Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 10932

1 Monday, 13 November 2006

2 [Open session]

3 [The accused entered court]

4 --- Upon commencing at 2.16 p.m.

5 JUDGE MOLOTO: Good afternoon. I believe somebody has a

6 housekeeping matter to raise. Mr. Milovancevic, good afternoon.

7 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Your Honours.

8 The Defence wanted to raise an issue just briefly. As a Defence

9 team, we have come to the very end. In addition to the cross-examination

10 of the witness that we started examining on Friday, we have another two

11 expert witnesses; in other words, we have been adhering to the deadlines

12 stipulated by the Trial Chamber and we believe that things can come to an

13 end as they have been planned.

14 On Friday, the Defence received the text of the redacted findings

15 of the military expert. The problem is that we do not recognise that.

16 This is not our findings. We handed over something else and I really

17 can't account for the mistake. I personally do not recognise these

18 findings and I never asked for such findings from our military expert.

19 The only way I can establish a link between the text that we received with

20 our request is if I take into account the remarks that the Prosecution had

21 to offer in keeping with Rule 94 bis.

22 In that, what is typical of Rule 94 bis is that the Prosecutor can

23 be of a position that some parts of the findings are not relevant, and

24 this is understandable. However, if some parts of the findings are left

25 in the text as being relevant, then this must have happened in very many

Page 10933

1 places, and then the relevant places have been redacted in order to suit

2 the Prosecutor's need. But in that case, we are going to end up with the

3 findings that are nothing like the findings that we wanted to receive, and

4 it makes it more similar to the findings provided to us by the

5 Prosecutor. In other words, the Prosecutor engaged Mr. Theunens, a

6 military expert, to provide them with their military findings that suited

7 them and now they have another set of military findings that suit them,

8 the findings that were obtained by our military expert.

9 So, if at all possible, in order for us to draw our case to an

10 end, I would kindly ask the Trial Chamber to take this into

11 consideration.

12 The accused, according to the Statute, has the right to examine

13 any expert in the same way as the experts are examined by the Prosecutor.

14 What we have received is something that doesn't suit us at all. We would

15 kindly ask the Trial Chamber to take the situation in consideration in

16 order to enable us to proceed with our work.

17 This is the issue that I wanted to raise before we continue.

18 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Mr. Milovancevic, what would you be asking the

19 Trial Chamber to do? Just take it into consideration, nothing further?

20 Because I want to know if there is a conclusion to your argument. Or are

21 you just placing the matter before the Trial Chamber for consideration?

22 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour, for

23 asking me this. The meaning of my intervention, of my address, to the

24 Trial Chamber was to put forth a proposal. In order for you to understand

25 what I'm talking about, it's this: The expert witness statements have

Page 10934

1 four pages of the contents. The first part contains highlighted parts

2 which have been redacted. What you see in front of you now, what has been

3 highlighted, has all been deleted or redacted from the findings. This is

4 page 3 and this is page 4. Everything has been deleted from page 4. In

5 other words, in the text that we have received, there are 20 pages missing

6 without any explanation whatsoever. Simply, pages 44 to 66 are missing.

7 I have marked all that. I don't want to dwell upon that here in the

8 courtroom.

9 But I'm talking, as a matter of principle, that the Defence has

10 the right to present their defence as they wish. If their defence case is

11 weak, then the accused will suffer consequences; however, neither the

12 Prosecutor, nor the Trial Chamber, for that matter, can impose it on the

13 Defence, how they wish to present their defence.

14 The document that we have received is a disaster. We do not

15 recognise it. My proposal would be for the Trial Chamber to look at our

16 findings and to allow us to present the findings, to bring the expert, the

17 military expert, a General Staff officer, and to tell us about the topics

18 that have been considered in the expert report.

19 For example, an interesting thing here is the fact that when the

20 expert report deals with the existence of paramilitary forces, whatever

21 has to do with the enemy side rather than Mr. Martic has been deleted from

22 the expert report. The paramilitaries are important; however, our learned

23 friends seem to believe that when paramilitaries are mentioned in the

24 context of the opposite side, then this doesn't have any merit.

25 For example, when the Trial Chamber is of the opinion that

Page 10935

1 Operation Flash is important and they leave it in the text, then the

2 question imposes itself as to how come the whole paragraphs have been

3 deleted from the text, and it seems that only the paragraphs that are of

4 some importance for the Prosecution have been left in the text. But we

5 can draw our conclusions only when we hear the military expert.

6 The essence of my intervention is the fact that the text is not

7 familiar either to the Prosecutor or to the Trial Chamber or to the

8 Defence. This was done by an officer who spent 20 years working in the

9 General Staff. We have invited him to talk to you and then you will be

10 able to draw your conclusion, contrasting his words with everything else

11 that you've heard.

12 I raised this issue at the very beginning, Your Honour, only to

13 give us time for the expert to prepare himself to come here and to present

14 his report.

15 MR. WHITING: Your Honour, if I may, I'm a little concerned about

16 the time, since I committed to finishing in two sessions and I've already

17 lost some time from one of those two sessions, but it seems to me, as I

18 understand Defence counsel, this is essentially an oral motion to

19 reconsider the Trial Chamber's decision of Friday. It seems to me that

20 that should be done in writing. And I can just say, from the oral motion,

21 I've certainly heard nothing that would justify, in our view, a

22 reconsideration of the Trial Chamber's findings. Certainly, we would

23 reject the notion that what's been left unredacted is simply what's good

24 for the Prosecution. I don't think that that's what's happened at all.

25 Those were not what the -- those were not the grounds for our motion and

Page 10936

1 I'm confident that that was not the basis of the decision. But, in any

2 event, it seems to me that if the Defence wants to seek a reconsideration

3 of the Trial Chamber's motion, or rather, decision, it should file a

4 written motion to do so and we'll respond.

5 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Mr. Milovancevic.

6 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, just a brief

7 remark, if I may. Obviously, we are going to issue a written response,

8 but I'm trying to gain time and this is the only reason why I raised this

9 issue. Any written submission has to be prepared, has to be sent to the

10 Trial Chamber, which all takes time, and we are running out of time,

11 unfortunately. What I wanted to say, in response to my learned friend's

12 words, is this: The proposal for the expert witness's report is nothing

13 else but a hostile attitude of the Prosecution towards the Defence. The

14 Prosecution is in no position to decide how the accused is going to

15 present his case.

16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Milovancevic, I do think you do need to put

17 your motion on paper if you want a reconsideration of the decision of the

18 Chamber. From what you have said since you started talking, I have 101

19 questions to ask which, if I did ask, we will spend the whole of today

20 talking about this thing. I think, in the interests of time, may I

21 suggest that you make a proper filing of your motion, put your grounds of

22 objection to the decision, and then let the Chamber deal with that.

23 For now, I can say we have heard what you say; we bear that in

24 mind. As you said, we must consider it. We are considering it. But to

25 enable the Chamber to consider it properly, I think put it on paper and

Page 10937

1 let's have a look at it. Thank you so much.

2 May I just also mention that the decision that the Chamber handed

3 down on Friday was oral and the Chamber did indicate that it will file a

4 reasoned, written decision today, and it is being filed as we speak.

5 Thank you very much.

6 May we call the witness, Mr. Milovancevic, if you are done?

7 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. This is

8 actually my learned friend's time for cross-examination.

9 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much, Mr. Milovancevic.

10 MR. WHITING: Your Honour, while the witness is being brought in,

11 I could note that I had an opportunity over the weekend to review that

12 last exhibit. We have no objection to that being made an exhibit, the

13 excerpt of the transcript, so if that could be given an exhibit number.

14 I also note that I did lose 15 minutes, which I hope I won't need,

15 but if I will, I will ask for it.

16 JUDGE MOLOTO: The excerpt of the transcript?

17 MR. WHITING: An excerpt of a transcript. It was at the very end

18 of the session on Friday, and it's -- the ERN number is 01510096. I

19 believe it -- at the end, the Defence counsel moved for it to be an

20 exhibit. We asked for time to just look at it over the weekend, and I'm

21 satisfied that it can be made an exhibit.

22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much. I remember now. Thank you

23 very much. That exhibit is admitted into evidence. May it please be

24 given an exhibit number, that document.

25 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this becomes Exhibit 1015.

Page 10938

1 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

2 [The witness entered court]

3 JUDGE MOLOTO: Good afternoon, Mr. Dobrijevic. Sorry we had to

4 ask you to wait a little bit because there were some little things to

5 attend to.

6 Let me just remind you that you are still bound by the declaration

7 you made at the beginning of your testimony to tell the truth, the whole

8 truth, and nothing else but the truth.

9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.

10 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

11 Mr. Whiting?

12 MR. WHITING: Thank you, Your Honour.


14 [Witness answered through interpreter]

15 Cross-examination by Mr. Whiting:

16 Q. Good afternoon, sir. My name is Alex Whiting. I'm one of the

17 prosecutors in the case and it's now my turn to ask you some questions.

18 Do you understand?

19 A. Yes. Please go ahead.

20 Q. I would ask you, please, to listen very carefully to my questions

21 and limit your answers to just my questions, please, because we have to

22 get through your cross-examination and we have limited time. Do you

23 understand?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. I want to first start with just a few basics that we may actually

Page 10939

1 agree on. When you talk about Banija, the region of Banija, that includes

2 the municipalities of Petrinja, Glina, Kostajnica, Dvor, and part of

3 Sisak, which was, I believe, known as Sisak, Kaprag; correct?

4 A. Actually, it is not Kaprag but Caprag.

5 Q. Thank you. Other than that, do you agree with what I said?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. And you, yourself, lived in Sisak until the 15th of June, 1991,

8 and from the 15th of June, 1991, until the beginning of August, you were

9 in Belgrade; and then at the beginning of August 1991, you returned to

10 Samarica; correct? Samarica.

11 A. I went to Belgrade and I took my family there. Actually, not to

12 Belgrade but to Serbia proper, because my wife hails from Srem, which is

13 part of Serbia and --

14 Q. Could you focus, please, really, on the question. You went to

15 Serbia, and that was on the 15th of June, 1991; correct?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. And then you returned to the Banija region at the beginning of

18 August; correct?

19 A. No. I returned to Sisak and I worked there for a few more days,

20 and then on the 1st of August I went to Serbia and I did not return to

21 Sisak but to Banija.

22 Q. Okay. When did you return to Banija?

23 A. I believe that this was on the 2nd of August.

24 Q. Okay. So you, yourself, spent only a matter of days in Serbia;

25 first in June and then in August.

Page 10940

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. Okay. And when you returned to Banija, you returned to Samarica;

3 correct?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. And Samarica is located in the Dvor municipality; correct?

6 A. Yes. Partly in Dvor and partly in Glina.

7 Q. Okay. And you testified that when you returned to Samarica in

8 August of 1991, your task was to organise the Territorial Defence in the

9 Serbian villages of Sisak, Caprag, that were part of the SAO Krajina;

10 correct?

11 A. Not to organise it. I already found some sort of organisation

12 there. There was a mini staff in the village of Mala Gradusa and there

13 were a few -- hundreds of people there who had already organised

14 themselves and who already had village guards.

15 Q. Okay. Your function, then, was you were a deputy or an assistant

16 in the staff of that TO, of Sisak, Caprag; correct?

17 A. Correct.

18 Q. And the municipality of Sisak, Caprag, borders on Kostajnica, and

19 so when you talk about events that occurred in Kostajnica in 1991, it is

20 because, as you say - and now I'm quoting you from Friday, at page 10887 -

21 that you were "in the immediate vicinity in all these actions and

22 operations that were unfolding"; correct?

23 A. Well, yes, that is the case.

24 Q. Thank you.

25 A. Some individuals were --

Page 10941

1 Q. Thank you. That's fine. Now, you assumed a function that related

2 to the entire area of Banija only at the end of 1992, in December of 1992,

3 when you became a coordinator for the SUP of Banija. And you held that

4 position for some period of months, until, I believe, April of 1993.

5 Correct?

6 A. That's correct.

7 Q. Now, sir, I want to be very clear with you, so I'm going to put to

8 you what our position is from the very beginning, and it's also because I

9 may not be able to put to you all of the evidence related to these

10 issues.

11 I want to put to you that with respect to 1991, either you do not

12 know what was happening in the entire area of Banija or you are choosing

13 not to tell the Trial Chamber, because what you have testified about what

14 was happening in Banija does not correspond to reality. The reality is

15 that the police of the SAO Krajina, both special units and the regular

16 police, were operating all over the region of Banija, starting from at

17 least June of 1991, and they were operating in all of the areas seized by

18 Serbs from then, the summer of 1991, through 1991 and into 1992, and these

19 police were under the authority of the Ministry of the Interior of the SAO

20 Krajina.

21 Do you understand our position, and do you agree with it? And you

22 can answer that yes or no. There are two questions.

23 A. Sir, this is not a pop quiz and I don't feel that I should be

24 answering by just yes or no. You've asked me something that requires a

25 broad answer from me.

Page 10942

1 Q. Sir, let me explain. I understand why you might be inclined to

2 think that. I'm going to go through these points in some detail and ask

3 you specific questions. I just wanted to give you our overall position

4 from the very start. So my question is: Do you understand our position,

5 and do you agree with it; yes or no?

6 A. I understand what you're saying but I absolutely do not agree with

7 that.

8 Q. Thank you. Now we can go into some detail about it. You

9 testified on Friday - and it's at page 10897, and it was also in the

10 summary of the evidence that the Defence provided to us about what you

11 were going to testify about - that essentially the police began

12 functioning in Banija, in the area of Banija, only in January of 1992. Do

13 you remember that testimony?

14 A. At the time we only spoke about the area of Kostajnica, i.e., the

15 Banija triangle, where the Croatian paramilitary had taken Kostajnica. I

16 said that, at the time when Kostajnica was being taken and then when it

17 was being liberated, that in that area, at that time, the police did not

18 function. I did not claim that for Glina or for Petrinja, because we did

19 not deal with those two areas at all.

20 Q. Well, sir, let me just actually read to you from what you said,

21 and perhaps now you're changing your testimony. But the question -- it's

22 at 10897. The question that was put to you on Friday was: "When was SAO

23 Krajina Police established, and this time in terms of its being fully

24 fledged?" Your answer was: "At the beginning of 1992, Kostajnica, in

25 January, then Gradusa, Petrinja, Glina. This is the period when Krajina

Page 10943

1 Police started functioning."

2 Now, that's what you said, sir, on Friday. Do you now want to

3 change that testimony?

4 A. On the contrary. I don't intend to change my statement. It is an

5 indisputable fact that in Glina the police were all the time the police

6 that had remained there when the SAO Krajina separated from Croatia, and

7 the same went for Petrinja. I was talking about Caprag, about the 23

8 villages that did not have any police stations at all. And I also spoke

9 about Kostajnica, which, during the Croatian paramilitary occupation and

10 after the liberation, I told you that Petar Vuruna was appointed in

11 January 1992 as the chief of police in Kostajnica. And these are all

12 indisputable facts and I adhere by all these facts.

13 Q. Well, sir, I'm sorry, because I'm still not understanding, because

14 on Friday, you said that it was in the beginning of January 1992 that the

15 Kostajnica Police started, and you said also it was then that the police,

16 the Krajina Police, was formed in Petrinja and Glina. Now, that's what

17 you said on Friday. Are you now saying that, in fact, the SAO Krajina

18 Police operated in Petrinja and Glina in 1991?

19 A. I didn't speak about the SAO Krajina Police. I was talking about

20 the police station that remained in Petrinja and in Glina. Those were

21 police stations which never discontinued their work. Those police

22 stations continuously worked --

23 Q. Let me interrupt you and see if I can get clarity on this. What

24 is your -- on Friday, certainly with that answer, you stated that the SAO

25 Krajina Police was not established in Petrinja and Glina until January of

Page 10944

1 1992, or even after. Now, today, what is your position? Was the SAO

2 Krajina -- forget about the police station. Was the SAO Krajina Police in

3 control or operating in Glina and Petrinja during 1991?

4 A. It couldn't operate. I don't know how you mean "operate." Please

5 don't forget that both Petrinja and Glina were under the occupation of the

6 Croatian paramilitaries for a while, and that Petrinja and Glina were

7 being liberated at the same time. While Petrinja and Glina were under the

8 occupation of the Croatian paramilitary forces, obviously, the police

9 could not operate in the way that they should have, under normal

10 conditions.

