Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 19855

 1                           Tuesday, 7 July 2009

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           --- Upon commencing at 9.05 a.m.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Good morning to everyone.

 6             Mr. Registrar, would you please call the case.

 7             THE REGISTRAR:  Good morning, Your Honours.  Good morning to

 8     everyone in the courtroom.  This is case number IT-06-90-T, the

 9     Prosecutor versus Ante Gotovina et al.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Registrar.

11             Mr. Misetic, is the Gotovina Defence ready to call its next

12     witness?

13             MR. MISETIC:  Yes, Your Honour.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  No protective measures.

15             MR. MISETIC:  That's correct, Mr. President.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Zidovec.

17             MR. MISETIC:  That's correct.

18             Madam Usher.

19             Yes.

20             MR. CARRIER:  There is one issue -- actually, two issues I think

21     we'd like to raise before the witness comes in.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  What's the issue?

23             MR. CARRIER:  One, my colleague Mr. Hedaraly is going to deal

24     with.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Perhaps you -- your so new that you're still the

Page 19856

 1     unidentified speaker.

 2             MR. CARRIER:  Oh, sorry, it's Carrier, C-a-r-r-i-e-r.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Well, you will get your reputation soon,

 4     Mr. Carrier.

 5             MR. CARRIER:  One of the issues is Mr. Misetic contacted us and

 6     Asked whether we had any objections to adding two documents to their

 7     65 ter list.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

 9             MR. CARRIER:  I can indicate that the first document which is

10     memo from Mr. Jarnjak, or Minister Jarnjak, I have no issue with that.

11     That was actually, I believe, on the Cermak Defence 65 ter list, which is

12     65 ter 2D00-531.

13             The other document is a table, and on the Cermak Defence 65 ter

14     list it's 65 ter 2D00-131.  The problem that we're having with this is

15     that it's a table -- it's not clear what the provenance of the table is.

16     Moreover, there a number of different tables included in the initial

17     group of documents that was sent to the OTP by Mr. Misetic, not all of

18     them have been translated.  There is also a three-page document that was

19     initially included that had -- that has not been translates so we don't

20     know exactly what that consists of.  My understanding is that this was

21     actually -- both of these documents, one that we're not objecting to, and

22     the other one were shown to the next witness during the proofing session,

23     although my understanding is that initially when it was shown to him it

24     was shown to him as -- as though it was an attachment to the first

25     document which we don't have any issue with.  Which the Prosecution

Page 19857

 1     understands is not the case, that these are actually separate documents.

 2     I think Mr. Misetic is now clear these are actually two separate

 3     documents.  We just don't know where the send one came from, who created

 4     it, for what purpose, et cetera.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, the Chamber has been copied on a short e-mail

 6     message on which you announced that you would seek to have admitted

 7     documents to the 65 ter list.

 8             MR. MISETIC:  Yes, Mr. President.  Actually --

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Apparently the first one which - this was said by

10     Mr. Carrier - is on the, I think, on the Cermak 65 ter list, that that

11     seems, therefore, not to be a major problem.

12             MR. MISETIC:  They both are on the Cermak 65 ter list.  However,

13     the reason we have them as one document is because when they were

14     produced to us, if the Chamber looks at the original of what we sent,

15     both documents were together in one file.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

17             MR. MISETIC:  And the first page of the B/C/S shows the file

18     marking on it, and in the original says that the file is called Separate

19     Police Units, and OA Povratak is in the upper right-hand corner.  So when

20     they were produced to us, they were produced to us as one file.

21             The second point, Mr. President, is that this witness in fact was

22     part of the OA Povratak operational command.  The document that

23     Mr. Carrier is referencing, the table, is titled OA Povratak.  It's part

24     of OA Povratak and would have been clearly a table prepared as part of

25     OA Povratak of which this witness was a member of the operational command

Page 19858

 1     as -- in his position as assistant minister of the interior.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  I must, admit reading it on my screen, I have to

 3     turn my head 180 degrees.  So it was presented as one document.

 4             MR. MISETIC:  One file.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  One file.

 6             MR. MISETIC:  Yes.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Does that in any way -- this explanation, does that

 8     in any way meet your concerns, Mr. Carrier?

 9             UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER:  Some additional information,

10     Mr. President, is a that we have received the initial document from

11     Minister Jarnjak, I think, on a number of occasions always as a separate

12     document, not part of a file.  I understand my friend's position that

13     this witness is part of the OA Povratak command, although in his

14     statement he doesn't actually indicate that.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, in his statement, of course, this is not a

16     92 ter witness for --

17             MR. MISETIC: [Microphone not activated]

18             JUDGE ORIE:  It is.

19             MR. MISETIC:  There is a 92 ter motion that was filed, last

20     Thursday, I believe.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Last Thursday, yes.

22             MR. MISETIC:  Or Friday.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  I have the statement, so don't worry about that.

24     But I thought that -- yes.

25             Yes, therefore, when I intervened when you referred to the

Page 19859

 1     statement was incorrect.

 2             Mr. Carrier, please proceed where I interrupted you.

 3             MR. CARRIER:  Just following up on that, we don't have any

 4     objection to the statement under 92 ter.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

 6             MR. CARRIER:  Despite what Mr. Misetic says about Mr. Zidovec

 7     being part of the OA Povratak command, he doesn't indicate that in his

 8     statement.  It's just not clear where this table's come from.  But,

 9     moreover, there's also a number of things that haven't been translated

10     with regard to that file, just as portions, so we don't have actually the

11     whole file at this point.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  As far as translation are concerned, Mr. Misetic.

13             MR. MISETIC:  I'm sorry about that.  I wasn't aware that all of

14     it wasn't translated, although I see that most of it is information that

15     I don't think needs to be translated, but if the headers are not

16     translated, we'll be sure to correct that.

17             But let me also point out that at paragraph 30 of the witness's

18     statement concerning his participation in the OA Povratak command, he

19     says all assistants to the minister were part of Povratak, insofar as

20     their areas of responsibilities were engaged in that operation.  So he as

21     an assistant minister, Mr. President, we would submit was in fact part of

22     Povratak.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Now let's try to find a very practical

24     solution.

25             Mr. Misetic would like to have this document added to the 65 ter

Page 19860

 1     list.  Id there any way that you introduce the document without showing

 2     it to the witness asking him question?  I take it that you have gone

 3     through the document during the proofing sessions.

 4             MR. MISETIC:  Well, I'm not sure --

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Well, if you -- if you ask questions about have you

 6     seen a document; or were you shown a document of this and this kind;

 7     could you explain to us whether this was what it was; et cetera.  So the

 8     65 ter list is there to make sure that the other party knows in advance

 9     what will be put to the witness.

10             Now, apparently here it is not that there is it some fundamental

11     objection against adding this one, but that there are still some

12     questions in relation to that, where does it come from, et cetera

13     et cetera.  Of course, without showing the document yet, we could seek to

14     clarify some of the issues Mr. Carrier raised.  Was it -- you say it is

15     one file.  Mr. Carrier seems not to know whether it was one file, what is

16     the relation between the one document and the other.

17             If you start with the one and say, Was anything attached to it;

18     or did you see any document related to it; and what do you know about

19     that document?  And then make your oral application to have it added to

20     the 65 ter list, because Mr. Carrier will be better in a position to

21     respond to that oral application in relation to the second document.

22             Do you understand what I mean?

23             MR. MISETIC:  I do, Mr. President.  I can just tell you that in

24     the proofing the witness, he doesn't -- and I think as is evident, made

25     perhaps from his statement, he doesn't have very specific recollections

Page 19861

 1     of specific documents.  The first document noted that it was sent to all

 2     assistant ministers of the interior, from which the witness confirms that

 3     in the ordinary course of business he would have received a copy of if

 4     it, if in fact it says that it went to all assistant ministers of the

 5     interior.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  If the witness doesn't know that much about it, have

 7     you then considered to tender it as a bar table exhibit?

 8             MR. MISETIC:  I would, Mr. President.  I would just say that if

 9     possible I would avoid that only because this is -- we would submit a

10     document that -- at least the first document would have gone to him as a

11     recipient of the document, so there is no need to bar table it.  If there

12     is an issue regarding whether that was part of the file or not, then

13     we'll bar table the second one.  But I would also add that given that he

14     in paragraph 30 of his statement says that he in fact was part -- or

15     engaged in OA Povratak as an assistant minister, we think that adds

16     something in terms of his basis of knowledge to comment on the general

17     statistics of how many police may have been engaged in the area.  And I

18     would note that on that specific question, at paragraph 36 of his

19     statement, the OTP asked him questions on deployment of police,

20     specifically, the separate police units which is in fact the file folder

21     that I'm now trying to tender, is the statistics on the separate police

22     units that were deployed.  So in fact the Prosecution -- but for the

23     Prosecution having flagged this for us in their statement of the witness,

24     we perhaps wouldn't have even looked there.

25             So the file folder actually is simply adding to what the witness

Page 19862

 1     is already going to testify to as to paragraph 36 of his statement.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Carrier.

 3             MR. CARRIER:  Mr. President, at paragraph 31 of his statement he

 4     actually says:

 5             "I did not directly participate in the operation," in relation to

 6     operation Povratak.

 7             And again, the issue with the table as opposed to the document

 8     from Minister Jarnjak is, the one from Minister Jarnjak we agree is sent

 9     directly to all assistant ministers, whereas the table isn't, which is

10     the issue.  And we -- they're not connected in any way or at least not in

11     a way that is obvious to the Prosecution.

12             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. President, if I may at one point.

13             Perhaps, if it is going to be an issue as to whether he was part

14     of Povratak or not, I think the Prosecution is aware that the witness

15     issued many orders during and after Operation Storm.  And in the upper

16     right-hand corner coded them as being part of OA Povratak.  So I will

17     take him through those, his own orders, under OA Povratak if that is an

18     issue, but I don't think it should be in dispute even -- that the witness

19     participated in OA Povratak.

20             MR. CARRIER:  And we don't dispute that he was part of it.  It's

21     just that he says he was, and so it's just not clear what he would have

22     been receiving.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  There is no dispute that he was, but he is saying

24     that he was not part of it, of the operation or whether he --

25             Let's -- if you can't resolve the matter, if the objection

Page 19863

 1     against this part of the document to be admitted -- to be added to the

 2     65 ter list stands, then, of course, the Chamber will have to decide.

 3                           [Trial Chamber confers]

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Misetic, the Chamber invites you to make the

 5     oral application to add it to the 65 ter list at the best possible moment

 6     before the break, when the -- when you think you have laid the

 7     ground-work as good as you can, and we'll then decide during the break

 8     having a closer at the document and translations, et cetera.

 9             MR. MISETIC:  Yes, Mr. President.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  So and the first one is -- leave is granted to

11     add the -- the first one, there was no objection, Mr. Carrier.  So leave

12     is granted for that one, and the other one we'll hear from you when we

13     are in a best position to decide on the matter.

14             Please proceed.

15             MR. MISETIC:  Okay.  Mr. President, with respect to the

16     discussion last week, let me just advise the Chamber that with respect to

17     expert reports, Mr. Jones's report will be available by 9.00 a.m. on

18     Thursday.  With respect to Mr. Pokaz's report, we have now engaged three

19     translators to get that done by Thursday at 9.00 a.m. as well, and that

20     is --

21             JUDGE ORIE:  You were invited to tell us what portion was already

22     translated.

23             MR. MISETIC:  First 15 pages have been translate by Friday, but

24     there was a significant amount that was left, and we had to engage other

25     interpreter/translators to get that done.  So we have hired -- or engaged

Page 19864

 1     two additional translators, who are now working on separate sections of

 2     the document.  A draft translation will be completed by Thursday at

 3     9.00 a.m.  Obviously, we will then work on a final translation after

 4     that.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  I'm not going to be asking Mr. Hedaraly or

 6     Mr. Carrier whether you're happy with it, but whether you can live with

 7     it.

 8             MR. HEDARALY:  We'll live with it, Mr. President.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.  Then could the witness be escorted into

10     the courtroom.

11             I spoke too quickly.  I was not going ask you whether you were

12     happy with it.  And since that word does not appear too often on the

13     transcript, it would be a pity if it would miss it.

14             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. President, let me just also note that while the

15     witness is coming in that there were three documents that had an ERN

16     number, ERN number, in the statement which have not yet been admitted

17     into evidence.  They are all in the Prosecution's -- all three are on the

18     Prosecution's 65 ter list.  I've had a conversation with Mr. Carrier and

19     Mr. Hedaraly, and at the conclusion of the 92 ter, I would like to simply

20     move those 65 ter exhibits into evidence so that the statement is

21     complete.

22             MR. CARRIER:  No objection.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Then we'll proceed as suggested.

24                           [The witness entered court]

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Good morning, Mr. Zidovec.  Can you hear me in a

Page 19865

 1     language you understand?

 2             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  The Rules of Procedure and Evidence require that you

 4     make a solemn declaration at the beginning of your testimony, that you

 5     will speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.  The

 6     text is now handed out to you by Madam Usher, and I would like to invite

 7     you to make that solemn declaration.

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

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

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Zidovec.

11             Please be seated.

12                           WITNESS:  ZDRAVKO ZIDOVEC

13                           [Witness answered through interpreter]

14                           Examination by Mr. Misetic:

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Zidovec, you will first be examined by

16     Mr. Misetic.  Mr. Misetic is counsel for Mr. Gotovina.

17             Please proceed.

18             MR. MISETIC:  Thank you, Mr. President.

19        Q.   Good morning, Mr. Zidovec.

20        A.   Good morning.

21             THE INTERPRETER:  Can extra microphones please be turned off.

22     Thank you.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed, Mr. Misetic.

24             MR. MISETIC:

25        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, could you please state your full name for the

Page 19866

 1     record, please.

