1 Thursday, 15 October 2009
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness takes the stand]
5 --- Upon commencing at 9.07 a.m.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning to everyone.
7 Mr. Registrar, would you please call the case.
8 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. Good morning
9 everyone in the courtroom. This is case number IT-06-90-T, the
10 Prosecutor versus Ante Gotovina et al.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
12 WITNESS: IVO CIPCI [Resumed]
13 [Witness answered through interpreter]
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Cipci, would I like to remind you that the
15 solemn declaration that you gave at the beginning of your testimony still
16 binds you.
17 Ms. De Landri, are you ready to continue your cross-examination?
18 MS. DE LANDRI: Yes, Mr. President.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Then please proceed.
20 MS. DE LANDRI: Thank you.
21 Cross-examination by Ms. De Landri: [Continued]
22 Q. Mr. Cipci, I'd like to direct your attention to the events of
23 August 1995 again.
24 MS. DE LANDRI: And if we could have the witness's statement,
25 D1723, please.
1 Q. Now, Mr. Cipci, were you in Knin on August 6, 1995, when
2 General Cermak arrived?
3 A. I don't have anything on the screen but the first page of my
5 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Cipci, could you answer the question. If
6 Ms. De Landri will take you to a specific portion that will then appear
7 on your screen, but the first question was whether you were in Knin on
8 August 6, 1995
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I was.
10 MS. DE LANDRI:
11 Q. And did you speak with the general at that time?
12 A. No.
13 Q. What -- to the best you can recall, what did you do on August 6th
14 of 1995?
15 A. On the 6th of August, the president was also supposed to arrive.
16 Franjo Tudjman was supposed to arrive. And he was also supposed to go
17 from Knin to Kijevo. That's why I'd been asked by my minister to put
18 everything in place for the president's security as he was driving from
19 Knin to Kijevo.
20 Since I was in Knin already on the 5th and the Kijevo-Knin road
21 seemed to me very dangerous due to a large number of military trucks
22 carrying ammunition, I telephoned the president's office and asked them
23 to give up on that plan and that the president didn't go to Kijevo
24 because this road seemed too dangerous to me.
25 Despite all that, I took a team of police officers and traffic
1 policemen on motorbikes and I arrived in Knin on the 6th to meet the
2 president, and if need be, I was ready to transport him to Kijevo, and
3 that's why I was in Knin already in the morning of the 6th of August.
4 Q. But can you be a little bit more specific about what exactly you
5 did on that day.
6 A. On that day I arrived in the morning, and I was in the place
7 where the president was supposed to land by his helicopter at the
8 football pitch in Knin. That's where I parked all the vehicles that we
9 brought, all the cars and motorbikes, and I ordered my officers to find
10 themselves a place to sit and wait for the outcome of the developments.
11 And when Mr. Franjo Tudjman arrived and landed, I was with the group of
12 people who met him in front of the helicopter.
13 After the landing I went -- he went to the fortress and I
14 remained in the football pitch with my men, and I waited for the
15 president to return. And when the president returned, I was told that
16 the president wouldn't go to Kijevo, but, rather, that he would take a
17 helicopter and fly to Drnis. After that, I gathered my men and we headed
18 for Split
19 I would like to say something else. On the 6th in the morning,
20 my minister was also in Knin, Ivan Jarnjak was also there, and I spoke to
21 him with regard to General Cermak as well. I heard that General Cermak
22 had arrived in Knin and that he had certain duties, that he had been
23 given certain tasks, and then I asked my minister Mr. Jarnjak as to what
24 Mr. Cermak --
25 Q. Could I interrupt you for one second. I'm sorry --
1 A. Yes, go ahead.
2 Q. -- I just would like to direct you now to your statement, to
3 paragraph 17 of your statement. Do you have that in front of you now?
4 Can you see it now?
5 A. Yes, I can.
6 Q. Okay. Just directing your attention to the 14th line of the
7 statement where it's written: "I asked what his function was," referring
8 to General Cermak. Who did you ask what his function was?
9 A. I've just told you I asked my minister, Mr. Ivan Jarnjak. He was
10 there on the 6th as well. He was in Knin on the 6th in the morning, and
11 he was the one who told me, who answered. And I also, in my subsequent
12 conversations with the minister, either with the minister he, himself, or
13 one of his assistants or his deputy, I was provided the same information.
14 Q. But tell us precisely what the information was.
15 A. The information was that Mr. Cermak had been sent to Knin by
16 Mr. Franjo Tudjman. Mr. Franjo Tudjman reactivated him from the reserve
17 force and promoted him to an active army general and that he was sent
18 because Mr. Cermak was a high-quality economist before that, with an
19 intention for him to try and put everything in place for the
20 normalisation of the situation in Knin, in the Knin region, and if
21 possible, for the economy to be revived there. And this is more or less
22 what they told me in my subsequent conversations with ministry officials.
23 Even the assistant minister who arrived in Knin shortly after Storm.
24 Mrs. Katica Osrecki told me that. I believe she had known Mr. Cermak
25 from before. I was her escort through Knin. We came to pay a visit to
1 Mr. Cermak together, and in a conversation going to his office that's
2 what she told me.
3 Q. Directing your attention again to that conversation that you just
4 spoke about that you had with Minister Jarnjak. Who else was present, if
5 any one, during that conversation?
