Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 3029

 1                           Friday, 13 November 2009

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           --- Upon commencing at 9.03 a.m.

 5             THE REGISTRAR:  Good morning, Your Honours.  Good morning,

 6     everyone in and around the courtroom.  This is case IT-08-91-T, the

 7     Prosecutor versus Mico Stanisic and Stojan Zupljanin.

 8             JUDGE HALL:  Good morning to everyone.  May we begin by taking

 9     the appearances, please.

10             MR. HANNIS:  Thank you, Your Honours.  Tom Hannis, Gerard Dobbyn,

11     and Crispian Smith on behalf of the Prosecution.

12             MR. ZECEVIC:  Good morning, Your Honours.  Mr. Cvijetic,

13     Mr. O'Sullivan, and Zecevic for Stanisic Defence.

14             MR. PANTELIC:  Good morning, Your Honours.  For Zupljanin

15     Defence, Igor Pantelic and Dragan Krgovic.  Thank you.

16             JUDGE HALL:  [Microphone not activated]

17             MR. ZECEVIC:  Your Honours, I promised that I would finish within

18     15 minutes, but it might take a bit longer.  But I think it will assist

19     the Trial Chamber, the line of the cross-examination, so with your leave

20     I will proceed with the witness a bit longer than anticipated.  I'm sorry

21     for that, but I couldn't --

22             JUDGE HARHOFF:  For how long?

23             MR. ZECEVIC:  Well, I guess half an hour all together.

24                           [The witness takes the stand]

25             JUDGE HALL:  Good morning to you, sir.  I would remind you that

Page 3030

 1     you're still on your oath.

 2             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Very well.

 3             MR. ZECEVIC:  May I proceed, Your Honours?

 4             JUDGE HALL:  Yes, please.

 5             MR. ZECEVIC:  Thank you very much.

 6                           WITNESS:  PETKO PANIC [Resumed]

 7                           [Witness answered through interpreter]

 8                           Cross-examination by Mr. Zecevic: [Continued]

 9        Q.   [Interpretation] Good morning, Mr. Panic.  Are you well?

10        A.   Yes, I am.  Thank you.

11        Q.   Mr. Panic, yesterday we talked about the prisons in Zvornik.  I

12     showed you a number of orders and instructions from the Ministry of the

13     Interior relating to this issue.  Let me remind you, I showed you a

14     letter dated the 10th of August, then the one dated the 17th of August

15     which we commented yesterday, and now I would like to show you a

16     letter -- or rather, an instruction dated 24th of August in which the

17     Ministry of the Interior is again making a query and asking for

18     information.  That's Exhibit 1D57, if we can please have that on our

19     screens.

20             The Ministry of the Interior, based on the letter from the

21     Ministry of Health, Labour, and Social Welfare of the government from

22     whom they had received requests for information is now passing on to all

23     public security stations and Public Security Service centres this

24     document requiring the following information:  The name and the location

25     of a camp, who ordered the camp to be established, who ordered the

Page 3031

 1     individuals to be detained there, the number of detainees, the number of

 2     the people arrested, and they gave them the dead-line for providing this

 3     information by the 30th of August, 1992.  Have you ever seen this

 4     document, or do you know that the public security station in Zvornik has

 5     ever received this kind of document?

 6        A.   I haven't seen this particular document.  All I know is that

 7     people who were working in the medical institutions used to come to Novi

 8     Izvor prison.  There was a female doctor.  I think her name was Bela, but

 9     I don't know her full name.

10        Q.   Do you know that the information about the existence of the

11     prisons in Novi Izvor and the misdemeanour courts had been submitted as

12     per requests from the MUP?

13        A.   No, I'm not aware of that, and I know that since this request

14     arrived an answer should have been sent, and they had to be told about

15     the doctors working in various institutions.

16        Q.   Tell me about the food provided at these two prisons, Novi Izvor

17     and misdemeanours court.  If I understood you correctly it seems that

18     there was a centralised kitchen providing food in Zvornik for these

19     facilities?

20        A.   Yes, we all received food, I say we and the hotel prisons from

21     the hotel kitchen.

22        Q.   Thank you.

23             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] I would like to tender this

24     document into evidence -- yes, I apologise.  Yes, it already has an

25     exhibit number.  Sorry.

Page 3032

 1             MR. HANNIS:  Your Honour, yesterday I didn't object to a couple

 2     of documents, but this one I do have an objection.  The witness hasn't

 3     seen this document.  He doesn't really have anything to add to it.  I

 4     would oppose this one at this time --

 5             MR. ZECEVIC:  Yes, but, Mr. Hannis --

 6             JUDGE HALL:  It's already exhibited.

 7             MR. HANNIS:  Okay.  My apologies.

 8             MR. ZECEVIC:  My apologies for creating any confusion.

 9        Q.   [Interpretation] Yesterday, Mr. Panic, while we were talking you

10     said that either from the beginning or from mid-August, all these

11     collection centres, camps, prisons, whatever, ceased to exist except for

12     the basic prison in Novi Izvor, or rather, misdemeanours court, and all

13     the detainees had been handed over to the army and taken to the Batkovic

14     camp; is that right?

15        A.   Yes.  Only this prison remained I think until the beginning of

16     1993.

17        Q.   The day before yesterday, the Prosecutor showed you a document 65

18     ter 1585.  I suppose it's been given a P number now, but unfortunately I

19     couldn't find it.

20             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Can we please have this document

21     pulled up, this document.  65 ter 1585.

22             JUDGE HARHOFF:  [Microphone not activated]

23             MR. ZECEVIC:  Thank you very much.

24             [Interpretation] So that's P342.

25        Q.   You remember seeing this document when the Prosecutor showed it

Page 3033

 1     to you in which a certain Colonel Ilic, despite all this warning coming

 2     from the MUP and other state organs and the decisions taken in this

 3     respect, orders the Muslims from the Divic collection centre, 78 men to

 4     be handed over on the 22nd -- 29 August 1992.  Do you remember this

 5     document?

 6        A.   I remember this document, and I said that I didn't know this

 7     Colonel Ilic.  He probably was from the corps because their command was

 8     up there.

 9        Q.   At that time, did you know at all that there was any kind of

10     collection centre in Divic?

11        A.   I'm not sure whether it was Divic or the residents of Divic who

12     were first in the centre in Celopek, and some of them were injured by

13     maltreatment, were sent back to Novi Izvor and the misdemeanour courts.

14     I don't know any more than that.

15        Q.   Well, it says here "Divic collection centre, 78 people," shows

16     that by the end of August it was under the army's control; is that right?

17        A.   I remember stating earlier to the Prosecutor, I said that there

18     was a collection centre at the football playground in Divic, only I don't

19     know whether in this period or not.  And Slavko Eric used to take Muslims

20     to Olovske Luke.  Some of them remained there, and the rest were brought

21     back in two or three buses, and Miko Miljanovic put those people in

22     Celopek, but I can't give you any time-frame for that.

23        Q.   When you said that after these problems the rampaging by Repic

24     and the others in the Celopek centre, the people who were transferred to

25     Novi Izvor and the misdemeanours court, as you said, injured and wounded,

Page 3034

 1     they were transferred there in order to be protected and in order to

 2     receive medical treatment; is that right?

 3        A.   Yes.

 4        Q.   Fine.

 5             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Can we now look at P347.  That's a

 6     report on the work of the Zvornik SJB.  That's a quarterly report

 7     covering July, August, and September 1992.  On the last page you can see

 8     that it was signed by the then-chief Milorad Lokancevic.  And on page 1,

 9     the last two sentences of the third paragraph, it reads as follows, just

10     to say that this document was drafted I suppose in late September or

11     early October.  And it reads as follows:

12             "Also, a number of measures were undertaken relating to

13     collection centres that -- and there are two such centres in the

14     municipality housing 180 persons.  This problem has been passed on to all

15     the military organs, CSB, MUP, and the Ministry of Health, but everything

16     remained as it is.  It was only on the 18th of September of this year

17     that with the assistance of military organ the collection centre in Divic

18     was disbanded, where 90 people were, mainly women, elderly, and children,

19     while in the prison in Zvornik there are still 56 people."

20             As far as I understand, on the 18th of September, this colonel in

21     his previous letter now says that it has been disbanded.  In other words,

22     that means that the SJB Zvornik played a role in this Divic centre for

23     more than two weeks, approximately.

24        A.   Judging by the letter and the information, I have no reason to

25     doubt that.  I don't know whether they wanted to go to Olovske Luke and

Page 3035

 1     those who didn't were put into the Novi Izvor prison, but as far as this

 2     information goes I know nothing about it.

 3        Q.   So in conclusion, on the 18th of September onwards, in the

 4     territory of Zvornik municipality and under the jurisdiction of the SJB,

 5     there was only this so-called basic prison in Zvornik in Novi Izvor and

 6     the misdemeanours court.  And that was it.  Based on this letter, we can

 7     conclude that nothing else existed in that sense.  Later on a commission

 8     from the Ministry of Judiciary and Administration came and confirmed

 9     that.  Can you confirm that for me?

10        A.   I think, yes.

11        Q.   Thank you.

12             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Mr. Zecevic.

13             MR. ZECEVIC:  Yes.

14             JUDGE HARHOFF:  This is of course an important piece of

15     information that by 18th of September there was only the Novi Izvor and

16     the misdemeanour court remaining as detention centres.

17             MR. ZECEVIC:  Yes.

18             JUDGE HARHOFF:  But the witness also said that all the other

19     detention centres that existed in the Zvornik area prior to 18th

20     September were closed down one by one and that the detainees there were

21     transferred to Batkovic.  Did I understand that correctly?

22             MR. ZECEVIC:  That is correct, Your Honours.  That's the

23     evidence, yes.

24             JUDGE HARHOFF:  But it leaves me with the impression that

25     Batkovic then must have been an enormous camp.  How many people were

Page 3036

 1     there, or were people released or in -- what happened?

 2             MR. ZECEVIC:  Your Honours, Batkovic camp was a military

 3     facility; therefore, we have no --

 4             JUDGE HARHOFF:  [Microphone not activated]

 5             MR. ZECEVIC:  Okay.

 6        Q.   [Interpretation] Mr. Panic, you heard the question.  Do you know

 7     anything at all about the Batkovic camp?

 8        A.   I know nothing about it.  As far as Batkovic is concerned, I only

 9     know that the prisoners were transferred to the Batkovic camp, and this

10     is where exchanges took place of certain detainees with Tuzla.  As for

11     anything else, I don't know what was happening there.

12             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Mr. Panic, are you able to give us an impression

13     of the number of detainees that were transferred to Batkovic and the

14     number of detainees who were then held at Novi Izvor and at the

15     misdemeanour court after 18 September?  I'm interested in getting an

16     impression of the number of persons that we are talking about here.

17     Maybe I should ask first of all:  Do you know how many detention centres

18     were closed down prior to 18th September 1992?  Do you remember that?

19             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I said as for Batkovic I really

20     cannot tell you very much because it was done by the military service,

21     and I know the technical centre, Ekonomija, the brickworks factory, Novi

22     Izvor, and the misdemeanours court.  I also cannot tell you how many

23     people were detained there, but what was left behind were some 30, 40

24     individuals.  I think that concerning Novi Izvor could -- Sredo Vukovic

25     who was running the Novi Izvor could give you more details.

Page 3037

 1             JUDGE HARHOFF:  So can I just ask you if I have understood

 2     correctly the following information, namely, that in the period leading

 3     up to 18 September 1992, three or maybe four detention centres were

 4     closed down and the prisoners -- or the detainees at those detention

 5     centres were transferred to Batkovic, and by 18 September only 30 or 40

 6     detainees remained at Novi Izvor and at the misdemeanour court.  Is that

 7     your testimony?

 8             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, that's right.  After the war I

 9     saw a number of those prisoners from Batkovic or who were in Celopek

10     prison.  I saw them and I talked to them.  Those were the people who were

11     exchanged, and there were many of them who were exchanged at Batkovici.

12             JUDGE HARHOFF:  I understand.  Just one final question.  I think

13     that during your testimony we heard of a significantly higher number of

14     detainees at Novi Izvor and the misdemeanour court, I think several

15     hundred but I'm not sure.  Can you tell us, if you know, what happened to

16     those detainees from Novi Izvor and the misdemeanour court.  Were they

17     also sent to Batkovic so that by 18 September we only had 30 or 40

18     detainees left there?  I don't know if I made myself clear, but if there

19     were many more people detained before 18th September at Novi Izvor, what

20     happened to those?

21             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, a lot of these prisoners were

22     transferred to Batkovic as well.  I think that one of them was even

23     exchanged for a Serb from Sarajevo, and this man from Divic was known as

24     the Frenchman because his father used to work in France.  What I said was

25     that sometime in January 1993 that there were 20 or 30 prisoners were

Page 3038

 1     allegedly taken to cut wood but were executed there.  But I really cannot

 2     tell you the exact figure, maybe 30, 40, maybe even 50 because I never

 3     went to that prison and I never looked at any lists.  This is what I

 4     heard second-hand from my colleagues.

 5             JUDGE HARHOFF:  And one final question.  I apologise,

 6     Mr. Zecevic.

 7             Am I also right to understand from what you have told us that it

 8     was the minister of the MUP who took the decisions to have all of these

 9     detainees assembled at Batkovic and have the remaining centres closed

10     down?  I mean, this was -- this entire operation was done under the

11     control of the minister of MUP; is that correct?

12             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm not sure whether it was under

13     the control of the MUP minister.  If the dispatches and letters came from

14     the ministry, they were received by the chief and the chief was the one

15     who implemented all those instructions and orders.  I didn't see any of

16     them.  By the rule, such things should be sent from the ministry

17     downwards and distributed from there.

18             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Thank you, sir.

19             Back to you, Mr. Zecevic.

20             MR. ZECEVIC:  Thank you.

21             [Interpretation] If I may be of any assistance to you, Your

22     Honours, the document that I showed you just a moment ago P347 alleges

23     that in the prison - and I'm talking about a report for July, August, and

24     September - where it is alleged that in the Zvornik prison there were 56

25     persons and that would be the exact and correct number.

Page 3039

 1        Q.   Mr. Panic, I'm a bit confused now.  All the three documents from

 2     the MUP that I showed you yesterday and the one that I just showed you

 3     today, they are not directives of any kind.  Those are directives to

 4     submit information about the existence of the place or anything to the

 5     contrary, and that was your testimony, was it not?

 6        A.   Yes, you are right.  Whoever was in charge should have submitted

 7     all that information and data.

 8        Q.   So we understand each other in that.  Batkovic, Batkovic, and the

 9     entire operation to transfer prisoners from Zvornik to Batkovic was a

10     hundred per cent military operation?  Am I right in thinking that?  I

11     believe that this is your testimony, is it not?

12        A.   Yes, that's what I stated.

13        Q.   That means that the transfer of prisoners from Zvornik to

14     Batkovic was something that had nothing whatsoever to do with the police.

15     The police did not have a role to play in that?

16        A.   You're right.

17        Q.   Very well.  Mr. Panic, we have another topic that I would like to

18     discuss with you, and I believe that it will be of some significance and

19     assistance to the Trial Chamber.  The document number is 65 ter 1793.  It

20     was admitted yesterday, but again because of an error on my computer I

21     was not able to record the P number.  Could I ask you to help me with

22     that?

