Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 9565

 1                           Wednesday, 5 May 2010

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           [The accused Zupljanin not present]

 5                           --- Upon commencing at 9.07 a.m.

 6             THE REGISTRAR:  Good morning, Your Honours.

 7             Good morning everyone in and around the courtroom.

 8             This is case number IT-08-91-T.  The Prosecutor versus

 9     Mico Stanisic and Stojan Zupljanin.

10             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you, Madam Registrar.

11             Good morning to everyone.

12             May we begin by taking the appearances, please.

13             MS. KORNER:  Good morning, Your Honours.  Joanna Korner,

14     Belinda Pidwell, Crispian Smith, for the Prosecution.

15             MR. ZECEVIC:  Good morning, Your Honours.  Slobodan Zecevic,

16     Slobodan Cvijetic, Eugene O'Sullivan, and Ms. Tatjana Savic appearing for

17     Stanisic Defence this morning.  Thank you.

18             MR. KRGOVIC:  Good morning, Your Honours.  Dragan Krgovic and

19     Miroslav Cuskic appearing for the Zupljanin Defence.  Mr. Zupljanin is

20     not present; he signed a waiver.

21             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.

22             Mr. Zecevic, we are advised that you have a matter to raise.

23             MR. ZECEVIC:  Well, Your Honours, there is one preliminary matter

24     which I wanted to raise with Your Honours at the end of yesterday's

25     session.  I stood up and I was having an objection.  In the meantime, I

Page 9566

 1     consulted with my friend Ms. Korner from the Prosecution side, and I

 2     withdraw that objection.  But there is one other matter that I wanted to

 3     raise the attention of the Trial Chamber to.

 4             JUDGE HALL:  Yes.

 5             MR. ZECEVIC:  Namely, the document P400 and the part which was

 6     read by Ms. Korner to the witness contains a mistake in English

 7     translation on page 21 of the document in e-court.  Namely, instead of

 8     putting it in the first -- in the -- first person like it is in the

 9     translation, it should be -- it should be "they."  So the plural and --

10     in a very general.  So what we are going to do is we will ask the -- send

11     the document to CLSS for verification of translation.  That is all I

12     wanted to raise with Your Honours.  Thank you.

13             MS. KORNER:  Your Honours, I certainly won't pursue the line of

14     questioning until that's sorted out, I may say it's unfortunate because

15     it's obviously something that the Prosecution have been relying on since

16     the beginning of the case, that it hasn't been spotted before, but

17     there's not much I can do about that now.

18             I don't believe I have very much time left.

19             JUDGE HALL:  I was about to remind you that you have exhausted

20     your time.

21             MS. KORNER:  Well, I was going to ask, Your Honours, in that

22     case, I wasn't go to get through any more documents, but I need to deal

23     with two matters that he has been raising.  Firstly, this document that

24     he says is this order by Subotic which gives the military the control

25     over everything which is actually one of the documents that was in my

Page 9567

 1     binder and I didn't use because I wondered how he was able to quote so

 2     accurately the number of the document, and he must have seen it when he

 3     was reading through them, but I feel I ought to go back and just deal

 4     with that.  That's the first thing.

 5             Second thing, there's one matter that he spoke about yesterday

 6     which I want to go back on and just deal with in the question of his

 7     knowledge of who was involved in these 300 people who were in prison.  So

 8     if I can have time to do that.

 9             The last matter is this:  As Your Honour will have seen, as with

10     so many of these witnesses, getting an answer to a question is -- that

11     you've asked, is very difficult; but I don't want to stop

12     them - Mr. Cvijetic says that is what I'm doing - even if they are going

13     right off track too often.  But it does eat into the time that I've been

14     allowed.  Accordingly, can I just mention that one of the documents I

15     intended to ask him about was the January 1993 Assembly meeting which he

16     attended even though he was no longer the minister.  I obviously haven't

17     got time to do that.  Can I just, as it were, as somebody in my

18     jurisdiction keeps saying, put down a marker that he is probably the last

19     witness I could directly deal with the Assembly.  It's got important

20     stuff in it, but it will have to be one of the documents that we apply to

21     put in via a bar table motion.  So if I can just -- because I can't deal

22     with it through him; I haven't got time.

23             JUDGE HALL:  And in terms of the two issues with which you

24     would --

25             MS. KORNER:  They're both quite short.

Page 9568

 1             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.  Please proceed.

 2             MS. KORNER:  Thank you very much.

 3             JUDGE HALL:  The -- my question was, How long would these two

 4     items take?

 5             MS. KORNER:  If I can get him just to answer, you know, very

 6     quickly, then it shouldn't take more than ten minutes absolute max.

 7                           [The witness takes the stand]

 8             JUDGE HALL:  Mr. Mandic, I remind you, you are still on your

 9     oath.

10             Yes, Ms. Korner, please proceed.

11                           WITNESS:  MOMCILO MANDIC [Resumed]

12                           [Witness answered through interpreter]

13                           Examination by Ms. Korner:  [Continued]

14        Q.   Mr. Mandic, I've got two very short matters I want to deal with

15     this morning and then you will be cross-examined.  The first is this:

16     You told the Trial Chamber -- I'll just find it.  Yesterday you recall I

17     was asking you about when you were saying to Mr. Krajisnik the

18     400 prisoners.  And I asked you whether the 400 people -- were they

19     civilians, and you said, "I don't know, Madam Prosecutor, I don't know

20     who those people were."  And in fairness to you, Mr. Mandic, because this

21     is even further on from the time that we are talking about than in

22     Krajisnik, can I just remind you of what you said in Krajisnik, and you

23     said that -- to the Court that other than the changes you made, you stood

24     by what you said.  And this is at page 8886, which was day four of your

25     testimony.  This was questioning by Judge Orie.  At the top of page 8886.

Page 9569

 1     He says:

 2             "Mr. Mandic, I'm interested in the 400 people that were in Kula

 3     as you told us.  Were they men, women, children?  What was the

 4     composition?  More or less, not in detail, of course?"

 5             And you replied:

 6             "I think that there were men, women, and children, Your Honour."

 7             Do you remember saying that?

 8        A.   I don't remember, but I don't have any doubts that it is

 9     formulated as you have just read it.

10        Q.   And then Judge Orie went:

11             "Ages?"

12             And you said:

13             "That was a long time ago.  It's difficult for me to remember.

14     But I do know that they had come from the Dobrinja neighbourhood, that

15     they had been frightened, and that they wanted to leave that area."

16             Judge Orie said:

17             "Yes.  Were they exchanged?"

18             And you said:

19             "No, Your Honours.  On my own initiative, and with the approval

20     of Mico Stanisic and Tepavcevic, who were the heads of police, took those

21     people to the Vrbanja Most."

22        A.   Do you want me to explain what this was all about now that you

23     have reminded me?  Had there been no exchange, the people were taken to

24     the part of the town held by Muslims.  This is what I said in the

25     Krajisnik case.  Therefore, there was no exchange.  People were simply

Page 9570

 1     sent to the Vrbanja Bridge, the part of Sarajevo that was Muslim

 2     controlled.  And those were residents of Dobrinje that sought shelter

 3     from war operations.  And it was a mixture, men, women, and children.

 4     There were fierce fighting in the part of Sarajevo where these population

 5     found themselves in.  So no exchange took place.  These people were just

 6     removed from the combat zone.

 7        Q.   Yes, Mr. Mandic, that's fine.  You did explain it all in the

 8     Krajisnik testimony, as you said.  I just wanted to remind you because

 9     you said you didn't know yesterday.

10             The other matter is the document --

11        A.   Just one minute.  We spoke yesterday about the 400 people who had

12     had come from Hadzici.  It's probably a different group of people, not

13     the one from Dobrinje neighbourhood.  There may have been a mix between

14     these two groups.

15        Q.   All right.  Mr. Mandic, believe you me, all your evidence in --

16     that you gave in Krajisnik is before the Trial Chamber, so we don't have

17     to repeat it.  But I want to ask you about this question of this order

18     from Subotic that you spoke about twice yesterday, and, indeed, you gave

19     the actual number, and I think that was because you had some notes and

20     you made a note of some of the documents you looked at; is that right?

21        A.   You are talking about yesterday?

22        Q.   Yes --

23        A.   No, no, no, I was just a little bit nervous and I was just

24     signing my name on the piece of paper.

25        Q.   Well, you see, you actually, yesterday - this is at

Page 9571

 1     page 9537 - when I was asking you about the -- the document which was at

 2     2650 about Mr. Poplasen asking for detainees to be used for construction.

 3     And you said at the top of page 9537:

 4             "There are documents indicating that nobody else except the

 5     military commander was authorised to send non-Serbs to perform labour.

 6     This was an order published in the Official Gazette 6/92, signed by

 7     Bogdan Subotic."

 8             I believe at that stage you actually had a note of that document,

 9     didn't you?  Or did you just recall exactly what the number was?

10        A.   No, Madam Prosecutor.  This order was part of my case when I was

11     being tried in the Bosnia-Herzegovina court.  I remember clearly about

12     that when I presented my own defence.  What I did yesterday was just

13     writing down my signature.  I was not taking any notes.  And I can say

14     that I know this order of Mr. Subotic by heart because it was crucial to

15     my trial.

16        Q.   Yes.  Quite.  All right.

17             MS. KORNER:  Could we have a look at that order.  Document P189,

18     please.  Which is tab 67 in our binder.

19             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes, that's the one.

20             MS. KORNER:

21        Q.   All right.  This, as you say, is published in the gazette on the

22     13th of June, 1992.  Instructions on the treatment of captured persons.

23             MS. KORNER:  And can we go to the second page, please, in the

24     English.  And the third page -- sorry, fourth page in B/C/S.

25        Q.   And there we see it's signed minister of the defence

Page 9572

 1     Colonel Subotic, and again the date of the 13th of June, Order 26, 1992?

 2             MS. KORNER:  Now, can we go back to the first page, please, in

 3     each.  Thank you.

 4        Q.   Instructions on the treatment of captured persons.  These

 5     instructions set out the rights and duties of military personnel of the

 6     army and members of the Serbian Ministry of Internal Affairs relative to

 7     the treatment of captured persons.  And then it defines, does it not, in

 8     paragraph 2:

 9             "Captured persons shall be taken to mean the members of the enemy

10     armed forces who have surrendered and laid down their arms or who -- or

11     have been overpowered in or out of combat."  Correct?

12        A.   Correct.

13        Q.   And then in paragraph 10, which is on the same page in English

14     but -- and the third page in the B/C/S, besides work connected with the

15     cleaning and maintenance of the camp, captured persons may be put to work

16     in agriculture, industry, mining, handycrafts, traffic trade, and other

17     areas which are not directly related to war operations."

18             Is that the part you were thinking of?

19        A.   This entire instruction relates to the army.  The minister of

20     defence is now instructing the army how to treat the captives.  Captives

21     involved both military personnel and civilians who are captured.  It is

22     true that he is giving instructions to military officers how to use the

23     captured persons for performing the work outside the camp.  So this

24     refers exclusively to the army, not to the police or the

25     Ministry of Justice relating to exploitation, release, and capture.  So

Page 9573

 1     there's no categorisation here whatsoever, whether there were civilians

 2     or military personnel, he is just talking about captives here.  And this

 3     is the minister of defence.  He is giving instructions to the army.  He

 4     is not authorised to give any instructions to the police or anybody else.

 5        Q.   Absolutely, Mr. Mandic, and I think you've made the point that I

 6     was trying to make.  These instructions, as you say, apply only to the

 7     army, because he has no authority to give them to anybody else, and apply

 8     only to those who are captives, captured persons, as defined in

 9     paragraph 2; is that right?

10        A.   That's right.

11             MS. KORNER:  Yes.  Thank you very much, Mr. Mandic.  That's all

12     that I ask.

13             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you, Madam Prosecutor.

14             JUDGE HALL:  Mr. Zecevic.

15             MR. ZECEVIC:  Thank you.

16                           Cross-examination by Mr. Zecevic:

17        Q.   [Interpretation] Good morning, Mr. Mandic.

18        A.   Good morning.  Good luck to you.

19        Q.   At the beginning of your questioning on Monday, my learned friend

20     Ms. Korner asked you about the changes in your testimony in the Krajisnik

21     case that you made by giving a statement to the OTP on the

22     25th of March, 2010, here in The Hague.  Do you recall that?

23        A.   Yes, I do.

24        Q.   The first alteration relates to the explanation of the 10.000

25     people who all were in the Butmir camp.  Do you remember that?

Page 9574

 1        A.   Yes.

 2        Q.   On page --

 3             THE INTERPRETER:  Could the counsel please repeat again the page

 4     and the line.

 5             JUDGE HALL:  Mr. Zecevic and Mr. Mandic, I understand that a part

 6     of the problem has been that the witness, Mr. Mandic, in his

 7     examination-in-chief had been speaking a little too quickly for the

 8     interpreters and, of course, Mr. Mandic, you, I would remind you and

 9     Mr. Zecevic that inasmuch as you speak the same language, it is

10     especially necessary in cross-examination for both of you to slow down

11     and to allow that interval between the question and the answer.

12             MR. ZECEVIC:  I understand, Your Honours.

13             MS. KORNER:  The interpreters said they didn't hear the page

14     number.

15             MR. ZECEVIC:  [Interpretation] I'll repeat.

16        Q.   So my question was:  On page 9402, line 17 of the transcript of

17     Monday, your answer to the question Ms. Korner asked you about this

18     alteration of your statement was entered, but I don't think it was

19     translated in its entirety.  The way I understood you, on Monday you said

20     that during your evidence in the Krajisnik case you explained the

21     situation and that you heard that while you were listening to the tapes

22     during the proofing for this testimony, but you had forgotten you had

23     already changed that in the Krajisnik case.  Is my understanding correct?