6 A. I believe that my chief of the police sector was also there. He
7 was with me, and he was in charge and responsible to organise everything
8 that was necessary in case President Tudjman wanted to travel from Knin
9 to Kijevo as had been announced. And when our minister arrived, there
10 was also Mr. Josko Moric. I don't know whether he was present during
11 that particular conversation. Of course the minister greeted all of us
12 from the police because we all knew each other very well, and I'm sure
13 that Mr. Jure Radalj, who was permanently by my side, he was also present
14 when I spoke to Mr. Jarnjak and when I asked him that.
15 Q. Okay. I'm also going to direct your attention now to
16 paragraph 18 in your statement, and specifically to line 25 where you've
17 said that: "Mr. Cermak had no military authority over them," meaning
18 troops, military command in the army situated in the building next to
19 where his office was.
20 MS. DE LANDRI: And I'd ask if we could have another document,
22 Q. Mr. Cipci, I'd ask you to look at that document. It's not
23 necessary for you to read it aloud. Just take a moment to look at it,
24 and I'm going to ask you some questions about it.
25 A. Go ahead. I've read the document.
1 Q. Have you seen it before?
2 A. No.
3 Q. So I think we can agree that it's a letter of appointment by the
4 president appointing General Cermak the garrison commander of the Knin
5 Garrison; is that right? Is that correct?
6 A. Yes. As far as I can see. That's what I can read in the
8 Q. And it's dated August 5, 1995
9 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. De Landri, is it really necessary to ask that?
10 I mean, if the witness would say no, it's the 12th," I think this
11 document we've seen this now 10 if not 15 times. Is it really -- try to
12 get to the core of what you want to ask this witness. And I could tell
13 you that the task of a garrison commander under the law, the position of
14 a garrison commander, in view of combat operations, military combat
15 operations, the understanding or misunderstanding of some 30, 40, or 50
16 people about whether they knew exactly what it was or not, whether they
17 knew the legislation or not, the documents issued by Mr. Cermak and
18 whether these were orders or were non-orders, we've gone through that
19 some 15 or 20 times.
20 If this witness, you think, could add substantially something to
21 this, if you have any reason to believe that, then ask focused questions
22 on those matters, and let's not ask the witness whether this really is a
23 document dated the 5th of August, because we've gone through that, I
24 think, 20 or 25 times. And unless you have any reason to believe that
25 this witness has information which makes this document not authentic or
1 that it would have been issued on another date, of course you're
2 perfectly free to ask whatever questions. If, however, there's no reason
3 whatsoever to believe that, then to ask him whether this is an
4 appointment letter for Mr. Cermak, whether it is dated the 5th of
5 October, whether it is signed by Dr. Tudjman, that's all, I would say,
6 not in dispute, and I'd like you to move forward in such a way that the
7 Chamber gets information in addition to the huge pile of information we
8 have already on this matter.
9 Please proceed.
10 MS. DE LANDRI: Yes, Mr. President.
11 Q. Mr. Cipci, did you have any conversations with President Tudjman
12 about Mr. Cermak's authority?
13 A. I had several conversations with President Tudjman. The first
14 time in 1960 when he became president. I had several conversations with
15 him, but Mr. Cermak's name never came up in any of those conversations.
16 Q. No. My question was: Did you ever have any conversations with
17 him about Mr. Cermak's authority, and in particular, his appointment
18 pursuant to this document this, letter?
19 A. No. I've already answered no.
20 Q. So what is your basis for your statement in paragraph 18 that
21 Mr. Cermak had no military authority over those troops?
22 A. I tried to explain that yesterday. The basis for that is the
23 fact that as I was assuming duties as the chief of the police
24 administration of Split
25 laws, including military laws in Split
1 a lot more combat units, including also the command of the navy. I had a
2 garrison commander, Mr. Zoricic. During the four years of war while I
3 was the chief of the police administration there -- you asked me what was
4 my basis for my claim, and I'm trying to answer that.
5 Throughout the four years of war I never had a single official
6 meeting with the garrison commander of Split, and at the same time, I had
7 official meetings with every other commander, including Admiral Letica.
8 Q. But you don't have any specific information about Mr. Cermak's
9 situation. Is that accurate? Just focus your answer on the question.
10 MR. KAY: I'm not sure -- I mean, Mr. Cermak's situation, he was
11 asked the question about what he knew about Mr. Cermak's appointment. He
12 gave that conversation with Minister Jarnjak. I hope it's not seen that
13 I'm being obstructive here, but the witness, I could detect, was getting
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now, I understood your last answer, Mr. Cipci,
16 to be that your statement in paragraph 18 that Mr. Cermak had no military
17 authority over those troops was based on your understanding of legal
18 provisions in relation to command structures and the position of a
19 garrison commander.
20 That took us a while to get to that, but now, Ms. De Landri, do
21 you -- do you seek to further explore the formal position or the
22 practical position, and if you would please then put the questions in
23 such a way that the witness has no difficulties in -- both in
24 understanding the question and also does not have an impression that it's
25 a matter that we have dealt with already.
1 Please proceed.
2 MS. DE LANDRI: Certainly, Your Honour.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Perhaps -- perhaps I could ask one question which I
4 think you may have on your mind.
5 You based your answer on your understanding of the legal
6 provision. Are you aware of any element in the position of Mr. Cermak
7 which is not either supported by or consistent with what we find in the
8 legal instruments about the position of a garrison commander?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know if Mr. Cermak received
10 from anybody authorities that were beyond the law or above the law. I
11 believe that even Mr. Franjo Tudjman would have indicated that in the
12 decision, at least in the footnotes. He would have added that, and he
13 would have worded it perhaps that Mr. Cermak, in addition to the
14 authorities given to him as the garrison commander, he has some other
15 authorities as well.
