1 Tuesday, 28 June 2011
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 2.20 p.m.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Good afternoon to everyone.
6 [B/C/S on English channel]
7 JUDGE ORIE: I hear my own words in B/C/S on Channel 4, which
8 most likely was a small mistake. Good afternoon again to everyone.
9 Madam Registrar, would you please call the case.
10 THE REGISTRAR: Good afternoon, Your Honours. This is
11 case IT-03-69-T. The Prosecutor versus Jovica Stanisic and Franko
13 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
14 There are a few matters I would like to briefly raise. There
15 seems to be a matter in relation to D239. I was informed that there
16 might be a request to change the status from public into under seal.
17 MR. JORDASH: Yes, there is. I apologise for the delay. This is
18 part of a package of documents we've been asked to have under seal.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Groome, any objection?
20 MR. GROOME: No, Your Honour.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Same true for the Simatovic Defence?
22 Then D239, the status, will be changed into admitted under seal.
23 There were numbers still to be assigned to certain documents.
24 The one is a witness statement, 1D4851.
25 Madam Registrar, that would receive number ...
1 THE REGISTRAR: This would be Exhibit D258 under seal,
2 Your Honours.
3 JUDGE ORIE: D258 is admitted under seal. Same is true for
4 diagrams created by a witness and attached to the statement 1D2589, would
5 receive number ...
6 THE REGISTRAR: This would be D259 under seal, Your Honours.
7 JUDGE ORIE: And is admitted under seal. Yes. Defence document
8 1D4852 is MFI'd but it did not appear any earlier on the 65 ter exhibit
9 list. May I take it that there are no objections against - because that
10 should be the first step - it to be added to the 65 ter list?
11 MR. GROOME: No objection to the addition to the 65 ter list,
12 Your Honour.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Same is true for the Simatovic Defence. Then
14 formally this document, which was already MFI'd, is that leave it now
15 granted to add it to the 65 ter list.
16 Then we move into closed session in order to further hear the
17 evidence of the present witness.
18 [Closed session] [Confidentiality partially lifted by order of the Chamber]
19 THE REGISTRAR: We are in closed session, Your Honours.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
21 Could the witness be escorted into the courtroom.
22 Mr. Groome, I think that everyone was still waiting for an e-mail
23 message by Mr. Ignjatovic but at least I haven't seen anything.
24 MR. GROOME: Nor have I, Your Honour. Given his expression of
25 wishing to inform the Chamber directly, I just assumed that he had done
1 that and had not cc'd the Prosecution. I'm somewhat surprise that he has
2 not. He was very clear that he would.
3 JUDGE ORIE: At least I'm not aware, but I'll further ask the
4 Chamber staff I met an hour ago approximately, I'll further ask to update
5 that information. But as long as we haven't received anything, it's
6 clear that the Chamber intends to ask the Republic of Serbia to get
7 further details for the request for protective measures. If we do not
8 receive anything meanwhile spontaneously, then we'll proceed for the time
9 being as we decided to do last Friday.
10 Mr. Jordash.
11 MR. JORDASH: May I just address you briefly before the witness
12 comes in, please, on this issue.
13 [The witness enters court]
14 JUDGE ORIE: On this issue. Yes, now before the witness comes in
15 is not possible anymore because the witness is in. But my recollection
16 was that he doesn't speak or understand English.
17 MR. JORDASH: Very, very basic but he may follow.
18 JUDGE ORIE: He may follow. So you would prefer to ...
19 MR. JORDASH: Well, I can -- I would request that the Court -- I
20 also spoke to Mr. Ignjatovic --
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
22 MR. JORDASH: -- and he assured me he would communicate with the
23 Chamber and he would communicate that their position was a request and
24 not a demand and that the witnesses shouldn't be concerned about being
25 prosecuted, and I would invite --
1 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. You would very much like the witness to know
2 that. That's clear.
