Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 19809

 1                           Tuesday, 29 May 2012

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

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

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Good afternoon to everyone.

 6             Madam Registrar, would you please call the case.

 7             THE REGISTRAR:  Good afternoon, Your Honours.  This is case

 8     IT-03-69-T, the Prosecutor versus Jovica Stanisic and Franko Simatovic.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Madam Registrar.

10             Before we continue with the -- with hearing the evidence of

11     Mr. Micic, I'd like to ask the parties the following, and it is in

12     relation to the Stanisic Defence.  It's Stanisic Defence's request to

13     have an opportunity to address the Chamber regarding the timing of the

14     filing of final briefs.  An opportunity to address the Chamber will be

15     given.  For us, the problem at this moment is whether we should give you

16     an opportunity to make oral submission or written submissions.

17             The schedule for this week is very tight, although we do not know

18     exactly how tight it is.  That depends on how much time the Prosecution

19     would need for Mr. Novakovic.  Could we have an impression of that?

20             MS. MARCUS:  Your Honour, I believe it's approximately an hour

21     and a half.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  An hour and a half.

23             How much time would the Simatovic Defence still need for

24     Mr. Micic?

25             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I believe that I may

Page 19810

 1     finish by the end of the first session.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Could we hear how much time the Prosecution and the

 3     Stanisic Defence would need for the cross-examination of Mr. Micic.

 4             MR. JORDASH:  We're not anticipating more than 20 minutes, maybe

 5     even less.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Twenty minutes.

 7             Mr. Farr.

 8             MR. FARR:  Your Honour, my initial estimate is up to three hours,

 9     but obviously I'll try to keep it shorter than that if possible.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Which would mean that you'd need another hour

11     most likely, one session tomorrow?

12             MR. FARR:  Correct, Your Honour.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Then we would have at least the second session

14     tomorrow for Mr. Novakovic.  So this is a chance that we would have some

15     time available on Thursday, although it requires the parties to behave

16     very disciplined, because the Chamber is not taking the risk that we

17     would not finish with Mr. Novakovic this week in order to give you an

18     opportunity to make oral submissions.  So I leave it to a great extent to

19     you.  If you think that there would be sufficient time, the Chamber is

20     quite willing to hear the oral submissions on the matter, but only after

21     the testimony of Mr. Novakovic is concluded.  If you think that you could

22     make that and it's a matter of discussing it between parties, then you're

23     invited to make oral -- to make written submissions.  Is that clear?

24             Then finally, I do understand that this was a matter the

25     Prosecution wanted to raise at this moment as well, or perhaps not the


Page 19811

 1     timing but to -- to make submissions.

 2             MS. MARCUS:  Yes, Your Honour, we were ready.  But we're in your

 3     hands as to the timing.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  And, well, you now know what has priority on

 5     our minds.

 6             Then the parties have sent by e-mail short submissions, as they

 7     were invited to do, in relation to the chart which was marked for

 8     identification, P3164.  The parties are invited to file these e-mail

 9     submissions in perhaps the same format, and these are the e-mail

10     submissions 25th of May by the Prosecution and the 28th of May by the

11     Defence.  So therefore we'd like to receive it formally filed.

12             If there's no other -- no other matter at this moment, could the

13     witness be escorted into the courtroom.

14                           [The witness takes the stand]

15                           WITNESS:  RADIVOJE MICIC [Resumed]

16                           [Witness answered through interpreter]

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Good afternoon, Mr. Micic.

18             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good afternoon.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  First I'd like to remind you that you're still bound

20     by the solemn declaration you have given at the beginning of your

21     testimony.

22             And you'll now be further examined by the Simatovic defence.

23             Mr. Bakrac.

24             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

25             Good afternoon to all in the courtroom.


Page 19812

 1                           Examination by Mr. Bakrac:  [Continued]

 2        Q.   [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Mr. Micic.  Mr. Micic, last week

 3     we concluded part of the examination.  The topic that I'd like us to

 4     discuss now has to do with 1993.  So sometime in mid-1993, what was the

 5     position that you held and where was it that you worked?

 6        A.   In mid-1993, I was still an operative in the AOS.  On the

 7     14th of November - I remember that because that's my birthday - I became

 8     head of the AOS division.

 9        Q.   Thank you.  Mr. Micic, so in August you were still an operative

10     in the AOS.

11             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Could we now please take a look at a

12     Prosecution exhibit, that is, P2414.  It is under seal.  So,

13     Your Honours, may it not be displayed to the public.

14        Q.   Mr. Micic, we're waiting for the English translation as well.

15     Could you please take a look at the first page, and later on we'll go

16     back to one of the paragraphs on this first page.  Can we now please take

17     a look at the second page.

18             Could you tell me whether you recognise the document, and can you

19     tell me whether this is your signature underneath where it says

20     "Operative Radivoje Micic"?

21        A.   Yes, that is my signature.  Which means that practically I

22     coauthored this document.

23        Q.   Thank you.  Can we now please move on to the first page again.

24     This is a document dated the 31st of August, 1993, and it is entitled

25     "Official Report on Intelligence about Dafina Milanovic."


Page 19813

 1             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, may we now move into

 2     private session.  I would like to mention a name.  And then after

 3     mentioning that name we can go back into open session.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  We move into private session.

 5             [Private session] [Confidentiality lifted by order of the Chamber]

 6             THE REGISTRAR:  We're in private session, Your Honours.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Madam Registrar.

 8             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]

 9        Q.   Mr. Micic, in the second paragraph -- or, rather, in the first

10     paragraph, let's deal with that first, you say from our operative source,

11     and then you say further on in the second paragraph:  It is interesting

12     that Gerasimovic, the judge working on the murder case - the murder took

13     place on the premises of Dafiment Banka - gave Dafina Milanovic for her

14     birthday a precious diamond of great numismatic value.  This information,

15     if I'm not mistaken, you got that from one of your operative posts.  Did

16     you check it, though?

17        A.   Yes, certainly.  These allegations or, rather, this information

18     was not correct as far as the diamond itself was concerned, or brilliant.

19     Judge Gerasimovic was an investigating judge at that time.  On the basis

20     of what we knew about his property and his revenue, this would be

21     nonsense.  I can put it that way.  Or inaccurate.

22             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, could we now please go

23     back into public session.  I think that further on ...

24             JUDGE ORIE:  May we turn into open session.

25                           [Open session]


Page 19814

 1             THE REGISTRAR:  We are in open session, Your Honour.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Madam Registrar.

 3             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]

 4        Q.   Mr. Micic, let us now look at page 2 of this official report.

 5     Last paragraph.  This is what it says here:

 6             "... D. Milanovic, during the period in question, pointed out

 7     several times that she did not trust Frenki because he had promised a lot

 8     but failed to deliver on anything, and concluded that Frenki did not

 9     trust her either.  She said that this was not fair because she,

10     allegedly, at one point in time imported two trucks with equipment,

11     helmets, bullet-proof vests, and night sights from Austria and two

12     aircraft from the United States for Frenki's requirements and, in fact,

13     had equipped 5.000 of his men."

14             So, Mr. Micic, as for this information that you received from

15     your operatives, did you check it any further?

16        A.   At any rate, like most of the information that can be verified,

17     we checked this too.  However, this information itself indicates that it

18     is incorrect.  Basically this is impossible.  Two aircraft from America,

19     at that time, the end of 1993, quite simply that was impossible.  It was

20     impossible to deliver that or import that.  There was no way of receiving

21     that in Serbia.  Equipping 5.000, men, that's an army.  That is an

22     unbelievably large number.

23             As for the question of trust, who trusted who, now, whether it's

24     Mr. Franko Simatovic or Dafina Milanovic, I think that it's a very

25     well-known thing who Dafina Milanovic is -- or, actually, I don't know to

Page 19815

 1     what extent the Trial Chamber knows about Dafina Milanovic.

 2        Q.   Thank you, Mr. Micic.  Just one more question that I'd like to

 3     add to this.  In 1992 or in 1993 was it possible to import equipment from

 4     Austria for 5.000 men without having this registered somewhere and so on?

 5        A.   Let's put it the other way around.

 6             MR. FARR:  Foundation, Your Honour.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Farr.

 8             MR. FARR:  Objection:  Foundation.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Could you lay a foundation for your --

10             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the witness was an

11     operative at that point in time, and he received some information from a

12     source and he checked that.  My question is whether in that check -- I

13     mean, the witness already told us that he had not come across anything

14     that was similar to this.  However, in view of his knowledge as an

15     operative, he can tell us whether that was possible in the first place.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Bakrac, if there's an objection against

17     foundation, then your -- and when I invite you to lay that foundation,

18     it's not for you to give that foundation but for the witness.  To ask the

19     witness such questions that the foundation is laid by him for his

20     knowledge.  And the question was -- the question was whether in 1992 or

21     1993 it was possible to import equipment from Austria for 5.000 men

22     without having this registered somewhere.

23             Is that at least ... if it was at that moment that you

24     intervened, Mr. Farr.

25             MR. FARR:  That's precisely the issue, how the witness knows --

Page 19816

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

 2             MR. FARR:  -- what was possible or not and in terms of importing

 3     weapons.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Mr. Bakrac, so you're supposed, then, to put

 5     questions to the witness so that the witness provides the foundation, not

 6     that you tell us why you think the witness could tell us what he did.

 7     Please proceed.

 8             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

 9        Q.   In your group AOS -- you also said there was another group, a

10     European group.  During your operative work, did you check the arrival of

11     foreign nationals, weapons, equipment into the territory of Serbia?  Did

12     you have this kind of insight?

13        A.   Certainly the arrival of foreign nationals at every point in

14     time, whereas the arrival of weaponry, especially this many, this

15     certainly would have been registered by our colleagues from the public

16     security and they would have passed that knowledge on to us.

17        Q.   Do you remember that in 1992 at one point an embargo was imposed

18     on the import of weaponry into Serbia?

19        A.   Well, that was the reason why I said that at that point in time

20     it was impossible.  Again, I'm saying that I think that it is impossible.

21     If this had to do with Austria, then three countries would have to be

22     crossed in order for this weaponry to reach Serbia or the

23     Federal Republic of Yugoslavia at the time unobserved.  This is an

24     operation that I cannot even imagine.

25        Q.   Mr. Micic, Mr. Micic, finally, tell me, when you have some

Page 19817

 1     intelligence received from some of your operatives, do you sometimes make

 2     remarks at the end of a text?

 3        A.   That is a integral part of the role of an operative.  That is to

 4     say, after presenting information or intelligence received from our

 5     contacts, we give an opinion of our own.  We state what our own position

 6     is with regard to this kind of intelligence.  However, that seems to be

 7     missing here.

 8        Q.   That's precisely what I wanted to ask about.  Why is there no

 9     remark here?

10        A.   Well, I can only go back once again to what I've already stated,

11     that is to say that this -- well, to put it very simply, this is simply

12     impossible.  There was no additional knowledge, say, from the public

13     security department or any other security organ in Serbia that would make

14     this possible.

15        Q.   Otherwise, would you have written something in your remark

16     regarding the reliability of the source?

17        A.   Well, if this could have been correct information or if it had

18     indicated that the original information has some basis in reality, I

19     would say that it is necessary to take further action with regard to

20     shedding more light on the circumstances involved.  I can assume who the

21     source was.  It's not right.  The source comes from criminal circles,

22     circles closed to Ms. Dafina.

23        Q.   Mr. Micic, at some point in 1993 or 1994, did you ask to be

24     transferred from the Belgrade headquarters?  And if you did, where?

25        A.   I can't say at what time it happened exactly, end 1993 or early


Page 19818

 1     1994, but I did go to see the then-deputy head of administration, asking

 2     him to find me a position somewhere, never mind what kind of duties it

 3     involved, that would take me away from the Belgrade headquarters.  And

 4     the reason was -- this is not a nice thing to say, but the relationship I

 5     had with the then-head of Belgrade centre was intolerable.

 6        Q.   When you say "head," you meant the head until that time or the

 7     one who arrived in 1993?

 8        A.   The latter.

 9        Q.   Whom did you approach with the request to get you a transfer?

10        A.   You mean name?

11        Q.   We can go into private session here.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  We move into private session.

13             [Private session] [Confidentiality lifted by order of the Chamber]

14             THE REGISTRAR:  We're in private session, Your Honour.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Madam Registrar.

16             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]

17        Q.   You can tell us the name of the person from whom you requested

18     the transfer.

19        A.   It was deputy head of the 2nd Administration, Dragan Filipovic,

20     whom I knew from working together in the American group.  And do you

21     still want me to tell you with whom I had this intolerable relationship?

22     That was Zoran Mijatovic who had returned from the 2nd Administration,

23     from the position of head of the administration to the position of head

24     of the Belgrade centre.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Bakrac, if you do not mind, I'd like to go back

Page 19819

 1     briefly to the -- to the document we had last on our screen.  You said it

 2     was so obvious that it was -- could not be true, that you did not make

 3     any remark about that.

 4             Now, is it your evidence that all of what was said by this source

 5     was untrue under all circumstances, or is it just the last paragraph?

