Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 12049

 1                           Thursday, 9 October 2014

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           --- Upon commencing at 9.01 a.m.

 5             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Good morning to everyone in and around the

 6     courtroom.

 7             Madam Registrar, could you call the case, please.

 8             THE REGISTRAR:  Good morning, Your Honours.  This is case number

 9     IT-04-75-T, the Prosecutor versus Goran Hadzic.

10             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Thank you.

11             May we have the appearances, please, starting with the

12     Prosecution.

13             MR. OLMSTED:  Good morning, Your Honours.  Matthew Olmsted and

14     Thomas Laugel for the Prosecution.

15             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Thank you.

16             Mr. Zivanovic.

17             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Good morning, Your Honours.  For the Defence of

18     Goran Hadzic, Zoran Zivanovic and Christopher Gosnell.

19             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Thank you.

20                           [The witness takes the stand]

21             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  I'm just suggested for the record that

22     Your Honours are sitting under Rule 15 bis.

23             JUDGE DELVOIE: [Microphone not activated] Sorry.  Indeed,

24     Mr. Zivanovic.  Thank you very much.  The record should indeed reflect

25     that we are sitting 15 -- pursuant to Rule 15 bis, Judge Mindua being

 


Page 12050

 1     absent.

 2             Please proceed, Mr. Zivanovic.

 3             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Thank you, Mr. President.

 4                           WITNESS:  VOJIN SUSA [Resumed]

 5                           [Witness answered through interpretation]

 6                           Examination by Mr. Zivanovic:  [Continued]

 7        Q.   [Interpretation] Mr. Susa, good morning.

 8        A.   Good morning.

 9        Q.   Mr. Susa, yesterday we talked about your contacts in Ilok with

10     the military authorities.  First, I would like to ask you if you

11     personally or as the ministry at any point in time went to Ilok and

12     stayed there?

13        A.   Yes, I stayed in Ilok by virtue of the fact that I was a

14     minister.  My family also moved to Ilok.

15        Q.   Can you explain tell us when that was and how that came about?

16        A.   This was in the winter of 1991.  I already had an office in Ilok

17     where I communicated with people.  After I met a gentleman by the name of

18     Andrija Islovak [phoen], who was an accountant in Agrokomerc, he asked me

19     if I had a family.  And I said, yes, I did, but we were not together.  My

20     husband -- my wife and my son were in one place and my parents and my

21     other child were in another place.  And then he suggested that I move

22     into his mother-in-law's house.  This was an elderly lady.  I agreed and

23     we all moved in there.  And so for the first time after a number of

24     months my whole family was together again there.

25             It was a house by the road so that there was a constant danger of


Page 12051

 1     incidents.  My younger son was naughty by nature, and so after a couple

 2     of months I moved to the so-called Sokacko Brdo hill.  That's where a

 3     gentleman used to live.  He was a Serb.  He left his house.  He moved to

 4     Australia.  The house belonged to a Croat named Mile Zovko.  I moved into

 5     the house.  Mr. Zovko's wife lived in Ilok.  Her name was Miluska

 6     [phoen].  She was a Slovak.  I was in contact with her.  I called her and

 7     she said:  "Please stay in the house.  I am glad that you are there and

 8     that you are looking after it in this way."  I lived in that house until

 9     1997.

10             Very quickly I got in touch with Mr. Mile Zovko as soon as the

11     phone lines were back on, and our contacts were very good and remained

12     very good.

13             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Could we look at P1710, tab 575,

14     please.

15        Q.   This is a report by the 1st Guards Motorised Division, report of

16     the 31st of December, 1991, following a meeting at the government's

17     commission which was held the day before on the 30th of December.  I

18     wanted to ask you this.  You've had the opportunity to see the document.

19     Could you please tell us if you remember the meeting?

20        A.   Yes, more or less, I do remember the meeting.

21        Q.   In the third paragraph, your address is referred to when you

22     said, among other things, that a large number of refugees did not come at

23     the invitation of the government but in an unorganised manner.  Is that

24     something that you said at this meeting?

25        A.   Yes, that is correct.


Page 12052

 1        Q.   Could you please tell us whether any of the military authorities

 2     disputed this at the time?

 3        A.   No, nobody disputed this.

 4        Q.   You also said that it was the government's wish to maintain

 5     accurate records of people who had temporarily occupied homes.  Is this

 6     correct?

 7        A.   Yes.

 8        Q.   Do you know if the army kept any records?

 9        A.   Yes, they had their records.

10        Q.   It also states here that you didn't want to pre-empt any

11     political solutions for the future and that everything was of a temporary

12     nature.  Are you able to tell us whether you did say that?

13        A.   Yes, I did.

14        Q.   Could you please explain now what you meant to say by that, that

15     you did not wish to anticipate a political solution?

16        A.   Well, if I'm not mistaken I already spoke about that yesterday or

17     the day before.  The arrival of the refugees from the area of

18     Western Slavonia did not mean the definite departure of those people from

19     the Western Slavonia area.  We assumed and we wanted those people at some

20     point to return to their homes.  We wanted everyone to return to their

21     homes.  In that sense, the fact that they were received in the area that

22     we covered was of a temporary nature as assistance to the people in the

23     winter, the winter was just ahead, and so we wanted to provide a roof

24     over their heads.  I think I said that.

25        Q.   Could you please look at the last paragraph on this page where


Page 12053

 1     the words or some parts of the address were interpreted.  These are the

 2     words of the Deputy Prime Minister Boro Bogunovic.

 3             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Olmsted.

 4             MR. OLMSTED:  Your Honours, the Prosecution objects to this

 5     manner of leading the witness through a document.  The witness -- rather

 6     than asking the witness open questions about this meeting, Mr. Zivanovic

 7     is simply putting a document to this witness in a leading manner and

 8     asking him to confirm or deny what was said in this document.  The better

 9     course would be to ask the witness what he recalls he himself said, what

10     other people at the meeting said, and then at that point raise issues

11     that are in this document.  But otherwise, it's completely leading and

12     it's entitled to very little weight.

13             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  The witness already discussed this document and

14     he's familiar with it, but I could rephrase my question.

15             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Please do.

16             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation]

17        Q.   Could you please tell us if you remember what the position of

18     Mr. Boro Bogunovic was at that meeting?

19        A.   I don't think that Boro Bogunovic's position was significantly

20     different than my own.  I must say that Boro Bogunovic expressed himself

21     in a fairly confused manner, and I'm afraid that whoever drafted the

22     document could not really be specific or precisely define all the things

23     that Boro Bogunovic said.  But if we had to come to a final conclusion, I

24     don't think that Boro Bogunovic's position was significantly different

25     from my own.  Had it been, it wouldn't have really mattered that much


Page 12054

 1     because I was representing the government.  I was authorised to state the

 2     government's position at that time.

 3             MR. OLMSTED:  And, Your Honours, I just note for the record that

 4     his answer verifies my concern, which is the leading nature of this

 5     document.  He's already commenting on what is written here and

 6     interpreting what he believes was the reason for it to have what it says

 7     in it.

 8             JUDGE DELVOIE:  It is noted, Mr. Olmsted.

 9             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation]

10        Q.   Could you please look at the document now, the last paragraph on

11     that page.  Could you please tell us if Boro Bogunovic said at the time

12     that the government wanted to change the structure of the population at

13     any cost?

14        A.   No.

15        Q.   Can you tell us whether Boro Bogunovic insisted that people are

16     settled and placed under intense artillery fire in the zone of intense

17     combat activities?

18             THE INTERPRETER:  Could the witness please be asked to repeat his

19     answer.

20             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation]

21        Q.   Could you please repeat your answer because of the interpreters.

22     They didn't hear you.

23        A.   In this entire area, there were no intense combat activities.

24     There were no combat activities at all.  So this remark could not have

25     been true, even if it had been said.  Let me explain.  We were talking


Page 12055

 1     about Serb refugees here, so I assume that Boro Bogunovic would not place

 2     Serb refugees in intense combat zones.

 3             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Could we please look at document

 4     from the Prosecution's 65 ter list, that's document 62 -- 6028, tab 653.

 5        Q.   Could you please tell me if you know if there were any SBWS

 6     organs of authority in Lovas at the time-period stated here, the

 7     20th of November, 1991?

 8        A.   No.

 9        Q.   Can you please look at the fourth paragraph of this document.

10             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation] I think that in the English it

11     goes to the following page where it said that the town commander stayed

12     in the village of Lovas.

13             THE INTERPRETER:  Interpreter's note:  We do not see the

14     original.

15             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation] And that he wanted to review the

16     troops and that there was a contact with the commander and the president

17     of the Serbian autonomous region, Savic.

18        Q.   Was there a representative of the Serbian autonomous region who

19     whose name was Savic, in Lovas?

20        A.   I don't know this man and there was no such function as president

21     of the SAO.  The person was obviously misrepresenting himself.

22        Q.   It states here that this person who was a commander of some unit

23     over there was contacted and he was told that he had to place himself

24     under the Lovas Town Command, otherwise the Ilok command will be

25     disarmed.  Could you please tell us:  At that time, could the Ilok


Page 12056

 1     command do that at that time?  Did it have the possibility of doing

 2     something like that?

 3             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Olmsted.

 4             MR. OLMSTED:  The witness's last answer is he doesn't know who

 5     this individual is and anything about this, so how can this witness

 6     comment on the rest of the paragraph?  It could be completely

 7     speculation.

 8             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Sorry, it is not good interpretation of the

 9     witness answer.  The witness answer is that he --

10             JUDGE DELVOIE:  The witness should repeat his answer then.

11             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  -- he had no such function.

12             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I will gladly repeat my answer.

13             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  That he doesn't know the man and there was no

14     such function.

15             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Zivanovic, just one moment.  The witness will

16     repeat his answer.

17             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know Mr. Savic.  The

18     position of the president of the SAO did not exist.

19             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation]

20        Q.   Was there a member of the government by that name?

21        A.   As far as I know, there wasn't.

22        Q.   A reference is made to a unit that the gentleman was in command

23     of.  I'd like to know whether at that time the command of the town of

24     Ilok had the authority to disband a unit which didn't want to be put

25     under its control.


Page 12057

 1        A.   Yes.  It was its legal obligation.  It had to do it under the

 2     law.

 3             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Your Honour, I would tender this document into

 4     evidence.

 5             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Admitted and marked.

 6             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, 65 ter 6028 will be Exhibit D223.

 7             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Thank you.

 8             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation]

 9        Q.   Did the government participate in the setting up of the police

10     stations in Ilok, Vukovar, Tovarnik, Mirkovci?

11        A.   No.  There is a very clear report issued by the military about

12     that.  It was the military that set up those police stations.

13        Q.   Did the Ministry of Defence of Slavonia, Baranja, and

14     Western Srem appoint commanders or staffs?

15        A.   No, not at that time.

16             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation] I would like to call up P373,

17     tab 685.  I'm interested in the second page of the original, paragraph 2.

18        Q.   This is a report dealing with the setting up of the five police

19     stations in the places that I have just mentioned.  As you are reading

20     paragraph 2, would you say that this reflects the situation as existed at

21     the time in the area?

22        A.   Yes, that's how things were.  The military influenced the setting

23     up of those bodies.

24        Q.   And now can you look at paragraph 4.  A reference is made to

25     dealing with the issues of settling and resettling.  How would you


Page 12058

 1     explain this wording?  What is resettling?  What is the issue of

 2     resettling that the military reports about in this document?

 3        A.   You would have to ask them.  We never dealt with the concept of

 4     resettling.  We always dealt with the issue of settling.  These are

 5     different things.  We never dealt with the concept of resettling.

 6        Q.   Under 4, it says that the organ for the civilian issues of this

 7     command is confronted with the issues of settling and resettling.  Did

 8     you hear from them what you meant?

 9        A.   It would have been very good if they had presented that problem

10     to us either in a written or a verbal form.  They never did that.

11        Q.   If we skip the following paragraph, we will come to the next one

12     where a reference is made to the self-styled representatives of the

13     authorities of the Serbian region.  When the government heard from the

14     military that some people turned up and introduced themselves as the

15     representatives of the government, how did you react?

16        A.   We were never informed about that.  It is very strange that some

17     people are referred to as "self-styled government representatives" and no

18     names are mentioned.  The military knew who they were.  They should have

19     mentioned their names in the report.

20             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Please bear with me.

21             I would like to call up document 379 under tab 661.

22             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, can counsel please repeat the

23     number?  Thank you.

24             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Before I call up the document, I

25     have a couple of questions.