16 I really don't know who was it who could have given Mr. Cermak
17 any higher authorities if not the supreme commander of the armed forces
18 who was also the one who actually issued the decision in the first place.
19 JUDGE ORIE: So your answer, more or less, is no, you're not
20 aware of anything beyond what is in the formal position of a garrison
22 MR. KAY: Your Honour, for the record, the witness did mention
23 his factual experience --
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
25 MR. KAY: -- at particularly from the garrison commander
1 Mr. Zoricic, and was dealing with those issues from his experience, and
2 his statement also deals with his experience in relation to that matter.
3 So --
4 JUDGE ORIE: Since -- since the matter is raised by
5 Ms. De Landri, I would just like to try to get focused answers, and the
6 witness apparently says that no additional authority had been given to
7 him on paper. Therefore, there was no additional authority. Whether
8 that's the whole picture or not, that's another matter, but that's the
9 answer of the witness at this moment.
10 Please proceed, Ms. De Landri.
11 MS. DE LANDRI: Thank you, Mr. President.
12 Q. Mr. Cipci, I'd like to direct your attention to paragraph 22 of
13 your statement. Oh. That's Exhibit P1723.
14 Now, in paragraph 22 you'd stated, and there was some testimony
15 to this effect yesterday, that you were the only official in Knin who
16 could authorise civilians to pass through that district. Is that
18 A. The question is not accurate, so the answer can't be either. I
19 was not the only official in Knin. I was the only authorised person to
20 issue passes for people to cross the check-points that were under the
21 control of my police administration, and I'm talking about the area above
22 Vrlika, Sinj, Vrlika, and border crossings, and for the passage through
23 those border crossings I was the one who was authorised to issue passes
24 which allowed people entry into the liberated area. Thus I was not the
25 only authorised person in Knin.
1 Q. But we agree that you had the authority to issue the passes, and
2 you -- that that authority derived from your position as a civilian
3 police authority. Is that accurate?
4 A. That authority was based on the order issued by the Minister of
5 the Interior, Mr. Ivan Jarnjak, as well as based on the fact that I was
6 the chief of the police administration. Therefore, at meetings that we
7 held before Operation Storm, it was expressly said that the chiefs of
8 police administrations would be issuing passes for people to pass through
9 their border check-points. My border check-points were beyond the town
10 of Vrlika.
11 Do you need further clarification? I can tell you that the --
12 that you could also enter the liberated area of Krajina from Sibenik,
13 Zadar, and other areas, and the respective chiefs of police
14 administrations were in charge of the border crossings in those areas,
15 and I'm talking about Zadar, Sibenik, and so on and so forth.
16 Q. Well, we've looked at some documents yesterday, and I'm going to
17 direct your attention to them in a moment, in which you wrote some
18 letters to the Ministry of the Interior asking for clarification about
19 some passes.
20 MS. DE LANDRI: And I believe those are D494 and 495. If we
21 could have those. 494 first.
22 Q. In your statement you said:
23 "Mr. Cermak was not authorised to issue passes to civilians."
24 Do you recall that? And I'd like to direct --
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. Okay.
2 A. I did say that.
3 Q. I'd like to direct your attention now to this exhibit. It's
4 D494. Have you had a moment to look at that document?
5 A. This is a document that I signed, and I sent it to my ministry.
6 Is that the document that I'm looking at?
7 Q. Yes.
8 A. It is -- it was written on the 15th of August. I can see my
9 signature, and there's also a footnote in my own handwriting.
10 Q. My question to you, Mr. Cipci, is if Mr. Cermak did not have the
11 authority to issue passes to civilians, why did you not write that at the
12 time when you wrote this letter or memo to the Interior Ministry on
13 August 15th of 1995?
14 A. Madam, I wrote this -- if you look at the last sentence, you will
15 see that it reads:
16 "Please reply and confirm in writing the validity of the passes."
17 The word "validity" means whether they were valid or not, because
18 they were not in compliance with what had been agreed, and I asked from
19 the ministry to confirm whether the passes were valid on the assumption
20 that something had been changed in the meantime.
21 The reply I received was that Mr. Cermak could no longer issue
22 passes for civilians but only for military personnel and for civilians
23 serving in the Croatian Army. That was the answer that I received from
24 the ministry, and I believe that Mr. Cermak later on indicated on his
25 passes that his passes were valid only for military personnel and
1 civilians serving in the Croatian Army. Therefore, you can see that this
2 was my written request for an explanation from the ministry as to whether
3 Cermak's passes were valid or not. I thought that they were not valid.
4 And as for Mr. Cermak, when he showed me a pass of that kind in his
5 office I told him, "Mr. Cermak, all civilians that I find in my territory
6 carrying your pass I'm going to remove from my area," and that did occur.
7 Q. I'm not sure there's an answer to the question. You stated
8 unequivocally in your written statement that you submitted to the Court
9 that there -- there was -- you were -- you were the only individual who
10 had that authority, but that's not expressed in the document that was
11 written at the time back in August of 1995.
12 Is there a reason why it wasn't expressed then but it's expressed
13 some 14 years later?
