1 Friday, 16 July 2010
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness takes the stand]
5 --- Upon commencing at 9.06 a.m.
6 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. Good morning to
7 everyone in and around the courtroom. This is case IT-08-91-T, the
8 Prosecutor versus Mico Stanisic and Stojan Zupljanin.
9 JUDGE HALL: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
10 Good morning to everyone including the witness and our Court
11 Officer in the field office in Sarajevo.
12 We are about to begin but we have a brief ruling to deliver
13 before we invite Mr. Krgovic to been his cross-examination.
14 JUDGE DELVOIE: Mr. Zecevic, in regard to your application, with
15 regard to the 44 witnesses, we are afraid we can't -- we can't give you
16 two weeks of non-sitting time. But what we -- what we would like to do
17 is extend for two weeks the -- the response time we were setting up in
18 the decision, so that we would like to have a response on whatever the
19 result of your conferring with the OTP would be by the 3rd of September.
20 Thank you.
21 MR. ZECEVIC: I understand, and I'm -- I appreciate,
22 Your Honours, thank you very much.
23 MS. KORNER: Your Honours, just one matter on timing. I meant to
24 deal with it yesterday and I forgot.
25 Your Honours ordered us to call a witness that we suggested as a
1 92 ter, a protected witness, as viva voce. I'm afraid I've forgotten his
2 number. What's his name, the fellow - thank you very much. Always
3 grateful to the Defence, particularly Ms. Savic for her assistance -
4 ST-137, and said we had six hours in which to call him. What the
5 decision didn't make clear was whether that six hours was added to our
6 grand total.
7 Can we say -- we were working on the basis of a 92 ter. Your
8 Honour, can I say, we don't expect an immediate answer today. He is not
9 coming until after the break, but we'd just like to know if Your Honours
10 would consider that aspect of it.
11 JUDGE HALL: Since we have a little while to look at it again, we
12 would advise you as to what we intended to convey.
13 MS. KORNER: Yes. Your Honours, I'm sorry. I did actually mean
14 to mention this yesterday.
15 [Trial Chamber confers]
16 JUDGE DELVOIE: The first impression would be, Ms. Korner, that
17 if we didn't say anything, we didn't add anything. But we'll see.
18 MS. KORNER: [Microphone not activated] ... as a prohibition.
19 Well, Your Honours, as I say, we were expecting to be -- because
20 of his previous testimonies, we were expecting to be able to call him
21 92 ter. I suppose we'll just have to see how the time factor goes when
22 we get nearer the time.
23 [Trial Chamber confers]
24 JUDGE HALL: Mr. Gajic, good morning to you. I trust you can
25 hear me.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning, Your Honours. Yes,
2 can I hear you.
3 JUDGE HALL: Thank you. Before Mr. Krgovic begins, I would
4 remind you, you're still on your oath.
5 Yes, Mr. Krgovic.
6 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Good morning, Your Honours.
7 WITNESS: SRETO GAJIC [Resumed]
8 [Witness answered through interpreter]
9 [Witness testified via videolink]
10 Cross-examination by Mr. Krgovic:
11 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, Mr. Gajic. My name is
12 Dragan Krgovic and I'm representing Mr. Zupljanin. I will be putting
13 questions to you about your testimony to date.
14 A. Yes, I return your greetings. Good morning. And I'm expecting
15 your questions.
16 Q. Mr. Gajic, when you went to Banja Luka to carry out this
17 assignment, besides overseeing or reviewing the situation regarding
18 special unit in Banja Luka, of course, you also had the opportunity to
19 hear about other problems and also get an idea of the situation in the
20 CSB Banja Luka territory; isn't that right?
21 A. Yes, I did.
22 Q. And you put some of that in the two reports that you submitted to
23 the minister's cabinet, right?
24 A. Yes, that is correct.
25 Q. And you proposed certain measures in order to deal with certain
1 problems and in order to improve, in a way, the work of the MUP organs in
2 that area; isn't that right?
3 A. Yes. And that is evident from my reports.
4 Q. And that was the first time from the time the conflict broke out
5 that you went to that area, in view of the fact that, for a considerable
6 period before you arrived, that part of Republika Srpska was cut off
7 because the corridor was closed; is that right?
8 A. Yes. That was the first time that I went to the Banja Luka CSB
10 Q. And you passed through the corridor that, for a while before that
11 was open but there were still dangers and restrictions of movement in
12 that area of the corridor when you passed through; isn't that right?
13 A. At the time it was risky, still, if I remember correctly, to pass
14 through the corridor. You couldn't really spend any time there. You had
15 to be absolutely vigilant and drive quite fast, while passing through the
17 Q. And when you were given the assignment to go out and -- to the
18 field, except for this part of your job regarding the special unit,
19 naturally, you also had the duty to consider all the other problems
20 cropping up in the work of the security services and you were to point
21 them out as well. That was part of the task, wasn't it?
22 A. Well, my job had to do exclusively with the order of the
23 minister. All that was in the order, that was what I needed to deal with
24 in order to complete my assignment.
25 JUDGE HARHOFF: Mr. Krgovic, this is a bit cryptic to me. What
1 other problems are you referring to?
2 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I will get to that
3 specifically when I show to the witness his report. I just wanted to
4 make an introduction about the work of the CSB and its inability to
5 control and oversee the work of the SJBs. So I'm going to put to the
6 witness his report and some other documents in order to see with the
7 witness whether this was what was told to him at the meeting and to see
8 if he can add something or comment to -- on his report in that sense.
9 JUDGE HARHOFF: Very well. Get at it. Be more precise and
10 direct. Go for it.
11 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] I will, Your Honour.
12 Q. Sir, Mr. Gajic, regarding the special units that we referred to
13 earlier. You are aware, of course, that in the territory of the entire
14 Republika Srpska at that point in time, during the time you went there,
15 certain SJBs and CSBs had active special units - that's what they were
16 called - which were not established by the Ministry of Interior; isn't
17 that right?
18 A. Yes. I was aware of that for certain centres, but I wasn't aware
19 of that as far as SJBs are concerned.
20 Q. The idea of the ministry was to disband those units and to
21 establish one single unit at the level of the MUP which would be under
22 the control of the minister and which would have its detachments in
23 certain centres; isn't that right?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Which was actually done in late 1992, wasn't it?
1 A. Yes. I don't recall the date, but it was at the end of the year,
2 when that happened.
3 Q. Yesterday, the Prosecutor asked you about the term "remove" and
4 you said that Stojan Zupljanin asked you what that term meant. To
5 "remove," that term doesn't exist in the Law on the Interior. There is a
6 term there saying "temporary removal," or "removal." But it is not the
7 same term that is used in the law.
