will

19     remind that you the basic Law on the Interior was later on amended by the

20     Law on Amendments to the Law of the Interior which has been made an

21     exhibit.  And the number is P1148.

22             By virtue of that law, the duties and role of the special police

23     were clearly prescribed.  And I want to ask you about your -- the extent

24     of your knowledge about that.

25             In Article 11 of the law, which is Exhibit P1148, it is stated

Page 23631

 1     that it is to combat all types of sabotage and terrorist activities in

 2     order to prevent hijacking of vehicles and kidnapping of persons as well

 3     as to release hostages and perform other duties which fall within the

 4     remit of the ministry under "special conditions."

 5             It is for that reason that the special police is being

 6     established?

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Mikulicic, may I ask, is there any dispute as to

 8     the law in force at that time?

 9             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  No, Mr. President.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  No dispute about that.

11             Then what could we expect specifically from this witness?  Can he

12     add something, or is it because -- until now it's a bit unclear to me

13     what --

14             MR. MIKULICIC:  Your Honour, I will go further on, and that was

15     only introduction in my next set of questioning.  Thank you.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Okay.  Then we will wait and here your next

17     questions.

18             MR. MIKULICIC: [Interpretation] I would kindly ask the Registrar

19     to display Exhibit D1084.

20             Mr. Cetina, while we're waiting for the document, my learned

21     friend from the Prosecution asked you about your authority as the chief

22     of the police administration in relation to the special police unit that

23     was within the police administration itself.  And you provided an

24     explanation.

25             I am about to show you a document which the then-minister,

Page 23632

 1     Mr. Ivan Vekic, sent as an order to all police administrations,

 2     including, I presume, the police administration of Zadar, where, in 1995,

 3     you became chief.

 4             MR. MIKULICIC:  So if I may ask the Registrar, please, D1084.

 5             Do we have some technical problems with our e-court?

 6             Now it is -- thank you.

 7        Q.   [Interpretation] Mr. Cetina, let me ask you this first.  Have you

 8     had occasion to see this order in the archives of the Zadar Police

 9     Administration when you assumed your position in 1995?

10        A.   No.

11        Q.   I'd like to direct your attention at paragraph 1, whereby it is

12     ordered that in each police administration a special police unit ought to

13     be formed.

14             Next, paragraph 7, reads:

15             "Special units are to be engaged solely pursuant to decisions

16     issued by the chief of a police administration, and deputy minister of

17     the interior, or the person thus authorised by him."

18             Was this theory translated into practice in keeping with this

19     order?

20        A.   Yes.

21        Q.   If we go to the next page of the document, I'd like to direct

22     your attention at item 8, where it says:

23             "Before engaging a special unit in the area of his

24     administration, the chief of a police administration must obtain

25     clearance from deputy minister or the person authorised by the deputy

Page 23633

 1     minister."

 2             Does the text of the order tally with the practice you

 3     encountered in the performance of your duties?

 4        A.   Yes.

 5        Q.   Next, let's look at item 9 of the document.

 6             It is stated:

 7             "A special unit cannot be used in the territory of another police

 8     administration without a decision of the deputy minister or a person thus

 9     designated by him."

10             This was also implemented, was it not?

11        A.   Yes.

12        Q.   Mr. Cinci -- I apologise.  Mr. Cetina, such a practice was in

13     place in peacetime conditions, rather than in situations in which the

14     special police force was used as part of war operations.  Is that

15     correct?

16        A.   Yes.

17        Q.   Mr. Cetina, I have just called you Mr. Cinci a minute ago.  Hence

18     my question is whether you now Mr. Cinci, as a matter of fact.

19        A.   Yes.

20        Q.   He was the chief of the Split Police Administration while you

21     were the chief of the Zadar Police Administration; correct?

22        A.   Yes.

23        Q.   Is your impression of Mr. Cinci that of a professional, of a

24     person who performed his duties professionally?

25        A.   Yes.

Page 23634

 1        Q.   I will quote to you a portion of his statement he gave before

 2     this Tribunal.

 3             MR. MIKULICIC: [Interpretation] It is Exhibit D1723.

 4        Q.   Perhaps we could have that on the screen.  Otherwise, I'll simply

 5     read out the portion I'm interested in and then I'll ask for your

 6     comment.

