Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 11514

 1                           Thursday, 10 June 2010

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           --- Upon commencing at 9.04 a.m.

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

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

 7     Prosecutor versus Mico Stanisic and Stojan Zupljanin.

 8             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you, Madam Registrar.  Good morning to

 9     everyone.  May we have the appearances, please.

10             MR. HANNIS:  Tom Hannis, Joanna Korner, and Jasmina Bosnjakovic

11     for the Prosecution.

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

13     Eugene O'Sullivan, Ms. Tatjana Savic appearing for Stanisic Defence.

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

15     Defence, Igor Pantelic.

16             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.

17             Mr. Zecevic, we were alerted that --

18             MS. KORNER:  Your Honours, I have a matter to raise which I think

19     is the same as Mr. Zecevic's.  I'd prefer to raise it, if I may.

20             MR. ZECEVIC:  I don't think that's proper, Ms. Korner, because

21     the matter which we are talking about is the very same, and it is my

22     mistake, and I should be able to explain my mistake before you take the

23     floor.

24             JUDGE HALL:  Yes, please proceed, Mr. Zecevic.

25             MR. ZECEVIC:  Your Honours, yesterday on transcript 11503, line

Page 11515

 1     14.  I proposed to the witness, which was yesterday, during the

 2     additional cross-examination, I proposed to him that two villages which

 3     were mentioned in that document are Muslim villages.  The witness says,

 4     "I don't know."  Now, I found out only later from the information of my

 5     office that, in fact, both these villages are, in fact, purely ethnically

 6     Serb villages.  So I wanted to apologise to the Trial Chamber and

 7     withdraw my question.  That is number one issue.

 8             The second issue, Your Honours, on page 11457, line 13.  We

 9     admitted the document 1D324.  I called the document by its 65 ter number,

10     which is 65 ter 153.  However, after I reviewed this yesterday afternoon

11     I found out that the identical, the similar, document has already been

12     admitted as P867 and has a 65 ter number 2822.  So therefore, in order

13     that we don't duplicate -- in order that we don't duplicate the

14     documents, I guess I should -- this document which I offered should be

15     withdrawn and the number deleted from the record.

16                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

17             JUDGE HALL:  Yes, so the order would be to withdraw the number

18     assigned to that last -- to that duplicate admission.  Thank you,

19     Mr. Zecevic.

20             MR. ZECEVIC:  Thank you very much.

21                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

22             MS. KORNER:  Your Honour, I'm sorry to take a little more time

23     over this, but it's not quite as simple as Mr. Zecevic would like to

24     suggest.  As you will recall this arose because of the document that I

25     was showing to Mr. Njegus yesterday about the report from the Trebinje

Page 11516

 1     CSB in respect of war crimes committed against Serbs.  There was a lot of

 2     interruption while we were showing the document, and the document wasn't

 3     being put up very clearly.  Do you remember the word "genocide" wasn't

 4     appearing.  I did not understand at the time that Mr. Zecevic's

 5     interruptions, because Mr. Krgovic was also interrupting at that stage,

 6     were intended that I should show the third page with the -- apart from

 7     Visegrad.  Now, I had looked at the whole document obviously before I put

 8     it to the witness, and, in fact, Your Honour, the suggestion by

 9     implication was very clearly that I was deliberately trying to mislead

10     the Court by not showing the witness a part of the document which was

11     contradictory to the proposition that I was exploring with the witness,

12     namely, that all that the Serbs were interested were that it was the

13     reporting of war crimes as against Serbs.  And that was absolutely clear.

14             Now, Your Honours, I was -- in the back of my mind that although

15     I hadn't specifically asked about Visegrad because it didn't say it in

16     terms that it was, in fact, a further alleged war crime against Serbs and

17     I so informed Mr. Zecevic before he began his re-cross-examination.  At

18     that stage I didn't have the document.  And the re-cross-examination is

19     quite important.

20             "However, Ms. Korner said that this report is only about crimes

21     against Serbs, so I would now like you to take a look at page 3, as I've

22     repeatedly asked you to do during her examination," which as I explained

23     to him I simply didn't appreciate this what he wanted me to do.

24             "The SJB of Visegrad has also filed two criminal reports for war

25     crimes, the massacre of ten civilians including two minor children and

Page 11517

 1     the killing of one women in the village of Pale."

 2             And this is the question and this is what I really -- and I took

 3     objection to it at the time.

 4             "Do you know that both these villages are Muslim villages?"

 5             It is a form of cross-examination that has occurred throughout,

 6     effectively the assertion of a fact, and I have already objected to the

 7     way these assertions are being made with which the witness is asked to

 8     agree.  So I assumed that I must have made a mistake and I was wrong when

 9     I was of the view that this was also a war crime attack apparently on

10     Serbs that they were reported because it was asserted as such.  I assumed

11     that Mr. Zecevic either knew or had strong instructions to that effect

12     because that's the only basis on which such a suggestion could be made in

13     that form.  And then, Your Honours, as you know the witness said, "I

14     don't know."

15             Your Honours, after the Court rose yesterday, my attention was

16     drawn to what I had in the back of my mind, and the reason I vaguely

17     remembered it but couldn't lay my hand on it was on the 18th

18     of -- sorry, the -- yes, the 18th of February, I think it was or the

19     19th, I think it was filed the 19th -- or it's dated the 18th, we made a

20     large -- we -- sorry, we put in a motion to amend our 65 ter list of

21     exhibits, and we divided the documents into categories.  And under

22     category D was a document which the categories were those which either

23     recently had come to light or had been overlooked in our researches.  And

24     document number -- proposed 65 ter number 03546, municipality of

25     Visegrad, official note from operative Dragan Vukasinovic dated the 2nd

Page 11518

 1     of October, and failure to take measures -- the relevance was failure to

 2     take measures against perpetrators of crimes committed against non-Serbs.

 3             Your Honours denied that motion.  The Defence objected to it.

 4     And one can assume, therefore, that the Defence went through the

 5     documents we were applying to add, and certainly all the documents have

 6     been disclosed to them.  Your Honours denied that part of the motion and,

 7     in fact, it's at the moment still subject to appeal.

 8             I would like Your Honours now to have a look -- because

 9     effectively my application is that this document now be made an exhibit.

10     Could we put up, please, 10382, please.

11             JUDGE HALL:  While the document is being loaded, I would

12     interject that one of the -- when the objection was taken to the question

13     by you, Ms. Korner, I did not appreciate that it was a matter in

14     controversy and I put it in the category that while the objection was

15     technically correct about the effect of the -- the form of the question

16     being counsel giving evidence, I considered it in the category of do you

17     know that London is the capital of the United Kingdom?  And that is why I

18     let the matter pass.

19             MS. KORNER:  Well, Your Honour, that's the problem.  It was a

20     matter of controversy.  Mr. Zecevic knew it was a matter of controversy.

21             JUDGE HALL:  I now understand that to be the position.

22             MS. KORNER:  And also I have to say, I assumed that it was being

23     done on instructions at the time, and I understand it may not have been.

24             Your Honours, this is the Official Note, 2nd of October, which

25     refers to the incident which was in that report.

Page 11519

 1             "Whilst gathering information on the crime committed against the

 2     Serbian people by members of Green Berets, Ustashas in the Visegrad

 3     municipality, we obtained certain security information at around 2000

 4     hours on the 1st of August, 1992, in Jelasci village" -- I don't know if

 5     I'm pronouncing this right.  "Around 10 kilometres from Visegrad the

 6     Green Berets committed a crime against the Serbian people the like of

 7     which has never been seen in these parts," then describes it.  And you

 8     will see at the bottom of the English translation "Green Berets shot dead

 9     on their door step, driven his wife's Sava" -- and if we go to the next

10     page in English, please.

11             THE INTERPRETER:  Ms. Korner is kindly asked to speak closer to

12     the microphone.

13             MS. KORNER:  Sorry.  Can we have the next page in English,

14     please.

15            Could we have the next page in English.  Thank you.

16            "They shot dead on their door-step Trivun and his wife Sava and

17     two underaged children."

18             And Your Honours will see that is clearly the incident that was

19     referring to in that report about which I was asking Mr. Njegus about

20     yesterday.

21             So, Your Honours, there are two matters.  The first is that,

22     Your Honours, I think the reasoning behind the refusal to allow us to add

23     it to our 65 ter was that we didn't give an actual explanation -- did not

24     indicate the reasons for their late addition beyond asserting they are

25     relevant to the case.

Page 11520

 1             My application is now, it is clearly and apparently relevant to

 2     what is a major issue in the case between the Prosecution and the

 3     Defence, namely, the Prosecution case is that any reference to war crimes

 4     against non-Serbs was literally window-dressing and that their only real

 5     interest was in investigating crimes committed against Serbs.  That is an

 6     issue in this case.  So therefore, my application -- and particularly in

 7     light of what happened, my application is this now that Your Honours

 8     effectively add it to our 65 ter list, but admit it as an exhibit.

 9             And the second matter is this, and I'm sorry to raise it.  Twice

10     in one week the allegation by Defence has been that the Prosecution and

11     myself in particular have attempted to mislead the Court in some way.

12     Your Honour, I take such allegations extremely seriously.  They're made

13     in open forum in the public.  I wasn't able to obtain an apology from

14     Mr. Pantelic, and I'm not seeking an apology now, but I am seeking that

15     the record is made clear, that at no stage was I ever attempting to

16     mislead the Court on any matter, nor would I.

17             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Thank you, Mrs. Korner.  May I just add on behalf

18     of the Bench that none of us have had any suspicions that you were

19     engaged in such attempts, so we have full trust in you, and we take the

20     remark from the Defence as being nothing more than expressions in the

21     heat of the fight.

22             But can I just return to the first issue that you raised because

23     I'm not sure I fully understand what the situation is, given the fact

24     that Mr. Zecevic has explained that his assumption was wrong, that these

25     two villages were not Muslim, that they were indeed Serb.  So my

Page 11521

 1     immediate reaction to that would be well then we will disregard that part

 2     of the re-cross-examination that came to us yesterday, and if we do so,

 3     how does that then impact your assertion today.

 4             MS. KORNER:  You mean my application, Your Honour, to add this

 5     document?

 6             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Yes, yes.

 7             MS. KORNER:  Your Honour, it's a further document, and it's quite

 8     important.  As Your Honours may know because we've heard evidence about

 9     Visegrad, Visegrad was the scene of some seriously appalling crimes as

10     against the non-Serb population, for example, the house fire -- well, I

11     don't know that Your Honours have because it was part of the adjudicated

12     facts and it's part of our application to call evidence about it.  And

13     that no attempt was made to investigate that -- there's no report about

14     it.  There's a report, however, on this.  And the whole document,

15     therefore, as I indicated and was suggesting to the witness, is all about

16     the reports of crimes committed against Serbs.  And this document, which

17     is the report from the -- Mr. Vukasinovic is part of that document.

18     It's -- it goes along with all the other reports.  So -- and,

19     Your Honour, it shows that the whole report -- because it's not clear,

20     you see, that's why I didn't deal with it, because it wasn't actually

21     clearly stated, and in the SJB Visegrad was put in a report about this

22     crime against non-Serbs.  This document makes it absolutely clear.  It

23     puts the whole report that I read to the witness in context.

24             JUDGE HALL:  So if we accede to the application to add it to your

25     65 ter list, what then?

Page 11522

 1             MS. KORNER:  And to have it made an exhibit.

 2                           [Trial Chamber and Legal Officer confer]

 3             JUDGE HALL:  Is the -- is there anything that the Defence has to

 4     say on the application to add this document to the 65 ter list and

 5     thereafter to have it admitted as an exhibit?

 6             MR. ZECEVIC:  Your Honours, I clearly admitted my mistake.  I

 7     withdrew my question.  As Judge Harhoff clearly stated, it would be

 8     disregarded by the Trial Chamber.  And I personally don't have anything

 9     against this document, but if we would admit this document as one

10     exception to the rules how we are admitting the document, we are opening

11     the door to more exceptions.  So I don't -- I mean, this document was not

12     shown to the witness, the witness didn't know about these villages at

13     all, of course he was not aware of this document.  I think at this point,

14     according to our -- the rules which were in place for ten months in this

15     trial, this document has reached the threshold to be MFI'd only, nothing

16     else.  Thank you.

17             JUDGE HALL:  Mr. Pantelic.

18             MR. PANTELIC:  I support submission of my learned friend,

19     Mr. Zecevic, on that issue.

20             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.

21             MS. KORNER:  Your Honours, this came about, as I said to

22     Judge Harhoff, the document which is based on this doesn't make it clear

23     that this is reporting an attack allegedly on Serbs.  Without this

24     document, I can't give evidence.  What I've said today about it and

25     really doubt, is not evidence.  The document is the evidence that links

Page 11523

 1     it to this document.  The fact that the witness couldn't recognise it is

 2     irrelevant.  It's clearly part and parcel of the documentation that's

 3     received by the MUP.  I suppose I could find another witness who I can

 4     ask about this gentleman, but I don't think there's any serious dispute

 5     that this is a document that is, on the face of it, what it says it is.

 6     And this all came about through the Defence.  So exceptional or not, Your

 7     Honours, we suggest this is an appropriate time to admitted this

 8     document.

 9             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.

10             Well, we note the objection that Mr. Zecevic has raised and

11     accepting the untidiness of this whole exercise and I believe I would

12     have made the observation quite early on in this trial - and I speak

13     personally here - that consistency is -- appearing to be consistent is

14     less important than trying to make the correct decision on each

15     individual occasion.  And we think that in the circumstances the

16     relevance of this document is rooted in the point in controversy between

17     the parties as to whether such reports were made in respect of attacks on

18     non-Serb villages, were, as to use Ms. Korner's phrase, window-dressing.

19             In the circumstances we accede to the application both to add it

20     to the 65 ter list and thereafter that it migrate and become an exhibit

21     marked for identification.

