Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 5767

 1                           Wednesday, 16 June 2010

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           --- Upon commencing at 2.21 p.m.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Good afternoon to everyone.

 6             Mr. Registrar, would you please call the case.

 7             THE REGISTRAR:  Good afternoon, Your Honours.

 8             Good afternoon, everybody in and around the courtroom.

 9             This is case number IT-03-69-T, the Prosecutor versus

10     Jovica Stanisic and Franko Simatovic.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Registrar.

12              Any problems with the -- Mr. Stanisic, can you now hear us?

13     Thank you.

14             Mr. Jordash, before I give you an opportunity to continue your

15     cross-examination, we are going through all the submissions and

16     transcripts dealing with matter you raised yesterday, and matters are not

17     yet entirely clear.  It was in of a different context than the matter was

18     raised at that time.  The Chamber is considering - we have not made up

19     our mind yet, we first want to review all the documents - to have a

20     meeting out of court.  It's primarily an administrative matter, which

21     does not directly affect what happens in court.  And that we would then

22     meet with presiding judge, representatives of the Registry, and you.  So

23     to see what exactly it is that you would wish to have, and to see what --

24     instead of making eternal submissions, and try to come to a solution as

25     quickly as possible.

Page 5768

 1             MR. JORDASH:  Thank you, Your Honour.

 2                           [The witness takes the stand]

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Witness JF-048, I would like to remind you - but

 4     perhaps you first confirm that you hear me in a language you understand.

 5             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I can hear you well.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  I would like to remind you that you are still bound

 7     by the solemn declaration you've given yesterday at the beginning of your

 8     testimony.

 9                           WITNESS:  JF-048 [Resumed]

10                           [Witness answered through interpreter]

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Jordash, please proceed.

12             MR. JORDASH:  Your Honours, I apologise, but our screen here

13     isn't working, so I don't know if that can be looked at.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Which screen is it?  Oh, yes.

15             MR. JORDASH:  This one.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Could someone assist Mr. Jordash?

17             Any other screen you can look at, Mr. Jordash?

18             MR. JORDASH:  I think -- I think we can probably use this one in

19     the meantime; the one to my right, I think.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, if you can look at it.  I don't know whether

21     it's the socket or the screen itself which causes the problems.

22             MR. KNOOPS:  It's working, Your Honour.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, please proceed.

24             MR. JORDASH:  Could we have on e-court, please, the witness's

25     first statement of 2000.  And, I beg your pardon, the list of P numbers

Page 5769

 1     has escaped me.  So if -- P523, please.

 2                           Cross-examination by Mr. Jordash: [Continued]

 3        Q.   While that's coming up on the screen, good afternoon,

 4     Mr. Witness.

 5        A.   Good afternoon.

 6        Q.   You spoke yesterday about somebody saying to you or you

 7     concluding that it was difficult to join the unit but even more difficult

 8     to leave.

 9             Do you recall that?

10        A.   Yes, I can recall that.

11        Q.   Am I correct that you joined the unit, and the process was this:

12     You met --

13             MR. JORDASH:  Perhaps we should go into a private session,

14     please, Your Honour.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  We move into private session.

16                           [Private session]

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 5770











11 Pages 5770-5777 redacted. Private session.















Page 5778

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6   (redacted)

 7   (redacted)

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19                           [Open session]

20             MR. JORDASH:  Could we --

21             THE REGISTRAR:  We're back in open session, Your Honours.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed, Mr. Jordash.

23             MR. JORDASH:  Thank you.

24             Please could we go to page 5 of the English version, and page 5

25     of the B/C/S in the document on the screen, which is P523.

Page 5779

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Not to be shown to the public.

 2             MR. JORDASH:  Not to be shown to the public.

 3        Q.   Am I correct -- no, I'll wait until the document's on the screen.

 4             And the paragraph I'm interested in, Mr. Witness, is the

 5     paragraph -- the first paragraph in the English and, I think, the first

 6     full paragraph of the B/C/S, which -- and it should start with:

 7             "... but the existence and name of the JATD ..."

 8             Do you have that?

 9        A.   Yes, I'm reading it right now.

10        Q.   And let me read the specific portion I'm interested in:

11             "Because members of the JATD wore red berets, they became known

12     as the 'Red Berets,' but they were not officially part of the MUP

13     structure but were, in fact, the paramilitary arm of the state security

14     service of the Serbian MUP."

15             Was it the case --

16             Do you have that, Mr. Witness?  Do you see that?

17        A.   Yes, I do.

18        Q.   Was it the case that after your time at location 1 and 2, or

19     thereabouts, the unit being referred to in this statement became known as

20     the JATD?

21        A.   To the best of my recollection, the official name of the unit for

22     anti-terrorist operations only came into existence after location 5 was

23     ceremonially opened.  I remember that well.  In my belief, that's when

24     its name became official.

25        Q.   And is it the case that after the name JATD became official that

Page 5780

 1     the unit became known as the Red Berets?

 2        A.   No.  I think I've said already that I heard of the name

 3     Red Berets for the first time when we were still at location 1 during a

 4     meeting and, of course, also at location 2 later on.  We were either

 5     called the Red Berets or Frenki's Men, but not much was known about us at

 6     the time.

 7        Q.   Now, looking at the paragraph in your statement, you refer to the

 8     JATD, the Red Berets, as, in fact, the paramilitary arm of the state

 9     security service of the Serbian MUP.

10             Could you please define what you mean by "paramilitary unit" and

11     why you use the term "paramilitary"?

12        A.   I will try to explain it in my way.  I hope you'll understand.

13             If you join a MUP unit, if you become part of the MUP structure,

14     be it a police station or a special unit of the Ministry of the Interior

15     such as the SAJ, your instructors, of course, are people who had either

16     graduated from the academy or from the interior high school.  However,

17     what we learned, having arrived at location 2, was that our group was the

18     initial group or the first group of members of that unit who actually

19     held police background in terms of education.

20             And this also went for the instructors.  This raised some doubt

21     in some of the guys, including myself and a few work-mates from Belgrade.

22     Of course, the option -- the other option would have been to go and join

23     another MUP unit somewhere in Belgrade or to join a MUP brigade or

24     something of that sort.

25             I hope I was sufficiently clear.

Page 5781

 1        Q.   Well, yesterday you gave evidence concerning your information at

 2     that time being limited to the first group of Red Berets being trained at

 3     the Alfa camp; is that correct?

 4        A.   Yes.  I don't understand where you are going with this.

 5        Q.   Well, it doesn't matter where I'm going.  I'm just going to ask

 6     you some questions about that.

 7             And your understanding was that this was the first group of

 8     Red Berets.  Who were they, if they were not police officers or from a

 9     police background?

10             MS. MARCUS:  I am sorry to interrupt.  It seems to me the witness

11     didn't say it was the first group, the witness said that the roots of the

12     unit stemmed back to the Alfa centre.

13             MR. JORDASH:  Which would make it the first group, if that's the

14     root.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Well, let's try to stay out of semantics, and let's

16     ask clear questions, what the witness can tell us.  Because he testified

17     quite a bit about the roots yesterday.  And to say that there was broad

18     and thorough knowledge of ... that would be an overstatement, on the

19     roots in the Alfa camp.

20             Please proceed.

21             MR. JORDASH:

22        Q.   Who were the previous Red Berets, as you understood at that time?

23        A.   As far as I remember, I think I said yesterday that I learned

24     from one of my instructors during an informal conversation that this is

25     where the origins of the unit lay.

Page 5782

 1             The guys who taught us were no rookies, and this is what I could

 2     gather from our conversation.  But as to who were the initial guys and

 3     what was the initial structure of the Red Berets, that's not something I

 4     can tell you about.  I can only tell you about the people who were in the

 5     unit when I was there.

 6             As for anything before that or after my departure, that's

 7     something I cannot provide you with much specific information.

 8        Q.   So you don't know who was part of the Red Berets before you

 9     joined; is that correct?

10        A.   Of course, before I joined the unit, I didn't even know of it.  I

11     heard of the Red Berets for the first time when they arrived at

12     location 1.

13        Q.   [Previous translation continues] ... June 1995, you had not heard

14     of the Red Berets; and when you heard of the Red Berets, you were not

15     told who they were or what their training was.  Is that correct?

16        A.   It is not.  First of all, it was not in June, if I remember

17     correctly.  I think they came for the first time in May to location 1.

18     And it was then when they told us that they were a special unit of the

19     state security sector, and rigorous training applies to any member of

20     that unit and everything I've said already.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Perhaps -- I'm trying to understand what Mr. Jordash

22     wants to know.

23             When you joined the Red Berets, was a unit called the Red Berets

24     already in existence?

25             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In my view, they -- it probably was

Page 5783

 1     in existence.  Otherwise, how could they invite us to join something that

 2     doesn't exist?

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Do you have any knowledge on whether it existed

 4     already for six month, or one year, or two years, or three years?  Do you

 5     have any knowledge about that?

 6             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] At that time, in May 1995, I did

 7     not have any knowledge.  As I said, from time to time I would get pieces

 8     of information at various locations, starting with location 2.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Okay.  And what did you learn as far as the history,

10     that is, how long the unit already existed, from what they had told you?

11             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Based on what I learned and what I

12     was told - and this takes me back to the conversation with one of the

13     instructors - I knew that the origins of the unit were in the Alfa camp,

14     as he said, following which the unit developed, although I don't know how

15     and in what direction.  What I can tell you, though, is that during my

16     stay in the unit, I know how it worked.  As for anything before my

17     time --

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Let me -- let me stop you there.  So you don't know

19     how long the unit was already in existence, you do not know how it

20     developed, you have only very limited information about the past of the

21     unit; is that -- apart from that, your instructors once were in the

22     Alfa camp; is that correctly understood?

23             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, one could say so.  That's it

24     more or less.

25             MR. JORDASH:

Page 5784

 1        Q.   And is it your evidence, so that I understand what you're saying,

 2     it is your evidence that you refer to the Red Berets as a paramilitary

 3     group because it's first -- let me start that again.

 4             Not -- did you, in your 2000 statement, refer to the Red Berets

 5     as a paramilitary group because the unit that existed before you joined,

 6     as you understood it, did not contain police officers, professional

 7     police officers?

 8        A.   Well, it's like this:  We, that is to say, our group, when we

 9     arrived at the unit, we were not looked upon as a paramilitary formation,

10     and we did not want to see the unit as such.  But there was some indicia,

11     some things that were happening, which made us think that way.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Jordash, in order to avoid further --

13             What, in your view, Witness JF-048, makes a unit a paramilitary

14     unit rather than a military unit or police unit or whatever?  What

15     qualifies a unit as a paramilitary unit, if you could tell us?

16             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] First of all, in my view and based

17     on what I was taught at location 1, for a unit to be a legal MUP unit as

18     part of its overall formation, it has to have people who underwent

19     training or education, people qualified to occupy positions within the

20     Ministry of the Interior.  One cannot take a car mechanic, although that

21     person may well be extremely fit and brave, and place such a person to a

22     leadership position in the MUP.  That has never been, and I don't think

23     that is the case now.