Page 12059

 1        Q.   We are talking about the area of Ilok and surrounding villages.

 2     Who set up the staffs and units of the Territorial Defence?

 3        A.   Colonel Belic says in his report that it was the military that

 4     did that.

 5             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation] P379, tab 661.

 6        Q.   It says here, inter alia, that TO units and staffs in towns are

 7     in the process of being established.  This is what we read in

 8     paragraph 1.  Could you please tell me whether this reflects what you

 9     knew at the time?

10        A.   I know nothing about that.  As I'm reading this text, I can see

11     that they were being set up by the military.  That's what I see.

12        Q.   You were the justice minister.  Did you issue a binding

13     instruction about the work of the commissions for temporary settlement?

14        A.   I didn't do it as the justice minister.  I did it as a government

15     member in charge of that issue.  Yes, I did.

16             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Can we now look at document under

17     tab 577.  It's on the Prosecutor's 65 ter list under number 6115.

18        Q.   Could you please tell us whether this is the instruction that you

19     issued?

20        A.   Yes, that's the instruction.

21        Q.   Could you please tell us in more detail what you meant by this

22     instruction when it comes to the contracts on the exchange of assets and

23     property with citizens of Croatian ethnicity.  Why did you say that those

24     contracts should be considered null and void and that they cannot have

25     any legally binding consequences?


Page 12060

 1        A.   Of course during a war or an imminent threat of war, I thought

 2     that conditions were not in place for all the parties to be equal when

 3     contracts were being signed.  Let me illustrate that by an example.  When

 4     a Serb came to a Croat and said, "I want to sign an agreement with you to

 5     exchange our properties," in my view such an agreement would be null and

 6     void because it could be assumed that a Croat accepted that under duress.

 7     In the times of war or imminent threat of war, there can be no

 8     conventional exchange or sale of property at all.  So this was the gist

 9     of that binding instruction that I issued.

10        Q.   It says here that the consequences of any exchange or sale of

11     property that happened after the 25th of September should be considered

12     null and void.  Is that for the same reasons or some other reasons?

13        A.   It is for the same reasons because according to the information

14     that we had, their contracts had already been signed on the exchange of

15     assets under suspicious conditions.  We did not want to participate in

16     any of that because we believed that the consequences of such legal

17     transactions at some point would be huge and maybe even irreparable.

18             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Your Honours, I would tender this document into

19     evidence.

20             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Admitted and marked.

21             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, 65 ter 6115 becomes Exhibit D224.

22             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Thank you.

23             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation]

24        Q.   Once the commission was set up by the government of Slavonia,

25     Baranja, and Western Srem, did the Yugoslav People's Army, i.e. the


Page 12061

 1     command of the town of Ilok, continue to participate in dealing with the

 2     issue of settling refugees in the area?

 3        A.   All the time.  Until the moment the JNA withdrew from the area,

 4     they were involved in the settlement, and I won't say that they

 5     participated in the resettlement, of individuals in the territory of

 6     Slavonia, Baranja, and Western Srem.

 7        Q.   According to what you know, the command of the town of Ilok,

 8     i.e., the military personnel in charge of those issues, were they in

 9     direct communication with local civilian authorities or did that

10     communication go via the government?

11        A.   They were in very direct communication with everybody.  They

12     bypassed us in everything.

13        Q.   Did they issue any instructions, orders, or any such thing to

14     those local bodies of authority?

15        A.   Yes, they did.

16             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation] I would like to call up P2280

17     under tab 663.

18        Q.   This is a report by the command of the town of Ilok, dating to

19     March 1992.  Under 7, which is the last paragraph, it says that the

20     commander of the town held a meeting with presidents of local communes,

21     Territorial Defence Staff commanders, and other responsible officials to

22     discuss the tasks assigned to them by the 1st Motorised Corps command.

23     Were you invited to such a meeting as members of the commission that was

24     in charge of Ilok?  You were no longer in the government at that time.

25        A.   No, I wasn't.  But there were other people, and they were not


Page 12062

 1     invited to such meetings.

 2             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Could we see the next page,

 3     page 3.  In English it would be the previous page.  In fact, it would be

 4     the last page in English as well.

 5        Q.   This report lists questions that require urgent answers regarding

 6     the community of Ilok, and you have a list of places.  In the first

 7     question we see:

 8             "What is the status of new settlers, what does it entail?  This

 9     is the biggest problem," et cetera.

10             Did the military authorities ever address the government with

11     these questions, asking for answers or maybe consulting you about this?

12        A.   They did not with me, but I can't say whether they tried with

13     somebody else.  I never received such a list of questions to answer.

14        Q.   Did you hear from any of your colleagues in the government that

15     the military authorities had addressed them with such issues?

16        A.   When I say I don't know, that means I've never heard of such a

17     thing.

18             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Your Honours, it seems I did not ask the

19     tendering of the previous document into evidence.  It is from tab 577.

20             JUDGE DELVOIE:  And --

21             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  And I would tender it.

22             JUDGE DELVOIE:  And the number is, for the Registrar?

23             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  It is exhibit number from the Rule 65 ter

24     Prosecution list 6115.

25             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Admitted and marked.


Page 12063

 1             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, the number was already admitted and

 2     marked as D224.

 3             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Oh, sorry.

 4             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Okay.  Thank you.

 5             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation]

 6        Q.   Can you tell us to the best of your knowledge, was this area ever

 7     visited by international observers?

 8        A.   I don't know.  They did not have any contact with me.

 9        Q.   I will come back to a couple of documents about this, but now I'd

10     like to move on to the period after the creation of the Republic of

11     Serbian Krajina.  Would you be able to tell me, if you know, whether you

12     were involved in the writing of the constitution of the RSK?

13        A.   None of us from Slavonia, Baranja, and Western Srem was involved

14     in the writing of the constitution of the Republic of Serbian Krajina in

15     its original form as it was adopted in Borovo Selo.

16        Q.   Can you remember for what territory this constitution of the RSK

17     was written?

18        A.   I can tell you, because it was very obvious, it said:  Only for

19     the territory of SAO Krajina.

20             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Could we see tab 591, L3.  In

21     English could we look at paragraph -- Article 3, in English.  It's the

22     next page.

23        Q.   This is Article 3 that you have discussed.

24        A.   Yes.

25        Q.   Can you remember, under this constitution, what did the election


Page 12064

 1     of the president of the Republic of Serbian Krajina look like?  How did

 2     it happen?

 3        A.   Direct general elections.

 4        Q.   Do you remember, according to that constitution, who elected the

 5     government and to whom was the government answerable?

 6        A.   The government was answerable to the president and the assembly.

 7     At the proposal of the assembly, the prime minister and other ministers'

 8     designates were appointed.  The president was able to replace or dismiss

 9     the prime minister designate.

10        Q.   Did you participate in the writing of amendments to the

11     constitution?

12        A.   Yes.

13        Q.   Can you tell us, did these amendments to the constitution change

14     this Article 3 that regard the territory of the RSK?

15        A.   Yes, it had to be changed because the RSK was not only created

16     for the territory of Krajina but also Western Slavonia and Slavonia,

17     Baranja, and Western Srem.  These three regions practically joined

18     together to form the Republic of Serbian Krajina.

19             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Could we look at L5, that's

20     tab 593.

21        Q.   This is in the first amendment.

22        A.   Amendment 1, para 1.

23        Q.   Did this amendment practically include the region of Slavonia,

24     Baranja, and Western Srem into the Republic of Serbian Krajina?

25        A.   Yes.


Page 12065

 1             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Could we look at the third

 2     amendment.  It's on the same page in Serbian.

 3        Q.   Could you now tell us what arrangements were made for the

 4     election of the president of the republic?

 5        A.   He was elected by the assembly.  But you can see that from the

 6     previous amendment, amendment 2.

 7             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Could we look at amendment 2,

 8     then, on the same page of the original.

 9        Q.   Under this amendment, the assembly not only elects and dismisses

10     the president but also oversees his work.  Was that the same arrangement

11     as in the previous version?

12        A.   No.

13        Q.   Can you tell me, did these amendments change anything in the

14     responsibility of the president towards the assembly --

15             THE INTERPRETER:  The interpreter didn't hear the second

16     institution.

17             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Now he was responsible only to the

18     assembly.

19             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation]

20        Q.   Can you see in which amendment it is stipulated?

21        A.   If you could make this text a little larger, I could see it.

22             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation] I believe we should move to the

23     next page in English.  Could we zoom in on the next amendment in the

24     original.

25             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Now you can see it.  From the


Page 12066

 1     amendment 4, para 2.

 2             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation]

 3        Q.   Do you recall what was the constitutional position of the

 4     president of the republic vis-ā-vis the Serbian army of Krajina?  Did it

 5     remain the same as in the constitution or was it changed?

 6        A.   You mean the previous constitution?

 7        Q.   I mean the constitution as it was adopted.  These are amendments.

 8        A.   It changed.  Now the president could propose the commander of the

 9     Territorial Defence but he was no longer able to replace him.

10             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Could we look at L55, tab 625.

11        Q.   If you could look at amendment 8.

12        A.   Para 3.

13        Q.   Yes, that one.  According to para 3, the president of the

14     republic appoints the commander of the Territorial Defence.  At that time

15     when this amendment was passed, and it was in May 1992, was the commander

16     of the Territorial Defence in fact the command of the Serbian -- no, no,

17     I made a mistake.  The commander of the Territorial Defence, was he

18     already appointed?

19        A.   Yes.

20        Q.   Did you participate in the writing of these amendments to the

21     constitution, amendments 1 through 8?

22        A.   Yes, I did.  But not in this form.  This is the final language

23     adopted.  The proposed language was quite different.

24        Q.   Could you tell us exactly what was different between the

25     proposals and the final version?


Page 12067

 1        A.   Our proposal did not take into account the still great powers of

 2     Milan Babic in SAO Krajina.  The first constitution was written for him.

 3     But when Goran Hadzic came into power, then all these amendments were

 4     necessary, and they all knew it, but at the same time they insisted that

 5     some of the amendments be rendered null and void and replaced by these

 6     amendments which are not quite appropriate.  They explained it by saying,

 7     and I could accept it, by saying that the first version envisaged

 8     elections of the president by general direct elections and thus was

 9     entitled to great powers, whereas in the new version the president was

10     elected solely by the assembly and therefore his scope of powers should

11     be smaller.

12        Q.   And the constitutional powers of the president of the republic

13     with further amendments, were they narrowed, did they remain the same,

14     were they expanded?

15        A.   They were successively slowly being narrowed.

16        Q.   And do you remember if any constitutional amendments were adopted

17     that would change the way in which the president of the republic was

18     elected?

19        A.   This was at a later stage when, again, we had political

20     turbulence in the Republic of Serbian Krajina and when one could assume

21     that some other people were pretenders for the presidential post who

22     again felt that they would easily win the direct general election.  I can

23     specifically say that this refers to Mr. Milan Martic.

24             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Can we please look at tab 638.

25     This is 1D3761.


Page 12068

 1        Q.   You can see that this is the 29th of October -- or, actually,

 2     September of 1992.  Can you please tell us how this amendment came about,

 3     amendment 10 specifically?  This is an amendment that you already

 4     mentioned.

 5        A.   Could you please enlarge the text?  I don't see it very well.

 6     Yes, this is what I was talking about earlier.

 7        Q.   You mention Mr. Martic.  Could you briefly tell us what was the

 8     relationship between Mr. Martic and Goran Hadzic in this period from the

 9     elections, from the time when Goran Hadzic was elected as president of

10     the Serbian Krajina onwards?

11        A.   Generally, in respect of all of us that were appointed to certain

12     posts and located in the Knin area, there was a kind of mistrust and it

13     was difficult for us to do our job for several reasons.  One of them is

14     the long and difficult road in order to get there at all.  And secondly,

15     a part of their bodies was in a very chaotic state.  So everything was

16     quite difficult.  That is how Goran Hadzic was received as well.

17             Most of the population of the SAO Krajina, the former

18     SAO Krajina, did not forgive him for the fact that he, they felt, got

19     Milan Babic out of the game in a very strange way.

20        Q.   Could you please clarify that what you mean, that he threw

21     Milan Babic out of the game?

22        A.   Because before the Serbian regions were formed and became the

23     Republic of the Serbian Krajina, the favourite person to win the

24     presidential post of this new Republic of Serbian Krajina, judging by his

25     popularity and the media promotion, was Babic.  After Milan Babic


Page 12069

 1     definitely indicated that he would not accept the Vance Plan at any cost,

 2     it was understood that he, as a crucial political factor, had to be

 3     pushed out of the game, and he was replaced by Goran Hadzic in the only

 4     possible way, by being elected by the assembly, because then he would not

 5     even have managed to win the direct general election.

