1 Tuesday, 1 December 2009
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness takes the stand]
5 --- Upon commencing at 9.06 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 and around the courtroom. This is case number IT-06-90-T,
10 the Prosecutor versus Gotovina et al.
11 Thank you.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
13 Good morning to you as well, Mr. Cvrk. I would like to remind
14 you that you're still bound by the solemn declaration you've given at the
15 beginning of your testimony yesterday.
16 Are you ready to proceed, Ms. Mahindaratne?
17 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Yes, Mr. President. Thank you.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Then please do so.
19 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Mr. Registrar, may have I document P610,
21 WITNESS: ZORAN CVRK[Resumed]
22 [Witness answered through interpreter]
23 Cross-examination by Ms. Mahindaratne: [Continued]
24 Q. Mr. Cvrk, good morning.
25 A. Good morning.
1 Q. Now, yesterday at the point of adjournment we were discussing the
2 disciplinary authority of the chief of police administration, and you
3 rejected the statement made by Mr. Cetina that I put to you last evening.
4 Now, if you look at this document, this actually I called up
5 yesterday but we didn't deal with it. This is an order issued by
6 General Mladen Markac to the commander of the special police unit
7 attached to the Dubrovnik-Neretva Police Administration, and he is
8 ordered to investigate into the conduct of a member of his unit and to
9 initiate disciplinary proceedings.
10 And you -- do you note that this order is sent to the chief of
11 the police administration asking him to hand it over to the commander of
12 the special police unit. The chief of police is not asked to order the
13 special police unit commander, but he is asked to hand this order which
14 is a direct order from General Markac to the commander of the special
15 police unit. And if you would see in the last paragraph, the commander
16 of the special police unit is asked to report back to the police --
17 special police sector on the disciplinary measures taken.
18 So do you agree with me that the contents of this document, in
19 fact, reflects that -- what Mr. Cetina said about his disciplinary
20 authority over the special police unit attached to his police
21 administration is correct? This is consistent with what he said?
22 MR. KUZMANOVIC: I'm going to object to the question because
23 there's been no foundation that the Dubrovnik police administration is
24 under Mr. Cetina's authority.
25 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Mr. President, that is not the issue. The
1 issue is that --
2 JUDGE ORIE: Please rephrase your question so that the issue
3 remains what you think the issue is and that ...
4 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Very well, Mr. President.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
6 MS. MAHINDARATNE:
7 Q. Does this reflect -- isn't it correct that General Markac, in
8 fact, had the ability to order the special police unit commanders
9 attached to police administration directly to initiate disciplinary
10 authority and that that did not fall within the competence of the chief
11 of the police administration?
12 A. I don't agree with your assertion, Mrs. Prosecutor, for several
14 The document that you have shown here is, beyond any doubt, an
15 authentic document, which was signed by the assistant minister,
16 Mr. Mladen Markac. The gist of it is this: This is a member of the
17 Dubrovnik-Neretva Police Administration who was engaged in a mission
18 which was at the state level, I believe, because he was dispatched to the
19 Neum state border. I'm not sure whether it falls within the
20 Neretva-Dubrovnik area or not. But I know that members of my unit were
21 also tasked with the same mission that these members of the
22 Neretva-Dubrovnik Police Administration were. It is stated here that an
23 Official Note was made of an incident which happened on the 15th of June,
25 JUDGE ORIE: I'm going to stop you there. What apparently
1 Ms. Mahindaratne wants to know is whether the authority which is
2 expressed here in this order, whether that's more consistent with what
3 another witness said than what you say. You're now explaining all the
4 specific circumstances. Would circumstances just disturb the authority
5 or would it not? The authorities who can order disciplinary measures or
6 disciplinary investigations to take place, would that be different, any
7 way different in Dubrovnik
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I merely wanted to
10 explain the circumstances under which the disciplinary measure was
12 JUDGE ORIE: I'm taking you back to what -- what the question was
14 Was the authority, in view of ordering that disciplinary
15 investigations should take place, any different in Dubrovnik-Neretva
16 Police Administration compared to the others?
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. The procedure involved is one
18 where assistant minister of the interior, based on information received,
19 may ask that disciplinary proceedings be initiated. In the case where a
20 member of the Dubrovnik-Neretva Police Administration is concerned, the
21 disciplinary proceedings can only be initiated before a disciplinary
22 court of the Dubrovnik-Neretva Police Administration. The same would
23 apply to any other member of any other police administration.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Carefully listen to the next question
25 Ms. Mahindaratne will put to you.
1 Please proceed.
2 MS. MAHINDARATNE:
3 Q. Now, isn't it correct, Mr. Cvrk, that you came within the command
4 structure of your chief of police administration only when you assisted
5 him in police operations that were conducted within the -- the regular
6 police operations conducted within the police administration area of
8 A. That was the priority method of proceeding on the part of any
9 police force of any police administration, and it was the basic way in
10 which the Ministry of Interior worked.
11 Q. My question was very clear. Isn't it correct that you came
12 within the command structure of your chief of police administration only
13 when you assisted him in regular police work which was carried out within
14 his area of police administration? That is the only circumstances. That
15 is my question.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kuzmanovic.
17 MR. KUZMANOVIC: He answered the question. And a repeating of
18 the question is not appropriate. He has answered the question. That was
19 the priority method of proceeding.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Well, whether that is -- Ms. Mahindaratne is
21 entitled to further explore whether command structures are expressed by
22 way of preference or -- which is highly uncommon, I would say. That was
23 a -- preferably my command would be this one or that one.
24 Therefore, Ms. Mahindaratne is entitled to further explore the
1 MR. KUZMANOVIC: I do understand that, Your Honour. But to ask
2 the exact same question again is really inappropriate.
3 JUDGE ORIE: That's why I said that she can further explore the
4 matter, Mr. Kuzmanovic. And Ms. Mahindaratne will certainly have
5 understood that putting exactly the same question is not a way of
6 exploring a matter any further.
7 Please proceed.
8 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Thank you, Mr. President. Mr. President, may
9 I also point out that I think there is a practice in this Court that
10 generally when a counsel cross-examines or examines a witness it is that
11 counsel who rises to their feet to object. This is -- perhaps this has
12 happened before, and I think the Trial Chamber has pointed out that this
13 is not appropriate.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Some self-restraint is, to use the word, is
15 preferred. Mr. Kuzmanovic, and in view of the number of objections and
16 in view of the effect which has been shown, I think that you should not
17 forget about self-restraint.
18 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Your Honour, I have absolutely no problem with
19 that. I guess I need to do whatever I think is appropriate to defend the
20 interests of our client, and I will do that with the Court's guidance, of
21 course. Thank you.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
23 Please proceed.
24 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Thank you, Mr. President.
25 Q. Can you answer my question, Mr. Cvrk. My question is that the
1 only circumstances under which you would come within the command --
2 subordination of the police -- chief of police administration is when you
3 assist him in regular police work which are carried out within the area
4 of the police administration. Is that a yes or a no?
5 A. The answer is yes. I was a member of the
7 Q. Now, isn't it correct that in the case of a crime committed by a
8 member of your unit, General Markac had the capacity to order you
9 directly to investigate the crime without seeking the assistance of the
10 MUP crime police to investigate the matter, since the special police
11 itself was a police force?
12 A. No, that was not the case.
13 General Markac would have had to insist on the imposition of
14 disciplinary measures, in case they had not been imposed before, because
15 he was the one who was the number one in the chain of command and he
16 received information to that effect. Since he was at the top of the
17 chain of command, he could have asked from each and every one of the
18 police structures to initiate disciplinary proceedings. Disciplinary
19 proceedings were carried out before disciplinary courts in each and every
20 police administration and, in the second instance, before the
21 disciplinary court in the Ministry of Interior.
22 I said that there was also a higher instances where the complaint
23 or the appellant could have addressed the administrative court of the
24 Republic of Croatia
25 judgement handed down, he could have addressed the Supreme Court of the
1 Republic of Croatia
2 relation to breaches of discipline.
3 Q. Mr. Cvrk, I think you understood my question. My question was:
4 In the case of a crime committed by a member of your unit, General Markac
5 had the capacity to order you to investigate the crime, as in carry out
6 the tasks that the crime police would do, without really seeking the
7 assistance of the crime police, because the special police had the
8 capacity to investigate the crime.
9 I'm talking about crime investigations.
10 A. Madam Prosecutor, my unit which provided the most assistance in
11 all sort of policing work did not have or keep the so-called K register
12 which would stand for the crime register. We could have assisted the
13 work of the crime police, but we did not engage in criminal
15 If a member of the special police of the Ministry of the Interior
16 committed a crime, just as any other citizen of the Republic of Croatia
17 he would have be the subject of the criminal investigation on the part of
18 the crime police force of the Ministry of Interior.
19 We were not engaged in criminal inquiries, regardless of the fact
20 that we were authorised personnel. Why? Well, because there was the
21 criminal investigation police to do that job.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Cvrk, there is malcommunication at this moment.
23 You are explaining what usually was done. Ms. Mahindaratne asks you
24 whether Mr. Markac had the authority, whether he used that authority is a
25 different matter for the time being, but whether he had the authority to
1 order you to investigate a crime committed by a member of your unit.
2 That's the question, not what happened, but whether he had the
4 Could you answer that question.
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, General Markac did
6 have the authority to ask that disciplinary proceedings be initiated.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. -- why do you give an answer different? We are
8 talking about crimes and about investigation of crimes. If you would say
9 that's covered by what I said, fine. Then that's on the record. But
10 that was the question. I didn't ask you whether he had the authority
11 to -- to initiate disciplinary proceedings. My question was whether he
12 had the authority to order you to investigate when a crime was committed
13 by a member of your unit.
14 Would you please answer that question.
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Generally speaking, if he had
16 notice of it, he had the authority to initiate proceedings of any form.
17 That's the extent of it.
18 Going back to the question put by the Prosecution, relating to
19 the --
20 JUDGE ORIE: No, no. No.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- criminal investigation --
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. You say he had the authority to initiate.
23 That means also to order an investigation when a crime was committed.
24 Is that correctly understood?
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You see, it is very difficult to
1 answer the question with a yes or a no, because there was a direct
2 responsibility to be borne under General Markac on the shoulders of the
3 specialist branches. However, from this particular example, it is quite
4 visible that if he had notice of anything going on at the level of the
5 ministry, he did have the authority to ask for the proceedings to be
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, including a crime to be investigated. And he
8 could order you to do that?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In the sense of proceedings, yes.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Would investigation of a crime, would that be
11 included in what you call "proceedings"?
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I believe so.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Then please carefully listen to the next question
14 Ms. Mahindaratne will put to you.
15 Please proceed.
16 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Thank you, Mr. President.
17 Q. Mr. Cvrk, moving on to another area. I just wanted to, before
18 that, just seek a clarification.
19 Yesterday when Mr. Mikulicic showed you a document and asked you
20 if you had seen it before, you said you had seen it during preparation
21 for testimony. Now, how many times did you meet with the Defence team in
22 preparation for testimony?
23 A. I was first contacted roughly two years ago. We had slightly
24 more contacts around the time I was giving my statement. And since I
25 already been here before but there was some rescheduling, so I was here
1 on two occasions and I had, each time, one day of proofing.
2 Q. And during those times, were you shown documents, apart from the
3 one you said you had already seen yesterday?
4 A. Well, at any rate, some of the documents which had to do with the
5 preparation and execution of Operation Storm.
6 Q. Were you shown orders of Mr. Markac?
7 A. Some of the orders, yes. But I was aware of these documents back
8 at the time when I was commander of the special police unit.
9 Q. Were you shown photographs?
10 A. I'm not sure what you have in mind specifically. There were
11 several photographs.
12 Q. That's what I'm asking. You were shown certain photographs?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Were you told that those photographs were already in evidence?
15 A. If I recollect correctly, I believe they did, yes.
16 Q. Were you shown photographs of special police taken in Gracac at
17 some stage, just after the operation?
18 A. Yes, precisely those photographs.
19 Q. Were you -- did the Defence team discuss any evidence led in
20 these proceedings with you? Any other -- for any other witnesses?
21 A. No, not in that sense, no.
22 Q. And when you were here, you said you had been to The Hague
23 before. Were you listening to or following the proceedings that were
24 going on at the time in court?
25 A. Periodically, yes, whenever I was able to, over the Internet.
1 As for the testimonies, the last testimony I followed was the one
2 by Mr. Davorin Pavlovic, upon my returned to Zagreb, the little that I
3 could glean.
4 Q. Okay. Thank you for that.
5 Now, going to Operation Storm, just one question before that.
6 Before the war - and when I say that, I'm talking about the period before
7 the -- the Krajina came under the control of the RSK authorities - did
8 you live in any part of the territory through which you and your unit
9 conducted operations, in the course of Operation Storm or in the course
10 of the mop-up operations afterwards?
11 A. No. I was born in Osijek
12 parents are in Slavonia
13 the area where Operation Storm was conducted in any significant way.
14 Q. Were there any other members in your unit who were from the area,
15 to your knowledge?