14 A. I really don't understand what you're aiming at, what you're
15 asking me. I have just told you that I was the only person authorised to
16 let people go through my check-points.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. De Landri is asking you the following: In this
18 letter which you have explained to us to be an instrument to verify the
19 accuracy of your own opinion that Mr. Cermak was not entitled to issue
20 passes, why at the time you didn't write to the Ministry, "I sent you
21 this pass. It's my view that General Cermak steps beyond his authority
22 by issuing those passes instead of seeking confirmation of the validity."
23 That's what you'd like to know.
24 MS. DE LANDRI: Yes, Mr. President.
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] With all due respect and -- I don't
1 see a big difference here. I don't see any major difference.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Do I understand your answer correctly if I think
3 that you are saying that you raised the issue but not in the sharp way as
4 Ms. De Landri would have expected you to do in view of your statement
5 that Mr. Cermak was not authorised issue those passes?
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I may have not been
7 stern enough in the written document, but I was very strict when I
8 removed from that territory people whom I found there with Mr. Cermak's
9 passes, and that was before, even before I sent my query to the Ministry
10 of the Interior.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Ms. De Landri.
12 MS. DE LANDRI: Thank you, Mr. President.
13 Q. Mr. Cipci, I believe yesterday you testified that your visits to
14 Knin were in a "semi-private capacity"; is that right?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. I'm wondering if you can explain to the Trial Chamber how if you
17 were in that location in a semi-private capacity you had the authority to
18 issue the passage of civilians in that area.
19 A. I apologise, madam. I obviously can't understand your questions.
20 I am repeating for the fifth time: I was the authorised person for the
21 area of my responsibility, which was the police administration of Split
22 and Dalmatia
23 of Split
24 Knin, and I had several check-points for which I issued passes. I did
25 not issue passes in Knin. I'm repeating this for the fifth time.
1 Q. Okay. I'd like to continue and direct your attention to
2 paragraph 25 of your statement.
3 MS. DE LANDRI: Can we have Exhibit D1723. Thank you.
4 Q. I'm sorry, that's paragraph 23. Do you have that in front of
6 A. Yes. I can see the first part of that.
7 Q. You're -- you may recall from memory without having to look at
8 the document that you stated that you confronted Mr. Cermak about the
9 passes, and you asked him about his issuance of those passes.
10 Can you tell the Trial Chamber when that conversation occurred?
11 A. Madam, first of all, you have to bear in mind that that happened
12 over 15 years ago, so I don't know when exactly that conversation took
13 place, but I know that it was --
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Cipci, you do not have to tell Ms. De Landri
15 what she has to keep on her mind. If you do not know any more after 15
16 years, fine, tell us, but please try to answer the questions and focus on
17 what is asked.
18 The question was: When did the conversation occur? If you know,
19 tell us. If you know it not on a precise date but, rather, say, within a
20 range after couple of days, tell us as well. If you don't know any more,
21 tell us also. Please proceed with your answer.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That conversation took place
23 certainly a few days after Operation Storm, but I don't know exactly when
24 that was.
25 MS. DE LANDRI:
1 Q. Okay. As best you can recall, can you tell us what was -- who
2 was present first?
3 A. General Cermak and myself.
4 Q. And where did the conversation take place?
5 A. In his office.
6 Q. Okay. And what did you say to him?
7 A. "Good morning, Mr. Cermak. Here I am. I came to have a cup of
8 coffee with you and have a little chat."
9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Cipci, you certainly have understood that
10 Ms. De Landri asked you what you said to Mr. Cermak in relation to the
11 passes. So if you'd please be kind enough to tell us what you told
12 General Cermak in relation to the validity of the passes.
13 THE WITNESS: Okay. [Interpretation] In an informal conversation
14 that we had, because my visit was not official, Mr. Cermak took out a
15 pile of passes that he had printed, and then I told him that those passes
16 were not in compliance with what my minister had told me, and that was
17 that the passes could be issued only by the chiefs of police
18 administrations for the passage through their respective check-points,
19 and that for that reason, until I was told differently by my minister, I
20 would not be inclined to let the civilians through to the liberated area
21 if they carried his passes. They would be allowed to do so only with the
22 passes issued by myself, and that is my answer to the question put to me.
23 MS. DE LANDRI:
24 Q. And did General Cermak have any comments to you, Mr. Cipci?
25 A. No.
1 Q. And approximately how long did your meeting last?
2 A. Not more than half an hour. That's how long it took me to have a
3 cup of coffee, smoke my pipe, and had a chat. I had arrived in Knin for
4 different reasons, but it seemed a decent thing to do to pay a visit to
5 Mr. Cermak. I also always paid a visit to Mr. Pasic, who was the mayor
6 of Knin of sorts, the commissioner of --
7 JUDGE ORIE: Before you start telling us all other persons you
8 paid a visit to, you've answered the question. That was half an hour,
9 that meeting.
10 Please proceed.
11 MS. DE LANDRI:
12 Q. Mr. Cipci, I'd like to direct your to paragraph 21 in your
14 Now, if I understood your answers to the last series of questions
15 correctly, you said the meeting that you had with General Cermak about
16 the passes occurred in his office. Here in paragraph 21, in the first
17 sentence, you say: "I was never present at meetings which were held in
18 General Cermak's office." Which is correct?
19 MR. KAY: Can we have the full context, please? The witness
20 stressed informally at the start of his testimony --
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Excuse me, I apologise.