8 A. Yes, that particular term is not in the law.
9 Q. That term can imply temporary removal from duty, it can imply
10 suspension, it can also mean the termination of employment, and in terms
11 of a member of the reserve forces, it can mean also being taken off the
12 list of -- for wartime assignments in the MUP and being placed at the
13 disposal of the Army of Republika Srpska; isn't that right?
14 A. Yes, I agree with that explanation.
15 Q. And as we said, that can have several meanings, and in your
16 answer to Stojan Zupljanin, you explained exactly what you meant by that
17 term, so you gave a kind of authentic interpretation of that term?
18 A. Yes, I did explain the meaning of that term to Stojan. I did
19 give an explanation. I don't know whether it's absolutely authentic or
20 not, but did I explain that as the termination of employment. That's how
21 I explained it.
22 As far as the reserve forces, in any case, that means being taken
23 off the MUP's wartime assignments lists and being placed at the disposal
24 of the Army of Republika Srpska. That's how that was regulated.
25 Q. And you were not surprised that Mr. Zupljanin sought an
1 explanation, because he wanted to have a clear situation when he began to
2 implement the minister's decision; isn't that correct?
3 A. No, I wasn't surprised. In any case, he did ask for a thorough
4 clarification, in order to know what to do in that case.
5 Q. Mr. Gajic, other than this part regarding the special unit, in
6 your report you also referred to some other things that you observed, so
7 I would like to ask you to look at Exhibit P631. This is a 65 ter 308
8 number, and that is in your tab number 8.
9 JUDGE DELVOIE: Mr. Krgovic, is that in your -- your list?
10 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] This is in the Prosecutor's tab.
11 JUDGE DELVOIE: [Microphone not activated] Thank you.
12 MR. KRGOVIC:
13 Q. [Interpretation] Have you found this report, Mr. Gajic?
14 Can you please look at page 4 in the Serbian version.
15 A. Yes, I found it.
16 Q. Can you find paragraph 2 of your proposals on page 4. And it
17 states here:
18 "Due to the great territorial diversity, large number of
19 inhabitants, bad road and telephone communications, combat activities, as
20 well as a number of other elements which influence the formation of the
21 centre, it is necessary to consider objective possibilities for effective
22 performance by the CSB Banja Luka on the territory of all the 26
24 Have you read this?
25 A. Yes, I have.
1 Q. And based on what you saw in the field of the situation, you
2 established that the CSB was not able to establish control over all the
3 municipalities and the CSB for reasons that you referred to, among other
4 reasons; isn't that right?
5 A. Yes. Because while considering the overall situation at the
6 meeting where they informed me about it, Stojan and his close associates,
7 I drafted this report that -- this proposal that is formulated in
8 paragraph 2.
9 Q. And also in paragraph 3, in view of the situation, in the
10 Prijedor CSB, which you referred to yesterday, you suggested in your
11 remarks that a CSB Prijedor should be formed which would cover the
12 territory of the municipalities of Prijedor, Bosanski Dubica,
13 Bosanski Novi, Bosanska Krupa, Bihac, Bosanski Petrovac, Kljuc, and
14 Sanski Most; isn't that right?
15 A. Yes. In order to free the Banja Luka CSB of its duties regarding
16 certain municipalities, and in order to be able to carry out its
17 functions as established by law, I proposed that a CSB centre be formed
18 in Prijedor, which would take over certain powers over those particular
20 Q. Which was done later. Not in 1992, but later. Prijedor CSB was
21 formed, wasn't it?
22 A. Yes, that's correct. I don't remember when, but it was formed.
23 I know that the Prijedor CSB was formed.
24 Q. And the situation that you mentioned in your report, the CSB
25 Banja Luka was said to be in the situation because after the war broke
1 out, having already 11 SJBs, 15 additional SJBs were attached to the
2 Banja Luka CSB, which, before the war, were not actually part of its
3 regular duties; isn't that right?
4 A. Yes, that is correct.
5 Q. And besides these practical and objective problems in the work of
6 the centre, there were also some matters of lack of coordination between
7 the CSBs and the SJBs because of the involvement of the Crisis Staffs and
8 the War Presidencies in the work of the CSBs and the SJBs; isn't that
10 A. Yes. Those problems were also referred to in that part that you
11 referred to just now.
12 Q. I'm now going to show you an exhibit that the Prosecutor showed
13 you yesterday. You only looked at the first page of it.
14 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Can we now please look in e-court,
15 Exhibit P595, which is tab 8A in the Prosecutor's binder.
16 Q. Mr. Gajic, this is a report that was handed over to you in the
17 CSB that you then forwarded together with your report to the minister's
18 cabinet; am I right?
19 MS. KORNER: Your Honours, I should just remind Mr. Krgovic that
20 he did say he didn't read it.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
22 MR. KRGOVIC:
23 Q. [Interpretation] During the discussions at the centre, you didn't
24 include some of the matters in your report because you believed that that
25 could be found in this report on the work that was attached to your
1 report. Or maybe you have just mentioned it in general terms.
2 A. Yes. During the meeting, during the discussions with
3 Mr. Zupljanin, we agreed upon that, this meeting with Mr. Zupljanin and
4 his associates. They did not also present the whole report. They
5 presented only some items from it because that report really corroborated
6 my report.
7 Q. Could you please now take a look at the following page, page 1,
8 where we have the introductory remarks, where reporting is discussed.
9 And then please take a look at the footnote -- yeah, that's the following
10 page, yes, that's right. So please take a look at the footnote, where it
11 is stated that the report on the work of the Banja Luka Security Services
12 Centres has been prepared on the basis of reports from public security
13 stations and relevant organisational units at the centres.
14 One of its shortcomings is incompleteness, is number of public
15 security stations were unable to furnish complete information. I will
16 not read the remainder of it.
17 I would like to ask you now to look at the penultimate
18 sentence --
19 THE INTERPRETER: Could Mr. Krgovic point to the interpreters
20 where this sentence is.
21 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] That's the penultimate sentence in
22 the footnote.
23 "The analytical quality of the reports received is very low and
24 hardly matches the conditions and situation in which the work was done.
25 Most of the reports merely itemise pieces of dry data without critical
1 examination and analytical sorting and deduction. Characteristic events
2 an occurrences are not mentioned and nearly all of the reports are devoid
3 of self-critical views of one's own work ..."
4 Q. In essence, Mr. Gajic, during the meeting with Mr. Zupljanin and
5 his associates, they pointed out to you to incompleteness of information
6 from the ground, and you included that into your conclusions - I will
7 show that later to you - where one can see that some of these comments
8 have been included.