24        A.   The figure of 10.000 people was mentioned in my testimony in the

25     Krajisnik case when a letter was shown to me written by Ljubica Vladosic

Page 9575

 1     and Dragan Bulajic who requested assistance and food for KPD Butmir.  In

 2     that letter, it is said that about 10.000 people had been processed at

 3     that KPD.  Then I accepted that number, that 10.000 people had been

 4     processed there, but not as prisoners or captives, but, rather, as

 5     persons who were exchanged there, because that was the place where the

 6     state commission of both the Serbian entity and the Muslim entity

 7     exchanged people.  That was a place where people sought shelter from

 8     combat activities in the immediate vicinity, and that's the Dobrinje

 9     neighbourhood where there's the Sarajevo airport.  And the third reason

10     for this large throughput of people was that on the premises of the

11     pre-war prison, there was a large chicken farm where people came and got

12     food to survive, because there was a shortage of food.  And I said that

13     in that context.  I didn't mean people who were taken prisoner.  And

14     that's what I repeated on Monday, and I said as much in the Krajisnik

15     case.

16        Q.   Thank you.  The second alteration you spoke about in your

17     statement given on the 25th of March, 2010, and also on Monday at the

18     beginning of your examination related to the duration of detention.  In

19     your evidence it is recorded 30 days, as Ms. Korner put to you, but you

20     corrected that because under the law police can impose detention for up

21     to three days.  And after that the person in question must be taken to an

22     investigating judge who has the authority to extend the detention for up

23     to 30 days and in certain cases up to six months until an indictment is

24     issued, right?

25        A.   Both the Prosecutor and I agreed that this is possibly a mistake,

Page 9576

 1     the only mistake.  Why?  Because, under the laws in force then about

 2     criminal procedure, in former Yugoslavia there was the rule that the

 3     police can detain a person up to 72 hours, which means up to three days.

 4     This was obviously a mistake.

 5             But another observation of mine about a mistake.  Yesterday at a

 6     certain moment the Prosecutor showed us the proposal for the police to

 7     extend a detention for up to 21 days, but that probably was not adopted.

 8     So if the duration of detention was up to 30 days, it's not logical for

 9     them to propose an extension for up to 21 days because one excludes the

10     other.

11        Q.   That would have been my following question.  I will later show

12     you a report of the MUP from July 1992 which was sent to the president of

13     the Presidency and the prime minister and it contains this proposal that

14     the duration of detention be extended up to 21 days.  I'll show you that

15     later.  Be that as it may, that proposal was not adopted or even

16     discussed so that the situation with regard to the duration of detention

17     that can be imposed by the police remained as it had been under the law

18     until that time which is up to 72 hours; correct?

19        A.   Yes, that is correct.

20        Q.   Finally, on page 9408, you were explaining, prompted by a

21     question by the Prosecutor, your third alteration that relates to

22     Mr. Mico Stanisic.  It's a fact, isn't it, that after the Defence at our

23     meeting on the 21st of March this year in The Hague put to you that our

24     client has nothing to do with the dispatch of May 1992, you said that our

25     allegation is correct and that what we say is true; is that so?

Page 9577

 1        A.   Yes, that is correct.  And I explained to the Trial Chamber what

 2     happened.  We don't need to repeat that.  I also said the same to the

 3     Prosecutor during the proofing.

 4        Q.   I don't want to repeat, but we need it for the transcript.  You

 5     stated the reasons to us why that mistake was made during the testimony

 6     in the Krajisnik trial and then you put forward the same reasons as here

 7     in your statement on the 25th of March, 2010.  Then in the proofing note

 8     that you made before your testimony on Monday, because the Prosecution

 9     also asked you about that, and also during your testimony on Monday you

10     always stated the identical reasons?

11        A.   Yes.  And they are the true reasons, the real reasons.

12             MS. KORNER:  Well, if you are going to put the proofing note to

13     him, then you should put the full thing that he said.

14             MR. ZECEVIC:  I'm not going to put to the witness the proofing

15     note.

16             MS. KORNER:  Yes, but you've just said:

17             "... in the proofing note that you made before testimony ... you

18     stated the identical reasons."

19             He gave extra reasons, Mr. Zecevic.

20             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation]

21        Q.   Well, you see, Mr. Mandic, I still have to read it to you.  We

22     have to go through it.  Your proofing note dated the 3rd of May, 2010, is

23     the conversation you had with Ms. Korner and an investigator of this

24     Tribunal.

25             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] I don't know, Your Honours, if this

Page 9578

 1     document is in e-court.  If so, we can show it on the screens.

 2             MS. KORNER:  I wouldn't have thought so, Your Honours.  Sorry, I

 3     wouldn't have thought so, Your Honour, because a proofing note is a

 4     summary of what the witness said.  It's not a word-for-word record of the

 5     conversation.  So, I mean, as such, I don't know that it's ever become --

 6     it shouldn't be part of evidence.

 7             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Can we put it on the ELMO.

 8             MS. KORNER:  We can put it on -- on Sanction, Your Honours.

 9     Your Honours should have had a copy.  It was sent to the Legal Officers.

10             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, for the very reason

11     that Ms. Korner has mentioned, this being a summary of the witness's

12     statement and the summary was made by an investigator and someone from

13     the OTP is why I didn't want to read it out.  But Ms. Korner insisted

14     that the proofing note be read.  Now, I expect instructions from the

15     Bench with regard what I should do.

16             MS. KORNER:  Your Honours, can I just say, at the beginning of

17     the proofing note it relates to the matter that you had -- that

18     Mr. Mandic raised but which was in private session.  So it should

19     probably not be displayed to the general public at the moment.

20             JUDGE HALL:  While you're on your feet, Ms. Korner, did I

21     understand you to be, as Mr. Zecevic understands your position, that the

22     proofing note, the entire proofing note, should be read?  I didn't

23     understand that to be your position.

24             MS. KORNER:  No, no.  No, no.  Mr. Zecevic said to him, In the

25     proofing note you gave exactly the same reasons for why you had changed

Page 9579

 1     your testimony.  I said he gave additional reasons.  And that the only --

 2     it's the additional reason that he gave that should be put to him.  If

 3     that's what -- I mean, the assertion that Mr. Zecevic made is just

 4     slightly inaccurate, that's all.  That's all I was saying.

 5             JUDGE HALL:  So, Mr. Zecevic, it seems that it would be

 6     sufficient for you to put the relevant passage in the proofing note to

 7     set the context for the contradiction you are suggesting the witness has

 8     made.  That will be sufficient.

 9             MR. ZECEVIC:  I understand, Your Honours, and I will read the

10     passage of the proofing note.

11        Q.   [Interpretation] Mr. Mandic, this says that during your proofing

12     at the Prosecution on the 3rd of May, 2010, you said the following.  I

13     will read it in English:

14             "He said that it didn't seem to matter how this had come about

15     when he was testifying against Krajisnik.  And it had seemed logical that

16     it was MS, but ongoing through the transcript he realised he had heard

17     about the law being enacted from Ostojic and had sent the dispatch on his

18     own initiative.  Now that MS was on trial, although he was not protecting

19     MS," meaning Mico Stanisic, "he did not want to say it was him.  MS has

20     four children."

21             [Interpretation] This is how it was recorded by the OTP.  I

22     suppose that Ms. Korner, in her objection, is alluding to what was

23     mentioned here as Mico Stanisic having four children?

24        A.   Yesterday when I started giving evidence, I clearly explained my

25     mistake, the mistake I made involving the names of the people who had

Page 9580

 1     co-operated with me with regard to the dispatch.  I didn't want anybody

 2     to suffer harm due to my mistake.  I mentioned these four children,

 3     but -- because I didn't want to wrong the man, because he had nothing to

 4     do with the dispatch.  And I explained as much on Monday.

 5        Q.   I believe that we have thus exhausted this topic.  You gave us an

 6     explanation.  All the other reasons have been repeated several times in

 7     your statement and during your testimony here and also in the interview

 8     with us on the 21st of March, 2010.  Let's move on.

 9             On Monday while you were giving evidence, on page 9411, you said

10     that Mico Stanisic remained minister of the interior of the

11     Republic of Serbian Bosnia-Herzegovina, that being the name then, ad hoc

12     because for Vitomir Zepinic who had been appointed minister of the

13     interior earlier, and that decision had been published in the

14     Official Gazette, it had been established that he was involved in illegal

15     activity, and that is why Mico Stanisic was appointed.  Do you remember

16     saying that?

17        A.   Yes, and that is true.

18        Q.   My learned friend Ms. Korner, on page 9413, said that she would

19     return to this issue to clarify, but she didn't, hence we will.  When you

20     said that the appointment of Vitomir Zepinic for minister of the interior

21     of the Republic of Serbian Bosnia-Herzegovina, you meant document P180.

22             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] If we can see it on our screens,

23     please, in e-court.

24             MS. KORNER:  Tab number?

25             MR. ZECEVIC:  I am sorry, I don't have a tab number for this one.

Page 9581

 1             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can see it on the screen.

 2             MR. ZECEVIC:  207.  Ms. Korner, tab 207.

 3             MS. KORNER:  Thank you.

 4             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation]

 5        Q.   Mr. Mandic, this is page 10 of the Official Gazette of the

 6     Serbian people in Bosnia-Herzegovina.  That is the Official Gazette.

 7     Issue 1, dated Wednesday, the 15th of January, 1992.  And under 22,

 8     there's the decision on the establishment and election of the

 9     Ministerial Council of the Assembly of the Serbian people in

10     Bosnia-Herzegovina?

11        A.   Correct.

12        Q.   Under Roman numeral III, and I believe that is the following page

13     in -- of the English document, it says:

14             "The following members of the ministerial council are appointed

15     ministers:"

16             And under number 1 we see Ranko Nikolic at minister for judicial

17     and administrative matters, and under number 2, Dr. Vitomir Zepinic as

18     minister of the interior.

19        A.   I believe I explained that.

20        Q.   Under 18 there's the name of Mr. Mico Stanisic and it says, As

21     minister without portfolio.  During your examination on Monday you said

22     that in January it was published that Vitomir Zepinic had been appointed

23     minister of the interior of Republika Srpska; you meant this very

24     document, didn't you?

25        A.   Yes, exactly.

Page 9582

 1        Q.   During your testimony both in the Krajisnik trial and yesterday

 2     and the day before yesterday and this trial, you mentioned

 3     Mr. Ranko Nikolic, minister of justice and public administration, who

 4     didn't turn up to take his position and that's why you became minister of

 5     justice and public administration, didn't you?

 6        A.   Yes.

 7        Q.   Mr. Mandic, let me ask you this:  This Official Gazette of the

 8     Serbian people in Bosnia-Herzegovina, this issue number 1 dated

 9     15 January 1992, was some sort of confidential, secret document?

10        A.   No, it was published in the Official Gazette, a publication in

11     the public domain.  And it says that it would be published in the

12     Official Gazette of the Serbian people of Bosnia-Herzegovina.  It's line

13     four.

14        Q.   Mr. Vitomir Zepinic - it says at the bottom of the decision that

15     it was made on the 21st December, 1991, but it was published in the

16     Official Gazette on the 15th of January - so Mr. Vitomir Zepinic was then

17     appointed minister of the interior and simultaneously he discharged the

18     duties of the deputy minister of the interior of the Socialist Republic

19     of Bosnia-Herzegovina, that is, deputy to minister Alija Delimustafic,

20     all the way up to the end of the war?

21        A.   Until April 1992 when he resigned to that post, and he was the

22     highest ranking official of Serb ethnicity in the

23     Ministry of the Interior.

24        Q.   I believe you said until 4 April 1992 when he resigned to the

25     post?

Page 9583

 1        A.   Yes, deputy minister of the joint MUP.  And until then he was the

 2     highest ranking official of Serb ethnicity in the joint MUP.

 3        Q.   We need to avoid overlapping, really, so that the interpreters

 4     can keep pace.

 5             If I understood your testimony correctly, your evidence in this

 6     trial and in the Krajisnik trial, at that time in March and early

 7     April 1992, it was established beyond any doubt that Mr. Zepinic was

 8     involved in some unlawful activities, and I think you said a car had been

 9     found, Mazda 626, along with the addresses of official -- sorry, the

10     offices given Zepinic by the democratic action party?

11        A.   Yes, the address where the car was found and the address where

12     those offices were registered in the name of his wife, Milosava.  Shall I

13     give you these addresses again?  The offices were in Lenin Street 67,

14     next to the Bosko Buha Kindergarten.  It was over 100 square metres.  And

15     the car, Mazda 626, was found by the police, the chief of which was

16     Tomo Kovac, at an address in Kasindol.  And we didn't find the money.

17        Q.   I would like to go through our transcript now and clear up

18     certain matters and discuss again some of the documents that the

19     Prosecution had shown you over the past few days.

20             On page 9415 when you were explaining the decision of the

21     Trial Chamber considering charges against you for embezzlement, your

22     complete explanation was not recorded, so I would like to correct that.

23     If I understood you well, you said at the time that there is no precedent

24     in the legal practice of any country whatsoever, that anyone can embezzle

25     their own money, and that is why you claim that this judgement was

Page 9584

 1     unfair.