24             Secondly, during training and education, it is clearly known and

25     it is regulated what the authority, the scope of authority, is of a

Page 5785

 1     professor or an instructor, what are the things he may and may not do.

 2     But this was not necessarily always the case at locations 2 and 3.

 3             MR. JORDASH:  Well ...

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Jordash, it seems to me the witness has a

 5     different concept of what means paramilitary.  That's compared to what

 6     most people would understand on it.  And, of course, we can further

 7     explore that and suggest to him a certain kind of a definition and then

 8     to see whether he would join in that or not.

 9             At the same time, his remark, I think, most likely, is to be

10     understood in the context of what apparently is his understanding or his

11     concept of what paramilitary is:  That people are not properly trained,

12     although at some of the places people apparently were trained, that there

13     was something with those teaching, instructing.  Which all is, for me,

14     not necessarily the core of the concept of paramilitary.

15             MR. JORDASH:  Mm-hm.  Your Honour, yes.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  But we go around in circles.  Either we clarify

17     it -- of course, you could suggest whatever you want to him and what a

18     paramilitary group in your view is and to see whether that matches with

19     his concept.

20             MR. JORDASH:

21        Q.   Let me ask you this, Mr. Witness:  From location 2 to location 5,

22     is there anything that you or your unit did which you would use to define

23     your unit as a paramilitary unit?

24        A.   A unit -- or rather, the unit, as I know it, when I was at the

25     locations, and based on my knowledge, did not commit any crimes such as

Page 5786

 1     arson, rape, if that's what you meant.  I never witnessed any of that.

 2             What am I trying to focus your attention to?  The behaviour of

 3     certain instructors towards us, the youngest of the unit -- well, having

 4     come from the school I did, such command personnel behaviour was

 5     incomprehensible in our view.

 6        Q.   So apart from some, in your view, unnecessarily tough training,

 7     was there anything that you or the unit did which you would say

 8     characterised you as a paramilitary unit, from location 2 to location 5?

 9        A.   In my opinion, save for the fact that at locations 2 and 3 we had

10     no contracts and we were paid in cash; for example, I meet you in the

11     street, give you a certain amount of money, and that's it.  That's

12     perhaps the simplest explanation I can offer.

13             If you are employed in a police station or if you were with the

14     SAJ, you received your salary, you had to sign for it, and records were

15     kept.

16             This was not the case at locations 2 and 3.  I'm positive about

17     location 2, and I think the same applies to location 3.

18        Q.   And yesterday you made mention in this context of the fact that

19     you in the unit were told to keep the operations of the unit secret.  And

20     I think you were suggesting yesterday that that was something which led

21     you to define the unit as a paramilitary unit; is that correct?

22        A.   No, that did not lead me to define the unit as a paramilitary

23     unit.  This was the state security sector; it's the secret police of a

24     state.  If everyone would know what the secret police were doing, it

25     would not be secret anymore.  This is not what made me believe that the

Page 5787

 1     unit was a paramilitary one.

 2        Q.   I mean, you were asked --

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Jordash, I think you are misstating the evidence

 4     of the witness yesterday.  I think it was not the operations that were

 5     secret, but the existence and being a member of that unit was secret.

 6             MR. JORDASH:  Well, I think the witness said - at the draft

 7     transcript page 34 - that he was strictly forbidden to discuss the

 8     operations of the unit and the very existence of the unit.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  And the very existence.

10             MR. JORDASH:  Yes.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  That's not only operations.

12             MR. JORDASH:  No.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  No, that makes it -- he went further, he called it a

14     secret organisation of which existence -- and, of course, if -- you

15     shouldn't talk about the existence, of course.  And then it would be a

16     bit funny to talk about the operations.  But -- so it went a bit further

17     than what you quoted.

18             MR. JORDASH:  Your Honour, yes.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed.

20             MR. JORDASH:

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 5788

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6        Q.   It wasn't a surprise, was it, that you were asked -- it wasn't a

 7     surprise to you or the members of your unit that you were being asked not

 8     to tell people what you were doing from location 2 to location 5; is that

 9     correct?

10        A.   Basically, yes.  That did not come as a surprise.  What did

11     surprise me, however, was that I was told not to tell even my mother and

12     father where I was and what I was doing.  Given my age at the time, I

13     found this surprising.  I just came out of school and started working,

14     and my dad asked me where I worked, and I was not supposed to tell him

15     what or where I was.  And his conclusion was that I dropped out.

16        Q.   And am I correct that at location 2 there was plenty or a huge

17     array of expensive electronic listening devices owned by the state

18     security; is that correct?

19        A.   As far as I remember, there was a room just behind the building

20     where we slept that we called communications centre.  Whether it was to

21     listen in on anything or just stay in touch with the rest of the MUP,

22     that's something I don't know.  But I clearly remember a room with a

23     large number of radio sets.  I'm going back to the part when I discussed

24     the origins of the units.  That's where I had the informal conversation

25     with my instructor.

Page 5789

 1        Q.   Wasn't it that communications centre that you were guarding at

 2     location 2?

 3        A.   We didn't guard only the communications centre; we took turns to

 4     guard the entrance gate, then the dormitory, then we had a sentry post by

 5     the villa.  And apart from training at that location, we performed sentry

 6     duty; we were in charge of security for the whole camp, for that whole

 7     location.

 8        Q.   But the whole camp consisted of the communications centre and

 9     buildings which serviced the guards who were staying there; isn't that

10     correct?

11        A.   No, I just listed where we took guard.  I can list you the

12     buildings there.

13        Q.   Okay.  But let's move on from there.  Let me ask you, please,

14     to --

15             MR. JORDASH:  Can we have, on e-court, please, page 5 of the

16     English and page 5 of the B/C/S.  I think we've got that.

17        Q.   And I want to go back to the paragraph we were looking at a

18     moment ago, where it says, in the last line:

19             "Prior to that, we functioned with the full support the Serbian

20     government, namely, Jovica Stanisic and Slobodan Milosevic, but our

21     existence and our activities were not known publicly."

22             What made you say that the JATD, prior to 1996, operated with the

23     full support of Jovica Stanisic?  What was your knowledge?

24        A.   Could you please once again explain which paragraph you are

25     referring to?

Page 5790

 1        Q.   The first paragraph of the English and the first full paragraph

 2     of the B/C/S.  And it's the last line.

 3        A.   Your question was, what led me to believe this; isn't that right?

 4        Q.   Yes.

 5        A.   First of all, we used vehicles with M number plates; that's one

 6     of the details.  The M number plates 601 and 602.  To my knowledge,

 7     MS 602 was the state security sector.

 8             May I continue?

 9        Q.   Please.

10        A.   Apart from that, the very fact that we directly joined the unit

11     in front of the MUP building in Belgrade, the fact that meetings about

12     joining the unit were held at location 1, and after I definitely found

13     out that I would be joining the unit, I had a meeting at the DB building,

14     together with some other colleagues, with Krsmanovic, who definitely told

15     us, Report in front of the Ministry of the Interior building on that date

16     on that -- at that time.  These details led me to believe that this unit

17     was part and parcel of the MUP.  And, of course, it logically follows

18     that if something is part of the MUP, then it will have support of the

19     government and the leadership.

20             MR. JORDASH:  Could we please have P524 on e-court.  Not to be

21     shown to the public.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Page, Mr. Jordash?

23             MR. JORDASH:  Page 15 -- sorry, 14580.

24        Q.   I want to read you a question and answer and ask you whether you

25     stick by your answer.  Line 20, with reference to the reporting chain of

Page 5791

 1     the Serbian MUP and state security:

 2             "Q.  And its reporting chain, did that fit within the general

 3     structure of the Serbian MUP and the state security service, or did it

 4     have a separate reporting chain as you understood it with reference to

 5     the Red Berets?

 6             "A. As far as I know, the only method of reporting was directly

 7     to Krsmanovic, and Krsmanovic was accountable directly to Frenki, and

 8     then how it went on from there, I do not know."

 9             Is that -- was that your understanding between location 2 and

10     location 5, that you did not know how the reporting went from Frenki

11     onwards?

12        A.   Yes, that's correct, as I stated in that testimony.

13             Although, there's one thing which prompted me to think in this

14     way:  The unit would not use the normal structure of the MUP when it came

15     to reporting.  There was, on one occasion, there was a meeting of the

16     whole unit with the managerial personnel when Franko Simatovic, the

17     commander of the unit, was present.  At one point, he said words to the

18     effect that we have to do whatever is required of us; but, on the other

19     hand, even the doors of the president's office are open to us, meaning we

20     will be given whatever we require and need, but, on the other hand, we

21     have to perform the task given to us.  (redacted); I can't

22     remember when.  But there was a large number of management personnel

23     there and us younger members of the unit attending.

24        Q.   Let me take you to location 2.  Your training exercises at that

25     location.  You were trained, is this correct, how to communicate during

Page 5792

 1     training -- sorry, how to communicate during combat; is that right?

 2        A.   Yes, that mode of communication was all specific to location 2.

 3     Sorry, oh, I apologise; I wasn't checking this list.  That's location 2

 4     and location 3 where we were told that.

 5        Q.   Let me shortcut these questions.

 6             What, in your view, took the training at location 2 outside of

 7     basic infantry training, if anything?

 8        A.   You mean beyond the basic infantry training as in the military?

 9     Well, it differs, of course.  Regular infantry training in a unit and

10     regular infantry training in the military are drastically different.

11        Q.   Well, the regular infantry training you received at location 2,

12     how was it different?

13        A.   How it was different, I don't know.  I tried to provide an

14     answer.  For instance, a soldier who is supposed to complete regular

15     infantry training in the VJ or the former JNA did not have to bring his

16     side-arm into the toilet or the assault rifle and to sleep in the bed

17     with it and not to leave it anywhere at any point in time.

18             Secondly, regular infantry training does not lead to situations

19     where an instructor tossing a hand-grenade, a real hand-grenade, to a

20     group of trainees who had instructed to sit down - and I'm not talking

21     about dummy hand-grenades; it was a real one - then I don't know whether

22     the instructors in regular infantry training are allowed to shoot live

23     ammunition next to soldiers' heads just because that particular soldier

24     is not fast enough to catch up with the rest of the group.  Or if he

25     failed to take cover properly, they are not allowed to shoot a live round

Page 5793

 1     next to the soldier's head, illustrating:  This is what will happen if

 2     you do not take cover properly.

 3             These are huge differences between this kind of training and

 4     regular infantry training.

 5        Q.   Am I correct that members of your unit left location 2 and went

 6     to Tara for training after receiving the training at location 2?

 7        A.   Yes, I remember that case.  That happened after location 2.  We

 8     were given a few days off, but suddenly we were informed that we were

 9     supposed to report at our main location.  Well, what happened on that

10     location?  What I took to be our main location was location 2.  I saw

11     that as our main location, and I reported then --

12        Q.   Did they go to Tara and receive additional training?

13        A.   To the best of my knowledge, yes.

14        Q.   And is it the case, and I suggest it is, that when they went to

15     Tara, they received specialised training because the training you

16     received at location 2 was just basic infantry exercises?

17        A.   I don't know what kind of training they received at Tara because

18     at that time I was at location 2 together with some other classmates,

19     meaning my peers, and with a large number of instructors.  When I

20     reported at the gate, I was told to stay there and continued regular

21     training just as before until the others came back.

