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
24 JUDGE HALL: Yes, please proceed, Mr. Zecevic.
25 MR. ZECEVIC: Your Honours, yesterday on transcript 11503, line
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15 withdrawn and the number deleted from the record.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
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
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
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
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.
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,
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
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.
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
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
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?
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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,
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
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
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
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
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
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
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 ..."
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
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.
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
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
25 a scholarship from telecom. It was at that time a large conglomerate in
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
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
7 I don't know the exact dates, but it was in late March when
8 barricades started appearing in Sarajevo
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
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
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
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
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,
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.
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
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
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
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
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
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
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,
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.
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
25 you. It's the federal SUP is my understanding. Thank you.
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
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
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
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
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
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
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 --
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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.
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 --
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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.
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?
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
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
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
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.
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
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
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
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
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
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
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.
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
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
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
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
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
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."
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
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
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
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
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.
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
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
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
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
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.
1 Q. Let me ask you about fax machines.
2 MR. HANNIS: Can we look at Exhibit P546. This is located at tab
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?
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
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?
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?
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
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
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
24 MR. HANNIS: Your Honour, he understands quite a bit of English.
25 That's all I --
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
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
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.
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?
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
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.
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
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
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.