 7             Mr. Cinci says as follows in paragraph 2 at page 2 of his

 8     statement:

 9             "The minister of the interior of the Republic of Croatia was, in

10     terms of territory, split between police administrations and,

11     professionally speaking, by sectors.  There was a sector for the regular

12     police, crime police, special police, finance, civil protection, and

13     other sectors."

14             The police administrations also consisted of sectors for basic

15     crime investigation, special police, and then I will skip a portion.

16             "And they were run by chiefs of sectors.  The chiefs of sectors

17     within the police administration were, at the same time, responsible to

18     the PA chiefs and, according to the professional line, to the assistant

19     ministers for their sector?"

20             Do you agree with this interpretation?  Is it the way you see the

21     organisation of the ministry?

22        A.   Yes.

23        Q.   Mr. Cetina, I'll draw your attention next to paragraph 3 where

24     Mr. Cinci says as follows:

25             "The exception was the special police, which, because of the

Page 23635

 1     specific nature of their tasks, had different lines of subordination,

 2     depending on the situation.  For instance, in the special police sector

 3     of my police administration, there were about 200 policemen.  When they

 4     were in Split, in my area of responsibility, the special police commander

 5     was responsible exclusively to me as a police administration chief.  But,

 6     when they participated in joint actions of the special police from

 7     several police administrations, they were under the command of

 8     Mr. Mladen Markac, assistant minister, and Zeljko Sacic, special police

 9     sector chief.

10             "However, when the special police members participated in

11     military police operations, of which there were many, Mr. Markac was

12     responsible to the Main Staff chief of the Croatian Army.  At that

13     moment, Mr. Markac, regardless of the fact that he was assistant minister

14     of the interior, was not responsible to Minister Jarnjak, and he did not

15     have to report to him on anything."

16             Mr. Cetina do you agree with that with this description as given

17     by your colleague, Mr. Cipci?

18        A.   Yes.

19        Q.   Let us move on to another topic which will my last, Mr. Cetina.

20             MR. MIKULICIC:  For that purpose, I would like to ask the

21     Registrar to display D179.

22        Q.   Mr. Cetina, you're a professional, a career policeman.  By the

23     way, how long have you been performing police duties in the various

24     forms?

25        A.   25 years now.

Page 23636

 1        Q.   In the course of your duties as the chief of the Zadar Police

 2     Administration, you had occasion to meet Mr. Jan Elleby, who was the

 3     chief of the CIVPOL in Sector South; correct?

 4        A.   Yes.

 5        Q.   Did you get -- any information or did you gain an impression

 6     of -- about how long he had performed police duties by the time when you

 7     acted as the chief of the Zadar Police Administration?

 8        A.   No.

 9        Q.   Let me ask you this, Mr. Cetina:  As a career policeman, based on

10     your professional experience as well as knowledge of the regulations

11     which defined your remit and official terminology, in official

12     correspondence and communication, did you ever pay attention to the use

13     of terminology you used to describe the events which fell under your

14     competence?

15        A.   Yes.

16        Q.   Do you believe it to be an important part of police work and the

17     performance of police duties?

18        A.   Yes.

19        Q.   Mr. Cetina, before you is a document you were shown a few days

20     ago.  It was sent to you by Mr. Jan Elleby.  The title of which is:

21             "List of murders committed since the 4th of August 1995."

22             Do you understand any death to fall under the category of murder

23     or does it entail something else?  And, if so, please tell us what.

24        A.   A murder only took place if a person was killed -- if the person

25     suffered a violent death.

Page 23637

 1        Q.   Does that entail suspicion of a crime?

 2        A.   In order to establish grounds for suspicion, one needs to carry

 3     out certain activities, in keeping with the Law on Criminal Procedure.

 4             MR. MIKULICIC:  I would kindly ask the Registrar to move to the

 5     next page of this document.

 6        Q.   To repeat, Mr. Elleby titled this document:

 7             "List of murders."

 8             Let us look at paragraph 4 of the document.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Mikulicic, this Chamber is more or less aware of

10     the legal definition of murder.  The Chamber is also aware that

11     Mr. Elleby used the word "murders" on the cover page.  What are we

12     exploring at this moment?  Whether Mr. Elleby, in view of what we see in

13     the document, on the basis of that alone, could not qualify all of the

14     events as murder, so, therefore, he has been imprecise in his language?

15     Or are we further exploring -- I mean, some matters seem to be rather

16     obvious -- if you find two bodies and whether they're murdered or not,

17     often it does not follow from the description.  That's obvious even

18     without any further questions put to the witness.