22        Q.   Is it the case that when you went to location 3 the unit was

23     instructed and commanded by the Poskok Unit?

24        A.   Not true.  As far as I know, in my opinion, that's not true.

25        Q.   Didn't five or six Poskok members become your instructors?

Page 5794

 1        A.   Yes, I cannot remember if there were five or six of them.  For

 2     two, I'm certain.  One of them became an instructor in our group -- to my

 3     group.

 4        Q.   Because the --

 5             MR. JORDASH:  Could I just take instructions, please.

 6                      [Stanisic Defence counsel and Stanisic accused confer]

 7             MR. JORDASH:  Is it possible to take a break, Your Honour,

 8     please.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  We'll have a break, and we resume at 4.00.

10                           --- Recess taken at 3.32 p.m.

11                           --- On resuming at 4.04 p.m.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Jordash, may I take it that you need another 15,

13     20 minutes?

14             MR. JORDASH:  Your Honour is right.  Thank you.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, please proceed.

16             MR. JORDASH:

17        Q.   Just to clear up the issue of training at location 2.  It's

18     right, isn't it, that the only persons being trained at location 2 were

19     those who were guarding the facility; is that correct?

20        A.   That is not so because our instructions and managerial personnel

21     never performed sentry duty.  Only those newly admitted, new members,

22     young members, did so.

23        Q.   Yeah, only the new members who had been taken from location 1

24     were trained at location 2; is that correct?

25        A.   Yes.  In front of the MUP building when we departed for

Page 5795

 1     location 2, some other lads boarded the bus, those who had not finished

 2     any training at location 1.

 3        Q.   Sorry, and who were these other lads who boarded the bus?  What

 4     have they got to do with location 2, if anything?

 5        A.   Those were young men that - at the same time as my unit -- my

 6     group and me - joined the unit.  But they joined it from other

 7     structures.  They used to be members of military units.  Moreover, some

 8     of them were physically stronger, readier than normal.  They found out

 9     about the tender to join the unit and were admitted into the unit and

10     joined it.

11        Q.   Okay.  The only people trained at location 2 were those who had

12     joined the unit at around the time that you joined; is that correct?

13        A.   Yes.  As far as I can remember, yes.

14        Q.   Thank you.

15             MR. JORDASH:  Could we have, please, on the e-court P524.  Not to

16     be shown to the public.  Oh, it's there.  Page 14622.  Could we go to the

17     top of the page, please.  Page 14622 and the top of the page.

18        Q.   I want to ask you about something you said in reference to

19     location 3.  Question at line 3:

20             "You said that your function was to provide security for the

21     transference of certain people wearing civilian clothing on the other

22     side to collect intelligence data.  That's what I understood from what

23     you were saying.  Is that right?"

24             Your answer:

25             "Yes, those were the rumours and stories going around the camp

Page 5796

 1     afterwards."

 2             Is it correct, Mr. Witness, that you went to location 2 -- sorry,

 3     to location 3 in order to provide security to intelligence operatives?

 4        A.   No.  As far as I know, this wasn't one of the reasons for us

 5     going there.  What was the true reason?  It is not known to me.  Because

 6     in many -- in majority of cases, we were never told why we were going

 7     somewhere.  We were told what to do at a certain location.  And this case

 8     did not occur at location number 3.  It is that we went from location 3

 9     to a village - I don't know the name of that village - and we were told

10     by the instructors when we were deployed at houses and lofts of houses in

11     which direction to open fire if we were ordered to do so, although that

12     order never came.  And after several hours, we withdrew from that

13     village.  And, later on, rumours started going around the camp about the

14     reasons that we were there.

15        Q.   And that was the provision of security for the transference of

16     persons who had been collecting intelligence data; was that the rumour?

17        A.   This was the gist of the stories making their rounds around the

18     camp.  Whether they collected intelligence or data, I don't know.

19             But the story went like this:  Our lads were strolling around

20     Osijek in civilian clothes last night.

21             This is, as far as I can remember, what was being told.

22        Q.   And apart from that rumour concerning what you were doing, in

23     terms of what you were doing at location 3, you don't, in fact, know; is

24     that correct?

25        A.   You mean this case concerning Osijek and what transpired there?

Page 5797

 1        Q.   No.  When you went from location 2 to location 3, before going to

 2     location 4, am I correct that whilst at location 3 you were not told and

 3     you did not know what it was your function was supposed to be?

 4        A.   No, no.

 5        Q.   No, you don't know what your function was supposed to be;

 6     correct?

 7        A.   No.  As I said earlier, members of the unit of my rank were never

 8     told the reasons for being somewhere.  When told what to do, you were

 9     supposed to do it, and that's it.

10        Q.   And, in fact, while you were at location 2, you, in fact, did not

11     engage in any combat or any operational activity; is that correct?

12        A.   Of course we did not, except this case, which we referred to, and

13     another case where there -- we were on alert, we were ready to act, we

14     were boarded on vehicles and waited for orders to depart, but we were

15     never told what kind of action that was supposed to be.  After half an

16     hour or an hour of us being gone on alert and being on vehicles, we were

17     ordered to return to the camp.  Those were the only semblances of action

18     that I had while at location 3.

19        Q.   Thank you.

20             MR. JORDASH:  Could we have 1D266 on e-court, please.

21        Q.   And while that's being found, Mr. Witness, is it correct that you

22     have a conviction for robbery arising from a crime you were found to have

23     committed in May of 1998?

24        A.   That's not true.  I've never robbed anybody in my life.

25        Q.   Is it true that you have a conviction for robbery arising from an

Page 5798

 1     incident in 1998?

 2        A.   I've never been tried before a criminal court.  I did stand

 3     before a disciplinary Tribunal of the MUP of Serbia, but I've never been

 4     tried before a criminal court, ever.

 5        Q.   Did you admit --

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Is it not to be shown to the public, this one?

 7             MR. JORDASH:  Your Honour, yes, I beg your pardon.

 8        Q.   Did you admit to being involved or associated with the robbers?

 9        A.   First of all, I would like to correct something.  I see in this

10     document in front of me --

11        Q.   Mr. Witness --

12        A.   -- what it's all about.  To the best of my knowledge, this is not

13     a criminal offence of robbery.

14        Q.   Mr. Witness, I'm asking you a question, so please would you

15     address the question.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  The witness, if he is -- if a document is put to

17     him, apparently in order to support your claim, then the witness should

18     be given an opportunity to have a look, at least, at the document.  And

19     if he has any comment on it, then he should be --

20             MR. JORDASH:  I was going to turn to the document, but if

21     Your Honour prefers it that way.

22        Q.   Mr. Witness, can you please, with the document ... what did you

23     have to say?

24        A.   I meant to say that aggravated theft is being referred to, and

25     not a criminal offence of robbery.  This is -- there is a huge difference

Page 5799

 1     between the two.

 2        Q.   Well, it's been translated in the English as a grave robbery.

 3     You can see that on the bottom right-hand corner of the screen.

 4             I don't want to waste time, Mr. Witness.

 5             Were you found responsible for a crime involving theft of items

 6     which did not belong to you and disciplined by the MUP?  Yes or no?

 7        A.   It is evident from this document that the disciplinary Tribunal

 8     of the MUP ruled in such a way.  But I've never been tried before a

 9     criminal court.  And to the best of my knowledge, for a decision of this

10     sort to be adopted, one had to stand trial before a criminal court.  I

11     was accused of committing a criminal offence, and I was convicted for

12     breaching the rules of service of the Ministry of the Interior, and this

13     is why such a judgement was passed.  As you can see from this document,

14     you can -- you may find out that I received a disciplinary punishment.  I

15     was not convicted before a criminal court.

16        Q.   And that disciplinary punishment was the cessation of your

17     employment, was it not?

18        A.   Yes, it was.

19        Q.   So it wasn't, as you indicated earlier today, that you hadn't

20     heard anything about your request to leave, it was the fact that you were

21     fired from your employment; isn't that correct?  Let me -- no?

22        A.   No, absolutely not.

23             MR. JORDASH:  May I tender this as an exhibit under seal,

24     Your Honours.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Ms. Marcus?

Page 5800

 1             MS. MARCUS:  No objections, Your Honour.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar, the number would be ...

 3             THE REGISTRAR:  It will be Exhibit D72, Your Honours, under seal.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  D72 admitted, under seal.

 5             MR. JORDASH:  Can we have, please, on the screen --

 6             Thank you, Your Honours.

 7             Can we have on the screen D5345, not to be shown to the public,

 8     please.

 9             For Your Honours information, this is the remainder of the

10     witness's DB file.

11             5345, 65 ter number, please.  Can we turn, please, to page 18 of

12     the English version.  And there are no page numbers on the B/C/S except

13     for the ERN number.  And for the B/C/S it's 0648-9360.  That's 0648-9360.

14        Q.   Whilst that's --

15             MR. JORDASH:  If -- perhaps we should go to page 1 just so that

16     we can identify the document, sorry.

17        Q.   Can you see that, to what the English version is on the screen?

18     And whilst the B/C/S is coming, can you have a look at the English

19     version, Mr. Witness, just so that you understand what the document is.

20     It is part of your record.

21             MR. JORDASH:  Let's turn, now, to page 18 of the English version

22     and 0648-9360 of the B/C/S.

23        Q.   You'll see your identifying details at the top of the page; we

24     don't need to go into that.  And then I want to ask you about the second

25     paragraph.

Page 5801

 1             You see the reference there that according to this file, which,

 2     as we saw, was dated January 2000, it was said that once you -- when you

 3     are at school, you were associated with persons from a criminal

 4     environment in Novi Sad, and you made contacts with local prostitutes and

 5     drug dealers; is that correct?

 6        A.   That is not true.

 7        Q.   Next paragraph:  After finishing school, from July 1995, you were

 8     assigned, as it indicates there.

 9             "... and officers evaluated him as extremely irresponsible and

10     physically unfit, so he was placed on guard duty, guarding facilities and

11     positions."

12             Is that correct?

13        A.   That is not true either.

14        Q.   "During that period, he was sanctioned several times over

15     disciplinary offences, failure to come to a guard post, prohibited

16     carrying of weapons and equipment, late arrival to work, et cetera."

17             Is that correct?

18        A.   I must say, there were cases such as this.  Occasionally I would

19     come late for work or was cautioned for not wearing my beret, but I am

20     quite taken aback by this information about me being in touch with

21     criminal circles.  I hear of this for the first time.  What prostitutes?

22     What drug dealers?  I'm speechless.

23        Q.   Did you, as the paragraph suggests below, in August 1995 cause a

24     serious incident, opening fire and activating a hand-grenade whilst on

25     guard duty?

Page 5802

 1        A.   That is true, and I was sanctioned.

 2        Q.   Did you, in autumn 1995, as the next paragraph suggests, with

 3     colleagues steal a vehicle and drive it around the location mentioned

 4     brandishing insignia belonging to the DB?

 5        A.   No, I have never done that.  It was done by a mate of mine who

 6     was in the same unit.

 7             MR. JORDASH:  Can we go to the next page, please.  And in --

 8     yeah, thank you.