22                           [Trial Chamber confers]

23             JUDGE HALL:  Sorry, I will pick up from where I said we accede to

24     the application and notwithstanding what I would have said about it being

25     marked for identification, we allow the document having been -- to be

Page 11524

 1     admitted and marked.  I was going to say "having been tendered."  I'm not

 2     sure it was tendered, but the document is somehow before us so we allow

 3     it to be admitted and marked.  And we remind counsel for the Prosecution

 4     that the -- this document is -- forms part of a motion of which the

 5     Trial Chamber is now seized to certify for the Appeal Chamber, the

 6     previous decision to which counsel has alluded.  So the decision that we

 7     now make we treat as an application that counsel would have made, as it

 8     were, for reconsideration.  So that portion of the motion that is still

 9     live falls away by virtue of the order that we now make.

10             MS. KORNER:  Yes, Your Honours.  In fact, Your Honour's are quite

11     right.  I meant to say that effectively that was how we would have to

12     treat it because there's still an outstanding motion to appeal and,

13     therefore, the appeal is obviously still live but minus this document.

14     Thank you very much, Your Honours.

15             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.

16             THE REGISTRAR:  The document will become Exhibit P1424,

17     Your Honours.

18             MS. KORNER:  If Your Honours forgive me, I will leave the court

19     because Mr. Hannis is going to continue.

20             MR. PANTELIC:  I would like to be heard before my learned friend

21     Ms. Korner is going to leave the court, please.  I have to address the

22     Trial Chamber with regard to the issue which was raised by Ms. Korner

23     related to my submission very shortly.

24             JUDGE HALL:  Please proceed, but I didn't realise there was

25     something that we were still considering, Mr. Pantelic.  I thought we

Page 11525

 1     ruled.

 2             MR. PANTELIC:  Your Honour --

 3             JUDGE HALL:  Go ahead.  Please go ahead.

 4             MR. PANTELIC:  Yes, thank you.  Could you bear with me for a

 5     moment, please.

 6                           [Trial Chamber confers]

 7             MR. PANTELIC:  Your Honours, Ms. Korner mentioned my name in

 8     relation to certain part of submission and allegations that she misleaded

 9     the Court, et cetera.

10             First of all, this interpretation was not my intention from my

11     part, to -- to say that she's misleading the Court on that way.  My

12     intervention was based purely on the -- in relation to the principles of

13     fairness and professional co-operation between the parties and

14     professional diligence.  I'm -- don't have any problem to apologise to

15     Ms. Korner if her impression was that I, to some extent, acted and said

16     something which was not appropriate in accordance with her understanding

17     and knowledge of course.

18             But prior to that, I'm entitled to have her apologise.  Namely,

19     and I make my submission on the transcript, it's at page 10869 and 10867

20     on May 26th.  At that day I said that Ms. Korner misquoting me in

21     relation to Traynor's article.  And that was the fact, if you are going

22     to see this reference.  So she clearly misquoted me and then on the basis

23     of this issue made further submissions, allegedly that I did not object

24     to the admission of all Mr. Traynor's article, et cetera.  But okay,

25     that's -- leave all this stuff aside.  I would say this is kind of a

Page 11526

 1     housekeeping matter that both parties have and then we are discussing one

 2     way or another.  But we have a more serious problem here, Your Honours.

 3     My position is the following:  I think and I believe, deeply believe,

 4     that certain members of Prosecution, namely, Ms. Korner, is actually

 5     performing her duty as a Prosecution attorney expanding the standards of

 6     re-direct examination, Your Honour.  Please.  Yesterday we were witness

 7     to that --

 8             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Mr. Pantelic, I'm sorry, this is enough.

 9             MR. PANTELIC:  Thank you.

10             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Counsels are expected to behave professionally

11     and diligently in court.  These accusations back and forth of who is

12     trying to mislead or twist the reality is something that you have to

13     fight outside the courtroom.  And we all accept that sometimes in the

14     heat of the fight parties may inadvertently come to express views that

15     perhaps they should not have done; and if they do so, the easiest and the

16     simplest thing between human beings is to reach out your hand and to give

17     an apology.  And other than that, I think there is nothing more to it.  I

18     suggest that we stop this now and bring the witness into the courtroom.

19             MR. PANTELIC:  Your Honour, I fully appreciate what you said, but

20     for the record, I must put on the record because this is a serious issue,

21     We think that principles of --

22             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Mr. Pantelic, the issue is closed.

23             MR. HANNIS:  Our next witness is Dragan Kezunovic.

24                           [The witness takes the stand]

25             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Kezunovic, could you please read once again

Page 11527

 1     the solemn declaration.

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

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

 4             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Thank you very much.  You may be seated.

 5             Can you please for the record state your name and your date of

 6     birth.

 7             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] My name is Dragan Kezunovic.  I was

 8     born on the 20th November, 1946.

 9             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Thank you.  What was your profession in 1992,

10     please?

11             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I was employed with the republic

12     secretariat for internal affairs in Sarajevo as assistant chief of

13     administration for communications.

14             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Thank you.  And what is your occupation today?

15             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm retired.

16             JUDGE DELVOIE:  What is your ethnicity, please?

17             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Serb.

18             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Is this the first time you are testifying before

19     this Tribunal or before a Tribunal in your country on these matters?

20             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, it's the first time.

21             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Thank you.  You have been called as a witness for

22     the Prosecution.  That means that the Prosecution will start asking you

23     questions.  Prosecution asked for four hours to do so.  After that, the

24     Defence, on that side, will cross-examine and ask questions also; after

25     which, the Prosecution can re-examine, re-direct, ask you some more

Page 11528

 1     questions.  And after all that, it's -- eventually the Bench, the Judges,

 2     could ask you questions.  Is that clear?

 3             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Clear.

 4             JUDGE DELVOIE:  We sit in sessions of 90 minutes, 20-minutes'

 5     pause; 90 minutes, 20-minutes' pause; and a last 90 minutes.

 6     So three sessions of 90 minutes each time with a pause of 20 minutes for

 7     technical reasons.  If for any reason you feel uncomfortable and need an

 8     extra break or a pause, just let us know.

 9             Mr. Hannis.

10             MR. HANNIS:  Thank you, Your Honour.

11                           WITNESS:  DRAGAN KEZUNOVIC (Resumed)

12                           [Witness answered through interpreter]

13                           Examination by Mr. Hannis:

14        Q.   Good morning, Mr. Kezunovic.  I see that you are currently

15     retired.  Could you tell us when you retired from the MUP?

16        A.   I received the decision on the 15th February, 2002.

17        Q.   Okay.  And how long had you worked in the MUP at the time you

18     retired?

19        A.   You mean in total, before the war and during the war?

20        Q.   Yes, in both the RS MUP and the Bosnian MUP.

21        A.   From the 1st of March, 1978.

22        Q.   And what positions did you hold, what jobs did you do in the MUP

23     when you worked for them, if you can briefly tell us?

24        A.   The internal organisation of the MUP changed several times during

25     my tenure, but generally speaking, until the war, I was always deputy

Page 11529

 1     chief, whether he was chief of sector or chief of department, or chief of

 2     administration.  And when he, the chief, retired, I became chief of

 3     communications.

 4        Q.   When did that first happen, that you became chief?

 5        A.   With the beginning of the conflict in Bosnia-Herzegovina, that

 6     means early April when I was invited to the MUP of the Republic of

 7     Bosnia-Herzegovina, as it was called then by definition.  The post of

 8     chief of communications was offered to me, and I accepted.

 9        Q.   Before that, if I can ask you, in the summer, July of 1991, what

10     position did you hold and where were you working?

11        A.   I was chief of section within the administration for

12     communications, and ex officio I was also chief of -- deputy chief of

13     administration.  However, since the post of chief was vacant, I was

14     acting chief.  I believe it was in June/July, that period.

15        Q.   And physically, geographical speaking, where were you working?

16        A.   At the base of the republic secretariat for internal affairs in

17     Sarajevo.

18        Q.   I'd like to show you now an exhibit that's already in evidence in

19     this case.  This is P897.  And I don't think this is one that you've seen

20     before, but I believe you'll be able to offer some comment on it.  And I

21     would tell you to start with, this is an intercepted telephone

22     conversation between Radovan Karadzic and Vitomir Zepinic.  Did you know

23     Mr. Zepinic in 1991?

24        A.   I did.

25             MR. HANNIS:  And with the usher's help, I could hand the witness

Page 11530

 1     a hard copy.  It might be easier for him to follow.

 2        Q.   The part I want to start with, Mr. Kezunovic, is on the second

 3     page of the document you have, and Mr. Karadzic is talking to Mr. Zepinic

 4     about positions in the MUP held by Serbian personnel.  Because you'll

 5     recall at this time after the nationalist parties had come into power,

 6     there were certain agreements about who would hold various positions in

 7     the various organs in the government.  Is that correct so far?

 8        A.   It is correct that parties had an internal agreement between them

 9     about the distribution of all senior posts in the secretariat for

10     internal affairs.

11        Q.   And in English, for Your Honours, if you're following along, at

12     the very bottom of the page Mr. Karadzic says:

13             "To take a position whether it's good or not.  Now I see, I have

14     to sign here," going on to page 3, "I have to sign here, something that

15     Simovic sent to me for some Kezunovic, whom I don't know, but to be

16     transferred from MUP to the defence ministry where Doka is."

17             And Mr. Zepinic says:

18             "Dragan Kezunovic?"

19             Mr. Karadzic says:

20             "Dragan Kezunovic."

21             And if you'll follow on to the bottom of your second page a

22     little further on Mr. Karadzic says:

23             "At communications, we have another man for communications at the

24     ministry to tie up with Doka, but we mustn't risk losing one place at the

25     SUP ..."

Page 11531

 1             Mr. Zepinic says:

 2             "The post is important to me.  That's an engineering post and

 3     it's very important for the man to be a professional here and the

 4     communications system at the ministry."

 5             Karadzic asks if Zepinic knows you.  And then going on to page 3

 6     for you he says:

 7             Zepinic says he was here this morning.  He asks what you're like.

 8     Zepinic tells him you're the son of Slobodan.  And at the bottom of page

 9     4 in English and still on your page 3 Zepinic asks:

10             "Well, who should I get instead of Kezunovic?"

11             And Karadzic says:

12             "Well, no, Kezunovic should stay if that's what's of interest to

13     us."

14             In July of 1991, were you aware of any discussions or a plan to

15     shift you from the MUP to the Defence ministry?  Did you know that was

16     being discussed?

17        A.   No.  Nobody ever told me, nobody ever asked me anything about

18     going to the Ministry of Defence, but there are other facts from this

19     conversation that I am aware of.  I will either explain or you will ask

20     me about it.

21        Q.   Okay.  Well, first let me ask you.  So I take it you did not

22     move, you did not move from the Ministry of the Interior or the

23     secretariat of interior; you remained in that position until the war

24     broke out, and you eventually went and worked for the RS MUP.  Correct?

25        A.   Correct.

Page 11532

 1        Q.   And you said you -- there were other facts that you're aware of.

 2     Could you briefly tell us what those are?

 3        A.   I can.  It all has to do with this text you've just read.  I said

 4     I was head of a section and the chief of that section would always be

 5     deputy chief of the administration, since the post of chief was vacant

 6     and I was told that this post was subject to internal agreement and was

 7     envisaged to go to the SDA and the person to be appointed to that post

 8     should be a member of the SDA, a Muslim.  But since the SDA didn't

 9     propose anyone for a long time, I was invited by the head of personnel,

10     Mr. Selimovic, he was also a member of the SDA, who told me something

11     like this.  You and I know each other well.  You're an engineer, a

12     trained engineer.  You have been in this post a long time.  Stay in that

13     job.  Mind only your job and pay no heed to anything else.

14             And that's what I did.  However, the problems started when the

15     chief was finally appointed.  It was an engineer, who had worked in

16     telecom previously, and the first thing that happened was that he invited

17     me to his office to tell me that within an hour I should advise him of my

18     departure from the Ministry of Interior and which job I found next.

19     Nobody mentioned the Ministry of Defence or anything else at that point.

20     I had an argument with the man.  I told him it was not something that he

21     was supposed to or could decide according to the rules and regulations

22     and that I would continue in my job whether he liked it or not.  And

23     that's what happened.  I remained in my job, but my coming to work was

24     practically just a formality from that time on.  Nobody gave me anything

25     to do, and I was not involved in the work in any practical terms.  I was

Page 11533

 1     just physically present at work, spoke to the other employees about the

 2     job and some current problems.  And one day I ran into Mr. Zepinic and

 3     complained to him about all that.  He was then deputy minister.  And this

 4     conversation between Zepinic and Karadzic was perhaps partly a result of

 5     my complaint to Mr. Zepinic.

 6        Q.   What was the name of the chief who told you to leave?

 7        A.   Akif Sabic.  I forgot to say a moment ago that at that time I did

 8     not belong to any political party.  I was not affiliated at all.

 9        Q.   That was my next question.  Did you ever belong to a political

10     party after 1991?

11        A.   No.

12        Q.   Okay.  You mentioned having a conversation with Mr. Zepinic,

13     telling him about this problem.  Was he able to do anything for you that

14     you're aware of in terms of fixing the problem?

15        A.   Well, he was probably able to help only by preventing them from

16     forcing me to resign and remain jobless.  That's actually what I was

17     asking him to do.  I asked him also to find me any post, any engineering

18     post, in that service.  It didn't have to be a senior post.  And he was

19     probably able to do that and he might have done it actually.

20        Q.   And I'm sorry, I forgot to ask you earlier.  What kind of

21     training did you have to hold the jobs that you eventually held?  What

22     was your educational background?

23        A.   I can.  I graduated from the school of electrical engineering of

24     the University of Sarajevo, and in the last year of my studies I received

25     a scholarship from telecom.  It was at that time a large conglomerate in

Page 11534

 1     PTT services, and I started working after graduation for telecom.

 2     However, after a while I transferred to the republic secretariat of

 3     internal affairs at their own request.  They invited me for an interview

 4     and offered me the post of engineer in charge of development and

 5     modernisation of the internal communications system.

 6             While I was working still in telecom, I was in charge of

 7     maintenance of hardware in transit switchboards, of which there were 23

 8     or 24 in the territory of the former Yugoslavia.  At that time it was

 9     almost state-of-the-art technology.  So I was assigned to that job and I

10     worked on the maintenance of hardware in the central management unit, but

11     later on when I transferred to the republic secretariat I completed

12     almost every year an advanced training course in a particular specialty

13     to keep up with the advancement of technology in the world.  We had to

14     attend courses and to keep up, especially courses concerning the

15     protection of data.