 2        A.   Yes, and I can explain.

 3        Q.   Take it easy, please.

 4        A.   I said at the beginning to the Trial Chamber when I was

 5     explaining the treatment that I had received when attempting to enter the

 6     European Union on this occasion.  In 1993 I was black-listed, that is,

 7     entry was forbidden to me into the United States and the European Union

 8     on the grounds that I was suspected of helping the hiding of

 9     Dr. Radovan Karadzic and helping to finance it.  I had been detained in

10     Serbia on those suspicions, and Serbia has not apologised to me to this

11     day.  And I was also tried before a court in Bosnia and Herzegovina.  In

12     this trial, a final decision, a final judgement, acquitted me of those

13     charges.

14             In the same trial, I was, however, convicted of abuse of

15     authority.  And Your Honours know that this crime does not exist in

16     democratic societies.  It's only when there's nothing else to pin on the

17     person that this crime is claimed.  And I was convicted because I gave

18     loans as director of a bank to certain companies that were suspected of

19     helping the hiding of Radovan Karadzic and they failed to return these

20     loans.

21             I was convicted on the basis of false testimony by an American

22     citizen, Tony Robinson -- or Toby Robinson.  Later on, it was established

23     that these loans were non-existent.  In fact, these loans and the money

24     are my property.  And when I was there before the court, I asked, To whom

25     I should pay damages.  They said, The owner of Privredna Banka.  And when

Page 9585

 1     I said that I am the owner of Privredna Banka so I had no one to pay

 2     damages to, they had no answer.  Therefore, I had been detained solely on

 3     the grounds of suspicions that were never proven, and that is my grudge.

 4     And the director of the IMF and the World Bank for Development and

 5     Reconstruction would have to be in prison for millions of years if they

 6     were convicted for writing off loans to countries that are obviously

 7     unable to repay them.

 8        Q.   Thank you.  Let us now return to some documents shown to you by

 9     Ms. Korner.  In the course of examination-in-chief the day before

10     yesterday and yesterday, Ms. Korner showed you some documents and asked

11     you to comment.  I classified these under three general topics that

12     Ms. Korner has dealt with.  Let's start with group number 1.

13             Ms. Korner asked you to comment on speeches during Assembly

14     meetings made by some MPs whom you designated as extremist; is that

15     correct?

16        A.   Yes.

17        Q.   Mr. Mandic, you are not a politician, are you?

18        A.   No, I'm not.

19        Q.   However, members of parliament were elected in free elections?

20        A.   Yes, by direct ballot in a perfectly democratic way.  That's how

21     MPs are chosen.

22        Q.   And MPs are ultimately responsible for whatever they say in the

23     Assembly to their own voters, and that is why they enjoy immunity as

24     members of parliament?

25        A.   Yes, that is standard practice and that is what the law envisages

Page 9586

 1     throughout the world.  We members of executive authority, people who were

 2     of the same mind as I who had the best intentions to introduce and impose

 3     the rule of law, encountered many problems in our attempts and efforts.

 4     These extremists would confront us and oppose us and draw along many

 5     other MPs.

 6             I refrain from telling people like them that they were wrong.  I

 7     instead wrote letters asking that local authorities be reflective of the

 8     ethnic structure of a given area.  But MPs of that kind would make

 9     speeches and elicit support from others, saying things along the lines of

10     it's a disgrace if you don't support your own.  However, at my

11     insistence, the insistence of Mr. Karadzic and Mr. Djeric, in most of the

12     cases my idea that the ethnic structure of the judiciary should reflect

13     the ethnic structure of a given area succeeded.

14        Q.   Mr. Mandic, could I ask you to give me concise answers and focus

15     on my questions in order not to waste time, because my time is limited as

16     was Ms. Korner's.

17             Let us go back to Assembly sessions.  The Assembly has its own

18     rules, including disciplinary measures applicable to MPs, and these rules

19     are written in the Rules of Procedure of the Assembly, and various other

20     regulatory provisions applying to the Assembly?

21        A.   Yes.

22        Q.   You participated in those Assembly sessions as a member of the

23     cabinet?

24        A.   Yes, as a member of the cabinet, I attended some Assembly

25     sessions.

Page 9587

 1        Q.   The government, the cabinet, is an organ of the Assembly?

 2        A.   Yes.

 3        Q.   And the government answers for its work to the Assembly?

 4        A.   Correct.  The Assembly elects and replaces the government.

 5        Q.   Mr. Mandic, the Prosecution asked you why you had failed to react

 6     when you did not agree with the arguments of various MPs.  Isn't it a

 7     fact that you, as a member of the government, were unable to speak at

 8     Assembly sessions even if you wished to unless a question is directed to

 9     you by MPs concerning items on the agenda that concern your ministry

10     directly?  Isn't it a fact that you were unable to take part in

11     parliamentary debates?

12        A.   When the issue of the election of these judiciary officials was

13     discussed, it is a fact that I had no right to speak.

14        Q.   Thank you.  And this particular limitation applies to all members

15     of the government and all ministers, doesn't it?

16        A.   Yes, it does.

17        Q.   On yesterday's transcript, page 9486, Ms. Korner discussed with

18     you an intercept in which you talked to Prstojevic.  That's 65 ter 3256.

19     Prstojevic was in Ilidza and you were reasoning with him and trying to

20     persuade him not to drive out members of other ethnic groups from the

21     territory of the municipality.  You were telling him it is the position

22     of the government and it was your policy.  And then on page 9487, you

23     said to Ms. Korner that there were many such people as Prstojevic in some

24     smaller places, namely people who advocated very extreme views.  Do you

25     remember saying that?

Page 9588

 1        A.   Yes.

 2        Q.   It is a fact that in some of those smaller places individuals of

 3     that sort ran out of control completely, as it were, and you said

 4     yesterday they were practically creating their own little states?

 5        A.   Yes, it's typical of Serb people.

 6        Q.   It is a fact, isn't it, that as a result of the war in 1992, the

 7     central government in Republika Srpska was not easy and quick to

 8     establish.  There were no mechanisms of central authority?

 9        A.   As the conflict escalated, communications broke down.  Both

10     telecommunications and roads were cut off, and it was very difficult to

11     keep in touch with all the territories held by Serbs.

12        Q.   It's also a fact, isn't it, that this lack of control and that

13     this parochial conduct of some local Mandarins was noticed as a problem

14     very early on, and even back on 23rd May, 1992, it was suggested at a

15     government meeting that Crisis Staffs should be abolished?

16        A.   Yes, and a decision was made to abolish them.

17             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] That's P217, tab 39.  Could we call

18     that document up.

19        Q.   This is under item 4.  Do you agree, Mr. Mandic?

20        A.   Yes.

21        Q.   That was the 23rd of May session.  You were at the time already

22     the minister of judiciary in that cabinet, and a conclusion was reached

23     to undertake measures to abolish Crisis Staffs; is that right?

24        A.   Yes.

25        Q.   It is a fact, isn't it, Mr. Mandic, that due to inability of the

Page 9589

 1     central government to control the territory, attempts were made to

 2     contemplate and to draw up various alternatives to the Crisis Staffs that

 3     eventually turned out to be a huge problem?

 4        A.   Yes.  One of the alternatives was -- just like Mr. Poplasen was

 5     in Vogosca - I don't know how it was called - I think it was called

 6     commissioners for certain towns that were appointed by the Presidency of

 7     Republika Srpska.  That was a transitional solution pending total

 8     abolishment of the local authorities and stripping them of all their

 9     jurisdiction.

10        Q.   I'm going to remind you that there were War Presidencies and then

11     war commissioner's offices were in place after that; is that right?

12        A.   Yes.

13        Q.   And this, as you put it, abolishment of local authorities took

14     place in September 1992 following the adoption of the amendment to the

15     constitution of Republika Srpska and some subsequent decisions?

16        A.   Yes.

17        Q.   Mr. Mandic, it is a fact that the corridor in Northern Bosnia was

18     opened only in early July 1992; is that right?

19        A.   Yes.  That was a huge problem for the Serbian people.  It is well

20     known that tens of babies died in the maternity ward in the hospital in

21     Banja Luka due to the lack of medicine.  This caused outrage among the

22     Serbian people in Bosnia-Herzegovina.

23        Q.   It is also a fact, isn't it, Mr. Mandic, that for a certain

24     period of time until this corridor was opened, neither the government nor

25     the ministries had almost no information about what was happening in

Page 9590

 1     northwestern Bosnia, which is the territory of the Krajina, as well as in

 2     central Bosnia, that is to say, Doboj, Brcko, and Samac; Is that correct?

 3        A.   Yes, I explained that all telecommunications and road

 4     communications were severed.

 5             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Could we just -- on page 25,

 6     line 12, I said Doboj, Brcko, and Samac.  Can that please be corrected in

 7     the transcript.

 8        Q.   As the government, and you as the minister, received information

 9     about what was happening in that period -- in that area, the

10     Northern Bosnia, north of Posavina, only in July 1992; is that correct?

11        A.   Yes.

12        Q.   On page 9494 of yesterday's transcript, you were shown document

13     P427.11.

14             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Can we please have it in e-court.

15     427.11.

16        Q.   This relates to the 28th session of the Government of the

17     Serbian Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina held on the 15th of June, 1992.

18     You remember that you discussed this document with Ms. Korner?

19        A.   Yes.

20        Q.   On page 4, I think both in Serbian and English, we have item 10.

21     My learned friend asked you about the commission that was set up and was

22     tasked with reviewing certain information arriving from the ground

23     concerning the exchange of prisoners, et cetera.  You said that it also

24     involved the bringing in of civilians into illegal prisons, wrongful

25     arrests, et cetera.  You remember that?

Page 9591

 1        A.   Yes, but can I see the proper page.  Yes, it's okay now.

 2        Q.   You can see, it's under item 10.

 3        A.   Yes.

 4        Q.   It is a fact, isn't it, that this commission and the information

 5     provided to you at the time, that is to say, on 15th of June, 1992, did

 6     not cover part of the territory that we discussed a moment ago, that is

 7     to say, you had no information whatsoever at the time?

 8        A.   Yes.

 9        Q.   In other words, this commission was set up based on the

10     information arriving from parts of the Serbian Republic of

11     Bosnia-Herzegovina with which you had communications?

12        A.   Yes.

13        Q.   On page 9559 of yesterday's transcript, you confirmed in response

14     to Ms. Korner's question that you had no information about Manjaca and

15     Sanski Most; do you remember that?

16        A.   Yes, that is correct.  I had no information whatsoever.  We

17     simply couldn't obtain any information because the Krajina was completely

18     severed.  Only after the corridor had been opened, we could use the roads

19     and telecommunications.

20        Q.   Although your ministry had certain institutions on the ground

21     that were under your jurisdictions, like, for example, the prison in

22     Doboj, the district prison in Doboj, you had no contact with that

23     institution all the way until the corridor was opened; is that correct?

24        A.   Yes, due to these and similar problems, I think that Doboj was

25     set up only towards the end of 1992 in December after we had completed

Page 9592

 1     the re-organisation and established the job qualification, adopted rules

 2     of governance, and we only appointed the governor of the prison towards

 3     the end of 1992.

 4        Q.   The fact is that after you learned about the events that had

 5     taken place in those territories that became accessible to you after

 6     July 1992, the Government of Republika Srpska adopted, on

 7     9th of August, 1992, a decision to set up a commission which will visit

 8     all the collection centres and other detention centres where prisoners

 9     were kept in the Serbian Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina.  That's

10     65 ter 1422.

11             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I'm being warned

12     about this document, that it was on the Prosecution 65 ter list but that

13     it had been removed from the list on the 14th of April of this year

14     pursuant to a ruling.  At that time, we notified the Registrar about this

15     and we talked with Mr. Philip, and it was suggested to us not to upload

16     this document for a second time since it's already in e-court.

17             MS. KORNER:  Sorry, could I have an explanation of that.  I'm not

18     sure what you are talking about.  Are you saying this is a document we

19     removed as a result of a ruling by the Trial Chamber?

20             MR. ZECEVIC:  That is my understanding.  The ruling of the --

21             MS. KORNER:  Your Honours, I see the time.  Yes, I'm not clear at

22     the moment on what basis.  If you ordered us to take it off, it's going

23     back in again.  If Your Honours take the break, I can discuss it with

24     Mr. Zecevic and maybe we can sort this out.

25             MR. ZECEVIC:  Yes, maybe that would be the best.

Page 9593

 1             MS. KORNER:  Yes.

 2             JUDGE HALL:  Yes, we'll take the break now.

 3                           [The witness stands down]

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

 5                           --- On resuming at 10.53 a.m.

 6             MS. KORNER:  Your Honours, while we are waiting for the witness

 7     to come in, may I just remind Your Honours that the discussion we had on

 8     Monday morning, we need to notify VWS as to when the next witness should

 9     be brought up.

10             JUDGE HALL:  We haven't forgotten, Ms. Korner.

11                           [The witness takes the stand]

12             MR. ZECEVIC:  May I continue, Your Honours?

13             JUDGE HALL:  Yes, please.

14             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Can we please have 65 ter 1422 in

15     e-court, please.  65 ter 1422.  Page 2 in both versions.

16        Q.   Finally we have the document, Mr. Mandic, on our screens.  As I

17     said, this is a decision by the government to form a commission.  The

18     decision was taken on the 9th of August, 1992, on behalf of the

19     government.  It was signed by Mr. Trbojevic.  Can you see that?

20        A.   Yes.

21        Q.   Pursuant to this decision, the government, in fact, set up two

22     commissions to visit the collection centres.  One commission, under A,

23     Vojin Lale and Mirko Erkic; and under B we have Slobodan Avlijas and

24     Goran Saric.  Can you see that?

25        A.   Yes.

Page 9594

 1        Q.   And under item 2, the government tasked the commission in detail,

 2     pursuant to this decision.  Can you see that?