9 But do you remember that discussion at the meeting included these
11 A. I do remember that. Yesterday, I told Madam Prosecutor that I
12 did not read -- that I had not read the entire report. I believed that
13 there was no need to read it in its entirety. But I fully agree with
14 what's said in the footnote, because the centre's report is based on the
15 reports made by the SJBs in its territory and then their internal
16 organisational units, and I fully agree with what's stated here; namely,
17 that the reports were incomplete, dry, with very few indicators
19 We have had problems even before the war in relation to
20 analytical presentation of the material. And with the start of the war,
21 it got even worse because we were short-staffed. We didn't have good
22 quality staff. I think I -- I think I was precise enough now in this
23 explanation of mine.
24 Q. Could you please now turn to the next page, to the third page of
25 this document.
1 It's in the last paragraph on this page, this very long sentence
2 which starts with words:
3 "In certain areas where combat activities were conducted, there
4 was a lot of misunderstanding by the action of the SJBs on part of the
5 local governments which tried to submit them to their own will, pushing
6 them to do jobs that were not part of the authorities of the SJB and very
7 often tasks that were contrary to the laws of the Serbian Republic of
8 Bosnia and Herzegovina, which gravely endangered the principle of lawful
9 activity of the SJBs."
10 And then it goes on, on page 4.
11 "The organs of government in some communities, Crisis Staffs,
12 regional staffs, and Territorial Defence ordered for some assignments and
13 positions to be conducted without following the legal form and therefore
14 could not have been conducted by the organs of internal affairs."
15 So this is what I was asking you about some time ago, namely,
16 about the interference of the local authorities in the work of the SJB
17 and the problems that came out of it.
18 Do you remember that Mr. Zupljanin was telling you about such
20 A. That's correct. We have had problems even before the war, when
21 there was no fighting, when the local authorities tried to interfere with
22 some of the work of the police, such as providing security for public
23 gathering and so on, let alone in the conditions when the war had started
24 and everything fell apart. Local politicians just could not understand
25 what the real role of the police was supposed to be.
1 MS. KORNER: Could I just ask where that part in the English is
2 about the Crisis Staff. It's not up on the screen.
3 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] It is on page 4 in the Serbian
4 version; whereas, in the English version -- I apologise. Yes, it's on
5 this page that we have on the screen. It's in the penultimate paragraph.
6 MS. KORNER: [Microphone not activated] [Overlapping speakers]
7 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] No, I'm sorry, the previous page.
8 Q. Please take a look at the paragraph after this one where it's
9 stated that:
10 "In some areas the public security stations are asked to provide
11 security in camps where extremists were held. Problems were also caused
12 by providing security for the population of Muslim and Croat ethnicity
13 who were left homeless during the war and were exposed to individuals
14 trying to fight some private war against the local population."
15 In your reports you mentioned, as well as in your yesterday's
16 testimony, that Simo Drljaca was the person who told that you some of
17 police employees were involved in guarding prisoners of war camps, which
18 is not a normal task of the MUP organs. Am I right?
19 A. Yes, I mentioned that in my report. And it wasn't a small number
20 of employees. It was quite a large number of employees that I was told
21 about by Simo Drljaca, and, accordingly, I proposed that certain measures
22 should be taken in my report.
23 Q. Would you please now take a look at page number 5.
24 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Madam Korner, on the English
25 version it's on the page that we had just a moment ago on the screen.
1 It's the second paragraph on that page where it is stated that:
2 "... chiefs of public security stations in some occasions instead
3 of professionally carrying out their duty, dealt with issues which were
4 outside their purview and were completely political in nature. They
5 requested permission from certain political organs and figures in
6 connection with purely professional issues. In this way, they tried to
7 avoid and shift responsibility to others for what had been done. At the
8 same time various concessions were made to the detriment of the service
9 and certain authorised measures were taken under the influence of those
10 organs and individuals."
11 What is stated here, in essence, is that some of the chiefs
12 refused to obey orders and directions from the centre, instead acting on
13 the basis of orders of local authorities and creating areas under their
14 control, and this specifically refers to Prijedor; am I right?
15 A. That's correct. I think that this refers primarily to Prijedor
16 SJB, and as it is evident from my report where I portrayed Mr. Drljaca in
17 a way.
18 Q. Upon your arrival in Prijedor, where you came to visit the SJB,
19 you weren't welcome. Mr. Drljaca didn't like anybody's interference, and
20 he organised the relations within Prijedor in such a way that Prijedor
21 became a self-contained state, of sorts?
22 A. Well, there was not much respect on his part. I was a little bit
23 surprised, considering the conditions before the war, because before the
24 war, if someone from a republican institution would come somewhere, he
25 would be treated with respect.
1 Q. In your report, you stated there was another problem; namely,
2 problem concerning members of light brigades. Some of the volunteers who
3 came back from other battle-fields from before and also people with
4 criminal records joined these light brigades.
5 And let me show you your report. It's stated in your report,
6 which is Prosecution Exhibit 1502; Prosecutor's binder, tab 9. And
7 there -- it's on page 2 of your report, item 5, third paragraph from the
8 top, where it is stated:
9 "After this part of the meeting was concluded, the chief of
10 centre informed those present about the activities of the light brigades
11 in the Banja Luka CSB centre area."
12 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: The text cannot be found
13 on the screen.
14 MR. KRGOVIC:
15 Q. [Interpretation] It is also mentioned that the light brigades are
16 financed by the socio-political organisation. And in the following
17 paragraph, one can see that it's stated that within the brigades, there
18 are persons who were responsible for various criminal activities, that
19 members of these units stop vehicles and inspect them, and also impose
20 curfew, based exclusively on the orders by their units?
21 MS. KORNER: I'm sorry, You're reading wrong page in English on
22 the screen. You're reading from page 2 in English and what's being shown
23 is different.
24 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Can we have the following page,
25 please -- or, rather, the previous page.
1 MS. KORNER: And also, I think in B/C/S, the page is not up
3 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] In B/C/S, it's on page 0360583.
4 Yes, we have the right page in the Serbian version. It should be on the
5 following page in the English version.
6 JUDGE DELVOIE: I think it will be on page 3, not on page 2.
7 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Page 3 in the English version.
8 Following page in the English, not the one that we have on the screen
9 now. Thank you.
10 Q. So, Mr. Gajic, it goes on to say that the brigades are under
11 General Talic's command. At the time of the meeting he was -- it was
12 agreed that the chief of the centre would establish contact as soon as
13 possible and resolve the issue of authority with regard to conducting
14 certain duties. He would also point out various criminal activities
15 being committed by a number of members.
16 You do remember this problem related to light brigades throughout
17 Republika Srpska. These brigades were financed by the local communities,
18 local municipalities, and treated these brigades as their own private
19 armies. Do you remember that?
20 A. I do remember. I was informed, to a certain extent, from certain
21 conversations while I was at the headquarters, but when I went to the
22 centre area, then I was completely informed about those problems in the
23 area where the Banja Luka centre was acting.