19             MR. MIKULICIC:  Yes, Your Honour.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  If there is anything else you would like to draw our

21     attention to, please feel free to do so.

22             MR. MIKULICIC:  Yes, Your Honour.  I'm grateful for such position

23     of the Trial Chamber.  I would like just --

24             JUDGE ORIE:  It's not a position.  It's --

25             MR. MIKULICIC:  It is, Your Honour, in fact.

Page 23638

 1             I will just like to stress the Chamber's attention that

 2     paragraph 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 12, 13, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 22, 28, and 32 has

 3     qualifications that one could not undertake under the term of "murder."

 4             And that was my point.  And I would like do ask the witness only

 5     one question on that topic.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Let's be quite clear, since you're talking

 7     about the position of the Chamber.

 8             The way in which the events are described here would not be

 9     sufficient to qualify them as murders, that's more or less -- that's a

10     legal issue.

11             MR. MIKULICIC:  Of course.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Whether Mr. Elleby had any other reasons, for

13     example, reports sent to him, to put these events in his list, is, of

14     course, a totally different matter.  I think we would agree on that.

15     Isn't --

16             MR. MIKULICIC:  We do, Your Honour.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  For example - and I'm not further focussing on

18     Brgud, but - if you look at the other documentation, there may be reasons

19     to believe that there was intention of killing of the two unidentified

20     ladies.  Still not known by whom.  Not sufficient to -- perhaps to

21     qualify it as a murder.  But you need more information than what we find

22     in this document to qualify these events as murder events.  Yes.

23             MR. MIKULICIC:  Yes.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  That's clear.  Then, please put your question to the

25     witness.

Page 23639

 1             MR. MIKULICIC:  Yes, it's clear.  Especially when, for example,

 2     in paragraph 4, well, the event has been previously described as a

 3     murder.  It is stated that was impossible to a certain age or cause of

 4     death.

 5             So it is a bit of --

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, at least --

 7             MR. MIKULICIC:  [Overlapping speakers] ...

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  [Overlapping speakers] ... the one.  I don't know

 9     whether, at any later stage, it had been possible to establish age and

10     cause of death.  But at least, from this document, nothing appears which

11     would qualify number 4 as a murder.  But it's rather a decomposed corpse

12     found.

13             Please proceed.

14             MR. MIKULICIC:  Thank you, Your Honour.

15        Q.   [Interpretation] Mr. Cetina, a question regarding this document.

16             When you received it, did you continue your discussions with

17     Mr. Elleby, concerning these -- qualification of these offences and

18     murder, although they're not supported in the allegations contained in

19     the document?

20             Did you continue your discussions with him on this?

21        A.   As far as I remember, no, I did not.

22        Q.   Thank you.  My last question, Mr. Cetina.  During your tenure as

23     the chief of the Zadar Police Administration, you went through an

24     eventful period; there were a great many activities in the area of

25     responsibility of area police administration.  Had anyone ever, in

Page 23640

 1     relation to you or as far as you know in relation to your associates,

 2     excerpt any sort of pressures along the lines that you should not be

 3     adhering to the law or that you should tolerate crime?  Were you ever a

 4     witness to any such actions?

 5        A.   No.

 6        Q.   Thank you.

 7             MR. MIKULICIC: [Interpretation] I have no further questions.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Mikulicic.

 9             Mr. Misetic, please proceed.

10             MR. MISETIC:  Thank you, Mr. President.

11                           Further cross-examination by Mr. Misetic:

12        Q.   Mr. Cetina, you were asked a few questions about Kistanje, and I

13     would like to ask you a few questions about that.

14             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. Registrar, if we could have on the screen,

15     please, Exhibit D1326, please.

16        Q.   Mr. Cetina, what will come up on the screen is -- should be an

17     assessment of the number of burned houses in Kistanje.  It's based on

18     statistics provided by the UN Military Observers, or UNMOs, from a report

19     they prepared on 4th of November, 1995.

20             MR. MISETIC:  It's D1326.

21        Q.   Now, we have the English on the screen.  Hopefully, you will be

22     able to follow it.

23             In the upper right-hand corner are statistics from the 1991

24     census about the total population, and then in blue you will see a number

25     for the total number of buildings in the village of Kistanje area,

Page 23641

 1     according to the 1991 census.  And the number on the census was 547.  You

 2     will see on the map all of the various hamlets that make up Kistanje.