 9        Q.   Looking at the top paragraph, in late 1995, you were assigned to

10     location 5, again, mainly engaged in guard and patrol duty; is that

11     correct?  That is correct, isn't it?

12        A.   That is true, much as the rest of those who were there.

13        Q.   And immediately upon arrival at that location, you contacted

14     individuals from the local criminal environment; is that correct?

15        A.   What criminal environment?  I do not understand this question.

16     This is all brand new to me.  I apologise if I'm being a bit abrupt, but

17     I'm not familiar with this.  Unless I left the camp on approval by the

18     commander or superior, I had no dealings, no contact with any local

19     population at all.

20        Q.   Next paragraph:

21             "As he turned out to be irresponsible, undisciplined, and

22     unreliable, he was not accepted by the group.  And in early

23     February 1996, he filed a request to be transferred to the police

24     brigade."

25             Is that correct?

Page 5803

 1        A.   Yes.  It is true that I submitted a request to leave the unit.

 2     But this is not how I saw the situation.  This was another person's

 3     perspective.

 4        Q.   And I suggest it's correct that you were not accepted by the unit

 5     at location 5 because of your criminal activities; isn't that correct?

 6        A.   No, it's not.  I always conducted myself well and fairly.  I was

 7     always a team player.  I never argued with my mates and comrades.  Quite

 8     the contrary:  I liked them and they liked me.

 9             MR. JORDASH:  May I tender this under seal, please, Your Honour.

10             MS. MARCUS:  No objections.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar.

12             THE REGISTRAR:  This will be Exhibit D73 under seal, Your Honour.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  D73 is admitted under seal.

14             MR. JORDASH:

15        Q.   Is that why you give evidence against the accused, Mr. Witness,

16     because you're angry about being fired for criminal conduct from the MUP

17     of Serbia?  Is that your motive?

18        A.   That is not my motive.  First of all, let us understand each

19     other.  I stood before a disciplinary commission and received my sentence

20     in that respect, but I was not fired from the MUP after certain events

21     because I no longer felt safe there.  I left the MUP and the territory of

22     Serbia altogether.

23        Q.   You suggest, in your statement of 2000, that you met Raja Bozovic

24     on two occasions.  Do you stand by that evidence?

25        A.   I made a correction during proofing.  I corrected something that

Page 5804

 1     had to do with the name of Rajo Bozovic.  Among the command personnel,

 2     there were quite a few people, a lot of names in circulation, and I had

 3     described him originally as a different person.  I can't say that I know

 4     Mr. Bozovic personally.  I may have met him in passing, but that's the

 5     extent of my knowledge of him.

 6        Q.   Okay.  So let's be clear:  You didn't attend any meetings with

 7     him, did you?

 8        A.   No, no personally with Rajo Bozovic.  Definitely not.

 9        Q.   When you watched the Kula video, did you recognise him?

10        A.   I did not.  That's precisely the point.  That's why I made the

11     correction in my former statement.  I had actually described another

12     person who I thought was Rajo Bozovic.

13        Q.   Thank you.

14       One last subject I want to deal with, and that's Arkan and Boca. You

15    saw nothing, is this correct, when you were at location 2 to suggest that

16    Arkan was collaborating on operations with anyone at (redacted); is that

17     correct?

18        A.   No, it's not.

19        Q.   It's not correct?

20             MS. MARCUS:  Can I please request a redaction of ...

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Please, proceed, Mr. ...

22             MR. JORDASH:

23        Q.   Let's put it this way:  Arkan didn't attend location 2 for any

24     meetings with anyone from location 2; correct?

25        A.   I apologise.  You put questions in a rather odd way, but I'll try

Page 5805

 1     to explain.  What I know about Arkan is what I learned from my colleagues

 2     and that is that at some point in time he arrived at the gate --

 3        Q.   Let's leave that aside for the moment.  At no point did you see

 4     Arkan attending location 2 to have meetings with any commander in

 5     location 2; correct?

 6        A.   Now I understand your question.  I did not see him personally.

 7        Q.   None of your unit at location 2 had joint operations with any of

 8     Arkan's Unit; is that correct?

 9        A.   As far as I know, that was not the case.

10        Q.   And the same question in relation to Boca's Unit:  You didn't see

11     any joint operations with them; is that correct?

12        A.   It is.

13        Q.   And none of Boca's Unit attended for meetings with any commander

14     at location 2; is that correct?

15        A.   As far as I know, it is correct.  Actually, I have no information

16     to that effect, so I can neither confirm nor deny.

17        Q.   But you saw nothing while you were there guarding to indicate

18     that that was the case, did you?

19        A.   I did see, on one occasion, that some of Boca's Unit's members

20     came to our camp.  They were loading green crates into their truck.  It

21     could have been ammunition or hand-grenades.  And there was a sign on the

22     truck that indicated they were from Boca's Unit.  It was either at

23     location --

24             THE INTERPRETER:  Interpreter's correction:  Could the witness

25     please repeat the last part of his answer.

Page 5806

 1             MR. JORDASH:

 2        Q.   Could you repeat the last part of your answer, please,

 3     Mr. Witness.  The translator didn't pick it up.

 4        A.   I wanted to say that on one occasion I saw members of Boca's

 5     detachment arrive at our camp at location number 2 with their truck.

 6     From the depot, they took out green crates containing either

 7     hand-grenades or ammunition in order to have them loaded onto their

 8     truck.

 9        Q.   It was the case that there was no warehouse of weapons or

10     ammunition at location 2; there was simply a store for the weapons and

11     ammunition required by the guards.  Isn't that correct?

12        A.   In my view, it is not.  It was an ammunition and equipment depot

13     from which we were supplied with all the necessary equipment and weapons.

14        Q.   Yesterday you said that the store corresponded to the current

15     needs of the unit; is that correct or not?

16             MS. MARCUS:  Your Honours, perhaps, if Mr. Jordash is quoting

17     something, in order for the witness to clarify, that the actual

18     transcript could be put before him.

19             MR. JORDASH:  Well, if the witness remembered saying it, it might

20     shortcut things, but if the witness doesn't remember saying that ...

21        Q.   Do you remember saying that the store corresponded to the current

22     needs of the unit?

23        A.   Of course it was for our needs, but also Arkan's Tigers and

24     Boca's Men came to supply themselves.

25        Q.   Could I suggest that neither Arkan's Men or Boca's Men came at

Page 5807

 1     any time to supply themselves; and the time that Arkan came, he was sent

 2     away by Krsmanovic?

 3        A.   Well, you can suggest whatever you like.  I know what I saw and

 4     what I heard.

 5        Q.   How did Arkan's Men -- how did it work?  Who gave the weapons or

 6     ammunition -- sorry, the ammunition to Arkan's Men?  Where did they go?

 7        A.   I know that on one occasion they arrived at the camp and that

 8     Garic opened up the warehouse; they went in together and loaded their

 9     vehicles, after which they left the camp.  That's all I know.  As for

10     where they had come from and where they went to, that's something I don't

11     know.

12        Q.   So it's on one occasion you saw that?

13        A.   It was once.  Definitely.

14        Q.   And in relation to Boca, once as well?

15        A.   As far as I recall, he was definitely there once.  I don't know

16     whether there were more occasions than that because I didn't pay much

17     heed to it, but I clearly remember having seen them once.  The logo on

18     the truck was brand new to me, and I was wondering who they were and what

19     they were doing there.

20        Q.   You didn't see what was inside the boxes; is that correct?

21        A.   I didn't.  I can only describe the crates.  I don't know what was

22     inside them, though.  Well, you don't need to be a rocket scientist to

23     conclude that.

24             MR. JORDASH:  I've got no further questions, Your Honour.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Jordash.

Page 5808

 1             MR. JORDASH:  Thank you, Mr. Witness.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Concept of time - 15 to 20 minutes, Mr. Jordash - is

 3     apparently also something we are sometimes differing.

 4             MR. JORDASH:  Yes.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Awareness exists.

 6             Mr. Petrovic, will it be you, or will it be Mr. Bakrac?

 7             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] It will be me, Your Honour.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Witness JF-048, you'll now be cross-examined by

 9     Mr. Petrovic.  Mr. Petrovic is counsel for Mr. Simatovic.

10             Please proceed.

11             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

12                           Cross-examination by Mr. Petrovic:

13        Q.   [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Witness.

14        A.   Good afternoon.

15        Q.   The location -- the school at location 1, as far as you know, was

16     it part of the public security sector of the Serbian MUP?

17        A.   As far as I know, it was.

18        Q.   What about the cadets at location 1; were they submitted to

19     medical examinations, psychological evaluation?

20        A.   Yes, yes.

21        Q.   Could the students be people with a criminal file, people

22     previously convicted of a crime?

23        A.   Not as far as I know.

24        Q.   Was it strange for you to find that members of a police unit

25     arrived there in order to recruit future members at the school at

Page 5809

 1     location 1?

 2        A.   I didn't find it strange.  I never even wondered about that.  In

 3     any case, the way they described the situation, it didn't seem strange.

 4     There was no reason for that.

 5        Q.   Very well.  On what date did you officially begin working?  When

 6     did your student status change?

 7        A.   When did my student status change to what?

 8        Q.   To that of an employee.  When did that happen?

 9        A.   After I completed my education and after we were assigned to go

10     either to a certain unit of the MUP or to a police station and six months

11     after the state exam, we become officially authorised personnel, entitled

12     to use the scope authority -- scope of authority as prescribed by the law

13     and to carry weapons.

14        Q.   Witness, therefore, upon graduation, you received the status of

15     intern?

16        A.   Yes, any student coming out of the school at location 1 did that.

17        Q.   In a single sentence, can you tell us what an intern is in that

18     respect?  What obligations, what rights does such a person have?

19        A.   As far as I know or as far as I remember, the only difference

20     between an intern and a member of the MUP is in that the intern still did

21     not take the either professional or state exam.  I don't know exactly

22     which term was used.

23        Q.   While you were an intern or a trainee, were you gainfully

24     employed?

25        A.   I should have been.  It's all part of the record.  I would have

Page 5810

 1     to go back to my employment history and check.  I think I was.

 2        Q.   Irrespective of that status of trainee or intern, as of the

 3     moment of employment, were you an employee of the Serbian MUP, in your

 4     understanding?

 5        A.   In my understanding, I was.

 6        Q.   As an employee of the Serbian MUP as of day one of your work, did

 7     you enjoy all the entitlements such as pension rights, health care, and

 8     all the other rights befalling any employee of the Ministry of

 9     the Interior?

10        A.   As far as I know, that should have been so.  And I think it was.

11     We received treatment.  The only odd thing was that we received our

12     salaries in cash, without any signatures.

13        Q.   We'll get to that.  Let's go back to your social and pension

14     status.  That was the same as it would have been in the case of any other

15     employee of the MUP?

16        A.   Yes, in essence, it was so.  We had a part of the unit where the

17     doctors were, and if we had any health concerns, we were supposed to turn

18     to them.

19             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Just to clarify that, I would

20     kindly ask that P548 be shown to the witness.  Page 11.  And it should

21     not be open to public.  Page 11, if possible, please.  On the left-hand

22     side we have, in B/C/S.  Could we have the same page in English, please.