 2        A.   My name is Zdravko Zidovec.

 3        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, I would like to turn your attention to a statement

 4     that you gave to the Office of the Prosecutor in 2007.  It is --

 5             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. Registrar 65 ter, 1D27-68.  If we could have

 6     that on the screen, please.

 7             And, Madam Usher, if you would assist me in providing a hard copy

 8     in B/C/S to the witness.

 9        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, if you look at the screen first, on the left-hand

10     side is the original English statement that has some signatures on the

11     bottom.  Do you recall whether your signature is on the first page of

12     this statement?  Can you tell us whether it is?

13        A.   I recognise it.  This is the text of the statement I gave to the

14     investigators in June of 2007.

15        Q.   And, Mr. Zidovec, yesterday you pointed out to us two areas that

16     you wanted to address, if we could turn your attention to paragraph 55 of

17     your statement, please.

18             Is there anything you wish to correct in paragraph 55 of your

19     statement?

20        A.   Yes.  I would like to make a correction.  The figure I gave at

21     the time, which has to do with the list of between 1200 and 1300 bodies

22     throughout the territory covered by Operation Storm, that the units of

23     the civilian protection sanitized in the course of August and thereafter.

24     The figure, unfortunately, was not correct.  The number involved is

25     902 bodies that the civilian protection sanitized throughout the area of

Page 19867

 1     its activity as part of operation Povratak in the wake of Operation Storm

 2     covering the stretch from Sisak to the area covered by the Split-Dalmatia

 3     police administration.

 4             The error was made due to the fact that I had a very short period

 5     of time at my disposal to prepare for my discussions with investigators,

 6     and in that short period I did not have occasion to obtain documents that

 7     would allow me to recall the exact figures.  The reason why I was unable

 8     to get the documentation was that, as of 2001, when the civilian

 9     protection became part of the state administration for rescuing, that

10     particular documentation relating to the civil protection had been

11     archived in the state archive and was no longer accessible.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  I think that if Mr. Misetic would be interested to

13     know all the backgrounds, why you said what you said at the time, and why

14     you could not have said otherwise, and then he will certainly ask for it.

15     If you just make the correction needed, and maybe that there are

16     questions, you'll then hear about it.  But let's first try to keep

17     focussed on what, apparently, Mr. Misetic is seeking, to have a

18     correction on a number.

19             Please proceed.

20             MR. MISETIC:  Yes.  Thank you, Mr. President.  And let me just --

21     I don't think this is going to be disputed, Mr. President, by the

22     Prosecution, so let me just save some time by saying --

23        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, at paragraph 58 in the Croatian version of this

24     document it says that -- the report says that there was a dispatch of

25     100 conscripts to Gracac fire station.  In the original English, it says

Page 19868

 1     that the dispatch was of 20 conscripts to the Gracac fire station, and so

 2     there's a correction that needs to be made in your -- translated version.

 3             Is that correct?

 4        A.   Yes.

 5        Q.   Other than -- other than these two corrections, is there anything

 6     else in your 2007 witness statement to the Prosecution that needs to be

 7     corrected?

 8        A.   Yes.  I would like to make another correction which was the

 9     result again of an error on my part, and this is the mention of -- or,

10     rather, in paragraph 13 and 15 of the B/C/S version of the Croatian

11     version of my statement, I talked about the preparation of the

12     civilian protection for the protection of civilians against any harm that

13     may come to them, not in the course of the Operation Storm, but in the

14     course of another operation --

15             THE INTERPRETER:  The interpreter didn't catch the name of.

16             MR. MISETIC:

17        Q.   Could you repeat the last part of what you said.  You said --

18             JUDGE ORIE:  [Overlapping speakers] ...

19             THE WITNESS:  It had to do with the preparations of the civilian

20     protection for the evacuation of the population for possible enemy

21     operations in the course of Ljeto, Summer 95, the order to that effect

22     came from the office for defence of the country of the Ministry of

23     Defence.

24        Q.   Is there anything else that needs to be corrected in your

25     statement?

Page 19869

 1        A.   I think that the other paragraphs reflect our discussions more or

 2     less, and I would have no other interventions to make at this point.

 3             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. Misetic, is there a problem with the

 4     transcripts in LiveNote?  I see that the LiveNote is working on the main

 5     monitors but not on the individual stations.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  I wasn't looking at the other screen, but I see that

 7     it's stopped at page 12, line 5.

 8             MR. MISETIC:  Okay.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Since it seems to be operational on the other

10     screen, I suggest that we proceed, because that means that from a

11     technical perspective, that there is a reliable transcript.

12             MR. MISETIC:  Yes.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  -- which certainly, sooner or later will appear on

14     our personal screens as well.

15             Please proceed.

16             MR. MISETIC:  Yes.

17        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, your 2007 statement, with the -- excluding the

18     corrections that have you now made, does the statement accurately reflect

19     what you said to investigators of the Office of the Prosecutor?

20        A.   It does, yes.

21        Q.   At the time you gave this statement in 2007 to investigators of

22     the Office of the Prosecutor, did you give the statement to the best of

23     your knowledge and in accordance with the truth?

24        A.   I confirm that I did.

25        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, if I asked you the same questions today that you

Page 19870

 1     were asked in 2007, would your answers be the same today as they were in

 2     2007 and as reflected in your 2007 witness statement, subject to your

 3     clarifications?

 4        A.   They would be the same, of course.  Although they would be

 5     substantiated by better figures and facts.

 6             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. President, I ask -- that 65 ter 1D27-68 be

 7     admitted into evidence.

 8             MR. CARRIER:  No objection.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar.

10             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, that will become Exhibit D1570.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  And is admitted into evidence.

12             Please proceed.

13             MR. MISETIC:  Thank you, Mr. President.

14             I have, Mr. President, explained the process of reading a witness

15     summary to the witness.  And with your permission and leave, I would like

16     to read out the summary.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Please do so.

18             MR. MISETIC:  Witness Zdravko Zidovec was the assistant minister

19     of the interior during and after Operation Storm, responsible for

20     information, analysis, and fire and civil protection.  The witness states

21     that his preparation for Operation Storm began only a few days before the

22     operation.  The witness was responsible for the establishment of

23     reception centres for civilians after Operation Storm.  There was no plan

24     to bring to the reception centres those persons who were capable of

25     living by themselves.

Page 19871

 1             The witness was also responsible for the burial of human remains

 2     after Operation Storm.  The task of collecting bodies was within the

 3     exclusive authority of the civil protection.  In the event that a body

 4     was found by the civil protection where the cause of death appeared to be

 5     suspicious, the responsibility for criminal investigation was with the

 6     crime police of the Ministry of Interior.  A crime technician of the

 7     crime police would accompany the civil protection unit at every burial.

 8             In the aftermath of Operation Storm, the witness states that the

 9     civil protection units searched 48.000 houses in the liberated areas,

10     primarily for the purposes of sanitation.

11             Than concludes the witness summary, Mr. President.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.

13             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. President, now with your leave I would like to

14     tender into evidence three documents mentioned in the witness's 92 ter

15     statement.  The first document is referenced at paragraph 53 of the

16     statement.  It is ERN number 0607-5489, which is 65 ter 4664.  I'd like

17     to move that into evidence.

18             The second document is referenced at paragraph 58 of the

19     statement.  It is ERN number 0349-3739, and it is 65 ter 4440.

20             And the third document is referenced at paragraph 70 of the

21     statement.  It is ERN number 0349-3704, and it is 65 ter 4430.

22             And I'd ask that the three exhibits be marked, and I tender them

23     into evidence.

24             MR. CARRIER:  No objection.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar, 4664.

Page 19872

 1             THE REGISTRAR:  65 ter 4664 becomes Exhibit D1571.

 2             65 ter 4440 becomes Exhibit D1572.

 3             And 65 ter number 44330 becomes Exhibit D1573.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  D1571 through D1573 are admitted into evidence.

 5             Please proceed.

 6             MR. MISETIC:  Thank you, Mr. President.

 7             Mr. Registrar, if we could have on the screen, please,

 8     Exhibit P-- that's P1148, please.  And if we could go to English page 5

 9     of this document.

10        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, you were responsible for the civil defence, and I'd

11     first like to show you by way of background the Law on Amendments to the

12     Law on Internal Affairs.  This is beginning at Article 24 -- sorry.  24b.

13             Now -- it's page 4 of the B/C/S.

14             Now, Mr. Zidovec, could you tell us what this law is, in relation

15     to the work of the civil defence.  How this law relates to the work of

16     the civil defence.

17        A.   Civilian protection came under the competence of the Ministry of

18     Interior in January of 1994, alongside fire-fighters and some other

19     activities, because it had been shown that the Law on -- in the interior

20     had to be amended.  This particular provision fully covers the activities

21     of civil protection; namely, protection and rescue of citizens and

22     properties, as well as dealing with consequences of natural disasters,

23     technological and environmental disasters.  What was also envisaged were

24     the consequences of nuclear disasters, as well as, of course, war

25     activities.

Page 19873

 1        Q.   Okay.  Mr. Zidovec, I would like now like to turn your

 2     attention -- turning directly to Operation Storm, please.

 3             MR. MISETIC:  And if we could turn to Exhibit D232, please.

 4        Q.   This is an order of yours from the 4th of August to all police

 5     administrations.

 6             Do you recognise this document?

 7        A.   Yes.

 8        Q.   You'll see that this is the order activating the civil protection

 9     and the fire service.

10             MR. MISETIC:  And if we could turn to page 2 of this document in

11     the English and leave it on page 1 in the Croatian.

12        Q.   If you look at paragraph 3, you order that in the police

13     administrations, including Zadar-Knin and Sibenik:

14             "Immediately prepare the activation of civil protection units,"

15     and then underlined:  "Immediately activate a detachment for hygiene and

16     sanitation members [sic] and a detachment for terrain clearing ..."

17             MR. MISETIC:  And then in the next paragraph, if we could turn

18     the page in the B/C/S, please.

19        Q.   It says that:

20             "The police administrations, in cooperation with the military

21     authorities, and on their approval engage in the removal of the bodies of

22     the dead in cooperation with the criminal police."

23             Now, first, can you explain to the Chamber what you meant when

24     you said that the police administrations are to remove bodies of the dead

25     in cooperation with the military authorities?

Page 19874

 1        A.   This part of the sentence relates to a very clear form of

 2     cooperation, which had previously been defined in the removal of bodies.

 3     The crime investigation police, i.e., forensic officers who normally

 4     conduct scene-of-crime investigations had to be part and parcel of the

 5     team involved in the removal of bodies.

 6             This meant that the forensic officer was supposed to attend the

 7     scene where the body was found and take all the steps prescribed by the

 8     law, i.e., examine the body, collect all information that may help in the

 9     identification of the body, such as lifting finger-prints.

10             What also had to be examined was the manner in which the person

11     died possibly, the body had to be photographed, and, finally, what had to

12     be produced was a detailed crime report or detailed forensic report.  It

13     was only once the forensic officer conducted his examination was the

14     civilian protection allowed to proceed to bury the remains.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Misetic --

16             MR. MISETIC:  I'll get back to it, Mr. President.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  No.  What I would like to tell everyone is that the

18     system is functioning apparently again and that you have to reconnect to

19     the server to receive the running LiveNote on your personal screen.

20             Please proceed.

21             MR. MISETIC:  Thank you, Mr. President.

22        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, this process of having a crime investigator do an

23     investigation prior to the burial, would that also include bodies of ARSK

24     soldiers that may have been encountered?  In other words, did the MUP

25     civil protection units also bury bodies of ARSK soldiers, and, if so,

Page 19875

 1     would the MUP crime investigator also do the same process of

 2     photographing the body, producing a detailed crime report, et cetera?

 3        A.   Yes, that's correct.

 4        Q.   Now, going back to -- to paragraph 4, can you explain a little

 5     bit further what you meant when you said that this was to be done in

 6     cooperation with the military authorities.  What did you understand that

 7     to mean?

 8        A.   This meant primarily that communication had to take place as to

 9     whether civilian protection teams could be dispatched to specific areas

10     where it was known that the remains of those killed were to be found, and

11     where no direct combat activities had taken place.

12             Secondly, it also meant that we counted on the possible

13     assistance of military machinery, in order to prepare the burial sites,

14     in keeping with the conventions that we were duty-bound to adhere to.

15        Q.   Okay.  Mr. Zidovec, let me turn your attention now to

16     Exhibit D233.

17             And in paragraph 64 of your statement, you say that:

18             "Only civil protection had the task of collecting bodies.  This

19     authority belonged exclusively to the civil protection."

20             Now, this is an order of yours from the 5th of August.

21        A.   Mm-hm.

22        Q.   Do you recognise this document?

23        A.   Yes.

24        Q.   And here you have laid out a procedure for the burial of bodies.

25             MR. MISETIC:  Let me wait for the Croatian version to be on the

Page 19876

 1     screen.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Carrier.

 3             MR. CARRIER:  Thank you, Mr. President.  Before my friend

 4     continues, if he could ask perhaps what the procedure was, rather than

 5     reading out the order.  It's leading.

 6             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. President, I think the witness just testified

 7     what the procedure was, the photographing, the bodies, et cetera.  There

 8     is already foundation.  There is foundation in the statement, and it's

 9     the witness's own document.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Even the question was put whether that covered also

11     ARSK soldiers found, if that is the procedure.  But I haven't, of course,

12     looked at the document yet, whether this document describes a different

13     procedure or whether it just gives the details.

14             Mr. Carrier, Mr. Misetic responded to your objection.  Does that

15     change your position?

16             MR. CARRIER:  No, because he was starting off saying -- referring

17     to the document saying you lay out the procedure.  And then I just wanted

18     to make -- I was clarifying whether or not he intended just to read it

19     him, or if he could ask him what the procedure was.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  But Mr. Misetic answered that he had asked

21     already about the procedure and that only after that he now draws the

22     attention of the witness to this document.

