Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 12379

1 Friday, 15 November 2002

2 [Open session]

3 [The accused entered court]

4 --- Upon commencing at 9.37 a.m.

5 JUDGE MUMBA: Please call the case.

6 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. Case number

7 IT-95-9-T, the Prosecutor versus Blagoje Simic, Miroslav Tadic, and

8 Simo Zaric.

9 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Mr. Pantelic, you're continuing with your

10 examination-in-chief.

11 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, Your Honour. I just wonder whether we should

12 address the Court with the -- with regard to the issue which was raised by

13 the Prosecution yesterday and after the consultations of our --

14 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Can --

15 MR. PANTELIC: Our clients.

16 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Can you just complete your questions and then

17 we will deal with that.

18 MR. PANTELIC: You mean after the set of questions for

19 examination-in-chief.

20 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. As I indicated yesterday, it won't be closed

21 until we deal with the matter which was raised by the Prosecution.

22 MR. PANTELIC: That was my misunderstanding. I thought you

23 were -- instructed us only for the yesterday's session of

24 examination-in-chief. But I will proceed. Okay.


Page 12380

1 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you.


3 [Witness answered through interpreter]

4 Examined by Mr. Pantelic: [Continued]

5 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, doctor.

6 A. Good morning.

7 Q. Yesterday I analysed additionally these exhibits, so now we will

8 turn back to a document that was discussed during the testimony of

9 Stevan Todorovic, and I would like to clarify a technical matter,

10 translation.

11 MR. PANTELIC: [Previous translation continues] ... Exhibit P77.

12 Yes. You may put the English version on the ELMO because it's an

13 issue of translation, please.

14 Q. [Interpretation] Please read out the heading of your document in

15 the upper left corner.

16 A. "Assembly of the Serb people of Bosanski Samac Municipality and

17 Pelagicevo under formation," and then under that it says, "The Municipal

18 Crisis Staff." And then underneath we have number 02-10/92. And then

19 date, 17th of April, 1992.

20 Q. Since this is an order that you already talked about yesterday,

21 tell me, please, pursuant to this order, was -- were the weapons brought

22 to the Municipal Crisis Staff ever confiscated?

23 A. No.

24 Q. Do you know where the confiscated weapons were stored? Do you

25 have any knowledge of that?

Page 12381

1 A. In military and police locations.

2 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Excuse me.

3 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, Your Honour.

4 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Mr. Pantelic, maybe it's a question of

5 translation; maybe not. You asked Dr. Simic were -- this is line 19, line

6 20/21: "Were the weapons brought to the Municipal Crisis Staff ever

7 confiscated?" And Dr. Simic's answer is no. And then your question is:

8 "Do you know where the confiscated weapons were stored?" Well, he said

9 they weren't confiscated, so how could confiscated weapons therefore be

10 stored? There seems to be some inconsistency there. Maybe you could

11 clarify, please.

12 MR. PANTELIC: Yes. I believe that's the translation. I will

13 clarify that. Thank you for your intervention, Your Honour.

14 Q. [Interpretation] Let me repeat the question: Were confiscated

15 weapons ever brought into the premises of the Crisis Staff?

16 A. No.

17 Q. Thank you.

18 JUDGE WILLIAMS: But again, just as a matter of clarification, but

19 weapons were confiscated, were they or were they not?

20 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

21 Q. Were weapons confiscated? And if so, where were they stored and

22 whose responsibility was this?

23 A. According to information that I have, it was stored in military

24 and police locations.

25 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Thank you.

Page 12382

1 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

2 Q. Yesterday we took a look at the document P58 before we stopped

3 working -- P98.

4 MR. PANTELIC: [Previous translation continues] ... P98.

5 Q. [Interpretation] You can put the Serbian version on the ELMO so

6 that other co-accused can follow it. Are you familiar with this document?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. Was this document discussed at the session of the Crisis Staff?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. Who authored this document?

11 A. The staff, professional staff of the municipal assembly.

12 Q. What was the purpose of this document, of this memo?

13 A. It was an appeal for assistance to be provided to the Serbs

14 imprisoned in the municipality of Odzak.

15 Q. The next document also has to do with --

16 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, Your Honour.

17 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Could -- could on the ELMO we see the signature

18 on the bottom, please.

19 MR. PANTELIC: Sure.

20 Q. [Interpretation] Did you sign this?

21 A. Yes.

22 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Thank you.

23 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you. P99.

24 Q. [Interpretation] The same question: Are you familiar with this

25 document?

Page 12383

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. Who is the author of this document? Who prepared it?

3 A. The professional staff of the municipal assembly.

4 Q. Is this your signature here on this document?

5 A. It looks like it.

6 Q. Do you remember discussing this document, this issue with other

7 members of the Crisis Staff at your sessions?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. I will now just give you the gist of this document, but does this

10 also have to do with an appeal addressed to the executive council?

11 A. Yes. We called this a cry for help to be provided to the

12 imprisoned Serbs.

13 Q. So this refers to the Serbs imprisoned in the territory of Odzak

14 municipality.

15 A. Yes.

16 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please, the --

17 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Di Fazio.

18 MR. DI FAZIO: The addressee of the document may be important for

19 you. Mr. Pantelic said that it was -- it was addressed to the executive

20 council. You might like to know what executive council. Are we talking

21 about the Bosanski Samac executive council or something else.

22 Also, at the top of the document -- oh, I'm sorry. My apologies.

23 Yes. It speaks for itself. I withdraw my objection.

24 JUDGE MUMBA: All right.

25 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you, Ms. Usher.

Page 12384

1 Now could we have, please, P100.

2 Q. [Interpretation] Yesterday we already touched upon the relations

3 with SAO Semberija and Majevica. Now, tell me please, do you remember

4 this document?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. Although this document is self-explanatory, can you confirm that

7 this has to do with the joining of SAO Semberija and Majevica and the

8 harmonisation of regulations, of Samac municipality with those of

9 SAO Semberija and Majevica.

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. Is this your signature down at the bottom?

12 A. It looks like my signature.

13 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you, Ms. Usher. Now I would like to have

14 Exhibit P101, please.

15 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Excuse me, Mr. Pantelic.

16 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, Your Honour.

17 JUDGE WILLIAMS: The last two answers with respect to signature by

18 Dr. Simic are "it looks like my signature." Does he remember

19 actually -- if he remembers the document, he remembers the discussions re

20 the document, can he answer more directly than "it looks like my

21 signature"?

22 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

23 Q. Do you remember signing this document at the time when it was

24 drafted?

25 A. Yes. But I have a copy in front of me, not the original.

Page 12385

1 MR. PANTELIC: So now we have 101; yes? Thank you.

2 Q. [Interpretation] This is a document that also speaks about the

3 relations between the Serb Municipality of Samac and SAO Semberija and

4 Majevica. It was issued on the same date, and it says that you had

5 certain representatives representing the Municipality of Bosanski Samac in

6 SAO Semberija and Majevica; is that right?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. Since this took place on the same date, was this also discussed at

9 the session of the Crisis Staff?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. Do you remember signing this signature?

12 A. The original, yes.

13 Q. Signing this document?

14 A. The original, yes.

15 Q. Does this seem to you like it could be your signature?

16 A. It resembles my signature.

17 THE INTERPRETER: Correction of interpreter: The representative

18 of the Samac Municipality in SAO Semberija and Majevica was in fact

19 Dr. Simic itself. This is what the document says.

20 MR. PANTELIC: Okay. Now could we have Exhibit P102, please.

21 Q. [Interpretation] Do you remember this document?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. Who drafted this document?

24 A. The executive council of the municipal assembly, namely,

25 Secretariat for Economy.

Page 12386

1 Q. And what was the justification of the relevant organ of the

2 municipality when the draft of this decision was presented to the Crisis

3 Staff to be adopted, if you remember?

4 A. The justification was that the municipality had no revenue and it

5 didn't levy any taxes.

6 Q. So that was the reason for adopting this decision, wasn't it?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. So that the municipality would have a source of revenue.

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. Please take a look at the signature on the last page. Do you

11 remember signing this document on that occasion?

12 A. Yes, the original.

13 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you, Ms. Usher.

14 Could we have P103, please.

15 Q. [Interpretation] Now, this is a decision that deals with certain

16 territorial delineation between the municipalities of Modrica and Brod.

17 Can you tell us, if you remember, what the circumstances were under which

18 this decision was adopted, and please tell us, do you remember why was

19 this decision discussed at the Crisis Staff sessions, if it was discussed

20 at all and adopted -- or rather, the War Presidency.

21 A. This decision has to do with territorial demarcation between these

22 municipalities because between these two municipalities there was another

23 municipality that had a completely different governing body. It was

24 governed by military authorities. And we couldn't --

25 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Lazarevic.

Page 12387

1 MR. LAZAREVIC: He was talking about three municipalities and here

2 in the transcript I see two municipalities. Actually, it was the

3 municipality of Bosanski Samac, Modrica, and the third was Brod. And here

4 in the transcript it says two municipalities. So it will make a

5 confusion. I didn't want to interrupt Mr. Simic while giving his

6 testimony, but I had to.

7 JUDGE MUMBA: Can we have clarification.

8 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

9 Q. So let's continue. You spoke about demarcation between three

10 municipalities, didn't you?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. Please continue, Dr. Simic.

13 A. Due to the presence of military administration, military rule in

14 the territory of Odzak municipality, we couldn't define the borders of any

15 of these municipalities, and therefore we couldn't define jurisdiction

16 itself. And all of this represented a problem in the operation of state

17 companies that had their seats mostly in Doboj and branch offices in

18 Samac, Modrica, Odzak, and Brod. This commission was established in order

19 to try and get the talks going with other municipalities as well as

20 representatives of the military administration in order to one day abolish

21 the military rule, and there was several proposals that were presented to

22 the People's Assembly of Republika Srpska, and sometime in the middle of

23 1993 the People's Assembly of Republika Srpska adopted a law on abolishing

24 the military rule in Odzak and establishing the Municipality of Odzak with

25 civilian government. This law also defined clearly borders between

Page 12388

1 municipalities.

2 MR. PANTELIC: Now can we have P105, please. Sorry. Could we

3 have Exhibit P105.

4 Q. [Interpretation] Look at the last page and see the date of the

5 document. When was this document done?

6 A. On the 15th of December, 1992.

7 Q. And at that time you were what?

8 A. I was president of the Assembly of the Samac Municipality.

9 Q. This document follows up on the previous presentation. Tell us,

10 when you submitted this bill to the People's Assembly of the Republika

11 Srpska, was this bill adopted? Did it become a law?

12 A. No. This bill was rejected and the People's Assembly took a

13 different decision. I mean, all of the proposals that came from the

14 ground were rejected and they passed their own decision, which was to

15 rescind military rule and introduce civilian administration in the

16 Municipality of Odzak and that the Municipality of Odzak should have its

17 pre-war boundaries.

18 Q. Will you look at the last page of this letter, please, under item

19 1 in annexes, we see the report of the Deputy Commander of the 1st Krajina

20 Corps for civilian matters, for civilian affairs. So, on page 3, look at

21 the third -- look, please, at page 3, doctor, the annexes. What was the

22 role of the military element, that is, the assistant commander of the 1st

23 Krajina commander for civilian affairs and what was the role of the

24 military bodies in the resolution of the situation. Briefly.

25 A. Well, they also submitted their own proposal to the People's

Page 12389

1 Assembly. They had a proposal of their own.

2 Q. Thank you.

3 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you, Ms. Usher.

4 Could we have now Exhibit P106, please.

5 Q. [Interpretation] This document speaks for itself, so it is a

6 decision to abolish Crisis Staff in neighbourhood communities in the

7 municipality territory. Is this your signature here on this document?

8 A. No.

9 Q. I know that you are not a graphologist, but could you tell us

10 whose signature is it.

11 A. Well, it doesn't look like my signature and I don't know whose

12 signature it is.

13 Q. Very well. My next question is: Do you remember if the Crisis

14 Staff discussed this decision?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. And whose suggestion was it? Whose proposal was it to abolish it?

17 A. It was the military who made such a proposal to the Ministry of

18 Defence and the Ministry of Defence then forwarded it.

19 Q. Will you please look at Article 3 of the decision and comment on

20 it.

21 A. "The Crisis Staff of the municipality" --

22 Q. You don't have to read it aloud. You can read it to yourself and

23 then comment on it.

24 A. We were endeavouring to preserve the civilian authority

25 neighbourhood communities too, but the problem arose with the people. The

Page 12390

1 Ministry of Defence and the military would not tolerate any longer ten or

2 more people sitting in those staffs and dodging their military obligation,

3 so they demanded that it be brought down to one or two people and if

4 possible that they be pensioners or disabled or something. And at that

5 stage we thought about representatives in neighbourhood communities and

6 these decisions were being prepared.

7 Q. In other words, this was an effort invested by the Crisis Staff,

8 an attempt to cut down on the municipal administration; is that what it

9 meant?

10 A. Yes.

11 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you, Ms. Usher.

12 Could we have Exhibit P107, please.

13 Q. [Interpretation] Are you familiar with this document?

14 A. I am.

15 Q. In point of fact, it is a document which follows up on your

16 previous explanation. These are representatives of the Crisis Staff in

17 neighbourhood communities; is that so?

18 A. Yes, it is.

19 Q. And now, will you please comment briefly on Article 3 of this

20 decision.

21 A. The representative now had to settle all the problems concerning

22 civilian affairs in the territory of neighbourhood communities by himself

23 according to this and, of course, seeking previously the consent of the

24 Crisis Staff of the municipality and the executive council.

25 Q. Now, that you mention the neighbourhood community, the local

Page 12391

1 community, I think it would be very important for this case and for the

2 Chamber to know if the territory of a neighbourhood or local community was

3 perhaps synonymous with a village, for instance, in the territory of

4 Bosanski Samac, would you say that that's what it was?

5 A. Yes, as a rule.

6 Q. Thank you.

7 MR. PANTELIC: [Previous translation continues] ... Can we have

8 P108, please.

9 Q. [Interpretation] This is a decision of the War Presidency to

10 change the name of the town and municipality of Bosanski Samac. Do you

11 remember this decision?

