Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 18986

 1                           Thursday, 20 January 2011

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           --- Upon commencing at 9.13 a.m.

 5             THE REGISTRAR:  Good morning, Your Honours.

 6             This is case IT-08-91-T, the Prosecutor versus Mico Stanisic and

 7     Stojan Zupljanin.

 8             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you, Madam Registrar.

 9             Good morning to everyone.  May we have the appearances today,

10     please.

11             MS. KORNER:  Good morning, Your Honours.  Joanna Korner and

12     Crispian Smith for the Prosecution.

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

14     Slobodan Cvijetic, Eugene O'Sullivan, Ms. Tatjana Savic, and Dan

15     Beauchemin appearing for the Stanisic Defence this morning.  Thank you.

16             MR. KRGOVIC:  Good morning, Your Honours, Mr. Krgovic and

17     Miroslav Cuskic appearing for Zupljanin Defence.

18             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.  Last week we had indicated that the

19     summary of a ruling that we had delivered would be followed by a fuller

20     oral ruling, which we now deliver.

21             The Trial Chamber now provides reasons for its ruling on the 10th

22     of January, 2011, denying the Prosecution's motion of the 23rd of

23     November, 2010.  In this motion the Prosecution had requested

24     reconsideration of the Trial Chamber's 4th of November, 2010, oral ruling

25     admitting into evidence certain unsigned statements, referred to as

Page 18987

 1     "Official Notes."  The Defence jointly responded on 3rd of December,

 2     2010, objecting to the motion.

 3             The Prosecution argued that the Trial Chamber admitted the

 4     Official Notes "for the truth of their contents."  It submits that the

 5     ruling was made "without an adequate finding of reliability of

 6     voluntariness" thus contravening Rules 89(C) and 95.  For these reasons,

 7     it submitted, the ruling must be reconsidered.  Alternatively, in order

 8     to challenge the reliability of the Official Notes, the Prosecution

 9     sought to add ST-238 to its Rule 65 ter witness list and sought to expand

10     the scope of ST-228's testimony.

11             The Trial Chamber recalls that it did not admit the Official

12     Notes for the truth of the matters asserted therein.  Instead it admitted

13     the documents as evidence of the procedures followed by the investigators

14     at the Omarska camp while interrogating detainees and as proof of what

15     the investigators noted the detainees' declarations to be, not as free

16     and voluntary statements of the detainees themselves.

17             The Chamber also held that the issue of what weight to be

18     assigned to the contents, as outlined above, will remain a task for the

19     Trial Chamber at the end of the trial.

20             For these reasons, the Trial Chamber denied the motion in its

21     entirety.

22             Thank you.

23             Yes, Ms. Korner.

24             MS. KORNER:  Your Honour, just to inform Your Honours in respect

25     of the witness who was here before Christmas was ill and never testified,

Page 18988

 1     Your Honours, I am -- apologise, it's actually not much to do with the

 2     Prosecution as such, but it appears now that having organised a videolink

 3     from his country of residence, the witness yesterday faxed to VWS a

 4     medical certificate which asserts that he is able to travel, and he is

 5     very anxious to give evidence in person.  In those circumstances, we feel

 6     that it's only right and proper that rather than going to the expense and

 7     trouble of a videolink, that the witness should be here to testify in

 8     person on Monday, and those are the arrangements that have been made.

 9             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.

10             So formally, I suppose, it is necessary for us to -- to reverse

11     the order that we would have made permitting the videolink, and, as I

12     recall, the issue was canvassed yesterday as to moving Monday's session

13     to the afternoon to accommodate a technician who had to travel.

14             So we would remain on Monday morning.

15             MS. KORNER:  [Microphone not activated] I had no idea there was

16     any such canvassing going on.

17             JUDGE HALL:  It may have been out of -- I remember --

18             MS. KORNER:  Yes.

19             JUDGE HALL:  -- it was discussed but it may very well have been

20     out of court.

21             MS. KORNER:  Right.  Well, Your Honours know that --

22             JUDGE HALL:  I am reminded that it was in fact in court.

23             MS. KORNER:  It completely escaped me.  But, anyway,

24     Your Honours, no, he will be here, I believe, on Sunday and so he can

25     testify on Monday morning.

Page 18989

 1             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.

 2             Do you have a matter, Mr. Zecevic.

 3             MR. ZECEVIC:  No, Your Honour, I was -- I stood up [Overlapping

 4     speakers] ...

 5             JUDGE HALL:  [Overlapping speakers] ...  could the witness be

 6     escorted to the stand.  Yes.

 7                           [The witness takes the stand]

 8             JUDGE HALL:  Good morning, Mr. Brown.  Whereas you probably think

 9     that - and I would be inclined to agree - it's otiose, I am obliged to

10     remind you that you are still on your oath.

11             Yes, Mr. Zecevic.

12             MR. ZECEVIC:  Thank you, Your Honour.

13                           WITNESS:  EWAN BROWN [Resumed]

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

15        Q.   [Interpretation] Good morning, Mr. Brown.

16        A.   Good morning, sir.

17        Q.   I have a few more documents to show you related to the same topic

18     that we discussed yesterday.

19             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Can we have 1D266, which is Defence

20     tab 129.

21        Q.   Mr. Brown, that is one of the documents that you received

22     yesterday during the break.  It has been printed for you.

23             This is yet another order by the commander of Tactical Group 3,

24     Colonel Lisica.  The date is the 11 November 1992 and it says here order

25     for the engagement of units of the Doboj CSB and the SJB Doboj.  And it

Page 18990

 1     goes on to say:

 2             "Based on demonstrated need, I hereby order, number 1, 100

 3     policemen shall be selected by the SJB Doboj," and then it goes on to

 4     give a specific task that they should carry out.

 5             And under item number 3, Colonel Lisica says that for the

 6     execution of this order Andrija Bjelosevic, the CSB chief, and Obren

 7     Petrovic, the SJB chief, shall be personally responsible to him.

 8             Do you remember, Mr. Brown, and you will certainly agree with me,

 9     that this is a clear-cut case of a subordination of the police to the

10     military?

11        A.   At face value it would seem that that is the case.  Whether there

12     is some agreement prior to this or whether Colonel Lisica was operating

13     in some other way, I don't know.  Whether this was referring to

14     exceptional circumstances at the front or any other agreement, I'm not

15     sure.  I would have to see other documents surrounding that.  But, at

16     face value, this document does appear to say that, yes.

17        Q.   Thank you.  And you can see under number 3 that the commander,

18     Colonel Lisica, says that the people from the police will be personally

19     responsible for the execution of this order, the CSB chief and the SJB

20     chief.  If there was some sort of an agreement, I'm sure that this order

21     would not contain this item.

22        A.   I wouldn't necessarily agree with that.

23        Q.   I accept that.

24             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, this document has been

25     MFI'd, and I propose to make it a proper exhibit, if there are no

Page 18991

 1     objections.

 2             MS. KORNER:  Your Honours it's the same objection as yesterday.

 3     This whole series of documents to do with Lisica and Bjelosevic, we're

 4     asking for the proper provenance of them.

 5             MR. ZECEVIC: [No interpretation]

 6             MS. KORNER:  Sorry, can I just finish.

 7             MR. ZECEVIC:  I'm sorry.

 8             MS. KORNER:  The second matter is this.  The witness has done no

 9     more -- this could have been shown to another witness.  I'm not sure

10     whether it was or not, nor am I sure why it was MFI'd at the time, but

11     this witness can't say anything except, "I see what it says here."

12             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, yesterday, after the

13     end of the session, my whole team made an effort to re-check once again

14     whether some of the documents that I want to go through with this

15     document -- with this witness is, indeed, yes.  This document, for which

16     Ms. Korner says it has no provenance, is in EDS.  It's number 06201475.

17     So the reason that this document was MFI'd was her objection that this

18     document doesn't have proper provenance.  However, it is obvious that

19     this document was in the hands of the Prosecution, because it's in EDS.

20     EDS is a place where the Prosecution puts documents.  That's why I think

21     that the situation is simple and that MFI designation can now be dropped

22     and this can become a proper exhibit.  Maybe the usher could help so

23     Ms. Korner can see the document.  There is also the ERN number, and I

24     think that it is quite clear.

25             JUDGE HALL:  So do I understand that this is not in the category

Page 18992

 1     of -- of the document such as we discussed yesterday?

 2             MR. ZECEVIC:  Well, Your Honours, I -- I -- I don't think it's in

 3     a category since it is in the electronic database of this Tribunal.  So,

 4     therefore, the provenance is from -- from this Tribunal.  If -- if

 5     Ms. Korner will maintain her -- her opposition or -- or suggestion that

 6     we should now find out how this document was uploaded into the EDS, well,

 7     then -- then I guess it would be the same situation.

 8             MS. KORNER:  Your Honour, we've checked and that's right.  So the

 9     basis of my first part of my objection is not right.  I'm not clear why

10     it was MFI'd last time but I don't think it was anything to do with me,

11     but in any event that's absolutely right.  So from that basis we do -- it

12     appears we seize this document, although there was nothing to indicate

13     that on the copy that we were provided with, in which case my objection

14     obviously doesn't stand.

15             JUDGE HALL:  And in terms of your second objection, it seems to

16     me that the stage we're at in the Prosecution's case, this being the

17     last-but-one witness, and it's a document on which the Defence wishes to

18     rely, we may as well admit it at this stage.  Yes.

19             MR. ZECEVIC:  So, it is my understanding that the document is

20     de-MFI'd?

21             JUDGE HALL:  Yes.

22             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, a brief observation.

23             This document belongs to the same group of documents, those which

24     were received from Republika Srpska.  We discussed it yesterday.  We

25     received it from the government, or, rather, republican secretariat of

Page 18993

 1     Republika Srpska.  So it's the same group of documents.  We were lucky

 2     enough to find this particular document inside EDS, but I'm rather

 3     certain that all other documents that we used yesterday are also in EDS.

 4     I'm going to return to this topic once I'm able to make additional checks

 5     as to what is exactly in EDS.

 6             Can we now have 1D00-0345.

 7        Q.   Sir, this is another document by Mr. Lisica.  I assume it is

 8     related to the previous document, because it has the same date.  It's

 9     tab 130.

10             The commander, Colonel Lisica, here orders to form a mixed

11     battalion as follows:  A company of military police and a Doboj

12     police company and another police company from Teslic.  And he appoints

13     as the commander the SJB chief, and as a deputy a lieutenant, which means

14     a military person.

15             Then under number 3, he defines the task, and further on says

16     readiness for the attack at 0700 hours on 12th November, 1992.

17             Sir, again, there is no doubt that this is a resubordination of

18     the police to the military because Colonel Lisica here even appoints as

19     the commander of this newly formed unit the CSB chief from Doboj?

20        A.   He would appear to be issuing an order for a joint operation in

21     that area, yes.

22        Q.   But a joint operation is under his command, isn't it?  It's not a

23     joint operation by the police and the military.  Here the police is

24     resubordinated, a commander of the new mixed unit is appointed, and it is

25     to him that Colonel Lisica ordered what to do and when to do it, right?

Page 18994

 1        A.   It's a joint operation in that there is military and civilian

 2     police but I would accept that, yes, he is instructing as you -- as you

 3     indicate.

 4        Q.   Sir, the joint operation cannot be if it's the case of

 5     resubordination.  We have to agree about one thing.  I hope that you will

 6     agree with me that when members of the police are resubordinated to the

 7     army, they lose, first, their status of authorised officials; and,

 8     secondly, they gain the same rights and duties as any other military

 9     conscript.

10             Would you agree with that?

11        A.   I would ask you to show me references that that is the case,

12     because I have not seen that that is the case.

13        Q.   Sir, when I show you regulations, you tell me that are you not an

14     expert for legal issues.

15             MS. KORNER:  Sorry, he has been asked -- either Mr. Zecevic shows

16     him or he doesn't.  He has been asked by the witness to show them.  He

17     can't make comments like that.

18             MR. ZECEVIC:

19        Q.   [Interpretation] Sir, if I were to show you relevant legislation

20     on which I base this particular claim of mine, would it help?

21        A.   Yes, it would, sir.

22        Q.   All right.  We are going to prepare this, and I'm going to hand

23     it over to you.

24             Sir, if the commander, Slavko Lisica, ordered, first, to form a

25     mixed battalion; then he, de facto, brought the members of the military

Page 18995

 1     and the members of the police into one unit, he appointed the commander

 2     of that unit, he gave them a task, and he also determined the place and

 3     the time of the attack, and now you tell me that this is a joint

 4     operation.  And I put it to you that in this particular case, the police

 5     has been resubordinated to the army and there is no joint operation.

 6     This is a military unit carrying out tasks defined by the commander of

 7     the tactical group.

 8        A.   It's a joint operation in that there's a civilian and police

 9     component.  That's what I mean by joint operation.  But I agree with you

10     that at face value this document, Colonel Lisica clearly believes he has

11     the authority to issue an order in order to place police under his

12     command, and he issues an instruction in that respect.  And I accept that

13     that seems to be at face value what this document says.  The background

14     to the operation, why that happened, any agreements that may have come or

15     his belief about why he could do that is something I can't comment.  But

16     at face value, this document does appear to say that, yes, sir.

17        Q.   Sir, thank you for your answer.

18             Now, a general question.  So let us disregard this particular

19     example.  When a member of the police is resubordinated to a military

20     commander, and you told us that this is possible to happen in the

21     British Army as well, although in exceptional cases.  Then, do those

22     members of the police remain members of the police, or do they become

23     members of the military from that moment on, the moment of

24     resubordination?

25        A.   They remain members of the police who happen to be -- but

Page 18996

 1     conducting tasks with the military and placed under their command, in

 2     that exceptional circumstance.  But they remain a member of the police

 3     force.

 4        Q.   You really surprise me with this answer.  If a member of the

 5     police is resubordinated to the army, then he cannot be member of the

 6     police anymore.  Because, from that moment on, his superior officer from

 7     the police cannot command him.  He is from that point on commanded by a

 8     military officer.  That's the whole essence of the concept of

 9     resubordination, isn't it?

10        A.   But it doesn't follow that just because for a particular or

11     exceptional operation a police -- policeman or a police unit is placed

12     under a military command that they lose or suddenly become, in essence,

13     members of the army or that they lose their position within the police

14     force.  In exceptional circumstances what normally would happen is once

15     the operation is finished they go back to doing what they normally do as

16     policemen.  They don't suddenly chop and change.  In my experience, when

17     policemen are subordinated in exceptional circumstances they don't

18     suddenly become in essence soldiers and lose or change in an instant only

19     to change back later.  They remain within the police.  And that would

20     seem to be --

21        Q.   Mr. Brown, please focus on my question.  I said during the time

22     of resubordination, whether it's one day or three months or two years,

23     doesn't matter, but during the resubordination to the military command.