16 A. Well, you see, the unit was multi-ethnic from its very set-up, so
17 that there were both Croats and Serbs within the unit who were from this
19 Q. Now, at the pre-operation briefings, either prior to the
20 commencement of Operation Storm itself or the mop-up operations, were you
21 given any information as to which of the villages, through which your
22 unit moved, advanced, as to which of those villages were Croat villages
23 or which were Serb villages? Were you given that information?
24 A. Similarly to the attitude to the members of my unit, which came
25 from several ethnicities, in terms of their origin, my attitude to them
1 was like to any citizens of the Republic of Croatia
2 area that we were liberating was an attitude to the territory of the
3 Republic of Croatia
4 the other ethnicity -- this was not very important when we carried out
5 our tasks. Only when considering the size of the places, it could be
6 expected that considerable military forces were there or that straggling
7 enemy soldiers might be in the area.
8 Q. Mr. Cvrk, you didn't quite answer my question. My question was
9 not about your attitude. Whether any information was given to you as to
10 what villages on the -- on the route, you know, through your axis, were
11 Croat villages or what were Serbs, whether that information was provided
12 to you by any -- either the special police sector command or the inner
13 control branch, any intelligence information. That was my question.
14 Is that a yes or no?
15 A. In that sense, no.
16 Q. Going to mop-up operations, Mr. Cvrk, I'd like to take you to
17 your statement given to the Defence.
18 MS. MAHINDARATNE: And this is at D1833, paragraph 21. This is
19 in the English document at paragraph 21, starts at page 6.
20 Q. But I'm going to read to you part of that paragraph.
21 You say: "As far as I know, there were several occasions when
22 combat contact occurred with members of the remaining terrorist groups
23 during ground search operations. Several enemy soldiers were taken
24 prisoner, and significant amounts of MES, minefields, weapons, and
25 equipment were discovered."
1 Now, yesterday, also you testified about such fire contact.
2 MS. MAHINDARATNE: And, for the record, this is at t --
3 transcript reference number T5384 and -- sorry, 25384 and 25388, where
4 you discuss combat activity with the enemy in the course of mop-up
6 Now, these mop-up -- combat activity that you referred to, did
7 those occur in the course of the series of mop-up operations carried out
8 by the special police during the period 21st and 3rd September? I'm
9 referring to the operations which were known as Action Oluja-Obruc.
10 A. Yes, according to my knowledge, there were such contacts.
11 Q. Now did your unit, the Zagreb Unit, meet with fire contact with
12 the enemy during the operations carried out between 21st August and
13 3rd September?
14 A. As far as I remember, no. But this is in the reports that we had
15 to submit. We submitted daily reports. And as far as I remember, I
16 think we mostly found mines and explosives as well as civilians and
17 persons who were supposed to be possibly members of the military and who
18 were then delivered to the regular police for further procedure.
19 Q. Now, when say to your knowledge -- your previous answer was to
20 your knowledge there was such contacts. So obviously you are referring
21 to, then, other units. What other units met with fire contact, to your
22 knowledge? Are you able to tell the Trial Chamber?
23 A. It is difficult to me to assert that with any certainty what was
24 the number of such contacts that occurred, but according to knowledge I
25 had at the time, as we communicated among ourselves, I know that such
1 contacts did occur, and that there was a number of units who reported
2 that kind of contacts to the special police sector.
3 Q. Now, apart from the Lucko Unit, are you aware of any other units
4 that met with fire contact? You said there were several other units.
5 A. If I tried to answer exactly about any of these, I couldn't say
6 that precisely. I know that there were such contacts, but what other
7 units except the one from Lucko had such contacts, I'm not really sure,
8 because a long time has passed since.
9 Q. Okay. Now, you said, you know, prisoners were taken during these
10 operations. Did your unit take any prisoners?
11 A. I think that one of the attached documents talks about that,
12 about one person who was found where my unit was engaged. And it was
13 supposed that he was a JNA officer, and then he was delivered for further
14 procedure. The unit frequently entered settlements where there were some
15 civilians, fewer or more numerous in number, and then, depending on
16 whether they were registered or not, we decided what needed to be done so
17 that they would be registered. We also reported about their needs,
18 especially if they were elderly and weak, so that they could be helped
19 through the UNHCR and the Red Cross.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Mahindaratne, could, we try to find out what the
21 witness remembers and what he says -- what documents are talking about.
22 What you just told us, is that your recollection, or is it just
23 that you read those documents and that you find it in those documents?
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It's partly my recollection, and
25 partly it comes from the original documents which were submitted to the
1 special police sector on behalf of my unit and personally on my own
3 JUDGE ORIE: And could you tell what you say is your own
4 recollection and what is taken from the documents?
5 A. As for the statement, I gave my statement mostly from my
6 recollection. But during the proofing, the Defence reminded me of the
7 original documents which were --
8 [Technical difficulty]
9 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... needs to be
10 restarted, so we should have patience for a second.
11 We have restarted the system.
12 We were exploring what was your own recollection and what was --
13 in your answer, referring to the documents, you're talking about one
14 person who was supposed to be a JNA officer.
15 Were you present when this happened?
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think that they reported to me
17 about that person, because it was in the general area of Knin. And then,
18 later on, the members of the unit sent this person for further
20 JUDGE ORIE: Further processing meaning exactly what in this
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Establishing his personal data,
23 personal identity, confirmation of his identity; and I believe that then
24 the procedure would be divided, whether it was a civilian, in which case
25 civilian police would continue that; or if it could be established that
1 that was military personnel, then he would be handed over for further
2 procedure to the military police.
3 So this was the general procedure applied.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. This one supposed JNA officer, was he found to
5 be a civilian or a military man?
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That happened during the later
7 procedure, and then we did not have much connection with that. We just
8 found this person, and we sent him for further proceedings.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now, you were asked whether any prisoners were
11 From your answer now, I take it that one person was processed,
12 because he supposedly was a JNA officer, although you do not know what
13 the results were of further verification of this idea, and that this is
14 the kind of thing that happened with others which were found in
15 settlements that it was verified whether they were registered or not, and
16 that you would decide what to do.
17 That's not really what I understand to be prisoners taken.
18 But it sounds to me as if you were verifying the status - civilian or
19 military - of persons you found and that you give one example where there
20 was a suspicion that someone was a JNA officer and that was processed but
21 you do not know what the outcome was.
22 Is that correctly understood?
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] At that time, during the
24 Oluja-Obruc, in case of this particular person, he was taken into
25 custody, and then he was handed over to others for further procedure in
1 order to establish his personal data. There were other persons for whom
2 it was quite simple to determine what their personal data were. There
3 were persons whose personal data needed to be further established. If
4 further establishment was necessary, then our duty was just to take these
5 persons into custody. And that was the procedure.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Even if the result could be that they finally
7 were found to be civilians?
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, eventually it was so.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now, what apparently Ms. Mahindaratne wanted
10 to know is - at least that's how I understood your question - whether any
11 persons were taken prisoner, who then finally were found to be
12 non-civilians or non-combatants.
13 Is that what you were ...
14 MS. MAHINDARATNE: That is correct, Mr. President.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Now, could you give us any example of someone taken
16 into custody who turned out to be a -- not a civilian, a combatant, or
17 whatever you found.
18 Tell us what you know about it.
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Apart from the -- my general
20 recollection of the events from 15 years ago, during the proofing, there
21 were several reports relating to the activities of the unit that I
22 commanded, and from these reports, which are enclosed, together with my
23 statement, enclosed by the Defence, it is visible from them that they
24 were person who were established on the spot to be such persons. It is
25 obvious from my reports that they were persons taken into custody and
1 persons who's personal identity was established immediately.
2 I do not know if there were any persons whom we had taken into
3 custody and for whom it was found out later that they were military
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I asked you these questions because I want to
6 find out exactly what your personal recollection of matters is and what
7 is to be deduced from documentary evidence. That's the reasons why I
8 asked these questions.
9 Ms. Mahindaratne, please proceed.
10 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Thank you, Mr. President.
11 Mr. Registrar, can I have document number P577, please.
12 Q. Now, in fact, you referred to the fact that all -- that what
13 occurred in the operations, with regard to fire contact and taking of
14 prisoner of war being reported -- what you would see on your screen right
15 now, Mr. Cvrk, is an overview of the reports submitted by the special
16 police units, all the units, during the series of mop-up operations
18 Now, what we have here is for date 21st August. You see that
19 none of the units have met with fire contact with any enemy groups.
20 There aren't any prisoners taken on 21st.
21 MS. MAHINDARATNE: And, Mr. Registrar, if you could move to the
22 next page.
23 Q. The 22nd. It was noted that none of the units had met with fire
24 contact and there aren't any prisoners taken.
25 And when I used the term "prisoners," I'm referring to members of
1 the Serb military.
2 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Mr. Registrar, if you could go to page 3. And
3 I believe the third block is darkened out. I think it's more clear on
4 the English -- at least we would know what exactly it says. If could you
5 get -- bring up the English document also at the same time. That -- that
6 slot is redacted.
7 Q. What you would see from what is -- what we can read, there are no
8 fire contact and no prisoners captured.
9 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Mr. Registrar, if you could go to the next
11 Q. This is the 24th. It's the same: no fire contact; no prisoners
13 MS. MAHINDARATNE: 25th; next page, Mr. Registrar.
14 Q. There is no fire contact. And there is one prisoner taken by
15 your unit, which is the reference you just made.
16 MS. MAHINDARATNE: And if could you go to the next page.
17 Q. 26th: there is only fire contact recorded against the Lucko Unit,
18 and no fire contact with regard to any other units. No one captured.
19 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Next page, please.
20 Q. There is just one fire contact recorded against the
21 Primorje Gorski Unit. None of the other units have any contact. And,
22 again, one person captured by your unit, as well as the other unit that
23 had had fire contact.
24 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Mr. Registrar, if you could go to the next
25 page, please.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Mahindaratne, could we go back for one second to
2 the previous page.
3 At the bottom of this page, Mr. Cvrk, we find recorded that one
4 person was captured. It's also recorded that there was one civilian.
5 Does that mean that one person was captured and that one civilian person
6 was found; or would it mean that one person was captured and that he was
7 the civilian that was found there?
8 Could you explain to us the structure of this report.
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As did I not draft this report, I
10 can just assume that the person who was taken prisoner is not the same
11 person who is registered as the civilian here.
12 JUDGE ORIE: But, if you didn't draft it, you could also assume
13 the other way around, or not?
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I suppose that it is not one and
15 the same person.
16 JUDGE ORIE: And on what grounds do you suppose that?
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, in the same table further
18 down, in "prisoners," I see that there's just a dash. And then, on the
19 right-hand side, there are seven civilians entered. So I suppose that
20 the data was entered independently into each column.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But if none of the civilians were arrested,
22 this is what you would expect, isn't it?
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. But, likewise, under
24 "prisoners," it says that there was one former JNA sergeant, and it says
25 "several civilians."
1 So I believe that the column "civilians" was registered
2 independently of the column that includes those captured.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you for this explanation.
4 Please proceed, Ms. Mahindaratne.
5 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Thank you, Mr. President.
6 Mr. Registrar, if you could go to the next page.
7 Q. This is the 28th, and you will see there is no fire contact by
8 any unit or -- and one person has been -- I'm sorry, no one captured.
9 MS. MAHINDARATNE: And if you could go to the next page,
10 Mr. Registrar.
11 Q. Again, no one -- no fire contact. And Zadar-Knin Special Police
12 Unit has captured one.
13 MS. MAHINDARATNE: And to the next page, Mr. Registrar.
14 Q. No fire contact by any units. Again, the Split Special Police
15 Unit has captured one person.
16 MS. MAHINDARATNE: And the next page, please.
17 Q. No fire contact by any units. It's the same. No one captured.
18 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Next page, Mr. Registrar.
19 Q. No fire contact. No one captured.
20 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Next page, please.
21 Q. It's the same: No fire contact. No one captured.
22 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Next page, please. This is the last --
23 last day of the operation.
24 Q. No fire contact, and no one captured.
25 So, Mr. Cvrk, in your statement you said that there were several
1 fire contacts during the mop-ups. And today, a little while ago, you
2 said that -- this is what you said:
3 "I know that such contacts did occur and that there was a number
4 of units who reported that kind of contacts to the special police
6 Now, we saw from the special police report itself, that only the
7 Lucko Unit had reported fire contact on 26th. And there was, on
8 the 27th, one other unit that had reported fire contact.
9 So in your -- your -- in your testimony, you have
10 exaggerated - haven't you? - by saying there were several contacts which
11 several units had reported.
12 Do you agree with me?
13 A. I can agree with you, because my recollection included the death
14 of a member of special police which happened between the Operation Storm
15 and the Operation Oluja-Obruc, which is not included in this report. I
16 have no reason to doubt that the reports which you showed here are
18 Q. Now, we saw -- in fact, we just discussed that, on the 25th, your
19 unit arrested a person, captured a person, and in fact the Chamber
20 questioned you.
21 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Mr. Registrar, if I could have P608, please.
22 Q. Now, this is a report. This is your report, in fact, for that
23 day, which you have submitted to the operation commander.
24 In the second paragraph, you record that -- the capture of that
25 prisoner. You said:
1 "During the search of terrain, which was done in 13 groups of men
2 and two official dogs ... the following civilian was found, and is
3 suspected to have participated in the armed rebellion against the RH ..."