23     Just a sec; we don't have it in English.  Oh, thank you very much,

24     Your Honours.

25        Q.   Witness, is this the application to social security, health

Page 5811

 1     insurance, upon the establishment of employment submitted on your behalf

 2     immediately after you started being employed?  Can you confirm that,

 3     please?

 4        A.   I think this is it.  I've never seen this document before.  But

 5     from those boxes I can read out, I think it resembles a health insurance

 6     policy.

 7        Q.   Could we go to box 14, which shows the date, 20th of June, 1995,

 8     when this insurance policy started running.  And this would be

 9     coincidental with your assuming your position in the unit.

10        A.   I cannot say precisely.  I see the 20th, but I'm not sure about

11     the 6th month.  But let's say that this is the 20th of June, 1995.  But I

12     reiterate:  I've never seen this document before.

13        Q.   Thank you, Witness.

14             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Could we see the rubber stamp, if

15     we could zoom in on it.  I don't see it being translated into English,

16     but could we see both rubber stamps in B/C/S.  Let's see what -- whether

17     we can make out anything.

18        Q.   Could you please take a look at the right-hand side, the rubber

19     stamp of the right-hand side.  If you can read out what is written there.

20        A.   As far as I can understand, the Republic of Serbia.  I can only

21     guess.  But since I know the rubber stamp of the MUP of Serbia, it does

22     resemble it.  But what is in the centre does not resemble the coat of

23     arms of Serbia.

24        Q.   Do you agree that it states here "Ministry of the Interior" and

25     that this is would be the older coat of arms with a red-point star?

Page 5812

 1        A.   I do not agree when it comes to the coat of arms.  I cannot make

 2     out anything of it.  I see that it states "Republic of Serbia, Ministry

 3     of the Interior," but I can't make out the coat of arm.

 4             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you very much, Your Honours.

 5     No need to dwell on -- any further on this.

 6        Q.   Witness, you stated that you had occasion to see the rules of

 7     service of state security of Republic of Serbia; is that correct?

 8        A.   Yes, on one occasion.  Briefly.

 9        Q.   Could you please explain what "briefly" means?  What was the

10     situation when you had this -- had this in your hands and when you took a

11     look at it?

12        A.   As far as I can recall, that was immediately before I took the

13     professional exam.  Several of us were invited or we came to the

14     Ministry of the Interior.  I believe that this was the state security

15     building.  In a room, one MUP member in plain clothes brought, in a

16     brief-case, several copies of that document.  If I remember correctly,

17     what it stated was, The Rules of the Sector of the RDB, Sector of State

18     Security; something of the sort.  As far as I can recall, it contained

19     the powers and authorities and the mode of operations of the state

20     security sector, as far as I could understand.

21        Q.   Did you see that it was a state -- a document designated as a

22     state secret?

23        A.   Yes, I can remember something stencilled on it as state secret.

24        Q.   Who allowed you to see a document designated as state secret, and

25     why would anybody allow a trainee at the MUP to do so?

Page 5813

 1        A.   I don't know why would anybody do that.  An instance -- well, the

 2     reason why we were supposed to cram what -- whatever we could cram was

 3     because we were about to take the professional exam to begin work in the

 4     state security sector, and for you to be able to work in the state

 5     security sector, you had to know rules of service of the state security

 6     sector; the same way as when you are supposed to work in public security

 7     sector, you had to know the powers and the authorities within that

 8     sector.

 9        Q.   So somebody gave you this booklet so that you could learn

10     something from it for how long?

11        A.   Not just me, the whole group that was in that room.  If I recall

12     correctly, some 30 minutes.  Maybe a bit more.

13        Q.   How many pages did the document contain?

14        A.   Not more than 30-odd pages, as far as I can remember.  It wasn't

15     a voluminous document.  It was an A4 volume, similar to this.  Maybe half

16     a centimetre thick, some 30-odd pages, if I remember correctly.

17        Q.   So you as a trainee were given state secret documents to study

18     for 30 minutes or so; is that correct?  Just answer Yes or No.

19        A.   Yes.

20        Q.   Thank you.  In your statement, on several occasions in that

21     statement, for instance on page 5, first paragraph, you state that the

22     Red Berets were not officially within the structure of the MUP, they

23     were, rather, a paramilitary wing of the state security sector; and,

24     furthermore, you say that the existence of the anti-terrorist operations

25     unit was officially recognised only in early 1996.

Page 5814

 1             This is what you stated in 2000; is that correct?

 2        A.   Yes, this is how I saw things.  Well, whether the unit was really

 3     a paramilitary unit or not, well, it is not up to me to decide or to

 4     [indiscernible].  But what -- this is how I saw things at the time.  This

 5     is my perspective of it.

 6        Q.   There were questions concerning that.  I'm going to reserve the

 7     right to ask one question:  The term "paramilitary unit," what does it

 8     mean, irrespective of the situation we're discussing?

 9        A.   How I understand the term paramilitary, it would denote a group,

10     organised group, of people who act outside the boundaries and outside the

11     powers of the military of the -- of Yugoslavia or the MUP.

12        Q.   Thank you.

13             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Now, let's show the witness P476,

14     please.

15        Q.   Witness, this is a decision dated the 12th of January, 1994, and

16     it states in decision that on December 1993, has been assigned to the

17     post under item 5, member number 2 of the decision establishing the

18     anti-terrorist and combat operations unit of the state security

19     department in the Ministry of the Interior.

20             My question to you is:  Do you accept that there was a decision

21     on the basis of which this unit was established and it operated under

22     from 1993 onwards?

23        A.   Is your question whether I recognise this document as a valid

24     document?

25        Q.   No, you misunderstood me.

Page 5815

 1        A.   I did not understand you either.

 2        Q.   Do you accept that there is a legal basis, legal foundation, for

 3     the existence of the JATD from 1993 and that it had been established on

 4     the basis of a decision of the minister of the interior of the

 5     Republic of Serbia; do you accept that or not?

 6        A.   I don't know how to answer this question.  Who am I to accept or

 7     not?  I do not understand the question.

 8        Q.   If this were true, would you change your position contained in

 9     your statement claiming that the Red Berets or JATD were a paramilitary

10     unit?  Had you known that, would it have changed your position and

11     conclusions concerning the JATD, and this document did exist?

12        A.   Well, I'll try to answer.  Can I do it in my own way very

13     briefly?

14        Q.   Would such knowledge that there existed a decision by the

15     minister would have influenced your attitude or position expressed in

16     your 2000 statement?

17        A.   Officially, yes; but in terms of conduct towards the members of

18     the unit at the time, well, that would not have changed my opinion.

19        Q.   What do you mean by saying "officially"?

20             Do you accept that there is a legal foundation for the

21     establishment of the JATD; is that correct?

22        A.   I don't know anything about legal foundations; but reading out

23     from this decision, it says who is appointed to which post.  My

24     statement, my earlier statement, claiming that this was a paramilitary

25     units or unit acting in a paramilitary way is confined strictly to the

Page 5816

 1     conduct of the instructors towards us in the unit, which is unacceptable.

 2     For instance, for the SAJ, I've never heard that any instructors there

 3     could behave towards those members as our instructors behaved towards us.

 4     And this is what I deem unacceptable.  This is what I meant to say.

 5        Q.   Thank you.

 6             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Let's take a look now at -- could

 7     you take a look at, please, at P481.

 8        Q.   Before it's being retrieved, do you know who Milan Radonjic was?

 9        A.   I do not know him personally.  I can only presume that he

10     occupied a high position.  But I don't know him personally.

11             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.  Let's lake take a look

12     at P481.

13        Q.   Please take a look the text below "decision":

14             "Milenko Milanovic, assigned to a post under item 5 on number 21

15     on the decision to establish the anti-terrorist and combat operations

16     unit in the State Security Department DT 02, number 2497, dated

17     4th of August, 1993."

18             Can you see that, Witness?

19        A.   Could we please zoom in on this section?

20             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Could we please focus below the

21     word "decision" in the B/C/S.

22             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] What was your question?

23             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation]

24        Q.   Well, the question was:  Can you see that there existed this

25     decision, and what was the number of that decision?

Page 5817

 1        A.   Yes, I did have a similar decision.  This is a decision

 2     determining the coefficient of pay or salary.

 3        Q.   I'm ask -- this is correct, what you say, but my question is

 4     this:  Can you see -- the text saying:

 5             "Decision on the establishment of the anti-terrorist and combat

 6     operations ..."

 7             Can you see the date of that decision and the number of that

 8     decision?

 9        A.   Yes, it states here:

10             "Decision to establish the anti-terrorist and combat operations

11     unit in the state security department in the Ministry of the Interior,

12     number 2497, of the 4th of August, 1993."

13        Q.   Fine.

14             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Can we take a look, then, at P528.

15     And not to be shown to the public, please.  P528, please.  Could we

16     please see the B/C/S version.  We've got the English version shown, but

17     could we have the B/C/S version so the witness can read it.

18        Q.   Witness, sir, this is a decision concerning you?

19        A.   Yes, as far as I can see.

20        Q.   Could you please take a look at the number and the date of the

21     rule book on the systemisation.  That would be DT-497 -- 2497 dated

22     4th of August, 1993.

23        A.   Yes, this is the same text that I can read.

24        Q.   Witness, although you may not known that, were you posted on

25     the -- or assigned on the basis of a decision dated from 1993 which had

Page 5818

 1     existed from then and which determines the posts in the anti-terrorist

 2     operations unit?  Does it follow unequivocally from those two documents

 3     that we saw?

 4        A.   Well, this decision doesn't say that I'm to be part of the

 5     anti-terrorist operations unit.  It just said that I'm to be assigned to

 6     the state security sector.

 7        Q.   Thank you.

 8             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Let's take a look at P54 -- no,

 9     sorry, we'll go another way.  Let's take a look at P481 again.

10        Q.   Could you please take a look at the explanation or statements of

11     reason determining the level of salary.  It is stated on the basis of

12     4, 5, and 6 of the rules of salaries of state security sector employees

13     dated the 4th of August, 1993.  Did you see this?

14        A.   No, I could not read it out.  Could we please zoom in on this

15     part.

16             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Could we please zoom in on the

17     last paragraph of the B/C/S version, please, so that the witness can see.

18             THE INTERPRETER:  And the English version, please; interpreters

19     intervention.

20             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation]

21        Q.   Did you see it, Witness?

22        A.   Yes, I did.

23             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Could we have P548 and that it not

24     be broadcasted for the public.  It should be in private, please.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  We turn in to private session.

Page 5819

 1                           [Private session]

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6   (redacted)

 7   (redacted)

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 5820











11 Pages 5820-5822 redacted. Private session.















Page 5823

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5                           [Open session]

 6             THE REGISTRAR:  We are back in open session, Your Honours.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Registrar.

 8             Mr. Jordash, what happened as you very quickly put a nine-page

 9     several-documents item to the witness about being convicted and then the

10     witness started saying, No, it was not conviction; it was disciplinary

11     measures, and he then said, Yes, it wasn't robbery; it was ... and you

12     said, Well, that's how it's translated.