24     Now you're telling me that this person in British Army remains a

25     policeman regardless of the fact that he had been resubordinated to the

Page 18997

 1     military and that he receives his orders from the military.  Is that what

 2     you're telling me?

 3        A.   In my experience, yes, absolutely.

 4        Q.   All right.  Then can you explain to me whether this member of the

 5     military who is actually a policeman resubordinated to the British Army

 6     for a particular operation, if he sees a case of theft that occurred

 7     during this operation, does it mean that he still has duties and

 8     obligations as a member of the police and then he has to pursue that

 9     thief and arrest him or he has to stay in his formation and wait for

10     orders to -- for orders being issued by the military commander, the

11     commander to whom he had been resubordinated.

12             What is he to do in this situation?

13        A.   I would expect that he has obligations as a policeman and he

14     presumably has obligations within any chain of command within the

15     military.

16        Q.   But, Mr. Brown, these two things are mutually exclusive.  The

17     military commander tells him, Stand here and guard this, say, passage;

18     and if somebody comes along shoot him.  And, at the same time, his duty

19     as a policeman is to go and arrest a perpetrator of a criminal offence.

20     So he has to do either one or the other.

21             What is a British policeman resubordinated to the military

22     command going to do, one or the other?  He cannot do both.  You have to

23     give me your answer.  What is your opinion?  What is this person going to

24     do?

25        A.   Well, I'm not really quite clear on the question, I have to say.

Page 18998

 1     To be -- to be quite honest.

 2        Q.   I think that I haven't added anything to my question that I asked

 3     you before and you gave the answer to that question, but you didn't give

 4     a proper answer.  I asked you one or the other, and you told me both.

 5             Does that mean that you don't have an opinion on this issue,

 6     or -- or you don't know the answer?

 7        A.   I'm not quite sure I understand your question.  All I can say is

 8     that -- that normally in my experience when police officers are

 9     subordinated to the military, there is a planning process under which

10     the -- that subordination occurs with the limitations or expanse of that

11     subordination.  But a policeman who is subordinated for a particular task

12     in the military, to my knowledge, remains a policeman, operates under

13     his -- his -- his regulations, and would be briefed up and made aware of

14     the regulations he was -- he was operating whilst he was attached to the

15     military.  But he doesn't lose his status as a policeman.  That's, from

16     my experience, what happens.  And that goes with -- with other

17     subordinations.  There's an -- there is invariably some agreement prior

18     to the subordination about the limits or expanses of that subordination.

19     Some of those can be simple issues of logistics, some of those can be

20     issues of discipline.  But, in my experience, when police are working

21     under the military, if that is the case, they don't suddenly, in essence

22     just become soldiers for that period, subject to army law, and able to be

23     tasked exclusively by commanders and to operate under commanders.  They

24     remain as police officers.  And I would imagine -- I'm not an expert on

25     the British police, but they have obligations to uphold law and protect

Page 18999

 1     citizens and the usual tasks.

 2        Q.   [No interpretation] [Overlapping speakers] ...

 3        A.   If your point, sir, is that when a policeman is subordinated to

 4     the military to all intents and purpose they become a soldier, full stop,

 5     I would not agree with that.

 6        Q.   [In English] okay, fair enough.

 7             [Interpretation] I accept that you're unwilling to agree.

 8             MS. KORNER:  I'm sorry, I object to the comments like this.

 9             MR. ZECEVIC:  [Interpretation] I cannot see anything wrong with

10     my comment.  I just said that the witness was unwilling to agree with me.

11             MS. KORNER:  I'm sorry but it's a comment, and I repeat for about

12     the third time:  Cross-examination is asking questions of the witness,

13     not making comments.  Comments are final address.

14             JUDGE HALL:  Let's move on, shall we?

15             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] I seek to tender this document into

16     evidence.

17             JUDGE HALL:  Admitted and marked.

18             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit 1D410, Your Honours.

19             MR. ZECEVIC:  [Interpretation]

20        Q.   Sir, during your examination-in-chief, you commented on document

21     P1668 which is tab 56 of the Prosecution and your footnote is 329, and

22     355 is the other footnote.  You commented on this letter written by the

23     commander, corps commander General Talic, and it is about the engagement

24     of the unit in late November at the Posavina front.  Do you remember

25     that?

Page 19000

 1        A.   Yes, I do, sir, yes.

 2        Q.   And you characterised it as a request, submitted by Talic with

 3     which I disagree, since the request is about the acceleration of the

 4     preparation and not about the engagement of police units.

 5             Do you agree with me?

 6        A.   Well, I -- I do think it's a request or he is asking him to -- to

 7     prepare and organise the police units of at least two battalions in

 8     accordance with an expressed -- an expressed need.  Presumably there's

 9     been some prior discussion or expression of this need.

10        Q.   Sir, this document makes no mention of any previous consultation

11     or agreement.  It seems that no one document that I showed you and --

12     but -- and which was explicit about resubordination where you did not

13     suggest that there must have been some sort of agreement or something of

14     that kind although no indication of that was found in any of those

15     documents.

16             Do you agree with me?

17        A.   Well, I think paragraph 1 says in accordance with the expressed

18     needs, General Talic has clearly expressed a requirement or a need have

19     this additional support.  It doesn't say whether that was in a meeting,

20     in an instruction, in a discussion, but I would take it from the first

21     line that General Talic has --

22        Q.   [In English] Has a need.

23        A.   -- has expressed a need to have this additional support.

24        Q.   [Interpretation] I agree with that.

25             After that document, on the following day we saw 2D119 which is

Page 19001

 1     an order by Mr. Zupljanin about raising men for the unit to be sent to

 2     the front which is tab -- tab 57, but there's no reason to display that

 3     document now.

 4             In essence, sir, when those two battalions, police battalions,

 5     arrived on the 23rd or 24th of November in Banja Luka, because they had

 6     come from the entire territory of the Krajina, because we're speaking

 7     about a large number of police officers, two battalions after all, at

 8     that moment, a police brigade was established.  General Talic greeted

 9     them and appointed the commander of that brigade.  We even saw a video

10     here.  I don't know if you had the chance to see the video recording of

11     that parade when the brigade commander, Mr. Peulic was appointed.  Do you

12     know about that?

13        A.   I haven't seen that video, sir, no.

14        Q.   But you do know that General Talic appointed the commander of

15     that brigade and that commander was Colonel Peulic.

16        A.   I wasn't aware of that, sir.  The document, on 22nd November,

17     doesn't indicate that Peulic is the commander.

18        Q.   Let me show you the document.

19             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] 2D118, which is tab 5 of the

20     Zupljanin Defence.  Mr. Krgovic kindly let me have it.

21        Q.   I didn't expect that you wouldn't know that, so I didn't prepare

22     for this.  I apologise.  But here's the document.  There is obviously a

23     mistake with the dates because the year is 1993, which we can tell from

24     the incoming mail stamp, so the 2nd of January 1992 is not the correct

25     date.

Page 19002

 1             And here, the commander of the 1st Krajina Corps, Momir Talic,

 2     orders that Colonel Dragoslav Djurkic be the commander of the police

 3     brigade; whereas, the previous commander, Bosko Peulic is returned to his

 4     previous duties.  The handover of duties shall be completed no later than

 5     4 January 1993.

 6             Have you seen this document before.

 7        A.   No, I haven't.

 8        Q.   You didn't know then that the police brigade in the Bosnian

 9     theatre was commanded by Bosko Peulic until another officer was appointed

10     commander of that brigade.

11        A.   I wasn't aware of that sir.  I know that the initial

12     establishment in November, end of November, had a different commander.

13     Whether there was a decision that, as this brigade was going to be going

14     into the corridor, a military officer might be more beneficial and

15     Colonel Peulic was placed in that position, I don't know.  But I wasn't

16     aware that Colonel Peulic was the commander of this or appointed as the

17     commander of this, nor was I aware of what agreements may have been

18     entered into in order for that to occur.

19        Q.   I'm not sure I understand what you say -- what you mean when you

20     say that initially it had a different commander.  When it was lined up

21     for the first time in Banja Luka, the police brigade I mean, when it was

22     established, then General Talic arrived and we saw the video, that's a

23     Prosecution Exhibit.  But I hope my learned friend will let me have it so

24     I can show it to you.  And General Talic appointed Bosko Peulic commander

25     of that brigade on that occasion?

Page 19003

 1             MS. KORNER:  If it's an exhibit.  If Mr. Zecevic wants to show it

 2     he can call it up.  I can't remember what the number is, but I'm sure his

 3     team can tell him.

 4             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I'm surprised that

 5     the gentleman who was an OTP expert has not seen the video, but we'll

 6     prepare it now and we can show it in a couple of minutes and so acquaint

 7     the expert with these facts.

 8             MS. KORNER:  Your Honours, again it's an improper remark, but as

 9     Mr. Zecevic knows that video was only obtained very, very recently

10     indeed, so it's not surprising that Mr. Brown, who has not been a member

11     of the OTP for some years now, has not seen the video.  If I had shown

12     him every piece of evidence that we had obtained in the last few years,

13     he would have been here for a week.

14             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] I apologise, I -- I meant no evil

15     and I really wasn't aware that the video was only subsequently ...

16                           [Trial Chamber confers]

17             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Zecevic, is it necessary to show the video.

18     The witness didn't know that Peulic was commanding the brigade but he

19     isn't challenging it as far as I know.

20             MR. ZECEVIC:  [Microphone not activated]

21             THE INTERPRETER:  Microphone, please.

22             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] I apologise.

23             Your Honours, it was not my intention to show the video or these

24     documents because I thought it was an undisputed fact.  However, the

25     witness --

Page 19004

 1             MS. KORNER:  It is undisputed.

 2             JUDGE DELVOIE:  I think it is, yes.  It is undisputed.

 3             MS. KORNER:  I'm just checking.  I mean, certainly there is no

 4     question it was Lieutenant-Colonel Peulic who commanded the brigade.

 5     What I need to check is whether that was the -- it was originally

 6     intended that he or somebody else should do it.  But certainly he was

 7     appointed.

 8             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] I am really am a bit confused.

 9             A short while ago the witness confirmed that according to his

10     knowledge the initial commander of that unit was another person and that

11     was my question to him.  I'll give you the reference.  I can refer to the

12     transcript.

13             Page 17, lines 6 and 7, the witness's answer was the following:

14     "I know that the initial establishment in November, end of November, had

15     a different commander."

16             THE WITNESS:  Well, from the establishment document from the CSB

17     on the 22nd November, Bosko Peulic is not annotated down as the

18     commander.  Now whether that was, you know, a decision after that,

19     Colonel Peulic should be -- maybe it was more skilled or -- should be in

20     there, or whether General Talic decided to appoint him.  I don't know.  I

21     take it very much at face value that Colonel Peulic was the commander.

22     I've not seen the video and so I don't contest that at all.  But the

23     document on the 22nd November outlining the -- which followed from that

24     document which is seen, outlining all the individuals and the structure

25     of that brigade has a Brane Pecanac as the commander.  There may well

Page 19005

 1     have been that what happened is there was a decision to change that.

 2     That's all I'm saying.

 3             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation]

 4        Q.   Mr. Brown, when police units are resubordinated, they are

 5     resubordinated in an organised manner.  In other words, the police

 6     officer is in charge of that unit.  At the moment of resubordination to

 7     the military he, as commander of the unit, and the whole unit are

 8     resubordinated to the military and become part of the military

 9     establishment, military structure.

10             Document 2D119 shows that the brigade command was appointed by

11     the MUP, but that doesn't mean a thing, because their commander is

12     appointed by the military because that unit is resubordinated to the

13     military and that unit is commanded by a military officer.  You know that

14     Bosko Peulic is a military officer rather than a police officer

15     correct -- am I right?

16        A.   Absolutely I know he was a military officer.  But my point is

17     that, and I have so say that I'm not an expert in the workings of the

18     police brigade in the corridor in November and onwards, but it would seem

19     that there was an express need by General Talic which necessitated him

20     making requests to have this battalion or brigade formed.  That was

21     accepted by the CSB, and what the CSB did was that they organised the

22     structure of that brigade as outlined in document D119 giving the whole

23     structure of that brigade and the command component and, at least at face

24     value from the document, appointing Brane Pecanac as the commander of the

25     brigade.

Page 19006

 1             Now what happened after that to make Colonel Peulic the commander

 2     of the brigade, I do not know, and I take it at face value that there was

 3     that change or that there was an appointment, but I don't know.  All I'm

 4     saying is that according to the document the CSB wrote, Colonel Peulic

 5     was not at least the initial commander or at least according to that --

 6     that individual document.  But as -- again, I'm not an expert on the

 7     police battalion structure.  [Overlapping speakers] ...

 8             MR. ZECEVIC:  [Overlapping speakers] ...

 9             MS. KORNER:  Sorry, can I interrupt because really I think it's

10     only fair to the witness.  The witness, having looked at the document,

11     it's 2D119, and I think it should be put up.

12             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I am not trying to

13     impeach document 2D119, but I do object to the way Ms. Korner interferes

14     with my examination of the witness.  The witness and I absolutely agree

15     on the contents of document 2D119.  There is no dispute there.  That's

16     why I haven't shown it to the witness.

17             By the way, the witness has it in front of him anyway.  But what

18     is in dispute is the issue of resubordination of this police brigade to

19     the military.  That is the crucial issue I'm discussing with the witness.

20        Q.   Sir, if General Talic appointed a military officer, a

21     lieutenant-colonel, Bosko Peulic, commander of this brigade, is this an

22     instance of resubordination of this brigade, to your mind then?

23     Resubordination to the military, that is.

24        A.   It could be.  But it could also be that the brigade lacked

25     certain skills and General Talic has offered Colonel Peulic up as the

Page 19007

 1     commander.  I don't doubt that if General Talic believes there's an

 2     exceptional need to have a police brigade for operations in the corridor

 3     that that brigade is to operate under his -- his corps.  But clearly

 4     there's been significant discussion, agreement, acceptance, consensus

 5     involving the Ministry of Interior, the Krajina Corps, the CSB for this

 6     brigade to be -- to be formed and dispatched to the corps.  When it's

 7     there, I don't doubt that it would have been subordinated to the corps

 8     for operations there.

 9        Q.   Sir, Mr. Brown, on page 21, line 18 you said that there's been

10     significant discussion, agreement, acceptance, consensus involving the

11     Ministry of the Interior.  We have seen two documents:  General Talic's

12     request, and Mr. Zupljanin's order, which issued in his capacity as CSB

13     chief.  These are the only two documents you cite in your report

14     concerning this matter.  And, on the basis of these documents, you were

15     unable to determine whether there was discussion, agreement, and so on.