3 MR. JORDASH: Your Honour, yes. Thank you.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Now, we'll then further verify -- yes, the witness
5 may put on his earphones.
6 [Trial Chamber and Legal Officer confer]
7 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Jordash, Chamber staff and the Registry will
8 verify whether anything can be found. I, nevertheless, intend to
9 proceed. But I might say, but in more cautious terms, a few words about
10 that, if that would work to for the time being.
11 MR. JORDASH: Thank you.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Good afternoon, Witness DST-032. First of all, I'd
13 like to remind you that you're still bound by the solemn declaration
14 you've given at the beginning of your testimony that you would speak the
15 truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
16 WITNESS: DST-032 [Resumed]
17 [Witness answered through interpreter]
18 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber was informed that the Republic of Serbia
19 expressed that you would have -- that there would be no need to have any
20 concerns for you for being prosecuted for giving testimony. Now, the
21 only thing is that we receive this in writing as well as we expect and
22 everyone is now searching in their e-mails and in the post-boxes where to
23 find that message, but since the Chamber has no reason whatsoever not to
24 trust the information which was provided by one of the parties to the
25 Chamber, and on that basis we would like to proceed at this moment.
1 Mr. Jordash, does this meet, more or less, your -- well, I
2 couldn't say your concerns, but does this meet what you would like me to
3 do at this moment?
4 MR. JORDASH: Yes, thank you.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Then please proceed.
6 Mr. Jordash will now continue his examination.
7 Examination by Mr. Jordash: [Continued]
8 Q. Good afternoon, DST-032. Can you hear me?
9 A. Good afternoon, and good afternoon to everyone else. I can hear
11 MR. JORDASH: Now, I want to keep moving forward in relation to
12 some documents. But before I do that, Your Honours should have received
13 a list of documents to be admitted pursuant to 92 ter, and we would --
14 JUDGE ORIE: We received the list, yes.
15 MR. JORDASH: We would seek to tender the exhibits as associated
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, let me just -- the first two on the list we
18 have dealt with already. These are not the associated exhibits, but the
19 first two we find on our list are now D258 and D259 under seal. So,
20 therefore, we now start with 1D32 and following, is that ...
21 MR. JORDASH: Your Honour, that's correct. And 1D1407.
22 JUDGE ORIE: I have numbered from 1D32 up to 1D37. These are six
23 documents. We then have -- perhaps I first ask Ms. Marcus whether there
24 are any objections against the first six, 1D32 up to and including 1D37?
25 MS. MARCUS: Thank you, Your Honour. On the 92 ter chart that we
1 received last week, there was a column for origin. And with respect to
2 1D32, 33, 34, 35, 36, and 37, we were told that the relevant
3 correspondence that resulted in the provision of those documents would be
4 provided. We have -- to the best of my knowledge we haven't received any
5 RFAs or any origins with respect to those documents and so we would
6 reserve our position on authenticity until we see the correspondence for
7 those, Your Honour.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. They'll be MFI'd. Madam Registrar --
9 MR. JORDASH: Sorry, Your Honour.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
11 MR. JORDASH: The RFAs have been sent to the Prosecution.
12 1D1520. But obviously they haven't looked at them yet.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. We MFI them for the time being. And,
14 Ms. Marcus, could we hear from you by tomorrow?
15 MS. MARCUS: Yes, Your Honour.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Madam Registrar, the first six documents on
17 the list would receive numbers ...
18 THE REGISTRAR: D260, D261, D262, D263, D264, and D265.
19 JUDGE ORIE: And we need to have them under seal.
20 MR. JORDASH: Yes, please.
21 JUDGE ORIE: D260 up to and including D265 are admitted under
23 MS. MARCUS: Excuse me, Your Honour, just one question, please.
24 JUDGE ORIE: I say "admitted," are MFI'd under seal. I made a
1 MS. MARCUS: Thank you, Your Honour. Can I ask why they're
2 admitted under seal? Is it because we anticipate a protective measures
3 motion from the Government of Serbia or what? What's the reason for
4 those documents being under seal?