11 Q. Well, sir, how about when Glina was liberated in July of 1991?

12 Was the SAO Krajina Police functioning then or not, in Glina?

13 A. When you say the SAO Krajina Police, I believe that you're trying

14 to say that this was a single linked-up service of the interior that

15 functioned across the entire territory. But this simply wasn't the case.

16 Q. Sir, I'm afraid I'm going to interrupt you. My question was very

17 specific. I was asking you about Glina in July of 1991.

18 A. Glina, in 1991, was liberated and it was liberated by the army, by

19 the unit under the command of Colonel Boric. This was the unit that

20 liberated Glina. And then after that, in Glina, the police remained and

21 continued operating in the territory of the municipality of Glina. Later

22 on the linking up --

23 Q. Sir, please, really listen -- I'm sure --

24 A. Pardon?

25 Q. -- you can understand my questions. Please listen very carefully

Page 10945

1 to my questions and just focus on my questions. The police that you're

2 talking about in Glina was the SAO Krajina Police under the control of the

3 Ministry of the Interior; correct?

4 A. Sir, I don't know whether you are the advocate of Croatia here or

5 you're representing the international tribunal. What I'm trying to say is

6 that the SAO Krajina Police represented the police of a state, and we are

7 now talking about one segment, about a police station in Glina, which

8 functioned in one way or another and was in one way or another linked up

9 with Knin, or maybe not.

10 JUDGE MOLOTO: I'm going to intervene here. It's not for you to

11 make that statement you've just made. It's highly irresponsible of you to

12 say the Prosecutor is here an advocate for Croatia. You know exactly what

13 position he holds here and he's asking you questions. Yours is to answer

14 his questions and not to query why he asks you the questions. Do we

15 understand each other, sir? You're not going to come --

16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.

17 JUDGE MOLOTO: -- you're not coming here to come and make

18 political statements for your constituency back home, okay? Thank you

19 very much.

20 MR. WHITING: Thank you, Your Honour.

21 Q. Sir, how about Dvor? Was the SAO Krajina Police operating in Dvor

22 after, say, June or July of 1991, or do you not know?

23 A. I have to reply to Mr. Prosecutor in the following way: Again,

24 you keep talking about the SAO Krajina Police, yet what I'm trying to tell

25 you is that those municipalities had their own separate police stations,

Page 10946

1 and, as far as I know, at that time, they performed certain functions only

2 within their territory. This is what I'm trying to tell you.

3 As far as I know, the SAO Krajina Police, as a single, organised

4 force, so to speak, began functioning only later on, on the orders issued

5 from Knin and so on. It was not easy, in the early days of war, to link

6 up all those police stations and to even establish police stations and

7 then to proceed so quickly. We would have been a very strong and very

8 large state had we been able to organise our government in the way that

9 you're trying to now put it to me.

10 Q. So is your testimony now, sir, that there were police in these

11 areas but they were not under the command of the Ministry of the Interior

12 of the SAO Krajina? They were autonomous units operating on their own?

13 And it was this way until January of 1992? That's your testimony?

14 A. More or less we can agree on this point.

15 Q. We are only agreeing that that is your testimony, just so we are

16 clear.

17 MR. WHITING: Now, if we could look at Exhibit 183, please.

18 Q. Sir, in fact, I'm going to put it to you that, starting from

19 January of 1991, the police stations of Glina, Dvor, Kostajnica, were

20 under the command of the SAO Krajina. This is a document dated the 5th of

21 January, 1991. It's from the SAO Krajina Executive Committee. And if you

22 look, it's an announcement of the setting up of the Serbian Autonomous

23 District of Krajina, Secretariat of the Interior. And if you look down,

24 it says in that first paragraph, it says: "The Secretariat will include

25 the police stations," and it lists a number of police stations, including

Page 10947

1 Glina, Kostajnica and Dvor. Do you see that, sir?

2 A. I don't see where it says that, but I have to distance myself from

3 this in a way. I personally did not have any role --

4 Q. I want to take this one step at a time. Look at the first

5 paragraph. It says -- if you could just read the first paragraph, it

6 says: "The Secretariat will include the police stations," and it lists a

7 number of towns and villages, and it includes Dvor, Glina and Kostajnica.

8 Do you see that, sir? This is in January of 1991.

9 A. Yes. Yes, I can see that.

10 Q. And that's how it was, wasn't it? Those police stations, from the

11 very beginning, were under the control of the SAO Krajina. At that time

12 it was the Secretariat of the Interior, and in May of 1991 it became the

13 Ministry of the Interior; correct?

14 A. I have to say, once again, that at that time -- now I'm talking

15 about my personal knowledge of how the police functioned in Banija. I was

16 not aware of these orders at the time, and, in fact, this is the first

17 time I see them.

18 Q. Well, now that you've seen this order, do you want to change

19 your -- is it now the case -- now do you say that you don't know, really,

20 how the police was organised in the area of Banija during 1991?

21 A. No. As far as I know, and on the basis of my knowledge, I still

22 assert that this was not any kind of a serious organisation and this was

23 not a single force that was able to function fully and properly in the

24 entire territory. I'm, in particular, now referring to the municipality

25 of Kostajnica.

Page 10948

1 Q. But, sir, isn't -- you didn't know about this order from the very

2 beginning of 1991, so you told us that you didn't -- you weren't aware of

3 this order. So isn't it the case that, really, you don't know how the

4 police was organised? You may have thought something but, in fact, you

5 don't really know.

6 A. No. Absolutely everything that I have said is something that I am

7 ready to repeat. In light of this order, even in light of this order, I

8 can say that at that time the police did not have even a theoretical

9 chance to function properly as a single force in the entire territory.

10 These were probably just some attempts to establish this single chain of

11 command, but I can state with certainty that this was not established at

12 the time, in actual fact.

13 Q. Well, sir, now you're saying that "these were probably"

14 something. You're just speculating now what this order means and what was

15 going on.

16 A. Can you please clarify your question. I don't know what you mean

17 when you say that I'm speculating. I have come here, I travelled 2.000

18 kilometres --

19 Q. Sir, in your last answer, you started to try to explain this

20 order, which you told us you'd never seen before, were not aware of, by

21 saying, "These were probably just some attempts to establish a single

22 chain of command." But that's just speculation on your part. The simple

23 fact is you don't know.

24 A. I have to apologise. I do know how the police stations functioned

25 at the time on the ground in Banija, the area that I'm familiar with, and

Page 10949

1 everything that I said about those police stations holds true. You do not

2 have a single fact --

3 Q. But, sir, the fact is you were a member of the TO of one

4 municipality, the Sisak, Caprag, municipality, and you were never a member

5 of the police during 1991. So how is it that you can be certain about how

6 the police functioned on the ground in the entire Banija area, which is

7 five or six municipalities? How can you be certain of that?

8 A. Of course I'm certain because I travelled to Glina every day.

9 That was the only place from which we got our supplies; I'm referring to

10 fuel and other necessities that we needed to survive and subsist on the

11 ground. So every day I would travel to Glina and to Kostajnica, and even

12 before Kostajnica was occupied by the Croatian forces and after it was

13 liberated, I was there quite often, so we had joint activities. In fact,

14 we were a single enclave in -- we were encircled and this is how we

15 functioned.

16 So you cannot tell me that I was not familiar with the situation

17 in Glina, Petrinja, Sisak, and Dvor. So you cannot claim that I was not

18 familiar.

19 Q. But it --

20 JUDGE MOLOTO: Excuse me.

21 MR. WHITING: I'm sorry, Your Honour.

22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Excuse me, sir, do you have a problem with your

23 earphones?

24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.

25 JUDGE MOLOTO: Are you just holding it? It's not because it's

Page 10950

1 falling off from your head.

2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, no. It was a comfortable

3 position.

4 JUDGE MOLOTO: If it's a comfortable position, please go ahead and

5 keep the position.

6 MR. WHITING: Thank you, Your Honour.

7 Q. But it's true, isn't it, that you had no function in the SAO

8 Krajina Police or in any police during 1991; correct?

9 A. That is correct.

10 Q. And when you offered the Trial Chamber your judgement about the

11 police in the Banija area, you were not aware of this order which is

12 before you on the screen. You didn't know about that; correct?

13 A. No, no. I'm --

14 Q. No, you mean you didn't know about it?

15 A. I did not know about it, no.

16 Q. Okay. Let's look at another document. It's Exhibit 568. While

17 it's coming up, this is a report from the Dvor Krajina -- oh, you're

18 getting your glasses.

19 A. Yes, it's just my glasses.

20 Q. You'll need them for this document. It's actually kind of hard to

21 read in the B/C/S, I'm afraid. And if it would be easier, I don't know

22 if --

23 MR. WHITING: I printed out a hard copy because I thought it might

24 be easier, and I'll sort of leave it to the witness to decide if he

25 prefers to look at the hard copy or the screen.

Page 10951

1 Q. Sir, this is a report from the Dvor special police unit to the

2 Ministry of the Interior, and it's a report on the activities from the

3 18th of June, 1991, to the 7th of April, 1992. That's on the first page.

4 If you could turn to the second page, this report goes through the history

5 of the Dvor special unit of the police. It says -- in the second

6 paragraph, it says that on the 28th of May, a group of Serbian volunteers,

7 headed by the author of this report, who is the unit commander, Simo

8 Miletic, went to Knin for training and then returned from Knin on the 15th

9 of June; and on the 18th of June, a training centre was set up in

10 Samaricki Brdjani. In the third paragraph, he says:

11 "The unit," in addition to training at the training centre, "the

12 unit had also had the task of protecting the Serbian population in our

13 municipality and wider, as we were the only organised armed formation in

14 Banija and Kordun."

15 And then I would ask you, sir, please, to turn to page 2 of the

16 B/C/S; we'll stay on page 1, this first page in the English, and you'll

17 see it's the third paragraph on page 2 in the B/C/S, and it's the fourth

18 paragraph from the bottom. It says that the training centre was moved to

19 Samarica on the 3rd of July, 1991.

20 And then it goes through here -- and I won't go through it all,

21 but it goes through all the different armed -- all of the different armed

22 confrontations that the unit participated in during June and July and

23 August of 1991. Do you see that, sir? Were you aware of these activities

24 by the Dvor special police unit during that time?

25 A. I was not aware of these activities because, as I have already

Page 10952

1 said, at that time, I did not have any particular knowledge as to what

2 each particular police station in each particular municipality was engaged

3 in, what it was doing. In my examination-in-chief we, in fact, did not

4 mention this area. It is an area with a majority Serb population. And,

5 for all intents and purposes, the police functioned there the entire

6 time.

7 So I do not challenge this document because this is the first time

8 that I see it, and I cannot give you any opinion on it whatsoever.

9 Q. Well, I appreciate that answer, but just two or three minutes

10 ago - it's at page 18 of our transcript from today - you said that -- you

11 explained -- it's at the end of page 17 and the beginning of page 18. You

12 explained how you travelled all over to Glina and Kostajnica, and then you

13 said, "So you cannot tell me that I was not familiar with the situation in

14 Glina, Petrinja, Sisak, and Dvor. So you cannot claim that I was not

15 familiar." But now you just told us that you, in fact, weren't familiar.

16 A. I would really like to appeal to you, in the interests of the

17 truth and because of the importance of this Tribunal. What I'm saying is

18 something that I -- I am fully behind what I say. I said that I was not

19 familiar with all the details of the functioning of the police. What I

20 said was that I knew that there was a police station in Dvor, that this

21 was a police station that never stopped functioning from the moment of the

22 inception of the SAO Krajina, and now, as to how it functioned and all

23 those details, this is not something that I can either confirm or deny.

24 Q. Okay. Well, now that you see this information about this fighting

25 that occurred in June and July and August of 1991, would that now cause

Page 10953

1 you to change your answer that the conflict -- the answer that you gave on

2 Friday, which is that the conflict in Banija began on the 21st of August,

3 1991?

4 A. Well, it's difficult to set a date. I don't know whether anyone

5 has the right answer to when the real conflict broke out, when the war

6 broke out, because we had known about some liquidations that had happened

7 in Sisak a long time before we actually became organised.

8 Q. It was you who told us on Friday that you thought the conflict

9 began on the 21st of August, 1991, in Banija. So my question is: Seeing

10 this, does that change your opinion that you offered on Friday? Would you

11 now say that, in fact, the conflict -- the fighting, the armed conflict,

12 in Banija started long before August 21st, 1991, that there was fighting

13 going on in June and July of 1991; right?

14 A. There were some liquidations in 1990, but what I'm trying to say

15 is that the war, according to me, began when the roadblocks were set up

16 and when the demarcation line was established. Before that, according to

17 me, in the entire Banija --

18 Q. Roadblocks were set up long before August of 1991; correct?

19 A. No. How would the Croatian police officers be able to enter

20 Kostajnica and to slaughter all those Serbs in Brdjani, Cakale, and the

21 other villages there? Had there been roadblocks there, they would not

22 have been able to get in at all. So what you're saying now is simply --

23 it doesn't hold water. The roadblocks were put up only --

24 Q. Sir, if you could focus your attention on this document and look,

25 please, now at page 1 of the document. In the fifth paragraph, it

Page 10954

1 says: "On the 24th of June, 1991, due to penetration by Ustasha forces

2 from the direction of Kostajnica, a barricade was set up in Dvor." The

3 next paragraph talks about a barricade in Zirovac, set up on the 25th of

4 June, 1991, and so on and so on.

5 Would you agree, sir, that barricades, in fact, were set up before

6 the 21st of August, 1991?

7 A. I partly agree that in some villages the roadblocks had been set

8 up, but I'm talking about the roadblocks that were set up, in my opinion,

9 along the entire demarcation line, when it was no longer possible to enter

10 the territory of the SAO Krajina because of the roadblocks. And, of

11 course, it is true that in some villages roadblocks were set up. This was

12 the decision of the people who were in charge of the Territorial Defence

13 in those villages.

14 Q. Okay. Let's move on to a different topic.

15 Staying with this document, if you could look at page 4 of the

16 document, and when I say "page 4," I think it's page 4 of the written --

17 no, just page 4, the fourth page of the document, and if we could look at

18 page 3, please. And there is a paragraph -- on the B/C/S, it's the third

19 paragraph down; in the English, it's halfway down. It begins, "On the 8th

20 of September 1991, following a request from the Kostajnica TO, I sent --"

21 A. Just a moment. I can't -- I can't find it.

22 Q. Okay. Look for a paragraph that begins -- do you see it? Okay.

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. If you could just read the next two paragraphs, please, the first

25 one about the 8th of September, 1991, and the second paragraph about the

Page 10955

1 13th of September, 1991. It's about this special unit of the Dvor police

2 participating in fighting in Kostajnica; right at the time of the

3 liberation of Kostajnica.

4 A. Unfortunately, I can't assist you with this document because this

5 is the first time that I see it. I don't know just how authentic it is,

6 in fact, but I maintain that when Kostajnica was liberated, it was

7 liberated by the Territorial Defence of Kostajnica itself.

8 Q. With the participation of this special police unit of Dvor;

9 correct?

10 A. It is possible that from the direction of Dvor, along the Una

11 River, because there had been some fighting up there, that a unit from

12 Dvor had been active here. But, in my opinion, it was not the key, the

13 decisive factor, in the liberation of Kostajnica.

14 Q. Okay. Are you aware, sir -- and I'm done with that document. Are

15 you aware, sir, that the Dvor -- this refers to the Dvor special police

16 unit. There was also a Dvor public security station. Are you aware that

17 police from the public security station of Dvor participated in fighting

18 in Kostajnica, Glina, Petrinja, Dubica, and other places?

19 MR. WHITING: This is a reference to Exhibit 599, Your Honours.

20 Are you aware of that fact?

21 Q. Did you know that, sir, at the time?

22 A. No, no. I was not aware of the fact that this unit had been

23 engaged in all those fronts. This is not something that I know or have

24 known.

25 Q. Okay. Did you know that on the 10th -- around the 10th of July,

Page 10956

1 1991, there were Martic's Police present in the village of Cukur, which is

2 just west of Kostajnica? It's very close, maybe no more than a couple of

3 kilometres west of Kostajnica. Did you know that, sir?