22 MR. KAY: -- and also in his statement.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Ms. De Landri, the question as put to the
24 witness, which of the two is correct, is unfair if we do not include the
25 remainder, the other sentences of paragraph 21.
1 MS. DE LANDRI: Certainly, Your Honour.
2 JUDGE ORIE: And we -- I'll refrain from further comment. Please
4 MS. DE LANDRI:
5 Q. Would you take a moment to look at paragraph 21, Mr. Cipci.
6 A. May I answer? Both are correct. I did go to Cermak's office,
7 but I never attended an official meeting. In other words, both are
9 Q. The meeting that you referred to involving the passes, that was
10 not an official meeting, in your view?
11 A. No way. I just came to say hello, and then in that informal
12 conversation he showed me that pile of passes. That's what I told you.
13 I did not have any reason to pay Cermak an official visit, because Knin
14 was not within the area of my official responsibility. My area of
15 responsibility ended with Vrlika.
16 Q. Just another question. You had in paragraph -- I believe it's
17 paragraph 23 also of your statement, you said you would expel anyone who
18 came into the jurisdiction with passes issued by General Cermak. Did
19 that ever, in fact, occur? Did you expel anyone who came into the
20 jurisdiction with a pass issued by the general?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Can you --
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. Can you tell us about that?
25 A. My officers informed me that some foreigners could be found in
1 the area of my responsibility carrying General Cermak's passes. They
2 told me they didn't know what to do. I instructed them to escort them
3 through the border pass and escort them from the area of our
4 responsibility and send them towards Knin, and that's what happened.
5 MS. DE LANDRI: Could we have P509 on the screen, please.
6 Q. Okay. Mr. Cipci, I'll ask you to take a look at that document
7 for a moment.
8 A. I have.
9 Q. Okay. Have you seen that document before?
10 A. No.
11 Q. And I think we can agree that that's - excuse me - an order dated
12 August 15th, 1995
13 movement of civilians to the town of Knin
15 A. I can read that.
16 Q. And you -- you say you've not seen that before testifying today
17 in this Chamber?
18 A. No.
19 MS. DE LANDRI: I'd ask for P510, please.
20 Q. I'd ask you to take a look at that document, Mr. Cipci, and read
21 that document, and first ask you if you've seen that document before?
22 MR. KAY: The document's under seal, Your Honour, I'm reminded.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar has taken care of the matter.
24 Please proceed.
25 MS. DE LANDRI: Thank you, Mr. President.
1 Q. Have you had an opportunity to take a look at that document?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Have you seen it before today?
7 (redacted) During the four years in
8 office, I must have seen hundreds of documents every day. So we're
9 talking about thousands during the term of office.
10 Q. I believe that one of the main themes of your written statement
11 to the Court is, first, that General Cermak did not have the authority to
12 issue the passes. My first question to you is if he did not have the
13 authority to issue the passes, as we've seen in the first document that
14 you've been shown, why was there an order that he issued saying that the
15 passes were no longer necessary? Can you explain that?
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe. One second, please. Mr. Kehoe.
17 MR. KEHOE: Just -- could we just go into private session very
18 briefly, Mr. President?
19 JUDGE ORIE: We turn into private session.
20 [Private session]
11 Pages 23180-23184 redacted. Private session.
20 [Open session]
21 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we're back in open session.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
23 MS. DE LANDRI:
24 Q. The second page of the document under paragraph C, I'd ask you to
25 have a look at that.
1 A. Could I have it in Croatian, please?
2 Q. Yes. I believe it's -- there should be a paragraph C in
3 Croatian. It should be on the right-hand side of your screen.
4 Have you had a moment to read that?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. My question to you is can you explain how General Cermak was able
7 to arrange for the freedom of movement of the ECMM monitors without your
8 intervention on August 18th?
9 A. In what area was this?
10 Q. Okay. Well, I believe it says on the front of the document. If
11 you'd turn your attention to the first page of the document.
12 JUDGE ORIE: I got the impression that it was in Dabar, as it
13 reads, with the grid coordinates. At least that's the event described
14 as --
15 MS. DE LANDRI:
16 Q. It's in the upper left-hand corner, sir.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. De Landri, we are talking about what is written
18 there under C. That's an event where Mr. Cermak was called. That's what
19 you are referring to?
20 MS. DE LANDRI: That's right.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Now, it seems to me that there is an indication in
22 that same paragraph of the place where this took place, would you agree
23 with that, and that apparently is what the witness would like to know in
24 order to answer your question, whether he has an explanation for that.
25 Now you take him back to the first page, but would it not be more
1 logical to tell him that what happened here happened, at least as far as
2 I'm aware, I do not know exactly where to locate it, in Dabar? XJ2554.
3 MS. DE LANDRI: No, the question is for him to answer.
4 JUDGE ORIE: No. The witness says, Where did this happen. And
5 then you say, Look at page 1. Whereas in the paragraph I see what seems
6 to be, at least that's how I understand it, to be a geographical
7 location, that is the combined Croatian MUP military police check-point
8 in Dabar. So there exactly they were stopped. There -- at least that's
9 how I understand it. That's where that phone call was made. And the
10 witness asked where was it.
11 Would you agree with me that because it's important for him,
12 you're asking for an explanation, it's apparently important for the
13 witness to know where it happened. So should we then not inform the
14 witness that it looks on this document that it happened in Dabar rather
15 than -- I do not know what I could find better on page 1 than I find in
16 this very paragraph which describes where it happened, unless my
17 understanding of the document is incorrect.