 3             MR. MISETIC:  And then if we could turn the page, please.

 4        Q.   Then on this chart all of the hamlets that were identified by

 5     UNMO as having been inspected by UNMO from the village of Kistanje are

 6     included here.  And can you see the totals at the bottom, that UNMO

 7     found, as of 4th of November, 101 totally destroyed buildings and

 8     63 partially destroyed buildings.

 9             Now, these statistics would suggest that there were 101 out of a

10     possible 547 totally destroyed buildings in Kistanje as of the

11     4th of November, 1995.  You were asked in cross-examination whether the

12     majority of buildings in Kistanje were destroyed as of, approximately, I

13     believe, the date was 14th of August, that was given to you.

14             My question to you is:  Did you actually do your own inspection

15     of the Kistanje area to check to see how many houses had been destroyed,

16     how many partially destroyed, and how many, in fact, weren't destroyed at

17     all?

18        A.   No.

19        Q.   Okay.  When you told the Presiding Judge that the majority of

20     houses were destroyed as of the 14th of August, what was -- what was that

21     based on?  What did you base that observation on?

22        A.   Based on what I was able to observe as I was passing through the

23     centre of the settlement.  And from what I recall of the houses I saw,

24     quite a few were destroyed.

25        Q.   Okay.  The centre of Kistanje, give us an approximation.  How

Page 23642

 1     many houses are in the centre -- I should say how many buildings are in

 2     the centre of Kistanje, from your recollection?

 3        A.   I don't remember.  But that was the first time I visited the

 4     area.  I think that I, in fact, passed along one street only.

 5        Q.   Well, can you give us an approximation?  Is there -- would you

 6     say there were 200 houses in the centre --

 7             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Mr. President, I think the witness has

 8     answered the question.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Well, I wouldn't disallow Mr. Misetic to a bit

10     further explore, although there is also some risk of --

11             MR. MISETIC:  I'm just trying to understand --

12        Q.   Trying to relate the concept of what it means when you say the

13     majority of houses.  I'm trying to relate that specifically to some

14     figures.

15             Can you give us a ballpark estimate of how many houses, to the

16     best of your recollection, and I'm not asking you to be precise, but to

17     the best of your recollection, in the centre of Kistanje, how many

18     buildings are there?

19        A.   Truly, I didn't count the houses and buildings.  I really don't

20     have an idea of the width of the settlement.

21        Q.   Well, the Chamber has heard evidence from the head of the human

22     rights monitoring teams in Sector South that he was in Kistanje on the

23     13th of August and counted seven houses burned in the centre of Kistanje.

24             Is that consistent or is that roughly --

25             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Mr. President, I had --

Page 23643

 1             MR. MISETIC:  -- coincide with your recollections?

 2             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Mr. President, I object to this.  The witness

 3     has clearly answered that he is unable to give any estimate at all, even

 4     a ballpark figure.  He has been very precise.  And to then explore this

 5     further and to put to the witness other figures given by witnesses is not

 6     appropriate, I believe.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Misetic, I tend to agree.  There's nothing

 8     opposed against -- there's nothing against asking the witness do seek

 9     whether he has any further information.  But until now, all his answers

10     went in the same direction and that is that he had only limited view on

11     the matter.  And then to put all kind of different estimates and to try

12     to find out which he likes most is perhaps not the way we should proceed.

13             MR. MISETIC:  I don't mind, Mr. President, but I'm just -- in

14     anticipation of an argument later that the witness said "totally

15     destroyed" or "majority destroyed."  As long as we're clear that -- I

16     attempted to get a more specific number as to what that really means

17     and --

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  What we know is that the witness told us that

19     he doesn't know exactly where the boundaries of Kistanje are, that he

20     drove through the centre, and that when he uses the word "majority" that

21     that might be influenced by his limited sight of -- of the location.

22     That --

23             MR. MISETIC:  Thank you, Mr. President.

24             JUDGE ORIE: -- seems to be the core.  And then, of course, we

25     have to evaluate the evidence of this witness, together with all the

Page 23644

 1     other evidence.

 2             MR. MISETIC:  Thank you, Mr. President.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed.

 4             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. Registrar, if I could have Exhibit D915,

 5     please.

 6        Q.   Mr. Cetina, I'm going to show you an Official Note of a interview

 7     of Mr. Zvonimir Lasan in the course of the Varivode investigation.