12 A. I do.

13 Q. So there was a discussion about it and then the War Presidency

14 took this decision on the 2nd of October, 1992; is that so?

15 A. Yes, it is.

16 Q. And whose proposal was it? Who drafted this decision?

17 A. The professional services of the executive council.

18 Q. Do you remember what was the reason behind this decision? Do you

19 remember perhaps some of the interventions during the discussion?

20 A. Well, one of the reasons is that earlier Samac used to be called

21 Samac, and another reason was that at that time there were already three

22 municipalities which were called Samac, so the Serb Municipality of

23 Bosanski Samac, the Croat Municipality of Bosanski Samac, Domaljevac on

24 the Croat side -- on the Croatian side, Slavonski Samac, and it all made

25 the situation complicated. It was difficult to tell these different

Page 12392

1 municipalities apart on the radio and so on and so forth.

2 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please, Mr. Pantelic asked two

3 questions: Whose proposal it was and who drafted the decision. We found

4 out who drafted the decision, but we haven't found out who proposed it.

5 It was asked, so perhaps the witness ought to answer that.

6 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Can we have the answer.

7 MR. PANTELIC: Yes. I believe that that was the second part of

8 the explanation -- that will be the second part of the explanation of

9 Dr. Simic.

10 Q. [Interpretation] Answer the question, please.

11 A. The proposal originated with the executive council of the

12 municipality.

13 Q. Did the War Presidency ever discuss discrimination against

14 non-Serb ethnicities when discussing the decision? Did somebody say, for

15 instance, "Now we would call ourselves Samac against the interests of

16 Muslims or Croats"? Were there any such interventions in the discussion

17 that was conducted?

18 A. No, there were never any such interventions. And had anyone

19 aspired to this, then we would have called it the Serb Samac. But we did

20 not want it to have any prefix. We wanted everybody to live in Samac only

21 and that is why it is called Samac, without emphasising the ethnic aspect.

22 Q. And in 1995 how was the municipality of Samac divided, that is,

23 the territory of Samac?

24 A. It was split into the Croat Samac, Domaljevac, and the Serb

25 municipality of Samac.

Page 12393

1 Q. And the former -- that is, part of the former Bosanski Samac

2 municipality called Prud, who did that go to?

3 A. That part of the former municipality of Bosanski Samac went to the

4 third municipality, Odzak, that is. So at the former municipality of

5 Bosanski Samac before the war was after the war split into three

6 municipalities.

7 Q. During the armed conflict, did this Croat municipality of Bosanski

8 Samac, Domaljevac, exist ever, or was that territory ever in the hands of

9 the Serb authorities?

10 A. That territory was never in the hands of the Serb authorities, and

11 the front line along the boundary of these two municipalities never

12 shifted during the war.

13 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you, Ms. Usher.

14 Could we have, please, Exhibit P109.

15 Q. [Interpretation] Will you comment on this decision. Does this

16 decision refer to your appointment as the president of the Crisis Staff?

17 A. Yes, it does.

18 Q. Tell us, does it reflect the factual situation, the date that we

19 have up there, is that the date when it was adopted?

20 A. The decision was taken on the 19th of April, but the professional

21 service typed it on the 17th in order to ensure the continuity.

22 Q. Did you sign it on behalf of the Crisis Staff? Do you recognise

23 your signature?

24 A. Yeah. I did sign the original.

25 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you, Ms. Usher.

Page 12394

1 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please, I don't know if the Chamber

2 is having the same difficulty, but I have trouble understanding the

3 meaning of "ensuring the continuity." I wonder what it mean that is a

4 document has to be backdated in order to ensure continuity.


6 MR. DI FAZIO: It doesn't mean anything to me. I wonder if you

7 are having the same trouble. If you are, it might be good to clarify it

8 now.

9 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Because it -- the assumptions have to be

10 cleared.

11 MR. PANTELIC: Yes. Yes, Your Honour.

12 Q. [Interpretation] Explain the reason for this continuity that you

13 just mentioned. What do you think and what knowledge do you have about

14 it? Why was this decision pre-dated?

15 A. Well, I am perplexed too. Legal people try to explain it to me,

16 but the clearest explanation that I have received so far was that that

17 provided for the seniority, for the number of years in service.

18 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, Ms. Usher. Please, could we have Exhibit

19 P110.

20 Q. [Interpretation] This document speaks for itself, so only a couple

21 of comments. So it was so this disposition or this decision was adopted

22 on the 30th of May, 1992, and it say that is Milan Simic is appointed

23 president of the executive council of the Municipality of Bosanski Samac;

24 is that correct?

25 A. Yes, it is.

Page 12395

1 Q. Now, in relation to this appointment, were there any disagreements

2 in the Crisis Staff? Because there were two candidates and there was a

3 certain procedure. There was some lobbying for Milan Simic. You

4 explained it to us yesterday.

5 A. Yes.

6 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you, Ms. Usher.

7 And now could we have Exhibit P111.

8 Q. [Interpretation] This document speaks for itself too. Mr. Mirko

9 Lukic appointed the deputy president or vice-president, was he that other

10 person that you mentioned who ran in these elections against Milan Simic?

11 A. Yes.

12 MR. PANTELIC: Yes. Could we have Exhibit P112, please.

13 Q. [Interpretation] Are you familiar with this decision of the 30th

14 of May, 1992 to set up the executive council and other administrative

15 agencies?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. Who drafted this decision? Who is the author?

18 A. Administrative bodies.

19 Q. So that the Crisis Staff practically only discussed it and adopted

20 something that was prepared in advance; is that so?

21 A. Yes, it is.

22 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Excuse me. Dr. Simic, if I hear you correctly,

23 the Crisis Staff, based on your answer to Mr. Pantelic's question -- the

24 Crisis Staff simply signed an already-prepared document. Is it usual

25 that -- was it the usual practice in Samac to have bureaucrats,

Page 12396

1 functionaries, prepare on their own -- on their own a document and then

2 Crisis Staff would simply look at it, discuss it, and sign it, or were

3 there discussions with one of the civil servants present taking notes and

4 the discussions were then put into draft form, written form, which was

5 then brought back to the Crisis Staff for the Crisis Staff to review and

6 adopt and sign?

7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This kind of paper, like all other

8 papers, at first are proposed by way of a draft, and that's what they are

9 called, a draft. The proposal is made by administrative bodies, and this

10 can only be written by legal people. During those days the Crisis Staff

11 was already abolished, and later there was this War Presidency and also

12 there was the municipal parliament, and then they would explain their

13 proposal there. Then the members of the legislative part of the

14 executive -- I mean, no, the legislative government of the municipal

15 assembly, they would discuss it. Then there would be a vote, either a

16 public vote or by secret ballot. And if there is a majority vote, if over

17 half of those present are in favour of, then the decision is typed out.

18 It is no longer called a draft. It is the final text.

19 If there were any amendments during the discussion, then these

20 amendments are discussed and then these amendments are included in the

21 final text, which is then brought for signature.

22 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Thank you.

23 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you, Ms. Usher.

24 Could we have exhibit, please, P116, please.

25 Q. [Interpretation] Please take look at this document and tell me,

Page 12397

1 are you familiar with this document?

2 A. I am familiar with it from the records, the documents of this

3 court -- I mean, its contents.

4 Q. Do you recall having signed this document on the 14th of December,

5 1992, at the premises of the heating plant where the seat of the War

6 Presidency was?

7 A. I did sign a similar record. I don't know whether this is the

8 original.

9 Q. Were representatives of the military court from Banja Luka there?

10 Specifically, was the investigating judge there and the military

11 prosecutor?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. Tell me, although of course you're not a legal expert, but in

14 these proceedings before a military court - and if you know, in other

15 proceedings before other relevant courts - is a record compiled like here

16 at this Tribunal, where every word is recorded, or does the person who is

17 carrying out the examination, like the investigating judge, does that

18 person then dictate what the person who was giving the answers said?

19 A. The difference is that then we had a normal conversation, and then

20 one of the prosecutors would make a summary, dictate this to the typist,

21 and thus create this record.

22 Q. So he conveyed the content of your statement, not faithfully, word

23 for word, but in abbreviated form, abridged form.

24 A. In abridged form.

25 Q. However, towards the end of this record, it says that there is a

Page 12398

1 note that you heard the dictation and that therefore practically you have

2 no objections. Were you aware of that fact then? Were you cautioned

3 then? Did the judiciary authority caution you about this?

4 A. I was not cautioned. I was not told that this was any kind of

5 court document. Furthermore, I did not read that paper, and I can say

6 that all of this was done in a high-pressure atmosphere.

7 Q. In this document on page 3 - I think it's underlined as well - in

8 paragraph 2 there is a sentence. It says that "Crni comes for the second

9 time at the invitation of the War Presidency of Samac." Is that correct,

10 this statement included in this court record?

11 A. Stevan Todorovic claimed that the War Presidency had invited Crni.

12 However, when preparing myself for the defence, for my defence before this

13 court, I did not find any such decision in the documents of the

14 War Presidency, nor does anybody know about this. When I gave additional

15 thought to this, I didn't find it logical because Crni was an inhabitant

16 of Samac. He lived in Samac. He was married to a woman from Samac. He

17 had a family in Samac. He had a child in Samac. And it wasn't logical to

18 me at all that he should be invited if he lived there had anyway.

19 Q. But he was arrested first and then expelled to Serbia. Do you

20 know about him having come back in the meantime?

21 A. He had been arrested, expelled to Serbia, demobilised, and then as

22 a civilian he came to Samac to see his family.

23 Q. As for volunteers from Serbia, did you ever offer them financial

24 compensation for their engagement in carrying out combat operations in the

25 territory of the municipality of Samac?

Page 12399

1 A. No.

2 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please, I don't think the witness

3 has answered the previous question.


5 MR. DI FAZIO: Mr. Pantelic asked the witness in relation to the

6 phrase "Crni comes for the second time at the invitation of the

7 War Presidency of Samac," and the witness went on to describe why that

8 would not be logical. But he hasn't actually said if he told the court

9 that. That was the question, and we should know whether or not he made

10 that statement, that utterance, that is contained in this document to the

11 court.

12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] When they took that statement, there

13 were other members of the War Presidency there. Stevan Todorovic was also

14 sitting there. He's the one who brought them, because they did not know

15 where I was. While they were talking to me, they were talking to

16 Todorovic as well, and they made a summary on that basis and they typed

17 what they typed.

18 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

19 Q. Who were the other members of the War Presidency who were there

20 then?

21 A. I think Savo Popovic was present.

22 Q. Please look at the penultimate paragraph on page 3 of this

23 decision.

24 JUDGE MUMBA: Mr. Di Fazio, has your question been answered?

25 Because you asked specifically whether or not the accused did make that

Page 12400

1 statement.

2 MR. DI FAZIO: Well, actually, on reflection, no, it hasn't. I

3 rather gathered that there's a suggestion inherent in that answer that

4 maybe the words are those of Todorovic. I don't know. But --

5 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Can we have a specific answer.

6 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes. You are quite right, and I omitted to notice

7 that there hadn't been a direct question to that very simple -- sorry, a

8 direct answer to that very simple question.


10 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

11 Q. In relation to Crni, could you just say whether you stated this on

12 the 14th of December, 1992 before the investigating judge of the military

13 court in Banja Luka.

14 A. No.

15 Q. Take a look at --

16 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Excuse me, Mr. Pantelic.

17 Dr. Simic, did you sign -- did you sign this statement, this typed

18 abridged summary of what went on in that room?

19 THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness please repeat his answer. The

20 interpreters could not understand what he said.

21 JUDGE MUMBA: Can you repeat your answer. The interpreters didn't

22 catch it.

23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] At the end of this document, where

24 it says that this document -- this statement was not read out to me,

25 that's where I signed this record.

Page 12401

1 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Okay. Thank you.

2 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

3 Q. The penultimate paragraph on page 3 of this document. It's a poor

4 copy, but take a look at it. It says here that you had been in the office

5 or at the position of the presidency of the War Presidency from April

6 1991.

7 A. At that time there was no War Presidency yet or was there a

8 Crisis Staff in 1991.

9 Q. So that is a mistake in the record, isn't it?

10 A. Yes.

11 MR. DI FAZIO: If you -- I'm sorry. It's an important document.


13 MR. DI FAZIO: I don't want to interrupt the flow of the

14 examination of my learned friend. I'll try to keep my interjections to a

15 minimum, but it is important.

16 The witness said that the statement -- he signed the statement,

17 the statement that was not read out to him. On the English translation

18 that I've got, it says that he doesn't wish to read the record, since the

19 statement was dictated out loud. That seems to be in -- a degree of

20 inconsistency. It may not have been read out to him but it may have been

21 dictated out loud. There's a difference.

22 JUDGE MUMBA: Maybe you can read the document in Serbo-Croat, then

23 the interpreters --

24 MR. DI FAZIO: That's a good idea. And then perhaps I'll invite

25 Mr. Pantelic to ask him if what's contained there in that last paragraph

Page 12402

1 after he's read it out is true or not.

2 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Pantelic.

3 MR. PANTELIC: Yes. Yes, Your Honour. I agree.

4 Q. [Interpretation] Could you please slowly read the penultimate

5 paragraph of this document.

6 A. "I have been in the position of the president of the

7 War Presidency since April 1991."

8 Q. Tell me --

9 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Excuse me, Mr. Pantelic. I think what we want is

10 the paragraph to be read out concerning the dictated -- the dictation of

11 the statement and so on, not the sentence concerning 1991. So what we

12 want is the sentence following that, just before the signatures.

13 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, yes.

14 Q. [Interpretation] Could you please read the paragraph underneath

15 the one you've just read out.

16 A. "I have nothing more to state, and I do not wish to read the

17 record because my statement was dictated out loud and, as such, I sign it

18 without any objections."

19 Q. Very well. Under which conditions was this statement taken?

20 Because we see that it was not in the court itself but it was in the

21 field. What was the atmosphere like when this statement was being taken?