23             MR. CARRIER:  And this one goes into more detail, I suppose is

24     the --

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes --

Page 19877

 1             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. President, I may also add that at paragraph 46

 2     of the witness's statement, this exhibit specifically was shown to him.

 3     He commented on it.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Under those circumstances, please proceed,

 5     Mr. Misetic.

 6             MR. MISETIC:  Thank you.

 7        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, as I said at paragraph 46, you referenced that you

 8     were shown this document by the Prosecution.  This is -- can you explain

 9     to the Chamber what this document was, why you issued this order.

10        A.   The document was issued one day after the start of

11     Operation Storm.  We were certainly expecting civilian victims as well as

12     military victims in the area.  For this reason, we issued a document

13     where we defined in detail for the relevant police administrations the

14     procedure that they had to follow in applying hygiene and sanitation

15     measures.

16             We believed that such a set of instructions was very important

17     because it was the civilian protection units from these very police

18     administrations that were the first to reach the area.  We wanted to make

19     sure that no omissions or errors are made in developing documentation and

20     burying remains.  We thought it important to draw their attention to

21     these matters once more, and, in particular, I refer to item 4, where, in

22     very precise terms, we describe the manner of burial that needed to be

23     followed for every body.

24        Q.   Okay.  Now, Mr. Zidovec, let me turn your attention to

25     Exhibit P898, and you reference this document that we're -- I'm about to

Page 19878

 1     show you at paragraph 54 of your statement.

 2             First, can you tell the Chamber who Slavko Maric was during

 3     Operation Storm?

 4        A.   Slavko Maric was the head of the forensic centre at the crime

 5     police at the seat of the ministry.

 6        Q.   Okay.  Now, you were shown this document by the Prosecution, and

 7     it talks about the identification of persons and dead bodies --

 8     procedure.

 9             MR. MISETIC:  And if we turn to page 2 in the English, please.

10        Q.   Now, you have already testified in court about photographing

11     bodies, et cetera.  Is the section under the portion that -- titled

12     "Dead Bodies" is this the procedure, as you understood it, of what was to

13     be done?

14        A.   Yes, that's correct.

15        Q.   Now, can you explain from the perspective of the MUP what the

16     process of photographing a body might mean in an investigation?  In other

17     words -- let me be more specific.  Does photographing a body begin an

18     investigation?  What is it procedurally within the Ministry of Interior

19     when a body is photographed?

20        A.   I believe that this is one of the key activities of the police.

21     In this particular case, it was simply necessary to make photographs, in

22     order, first of all, to be able to prove the condition of the body when

23     found.  Also, whether there were any visible marks which could help the

24     experts as to why this particular person died.

25        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, let me turn your attention to Exhibit D1571.  This

Page 19879

 1     is referenced at paragraph 53 of your statement.  And in your statement

 2     at paragraph 53, you say what we're about to see on the screen:

 3             "... is an instruction sent by me, dated 6 August 1995, with an

 4     example of the form that was to be filled out by the sanitation group."

 5             MR. MISETIC:  If we could turn the page, please.  And I believe

 6     one more page in the English to get to the attachment.  If we ...

 7             Can we also turn the page in the Croatian version, please.

 8        Q.   Now, is this the form that the civil protection units were

 9     supposed to use when registering bodies that were found?

10        A.   Yes, that's correct.

11        Q.   Now, you see the columns there, and there's a number,

12     identification number; and then status, civilian or soldier.  Could you

13     tell the Court first how the status of the person would be determined.

14        A.   The fundamental element was obviously the equipment or parts of

15     uniform that was -- that were found on the body.

16        Q.   Now, if I could turn your attention to Exhibit D69, please.

17             Now, this is the OA Povratak list of individuals at the end that

18     were all collected.  Was this -- comparing your previous form that you

19     had sent out with the final Povratak list of bodies, can you confirm that

20     this list was prepared pursuant to the instruction that you had sent on

21     the 6th of August?

22        A.   Yes.

23        Q.   Now, Mr. Zidovec, I'd like to turn briefly to the issue of the HV

24     and sanitation, and this is related to paragraphs 65 through 69 of your

25     statement.

Page 19880

 1             MR. MISETIC:  And if we could first turn to Exhibit D598, please.

 2     It is an order of General Cervenko from the 5th of August.

 3        Q.   The order, in point 1, says that the Military Districts are to

 4     establish mixed sanitation detachments.

 5             MR. MISETIC:  And if we could turn the page in the English,

 6     please.

 7        Q.   Now, the paragraph above, numbered paragraph 2 in

 8     General Cervenko order it says:

 9             "In establishing the detachment, ensure that the sanitation teams

10     invariably include criminal investigation technicians from MUP for

11     identification, persons for keeping records, medical team ..." et cetera.

12             And if I could turn your attention to Exhibit D234, please.  This

13     is General Cervenko's order on the 5th.  This is now a document which

14     reflects the minutes of a meeting held on the 6th of August between the

15     heads of the crime investigation departments in the MUP.

16             MR. MISETIC:  And if we turn the page in English, please.  And

17     turn the page in Croatian, please.

18        Q.   Now, the sentence above the section that begins AD-2, it says:

19     "Mr. Zidovec liaises with the HV regarding hygiene and sanitation

20     measures and the identification."

21             Now can you tell the Chamber whether you recall liaising with the

22     HV concerning sanitation measures?

23        A.   Given the situation which the first civil protection units

24     encountered in the field on the 5th of August, we thought that it was

25     necessary to come by logistical support, i.e., mechanisation that would

Page 19881

 1     enable us to carry out sanitation, that is removal of the bodies as

 2     quickly as possible, the bodies that were found in the ground.  The

 3     civilian protection did not have any such mechanisation.  And that I

 4     believe that in the crime police department, they were also convinced

 5     that such mechanisation could be achieved through a cooperation with the

 6     Croatian Army.  I am not aware of any specific arrangements made in the

 7     field, but I do know that this document came to me, it was submitted to

 8     me.  And as regards making the necessary mechanisation available, it was

 9     done on the ground, arranged by our representatives who were there and

10     most probably the military authorities that were also there.

11             If I may go back to the order of General Cervenko, which I was

12     just shown, I would like to say once again that, according to all my

13     knowledge, the sanitation of human bodies was carried out exclusively by

14     civilian protection, in cooperation with crime police, and this was done

15     in the way which I previously described.

16             Certain other elements of this order by General Cervenko indicate

17     that there was -- that we were supposed to set up a rather -- or to have

18     a rather ideal situation in order to be able to carry out this order, but

19     we were far from any such ideal situation.

20             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. Registrar, if could I have exhibit 65 ter

21     1D830, please.

22        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, this is also a document of yours dated

23     6 August 1995.  And you appointed Mr. Boris Davidovic as the deputy head

24     -- who was the deputy head of the MUP civilian protection as coordinator

25     for clearing the terrain of bodies.  And you sent this to the Zadar-Knin

Page 19882

 1     police administration operative staff.

 2             Do you recall appointing Mr. Davidovic in the field to coordinate

 3     the collection of bodies?

 4        A.   Yes.

 5        Q.   If you look in the upper right-hand corner of this document, it

 6     says OA Povratak.  Can you tell the Chamber why you issued this document

 7     with those words on the page?

 8        A.   This was done because all of the affairs as of the morning of the

 9     4th of August and also in the case that we had in May of that year during

10     the Operation Flash, all that was done within the framework of the

11     OA Povratak.

12        Q.   Were you, as an assistant minister, part of OA Povratak?

13        A.   Yes, of course, because of the duties that I carried out at the

14     time.  All assistant ministers and all the work carried out at the time

15     belonged to the operational action Povratak.

16        Q.   Okay.

17             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. President, I ask that 65 ter 1D830 be marked,

18     and I tender it into evidence.

19             MR. CARRIER:  No objection.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar.

21             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, that will become Exhibit D1574.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  And is admitted into evidence.

23             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. Registrar, if we could have Exhibit D43 on the

24     screen, please.

25        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, this is a document dated 7 August 1995 bearing your

Page 19883

 1     signature and stamp.  And it says:

 2             "Assistance to the Zadar-Knin police administration."  And then

 3     it says:  "For the needs of rapid terrain clearance of the town of Knin,

 4     urgently mobilize 100 civilian protection conscripts from the area of

 5     Sinj.  The unit shall be dispatched for jobs relating to the clearing of

 6     the terrain and roads in the area of town of Knin."

 7             "The unit must report to Mr. Stanko Batur at the Knin police

 8     station."

 9             Can you tell the Chamber who Mr. Stanko Batur was.

10        A.   Mr. Stanko Batur was chief of section of the civilian protection

11     at the police administration in Zadar, and immediately after the

12     completion of the Operation Storm he was sent to Knin because the then

13     police in Knin simply had nobody who would be capable to take over the

14     duties, which according to the first information received, were supposed

15     to be very abundant.

16             On the 5th of August, the chief of Department of the Civilian

17     Protection from the ministry arrived to Knin along with his associates.

18     They estimated the situation pertaining to the civilian protection

19     activities, and this was the main reason why we requested from the

20     nearest police administration to provide such a number of persons.  They

21     mostly were supposed to engage in cleaning of the town, following the

22     combat activities, and what particularly concerned us at the time was an

23     estimate that in a large number -- that the large number of houses and

24     apartments were abandoned.  And in order to prevent any possibly socially

25     critical element we were supposed to act.

Page 19884

 1        Q.   We will get that topic in a few minutes, Mr. Zidovec.  But I just

 2     wanted to establish who Mr. Batur and Mr. Davidovic were.

 3             MR. MISETIC:  And, Mr. Registrar, if we could now have exhibit

 4     65 ter D1837, please.

 5        Q.   Can you tell the Court briefly to Damir Cemerin was.

 6        A.   Damir Cemerin was chief of Department of Civilian Protection at

 7     the seat of the ministry which belonged to the section for fire services

 8     and civilian protection.

 9        Q.   This is a document from Mr. Cemerin to you on the 11th of August,

10     reporting on the state of civilian protection activities in the

11     Zadar-Knin and Lika-Sinj police administrations.  And it was reported to

12     you that:

13             "On 11 August at 0800 hours a meeting was held with Mr. Cetina;

14     Mr. Djurica; Mr. Batur, who we just spoke about; Mr. Davidovic was also

15     present at the meeting.  And if we go to the third paragraph, it saw says

16     Mr. Batur and Vanjak reported that activities were proceeding with

17     relative difficulty because of the large area and the lack of logistic

18     support partly within the police administrations, but above all, from the

19     bodies in the canton.

20             "They also reported on a meeting with representatives of the

21     Croatian army who had committed themselves to joining in the clearing the

22     area and with all available means, and above all, in burying animals and

23     collecting and caring for animals which are mainly roaming around the

24     liberated territory.  To carry out that commitment the Croatian army

25     would join the action after 12 August with three to four excavators,

Page 19885

 1     lorries, and about 150 soldiers, as well as hygiene teams and units for

 2     the combat security of the areas where the teams are working."

 3             Now, is this a report that you received on or about the 11th of

 4     August, from Mr. Cemerin?

 5        A.   Yes, I can confirm that it is.

 6        Q.   I will ask you a few questions about this document after we look

 7     at the next document.

 8             MR. MISETIC:  But, in the interim, Mr. President, I tender 65 ter

 9     1D837 into evidence.

10             MR. CARRIER:  No objection.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar.

12             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, that becomes Exhibit D1575.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  And is admitted into evidence.

14             Please proceed.

15             MR. MISETIC:  Thank you.

16        Q.   Now, this document talks about lack of logistic support and what

17     the Croatian army had agreed to do on -- on or about the 11th of August.

18     And, Mr. Zidovec, let's turn to Exhibit P496, please.

19             What I'm going to show you is an order of General Gotovina from

20     that same day, 11 August.

21        A.   Mm-hm.

22        Q.   And now it talks about -- it makes a reference to

23     General Cervenko's initial order.  And in the aim of clearing up the

24     terrain, point 1 is the establishment of a mixed detachment.

25             And if we look at paragraph 3, of this, if you look at the

Page 19886

 1     entries at number 2 and number 3, General Gotovina's order makes

 2     reference to Mr. Davidovic and Mr. Batur.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Carrier.

 4             MR. CARRIER:  I'm not sure whether or not Mr. Misetic is going

 5     read this document to him our ask him whether he knows anything about it,

 6     or whether he has seen it before, whether he was aware of it at the time.

 7     It seems to be leading if you just read it out to him without any

 8     foundation.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, we do not know yet what the questions will be.

10             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. President, I just ten minutes going over who

11     Boris Davidovic and Stanko Batur are.  I haven't had a chance to even ask

12     the question yet.  So there are plenty of foundation laid for this

13     witness knowing who those individuals are.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, which does not necessarily include his

15     knowledge of this document, but you may proceed, Mr. Misetic.

16             MR. MISETIC:

17        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, you see that two of the people from the MUP are

18     included in an order of General Gotovina.  First of all, can you tell us,

19     based on your knowledge as assistant minister, could General Gotovina

20     order Boris Davidovic or Stanko Batur?

21        A.   No, I do not have any such knowledge, and I cannot confirm that

22     this was the case.

23        Q.   Now --

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Misetic, it's not for the first time that have I

25     difficulties in understanding the answer.  The question was:

Page 19887

 1             "Could General Gotovina order Boris Davidovic or Stanko Batur."

 2             The answer is:

 3             "No, I do not have any such knowledge and cannot confirm that

 4     this was the case."

 5             Did you want to say that General Gotovina could not give any

 6     orders to Boris Davidovic and Stanko Batur?

 7             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I have no specific knowledge.  I

 8     cannot at all recall that the three persons listed here who belonged to

 9     the civilian protection received any orders directly from

10     General Gotovina, or they -- indeed, that they carried out these orders.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  But that wasn't the question.  The question was

12     whether General Gotovina was in a position to give orders to these

13     persons.  That was the issue.