16     You may be able to assume that there was something of that kind, but I'm

17     sure you cannot claim it for certain.

18        A.   Well, of course, I wasn't there, so I can't say for certain.  But

19     the document -- document says in accordance with an order from the

20     minister of the interior on the basis of dispatch from the 1st Krajina

21     Corps with the consent of the minister of the interior and clearly this

22     is a CSB Banja Luka instruction, so I would -- I would assume that --

23     that that constitutes some kind of process of agreement and consent that

24     this -- and this occurs very quickly.  The request is quite -- at least

25     General Talic's instruction, I don't know what went on prior to that, but

Page 19008

 1     this seems to have happened quite swiftly, and we're talking about a

 2     large unit, and we're talking about units coming from all over the

 3     Krajina, and the brigade was formed.  And was dispatched.

 4             Now when I put all that together, I can only assume that this

 5     sort of co-ordination was fairly significant and the dispatch of this

 6     brigade was quite significant.  So I may be wrong.  I wasn't there.  I

 7     don't know what meetings were there, but my feeling is that with that

 8     background that that type of consent was -- was agreed and accepted.

 9        Q.   Mr. Brown, you confirmed yesterday that you hadn't seen the

10     minister's orders.  When I showed you an order of the minister, and we

11     had -- we had to print them during the break for you to review these

12     documents for the first time, the minister's order dated 15 May was at

13     stake, and we're talking about November.  The minister's order is a legal

14     text.  That's why things go so fast, because under the law, that is the

15     procedure.  The police can be resubordinated to the military for the

16     execution of combat missions and that is why these things were done so

17     efficiently, because it's a legal obligation and it is set down by the

18     law.

19             Apart from all these matters you discussed with Ms. Korner, my

20     learned friend asked you during the examination-in-chief some questions

21     about discipline.  And then to her question you said that you had never

22     seen a document confirming the assumption that resubordinated MUP

23     officers can be held accountable before military disciplinary or

24     judiciary bodies.  Do you remember confirming that to the Prosecutor?

25        A.   I don't remember.  I take that that's what I said.  I -- I would

Page 19009

 1     accept that I haven't seen documents that -- to that fact.

 2        Q.   Very well.  In your report, sir, item 249, and footnote 354, you

 3     cite a document which I would like to show you.  It's 1D04-9050, tab 12.

 4             I hope it is not in dispute that you have seen this document

 5     earlier, sir.

 6             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] This is not the correct document in

 7     English.  1D04-9050.  The Serbian original is right but the English

 8     translation is wrong.  The tab number is 12.

 9             MS. KORNER:  That's 1D049054, tab 12. [Microphone not activated]

10             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] This is it.

11        Q.   Sir, you must have seen this document before, since it appears in

12     your footnote 354, right?

13        A.   Yes, I have seen it.  I remember it, sir.

14        Q.   Sir, this is a document of the 1st Krajina Corps.  It was not

15     signed by Major-General Momir Talic but by one of his assistants because

16     it says "for the commander?"

17             Do you agree?

18        A.   That's true, sir, yes.

19        Q.   And this is about police members abandoning their positions;

20     correct?

21        A.   It would appear to be, yes, sir.

22        Q.   And it says in paragraph 2:  "Immediately file criminal reports

23     for each individual and take other measures to inform the public,"

24     et cetera.

25             "Immediately file criminal reports for each individual ..."

Page 19010

 1             Is that not implementing disciplinary or penal measures against

 2     these members by the military?

 3        A.   I don't accept that that's what's happening.  I think what has

 4     happened is that the Krajina Corps has received this information from the

 5     Main Staff.  They're quoting it and sending it directly to the CSB and

 6     with the intention that the CSB file criminal reports presumably in

 7     relation to the list of men who are included on this report.

 8        Q.   Wait a minute, Mr. Brown.  This document was sent to the CSB

 9     Banja Luka to the command of the 1st Krajina Corps and the 43rd Motorised

10     Brigade.  Isn't that right?

11             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Ms. Korner, please be so kind as to

12     get up and say whatever is that you have to say.  Do not suggest anything

13     in other ways.

14        Q.   Sir, this document is written by the command of the Krajina

15     Corps.  They're writing from the forward command post, and the document

16     is being sent to the CSB of Banja Luka to the command of the 1st Krajina

17     Corps and the 43rd Motorised Brigade; isn't that right?

18        A.   It would say that on the document, sir, yes.

19        Q.   So on of basis of what did you conclude that this had been sent

20     to the CSB as an instruction for them to file criminal charges

21     immediately?  And in your view how is it that the 1st Krajina Corps

22     command can order the CSB Banja Luka to file criminal charges against

23     their members?

24        A.   My reading of this is that the forward command post at this time,

25     probably where General Talic was based, received some information from

Page 19011

 1     the Main Staff.  General Talic or whoever signed the document on his

 2     behalf sends a copy of that to the 1st Krajina Corps, presumably for the

 3     archive, because that is where the headquarters was based.  The 43rd

 4     brigade potentially, because maybe that was the unit that -- well, it

 5     comes from Prijedor, is related to the Prijedor area, and it sent it to

 6     the Banja Luka CSB.  And I think it's sending it to the Banja Luka CSB

 7     because it expects the Banja Luka CSB to immediately file criminal

 8     charges on the individuals who fled.

 9             General Talic hasn't sent this to the military courts or to --

10     to -- to the military disciplinary organs.  He sent it is to the CSB

11     because I think that's where he expects individuals to take action

12     against the policemen who fled the front line or whatever they've alleged

13     to have done.  Abandoned positions.

14        Q.   Sir, it is certain that you did -- do not expect the commander of

15     the 1st Krajina Corps to file criminal charges.  He is telling his own

16     subordinate units to do that; isn't that right?  General Talic would not

17     be signing criminal reports, would he?  I hope that is not what you are

18     trying to say?

19             MS. KORNER:  Your Honour, that is why I interrupted.  I accept

20     that the -- the criticism that I shouldn't have interrupted in the way I

21     did.

22             I do not know on what basis Mr. Zecevic is asserting that this is

23     not sent to the CSB for it to prosecute as Mr. Brown has said.  If he has

24     a reason for asserting it, I think that ought to be put.

25             MR. ZECEVIC:  All in due time, Ms. Korner.

Page 19012

 1        Q.   [Interpretation] Mr. Brown, please reply to my question.  I have

 2     put a question to you.

 3             Oh, the question was whether you expect General Talic to be

 4     signing criminal reports or do you expect General Talic to tell his

 5     subordinate units, or rather, instruct them to file criminal reports

 6     against members of the military who had abandoned their positions.

 7        A.   If your assertion is that General Talic is sending this to the

 8     Banja Luka CSB and by sending that document that implies the Banja Luka

 9     CSB is a subordinate unit to the corps, I would disagree with you.

10     General Talic, if he himself or his staff are made aware of criminal

11     charges of military figures in his command, I would expect him to

12     initiate a process to -- of -- of filing criminal charges through the

13     military judicial process.  But, as I say, I think this is a document

14     that is sent to the Banja Luka CSB in the expectation that they should

15     investigate what had happened to individuals, individual policemen, and

16     that -- that to me is what this document is about.

17        Q.   Sir, Mr. Brown, you will agree that it would be most logical for

18     military conscripts who abandoned their positions have their direct

19     superiors, the commanding officers of the units that they were in before

20     they had abandoned their positions would file criminal reports?  I'm

21     talking about military conscripts.  It should be done by their direct

22     commanding officers, not the corps commander, right?

23        A.   Well, I guess if the corps commander receives information, which,

24     in this case, has happened through the Main Staff it could be initiated

25     by the corps commander.  But if -- if conscripts from a battalion or a

Page 19013

 1     brigade fled, you would expect the battalion to -- to initiate the

 2     investigation process.

 3        Q.   Tell me something else.  If that were true, actually I don't want

 4     to speculate any further.

 5             Tell me just one thing.  It is a fact that as far as military

 6     conscripts are concerned, it is the military judicial that is in charge,

 7     right?  For as long as they're in the army.  Do we agree on that at

 8     least?

 9        A.   Yes, I believe that's the case.  And I believe that was the case

10     in the RS Law on the Army.

11        Q.   Thank you.  Now, have a look at what it says here in this

12     document.  "Attachment: List of military conscripts," that's what I'd

13     like to highlight, "reserve policemen who fled from their positions."

14             Mr. Brown, that is why I'm putting this to you, that

15     Commander Momir Talic is hereby ordering military units to file criminal

16     charges because he is acting the right way in accordance with the law.

17     He is treating reserve policemen who had been resubordinated to the

18     military as military conscripts.  There's 71 of them, and, therefore,

19     they have to be held accountable before military courts because, as

20     military conscripts, they are responsible, not as policemen.  Because

21     they abandoned a military unit.

22             Do you agree with me on that?

23        A.   No, I don't agree with you, sir.

24        Q.   Let's take things one at a time then.

25             What is it that you disagree with?  Do you disagree with me

Page 19014

 1     saying that they are military conscripts?  These reserve policemen.  Are

 2     they military conscripts or not?  Yes or no.

 3             [In English] It's a simple question, Mr. Brown.  Yes or no?

 4        A.   I don't know.  I don't know from the attachment whether they are

 5     policemen or whether they are conscripts, whether they're members of the

 6     43rd Brigade, soldiers, or whatever.  If all of them are policemen --

 7        Q.   [Interpretation] Sir, Mr. Brown, please, we are looking at a

 8     document, both you and I are looking at this document.  So far, you have

 9     been making the following assertion to me.  Since the heading of the

10     document says that members of the police had abandoned their positions,

11     you were saying that General Talic is writing to the CSB Banja Luka and

12     instructing them or suggesting to them that they should file criminal

13     charges against their members.

14             Now this is what I'm putting to that you, that that is not the

15     case.  That he is providing information to the CSB but that he is

16     instructing his own subordinate units, the 43rd Motorised Brigade, first

17     and foremost, to file criminal reports against these reserve policemen

18     who had abandoned positions at a moment when they were resubordinated to

19     the military.  At that point in time, they were military conscripts and

20     all of that is written in this document.  Sir --

21        A.   That is not my reading of the document, sir.  My reading of the

22     document, as I said before --

23        Q.   Very well.

24             JUDGE HALL:  Mr. Zecevic, it is the time that we would take a

25     break.  Could we resume this exercise in 20 minutes?

Page 19015

 1             MR. ZECEVIC:  Thank you.

 2                           [The witness stands down]

 3                           --- Recess taken at 10.26 a.m.

 4                           --- On resuming at 10.54 a.m.

 5             MS. KORNER:  Your Honours may I just raise the question of

 6     timing.

 7             I'm a little concerned that we may not even finish Mr. Brown

 8     tomorrow morning.  And, as you know, he is anxious to be able to leave

 9     tomorrow.  I was wondering, just in case we could possibly make

10     arrangements to maybe sit a little longer tomorrow.  I don't know whether

11     that affects Your Honours' abilities to --

12             JUDGE HALL:  Today you mean.

13             MS. KORNER:  Well, either today or tomorrow.

14                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

15             JUDGE HALL:  The Registry would -- we would see whether we can do

16     it tomorrow.  It would be --

17             MS. KORNER:  [Overlapping speakers] ...  I hope it won't be

18     necessary, Your Honours.  But as it -- and can I say this not a criticism

19     of Mr. Zecevic.  I understand why this is going on a little longer, but

20     it's just a question of having it available, if necessary.

21             JUDGE HALL:  Yes.  Sorry, do I understand that the witness would

22     be available into the afternoon tomorrow?

23             MS. KORNER:  I think so, Your Honour, yes.  I think his problem

24     is from tomorrow evening.

25             JUDGE HALL:  I see.  Very well.  Thanks.

Page 19016

 1                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

 2             JUDGE HALL:  So we will request the Registry to make

 3     arrangements, tentative, for a fourth session tomorrow to accommodate any

 4     possible spillover.  Thank you.

 5                           [The witness takes the stand]

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

 7             JUDGE HALL:  Yes, please.

 8             MR. ZECEVIC:  Thank you.

 9        Q.   [Interpretation] Mr. Brown, I think that you said towards the end

10     that did you not agree with the position that I presented in my last

11     question; namely, that these are reserve policemen who had fled from

12     their positions and that in this document the commander of the

13     1st Krajina Corps is treating them as military conscripts which is what

14     is written in the document itself.  I think that your answer to that

15     question was not fully recorded.

16        A.   Well, the document at the end says list of conscripts, reserve

17     policemen.  But I think I made my position clear that I think

18     General Talic believes that the Banja Luka CSB is to initiate proceedings

19     against these individuals.

20        Q.   Very well.  Let us now look at the next page.

21             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Mr. Zecevic, are we going to leave this document?

22             MR. ZECEVIC:  Oh, no, the second page of the document.

23             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Ah, right.  Thanks.  I have a question relating

24     to the document when you're finished.

25             MR. ZECEVIC:

Page 19017

 1        Q.   [Interpretation] Sir, this is a list of these military conscripts

 2     as Mr. -- as General Momir Talic says, who had abandoned their positions.

 3     And this very list says "list of soldiers."  I underline the word

 4     "soldiers," who wilfully abandoned their positions between 13th of

 5     September, 1992, and the 11th of October, 1992.  Obviously, the command

 6     of the 1st Krajina Corps considers them to be soldiers; and if they

 7     consider them to be soldiers, as you said to me a moment ago, in that

 8     case, as for taking disciplinary action again them, or bringing criminal

 9     charges against them, it is the military commands that are in charge of

10     that, and appropriate organs of the military judiciary, right?

11        A.   It says "soldiers" in the document.  But if these individuals

12     were soldiers, I would not have expected General Talic to send that to

13     the CSB.  There's no reference in this document to sending reports to the

14     military police battalion, to the military courts, to the investigative

15     military courts at all, and I stand by my position.  I don't know why

16     they've put "soldiers" on there, but it would seem to me that on face

17     value this document is going to the CSB because they expect the CSB to

18     initiate some kind of proceedings against them, or investigation, I

19     guess.

20        Q.   Sir, I think it's quite clear that they are reserve policemen we

21     saw that.  Are you challenging the fact that the people on this list are

22     reserve policemen?

23        A.   I don't know if they are reserve policemen.  I'm assuming they

24     are because that's what the title of the document is about, so I'm not

25     challenging that they're reserve policemen at all.

