1 Tuesday, 1 December 2009
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.03 a.m.
5 JUDGE PARKER: Good morning. We are to commence the Defence
6 evidence, and we understand from yesterday, Mr. Djurdjic, the accused
7 himself will now give evidence. Is that correct?
8 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours. The
9 first witness for the Defence is the accused, Vlastimir Djordjevic.
10 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you very much.
11 If the accused could come forward.
12 Would you please take the affirmation.
13 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, Your Honour.
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I shall
15 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
16 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you very much. Please sit down.
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
18 JUDGE PARKER: What we have heard, Mr. Djordjevic, suggests that
19 you could be in that witness box for well over a week. If you find that
20 you are tiring significantly in that time, please indicate.
21 Yes, Mr. Djurdjic.
22 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours.
23 WITNESS: VLASTIMIR DJORDJEVIC
24 [Witness answered through interpreter]
25 Examination by Mr. Djurdjic:
1 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, Mr. Djordjevic. Before we
2 commence with the examination-in-chief, please introduce yourself to the
3 Court and state your personal data.
4 A. I am Djordjevic, Vlastimir. I was born on the 17th of November,
5 1948, in the village of Kozica
6 Q. Thank you. Please be so kind as to tell us what are you -- what
7 is your educational background?
8 A. I have a bachelor's degree in law.
9 Q. Thank you.
10 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we see exhibit D010582 [as
12 Q. That is, Mr. Djordjevic, document number 1.
13 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] May I ask Your Honours, can we
14 provide Mr. Djordjevic with a hard copy for his easier reference and for
15 him to be able to more easily handle the document? Because it does not
16 have any annotations or anything added subsequently, so it is quite
17 clean. He can use it during the testimony.
18 JUDGE PARKER: It will be I think practical, Mr. Djurdjic, for
19 you to provide the accused with hard copy documents when he's going to be
20 making detailed reference to them, as long, of course, as they are not
21 annotated in any way.
22 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, prior to today's
23 session we received translations of all the documents that we are going
24 to be seeing under a single number, except for one document, and I
25 believe we handed over that one document to you this morning as well.
1 Q. Mr. Djordjevic, please explain what this document which you have
2 in front of you is.
3 A. This is a decision when I was admitted to work in the Ministry of
4 the Interior, the secretariat of the interior, in Zajecar a month after
5 graduation. So I was employed a month after graduation with the
6 secretariat of internal affairs in Zajecar, and this precisely is the
7 administrative decision stating that I was so employed.
8 Q. Thank you.
9 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we see page 2 now.
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] After having completed my
11 apprenticeship within the secretariat in April 1973, I was assigned to
12 the position of crime detective in the secretariat of the interior of
14 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we see page 3 of this
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This decision or by this decision I
17 was assigned from my previous post to the post of inspector for
18 white-collar crime or for the suppression of economic crime in the
19 inter-municipal secretariat of the interior Zajecar. So it somewhat
20 changed my status, and there was also a revamping within the secretariat.
21 So instead of the secretariat of the interior of Zajecar, they set up the
22 inter-municipal secretariat for internal affairs of Zajecar which
23 encompassed several municipalities. And within such a joint
24 inter-municipal secretariat, I was assigned to the post of inspector for
25 economic crime. That was in May 1974.
1 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we see page 4 of this
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Page 4 of this document which is in
4 March 1995 -- 1975, the leadership of the then-inter-municipal SUP from
5 the previous post of crime inspector for economic crimes, they assigned
6 me to the post of inspector of the militia, police inspector, in the same
7 secretariat so that as of the 1st of March, 1975, I was transferred to
8 the uniformed segment of the force, and I was a police inspector within
9 this inter-communal secretariat.
10 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we see page 5 now, please.
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In June 1976, from the post of
12 police inspector I was assigned to the post of senior police inspector in
13 the inter-municipal secretariat. A senior police inspector within the
14 inter-municipal secretariat meant that I was the officer in charge of the
15 uniformed segment of the inter-municipal secretariat, so I was the
16 superior to all the police commanders of the police stations within the
17 secretariat area, which there were eight at that time. I was responsible
18 for the uniformed segment of the force in that regional, meaning for
19 several municipalities.
20 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation]
21 Q. Thank you.
22 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we now see page 7.
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Now, these are decisions -- or
24 rather, this is a decision. Since there were certain reorganisational
25 changes within the secretariat from the post of senior inspector I was
1 assigned to the post of full inspector. Practically I did the same work.
2 There was some revamping, there were some changes. So instead of the
3 previous titles which I previously had, which was inspector -- police
4 inspector or senior police inspector, they introduced the titles of full
5 inspector, high inspector, high inspector first class, and -- so I was
6 practically doing the same work but my status had changed in that respect
7 because the regulations on the internal organisation and the job
8 description scheduled within the inter-municipal secretariat had changed.
9 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation]
10 Q. Thank you.
11 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we see page 8 now, please.
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Within that same secretariat there
13 existed the post of assistant secretary for militia for police affairs,
14 and I was assigned on the 1st of April, 1979, to that position while
15 practically as assistant secretary for police affairs I was also the
16 superior of all the police station commanders in the area. I answered to
17 the head of that secretariat for the uniformed segment of the force and
18 for their -- the discharge of their duties by them, by those officials.
19 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we see the following page,
20 please -- not in e-court, please.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is a decision from late
22 January, 1982, 29th of January, in fact. At that time it was assessed
23 that I should be assigned to one of the positions within the republican
24 secretariat of the interior. And so this is the relevant decision when
25 from the inter-municipal secretariat of the interior in Zajecar I was
1 transferred to work in the republican secretariat of the interior of the
2 Republic of Serbia
3 police administration of the republican secretariat.
4 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we see the next page, please.
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is the same decision. It had
6 to do with my personal emoluments, my salary. That is why we saw it
8 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we see the next page, please.
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is a decision whereby -- from
10 the -- my position I was promoted on the basis of my years of service and
11 of my educational background. I was eligible for a higher post than
12 one -- than the one that I was holding, so this is a decision that was
13 brought so as to promote me to the post of senior inspector. So this
14 is -- this was a decision on my promotion rank-wise within the police
16 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we see the next --
17 MR. STAMP: Since we can't follow this on e-court, could we just
18 be given the dates of each individual page that he's referring to because
19 that last one I'm not able to find so far.
20 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Distinguished colleague, each
21 document, there is the date on the top of each document. The date on
22 which it was adopted and then by whom it was adopted. It is indicated.
23 But you all -- you have received the hard copies of all these documents,
24 I believe, haven't you? You can see 18th of May, 1982. It is written on
25 the top of the document, if that is what you are referring to. Each
1 document bears a date.
2 MR. STAMP: That is what I was asking for, the date of the
3 document that the witness is referring to. I didn't have it before. Now
4 I know that we are speaking about a document dated the 18th of May.
6 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation]
7 Q. Mr. Djordjevic, for easier reference, please always refer to the
8 date. State the date of the decision that you are talking about.
9 A. So this decision is of the 18th of May, 1982, and it was adopted
10 by the head of the administration for joint affairs within the
12 Q. Thank you.
13 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we see the next page.
14 THE WITNESS: This is a decision of the 3rd of October, 1985
15 And as my previous post I had spent a required number of years. I was
16 promoted to the position of senior inspector first class and the head of
17 the administration for joint affairs brought this decision, promoting me
18 to that particular position or to the rank of senior inspector first
20 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we see the next page, please.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is a decision which was taken
22 on the 27th of July, 1990, where the republican secretary assigned me
23 from my position of head of police department where I had been working
24 until that point to chief of the inspector for internal control of the
25 legality of work in the republican secretariat, whilst holding the same
1 rank according to the previous decision. So from the police
2 administration I was transferred to be chief of the inspector for
3 internal control of legality of work.
4 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation]
5 Q. Thank you. Let us just explain to the Court, it is stated here
6 "republican secretary." According to the constitution valid at the time,
7 was the secretary at that time what was later minister, corresponded
8 later to the title of minister within the secretariat of internal
10 A. Yes. That would in current conditions be a minister. At the
11 time the designation was secretary, republican secretary, because the
12 institution was the republican secretariat of the interior. At that time
13 Radmilo Bogdanovic was the republican secretary. Later, instead of
14 republican secretary, this became a ministry and hence all later senior
15 officials were ministers, the heads of those institutions were ministers.
16 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we have the next page, please.
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Minister Zoran Sokolovic on the
18 31st of December, 1991, assigned me to the position of chief of police
19 administration, my rank being the same one that I had at the time. So
20 from chief of the inspectorate I was transferred, I was assigned, to the
21 position of chief of police administration.
22 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we see -- Your Honours, I move
23 to tender this exhibit.
24 JUDGE PARKER: It will be received.
25 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit D00393.
1 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we please have Defence
2 Exhibit D010-0582 -- no, we've already dealt with that. I beg your
3 pardon. D010-0394.
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] On the 12th of September, 1996
5 Government of the Republic of Serbia
6 the interior at its session held in September 1996. The Ministry of the
7 Interior was provided with a copy of this decision on my appointment as
8 assistant minister.
9 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation]
10 Q. Thank you.
11 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could this exhibit please be
12 admitted into evidence.
13 JUDGE PARKER: We notice, Mr. Djurdjic, that the name is not
14 given of the witness. He is described only by position. Perhaps the
15 witness could confirm that he was that person.
16 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, technical mistake in
17 e-court. So the next exhibit is the decision on the appointment. Here
18 we only see that a decision on the appointment is enclosed, whereas in
19 the next exhibit there is the actual decision on the appointment, however
20 this is a technical error, and you will see from the next document -- or
21 rather, the one that we're going to display. That's going to be that
22 decision on the appointment. I would appreciate it if we could correct
23 this, if the first page and this other page could be one single exhibit.
24 I don't know whether that is possible at this point in time because this
25 seems illogical the way we've entered it into e-court.
1 JUDGE PARKER: It would seem that if they cannot be combined, the
2 next document is the more important one. So we will see that on the
3 screen at the moment, give it an exhibit number, and if the records
4 officer is able to combine them, she will do so.
5 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation]
6 Q. Mr. Djordjevic, could you please have a look at the document that
7 is the second one under your number 10.
8 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] And could we see in e-court
10 Q. Mr. Djordjevic, I see it. That's the decision that I'd like you
11 to tell us about.
12 A. Yes, yes, the government passed a decision appointing me
13 assistant minister, and now the administration, the technical people
14 within the government, are simply sending this on to the ministry. So
15 this is the actual decision of the government appointing me assistant
16 minister, and it is compulsory for this decision to be published in the
17 Official Gazette of the Republic of Serbia
18 September, 1996.
19 Q. Thank you.
20 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could this exhibit please be
21 admitted into evidence.