13             Now, if I understand the difference between robbery and theft --

14     whereas in other parts of these documents we find theft, we find larceny,

15     which may have been abolished in the UK but is -- still has some meaning,

16     isn't it, and we find robbery.  And then to just say to the witness,

17     That's how it is translated.  Where you find three different terms.  And

18     then further, if you look at the description on which, apparently, the

19     decision was based, then that is -- if robbery involves threats and

20     violence, sleeping on a bed, which is how it is explained, doesn't seem

21     to be very violent.  So, therefore, I have some problems with the way in

22     which you deal with the matter.

23             But apart from that, could you tell us how those proceedings

24     developed?  You only paid attention to the first instance decision.  What

25     happened during this procedure after that?  As you read it, I -- of

Page 5824

 1     course, we have difficulties in reading nine pages in a second, but you

 2     certainly have prepared for it.  Could you tell us what then happened?

 3             MR. JORDASH:  If I may just find the document, Your Honour.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Is it a final decision?  Was it appealed?

 5     Was it ...

 6             MR. JORDASH:  Well, it -- in sum, there was some form of hearing.

 7     The witness admitted --

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  No, let's start from the decision, the disciplinary

 9     decision.  First three pages.  Okay.  Fine.  What then happened during

10     these proceedings.  Do you know?  What was the follow-up?  What else do

11     we find, as far as you are concerned?  Because you are suggesting that

12     there's a kind of final conviction or at least establishment of facts.

13     What, in your view, on these fourth up to the ninth page, happens in this

14     proceedings?

15             MR. JORDASH:  Well, there's some form of disciplinary hearing.

16     There's some form of admission by the witness.  And, as a consequences,

17     there is a disciplinary measure imposed upon the witness.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  That's -- most of that is found in the first three

19     pages.  What I find later - but I must say the documents are not very

20     clear - mention is made that the matter was reviewed, that the

21     disciplinary proceedings were then barred.  Then later we find a document

22     that he was appointed again and ordered -- the case was referred to

23     another court.

24             I mean, you focused on the first -- you provide nine pages, and

25     the fourth to the ninth page are creating -- well, at least some

Page 5825

 1     confusion on what really the outcome of that proceedings was apart from

 2     the first instance.  The first instance is clear.  Disciplinary

 3     proceedings.  And you said for robbery, but that could be larceny, that

 4     could be theft.  At least, he fell asleep when his colleagues stole

 5     something, sport shoes, mobile phone.

 6             I want to know:  You -- there was a clear suggestion in your

 7     question to the witness that he was finally convicted or a disciplinary

 8     measure was imposed; whereas from the fourth to the ninth page, that

 9     becomes highly questionable.

10             MR. JORDASH:  Well, the witness agreed that he'd lost his

11     employment as a consequence of the hearing.  And that's the best evidence

12     that we have of what happened.  I was using the document merely to

13     endorse the questions and see what he had to say about it.  And that's

14     what he had to say.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, I think -- I think the suggestion went further.

16     But I, at least, was entirely confused by all of the other pages.  And

17     from what you tell us now, it seems that the review or the appeal or what

18     then happened, for example, how to interpret a decision, where, in

19     1999 -- well, after the fact, which mentions the disciplinary

20     proceedings, nevertheless, seems to assign him a certain position again.

21     So it's ... well, I mean -- yes.

22             MR. JORDASH:  The document isn't clear, the witness's answer was

23     clear, and I was content with that answer.  If my learned friends had

24     felt that that somehow -- [Overlapping speakers] ...

25             JUDGE ORIE:  This Chamber has the habit of if documents are put

Page 5826

 1     to it and are tendered into evidence, to look at it very critically and

 2     to see what these documents say, even in order to make an assessment on

 3     whether what the witness said was entirely true or not, whether the

 4     suggestion, which were, in your questions, are based in those documents

 5     are not.  That's how we work.

 6             MR. JORDASH:  The document suggests that there was some form of

 7     review of the disciplinary finding.  The document doesn't suggest what

 8     happened in the end.  And the witness has said --

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  No.  Therefore, that's exactly -- and even the

10     documents say that the disciplinary proceedings were barred.  And the

11     documents also say that, at least to the extent I understand these

12     documents, that in 1999, in Kosovo, he was given a position of ... let me

13     see.  If you look at English page 4 and 5.  A decision from 1999, a

14     decision by which the employee assigned to the post of a police station

15     security policeman.  That's the old -- that's the 1st of July 1999.

16             And then on the next page a reference is made:  There was a

17     disciplinary procedure initiated against the said employee for ... and

18     then it mentions what was the reason, based on article so and so.  The

19     said employee has been assigned to the post as mentioned in the first

20     part of the decision and given the rank as mentioned in the second part

21     of the decision.

22             So I'm totally confused, and I would not satisfy myself by

23     saying, Well, this is what the witness said, if I get a totally confusing

24     set of documents underlying your questions.

25             MR. JORDASH:  This is the record from the DB.  This is what we

Page 5827

 1     have.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, in 1999 he is appointed.

 3             MR. JORDASH:  But I put it before the Court, I asked the witness

 4     whether he had been convicted or a finding had been made, he confirmed he

 5     had, and I left it for the Court to consider the papers.  I cannot take

 6     the matter further.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  No, but if I ask you whether this is a final

 8     decision or not, you say, Well --

 9             MR. JORDASH:  Well, I don't know --

10             JUDGE ORIE: [Overlapping speakers] ... but how do you --

11             MR. JORDASH: -- from the contents of the document.  I can only

12     see what is there in the document.  And the --

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, the document also says that in 1999, at least

14     as far as I understand this document, that he was assigned a certain

15     position and that the disciplinary proceedings had been barred, that the

16     decision had been -- so, therefore, what happened in first instance may

17     be true, but it's, for me, it's totally confusing.  And then to say,

18     Well, this is what the witness said.

19             MR. JORDASH:  But I don't know what I could have done other than

20     put the document and ask the witness what his position was.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Well, to give -- well, you put only one document to

22     him.  You didn't put this document, for example, to him.  What happened

23     in 1999?  Were you reinstated?  How do you reconcile that with being

24     fired?  That's, of course, if you get a whole bunch of the documents,

25     which we would like to know.

Page 5828

 1             MR. JORDASH:  But, respectfully, that's for the Prosecution to

 2     re-examine on.  It's not -- in the same way the Prosecution put --

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  No --

 4             MR. JORDASH: -- in part of the DB record and missed out this

 5     part --

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  If you would have presented us only the first

 7     decision, then I don't know whether I would have highly appreciated that.

 8     But we are unable, if you put in a lot of other aspects, if you do not

 9     deal with them, we are confused tomorrow or the day after tomorrow when

10     the witness has left.  And, therefore, whether this is for the

11     Prosecution or not, it's fine.  You apparently rely heavily on a

12     party-driven system, but this Chamber is also inclined to use its own

13     reading capacity and to see whether everything fits in well.  And, again,

14     this is -- for me, at least, it was highly confusing.

15             MR. JORDASH:  Your Honour, I understand what Your Honour is

16     saying, but it's an extremely difficult line to draw.  At what point does

17     a party -- at what point does our obligation arise to point out in

18     documents things which are not helpful to our case in the light --

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Jordash, I started with the other example.  The

20     witness said it was not robbery.  Yes?  You said, But that's how it's

21     translated.  If you would have gone through the whole of the translation,

22     you would have found theft as well, and you would have found larceny as

23     well.  So that was not a response which assists the Chamber.  Of course,

24     the Chamber cannot rush through the documents, but the way in which the

25     offence, the disciplinary offence, or the -- call it a -- call it an --

Page 5829

 1     even if it's a criminal offence -- is described, is not one where you

 2     would easily stop the witness by saying, That's how it's translated.

 3     Because robbery, aggravated robbery, and what we find in the statement,

 4     sounds to be at least a bit apart.

 5             MR. JORDASH:  I accept completely Your Honour's comment about

 6     that, and I apologise for that.

 7             In relation to the second part --

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  I see that.

 9             MR. JORDASH: -- I -- I find it difficult to understand exactly

10     how a party can conduct a case and point out --

11             JUDGE ORIE: [Overlapping speakers] ... Well, you can conduct --

12             MR. JORDASH: -- what is not helpful.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  If -- well, of course, one of the things you could

14     consider is that if the documentation shows clear signs of the decision

15     not being a final one, to not just act and leave it to the Chamber by

16     going through the remaining six pages, to find out that there is a

17     problem.  You understand what I mean?

18             MR. JORDASH:  Certainly.  And I'll take what Your Honour is

19     saying.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

21             We'll have a break, and we resume at five minutes past 6.00.

22                           --- Recess taken at 5.36 p.m.

23                           --- On resuming at 6.08 p.m.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Jordash, I would like to convey to you that my

25     observations just before the break are unanimously shared by my

Page 5830

 1     colleagues.  That's -- because it looked, perhaps, very much as a

 2     private -- some private observations.  They were not.

 3             We are waiting for the witness.

 4                           [The witness takes the stand]

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Petrovic, please proceed.

 6             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours.

 7        Q.   Witness, sir, in your statement, you stated:

 8             "Although Simatovic at the beginning, in mid-90s, was at the head

 9     of the paramilitary branch of the state security, his official position

10     at the time was special advisor of the head of the DB."

11             My question to you is this:  Is it true that you, until July

12     1995, had not known anything about what kind of actions and what kind of

13     posts and tasks were performed by Franko Simatovic?

14        A.   As far as I can see, you are right in saying so.  I remember

15     seeing, first time, Franko Simatovic --

16        Q.   No.  Fine.  I'm going to ask you everything, and you may add.

17             So until July 1995 you had not known anything about this man; is

18     that correct?

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21        Q.   Fine.  We will get to that eventually.  So before that time in

22     1991, 1992, 1993, what transpired then, you know nothing about that?

23        A.   That's correct.

24        Q.   You state here that his official position was special advisor to

25     the head of state security of DB.  When did you learn that Mr. Simatovic

Page 5831

 1     was special advisor to the head of state security?

 2        A.   I believe that this was on the occasion of our meeting at

 3     location 4, if my memory is not playing tricks on me.  I believe that

 4     this was the location when -- where this took place.

 5        Q.   Due to the passage of time, is it possible that you heard much

 6     later about this?  Do you allow for this possibility, since this is a

 7     very specific piece of information, maybe you've heard in the subsequent

 8     years?

 9        A.   Of course it's possible, but as far as I can remember, I think

10     that I learned that at location 4 on the occasion of our meeting there.

11        Q.   Fine.  Is it true -- or let me rephrase it.

12             Did you know anything about, when he became special advisor, what

13     were his duties, his obligations, his entitlements; do you know anything

14     about that?

15        A.   No, this happened at higher circles from those that I moved in.

16        Q.   Fine.  Thank you.  Witness, sir, is it true that you saw

17     Simatovic in 1995 on two occasions:  First time at location 2, and the

18     second time around at location 4.  Is that correct?

19        A.   That's correct.

20        Q.   Is it true that on both occasions you did not see him issuing any

21     orders to anybody, receiving any kind of reports from anybody; is that

22     correct?