Page 19018

 1        Q.   All right.  Now, you claim that General Talic is mistakenly

 2     calling them military conscripts on the first page and calling them

 3     soldiers on this list.  Again, mistakenly.  And that although they are

 4     military conscripts or soldiers, he is sending this to the CSB and

 5     expecting them to bring criminal charges against them.  Is that your

 6     assertion?

 7        A.   My reading of this document is that these are reserve policemen

 8     who fled, the Main Staff has highlighted that, General Talic is sending

 9     this to the CSB in order for them to action it, and that as reserve

10     policemen they don't fall within the Law on the Army or service rules and

11     that's why he's sending them to the CSB.  I think I've stated that a few

12     times.

13        Q.   How do you explain the fact that he is calling them soldiers?

14        A.   I can't explain, whether it's an error whoever has made the list,

15     I don't know.

16        Q.   And at first he says military conscripts dash -- or, rather,

17     comma, reserve policemen.  Is that a mistake too, I assume?

18        A.   I can't say why they've put that, but the title of the document

19     relates to reserve policemen, and I'm assuming that this list is of

20     reserve policemen and the document is going to the CSB.

21        Q.   Sir, you keep forgetting that, on page 1 of this document, we see

22     that this document was sent to the command of the 43rd Motorised Brigade

23     and the command of the Krajina Corps.  I think that we've already dealt

24     with that?

25             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Zecevic, don't you think that this is as far

Page 19019

 1     as can you go with it.

 2             MR. ZECEVIC:  Yes, Your Honours.  I understand.  Thank you very

 3     much.

 4             Your Honour, just for the record, one of the exhibits in this

 5     case is P1566.  This the list of the -- the uncomplete list of the

 6     members of the reserve force of police in -- in Prijedor for

 7     September 1992, and I have identified during the break at least five of

 8     the persons which appear on the list in this document, this military

 9     document, which we are talking about.  And I can give the references.

10     Those are the numbers in this document which we are looking right now are

11     numbers 22, 30, 62, 66, 70, and they correspond to numbers in P1566, 83,

12     104, 115, 85, and 142.  And apparently, in addition, number 20, which

13     corresponds to number 50 in this -- in this case.

14             I'm notified that there are more, but I think this is sufficient.

15             JUDGE HARHOFF:  So, Mr. Zecevic, by this comparison, we are to

16     conclude that the -- at least some of the persons there on the first

17     lists we saw were, indeed, reserve police force members.  Is that the

18     conclusion that you are suggesting?

19             MR. ZECEVIC:  Your Honours, I don't -- I don't -- I don't -- I

20     don't challenge that all of them are reserve policemen.  What I'm saying

21     is that the moment when they were resubordinated to the army, they lose

22     their position as the police officers and became military conscripts, or

23     soldiers, as the document says.  That is the -- that this is the point.

24             Your Honours, can I have this document admitted?

25             JUDGE HALL:  Admitted and marked.

Page 19020

 1             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, therefore, 1D04-9050 will become

 2     Exhibit 1D411.

 3             MR. ZECEVIC:  Thank you.

 4             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Mr. Zecevic.

 5             MR. ZECEVIC:  Yes.

 6             JUDGE HARHOFF:  I have a question for you and a question for the

 7     witness.

 8             My question to you is if you are in possession of any evidence

 9     that any of the persons, the 71 persons on the first list, were ever

10     prosecuted; and, if they were, by which authority?

11             MR. ZECEVIC:  Well, not at this point, Your Honour, but I will

12     gladly endeavour to find the documents in that -- in -- in relation to

13     that, yes.  If I can, of course.

14             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Of course, that goes without saying.  But, of

15     course, it would be interesting to see who actually took action on this,

16     whether it would be the civilian prosecutor or the military prosecutor.

17             MR. ZECEVIC:  I understand.  I understand.

18             JUDGE HARHOFF:  My question to the witness is this.  What do you

19     make of the fact that in the letter signed by someone in -- on behalf of

20     General Talic, first of all, what do you make of the fact that this was

21     brought to the level of Talic for him to sign the letter?  Obviously

22     someone else signed it on his behalf but it seem to me that under normal

23     circumstances a -- an abandonment from the front line would be dealt with

24     by the 43rd Corps itself.

25             So my question is what are you able to infer from the fact that

Page 19021

 1     this was now brought to the level of the Main Staff of the Krajina Corps;

 2     secondly, what do you make of the fact that the Banja Luka CSB is

 3     indicated as the primary addressee of this letter?

 4             Is there any hierarchy to be inferred from the way in which the

 5     letter was drafted among the two addressees?

 6             THE WITNESS:  Possibly answering your first question, sir.

 7             It's clear that the flow of information has come from the

 8     Main Staff to the corps.  That's -- I think it's not come from below to

 9     Talic.  How the Main Staff got wind of that or under what process I'm not

10     sure, but it seems that General Talic's headquarters has received the

11     information so, in a way, I'm not surprised that General Talic is -- or

12     him or his staff are dealing with it.  That's one issue.  And second, I

13     think abandonment of a position is an important thing for a commander to

14     know, irrespective of what level.  I would, you know, commanders don't

15     like to see that because it weakens their operations, their units.  So in

16     a way I don't see that in any surprising.

17             In relation to the hierarchy, I can't say for sure but I would

18     suspect that the CSB are number one because they are the ones who have to

19     action it.  I think the second distribution to the Krajina Corps

20     headquarters is probably for the archive.  I don't think the forward --

21     well, the forward command post did have an archive but it was a

22     relatively small headquarters deployed to the corridor area to better

23     manage the operations there.  So I think the second distribution is

24     probably for an archival purpose, and the 43rd Brigade may well have just

25     been a unit that the soldiers abandoned and so it may be that

Page 19022

 1     General Talic is simply saying we're aware of this issue.

 2             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Thank you for this answer.

 3             What you are suggesting, if I understand you correctly, is that

 4     the Banja Luka CSB is really the primary addressee and then the 43rd

 5     Motorised Brigade is copied for their information.  Is that a correct

 6     understanding of what are you suggesting?

 7             THE WITNESS:  Yes.  Now I'm not sure where the Prijedor unit was,

 8     whether they actually abandoned from Prijedor or whether they're

 9     informing them because the 43rd brigade invariably covered Prijedor from

10     its garrison.  Well, that is my position, sir.

11             JUDGE HALL:  If that is your suggestion, then my question is, if

12     this letter were to be sent to the 43rd Motorised Brigade for their

13     information, copied for their information, cc, however you want to put

14     it, would that appear like this, or would -- would you not have expected

15     that the authority to which this letter is sent for information would

16     appear at the bottom of the page, normally?  It would say cc 1st Krajina

17     Corps, 43rd Brigade.

18             THE WITNESS:  The corps didn't seem to use that all the time,

19     sir.  I've seen instructions both with the distribution where it is here,

20     and I've seen distributions in a long list at the bottom of the document.

21     I'm not sure I can say one way or the other whether I would expect to see

22     it on a document like this.

23             JUDGE HARHOFF:  So your testimony is that it does occur

24     frequently like this?

25             THE WITNESS:  I've seen documents like this, yes, sir.  It tends

Page 19023

 1     to be these smaller instructions, orders, information, where it's maybe

 2     one or two addressees get placed at the front.  If it's a very large

 3     combat report that's going to every unit of the corps, it is often -- the

 4     distribution is often at the back of the document.  But I've seen both.

 5             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Thank you.

 6             MR. ZECEVIC:

 7        Q.   [Interpretation] One question in relation to the question put by

 8     His Honour.

 9             Sir, you remember that yesterday we discussed document 1D368 that

10     is your footnote 616.  Tab 44.  It has to do with guide-lines of the

11     military prosecutor's office attached to the Main Staff of the army for

12     setting the criteria for criminal prosecution.

13             Do you remember that we commented on that document yesterday?

14        A.   Yes, sir.

15        Q.   Now can we have it on the screens.  It's page 11, I think, or

16     maybe 20.  It 0760348.  And at the beginning of the page is item 2.  In

17     the document itself, it's page 9.  Yes, that's the page.  They just tell

18     me now that it's page 19.  And in English, page 5.

19             Sir, here, in item 2, it says:  "The criminal offence of wilfully

20     absenting one's self-from one's post and desertion from the armed

21     forces - Article 217 of the Criminal Code."

22             This relates to the topic we've just discussed, wilfully leaving

23     the post -- I don't want to go into details.  It's -- it has to do with

24     the persons who took part that combat.  Do you agree?

25        A.   I would imagine it covers combat as well.  It may be wilfully

Page 19024

 1     abandoning your post in a way regarding a barracks or doing another

 2     military activity, but, yes, I think it is abandonment of a military

 3     position.

 4        Q.   All right.  You quoted this document in your report, footnote

 5     616, so I think it isn't in dispute that this document envisages criminal

 6     offences.  Those criminal offences which, in the view of the highest

 7     military prosecutor in the Army of Republika Srpska, the one attached to

 8     the Main Staff, would fall within the jurisdiction of the military

 9     judiciary.  Isn't that so?

10        A.   That's correct, yes.

11        Q.   Thank you.

12        A.   For military personnel, and military personnel are defined in the

13     service regulations as being members of the army, cadets, active and

14     reserve army members, I think.  I'm not a legal expert.

15        Q.   Absolutely; I agree with you.

16             I have just a few more questions for you.  I want to clarify some

17     things in relation to some documents.

18             Sir, in your report, in footnote 333A, that's the first footnote

19     under the number 333, and you quote 1D04-9039, which is an order by the

20     5th Corps command dated 18th February 1992.

21             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Tab number 9.  I'm sorry.

22        Q.   It's one of the documents that was copied for you, I assume.

23             Do you see the document?

24        A.   I do, sir, yes.

25        Q.   Under (a), it says that:

Page 19025

 1             "Temporary check-points of the VP and the police shall be

 2     established to carry out thorough inspections of persons and vehicles

 3     entering and leaving and prevent any unauthorised circumstances and

 4     transport of military equipment" and other things.  You can see that?

 5             I think that you used that in your report in order to illustrate

 6     some things that you were saying about the check-points.

 7        A.   Yes.  I think I would have to read my report again, but I think

 8     it was a document referring to joint police/military check-points.  In

 9     this case, in Western Slavonia, I think.

10        Q.   Sir, are you aware that in 1991, the MUP of the Socialist

11     Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina carried out an action under the

12     code-name of check-point 91 throughout the territory of

13     Bosnia-Herzegovina and in that action they acted together with the

14     members of the army, JNA at the time, and the members of the federal SUP,

15     and they controlled entry and exit motor vehicles, transportation of

16     military equipment and so on?

17        A.   I'm not aware of that operation, sir.

18        Q.   All right.

19             MS. KORNER:  I'm so sorry, Your Honour.  Could we have a date for

20     this operation.

21             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Check-point 91.

22             MS. KORNER:  Yes, sorry.  I mean, when in 1991.

23             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] It was throughout 1991.  We heard

24     testimony about it in this case.

25             I seek to have this document admitted, if there is no objection.

Page 19026

 1             JUDGE HALL:  Admitted and marked.

 2             THE REGISTRAR:  Exhibit 1D412, Your Honours.

 3             MR. ZECEVIC:

 4        Q.   [Interpretation] Sir, now that we are talking about check-points,

 5     let us touch upon another issue.  1D04-9045.  It is also a document that

 6     you used in your report, the same footnote, 333, but C.  Tab number 10.

 7             It is an order by the command of the 5th Corps dated 9th of May,

 8     1992.  Are you familiar with this document?  It is mentioned in your

 9     report.

10        A.   Yes.  I'd have to read it again.  Unfortunately, there's a rather

11     large number of footnotes in my -- my document.

12        Q.   Go ahead.

13        A.   Could I see the second page, sir?

14             MR. ZECEVIC:  Can he have the second page, please.

15             THE WITNESS:  Yes, I've read it now, sir.

16             MR. ZECEVIC:

17        Q.   [Interpretation] All right.  Can we have page one again.

18             This is an order by the command of the 5th Corps signed by the

19     commander Momir Talic.  It was still called the 5th Corps at that time,

20     and after that it was called the 1st Krajina Corps.  It relates to

21     movements of civilian vehicles in the zone of responsibility, and this

22     order comes from the archive of the command.  And it says, third

23     paragraph:

24             "Military police organs and mixed forces of military police and

25     the MUP are controlling and regulating traffic at junctions and

Page 19027

 1     check-points."

 2             And that pertains to the zone of responsibility of the 5th Corps.

 3             You also spoke about this, about the fact that the members of the

 4     MUP of the Serbian Republic of Krajina took part in some combat

 5     operations together with the 1st Corps.

 6        A.   Yes, I think I was referring to MUP Krajina police in the

 7     corridor a lot later than this.  Here they're referring to, I'm assuming

 8     because the corps still had a component in Western Slavonia, they're

 9     referring to MUP and military police in the Western Slavonia or Krajina

10     area that the corps deployed.  So the references to the MUP of the

11     SR Krajina but, yes, I talked in a different context about the MUP

12     Krajina being involved in combat operations in the corridor later in

13     1992.  I'm not aware of what operations may have been conducted by the

14     corps and MUP Krajina in Krajina in 1991 and early 1992.

15        Q.   Sir, this is a document dated the 9th of May, and in the very

16     first very sentence, it says:

17             "In the zone of responsibility of the 5th Corps."

18             It doesn't say north from Sava river, as we found in some other

19     cases, it pertains to the whole zone of responsibility of the 5th Corps.

20     And then in the third paragraph it says:

21             "Controlling and regulating shall be carried out by military

22     police organs and mixed forces of military police and the police of the

23     Serbian Republic of Krajina."

24             Do you agree with that?  There is no specific instruction that

25     this should be in force only in that part of the zone of responsibility

Page 19028

 1     of the 5th Corps which is in the territory of Croatia.  This pertains to

 2     the whole zone of responsibility of the 5th Corps.  Isn't that so?

 3     That's what you can conclude from this document.

 4        A.   Well, there is an ambiguity but it does have a wide distribution

 5     so it may well be -- I mean, the focus seems to be a problem in -- in --

 6     in the Krajina area.  He is not -- he doesn't, I don't think I would have

 7     to check again, he doesn't mention the MUP in Bosnia.  But he does

 8     mention the MUP in Krajina.  But the order does say "zone of

 9     responsibility," and it is a wide distribution, so he may be talking

10     about all his units in the corps.

11        Q.   All right.  Now, to be absolutely clear, the police of the

12     Serbian Republic of Krajina has absolutely nothing to do with the MUP of

13     Republika Srpska.  Isn't that so?

14        A.   I don't know.  It's not an area, a relationship between the two

15     is -- is not -- is not one I know well.  But I am aware that Mr. Martic

16     and, you know, was present in many meetings in 1992, but it's not an area

17     of my expertise that I'm aware, in terms of the relationship between the

18     two police organisations.