22 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
23 JUDGE PARKER: It will be admitted as an exhibit together with
24 the previous document.
25 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, those two documents will be Exhibit
2 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we please have a look at
3 number 12, and that is Exhibit Number D010-0391.
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is a decision in which the
5 Minister of the Interior, Vlajko Stojiljkovic, appoints me acting head of
6 the RJB, the public security sector. Before that decision was taken,
7 changes had been introduced, ranks had been introduced. According to the
8 previous decision I got an appropriate rank, and it is in that way that
9 he appointed me acting head of the RJB on the 30th of May, 1997.
10 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation]
11 Q. Thank you.
12 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could this exhibit please be
13 admitted into evidence.
14 JUDGE PARKER: Yes.
15 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit D395.
16 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we please see Exhibit
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is a decision also taken by
19 Minister Stojiljkovic. The date is the 27th of January, 1998. By this
20 decision he appoints me head of the RJB, the public security sector.
21 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation]
22 Q. Thank you.
23 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could this exhibit please be
24 admitted into evidence.
25 JUDGE PARKER: Yes.
1 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit D396.
2 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we please now see Exhibit
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is a decision that was passed
5 by the Government of the Republic of Serbia
6 whereby I was relieved of the duty of assistant minister of the interior.
7 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation]
8 Q. Thank you.
9 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could this exhibit please be
10 admitted into evidence -- I beg your pardon. I have just heard that
11 there is no translation for this document, so then could it just be
12 marked for identification before being admitted?
13 JUDGE PARKER: It will be marked.
14 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit D397, marked
15 for identification.
16 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could I please have Exhibit
18 Q. And, Mr. Djordjevic, could you please look at number 16.
19 A. Yes, yes. After having been relieved of duty - we saw the
20 document a moment ago and then I ceased to be assistant minister - the
21 then-Minister of the Interior, Dusan Mihajlovic, on the 31st of January,
22 2001, appointed me counsellor of the minister of the interior.
23 Q. Thank you.
24 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could this exhibit please be
25 admitted into evidence.
1 JUDGE PARKER: Yes.
2 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit D398.
3 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could I please have D010-0402.
4 Q. And that is page 17 for you, Mr. Djordjevic.
5 A. Yes, this is a definite decision for me. It was passed by the
6 minister of the interior, and it states that my employment was terminated
7 as of the 3rd of May, 2001, and that, even before I met the general
8 pre-requisites for retirement, I was entitled to retire in accordance
9 with Article 41 of the Law on the Interior, and the decision was passed
10 on the 3rd of May, 2001.
11 Q. Thank you. Did you know that you would be pensioned off, or were
12 you pensioned off and then informed -- or rather, were you informed of
13 the termination of your employment?
14 A. At the moment when I was relieved of duties as
15 assistant minister and when I was appointed counsellor to the minister,
16 the minister decided that I should be a member of the coordination body
17 for the south of Serbia
18 to say from the 1st of February up until my retirement, I was a member of
19 that coordination body in the south of Serbia. Practically, as the
20 coordinating body we were responsible for the state of security in the
21 three municipalities in the south of Serbia that border with Kosovo and
22 Metohija. We also had other obligations in view of the land security
23 zone, that is to say conditionally speaking that would be the
24 administrative line facing Kosovo. Practically up until my retirement I
25 was a member of that body and I was there. From time to time I did go to
2 On that day, the 3rd of May, I finished the meeting that was
3 chaired by Mr. Nebojsa Covic, who I think was deputy prime minister at
4 that time, and he headed that coordinating body too. I think that the
5 meeting was over by about 8.00 p.m.
6 from Belgrade
9 interpreted], 2001. I didn't know that I had been pensioned off. I
10 didn't know anything about this. The first time I ever found out about
11 it was in the evening of the 3rd of January [as interpreted].
12 Q. Thank you.
13 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could this exhibit please be
14 admitted into evidence.
15 JUDGE PARKER: The translation has indicated the 3rd of January
16 and the 4th of January. Should that be May? Lines 14.8 and 10 or 11.
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It should be May.
18 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, in the entire
19 decision, the only date that is mentioned is the 3rd of May. There is no
20 other date. It only says down here the 4th of May, and there is his
21 signature, that is to say that the mentioned person received the
23 JUDGE PARKER: There may be a translation issue in the
24 transcript, Mr. Djurdjic. It's a mistake in the transcript.
25 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you. I didn't understand.
1 Q. Would you please move on to document 18, if you need to have a
2 look at it while giving your next answers.
3 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] If I've forgotten to do so, I
4 would like to ask that the previous exhibit be admitted into evidence.
5 JUDGE PARKER: The decision of the 3rd of May, 2001, will be
7 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit D399.
8 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
9 Q. Mr. Djordjevic, as for your entire career, you spent it in the
10 Ministry of the Interior; right?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Could you please tell us a few words about who it is that is in
13 charge of the Ministry of the Interior, and could you provide some basic
14 information to us about the Ministry of the Interior as such.
15 A. First of all, may I say that in the system of the state
16 administration, it is the ministries that discharge duties that are of
17 importance for the republic. So internal affairs is -- are taken care of
18 by the Ministry of Internal Affairs, of the interior. Also the Law on
19 State Administration, the Law on Internal Affairs, state that the
20 minister of the interior is the head of the Ministry of the Interior, and
21 from that point of view -- actually, first of all, may I say that the
22 minister is elected or later relieved of duty by the Assembly of the
23 Republic of Serbia
24 referred to, the minister of the interior is accountable for the entire
25 work and functioning of the Ministry of the Interior, that is to say that
1 he is responsible -- or rather, he represents the ministry vis-ā-vis all
2 other state organs, and it is the minister's duty at the request of the
3 government or the parliament or parliamentary bodies to provide
4 information to the government or the parliament or parliamentary bodies
5 about the work and the results of work of the ministry or individual
6 issues that he's called upon to explain.
7 In his capacity of minister, he was a member of the government as
8 well, specifically in this particular case Mr. Stojiljkovic was also
9 deputy prime minister; he was not only minister of the interior. But the
10 Ministry of the Interior in all its domains - we'll probably deal with
11 that a bit later - is headed by the minister of the interior in
12 accordance with the powers vested in him by law.
13 Q. Thank you. Does the minister submit reports about his work and
14 the work of his ministry to some organs?
15 A. The Ministry of the Interior through the minister, or rather, it
16 is the minister who first submits an annual report on work to the
17 Government of the Republic of Serbia
18 Assembly or to the Assembly itself once he is asked to do so. So it was
19 the minister's duty to submit a report once a year to the Government of
20 the Republic of Serbia
21 informed about what the prime minister or the president of the Assembly
22 are asking him to do. So he was the person who represented the ministry
23 and who was duty-bound to inform the mentioned state organs about what
24 had been done and how it had been done.
25 Also as minister it was his duty to have direct co-operation with
1 other state organs, other ministries, with the Army of Yugoslavia, and I
2 don't know -- all those state institutions that are at that level where
3 he is the representative of the ministry.
4 Q. Thank you. Can you please tell me in what way the internal
5 affairs are being carried out and who's the person who specifies that.
6 A. Pursuant to the laws that I mentioned herein above, the minister
7 of the interior was authorised to issue other bylaws regulating the area
8 of internal affairs, and in addition to that, also to issue internal
9 enactments within the ministry itself. These internal enactments
10 regulated within the ministry which jobs are going to be performed within
11 the ministry, in what way, which organisational units are going to take
12 care of them, et cetera. Practically by passing these internal
13 enactments he regulated all the issues, he issued rules, orders,
14 instructions, and other things. As for written documents are concerned,
15 his role reflected in regulating all the issues by means of issuing books
16 of rules, orders, and instructions. Those were the methods that the
17 ministry as a state organ was duty-bound to perform, either through its
18 organisational units or its various services.
19 Q. Thank you. In order to illustrate what you have just told us,
20 can we please now look at Exhibit D101. That's number 19 in your binder.
21 A. A short while ago we saw the Law on the Internal Affairs, and in
22 Article 7 of the said law it is stipulated that the minister is
23 authorised to govern the way of conducting affairs within the ministry,
24 and in accordance with this article the minister of the interior shall
25 issue directions how the internal affairs are going to be conducted by
1 people belonging to the reserve forces. This is only one of the
2 directions that he was bound to issue, and he did issue a great many of
3 them indeed.
4 Q. Thank you.
5 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we please now look at Exhibit
6 D101 -- I beg your pardon, 102.
7 Q. That's number 20 in your binder.
8 A. Well, yes. The previous direction that we have seen, so to
9 speak, is a kind of general enactment stipulating the engagement of
10 reserve forces, and the next document that is, so to speak, of a
11 lower-ranking status stipulates how this previous direction is going to
12 be implemented in practice, precisely and specifically how these reserve
13 forces are going to be -- how to carry out certain peacetime
14 [indiscernible] for the ministry by the reserve forces, it was issued
15 pursuant to Article 28 of the Law of the Internal Affairs of the Republic
16 of Serbia
17 engaging reserve forces by quoting which rights and obligations such
18 persons have once they are summoned pursuant to this order.
19 Q. Thank you. In this order I see that the period from the 1st of
20 July until 31st of December, 1998, is mentioned with regard to the
21 engagement of reserve forces. Can you tell me, is it possible to engage
22 people from the reserve forces without an order of this kind coming from
23 the minister?
24 A. As I said, this is an order which provides for operationalisation
25 of the previous direction. So twice a year the minister would issue this
1 kind of order that would remain valid for the following six months.
2 Pursuant to this order and only in this way could he engage any member of
3 the reserve forces in order for them to carry out certain peacetime tasks
4 within the Ministry of the Interior. In this manner, practically
5 throughout the whole year, throughout the whole 12 months, there was an
6 order in force issued by the minister of the interior which practically
7 sanctions and approves the use of the reserve force and envisages what
8 their obligations are. In addition to that, the order provides for the
9 relevant administrations in the ministry and the secretariats that are
10 obliged to ensure that this order is going to be implemented as
11 stipulated in the order itself.
12 Q. Thank you.
13 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Djurdjic, could you remind us of the date of
14 Exhibit D101, the document preceding this one.
15 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] The document D101 is dated 22nd of
16 June, 1998. 22nd of June, 1998.
17 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.
18 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] And D102 is the 1st of July.
19 Q. Could you please previously turn to 21 now --
20 JUDGE PARKER: The document on screen is D102, is it?
21 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Yes, and the witness -- or rather,
22 the accused already spoke about it. Now I would like him to tell us just
23 briefly something about the document 103, what's the difference, and to
24 what period it pertains.
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This previous order was in force
1 from the 1st January 1990 -- from the 1st July 1998 until the 31st of
2 December, 1998
3 minister issued the next order that was going to remain in place for the
4 next six months containing the same obligations that I already spoke
5 about. Therefore, there was always the minister's order in force which
6 enabled the engagement of the reserve force for the purpose of their
7 carrying out certain peacetime tasks in the ministry.