 8             MR. MISETIC:  And if we could turn to page 4 in the Croatian,

 9     please.

10        Q.   Now, I would turn your attention to that first paragraph in the

11     Croatian towards the bottom.  And the last sentence Mr. Lasan, in his

12     police interview, said:

13             "Aside from this murder, Zvonimir states that he didn't kill or

14     shoot at anyone else after Operation Storm, besides shooting at some

15     Chetniks during the operation and burning one house when they enter

16     Kistanje, which he thought was a Chetnik house because he saw a lot of

17     books there that were mostly in Cyrillic and a picture of a man in a

18     Yugoslav uniform."

19             Now, my question to you is:  When Mr. Lasan acknowledged at least

20     setting one house on fire in Kistanje during Operation Storm, did the

21     police open a further investigation into Mr. Lasan and his associates who

22     were then being suspected of the Varivode murders to see what else they

23     may have done in Kistanje during Operation Storm?

24        A.   I don't remember.  These are the details of a case in which the

25     criminal investigation police was engaged, and I don't remember what

Page 23645

 1     steps were taken.

 2        Q.   Well, would you agree with me, on the basis of this Official

 3     Note, there at least was some information available to the police as to

 4     who it might have been involved in setting fire to houses during

 5     Operation Storm in Kistanje?

 6        A.   Yes.

 7        Q.   I'd like to turn your attention now to this issue of MUP acting

 8     towards HV members.

 9             MR. MISETIC:  And, Mr. Registrar, if could I have Exhibit D57 on

10     the screen, please.

11        Q.   I will try to show you several examples, Mr. Cetina.  This is the

12     Knin police station log-book.

13             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. Registrar, if we could go first to English

14     page 43 and Croatian page 43, please.

15        Q.   Looking at the first entry, number 147, the police report that

16     they stopped a passenger vehicle with members of the Croatian army who

17     were transporting different household appliances.  And the course of

18     action taken is the duty officer of the 72nd Military Police Battalion

19     Sergeant 1st Class, Knezic [phoen], who took over the case.

20             MR. MISETIC:  If we turn to English page 72, Croatian page 76.

21        Q.   This is entry number 223.  This is the 29th of August.  The

22     police car patrol brought from the Krka check-point three persons in a

23     passenger car.  It goes on to say that -- towards the bottom, they were

24     wearing Croatian army uniforms, although they are not members of the

25     Croatian army.  Course of action taken is they were handed over to the

Page 23646

 1     crime police officer who confiscated the goods from them and issued a

 2     relevant receipt.  These three persons left the premises of the first

 3     police station at 2200 hours.

 4             MR. MISETIC:  The next entry is at page 86 in the English,

 5     page 93 in the Croatian.

 6        Q.   This is entry 248.  On the 2nd of September, at 1210 hours, at

 7     the police station Kistanje, the duty officer reported that their

 8     officers had stopped two HV personnel and one MUP personnel who were

 9     transporting items.

10             Then there's the course of action that they took against the two

11     HV and one police officer who were in this car.

12             Mr. Cetina, I won't take more time, but I will tell you that

13     there's well over a dozen such examples of -- in this log-book alone of

14     police taking action against either persons who were confirmed to be

15     members of the HV or were wearing Croatian army uniforms and the police

16     took action against them.

17             And if I could show you one additional exhibit.

18             MR. MISETIC:  This is Exhibit D486, please.  And this will be ...

19                           [Defence counsel confer]

20             MR. MISETIC:  This is under seal, Mr. Registrar.

21        Q.   Now this is a report, Mr. Cetina, about an incident that took

22     place on the 19th of September.  And if you read through it, it talks

23     about this incident taking place at a check-point.

24             "The car had no registration plates.  When the officials

25     Mladen Zuteg [phoen] and Arsen Stefanic [phoen] pulled over the car, the

Page 23647

 1     co-driver," and then it gives the HV member's military police post

 2     address, "pulled over the car, the co-driver, Miroslav Lucin [phoen],

 3     came into oral conflict with the aforementioned policemen, offending

 4     them, and preventing them in exercising their duty.  Then he sat in the

 5     driver's seat aiming to drive away.  The policeman Arsen Stefanic fired

 6     two rounds of ammunition from a machine-gun in the rear left car tire to

 7     prevent him to drive away.