 6             In the Slavonia, Baranja, and Western Srem area, we had a smaller

 7     population in relation to the SAO Krajina.  We were not well known and it

 8     was normal that their politicians would win more votes in any general

 9     election in which the majority of the population would take part.

10        Q.   And can you tell us what was the actual influence of

11     Goran Hadzic, especially in that area?  In the Knin Krajina, in the

12     SAO Krajina, what was his political influence in the period when he was

13     the president of the Republic of Serbian Krajina?

14        A.   I'm afraid it was not very great.  If you look at his narrowed

15     powers, he did not really have too much authority according to the laws

16     and the regulations, and he did not impose himself.  He didn't

17     politically engage himself in that area.  He would stay there for as long

18     as he needed to and then he would return to the SBWS area.  This is

19     something that was well known, so he really never gained much popularity

20     over there.

21        Q.   Do you know where Goran Hadzic lived in that period?

22        A.   He lived in Novi Sad during that whole period.  That was where

23     his family was.  We were all neither here nor there throughout that whole

24     period.

25        Q.   When were you elected into the government of the Republic of


Page 12070

 1     Serbian Krajina?

 2        A.   When Goran was elected president at an assembly session in

 3     Borovo Selo, I was elected justice minister.

 4             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Can we look at L6, please.  This

 5     is tab 594.

 6        Q.   You see the decision on the screen now.  It states that it was

 7     adopted on the 26th of February, 1992.  I wanted to ask you something

 8     else.  I see that the prime minister was elected here as well as 13 other

 9     ministers of that government.  Could you please tell us, were any

10     ministries left open?  Some ministers were perhaps not appointed at that

11     time; is that right?

12        A.   Yes, they were not appointed because we tried to have equal

13     representation throughout that whole area, and certain areas simply at

14     that time did not have the people that they could propose for those

15     ministerial posts.  There were four or five ministries left unfilled here

16     and their posts were filled later.

17        Q.   I can see that the culture ministry was left without a minister.

18     No culture minister was appointed at that time.  Are you able to tell us

19     if you know whether somebody was appointed later and who was that?

20        A.   Yes.  It was Sergej Veselinovic.

21        Q.   Do you know if the government in the beginning after the

22     elections adopted any principled directives or conclusions about its

23     work, adopted any goals?

24        A.   Yes, it did draw conclusions about its goals.  Yes.

25             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Can we look at P3055, please.


Page 12071

 1     This is tab 632.

 2             MR. OLMSTED:  Your Honours, before the witness is shown this

 3     document, perhaps the next question should have been what those goals

 4     were.  Because it could be interesting to know if this witness has any

 5     independent recollection of those goals.

 6             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Zivanovic, it seems reasonable.

 7             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  I would ask the witness just to identify the

 8     document, if it was the document what he spoke about.

 9             JUDGE DELVOIE:  You may continue.

10             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation]

11        Q.   Mr. Susa, could you please look at this document.  This is the

12     declaration on the political goals of the Republic of Serbian Krajina,

13     and it says here that it was adopted on the 18th of May, 1992.  Could you

14     please tell us whether this is a document setting out the political goals

15     of the Republic of the Serbian Krajina?

16        A.   Well, yes.  We don't have to read the document but I will give

17     you the main points of the declaration.

18        Q.   Go ahead.

19        A.   The declaration boils down to a definitive assertion which people

20     perhaps didn't understand initially, and that is that all of our work,

21     our desires, our -- at joining Yugoslavia again should end.  We said that

22     in an indirect but understandable way, saying that we will maintain

23     relations with the former Yugoslavia that are guided by common goals and

24     objectives.  This is something that people perhaps didn't understand, but

25     to me - and I participated in the drafting of the declaration - it was


Page 12072

 1     clear what the main elements were.  Everything else there that is

 2     contained in the declaration is of a declaratory nature and it's not so

 3     significant.

 4        Q.   I think you already said that but that was my question:  Did you

 5     take part in the drafting of the declaration?

 6        A.   Yes, I did.

 7        Q.   Did anything in the declaration indicate that the goal of the

 8     Republic of the Serbian Krajina was the creation of something that could

 9     be described as Greater Serbia?

10        A.   After the declaration and the political position that we found

11     ourselves in, we could have written whatever we wanted.  But it was clear

12     that nothing would come of that goal, and I didn't really believe that it

13     existed anymore.  I successively took part in all of the declarations

14     from the SBWS one to others, and we always emphasized that basic desire

15     to remain in Yugoslavia.  However, with this declaration we definitely

16     abandoned that idea.

17             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Your Honours, I did not ask to tender into

18     evidence document 1D3761.  It is tab 638.  It is amendment -- amendments

19     on the constitution of the RSK.  It was shown to the witness.  Amendments

20     9, 10, and 11.  And I would tender it.  I'm sorry for the inconveniences.

21             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Admitted and marked.

22             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, 1D3761 becomes Exhibit D225.

23             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Thank you.

24             Mr. Zivanovic, these are amendments to the constitution.

25     Amendments --


Page 12073

 1             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  To the constitution of the RSK.

 2             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Yeah.  Should --

 3             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  The amendments number 9, 10, and 11.

 4             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Shouldn't we give them an L number?

 5             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Yes.

 6             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Rather than a --

 7             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Yes, the --

 8             JUDGE DELVOIE:  -- rather than a D number?

 9             Madam Registrar, could you provide an L number?

10             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, the next L number will be L69 and

11     D225 remains available.

12             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Thank you.

13             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation]

14        Q.   Mr. Susa, you took part in the talks on the Vance Plan.  You

15     spoke about that yesterday.  Do you recollect one of the elements of the

16     Vance Plan being the return of refugees?

17        A.   Yes.  Yes, that was one of the key elements of the Vance Plan.

18        Q.   And how did you understand that part of the Vance Plan?  Who was

19     supposed to come back and where?

20        A.   All the people that had left their hearths, whatever the

21     circumstances, who had left their homes, mostly, and this was something

22     that was known, were fleeing from the destruction of war and all the ills

23     that war brought; thus, everyone.

24        Q.   And do you remember that you gave statements to the media on

25     these matters?


Page 12074

 1        A.   Yes, I provided many statements to the media on this topic as

 2     well, among others.  I really don't know how many times I addressed the

 3     media.

 4        Q.   I'm going to show you a statement.

 5             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation] This is 1D3645, tab 558.

 6        Q.   This is a statement, I think, given to the Novi Sad Dnevnik on

 7     the 20th of March, 1992.  It was less than a month after you were elected

 8     into the government of the Republic of the Serbian Krajina.

 9        A.   Could we zoom in on the text.

10        Q.   This is the text:  "Krajina, Never Again in Croatia."

11        A.   I saw that and I was afraid as soon as I saw the beginning.

12             MR. OLMSTED:  Your Honours, my records indicate that this has not

13     been added to the Defence's 65 ter exhibit list.  Can that be confirmed?

14             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  It is 1D3645.  It was on our Rule 65 ter list and

15     I think that it is on our list, too.  Our list for this witness, too.

16             JUDGE DELVOIE:  I think you mentioned the tab number.

17             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  The tab number is 558.

18             MR. OLMSTED:  Your Honours, I believe this is still subject to a

19     pending motion by the Defence, the third motion to amend its Rule 65 ter

20     list.  And this -- I don't believe this was one that was brought up at

21     the beginning of this witness's testimony.  This wasn't included in

22     Mr. Zivanovic's oral submissions.

23             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  I can double-check it and --

24             JUDGE DELVOIE:  You'll let us know after --

25             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  -- and see after the break.


Page 12075

 1             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Yes, Mr. Zivanovic.  Thank you.

 2             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation]

 3        Q.   When it comes to the government of the Republic of Serbian

 4     Krajina, did it deal with the return of refugees and displaced persons?

 5        A.   Yes, it did.

 6        Q.   Did it issue documents?  Did it pass decisions or some other

 7     enactments to that effect?

 8        A.   Yes, decisions were passed both by the government and the

 9     assembly.  The government issued decisions, the assembly issued

10     declarations.  We spoke about that in the media.

11             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation] I would like to call up under

12     tab 561.  This is an exhibit from the Prosecutor's 65 ter list, 1099.

13     [In English] No, no.  [Interpretation] It was below that.  Declaration.

14     [In English] The document on the top of the original.  This is it.

15             MR. OLMSTED:  Do we have an English translation of this

16     declaration?  I only see a decision.

17             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  I believe that there is a translation, but if not

18     I'll withdraw the question.  Thank you.

19             May we see L8, please.  It is tab 596.

20        Q.   [Interpretation] You already spoke about a document which was

21     issued by the assembly and we will not be looking at that; however, we

22     are going to look at a decision that was passed by the government.  What

23     you see on the screen now, is that the decision in question?  It was

24     issued on the 21st of April, 1992.

25        A.   Yes, that's the decision.


Page 12076

 1        Q.   Could you please tell us whether refugees and displaced persons

 2     returned in keeping with this decision?

 3        A.   Unfortunately, no.

 4        Q.   Why?  Why did they not return in accordance with this decision?

 5        A.   Nobody prevented the refugees from returning.  We encouraged

 6     their return as much as we could.  However, in conversations with the

 7     people on the other side, we realised that they did not demonstrate any

 8     wish to return for as long as we existed as an authority.  In other

 9     words, that they would wait for the Croatian authorities to be

10     re-established after which they would be willing to return to their

11     homes.  On our side, we did our utmost to start the return of refugees

12     and displaced persons.

13        Q.   Pursuant to this decision --

14             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation] And can the original be zoomed in

15     just a little.

16        Q.   In Article 1, it says that all those who wanted to return are

17     required to send a written request to the secretariat of the interior in

18     charge, depending on their previous place of residence.  Were such

19     requests filed at all?

20        A.   I really can't say that this did not happen, not even once,

21     because I don't know.  In any case, the number of such applications was

22     not significant.

23        Q.   This decision also envisages a possibility to ban certain people

24     from returning.  Who could have been forbidden to return?

25        A.   Only those for which there was evidence that they participated in


Page 12077

 1     the commission of crimes until the moment it could be established for a

 2     fact whether those crimes were committed or not in a legally binding

 3     procedure.  We didn't want to harm those people because otherwise they

 4     would have had to come, be detained, and wait for the court decision to

 5     become final.  I believe that this was fair on our behalf.  In respect of

 6     the other side which arrested a lot of people and kept them detained for

 7     a long time before it was finally established that they were innocent.

 8             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Your Honours, I see the clock.

 9             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Thank you Mr. Zivanovic.

10             We'll take our first break, 30 minutes.  We will be back at

11     11.00.  Court adjourned.

12                           [The witness stands down]

13                           --- Recess taken at 10.29 a.m.

14                           --- On resuming at 11.01 a.m.

15             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Zivanovic.

16             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Your Honours, before the witness enters the

17     courtroom, I would ask the Trial Chamber to admit on our Rule 65 ter list

18     the document -- document 1D3645.  This document was among the documents

19     filed with our third motion to amend our Rule 65 ter list.

20                           [The witness takes the stand]

21             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  This is article that I tried to show to the

22     witness.

23             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Olmsted.

24             MR. OLMSTED:  Your Honours, and I believe we -- we raised this in

25     our response to that motion.  We object to the admission of this


Page 12078

 1     document, which is an open source document, a publication that could have

 2     been found by the Defence at any time in these proceedings.  And I would

 3     note that the Defence has met with this witness since at least

 4     September 2013 and certainly could have been apprised of this open source

 5     newspaper article well in advance of their case or at least by the

 6     beginning of their case, and now we're several months into their case and

 7     they're proposing to add it to the list and we oppose it on due diligence

 8     grounds.

 9             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Your Honours, I believe that it is in the

10     interests of justice to admit this document and it is relevant for this

11     particular witness, actually.  It is his statement to the media as to the

12     return of refugees.

13                           [Trial Chamber confers]

14             JUDGE DELVOIE:  The objection is overruled.  The document can be

15     added to the 65 ter list and is admitted and marked.

16             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, document 1D3645 will be

17     Exhibit D225.

18             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Thank you.

19             Yes, Mr. Zivanovic, sorry.  Please proceed.

20             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation]

21        Q.   Mr. Susa, we started talking about your statement which you gave

22     to the media.

23             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation] I would like to call up 1D3645

24     under tab 558.  Can we zoom in on the original, please.  Under the title:

25     "Krajina, Never Again In Croatia."