8 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation]
9 Q. Thank you. Can you tell us, these orders and directions all
10 refer to the engagement of the reserve forces in peacetime. In wartime
11 can you tell us what the procedure was with regard to the reserve force
12 under the Law on the Interior?
13 A. The same procedure. The minister has to take a decision in order
14 to engage the reserve forces following the mobilisation and in accordance
15 with the wartime plans of the ministry. Thereby, the reserve forces were
16 attached to the Ministry of the Interior which were already prepared by
17 the Ministry of the Interior. And this reserve force can only be engaged
18 by virtue of a decision issued by the minister. There was no other way
19 for that to be done.
20 Q. Does that mean that the Ministry of the Interior in case of war
21 has its own war units, reserve war units?
22 A. Yes. Starting from the municipal organ of the interior, which is
23 the lowest organisational unit within a secretariat. In a municipality
24 there is a war unit of the police and it went all the way up to the
25 secretariat of this specific municipality. All the municipalities had
1 those wartime police units made up of members of the reserve force
2 generally in the ratio 1:1, which means there was one member of the
3 reserve and one active-duty police officer. The reserve force also was
4 engaged in the so-called special police units, but pursuant to their war
5 plans the Ministry of the Interior already had wartime police units
6 prepared in combination with the active-duty force in the ratio 1:1.
7 Q. Can you tell us what was the status of the reserve police
8 officers when they become engaged?
9 A. By virtue of the direction and orders issued by the minister, the
10 status of these members of the reserve forces is decided and defined
11 whether they be engaged in peacetime or in wartime. In other words, once
12 they are admitted into the reserve force and once they become engaged,
13 from day one of their engagement a member of the reserve force of the
14 police or the Ministry of the Interior acquires a status of an authorised
15 official, and he is entitled to all other rights affordable to any other
16 authorised official. That is to say, when it comes to active-duty police
17 officers he exercises the same powers of an authorised official as they
18 do and he also has other entitlements arising from the employment just
19 like any other active-duty policeman, that is to say he is entitled to a
20 salary, he is entitled to daily allowances, he has a right to a sick
21 leave or the right to receive medical treatment if injured while carrying
22 out duties. This is equal to every other -- to what every other
23 active-duty police officer enjoyed.
24 Q. Thank you. Mr. Djordjevic, let us now move to the questions
25 relating to the internal organisation of the MUP and the closest
1 associates of the minister under the rules of internal organisation.
2 First tell me who adopts these rules? What do you know about that?
3 A. As we already mentioned, in accordance with the Law on the
4 Internal Affair, the minister of the interior is the one who adopts the
5 rules of internal organisation of the Ministry of the Interior. And in
6 principle, these rules on the internal organisation in its first segment
7 encompasses all the duties and jobs that specific organisational units of
8 the ministry are going to discharge, and this is described in the Law on
9 the Internal Affair. This same enactment says that the units which are
10 attached to the headquarters of the ministry, what they're going to do,
11 also detached units that are in the secretariats, and other units. The
12 rules on internal organisation contains all the duties and
13 responsibilities of all these organisational units, whether in the
14 headquarters of the secretariat, the ministry, and other bodies.
15 Q. Thank you. Can you tell me this, these rules passed by the
16 minister, does this have to receive an approval by the government?
17 A. Yes. The minister prepares a draft of the rules, and this draft
18 is then offered for adoption by the Government of the Republic of Serbia
19 who give their approval. The moment they give their approval it
20 practically become to be enforced in compliance to what the minister had
22 Q. Thank you. In the period while you were head of the public
23 security department, were there any assistants in the ministry and what
24 were their duties and who appointed them, although you already said that
25 based on your personal experience?
1 A. Yes. First of all, the Government of the Republic of Serbia
2 the proposal of the minister of the interior appoints assistant ministers
3 in the Ministry of the Interior. So the government is the one who makes
4 these personnel decisions, and after that, the minister is bound to issue
5 decisions in -- and issue instructions and assign certain domains to
6 every assistant. At the time when Minister Stojiljkovic was in this
7 position --
8 Q. One moment, please.
9 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we please look at Exhibit
11 Q. It's number 23 in your binder, sir.
12 A. Yes, this is a letter from the minister of the interior dated the
13 4th of June, 1997, in which he informs the organisational units of the
14 public security department at the MUP headquarters all the secretariats,
15 all the centres of the state security department, the MUP staff in
16 Pristina, border police stations, the police academy, the post-secondary
17 school of internal affairs, the secondary school of internal affairs, and
18 the institute for security. So, as I've already said, at this point in
19 time in the public security sector four assistant ministers were
20 appointed by the government decision. That was Radomir Markovic, Stojan
21 Misic, Obrad Stevanovic, and General Petar Zekovic. I was assistant
22 minister from 1996 onwards, as we've already seen.
23 Q. May I just interrupt you. I'm sorry. In paragraph 2 could you
24 please have a look who it was that was appointed at the session of the
25 4th of June.
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. And could you explain that to us.
3 A. Yes. A bit earlier the government had appointed assistant
4 ministers, namely myself, Stojan Misic, and Radomir Markovic, and on the
5 4th of June Major-General Petar Zekovic and Major-General Obrad
6 Stevanovic were appointed. So in this dispatch the minister of the
7 interior, through the powers vested in him by law, is making his
8 assistant ministers in charge of particular fields. So Radomir Markovic
9 is in charge of crime police affairs -- police work actually, then
10 analysis and information; Major-General Stojan Misic is in charge of
11 matters related to foreigners, administrative and legal affairs, fire
12 prevention, police and communications affairs; Major-General Obrad
13 Stevanovic for affairs relating to the police administration and the
14 operations centre, also for the secondary school and the college of
15 internal affairs and the police academy; whereas Major-General Petar
16 Zekovic is in charge of affairs related to the administration for joint
17 affairs and the boarder and lodging administration. At that point in
18 time the minister, by his decision, appointed me head of the public
19 security department -- acting head, actually.
20 As is stated in this dispatch, the assistant ministers helped the
21 minister in carrying out duties pertaining to the province of work of the
22 administrations that they were in charge of. So Radomir Markovic made
23 certain proposals to the minister in order to improve on the work of the
24 crime police and everything that is related to that. And that had to do
25 with crime throughout the territory of the Republic of Serbia
1 every point in time the assistant ministers also were supposed to
2 transmit the orders of the ministers -- the minister to people in the
3 field, in the areas in which they were responsible. So on the one hand
4 they were making proposals to the minister, and in this way they were
5 helping him carry out his duties as minister; and then on the other hand,
6 they were conveying the minister's orders, requests, et cetera, down the
7 line in that field of work in which they were responsible for helping
9 Q. There is one thing that I find striking here. All the lines of
10 work that are mentioned here, that the minister is in charge of and that
11 his assistant ministers are in charge of, all of this has to do with
12 public security?
13 A. Yes, yes. Practically for every line of work, for every
14 administration and headquarters, the minister charged every one of his
15 assistant ministers who would be keeping him abreast of what was going on
16 in that particular administration.
17 Q. And you were assistant minister and chief of the RJB.
18 A. Acting chief.
19 Q. Acting chief.
20 A. At that moment and through this instruction that was given by the
21 minister or this information and the assistant ministers had these
22 narrower responsibilities for the functioning of particular sections
23 within the RJB in the secretariat headquarters. In some way he
24 diminished the role at that point in time of the acting chief of the RJB,
25 because instead of -- instead of the heads of administrations being
1 directly responsible to the head of the department and then the head of
2 the department to the minister - as was customary in the system in terms
3 of superiority, et cetera - the minister on the basis of the rights
4 vested in him by the law, he made assistant ministers in charge of
5 particular tasks. Perhaps it was easier for him in that way to have more
6 direct links to the administrations. But at any rate, through this mode
7 of organisation of work in some way the role of -- the role of the
8 assistant minister who was in charge of the RJB was diminished, and that
9 was I at that point in time. So the situation was not fully clear as for
10 immediate responsibility, and as for relationship of hierarchy, of who is
11 the superior and who is below that superior, as is customary in the
12 Ministry of the Interior.
13 Q. Thank you. However, all the assistant ministers are equal and
14 they cannot issue orders to one another; right?
15 A. Yes. I as assistant minister --
16 MR. STAMP: [Previous translation continues]...
17 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] I withdraw the question. I
18 withdraw the question. I do beg your pardon. I do beg your pardon. I'm
19 obviously still cross-examining. May I re-formulate? Oh, no, I won't.
20 Let's just move on.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] May I say something?
22 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation]
23 Q. No, you may not.
24 In the top echelons of the MUP was there another method of work
25 in the form of a collegium?
1 A. Yes, yes. In the Ministry of the Interior and earlier on while
2 there was still a republican secretariat of the interior, there was
3 always a collegium of the minister and also the -- there was a collegium
4 of the chief of the RJB. As for the collegium of the minister, in this
5 period, that is to say from the beginning of June 1997 --
6 Q. I beg your pardon. Up until that period, tell us what was it
7 like while the minister was Sokolovic, while it was Sokolovic who was the
9 A. I've already said that the institution of the collegium as a
10 method of work and leadership in the ministry existed before Vlajko
11 Stojiljkovic came as minister -- became minister. So Minister Zoran
12 Sokolovic had his collegium consisting of the heads of the RJB and the
13 RDB. I think there was also an assistant for joint affairs, for finance,
14 et cetera, but basically it was the minister who had a collegium that
15 consisted of the chiefs of services, that is to say of the RJB and the
16 SDB. As for public security, I was a member of the collegium of the
17 chief of the RJB because at that time I was head of the police
18 administration. Once a week we had collegium meetings of the head of the
19 RJB, and every one of us reported on his own line of work in terms of
20 what had been done during the previous week. And then there would be a
21 proposed plan of work for the following week.
22 At that collegium of the chief of the RJB, decisions were made
23 practically on all matters and that is where decisions were made how and
24 in which way certain tasks would be carried out. If there were any
25 controversial matters, of course it was the chief of the RJB who would
1 make the ultimate decision. If there were any controversial matters,
2 then he would communicate with the minister, he would clarify the matters
3 involved with the minister, and he would convey to us what the position
4 was as agreed upon with the minister in practical terms.
