1 Thursday, 7 July 2011
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness takes the stand]
5 --- Upon commencing at 9.03 a.m.
6 JUDGE KWON: Good morning, everyone.
7 Good morning, Ms. Sutherland. Yes, please continue.
8 MS. SUTHERLAND: Good morning, Your Honours.
9 WITNESS: CHRISTIAN NIELSEN [Resumed]
10 Examination by Ms. Sutherland: [Continued]
11 Q. Dr. Nielsen, we finished yesterday afternoon discussing the
12 police in relation to the Variant A/B document instructions, but I just
13 want to take you back for a moment to paragraph 17 of your report, where
14 you're discussing the -- the discussions that are taking place between
15 Karadzic and his interlocutors in relation to posts within the MUP. And
16 in paragraph 17 you say:
17 "Karadzic also insisted that those Serbs who were appointed
18 holding important positions ..." and you refer to an intercept of the 2nd
19 of September, 1991.
20 MS. SUTHERLAND: Could I please have 65 ter number 31885 on the
21 screen, please.
22 Q. This intercept also is discussed in paragraph 18 of your report.
23 Did Zepinic in this intercept discuss with Karadzic the fact that the SDS
24 were occupying more of the commanding posts than they were in fact
25 entitled to?
1 MR. ROBINSON: Objection, leading.
2 JUDGE KWON: Yes, but -- let me see.
3 Could you indicate the passage or -- and reformulate the
5 MS. SUTHERLAND: Yes, Your Honour. I think there is some
6 latitude in relation to expert witnesses, but if we can go to page 10 of
7 the English and page 12 of the B/C/S.
8 Q. What is Dr. Karadzic discussing with Zepinic at that point in the
9 conversation? And first of all, before you answer, did you listen to the
10 audio-tape of this intercept?
11 A. I have listened to the audio-tape of this intercept, and in fact
12 listened to the audio-tape of all of the intercepts that are cited in my
13 report, not least so that I could compare the audio with the transcribed
14 text to make sure that they were accurate. In this conversation, this is
15 one of very many that I refer to in the report, in which Drs. Zepinic and
16 Karadzic are discussing personnel issues and particularly the number of
17 Serbs, and I would also point out the nature of Serbs or character of
18 Serbs employed by the then-joint Bosnian MUP. Here we have an awareness
19 on this page in front of us that they -- as Zepinic, in fact, says, that
20 we -- that they are occupying more posts than they were entitled to and
21 there's some discussion about this.
22 I would point out in respect of paragraph 17 and indeed it's a
23 point I come back to repeatedly. For example, also in paragraph 22 of my
24 report, that it was very important from the perspective of Dr. Karadzic
25 and the Serbian Democratic Party not only that a sufficient number of
1 Serbs be employed in the police, but they in fact -- that they in fact be
2 Serbs who were loyal to the party line of the SDS.
3 Q. Also, Dr. Nielsen, you will find the intercept in appendix B in
4 the binder down beside you. And again the reference is -- I think it's
5 document number 4 in that binder, but it's 65 ter number 31885.
6 If I can just take you to a passage on page 16 in the English and
7 page 13 in the B/C/S.
8 A. I'm sorry, I can't find it in the binder here, but I'll look at
9 the screen. Ah, here it is.
10 Q. Is there a passage on that page that you were just discussing a
11 moment ago? Is -- is Karadzic warning Zepinic that things must be done
12 as the party orders and not as somebody else orders?
13 A. Well, this is not an isolated case. This is again one of a
14 number of conversations. On the B/C/S, near the top of the page Karadzic
15 is saying: Please bring over all the people here who have been employed
16 in the name of the SDS. We posted them to those positions through our
17 victory in the elections and I have something to say to them. This is
18 again the notion that -- this does not mean that these persons in the
19 police are SDS party members, but it means that from Karadzic's point of
20 view they inhabit or sit on those posts by virtue of the SDS's victory in
21 the elections, and therefore in implementing decisions and in performing
22 their work in the MUP they should adhere to the wishes of the party.
23 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, I'd ask for that document to be
24 marked for identification.
25 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
1 THE REGISTRAR: As MFI P2963, Your Honours.
2 MS. SUTHERLAND:
3 Q. Dr. Nielsen, we have an incredibly large amount of material to
4 get through today, so I would ask you if you could keep your answers to
5 be as brief as possible.
6 By February 1992 is Mr. Karadzic content with the appointment of
7 personnel within the MUP?
8 A. No. By February 1992, Karadzic continues to be very distraught
9 with the -- what he perceives to be the discrimination against Serb
10 employees and the interests of the Serbs in the MUP.
11 Q. And I think this is discussed at paragraph 55 of your report. In
12 paragraph 56 you describe a meeting that occurred on the 11th of
13 February, 1992; that is, the minutes of that meeting is an exhibit
14 P01083, so I don't intend calling that up onto the screen. But what was
15 discussed at the 11th of February meeting, and this is appendix A,
16 document number 6, 65 ter number 05413.
17 A. I discuss the 11 February 1992 meeting which took place in
18 Banja Luka in paragraphs 56 and the following paragraphs in my report.
19 The key conclusions from this meeting related to a desire to effect the
20 establishment of a separate Serbian Ministry of Internal Affairs in
21 Bosnia and Herzegovina, and it can be said that this idea of such a
22 Serbian ministry had grown out gradually from the previous discussions of
23 decentralising internal affairs.
24 Q. And having decided that they wanted to form a Serb Ministry of
25 Internal Affairs, did there come a time when the Bosnian Serbs passed a
1 law on this?
2 A. Indeed. In late February, I believe it was on the 23rd of
3 February, 1992, the Assembly of the Serbian nation in Bosnia and
4 Herzegovina passed a law establishing a Serbian Ministry of Internal
6 MS. SUTHERLAND: If I could have 65 ter number 01002 on the
7 screen, please.
8 Q. Is this the law that was passed?
9 A. Yes, that is correct. And I see that the date of its
10 proclamation is rather the 28th of February. I erred in my memory there.
11 Q. I think this is discussed at paragraph 95 of your report.
12 MS. SUTHERLAND: I tender that document, Your Honour.
13 JUDGE KWON: Yes, it will be admitted.
14 THE REGISTRAR: P2964, Your Honours.
15 MS. SUTHERLAND:
16 Q. On appendix B, Dr. Nielsen, 65 ter number 18280 is the
17 Republika Srpska MUP rule book on internal organisation, and this is
18 discussed in chapter 3 at paragraphs 175 to 188 of your report. Does the
19 rule book provide an explanation of the internal structure and the
20 function of the RS MUP?
21 A. Yes, that is correct.
22 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, without bringing that document up
23 onto the screen, I seek to tender that document.
24 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Robinson.
25 MR. ROBINSON: We don't object.
1 JUDGE KWON: This is what we see on the monitor?
2 MS. SUTHERLAND: Yes, Your Honour.
3 JUDGE KWON: Yes, that will be admitted.
4 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P2965, Your Honours.
5 MS. SUTHERLAND:
6 Q. In paragraph 80 of your report you cite to a letter dated the
7 23rd of March, 1992, from Karadzic, re: Steps being taken to staff police
8 around-the-clock. That's Exhibit P02560. I don't intend calling it up
9 on the screen, but do you -- who was this letter sent to?
10 A. This letter was sent to the municipal presidents of the SDS in
11 Bosnia and Herzegovina.
12 Q. In paragraph 81 of your report you cite to an RS Assembly session
13 held on the 24th of March, 1992, which is Exhibit P00961. Can you
14 briefly discuss what was discussed at the Assembly meeting and by whom in
15 relation to the police?
16 A. At both the 12th and 13th Sessions of the Bosnian Serb Assembly,
17 which were held on the same day, the 24th of March, 1992, and indeed also
18 at the previous session of the Assembly, the 11th Session, there were
19 discussions of the establishment of Bosnian Serb Ministry of Internal
20 Affairs in Bosnia and Herzegovina. And as indicated in paragraph 81,
21 Dr. Karadzic placed great weight on the establishment of such a police
22 force, and he indicated to the Assembly representatives that in the very
23 near future some events would take place in which the police would play a
24 key role. And he then emphasized that the police must be under the
25 control of the civilian authority and must obey it.
1 Q. Now, you referred to the 13th Session, that's Exhibit P01354.
2 JUDGE KWON: Is there something wrong in emphasizing that police
3 must be under the control of the civilian authority? Or something odd?
4 THE WITNESS: I don't think so at all, Your Honour. I regard it
5 as the normal state of affairs with the police in any country, but I
6 think it's very important to highlight that that statement was made at
7 the Assembly.
8 JUDGE KWON: Why do you find it important?
9 THE WITNESS: In the context of the subsequent performance of the
10 Ministry of Internal Affairs, this indicates, from my point of view as an
11 analyst, a strong desire to keep the police under civilian control, which
12 is relevant in the light of the fact that there were subsequent
13 protracted discussions in the Republika Srpska about who was really
14 controlling the police.
15 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
16 Back to you, Ms. Sutherland.
17 MS. SUTHERLAND: Thank you, Your Honour.
18 Q. At the 13th Session held on the 24th of March, was that the
19 session where Mico Stanisic was appointed as minister of the Serbian MUP?
20 A. That is correct.
21 Q. In paragraph 89 of your report, you mention that on the 31st of
22 March, 1992, Momcilo Mandic sent a dispatch, which is Exhibit P01116.
23 What was the essence of the dispatch?
24 A. The essence of the dispatch of the 31st of March, 1992, was to
25 announce that on the following day the Bosnian Serb Ministry of Internal
1 Affairs in the Serbian Republic would start to function. I believe that
2 I've previously in my testimony in other cases referred to this as a
3 birth certificate of sorts of the RS MUP.
4 Q. I want to turn now to discuss the importance of the RS MUP from
5 April 1992. Did Mico Stanisic issue any orders with respect to MUP units
6 and their involvement with the Army of Republika Srpska?
7 A. Mico Stanisic in his capacity as minister of RS MUP issued quite
8 a large number of orders and dispatches related to the role of the police
9 vis-a-vis the Army of Republika Srpska. The most important one perhaps
10 is the one dated 15 May 1992, where three days after the establishment of
11 the Army of Republika Srpska, Mico Stanisic attempts to lay out clear
12 lines for the command and control of the police, particularly in
13 circumstances where police forces would be resubordinated to the
15 MS. SUTHERLAND: If we could have 65 ter number 05292 on the
16 screen, please.
17 Q. Is that the document you were just referring to?
18 A. Yes, it is.
19 Q. And what does he say about any operations to be conducted?
20 A. Well, first of all, it's important that this order notes -- and
21 something that's confirmed in other later documents, that the police is
22 regarded as part of the armed forces of the Serbian Republic of Bosnia
23 and Herzegovina and is to be engaged in what Mico Stanisic refers to, the
24 defence of the territory of that republic. In this order one of the key
25 points is that the police will be organised, and indeed the entire
1 ministry will be organised, into so-called war units which are to be able
2 to participate extensively in combat operations, as indeed subsequent
3 documents show that they do. And they set up a command structure which,
4 among other things, outlines what the framework will be for co-operation
5 with the Army of Republika Srpska.
6 MS. SUTHERLAND: And if we can just go to page 2, please, in the
7 English, paragraph 7.
8 Q. Is that the -- what you were just discussing there, paragraph 7,
9 and then going over onto page 3?
10 A. Yes. In fact, on the second page of the original of the document
11 we see that a staff, a command staff, is being formed in which the
12 minister for internal affairs is the commander of the command staff. And
13 in paragraph 7 we have a clear statement, that the use of units of the
14 ministry in co-operation with the armed forces of the Serbian Republic of
15 Bosnia and Herzegovina can be ordered by the minister for internal
16 affairs. And during periods of resubordination -- or I should say even
17 during periods of resubordination, the minister of internal affairs makes
18 clear that units are to be -- of the police are to be directly commanded
19 through designated employees of the ministry and that the Ministry of
20 Internal Affairs ultimately retains bureaucratic control of them.
21 MS. SUTHERLAND: [Microphone not activated]
22 JUDGE KWON: Did you say something, Ms. Sutherland?
23 MS. SUTHERLAND: Sorry, Your Honour, I tender this document.
24 JUDGE KWON: Thank you. Yes.
25 This will be admitted.
1 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P2966, Your Honours.
2 MS. SUTHERLAND:
3 Q. Dr. Nielsen, was the RS MUP a constituent part of the RS armed
4 forces formally?
5 A. Yes, it was. And as I point out in the beginning of the section
6 of my report entitled: "RS MUP and the War in Bosnia and Herzegovina,"
7 beginning on page 54, the RS MUP played a major role according to its own
8 documents in the war in Bosnia-Herzegovina in 1992. And in the words of
9 Biljana Plavsic and other politicians and indeed in the words of
10 officials of the ministry itself, the RS MUP in the early days of the war
11 acted as an army - I want to make it clear that that's their word - as an
12 army of the RS.
13 Q. And this is I think referred to in paragraph 191 of your
14 statement -- your report?
15 A. That is correct. And it is also confirmed by numerous later
16 documents produced by the police.
17 Q. So in essence, what was the role played by the RS MUP in the war
18 in BiH?
19 A. Well, I think that perhaps the best way of answering that
20 question is that if we jump to paragraph 380 of my report where I discuss
21 the 1992 RS MUP draft annual report, I quote that report, stating that,
22 and I quote:
23 "Since the very beginning of the war, almost the entire available
24 personnel of the organs for internal affairs have been involved in war
25 activities for the liberation of occupied territories and the protection
1 of liberated Serbian territories. This in good measure also persists
3 And quote:
4 "And the RS MUP also in its own words thought that it had made 'a
5 significant contribution' in the struggle of the Serbian nation."
6 Q. And that draft report is 65 ter number 11241, which we will get
7 to a little bit later on. Can you describe for the Chamber the role that
8 the RS MUP played in the take-overs?
9 A. As indicated by some of the documents we saw yesterday and early
10 this morning, from the point of view of the Bosnian Serb leadership,
11 taking control over the police in areas which they wished to see included
12 in a Bosnian Serb entity was crucial. After April 1992 or after the
13 beginning of April 1992, we see a pattern, that while differing from
14 municipality to municipality, overall conforms to a trend in which the
15 police play a crucial role in establishing the authority of the Bosnian
16 Serb Republic.
17 Subsequent documents produced by the police of a analytical
18 nature, for example, their quarterly and annual reports produced in 1992
19 and later, confirm that the Bosnian Serb police perceived its role to be
20 to assist in implementing the goals of the Serbian Democratic Party in
21 establishing the power of the Bosnian Serbs or the authority of the
22 Bosnian Serbs on the territory that they regarded as their own. I want
23 to indicate also that these actions by Bosnian Serbs in the police
24 predated in many cases April 1992; that is to say, documents produced by
25 the Bosnian Serbs themselves indicate that measures to effect a take-over
1 of authority in parts of Bosnia and Herzegovina significantly in many
2 cases predated the actual establishment of the police in April 1992.
3 Q. Dr. Nielsen, just briefly, in paragraphs 192 to 195 you discuss
4 the issue of the loyalty oaths after the Serbs took power in the
5 municipalities. In that regard, were the public police stations renamed
6 in any way?
7 A. I think that it's significant to note that particularly in the
8 first three months of the existence of RS MUP, many of the public
9 security stations, the SJBs, at the municipal level while retaining the
10 name "public security station," added the adjective "Serbian" to the
11 beginning of that phrase, that is, "Serbian public security stations,"
12 and that in some cases is reflected in the stamps and seals that they
13 used as well, thereby emphasizing the ethnic nature of the new police
15 Q. And did many non-Serb police officers have an aversion to signing
16 the loyalty oath?
17 A. Certainly it appears that police officers of Muslim and Croat
18 ethnicity who were present on territories in which Serbian police
19 stations were being established under the control of RS MUP, in many
20 cases did not desire and objected to swearing any types of solemn
21 statements or oaths to these new police stations. I discuss that, for
22 example, in paragraph 194. And perhaps the best indication of the
23 overall trend of employment of Croats and Muslims in the RS MUP is that
24 by the middle of the summer of 1992 a total of six non-Serbs, that is,
25 six Muslims or Croats, remained in the entire Ministry of Internal
1 Affairs according to the documents of that ministry.
2 Q. Turning now to -- in relation to combat operations. In paragraph
3 215 of the report there's reference to the RS MUP forces co-operating
4 with the JNA and the TO; and in paragraph 216, subordination to the VRS.
5 But I think you testified a little earlier that the police units were
6 ultimately responsible to the MUP; is that right?