22 A. The atmosphere was the following: Two prosecutors were present,

23 one typist, military security personnel. The previous days there were

24 arrests of civilian authorities of the municipality of Samac.

25 Q. Did you feel that you were under pressure when you were giving

Page 12403

1 this statement?

2 A. Absolutely, yes, because I did not know whether I would be

3 arrested or not.

4 Q. Were you concentrated, focussed when you gave this statement?

5 A. No.

6 Q. Did you have legal counsel, legal assistance?

7 A. No.

8 Q. Could you describe those times to us and the relationship between

9 the military and the civilian authorities. What was going on? Because we

10 can see that this is the month of December 1992. Were there any tensions,

11 if I can put it that way, between certain military circles and the

12 civilian authorities precisely at that time?

13 JUDGE MUMBA: Mr. Pantelic, don't -- don't give evidence.

14 Let -- ask the witness what was the atmosphere, what was going on.

15 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, yes, Your Honour.

16 JUDGE MUMBA: It is the accused who was there and he is the one

17 who should give evidence.

18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is precisely the period when

19 the conflict culminated between the civilian authorities and the military

20 authorities, especially in that area. Later on this conflict was deepened

21 in all other areas. There were some events at that time, such as the

22 closing of the corridor, the killing of scouts, arrests of security

23 officials of brigades, then the arrival of volunteers, a major

24 concentration of brigades of the Army of Republika Srpska in an

25 exceptionally small area, which led to incidents every day. And this

Page 12404

1 resulted in mutual interference, especially of the military authorities

2 that had force in their hands in the affairs of the civilian authorities.

3 There was even a tendency to have the civilian authorities wither away

4 altogether.

5 Q. Did you have the impression that the proceedings between the

6 military judiciary was rigged in a way?

7 MR. WEINER: I object to that, Your Honour.

8 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Pantelic.

9 MR. WEINER: A very leading question.

10 JUDGE MUMBA: I've warned you before that -- don't give evidence.

11 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, Your Honour. I will just rephrase my

12 question.

13 Q. [Interpretation] Please tell me, Dr. Simic: In view of what you

14 have just told us, what was your personal impression? Do you have any

15 additional knowledge concerning the nature of the proceedings that took

16 place before the military court in Banja Luka?

17 A. I can't comment on that because I was not present at the trial,

18 nor was I there in that court, nor was I ever called to testify before

19 that court, nor was I ever told that a record had been taken based on my

20 statement that would eventually be used as a court exhibit. I wasn't even

21 summoned by the first instance military court in Bijeljina, when they

22 convicted me, nor was I summoned by the higher court in Han Pijesak, which

23 reviewed this judgment later on; therefore, I was never summoned to appear

24 as a witness in court. And as far as I know, nobody went to testify from

25 the Samac municipality area.

Page 12405

1 MR. PANTELIC: Yes. Just a correction in the transcript. It's

2 page 26, line 22. Instead of "military court in Bijeljina," we heard that

3 he made a reference to military court in Banja Luka.

4 Q. [Interpretation] Is that right?

5 A. Yes.

6 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you, Ms. Usher.

7 JUDGE WILLIAMS: I just have one last question on this document.

8 Page 26, lines 20 to 23. Dr. Simic, you say that you were never told that

9 a record had been taken based on your statement that would eventually be

10 used as a court exhibit. I'm afraid I am a little bit lost on that

11 because you knew that this record, shall we say, of what you were saying

12 had been dictated, and you signed it. So are you talking about something

13 different in your answer where you say you were never told that a record

14 had been taken? Perhaps you could just clarify that last point for me.

15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That I was told that -- had I been

16 told that my statement would later be used in court, I would engage

17 counsel, because I wouldn't agree to give any statements that would be

18 later used in court without legal advice. And I didn't know -- or I would

19 expect to be summoned to testify in court based on the statement. It is

20 very hard to summarise something that has been said over one hour in one

21 typed page.

22 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Okay. Thank you.

23 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

24 Q. And another question that may be useful in order to clarify this:

25 You were at that stage examined by the investigative judge, weren't you?

Page 12406

1 A. An investigative judge of the military court.

2 Q. Thank you. Now, we shall turn to some other matters that stem

3 from previous statements of witnesses and previous documents. Please tell

4 me, what do you personally know about the conditions and reasons for a

5 transfer of some residents of Samac into Zasavica? What do you know about

6 Zasavica?

7 A. What I know about Zasavica differs greatly from the information I

8 acquired in these proceedings. The information we had at the time were

9 such that civilian police stationed at one entrance into Zasavica - and

10 that is a local commune with a large territory that has at least four to

11 five entry/exit points and borders with the Bosna River, which is very

12 shallow in summertime - so the purpose was to have civilian police

13 placed -- two policemen at the entry point into Zasavica in order to

14 protect the operation of farms in that local commune which continued

15 operating even in the state of war and imminent threat of war and provided

16 food for the army and civilian residents of Samac and public kitchens

17 there.

18 Q. Just a moment, please. I have to interrupt you.

19 MR. PANTELIC: For the benefit of my learned friends, our internal

20 number of this document which I would like to introduce at this stage is

21 KS2/1.

22 Q. [Interpretation] Now that you've mentioned this topic concerning

23 the operation of farms, please tell us, did you sign this document?

24 A. No.

25 Q. Do you remember that this issue was discussed at the sessions of

Page 12407

1 the Crisis Staff?

2 A. Generally speaking, we spoke about activating farms. However,

3 these were operative matters that the executive council was in charge of,

4 in fact.

5 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please, again, I seek a further

6 clarification because I gather that Mr. Pantelic is leaving the topic of

7 the placing of policemen at Zasavica. I understood the witness to be

8 saying that civilian police were placed at various checkpoints -- entry

9 points -- I'm sorry -- entry points around Zasavica in order to continue

10 to protect the operation of the farms because of the state of war and

11 imminent threat of war. I don't understand if policemen placed at various

12 checkpoints were to protect against military incursion by enemy forces or

13 whether they were there to just provide general police security because of

14 the general troubled times. They're two distinct and different things,

15 and I'm not quite clear from the answer and it might be important for the

16 Chamber to know whether these are protecting against military incursion or

17 general troubles at the time.

18 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

19 Q. We will come back later to this document, but let's clarify this

20 first. What you know about that police checkpoint in Zasavica, do you

21 know what was the nature and purpose of that police checkpoint there? Can

22 you explain that to the Trial Chamber.

23 A. I don't understand your question.

24 Q. Why was a checkpoint placed in Zasavica?

25 A. I said that there was just one checkpoint in Zasavica, only on one

Page 12408

1 entry point. Therefore, not on all entry points but only on one.

2 Zasavica has four to five entry or exit points and a large territory and

3 in order to protect a village of that size, one would need at least 100

4 people. Those two policemen, based on the information that we received,

5 were tasked with guarding the farms, which were actively operating, and

6 this is one of the documents speaking about how the food was provided for

7 those farms. When we --

8 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. The -- the Prosecutor did ask was it to

9 protect generally, general police work, or was it to protect the farms

10 against army incursions of the enemy forces.

11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] They were there to protect farms,

12 mostly from local residents, not from the enemy.

13 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

14 Q. You mean in order to prevent looting of the farms by individuals.

15 A. Yes, in order to prevent individuals from looting the farm. But I

16 also wanted to say why were the farms activated in that village as well.

17 Because that was the only village in Samac municipality that wasn't

18 shelled. That village was not shelled by enemy forces. We never ever

19 received an information saying that a single shell landed in that village.

20 Q. Now, please take a look at this document and give us your

21 comments. Please explain to the Trial Chamber what was the purpose of

22 this decision and tell us how this mechanism performed. First of all,

23 tell us when was this decision passed.

24 A. On the 13th of May, 1992.

25 Q. Please now explain this document to us.

Page 12409

1 A. Then and in other times the farms brought in food from the central

2 silo. The central silo is where the food was stored and mixed and

3 so-called food mix was produced to feed the cattle, and that process of

4 maintaining the farms and feeding the cattle was used in the same way as

5 before. The food was taken in the agricultural concern and then the food

6 was brought in to feed the cattle and they continued producing eggs and so

7 on.

8 Q. And once they received the feed for cattle and chicken and so on,

9 how did the farm pay back to the agricultural concern for the feed? Would

10 they pay them back in money or in goods?

11 A. They would pay them back in goods, in meat.

12 Q. Now, please tell me, we see the names of two farmers here in this

13 document who on the 13th of May, 1992 were approved 3 tonnes of cattle

14 feed. Tell us, please, this gentleman here, Senjic Juro, what was his

15 ethnicity?

16 A. He's a Croat.

17 Q. Therefore, the Crisis Staff -- and you can correct me if I'm

18 wrong -- the Serb Crisis Staff on the 13th of June -- 13th of May, 1992

19 delivered 3 tonnes of cattle feed to Senjic Juro, a Croat from Zasavica,

20 whereas he took on an obligation to return the value of that to PIK Samac

21 upon the completion of that process; is that right?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. Did farmers in such a process make certain profit upon paying back

24 the value of the feed?

25 A. Yes. They would have some goods left over, some meat.

Page 12410

1 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you. I would like to tender this document

2 into evidence, Your Honour, please, if there's no objections, of course.

3 MR. DI FAZIO: No objection, if Your Honours please.

4 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Can we have the numbers, please.

5 THE REGISTRAR: It will be D71/1 and D71/1 ter, Your Honours.

6 Thank you.

7 MR. PANTELIC: The next document is also related to this process,

8 and I will very briefly pass -- go through this.

9 Q. [Interpretation] Is this your signature on this document?

10 A. No.

11 Q. So somebody dealt with these matters on behalf of the

12 Crisis Staff.

13 A. The executive council of the municipal assembly, Secretariat for

14 Agriculture.

15 Q. But they used the name of the Crisis Staff, and you don't know for

16 what reason.

17 THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness please repeat the answer. The

18 interpreters didn't hear it.

19 JUDGE MUMBA: Can you repeat the answer, please.

20 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

21 Q. Could you please repeat the answer. The interpreters didn't hear

22 you.

23 A. At the time no other stamp existed, a stamp of a different form.

24 Q. Please be more precise. You said that there were three stamps of

25 the Serb municipality. Please complete your answer. What stamp was

Page 12411

1 missing or lacking?

2 A. They didn't have a stamp with a different form. This stamp was

3 manufactured in three versions or three --

4 Q. Let's simplify this. Was there no stamp then bearing the text of

5 the executive council of the municipal assembly?

6 A. Yes, it didn't exist then.

7 Q. Please take a look at the date on this document. Tell us what the

8 date is.

9 A. 13th of May, 1992.

10 Q. What is the ethnicity of the owner of the farm called

11 Tunjic Mato?

12 A. A Croat.

13 MR. PANTELIC: [Previous translation continues] ... If there is no

14 objections, Your Honour. And it's about time for our break.

15 MR. DI FAZIO: No objection.

16 JUDGE MUMBA: Can we have the number, please.

17 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honours. It will be D72/1 and

18 D72/1 ter. Thank you.

19 JUDGE MUMBA: Mr. Pantelic, how many more minutes? You were

20 supposed to end up yesterday.

21 MR. PANTELIC: Your Honour, frankly, I have only one document,

22 which is basically the same issue. And then -- then I will quite

23 efficiently go through, let's say, maybe 20 questions with regard to the

24 statements of the OTP witnesses. Here we have to clarify certain events

25 and facts. And I don't believe that Dr. Simic will give an expanded

Page 12412

1 version of answers. Maybe just yes or no. So in total maybe, let's say,

2 half an hour maybe, 40 minutes, something like that.

3 JUDGE MUMBA: Very well.

4 MR. PANTELIC: I will finish then.

5 JUDGE MUMBA: We'll adjourn and continue our proceedings at 11.30

6 hours.

7 --- Recess taken at 11.01 a.m.

8 --- On resuming at 11.31 a.m.

9 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Pantelic, you're continuing.

10 MR. PANTELIC: Yes. Thank you, Your Honour. I have one more

11 document to discuss. Basically it's the same issue. For the benefit of

12 our friends from the Prosecution, it's KC2/3.

13 Q. [Interpretation] Dr. Simic, is the date on this document the 18th

14 of May, 1992?

15 A. It is.

16 Q. Do you recognise the signature on this document?

17 A. It looks like mine.

18 Q. And what is this document about?

19 A. Agricultural Company Samac is authorised to issue feed concentrate

20 G-12 for heifers and the total amount of feed is 8 tonne, metric tonnes.

21 Q. Do you perhaps know what is the ethnicity of the owner of the

22 farm?

23 A. Croat.

24 JUDGE MUMBA: The English translation shows the date as 18th

25 August. Is that a mistake? Because you said the witness said the date is

Page 12413

1 18th May, 1992. Which is the correct date?

2 MR. PANTELIC: Yes. Yes, you are right. Your Honour, maybe we

3 could put the B/C/S version on the ELMO and then our friends from

4 technical booth can zoom onto the date, because it is handwritten

5 document, the left top side. And maybe ...

6 JUDGE MUMBA: What does it look like to you -- or the witness.

7 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

8 Q. Will you tell us, what do you think? Is it August or May?

9 A. This is May 1992.

10 JUDGE MUMBA: And in any case, the accused knows about the

11 document. So we take May -- 18th May 1992 as a correct date.

12 MR. PANTELIC: Yes. Your Honour, thank you.

13 JUDGE MUMBA: There's no objection, I take it, from the

14 Prosecution to this production?

15 MR. RE: There's no objection, Your Honour.

16 JUDGE MUMBA: Can we have the numbers.

17 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you.

18 THE REGISTRAR: It will be D73/1 and D73/1 ter. Thank you.

19 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

20 Q. Since we are on this topic about Zasavica, tell us, did you have

21 any personal knowledge whether in Zasavica there were also the inhabitants

22 of some villages from the neighbourhood of Samac who had to be relocated

23 from the villages, and do you know why, if that is so?