 3        A.   Yes.

 4        Q.   Under item 3, the commission instructed -- was instructed to

 5     submit reports following the inspections?

 6        A.   Yes.

 7        Q.   You have seen this before?

 8        A.   Yes.

 9             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] If there are no objections, I would

10     like to tender this document into evidence.

11             JUDGE HALL:  Admitted and marked.

12             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit 1D254, Your Honours.

13        Q.   Mr. Mandic, this commission was not the commission of your

14     ministry, but, rather, a commission set up by the government; is that

15     right?

16        A.   Yes, it was the government commission made up of experts in this

17     particular area.

18        Q.   These two commissions submitted their respective reports in

19     relation to the territories they had visited.  The commission, under A,

20     made up of Vojin Lale and Mirko Erkic, submitted a report, P194 dated the

21     17th of August, 1992.  The report was submitted to the government, and it

22     reads that this is a report by the commission, following the inspection

23     of prisoner facilities in the region of Krajina.

24             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Can we please have Exhibit P194.

25        Q.   You can see this front page, and do you remember this report?

Page 9595

 1        A.   Yes, I do.

 2        Q.   Since this is a document already in evidence, let us not waste

 3     time.  Based on this report and the report submitted by commission B, the

 4     government received an aggregate report shown to you yesterday which was

 5     marked P393, summarising these two reports?

 6        A.   Yes.

 7        Q.   All right.  And all these reports, as we said, went to the

 8     government because it was a government commission; right?

 9        A.   Yes.

10        Q.   Thank you.  Let us pass on to something else.  Or, rather, one

11     more question.  Only based on the findings of these commissions that were

12     submitted in the second half of August, the government, including the

13     ministries, received a comprehensive picture of the situation in the

14     territories visited by the commissions?

15        A.   Yes, they were informed of the situation on the ground.

16        Q.   Thank you.  When you say "situation on the ground," you mean the

17     situation with regard to the matters with which the commissions were

18     tasked?

19        A.   Yes.

20        Q.   Very well.  Let us pass on to the second group of questions my

21     learned friend Ms. Korner asked you in the two days of

22     examination-in-chief.  This second group of questions related to

23     prisoners, commissions for exchange, imprisonment facilities, et cetera.

24     Even today she asked you again about something similar.

25             On page 9499 of the transcript, you spoke about the authorities

Page 9596

 1     with regard to the prisoners and the powers of the military commanders

 2     with regard to that.  Do you remember?

 3        A.   Yes.

 4        Q.   An instruction was mentioned about the treatment of prisoners,

 5     dated the 13th of June, 1992, which was drafted and published in the

 6     Official Gazette by the Ministry of Defence -- or the Minister of Defence

 7     Subotic.  We saw it.  P427.27.  Let us take a look at it again and

 8     explain some of the facts.

 9             This is the instruction on the treatment of captured persons

10     which you saw at the beginning of today's hearing.  Do you remember?

11        A.   Yes.

12        Q.   Ms. Korner quoted some of the items to you, I believe it was

13     item 2, item 10, et cetera.  I would like us to comment on item 4.

14     Item 4 reads that:

15             "Captured persons shall be taken to reception centres as

16     determined by a senior officer with the rank of company commander or by a

17     person holding an equal or higher position before the start of combat

18     activities."

19             Can you see it?

20        A.   Yes, I can see it.

21        Q.   Which means that the military, before it launches a military

22     operation, the officer, that is, the company commander or

23     higher-ranking officer, depending on who is in charge of the operation,

24     determines the place to be considered a reception centre; right?

25        A.   Yes.

Page 9597

 1        Q.   And then in the following paragraph of the same item, we read:

 2             "After their identity has been established in the reception

 3     centre, captured persons shall be taken to prison camp in an organised

 4     manner and under escort."

 5             Is that right?

 6        A.   Yes.

 7             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Can we now see the following page

 8     of the Serbian text, and I believe we can stay on the same page of the

 9     English version.  The items I'm interested in are 12, 17, 18, and 19.

10     Page 2.

11        Q.   You see that it says in item 12 that:

12             "The camp commander shall issue regulations relative to specific

13     rights and obligations of captured persons, their behaviour in the camp,

14     and the conditions for the application of disciplinary measures.  The

15     regulations shall be displayed publicly so that all captured persons can

16     see them."

17             Can you see that?

18        A.   Yes.  This is exactly what I tried to explain, having been asked

19     by the Prosecutor.

20        Q.   And the last thing.  Item 18 reads:

21             "The commanders of corps of they Army of the Serbian Republic of

22     Bosnia-Herzegovina are responsible for ..."

23             In the English version this on the following page, item 18,

24     et cetera.  It is signed by Minister of Defence Colonel Bogdan Subotic;

25     right?

Page 9598

 1        A.   Yes.  This is what I was saying, the corps commanders were

 2     deciding on who was to be released and who was to be kept, who was to be

 3     considered a POW, and, again, this was applied to all captured persons,

 4     both military staff and civilians, non-Serbs.  Only the corps commander

 5     had the power to decide on these matters.  And this instruction with

 6     legal force was published in the Official Gazette of the Serbian People.

 7     Since there was an imminent threat of war, this had legal force and was

 8     binding for both the military and the civilian authorities, including the

 9     police and everybody else.

10        Q.   It's a fact, isn't it, sir, that under Article 4 of the

11     Geneva Convention on the treatment of prisoners -- or let me put it this

12     way, Article 4 of the Geneva Convention on the Rights of Prisoners of War

13     lists all those persons that are to be considered prisoners of war under

14     the convention.  There are six times plus two additional items.  Are you

15     familiar with that?

16        A.   Yes.

17        Q.   You will agree with me when I say, I hope, that a person - and

18     this in line with the provisions of the Geneva Convention - gets the

19     status of a prisoner of war as from the moment it comes under the control

20     of the enemy?

21        A.   Yes, if it happened in combat and if that person was armed.

22        Q.   That means if the military carries out some operation and takes

23     some persons prisoner - and in this instruction we see -- we read

24     "captured persons."  From that moment on, those persons are under the

25     control of the military that took them prisoner?

Page 9599

 1        A.   Under the authority of the military commander with territorial

 2     jurisdiction.

 3        Q.   Certainly as the commander under this instruction before

 4     commencing the operation must decide what is to be considered a

 5     collection centre and once the persons have been brought there after the

 6     military operation, a certain procedure must be applied to establish

 7     whether or not a certain person meets the conditions to be considered a

 8     POW of the Geneva Convention; right?

 9        A.   Yes, that is in line with the instruction and it's in accordance

10     with the standards of the Geneva Convention.

11        Q.   That means until the moment this procedure is carried out and

12     until it is established whether those persons have a status under the

13     Geneva Convention or whether they are civilians or have some other

14     status, they remain in that collection centre or in that facility under

15     the control of the military; right?

16        A.   Yes.  They remain under the control of the military, but they are

17     captured persons.  Once that procedure is carried out, then it is

18     established who is a soldier, who is a civilian, et cetera.  It's done by

19     the relevant services, of course.

20        Q.   Thank you.  In your 92 ter package, there's document 65 ter

21     1403 --

22             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Mr. Zecevic, are you moving on to something else?

23     Because I have a few questions relating to this document and this matter.

24             MR. ZECEVIC:  Yes, I was it was my intention to move on, yes.

25             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Then can I just kick in a few questions.

Page 9600

 1             First of all, Mr. Mandic, the instruction that we saw to set up

 2     the reception centres did not, as I could see, make the distinction

 3     between POWs and civilians.  It just said that the identity had to be

 4     established of the captive person, and then once that procedure had been

 5     brought to an end, the person was then to be passed on to, I think the

 6     term was, prison camps.  So my question is:  What would the commander do

 7     if he sat in front of a captured person and that person turned out to be

 8     a civilian?  Would that person then still be sent to a prison camp?

 9             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, this is about captive

10     persons, and civilians are not distinguished from military prisoners of

11     war.  Once the relevant services establish who was a civilian and who

12     isn't, they classify the persons in accordance with military rules and

13     decide where these persons are to be put up.  And this depended

14     exclusively on the corps commander and his services.

15             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Yes, I can read that in the rule or in the

16     instruction.  But my question to you was that the rule in paragraph 4

17     only said that the captive persons would be passed on or sent on to

18     prison camps.  And so I repeat my question:  Since the rule itself does

19     not make any distinction between prison camp for prisoners of war and

20     other detention facilities for civilians, then it looks to me as if

21     everybody, prisoners of war as well as civilians, would be sent to the

22     same prison camps?

23             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Whether they were sent to separate

24     camps or the same ones as it says here, I cannot tell you, Your Honour,

25     because I had no knowledge about that.  Those camps were secured by the

Page 9601

 1     army, and the army ran those camps.

 2             JUDGE HARHOFF:  But, Mr. Mandic, you being the minister of

 3     justice at the time, you would have taken part in the government's

 4     considerations about how to treat all of these people.  So what was your

 5     input to the issue of how to treat civilians who for one reason or

 6     another had been detained?

 7             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is contained in the report of

 8     the government commission on the proposed measures.  It was submitted to

 9     both the president of the republic and the cabinet and all relevant

10     institutions.  Because the governmental commission, which was composed of

11     experts and had visited various parts of the territory controlled by the

12     Bosnian Serbs, drafted a report on the conditions in those camps and made

13     proposals as to the measures which should be done in those camps where

14     civilians, women and children, and POWs were held.  This is a already an

15     exhibit in this trial.  Because a civilian body of state administration

16     could only propose measures for the army to implement or those who

17     controlled those camps.

18             JUDGE HARHOFF:  And so the camps that were set up to hold the

19     civilians, would they come under the jurisdiction of the

20     Ministry of Justice?

21             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, Your Honour.  The

22     Ministry of Justice set up prisons and facilities for penitentiary

23     facilities for the needs of the judicial system of Republika Srpska.

24     This has nothing to do with the camps in which non-Serbs were kept.

25     These are two completely separate institutions.

Page 9602

 1             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Forgive me for trying to explore this further on.

 2     We have been through this issue with many witnesses before you,

 3     Mr. Mandic.  I'm simply trying to get a better understanding of just how

 4     this was done.  Let's get back to the starting point.  As far as

 5     prisoners of war are concerned, they would be held in special prison

 6     camps run by the Ministry of Defence; did I get that right?

 7             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

 8             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Right.  If then civilians were detained, then

 9     they would first be sent to a reception centre where their identity would

10     be established and in -- more particularly, their role of being either a

11     combatant or a non-combatant.  So if --

12             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Correct.

13             JUDGE HARHOFF:  If the reception centre established that the

14     person was not a combatant, that is to say, a civilian, then he or she

15     would be sent to a separate camp; is that correct?  Separate from the

16     camp that would hold the prisoners of war.  Is that correctly understood?

17             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Reading and trying to interpret

18     this instruction, that's what it says.  However, both captured civilians

19     and POWs were the responsibility of the army because they were detained

20     and released on account of war and during the war, and there was no other

21     institution with jurisdiction and authority to detain or release them

22     apart from the army.  And that is pursuant to this instruction and on the

23     orders of the President of the Republic Dr. Karadzic.  Because this here

24     is preceded by an order which I see is not included in this material.

25             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Well, my concern is still that civilians who were

Page 9603

 1     captured and detained would ordinarily be detained under the authority of

 2     either the Ministry of Justice or the Ministry of the Interior, but

 3     certainly not by the army?

 4             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It was only under the jurisdiction

 5     of the army because nobody could be under the jurisdiction of the

 6     Ministry of Justice unless an investigating judge had made a decision to

 7     detain a civilian on account of a criminal offence, because the

 8     Ministry of Justice as a state organ had no authority to detain anyone

 9     during the war unless it was doing a service for the army or following a

10     decision of a competent court in the area, because the Ministry of

11     Justice established penal correctional facilities only in July and early

12     August, and that process continued until December that year, from all I

13     know from my term in office as minister.

14             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Mr. Mandic, maybe I could ask you a different

15     question or, rather, ask you a question from a different angle, namely to

16     say, was there in the government a clear plan of how to deal with all the

17     various categories of persons who were detained during the war in the

18     summer of 1992?

19             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.  In August and September,

20     commissions were established and a plan was adopted to close down

21     collection centres set up by local Crisis Staffs that were spread all

22     over the territory and with which the government had no communication, as

23     it had no communication with certain areas held by Serbs.  That's why

24     these commissions were set up and prepared a comprehensive report on how

25     to close down these camps where people were detained, civilian or

Page 9604

 1     non-civilian.  The government, the Presidency of the republic, and the

 2     Supreme Command of the army were all informed of this, and they were the

 3     only ones who were able to take the necessary steps because the Ministry

 4     of Justice or the Ministry of the Interior as organs of state authority

 5     were unable to do anything about detained non-Serbs in circumvention of

 6     the army because the immediate state of -- the immediate threat of war

 7     had been proclaimed, and we had to act pursuant to this instruction

 8     issued by the minister of defence.  It was published in the

 9     Official Gazette and had the force of law.  And this clearly says that

10     local army commanders have jurisdiction over detained people.

11             JUDGE HARHOFF:  So, if I understand you correctly, in the end the

12     responsibility for all categories of captured persons during the war was

13     left in the hands of the army; is that correct?

14             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Correct, Your Honour.

15             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Thank you.

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

17             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Back to you, Mr. Zecevic.  Thanks.

18             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] If I may be of assistance, I

19     believe when the witness was speaking about the commission of the -- of

20     the report of the commission, referred to 5393 -- sorry, P393.  It's a

21     report made by the state commission proposing certain measures that

22     needed to be applied.