 6             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I stress the prefix regarding

 7     Mrs. Milanovic, especially the initial information coming from a source

 8     that belonged in criminal circles that involved a lot of fraud and

 9     dishonest actions.  There is not only this reference to a diamond, but

10     you see there is information --

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Would you please listen to my question:  Is it your

12     evidence that whatever is said here by this source is untrue?  For

13     example, who attended the birthday celebration of Dafina Milanovic, is

14     that true or not true?  Could it be true?

15             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I suppose it's possible.  I suppose

16     it's true.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Because you said there's no reason to make any

18     observation, because what is untrue is clearly untrue.  Now, if you say

19     that may be true, wouldn't it be important then to distinguish between

20     what may be true and might be of interest and what, as you said, is

21     obviously not true?  How would the reader know that -- that the diamond

22     is not true but that the people attending the birthday celebration may be

23     true and that perhaps the -- the confidence Mr. Milosevic may have had in

24     John Kennedy, was that true, was that not true?

25             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It's a very simple principle.  We

Page 19820

 1     as operatives collect information.  If we had no foreknowledge -- and

 2     this especially is an area I wasn't involved in directly.  I had no

 3     foreknowledge about any of these areas.  For instance, there is a

 4     reference here to two aircraft from America, which is obviously

 5     suspicious.  Still it doesn't mean that if I brought it to the

 6     leadership - and when I say "leadership," I mean the centre where all the

 7     information of all the operatives within the centre is collated - it

 8     doesn't mean that they would not order further action be taken to verify

 9     and supplement this information to take further operative steps.

10             I could not, and it would have been unprofessional of me to

11     include my judgement on matters I did no -- I didn't know enough about.

12     I was not involved in the surveillance of Dafina Milanovic, and I am not

13     even sure that the leadership did not order further action be taken on

14     this, telling an operative to collect more information.

15             MR. BAKRAC: [No interpretation]

16             JUDGE ORIE:  A minute ago you said that you make an observation.

17     If you would -- you were asked by Mr. Bakrac would you have made a

18     comment like this may be true or this may not be true, and then you said

19     well, it's obvious what is not true and therefore there was no need to do

20     that, but that apparently then does not apply to the whole of this

21     document; whereas on other matters your comment is missing on the

22     likelihood of the observations made by your source.

23             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm saying this again.  I did not

24     have all the information concerning the reliability of sources and

25     verifiability of intelligence.  It's tantamount to giving an unqualified

Page 19821

 1     opinion on -- on inaccurate information.

 2             Mr. Bakrac asked me about the last paragraph, which is a case in

 3     particular because it's absolutely impossible, whereas the other

 4     information isn't necessarily implausible.  In any case, I suppose the

 5     leadership of the centre would have reacted if there was anything

 6     controversial in this.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Well, the question put to you by Mr. Makrac --

 8     Bakrac was the following:

 9             "... finally, tell me, when you have some intelligence received

10     from some of your operatives, do you sometimes make remarks at the end of

11     a text?"

12             And then you said:

13             "That is an integral part of the role of an operative."

14             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Correct.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Now, apparently for most of this report you have not

16     made any observations on the likelihood.  And then you were asked:

17             "That's precisely what I want to ask about.  Why is there no

18     remark here?"

19             And then you said that you had -- "it's simply impossible."

20     "There was no additional knowledge."  Mr. Bakrac didn't ask you

21     specifically on the last paragraph but in more general terms, and what I

22     observe is that on none of the other paragraphs there's any comment on

23     whether it could be true or not.

24             Yes, Mr. Bakrac.

25             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, it may have been my

Page 19822

 1     mistake.  I did not follow the interpretation.  But when I was asking my

 2     question, I wasn't asking about operative officers but operative sources.

 3     When they received information from operative sources.  I'm not claiming

 4     that it's exactly the same in the transcript because I didn't check, but

 5     the text says "from operative sources."

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, but it doesn't change the gist of the questions

 7     and the answers irrespective of whether this was very accurate.

 8             One additional question:  How would you know that the

 9     judge - I've never heard of him, so I've got no opinion about him in

10     whatever way - how would you know that he couldn't give a diamond or a

11     brilliant or whatever to another person without verification?

12             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think that's what I said.  This

13     would take time, but searching through the records that we had on certain

14     individuals within the centre, Belgrade itself, it was established that

15     the judge in question did not engage in anything improper, and we had no

16     information that he was involved in anything criminal or in spying or

17     anything.  This is what we normally do with regard to everyone who is

18     mentioned in such reports, especially people like Mrs. Dafina.  Operative

19     steps would be taken to find out about the financial situation of the

20     person, and he could have offered a gift like this only if he had -- he

21     had engaged in something criminal, because that's not the kind of money

22     you can earn.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Now, what is still unclear:  You said, Well,

24     we send that up and of course it would then be verified.  So apparently

25     you did not verify it at that moment.  You left it without comment.  You

Page 19823

 1     did not make any verification yourself.  Because a minute ago when I

 2     asked you about comments on other matters, you said, Well, if we send it

 3     in, then perhaps others would do the verification, but now it sounds as

 4     if this is whether -- sounds as if this was routine verification done by

 5     yourself, which is not fully in line, I think, with what you told me two

 6     or three minutes ago.  Any comment on this observation?

 7             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] When an operative is writing on

 8     something that is not his personal area of work, he avoids making remarks

 9     because he's not familiar enough with the issues at hand.  But the

10     leadership of the centre, if they are interested, would order the same

11     operative to gather more information using the same source, and I never

12     received such an order.  And the operative source involved was never

13     again used for inquiries of this kind.  And if I may add, this is

14     information that I received not within my own line of work but picked up

15     by the way, in passing.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Are you aware of the existence of any document

17     in which everything you've now told us is put on paper?  For example, the

18     information about the background of the judge, or whatever.

19             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm not supposed to know this, but

20     I do know that there are files on the lady, Mrs. Dafina, because she was

21     under surveillance very actively.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  I'm asking about the existence of a document in

23     which this report is considered saying, for the judge, couldn't be true

24     because he doesn't have sufficient means to buy a diamond or for the

25     others it's to be verified that those people were present at the birthday

Page 19824

 1     party.  I mean, a document not generally on the background of -- of the

 2     lady but on -- on the accuracy of the information contained in this

 3     report.

 4             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I was not given any tasks to create

 5     something like that, and I did not.  But I cannot claim with any

 6     certainty that nobody else within the Belgrade centre was tasked with

 7     further exploring this matter.  It's possible, but I don't know anything

 8     about it.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  So the simple answer is no, you're not aware of any

10     such document.

11             Please proceed, Mr. Bakrac.

12             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

13        Q.   Mr. Micic, you said you asked Mr. Filipovic to transfer you to a

14     different administration.  What did he tell you?  Were you transferred?

15        A.   Deputy head of the 2nd Administration took my request under

16     advisement.  He did not give me any answer on the spot.  He didn't

17     promise anything.  And I definitively moved to the 2nd Administration in

18     June 1994, I believe.

19        Q.   When you joined the 2nd Administration of the RDB of Serbia, what

20     position were you placed in and what responsibilities did it involve?

21        A.   I was independent operative instructor.

22        Q.   Can you tell us what that job involved?

23        A.   That job involved direct operative work but also training and

24     co-ordination, providing training and co-ordination to individual

25     operatives or centres in the territory of Serbia, with the proviso that

Page 19825

 1     the administration could not give orders, but the training role was

 2     pronounced.

 3        Q.   When you say that the administration could not issue orders, what

 4     administration do you mean?

 5        A.   No.  The then-administration did not have the role in which it

 6     could give orders.  It assumed that capability only in 2003.

 7        Q.   When you say administration, which administration is it?

 8        A.   The 2nd Administration.  But also all other operative

 9     administrations.  So it means that an instructor could not order that

10     something should be done in the centres.  Maybe you don't quite

11     understand it.

12        Q.   Mr. Micic, how many centres of the RDB were there in Serbia, in

13     the territory of Serbia?

14        A.   The number varied.  Fifteen to 17 at the time.  Whether it was 15

15     or 16 at that precise moment, I wouldn't know.  The territory also

16     varied.  There was restructuring.  Some the centres were abolished, some

17     were merged.  But I think I could say around 15.  I'm not absolutely

18     sure, but I think that the number is around 15.

19        Q.   You told us that the 2nd Administration could not issue orders.

20     Can you tell us, then, the heads of the centres reported to whom?

21        A.   The centre heads were responsible for their own work, and they

22     would receive instructions solely from the heads of the State Security

23     Department for the whole of Serbia, or his deputy.

24        Q.   Do you know in 1994 when you arrived in the 2nd Administration

25     and then in 1995 and later who was the deputy head of the State Security

Page 19826

 1     Department?

 2        A.   It was the late Mr. Tepavcevic.  He was the deputy head of the

 3     security department.

 4        Q.   Thank you, Mr. Micic.  If this is the closed session, I think we

 5     can go back to the open session, Your Honour.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  We return into open session.

 7                           [Open session]

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

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Madam Registrar.

10             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]

11        Q.   Mr. Micic, I think you wanted to say something.  But if you see a

12     carat next to a name, it means that it is going to be corrected later.

13     You need not worry about that.

14             In June 1994, when you arrived and you assumed your position

15     there, the position of an independent operative instructor in the -- the

16     administration, do you know what was the position of Mr. Frenki Simatovic

17     at the time?

18        A.   At the time, Franko Simatovic was a special advisor to the head

19     of the State Security Department.

20        Q.   Do you know whether he as a special advisor to the head of the

21     State Security Department had some special authority?

22        A.   What I know, and a later practice confirmed this, is that his job

23     involved primarily investigation and development of technical resources,

24     their application.  And later on I also was influenced by him in that

25     regard, especially in the IT department, specifically in the analytics


Page 19827

 1     department.  This entails also communications systems, especially special

 2     communications systems, and to speak even more narrowly, special

 3     communications between agents.

 4        Q.   Is it possible to say that the framework of all these activities

 5     is something that naturally belonged to the 2nd Administration?

 6        A.   Yes.  I think I can assert this based on my own knowledge.  The

 7     2nd Administration had many of those things at their disposal.  If you

 8     look at the activities of the third branch of the 7th Administration, you

 9     will see that they certainly had a lot of technical resources at their

10     disposal.

11        Q.   We heard other testimony here, and our time is quite limited here

12     so I'm going to skip some of the subjects, we heard that the

13     2nd Administration had a special person in charge of analytics, records,

14     and documentation, as well as a branch for special purposes.  Could you

15     explain these things, and why was it so in the 2nd Administration?

16        A.   To be very brief, as brief as I can be, yes, it is true because

17     of the specific nature of its work as opposed to the

18     counter-intelligence.  They used -- they had a special methodology to

19     access those particular tools, if I may use that word.  Within this

20     administration, it was absolutely necessary to have a separate people

21     working on analytics, on IT technology, and on documentary technology.

22        Q.   Does that mean that the 2nd Administration was different in its

23     status from other administrations?

24        A.   Talking about its status, I have to say that it was absolutely

25     equal to other administrations, operative administrations and other

Page 19828

 1     parts.  You can see that very clearly if you look at the remuneration.

 2     People who worked in the 2nd Administration and outside, it had

 3     absolutely exactly the same competencies and authority.

 4        Q.   When you say that they had the same competencies and authority,

 5     are you talking within the 2nd Administration, because my question was:

 6     Did they have special authorities compared to people who worked in all

 7     other administrations within the State Security Department?

 8        A.   No.  No.  It was identical.  It was only much, much later, in two

 9     thousand and something, when people who worked in the 2nd Administration

10     did not have their special status of an authorised official any more.

11     They did not have that particular ID any more.  But up to that moment,

12     within the State Security Department and especially within the operative

13     administrations, the 1st, the 2nd, and the 3rd, they were absolutely

14     equal, except, of course, in the subject matter of their work.  That was

15     the only important difference.

16        Q.   Thank you, Mr. Micic.  Very briefly:  The fact that the

17     2nd Administration was rather specific and the fact that they needed to

18     have a special analytics department, IT department, and people working on

19     documentary materials, does it mean that they had particular

20     requirements?  I'm talking about equipment here.  And if yes, what

21     exactly?

22        A.   Of course.  I'll try to give you an example.  The

23     counter-intelligence services are the services that use their own

24     resources, the resources within their own state.  We, however, were

25     sometimes forced to use resources that were still the resources of our

Page 19829

 1     state but they were specifically resources outside of our state in order

 2     to protect our interests.  So our method of work was very different from

 3     the counter-intelligence people.  I could say that the craft is the same,

 4     however the tools are very different.

 5        Q.   Could you be a bit more specific?  What tools?  What tools did

 6     the 2nd Administration need?

 7        A.   You mean technical tools?

 8        Q.   Anything that you can explain briefly to us in order to be more

 9     specifica, to explain what exactly you meant to say.