5 MR. JORDASH: Precisely that.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, so we will hear further submissions by the
7 government anyhow on what should remain confidential and what should not
8 and then we'll ...
9 Okay so then I correct my mistake: D260 up to D265 are MFI'd
10 under seal.
11 Next one, 1D364. Ms. Marcus?
12 MS. MARCUS: No objections.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Jordash, need to be under seal?
14 MR. JORDASH: Yes, please, for the same reason.
15 JUDGE ORIE: I'm looking at the Simatovic Defence, apparently no
16 objections. Then this document receives number D266, admitted under
18 Next one, 1D1276.
19 MS. MARCUS: No objections.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Under seal, Mr. Jordash?
21 MR. JORDASH: Yes, please.
22 JUDGE ORIE: No objections by the Simatovic Defence.
23 MS. MARCUS: Your Honour, this is an Official Gazette, does it
24 need to be under seal?
25 MR. JORDASH: It's a confidential issue. Confidential Issue 18,
1 27th of July, 1990.
2 JUDGE ORIE: I can't see that it is the Official Gazette as
3 matters stand now. We have to consider confidentiality anyhow for all of
4 these documents. This will be D267 admitted under seal.
5 Then the next one, 1D1896, rule book.
6 MS. MARCUS: No objections.
7 MR. JORDASH: Under seal, please.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Under seal. No Simatovic objections. D268 under
9 seal, with apologies to the Registrar that I've taken over part of her
11 Then we have two documents which are already MFI'd, D233, D236.
12 And the last one on the list is also already MFI'd, D151. And D233 is
13 public. And the other two, D236 and D151, are under seal.
14 MR. JORDASH: Yes, please. Thank you.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Then we can proceed.
11 Pages 11975-11978 redacted. Closed session.
13 A. Yes. I drew this diagram in Serbian. I designated the
14 18 centres, or, rather, I put 1 through 18. As for regular reporting, it
15 was carried out by drafting, submitting, and forwarding original or
16 primary material, or documents, in four identical copies. Two copies
17 always remained in the centre, and you have them shown here. It was a
18 copy for the operative who authored the document and another copy for
19 operational archives.
20 The same goes for the centre as would go for the
21 5th administration in the seat of the service. The other two copies
22 which are marked here. And I may indicate them to you if you wish, in
23 the small rectangle, we have one and the other. Upon a decision by the
24 chief of centre, they were to be forwarded to the relevant
25 administrations, either the 1st or the 3rd, and another copy was to go to
1 the 5th administration. It wasn't necessary for the chief of centre to
2 come up with the formal decision on the forwarding of these documents to
3 the administrations in the seat of the service; rather, it was understood
4 that it would be done once he signed cover letters for each of the
5 administrations. Then documents would be put in separate envelopes and
6 addressed to the relevant administrations.
7 Q. Thank you. And would all information that was generated in the
8 centres be sent to the 1st, 3rd, and 5th administration, or only certain
10 A. All information -- or, rather, primary documents or originals
11 were not forwarded to all the administrations in the seat of the service.
12 Some documents, as I mentioned in my statement, such as official notes
13 which is used to document certain activities by operatives, as a rule
14 were created in two copies which would both remain in the centre. Such
15 official notes were not forwarded to the administrations in the seat of
16 the service.
17 The diagram has one precondition and that is that there are four
18 identical copies of the document in question. We have it shown here.
19 Two of those copies were to remain in the centre, whereas the other two
20 copies were to be sent to two different administrations. In order to
21 fulfill the conditions of this situation, it would have to mean that
22 these documents had to be, say, associate reports, official notes of
23 interviews, and reports on the application of certain measures.
24 All those documents had to contain security-related information
25 that was important for the work of service. That was the basic criterion
1 by which the chief of the centre abided when making such decisions.
5 Q. Once the information arrived at the 1st and the
6 3rd administration, did all information get passed upwards or only
7 certain information went upwards in the service?