7 A. What I testified is that during periods when the police are
8 resubordinated to the military of the RS, the Army of the RS, any orders
9 given to those police officers who are resubordinated to those units
10 were, according to Mico Stanisic's 15 May order, supposed to go through
11 the designated police commander of such units. And when I state that the
12 police was ultimately responsible to the MUP, what I meant by that is
13 that at such time that the police would be finished in the operation, a
14 specific combat operation that the minister of internal affairs had
15 authorised, they could not be redeployed to yet further combat activities
16 without the military first coming back to the police, to the minister of
17 internal affairs, and seeking permission to resubordinate them, again, to
18 new operations. This I would note, as reflected in meetings of the MUP
19 leadership in the summer of 1992, was a point of some contention between
20 the police and the army. And I know that they had meetings to resolve
21 disputes about how this was actually going to be implemented in practice.
22 MS. SUTHERLAND: If I could have 65 ter number 05682 on the
24 Q. Dr. Nielsen, this is in appendix A, document 15. It's a report
25 on the analysis of the work of the SJBs in 1992 on the territory of the
1 CSB Banja Luka. And you cite that in your report at footnotes 192, 242,
2 250, 380, and 558. In that document they discuss combat operations.
3 What were one of the tasks undertaken by the police during -- in combat
4 operations -- or one of the first tasks I should say?
5 A. During combat operations undertaken in the summer of 1992, the
6 police co-operated with the military in seeking to disarm the population,
7 in particular the Bosnian Muslim and Bosnian Croat population of areas in
8 which the Serbian Republic was asserting its control. I would just note
9 briefly since it links into a point that I mentioned earlier, that page 2
10 of the B/C/S of -- or actually, with the cover, it's page 3 of the B/C/S
11 document refers to the fact that the police largely accepted the
12 programme of the SDS even though most of the police were not members of
13 that party.
14 Q. I think that's also on page 3 of the English for Mr. Registrar.
15 In paragraphs --
16 MS. SUTHERLAND: I'm sorry, I would seek to tender that document.
17 [Trial Chamber confers]
18 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, I seek to tender that document.
19 JUDGE KWON: My apologies. Yes, that will be admitted.
20 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P2967, Your Honours.
21 MS. SUTHERLAND:
22 Q. Dr. Nielsen, in paragraphs 203 and 204 you discuss Crisis Staffs
23 charging the relevant SJBs with the implementation of decisions on the
24 disarming of the non-Serbian population and them closely -- or them
25 controlling or closely co-ordinating with the municipal police. Was it
1 the case that in every municipality the chief of the SJB was a member of
2 the Crisis Staffs?
3 A. Yes, that is correct. And as such, the police and the
4 Crisis Staffs co-operated closely throughout the summer of 1992.
5 Q. You mentioned a moment ago about six Muslims being left in the
6 RS MUP. That's actually discussed at paragraph 208, and footnote 250
7 refers to an exhibit, P02760. I want to turn now to the system of
8 reporting within the RS MUP, and that's dealt with at paragraphs 236 to
9 243 of your report. You say at paragraph 236 that Stanisic --
10 Mico Stanisic orders daily bulletins to be sent. And you also make
11 reference to the fact that on the 22nd of April, 1992, at an expanded
12 meeting of the National Security Council, of which Karadzic is in charge
13 of, that the RS government directed the RS MUP to report daily on the
14 situation on the territories of the Republika Srpska.
15 What evidence did you find to show whether there was this
16 reporting going on?
17 A. Through my research I was able to collect a substantial quantity
18 of these daily bulletins, which to my mind indicated that Mico Stanisic's
19 order was indeed implemented. And one can see in the course of the
20 summer of 1992 that information which is reflected in dispatches sent
21 from the municipal or SJB level to the regional or CSB level is duly
22 collated at the regional level and sent to the Ministry of Internal
23 Affairs and is then in -- once again collated and paraphrased or
24 reproduced in some form in the daily bulletins in the ministry itself.
25 It is indeed the case that there are times at which for,
1 sometimes a number of days, that one police station at a municipal level
2 or several of them or even a whole region for short periods will not be
3 furnishing information because of difficulties with communication, but
4 overall the general pattern is one of regular communication throughout
5 the hierarchy of the RS MUP. And I would note finally that the draft
6 1992 RS MUP annual report indicates that these daily bulletins, along
7 with much other information, were forwarded to the organs of the RS
8 government, both the government itself and the Presidency.
9 Q. And again you make reference to the draft annual report, that --
10 and I said earlier that that was 65 ter number 11241. That is actually
11 been exhibited now in our case -- in the case, Exhibit P02761.
12 MS. SUTHERLAND: If we could quickly call that exhibit number up.
13 If we could go to page 22 to 23 of the English and page 31 to 33 of the
15 Q. You referred earlier to the number of bulletins that they
16 received -- that the government were receiving.
17 A. Yes. In paragraph 389 of my own report, I note that
18 approximately 150 issues of the bulletin of daily events were produced by
19 the RS MUP in the course of the period from April to December 1992. And
20 according to this section of the draft annual report, it is also stated
21 that the president of the government, that is, the prime minister, had
22 received over 90 different documents from the RS MUP and that the
23 president and the members of the Presidency had received more than 80
24 documents of an analytical nature in the course of the past eight months.
25 Q. I'm sorry, if I could just go back to page 7 of the English. And
1 I think it's on page 6 of the B/C/S. You mentioned earlier about the
2 activities regarding the division of the MUP. In the last paragraph on
3 page 7 of the English, is this what's discussed?
4 A. Yes. I think this particular paragraph of the draft 1992 RS MUP
5 annual report is quite significant and is also, again, corroborated by
6 many other documents produced by the RS MUP in the course of 1992 and
7 subsequently. I want to preface my comments on this paragraph with the
8 fact that I'm not a lawyer and I'm not taking any position whatsoever on
9 the veracity or accuracy of the statements being made by the RS MUP as to
10 legal or illegal actions. However, as an analyst I find it highly
11 relevant to note that in the 1992 draft annual report of the RS Ministry
12 of Internal Affairs, and indeed in many other documents of the RS MUP in
13 1992 and indeed in later years, they refer to their own actions,
14 particularly for the period prior to April 1992, as "illegal." I want to
15 very clearly stress that this is their word; it is not mine. And it
16 appears in the original of these documents.
17 Here in this particular paragraph we see that they talk about the
18 illegal organisation of the Serbian Ministry of Internal Affairs, the
19 illegal arming of reliable active personnel and reserve employees, and
20 indeed at another point in the report they point out that the Bosnian
21 Serbs in the Ministry of Internal Affairs, at a time when there was still
22 a joint multi-ethnic Bosnian Ministry of Internal Affairs, engaged in
23 the - again in their own words - "illegal" arming of Serbs in
24 municipalities under the control of the SDS at that time. They also
25 refer to unilateral actions, including combat activities undertaken by
1 Bosnian Serbs over half a year before the Bosnian Serbs established their
2 own Ministry of Internal Affairs.
3 MS. SUTHERLAND: If we could go to the following --
4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we have a reference for the
5 line and could we also have the -- could we see the actual exhibit that
6 has been admitted.
7 MS. SUTHERLAND: It's on the screen.
8 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] This is a draft. So first of all,
9 can I have a reference what line this was in, and then we have the
10 separate issue of the document. But I'd like to see the line where the
11 word "illegal" is used.
12 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, it's inappropriate. This document
13 has been admitted.
14 JUDGE KWON: Just -- the Witness, answer this question without
15 indicating specific passage in this report, did he?
16 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, Dr. Nielsen referred to illegal
17 organisation of the Serbian MUP and illegal -- this reference to illegal
18 arming. It's on the second line of the last paragraph of page 6 of the
19 English. And in the B/C/S it's on page -- sorry, page 10 of the --
20 it's -- it's numbered page 6 of the B/C/S in the actual document but it's
21 page 10 in e-court.
22 JUDGE KWON: Thank you. Let's proceed.
23 MS. SUTHERLAND: If we can go to page 7 of the English.
24 Q. Very quickly, Dr. Nielsen -- and so it would be page -- it's also
25 on the same page and then going over on to the up -- the next page of the
1 B/C/S. We see a lot of numbers there in relation to personnel of the
2 Serbian MUP. Do you have a comment to make briefly about those figures?
3 MS. SUTHERLAND: If we could go to the following page of the
5 THE WITNESS: Well, I would note two things about the numbers
6 that are stated on personnel in the draft 1992 annual report of the
7 RS MUP. First and foremost, I would note that the RS MUP increased
8 greatly in size. The size of the RS MUP alone was much larger because --
9 particularly because of the size of the reserve police force in the
10 summer of 1992 than its predecessor, the SRBH MUP had been. And second
11 of all, as I note in examining this draft 1992 annual report, there is an
12 extremely extensive involvement of the ministry in combat activities.
13 Here we see a figure that is given well over 300.000 days of man -- man
14 days, so to speak, of combat involvement or on average 1.451 police
15 officers per day for every day from April to December 1992 involved in
16 combat on the part of the RS MUP.
17 MS. SUTHERLAND:
18 Q. Thank you. I want to turn now to talk about -- to discuss the
19 RS MUP involvement in detention facilities. In paragraph 296 of your
20 report you say that:
21 "By mid-July 1992 at the latest, all leading officials of the
22 RS MUP were fully aware of the ministry's involvement in the operation of
23 detention camps."
24 A. Yes. In -- on 11 July 1992, the entire leadership of the RS MUP
25 met in Belgrade together with one representative of the federal
1 secretariat for internal affairs in Belgrade and discussed the work of
2 the ministry and the challenges and problems confronting the ministry.
3 One of the items clearly discussed at that meeting was the involvement of
4 the employees of the ministry in the operation and guarding of detention
5 facilities in the RS. This particularly came out in the comments of
6 Stojan Zupljanin, who was the chief of the CSB in Banja Luka and who
7 noted that the police were guarding large numbers of Muslims and that in
8 some of these camps the conditions were inadequate.
9 Q. I would note that this is -- the 65 ter number 09243 is in fact
10 Exhibit D00447.
11 A. I would just note that I stated that the conditions were
12 inadequate and not inaccurate.
13 Q. What other major issues were discussed at this meeting?
14 A. Other major issues discussed at this meeting were the extensive
15 involvement of the police in armed combat activities. Memorably quoted
16 by one key participant who stated that it was unacceptable that the
17 police were in the trenches when the army was guarding or was checking
18 traffic, that it should be the other way around. So the police
19 definitely were unsatisfied with the extent of their combat involvement.
20 They discussed co-operation with civilian authorities and in particular
21 difficulties in co-ordinating with various Crisis Staffs. They discussed
22 the challenges facing the police in dealing with paramilitary
23 organisations. They discussed the role of the police in, in their own
24 words, in defending the territory of the Serbian Republic of Bosnia and
25 Herzegovina. And they discussed the types of rules and regulations that
1 needed to be elaborated and promulgated in the months to come.
2 I would note that the aversion of the notes of this meeting, the
3 minutes of this meeting, as well as a document dated 17 July 1992, in
4 which the main findings of the meeting were enunciated, were distributed
5 to the higher RS authorities, in particular the prime minister and the
6 president of the Presidency, Dr. Karadzic.
7 Q. You mentioned that they discuss at this meeting the various
8 challenges facing the police dealing with the paramilitary organisations,
9 and there's a section on the relationship between the RS MUP and the
10 paramilitary organisations at -- in paragraphs 361 and 378 of your
12 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, I would ask to seek leave to use
13 Defence Exhibit D01412, which is a report by Milorad Davidovic. It was
14 not on our list because it was exhibited only at the same time as the
15 final notification was being filed.
16 JUDGE KWON: I don't think there's any opposition from the
18 Yes, proceed, Ms. Sutherland.
19 MS. SUTHERLAND: If that could be brought up on the screen,
21 JUDGE KWON: Exhibit number is 142?
22 MS. SUTHERLAND: 1412.
23 JUDGE KWON: Yes, 1412.
24 MS. SUTHERLAND:
25 Q. Dr. Nielsen, have you had an opportunity to review this document?
1 A. Yes, I reviewed this document.
2 Q. It indicates that Mr. Davidovic was sent in to clean up the
3 problems associated with some paramilitary groups. What were these
5 A. As indicated in this and other documents, a large number of
6 paramilitary groups, many of them stemming from the territory of Serbia,
7 entered the territory of the Serbian Republic, that is to say the
8 territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina, beginning in April 1992 and
9 participated in operations, combat operations, but also engaged
10 extensively, as we see in this document, in activities that are described
11 by the police and by Mr. Davidovic as being illegal, particularly looting
12 but also killings and in some cases other types of violence against
13 civilians and others.
14 By the time of the 11 July meeting to which I referred
15 previously, the RS MUP was increasingly of the opinion that these
16 paramilitary formations should no longer be allowed to operate. However,
17 they in most cases conditioned their opposition to these paramilitary
18 formations, as does indeed Mr. Davidovic in this document, with an
19 appreciation in their opinion of the assistance that these paramilitary
20 formations had offered in the take-over of authority in various regions
21 of Bosnia and Herzegovina. And the focus -- the focus was therefore from
22 the point of view of the police on integrating units, paramilitary units,
23 if at all possible, into regular units, particularly of the Army of the
24 RS; or if that was impossible, if the groups were deemed too violent or
25 too criminal in nature, then they should be expelled to the territory of
1 Serbia. This resulted, as I detail in my section on paramilitary
2 organisations, particularly in paragraphs 365 and following, in a large
3 operation at the end of July 1992 where the RS MUP expelled the
4 Yellow Wasps, a paramilitary formation also mentioned in the document in
5 front of us from the territory of Zvornik municipality.
6 Q. But how did these groups, including the Yellow Wasps, come to be
7 in BiH in the first place?
8 A. Certainly when these groups were arrested - and I have been able
9 to review a large number of statements which are footnoted in
10 footnote 567 of my report of paramilitary members that were arrested and
11 gave statements to the RS police, in the words of these paramilitary
12 members, the reason why they were in the -- in Bosnia and Herzegovina was
13 because they had come to defend the Serbian nation. A number of the
14 paramilitary members who were arrested by the police expressed strong
15 disbelief. They simply did not understand why they had been arrested,
16 given that they had been co-operating with the police just a few weeks
17 earlier. And in at least one case, one of the paramilitary members whose
18 statement is -- was taken by the RS MUP and is footnoted in footnote 567,
19 stated that he had come to help assist the Serbian cause in Bosnia and
20 Herzegovina after reading an appeal by Dr. Nikola Koljevic, who was a
21 member of the Presidency of the Serbian Republic. Most of these people
22 stemmed from the territory of the Republic of Serbia.
23 Q. And to your knowledge, did any of these -- these people from the
24 groups have any meetings with members of the RS Presidency?
25 A. In these same statements, in a number of these statements, there
1 are references to a meeting with Biljana Plavsic in Pale in the summer of
2 1992, where these paramilitaries went for what they deemed an informal
3 meeting with Ms. Plavsic. Again, the fact that these paramilitary
4 members had only weeks earlier been co-operating with the police and with
5 the army and indeed had met with high-level members of the Bosnian Serb
6 leadership led these paramilitaries to be bewildered by the fact that
7 they were now being arrested and expelled from the territory of Bosnia
8 and Herzegovina.
9 Q. Thank you. Dr. Nielsen, I wanted to take you to paragraph -- on
10 another topic, to paragraph 298 of your report, where you talk about the
11 processing of detainees and the categorisation of these detainees. From
12 the police's own documents, what was the categorisation? What was their
13 categorisation of the detainees?
14 A. By the middle of the summer of 1992, the RS MUP was detaining
15 thousands of persons according to their own documents in various
16 detention facilities, particularly in north-western Bosnia and
17 Herzegovina on the territory under the jurisdiction of CSB Banja Luka.
18 At -- as partial result of the 11 July meeting, there was a decision to
19 try to figure out who these people actually were and whether they should
20 still be detained because, as previously noted, Mr. Zupljanin in
21 Banja Luka had indicated that these people had been detained en masse by
22 the Crisis Staffs and the army, according to his words, and that they had
23 been "dumped" upon the police who were being forced to deal with these
24 large numbers of people in detention facilities.
25 So they devised a system of categories, which I describe in
1 paragraph 298. And according to this the first category would be people
2 in these detention facilities who were suspected of committing criminal
3 acts. The second was comprised of persons suspected of aiding and
4 abetting those who committed criminal acts. And the third category was
5 comprised of "adult males concerning whom the service has not to date
6 gathered any security-relevant data on the basis of which these persons
7 may be treated as hostages."
8 After that report, a discussion ensued, which I describe in
9 paragraphs 298 through 302 of my report, both involving members of the
10 government and the Presidency but also varying opinions within the police
11 about what should actually be done with these people, particularly
12 because it emerged over time that the largest category of persons seem to
13 be in this third category.