16        Q.   Now, I think you said earlier that you were invited to come work

17     for the newly created Serbian MUP, which later became the Republika

18     Srpska MUP.  When approximately did that happen, do you remember the date

19     that you were first contacted about doing that?

20        A.   Well, that was -- but before that I need to explain something

21     else and I will be brief of course.  My father hails from Sokolac, the

22     municipality of Sokolac, which is 40 kilometres from Sarajevo.  We had a

23     family house there.  This house was set to fire in December of 1990 by

24     someone.  At the time of course it was not possible to do anything about

25     fixing it, and as of that moment I travelled every day to Sokolac so that

Page 11535

 1     I'd just be present there and to take care of the remains of that house.

 2     The first floor and part of the roof burned down, and then the water and

 3     the cold destroyed the bottom part of the building as well.  So until the

 4     time of the breakout of the war, I would go every day and spend the night

 5     in this house in Sokolac and then take the bus to Sarajevo in the

 6     morning.

 7             I don't know the exact dates, but it was in late March when

 8     barricades started appearing in Sarajevo.  There were also various

 9     protest gatherings of -- I can't even remember who anymore.  And the

10     barricades were set up at the entry points to the town.  It was in the

11     first weekend in April and then the days immediately following, Monday,

12     Tuesday, that the bus could not pass through the barricades.  It had to

13     stop before them, but these barricades were set up by both sides along

14     the road from Sokolac and Pale.  The Serbs had their check-point and at

15     the exit point from the town near the town hall, the Muslims, the

16     Green Berets, had theirs.

17             I'd noticed one even earlier because that's usually where I would

18     wait for the bus for Sokolac and also this was the place where I would

19     step off my bus on my way in.  So it was for two days in a row that I

20     could not come to my place of employment.  My colleagues from down there

21     were calling me, and I explained why I couldn't come to work.

22             Also, please understand, I was not surprised by the situation and

23     the conditions that morning, but the events were unfolding in such a way

24     that it was only a matter of days when this would happen.

25             And now I'm answering to your question.  I apologise.  So it was

Page 11536

 1     in the period between the 5th and the 10th of April when I received a

 2     call from communications officer who was also from Sokolac and who was

 3     most probably at Pale at the time, telling me that Mr. Stanisic would

 4     like to speak to me; and then I was offered the position.  But since

 5     everything was clear by then and one could tell where things were going

 6     to go, I accepted the job.  That's in brief.

 7        Q.   Thank you.  What was the name of the person who called you and

 8     told you that Mr. Stanisic was wanting to speak to you about working at

 9     the newly formed Serb MUP?

10        A.   It was a communications officer who worked as an operator, Zoran

11     Borovcanin.

12        Q.   And did you talk with Mr. Stanisic on the phone, or did you go

13     see him in person?  How did that take place?

14        A.   I went to Pale, and I followed the instructions Zoran gave me,

15     and that's where I met with Mr. Stanisic and where everything was

16     arranged.

17        Q.   Had you known Mr. Stanisic before?

18        A.   Yes, I have.

19        Q.   And that's Mico Stanisic we're talking about?

20        A.   Yes, yes.

21        Q.   What did he tell you when you had that conversation?

22        A.   Well, to the effect of:  You see how things are developing.

23     Please bear in mind that I used to work for the police.  I knew about

24     what was going on in general terms in the wider area.  This was just -

25     let me put it like this - an official confirmation that things seemed to

Page 11537

 1     be going in a certain way.  I realised I had not much choice.  I accepted

 2     the post, especially because this was a kind of post that involved my

 3     expertise that I was good at.  So I thought there shouldn't be any

 4     problems there.

 5        Q.   And to be precise, what post was it that he offered you?

 6        A.   Chief of administration for communications or chief of

 7     communications, as we would internally call it.  Now, at the time whether

 8     it had -- because at the time we didn't have an official document

 9     explaining internal systemisation, and the terminology used was such to

10     be analogous to the pre-war systemisation.  I was offered a post of

11     deputy minister or chief of that administration.

12        Q.   And did he give you any particular task upon your acceptance of

13     the position as chief of communications?

14        A.   Nothing special.  He told me there's no need for me to explain

15     things to you.  You know well enough what is necessary.  I only asked

16     where is the starting location, so to speak, what is our starting point?

17     What needs to be linked up into the system.  And I was told it would be

18     Pale and then we'll see how things developed on the ground.  And

19     according to that, we'll be organising our communications system.

20        Q.   And after that, what did you do then?  Did you stay in Pale and

21     try to get things right?

22        A.   Well, to tell you the truth, the question was put, it was put in

23     a brief form and clear, but the answer is more complex -- yet, I will try

24     and answer you in a brief manner.  When you come to a location where

25     there's nothing, you don't have the premises, you don't have the devices,

Page 11538

 1     you don't have the personnel, you don't have documentations according to

 2     which you should be working, it is clear from all that that the initial

 3     starting point, initial location, was zero.  Nothing could have been done

 4     overnight, of course, or in a brief period of time.  Things had to be

 5     done in proper order to see who was available, who's available of people

 6     with expertise, communication expertise, who used to work in former

 7     republican SUP.  And I'm not talking only about the headquarters, but in

 8     broader terms, the town SUP or the city of Sarajevo SUP, the municipal

 9     secretariats.  And then to see what kind of equipment we can find.  So we

10     spent a few days in the initial stage to have -- having consultations

11     with people from our profession.  It was very difficult to establish

12     communication because at the time initially the communications were not

13     functioning because they were switched off.  Later on some of the relays

14     were later on destroyed.  So the infrastructure was not present.

15             In the first few days I used to go back to Sokolac to spend the

16     night there.  On occasions, of course, I had to sleep in the building

17     where we met, and so on.

18        Q.   After you accepted the job, then did you stay in Pale; and if so,

19     for how long?

20        A.   I stayed for several days.  I cannot tell you precisely how many,

21     but it was for a shorter period of time.  And then, after receiving an

22     order by the minister, I went to the school -- to a school in Sarajevo,

23     to the school of internal affairs.  And me and several associates went

24     there to the premises of that school to check whether the headquarters of

25     the ministry could be located there.

Page 11539

 1        Q.   And the school you're talking about, that's the one that was

 2     located at Vrace, if I'm pronouncing that correctly?

 3        A.   The school -- or rather, this was a centre for education of

 4     internal affairs staff, including as well a high school for internal

 5     affairs four years, and upon graduating from that, one would become a

 6     police officer.  And it was called centre for education of police staff.

 7     It was called like that because all the courses were being organised

 8     there which the --

 9        Q.   I'm sorry to interrupt.  My question, though, was just:  Is that

10     the location that's sometimes referred to as Vrace?

11        A.   Yes.

12        Q.   Thank you.  And -- thank you.  And you say you went there after

13     receiving an order by the minister.  Was that a written order or just a

14     verbal order, to go to Vrace?

15        A.   It was a verbal order.  I even wasn't told that by him.  The

16     colleagues who went along, one of them or several of them told me who

17     should be in that group, initial group, and that was all.

18        Q.   Thank you.  Next I'd like to show you Exhibit P541.  I have a

19     hard copy of this one for you as well.

20             MR. ZECEVIC:  Could we have a tab, please.

21             MR. HANNIS:  Oh, I'm sorry.  It's tab 9.

22        Q.   And you will have seen this one, Mr. Kezunovic, during proofing I

23     think.  It's the record of a meeting of a board of directors at the

24     police academy on the 14th of April, 1992.  And you'll see you're listed

25     as one of those attending the meeting.  Do you recall having been at such

Page 11540

 1     a meeting?

 2        A.   Yes, I do.

 3        Q.   And I want to ask you about on your first page, I think it's the

 4     second paragraph.  It says, "There's a gap between Pale and the Serbian

 5     MUP.  The minister and the under-secretary and all the others are in

 6     Pale."

 7             Was that a source of some difficulties in getting things started

 8     in the first week or two after the split of the former MUP?

 9        A.   Well, based on what I see in the document, my understanding of

10     this gap is bad communications or poor communications, which then makes

11     it difficult to communicate between Vrace and other locations, primarily

12     Pale, the minister and his immediate associates.  I assume that the gap

13     mentioned here is that gap.  And let me just clarify one more thing.

14     Before the war, in entire Yugoslavia and in Bosnia and Herzegovina as

15     well, the police had its own system of communications and let me tell you

16     what it implied.  But also, all other major state systems, like power

17     system -- electrical power system, TV, they all had internal systems.  It

18     wasn't only the police, but one of the specific elements of the police

19     system was that it had capacity of the kind where the communication

20     between different cities and towns linking up police elements and units

21     was done in accordance to hierarchy.  So when we're talking about the

22     territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina, it was like that.  And when we're

23     talking about the city of Sarajevo and some of the other cities in the

24     republic, the police had teleprinter communication because at the time we

25     didn't have computers, we used teleprinters.  And we had our own cable

Page 11541

 1     connections that linked up all police buildings and state facilities for

 2     the purpose of security and protection of state organs and other

 3     facilities that the police was in charge of security-wise.

 4             So the school at Vrace was also linked-up with two cables, the

 5     public cable and the police cable.  But that went through the Telekom

 6     building, which was after several days -- the communication was switched

 7     off because the Telekom building was in Sarajevo.  We could see it from

 8     Vrace, the building by the communication was switched off.  We managed to

 9     find some people who lived in the neighbourhood and we asked them to lend

10     us two phone numbers so that we would have some sort of communication.

11     But we couldn't use these two numbers for anything confidential, for

12     instance, we could not exchange written messages -- and I'm talking about

13     the first few days here.  And yes, that's why they're speaking about the

14     gap in communication.

15        Q.   And were you able to use those two phone numbers you borrowed

16     from some people living in the area to communicate with Pale during those

17     first few days, although you could only do it for open conversations?

18        A.   I'm sorry.  I have to add one more thing.  These two numbers, we

19     had our police officers who gave us the numbers.  It was the police

20     officers or their relatives.  It wasn't us or the service who did that.

21     It was done independently of me.  Once the cables in the Telekom building

22     were cut off.  Now, I can't remember whether these people were relatives

23     of one of our police officers or neighbours, but it was along those lines

24     that we got hold of the two telephone numbers.  And then I think later on

25     even these two numbers were switched off because they were all part of

Page 11542

 1     the same switchboard.

 2             MR. HANNIS:  If I may, one more question before we break.

 3        Q.   You see -- I think it may be on page 2 of your document, there's

 4     a section where you're listed as speaking, and you talk about you don't

 5     have enough people and there are big communication problems in the field.

 6     And the last thing you're noted as saying, it says:

 7             "According to the agreement with the Serbian S SUP and the

 8     Serbian MUP, we should request the equipment they can give us."

 9             Serbian S SUP, does that mean the federal SUP in Belgrade?

10        A.   Yes.

11        Q.   And do you recall now what the agreement was under which you

12     might request equipment from them?

13        A.   It was not any special agreement.  A group of us that were in the

14     supervisor position there at Vrace, we sat together.  The people

15     mentioned in the document, including myself, we sat there and tried to

16     discuss the options of overcoming our problems.  And when my turn came --

17     well, I would have said it anyhow.  It was logical of course.  You must

18     understand, at the time, you must understand me and my position.  For me,

19     Yugoslavia was my state, not Bosnia and HerzegovinaBosnia and

20     Herzegovina was part of the state of Yugoslavia.  And as long as the

21     federal SUP existed, which was the top of the pyramid for all the

22     republics, I had my expectations from them and that was what my comment

23     was about.  I don't know who else one could have asked at the time.

24        Q.   Thank you.

25             MR. HANNIS:  It's time for our first recess.

Page 11543

 1             JUDGE HALL:  Yes.  We resume in 20 minutes.

 2                           --- Recess taken at 10.24 a.m.

 3                          --- On resuming at 10.49 a.m.

 4             MR. HANNIS:

 5        Q.   Mr. Kezunovic, I have wanted to make one request.  I know it's

 6     your first time testifying, and I appreciate your sincere desire to give

 7     us as much information as possible, but I'd like to ask you to try and

 8     keep your answers as short as possible depending on the question.  But

 9     also, if you feel you need to add something to clarify, please let us

10     know and I'll be happy to let you do that.  The only reason I say this is

11     because I'm under a time-limit and I have a lot of things I want to try

12     and cover with you.  And having said that and looking at the transcript,

13     I realise I may not have gotten a complete answer to one of my recent

14     questions.  Regarding the time you were at Vrace, You mentioned the phone

15     lines being cut or turned off, and you - meaning I guess individual

16     police officers through family members in the area - were able to get two

17     telephone numbers that you were able to use.  And my question was:  Were

18     you able to use those two telephone numbers to communicate by phone from

19     Vrace to Pale during those early days?

20        A.   Generally, yes.

21        Q.   Thank you.  And the document that we were looking at of the

22     meeting of the 14th --

23             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Could I just ask --

24             MR. HANNIS:  Yes.

25             JUDGE HARHOFF:  -- you also mentioned that the lines were cut off

Page 11544

 1     at some point.  When was that, do you recall?

 2             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't remember the exact date,

 3     but it was several days after we arrived at Vrace.  Simply when the folks

 4     in town realised that someone is in that installation, that it's

 5     occupied, that it's -- something is going on there, they intercepted the

 6     conversations because the cable which connected the Vrace building with

 7     the Ministry of the Interior passed through the building of Telekom, and

 8     Telekom was a very visible building in town.  It was approximately 1

 9     kilometre away as the crow flies.  You simply pull out the fuses and stop

10     the connection, or you can do it through software at the switchboard.

11     You can disconnect certain numbers.  But in this particular case, the

12     cable was disconnected.

13             JUDGE HARHOFF:  It's just because the issue of communication is

14     an important issue in this trial.  So are you able to approximately

15     remember how long time these two phone lines were available to you?

16     That's all we need to know.  Just approximately.

17             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I know even this.  There was a

18     short period when the cables were disconnected.  We had no telephone

19     communication at all for a couple of days.  I can't tell you the exact

20     number of days, but for a couple of days we had no telephone

21     communication at all.  We only had one amateur short-wave radio station,

22     radio transceiver for ham radio operators, but that's not something that

23     we professionally would use because everybody can listen to these air

24     waves and practically anyone can intercept.  So that sort of

25     communication, even if it existed, was completely unsuitable for

Page 11545

 1     confidential exchanges.  I don't know what was going on at the time that

 2     was very important or confidential.  That's another matter.