4 A. Do you mean Cukur?

5 Q. Probably. If that's a village that's just west of Kostajnica,

6 then that's the village I'm talking about.

7 A. I would first like to ask you, sir, to explain to me what is

8 Martic's Police? Why are you referring to this as Martic's Police? Is

9 this the way that you call the police force in any country of the world?

10 Do you always refer to it by referring to it with the president's name?

11 What do you mean when you say "Martic's Police"?

12 Q. In fact, sometimes I do, but in this case I'm using that term

13 because I'm referring to a specific document, and I'll show you the

14 document in a moment. But for the purposes of the question, let's say

15 "Martic's Police" is police under Milan Martic's command. Were you aware

16 that there were police under Milan Martic's command in Cukur, just next to

17 Kostajnica, in July of 1991?

18 A. No, no. I don't know about that, but I must insist, once again,

19 that Cukur was the first village --

20 Q. How about the village of Zamlaca, Zamlaca, which is in Dvor? Did

21 you know that there was police under Milan Martic's command there in July

22 of 1991?

23 A. Perhaps Milan Martic would be the best person to tell you whether

24 it was under his command or not. But it is my assertion that the entire

25 area along the River Una, Zamlaca, Kozibrod, and then some other places,

Page 10957

1 that these were all major and terrible strongholds of the Croatian

2 paramilitaries at the time. And I know that there was heavy fighting

3 there to liberate this corridor along the River Una, from Kostajnica

4 towards Dvor.

5 Q. So you're not aware of police under Milan Martic's command in that

6 village of Zamlaca. You didn't know about that in July of 1991.

7 A. No, no. I know something else.

8 Q. Okay.

9 A. I know that --

10 MR. WHITING: If we could look, please, at Exhibit 01228713.

11 Q. Sir, you see this is a document, this is a -- this is a document

12 from the 5th Corps of the JNA, which is also known as the Banja Luka

13 Corps, dated the 10th of July, 1991, and it is about -- it's from the

14 intelligence department and it's about -- it's primarily about the

15 deployment and activities of the Croatian police units.

16 I'm going to ask that we turn to the second page of the document.

17 If we could scroll down, you'll see the third paragraph from the bottom

18 says that "Marticevci," meaning Martic's Police, "have blocked the bridge

19 and mined it in the village of --"

20 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Objection, Your Honour.

21 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Mr. Milovancevic.

22 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Martic's Police is not

23 something that is mentioned in the text at all. I would kindly like to

24 ask my learned colleague to read exactly what it says and to show where

25 Martic's -- the term "Martic's Police" is used. We have heard that

Page 10958

1 "Marticevci" is a colloquial term, and, in fact, the witness himself

2 queried the use of this term just now. It says here that the bridge was

3 blocked by Marticevci, and these are supposed to be Serbs, I guess,

4 because the other side are Croats.

5 MR. WHITING: Your Honour, I apologise. It's true, it doesn't say

6 "Martic's Police." I had misrecollected in the document. It says

7 "Marticevci," which means Martic's men.

8 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much. You may proceed.


10 Q. In any event, the document says: "Marticevci have blocked the

11 bridge and mined it in the village of Zamlaca," and then it goes on to

12 talk about snipers. And then in the next paragraph, it says: "Marticevci

13 are also billeted in the village of Cukur."

14 A. Sir, I don't know why this cynicism. Perhaps I'm being too

15 courageous to say that. But how is it possible for a man in Knin to be in

16 command of every single person in this area? I have given you an exact

17 testimony about all the groups that referred to themselves as Marticevci,

18 or Martic's Police, yet they had nothing to do with Martic himself

19 whatsoever. And I agree with Mr. Milovancevic --

20 Q. Well, that's fine. But, sir, here, it's not the group that's

21 referring to it self as Marticevci, it's the JNA that's referring to these

22 people as Marticevci.

23 A. I don't know who drafted this document and what were the motives

24 for using this term or writing this. It would be similar to, if you were

25 to call the soldiers who took photographs of themselves with the heads

Page 10959

1 that had been cut off, for them to call -- for you to call them the police

2 or the soldiers of the president of Germany. If this was the police, in

3 fact, then there was a chain of command and Martic was the Minister --

4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Again, we are not here dealing with problems of

5 Germany, okay? You wanted to know -- you said you don't know who drafted

6 this thing. This thing is drafted by a person who calls himself Zdravko

7 Djuric, Head of the Intelligence Department, a lieutenant-colonel. If you

8 look at the bottom of that document, you will see that.

9 Now, if you want to make comparisons with Germany, you can

10 actually direct that comparison to this person who wrote this document.

11 We are reading what is written there. It's written "Marticevci." That's

12 how he wrote it in an official document from the JNA, okay?


14 Q. Having seen this document, sir, would you agree that, in fact,

15 there were Marticevci in these two locations in July of 1991?

16 A. Again, I don't know what you mean by this term "Marticevci."

17 Please, what is the meaning of "Marticevci"? Does it mean that if Martic

18 was the Minister of the Interior of Krajina and the most reputable person

19 in Krajina, then all people who were in war in Krajina bore the nickname

20 "Marticevci"? I told you that there were so-called groups who called

21 themselves --

22 Q. Sir --

23 A. Would you please allow me to --

24 Q. No, I'm sorry, I'm going to interrupt you. Is this the first time

25 that you have heard the term "Marticevci"?

Page 10960

1 A. On the contrary. I did hear the term before, but I'm telling you

2 that it is not appropriate to use it at an institution such as the

3 international tribunal.

4 Q. Sir, I have to deal with the evidence as it comes in. Now, if you

5 could focus on my question, having seen this document, would you dispute

6 that there were Marticevci, meaning Martic's men, in these two locations

7 in July of 1991, or do you simply not know?

8 A. I apologise, sir, Mr. Prosecutor. I know everything about this.

9 I'm familiar with Rastovac, Ustolica, Svinjica, which bordered on Mala

10 Gradiska, where my staff was. I knew all the people who were there in

11 these villages, who were waging war there. I'm really bothered by this

12 paraphrase before the international tribunal. I'm bothered by the fact

13 who defended Krajina, who were expelled in genocide, to call them

14 Marticevci. Those were fighters of the SAO Krajina or something else.

15 Why would they be Marticevci? This is not an appropriate term for these

16 people, and I apologise for saying that.

17 JUDGE MOLOTO: The term may or may not be appropriate. The term

18 does not come from the international tribunal, the term comes from this

19 document. This document is generated by what was then called the JNA.

20 Now, you can't then erase that term from the whole document simply because

21 you don't like it. It's not a term of the international tribunal, it's a

22 term of this person who wrote this document here, who wrote this document

23 in the name of the JNA. And we have to deal with the evidence as it is

24 and get on.

25 Please don't waste our time. Just answer the questions that are

Page 10961

1 put to you and let's move on. Whether you are not happy about the use of

2 the term or not, there is nothing we can do about it. It was written

3 there by Djuric, and we can't erase it, okay? Let's get on with the

4 evidence, please.


6 Q. Could you please, sir --

7 MR. WHITING: Thank you, Your Honour.

8 Q. Could you please, sir, focus on my question. Having seen this

9 document, do you dispute that there were - and I use the term because it's

10 in the document - Marticevci in these two villages in July of 1991, or do

11 you not know?

12 A. I know that there were fighters belonging to the Territorial

13 Defence of the Serbian Republic of Krajina. Whether they were called

14 Marticevci, whether they called themselves Marticevci, who called them

15 Marticevci, I really wouldn't want to testify about that. You should call

16 this Colonel Djuric to explain things to you.

17 JUDGE MOLOTO: Just answer the question. If you don't know, you

18 don't know.

19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.

20 JUDGE MOLOTO: Do you agree that there were Marticevci's people --

21 Marticevci in those areas at that time? You can either say yes or no. If

22 you don't agree, you can just say you don't agree.

23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I do not agree. Thank you, Your

24 Honour. Thank you very much.


Page 10962

1 Q. Sir, just in the last paragraph, it says: "Following our

2 estimations, the mood of the inhabitants of the village Rosulje, Slabinja,

3 Zivaja, Rastovac," and so on "is positive towards the members of the JNA."

4 So it's true that the JNA had been present in the village of Zivaja by

5 July of 1991; correct?

6 A. We said that it was Slavko Borovic's unit that was part of the

7 Banja Luka Corps. We never disputed that, did we?

8 Q. And they were present there from July of 1991?

9 A. I don't know exactly the date. I wouldn't be able to tell you

10 anything about that.

11 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Milovancevic.

12 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the content of the

13 last paragraph has been misinterpreted. I have allowed for the witness to

14 answer, but this is not good for the Trial Chamber. This is about the

15 mood of the population towards the JNA, not of the presence of the JNA in

16 some villages. It says here that there are some villages in which people

17 display a favourable mood towards the JNA and some villages where that was

18 not the case. It doesn't say here that the JNA was present in those

19 villages. It just mentions the villages in which the population fosters

20 positive feelings towards the JNA.

21 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Milovancevic, what has been misinterpreted?

22 The statement that we read in English says: "Following our estimations,

23 the mood of the inhabitants of the village Rosulje, Slabinja, Zivaja,

24 Rastovac, Ustolica," and the other one, "is positive towards the members

25 of the JNA." What's wrong with that statement? Just one sentence,

Page 10963

1 Mr. Milovancevic. Go straight to what is wrong, because I don't

2 understand when you make a long statement. What has been misinterpreted?

3 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the paragraph

4 doesn't speak about the presence of the JNA units in those villages at

5 all. It talks about the attitude and the mood.

6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Indeed. I agree with you. It doesn't talk about

7 the presence. You may proceed.

8 MR. WHITING: Thank you, Your Honour. Could this document be

9 admitted into evidence, please.

10 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence. May it

11 please be given an exhibit number.

12 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this becomes Exhibit 1016.

13 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

14 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Mr. Whiting, before you leave the document and

15 it comes off the screen, I'd like to ask the witness a question.

16 I'd like to ask you this question: It would be the second

17 paragraph, a single line from the bottom of the page. "Marticevci are

18 also billeted in the village of Cukur." What would you understand that to

19 mean? What is the process of billeting?

20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the village of Cukur is

21 on a hilltop above Kostajnica. It is a village from which you could

22 easily control the entire area of the town. I'm not saying that in that

23 area there were no units of the Territorial Defence. However, I could not

24 accept, and I still cannot accept, that somebody called them Marticevci,

25 because this is a term that should be discontinued once and forever.

Page 10964

1 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: I understood that evidence which you have given

2 repeatedly perfectly, but what I'm asking you: What is -- firstly, let me

3 get it in sequence. What do you understand the term "billeting" to mean?

4 "Marticevci are also billeted ..." What is that process? What does it

5 entail, as you understand it?

6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I understand your question, Your

7 Honour. On the outskirts of Kostajnica, there were Serb guards put up by

8 the villages Cukur, Velesnja, Kozibrod, Komogovina, and so on and so

9 forth. I already said on direct examination that our two lads were killed

10 there - one was from that village and another one from the village of

11 Velesnja - as they were keeping guard, so as to prevent units leaving

12 Kostajnica and attacking the neighbouring villages that bordered on

13 Kostajnica.

14 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Is it a formal process that is used in the

15 command system or direction system?

16 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreters note: In the original text, it

17 says only Martic's men are in the village of Cukur.

18 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Very well. Thank you for that correction,

19 because it would make a difference -- sorry, it does make a difference and

20 I would then not press him. Thank you for that correction.

21 MR. WHITING: Thank you, Your Honour.

22 Q. By the way, in July of 1991, was the Territorial Defence in

23 Kostajnica under the command of Milan Martic?

24 A. Not at all, as far as I know. Not a chance.

25 Q. So this reference, in your mind, to Marticevci would not be a

Page 10965

1 reference to members of the TO?

2 A. We don't seem to be able to discard this document. Why do we

3 trust this Zdravko Djuric who decided to call them that? Why are we

4 talking about this? We had the police, we had the army, and we had the

5 Territorial Defence, and it all depends on who was exactly where and at

6 what time.

7 JUDGE MOLOTO: Please answer the questions and don't ask

8 questions. Just answer questions.


10 Q. The question was that --

11 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Would you not normally trust a

12 lieutenant-colonel in the JNA? The head of intelligence department, would

13 you normally not consider him reliable in reporting or making a statement

14 in a document? No? Is it inconceivable that he could say something in

15 the document that would not report the situation properly?

16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I never said that, not

17 for a moment. I only said that I don't know why he used this particular

18 term. I never doubted a colonel of the JNA. However, the term, and why

19 it is there, this is something that I find really intriguing, and this is

20 what we have been arguing about for a while now.

21 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Thank you.

22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Do you then find a reference to the use -- to that

23 term, "Marticevci," not to be a reference to the TO? That was the

24 question that was put to you and which hasn't been answered.

25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I really don't have enough wisdom to

Page 10966

1 assume what somebody meant when they used the term "Marticevci." I don't

2 know who he had in mind - the police, the Territorial Defence, the JNA.

3 How should I know that?

4 JUDGE MOLOTO: So you don't know the answer to that question. The

5 short and sweet answer is to say "I don't know."

6 MR. WHITING: Thank you, Your Honour. I think it's a convenient

7 time.

8 JUDGE MOLOTO: We will take the break and come back at 4.00.

9 Court adjourned.

10 --- Recess taken at 3.31 p.m.

11 --- On resuming at 4.01 p.m.

12 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Whiting, I see your learned friend is on his

13 feet.

14 Mr. Milovancevic.

15 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the Defence would

16 like to ask for five minutes before the end of the session for a very

17 urgent matter that we would like to raise; maybe not more than three

18 minutes. We would like to raise an issue that is very important for the

19 rest of these proceedings, at the end of today's session, please, if

20 possible.

21 JUDGE MOLOTO: At the end of today's session, Mr. Milovancevic, or

22 at the end of this session?

23 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] What I had in mind was at the

24 end of today's sitting. It doesn't have to be at the end of this

25 session. My learned friend can continue without us actually wasting any

Page 10967

1 more of his time. I apologise.

2 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Mr. Whiting, you may proceed. Just bear in

3 mind Mr. Milovancevic's request at five to seven.

4 MR. WHITING: I should be silenced by then. Thank you, Your

5 Honours.

6 Q. Sir, are you aware that at the end of July of 1991, I believe on

7 the 26th of July, there was an attack by Serb forces on the village of

8 Struga?

9 A. Well, I wouldn't say that there was an attack. Units of the

10 Croatian paramilitary forces were stationed there, and I said that this

11 was a very important place for the transport from Kostajnica to Dvor. As

12 far as I know, there were two strongholds and that there was -- what

13 happened was these places were liberated.

14 Q. Okay. Attacked/liberated. They were "liberated" by Serb forces

15 on the 26th of July; correct?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. And members of the police participated in that operation; correct?

18 A. Well, members of the police of Dvor Na Uni, yes.

19 Q. Thank you. Let's talk now about Glina.

20 MR. WHITING: I want to look, please, at Exhibit 583?

21 JUDGE MOLOTO: We are done with the document on the screen?

22 MR. WHITING: Yes.

23 JUDGE MOLOTO: And it is in evidence?

24 MR. WHITING: Yes. I believe it's Exhibit 1016.

25 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

Page 10968


2 Q. This is a report from Glina, from Captain Dragan, on the 19th of

3 July 1991. If we could go down to the bottom of the report, you can see

4 that this is -- and this is on page 2 of the English. It is sent to the

5 secretary of the SUP of the SAO Krajina, who was Milan Martic at the time,

6 as well as the command of the SAO Krajina TO, Frenki, Major Fica, and a

7 security officer.

8 Now if we could go to the top, this is, as I said, a report -

9 there, perfect - from Captain Dragan on this date. In the third

10 paragraph, if we could scroll down a little bit -- well, it's actually --

11 in the B/C/S, it's the second paragraph; in the English, for some reason,

12 it's the third paragraph. It says: "As for regular police and reserve

13 forces, they all know their duties. The police carry on with their tasks

14 as before."