14 MS. SUTHERLAND: If I could have Exhibit Number 09453 -- sorry,
15 65 ter number 09453 on the screen.
16 Q. Dr. Nielsen, this is an -- in appendix B, document 13. It's the
17 SJB Prijedor report of January 1993. Does that document make reference
18 to the categorisation of the detainees? And just, first of all, before
19 we get there. In relation to the Prijedor municipality, what was the
20 level of involvement of the police in camps in that municipality?
21 A. To answer that question, I would refer to page 5 and the
22 following pages of the B/C/S, in which the Prijedor police themselves
23 describe their extensive involvement in operating three so-called
24 collection centres, one being Keraterm, one being Trnopolje, and one
25 being Omarska --
1 JUDGE KWON: It would be beneficial on the part of the Chamber to
2 follow. Could you wait.
3 THE WITNESS: I apologise, Your Honour.
4 JUDGE KWON: So are we on the correct page?
5 Yes, please proceed, Dr. Nielsen.
6 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honour. As the Chamber will see at the
7 bottom of this page in -- on the English, it says that three collection
8 centres were established on the territory of Prijedor municipality,
9 Keraterm, Trnopolje, and Omarska. And it says that several thousand
10 people passed through these centres and that about 6.000 preliminary
11 interviews were conducted with these people. It was on the basis of such
12 interviews, which I would note were conducted usually with -- in
13 co-operation with the military but within the police by both the national
14 and Public Security Service. It was in the course of such discussions
15 that decisions were made about who fit into which category of these three
16 categories that I referred to earlier.
17 MS. SUTHERLAND:
18 Q. And while we have that document up on the screen, is there any
19 reference in that document to whether the actions of the Bosnian Serbs
20 were illegal?
21 A. Well, on the second page of the B/C/S - and here I want to make
22 clear that this doesn't -- these comments that I'm about to make refer to
23 other activities, not the detention facilities' related activities, but
24 to activities taken at earlier stages. It notes that preparations for
25 the establishment of the take-over of the police by the Serbs in Prijedor
1 municipality had to be undertaken in a covert and, in their words,
2 illegal manner. It refers to the illegal organisation and formation of
3 shadow police stations, because at the time the SDA, that is, the Bosnian
4 Muslim party, controlled a large number of people in the police in the
5 municipality. And therefore, the Bosnian Serbs had to act covertly in
6 making their plans to take-over the police in Prijedor.
7 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, I tender that document.
8 JUDGE KWON: This will be, yes, admitted.
9 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P2968, Your Honours.
10 JUDGE KWON: Exhibit P2968.
11 MS. SUTHERLAND:
12 Q. Also in paragraph 288 of your statement when you were discussing
13 the detention centres in Prijedor you cite to two exhibits P02460 and
14 P2793, which I won't -- won't call up at the moment. What part, if any,
15 did the National Security Service play in relation to the detention
17 A. The National Security Service, which was of course part of
18 RS MUP -- and I should state so that it is clear was named the National
19 Security Service. It was what had earlier been known in Bosnia as the
20 State Security Service and was indeed after 1994 again renamed the State
21 Security Service in the RS as well. This National Security Service in
22 1992 was charged with protecting the security of the Bosnian Serb state
23 and its constitutional order. And along those lines, it engaged in the
24 interrogation of persons who were detained on suspicion of having
25 conducted activities aimed at toppling the Serbian Republic or resisting
1 the imposition of the authority of the Serbian Republic. And it's
2 confirmed -- I deal with that, for example, in paragraph 289, that the
3 National Security Service, abbreviated SNB, had conducted a total of over
4 8.000 "informational interviews" with a total of 5.740 persons in
5 detention facilities in a number of municipalities. As I note elsewhere
6 in my report, particularly in the section dealing with the National
7 Security Service, it is clear that the National Security Service was also
8 aware that a large number of persons of Bosnian Croat and Bosnian Muslim
9 ethnicity were leaving north-western Bosnia-Herzegovina and that there
10 was a level of destruction of religious buildings, mosques, churches,
11 et cetera, that was also taking place during this period.
12 Q. Just going back to the reference you made to paragraph 289 and
13 the number of people that were informally -- sorry, that were
14 interviewed, informational interviews, you also note in paragraph 289
16 "However, a total of only four criminal complaints were filed by
17 these authorities during that year."
18 Is that correct?
19 A. That is what the document states. Certainly, looking at all of
20 these documents in total, as an analyst, there is a significant disparity
21 between the number of the number of persons who were detained in these
22 facilities, which often goes up, as the Court can see, to the thousands
23 of persons, and the very, very small number of persons who were
24 eventually charged with any criminal acts.
25 Q. You mentioned earlier on in your testimony a meeting of the 17th
1 of July - and this is 65 ter number 01587 which is Exhibit P01096 - and
2 you said a copy of that report was provided to the president of the
3 Presidency and the prime minister. What was actually dealt with at this
4 meeting on the 17th of July, very briefly?
5 A. I have to put in a small correction because there was no meeting
6 as such on the 17th of July. The 17 July document that we see in front
7 of us is merely an information about the most significant findings and
8 conclusions of the meeting that took place in Belgrade on the 11th of
9 July, 1992. As we see on the cover page of the 17 July document, it
10 was -- in the Serbian it's in -- it's handwritten that the report was
11 delivered to the president of the Presidency and to the prime minister.
12 And it contained all of the key findings on all of the topics that I
13 earlier noted had been discussed at the 11 July meeting, including the
14 topic of what to do with the large numbers of people who were detained in
15 those detention facilities.
16 Q. In paragraphs 301 and 302 of your report, you indicate that the
17 Republika Srpska authorities had to deal with detention facilities
18 because of an increasingly -- an increasing number of international
19 complaints. How did they deal with -- how did they deal with this?
20 A. It's a matter of general knowledge that by the middle of July
21 1992, the existence of detention facilities, particularly in
22 north-western Bosnia and Herzegovina, had become known both in Bosnia and
23 Herzegovina and internationally. As a result of this, in the following
24 weeks after this 11 July meeting, pressure rose to disband these
25 detention facilities but the police discussed at length what was actually
1 to be done with these people who were detained in such facilities. In
2 the event, as I discuss in the subsequent paragraphs of my report, the
3 tendency was to transfer -- to close the facilities, such as Omarska,
4 that were being operated by the police and which had been established
5 pursuant to Crisis Staff orders and to move most of the people who were
6 being kept at such facilities to facilities under the control of the
7 military, in particular the Manjaca detention facility in -- also in
8 north-western Bosnia and Herzegovina.
9 And I discuss that in paragraphs 291, 292, and 293, particularly
10 in the light of the fact that according to documentation of the Army of
11 Republika Srpska, they were quite -- that is to say, the receiving
12 officers of the Army of Republika Srpska were quite astonished and very
13 displeased by the state in which these people were being transferred to
14 their custody at Manjaca. Criticisms made by the military of the
15 police's handling of these persons included complaints that no adequate
16 dossiers accompanied these prisoners, so it was difficult to see why they
17 had been detained in the first place. And secondly, in a number of
18 cases, which I deal with in the paragraphs that I just mentioned,
19 officers of the VRS complained that prisoners or persons who were being
20 transferred to Manjaca from Omarska had been physically beaten and in
21 some cases even killed by the police.
22 Q. Did Mr. Karadzic issue any orders in relation to persons being
24 A. Yes. I am aware of the fact, and I cite on several occasions in
25 the report, that during the course of the summer of 1992 on repeated
1 occasions the -- Dr. Karadzic, as the president of the Presidency, issued
2 orders encouraging -- or I should say ordering subordinates to treat all
3 persons detained according to the Geneva Conventions. I cite one example
4 of such a document on the 23rd of July in paragraph 299, and as I note
5 elsewhere such documents or such orders, that the Geneva Conventions
6 should be respected, were issued also later during the course of August.
7 In paragraph 310 I note a 19 August order by Dr. Karadzic to the VRS and
8 the MUP to treat all prisoners in accordance with international norms.
9 Q. On the 23rd of July, 1992, the order you just referred to of
10 Mr. Karadzic, was there any conditional -- conditions put on that order?
11 I think that's 65 ter number 11100. Do you recall if there was any
12 conditional language?
13 A. Yes. In the 23rd July 1992 order, Dr. Karadzic seemed to
14 condition -- in the first paragraph of that order seemed to condition the
15 implementation -- let me just make sure that we have the right document
16 here. Could I have paragraph 1 of the B/C/S enlarged, please.
17 My reading of this document, the B/C/S language of the
18 document -- and I would note that it's an incomplete translation on the
19 English version of the order. But my reading of the first paragraph of
20 this document seemed to indicate that there was some conditionality in
21 the observation of the Geneva Conventions in Dr. Karadzic's mind,
22 particularly conditioning the respect of the Geneva Conventions to that
23 portion of the population which did not resist the authority of the RS or
24 engage in combat activities against the RS.
25 JUDGE KWON: In your opinion, how should English translation be?
1 THE WITNESS: Well, I -- again, is it possible for the Serbian to
2 be enlarged even larger than present? Or for me to have the original
3 because it's very difficult to read on the screen, but I'll give it my
4 best try. As I read it, it says:
5 "Towards the civilian population of any nationality which does
6 not display," I believe it's -- but it's very difficult to see on the
7 screen, it was much easier when I had the printed document I was looking
8 at earlier, "that does not display aggression and combat activities
9 towards our army and towards the civilian population of the Serbian
10 authority, one must treat them in accordance with the law and with the
11 Geneva Conventions."
12 What I meant by the conditionality here is that it seems to be
13 conditioning the observation of the Geneva Conventions on whether or not
14 the civilian population accepts Serbian rule or resists it.
15 JUDGE BAIRD: So would the English translation be incorrect?
16 THE WITNESS: Yes, because as you see there's a passage there,
17 Your Honour, that is referred to as illegible, and that to me is the
18 crucial part that's missing from that -- that paragraph. Because the --
19 it's not regarding the civilian population of any ethnicity, full stop.
20 It's regarding the civilian population of any ethnicity that does not
21 participate in resistance or combat activities towards our army.
22 JUDGE BAIRD: Thank you.
23 MS. SUTHERLAND:
24 Q. You mentioned a moment ago that there was also another order by
25 Karadzic on the 19th of August, 1992. When was the international
1 community focusing on the detention facilities, do you know?
2 A. Well, I know that by the 2nd of August, and that is to say by the
3 beginning of August, and I referred to some of the international
4 journalists in footnotes 431 and 432, news articles had started to be
5 published internationally focusing on what was allegedly the mistreatment
6 of persons detained in these facilities. So, as I said, after that
7 happened this trend seemed to reinforce the desire of the RS MUP to
8 divest itself of, as it were, the business of detaining large numbers of
9 persons. And we see a quite accelerated push during the month of August,
10 1992, to shut down detention facilities operated by the RS MUP and to
11 transfer people detained in those facilities either to territories
12 outside of the Serbian Republic or, in some cases, to the jurisdiction of
13 the VRS, particularly at the detention facility of Manjaca operated by
14 the VRS.
15 Q. Thank you.
16 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, I note the time.
17 JUDGE KWON: We'll have a break for half an hour and resume at
18 five past 11.00.
19 --- Recess taken at 10.34 a.m.
20 --- On resuming at 11.05 a.m.
21 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Ms. Sutherland.
22 MS. SUTHERLAND:
23 Q. Just before the break, Dr. Nielsen, you mentioned that -- that
24 there was quite a push during the month of August to shut down the
25 detention facility operated by the RS MUP and to transfer people detained
1 in those facilities to either the territories outside of the Serbian
2 territory or in some cases to the jurisdiction of the RS, i.e., Manjaca.
3 According to the RS MUP's own documentation, were there any instances in
4 which abuse was committed against the persons who had been detained in
5 these detention facilities who were being transferred elsewhere?
6 A. Yes. According to the RS MUP's own documentation, there were
7 such instances. I deal with one of those in I believe paragraphs -- I'll
8 just locate that. In paragraphs, for example, 327, where there was one
9 transport of persons who had been detained at one police-controlled
10 facility and there was an incident which was described as being a
11 "massacre" and where the VRS urged that the police engage in
12 investigation of that incident which had taken place while the convoy was
13 under police jurisdiction.
14 Q. And is that the incident known as either the Koricani Stijena or
15 the Mount Vlasic massacre?
16 A. Yes. That is the incident which has been referred to at this
17 Tribunal and elsewhere Koricanska Stijena incident.
18 Q. You mention in paragraph 327 of the report that Zupljanin who was
19 the chief of the CSB was asking Drljaca, who was chief of the Prijedor
20 SJB, to carry out an investigation immediately. And there's a reference
21 to Drljaca responding, they couldn't be carried out because the officers
22 were deployed on the battle-field.
23 MS. SUTHERLAND: If we could have 65 ter number 05781 on the
24 screen, please.
25 [Microphone not activated]
1 JUDGE KWON: Microphone.
2 MS. SUTHERLAND: That doesn't appear to be the correct document.
4 Q. And while we're waiting for that --
5 MS. SUTHERLAND: Yes, I see we have the correct B/C/S but the
6 English translation doesn't appear to be the same document. Okay. We
7 have the right one now.
8 Q. Was that the document that you were referring to in paragraph
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And the fact that the policemen that were involved in the escort
12 on the Travnik convoy on the 21st of August, 1992, are at the front, what
13 can you tell us about policemen going to the front after -- sorry, after
14 they may have been involved in certain incidents?
15 A. Well, there's two points here. One specifically relating to this
16 incident which is that when Drljaca on the 14th of September says that
17 these officers cannot be investigated because they're deployed at the
18 battle-field, his superior, Stojan Zupljanin, again seeks information but
19 there's no indication, certainly in 1992, that any investigation was
20 pursued on this matter despite the very strong words of the army in
21 describing what took place during that incident.
22 At a more general level, the minister of internal affairs in the
23 summer of 1992, Mico Stanisic, made reference and indeed ordered that
24 those police officers who had been committing infractions which were
25 incompatible with their service in the police should be transferred to
1 serve in the Army of Republika Srpska. That is, instead of removing them
2 entirely from service, they would instead end up serving in the military.
3 And indeed the draft 1992 annual report of the RS MUP by and large
4 confirms that many thousands of police were in the course of 1992
5 transferred to military service, a much larger number than the number of
6 police officers against whom disciplinary or criminal proceedings were
8 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, I tender that document that's on
9 the screen.
10 JUDGE KWON: Yes, that will be admitted.
11 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P2969, Your Honours.
12 MS. SUTHERLAND: And I also, Your Honour, before the break I
13 seeked to tender the document that Dr. Nielsen referred to in relation to
14 Mr. Karadzic's order of the 23rd of July, 1992, and that's
15 65 ter number 0 -- 11100.
16 JUDGE KWON: About which Dr. Nielsen indicated that the English
17 translation is not complete?
18 MS. SUTHERLAND: Yes, Your Honour.
19 JUDGE KWON: And that was a draft translation and the final
20 translation will reflect the correct English translation?
21 MS. SUTHERLAND: Yes, Your Honour, I will see to it.
22 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
23 Yes, that will be admitted as well.
24 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P2970, Your Honours.
25 MS. SUTHERLAND: If we could have a document that's listed in
1 appendix B, 65 ter number 21837. It's document 12 in that appendix.
2 Q. Is this the document you were referring to a moment ago when you
3 said that Mico Stanisic issued an order in the summer of 1992?
4 A. Yes, that is that order.
5 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, I seek to tender this document.
6 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P2971.
8 MS. SUTHERLAND:
9 Q. I want to turn now to discuss deportations, and this matter is
10 dealt with in paragraphs 320 to 329 of your report. What role did the
11 RS MUP play in the deportations or expulsions of the non-Serb population?
12 A. Based on my review of the RS MUP's own documentation for the
13 summer of 1992 and the autumn of 1992, it is clear that the police in
14 co-operation with the Crisis Staffs and also in co-operation with the
15 military first established and then guarded detention facilities that I
16 referred to earlier where large numbers of people were detained. As I
17 noted earlier in my testimony today, there was a tendency that once these
18 facilities in the late summer and early autumn of 1992 were being
19 disbanded, the persons who were in those facilities did not return to
20 their residences, but instead had to leave the territory under the
21 control of the RS, many of them ending up elsewhere in the former
22 Yugoslavia, for example, in Croatia or abroad.
23 I would also note that a number of persons of course who were
24 never detained in detention facilities were -- went straight from their
25 residences in various parts of territory under the control of the Bosnian
1 Serbs to territories outside Bosnia-Herzegovina. In many cases, the
2 police played a facilitating role in this process.
3 Q. You note in paragraph 320 of your report that the police would
4 regulate the departures in co-operation with the municipal secretariat
5 for national defence. And you also talk about the voluntariness or
6 involuntariness of this action in paragraph 320. Were the police making
7 any comments as to whether they could guarantee these persons' safety or
8 not if they were to stay in the -- on the territory?