23             THE REGISTRAR:  Exhibit P348.

24             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Could the Chamber please produce

25     that document.  Thank you.

Page 3040

 1        Q.   This is a report on the work for the year 1992.  I believe that

 2     you were present when I objected to the admission of this document into

 3     evidence, and I therefore wanted to discuss some things with you.

 4     Mr. Panic, in the police you spent your entire career, as it were.  Am I

 5     right?

 6        A.   Yes.

 7        Q.   How many official annual report does a public security station

 8     submit to the responsible security services centre every year, either to

 9     the security services centre or to the ministry, how many one or more?

10        A.   There is just one annual report.

11        Q.   We're talking about annual reports, exclusively about annual

12     reports.  I know that there are other reports such as daily, quarterly,

13     and so on and so forth, but I would like to focus on annual reports.  My

14     question to you is this:  How many annual reports are submitted every

15     year?  That's my question, is there one or more?

16        A.   There's just one.

17        Q.   Thank you.  And now let's look at the document together, the

18     document is on the screen.  On page 1, this is obviously an attachment to

19     the document where it says "1992," under 1, methodology for drafting the

20     report, under 2 report, under 3 programme of activities for the year

21     1993.  Am I right, have I read all that correctly?

22        A.   Yes.

23             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Could the Court please produce page

24     number 2 in this document.

25        Q.   Mr. Panic, you're going to see that page, and could you please

Page 3041

 1     confirm that the page depicts the programme of work for the year 1993.

 2     Can you see that?  Is that a customary form that was used to draft the

 3     annual programme of work?  Would that be its first page?

 4        A.   Everything depended on the drafter.  Maybe this was normal for

 5     this particular person who authored this report.

 6        Q.   On page 12 in e-court is where this document ends.  Page 12 of

 7     this document is the end of the programme of work.  You will see that it

 8     shows the name of the chief of the service but the document is not

 9     signed.  Do you agree?

10        A.   Yes, it's not signed.

11        Q.   Thank you.

12             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Can the witness please be shown

13     page 13 in the same document.

14        Q.   Look at this.  This is a document that was submitted to the CSB

15     Bijeljina.  The document number in the left upper corner is

16     01-16-01-06-2.  Can you see that?

17        A.   Yes.

18        Q.   The date is 8 January 1993, and this is a supplement of the work

19     report of the Zvornik SJB for the year 1992.  And it says that it is

20     connected with a document under the same number as this one dated 7

21     January 1993, and further on it says that the supplement is being sent in

22     order to clarify some of the tasks and duties within the purview of

23     traffic police.  And the signature is by the chief of the SJB, Milorad

24     Lokancevic.  Can you see all that?

25        A.   Yes.  It says so.  The programme did not include the work of the

Page 3042

 1     traffic security police, and that's why a supplement is being submitted.

 2             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Can the witness please be shown the

 3     following page, page number 14.

 4        Q.   This is an accompanying letter, again, bearing the same number as

 5     the previous document 01-16/01-061-2.  And the date is 4th of January,

 6     1993.  And the document was sent to the CSB Bijeljina -- do you want us

 7     to take a break?

 8        A.   No, no, this is all down to cigarettes.  I'm sorry.

 9        Q.   Well, take your time.  Take it easy.

10             Could you follow what I've just told you?

11        A.   Yes, I've read it actually.

12        Q.   So the document is a report on the work of the SJB Zvornik for

13     1992 and the work programme for 1993, and it was sent to the CSB in

14     Bijeljina and the CSB in Sarajevo.  Can you see that?  And it was signed

15     by Chief Milorad Lokancevic.  Can you see all that?

16        A.   Yes.

17        Q.   Very well.

18             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Let's show the witness page number

19     15 in the same document, please.

20        Q.   This document bears the same number as the previous two

21     documents.  I'm not going to repeat it.  And the date is 7 January 1993.

22     The document was sent to the CSB in Sarajevo, and again it refers to the

23     report on the work of the SJB Zvornik for the year 1992.  Again, this

24     document is signed by Milorad Lokancevic, and you can see on the

25     left-hand side that the document was sent to the Bijeljina CSB, Sarajevo

Page 3043

 1     CSB, and archives.  And in handwriting you can see that it was sent by

 2     Telex via Pale on the 9th of January, 1993.  Can you see all that, sir?

 3        A.   Yes.

 4        Q.   Thank you.

 5             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Let's now show the witness page 16

 6     in the same document, please.

 7        Q.   Page 16 in the same document is a report on the work of the

 8     Zvornik SJB for the year 1992, and the number -- or rather, the date it

 9     bears is January 1993.  If you scroll down just a little we'll all be

10     able to see the date.  Could you please scroll down.

11             January 1993 is the date.  And it says that it was sent by Telex

12     via Pale on the 9th of January, 1993.  And finally you will see the

13     signature of the chief, Chief Lokancevic.  Do you see the document, sir?

14        A.   Yes.

15        Q.   This document that we see now - and the pages are between 16 and

16     28 in e-court --

17             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] But I would kindly ask the witness

18     to be shown page 21 of the document.  Page 21.

19        Q.   You see this is page 21, sir.

20             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Could we blow up the whole page a

21     little.  Thank you.

22        Q.   It speaks about the participation of MUP members in combat

23     operations, the tasks and duties of the police, and so on and so forth.

24     Could you please take a look at this page, sir, and then we will move on

25     to the next one.  I would like you to compare the page that you have

Page 3044

 1     before you now and the one that I'm just about to show you.  Have you had

 2     enough time to look at the page, sir?

 3             I'm interested in hearing from you whether this document was

 4     typed on two different typewriters.  Could you please take a careful look

 5     at this page, and then you will look at page 26.  Did you have a good

 6     look?

 7        A.   Yes.

 8             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Can the witness please be shown

 9     page 22 in e-court.  Again, blow up, please.

10        Q.   Would you be able to agree with me, Mr. Panic, that this was

11     typed on a totally different typewriter and that on page 6 the number

12     looks very much like figure 8?

13        A.   No, I wouldn't be able to say that.

14        Q.   You're not able to say that?

15        A.   No.  The numbers are different.  It says "SJB" and -- no, I

16     can't.

17             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Could the witness please be shown

18     pages 21 and 22 at the same time on the screen, both in the Serbian

19     language.  So could two different pages be displayed on the screen at the

20     same time, 21 and 22.

21        Q.   Look at these two pages and please tell me whether you would be

22     agreeable to say that the typewriters are different and the font is

23     different.  Maybe the two pages could be blown up --

24             JUDGE HALL:  Mr. Zecevic, whereas I understand the thrust of the

25     questions that you're putting to the witness, having regard to his -- he

Page 3045

 1     doesn't -- he doesn't purport to hold any expertise in typewriter style

 2     and print, wouldn't the submissions be just as effective once you at the

 3     appropriate stage make it to the Chamber, who would have the -- in other

 4     words, it seems to me that the witness has no greater ability than the

 5     Chamber would have in this regard to the extent that this is an important

 6     point for your case.

 7             MR. ZECEVIC:  I fully agree with Your Honours, and I understand

 8     the position.  I was just trying because I believe the witness is an

 9     experienced policeman, that he should be able to assist us on this.  If

10     Your Honour feels that this can be achieved by a submission, I'm

11     perfectly willing to stop the cross-examination on this subject with the

12     witness and make the submission in due course.

13             MR. HANNIS:  Your Honour, if it will assist the Chamber and my

14     learned friend, I'll stipulate that those two pages appear to be typed on

15     different typewriters.  He's an experienced police officer, but we have

16     no evidence that he's an experienced report preparer or a typist or

17     anything of that nature.  And I really don't think he can assist us much.

18     If that's the point Mr. Zecevic wants to make, I agree, we can all look

19     at that and see it was done on two different machines.

20             MR. ZECEVIC:  Your Honour, the concern is the fact I went at

21     depth yesterday to analyse this document because I made the objection and

22     it was overruled and the document was admitted.  And I'm trying to, if I

23     can, to assist the Trial Chamber because now it comes to the weight of

24     the document.  What I'm trying to is to show the Trial Chamber that there

25     is a -- there is a substantial question on the authenticity of these

Page 3046

 1     documents because they are completely different reports.  And I wanted

 2     just to establish through the witness.  If I can, I'm perfectly willing

 3     to do that by submission in due course when the Court pleases.  Thank you

 4     very much.

 5             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Thank you, Mr. Zecevic.  We remember your

 6     objection from yesterday, and we do understand that you want to point out

 7     the differences between the two parts of this document.

 8             Now, you have taken the witness to a number of pages in the

 9     reports, but I'm unsure about the purpose for doing this.  You took the

10     witness from one page to the next to the next and so on, but what are the

11     points that you would wish to highlight in showing these pages or

12     passages to the witness?

13             MR. ZECEVIC:  Exactly what I said just now, that this document

14     contains two annual reports for 1992 of SJB Zvornik which are completely

15     and in a very substantial part different.  There is a difference in

16     statistical data, there is a difference in comments, in everything.  They

17     are entirely two different documents which are contained in one exhibit

18     right now.  And that was the point of my objection yesterday.  Now, when

19     I analysed it, I indeed analysed it in depth, I am perfect -- I have now

20     all the major discrepancies now, and I wanted to go with the witness

21     through this.  If, as I say, the Trial Chamber feels that this can be

22     done by submission, I'm perfectly willing to terminate my

23     cross-examination and make the submission in due course whenever it

24     pleases the Court.

25             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Maybe I have just been unattentive or not paid

Page 3047

 1     particular -- sufficient attention to the pages that you showed to the

 2     witness, but it is at this moment a bit unclear to me which differences

 3     exactly you wish to point out to the Court.

 4             MR. ZECEVIC:  Well, Your Honours, namely, the document which

 5     is -- this part of the document, so to speak, is contained in the pages

 6     16 to 28 in the e-court.  That is the -- that is the report of -- for

 7     SJB -- the annual report for SJB Zvornik dated January 1993.  This

 8     document -- this document contains 12 pages.  The next document which is

 9     also called the report for SJB Zvornik dated December has 13 pages.

10     These two documents are completely different reports for the same period

11     of time and for the same SJB Zvornik, and that is what I intended to show

12     through the witness.  It contains completely different data.  It contains

13     completely different matters.  So that's why I say it is -- this document

14     will not assist the Trial Chamber because we cannot be sure which one of

15     these reports is the real annual report.  I -- my submission is that

16     these reports are not sufficiently -- this document is not sufficiently

17     authenticated that we can't use it properly, because we don't know which

18     one of these was the official.  It might be that both are maybe versions

19     of the document which didn't -- which didn't after all became an official

20     report.  That is my submission.

21             JUDGE HARHOFF:  I understand.  Now, as I recall from my reading

22     the documents, the two versions are not entirely different.  Parts have

23     been added in one and some new information has been provided.

24             MR. ZECEVIC:  Your Honours, my submission is that the documents

25     are entirely different, and I can prove that to you.  But I don't think

Page 3048

 1     that it needs -- it would need a significant amount of court time.  Maybe

 2     I can do that in a submission -- in a written submission, and indicate

 3     exactly the points where there is discrepancies between the two

 4     documents, which I think are important and relevant of course.

 5             JUDGE HARHOFF:  All right.

 6             MR. ZECEVIC:  Like number of killings, like the existence of the

 7     war crimes.  In one there is no mentioning of war crimes; in the other

 8     there are three criminal complaints filed for the war crimes.  I mean,

 9     that's, in my opinion, is very relevant for this case.

10             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Thanks.  I get the gist of it.

11             MR. HANNIS:  Your Honour, I'd be thrilled to discuss some of

12     those issues, but we don't need to do it with this witness.  He can't

13     contribute to this.  He wasn't a report writer.  He doesn't know anything

14     about that.  If there was something specific Mr.  Zecevic had to say

15     about -- report one lists 23 patrolmen and report two lists 28 he might

16     be able to ask this witness and say, how many were there, and if he could

17     say 23 or 28, but absent something like that, it's a waste of all our

18     time to be trying to do this with him.  This should be a submission --

19     and I would argue, you already decided that this was admissible.  His

20     arguments now should go to weight, and that's something we can save for

21     the end of the case or another day, but we shouldn't be doing it now in

22     the courtroom with this witness.

23             MR. ZECEVIC:  I fully agree, Mr. Hannis, with you.

24        Q.   Thank you, Mr. Panic, I have no further questions.

25                           [Trial Chamber confers]

Page 3049

 1             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Thanks.  Please proceed.

 2             MR. HANNIS:  Thank you, Your Honours.

 3             MR. ZECEVIC:  I have no further questions, Your Honours.

 4        Q.   [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. Panic.

 5             MR. HANNIS:  Thank you.

 6             No questions from Mr. Pantelic?

 7             MR. KRGOVIC:  We don't have questions, Your Honour.

 8             MR. HANNIS:  Then may I proceed with re-direct, Your Honours?

 9             JUDGE HALL:  Yes.

10                           Re-examination by Mr. Hannis:

11        Q.   I'll deal with a few questions from today first, Mr. Panic, and

12     then go to some things from yesterday.  At page 4, line 8 today

13     Mr. Zecevic asked you about all the camps ceasing to exist.  And you told

14     us earlier about there were hundreds of people detained in these various

15     collection centres and camps from the beginning of the war, and you've

16     given us some evidence to indicate several hundreds were killed and

17     buried in mass graves.  And I think you told us about Mr. Tanic, a police

18     employee, who was involved in identifying some of the bodies and bagging

19     the bodies.  That's right, Mr. Tanic was a police employee and did that?

20     Is that correct?

21        A.   Yes, he was employed with the police, and he was appointed to the

22     commission for sanitation and hygiene clearance of the terrain.

23        Q.   And to get down to the 30 or 40 or 50 that were left in

24     September, I guess hundreds of others were exchanged; is that right?

25        A.   Yes.

Page 3050

 1        Q.   And then the rest were sent to Batkovic; correct?

 2        A.   I think so.

 3        Q.   But weren't many of the Muslims that were being held in detention

 4     in Zvornik civilians and not prisoners of war, not fighters?

 5        A.   Yes, in most cases that referred to the technical school centre,

 6     primarily the case was there.

 7        Q.   And at least we know from Colonel Ilic's order that we looked at

 8     yesterday, that those at the Divic centre were civilians because that was

 9     the purpose of his order saying these aren't military people; right?

10        A.   Yes, and the residents of Divic were for the most part civilians.

11        Q.   [Microphone not activated] And at page 11 --

12             THE INTERPRETER:  Microphone, please.

13             MR. HANNIS:  I'm sorry.

14        Q.   And at page 11 Mr. Zecevic asked you about Batkovic and he said:

15             "So we understand each other in that, Batkovic and the entire

16     operation to transfer prisoners from Zvornik to Batkovic was a hundred

17     per cent military operation.  Am I right in thinking that?"

18             And your answer was:

19             "Yes, that's what I stated."