23             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's precisely what I tried to

24     explain to the Court.  The government could only propose measures, but it

25     could not enforce them.  It could only propose how to close down these

Page 9605

 1     illegal prisons and to put everything in conformity with the rule of law,

 2     and that could only be implemented by army commanders at the local level.

 3             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation]

 4        Q.   Thank you, Mr. Mandic.  Let us go back to your 92 ter packet,

 5     65 ter 1403.  It's a letter from the state commission.  Tab 35.  It's

 6     from the 92 ter package.  I'm not sure you received it.  It's a letter on

 7     whose page 3 you will see the President of the State Commission

 8     Filip Vukovic.  It concerns the state commission for the exchange of

 9     prisoners on the side of the Federation.  And you talked about it in your

10     direct examination?

11             MS. KORNER:  He didn't.  I didn't ask him about this.

12             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation]

13        Q.   I said you mentioned the name of Filip Vukovic in regard to an

14     intercept.  I believe it was a conversation with Krajisnik, do you

15     remember that?

16        A.   Yes, yes, I'm looking at Madam Prosecutor.

17             MS. KORNER:  Sorry, Your Honours, I shouldn't have interrupted.

18     I thought it was suggested that I showed him this document, but I hadn't.

19             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation]

20        Q.   Very briefly, sir.  Considering that there was a state commission

21     in the Federation headed by this Filip Vukovic, it means, doesn't it,

22     that the other side also captured Serbs?

23        A.   Yes.

24        Q.   And it was precisely these captives who were exchanged for

25     persons captured in the military operations of the Army of

Page 9606

 1     Republika Srpska?

 2        A.   Yes.

 3        Q.   Another document on the same issue from your 1992 ter package,

 4     tab 32, P179.18.  It's a government decision dated 8 May 1992.  It's a

 5     decision to establish a central government commission for the exchange of

 6     prisoners of war, arrested persons, and bodies of the dead.  It was

 7     headed by Rajko Colovic?

 8        A.   Yes, I can see that.

 9        Q.   On page 2 we see the signature of the prime minister,

10     Dr. Branko Djeric.  It's a fact, isn't it, that this central commission

11     was also a government commission?

12        A.   Yes.

13        Q.   And it had no direct connection to the Ministry of Justice.  And

14     on top of that you were not the minister of justice yet?

15        A.   No, I wasn't.  I had only just been appointed.

16        Q.   You are aware that attached to various army corps there were also

17     commissions for exchange of prisoners?

18        A.   Yes.  There were municipal commissions and commissions attached

19     to army corps.  Municipal commissions had been set up by Crisis Staffs

20     and were later renamed war commissions.  That's what I was trying to

21     explain.  It was a period when the whole territory held by Serbs was

22     divided into bits and pieces that had no communication amongst

23     themselves.  Roads were cut off and telecommunications too.

24        Q.   On page 9513 of yesterday's transcript, you said that Mr. Colovic

25     resigned at some point?

Page 9607

 1        A.   Yes, I remember that.  He was given a different position.

 2        Q.   Now, I'd like to show you another document from your

 3     92 ter package.  It's 65 ter 1401.  The date is 14 July 1992.  It was

 4     sent by the Ministry of Justice and thereby the Ministry of Justice sends

 5     to the municipality of Ilidza, in this case, the government decision to

 6     appoint Nenad Vanovac, chairman of the central commission, for the

 7     exchange of POWs and others?

 8        A.   Yes, somebody signed this for me and informed that this Vanovac

 9     was going to replace Colovic as chairman of the commission.  He was

10     appointed by the government, and somebody signed this on my behalf.

11             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Can we see page 2 of this document.

12     I'm being told there's no page 2.  I'll come back to this issue.

13        Q.   Let me show you one more document, 92 ter package 65 ter 1986.

14     This is a contract that the chairman of this commission Nenad Vanovac

15     signed on the 5th of July, 1992, with the chairman of the Federations

16     commission and with the mediation of the UNPROFOR.  It's an agreement to

17     release prisoners all for all.

18        A.   Yes, I can see that.

19        Q.   You know that on the 11th of July, in fact, I hope you know that

20     on the 11th of July an agreement was reached between Dr. Karadzic and

21     Mr. Izetbegovic on the exchange of prisoners.

22             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Can we see page 2.

23             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I know.

24             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] That is the agreement of

25     11 July 1992.  If we can just see the last page, page 4 in e-court.  It's

Page 9608

 1     5 in English.

 2        Q.   Do you see the signature of Radovan Karadzic and --

 3        A.   Nenad Vanovac.

 4        Q.   Yes, Nenad Vanovac, chairman of the commission.  And this is a

 5     copy that, I suppose, was given to the other side, Mr. Izetbegovic and

 6     Filip Vukovic, for them to sign?

 7        A.   Yes.

 8             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Court's indulgence.  I had given

 9     the 65 ter number, and my assistant suggests that it's P1318.26, already

10     an exhibit.

11        Q.   Mr. Mandic, let's move on to a different topic you discussed with

12     Ms. Korner.  You spoke about prisons and explained the jurisdictions of

13     military and civilian authorities.  And you explained that again in

14     response to a question by His Honour Judge Harhoff.  We have seen that

15     instruction issued by the minister of defence, and on page 9536, when you

16     were asked to give an explanation about the prison in Vogosca, you said

17     the prison was divided between jurisdictions into one section in the

18     jurisdiction of the army and another section run by the court.

19        A.   Yes.

20        Q.   And yesterday you spoke about it on this page that I referred to

21     and you said that in the section run by the court there were only two

22     persons that had been charged.

23        A.   Yes.  Persons against whom the court had instituted proceedings

24     because all the people imprisoned during the state of immediate threat of

25     war fell under the jurisdiction of the military authorities.

Page 9609

 1        Q.   We'll come to that.  When you gave this answer, you made a

 2     comparison which I think is a very good one.  You compared the situation

 3     in the prison in Vogosca with the situation that prevails in the

 4     Scheveningen prison where the entire building is under the jurisdiction

 5     of the Dutch Ministry of Justice, however, the UN Detention Unit is a

 6     section where totally different rules apply; is that correct?

 7        A.   Yes.

 8        Q.   The jurisdiction under the section which constitutes the UN

 9     Detention Unit allies only with this Tribunal.  It is nothing to do with

10     either the Dutch authorities or Dutch courts; is that correct?

11        A.   I did that for the benefit of the Trial Chamber so that they can

12     grasp the situation that existed in certain prisons in Republika Srpska.

13     This refers to Vogosca Correctional and Penal Facility, Butmir, and

14     others.

15        Q.   On page 9540 of yesterday's transcript, we cited another example

16     relating to the current situation of Sarajevo Butmir prison.  Let us not

17     repeat that, but the essence, Mr. Mandic, is, and I hope you will agree

18     with me, is that the organ conducting proceedings against certain

19     individual under the law is responsible for this individual and his

20     rights?

21        A.   Yes, this was illustrated by the examples that I cited both in

22     Holland and in Bosnia-Herzegovina.

23        Q.   And the same applied to Republika Srpska in 1992, the same

24     principle?

25        A.   These two examples illustrate the situation in Republika Srpska

Page 9610

 1     in 1992.

 2        Q.   Very well.  A third set of questions that Ms. Korner tackled in

 3     examination-in-chief refers to the election and appointment of judges,

 4     and reactions of certain MPs to the proposals coming from your ministry

 5     relating to the appointment of judges.  Do you remember that?

 6        A.   Yes.

 7        Q.   On that occasion you were shown document 65 ter 2722, which is

 8     tab 77 in the Prosecution binder.

 9             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] And can we please look at it again.

10     It's 65 ter 2722.

11        Q.   Do you remember that document, sir?

12        A.   Yes.

13        Q.   You saw it yesterday?

14        A.   Yes.

15             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Can I please have page 6 in

16     Serbian.  I don't know which page it is in English, but since we are just

17     looking for a specific name, I think it will suffice.

18        Q.   It was suggested at the time by the Prosecution that crossed out

19     are the candidates in this list were actually stricken out on the grounds

20     of their being non-Serbs.  Do you remember that?

21        A.   Yes.

22        Q.   You can see here under number 34 --

23             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] I apologise, it's on the next page.

24     Number 34 we are looking for.  It's page 10 in English I'm being told.

25             MS. KORNER:  Actually, Your Honours, to be clear, I'm not

Page 9611

 1     suggesting the crossings out here were done because they were non-Serbs,

 2     indeed I didn't suggest it.  I went to the actual meeting of the Assembly

 3     and quoted what had been said there.  I have no idea why these people

 4     have been crossed out here.  And, indeed, I'm not suggesting anything.

 5     I'm merely pointing out what was said.

 6             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation]

 7        Q.   In that case, I misunderstood the point made by Ms. Korner when

 8     she showed you this document.  At any rate, let us just, to be on the

 9     safe side, comment on it.  Under 34 crossed out is a certain Nada Visic

10     nee Bjelic; is that right?

11        A.   Yes.

12        Q.   And she is a Serb.

13             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] And if we move to item 48.  It's

14     page 12 in English.

15        Q.   So item 47 is a Serbian woman named Rada.  She was also crossed

16     out.

17        A.   Slavica.

18        Q.   Number 48 is a certain Slavica who was first -- whose name was

19     first underlined and then crossed out, under 48?

20        A.   Yes.

21        Q.   Very well.  Let's not dwell on this any longer.  There is another

22     Serb, Milorad Krkeljas, on the following page who has also been stricken

23     out.  But in view of the fact that this is a rather tiresome exercise and

24     in view of what Ms. Korner said with respect to this, let us move on.

25        A.   I understood that Ms. Korner did not comment on the list, not on

Page 9612

 1     any individual name on the list.

 2        Q.   I agree with you.  When we look at document P378, it's a document

 3     that --

 4             THE INTERPRETER:  Could the speakers please not overlap.

 5     Thank you.

 6             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This refers to the Assembly session

 7     held in Banja Luka.

 8             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation]

 9        Q.   Yes, this refers to the Assembly session held on

10     12th August, 1992.  It's P738.  It's tab 93.  And you discussed this

11     document with Ms. Korner yesterday.

12        A.   Yes.

13             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Can we please -- it's a wrong

14     document.  I need P738 or 65 ter 1459.  That's the one.  Can we please

15     look at page -- or rather, I can give you ERN number which is 0410-2038.

16     It's entitled, or, rather, there's a subheading, The Discussion of

17     Momcilo Krajisnik.

18        Q.   Mr. Mandic, if I remember your statement given yesterday

19     correctly, you said that the position of your ministry as well as the

20     position of the president was that the ethnic composition and

21     representation should strictly be abided by in the Assembly?

22        A.   Yes.  It was both my position and the position of the president.

23             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Can we please look at page which

24     bears number 18 in the upper right-hand corner.  Yes, that's the one.

25        Q.   Sir, this is --

Page 9613

 1             MS. KORNER:  English, please.

 2             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation]

 3        Q.   -- the contribution of Mr. Karadzic.

 4             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Yes.  You'll have the English

 5     version as well.

 6        Q.   As I said, this is the contribution of Mr. Karadzic who took to

 7     the floor after what Ms. Korner showed to you on the previous pages where

 8     the MPs voted contrary to your proposal and, in fact, did not elect the

 9     candidates that were proposed.  Do you remember that?

10        A.   Yes, I do.  If I may explain --

11        Q.   Let us read what Mr. Karadzic said.

12        A.   I can comment on it.  I was at this session.  Mr. Karadzic tried

13     to persuade the MPs to accept the proposal that I put forward for members

14     of judiciary to be elected in proportion to the ethnic composition.

15     However, he was overruled by the MPs and his suggestion was not accepted.

16             In order to illustrate his point, he said that Alija Izetbegovic

17     was paying every Serb in gold just to be in his government.  And after

18     that the majority of MPs refused to vote in favour of these officials to

19     be elected.  Since Mr. Karadzic, pursuant to Article 83 of the

20     constitution, had powers to sign decisions on behalf of the Assembly,

21     these people were appointed to the Ministry of Justice.  That was the

22     problem.

23             I as the minister -- and I think that Mr. Karadzic either was

24     able to confront these people who were rather overheated in their

25     discussion.  They had been on the front, et cetera.  He tried to find a

Page 9614

 1     way to impart on those people that this was the wrong way to take, the

 2     wrong course.  We didn't manage to do that at that Assembly, but we

 3     managed to do that later.

 4        Q.   The crux of the matter, Mr. Mandic, is, isn't it, that the

 5     president of the republic, the government, and the ministry pursued one

 6     policy and they had one single proposal behind which you stood, i.e.,

 7     that the national proportionality be represented in a proper way; is that

 8     correct?

 9        A.   Yes.

10        Q.   However, the MPs were against that?

11        A.   Yes, they were even against the president himself.  They could

12     have impeached him.  They could have dismissed me as well.  They were the

13     people who had power in their hands because they were elected directly by

14     the people.

15        Q.   Beneath the contribution by Mr. Karadzic, we can see what

16     Mr. Krajisnik says.  He was the speaker of the parliament?

17        A.   Yes.

18        Q.   And he says the following:

19             "Radovan, let me explain.  Nobody rejects them because they are

20     not good or because they are Muslims or Croats.  Simply, we have decided

21     to declare ourselves now because we are in a state of civil war and they

22     say once the conditions are ripe, they with be elected."

23             Do you remember that?

24        A.   Yes.

25        Q.   Very well.  Thank you.  I have to show you, since it was

Page 9615

 1     something that Ms. Korner showed to you too, and that is minutes of the

 2     meeting of the 20th session held on the 14th, 15th September.  It's P430,

 3     tab 38.