15 So, would you agree that in July of 1991, there were police of the

16 SAO Krajina in Glina and that they were under the command of the SAO

17 Krajina Secretary of the Interior or Minister of the Interior?

18 A. Well, I've already stated that the police station in Glina, for

19 all intents and purposes, existed throughout all this time. From the

20 moment Krajina separated from Croatia, as far as I know it never stopped

21 operating. The only issue is the area where it was active, because Glina

22 was cut off from Kordun by the Croatian forces and Glina was also

23 encircled. So one can talk about the control and the work of the police

24 only in the specific area which was, by then, free from the Croatian

25 paramilitary.

Page 10969

1 Q. And you didn't answer the next part of the question. The police

2 was under the command of the Secretariat of Krajina, as it states, of the

3 secretary of -- Secretariat of the Interior of the SAO Krajina, as it

4 states in this document; correct?

5 A. Well, at the relevant time, I don't know what the link was between

6 the ministry in Knin and certain local police stations, and how much

7 contact they had. I can't be of assistance there because I don't know

8 anything about those direct links and contacts, because I wasn't privy to

9 the documents that you are presenting to me here today.

10 Q. Okay. Thank you.

11 MR. WHITING: I'd like to look at another document, Exhibit 582.

12 This is a document -- this is another hard one to read, and I print -- I

13 think it's probably possible to read it, but I printed it out, if you

14 would like a hard copy.

15 Q. This is a document from the chief of the war staff in Dvor, Nikola

16 Bojanic. It's a report dated the 23rd of July, 1991. It talks about a

17 meeting that was held with Captain Dragan, the commander of the war staff

18 in Dvor, and later joined by Milan Martic and representatives of the war

19 staffs from Glina and Kostajnica. It says there was nobody from

20 Petrinja. In the last paragraph, it says: "After the meeting was

21 addressed by the Defence Minister," which in this document is a reference

22 to Milan Martic, "and the staff commanders from Dvor, Glina and

23 Kostajnica, Captain Dragan made an assessment of the situation in Banija,

24 saying that unity had been established in the conduct of all operations in

25 the area."

Page 10970

1 Now, my first question to you, sir, is were you aware of this

2 meeting that was held on the 23rd of July, 1991, with those participants?

3 A. No.

4 Q. And would you agree with the conclusion of Captain Dragan that

5 unity had been established in the conduct of all operations in the area of

6 Banija? Or can you not comment on that or are you not aware of that?

7 A. I wouldn't comment on this. I don't know that the role of Captain

8 Dragan was so significant in Banija for him to be able to provide such

9 estimates.

10 Q. Well, put aside Captain Dragan's role and focus, please, on the

11 assessment that he made. Would you agree with that assessment that he

12 made, that unity had been achieved in the conduct of all operations in the

13 area, or would you disagree? Or do you not know? Are you unable to

14 comment on that?

15 A. I would abstain from comment. I wasn't present. I'm not aware of

16 the meeting. I see the document for the first time.

17 Q. So is it --

18 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Excuse me. That was not the question, was it?

19 MR. WHITING: That's --

20 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Could you answer the question, Witness.

21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Could you please repeat the

22 question.


24 Q. Yes. Would you agree with the assessment that unity had been

25 achieved in the conduct of all operations in the area of Banija, or would

Page 10971

1 you disagree with that assessment? Or do you not know? Are you unable to

2 answer -- do you not know enough information to know?

3 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Objection, Your Honour. I

4 believe that the text doesn't offer any basis for the question about

5 Captain Dragan talking about the situation in Banija. When you look at

6 the document, you see where the meeting was held, and Captain Dragan is

7 talking about the situation in --

8 MR. WHITING: I'm really sorry to do this. I'm very sorry to

9 interrupt, but I don't -- I don't -- there has been no objection and now I

10 think we are about to hear some argument about the document, and I suggest

11 that that's not proper.

12 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Milovancevic.

13 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I can only read

14 the last sentence of the text that is before you, but still, it won't

15 be -- and I don't want to comment any further because of my colleague's

16 words. This text is --

17 JUDGE MOLOTO: Don't comment, then, Mr. Milovancevic. You say you

18 don't want to comment. Let the question --

19 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Hereby my words, Your Honour:

20 Anything else would be interpreted as leading the witness and I don't want

21 to say anything else.

22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

23 You may proceed, Mr. Whiting.

24 MR. WHITING: Thank you, Your Honour.

25 Q. Sir, can you focus your mind, please, on the question. The

Page 10972

1 question is: Would you agree with -- I want to state it exactly how I put

2 it. Would you agree with the assessment that unity had been achieved in

3 the conduct of all operations in the area of Banija or would you disagree

4 with that assessment? Or do you not know?

5 A. I would simply shy away from this document. I'm not aware of the

6 meeting. I'm not in a position at this moment to --

7 JUDGE MOLOTO: I must interrupt you, sir. Please concentrate on

8 the question. The question is not about the meeting; the question is

9 about the assessment made by the author of the document. Do you agree

10 with that assessment, don't you agree with the, assessment, or don't you

11 know, don't you have an opinion? Please let's concentrate on -- focus on

12 the question put to you.

13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

14 I simply don't want to -- I don't have the right answer to this

15 question that might satisfy the Trial Chamber. I don't know anything

16 about this document. I don't know whether any unity was established at

17 the time.

18 JUDGE MOLOTO: Sir, you know what, if you don't know, say you

19 don't know. You don't have to give an answer that satisfies the Trial

20 Chamber. Give the answer that is according to your knowledge. Do you

21 know -- do you agree with that assessment, don't you agree with the

22 assessment, or don't you have anything to say?

23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I've repeated several times that I

24 don't have anything to say about this document because I'm not familiar

25 with it.

Page 10973

1 JUDGE MOLOTO: No, no, no, no, not the document. The assessment

2 made -- you're asked about one sentence. The sentence says that unity had

3 been established in the conduct of all operations in the area of Banija.

4 Do you agree with that assessment or don't you? According to your

5 knowledge, is that fact or is that not fact?

6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can't answer in the simple way,

7 because I'm also aware of some other circumstances. In my view, what

8 Captain Dragan stated is not a valid assessment. And if that is what is

9 asked from me, I can talk about that. I cannot talk about the document

10 because I'm not familiar with it. And I very much doubt that Captain

11 Dragan was in a position to make any assessments.

12 JUDGE MOLOTO: We are not asking you to assess Captain Dragan. We

13 are asking to you assess a statement, sir. Just forget about the

14 statement -- about the document. If it's put to you that Dragan has made

15 an assessment that unity had been established in the area of Banija, do

16 you agree with that statement or don't you agree with that statement?

17 Forget about the document.

18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't agree.

19 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you. Why must it take so long just to answer

20 a simple question like that?

21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Because the question wasn't simple,

22 Mr. President.

23 JUDGE MOLOTO: It was a very simple question.

24 You may proceed, Mr. Whiting.

25 MR. WHITING: Thank you, Your Honour.

Page 10974

1 Q. Well, you've actually now, I think, given two answers to the

2 question, because at line 15 of page 40, you said, "I don't know whether

3 any unity was established at the time," and now you have just said, "I

4 don't agree" with the assessment. So can you clarify for me: Is it that

5 you don't know whether unity was established or you disagree that unity

6 was established?

7 A. I don't agree that any unity was established. And I would now

8 like to go back to the person who actually made this assessment.

9 Q. There is no need for that. Thank you.

10 I'd like to move on to another topic, which is events that

11 occurred at Samarica, because you told us that in August of 1991, you,

12 yourself, were at Samarica.

13 MR. WHITING: If we could look, please, at Exhibit 567.

14 Q. This is a report from the Samarica training centre on the 10th of

15 August, 1991, when you were there; correct?

16 A. From time to time.

17 Q. Okay. Well, it says -- this talks about how the training centre

18 was set up on the 18th of June, and then it moved on the 27th of June

19 1991. And it says in the second paragraph, it says:

20 "The task of the training centre was to train special purposes

21 police units of the SAO Krajina and Territorial Defence volunteer

22 detachments to protect and defend people in the Banija area from the

23 pro-fascist Croatian authorities."

24 You would agree with that, wouldn't you, sir; that the purpose of

25 the training centre at Samarica was to train special police units of the

Page 10975

1 SAO Krajina and Territorial Defence volunteer detachments; right?

2 A. No. I would agree partly. If we are talking about 200 people,

3 then these cannot be both the Territorial Defence and the special units,

4 because 200 people, that's a fairly small unit. That would be a

5 two-companies-strong unit.

6 Q. Let me put the question to you this way, sir: Were special

7 purpose police units of the SAO Krajina trained at Samarica at this time;

8 yes or no?

9 A. I cannot give you a yes or no answer. In order to train a special

10 unit, the honourable Chamber is probably aware of this, it takes a long

11 time. You need certain people who have certain prior knowledge. In this

12 case, these were simply people who were organised in some way and trained

13 to handle just the very basic weapons. So these were not any special

14 units, because this was too short a time period to actually train such

15 units.

16 Q. Well, let's put aside whether the training was adequate or not.

17 The fact is, special purpose police units of the SAO Krajina were being

18 trained at Samarica at this time, exactly as is stated in this document;

19 right?

20 A. Samaricki Brdjani is actually a place on the outskirts of

21 Samarica, on the road to Dvor, and as far as I know, Samarica actually

22 covers tens of thousands of square metres.

23 JUDGE MOLOTO: We haven't got much time. Please listen to the

24 questions and answer the questions that are put to you. You were not

25 asked where Samaricki Brdjani is. You're just being asked whether special

Page 10976

1 purpose police units of the SAO Krajina were being trained at Samarica as

2 of the date of this letter, of this document. The answer is very simple:

3 Yes, they were; no, they were not; I don't know. One of those three.

4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I'm begging you, I

5 really don't want to annoy the Tribunal. I don't want to say things that

6 are not true. I was in Samarica where there is a hotel, where there are

7 restaurants, and where the centre was, where people came together. This

8 was used for cultural events before the war. And in the first days, in

9 the early days --

10 JUDGE MOLOTO: I'm very sorry, sir. We are not talking about

11 hotels and restaurants here, please. We are talking about the training of

12 special purpose police units of the SAO Krajina in Samarica at a

13 particular date. Do you know about that; and if you do know, do you agree

14 or do you not agree that this happened? Please, let's move on.

15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I agree that there was a certain

16 number --

17 JUDGE MOLOTO: Fine. Do you also agree that at the same time

18 Territorial Defence volunteer detachments were also being trained at that

19 same place?

20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know about any volunteer

21 detachments and I don't know about them being trained there at all.

22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much.

23 MR. WHITING: Thank you, Your Honour.

24 Q. Now, I'm going to move on to -- oh, one other question about

25 Samarica in August of 1991.

Page 10977

1 MR. WHITING: This is a reference to Exhibit 508, Your Honours.

2 I'm not going to go through it, but I will just put this one question to

3 the witness.

4 Q. The Operational Group 1 of the JNA was based in Samarica as of

5 August of 1991; correct?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. Thank you. Now I want to move on to another topic. During

8 fighting that occurred in Kostajnica and Glina in August of 1991, there

9 were Croatian civilians who were driven from those areas into other areas

10 of Croatia, for example, Zagreb; correct?

11 A. Is that the question?

12 Q. That's the question.

13 A. As far as I know, in the early days, when the first incidents

14 involving gunfire and the liquidation of civilians began, many Croats left

15 their homesteads and went to Zagreb, to Sisak and to other places, but a

16 large number of them remained in Banija.

17 Q. Okay.

18 MR. WHITING: I'd like to look at a document. It's 00290007. If

19 we could look at page 2 of the document, please.

20 Q. Sir, unfortunately, I have this document only in English. It's a

21 memo to Helsinki Watch related to an interview at the Red Cross in Zagreb

22 on August 1st, 1991, and the memo itself is dated August 15th of 1991.

23 I'll just read the first few sentences of it and see if you agree. It

24 says:

25 "Yesterday, all Kostajnica was evacuated. Some 2.500 fled to

Page 10978

1 Bosnia and Bosanski Novi. One group turned and started toward Zagreb.

2 There are 156 displaced from Kostajnica in Kutina. Some 400 got to

3 Zagreb. We saw them in the plaza where they had a vigil and booth for

4 collection of money for the displaced. The third part of this group went

5 to Ivanic Grad, a suburb of Zagreb. Now there are 650 displaced people in

6 Zagreb, mostly from Glina and Knin."

7 Does that correspond to the information that you had at that time

8 about displaced persons -- displaced persons, in this case, obviously,

9 Croats, from Kostajnica and Glina?

10 A. No.

11 Q. Thank you.

12 MR. WHITING: Could this document be admitted into evidence,

13 please, Your Honour.

14 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence. May it

15 please be given an exhibit number.

16 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this becomes Exhibit 1017.

17 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much.

18 MR. WHITING: Thank you, Your Honour.

19 Q. Now, you testified on Friday that, based on the elections in 1993,

20 you believe there were 1.200 Croats in Kostajnica in 1993. But in 1994,

21 you'd agree with me that, according to the census -- I'm sorry, 1991,

22 according to the 1991 census, there were 4.295 Croats in Kostajnica. So

23 by 1993, approximately 75 per cent of the Croat population had left

24 Kostajnica; right?

25 A. No, no. I spoke -- please, I spoke about 120 -- 1.200 that had

Page 10979

1 the right to vote. Now you have to figure in all those people who were

2 underage, who did not have the right to vote. So I agree that there were

3 4.000 Croats in Kostajnica before the war and I agree that about 1.200 of

4 them had the right to vote. But I also said that 111 Croats participated

5 in the Territorial Defence of Kostajnica, and they were the ones that took

6 part in the liberation of Kostajnica.

7 Q. Okay. I'm going to get to that in a moment, but this figure of

8 1.200 people, that, you say, is the number of Croats who had the right to

9 vote.

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. But how was that determined that they -- how do you know that this

12 number of people had the right to vote? Was that on some list of Croats

13 who had the right to vote? Or what is that -- where does that number come

14 from?

15 A. That was the number in the electoral rolls that was used at the

16 last election before the war, when Racan won. The Croats voted in

17 accordance with the electoral rolls. Serbs and Croats alike, in fact,

18 voted in accordance with that. Not all of them took their right to vote,

19 but there were 1.200 of them who had the right to vote, and a certain

20 number of them voted, also, in 1993, for the elections into the Serbian

21 Assembly.

22 Q. Okay. So that number, 1.200, actually comes from the election

23 that was held in 1990, when Racan won; correct?

24 A. No. Many more voters participated in that election. I'm talking

25 about 1993, after Kostajnica was liberated, that over 1.200 Croats voted

Page 10980

1 at that election in Kostajnica.

2 Q. Well, now you're saying something different. You said before

3 that -- you said just a moment ago that 1.200 had the right to vote and a

4 certain number of them voted, and now you're saying that 1.200 actually

5 voted. Which is the truth, sir?

6 A. No. There has been a misunderstanding. In the

7 examination-in-chief and now I'm saying the same thing: 1.200 Croats

8 voted in the election. These are the Croats that had the right to vote.

9 But what I'm saying is that the number of Croats that remained in the

10 municipality of Kostajnica was much bigger because, of course, you had the

11 entire families there with children, minors who did not have the right to

12 vote. This is what I'm trying to say. It is not only 1.200 Croats that

13 remained in Kostajnica but more than that.

14 Q. But, sir, even if that is true - and, for the moment, I'm not

15 putting any position on that either way - but even if it's true that 1.200

16 Croats voted in 1993, you're aware, aren't you, that after 1991, the

17 conflict in 1991, in the Serb areas, the Croats who remained were mostly

18 elderly Croats, and the young people with families and the children, they

19 all left. So even if this is true, this is probably the number of Croats

20 that were remaining in the area, because the children were gone; right?

21 A. Well, I would not agree with you fully, but it is true that a

22 certain number of young people went over to the Croatian side to fight for

23 that side. I would agree with you on that.

24 Q. And the figure of 111 Croat TO members participating in the attack

25 on Kostajnica in September of 1991, that is just not true, is it, sir? By

Page 10981

1 September of 1991, the TO forces of the SAO Krajina were staffed,

2 virtually, entirely by Serbs, isn't that true?

3 A. Yes, primarily by Serbs. But this information is correct. I

4 checked it and those lists exist and can be submitted to the Tribunal. If

5 you doubt, you can have the name, the place of origin, the date of birth,

6 for each and every Croat that participated in the Territorial Defence and

7 fought in the Kostajnica area. So this information is 100 per cent true.