18 Okay. Apparently the stopping the monitors took place in Dabar.
19 If that is relevant for your answer, then please be informed about that,
20 and then could you please explain as Ms. De Landri asked you.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Very well. If it took place in
22 Dabar and if the question is how could Mr. Cermak have dealt with the
23 issue without me, then my answer is that Dabar was not in my area of
24 responsibility. Mr. Cermak had absolutely no reason to contact me, and
25 he did not. The same applies to those manning the check-point. They did
1 not need to get in touch with my chief but, rather, with the chief who
2 was superior to them.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Now, next question. You say Dabar is not within
4 your area of responsibility. Is that -- now, could you explain whether
5 Mr. Cermak could deal with the matter directly to the extent the persons
6 involved could observe?
7 A. Based on this paragraph, it turns out that Mr. Cermak indeed took
8 part in it and resolved the problem. That is a fact, but that's also all
9 I can say.
10 JUDGE ORIE: So you say, "I have no explanation as to what his
11 authority or role could have been here."
12 Please proceed, Ms. De Landri.
13 MS. DE LANDRI: Thank you, Your Honour.
14 Could we get P957, please.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Just for my information, Dabar is approximately
16 where, because I wouldn't know. No one knows.
17 Could you tell us where approximately Dabar is?
18 MS. DE LANDRI: I'm being told, excuse me --
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, yes. But --
20 MS. DE LANDRI: Oh, I'm sorry.
21 JUDGE ORIE: -- I'd like to hear it from the witness.
22 Could you tell us where it is?
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know exactly. I think it's
24 to the west from Krajina. It wasn't in the area bordering on the
25 Split-Dalmatia county, at least I think; although, I must say I'm not
1 certain. These are small border check-points and hamlets of which there
2 are thousands.
3 JUDGE ORIE: So not knowing exactly where it is, it may have been
4 difficult for you to establish that it was not in your area of
5 responsibility, isn't it, if you can't tell us where it is? You cannot
6 for sure tell us that it was outside your area of responsibility.
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm positive it was not in my area
8 of responsibility.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Although you do not know where it is.
10 Please proceed, Ms. De Landri.
11 MS. DE LANDRI: Thank you, Mr. President.
12 Q. Do you have P957 in front of you? I'd like to direct your
13 attention to paragraph 2.
14 Have you had an opportunity to read paragraph 2?
15 A. The first part of that paragraph.
16 Q. Yes. Yes. I'm just directing your attention to the first part
17 of it.
18 In particular, I want to ask you about the sentence that reads:
19 "Today we went to General Cermak to complain about our ROM
20 restriction of movement yesterday in Vrlika area. He apologised to us
21 for this accident that will never happen again. Military and civilian
22 police should know that all IOs have Fom in the area. He was for sure
23 that one of the low-ranking officers was acting by self-initiative. The
24 General reacted immediately by phoning the minister of internal affairs
25 and asking him to contact -- to contact with the civil police in Split
1 establish coordination to avoid those accidents in the future. He told
2 us that the officer will be punish. TC: The angry way of phoning the
3 minister gave us the idea that he really wants to have good relationship
4 with the ECMM. EC."
5 My question to you, Mr. Cipci, is does that change your view at
6 all about Mr. Cermak's relationship with the civilian police?
7 A. It absolutely does not. The stress should be placed on the word
8 "he asked," Minister Jarnjak. If you can order someone something, you
9 don't need to ask.
10 MS. DE LANDRI: Mr. President, this might and good time for a
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. It may be, but before we have the break,
13 Mr. Cipci, I'm just trying to find out exactly the boundaries of your
14 area of responsibility going in south-easterly direction from Vrlika.
15 Then you go in the direction of Sinj; is that correct?
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It's Sinj, Vrlika, Knin, or the
17 other way round.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Now, I am right in understanding that Sinj is
19 south-east of Vrlika.
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, to the south-east. Vrlika is
21 somewhat higher up on the map.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now, in easterly direction of Vrlika, where
23 did your responsibility end.
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] To the west of Vrlika, towards
25 Kijevo. Sinj, Vrlika, and then Kijevo. The boundary was between Vrlika
1 and Kijevo.
2 JUDGE ORIE: But I wasn't asking you in a westerly direction, but
3 from the town of Vrlika
4 responsibility extend?
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Sinj was also within my area of
6 responsibility. It is within the boundaries of what today is the
7 Split-Dalmatia county. That was the border of my area of responsibility
8 and the territory of the Split-Dalmatia police administration. The
9 borders of the Split-Dalmatia county are also the borders of the
10 Split-Dalmatia police administration.
11 MR. KEHOE: Mr. President, by way of assistance to the Chamber,
12 there was a series of maps that we put in, D806, if that would assist.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I'll have a -- D806, you said. Just let me
14 have a look.
15 MR. KEHOE: It was a sequence of maps that we admitted some time
16 ago, and it was a series of three maps. I think the pertinent map is map
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I'll have a look at it, because I'd like to --
19 MR. KEHOE: And then map 3 as well.
20 JUDGE ORIE: I'm just checking the maps, Mr. Cipci.
21 I'm afraid that these maps do not fully help me out.
22 Could I ask you again. Going from Vrlika, going in
23 south-easterly direction, that is direction of Hrvace and Sinj. Yes?
24 Are you with me?
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I am. One goes towards Sinj.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Would that whole area be within your area of
2 responsibility, from Vrlika to Sinj?