24 A. Not at that time. Depends on the period of time that we are

25 talking about.

Page 12414

1 Q. I'm talking about May 1992.

2 A. I had no such information.

3 Q. But you said that you had information about some other period of

4 time. Will you explain it.

5 A. Well, that other period, when I returned from my sick leave -- so

6 I was absent for several months, and then I was informed that there were

7 certain happenings in Zasavica. They were in part presented here.

8 Q. What happenings do you mean?

9 A. Well, that in Zasavica there were Serbs and Muslims and Croats.

10 Q. And who did you hear that from?

11 A. From Stevan Todorovic.

12 Q. What did he explain to you? Why was that done?

13 A. It is very -- it was very difficult to understand his answers and

14 the words he used. But as far as I could understand, he had transferred

15 some of the civilian population from Samac to Zasavica because members of

16 those families had swum across the Sava and were divulging information

17 about the shelling of the town of Samac and the aftermath of those

18 shellings, and so on and so forth.

19 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Excuse me. Dr. Simic, you say that it was very

20 difficult to understand Stevan Todorovic's answers and the words he used.

21 Why was that?

22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Because he was under the influence

23 of alcohol day in, day out. And one could say that it was a very high

24 degree of intoxication. He also used all sorts of pills, and one could

25 never know what particular mood he was in. And the span of his reactions

Page 12415

1 was from the high tension to high emotions. Sometimes he reacted like a

2 child, so that his reality seemed to us very questionable.

3 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Thank you.

4 JUDGE LINDHOLM: Dr. Simic, as a highly educated person and having

5 got a degree as a doctor, you have also sworn the oath of Hippocrates,

6 haven't you?

7 THE WITNESS: [No audible response]

8 JUDGE LINDHOLM: Isn't what you are talking about and telling us

9 about Mr. Todorovic, isn't -- aren't you breaking your oath?

10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. It would be breaking the oath

11 if he were my patient. But I am not accused because -- I didn't

12 understand. I did not understand what you just said.

13 JUDGE LINDHOLM: Well, you were a co-accused, and do you think

14 that this is, so to say, freeing you from the oath you have given as a

15 doctor?

16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I did not treat Stevan Todorovic.

17 He was not my patient, and therefore I am under no professional obligation

18 towards him.

19 JUDGE LINDHOLM: You said three days ago --

20 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for the Judge, please.

21 JUDGE LINDHOLM: [Microphone not activated]

22 THE INTERPRETER: The microphone is still switched off.

23 JUDGE LINDHOLM: You said three days ago that he was your patient;

24 isn't that right?

25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Stevan Todorovic before the war at

Page 12416

1 times would run into the emergency service, where I was on duty, and ask

2 me for a prescription. But I cannot consider myself his doctor, because I

3 did not have his file. I did not examine him. I didn't establish a

4 diagnosis. And he was not filed as my patient. So I merely knew from his

5 reactions when he came to me to write for him a prescription for him or

6 for his mother or for his father or whoever.

7 JUDGE LINDHOLM: Your explanation today doesn't confirm what you

8 said three days ago when you said that Stevan Todorovic was a patient of

9 yours. Can you recall that?

10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I've just explained it, what were my

11 professional contacts with him. I never examined him, therefore -- he

12 never undressed in front of me so that I could listen to him. He would

13 always run in. He would jump the queue. He never waited for queues,

14 especially when we were on duty, so that he could be issued with a

15 prescription in order for him to obtain a medicine. And that is the

16 amount of my professional contact with him. This was my political

17 observation, and since this is a criminal court, I have to defend myself

18 and I have to explain what my impressions were.

19 JUDGE LINDHOLM: And if I may continue, you feel free to reveal

20 whatever about Stevan Todorovic, not present here, sitting in a Spanish

21 prison?

22 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Before you answer that, Dr. Simic, I appreciate

23 that what you were saying was in response to my question concerning why

24 you couldn't understand his words, and I also understand that you are

25 under an obligation to tell the truth pursuant to the solemn declaration

Page 12417

1 here. So you were responding to my question. Thank you.

2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

3 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Please proceed.

4 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you, Your Honour.

5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Just a moment. I haven't answered.

6 I haven't answered Judge Lindholm. Judge Lindholm asked me if I thought

7 that I had the right, and I do not know whether I can answer that

8 question. I need some legal advice on that. I mean, with regard to the

9 Hippocrates oath.

10 JUDGE MUMBA: I think after Judge Williams's intervention, the

11 matter is left at that. So we'll proceed with the case.

12 MR. PANTELIC: Yes. Thank you, Your Honour.

13 Q. [Interpretation] But did you hear from another source about the

14 reasons for this, as you told us, police operation in relation to

15 Zasavica?

16 A. All stories circulated around. At this point I cannot really

17 pinpoint the source of those stories. But when the chief of police

18 performed his duties, we simply thought that he was the one whose duty it

19 was to provide the information.

20 Q. Did you personally have any knowledge about cases of mistreatment

21 of civilians who were temporarily placed in Zasavica?

22 A. No.

23 Q. Did Stevan Todorovic in his capacity of the chief of police -- I

24 mean, you personally, did he ever report to you about possible incidents

25 that might have taken place in Zasavica?

Page 12418

1 A. No.

2 Q. Did you have any personal knowledge about the living and housing

3 conditions in Zasavica?

4 A. No.

5 Q. Was there any barbed wire around Zasavica?

6 A. No.

7 Q. Was Zasavica mentioned as a camp in Samac at the time?

8 A. No.

9 Q. Did Stevan Todorovic report to you - I mean to you

10 personally - about the existence of prisons, several detention units, if I

11 may call them that, in Samac?

12 THE INTERPRETER: We could not hear the witness's answer because

13 the witness speaks over the counsel.

14 JUDGE MUMBA: Can the witness -- can you repeat the answer? The

15 interpreters didn't get it. And perhaps you should move closer to the

16 microphones.

17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, not to me personally.

18 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

19 Q. But did he report to the Crisis Staff?

20 A. Yes, now and then.

21 Q. What do you mean?

22 A. That there was a certain number of arrested individuals in prison

23 in Samac.

24 Q. Did he report to the Crisis Staff about the grounds for the arrest

25 of those civilians?

Page 12419

1 A. Insofar as one could infer from his reports, because he had

2 difficulties concentrating on a particular topic, one was led to

3 conclusion that those were Islamic terrorists, according to him, and that

4 he had enough evidence to file a criminal report against them and request

5 an investigation.

6 Q. Within that context, did he also mention Croat civilians?

7 A. Yes, he did.

8 Q. Did you personally know about the incidents committed by

9 Stevan Todorovic in Samac in those detention units?

10 A. No.

11 Q. Did Stevan Todorovic attend the meetings of the Crisis Staff and

12 speak about crimes and offences he had committed?

13 A. No.

14 Q. Did you learn from some other sources what Stevan Todorovic was

15 doing at that time in Samac?

16 A. No.

17 Q. Did you support the appointment of Stevan Todorovic as

18 vice-president of the executive council of the Municipality of Samac in

19 1995?

20 A. No.

21 Q. Within the civilian authorities in Samac, was some kind of

22 initiative launched to investigate the abuses of Stevan Todorovic by a

23 commission of the Ministry of the Interior of Republika Srpska?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. Were there any other efforts to inform the appropriate police

Page 12420

1 authorities about the behaviour of Stevan Todorovic?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. In what sense? Could you explain this.

4 A. We spoke to his chief in Doboj, Andrija Bjelosevic, and also with

5 every member of the Ministry of the Interior who came to that area. And

6 we drew their attention to the fact that we believed that Stevan Todorovic

7 does not know how to do that job and that he should be replaced.

8 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Re.

9 MR. RE: Perhaps at this stage in the examination-in-chief

10 Dr. Simic could clarify what he means by civilian authorities in Samac,

11 firstly, and secondly who the "we" is who spoke to the chief in Doboj. It

12 may be of assistance to the Trial Chamber.

13 JUDGE MUMBA: Very well. I'm sure the accused has heard that. He

14 can explain.

15 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Excuse me. And also, Dr. Simic, as well perhaps

16 you could give us the timing. There's no mention of the year when these

17 efforts were being made.

18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] We intensified these efforts towards

19 the end of 1992, in terms of informing the Ministry of the Interior that a

20 initiative should be launched for Stevan Todorovic to be replaced. The

21 Ministry of the Interior sent a commission which spent some time towards

22 the end of 1992 and beginning of 1993 in Samac and it investigated the

23 work of Stevan Todorovic as well as of other authorities in the Public

24 Security Station.

25 In addition to that, one of the high officials of the Ministry of

Page 12421

1 the Interior at that time - I think it was the assistant minister for the

2 public sector - advised Stevan Todorovic to tender a resignation on his

3 own and to withdraw from that position. Tomo Kovac was the name of this

4 high official.

5 Stevan Todorovic talked everywhere about this intervention, about

6 the intervention of this MUP official. He made fun of his proposal, and

7 he said that it didn't cross his mind ever to resign from that position.

8 JUDGE MUMBA: And the other point of clarification was when you

9 answered that we spoke to his chief, meaning the chief of Todorovic.

10 What -- who do you mean by "we"? Yourself and who -- or was it yourself

11 as the Crisis Staff or the War Presidency?

12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] At that time the assembly had

13 already started to function, so this was a delegation on behalf of the

14 municipal assembly.

15 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

16 Q. Before the assembly started to work, that is to say, in the period

17 from April 1992 until the end of 1992, were there any efforts made by you

18 personally or --

19 A. Officials from the Ministry of the Interior were contacted then,

20 and this was discussed with them when they came to the territory of the

21 municipality. We asked them to deal with this problem because in Samac

22 this was not a good thing. Tomo Kovac conducted that conversation then

23 and advised Todorovic to resign on his own. Todorovic said this to almost

24 everyone he would see.

25 MR. RE: Again, same point of clarification. Your Honour,

Page 12422

1 Dr. Simic has several times within the last few moments used the words

2 "we." It is entirely unclear as to whether he's including himself there

3 or whether it's a generic "we" meaning the municipality. I'd ask him to

4 clarify that now so that we have a proper record of who's actually doing

5 these things he's talking about.

6 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Dr. Simic, you heard what the Prosecution is

7 asking for.

8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] When I say "we," I am speaking on

9 behalf of the organs of the municipal assembly and on behalf of a larger

10 number of assemblymen in the municipal assembly, because there were others

11 too who supported him.

12 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

13 Q. Was the dislike between you and Stevan Todorovic deepened after

14 everything that was done?

15 A. Yes. He saw me as his greatest opponent. Especially he assumed

16 that he would be left without the job of chief of police, and then he

17 started resorting to different means in order to exert pressure upon me,

18 starting with having me followed, spied on, and even -- I even suspect

19 that he organised an assassination attempt against me.

20 Q. When was this? In which period and in which way?

21 A. There is a record about this shooting at my car. He organised

22 this very quickly. And I would like to ask that this record be introduced

23 by way of confirmation of my words, and this record was compiled by his

24 service.

25 Q. Tell me, what was the relationship between you and the volunteers

Page 12423

1 who were in Samac, who were in the entourage of Stevan Todorovic?

2 A. For the most part, I did not have any contact with the volunteers.

3 Some of them would very rarely stop by the premises of the Crisis Staff.

4 Q. We are now going to move on to an analysis of two documents that

5 were introduced previously.

6 MR. PANTELIC: [Previous translation continues] ... Exhibit D58/3,

7 please.

8 THE REGISTRAR: Mr. Pantelic, just to -- by way of confirmation,

9 you require D58/3?

10 MR. PANTELIC: That's correct.

11 THE REGISTRAR: Thank you.

12 JUDGE LINDHOLM: Before we proceed to the document you are talking

13 about, I would be interested in knowing what was the reason for the

14 disagreement between Dr. Simic and Stevan Todorovic. Could you tell us a

15 little bit about that.

16 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

17 Q. You heard the question of His Honour Judge Lindholm. Could you

18 please answer it.

19 A. I told you that in 1990, when the first multi-party elections were

20 held, I did not want Stevan Todorovic to be on the same list with me. But

21 I'm not going to talk about his symptoms. Then I was against him being

22 proposed by the assembly for any position, let alone chief of police. In

23 the future also -- whenever I could, when I could prevent him from being

24 present in any body, I always spoke against Stevan Todorovic being in such

25 a body. When he was replaced in 1994, I was against having him given any

Page 12424

1 leading position in the territory of the Municipality of Samac, because I

2 thought that a personality with such structure does not know how to be in

3 a leading position at all, and on the other hand, he would only disgrace

4 all of us. That's what I thought. That's how I behaved. Hence, the

5 animosity between the two of us. That is the genesis of it.

6 JUDGE LINDHOLM: If I may continue my questioning. How does it

7 come that he, though, was a member of the Crisis Staff in 1972 [sic] and

8 upwards, although you were resisting him all the time? Can you explain

9 that to me. Because there's -- this has been told by different witnesses

10 before this Tribunal.

11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The year written down here is 1972

12 in the transcript, and you probably meant 1992.

13 JUDGE LINDHOLM: [Microphone not activated] 1992, yes.

14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] We introduced the payrolls of the

15 Crisis Staff, and I think that in this way we proved that Stevan Todorovic

16 was not a member of the Crisis Staff and that he falsely represented

17 himself here as a member of the Crisis Staff.

18 JUDGE LINDHOLM: Did I hear your answer accurately? Forcibly, or

19 in which way did he become a member of the Crisis Staff?

20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I said that Stevan Todorovic was not

21 a member of the Crisis Staff and that we proved this by exhibiting the

22 payroll of the Crisis Staff from May 1992 two days ago.

23 MR. PANTELIC: [Microphone not activated]

24 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please, for Mr. Pantelic.

25 MR. PANTELIC: [Microphone not activated]

Page 12425

1 JUDGE MUMBA: Your microphone.

2 MR. PANTELIC: Sorry. Sorry. If I may be of assistance to the

3 inquiry of His Honour Judge Lindholm, Your Honour, you can find on page

4 46, line 18 an accurate translation of what Dr. Simic just said. The gist

5 of it is that Mr. Stevan Todorovic falsely represented himself here, in

6 the Tribunal before this Trial Chamber, as a member of the Crisis Staff.