14             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't think he was in a position

15     to do so.  But let me just add that there was no need for such order,

16     since the civilian protection had very specific --

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Whether there was any need for anything was, again,

18     not the question.  There are, I would say, three options.  The first one

19     is he could; the second one is he could not; and the third one is I do

20     not know.  If he could, I think that Mr. Misetic will further explore on

21     what basis; if could not, Mr. Misetic or Mr. Carrier, at a later stage,

22     will explore the basis for such an answer.  If you don't know, then we

23     are informed about that.

24             Could we try to keep our answers as clear as possible.

25             And, Mr. Misetic, in this context, if you would not mind,

Page 19888

 1     otherwise we would have waited for a second.  But if I take to you

 2     page 28.

 3             MR. MISETIC:  My LiveNote is now down.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Your LiveNote is down.  Oh, I will read the -- and

 5     perhaps the witness could listen with me as well.

 6             You said in one of your answers that, when we're talking about

 7     number of persons, you would need, you said, What particular concerned us

 8     at the time was an estimate, that in a large number, that the large

 9     number of houses an apartments were abandoned and -- I'm specifically

10     focussing on the last part of your answer which reads:

11             "And in order to prevent any possibly socially critical element,

12     we were supposed to act."

13             I've got no idea --

14             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. President let me just state --

15             JUDGE ORIE:  -- what that was.

16             MR. MISETIC:  I've got a whole section to go into this issue, but

17     if you wish to clarify that sentence --

18             JUDGE ORIE:  No.  But, for me, it's -- if I would unkind, I would

19     describe it as bureaucratic language, very much vague and not very to the

20     point.

21             So I would like to invite you to give answers as clear as

22     possible and as factual as possible.

23             Please proceed.

24             MR. MISETIC:  Thank you.

25        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, turning to this order, at page 25, line 15, of

Page 19889

 1     today's transcript, you talk about - I'm sorry, but my LiveNote has now

 2     crashed - a necessity to come by logistics, mechanisation, et cetera, to

 3     enable us to carry out sanitation and removal of bodies as quickly as

 4     possible.

 5             Are you aware of whether the Split Military District was

 6     providing logistics to the civil defence to assist it in removing bodies

 7     and fulfilling its civil protection tasks?

 8        A.   I can't remember.

 9             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. President, noting your admonition about prior

10     to the break, let me turn to that topic right now.  Although,

11     Mr. President, let me ask a procedural question.  I'm reminded that the

12     two documents are on the Cermak Defence 65 ter exhibit list.  Am I

13     allowed to use documents that are on their list?

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Carrier, in view of the function of 65 ter

15     lists, would you object against the use of the documents which appear on

16     the exhibit list of another party?

17             MR. CARRIER:  In this circumstance I'm not opposed to the

18     Gotovina Defence adding it to their 65 ter list.  But my objection was

19     more about whether or not this person can obviously speak to the specific

20     part of the -- one of the documents.  That is something I can raise at

21     the point it is, perhaps, specifically addressed depending on the

22     foundation, but that was a long way of saying no.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Until now, I think the only thing we discussed was

24     an application to add the documents to the 65 ter list, and their appears

25     now to be no objection to that, which would have saved us a bit of time

Page 19890

 1     earlier.

 2             Mr. Misetic.

 3             MR. MISETIC:  Yes.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Leave is granted to add the documents to your 65 ter

 5     list.

 6             MR. MISETIC:  Thank you, Mr. President.

 7        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, as assistant minister of the defence -- sorry, and

 8     an assistant minister of the interior, would you regularly receive copies

 9     of instructions or orders from the Minister of the Interior that would be

10     sent to all ministers -- all assistant ministers of the interior?

11        A.   I think I can answer the question in the affirmative.

12        Q.   Okay.  Turning your attention to paragraph 36 of your statement,

13     you were asked questions about groups of 100 separate police being sent

14     to the various police administrations to carry out difficult duties.

15             "I believe these groups were formed as additional control over

16     the territory to assist in controlling the movement of people and groups

17     in the area, in particular, they were to form check-points to execute

18     this task of controlling movement."

19             How do you -- what is your basis of knowledge about the sending

20     in of groups of police officers and the reasons why these additional

21     officers were sent in the area?

22        A.   I know about it because the OA Povratak staff constantly received

23     information about the uncontrolled movement of various individuals of

24     different status.  There was a large presence of the army there, a large

25     presence of refugees and returnees.  The need arose for such check-points

Page 19891

 1     to be erected in the area, in order to maintain public law and order.

 2        Q.   Would have you received information -- as part of this

 3     information, would you have also received copies of reports about the

 4     numbers of police that were being sent in and withdrawn from the

 5     liberated areas?

 6        A.   I suppose that this was the case, but I cannot confirm that it

 7     happened in every case.

 8             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. President, on this basis, may I show him the

 9     documents or ...

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Please do so.

11             MR. MISETIC:

12        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, let me show 2D00-531, please.

13             Now, this is again a part of OA Povratak, and it's from

14     Minister Jarnjak on 28th of August.  And it talks about, as you can see,

15     the third paragraph -- sorry, if we could change the page in English,

16     please.

17             The third paragraph talks about the needs in the liberated

18     territories concerning numbers of policemen and the problem of the fact

19     that -- it says:

20             "It will not be possible to keep such a large number of policemen

21     as assistants much longer due to structural, economic, and operational

22     reasons and for reasons regarding the assessment of the volume and

23     importance of the jobs and tasks which await us."

24             It says, Therefore, the problem with the formation of police

25     administrations, stations, and substations within the liberated

Page 19892

 1     territories is to be dealt with immediately to be resolved by

 2     31 March 1996.

 3             Then talks about the police administrations in the liberated

 4     areas are to commence the manning of the planned job positions.

 5             MR. MISETIC:  If we turn the page in the English, please.

 6        Q.   The manning of those police administrations and police stations

 7     in the liberated area is to be conducted at a rate of 15 per cent per

 8     month.  And under number 4 it says:

 9             "All other police administrations are to decrease the assistance

10     which they are providing to the administration noted under item 1 at a

11     rate of 15 per cent per month."

12             And if we could look at the bottom --

13             MR. MISETIC:  If we turn the page in English, please.  Or if we

14     could scroll down, I'm not sure that if it's -- yes, if we could turn the

15     page in English, please.

16        Q.   It notes that it is forwarded to the deputy minister and all

17     assistants to the minister.

18             Now, do you recall receiving this specific document from

19     Minister Jarnjak?

20        A.   I can't recall specifically, but there would be no reason why I

21     would not -- for me not to receive it, that is.  If it has been sent to

22     all assistant ministers, that included myself.

23        Q.   Do you recall a discussion within the OA Povratak action about --

24     towards the end of August that the police that had been sent in from

25     outside the liberated territories to assist had to be withdrawn

Page 19893

 1     gradually, and the police that were now being formed within the liberated

 2     area had to start increasing their own personnel in the area?

 3             Do you remember a discussion about this?

 4        A.   Yes.

 5        Q.   Okay.

 6             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. President, I ask that 2D00-531 be marked, and I

 7     tender it into evidence.

 8             MR. CARRIER:  No objection.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar.

10             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, that will become Exhibit D1576.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Is admitted into evidence.

12             Before we have a break, Mr. Misetic, I would like to ask one

13     additional question.

14             Mr. Zidovec, could you tell me, what a recruitment to be carried

15     out at a rate of 15 per cent a month means?

16             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think it involved a process of

17     replacing men who had been in the field for a while and had already been

18     exhausted by the work performed.  What it also may have included was that

19     personnel was being transferred from one police administration to the

20     next, and this flow of personnel meant that some police administrations

21     were understaffed.

22             So in my view, this was a rotation of personnel with a view to

23     meeting the needs arising in the liberated area, whilst not disturbing

24     the work in the mother administration, so to speak, in the parent

25     administrations.

Page 19894

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  My question was what this 15 per cent actually

 2     meant.  Would it mean to replace 15 per cent of the total force per

 3     month?  Would it mean that 15 per cent of the force would be considered

 4     to be exhausted?  Would it be that you would fill 15 per cent of the

 5     vacant positions not counting the positions that were filled by others?

 6     I'm just trying to understand what does that mean.  The 15 per cent, I do

 7     see that there was a need to strengthen and to refresh.  But what does

 8     recruitment of 15 per cent per month mean?  15 per cent of what?

 9             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can't give you a specific answer.

10     This was fully outside of my remit.  I simply don't remember.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Zidovec.

12             We'll have a break, and we will resume at five minutes past

13     11.00.

14                           --- Recess taken at 10.42 a.m.

15                           --- On resuming at 11.12 a.m.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Two brief matters, Mr. Misetic.

17             The one unrelated to this witness, we announced that the 16th of

18     July was a non-sitting day.  Mr. Kehoe asked us to consider whether the

19     17th, being a non-sitting day would be feasible.  We have explored the

20     possibilities; they are non-existent, unfortunately, Mr. Kehoe.  So,

21     therefore the 16th.  Apart from that, the 20th of July will be a

22     non-sitting day as well.

23             This far, not in relation to the witness, as far as the other

24     document, the tables are concerned, we see that that document starts in

25     the original with a page -- first of all, it starts with one page with an

Page 19895

 1     empty stamp which is not translated.  However that same stamp.  But now

 2     filled in - it's a kind of a form - is translated, then we have the order

 3     or the -- which we dealt with earlier.

 4             What then follows is apparently a list of police administrations

 5     which is not translated.  Of course, the language is very much the same

 6     in repetition, but it is not translated.  And that -- I think that if,

 7     for example, would you have of all the used terms, [B/C/S spoken], [B/C/S

 8     spoken], then that comes back 27 times, but also the -- although we could

 9     guess what is the title of it, we would like to have a translation for

10     that.

11             MR. MISETIC:  Yes, Mr. President.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Then that is a list of -- that's three pages.

13             Then we first come to the first table, OA Return Assistance.

14     That page is fully translated.  However, on the page after that, in the

15     original, we find in the title the date of the 27th of August, 1995.

16     That is not translated.  And what we find there, there are several pages.

17     Sometimes it's same content with some handwriting, and then in an other

18     copy of apparently the same document, the handwriting is replaced by

19     typescript.  But we have no -- even not the titles, the columns are not

20     translated.  So as it stands now, either are you limited to only the

21     fully translated table, in which at least the incompleteness of

22     translation is not a problem anymore.  Whether there are any other

23     problems, that is then still to be seen.

24             So if you want to have everything and then please prepare for a

25     full translation to the extent possible, perhaps discuss with Mr. Carrier

Page 19896

 1     whether the objections are still outstanding.

 2             MR. MISETIC:  Actually, Mr. President, what I had sent around

 3     yesterday was the Gotovina Defence's original and translation.  I'm

 4     content with the Cermak Defence's translation which is already uploaded

 5     into e-court and just tendering that into evidence.

 6             So I'm interested in the chart, the first chart with the

 7     numbers -- [Overlapping speakers] ...

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Now, the problem is this Court has no access

 9     to uploaded documents immediately --

10             MR. MISETIC:  I can call it up.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  If you do that, then I can compare that with

12     the document I have in hard copy here.

13             MR. MISETIC:  Yes.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Let's proceed.

15             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. Registrar, may we have 65 ter 2D00-131 on the

16     screen, please.

17             You see, Mr. President, that the one document you were stating is

18     translated here.  And then if we turn to page 2 and then page 3 in the

19     English.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  I see that's uploaded in e-court.  The third

21     page contains -- I'll check it again.

22             Yes, these are the seven rows in OA Return, help, all fully

23     translated.  Yes, it seems all the numbers are all exactly the same.

24             And then we have the other table.

25             Yes, that seems to be a complete translation of everything.  I

Page 19897

 1     was looking at the numbers, whether they are approximately the same.

 2     Yes.

 3             Mr. Carrier, you had a similar opportunity to check whether we

 4     have everything in translation now.  Translation issue seems to be

 5     resolved, if we would use this version of the document.  I'm -- I must

 6     say, not entirely.  Not entirely.

 7             MR. CARRIER:  No, that's actually --

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  No, for example, I see that on --

 9             MR. MISETIC:  The numbers.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  No, let me see --

11             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. President, that's what -- I'm talking to my

12     case manager about the numbers in Zadar-Knin don't seem to be --

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Could you verify, and could you sit together

14     with Mr. Carrier and see whether we have finally -- because if numbers

15     are not --

16             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. President, may I propose that since the numbers

17     are going to be the same whether they are in the B/C/S or in the English,

18     that they could be verified in the original, and then we will discuss and

19     circulate a final translation to fix any errors.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Carrier, it seems that not for the full

21     100 per cent, but for 98 per cent of the problems have been resolved, the

22     technical problems.

23             Any further objection?

24             MR. CARRIER:  No.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Then it can be admitted into evidence, but the

Page 19898

 1     Chamber would like to receive, let's say, within the next 24 hours

 2     whether there is any reason to review whether there are any technical

 3     mistakes.

 4             Mr. Registrar.

 5             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, that will become Exhibit D1577.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  And is admitted into evidence, with the provisio I

 7     just expressed.

 8             Please proceed.

 9             MR. MISETIC:  Thank you, Mr. President.  While we have this

10     exhibit on the screen, if we could also have the original Croatian

11     version of the chart, please.

12        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, I just want to see if you can help us perhaps

13     understand the chart.  You may or may not be able to help us.  It says

14     OA Povratak at the top.

15        A.   Mm-hm.

16        Q.   And can you tell us, having been an assistant minister of the

17     interior, the title is in Croatian "ispomoc," which is help, can you tell

18     us what your understanding would be as to what this chart represents.

19        A.   In my view, the chart contains information on additional police

20     forces sent from certain police administrations to other police

21     administrations.  The aim was to assess the situation in Sector South and

22     elsewhere, where it was necessary to do so.