8 A. Once such documents were processed in terms of archiving and
9 registering, they were immediately sent to the relevant chiefs of
10 administrations. Those chiefs of administrations carry out a selection.
11 In other words, they choose the documents that they will forward to the
12 respective assistants of the chief of service depending on the line of
13 work. It depended upon their assessment.
11 Page 11982 redacted. Closed session.
16 First of all, Witness DST-032, I am inclined to become a bit
17 nervous if an agenda, the same symbol, gets two explanations. Now, what
18 I see is the legend, the original materials for 1 or 3 administration,
19 is, as far as I can see, exactly the same as the 5th administration. I
20 also do not know exactly what it means, original materials 1 or
21 3 administration. Is that coming from or addressed to? That is a bit
22 unclear to me, because if I understand the diagram well, then the symbol
23 presents the kind of information which is sent in the direction of the
24 arrow between the various instances.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, in the last line of
2 the legend you will see a circle next to which there is the explanation
3 "analytical material." And if you look at the chief of the
4 5th administration and the link with the deputy and the chief, the
5 materials that travel that way are analytical materials.
6 Whereas the 1st and 3rd administrations, as operative and
7 instruction administrations, in line with what you said, they forward to
8 higher authorities original material or primary documents. These are
9 documents which were created in the centres by operative workers
10 authorised to collect information and compile material that in our
11 terminology is called original material. And in the rule book on the
12 work of the State Security Service from 1990, which was in force at the
13 time, they are also called primary documents.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So if I understand you well, what your
15 explanation is, is that the boxes with the diagonal cross in it, that the
16 main thing we have to understand is that that is original material and
17 that despite the legend but focusing on the diagram itself, that we can
18 see that whatever original material is received by the 5th administration
19 is not sent upwards, it is only the analytical material which is then
20 sent further up in the system; whereas if original material is received
21 by the 3rd administration or by the 1st administration, that they would
22 send that material further up in the line but they would also receive
23 that later back. Is that a correct understanding?
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. As you can see from this
25 schematic, the 5th administration receives the material we spoke about,
1 namely primary documents or original material. This is where that is.
2 Analysed, assessed, and based on that, analytical material is produced
3 which is then sent on.
14 question for you: We sometimes see lines with arrows but without any
15 indication whatsoever of what kind of information is sent along those
16 lines. I see three lines from the chief of service, direct lines, going
17 down to the 1st, the 3rd, and the 5th administration, but it doesn't tell
18 us what is transported or what is sent through these lines. Could you
19 tell us what that is, or ...
1 From the chief of service I see, for example, that original material goes
2 up to him and is sent back to him. The same is true for analytical
3 materials which is sent from the deputy up to the chief of service and
4 then goes back again apparently once it has been processed, or.
5 Now, I see lines from the chief of service directly to the box of
6 the 1st administration, the 3rd administration, and the
7 5th administration. Now, what is -- what information is passed through
8 those lines? Or what instructions or orders or whatever it is?
10 The chief of administration, for example, the 1st administration, can
11 submit a document to the chief of service. And the chief, having
12 acquainted himself with the document, returns it for some action to be
13 taken in accordance with that document.
14 JUDGE ORIE: So what you say is that the chief of an
15 administration can bypass the assistant chief of service and the deputy
16 chief of service and directly address the chief of service, and then he
17 could, in return, send back information to the chief of the
18 administrations? What, therefore, is missing in the diagram is the arrow
19 up from the 1st, the 3rd, and the 5th administration directly to the
20 chief of service, because the arrow only points down and does not point
1 such a way that it becomes illogic. But I do understand that the lines
2 down from the 1st, the 3rd, and the 5th administration, without any
3 indication of what kind of material is sent or what information is
4 transported, that it should have arrows in both directions; is that
5 correctly understood?