10        A.   Again, to be very brief:  When you say human sources, human

11     means, it means that you have to go and establish contact with them

12     outside the territory of your own country.  It's something completely

13     different from the case in which you establish contact within the

14     territory of your country.  It means that you have to undertake a series

15     of preliminary actions in order to establish a secure contact.  If you

16     establish a contact with a foreign citizen within the territory of our

17     country, it means that you go very deep into the territory of your own

18     country.  You normally go deeper than it would be strictly necessary in

19     order to establish a secure contact and to protect your own contact.

20             When we talk about the technology, if we talk about the

21     electronic surveillance, it is something that the counter-intelligence

22     people -- I'm not going to say that they don't know about it, but the

23     intelligence administration uses these things far more than others.  Then

24     if you have to establish a contact with the live source, so to speak, you

25     can do it -- nowadays they call it Bluetooth.  You have a special modem


Page 19830

 1     that can zip the files so you can simply carry it in your bag and you

 2     don't have to have an actual contact with this other person.  You can

 3     still transfer information at a distance.  The operative official has to

 4     undertake a number of operative measures and activities in order to

 5     ensure the safety of the contact.  I do not know if anything else --

 6        Q.   Thank you, Mr. Micic.

 7        A.   Just one more thing.  This is a rather complex topic.  That is --

 8     it is not easy to explain it in just a few minutes.  However, if you have

 9     any other specific questions --

10        Q.   Thank you, Mr. Micic.  Tell me, in June 1994 when you were

11     transferred to the 2nd Administration of the State Security Department,

12     who was giving you your tasks?

13             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, maybe we should move

14     to the private session for a few moments.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  We move into private session.

16             [Private session] [Confidentiality partially lifted by order of the Chamber]

17             THE REGISTRAR:  We're in private session, Your Honour.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Madam Registrar.

19             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]

20        Q.   Mr. Micic, in June 1994 when you were transferred to the

21     2nd Administration, who was giving you your instructions and tasks?

22        A.   It was only the deputy head of the 2nd Administration, because at

23     the time the head of the administration had not been appointed yet.

24        Q.   Can you tell us his name?

25        A.   Dragan Filipovic.

Page 19831

 1        Q.   While we are still in closed session, could you tell us briefly

 2     whether you had any contacts with Franko Simatovic, and, if so, what kind

 3     of contacts?  From June 1994 onwards when you were in the

 4     2nd Administration.

 5        A.   He was the factor that complicated our everyday work.  He

 6     insisted that we should have more sophisticated technological work,

 7     whatever it meant, and I know about that very well.  He insisted that the

 8     IT technology should be used within the work of the analytics branch of

 9     the 2nd Administration, as well as other fields of work which also should

10     have been performed with more technical resources.  Our contacts were not

11     frequent, only every now and then, but whenever we did have a contact, it

12     was on the topic of using of the technical resources in our operative and

13     analytical work.

14        Q.   You as an individual, did you attend those meetings or briefings

15     with Mr. Simatovic as an individual, or was there a number of operatives

16     who attended those meetings?

17        A.   No.  Everybody went.  You have to bear in mind that at the time

18     the 2nd Administration did not have a lot of people working in it,

19     probably not more than ten.  So as far as I can remember, it was in the

20     meeting room where he would hold what you could call a briefing or maybe

21     instructions on further development.  There were some cases when he had

22     to draw things on blackboard, because I have to admit that we did not

23     understand exactly what he wanted us to do and how.  I think that

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 19832

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6        Q.   Mr. Micic, when you were in the 2nd Administration, did you ever

 7     receive any specific working task from Mr. Franko Simatovic or any

 8     specific operative task?

 9        A.   Wait a minute.  We shouldn't confuse working and operative tasks.

10     Operative tasks, no.  The operative tasks were within the exclusive

11     purview of Dragan Filipovic.  That is the deputy head.

12             Working tasks, especially those related to the IT technology,

13     that was something that he influenced a lot within the

14     2nd Administration.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  I carefully listened to the questions and to the

16     answers.  I'm still wondering what exactly the reason is that we went

17     into private session.  I mean, is there BIA source?  You didn't ask for

18     that BIA operative --

19             MR. BAKRAC: [No interpretation]

20             JUDGE ORIE:  -- if you're talking about Mr. Filipovic.  Well,

21     whether that's an operative or whether that's a person which was

22     mentioned many, many times.  Location, specific technical means.  I have

23     difficulties in understanding, but please explain yourself.

24             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, my expectation was that

25     perhaps something more specific would be mentioned, things that are used

Page 19833

 1     in the BIA today in terms of IT and their operative work.  So that is why

 2     I wanted to deal with these few questions that way.

 3             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] May I say something?  Sorry about

 4     that, but may I say something now by way of an example?

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  No.  We'll just first -- this -- first resolve this

 6     matter and then ...

 7             Mr. Bakrac, I'm re-reading now all your questions, and I have

 8     great difficulties to follow your expectation that technical details of

 9     any specific kind would come as an answer.  Earlier we had the Bluetooth,

10     now that's common technology everyone uses in his house and in his cars,

11     so ...

12             Would you tell us -- then the heads of the centres reported to

13     whom?  That's a not question which would --

14             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I'll try.  I'll try.

15     I'll try, Your Honour, to deal with that through my next question, and

16     then we can move into open session.

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Please.  What we're concerned about, whether it

24     would reveal any secrets.  Now, if everyone uses it now and if at that

25     time it may not have been very interesting -- may have been a very

Page 19834

 1     interesting new development, that's not something that could in any way

 2     affect the state security of the Republic of Serbia.

 3             Steganography, that I'm not familiar with, or is the

 4     transcript ... I'm familiar with stenography.  I'm not familiar with

 5     steganography.  Is there any difference between the two?

 6             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I don't want to lead in

 7     anyway.  I'm going to try to deal with this through the witness.

 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        Q.   Just tell me this:  When was it that you first came across this

23     concept, this way of operative work?

24        A.   Once again I say that this was what Franko Simatovic had wanted

25     and asked for, that we start dealing with this kind of research and

Page 19835

 1     development in realtime.

 2             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] I'm mindful of the time,

 3     Your Honours.  I do apologise to you, but with all due respect, I think

 4     that 15 or 20 minutes were used by different questions at the very

 5     beginning, so could you please be so kind as to give me this time so that

 6     I could conclude my examination?

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  You get 20 minutes after the break, Mr. Bakrac.

 8             We take a break and we'll resume at 4.00.

 9                           --- Recess taken at 3.30 p.m.

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

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Bakrac, you've got until 25 minutes past 4.00.

12             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

13        Q.   Mr. Micic, during 1994 and 1995, did you hear of Operation Pauk,

14     and, if so, what was it that you heard?

15        A.   Yes, I heard about it, and I was made aware of the reasons for

16     starting this operation.

17        Q.   Can you please tell us what that was.

18        A.   Well, practically this had been agreed upon at highest state

19     level.  As far as I know, it had been signed by Fikret Abdic, the

20     political leader of the then-Western Bosnia, then Martic and Karadzic as

21     well, together with Milosevic, the then-leader of Serbia, with a view to

22     creating and maintaining Western Bosnia as part of Krajina.

23        Q.   Do you know about the involvement of the 2nd Administration or

24     part of the 2nd Administration in this operation?

25        A.   At that time, I had not been made aware of the true objectives of

Page 19836

 1     the operation.  However, since I saw Mr. Simatovic directly, as well as

 2     the team that went with him, there were three or four big trucks and

 3     perhaps four Range Rovers or Land Rovers.  I cannot really make a

 4     distinction between the two.

 5             They had set out, and on the basis of the composition of the team

 6     I could assume what that had to do with, namely that the establishment of

 7     a post was the main objective.

 8        Q.   Please tell us first what kind of post was supposed to be

 9     established, and secondly, do you know what these trucks and Range Rovers

10     contained?

11             MR. FARR:  Objection, Your Honour.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Farr.

13             MR. FARR:  The witness has just said that it was on the basis of

14     the composition of the team that he could assume what it had to do with,

15     the establishment of a post, and he's now been asked specifically what

16     kind of post was to be established.  We would submit that there's no

17     foundation for that based on his previous answer, that it's just based on

18     an assumption.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Bakrac, we're not primarily interested in

20     assumptions.  If the assumption is based on anything, then please try to

21     find out what that is and then we can consider whether we need the

22     assumptions any further.

23             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

24        Q.   Mr. Micic, when you say "on the basis of the composition of the

25     team that had set out," can you tell us which team this is?  I think that

Page 19837

 1     we are in closed session, so you can give us the names, and then we can

 2     move into open session.

 3        A.   First of all, as we've already said, the trucks contained

 4     equipment.  At that time, I did not know what kind of equipment.

 5     However, the people who went along to operate the equipment, and that

 6     primarily has to do with radio scouts, the late Ranko Tadic.  I can give

 7     a name; right?  Then Nikola Varda and people around them.  It is certain

 8     that they were involved in this kind of work.  And along with them was

 9     the team from the 2nd Administration for the special purpose

10     communications, namely Janko Budimir -- or, rather, Janko was his working

11     name.  Ranko Levi [phoen], Budimir Milorad, and this practically

12     indicated that there would be radio reconnaissance, and acting in

13     co-ordination with the others, this indicated that a post would be

14     established.  So I had not been made aware of the objectives of the

15     operation for the purpose of keeping the conspiracy, but I did see the

16     results of this involvement.

17        Q.   Thank you.

18             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, can we now move into

19     open session?

20             JUDGE ORIE:  We return into open session.

21                           [Open session]

22             THE REGISTRAR:  We're in open session, Your Honour.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Madam Registrar.

24             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]

25        Q.   Mr. Micic, do you know anything about the further involvement of


Page 19838

 1     Franko Simatovic in Pauk, and also do you know whether Franko Simatovic

 2     went to Petrova Gora?

 3        A.   Yes, I know that towards the end of that year from time to time

 4     he went to Petrova Gora.  At first it was from time to time and for

 5     longer stints several times at a weekly level.  However, from 1995 it got

 6     shorter.  It was only a few days and he went less and less often.  That

 7     is to say, he left the premises of the 2nd Administration less and less

 8     often.

 9        Q.   You said a moment ago, it's reflected in the transcript, too,

10     when you mentioned the team that went there, you said that later on you

11     saw the results of this involvement.  Can you explain to us what it was

12     that you meant?

13        A.   Well, practically, in addition to the operative involvement in

14     the field, there was a great deal of radio reconnaissance.  We obtained

15     the results of this work in the administration itself.

16        Q.   Thank you, Mr. Micic.

17             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Can we now please take a look at

18     1D3436.

19        Q.   While we're waiting, Mr. Micic, tell me first of all whether you

20     are familiar with this format of information, MUP Republic of Serbia, the

21     2nd Administration of the RDB, and then the date.

22        A.   Yes.

23        Q.   The date is April 1995, so it seems that information is being

24     provided here about a conversation between Fikret Abdic and Milan Martic

25     and some other detail is being provided.  I'm interested in the

Page 19839

 1     following:  On this first page, do you see something that rings a bell?

 2     Do you remember receiving this kind of information?

 3        A.   Well, specifically towards the very end of this page a certain

 4     Sandi is mentioned.  As far as I know, he cropped up often in the reports

 5     that were sent to the 2nd Administration.

 6        Q.   Do you remember -- do you remember -- do you remember whether

 7     this information sometimes contained something that had to do with the

 8     position of the Republic of Slovenia that had been seceded from

 9     Yugoslavia in relation to the existence of the Autonomous Province of

10     Western Bosnia?

11        A.   Specifically it had to do with Slovenia's favouring of this

12     status of Western Bosnia.  As far as we know on the basis of these

13     documents, Slovenia even wanted to officially recognise Western Bosnia as

14     an autonomous entity.

15             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, can we please move on

16     to page 2 now.

17        Q.   I'm going to look at a particular paragraph now, and I would like

18     to know whether this would jog your memory in terms of this information

19     reaching you.  There is a reference to a certain Slaven who is supposed

20     to come and see Abdic.  That is paragraph 3.  Around 10.00 he will be at

21     the agreed place at the Bosna Hotel in Banja Luka, and it seems that he's

22     coming from Ljubljana, and Stanic says that he informed his republic of

23     the intention of Fikret Abdic to declare a republic in the AP, and he

24     says that this position was welcomed in Slovenia.

25             Does this jog your memory?  Is this the kind of information that

Page 19840

 1     you received, and was this of interest to the Republic of Serbia?

 2        A.   Yes.  Information of this kind, well, naturally arrived in the

 3     2nd Administration.  At any rate, this was of significance for the

 4     Republic of Serbia itself.  That is to say, if this political option were

 5     to come to fruition, then, well, things would have been completely

 6     different in the Balkans.  The game would have played out differently, as

 7     we say, from a political point of view.

 8             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I don't know whether

 9     the Prosecution is changing its position with regard to this document.

10     We asked the Republic of Serbia specifically for all these documents.  At

11     this point I would like to tender the document because the witness has

12     recognised it, but Mr. Farr, if he still has objections to this, then

13     we're going to wait for the response of the Republic of Serbia.