24 Q. Can you look at the following page, please. That is page 3 of
25 this report.
1 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Let me just check the English page.
2 Let me just go back to this previous question.
3 Q. You are aware that when you were in the Prijedor municipality
4 territory that there was a strong connection between the police station
5 of the SJB in Prijedor, the local brigade, and the Crisis Staff in
6 Prijedor; isn't that correct?
7 A. I was informed to a certain degree by Mr. Simo Drljaca about this
8 cooperation, about this joint coordinated action.
9 Q. When you put this information your second report, speaking about
10 specific things, this information about Trnopolje, Keraterm, Omarska, did
11 you know at that time Mr. Stojan Zupljanin had formed a commission of the
12 CSB that visited Prijedor, and this information that is in the report is
13 quite similar to the information that the commission recorded. Are you
14 aware of that?
15 A. No, I didn't know that. I don't remember if I did get that
16 information at that meeting or not. I simply don't remember.
17 Q. And now that we are on this topic, I would like you to look at
18 another document. That is document P668, and it's in tab 4 of the
19 Zupljanin Defence binder.
20 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, that's the right page that we
21 see on the screen. Thank you.
22 Q. This is a document by Mr. Drljaca. And if you look at the first
23 paragraph here where it says that the War Presidency of the Prijedor
24 Municipal Assembly, at a meeting held on the 24th of July, adopted a
25 decision, pursuant to which the reserve police force presently employed
1 should be greatly reduced and the security for the Keraterm, Trnopolje,
2 and Omarska Reception Centres should be provided by the army. That
3 decision should have been implemented by the 31st of July, 1992.
4 Mr. Gajic, it's evident from this document that Mr. Drljaca, when
5 he is reducing the reserve police force and reducing the security, is not
6 implementing the decisions of the CSB MUP but of the local Presidency of
7 the municipality of Prijedor; isn't that correct?
8 A. You can see that it's independent and that -- that he's
9 independent and under another influence and is not listening to the
10 command and control system within the Ministry of the Interior.
11 Q. Mr. Gajic, can you please look at this report again by the
12 Prosecutor that I had on the screen earlier. This is exhibit number -
13 let me just have a second - P1502, and this is in the Prosecutor
14 tab number 9?
15 Can you please look at page 2 of this document? Actually, can we
16 look at page 1 first? Item 1, please.
17 Mr. Gajic, you gave a statement to the Prosecutor sometime in
18 May 2009; actually, 29th of May 2009. The Prosecutor didn't show you
19 this document at that time; isn't that right? He showed you the previous
20 statement but not the -- report, but not this one; isn't that right?
21 A. I don't remember. I think that he didn't show me this one. I
22 think that he didn't, but I'm not sure.
23 Q. And here in item 1, what is practically being spoken about
24 throughout your whole report is the way the status of the special police
25 detachment in Banja Luka was dealt with. And it says here that:
1 "The special police detachment, 100 men strong, will be put at
2 the disposal of the 1st Krajina Corps, under the command of General Talic
3 as of 10th August 1992."
4 Isn't that right?
5 A. Yes, that is correct.
6 Q. And then on the following page the handover of the units will be
7 carried out on the 10th of August, 1992 in Kotor Varos where the unit is
8 deployed. The handover will be attended by Djuro Bulic, SJB sector
9 chief, and on behalf of the CSB by Colonel Bogojevic, who is the military
10 security chief on behalf of the 1st Krajina Corps.
11 Do you remember, and you mention that in your report, that that
12 is what was agreed?
13 A. Yes, that was agreed and it was cited in the report.
14 And before you put your next question, I would just like Their
15 Honours to grants me a break of two minutes.
16 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, perhaps we can make a
17 break now. I have some ten or 15 minutes left anyway, so perhaps this
18 would be a good time for a break, instead of going on a break at 20 past
19 10.00, perhaps we can take the break now.
20 JUDGE HALL: Yes. Yes, we will do that. We will rise now and
21 resume in 20 minutes.
22 [The witness stands down]
23 --- Recess taken at 10.00 a.m.
24 [The witness takes the stand]
25 --- On resuming at 10.30 a.m.
1 JUDGE HALL: Yes, Mr. Krgovic, you may continue.
2 MR. KRGOVIC:
3 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Gajic, let us continue.
4 Do you have the document before you still?
5 P15.2 -- .02 [as interpreted]. Page 2 of the said document.
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. I read to you item number 2, and, in essence, the issue of the
8 special unit is resolved here in the text. You are most probably aware
9 that the decision and conclusions were implemented. You did not get any
10 information that it was not done; am I right?
11 A. I did not get any information that it was not done, that's right.
12 Q. The composition of the special units, most of the members of
13 these units were members of the army who return -- returned to the VRS
14 for all practical purposes.
15 A. Yes, that's correct.
16 Q. Under 4, it is stated that:
17 "The centre will resolve all issues relating to the status of
18 families of those killed and wounded who had been members ... of the unit
19 until the date of transfer of the unit."
20 And that the salaries and various costs will be taken carry of
21 for the period of up to the 31st of August, 1992. Do you remember that
22 this was also agreed upon at the meeting?
23 A. Yes, it was. And I put it into my report.
24 Q. Do you know that they received salaries for the month of
25 August of 1992?
1 A. No, I don't know. I don't have that information, but I have no
2 doubts that it was not done. I believe that whatever was put into the
3 report was, later on, implemented.
4 Q. You were asked by the Prosecutor, after having shown you the
5 previous report related to your visit to the Banja Luka centre.
6 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Could we please have P631 on the
8 Q. And I'm talking about your visit to the CSB.
9 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] The document is in the Prosecution
10 binder, tab 8. We need page 3 of the document in the B/C/S version, item
11 number 3.
12 Q. In this paragraph that's dealing with the visit to the SJB in
13 Banja Luka, please find this part where SOS is mentioned.
14 So you were not familiar prior to your visit to Banja Luka and
15 his -- to visit -- to Banja Luka and your meeting with Mr. Zupljanin, you
16 were not aware that the special unit was called SOS?
17 A. No, I didn't know about that. I think I mentioned that yesterday
18 during my testimony; namely, that I received that information only during
19 the meeting.
20 Q. Neither Mr. Zupljanin nor the command of the detachment referred
21 to the unit as such; namely, as SOS. Am I right?
22 A. They referred to special police unit; that's how they called it.
23 Because that's the usual term used by the police, both before the war and
24 during the war.
25 Q. This term, SOS, was used by Mr. Tutus when he was speaking about
1 some members of the special detachment, or did he speak about some other
2 organisation called SOS? Are you familiar with existence of some other
3 unit called SOS, Serbian Defence Forces?