13 A. During the interview in Belgrade, the Defence representatives
14 showed me a figure for one year only, and that figure referred to
15 countering extremism and terrorism, and I believe that figure was 8.902.
16 Based on that, I stated in my statement that I couldn't imagine that the
17 chief of service read more than a couple of documents a day, because the
18 question, then, is what were the deputy, the assistants, the chiefs of
19 administrations, special counsellors, et cetera, do?
11 Page 11988 redacted. Closed session.
10 A. That can clearly be seen here. You're now asking me, and I'm
11 answering, about how things were with the operative administrations, the
12 1st or the 3rd. At the same time, though, the same document that reached
13 the chief of the 1st administration or the 3rd also reached the
14 5th administration. The 5th administration informs the chief of service
15 in a synthetic way, not by means of individual documents. But, rather,
16 based on the documents received by the 5th administration and that were
17 processed there and turned into analytical material no matter what they
18 were called at any point in time, the 5th administration informs the
19 chief of service in a synthetic manner so that very few situations remain
20 when the chiefs of the operative administrations can directly contact the
21 chief of service.
22 These situations are very infrequent because the chief of service
23 is already acquainted by the 5th administration by means of the
24 analytical material that has been created.
11 Pages 11990-11997 redacted. Closed session.
19 MR. JORDASH: May we have, please, on the screen, P2979.
20 Q. I want to deal very briefly with this because you may be asked
21 about it by others, allegations in the Vreme newspaper relating to the
22 year 2000. I think you referred to them when you attended court on
23 Friday, allegations that you'd improperly destroyed documents. Would you
24 like to respond to that?
25 A. Yes, I would. This copy of the Vreme magazine was shown to me by
1 Defence. I refused to read the article. A few years back, and now I see
2 it was in November 2004, this article appeared in the Serbian public and
3 I didn't read it at the time either. Now I see that a group of senior
4 officials -- first of all, I was never a senior official of the
5 State Security Service. The only senior officials are the chief of the
6 service and his deputy.
7 JUDGE ORIE: One second, please. Did I understand you well that
8 you didn't read it at the time and when it was given to you by the
9 Defence that you also refused to read it; is that how I have to
10 understand your testimony?
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That is correct. That is precisely
12 what I said.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Jordash, is it of any use to comment on
14 something you haven't read.
15 MR. JORDASH: Well, I think the witness knows the substance of
16 what he was accused of.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Then let's get rid of the article.
18 MR. JORDASH: Well, there's one aspect of it that I would like to
19 ask the witness about.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Then you put that to the witness. But I'm
21 not much inclined for a witness who says I don't want to read it and to
22 hear his comments on what he supposedly had not read. And I do not fully
23 understand why you refused to read it if it is considered relevant by the
24 Defence because it obstructs the way to get the best testimony.
25 Mr. Jordash, could you please then -- let's not -- if you want to
1 comment on allegations, fine, let's forget about the article.
2 If there's any specific question Mr. Jordash would like to put to
3 you in relation to this Vreme article, he will do so.
4 MR. JORDASH:
5 Q. I just want to ask you about one aspect which has been translated
6 as follows: That you were responsible for destroying documents related
7 to collaborators for special purposes insofar as the centres had these.
8 Are you aware of the term "collaborators for special purposes"? Is that
9 something that you've heard of before?
10 A. I'm not sure of this term of "collaborator" or "associate for
11 special purposes." As far as I recall, there was something 20 years ago
12 that was called "associates for particular purposes." As for these
13 associates for special purposes, I encounter that term for the first time
14 in 1991 when I was sent to the Kosovo SDB. There were dozens upon dozens
15 of such files in different organisational units of the Kosovo SDB.
16 I believe I need to provide an explanation to this Court. These
17 people were associates --
18 Q. Could you be quite brief because I've got some ground I need to
19 cover, so please be brief.