19        Q.   So let us clarify this.  The police of the Serbian Republic of

20     Krajina is the police that comes from a part of the Republic of Croatia

21     and which was headed by Mr. Martic.  Isn't that so?  That's the police of

22     the Serbian Republic of Krajina.

23        A.   Yes, I believe that's the case.

24        Q.   Sir, since they were members of the police, they had the police

25     uniforms.  Do you know that?

Page 19029

 1        A.   I -- I would assume so.  But, again, I can only say that I'm not

 2     an expert on the MUP of the SRK.

 3        Q.   All right.

 4             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] I seek to have this document

 5     admitted.

 6             JUDGE HALL:  Admitted and marked.

 7             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit 1D413, Your Honours.

 8             MR. ZECEVIC:

 9        Q.   [Interpretation] Sir, another document related to the same topic.

10     It's 65 ter 10219.  Your footnote 352.  And tab 11.

11             This is a memo from the command of the 1st Krajina Corps dated

12     the 10th of June addressed to the MUP of the Republika Srpska Krajina.

13     You have obviously seen that document before because it forms a part of

14     your report.  And in it, the command of the 1st Krajina Corps refers to a

15     cable of the 8th of June, in which the MUP of the Serbian Krajina informs

16     them that they had formed the volunteers unit and sent to the complement

17     of the 1st Krajina Corps, and now Mr. Talic tells them that they will

18     receive the unit on the 10th June at 1500 hours at the Manjaca training

19     ground.  Do you agree with that?

20        A.   Yes, sir.

21        Q.   So this means that within the 1st Krajina Corps there was at

22     least one unit of the MUP of the Republic of Serbian Krajina, at least

23     from the 10th of June 1992 onwards.

24        A.   Yes.  I -- I assume that MUP Krajina passed some instructions to

25     the Main Staff saying, We have some volunteers that would be willing to

Page 19030

 1     come to Bosnia, and that was passed to the corps.  And the corps said

 2     We're happy to have you, and you will be escorted here, and you can have

 3     some training at Manjaca camp.

 4        Q.   But, sir, let us be very precise.  It doesn't say here, We have

 5     some volunteers.  They say, We have formed a volunteers unit and are

 6     sending it into your complement, the complement of the 1st Krajina Corps.

 7     That's what is says here?

 8        A.   Yes, I suspect they offered that unit up and it's been agreed and

 9     accepted.

10        Q.   So let us now return to the issue of the resubordination.  The

11     MUP of the Serbian Republic of Krajina forms a volunteers unit and sends

12     it to the 1st Krajina Corps, saying, We are sending these volunteers unit

13     into your complement.  So we assume that those people wear police

14     uniforms and they are members of the MUP of the Republic of Serbian

15     Krajina.  And now, on the 10th of June, the 1st Krajina Corps accepts

16     this unit, and they say that they are going to take it and escort it and

17     deploy it into the -- in the planned sector, so you would agree that now

18     this unit becomes a part of the 1st Krajina Corps, a military formation?

19        A.   Well, the issue of uniforms I can't comment on, whether they were

20     given combat uniforms by the corps I would imagine they were.  I don't

21     know from this document what any agreements would be in relation to the

22     use of that volunteer unit.  It may well have been that this is similar

23     to one of the paramilitary instructions which discusses, you know, having

24     volunteers integrated into the army, but clearly this volunteer unit is

25     placed in the corps as a unit of the corps.  Whether they were dispersed,

Page 19031

 1     whether they were kept as a volunteer formation, I can't say.  But it's

 2     clear that the MUP RSK have offered this formation up, it's been agreed

 3     and accepted by the Main Staff, and they've been -- or they are to be

 4     integrated into the 1st Krajina Corps.  How that unit was used, what that

 5     agreement was, what happened to the individuals in it, whether they

 6     stayed as a formed unit or -- I can't say.  But I accept your assumption

 7     that these units are to be made available and placed in the 1st Krajina

 8     Corps.

 9        Q.   Sir, those people, although they are policemen of the Serbian

10     Republic of Krajina, when they were part of the 1st Krajina Corps, they

11     became soldiers of the 1st Krajina Corps; right?

12        A.   They most probably did.  I can't say for sure because I don't

13     what agreements were there, but they may -- most probably were volunteers

14     who were happy to come and fight presumably --

15        Q.   All right.

16        A.   -- in Bosnia.

17        Q.   Thank you.

18             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Can we admit this document as well?

19             JUDGE HALL:  Does it have to be separately admitted?  It's a

20     footnote to the report.

21             MS. KORNER:  Yes.  I don't think it's on our 65 ter list, though,

22     and your order was we could only admit documents which were on our 65

23     ter.

24             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you, Ms. Korner.

25             Yes, admitted and marked.

Page 19032

 1             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit 1D414, Your Honours.

 2             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Mr. Zecevic, I'm -- just in order to be clear

 3     about the significance of this last document that we admitted into

 4     evidence, because I --

 5             MR. ZECEVIC:  Well, if I may --

 6             JUDGE HARHOFF:  I was unsure about what it was you really wanted

 7     to prove here.

 8             Is it the Defence position that these volunteers were

 9     resubordinated, or -- or what?

10             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Absolutely.  Absolutely,

11     Your Honour.

12             This is a police unit which was sent from the territory of

13     another country.  It has nothing do with Republika Srpska.  So the MUP of

14     this other country offered to the 1st Krajina Corps their own unit,

15     police unit, which would arrive there as volunteers.  They came as

16     volunteers and they were resubordinated to the 1st Krajina Corps and, in

17     that moment, they became soldiers.

18             I say that this is a general principle.  Every time when members

19     of the police, regardless of whether they are volunteers or regular

20     members, are resubordinated, they become soldiers.  They cannot be, at

21     the same time, both soldiers and policemen.  When they are

22     resubordinated, they are soldiers and they have all rights and duties as

23     any other soldier, and this is the position of the Defence.  We give this

24     as an example.

25             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Zecevic, if they come from another country,

Page 19033

 1     can they come as policemen?  I mean, they are not policemen in the RS

 2     they come as civilians in the RS and they are volunteers in -- in the RS

 3     army.

 4             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] I absolutely agree with you,

 5     Your Honour.  Absolutely agree.  The legal principle remains unchanged.

 6     It doesn't matter whether it's volunteers or whether it is a

 7     resubordination in order to carry out a certain combat task.  We've seen

 8     it defined in regulations, and we are certainly going to explain that to

 9     the Chamber in more detail.

10             And I also think that it is important to bear in mind that there

11     is also such a thing as a volunteer unit wearing police uniforms, a unit

12     that carries out combat activities in the territory of Republika Srpska,

13     at least from the 10th of June 1992 and which has absolutely nothing to

14     do with any of the accused.

15             So that's the second aspect that I want to bring forward.  And

16     that's the reason why I seek to have it admitted.

17             MS. KORNER:  Your Honour --

18             JUDGE HARHOFF:  We have admitted the document, all right.  That's

19     not an issue.  But maybe there is some uncertainty about the exact

20     meaning of resubordination and we may return to that.

21             But, you see, my understanding of resubordination of police units

22     into the army was that according to some agreements between the MUP and

23     the army, certain police units would be on loan for a limited period of

24     time from the police to the army for the purpose of providing assistance

25     to the army during the combat operation.  And when that combat operation

Page 19034

 1     was brought to an end, the normal sequence of events would have been that

 2     the police unit would then return to its normal police functions within

 3     the MUP.  And that seems to me to be different from the situation where

 4     some persons may be policemen, decide to leave the police and become

 5     volunteers and sort of sign up as regular combatants and then be included

 6     in the army after some military training.

 7             But I -- I would be curious to learn what the -- the Defence

 8     position is, really.

 9             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, it's very simple.  I

10     agree with the Court that the issue of resubordination and the issue of

11     volunteers are two different issues.  They are separate.  A volunteer is

12     an individual who, by his own free will, places himself under the command

13     of a military unit, and it is fully regulated by the applicable laws.  It

14     is all in our law library.

15             The issue of resubordination, contrary to your understanding, is

16     not an issue about an agreement or an approval or anything like that.  It

17     is regulated by law.

18             Your Honour, the Supreme Commander is the president of the

19     Presidency.  He may order, as you have seen in the documents, he may

20     order a police unit to be resubordinated to the Sarajevo-Romanija Corps.

21     We have shown such a document yesterday in the courtroom.

22             The second in command below him, who can also give such an order,

23     is Ratko Mladic, the chief of the Main Staff.  The constitution clearly

24     says that the President of the Presidency as the Supreme Command can

25     delegate his authority to him.

Page 19035

 1             So this commander, Ratko Mladic, then issues a directive to army

 2     units, the corps in the territory of Republika Srpska, to carry out

 3     certain tasks, and then it is the corps which is authorised by law to

 4     resubordinate police units if there is a need to do so.  And that's what

 5     they do.

 6             And now comes the correct part of your understanding.  At the

 7     moment when they are resubordinated to the army, during the period that

 8     they are resubordinated for carrying out certain task they become members

 9     of the military, they enter the command structure of the military, and

10     they have no link with their domestic unit.  That is, the Ministry of the

11     Interior.  In such a moment when the military has no need for them

12     anymore, then they go back to their security station or the centre of

13     security services, and they continue to perform their tasks that they

14     normally perform as members of the police, which, in essence, they are.

15     And it goes on like that until the next moment, until the military has a

16     need to resubordinate them again and incorporate them into the military

17     again.

18             This is the position of the Defence.

19             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Yes, I understand as much.  And my reference to

20     an agreement was only meant to say that, of course, resubordination takes

21     place, according to the law.  We are perfectly aware of that.  But that

22     the normal sequence of events, when we have resubordination, is that

23     there is typically some sort of an understanding or agreement between the

24     police and the army commander in the local area.

25             But be that as it may, your answer seemed to confirm my

Page 19036

 1     understanding that there is a significant difference between

 2     resubordination of police forces, on the one hand, and the voluntary

 3     signing up as soldiers by individuals who may or may not have had

 4     previously employment with the MUP.  And if you remember my initial

 5     question about the document that we admitted as 1D414, my question to was

 6     whether you would be of the opinion that the voluntary assignment of

 7     individuals, whether in that -- whether in your understanding, that was a

 8     resubordination, and you said yes.  But now you're clarifying, and you're

 9     saying that there is a difference, indeed.

10             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I will try to explain

11     very briefly.

12             That is why I showed the first document dated 18 February 1992.

13     That document shows that MUP units of the Serbian Republic of Krajina

14     jointly manned some check-points with the military police.  It is our

15     position that, in that case, they resubordinated to the 5th Corps of the

16     JNA.

17             On the other hand, this, from June, is some interim situation,

18     because, Your Honours, these are not individuals who sign up as

19     volunteers.  It's an instance where the MUP of the Serbian Republic of

20     Krajina informs the Krajina Corps that they have established a unit they

21     are putting at their disposal; that is, a unit established by the MUP of

22     the Serbian Republic of Krajina.  So we're not talking about the free

23     will of every individual.  It's an existing unit.  And I suppose that

24     this unit, at that moment, is integrated into the 1st Krajina Corps as a

25     volunteer unit because, at that moment, it was a unit from outside the

Page 19037

 1     territory of the Republika Srpska.  The Republika Srpska is in existence

 2     and so is its army, and that is why this unit is being integrated as a

 3     volunteer unit.

 4             I don't know if I have been clear enough.

 5             So it's not a clear-cut case, but I do agree that volunteers are

 6     one thing and resubordination a different things altogether.

 7             I hope that I was able to be of assistance.

 8             MS. KORNER:  Your Honours, you invited Mr. Zecevic to make the

 9     speech and I understand the reason behind it.  But I do feel that I

10     should say two things at this stage.

11             Firstly, his assertions we would say are not borne out by the

12     evidence that you have heard so as far.  In particular, his assertions as

13     to what this document shows are inferences that he wants you to draw

14     which may or may not be correct from the terms of this document and which

15     he, himself, has no further information about, unless is he going to call

16     evidence later.

17             The third thing is this.  This is the sort of evidence that the

18     witness should be asked about.  Mr. Zecevic asserted earlier that the law

19     said that the moment there was resubordination, these police officers,

20     leaving aside volunteers from the RSK or whatever, became military

21     conscripts.  Mr. Brown invited Mr. Zecevic to show him the law which he

22     had in mind, and Mr. Zecevic said he would.

23             Your Honours, we repeat that invitation, and we also suggest that

24     the proper person to ask these questions about is Mr. Brown and not for

25     Mr. Zecevic to make what he hopes will be the case.

Page 19038

 1             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Ms. Korner, I think we would be failing in our

 2     duty if we didn't ensure that we would have understood correctly what the

 3     Defence position, as well as the Prosecution's position is, when we're in

 4     doubt.

 5             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, it is not my

 6     intention, nor do I have the time, to discuss legal matters with this

 7     witness who is a military expert.  I asked him the question several times

 8     over and he replied he wasn't a legal expert.

 9             I will give the references.  It's the Law on the -- on Internal

10     Affairs, the Law on the Army, the Law on All People's Defence, and all

11     accompanying regulations for which, I suppose, I would need a couple of

12     days to put them all to the witness and I don't have those days.  And

13     apart from that, the witness said himself he wasn't a legal expert.

14             So we will deal with these references and these matters when the

15     time comes.

16             MS. KORNER:  No, but I'm asking, leaving aside the witness, I'm

17     asking that we be provided because this assertion has now been made twice

18     in the space of two hours with the relevant articles of the relevant laws

19     that Mr. Zecevic asserts and has asserted to the Trial Chamber deal with

20     his proposition to the witness.

21             MR. ZECEVIC:  Your Honours, it goes without saying that I would

22     be making submissions on the subject, and I will cite all the relevant

23     laws which are, by the way, all stipulated in our law library.

24             May I continue with the witness, please.

25             JUDGE HALL:  Yes, please.

Page 19039

 1             MR. ZECEVIC:

 2        Q.   [Interpretation] Sir, we have briefly touched upon Manjaca based

 3     on this document.  In your report - please bear with me - you spoke about

 4     POW camps and collection centres.  You have touched upon these matters in

 5     your report.

 6        A.   I have, sir, yes.

 7        Q.   The document I want to show you is 1D04-9443.  That's tab 43.

 8     Your footnote is 911.

 9        A.   Is that the right footnote?

10        Q.   911.  I suppose you have seen this document before, because it's

11     as cited in one of your footnotes.  It's dated 13 September, 1991.  As

12     far as I can tell, this is an order about the establishment of this POW

13     camp, and these POWs are from the MUP and the ZNG of Croatia, and the

14     camp commander is appointed and the security of the camp is dealt with

15     and everything else that's necessary.  Do you agree with that?