Page 12079

 1        Q.   Your words are quoted regarding the return of refugees.  You will

 2     find them in the first column towards the bottom.

 3        A.   Yes, I can see that.

 4        Q.   You say, inter alia, that:

 5             "The return of Croats to Krajina is a normal process which we

 6     will not try to stop in any way because we will not accept the policy of

 7     citizens of the first and second class."

 8             Did you ever give such a statement to this particular newspaper

 9     or newspapers in general?

10        A.   I have no reason to doubt that these are my words, because I did

11     give such statements.

12        Q.   Could you please tell me whether this statement reflected the

13     position of the government and the authorities of the Republic of Serbian

14     Krajina at that time?

15        A.   Yes, I conveyed the positions of my government.

16        Q.   Do you happen to know what were the problems confronted by the

17     refugees who wanted to return to either of the sides?

18        A.   The return on both sides was a painstaking process.  There was

19     mistrust on both sides about the return of the other side.  I have to say

20     that in principle we were in favour of a return and we would have done it

21     gladly, but there were no invitations to people to return and there were

22     no technical capabilities in place for our people to return to Croatia.

23     Most of the Croatian assets in Slavonia, Baranja, and Western Srem,

24     including the largest part of Krajina that I was familiar with, was

25     protected and preserved.  That was my priority.


Page 12080

 1        Q.   Can you tell us a bit more specifically about that problem;

 2     namely, that there were no invitations to people to return and that

 3     technical capabilities were lacking for the return of people to Croatia?

 4        A.   At the same time as we were making decisions and declarations and

 5     appealing to Croats to return to their homes via mass media, there were

 6     no similar invitations from the other side to Serbs to return, at this

 7     time, only to the area of Western Slavonia.  And the whole tragedy is

 8     that such invitations were not made, and even if they had been made, they

 9     could not have been taken up because numerous settlements and houses had

10     already been burned.

11        Q.   Did you take part in any discussions with international

12     representatives or the Croatian side about this issue of having resettled

13     persons returned?

14        A.   Yes, I participated on a number of occasions in talks with

15     representatives of the international community.  More specifically, the

16     international community organised discussions between us and the Croatian

17     side and there was a period in which these talks were held very

18     intensively.

19        Q.   What was the reason why Croat refugees did not return to their

20     homes in Ilok and that area of the Republic of Serbian Krajina?

21             MR. OLMSTED:  Objection, Your Honours.  How would the witness

22     know that?  At the very least, there has to be some foundation laid so we

23     can understand what the basis of his answer would be.

24             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  As far as I see, the witness said that he

25     participated in discussions between -- with the Croatian side about


Page 12081

 1     the -- about the resettled person -- about the persons returns.  It was

 2     my previous question and witness answer.  And I asked him if he knows

 3     anything about the one specific local -- area, about Ilok, and where he

 4     testified that he was one of the government representatives for such

 5     matters.

 6             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Yes, Mr. Olmsted.

 7             MR. OLMSTED:  Well, Your Honours, Mr. Zivanovic is therefore

 8     missing a number of questions before he can get to the question that he

 9     asked.  He's simply not laying the foundation and, I suggest, leading the

10     witness right to the point he's trying to make.

11             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  I believe that the previous answers of the

12     witness is about Ilok and about -- and his last answers gave enough of a

13     foundation for this question.

14             JUDGE DELVOIE:  I agree, Mr. Zivanovic.  The objection is

15     overruled.

16             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation]

17        Q.   Do you want me to repeat the question?

18        A.   No need.  I understand both you and the Prosecutor.  If you mean

19     whether I talked directly to Croats who wanted to return to Ilok, that

20     did not happen.  But through their representatives who talked to us under

21     the aegis of the United Nations, I understood that they were insisting at

22     all costs that the organs of Croatian authorities be established first,

23     and I understood it as a precondition for their return set by them.

24        Q.   When you say that they insisted on the establishment of Croatian

25     authorities, you mean which territory?


Page 12082

 1        A.   The area I know best and the one that's closest to me is

 2     Slavonia, Baranja, and Western Srem.  The Republic of Serbian Krajina was

 3     not covered so extensively in all its parts in the negotiations, so I

 4     can't know what happened exactly in Glina, Banja, Kordun, Lika, or

 5     Dalmatia, but I know very well what was going on in Slavonia, Baranja,

 6     and Western Srem.

 7             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Your Honours, I would tender the document 1D3645

 8     into evidence.

 9             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Admitted and marked.

10             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, that's the document that was

11     admitted at the start of this session --

12             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Oh, yeah.  Sorry.

13             THE REGISTRAR:  -- and added to the 65 ter list as D225.

14             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Thank you.

15             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation]

16        Q.   Mr. Susa, I will now go back to a document that I was not able to

17     show you earlier, but first of all, I have a question.  Do you remember

18     during your tenure on that commission for Ilok, for short, do you

19     remember whether you received any requests from the local commune of

20     Mohovo?

21        A.   Yes, I received one request from Mohovo.

22        Q.   What was this request about, if you remember, before I show you

23     the document?

24        A.   I must tell you straight away why I remember it, because it was

25     the only local commune that came directly to me for advice and for


Page 12083

 1     consultation about the situation in that local commune, so it's not

 2     difficult to remember.  From earlier, I knew two of the three members of

 3     that small delegation that came to Ilok to present their problem.

 4     Mohovo, and I knew that from before, was a mixed community of Hungarians,

 5     Ukrainians, Ruthenians, and Serbs, and some refugees had also temporarily

 6     settled there under the supervision of the army.  In and of itself that

 7     was not a problem.  It wouldn't have been a problem if it hadn't

 8     disrupted not only interethnic but also interpersonal relations.  So

 9     there we had a problem not only between Serbs and Croats but between

10     everybody.  And the army contributed to it by encouraging the moving out

11     of Croats and all the others, whereas the local residents of Mohovo

12     wanted to stop it.

13             I understood that they had first addressed the army, asking them

14     for protection and for diffusion of tensions, but it didn't happen.  In

15     that village before the JNA came, there were ethnic Croats who had

16     received weapons and boasted about it, and now they were denying they had

17     weapons.  These people were committed to preserving their little village,

18     and they asked me what I thought about it - "I," meaning the government

19     of SBWS - whether I was able to mediate in their relations with the army,

20     and whether there was a way to give them full control over resolving the

21     problems in the village.

22             I did that and within the next few days I invited them again.

23     There was no post office working at that time, and I told them the

24     position of the government; namely, that we do not encourage any

25     emigration, that all places within SBWS were equal.  I had spoken to the


Page 12084

 1     army which promised me that all the steps would be taken to stabilise the

 2     situation, and in that way I kind of agreed with them that they are the

 3     best placed to resolve the issues in their village.

 4             These people were a tight-knit community.  They were not only

 5     friends but they were also related to each other.  So that's what I told

 6     them and, of course, I did not attach any strings to it.

 7        Q.   Were you aware at that time of the position of the army - that is

 8     to say, a specific command of the JNA - regarding the ethnic composition

 9     or possibly a change of the ethnic picture of the population in that area

10     of Ilok and its surroundings?

11        A.   To be quite truthful, I cannot say that anyone told me directly

12     that they were in favour of people moving out.  However, from their

13     internal documents I realised that they were very interested and very

14     involved in it, and they were exchanging reports between them, reports

15     saying how many people moved in or out and what activities needed to be

16     carried out to get people to move out in even greater numbers and how to

17     change the ethnic structure of particular places.

18             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Could we now look at P1715.

19     That's tab 679.

20        Q.   It's a report from a meeting held on 21st February 1992.  It was

21     held, as you see, in Mirkovci, and we see who was present at the meeting

22     including the representatives of local authorities.  Did you or any

23     member of the government or any member of that commission get the

24     invitation to this meeting, this meeting between local authorities and

25     the military?


Page 12085

 1        A.   If we had been invited, we would have come.  We always did.  But

 2     I don't see any of us here, so I can only conclude that we were not

 3     invited.

 4        Q.   We don't see the names of all the people who attended.  We only

 5     see various job titles.

 6             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation] If we can look at the bottom of

 7     the page.

 8        Q.   We see that the meeting was chaired by Corps Commander

 9     General Delic, which seems to indicate that he was also present.  I'm

10     interested in item 5 (a).  It says the agency for civilian affairs,

11     meaning a member of the JNA.  It says that at the level of the government

12     of SBWS, measures need to be taken to resolve the issue of settling

13     currently uninhabited places, Nijemci, Apsevci, et cetera, as soon as

14     possible, and that in places that are settled, the ethnic structure

15     should be changed more efficiently.  They are suggesting that the

16     government should do this.

17             Has such a request ever been made of the government to change the

18     ethnic structure more efficiently?

19        A.   They never suggested anything of the sort to us.  And if they

20     had, we wouldn't have accepted.  Mr. Delic cannot speak on behalf of the

21     government or suggest anything to the government because he is not a

22     member.

23        Q.   Now I'm not talking about the government but about some members

24     of the army.  Did they hold such a view?

25        A.   Well, obviously.  It's written here.  That's what I was talking


Page 12086

 1     about.  There are many such documents, including at lower levels.

 2        Q.   Mr. Susa, you spoke earlier about the judiciary of Slavonia,

 3     Baranja, and Western Srem and later you yourself were a minister of

 4     justice in the government of the Republic of Serbian Krajina.  First

 5     we'll discuss Slavonia, Baranja, and Western Srem.  What were the

 6     competencies of the judiciary at the time when the Yugoslav People's Army

 7     with their military commands and staffs were present there?

 8        A.   Our jurisdiction was narrowed down considerably.  The army had

 9     powers according to the legislation that governed immediate threat of

10     war.  So they were in charge of taking pre-investigating, investigating,

11     and prosecuting measures in a large number of cases.  We did not

12     interfere, but we also noticed that a number of cases was also ending up

13     before our courts.  So we concluded that there must be some instruction

14     from military commands that the civilian police or military police under

15     their command should submit some cases to our judiciary and those were,

16     as a rule, less serious crimes, and we prosecuted them.  This continued

17     until the JNA withdrew.  After that, our courts were showered by a great

18     number of cases that had previously been handled by the military

19     judiciary, and that included everything, aggravated robberies, thefts,

20     killings, murders, et cetera, and we started dealing with this

21     intensively.

22        Q.   You mentioned the immediate threat of war.  Do you perhaps

23     remember when the immediate threat of war was declared?

24        A.   The immediate threat of war was declared in October 1991, if I'm

25     not mistaken.  It was published in the Official Gazette of the SFRY.  I


Page 12087

 1     think that it went into effect on the 18th of October.

 2             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Could we please look at P2932.

 3     This is tab 711.

 4        Q.   Could you please look at the first document published in this

 5     issue of this Official Gazette.  It states that the immediate threat of

 6     war was established on the 1st of October.

 7        A.   Yes, that is correct, but it goes into effect on the day it is

 8     published in the Official Gazette.

 9        Q.   I'm interested in another thing.  You said that military organs

10     had certain judicial responsibilities when imminent danger of war was

11     declared.  So what I'm interested in is:  Did you know about this?  Did

12     you have an opportunity to see the document or to hear of it?

13        A.   Well, we received all the Official Gazettes.  They were

14     dispatched to all the official organs that were dealing with state,

15     social affairs.  They were also dispatched to all work organisations.  So

16     it was an obligation to know all of this.

17             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Could we look at 1D2481, tab 488.

18        Q.   This is a draft record from a session of the Presidency of the

19     SFRY of the 5th of October, 1991.

20             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Could we look at the next page,

21     please.

22        Q.   It states here that the order has been given --

23             THE INTERPRETER:  Could the counsel please tell us where he's

24     reading from.

25             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation]


Page 12088

 1        Q.   Could you please tell us --

 2             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Zivanovic --

 3             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation]

 4        Q.   -- if this order --

 5             JUDGE DELVOIE:  -- the interpreters are asking you whether you

 6     could tell them where you're reading from.

 7             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation]

 8        Q.   Perhaps we can read the first paragraph of the original, where it

 9     says that:  At the proposal of the Federal Secretariat for National

10     Defence and with consultation with members of the SFRY Presidency, the

11     SFRY Presidency, without holding a session, issued the order on the

12     territorial jurisdiction of first-degree military courts and military

13     prosecutor's offices at military commands.  And that the order also

14     determines the competencies of military courts in the event of an

15     imminent threat of war.

16             What I would like to know is if you know whether this order that

17     had to do with competencies of military courts in the event of an

18     imminent threat of war was applied in the territory of Slavonia, Baranja,

19     and Western Srem as of October 1991?