 3             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Back to you, Mr. Hannis.

 4             MR. HANNIS:

 5        Q.   During that time when you had no phones for a couple of days, did

 6     you have any other means to communicate with Pale besides this amateur

 7     short-wave radio station, if you recall?

 8        A.   Maybe it was possible, but that too would have been completely

 9     insecure and unreliable to use the radios, portable radios that police

10     officers normally carry.  Because the local repeater located at Pale

11     covered the area of Pale, and the repeater that could cover the broader

12     area of Sarajevo was located at Mount Trebevic.  But there anyone could

13     listen to those communications.  When I say "anyone," meaning the police

14     force on either side, anyone.  Anyone with the -- with an amateur radio

15     would have the scanning option, scan various frequencies, and when you

16     catch on a signal you stop.  That was completely unreliable.  It was

17     better to get into a car, spend half an hour or an hour driving to Pale,

18     and then have a conversation face-to-face.

19        Q.   That was my next question.  Did you communicate by using couriers

20     or driving to Pale and speaking directly with someone during that time?

21        A.   If you mean me personally, I did not organise any courier

22     service.  Whether people could send messengers to carry messages, they

23     could.  When I was faced with a need to deal with other problems, not

24     only the problem of communication between Vrace and Pale, of course I was

25     able to go there myself and from there I had a better orientation of what

Page 11546

 1     was going on the ground.

 2             MR. ZECEVIC:  I'm sorry, Your Honours.  I note that parts of the

 3     answers -- the previous answer, the one before that, and this one were

 4     not recorded.  I think either the witness should be cautioned to speak

 5     slowly so that everything he says would be recorded.  Because I think

 6     it's important.  Because there was a sentence after the sentence on 32,

 7     10/11, when witness said whether people could send messages, to carry

 8     messages, they could.  And then he explained on that but it wasn't

 9     recorded.  Thank you.

10             MR. HANNIS:

11        Q.   Mr. Kezunovic, you heard that.  Do you recall what you said after

12     the part of your answer where you said:

13             "Whether people could send messengers to carry messages, they

14     could."

15             Mr. Zecevic said then what you said next was not recorded in the

16     transcript.  Do you remember what else you said because I don't know?

17        A.   I'm sorry, now I am confused because the gentleman mentioned page

18     31.  I don't know in which document.  I have three pages in front of

19     me --

20        Q.   No, that was a reference to the page number on the electronic

21     transcript.  It's on the computer screen that he was referring to.

22             MR. HANNIS:  I don't know what else I can do, Mr. Zecevic.

23             MR. ZECEVIC:  Thank you, Mr. Hannis.  We will have to ask for a

24     verification or maybe in the cross-examination I can clarify that.  Thank

25     you.

Page 11547

 1             MR. HANNIS:  Thank you.

 2        Q.   Mr. Kezunovic, I want to show you another document that arises

 3     out of the reference here to maybe getting equipment from the Serbian MUP

 4     or the federal SUP.

 5             MR. HANNIS:  Could we show the witness 65 ter number 1943.  This

 6     is at tab 32.

 7        Q.   This is just a short document, so I'll see if we can work with it

 8     on the screen.  And, Mr. Kezunovic, do you recognise what that is?  It's

 9     dated the 8th of May, 1992, and mentions the federal secretariat of the

10     interior for the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.  It appears to

11     be a list of various kinds of communications equipment.

12        A.   Could you move the list for me to see all of it.

13        Q.   And then there's a second page we can show you when you're ready.

14        A.   This is probably a set for a short-wave transceiver, short-wave

15     radio.  This is the breakdown of this set.  It's a short-wave radio

16     station with accessories and installations, power feed, Teletype, various

17     connection cables, the micro telephone combination --

18        Q.   Sorry, let me stop you there.  Right above the list of items

19     you'll see a sentence that in my English translation reads:

20             "Following the order of the federal secretariat, we are

21     delivering to you equipment and devices necessary for establishment of

22     the radio-teletypewriter centre for the needs of the SR BH MUP."

23             MR. HANNIS:  Could we go to the second page of this document in

24     both English and B/C/S.

25             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, that's a continuation of the

Page 11548

 1     list of the component parts of the set.

 2             MR. HANNIS:

 3        Q.   And at the bottom of the page we see a couple of signatures.  Do

 4     you recognise any of those?

 5        A.   I recognise my signature, my own signature; and the other one I

 6     don't know.

 7        Q.   Did you receive this equipment from someone on or about the date

 8     of 8 May 1992?

 9        A.   Do you mean whether I personally received it or whether the MUP

10     received it, someone on behalf of my service?

11        Q.   [Previous translation continues]...

12        A.   Most probably, most probably one of my employees received the

13     set, inspected its completeness, and gave me a list to sign because I was

14     the head of that administration.  That's -- that was the procedure then.

15        Q.   The signature on the left-hand side of the page is under

16     typewriting that is translated as for SSUP, for the federal secretariat

17     of the interior, equipment handed over.  Did you meet that person?  Did

18     that person come in and present a document to you, or was it somebody

19     from your own service who gave you the document already signed by

20     somebody from the federal SUP, do you remember?

21        A.   Right.  That's how it was.  That's how it worked.  I received it

22     from my service.  I don't know exactly who gave it to me now, but it was

23     at Pale that I signed it.  That's where I was given it.

24        Q.   And I understand your earlier answer to be that you didn't

25     personally receive all these items on the list, but I assume that if

Page 11549

 1     indeed this equipment had not been delivered at some point in time you

 2     would have found out that you didn't receive the equipment; is that

 3     right?

 4        A.   Absolutely.

 5             MR. HANNIS:  Your Honours, I'd like to tender this document, 65

 6     ter 1943.

 7             JUDGE HALL:  A list of radio equipment that was -- so it was like

 8     a shopping list.  So what --

 9             MR. HANNIS:  What is important, Your Honour, that this is

10     received from the federal SUP.  Part of our case is there's a joint

11     criminal enterprise working with Mr. Milosevic and other individuals in

12     Serbia.  It's important to show the co-operation between the former

13     Federal Republic of Serbia [sic] and the newly created Republika Srpska.

14             JUDGE HALL:  Admitted and marked.

15             MR. HANNIS:  Thank you.

16             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit P1425, Your Honours.

17             MR. ZECEVIC:  I'm sorry, Your Honours, just one comment.  This

18     document refers to the equipment received from the federal secretariat of

19     security, so it doesn't have anything to do -- it is recorded as --

20     Mr. Hannis has Federal Republic of Serbia.  It's the Federal Republic of

21     Yugoslavia, SFRY.  And it says SSUP, which means the federal MUP.

22             MR. HANNIS:  I -- I'm sorry, I guess if that's what I said, I

23     misspoke.  I read earlier the title of the document which says SFR

24     Yugoslavia at the top of the page.  I certainly didn't intend to mislead

25     you.  It's the federal SUP is my understanding.  Thank you.

Page 11550

 1        Q.   Now, I wanted to ask you about the types of communications

 2     equipment you had for use in the Republika Srpska MUP in 1992.  You've

 3     mentioned telephones.  Did you also have Teletype machines and

 4     teleprinters?

 5        A.   May I ask one -- or rather, two things.  First of all, can I give

 6     my comment first about this equipment that was delivered, this device,

 7     this set that was provided on the previous list?

 8        Q.   If you can do it briefly, sure.

 9        A.   Here is why.  I have told you and I can't remember in response to

10     which question, for me at this moment, chronologically speaking, the

11     federal secretariat for internal affairs was hierarchically directly

12     superior to the secretariat I was working for.  And everything that was

13     going on in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the break-up, the collapse of the

14     system, was just beginning.  It was the month of April.  Until that

15     moment, perhaps due to my upbringing -- but in any case for me it was a

16     completely legal institution that had appropriate equipment envisaged by

17     the war plan --

18        Q.   I'm sorry.  I'm sorry.  I didn't want to get into a discussion

19     with you about the legality.  This is an issue better left for the

20     Judges.  But if there's something else you want to say about it, please

21     do.  But again, keep it short if you can.

22        A.   I have nothing else.  The whole point was that for me in my eyes

23     it was completely legal.

24        Q.   Thank you.  I wanted to ask you about the types of means of

25     communication that you had in the Republika Srpska MUP in 1992 for

Page 11551

 1     communicating between MUP headquarters, the five CSBs, and the SJBs.  Can

 2     you tell the Judges what those were, just kind of list the equipment

 3     available.

 4        A.   If you mean the MUP headquarters on the Serbian side, you mean,

 5     Serbian MUP, in our headquarters we had very little equipment.  We had a

 6     certain number of telephone plug-ins from the local switchboard of Pale.

 7     We had one short-wave radio, and we had several ultra short-wave radios.

 8     Those are the networks used by police officers on the beat.  We had one

 9     or two teleprinters that could work via telephone lines, and there were

10     devices onto which you would plug-in a teleprinter on one side and a

11     telephone connection on the other side, and that's how you would get a

12     telegraph -- teleprinter connection between two teleprinters or

13     Teletypes.  But that was the barest minimum because only one operator

14     could work at a time, and if you need to communicate with five points you

15     have to deal with them one by one, and I suppose it's all clear.  If you

16     have a short dispatch, to note down, it can be done; but if it's

17     something longer, then it's very difficult.  But that only worked until

18     the moment Telekom found a way to provide alternative communication lines

19     on the Serbian side.  It's only when the postal system was

20     inter-connected internally, then we got from them two or -- one or two

21     channels to connect our devices onto.  It's like a leopard skin, and you

22     have to connect the spots into one whole.

23             Now, for the purposes of documents and coded documents,

24     work-plans, and all the background material that all the participants

25     need to have, it was impossible to achieve at the beginning.  Only when

Page 11552

 1     you get into direct contact with them, you hand them physically all these

 2     documents, the encryption tables, et cetera, on the condition, of course,

 3     that they have the right personnel for it.  In some places it went

 4     quicker, in others slower.

 5        Q.   You also had fax machines?

 6        A.   We did, but under the regulations on data protection and in my

 7     view the fax was a completely insecure, unprotected device and you

 8     couldn't transmit anything confidential through it.

 9             Let me just say one more thing.  All that I'm saying about rules

10     and regulations, I mean regulations applying to communication centres,

11     operators, professionals, who are encryptors, part of the communication

12     system, whether anyone outside communications centres was violating these

13     rules is something I wouldn't know.  Whenever I got reports about

14     something like that, I reacted, but there are things I may not have known

15     about.

16        Q.   But you did receive reports during 1992 that sometimes MUP

17     employees were, for example, using the fax to send communications that

18     should have gone by a more secure means; is that right ?

19        A.   I didn't understand the question.  Did I see?  Is that the

20     question?

21        Q.   Well, the last part of your previous answer was, "whenever I got

22     reports about something like that, I reacted ..." and you were referring

23     to when anyone outside communication centres was violating these rules

24     about encrypted communications.  And I took that to mean that you did

25     hear that that happened some time.  And I thought we've seen some --

Page 11553

 1     during proofing some examples of faxes that were sent, which in your view

 2     probably should have been sent by a more secure means.  Correct?

 3        A.   Correct.

 4        Q.   And I think we saw it in one of the meetings you attended, that

 5     that was something you complained about to your boss, that people weren't

 6     following the regulations about how to use communications equipment to

 7     ensure the best protection of data?

 8        A.   That's correct.  That's true.

 9        Q.   Thank you.  And as you said before, one other means that you

10     could use to send information or communications would be couriers, human

11     beings?

12        A.   That's right, but that was not envisaged within my service,

13     within communications.  In theory, somebody could give an assignment to

14     the courier, but then you would need drivers, vehicles, fuel, a number of

15     other things that I, in my administration, in my line of work, did not

16     dispose of.  I did not even have enough vehicles for my own requirements,

17     let alone organising a service like that.  You would need the staff, you

18     would need -- it's not as simple as that.

19        Q.   I understand.  Let me go next to another topic.  Just in general

20     terms about the level and functioning of communication in the RS MUP in

21     1992, you're aware of an annual report that was prepared about the

22     working of the MUP for that time-period between April and the end of

23     December 1992.  I'd like to have you look at Exhibit P625, and because

24     this is a lengthy document I'll hand you a hard copy with help from the

25     usher.

Page 11554

 1             MR. ZECEVIC:  I'm sorry, tab number, please.

 2             MR. HANNIS:  I'm sorry.  This is tab number 88.

 3        Q.   And you've seen this report before, Mr. Kezunovic?

 4        A.   Yes.

 5        Q.   And if we could look first at page -- it's page 23 of the

 6     English.  And for you, Mr. Kezunovic, I think it's the page number 28 in

 7     the bottom right-hand side.

 8             MR. HANNIS:  In e-court the B/C/S is page number 32.  And it's

 9     the second paragraph up from the bottom for you, Mr. Kezunovic.  It talks

10     about:

11             "On average, 15 dispatches a day were sent to the centres and

12     other organs from the MUP headquarters (a total of 4170 in all lines of

13     work) and on average 16 dispatches a day were received (a total of

14     4400)."

15             I have a question for you about the definition of dispatch in

16     your communications centre, and let me explain a little bit.  For me in

17     English "dispatch" I think has a more generic meaning, and it can mean

18     sort of any official document or maybe a military document or a news

19     report.  But I gather from what I've read and heard from other witnesses

20     that dispatch has a more narrow meaning.  Could you tell the Judges what

21     your understanding of a dispatch is in terms of the RS MUP communications

22     work.