14             MR. FARR:  Your Honour, I'm not -- I'm not aware of the

15     Prosecution having an objection to this document previously.  This is a

16     document that the OTP received from Serbia.

17             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, it's correct.  We have

18     lots of such information.  And, well, this document is Prosecution

19     number -- I mean, the Prosecution received this document from the

20     Republic of Serbia, but then I would like to tender it.  And I would like

21     to thank Mr. Farr, too.

22             MR. FARR:  No objection, Your Honour.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar, this document without any problems

24     would receive number ...

25             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 1D3436 will receive number D1116,

Page 19841

 1     Your Honours.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  D1116 is admitted into evidence.  Any need to have

 3     it under seal, Mr. Bakrac?

 4             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, out of an abundance of

 5     caution, I would like to have it under seal until we've worked things out

 6     with the Republic of Serbia.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Admitted.

 8                           [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Bakrac, the abundance of caution then would be

10     valid five minutes ago as well, so -- but we'll -- it's admitted under

11     seal.

12             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Correct.  Correct, Your Honour.

13     You're right.

14        Q.   Mr. Micic, my time is running out, so very briefly:  Do you know

15     whether anyone from Belgrade or Serbia went with this equipment, and if

16     so, what was the purpose?  In addition to these technicians, this team

17     that you've already referred to.

18        A.   Yes.  At the very beginning I did not say that in addition to the

19     people or experts from the electronic line of work or whatever you wish

20     to call it, there was a team -- I mean, there were these young men,

21     officials from the ATD, the unit for anti-terrorist activity.  As always,

22     when it was necessary to secure not only the post itself or the

23     interception centre, but also the transport of the equipment just as this

24     paper says, it was a state secret, strictly confidential.

25        Q.   You mentioned that the JATD also went.  Can you tell us from an

Page 19842

 1     organisational and functional point of view in the State Security Service

 2     what was that?

 3        A.   In 1993, the minister of the interior established a unit for

 4     anti-terrorist activity on the basis of a document he issued himself, and

 5     this was an organisational entity within the State Security Department.

 6        Q.   Do you know where the premises of the JATD were, where their seat

 7     was?

 8        A.   As far as I know, it was in Lipovica at the time, but they also

 9     had shared premises with the 2nd Administration on the second floor.

10     There was one office made up of two rooms.

11        Q.   To the best of your recollection, who used it?

12        A.   There was an officer called Milenko who was almost permanently

13     present.  I was his best man in Croatia, because we were friends.  His

14     name was Milenko.  And then there was this -- give me a moment.  There

15     was Mr. Radonjic who came very seldom, and Krsman was there even more

16     rarely.  Krsmanovic.

17        Q.   Thank you, Mr. Micic.  What was the relationship between the

18     2nd Administration and the JATD, if there was one?

19        A.   In functional terms, it was the same relationship as with all

20     other units, primarily in the sense of providing information and

21     intelligence concerning Western Bosnia specifically.  It was information

22     about the ability of transports to pass, and as feedback we would get

23     from them some little intelligence from their own observations, but

24     nothing significant.

25        Q.   You said, Mr. Micic, they had one office on the same floor as the

Page 19843

 1     2nd Administration.  Can you tell us, where was the office of

 2     Mr. Simatovic at the time you joined?

 3        A.   It was an entirely different wing.  The opposite direction from

 4     the landing, from the 2nd Administration.

 5        Q.   I have to show you very quickly two documents and a couple of

 6     questions before I conclude.  Do you know what Pajzos is, near Ilok?

 7        A.   That was also one of the intelligence centres outside the

 8     territory of the Republic of Serbia.  I say it was a post because apart

 9     from radio interception they were involved in other activities and steps.

10        Q.   Can you tell us how you know that?

11        A.   I went there twice, the first time when I continued on my way

12     from the Novi Sad centre towards Pajzos.  The Novi Sad centre was in

13     charge of providing logistics to that post, and I brought

14     counter-intelligence information that we obtained precisely by radio

15     interception, and it concerned the unauthorised use of radios and other

16     communications by our members.

17             And the second time, I was there when it was necessary to provide

18     briefing and instruction to the team that operated there, radio

19     interceptors, and analysts, and certain operatives.  I was to tell them

20     in which directions to -- to work more on.

21        Q.   Who provided security to this post?

22        A.   At that time the members of the said unit were there.  At that

23     check-point there were three of them.  On the grounds where this house

24     was - it used to be Tito's villa - there were another three of them.  But

25     I believe they worked in shifts, so I don't know the real number.

Page 19844

 1        Q.   Mr. Micic, we shall now look at two more documents, and I'll have

 2     a couple of questions on each of them and that will conclude my

 3     examination.

 4             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] 2D2704.  I believe this document

 5     should be under seal.  We received it unredacted on 15 May from the State

 6     of Serbia.

 7             In its redacted form this document has been seen before here, and

 8     it was part of the Prosecution's disclosure regarding the file on certain

 9     Zoran Ristovic, and we received this document from Serbia unrevised and

10     complete.

11        Q.   Mr. Micic, look at the top right corner.  It says "Ministry of

12     the Interior, State Security Department, ATD unit."  The date is

13     1st February, 1994, and it's a report on the activities in the territory

14     of the RSK Ilok from 15 to 30 of January, 1994.  Have you looked at this

15     page?

16        A.   Yes.

17             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Can we move to the next page.

18        Q.   Mr. Micic, please read through this second page as quickly as you

19     can so that I can conclude my examination and then I'll ask you two

20     things.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Farr.

22             MR. FARR:  I apologise for interrupting, but this is unduly

23     leading.  If Mr. Bakrac is intending to ask the witness about the

24     contents of this document, there's -- he should see what the witness

25     knows on this topic before --

Page 19845

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Bakrac, that's the usual order in

 2     examination-in-chief.

 3             Would you please stop reading.

 4             Put your questions and then we can look at the document if

 5     there's any need to do that.

 6             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]

 7        Q.   Witness, have you ever seen the document before?

 8        A.   No.

 9        Q.   You haven't.  Witness, can you tell me, seeing how you used to

10     work in the state security sector, if we go back to page 1, look at the

11     top.  It says "ZNRB" [as interpreted] and then followed by initials.  Do

12     you recognise the initials?

13        A.   Yes.  That's -- those are the initials of Franko Simatovic.

14        Q.   And what does ZNRDB mean?

15        A.   That means it was sent to the deputy head of the RDB.

16        Q.   Could you tell us, with all your experience of work in the RDB,

17     what the initials of Franko Simatovic meant?

18        A.   That means he familiarised himself with the contents of the

19     document.  Then he would initial it and send it on, in this case to the

20     deputy head.

21        Q.   If the subject of a report were the conduct of people who were

22     guarding Pajzos, would it have been logical for Mr. Franko Simatovic to

23     be informed about that?

24        A.   Well, in view of the fact that JATD work was very sensitive and

25     all the harm that could come to this radio interception group and if

Page 19846

 1     there was any threat to the whole project, he would be informed.

 2             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] I would like to draw the attention

 3     of the Trial Chamber to the fact that there is some information about

 4     this on page 2.  I just want to ask the witness.

 5        Q.   Did you know about the Special Police Unit's presence in the

 6     territory of Slavonia, PJP?

 7        A.   Yes.  From 1991, PJM, later PJP, were constantly present there,

 8     and they were under the command of Radovan Stojicic Badza.  The purpose

 9     was for them to train local police stations so they can continue to

10     operate and do their part of the job.  From 1995 they were called PJP,

11     because milicija changed into policija, and at that time Obrad Stevanovic

12     was the head of those units.

13        Q.   Did you know that in -- within PJM units there was a unit called

14     Red Berets?

15        A.   No, I did not know that there was any separate unit like that.  I

16     know that members changed berets.  I don't know how and why, but they at

17     different points in time black, red, and blue berets.

18        Q.   Thank you, Mr. Micic.

19             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] I should like to tender this

20     document, too, Your Honours.  I have only one more document left and one

21     more question related to it and that would be the end of my direct

22     examination.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed.

24             MR. FARR:  Apologies.  Just to say we have no objection to the

25     admission of the document just tendered.

Page 19847

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar, the number would be ...

 2             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 2D1704 will receive number D1117,

 3     Your Honours.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  D1117 is admitted into evidence under seal.

 5             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, my last document and

 6     my last question, it's a document we also received from Serbia, from the

 7     pile of Mr. Micic, and we added it to our 65 ter list.  We hope that this

 8     will be approved.  It's 2D1698.

 9        Q.   It is a certificate, Mr. Micic, regarding you, and I want very

10     brief information about it.

11             The date is 20th February 1998, certificate confirming

12     Radivoje Micic from the 2nd Administration attended a specialised

13     workshop with the title "Organising Intelligence Work Abroad," in the

14     period from 19 January to 19 February 1998, and it lists the topics

15     covered by the workshop.

16             Could you tell us briefly:  Who organised this, where, and who is

17     the director Dr. Andrija Savic who signed this certificate?

18        A.   The workshop lasted more than a month.  It was organised by

19     Franko Simatovic personally.  You can see there the areas covered by the

20     workshop.  Andrija Savic was at the time director of the training centre,

21     so he was the person authorised to issue certificates like this, and you

22     don't need my opinion about Mr. Andrija Savic.

23        Q.   Thank you, Mr. Micic.

24             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I should like to

25     tender this document, which is from the personnel file of Mr. Micic, and

Page 19848

 1     this would be the end of my examination-in-chief.

 2             MR. FARR:  No objection, Your Honour.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.  Madam Registrar.

 4             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 2D1698 will receive number D1118,

 5     Your Honours.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Madam Registrar.  And it's admitted into

 7     evidence under seal.

 8             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Mr. Micic, thank you very much.

 9             And thank you, Your Honours, for allowing me this small

10     extension.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Before I give an opportunity to cross-examine the

12     witness, I have one -- one question for you, because matters are not

13     perhaps perfectly clear.

14             You looked at the previous document, which was about Pajzos, if

15     you remember well.  You read the second page.  Perhaps you could have it

16     on the screen again.

17             Now, the question put to you was:

18             "If the subject of a report were the conduct of people who were

19     guarding Pajzos, would it have been logical for Mr. Franko Simatovic to

20     be informed about that?"

21             And then you explained why it would be reasonable.

22             Now, the question was "If the subject of a report were."  I think

23     you earlier said that Pajzos was guarded by the anti-terrorist unit.  Is

24     that correctly understood?

25             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

Page 19849

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Could you tell us where on this document you can see

 2     that the anti-terrorist unit was sent there to guard Pajzos?

 3             Perhaps we could have it on our screen again.

 4             Yes.  This document now, whatever page you would like to read,

 5     the first one or the second one, where does it say that the

 6     anti-terrorist unit is there to guard Pajzos?

 7             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think this document does not

 8     contain any explicit description of the main tasks of the unit in this

 9     case.  As far as I can see, it's more about the problems that the members

10     of the unit were facing in going about their duties.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  So this document does not refer to guarding Pajzos

12     as one of the tasks with which the anti-terrorist unit was sent there?

13     Because that was the basis of the question, assuming that.

14             Mr. Bakrac.

15             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I apologise, but due

16     to time restrictions and because Mr. Farr reacted, I considerably

17     abbreviated my work on this document.

18             You can see on page 1 the stamp of the RDB, unit for

19     anti-terrorist operations, and it says in mid-1993 this unit was

20     disbanded but the image of the Red Berets that was exclusively used in a

21     negative context --

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Would you please -- is this still on page 1 you are

23     quoting from or is it on page 2?

24             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] No, Your Honours.  It's page 2,

25     towards the bottom.

Page 19850

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Then I'll give you an opportunity to put your

 2     question specifically in relation to that relating to page 2.  So do not

 3     start explaining yourself what -- but ask the witness questions about it.

 4     Please do so.

 5             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation]

 6        Q.   So, Mr. Micic, we have seen the stamp on the first page.  Now,

 7     look at this passage which says that -- which says:

 8             "In mid-1993, this formation was disbanded, but the image of the

 9     Red Berets used exclusively in negative contexts was transferred to a

10     group that remained in Ilok as part of our unit that was present in Ilok

11     to guard the Pajzos and the white house facilities."  And the name

12     mentioned is Radoslav Krsmanovic.

13             Do you see a connection here that allows you to say that part of

14     the JATD was providing security there?

15             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, can we move to page 3?

16             JUDGE ORIE:  I would first like to hear an answer from the

17     witness unless he has seen enough, and if -- you asked him a question

18     already without asking him to go to page 3, isn't it?  So why not first

19     wait for an answer?

20             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm sorry.  I had not read in great

21     detail this particular passage describing the responsibilities of the

22     unit in that area, in Pajzos and the white house.  It does refer

23     explicitly to their specific tasks and probably not only the tasks of the

24     unit but the command as well.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Could I ask -- of course I've seen that guarding

Page 19851

 1     Pajzos is mentioned in this document, but I did not gain the impression

 2     until now that it was the unit which is at the head of this document but

 3     describing their own activities, but, rather, activities from other

 4     groups.  This formation was, they planned it, transferred to a group that

 5     remained in Ilok as a part of -- and then it's a four unit, perhaps our

 6     unit.  So it sounds as if -- if that's a reference to our unit, that

 7     those were the remainders of the earlier Red Berets formations which are

 8     described as already starting in 1992.