4 There's the details of the civilian Luka Pasic, born
5 4th October, 1934, in Otok - and then the next word is illegible -
6 resident in Pasic hamlet.
7 "He was handed over for further processing to the
8 Knin Police Station. All other persons found by the unit during the
9 search had duly registered places of residence and passes issued by the
10 military police."
11 Now, my question is first: Was this place called Otok-Bender?
12 Do you recall? If you don't remember, it's all right.
13 A. I cannot tell you with any precision. It's been a long time ago.
14 Q. That's okay.
15 Now, can you please explain this "duly registered places of
16 residence and passes" that you refer to in paragraph 4? What were those?
17 In fact, one of the basis, as I understand from this document, for taking
18 that person into custody is because he did not have these passes. What
19 were those passes that you were looking for?
20 A. What I wrote in this report was that the individuals found in the
21 area searched by the unit had their place of residence registered,
22 whereas, other individuals, who entered the area, were in possession of
23 passes allowing them freedom of movement. Passes given to them by the
24 military police. And this meant that all the individuals found in the
25 area were legitimately there.
1 To the best of my recollection, in order to enter, gain access to
2 the area, and the date is the 26th August, one had to have an express
3 authorisation to enter the area, especially in order to prevent
4 unauthorised entry into the area. And that was one of the measures in
5 force at the time, in order to prevent theft, looting, et cetera.
6 Q. Now -- so, there -- as I understand you, there were two types of
7 documentation: One was where the civilians had some documentation to
8 show that they were -- they had a registered place of residence; is that
10 A. Yes. They were citizens, civilians, individuals who resided
11 there. For the most part, they had proper documentation or were in the
12 process of obtaining them.
13 The other category of persons who were able to gain access to the
14 area --
15 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... I will get to that other
17 The first category: What were the documents in the course of the
18 mop-ups? What were those documents that you would ask for which would
19 establish a person's residence, which would establish that he was, in
20 fact, legally a resident in the area? So what were you looking for, in
21 terms of documentation?
22 A. I do believe that, by that time, the 26th of August, the better
23 part of the civilians found in the liberated area had already applied for
24 Croatian documents or had certificates given to them by the UNHCR,
25 certifying that they had been in the area before.
1 Q. So they would have a certificate or some documentation received
2 which would indicate that they had applied for documentation. That was
3 the first category of people?
4 A. That's correct.
5 Q. Now, those passes, those -- -- those who did not have this
6 documentation to show their residence, they had to have a pass to enter
7 the area, is it -- is that what you -- that's what you just said?
8 A. That's correct.
9 Q. Now, from this document -- your report indicates that those
10 passes were issued by the military police.
11 A. If that's what the report says, I do believe that that was the
13 Q. Are you able to tell the Trial Chamber what type of passes these
14 were? Did it say that the person had been -- who had signed it, issued
15 by what authority?
16 A. It must have been an agency of the Croatian authorities that
17 issued it. And I believe that the individuals who had passes were
18 individuals who had lived in the area previously and were in possession
19 of Croatian documents, as such. And the purpose of their travel there
20 was to see their relatives or property.
21 Q. So anyone who didn't have these type of -- two types of documents
22 would be arrested for further verification; is that correct?
23 A. That's correct. I think that the check-points which were jointly
24 manned by the Croatian police and the army prevented such individuals
25 from entering the area. However, if they did manage to enter the area in
1 one way or the other, it was up to us to report them.
2 Q. Now what from the instructions? Who gave you the instructions
3 about these passes, and what were those instructions?
4 A. I think that this was discussed at the general briefing which we
5 had prior to any sort of search operation. That was the only time we
6 could have been told that.
7 Q. Thank you for that.
8 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Mr. Registrar, could you -- could I please
9 have document number 1393, please.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Could I ask one question for purposes of
12 Mr. Cvrk, you were talking about passes issued by the military
13 police. Would this be passes just valid for the duration of the search
14 of the terrain; or would they have -- would they be issued especially for
15 that day or that occasion; or would the passes be of a more general
17 If you know. If you don't know, tell us as well.
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm not 100 per cent sure, but I
19 believe that these you were one-day passes, allowing an individual to
20 enter the area.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But that's -- my question was whether they
22 were specific for that day of the search, or whether they would be -- one
23 day could be during that search or could be at another day, validity only
24 for one day.
25 Could you tell us whether they were specifically for the search
1 occasion or ...
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think the passes were issued
3 regardless of the searches of the terrain. We happened to be there
4 searching the area when these individuals were there.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Which means that those persons who were not
6 registered were not free to move without such a pass; is that ...
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's correct. They were directed
8 to obtain such passes as soon as possible. And I'm referring to the
9 population found in the area at the time.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
11 Please proceed, Ms. Mahindaratne.
12 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Thank you, Mr. President.
13 Mr. Registrar, if I could have 65 ter 1393, please.
14 For the record, Your Honours, this is an extract of the
15 Exhibit P1240, which is already in evidence, which is the war record of
16 the Zagreb
17 65 ter 1393.
18 Q. Mr. Cvrk, you might recognise this document. This is a part of
19 your war record, which is already in evidence, for the Zagreb Unit.
20 Do you recognise it?
21 A. I do.
22 Q. Did you write it yourself?
23 A. A group of policemen wrote it. I didn't personally.
24 Q. Now, in -- if you see in the second paragraph you record as
1 "Since all Croatian villages and areas were burnt and destroyed,
2 the action was carried out in the area mostly occupied by Serbs."
3 Now, this is a record of your mop-up operations. And a little
4 while ago I asked you if you had any information before your operations
5 as to whether -- as to what -- what villages were Croatian and what
6 villages were Serb villages, and you said that was not important, that
7 that information was not provided, and you didn't even consider that
9 So how is it that when you're writing this report you have
10 reported that those burnt villages were Croatian villages? That's an
11 inaccurate report, isn't it?
12 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Your Honour, this is a mis -- total
13 mischaracterisation. The question Mr. Cvrk was asked was: Before the
14 operation, were briefed on areas relating to Serb and Croat populations?
15 And he said, No --
16 MS. MAHINDARATNE: [Overlapping speakers] ... Mr. President, I
17 don't think that that's --
18 MR. KUZMANOVIC: [Overlapping speakers] ... can I finish, please.
19 MS. MAHINDARATNE -- should take place --
20 JUDGE ORIE: [Overlapping speakers] ... not two at a time.
21 Do you speak any English, Mr. Cvrk? Do you?
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
23 JUDGE ORIE: So that doesn't help us out.
24 One second.
25 MS. MAHINDARATNE: I could, Mr. President, proceed with the other
1 questions and get to this just at the point of the break to save time.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, if you move on and certainly from the first
3 line expressed by Mr. Kuzmanovic, you know already what his concern is.
4 Perhaps you could consider and perhaps -- when summarizing what the
5 witness said a couple of minutes ago, to literally quote him on that
7 MS. MAHINDARATNE: I will do that, Mr. President.
8 JUDGE ORIE: So that we have no problems in mischaracterisation
9 of the earlier testimony.
10 MR. KUZMANOVIC: That is satisfactory, Your Honour. Thank you.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
12 MS. MAHINDARATNE: I will get to this in a moment, Mr. President.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, as you deem fit.
14 [Prosecution counsel confer]
15 MS. MAHINDARATNE:
16 Q. Mr. Cvrk, were you -- or did you receive orders from
17 General Markac regarding operations, mop-up operations, or the -- Storm,
18 the initial attack itself. Did you receive, directly, orders from
19 General Markac?
20 A. Yes, I received my orders from General Markac.
21 Q. Now, were those orders given to you in writing or verbally?
22 A. We all received elements of orders which had to do with our axis
23 of attack. And I'm now referring to Operation Storm, because there was a
24 generic order, and we received the elements that were relevant to our
1 As for Oluja-Obruc, we would be receiving orders for the
2 following day. And they came from the special police sector.
3 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter isn't sure about the last part.
4 MS. MAHINDARATNE:
5 Q. Can you repeat your last few words, Mr. Cvrk. The interpreter
6 didn't catch it.
7 A. For Operation Oluja-Obruc, we received daily orders for the
8 following day. And they were, for the most part, written by the special
9 police sector.
10 Q. Now, in your testimony in your statement at paragraph 21 and
11 22 --
12 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Mikulicic, you're in -- you're on your feet.
13 MR. MIKULICIC: Yes, Your Honour, just one word is missing in
14 line 2 of page 30th. So maybe we could ask witness -- well, now it's in.
15 Okay. Thank you.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Well, you see, miracles still happen. Yes.
17 Assisted by our transcriber.
18 Please proceed.
19 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Thank you, Mr. President.
20 Q. Now, in paragraph 21 and 22 of your statement you say that, on
21 every occasion and at every meeting you attended, General Mladen Markac
22 emphasised the obligation to adhere to RH regulations and those of the
23 international law of war.
24 Now, did he reiterate those instructions regarding the
25 international law of war at -- before he issued every order for every
2 A. I can't tell you this with 100 per cent certainty, because there
3 were such situations and attacks where we suffered casualties. What I
4 can tell you with full certainty is that the units I commanded, as well
5 as other units, before being introduced into Operation Storm, had to have
6 gone through training on the international law of war and had to go
7 through the textbooks, and I think this is something that the
8 Trial Chamber is aware of.
9 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... Mr. Cvrk, you've already
10 mentioned about your training. I'm not asking about your training. I'm
11 asking about what General Markac told you. And this is what you have
12 said: You said that on every occasion and at every meeting you attended,
13 General Markac reminder you of these international law of war. And
14 presumably what you are referring there is to -- how to treat civilians
15 and prisoners of war.
16 Now, my question to you is: Before he issued an order for an
17 operation, a mop-up operation, did the reiterate these orders, these
19 A. We were specifically cautioned, before engaging in
20 Operation Oluja-Obruc, about the civilians that we might come across. So
21 this was the subject of every single briefing we had and every order we
23 Q. So in every order you received, that reminder would be included.
24 That's what you're saying?
25 A. I can't claim that daily orders were written for
1 Operation Oluja-Obruc, but we were cautioned about the presence of
2 civilians in the areas we were supposed to search, and about the
3 treatment that we were supposed to accord them at the briefings that we
5 Q. Now, in your written orders, were these instructions included, --
6 the written orders that you received for a specific operation?
7 A. I'm not sure that we had written orders for Oluja-Obruc, but I
8 think it was included in the general order for Operation Storm.
9 MS. MAHINDARATNE: If I could call document P556.
10 Q. And I can tell you, Mr. Cvrk, we do have a number of orders
11 issued during Oluja-Obruc in evidence at the moment.
12 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Mr. Registrar, if I could have P556.
13 Q. And this is not issued to you. This is -- because you were not
14 involved in this specific mop-up operation?
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kuzmanovic.
16 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Your Honour, just for information, P556 is not
17 included in the list of exhibits to be used by the OTP.
18 MS. MAHINDARATNE: It is, Mr. President. As I -- probably
19 Mr. Kuzmanovic has --
20 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Is it P or D, because there is no P55 --
21 MS. MAHINDARATNE: P556 and P557 are included.
22 MR. KUZMANOVIC: 554, 560, 577; that's the order on my list that
23 I received from the Prosecution.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Can you please verify.
25 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Yes, Mr. President, if I could have a moment.
1 It is not, Mr. President, in fairness to the Defence. I will
2 therefore not call this document. Unless the Defence --
3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kuzmanovic.
4 MS. MAHINDARATNE: This is a document [Overlapping speakers] ...
5 MR. KUZMANOVIC: [Overlapping speakers] ... Your Honour, I --
6 JUDGE ORIE: Of course if Ms. Mahindaratne didn't call
7 the document, then there is no issue anymore. If she would like to
8 proceed, would you --
9 MR. KUZMANOVIC: I don't have an objection to that. I just
10 wanted to have notice of it. And now, obviously, we have it. It's a
11 document in evidence.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So you are free either to use it or not use it
13 under the circumstances.
14 MS. MAHINDARATNE: [Overlapping speakers] ... Thank you,
15 Mr. President. I will use it.
16 Thank you, Mr. Kuzmanovic.
17 Mr. Registrar, can we go back to the document P556.
18 Q. Now, this is not an order issued to you, Mr. Cvrk. This is it an
19 order issued to a different special police unit, because you were not
20 involved in this specific mop-up operation.
21 And can you read this order, and can you see that there is no
22 instructions reminding the units as to --
23 MR. KUZMANOVIC: I'm sorry to rise, Your Honour --
24 JUDGE ORIE: One -- let's first allow Ms. Mahindaratne to finish
25 the question, and then we'll hear your objection, Mr. Kuzmanovic.
1 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Now my question -- you will see that there is
2 no such instruction.
3 Q. My question to you is: Now, did you receive any written orders
4 regarding mop-up operations where such an instruction was included?
5 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kuzmanovic.
6 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Your Honour, this document deals with
7 Sector North PU Karlovac, which is not part of this area that we're
8 dealing with in this case.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Mahindaratne.
10 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Mr. President, this is a document which is in
11 evidence, and this is -- it relates to this part of the case as, not
12 territory-wise, but to General Markac's command and control. And my
13 question is very fair. I'm just reminding this witness, since he said he
14 cannot recollect as to how the orders looked or whether he received,
15 whether he received such an order, or -- as to whether he had received
16 such instructions.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. You would say it's, rather, background than
18 directly applicable for the territory covered by the indictment.