5 When Minister Stojiljkovic became minister, I as acting chief of
6 the RJB and later on in 1998 when I became chief of the RJB, I never held
7 a single collegium of my own, that is to say there was no collegium of
8 the public security. The minister of the interior once a week invited to
9 his collegium all the heads of different lines of work in the
10 headquarters of the ministry, that is to say all the heads of
11 administrations, then he'd call the chief of the secretariat of the -- of
12 internal affairs in Belgrade
14 At this collegium the minister -- or rather, at first I would
15 open the collegium and I would give the floor practically to the chiefs
16 of administrations in public security. The chiefs of administration
17 would report on the situation in the preceding week, and also they would
18 say whether there were any proposals for the following week. Then
19 assistant ministers would take part in the discussion. Every one of them
20 made their own contribution as they deemed fit. I also, if I had
21 anything to observe, I could say whatever I wished to say and then the
22 minister would conclude the collegium in the following way. He would
23 issue orders as to what would be done in what way, who would cooperate
24 with who in carrying out these tasks and who would perhaps even be
25 involved from outside the ministry, and so on.
1 After the heads of administrations would report, then in the
2 conclusions the minister would give guide-lines, detailed guide-lines, to
3 all the administrations in the public security sector. Whatever the
4 minister would say at that point in time had to be carried out as he had
5 said because within a week's time he would ask for information, for
6 feedback, as to what had been done in the meantime. That is the way in
7 which this collegium operated. This was supposed to be the collegium of
8 the public security, but it wasn't really because the collegium was
9 chaired by the minister, and he issued tasks there too. So in a way it
10 was the collegium of the minister rather than the collegium of public
12 Q. Thank you. After such a collegium would any conclusions be
13 written up?
14 A. Yes. At the collegium most often it was the head of the analysis
15 department, and he would take the minutes. After the meeting it was his
16 duty to send the conclusions to all assistant ministers and heads of
17 administration, that is to say all the participants in the meeting. It
18 was his duty to send the conclusions and all the instructions provided by
19 the minister in writing, and it was on the basis of that that everyone
20 operated during the following week.
21 Q. Thank you.
22 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] And now, please, could we have
23 Exhibit D208.
24 Q. You have that under number 24.
25 A. Yes. This is a decision of the minister on the 4th of -- dated
1 the 4th of December, 1998. In this decision he establishes in formal
2 terms his own collegium. In the meantime - I just have to say one more
3 thing - there were certain personnel problems -- or rather, there were
4 certain solutions that were worked out in the state security sector.
5 Instead of Jovica Stanisic, assistant Minister Radomir Markovic was
6 appointed head of the SDB and Nikola Curcic, Major-General Nikola Curcic
7 was appointed as his deputy. So Radomir Markovic until then, who was in
8 charge of crime and analysis, and now he became head of the SDB.
9 Through this decision, the minister sets up his own collegium
10 consisting of the head of the RJB, the head of the SDB, and his deputy.
11 Assistant Ministers Obrad Stevanovic, Stojan Misic, and Petar Zekovic and
12 also, Lieutenant-General Dragisa Dinic who was head of the administration
13 for traffic police and also he was assistant chief of the RJB. On the
14 next page we see the Major-General Dragan Ilic chief of the crime police
15 administration was also included and appointed as member of the collegium
16 and also Major-General Branko Djuric, chief of the secretariat of the
17 interior in Belgrade
18 meetings should be attended by the chef de cabinet to the minister and
19 Slobodan Krstic, head of the analytics department, who was in charge of
20 keeping the minutes. Also, the possibility is provided for other senior
21 personnel from the ministry to attend collegium meetings on the basis of
22 a special decision made by the minister. That is what is written in this
24 In actual fact, these meetings that were held once a week were
25 always attended by all heads of administrations in the RJB, just like
1 before and in the same way reports were made like before and conclusions
2 were drawn up the same way like before. If I can put it this way, the
3 only new thing here is that the collegium meetings are attended by the
4 chief of the SDB and his deputy.
5 Q. Thank you. You told us that in practice heads of administration
6 who participated from the public security sector. Did heads of
7 administration from the state security sector also attend these meetings?
8 A. No, this collegium meeting was never attended by heads of
9 administration of the state security department. The chief of the
10 department and his assistant were there, and as a rule the chief of the
11 department would inform the minister on a couple of matters which he
12 considered should be made available to the minister and that is where his
13 briefing ended. As far as the leadership and senior officials from the
14 public security department is concerned, everything remained the same as
15 prior to the adoption of this decision.
16 Q. Thank you. Tell us, after these collegium meetings did you hold
17 also collegium meetings of the head of the public security department?
18 A. After this collegium, I never held any meetings because all the
19 senior officials, all the line of work senior officials and the assistant
20 ministers who were responsible for the specific segments of work in the
21 ministry would present all security parameters, all the problems that
22 they were confronted with, as well as all the proposals that they had for
23 work in the coming period. All of that would be reflected in the
24 conclusions of the minister, who would then instruct everybody how to go
25 about finishing their particular segment of the work. So I, just as all
1 the other assistants and heads of administrations, only had to implement
2 the work assigned to me within the next days and ensure the overall
3 functioning and the execution of the work falling within the competence
4 of the ministry, both on the ground and in the particular secretariats.
5 So I did not have my own collegium meeting as the chief of the public
6 security sector.
7 Q. Thank you.
8 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I believe it is time
9 for our break.
10 JUDGE PARKER: Very well.
11 We will adjourn now and resume at 11.00.
12 --- Recess taken at 10.29 a.m.
13 --- On resuming at 11.06 a.m.
14 JUDGE PARKER: Yes, Mr. Djurdjic.
15 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
16 Q. I would like to ask you, you described how it was until the 4th
17 of December and you told us something about the 4th of December as well.
18 I would like to know, though, whether the minister up until the 4th of
19 December, 1998, had his own collegium meetings that would be attended by
20 the chiefs of both departments and the assistants.
21 A. I don't remember. It's possible that at some point in time we
22 did meet with the minister in that composition, but that wasn't his style
23 of work really. He would call the chief of public security when he
24 needed him, when he needed chief of state security he would call him,
25 when he need any other assistant ministers in terms of their line of work
1 he would call them individually, that is to say that the collegium of the
2 minister never met, as is written here in this decision, which is to say
3 with these nine men, with General Branko Djuric, Slobodan Krstic, and
4 Pantovic. This collegium never met with the minister.
5 Q. Thank you. But would you please carefully listen to my
6 questions. I asked you about the situation up until the 4th of December,
7 1998, was there -- were there any collegium meetings that would be
8 attended by both the chiefs of the RJB and state security? Who was the
9 chief of state security at that time?
10 A. I think up until October or November it was Jovica Stanisic, who
11 was the chief of state security, and at that time there never was any
12 collegium meetings with the minister that would be attended by the chiefs
13 of both the RDB and RJB.
14 Q. Thank you. You as assistant minister, could you issue tasks to
15 another assistant minister and vice versa?
16 A. As I have told you earlier, this type of organisation in a way
17 disturbed the relationship that existed between the administrations
18 within the ministry and the chief of the RJB. As for me personally, I
19 was assistant minister and my relationship with other four assistant
20 ministers from the public security was such that I could not issue any
21 orders to them. That means that all orders, instructions, tasks, and so
22 on could only be issued to them by the minister himself. I could not
23 issue any orders or tasks to my peers, to other assistant ministers.
24 That means that all assistant ministers were responsible to the minister
25 directly. They were responsible to him for the task that had been issued
1 to them by him.
2 A bit earlier we spoke about how Radomir Markovic transferred and
3 became chief of state security - if I'm not mistaken - sometime in
4 October of 1998. Yes. Earlier on we saw in a dispatch that he was
5 responsible for crime investigations, police administration, and also for
6 the administration for analysis and information. When the minister
7 appointed him chief of the RDB, he decided that the administration for
8 analysis and information need to be linked in via General Stojan Misic to
9 the administrations for which General Misic was responsible to the
10 minister. And he was tasked with coordinating the work of the
11 administration for analysis and information.
12 At that point the minister said that his further communication
13 with the chief of the crime investigations police administration would be
14 direct. So that means that there was direct relationship between them,
15 and he, the chief of that administration, was directly responsible to the
16 minister, that is to say that none of the assistant ministers were any
17 longer in charge of the crime investigations department.
18 Q. Thank you. I would like to put the most important question to
19 you concerning the security and -- or rather, I would like to tell you
20 that the most important question in Yugoslavia at that time concerned the
21 security and political situation in Kosovo. So what were the topics
22 discussed at these collegiums held by the minister?
23 A. At these collegiums in the form that they were in, we received --
24 rather, the minister was informed in most general terms about the
25 situation and the problems if the RDB had some observations they were
1 provided but also in global terms. The chief of the department would
2 inform on that. And as for other lines of work within the ministry, and
3 none of them briefed about the tasks and jobs conducted down there in the
4 territory of Kosovo
5 informed the minister only about sending certain individuals, police
6 members, down there and also about equipment and weapons and also members
7 of joint services who provided logistical support to these units, to
8 PJPs, also informed the minister. But there was no special information
9 given about anti-terrorist activities in the territory of Kosovo
10 Metohija. This wasn't the topic at any of the meetings, not at all. All
11 that was given was just general information, something that was widely
12 known to everybody. There was no detailed information provided about
13 anti-terrorist and combat activities conducted in the territory of Kosovo
14 and Metohija.
15 Q. Thank you. You have a document before you, it has two pages.
16 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we see page 3, please. I
17 think it was D209 -- I apologise, 208, not 209.
18 Q. In this exhibit we have page 3 and we will get to it. Now, tell
19 me, please, based on what you know, was this page a part of the document
20 that we saw?
21 A. This is the first time I see it -- or rather, I saw it during our
22 proofing, but in my view this is a document that the cabinet of the
23 minister prepared so that he would have a list of the participants. This
24 is not an official document on the composition of the collegium; this is
25 simply a list of persons that are already mentioned in the decision.
1 This is not a part of this document.
2 Q. Do you know who drafted this?
3 A. No, I don't.
4 Q. Thank you. Tell me, please, you see that this is a list of
5 collegium participants and ten people are listed, and then below that we
6 have a list for RDB. Can you explain this?
7 A. I don't know about this. All of these persons were mentioned
8 earlier in the minister's decision on establishing the collegium. Now,
9 why they were divided in this list, I don't know.
10 Q. Let me ask you this: Members of the collegium are listed in the
11 decision, Danilo Pantovic, head of the office of the minister; and Krstic
12 Slobodan, chief of the IT administration only attend collegiums according
13 to the decision but they're not members of it.
14 A. Yes, and this is why I think that somebody else drafted this list
15 based on the people who attended collegium meetings, but what their
16 criterion was I don't know. Pantovic and Krstic were not members of the
17 collegium. In the basic decision they are not listed as members of the
18 collegiums. This is probably just an auxiliary document that was
19 prepared for the minister so that he could see who participated in those
21 Q. Thank you.
22 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we see the next page,
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In my view, this was drafted
25 according to the same principle, collegium in its expanded composition,
1 which includes chiefs of administrations. In addition to Pantovic and
2 Krstic, here, just for the record, they also included other participants
3 of the collegium. There are two names here that are questionable in my
4 view, Momo Stojanovic and Zavisic. I don't know who drafted this and
5 what criteria they used to do that.