23        A.   A dispatch in principle is something that has to be urgently

24     sent.  It's an order, information, some requested data that is being

25     exchanged among the operational services, and it should be urgently sent

Page 11555

 1     to the other side or to a number of sides.  And the word comes from the

 2     French word "depeche" to hurry, meaning that some information has to be

 3     conveyed to somebody else as urgently as possible, who then in turn needs

 4     to do something on the basis of the contents of that dispatch.  In

 5     principle, it should be a brief document because the -- and there are

 6     dispatches that are conveyed openly in their original state and

 7     dispatches that are conveyed in a coded manner.  There was a rule-book

 8     that defined what a dispatch should contain, which elements it should

 9     contain, formally speaking, heading, what should be contained in the

10     heading, the addressees, the content of the dispatch, the signature.  The

11     format was precisely defined, who is the drafter, who is to be the

12     recipient of the dispatch.  In order to make everything even more

13     precise, records were kept of all the dispatches incoming and outgoing in

14     all the communications centres, all dispatches that were received at the

15     window, as we call it, at the door of the communications centre, would be

16     recorded in the books of open and coded dispatches.  There are also

17     signed degrees of urgency, and it is known within which period of time

18     they would have to be delivered.  This is dated in the heading.  Records

19     are kept of those sent out and those received, and such books are being

20     held -- maintained also at all the centres where the dispatches

21     originate, and records are kept at the end where they are received.  This

22     is maintained, these records, both in the units that are sending out and

23     receiving the dispatches as well as at the communications centres.

24        Q.   In terms of this annual report, the section -- part of the

25     section that we're looking at now and beginning on page 25 of the English

Page 11556

 1     and 32 in your copy, there's a section about the task and duties of

 2     communications and cryptographic data protection.  Did you,

 3     Mr. Kezunovic, as chief of that administration have input into this

 4     annual report; and if so, how was that done?

 5        A.   Of course.  I had my own report, the report from my

 6     administration which was done on the basis of input or reports drafted by

 7     the centres.  The centres did their reports on the basis of reports of

 8     the public security stations.  The centres would compile all the

 9     statistical data, they would process all the aspects of certain issues,

10     as they saw it out in their own area of activities, the conditions of

11     operation, the technology of all the systems.  They would process --

12     perhaps if they had a problem with a shortage of something, if they had

13     personnel problems, any problems would be analytically processed and sent

14     to the centre.  The centres would compile all the data and send it to the

15     MUP seat.  And then on the basis of their reports and the reports done by

16     the unit at the SUP seat would make an overall report that would

17     encompass the work of all the organs in the communications sector.  We

18     would carry out the analysis on the basis of methodology in practice, and

19     then this would be some sort of summary taking out all the relevant parts

20     from different reports from the point of view of an analysis.  It would

21     be the item that dealt with the work of the communications section, some

22     problems would be dealt with, and also the statistical data would be

23     provided about the number of dispatches sent out and received.  This was

24     always done this way.  Except before the war data would be given about

25     the quantity of information because the number of dispatches, for

Page 11557

 1     example, one dispatch would -- could be equal to ten smaller ones.  But

 2     when you sum up the information, then you would be able to present that

 3     more specifically as far as the quantity of information was concerned.

 4        Q.   Thank you.  And, as I understand it then, the various

 5     administrations within the MUP at headquarters, for example, 01,

 6     uniformed police; 02, crime prevention; I think communications, you were

 7     04, each of those administrations submitted their own report based on

 8     what they received from the centres, which was based on what the centres

 9     received from the SJBs.  Am I right so far?

10        A.   Yes, you are.  That's how it should be.

11        Q.   Who then took all that -- all those reports from the

12     administration heads like yourself and created this report?  Who in the

13     MUP did that, either a person by name or a section by name?

14        A.   The administration for analysis and data or information would do

15     that.  I would give my report to the -- to my secretary and tell her,

16     "Take it and hand it over to the secretary for the administration for

17     analysis," probably the others did the same thing.  They would send

18     somebody to deliver the report because it was all in the same building.

19     The analysis chief would either personally or would send someone to ask

20     if this was really a summary of all the most important information

21     because this is a shorter report than my original report was.  And

22     then -- so we would agree on all of these matters before the summary on a

23     particular topic would be included in the final report.

24        Q.   Okay.  I think that partly answered my next question.  You had an

25     opportunity to review what the analytical folks had put into the complete

Page 11558

 1     report in terms of what it said about your section; is that right?  You

 2     had a chance to object if you felt they left out something important or

 3     wrote something incorrect, is that right, you had an opportunity?

 4             And having looked at the report and what it says about your

 5     section, is it accurate?

 6        A.   Is the data that is here in the report accurate?

 7        Q.   Yes.

 8        A.   Yes, yes, it is.  Yes, although I could perhaps express certain

 9     things differently, stylistically in order to make it more understandable

10     for those who were not so involved in the technical aspects.  Maybe

11     something there could be a little different, more adequately expressed.

12        Q.   Okay.  Thank you.  I understand that.  Let me ask you a question

13     about -- it's English page 27 in e-court, and your hard copy,

14     Mr. Kezunovic, I think it's page -- at the bottom of page 33.  And in

15     e-court the B/C/S is page 37.  This is an entry in the section about

16     communications and cryptographic data protection.  And there's a

17     breakdown here between open and coded dispatches.  You see that?

18        A.   Yes.

19             MR. HANNIS:  I think we have to go to the very bottom of the --

20     or, I'm sorry, the very top of the English page.  Yeah.  We have it here.

21        Q.   And then going on to the next page in e-court, in the B/C/S, and

22     for you I think over to the top of the next page, Mr. Kezunovic, there's

23     a reference to how many short-wave radio connections were established

24     from the communications centre base during that time-period.  You see

25     that?

Page 11559

 1             And the communications centre base, was that a base that was at

 2     MUP headquarters?  Where was that physically located?

 3        A.   Each organ from the republican SUP via the security centres in

 4     the former Bosnia and Herzegovina down to the municipal secretariat, 109

 5     municipalities, ten centres, and some other units, had short -- a

 6     short-wave radio station.  This network was built before the war,

 7     equipment was procured, and it was operational, but it worked exclusively

 8     as a reserve system.  That was the intention.  When none of the other

 9     means of communication were working, then the short-wave network would be

10     initiated.  This was done before the war, and it functioned more easily

11     because machine coding was used, teleprinters, Teletypes, and some other

12     devices which did not require the code technicians to do all of that by

13     hand.  And it operated in the fastest possible way that the technology at

14     the time allowed.

15             This network that is being referred to in this report did keep

16     the same number of connections, but only in setting up the

17     communications, to set up the communications and to gauge their quality

18     because we treated it also as a spare, reserve, system.  When nothing

19     else was working, this was our backup.  And this backup, since it was a

20     backup and was not used in its regular -- in the regular operations in

21     order to be able to check its conditions, we would use it from time to

22     time according to a plan so that the participants in the network could

23     check the communications, check the quality, and then the communication

24     would be broken.  There was no information actually confirmed -- conveyed

25     over the network.

Page 11560

 1             I would issue an internal order for them to, let's say, put

 2     together two simple sentences and to convey that text on the network in

 3     order to check whether the system was working, to see if there were no

 4     errors anywhere in the system.

 5        Q.   My question is specifically that location that's referred to

 6     there, communications centre base.  Can you tell me physically,

 7     geographically, where that was located.  If somebody said Mr. Kezunovic

 8     is in the communications centre base, where would I go to find you?

 9        A.   Could you please repeat your question.  My headphones fell off.

10        Q.   I saw that.  I'm trying to find out where this communications

11     centre base that's referred to in the annual report, where was that

12     physically located, geographically speaking?  If I were trying to find

13     someone who was in the communications centre base, what building would I

14     go to?

15        A.   I'm sorry, but I don't see where it says "base."  In this part of

16     the text where we're talking about the short-wave radio communications,

17     is that there?

18        Q.   Yes.  In my English translation at least it says "9.585

19     short-wave radio connections were established from the communications

20     centre base ..."

21             So that sounds like a place, a physical location; and if so, can

22     you tell me where it was?

23        A.   In this text there is no sentence like that, but regardless of

24     that there was no base as such.

25        Q.   Can you --

Page 11561

 1        A.   Seat of the communications centre, yes, yes, that is a different

 2     sense.  From the seat, from the communications centre, from the

 3     communications centre.  That was in the same building as the MUP.  Each

 4     public security centre and each public security station, there are

 5     premises where the communications centre is placed.  This is the

 6     communications centre.  It's just a -- perhaps a terminology issue, a

 7     clumsy use of a particular word.  There is no base as such.

 8        Q.   Okay.

 9        A.   This is just a regular communications centre where all the

10     communications equipment and personnel is located.  So this would be in

11     the centre, security -- public security centre or the public security

12     station depending on the facility.

13        Q.   Well, I guess my question is:  The communications centre from

14     which 9.585 short-wave radio connections were established, was that in

15     MUP headquarters communications centre?

16        A.   I think that this is an error, from the seat of the

17     communications centres in the whole of the network, because if the MUP

18     were to carry out 9.585 connections, it would need to do only that,

19     nothing else.  I think this means all the communications all over.

20     They're planned in a hierarchical structure.

21        Q.   Okay.  Thank you.  In addition to MUP's communication network,

22     did some of the other large organs or bodies have their own separate

23     communications networks?  For example, the army, the VRS, did they have a

24     separate communications network?

25        A.   Yes, yes.  But their communication directly - well, how can I put

Page 11562

 1     it?  Ours was also part of the operative services but in a slightly

 2     different way.  As for the military system, for example, before combat

 3     began there was radio silence.  Nobody's allowed to use the radio

 4     communications before combat starts.  Only once combat action was

 5     initiated were they able to move -- to use the radio communications, but

 6     they also have fixed communications systems, they also have mobile

 7     systems which are used by the units that are actually in the field, but

 8     I'm not familiar with that type of organisation.

 9        Q.   And I think you explained to me that between the police you had a

10     primary system that you relied on and a backup system or a reserve

11     system.  Can you explain to us what those were for the police?

12        A.   It's the same system but there are two versions of it.  I will

13     explain it in the easiest way if I just talk about telephone

14     communications.  Telephone communications comprise - and now I'm speaking

15     in the most simple language, to persons who are not experts in

16     this - there are telephone exchanges of different hierarchical level that

17     have to be linked, they have to be inter-linked.  So we have these two

18     systems that you referred to.  You actually referred to the manner in

19     which these exchanges are linked together.  They are either linked by

20     cable relay systems or by radio relay systems.  For us in the MUP what

21     was interesting was to have as many as possible of these connections via

22     cable because that's the securest way.  It's -- goes under the surface.

23     They're dug-in and it's not possible to have leaks, unwanted leaks.  And

24     because of that we would want as much as possible of the information to

25     go through the cables and avoid having them go over the radio relay

Page 11563

 1     system.  We consider the radio relay system as a backup system.

 2        Q.   And for the military, which was their primary and which was their

 3     backup?

 4        A.   Well, I know this in principle the army had its own radio relay

 5     systems and their own cable systems that were laid only for military

 6     purposes.  I don't really know much about that system.  They also use

 7     telecom cables.  Everything that could be used as a regular system or a

 8     backup system, they used.  They would also resort to one or two parallel

 9     systems just in case.

10        Q.   Okay.  And the civil authorities, for example, the Presidency,

11     the Assembly, the government, did they have a separate communications

12     system apart from what you used in the MUP and what the army used, do you

13     know?

14        A.   They used the public system and a little bit of the police

15     system, mostly the telephone lines, for security purposes.  Whether we're

16     talking about particular figures whose security is taken care of by the

17     police or because of our people who had a need to communicate with the

18     state organs, this applied in peace time.  But the defence ministry or as

19     it was called then the republican secretariat for national defence, had a

20     communications detachment for war time situations which was supposed to

21     be placed at a number of locations in war time with specific personnel

22     and equipment and to secure the communication of those organs with the

23     other structures, that are state structures.  But we're only talking

24     about war time requirements in this particular case.

25        Q.   Let me ask you if you know whether or not the civilian

Page 11564

 1     communication network sometimes had connections that were not available

 2     to the police.  For example, in Pale was the civil communications network

 3     able to contact, for example, a Crisis Staff in some municipality for

 4     which you didn't have a connection to the MUP system, do you know?

 5        A.   I know this just generally, that a communications centre was set

 6     up in Pale, the one that covers the secretariat or the Ministry of

 7     Defence, but it didn't have any particular capacities except what it

 8     could use through the public telecommunications system.  And perhaps it

 9     had along some lines the ability to have special connections if they were

10     installed.  But I really don't know their plan.  I don't know what they

11     had.  All I know was that there was that centre.  I even dropped by

12     there.  It wasn't anything of particular interest that I noticed there.

13     They had the same problem that I did basically, as far as communication

14     was concerned.

15        Q.   Do you know who the head of that centre was at the time?

16        A.   Yes, it was Colonel Milorad Kotlica.  Unfortunately he died in

17     the meantime.

18        Q.   And for the civil authorities, do you know who the head of that

19     communications centre was in Pale in 1992?  Because I take it Colonel

20     Kotlica was for the military, or am I misunderstanding?

21        A.   No, it was not military.  You have to understand, there was an

22     army with its General Staff and it had operational command of the army,

23     and on the other hand there's the Ministry of Defence, which has a

24     completely different function.  They don't deal with the raising defences

25     on the territory.  They deal with the general defence preparations for

Page 11565

 1     the state, in a very broad sense.  That detachment was a military

 2     detachment and they did wear uniforms when they were in the field, and

 3     they did use equipment that could be perhaps qualified, at least some of

 4     it, as military equipment because the technical specifications were the

 5     same.  But they had no direct powers towards the army or the army towards

 6     them.  They were in contact perhaps with municipalities and some other

 7     structures.  So I don't know apart from this centre at Pale that there

 8     was another communications centre for communication -- for civilian

 9     authorities.

10        Q.   Thank you.

11             MR. HANNIS:  I see Mr. Zecevic.

12             MR. ZECEVIC:  I'm sorry, if I may be of assistance, 51, 16, I

13     believe the witness said that detachment was not a military detachment.

14     Maybe you can clarify.

15             MR. HANNIS:

16        Q.   Witness, you heard what Mr. Zecevic said.  Can you tell us which

17     is correct.  Did that detachment -- was that detachment military or not?

18        A.   It wasn't military in the sense of being part of the army because

19     they were part of the defence ministry and they were planned for a war

20     time situation and they wore uniforms.  When the war start, they put on

21     uniforms, and these are people, for instance, the detachment commander

22     within his section in the Ministry of Defence, was Hasan Redzepagic, a

23     major.  I know them all as civilians, but they did have ranks.  It was a

24     very specific, peculiar structure, where the hierarchy has to be clearly

25     known, who is in command and who obeys.