19 MS. MAHINDARATNE: That's correct, Mr. President.
20 JUDGE ORIE: The witness may answer the question.
21 MS. MAHINDARATNE:
22 Q. Mr. Cvrk, can you tell the Trial Chamber if, in fact, you had
23 received any written orders from Mr. Markac for mop-up operations, where
24 you were reminded about your obligation to comply with international law.
25 A. In the sense of it being in an order, written order, for
1 Oluja-Obruc, I cannot be sure. I cannot claim either way.
2 I know that we were, though, cautioned about our duty to behave
3 in a certain way, where clear procedure was defined. Now, whether this
4 was in verbal or a written order, I'm not sure.
5 Q. Okay. Very well.
6 Going back to the issue -- the previous issue that I said I would
7 get back to --
8 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Mr. Registrar, if could I have 65 ter 1393.
9 Q. And while the document is coming up, Mr. Cvrk, let me remind you
10 what you said this morning. I asked if you had been briefed, either
11 prior to the commencement of Operation Storm itself or the mop-up
12 operations, were you given any information as to which of the villages
13 through which your unit moved advanced as to which of those villages were
14 Croat villages or which was Serb villages. Were you given that
16 And your response was:
17 "Similarly to an attitude of the members of my unit which came
18 from several ethnicities in terms of their origin, my attitude to them
19 was like to any citizens of the Republic of Croatia
20 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Mahindaratne, you're reading.
21 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Sorry, Mr. President. I think I will -- that
22 was a long answer, which was not on point.
23 My next question to you was:
24 "Mr. Cvrk, you didn't quite answer my question. My question was
25 not about your attitude. Whether any information was given to you as to
1 what villages on the route through your axis were Croat villages or what
2 were Serbs, whether that information was provided to you either by the
3 special police sector command or the inner control branch, any
4 intelligence information. That was my question.
5 "Is that a yes or a no?"
6 You say:
7 "In that sense, no."
8 That was your answer.
9 Now, in this document, 65 ter 1393, you have reported that the
10 villages that -- you say:
11 "Since all Croatian villages and areas were burnt and destroyed,
12 the action was carried out in the area mostly occupied by Serbs."
13 So if you had not been given that information, Mr. Cvrk, how did
14 you know that the villages and the area that were burnt were Croat
15 villages, as opposed to Serb?
16 A. I would like to say that the document you're referring to was, in
17 fact, written as a narrative, almost a literary rendition of it. And I
18 cannot, in any way, tie it with the actions that we talk in
19 Operation Oluja-Obruc. There was a rendition of the events by one of the
20 members of the special police.
21 The description of the state of affairs and -- and the war path
22 of my unit cannot be really tied in with this. And I'm sure that you
23 will find nothing in the war record that contradicts what I said, and I
24 said that the actions in Operation Oluja-Obruc were not related to an
25 area that had suffered more or less damage but it, in fact, referred to
1 an area where I was instructed to go and search.
2 Q. So as I understand your testimony to be, what you're saying in
3 that specific sentence is not correct. That was just written as a
4 narrative, but there is no truth to that. That's what you're saying?
5 JUDGE ORIE: Well, Ms. Mahindaratne, let's try to -- I can
6 understand that you are a bit confused by the answer of the witness
7 because he used many words but didn't really answer your question.
8 Earlier you said prior to the -- your operations, you were not
9 informed about what were Serb villages, what were Croat villages.
10 Now, in this report, a distinction is made between these two kind
11 of villages. How did this information -- how was this information
12 introduced, where you were not informed about it before the operation?
13 Where does it come from?
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] For each and every operation in
15 Oluja-Obruc, we received maps and indications as to where we were
16 supposed to go. To me, as a commander, the fact that the area had
17 suffered more or less damage did not matter as much. I had to go through
18 an area as per the order.
19 What the war record says is written more of a -- more as a
20 narrative. And it reflects the personal view of the author of the war
22 JUDGE ORIE: Personal view, I mean, it's an observation, whether
23 a village is a Croat village or mainly Serbian-populated village.
24 Do you know where the author of this document got this
25 information from? That's the question.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Believe me, I don't know. I think
2 that this was his personal, general conclusion.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Well, I accept that you say, I don't know where he
4 got it from. That -- to characterise a village as of one or another
5 ethnicity, to say that this is an overall conclusion, whereas, usually it
6 is a fact which is based on other facts. But let's leave that apart.
7 You do not know, and that's most important.
8 Ms. Mahindaratne, please proceed.
9 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Thank you, Mr. President. I tender this
10 document. It's a part of Exhibit P1240, for the record.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And it's not sufficient that we know what
12 pages of -- do we need a duplicate here?
13 MS. MAHINDARATNE: No, Mr. President. It's just for the record I
14 indicated that it is a part. It is not -- this document is not included
15 in P1240, but --
16 JUDGE ORIE: It is not included.
17 MS. MAHINDARATNE: No, Mr. President.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Then it needs an exhibit number.
19 Mr. Registrar.
20 THE REGISTRAR: This document becomes Exhibit P2679. Thank you.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Any objections? If not, P2679 is admitted into
23 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Mr. President, I note the time. I have just
24 one --
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now, Ms. Mahindaratne, forgive me for not
1 immediately responding to numbers, but the author of this portion of the
2 document is who exactly?
3 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Mr. President, this is a part of the war
4 record of the -- this witness's unit, Zagreb Special Police Unit. The
5 exact author is not known.
6 JUDGE ORIE: It's a unit report.
7 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Yes.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. It is an appropriate time for the break.
9 You know that before breaks I'm usually interested in knowing how
10 much time you would still need.
11 MS. MAHINDARATNE: I believe less than a half-hour,
12 Mr. President.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Less than half an hour.
14 Mr. Mikulicic, could you give, already, an estimate, as matters
15 stand now?
16 MR. MIKULICIC: As matters stand now, I believe I will have one
17 session, maybe less.
18 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber will consider the times claimed and the
19 times to be allowed.
20 We'll have a break, and we'll resume at 11.00.
21 --- Recess taken at 10.37 a.m.
22 --- On resuming at 11.08 a.m.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Mahindaratne, please proceed.
24 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Thank you, Mr. President.
25 Q. Mr. Cvrk, now you testified yesterday that you were in
1 Donji Lapac on 7th August, late evening, to report on your unit linking
2 with the Gospic Military District units.
3 MS. MAHINDARATNE: This is, for the record, at transcript
4 page 25378.
5 Q. To whom did you report to in Donji Lapac?
6 A. I believe that I found the chief of the special police sector in
7 Donji Lapac, and that was Mr. Zeljko Sacic.
8 Q. And when you were asked about what you observed in Donji Lapac,
9 this is what you say. You said:
10 "There was quite obvious that a high degree of combat activity
11 had taken place there. The command building and the police station had
12 received several direct hits."
13 What command building were you referring to in Donji Lapac?
14 A. I think that it was the police station building.
15 Q. So there wasn't a separate command building. You were referring
16 to the one police station; that's all?
17 A. I think that it was the police station, as it was the duty of
18 other forces who were already there to deal with that, this is just my
19 general recollection from the moments when I passed through the town, and
20 this is what I confirmed here.
21 Q. Now, yesterday, you said, Mr. Cvrk, that you were in Donji Lapac
22 until night-fall. And you say:
23 "I spent some time this with the men from the battery that I
24 referred to."
25 And you also say that on the following morning at some 10.00 or
1 11.00 in the morning, you were invited to a coordination meeting of all
2 special police unit commanders.
3 MS. MAHINDARATNE: This is at page 25379.
4 Q. Now, where was that coordination meeting that you were supposed
5 to report to on the following morning?
6 A. I think that it was held in Boricevac. There was a building next
7 to the school, and there was a church very close by where we had the
8 meeting. But whether this was -- this place where we had the meeting was
9 a part of the school, I'm not sure. But the school and the church were
10 certainly right next to that place.
11 Q. And was Mr. Markac present at that meeting?
12 A. Yes. Yes, Mr. Markac was present at that meeting.
13 Q. And Mr. Sacic?
14 A. So was Mr. Sacic and most of us commanders of special police
16 Q. So this was on the 8th August morning; is that correct?
17 A. As far as I can remember, I think that it was so.
18 Q. Now, yesterday you also said that -- this is what you said. I'll
19 read it to you. You said:
20 "To my knowledge, most of the units of were disengaged, one by
21 one, in succession; and, as far as I remember, until the end of the day,
22 and I'm referring to the 9th of August, all of us had left the general
23 area of Donji Lapac."
24 So do I understand your testimony to be that to the end of
25 9th August, the units were in the area of Donji Lapac; is that your
2 A. Yes. To the -- by the end of the 9th, according to my
3 recollection, yes, that was so.
4 Q. Do you recall where you spent the night of 7th August?
5 A. I think that I spent the night between the 7th and the 8th in a
6 place called Bruvno where I arrived very late in the even.
7 Q. And your unit? Where was your unit stationed on the evening of
8 9th -- 7th August?
9 A. Between the 7th and the 8th, a part of the unit which was part of
10 the rocket and artillery support for the special police were in the
11 general area of Boricevci. And most of the members of the unit were in
13 Q. Mr. Cvrk, did you see houses burning in Donji Lapac in the
14 evening of 7th August?
15 A. Yes, a part of them. But I don't have a major recollection of
16 Donji Lapac itself, because my activity on the 7th was focused towards
17 Udbina, so that I do not remember all the developments in Donji Lapac
18 except reports on linking up with forces from the
19 Gospic Military District.
20 Q. But can you be a bit more specific? You said you recall "part of
21 them." So about how many houses did you see burning when you saw? I
22 mean, approximately 10, 20, more than that?
23 A. Look, maybe up to ten facilities, not just houses, but, as far as
24 I remember, it was one motel, and there was a truck burning which was hit
25 at the very entrance to the town. So maybe up to ten various facilities
1 or so, but I couldn't say that with 100 per cent certainty, because I was
2 not focused on that at all at the time, because this was the zone of
3 combat operations.
4 Q. Now, was the burning discussed at the meeting had you with
5 Mr. Sacic in Donji Lapac? You know, did you all, at this, discuss as to
6 what was going on, why there were property burning?
7 A. I personally did not. My discussion with Mr. Sacic was focused
8 on the execution of the tasks that I had to, together with my colleagues,
9 to link up with the Military District Gospic and in the direction of
10 Udbina. I came there to report to him that we managed to link up with
11 them, that we linked up with the 9th Brigade before Udbina. And, thus,
12 we accomplished our task. So the contents of my discussion with
13 Mr. Sacic was mainly focused on the execution of this particular task.
14 Q. Do you know as to who burnt those houses, at least, Mr. -- at
15 least today?
16 A. Well, from general information, or from what I could glean here
17 and there, it was a place where we linked up with parts of the
18 Croatian Army, and it's possible that some problems resulted from that.
19 And during the preparation for my testimony, I was informed about the
20 reactions of the special police command to this. But as for my knowledge
21 from that time, when these events were taking place, I do not have it. I
22 know that this problem did occur. I even saw some of the documents
23 discussing these problems during my preparation for my testimony. And I
24 could see from what the command of special police did that this happened,
25 but I didn't take any part in that.
1 Q. So during your preparations, the Defence team showed you
2 documentation and informed you about the evidence regarding what happened
3 in Donji Lapac?
4 A. Yes, they informed me about the documents which are enclosed and
5 which are connected with the Defence.
6 Q. And were you also informed as to, you know -- earlier on you said
7 that you were shown photographs about special police members being --
8 special police members taken in Gracac. Were you also informed about the
9 evidence relating to those photographs, what has transpired in the
10 testimonies here?
11 A. I was shown these photographs, and as you asked me previously, I
12 saw this on the Internet when I was in Zagreb. When I returned from
13 here, I saw the statement of Mr. Pavlovic in connection with your
15 Q. So you were shown Mr. Pavlovic's statement in the preparation for
16 this testimony today; is that correct?
17 A. No, not during the preparation. But I found it on the Internet.
18 I saw his statement on the Internet. That was at the time when I was in
20 JUDGE ORIE: I seek, on one point, clarification,
21 Ms. Mahindaratne.
22 These photographs, they were shown to you during your preparation
23 for your testimony; is that correctly understood?
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That is right, Your Honour.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Could you briefly describe what you saw in these
1 photographs? Not in detail but ... was it persons, was it houses, was
2 it -- what did you see on the photographs?
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] These were photographs depicting
4 special police members in vehicles and standing by some houses.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Do you remember the colour of those vehicles?
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. Because, as far as I can
7 remember, the photographs were black and white.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then it's difficult to identify the colour.
9 That's ...
10 Were these trucks or vehicles for persons?
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] One truck and a number of passenger
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. One of them showing someone to -- who is about
14 to jump-start the passenger vehicle?
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That is correct, Your Honour.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
17 Please proceed, Ms. Mahindaratne.
18 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Thank you, Mr. President.