20        A.   Yes, it was.

21             MR. OLMSTED:  Your Honours, how could he -- the witness answer

22     that question without seeing the order, if there was one.  But I guess he

23     already answered.

24             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Unfortunately, we don't have the order but we

25     have the minutes from this -- from the session of this organ of the


Page 12089

 1     former Yugoslavia.  And in many cases the minutes from these organs were

 2     admitted into evidence.

 3             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Olmsted.

 4             MR. OLMSTED:  Well, Your Honours, the issue is foundation.  There

 5     is no foundation that this witness attended this meeting.  We have no

 6     idea what were the contents of this order.  So for this witness to

 7     testify that this order was, in fact, adopted or implemented, he simply

 8     cannot -- it would be speculation without further foundation.

 9             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Sorry, I didn't ask the witness whether he was

10     present at the session of the Presidency of SFRY, but I just ask him

11     whether he knows that the jurisdiction of the military courts were

12     implemented in the SBWS during the immediate threat of war.

13             JUDGE DELVOIE:  And did you ask whether there was -- there was --

14     there had been issued the order you were referring to?  Mr. Olmsted's

15     first -- yes, go ahead.

16             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  No, no, no.  My question is whether this

17     jurisdiction of the military courts as presented in this document was

18     implemented on the territory of the SBWS.

19             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Yes, Mr. Olmsted.

20             MR. OLMSTED:  And, again, Your Honours, that goes back to my

21     question:  As we don't know what the order is, it doesn't -- the document

22     doesn't mention anything about the SBWS, so the witness simply cannot

23     answer these questions without speculating.

24             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  It is -- it is stated here that the order also

25     determines the competencies of military courts in the event of an


Page 12090

 1     immediate threat of war.  It is a -- this paragraph, the second -- the

 2     second sentence in this paragraph.

 3             JUDGE DELVOIE:  I agree, Mr. Zivanovic.

 4             So the witness should answer that question, whether he knows

 5     whether this is implemented in a certain territory which you may or

 6     may -- which you may define.

 7             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  I define -- I asked about the territory of the

 8     SBWS.

 9             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Then put a clear question to the witness.

10             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation]

11        Q.   Mr. Susa, are you able to tell us whether starting from

12     October 1991, the military courts' competencies applied in the SBWS in

13     the event of immediate threat of war?

14        A.   Well, I will be very co-operative and perhaps I would answer:  If

15     I was asked whether I ever saw such an order, I can say I did not.  But

16     on the other hand, it is quite clear that military judicial organs

17     behaved in such a way that it could be easily concluded that such an

18     order existed, and it's not possible to avoid the determination of the

19     Presidency of the Socialist Republic of Yugoslavia by the military

20     organs.  They had to apply that in practice.  As to what form and under

21     what orders, that is something that I don't know.

22             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Your Honours, I would tender this document into

23     evidence.

24             MR. OLMSTED:  Your Honours, the Prosecution objects.  The

25     witness's last answer clearly establishes that he is not aware of any


Page 12091

 1     such order.  He can only presume based upon what he's observing on the

 2     ground that maybe such an order was issued, but with regard to this

 3     document, he knows nothing about an order that was issued.

 4             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Sorry, but the witness said that he never saw --

 5     never seen this order, not that he doesn't know anything about this

 6     order.

 7                           [Trial Chamber confers]

 8             JUDGE DELVOIE:  The objection is overruled.  The document is

 9     admitted and marked.

10             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, 1D2481 will be Exhibit D226.

11             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Thank you.

12             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Microphone not activated].

13        Q.   [Interpretation] Are you able to tell us until the military

14     courts had the competencies to prosecute the crimes committed in the

15     territory of Slavonia, Baranja, and Western Srem, until what time?

16        A.   Throughout the whole period until the army withdrew and until

17     this measure about the declaration of an imminent threat of war was no

18     longer valid.

19        Q.   Do you remember when the immediate threat of war ceased to be

20     valid?

21        A.   It was sometime in May or June 1992.  There is also a decision on

22     this.

23             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Could we look at P181.  This is

24     tab 689.

25        Q.   Could you tell us, on the basis of this, when the decision on the


Page 12092

 1     existence of an immediate threat of war was rendered null and void?

 2        A.   Again, you can see the date when it went into effect.  That's the

 3     date at the top, the 22nd.

 4        Q.   Did you hear about an incident in Lovas at the so-called

 5     minefield where there were a number of Croat inhabitants of Lovas?

 6        A.   Yes, I did hear of the incident.

 7        Q.   Do you know who carried out an investigation into this incident?

 8        A.   In the beginning it was the military police that conducted the

 9     first actions regarding this investigation, and then later it was handed

10     over to the military prosecutor's office.

11             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  May we see please 1D157.  It is tab 4.

12        Q.   [Interpretation] This is a statement by one of the commanders of

13     one of the units that was deployed in Lovas.  All I would like to know is

14     if you are aware --

15             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation] I think this is on the second

16     page.  Can we look at the second page of the original, please.

17        Q.   Where the units that took part in this are mentioned and where

18     the person who signed the document reports that he informed the

19     authorised bodies about the incident - i.e., the commander of the

20     Territorial Defence in Serbia, General Djokic - and that he also informed

21     the organs of the 1st Guards Division where the incident occurred.  What

22     I would like to know is whether the army ever informed you about this

23     incident, i.e., the judicial organs of Slavonia, Baranja, and

24     Western Srem or later the Republic of Serbian Krajina, so that they could

25     take up the case and prosecute it?


Page 12093

 1        A.   This case was never passed to us for further processing.

 2        Q.   And can you tell me if it was the 1st Guards Division that was

 3     responsible for prosecuting the incident where the incident took place

 4     and which reports to the republican staff of the TO of Serbia?

 5        A.   He addressed the organs properly and he spoke the truth.  In the

 6     last sentence he says that he informed the authorised person that the

 7     investigation is being carried out by organs of the 1st Guards Division,

 8     and that was within their competence to do so.

 9             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Let's we go back to the first

10     page, please, in the same document.

11        Q.   You will see in the third paragraph from the bottom of the page.

12             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation] This will be the fourth paragraph

13     from the bottom of the page in the English translation -- or, rather, the

14     fourth and the fifth.

15        Q.   It says that:  From the 2nd Motorised Brigade command, it was

16     suggested that the above incident falls within the competencies of the

17     security organ and the 1st Guards Brigade and that it was not my

18     responsibility because it took place in the zone of responsibility of the

19     2nd Motorised Brigade.

20             Does that tally with what you knew about the competencies for

21     such crimes?

22        A.   I can't tell you what division, what brigade, because those

23     things mean nothing to me.  However, in principle it was the JNA that was

24     responsible and how they distributed responsibilities and competencies

25     among themselves, I wouldn't be able to tell you because I don't know.


Page 12094

 1             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Your Honours, I would tender this document into

 2     evidence.

 3             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Admitted and marked.

 4             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, 1D157 will be Exhibit D227.

 5             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation]

 6        Q.   Do you know whether the judiciary bodies were informed about a

 7     crime which happened sometime in November 1991 in Dalj mountains -- in

 8     Dalj, as a matter of fact.  Apparently a number of Hungarians were killed

 9     there on that occasion.

10        A.   No, we were never informed about that.

11             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  I would refer to P2093.  It should not be

12     broadcasted.  And it is at paragraph 76 and -- 76 of this document.

13             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Do we have a tab?

14             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  It is tab -- sorry, it is tab --

15             JUDGE DELVOIE:  36?

16             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Sorry, Your Honours.

17                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

18             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  I cannot find the tab.  I'm sorry.

19             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Just one moment, please.

20             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Oh, tab -- it is tab 648.

21             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Now, next question is:  Can it be shown to the

22     witness?

23             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  We --

24             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Olmsted.

25             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  I think that we --


Page 12095

 1             MR. OLMSTED:  No, Your Honours, not under your guide-lines.

 2             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Anyway, I could -- I could state for -- I could

 3     put the question to the witness from this document and it is just for

 4     your reference --

 5             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Go ahead.  Yes.

 6             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation]

 7        Q.   In January 1992, military bodies conducted an investigation about

 8     the crimes which had occurred in Dalj mountains.  Do you know anything

 9     about that?

10        A.   You're asking me whether I know anything about that?

11        Q.   Yes.  You, the government, the judiciary bodies, did you know

12     anything?

13        A.   No, I didn't know anything about that.

14        Q.   Did you receive any information about that event from military

15     bodies?  And when I say "you," I mean you, the government, the judiciary

16     bodies of the Republic of Serbian Krajina?  Did you receive any

17     subsequent information about that?

18             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Olmsted.

19             MR. OLMSTED:  Asked and answered.

20             JUDGE DELVOIE:  I expected your objection.

21             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Okay.

22        Q.   [Interpretation] Are you familiar with the Dusan Boljevic case?

23        A.   Yes, I am.

24        Q.   Can you just briefly tell us what happened?  Who was in charge of

25     the proceedings in that case?


Page 12096

 1        A.   A number of killings happened in Baranja.  It was the military

 2     investigation bodies that were in charge of the first phase of the

 3     proceedings.  The file was in the hands of the military investigating

 4     judge in Belgrade until the moment the military withdrew, and then the

 5     military judiciary bodies declared themselves incompetent and returned

 6     the case to us.  We conducted the proceedings at the higher court in

 7     Beli Manastir.  We convicted Mr. Boljevic to the maximum prison penalty

 8     of 20 years.

 9        Q.   What happened to him after that?

10        A.   I don't know.  I thought that he was serving his sentence, but

11     then I heard that he had died.

12             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  May we see, please, 1D1034.

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)


Page 12097

 1

 2

 3

 4

 5

 6

 7

 8

 9

10

11 Page 12097 redacted.

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


Page 12098

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6   (redacted)

 7   (redacted)

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Yes, it is confidential.  Sorry, I --

20             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Should we go into private session or?

21             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  It -- I'll not discuss anymore this particular

22     document, and this part might be redacted.

23             JUDGE DELVOIE:  So we remove it from the screen?

24             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Yes.  Yes, please.

25                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]


Page 12099

 1             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation]

 2        Q.   I interrupted you.  I apologise for that.  You were talking about

 3     the military judiciary bodies in the Republic of Serbian Krajina from the

 4     moment the republic was set up.  Were military courts ever set up?

 5        A.   No, never in a legal way.  For a short period of time, when I was

 6     no longer minister of justice, they were indeed set up.  But still they

 7     couldn't take off the ground.  They were never operational.  Why?

 8     Because the Ministry of Defence and the Ministry of Police did not adhere

 9     to the provisions of the law, according to which the judges of the

10     military courts and military prosecutors had to be appointed by the

11     president.  They started doing it themselves, bypassing the authorities

12     of the president of Republic of Serbian Krajina.  That's how they

13     compounded the whole situation and made the whole process unlawful.

14        Q.   Does that mean that some illegal military courts, as it were,

15     were set up?

16        A.   They were set up in an unlawful way.  Defence counsels appealed

17     against their judgements.  And even if those judgements were

18     well-grounded, they had to be overturned on formal and legal grounds.

19        Q.   Mr. Susa, do you remember if you had any written correspondence

20     with Mr. Thornberry?

21        A.   Yes.  I believe that we exchanged several written documents.  I

22     don't know what specifically do you have in mind.

23        Q.   Did Mr. Thornberry ever address you with regard to the

24     confiscation of Croatian property in the Republic of Serbian Krajina?  Do

25     you remember that?


Page 12100

 1        A.   Yes, he did do that.  When that letter of his or that inquiry was

 2     drafted, it was not based on proper information from his associates.  We

 3     never applied any measures in respect of the -- a decision.  We never

 4     confiscated any property.  This could be done only by a court, and I

 5     informed Mr. Thornberry about that in a letter.  I believe that he took

 6     it under advisement, and after that he didn't have any inquiries with

 7     this regard.

 8        Q.   Can you tell us what he meant by "confiscation"?

 9        A.   I just wanted to say something about that.  When his associates

10     told him that we had a temporary hold of other people's property, they

11     interpreted that as a permanent situation and they erroneously concluded

12     that we were confiscating Croatian property and giving it to somebody

13     else for their use.  And that was not correct because on the other hand

14     we received complaints from the Serbs who were in temporary possession of

15     that property.  We strictly paid attention to that, and we did not want

16     the status of ownership and the title and deed to ever be changed.

17        Q.   Did you explain that, either orally or in writing, to

18     Mr. Thornberry and his associates?

19        A.   As far as I remember, I sent my letter directly to

20     Mr. Cedric Thornberry.  I explained everything to him and it was

21     accepted.