7 That was the right words that Dr. Simic used. Not forcibly, but falsely.

8 JUDGE LINDHOLM: [Microphone not activated] Falsely. Okay. Okay.


10 JUDGE LINDHOLM: But how is that possible?

11 MR. PANTELIC: Well, it's a dimension of the truth, actually, of

12 versions of truth and, you know.

13 JUDGE LINDHOLM: We have heard through many mouths that he was a

14 member of the Crisis Staff, not only through the mouth of

15 Stevan Todorovic. Can that be explained.

16 MR. PANTELIC: Well, to some extent it can be. This is a Defence

17 case, and we shall present appropriate evidence with regard to that issue.


19 MR. PANTELIC: And allow me to emphasise, Your Honour, that we

20 heard that in category of hearsay of the Prosecution witnesses because

21 they were not members of any official institutions. They were allegedly

22 victims, and victims by itself. So they heard that maybe Stevan Todorovic

23 was -- was a member of Crisis Staff. If you go and make an analysis of

24 the witness statements. Only witness Stevan Todorovic here gave his

25 explanation and some extended version of his point of view to that extent.

Page 12426

1 And also, I would like to draw your attention, Your Honour, to the

2 municipal Official Gazette number 1, where the members of executive

3 boards -- board are, including Stevan Todorovic as the chief of police.

4 Thank you.

5 Q. [Interpretation] Please take a look at this document. Could you

6 tell me briefly whether you were familiarised with it at the time of its

7 creation and what is this about and what was the basis for this

8 conclusion.

9 Excuse me. Let us clarify this, because the 23rd of November is

10 the date in the English version. How do you interpret the date in the

11 original, in the Serbian version that is right in front of you?

12 And could you please put this Serbian version on the ELMO. Is it

13 the 23rd of November or is it some other date?

14 A. I read this as the 23rd of November, 1992.

15 Q. Please look at the top of this document now, when it refers to the

16 session held on such and such a date. What is the date there?

17 A. The 28th of November, 1992.

18 Q. So what do you infer on that basis?

19 A. The 28th of November, 1992 is more legible, as far as I'm

20 concerned.

21 Q. So what about the date at the bottom of the page? What could that

22 be?

23 A. The 28th of November, 1992.

24 MR. PANTELIC: Just a small correction with regard to the

25 translation, because in the English translation -- could you

Page 12427

1 please -- Ms. Usher, could you please --

2 JUDGE MUMBA: I think we've observed that already, so just go

3 ahead.

4 MR. PANTELIC: Okay. Thank you.

5 Q. [Interpretation] So do you remember some discussion regarding this

6 conclusion at the War Presidency?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. What was the objective of adopting this conclusion?

9 A. The objective was to, regardless of the wartime, summon all

10 assemblymen and commence the work of the Municipal Assembly of Samac

11 Municipality. And based on the instructions coming from the republic, to

12 abolish the Crisis Staff, the War Presidency. And then finally on the

13 17th of December, the People's Assembly -- I think there was a decree

14 coming from the republic level. I'm not sure from which organ

15 specifically. This decree regulated the abolishment of War Presidencies,

16 which means that regular municipal parliaments had to be convened

17 irrespective of the war situation.

18 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you, Ms. Usher.

19 Could we have now Exhibit D60/3, please.

20 Q. [Interpretation] What was the objective of this decision and who

21 prepared the draft of the decision?

22 A. This decision was prepared by the executive council of the Samac

23 Municipal Assembly, and its purpose was to aid the civilian protection,

24 place and manner of burying fallen Serb soldiers and those who had died.

25 Q. In order to convey properly the meaning of this word in English,

Page 12428

1 I'm not really happy with the translation. When you say "civilian

2 protection," do you mean the organ that exists within the National Defence

3 structure? Is that what you have in mind?

4 A. Yes.

5 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you.

6 Q. [Interpretation] Here during the proceedings, during the

7 Prosecutor's case, several topics were raised, and I would like to ask you

8 now whether you personally ever - of course before arriving to

9 The Hague - were in contact with a certain document known as Variant A and

10 B.

11 A. No.

12 Q. Did you familiarise yourself with the contents of that document

13 here in The Hague, that document that we refer to here as Variant A and B?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. Did the Crisis Staff or any other organ, according to your

16 knowledge, have contact in Samac or have you heard from somebody else who

17 knew of this document known as Variant A and B?

18 A. No.

19 Q. Did you know about whether somebody in civilian or military organs

20 discussed Variant A and B in Samac?

21 A. No.

22 Q. Thank you.

23 MR. PANTELIC: Your Honour, just for the record, I have to make

24 certain references now to the -- to the witness statements that we heard

25 here in order to have a proper way of examination. So I would like to

Page 12429

1 make some references to certain witnesses that appeared here before.

2 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. You can go ahead.


4 Q. [Interpretation] When the testimony of Mr. Sulejman Tihic is

5 concerned, tell me please, were you ever a client of Sulejman Tihic?

6 A. No.

7 Q. He was an attorney in Samac, wasn't he?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. You were president of the municipal board of the SDS, and he was

10 president of the municipal board of the SDA; therefore, could you tell us

11 how often did you meet in the official capacity during late 1991 and up

12 until April of 1992?

13 A. He was not the first president of the SDA in Samac.

14 Izet Izetbegovic was.

15 Q. I limited that to the time period mentioned in the indictment,

16 specifically from October of 1991 until April of 1992, so please tell me

17 about that.

18 A. We would meet each other at municipal assembly sessions.

19 Q. And how often would that be?

20 A. These sessions were held once a month, once every two months, and

21 they were not held at all in the period immediately before the beginning

22 of the war.

23 Q. And what did you talk about on those occasions?

24 A. I don't remember speaking to each other directly at all during

25 that period.

Page 12430

1 Q. Did you have any cooperation with him due to party work? Did you

2 analyse material for assembly sessions? Did you work together in any

3 party committees?

4 A. No.

5 Q. When you just told us that you met with him at assembly

6 sessions - that's what you've just told us - and in order to make sure

7 that it is all logical, I'm asking you now in what capacity did you meet

8 each other at those assembly sessions?

9 A. As assemblymen of the Municipal Assembly of Samac.

10 Q. On that occasion, would you normally greet each other? Would you

11 exchange any words? Did you discuss the agenda of the session?

12 A. The municipal assembly has 50 assemblymen. Then there are members

13 of the executive council and other professional staff members, so normally

14 through there would be 50 to 60 people, and I don't think that I

15 specifically exchanged any words with him or shook hands with him.

16 Q. Did the municipal board of SDS have any contacts with the

17 municipal board of the SDA and HDZ?

18 A. These contacts were carried out by clubs of MPs. There was a club

19 of MPs of the SDS, that of the HDZ, and all other parties. So every party

20 had its club of MPs in the municipal assembly that represented the

21 interests of that party.

22 Q. Did you see Mr. Sulejman Tihic in private, privately, or did you

23 meet with your families?

24 A. No.

25 Q. Did you sit with him in cafes or restaurants in Bosanski Samac

Page 12431

1 prior to April of 1992?

2 A. No.

3 Q. Did you ever talk to him about the future set-up of Yugoslavia or

4 political problems and how they could be solved in that first trimester of

5 1992?

6 A. No, not with him personally.

7 Q. Who did you discuss it with, then?

8 A. Those were daily issues discussed among all citizens.

9 Q. Did you on one occasion -- no. First of all, were you ever with

10 him in a restaurant owned by Hamde Tobakovic?

11 A. No.

12 Q. On which occasion you said you would sacrifice your child for the

13 future of the state.

14 A. I have never stated that.

15 Q. Did you frequent the Cafe AS?

16 A. No.

17 Q. Did you frequent the pizzeria of the Bicic brothers?

18 A. No.

19 Q. Did you ever say to Sulejman Tihic that Serbs were used to being

20 in war?

21 A. Sulejman Tihic and I didn't know each other well enough in order

22 to have any personal conversation.

23 Q. I'm asking you this specifically because this is something that a

24 witness stated here. So we will now go question by question. Have you

25 ever told Sulejman Tihic that Serbs were used to wars?

Page 12432

1 A. No.

2 Q. Just prior to the breakout of war in Bosanski Samac, a meeting was

3 held between the municipal officials and those of political parties. Were

4 you familiar with what went on on that meeting?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. Based on your recollection, when was this meeting held? What

7 date?

8 A. The 14th or 15th of April, 1992.

9 Q. At whose initiative was this meeting called?

10 A. At the initiative of the president of the municipal board of the

11 SDS for the Municipalities of Samac, Odzak, Gradacac, and Orasje.

12 Q. Who attended the meeting, based on your recollection? You don't

13 have to give us every single name, but those that you remember.

14 A. Representatives of all three parties from these four

15 municipalities were present there.

16 Q. Do you remember any names?

17 A. President of Gradacac municipality, Sefko Seric -- I think that's

18 what he was called; president of municipal board of the SDS of Odzak,

19 Dragomir Tesanovic then representatives of the SDA and HDZ from Odzak,

20 whose names I don't know; then there was Cvijetin Josipovic from Orasje

21 and representatives of the HDZ and SDA from Orasje; and then from Samac I

22 think there were Mato Nujic, Filip Evic, Izet Izetbegovic,

23 Mirko Jovanovic, and I. But it is possible that I made a mistake with

24 respect to some of the names.

25 Q. Was Sulejman Tihic present there at the meeting?

Page 12433

1 A. I can't remember him being there at the meeting.

2 Q. What were the topics discussed?

3 A. The Lisbon Agreement.

4 Q. In what respect? What parts of it were discussed?

5 A. In the sense of implementing or discussing the implementation of

6 the Lisbon Agreement on the ground. This envisaged the division into

7 three cantons along the ethnic lines in one state where all decisions

8 would be passed based on consensus and where that state was supposed to

9 resemble Switzerland.

10 Q. And what was the position of those who were present? What were

11 the viewpoints expressed, if you remember?

12 A. The meeting was a constructive one, a calm one. Representatives

13 of Odzak, Gradacac, and Orasje mostly agreed that these talks should be

14 continued similar to the way they are conducted at the highest level, and

15 it was agreed that we should meet the following Wednesday and then meet

16 once a week. The Lisbon Agreement envisaged a possibility that set forth,

17 that if the interested parties were unable to agree, on introducing an

18 international arbitration that was to resolve disputes.

19 Q. Were members of the military present at that meeting?

20 A. Mico Djurdjevic, a retired colonel, was present at the meeting.

21 Q. Were any other members of the military there at the meetings, in

22 the corridors around the building? Were there any guards? Was there an

23 increased number of soldiers there?

24 A. No, there were no other soldiers there.

25 Q. Did Colonel Djurdjevic say anything regarding this issue?

Page 12434

1 A. I don't think that he took part in discussion at all.

2 Q. Did you mention some ultimatums or some deadlines by which the

3 agreement had to be reached and some threats if there was a failure to

4 reach such agreements?

5 A. Nobody mentioned any ultimatums or deadlines, nor was the -- nor

6 did the Lisbon Agreement include any deadlines.

7 Q. When you say "nobody," you include yourself, don't you?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. That's what I'm asking you.

10 Did you with Sulejman Tihic from the SDA and Evic from HDZ go to

11 do rounds of the barriers in the area on the eve of the conflict? So I'm

12 talking about March and perhaps early April 1992.

13 A. We visited two villages, but it was on the day when the Muslims in

14 Samac put up barricades to face Serb villages and when they prevented the

15 Serb population from entering the town.

16 Q. Could you be more specific as to the date. When was it that you

17 visited those?

18 A. That was sometime in late 1991, early 1992. I wouldn't know the

19 exact date.

20 Q. On the 17th of April, 1992 did you make a call to Boro Pisarevic

21 and did you talk with Sulejman Tihic on that occasion and did you tell him

22 on the same occasion that he should surrender and that there would be no

23 negotiations with his side and that the Serbs would continue until the

24 final victory?

25 A. No.

Page 12435

1 Q. Did you ever talk with Sulejman Tihic that day at all, on some

2 other occasion but on that same day?

3 A. No, I didn't.

4 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Excuse me.

5 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

6 Q. Did you --

7 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Just for the sake of clarity, your question on

8 line 25 of page 56, you -- where you've got a number of pieces in there.

9 One of the questions would be: Did you make a call to Boro Pisarevic?

10 Number two: Did you talk with Sulejman Tihic on that occasion? And then

11 number three: Did you go on and talk about surrender? And we just have

12 one answer: "No." Could we find out whether, first of all, there was a

13 telephone call made by Dr. Simic to Mr. Pisarevic's home.

14 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, Your Honour.

15 Q. [Interpretation] Could you answer that question.

16 A. I did not make any calls that day.

17 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Thank you.

18 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

19 Q. Did you talk with Simo Zaric and Sulejman Tihic a few days after

20 the 17th of April when Sulejman Tihic was having an interview at

21 Simo Zaric's, and did you say on that occasion that you were not

22 responsible for his release?


24 MR. RE: In relation to following up to Judge Williams's question,

25 there were three questions asked in one. Mr. Pantelic has just put to the

Page 12436

1 witness, or the accused, one of those. The two other questions still

2 remain unanswered. It's unclear whether the "no" was referring to one,

3 two, or three of those.

4 MR. PANTELIC: Yes. In fact, I'm referring to certain portions of

5 the previous testimonies of OTP witnesses.

6 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. That is -- that is clear.

7 MR. PANTELIC: Of episodes, you know.

8 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, yes.

9 MR. PANTELIC: And then in general I put that to the witness and

10 he will say simply whether he's aware of that event or not.

11 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. So do we take it that the "no" is --

12 MR. PANTELIC: Is for all the episodes.

13 JUDGE MUMBA: Is for all. Very well.

14 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

15 Q. So you've understood what I've said. I'm telling you what some

16 witnesses for the Prosecution said here. And after all, you heard them.