 9             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.  The entire

10     context is subject to interpretation.  You can see at the top there is a

11     reference to the PJM of the MUP of Serbia.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Now, I can ask questions on the basis of my

13     understanding of the document.  You can ask questions but not putting

14     your interpretation of the document to the witness.  So if you have any

15     specific questions to the witness so as to -- for example, so as to

16     explain the composition of unit and units which are disbanded and

17     reformatted -- reformed in -- later on and where people from those

18     previous units stayed in the area and were called "parts of our unit,"

19     which apparently is the remainder of earlier formations, then you can ask

20     the witness questions about it, but you cannot put to the witness what

21     your interpretation of the document is.  Please proceed.

22             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.  Let me just

23     check this translation, because it says "part of our unit" here.

24             Let's move to page 3, please.  And I will conclude with this.

25        Q.   This document is dated 1st February, 1994.  Do you know who

Page 19852

 1     Dragoslav Krsmanovic was?

 2        A.   Yes.  That's precisely the person that I mentioned as

 3     occasionally visiting the offices on the same floor as the

 4     2nd Administration.

 5        Q.   And he was affiliated to whom?

 6        A.   The JATD command.  I really don't know what his specific duties

 7     were.

 8             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. Micic.

 9             I don't know if there is any need for -- we will analyse this

10     document in our final brief, and I don't think there is any need to

11     explore it further with this witness, because I don't think he knows any

12     more about this.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Let's try to find out.  On page 3 it is reported

14     that the management of the police station knew that more than 20 former

15     members of the unit, and this is a document of early 1994, were residing

16     in the area of Ilok and that a majority of them were engaged in dirty

17     jobs but that out of fear of retaliation the Ilok Police Station

18     prevented the police station from taking any steps against them.

19             Were you aware of any members or former members of the

20     anti-terrorist unit almost, if I read it well, terrorising the Ilok area?

21             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Apart from this document, I have no

22     other knowledge about this.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  And then the line "The easiest way of concealing

24     such inaction was to claim that those were members of the Red Berets

25     enjoying the protection of the Serbian MUP," any comments on that line?

Page 19853

 1             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As far as I understand the

 2     document, it meant that these, let's call them bad guys who had been

 3     expelled or had left the JATD in some other way, held themselves out to

 4     be -- or misrepresented themselves as the Red Berets, pretending they

 5     were under the protection of the Ministry of the Interior of Serbia,

 6     which was not true, and this document says indeed that it was a real

 7     danger for the whole ministry, for the JATD, and others.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Do you have any knowledge about JATD members leaving

 9     the unit and engaging in criminal activity?

10             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.  Really.  I had no such

11     knowledge then or do I have any now, in that respect, that is.  Which is

12     not to say that no such thing ever happened, but I just didn't know about

13     it.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Now, having looked a bit closer at the

15     document, also at page 3, you still are of the view that the document

16     doesn't refer in any way to the task why that the JATD was sent to Pajzos

17     to guard the facility?

18             THE INTERPRETER:  Could all unnecessary microphones please be

19     switched off.  Thank you.

20             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I had already apologised for

21     misreading or misinterpreting the document, these one or two sentences.

22     I did not read it carefully enough where there is this specific reference

23     to the tasks of member units in that situation.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Bakrac, all my questions derived from the way in

25     which you qualified the document, that's if the document is about this,


Page 19854

 1     then either you are in a position to clearly say that it is and otherwise

 2     it is asking for confusion, and certainly leading in

 3     examination-in-chief.

 4             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour.  Your Honour, I do

 5     apologise, but especially the second page --

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Bakrac, I think that we can move on --

 7             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  -- and if there's any further comment, there are

 9     other moments where you can express those comments.

10             Mr. Jordash.

11             MR. JORDASH:  No questions, thank you.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  No questions.

13             Mr. Farr, are you ready to cross-examine the witness?

14             MR. FARR:  Yes, Your Honour.  Just a moment.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Then you may proceed.

16             Mr. Micic, you will now be cross-examined by Mr. Farr.  Mr. Farr

17     is counsel for the Prosecution.

18             MR. JORDASH:  Sorry, Your Honour.  I don't know if this is a

19     convenient time for a break.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  It is a bit early, but if it would be preferred to

21     have the break now, then we'll take the break now.

22             MR. JORDASH:  Yes, please.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Then we'll resume at 20 minutes past 5.00.

24                           --- Recess taken at 4.54 p.m.

25                           --- On resuming at 5.24 p.m.

Page 19855

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Before we continue, just a brief matter.  There's a

 2     Prosecution motion to compel disclosure of notes and photographs from the

 3     examination of notebooks.  Mr. Jordash in his response I think suggested

 4     that rather obtain them on a voluntary basis rather than anything else.

 5             Now, what's the position of the Prosecution in light of this?  Do

 6     you want to put your motion on hold or would you still insist?  Of

 7     course, we have -- my memory tells me that communication with the expert

 8     was not always of the quickest kind.  At the same time, Mr. Jordash, do

 9     you know if the Prosecution would accept, by freezing its motion, your

10     offer, when do you think you could not only have put the questions to the

11     expert, but also when do you think you could report to us when the expert

12     thinks that he could respond to such a request?  Because the first part I

13     take it that you can do it tomorrow or the day after tomorrow, if not

14     today, but the --

15             MR. JORDASH:  Yesterday.  It was done yesterday.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  It was done yesterday.  Okay.  That's fine.  Do you

17     have an indication as to when you think that the expert might find time

18     to respond to your request?

19             MR. JORDASH:  I'm happy to put as much pressure on as is

20     necessary and I anticipate then I will get a very quick response.  I

21     think the -- I don't have to be too careful about upsetting him now.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Okay.  I'll leave that without any comment as to

23     whether there was any reason before to avoid that.

24             But, Mr. Groome --

25             MR. GROOME:  Your Honour --


Page 19856

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  -- under the present circumstances.

 2             MR. GROOME:  Under the present circumstances, Mr. Jordash

 3     anticipates a quick response, we'll ask that the motion be held in

 4     abeyance for the moment and then we'll formulate our position once we see

 5     what the response is.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Then that's how we will proceed.  And,

 7     Mr. Jordash, the earlier we have news, I think the better it would be.

 8             MR. JORDASH:  Your Honour, yes.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Farr.

10             I apologise to the witness for -- Mr. Micic, for dealing with

11     other matters.  You had to wait, but Mr. Farr is now ready to start his

12     cross-examination.  Mr. Farr is, as I said before, counsel for the

13     Prosecution.

14                           Cross-examination by Mr. Farr:

15        Q.   Good afternoon, Mr. Micic.  Can you hear me?

16        A.   Yes, very well.

17        Q.   Can I start off by asking you whether you ever received an award

18     from the JSO, the successor unit to the JATD?

19        A.   The JSO, no.

20        Q.   I'd like to ask you a few questions about the relationship

21     between the DB of Serbia and the leadership of the Republika Srpska.  Are

22     you aware of any employees or officials of the DB of Serbia meeting with

23     Ratko Mladic in the second half of 1995?

24        A.   I'm not aware of that, no.

25        Q.   Are you aware of any employees or officials of the DB of Serbia

Page 19857

 1     meeting with other senior officers of the VRS in the second half of 1995?

 2        A.   That would be sheer guesswork.  I don't have any direct

 3     information.

 4        Q.   Are you aware of any employees or officials of the DB of Serbia

 5     meeting with Tomislav Kovac, the deputy minister of the interior of the

 6     RS in the second half of 1995?

 7        A.   Unfortunately, I cannot even remember who this person was, the

 8     one that you've mentioned, Kovac.

 9        Q.   Are you aware of any employees or officials of the DB of Serbia

10     serving as a co-ordinator of the forces of the Ministry of the Interior

11     of the Republic of Serbia in Bosnia in the second half of 1995?

12        A.   In that function to co-ordinate the work of somebody else's

13     service, no.  Co-ordination, yes.

14        Q.   Co-ordination -- my question is about co-ordination of the forces

15     of the Ministry of Interior of the Republic of Serbia operating in

16     Bosnia.  Are you aware of any employee or official of the DB of Serbia

17     carrying out that function, specifically in September or October of 1995?

18        A.   I can only confirm the presence of employees of the state

19     security, but as for the 2nd Administration and its employees in the

20     region of Bijeljina ...

21        Q.   And which employees of the state security can you confirm the

22     presence of in Bosnia in that time in 1995?

23        A.   I don't know whether you are referring to specify names.  If so,

24     perhaps it would be advisable to move into closed session or deal with it

25     in some other way, because most of these people are still alive.  So I


Page 19858

 1     really don't know what the practice of this Court is.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  The mere fact that they are still alive is not a

 3     reason to go into private session unless there are any specific concerns

 4     about these persons, but in itself if they are still working as BIA

 5     operatives, then that would be a reason to go into private session.  I do

 6     not know whether the persons you have in your mind are still BIA

 7     operatives.  If so, please tell me so that we can go into private

 8     session.

 9             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] One of the persons, yes, is still

10     an active-duty member; and the others, no.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Then we move into private session.

12             [Private session] [Confidentiality partially lifted by order of the Chamber]

13             THE REGISTRAR:  We're in private session, Your Honours.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Madam Registrar.

15             MR. FARR:  And, Your Honour, could I just request that we get the

16     name of the one person who still is an active member in private session

17     and then return into open session.

18        Q.   So, sir, could you start by please giving us just the name of the

19     one person who is still an active employee of BIA.

20   (redacted).

21        Q.   And can you tell us his function, please, at that time in 1995?

22        A.   We called it reproducer, that is to say, he transcribed onto

23     paper that is to say visible media material that needed to be reproduced.

24             MR. FARR:  And could we now return to public session, please,

25     Your Honour.

Page 19859

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  We will return into public session.  The other

 2     names are not at the present BIA operatives, so you can use their names

 3     unless there's any very specific concern.  Therefore, we now move into

 4     open session.

 5                           [Open session]

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

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Madam Registrar.

 8             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Radenko Novakovic, first of all.  I

 9     cannot recall the first name of this other person, but his last name is

10     Lukic.  Lukas was his nickname.  There were two other employees, and I

11     only remember the nickname of one of them, Nesa from Sremska Mitrovica.

12     And the other one is an elderly man.  I really cannot remember his name

13     and surname now.

14             I just want to add something.  I don't know whether that is what

15     you consider to be co-ordination.  Our terminology is "sadejstvo," acting

16     in concert, the two services acting in concert, because co-ordination

17     implies certain powers of an order-issuing nature.  In order to

18     co-ordinate, one has to be in a position to order a particular type of

19     conduct.

20        Q.   And when you say "acting in concert, the two services acting in

21     concert," just for clarity, which two services are you referring to?

22        A.   Well, in this specific case it is the service of Republika Srpska

23     that had to be informed about setting up a post of our service in

24     Bijeljina but also about some other actions.

25        Q.   Are you aware of any co-operation between employees or officials


Page 19860

 1     of the DB of Serbia and an intelligence grouped called Tajfun or Sigma?

 2        A.   I've never heard of Sigma up until now.  Tajfun yes, but at a

 3     later stage, mostly from the media.  If that is relevant.  I think that

 4     Radovan Karadzic was the target, but I cannot assert anything because

 5     this comes from the media.

 6        Q.   So it's fair to say you never heard of it in 1994 or 1995; is

 7     that correct?

 8        A.   I most certainly hadn't heard of it.

 9        Q.   Did you ever learn anything about a possible professional

10     relationship between a person named Mijovic and Mr. Simatovic?

11        A.   As for their direct relations, whatever we call them, I really

12     cannot qualify them in any way because I don't have any information as to

13     whether they were professional or something else, especially because I

14     first heard of Mr. Mijovic in the context of that well-known - I know it

15     is well-known here - celebration in Kula in 1997.

16        Q.   So you had never heard of Mijovic any time before the celebration

17     in Kula in 1997; is that your evidence?

18        A.   Yes, precisely.

19        Q.   You mentioned Mr. Simatovic's presence in Petrova Gora during

20     Operation Pauk.  During your time in the DB, did you ever learn anything

21     about Jovica Stanisic being present in Petrova Gora?

22        A.   No.  No.  I don't know of Mr. Stanisic being there, but I'm not

23     saying that he wasn't there.  I mean, I'm saying I don't know.

24        Q.   During your testimony last Thursday, you talked about

25     Mr. Simatovic's mission to Knin, but you also indicated that he went to

Page 19861

 1     Slavonia in 1991, and that's at transcript page 19780.  To your

 2     knowledge, when was Mr. Simatovic in Slavonia in 1991?

 3        A.   Well, if it is after his return from Kosovo, then very roughly

 4     speaking it would be around the middle of that year 1991 and the three or

 5     four months that followed.  That's when he was in Knin.