 4             THE INTERPRETER:  48, correction by the interpreter.

 5             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation]

 6        Q.   Again, there is mention here of the election of judges.

 7             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] And if we can please have ERN page

 8     number 0422-6317.  That was the part that Ms. Korner didn't read out to

 9     you, but I think it will be a good means of illustrating the point that I

10     want to make.

11             MS. KORNER:  Sorry, tab 38 or 48 in which, yours or ours?

12             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] It's tab 98 in the Prosecution set

13     of documents.

14             THE INTERPRETER:  Interpreter's note:  Could the counsel please

15     read slowly when he is quoting numbers.  Thank you.

16             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] We had a correct page in the

17     Serbian version, however, the English is wrong, regrettably.

18             MS. KORNER:  Your Honours, can I suggest Mr. Zecevic puts his

19     headphones on, because he is not hearing what the interpreters say, and

20     we are having quite a lot of problems at the moment.

21             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] I have read the transcript,

22     Ms. Korner, and I will be careful in future.

23        Q.   I'm going to ask you to read this portion.  Actually, these are

24     only two sentences somewhere in the middle of the page in Serbian, and

25     I'm expecting an interpretation to get in order not to look for the

Page 9616

 1     translation on the page.  The question is as follows:

 2             "Who is in favour of appointing Zoran Kovac, deputy of the public

 3     prosecutor in Banja Luka?"

 4             Do you see that?

 5        A.   Yes.

 6        Q.   Then the question is:

 7             "Who is for, who is against, abstained?"

 8             And the speaker, I suppose, then notes that the majority was

 9     against and that thereby the decision to appoint Zoran Kovac was not

10     approved and confirmed.

11             It is the fact, Mr. Mandic, that Zoran Kovac was a Serb; is that

12     right?

13        A.   Yes.

14        Q.   Immediately underneath the question asked by the speaker was:

15             "Who is in favour to appoint Ibrahim Alagic, deputy prosecutor in

16     Banja Luka?"

17             Alagic, Ibrahim is a Muslim?

18        A.   Yes, he is a Muslim.

19        Q.   Then we have the vote, and it is stated that with the majority of

20     votes, Mr. Ibrahim Alagic was elected?

21        A.   Yes, that's what I was talking about all the time.

22        Q.   Thank you.  I have no questions relating to this.

23             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] I have just been told that this was

24     page 116 in English.  I do apologise for this.

25             Yes, correct, it's halfway through the page in the English

Page 9617

 1     version.  Mr. Kovac and Mr. Alagic are mentioned.

 2             For the sake of the Trial Chamber, since our legal library still

 3     isn't uploaded in e-court unfortunately, I'll give the reference numbers

 4     or the issue numbers of the Official Gazettes with the dates where the

 5     decisions on appointing non-Serb judges were published.  The

 6     Official Gazette of the Serbian Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina issue 13

 7     of 10 August 1992, page 475, 476.  And Official Gazette issue 11,

 8     page 394, dated 13 July 1992.

 9        Q.   Mr. Mandic, we are nearing the end of this part where I commented

10     with you the documents you've already seen, because Ms. Korner showed

11     them to you.  I believe that you are sick and tired of it, but we must do

12     that for the sake of the transcript.  On page 9534 of yesterday's

13     transcript, Ms. Korner asked you about a document I would like to comment

14     on with you some more.  It's the 65 ter document 1987, or P1328.  That's

15     tab 42 of the Defence list.

16             And this is your letter sent out on the 5th of August, 1992.  It

17     was sent to the Presidency to the attention of the

18     President Radovan Karadzic.  Do you remember the letter?  You saw it

19     yesterday?

20        A.   Yes, but I remember it anyway.

21        Q.   You said that you sent out a similar letter on the

22     10th of July, 1992?

23        A.   Yes.

24        Q.   So this is your second letter urging the president of the

25     republic as it were to allow that the regular courts and public

Page 9618

 1     prosecutor's offices temporarily take over the competence of military

 2     courts of Military Prosecutor's Offices?

 3        A.   Yes, and I explained why.  Because the judiciary, the military

 4     judiciary, and the prosecutor's office didn't function properly, so we

 5     wanted to establish the civilian authorities.  There were problems on the

 6     ground; there was crime and everything that goes with the state of war or

 7     the imminent threat of war.  I tried to suggest that regular courts take

 8     over the powers of the military judiciary which was possible to do

 9     through a decision of the Assembly because we wanted to start working and

10     building the rule of law.  I was very dissatisfied with the state of

11     affairs, and that's why I handed if my resignation which was discussed at

12     the Assembly session in Bijeljina -- [Microphone not activated] --

13     September.

14             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] I don't know if this may be a

15     convenient moment for making a break, Your Honours, because we can --

16     thank you.

17                           [The witness stands down]

18                           --- Recess taken at 12.05 p.m.

19                           --- On resuming at 12.31 a.m.

20             MR. ZECEVIC:  Your Honours, while we are waiting for the witness

21     to be ushered in, I would like to extend my apologies to the interpreters

22     for talking faster than I should have.  I'm really sorry.

23             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you, Mr. Zecevic.

24                           [The witness takes the stand]

25             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Could we please see P400, and

Page 9619

 1     that's tab 112 of the Prosecution binder.  The page of the Serbian

 2     version is 89, and the page in the English version is 88.

 3        Q.   Mr. Mandic, this is -- these are the minutes from the

 4     22nd session of the Assembly of RS on the 29th of November, 1992.  A

 5     short while before the break you said that the matter we discussed about

 6     the taking over of authorities from military courts by civilian courts

 7     not only did you write to Mr. Karadzic twice to that, but also you spoke

 8     about that before the Assembly in Bijeljina, and this shows how insistent

 9     you were.  At the meeting on the 24th of November you repeated the same,

10     although on that occasion basically the cabinet fell.

11        A.   Let me explain, I addressed the speaker of the Assembly and the

12     president of RS about this problem several times, orally and in writing.

13     At the session in September in Bijeljina when I handed in my resignation,

14     tackling this issue was also postponed, and that was done on the

15     insistence of the military bodies which had a very strong authority and a

16     backing by the political authorities of RS.

17        Q.   Mr. Mandic, take a look at what you have in front of you.  This

18     is your -- these are your words that you said at the session held on the

19     24th of November.  I will just quote some of the most important

20     sentences.  The fourth or sixth sentence is:

21             "The amount of crime and the number of crimes committed and the

22     perpetrators of crime is on the rise, and we cannot cope with this chaos.

23     Looking for ways to strengthen the rule of law, the ministry of judiciary

24     has forwarded this matter to you."

25             And toward the end you say:

Page 9620

 1             "I believe that this proposal of mine, that is, the proposal of

 2     the judiciary, is necessary and justified.  And once the war is over,

 3     they will again be separated."

 4             "They" meaning the judiciary; right?

 5        A.   Yes.

 6        Q.   On the following page of the Serbian version and the same page of

 7     the English version, which means page 90 in the Serbian version, we can

 8     find the reply of General Gvero, which can be summed up as follows:  He

 9     refuses your proposal both in general and in particular; right?

10        A.   Yes, General Gvero was the assistant commander of General Staff

11     in charge of, I believe, the judiciary and the organisation of the

12     military judiciary, among other things.  He -- his rank was that of an

13     assistant commander of the General Staff of the VRS.

14        Q.   And in that capacity he must have also been member of the

15     General Staff?

16        A.   Yes, by virtue of his position.

17             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Mr. Mandic, forgive me for being a bit slow on

18     beat here, but could you briefly resume the reasons why you decided to

19     resign as minister.  Was that because of this issue relating to the

20     organisation of the judiciary, or were there other reasons?

21             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I handed in my resignation and

22     requested to be appointed to another duty in Belgrade in September 1922,

23     not at this session, Your Honour.  My resignation was not accepted.  The

24     MPs did not accept it.  And then I was supposed to be a minister without

25     portfolio.  That was an agreement with the prime minister.  And then I

Page 9621

 1     went to Belgrade.  This was one of the reasons for my dissatisfaction and

 2     one of the reasons why I left Bosnia-Herzegovina.  But my resignation was

 3     not accepted.  You can see the transcript of the session in Bijeljina; I

 4     remained in my previous position until this session.

 5             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Right, I can see that.  But my question to you

 6     was what exactly were the issues that prompted you to resign?  What was

 7     the disagreement about?

 8             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The main reason for my

 9     dissatisfaction was the fact that the judiciary didn't function.  We

10     organised a civilian judiciary which had nothing to do.  It had no powers

11     because everything was under the authority of the military judiciary

12     because there was a imminent threat of war or the state of war.  And all

13     persons from 16 to 70 years of age were under the authority of the

14     military judiciary, and it was mostly them who committed crimes.

15             We established courts and prosecutor's offices, both civilian.

16     Here is an example:  In Vogosca, only two persons were tried in eight

17     months, and hundreds of people were detained due to activities of the

18     Military Prosecutor's Office.  On the one hand, there was the civilian

19     judiciary having nothing to do; on the other hand, the military judiciary

20     which had lots to do but wasn't efficient.  The crime was on the rise.

21     And this was like fighting windmills.

22             JUDGE HARHOFF:  But the distribution of tasks within a government

23     would be something for the government itself to organise, would it not?

24             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, Your Honour.  The law on the

25     government and the law on the ministries clearly defined the tasks of

Page 9622

 1     these bodies.  My tasks as a body of public administration were clearly

 2     defined.  I mean I -- when I say "I," I mean the Ministry of Justice.

 3     And before I was appointed, the Law on Ministries had already been

 4     adopted.  My powers were clearly limited by these laws.

 5             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Thank you.  Back to you, Mr. Zecevic.

 6             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation]

 7        Q.   If I may assist the Bench, Mr. Mandic, it's a fact that the

 8     constitution and the laws of the Republic of Serbian Bosnia-Herzegovina,

 9     just as the case was in the early Socialist Republic of BiH, there was a

10     military judiciary parallel to the civilian one?

11        A.   No, not in parallel, but they were a separate institution.  They

12     were a body that had both the prosecutor's office and courts and

13     penitentiaries and military police.  That was a system that existed in

14     previous -- or former Yugoslavia and had been transposed into the RS

15     pursuant to relevant jurisdiction.  That was the system; the rule of law

16     was defined.

17        Q.   And your proposal and your persistence were, as it were, unlawful

18     or illegal.  But it was motivated by the fact that some 90 per cent of

19     the criminal offences were -- came under the jurisdiction of the military

20     judiciary, which to your -- in your opinion didn't function it should

21     have?

22        A.   Yes.  Most crimes were committed by conscripts who came under the

23     authority of the military judiciary, but that judiciary did not function.

24     That was why I made these proposals, and this motivated my efforts that

25     we should use professionals, judges, prosecutors, and others to establish

Page 9623

 1     the rule of law, but I was unsuccessful in two of my attempts.  So I

 2     handed in my resignation, and in November I also tried to convince the

 3     Assembly that they pass a decree with legal force, although it was

 4     unconstitutional.  Under the constitution the military judiciary was

 5     separate from the civilian one because I wanted that finally we start

 6     working and that we start building the rule of law, but there was no

 7     understanding for my efforts.

 8        Q.   On page 57, line 9, I did not say that your persistence was

 9     illegal.  It was just --

10        A.   It was outside of the institutions -- outside of the

11     institutional framework.

12        Q.   Mr. Mandic, the last document that you commented with Ms. Korner

13     is one I would also like to comment with you.  It's page 9542 of the

14     transcript, and the document in question is 65 ter 1214.  That's tab 100

15     of the Prosecution's set of documents.

16             This is the 50th session of the cabinet held on the

17     28th September, and if you recall, Ms. Korner showed you page 6 in

18     Serbian, a statement concerning current affair, namely, a delegation that

19     was supposed to go to Bijeljina to attend a meeting on the

20     12th of September.  It's the last page in English.

21             Do you recall this answer?

22        A.   Yes.

23        Q.   Mr. Mandic, I'll try to be brief, it is a fact that Ms. Korner

24     quoted from this but not the entire entry.  I'd like to read it all so we

25     can discuss it together.  The last three lines of the document.  It says

Page 9624

 1     a delegation has been designated, and then it says this meeting in

 2     Bijeljina was convened by representatives from Krajina and Posavina.

 3             Do you see that?

 4        A.   Yes.

 5        Q.   It goes on to say it was suggested that other ministers attend

 6     the meeting if that does not take them away from other commitments.

 7     Which means that this government session in Bijeljina was not held at the

 8     initiative of the government, but at the initiative of representatives

 9     from Krajina and Posavina?

10        A.   Yes, that's correct.

11        Q.   Mr. Mandic, we'll now move to another subject since you are

12     perhaps one of the best placed people to explain the situation in the

13     Ministry of the Interior of the Serbian Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina

14     in -- sorry, Socialist Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina in 1991.

15             After the multi-party elections, the three nationalist parties,

16     the SDS, HDZ, and SDA formed a coalition.

17        A.   Yes, they were the victorious parties.

18        Q.   Between them, these parties concluded an inter-party agreement

19     dividing certain leading positions in the state including the

20     Ministry of the Interior; correct?

21        A.   Yes.

22        Q.   You confirmed yesterday something you also said in the Krajisnik

23     case, namely, that you were not a member of the Serbian Democratic Party

24     and that your appointment came at the recommendation of

25     Mr. Vitomir Zepinic and then-Minister of the Interior Alija Delimustafic

Page 9625

 1     and that it was the first time you met Mr. Karadzic and Mr. Krajisnik?