17 You know very well which witnesses I'm referring to. In this specific

18 case, I'm referring to Sulejman Tihic, who testified here and who spoke

19 about certain episodes before this Chamber and his perception of your role

20 in all this. So when I'm trying to arrive at some clarifications, you are

21 giving me your affirmative or negative answers, but they refer to the

22 entirety of the episodes that I present to you.

23 Did you ever meet Sulejman Tihic in the restaurant which belonged

24 to Hranaprodukt company, the occasion on which he was bloodied and

25 bruised?

Page 12437

1 A. No.

2 Q. Did you see Sulejman Tihic in the same condition elsewhere in

3 Samac in April 1992?

4 A. No.

5 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Excuse me, Mr. Pantelic, your question on page

6 58, line 24/25 and on to the following page wasn't answered. Did you talk

7 with Simo Zaric and Sulejman Tihic a few days after the 17th when

8 Sulejman Tihic was having an interview at Simo Zaric's, et cetera. So we

9 need to get an answer whether he talked on that occasion.

10 And secondly, when you say "an interview at Simo Zaric's," do you

11 mean at his apartment? Do you mean at an office in the police station or

12 wherever else?

13 MR. PANTELIC: When I -- yeah, I will clarify that. When I said

14 "interview," in official sense -- in Serbian language that means

15 "informativni razgovor," which is very limited to the issue. So maybe

16 it's a matter of translation, but I will clarify that, Your Honour.

17 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Yeah. But it does -- that still doesn't address

18 the issue of the location at Simo Zaric's -- at Simo Zaric's. At which

19 location? Home? Office?

20 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, yes.

21 Q. [Interpretation] Right. So did you a few days after April the

22 17th talk with Simo Zaric and Sulejman Tihic by telephone when

23 Sulejman Tihic was arrested and when he was taken for an interview at

24 Simo Zaric's?

25 A. I believe so.

Page 12438

1 Q. Did you say on that occasion to Simo Zaric that you were not --

2 that it was not in your jurisdiction to have Sulejman Tihic released?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. What did you mean by this, that it was not in your jurisdiction?

5 A. I meant that it was up to the Ministry of the Interior

6 exclusively.

7 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Mr. Pantelic, could I still have an answer as to

8 at which location. Again, we're saying this time now that it was after

9 Mr. Tihic was arrested and when he was taken for an interview at

10 Simo Zaric's. Again, are we talking about the police station?

11 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

12 Q. Yes. Well, you heard the question asked by Judge Williams. Did

13 you talk with Mr. Simo Zaric while he was in the police station?

14 A. I was answering questions concerning my telephone call. I am not

15 sure where I was called from, but I think that that conversation took

16 place, and hence my answer.

17 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Excuse me. Sorry to belabour the point, but I

18 think it's quite important to know whether after Mr. Tihic was

19 arrested - and he was now being interviewed by Mr. Zaric- whether this was

20 in an official location such as the SUP building and was not, shall we

21 say, a more casual tete-a-tete in a cafe or somewhere else.

22 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

23 Q. On that occasion, when you had this conversation with Simo Zaric,

24 when you talked over the telephone --

25 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Lazarevic.

Page 12439

1 MR. LAZAREVIC: I was just informed by the client that they don't

2 receive anything in their earphones, so they cannot follow the trial.

3 JUDGE MUMBA: Can we have some assistance on the earphones.

4 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation] Do you hear the interpretation now?

5 [In English] They didn't hear your question, in fact, Your Honour,

6 so --

7 JUDGE MUMBA: Oh, I see.

8 MR. PANTELIC: So that's maybe a matter of technical --

9 JUDGE MUMBA: If it can be repeated.

10 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Is it working now, Mr. Tadic, Mr. Zaric? Can you

11 hear? You can hear?

12 Okay. Well, maybe I'll just repeat the last question, not the

13 series. I was wanting to know whether the conversation on the telephone

14 between Dr. Simic and Mr. Tihic, when Mr. Tihic had been arrested and was

15 being interviewed in Mr. Zaric's, according to the answer, whether that

16 interview between Mr. Zaric and Mr. Tihic was in the SUP building or

17 whether it was in some other location.

18 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

19 Q. So when you received that phone call, were you informed, did you

20 know where Simo Zaric was calling you from?

21 A. I'm not sure that I asked him that or that I gave it a thought.

22 The problem was that Sulejman Tihic had been arrested and that Simo Zaric

23 and Sulejman Tihic were looking for the way to set him free, and I said

24 that it was not within my terms of reference either to arrest him or to

25 set him free.

Page 12440

1 JUDGE WILLIAMS: So I assume the answer is you don't know where

2 this interview was going on. All you know is that Mr. Tihic had been

3 arrested and he was with Mr. Zaric.

4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

5 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

6 Q. And during that telephone conversation that we are talking about,

7 did you also talk personally by telephone with Mr. Sulejman Tihic?

8 A. I believe so.

9 Q. Did you repeat to him that position that you've just told us

10 about?

11 A. I did.

12 Q. Right. In the restaurant which belonged to Hranaprodukt company,

13 did you meet any of the witnesses for the Prosecution who had testified

14 before this Chamber at the time when he was bloody and bruised?

15 A. No. Nor am I aware that in the Hranaprodukt restaurant there was

16 a soup kitchen.

17 Q. But did you see any of the witnesses for the Prosecution having

18 testified before this Court who would be bloody and bruised anywhere else?

19 A. No.

20 Q. Did you once talk with Simo Zaric about Dikan's murder, committed

21 by Lugar?

22 A. I cannot recall that conversation.

23 Q. In relation to Dragan Lukac, do you know him?

24 A. Only by sight.

25 Q. Did you know what his particular trade was, what was his

Page 12441

1 occupation?

2 A. I did.

3 Q. Did you used to see him in the medical centre officially?

4 A. No.

5 Q. Were you present at the meeting held on the 6th of March, 1992 in

6 the police station in Samac, the meeting at which -- no, let me ask you

7 this first: Were you present at that meeting in the police station?

8 A. I think I was.

9 Q. On that occasion, at the meeting, was Colonel Nikolic there too,

10 Captain Petrovic, a security officer; Vinko Dragicevic, from the police;

11 then Milan Jekic, also from the police; and Mirko Lukic? Were they all

12 present there?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. And what was the subject matter discussed there?

15 A. The implementation of the agreement signed by the

16 Yugoslav People's Army and the Minister of the Interior,

17 Alija Delimustafic.

18 Q. Did you comment on that agreement on that occasion and what was

19 your position?

20 A. I did not comment on it, and I took no position.

21 Q. Did you attend a meeting held on the 12th of April, 1992 in the

22 premises of a neighbourhood community, a meeting attended by you,

23 Dragan Lukac, and Simo Zaric?

24 A. I have no recollection of such a meeting.

25 Q. At that meeting you allegedly discussed certain activities of the

Page 12442

1 army, and Lukac opposed it and you were, as he put it, indolent, with

2 reference to those topics.

3 A. I do not remember attending that meeting.

4 Q. Was Dragan Lukac at a meeting in the municipal hall on the 15th of

5 April, 1992 that you mentioned a while ago, the meeting of municipalities

6 and party officials, discussing the principles of the Lisbon Agreement?

7 A. No.

8 Q. Did you order to arrest Dragan Lukac in Crkvina on the 17th of

9 April, 1992?

10 A. No.

11 Q. Did you attend a meeting on the 11th of April, 1992 to discuss the

12 appointment of Dragan Lukac as chief of police, as proposed by the HDZ?

13 A. No.

14 Q. With reference to Izet Izetbegovic, after the meeting in the

15 municipal hall on the 15th of April, 1992 did you go together to a

16 restaurant and -- no, first, did you go to a restaurant with him?

17 A. I'm not aware of that.

18 Q. Did you perhaps mention to him under some other circumstances that

19 the Serbs would resort to force, to which he responded that you would end

20 up as Dr. Mengele.

21 A. We never conducted any such harsh conversations.

22 Q. I'm asking you about this.

23 A. No, I never said that. And Izet Izetbegovic is a person that I

24 like very much, and I'm really fond of him.

25 Q. But did he tell you that you would end up as Dr. Mengele?

Page 12443

1 A. I don't remember.

2 Q. Did you go with Izet Izetbegovic to the regional staff of the TO

3 in Doboj towards the end of 1991 or beginning of 1992 in the capacity of

4 municipality officials so that you would resolve the question of

5 withdrawing weapons by the TO into JNA depots?

6 A. No.

7 Q. Do you know Esad Dagovic?

8 A. No.

9 Q. In your official capacity, did you enter the building of the

10 Municipal Assembly of Samac in the period from April to August 1992? And

11 how often, if so?

12 A. I think that I did not go into it practically at all.

13 Q. Were you present at a meeting in the village of Struke near Prud

14 towards the end of March 1992 in the house of a certain Mr. Nijemcevic?

15 A. I think that you should put shorter questions.

16 Q. Towards the end of March 1992 were you in the house of

17 Mr. Nijemcevic in Struke on any occasion?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. Could you explain the occasion and could you explain other details

20 related to your stay at that house?

21 A. That was a private house, a private visit attended by neighbours.

22 My visit was a very short one. But I am convinced that the witness who

23 talked about some meeting there was not present in the house.

24 Q. Where did you come from when you came to this house in Struke?

25 From which direction?

Page 12444

1 A. The direction of Samac. It is very close to Samac.

2 Q. How long were you there?

3 A. 15 to 20 minutes.

4 Q. Where did you go afterwards?

5 A. I think that I had to do a house-call. I think that I went to see

6 a certain patient.

7 Q. Do you perhaps remember - it's been ten years after all - but

8 which time of day was it?

9 A. I think it was the morning hours. In the morning.

10 Q. Was Blaz Paradzik present at the meeting?

11 A. I don't think he was present.

12 Q. Did you go -- did you come by yourself or did you come with

13 somebody else to that house?

14 A. I think that I came by myself. I do not remember anybody else

15 being with me.

16 Q. On that occasion did you talk about a plan of annexing the

17 villages where the majority population was Serb in the surroundings of

18 Odzak; that is to say, the annexation of these villages to the

19 municipality of Samac?

20 A. No.

21 Q. You personally or the Crisis Staff, did you issue passes to

22 civilians to leave town?

23 A. No.

24 Q. Do you know Alija Fitozovic?

25 A. By sight.

Page 12445

1 Q. In April 1992 or later, did you have any personal knowledge about

2 the activities of Alija Fitozovic in Bosanski Samac?

3 A. What was talked about in town.

4 Q. And what was talked about in town?

5 A. That he established a unit consisting exclusively of Muslims, that

6 he armed it, that he established various checkpoints, night-time

7 checkpoints that were observing movements of the population, and it was

8 basically within that framework.

9 Q. I am going to convey an episode to you now that Stevan Todorovic

10 spoke about, and you are going to give me an answer as to whether that was

11 an accurate description of this episode, or perhaps if you have some

12 explanations, feel free to give them.

13 On the 12th of April, 1992 were you present at the premises of the

14 company of the Agro Posavina in Donji Zabar at a meeting that was attended

15 by Colonel Nikolic as well, then Mico Ivanovic and Stevan Todorovic, and

16 on that occasion Colonel Nikolic informed about the arrival of a group of

17 volunteers from Serbia in the region of Bosanski Samac?

18 A. No.

19 Q. Were you present --

20 JUDGE MUMBA: Let's just be clear -- clearer maybe.

21 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, Your Honour.

22 JUDGE MUMBA: The answer given is no. It means -- the accused

23 means he was not present at that meeting; is that what it means? Or that

24 the things suggested were not discussed? What is the correct

25 interpretation?

Page 12446

1 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

2 Q. You heard Judge Mumba.

3 A. That means that I was not present at the meeting.

4 JUDGE MUMBA: Thank you.

5 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

6 Q. Were you present at a meeting on the 15th of April, 1992 in

7 Obudovac that was attended by the following persons including yourself,

8 that is Milos Bogdanovic, Savo Popovic, Dusan Tanasic, Mico Ivanovic, and

9 Mirko Jovanovic?

10 A. I think that there were other names involved too. Yes.

11 Q. So you were at that meeting.

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. Tell us, what are the other names? What was it that you wanted to

14 add? Who else was there?

15 A. I'm already tired and it's hard for me to focus now.

16 MR. PANTELIC: It's 1.00, Your Honour. Maybe we could have a

17 break and then I have virtually - maximum 15 questions - 15 episodes like

18 this and --

19 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Pantelic. Because sometimes you're going

20 in too much detail, which is not necessary.

21 MR. PANTELIC: Okay, Your Honour, I will take your instructions.

22 JUDGE MUMBA: So how long do you think you will take? Because you

23 were supposed to take half an hour. You went on --

24 MR. PANTELIC: Let me say 15 minute, 20 maximum.

25 JUDGE MUMBA: All right. 20 minutes when we start in the

Page 12447

1 afternoon.

2 We'll adjourn now and resume our proceedings at 14.30 hours.

3 --- Luncheon recess taken at 1.00 p.m.

4 --- On resuming at 2.33 p.m.

5 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Pantelic.

6 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, Your Honour.

7 Q. [Interpretation] So Dr. Simic, before the break, we talked about

8 this meeting on the 15th of April, 1992 in Obudovac. How far away is

9 Obudovac from Samac and in which direction?

10 A. [Microphone not activated]

11 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.

12 JUDGE MUMBA: The microphones for the accused.

13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Around 20 kilometres, to the east,

14 towards Bijeljina.

15 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

16 Q. Before the break you said that apart from those names that I

17 mentioned, there were some other persons attending the meeting. Have you

18 remembered in the meantime? Can you give us the other names?

19 A. I cannot.

20 Q. From which direction did you come to Pelagicevo -- sorry,

21 Obudovac?

22 A. From the direction of Bosanski Samac.

23 Q. On that occasion did you say to those who were present that you

24 were coming from Colonel Nikolic, who has provided information that over

25 the next 48 hours, according to his information, there is going to be an

Page 12448

1 attack by Croat and Muslim forces against Samac?