16        A.   Yes.  Could I see the second page, sir?

17             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Could we please see the second

18     page.

19             THE WITNESS:  And the following page.  Is that possible?

20             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] The third page, please.

21             THE WITNESS:  Yes.

22             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation]

23        Q.   We see that at this time, Colonel Talic was a deputy commander,

24     and he signed this order, didn't he?

25        A.   Yes.  I believe that's the case.

Page 19040

 1        Q.   So from this order, we can conclude that the POW camp at Manjaca

 2     was established in September 1991; right?

 3        A.   That's correct, yes.  It was initially established for the

 4     operations that were ongoing in Western Slavonia, and I'm assuming that

 5     the reference on the first page is to ZNG or Croatian prisoners that

 6     the -- and maybe MUP prisoners that they had taken in operations there.

 7     But initially the camp was established in that -- in that period.

 8        Q.   All right.  And as we see, Lieutenant-Colonel

 9     Stanko Baltic from the command of the 5th Corps of the JNA is appointed

10     camp commander.

11        A.   That's correct, sir, yes.

12             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Could we now please see --

13             THE INTERPRETER:  Interpreter's correction:  I seek to tender

14     this document.

15             JUDGE HALL:  Admitted and marked.

16             THE REGISTRAR:  Exhibit 1D415, Your Honours.

17             MR. ZECEVIC:

18        Q.   [Interpretation] The following document is 1D04-9450, tab 50, and

19     your footnote is 912.  It's a document from January 1992.

20             This is an order.  You have seen this document too, because it's

21     cited in one of your footnotes.  It's an order about the -- setting up of

22     a collection camp for prisoners of war in the facilities of the former

23     penal correction facility at Stara Gradiska.  It's dated 7 January, 1992,

24     and signed by Lieutenant-General Vladimir Vukovic, the then-commander,

25     which we see on the following page.  Do you agree with that?

Page 19041

 1        A.   Yes, I believe that was a prison in Stara Gradiska and that they

 2     also used that, initially at least, for the operations that they were

 3     conducting in Western Slavonia.

 4        Q.   I believe it is not in dispute that this collection centre for

 5     POWs in Stara Gradiska, for a while, was also used to accommodate persons

 6     deprived of liberty or taken prisoner during the clashes in

 7     Bosnia-Herzegovina; correct?

 8        A.   Yes.  I do know that certain prisoners were taken to

 9     Stara Gradiska in the early part.  I'm not sure that Stara Gradiska is

10     over the Sava river.  I think it might actually be over the river.  And I

11     don't believe that collection facility was used for that long probably

12     because of that fact.  But I do know that a small number of prisoners in

13     the operations that happened in -- in the early -- late spring or early

14     summer of 1992, a small number did go to Stara Gradiska.

15        Q.   Thank you.  Unless there is an objection, I seek to tender this

16     document.

17             JUDGE HALL:  Admitted and marked.

18             THE REGISTRAR:  Exhibit 1D416, Your Honours.

19             MR. ZECEVIC:

20        Q.   [Interpretation] Sir, I want to show you a document which is

21     already an exhibit in this case, P61.2, which is tab 51, and your

22     footnote is 913.  It's an order by Ratko Mladic dated 12 June 1992 about

23     the treatment of prisoners of war.

24             Sir, it is not in dispute that pursuant to the order of the chief

25     of General Staff, Ratko Mladic, prisoners of war should be placed in POW

Page 19042

 1     camps by the army, and these camps should have been established at corps

 2     level; isn't that right?

 3        A.   Well, this is a document saying that prisoners of war camp should

 4     be established in -- in -- at corps level, and it outlines the

 5     guide-lines for those.  There was clearly an already existing prisoner of

 6     war camp in the corps at Manjaca at this time.  I think Stara Gradiska

 7     had already ceased to function.  But clearly it wasn't the only detention

 8     centre that was there.  But this does seem to instruct at military level

 9     there is to be a corps-level prisoner of war camp, which already existed

10     in the case of the 1st Krajina Corps.

11        Q.   It's a fact, isn't it, that all corps - and there are documents,

12     I don't know to which extent you're familiar with them - the eastern

13     Bosnian and the Krajina Corps and others organised some brigades -- or,

14     rather, some brigades organised camps, too, such as the Birac Brigade

15     which organised a camp at Vlasenica.  Then the Eastern Bosnian Corps had

16     one at Batkovici.  Do you know that they had their respective POW camps?

17        A.   I don't know in all corps, but I do know there was one at

18     Batkovici because certain prisoners, once Manjaca closed, were sent

19     there.  I don't know from the other corps, however.

20             JUDGE HALL:  Mr. Zecevic, it's time again for the break.

21             MR. ZECEVIC:  Oh, yes, yes.  I'm sorry, Your Honours.  I will be

22     shortly finishing after we return.  Thank you, Your Honours.

23                           [The witness stands down]

24                           --- Recess taken at 12.07 p.m.

25                           --- On resuming at 12.33 p.m.

Page 19043

 1                           [The witness takes the stand]

 2             JUDGE HALL:  Yes, Mr. Zecevic, you may continue.

 3             MR. ZECEVIC:  Thank you, Your Honours.

 4        Q.   [Interpretation] Could we please see P1795, which is tab 20 of --

 5     in the Prosecution binder.

 6             The footnote in your report, Mr. Brown, is 669.  And in the

 7     examination-in-chief, you commented on this document with the Prosecutor.

 8             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Could we please see page 13 of the

 9     Serbian text, and page 11 of the English text.  The heading is (B)

10     security support.

11        Q.   Sir, there's a section which you didn't comment for Ms. Korner.

12     It's the following paragraph:

13             "Devote special attention to security for and protection of

14     sensitive elements of combat disposition and facilities and achieve full

15     control and restrict movements of the population in the zone of

16     responsibility."

17             And then, in this order of the 1st Krajina Corps, signed by

18     Mr. Talic, it says:

19             "Prisoners of war and the bearers of enemy activity after

20     processing shall be escorted to POW camps and the military investigative

21     prison."

22             You remember that I intervened during the examination-in-chief to

23     explain the abbreviation VIZ?

24        A.   Yes, I do, sir, I remember that.

25        Q.   Since this order is dated 9 June 1992, it is clear that, as of

Page 19044

 1     that day, Mr. Talic, as the commander of the 1st Krajina Corps, gives

 2     instructions to subordinate units to take two categories of persons to

 3     POW camps and military investigative prisons, because, as he said,

 4     "prisoners of war and persons responsible for hostile activity."

 5             Can you see that?

 6        A.   Yes, I can see that, sir.

 7        Q.   You will agree with me when I say that persons responsible for

 8     hostile activity would possibly be those who organised rebellion, for

 9     example.

10        A.   I wouldn't necessarily say so.  It depends if you want to expand

11     on what you say organised rebellion.  I am assuming he means people who

12     are involved in hostile combat activities, firing on his troop, that type

13     of activity as opposed to -- I mean someone who organises a rebellion

14     doesn't necessarily take armed action, do they, I assume.  So I put this

15     within the confines of what he's -- his soldiers are doing which is to

16     conduct combat activities.

17        Q.   That's precisely my point.  The way I understand this document,

18     two categories are mentioned here.  One category is prisoners of war and

19     that supposedly refers to persons taking part in combat activities and

20     who were taken prisoner by the units of the 1st Krajina Corps.

21             But what it says prisoners of war and persons responsible for

22     hostile activity.  So these are two groups, two categories; those who

23     took direct part and those, who, in my opinion, did not take direct part

24     but engaged in some sort of hostile or enemy activity.  Is that the way

25     you understand it too?

Page 19045

 1        A.   Well, he has clearly got two groups, he actually highlights two

 2     groups, and whether he -- I mean, prisoners of war are invariably a

 3     clearly defined category within the Geneva Conventions and whether he

 4     believes that, you know, people who are firing on his troops need -- need

 5     to find out and define whether they fall in that category or not, maybe

 6     he is covering his [indiscernible].  I guess he is saying people who are

 7     involved in armed actions against us are to be -- to be taken -- taken

 8     in.

 9        Q.   There's something else here that's very telling.  He orders that

10     these two groups of people shall be processed by intelligence and

11     security organs of the units.

12             Do you agree?

13        A.   Yes, he says that.

14        Q.   Thank you.  As an illustration, in case you agree, we'll see the

15     document I am about to show.  1D00-156, and that's tab 119 in the Defence

16     binder.

17             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Mr. Brown, just before we leave this document,

18     could I ask you to clarify a bit your answer to Mr. Zecevic's question as

19     to who might be encompassed by the expression "persons responsible for

20     hostile activity" because I thought that you said that those who were

21     prisoners of war would be enemy combatants, obviously.  And then the

22     other group, which is called here in this order persons responsible for

23     hostile activity, would be people who had not engaged in direct armed

24     confrontation with the Serb forces.

25             And that leaves then the question about who might these persons

Page 19046

 1     be.  Could it be, for instance, also politicians; or members of civilian

 2     groups?  Who -- could it be civilians, really?

 3             THE WITNESS:  There's an ambiguity here, really, because it

 4     leaves his subordinates open to say that that is people -- that those are

 5     people who fall into that category.  I mean, if you read that as a

 6     subordinate, you could be under the impression that people suspected of

 7     being involved in armed activities, whether they're actually firing on

 8     his soldiers at the time, are -- should be brought into prisoners of war

 9     camps.

10             Clearly the first category would be fairly easily discerned but

11     the second category seems potentially more wide one that allows for

12     individuals who are suspected of being involved in hostile activity,

13     whatever that could be, demonstrations, political activity, or, you know,

14     armed action but who don't fall within the category of prisoner of war.

15     So it seems rather general.

16             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Thank you.

17             MR. ZECEVIC:  May I continue, Your Honour?

18             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Yes, please.  Sorry.

19             MR. ZECEVIC:  Thank you very much.

20        Q.   [Interpretation] Sir, I didn't know if you had the chance to see

21     this document.  I was unable to find it in your footnotes.  It's a

22     document signed by Milutin Vukelic, assistant commander for morale, and

23     the date is 3 August 1992.  It says:

24             "Request for the release of prisoners Zudija Ramic and Mile

25     Mandic."  It says:  "Request submitted."

Page 19047

 1             It is sent or was sent to the 43rd MTBR and to the CSJB Prijedor.

 2     Can you see that?

 3        A.   Yes.  Can I just take a bit of time to read it?  It's not a

 4     document I've seen before.

 5        Q.   [In English] Yes, by all means, Mr. Brown.

 6        A.   Yes, I see that now, sir.

 7        Q.   [Interpretation] It says here:

 8             "Pursuant to the request by the president of the FR of Yugoslavia

 9     and the commander of the Main Staff of the Serb Republic of

10     Bosnia-Herzegovina, it is vital to close as soon as possible the

11     investigation against Zudija Ramic, son of Dervis."

12             The commander of the General Staff of the army is General Ratko

13     Mladic at that point in time, right?

14        A.   That's correct, sir, yes.

15        Q.   And then further on instructions are being provided to give that

16     person the necessary documents, that he should be sent to the 1st Krajina

17     Corps and then they will facilitate his departure to Belgrade.

18             And then the second sentence is said:

19             "The investigation against the said person is to be closed and he

20     should be allowed to defend himself as a free man."

21             And in the last sentence it says:

22             "Complete this request by the 6th of August, 1992, and report in

23     writing to this command about all matters."

24             This has the form of an order, doesn't it?

25        A.   Yes, it's an instruction.  Doesn't say "order" but it's an

Page 19048

 1     instruction from quite a senior level to have these individuals released.

 2        Q.   Thank you, sir.  I would like to suggest that this document be

 3     admitted into evidence as well.

 4             JUDGE HALL:  Admitted and marked.

 5             THE REGISTRAR:  Exhibit 1D417, Your Honours.

 6             JUDGE HALL:  I was bemused, Mr. Zecevic, at your choice of the

 7     word "suggest."

 8             MR. ZECEVIC:  Thank you, Your Honours.

 9        Q.   [Interpretation] Mr. Brown, I am not going to show you any more

10     documents because I really should finish rather soon.

11             Mr. Brown, as for your expert report, you have based it, if I can

12     put it that way, and if I remember correctly you said that on the first

13     day and you repeated that to me as well, first of all, on a collection of

14     documents of the 1st Krajina Corps.  This is a vast amount of documents

15     that you analysed, right?

16        A.   Well, I'm not sure what your definition of "vast."  It seemed

17     vast at the time.  It was a lot.  I'm not sure of the exact number, but

18     it was a lot.

19        Q.   I don't know if you will agree with me, but the methodology that

20     you applied, actually, Mr. Brown, is that through these documents you

21     wanted to show, de facto, how the corps functioned at the time.  Of

22     course, in a certain context, and you provided that context in the first

23     part of your expert report.

24        A.   Well, yes.  I wanted to see what the documents told me in a

25     particular period, and bearing in mind the limitations that I highlighted

Page 19049

 1     at the beginning of my testimony and also in the report.

 2                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

 3             MR. ZECEVIC:  May I continue?

 4             JUDGE HALL:  Yes, Mr. Zecevic.

 5             MR. ZECEVIC:

 6        Q.   [Interpretation] Mr. Brown, I hope that you will agree with me

 7     that in order to view this subject matter fully, the one that you are

 8     discussing, an appropriate methodology would be the following.  First of

 9     all, legal assumptions; and then the factual situation, and only then the

10     drawing of conclusions or the stating of your opinion, how things should

11     have been and how they actually were, in reality.

12             But I assume that that was not your task?

13        A.   Well, I -- I would argue that in -- bearing in mind this is the

14     not the complete story of the Krajina Corps nor is it the complete story

15     of the 1st Krajina Corps.  I would argue that in many respects I have

16     looked at some of the legal components and the framework components and

17     placed those alongside the documents that were -- the reports and

18     documents, contemporaneous reports and documents, produced by the corps

19     reflecting the picture that they saw and reflecting the issues that they

20     reported in their -- in their -- in their work.  So I wouldn't

21     necessarily say that -- that the methodology I -- I -- wasn't in that

22     manner.  But there are limitations to the report, and, you know, I fully

23     admit those.

24        Q.   Sir, tell me, did you write this report by yourself?

25        A.   I did, sir, yes.

Page 19050

 1        Q.   Sir, during the direct examination, you confirmed that your

 2     expert report was primarily a military expert report, that you do not

 3     have any special expertise with regard to Crisis Staffs.  You said that

 4     some other analysts in the OTP dealt with that particular subject matter.

 5     Also, you said that legal subjects, orders, documents of the MUP, were

 6     not the subject of your expert report; right?