8 Q. Okay. Where did this list come from that you are talking about?

9 A. Well, every commander of a unit had a list of the fighters in the

10 unit. Now, the Territorial Defence already had the squads, the platoons,

11 the companies. We did keep the records. How else could we provide these

12 people with weapons, with food, if we didn't have records on them?

13 Q. Okay. But this list is, I take it, not a list that you prepared

14 and not a list that you, yourself, checked. Because this is referring to

15 the TO of Kostajnica and you were in the TO of -- I can't -- Caprag,

16 the -- Sisak.

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. No, not Sisak. Yes, Sisak, Caprag.

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. Forgive me. The list was not one that you prepared or you,

21 yourself, checked; correct?

22 A. I checked it before I came here to the Tribunal, and several

23 times, because I didn't want to find myself in a situation where you would

24 discover that anything that I told you, any fact, was not, in fact, true.

25 So I went to the people in charge of security affairs there and I went,

Page 10982

1 with them, through the information that I presented to you here.

2 Q. But when you say you checked the list, what you mean is you looked

3 at the list again but you did not, yourself, have an opportunity to

4 confirm that those individuals on the list actually participated in the

5 fighting in Kostajnica; correct? That's not something that you were in a

6 position to do.

7 A. Well, sir, I can't understand why you have this level of

8 confidence in my evidence, when I say to you that this information is

9 correct and when this information can be verified, if the Trial Chamber

10 orders us to do so, through Mr. Milovancevic, in writing. So I have

11 absolutely no reason to either enlarge or reduce the figure that I'm now

12 putting here to you. You keep forgetting --

13 Q. Sir, did you give the list to Mr. Milovancevic, or offer it to

14 him?

15 A. No. I handed over to Mr. Milovancevic a list of 611 people who

16 had been slaughtered in Sisak and he never asked me anything about that.

17 So now I would like to ask you to ask me about it.

18 Q. I'm not going to. I'm focused on this list that --

19 A. I knew it.

20 Q. Okay. I am focused on this list of 111. Did you offer that list

21 to Mr. Milovancevic? Did you tell him about it and tell him that that

22 list existed?

23 A. I didn't cover this topic with Mr. Milovancevic at all, as far as

24 I can remember. I thought that this list, with the 611 people who had

25 been slaughtered, that this was much more relevant than the list of 111

Page 10983

1 people who participated in the struggle to liberate their own town.

2 Perhaps this was a misjudgement on my part.

3 Q. No, sir. Let's please -- I know you really want to talk about

4 that list of 611 people. My questions about the 111 people. In the

5 summary of the evidence that you were going to give that was provided by

6 Defence, it talks about these 111 Croats who were supposedly members of

7 the TO. So having heard that, do you now remember that, in fact, you did

8 talk about that with Mr. Milovancevic, before your testimony here?

9 A. It is possible that we actually discussed it, because I had a

10 brief summary of my evidence. It's possible that it was mentioned, but I

11 had no reason to think that you would question the validity of my

12 statement, my evidence.

13 Q. Okay. I'm going to move on to another topic. You testified, and

14 this is at 10888 of your testimony from Friday, that there were

15 some "self-styled hooligans in Banija in 1991," but you explicitly wanted

16 to stress that they had nothing to do with the legal authorities. Do you

17 remember that testimony from Friday, sir, about the hooligans?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. One of the two examples you gave was a group led by Stevo

20 Borojevic, and you said that these groups were violent and would terrorise

21 the population. Do you remember that testimony, sir?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. In fact, Stevo Borojevic was a commander of a special unit in

24 Kostajnica and was under Milan Martic's command in September of 1991;

25 correct, sir?

Page 10984

1 A. No.

2 Q. Let's look, please --

3 A. Stevo Borojevic was under nobody's command.

4 Q. Well, let's look at document 600 in evidence in our case, please.

5 This is a document to the Ministry of the Interior of the SAO Krajina on

6 the 30th of September, 1991. Do you see that, sir?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. And it's a special police unit in Kostajnica, and let's -- if we

9 could scroll down to the bottom of the page, it's from Stevo Borojevic.

10 If we could look now at the second paragraph of this document, it says:

11 "This unit provides training to young people with its instructors

12 who had undergone the training in Golubic. This is the only unit in this

13 area that has remained under your command, while all other units have been

14 taken over by the JNA and the TO."

15 So, in fact, Mr. Borojevic, Stevo Borojevic, was in command of the

16 special police unit in Kostajnica and he was under Milan Martic's command;

17 right?

18 A. No, no. I know Stevo Borojevic personally. He was at Samarica

19 for a while. He was born in the village of Borojevici. He had his

20 headquarters in the village of Komogovina, and that's where he gathered a

21 number of -- well, 30, maybe 40 lads, who were a little bit -- not very

22 well-behaved. And his deputy actually killed him. He was from Bosnia.

23 And, in fact, they were under nobody's command. This is why they ended

24 the way they did. They simply killed each other. They are all dead now.

25 Q. Sir, is it your position that Stevo Borojevic was never under

Page 10985

1 Milan Martic's command?

2 A. As far as I know, no.

3 Q. Okay.

4 MR. WHITING: Could we look, please, at Exhibit 601, then.

5 Q. Now, this is an order dated the 13th of January, 1992, from the

6 Ministry of the Interior, and if we could scroll right down to the bottom,

7 please, you'll see that it's from Milan Martic. It says -- it is an

8 order from Milan Martic about the insignia of the SAO Krajina Police, and

9 you'll see in the second paragraph there, it says: "Stevo Borojevic,

10 Commander of the Unit for Special Purposes of the Kostajnica Municipal

11 Assembly, is authorised to carry out/execute this order."

12 Do you still say that Stevo Borojevic was not under Milan

13 Martic's -- was never under Milan Martic's command?

14 A. I've already told you, as far as I know, he was not under Milan

15 Martic's command.

16 Q. Now that you see this document, would you agree with me that you

17 don't really know what the situation was with Stevo Borojevic; correct?

18 You don't really know whose command he was under.

19 A. Now, whether at the beginning, when this unit was established,

20 whether he was really loyal to the Ministry of the Interior of Krajina, it

21 is possible that it was so. I'm talking about the activities of this

22 group after they moved to the village of Komogovina, when they set up

23 their own headquarters, where they mistreated people, took away their

24 weapons and did all this stuff that they actually did on the ground.

25 Q. But you'd agree with me, wouldn't you, from the previous document

Page 10986

1 that in September as --

2 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Mr. Milovancevic.

3 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the way that my

4 learned colleague is conducting his examination with regard to this

5 document is designed to mislead the witness. The first paragraph is being

6 skipped.

7 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Whiting.

8 MR. WHITING: Your Honour, if the Defence counsel wants to ask

9 about the first paragraph -- this document is in evidence. If he wants to

10 ask about the first paragraph in re-direct, that's fine. I'm focussed on

11 the fact that the command is given to Stevo Borojevic. That's my only

12 interest in this document.

13 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

14 Any response, Mr. Milovancevic?

15 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] This document pertains to

16 Martic's order to remove -- this is what it says in the document. It says

17 here what it is all about.

18 JUDGE MOLOTO: Please respond to the objection -- to the answer by

19 the opposite side. We know --

20 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] I will maintain my objection.

21 JUDGE MOLOTO: Okay. Fine. The objection is overruled.

22 MR. WHITING: Thank you, Your Honour.

23 Q. Now, before the objection occurred, when you said, "Now, whether

24 at the beginning, when this unit was established, whether he was really

25 loyal to the Ministry of the Interior of Krajina, it is possible that it

Page 10987

1 was so," you would agree with me, would you not, from the previous

2 document, Exhibit 600, that in September of 1991, he was very loyal to

3 Milan Martic; correct?

4 A. I wouldn't be sure of that.

5 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Mr. Whiting, are you referring to 601 or to 600?

6 MR. WHITING: To 600, Your Honour.

7 Q. So you're not sure. You don't know.

8 A. No, no.

9 Q. Okay. Now, you testified about Milan Martic arriving to the area

10 by helicopter. It's at 10890. Isn't it true, sir, that Milan Martic came

11 by helicopter in November of 1991 to Zivaja, where the JNA was located,

12 because the SAO Krajina Police in the area was in a dispute with the

13 president of the Kostajnica municipality, Branko Mitrovic? And, in

14 addition, the military police of the JNA in Zivaja, under Slobodan

15 Borojevic, was seeking to establish control, so Milan Martic came because

16 of that. And members of the SAO Krajina Police in the area were dismissed

17 at that time as a result of those disputes. Isn't that true, sir?

18 A. No. Again, I would object, Mr. Prosecutor. On several occasions,

19 I've stated, and I still claim, that at the time when Kostajnica was

20 liberated, there was no police station, and you are now repeating and

21 insisting on the fact that the police existed there. No, it didn't,

22 because all the police was part of the Territorial Defence. And it was a

23 few days after the liberation of Kostajnica, as far as I know, it was then

24 that Mr. Milan Martic, at the request of some people from the municipality

25 and from the Territorial Defence, arrived in the area by helicopter and

Page 10988

1 gave the authority to the army and Captain Borojevic to take over the

2 bridge in Dubica that later on the Croats blew up, and that he gave them

3 the authority to take over the entire power and to restore order in the

4 area, because a lot of Croats had remained there and they were under the

5 threat of liquidation from precisely such groups that had already started

6 ill-treating people.

7 Q. So your memory is that this occurred a few days after the

8 liberation of Kostajnica, which was on the 12th of September, 1991.

9 A. That's correct.

10 Q. But the document you looked at with Defence counsel, which is

11 Exhibit 602, that pertains to Slobodan Borojevic taking over functions in

12 the Dubica area is dated the 26th of November 1991.

13 A. It is possible that I am mistaken about dates, but I'm certainly

14 not mistaken about the event itself.

15 Q. But, sir, you'd agree with me that it's just not possible that

16 from the 12th of September, 1991, until the 26th of November, 1991, that

17 there was no police functioning in the Serb-controlled areas of Dubica and

18 Bacin, those areas; that those areas were without any SAO Krajina Police.

19 That's just not possible, is it, sir?

20 A. Not according to you. According to me, it is possible, because

21 you keep forgetting that at the time Kostajnica was under the control of

22 the Croatian forces and the Territorial Defence was headquartered in

23 Velesnja, and all the police officers were part of the Territorial

24 Defence. Where would that police have been in a city that was occupied,

25 and what would they have been doing?

Page 10989

1 Q. Sir, I think you'll agree with me that there was -- by September

2 of 1991, the SAO Krajina Police existed in Dvor, in Glina, in Kostajnica,

3 in all of those areas. Kostajnica and the area of Dubica and Bacin were

4 liberated, to use your term, on the 12th of September, 1991. Are you

5 saying that from the 12th of September, 1991, until the 26th of November,

6 1991, the SAO Krajina Police did not function in the areas -- in those

7 areas of Kostajnica, Dubica, Bacin; that those were left completely

8 without any police from the Krajina?

9 A. This is precisely what I'm saying. During that period of time,

10 there was no police in the area and the police --

11 Q. This is an area which you testified was very close to the front

12 line, that was manned by the Territorial Defence. The JNA was present in

13 Zivaja, which is some 15 kilometres from Dubica. You're saying, despite

14 this military presence in this area, they let the area be completely

15 uncontrolled by police? That's really your testimony, sir?

16 A. Well, I'm saying what I'm saying. I'm saying that in Kostajnica,

17 the police was formed in January 1992, and that Petar Vuruna, the police

18 officer from Zagreb, was appointed the chief of that police. That was the

19 first police. I believe before him there was somebody else called

20 Vujakovic, or I don't know. But this was only for a brief period of time,

21 and then he went to Sas, because at the time a substation or a department

22 of the police had been established in Sas, in order to control that remote

23 area, in order to establish authorities there.

24 Q. Sir, the truth is that the police of the SAO Krajina functioned in

25 September, October, November, in Kostajnica, in Dubica, in Bacin, in all

Page 10990

1 of that area controlled by Serb forces, and that in November of 1991, as a

2 result of a dispute that occurred with the police, the SAO Krajina Police

3 in Dubica, many of them were dismissed and thereafter replaced. That's,

4 in fact, what happened, isn't it, sir? Or do you not know, since this was

5 not actually your municipality?

6 A. Well, if you were there, and I wasn't, then I suppose what you are

7 saying is the truth. What I am telling you is my knowledge of something

8 that I checked before I arrived here. If I was not sure about things, I

9 asked people who were in the area at the time. I consulted some people

10 prior to my arrival here.

11 Q. Okay. So, in fact, your testimony here today is not -- on Friday

12 and today is not based on your own knowledge but based on information that

13 you've gathered from others; correct?

14 A. With the permission of the Trial Chamber, I will start getting

15 angry. This is not what I said. I stand by what I said. Why are you

16 putting words in my mouth? I simply told you that I adhere by my

17 statement. Why are you going over the same grounds again and again? You

18 keep on asking me questions that I've already answered. Why is that?

19 Q. Sir, please don't become angry. I really don't want you to become

20 angry. I was just quoting back your own words, which you said: "If I was

21 not sure about things, I asked people who were in the area at the time. I

22 consulted some people prior to my arrival here." So isn't it, in fact,

23 the case that your testimony here is based not just on your own

24 information but information you've gathered from other people? Isn't that

25 true? Isn't that what you said?

Page 10991

1 A. Yes. Yes, sir, I did, but please allow me. This happened --

2 please.

3 Q. Sir --

4 A. Please.

5 Q. You've answered --

6 A. Please, please, please, no. Your Honour, could I please answer?

7 This happened -- please.

8 Q. Sir --

9 A. This happened ten years ago. And this is what I knew ten years

10 ago. And I appear before this Trial Chamber to tell the truth. Then I

11 had to check what happened ten years ago. Are you trying to tell me that

12 you know exactly what happened ten years ago without checking it? Why

13 would I have any reason? I'm here to tell the truth. I have sworn to

14 tell the truth. And please do not for a moment start thinking that I want

15 to say something that did not really happen on the ground.

16 And thank you, Your Honours, for allowing me to say this.

17 JUDGE MOLOTO: It's precisely because these things happened ten

18 years ago and you don't remember them all, that's why you went and checked

19 with other people. Therefore, what you are telling this Tribunal today is

20 not based on your knowledge only but it is based also on what you were

21 told by other people. Is that not so? What is so difficult in just

22 admitting to that? That's the question that you are being asked. Your

23 testimony is based on both your knowledge and what you were told by other

24 people. There is no need for you to get angry. The Prosecutor gets that

25 from you.

Page 10992

1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

2 MR. WHITING: Thank you, Your Honour.

3 Q. I'm going to move on to another topic very briefly. You

4 testified - this is at 10860 to 61 - that at the end of 1990, the Croatian

5 police sought to move reserve police weapons from Petrinja to Sisak. The

6 movement of the weapons was intercepted by the SDS and the weapons were

7 brought back to Petrinja, and then the Croatian police conducted searches

8 in order to locate these weapons which had been stolen by members of the

9 SDS. Did I understand your testimony correctly, sir?

10 A. No, you didn't. Those weapons that were intercepted were returned

11 to the police station, and as far as I know, those weapons were returned

12 completely to the police station. However, on the following day, the

13 so-called police officers came from Zagreb, 300 of them, and they started

14 searching houses with bayonets, with Kalashnikovs. They would pierce

15 cushions. They started arresting people; a hundred people were arrested

16 in Petrinja, and some of them spent as long as three months in various

17 prisons. Those were honourable people, people who enjoyed reputation in

18 the town.

19 Q. Isn't, in fact, what happened that, after the weapons were

20 returned to Petrinja, the police station was broken into and some of the

21 weapons were stolen? Isn't that, in fact, what happened?

22 A. I believe that some of the weapons were but very, very few.

23 You're right there.

24 Q. And the searches and the arrests that you described, the piercing

25 of cushions and so forth, that was in relation to trying to locate those

Page 10993

1 weapons that had been stolen; right?

2 A. No, not only in relation with the weapons. This was done

3 indiscriminately. The searches were done indiscriminately, from one house

4 to another, and irrespective of the house and who was living in it, the

5 same things happened in them.