Page 11566

 1        Q.   Having said that, I guess in your job did you wear uniforms or

 2     did you wear civilian clothes?

 3        A.   You mean before the war or during the war?

 4        Q.   Both.

 5        A.   It was up to me.  I could wear a uniform or civilian clothes.  If

 6     I thought I was going to a drill where I wouldn't have to run about the

 7     field much, then I went in civilian clothes, but if the weather was

 8     inclement and I knew I would get soaked, I would put on a uniform, but I

 9     didn't have to.

10        Q.   Too bad you didn't bring your uniform to The Hague.  Sorry.  I'm

11     disappointed with the weather we've been having.  Let me show you next,

12     related to this annual report.  Let me show you next 65 ter 068.  This is

13     at tab 78.  You mentioned that in preparing your part of what went into

14     the annual report, you received information from the CSBs.  This document

15     is described as an activity report of communications and cryptographic

16     data protection department for the period of 30 July to 30 September 1992

17     for the Doboj CSB.  Do you recognise the name and signature that's on

18     that document?

19        A.   Yes.  Head of section, Miomir Djekic.

20        Q.   Yes.  And my English translation has his name spelled as Miomir

21     Cekic with a C with a half banana, but you tell me his correct name is

22     Djekic, which should be --

23        A.   Yes, right --

24        Q.   The D with a diacritic or sometimes spelled in English as Dj.

25     You knew him as the department chief in Doboj?

Page 11567

 1        A.   Yes.  I know him very well.

 2        Q.   And is this the kind of information you would receive from the

 3     CSBs to help prepare quarterly and semi-annual and annual reports?

 4        A.   In general, yes.  I just can't see the statistics, for instance,

 5     the number of dispatches, I can't see very clearly the text.

 6        Q.   I don't see those in this particular text either, but I don't

 7     have one for the end of the year.

 8        A.   Because let me tell you, it was not customary for us to do these

 9     statistics unless somebody asked for it specifically, for a particular

10     requirement, for a particular occasion.  It would be done in the annual

11     report.  The statistics were not put in here.

12        Q.   Thank you.

13             MR. HANNIS:  I'd like to tender that document, Your Honour.

14             JUDGE HALL:  Admitted and marked.

15             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit P1426, Your Honours.

16             MR. HANNIS:  Thank you.

17        Q.   Mr. Kezunovic --

18        A.   Sorry, excuse me, really, I just noticed.  I can't see to whom

19     this was sent.  It should be in the heading.  It just says "report," and

20     I can see in the heading that it's Doboj, and I see the chief of section

21     at the bottom, but I can't be sure that this is a report here addressed

22     to the centre.  If it was addressed to the centre, it would say "to the

23     chief."  If there was several addressees, they should be named, like

24     communications administration -- unless this is a cover letter saying:

25     Please find attached such and such a report.  But this is just about the

Page 11568

 1     form.  The rest is okay.

 2        Q.   Okay.  Thank you.  Next I wanted to ask you about where MUP

 3     headquarters, the RS MUP, where it was located during 1992.  I understand

 4     from other evidence in the case that it was not always in the same

 5     location.  You told us that in April 1992 for a while that you were in

 6     Vrace and you were also in Pale.  Can you tell us to the best of your

 7     knowledge where MUP headquarters were located throughout April through

 8     December 1992?

 9        A.   We among us considered that the base of the MUP is at Pale;

10     however, parts of the MUP were located in different places.  Simply,

11     there was no building big enough and with an appropriate layout of

12     premises that we could all sit in one place.  The seat of the MUP was at

13     Pale, but we were all stationed in a number of buildings.  Some people

14     were in the same place from December to April, others moved several

15     times, like myself.  I was briefly at Vrace, then for a while at

16     Lukavica, then I returned to Pale, and then from Kalovita Brda we moved

17     to an installation called Kikinda because it was owned by some business

18     company Kikinda, and that's why they called it that.  Others were on

19     Mount Jahorina, but we all thought of it as the location of the MUP with

20     the main location in Pale, but there were several buildings.

21        Q.   Was there a time in 1992 where or when the RS MUP headquarters

22     was moved to Bijeljina?

23        A.   Yes.  I personally received orders early in December, official

24     orders, to go to Bijeljina.  There was some units, organisational units I

25     mean, that had moved even before me.  And at that moment we considered

Page 11569

 1     that we had two basic locations of the MUP, one in Pale and one in

 2     Bijeljina, that were on a completely equal footing as far as

 3     communications were concerned.  We would only put in an additional symbol

 4     to designate whether something was being sent from Pale or for Bijeljina.

 5        Q.   Okay.  Thank you.  Do you know in -- from April through December

 6     1992 where the minister's office was located.  Where was Mr. Stanisic's

 7     office during that time-period?  And I understand it was not always in

 8     the same place?

 9        A.   Again I have to say from the viewpoint of us signals men, the

10     office had two designations:  Pale or Bijeljina.  The minister could

11     formally be in any of these two locations.  We knew where to send him

12     communications, in Pale or in Bijeljina.

13        Q.   If you needed or wanted to speak to him personally in Pale, where

14     would you go, what building would you find him in in 1992?  And if it's

15     more than one, please tell us about that.

16        A.   He would be in one of these two locations, Pale or Bijeljina.  I

17     would check with his secretary or his chef de cabinet.  I would ask where

18     I could find the minister, if he had time to see me, if he has the

19     possibility, et cetera.

20        Q.   But in Pale where would you go to find him?  Where was his office

21     physically located within Pale, if you know?

22        A.   For a while we were at Kalovita Brda, which is a smaller

23     installation, and then we moved into the other building that we called

24     Kikinda.  And there was one more building in Pale closer to the centre,

25     between the previous two.  And later ministers used that same location.

Page 11570

 1     The premises were good and supporting services could be housed next to

 2     the minister's office.

 3        Q.   Thank you.  I think it's time for our next break, Mr. Kezunovic.

 4             JUDGE HALL:  Yes.  We would resume in 20 minutes.

 5                           --- Recess taken at 12.04 p.m.

 6                           --- On resuming at 12.29 p.m.

 7             MR. PANTELIC:  Just for the record, Your Honours, my colleague

 8     co-counsel Krgovic, Dragan, is present at the hearing now.  After a big

 9     fight, many years.

10                           [The witness takes the stand]

11             MR. HANNIS:

12        Q.   Mr. Kezunovic, I next want to show you a document that's already

13     in evidence, it's Exhibit P160.  And I'll tell you, as it's coming up on

14     the screen, it refers to a meeting of MUP officials in Belgrade on the

15     11th of July, 1992.  I see you on the first page as -- listed as one of

16     those attending.  Do you recall attending this meeting in Belgrade in

17     July 1992?

18        A.   I do.

19        Q.   I just have two short things to ask you about.  One is to clear

20     up a translation issue.

21             MR. HANNIS:  If we could look at page 17 of the English and in

22     e-court it's page 17 of the B/C/S as well.

23        Q.   You're listed as one of those who participated in a discussion.

24     And it says:

25             "Kezunovic on connections" -- top of the page in the English and

Page 11571

 1     that fourth paragraph in B/C/S at the very bottom.  It says:

 2             "Kezunovic (on connections ..."

 3             And there's an abbreviation in the B/C/S which has been

 4     translated in English as criminal code, but I think it stands for

 5     something else.  Can you tell us what those two letters are, my

 6     Cyrillic's not very good.  I think it's --

 7        A.   It's in paragraph 4?

 8        Q.   Yes.

 9        A.   "Dragan Kezunovic (KZ" --

10        Q.   [Previous translation continues]...

11        A.   Cryptographic protection.

12        Q.   Thank you.

13        A.   Or encoding.

14        Q.   Thank you.  That makes more sense and I'd just like to note that

15     correction for the record in the English version.

16             And at page -- if we could go to page 28 of the English, I think

17     it's 31 in the B/C/S at the top of both pages.  And we're in the section

18     that talks about conclusions that were reached as a result of the

19     meeting, and number 15 is the one I want to ask you about.  It says:

20             "Code-names are to be chosen for all SJBs, police stations,

21     centres, and administrations ..." and the responsible party for that is

22     your administration for communications and cryptographic data protection.

23             First of all, can you explain to us what that is, what sorts of

24     code-names were going to be chosen for the SJBs and the centres,

25     et cetera?  Is that an actual name?  Is it a number?  Is it some

Page 11572

 1     combination of names and numbers?

 2        A.   I think it's the development of a list of names, or rather,

 3     number designations for certain organisational units, but I don't know if

 4     that's what is meant.  If somebody meant the code book, then this is not

 5     the most fortunate phrasing.  So I cannot really be sure, do I understand

 6     the meaning, but I suppose it's the nomenclature.  All organisational

 7     units should have a number designation that they would put on their

 8     dispatches and all the other communications.  And these number

 9     designations were usually -- that was usually done by the personnel

10     department, not the communications department.  But I'm not saying it's

11     absolutely impossible that we did it.  In any case, I didn't do this.

12     This had to be developed for the ministry to operate.

13        Q.   Was there already some kind of designator system in place as of

14     July 1992, maybe a carry-over from the previous MUP, do you know?

15        A.   It could not be fully carried over, but there was a certain

16     analogy and the same logic, according to which we designated our

17     communications centres and our outside stations.  It was not the purpose

18     to make it similar to the previous system, but it was certainly easier

19     and more identifiable to people.  For instance, my unit had the

20     designation 4 or 5, I can't remember exactly, but it was the same as

21     before the war.  For instance, the uniformed police was line 1, the crime

22     investigation department was 2, et cetera.  Anyway, it reflected the

23     organisation as it developed and spread.

24        Q.   Okay.  Let me ask you a little further to be sure I understand

25     this.  You talked about the lines of work or the administrations within

Page 11573

 1     the organisation.  01 is uniformed police, and I think 02 is crime

 2     prevention, and communications was 04.  And as I understand it, the

 3     organisation in which you worked would also have a designator.  So MUP at

 4     the seat, at the head, MUP headquarters would have some sort of

 5     designator, and you as an individual, would you have a designator as

 6     well?

 7        A.   Not in this sense, that I would have my own number.  I was chief

 8     of administration, the administration comprised certain sections with

 9     heads of sections.  In some administrations they were sectors, with chief

10     of sectors -- however, there was another thing.  If phone book, so to

11     call it, was made for the users of ultra short-wave communications,

12     not -- which is not the same as short-wave communications, then all the

13     participants that would appear in that book had their own code-name,

14     calling name.  That is something entirely different.  It was not the same

15     as the number.  You knew what code-name the MUP in the headquarters had,

16     you knew the code-names were for centres.  It would be usually a

17     code-name with two components, one name of a geographical feature plus a

18     number.  But that was the case with the republic SUP before.

19        Q.   And there you're talking about short-wave radio communications?

20        A.   These are ultra short-wave communications.  Those are the radios

21     carried by policemen in the field or in their vehicles.

22        Q.   Okay.  And as I understand it, that would be, for example, a

23     small police platoon or something might have a designator of, pick a

24     name, cobra, and the commander would be Cobra 1; am I understanding

25     correctly?

Page 11574

 1        A.   Yes, that's the same principle.

 2        Q.   Now, with regard to the MUP headquarters and the CSB and the SJB,

 3     they could have a nomenclature of where there would be a number for the

 4     CSB or the SJB, and within that there would be a subnumber for the

 5     various administrations.  For example, Zvornik -- let's just pick a

 6     number and say it would be 150, and 150-04 would mean the source was from

 7     communications in Zvornik police station.  Am I understanding correctly?

 8        A.   Generally speaking, yes.  If a line of work at the headquarters

 9     of the ministry has a certain number, that number extends down to the

10     last organisational units in the municipality, through the centre, the

11     regional unit, down to the lowest-level one.  And you would know that a

12     communications group in the same line of work would have the same number

13     as the corresponding administration at the MUP headquarters, plus there

14     would be another symbol to designate the unit in question.

15             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Mr. Hannis.

16             MR. HANNIS:  Yes.

17             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Where are we going with these technicalities?

18             MR. HANNIS:  Your Honours, it may be useful in examining

19     individual documents that were sent.  Sometimes to be able to identify

20     based on the number where it came from, if there's no indication

21     otherwise.  We may have some documents where it doesn't say "Zvornik

22     police station."  It may say -- it may say a number, and that can help us

23     identify the sender or the receiver or the person mentioned to do

24     something or respond to something.

25             I'll stop there and move on to tab number 66, if I may.

Page 11575

 1        Q.   And we can just look at the first page.  This is an order from

 2     Minister Stanisic on the 23rd of July, 1992.  I'm sorry, this is Exhibit

 3     1D058.  And, Mr. Kezunovic, I'm interested in the introductory paragraph

 4     for this order.  It says:

 5             "Proceeding from conclusions reached at the meeting of executive

 6     employees held on 11 July 1992," which seems to refer to the meeting in

 7     Belgrade that you attended, "the meeting of the collegiate body held on

 8     23 July 1992 ..."

 9             Let me ask you, first of all:  What does that term "collegiate

10     body" mean in this context?  Can you tell us who the members of the MUP

11     collegium or collegiate body were on July 23rd, 1992?

12        A.   The minister, the deputy minister, the heads of the section,

13     assistant ministers, I'm not sure whether it was also the commander of

14     the special brigade or the detachment, as the unit was called at the

15     time.  Also -- but in any case, this was something that was regulated on

16     the rules of internal operation, where it is stated who comprises the

17     collegium, the broader collegium, and also if necessary other persons

18     could be invited to attend if there was a need.  In any case, the

19     leadership along all the professional lines of work, of course the

20     deputies, the heads of the departments, and maybe some other leadership

21     officials, and I think probably in the rules on internal organisation

22     they are stated.  I don't need to mention each such case myself.

23        Q.   Okay.  In your answer you just made reference to the broader

24     collegium.  I might use the term extended collegium.  How was that

25     different from the regular collegium?  What additional persons would make

Page 11576

 1     up the broader collegium, if you know?

 2        A.   Usually the chiefs of the centres of public security.  Perhaps in

 3     the beginning also the chiefs of the state security centres; and if

 4     needed, somebody else too.