20 A. In briefest terms possible, these are associates for particular
21 purposes who were engaged in cases of war or an immediate threat of war
22 in the former SFRY.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Jordash, may I invite you to have a look at the
24 transcript. Page 34, first line, the sentence starting with "as for
25 these associates," there seems to be a bit of an inconsistency. It may
1 be a translation issue, and perhaps I also ask the specific attention
2 from the interpreters.
3 The witness told us that as far as he recalls 20 years ago there
4 was called associates for particular purposes. And then he says: "As
5 for these associates for special purposes," and that apparently is
6 exactly the distinction he intends to make. So therefore could it be
7 that when he said "as for these associates for particular purposes,"
8 rather than "special purposes," because I'm a bit confused. You see the
9 point? He refers by a different name to what he mentioned before and he
10 uses exactly the term where he says he's uncertain about.
11 MR. JORDASH: Your Honour, yes.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Could you please seek it to be clarified. Or if you
13 can live with it, then we should move on. But it's unclear to me.
14 MR. JORDASH:
15 Q. DST-032, what type of associates were you referring to in
16 relation to the Kosovan DB? How would you term them?
17 A. I was talking about, as far as I remember, about associates for
18 particular purposes.
19 Q. Have you ever come across the term "associates for special
20 purposes" during your career in the DB?
21 A. No.
22 Q. Finally, do you admit or deny destroying documents in the way
23 alleged by the Vreme article, i.e., improperly?
24 A. It wasn't only in the Vreme article, but also in different TV
25 broadcasts that they referred to it. I claim in full responsibility that
1 all documentation was destroyed in keeping with the rules of the State
2 Security Service as of 1990. There is a problem, though, if I may
3 explain, or actually two.
4 First, this campaign in the media, the Vreme magazine and the TV,
5 began in November when I was still special advisor of the BIA director.
6 Q. Which year?
7 A. 2004. I asked the then director to protect me from such
8 allegations or such campaign. If he was unable to do that, I asked him
9 to ask the government to step in because I acted under the then Law on
10 the BIA Service, which decidedly states that the agency is duty-bound to
11 assist his -- their employer if accused of something that is not
12 substantiated. That assistance encompassed a number of different aspects
13 and measures. In both cases my request was refused.
14 The second problem was this: It wasn't only me, but any of us,
15 we couldn't create a diagram like we did for you for the Serbian public
16 to explain what it was that we did. We simply cannot do that because we
17 are bound by the necessity to keep state and official secrets under the
19 Q. Let me ask you about a different subject, DST-032.
11 Pages 12003-12041 redacted. Closed session.
20 [Open session]
21 THE REGISTRAR: We are in open session, Your Honours.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
23 For the parties, if possible, if we could finish the testimony of
24 this witness after two and a half hours. You've had one hour now,
25 Ms. Marcus. You would please try to do it as efficiently as possible,
1 and then I don't know how many re-examination there will be, but, of
2 course, let's try to see whether we would achieve to finish after the --
3 before the second break, which would mean that the next witness should be
4 on standby, Mr. Jordash, the next witness who is scheduled for two and a
5 half hours, which would mean that would take us well into Thursday.
6 Could the parties consider and see whether there would be any
7 opportunity that we would finish that witness perhaps on that Thursday.
8 I am aware that we have a similar matter to deal with as we did with the
9 present witness and the previous witness. Let's see how far we can come.
10 I'm using cautious language which means that I'm not fully confident that
11 we'll make it, but I also do not exclude for that possibility if everyone
12 tries to focus on it.
13 Mr. Jordash, you're on your feet.
14 MR. JORDASH: Only that I'd like to supplement the application
15 for protective measures.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, let's then do that tomorrow, or whether you set
17 out in detail -- I do agree with you that there are three lines which we
18 find in the application is not -- by quantity, is not overwhelming.
19 MR. JORDASH: No, I accept that.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We adjourn for the day, and we resume
21 tomorrow, the 29th of June, 9.00, Courtroom II.
22 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.03 p.m.,
23 to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 29th day of
24 June, 2011 at 9.00 a.m.