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. Yes.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Now, in easterly direction, would that -- would your
5 area of responsibility go up to the border to Bosnia. And when I say
6 easterly direction, I'm moving to the right, but you would --
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] To the east and south-east of Sinj,
8 there is the border with Bosnia
9 border. All the way to the east from my area of responsibility there is
11 Sibenik, and Vrlika, which at the time was the Zadar-Knin administration
12 and now it is Sibenik-Knin administration. This is where the borders
13 were: Bosnia
14 third side. That's it.
15 JUDGE ORIE: [Interpretation] Now, between Vrlika and Sinj
16 there seems to be a lake. I take it that it's an electrical plant which
17 created that lake. Is that a rather long lake. Is that --
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, there is an artificial lake
19 which was made because of the hydroelectric plant of Peruca.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Now, was that lake entirely within your area of
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It is difficult for me to say where
23 the border was exactly once you go beyond Knin -- Sinj. In any case,
24 Vrlika was, and everything to the west of Vrlika, that was still within.
25 JUDGE ORIE: The lake, at least, I take it from maps I'm
1 consulting at this very moment, is somewhere between Vrlika and Sinj.
2 Not south of Sinj but north-west of Sinj. Was that artificial lake
3 entirely in your area of responsibility?
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I cannot say. I am not certain.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Well, if you can tell us what was within your area
6 of responsibility and what not, then I at least expect you to be able to
7 know where your area of responsibility was, isn't it?
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, it is, but you need to know
9 that my area of responsibility in terms of size was the greatest one in
11 and the greatest one in terms of number of staff. I didn't tour each and
12 every village. I had under me the city of Split with 200.000 inhabitants
13 and 12 other towns. This is what I visited. I didn't go into each and
14 every municipality.
15 JUDGE ORIE: It now appears that you do not know where the
16 borders are of your area of responsibility, and it also appears that you
17 do not know where Dabar is, and nevertheless you come with a strong
18 statement that it was not in your area of responsibility.
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I claim that as far as I can recall
20 at this point in time, Dabar was not within my AOR. I do not recall
21 having Dabar as a crossing. In -- maybe I'm wrong, but at this point in
22 time I think Dabar was not within my AOR. That's it.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Of course we expect you to tell us what you
24 know for certain.
25 For the parties' information, if I look at Google maps, I see a
1 Dabar in Croatia
2 Vrlika and Sinj. And if the parties could assist Chamber in establishing
3 where in August 1995 the exact borders of the area of responsibility of
4 this witness were that would be appreciated.
5 MR. KEHOE: One thing, Mr. President, that may assist, and I'd
6 have to go back to a different map, often times in this area we have
7 villages of same name and the key point here, I think, is this grid
8 reference, this NATO grid reference of --
9 JUDGE ORIE: If that would help --
10 MR. KEHOE: I think so.
11 JUDGE ORIE: -- as I said before, I'm -- and I think I was quite
12 transparent, the maps I'm consulting at this moment because on the maps
13 you've shown, you drew our attention to, I do not know whether we have
14 the exact borders, at least not described in the way as the witness says
15 was his area of responsibility. That's the reason, but --
16 MR. KEHOE: Yes.
17 JUDGE ORIE: But every assistance by the parties to find out
18 whether this Dabar is the Dabar we're talking about and whether this
19 Dabar would be within or outside the zone of responsibility would assist
20 the Chamber in further assessing the reliability and credibility of the
21 answer that was an explanation on how Mr. Cermak could deal with the
22 matter without the intervention of the witness.
23 We will have a break, and we'll continue at five minutes past
25 One -- Ms. De Landri, your time limit of yesterday, do you still
1 think you could keep it to two -- two sessions?
2 MS. DE LANDRI: Yes, Your Honour.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And you are not only encouraged but even
4 instructed to do it, because that's the time the Chamber, having assessed
5 the efficiency of the cross-examination, allows you to continue.
6 We will resume at five minutes past 11.00.
7 --- Recess taken at 10.41 a.m.
8 --- On resuming at 11.10 a.m.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. De Landri, please proceed.
10 MS. DE LANDRI: Thank you, Mr. President.
11 Q. Mr. Cipci, you said in your statement, your written statement,
12 that Mr. Cermak did not command the civil police. Do you recall that?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Can you explain to the Trial Chamber why it is, in that case,
15 that he would have received reports of ordinary criminal activity during
16 the relevant time period?
17 A. I don't know who and why sent such reports to Mr. Cermak.
18 Q. Okay. Well, maybe it would be -- assist you if I showed you some
19 of those reports.
20 MS. DE LANDRI: Could we show the witness 65 ter 2806.
21 Q. Just to summarise briefly, I think if you have a moment to look
22 at the document I think we can agree that that's a report from
23 Chief Cetina to General Cermak about several murders?
24 MR. KAY: Excuse me. I don't see the word "report." I see "We
25 hereby advise you that we have completed the necessary checks."
1 JUDGE ORIE: A written communication in relation to, would that
2 do, Mr. Kay?
3 MR. KAY: Yes. I'm concerned about terminology that's used and I
4 hope the Bench can sometimes appreciate --
5 JUDGE ORIE: That's why I suggested --
6 MR. KAY: Yes.
7 JUDGE ORIE: -- a more neutral way, and --
8 MS. DE LANDRI: No objection to that terminology, Your Honour.
9 JUDGE ORIE: No objection, so that's then accepted. Please
11 MS. DE LANDRI:
12 Q. I just ask the witness if he can explain why, in view of his
13 statement in his report, General Cermak might have received this advice
14 from Chief Cetina.