20             And he goes on to say:

21             "That means the transfer to Batkovic was something that had

22     nothing whatsoever to do with the police.  The police did not have a role

23     to play in that."

24             You said:

25             "You're right."

Page 3051

 1             But didn't the police at least have a role in opening the doors

 2     to Novi Izvor so the military could come in and pick up those people?

 3     The police had to do something for that transfer to occur; correct?

 4        A.   Yes, as far as Novi Izvor or any other prison where police was

 5     providing security, they would receive orders how many people should be

 6     handed over to the army, and how it would help with the military trucks

 7     and the soldiers who came there.  That is the level of the police

 8     participation.

 9        Q.   Okay.  And would the police hand over civilians to the military

10     to take them to a military camp without any documentation to indicate

11     that they were prisoners of war, that is, combatants?

12        A.   I don't think so.  Always a document should be received

13     beforehand, and probably the chief or the commander receives such a

14     document, who then informed the prison warden who is going to be handed

15     over to the army to be taken to Batkovici.  So that's how it went.

16        Q.   Okay.  Thank you.  I want to go back to yesterday.  At page 2978,

17     line 7, Mr. Zecevic was asking you about Dragan Spasojevic, and you told

18     us that he worked at the police just a bit over a year.  And how old was

19     he?  I understand he was a pretty young man in 1992.

20        A.   I think that he was born in either 1964 or 1966, I'm not sure,

21     but yes he was younger.

22        Q.   Do you know why such a young man with so little experience in the

23     police was given the job of commander rather than some older, more

24     experienced guy like yourself?  What was his qualification for the job?

25        A.   He was an SDS member from the very beginning, and he was in the

Page 3052

 1     Main Board.  I was not an SDS member, and these things were decided along

 2     the party lines.

 3        Q.   Okay.  Thank you.  Next at page 3006, beginning at line 18,

 4     Mr. Zecevic was asking you about the special brigade who came to make the

 5     arrest of the paramilitaries.  Do you know how many men came in that

 6     special brigade unit for that purpose approximately?

 7        A.   I wouldn't be able to tell you the exact number because they came

 8     during the night.  We were ordered not to leave the hotel.  They arrested

 9     them, took them to Bijeljina, and we never saw them again until some of

10     the groups returned again sometime later.

11        Q.   And Mr. Zecevic was asking you whether or not the -- given the

12     nature of these groups and the nature of the problem, whether it was

13     appropriate that some time would be required to plan and organise such an

14     operation.  And you agreed with him.  It was not something that would be

15     appropriate for an ad hoc operation.  But my question is:  In Zvornik you

16     had had problems with Zuco and the other paramilitaries a long time

17     before the 20th of July; right?  They'd been a problem from the very

18     beginning in April?

19        A.   Yes, that's right.

20        Q.   And we saw in a report by a couple of inspectors, Mr. Andan and

21     the other gentleman dated 17 June, that the inspectors were aware of the

22     problem in the middle of June.  Do you recall that?

23        A.   Yes, I do.

24        Q.   And you -- I think you'd told us you had heard about the incident

25     where Minister Ostojic was stopped at the check-point and taken out of

Page 3053

 1     his car.  Do you recall that that was sometime in July?

 2        A.   I think it was in July, but I'm not sure about the specific date.

 3        Q.   Okay.  Next at page 3012, line 16, Mr. Zecevic asked you

 4     regarding Repic and those crimes he was committing against the detained

 5     in Celopek, he said:

 6             "Do you know that due to the nature of the crimes involved, these

 7     are crimes that are violations of international humanitarian law.  In the

 8     law of war in the former Yugoslavia it was military organs that dealt

 9     with this?"

10             And you said:

11             "Yes.  As far as military personnel were concerned, they were

12     tried by military courts."

13             Mr. Zecevic said:

14             "Not only with regard to military personnel, also with regard to

15     these particular forms of crime that were committed in a situation of

16     war?"

17             And you said:

18             "Yes."

19             But did you know about the law about war crimes in the newly

20     formed Republika Srpska?  Was there any change between the old law and

21     the new law, or do you know?

22        A.   I wasn't familiar with any new laws, whether there were any

23     changes or not.  I know only that Repic was later tried and convicted in

24     Mitrovica.

25        Q.   Even under the old Yugoslav criminal law, wasn't it possible for

Page 3054

 1     certain crimes, like the murder of the Muslim civilians in Celopek Dom,

 2     could not a crime like that be charged either as a regular murder under

 3     the criminal code or as a war crime?  Didn't the Prosecutor have

 4     discretion, do you know?

 5        A.   He probably had, but why I can't tell you.

 6        Q.   Do you know -- my -- I'm not sure about this, but do you know

 7     whether or not there was a longer penalty, prison sentence, for a regular

 8     murder than for a war crime, or do you know?

 9        A.   I don't know about that, but I think that the penalty for a war

10     crime should be longer, but that's my view.

11        Q.   And even if it was something that might be defined as a war

12     crime, if you as a policeman had knowledge of it would you have an

13     obligation to report it to somebody, no matter whether it was committed

14     by a military person or a civilian or a policeman?  If you knew about it,

15     would you have an obligation to report?

16        A.   It is possible that I would have reported it, but as for the army

17     and their jurisdiction and everything to do with them, it was up to the

18     military police.  At that time, when all these paramilitary formations

19     were so strong, I have very strong doubts that they would dare report

20     them.

21        Q.   Did you personally ever report any crimes you were aware of to

22     the military authorities or the military police?

23        A.   I've never seen any crime or any murder, only what I said in my

24     statement was that I saw Repic coming in and therefore I wouldn't make a

25     good witness.  However, the witness -- the army authority and its

Page 3055

 1     officers knew very well what the military was doing, particularly in the

 2     area of Zvornik.  The situation was normalised.  We were back to our

 3     regular duties of maintaining law and order.

 4        Q.   At page 3013, line 20, Mr. Zecevic asked you about the special

 5     unit coming back to Zvornik after the Yellow Wasps and the others had

 6     already been arrested and detained.  You don't have any personal

 7     knowledge yourself about why the special unit came back after that

 8     operation was completed, do you?

 9        A.   No, I don't.  Occasionally a few number from Bijeljina would come

10     passing by or if they decided to come to Zvornik.

11        Q.   Talking about Repic at page 3016, line 5, you were asked about

12     your view about the reserve policemen vis-à-vis Mr. Repic, and the

13     question was:

14             "And knowing the structure of his personality, I mean he did not

15     mind who was of which ethnicity, there was his readiness to mistreat and

16     kill anyone for any reason; right?"

17             And your answer was:

18             "Precisely."

19             My question is:  First of all, at Celopek how many guards were

20     there?  How many reserve policemen were guarding that facility, do you

21     know?

22        A.   I think two or three, whereas the rest were at the school or on

23     patrol.

24        Q.   And the information you got from your colleague there about Repic

25     coming, what was your understanding?  Did Repic come alone or with one or

Page 3056

 1     two friends or in a large group?

 2        A.   They always appeared in troikas or in twos.

 3        Q.   And the guards, the reserve police, were armed with automatic

 4     rifles; is that right?

 5        A.   Yes.

 6        Q.   Did you ever see Repic do anything to a Serb?

 7        A.   No, no.  I never met with him.  I didn't see him, maybe just in

 8     passing.

 9        Q.   And you never heard of him doing anything to a Serb, only the

10     Muslims; is that right?

11        A.   No, I didn't hear that.  However, judging by the rumours about

12     him it is possible.  I suppose that they did not dare oppose him, and

13     even if a Serb had opposed them I suppose that --

14        Q.   But you don't know of any instance where a Serb or a Serb

15     policeman ever opposed him or he ever mistreated a Serb or a Serb

16     policeman; right?

17        A.   No.

18        Q.   Do you know how long the delay was in moving the Celopek

19     survivors after the police first became aware that Repic had abused them

20     and mutilated the genitals of some of them and committed those other

21     atrocities?  How long did it take before they got moved to someplace a

22     little safer?  Was it weeks or months?

23        A.   I don't know exactly.  I believe that it was less than a month.

24        Q.   Thank you.  At page 3017, line 9, Mr. Zecevic was asking you

25     about the nature of prisons in Bosnia and the former Yugoslavia, how

Page 3057

 1     they're established and who guards them.  In Zvornik, from the beginning

 2     of the conflict when the paramilitaries and the TO and these other groups

 3     were capturing people and setting up these -- I guess the best definition

 4     is that one that was in Mr. Stanisic's comments in the July meeting in

 5     Belgrade, these undefined camps, they weren't really arresting them in

 6     the strict legal sense that you as a policeman arrest somebody, were

 7     they?

 8        A.   That's true.  No procedure was followed, no normal police

 9     procedure.  They arrested them and they established the camps.  They

10     incarcerated them there.

11        Q.   And these places where these people put were not really prisons

12     in the strict legal technical legal sense like Novi Izvor and the

13     misdemeanour court might have been a prison.  Would you agree?

14        A.   None of the facilities where they were incarcerated was a real

15     prison.  Novi Izvor and the misdemeanour court served as prisons before

16     the war, so they could be referred to as prisons in a certain manner.

17     And the others were mostly factories, schools, and other such makeshift

18     facilities.

19        Q.   Gogic and Crni, were they also capturing some people or arresting

20     people and bringing them into detention, if you know?

21        A.   I did not see that, but I heard that they did.

22        Q.   And you told us they were wearing police uniforms and being paid

23     out of the police budget; correct?

24        A.   Yes, but they never brought them to Novi Izvor, for example, or

25     to the police station where there was a room where people were

Page 3058

 1     interviewed.  I don't know where they took them.

 2        Q.   Okay.  In the MUP quarterly report for April, May, and June,

 3     that's Exhibit P322, Your Honours, there was an -- there was one entry

 4     that said that during this time-period police employees brought in 537

 5     and interviewed 48 Muslim extremists.  Does that number include people

 6     brought in by Gogic and Crni, or do you know?

 7        A.   It is possible that that number includes those; however, those

 8     who were brought for interviews were brought in by the police and the

 9     military to a certain extent.  And then crime prevention police

10     inspectors or inspectors from the state security would interview these

11     people and decide as to what to do with them.

12        Q.   Okay.  Thank you.  In terms of these other detention facilities

13     or undefined camps, I believe you told us in your testimony before that

14     some people were detained for a while at least at the Celopek Dom,

15     Drinjaca school, Standard, Alhos, and Karakaj Technical School.  Were

16     there any others that I've missed or that you remember?

17        A.   Ekonomija, yes, the brickworks; Novi Izvor, yes.

18        Q.   Oh, yes, Ciglane I forgot.  Thank you.

19             MR. HANNIS:  Your Honours, I know it's nearly time for the break.

20     I have probably 10 or 15 more minutes.  So I don't know if you want me to

21     continue for a while or recess now.

22             JUDGE HALL:  If this is a convenient point -- because as you say

23     you're just maybe two minutes early of the break, but if this is a

24     convenient point --

25             MR. HANNIS:  It is.

Page 3059

 1             JUDGE HALL:  -- and you can't complete before the break, we may

 2     as well break now.

 3             MR. HANNIS:  Thank you.

 4                           [The witness stands down]

 5                           --- Recess taken at 10.23 a.m.

 6                           --- On resuming at 10.58 a.m.

 7             JUDGE HALL:  Our delay in taking the bench following the break

 8     was dealing with certain administrative matters which relate to the

 9     hearing, as counsel would appreciate.

10                           [The witness takes the stand]

11             MR. HANNIS:  Thank you.

12        Q.   Witness, I just have a few more questions for you.  At page 3019,

13     line 23, Mr. Zecevic was showing you a document and he said:

14             "Here it says that the army was taking into detention or bringing

15     into detention members of the public and population without any documents

16     and then left such camps to the Ministry of the Interior."

17             And you were asked if that was the situation in Zvornik.  And he

18     went on to ask you:

19             "So you also knew that there were no documents supporting the

20     detention of such individuals were found by the police once they took

21     over; that's right?"

22             And you said:

23             "No, only later did the prison, wardens, and guards start keeping

24     records of events."

25             My question is:  When the police took over some of these

Page 3060

 1     non-standard detention facilities or these undefined camps and you had no

 2     records for the people that were there, shouldn't they have been released

 3     if there were no documents to support their detention, just as a

 4     procedural matter?  Did you understand my question?

 5        A.   I understood the question.  However, whether they should have

 6     been released or not, they could not have taken that decision without the

 7     superior officer, and I suppose the officer appointed a warden, guards,

 8     ordered them to keep the records of daily events, and everything else

 9     that was a standard procedure.

10        Q.   I guess I understand your answer to mean that you don't believe

11     that the guards at that level had the authority to release the people; is

12     that what you're saying?

13        A.   Yes.

14        Q.   But generally speaking based on your experience as a policeman,

15     people can't be kept in detention without some kind of criminal charges

16     or some finding by a judge, et cetera; is that correct?

17        A.    By the book, that should have been the case.  They should have

18     been interviewed, they should have been said why they were brought in,

19     they should have been informed as to what was being alleged against them,

20     they should have been handed over to a court or a prosecutor's office,

21     but that was simply not the case.

22        Q.   Thank you.  Lastly, at page 3026, beginning at line 22,

23     Mr. Zecevic had asked you if you knew about any incidents where

24     paramilitaries had broken in to some of these detention facilities

25     guarded by the police and abused the prisoners.  And you said:

Page 3061

 1             "I know about that.  I did not see it, but I heard, for example,

 2     that a military policeman came in, the previous day his brother had been

 3     killed and he entered with a rifle, disarmed the guard, and beat some

 4     Muslims."

 5             Which facility was that at, if you recall?

 6        A.   I believe that that was in Novi Izvor.  I'm not sure that our

 7     active or reserve policeman was on duty or whether it was a military

 8     police policeman whose brother had been killed.  In any case, as far as I

 9     remember his name was Slavko Lukic.

10        Q.   Do you recall approximately when that was, what month?

11        A.   No, I can't say.  It was 17 years ago.  It was in 1992, very

12     early in 1992, but I can't be sure of the month.

13        Q.   How far was that Novi Izvor facility from the SJB building in

14     Zvornik, how many metres or kilometres?

15        A.   Twenty metres, immediately behind the police building.  Between

16     the police building and Novi Izvor there were some depots, the

17     misdemeanour court, and then behind the two there was the Novi Izvor --

18     administrative building of Novi Izvor.

19        Q.   Regarding that incident, do you know whether the guard or the

20     warden or yourself, did anybody inform the military police about that

21     incident?

22        A.   I wouldn't know that.  I probably heard that only a month or so

23     after the event.  Either the guard or the warden should have reported

24     that.  If they were members of our police, they should have reported that

25     incident to the public security station, and alternatively if they were

Page 3062

 1     military police then they should have reported that to the military

 2     authorities.

 3        Q.   Thank you, Mr. Panic.

 4             MR. HANNIS:  I have no further questions, Your Honours.

 5                           Questioned by the Court:

 6             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Panic, on Wednesday, I think, and it's

 7     transcript page 54 -- just one moment.  53, 25 -- 53, 25, yes, you were

 8     asked:

 9             "With regard to equipment that regular policemen in Zvornik had,

10     what kind of uniforms and weapons did you have in April, May, June, July

11     1992?"