19 Q. Just one other question about Donji Lapac.
20 Now, you said you didn't pay attention to what happened in
21 Donji Lapac but you were informed in your preparation about the
22 documentation and the evidence. Were you informed that there has been
23 some discussion as to who perpetrated the crimes in Donji Lapac?
24 About -- you, in fact, referred to the linking up with the army. Were
25 you specifically informed of that?
1 A. Was I specifically informed about that at the time, during the
2 Operation Storm, while it was in progress? Was that your question?
3 Q. No, no, during your preparations with the Defence team.
4 A. During the preparation, we discussed that, whether a unit of
5 Croatian Army entered Donji Lapac and several problems arose, as a result
6 of that.
7 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Mr. Registrar, can I have P586, please.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Mahindaratne, before we look at that, could you,
9 please, further explore what the several problems were that arose.
10 Could you give us further information? You said you discussed it
11 and several problems arose as a result of that.
12 What problems arose?
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mostly, several facilities were
14 torched when this unit entered Donji Lapac. This is what I was told.
15 MS. MAHINDARATNE:
16 Q. And you were told that by -- during the preparation for testimony
17 by the Defence team?
18 A. I think that in this way the Defence wanted to prepare me
19 concerning absolutely all events connected with the military and police
20 Operation Storm and the area through which the special police was moving.
21 So I think it was their general intention and that they told me that in
22 order to remind me of the events in Donji Lapac. So, yes.
23 Q. And were you -- I'm going show you two documents, Mr. Cvrk. If
24 could you just quickly tell the Trial Chamber if you have seen these two
25 documents during preparation.
1 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Mr. Registrar, if could I have P586, please.
2 Q. Did you see this document during preparation?
3 A. Not this one.
4 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Can I have D556, Mr. Registrar.
5 Q. Were you shown this document?
6 A. Generally speaking, no, I don't think so.
7 Q. When you say "generally speaking," is it that you can't remember
8 or ...
9 A. I'm not 100 per cent sure, but I don't think so.
10 Q. Okay.
11 Now, until the Defence informed you of the -- of the situation in
12 Donji Lapac, were you aware of any facts about what really happened in
13 Donji Lapac, resulting from experience during Operation Storm?
14 A. Not from personal experience, but we often discussed the fact
15 that when we linked up with this unit of Croatian Army, that several
16 business establishments were torched. There was some torching, in other
18 Q. Thank you, Mr. Cvrk, for answering my questions.
19 MS. MAHINDARATNE: I have no further questions for this witness,
20 Mr. President.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Ms. Mahindaratne.
22 Mr. Mikulicic, the Chamber has considered your -- your request to
23 re-examine the witness for one session or less, which is rather a
24 flexible expression. The Chamber also has already considered the way in
25 which the examination-in-chief was conducted, and the Chamber strongly
1 invites you to see whether can you conclude your re-examination within
2 one hour.
3 Please proceed.
4 MR. MIKULICIC: I will try, Your Honour. I will do my best.
5 Re-examination by Mr. Mikulicic:
6 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, Mr. Cvrk.
7 We will be going back to the topics broached by my learned
8 friend. Let us start with the subject of internal control of the special
10 Mr. Cvrk, I'll ask you to have a look at the document 3D00611.
11 MR. MIKULICIC: [Interpretation] If I can have the Registrar's
13 Q. The issue of authority and obligations that the internal control
14 department had within the special police structure evidently still
15 remains unclear.
16 To your recollection, what was the main role of the internal
17 control department of the special police sector?
18 A. The internal control department of the special police sector of
19 the Ministry of the Interior had, as its task, to gather and compile
20 information concerning in-house order, activities carried out and their
21 nature. All the information, having been analysed, was sent to the head
22 of the sector -- special police sector, along with recommendations for
23 actions that needed to be taken over a period of time.
24 So, in a nutshell, that would be the role of the internal control
1 Q. Mr. Cvrk, you have a document before you dated the
2 13th of February, 1995, co-signed by the minister of the interior,
3 Mr. Jarnjak, and his assistant, Mr. Markac, concerning the scope of work
4 of the internal control department of the special police sector. What
5 the document speaks to is the fact that the department has, as its
6 objective, to gather, process, and use information on the -- on the
7 internal order. In the second paragraph, that it is supposed to work on
8 the protection of the security of the special police. In the third
9 paragraph, that it is supposed to maintain cooperation with the SZUP and
10 other security services; to apply methods and means in order to gather,
11 assess, and work on intelligence.
12 Mr. Cvrk, according to your understanding and experience, had the
13 internal control department ever been involved in disciplinary
14 proceedings against members of the special police sector?
15 A. No. This isn't something that the internal control department
16 was able to do.
17 MR. MIKULICIC: [Interpretation] Can this document be assigned a
18 number, please.
19 MS. MAHINDARATNE: No objection.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
21 THE REGISTRAR: This document becomes Exhibit D1839. Thank you.
22 JUDGE ORIE: And is admitted into evidence.
23 MR. MIKULICIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
24 Q. Mr. Cvrk, my learned friend from the Prosecution asked you
25 yesterday about the authority vested with the chief of the police
1 administration. She showed you an expert -- excerpt from the testimony
2 of Mr. Cetina, the former head of the Zadar-Knin Police Administration.
3 Mr. Cvrk, the relations among members of the special police units
4 within the sector, in the activities that they carried out in the area of
5 responsibility of the police administration, and the relations among
6 members of the Joint Forces, including special police units outside of
7 the territory of the police administration, can you clarify what sort of
8 difference there exists in terms of hierarchy?
9 A. The special unit of the Zagreb Police Administration that I was
10 the commander of was part and parcel of the Zagreb Police Administration,
11 and, as a unit, it engaged in all sorts of activities, as envisaged by
12 the rules of the Ministry of the Interior, Law on Police, and other
14 I am directly responsible to the head of the Zagreb
15 Police Administration for my work. And, when it come to the activity of
16 joint police forces, the Zagreb Police Administration customarily would
17 receive either a request or an order for its participation in the joint
18 force. As soon as the Joint Forces leave the area of the
19 Zagreb Police Administration, they are resubordinated as per order. This
20 is the customary model of activity in the police administration and in
21 the joint police force.
22 Q. As far as matters related to the status of special police members
23 is concerned, in terms of their employment and other benefits, where are
24 these matters resolved? At which level? Is it the level of the police
25 administration, or the level of the joint forces, regardless of the
1 police administration involved?
2 A. The employment status of all members of the police, including the
3 register of their attendance at work, or other employment benefits, all
4 of that is taken care of by the police administration.
5 MR. MIKULICIC: [Interpretation] I will now be referring to the
6 transcript of Mr. Cetina's testimony, pages 23488 -- or, rather, that
7 page, line 7.
8 Q. My question to Mr. Cetina was to explain the situation in
9 relation to the statement he gave to the OTP investigators about how
10 special police units were organised within a police administration.
11 I also asked him to distinguish between this situation and the
12 situation where members of the special police unit are involved in
13 operations such as Operation Storm. At the time, I asked Mr. Cetina if
14 he agreed that these were two different sets of situations, and his
15 answer was yes.
16 I next asked him if it was true that special police members
17 engaged in combat during Operation Storm were outside of the
18 jurisdiction, or, rather, within the jurisdiction of the Main Staff of
19 the Croatian Army. And his answer was yes.
20 I next asked him what, of the case when they were not engaged in
21 combat, if, in that case, they were within the jurisdiction of the police
22 administration. Again, he answered in the affirmative.
23 Do these answers provided by Mr. Cetina tally with what your
24 understanding of the special police units' position is when it is under
25 the competence of the police administration and under the competence of
1 the Main Staff?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Mr. Cvrk, let us discuss the powers vested with the special
5 On this score, I'm referring to the conduct of proceedings.
6 MR. MIKULICIC: [Interpretation] Can we call up document D527,
8 Q. I will be showing you a decree on the internal structure and
9 manner of work of the Ministry of the Interior of the
10 Republic of Croatia
11 MS. MAHINDARATNE: I'm interested in Article 17 of the decree,
12 which can be found at page 13 of the English version in e-court -- no,
13 that's not the case. Apologies. Page 8 in e-court, Article 17. My
15 Article 17. That's page 9 in the Croatian version. I think that
16 we have it at last.
17 Q. Mr. Cvrk, the decree on the internal structure of the
18 Ministry of the Interior, in Article 17, provides for the duties of the
19 crime police sector. It reads:
20 "It shall monitor and analyse the state of affairs and trends in
21 criminality overall."
22 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Now let us turn to Article 27. Because that's
23 all I need of this Article at the present. And that's at page 11 in
24 e-court. Page 12 of the Croatian version. Article 27. I'm interested
25 in the bottom part of the page in Croatian.
1 Q. The decree on the internal structure of the
2 Ministry of the Interior describes the activities of the special police
3 sector in this Article. It reads:
4 The special police sector shall establish, direct, and guide the
5 work of special police units. It shall monitor and analyse incidents of
6 terrorism, et cetera.
7 You will have noticed, Mr. Cvrk, that the Article describing the
8 special police sector and its obligations does not mention work related
9 to crime at all, does it?
10 A. That's correct, it does not.
11 Q. As part of the organisation of the Ministry of the Interior,
12 which was organised by sectors, which sector was concerned with issues
13 related to crime?
14 A. Crime was the sole competence of the crime police sector.
15 Q. Mr. Cvrk, your special police unit of the
17 engaged in a criminal investigation, conducted suspect interviews,
18 crime-scene examinations; and had your special police unit ever been
19 engaged in filing a criminal report, bringing charges?
20 A. No, never.
21 Q. Correct me if I'm wrong, Mr. Cvrk, but I do recall you stating in
22 your testimony that the special police would assist the crime police in
23 certain instances of arrest and some other situations.
24 Can you tell us something about the cooperation involved and what
25 role the special police sector played in that cooperation with the crime
2 A. The special policemen assisted the criminal investigation
3 policemen of the Zagreb Police Administration in arresting perpetrators
4 of the most serious crimes, in arraigning them, and in other activities
5 related to the criminal investigation.
6 At the end of this process, we would filed the so-called general
7 report that would be attached to the case file. This, because we did not
8 keep a record of any crimes or misdemeanours; rather, in the area of the
9 police administration, regardless of the police station concerned, we
10 would be seconded for assistance, and report on what was done. That was
11 the usual procedure through which we assisted the crime police of the
12 RH MUP.
13 Q. You've just said, Mr. Cvrk, that you did not keep either a
14 criminal or a misdemeanour record in the special police sector. Who did
15 maintain such records within the Ministry of the Interior?
16 A. The criminal or misdemeanour records or registers were kept by
17 the police stations in accordance with the Law on Police.
18 Q. The internal structure of the Ministry of the Interior, which is
19 dealt with in Article 3 of the decree, envisages several sectors, such as
20 the police sector.
21 MR. MIKULICIC: [Interpretation] If we could have a look at
22 Article 3 which is at page 2 of the document, counting from page 1.
23 Q. In the Ministry of the Interior, first of all, we have the
24 minister's office, then we have the Service for the Protection of the
25 Constitutional Order, and then we have various sectors from 3 through 10:
1 We have the police sector, crime police sector, special police sector,
2 et cetera.
3 Mr. Cvrk, did any of these sectors of the Ministry of the
4 Interior keep criminal or misdemeanour registers?
5 A. To my recollection, no.
6 Q. General Markac was assistant minister for special police. We've
7 just described the activities of the special police. Was General Markac
8 able to order the special policemen of the sector to engage in a criminal
10 A. No. That was not part of the description of our work.
11 Q. We will be moving to a different topic now.
12 MR. MIKULICIC: [Interpretation] Can we call up P2379. If we
13 could please see page 2 of this document.
14 Q. Do you remember, Mr. Cvrk, it was discussed whether, during the
15 search of the terrain, during the Oluja-Obruc operation, any civilians
16 were taken prisoner and whether there were any combat contacts. And my
17 learned friend showed you a table for the 26th of August from which it
18 followed that one person had been taken prisoner, and that there was some
19 fire contact, and that a civilian was also registered; and then
20 Presiding Judge Orie asked you whether this was one and the same person.
21 Do you remember that, whether this was one and the same person?
22 A. Yes, I remember.
23 Q. Please have a look at point 5 of this document, which says that
24 at 1200 hours in Kovacevica Stanovi a member of the enemy army opened
25 fire but was overpowered, arrested, and handed over to the military
1 police. And further on, in the same paragraph, it says that in the same
2 village, one unregistered civilian by the name of Vasil Kovacevic was
3 found there and that it was an elderly man. Does this report, submitted
4 by the Primorsko-Gorinska Police Administration and its unit, clarify
5 this dilemma, whether this was one person or two different persons?
6 A. It is now quite clear that these are two different persons.
7 MR. MIKULICIC: [Interpretation] Could we please see the
8 document P610.
9 Q. We will return to another document which my friend from the OTP
10 showed you - and it is a document signed by General Markac and sent
11 personally to the chief of the Dubrovnik
12 Administration - and it has to do with initiating a disciplinary
14 Do you remember that you saw this document a while ago?
15 A. Yes, I remember.
16 MR. MIKULICIC: [Interpretation] could we please focus on the
17 second paragraph of this document, below the title "Order," where it
19 "Enclosed you will find an official record made on the said
20 incident which occurred on the 15th of June, 1995, at the [sic]
21 international border crossing, Neum 2, as well as the reports submitted
22 by the Croatian Republic
23 Mr. Cvrk, you said that in the activities at the state border,
24 members of your unit also took part, that is to say, members of the
25 special police unit of the Zagreb Police Administration; is that correct?