23        A.   Correction to my answer to the previous question.

24             Am I allowed to do so or not?

25        Q.   Go ahead.

Page 5832

 1        A.   I said location number 2 and location number 4, answering your

 2     previous question.

 3        Q.   I'm asking you about 1995, not 1996.

 4        A.   Okay, fine.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Petrovic, if the witness is correcting an

 6     answer, he should first be given an opportunity to do so.  And if it then

 7     falls outside the time-frame of your question, then that becomes apparent

 8     anyhow.

 9             Please proceed.

10             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation]

11        Q.   Witness, let us clarify, in 1995 - I emphasise 1995 - you saw

12     Mr. Simatovic twice?

13        A.   Yes, as far as I can remember, concerning 1995, twice.

14        Q.   Thank you very much.  Fine.

15             My question -- before you asked whether you could rectify your

16     previous answer, so my question was:  Is it true that on those two

17     occasions you did not see Simatovic issuing any orders to anybody or

18     seeing that Simatovic was being reported to, receiving any report from

19     anybody; is that correct?

20        A.   I cannot recall, but Mr. Simatovic was received at location

21     number 4 as our big boss, as the main boss, as the main commander.

22        Q.   I'm not asking you about that.  But you cannot recall that he

23     issued any orders to anybody or receiving reports from anybody?

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 5833

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6   (redacted)

 7   (redacted)

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12             "This meeting was held after we left Eastern Slavonia towards the

13     end of 1995."

14             Is that correct?

15        A.   I believe so.  I cannot recall the month or the date, but I can

16     recall the sequence of events.  This I can recall.  This would be

17     approximately it.

18        Q.   Is it true, then, that at the time of that meeting at location 4,

19     the wars in Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina had ended?

20        A.   I cannot remember correctly.  I cannot recall when Srebrenica

21     happened and when the Dayton Accords were signed.  It did not interest me

22     that much, so I cannot recall the dates.  But I couldn't really be more

23     precise whether this occurred before the war ended or after the war had

24     ended.

25        Q.   May I help you.  Dayton Accords were signed on the

Page 5834

 1     21st of November, 1995, so --

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Petrovic, the witness says:  I do not remember

 3     before it -- the war ended or after the war ended.  And then to go with

 4     him through the dates on which the peace agreements were concluded,

 5     Dayton, et cetera, doesn't make that much sense because he says I don't

 6     know whether it was during or after the war.

 7             Please proceed.

 8             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours.

 9             JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... tell you that

10     the Chamber thought that -- I'm a bit late in telling you that we thought

11     that half an hour would be an appropriate time to be left for you, which

12     would give you until 20 minutes to 6.00.

13             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I must say that this

14     will present a great problem.  But I have no other choice but to yield to

15     your decisions.

16             JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... you start with

17     the most important questions, and then ...

18             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours.

19        Q.   Witness, sir, do you know anything about the relationship between

20     Simatovic and the former president of Yugoslavia, Milosevic?

21        A.   What I knew, I stated.

22        Q.   No, we heard it.  We do not have much time.

23             Do you have any knowledge about the relationship between the two

24     individuals specifically?

25        A.   I do not have any specific knowledge about that.

Page 5835

 1        Q.   Doesn't it -- well, I'll withdraw.

 2             Is it known to you -- is anything about possible meetings between

 3     the Simatovic and Milosevic meeting outside of ceremonies, some solemn

 4     events, et cetera; do you know anything about that?

 5        A.   I do not know anything about that.

 6        Q.   Fine.  Thank you.  I'm going to ask you about meetings at

 7     location 2 -- or rather, that one arrival of Simatovic, as you say, to

 8     location 2.

 9             First of all, is it true that you cannot be specific as to what

10     was the month when Simatovic arrived at location 2, given the passage of

11     time and the fact that at that moment this was not the most important

12     thing in your life?

13        A.   I cannot recall the precise date.  It could have been in June or

14     maybe between July and August; that period.  It must have been in that

15     period.  But I cannot really recall the specific date.

16        Q.   Could you please tell us, Why do you think this was in that

17     period June, July, August?  What triggers your memory?

18        A.   Well, this is the period when I was there, and I know for a fact

19     that the former commander arrived in helicopter.  I remember that

20     specifically.  And we -- I know and recall how discipline had to be

21     strictly observed and what kind of measures were put in place.

22        Q.   I'm asking you about the date or the period.  What makes you

23     believe that this must have been in July or August?  Well, I'm not asking

24     about some other circumstances.  It could have been in some other month,

25     not specifically July or August.

Page 5836

 1        A.   Well, if I hadn't been there, I wouldn't have had knowledge about

 2     that.  I can tell you what I know about.

 3        Q.   Well, let's go to page 9 of your statement.

 4             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Paragraph -- could we please

 5     retrieve P523, without showing it to the public, page 9, the second full

 6     paragraph on that page.  In English, that would be the first full

 7     paragraph of that same page.

 8        Q.   Witness, it's stated here:

 9             "I stayed at this camp from June until early October.  During

10     this time, Franko Simatovic came in a helicopter to that camp."

11             So please explain to me how is this difference possible from your

12     statement in 2000 and from your today's testimony.  Isn't it true that

13     you cannot recall with certainty the period when Simatovic arrived there?

14        A.   No, what you said is not closer to the truth.  So if it concerns

15     location number 2, of course, it is true what I said between June and

16     October, this would then have to refer to locations 2 and 3.  So this

17     would not be entirely true.

18             As far as arrival of Mr. Franko Simatovic to location 2, this is

19     what I can state with certainly because I know about that.

20        Q.   Well, you read -- when you read your witness statement, then this

21     is not the conclusion one could draw.  But I'm not going to dwell on

22     that.

23             What is a Desert Eagle; do you know?

24        A.   This is an Israeli-made pistol - to the best of my knowledge;

25     I've never held one in my hand - which can take -- or different calibres

Page 5837

 1     of barrel.  It can use different munitions of different calibres.

 2        Q.   So this is a pistol which was not part of standard-issue

 3     equipment of the military or MUP even before that or after that; is that

 4     correct?

 5        A.   As far as I can say, no, it wasn't.  I know that this is a very

 6     expensive item, very expensive pistol, relatively new at the time.

 7        Q.   You say that Simatovic came to location 2 to test that weapon.

 8             First of all, could you please tell us what exactly did you see

 9     with your own eyes, how he tested that weapon?

10        A.   We were told that by one of the instructors.  We could hear

11     gun-shots close to the villa.  I cannot recall which instructor told me

12     that, but he related that they had tasted the Desert Eagle.

13        Q.   But you did not see nor hear what was tested by whom; you are

14     telling somebody else's words?

15        A.   When it comes to the Desert Eagle, yes.  But as far as the

16     arrival and the visit is concerned, that's a completely different thing I

17     saw.  And we were told who was coming and how we were supposed to behave.

18        Q.   But you do not know why Simatovic came there, what was his

19     mission, his task; is that correct?

20        A.   This is what the -- this is something I did not know.

21        Q.   At one place in your statement you mention that you'd heard that

22     Simatovic and Arkan were not on the best of terms.

23             Could you please tell us where did you hear that?

24        A.   This was more or less, as far as I could tell, this was a public

25     secret.  More specifically, I heard that from my former colleagues in

Page 5838

 1     Kosovo.  To wit, if I can explain --

 2        Q.   No, I'm just interested in what I asked you about.

 3        A.   Fine.

 4        Q.   Very well.

 5             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Could we please show the witness

 6     the video that we saw yesterday.  That would be P2609.3.

 7             Your Honours -- Your Honours, if I could advise you of my

 8     findings of going through that video after -- afterwards, if you allow

 9     me, so that we do not waste time.  I made an effort to go through the

10     footage, and I could tell you what, as a layperson, I concluded from

11     watching the video.

12             Can we see the clip now, please.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Let's first look at the clip.

14                           [Video-clip played]

15             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation]

16        Q.   While we are paused here --

17             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] No, no, we have to go back.  Could

18     we please stop.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Petrovic, what would you like to see?  The --

20     first the balaclava black uniforms?

21             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] That portion -- or both portions

22     that we saw.  Stop, please.

23        Q.   Witness, can you recognise the patch?  I know it's difficult, but

24     do try.

25        A.   Yes, very difficult.  As far as I can see, there seems to be

Page 5839

 1     tiger there with a three-coloured flag, however this is a very bad still.

 2     Yes, it's slightly better.  The head of a tiger and a three-coloured

 3     flag.

 4        Q.   Whose insignia was this?

 5        A.   As far as I know, Arkan's Tigers had that.

 6             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Let's go on.

 7                           [Video-clip played]

 8             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation]

 9        Q.   Were you able to hear the part where the person says, "Tiger's

10     oath" or "Tiger's word"?  Were you able to make that out?

11        A.   Yes, I quote you, when you say "Tiger's word or Tiger's oath," I

12     didn't hear that.

13             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Could we rewind, please.

14                           [Video-clip played]

15             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation]...

16             THE INTERPRETER:  We can't hear Mr. Petrovic.

17             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I heard it.  It seems like

18     they're saying "Tiger's word."

19             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation]

20        Q.   And, after that, the text of the pledge follows, I believe?

21        A.   Yes.

22             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Let's move on.

23                           [Video-clip played]

24             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Stop, please.

25        Q.   Witness, based on what you can see, can you tell us where this

Page 5840

 1     was taped?

 2        A.   The people in these uniforms?

 3        Q.   Yes, can you tell the location?

 4        A.   This resembles our mess, or a mess.

 5        Q.   A mess.  Do you recognise the location, or is it something you

 6     cannot say?

 7        A.   I can't.  Not on the basis of this.

 8        Q.   You can't say whose mess this is?

 9        A.   I don't recall this as a mess where I was.  Perhaps you can give

10     me a moment and I'll try to remember, but...

11        Q.   That's fine if you can't.

12        A.   It doesn't resemble any of the messes.  I just tried to remember

13     the mess at location 2.  There was no mess at location 3.  As for

14     locations 4 and 5, they didn't resemble this location.

15        Q.   Thank you.

16             Can you recognise any one these soldiers we see?

17        A.   No, I can't recognise anyone.

18             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Let's play this slowly.  There are

19     a few more seconds.  And then the witness can see he whether he can

20     recognise anyone.

21                           [Video-clip played]

22             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation]

23        Q.   Did you recognise anyone?

24        A.   I didn't.

25        Q.   Witness --

Page 5841

 1             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Stop, please.

 2        Q.   Do you recognise anyone here?

 3        A.   No, I really can't recognise anyone.

 4        Q.   Witness, do you see any insignia on these men that would assist

 5     us in establishing who they are?

 6        A.   I don't see any, and we didn't wear any either.

 7        Q.   Can we agree, then, that we cannot ascertain who these people are

 8     and where they are?  We don't know who they belonged to?

 9        A.   Yes.  What I said earlier was that we had the same custom to tell

10     the oath just before meals.  As for your question, you are quite right.

11        Q.   Thank you.

12             How were you paid out?  You said it was in cash, but how was it

13     done?  Did someone count the bills in front of you and give them to you,

14     or ...

15        A.   Yes, one of the instructors would usually arrive with the money.

16     He would count it and give it to us.  For the most part, we all received

17     the same amount, at least those members of the unit at my level.