12             Your answer is:

13             "We had multi-coloured camouflage uniforms in olive-drab."

14             Is that right?

15        A.   We had both camouflage and olive-drab uniforms and we also had

16     blue camouflage uniforms.  When we were engaged, we --

17             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Okay.  You -- indeed I should have finished

18     your -- the answer.  You indeed said "and police uniforms."  But then my

19     question is as follows:  If someone would say that he have seen people or

20     units wearing olive-drab uniforms and therefore he makes the conclusion

21     that that must have been military and not police people or units, he

22     could have been wrong because you were wearing olive-drab uniforms as

23     well.  Is that right?

24        A.   It is possible those who were not familiar with uniforms didn't

25     know that military uniforms were different.  They were more intense

Page 3063

 1     green, whereas ours had more white in the pattern.

 2             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Thank you.

 3             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Thank you, Mr. Panic.  I would like to just

 4     return briefly to the matter of closing down these undefined camps and

 5     transferring the detainees from there to the Batkovic military prison.

 6     And my question is:  Why was it decided to close down the camps and

 7     transfer the detainees to Batkovic, do you know?

 8        A.   I can't give you a correct and honest answer.  It was up to my

 9     superiors, and at the time I may not even have been there.  I was sent

10     all over the place.  To be honest, I really can't -- I may make a

11     mistake.  I don't know who took that decision.  I know that it was

12     somebody above me, a higher instance.  I only heard that they were

13     transferred.  Who ordered that, who arranged that, I really can't tell

14     you.

15             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Thank you.

16             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you, Mr. Panic, for your attendance to assist

17     the Tribunal.  You are now released as a witness, and we wish you a safe

18     journey back to your home.

19             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you, and I wish you a

20     pleasant stay here.

21                           [The witness withdrew]

22             MR. HANNIS:  Your Honours, Mr. Di Fazio has the next witness.

23             MR. DI FAZIO:  If Your Honours, please, the next witness is

24     Mr. Majkic, Dragan Majkic, and I call him.

25                           [The witness entered court]

Page 3064

 1             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will

 2     speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

 3             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Good morning, Mr. Witness.  Thank you for coming

 4     to The Hague --

 5             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning.

 6             JUDGE DELVOIE:  May I ask you your name, please.

 7             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Dragan Majkic.

 8             JUDGE DELVOIE:  And your -- and your date of birth?

 9             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] 6 September 1958.

10             JUDGE DELVOIE:  What is your ethnicity, sir?

11             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Serb.

12             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Thank you.  Did you ever testify before this

13     Court before or before any court in your country?

14             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I have, three times in

15     Sarajevo.

16             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Thank you.  Well then, as you are a witness

17     called by the Prosecutor's office, they will start putting questions to

18     you; afterwards, the Defence will; and eventually, the Judges may have

19     some questions for you.  I forgot one detail.  Your profession, please?

20     What is your occupation?

21             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm a mechanical engineer with a

22     university degree.

23             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Thank you.

24             Mr. Di Fazio.

25             MR. DI FAZIO:  Thank you, Your Honours.

Page 3065

 1                           WITNESS:  DRAGAN MAJKIC

 2                           [Witness answered through interpreter]

 3                           Examination by Mr. Di Fazio:

 4        Q.   Mr. Majkic, just to continue on with those personal details, what

 5     is your current occupation?

 6        A.   At the moment, I'm a fire inspector, cantonal fire inspector in

 7     the canton of Bihac.

 8        Q.   And fire inspectors, are they -- do they work with the police?

 9        A.   A few years ago we became civil servants, therefore we are not

10     police employees any longer.

11        Q.   Thanks.  I just wanted to put some more personal details to you,

12     and could you tell us if they're correct.  You've given us your date of

13     birth and your ethnicity.  You were born in the village of Podug, which

14     is about 3 or 4 kilometres from Sanski Most.  You're a widower, and you

15     have two children; correct?

16        A.   Yes, yes.

17        Q.   Thanks.  You were educated in Sanski Most, and you did an

18     engineering course at a place called Rijeka University, and in 1994 you

19     started working at a place called the Famos factory?

20        A.   In 1984.

21        Q.   Yes, I'm sorry if I said "1994."  I meant 1984.  Thank you for

22     that.

23             In 1987 you joined the police as an inspector of fire protection,

24     and in July of 1991 you were appointed as chief of police in Sanski Most.

25     Are those details correct?

Page 3066

 1        A.   Yes, they are.

 2        Q.   And you held that position as chief of police until very late

 3     April of 1992?

 4        A.   Yes.

 5        Q.   On the 18th of November -- sorry, my apologies.  You joined the

 6     SDS political party prior to the November 1990 elections in Bosnia, and

 7     you left the party in February of 1993?

 8        A.   That's correct.

 9        Q.   I want to ask you about some personalities in the -- that you may

10     know.  Do you know Stojan Zupljanin?

11        A.   Yes.

12        Q.   Can you remember when you first met him, when you first were

13     introduced to him?

14        A.   That was probably seven or eight days after I had been appointed

15     chief.

16        Q.   Thank you.  Do you know a gentleman named -- or did you know a

17     gentleman named Nedeljko Rasula or Rasula?

18        A.   Yes.

19        Q.   Did he hold any position in the SDS in Sanski Most?

20        A.   He was the first president of the SDS Municipal Board in Sanski

21     Most, and he was an MP in the BH parliament and also the president of the

22     Assembly of Sanski Most municipality.

23        Q.   Thank you.  The Municipal Board of the SDS in Sanski Most, was

24     that occasionally known as the principal -- the principal board of the

25     SDS?

Page 3067

 1        A.   No.  The principal or the Main Board was at the very top of the

 2     SDS.  I'm talking here about municipal boards that had their own

 3     Executive Boards at the level of local government, that is to say at the

 4     level of municipalities.

 5        Q.   Thank you.  In 1990, can you recall if there was an Executive

 6     Board at a municipal level in Sanski Most; and if so, who were the

 7     members?

 8        A.   Are you referring to the SDS?

 9        Q.   Yes, indeed, yes.

10        A.   First an initiating board was established, and it worked on the

11     preparations for establishing the Municipal Board of the SDS in Sanski

12     Most where the Municipal Board was elected, and Mr. Rasula was elected

13     president of this board for Sanski Most.

14        Q.   Thank you.  Do you know a gentleman named Dusan Nikolic?

15        A.   Yes, he was a doctor.  He was a physician working at the clinic

16     in Sanski Most.

17        Q.   Was he on the Executive Board?

18        A.   Yes, he was a member of the Executive Board of the SDS.

19        Q.   Thank you.  I just want to run some names past you, and I want

20     you to tell the Trial Chamber if you know these people and if they were

21     members of the Executive Board in Sanski Most.  Boro Savanovic?

22        A.   Yes.

23        Q.   Nemanja Tripkovic?

24        A.   Yes.

25        Q.   Drago Djuric?

Page 3068

 1        A.   Yes.

 2        Q.   Mico Prastalo?

 3        A.   I think that he was, but I'm not quite sure.

 4        Q.   Okay.  Slobodan Krunic?

 5        A.   Yes.

 6        Q.   And yourself, what about yourself, were you a member of the

 7     Executive Board?

 8        A.   Yes, I was.

 9        Q.   Do you know a gentleman named Vlado Vrkes, or did you know a

10     gentleman named Vlado Vrkes?

11        A.   Yes.

12        Q.   Did he occupy any position in the SDS in 1990 and 1991?

13        A.   In 1990, when the Municipal Board had already been formed, at a

14     meeting held in the village of Tomina - I think that was prior to the

15     elections - Rasula brought him to this meeting and nominated him to be

16     elected the secretary of the SDS in Sanski Most.  We were slightly

17     against this.  We protested because nobody knew him; however, he said

18     that, "If this man is not elected secretary, I will not continue to be

19     your president."  Therefore, we had no choice but to accept this

20     nomination made by Mr. Rasula.

21        Q.   Thank you for that.  Just earlier in your testimony this morning

22     you mentioned that the Main Board or principal board, I'll refer to it as

23     the Main Board of the SDS for Bosnia, was that located in Sarajevo?

24        A.   Yes.

25        Q.   How was policy formulated in the SDS, or perhaps my question

Page 3069

 1     should be more refined and I should ask you:  Who formulated policy in

 2     the SDS?

 3        A.   Well, you had Mr. Karadzic up there.  He was one of the founding

 4     members of the SDS at the level of the republic.  Then at his initiative,

 5     or I don't know exactly how, municipal or regional boards of the SDS were

 6     established.

 7        Q.   Thank you.  Incidentally, was there a regional board in Banja

 8     Luka?

 9        A.   Yes.  It existed there before we even started with our initiative

10     board in Sanski Most.

11        Q.   Thanks.  Just cast your mind back to the period of time before

12     the elections in 1990.  How did the Sanski Most local SDS explain policy

13     to the people in that period of time leading up to the elections?

14        A.   Well, let me start from the beginning.  A group of some 20 men,

15     including myself, got together.  Three of them somehow chaired this

16     meeting.  They said that they had been with Mr. Karadzic some month or

17     month and a half with him, and that they discussed the idea of

18     establishing the SDS in Sanski Most.  Mr. Karadzic approved the idea, and

19     they called one or two persons each from every village and they got

20     together in the social club of the local commune in Sanski Most.  And

21     that was when it was agreed to establish the SDS in Sanski Most.  In the

22     village of Tramosnja the initiative on the steering committee was

23     elected, Mr. Rasula was elected chairman, and after that a decision was

24     made to establish boards in local communes.  Then the presidents of

25     subcommittees in local communes were later appointed to the executive

Page 3070

 1     committee of the municipality, and then later at the founding meeting of

 2     the SDS which was held in the sports hall, all these subcommittee

 3     presidents became members of the Executive Board.

 4        Q.   Thank you.  Let me perhaps explain myself a little better.  In

 5     the period of time when you were electioneering, carrying out election

 6     activities, how did you explain to the local people, to the villagers,

 7     what SDS policy was?  How did you tell them what the SDS stood for?  What

 8     did you rely on?  Did you have any documentation to assist you?

 9        A.   There was no documentation available.  Everybody knew that

10     single-party system of the communist rule was abolished, and a decision

11     was made to introduce a multi-party system.  And this idea was embraced

12     by everyone.  It was possible to establish all kinds of political

13     parties, just like the League of Communists transformed itself into the

14     SDB, or the Socialist Democratic Party.

15        Q.   Thank you.  Did the Main Board of the SDS in Sarajevo ever

16     provide the Sanski Most SDS with written documentation concerning

17     official policy?

18        A.   Of course we had a platform or a manifesto and the statute of the

19     SDS.  This is what every political party had.  It was probably Mr. Rasula

20     who was at the head of this steering committee, had the statute, that he

21     operated pursuant to this statute as well as to the programme and

22     manifesto at the level of BH.

23        Q.   Thank you.  Did Mr. Rasula ever go to Sarajevo to attend meetings

24     with the Main Board?

25        A.   I know that he went there, and he informed us always about these

Page 3071

 1     trips, and then he would provide some feedback information, whether any

 2     instructions were given by the Main Board to be implemented or adhered

 3     to.

 4        Q.   Thank you.  So Mr. Rasula acted as a go-between, so to speak,

 5     between the SDS in Sanski Most and the Main Board in Sarajevo?

 6        A.   Initially, there was a regional board of the SDS, and above it

 7     was the Main Board.  Rasula used to go to meetings, both at the regional

 8     board and also at the Main Board when invited.  I don't know how he

 9     appeared there, in what capacity, as a member of the Main Board, but he

10     always went and he always told us what tasks or what instructions had

11     been issued at these meetings.

12        Q.   Thank you for that.  During these meetings, either in Banja Luka

13     at the regional board or the Main Board in Sarajevo, do you know if he

14     had contact and discussions with Mr. Karadzic?

15        A.   Well, he -- yes, he was later elected at this first multi-party

16     elections an MP for the BH parliament.  But I really don't know whether

17     he met with him head to head.  Once he asked me to come with him because

18     I was already nominated for this appointment to the chief, he never met

19     with Rasula.  There was some discourse between regions and Mr. Karadzic,

20     but at the end of the day everything ended normally at the meeting, ended

21     normally.  And then I did not notice Mr. Rasula meeting with anybody.  He

22     was at the meeting just like I was.  Everybody was standing.

23        Q.   Apart from meetings that you attended personally, did Mr. Rasula

24     report to you that he had had discussions with Mr. Karadzic on occasions

25     when he attended the regional board or the Main Board?

Page 3072

 1        A.   He never said that to me personally.  He would talk about it at

 2     the meetings of the municipal board or of the Executive Board, which was

 3     formed later.  He just reported to us whenever he -- any contacts were at

 4     the regional or the republican level.  As I said, he never reported to me

 5     personally.

 6        Q.   Thank you.  Did there come a time when the Executive Board in

 7     Sanski Most was reduced in size, the Executive Board of the SDS?

 8        A.   Excuse me.  When the statute was amended, as far as I can

 9     remember, it was necessary to establish within the Executive Board a

10     smaller operative body so that there would be no need to convene the

11     meetings of the Executive Board always, and that was called Registry.

12     And that smaller body -- because they had 11 members, and if necessary

13     then the entire membership of the executive body would attend meetings.

14     But that happened later.

15        Q.   Thank you.  Can you remember when that happened, what year that

16     was or month if you can?

17        A.   It might have been in June 1991 or maybe July.  I'm not sure.

18        Q.   Thank you.  And can you tell us if in this reduced and more

19     compact Registry created from within the Executive Board, whether Rasula

20     and Vrkes were members?

21        A.   Yes, they were.

22        Q.   You were a member?

23        A.   Yes, I was.

24        Q.   And it had approximately 11 members?

25        A.   Not approximately, exactly 11 members.

Page 3073

 1        Q.   Thanks.  And another member of that smaller, reduced body was

 2     also Boro Savanovic; is that correct?

 3        A.   Yes, it is.

 4        Q.   Thanks.  Now, I don't think there's any dispute.  You were

 5     appointed as police chief on the 9th of July, 1991.  Is that date right?

 6        A.   Yes.

 7        Q.   Thanks.  And you've told us already that you ceased to be police

 8     chief in late April 1992.  In that period of time between your

 9     appointment as police chief up to the period of time you left the

10     following year, did you report to that secretariat or Registry that

11     you've just been talking about from time to time and told them about

12     police matters?

13        A.   Well, no.  All these people from the secretariat were people from

14     the Executive Board, and later on they were all in the Crisis Staff.  So

15     they were already privy to everything that was going on.  There was no

16     need for me to report anything about the police work because it was the

17     majority of them in this Registry or secretariat who were

18     decision-makers.

19        Q.   Just -- could you just explain to the Trial Chamber but more

20     clearly, please, if you would, why you say there was no need for you to

21     report anything about police work because the majority of them were

22     already in the Registry or secretariat.  I don't quite understand that

23     answer.