1 A. Yes, that is correct.
2 Q. It is correct, isn't it, Mr. Cvrk, that the area of the border
3 crossing Neum is in the area of the Dubrovnik
4 Administration and far away from the -- from the area of responsibility
5 of the Zagreb
6 A. Yes, that is correct.
7 Q. Can you tell us, how did it happen that some of your members,
8 special policemen from Zagreb
9 the area of the Zagreb Police Administration? What was this all about?
10 A. I believe that it had to do with an operation that was called
11 Krug Dubrovnik, that is to say, Circle Dubrovnik. Where special
12 policemen from a number of various police administrations were sent to
13 the area of the Dubrovnik
14 discharge some police duties.
15 Q. Is it correct that this operation included joint forces of police
16 which were formed from policemen from several police administrations, as
17 you told us?
18 A. Yes, it was necessary to have an order of the police -- special
19 police sector so that these members could be engaged in the area of
20 another police administration.
21 Q. Considering the fact, Mr. Cvrk, that in this memo of the
22 assistant minister, Mr. Markac, a report of the members of the border
23 police of the Croatian Republic
24 correct that this was a report that did not come from the territory of
25 the Republic of Croatia
1 A. Judging by this document, one can assume that this was the
2 activity of special police members within the border crossing Neum 2,
3 which was under the jurisdiction of Bosnia and Herzegovina
4 Q. When official documents were exchanged between two countries - in
5 this case, Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Republic of Croatia
6 the documents that were connected with police work submitted to the
7 Ministry of Interior? Were they sent directly to police administration,
8 or were they sent to the ministry headquarters in Zagreb?
9 What do you remember about this procedure?
10 A. They were certainly sent to the Ministry of the Interior.
11 Q. As this has to do with initiating proceedings from a foreign
12 country and as these are joint forces, do you find it strange that
13 assistant minister, Mr. Markac, took on the initiative in such a
15 A. No, I do not find it strange because it is certain that the
16 interior minister requested him to do so.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Mahindaratne.
18 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Mr. President, I object because this witness
19 was not aware of -- he was just merely speculating. And, right now,
20 Mr. Mikulicic has taken the witness to a point, now he is, in fact,
21 expressing an opinion about this document, when, in fact, during my
22 examination, this witness was not familiar at all with the document.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Mikulicic.
24 MR. MIKULICIC: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I showed to the
25 witness this document. I pointed out a section of the document which I
1 considered to be important, and I asked him to comment on that on the
2 basis of his personal experience. He said that it is obvious that the
3 initiative had come from another country and that it was normal that then
4 it would be resolved through the headquarters of the ministry in Zagreb
5 For the needs of these proceedings, I think this is quite
7 JUDGE ORIE: The question has been answered. I do not see a
8 reason, at this moment, to strike the answer from the record.
9 Please proceed.
10 [Defence counsel confer]
11 MR. MIKULICIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
12 Now I would ask for the document, D99.
13 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Mr. President, I just wish to point out just
14 an error on the transcript at page 54. Mr. Mikulicic' questioning about
15 the 26th August, you know, capture of prisoners -- prisoner. At
16 page 54, line 9:
17 "Do you remember, Mr. Cvrk, it was discussed whether, during the
18 search of terrain, during the Oluja-Obruc operation, any civilians were
19 taken prisoner and whether there were any combat contacts. And my
20 learned friend showed you a table for the 26th of August ..."
21 That was really 27th August, Mr. President. Just for clarity of
22 the transcript.
23 MR. MIKULICIC: Correct, Your Honour. My mistake. Apologies.
24 Thank you for the intervention, Ms. Mahindaratne.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. It's the report on the 26th that was shown.
1 MR. MIKULICIC: [Overlapping speakers] ... 27th. Right. My
2 mistake. I'm sorry.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
4 MR. MIKULICIC: [Interpretation] if we could please see the
5 document D99.
6 [Defence counsel confer]
7 MR. MIKULICIC: [Interpretation] My apologies, Your Honours, but
8 it seems that something is wrong in my records.
9 Q. We'll return for a moment to your statement, Mr. Cvrk, and
10 paragraph 21, which my learned friend from the OTP referred to. And in
11 this paragraph you said that, as far as you know, there were several
12 occasions when combat contact occurred with members of the remaining
13 terrorist groups during ground-search operations?
14 After that, you were shown a table from which we could see on how
15 many occasions such combat contact did or did not occur. And, actually,
16 there were very few such contacts. Do you remember?
17 My question is: These numbers, as one can see from the document,
18 includes the Operation Oluja-Obruc. But you also took part in other
19 operations of ground search and mop-up -- and not just in this one.
20 Is that right?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. During the direct examination, we talked about ground search
23 operations in the areas of Petrova Gora and Plitvice. Did it happen,
24 during these other ground search operations outside the former
25 Sector South, any contacts occur with straggling enemy soldiers?
1 A. As far as I remember, the unit I commanded did not have such
2 contacts. However, there were other contacts as well.
3 Q. When, in paragraph 21 of your statement, you talked about these
4 contacts, did you focus exclusively on the Oluja-Obruc operation or
5 also --
6 MS. MAHINDARATNE: [Previous translation continues] ... I object
7 to this leading. The witness has answered my question as to what exactly
8 he was referring to when he referred to those contacts. He, in fact,
9 conceded with my suggestion. And now, if Mr. Mikulicic wants to
10 rehabilitate the witness on that aspect, it should not be done in a
11 leading manner.
12 MR. MIKULICIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I do not think that
13 I asked a leading question. My question to the witness was whether his
14 unit also participated in other ground search operations and whether any
15 contacts occurred during these other ground search operations. That was
16 the basis of my question. And after that I ask him whether, in his
17 statement, he referred to other operations or just this one, Oluja-Obruc.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Your last question was leading, Mr. Mikulicic.
19 Would you please rephrase it. You could rephrase it in the way by what
20 was your focus on as far as operations are concerned.
21 Please proceed.
22 MR. MIKULICIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President. Let us
23 depart from this subject, then, and move on to another one.
24 And, for this purpose, I would ask for the document D1788 to be
25 shown, please.
1 Q. You will remember, Mr. Cvrk, that when, during grounds searches,
2 you would come across civilians, that one of your obligations was to
3 establish whether they had valid personal identification or passes, as
4 you mentioned.
5 This is a document which was sent by Colonel Mladen Fuzul on the
6 occasion of a ground search operation on the 21st of August, 1995. In
7 the introduction he says, As special MUP forces will be mopping up the
8 remaining Chetnik forces in the field, deep in the area of responsibility
9 of OG West" -- that's the operations Group West, "with the aim of
10 ensuring the safety of our members, I hereby order ... any movement is
11 banned deep in the territory.
12 And now the area is specified?
13 Under item 2 it says, Inform the personnel located along the road
14 about this order, and forbid any movement in the said territory in which
15 special MUP forces will be moving.
16 Under item 3 it says that the mop-up operation of the special
17 forces of the MUP shall begin at 0600 hours on 22nd of August, 1995. The
18 forces will be moving from the west to the east, and the operation will
19 last for the next couple of days?
20 And, finally, that prompt information shall be submitted at the
21 end of the operation and unit commanders will shall responsible for this
23 First let me ask you, Mr. Cvrk, whether you ever saw this order?
24 A. I think that during the preparation we saw a number of various
25 orders which dealt with the activities during the Oluja-Obruc operation,
1 and I think I saw this one as well.
2 Q. Even though you're not a soldier but you have some military
3 experience, can you tell us what is the purpose of an order like this one
4 in a situation when a certain area is being searched and mopped up by
5 special police members?
6 A. The purpose of this document is, first of all, to confirm to the
7 military units, which are located in the area liberated during the
8 military and police Operation Storm, that special police forces would be
9 moving in the area with a specific task. Also, this order says that the
10 movement of units which are located in this area should be limited in
11 order to prevent any misunderstandings that could result from that.
12 MR. MIKULICIC: [Interpretation] Could we please see the document
13 1D622 now.
14 The document's ID is 1D70-1176.
15 [Defence counsel confer]
16 MR. MIKULICIC: [Interpretation] 1D622. This is not the document
17 that I'm looking for, Mr. Registrar. Maybe if we could show it -- that's
18 right. That's it.
19 Q. Mr. Cvrk, this is a document dating the 8th of August, 1995
20 which was sent by Mr. Josko Moric, assistant minister for the police, and
21 he sent it to the police administrations of Zagreb, Karlovac, Lika-Sinj
22 and Zadar-Knin.
23 In this document, it is stated:
24 "At exactly 2200 hours, re-open to traffic all roads on which
25 traffic was banned due to the liberation of the occupied area, without
1 any limitations or bans."
2 Mr. Cvrk, while you were in the territory of the Lika-Sinj and
3 Zadar-Knin Police Administrations, the latter of which includes the
4 territory where Operation Storm took place. Did you, after that date,
5 that is to say, after the 8th of August, 1995, ever come across any bans
6 or limitations of movement?
7 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Mr. President, I don't believe I
8 cross-examined this witness on restriction of movement. That was not the
9 issue on the passes. I think now Mr. Mikulicic is moving into a
10 different area.
11 JUDGE ORIE: I think I raised a question in this respect and that
12 Mr. Mikulicic is not limited to what you raised but that he also can put
13 follow-up questions in relation to questions already put to the witness
14 from the Bench.
15 Therefore, you may proceed, Mr. Mikulicic.
16 MR. MIKULICIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
17 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Cvrk, let me repeat my question. While you
18 were present in the territory covered by Operation Storm, after the
19 8th of August, had there been any other restrictions of movement, bans on
20 movement in place at the time you were involved in search operations?
21 A. If you're asking me about the period after the 21st of August,
22 the general idea was that, for logistical and other reasons, all the
23 roads were to be made trafficable as soon as possible. As far as I know,
24 the ordinary, the civilian, and the military police had many men who were
25 there to carry out regular traffic control.
1 Q. So what is your answer to my question? Were there bans or
2 weren't there?
3 A. As far as I know, movement was banned in that period of time only
4 in the areas where we were present and active. But it did not relate to
5 the main roads such as the Gospic-Gracac road and others.
6 Q. Thank you.
7 MR. MIKULICIC: [Interpretation] can this document be assigned a
8 number, please, Your Honour.
9 MS. MAHINDARATNE: No objection.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
11 THE REGISTRAR: This document becomes Exhibit D1840. Thank you.
12 JUDGE ORIE: And is admitted into evidence.
13 MR. MIKULICIC:
14 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Cvrk, you were asked about having been
15 cautioned about the respect for international humanitarian law in
16 discharging your duties as the special police force.
17 Were these subjects covered by the schooling of the members of
18 the special police units?
19 A. These were mandatory subjects, addressed in the courses for
20 commanders, Deputy Commanders, specialist instructors, and, of course,
21 for all the special policemen who dealt with these subjects through
22 their -- throughout their courses.
23 Q. In the performance of your duties, did you address your special
24 policemen and instruct them that they were supposed to abide by the
25 provisions of international humanitarian law in the line of their duty?
1 A. Of course. This was an obligation.
2 Q. In issuing verbal or written orders to your subordinates, was
3 there an obligation on your part to always refer to this, or would you
4 issue a general order before an action?
5 A. There was a general order issued before Operation Storm, which
6 covered all these matters and was binding for all those who were
8 As for Operation Oluja-Obruc and others that followed, the
9 procedure was worked out even in more detail, as civilians were
10 encountered in the liberated areas.
11 MR. MIKULICIC: [Interpretation] This is my last topic,
12 Mr. President.
13 Q. P1240 was also discussed; this is the war record.
14 Mr. Cvrk, can you tell us something about the circumstances and
15 the time-period when this document emerged and what its purpose was?
16 A. If I remember correctly, the document was made in 1998 or 1999.
17 I don't consider it to be a report or an official document -- or, rather,
18 it is a -- or an official document that will relate to that time-period.
19 The war record was compiled based on the information received from all
20 the units involved and their activities from the start of the homeland
21 war through to its end. The document that we were able to see here was
22 written as a literally narrative, and, as such, cannot be considered to
23 have used either official or military terminology, which would make it
24 tantamount to an official report on all the activities and the experience
25 the police force had.
1 Q. Thank you, Mr. Cvrk, for all your answers.
2 MR. MIKULICIC: [Interpretation] I have no further questions.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Mikulicic.
4 Could I, since there has been an entry which has been used, P577,
5 Ms. Mahindaratne, 27th of August.
6 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Yes, Mr. President.
7 JUDGE ORIE: The Primorje Gora, the entry with the one person
8 captured and the one civilian, is not fully translated; the seized goods.
9 You see there are -- it was page 7, I think.
11 MS. MAHINDARATNE: I see, Mr. President.
12 JUDGE ORIE: You see there, three shotgun, one M-48. But more
13 has been seized, apparently, which may be the binoculars. But at least
14 it's an incomplete translation.
15 MS. MAHINDARATNE: I will have it revised, Mr. President.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Thank you.