9 A. In a number of cases I reviewed documents in which the police
10 and/or the Crisis Staffs were -- I would again remind that the police
11 were a constituent part of the Crisis Staffs - issued statements to the
12 effect that the physical security of persons who were detained in
13 detention facilities could not be guaranteed if they returned to their
14 residences nor could the security of their property be guaranteed. I
15 note in paragraph 326 of my report that Vinko Kondic, who was the chief
16 of police in the SJB Kljuc, reported that pressure had been put on
17 Muslims to leave Kljuc municipality. And while noting that Muslims had
18 started what he called an armed rebellion against Serbian rule, he also
19 observed that they had been the objects of what he called a campaign of
20 terror with "monstrous crimes being committed against the Muslims." In
21 some cases these crimes were perpetrated by people who were either police
22 officers or wearing uniforms of various kinds.
23 I would also note that in paragraph 321 there was a reference in
24 the RS MUP daily bulletin to an extraordinary event in July 1992 in
25 Sokolac municipality, on the other side of the Serbian Republic, where an
1 entire Muslim family that had actually declared its loyalty to the RS
2 authorities was killed.
3 MS. SUTHERLAND: If I could have 65 ter number 00883 on the
4 screen, please.
5 Q. This is the dispatch of the SJB Kljuc dated the 28th of
6 September, 1992. Is that the document that you just referred to?
7 A. Yes, that is the document that I cite in paragraph 326 of my
9 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, I seek to tender that document.
10 JUDGE KWON: This is not related to the event noted in para 321?
11 MS. SUTHERLAND: 326, Your Honour, I'm sorry, Kljuc.
12 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
13 That will be admitted.
14 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P2972, Your Honours.
15 THE ACCUSED: Could we see next page or how many pages this
16 document has?
17 MS. SUTHERLAND: Two pages. And I note there on page 2 it says
18 the --
19 JUDGE KWON: Just going back to para 321, you noted that while
20 the authorities attempted to ensure that equal protection was provided,
21 the -- that example referred to in that paragraph shows the contrary. Is
22 that what you said?
23 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honour. This is one example where it
24 appears that despite assertions made on repeated occasions that all
25 persons who declared their loyalty to the Serbian Republic would be able
1 to live under complete physical security on the territory of the RS,
2 unfortunately the contrary occurred and the RS MUP, in fact, reported
3 that it was very deplorable that a family of Bosnian Muslims who had
4 declared their loyalty was killed.
5 JUDGE KWON: So does it mean, in your opinion, that authorities
6 didn't attempt to ensure that equal protection was provided?
7 THE WITNESS: Your Honour, I would not like to generalise on that
8 point. What does appear to take place over the summer of 1992 is that
9 there are a number of places in which the police seems - and it varies
10 from case to case - unwilling or unable to provide for the security of
11 Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats who remain on the territory of the RS.
12 And certainly, in such cases where crimes against such persons are
13 committed, it is difficult to see that due diligence was exercised in
14 terms of investigating and prosecuting those crimes, which links to a
15 subsequent point that I make in the report in paragraphs 327 and
16 elsewhere, that there is at times a disparity in the documentation of the
17 RS MUP itself between the level of emphasis placed on the investigation
18 of what they termed war crimes against Serbs and war crimes against
19 others. There are cases in which the minister of internal affairs says,
20 full stop, that all war crimes or allegations of war crimes should be
21 investigated thoroughly; but there are also several occasions on which
22 both he and the civilian authorities of the RS tend to emphasize the
23 investigation of war crimes committed against the Serbs.
24 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
25 MS. SUTHERLAND:
1 Q. Now, I think you deal with this in paragraphs 3 -- 236 and 237;
2 is that right?
3 A. Yes, that is correct.
4 Q. So in your view, was there a pattern established in relation to
5 the non-Serb civilians by the RS MUP authorities or by the authorities
7 A. I think that the most nuanced way of phrasing it is that despite
8 repeated assertions by both the political and police authorities of the
9 RS, that they would seek to provide full security for all citizens of the
10 Serbian Republic, regardless of ethnicity, the documentation of the
11 police itself shows cumulatively that in many, many cases such security
12 was not provided to Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats and that the
13 consequences of violent acts against the persons and property of Bosnian
14 Muslims and Bosnian Croats in the course of the summer of 1992 were not
15 prioritised as a matter of investigation by the police.
16 Q. I want to just deal briefly with reports of the MUP about their
17 involvement in events in 1992. We've discussed on a number of occasions
18 the draft report, and that's dealt with in paragraphs 379 to 391 of your
19 report. I want to take you to the work report of the RS MUP Romanija
20 Birac CSB.
21 MS. SUTHERLAND: And that's 65 ter number 11528. And English
22 page 3 and B/C/S page 3.
23 Q. What is the significance of this document, and in particular
24 references to the SDS?
25 A. I cite this report in footnote 597 on page 109 of my report,
1 noting that this report of CSB Sarajevo emphasises that the SDS was
2 regarded by the police for the duration of 1992 in the RS as the bearer
3 of the activities and means for the liberation of the Serbian nation.
4 The organs of internal affairs, so to say, first entered into the battle
5 of the Serbian nation for liberation. So this ties together two of my
6 earlier points; one, the identification by the Bosnian Serb police with
7 the political programmes of the Serbian Democratic Party; and secondly,
8 the prominent and indeed leading role, particularly in the first half --
9 month and a half of the conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina that the
10 police itself played.
11 As I note in paragraph 383 where footnote 597 is located, this
12 goes all the way back -- one can trace such associations between the
13 Bosnian Serbs in the police and the SDS all the way back to 1991, where
14 again the police in their draft 1992 annual report state that already in
15 the second half of 1991 and early 1992 Serbs had -- Serbs in the police
16 had been "illegally," again their word, illegally arming Serbian
17 civilians in municipalities that were at that point under the control of
18 the SDS.
19 Q. You also discuss in paragraph 70 and 71, 72 an SJB Ilidza report,
20 which is 65 ter number 01230, now Exhibit P02308, and that is on appendix
21 A, document number 25. And you state in your report that there is
22 co-ordination -- and this is a document -- the SJB Ilidza report is dated
23 the 20th of September, 1993, but it makes reference to the co-ordination
24 of the Serbs prior to April 1992, does it not?
25 A. That is correct. This is one of a considerable number of reports
1 from the second half of 1993 that are retrospective in nature. The
2 reason for these reports is that there was at the time an attempt to
3 nominate deserving individuals of the RS MUP for high distinctions and
4 awards and medals by the Bosnian Serb leadership, and these documents at
5 length enunciate the reasons for why various persons in the police from
6 the municipal level all the way up to the top of the ministry should
7 receive such awards. And indeed they were subsequently awarded awards by
8 Dr. Karadzic, as the president of the RS, in I believe November 1993.
9 As I referred to in paragraph 72 of my report, here and also
10 paragraph 71, we once again here in these nomination texts see that the
11 police perceive it to be a -- laudable that the police as early as 1991
12 co-operated closely with SDS representatives and acted on the directives
13 of the SDS. These nomination texts very frequently -- or commendation I
14 suppose would be the better word, commendation texts frequently refer to,
15 again in their own words, illegal activities that the police was engaged
16 in prior to 1992. And in the case of Mr. Tomislav Kovac, who was before
17 the war commander of the police in Ilidza in a suburb of Sarajevo and who
18 later rose to become minister of internal affairs in 1995, one
19 commendation described him as having organised "the formation of the
20 Serbian public security station, organising illegal work and the arming
21 of the Serbian people" and they also commended him for ensuring that
22 Croats and Muslims were removed from the Ilidza police station before the
23 war even began.
24 Q. And that is Exhibit P02308 that I just mentioned a moment ago,
25 Your Honour, so I won't bring it up on the screen.
1 JUDGE KWON: Were you minded to tender that --
2 MS. SUTHERLAND: Yes, I was just about to make an --
3 JUDGE KWON: -- 65 ter 11528?
4 MS. SUTHERLAND: Yes, Your Honour.
5 JUDGE KWON: That's Romanija Birac CSB work report, that will be
7 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P2973, Your Honours.
8 MS. SUTHERLAND:
9 Q. You mentioned Mr. Karadzic awarding RS MUP with awards. If I
10 could have 65 ter number 05289 on the screen, please. And this is the
11 document that you just referred to in paragraph 72 of your report and you
12 said November 1993. If we look at -- one moment. We can see that this
13 is a decree adopted by the president of the Republika Srpska on awarding
14 commendations. And if we look at the first article, can you just look at
15 the persons listed 1 to 5, and do you have any comment in relation to
16 those persons listed there?
17 A. Well, first of all, the highest commendation, the Nemanjic order,
18 is awarded to the ministry as a whole and then to four individuals who
19 were all playing leading roles in the formation of RS MUP and indeed in
20 its operations during 1992. In many cases again there are documents of
21 the police themselves in which these persons are thanked for playing
22 leading roles in the establishment of the Serbian Republic and in the
23 defence of that republic. Often, again, in the police's own words, they
24 proudly use the term "illegal" to refer to activities that these people
25 undertook prior to April 1992.
1 The document as a whole beyond these first couple of individuals
2 is a veritable who is who of RS MUP in 1992. I would note that
3 Simo Drljaca, who was the chief of police in -- in Prijedor as well as
4 his commander, Stojan Zupljanin, appear on the following page as
5 receiving the Karadjordjevic star 1st class commendation. And perhaps it
6 is also worth noting that in the case of some of the individuals who
7 received commendations, these were even individuals who had been
8 criticised within the RS MUP for playing disruptive roles, in particular
9 Ljuban Ecim who had been the leader of the special police in the
10 Banja Luka area.
11 Q. You mentioned that -- you mentioned Tomo Kovac as the minister of
12 the MUP. What position did he hold in 1992?
13 A. Tomislav Kovac at the beginning of the war was the commander of
14 the police at SJB Ilidza. He was then promoted to chief of police in
15 Ilidza, and as I, in fact, note in my report on the section on the
16 paramilitary operations, in August 1992 his rise through the ranks of the
17 police continued only actually a day or two after he had recommended that
18 the police continue to engage in joint operations with an indeed armed
19 paramilitary groups which, in principle, should have been disbanded by
20 that point. He was then appointed, I believe it's stated in my report,
21 in August 1992 to the position of assistant minister, and by the time we
22 get to 1995 he was acting minister of -- or, excuse me, deputy minister
23 and indeed acting minister during the summer of 1995 for RS MUP. And
24 subsequently he was promoted to minister of RS MUP, a position he held
25 until December 1995, when he was replaced by Dragan Kijac.
1 Q. Thank you.
2 MS. SUTHERLAND: If we could go to page 2 of the document and
3 still on page 1 of the B/C/S.
4 Q. And you mentioned a moment ago Simo Drljaca who you said was
5 chief of the police in Prijedor. And you noted in I think paragraph 327
6 of your report that it was -- the Prijedor the police were involved in
7 the Koricani Stijena massacre; is that right?
8 A. That is correct, both according to the documents of the RS MUP
9 and of the VRS. And I would just supplement my previous answer by noting
10 that it is in paragraph 374 of my report that I refer to Kovac's
11 promotion in August 1992 to assistant minister.
12 Q. And Stojan Zupljanin, what did he -- was he promoted throughout
13 the war?
14 A. Yes, Stojan Zupljanin, who had been the chief of the CSB in
15 Banja Luka from already 1991 was, I believe, in 1994 promoted to be the
16 advisor to the president of the RS on security matters.
17 Q. And you mentioned Ljuban Ecim. If we could go to page 3 of the
18 English and page 2 of the B/C/S. And Ljuban Ecim and Zdravko Samardzija,
19 listed at number 6 and 7 for the Karadjordjevic star 3rd class.
20 A. Yes. I would note for the Court that in the section of my report
21 starting around paragraph 223 on page 67, I deal in length or at length
22 with the formation of the CSB Banja Luka special police unit which was
23 commanded by Ljubomir Ecim and in which Mr. Samardzija also served. This
24 was a unit that had its origins as a Serbian paramilitary unit and which
25 during the course of 1992 in the summer engaged in a number of activities
1 that were regarded as callous and highly problematic by the -- by many
2 civilian and indeed police authorities in the region, which led therefore
3 that special police unit to be partially disbanded in August 1992.
4 Q. You mentioned a moment ago that there was MUP supporting
5 documentation for these nominations for commendations. And these are
6 listed on appendix B and these are discussed at paragraph 71 and 72 of
7 your report.
8 MS. SUTHERLAND: And they're 65 ter numbers 018 -- sorry, my
9 mistake, 18264, which is entitled: "RS MUP Nominations for
10 Commendation." Another document, 65 ter number 10416 which is an undated
11 commendation for Srecko Samardzija. Another document,
12 65 ter number 01671 from the Blazuj reserve police SJB proposal for
13 public recognition. And 65 ter number 11302, which is dealt with at
14 paragraph 72 which is RS MUP notice concerning the activities of the
15 reserve militia station in Ilidza, which is undated.
16 Are they the documents that you were referring to a moment ago
17 when you said there was supporting documentation?
18 A. Yes, that is part of the supporting documentation. I would
19 stress that unfortunately I was not able to locate supporting
20 documentation for all of the persons nominated in -- for presidential
21 awards in 1993.
22 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, I would seek to tender those four
23 documents without the need to call them up.
24 JUDGE KWON: I have to ask the opinion of Mr. Robinson.
25 MR. ROBINSON: No objection. Since he's described them
1 generally, it's okay.
2 JUDGE KWON: Yes, given the position of the Defence, we'll admit
3 these documents.
4 Yes, we give the numbers for these.
5 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honour, they will be Exhibits P2974
6 through P2977.
7 JUDGE KWON: Witness -- Dr. Nielsen referred to his report
8 paragraph 327, the parts referring to Drljaca. Could you go through with
9 him what that -- the paragraph refers to.
10 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, we dealt with that I think just
11 after the break when we were talking about the Koricani Stijena and the
12 order from Zupljanin to Drljaca to investigate the matter, and then
13 Drljaca responded to Zupljanin: Well, they're off at the front in
14 Han Pijesak.
15 JUDGE KWON: Have we admitted those documents?
16 MS. SUTHERLAND: Yes, Your Honour.
17 JUDGE KWON: And the VRS report as well?
18 MS. SUTHERLAND: No, Your Honour. I can -- I can locate the army
19 document to see whether in fact it is admitted.
20 JUDGE KWON: And could you tell me the exhibit number of the
21 documents we admitted -- I mean the MUP documents.
22 Please proceed in the meantime.
23 MS. SUTHERLAND: The dispatch from Drljaca back to Zupljanin on
24 the 14th of September, 1992, is Exhibit P2969.
25 Q. Dr. Nielsen, I think the army document that you referred to
1 earlier in your testimony was dated the 21st or the 22nd of August, was
2 it not?
3 A. I refer, actually, to a number of VRS combat reports and other
4 documents in paragraph 327 that deal with this incident. So footnotes
5 496 and 497 and also there is a press conference with General-Major Talic
6 in 495.
7 JUDGE KWON: Let's proceed.
8 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, I can give you the 65 ter numbers
9 for those documents --
10 JUDGE KWON: I have the footnote.
11 MS. SUTHERLAND: Okay.
12 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
13 MS. SUTHERLAND: And could I tender the presidential decree on
14 the distribution of awards, 65 ter number 05289, please?
15 JUDGE KWON: Yes, that will be admitted.
16 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P2978, Your Honours.
17 MS. SUTHERLAND:
18 Q. Dr. Nielsen, I wish to turn to another topic now, and that is the
19 topic of Typhoon and Sigma. The Court was directed to an exhibit the
20 other day, Exhibit P0296.
21 MS. SUTHERLAND: And I would seek leave to use this exhibit,
22 Your Honour. If that could be brought up on to the screen, please.
23 JUDGE KWON: Did he deal with it in his report?
24 MS. SUTHERLAND: Uh, no, Your Honour. And this is the public
25 version of the document. If we could have the following page.