22        Q.   After that, did he additionally address you on this issue?  Did

23     he ask for additional information?

24        A.   No, no.

25        Q.   While you were minister of justice in the government of the RSK


Page 12101

 1     and even in -- earlier in the government of SBWS, did you have any

 2     meetings with international representatives where they perhaps complained

 3     against certain acts of the judiciary or some specific cases?  Did they

 4     ever say that the judiciary was not acting properly, failing to prosecute

 5     perpetrators of crimes against non-Serbs?

 6        A.   They never addressed me directly.  Whether they talked to the

 7     judges in the supreme court, I don't know and the judges didn't tell me.

 8        Q.   You spoke about certain problems that the judiciary faced during

 9     the time they were being established in October 1991.  What happened with

10     the courts that, before the beginning of the conflict until July 1991,

11     existed and operated in the territory of Slavonia, Baranja, and Western

12     Srem?

13        A.   Before that in this part of the Croatia, there were two courts:

14     The municipal court in Beli Manastir and the district court.  And there

15     were prosecutors' offices, municipal and district one.  They were both

16     under the district court in Osijek.

17        Q.   What happened with these institutions and the personnel,

18     including judges, when the war began?  For instance, the court in

19     Beli Manastir and the court in Vukovar.

20        A.   The municipal court in Beli Manastir and the prosecutor's office

21     in Beli Manastir remained intact.  The municipal court in Vukovar and the

22     municipal prosecutor's office in Vukovar fell apart completely.

23             A number of judges were arrested by the Croatian authorities,

24     others were expelled.  Later, the courthouse was demolished and we had to

25     rebuild everything from scratch.


Page 12102

 1             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Your Honours, I see the time.

 2             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Thank you, Mr. Zivanovic.  Indeed, we take the

 3     second break.  30 minutes.  We'll be back at 12.45.  Court adjourned.

 4                           [The witness stands down]

 5                           --- Recess taken at 12.15 p.m.

 6                           --- On resuming at 12.46 p.m.

 7             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Zivanovic, I'm told that you have 15 minutes

 8     left.

 9             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Yes.  Yes, Your Honour, and I respectfully ask

10     for 15 minutes more to complete my cross-examination.

11             JUDGE DELVOIE:  15 minutes --

12             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  15 minutes --

13             JUDGE DELVOIE:  -- more?

14             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  -- plus 15 minutes.  It is actually 30 minutes --

15             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Okay.  If we can limit it to that, that's not a

16     big problem.

17                           [The witness takes the stand]

18             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  And, Your Honours, I will use one document.  It

19     is actually not on our list, Rule 65 ter list, but it is the extract of

20     the document already admitted into evidence.  It is P1597, the tab number

21     572.  These are minutes from the Assembly of RSK from 20 of April, 1993,

22     and some parts of this documents have been translated and admitted into

23     evidence and we translated one page for the purpose to show to this

24     witness.

25             JUDGE DELVOIE:  So you added a one-page translation?


Page 12103

 1             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Yes.  Correct.

 2             JUDGE DELVOIE:  If there is no objection from the other side.

 3             MR. OLMSTED:  Well, this is the first I heard about this,

 4     Your Honour, so I don't even know what the document is about.  And maybe

 5     the witness shouldn't either.

 6             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  As I said, it is -- this is the minutes from the

 7     Assembly of the RSK held on 20 of April, 1993, and this particular page

 8     was actually nomination -- election of the government of

 9     Djordje Bjegovic, of the new government, and it indicates when the

10     witness ceased to be a minister of justice in the RSK government.

11             JUDGE DELVOIE:  And how come the Prosecution doesn't know about

12     this in advance?  It's a question I'd -- for you, Mr. Zivanovic,

13     because --

14             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  No --

15             JUDGE DELVOIE:  -- the Prosecution says, "I don't know in

16     advance."

17             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  We put it on our list for this witness.  It is,

18     as I said, tab 572, and we --

19             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Okay.

20             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  -- put the translation of the document on the

21     list.

22             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Okay.

23             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  No, sorry, it is -- sorry, sorry.  It is 1597

24     from the Prosecution Rule 65 ter list.  1597.

25             MR. OLMSTED:  Your Honours, I'm sorry.  I'm at a loss.  I don't


Page 12104

 1     know what is at issue here.  If 1597 is on the Defence's list for this

 2     witness, is this a new page that wasn't previously disclosed to the

 3     Prosecution?  I just don't know.  I'm sorry.

 4             JUDGE DELVOIE:  As I understand it, Mr. Olmsted, it's a

 5     Prosecution exhibit that had a partial translation.

 6             MR. OLMSTED:  Yes.

 7             JUDGE DELVOIE:  And from that same exhibit, the Defence adds the

 8     translation of an additional page.

 9             MR. OLMSTED:  Okay.  That's sort of how I understood it.  But

10     then my question is where is this additional page?  Because I don't think

11     I've seen it.

12             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  The additional page is 1D3762.  It is translation

13     of that page.  And it is on our list.

14             JUDGE DELVOIE:  And that's on your list.  Okay.  Then I think we

15     can move forward.  Isn't it, Mr. Olmsted?

16             MR. OLMSTED:  Yes, Your Honours.  I still have not seen the page

17     but at this stage let's go forward.

18             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Thank you.

19             Please proceed, Mr. Zivanovic.

20             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation]

21        Q.   Mr. Susa, can you tell us something about the kind of relations

22     that existed on the one hand between the Ministry of Justice of the RSK

23     and the foreign ministry on the other hand?

24        A.   The relations were very decent at first.  However, they were

25     disrupted very quickly because we came up with some new demands and new


Page 12105

 1     proposals for the way to work.  In my first trips to the area of Knin, I

 2     had talks with the representatives of the judiciary and I noticed major

 3     problems in their operation, and I demanded that they change pronto.  The

 4     greatest problem was with the operation of the prisons in Glina and in

 5     Knin, which held a large number of people without any accompanying

 6     documents.  Our conclusion was that these people were held there without

 7     any investigating judge having made the appropriate ruling to put them in

 8     remand, and the police had not completed their pre-investigation work.

 9             I sent a letter to the foreign ministry saying that, within three

10     days, we will wait for criminal complaints to see if these people should

11     really be in remand or not.  And if we don't receive them, all these

12     people will after three days be released.  This caused a great

13     dissatisfaction.  The foreign ministry asked us to change the legal

14     provision which stipulated that the maximum detention by the police be

15     extended from three days to 30 days.  I did not accept that, and tensions

16     began to rise within the ministry and to shift to the interpersonal

17     level, so the relations between me and Milan Martic became increasingly

18     bad.

19        Q.   Did the judiciary, at their meetings or in some other form, point

20     out their problems with the Ministry of the Interior?

21        A.   Yes, at least once a week we had meetings of the collegium that

22     included representatives of the judiciary, and we discussed various

23     problems such as lack of personnel and resources.  But they also pointed

24     out very sloppily drafted criminal complaints that gave no proper basis

25     for work, and I asked that this be changed in the period that followed.


Page 12106

 1             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Could we look at 1D2595.  That's

 2     tab 642.

 3             MR. OLMSTED:  Your Honours, I'm checking right now to see whether

 4     this is one that's been admitted onto their 65 ter exhibit list.  Perhaps

 5     Defence counsel can help me out.

 6             Is this one of the ones that you raised at the beginning of this

 7     witness's testimony, or is this one that there is still a pending motion?

 8             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Frankly, I don't recall.

 9             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Please proceed, Mr. Zivanovic.

10             Yes, Mr. Olmsted.

11             MR. OLMSTED:  Your Honours, does that mean you're admitting it

12     onto their 65 ter list, or should he proceed to a different document or

13     subject matter?

14             JUDGE DELVOIE:  I didn't admit anything.  Mr. Zivanovic asked to

15     have it on the screen, but that's not an admission to the 65 ter list

16     yet.

17                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

18             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Yes, Mr. Olmsted.

19             MR. OLMSTED:  Yes, Mr. President.  It's my understanding for the

20     procedure for direct examination that before a document can be used with

21     a witness, it should be on their 65 ter exhibit list.  That was the

22     practice we followed in the Prosecution's case in chief.

23             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Your Honours, I cannot say -- oh, sorry.

24                           [Trial Chamber confers]

25             JUDGE DELVOIE:  So are the parties expecting us to find out


Page 12107

 1     whether it's on the list or not?

 2             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Your Honours, I am just informed that this

 3     document is on our third amended Rule 65 ter list, and I didn't ask the

 4     Chamber to admit it on the list but now I would ask if it is possible.

 5     It is the subject of the third motion for amended our Rule 65 ter list.

 6             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Which we didn't deal with yet, right?

 7             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Correct.

 8                           [Trial Chamber and Legal Officer confer]

 9             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Could you repeat the 65 ter number,

10     Mr. Zivanovic?  There seems to be a little problem.

11             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  It is 1D2595.

12             JUDGE DELVOIE:  1D25 --

13             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  2595, sorry.

14             JUDGE DELVOIE:  1D2595.

15             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  95.

16                           [Trial Chamber and Legal Officer confer]

17             JUDGE DELVOIE:  So now you are asking to admit it to your exhibit

18     list, Mr. -- to your 65 ter list, Mr. Zivanovic?

19             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Yeah.

20             JUDGE DELVOIE:  And what is the Prosecution's position now?

21             MR. OLMSTED:  The Prosecution's position is as stated in its

22     response to that motion, which is that it opposed its admission because

23     the Defence have failed to show any due diligence with regard to this

24     document.  We have already dealt with one such document.  And the same

25     reasoning on the Prosecution part applies, which is this witness was


Page 12108

 1     known to the Defence for a long time, this document is not shown to be

 2     something that was only recently discovered by the Defence.

 3             JUDGE DELVOIE:  We are losing a lot of time with this,

 4     Mr. Zivanovic.

 5             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Your Honours, I'll not show this document to the

 6     evidence, but I stay behind our motion to -- that this document should be

 7     admitted into -- should be admitted on our Rule 65 ter list as said in

 8     our motion and in our reply.

 9             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Well, if you don't use it with this witness, that

10     takes the urgency away and we can await the decision on your third

11     motion, no?

12             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  I would prefer if it could be decided now because

13     this document is relevant for this witness and we indicated in our

14     Rule 65 ter motion on our list that it is -- it had to be used with this

15     witness.

16             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Well, yes, but now you say you will not use it.

17     Or am I wrong?  You say you will not use it with this witness.

18             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  My intention was to use it.

19             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Yes.

20             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  And I would use it.

21             JUDGE DELVOIE:  The problem is, A, we are losing time; and B, you

22     asked to admit it here and now but we don't have the arguments from both

23     sides, the arguments being in the motion and in the response.

24             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  From our side, I just would add that this

25     particular document is relevant because it indicates about the matter


Page 12109

 1     that the witness mentioned right now about the relationship between the

 2     Ministry of Justice and Ministry of the Interior of RSK, and this

 3     document clearly indicates the nature of their problem.

 4             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Well, Mr. Zivanovic, for the moment we will not

 5     admit the decision to your 65 ter list, but this decision is without

 6     prejudice.

 7             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Okay.

 8        Q.   [Interpretation] Mr. Susa, we are going to move to a different

 9     subject.  You were talking about your opposition to the setting up of

10     military courts in the Republic of the Serbian Krajina.  Do you remember

11     if you talked about this publicly in the media?

12        A.   I talked about this at government meetings in direct

13     communication with the defence ministry and Ministry of the Interior as

14     well as in the media.

15             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Could we look at document 1513

16     from the Prosecution's list.  It's tab 582.

17        Q.   This is a text that appeared in the press.  We can see that the

18     date is the 24th of February.

19        A.   I only see the text in English.

20        Q.   Yes, in English.  That is correct.  It does not only refer to you

21     and the question of military courts.  I am going to read a short part of

22     it that links back to your statement.

23             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation] It's on page 2 of the text.

24        Q.   I will read it in English and then you will get a translation.

25     It's the first paragraph here that we see.


Page 12110

 1             [In English] "And just when it was expected that this would reap

 2     results and prevent further robberies, Minister of Justice Vojin Susa

 3     wrote a letter in which he accused the army of creating a 'parallel

 4     military legal system' that was in contradiction with the regulations of

 5     the president of the Republic of Serbian Krajina, Goran Hadzic, which say

 6     that in conditions of a state of war, all military legal matters are to

 7     be dealt with by civil courts.  This was justified by the fact that the

 8     military legal system is not regulated by appropriate laws."