2 A. No.

3 Q. Did you inform those present that members of the Crisis Staff who

4 were proposed should be in Crkvina on the 16th of April in the evening

5 hours?

6 A. No.

7 Q. Did you say then that Colonel Nikolic insisted that Fadil Topcagic

8 should be on the Crisis Staff?

9 A. No.

10 Q. What was the topic on the agenda of that meeting, briefly?

11 A. Information regarding the meeting in the Municipal Assembly of

12 Samac.

13 Q. On that occasion, did you say that Stevan Todorovic, Milos

14 Bogdanovic, and you should be in Crkvina and that after that you should

15 address the inhabitants of Samac after the military operation is over?

16 A. No.

17 Q. From April until the end of 1993 did Stevan Todorovic report to

18 you personally orally about the situation and about the conditions of

19 imprisonment in Bosanski Samac in which the prisoners were?

20 A. No.

21 Q. You personally, or the Crisis Staff as an institution, did you

22 give instructions to start investigation proceedings against Croats or

23 Muslims who took part in the armed rebellion?

24 A. No.

25 Q. So that relates to you personally and to the Crisis Staff as an

Page 12449

1 institution.

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. Who was in charge of these proceedings?

4 A. The Ministry of the Interior.

5 Q. Did the Crisis Staff have the authority to release larger groups

6 of prisoners who were envisaged for an exchange procedure?

7 A. No.

8 Q. Did you personally have such authority?

9 A. No.

10 Q. Around the 19th of April, 1992 did you say over the telephone to

11 Stevan Todorovic that Sulejman Tihic was in the apartment of

12 Boro Pisarevic?

13 A. No.

14 JUDGE LINDHOLM: Excuse me if I interrupt you, but going back to

15 page 71 and line 11: Did the Crisis Staff have the authority to release

16 larger groups of prisoners, and so on, and then going forward. Who had

17 the authority?

18 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

19 Q. You heard the question of Judge Lindholm.

20 A. The Ministry of the Interior and Ministry of Justice.

21 JUDGE LINDHOLM: And if I may continue, on which level -- or

22 rather, of which level are we now talking?

23 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

24 Q. In Samac, at the level of the municipality of Samac, which organ

25 was in charge of the exchange procedure of a large number of prisoners?

Page 12450

1 A. Are we now speaking of the exchange or the imprisonment?

2 Q. The exchange.


4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The exchange is a complex procedure,

5 and it was under the control of the Ministry of Justice but also all

6 security services in the field, both military and police.

7 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

8 Q. As for the detention and imprisonment?

9 A. The Ministry of the Interior was in charge of those affairs, as

10 was the military police.

11 MR. PANTELIC: May I proceed, Your Honour, with the questions?

12 Q. [Interpretation] Please tell me, did Stevan Todorovic have to ask

13 for approval, a written or a verbal one, from the Crisis Staff if he

14 wanted to release one of the prisoners?

15 A. No.

16 Q. Did he have to ask for an approval from you personally?

17 A. No.

18 Q. Do you personally know that the prisoners in the first few weeks

19 after the conflict broke out, between the 16th and 17th of April, were

20 taken for their meals to the restaurant of the Uniglas factory?

21 A. I learned of it later.

22 Q. When?

23 A. During May of 1992.

24 Q. Can you remember who did you learn this from?

25 MR. LAZAREVIC: Your Honour, maybe I'm --

Page 12451

1 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Lazarevic.

2 MR. LAZAREVIC: I was listening very carefully to what the accused

3 said, and I believe he said during November 1992, but I could be wrong, of

4 course. Here it says "May."

5 JUDGE MUMBA: Can we have that clarified. Was it may or --

6 MR. LAZAREVIC: If I'm wrong, I do apologise to the witness and to

7 the Trial Chamber also.

8 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

9 Q. Please tell us, when did you learn that prisoners were taken for

10 their meals to the restaurant of the Uniglas factory?

11 A. I learned of it during May of 1992. And as to whom did I learn

12 this from, after ten years I really can't tell you.

13 Q. Did Stevan Todorovic inform you personally about the establishment

14 of detention units in such locations as the elementary school, secondary

15 school, and the TO building?

16 A. No.

17 Q. Do you know whether he informed about this the institution itself?

18 I mean the Crisis Staff.

19 A. He informed the Crisis Staff that there were prisoners.

20 Q. And you, as a member of the Crisis Staff, did you acquire that

21 information at that time as well?

22 A. Could you be more specific?

23 Q. Since in your previous answer you said that he did not inform you

24 about this personally, and now you are telling us that the Crisis Staff as

25 an institution was informed -- now, in view of the fact that you were the

Page 12452

1 president of the Crisis Staff, could you please clarify whether you in

2 your capacity as president of the Crisis Staff had information about these

3 locations where people were imprisoned of which you were informed through

4 Stevan Todorovic -- the Crisis Staff was informed.

5 A. I had that information which he presented at the sessions of the

6 Crisis Staff, which were mostly quite limited and boiled down to the fact

7 that there were some prisoners.

8 Q. Did anybody speak about the conditions under which prisoners were

9 kept? Did anybody speak about their treatment or possible measures to be

10 taken?

11 A. No.

12 Q. Did Stevan Todorovic inform you that Lugar had killed Dikan?

13 A. No.

14 Q. Did you personally know about the fact that some members of the

15 volunteer units were mistreating prisoners?

16 A. No.

17 Q. Did Stevan Todorovic inform you that he had killed the person

18 nicknamed Antesa?

19 A. No.

20 Q. Did you know that Father Jozo Puskaric was detained?

21 A. No.

22 Q. Did you personally decide who was eligible to be exchanged?

23 A. No.

24 Q. Did you personally have anything to do with work obligation in

25 Odzak?

Page 12453

1 A. No.

2 Q. Were you aware of plunder, certain cases of plunder carried out by

3 members of volunteer units, cases in which certain vehicles were stolen?

4 A. I knew of it partially.

5 Q. Can you please explain this.

6 A. I don't know. What do you mean, "explain this"?

7 Q. Well, you said that you partially knew of it, so my first question

8 would be: What cases were you aware of?

9 A. On the road one could see a volunteer driving a vehicle, and I

10 would ask him where did he get that vehicle, and the driver would explain

11 to me that he had taken the vehicle from somebody.

12 Q. Did you ask for an explanation from police organs? Did you take

13 steps to have such cases prosecuted?

14 A. In principle, yes.

15 MR. RE: Perhaps that could be clarified.

16 JUDGE LINDHOLM: This is a very confusing answer. "In principle,

17 yes." Yes or no?

18 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

19 Q. Please be more precise.

20 A. I tried to ensure that all organs did their job, that the Ministry

21 of the Interior did what it was supposed to, that the judiciary did this

22 as well, and they were in charge of these matters. The police organs and

23 the judiciary were in charge of this.

24 JUDGE LINDHOLM: If I may continue.

25 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, Your Honour.

Page 12454

1 JUDGE LINDHOLM: As to the action taken by the accused, it's not a

2 sufficient answer to say "in principle." Did you or did you not?

3 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

4 Q. And I would like to add this: Did you request the police to

5 instigate proceedings?

6 A. Yes, both from the police and the judiciary. I requested them to

7 put an end to criminal acts and to prosecute.

8 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Excuse me, Mr. Pantelic.

9 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, Your Honour.

10 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Dr. Simic, when you made these requests, were

11 these verbal requests or were these requests in writing, signed by

12 yourself on behalf of the Crisis Staff, War Presidency, whatever?

13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Those were verbal requests and

14 practical moves, steps. So verbal requests to have this done and

15 practical steps to ensure logistics necessary, both to the Ministry of the

16 Interior and the judiciary to carry out their duties. One of the

17 practical steps taken was that we designated a coordinator who was in

18 charge of coordinating the judicial organs in our municipality. Then we

19 also asked the Ministry of the Interior to demobilise those judges who

20 were at the front so that they could come back and do their work.

21 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Thank you.

22 MR. RE: Your Honours, before Mr. Pantelic goes on.


24 MR. RE: The witness -- sorry, Dr. Simic again used the word "we"

25 in his last answer. Again, I seek clarification of what we means. We is

Page 12455

1 more than one person. Does he mean we the Crisis Staff, we the assembly,

2 we, myself and one other person?

3 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Can we have clarification, please, from the

4 accused.

5 MR. RE: And I stress that I seek it every time the word "we" is

6 used, that it's clarified exactly who Dr. Simic is talking about.


8 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

9 Q. I think that it is in the interests of your case to be more

10 precise.

11 A. When I say "we," that pertains either to the Crisis Staff or to

12 the War Presidency or to the municipal parliament.

13 MR. RE: Well, that's not the clarification that I'm seeking with

14 respect. The clarification -- there are three different organs Dr. Simic

15 is talking about there. He's just saying it would be one of the three.

16 In my submission, we should know exactly which one he's referring to every

17 time he does and that he doesn't use the word "we" without explaining what

18 he means by "we."

19 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. And this last question, when he's talking

20 about asking the Ministry of the Interior to demobilise the judges who

21 were at the front so they could come back and do their work. He did say

22 "we." At that stage, which institution is he referring to?

23 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

24 Q. You have heard the question.

25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, it wasn't translated

Page 12456

1 well. I said that we requested the Ministry of Defence, not the Ministry

2 of Foreign Affairs.

3 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]

4 Q. But the key point here is who do you mean by "we"? Please be very

5 specific. Do you mean I, Dr. Simic? Do you mean the Crisis Staff as an

6 institution or the War Presidency as the institution? This is the essence

7 that we need to gather from your answer.

8 A. I tried to never speak on behalf of myself personally. I was

9 president of the municipal assembly while the Crisis Staff existed. It

10 existed in lieu of the municipal assembly. The War Presidency also

11 existed in lieu of the municipal assembly. And then the municipal

12 assembly itself started functioning, and I always was a representative of

13 that body. And when I say "we," I refer to that body, depending on which

14 time period the question pertained.

15 JUDGE MUMBA: Precisely, that is the reason why we also want

16 specifications, because it seems at different periods different

17 institutions were operating or in charge.

18 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation] Yes, precisely so.

19 Q. We are now discussing the fact that you saw some volunteers

20 driving vehicles that they appropriated. In what period of time did you

21 observe this?

22 A. Between May and June of 1992.

23 Q. Did you then take the steps that you mentioned in terms of putting

24 requests that some legal measures be taken?

25 A. Measures were taken by the Crisis Staff in a sense that they

Page 12457

1 wanted to prevent crime in the territory of our municipality by requesting

2 competent organs to do their job.

3 Q. Do you know that the goods from the furniture factory were

4 transferred to a town called Ruma in Serbia throughout 1992 and 1993?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. Can you give us more details. What was the time period and what

7 were the reasons for transferring these goods?

8 A. There's a decree of the government of Republika Srpska to put on

9 the market final goods and to take out the goods from the war zone so that

10 they can be used later on or bartered for other goods.

11 Q. Who was in charge of that in Samac?

12 A. The executive council, Secretariat for Economy.

13 Q. If you know, please tell us what kind of a company, in terms of

14 property ownership, was the furniture factory? Was it public, private, or

15 state-owned?

16 A. It was state-owned.

17 Q. Who was in charge of managing and leading that factory, if it was

18 state-owned indeed?

19 A. Ministry of Economy of Republika Srpska was in charge of it.

20 Q. Do you have any knowledge whether Stevan Todorovic travelled to

21 Belgrade in the summer of 1992 in order to intercede on behalf of Crni and

22 have him released from detention?

23 A. No.

24 Q. Did you advise or prompt practically Milos Bogdanovic in relation

25 to a number of people who were to be sent to Serbia for training?

Page 12458

1 A. No.

2 Q. Did you, together with Miroslav Tadic and Simo Zaric, make plans

3 concerning the persecution of non-Serb population in Bosanski Samac?

4 A. No.

5 Q. Did you make such plans with some other people?

6 A. No.

7 Q. Did you, Miroslav Tadic, and Simo Zaric plan or in any other way

8 aided, abetted, or organised the deportation in Bosanski Samac?

9 A. I do not understand that word. What does "deportation" mean?

10 Q. Did you, Simo Zaric, and Miroslav Tadic plan, carry out, or

11 organise in some other way forcible transfer of non-Serb population or

12 ethnic cleansing from Samac?

13 A. I don't understand the term "ethnic cleansing" either. I need a

14 precise question.

15 MR. PANTELIC: I've finished with my examination-in-chief,

16 Your Honour.

17 MR. RE: Your Honours, before Mr. Pantelic --

18 JUDGE MUMBA: But can you explain to the witness your question,

19 because he hasn't answered, because he complained that he doesn't

20 understand "ethnic cleansing" either. Can you use simple terms in your

21 question so that he can understand the question.

22 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, of course.

23 Q. [Interpretation] Did you, Simo Zaric, and Miroslav Tadic prepare,

24 plan, or organise in some other way the procedure of exchange of the

25 civilian population to and from Samac?

Page 12459

1 A. I cannot answer yes or no to that question.

2 Q. Well, then can you give us a broader answer? What kind of an

3 answer can you give us?

4 A. I can say that we did not plan any departure of the non-Serb

5 population from the territory of the Samac municipality, nor was it ever

6 our objective.

7 Q. Did you personally have a discriminatory attitude towards the

8 non-Serb population in Bosanski Samac, in terms of their ethnic or

9 religious background, of the non-Serb population?

10 A. No.

11 MR. PANTELIC: I think I've finished, Your Honour, my

12 examination-in-chief. Thank you.

13 JUDGE MUMBA: Very well.

14 MR. RE: Your Honours, before Mr. Pantelic sits down.


16 MR. RE: The Prosecution -- it appears he hasn't put to his client

17 the allegations contained in paragraphs 11 and 12 of the indictment.

18 That's the wider context of Bosnia. He appears to have confined his last

19 questions to Bosanski Samac.

20 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Yes. Although it is the choice of the Defence

21 how they put it, but it's fair to the accused to put things to him which

22 are in the indictment so that he has an opportunity to deal with them.