1 Q. Dr. Nielsen, what is this document?
2 A. This is an Official Note of the 2nd Administration of the State
3 Security Service of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Serbian
4 Republic dated 27 June 1994, connected to the group known as Typhoon.
5 Q. And there's a reference in the document to Sigma.
6 A. Yes. Essentially there was an intelligence group whose origins
7 go all the way back to the second half of 1991, to the JNA, who during
8 the course of 1991 and 1992 organised themselves and proffered their
9 services to the authorities of the Serbian Republic and were constituted
10 as information centre Typhoon, I believe, in June 1992 pursuant to an
11 order by the president of the republic, Dr. Karadzic. This group was
12 subsequently engaged in a number of activities of a controversial nature,
13 with the result that efforts were made by the authorities of the RS to
14 disband the information centre Typhoon. And here we see in this document
15 from June 1994 that members of this former group decided to establish
16 contact directly with the State Security Service of the Republic of
17 Serbia, where they are now proffering their services to Belgrade, as it
18 were. And a decision is made here by the deputy chief of
19 administration - I note that his name is redacted here - that the deputy
20 chief of information in the Serbian State Security Service agrees that
21 these persons should be allowed to enter into service for the Serbian
22 State Security Service and that they shall be constituted under the
23 pseudonym Sigma.
24 Q. You mentioned a moment ago that Typhoon was constituted as an
25 information centre pursuant to an order of the president of the republic.
1 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honours, I would seek to add an exhibit
2 65 ter number 23182 and to use that with Dr. Nielsen. It is in relation
3 to the establishment of the group Typhoon.
4 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Robinson.
5 MR. ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. President. We did receive notice
6 recently that they were going to seek to add these to the 65 ter list and
7 we don't object.
8 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
10 MS. SUTHERLAND: If 65 ter number 23182 could be brought up on
11 the screen, please.
12 Q. This is a decision dated the 22nd of July, 1992. Was this the
13 decision that you spoke of a moment ago?
14 A. I believe there -- if memory serves - and it's been a while since
15 I looked at all the documents - but I believe there's even an earlier
16 document. I think I referred to June 1992. But in any case this
17 certainly shows that in July 1992 Dr. Karadzic in his capacity as the
18 president of the National Security Council in the RS is asking for the
19 army of the Serbian Republic and the MUP to co-operate with the
20 information centre Typhoon in its operations.
21 Q. And I note that the broad number is 01-343/92.
22 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, I seek to tender that document.
23 JUDGE KWON: Yes, this will be admitted.
24 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P2979, Your Honours.
25 MS. SUTHERLAND: And if I could go to another document related to
1 Typhoon which is 65 ter number 23183, also disclosed, as Mr. Robinson
2 said, as a potential 65 ter exhibit.
3 Q. Dr. Nielsen, this is a document dated the 30th of November, 1992,
4 signed by the president, Dr. Karadzic, and it's an order referring to an
5 order of the 23rd of June, 1992, with the broad number 01-140/92. Do you
6 have any comment on this document?
7 A. Well, I believe that that number, 01-140/92, is most likely the
8 document from June 1992 that I was referring to earlier, but again this
9 document which is, in this case, issued by Dr. Karadzic in his capacity
10 as president of the Presidency of the RS, states again that the
11 information centre Typhoon exists and that it is supposed to be enjoying
12 the protection of the 1st Krajina Corps in the VRS.
13 Q. And you said that Typhoon then became -- then was working under
14 the -- the pseudonym of Sigma. And then you said that it was disbanded
15 by the authorities of the RS because of -- it was engaged in a number of
16 activities of a controversial nature. Can you just briefly describe why
17 it was disbanded.
18 A. I just want to clarify that Typhoon was disbanded -- at least
19 attempts were made to put it out of existence in 1993 and late -- early
20 1994, but that it resurfaced, now under the protection of Serbian state
21 security and allegedly with the permission of the RS authorities, in June
22 1994 as Sigma. So there was nothing called Sigma until the summer of
24 The reason that Typhoon or one of the reasons that Typhoon was
25 disbanded was that it turned out that among its activities were
1 intelligence reports that were produced on allegedly very high levels of
2 corruption among persons either in the Bosnian Serb leadership or close
3 to that leadership. That was not something that was desirable from the
4 point of view of the Bosnian Serb authorities, and that was according to
5 many sources the reason -- one of the reasons why Typhoon was being shut
7 Q. Thank you.
8 MS. SUTHERLAND: I've finished with that document.
9 Q. I wish to deal now with another topic, the period from mid-1995.
10 Did the hierarchical structure of the RS MUP change between 1993 and
12 A. The essential structure of the ministry remained the same,
13 although there were a number of smaller, I would say, cosmetic changes
14 made to the titles of various units and entities within the RS MUP. One
15 of them that I referred to earlier was the renaming of the National
16 Security Service as the State Security Service.
17 Q. Who was the minister of the MUP in July 1995?
18 A. I believe his name was, if memory serves, Zivko Rakic, but it may
19 have been Ratic, Ratic or Rakic. But at any rate he was not the one who
20 on a daily basis was actually running the ministry at that point.
21 Q. Who was the deputy minister?
22 A. Tomislav Kovac.
23 Q. Who was head of the public security?
24 A. Milenko Karisik.
25 Q. Who was the head of the state security?
1 A. Dragan Kijac.
2 Q. Who was the commander of the special police brigade?
3 A. Goran Saric.
4 Q. And who was his deputy?
5 A. Ljubomir Borovcanin.
6 Q. Now, I'm not going to get into the substance of the Srebrenica
7 operation with you, but I do want to ask you a few questions about how
8 the RS MUP was structured and how it was operating during the period
9 June/July 1995. And I --
10 JUDGE KWON: Before doing so, you're tendering that previous
11 Typhoon document?
12 MS. SUTHERLAND: Yes, Your Honour.
13 JUDGE KWON: Putting under the 1st Krajina Corps.
14 That will be admitted.
15 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P2980, Your Honours.
16 MS. SUTHERLAND:
17 Q. You mentioned a moment ago that Rakic -- or you said Ratic or
18 Rakic was not the one who was on a daily basis running the ministry at
19 that point. I was going to deal with it a little later, but at this
20 point who was dealing with it? Who was running the ministry at that
21 point in 1995?
22 A. All of the documentation from June and July 1995 indicates that
23 on a de facto basis the person issuing orders, instructions, et cetera,
24 in the RS MUP was Tomislav Kovac, the deputy minister. He subsequently
25 became minister.
1 Q. Now, the questions that I want to -- the topics that I want to
2 ask you about relate to the following, and that's the establishment of
3 the Pale police staff, the relationship between the RS MUP and the
4 Serbian MUP units operating in the Republika Srpska. I will ask you some
5 questions about Tomo Kovac's positions in July 1995 and the reporting by
6 the subordinate units to him and communications between state security
7 and other units. I want to also take you to an example of how the MUP
8 implemented an order from the president during this period, and I will
9 also be asking you to identify the names and positions of RS MUP members
10 who appear in Mr. Karadzic's appointment diary in this period.
11 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, at this time I would seek leave to
12 add a document to the 65 ter list and that's Exhibit 23166. It was
13 disclosed to the Defence on the 14th of March, 2011, under Rule 68(ii)
14 and on the 22nd of June, 2011, as a potential 65 ter exhibit.
15 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
16 MS. SUTHERLAND: If that document could be brought up on the
17 screen, please.
18 Q. First of all, Dr. Nielsen, were you aware -- are you aware of a
19 police staff command being set up in Pale in 1995 through your review and
20 analysis of documents?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. If you can look at the names of the people who were appointed to
23 the staff, can you explain who these people are? If we look at the
24 addressees, who or what is the police administration Bijeljina?
25 A. As of June 1995, the RS Ministry of Internal Affairs had its seat
1 in Bijeljina in the north-eastern corner of Bosnia and Herzegovina, but
2 it also maintained important offices at Pale, near Sarajevo. And indeed
3 the documentation of the ministry during this period reflects that
4 orders, instructions, decrees, et cetera, were issued both through the
5 offices in Bijeljina and in Pale. In this case this document stems from
6 Pale and is being issued by the deputy minister of MUP, Tomislav Kovac,
7 who is establishing an operational staff of police forces in the zone in
8 which a -- a state of war exists. The one that's referred to at the top,
9 the staff of the command of police forces in MUP for -- located at
10 Bijeljina, is basically the overall operational commanding unit for the
11 field deployment and combat operations of MUP at that time.
12 Q. And I think you mentioned earlier that the special brigade
13 commander was Goran Saric?
14 A. Correct.
15 Q. What was the role of the staff?
16 A. Obviously when police forces are involved in day-to-day combat of
17 an intense nature, as they were during this period, for example, at the
18 Trnovo battle-field not far from Sarajevo, it is necessary to ensure that
19 these forces are commanded operationally in a correct and efficient
20 manner. And one of the purposes of having these police command staffs is
21 to ensure that.
22 MS. SUTHERLAND: I tender that document, Your Honour.
23 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
24 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P2981, Your Honours.
25 MS. SUTHERLAND:
1 Q. I now want to look at a couple of documents regarding the
2 relationship between the RS MUP and Serbian MUP units operating in the
3 territory of the RS during June and July 1995.
4 MS. SUTHERLAND: If we could have 65 ter number 08208 on the
5 screen, please.
6 Q. This is a document dated the 24th of June, 1995, from the public
7 security station Bratunac. It's addressed to the chief of Zvornik CSB.
8 Who is that?
9 A. As of June 1995, that was Dragomir Vasic.
10 Q. Do you see Vasic's name on the document?
11 A. Yes, I see it in handwriting at the top.
12 Q. The document refers to MUP special -- MUP Serbia special task
13 units (Frenki). What's this a reference to?
14 A. The name or nickname Frenki is a reference to Franko Simatovic,
15 who was a high-ranking employee of the State Security Service of the
16 Republic of Serbia at the time.
17 Q. The Bratunac SJB commander is requesting information about
18 whether the "deputy minister" has approved the stay of these ten Serbian
19 MUP members. And you mentioned a moment ago that the deputy minister was
20 Tomo Kovac. It then says:
21 "... approved by President Karadzic and Tomo ..."
22 Who is the Tomo referred to here?
23 A. Given that the document already mentions the need for the deputy
24 minister to approve the stay of these MUP Serbia units on the territory
25 of the RS, I infer that this is a reference to Deputy Minister Tomislav
2 Q. And what, if anything, does this handwritten comment tell you
3 about Karadzic's role in the deployment of Serbian MUP forces into the
5 A. The fact that not only the deputy minister of internal affairs
6 but also the president of the RS, Dr. Karadzic, approved this shows to me
7 that from the perspective of the MUP it was if not necessary at least
8 highly desirable that Dr. Karadzic approve of this, and certainly in
9 approving of it he would also had knowledge that such units were deployed
10 on the territory of the RS.
11 MS. SUTHERLAND: I tender that document, Your Honour.
12 JUDGE KWON: But we don't know whose handwriting this is, Mr. --
13 Dr. Nielsen?
14 THE WITNESS: Your Honour, if my memory were better than it was,
15 I could probably -- many years ago I could have told you whose
16 handwriting that is, but I can't off the top of my head. I apologise.
17 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
18 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Your Excellencies, we are not
19 opposed, but if there is other evidence that would be good if we received
21 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, can I tender that document?
22 JUDGE KWON: Yes, I was about -- wondering whether -- yes, we'll
23 admit this.
24 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P2982, Your Honours.
25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I said taking into account your
1 observation, Your Excellency, namely that we did not have information as
2 to whose handwriting that was. So we are not opposed, taking into
3 account your observation.
4 MS. SUTHERLAND: If we can take a look at another document,
5 65 ter number 01958.
6 Q. This is a document dated the 1st of July, 1995, from the special
7 police brigade Trnovo from the special police brigade deputy commander
8 Ljubisa Borovcanin dated -- and if we can look at the addressees. The
9 document is sent to Tomo Kovac in his capacities as deputy minister and
10 Pale police staff commander. Why would this report have been sent to
11 Kovac in two different capacities?
12 A. Kovac is at this point what one calls dual-hatted; that is, he is
13 wearing several different functional titles within the RS MUP, but
14 keeping in mind that the ministry was operationally co-located at both
15 Pale and Bijeljina which were some distance apart, I see this, among
16 other things, as an attempt to ensure that wherever he is he's going to
17 receive this message and that both subordinates at Pale and Bijeljina
18 will be duly informed of its contents.
19 Q. And who is the Vogosca police forces staff?
20 A. I do not have detailed knowledge of that, but again any of these
21 police force staffs in 1995 would have existed in areas in which intense
22 operations were ongoing.
23 Q. The document talks about two platoons from each of the Kajman,
24 Plavi, Skorpija detachments (the MUP of Serbia) attacking a particular
25 feature. We saw in the previous document that President Karadzic and
1 Tomo Kovac personally approved the deployment of ten Serbian MUP members
2 into Bratunac on the 24th of June, one week earlier. Does that tell you
3 anything about who would have had to approve the deployment of the much
4 bigger Kajman, Plavi, and Skorpija Serbian MUP units into the areas?
5 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] This is both a leading and a
6 misleading question. It has nothing to do with Bratunac, and we don't
7 know whether that was approved in Bratunac.
8 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour --
9 JUDGE KWON: Yes, I think you can reformulate the question.
10 MS. SUTHERLAND:
11 Q. Dr. Nielsen, who in your view would have had to approve the
12 deployment of this much bigger Kajman, Plavi, Skorpija Serbian MUP units
13 into the RS?
14 A. Two points. First, the language of the document in front of us
15 is ambiguous as -- grammatically as to whether all three of these units
16 are from MUP of Serbia or whether it is only the third of those units,
17 the Skorpions, that belongs to MUP of Serbia. My second point would be
18 that certainly the leadership of RS MUP would have known, as we can see
19 here from this dispatch, that such units were located on the territory of
20 the Serbian Republic. And given the fact that the deputy minister,
21 Tomislav Kovac, was at this point in constant daily communication with
22 the highest authorities of the republic, my assumption would be that they
23 would also be aware of the presence of such units, particularly in light
24 of the fact that a much smaller unit of mechanics that came from MUP of
25 Serbia had apparently been the subject of notification to the Presidency.
1 It would be curious if the deployment of an entire armed unit from MUP
2 Serbia would not elicit similar notification.
3 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Objection. All these are extensive
4 speculations. The assumption that I was informed --
5 JUDGE KWON: That's subject of your cross-examination.
6 Yes, Ms. Sutherland.
7 MS. SUTHERLAND:
8 Q. So whose command are the Kajman, Plavi, and Skorpija operating
9 under here?
10 A. I know from other documents that these units were in the Trnovo
11 battle-field area by around the 24th of June, I believe, 1995. And
12 during that period they carried out combat operations together with the
13 RS MUP units under the command of Goran Saric, who was the commander of
14 the special police brigade at that point.
15 Q. The document describes problems observing agreement with SRK
16 command on joint action. Were these MUP units under the command of the
17 SRK or were they working in co-ordination with them?
18 A. During this period I believe the combat operations in the Trnovo
19 area were being co-ordinated with the military forces that were in the
20 area. I know from other documents that despite the type of agreement
21 that this document refers to, the police was, once again, as in 1992,
22 rather resentful of having in its own opinion to bear the brunt of the
23 burden on the combat -- in the combat area.
24 Q. And at what level does this co-ordination occur, at the staff
25 level or lower down, at Borovcanin's level?
1 A. That certainly depends on what kind of co-ordination we're
2 talking about. At the day-to-day/hour-by-hour co-ordination level, that
3 would have been handled at the level of Borovcanin and people around him.
4 But in terms of the decisions to deploy both police and military units,
5 this could not have been taken without the involvement of the leadership
6 of both the RS MUP and the Main Staff of the VRS, both of which were of
7 course constituent parts of the armed forces of the RS, and hence
8 ultimately subordinate to the Presidency.
9 MS. SUTHERLAND: I tender that document, Your Honour.
10 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
11 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P2983, Your Honours.
12 MS. SUTHERLAND: If we can look at another document,
13 65 ter number 09274.
14 Q. This is a document dated the 6th of July, 1995, from Tomo Kovac,
15 staff commander of the police forces Pale to the Sarajevo CJB and the
16 Vogosca police forces staff. And you mentioned earlier that Tomo Kovac
17 was also the deputy minister of MUP. And so can you explain why some
18 documents are sent in his capacity as deputy minister and others in his
19 capacity as staff commander?
20 A. I referred just a moment ago to his dual-hatted function. In
21 cases during this period where Tomislav Kovac has to regulate matters
22 that would normally be within the ambit of the minister of internal
23 affairs, pursuant to the Law on Internal Affairs, he would send documents
24 on that basis. In other cases - and this is one where it's essentially
25 referring exclusively to combat operations, which again are within the
1 ambit of a police forces staff - he logically sends such orders and
2 informational reports, dispatches, et cetera, as -- in his capacity as
3 the commander of the police staff at Pale which he had himself
5 Q. In the first paragraph of the document it describes an offensive
6 by the Herzegovina Corps and it's reported that 50 to 100 enemy soldiers
7 died and 23 were captured. Would the capture of large groups of
8 prisoners be something that the deputy minister of the RS MUP would have
9 to be informed about?