24        A.   I'm sorry.  When the Crisis Staff was set up after I left,

25     there -- but there was already a Crisis Staff.  After that point, for a

Page 3074

 1     certain period of time there was no secretariat, there was no executive

 2     committee; they were dead.  The Crisis Staff and the Assembly, made up of

 3     the Serbian deputies who remained in the Assembly, the political party

 4     executive committee or Registry didn't exist at all.  Only later did they

 5     resume their work.

 6        Q.   Okay.  But I'm talking about not the period of time after the

 7     creation of the Crisis Staff, but the period of time between your

 8     appointment in July 1991 up until the time you left.  Now, in that time

 9     did you as police chief occasionally report or hold discussions with this

10     smaller secretariat formed from the Executive Board of the SDS?

11        A.   When I was appointed chief, I immediately made it known to them

12     that I wished my position in the SDS to be put on hold because I think

13     that politics and my duty were incompatible.  So I kind of wanted my

14     membership to be frozen, so to say, and I refused to attend any meetings,

15     either the executive committee or the secretariat.  Well, later on it

16     turned out that there were some lies launched against me.  I appeared

17     before the board, and I refuted all these accusations, and every time the

18     Executive Board decided that I still have their trust and I should remain

19     in my position, however, that I should be more diligent in providing

20     report about my work in order to avoid all these malicious rumours going

21     around.  So on several occasions when all these rumours were widespread,

22     I always went before them to tell them that it wasn't true.  But I said

23     that I wanted to do my job properly because it was not only the SDS who

24     appointed me to this duty, and because it was the SDA and the HDZ

25     endorsed my appointment.  Therefore, I felt that I should be working for

Page 3075

 1     the well-being of everything, not only of my party.

 2        Q.   Thanks.  Leaving aside those explanations, did this secretariat

 3     or -- small secretariat or Registry in -- formed from the Executive Board

 4     ever seek information from you concerning police activity or police work?

 5        A.   I don't remember attending the secretariat meetings.  I may have

 6     gone to the executive committee meetings three times, let's say.  And I

 7     never went to the Main Board meetings at all, but I have to say that

 8     everything important took place on the Main Board.

 9        Q.   Okay.  Well, let's turn to the middle of 1991.  You said --

10     you've told us that you were appointed in July 1991.  Was there a

11     commander of police also appointed around the same time, a gentleman

12     named Enver Burnic?

13        A.   About a month before I was appointed, he was appointed, because

14     there were some problems.  However, he was first nominated -- actually,

15     appointed and then later on I was appointed.

16        Q.   Thanks for that.  And was he of Muslim -- was he a Muslim?

17        A.   Yes, he was.

18        Q.   Thanks.  Think now about the work that you were doing in the

19     ensuing months after July 1991.  You've told us that you met -- already

20     this morning that you met Mr. Zupljanin some days after your appointment

21     as police chief.  At that time, what position did Mr. Zupljanin hold?

22        A.   He was my superior, and he was the head of the security services

23     centre Banja Luka.

24        Q.   Known as the CSB -- was that the CSB regional headquarters?

25        A.   I cannot remember exactly when it was operated as CSB like the --

Page 3076

 1     which meant security services centre because the state and the public

 2     security were together.  Later on, I don't know exactly when they were

 3     separated, so it became the centre of public security.

 4        Q.   Leaving aside the acronyms and the bureaucracy involved, was he

 5     regional police chief in Banja Luka?

 6        A.   Yes.

 7        Q.   How often did you meet with him?

 8        A.   We had monthly meetings, regular meetings of all chiefs at his

 9     invitation, and we had to submit reports for the previous month about our

10     work.  And then quarterly, we would submit quarterly work reports, and

11     then -- sixth-monthly report, and then annual report.  As I said, we met

12     every month.  We met -- I say all the chiefs met with him.

13        Q.   Thanks.  In addition to the transmission of these reports, who

14     set the agenda for these meetings?

15        A.   He would send out dispatches with the agenda so that we had to

16     prepare ourselves for the meeting.  It was him who decided the topics,

17     and we just had to prepare ourselves for the discussion.

18        Q.   And thinking back to those meetings, was Mr. Zupljanin a thorough

19     man?  Did he ensure that all the matters in the agenda were covered at

20     those meetings or do his best to ensure that all matters were covered?

21        A.   I never noticed if something was done that wasn't on the agenda.

22     We followed the agenda to the letter.  That's how things always were.

23     Nothing new was added; nothing was omitted.

24        Q.   Now, this system of reporting by the various police chiefs to the

25     regional headquarters in Banja Luka, did that continue right up until

Page 3077

 1     late April of 1992?

 2        A.   Yes.

 3        Q.   Thanks.  Individual police stations such as the Sanski Most

 4     police station, did they create daily reports?

 5        A.   We were duty-bound to submit our reports every morning at 5.00

 6     about all that had happened over the past 24 hours, and we sent that

 7     report to the CSB in Banja Luka.

 8        Q.   And the report -- this daily report that you said was prepared

 9     every hour -- sorry, every day, sorry, was a copy sent to the commander

10     of police, such as Burnic, to yourself as well?

11        A.   Yes.  The same report was -- what was waiting for me in the

12     morning on my desk and one was on the commander's desk.

13        Q.   Thanks.  And this sort of report, daily report, that you've just

14     described, was -- were all the other SJB stations covered by the Banja

15     Luka regional police area also providing such reports?

16        A.   That was their obligation.  They had to do that.

17        Q.   Okay.  So the CSB in Banja Luka between July and April of 1992

18     was receiving police information consisting of at least daily reports,

19     information that you provided when you actually met face-to-face,

20     quarterly reports, biannual reports, and yearly reports?

21        A.   Yes.

22        Q.   Up until April of -- late April of 1992, did the police in Sanski

23     Most use teleprinters, telephones, and couriers to transmit information

24     to Banja Luka?

25        A.   Most was done by teleprinter, by sending dispatches, because

Page 3078

 1     every dispatch had a marking, the marking of confidentiality, and the

 2     speed of delivery.  That was one way.  The second way was by couriers.

 3     The mail that had to be sent that way was sent that way.  And the third

 4     way was by telephone, and that was what I used for my communication with

 5     the chief when I needed to set up meetings, when we needed to set up

 6     meetings in his office, when I asked him to receive me, because I had

 7     information for him that I had something to discuss with him or when I

 8     needed to reach some conclusions with him.

 9        Q.   Thanks.  And those modes of communication that you've just

10     described, were you -- you were using those modes of communication right

11     up until the time that you left on the 30th of April, 1992?

12        A.   Yes.

13        Q.   Thank you.  Okay.  Turn your attention now to April of 1992.  In

14     early April of 1992, did your police station in Sanski Most receive any

15     dispatch from a gentleman named Momcilo Mandic?

16        A.   As far as I can remember, I know that on the 2nd of April a

17     dispatch came from Mr. Mandic.  He was the assistant minister of the

18     interior at the time.

19        Q.   Assistant or deputy?

20        A.   Assistant.  In the joint BH ministry, he was the assistant

21     minister for crime prevention.

22        Q.   Thanks.  And I want to ask you about this dispatch that you've

23     spoken about.  You've told us it came on the 2nd of April, and it was

24     from Mandic.  Was it directed just to your police station, or was it

25     Bosnia-wide?

Page 3079

 1        A.   It was sent to all the centres and public security stations.

 2        Q.   Thanks.  Can you remember the content; and if so, can you tell

 3     the Trial Chamber basically what the content of that document was?

 4        A.   I can't remember the details.  In any case, it was about the

 5     take-over of public security stations, where that was possible.  That was

 6     the gist of it.  Wherever possible, public security stations should have

 7     been taken over before the 15th of April.  That was the gist of the

 8     matter.

 9        Q.   Okay.  Could you explain to the Trial Chamber who was going to

10     take over the public security stations.  What was contemplated in the

11     document?

12        A.   What I'm saying is this:  As far as I can remember, it was to the

13     effect that wherever possible, wherever possible, public security

14     stations should have been taken over.  From Mr. Zupljanin I received

15     several orders even before that that Kljuc, Sanski Most, Prijedor, and

16     Bosanski Novi should be left out even for a year if need be, that we

17     should remain living together irrespective of the situation in Bosnia,

18     that those four enclaves should be -- should continue working normally

19     together, and that's why that dispatch did not mean that much to me.  In

20     factual terms it meant nothing.

21        Q.   Okay.  Thanks for that explanation.  But I just want to be clear

22     about something.  Public -- you said wherever possible the dispatch said,

23     wherever possible public security stations should have been taken over.

24     Now, leaving aside what was intended for Sanski Most, what did that --

25     what did you understand that to mean, that public security stations

Page 3080

 1     should have been taken over?  Who was going to take over?

 2        A.   This is what was actually done.  That was done where national

 3     composition was pronouncedly different, where one people was a minority

 4     with respect to the other people which was a majority.  This was done

 5     spontaneously.  Nobody tried to put up any resistance or whatever.  I

 6     don't know.  As far as I know, this was done spontaneously in the public

 7     stations in question and the hand-over was very smooth.  Nobody even

 8     noticed that something had happened.

 9        Q.   Okay.  Forgetting how smooth the hand-over was and demographic

10     issues, all I want to know is this:  Who was going to take over the

11     public security stations according to the dispatch?

12        A.   Nobody had to occupy them.  Within the station they had to carry

13     out a transformation from one status to another.  There was no visible

14     take-over, just a transformation wherever that was possible.

15        Q.   Thanks for that.  I think we're getting closer to the information

16     I'm seeking.  The transformation from one status to another mentioned in

17     the -- or referred to or understood in the document, what change in

18     status are we talking about here, from what to what?

19        A.   Given the fact that the Assembly of the Serbian people in the

20     parliament - and I can't say much about that - since they took a decision

21     sometime in March, adopted a constitution and a decision on the Ministry

22     of the Interior, those decisions were sent to the centres and the public

23     stations.  And we were well informed about the details that were passed

24     down from the very top.  And since that was issued in the municipalities

25     that were -- that had municipalities formed as Serbian Assemblies, there

Page 3081

 1     was no problem with the transfer of police from one status to another.

 2     And where the Municipal Assemblies were not in a position to make such

 3     decisions, of course that the police did not have an easy task.  Things

 4     were not as simple.  It was very difficult, actually, on both sides it

 5     was difficult.

 6        Q.   Did the dispatch refer to the creation of Serbian police

 7     stations?

 8        A.   Within the framework of that what was it called Bosnia and

 9     Herzegovina of the Serbian people, that was already an area in Bosnia and

10     Herzegovina of the Serbian people where the Assembly of Serb MPs took a

11     decision on the creation of such an area.  That's when they adopted a

12     constitution, the laws, the law on the interior.  And that's when

13     Mr. Mico Stanisic was appointed the minister of the then -- and we were

14     informed about that.  In dispatches he was appointed the minister of such

15     a MUP within the area of the Serb people as they were called at the time.

16        Q.   Did you speak about this document or dispatch to anyone else in

17     the police station when you received it?

18        A.   I did not want to show such dispatches to anybody.  Only on the

19     2nd of April when we received that dispatch from Mr. Mandic, in the

20     afternoon I went to Mr. Rasula, he was the president of the municipality,

21     and I informed him about the dispatch that had arrived.  He was taken by

22     surprise.  He didn't understand what was going on.  But I didn't even

23     want to inform anybody within the police about any such dispatch.

24        Q.   What about --

25        A.   Although everybody in the police knew.  It was on the grape-vine

Page 3082

 1     immediately.

 2        Q.   What about Mr. Burnic, did you speak to him about it?

 3        A.   When I received a dispatch, a few minutes later he came to my

 4     office and asked me if I had received a dispatch.  I told him, "There's

 5     no dispatch.  Just proceed the way we've done so far.  We will continue

 6     working within the framework of our legal obligations."

 7        Q.   What do you mean?  You told him that there -- that no dispatch

 8     existed or something else?  I'm not quite clear.

 9        A.   I told him, "There's no dispatch, no dispatch.  It's not valid

10     for me.  We continue as we have done so far."  On several occasions

11     before that, Mr. Zupljanin ordered me not to do anything, that we should

12     maintain peace, and that we should try and curb all the national tensions

13     in the municipality, that we should not allow them to get off the ground.

14     And then Mr. Burnic, even before Zupljanin told me that, Burnic told me

15     that it had been decided that the four municipalities would remain

16     enclaves and that nothing would be going on here in terms of the

17     take-over, we would remain oasis in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and later on

18     I heard that from Mr. Zupljanin who warned me about that and he told me

19     how to behave.

20             THE INTERPRETER:  If the witness could be asked to slow down.

21     Thank you.

22             MR. DI FAZIO:

23        Q.   Take it slower if you wouldn't mind.

24             MR. DI FAZIO:  Can the witness be shown 65 ter 62, please.  Is it

25     possible to get the English up?

Page 3083

 1        Q.   Let's just have a look first at this document.  I think you've

 2     seen this before.  This is not the dispatch that you've just been

 3     speaking about, is it?

 4        A.   No.

 5        Q.   It's dated the 31st of March, 1992, and you can see it goes to

 6     all public security stations and the SDB, the State Security Service, and

 7     all security services centres.  In -- the first paragraph, as you can

 8     see, describes various political and legal developments, and I'm

 9     interested in asking you questions about the third -- well, what appears

10     in the B/C/S as the second paragraph headed -- and above that page 2,

11     little number 2.

12             MR. DI FAZIO:  So if we could scroll down on the B/C/S, please.

13        Q.   Just have a read of that document.

14             MR. DI FAZIO:  And if we could also scroll down to the bottom

15     with the English.  Thanks.

16             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] On page 2, do you want me to read

17     the paragraph on page 2?

18             MR. DI FAZIO:

19        Q.   No, just read it to yourself.  I'll ask you questions about that.

20     The document is signed by Deputy Minister of the Interior, Momcilo

21     Mandic.  And it says that public security stations of the Socialist

22     Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina on the territory of the Serbian

23     Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina are abolished and their tasks and

24     duties are taken over by the MUP of the Serbian Republic of Bosnia and

25     Herzegovina.  Do you see that?  And finally in the paragraph it says that

Page 3084

 1     prior to engagement of -- these new bodies, employees are obliged to

 2     swear an oath of allegiance before the minister or an official.

 3             Is there anything in that document sent to the SJBs that is

 4     inconsistent with the dispatch that you received?

 5        A.   I can't -- I don't know.  I don't understand you.  Are you

 6     referring to this as compared to Mr. Mandic's dispatch dated the 2nd of

 7     April?

 8        Q.   I'm comparing this document here signed by Momcilo Mandic, and

 9     asking you to compare it with the dispatch that you've spoken about.

10     This document is -- can you tell the Trial Chamber if this document is

11     consistent with the information that you read and saw in the dispatch

12     that you have told us about this morning?

13        A.   The dispatch dated the 2nd of April that arrived and that was

14     signed by Mr. Momcilo Mandic was shorter than this one, of course.  It

15     may have been half a page.  I found it very strange.  What I'm reading

16     now and what I remember from before, I know that that dispatch looked

17     very strange to me, and that's why perhaps I just put it in my pocket.