 9             [Interpretation] Do you remember giving a statement like this to

10     the media?

11        A.   Yes, I remember giving it, because the background data is

12     correct.

13             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Your Honours, I would tender this document into

14     evidence.

15             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Admitted and marked.

16             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, 65 ter 1513 will be Exhibit D229.

17             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Thank you.

18             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation]

19        Q.   Mr. Susa, while you were the justice minister and generally, did

20     you command any military or police unit or generally any other armed

21     formation?

22        A.   Those were not my competencies and I did not have any desire to

23     do anything like that.

24        Q.   I'm going to show you a document of the same date as this

25     statement that I have just shown you.


Page 12111

 1             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation] This is tab 668.  The document is

 2     from the Prosecutor's list, the 65 ter list.  It's document 6540.

 3        Q.   This is -- I don't even know what this is.  Is it a report or

 4     something similar, sent by the commander of the Slavonia Baranja Corps,

 5     Colonel Sladojevic?  I don't see to whom the document was sent.  Could

 6     you please look at what is said in the first paragraph of the document;

 7     namely, that the Red Berets, currently the special unit, I don't know

 8     what A/A means, that was established by order of the president of the

 9     republic, Goran Hadzic, is currently in Ilok and under the command of the

10     minister of justice.

11             Could you please tell us if you were aware that Goran Hadzic had

12     formed a special unit, either by the name of Red Berets or some other

13     name, that is being referred to here in this document?

14        A.   I was not aware that he formed any kind of unit.

15        Q.   And you said that you did not command any units.  Are you able to

16     explain, do you know how you're -- you're referred to here, not by name

17     but by your function, as being in command of a unit?

18        A.   Well, I think 100 per cent here they mean me, and the

19     continuation of this information could have been found in the daily

20     Politika signed by General Mileta Novakovic where all of this is

21     thoroughly dealt with and it's even said which day I did a review of the

22     unit.  So the resolution of this situation was quite unexpected because

23     at the time when I was allegedly reviewing the unit, I had already been

24     in Benkovac for two days.  Something that Mr. Zecevic, the

25     prime minister, and three other ministers were aware of.  Those three or


Page 12112

 1     four ministers were actually with me at the time at the hotel in

 2     Benkovac.  I stated all of this before the government and then it became

 3     clear that all of this was a provocation directed primarily at

 4     Goran Hadzic.  And the following day, a denial was published in the

 5     Politika daily where General Novakovic admitted that he had received

 6     inaccurate information from the field.

 7        Q.   And do you know how this misinformation came about, about

 8     Goran Hadzic forming this unit and you being in command of that unit and

 9     that you had reviewed the unit?

10        A.   Perhaps Mr. Sladojevic really wanted to find out what sort of a

11     unit it was.  I mean, he could have asked me.  I knew.  In the Pajzos

12     zone, which is in the immediate vicinity of Ilok, as early as 1991 there

13     was a Red Beret unit stationed there had which had been founded by the

14     state security of Serbia.  This was a unit that had top equipment in

15     order to be able to survey the terrain in depth.  They did not carry out

16     any military activities.  They were concealed there.  And at the same

17     time, they were guarding a capital facility from the time of

18     President Tito.  This was a hunting villa or lodge.  This is where they

19     were staying and they were staying there when this article was published.

20     Later, just like all the other units that had come from Serbia, it was

21     withdrawn and it returned to Serbia.

22        Q.   Mr. Susa, please tell us how long you stayed at the post of

23     justice minister in the Republic of the Serbian Krajina?

24        A.   Until the assembly session in Okucani.  That is when I accepted

25     the end of my function with a dose of relief.


Page 12113

 1        Q.   And do you remember who was elected justice -- as justice

 2     minister in the government of the Serbian Republic of the Krajina?

 3        A.   Yes, I remember.  That was my learned colleague,

 4     Mr. Radomir Kuzet.  He was a lawyer.

 5             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Can we see please 1D3762.

 6             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Zivanovic, could we have a date on the record

 7     for that assembly session?

 8             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation]

 9        Q.   Can you remember the date or approximate date when this assembly

10     session was held?

11        A.   I think it was held sometime around the 20th of May, 1993.

12             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Since we have this whole document on our list, I

13     will show to the witness the first page just for the date, to clarify the

14     date of this session.  It is tab 572, Exhibit 1597 from the Prosecution

15     list.

16             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I accept that it was this date.  It

17     was the first and last assembly meeting that was held in Okucani in any

18     case.  There were no others before it or after.

19             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation]

20        Q.   Could you please tell us the date, then, for the transcript?

21        A.   It was the 20th of April, 1993.

22             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  And may we see 1D3762.

23        Q.   [Interpretation] I'm going to show you an excerpt from the record

24     of the meeting that is translated.  This is the address by

25     Djordje Bjegovic.  Could you please tell us what post he was given at


Page 12114

 1     that assembly?

 2        A.   Until then he was a minister in Mr. Zecevic's government, just

 3     like myself, and now he became the prime minister designate of the new

 4     government.  And then after this assembly session, he became the

 5     prime minister.

 6        Q.   And can you see here who was suggested as the minister of justice

 7     and administration?

 8        A.   As I said, it was Mr. Radomir Kuzet.

 9        Q.   Mr. Susa, thank you very much.  I have no further questions for

10     you.

11        A.   Thank you.

12             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Thank you, Mr. Zivanovic.

13             Mr. Olmsted, are you ready for cross?

14             MR. OLMSTED:  Yes, Your Honours.  I do have -- before I begin,

15     I've made copies of the witness's 1998 statement that have the paragraphs

16     numbered, because I might be referring to some of the paragraphs and it

17     will be easier, I think, for us to deal with them in that manner.

18             I have English copies for Your Honours, and I have a B/C/S

19     version for Defence counsel and for the witness.

20             And, Your Honours, there is one more statement.  Just for the

21     witness's sake, I'd like to give him a copy of his 2014 statement just in

22     case we need to reference it.

23             THE INTERPRETER:  Could the interpreters also be provided with a

24     statement that has paragraphs numbered?  It would be of assistance.

25             MR. OLMSTED:  Would the interpreters be all right with an English

 


Page 12115

 1     version?

 2             THE INTERPRETER:  Yes, thank you.

 3             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Has everything been distributed, Mr. Olmsted?

 4             MR. OLMSTED:  Yes, Mr. President, I believe so.

 5             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Okay.

 6             MR. OLMSTED:  Thank you.  And I'll begin.

 7                           Cross-examination by Mr. Olmsted:

 8        Q.   Mr. Susa, good afternoon.

 9        A.   Good afternoon.

10        Q.   Since Defence counsel touched on the issue the Red Berets, I'll

11     begin there.  You've testified that you were familiar with the unit the

12     Red Berets that was sent to the Ilok area by DB Serbia in 1991.  You were

13     also aware, weren't you, that this Red Beret unit, some of its members

14     were committing crimes in Western Srem, in particular against the

15     non-Serb population?

16        A.   If we are talking about one and the same unit of Red Berets which

17     I touched upon in the examination-in-chief, that unit did not participate

18     in any combat around Ilok at all.

19        Q.   Sir, I'm not talking about combat.  I'm talking about crimes.

20     That while they were in the area of Ilok, they were engaged in bad

21     behaviour, and in particular they were threatening the remaining non-Serb

22     population.

23        A.   I apologise.  I would need official information to that effect,

24     which I don't have.  The judiciary bodies never informed me of any

25     proceedings that may have been instigated against them.


Page 12116

 1             MR. OLMSTED:  Let's take a look at 65 ter 6692.  This is tab 180.

 2        Q.   And what you are about to see Mr. Susa is a 27 January 1993

 3     UNPROFOR weekly situation assessment, and if I can draw your attention

 4     to -- well, actually, I don't know if we have a B/C/S version of this so

 5     I'll have to read it to you.

 6             But under item 3, it reports that the Ilok area is under the

 7     control of the Red Berets from Bapska and that there are reports about

 8     threats towards Croats in that area.  Now, being based in Ilok, you were

 9     aware of these problems with the Red Berets, weren't you?

10        A.   No, I was not aware of these problems.

11             MR. OLMSTED:  Let us have on the screen 1D3087.  This is tab 272.

12        Q.   This is a Slavonia Baranja Corps security organ report, dated

13     2 March 1993.

14             MR. OLMSTED:  And if we could turn to page 2 of the English,

15     page 3 of the Serbian version.

16        Q.   This document reports that you and the Red Berets conducted a

17     search of the Catholic church in Ilok on the 27th of February, 1993.

18        A.   I have page 2 before me.

19        Q.   And now hopefully you can see it.  It reports that the Red Berets

20     in your presence conducted a search of a Catholic church on the

21     27th of February, 1993, at 3.00 p.m.  Now, this is highly specific

22     intelligence information about you and your links to the Red Berets,

23     isn't it?

24        A.   According to my records, that never happened.  I never conducted

25     a search of a Catholic church.

 


Page 12117

 1             MR. OLMSTED:  Your Honours, may this be tendered into evidence.

 2             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Zivanovic.

 3             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  I would object because the witness stated that he

 4     doesn't know anything about this.

 5             MR. OLMSTED:  Your Honours, this is cross-examination and the

 6     Prosecution is using this for impeachment purposes.

 7             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Yes, Mr. Zivanovic.

 8             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  For --

 9             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Well?

10             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  I don't know what kind of impeachment.  I don't

11     understand.  It is for impeachment purposes.

12             JUDGE DELVOIE:  That's what Mr. Olmsted says.

13             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Okay.

14             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Admitted and marked.

15             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, 65 ter 1D3087 will be

16     Exhibit P3272.

17             MR. OLMSTED:  And if we could have on the screen -- if we may

18     have on the screen 1D3551.  This is tab 282.

19             Oh, and, Your Honours, this is a confidential report.  Perhaps we

20     should -- perhaps we should go into closed session -- or private session.

21             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Private session, please.

22                           [Private session]

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)


Page 12118

 1

 2

 3

 4

 5

 6

 7

 8

 9

10

11 Page 12118 redacted. Private session.

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


Page 12119

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5                           [Open session]

 6             THE REGISTRAR:  We're in open session, Your Honours.

 7             MR. OLMSTED:  Your Honours, the Defence counsel showed this

 8     witness 65 ter 6540.  The Defence did not tender it into evidence.  The

 9     Prosecution believes it's relevant to this line of questioning, and

10     therefore it seeks to admit that into evidence so that the Trial Chamber

11     can see the complete picture with regard to this issue.

12             JUDGE DELVOIE:  The document is admitted and marked.

13             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, 6540 will be Exhibit P3274.

14             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Thank you.

15             MR. OLMSTED:

16        Q.   Mr. Susa, you testified about your friendship with Mr. Hadzic

17     since high school.  Do you still --

18             MR. OLMSTED:  Your Honours, we may have some problems with --

19             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, that's true.  There was a

20     delay in the interpretation.  That was the problem.

21             MR. OLMSTED:

22        Q.   Thank you, Mr. Susa.  You still consider Mr. Hadzic to be your

23     friend, don't you?

24        A.   Yes, Mr. Hadzic is my friend.

25        Q.   While Mr. Hadzic was a fugitive from this Tribunal between 2004

 


Page 12120

 1     and 2011, did you have any communications with him via telephone or

 2     otherwise?

 3        A.   Well, no, we didn't speak or see each other for approximately

 4     ten years.

 5        Q.   And after Mr. Hadzic was arrested in July of 2011, did you have

 6     any direct communications with him?

 7        A.   He never called me, nor I him.

 8        Q.   Your August 2014 statement indicates nine dates between

 9     25 September 2013 and 1 August 2014 that you were interviewed by

10     Mr. Zivanovic or a member of Mr. Hadzic's Defence team.  Prior to

11     September 2013, Mr. Hadzic's Defence team consulted you on matters

12     relevant to this case, didn't they?

13        A.   I can't say when that started happening.  And, yes, they did

14     contact me.  There is nothing in dispute about that.

15        Q.   Do you recall what year they first contacted you in?  Was it the

16     year that he was arrested?

17        A.   No, I think that was the following year.

18        Q.   So please tell us, their contacts with you in the year of 2012,

19     what were the nature of those contacts?

20        A.   Mr. Zivanovic asked me whether I would be willing to testify as a

21     Defence witness and I agreed.  A few months later we met for the first

22     time, we started talking about the Hadzic case.  Mr. Zivanovic asked me

23     about my journey through all that was happening from 1991 to the end of

24     my political engagement.  Later on we discussed some specific events that

25     I was either involved in or the documents that Mr. Zivanovic assumed I


Page 12121

 1     had been involved in drafting.