23        Q.   Let's look at the column Zadar-Knin, which is the second column

24     -- second row, I should say.

25             Do you see that?

Page 19899

 1             MR. MISETIC:  Perhaps we could blow that row up.

 2        Q.   Can you tell us where it says:  "First echelon of help," what the

 3     entry there means, in your interpretation.

 4        A.   I think an assessment had to be made of the strength of forces

 5     which would be able to cover all the problematic areas.  In other words,

 6     we simply did not know what the specific --

 7        Q.   Let me ask you --

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Zidovec, could you tell us what you know and

 9     what you don't know.  It is not always clear whether are you looking at

10     the document and try to understand what it means and then give us your

11     explanation of what it means, or whether have you any knowledge on how

12     this 1st echelon and the 2nd echelon, what it really means.

13             Do you know it, or are you just interpreting, or mainly

14     interpreting?

15             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know exactly what the term

16     "echelon" means in this specific case.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  And that was apparently the issue in respect

18     of this table.

19             MR. MISETIC:  Yes.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Please tell us if you do not know, rather tell us

21     than try to digest in your own thoughts what it could mean and then

22     present that as the most likely interpretation of the document.

23             Please proceed, Mr. Misetic.

24             MR. MISETIC:  Thank you.

25             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you very much, Mr. President.

Page 19900

 1             MR. MISETIC:

 2        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, at paragraph 45 of your statement, you discuss fire

 3     prevention service, and I'd like to ask you a few questions about that.

 4     But first let me show you D600.

 5             Now, fire prevention was part of your portfolio.  And if we look

 6     at this document, this is also an OA Povratak order.

 7             MR. MISETIC:  If we scroll down, please.

 8        Q.   It's the 6th of August.  It has your signature and stamp.  And it

 9     says -- the subject is evidence of fires for the purpose of statistical

10     record of fires that were the result of combat operations in the areas of

11     your police administrations ... it is necessary to send to this

12     headquarters the following information for the previous day."

13             And you see what you instructed the fire services to report.

14             Number 2 is cause of fire.  And my question to you is, how would

15     the -- what is your understanding of what the fire service would do to

16     determine the cause of a fire?

17        A.   The fire prevention service must know the cause of fire.  That's

18     part of its job, to determine whether the fire was caused by a war

19     activity, by someone setting something on fire, or for -- for quite a

20     different reason.

21        Q.   Well, let me ask you this.  The order says that you're seeking

22     this information to keep statistical records of fires that were the

23     result of combat operations.

24             If -- what would happen in the event that one of the fire teams

25     determined that the cause of the fire was not as a result of combat

Page 19901

 1     operations but a deliberate fire set as arson by a member of the

 2     military?  What would the procedure be, once that cause of fire was

 3     established?

 4        A.   The data on all the fires that were not results of combat

 5     activities were sent by fire-fighting units to the criminal police.

 6        Q.   Which criminal police would they send it to?

 7        A.   To the criminal police at the seat of the ministry.  I assume

 8     that the -- they also forwarded this to the relevant police

 9     administration in the field, so in Knin or elsewhere, wherever the fire

10     occurred.

11        Q.   Let me show you a video, Mr. Zidovec, on the basis of that last

12     answer as the foundation.

13             MR. MISETIC:  This is Exhibit D508.  I believe the transcripts

14     have been provided to the booths.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Whether that could be the basis for the last

16     answer is -- is still --

17             MR. MISETIC:  [Overlapping speakers] ...  anticipating an

18     objection --

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, yes, but it's of course also highly suggestive

20     that here you'll find the basis for your last answer, which is not what I

21     expect you to do, Mr. Misetic.

22             MR. MISETIC:  Your Honour, it wasn't directed to the witness; it

23     was directed to Mr. Carrier.  Because I'm trying to find the line whether

24     have I established a foundation or ...

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  At the same time, the witness hears whatever

Page 19902

 1     you say.

 2             MR. MISETIC: [Overlapping speakers] ... okay.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed.

 4                           [Video-clip played]

 5             THE INTERPRETER: [Voiceover]

 6             "Journalist:  Mr. Minister, Jim Rupert, Washington Post.  What

 7     information does your government have concerning the reports of setting

 8     villages on fire by the Bosnian army that entered the Croatian territory

 9     to provide support to the Croatian military operation?

10             "Jarnjak:  I have no information concerning this matter.

11     However, when we come to that area, and any area, the police will

12     establish the actual state of affairs, inspect each object, take records,

13     and thereupon establish whether it was caused by combat activities or

14     something else.  Then I will be able to give a specific answer to your

15     question."

16             MR. MISETIC:

17        Q.   Now, Mr. Zidovec, is what the minister says there the correct

18     procedure as to how it would be established or who would establish

19     whether a cause -- a fire was caused in combat or as arson by the

20     military?

21        A.   Given that the order which I signed was sent to a range of police

22     administrations from Vukovar onwards, it is rather difficult for me to

23     answer your question.

24             The fire-fighters could not work in all the areas in the same

25     way.  They could not even be in all the areas.  However, wherever they

Page 19903

 1     there were fire-fighters, obviously they could also establish the causes

 2     of fires.  From their reports, the crime police could deduce the elements

 3     for their further activities.

 4        Q.   Yes.  My specific question, though, is whether it was ultimately

 5     determined by the fire service that the fire was deliberately caused by

 6     civilian or military personnel, would jurisdiction still remain with the

 7     crime police to investigate the arson further?

 8        A.   I would kindly ask to you repeat your question.

 9        Q.   Is it fair to say that the first determination of whether a fire

10     was caused by arson or in combat, is determined by the fire service of

11     the MUP; is that correct?

12        A.   In the given circumstances where they were present, they could

13     indeed make such an estimate.

14        Q.   Okay.  And what would happen if -- let me change the question.

15             If the cause of the fire was determined to be arson, would it

16     matter whether you suspected, at the fire level, that the arson was set

17     by the military or the civilian police?  Or would the fire service report

18     it to the crime police of the MUP, and then they would deal with the

19     issue of who caused the fire?

20        A.   Our reports were sent to the police stations in the field and

21     also to the crime police at the level of the police administration and

22     also at the level of the ministry, which then processed them in their

23     criminal reports when they decided to make -- to file criminal reports.

24        Q.   Okay.  Do you have any knowledge as to what the crime police

25     would do in the event that they determined that the fire was set by

Page 19904

 1     military personnel?

 2        A.   No.

 3        Q.   All right.  Let me turn to another topic --

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Could I ask one clarifying question.

 5             You just said:

 6             "Our reports were sent to the police stations in the field and

 7     also to the crime police at the level of the police administration and

 8     also at the level of the ministry, which then processed them in their

 9     criminal reports when they decided to make -- to file criminal reports."

10             Now, a few minutes ago, you were asked about the data on all the

11     fires that were not results of combat activities; therefore, had other

12     causes were sent by fire-fighting units to the criminal police, you said.

13             And then the question was:  "Which criminal police would they

14     send it to?"

15             And you said:

16             "To the criminal police at the seat of the ministry.  I assume

17     that they also forwarded this to the relevant police administration in

18     the field, so in Knin or elsewhere, wherever the fire occurred."

19             So a couple of minutes ago, it was just an assumption that they

20     would sent it to the local police authorities; whereas, now, you state,

21     if I understood you well, that they were sent to the police stations in

22     the field.

23             What made the difference between the assumption five minutes ago

24     and, now, it not being an assumption anymore, but a statement what

25     happened?

Page 19905

 1             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] All the events that occurred in the

 2     field were obviously recorded in such a way that they would end up in a

 3     certain police station; that is, police administration, in the field.

 4             From there, the reports were also coming to the headquarters of

 5     the OP Povratak, and there we had uniformed police, crime police, and all

 6     other types of police.  In certain regular analysis that were undertaken,

 7     it was obviously clear that the crime police would undertake certain

 8     additional investigation of any suspicious fires and proceed with

 9     criminal reports.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  It's not an answer to my question.  The same problem

11     you had with your last question, Mr. Misetic, that the answer given was

12     not an answer to your question.

13             May I ask you to well consider what the question is, and then to

14     give an answer to the question, focussing on what the person who asks the

15     question would like to know.

16             Please proceed.

17             MR. MISETIC:  Thank you, Mr. President.

18        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, turning your attention to reception centres.  My

19     first question to you is:  To your knowledge, did you receive any -- let

20     me rephrase it.

21             Did you receive any reports that international organisations,

22     whether the Red Cross, Amnesty International, the United Nations,

23     et cetera, criticised Croatia's establishment of reception centres for

24     civilians?

25        A.   No, I have never received any such reports.

Page 19906

 1        Q.   What was the ethnicity of the people that were housed in the

 2     reception centres during and after Operation Storm, to your knowledge?

 3        A.   In the reception centres, there were citizens of both Croatian

 4     and Serbian ethnicity.

 5        Q.   Can you explain to the Chamber why reception centres were

 6     established?

 7        A.   The first order to set up reception centres was signed by me on

 8     August the 4th, under the assumption that, obviously immediately after

 9     the combat activities, the population of the area will need assistance.

10     We requested the cooperation from the government office for refugees and

11     also the cooperation of local institutions, primarily social welfare

12     centres.  However, the situation in the field was such that these centres

13     were mostly set up by ourselves, in different school facilities and other

14     similar public facilities which could receive the population.  And then,

15     again, we would ask for cooperation and assistance of the relevant

16     institutions such as social welfare centres and other services.

17        Q.   Okay.  Were the reception centres set up as part of a plan to

18     remove Serb civilians from the liberated areas?

19        A.   No, no.

20        Q.   Did you receive any information which indicated to you that

21     within the reception centres fear was deliberately being instilled in

22     Serb civilians so as to encourage them to leave Croatia?

23        A.   I have never been informed about that.

24        Q.   Do you have -- or did you receive any information that Serb

25     civilians were systematically being transferred out of the reception

Page 19907

 1     centres to locations outside of Croatia?

 2        A.   We have not received any such information.

 3        Q.   Would the authorities transfer people to these reception centres

 4     against their well, to your knowledge?

 5        A.   No.

 6        Q.   Were people allowed to leave the reception centres once they had

 7     entered?

 8        A.   Yes.

 9        Q.   Can you explain what the procedure was if a person wished to

10     leave the reception centre?

11        A.   Such a person was erased from some basic records that we kept,

12     and the relevant social welfare centres would be informed about this;

13     also, the respective Red Cross unit, but I'm not sure that this was a

14     rule.  What was certainly the case was that any such person was allowed

15     to leave a reception centre at any time he or she wished to do that, in

16     order to return home or to go anywhere else.

17        Q.   What about persons who were determined to be incapable of living

18     by themselves?  Sick, elderly?  How would those people ultimately leave a

19     reception centre?

20        A.   For such persons, we requested the social welfare centres to take

21     care about them and also Red Cross units, in order to provide the

22     necessary logistics.

23        Q.   Okay.  Turning your attention to the issue of the -- to

24     paragraph 23 of your statement, I should say, which is your statement

25     that in the aftermath of Operation Storm, civilian protection units

Page 19908

 1     examined -- should say 48.000 houses, primarily for the purposes of

 2     sanitation.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Could I ask one question in relation to the last

 4     series of questions about the reception centres.

 5             MR. MISETIC:  Yes.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Could I ask you, Mr. Zidovec, your answer about

 7     everyone being free to leave the reception centre, would that be equally

 8     true for men, including able-bodied men, women, children?  Would it be

 9     true for everyone?

10             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This rule obviously applied to

11     everybody who was in a reception centre.  The old people who were,

12     indeed, in the reception centre were mostly elderly, some of them

13     entirely incapacitated, unable to move, who were brought there by their

14     relatives because there was nobody else in the surrounding area who would

15     be able to take care about them.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  But were there also able-bodied men, and were they

17     sometimes questioned about their past?  And would they also be free to

18     leave the reception centres?

19             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In our reception centres that were

20     set up by the civil protection, we had no such questioning.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.

22             Please proceed, Mr. Misetic.

23             MR. MISETIC:

24        Q.   Just following up on the Presiding Judge's questions, do you know

25     what the difference was between a reception centre and a collection

Page 19909

 1     centre?

 2        A.   The population that went to the reception centres was the

 3     population whose basic living was jeopardised.  There they were provided

 4     with fundamental medical care, and they were -- the proposals were made

 5     to organise their social security and obviously certain hygienic

 6     functions were carried out.  So certain elementary assistance was

 7     provided by the civilian protection.

 8        Q.   Yes.  But do you know what a collection centre was?

 9        A.   I assume on the basis of a document which was shown to me here, a

10     document of the crime police, that they referred to centres where they

11     could have arrested soldiers or members of some military formations, but

12     civilian protection had nothing to do with such collection centres.  Our

13     centres were exclusively of a humanitarian nature.

14        Q.   Thank you very much.  Now, going back to paragraph 23 of your

15     statement, why was the civil protection examining 48.000 houses?

16        A.   There were two main reasons.  First, the apartments and houses

17     were examined to establish if there were any bodies in there; and,

18     secondly, also certain sanitation measures, clearing up measures were

19     carried out in order to prevent any infections that could occur following

20     the fact that these houses or apartments were abandoned.  So, obviously,

21     if there were any food items of animal origin, for example, because there

22     was no electricity there, so we wanted to prevent any possible epidemics.

23        Q.   What type of things would civilian defence remove from the houses

24     once they entered?

25        A.   They removed foodstuff of plant or animal origin that were left

Page 19910

 1     behind.  You know that nearly everybody at the time had large amounts of

 2     fresh meat in -- in the fridges or dry meat and other kinds of foodstuff,

 3     and due to the summer weather, this was a potential source of -- of

 4     epidemics.

 5        Q.   When civilian protection would enter these houses, would they be

 6     in uniform, on all occasions?