 8             "The officials in the 6th Police Station Benkovac and

 9     72nd Battalion of the Military Police Benkovac operated on the site.

10     Miroslav Lucin was brought into the premises of the 72nd MPs," et cetera.

11             And I can tell you, the Chamber has Exhibit D842, which is the

12     military police's report of this incident.  And that report shows that,

13     in fact, the military police were not at this check-point when the shots

14     were fired by the policemen to stop the car.  They were only called in

15     after the HV member was detained.

16             Mr. Cetina, looking at this material, would you agree with me

17     that, while officers may have been afraid in certain circumstances to

18     take action, there were, in fact, numerous occasions when your police

19     officers, in fact, did take action against persons in military uniforms,

20     whether they were in the HV formally or not?

21        A.   Yes.

22        Q.   Now, I would like to show you three final documents, and this has

23     to do with the issue of sanitation of the terrain and whether there were

24     investigations carried out.

25             MR. MISETIC:  And, Mr. Registrar, if we could have Exhibit D1396

Page 23648

 1     on the screen, please.

 2        Q.   You were asked questions by the Prosecution concerning a meeting

 3     on the 6th of August in which there was a discussion about -- in the

 4     sanitation of terrain there -- operative investigations did not have to

 5     be conducted.  You testified that you weren't aware of that conversation.

 6     And I'd like to show you three on-site investigations.  This is from the

 7     11th of August; it's from the Sibenik Police Administration.  If you look

 8     towards the bottom it says, under point 1:

 9             "The on-site investigation is conducted based on information

10     received from an unknown member of the 142nd Brigade."

11             At the top, it says the date of commission is 6 August 1995.

12             MR. MISETIC:  If we turn the page, please.

13        Q.   You'll see, under point 6, an on-site investigation, in fact, was

14     carried out.  And if we look through that, can you see the results of the

15     on-site investigation.

16             In the interests of time, Mr. Cetina, I will tell you that there

17     at least two other such on-site investigations for bodies found prior to

18     the 10th of August, and those are D1397 and D1398.

19             My question to you, Mr. Cetina, is:  In fact, it was up to the

20     sanitation teams -- let me rephrase that.

21             In fact, investigations of bodies found did go on immediately

22     after Operation Storm, as far as you know, if circumstances dictated that

23     there was a suspicion that something of a criminal nature may have taken

24     place.

25             Is that correct?

Page 23649

 1        A.   Yes.

 2        Q.   Thank you, Mr. Cetina.

 3             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. President, I have in further questions.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.

 5             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Mr. President, just for clarity of the record,

 6     Mr. Misetic mentioned the discussion with regard to the sanitation issue

 7     and that was not 6th August.  7th August.  I just wished to point that

 8     out.

 9             MR. MISETIC:  That's fine, Mr. President.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, I was trying to find it, as a matter of fact,

11     but I couldn't find it.

12                           [Trial Chamber confers]

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Cetina, Judge Kinis has one or more questions

14     for you.

15                           Questioned by the Court:

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Cetina, Judge Kinis has one or more questions

17     for you.

18             JUDGE KINIS:  Mr. Cetina, I would like to -- referring back to

19     Exhibit D598.  This is a report, Tomurad to Josko Moric.

20             Could you please bring up on the screen, this document.  Second

21     page, please.  No, this is not ... I'm sorry, this is not the right one.

22             MR. KAY:  589, I think, is the document Your Honour requires.

23             JUDGE KINIS:  Sorry?

24             MR. KAY:  589.

25             JUDGE KINIS:  589, yes.  Yeah.  589, yes.

Page 23650

 1             In the second page of this document there is mentioned --

 2     Mr. Tomurad mentions that there are such situations that individuals who

 3     are taking away property on basis of written permissions issued by

 4     municipal presidents.

 5             My question is:  If such actions did take place, and obviously it

 6     was, what kind of measures was prepared in order to stop such?  And was

 7     there some -- some activities -- or some actions to -- to call such

 8     persons to criminal liability?

 9        A.   These certificates or permissions were not considered valid by

10     the police, and in such cases, the objects concerned were to be

11     confiscated or seized.

12             JUDGE KINIS:  And there was no action taken against those persons

13     who issued such certificates?

14        A.   No.  As far as I remember, they weren't.

15             JUDGE KINIS:  And the next question is regarding restrictions of

16     UNCIVPOL.  Witness Laila Malm, from UNCIVPOL, testified on the

17     11th September, 1995; she visited Gracac graveyard.  And after a couple

18     of minutes, a Croatian police officer arrived and told witness to left --

19     leave this graveyard.