 5        Q.   Okay.  Thank you.  In 1992, between April and the end of

 6     December, how frequently were there meetings of the collegium with the

 7     heads of the administration?

 8        A.   Between April and - I'm sorry, which period?

 9        Q.   And the end of the year.  Did you meet once a month?  Once a

10     week?  How often, if you remember?

11        A.   I cannot remember, but I assume that it was at least once a

12     month.

13        Q.   How about meetings of the extended collegium, do you recall how

14     often that group met in 1992?

15        A.   I really cannot say with any certainty.  I cannot remember.

16        Q.   Would it be less often than the regular collegium?

17        A.   Yes, yes.  In any case, yes, it would be less often.

18        Q.   Okay.  That makes sense to me.  At any of the collegium meetings

19     you attended in 1992, do you remember the subject of paramilitary groups

20     being discussed?

21        A.   I do, but really in the most general terms.  I cannot tell you

22     when this was, which session, who was discussed, but I know that the

23     minister did respond strongly and asked the police and the leadership to

24     deal with these matters and to clear that up.

25        Q.   Do you remember being interviewed by representatives of the

Page 11577

 1     Office of the Prosecutor in 2004?

 2        A.   Yes, I do.

 3        Q.   And do you recall in that meeting mentioning two different

 4     paramilitary groups that you recalled being talked about in collegium

 5     meetings?

 6        A.   I recall - and again I have to stress only in general terms, and

 7     I don't know the name of the group or who was at the head of the group,

 8     who commanded the group - somewhere along the road to Zvornik, and I know

 9     that they stopped me as well.  I wasn't mistreated in any particular way,

10     but for example, they kept me for an hour or so.  I couldn't continue on

11     my way.  I don't know the name of the group, but I do know that these

12     things happened.  I couldn't say exactly what the date was.  Perhaps I

13     can recall what period it was, but I really cannot remember the date.

14     This is something that happened two or three times when I was going down

15     that road towards Bijeljina, and that's what happened to me.  The group

16     was later arrested and eliminated.  They were dealt with and then the

17     road later was clear.

18        Q.   And do you recall what was being said about that group in the

19     collegium meeting?

20        A.   I don't remember what was said specifically, but I do remember

21     that the minister was angry and that he reacted firmly and that he

22     demanded that these people be dealt with, the matter be dealt with.  And

23     I know that he even criticised somebody from the police who was in charge

24     of that, shouted at them, and said, "If you're not capable of doing that,

25     just say so and we'll assign someone else to do it."

Page 11578

 1             I don't remember the specifics of this, however.

 2        Q.   Was your memory about the events in Zvornik when you were stopped

 3     and about discussions at the collegium, was your memory about those

 4     things better in 2004 when you were interviewed than it is as you sit

 5     here today?

 6        A.   Possibly it was, yes.

 7        Q.   I want to read you something and ask if it refreshes your

 8     recollection.  At page 46 of your interview --

 9             JUDGE HALL:  Mr. Hannis, isn't the practice to have the witness

10     read it himself and then ask the question.

11             MR. HANNIS:  Well, Your Honour, I'm afraid I don't have it in

12     B/C/S.

13             JUDGE HALL:  Because the -- I don't suppose I need to remind you

14     that a refreshing-memory document is not part of the -- is not

15     evidential, and if you were to read it, you would be in effect making it

16     part of the record.

17             MR. HANNIS:  Yes.

18             Let me pass on that for now and perhaps I'll have B/C/S in the

19     morning during my last portion.  I'll do it that way.  I understand your

20     concern.

21                           [Prosecution counsel confer]

22             MR. HANNIS:  Thank you.

23        Q.   In terms of when you were stopped at this location, do you

24     remember if it was before or after the meeting in Belgrade on July 11th?

25        A.   I don't remember.  I can't remember now.  I know that I passed

Page 11579

 1     there two or three times.  In any case, it was before or around that

 2     date.  Most probably before because this road goes from Pale via Sokolac,

 3     Han Pijesak, Vlasenica.  It doesn't go directly to Zvornik.  You would go

 4     through Sekovici via a detour, but then it comes back to the part of the

 5     road that leads from Zvornik to Kalesija towards Tuzla.

 6        Q.   Thank you.  Next I'd like to show you a document that is 65 ter

 7     number 2747.  This is at tab 24.  Now, Mr. Kezunovic, this is dated the

 8     26 of April, 1992, and it appears to be from the ministry in Sarajevo.

 9             MR. HANNIS:  If we could scroll all the way to the top of the

10     B/C/S page.  There is a fax header on the B/C/S copy that has not been

11     reflected on the English translation.  Do you see that, Mr. Kezunovic,

12     where it says in English "from" and then "Srpska Republika BiH MUP."  And

13     then if we could shrink it a little bit so we can see the phone number as

14     well.

15        Q.   I take it this document was -- oh, sorry.

16             MR. ZECEVIC:  I'm really sorry.

17             Your Honours, if the intention of my learned friend is to suggest

18     that this document was sent in 1992 over the fax, I believe this is not

19     adequate because the date from the fax message is clearly missing -- at

20     least on my copy.

21             MR. HANNIS:  Well, Your Honours, that goes to weight, I guess.

22     I'll ask this witness if they had fax machines capable of sending

23     messages on the 26th of April, 1992.

24             JUDGE HALL:  Sorry, you said the date appears in the header of --

25             MR. HANNIS:  No, I don't have a date on the header.

Page 11580

 1                           [Trial Chamber confers]

 2             JUDGE HALL:  Mr. Hannis, mustn't we take the document as it is

 3     and at the end of the day make what we can of it?  It is --

 4             MR. HANNIS:  Your Honours, I understand.  I think this is already

 5     in evidence as P1420.

 6             JUDGE HALL:  Yes, yes.  But in terms of the -- I think it can be

 7     said it's notorious that the headers of faxes are not necessarily

 8     accurate.

 9             MR. HANNIS:  Yes, I --

10             JUDGE HALL:  So there's room for argument, but as I said, we take

11     the document as it is and --

12             MR. HANNIS:  Yes, I have some questions that may bear on that.

13        Q.   Mr. Kezunovic, can you explain why this document would have

14     English on it, the words "from" and "phone no."?

15        A.   Well, this is simply made by the fax software, so that the

16     company or an individual using the fax can put in their name so that the

17     person or entity receiving a message from that fax has confirmation that

18     it comes from that company or individual.  But that doesn't necessarily

19     have to mean that.  I can get that and put it somewhere else, even though

20     if I didn't change the name of the company or the person that is sending

21     it.  This "from" part, it doesn't necessarily have to be accurate, the

22     phone number either.  I mean, you could take that as being accurate or

23     not.  It doesn't have to be.  Usually there is a confirmation report that

24     is printed, whether the message was transferred or delivered successfully

25     or not from/to, and this would contain the accurate information.  But

Page 11581

 1     here we don't have that confirmation as an attachment.

 2        Q.   Well, can you remember now whether or not you had fax machines in

 3     the RS MUP that were being used in late April 1992?

 4        A.   We did, but I have to say that as per the custom that was

 5     inherited and our position towards faxes as means of communication, this

 6     was a means for open communication, and the intention was not to send any

 7     confidential information via fax.  It was procured before the war so that

 8     some services, like the financial services, administration that worked

 9     with companies procuring equipment and material, could communicate more

10     easily.  This means of communication, fax communication, was intended

11     only for such cases, for open communication.  It was just a means of

12     communication.  You could easily take information from faxes parallel

13     information could be taken at the same time.  So it was not considered to

14     be a secure means of communication.  We did not use it in the

15     communication centres for confidential information or information that

16     was supposed to be encrypted.

17        Q.   A question about the addressees.  You see the five security

18     services centres listed here along with the names of the heads of those

19     services.  Is that information correct based on your knowledge of who was

20     in those positions in April 1992?

21        A.   It's correct.  The information there is correct.

22        Q.   Let me ask you about Mr. Jesuric and the head in Bijeljina.  Do

23     you know what other positions he held in the MUP later in 1992?

24        A.   I know that he was the chief of the Bijeljina station.  I know

25     that he was the chief of the department for aliens I think at one point

Page 11582

 1     in time.  I don't know the full name.  Perhaps he was the chief of one of

 2     the administrations even later.  I cannot remember the chronology of the

 3     posts that he was appointed to.

 4        Q.   Okay.  Do you know what he was by profession before 1992?  Was he

 5     a policeman?

 6        A.   I think that he's a lawyer by profession.

 7        Q.   Thank you.

 8        A.   A lawyer.

 9        Q.   You mentioned that certain kinds of documents shouldn't be sent

10     by fax because of the confidential nature of their content.  Did you have

11     a chance to look at the content of this one during proofing?  It talks

12     about the minister transferring his authority to the CSB heads regarding

13     distribution of certain employees.

14        A.   This dispatch was sent to the chiefs of the centres.  Do you mean

15     what was the intention with this dispatch?

16        Q.   No.  Let me try and rephrase my question.  This doesn't seem to

17     be information about -- of an operational nature.  It seemed to be more

18     administrative in terms of delegating to the heads of centres the

19     authority to choose employees for certain positions within the centres.

20     And my question is:  In your opinion in your job, would this be something

21     that would necessarily have to be sent as a coded message ?

22        A.   I have to repeat one thing.  I never worked on sending out

23     dispatches.  This was done by operators at the communications centre who

24     receive a dispatch, log it in, and then encrypt it, if necessary note

25     down the manner of its transmission, and do all the actions that have to

Page 11583

 1     be taken in relation to that dispatch.  They didn't remember the contents

 2     of the dispatch themselves either.  They would just read it because if

 3     they needed to type it out, they would do it, and then they would forget

 4     it because new ones were coming in.  Nobody remembered the contents.

 5     Myself in particular, I wasn't really looking at who was sending what to

 6     whom.  I didn't need to do that.  It wasn't in the description of my

 7     duties unless the addressee in the dispatch was myself, and then if it

 8     was I would act in accordance with what was stated in the dispatch.  If

 9     you're asking for my personal opinion in terms of this dispatch, since

10     this was at the beginning, this is the 20th of April, if I'm not

11     mistaken, 1992, you can't really see it very well here, you're right that

12     this is an administrative procedural question up to a point.  The

13     appointment of personnel.  Before the war there was a procedure which was

14     a bit more complex, more complicated in terms of electing or choosing an

15     employee according to all the criteria that they were supposed to

16     fulfill.  And also, before the war the republican SUP would have to

17     approve each of the appointment, the relevant, professional section.  If

18     the Prijedor centre had to appoint a communications operative, we would

19     have to approve that, look at all the material the centre had prepared

20     that had to do with the employment of that particular worker.  We would

21     also have to review.  Probably the intention of this was to speed up the

22     procedure.  In this period there was no time to go through that whole

23     process.  Simply, the centre chiefs were authorised to organise that

24     matter, again in keeping with all the set criteria and procedures.  I

25     assume that that was the point, the intention.

Page 11584

 1        Q.   Let me ask you about fax machines.

 2             MR. HANNIS:  Can we look at Exhibit P546.  This is located at tab

 3     14.

 4        Q.   This is to all CSBs.  The chief from the minister dated 20 April

 5     1992.  It says:

 6             "I hereby order that fax machines be obtained and installed in

 7     all security services centres and all public security stations ..."

 8             I think you told us during proofing that there was a shortage of

 9     fax machines available to you at that time, in April 1992; is that right?

10             JUDGE HALL:  Mr. Hannis, I'm not unmindful of the answer that you

11     gave to a question put to you by Judge Harhoff near the beginning of the

12     current session, but is this really necessary?

13             MR. HANNIS:  [Microphone not activated]

14             THE INTERPRETER:  Microphone, please.

15             MR. HANNIS:  I had a suggestion that one document that had a fax

16     header, Your Honour, was not faxed in 1992.  So I think I need to

17     establish that there were fax machines being used by the MUP in April

18     1992.  Unless the Defence is willing to agree that's true, I think I have

19     to prove it.  And this question is leading to some questions about a

20     different fax header we'll see on another document that may explain

21     something that on its face appears unusual.

22        Q.   Mr. Kezunovic, was there a shortage of fax machines available for

23     the RS MUP in April 1992?

24        A.   Do you mean MUP at the seat or generally all the organisational

25     units in the MUP including the ones in the field?

Page 11585

 1        Q.   I mean both, headquarters and in the field.

 2        A.   They weren't all covered with that equipment.

 3        Q.   And in some cases when MUP wasn't able to find them within their

 4     own warehouses or able to purchase them from outside, did they sometimes

 5     borrow them or requisition them from private enterprises or commercial

 6     enterprises?

 7        A.   Possibly this happened.  I personally didn't borrow one or

 8     requisition one from anyone for my own needs.  Perhaps some did do that

 9     in the field.  A lot of that - and I can't really put it in the

10     chronological order - but a lot of equipment was received in various

11     ways, through donations and, I don't know, from people who live and work

12     abroad.  But this happened later.  They would do that based on what they

13     felt would be the most useful thing.  I don't believe that they

14     particularly discussed with anyone else what was required or what was a

15     priority.  But again, I repeat, the fax is a open communications means,

16     and if we do have telephone communications that would mean that

17     automatically we would have fax communication available too.  But there

18     are also these other circumstances, meaning that it was vulnerable to

19     listening in or taking information from it.  So that would be a factor in

20     the final decision.

21        Q.   Let me show you another document.  This is P543.  It's at tab 10.

22     This is a document to the CSB centres from the minister, and you'll see a

23     fax header on this one with a date and time, 18 April 1992.  I can't read

24     that word or pronounce it in the upper left, "buducnost." Can you tell us

25     what that was?

Page 11586

 1        A.   There's something else before that word, an acronym, that I can't

 2     make out.  It must have been a company or an institution.  There's

 3     something before "buducnost" where the cursor is.

 4        Q.   Do you know what -- sorry.  Do you know what "buducnost" was?

 5        A.   I don't know.

 6        Q.   Thank you.  I'd like next to show you an exhibit at tab 50.  This

 7     is 65 ter number 0153.  It's a payroll document apparently for the month

 8     of May 1992.  And I'd like to show you the second page in both English

 9     and B/C/S.  The last group appears to be --

10             MR. ZECEVIC:  I'm sorry.  I'm sorry, Mr. Hannis.

11             MR. HANNIS:  Yes.

12             MR. ZECEVIC:  This is exactly the document which I withdraw this

13     morning.  It's also P867, it's the identical document.