4 A. I was told about that at the station, and I think Mr. Tutus also
5 knew about this name, this title, SOS.
6 Q. Do you know that this unit, that term, that organisation called
7 SOS, existed for a period of time but only during April, and that by the
8 time of your arrival in Banja Luka that this unit ceased to exist?
9 A. In the initial period of the war, this term was used. But at the
10 time of the meeting, and, of course, later, people referred to the
11 special police unit.
12 Q. Something I forgot to ask you about. Please take a look at item
13 number 8 on page 4 in the B/C/S version.
14 We see here is mention about your proposal about contacts with
15 the chief of the CSB and his associates with responsible employees in the
16 area. And also mentioned is consideration of possibility of bringing in
17 soldiers to the front lines to replace the policemen.
18 You will agree that one of the problems that you discussed in the
19 CSB of Banja Luka was the fact that many of the policemen were used for
20 combat operations?
21 A. There were such case, yes. There were such examples when the
22 police was put into the first combat lines, although in essence.
23 Q. It was not actually fit to carry out combat activities in terms
24 of staff or equipment and materiel; isn't that correct?
25 A. That's true. It wasn't up to it, either due to the personnel or
1 materiel and equipment, but also in professional terms, it was not
2 trained for combat activities.
3 Q. So this prevented the police from carrying out its duties as
4 envisaged under the law; isn't that right?
5 A. Yes, that is correct.
6 Q. And this proposal of yours actually intended to put soldiers back
7 into the front lines and make it thus possible for policemen to go back
8 to their regular duties. Wasn't that correct?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Mr. Gajic, thank you very much. These are all the questions that
11 I have for you.
12 Re-examination by Ms. Korner:
13 Q. Mr. Gajic, I want to go back, please, to the matters that you
14 were asked about yesterday by Mr. Zecevic in relation to resubordination.
15 And you were asked at page 42 -- really starting at page 40, the question
17 "Namely when a group of policemen go with the assignment to be
18 resubordinated to a specific military unit, that group of policemen is
19 led by a senior officer who is their commander as well?"
20 And you said -- your answer was:
21 "That group of policemen is organised within a certain formation,
22 a squad, a company, a battalion, a platoon, and it's under the command of
23 a senior officer from that station or centre, but the entire unit is then
24 resubordinated to that particular unit -- military unit."
25 Now, before we go further with what you were asked about, you
1 will find, as I understand it, under tab 22 from the Defence bundle, from
2 Mr. Zecevic, the Law on All People's Defence.
3 MS. KORNER: And, Your Honours that is, at the moment, identified
4 as 1D00-4042. It's part of the -- as yet, untendered law library.
5 Q. And can you go to Article 104.
6 MS. KORNER: And that, for the screen purposes, is page 67 in
7 English, and page 18 in B/C/S.
8 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
9 JUDGE HALL: Ms. Korner, could you give us a moment, please.
10 There is something wrong with the connection to Sarajevo.
11 MS. KORNER: Certainly.
12 JUDGE HARHOFF: Mr. Witness, can you hear us?
13 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
14 MS. KORNER: There's a pretty picture on the screen, Your Honour,
15 with the microphone off.
16 JUDGE HARHOFF: We'll try once again.
17 Mr. Gajic, can you hear us?
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can hear you.
19 JUDGE HALL: Apparently it's back up.
20 MS. KORNER:
21 Q. Mr. Gajic, just testing, can you hear me?
22 MS. KORNER: No, I don't think so.
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can hear you.
24 JUDGE HALL: Ms. Korner, don't forget --
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can hear you.
1 MS. KORNER: All right. Okay.
2 Q. All right. Do you have --
3 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
4 JUDGE HALL: We are advised that the problem is that the witness
5 can hear you, but the Court Officer can't. So if you would allow, after
6 you ask the question, for the Court Officer here to relay by telephone to
7 the Court Officer there?
8 MS. KORNER: Does she need to hear the questions?
9 She needs the tab. Okay. The tab is number is tab 22 in
10 Mr. Zecevic's Stanisic Defence bundle. And it should be at page 18,
11 Article 104. And perhaps -- can I just make sure it's up on the screen.
13 Q. That reads that in war, or a time of immediate threat of war and
14 other emergencies, the police may be used for carrying out combat
15 activities. And then:
16 "During its engagement for combat activities in the armed forces,
17 the police shall be under the command of the authorised officer in charge
18 of ... combat activity."
19 Is that the Article to which you were referring, the law.
20 A. Could you please tell me in the Serbian version which Article of
21 the All People's Defence law that is, please.
22 Q. Article 104, which you should find on page 18 in your copy.
23 MS. KORNER: I don't know whether somebody left a mobile in
24 court, Your Honours. Oh, it's in Sarajevo, is it? Sounds like coming
25 from over there.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The Article is there that we
2 commented on yesterday.
3 MS. KORNER:
4 Q. Right. So we're referring -- and, indeed, I asked you some
5 questions about this earlier. We are referring, are we, to the use of
6 police in combat activities; is that right?
7 Can you hear me, Mr. Gajic?
8 A. I can hear you. I can hear you.
9 Q. Right. When you were describing to Mr. Zecevic what happened,
10 were you referring to police engaging with the army in combat activities?
11 A. I was thinking, in any case, of the police which, pursuant to the
12 law, is resubordinated to the Army of Republika Srpska; namely, placed at
13 the disposal of a certain unit that is in coordinated joint action with
14 the army units from a specific corps or other formation.
15 Q. Yes. Let -- please let's not confuse the -- the question of the
16 special police being -- being dismissed from the police and -- and -- and
17 then being put at the disposal of the army. We're talking about the army
18 making a request, or however it's dealt with, because there's an argument
19 about this, that a squad of police should be used; is that right?
20 A. I did not understand your question completely.
21 Q. All right. We're not -- we looked at with you a number of
22 documents in relation to the special police where they were to be
23 dismissed from the police and put at the disposal of the army, or
24 disbanded, not dismissed. Disbanded.
25 Do you agree with that?
1 A. I do.
2 Q. Right. What we are talking about in the use of police under
3 Article 104 is police, as you put it to Mr. Zecevic, a unit of police,
4 with a senior officer, going to the army and being placed at that stage,
5 whilst in combat activities, under the authority of a senior officer, an
6 army officer. Is that -- is that right?
7 A. Yes, that is right.
8 Q. All right. Now, the thing I just want to make -- to clarify with
9 you is this. Mr. Zecevic went on to put to you that, at page -- and this
10 is at page 40, when -- when the unit with the senior officer reached the
11 military unit, he reported to the command of that military unit and then
12 he and all of the members of the MUP are resubordinate to the military
13 command and they become part of the military command structure, is that
15 And you said:
16 "Yes, that's right."