20             Could you comment on this, please.

21        A.   He -- it is highly likely that he did not the relevant

22     documentation that would have permitted him to gain access to the

23     graveyard.

24             JUDGE KINIS:  What kind of documentation UNCIVPOL officer should

25     get?  You are referring documentation, what kind of documentation you're

Page 23651

 1     referring to?

 2        A.   What I wanted to say, that the police officer did not have an

 3     order from his superior to prevent visits from taking place, visits to

 4     the cemetery.

 5             JUDGE KINIS:  But it happened.  We received numerous evidence on

 6     this.

 7             And finally, Ms. Prosecutor asked this question regarding the

 8     determination of dead bodies, particularly who was a victim of combat and

 9     who was a victim of murder.

10             And could you please explain whether such a criteria include area

11     or time-limits or characters of wounds, or maybe some other

12     characteristics, where policemen or persons who will deal with these

13     matters immediately can decide that there is no necessity for on-site

14     investigation and just send sanitation teams, which actually happens on

15     the ground.

16        A.   The persons who were out in the field always have most

17     information and are always better placed to decide on what needed to be

18     done.

19             JUDGE KINIS:  But we received numerous evidence, including these

20     entries into Knin log-book, police log-book, where policemen, immediately

21     after they receiving information about dead bodies was found, immediately

22     informed just sanitation team and that's all.  No -- any actions were

23     taken.

24        A.   This was a procedure that was worked out by the

25     Ministry of the Interior.

Page 23652

 1             JUDGE KINIS:  But you mentioned that -- you mentioned all time

 2     and you reiterate many times that law has supremacy over orders issued by

 3     officials of ministry.

 4        A.   Yes.  Where there are reasonable doubts for suspicion that a

 5     crime was committed.

 6             JUDGE KINIS:  Actually, it does not answer my question.  But

 7     thank you very much.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Cetina, one follow-up question on a matter which

 9     was raised in relation to your involvement in mop-up operations of the

10     special police.  You said you were not involved in organising or

11     planning.  You may have been informed.

12             Were you asked, assistance of a limited nature, such as, keep

13     civilians out of that area or keep others out of that area when there --

14     when a mop-up operation was planned?

15        A.   It is possible that I received some notification.  But as for

16     detailed plans of engagement of the police, that is something I was not

17     privy to.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  But I didn't ask you whether you were privy of

19     detailed plans.

20             I asked you whether, when you were notified, whether it was

21     expected that you would assist, although perhaps in a very limited way,

22     and I gave a possible example of keeping out civilians of the area where

23     the mop-up operation would take place.  So let's stop civilians to go to

24     Village A, B, and C, because there will be a mop-up operation.  And this

25     is just an example.

Page 23653

 1             I'm asking you whether any kind of assistance was asked from you

 2     or required from you or whether you even were ordered to give such

 3     assistance.

 4        A.   I did not receive such an order.  It is possible that a

 5     notification was sent, and if the regular police, indeed, participated,

 6     it was probably along the roads.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  I asked you about whether you were asked,

 8     whether you were requested, whether you were ordered, and in your answer

 9     you limited to that you never received such an order.  And you say:

10             "It is possible that the regular police, indeed, participated ...

11     along the roads."

12             Could you give us a bit more information about such

13     participation.  Who would ask you to do that?

14        A.   An order is an order to me.  If I'm instructed to do something, I

15     do.

16             On the other hand, we may have received some information of

17     police activity in the broader area.  And if we assessed that it was

18     necessary to stop people moving along roads from getting off and getting

19     into the area in order to keep them safe, then we tried to keep them out

20     of such areas of combat.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  So you were, from what I understand, notified

22     as to when and where; and then, if you considered it useful to take any

23     action in order to guarantee safety, you would take action?

24        A.   Yes.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Could you give us one example?  And could you also

Page 23654

 1     tell us how many of your men were then involved?

 2        A.   If there were such instances, they happened seldom.  Such

 3     information was forwarded, usually, to the chief of the police station

 4     involved.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  I'm asking you whether you could give us an

 6     example.

 7        A.   I don't remember.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you for those answers.

 9             Any -- have the questions of the Bench triggered any need for

10     further questions?