18     And when my commander came, I just told him, "Just proceed the way we're

19     doing now."  And it differed from this dispatch here, it did.

20        Q.   I'm sure the documents are different.  You've already told us

21     they are different.  You told us that, we know that.  Thank you.  What

22     I'm asking you is this:  Is this document basically consistent with the

23     dispatch that you received?  In other words, this document refers to the

24     abolishment of public security stations for the Socialist Republic of

25     Bosnia and Herzegovina on the -- where they appear on territory of the

Page 3085

 1     Serbian Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

 2        A.   I've told you already several times that I don't remember

 3     exactly, but it differed in the style.  It looked like an order, an order

 4     to do something that differs a lot from what I am reading now.  The

 5     essence of the two was different.  Globally speaking, there was some

 6     similar characteristics, but the style was different, and it was -- I

 7     found it very strange.  And I really can't find any grounds of comparison

 8     between the two.

 9        Q.   Thank you, thank you.

10             MR. DI FAZIO:  If Your Honours, please, I seek to tender the

11     document.  If there's going to be an objection I will ask that it be

12     marked for identification and another witness can deal with it.

13             JUDGE HALL:  Is there an objection?

14             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I object.  The witness

15     did not identify this as something that he received.  He did not

16     recognise the content.  There is not enough nexus to introduce this

17     document through this witness.

18             MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] I join my colleague Krgovic.  I

19     believe it's impossible to use this witness as an appropriate witness to

20     clarify the ambiguity.

21             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] And Mr. Mandic is also on the list

22     of Prosecutor's witnesses, so maybe my learned friend, Mr. Di Fazio, can

23     face Mr. Mandic with this document and try and seek clarification with

24     him as regards to this document.

25             JUDGE HALL:  Well, inasmuch as Mr. Di Fazio is content to have it

Page 3086

 1     marked for identification, we do that at this stage.

 2             And, Mr. Di Fazio, this is time for the break.

 3             MR. DI FAZIO:  It's a good time for me, thank you.

 4             THE REGISTRAR:  Exhibit P353, marked for identification, Your

 5     Honours.

 6                           [The witness stands down]

 7                           --- Recess taken at 12.08 p.m.

 8                           --- On resuming at 12.32 p.m.

 9             MR. HANNIS:  Your Honours, while the witness is being brought in,

10     may I raise or alert you to a possible scheduling issue because I think I

11     have to take some of the blame, it took a little longer with the last

12     witness than I thought it would take.  I understand now based on the

13     estimated time for Defence cross-examination that with a normal sitting

14     day on Monday we may not finish with this witness, and I think on Tuesday

15     the videolink witness has to take priority.  We've discussed with the

16     Defence they don't object to interrupting his testimony and proceeding

17     with the videolink as scheduled.  The witness I think has been alerted to

18     this possibility.  He doesn't mind staying here and finishing his

19     testimony on Thursday or Friday if need be.  If that pleases Your

20     Honours, that's what we would propose.

21                           [The witness takes the stand]

22             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Di Fazio, I'm sorry, but I'm -- I get very

23     frustrated when -- your -- the document we just marked was 65 ter 62; is

24     that right?

25             MR. DI FAZIO:  Yes.

Page 3087

 1             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Well, I get very frustrated when I can't find it

 2     on your list of documents to use -- for use with this witness.  Can you

 3     assist me?

 4             MR. DI FAZIO:  No, I can't.  My case manager alerted me earlier

 5     to the fact that it wasn't on the list, and it should have been on the

 6     list.  It was always in my contemplation to use it and it's my

 7     responsibility entirely, and I have to accept responsibility for that.  I

 8     hadn't realised it wasn't on the list.  I had assumed that it being one

 9     of the first documents I was going to use that it was on the list.  So I

10     have to apologise to you.

11             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Okay.

12             MR. DI FAZIO:  Thank you.

13             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Thank you.

14             MR. DI FAZIO:  I'll try and ensure that that doesn't happen

15     again.

16             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Or if it happens, Mr. Di Fazio, it would be of

17     assistance if you can say that it isn't on your list.

18             MR. DI FAZIO:  Yes.

19             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Thank you.

20             MR. DI FAZIO:  Thank you.

21             The next one is on the list.  Could the witness please be shown

22     65 ter 76, please.

23        Q.   Again, Mr. Majkic, this is a document that was sent to all SJB

24     stations or on the face of it was apparently sent to all SJB stations and

25     appears to be a document of Mr. Zupljanin, although it's unsigned.  In

Page 3088

 1     the -- could you just have a quick look at the -- sorry, and it's dated

 2     the 10th of April, 1992, so not long after the dispatch that you've

 3     spoken about earlier.  And the document refers to a dispatch

 4     communication that -- an earlier dispatch communication about forced

 5     formation of organisational units of the Serb MUP.  And then it goes on

 6     to say that there's no -- I'll withdraw that.  Yes, then it goes on to

 7     say that there are -- that there is -- in the formation of organisational

 8     units, there is no forcing.  And then it goes on in the second paragraph

 9     to talk about employees needing to sign a formal statement, and this

10     should be no different from the statement of the ex-minister of internal

11     affairs and should have nothing to do with the so-called statement of

12     loyalty noted in the dispatch.

13             Firstly, have you seen this document before?  Do you recall

14     receiving this document?

15        A.   The title or the address is to the SJB chief and commander to all

16     SJB chiefs and commanders, that means that I must have received it.

17        Q.   Thank you.  And the format.  Look at the format, not what the

18     content of the document is but the format, what it looks like visually.

19     Is that the sort of format of -- or one of the formats of documents sent

20     to various SJB stations by Mr. Zupljanin?

21        A.   The A4 format is a normal format.  All such letters and

22     dispatches were sent on the A4 format papers, and I believe that this is

23     A4 format, is it not?

24        Q.   Thank you.  Do you recall actually receiving any such document?

25        A.   I can't remember, but it says that it was sent to all the SJB

Page 3089

 1     chiefs and commanders, which means that I must have received it.  But I

 2     can't recall this.  There were a host of such dispatches.  I can't recall

 3     this particular one, but I must have received it judging by the address.

 4        Q.   Thank you.

 5             MR. DI FAZIO:  I seek to tender that document into evidence.

 6             JUDGE HALL:  Admitted and marked.

 7             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit P354, Your Honours.

 8             JUDGE HALL:  Sorry, Mr. Cvijetic, you were about to raise an

 9     objection?

10             MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Identical as before.  The witness

11     cannot recall the document, cannot recognise the document, cannot

12     interpret its contents.  Maybe this document should be introduced through

13     another witness.  Again, the same objection as before.

14             JUDGE HALL:  What I understood the witness's testimony to be is

15     that unlike the previous document that he must have received this one.

16     So wouldn't that have -- wouldn't that put it in a different category?

17             MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, it's your decision.

18     I just raised my objection.

19                           [Trial Chamber confers]

20             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Di Fazio, the document is not signed.  Is it

21     a Telex, or what is it exactly?

22             MR. DI FAZIO:  I'm not sure if it's a Telex, if Your Honours

23     please, or if it was a typed document.  Perhaps we could ask the witness

24     himself.  He might be -- he's probably in the best position to answer

25     that question.

Page 3090

 1        Q.   You heard His Honour's question.  Looking at the document, what

 2     does it tell you, that this was a Telex or sent by fax or letter, can you

 3     recall?

 4        A.   I apologise.  I've just spotted in the address to the SJB, to all

 5     chiefs and commanders, I am not sure.  It doesn't really make sense for

 6     the chief of the security services centre to send this dispatch both to

 7     the chiefs and to the commanders.  Normally such dispatches would only be

 8     sent to the chiefs.  And as for the manner of sending, I don't know.  I

 9     don't know whether it was sent by teleprinter, whether it was typed and

10     sent by some other media.  I really -- I can't say anything for sure.  I

11     wouldn't be able to tell you what method of sending was used.

12             MR. DI FAZIO:  Can I just ask -- I apologise.  Can I ask just one

13     more question of the witness that might assist in this topic?

14             JUDGE HALL:  Yes.

15             MR. DI FAZIO:

16        Q.   Can you recall there being any controversy or issue concerning

17     whether or not the creation of the Serbian MUP was to be forced or

18     whether it was to be voluntary?  Can you remember that being an issue and

19     being raised in paperwork in April of 1992?

20        A.   I apologise.  You will have to repeat because I did not arrive at

21     understanding the question the way you put it.

22        Q.   Okay.  Look, the document says -- refers to a previous dispatch.

23     You told us about that earlier today.  And it talks about having --

24     police having been informed about forced formation of organisational

25     units.  And the author, apparent author Mr. Zupljanin, goes on to warn

Page 3091

 1     that the formation of organisational units is not forced in any way.

 2     Now, can you recall - regardless of what this document says - but can you

 3     recall if in April of 1992 there was any concern or controversy in police

 4     circles about that issue, that very issue?

 5        A.   I've already told you several times and I have repeated several

 6     times, the status of Sanski Most, Kljuc, Prijedor, and Bosanski Novi were

 7     explained to me by Mr. Zupljanin on several occasions.  He spoke about

 8     our status in the future as well.  So I was not much bothered.  I was not

 9     interested in the dispatches or information with such context.  I really

10     did not give such things any second thought.  Even if I received such

11     kind of instructions or dispatches, I would just ignore them because they

12     actually did not apply to me.  And why would Mr. Zupljanin tell me one

13     thing and then send me an entirely different thing?  It doesn't make

14     sense.

15                           [Trial Chamber confers]

16             JUDGE HALL:  We recall the order marking it as an exhibit and

17     will now have it marked for identification.

18             THE REGISTRAR:  [Microphone not activated]

19             JUDGE HALL:  That is pending authentication through another

20     witness who is able to speak more directly to the document.

21             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, for the purposes of the transcript,

22     this is Exhibit P354 marked for identification.

23             MR. DI FAZIO:  Thank you.

24        Q.   In 1992, did you become aware of an organisation in Sanski Most

25     bearing the acronym SOS and standing for Serbian Defence Force?

Page 3092

 1        A.   Well, the existence of the SOS, Serbian Defence Forces, was the

 2     first time mentioned at the meeting of the 14th of April, that is the

 3     meeting of the executive committee where they appeared with a sort of

 4     ultimatum.  I think that this was more of a fantasy made by people in

 5     town.  They used to tell stories about this small group of young men.  We

 6     assumed there were seven or eight of them.  And we used to call them SOS

 7     men.  Prior to that, we had no information about any organisation and

 8     existence.  To put it simply, people were talking in the town about the

 9     SOS.  As for the police, the police had no information about their being

10     formed.  Only on the 14th of April when they appeared for the first time

11     before the executive committee with the ultimatum of taking over the

12     public security station was when I saw these three men for the first

13     time, and they declared themselves or introduced themselves as members of

14     the SOS.

15        Q.   Okay.  So is it your position that the police in Sanski Most had

16     no information or intelligence about SOS or SOS activities in Sanski Most

17     up until the 14th of April?

18        A.   There was mention of that organisation in the police as well,

19     just like among ordinary people, in the same way.  We had some suspicions

20     that there were these seven or eight lads.  Later on, when I saw that

21     there were about 50 of them, then I realised that they were a rather

22     serious and larger organisation because we had no idea that they had such

23     strengths.  We thought that they were self-styled organisation, member

24     numbering seven or eight people.  So we acted according to the stories

25     that reached us from the streets.

Page 3093

 1        Q.   Okay.  So the police were gathering intelligence, I assume, or

 2     information about them and concluded that there were about seven or eight

 3     of them, local Sanski Most lads?

 4        A.   That's what we in the police concluded, that there were no more

 5     than seven and eight of them.  We suspected of certain crimes being

 6     committed by them, and then we engaged all our resources in order to try

 7     and catch them in flagrante in committing these crimes, but we never

 8     managed to do that.

 9        Q.   And what sort of crimes were these?

10        A.   Usually planting of explosives in certain Muslim and Croat

11     buildings, but in three occasions they attacked the buildings owned by

12     the Serbs.  However, they caused only damage but there were no

13     casualties.  And the damage was insignificant.

14        Q.   Thank you.  And were these bombings occurring in late 1991 and

15     also early 1992?

16        A.   Precisely in that period, autumn of 1991 and the beginning of

17     1992, so four or five months all together.

18        Q.   Okay.  Now, you said that these crimes were investigated.  Did

19     the police ever get any results, and by that I mean solve the crimes?

20        A.   The police and the investigating judge and the prosecutor would

21     always visit the crime scene, do what they were supposed to do, criminal

22     reports were being filed, but we never managed to detect who the

23     perpetrators were, although I also ordered the commander as well to take

24     part with the police in on-site investigation and to become involved in

25     the detection process of these crimes.  Therefore, we had quite a few

Page 3094

 1     people involved in these investigations, but as I say, we never succeeded

 2     in solving these crimes or proving who the perpetrators were.  Although

 3     the suspicion was always there, that this was exactly those young men.

 4        Q.   Okay.  So your police had suspicions that the SOS was involved in

 5     these bombings throughout 1991 and 1992.  The police must therefore have

 6     paid particular attention to the SOS and done its utmost to investigate

 7     the SOS, this group of seven or eight lads from Sanski Most; is that

 8     correct?

 9        A.   That's correct, yes.

10        Q.   And were the police able to get information about these seven or

11     eight lads in Sanski Most, for example, where they lived, who they were,

12     what they were doing in Sanski Most?

13        A.   The two who we thought were the ring-leaders used to be

14     sportsmen, they played hand-ball, however, they didn't have any criminal

15     records or even misdemeanour records in the police.  So we were a little

16     perplexed about that, that all of a sudden such a law-abiding citizen

17     started committing crimes.  Therefore, we carried out this thorough

18     investigation in order to detect them and prove anything, but as I said,

19     we failed.  Either they were too skilful or I don't know.

20        Q.   I'll come back to the Sanski Most SOS in a while.  In early April

21     1992, did you go to Banja Luka and attend a meeting with -- where

22     Mr. Zupljanin was present?

23        A.   Yes, it took place on the 6th of April.  He sent a dispatch

24     inviting us to come to this meeting three or four days before that, and

25     he included an agenda for the meeting.

Page 3095

 1        Q.   Thank you.  And was this -- on this occasion did Mr. Zupljanin

 2     explain to you that the SOS had taken over Banja Luka?

 3        A.   The meeting took place on the 6th of April, but on the morning of

 4     the 4th of April on Radio Banja Luka on some other local radio I heard

 5     that the Serbian Defence Forces in Banja Luka had carried out a sort of

 6     assault or whatever and took power.  Then Mr. Zupljanin informed us about

 7     this piece of news at this meeting.

 8        Q.   On the 6th?

 9        A.   Yes, 6th of April.

10        Q.   That was the first you heard of it?

11        A.   I said I first heard it on the radio on the 4th of April, on the

12     day it happened.  It happened on the early morning of the 4th of April

13     when the SOS carried out this act, and when I came to the meeting on the

14     6th of April Mr. Zupljanin told us the same story about what had

15     happened.

16        Q.   Did the radio provide information to citizens in the area that it

17     was the SOS that had taken over Banja Luka?