6 Q. Now, you testified at page 10915 that, in 1991, "Croatian

7 authorities wanted to turn the SDS into an extremist political party so as

8 to be a counterweight of the then ruling Croatian extremist parties to

9 provide justification for the then secessionists' endeavours of the

10 Croatian leadership." Is that your testimony? Do you remember that?

11 A. Yes. You quoted me well.

12 Q. Are you saying there, then, that the SDS was, in fact, an

13 extremist party?

14 A. It wasn't. Not a chance. No. Please allow me. Please allow me.

15 Q. Sir, you've answered the question and we have very limited time.

16 So, in other words, this plan of the Croatian extremist parties to make

17 the SDS extreme failed, in your view; is that your testimony?

18 A. It failed; you're right.

19 Q. I just want to ask you briefly about your testimony concerning

20 what occurred on the 2nd of August, 1995. You testified that Milan Babic

21 had a meeting with Peter Galbraith, the Ambassador to Croatia from the

22 United States, from 8 to 11 at night, on the 2nd of August, 1995, and then

23 Milan Babic came --

24 A. Milan Babic, yes.

25 Q. Right. That's what I said, and I hope that was interpreted.

Page 10994

1 Milan Babic had the meeting, and then after the meeting was over, he came

2 back and he recounted for you what must have been very dramatic words from

3 Peter Galbraith. It must have been quite a dramatic moment; correct?

4 A. Yes, it was.

5 Q. And you testified that you communicated through the night, so the

6 night from August 2nd to August 3rd, with the delegation in Geneva and

7 that it was agreed -- and they must have found these words quite dramatic

8 as well, when they heard them; correct? When they heard those words from

9 Peter Galbraith.

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. And it was agreed that whatever request was made would be

12 accepted.

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. In fact, though, on the 3rd of August, 1995 - and this is a

15 reference to Exhibit 391, Your Honours - Mr. Stoltenberg reported from

16 Geneva that -- so the following day, the 3rd of August, he reported that

17 the RSK delegation in Geneva had not changed its position and had not

18 received any new instructions. Can you explain that, sir?

19 A. I'm not familiar with Mr. Stoltenberg's words. What I know is

20 this: We received feedback information from our negotiators, and I told

21 you who they were at that time. They told us that they had accepted all

22 the conditions that were asked from them. The first one was to continue

23 negotiations at Pleso the following Thursday, regarding the opening of the

24 Lika railway, the political and military issues, and so on and so forth.

25 This is what I learned during that night. And I believe that before me

Page 10995

1 you had witnesses who were members of that delegation, and I don't see any

2 thing in dispute here at all.

3 Q. Okay. When you say you learned that during that night, which

4 night are you talking about? The night from August 3rd to August 4th?

5 A. Well, I believe that this was from August 2nd to August 3rd. In

6 any case, this was on the eve of the attack against Krajina, the night

7 before.

8 Q. Okay.

9 MR. WHITING: Could we look at another document. It's 04179337.

10 Q. Sir, this is a document recounting a meeting that was held on the

11 26th of February, 1993, with some municipal leaders or representatives

12 from Banija and Kordun and Milan -- Slobodan Milosevic and Nikola

13 Sainovic. And if you see in the second paragraph, your name is mentioned

14 from Caprag, Nikola Dobrijevic. Do you recall this meeting?

15 A. Of course I do.

16 Q. And are you familiar with this statement that was issued?

17 A. I didn't read this statement. However, I'm familiar with the

18 details of the organisation of this meeting, because I was in charge of

19 all that. So whatever you want to know, I can provide you with quite a

20 lot of detail.

21 Q. Sir, do you see that the statement is issued in your name and

22 other people's names? It says -- and if we can look at the last page,

23 it's signed by you.

24 MR. WHITING: If we could go to the last page of the document,

25 please.

Page 10996

1 Q. I take it -- I apologise, your name --

2 A. My signature is not there.

3 Q. You're absolutely correct. In the English translation it

4 indicates that your signature is there, but we can see very well that you

5 did not, in fact, sign it. So did you never read -- you never read this

6 document?

7 A. No, I didn't.

8 MR. WHITING: Could we go back to the first page.

9 Q. After the word "statement" there, I just want -- if you could just

10 read those three paragraphs. You can read them to yourself.

11 Is that an accurate account of what occurred at that meeting?

12 A. This is a very superficial account. I don't know who the author

13 of this is.

14 Q. Well, we saw that it was signed by everybody but you. The

15 question is not whether it's superficial or detailed; the question is, is

16 it accurate?

17 A. Partly accurate, because --

18 Q. Can you please identify what's not accurate. In those paragraphs,

19 what's not accurate? If it's partly accurate, what is not accurate?

20 A. Well, please allow me, sir. This is a delegation from two regions

21 talking to the president and the prime minister of a state. Would you

22 please allow me to say a few words about all this.

23 The meeting was initiated in order to improve the situation with

24 the supply and the functioning of the municipalities in Banija and

25 Kordun. The war was over. The UNPROFOR came. However, people did not

Page 10997

1 have any means to live, and people, able-bodied men especially, started

2 leaving the area. This is why we went to President Milosevic to ask for

3 assistance from Serbia, economic or any other assistance, in order to

4 improve the situation on ground.

5 After that meeting, I went to Knin and I reported about the

6 meeting to Mr. Milan Martic. I reported to him about the meeting in great

7 detail.

8 JUDGE MOLOTO: Sir, thank you for that. Can you tell us what is

9 inaccurate about this document -- in this document?

10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I believe that putting an emphasis

11 on smuggling, illegal trade, and so on and so forth. There were such

12 things in every war. In this particular case, this was not such a strong

13 fact in order to find its place in such a serious statement.

14 JUDGE MOLOTO: Sir, is that statement inaccurate or is it just

15 over-emphasised? You're saying "putting an emphasis." I don't know where

16 the emphasis is put, because nothing is underlined, nothing is

17 emphasised. Words are just written there. Now, just point to that which

18 is inaccurate, not that which is over-emphasised.

19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Let me put it this way: This is all

20 partially accurate, but the words that were used are not adequate, to put

21 it this way. So everything is in accurate but not described in adequate

22 words.

23 JUDGE MOLOTO: You see, now you're saying two things. You said

24 this is all partially accurate and then you say, "So everything is

25 accurate but not described in adequate words." Just tell us, sir, which

Page 10998

1 part -- just tell us the part that, according to you, is inaccurate.

2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. President, what I'm saying is

3 that there has been an over-emphasis on the smuggling and on illegal

4 trade. These things existed but they were not such a big problem. The

5 economy, the organisation, and the way of life were more of a problem than

6 smuggling and illegal trade.

7 JUDGE MOLOTO: Therefore, this document is accurate, all of it.

8 All that you read is accurate, but it just doesn't talk about other things

9 that you would have preferred were mentioned.

10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] One could put it that way, yes.

11 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.

12 MR. WHITING: Thank you, Your Honour.

13 JUDGE MOLOTO: So, then, don't describe it as inaccurate. We have

14 taken 15 minutes' time to sort that little point out, when you knew that

15 the document is accurate.

16 MR. WHITING: Thank you, Your Honour. Could this document be

17 admitted into evidence, please.

18 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence. May it

19 please be given an exhibit number.

20 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this becomes Exhibit 1018.

21 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

22 MR. WHITING: Your Honour, I think it's a convenient time, and I

23 can assure Your Honours that I have about -- literally about three minutes

24 more after the break, and then I'll be completed.

25 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

Page 10999

1 Court adjourned. We'll come back at a quarter to 6.00.

2 --- Recess taken at 5.15 p.m.

3 --- On resuming at 5.45 p.m.

4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Mr. Whiting.

5 MR. WHITING: Thank you, Your Honour.

6 Could we look at Exhibit 1015, please. This is the ...

7 Q. Sir, this was the transcript or the partial transcript of the --

8 if we could go to page 4 -- the fourth page in the excerpt in B/C/S and

9 the fifth page in the English. This is that transcript of the meeting

10 with Mr. Mesic and Mr. Tudjman and other people on the 12th of November

11 1991. Do you remember testifying about this, sir, on Friday?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. And I would just like to read on from where you stopped with the

14 Defence counsel. You stopped with this sentence, and see if you can

15 locate it. I think if we scroll down just a little bit, it's about a

16 third of the way on the English, and I'm not exactly -- I think it's now

17 on the screen in the B/C/S, but I'm note sure. You stopped with this

18 sentence -- it's Mr. Mesic talking, and he says: "Milosevic said that

19 there is no inch of the land that he demands, which is supposed to be some

20 kind of great Serbia, that he is interested only in the rights of Serbs in

21 Croatia." Do you see that on the screen in front of you?

22 A. Yes, yes.

23 Q. And that's where you stopped with Defence counsel. I just want to

24 read the next three paragraphs, please, or next few sentences -- really,

25 three sentences. Mr. Mesic says: "I told him --" and he is speaking to

Page 11000

1 Mr. Andreotti there, or he's recounting his conversation with Mr.

2 Andreotti, and he says: "I told him, 'Listen, sir, if you have been

3 following Milosevic a bit, he was always talking, his mouth was full of

4 Serbia and the rights of Serbs until a few months ago. If you follow what

5 he is saying now, he only speaks of Yugoslavia and the continuance of

6 Yugoslavia. In other words, he wishes to deceive you. He wants the

7 Greater Serbia, but he talks about Yugoslavia, because now he would like

8 to create Yugoslavia out of the remains. And why is the army at his

9 side?'"

10 And that's true, sir, isn't it, that Mr. Milosevic wanted the

11 Greater Serbia but he talked about Yugoslavia; right?

12 A. This is absolutely untrue. And thank you very much for asking me

13 this question. Had Mr. Milosevic wanted Greater Serbia, then, in 1991 and

14 in 1992, we could have done whatever we wanted, so to speak, in Croatia,

15 because you have to remember that at that time most of the army's assets

16 had already withdrawn from Croatia; they were in the territory of the

17 Republic of Serbian Krajina and the Territorial Defence had already at

18 that time subordinated to the JNA. At that time we were already about to

19 enter Sisak, Kozibrod, Karlovac, Gospic. We could have taken Sisak in

20 four hours, flat, had this been what we had wanted, had it been the case

21 that Serbia had attacked Croatia. We had a tank unit in Petrinja, the

22 17th Brigade in Gradusa, and at that time, Sisak was easy prey for them.

23 This is just evidence that this was not about Greater Serbia; this

24 was about keeping people alive, saving people's lives, saving and

25 maintaining the rights of Serbs in their territories that they had

Page 11001

1 historical claim to.

2 Q. Sir, in that last answer, you said: "... we could have done

3 whatever we wanted, so to speak, in Croatia ..." Who is "we" in that

4 sentence?

5 A. I'm now talking about the units that were stationed at the time

6 when Croatia attacked the barracks and when the army pulled out of

7 Croatia, mostly to the areas in the Republic of Serbian Krajina, and about

8 the Territorial Defence of the Serbian Krajina. At that time, in military

9 and technical terms, we were much stronger than Croatia, and had it been

10 in our interests to attack Croatia, we could have done that. And now we

11 are talking about the state of Croatia that was founded on the genocide of

12 the Serbian people. They expelled 600.000 people, Serbs, and this is why

13 I'm bothered by the double standards being employed here.

14 Q. Okay. I don't want to go down that road. Just one last

15 question. Isn't it true that, by the end of 1991, Serb forces, including

16 the -- in which I include the JNA, the Territorial Defence of the SAO

17 Krajina, and the police, had taken control of all of the Serb areas in

18 Croatia? And from that -- and from that, the RSK was born. Isn't that

19 true, sir?

20 A. Yes, but you are forgetting one fact: Before that, Serbs had been

21 removed from the constitution. Before that, only cultural autonomy was

22 sought, and Croats refused to accept any of it.

23 Q. Thank you. You've answered my question. Thank you.

24 MR. WHITING: I have no further questions. Thank you, Your

25 Honour.

Page 11002

1 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you, Mr. Whiting.

2 Mr. Milovancevic, just before you start, let me mention to you

3 that we must finish with this witness today and you must still have your

4 five minutes with the Court, because tomorrow we are doing a videolink.

5 Thank you. You may proceed.

6 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

7 Re-examination by Mr. Milovancevic:

8 Q. [Interpretation] Witness, I will now ask you some questions that

9 relate to the cross-examination by the Prosecutor.

10 Do you remember a document of the command of the 5th Corps of the

11 10th of July, 1991, mentioning the villages of Zamlaca, Struga, Cukur,

12 Marticevci, that we talked about at length? Do you remember that?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. Before we bring this document to the screen - so this would be

15 Exhibit 1016; could it be brought on the screen - could you please tell

16 me, before that, who had the majority -- which ethnic group had the

17 majority in the village of Kuljani mentioned in this report?

18 A. It was a majority Croatian population.

19 Q. Which ethnic group was in the majority in the village of Kozibrod,

20 mentioned on page 2?

21 A. The majority was the Croatian population, and we had a very strong

22 station there. Before the war, there was no police station there, yet

23 when Croatia took those police measures, as they called them, against

24 Banija, a strong police station, manned by several hundreds of MUP people,

25 as called them, was located in Kozibrod, because that was precisely what

Page 11003

1 they wanted. They wanted to cut off Banija's lines of supply from Bosnia

2 and the rest of Yugoslavia.

3 Q. Thank you. And which ethnic group was in the majority in the

4 village of Volinja?

5 A. I think that it was a mixed group, but Croats were in the

6 majority.

7 Q. What about the village of Divusa? What was the majority

8 population there?

9 A. I think that in Divusa it was half/half, but I'm not sure.

10 Q. Thank you. What about the village of Uncani?

11 A. Uncani had the majority Serb population.

12 Q. What about the village of Struga?

13 A. Struga was a Croatian village.

14 Q. So when you say a Croatian village, what do you mean?

15 A. I mean that it had a majority Croatian population.

16 Q. In the villages of Struga and Cukur, which ethnic group had the

17 majority?

18 A. In Cukur, it was the Serb population that was in the majority.

19 Q. And what about Zamlaca?

20 A. In Zamlaca, Croats were the majority, but there were Serbs there,

21 too.

22 Q. Thank you.

23 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Could we now look at this

24 document. Could we just scroll up a little bit so that we see the body of

25 the text. Thank you.

Page 11004

1 Q. The first sentence, can you read it? It says that the

2 intelligence department submits the available information about the

3 deployment and activities of Croatian MUP units in order to update the

4 working maps. Do you see this here in the first sentence?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. And the text goes on to say that the bridge on the River Una, in

7 Kostajnica, has been secured with two bunkers protected by sandbags. So

8 now we are listing the Croatian MUP units and what they hold. The bridge

9 on the Una River and the two bunkers protected by sandbags, do you see

10 that?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. The next sentence reads: "An identical bunker has been set up in

13 front of the Central Hotel." Do you see that?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. Where is this Central Hotel?

16 A. It is in the Kostajnica area but on the very bank of the River

17 Una, in the direction of Dubica.

18 Q. So we have this following information about this Central Hotel:

19 There is a light machine-gun emplacement at the belfry of the

20 St. Anthony's church, with one observer and one sniper. Can you tell us,

21 the church of St. Anthony, what religion is it?

22 A. That would be the Roman Catholic Church, as you can see from the

23 very name.

24 Q. In paragraph 4, it says: "The gas station in Kostajnica has been

25 seized from the Croatian MUP." Can you see that?

Page 11005

1 A. Yes.

2 JUDGE MOLOTO: Where are you reading, Mr. Milovancevic?

3 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, this is all on

4 page 1 of this document, in B/C/S. We are talking about document 1016.

5 So we are moving on from the bunker in front of the Central Hotel and then

6 the church of St. Anthony, and then I skipped two paragraphs and then we

7 go to the gas station. So I'm just going from the beginning of the

8 document downwards, to see what's listed there.

9 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, but I don't see the gas station, I'm sorry.

10 MR. WHITING: Your Honour, it's "filling station." It's the third

11 line up from -- third paragraph up from the bottom of the first page.

12 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you. Okay. Thank you. I'm with you now.

13 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. Whiting.

14 Q. Then it says: "The Djed elevation near Kostajnica has about 150

15 armed MUP personnel."

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. Do you know where this elevation is located?