 7        A.   When I say I'm not an expert on Crisis Staffs, it wasn't a

 8     subject that I took an entirety and studied with a single focus.

 9     Clearly, through the optics and the references in the Krajina Corps

10     report -- sorry, the Krajina Corps documents, I was aware, read, utilised

11     Crisis Staff material.  So I became aware of Crisis Staffs, their

12     operations, and their linking to specific operations that the Krajina

13     Corps conducted.  But in terms of its entirety, the establishment

14     process, the history, I'm not, but I did look at Crisis Staffs because it

15     was, to me, had an important bearing on the activities of the military at

16     that period.

17             But I do know that another analyst in a different analytical team

18     within the OTP conducted far more exhaustive work than I did on that.  As

19     did another analyst in relation to the MUP, you know, when I was looking

20     at military issues another analyst on an analytical team looked at, in

21     detail, the issue of the MUP.  I did utilise some MUP references and

22     documents in a similar way to the Crisis Staffs.  But in both of those

23     areas I'm not an expert.  I wouldn't profess to be.

24             I think had you another area in relation to legal issues, I

25     guess.  Was that one?  Legal issues and orders.  Is that about the

Page 19051

 1     military or the MUP?

 2        Q.   MUP.

 3        A.   The MUP.  No, it's not an issue that I looked at in my report.

 4     Obviously I utilised military regulations and laws, but again I'm not a

 5     league expert.  But in relation to the MUP, no, I didn't.  So I agree

 6     with you, there.

 7        Q.   So it would be fair to characterise your approach because there

 8     is no dispute as regards the fact that you are partly speaking of the

 9     effect of Crisis Staffs on the army, the JNA, and then also the

10     co-operation between military and police organs.  So wouldn't it be fair

11     to characterise your point of view with regard to these matters as a

12     point of view from the side of the military, right?  When I say "from the

13     side of the military," I'm saying on the basis of your insight into

14     military documents.  That's how you interpreted these relations.  Isn't

15     that right.

16        A.   Well, sir, I hope that -- I'm a professional analyst by training

17     and by profession.  And I was obviously also a military -- former

18     military officer fulfilling analytical functions predominantly within the

19     military.  When I left, I continued to do analytical work here,

20     investigative work, and I continued to gain analytical professional

21     qualifications.  So I -- my perspective is as an analyst, first and

22     foremost.  Clearly the subject matter relates to the functioning,

23     predominantly, of the military in the Krajina area and the Krajina Corps,

24     and the vast bulk of material I utilised came from military documents.

25     So from that perspective I would agree with you, but at the heart of it,

Page 19052

 1     I hope, maybe it is for others to decide, but I would hope that, you

 2     know -- I would see myself as a professional -- a professional analyst.

 3     In this case was working on a subject, a predominantly military subject

 4     using predominantly military materials.

 5        Q.   Thank you, Mr. Brown.

 6             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.  I have no further

 7     questions for you.  That is all I had to ask you about.

 8             THE WITNESS:  I don't know if -- in all fairness to Mr. Zecevic,

 9     he -- earlier in my testimony, he asked me about the issue of town

10     commands, and so I'd mentioned I think in my direct that it was a phrase

11     that I had seen only two or three times, and he asked me in relation to

12     the issue of Derventa and Donji Vakuf.  This was -- seemed to be quite a

13     long time ago, and I -- but it was earlier on in the testimony, and

14     whilst referring to -- I think one of the questions was I wasn't aware of

15     the situation about the establishment of those town commands or military

16     commands in Derventa.

17             And I looked at a reference in my report and there was one

18     document which came up, one I hadn't remembered, which was a document

19     from the assistant commander for civilian affairs.  The date is a couple

20     of days prior to the documents that you showed me, that makes reference

21     to -- there is a reference to town command once in a paragraph and it

22     makes reference to a meeting of the Crisis Staff, I believe, on the 17th

23     of June at which the issue of Donji Vakuf and Derventa were referenced,

24     and that a decision or it was agreed that, along with some municipal

25     figures and elements of the 1st Krajina Corps, that establishment of a

Page 19053

 1     command would be formed in those municipalities.  So I guess I'm -- I

 2     have come across this document subsequent to the question that

 3     Mr. Zecevic gave me, and maybe that sets the context behind why

 4     Donji Vakuf and Derventa were treated in a slightly different way, and it

 5     would appear, at least from that document, that an ARK Crisis Staff

 6     decision agreed that this type of command organisation should occur in

 7     those two areas.

 8             So it was really just to follow up on -- in fairness to

 9     Mr. Zecevic's questions.

10             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you, Mr. Brown.

11             MR. ZECEVIC:

12        Q.   [Interpretation] Mr. Brown --

13             MR. ZECEVIC:  I'm sorry, Your Honours I now have a follow-up

14     question.

15        Q.   [Interpretation] Mr. Brown I showed you 1D365.  That is tab 1.

16     This is an instruction for carrying out civilian work in crisis areas and

17     the date is the 25th of November, 1991.

18        A.   Yes, sir.  But I think you also showed me a specific document in

19     relation to Derventa which was sometime in June 1992.  And then I think

20     you went on to talk about a similar document for Derventa.  And I can

21     give you the reference to -- the footnote reference in my report if that

22     would be of use.

23        Q.   [In English] Yes, please.

24        A.   It's footnote reference 847 and it's a document dated the 17th of

25     June with an ERN 01241627.  That's the B/C/S.  And an English 0190350.

Page 19054

 1        Q.   [Interpretation] Sir, of course, I don't have the document here

 2     but I'm going to review it.  However, on the basis of what I can see from

 3     your footnote 847 that you have just kindly provided to us, it pertains

 4     to the 17th of June.  However, the document that I showed you, 1D403,

 5     which is an order of the 19th Partisan Brigade, obviously has nothing

 6     whatsoever to do with this document, because that document establishing

 7     the command of defence of Gornji Vakuf is dated the 13th of June.  1D403.

 8     Please, could that be displayed.  It is Defence tab 152.

 9             Can you see it now, Mr. Brown?  I assume that you remember.  It

10     was only yesterday.  The date of the document is the 13th of June.  That

11     is to say, four days before this document that you are speaking of now.

12     And that is mentioned in your footnote.  The command of the 19th

13     Partisan Brigade is establishing the command of the town of Gornji Vakuf.

14     Do you agree?

15        A.   Yes.  But I think I was possibly referencing the one you showed

16     me about Derventa.  Was there one about Derventa as well?  I mean, I only

17     flagged the document up as --

18        Q.   Derventa is 1D404, dated 29th of August.  However, that order,

19     sir, says that only military matters will be dealt with by the command of

20     the town from then onwards.

21             So we have a document whereby Colonel Lisica is abolishing the

22     town command, but we did infer that it did exist before that.  However,

23     document 1D104 says -- 404, rather, says that it had been established

24     before that?

25        A.   Yes, I think that's what sparked me.  One of the questions you

Page 19055

 1     asked me, or maybe in reference to one of my answers, was I wasn't sure

 2     about how the Derventa defence command had been established.  And in

 3     coming across that document, I didn't spend a lot of time on it.  It may

 4     well have been that there had been this ARK decision, and then the

 5     establishment of these two commands occurred.  I only flag that up.

 6        Q.   Thank you.  Unless you have something else to add, I think that

 7     we have finished.

 8        A.   No, sir, thank you.

 9        Q.   Thank you.

10             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, just a brief

11     observation.  You will recall that yesterday we discussed the

12     documentation that was provided to us by the republican secretariat of

13     Republika Srpska in relation to the objections that Ms. Korner had to

14     that.  1D266 and 1D410, Defence tabs 129 and 130, are documents that we

15     are referring to today because during the night we managed to find those

16     documents in EDS.  To our surprise, both of these documents very

17     explicitly and clearly, in accordance -- were in accordance with Rule 68,

18     so the Prosecution was duty bound to disclose these documents to us.

19     They had never been disclosed to us before.  We will continue to look for

20     these documents in EDS; however, I have to say that we are now concerned

21     that, as the Prosecution case is drawing to a close, we are finding

22     documents that are in the hands of the Prosecution and that have not been

23     disclosed to us but that had been the duty of the OTP in accordance with

24     Rule 68.  That is all I had to say, thank you.

25             MS. KORNER:  Your Honours, we are bound by what turns up in the

Page 19056

 1     searches that we do.  We have checked for searches that we asked the --

 2     the -- the unit to do on Doboj and the CSB.  The documents -- I don't

 3     know about the second one because I don't know what the ERN is.  The

 4     first document that Mr. Zecevic mentioned this morning did not turn up in

 5     our searches.  We keep a full record of the document that -- that we look

 6     for in our searches.  Clearly, if it had turned up in our searches we

 7     would have disclosed it.  It is why Rule 68 is a continuing obligation.

 8     It's the limitations, I suppose, of the way the documents are scanned.

 9     Doboj, in particular, is a -- is a difficult one to pull up all documents

10     relating to it.

11             I would resist any suggestion, and to be fair to Mr. Zecevic I

12     don't think he is making it, but if he is we resist it, that we are

13     deliberately withholding Rule -- material which we know to be Rule 68,

14     and indeed Your Honours will have seen that throughout the case under our

15     continuing obligation we find documents we disclose them.

16             JUDGE HALL:  I was just going to add that the sheer volume of

17     documents with which we are dealing is that this type of thing is likely

18     to continue to happen.

19             And as you have said, Mr. Zecevic imports no malice on behalf of

20     the OTP in this regard.  It's just a fact.

21             MS. KORNER:  Well, I will take it that "we are now concerned"

22     doesn't reflect an allegation that we're deliberately withholding it.

23             Your Honours, can I assist on one other matter, though.

24             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Just one moment, Ms. Korner.

25             Mr. Zecevic, just to make sure, these two documents are not

Page 19057

 1     documents that have still the MFI status; right?

 2             MR. ZECEVIC:  Not -- not anymore.  One of them, Your Honours,

 3     1D -- yeah, was de-MFIed because found out that it was in the possession

 4     of --

 5             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Thank you.

 6             MR. ZECEVIC:  -- of the Office of the Prosecutor some time ago.

 7             MS. KORNER:  Your Honours, can I assist on one other matter,

 8     which I think arose out of Judge Harhoff's question, as to whether the

 9     list of deserters from the Prijedor police were ever prosecuted.

10             Your Honours, we did a search of the Prijedor police crime

11     register which, as you know, are exhibits in this case and the

12     prosecutor's office, the prosecutor's office log-book for Prijedor, and,

13     of course, the Defence can check this because they're exhibits, none of

14     the names appear in that book.  We equally checked the military

15     prosecutor's log-book, Banja Luka area, and none of those names appear.

16             There are other documents, one of which is already an exhibit,

17     which appears to show -- this is subject to the names being those that

18     are in the -- this -- this list of deserters because, as Your Honours

19     know, sometimes identical names appear and it's not the same person.

20     Indeed, there was an objection to our Skrbic application on the basis

21     there was another an called Skrbic, so the same must apply.  But it does

22     appear in P5.0511.  I can't work that one out.  I think that's one of the

23     log-books, that on the 30th of October there's a list of members of the

24     Prijedor Military Police Unit which were commanded by a man called

25     Trifunovic and eight of the names are the same as those on the deserters

Page 19058

 1     list.  So -- and, of course, the Defence can check this themselves, but I

 2     thought, in order to answer the question ...

 3             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.

 4             Mr. Krgovic.

 5                           Cross-examination by Mr. Krgovic:

 6        Q.   [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Mr. Brown.

 7        A.   Good afternoon, sir.

 8        Q.   My name is Dragan Krgovic.  On behalf of the Defence of Stojan

 9     Zupljanin, I am going to be putting questions to you in relation to your

10     analysis and your testimony before this Court.

11             Now that we have the last answer you gave to Mr. Zecevic here,

12     may I ask whether you found anywhere any documents that indicated that

13     there was a town command in any other municipality apart from the ones

14     that you discussed with Mr. Zecevic?

15        A.   In corps command documents, I don't believe I did.  It isn't --

16     it isn't a command phrase that I was aware of.  I am -- saw references,

17     of course, to Crisis Staffs.  There's a defence command in Kljuc.  And

18     there are obviously, as Mr. Zecevic has highlighted, some references in

19     relation to town commands, but it wasn't a common phrase that I -- I

20     remember from the Krajina Corps collection.

21        Q.   When you looked at the documents from Kotor Varos, the documents

22     of the War Presidency, did you notice that at one point in time a town

23     command was established there?

24        A.   No, I -- I don't remember that.  It may be present.  It's not

25     a -- it's been a long time since I looked at these documents, but it

Page 19059

 1     wasn't -- it wasn't a reference I remember.  It could be there, of

 2     course.

 3             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Could the witness please be shown

 4     65 ter 10508.  Tab 15 of the Zupljanin Defence.

 5        Q.   Could you now please have a look at this document, paragraph 1.

 6     This is an excerpt of the minutes of a session of the Crisis Staff.  We

 7     are looking at paragraph 1, item 1, Colonel Peulic is being quoted, and

 8     the second sentence says -- this is what Peulic did:

 9             "In view of the developments in our area" he ordered that

10     everyone who can carry a rifle be mobilised.

11             A town command had to be formed and he appointed Captain Tepic as

12     commander.  You know that Captain Tepic at the time was commander of the

13     Light Kotor Varos Brigade at one moment.  Is it one and the same Tepic?

14        A.   I would assume that that is him, sir, yes.  Bearing in mind

15     Ms. Korner's point there are many people with similar names, but I

16     guess -- I guess this is probably him.

17        Q.   And this document shows that Lieutenant-Colonel Peulic orders the

18     town command to be appointed and appointed its commander.

19        A.   Well, it says it must be formed.  Whether it was or how it was

20     formed or whether this is a discussion within the Crisis Staff that

21     that's his point of view, is -- is a possibility.

22             But, clearly, he feel there's a need for some kind of command in

23     the town, and he is making that point at item 1.

24        Q.   I'm not sure what you heard in interpretation, but here, it's

25     quite clear in the document.  It is clear that the town command had been

Page 19060

 1     established and that a commander had about been appointed.  That's what I

 2     see in Serbian at least.

 3             MS. KORNER:  [Microphone not activated]

 4             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] "With regard to development of

 5     events in our area."

 6             He ordered - I emphasise that - that anyone that can carry a

 7     rifle must be mobilised.  A town defence command must be formed and he

 8     appointed Captain Tepic as commander.

 9        Q.   It's past tense here.  It means that it had been done before;

10     isn't that so?