 7        A.   Generally speaking, they were wearing uniforms.  If any member of

 8     the civilian protection did not have a full civilian protection uniform,

 9     this only occurred with people who carried out these duties for a long

10     period of time, because the uniforms would -- would simply not be useable

11     anymore, and we did not have replacement uniforms.  The civilian

12     protection also never entered any house or apartment without a police

13     escort.  This was a very clear instruction to all civilian protection

14     units.

15        Q.   How would the civilian protection enter a house if the house was

16     locked?

17        A.   As I said, the civilian protection groups were escorted by the

18     police and any such group also had an explosive expert who would carry

19     out the initial examination of the door, first of all, before they

20     entered, and then -- of the apartment.  Obviously the circumstances in

21     the month of August were such that possible stench or anything else that

22     would provide the indication that there was a reason why the civilian

23     protection had to intervene, in such cases, the civilian protection would

24     force the door to enter the premises.

25        Q.   Finally, Mr. Zidovec, turning your attention to paragraph 34 of

Page 19911

 1     your statement.  You say:

 2             "It is normal to expect larger amount of criminal activity in the

 3     area after such a large operation."

 4             Can you tell us why there would be an increase in criminality in

 5     that area?

 6        A.   This statement that I made to the investigators is obviously

 7     partly a result of my general experience, because we have all witnessed a

 8     range of such turning-point activities, and this was just one of them.

 9             In addition, everything that happened in the first days after the

10     completion of the combat activities in that area, brought about certain

11     emotions which could not at all exclude the possibility of criminal

12     activities.  Once this area was opened, people went there for a variety

13     of motives.  There were refugees, displaced persons, but also criminals.

14        Q.   Do you know if the border with Bosnia was secure?

15        A.   One part of the border with Bosnia was covered by the police

16     stations.  However, this is a rather porous border, and that part which

17     is usually called green border was such that one could cross it without

18     any real risk or without any possibility of the police controlling the

19     entire area.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Misetic, could I seek clarification of the

21     previous answer of the witness.

22             You said:

23             "Everything that happened in the first day after the completion

24     of the combat activities brought about certain emotions which could not

25     at all exclude the possibility of criminal activities."

Page 19912

 1             Now have I never heard of emotions which would exclude for the

 2     possibility of criminal activities.  But could you tell the Chamber what

 3     you actually wanted to say here?  Is it to say that emotions emerged

 4     which would drive people to acts of a criminal nature which, under other

 5     circumstances, they would not have committed?  Is that what you wanted to

 6     say?

 7             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.  I wanted to say that there

 8     was a very realistic possibility for the property that was in the area to

 9     be stolen, for various reasons.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  As far as I understood in paragraph 34, you were

11     only talking about expectations.  But leaving that apart, so what you

12     wanted to say is that after Operation Storm, you could expect a higher

13     level of theft.

14             Now in the next line, you say that there were refugees, displaced

15     persons but also criminals.  Now, I do understand that criminals have an

16     inclination to, at least if they are thieves, to theft, anyhow.  So what

17     then is the special emotion?  Because this Chamber heard a lot of times

18     that people were sometimes emotional because they saw that all their own

19     property had been stolen or had been destroyed earlier and, although not

20     being criminals, that they would take what they think was taken from

21     them.  These were not criminals.

22             Now, what did you intend to say there, that it was only criminal

23     that would commit theft or -- and what special emotions would have played

24     a role there?

25             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As far as emotions are concerned,

Page 19913

 1     I'm referring to refugees and returnees in that respect.  When I'm

 2     mentioning criminals, I'm quite clearly referring to certain individuals

 3     who engaged in crime for personal gain and had no other links to that

 4     area than crime.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Let me then see whether I understood your answer

 6     well.  You had criminals who are stealing just because they wanted to

 7     become richer, and there were other people that, under the emotions of

 8     possibly revenge or possibly because they saw that their property had

 9     been taken by others and sought compensation, and that they may have

10     been, for those reasons, inclined to take goods that may not have

11     belonged to this them.

12             Is that how I have to understand your answer?

13             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.  I think that the motive of

14     revenge was quite understandable under the circumstances.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Misetic, could you also try to elicit from -- I

16     sometimes need a rather long exegetical exercise in order to understand

17     what the witness really wants to say.

18             Could you please, also in the way in which you question him, try

19     to get answers which are understandable for normal people as well.

20             MR. MISETIC:  I'm going have to pass that task on to my

21     colleague, Mr. President, because I have completed my direct examination.

22        Q.   Thank you, Mr. Zidovec.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  If you have got one second.

24                           [Trial Chamber and legal officer confer]

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Next, Cermak Defence.

Page 19914

 1             Mr. Cayley.

 2             MR. CAYLEY:  As things stand, Your Honour, no questions thank

 3     you.

 4             No questions, then for the Markac Defence.

 5             Mr. Mikulicic.

 6             MR. MIKULICIC:  [In English] Thank you, Your Honour.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Then, Mr. Zidovec, you will now be examined by

 8     Mr. Mikulicic.  And Mr. Mikulicic is counsel for Mr. Markac.

 9             Please proceed.

10                           Cross-examination by Mr. Mikulicic:

11        Q.   [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Mr. Zidovec.

12        A.   Good afternoon.

13        Q.   I will have several questions for you and since we speak the same

14     language, we should be mindful of the fact that we need to make a pause

15     between question and answer so that the interpreters can do their job.

16     After I put a question to you, please wait with your answer so that the

17     interpretation can catch up.

18             Mr. Zidovec, mention was made of the uniforms of the civil

19     protection, and you explained that, due to the objective circumstances,

20     it was not always the case that the special -- that the civil protection

21     units of wore uniforms.

22             At any rate, can you tell what was the colour of the civilian

23     protection uniform at the time, if you remember?

24        A.   The civilian protection uniforms were of a

25     greyish/greenish/brownish colour, although brown was the predominant

Page 19915

 1     colour.  The uniforms had a sign of the civilian protection which clearly

 2     identified them.  The insignia was envisaged the under the civilian

 3     protection convention.

 4        Q.   On the issue of the insignia, is it right that it was a blue

 5     triangle against an orange background?

 6        A.   Yes, that's right.

 7             MR. MIKULICIC: [Previous translation continues] ... [In English]

 8     I would just like to draw your attention that that type of sign could be

 9     find under the Annex 1 to Additional Protocol of Geneva Convention from

10     12th of August, 1949, in paragraph 15.

11        Q.   [Interpretation] Mr. Zidovec, the civilian protection team which

12     went out into the field on request consisted as you told us of a

13     scene-of-crime officer, a civilian protection officer, and an explosives

14     expert.

15             Now the role of the scene-of-crime officer, in relation to the

16     examination of a dead body and within the civilian protection team was

17     exactly what?

18        A.   His main role was to preserve the location where the body was

19     found and to preserve the trace evidence; in other words, the

20     finger-prints, and to take a photograph of the body.  Thus, preserving

21     the state and condition of the body before sanitation takes place.

22     Whenever it was possible, the body was searched for possible ID.

23        Q.   Was the scene-of-crime officer precisely the person who was

24     authorised to establish if, on the basis of the examination of the body,

25     there were any indications of foul play?

Page 19916

 1        A.   Yes.  The scene-of-crime officer would examine the body and have

 2     the first indications of the possible cause of death.

 3        Q.   If I understand the procedure correctly, and you'll correct me if

 4     I'm wrong, there were two basic courses of action, the first being the

 5     following.  If the scene of crime does not conclude that there was any

 6     foul play in relation to the body, what follows next is the removal of

 7     the body.

 8             Is that right?

 9        A.   Yes, that's correct.

10        Q.   In the event of the other situation, where the scene-of-crime

11     officer, upon examining the body, suspects that murder may have been

12     committed, another type of procedure will follow.

13             Can you explain what that procedure was.

14        A.   According to this procedure and on the basis of the detailed

15     crime report produced by the scene-of-crime officer, the crime police

16     would, as part of the police administration, take further steps in the

17     investigation, proceeding from the evidence collected during the scene of

18     crime investigation.

19        Q.   Is my understanding correct, that in this case, the

20     scene-of-crime officer would send his report also to the relevant crime

21     police about the reasons to suspect that a crime had been committed?

22        A.   All the reports produced by scene of crime officers ended up in

23     police administrations, including the ones you referred to, and the ones

24     where it became obvious that the bodies concerned were to be found there

25     as a result of combat activities and other type of activities.

Page 19917

 1        Q.   Was this a two-fold procedure.  According to one, it was the

 2     police administrations that received information; and according to the

 3     other, it was the civilian protection that received information.

 4        A.   I don't understand your question.

 5        Q.   The hygiene and sanitation reports were produced and ultimately

 6     sent to the staff of OA Povratak, OA Return, and they were in fact

 7     produced by civilian protection bodies, were they not?

 8        A.   Yes.

 9        Q.   Does this mean that the reports produced by scene of crime

10     officers about possible crimes also ended up in the hands of the civilian

11     protection bodies and the staff of the OA Povratak?

12        A.   These sort of reports did not reach the civilian protection

13     structure.  As you could see from the forms that were shown here, we only

14     entered the data envisaged by the format of the document.

15        Q.   The sanitation process you described for us during your

16     testimony, you, as a high-ranking officer -- official of the Ministry of

17     the Interior, did you ever receive instructions or orders, formally or

18     informally, to the effect that the sanitisation process should be used as

19     a method of suppressing evidence of crime as a method of covering up for

20     foul play, crime, murder, arson, looting, and such-like?

21        A.   No, never.

22        Q.   Let us move to a different topic now.

23             In your statement, and I'm referring to paragraph 39 - this is

24     D1570 - you say that in late August and early -- or early September 1995,

25     you visited Gracac.

Page 19918

 1             To the best of your recollection, what was the condition of the

 2     town when you got there?  And I'm referring to the buildings, the

 3     streets, and so on?

 4        A.   In the part of town where I moved, it was practically intact.  I

 5     spent most of the time at the police station, i.e., in the same building

 6     housing the police station of the Krajina police.  The building did not

 7     have any damage traces.  It needed a good cleaning but nothing more than

 8     that.

 9             Close to that building there was a motel whose -- the name of

10     which escapes me now, which was not damaged either.  But that time, meals

11     were provided there, both to the civilian protection units of and

12     policemen.  The civilian protection was billeted in a tent close to the

13     police station.

14             According to what I heard, a unit of the Special Police was to be

15     found there at the time, and I knew General Markac and others among them,

16     so I wanted to go and say hello.  I took the civilian protection vehicle,

17     and I went to the facility where they were, some 3 to 4 kilometres away

18     from the police station.  There, I found several individuals I knew.  I

19     spent perhaps half an hour talking to them on some vital matters, how

20     they were faring, et cetera.  I did not have to do the civilian

21     protection business or that of the Special Police.  It was a private

22     conversation which lasted roughly half an hour.  At that point members of

23     the Special Police did say that they would appreciate it if the civilian

24     protection unit cleaned the premises where they were quartered, and we

25     merely engaged witty jokes about us not being able to afford, by that

Page 19919

 1     time, to pose as housekeeping help.

 2        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, now that you have broached the topic, the visit to

 3     the HQ of the Special Police in Gracac, how did it strike you in terms of

 4     the level of equipment and the conditions in which the Special Police

 5     were dwelling?

 6        A.   If I remember correctly, they had a rather large room with tables

 7     put together and chairs, and I seem to recollect a computer being there.

 8     I know that an individual from the technical -- operational technical

 9     sector accompanied the Special Police contingent, and I presumed that the

10     computer was his.

11        Q.   If I understand you correctly, you perceived that room to be more

12     of an office, an administrative office; is that right?

13        A.   Yes, that's right.

14        Q.   As you travelled through the area liberated in Operation Storm,

15     you said you came across check-points; do you recall that?

16             This is my question:  Do you remember who it was who manned the

17     check-points?  What sort of units were they?

18        A.   The check-points were manned by the civilian police, sporting

19     blue uniforms and by reserve [as interpreted] police forces, which had a

20     different colour uniform; it was greyish/blue.  The pattern was different

21     and distinct from the regular police blue uniform.

22        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, you could recognise members of the reserve police by

23     their uniforms; is that correct?

24        A.   Of course.  Of course, members of Special Police wore uniforms of

25     a distinct green colour, which differentiated them from all other police

Page 19920

 1     uniforms.

 2             MR. MIKULICIC: [Previous translation continues] ... on page 63,

 3     line 10, was wrongly interpreted my question in respect of the type of

 4     police that I mentioned.  I mentioned special, not reserve police.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Then that's now on the record.

 6             MR. MIKULICIC:  Thank you, Your Honour.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  And that is what, therefore, the witness may have

 8     understood to be your question.

 9             MR. MIKULICIC:  Yes, the witness understood correctly,

10     Your Honour.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

12             MR. MIKULICIC:  Thank you, Your Honour.

13        Q.   [Interpretation] My last question to you, Mr. Zidovec.  Did you

14     ever see members of Special Police on the check-points?  So were any of

15     the check-points manned by Special Police members?

16        A.   No, never.

17        Q.   Thank you for your answers.

18             MR. MIKULICIC: [Previous translation continues] ...

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Then we will first have a break before you have an

20     opportunity to cross-examine the witness, Mr. Carrier.

21             We will resume at a quarter to 1.00.

22                           --- Recess taken at 12.27 p.m.

23                           --- On resuming at 12.50 p.m.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Zidovec, you will now be cross-examined by

25     Mr. Carrier.  Mr. Carrier is counsel for the Prosecution.

Page 19921

 1             Mr. Carrier, please proceed.

 2             MR. CARRIER:  Thank you, Mr. President.

 3                           Cross-examination by Mr. Carrier:

 4        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, I have one introductory question.  I just want to

 5     figure out, were you a member of the Command Staff of Operation Povratak?