17 And then whilst they're executing the assignment, those MUP
18 member, said Mr. Zecevic, together with their senior officer are exempted
19 from the MUP --
20 A. Yes, that is correct.
21 Q. When they are executing this assignment, those MUP members,
22 together with their senior officer, are exempted from the MUP command
23 structure and find themselves within the military command structure and
24 are treated as members of military units. You [sic] said -- is that
1 And you said that is how it is regulated under the law and that
2 is how it should be. Now, to which law are you referring?
3 A. This law, as well as the Law on the Interior Affairs contain
4 certain provisions that deal with this. So they are placed under the
5 full jurisdiction of that unit and execute all tasks and assignments that
6 that command, the military unit command, issues to them.
7 Q. Yep. But they do not, do they, become members of the military.
8 They are still policemen who are, for a certain period of time, are being
9 used for military tasks, and for those tasks are the -- are under the
10 command of the military.
11 A. Madam Prosecutor, definitely that this is preceded by a certain
12 order from the superior officer, the minister, or the centre, for that
13 unit to be sent to execute a military task and is being resubordinated to
14 such and such a unit of a certain military command from such a such time
15 to such and such a time. And then after that date, it returns to the CSB
16 or the organisational unit of the ministry from which it was originally
18 Q. All right. And during that period, whilst it is under the --
19 the -- it is resubordinated to the military command, the members of the
20 police unit are still police officers; is that right?
21 A. Yes. They are on a kind of work duty. They are employees of the
22 ministry. But during that time they are considered to be members of the
23 armed forces during that time, while they are implementing the combat
25 Q. But they don't lose, for example, their holiday entitlement, as
1 you talked about earlier, because they're engaged on military tasks which
2 they received as policemen.
3 A. They do have the right to a salary, to annual leave, yes.
4 Q. And they're paid, even whilst they're engaged in military tasks -
5 is that right? - by the MUP.
6 A. I think that they should be paid. I don't know if I'm competent
7 enough to answer this question, but I think that they should be paid by
9 Q. Right. And, finally, you were asked about the disciplinary
10 aspects - in other words, what would happen if, whilst engaged in a
11 military task, a policeman committed a crime. And you gave two
12 contradictory answers at page 43 when Mr. Zecevic asked -- Judge -- in
13 fact, I'm sorry, it was Judge Harhoff who asked you about this. You
15 "Any violation - and this is something that I assume; I'm not
16 sure, I'm not the most competent person to make these kind of
17 interpretations - but I think any kind of violation, work duties and any
18 commission of a crime would mean they would be held responsible within
19 their regular composition. So, in that case, the centre or the public
20 security station would be responsible in that case."
21 And Judge Harhoff said:
22 "Meaning responsible for taking steps to prosecuted the
23 perpetrator; is that what you mean?"
24 Your answer was: "Yes. That perpetrators -- measures would need
25 to be immediately taken against such a perpetrator."
1 Then later on when Mr. Zecevic went back to the same topic and he
2 put to you at page 44:
3 "If they commit a crime as members of the military," and we dealt
4 with that, "they would be subject to arrest by the military police and
5 they would then be processed before the military judicial organs just
6 like any other soldier; is that correct?"
7 Your answer:
8 "I am not a lawyer and I really cannot recall all the laws and
9 regulations. It's been a long time since I did that, but it is logical
10 that it would be like that."
11 Now, Mr. Gajic, this is no criticism of you at all, but is the
12 real answer that you don't know one way or the other?
13 A. I will tell you. Members of the police organisational unit that
14 are being sent to execute a military assignment are resubordinated to a
15 specific military unit. They carry out all the tasks, the jobs that that
16 military officer issues to them and are responsible exclusively to that
17 command for the execution of that assignment. If violations occur in any
18 way - I mean, this is what I believe, I would need look at the laws and
19 regulations - they would be held responsible pursuant to those
20 regulations. But since they are also considered to be as employees of
21 the police, procedures would need to be initiated which, in a way, would
22 result with the termination of employment. If that violation or that
23 crime that the person perpetrated would then carry disciplinary measures,
24 and part of those disciplinary measures could be termination of
25 employment. So these proceedings should be conducted parallelly. This
1 is my interpretation. I would still probably need to go back and refer
2 to the regulations, but I think that that is how this should be done.
3 Q. All right. Perhaps I put it too strongly by saying you didn't
4 know one way or the other.
5 You are -- can -- interpreting - is that right? - from what you
6 understand would be the situation without having experience, if I can put
7 it that way, of an actual situation where this arose.
8 A. Madam Prosecutor, I have no personal experience related to that.
9 Also, this was many years ago. I haven't looked into the regulations.
10 Please, don't expect from me to interpret regulations. It's been ten
11 years since I've seen any regulations.
12 Q. Thank you. I don't. I'm going move on.
13 Mr. Gajic, I want to deal with a couple of matters that were
14 raised with you this morning about your reports.
15 First of all, you were taken through by Mr. Krgovic the CSB
16 report that you submitted with your first report on the CSB Banja Luka.
17 And you said -- first of all, you were asked about various parts of the
18 report and whether you remembered matters that were in the report being
19 discussed. This is at page 11 of today's transcript. And you said:
20 "I do remember that. Yesterday, I told Madam Prosecutor that I
21 had not read the entire report. I believe that there was no need to read
22 it in its entirety."
23 What you actually said to me yesterday was that you had not read
24 the report at all. That was at page -- just a moment, I don't know if I
25 actually marked the page but -- yes, at page 18 of yesterday's
1 transcript, I asked you to look at the report and you intervened at line
2 8 and said:
3 "I didn't read it. I just attached that to my report and left it
4 at the office. I didn't read this report."
5 So which is it, sir? Did you not read the report at all; or did
6 you read parts of the report, as you've said this morning?
7 A. I told you and I think I told also the other lawyer that I did
8 not read the report, that there was no need for me to read the report
9 because my report, the report I submitted to the minister, also contained
10 issues mentioned in the report issued by the centre. And also, I
11 remember there were certain issues that were dealt with in this report
12 and that were also discussed at the meeting with the chief of centre and
13 his associates.
14 So some of these issues were dealt with at the meeting, and I
15 felt, because of that, there was no need for me to go into the report and
16 read it.
17 Q. Yep. All right. I -- it may not matter too much. Can we -- are
18 you saying you did read parts of the report or you didn't?
19 A. Whom did I say that to?
20 Q. No. Mr. Gajic, I just want your final answer on this. Before
21 you sent the report to the minister's office, cabinet, did you read part
22 of this report on the CSB from Banja Luka or didn't you read any of it?
23 A. I told you already that I didn't read it thoroughly. I may have
24 just glanced at it or I may have not glanced at it, but I know that I
25 didn't really read it. But most of the issues that are contained therein
1 were discussed at the meeting in the centre.