17 Any further questions triggered by -- perhaps by the questions of
18 the Bench? No need for that.
19 [Trial Chamber confers]
20 Questioned by the Court:
21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Cvrk, you told us that these pictures were shown
22 to you, one truck, one passenger vehicle -- some of passenger vehicles.
23 Do you remember, in what context were these photographs shown? Were
24 they -- were you asked questions and then the photographs were shown;
25 and, if so, what were these questions? Or were the photographs shown,
1 and were then questions put to you when preparing for your testimony?
2 Could you describe what happened just before and just after the
3 time these photographs were shown to you?
4 A. The photographs which were allegedly taken in Gracac by a foreign
5 journalist were shown to me. We talked about the general context of the
6 time and place where they were taken and about the policemen shown in the
8 JUDGE ORIE: Now, can we take it step by step.
9 You say these photographs apparently taken by journalist. Did
10 you know, or were you told who took those photographs?
11 A. As far as I remember, when the photographs were shown to me, a
12 photograph with the journalist was also shown to me.
13 JUDGE ORIE: A photograph with the journalist.
14 A. The one who authored all the other photographs.
15 JUDGE ORIE: And then you were told that this was the person who
16 took those photographs?
17 A. That's correct, Your Honour.
18 JUDGE ORIE: And then were you explained what you saw on those
19 photographs; or were you asked to comment on it?
20 A. The photographs were shown to me, and I was told that the
21 photographs were admitted into evidence.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But then -- what then happened?
23 A. From my general knowledge, the Defence was trying to get some of
24 the persons shown in the photographs to give them statements. I was told
25 that the general area where they were taken was Gracac and the time was
1 the 8th or the 9th of August. So roughly around the time when the units
2 started disengaging and returning to their parent units.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So they were shown. And then you were asked
4 whether you could assist in getting statements from the persons shown on
5 these photographs?
6 A. No. Apparently they had already been taken earlier on. But
7 apparently the circumstances under which the photographs were taken were
8 supposed to be clarified or found out in greater detail.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. You said "... they had already been taken
11 That is statements from the persons shown on the photographs?
12 A. Yes, apparently one of them did give a statement.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Were you informed about the content of that
15 A. Not in any detail. What it involved was that one of the
16 policemen was supposed to drive one of the vehicles somewhere.
17 JUDGE ORIE: For what purpose?
18 A. Probably in order to have the vehicles removed from the roads
19 that were used; in order to make sure that there are no civilian vehicles
20 in the area.
21 JUDGE ORIE: And that's what you were told about these -- about
22 this statement?
23 A. Yes, that that was the statement given by the policeman depicted
24 in the photograph. That was the general idea.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So you were informed about the statement by
1 one of the persons appearing on this photograph. Did you recognise that
2 person, or didn't you know his identity?
3 A. I am not aware of his identity. He was not a member of my unit.
4 JUDGE ORIE: So once you were told about this statement and once
5 these photographs had been shown to you, what then were you supposed to
6 do or were -- what were you asked to do? To comment or to answer
7 specific questions?
8 A. I was told that the photographs were part of the case file and
9 that I might be asked to comment on what is shown in the photographs.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And did they ask you at the time what your
11 comment would be?
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That the photographs that could be
13 seen were not really that affirmative for the police force. But that
14 given that the operation was nearing its end and given the circumstances
15 in which members of that particular police unit were in, it could be
16 warranted. That would be my interpretation of it.
17 JUDGE ORIE: And you told them at the time, the ones who
18 interviewed you?
19 A. Yes. I said it then and I'm saying it now. I stand by that.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. If you say "that the photographs ... could be
21 seen were not really that affirmative for the police force," did you
22 intend do say that this is not characteristic for what the police force
24 A. I meant to say that, in the course of our activities, we dealt
25 with very serious tasks, so that these eight or nine photographs where
1 people were merrymaking or whatever they were doing, does not generally
2 reflect the police force, as such. That's why I said that it wasn't
4 JUDGE ORIE: Did you give any other comment?
5 A. If I'm supposed to give a final comment on my testimony before
6 this honourable Tribunal, I can say that the special police units of the
7 Zagreb Police Administration as well as all other special police units
8 were organised with a very clear chain of command and structure; and
9 that, as of 1993 onwards, as the special police departments were set up,
10 a contribution was made to making the structure even more solid.
11 Is that what you meant?
12 JUDGE ORIE: No. I meant whether you gave any further comment on
13 the photographs that were shown to you.
14 A. No, that would be all.
15 JUDGE ORIE: If you would just give me one second, please.
16 Yes, I'm just checking. You said some eight or nine photographs
17 with vehicles on it were shown to you?
18 A. Six, seven, eight, thereabout. Definitely more than five.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Did you -- was it first time that you saw
20 these photographs?
21 A. Yes, that was the first time.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Did you have any opinion about this -- this
23 passenger vehicle? You said you understood this because it was the end
24 of the operation, so you understood the activity.
25 Could you explain what you meant by that?
1 A. What I meant by referring to the easing of tensions, I meant one
2 of the soldiers who was playing the accordion and the other two clipping
3 their hair on the road. It's not your soldierly behaviour, if you will,
4 and that's what I had in mind.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Did you -- as far as the passenger vehicle was
6 concerned, did you understand that activity or ...
7 A. To my knowledge, whether it was in the early days of
8 Operation Storm or before linking up with the Croatian army forces of the
9 Split Military District, I know that there was an opening of fire.
10 Someone opened a fire -- opened fire, and this resulted in the death of
11 one of the members. And I'm not sure if it's the same unit that was
12 shown on the photograph.
13 It is possible that the logic behind relocating these vehicles to
14 another place was to prevent the unlawful use of civilian vehicles. That
15 was my line of thinking.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Let me just check what you earlier said.
17 Earlier you said, when these vehicles were to be driven away, I
18 asked you for purpose.
19 And then you said:
20 "Probably in order to have the vehicles removed from the roads
21 that were used; in order to make sure that there are no civilian vehicles
22 in the area."
23 Now, these are two different explanations for the same situation.
24 The one in which you say it could be seen in the context of that
25 passenger vehicles should not be illegally used, and earlier you said it
1 was to free the roads.
2 Now, what makes you believe each of these explanations? Was one
3 of them suggested to you, or was -- did you both came to these ideas
4 which are not fully consonant yourself? Could you tell us what ...
5 A. I said earlier that I followed Mr. Pavlovic's testimony at home
6 over the Internet, and I followed the part of his testimony which had to
7 do the photographs.
8 So now it's difficult for me, with hindsight, to say which caused
9 the other.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Earlier you said, when you talked about the
11 vehicles being removed from the roads that were being used, you said that
12 this was -- you took it from the content of the statement that was taken
13 from the person who apparently was driving or manipulating this car.
14 Now, which of the two is it?
15 Mr. Misetic.
16 MR. MISETIC: Mr. President, well, I don't want to do it front of
17 the witness. There might be a interpretation issue with respect to the
18 question you're posing there.
19 JUDGE ORIE: If there is, tell me what line it is. Then I will
20 repeat my question.
21 MR. MISETIC: It's the use of the word the witness used could
22 mean both - and I will be try to be vague about this - both something
23 stated in court and something written on paper.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Is that -- the answer he gave earlier?
25 MR. MISETIC: Yes.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
2 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Your Honour, I was going to rise and say the
3 same thing, so we're --
4 JUDGE ORIE: I suggest that we then verify that on the basis of
5 the original so that we -- and that I refrain from reference to -- to the
6 previous answer.
7 Now, to free the roads of vehicles, do you remember whether that
8 was on the basis of the testimony of -- I think it was Mr. Pavlovic, or
9 that you got that from any other source?
10 A. I think that those were the words of Mr. Pavlovic, given during
11 his testimony.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Could you then tell me what you remember that
13 was found in the statement of the special policeman who drove that car
14 away? What was his explanation for what he did at the time? What was
15 the purpose of driving away this ...
16 A. The reason was to have all these vehicles relocated to one place.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And what's the purpose of relocating all
18 vehicles to one place?
19 A. I think that the only reason that would justify their relocation
20 was to make sure that things worked properly. We moved ahead, whereas
21 these vehicles were lying around, scattered everywhere. That was my line
22 of thinking.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But I asked you not what your line of thinking
24 was but what you found in the statement of which the content was, in
25 general terms, made available to you. I'm not asking you to imagine what
1 the reason could have been, but whether any reason was given by the
2 person who gave that statement.
3 MR. MIKULICIC: Your Honour, I hate to interfere into your line
4 of questioning, but the witness expressly said that he was not shown any
6 JUDGE ORIE: But the content was told to him, not in detail, but
7 the content was shown -- was told him.
8 So I'm asking whether any reason for this activity was given in
9 the statement to the extent you were told about the content of that
11 A. Your Honour, I was shown photographs; I was not shown a
12 statement. But the contents was re-told in such a way that I was told
13 that it was established who this person was, that the person had given a
14 statement in which he supposedly said that the vehicles were moved so
15 that they would be all brought to one place.
16 So, in general terms, this is what I remember and what I have
18 As for the statement itself, I have not seen it. I did not have
19 it before me. It was not presented to me.
20 [Trial Chamber confers]
21 JUDGE ORIE: I have no further questions for you.
22 Any questions --
23 MR. MIKULICIC: No questions, Your Honour.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
25 Nevertheless, Witness, you're not yet excused. The Chamber keeps
1 the possibility open that we would like to put one or two more questions
2 to you after the break.
3 For you, it is now time for the break. We might need another two
4 or three minutes.
5 Madam Usher, could you escort the witness out of the courtroom.
6 [The witness stands down]
7 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Mikulicic, the Chamber has the authority to call
8 upon a party to produce certain evidence. If the Chamber would call upon
9 the Markac Defence to produce the statement which was not shown to the
10 witness but, as he testified, he was told about the content, would you be
11 in a position to produce such -- that evidence?
12 MR. MIKULICIC: I'm not aware, Your Honour, whether this
13 statement was finalised. I will ask my Case Manager, and in just a
14 minute I will --
15 JUDGE ORIE: In whatever form, finalised or not. But has a
16 statement been taken?
17 MR. MIKULICIC: Just a minute, Your Honour.
18 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Mr. President, the statements have been served
19 on the Prosecution. So we are if a position to produce the --
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, so it does --
21 MR. MIKULICIC: Your Honour, I have just been informed by my
22 Case Manager that that statement is on our 65 ter list.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Is on your 65 ter list.
24 MR. MIKULICIC: Yeah.
25 [Trial Chamber confers]
1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Mikulicic, if the -- you could provide the
2 Chamber with that statement, we have a look at it then, and we consider
3 whether it's - of course, we do not know what the content is - whether it
4 has any probative value and whether it has relevance. And also, it
5 enables us to -- to further be informed about the way in which the
6 witness was prepared for his testimony in court.
7 Mr. Kuzmanovic.
8 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Your Honour, I just want to put on the record
9 that when Mr. Tieger gave Mr. Galbraith presidential transcripts to
10 meetings that he wasn't present, we didn't have a similar kind of
11 inquiry. And I just want to draw that to the Court's attention, that
12 that parallel was not -- that parallel is almost exactly the same as the
13 situation here where we're preparing a witness for testimony; he
14 discloses information that we provided to him, completely honestly. And
15 the same inquiry wasn't made with respect to the same instance that
16 happened with Mr. Galbraith and Mr. Tieger.
17 I just wanted to put that on the record.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We will certainly pay attention to whether
19 there is any disparity in the situations.
20 Mr. Kehoe.
21 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Mr. President.
22 That came to my attention to. Since I was the one that was
23 objecting to the procedures by Mr. Tieger, I argued it's exactly that
24 point, that information was given to a witness that he hadn't seen and
25 then was opining about evidence about which he knew nothing.
1 The pages are page 4949, to line 20, to page 4952, to line 24, in
2 response to my objection, Judge, on page 4952 at line 21 and 22, you
3 denied my objection.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, we will have a look at it, Mr. Kehoe.
5 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Mr. President, may I just -- on a related
6 matter, I just wanted to point out that generally there is a practice
7 that, in the course of preparation of a witness, if the witness addresses
8 issues or the witness is shown matters which are not contained in the
9 statement, the parties disclose that -- those facts to the opposing party
10 by way of a proofing note. And we have a not received a proofing note in
11 relation to that witness.
12 MR. KEHOE: That has absolutely never been the practice and is
13 completely inaccurate.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kuzmanovic.
15 MR. KUZMANOVIC: I agree with that, Your Honour. It's just
16 simply not -- it's simply not the case. The photographs that were shown
17 to this witness are all in evidence. There are four or five photographs,
18 I believe, maybe six. They're photographs that we used with this
19 particular witness, and, unfortunately, he couldn't help us. So
20 that's -- that's that.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
22 MR. KEHOE: Mr. President, if I can clarify my statement. And I
23 think it's just to be clear.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
25 MR. KEHOE: That the obligation is to make it clear to the
1 opposing side what we are going to lead on direct examination. So if
2 there is any change in the 92 ter statement, there is some supplemental
3 information sheet given. That's -- that is it the Defence obligation.