18 A. This is not an elevation; this is a hill, in fact, which actually

19 dominates the entire area of Kostajnica.

20 Q. Thank you very much.

21 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] I would like to remind the

22 Trial Chamber that, during our site visit, this is where we had lunch, in

23 the wooden building on top.

24 Q. And then it says, as follows: "In Hrvatska Kostajnica, according

25 to our assessment, there is about 300 Croatian MUP members stationed full

Page 11006

1 time, about 60 members of the National Guards Corps, and about 400 reserve

2 police. Most of them are billeted in the high school there." Do you see

3 this?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. Does this information tally with what you knew at the time to be

6 true?

7 A. Well, there are more people mentioned here than we assessed at the

8 time.

9 Q. Thank you. Then it says: "In the village of Kuljani, all the

10 yards along the road are fortified with sandbags." And whose village was

11 it? What did you say?

12 A. It was a Croatian village.

13 Q. Then it says further on: "In the village of Kozibrod, there are

14 two bunkers about 150 metres from houses, family houses, and there are

15 also some trenches there --" I would like to apologise to the

16 interpreters. There, you also have dug in the trenches, communication

17 routes, that are about 300 to 400 metres long. Kozibrod is ...?

18 A. It's a Croatian village.

19 Q. Then we have the next village. "At the exit from Kostajnica, in

20 the direction of the village of Volinja, there are bunkers at about a

21 distance of 250 to 300 metres." What did you say? Who inhabited Volinja?

22 A. We said it was a Croatian village with some Serbs.

23 Q. "In the village of Divusa, the main collection point is the

24 church, where there is an observation post and a machine-gun

25 emplacement." Do you know what church is there, in the village of

Page 11007

1 Divusa?

2 A. It's a Croatian Catholic church.

3 Q. I will not go through all this, but let me just put it to you that

4 it says here that the field in the village of Uncani, that mines were laid

5 there, signal and anti-personnel mines, and that there are two platoons of

6 MUP and about 100 MUP personnel in the village of Struga, whereas there

7 are some Marticevci mentioned in the village of Cukur. Do you see this in

8 the document?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. Does this document correspond to the situation that you tried to

11 paint to the Trial Chamber in your testimony?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. Thank you.

14 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] I would now like us to look at

15 a document. In my files I have it as Exhibit 600, and now I would like to

16 ask my learned colleague Mr. Whiting whether this is the document

17 mentioning Borojevic, Stevo Borojevic. I think this is what I have noted

18 down, but I don't want to make a mistake. Can we now look at this

19 document. This is Exhibit 600.

20 Q. Do you remember this document? This is a document about Stevo

21 Borojevic.

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. Do you see the date here?

24 A. It is the 30th of September, 1991.

25 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Can we now scroll up in this

Page 11008

1 document to see the text itself.

2 Q. Can you please look at the third paragraph. The drafter

3 says: "We don't want to be under their command. We want to be directly

4 under your command, where we have been so far." Do you see this part of

5 the text?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. So this person unequivocally states that he considers himself to

8 be under Martic's command.

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. This is his belief. This is what he considers to be the fact.

11 And then he goes on to say: "Please do the following for us," and then

12 four tasks: First, your direct command and tasks; second, legitimacy of

13 the unit in writing; third, authorisation for operation and work; four,

14 certain quantities of equipment, uniforms. Do you see that?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. What I want to know is, what is your interpretation of this

17 information? You see a person here asking for authorisation for work, the

18 legitimacy for his unit in writing, uniforms, yet he claims to be under

19 Martic's command.

20 A. It is quite interesting to see the previous passage.

21 Unfortunately, you stopped taking care of us and we decided to present to

22 you our problems in writing. This is precisely what I have been

23 testifying about.

24 Q. Thank you. You said that you saw that this document was dated the

25 30th of September, 1991.

Page 11009

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. Thank you.

3 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] We can now leave this document

4 aside. Let us now look at document 602. This is Exhibit 602.

5 Q. Not to waste time, this is an order from the Minister of the

6 Interior of Krajina, Martic. This is the document that I showed you,

7 Mr. Dobrijevic. Its date, the date of drafting, is the 26th of November,

8 1991. In this document, Mr. Martic orders, in paragraph 1, that "in

9 accordance with the written and oral agreement with the commander of the

10 Banja Luka Corps," now I will skip some parts, "General Uzelac. Establish

11 authorities in wartime conditions in the area of Dubica, the municipality

12 of Kostajnica, until a regular public security station/police station can

13 be established in Dubica. All the tasks shall be performed by the public

14 security station in Kostajnica, with the assistance of the Banja Luka

15 Corps." Do you see that?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. I showed you also paragraph 4 of this order, where it says

18 that: "All people wearing camouflage uniforms who are not members of the

19 SAO Krajina Police, who do not have appropriate authorised cards or have

20 not been legally appointed in accordance with the appropriate decisions of

21 the Minister of the Interior, are obliged to return their police insignia

22 and to report to the military department in Kostajnica, in order to be

23 assigned to wartime formations of the Yugoslav People's Army." Do you see

24 this, Mr. Dobrijevic?

25 A. Yes. And this is something that I had this little quarrel with

Page 11010

1 Mr. Prosecutor about.

2 Q. You see that Mr. Martic wrote this on the 26th of November, 1991;

3 is that true?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. In accordance with the previous document, he received a letter

6 from Borojevic.

7 A. That was two months ago.

8 Q. Do you remember that the Prosecutor asked you about a document

9 from January 1993 in which Martic orders Borojevic to act in accordance

10 with the order --

11 MR. WHITING: I'm sorry.

12 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation]

13 Q. -- of the unit.

14 MR. WHITING: It may have been interpretation. It's January 1992,

15 that document.

16 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you. This is not

17 misinterpretation. I made a mistake. It was in January 1992. Could you

18 please provide me with the number of that document? I have two or three

19 different numbers written down and I now don't know which one is the

20 correct one, so could you please help me.

21 MR. WHITING: I'm pretty sure it's 601.

22 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you. This is what I

23 noted. Can we please now look at Exhibit 601.

24 Q. You remember that the Prosecutor showed you this document, dated

25 13 January 1993, containing an order. Could you please scroll down. The

Page 11011

1 Prosecution -- the Prosecutor showed you the second paragraph.

2 THE INTERPRETER: If the parties could be asked to make a pause

3 between their questions and answers. If we do that, we won't be making

4 mistakes.

5 JUDGE MOLOTO: Will the parties please make pauses in between your

6 speeches so that the interpreters don't make a mistake. They have just

7 made a mistake. They said January 1993 instead of January 1992. Thank

8 you very much. Let the record show that the document is dated the 13th of

9 January, 1992.

10 You may proceed, Mr. Milovancevic.

11 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation]

12 Q. Do you see this first paragraph in this order in which Mr. Martic

13 says as follows:

14 "I order that all the insignia of the police of the Republic of

15 Serbian Krajina should be removed from the uniforms of the persons who do

16 not belong to the police of Krajina, i.e., that uniforms be taken from the

17 persons who do not belong to the legal military formations of the Republic

18 of Srpska Krajina, i.e., the JNA." Do you see that?

19 A. Yes, but uniforms should be taken from those who do not belong to

20 the police, and you said from those who do belong to the police.

21 Q. Thank you for the correction. I'm wearing a wrong pair of

22 glasses, unfortunately.

23 On the 26th of January -- November -- this is my question: On the

24 26th of November, 1991, Mr. Martic issued this order in order to remove

25 the insignia and uniforms from all those who did not belong to the

Page 11012

1 police.

2 JUDGE MOLOTO: This document is not dated the 26th of November,

3 1991. It is dated the 13th of January, 1992.

4 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, thank you very

5 much. It was my mistake. I was not precise. This is my question to the

6 witness:

7 Q. In the document, in Exhibit 602, bearing the date the 26th of

8 November, 1991, we just saw that Martic issued an order for the uniforms

9 to be taken away from all those who wore them illegally. Do you remember

10 that, Witness?

11 A. Yes, I do.

12 Q. Here, he sends such an order to Stevo Borojevic. Can you see that

13 in the second paragraph?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. In the third paragraph, what does he say about the order? Who

16 should be copied?

17 A. The report, pursuant to this order, should be sent to the Ministry

18 of the Interior of the Republic of Srpska Krajina, to be submitted by the

19 commander of the unit for special purposes of the SAO Kostajnica within 15

20 days.

21 Q. Now that you have seen all these documents, could you please share

22 with us your position about Stevo Borojevic? Did your position change

23 vis-a-vis what you have already told us?

24 A. I said that at the beginning Stevo Borojevic may have been one of

25 those men who were loyal to the police and to the armed forces of the

Page 11013

1 Republic of Srpska Krajina, but later on his behaviour, however, changed.

2 He established his own independent unit and he did not accept anybody's

3 command or control.

4 Q. Thank you very much. In one of these documents, he, himself,

5 Stevo Borojevic, says that he did not want the command of the JNA?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. According to your information, what was the relationship and

8 attitude of Mr. Martic towards those who did not respect control?

9 A. He wanted them to be disarmed and to be subordinated to the

10 command of the JNA, or the Territorial Defence, which was also under the

11 command of the JNA at the time.

12 Q. Thank you. One more question. Do you remember that the

13 Prosecutor asked you about the presence of MUP units in the territory of

14 Dubica, Bacin, Serbian Krajina, and Kostajnica, and that you were also

15 asked whether the suffering of the population in the area had anything to

16 do with their activities? Do you remember that question?

17 A. Yes, I do.

18 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Can we please look at another

19 document which is Exhibit --

20 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Mr. Whiting.

21 MR. WHITING: Thank you, Your Honour. I would object. I didn't

22 ask anything about -- I don't think I asked anything about the suffering

23 of the population in that area, having to do with their activities. I

24 focused my questions, I think, on the presence of the MUP.

25 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Milovancevic.

Page 11014

1 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] My learned friend is right and

2 I will rephrase the question accordingly.

3 Q. The question by the Prosecutor was relative to the alleged

4 presence of the MUP Krajina in Dubica, Bacin, Serbian Krajina and

5 Kostajnica. Do you remember that?

6 A. Yes.

7 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Could we please look at Exhibit

8 290 from the exhibit list; page 2 in B/C/S.

9 Q. This is a document issued by the police administration of Sisak,

10 Department for White Collar Crime, and it is about an interview with Josip

11 Josipovic. The document has been admitted as Exhibit -- actually, as an

12 official note which was drafted on the 1st of April, 1992. Can you see

13 that in the heading of the document?

14 A. Yes, I do.

15 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Can we look at page 2 in

16 B/C/S. I apologise to the Trial Chamber. This is a text that starts in

17 B/C/S, on page 2, and this is in the middle of the second page, listing

18 the names of some individuals. After that, there is a text that I want to

19 show to the witness. This is how I would describe the part of the text

20 that I want to show to the witness. It says here in the official note --

21 MR. WHITING: Objection. This is -- objection on two grounds:

22 First of all, this is about to be leading; secondly, this does not arise

23 out of the cross. This is going to be about specific things that occurred

24 in the area of Dubica and Bacin, according -- you know, and this

25 document's comment on it, but I didn't talk about that, I didn't ask

Page 11015

1 questions about that. And it's leading -- it's going to be leading to put

2 this to him and ask him to comment on it.

3 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Milovancevic.

4 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, my learned friend

5 has raised a number of issues that have to do with the control of MUP

6 Krajina over this area. I want to show the witness a part of the document

7 speaking about who has the control over the area. Nothing else. This is

8 the essence of all the Prosecutor's questions: Who was it who was in

9 control of the entire area? Was it -- on the 1st of April, 1992, the

10 police administration of Sisak had information about that. And I'm going

11 to put my questions to the witness so as not to lead him. I'm not going

12 to put leading questions to my witness.

13 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Whiting.

14 MR. WHITING: Well, Your Honour, it's already leading to have --

15 it's too late. It's already leading. He has him read the thing and the

16 answer is predictable.

17 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] My learned friend -- Your

18 Honour, my learned friend doesn't know what I'm going to read or what I'm

19 going to ask my witness. How can my learned friend know in advance why

20 I'm showing the text to the witness?

21 JUDGE MOLOTO: You are saying it's already leading, Mr. Whiting.

22 In what respect? Can you just refer us to the text.

23 MR. WHITING: He said he wants to read the text that follows the

24 four names, and he says he wants to -- and in the English, that's

25 approximately -- just below the middle of the page on page 2. And then he

Page 11016

1 says he wants to ask him about who had control in this region, a topic

2 which -- in this region of Dubica, a topic which he did not address

3 directly on his direct examination and could have. Having read this, it's

4 already leading, because there is some comment about that here. So he's

5 going to lead him into that answer by having him read this.

6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Let me just read it myself.

7 Mr. Milovancevic, it doesn't look like -- it does look like you're

8 leading the witness, because the question that you said you wanted to put

9 to him, you could put it to him without a document: Do you still stick by

10 your evidence as to who controlled the area?

11 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, the purpose and

12 the objective of my question is to establish why Mr. Martic arrived in the

13 area.

14 JUDGE MOLOTO: I thought you said you want to establish who

15 controlled the area. Now, do you have a different purpose now from who

16 controlled to the question why Mr. Martic --

17 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I cannot avoid

18 the establishment of that fact as well, but the goal of my question is to

19 establish something that my learned friend has already asked the witness.

20 The questions I'm referring to are about the circumstances that brought

21 Mr. Martic to the area, by helicopter.

22 JUDGE MOLOTO: I'll allow the questions.

23 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

24 Q. I'm going to show you part of the text. Momcilo Kovacevic is

25 commander; Stevo Radjan is his deputy. "The control over the area is

Page 11017

1 exercised by local Chetniks who are in conflict with Marticevci. Local

2 Chetniks are responsible for the crimes committed over civilians for

3 plunder, torching, and similar things, whereas the military police are

4 trying to introduce peace and order. When Mile Martic came to the area in

5 November 1991, he was in Zivaja, but he didn't dare come to Dubica. Later

6 on, the military police did take over control. In the meantime, there

7 were several shake-ups in power."

8 I wanted to ask you this: Did you ever hear of Momcilo Kovacevic

9 and Stevo Radjan?

10 A. I didn't hear about Kovacevic and I did hear about Stevo Radjan.

11 Q. Did you mention Stevo Radjan on examination-in-chief?

12 A. Yes. I know he was in control of the bridge in Dubica and I know

13 that he was in charge of one of the renegade groups, so to speak.

14 Q. Thank you.

15 MR. WHITING: I'm sorry --

16 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] I don't have any further

17 questions, Your Honours.

18 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Mr. Whiting.

19 MR. WHITING: If I could just have a moment. I'm wondering if we

20 could be provided a cite from Defence counsel with respect to that last

21 question, whether he mentioned Mr. Radjan in his examination-in-chief.

22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Milovancevic, will you please provide a cite as

23 to where in the evidence of this witness he mentioned Mr. Radjan?

24 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I have not marked

25 it at the moment, but I know, 100 per cent, that the witness did mention

Page 11018

1 that individual at the moment when he spoke about renegade groups and

2 individuals. That was on examination-in-chief. He mentioned Radjan, and

3 that was on the first day of my examination. I apologise, I don't have

4 the indication of the page at the moment.

5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Not only him but also Mr. Japan,

6 Stevo Borojevic, and some others, and I remember this very well.

7 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Milovancevic, can you do us the favour tomorrow

8 to bring us the cite, okay?

9 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours. I

10 will.

11 JUDGE MOLOTO: Now, you also said, Mr. Milovancevic, that you

12 wanted the witness to tell you why Mr. Martic had come, but you haven't

13 asked him that question.

14 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, my learned friend

15 intervened and objected. I apologise.

16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Then you said you have no further questions.

17 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] I don't have any further

18 questions about the control of the situation in the area and what

19 happened. My last question was about the reason for which Mr. Martic

20 came. That will be my last question.

21 Q. If you will allow me, can the witness tell us what, according to

22 him, was the reason for which Mr. Martic came to the area by helicopter in

23 November 1991, which was also recorded by the Croatian police?

24 A. I can do that. As far as I can remember, on the

25 examination-in-chief, I said that Slobodan Borojevic, who was the

Page 11019

1 commander of the unit that was part of the Banja Luka Corps, wanted to

2 leave the area because there was no authority, because there was no

3 control, because of the wilful behaviour of the group that we mentioned.