18        A.   Yes, yes.  They even said that they were called the Serbian

19     Defence Forces and that they were the ones who took over power.

20        Q.   Thanks.  Well, now given the fact that police in Sanski Most had

21     suspected the SOS of carrying out bombing attacks in Sanski Most, and

22     considering that you knew because you'd heard it on the radio that they'd

23     supposedly taken over Banja Luka, was this issue of the activities of the

24     SOS discussed -- sorry, on the agenda of the meeting that you went to?

25        A.   As I said, Mr. Zupljanin informed us about this act of theirs and

Page 3096

 1     what had happened.  That was at the very beginning of the meeting.  He

 2     told us what had happened in Banja Luka.  And he commented nothing

 3     further about that.

 4        Q.   That's all he said, just that they -- the SOS have taken over

 5     Banja Luka?

 6        A.   Yes, that they had carried out this act of take-over of power,

 7     and that in fact the power in Banja Luka had changed hands.

 8        Q.   This must have been a source of serious concern to you, given the

 9     fact that you - as chief of police in Sanski Most and the police in

10     Sanski Most - suspected the SOS of carrying out bombing attacks

11     throughout the latter part of 1991 and into 1992 and now they were taking

12     over Banja Luka.  So that must have been a source of absolute concern to

13     you; correct?

14        A.   I'm sorry, but these SOS forces, as far as I know -- or actually,

15     I'm convinced 100 per cent, they were not at the government level.  They

16     were rather some local organisations.  There were some towns that, for

17     example, needed these kind of forces.  This is where they were formed.

18     For example, the SOS in Sanski Most and the one in Banja Luka had no

19     connection.  They didn't cooperate with each other.  They had their own

20     respective plans and operated according to those plans.  They had their

21     own agendas that they pursued.

22        Q.   Okay.  Explain to the Trial Chamber, please, where you obtained

23     information about the agenda and plans of the SOS in Sanski Most.  Where

24     did you get that from?  How did you know it?

25        A.   On the 13th of April, it was a Monday, I was --

Page 3097

 1        Q.   No, no, I'm talking about the 6th of April.  The 6th of April at

 2     the meeting.  Where did you have the information about the SOS and its

 3     leadership and its plans -- from where had you obtained that information

 4     as at the 6th of April when you were sitting in the room there with

 5     Mr. Zupljanin?

 6        A.   Well, I already said Mr. Zupljanin informed us about this act.

 7     That's all.  It was a very brief information, and nobody discussed this

 8     any longer.  The meeting went on according to its established agenda.

 9        Q.   Which did not include anything about the SOS; is that correct?

10        A.   I don't remember exactly what the agenda was, but if this

11     take-over of power in Banja Luka took place on the 4th and we arrived on

12     the 6th and we received the invitation before the 4th containing the

13     agenda, it is most probable that some items on the agenda had been added

14     to the agenda following the events of Banja Luka, maybe to involve those

15     berets and tri-colours and the uniforms that were mentioned were probably

16     included into the agenda by Mr. Zupljanin as something that had a bearing

17     on the events in Banja Luka.  So probably that was the outcome of what

18     happened on the 4th April.  Of course the agenda that we had originally

19     received with the dispatch, we worked on it.  I can only understand that

20     probably the agenda was amended by adding some additional topics.

21        Q.   Thank you.  Given the fact that Mr. Zupljanin merely announced

22     that the SOS had taken over Banja Luka, and given the fact that you and

23     police in Sanski Most had suspicions that an organisation also named SOS

24     had been responsible for bombings in Sanski Most, did it not occur to you

25     to raise the issue with your regional chief and indeed with all the other

Page 3098

 1     police chiefs and explain that a very serious problem was developing with

 2     SOS?

 3             MR. PANTELIC:  I do apologise, Your Honours.  I didn't intervene

 4     before.  I don't -- in principle don't have any problems with the line of

 5     questioning that my learned friend Mr. Di Fazio is posing, but the

 6     formulation of the questions and -- sometimes they're multi-folded, they

 7     are loaded, and they are leading questions at the end.  So I kindly ask

 8     to either split questions or be underlining like he usually excellent is

 9     doing in examination-in-chief.  Thank you so much.

10             MR. DI FAZIO:  All right.  I'll reduce it to one question.

11             JUDGE HALL:  And the leading questions, Mr. Di Fazio.

12             MR. DI FAZIO:  Sorry, yes.

13        Q.   Did you raise the question of the bombings at this meeting on the

14     6th of April with your regional chief, bombings in Sanski Most?

15        A.   At each meeting when I submitted my monthly reports, I always

16     highlighted these crimes or any other crimes that had happened, just like

17     we did on a daily basis if need be.  But we only had suspicion about

18     these young men, these SOS or however they called themselves.  We had our

19     suspicions.  We didn't want to pressure them and to flush them out; we

20     wanted to call them at -- catch them red-handed.  But I did report any

21     crime at our regular meetings.

22        Q.   You had driven from Sanski Most to this meeting on the 6th of

23     April; is that right?

24        A.   Yes.

25        Q.   And you were in a police car?

Page 3099

 1        A.   Yes, always in a police car.

 2        Q.   Right.  And you're able to enter Banja Luka and go to the meeting

 3     no problem I assume?

 4        A.   At this point I cannot recall, but when I was travelling on the

 5     6th I don't think that I saw any check-points along the way on my way to

 6     Banja Luka or perhaps I've forgotten.  I really don't remember.  All I

 7     know is that I didn't encounter any problems on my way to Banja Luka.

 8        Q.   So it was a -- as far as you were concerned, a smooth ride into

 9     Banja Luka?

10        A.   Yes.

11        Q.   Did you make inquiries of the original police chief,

12     Mr. Zupljanin, or any of the other police chiefs as to what SOS taking

13     over actually involved?

14        A.   Well, that was already a fait accompli.  Under the pressure of

15     the SOS, the power changed hands.  For me coming from Sanski Most was

16     something that was a fait accompli.  Probably Mr. Zupljanin behaved

17     afterwards in keeping with what the government or the local governments

18     of these taken-over municipalities had agreed with him.  But I know

19     nothing about that; therefore, I'm not the right person to comment on

20     that.

21        Q.   Thanks, and thanks for that explanation about power changes and

22     so on.  But my question is very simple.  You apparently had a smooth ride

23     into Banja Luka and yet you are informed, A, by the radio; and B, by your

24     regional police chief that the SOS had taken over.  In those

25     circumstances, did you consider getting information about what precisely

Page 3100

 1     was involved in the take-over?

 2        A.   Since this took place on Saturday, it was a non-working day, on

 3     the Monday I went to Banja Luka - and since this was an ongoing process

 4     not only in Banja Luka but in other municipalities as well - it sort of

 5     became something normal.  I'm not saying normal, but kind of -- it became

 6     a frequent occurrence in Bosnia-Herzegovina, this way of taking over

 7     power.

 8        Q.   Okay.  You said that Mr. Zupljanin said nothing more about the

 9     take-over of power other than to announce the fact of it.  Did you or any

10     other policemen offer any solutions as to what you might do to ensure

11     that the SOS were disarmed, arrested, placed into prison, and order

12     restored?  Was that discussed by you or any other policemen?

13        A.   I don't know what to tell you.  This SOS, we assumed that this

14     was a kind of paramilitary armed force of a considerable size and we were

15     not sure whether the police was fit to enter into any conflict with them.

16     Perhaps it was only the military capable of doing that, and I very much

17     doubt that the police was capable of doing anything to counter the SOS.

18        Q.   Thank you.  Could you explain to the Trial Chamber what it is --

19     sorry.  Explain to the Trial Chamber how you and the police and why you

20     and the police assumed that the SOS was a paramilitary armed force of

21     considerable size.  How did you know that?

22        A.   Well, I can tell you that in Sanski Most when the war started and

23     when they were disbanded, we never found out who set up this organisation

24     and how.  We never learned where they had come from --

25        Q.   [Previous translation continues]...

Page 3101

 1        A.   -- the same applied to Banja Luka.  There was no one standing

 2     behind the SOS organisation, not even the SDS.  Quite simply, it was a

 3     paramilitary organisation and how they organised themselves was never

 4     clear to me to this date --

 5        Q.   Fine, fine --

 6        A.   -- all I know is that there was no one behind them.

 7        Q.   Okay.  Thanks.  Well, that's some intelligence about the SOS that

 8     you had.  Given that intelligence, can you explain to the Trial Chamber

 9     where the assumption comes - assumption - that this SOS was a

10     paramilitary force of considerable size?  Where did that -- on what was

11     that assumption based, the assumption you spoke about?

12        A.   We didn't know that until they appeared in reality or in practice

13     with this act of taking over power in Banja Luka or when they came at the

14     meeting in Sanski Most with this ultimatum that power should be

15     transferred to them.  We had no other information.  We didn't know who

16     was behind them.  We -- all we knew was that they were a paramilitary

17     organisation.

18        Q.   Thank you.  Mr. Majkic, I haven't finished yet with the 6th of

19     April meeting, but just leave it for a moment.  Given what you had been

20     told by Mr. Zupljanin in -- on the -- at the 6th of April meeting and

21     given your suspicions of the SOS in Sanski Most being involved in

22     bomb-throwing campaigns or throwing of bombs, did you go back to Sanski

23     Most and continue to investigate the activities of the SOS in Sanski

24     Most?

25        A.   If a criminal report had been filed against an unidentified

Page 3102

 1     perpetrator, that means that there is an ongoing search for these

 2     perpetrators.  It was already April, but I think that this stopped

 3     sometime in mid-March, but nevertheless the police had an obligation to

 4     investigate such crimes until they uncover the perpetrators, for as long

 5     as it takes.

 6        Q.   Thank you.  What I'm asking you is that given what you discovered

 7     in Banja Luka and were informed in Banja Luka, did you -- did that

 8     provide any incentive to go back and investigate more thoroughly, more

 9     deeply, the activities of the SOS in Sanski Most; and if so, what did you

10     do?

11        A.   On that day, on the 6th, when the meeting ended sometime in the

12     afternoon I arrived home in the evening.  I didn't go back to the office

13     because the office hours were over.  And on that day, between the 6th and

14     the 7th, the 6th Krajina Brigade arrived in Sanski Most.  And the troops

15     were deployed on the hilltops and all over the place.  I don't know what

16     their employment schedule was, but in any case the brigade was deployed

17     there on the 7th of April.  That's when I met Colonel Basara.  We had

18     coffee together.  He came to me and told me, "I arrived to prevent

19     international inter-ethnic conflicts."  Given the fact that in mid-March

20     those inter-ethnic tensions started mounting -- in Sanski Most I

21     experienced some personal problems because I was involved in curbing

22     those inter-ethnic tensions and I was successful to some extent.

23     However, in mid-March I sent a letter to the 5th Corps and the commander

24     of the 6th Brigade, Basara, asking for the 6th Sana Brigade to return to

25     Sanski Most after having spent a lot of time on the front line because I

Page 3103

 1     expected there would be imminent inter-ethnic conflicts in Sanski Most.

 2     According to the information that I had from people in the army who had

 3     told me later about that, Colonel Basara took this letter on several

 4     occasions to the corps commander asking him to allow him to attend to

 5     Sanski Most.  This was approved some 20 days later, and he returned to

 6     Sanski Most together with the brigade.  And that was done because the

 7     inter-ethnic tensions had been mounting in Sanski Most for some time

 8     before that.

 9        Q.   I didn't actually ask you about that, but you raised that issue

10     of the 6th Brigade returning.  Did they provide any reassurance to you in

11     dealing with groups like the SOS in Sanski Most?

12        A.   Again, I repeat.  In Sanski Most the SOS did not exist.  Nobody

13     knew about it.  Those were all suspicions by -- on the part of the

14     citizens, on the part of the police.  There were, as we assumed, only six

15     or seven lads.  We didn't have a clue that the group was actually much

16     bigger than only perhaps six or seven of them.  I really don't know.  I'm

17     a bit -- I don't know.  I don't know what I actually wanted to say.  I'm

18     a bit confused now.  The existence of the SDS was nowhere on paper.  It

19     was never made official.  It was never in writing.  Nothing.  We tried to

20     detect the perpetrators of crime, but we failed.  We never made any

21     progress.  We can't be sure to this very day that they were the ones who

22     did all those things.

23        Q.   Okay.  We'll return to Mr. Basara and the SOS later.  Just let's

24     go back now to the 6th of April meeting.  On -- you've told us that

25     Mr. Zupljanin mentioned the take-over and that was it.  What else did he

Page 3104

 1     discuss with you police chiefs?

 2        A.   It was probably reports.  It was the beginning of the month.  We

 3     had to submit our reports, and after that he spoke about the berets, the

 4     markings on the berets, the solemn declarations.  One uniform was hanging

 5     on the coat rack in the corner.  He showed us that uniform as a model of

 6     what the uniforms would like under new circumstances.  That was

 7     discussed, and at the end he distributed the berets, the markings for the

 8     berets, and the solemn declarations.  I received some hundred of the

 9     berets and some hundred of the solemn declarations.

10        Q.   Just tell us about these berets.  What exactly were they, what

11     were they intended for, and what insignia did they contain or have on

12     them?

13        A.   The berets were blue, very standard issue.  It could have been

14     any colour, but it was blue.  And the insignia on the berets were a metal

15     three-coloured Serbian flags, and they're supposed to be put on the

16     berets, the flags.

17        Q.   And what did he say should be done with these berets?

18        A.   When the transformation had already been completed of the police

19     forces in the municipalities and when new conditions were in place with

20     keeping with the constitution and the laws that had been adopted by the

21     Assembly of the Serbian People, those berets were given to those

22     municipalities.  They did give them to me also, but then Mr. Zupljanin

23     told me Sanski Most, Prijedor, Bosanski Novi, as I've already told you

24     five times and he said to me at least five times, you shouldn't do

25     anything in these municipalities be it as long as it may -- even a year.

Page 3105

 1     So what I did with the berets is I put them in the trunk of my car, never

 2     showed them to anybody, only when the conditions changed in Sanski Most I

 3     took them out and distributed them.

 4        Q.   Thank you.  Thanks for explaining that.

 5             JUDGE HALL:  Mr. Di Fazio, could you think of winding up between

 6     1.30 and 1.35.  There's a procedural matter which Mr. Zecevic wishes to

 7     raise before we adjourn, and then the Chamber itself has a short matter

 8     with which to deal.

 9             MR. DI FAZIO:  Certainly, Your Honours, perhaps if I just deal

10     with this particular meeting, that would probably be a natural break.

11             JUDGE HALL:  Yes, if you think of 1.35 as the outside time for

12     you.

13             MR. DI FAZIO:  Yes.  Thank you.  So -- sorry, would Your Honours

14     just bear with me.  I just want to look at the transcript.

15        Q.   Now, you said that Mr. Zupljanin told you that in various

16     municipalities, including yours, some -- you shouldn't do anything in

17     these municipalities.  Did you know what was going to happen in the other

18     municipalities, that he was -- the ones he wasn't referring to?

19        A.   To be honest, I did not even think about what would be happening

20     in the other municipalities.  I was only concerned with the security of

21     my and sanctity of my municipality.