 6        Q.   My question was actually directed to Slavonia.  When to your

 7     knowledge was he in Slavonia in 1991?

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Farr, could you assist me?  I have still not the

 9     numbered transcript of last Thursday and a search on Slavonia doesn't

10     help me.  Could you give us another few words so that I can find the

11     relevant place.

12             MR. FARR:  I can -- shall I just read the quote from the witness?

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, but for me it's important that I can look at

14     the context.  So you can read it to the witness, then I'll find the

15     words.

16             MR. FARR:  Okay.  Very good.

17        Q.   Sir, your answer -- well, I'll start with the question.  The

18     question was:

19              "Mr. Micic, to the best of your recollection, in 1991, in his

20     operative work, what locations did Franko Simatovic go to?"

21             Your answer was:

22             "Apart from Belgrade, Mr. Franko Simatovic's operative activities

23     took him to Kosovo --" the transcript says, "in the then-RSK, today the

24     Republic of Croatia, more precisely to Knin and Slavonia, and also there

25     was a period, another period, that he spent at Kosovo."

Page 19862

 1             And, sir, my question was:  When was he in Slavonia, to your

 2     knowledge?

 3        A.   The quotation that you refer to was the Republic of the

 4     Serb Krajina.  I wanted to explain what it encompassed, and that's why I

 5     mentioned Slavonia.  In my view, I mean I saw him a few times -- or,

 6     rather, twice, when I mentioned that I was at the place that was called

 7     Tito's villa.  I cannot remember any more details.  I'd have to think

 8     about it.  That's the point in time when the RPGs were being established.

 9     Now, whether they were mobile or stationary -- well, this is the only

10     involvement of his that I know of on that basis.

11        Q.   And was that in 1991?

12        A.   No, no.  1991 -- I'm sorry.  I'm sorry.  To the best of my

13     knowledge, in 1991 -- I mean, it only had to do with the

14     already-mentioned gentleman Mr. Daniel Snedden and taking various

15     measures vis-à-vis him in Knin.

16        Q.   Okay.  Can we please have --

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Can I ask one question.

18             When you say, "I was at the place that was called Tito's villa,"

19     is that Pajzos where you're referring to or ...

20             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.  Please proceed.

22             MR. FARR:  Could we please have 65 ter 6536 on the screen, not to

23     be broadcast.  And specifically if we could please have page 8 in B/C/S,

24     which is ERN 0682-2734, and page 8 also in English.

25        Q.   Sir, this is a decision dated 19 November 1990, but effective as

Page 19863

 1     of the 1st of September, 1990, appointing you to a position in the

 2     2nd SDB Administration in Belgrade, specifically the post set out in

 3     Article 42, number 19, and my question is:  Is it correct that this is a

 4     decision appointing you to your position as an operative in the American

 5     intelligence section of the Belgrade DB centre?

 6        A.   Yes.

 7             MR. JORDASH:  Sorry to interrupt.  May Mr. Stanisic be excused

 8     for five minutes?

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Again, if you want us to stop --

10             MR. JORDASH:  No, we can continue.  Thank you.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.  Please proceed.

12                           [The Accused Stanisic withdrew]

13             MR. FARR:  And could we now please have Exhibit P474 on the

14     screen, again not to be broadcast.  And in P474, specifically we'll need

15     page 43 of the B/C/S, which is ERN 06112138, and page 2 of the English.

16        Q.   And, sir, this is an excerpt from the personnel file of

17     Dragan Filipovic.  It's a decision of precisely the same date,

18     19 November 1990, effective the same date, 1st of September, 1990,

19     appointing Mr. Filipovic to precisely the same point as you, that is, the

20     post in the 2nd Department of the SDB Administration in Belgrade, defined

21     under Article 42, number 19.

22             Do you recall Dragan Filipovic being appointed to the same

23     position as you on the same day in 1990?

24        A.   I really can't recall that it was on the same day, but he was

25     certainly an employee of that division or section.

Page 19864

 1             MR. FARR:  Can we scroll to the bottom of the page, and

 2     particularly the left-hand side of the bottom.

 3        Q.   In the B/C/S version we see a handwritten notation on the

 4     left-hand side at the bottom.  Can you tell us what that is?

 5        A.   As I read it, he received it on that day.  The date is indicated.

 6     And I suppose this is the signature of Mr. Filipovic, meaning that he

 7     received it.

 8        Q.   Are you able to recognise his signature?

 9        A.   I can't say for sure, but I think it's his signature.

10        Q.   Last Thursday you said that during your time in the American

11     intelligence service section the number of operative workers varied from

12     four to seven, and that's at transcript page 19777.  Do you recall how

13     many operatives there were during 1991?

14        A.   I'm not absolutely sure, but most probably there were six or

15     seven.

16        Q.   So does that mean that your immediate team was either seven or

17     eight people, including yourself, Mr. Filipovic, and Mr. Simatovic?

18        A.   Yes.  I meant them too.

19        Q.   Is it fair to say that you worked closely with them and knew them

20     well at that time?

21        A.   Well, if you can put it that way.  There was certainly,

22     professionally speaking, close co-operation.  We were a tight-knit group.

23     But it's also true that the principle of subordination was strictly

24     observed.  We knew exactly who the boss was and who the gofers were,

25     people who brought in information, but there were no close private

Page 19865

 1     relations.  In 1991 I was going through a divorce, and at that time

 2     Filipovic had a lot of understanding for my personal situation, and he

 3     accommodated me whenever I had to take a leave of absence to appear

 4     before the court.  I don't know if you can call that closeness.

 5             MR. FARR:  Okay.  I'd like to move to a later period now, and for

 6     that could we please have 65 ter 6536 back on the screen, again not to be

 7     broadcast.  And specifically I'll need page 3 of the B/C/S, which is

 8     ERN 0682-2728, which is page 1 of the English.

 9        Q.   And, sir, this is a decision dated the 10th of June, 1994,

10     effective as of the 1st of July, 1994, and this decision appoints you to

11     the post from Article 11, number 3, of the book of Rules on Staff

12     Planning in the State Security Department of the Ministry of the

13     Interior?

14             MR. FARR:  And for the Chamber's and Defence's reference, that

15     book of rules is in evidence as D115 and D833.

16        Q.   Sir, according to that book of rules the position defined by

17     Article 11, number 3, is the post of independent operative instructor,

18     which you told us earlier was your position.  Can you confirm that this

19     is the decision appointing you to that position?

20        A.   Yes.  Yes, that should be it, with my signature.  That's the

21     decision.

22                           [The Accused Stanisic entered court]

23             MR. FARR:  And can we now please have Exhibit P474 back on the

24     screen, again not to be broadcast.  And we'll need page 52 in B/C/S,

25     which is ERN 0611-2147, and page 15 in English.  And I note for the

Page 19866

 1     record at this point that the date at the top of the page in English is

 2     incorrect.  It should be 11th of October of 1993, as reflected in the

 3     B/C/S version.

 4        Q.   Sir, this decision dated 11 October 1993 appoints

 5     Dragan Filipovic to the position defined by Article 11, number 2 of the

 6     applicable rules, and this position is the deputy chief of administration

 7     of the 2nd RDB Administration.  You confirmed that Filipovic was in that

 8     position at the time you joined the 2nd Administration.  If we could

 9     scroll to the bottom of the page.  Again, my question is:  Are you able

10     to identify that as the signature of Dragan Filipovic?

11        A.   I think -- I think it is.

12        Q.   Is it accurate to say that Mr. Filipovic was your direct

13     supervisor at the time you joined the 2nd Administration of the DB?

14        A.   No.  It was quite a different person.  If you mean who was my

15     immediate superior.  It was a different person, the one because of whom I

16     left the centre.  Just before my transfer, just before asking for a

17     transfer, I was promoted into chief of division or head of group, and I

18     had received a letter of appointment to that post, but the prospects were

19     glum in my view because of very difficult intrapersonal relationship and

20     that's why I approached the person I told you about to see if he could

21     help.

22        Q.   I apologise for interrupting.  I can see that my question wasn't

23     clear.  I meant after you joined the 2nd Administration.  From that time

24     on, was Dragan Filipovic your direct supervisor?

25        A.   Yes.  He was my immediate superior until 1999.

Page 19867

 1             MR. FARR:  Can we please have 65 ter 6536 back on the screen, not

 2     to be broadcast.  And now we'll need page 14 in the B/C/S, which is

 3     0682-2757.  And unfortunately we don't have a translation of this page

 4     available yet.

 5        Q.   But, sir, can I just ask you whether you recognise this as your

 6     employee evaluation questionnaire for 1996?

 7        A.   Yes.  That's our evaluation form, and my signature is there to

 8     indicate that I have been made aware of my grades.

 9        Q.   And we also see Dragan Filipovic's signature; correct?

10        A.   Like on the previous documents.  That would be his signature.

11        Q.   And can you please read the three words in Serbian that appear

12     immediately above Mr. Filipovic's signature so we can get a translation.

13        A.   I don't know what you mean.  You mean those three lines?

14        Q.   Sorry, the words immediately above Mr. Filipovic's signature,

15     indicating his position.

16        A.   All right.

17        Q.   Would you read them out loud, please.

18        A.   "Manager of organisational unit."

19        Q.   And why did Mr. Filipovic sign your evaluation questionnaire as

20     the manager of organisational unit?

21        A.   Well, there was no one else.  He managed, led, the organisational

22     unit at the time.

23        Q.   And would "organisational unit" there refer to the

24     2nd Administration?

25        A.   In my view, yes.  They meant the 2nd Administration.

Page 19868

 1             MR. FARR:  Can we now please have page 12 in B/C/S, which is

 2     ERN 0682-2755, if I'm not mistaken.  And that's page 15 in English.

 3        Q.   Sir, are you able to recognise this as your employee evaluation

 4     questionnaire from 1995?

 5        A.   If it bears my signature, then it is it.  Just let me add one

 6     thing.  Neither I nor many other employees thought much of this

 7     evaluation.  We did not attach to it any special importance.

 8        Q.   If we look at the bottom of the page, here we see that

 9     Mr. Simatovic has signed as the manager of your organisational unit;

10     correct?

11        A.   Yes.  This was a fax, a facsimile, if that matters.  Only he

12     could use it, though.

13        Q.   And why -- why was Mr. Simatovic here indicated as the manager of

14     the organisational unit?

15        A.   I can only suppose that it was because my immediate supervisor

16     was absent, Dragan Filipovic.  Why he was absent at that time, I can't

17     remember, and I can't remember for how long.  I suppose that all these

18     evaluations suddenly landed on somebody's desk and needed to be signed

19     quickly, and I believe that's the main reason why Mr. Franko Simatovic

20     affixed his facsimile.  The deficiency of this document is that there is

21     no worth "za" in front of the signature to indicate that he was not the

22     head of that unit, that he was signing on behalf of somebody else.  It

23     did happen that I signed for other people, but I always put the word "za"

24     whether it was my superior or my subordinate that I was signing for.

25        Q.   Can you tell us why it would be Franko Simatovic's desk in

Page 19869

 1     particular that these evaluations would land on when Dragan Filipovic was

 2     absent?

 3        A.   I don't know whether it was in his capacity as special advisor or

 4     head of department that he did this.  Mr. Franko Simatovic was named

 5     deputy head of department in 1996.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Bakrac.

 7             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, sorry.  There's an

 8     important error in the transcript.  Could the witness repeat his dilemma

 9     on page 59, line 12 and 13.  He begins:  "I don't know whether it was in"

10     one or the other capacity.  So he could name these two positions?

11             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In the course of 1996,

12     Franko Simatovic was moved from the position of special advisor in the

13     RDB of the Republic of Serbia to the position of assistant head of RDB of

14     the Republic of Serbia.  It may seem similar, but it's not the same.

15             MR. FARR:

16        Q.   Sir, our position will be that this document tends to show that

17     Mr. Simatovic was at least functioning as the head of the

18     2nd Administration as early as 1995, or perhaps even earlier.  Are you

19     able to comment on that?

20        A.   This signature can certainly not corroborate that.  I said

21     tongue-in-cheek that he burdened us, but only in a technical sense.

22     Until 1996 he served as special advisor.  After that, after he was

23     appointed assistant chief of RDB, he helped the chief of RDB in

24     intelligence matters.  So, in addition... by virtue of his line of work

25     or how should I put it, he was also tasked with the 2nd Administration.

Page 19870

 1        Q.   I asked you earlier whether --

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Bakrac.

 3             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I think that line 9

 4     does not exactly reflect what the witness said, by his line of work and

 5     his responsibilities, what he was to the 2nd Administration.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Bakrac, I have to compare my screens, because on

 7     the screen to my left line 9 reads:  "JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Bakrac."  That

 8     certainly is correct.

 9             You -- the last sentence of your last answer was:  "So by virtue

10     of his line of work and responsibilities," and could you then again tell

11     us what you then said.  Not to explain, but just to repeat what you then

12     said.  He was in charge of ...