14             MR. HANNIS:  Ah.  Well, no, actually as far as I can tell there

15     is a difference.  What I have is P867 is the same document but without

16     signatures in my B/C/S.

17             MR. ZECEVIC:  Oh, that is correct.  I'm sorry, that is correct --

18             MR. HANNIS:  It does appear to be the same type --

19             MR. ZECEVIC:  It does appear the same document except for the

20     signatures, I agree.

21             MR. HANNIS:  So what I'd like to do is substitute this one with

22     the signatures as the B/C/S version, if I can do that with my case

23     manager and the Legal Officer, once I've had the defendant (sic) confirm

24     something about the signatures.

25        Q.   Mr. Kezunovic, you recognise your name on the list?

Page 11587

 1                           [Prosecution counsel confer]

 2             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, I can find it, but I didn't

 3     get an answer as to the accused or the witness recognising their name.

 4             MR. HANNIS:

 5        Q.   I'm sorry, I didn't understand that.  Mr. Kezunovic, you see your

 6     name on the page there as number 1 under the last group of names?

 7        A.   I can see it.

 8        Q.   And is that your signature on the right?

 9        A.   Yes, it is.

10        Q.   All right.  The other 11 individuals in that group, were they the

11     people who worked in your administration in May of 1992, Mr. Andric and

12     the others?

13        A.   Yes.

14        Q.   Thank you.

15             MR. HANNIS:  Yes, Your Honours.  I don't know the best way

16     mechanically to do it, whether we substitute it or we cross-reference it,

17     but I would like this to be one that goes into evidence.

18             JUDGE HALL:  The Registry will deal with the technical details --

19             MR. HANNIS:  Okay.

20             JUDGE HALL:  -- of how it's done.  But the Chamber agrees.

21             MR. HANNIS:  Thank you.

22        Q.   Next I would like to show you -- I have a few payroll documents

23     that I want to show you for various purposes.  The next is -- it's at tab

24     72, it's 65 ter number 3128, and it appears to be for the month of

25     July 1992.  You see number 2 shows Slobodan Skipina as the

Page 11588

 1     under-secretary and number 7 Vlastimir Kusmuk as an assistant to the

 2     minister.  And to your knowledge is that the positions that those two men

 3     held in July 1992 in the MUP?

 4        A.   Yes.

 5        Q.   Thank you.  And I see you're number 5 on the list.

 6             MR. HANNIS:  Could we tender 65 ter 3128?

 7             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Is this disputed at all?  I mean --

 8             MR. HANNIS:  Your Honour, sometimes I think it's important to

 9     corroborate -- I don't know if it's disputed.

10             MR. ZECEVIC:  No, it's not.

11             MR. HANNIS:  Okay.

12             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Sorry?

13             You should --

14             MR. ZECEVIC:  No, it is not disputed that these persons were

15     the -- were at the seat of the MUP at this particular time in 1992.

16             MR. HANNIS:  Is it also not disputed that they later were shifted

17     to the position of advisors to the minister, both Mr. Skipina and

18     Mr. Kusmuk?

19             MR. ZECEVIC:  I don't think that that is also disputed.  We had

20     the documents on -- I'm not sure about Mr. Kusmuk at this point, but for

21     Mr. Skipina Slobodan, I'm 100 per cent sure that I know the decision of

22     the minister to appoint him as the advisor.  And Mr. Dragan Kijac took

23     over his position as the chief of national -- under-secretary for

24     national security, somewhere in August 1992.

25             MR. HANNIS:  And while you're in a good mood, is it also not

Page 11589

 1     disputed that their salaries as advisors were reduced, they were less

 2     than the salaries they had as an assistant minister or the --

 3             MR. ZECEVIC:  Well, you're definitely pushing me too far.  I

 4     can't tell you about the salaries, but I don't -- if you give me time, I

 5     might not be disputing that as well.

 6             MR. HANNIS:  Well, that's why I'm trying to show the documents,

 7     because I'll show another document what their salary was when they were

 8     in those new positions.

 9             MR. ZECEVIC:  I don't see -- I mean -- I don't see the relevance

10     of that.

11             MR. HANNIS:  Well, Your Honours, we -- I don't know if -- I guess

12     I can say this in front of the witness.  It's the Prosecution's position

13     that those two particular individuals were placed in high positions at

14     the beginning.  They were later, we say, sidelined when they were shifted

15     to the advisor position without any real tasks to do, and that there was

16     a reason for that.  And the reasons for that relate to different

17     philosophies between the accused and those gentlemen.  It may go --

18             JUDGE HARHOFF:  But hold on --

19             MR. HANNIS:  Yes.

20             JUDGE HARHOFF:  -- maybe at this point the witness should take

21     off his earphones.

22             Mr. Kezunovic, would you be good enough to take off your

23     earphones?

24             MR. HANNIS:  Your Honour, he understands quite a bit of English.

25             That's all I --

Page 11590

 1             JUDGE HARHOFF:  I mean, if you want to put questions to

 2     Mr. Kezunovic directly on the reasons why these two gentlemen were

 3     sidelined, as you say, then, you know, just put those questions and get

 4     directly to it because the Chamber is wary of the amount of documents

 5     that is being introduced into evidence for reasons that are not quite

 6     clear.  And we have seen already twice today documents which have been

 7     duplicated inadvertently.  So let's direct the questions to the witnesses

 8     that will enable you and the Defence to elicit the information which is

 9     relevant.

10             MR. ZECEVIC:  If I may just briefly comment, Your Honours.

11     Mr. Skipina was the witness here in this case, so we have his testimony

12     in this case.  And I cannot remember on top of my head, but I'm sure that

13     he was asked this question.  Vlastimir Kusmuk is the one that's on the

14     list, but apparently our friends from the Prosecution want to withdraw

15     him.  Now, if that is an issue of the -- that the OTP wants to rely on or

16     thinks it's an important issue in this case, well then both of these

17     gentlemen should have been asked that question, the ones which were

18     appointed as the advisors to the minister and before holding the position

19     of the assistant minister.  I'm not saying that this question -- this

20     question cannot be put to the -- to this witness as well, but it would be

21     only expected that the actual persons are called to testify to this

22     facts.  Thank you.

23             MR. HANNIS:  Your Honours, if I can have an agreement from the

24     Defence that these payroll documents are authentic, well that's all I

25     want to do is get the documents in.  I can make my argument later at the

Page 11591

 1     relevant time, at the end of the case, if I need be I have the

 2     information from which I can argue that there is a logical inference to

 3     be drawn from timing and changes in pay and moves tied in with other

 4     evidence.  I don't need to ask this witness and I don't know if I can't

 5     have the Defence tell me that they're not going to object to my tendering

 6     these documents, then I need to show them to a witness who has knowledge

 7     about them, unless I can satisfy Your Honours that I can get these in

 8     through a bar table motion.

 9             JUDGE HALL:  Yeah, I was going to say I thought it was an

10     either/or.  Either lead the evidence directly or seek to tender the

11     documents.  If the evidence could be had through the direct testimony of

12     a witness, that would be it, that would be as much as you would need.

13             MR. HANNIS:  Mm-hmm.  But covering the point that was made about

14     whether this duplication and the Chamber's concerned about a lot of

15     documents -- I need a lot of documents sometimes to make the argument.

16     And the fact that one witness, for example, Mr. Skipina was here and

17     testified about something, sometimes Your Honours may not find it

18     sufficient to rely on the word of one witness about one event if there is

19     a document that supports it or opposes it.  That's something you will

20     factor in through your total consideration about the credibility of a

21     witness about that point.  So that's why I'm trying to get in some of

22     these documents.

23                           [Trial Chamber confers]

24             JUDGE HALL:  Mr. Hannis.

25             MR. HANNIS:  Yes, Your Honour.

Page 11592

 1             JUDGE HALL:  The practical concern that the Chamber has is that

 2     apart from at the end of the exercise unnecessarily burdening some

 3     landfill somewhere, is that you having telegraphed the purpose for which

 4     you wished to tender these documents, it is an argument which when you

 5     come to make it we -- and I'm trying to phrase this correctly so that I'm

 6     not suggesting that we have reached a conclusion, but it seems that we

 7     would have some difficulty accepting because the documents by themselves

 8     wouldn't -- without more it seems to us, support the conclusion which you

 9     are inviting the Chamber to draw inexorably merely from what the

10     documents contain and therein lies our problem.

11             MR. HANNIS:  I understand, Your Honours, and I'm hoping that the

12     documents won't be the only thing I have to make the argument by the time

13     we get to the end of the Prosecution case, that there are or is at least

14     one witnesses to come that will speak to some of this.

15             JUDGE HALL:  By majority we are going to get on with it and allow

16     the documents to be admitted, Judge Harhoff dissenting.

17             MR. HANNIS:  Thank you.  So save time I will skip over some of

18     the additional ones now and talk with my learned friends across the way

19     about the possibility of maybe introducing the others through the bar

20     table without having to ask the witness it that's his name.

21             THE REGISTRAR:  The document will become Exhibit P1427,

22     Your Honours.

23             MR. HANNIS:  Thank you.

24        Q.   Mr. Kezunovic, how did you know Mr. Stanisic?  When and where did

25     you first meet him?

Page 11593

 1        A.   You mean when I first met him?  Before the war, when he was

 2     working in the city secretariat for internal affairs, Sarajevo.

 3        Q.   And Mr. Zupljanin, how and when did you first meet him?

 4        A.   Also before the war.

 5        Q.   Earlier I asked you about where the MUP headquarters were located

 6     and where the minister's office was in 1992.  Did you have occasion where

 7     you had difficulty in locating the minister when someone from the

 8     government was trying to find him?

 9        A.   I told you that the MUP was housed in several locations in Pale.

10     The president of the republic and the government were also housed in a

11     number of buildings, and we didn't meet every day for practical reasons.

12     It was neither necessary nor possible to meet every day.  Everyone dealt

13     with their responsibilities the best they could, the best that could be

14     organised.  Plus, he wasn't necessarily always there when I needed him.

15     I first had to locate him and then see if it was possible to meet.  It

16     was mostly a technical matter.  We were not all in the same building in

17     the same place.

18        Q.   Did you ever have a conversation one-on-one with Mico Stanisic

19     about your difficulty in locating him when you needed him sometimes?

20        A.   I think once at the request of operators, signals men, but that

21     was early in April, at the very beginning when we were at Kalovita Brda.

22     They kind of delegated me -- not really delegated me because they

23     couldn't give me an assignment, but they asked me nicely because somebody

24     from the government was looking for the minister and they didn't know how

25     to find him because at that time the service was not as established and

Page 11594

 1     as well equipped as before the war when we had duty service and all the

 2     communications equipment was fully in place and in operation and we were

 3     all stationed in the same building, all the various organisational units

 4     in the same place.  And of course if the minister was on a field mission,

 5     moving around the duty service or his own chef de cabinet or his

 6     technical secretary or somebody would have to keep track of all the

 7     senior officials, not only that minister but all the other senior

 8     executives because, for instance, it might have become necessary to

 9     convene a meeting of the collegium.  And the person who would get that

10     task, be it from the office of the minister or from the communications

11     centre, that person would have to know who is where so as to deal with it

12     operationally.  In that sense, the minister would have to be on the

13     radar, I mean assistants also but assistants, of course, are not as

14     important as the minister.

15        Q.   Let me stop you there.  I understand that at MUP headquarters

16     there would be 24 hours a day somebody who was on duty, as I think the

17     term was "operations officer."  Is that right?

18        A.   In principle, yes.  But conditionally speaking, at the

19     beginning - and this is why - there would be one or two people who would

20     be on a 24-hour shift.  If that person was alone, he would also have a

21     bed there and he wouldn't be able to leave the room except to go to the

22     toilet.  So if we're talking about this initial period which was

23     relatively short, that's how it was.  Later on the service was better

24     organised, it had more personnel, more decent premises to accommodate

25     these people on such jobs.

Page 11595

 1        Q.   On this occasion when some of your colleagues asked you to try

 2     and locate the minister, did you try and find him through the duty

 3     officer?

 4        A.   Nobody tasked me as me to look for him.  The normal thing to do

 5     was to call the duty service or the communications centre and ask where

 6     he was, and that signals man would inform me and ask me -- not that same

 7     moment, but when he ran into me.  In fact, he would be just answering my

 8     question:  How is it going?  Are you having any problems?  And they would

 9     share with me their difficulties and they would mention that as well.

10     It's not only about this minister, but a minister, any minister, from the

11     cabinet would call the duty operator at the MUP or the signals man but

12     even not directly but through his secretary.

13        Q.   Mr. Kezunovic, let me ask you, as a result of that inability to

14     locate the minister on that occasion, did you personally have a

15     conversation with Mico Stanisic about that?

16        A.   Yes, yes, once.  I mentioned that as well because other people

17     mentioned it to me, and among 15 or 20 other questions and issues that

18     had to be dealt with, I mentioned to him that as well.  It was not only

19     my problem; it was a general issue.  If you were looking for anyone else,

20     it was the same thing.

21        Q.   I understand.  What was his response to you when you raised it

22     with him?

23        A.   I can't remember it word for word, but among other things he said

24     that even those who are insisting on it should not insist too much.

25     Because moving around on the ground at that time was an issue of personal

Page 11596

 1     security and safety, among other things.  There was not a single section

 2     of any road leading from Pale in any direction that was completely safe

 3     from nasty surprises, and it was also for that reason that he was perhaps

 4     reluctant to share his travel plans, and I suppose it was the same with

 5     the others.

 6        Q.   Thank you.

 7             MR. HANNIS:  Your Honours, I think we've reached the point to

 8     break for the day.

 9             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.

10             Mr. Kezunovic, I must remind you that you, having been sworn as a

11     witness and your testimony not being complete, that you cannot have any

12     communication with counsel from either side, and in such conversations as

13     you may have outside the chamber you cannot discuss your testimony.  So

14     we take the adjournment now to resume in Courtroom I tomorrow morning at

15     9.00.  Thank you.

16                           --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.44 p.m.,

17                           to be reconvened on Friday, the 11th day of

18                           June, 2010, at 9.00 a.m.