11             MR. MIKULICIC:  I have just one question, Your Honour.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Just one question.

13             MR. MIKULICIC:  Yes, Your Honour.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, I'm looking at the clock.  I'm guilty, myself,

15     Mr. Mikulicic.

16             MR. MIKULICIC:  I will be very short.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

18                           Further cross-examination by Mr. Mikulicic:

19        Q.   [Interpretation] Mr. Cetina, Judge Kinis asked you about such

20     situations in which policemen, when coming across a corpse, notified

21     sanitation teams.  It is true and correct - is it not? - that there was

22     always a crime technician who would be part of such a group of people?

23        A.   Yes.

24        Q.   And this scene-of-crime officer, as a trained policeman, was able

25     to ascertain whether there were any grounds to believe that a murder was

Page 23655

 1     involved when studying such a corpse?

 2        A.   Yes, that is correct.

 3        Q.   Thank you very much for your answers.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  By the way, Mr. Mikulicic, that is not what

 5     Judge Kinis put to the witness, as a matter of fact, but -- and I

 6     verified that with him.  That is, upon receiving information about dead

 7     bodies, sending sanitation immediately, not finding a body on your way.

 8             But let's leave that alone for the time being.

 9             Mr. Misetic.

10             MR. MISETIC:  Just to let the Chamber know, we have the

11     translation of that Brgud document, while the witness is here.  We can

12     show it via Sanction.  Otherwise, we can tender it Monday.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  I would like to have a look at it.  I don't know

14     whether it is long or short.

15             MR. MISETIC:  It's one page.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  One page.  Could it be shown, and I'm aware that ...

17             Not necessarily to be shown to the witness yet, but let's see

18     whether it's --

19             MR. MISETIC:  We have to show it via Sanction, Mr. President,

20     because it is not in e-court.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, that would, then, be under our ...

22             MR. KAY:  While we're waiting, Your Honour, the bar table matter

23     that I referred to yesterday, I've used some of those documents now so

24     it's -- they've come off the bar table.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, if you, then, could please.  I'm a bit worried

Page 23656

 1     about all those assisting us, Mr. Kay, Friday, five minutes.  If it is an

 2     administrative matter, that you should take them out from your bar table

 3     list, then we can deal with that.  Unless there is anything urgent to be

 4     done in court at this moment.

 5             MR. KAY:  It's just that two documents remain, and they can be

 6     made exhibits, to deal with it.  Everything else has been dealt with.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

 8             Then, Ms. Mahindaratne, are you aware of which documents we're

 9     talking about?

10             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  Yes, Mr. President, during the break I

11     reviewed them, and I have no objections.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  No objections.  That would be, Mr. Kay ...

13             MR. KAY:  65 ter 984.  If that could be made an exhibit, please,

14     Your Honour.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar.

16             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, that becomes Exhibit D1770.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  And is admitted into evidence.

18             MR. KAY:  65 ter 147.  If that could be made an exhibit, please,

19     Your Honour.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar.

21             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, that becomes Exhibit D1771.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  And is admitted into evidence.

23             Let's -- this Sanction document.  I don't see anything on my

24     screen but ...

25                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

Page 23657

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  If you just give me a second to read it.

 2             Yes, that certainly fills in.  I don't think that the witness

 3     could -- could give us further information about that.  But at least it

 4     gives more complete picture of the sequence of events.

 5             May -- would you like to bar table this -- or would you like to

 6     have this document -- then we'll deal with it in the technical matter

 7     because it's not yet uploaded.  But, Mr. Kay, is it something you'd --

 8             MR. KAY:  We can bar table it, and we will deal with it as

 9     quickly as possible.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you for that.

11             Mr. Cetina, on the assumption that there are no further questions

12     from Ms. Mahindaratne.

13             MS. MAHINDARATNE:  No, Mr. President, I don't have any questions.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Then this concludes your testimony in this court.  I

15     would like to thank you very much for coming to The Hague.  We're glad

16     that we can release you still on Friday, so that you don't have to stay

17     over the weekend.  I would like to thank you for having answered the

18     questions that were put to you by the parties and the questions that were

19     put to you by the Bench.  And I wish you a safe trip home again.

20             We adjourn, and we will resume on Monday, the 2nd of November,

21     9.00, Courtroom III.

22                            --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.57 p.m.,

23                           to be reconvened on Monday, the 2nd day of

24                           November, 2009, at 9.00 a.m.