10 A. Certainly in combat situation reports, or sitreps, we see
11 throughout this period that they include information on the number of
12 enemy soldiers captured or killed, as well of course as information on
13 the casualties incurred by the RS MUP, and that ultimately these reports
14 would be communicated on to the deputy minister. Here it's actually an
15 even more efficient reporting mechanism, that because in his capacity as
16 direct commander of the police staff at Pale, he is himself reporting to
17 other relevant units of the RS MUP on such activities and displaying
18 knowledge of such.
19 Q. Further down there's a reference in the document to special MUP
20 forces of RS Serbia and the RSK. Can you tell us who these are?
21 A. From other dispatches that I have read from Trnovo, from this
22 period, including the previous one, from Borovcanin, I take this to be a
23 reference to the detachments including Kajman, Plavi, and Skorpija that
24 were mentioned in earlier dispatches. They have a conglomeration of
25 units present at Trnovo in early July 1995 which they refer to as the
1 joint forces of RSK MUP, RS MUP, and MUP of Serbia.
2 Q. And down the bottom of the document Kovac reports that an
3 offensive against Srebrenica began in the early hours of the 6th of July.
4 Kovac then states that he would keep the recipients "posted on all the
5 interesting events on this battle-field."
6 Does this tell you anything about Kovac's level of notice,
7 re: the events around Srebrenica?
8 A. I read this as a clear intent that Kovac intends to stay abreast
9 of the evolving security situation in the Srebrenica area and to report
10 in the coming days on that situation, including the types of information
11 that we would have seen in the sitrep.
12 Q. Can you tell from this document whether Kovac -- I'm sorry, I
13 withdraw that.
14 I want to look briefly at some of the sources of where Tomo Kovac
15 and the MUP were receiving information from during this period. I don't
16 want to get deeply into these, but I'm interested in who's providing who
17 with information.
18 MS. SUTHERLAND: If we could have the first document 65 ter
19 18957, please.
20 Your Honour, just while that's coming up, I tender the document
21 65 ter 09274.
22 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
23 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit P2984, Your Honours.
24 MS. SUTHERLAND: The document in front of us, 18957 is dated the
25 9th of July, 1995, and it's --
1 Q. Can you tell the Court who is the sender and who is the
3 A. The recipient is the RS Ministry of Internal Affairs cabinet at
4 Pale as well as the staff of the command of police forces of the MUP at
5 Bijeljina. And it's signed -- typed signed by Dragomir Vasic, but it has
6 been signed for him.
7 JUDGE KWON: Is it Zvornik CSB or SJB?
8 THE WITNESS: Your Honour, if I may assist it is Zvornik CJB
9 because at the beginning of 1994 all the CSBs were renamed as CJBs. This
10 was because of a structural change that I perhaps should have mentioned
11 earlier which is that in 1994 the State Security Services and -- or the
12 State Security Service and the Public Security Service which had been
13 earlier co-located in the CSB were separated out. So henceforth the
14 Public Security Service would be in the CJB at the regional level and the
15 State Security Service would be in the CRDB [Realtime transcript read in
16 error "CRJB"] at the regional level.
17 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
18 MS. SUTHERLAND: I tender that document.
19 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
20 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P2985, Your Honours.
21 MS. SUTHERLAND: The next document is 65 ter number 01943. And
22 it's dated the 12th of July, 1995.
23 Q. Who is the sender and who is the recipient of this document?
24 A. First, please permit that I correct line 64 -- 16, it should be
25 CRDB not CRJB.
1 In this document in front of us now, the recipient is the deputy
2 minister of internal affairs of the Republic of Serbia personally as well
3 as the leader of -- or head, rather, of the Public Security Service who
4 was, again, Milenko Karisik, again personally, and the dispatch is being
5 sent by the head of the RDB, Dragan Kijac.
6 Q. And this document and the previous document are about the
7 situation in Srebrenica?
8 A. Yes, that is correct.
9 MS. SUTHERLAND: I tender that document.
10 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can I have a clarification. Is it
11 Serbia or the Republika Srpska. In the transcript it is Serbia. It is
12 written in the transcript of the Republic of Serbia.
13 MS. SUTHERLAND: That's at -- on page 65, line 2.
14 Dr. Nielsen, do you see --
15 THE WITNESS: Yes, it is the deputy minister of internal affairs
16 of the RS, not the Republic of Serbia.
17 JUDGE KWON: Yes, this will be admitted as Exhibit P2986.
18 And shall we take a break if it is convenient?
19 MS. SUTHERLAND: Yes, Your Honour.
20 JUDGE KWON: We'll have a break for an hour and resume at 1.30.
21 --- Luncheon recess taken at 12.30 p.m.
22 --- On resuming at 1.31 p.m.
23 JUDGE KWON: Before we begin, I wanted to let the parties know
24 that we are sitting pursuant to Rule 15 bis for this session, with
25 Judge Morrison being away due to his urgent personal matters.
1 Yes, Ms. Sutherland.
2 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, before I continue in relation to
3 Exhibit P2982 which was discussed at pages 56 to 58 of today's
4 transcript, it was the document dated the 24th of June, 1995, from the
5 public security station Bratunac to the public security centre Zvornik.
6 And you inquired about the handwriting on the document. The MIF for the
7 document for the Trial Chamber's benefit and Mr. Karadzic's says that the
8 document was seized by the OTP from Mane Djuric at the Zvornik CSB. Of
9 course, Mr. Nielsen has already -- Dr. Nielsen has already explained the
10 difference between the CSB and the CJB at that point in time. So I note
11 that for the record.
12 JUDGE KWON: That does not mean that it's -- it is his
14 MS. SUTHERLAND: No, Your Honour. It's simply -- I was just
15 simply advising the Court and Mr. Karadzic as to where we got the
16 document from, and it was seized on the 5th of June, 2002.
17 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
18 MS. SUTHERLAND: If I could have 65 ter number 01943 on the
19 screen, please. Oh, I'm sorry, we've dealt with that document, that's
20 Exhibit P2986. If I could have 65 ter number 04672, please.
21 Q. This is a document dated the 13th of July, 1995, and it's a
22 dispatch from the SBP deputy commander Ljubisa Borovcanin to the Pale
23 police staff. In this document Borovcanin describes how the MUP are
24 involved in organising "the evacuation of the civilians from Srebrenica
25 to Kladanj." He also describes that during the day, 13th of July, 1995,
1 the MUP "captured or had surrendered to us, 15.000 [sic] Muslim soldiers.
2 The number increases by the hour."
3 Dr. Nielsen, in your opinion as the commander of the Pale police
4 station to whom this report was sent, would Kovac have been made aware of
5 the information contained in this report?
6 A. I would note that this document was sent not to the commander of
7 the Pale police station but to the command of the police staff at Pale
8 who was, as we have seen in earlier documents today, Tomislav Kovac, so
9 he is in fact one of the recipients of this document.
10 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, I tender that document.
11 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
12 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P2987, Your Honours.
13 MS. SUTHERLAND: Could I have 65 ter number 01965 on the screen,
15 Q. This is dated the 13th of July, 1995, and it's a dispatch from
16 Tomo Kovac to the chief of the Zvornik CJB, passing on the information
17 which Kovac -- sorry, who is Kovac receiving his information from,
18 Dr. Nielsen?
19 A. In this particular case, Kovac is forwarding information to the
20 chief of CJB Zvornik, which he, Kovac, has obtained -- it's the text of a
21 dispatch sent by the Drina Corps command of the VRS.
22 Q. Is it a particular department within the corps?
23 A. Yes, it is. It's the department for intelligence and security
25 MS. SUTHERLAND: I tender this document.
1 JUDGE KWON: Yes. Yes, Exhibit P2988.
2 MS. SUTHERLAND:
3 Q. Dr. Nielsen, I want you to now look at a log-book from the
4 Republika Srpska state centre for encrypted communications,
5 65 ter number 02589. I want to take you in particular to entries from
6 the 11th of July to the 16th of July. If we could look first at entries
7 for the 11th of July.
8 MS. SUTHERLAND: And that is on the English page 4 and the B/C/S
9 pages 2 to 3.
10 Q. The entries for the 11th of July are numbered 2251, 2252, and
11 2253. If you could briefly explain to the Chamber those entries, please.
12 A. Yes, this is 2250 -- excuse me, 2251, 2252, and 2253 are all
13 referring to the same dispatch which is being received, it's a strictly
14 confidential dispatch from the security organ of the Main Staff of the
15 VRS and it's being distributed. The reason it's listed three times is
16 that there were three different recipients, and for each recipient
17 there's one entry in the log-book although it's the same dispatch and it
18 arrives at the same time from the same sender.
19 JUDGE KWON: Do you know what is the state centre for encrypted
21 THE WITNESS: Your Honour, I know that this was the central
22 location in Pale at the time where security -- excuse me, where encrypted
23 telegrams from various areas in the RS were being received and then
24 distributed on to their recipients, many of whom were located at Pale.
25 JUDGE KWON: It belonged to which organ?
1 THE WITNESS: In this particular case I believe that these
2 log-books were all confiscated from the RS MUP. I believe to the best of
3 your knowledge and my recollection of these log-books that they were
4 collected from the RS State Security Service and that the -- this
5 communication centre was being operated by the RS State Security Service.
6 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
7 MS. SUTHERLAND: If we could go to the 12th of July, this is page
8 6 of the English, page 3 of the B/C/S.
9 Q. The entries that I would like you to focus on numbered 2265,
10 2266, and 2267.
11 A. Again here this is a case of one dispatch, in this case it's from
12 the following day, the 12th of July, 1995, again strictly confidential,
13 again stemming from the VRS security organ and it's being distributed to
14 three different recipients. It's -- one of which is the State Security
15 Service of the RDB -- or RDB, one being the defence ministry, and one
16 being the president.
17 Q. The 13th of July which is --
18 JUDGE KWON: No, but the first one, the number of the first one
19 is different from the others, 2265. Is it translation problem? It says
21 THE WITNESS: Your Honour, I believe in the B/C/S original it's
22 because in the case of 2265 the handwriting is perhaps -- it's quite
23 minuscule, and I believe that the person translating this document has
24 erroneously put 840 instead of 860 because it's clearly reflected that
25 2265, 2266, and 2267 were all received at 0455 on the 12th of July, 1995.
1 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
2 MS. SUTHERLAND: If we could go to the entries for the 13th of
3 July, that's English page 10, B/C/S page 4.
4 Q. The entries to focus on number 2298, 2299, and 22300 [sic].
5 A. This is a similar occurrence. For the third day in a row at 0425
6 hours on the 13th of July, 1995, a dispatch is received from the security
7 organ of the Main Staff of the VRS and is being sent, or rather,
8 distributed by the communications centre to the president of the
9 republic, the Ministry of Defence, and the State Security Service of the
11 Q. If we can go to the 14th of July, this is at English page 12,
12 B/C/S page 5, the entries to focus on numbered 2320, 2321, and 2322.
13 A. This is the exact same phenomenon recurring now on the 14th of
14 July, 1995, at 0610 hours.
15 Q. If we can go to the entries on the 15th of July, that's English
16 page 13 and 14 and B/C/S page 6. The entries to focus on are numbered
17 2334, 2335, and 2336.
18 A. This is, again, the same pattern of communication recurring now
19 on 15 July 1995 at 0715 hours. I just want to correct a statement I made
20 a few moments ago because now that I look at the ERN number of the
21 document I see that it is actually another log-book that looks very
22 similar to another one I'm familiar with, that other one being from the
23 State Security Service. In this case, I actually do not know exactly
24 where it was located originally. So it may not be from the State
25 Security Service.
1 Q. If we can go to entries for the 16th of July, this is English
2 page 16, B/C/S page 7, the entries to focus on are numbered 2351, 2352,
3 and 2353.
4 THE INTERPRETER: Please all unnecessary microphones be switched
5 off. Thank you very much.
6 THE WITNESS: This is again a similar pattern of communication
7 now on the 16th of July, 1995, at 0525 hours. I would note just in
8 passing that there are other instances in this log-book of communications
9 that are also coming from the security organ of the VRS and that are also
10 going to people located at Pale, including the president.
11 MS. SUTHERLAND:
12 Q. Do the above-mentioned entries that we've just gone through from
13 the 11th to the 16th of July show that every day during that period the
14 VRS Main Staff security organ sent a report to the head of the RS MUP,
15 Dragan Kijac, a representative from the Ministry of Defence, and also the
16 president of the republic, Radovan Karadzic?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Is this consistent with communications functioning between the
19 RDB and the other organs in the RS and the RSK and Serbia during this
21 A. Speaking purely based on this log-book, it's consistent with
22 communications functioning between the RDB and other organs in the RS and
23 between the security organs of the VRS and other organs in the RS. Based
24 on the pages we've looked at here, I can't comment on the RSK and Serbia.
25 Q. In your view, would information that was sent to Dragan Kijac and
1 the president in these reports also have been made available to the
2 deputy minister, Tomo Kovac?
3 A. According to the way in which the ministry functioned at the
4 time, the minister or acting minister would have been privy to the
5 information that was being collected by the State Security Service.
6 Q. And have you ever seen one of these reports sent by the Main
7 Staff security organ between the 11th and 16th of July, 1995, to Kijac
8 and the president?
9 A. No, I have not. And in my capacity as an analyst who collected a
10 large number of documents related to both the VRS and the RS MUP, I would
11 point out that on recurring occasions in visiting archives in the Serbian
12 Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, we frequently found that the archive
13 for the period covering July 1995 was missing.
14 MS. SUTHERLAND: I tender that document, Your Honour.
15 JUDGE KWON: Yes, this will be admitted.
16 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P2989, Your Honours.
17 MS. SUTHERLAND:
18 Q. Just on that point you say you haven't ever seen any of these
19 reports, but are you aware of whether the Office of the Prosecutor
20 possesses the reports?
21 A. I have been informed by a military analyst of the Office of the
22 Prosecutor that pursuant or after my departure from the OTP these
23 dispatches that are listed in this log-book and which we were looking at
24 here have not yet surfaced, they are not yet available.
25 Q. I want to look now at other communication entries in the RS state
1 security log-book of telegrams received.
2 MS. SUTHERLAND: And if 65 ter number 22831 could be brought up
3 on the screen, please.
4 Q. If we could look at entries for the 12th to the 18th of July,
5 1995, and that's in the B/C/S at pages 133 to 139 of the document.
6 Dr. Nielsen, did you review the entries for the period 12 to 18
7 July 1995?
8 A. Yes, I did. And with respect to this specific log-book, I would
9 note that this one was definitely collected from the RS intelligence
10 service and that's why -- I was involved in collecting it which is why a
11 sticker with my name and signature appears on the cover.
12 Q. The communications between the 12th and 18th of July, 1995, do
13 those communications show that there was communications between the RDB
14 and other organs in the RS, the RSK, and Serbia during this period?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. And is this consistent with communications functioning?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. I would now like you to look at another log-book from the RS
19 state security log-book of telegrams sent, and that's --
20 MS. SUTHERLAND: Sorry, if I could tender that document,
21 Your Honour.
22 JUDGE KWON: What about the translation, Ms. Sutherland?
23 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, if we could either ask Dr. Nielsen
24 to read out the headings and --
25 JUDGE KWON: Oh, I think we have the translation of the legend,
1 but do you see the third column. Can you read all?
2 MS. SUTHERLAND:
3 Q. Dr. Nielsen, do you see the third column?
4 A. Yes, I see the third column.
5 Q. What's that heading?
6 A. The third column is "from whom."
7 JUDGE KWON: Yes, I have that translation, but the content.
8 MS. SUTHERLAND: Oh, I'm sorry.
9 Q. Between the 12th and 18th of July, is -- it's over a period of
10 six pages. Could you tell the Court the names of the persons that the
11 communications were received from.
12 JUDGE KWON: Which one is the first page? Is that the page we
13 are looking at now?
14 MS. SUTHERLAND: Yes, Your Honour, that has the entries for the
15 12th -- at the beginning in the -- the column, the fifth column. You see
16 it says --
17 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
18 MS. SUTHERLAND: -- 120.07 [sic].
19 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
20 MS. SUTHERLAND: And then the next one 13.07.
21 JUDGE KWON: I see. So if you are tendering six pages, why don't
22 you ask this document to be translated only on that column?
23 MS. SUTHERLAND: Yes, Your Honour --
24 JUDGE KWON: Or would you like to --
25 MS. SUTHERLAND: No, we'd --
1 JUDGE KWON: -- ask the witness to read out?
2 MS. SUTHERLAND: No, we can actually have the -- for those six
3 pages we will have the third column translated in full.
4 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
5 MS. SUTHERLAND:
6 Q. But, Dr. Nielsen, can you advise the Chamber who of the -- which
7 of the organs in the RS, RSK, and Serbia are these communications being
8 received from?