6 Q. Thank you.
7 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I don't know whether
8 this would be a good time, but I have to comment on the last two pages of
9 this document. Not knowing that there was already an OTP exhibit that
10 had been used here, we also obtained from the national council an
11 official document on the collegium of the ministry without these two
12 enclosures, attachments. And I think that these two attachments are not
13 authentic, that they're not original attachments to the decision that was
14 admitted into evidence. I think that this was produced by somebody
15 subsequently, not at the time when this document was adopted on the 4th
16 of December. And we think so especially in view of the way that the
17 names of the persons are listed on pages 3 and 4 of this document.
18 JUDGE PARKER: Well, Mr. Djurdjic, that's an interesting
19 question. We have the document with the pages attached. We have this
20 witness expressing a view that it may not be as he understood it. It
21 will be a matter for other evidence, if there is any, or for a decision
22 by the Chamber in due course. At the moment it's an open question. I
23 just want you to be aware that because you think it is something else,
24 that doesn't mean that it's necessarily so.
25 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you. Just for the sake of
1 clarification, the exhibit which we received by official channels, is it
2 in that form that we should tender it before the Court, because the
3 numbers here indicate that we used an OTP document, K054-1171, that's one
4 page; and the other page is K054-1171. When we received these documents
5 officially, we didn't get that.
6 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction: The first document's
7 number is K054-1172.
8 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation]
9 Q. Let us move on, Mr. Djordjevic. Did the minister of the interior
10 appoint the chiefs of the secretariats of the interior in the territory
11 of the Republic of Serbia
12 A. In accordance with his legal powers, the minister decided first
13 on the admission of all staff to work at the Ministry of the Interior,
14 and later also about any promotions, personnel promotions, personnel
15 assignments throughout the service. To that effect, the minister also
16 made decisions as to whom he would appoint to the position of chief of
17 administration at the headquarters of the ministry or chief of a
18 secretariat, namely, these most responsible positions within the
19 secretariat. And he would adopt relevant decision assigning them to such
21 Q. Thank you.
22 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we have Exhibit D010-0600.
23 According to the 65 ter list, it is 1787.
24 Q. And, Mr. Djordjevic, you please take a look at serial number 25.
25 A. This is a decision by which on the 4th of June, 1997, the
1 minister appointed Branko Djuric as chief of the secretariat of the
2 internal affairs in Belgrade
3 chief of department of internal affairs at Novi Belgrade. But as of that
4 point in time the minister appointed him under this decision to the
5 position of chief of secretariat.
6 Q. Thank you. I can see on this decision that the date when it was
7 brought was the 4th of June, 1997.
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. If I'm not mistaken, you were appointed as acting head of the
10 public security department on the 1st of June, 1996. So I would like to
11 know whether the minister consulted you in respect of the appointing of
12 this most important position, that of chief of secretariat of the
13 interior in Serbia
14 A. As according to the job description schedule, I was the senior
15 official in charge, at least I was the acting head in the public security
16 department. It would have been normal for me keeping with the powers
17 pertaining to that post to have been asked about the appointment of staff
18 to the most important positions, in particular in respect of chiefs of
19 secretariats. As the chief of the public security department, I had a
20 right to propose certain appointments to the minister - and I'm referring
21 to the most important once again, namely, chiefs of administrations or
22 chiefs of secretariats. This is the normal order of things, the normal
23 course of things. However, the minister, without consulting me in any
24 way whatsoever, brought this decision appointing Branko Djuric as chief
25 of secretariat so that I only heard later by word of mouth or in the news
1 that he had been appointed chief of SUP, of the S-U-P, which was totally
2 out of the customary way things were done because at that time I was the
3 acting chief of the public security department. But it is the way it
4 was. So that after all he has the legal authority, he has the
5 possibility to do so, whether he would see fit to consult someone or not
6 was up to him.
7 Q. Thank you.
8 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] I ask for this exhibit to be
9 admitted into evidence.
10 JUDGE PARKER: It will be received.
11 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit D400.
12 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
13 Q. Please tell us with regard to the period of your work as chief of
14 the security department, were there any other cases of decisions having
15 been taken by the minister without any consultations whatsoever with you?
16 A. Of course there were such instances. There were a number of such
17 instances. There were different appointments that had been made in
18 respect of which he made his own decisions without consulting at all or
19 obtaining the sense, the opinion, of, for instance, the chief of the
20 public security department. This could have referred to specific
21 security duties and jobs which the ministry carried out or the internal
22 organisation, so to speak, of work within the ministry. A typical
23 example, for instance, was that at the end of 1998 he decided in
24 agreement with the state security department to have the special unit
25 from Novi Sad
1 state security department, i.e., to their special operations unit and
2 that the commander of that unit according to his decision was assigned to
3 the post of deputy commander of the special operations unit. It would
4 have been quite regular for him to have consulted me somewhat in that
5 respect, but he did not. I learned about that from the commander of the
6 unit, Branko Curcic, that is the special unit from the Novi Sad who came
7 to see me. And he told me that he had been called by people from the
8 state security department and that according to instructions from the
9 minister they had decided to take over most of the members of that unit
10 into this special operations unit and that he personally was to be
11 assigned to the position of deputy commander of the special operations
12 unit. And he asked me what was he to do, and what else could I tell him
13 but simply I just told him, "You have no other option, you have no
14 choice, just accept what you are being offered," and that was the way it
15 was done.
16 Then the minister called me and he told me that a part of the
17 unit was to be transferred into the state security department special
18 operations unit and that the other members of the unit, which that unit
19 would not wish to take its into ranks, would have to be assigned to the
20 territorial unit of the secretariat for internal affairs of Novi Sad
21 issued orders to the secretariat's head to that effect, so to in fact
22 take in these actually surplus members from that unit who we assess could
23 go there. We also took part of the members into the Belgrade department.
24 So this was the way in which this unit from Novi Sad was dismantled, in
25 the way that I have just described.
1 There also had been other security relevant situations, just as
2 the appointment of Djuric, for instance, there was the relieving of
3 office of some heads of -- in the service without me knowing anything
4 about it. He would send, for instance, an assistant minister to dismiss
5 some chief in the service, and to me he would just say, "Now find a
6 position for this person, for so and so, and see where you can put him."
7 This was as far as personnel was concerned, as far as staff was
9 As regards to the actual work depending on his assessment and his
10 own choices, he would assign some people to be in charge of certain work
11 without taking account in so doing of some standard, hierarchical
12 relationships in the service. A characteristic example is the assistance
13 that was rendered on one occasion in connection with a Studio B
14 independent television station, which being independent in its way was
15 actually -- bore the brunt of the current authorities. And at that time
16 the decision, a judicial decision in fact, was taken for that TV studio
17 to be extinguished. He issued instructions to that effect. Members of
18 the police in SUP
19 engaged to carry out that task. This assistance was rendered and the
20 staff of the TV Studio B were expelled. And in accordance with the
21 judicial decisions, that matter was dealt with in that way. So that was
22 a very important question which he decided on himself -- organised
23 himself through various superior officials. I only learned about it the
24 next morning when I came to work, that that had been done the previous
25 night. The senior officials who had been ordered to do that came to me
1 and told me that that had been done, and they told him -- me that one of
2 his requests when he charged them with this task was that they should not
3 tell me about it. Now, why he did so, I really don't know. I have some
4 explanations in my mind, but I really do not actually know.
5 On that occasion either I -- neither on that occasion did I go to
6 see him and seek any explanations; I was just simply informed that this
7 had been done. So -- and as the police was -- and that the police a part
8 of their public security department had been engaged, not only had he not
9 informed me, but he had in fact forbidden the people who had done this
10 job to inform me of it in any way whatsoever and there had been other
11 instances as well.
12 Q. Thank you.
13 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could I have Exhibit D38.
14 Q. This is your number 26.
15 A. Yes, this is a decision -- a decision by which the minister
16 actually assigns Dusan Gavranic from the position of chief of the
17 secretariat of the interior in Zrenjanin to the position -- assigns him
18 to the position of chief of secretariat of the interior in Gnjilane. On
19 that occasion he tasked me, the minister, that is, with calling the chief
20 from Gavranic and communicating to him the minister's decision which was
21 that he was to be assigned to the secretary in Gnjilane. I think -- in
22 fact, I do not think, I'm sure because I was aware what the situation was
23 like, that Dusan Gavranic actually fell out of favour with the minister
24 because he did not do something he wanted him to do in connection with
25 some structures in Zrenjanin. And he thought that when I communicated to
1 him the minister's decision, that he would be appointed to Gnjilane, that
2 he would refuse that, and that thereby his service, his employment, with
4 and I told him that there existed the need because the Gnjilane chief was
5 to be retired and there existed the need for another chief to be
6 appointed to that position. I explained to him in a couple of sentences
7 that many of our people and many of our senior officials were going down
8 there to work. And he only asked me, "When am I supposed to go?" And I
9 informed the minister accordingly, this decision was taken accordingly,
10 he went down there, and I believe that he did his job successfully. So
11 that it was decided in that way, and thus by the minister and he assigned
12 Gavranic as chief of the SUP
13 Q. Thank you.
14 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we have Exhibit P78, please.
15 Q. Your number 27.
16 A. This is a decision of the 15th of April, 1999, under which
17 Lieutenant-Colonel Vucina Janicijevic is appointed to the position of
18 chief of the secretariat of the interior in Kosovska Mitrovica.
19 Q. Who brought this decision?
20 A. Also the minister, and the decision was served on Janicijevic on
21 the 22nd of April, 1999.
22 Q. Sorry, I didn't hear you, when was it adopted?
23 A. I did say it was on the 15th of April, 1999.
24 Q. Thank you.
25 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could I please have Exhibit P77.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is a decision dated the 15th
2 of April, 1999, as well. I passed this decision as the chief of the
3 department and in accordance with the powers vested in me by the
4 minister. In this decision Colonel Ljubinko Cvetic, an employee of the
5 Ministry of the Interior in the Kragujevac secretariat shall cease to
6 perform the tasks and duties of the chief of the Kosovska Mitrovica
7 secretariat of the interior, where he was sent on the 1st of January,
9 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation]
10 Q. Thank you. The decision on appointment was made by the minister,
11 and then on his order you had this person reassigned to the same SUP?
12 A. Yes, and that's not the only such case --
13 MR. STAMP: No, Your Honours, I didn't object on a couple of
14 occasions to leading questions of this nature, but sometimes I get the
15 translation a long time after the question has been asked and answered.
16 I think counsel should be careful --
17 JUDGE PARKER: So you object?
18 MR. STAMP: Yes, I object because it's leading.
19 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Djurdjic.