13             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Maybe I'll get it wrong again, but

14     we don't understand each other perhaps.  As special advisor until

15     mid-1996.  Is that what you mean?

16             JUDGE ORIE:  I can't tell you what I meant apart from asking you

17     to again give that answer, because Mr. Bakrac thinks that there may be

18     something wrong.

19             Mr. Bakrac, did I put it to the witness in a correct way?

20             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I apologise to you in

21     advance and to the interpreters as well.  Perhaps it is due to my poor

22     knowledge of English, but I believe the sense of what the witness said in

23     Serbian is not "in charge" in English.  I believe the meaning is -- is

24     different.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Could you please -- when you talked about his line

Page 19871

 1     of work and responsibilities, what did you then say was his task in

 2     relation -- or what was his task as a special advisor?  Was he in charge

 3     of anything, or did you say something else?

 4             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As special advisor, his main duty,

 5     as I said before, was technical and technological improvement.  I mean of

 6     our operative technology.  And considering that the 2nd Administration

 7     was rather different from other administrations in terms of technology

 8     and used technology a lot, especially computer technology in analysis and

 9     radio and electronic reconnaissance and surveillance, his role was

10     important.  I suppose he also had contacts with other administrations, as

11     far as I remember.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Let me stop you there for a second.

13             Mr. Bakrac, if the words of the witness would have been

14     translated not as being "in charge of" but "dealing with," would that

15     come closer to what was your understanding of the response?

16             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Precisely, Your Honour.  You

17     understood the main thing.  That was the point I wanted to make.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Then we'll seek a verification of the translation

19     and see whether it was translated in accordance with what the witness

20     said or whether it's -- there are several ways to translate it.  We'll

21     seek verification of that.

22             Please proceed.

23             MR. FARR:

24        Q.   Sir, I asked you earlier whether you had ever received an award

25     from the JSO, and you indicated that you hadn't.  Are you aware of

Page 19872

 1     Mr. Simatovic or Mr. Filipovic ever having received an award from the

 2     JSO?

 3        A.   I really don't know about their awards, but I know -- well, I'm

 4     sorry about this imprecision, but I know that some knives were being

 5     given out of different types.  I think that to this day I have a lighter,

 6     but it's a zip lighter.  It's basically the RDB that awarded these

 7     objects as some kind of an award, but this was apart from formal

 8     protocols, apart from regulations.  It's not that someone was awarded by

 9     way of a formal decision, but things were just given to people, but they

10     were totally insignificant from a material point of view.

11        Q.   Sir, I'm sorry, I didn't understand your answer.  Are you aware

12     of Mr. Simatovic or Mr. Filipovic ever having received an award from the

13     JSO?

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Perhaps I can -- the witness says that he is not

15     aware of awards but about knives and lighters, insignificant.

16             Do you know whether Mr. Simatovic and/or Mr. Filipovic received

17     any such lighters or knives or whatever was given by the RDB to their

18     employees?

19             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] What I can say with certainty is

20     the following:  Since both of them were smokers just like I am, they used

21     lighters with an emblem of the department.  Now, in formal terms, whether

22     this kind of a reward was followed by a decision within the department,

23     that I really don't know about.  But that doesn't mean to say that there

24     weren't any.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  But let's be practical.  The lighters, I do not know

Page 19873

 1     what they do with nonsmokers, but the lighters with the emblem of the

 2     department, would you buy them at the department shop, or were they given

 3     as a kind of appreciation of work done?

 4             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, it wasn't necessary to buy

 5     them.  Quite simply they were received.  I had a lighter like that, too,

 6     but it didn't work for very long.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Now, apparently there is a reason to play down the

 8     significance of all this where you were not even asked to qualify.  The

 9     simple question is:  Did they received one; yes or no?  And was it

10     related to the performance of work or duties?  And you similarly,

11     although you were not happy with the quality of the lighter, I do

12     understand.

13             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, I repeat once again.

14     Formalisation --

15             JUDGE ORIE:  There's no need to repeat what you've said already a

16     couple of times.  If there's anything you'd like to add, please do so.

17     If you want to repeat what you said, there's no need.

18             Mr. Farr will then put his next question to you.

19             MR. FARR:

20        Q.   Sir, I'd like to return now to Mr. Simatovic's mission to the

21     Krajina in 1991.  On Thursday, Mr. Bakrac asked you the following:

22             "Q.  Mr. Micic, you said that you knew Franko Simatovic went to

23     Knin along operative lines of work.  Do you know specifically what it

24     involved?"

25             Your answer was:

Page 19874

 1             "Well, specifically, the Daniel Snedden case, that's to say,

 2     Dragan Vasiljkovic, an Australian national.  The work on this case called

 3     for work outside ... the territory of the Republic of Serbia."

 4             And that's page 19789.

 5             How did you know, what is the source of your knowledge that this

 6     was the purpose of Mr. Simatovic's mission to Knin?

 7        A.   It wasn't only Mr. Simatovic that went to Knin in that period.

 8     From time to time Dragan Filipovic went, too, but to a lesser extent.

 9     And in direct talks this was mentioned several times, what was being done

10     there, because this was a great novelty as far as our work until then was

11     concerned.  It was very brief, like classical operative work vis-à-vis

12     the already-mentioned subject.  That's the only thing I know, not more

13     than that, because I was never there myself, directly.

14        Q.   So is it fair to say that your information about this depends

15     entirely on what Mr. Simatovic, Mr. Filipovic, or others were willing to

16     tell you about it?

17        A.   You can put it that way, yes.

18        Q.   And you had --

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Farr, we're willing to tell you, I think I've

20     told you, that would be the right way of putting it --

21             MR. FARR:  Yes, I take your point.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  -- because we couldn't -- yes, please.

23             MR. FARR:

24        Q.   And is it also fair to say that you had no reason to check this

25     information, and you did not check this information?

Page 19875

 1        A.   Well, it's superfluous to check what your superior, your

 2     supervisor, says.  Your then-supervisor.  At that point I could not

 3     envisage anything else that could be done.  I didn't know anything then

 4     about RPG or anything else.  Also, Daniel Snedden constituted a real

 5     threat for the relations within the region then in general terms.

 6        Q.   You were also asked on Thursday when in 1991 Mr. Simatovic was in

 7     Knin, and you said:

 8             "In any case, that was during the summer.  I can't be any more

 9     precise than that."

10             And that's at page 19781 to 19782.

11             Our position is that you may be mistaken about the timing and

12     that Mr. Simatovic was actually in Knin beginning in the spring of 1991.

13     Are you able to comment on that?

14        A.   Nothing more than what I've already stated.

15        Q.   Is it correct that Mr. Simatovic's mission to the Krajina was

16     undertaken with the permission and knowledge of the leadership of the

17     DB of Serbia, if you're able to say?

18        A.   Well, I can just apply logic.  I am justified in assuming that he

19     could not have gone there on his own.  He had to get some approval in

20     order to engage in operative activity outside the territory of Serbia.

21        Q.   And based on your knowledge of how the DB functioned at that

22     time, who would ordinarily have had to provide that approval?

23        A.   At that time, I was an ordinary beginner without any particular

24     high posts.  Now, how could I conclude what the minister of the interior

25     would decide on and what the head of the department would decide on, to

Page 19876

 1     what extent they could take decisions independently?  At any rate, the

 2     department was just -- I mean, the department for state security was just

 3     a department within the Ministry of the Interior.

 4        Q.   Now, you've -- you've told us that Mr. Filipovic spent time in

 5     Knin at this time as well, and we've seen that you and Mr. Filipovic had

 6     the same position.  Is it your evidence that you can't tell us who would

 7     have given -- who would have had to give you approval to do operative

 8     work outside of Serbia?

 9        A.   I am just assuming -- actually, I know what would have been

10     sufficient for me, that is to say that the head of the group or the head

11     of the division would give an order.  However, following the formalism of

12     the then-8th Administration, the one that was involved in logistics,

13     legal grounds would have to exist -- or, rather, a decision would have to

14     be made, and other things would have to be taken care of, like the money

15     that would necessarily be spent on such a mission.  And as for the

16     technical resources needed, I would deal with the -- I would actually

17     address the office that dealt with that.

18             When I say technical resources, I'm saying that operative work

19     required some special technical resources too.  When I say that, I mean

20     if I'm issued with a particular piece of equipment, I have to sign a

21     document saying that I had been issued with that particular piece of

22     equipment.  I'm just giving this by way of an example.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Farr, is there any way that we could leave the

24     realm of assumptions, logic, et cetera, and rather go back to the facts.

25             MR. FARR:

Page 19877

 1        Q.   Sir, in addition to Mr. Simatovic and Mr. Filipovic, there has

 2     been evidence in this case that Milan Radonjic was also in Knin at this

 3     time.  Were you aware that he participated in this mission as well?

 4             MR. FARR:  And, Your Honours, that's at transcript page 16708.

 5             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.  I had no knowledge about

 6     Milan Radonjic because he was in a completely different division.  If I'm

 7     not mistaken, at that time he was dealing with the subject matter of the

 8     Israeli intelligence service, but I'm not sure.

 9        Q.   Now, based on things that you were told about this mission, did

10     you ever hear whether this mission had been approved by authorities in

11     the SAO Krajina as well?

12        A.   No.  If we are talking about 1991, the details of the

13     arrangement, if I can put it that way, or of the stay there, I really had

14     no knowledge about that, none whatsoever.

15        Q.   During the time he was in the Krajina, as far as you know, did

16     Mr. Simatovic prepare any reports on the activities of Daniel Snedden?

17        A.   I am not aware of that.  I repeat once again:  I was not directly

18     involved in working on Daniel Snedden, but if someone looks at the file,

19     then this can either be confirmed or refuted.  If I may just take a

20     minute.

21        Q.   Sir, our time is short.  I'd prefer to move on.  I'd like to turn

22     briefly just to the question of the extent of your knowledge --

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Farr.

24             It was not quite clear to me, but when you said, "If I may just

25     take a minute," did you intend to take a minute to explain things

Page 19878

 1     further, or was there any other reason for which you needed a minute?

 2        A.   Just to give an example why that was the case.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed, Mr. Farr.

 4             MR. FARR:  Thank you, Your Honour.

 5        Q.   Can you tell me if this is accurate:  Because of the principle of

 6     conspiracy, in general your DB colleagues would not necessarily tell you

 7     about all of their activities; is that correct?

 8        A.   I don't know if we understand each other correctly.  What do you

 9     mean by "conspiracy" as "zavera"?  Conspiracy as in "konspirativnost" is

10     one of the main principles for the functioning of any service of this

11     kind in Serbia and outside Serbia anywhere.

12        Q.   And is it fair to say that that principle is essentially that

13     even members of the same service should only share information with each

14     other on a need-to-know basis?

15        A.   Yes, yes.  That was my example in terms of expressing

16     unauthorised interest for Mr. Daniel Snedden.  Two persons left the

17     security service because of that.  It was that strict.  They were

18     dismissed from the company.

19        Q.   I'm sorry, could you just explain in a bit more detail why they

20     were dismissed?

21        A.   There is this principle of everyone doing the work that he or she

22     is in charge of.  If you express unauthorised interest or if you

23     jeopardise in any other way the implementation of missions with regard to

24     a particular subject, you are punished most strictly.

25             In this particular case, I know of two individuals.

Page 19879

 1        Q.   And can you tell us who they were and how they expressed interest

 2     in this case that led to their dismissal?

 3        A.   Well, I mean we, all the other employees, were told about that at

 4     a separate meeting of the head of the division, but the least possible

 5     information was given.  At this same meeting I insisted that the

 6     punishment be even more severe.  It is disclosure of a secret, and that's

 7     very serious.  I never expressed interest in anybody else's work.  I

 8     cannot remember the name of one of these individuals, and the other one I

 9     see from time to time to this day.  So ...

10             MR. FARR:  Could we please have Exhibit P2420 on the screen.

11        Q.   And, sir, while the document is coming up, I'll tell you that it

12     is an Official Note on the heading of the 2nd Administration of the RDB.

13     It is dated 27 June 1994.  So this is just a few days before you joined

14     the 2nd Administration.  And if we could have the second page in B/C/S

15     and the bottom of the first page in English.  And here at the bottom of

16     the document we see the words "Deputy Chief of Administration,

17     Dragan Filipovic," and below that a signature.  Sir, again can you

18     confirm that this is the signature of Dragan Filipovic?

19        A.   Yes.  It should be his signature.

20             MR. FARR:  And can we please go back to the top of the first page

21     in both languages.

22        Q.   And we see here that the document is entitled "Official Note on

23     the Tajfun Group," and I'll begin reading at the top of the document.  It

24     says:

25             "Because of the internal conflict and discord in the RDB and the

Page 19880

 1     RJB of the Republic of Serbia, the intelligence group known under the

 2     pseudonym Tajfun from Banja Luka, as well as the Banja Luka Department

 3     for Narcotics have decided to reduce their intelligence activity since

 4     they've started having doubts that their intelligence reports that they

 5     have been preparing have not been reaching the right end user (the

 6     president of the republic) but, on the contrary, have been ending up in

 7     the hands of unknown people.