9 A. Well, for example, here we have communications being received
10 from the Main Staff of the VRS, that's the third row on this page. We
11 have a number of the CRDBs, the centres for state security that are
12 sending information in. And on other pages we have references to other
13 units of MUP in both the RS and MUP in Serbia. But again, I think the
14 best thing rather than to go through all of these one by one would be to
15 have a translation and then it can be seen on which basis I drew this
17 JUDGE KWON: Very well. We'll mark it for identification,
18 pending translation.
19 THE REGISTRAR: As MFI P2990, Your Honours.
20 MS. SUTHERLAND: If we could have 65 ter number 22833 which is
21 the log-book from the Republika Srpska state -- it's the Republika Srpska
22 state security log-book of telegrams sent.
23 Q. And again, if we could look at entries from the 9th to the 16th
24 of July, 1995, and that's on pages 182 to 188. Dr. Nielsen, if you can
25 advise the Chamber of who the organs in the RS -- sorry, does that
1 show -- have you -- I'll start again.
2 Have you reviewed the entries between the 9th and the 16th of
3 July, 1995, in this log-book?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Does it show that communications were being sent from -- between
6 the RDB and other organs in the RS, RSK, and Serbia during this period?
7 A. Yes. This log-book is consistent with communications functioning
8 among those institutions.
9 Q. And can you tell the Trial Chamber what organs within -- within
10 the RS, RSK, and Serbia that these documents were being -- these
11 communications were being sent from -- sent to?
12 A. Well, in this case I believe, if I'm not mistaken, that this is a
13 log-book of incoming dispatches. So it's a list of -- of the persons, or
14 rather, institutions that are sending dispatches to the DB in the -- that
15 is, the State Security Service in the RS and -- for example, the page
16 that we have up on the screen now, we see a variety of, uh, originators
17 of such communications. In some cases it's the Main Staff of the VRS.
18 In some cases it's subordinate regional centres of the DB. In one case,
19 the bottom entry on this page, it's the State Security Service in the MUP
20 of the RSK. So there's a variety of -- and there's one from Serbia. So
21 there's a variety of people who are communicating with the RDB during
22 this period in July 1995.
23 MS. SUTHERLAND: Can we just go to the first page of the
24 document. The second page. And the third. And the following.
25 Q. Dr. Nielsen, the -- the log-book that we looked at a moment ago,
1 exhibit -- which has been marked for identification, Exhibit P2920, I
2 think you said that that was the log-book of telegrams received. This
3 log-book that we're looking at now, is this a log-book of telegrams sent?
4 Because I think you referred a moment ago to it being of telegrams
5 received by the DB.
6 A. Well, if we could go back to the page that I was commenting on
7 before, it seemed to me that they had listed the communications in the
8 column that says "from whom" and not "to whom."
9 Q. That's on page 182, please.
10 A. So certainly in the B/C/S version just by looking at this page in
11 isolation, the list with all the addresses is the column that says "from
12 whom" not "to whom." To make any further inferences about the full
13 nature of this particular log-book, I would have to review it in its
14 entirety again. This is, again, a log-book that I have not reviewed in
15 detail for a number of years, but certainly the fact that it says "from
16 whom" tends -- if you list things in that column, it tends to be a list
17 of communications that are being received, not sent.
18 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, we will undertake to have the pages
19 of the entries of the 9th to the 16th of July, 1995, translated.
20 JUDGE KWON: Yes, we'll mark it for identification.
21 THE REGISTRAR: As MFI P2991, Your Honours.
22 MS. SUTHERLAND:
23 Q. The communications that we have seen, what does this tell you
24 about the nature and the regularity of the communications between the
25 organs of the RS, that is, the Presidency, the RS MUP, the Ministry of
1 Defence, and the field during the period 10 to 16 July 1995?
2 A. I infer from these log-books that despite the fact that we in
3 many cases lack the dispatches that are referenced in these log-books,
4 the log-books themselves lead to the conclusion or point towards the
5 conclusion that communications were functioning regularly during this
6 period because they list a very substantial number of communications
7 among these institutions during this period of July 1995.
8 Q. I now want to turn to look at an example of how the MUP
9 implemented an order issued by the supreme commander, Karadzic, during
10 this period.
11 MS. SUTHERLAND: If I could have 65 ter number 01964 on the
12 screen, please.
13 Q. This is dated the 10th of July, 1995, and if you could look at
14 the addressees, please, and look at the sender. This is from Kovac in
15 his capacity as staff commander. Are you aware of whether he personally
16 signed this document?
17 A. I am aware that Tomislav Kovac has on many occasions, including
18 in speaking to journalists, stated that he has never signed this order.
19 He denies signing this order.
20 Q. The document states that pursuant -- "on the order of -- of the
21 supreme commander of the Republika Srpska armed forces," who is that a
22 reference to?
23 A. That is a reference to the president of the republic,
24 Dr. Karadzic.
25 Q. The document then describes the make-up of the MUP forces and
1 appoints Ljubisa Borovcanin as its commander. It then orders Borovcanin
2 to make contact with the Drina Corps Chief of Staff, General Krstic at
3 that time. Can you tell the Trial Chamber what the relationship was
4 between General Krstic and the MUP units described in this order?
5 A. Pursuant to this order, the MUP units identified herein are to
6 report by the mid -- middle of the day on 11 July 1995 to Bratunac. And
7 once they get there, they are to be under the command or to -- rather, to
8 report to the chief of the staff of the corps, General Krstic, where they
9 were then supposed to receive further instructions.
10 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, I tender this document.
11 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
12 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P2992, Your Honours.
13 MS. SUTHERLAND: If I could have 65 ter number --
14 THE ACCUSED: [Overlapping speakers] --
15 MS. SUTHERLAND: 65 ter number --
16 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] -- said that he did not sign it and
17 that it would be more desirable to have an order that I had allegedly
19 MS. SUTHERLAND: We're getting there, Mr. Karadzic.
20 If I could have 65 ter number 09214, please. This is a document
21 dated the 10th of July, 1995, and it's a dispatch of the RS MUP deputy
23 Q. Again, did Kovac sign this document?
24 A. No. This is another example of the same document but not signed
25 by Kovac.
1 Q. Do you know who it's signed by?
2 A. I just want to make sure that I'm looking at the same document in
3 B/C/S because I see that there's a discrepancy between the English
4 document on the screen and the B/C/S document on the screen. The English
5 translation says "signed for staff commander Tomislav Kovac," whereas the
6 B/C/S version, as far as I can see, unless -- can the B/C/S version be
7 scrolled down. Is there a second page? I don't think that this is the
8 same document in English in B/C/S. That's the one, yes. That looks more
10 In this case, it's signed for Kovac by an R. Nikolic, and I take
11 that to be a reference to the Nikolic who is identified in the document
12 we saw earlier today establishing the police staff at Pale. He was a
13 member of that staff.
14 Q. Is it R. Nikolic or D. Nikolic?
15 A. If I may be permitted to look back at the staff establishment
16 document. I take it to be R. Nikolic, as in Radomir Nikolic, who is
17 number 6 on the -- original -- uh, form. But again, I would say that's
18 with a bit of, uh, uncertainty, mainly for the reason that, uh -- the
19 handwriting is not quite distinct. But I make it out to be an R, and
20 that would have been the only R. Nikolic on the staff of the police at
21 Pale is Radomir Nikolic who is identified in 65 ter 23116 -- or excuse
22 me, 23166.
23 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour --
24 THE WITNESS: But it's certainly not signed by Kovac.
25 MS. SUTHERLAND: -- I seek to tender that document.
1 JUDGE KWON: Probably you need to remove the first page of the
2 B/C/S, which is not translated.
3 MS. SUTHERLAND: Yes, Your Honour.
4 JUDGE KWON: Thank you. This will be admitted.
5 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P2993, Your Honours.
6 MS. SUTHERLAND:
7 Q. And I take it, Dr. Nielsen, that this is a different version of
8 the previous document we just saw, Exhibit P2992; is that right?
9 A. That is correct. There are a great many copies of that document
10 that were found in various archives of the RS MUP.
11 Q. Just getting back to the, um, Nikolic -- do you know a person
12 called Dragomir Nikolic?
13 A. Yes, I've heard of that person.
14 Q. Who is that person?
15 A. I believe, as far as I know, that that was a person who at the
16 time of the events in Srebrenica in July 1995 was serving in the VRS as
17 an officer. I don't at the moment recall his position, his exact
19 Q. I want to look now at another example of a presidential order
20 being implemented.
21 MS. SUTHERLAND: If I could have 65 ter number 01885 on the
22 screen, please.
23 Q. This is a document dated the 11th of July, 1995, entitled:
24 "Republika Srpska Presidential Directive." And it's an order on the
25 establishment of an office of a public security station in Serbian
1 Srebrenica. What is the significance of this document?
2 A. Once Srebrenica came under Serbian control after the 11th of July
3 of 1995, there were steps taken by the authorities of the RS to establish
4 all of the types of organs that one would have functioning at the
5 municipal level, including, as we see here, a paragraph -- a -- a public
6 security station, in this case for what they have now termed Serbian
7 Srebrenica. And it's stated that this station will function pursuant to
8 the Law on Internal Affairs and will also establish close co-operation
9 with Miroslav Deronjic, the highest civilian official in Srebrenica at
10 the time.
11 MS. SUTHERLAND: I tender that document, Your Honour.
12 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
13 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P2994.
14 MS. SUTHERLAND: If I could have 65 ter number 01898 on the
15 screen, please.
16 Q. This is a document dated the 12th of July, 1995. What is this
18 A. This is a document of the RS Ministry of Internal Affairs from
19 the office of the minister that is forwarding verbatim an order of the
20 president of the republic to the Zvornik public security centre.
21 Q. And when you say an order of the president of the republic, is
22 that the order that we saw in the previous document, P2994?
23 A. Yes.
24 MS. SUTHERLAND: I tender that document, Your Honour.
25 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
1 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P2995, Your Honours.
2 MS. SUTHERLAND:
3 Q. And again, just to remind us, who was the chief of the Zvornik
4 public security centre?
5 A. Dragomir Vasic.
6 MS. SUTHERLAND: If we could have 65 ter number 01929 on the
7 screen, please.
8 Q. This is a document also dated the 12th of July, 1995. What does
9 this report show?
10 A. This -- well, the essence certainly of the beginning of this
11 report from Dragomir Vasic, the chief of CJB Zvornik is to report back to
12 the Ministry of Internal Affairs and to the minister -- office of the
13 minister that he is acting in accordance with the order that we just saw,
14 which originally stemmed from the president.
15 Q. And what sort of co-ordination does it show?
16 A. The -- in addition to showing that Vasic is carrying out the
17 orders of the president as transmitted through the minister or the office
18 of the minister, this also shows that the police is closely co-ordinating
19 with the top generals of the VRS. Here we have General Mladic and
20 General Krstic on the second point of the dispatch. And it shows an
21 awareness of the concentration of a large number of Muslims at Potocari
22 and an awareness that others are fleeing. It also discusses meetings
23 with UNPROFOR, the International Red Cross, and other relevant operations
24 that are taking place in Srebrenica at that time. And it states finally
25 that Vasic will keep the minister promptly informed of all further facts
1 and developments.
2 Q. And is there also co-ordination with Deronjic?
3 A. Yes. As stated in paragraph 1 of the dispatch, he is
4 implementing the president's order transmitted through the minister to
5 contact the civilian commissioner in Bratunac, Miroslav Deronjic.
6 Q. And what's the significance of the fact that it describes how
7 they're going to evacuate the civilian population and how the joint
8 police forces are advancing?
9 A. I see these as pertinent and relevant amounts of information that
10 are being provided by Dragomir Vasic to his superiors. I mean, he's
11 showing that communications are functioning at that time in both
12 directions, and as such that also means that the chain of command is
13 functioning in both directions. He's showing that he's implementing an
14 order that he's received that ultimately stems from the president of the
15 republic. On the other hand, he's also showing that he's engaging in
16 various co-ordination activities and that he is aware of the need to keep
17 his superiors informed of all important events.
18 MS. SUTHERLAND: I tender that document, Your Honour.
19 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
20 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P2996, Your Honours.
21 MS. SUTHERLAND: May we now look at another document,
22 65 ter number 21253.
23 Q. This is a very urgent dispatch dated the 12th of July, 1995.
24 What is the significance of this document?
25 A. Once again, what we see here is that the Ministry of Internal
1 Affairs is distributing verbatim an order of the president of the
2 republic to subordinate organs of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the
3 RS. In this particular order it again pertains to events that are
4 relevant to security, in this case humanitarian convoys passing through,
5 and talks about the need for co-ordination among the organs of the state
6 in a view to permitting but also controlling the passage of such convoys
7 through the territory of the RS.
8 Q. I think if we can go to page 2 of the English, this is referred
9 to in paragraph 8; is that right?
10 A. Yes, it's also referred to in paragraph 8. It's also referred to
11 already in paragraph 1, that this is focusing on humanitarian convoys.
12 Q. And are there legal consequences or sanctions?
13 A. In the final paragraph of the transmitted order from the
14 president of the republic, it's stated that this is a matter to be taken
15 extremely seriously and that therefore anyone who hinders or neglects to
16 implement this order will face swift legal sanctions.
17 Q. Does this show co-operation between the organs?
18 A. Yes, it does.
19 Q. And it shows within a day of the president issuing the order it
20 was passed on to the subordinate organs of the RS MUP verbatim?
21 A. Correct.
22 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, I tender this document.
23 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
24 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P2997, Your Honours.
25 MS. SUTHERLAND:
1 Q. And the second-to-last document I wish you to look at is
2 65 ter number 13605. This is dated the 15th of July, 1995. Who is this
3 communication between?
4 A. This is from the office of the minister of the internal affairs
5 in the RS to the Zvornik CJB. It's a -- it's the text of a proclamation
6 or a -- rather, a decision on the proclamation of a state of war in
7 Srebrenica, Skelani municipality, originally written by the president of
8 the republic on the previous day.
9 MS. SUTHERLAND: I tender that document, Your Honour.
10 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
11 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P2998, Your Honours.
12 MS. SUTHERLAND:
13 Q. And what's the difference between this dispatch that we see here
14 and the previous one, Exhibit P2997?
15 A. Well my --
16 Q. In relation to reporting. Do we see any commentary, for example,
17 from the RS MUP in this document?
18 A. No, there is -- at this stage there's no comment. It's just
19 saying that we are forwarding to you a decision. And then you have the
20 text of the decision, and then you have the typed signature of the deputy
21 minister, Tomislav Kovac. There's no editorial comment or annotation
22 being offered in this document.
23 Q. I now wish to show you a document which is the agenda of
24 Mr. Karadzic and that's Exhibit P02242. This is his agenda for the 2nd
25 of January to the 25th of December, 1995, but I want to look at entries
1 between the 10th and the 14th of July, 1995, that's on the English page
2 77 to 80 and in the B/C/S pages 89 to 91.
3 Looking first at the entry for 10th of July, can you point out
4 for the Trial Chamber the MUP names that are contained within this
6 A. Yes. Before doing so let me just amend the last sentence of my
7 previous response which was there's no editorial comment or annotation
8 being offered in this document.
9 In -- on the 10th of July in this agenda we see that
10 Dr. Karadzic's meeting with Dragan Kijac and Milenko Karisik who are
11 respectively the heads of state and public security at the time in
12 RS MUP, he meets with them from 1700 to 1720 hours. We then have -- two
13 lines below that we have Zika Rakic, this is the minister, in fact, of
14 internal affairs at the time from 1935 to 2005 hours. Those are the
15 people that I immediately recognise from RS MUP with which he meets on
16 the 10th of July. If we could go to the next page.
17 Q. Looking at the 11th of July.
18 A. Yes, on the 11th of July -- well, the first thing I note is that
19 he meets at -- from 1910 to 1920 hours for ten brief minutes he meets
20 with Stojan Zupljanin, who is admittedly no longer in the MUP at that
21 point but was of course the former head of the CSB in Banja Luka and was
22 at the time of July 1995 a security advisor to Dr. Karadzic, to the
23 president. So that's relevant from the point of view of the police. And
24 his last meeting on the 11th of July is with Milenko Karisik, the chief
25 of the Public Security Service of RS MUP from 2230 to 2245 hours.
1 Q. [Microphone not activated]
2 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
3 JUDGE KWON: Microphone.
4 MS. SUTHERLAND: If we can go to the 13th of July, which is the
5 following -- and over on to the following page.
6 THE WITNESS: Right. Here we have from 1550 to 1610 hours we
7 have a meeting with Tomo Kovac, who was the deputy minister of internal
8 affairs and, as I previously stated, was de facto operating as the
9 minister of internal affairs in many respects at the time.