 6        A.   In the Command Staff of the Operation Povratak, there were all

 7     the competent assistant ministers, including myself.

 8        Q.   When you gave your statement to OTP and the Prosecution

 9     investigators back in 2007, at that time you told them that you didn't

10     really remember much about Povratak.  You said that you didn't directly

11     participate in that operation.  You said that it was primarily a police

12     operation.  You said you seemed uncertain to even -- who was in charge of

13     that operation.

14             Can you explain how it is as a member of the Command Staff of

15     Operation Povratak you told the investigators that, and how come now you

16     say that you were involved in that operation?

17        A.   This, first of all, had to do with a large of period of time

18     which elapsed since these events.  I was in charge of the civilian

19     defence and fire-fighting exclusively in 1995 and never thereafter.  And

20     in 2001, I retired, and, at that point, I simply turned my attention

21     towards some other activities, and I did not discuss these matters

22     anymore.  So the 12 years is certainly a long period of time which

23     influenced what I said during that interview, and I also did not have any

24     time to prepare for that interview.  This is why my answer was to

25     imprecise.

Page 19922

 1        Q.   So I do understand you to say that, since 2007, you started to

 2     look at documents and then you realized or remembered that you actually

 3     were a member of Operation Povratak.  Is that how it worked?

 4        A.   This is not entirely true.  After my interview with the

 5     investigators, possibly a year or so later, I was invited by the Defence

 6     team.  And during that conversation we tried to extend some of my

 7     recollections.  So between that moment of time and my arrival here,

 8     another year has elapsed.  Once I was invited by the Defence to appear

 9     here, I started looking up certain documents or start -- tried to contact

10     certain people who worked at the civilian protection at the time, in

11     order to immerse myself into this subject.  And before my arrival here, I

12     also had an opportunity -- a couple of days of day before my arrival, I

13     also had an opportunity to look at my statement.

14        Q.   You mentioned that in 1994 civil protection was moved from the

15     Ministry of Defence, and then it came under the authority of the Ministry

16     of the Interior, and was under your authority during 1995.  I take it

17     that when the authority was given to the MUP over civil protection, it

18     was simply over the existing structure that was in place, that had

19     existed since 1991.

20        A.   I do not understand precisely.  Which structures are you

21     referring to?

22        Q.   You said in your statement that civil protection had existed

23     since 1991; right?

24        A.   Yes, that is correct, and it was an integral part of the Ministry

25     of Defence.

Page 19923

 1        Q.   And that's the structure that you took over -- or your ministry

 2     took over in 1995 and you were in charge of during 1995.

 3        A.   No.  The structure of civilian protection, fire-fighting, and

 4     fire prevention was set up in January of 1994 when civilian protection

 5     was moved from the Ministry of Defence to the Ministry of Interior.  And

 6     there was another assistant minister who was in charge of that for a

 7     period of one year.  When he left the ministry towards the end of 1994,

 8     in the early days of 1995, the minister made a decision whereby I was to

 9     be in charge of these segments, most probably he believed that in this

10     way we could cover these issues without hiring a new assistant minister.

11        Q.   Okay.  If a member of the military had asked that civilian

12     protection personnel from the MUP be transferred to their groups for

13     sanitations purposes, would you have been informed of that?

14        A.   I suppose I would, either directly or by people belonging to the

15     civilian protection which received such a request.

16        Q.   And during Operation Storm, Mr. Cemerin, who was the chief of

17     civilian protection, he was on the ground during that operation and

18     monitoring civilian protection; is that right?

19        A.   That's right.  He supervised and coordinated the work of our

20     units and our people on the ground.

21        Q.   And he would have been reporting to you about what his

22     observations were, in terms of what was happening with civil protection

23     sanitation operations after Operation Storm; right?

24        A.   Yes.  Apart from general information that I received from him, I

25     also received his opinions as to what needed to be improved, in order to

Page 19924

 1     carry out our tasks better.  And also, within the civilian protection

 2     department, some of those tasks were -- some of these decisions were made

 3     by himself.

 4        Q.   Okay.  Now, Mr. Zidovec, I didn't ask you about improvements or

 5     anything like that.  I just wanted to know whether or not he did in fact

 6     he did report to you.  So just to move it along a little more quickly, if

 7     you could just answer the question I pose to you.

 8             Now in your 2007 statement to the Prosecution, you said that

 9     civil protection had exclusive authority to collect bodies of people

10     killed during Operation Storm.  You said that you conducted that work

11     completely independently from the military.

12             In your supplemental statement you explain that perhaps you had

13     some logistical support from the army, although you don't know the

14     details of that.  You also said that during your testimony today that

15     perhaps there was some communication with the military, at least with

16     respect to figuring out whether it was safe to conduct a sanitation

17     operation.  But you also say that civil protection never acted on orders

18     from the HV Main Staff.  And in your statement in 2007 you said that

19     there was no formal or official communication with the military on

20     collecting dead people.  You also said that you were not aware of the

21     military having conducted any sanitation operations during

22     Operation Storm.

23             Mr. Zidovec, I am going to suggest that, actually, none of that

24     is accurate, and that in fact the MUP civil protection sanitation units

25     that were under your authority including MUP civil protection personnel

Page 19925

 1     that you personally appointed to coordinator positions during

 2     Operation Povratak, not only coordinated their human sanitation

 3     activities with the HV but they also worked under the supervision of the

 4     HV to quickly sanitize the liberated territory of bodies after

 5     Operation Storm.

 6             Would you agree with that?

 7        A.   I have no information about this.  And I might add that during

 8     the conversations that I had these days, with people who used to work in

 9     the civil protection, including Mr. Cemerin and others, I was told

10     categorically by them that military bodies did not participate in the

11     sanitation operations carried out by civil protection.

12        Q.   You mentioned today and in your supplemental statement from

13     July 2009 that you maintain the position that you had exclusive authority

14     for human sanitation, but you didn't discount the possibility that HV

15     provided some logistical support, although you're not sure if they did do

16     that in fact.  I'm going to suggest to that there wasn't an order from

17     the Split Military District logistics group before Operation Storm

18     ordering support, in terms of manpower, supervision, among other things,

19     for sanitation after the operation.

20             Are you aware of that?

21        A.   No, I'm not aware of that.

22             MR. CARRIER:  Mr. Registrar, could I please have document number

23     65 ter 4503.

24        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, what's coming up on the screen in front of you is a

25     Split Military District logistics order for Operation Storm dated the 1st

Page 19926

 1     of August, 1995.

 2             MR. CARRIER:  If we could go to page 6 in both English and the

 3     B/C/S.

 4        Q.   And you'll see on this page it reads that:

 5             "Human sanitation shall be performed daily in cooperation with

 6     police administrations."

 7             MR. CARRIER:  And if we can go to page 10 in both the English and

 8     the B/C/S.

 9        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, item number 11 of this logistics order is entitled

10     "Sanitation of the Theatre of Operations."  Item 11.1 indicates that the

11     medical service of the HV command shall be responsible for the sanitation

12     of the theatre of operations.

13             Item 11.2 says basically that HV units of themselves can sanitize

14     if it can be done quickly.

15             Item 11.4 indicates that the HV will supply resources and troops

16     to perform the sanitation with joint forces and that if the military

17     isn't able to provide sufficient troops, the civilian institutions will

18     be engaged, as required.

19             Item 11.5 indicates that human sanitation will be carried out

20     under the supervision of qualified HV personnel, and they list some, and

21     one of them can be an army medical unit.

22             And then just below item 11.5 in the next paragraphs, it's

23     indicated that appropriate logistics base medical service in whose area

24     of responsibility the sanitation is being formed will provide the

25     necessary forensic experts.

Page 19927

 1             Now, Mr. Zidovec, given this logistics order from the Split

 2     Military District before Operation Storm, is it your position that you

 3     weren't aware that this order was made, that these resources were ordered

 4     to be supplied, that forensics experts were ordered to be supplied, all

 5     in support of human sanitation operations?

 6        A.   No.  Is this is the very first time that I have seen this

 7     document, and as regards to your final question, I have to answer

 8     negatively, I don't know.

 9        Q.   During your examination today, Mr. Zidovec, you were shown an

10     order from General Cervenko, which is Exhibit D598.

11             MR. CARRIER:  And, Mr. Registrar, if we could please call that up

12     onto the screen.

13             I'm sorry, I've just been reminded that I'd like to tender the

14     logistics order.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Misetic.

16             MR. MISETIC:  I think we need an updated translation of it, which

17     I think is of some significance.  So subject to the updated translation,

18     11.1 doesn't say Croatian armed forces; it says Croatian forces, which

19     are two different terms, which will be relevant later.

20             Subject to that, we have no objection.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  So no objection against the original, although

22     would you like to have the translation verified.

23             Mr. Registrar.

24             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, that will become Exhibit P2570.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  And is admitted into evidence.

Page 19928

 1             May I take it that you'll share your concerns about the

 2     translation with Mr. Carrier and that either he or you, together, will

 3     take care that we finally get the translation we need.  That is, a fully

 4     accurate translation, especially if is on vital points of the document.

 5             MR. MISETIC:  Yes, Mr. President.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed.

 7             MR. CARRIER:

 8        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, were you aware that -- of General Cervenko's order

 9     back in August of 1995?

10        A.   To the best of my recollection, I was not aware of it.  Or I

11     should perhaps say I didn't see it.

12             MR. CARRIER:  Sorry, Mr. Registrar, could we have D598 on the

13     screen, please.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Carrier, could we have a clarification of that

15     last answer.

16             You were asked whether you were aware of this order.  Now

17     awareness can be the result of looking at the document, hearing about the

18     document or whatever other information you would have received about an

19     order.

20             You then said:  "Or I should perhaps say I didn't see it."  The

21     question was not, I think, whether you had seen the order.  The question

22     was whether you were aware of the existence of that order.

23             Now, I do understand that you haven't seen it.  Were you by any

24     other means aware of such an order to exist, whether or not in writing?

25             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] At this moment my answer is

Page 19929

 1     negative.  I wasn't aware of it.  But what I do know is that in one or

 2     two orders received the previous day during the day, on the 4th of

 3     August, we sent almost identical instructions from the civilian

 4     protection to our units in the field.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed, Mr. Carrier.

 6             MR. CARRIER:  If we could go to page 2 and point number 2 on that

 7     page in both the English -- well, it may be page 1 in B/C/S.

 8        Q.   Point number 2, Mr. Zidovec, reads that:

 9             "In coordination with the police administrations and health

10     Crisis Staff in the counties, include a civil protection unit from a

11     county police administration ..." and it goes on to give different

12     districts.

13             And then the next paragraph, under number 2 it says that:

14             "In the course of the work of the sanitation detachment, the

15     commander of the detachment or a person designated by him, shall

16     coordinate all issues concerning the implementation of the sanitization

17     task within the scope of authorities of the counties."

18        A.   Mm-hm.

19        Q.   Now, you agree with me that it's -- that order indicates that

20     part of the detachments formed for human sanitation by the HV are to

21     include civil protection units as well.

22        A.   I don't know that civil protection units belonged to detachments

23     that were set up by the Croatian army.

24        Q.   General Cervenko's order indicates that if a detachment is set

25     up, civil protection units are to form part of that; right?

Page 19930

 1        A.   Yes, this is what is written here.

 2        Q.   Point number 3 from this order from this order, which at the

 3     bottom of page 2 and on to page 3 of the English - still page 1 of the

 4     B/C/S - reads that:

 5             "Sanitation shall be conducted in accordance with the

 6     instructions of the Ministry of Defence."

 7             And it goes on to give details about that order, which is dated

 8     15 October 1993, as well as the International Laws of War and then it

 9     lists some priorities.  The first one being removal of corpses.

10             Now, Mr. Zidovec, in your 2007 statement you indicated that you

11     had you never heard of a military doctor named Dr. Brkic.  We'll come

12     back to that.

13             This Chamber has already received evidence that Exhibit D1058 is

14     an order from Dr. Brkic which outlines how human sanitation, among other

15     things, is to be conducted.  Were you ever aware of any order from an HV

16     Main Staff doctor about how human sanitation was to be conducted?

17        A.   No, I wasn't aware of such an order.

18        Q.   Now point number 7 in General Cervenko's order appoints Brigadier

19     Dr. Zlatar from the HV Main Staff to coordinate, supervise, and provide

20     expert advice to the participants in the sanitation campaign.

21             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. President, can I get a clarification from

22     counsel.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Misetic.

24             MR. MISETIC:  Exhibit D1058 doesn't appear to be the document

25     that Mr. Carrier claimed it would be.

Page 19931

 1             MR. CARRIER:  D1056.

 2             MR. MISETIC:  D1056, okay.

 3        Q.   And this person who is appointed to supervise, et cetera, is to

 4     coordinate and determine the procedure regarding corpses, carcasses,

 5     scattered livestock, et cetera.

 6             Now you agree that what is being described here is what you say

 7     came under your authority for civil protection.  Is that not right?

 8        A.   That's correct.

 9        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, were you ever aware of an order issued by

10     General Cermak during August 1995 regarding sanitation operations?

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Misetic.

12             MR. MISETIC:  Sorry, Mr. Misetic, I have to note an objection.  I

13     finally pulled up D1056, and in the future if counsel could call up the

14     documents so we have a chance to make our objections on time to the

15     proposition that was posited, I don't believe accurately reflects what

16     the document sates.  So just so that we don't move too fast before we can

17     make our objection.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  I take it that Mr. Carrier did not do it

19     intentionally, but he is urged to be very precise so as to give a fair

20     chance to the Defence to --

21             MR. MISETIC:  Well, Mr. President, the document is dated

22     15 October 1993.  So that date relevant in -- in light of what the

23     witness testified happen in 1994, and I don't think it was accurately

24     depicted as to what the contents of the document are.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Let's proceed at this moment, Mr. Carrier, I

Page 19932

 1     think you --

 2             MR. CAYLEY:  Your Honour, in light of what you just said, if

 3     Mr. Carrier can provide to us the exhibit number for the document he is

 4     referring to at the moment, that would help me.  Thank you.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

 6             Mr. Carrier.

 7             MR. CARRIER:  P506.

 8        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, are you aware that the military set up sanitation

 9     detachments at both the garrison and Military District level during

10     Operation Storm and that civil protection personnel and units were

11     incorporated into those structures?