23 MR. PANTELIC: Well, it -- for us as a Defence we think that there

24 is not any evidence with regard to that issue, but I would of course

25 follow the suggestion and instructions.

Page 12460

1 Q. [Interpretation] Therefore, did you, Miroslav Tadic, and

2 Simo Zaric plan the process of banishment of the non-Serb population in a

3 broader area of Bosnia and Herzegovina?

4 A. No.

5 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Very well.

6 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you, Your Honour.

7 [Trial Chamber confers]

8 JUDGE MUMBA: I had indicated earlier that you can finish your

9 questions as planned. But in view of the matters that were raised by the

10 Prosecution yesterday, we shall not formally close the

11 examination-in-chief. We'll wait and see whether there will be any

12 further developments which may necessitate your putting some more

13 questions to the accused.

14 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, Your Honour. Well, all three Defence teams

15 were informed yesterday during the lunch break that pursuant to Rule 68,

16 the Prosecution, I would say, has not fulfilled its obligations of

17 disclosure of materials which may be possibly exculpatory for our clients.

18 In particular, I was informed by the Prosecution that they

19 recently discovered seven binders of such materials. Of course in

20 relation to Rule 70, they have to, I would say, additionally make an

21 overview and check of these materials, and then they will be in a

22 situation to provide the Defence with the certain materials.

23 Well, since this is an extremely serious issue, where in

24 particular the Defence for Mr. Blagoje Simic was informed of that fact in

25 the middle of examination-in-chief in capacity -- Dr. Simic in capacity of

Page 12461

1 a witness before this Trial Chamber, I have accordingly informed my client

2 yesterday and very briefly this morning about the legal aspects of that

3 issue and problem. And since we are now in some kind of very hypothetical

4 situation.

5 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Because that's what I was about to say,

6 that --

7 MR. PANTELIC: That is correct. Yes, Your Honour.

8 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. The documents haven't yet been furnished to

9 the Defence. Neither yourself nor your colleagues know to what extent,

10 yeah, your cases may be affected. Perhaps we can wait for submissions

11 until that is done, and I may as well go back to the Prosecution and find

12 out the latest.

13 MR. PANTELIC: Yes. And then maybe we could be in a situation to

14 respond and to --

15 JUDGE MUMBA: Yeah, of course, Mr. Pantelic.

16 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, yes. Of course. Thank you.

17 JUDGE MUMBA: Maybe the accused can move back to the former seat.

18 If I may explain to the accused, you are still continuing with the

19 examination-in-chief. The finalisation will be dealt with later of the

20 procedural issues have been discussed by the Trial Chamber and the

21 parties. But in the meantime, since you're not giving evidence any more,

22 you may go back to your former seat.

23 Yes, the Prosecution, any latest information after what you

24 submitted yesterday?

25 MR. RE: I can inform the Trial Chamber the situation is the

Page 12462

1 following: Mr. Pantelic just referred to seven binders. There may be

2 some confusion there. The seven binders are binders of material in

3 relation to Dr. Blagoje Simic only as a result of a system-wide name

4 search in relation to him. The Prosecution received that material, I

5 think it was late on Monday night, and we are in the process of reviewing

6 those seven binders at the moment. We are reviewing it obviously for,

7 one, our own purposes, and two, to comply with Rule 68, which is to

8 disclose to the Defence the existence of material known to the Prosecutor.

9 We are presently going through those seven binders.

10 In relation to the two remaining defendants, those searches should

11 be completed, I'm told, by the close of business on Tuesday. That is only

12 in relation to their names, a system-wide or an all-system search in

13 relation to their names. The Prosecution hopes to be able to complete its

14 review of that material for the purposes of Rule 68 by the end of next

15 week. That is only in relation to the names of the defendant -- of the

16 three accused. So it's not a matter of turning over seven binders.

17 JUDGE MUMBA: No, no. Yes, that is appreciated. But I seem to be

18 confused. You are indicating that you'll be able to complete reviewing

19 the material concerning Dr. Blagoje Simic when?

20 MR. RE: I can't give you -- unfortunately I cannot give you a

21 precise date. The mechanics of this -- the material comes from many

22 different collections that the OTP holds in its evidence and information

23 support unit, millions of documents. His name is entered into the system

24 and it comes -- the name may come up in many, many, different contexts,

25 including in testimony in this case and in witness statements, which the

Page 12463

1 accused -- the Defence of course already has. A lawyer has to go through

2 and initially review all the material to find out, A, whether it's

3 relevant, and B, whether it's --

4 JUDGE MUMBA: Very well. We don't need the details. So you are

5 saying that you as Prosecution in this case may be able to complete your

6 exercise by Tuesday?

7 MR. RE: No. There are two issues. One is Dr. Simic. We are

8 reviewing those seven binders at the moment. I can't tell you at the

9 moment because -- this is why the mechanics are important. We need a --

10 JUDGE MUMBA: Very well.

11 MR. RE: Language translator to look at all the documents that are

12 in B/C/S -- for obviously both sides. We will have the results of the

13 searches of Mr. Tadic and Mr. Zaric by close of business Tuesday. We will

14 then start to review those. They're one set of searches.

15 In regard -- in relation to the witness searches I briefly spoke

16 about yesterday, the Prosecution did all systems -- or system-wide

17 searches on all the witnesses it called and provided that information as

18 those witnesses were called during the course of the trial. Those haven't

19 been updated, but that is not an enormous issue. They will be updated

20 because obligation to disclose is obviously an ongoing one. The more

21 important issue is the system-wide or all-systems search of the relevant

22 criteria in relation to the defendants and all the other possibilities in

23 the case.

24 The estimate - and this is before we have all the search criteria

25 and keywords. And we're working with the Defence, we have given them

Page 12464

1 copies of the search in 1998, which was before another - I think - 3

2 million documents were added to the collection. They are providing us

3 with their own keywords, which we will put into the system, which will

4 hopefully shorten the proceedings. We don't know yet at the moment -- the

5 estimate, as of yesterday -- that's without that specific

6 information -- is maybe 100 person days. Now, person days is a term used

7 for one person sitting, producing, and reviewing the material. It may

8 produce 100 binders; it may not. We don't know. So the acting Prosecutor

9 has -- is putting a team into place to start reviewing this material as

10 soon as we have the results of it. Then we can start looking at it, and

11 for the purposes of disclosure to the Defence.

12 So I -- at this moment I cannot give any estimate of how long it

13 will take. It could take -- it could take several months to do it. It

14 could be shorter, depending upon what's produced and how many people we

15 can get on to the job, because we need lawyers and translators who can sit

16 down and look at every document which is produced.

17 [Trial Chamber confers]

18 JUDGE MUMBA: Having received this information, the Trial Chamber

19 will adjourn for half an hour and come back and inform the parties what

20 the next course of action will be.

21 But before we adjourn, we have a decision concerning the complaint

22 that the Defence raised on the -- on Tuesday, the 12th of November,

23 concerning the publication of the report of the expert witness,

24 Professor Kecmanovic by a Sarajevo newspaper, namely the Dani magazine, on

25 3rd October, 2002 and for the refusal of the said newspaper to accede to

Page 12465

1 the Defence requests to stop further publications.

2 The Trial Chamber has found that the expert report of

3 Professor Kecmanovic was publicly filed on 20th September. It was

4 therefore available in the public domain. The Tribunal's practice is to

5 public all public documents in all trials unless otherwise ordered by the

6 Chamber. The suggestion, therefore, that the report may have been leaked

7 from the Tribunal is clearly misconceived. The Trial Chamber would take

8 action where appropriate if non-public material were disclosed to the

9 public in violation of the Tribunal's rules and orders.

10 In this complaint, the Trial Chamber finds that there was no legal

11 impediment to the publication of the said report by the said newspaper,

12 even before Professor Kecmanovic formally presented his report before the

13 Trial Chamber, so no action can be taken by the Trial Chamber against the

14 newspaper.

15 We'll adjourn now and reconvene at 15.45.

16 MR. PANTELIC: Your Honour, I do apologise. On the previous

17 issue, do we have a possibility to address the Trial Chamber on the issue

18 that was just raised by the Prosecution?

19 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. That's why we are coming back.

20 MR. PANTELIC: Okay. Thank you.

21 MR. RE: I'm sorry, Your Honour. Before -- I apologise. I've --


23 MR. RE: I really apologise for this. There's something I have to

24 add. Can you just excuse me for one moment.


Page 12466

1 MR. RE: The -- in case there is any misapprehension about what I

2 am saying on behalf of the Prosecutor to the Trial Chamber, it's not that

3 we have failed to disclose. It's that we are in the process of reviewing.

4 We have disclosed as we have gone.

5 JUDGE MUMBA: That is understood. That has been understood. Your

6 explanation has been understood.

7 MR. RE: Thank you. I just want to make it completely clear that

8 we understand the ongoing nature of the obligation.

9 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, yes. Yes.

10 MR. RE: And this is something we're doing now, which we did

11 before. We are updating an earlier search at this stage.

12 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. We've understood that, because we know that

13 there is no limitation on Rule 68.

14 MR. RE: Yes.

15 JUDGE MUMBA: It's an ongoing obligation. Yes.

16 MR. RE: Thank you, Your Honour.

17 JUDGE MUMBA: That is understood.

18 We'll adjourn for half an hour.

19 --- Break taken at 3.20 p.m.

20 --- On resuming at 3.49 p.m.

21 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. The Defence wanted to say something, but it

22 will be very, very brief because nothing has been discovered yet.

23 Mr. Pantelic.

24 MR. PANTELIC: Well, just in principle, Your Honour, I would like

25 to inform the Trial Chamber that yesterday I have discussed that matter,

Page 12467

1 as I stated, with my client. And since this issue might affect very

2 seriously his position and his defence -- I mean, speaking hypothetically,

3 because my understanding was that a certain, I would say -- a quantity or

4 number of documents which is now in a procedure for reviewing by the

5 Prosecution, in terms of Rule 68, might be hypothetically of certain

6 importance, firstly, for his testimony in chief here before the Trial

7 Chamber. And then also with regard to the numerous lines of

8 cross-examinations of various OTP witnesses in the Prosecutor case. So

9 simply we are not in a situation to realise now without more details --

10 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. That's why I said --

11 MR. PANTELIC: From the Prosecution --

12 JUDGE MUMBA: Yeah. That's why I said briefly, because I know you

13 haven't got the documents yet, if any.

14 MR. PANTELIC: That's correct.

15 Maybe my colleagues also have to add something.


17 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you.

18 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Lukic.

19 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I wish to express my

20 deep concern, having heard this information. Why, we are all familiar

21 with Rule 68, and that the Prosecution is under permanent obligation. I

22 shall remind you that at the Pre-Trial Conference when Catharine B. asked

23 a question, my learned friend Di Fazio said quite clearly that he had

24 disclosed all the material under Rule 68, that there was no other

25 evidence. And now we hear that the Prosecution has been in possession of

Page 12468

1 this material since 1998 and that they have been examining this material

2 all the time. And I heard the Chamber voice its concern, not to mention

3 us, twice already during the Prosecution case documents surfaced, the

4 document for Esad Dagovic and Witness M, who turned up during the

5 cross-examination. It is really a matter of utmost concern to us to learn

6 the Prosecution has been in possession of this material for a long time

7 and they have been systematising them through some database or what. The

8 Defence is not interested how the Prosecution classifies its information,

9 what it does.

10 What we would like to know: If the Prosecution had this material

11 during their case and they were aware of it, they had to disclose these

12 documents to us straight away, if there are any said documents. And

13 again, hypothetically, if the Prosecution comes across such documents and

14 discloses them to us, we shall insist to learn when did the Prosecution

15 come by that particular document which they are disclosing to us at this

16 stage. Thank you.

17 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Pisarevic.

18 MR. PISAREVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I'm not going to

19 repeat what my colleagues have already said. Merely, I wish to voice my

20 profound concern with regard to the situation that we now find ourselves

21 in. I think in view of the position of Mr. Zaric's defence, and it is

22 identical with the position of Mr. Miroslav Tadic's defence, I will not be

23 repeating what my colleague Mr. Lukic has said regarding the obligation of

24 the Prosecution to, as we have a reciprocal procedure, and that they were

25 simply duty-bound to immediately disclose the material to us immediately

Page 12469

1 after having received this material. It is very important for us to

2 obtain this information. We cannot say what we shall find in these new

3 documents. But in any event, I think that without it, the participation

4 in these proceedings will be brought into question, or rather, what would

5 be brought into question would be adequate legal assistance to our

6 client's, the accused, in this case. That is all. Thank you.

7 MR. RE: Your Honour, may I respond to something which Mr. Lukic

8 said which is quite inaccurate.


10 MR. RE: In relation to the Prosecution's case.


12 MR. RE: The Prosecution does not, as Mr. Lukic said -- has not

13 had all this material in its possession and been reviewing it and

14 withholding it in any way. The Prosecution has since 1998 added several

15 million documents to its collection. They were not electronically

16 searchable across the entire system until various stages of last year.

17 The situation is we are aware of our ongoing obligation. We have

18 to do another search of what is there. We do not know what is there and

19 won't until we have the results and have reviewed it. We are not

20 withholding any information. We are completely aware of the ongoing

21 disclosure obligations.

22 Now that we have become aware that we haven't done another systems

23 search, we are doing one immediately.

24 JUDGE MUMBA: Very well. The Trial Chamber expects the

25 Prosecution to work throughout the weekend and perhaps Monday and Tuesday

Page 12470

1 to complete whatever they are doing about this, and the proceedings will

2 continue on Wednesday. On Wednesday, we shall sit at 9.00 hours, which is

3 20th November.

4 The accused should be ready for cross-examination on Wednesday,

5 depending on the situation of the procedural matters that have been

6 raised.

7 So we'll adjourn until Wednesday, 20th November, at 9.00 hours.

8 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned

9 at 3.57 p.m., to be reconvened on Wednesday,

10 the 20th day of November, 2002, at 9.00 a.m.