20 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I'm just asking for
21 an explanation, an explanation of the appointment. It's the 15th of
22 April, 1999, and a new chief of the SUP
23 signed by the minister. And then according to the authority given to him
24 by the minister, the chief of the RJB gives a decision on the cessation
25 of duties of the hitherto chief of SUP. I want him to explain the
1 situation, the witness to explain the situation. What is leading in
3 MR. STAMP: Your Honour, basically he tells the witness that --
4 JUDGE PARKER: No need, Mr. Stamp.
5 You're telling the witness really what you think the answer to
6 your problem is instead of inviting him to tell you; that's the basic
7 problem. It takes away the reliance we can place upon the answer given
8 by the witness; that's the disadvantage from your point of view. So I
9 think over this particular issue the ground has been lost, it's too late.
10 Get your answer and carry on, but Mr. Stamp is suggesting that you are
11 slipping into the habit of leading on some important matters. If you
12 could be careful about that in future. Thank you.
13 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
14 Q. Since the minister appoints and relieves chiefs of SUP, when is
15 there a situation in which you, on authority given to you by the
16 minister, adopt decisions or pass decisions?
17 A. I said in relation to this decision - I don't know what the
18 transcript says - that on the 15th of April on the authority given to me
19 by the minister I passed a decision to the effect that Cvetic would no
20 longer be an employee. When the minister gave me such instructions or
21 orders, then I would act accordingly; when he would tell me to make a
22 decision in relation to a chief of a particular secretariat, that he
23 should be dismissed, then acting upon instructions of the minister I
24 would pass such decisions. So it's not just one decision. There are
25 several decisions primarily relating to chiefs of secretariats in the
1 territory of Kosovo, where after the minister's definite decision on the
2 appointment of a new chief of secretariat, then I would pass a decision
3 according to which the hitherto chief of secretariat would no longer be
4 in that position.
5 Q. Thank you.
6 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could we please have P1036,
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That is a decision dated the 20th
9 of December, 1996, in which the chief of the department, Radovan Stojicic
10 passes a decision whereby Ljubinko Cvetic, an employee of the Ministry of
11 the Interior in Kragujevac, secretariat of the interior, is being sent to
12 perform the tasks and duties of the chief of the Kosovska Mitrovica
13 secretariat of the interior as of the 1st of January, 1997. It is
14 important to note that the previous chief of department was deputy
15 minister, whereas I was assistant minister. In the Serbian language and
16 in our part of the world is a very important distinction. A deputy
17 minister stands in for the minister, deputises for the minister, whereas
18 the assistant minister assists the minister and is responsible for a
19 particular activity.
20 According to this decision, the deputy minister is practically
21 minister when the minister is absent, and he has rights of his own and
22 powers of his own in terms of making an appointment decision or a
23 decision to relieve someone of duty, et cetera. That is a right that he
24 has by virtue of the fact that he is deputy minister.
25 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation]
1 Q. Thank you.
2 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could I please have Exhibit P75.
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That is a decision dated the 4th of
4 June, 1997
5 out the duties of the chief of the secretariat of the interior in
6 Pristina as of the 15th of June, 1997.
7 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation]
8 Q. Thank you.
9 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] I would like to have Exhibit P79,
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That is a decision like the
12 previous one for Cvetic. On the 15th of April, 1999, as authorised by
13 the minister I make a decision to the effect that Colonel Bosko Petric
14 shall no longer be chief of the secretariat of the interior in Pristina.
15 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation]
16 Q. Thank you.
17 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Could I please have Exhibit P357.
18 Q. It is number 32 in your binder of documents. I would like us now
19 to go through these rules, but you should explain to us how this worked
20 out in practice and you should try to familiarise the Trial Chamber with
21 this. We have before us the rules on the internal organisation of the
22 Ministry of the Interior. So could you please tell us what these rules
24 A. This is a rule book on the internal organisation of the Ministry
25 of the Interior. It was adopted on the 31st of December, 1997. I have
1 already said that in accordance with the authority vested in him by law,
2 the minister of the interior, with the agreement of the
3 Government of Serbia
4 organisational units, their authority in terms of location, also their
5 tasks and duties, and practically in this way these rules -- through
6 these rules the minister prescribes how work will be organised and
7 carried out in the Ministry of the Interior.
8 Q. Thank you. Could you please tell me whether these rules pertain
9 to both departments that are within the ministry.
10 A. No. These rules only pertain to the internal organisation of the
11 public security. According to the regulations then in force, the
12 internal organisation of the state security was organised on the basis of
13 other rules which involve a certain degree of secrecy, so special rules
14 are adopted, whereas these rules were passed for the public security
16 Q. Thank you. In terms of the work carried out by public security,
17 what is the basic organisational unit?
18 A. In accordance with the law, the basic organisational unit for
19 carrying out work in the domain of public security is the public security
21 Q. Thank you. Could you please tell us about public security work.
22 What organisational units were established for carrying out this work?
23 A. These rules specify two forms of organisational units, if I can
24 put it that way. The first form is up and down the line, and the second
25 form is territorial. As for the line-based one, it has to do with
1 administrations in the headquarters of the ministry, and they are
2 responsible for a particular line of work throughout the territory of the
3 Republic of Serbia
4 units that are territorial organs of the Ministry of the Interior in the
5 territory of the Republic of Serbia
6 of the interior which then have their own organisational units deep down
7 in the territories of the municipalities.
8 Q. Thank you. Tell me, in the territory of the Republic of Serbia
9 how many secretariats of the interior are there?
10 A. These rules specify 33 secretariats in the territory of the
11 Republic of Serbia
12 province of Kosovo
13 province of Vojvodina, and the rest are in the territory of Serbia
14 as it was known at the time.
15 Q. Thank you. And within the secretariat, are there other
16 organisational units that cover parts of the territory within the
18 A. The secretariat of the interior was part of the ministry
19 responsible for internal affairs in the territory of a few
20 municipalities, that is to say immediately responsible for the
21 headquarters of the secretariat and for a few municipalities. That is
22 how the regional organisation worked at the time in the Republic of
24 narrower organisational units that were in the territory of the
25 municipalities that were an integral part of the said region. In the
1 territory of the municipalities there were divisions of the interior. In
2 larger municipalities, I think in about 20 in the territory of all of
4 internal territorial form of organisation within the territory of the
5 secretariat. So the secretariat and its narrower forms in bigger
6 municipalities and in smaller municipalities with a smaller population,
7 et cetera, there were only police stations.
8 Q. Thank you. Do these rules prescribe the actual authority of the
9 secretariat or the division of the interior?
10 A. Secretariats and of course their divisions and police stations
11 carried out all work from the domain of the interior in their own area.
12 What was in the domain of work of the Ministry of the Interior according
13 to law were also the tasks that were carried out by the secretariats of
14 the interior and their narrower territorial units.
15 Q. Thank you. What were the organisational units within the
16 Ministry of the Interior?
17 A. In the Ministry of the Interior, the basic units were the
18 administrations, just like there's the secretariat down there. In
19 headquarters there were administrations. Every administration had a few
20 divisions within it, so these were lower-ranking organisational units
21 within the administrations. And every division had within it a few
22 departments say for a particular group of tasks where this was required.
23 So that was the schematic governing the organisation of the
24 administrations in the headquarters of the ministry.
25 Q. Thank you. Tell me, who headed the departments, the
1 administrations, and the SUPs?
2 A. They were headed by heads, the chief of the department, the head
3 of the department; the chief of the administration, the head of the
4 administration; the chief of the secretariat, the head of the
6 Q. Thank you. Tell me, the law says what all the administrations
7 were so we don't have to go into that. From an operative point of view
8 for the MUP and generally speaking for security, what are the most
9 important administrations that were involved in operative security work?
10 A. Since we've already been talking about the secretariats and we
11 said that they carry out all the work in their own territory, from the
12 domain of work of the interior, that is the protection of persons and
13 property, the control of traffic, fire protection, checking the movement
14 of foreigners, et cetera, so the secretariats did all of that within
15 their own territory. For example, an administration would be involved
16 only in one particular line of work. Say the crime police administration
17 had as their duty to programme, promote the activity in this entire line
18 of work, that is to say crime prevention throughout the territory of the
19 Republic of Serbia
20 crime prevention and control throughout the Republic of Serbia
21 that point of view it is their duty to promote such activities and issue
22 certain instructions and orders to secretariats in terms of how this
23 could be carried out as successfully as possible. That also pertains to
24 the police administration and all the other administrations in the
25 secretariat, or rather, at the headquarters of the ministry.
1 In terms of the subject matter they deal with, the volume of
2 their work, the complexity of their work, the first category of
3 administrations in the headquarters of the ministry are the crime
4 prevention police and the crime police.
5 Q. Thank you. With regard to defence tasks, how did the Ministry of
6 the Interior function and how was that implemented and regulated in
8 A. The Ministry of the Interior, just like any other state organ in
9 the Republic of Serbia
10 make preparations for an immediate peril of war and for war. And in that
11 sense just like all other state organs they had their wartime plans.
12 These wartime plans were technically prepared by an organisational unit
13 within the Ministry of the Interior which was involved in defence
14 preparations in the broader sense of that word. Before that used to be
15 an independent unit and it was called a department for wartime
16 preparations, but about the period that we are talking about now, which
17 is 1997 and 1998, this job was done by a division within the police
18 administration. So it was no longer an independent unit, but it rather
19 operated within the police administration and their basic tasks were
20 identical. This division had the duty to prepare programmes for the
21 preparation of the Ministry of the Interior for operating in wartime
22 conditions and in accordance with the regulations to prepare all the
23 documents and to establish a system of conveying orders from the federal
24 government all the way down to the state organs, as it was usually done
25 in such circumstances. This division as far as the ministry is
1 concerned, they prepared the plan at the headquarters which was always
2 updated at a later stage by adding sometimes duties and tasks received
3 from the federal government. These instructions had to be incorporated
4 because all these plans were compatible with the system of preparing
5 wartime plans that were carried out by the federal government to the
6 level of republic to the level of the lowest organs.
7 Now, that's as far as the headquarters is concerned. This
8 organisational units had its sectors that were carrying out these jobs.
9 As for the secretariat, this line of work was covered by officials within
10 the police department that existed within any secretariat of the
11 interior. So all the instructions and orders related to the preparation
12 of wartime documents and their updating through this division in the
13 police administration were passed down to the units on the ground, and
14 therefore all the organs and the administrations within the headquarters
15 had a duty to have the latest updated plans to make the Ministry of the
16 Interior fully prepared in case of an immediate danger of war or war.
17 Q. This internal organisational structures within SUPs and OUPs, how
18 did that look like and in what form did they operate?