4 And the assemblymen in the municipality of Kostajnica, Mesinovic Glavas,

5 and some others, had gone to Knin and asked Mr. Milan Martic to help.

6 They asked him to come over there and help establish authorities and order

7 there.

8 I even answered to some additional questions by the honourable

9 Judge Moloto about that subject, and I believe that we have elaborated

10 that topic well and truly.

11 Q. Thank you very much.

12 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] I have finished my

13 re-examination.

14 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much, Mr. Milovancevic.

15 Judge?

16 JUDGE HOEPFEL: No questions, thank you.


18 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: No questions, thank you.

19 Questioned by the Court:

20 JUDGE MOLOTO: Sir, I have just two issues to raise with you; not

21 questions, issues. You just said a few minutes ago that Mr. Martic did

22 not want those who did not respect control to be disarmed and subordinated

23 to the JNA and the Territorial Defence command.

24 A. Yes.

25 JUDGE MOLOTO: And you said Stevo -- what's his surname?

Page 11020

1 A. Borojevic.

2 JUDGE MOLOTO: Borojevic was one such person whom Mr. Martic

3 wouldn't want because he was also disrespectful of control.

4 A. Yes, that is correct.

5 JUDGE MOLOTO: And yet by this order of the 31st of January, 1992,

6 Mr. Martic instructs him to execute the disarming of those who are not

7 respectful of control.

8 A. Yes. Thank you for this question. I said that Stevo Borojevic

9 and his unit, when they first had come to Samarica, as far as I know, he

10 had been extremely --

11 JUDGE MOLOTO: Let me interrupt you. Let me interrupt you. We

12 know what you have told us. I just want you to listen to my questions.

13 You're telling us Mr. Martic did not want people who disrespect control;

14 he wanted them subordinated to the JNA and the Territorial Defence. And

15 I'm saying to you, on the 31st of January 1992, Mr. Martic orders him to

16 do exactly that in his capacity as the commander of the special purposes

17 police unit, not the TO, not the JNA.

18 A. If you're asking for my opinion on this topic, I think this was

19 the last attempt on the part of Mr. Martic to bring Stevo Borojevic and

20 his group under the regular command, to bring them into the regular

21 structure of the Territorial Defence or the police.

22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Don't change the content of that order. You are

23 changing the content of that order. That order is not trying to bring

24 Stevo into any line. That order is saying to him, in his capacity as the

25 commander of the police, special purposes police, he must execute the

Page 11021

1 order to disarm those people who are disrespectful of control. Isn't that

2 what that document says?

3 A. Well, that's not how I understood this document.

4 JUDGE MOLOTO: If you didn't, that's not how you understood that

5 document, let's leave it at that point.

6 Let me ask you the next question. Now, this question you may very

7 well have answered; I may have forgotten. Where do you stay, sir?

8 A. In Belgrade.

9 JUDGE MOLOTO: How long have you been staying in Belgrade? Since

10 when?

11 A. Since Operation Storm, the fall of the Republic of Serbian

12 Krajina.

13 JUDGE MOLOTO: Do you ever go back to the Krajina?

14 A. No. No, I have not gone back to Krajina, because as early as in

15 1992, I was indicted for war crimes in Croatia.

16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Where are the records of what happened in the

17 Krajina kept?

18 A. Well, the records are not kept any place specific. Individuals,

19 individual persons, hold some parts of it, and I, as a member of the

20 Republic of Serbian Krajina government in exile, we actually hold most of

21 the records that you're referring to now.

22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Now, when you say they are kept by individual

23 people, I'm not quite sure I understand you. How do you know who is

24 keeping what?

25 A. Well, some important documents remained behind after Operation

Page 11022

1 Storm and some presidents of municipalities, people employed in the

2 administration, and so on, they managed to salvage some of the records and

3 they keep it. This has not been organised yet.

4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Please answer my question very directly. You said

5 today, at page 49, lines 17 to 25: "I checked it before I came here to

6 the Tribunal, and several times, because I didn't want to find myself in a

7 situation where you would discover that anything that I told you, any

8 fact, was not, in fact, true. So I went to the people in charge of

9 security affairs there and I went with them, through the information, that

10 I presented to you here."

11 Who are the people in charge of security affairs there that you

12 went to, and where is "there"?

13 A. Well, all those people mostly live in Serbia, and I went to those

14 people that I knew had security functions in the local units. So we are

15 talking about people dealing with security affairs at the time when the

16 Republic of Serbian Krajina existed and at the time when those units were

17 legal units of the army of the Republic of Serbian Krajina.

18 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please, Your Honour.

19 JUDGE MOLOTO: Who specifically did you go to to check?

20 A. Well, I don't know whether it is relevant to give you the names.

21 I don't know how some of these people would react if I mentioned their

22 names. If you think that this is important, I can perhaps do it in closed

23 session. But I don't really think that these names are relevant. These

24 would mostly be people who have these documents in their possession.

25 JUDGE MOLOTO: Relevance is determined by the Bench, okay? But if

Page 11023

1 you say you don't -- you feel uncomfortable about giving the names, that's

2 fine. You don't have to tell us the names. But relevance is determined

3 by this Bench, not you.

4 That is all. That concludes the questions by the Bench.

5 Any questions arising, Mr. Milovancevic?

6 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] No, Your Honour. Thank you

7 very much.

8 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Whiting.

9 MR. WHITING: Just one, Your Honour.

10 Further Cross-examination by Mr. Whiting:

11 Q. Sir, you stated that you're a member of the Republic of Serbian

12 Krajina government in exile. What is your position in that government in

13 exile?

14 A. Well, I'm a member of the cabinet. The government was set up in

15 such a way that every region is represented by one representative who is

16 then titled minister, and then he has his deputies. It would be a

17 minister without a portfolio. I'm the deputy minister for Banija.

18 Q. Who is the president of that government in exile?

19 A. The president is Milorad Buha.

20 Q. Not Milan Martic?

21 A. Milan Martic is still the President of the Republic of Serbian

22 Krajina, as far as I know. The president of the government, the Prime

23 Minister, that was Milan Babic.

24 Q. Thank you.

25 MR. WHITING: I have no further questions. Thank you.

Page 11024

1 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

2 Sir, that brings us to the end of your testimony. Thank you very

3 much for taking the time off to come and testify at the Tribunal. You are

4 now excused. You may stand down. Once again, thank you for your time.

5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.

6 [The witness withdrew]

7 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Milovancevic, you asked for five minutes.

8 Shall we leave at 20 to?

9 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Well, yes, since we don't have

10 another witness and tomorrow we have the videolink testimony. I will not

11 keep you long.

12 The reason why I asked the permission to address you is the same

13 as the military expert issue. Tomorrow, we will hear our expert,

14 Professor Smilja Avramov. As the Defence team, we now have the same -- we

15 are now in the same position with regards to the military expert's

16 report.

17 Although this expert's report, drafted by Professor Avramov, as

18 the most eminent Yugoslav expert for international law and a person who

19 has chaired a number of institutions, even international institutions,

20 dealing with international law, although this report has only 15 pages,

21 some parts of the text have been deleted from it. This deletion renders

22 us unable to deal with some issues that the Prosecution has dealt with in

23 the course of its case.

24 We have analysed UN Security Council resolutions, reports by the

25 Secretary-General of the United Nations and the General Assembly from

Page 11025

1 1991, a text about the premature recognition of Croatia and Slovenia, and

2 all those parts have simply been deleted from our expert's report.

3 The Prosecutor called evidence about reports filed by the ECMM,

4 acting as a mediator in the Yugoslav crisis, and presented evidence on the

5 basis of what their staff did on the ground in the former Yugoslavia, yet

6 texts that pertain to the mediation of the European Union in this respect

7 have been deleted from our report.

8 So we believe, Your Honours, that this is, in fact, interfering

9 with the way -- how we intend to present our case. We believe that the

10 Trial Chamber can make a decision in this matter only after hearing both

11 parts -- both parties. You have to hear how the international community

12 acted in the situation. This cannot be deemed irrelevant, Your Honour,

13 because we may have taken half of the time here in the courtroom dealing

14 with the Vance Plan, because this shows how the international community

15 treated the situation in the former Yugoslavia.

16 Very important witnesses were called by the Prosecution to deal

17 with the issue of how the international community viewed the crisis in the

18 former Yugoslavia, yet when we try to see how the situation was dealt with

19 when our expert wants to analyse this, then this is treated as

20 irrelevant. This is really difficult for us to understand. An expert

21 can, of course, have his or her view, and the Prosecution is, of course,

22 free to agree or disagree with it; but the validity of the report will be

23 weighed in light of all the other evidence.

24 To say to the Defence, "You cannot use this portion" in a

25 situation where the indictment, in its very foundation, is based inter

Page 11026

1 alia on the secession of Croatia, these documents are referred to in the

2 very counts or the very paragraphs of the indictment, and there are

3 paragraphs in the indictment talking about the Presidency, what the

4 Presidency did, the decisions taken by Croatia and Slovenia. We are

5 brought in a situation, when we are treated unequally, when you compare it

6 with the way that the Prosecution was able to present its case.

7 Mr. Theunens spoke about the constitutional role of the Yugoslav People's

8 Army, the Presidency, and everything else.

9 To cut a long story short - and I don't want to now be talking

10 about the merit of the case and to speak about the weight of the

11 evidence - we apply to the Trial Chamber to make it possible for the

12 Defence to examine its expert in the way that it has planned to do. To do

13 it like this would be, in our opinion, to bring into question the right of

14 the Defence to present its case the way it sees fit. We simply cannot see

15 how the Prosecution, or even the Trial Chamber, can have the right to do

16 so, in light of the circumstances that I just presented.

17 Because this is an urgent matter, this should be dealt with by the

18 Trial Chamber in a written or oral decision before the testimony via

19 videolink begins tomorrow. To eliminate the topics that have been

20 eliminated would not make the proceedings shorter and, in fact, would

21 facilitate the understanding of the matter by the Trial Chamber. The key

22 elements have been deleted, pertaining to the application of the Geneva

23 Conventions.

24 On Friday, I mentioned Protocols I and II of the 1949 Geneva

25 Conventions, and the expert deals precisely with the interpretation of

Page 11027

1 secession, armed rebellion, and the attitude of the international

2 community towards a high signatory of the Geneva Conventions. So how can

3 we be denied the right to deal with those issues?

4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you, Mr. Milovancevic. I'm not going to be

5 long. You just asked a question: You don't know how the Chamber has the

6 right to do this. The Chamber has the right to do this in terms of Rule

7 89(C).

8 The next point you raised which I'm going to respond to is:

9 You're asking the Chamber, either by oral or written decision, to deal

10 with the situation. May I request, as we did this morning, that the

11 Defence deals with this matter by written submission, and the Chamber will

12 deal with it accordingly.

13 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I know about this

14 order by the Trial Chamber and we really complied with it as much as we

15 could, wherever it was possible. Now, this can all stop making any

16 sense. Tomorrow, and perhaps the day after tomorrow, we will hear

17 Professor Avramov via videolink, and the appeals and the -- any decision

18 that will be made after this witness has already been heard can hardly

19 have any effect.

20 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: One moment, please, Mr. Milovancevic.

21 [Trial Chamber confers]

22 MR. WHITING: Your Honour, if I may, I would just note that the

23 Trial Chamber's decision, written decision, on this issue came out on the

24 9th of November, last Thursday. The Defence has had several days to file

25 a reconsideration of that order, if that was the course they wanted to

Page 11028

1 take. To wait until a quarter to seven the day before the witness is to

2 come, I think, is a little unfair.

3 And I would say, also, I don't think the Defence has -- they

4 had -- we filed a motion; they responded. They had an opportunity to

5 raise all their issues. I don't think they raised anything new now which,

6 in any way, justifies changing the Trial Chamber's thorough,

7 well-reasoned, careful decision on this issue.

8 I'm happy to address -- try to address those issues, if Your

9 Honours wish, but I really think this course is not fair, and I don't

10 think there is a basis for changing the Trial Chamber's decision.

11 JUDGE MOLOTO: If you want to make any submissions, by all means,

12 go ahead, Mr. Whiting.

13 MR. WHITING: Well, Your Honour, I'll just touch on briefly some

14 of the issues that were raised, and I didn't try to list all the issues.

15 If there is any issue that gives pause to the Trial Chamber, I'm happy to

16 give it further consideration. So this isn't necessarily exhaustive.

17 But the first point is, the Defence has suggested now and again --

18 they had earlier today, that there is some unfairness, that the

19 Prosecution got to do things a certain way and the Defence is not being

20 allowed to do it the same way. I would reject that completely. To the

21 extent the Prosecution solicited the views of the international community

22 on certain issues, those were relevant and done in a proper procedural

23 way, we would submit. They were not objected to, that is, the

24 international community's views on issues that are relevant to this trial;

25 for example, treatment of the Croatian -- Croat civilians in the RSK, and

Page 11029

1 so forth. So the -- and they were brought -- this information was brought

2 in through the proper witnesses.

3 The issue with this witness is she is an expert and we objected

4 that certain areas that she covered were not within her expertise, and the

5 Trial Chamber also found that certain areas that she talked about were not

6 relevant to -- either not relevant to the issues before the Trial Chamber

7 or have been sufficiently covered both by the Prosecution, the Defence,

8 and no further evidence was needed, I believe, on that second point. I

9 don't recall if that was actually touched on by the Trial Chamber.

10 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Mr. Whiting, sorry to interrupt you, but what

11 about Mr. Milovancevic's point of drawing a reference to the expert

12 Theunens and the fact that, in his opinion, he would have been allowed to

13 testify on some of those very issues and areas that the Prosecution

14 objected to their expert covering? What would your response be there?

15 Because that, for me, would be more pointed.

16 MR. WHITING: Right. Well --

17 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Specifically?

18 MR. WHITING: -- for one thing -- I'm not sure what areas he's

19 talking about. But, for one thing, Mr. Theunens was a different kind of

20 expert. He was a military expert, and so he -- to the extent that he

21 commented on military doctrine or military law, that necessarily -- would

22 not necessarily and, in fact, would not be an area that a legal expert

23 could comment on.

24 Secondly, in my view, Mr. Theunens, when he commented on the law,

25 the constitution and so forth, those were with respect to pertinent issues

Page 11030

1 in the trial, that is, the command and control of the army, of the TO, and

2 so forth.

3 The issues that have been redacted from this expert report are not

4 issues which are pertinent to the trial. The international community's

5 reaction and their behaviour towards the dissolution of Yugoslavia and the

6 mediation by the European Community is not relevant to this case. It's

7 not relevant. So those issues -- so the issues that have been -- so it's

8 apples and oranges, to compare -- to try, on the fly, you know, in this

9 sort of way, to sort of draw loose comparisons between what the

10 Prosecution experts testified about or Prosecution witnesses and what's in

11 this report, it's really trying to compare apples and oranges.

12 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Do you see the dissolution of Yugoslavia itself

13 as being relevant to the issues? If not the response of the European

14 Community and the mediation.

15 MR. WHITING: Well, certainly the dissolution of Yugoslavia is in

16 the background of this case and there are certain issues which have

17 arisen, for example, the right to self-determination and those issues,

18 which have been really very thoroughly canvassed and which remain in the

19 report. Those parts have not been redacted. That is in the report. That

20 has been left in the report.

21 So I'm not going to say that every issue that falls under the

22 category of dissolution of Yugoslavia is not relevant. But what I think

23 the Trial Chamber did is went through the report, and those issues --

24 those sections which were relevant to the issues in the trial have been

25 left in and can be talked about, and those parts that are not are out.

Page 11031

1 JUDGE MOLOTO: Look, I think we should stick to this order that

2 the Chamber has just made, that any objections must be made in written

3 form and the Chamber will deal with them. Just like Mr. Milovancevic was

4 expecting the Chamber to give either an oral or written decision now,

5 let's get these things on paper and let's apply our minds to them and deal

6 with them. I don't think we can give a decision between now and 7.00.

7 On that note, the court is adjourned to tomorrow at a quarter past

8 2.00 in this court.

9 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 6.52 p.m.,

10 to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 14th day of

11 November, 2006, at 2.15 p.m.