18        Q.   So, Witness, he would bring a stack of bills and distribute them

19     among those of you who were there?

20        A.   Well, it was more of a bag than a stack of bills.

21        Q.   So you didn't receive money in any envelopes with any markings?

22        A.   I think it only happened at location 5, if I'm not mistaken.

23        Q.   At location 5, can you describe the envelopes for us?

24        A.   I think they were blue, and it said -- well, first there was our

25     initial of the first name, then the last name, and then the amount of

Page 5842

 1     money.  And, of course, we needed to sign on a list.

 2        Q.   Thank you.  I only have a few questions left.

 3             Do you know when Arkan was killed?

 4        A.   January 2000, I think.  No?  Well, I think so.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Why not tell the witness when he was killed, because

 6     that seems to be a matter on which the parties could easily agree.  You

 7     apparently know when he was killed, so why ask the witness, if that's

 8     common knowledge?

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 5843

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6                           [Private session]

 7   (redacted)

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 5844











11 Pages 5844-5847 redacted. Private session.















Page 5848

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6   (redacted)

 7   (redacted)

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25                           [Open session]

Page 5849

 1             THE REGISTRAR:  And we are back in open session, Your Honours.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Registrar.

 3             MS. MARCUS:  Could I please ask the Court Officer to call up D73.

 4     The top of the first page, please, in both languages.  Okay.  I guess,

 5     the second page in B/C/S, please.

 6                           Re-examination by Ms. Marcus:

 7        Q.   JF-048, when you were shown this document, you said on the record

 8     today in cross-examination at transcript page 33, line 18, you said you

 9     were speechless.  What was it that surprised you about this DB file on

10     you containing this document from the year 2000?  If you do need private

11     session to answer the question, please just let me know.  What was it

12     that rendered you speechless?

13        A.   I was rendered speechless because this would be so-called

14     official document, one of the members of the state security sector,

15     containing lies about me.  In a normal country, if something of the sort

16     is produced before a court without any proof, then this is grounds for

17     lawsuit.  There are truthful things in this document, but there are many

18     which are not truth.

19        Q.   After reading this file, were you able to determine for what

20     purpose the state security service was collecting information about you

21     in the year 2000?

22        A.   It's unclear to me what the intension was, but I can see the gist

23     of this document, to present me in the worst possible way.  To whom, I

24     don't know.  But as far as -- well, I saw it in terms of whatever

25     mistakes I've made in my life, some 80 per cent were heaped on top of

Page 5850

 1     that.  This is how I see this document.

 2        Q.   During cross-examination, Mr. Petrovic suggested to you that your

 3     assessment of the unit being some kind of paramilitary branch of the DB

 4     was incorrect.  And the reason he put to you was because the payment you

 5     received was supported by official documentation from the MUP of Serbia,

 6     in some cases signed by the first accused.  Did you see any of those

 7     decisions calculating your salary or the -- using the coefficient, did

 8     you see that during your time operating with the Red Berets?

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Petrovic.

10             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, objection.  An

11     objection.  I showed a host of documents, both general and those specific

12     to the witness, proving that there was no talk about paramilitary units,

13     that it went for a unit part and parcel of the Ministry of the Interior.

14     And this misinterpretation and misrepresentation on the part of my

15     learned friend is unacceptable.

16             MS. MARCUS:  Your Honours --

17             JUDGE ORIE:  The objection is overruled.

18             Please proceed, Ms. Marcus.

19             MS. MARCUS:

20        Q.   Would you like me to repeat the question, or did you -- did you

21     hear my question?

22             JF-048, let me repeat the last question:  Any of those decisions

23     that you were shown calculating your salary, decisions using

24     coefficients, for example, did you see any of those official MUP

25     decisions during your time operating in the field with the Red Berets?

Page 5851

 1        A.   If my memory is correct, I believe that this was shown at

 2     location 5.  For certain, it was not shown to me on location 2 and 3.

 3             I -- if I remember correctly, the first time I saw them was at

 4     location 5.  I'm certain that I did not see anything of the sort for

 5     certain at locations 2 and 3.

 6        Q.   During your time at locations 2 and 3 -- and 4 - let me add - did

 7     you see any similar decisions in relation to any of your colleagues who

 8     were with you, those are your colleagues from -- who came with you

 9     throughout your deployment?

10        A.   No, I did not see anything.

11        Q.   So, to your knowledge, it could be quite possible that your

12     colleagues had similar decisions on which these payment records --

13             JUDGE ORIE:  One second, one second.

14             Yes, please finish your question.

15             MS. MARCUS:

16        Q.   The question is:  Based upon your knowledge, would you say that

17     it is quite possible that your colleagues had similar decisions on which

18     the payment records were based or calculated?

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Ms. Marcus, may I answer the question?  Yes, that's

20     possible because the witness doesn't know, so he can't exclude nor tell

21     us, isn't it?  He hasn't seen anything.  So let's -- let's get to the

22     core.  I've answered the question.

23             MS. MARCUS:  Understood, Your Honour.

24        Q.   JF-048, you reviewed --

25             JUDGE ORIE:  No, my answer is not based on the knowledge of the

Page 5852

 1     witness.  You added that to the question, of course.  I couldn't include

 2     that in my answer.

 3             Please proceed.

 4             No, usually the question, "Is it possible ..." is very often,

 5     unless someone has clear knowledge of what, under the circumstances,

 6     would be possible if you have thorough knowledge of the situation, is

 7     usually a useless question.

 8             MS. MARCUS:  I understand, Your Honour.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Please proceed.

10        Q.   My next question, JF-048:  You reviewed quite a number of payment

11     records in preparation for your testimony.  And you prepared a chart, one

12     of the charts that we tendered yesterday.  Do you recall what I'm talking

13     about, the payment records with lists of names of people paid?

14        A.   Yes, I do recall that.

15        Q.   When you looked at those payment records, what was your initial

16     reaction?

17        A.   My initial reaction was that I recognised many of the names

18     listed there.  That was one of my first reactions, if I can recall

19     correctly.  Of course, there were other reactions.  For the first time I

20     saw that document, I had not seen it earlier, and as far as I can recall,

21     no documents could I find my own signature.  On several occasions,

22     somebody else signed on my behalf.  And then a signature of a third

23     person would be on behalf of the whole group.  Those were my initial

24     reactions when I saw those documents for the first time in my life.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Ms. Marcus, when you said, I could finish the

Page 5853

 1     witness ... and then, of course, I thought within approximately the time

 2     for this hearing.

 3             MS. MARCUS:  I have no further questions, Your Honour, thank you.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Any questions arising from ...

 5             The Chamber has no questions.  None other from the Defence.

 6             Then Chamber still has to decide on the admission of the whole or

 7     part of the -- with or without the Kosovo matters.  We'll decide that

 8     soon.

 9             MS. MARCUS:  Your Honour, that's the submission -- sorry to

10     interrupt you.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, we will hear that tomorrow.

12             Let me first see whether -- I would first like to thank you,

13     Witness JF-048, for having come the long way to The Hague and for having

14     answered the questions that were put to you by the parties and by the

15     Bench.  I wish you a safe return home again.

16             Madam usher, could you please escort the witness out of the

17     courtroom.

18             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

19                           [The witness stands down]

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Bakrac.

21             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, while the witness is

22     exiting the court, may I use this time.  One minute.  I would like to

23     draw the attention of the Chamber that I asked Mr. Petrovic to ask the

24     witness about payments because I questioned another witness about the

25     modes of being paid at that unit and at another unit, and this why we

Page 5854

 1     wanted to clarify that matter.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Thank you for that submission.

 3             I'm looking at the Prosecution.  For tomorrow's witness, two

 4     hours in chief have been requested.  Ms. Friedman, I -- having read the

 5     expert report, which provides relevant information such as whether the

 6     Unix system was used on a Hewlett-Packard system and how many vacancies

 7     they are, is there any way to do it more compact?

 8             MS. FRIEDMAN:  Yes, Your Honour, I anticipate that, at most, it

 9     would be an hour and a half.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Could I already inquire as to the -- the

11     parties, of course, have requested cross-examination of -- usually an

12     expert report doesn't need a lot of explanation in chief any further, if

13     it's clear, and, of course, you may have had some influence on what you

14     exactly wanted the expert to describe and what details to give and what

15     details not to give.  I found a lot of details I think you should ask --

16     you should have asked the expert not to give.  So, therefore, let's see

17     how much time you really need.

18             For cross, as far as matters stand now.  So you -- exclusively on

19     the basis of the expert report.

20             MR. JORDASH:  The problem we have is that we don't have any of

21     the underlying material and so we don't know what the witness is going to

22     say beyond her report.  And it may be at some point we shall seek an

23     adjournment of cross-examination on that basis, but it does --

24             JUDGE ORIE: [Overlapping speakers] ... yeah, but -- you say, I --

25     that causes me some problems.

Page 5855

 1             MR. JORDASH:  I can -- the problem -- the additional problem is

 2     this, that the witness purports to describe the whole of the conflict as

 3     Serbian aggression, and so cross-examination -- [Overlapping

 4     speakers] ...

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, I see that the word aggression is often used.

 6             Could we -- could you agree with the Prosecution to interpret the

 7     word "aggression" in such a way that it's -- whether or not it's

 8     aggression is not for a sociologist to decide.  In Kampala, they managed,

 9     after seven years, to tell us what aggression is.  That took them seven

10     years after a history of 50 years.  So I think -- could you agree with

11     the Prosecution to ignore, I would say, the strong language, which

12     doesn't make necessarily a strong argument.

13             MR. JORDASH:  The problem is that the whole of this witness's

14     thesis is one which absolves Croatian military of any action whatsoever

15     and imputes it all to the Serbian military, so --

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, I think what the core of the report is, is

17     where people moved, at what moment, and where they went.  And I do not

18     expect from someone in that position to tell us exactly who is to be

19     blamed for the war or for aggression or ... and I really urge the parties

20     to see whether they can agree on that.  Because what we are talking about

21     in an expert report is not about who is the aggressor, but on the impact

22     of the developments, of the development, or the cause of events, on the

23     moment of people.  I take it that that is the core of what we'll hear

24     from that witness.

25             MR. JORDASH:  Well, if my learned friends agree to move some of

Page 5856

 1     this material, then we can probably complete cross-examination in an hour

 2     or so.  But if not, it's going to be a long process.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  I already expressed that there were certain portions

 4     where I really won't know what we have to do with that, what service were

 5     used, what computers were used, what ... there's lot of information which

 6     is really superfluous.

 7             Ms. Friedman, I don't want to spoil your evening, but an

 8     agreement with Mr. Jordash, do you think it would be something feasible?

 9             MS. FRIEDMAN:  We would be prepared to meet or -- and to meet

10     with Defence counsel in the morning to discuss the matter.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Okay.  That's at least a start.

12             I apologise to interpreters, to security, to transcribers,

13     everyone, for, again, stealing some of your time.

14             We adjourn.  And we'll resume tomorrow, Thursday, the

15     17th of June, in Courtroom II.

16                           --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.09 p.m.,

17                           to be reconvened on Thursday, the 17th day

18                           of June, 2010, at 2.15 p.m.