19 A. The SUPs in order to be able to carry out their work successfully
20 had at their headquarters in a way some kind of line-based divisions. So
21 the difference is with the ministry [as interpreted] in Belgrade, between
22 them and the ministry. The ministry [as interpreted] in Belgrade had the
23 crime administration because they dealt with most of the problems, and
24 the secretariat instead had divisions that dealt with this matter. So
25 the internal organisational units in the secretariat for specific lines
1 of work had divisions. For example, in the secretariat of the
2 interior --
3 Q. One moment, please. On page 54, line 25, it should read not the
4 ministry in Belgrade
5 line 24. So we are not talking about the ministry in Belgrade, we are
6 talking about the secretariat of the interior.
7 JUDGE PARKER: I'm waiting to have the witness concur with that,
8 Mr. Djurdjic.
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes, it's all right. I agree
10 with this change. I was speaking about the secretariat of the interior
11 and the criminal investigation police in the secretariat of the interior
12 as a line-based organisation part dealing with the crime. At the level
13 of the secretariat, apart from Belgrade
14 combatting crime. Now, this line-based administration for combatting
15 crime from the Ministry of the Interior through their line of work
16 achieved betterment of the work through the respective divisions in the
17 secretariat down there that were responsible for that operation. This is
18 how this department and the headquarters of the ministry promoted and
19 improved the work for which it was in charge with.
20 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation]
21 Q. Thank you. You started to explain the difference in the names of
22 various organisational units in Belgrade
23 various secretariats. Can you tell us why this distinction was made.
24 A. The distinction was made precisely because of the security
25 problems that the secretariat faced. The most complex security issues in
1 the Republic of Serbia
2 in Belgrade
3 tasks to be successfully carried out by the secretariat in Belgrade
4 large number of personnel was required and a large number of units and
5 specialised skills were required. So the administration allowed within
6 its organisational chart a large number of units and personnel in which
7 way they would organise this line responsibility within the secretariat.
8 All these jobs could have been done in the secretariat through the crime
9 division within which we had economic crime sector, regular crime sector,
10 et cetera. But --
11 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: Could the witness please
12 slow down. These are very complex matters.
13 JUDGE PARKER: I'm afraid, the complexity of what you were saying
14 was going too quickly for the interpreters. Could you look back to the
15 screen and take up where the interpretation fell away, please.
16 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation]
17 Q. I would kindly ask you to speak slowly, first of all to allow the
18 interpreters to hear you out and then to interpret what you are saying.
19 If what you are saying is not interpreted and recorded, it's futile;
20 therefore, I would kindly ask you just to repeat slowly your answer to my
21 last question regarding the forms of internal organisational units and
22 the distinction that existed between the Belgrade SUP and other SUPs
23 throughout Serbia
24 A. The most serious security-related issues in Serbia existed in the
25 area of the secretariat of the interior [Real-time transcript read in
1 error "failure to punish"] of Belgrade. In order for those tasks to be
2 successfully completed, the organisational chart envisaged a large number
3 of personnel and due to the complexity of these issues and the number of
4 people involved in this work, the secretariat of the interior of Belgrade
5 had administrations that were responsible for a certain type of work.
6 Consequently, the secretariats that faced less serious security problems,
7 these jobs in organisational terms were carried out by lower-ranking
8 organisational units which in the secretariats were called divisions.
9 These divisions within the secretariats encompassed practically all lines
10 of work that existed in the Ministry of the Interior. Therefore, at the
11 level of the secretariat --
12 MR. STAMP: If --
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- we had a criminal investigation
14 division --
15 MR. DJURDJIC: [No interpretation]
16 MR. STAMP: Perhaps counsel may consider whether or not line 3 of
17 page 57 needs correction before we go too far away from it.
18 JUDGE PARKER: I didn't want you to interrupt the witness who was
19 attempting to describe a very complex situation. Yes, we see a failure
20 to punish Belgrade
21 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation]
22 Q. Before you continue, can you please - and my learned colleague is
23 absolutely right - why there was an administration in Belgrade, whereas
24 there was no such thing in the republic. Can you please slowly explain
25 this segment.
1 A. 40 per cent of the security-related issues in the Republic of
3 the number of crimes committed, the misdemeanours, the traffic of
4 offences in all lines of work. Such a complex security situation
5 demanded a large number of personnel, and this large number of personnel
6 and such problems that they faced could only have been organised by
7 establishing administrations, because that's the highest level of
8 organisation. And that was the case in Belgrade, the secretariat of the
9 interior in Belgrade
10 investigating police administration, the police administration, the
11 border police administration, fire-fighting police administration, which
12 means that all those administrations that already existed in the ministry
13 headquarters. Apart from the secretariat of the interior of Belgrade
14 had other secretariats who for the performance of certain tasks along
15 their lines of work had their respective organisational units that were
16 called divisions. So there was in a secretariat a division of the
17 criminal investigation police, whereas in Belgrade we had a criminal
18 investigation administration. And also there was an administration at
19 the level of the ministry. So in respective secretariats we had traffic
20 division, criminal investigation division, et cetera, fire-fighting
21 police division, border police division, the division for aliens and
22 travel documents, et cetera.
23 Sometimes if a secretariat didn't have so many problems of that
24 nature instead of divisions, we had sectors.
25 Q. Thank you. Can you please now explain the relationship between
1 the administration at the ministry head office or headquarters and these
2 divisions in the Belgrade SUP
3 A. The ministry administration had the task and the responsibility
4 for the security situation according to its line of work that stretched
5 across the whole territory of the Republic of Serbia
6 impacted on the preparation of plans for that particular line of work how
7 to improve the operational performance of the secretariat along this
8 specific line. They also received from various secretariats
9 security-related information, and having analysed them they would send
10 proposals to those secretariat for measures to be undertaken in order to
11 monitor the security situation and launch proper response to such
12 security problems. So this line within the ministry head office was
13 responsible for the security situation according to its line of work all
14 the way down to the last secretariat on the ground or let's say the last
15 organisational unit within such a secretariat.
16 Q. Thank you. Tell me, please, were there any organisational units
17 outside the headquarters of the secretariat; and if so, what were these
18 organisational units?
19 A. Outside the headquarters -- well, I don't really understand your
20 question. Outside the headquarters?
21 Q. Outside the headquarters of the department.
22 A. Yes, there were organisational units of the ministry. If I can
23 put it this way, they were schools, namely, the post-secondary school for
24 internal affairs, the police academy, the secondary school for internal
25 affairs, and the security institute, and the department for legal and
1 financial affairs. They were outside the public security department,
2 that is.
3 Q. Thank you.
4 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I would like to move
5 on to a new topic now. I don't know whether you think it would be
6 advisable to take the break now and then start this new topic, or should
7 I start it now and then could we take the break later? I know that
8 there's seven or eight minutes left until the break.
9 JUDGE PARKER: I think you are indicating that you're moving on
10 to another fairly large area. That being the case, it would be more
11 practical to have a break now and resume and allow you to go interrupted
12 into the new area. That will give both you and the accused a chance to
13 collect your thoughts again, separately of course.
14 We will adjourn now and resume at five minutes to 1.00.
15 --- Recess taken at 12.22 p.m.
16 --- On resuming at 12.56 p.m.
17 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Djurdjic, there is at 2.00 a ceremony in this
18 courtroom to swear in a new Judge. For that reason, we are asked to
19 finish early and somewhere about 1.30, 1.35, if that would fit in with
20 your programme. Thank you.
21 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours. We now
22 do have a topic that I believe will fit in to that time-frame more or
24 Q. Mr. Djordjevic, I shall now like to move on to an article of the
25 rules, which is Article 6, the Rules on Internal Organisation, that is a
1 document 32 in your binder and it is P357, the exhibit number. What I
2 would like you to tell us is how was this Article 6 applied in practice?
3 A. This article refers to the PJPs --
4 Q. I apologise. Just to tell the Trial Chamber and the -- my
5 learned colleagues it is page 7 in the English version.
6 Yes, Mr. Djordjevic.
7 A. So far we've been speaking about organisational units specified
8 under these rules for the purpose of discharging their regular duties
9 from Article 2 of these rules. In addition to these organisational
10 units, according to Article 6 the minister was empowered and entitled to
11 set up special "posebne" and special "specijalne" units of the police and
12 other operative groups of the police. Pursuant to this article he
13 adopted such documents as specified the tasks of the relevant units of
14 the time-frames, the duties, the powers, and the rights and obligations
15 of their personnel. If such units also comprised members of the reserve
16 force, the possibility was also -- namely, the possibility was also
17 provided for these units to be manned with members of the reserve force
18 and as appropriate as necessary also by staff -- other staff from the --
19 within the Ministry of the Interior and the school of internal affairs.
20 Thus, according to this article, the minister was authorised to set up
21 special "posebne" and special "specijalne" police units and he did so.
22 Q. Thank you.
23 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Can we have Exhibit P58 now.
24 Q. In your binder it is number 33.
25 A. Availing himself of the powers of this article of the rules, the
1 minister of the interior, as can be seen on the following page, on the
2 1st of August 1993 - at that time it was Zoran Sokolovic - he brought a
3 decision on the setting up of special units of the police. By this
4 decision the place where these units will be set up is envisaged as well
5 as the organisational and establishment structure of such units; the
6 actual tasks of the special units are defined; who is entitled to put
7 them in a state of alert, a state of readiness; who is the one who orders
8 them to assemble and be engaged; how are they professionally trained,
9 educated. The manner in which these units are manned is also specified
10 in it.
11 Q. Thank you.
12 A. And on page 2 of this document defines the status of members of
13 special police units.
14 Q. Thank you. Can you tell us, please, were these -- or rather,
15 what was the nature of these units that were set up by this decision?
16 A. The PJPs in the organs of the interior in the former Yugoslavia
17 were set up after the incursion of an Ustasha terrorist group in 1972.
18 At that time all the republican secretariats were charged with that task
19 and set up units, special-purpose units, that could be used to discharge
20 work, carry out tasks of the most complex security nature, which also
21 included the apprehension and arrest of any terrorist groups. So in
22 keeping with this obligation, the Ministry of the Interior in the
23 time-period -- in that time-period always had units for this particular
24 purpose under different names. These units were set up for those
25 situations, for those complex security tasks which regular units were
1 unable -- regular police units were unable to carry out. These units
2 were intended for maintaining public law and order at mass rallies,
3 football matches, large football matches. They were also envisaged to be
4 used in the event of major natural disasters, in riots, mass riots and
5 demonstrations. Also, it was envisaged that these units would be engaged
6 to capture and deprive of liberty grave criminals, very serious
7 criminals, and also in countering terrorist activities.
8 Q. Thank you. I just wanted to ask you this: In terms of function
9 and nature, were these standing units, permanent police structures?