 8             "The members of the Tajfun group have therefore decided to

 9     establish contact with the 2nd Administration of the RDB of the Republic

10     of Serbia MUP explaining that we were the only institution they still

11     have faith in and stating their wish to forward their intelligence and

12     information directly to us in the future, and so leaving the processing

13     of intelligence and its distribution to us.

14              "We let the members of this group know that we will accept the

15     group's initiative only under the condition they get approval from the

16     president of the republic, Radovan Karadzic, and the minister for the

17     interior, M. Stanisic.  Since the said group informed us that they got

18     Karadzic's and Stanisic's approval, we are of the opinion that this

19     segment of the intelligence bodies of the Republika Srpska should be

20     subsumed under our system."

21             MR. FARR:  And next page in B/C/S, please.

22        Q.   [As read] "The technical aspects of a two-way communication were

23     therefore analysed, and the said group will form now -- will from now on

24     contact us under the pseudonym Sigma.

25             "The preliminary discussions on Sigma's incorporation into the

Page 19881

 1     intelligence system of the RDB of the Republic of Serbia MUP were held by

 2     the chief of the 2nd Administration of the RDB of the Republic of

 3     Serbia MUP, Franko Simatovic, and the Deputy Chief of the

 4     2nd Administration of the RDB, Dragan Filipovic."

 5             Now, I asked you earlier today whether you had any knowledge of

 6     an intelligence group known as Tajfun or Sigma, and I believe you said

 7     you you did not have any knowledge during the period 1994/1995, and that

 8     what you know, you know only from later media reports.  Is it really your

 9     evidence that you had no idea that Franko Simatovic and Dragan Filipovic

10     were making these arrangements with this group?

11        A.   It's not only that this is the first time that I see this

12     document or, rather, am made aware of its content.  That's one side.  And

13     then on the other side, my subsequent work and my work in the

14     2nd Administration did not even hint at what is mentioned here, except

15     for the part that I've already referred to, the Bijeljina post.

16             MR. FARR:  Okay.  Could we please have the top of the first page

17     in both languages.  And I'm interested in the handwritten remarks at the

18     top, starting on the top left.

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24             JUDGE ORIE:  We move into private session.

25                           [Private session]


Page 19882

 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                           [Open session]

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


Page 19883

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Madam Registrar.

 2             MR. FARR:

 3        Q.   Now, sir, earlier, when I was reading out the entire text of the

 4     letter, I read a portion that included the words "the preliminary

 5     discussions on Sigma's incorporation into the intelligence system of the

 6     RDB of the Republic of Serbian MUP were held by the chief of the

 7     2nd Administration of the RDB of the Republic of Serbia MUP,

 8     Franko Simatovic, and the deputy chief of the second administration of

 9     the RDB, Dragan Filipovic."

10             Now, sir, doesn't this show that Mr. Simatovic was in fact

11     functioning as the chief of the 2nd Administration at this time?

12        A.   I've already stated in which field my knowledge is in terms of

13     Franko Simatovic's presence in the 2nd Administration.  Now, what Fica

14     wrote, I cannot really stand by that.  But obviously Franko is suggesting

15     what should be done further, that is to say, to open a file.  This is

16     purely analytical work.  But the decision was no.  Why it was no, that I

17     would not know how to explain.

18        Q.   Now, you indicated also when you were in the 2nd Administration

19     you never received any tasks from -- from Mr. Simatovic.  Do you have any

20     knowledge of why Mr. Filipovic appears to be receiving a task from

21     Mr. Simatovic via this handwritten note?

22        A.   I can only suppose at that time work with a network of agents was

23     of such a scope that it was not easy to make quick conclusions.  I

24     suppose this was rather a request for a professional opinion what should

25     be done next on the case that we just read about, how to use the agents

Page 19884

 1     outside the country.

 2        Q.   Okay.

 3             MR. FARR:  Can we now please have Exhibit P2941 on the screen.

 4        Q.   And, sir, while this is coming up I'll just orient you by telling

 5     you that now we're moving to a later period, which is specifically the

 6     second half of 1995.  And this is specifically a letter dated the

 7     26th of September, 1995, that we'll see on our screens in just a moment.

 8             And if we could just zoom in a little bit more on the signature

 9     at the bottom, we can see that it's signed in the name of Tomislav Kovac

10     as deputy minister.  And if we could zoom out again, we can see that the

11     ministry in question is the Ministry of the Interior of the

12     Republika Srpska.

13             And I'll just read the first -- sorry.  In the letter we also see

14     it's addressed to General Ratko Mladic as the commander of the Main Staff

15     of the VRS.  And I'll read the first paragraph of the letter.  It says:

16             "I propose to schedule a meeting between the RS Deputy Minister

17     of the Interior Tomislav Kovac, the co-ordinator of the forces of the

18     Ministry of the Interior of the Republic of Serbia, Dragan Filipovic, and

19     you to resolve certain problems with regard to the commanding of troops

20     currently under the RS MUP."

21             Now, you told us earlier that you had knowledge of any member of

22     the Serbian DB meeting with either Ratko Mladic or Tomislav Kovac in

23     September or October 1995.  Were you even aware that Tomislav Kovac was

24     trying to arrange such a meeting among himself, Dragan Filipovic, and

25     Ratko Mladic in September of 1995?

Page 19885

 1        A.   I can only repeat what I stated earlier.  I would need a lot of

 2     time and material to even recall who Tomislav Kovac was.  I have no

 3     closer or better knowledge.  At the time when we first mentioned him, I

 4     didn't even know who he was.

 5             Should I go on?  I would use this formula for a good legend in

 6     another country.  I would say that I'm a co-ordinator of some special

 7     group attached to the Ministry of the Interior to get these people to

 8     work for my intelligence service.  That's what I would do.

 9             Maybe that title existed, but I'm not aware that Dragan Filipovic

10     was any sort of co-ordinator of forces within the MUP.  He was my boss,

11     but he was not co-ordinator of forces within the MUP.

12     JUDGE ORIE:  Could I ask you the following question:  You earlier said,

13    "Unfortunately --" "Unfortunately, when asked about Tomislav Kovac, I

14   cannot even remember who this person was, the one you've mentioned, Kovac."

15             Now, a few lines ago you said:  "At the time when I met him, I

16     didn't even know who he was."

17             On the one hand you tell us that you do not know who Mr. Kovac

18     is, and at the same time in your last answer you said you met him, but at

19     that time you didn't know who he was, but there may be an error, because

20     it's -- could you please explain?  And if need be, of course, we'll check

21     whether your words are translated and scribed accurately, but that's my

22     problem at this moment, reconciling the two answers you gave as it

23     reaches us -- and they reach us in English.

24             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Sorry I didn't follow the

25     interpretation, but I'll repeat once again.  Neither then nor now until

Page 19886

 1     this moment that name told me nothing and doesn't tell me anything now.

 2     I just don't know who that person is.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  What did you then mean when you said:  "At the

 4     time when I met him, I didn't even know who he was."  What's the meaning

 5     of that sentence?  Can you explain to us?

 6             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I really can't go back to that

 7     context.  I can't recall it.  But it was not -- I couldn't have said

 8     anything about meeting Tomislav Kovac.  Maybe I should -- maybe you

 9     should quote to me what I said before.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  I'll read your entire answer.  You said, when asked

11     about Tomislav Kovac trying to arrange a meeting among himself,

12     Dragan Filipovic, and Ratko Mladic in September of 1995, your answer was:

13             "I can only repeat what I said earlier.  I would need a lot of

14     time and material to recall who Tomislav Kovac was.  I have no closer

15     knowledge.  At the time when I met him, I didn't even know who he was."

16             That was what your answer -- how it was translated and

17     transcribed.

18             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I meant probably that when I met

19     Filipovic, Dragan, I had no prior knowledge, and I still don't know

20     anything about Tomislav Kovac.  He was never a subject of conversation.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Bakrac.

22             MR. BAKRAC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I let this pass

23     because I didn't want to suggest anything, because it might be my

24     mistake.  I wasn't following the transcript.

25             I did not hear the witness mention meeting Tomislav Kovac.  I

Page 19887

 1     don't know.  Maybe -- I don't know whether it's necessary to check the

 2     recording, but it's my mistake.  I wasn't following.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  No, it's not your mistake.  I would like to know

 4     what the witness said, Mr. Bakrac.  That's the issue at stake, not on who

 5     in time asked for translations or anything else.

 6             Madam Registrar, I would like to have those lines verified from

 7     the audio, and as far as the translation is concerned, and of course the

 8     transcription.

 9             Mr. Farr, I would like to read one decision, so therefore I

10     suggest that we adjourn for the day.  Are you on time in your schedule?

11             MR. FARR:  I estimate another hour and a half, Your Honour, so,

12     yes, I think I am.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  If you could try to see whether you could do it in

14     one session that would be appreciated.  So be as efficient as --

15             MR. FARR:  Yes, Your Honour.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Then I'd like to instruct you again that you should

17     not speak or communicate in any other way with anyone about your

18     testimony, and we'd like to see you back tomorrow morning at 9.00 in this

19     same courtroom, and we'll conclude your testimony tomorrow.

20             You may follow the usher.

21                           [The witness stands down]

22             JUDGE ORIE:  I'd like to deliver a decision on rebuttal

23     deadlines.

24             The Chamber addresses the Prosecution's request to extend the

25     deadline for rebuttal filings.


Page 19888

 1             On the 1st of May of this year, the Chamber instructed the

 2     Prosecution to file requests or notification of rebuttal evidence no

 3     later than the 8th of May, 2012.  With regard to Defence evidence

 4     admitted after the 8th of May, the Chamber instructed the Prosecution to

 5     file any such motions no later than one week after the date of the

 6     introduction of such evidence.  You can find this on page 18810 of the

 7     transcript.

 8             On the 8th of May, the Prosecution filed its notification

 9     regarding rebuttal evidence.  In its notification, the Prosecution

10     requested the Chamber to adjust the deadline for rebuttal filings in

11     relation to Defence documents which have been tendered and for which a

12     decision on admission is pending.  The Prosecution requested that this

13     deadline be set to two weeks following the find decision on admission.

14     The Prosecution noted that the Defence had tendered many Defence

15     documents from the bar table for which a decision on admission was

16     pending and which could potentially trigger additional rebuttal evidence.

17             On the 24th of May, the Prosecution orally requested to adjust

18     the deadline for rebuttal filings in relation to Stanisic Defence bar

19     table documents to seven days from the final decision on admission of

20     such documents by the Chamber.  The Stanisic and Simatovic Defence

21     submitted in court that they did not object to this request.

22             The Chamber accepts that the Prosecution will be in a better

23     position to determine if rebuttal evidence, if any, once it has a full

24     overview of the documents, if any, still to be admitted in the Defence

25     case.  In view of the scheduling of the remainder of the trial, the

Page 19889

 1     Chamber considers that a one-week time period remains appropriate.  The

 2     Chamber accordingly grants the Prosecution's request in part and sets the

 3     deadline for rebuttal filings in relation to documents tendered by the

 4     Defence and admitted after the 8th of May, 2012, to one week after the

 5     Chamber's last decision admitting documents in the Defence case.

 6             In its notification, the Prosecution further requested the

 7     Chamber to adjust the deadline for rebuttal filings in relation to the

 8     final four Defence witnesses, namely Milosevic, Plahuta, Vujovic, and

 9     Micic, to two weeks after the last of these witnesses has finished

10     testifying.  The Prosecution requested the same in relation to the

11     re-called Defence witness Novakovic.  The Prosecution submitted that

12     these witnesses were all expected to testify about the structure and

13     membership of the Serbian DB.  The Prosecution anticipated that it would

14     make inter-related rebuttal submissions in relation to their testimonies.

15             Neither the Stanisic nor the Simatovic Defence responded to this

16     request.

17             On the 21st of May, the Chamber suspended the deadline for

18     rebuttal filings in relation to the aforementioned witnesses, pending the

19     present decision.  The Chamber informed the parties accordingly through

20     an informal communication which is hereby put on the record.

21             The Chamber accepts that it may be more efficient for the

22     Prosecution to make rebuttal filings once the four aforementioned final

23     witnesses have testified.  The Prosecution should already have a good

24     overview of Witness Novakovic's testimony, who is being re-called for

25     further cross-examination.  The Chamber considers that a one-week time

Page 19890

 1     period remains appropriate.  The Chamber accordingly grants the

 2     Prosecution's request in part and sets the deadline for rebuttal filings

 3     in relation to witnesses to one week after the last of these witnesses

 4     have finished testifying.

 5             And this concludes the Chamber's decision.  So there is a

 6     distinction between Novakovic and the others, but Novakovic is the last

 7     one anyway who will appear.

 8             We adjourn for the day, and we'll resume tomorrow, Wednesday, the

 9     30th of May, at 9.00 in the morning in this same courtroom, II.

10                           --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.04 p.m.,

11                           to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 30th day

12                           of May, 2012, at 9.00 a.m.