2 Q. Right. Now, the meeting -- the first meeting you had, which you
3 referred to in your first report you say:
4 "Present at the meeting were the chief of the CSB Banja Luka, his
5 close associates - in other words, the chiefs of the SJBs - as well as
6 all the high officials employed at the station."
7 Does that mean that it included the chief of the Sanski Most SJB,
8 for example?
9 A. No. Present were senior officers of the internal organisational
10 units of the Banja Luka CSB. At least that's how I remember it.
11 Q. Can you look at your report, please, again, from the 5th of
12 August, that's tab 8 in the Prosecutor's bundle.
13 MS. KORNER: Can we have it up on the screen. It is now exhibit,
14 or always was exhibit --
15 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, maybe it's a
16 translation issue, because transcript says "meetings," not "a meeting."
17 This paragraph refers to several meetings; whereas, in the English you
18 can see just "a meeting." In the Serbian version it says --
19 MS. KORNER: No, I agree. It says "meetings," sorry.
20 Can we have -- P631, please. First page.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, no.
22 [Prosecution counsel confer]
23 MS. KORNER: Right.
24 Sorry, can I have him back on the screen.
25 Q. Now, what is being brought up, please, Mr. Gajic, what I'm asking
1 you is whether it was one meeting or more than one meeting. You have
2 written there "the chiefs of the SJBs," and that suggests more than one
4 So what about the chief of the SJB Kljuc? Or Mrkonjic Grad? Or
5 Bosanska Krupa?
6 A. Where meetings are discussed, there was a meeting in the centre
7 and there was a meeting at the Banja Luka public security station. The
8 first meeting, present there was the chief of centre and his immediate
9 associates from the centre and the Banja Luka SJB, which is in the same
10 building. There present we had also senior officers from the station,
11 but no one who would have been outside of the seat of the CSB.
12 So this does not refer to any other chiefs of any public security
13 stations from Kljuc, Mrkonjic, and so on and so forth. I met with the
14 chief of the CSB in Banja Luka and his associates, and there was a
15 meeting with chief from Prijedor.
16 Q. Just read would you, please, without comment, read word for
17 word -- just wait --
18 A. I believe I was clear.
19 Q. Just read word for word so that we can get the translation of the
20 sentence that begins: "Present at the meetings ..."
21 Just read it out, word for word.
22 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] But read it out loud, please.
23 MS. KORNER: No, don't -- thank -- Mr. Krgovic. Yes, I'm sorry.
24 Read it out loud. I'm sorry, yes. Read it out loud.
25 Q. Read it out loud.
1 A. "Present at the meetings were the chief of Banja Luka CSB."
2 "Present at the meetings," therefore there were several meetings, "were
3 the chief of the Banja Luka CSB and his close associates as well as
4 chiefs of SJBs and all the senior officers from the station.
5 Q. Right. You were reporting that the chiefs in --
6 A. What it that you want me to explain now?
7 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] I believe there's a translation
9 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
10 JUDGE HALL: Ms. Korner, there is another technical problem which
11 we are advised could be correct -- might be corrected in as little as
12 five minutes. But the problem is that, again, the Court Officer isn't
13 hearing what you are saying so, therefore, she doesn't know which portion
14 of the document -- to which portion of the document to refer the witness.
15 MS. KORNER: He has got it though. He has read it out. I'm now
16 told there is some sort of translation problem.
17 Your Honour, I'm perfectly happy to adjourn for five minutes.
18 But before we do so, just so there is no mistake, what I'm asking the
19 witness to read out, without altering a single word in the Serbian
20 language, without adding any extra comment, the line that begins in his
21 report: "Present at the meetings ..."
22 So I hope that becomes clear.
23 JUDGE HALL: Well, perhaps when we resume you could ask that
24 question again --
25 MS. KORNER: Yep.
1 JUDGE HALL: -- in -- as clearly as you have just articulated so
2 that he would understand and there should be no confusion.
3 So I suppose we rise and resume in five minutes, or when we're
4 instructed that we can return by the technicians.
5 --- Break taken at 11.18 a.m.
6 --- On resuming at 11.26 a.m.
7 MS. KORNER: Your Honours in the intervening period, I have been
8 informed, and it's been confirmed, and I'm grateful to the interpretation
9 booth, that it's probably a misunderstanding in the translation; in other
10 words, that the word -- the apostrophe S shouldn't go on the SJBs. So
11 I'm not going to pursue this any further because the point I wanted to
12 make is based on the translation.
13 Q. However, I do want to ask you about this. Of all the SJBs within
14 the area of responsibility of the CSB Banja Luka, you only paid a visit
15 to Prijedor. Was that as a result of the instructions that you had
16 received at the meeting before you commenced your inspection, whether or
17 not Mico Stanisic was there?
18 A. That was a result of the discussions in the Banja Luka CSB where
19 I got certain information, and then I went to Prijedor SJB so as to get
20 some insight into the problems they were facing.
21 Q. You see, you were shown a document by Mr. Krgovic which is a
22 dispatch from Mr. Drljaca to both the MUP and the army. Now, there's
23 some discussion, which we needn't trouble you with, as to whether it was
24 ever sent to the MUP. But are you sure you didn't receive any
25 instructions then and there to go to Prijedor, at the meeting before your
2 A. I didn't get any instructions at the meeting that was held on
3 Pale or Jahorina. I wasn't told to go to Prijedor.
4 Q. So you did that on your own initiative?
5 A. Well, bearing in mind the problems that were presented to me at
6 the meeting with the chief of the CSB, prompted me to try and get
7 informed about the problems existing in Prijedor. And, also, this was
8 along the way to the place where I was born, so I took the opportunity to
9 visit my home.
10 Q. And what do you say were the problems that were mentioned to you,
11 specifically in respect of Prijedor and in no other SJB within the CSB's
13 A. I thought I made it clear in my report. Everything that was
14 included and that is contained in my report, it -- that's it.
15 And as far as Prijedor is concerned, the meeting there was very
16 brief because of the character of Mr. Simo Drljaca. He just briefed me
17 in very short lines what was going on in relation to Reception Centres or
18 camps. He was saying that the police cannot carry out police
19 assignments. He wanted to form -- to have a centre formed there. He
20 obviously wanted to have some kind of political authority. He believed
21 that if he would become the chief of a centre, he would then have
22 limitless authority, that he would have some special police of his own
23 that would be under his command. It was a very brief meeting, and he was
24 the one talking all the time.
25 Q. Yes. But he wanted to have special police. Did Mr. Zupljanin
1 not tell you, when he was describing, as you say, the problems with the
2 Prijedor [sic], that there was something called an intervention platoon
3 attached to the Prijedor SJB?