10 A. These are units that were set up and structured according to a
11 specific establishment scheme with companies, detachments, and platoons,
12 and that was how they featured in the relevant report. It was always
13 known whether someone was a member of that unit or not. In other words,
14 these were not regular units, but they could be engaged depending on the
15 security situation and assessment of that situation, meaning that they
16 were engaged on an ad hoc basis. What does that mean? That means that
17 if a problem crept up that could not be dealt with by using regular
18 police units, the minister of the interior or a person so authorised by
19 him under the law would order the engagement of a part of these already
20 prepared and trained and equipped members of that unit to adequately
21 react to the security problem at hand and deal with it. Once that
22 problem has been resolved those units would return to their home
23 secretariats and continue -- and resume their regular work and duties.
24 So they are engaged and assemble as envisaged in the relevant documents
25 only from the moment they start their engagement until they have
1 completed the relevant security task.
2 Q. Thank you. Will you tell us this: When they are not engaged,
3 what work do these members of these units do?
4 A. These are regular -- they are regular staff of regular police
5 stations, and their status is associated with a police station in which
6 they charge their duties. They can be policemen who work as patrol, beat
7 policemen; they can be engaged in traffic control or any other work which
8 pertains to the uniformed police force. The minute they are in keeping
9 with the relevant documents ascribed on the roster of members of special
10 units, they undergo specific training in order to be able successfully to
11 discharge the duties that I referred to earlier, starting with natural
12 disasters, mass riots and disorders up -- and to terrorism. That means
13 that during their work, in accordance with a plan of training, they are
14 also educated and undergo training so that once orders are received for
15 them to be engaged that they are capable successfully of discharging
16 them. That is as far as the active part of the members of the special
17 police force units are concerned. Every such unit, every police unit --
18 every such unit also has members of the reserve force among it who also
19 undergo specific training, and they are engaged when so demanded -- when
20 so ordered by the minister of the interior.
21 Q. Thank you. Please be so kind as to clarify two things for us:
22 The first one is -- has to do with training of the PJP units. Who
23 organises this training and how is it conducted?
24 A. In the administration of the police at the headquarters of the
25 ministry there exists an organisational form which is a department as a
1 subunit or a section, the task of which is to see to the overall
2 education of the PJPs and to ensure that they achieve the necessary level
3 of readiness to successfully discharge complex tasks. The first task
4 which is set before the future members of these units is the educational
5 objective, their training in other words. The training and the programme
6 of training are dealt with precisely in this organisation in the police
7 administration. It draws up the curriculum, the training curriculum,
8 which is then delivered at various secretariat areas on the territory of
10 members of the PJPs, of the special police units, are practically trained
11 for what expects -- for what awaits them in discharging their difficult
13 Q. Thank you. Whilst we are on the subject, the equipment and the
14 armaments of these units, who sees to that? Whose concern is that? How
15 is that dealt with?
16 A. This is also the task of this particular organisational unit
17 within the police administration of the Ministry of the Interior. There,
18 depending on the purpose - and I described all the purposes a while
19 ago - they're assigned adequate equipment. If their task is to
20 re-establish law and order that has been disrupted, they will of course
21 carry equipment which is adapted to that purpose. The particular type of
22 equipment that the PJPs will have, depending on their specific task that
23 they should be assigned to, all these and all this was programmed and
24 planned by this particular unit within the police administration, and it
25 also monitors the purchase, the procurement, of the different types of
1 equipment that was to be obtained, and saw to the uniformity of both the
2 equipment and the armaments of the PJPs.
3 Q. Thank you. Would you now please explain to us in practice, what
4 was the engagement of the PJPs like on a concrete task? But please
5 explain it to us without reference to specifically Kosovo and Metohija.
6 A. One of the basic tasks on which the PJPs were engaged is in fact
7 maintaining law and order at large rallies or action in -- when
8 demonstrations or protests were taking place or situations where law and
9 order was disrupted and ended in demonstrations. An assessment would be
10 made in the ministry of the future security event, for instance, some
11 demonstrations in Belgrade
12 receives, the minister -- that is assessments regarding the possible
13 number of people that will turn out at the demonstrations -- the minister
14 would be given an assessment of the required number of people to
15 adequately respond to that number of protesters. Then the minister
16 issues instructions or an order as to what units and in what number will
17 be engaged to maintain law and order at such demonstrations or in order
18 to suppress such demonstrations. In accordance with that order, members
19 of the special police units, two or three or what have you, number of
20 detachments, then arrive in Belgrade
21 accommodation. The secretariat in Belgrade has its headquarters, its
22 staff set up specifically to act in respect to that particular
23 security-related issue and has its relevant plan. These units, when they
24 come in the area of Belgrade
25 and they act in accordance with the tasks issued them in accordance with
1 a plan adopted by that staff. Until that security matter has been dealt
2 with, these units remain in that area.
3 Q. Thank you. When they come to discharge a task, to whom do these
4 units answer, and who is in charge of them?
5 A. I've already said that the secretariat in Belgrade had a staff
6 that was in charge of acting in relation to that security-related
7 incident. All would be tasked with reporting to that staff, and they are
8 placed at the disposal of that staff. Practically, in an operative
9 sense, from then onwards as for their engagement and all decisions
10 related to it, all decisions are made by this staff that is in charge in
11 terms of territory of acting with regard to such security-related
13 Q. Thank you. When units are sent to carry out a particular task,
14 do they have any functional link with the organisational units, say the
15 SUPs or the OUPs from which they were sent to carry out this task?
16 A. At the moment when they are engaged, their obligations stop,
17 their obligations of the members of the PJPs, towards the secretariat
18 from which they were sent. So they have only obligations towards the
19 secretariat or staff to which they have been sent by way of assistance.
20 They have no obligations whatsoever anymore towards their own
21 organisational units or the secretariat from which they had been sent.
22 Q. Thank you. When these units accomplish the mission they had been
23 sent out on, do they send reports to the secretariats from which they had
24 been sent?
25 A. No. All the reports that they are supposed to submit in relation
1 to that particular security-related incident, they submit to the staff
2 that is in charge of dealing with that security-related incident. The
3 commanders of these units can perhaps send a report to their original
4 secretariat if there were some disciplinary problems or, I don't know,
5 some kind of secondary behaviour of the members involved. However, in
6 terms of operative procedure their only obligation is towards the staff
7 where they had been engaged.
8 Q. Thank you. You told us that the decision on the engagement of
9 PJP units is passed by the minister or a person authorised to do so by
10 the minister. After such a decision, what is the technology that follows
11 in terms of procedure, in terms of carrying out that decision?
12 A. This is a legal term as to who can engage these units and that's
13 the way it's always been. Without the minister's decision, not a single
14 part of the PJPs can be used in any way. I'm sorry, the other part of
15 your question slipped my mind.
16 Q. After that what was the technology, as it were, of the procedure
18 A. Once a decision is made by the minister, the organisational unit
19 within the police administration that I spoke of a few moments ago and
20 that took care of training and equipment, carries out all the necessary
21 work, that is, calling up members of the unit so that they could respond
22 in accordance with the minister's decision. They should report to a
23 particular secretariat, a particular area where they're to be engaged.
24 This task consists of the following: This organisational unit should
25 send orders to the secretariats to mobilise a company, a platoon, or, I
1 don't know, whatever. They give instructions by way of a dispatch as to
2 how that unit should be equipped, that is to say the members who are
3 being sent. Also, what means of transportation would be used, and also
4 their possible rights in terms of per diems and the like. It has to do
5 with logistics primarily.
6 Q. Thank you. You told us that there is a plan, a plan of action.
7 Who approves that plan of action and on what basis?
8 A. If we take the example of Belgrade and establishing peace and
9 order in Belgrade
11 Of course if there is a special security situation on the ground, then
12 the minister should also be made aware of the plan, that is to say he
13 should state his own views in this regard as well, but basically it is
14 the chief of the secretariat involved that is responsible for carrying
15 out the said task in his own area of responsibility.
16 Q. Thank you. After this plan is adopted, does -- is a decision
17 made on the engagement of the PJPs?
18 A. Yes. That is the proper sequence of events. In order to make a
19 plan, first there has to be an estimate of the number of people who might
20 get together for a rally or a riot or whatever, and in relation to that a
21 security response is planned. Based on such an estimate of the necessary
22 security forces, a request is put to the minister as to how many people
23 should be involved.
24 Q. Thank you. Another thing, when the administration of the
25 ministry that is in charge of such tasks, when they do everything that
1 you told us about, where they're sent and how they're sent, does it have
2 any powers in relation to the PJP unit sent on that particular mission?
3 A. That part of the administration of the police that deals with
4 bringing in members of the PJP to the secretariat where the operation is
5 going to take place has the duty towards the staff of that ministry to
6 tell them when the forces would arrive, at what time, what the numbers of
7 personnel would be, et cetera. Then the role of that organisational
8 units in the police administration boils down to the following: To
9 engage people, to make it possible for them to get to the secretariat
10 from which they would operate, and that this staff should be told, "At
11 such and such a time members of the police will come to you," et cetera.
12 Also the role of the organisational unit involved is a logistical one.
13 If additional forces are needed or if additional equipment is needed,
14 they are going to help out operationally. So if this staff is, say, in
16 as possible. But operationally, it is that staff that is responsible for
17 carrying out this task, or rather, this secretariat in whose territory
18 the activity is taking place.
19 Q. After the task is carried out, the PJP unit that was engaged,
20 does it submit a report to the police administration about its
21 engagement, about its activity?
22 A. Operationally, no. That is to say, everything that was done by
23 this unit operationally, it is done in relation to that staff so that
24 this staff could compile a complete report. The leadership of that PJP
25 will submit a report if some of the equipment was damaged or again if
1 there is an obligation to renew something. That is what I meant. But
2 operationally, how they operated, in which way they carried out these
3 tasks, this attached unit of the PJP has such obligations towards the
4 staff where they worked.
5 Q. Thank you. Just a brief question because our time is running
6 out. You said that the police administration addressed the SUPs from
7 which the units were engaged in order to be sent to carry out a
8 particular task. Did the SUPs inform the police administration to the
9 effect that they had carried out this order and that they mobilised the
11 A. Yes, because in the secretariat there is a group of people -- at
12 least there is one person who takes care of the special units in his own
13 area in this sense, where they were sent, whether they were equipped
14 properly, where these reports are, et cetera. And then there is this
15 mutual information. There is an exchange of information between the
16 police administration that is involved in this work and these employees
17 in the territory of the secretariat from which these members of the unit
18 were engaged.
19 Q. Thank you.
20 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I would like to call
21 it a day now.
22 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you, Mr. Djurdjic, yes.
23 We will adjourn now and resume at 9.00 tomorrow morning.
24 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.32 p.m.
25 to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 2nd day of
1 December, 2009, at 9.00 a.m.