 2        A.   Until that time, I was the Judge of the Lower Court II in

 3     Sarajevo in criminal cases and I had been appointed judge in the high

 4     court now called cantonal court in Sarajevo.  And then in the beginning

 5     of 1991 I was persuaded by Vitomir Zepinic and Alija Delimustafic to go

 6     to the seat of the Serbian Democratic Party where I met Rajko Djukic and

 7     Dr. Radovan Karadzic.  Viktor introduced me, told them about my

 8     background, and suggested that they appoint me assistant minister for

 9     crime prevention.

10             At first I didn't want to accept this.  I had had long years of

11     service in the police dealing with violent crimes; however, I was

12     persuaded eventually by Vitomir Zepinic and by my own brother who taught

13     the police school at Vrace.

14        Q.   The LiveNote is picking up again.

15             And indeed you were appointed, Mr. Mandic, assistant minister?

16        A.   I believe it was the 1st of February or the 1st of March, 1991.

17     At a government session I was appointed assistant minister for crime

18     prevention.

19        Q.   And after you joined the ministry, you got to know -- in fact,

20     you met some people with whom you had worked earlier in the police?

21        A.   I thought then and I think now that the collegium of

22     Minister Delimustafic functioned very well because it had Muslims, Serbs,

23     and Croats in it, people who had mutual respect for each other, and

24     working together to preserve the unity of the MUP.

25        Q.   And for a while, perhaps the first six months, this Ministry of

Page 9626

 1     the Interior of the Socialist Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina and the

 2     minister's collegium operated relatively normally based on mutual

 3     agreement and tripartite representation.  In other words, the three

 4     parties represented in the collegium all had to agree with the decisions?

 5        A.   I think our co-operation was really good, and we worked really

 6     well until the end of 1991 approximately.

 7        Q.   It is true, isn't it, that amongst you, within the collegium, you

 8     thought of yourselves as professionals, and you thought that you were

 9     going to act professionally but in keeping with the decisions made by

10     politicians?

11        A.   All the three political parties involved made sometimes

12     unreasonable requests and demands, but we did our best to accommodate

13     them in a reasonable way and defuse the tensions between the parties, and

14     we were rather successful in this.  For instance, in staffing decisions,

15     one party from one region wanted to appoint a person who had absolutely

16     no experience of police work, and we tried to handle such demands the

17     best way we could.  Sometimes I handled this, sometimes

18     Alija Delimustafic, sometimes Kvesic, Branko, or Bruno Stojic.  We

19     managed to navigate these waters quite well.

20        Q.   However, the situation in 1991 is slowly beginning to swing

21     towards extreme, and the SDA party formed the National Defence Council on

22     the 31st of -- on the 13th of June, 1991; you know that?

23        A.   Yes, I do.

24        Q.   And if my information is correct, Mr. Hasan Cengic was at the

25     head of that National Defence Council?

Page 9627

 1        A.   He was a party whip, pro-Shiite, pro-Iran, a real hawk of his

 2     party, and he had worked together with Mr. Izetbegovic long before the

 3     war when the Young Muslims Association or whatever it was called was

 4     established.  I'm not sure about the name, but I know he was a very

 5     radical man who wanted to introduce, pro-Iranian, pro-Shiite aspects into

 6     the work of his party.

 7        Q.   I'm sure you know -- sorry, let me ask you something different.

 8     Until that time since you were born and bred in Bosnia-Herzegovina, would

 9     you say that Bosnian Muslims were rather secular?  Radical religious

10     riots and customs did not find really fertile soil in Bosnia?

11        A.   I was born in Sarajevo which is -- which has a majority Muslim

12     population, and I never really felt any different in -- never felt any

13     difference between Serbs and Bosnians and Croats.  We in Herzegovina

14     referred to Muslims as Turks and that -- the atmosphere was really

15     relaxing.  The Olympic games in 1984 were held in Sarajevo.  It was like

16     a door opened towards the west in capitalism, and it brought a lot of

17     well-being.  However, with the break-up of Yugoslavia, all this fell

18     through.

19        Q.   Let us go back to Hasan Cengic and the Party of

20     Democratic Action.  You are certainly aware that in the course of 1991

21     the SDA party secretly sent Muslim trainees for training to the MUP of

22     the Republic of Croatia without informing the MUP of the

23     Socialist Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina?

24        A.   Of course we knew about this.  People from different localities

25     went to Croatia for training, went even to Iran for training, and the

Page 9628

 1     Muslims who worked with us, our work colleagues, did not even try to hide

 2     it from us.  We openly discussed why a political party would be

 3     organising such training, and that the chief and the personnel chief

 4     Alija Delimustafic and Ibro Selimovic were very offended and felt

 5     personally insulted by this, but we couldn't do anything about it.

 6        Q.   Do you know that this connection between the Party of Democratic

 7     Action and the MUP of the Republic of Croatia went through the Islamic

 8     religious community and the mosque in Zagreb?

 9        A.   Yes, I know that.  It was a centre where they were admitted and

10     recruited and later trained in training centres in Croatia which had

11     already been engulfed in war.

12        Q.   One indisputable fact is that this Muslim trainees from

13     Bosnia-Herzegovina fought as part of MUP Croatia units in the fighting

14     against the JNA and Serbian forces?

15        A.   Yes, in Krajina and in Slavonia.

16        Q.   I'll show you P895.  It's tab 2 in the Defence binder.  This is a

17     letter from Mr. Zupljanin sent to the Council for the Protection of the

18     Constitutional Order of the Socialist Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina on

19     25 July 1991.  Mr. Zupljanin, as centre chief, notifies the Council for

20     the Protection of the Constitutional Order, and that's the last sentence

21     on page 1, that there are attempts to turn this ministry into a Muslim

22     Army, and it's obvious also from the latest training course for the

23     police.

24             And on page 2 in the penultimate paragraph, it says:

25             "Individual members of the Muslim community are being sent in an

Page 9629

 1     organised way for training at the MUP of the Republic of Croatia."

 2             Which is also obvious from an Official Note attached hereto.  And

 3     this Official Note is 1D128.

 4             Do you know this document?

 5        A.   No, I've never seen it here.

 6        Q.   But, in any case, you were aware of this, you had information

 7     about this?

 8        A.   Yes, we had information about this from the local level, but I

 9     can't remember this document.

10        Q.   I'm going to show you now 1D112 which is another dispatch sent by

11     the chief of the Banja Luka Security Services Centre sent to the chief in

12     Prijedor on 19 September 1991.  In this letter, Mr. Zupljanin addresses

13     the chief in Prijedor with respect to five Muslim employees and says that

14     the Banja Luka CSB had nominated the first one on the list, and that he

15     should come and sign for the decision on appointment.  And as for the

16     remaining employees for whom no proposal was received by MUP in absence

17     of the vetting procedure and their failure to fit into the job

18     classification, he says that he had been informed that, irrespective of

19     that, they did start working in the Prijedor public security station in

20     contravention of his position.

21             Are you aware of that?

22        A.   No.  I don't know anything about this letter.  No, no.

23        Q.   Are you aware that there were similar cases to this one when

24     public security stations, contrary to the orders from CSB chiefs,

25     recruited people, primarily Muslims?

Page 9630

 1        A.   It was not possible for any single person to get employment with

 2     the police without a decision from the ministry.  If any rules were

 3     broken and if job classification was not observed, that was done by the

 4     police station.  The police stations were not authorised to employ

 5     anyone.  It was only the ministry that could do that.  And if that was

 6     done by the police stations, that constituted the breach of law because

 7     they did this without the knowledge of the chief of the centre.  And that

 8     was illegal according to the rules of service.  The chief of the centre

 9     for any employment has to give his approval.  Zupljanin says here that we

10     gave our approval only for one person, and for the rest there was no

11     approval given.  And this breach was done by the police station, not the

12     centre.

13        Q.   When you say "the ministry," since we are talking about

14     September 1991, you are referring to the Ministry of the Socialist

15     Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina?

16        A.   Yes, yes, of course.

17        Q.   The fact is that in that period or thereabouts, that is to say,

18     in the autumn of 1991, instead of Himzo Selimovic, the personnel service

19     recruited Mirsad Srebrenikovic as the head of the department with the

20     MUP?

21        A.   The position of the assistant minister for personnel was

22     allocated to the Muslim people based on the inter-party agreement.  For a

23     certain period of time, that is to say, until the second half of 1991,

24     this duty was discharged by Himzo Selimovic, a Muslim from Sarajevo, a

25     very respectable person who had worked for a certain period of time in

Page 9631

 1     the police.  To our utmost surprise, without any proper procedure and

 2     without anything, he was dismissed, and Mirsad Srebrenikovic, a Croat,

 3     actually a man who had Croatian citizenship and who worked in the mosque

 4     in Zagreb and who was a religious master or teacher, he finished

 5     religious schooling in Tehran or some place like that, I don't know.  I

 6     think that created huge problems in the functioning of the joint MUP.

 7        Q.   The fact is, and I think you spoke about that, that this

 8     Mr. Srebrenikovic started to pursue personnel policy by force and that he

 9     only recruited Muslims to work in the MUP of Bosnia-Herzegovina?

10        A.   According to the rules in force at the time, the assistant

11     minister for personnel was allowed to employ certain people but having in

12     mind the needs of certain centres and police stations.  But he could do

13     that only up to a certain level.  That is to say, beat policemen or any

14     other low-ranking policemen.  As for higher ranking officials, it had to

15     be done at a higher level.

16             At that time, I think that hundreds of decisions were issued.  I

17     think that two or three offices were engaged full time employing Muslims.

18     So the quotas set up by the job classifications were multiplied many

19     times over.  For instance, if you needed 15 policemen, they recruited 45

20     of them.  The Muslim chief would just call me and say, I don't know what

21     to do with these people; I don't know who they are; they cannot speak

22     Serbo-Croatian.  And that is when we realised that something was very

23     wrong.  Of course, we convened meetings immediately, but Srebrenikovic

24     didn't pay any heed to this, and that started to be a serious problem.

25     This Mirsad Srebrenikovic, about whom I discussed with Madam Prosecutor,

Page 9632

 1     is still working in Croatia in Zagreb in the mosque.  Can you imagine?

 2     We grew up in a socialist society and we were not very versed in

 3     religious affairs and then all of a sudden you have a religious teacher

 4     coming to perform police duties.  That was surprise not only for Serbs

 5     and Croat, but for Muslims as well.  We had to stop everything at noon to

 6     allow Mirsad to go and do his prayers or whatever.  We were shocked by

 7     that.

 8             I don't mean to be offensive, really, but this was really

 9     shocking for us.  And that just added to mistrust amongst ourselves.

10        Q.   When you say "mistrust," are you referring to mistrust among the

11     executive members of the collegium of the minister of the MUP?

12        A.   I discussed this with the minister of the MUP on several

13     occasion, we were friends, but he told me that he was helpless.  That

14     that was the policy of the top Muslim leadership who wanted to have the

15     Muslim police and the Muslim army.  And if he opposed Cengic and others,

16     he risked losing his job.  And he told me several times that he was

17     helpless and that he couldn't do anything about that.

18             I think that there are minutes of meetings, unless they have been

19     destroyed, where we discussed these issues, because we couldn't

20     understand why would a foreign national be appointed to such an important

21     position.  And it was done by first removing a Muslim from that position.

22     We just learned later on that this man had come from the mosque and that

23     he was in charge of personnel affairs.  But we couldn't resolve this

24     issue in a peaceful and amicable manner.

25        Q.   When you said that the chief of public security station of

Page 9633

 1     Bratunac complained to you about people coming to work there who were not

 2     able to speak Serbo-Croatian, do you know which language they spoke?

 3        A.   Believe me, I don't.  It was a long time ago.  I just quoted

 4     Bratunac as an example, but we received these complaints from many

 5     places, because at the headquarters of the MUP we didn't know anything

 6     about that.  We didn't know about these people coming from abroad,

 7     getting appointments, and starting working.  I can't remember all the

 8     places from which we received such information, so it was almost a

 9     nightmare.  We were stunned.  The Serbian Democratic Party and the

10     HDAs [as interpreted] reacted immediately, while those from the SDA

11     pretended that they didn't know what we were talking about.  They said

12     that this was just recruitment that was on par with the composition of

13     Bosnia-Herzegovina.  And then it meant that you have to sack 2.000 Serbs

14     in order to recruit and employ Muslims mainly in order to achieve the

15     balance within the service with respect to the national composition.  And

16     couldn't agree with that.  I couldn't say to people who had been working

17     for 20 or 15 years who had finished police academy that they should leave

18     the service to vacate a position for someone who would come from the

19     Zagreb mosque or from Iran to work in his place without any vetting or

20     procedures, without any security checks, et cetera.

21        Q.   When you said that no security checks had been carried out, does

22     that mean that even individuals who had criminal records were employed by

23     the MUP of the Socialist Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina?

24        A.   Yugoslavia was functioning at the time.  We had an information

25     system in place.  If somebody came from Raska, for example, we just check

Page 9634

 1     whether he had a criminal record or not.  It was not a problem.

 2        Q.   Are you aware that in certain instances even some, so to say,

 3     criminals or people prone to criminality who were well known as such in

 4     Sarajevo were issued MUP IDs?

 5        A.   That happened to a group headed by Ismet Bajramovic.  He was a

 6     well known criminal, and he carried an official ID.  But I don't believe

 7     that that was prompted by the reasons that underlied this procedure of

 8     people being brought from abroad.  I think that this had do with crime

 9     and criminality.  That was not the same problem.

10        Q.   Mr. Mandic, sometime in early October 1991, you were criticised

11     by the executive committee of the SDA.  It was signed by Hasan Cengic.