12        A.   No.  No, I don't know.

13             MR. CARRIER:  Mr. Registrar, could you please call up

14     Exhibit P506, please.

15        Q.   Now, Mr. Zidovec, as we wait for this to come on to the screen,

16     this is an order dated 5 August 1995, this time from General Cermak who

17     is the HV Knin garrison commander.  And this is an order issued to

18     institute organised and expert hygenic and sanitation measures in

19     relation to human an animal remains in the liberated area.

20             You've never seen this order, though; is that right?

21        A.   That's correct.

22        Q.   Now on page 1 you can see that General Cermak is ordering a

23     terrain and hygiene sanitation measures staff under his command.  And you

24     can see he appoints a number of people.  The first one being Brigadier

25     Dr. Brkic, the Main Staff officer, as the head of staff.  And just so

Page 19933

 1     we're clear this is the same doctor that wrote the Ministry of Defence

 2     instructions on hygiene and sanitation, dated 15 October 1993.  That was

 3     a document mentioned in General Cervenko's order that we already looked

 4     at.

 5             You can see there are other people appointed as -- other army

 6     people appointed as head of human hygiene and sanitation measures.  That

 7     is Major Sruk.  There's a Lieutenant Dr. Snezija [phoen] - I know I'm

 8     pronouncing that probably very incorrectly - but that doctor was

 9     appointed as assistant head for human hygiene and sanitation measures.

10     And you can see another person appointed was Captain Boris Radovic, and

11     he was appointed coordinator for animal hygiene and sanitation measures.

12             Were you ever aware of these people?  You already said you don't

13     know Dr. Brkic, but do you recognise the other names at all?

14        A.   No.

15        Q.   And would you agree with me that this order by General Cermak

16     seems to be setting up a team to deal with, among other things, organised

17     and expert sanitation of human remains in the liberated area?

18             MR. CAYLEY:  Your Honour, I'm going to object to my learned

19     friend's question.  The witness has already said he has never seen the

20     document.  Mr. Carrier is simply characterizing the document and asking

21     the witness who has never seen the document before to confirm the

22     contents of the documents, what the document represents itself to be.

23             I don't see any point to that question at all.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Carrier, what the -- this order seems to be

25     setting up, if you ask that from a witness who has never seen the

Page 19934

 1     document before, then you invite the witness to do something even the

 2     Chamber could do.  That is, to see what the documents tell us.  If you

 3     have any further questions in relation it that, of course, you may put

 4     them to the witness.

 5             MR. CARRIER:  Mr. Registrar, could you please call up document

 6     number 65 ter 7342.

 7        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, what is coming on to the screen here is a document

 8     that you issued on 7 August 1995 under the heading Operation Povratak.

 9     And it was sent to the Zadar-Knin police administration operative staff,

10     and in that document you explain that your goal is to coordinate hygiene

11     and sanitation measures in that police administration.  And you

12     particularly mention the town of Knin.

13             Do you recognise that document?

14        A.   I signed it.

15        Q.   And can you see that you have appointed a Mr. Cicko who was a

16     senior advisor in the MUP civilian protection department.  He was

17     appointed to position of coordinator for hygiene and sanitation measures

18     in Knin.  Do you recall whether or not he actually accepted that

19     appointment and went to Knin to work?

20        A.   He was in Knin, yes.

21        Q.   And another person that you appoint is Dr. Sugnetic.  I think I'm

22     getting that quite wrong.  And he was also a senior advisor with -- or,

23     sorry, just an advisor with the Ministry of the Interior's civilian

24     protection department, and you appointed him as deputy coordinator.

25             Do you know whether or not that doctor took that up position and

Page 19935

 1     went on to the ground and helped coordinate human sanitation operations?

 2        A.   I don't recall the name specifically or whether he was there, but

 3     I do know for a fact that Mr. Cicak was.

 4        Q.   Were you aware that in August 1995 General Cermak requested that

 5     Mr. Cicko and presumably the other doctor, although the name is

 6     misspelled, General Cermak requested that these people be transferred to

 7     the terrain hygiene and sanitation's measure staff under Dr. Brkic.

 8             Were you aware of that?

 9        A.   No, I'm not aware of that.

10             MR. CARRIER:  If I could tender that document, please.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  I hear of no objections.

12             Mr. Registrar.

13             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, that'll become Exhibit P2571.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  And is admitted into evidence.

15             MR. CAYLEY:  Your Honour, I'd just like to make one point.  And

16     again, it's related to Mr. Carrier not announcing the exhibit numbers.

17     If you actually look at the exhibit that he is referring to, and it's

18     D1048, it doesn't quite say what Mr. Carrier is saying.  And I know

19     Your Honour, often makes the point about accuracy.  It broadly says what

20     Mr. Carrier is saying, but it certainly doesn't mention Dr. Brkic.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Carrier, if there is a specific or if there is a

22     repeated comment on the accuracy of a summary or a quote of a document,

23     then you will have to first show the original and then take us to the

24     passage you want to summarise or you want to quote so that we can verify

25     whether it's accurate.

Page 19936

 1             This has been raised now two times, so I invite you to show us,

 2     for the next two or three documents, that you always accurately summarise

 3     or quote.  And give us an opportunity to verify.

 4             MR. CARRIER:  Certainly.  The next exhibit is D1058.  The one

 5     after that is 65 ter 2096.  The one after that is D603.

 6             And, Mr. Registrar, if could I have Exhibit D1058 on the screen,

 7     please.

 8        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, this is a request from General Cermak dated

 9     10 August 1995 --

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. -- if you just wait for a second so that we have

11     the document in both languages on our screen, as we have them now.

12             Yes, please proceed.

13             MR. CARRIER:  Thank you, Mr. President.

14        Q.   And can you see the subject heading is "Request for the transfer

15     the personnel from the civil defence."  And in this request,

16     General Cermak states:

17             "In regard to the sanitation of the municipality of Knin, we

18     request the transfer of personnel from the MUP civil defence of the city

19     of Zagreb to the staff for the sanitation of the terrain of the

20     municipality of Knin with the aim of improving efficiency."

21             And one of the people listed is the person that you had

22     appointed, Damir Cicko.  And I take it you're not in a position to

23     confirm whether there was a Dr. Santetic, who was a member of civil

24     defence, or is that a misspelling of -- do you know if that person exists

25     as a member of civil defence?

Page 19937

 1        A.   I can tell you nothing about the person under number 2.  I simply

 2     can't remember.

 3        Q.   And I take it you don't remember whether or not you received this

 4     request from General Cermak or whether you granted it or anything?

 5        A.   No, I can't.  In view of the addressee to which this -- or,

 6     rather, the address that was involved, he -- the letter would not have

 7     come to me for my information but to the civilian protection.

 8        Q.   But you would have been aware of the request, given that this is

 9     a request for transfer of civilian protection staff to -- to the HV.

10        A.   Unfortunately, I can't say anything specific about it, confirm

11     it, or deny it, because I don't remember.

12             MR. CARRIER:  Your Honour, the next exhibit is going to be D30

13     and D612 after that.

14        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, do you recall whether or not you ever received any

15     reports or any subsequent interactions on the ground during the

16     sanitation process between Mr. Cicko and Dr. Brkic.

17        A.   I don't know anything about it.

18        Q.   Do you know a person who was employed as an engineer during

19     August 1995 named Ivan Jelic?

20        A.   I don't even know where the person was employed.  The name

21     doesn't tell me anything.  I don't know.

22             MR. CARRIER:  Mr. Registrar, if we could have Exhibit D30 up on

23     the screen, please.

24        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, this is a report from Dr. Brkic to General Cermak

25     dated 12 August 1995, and he's reporting on hygiene and sanitation

Page 19938

 1     measures taken in the period from 5 to 12 August 1995.  And in this

 2     report, he indicates that he arrived in Knin on the 5th of August, 1995.

 3     And on page 1 and on to page 2 in the English, but still in page 1 in the

 4     B/C/S, under heading 1, which is human sanitation and technical measures,

 5     Dr. Brkic talks about arriving in the Knin city cemetery, discovering

 6     that there was an excavator, there's was a hole, there were several

 7     bodies around the hole and in the hole.  Also indicates that exact

 8     numbers of bodies would have been indicated in the daily report.  And he

 9     talks about an interaction with Ivan Jelic.  And if you go down to the

10     next paragraph, he talks about arriving back in the cemetery on

11     7 August 1995 to discover that the hole had been filled in, and he made

12     inquiries as to who had filled it in; he didn't get an answer.  He talked

13     about how he realized his presence there was indispensable due to the

14     work and actions that they were performing.  And he goes on to say that

15     together with the civilian protection staff, pursuant to General Cermak's

16     order, they produced certain results which conformed with all the rules

17     of hygiene and sanitation measures and talks about having to deal with

18     the bodies in a different way.

19             And then down at the next paragraph, Dr. Brkic indicates that

20     this work certainly could not have been carried out without civil

21     protection and specifically names Mr. Cicko, among others.

22             Were you ever aware or made aware from Mr. Cicko, the person you

23     appointed or anyone else about any involvement with an army doctor?

24        A.   In our dealings, there were no army doctors.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Carrier, I would need a couple of minutes for a

Page 19939

 1     few procedural matters.  We have only a couple of minutes left.

 2     Therefore, my question whether this would be a suitable moment needs only

 3     one answer.

 4             MR. CARRIER:  Yes, that's fine.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

 6             Mr. Zidovec, we'll adjourn for the day.  We'd like to you back

 7     tomorrow in the afternoon at a quarter past 2.00 in this same courtroom.

 8             Meanwhile, I instruct you that you should not speak with anyone

 9     about your testimony, whether it is the testimony you gave already today

10     or whether it's testimony still to be given tomorrow.

11             I'll ask Madam Usher to escort you out of the courtroom, and we'd

12     like to see you back tomorrow.

13             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.

14                           [The witness stands down]

15             JUDGE ORIE:  I would like to read quickly the reasons for a

16     decision which was taken already quite a while ago.

17             These are the Chamber's reasons for granting trial-related

18     protective measures for Witness AG-58.

19             In court on the 9th of June, 2009, during closed session, the

20     Gotovina Defence applied for full protective measures for Witness AG-58.

21     This request can be found at transcript page 18.405.  Neither the

22     Prosecution nor the Cermak or Markac Defence objected.  On the same day,

23     the Chamber granted the application and decided that it would hear the

24     testimony of Witness AG-58 in closed session and refer to the witness by

25     his pseudonym.  This decision can be found at transcript page 18.410, and

Page 19940

 1     the decision was rendered in closed session and the public is hereby

 2     informed about it.

 3             This Chamber has previously held that a party seeking protective

 4     measures for a witness must demonstrate an objectively grounded risk to

 5     the security or welfare of the witness or the witness's family, should it

 6     become known that the witness has given evidence before this Tribunal.

 7     The mere expression of fear by a witness is insufficient to justify

 8     protective measures.  This standard can, for example, be satisfied by

 9     showing that a threat was made against the witness or the witness's

10     family.

11             Witness AG-58, a Croatian Serb, lives with his family in Serbia.

12     The witness feared that, should it become known that he had testified,

13     the security and welfare of his family in Serbia might be put at risk.

14     The witness's fear was based on two incidents that occurred just before

15     he left for The Hague.  On one occasion, he repeatedly noticed that a

16     certain person or persons in his vicinity appeared to be following him.

17     On another occasion, he encountered an acquaintance, who made comments

18     that were delivered in a way and contained allusions such that the

19     witness could, and did, reasonably perceive them as a warning about his

20     family's security or welfare.  The Gotovina Defence stated that these

21     comments were made after the witness informed his acquaintance that he

22     was called to testify by the Gotovina Defence.  None of the other parties

23     explored this assertion, which was made at transcript page 18.352.

24             For these reasons, the Chamber found that the Gotovina Defence

25     had demonstrated an objectively grounded risk to the security and welfare

Page 19941

 1     of Witness AG-58 and his family, should it become known that he had given

 2     evidence before this Tribunal.  The Chamber furthermore considered that,

 3     in light of the nature of the anticipated evidence of the witness, the

 4     only effective way to protect his identity was to hear his testimony in

 5     closed session.

 6             And this concludes the Chamber's reasons for its decision to

 7     grant protective measures to Witness AG-58.

 8             Next matter.  Very briefly, the Chamber was informed that

 9     Mr. Markac would prefer not to be present in court on the 13th of July.

10     This is understood as a waiver of the right to be present during that

11     day, and if it's for personal reasons that Mr. Markac prefers not to be

12     present, then the Chamber doesn't need any further information.  If,

13     however, there would be other reasons which would be of a kind for the

14     Chamber to know, the Chamber would expect Mr. Kuzmanovic or Mr. Mikulicic

15     to inform the Chamber in an appropriate way.

16             Then, finally, we turn into private session for one second.

17                           [Private session]

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 19942

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6                           [Open session]

 7             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, we're back in open session.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Registrar.

 9             Finally, Mr. Carrier, could you give us an indication as to how

10     much time you would still need for your cross-examination.

11             MR. CARRIER:  I hope to complete it in the first session.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  The first session.

13             Then anything unusual long for re-examination or just within the

14     normal limits which is anything between five and ten minutes?

15             Then we adjourn, and we resume tomorrow, Wednesday, the 8th of

16     July, quarter past 2.00, Courtroom I.

17                            --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.52 p.m.,

18                           to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 8th day of July,

19                           2009, at 2.15 p.m.