11        A.   Well, I can only go on the translation in front of me.  Where --

12     Colonel Peulic is briefing the Crisis Staff and there's clearly an issue

13     that needs to be resolved, presumably one in relation to mobilisation,

14     and he said a command must be formed.

15             Now whether he is within the grouping of the Crisis Staff putting

16     his position for agreement within the Crisis Staff and a town command was

17     formed, is one possibility.  But at least from the translation here, it

18     says that he is indicating his point, briefing in the Crisis Staff.  Now,

19     it may well have been agreed.  I'm not sure, sir.  And clearly he does

20     suggest the appointee.

21        Q.   Maybe it's a language issue.  But here it is quite clear that

22     Captain Tepic had already been appointed as the town commander.  Isn't

23     that so?

24        A.   I'm sorry, I can only go by the translation.  I think it seems to

25     be him suggesting that -- that it must be formed and that Captain Tepic

Page 19061

 1     should be its commander.  That may well have happened.  They may well

 2     have agreed to that.  At least at this stage I think he is voicing his

 3     view that it must be formed and that -- that the captain should be placed

 4     as its commander.  It would not surprise me if that didn't happen, but at

 5     least at this stage I think he is just briefing the Crisis Staff and

 6     presumably expressing his position for agreement within that forum.

 7        Q.   Well, he doesn't form or present his opinion.  He says that he

 8     ordered that everything that -- carry a rifle should be mobilised and

 9     that a town command should be formed.  Isn't that so?

10        A.   Yes.  But there would seem to be two issues, one of the issue of

11     mobilisation and one of the issue of town command.  It may well be that

12     as prior to this the mobilisation instruction had gone out in April and

13     reinforced in May that there were some people who were in Kotor Varos who

14     were not placing themselves -- or were not mobilising themselves, and he

15     is ordering that people should because that is what had come down through

16     the Presidency and the corps.  But then there's a second issue of this

17     issue of town command, and I think he is voicing his opinion and voicing

18     who he thinks should command it.  As I say, it may well have come about

19     and they may well have accepted that and -- it may well have been a town

20     command in Kotor Varos.  But I think at this point what he is saying is

21     that he believe it should be formed.

22        Q.   And then you can see from the agenda that this issue wasn't

23     discussed, so it is quite obvious that the Crisis Staff did not discuss

24     this topic.  It was simply adopted.  You can see in other items of the

25     agenda that was no further discussion of this issue.  Mr. Peulic simply

Page 19062

 1     informed the Crisis Staff that he had formed a town command and that he

 2     had appointed Captain Tepic as town commander?

 3             MS. KORNER:  [Microphone not activated]

 4             Sorry, Your Honours, I shouldn't do it like this.  Could I just

 5     ask counsel to point out the part where it says this was adopted.

 6             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Maybe it's an interpretation

 7     question.  I'm saying that Mr. Peulic simply informed them.  They didn't

 8     discuss it.  This was simply a military order to form a town command.

 9     There was no discussion of this issue and nobody stood up against it in

10     this situation.  Nobody discussed the issue.  That's what I'm trying to

11     say.  That's what I claim.  And I expect Mr. Brown to agree with me.

12        Q.   You will agree with me, Mr. Brown, that, in this document we find

13     no discussion and no position to this order of Mr. Peulic?

14        A.   Could I see the second page just to complete the document?

15        Q.   [In English] Yeah.

16        A.   Well, these are minutes I'm assuming, and minutes tend to be a

17     reflection of discussions as opposed to the verbatim annotation of what

18     was discussed.  I accept your point, there is no reference in here that

19     Colonel Peulic's discussion was adopted.  It doesn't reference that in

20     the minutes, but I'm assuming that because these are minutes those types

21     of issues were discussed in this forum.  And as I say, I'm -- it may well

22     have been that everyone was in agreement and a town command was formed.

23     But I wasn't aware of that and I don't think that document necessarily on

24     its own says that.

25        Q.   [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. Brown.  In answer to question by

Page 19063

 1     Mr. Zecevic, and also by the Prosecutor, on a number of occasions you

 2     mentioned a document dated 28th of May.  That's P376.  Tab 12 in the

 3     Prosecution binder.

 4             You commented this document.  So I'd like to ask you:  Mr. Brown,

 5     with regard to the relation between the military and the police, and the

 6     engagement of the police in combat operations, there was a period at the

 7     beginning of the conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina where there were no

 8     rules for the engagement of the police.  Local military commanders

 9     engaged local police forces in combat activities without any information

10     or any approval from the corps or from the Security Services Centre.

11             Have you come across such documents and could this be your

12     conclusion about this period?

13        A.   I haven't looked extensively at police documents to be able to

14     comment on that.  I can only say, for example, in relation to the ARK

15     decisions about drawing up plans for the confiscations of illegally-held

16     weapons that was passed down to municipalities and appeared to be acted

17     upon in places like Bosanski Novi, Kljuc, Prijedor, specifically

18     referenced.  That there was a functioning chain of command and that local

19     police SJBs were reacting to that.  But I'm not a MUP expert, and I'm --

20     I don't profess to have a detailed knowledge of how the various SJBs

21     functioned in detail.  That wasn't within the remit of this report.

22        Q.   This document by Mr. Zupljanin, especially if you read its second

23     paragraph, tells us that Mr. Zupljanin protests against certain actions

24     and forbids any action of the police without prior consent of the CSB in

25     Banja Luka and the relevant corps command.  This obviously tells us that

Page 19064

 1     there had been such practice before.  There were police units that had

 2     been engaged without the prior approval of the CSB or the corps command.

 3        A.   Yeah, well, clearly there was obviously an issue here which

 4     necessitated Mr. Zupljanin accepting this instruction.  So I would agree

 5     there was obviously a problem that needs to be revolved.  How widespread

 6     that was or where it was, I can't say because I'm not a police expert.

 7        Q.   Surely you know that certain formations of the armed forces below

 8     the corps level would often resubordinate the whole public security

 9     stations to themselves, or they would even put the command of a brigade

10     inside a public security station.  Isn't that so?

11        A.   I haven't seen examples where brigades subordinate an entirety

12     complete public security stations, and I wouldn't necessarily draw an

13     inference just because a brigade command was inside a public security

14     that that somehow means the brigade commands that SJB.  I have been

15     inside many police stations, hopefully on the right side, but as a

16     military officer.  But I didn't mean to say that I commanded the police

17     station.

18             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Can we have P160, tab 6 in Stanisic

19     Defence binder.

20             MS. KORNER:  Just before we move on, can I ask about the

21     Kotor Varos document that Mr. Krgovic showed the witness.  Because if he

22     is assuming that it's an exhibit, it isn't.  It's one of the ones that we

23     didn't get exhibited.  25th of June.

24             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Then I would like the number to be

25     assigned.  I also wasn't quite sure, but I think that now if Ms. Korner

Page 19065

 1     confirmed it, obviously it should become an exhibit.

 2             The previous document, not this one.  It's -- just a moment.

 3             MS. KORNER:  Your Honours, it's document that was at the Defence

 4     tab 15.

 5             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] 65 ter 10508.

 6             MS. KORNER:  Your Honours, it was one that wasn't on our 65 ter

 7     list when I dealt with them.  We tried, I think, at some stage we

 8     discussed whether this would be stipulated to by the Defence but the

 9     discussions never reached fruition.  So it's not an exhibit at the

10     moment.

11             JUDGE HALL:  So we mark it now as an exhibit.

12                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

13             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Mr. Krgovic, I assume that you wanted to have

14     this document exhibited to show who actually established the town

15     command.  And if I -- if my recollection is correct, you had the view

16     that this was Lieutenant-Colonel Peulic.

17             When I looked at the document, that, however, was completely

18     unclear to me.  I couldn't see out of the document whether it was the

19     Crisis Staff that had established the town command or whether it was the

20     army man.  So I guess we can admit it with this uncertainty, but ...

21                           [Trial Chamber confers]

22             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Or, as Judge Hall suggests, as a fact that town

23     commands were, indeed, established regardless of who actually created

24     them.

25             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.  I think that it

Page 19066

 1     is obvious here in this document.  It is obvious that it was Mr. Peulic

 2     who formed the town command.

 3             Maybe it's an issue of translation.  We are going to double-check

 4     it.  Now I can't really see it on the monitor.  I cannot follow

 5     interpretation into English and maybe something is unclear.  It seems to

 6     me that a small part is missing in English translation.

 7             JUDGE HALL:  For myself, Mr. Krgovic, I would prefer to regard

 8     your last observation as a submission, but we will see.

 9                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

10             THE REGISTRAR:  This will become Exhibit 1D132.  I apologise,

11     thank you.  Yes, 2D.

12             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation]

13        Q.   Now this is a short document about a meeting on the 28th of July.

14     Mr. Zecevic already showed you some conclusions.  This was a meeting of

15     the top leadership of MUP, and I want to show you the presentation of

16     Mr. Zupljanin.  Page 8 in English.  The same in Serbian, in e-court.

17     Excuse me, it's 11th of July.

18        A.   Sir, was this the one contained within the binder that

19     Mr. Zecevic gave me or the documents?  Or is it -- I have a slightly

20     different one, but I -- I don't know if ...

21        Q.   I don't think so.

22        A.   I have one on the front page that says, "Report on some aspects

23     of the work done to date and the tasks ahead."

24        Q.   No, that's not the document.

25        A.   Oh.

Page 19067

 1        Q.   Take a look here.

 2        A.   Okay.

 3        Q.   Third paragraph from the top in your version where Mr. Zupljanin

 4     says:

 5             "Because of the casualties (in Mrkonjic Grad, 20 active-duty and

 6     reserve police members perished)."

 7             And then he goes on to say:

 8             "The role of the police has to be defined.  Its direct engagement

 9     in combat activities and related to this, the reinforcements.  The army

10     wants the whole force to be engaged, to be resubordinated, and then

11     pushed to the front lines, and this has to be prevented."

12             In essence, this is similar to this letter sent by Mr. Zupljanin.

13     He is also highlighting the same occurrence.  There is obviously a

14     problem in engagement the MUP units because it is happening contrary to

15     the law and without the approval of the CSB, right?

16        A.   I'm not sure I -- I know -- at least not from the English

17     translation the phrase you have, "the army wants the whole force to be

18     engaged and has to be resubordinated, and then pushed to the front

19     lines."  I don't read that from paragraph 3.  I accept that clearly the

20     MUP were unhappy about involving police officers on the front line.  At

21     least the general issue from there is.  But that phrase that you use

22     about resubordination, pushing to the front line, whole forces being

23     engaged, I don't see that in paragraph 3.

24        Q.   It seems that this sentence wasn't translated.  I read it

25     correctly.  I will read it once again:  "The army wants to engage the

Page 19068

 1     whole force --

 2             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Krgovic, could you first read the part that

 3     is in the English translation so that we know where there is something

 4     missing?

 5             MR. KRGOVIC:  Because of the casualties -- [Interpretation] I

 6     will read it in Serbian.

 7              "Because of the casualties (in Mrkonjic Grad ... in only one

 8     operation 20 active-duty and reserve police members were killed).  The

 9     role of the police has to be defined, its direct engagement in combat

10     activities, and related to this, the reinforcements.  The army demands

11     engagement of the whole force.  They resubordinate them and then push

12     them to the most difficult parts of the front line, and this has to be

13     prevented."

14             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Can you read a little bit more?

15             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] "It is difficult to tell the exact

16     number of the members" --

17             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Thank you.  It's okay.  So we're -- in the

18     English it's one illegible sentence.

19             MS. KORNER:  Your Honours, it's quite a lot, I've just noticed,

20     and it's unfortunate, actually, because this document has been around

21     since the beginning of the case that hasn't come up before.  I think we

22     better say we'll send it back for translation because if Mr. Krgovic can

23     read it, I see no reason why CLSS can't read it.

24             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation]

25        Q.   So, Mr. Brown, this obviously tells us that the army would take

Page 19069

 1     the whole force, resubordinate it, and then push it into combat

 2     activities; right?

 3        A.   Well, from your translation the army is demanding that.  I'm

 4     assuming they are referring to when they do take policemen they put them

 5     on the front lines, which the police are unhappy with.  I don't read that

 6     from your -- from your translation that the police have been in entirety

 7     placed under the command of the army.

 8             I don't doubt there was a problem, and I think there are many --

 9     or a number of references, at least, that the police were unhappy about

10     their engagement on the front, I assume.  After all, they're police

11     officers and maybe see themselves not as soldiers, and then there are

12     other references that -- echoing that.  So I don't doubt there was a

13     problem.

14        Q.   It says here "the whole force."  They are talking about the

15     entire force.

16        A.   Well, it could be, he is talking about when police forces are

17     sent to the front, the whole force meaning that force that's gone there.

18     Not necessarily the whole police force, the whole of the MUP, in the

19     whole of the Krajina.

20        Q.   We are talking here about individual municipalities.  So

21     Mr. Zupljanin is talking about individual municipalities.  The way I

22     understand this document is that the army wants to engage the full

23     complement or the whole force from a particular police station to send

24     into combat activities.  He is not talking about the whole of Krajina.

25     He is talking about individual stations of public security.  That's my

Page 19070

 1     understanding of this document, and would you agree with me that this is

 2     the essence of his words, not the whole Krajina force but individual

 3     municipalities?

 4        A.   Well, that may be what the army wants, and it may well have been

 5     that municipalities, military commanders or Crisis Staffs or anybody else

 6     wanted the engagement of the whole of the police SJB, but I don't see

 7     that that, at least in the military documents I saw, that that happened.

 8        Q.   Mr. Zupljanin --

 9             JUDGE HALL:  Mr. Krgovic, it's that time of day, yes.

10             So we must take the adjournment and we would resume tomorrow

11     morning at 9.00.

12             THE WITNESS:  Sir, I wonder if I may be so bold to ask a personal

13     issue.

14             JUDGE HALL:  Certainly, Mr. Brown.

15             THE WITNESS:  I was asked by some former colleagues, one who

16     happens to currently work for the Registry, to go to a social evening for

17     a couple of people.  Only one who works at the ICTY, and bearing in mind

18     your caveat about not discussing or chatting to individuals within the

19     Tribunal, or at least not with the OTP and the Defence, I wonder if,

20     clearly, I wouldn't discuss issues of the case but I wonder if I would be

21     able to go to that.

22                           [Trial Chamber confers]

23             JUDGE HALL:  You have, Mr. Brown, reminded yourself of the

24     original warning not to discuss the case with anyone, so with that in

25     mind, we see no difficulty with your so attending the social function.

Page 19071

 1             THE WITNESS:  I appreciate that, sir.

 2                            --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.46 p.m.,

 3                           to be reconvened on Friday, the 21st day of

 4                           January, 2011, at 9.00 a.m.