10 MS. SUTHERLAND: If we can go to the entry for the 14th of July.
11 THE WITNESS: I'm not seeing anyone here from RS MUP
12 immediately --
13 MS. SUTHERLAND: If we can go --
14 THE WITNESS: -- that I recognise.
15 MS. SUTHERLAND: -- to the following page.
16 THE WITNESS: I see Tomo Kovac listed near the bottom in a
17 meeting where the prime minister -- or as he's referred to here
18 President Krajisnik also attended, starting at 1615 and most likely going
19 on until 1745 hours, given that the following meeting started at 1755.
20 MS. SUTHERLAND:
21 Q. Do you --
22 A. And I also -- sorry.
23 JUDGE KWON: Where do we have the --
24 MS. SUTHERLAND:
25 Q. At the top of the English on the 14th of July, do you see
1 Tomo Kovac in the agenda for 2245 to 2310 hours?
2 A. Yes, I think I overlooked that one.
3 Q. And so the -- the one that you were just referring to at the
4 bottom of the page, is that on the 14th?
5 A. The one I just referred to is on the 15th --
6 Q. On the 15th, I'm sorry --
7 A. -- from 1415 to probably 1745, and that's cut off.
8 Q. Yes, and that's the one that's on page 80 of the English
9 translation. If we could go over the following page. No, I'm sorry, now
10 I'm confusing you --
11 A. Well, now I see it at the bottom of the English page in front of
12 me here, third-to-last line.
13 Q. Yes. And that's on the 15th of July?
14 Thank you, doctor --
15 MS. SUTHERLAND: One moment, Your Honour.
16 [Prosecution counsel confer]
17 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, just a matter in relation to
18 Exhibit P2993 which was 65 ter number 23116 [sic]. That was the document
19 that you said that we should remove the first page of the B/C/S because
20 we didn't have a translation. In fact, both pages of the B/C/S need to
21 remain in the exhibit because the first page of the exhibit is
22 translated. It's the typed signed version, and the other page which has
23 been admitted is the original, signed version. So it's a signed version
24 and a typed document which are the same, the content is the same, and we
25 have the English translation for it.
1 JUDGE KWON: Do we have the confirmation from the witness?
2 I remember, Witness, that that document was not identical to the
3 translated one. Shall we upload it --
4 MS. SUTHERLAND: If we could call it up.
5 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
6 MS. SUTHERLAND: Exhibit P2993.
7 JUDGE KWON: Only the B/C/S.
9 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
10 JUDGE KWON: I was told that they are so quick as to remove the
11 page already.
12 MS. SUTHERLAND: I have the document here, we could put it on
13 e-court -- sorry, ELMO.
14 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
15 JUDGE KWON: Just for your information, the 65 ter number of this
16 is 9214.
17 Mr. Tieger.
18 MS. SUTHERLAND: Yes, Your Honour, it is. I'm sorry, I misspoke
19 when I said it was 23166.
20 The reference to 23166 was the reference that Dr. Nielsen made in
21 relation to -- when he spoke about Dragomir Nikolic.
22 JUDGE KWON: I will leave it in the assessment of the witness.
23 Doctor, could you compare the pages and -- two pages and then
24 whether you can tell us the contents of them are identical, as indicated
25 by Ms. Sutherland.
1 THE WITNESS: I agree that these are two versions of the same
2 order. In one which is merely typed, the other which is typed and signed
3 for Tomislav Kovac, by someone whose last name was Nikolic.
4 JUDGE KWON: Thank you. Then we'll reinstate the first page.
5 MS. SUTHERLAND: And I'm advised that the page is back in
7 JUDGE KWON: Very well.
8 MS. SUTHERLAND:
9 Q. Dr. Nielsen, that completes my examination.
10 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honours, thank you.
11 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
12 Mr. Karadzic, are you ready to start?
13 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Excellency, I am ready.
14 But I was wondering whether perhaps it would be better if I started from
15 the beginning on Tuesday and not stop after 20 minutes. Of course it is
16 up to you.
17 JUDGE KWON: Why don't you put some introductory questions and
18 then we'll adjourn for this week.
19 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
20 Cross-examination by Mr. Karadzic:
21 Q. Good afternoon, Doctor.
22 A. Good afternoon.
23 Q. I should like to ask you whether you had been in Yugoslavia prior
24 to these wars?
25 A. No. The first time I visited the territory of what used to be
1 Yugoslavia was in 1994.
2 Q. Thank you. And is anyone -- does anyone from -- does any member
3 of your family hail from Yugoslavia?
4 A. Well, I'm married to someone from the former Yugoslavia if that's
5 included in your definition of family, but my parents and my -- the rest
6 of my family are all from Denmark.
7 Q. Can you tell us where exactly your wife comes from?
8 A. Certainly, she's from Zagreb.
9 JUDGE KWON: Yes --
10 MS. SUTHERLAND: It doesn't matter. The witness has answered the
11 question, Your Honour, but I was wondering as to the relevance of it.
12 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation] Well, I was just interested how
13 come that Dr. Nielsen wanted to learn Serbo-Croat, and I wanted to know
14 whether -- with whom he had close contacts and whether his contacts could
15 have in any way influenced his options.
16 Q. My wife has a great influence in me. Can the same be said in
17 respect of you?
18 JUDGE KWON: Let's proceed, Mr. Karadzic.
19 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
20 Q. Dr. Nielsen, did you know, were you familiar with the pre-war
21 political system, what was referred to as self-managing socialism?
22 A. Yes, that was part of my training as a historian, to familiarise
23 myself with that topic.
24 Q. Do you agree with me that that had been a mono-party system and
25 basically a profoundly undemocratic system?
1 A. I would agree that what existed in socialist Yugoslavia was a
2 mono-party system that operated according to the party state principle.
3 Q. Thank you. Would it be fair to say that in that system as well
4 there existed in the republics that had a number of constituent peoples,
5 such as Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina, were there -- there existed
6 the obligation on proportionate or parity representation of those
7 constituent nations as well as of the others, the so-called national
8 minorities, in the governments in the rule of the respective countries --
9 or republics, rather?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And that that was also the case in respect of the distribution of
12 executive positions in socially owned enterprises, in public enterprises,
13 namely, that account was always taken of that principle, and when Bosnia
14 and Herzegovina is concerned and probably also pre-war Croatia, that was
15 something which was also reflected in their constitutions, i.e.,
16 legislation generally?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Thank you. Do you agree with me that that one and only party
19 which was in power decided what members of the party, Serbs, Croats, and
20 Muslims, would represent their national communities in the bodies of
21 government and in all places where proper ethnic representation had to be
22 promoted. Do we agree that that party, the only existing party and the
23 party in power - as there was no opposition - actually designated what
24 Croat, what Serb, what Muslim would hold a specific office or position?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. Do you know that in that period numerous intellectuals from all
2 the three national communities, ethnic communities, including yours truly
3 and my closest associates, had been dissidents opposing that system for
4 many decades?
5 A. Yes, I know that there were many dissidents.
6 Q. Thank you. Do you agree that before the 1990 elections, the
7 state administration, the state services, the bureaucracy generally, the
8 state apparatus as a whole had not been divested of its party or
9 political characters, but on the contrary, membership of the party
10 greatly determined one's position in the state apparatus?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Thank you. Are you familiar of the -- with the concept of
13 negative selection which designated poor selections or elections within
14 the state apparatus or to state offices because the one who could better
15 ingratiate himself with the party in power was the one who was appointed
16 to a specific office?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Thank you. Do we agree that it was inconceivable for any
19 executive position, for instance, in the police, to leave aside the other
20 services, for appointments to be made to such positions were -- of people
21 who were not members of the League of Communists?
22 A. Yes, I believe that's why they called it a party state.
23 Q. So anyone who was not a member of the party could not be elected
24 or appointed -- appointed to a position, to an executive or a leadership
25 position; is that correct?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Thank you. Do you remember that if they wanted to replace
3 someone, first of all the municipal party committee or his basic chapter
4 of the League of Communists would make such a decision; and then if such
5 a decision was brought at that level, the person in question would also
6 be dismissed at other levels?
7 A. Yes, that is something that I'm familiar with.
8 Q. Thank you. And do you agree with me that at the 1990 elections
9 there was a replacement of not only the regime but also of the system,
10 and that the system of self-managing socialism and the mono-party
11 autocracy, not to say dictatorship, was actually replaced thanks to the
12 electoral will of the citizens and that replacing it was the multi-party
13 system which was then introduced?
14 A. I would agree with you partially. I agree that the mono-party
15 state system was replaced. It was, subsequent events showed, replaced by
16 three parties who in large measure all tried to create their own party
17 state systems using the types of political rules that they'd been
18 familiar with from the previous system.
19 Q. Thank you. That was in fact my next question, but you have
20 pre-empted me. I should like to ask you this: Do you remember that the
21 Serbian Democratic Party was the last one to be founded of the ethnically
22 determined parties and that I personally actually spoke against that
24 A. I don't recall that actual statement. I'm not disagreeing with
25 you that that statement was made, but I do recall certainly the Serbian
1 Democratic Party was the last one of the three ethnically determined
2 parties founded, and I recall that Alija Izetbegovic was among the guests
3 at the establishment of that party.
4 Q. That is correct. Thank you. And do you remember that after the
5 1990 elections I proposed that we should not elect a party-based
6 government but a government of experts and that the two other parties in
7 our coalition did not accept that?
8 A. I do not recall that statement.
9 Q. Thank you. Do you agree that the constitution of the Socialist
10 Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina was amended in the summer of 1990
11 towards the end of July, just a few months prior to the elections?
12 A. I am not an expert on constitutional arrangements, but I believe
13 that you are correct in making that statement.
14 Q. Thank you. I'm not asking you in the legal sense, but
15 historically speaking was that a fact, did it happen that way?
16 A. I can only reiterate my previous answer.
17 Q. Thank you. On the assumption that you believe me, is it
18 customary in democratic systems for a constitution to be amended in a
19 year of elections and not to say three months, let alone three months,
20 prior to elections?
21 A. I'm not an expert on constitutional law and election systems, but
22 I would tend to agree with you that that is unusual.
23 Q. Thank you. In that case probably you cannot give me an answer to
24 this, that we ask that instead of the chamber of associated labour, in
25 addition to the chamber of citizens and the chamber of municipalities,
1 there should be introduced in the Assembly of Bosnia and Herzegovina a
2 chamber of nations which would see that there would be no engineering of
3 a majority and out-voting in that sense, so as to prevent any political
4 upheavals and convulsions on that account?
5 A. You are right, I cannot give you an answer to that question.
6 Q. Is it your view that it would have been good if you knew that,
7 that that would have cast a certain light on your perception of some
8 other facts?
9 A. Well, I think it's part of the overall political background which
10 I try -- certainly the general political background of the period from
11 November 1990 until April 1992 that I have as the background for my
12 report. But basically I left political matters over to the expertise of
13 other experts and focused mainly on the police.
14 Q. Thank you. Did you perhaps happen to learn that our proposal was
15 not accepted, but they comforted us by introducing a national equality
16 council which would not be a permanent chamber of citizens but would be
17 an ad hoc chamber of citizens. When 20 MPs demanded that something be
18 discussed by the council, it could not be done until the council accepted
19 such a decision. Were you aware of such a council which was, in fact, as
20 a substitute for what we were actually asking for?
21 A. I've heard of it.
22 Q. Thank you. In the first part of the -- the introductory part,
23 perhaps, the very first paragraph of the introduction you say that the
24 control of political forces in Bosnia and Herzegovina was a component and
25 key element in the attempts of the Bosnian Serb leadership to achieve
1 their primary goals. And in paragraph 2 you state:
2 "The development of this view has to be understood in the overall
3 context of Bosnian Serb ideology in 991 to 992."
4 And then you go on to say, namely:
5 "The SDS consistently expressed dissatisfaction with the steps
6 taken by Bosnian Muslim and Bosnian Croat politician on the BH's path to
8 I should like to ask you this: Do you agree our primary goals,
9 the primary objectives of the Serbian Democratic Party and our ideology
10 are in fact contained in our programme, in our founding programme, as
11 well as in our pre-election programme which actually won us the votes of
12 almost all Serbs there?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Thank you. Are you familiar with the programme of the Serbian
15 Democratic Party established and accepted in 1990 at establishment and
16 confirmed in 1991 on the 12th of July, on St. Peter's day?
17 A. Yes, I have in the past read that programme.
18 Q. [No interpretation]
19 JUDGE KWON: Just a second. That's probably understood in B/C/S.
20 Could you put a pause between the question and the answer. So
21 your previous answer was not noted.
22 THE WITNESS: I apologise, Your Honour. My previous answer was:
23 Yes, I have read that programme.
24 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Karadzic, whenever it is convenient, we will
25 adjourn. And there's one matter the Chamber wants to clarify.
1 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, we can adjourn now as far as
2 I'm concerned. Thank you.
3 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Tieger.
4 MR. TIEGER: I'm sorry, Your Honour, not to pre-empt the Chamber,
5 I will just need two minutes as well.
6 JUDGE KWON: Please go ahead, then.
7 MR. TIEGER: Thank you.
8 With respect to 65 ter 30115, that was the intercept that was
9 raised yesterday to which Mr. Robinson objected because that intercept
10 had not been put to Mr. Mandic, which provoked a discussion about whether
11 the issue had been raised before. I know the Court indicated that it
12 would leave -- leave that matter for the moment and come back to it
13 another time, but Mr. Robinson's e-mail to the Chamber has sort of forced
14 my hand at this moment. So I wanted to respond to the Court's inquiry
15 about when that was previously raised and what the nature of it was.
16 JUDGE KWON: I'm not sure about Mr. Robinson's e-mail to the
18 MR. TIEGER: Well, to the Legal Officer in any event -- well, in
19 any event, we'll leave that for now. I'll respond, if I may then, to the
20 Court's inquiry about where that discussion took place, and it was on two
21 days, the 25th of February, 2011, and then the 28th of February, 2011.
22 So first it came up and then the argument -- or the discussion about it
23 continued, but the relevant point to which I want to draw the Court's
24 attention was on the 28th of February at pages -- the argument then or
25 the submission by the Prosecution is made at 12480 through 12482. I
1 won't go into the details and I'm prepared to supplement those if
2 necessary, but I don't think that's the case. But what happened was
3 basically there were 14 intercepts, some included by Mr. Mandic. The
4 argument was made by the Defence that we heard yesterday, and the Court's
5 ruling was that it would admit intercepts that had been sufficiently
6 contextualised by the witness but would not at this -- at that time admit
7 intercepts for which there was only voice recognition provided. And the
8 Court noted explicitly that, of course, the Prosecution would be able to
9 use that evidence of voice recognition later to authenticate the
10 intercepts when they were tendered again. And there was another
11 reference in the same general portion to the fact that the intercepts
12 could -- could be tendered again and that the anticipation was they would
13 be tendered again.
14 So I would say it's a very clear rejection of the argument that
15 the Mandic-related intercepts could not be tendered because they had not
16 been put to Mr. Mandic. I would further note that that understanding of
17 the Court's decision was apparently shared by the Defence because the
18 Defence itself introduced an intercept of Mr. Mandic on 21 March 2011, if
19 not on other occasions, but I found at least one. And that was D -- now
20 MFI D1239.
21 So I think everyone shares the understanding that the submission
22 of the intercept is not precluded, provided that it otherwise fits within
23 the guide-lines - in this case it clearly does - it was contextualised by
24 a witness and it should be admitted.
25 JUDGE KWON: Thank you, Mr. Tieger.
1 This may only concern you, Mr. Robinson, and probably the Victims
2 and Witnesses Section of the Tribunal.
3 On 5th of July, 2011, upon the accused's request, the Chamber
4 issued a subpoena ordering General Sead Delic to submit to an interview
5 with the accused's legal advisor. At this stage the Chamber wishes to
6 clarify that the language of the subpoena in no way implies that the
7 Victims and Witness Section of the Tribunal should be responsible for
8 organising the interview and for covering the costs incurred therein.
9 Rather, the Chamber reminds the accused that it is for him to make all
10 the necessary arrangements for these interviews to be conducted.
11 In addition, the Chamber reminds the accused that he has
12 resources available to him to cover costs incurred during the
13 investigative stage and that it is for him to file the appropriate
14 requests. I hope that clarifies the matter.
15 We'll have a long weekend and we'll resume on Tuesday at 9.00.
16 And, Dr. Nielsen, I didn't tell you yesterday but you are
17 familiar with the rule that you are not supposed to discuss with anybody
18 about your testimony here.
19 THE WITNESS: Of course, Your Honour. Thank you.
20 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
21 We'll rise.
22 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 2.59 p.m.,
23 to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 12th day of
24 July, 2011, at 9.00 a.m.