4 The Prosecution has an additional obligation, and that is the
5 Rule 68 obligation.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I'm also looking at the clock.
7 Mr. Kuzmanovic, I'm aware that I'm creating the problem, but I
8 have to resolve it as well.
9 MR. KUZMANOVIC: I understand that, Your Honour. One short
10 thing: The photographs were on our list of exhibits potentially to use
11 with this witness. So we didn't use them for obvious reasons, because he
12 couldn't help us. So there was no point in showing --
13 JUDGE ORIE: [Overlapping speakers] ... Yes, I'm not blaming you
14 on not having used it. I'm just asking -- the simple thing is I'm asking
15 you whether you could produce such evidence if the Chamber would want to
16 see it. And you are now, invited, but perhaps I should look at the
17 Prosecution, whether, prior to giving any decision on whether we would
18 call that evidence, whether we could have a look at it. It could that be
19 that it's totally irrelevant, without any probative value, although,
20 apparently, it has been on your -- it has been disclosed. It has been on
21 the 65 ter list.
22 So maybe there is some relevance, and maybe there is some
23 probative value in it. The Chamber would like to see it. Preferably, in
24 order not to disturb the programme of this witness, during this break.
25 Is that a possibility? I take it that it's not, you know, 15 pages.
1 MS. MAHINDARATNE: [Overlapping speakers] ... yes, Mr. President,
2 we can provide it. They are short statements.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
4 Then we will have a break, and we will resume at a quarter past
6 --- Recess taken at 12.52 p.m.
7 --- On resuming at 1.22 p.m.
8 JUDGE ORIE: I hereby inform the parties that I have difficulties
9 in checking the transcript during the breaks because I'm logged in in
10 this courtroom and I can't approach. So, therefore, if you would give me
11 just a tiny little moment.
12 Yes, I checked your references given before. It might well be
13 that where the parties became a bit emotional about an issue you raised,
14 that it was not exactly the issue which was on the mind of the Chamber at
15 this moment. So, therefore, we'll, of course, we'll re-read and
16 reconsider what was said. But, until now, we didn't have the impression
17 that the parties were raising issues -- exactly the same issues as were
18 on the mind of the Chamber. And, of course, what's on the mind of the
19 Chamber is on our mind. And there's nothing wrong in trying to
20 understand that and to respond to that. But it does not always guarantee
21 that there's a clear connection between the two.
22 I leave it to that at this moment.
23 [Trial Chamber confers]
24 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Mr. President, may I just ...
25 [Trial Chamber confers]
1 MS. MAHINDARATNE: May I just address Court --
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
3 MS. MAHINDARATNE: -- very briefly. I just wanted to point out
4 what was raised by Mr. Kehoe that the transcripts shown to Mr. Galbraith
5 were related to meetings in which he participated. There was only one
6 exception --
7 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Mahindaratne --
8 MS. MAHINDARATNE: [Overlapping speakers] ... there was only
9 one --
10 MR. KEHOE: No, no.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Mahindaratne, I said that you raised an issue
12 which was not the issue which was on the mind of the Chamber. Now --
13 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Very well, Mr. President.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Then, perhaps it's not very clever to insist on
15 putting it on the mind of the Chamber where the Chamber, I think, clearly
16 indicated that that was not, first of all, what we were thinking of at
17 the time. And, second, that we would, nevertheless, review what you
18 raised by reading the transcript.
19 So, therefore, then to explain to this Chamber what it was might
20 be a bit overdone.
21 MS. MAHINDARATNE: My apologies.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then the Chamber has no further questions for
23 this witness on the basis of the matters raised.
24 Would that be different for any of the parties?
25 If not, then we would invite Madam Usher to bring the witness
1 into the courtroom so that we can release him properly.
2 Is it true that we haven't seen this statement ever before? We
3 have seen two statements and the most relevant in relation to the -- to
4 the photographs discussed, where the one was the statement by
5 Marinko Ziglar [phoen], but has it never been on the transcript?
6 MR. MIKULICIC: No, Your Honour, we have never seen those before.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Never seen those before. Then ...
8 [The witness takes the stand]
9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Cvrk, it's now clear that no one has any further
10 questions for you. It would have been preferable to already establish
11 this before the break, but we were not able to do so.
12 I would like to thank you very much for coming to The Hague and
13 for having answered all the questions that were put to you by the parties
14 and by the Bench, and I wish you a safe return home again.
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
16 [The witness withdrew]
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Mikulicic, are you ready to call your next
18 witness? Most likely we are -- we're limited perhaps to the
19 92 ter attestations. But, nevertheless, done is done. So because we
20 have to finish well in time, because there's a ceremony at 2.00, where
21 the Judges will have to attend. So we really have only 15 minutes.
22 No protective measures, from what I understand.
23 MR. MIKULICIC: No protective measures, Your Honour.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Also I do understand that none of parties object to
25 admission into evidence of any 92 ter statements, and that the only issue
1 remaining is the revised copy of one of the 92 ter statements, and that
2 the parties more or less have agreed that if we do not touch upon the --
3 on the difference between the versions at this moment and if we leave
4 that until tomorrow --
5 Madam Usher, could you escort the next witness into courtroom.
6 -- that we'll then start tomorrow with the revised version. So
7 whatever we are saying today, whatever is attested to, will be in
8 relation to a revises version, which became available, only at a late
9 stage, to the Prosecution.
10 Ms. Mahindaratne.
11 MS. MAHINDARATNE: That is correct, Mr. President. That has been
12 disclosed and sent to the Chamber also.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
14 Is there any procedural matter to be raised in relation to these
16 MR. MIKULICIC: Your Honour, we hope that we will be able to
17 upload the revised version of the -- of Mr. Moric's interview until
18 tomorrow. So to avoid any misunderstanding in the transcript, I think it
19 will be better to refer to that statement tomorrow, not today at all. So
20 that wouldn't be any discrepancies for -- for one who will read the
21 transcript afterwards.
22 [The witness entered court]
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
24 Good afternoon, Mr. Moric.
25 THE WITNESS: Good afternoon.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Before you give evidence in this Court, the
2 Rules of Procedure and Evidence require that you make a solemn
4 The text will now be handed out to you by Madam Usher.
5 May I invite you to make that solemn declaration.
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I solemnly declare
7 that I will speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
8 WITNESS: JOSKO MORIC
9 [Witness answered through interpreter]
10 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you. Please be seated.
11 Mr. Moric, we have only very little time today, which means that
12 most likely, in 10 to 12 minutes, you are out of this courtroom again,
13 but then we'll continue tomorrow.
14 Mr. Mikulicic, are you ready to examine the witness?
15 MR. MIKULICIC: I am, Your Honour.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Moric, it doesn't come as a surprise to you, I
17 take it, but Mr. Mikulicic, who's now going to examine you, is counsel
18 for Mr. Markac.
19 Please proceed.
20 Examination by Mr. Mikulicic:
21 MR. MIKULICIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
22 Q. [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Mr. Moric.
23 A. Good afternoon.
24 Q. I would ask the Registry for the document 3D04-1706, please.
25 Mr. Moric, on behalf of the Defence of General Markac, I will ask
1 you a number of questions about the events which you witnessed, and I
2 will ask you to answer the questions to your best recollection. If you
3 do not remember some of them that well anymore, and I will ask to you say
4 that. And also I will ask to you wait a bit before answering my question
5 so that we allow the interpreters to do their job and so that what we say
6 wouldn't overlap. I will also ask you to answer slowly, which is not
7 usual for normal conversation, because this will assist our interpreters.
8 Mr. Moric, do you remember that you gave a statement to the
9 Defence of General Markac in the month of May this year and that you
10 answered some questions on that occasion.
11 A. Yes, Counsel, I remember that I gave a statement an answered your
13 MR. MIKULICIC: [Interpretation] could we please show the last
14 page of the statement.
15 Q. And I will ask you, Mr. Moric, to confirm whether this is your
16 signature where it says "witness signature" on the last page of this
18 A. Yes. I confirm. That is my signature.
19 Q. While you were giving this statement, Mr. Moric, were you talking
20 about facts to the best of your recollection and point out the facts as
22 A. Yes, I did. I said everything relating to these facts as I
23 remember them and as I experienced them at the time that we were talking
25 Q. If I were to ask you the same questions today, and if I were to
1 discuss the same circumstances with you today, would your answers be the
2 same as they were at the time when you gave this statement?
3 A. Yes, they certainly would be the same. Maybe a formulation would
4 be different, but, generally, they would be the same.
5 MR. MIKULICIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I wish to tender
6 this statement into evidence.
7 MS. MAHINDARATNE: No objection.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Since there are no other objections --
9 Mr. Registrar.
10 THE REGISTRAR: This document becomes Exhibit D1841. Thank you.
11 JUDGE ORIE: And is admitted into evidence.
12 MR. MIKULICIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
13 Q. Mr. Moric, I will ask you, by way of introduction, to tell us a
14 few words about your professional career as a policeman or any other
15 employment that you were engaged in or are engaged in currently.
16 A. In 1976, I graduated from the secondary school of internal
17 affairs, and I started my professional career as a special policeman.
18 After that, during my career, I discharged practically all police duties
19 that have to do with public security and some duties relating to national
21 And in 1991, I was appointed from the ranks of professional
22 policeman, that is to say, experts as the assistant minister of the
23 interior who was in charge of administering regular police, that is to
24 say, prevention.
25 I worked as assistant minister for nine years, until
1 January 2000, when I retired.
2 After that, I worked in the field of private business and
3 corporate security. Currently I work on jobs relating to corporate
4 security in a publicly owned company.
5 MS. MAHINDARATNE: I don't wish to interrupt, but I just want to
6 point out that the revised transcript is uploaded under 65 ter 7516, if
7 Mr. Mikulicic wants to tender that under 92 ter now.
8 MR. MIKULICIC: Thank you, Ms. Mahindaratne.
9 MS. MAHINDARATNE: 65 ter 7516.
10 JUDGE ORIE: I leave it to you, Mr. Mikulicic, whether you want
11 to deal with it today or whether you will start with it tomorrow morning.
12 Please proceed.
13 MR. MIKULICIC: Thank you, Your Honour. Perhaps we can deal with
14 it today and that will be just time for the recess then.
15 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Moric, another procedural matter: Do you
16 remember that in January 2004 an interview was conducted with you by
17 investigators of the OTP in Zagreb?
18 A. Certainly. I remember.
19 Q. And, Mr. Moric, when you gave this statement, did you truthfully
20 and to the best of your knowledge and recollection describe the events
21 which were later recorded in that statement?
22 A. Yes, I did. I related the events and the facts as I experienced
23 them at the time that we discussed.
24 Q. Did you ever, on any later occasion, have an opportunity to see
25 the statement which you gave to the investigators?
1 A. No, it wasn't submitted to me in any form.
2 Q. If you were asked about the same circumstances today, would you
3 provide the same answers, as you did in 2004, when you talked with the
4 investigators of this Tribunal?
5 A. In substance, I certainly would provide the same answers. Maybe
6 I would formulate something differently.
7 MR. MIKULICIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I propose to tender
8 into evidence the statement which Mr. Moric gave to investigators of the
10 [Defence counsel confer]
11 JUDGE ORIE: The claim was informed that no party objected to the
12 admission of this rather lengthy transcript of the interview.
13 Mr. Registrar.
14 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this document becomes
15 Exhibit D1842. Thank you.
16 JUDGE ORIE: D1842 is admitted into evidence.
17 MR. MIKULICIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. Maybe
18 another two questions, Mr. Moric, before the break. That is to say,
19 before we adjourn for the day.
20 Q. You told us that you currently work in a publicly opened company.
21 In addition to this job, are you doing any work connected with education?
22 A. Yes, in addition to that, I am also a lecturer at the Faculty of
23 Political Sciences, that is to say, in security management studies at the
24 faculty political sciences.
25 Q. And just as a curious detail, Mr. Moric, you said that you were
1 appointed assistant minister in 1991 and that you held this post until
2 the year 2000; how many ministers were changed in the meantime that you
3 were assistant to?
4 A. During these nine years, I was an assistant to six minister of
5 the interior, and the post of the deputy and other assistants to the
6 minister, there were around 40 other colleagues.
7 Q. Mr. Moric, while discharging this duty, were you connected to any
8 political party in the government of the Republic of Croatia?
9 A. No. While I was professionally engaged in this work as part of
10 the state executive authorities, I was not a member of any political
11 party, nor did I engage in politics in any way.
12 MR. MIKULICIC: If we could stop here, Your Honour, if it is
13 convenient time for the Chamber.
14 JUDGE ORIE: It is, Mr. Mikulicic.
15 As I said before, Mr. Moric, we would not be together for a long
16 time. I would first -- I would like to instruct you that you should not
17 speak about the evidence, although it was -- well, on the content, it was
18 a lot but not many words spent on it. You should not speak with anyone
19 about the -- your evidence, which includes your statements given to the
20 Defence and the Prosecution, so don't discuss it with anyone, and neither
21 discuss any evidence you are still about to give in the days which will
23 Because we adjourn for the day, and we will resume tomorrow,
24 Wednesday, the 2nd of December, at 9.00 in the morning in this same
25 courtroom, III
1 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.45 p.m.,
2 to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 2nd day of
3 December, 2009, at 9.00 a.m.