22        Q.   And he said that you shouldn't do anything in particular with the

23     berets, and only when conditions changed you took them out and

24     distributed them.  Was that by pre-arrangement?  Did you know what sort

25     of conditions had to apply before you could use the berets?

Page 3106

 1        A.   Mr. Zupljanin distributed those to all the chiefs where the

 2     transformation had been carried out.  I received them too.  I don't know

 3     whether the berets were also given to the Prijedor chief.  I can't be

 4     sure of that.  But I know that everybody was given or should have been

 5     given all the berets.  Zupljanin distributed them to everybody, including

 6     myself, but then again he repeated, "You do not take any steps even for

 7     as long as a year.  Stay put.  Don't do anything."  And he mentioned

 8     Kljuc, Sanski Most, Prijedor, Bosanski Novi as the municipalities that

 9     should not be affected by the distribution of the berets.

10        Q.   Thanks.  The steps that you just spoke about, don't take any

11     steps even for as long as a year he said, stay put.  Now, did you

12     understand what steps Mr. Zupljanin was referring to you when he said to

13     you, "Don't take any steps, even for as long as a year"?  What were those

14     steps?

15        A.   If the chief told me not to do anything, he told that to me, he

16     ordered me not to do anything, no steps, nothing, nothing.  He just said,

17     "Continue doing what you have done so far.  You will be an oasis in

18     Bosnia-Herzegovina where people will live in peace, in unity, as you have

19     in the past."  That's the way I understood him and that's the way I

20     behaved, according to his instructions or orders.  You call them what you

21     will.  I don't know what to call his words.

22        Q.   Thank you.  But in order for you to have had a sensible

23     discussion, you must have understood what the steps were that he was

24     talking about when he said to you, "Mr. Majkic, don't take any steps in

25     Sanski Most."  So explain to the Trial Chamber what were the steps that

Page 3107

 1     you two had in mind?

 2        A.   Nobody had any intention to do something.  Nobody had any

 3     intention to take over.  Even if I took the 2nd of April dispatch to

 4     Mr. Rasula, he was taken by surprise.  He was the top man in the

 5     municipality, and he agreed with what Mr. Zupljanin said.  Because we

 6     found that a most convenient thing in Sanski Most and we behaved

 7     normally, we worked normally, together until the very last day, until the

 8     moment there was an agreement on division.  And when we parted our own

 9     ways, until that very day we worked together as if everything was normal.

10     The police force was united as if nothing was going on.

11        Q.   All right.  Okay.  Did he also have oaths, loyalty oaths, printed

12     out on paper and did he distribute those?

13        A.   Yes.

14        Q.   Thank you.  And did he have a uniform which he showed to you

15     police chiefs as an example of a new uniform that was to be worn by

16     police?

17        A.   There was just one uniform hanging on the clothes rack in the

18     corner -- but not really in the corner.  It was actually next to the desk

19     at which he was sitting together with the other leaders from the centre.

20     He stood up and he showed us the uniform, he pointed to it and said that

21     that was the kind of uniform that policemen should wear.  There was just

22     one sample, that one uniform hanging on the coat rack.

23        Q.   And can you just describe it, please, to the Trial Chamber.

24        A.   There was a beret, and since it was April or already warm there

25     was a blue camouflage shirt and there was also a pair of trousers with

Page 3108

 1     pockets on the side.  It was also a blue pattern similar to the military

 2     camouflage uniform.  The police uniform would have been similar, not the

 3     same but very similar.  It was a camouflage uniform but the colour was

 4     blue.

 5        Q.   Thanks.  Let's just wrap this topic up quickly, if you could keep

 6     your answers as short as possible.  Did you eventually -- sorry, did you

 7     take possession of your berets, your copies of loyalty oaths, put them in

 8     your car, and eventually drive back to --

 9             MR. PANTELIC:  Objection.  I didn't hear that the witness

10     mentioned a word "loyalty oaths."

11             MR. DI FAZIO:  Okay.

12             MR. PANTELIC:  This witness simply said "oaths."

13             MR. DI FAZIO:  I'll rephrase my question.

14        Q.   Did you put the oaths on paper and the berets and -- into your

15     car and drive back to Sanski Most?

16        A.   Yes.

17        Q.   Did you distribute the berets and the oaths on paper when you got

18     back?

19        A.   No, on the contrary.  I hid them well.  I didn't want somebody to

20     steal them.  I had thought that I would not be needing them in a while,

21     in a long while.

22        Q.   Where did you hide them?

23        A.   In the trunk of my car, and the car was only driven by me and

24     that's where I hid them, in the trunk.  And my car was always in the

25     garage that was locked, and only when I used it I would take it out of

Page 3109

 1     the garage and then I would drive it myself.

 2        Q.   Thanks.  And just the actual content of the oath, in fact, what

 3     was the oath on that -- printed out on that paper that was given to you?

 4        A.   It was a solemn declaration.  The title was "solemn declaration."

 5     I know that the contents were the same as the contents of the former

 6     solemn declaration that we used to take before 1990 in

 7     Bosnia-Herzegovina.  So it was identical.  The only difference being a

 8     reference to Republika Srpska and the Serbian people.  I can't really

 9     give you the exact details of those changes.  Everything else, the rest

10     of the contents, were absolutely the same as before.

11        Q.   Thank you.

12             MR. DI FAZIO:  This would be an appropriate time on this topic.

13     Thank you.

14             JUDGE HALL:  We must take the adjournment for today, and we will

15     resume with your testimony on Monday, Monday morning.  You having been

16     sworn as a witness, you cannot communicate with the lawyers from either

17     side; and in such conversations that you have with anybody outside of the

18     chamber, you can't discuss your testimony before the Tribunal.  Do you

19     understand what I've said?

20             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I do.

21             JUDGE HALL:  Well, thank you, sir.  You're now excused, and we

22     wish you a safe weekend, and we will see you on Monday morning.

23             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.

24                           [The witness stands down]

25             JUDGE HALL:  Mr. Zecevic, before I hear you, we have a ruling to

Page 3110

 1     deliver, and that is that -- this is an oral decision on the

 2     Prosecution's notices on the mode of testimony of SD-4, 52, and 140.

 3             On the 28th of October, the Trial Chamber granted the Defence

 4     until the 11th of November to respond regarding requests of the

 5     Prosecution filed as notices on the 14th and 26th of October to amend the

 6     mode of testimony of witnesses 4, 52, and 140.  The Prosecution requests

 7     that these witnesses testify pursuant to Rule 92 ter.

 8             In addition, the Prosecution seeks to add to its Rule 65 ter

 9     exhibit list 20 documents relating to the witnesses.  Also on the 28th of

10     October, the Chamber granted a similar request regarding ST-79 and allow

11     the Prosecution to add to its exhibit list three documents relating to

12     this witness.  The Defence did not file any request by the 11th of

13     November.  The Prosecution submits there is no prejudice to the accused

14     as a result of the variation of the mode of testimony of ST-4, 52, and

15     140.  It argues that the transcripts, written statements, and associated

16     exhibits meet the requirements of admissibility under the rules and that

17     the amendments of the mode of testimony are made in an attempt to save

18     court time and to stream-line the presentation of evidence.  The

19     Prosecution submits that the 20 documents form an inseparable part of the

20     witness's prior evidence.  The Prosecution submits that ST-4 will be

21     testifying about police involvement in crimes.  52 is a crime base

22     witness and 140 is a linkage witness.

23             Considering the nature of the testimony of the witnesses, the

24     Trial Chamber finds that the witnesses should be present in court to

25     attest the accuracy of their prior statements and be available for

Page 3111

 1     cross-examining judicial questioning pursuant to Rule 92 ter.  The

 2     Trial Chamber is satisfied that the evidence of the witnesses fulfil the

 3     requirements of Rule 92 ter.  It is recalled that the parties' witnesses

 4     and exhibit lists can only be amended with leave of the Trial Chamber

 5     upon showing of good cause of the requesting party.

 6             The Trial Chamber is satisfied that the 20 documents form an

 7     inextricable and indispensable part of witnesses' evidence.  It also

 8     notes that there is no objection from the Defence.

 9             The Chamber therefore allows the Prosecution to call ST-4, ST-52,

10     and ST-140 pursuant to Rule 92 ter.  It will accept on to the

11     Prosecution's Rule 65 ter exhibit lists ST-4's prior statement, ST-52's

12     prior statements and 11 associated documents, and ST-140's prior

13     statements and testimonies and nine associates documents.  This material

14     will be admitted into evidence upon the witnesses having complied with

15     the conditions of Rule 92 ter.  Thank you.

16             Yes, Mr. Zecevic.

17             MR. ZECEVIC:  Thank you, Your Honour.  Your Honour, I wish to

18     raise a matter which is of great concern for the Defence, and actually

19     the last question and the answer of the witness gave me a perfect

20     pretext.

21             Now, Your Honours, when my friend Mr. Di Fazio showed the

22     document P353, which was MFI'd, he mentioned in the document when he

23     was -- he was directing the witness, he mentioned the oath of allegiance,

24     and I -- and I was wondering where did that come from.  Now I checked the

25     document.  The document, Serbian original, says clearly "solemn

Page 3112

 1     declaration," like it was interpreted here in court Svecana Obaveza means

 2     solemn declaration, so there was no oath whatsoever mentioned in the

 3     document.  Now, the translation of that document is clearly wrong, and I

 4     was always wondering where did the idea -- the allegation, which is an

 5     issue in this case, of a loyalty oath, of oath of allegiance, of any kind

 6     of oath came to the -- came as an idea for the Office of the Prosecutor

 7     because I never ever in all the documents which were disclosed in this

 8     case ever found anything suggesting oath or anything of a kind.  It was

 9     always a solemn declaration, which does not mean an oath like over here.

10     The witnesses are giving the solemn declaration.  They are not taking an

11     oath.

12             Now, my submission is that I would ask the Trial Chamber to order

13     that this document, 353, be sent to the CLSS for official review of the

14     translation so that in future we don't have any more of this -- because

15     this is not the proper allegation.  It is only the misinterpretation

16     which led the Office of the Prosecutor to allege that there was some --

17     any kind of oath taken and something like that.  And I think -- I think

18     this is of help for all the parties that we do not use the time -- the

19     court time improperly by making objections and that we clarify this

20     situation once and for all.  Thank you very much.

21                           [Trial Chamber confers]

22             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Mr. Zecevic, the Chamber wishes to thank you for

23     drawing our attention to these problems.  It's very useful that you have

24     done so, and we urge counsels consistently to take up any difficulties

25     that they may become aware of regarding translation.  It -- it is of

Page 3113

 1     course of no secret that translations as well as interpretations will

 2     occasionally incur inaccuracies, although I believe generally that the

 3     services we have at our disposal, both for interpretation and also for

 4     translations, are of a very high standard.  But of course we are dealing

 5     with human beings and inaccuracies or mistakes do occur, and that's why

 6     it's important that you who speak the language draw our attention to it.

 7             In the instant case, I suggest we ask translation -- the CLSS to

 8     have a look at it and then take whatever measures are required

 9     accordingly.  So if we can ask Madam Registrar to bring this to CLSS.

10             MR. ZECEVIC:  Thanks, Your Honours, I understand, and I

11     appreciate, and I just didn't mean to criticise either CLSS or

12     interpreters.  It's just a mistake which I didn't say was intentionally

13     made.  It's just that this mistake has misleaded our friends from the

14     Prosecution for their allegations.  Thank you very much.

15             MR. PANTELIC:  Just very shortly, and as usual our friends from

16     Prosecution like to be sort of misleaded and they create their own

17     theory, and, you know, that's why we have to clarify all these issues in

18     order to have very precise proceedings.

19             Your Honours, just very briefly, I would like to respectfully

20     bring to our attention our old motion when Honourable Judge Harhoff was a

21     Pre-Trial Judge sometimes in June.  Actually, 3.000 documents from --

22     which was seized from CSB Banja Luka police regional centre in 1998 are

23     still not available to the Defence.  I would call this issue, issue

24     3.000.  As far as I remember, we filed a joint motion with that regard.

25     The position of the OTP was that for certain public reasons, security

Page 3114

 1     reasons, or whatsoever we were not allowed to have access to these

 2     documents.  So we discussed that in details, Judge Harhoff I believe is

 3     aware about that.  Now we are most -- more than -- let's say -- we are

 4     almost two months in trial and you can imagine, Your Honours, that -- I

 5     don't want to speculate, but maybe some of these 3.000 documents might be

 6     of certain importance for the Defence.

 7             So I just want to bring to your attention to see where we are in

 8     this issue about the motion that we filed with respect to these

 9     documents, 3.000 documents, and what would be the position of the OTP

10     with that regard.  I mean, I'm not asking immediate resolution, but just

11     to put on the record that I think that we have to deal with that issue.

12     Thank you so much.

13             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Mr. Di Fazio, would you like to give a reply or

14     comment?

15             MR. DI FAZIO:  Well, I would need to be able to look at the --

16     refresh my memory and look at the motion and our response in order to be

17     able to comment in any way that would assist you, and I can't do that as

18     I stand here.  If Your Honours please, the matter can be addressed on

19     Monday.  I can raise it with my colleagues, and I think that's probably

20     the easiest and best way of going about it.

21                           [Trial Chamber and Legal Officer confer]

22             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Mr. Di Fazio, I'm just being instructed or being

23     reminded by our Legal Officer that the issue is under consideration in

24     the Chamber and that we will hand down our ruling shortly.  And so I

25     don't think -- we have heard already the submissions by the Prosecution,

Page 3115

 1     so there is no need to bring -- unless of course you have anything new to

 2     add.  But otherwise the decision is due to arrive very shortly.

 3             MR. DI FAZIO:  I'm sure the matter has been well ventilated in

 4     the motions.

 5             JUDGE DELVOIE:  I have one short matter to discuss as well.  The

 6     time estimates again.  I was told that we got your time estimates for the

 7     witnesses that are expected to come before Christmas from the Defence

 8     counsels.  Is that right?

 9             MR. ZECEVIC:  Yes, Your Honours, we have the estimates.

10             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Okay.  And we have them as well.  You have

11     communicated them to us?

12             MR. ZECEVIC:  I don't believe so.

13             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Oh.

14             MR. ZECEVIC:  As yet.

15             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Okay.

16             MR. ZECEVIC:  Because we were waiting for some witnesses which --

17     we want to give you the complete list --

18             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Because we --

19             MR. ZECEVIC:  And we still haven't had the time to check all the

20     witnesses.

21             JUDGE DELVOIE:  We would still like ST-29 -- 25, 29, 33, 34, 35,

22     36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, and 43.

23             So if you could please provide us with that.

24             MR. ZECEVIC:  I will, Your Honour.

25             JUDGE DELVOIE:  I wouldn't dare draw as a conclusion that you

Page 3116

 1     don't have cross for them.

 2             MR. ZECEVIC:  Thank you very much.  I understand.

 3             JUDGE HALL:  [Microphone not activated]

 4                           --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.48 p.m.,

 5                           to be reconvened on Monday, the 16th day of

 6                           November, 2009, at 9.00 a.m.