4 A. I don't remember that.
5 Q. Hmm. Well, it's not in your report so I agree.
6 The only thing that you mention in your report specific to
7 Prijedor before the suggestion that it should get its own CSB is the fact
8 that the police employees were guarding what you described as camps and
9 you name them: Keraterm, Omarska, Trnopolje "where war prisoners are
11 Now, is that right? Do you agree with that?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. And if you were paying this visit to Prijedor on your own
14 initiative and without instructions before you began the inspection, why
15 didn't you ask to go and see these camps?
16 A. I didn't think it was necessary for me to go and see those camps.
17 I thought that it was sufficient for me to turn into a report the
18 information that I processed, and there was the minister there and his
19 close associates, to decide after I had provided my report to them, to --
20 if any adequate measures would need to be taken.
21 Q. Yep. But according to you, the police officers should not have
22 been guarding war prisoners. That should have been the job of the
23 military, if these were prisoners of war.
24 So didn't you think it was important to find out who these people
25 were and why the police were guarding them so that you could personally
1 report to the minister about what was happening?
2 A. No. I didn't think that it was necessary for me to do that.
3 Q. Or was it - can I ask you again - that you were specifically told
4 at the time meeting before you went on the inspection to go to Prijedor
5 because of these camps?
6 A. I was not told to go to Prijedor because of those camps.
7 Q. And you didn't think it necessary to go to --
8 A. I didn't even know that there were camps in Prijedor until I got
10 Q. Yep. And you didn't think it was necessary, for example, to
11 carry out any kind of inspection in Sanski Most where there had been
13 A. I didn't think it was necessary. Finally, my time was very
14 limited. I didn't have instructions to go to Sanski Most, to Kljuc, or
15 anywhere. I simply -- I simply didn't receive relevant instructions, as
16 far as that's concerned.
17 Q. And you had no instructions, as you've told us, to go to Prijedor
19 A. No. I didn't receive instructions from the ministry.
20 Q. All right. And, finally, then, on the matters you were asked
21 about by Mr. Krgovic, it was put to you when you were asked to look at
22 the second report that you did, which you will find behind tab 9 in the
23 Prosecution bundle. And at page 2 in the English, beginning of page 1
24 and carrying over to page 2 in the B/C/S, you were told what was going to
25 happen to the Banja Luka special police detachment.
1 And it was put to you by Mr. Krgovic that you had no information
2 that what is set out there as the proposals was -- oh, sorry, it's P1502,
3 were not carried out.
4 And you said:
5 "That's right."
6 You had no information to suggest it wasn't carried out.
7 In fact, you had no information one way or the other, again, did
8 you, Mr. Gajic, because you were asked by me yesterday at page 32:
9 "Did you, Mr. Gajic, have any further input into what happened as
10 a result of the report that you produced on Banja Luka?"
11 And you said:
12 "I had no further information."
13 So you didn't know, did you, Mr. Gajic, one way or the other,
14 whether your proposals were put into effect, or whether any of the
15 proposals were put into effect?
16 A. I told Mr. Krgovic, or whoever was questioning me, that after I
17 went there once and the second time, and after I made the first and
18 second report, I no longer had anymore information about the further
19 implementation of these proposals.
20 Q. Yep. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Gajic. That's all I ask.
21 A. I think that my report was -- is not controversial.
22 [Trial Chamber confers]
23 Questioned by the Court:
24 JUDGE DELVOIE: Mr. Gajic, I would like to ask you something that
25 maybe look -- looks peculiar about how you -- how things are normally
1 done in your country.
2 When you speak -- when you're telling somebody something about a
3 third person, do you refer to that third person you're telling about by
4 his first name; or do you refer to him by "Gospodine" and his last name,
5 in normal circumstances?
6 A. Your Honour, one should address that person as "Gospodine."
7 JUDGE DELVOIE: Okay. I'm asking you this, because I noticed
8 that you refer to Mr. Zupljanin as Stojan. Stojan and his associates and
9 so on. Whereas, for instance, for Mr. Tutus, you don't say Vladimir; you
10 say Mr. Tutus.
11 Is there an explanation for that?
12 A. Perhaps it's my mistake that I did it like that. There is no
13 reason not to address Zupljanin as "Gospodine," or without "Gospodine,"
14 and the same thing would apply to Tutus. It's just probably my mistake
15 that I did it that way.
16 JUDGE DELVOIE: So it is not because of -- you had a more close
17 relationship or a prior relationship with Mr. Zupljanin which you didn't
18 have with, for instance, Mr. Tutus, or Mr. Stanisic? It's not -- it's
19 not that -- that's not the reason.
20 A. Your Honour, sir, I think that I told the investigator of your
21 court that I only met Gospodine Zupljanin when I came to the meeting. I
22 didn't know him before the war.
23 As for Gospodine Tutus, I knew him before the war for some six to
24 seven years.
25 JUDGE DELVOIE: Okay. Thank you.
1 JUDGE HALL: Mr. Gajic, we thank you for your testimony before
2 the Tribunal. You are now released as a witness. Thank you.
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
4 [The witness withdrew]
5 JUDGE HALL: Before we rise, there is an brief -- it's a ruling
6 of sorts although -- well, counsel would see why I was reluctant to --
7 why I had some difficulty as to how to describe it.
8 On the 12th of July, 2010, the Prosecution filed a submission in
9 response to the order of the 29th of June, 2010, regarding the Mladic
11 The Trial Chamber notes the requests made therein, including that
12 the Prosecution seeks to add two Rule 92 bis witnesses, should the
13 Defence continue to challenge the authenticity of the notebooks.
14 The Prosecution has included statements for the proposed
15 witnesses, one of which has been certified pursuant to Rule 92 bis.
16 It would assist the Trial Chamber to receive responses from the
17 Defence to the Prosecution's submission, including in respect of the
18 admission into evidence pursuant to Rule 92 bis of the evidence of the
19 two proposed witnesses, and any response is to be filed by Friday, the
20 6th of August.
21 Thank you.
22 [Trial Chamber confers]
23 JUDGE DELVOIE: And there is -- there is the other matter,
24 Ms. Korner, about Witness ST-137. As my first intuition told me, we were
25 not adding hours for that witness, so the number of hours will stay the
2 MS. KORNER: Right. Your Honours, can I say, at the moment, we
3 seem to be coming in within our allotted total anyhow. If needs be and
4 we have to run a few hours over, then we'll make a separate application.
5 JUDGE DELVOIE: Thank you.
6 JUDGE HALL: Thank you. And if there is nothing else that we
7 need consider, we will take the adjournment to Monday morning in this
8 courtroom at 9.00. And I wish everyone a safe weekend.
9 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 11.47 a.m.,
10 to be reconvened on Monday, the 19th day of July, 2010,
11 at 9.00 a.m.