12     P905, which is a letter sent by the Party of Democratic Action on

13     8th October, 1991, in which it says, subject:

14             Protest against the manner of work of Momcilo Mandic from the

15     Ministry of the Interior.

16             Do you remember this incident, and can you briefly explain?

17        A.   Yes, I remember.  Mr. Cengic who was the Secretary-General of the

18     SDA who was the most right-wing oriented man in his party.  He was

19     pro-Shiite, he was pro-Iranian, he wanted, among other things, to be in

20     charge of personnel policy in the police.  It was normal practice for any

21     executive position to have three candidates nominated for that position

22     who fulfilled formal requirements.  We are talking about Foca

23     specifically here.  The first proposal was for a Muslim, because Muslims

24     constituted a majority in the municipality of Foca.  There were three

25     candidates.  There was -- one of them was Hodza who was Cengic's

Page 9635

 1     relative.  Naturally - and I remember exactly the name of that

 2     person - we elected Himzo Selimovic.  And in agreement with Delimustafic,

 3     I signed this letter of appointment or this decision because he was a

 4     professional with long service.  Himzo Selimovic is policeman number 1 in

 5     Sarajevo canton nowadays.  I didn't want to see this Hodza from

 6     Ustikolina who had finished religious school.  Of course, now he is

 7     criticising me that I wasn't pursuing the policy in favour of Muslims but

 8     I was in some business deals with Delimustafic.

 9             That was how we assistants and executives co-operated when we had

10     these unreasonable requests.  Some of us bore the brunt of the anger of

11     those people who wanted to take decisions in our stead.  I decided to

12     employ Himzo Selimovic.  As I said, he is now in the canton in Sarajevo.

13     And he had a long career in the police.  You can find, I think,

14     documentation supporting my claim.

15        Q.   So, to recap, this attack by Hasan Cengic on you was based

16     actually on the fact that instead of employing a relative of his who

17     didn't have adequate qualification, the chief of public station in Foca

18     became Selimovic who was a professional policeman?

19        A.   Mr. Cengic is alleging here that I'm not pursuing the personnel

20     policy that should be afforded to the Muslim people.

21        Q.   Mr. Mandic, the essence is actually in what I said.

22        A.   Yes, I am explaining this in rather extensive form.

23        Q.   Due to this situation that evolved in the course of the autumn of

24     1991 in the Ministry of the Interior of the Socialist Republic of

25     Bosnia-Herzegovina, the Serbian personnel protested both within the

Page 9636

 1     MUP - you said yourself that you attended meetings with the minister on

 2     these topics - and they also protested in the media.  I'm going to show

 3     you document 1D116, dated 9 September 1991.  Tab 22.  1D116, that's a

 4     press release issued by the executives of Serb nationality in the MUP of

 5     B&H.

 6             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Can you please enlarge the Serbian

 7     version so that the witness can read it.

 8        Q.   This is a press release.  As far as I can tell from the text,

 9     Mr. Karadzic stated for "Oslobodjenje Daily" on the 7th of September

10     about warmongering.  A reaction of the MUP of BiH ensued, and now MUP

11     executives of Serb ethnicity are reacting.

12             Do you remember?

13        A.   Yes.  And in order to avoid repeating, these are the very same

14     reasons I've been speak being for quite a while.

15        Q.   Thank you.  It's a fact, Mr. Mandic, isn't it, that this was a

16     matter discussed by the Presidency of the SRBiH, the socialist republic.

17     Do you know that at the session on the 21st of September, 1991, the

18     Presidency established a Crisis Staff, a member of which was, among

19     other, the Minister of the Interior Alija Delimustafic,

20     Minister of Defence Jerko Doko, the commander of the TO, and it was

21     chaired by Dr. Ejup Ganic.

22             Do you know about that?

23        A.   Yes, I do.

24        Q.   At some moment in time, September 1991, the Presidency called up

25     the reserve police force and the Socialist Republic of

Page 9637

 1     Bosnia-Herzegovina; do you remember that?

 2        A.   Yes, I do.

 3        Q.   I'm going to show you document 1D121.  That's a dispatch of the

 4     MUP, dated 26 September 1991.  It is signed by the then-minister

 5     Alija Delimustafic.  In that dispatch which was sent to all CSBs and SJBs

 6     and to all executives, it is stated that the reserve police force has

 7     been called up, mobilised.  And in the first paragraph, the minister

 8     himself states that it has been observed that in some cases the reserve

 9     police force are not acting in accordance with the law, with the rules

10     governing the carrying out of tasks by the public order services,

11     et cetera.  Do you remember this dispatch or the problem that you were

12     facing?

13        A.   Yes, yes.

14        Q.   On the second page of this document, right above the signature of

15     the minister under item 10, it is said that this order is effective as of

16     27 September 1991 at 8.00.  Do you see that?

17        A.   Yes.

18        Q.   On the other hand, sir, 1D130, that's tab 57, you, on

19     26 September 1991, sent a letter to the Presidency, the cabinet, the

20     federal SUP, and the federal secretariat of All People's Defence, and

21     also to the General Staff of the JNA.  In that letter of yours ... In

22     that letter of yours -- do you remember this letter?

23        A.   Yes.

24        Q.   On the last page, page 4, there's your signature.  In this letter

25     you state that at the meeting held on 23 September the Presidency adopted

Page 9638

 1     a decision allowing the minister to raise an additional number of reserve

 2     police officers, this is on page 1.

 3             Do you remember that?

 4        A.   Can I see page 1 again?

 5        Q.   You were just being shown the signature.

 6             Do you remember this letter?

 7        A.   Yes, I do.

 8        Q.   In this letter you state that this decision of the Presidency is

 9     in contravention of the law because it is up to the cabinet to decide

10     about the reserve and active police forces in the republic; right?

11        A.   Yes.

12        Q.   Since laws and regulations had to be obeyed, you state here that

13     this gives rise to a potential problem because those forces could be used

14     to be -- to establish an army; right?

15        A.   Yes, and that was actually the intention.

16        Q.   You also say here that the reserve police forces are reinforced

17     by persons who have not been vetted and that those persons are being

18     armed; correct?

19        A.   Yes.

20        Q.   Sir, the previous document dated 26 September signed by

21     Alija Delimustafic, that dispatch we saw a short while ago, do you

22     remember it?

23        A.   Yes.

24             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, my assistants are

25     signalling me that document 1D121 is still -- still has the status of

Page 9639

 1     marked for identification.  Unless there are objections by the

 2     Prosecution, I seek to tender this document into evidence now.

 3             [English] 24.  That was the previous document which the -- which

 4     the witness commented signed by Minister Alija Delimustafic, dated 26

 5     September 1991.

 6             JUDGE HALL:  Is there an objection?

 7             MS. KORNER: [Microphone not activated]

 8             THE INTERPRETER:  Microphone for the Prosecution, if you mean to

 9     say anything.

10             MR. ZECEVIC:  Yes, well, it has your ERN number.

11             MS. KORNER:  No objection, Your Honour.

12             JUDGE HALL:  So we'll lift the MFI status, and it is now entered

13     as an exhibit.

14             MR. ZECEVIC:  Thank you very much, Your Honours.

15        Q.   [Interpretation] Mr. Mandic, apart from this letter that you

16     drafted in September, or, rather, in spite of it, the situation in the

17     MUP of the Socialist Republic of BiH further deteriorated; correct?

18        A.   Yes.

19        Q.   I'll show you a document.

20             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] 1D03-2191.  Tab 25.

21        Q.   That's a document which was sent if your name on the

22     9th of January, 1992.  Your signature is missing.  And it's about the

23     conduct of the advisor of the minister of the interior, Mr. Avdo Hebib.

24     Let us wait for it to appear.

25             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Can we please see page 2.

Page 9640

 1        Q.   You can see that the signatory is assistant Minister of the

 2     Interior Momcilo Mandic, but there is no signature?  Do you remember this

 3     letter?

 4        A.   Yes, I do.  He was a psychologist by training.  And he was

 5     appointed assistant for policing.  But after these things, he was

 6     replaced and Jusuf Pusina was appointed in that position.  He was known

 7     as a person who disliked Serbs.  He came to this position before the

 8     elections when the ethnic-based parties won the elections.  He came to

 9     Doboj to conduct some illegal checks, and that's what I also mentioned.

10        Q.   Just go slowly, please.  Avdo Hebib -- so this was written on the

11     9th of January, 1992.  At that moment, Avdo Hebib was no longer assistant

12     minister, but he was an advisor of Minister Delimustafic; right?

13        A.   Yes.

14        Q.   You say on page 1 that you would like to point out the conduct of

15     Mr. Avdo Hebib, who, in the entire republic, insights interethnic hatred

16     and thus threatens the peace in this multi-ethnic republic, remember

17     that?

18        A.   Yes.

19        Q.   You go on to say that he, on his own, and in agreement with some

20     executives, arms persons with weapon which are the property of the MUP of

21     Bosnia-Herzegovina; is that correct?

22        A.   Yes.

23        Q.   And, finally, on page 2, you say, I believe that nobody in the

24     ministry controls the activities of Mr. Hebib nor does anybody have

25     insight into what he does.  And if this situation continues,

Page 9641

 1     unforeseeable consequences for the peace and stability in

 2     Bosnia-Herzegovina are imminent.

 3             And that's what you wrote in January 1992; do you remember that?

 4        A.   Yes, I do.  You received a copy, but the original was signed and

 5     is kept in the ministry in Sarajevo.

 6        Q.   And you'll stand by what you wrote here?

 7        A.   Yes, I wrote this dispatch.

 8             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Unless there is opposition, I seek

 9     to tender this document into evidence?

10             JUDGE HALL:  Appears to be none.  Admitted and marked.

11             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit 1D255, Your Honours.

12             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation]

13        Q.   We spoke about how this situation deteriorated in the MUP of the

14     Socialist Republic of BiH, and there is rising intensity of the scale of

15     the problem.  I'll show you 1D177.  It's a document dated

16     6 February 1992, a document of the SDS.  It was signed by the

17     then-president of the party Dr. Radovan Karadzic.  It's about the

18     conclusions or decisions of the Presidency of the Bosnia-Herzegovina

19     taken on 2 March 1992.

20        A.   I haven't received it.

21             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] 1D11 --

22             THE INTERPRETER:  Could counsel please repeat the number.

23             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] 65 ter 37.

24             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Now I can see it.

25             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation]

Page 9642

 1        Q.   This is the document of the Serbian Democratic Party of

 2     Bosnia-Herzegovina, and it refers to the required personnel and

 3     organisation -- personnel related and organisational measures in the

 4     MUP of BiH.  We've just seen that document from September, your -- that

 5     is, the press release of the executives of the MUP of the

 6     Socialist Republic of BiH.  Essentially, from September, although this is

 7     already February 1992, the problems had persisted, only they became even

 8     more complex?

 9        A.   Yes, they became more profound.

10             MS. KORNER:  Right.  The document allegedly is dated 6th of Feb,

11     but if you look at the line below it says 2nd of March.  So can

12     anybody -- maybe the witness can assist with when this document was

13     issued.

14             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This document was published on the

15     6th of February.  It mentions the session of the 2nd of March - this must

16     be a typo - a session of the Presidency of the SRBiH.

17             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation]

18        Q.   I suppose that you cannot remember now whether there were

19     decisions of the Presidency of the Socialist Republic of

20     Bosnia-Herzegovina on the 2nd of February?

21        A.   I couldn't remember the sequence.  The problems were personnel

22     related.  It was about the hiring of foreign citizens by the MUP, and

23     these problems were put forward to the Presidency of BiH, and there was

24     discussion.  And after the decisions taken, this letter was written.

25     Whether this was on the 2nd of February, 1992, most probably it was.  I

Page 9643

 1     think this is a typo.  And Dr. Karadzic refers to the decisions taken at

 2     the cessation of the Presidency, so -- which had to -- which had to have

 3     been earlier.  I'm sure that there was a session of the Presidency at

 4     which these problems were discussed.

 5        Q.   Thank you, sir.  Now, please, take a look at page 2.  We still

 6     have that much time left.  You can see item 2 in the last paragraph.

 7     What is required is that Mr. Munir Alibabic be replaced, who -- he was

 8     the -- he was an assistant in the MUP of BiH because he had been working

 9     in the interest of the SDA party?

10        A.   He only worked on Serbian personnel, and these intercepted

11     conversations, most of them, were scrambled.  It was explained how Munir

12     went about that.  He edited taped conversations, and I prohibited him

13     from entering MUP premises.  I even threw him out.  But he continued

14     working.  He enjoyed the support of his party.  And he was the one who

15     jailed Alija Izetbegovic as a young Muslim.  And then he became a

16     supporter of some right-wing Muslims.  And after the war he co-operated

17     with the chief prosecutor, Karla del Ponte, and the international

18     community, that is, the OHR, banned him from the police service for life

19     because he had given false information to this Tribunal.  Of course, that

20     information was verified and then he was banned from doing police work

21     for life.

22             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.  Your Honours, I believe

23     this is a convenient moment and it's time to adjourn too.  Let me just

24     mention that this document hasn't been recorded correctly.  It is

25     65 ter 37.  It is already an exhibit, and a reference is 1D117.

Page 9644

 1             JUDGE HALL:  That you, Mr. Zecevic.  So we take the adjournment,

 2     to resume in this courtroom at 9.00 tomorrow morning.  Thank you.

 3                           --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.48 p.m.,

 4                           to be reconvened on Thursday, the 6th day of

 5                           May, 2010, at 9.00 a.m.