 2        Q.   And these discussions that took place in 2012, did they occur

 3     prior to the trial beginning against Mr. Hadzic?

 4        A.   No.  The trial had already started.

 5        Q.   So the trial began in September 2012.  So these discussions

 6     occurred towards the end of 2012; is that correct?

 7             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Sorry.  As far as I recall, the witness said that

 8     he believes that it was one year after.  He didn't fix the year 2012.

 9     And I see that the Prosecution always used the year 2012.

10             JUDGE DELVOIE:  I don't see the problem, Mr. Zivanovic.

11             You may continue, Mr. Olmsted.

12             MR. OLMSTED:  Thank you, Mr. President.

13        Q.   I'm just trying to pin-point when these discussion occurred, and

14     you say that they occurred a year after he was arrested, so sometime in

15     2012.  You said it was after the trial began.  So would it have been

16     towards the end of 2012 that you had these discussions with

17     Mr. Zivanovic?

18        A.   You insist on dates.  However, at the time they didn't matter

19     that much.  I wouldn't be able to tell you, but I knew by then that

20     Mr. Zivanovic was Mr. Hadzic's legal representative.  I don't know

21     whether talks happened in September or October or when.  In any case,

22     Mr. Zivanovic made a record of every such interview.

23        Q.   While you were in The Hague preparing for your testimony, how

24     many days did you meet with the Hadzic Defence team?

25        A.   I can give you the number of hours:  Six or seven hours all


Page 12122

 1     together, an hour a day.

 2        Q.   So you were here for, what, two weeks, and you met for only six

 3     hours?

 4        A.   Perhaps more.  I've been here for a long time and I've seen

 5     Mr. Zivanovic almost every day.  I believe that he was absent for a

 6     while.  He attended his mother's funeral [as interpreted] or something.

 7     But we were here and we reviewed all the documents that have been

 8     presented to me here at trial.  I really did not keep a record of the

 9     time spent in conversations with the Mr. Zivanovic, but it was not a

10     short time, I would say.

11        Q.   That's fine.  And we apologise that you've been here for so long.

12     Now, you were interviewed by the ICTY Office of the Prosecutor on

13     10 January 1998.

14             MR. OLMSTED:  And if we could bring up 1D2318.

15             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Zivanovic.

16             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Sorry, I just noted one error in transcript.  It

17     is line 17.  It was not -- the witness did not mention "funeral" but

18     "memorial service."

19             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Thank you.  It's noted.

20             MR. OLMSTED:  And if we could bring up 1D2318.  This is tab 261.

21        Q.   And, sir, this is your 1998 statement that I'm drawing to your

22     attention.  Now, prior to signing this statement it was read to you in

23     the Serbian language by an interpreter; correct?

24        A.   Not correct.  I told you that that statement had been read to me

25     in Serbian by Miroslav Vasic in Toma Fila's law firm.


Page 12123

 1        Q.   Besides signing each page of the statement, you signed the

 2     acknowledgement at the end --

 3             MR. OLMSTED:  If we could turn to the second-to-last page.

 4        Q.   -- confirming that the statement was read over to you in the

 5     Serbian language and is true to the best of your knowledge and

 6     recollection.  Now, as an experienced attorney, you're aware of the

 7     significance of signing such an acknowledgement; correct?

 8        A.   I had no reason to doubt the veracity of what was read to me by

 9     Mr. Vasic on the premises of Toma Fila's law firm.  He represented the

10     Defence of the accused, after all.  I was forced to rely on his knowledge

11     of the whole matter.  I signed what was read to me by him.

12             MR. OLMSTED:  And if we can go to the first page.

13        Q.   We see that also present that day when this statement was read

14     back to you was Toma Fila, the attorney for Slavko Dokmanovic.

15             MR. OLMSTED:  If we could turn to the first page.

16        Q.   And I think you've already mentioned Mr. Vasic being present.

17     But also present were Vladimir Petrovic and Sanja Leskovac, and they were

18     all members of the Dokmanovic Defence team, weren't they?

19        A.   I am not disputing that at all.

20        Q.   And both Mr. Fila and Mr. Vasic speak English?

21        A.   Quite possible.  I'm sure about Vasic.  I don't know about Fila.

22             MR. OLMSTED:  And if we could turn to 1D2319, page 32, which is

23     transcript page 3266.  This is tab 262.

24        Q.   Now, on May 26th, 1998, you testified in the Dokmanovic trial.

25             MR. OLMSTED:  And I don't think we -- I don't know if we have a


Page 12124

 1     B/C/S version of this.

 2        Q.   But at that trial, you testified that this 1998 statement of

 3     yours was read back to you in Serbian and you signed the statement as

 4     being true and correct.  Is that right?

 5        A.   I repeat:  I'm telling you how we arrived at the Serbian version.

 6     I never saw it in that form.  As for that English version, I signed it

 7     because Mr. Vasic said that it was okay.

 8             MR. OLMSTED:  And if we could just turn to the next page in the

 9     transcript.

10        Q.   And during cross-examination, the attorney for the Prosecution

11     referred to your 1998 statement on a number of occasions, and the only

12     mistake that you pointed out was with regard to the participation of

13     Veselin Sljivancanin at the Velepromet meeting on the 20th of November,

14     1991; isn't that correct?  You didn't point out any other errors.

15        A.   Obviously there are some parts of the statement which are of

16     interest only for the Dokmanovic case.  I'm afraid that Mr. Vasic focused

17     on that part concerning the conduct and the movements of

18     Mr. Slavko Dokmanovic.  I had access only to that part of statement that

19     he read back to me and that was important for him.  My whole statement is

20     important, in my view and from my point of view, that is, but I heard

21     only the part of the statement that he read back to me.  And now, as

22     you're showing the statement to me in English, I really cannot decipher

23     what's important and what's not.

24        Q.   You testified that the SBWS judiciary began to function at the

25     beginning of November 1991.  In carrying out their functions, the SBWS


Page 12125

 1     courts and prosecutors' offices, which I'll refer to as "the judiciary"

 2     just for simplicity's sake, applied the laws of the SFRY and the Republic

 3     of Serbia until the SBWS or the RSK established its own laws; correct?

 4        A.   Correct.

 5        Q.   And with regard to the SFRY laws, the SBWS courts applied, among

 6     others, the SFRY Criminal Code and SFRY Criminal Procedure Code?

 7        A.   Yes.  They applied SFRY laws for the crimes contained therein.

 8     Most of the crimes were described in republican criminal codes and those

 9     were separately implemented in Croatia and in Serbia.

10        Q.   The SFRY Law on the Military Courts is another law that was

11     applied in the SBWS until Mr. Hadzic issued by decree an RSK Law on the

12     Military Courts in February of 1993; correct?

13        A.   You could say that.

14             MR. OLMSTED:  If we could have P2518 on the screen.  This is

15     tab 1.  And if we could look at Article 1 of the SFRY Law on Military

16     Courts.

17        Q.   We see that it limits the criminal jurisdiction of the military

18     courts to criminal offences committed by military personnel and those

19     involving certain criminal offences committed by other persons which

20     relate to national defence and state security.

21        A.   I have a problem with interpretation.

22        Q.   Mr. Susa, did you hear what I said or do I need to repeat it?

23        A.   I did.  You don't have to repeat.  I heard it.  Yes, that's what

24     is written.

25             MR. OLMSTED:  And if we look at page 2 --


Page 12126

 1             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Olmsted, when reading from a document, you

 2     should pay particular attention to the speed you're reading it.  I think

 3     that's the basis of the problem.

 4             MR. OLMSTED:  Thank you, Mr. President.  I'll keep that in mind.

 5             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Thank you.

 6             MR. OLMSTED:  If we could turn to page 2.  And I'm wondering --

 7     no, we want to have P2518 on the left-hand -- on the right-hand screen

 8     the English is -- no, I stand corrected.  I apologise.  Page 2, if we

 9     could look at Article 9.

10        Q.   This article defines military personnel as including soldiers on

11     compulsory military service, military school cadets, active junior

12     officer, officer, or noncombat specialist, persons from the reserve force

13     while as conscripts on military duty, or a civilian carrying out specific

14     military duty.

15             Mr. Susa, members of the Territorial Defence do not fall within

16     this definition of military personnel; isn't that correct?

17        A.   No, you are not correct.  They definitely fall within two

18     categories:  Either persons under number 4 or persons under 5.  They're

19     either from the reserve force or civilians performing some military

20     duties.

21        Q.   Well, I'll put to you that being a member of a TO unit does not

22     mean that you are a reserve officer.  That is -- or reserve -- member of

23     the reserve force.  Rather, the TO was separate under the SFRY Law on

24     All People's Defence from the JNA and police.  That's in Article 102 of

25     that law.


Page 12127

 1        A.   I would say that you are not right, because at the moment when

 2     front lines are opened and war activities begin, the Territorial Defence

 3     begins to function under the command of the army and as an integral part

 4     of the army.

 5        Q.   That would be the case if they were resubordinated to the army

 6     but it's not necessarily the case; isn't that correct?

 7        A.   When they are resubordinated to the army, that's the way they

 8     operate.

 9             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Zivanovic.

10             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  I think that the witness should see this

11     provision of the law the Prosecution referred to.  It is Article 102 of

12     Law on All People's Defence.

13             MR. OLMSTED:  Defence counsel can certainly show that to this

14     witness during re-examination, Your Honours.

15             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  But it was part of the question of the

16     Prosecution concerning this particular provision, and it would be fair to

17     show that to the witness, this article.

18             JUDGE DELVOIE:  I agree with Mr. Zivanovic, Mr. Olmsted, unless

19     the witness says that he knows what is in Article 102.

20             MR. OLMSTED:  If we could have L10 on the screen.  This is tab 2.

21     And if we could turn to page 64 of the English, page 17 of the original.

22        Q.   And if I could draw your attention to Article 102.

23             MR. OLMSTED:  And in the English if we could -- yes.

24        Q.   It states:

25             "Territorial Defence shall comprise all armed formations which


Page 12128

 1     are not incorporated in the Yugoslav People's Army and the police."

 2             And --

 3        A.   I don't see that's the position.  It's not written in that

 4     article.  Maybe there is another article?

 5             MR. OLMSTED:  May we -- if we could turn the page.  Is it -- page

 6     of the original version.  I think it's in the third paragraph.

 7        Q.   And perhaps you see it now.

 8             "The Territorial Defence shall comprise all armed formations

 9     which are not incorporated in the Yugoslav People's Army and the police."

10             And, sir, that is what we were just talking about.  Because all

11     the Territorial Defence is not resubordinated to the army, it was

12     separate.

13             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Sorry, maybe it should be more precise.  What

14     Territorial Defence was not resubordinated?  What part of

15     Territorial Defence, from which area or from ...?

16             JUDGE DELVOIE:  I don't see any problem with the theoretical

17     question as such, Mr. Zivanovic.

18             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't think the Prosecutor is

19     showing me the right article.  Article 103 would be much more relevant,

20     which says something slightly different from what the Prosecutor is

21     putting to me.  I really had no occasion to familiarise myself properly

22     with this law, but in any case, it's quite obvious what Article 103 says

23     and you can see who, and when, controls the Territorial Defence.

24             This is a bit different from what the Prosecutor was saying.

25             MR. OLMSTED:


Page 12129

 1        Q.   Well, as your knowledge of this law is clearly limited, we'll

 2     move on.  But let me ask you this:  Paramilitary groups --

 3             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Zivanovic, I think we would like to see at

 4     this point in time Article 103.  I suppose it's the next page in the

 5     English version.  There it is.

 6             You may proceed.

 7             MR. OLMSTED:

 8        Q.   Just turning briefly to paramilitary groups, armed paramilitary

 9     groups.  They did not fall within the definition of military personnel

10     because by definition they were outside the army; isn't that correct?

11        A.   That's how it should be.

12             MR. OLMSTED:  And if we could go back to P2518, the Law on

13     Military Courts.

14             Well, Your Honours, I see the time, and perhaps two minutes is

15     not enough to even go into the next matter.

16             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Okay.

17             Mr. Susa, this is it for today.  We expect you to be back

18     tomorrow morning at 9.00.  And as previously said, you are still a

19     witness under oath.  You may not discuss your testimony with anybody and

20     you cannot have contact with any of the parties.  Thank you.

21             Court adjourned.

22                           --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.57 p.m.,

23                           to be reconvened on Friday, the 10th day

24                           of October, 2014, at 9.00 a.m.

25