15 A. Mr. Cetina, the chief of the Zadar Police Administration, as I
16 can see sent this document to the Knin Garrison command for
17 General Cermak's attention, but this means that the official report had
18 been sent to someone else, probably to his superior, that is to say the
19 ministry in Zagreb
20 General Cermak's duty to establish quality co-operation with both the
21 civilian police and the governmental commissioner so as to be able to do
22 his work. Therefore, Cetina did not send the report to Cermak. He
23 simply informed him. He brought to his attention the fact that there was
24 a report he had submitted to his superior. I believe this falls within
25 the framework of quality co-operation.
1 MS. DE LANDRI: Your Honour, I'd like to tender this document in
3 MR. KAY: No objection.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
5 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will become Exhibit P2649.
6 JUDGE ORIE: P2649 is admitted into evidence.
7 MS. DE LANDRI: Could we have D487 on the screen.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. De Landri, I'm informed that this is a document
9 which should not be shown to the public.
10 MS. DE LANDRI: Thank you.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Could you please be very precise in that.
12 MS. DE LANDRI: Yes, Your Honour. My apologies.
13 JUDGE ORIE: And could you also, when you put questions to the
14 witness, consider whether we have to go into private session for those
15 questions or whether we can deal with the matter in public.
16 MS. DE LANDRI: Yes, Your Honour.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Perhaps in view of what we did earlier, it would be
18 wiser to go into private session.
19 MS. DE LANDRI: Yes, Mr. President.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
21 [Private session]
11 Pages 23198-23201 redacted. Private session.
8 [Open session]
9 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we're back in open session.
10 JUDGE ORIE: [Interpretation] Thank you.
11 Please proceed, Ms. De Landri.
12 MS. DE LANDRI: Yes. I just wanted to direct the witness's
13 attention to 65 ter 3289.
14 Q. Do you have that document in front of you, Mr. Cipci?
15 A. I do.
16 Q. And can you see that that's dated October 11th, 1995, and in the
17 B/C/S version, on the lower right-hand side, is that Chief Cetina's
19 A. I don't know, but the name that is typed does say "Ivica Cetina,"
20 although I don't know whether this is his signature.
21 Q. My question is again, this document appears to report ordinary
22 criminal activity, and it's from Mr. Cetina to General Cermak. Do you
23 know why Chief Cetina would be making this report to General Cermak in
24 October of 1995?
25 A. I suppose for the same reasons I specified before. As of day
1 one, General Cermak was requested information by various international
2 monitors, and they also submitted their complaints to him.
3 It is quite certain that General Cermak wanted to be informed
4 about the incidents taking place in the area so as to be able to provide
5 quality and relevant information to the international monitors and
6 international organisation if they asked for any information.
7 In the document we saw before, one could notice that he had no
8 information about the murder and the rape, and hence he sought that
9 information from Mr. Romanic. It probably became a practice that
10 co-operation be established between Cermak and the civilian police in a
11 way that they would report to him such events so that he would be
12 informed should anyone from the international institutions require
13 information on those.
14 I don't know what the exact case was, and I don't know why Cetina
15 sent it. I can only see it before me. And based on my previous
16 experience working for the police, that is the context in which I see
17 this document.
18 MS. DE LANDRI: Mr. President, I'd like to tender this document
19 in evidence.
20 MR. KAY: No objection.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
22 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that becomes Exhibit number P2650.
23 JUDGE ORIE: P2650 is admitted into evidence. You may proceed.
24 MS. DE LANDRI: Thank you, Mr. President.
25 Q. Mr. Cipci, are you aware that there is evidence in this case that
1 Mr. Cermak had daily meetings with representatives of the civilian and
2 military police in Knin?
3 A. I know that he did have meetings. I heard that during my stays
4 in Knin. I heard it from Mr. Pasic, whom I knew. I heard that he held
5 regular meetings with Mr. Cermak, that the chief of police was also
6 present, as well as the representatives of some other institutions such
7 as the Red Cross and others. All those who were duty-bound to deal with
8 the situation in Knin were supposed to have regular briefings in order to
9 coordinate their activities. Mr. Pasic had whole quality co-operation
10 with the civilian police and others, and the same applied to Mr. Cermak.
11 He had to co-operate well with the representative of the government of
12 the Republic of Croatia
13 factors that were to be on the same page and -- and they were supposed to
14 deal with the situation in the liberated area. It is not surprising that
15 they met every day, because there were daily problems starting with
16 water, electricity, cleanliness, food supply, and each of them had an
17 area that they had to focus on and deal with. That mutual assistance
18 between the representative of the government, Mr. Cermak, the civilian
19 protection, the Red Cross, the police, had to function if they wanted to
20 do their job well and if they wanted to accomplish the mission for which
21 they had been sent to the liberated area.
22 Mr. President, can I say another sentence, please? It would be
23 much more logical to me --
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I will allow you to add one sentence, but from
25 the whole of your answer I understood that your answer to the previous
1 question was that you were aware that these meetings took place.
2 May I invite you to see what Ms. De Landri specifically wants to
3 know, and here she only asked for your awareness of this evidence. If
4 you'd like to add one sentence, I'll allow you to do that but keep it to
5 one sentence, please.
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I did know, and it would have
7 been more logical if the meetings had been held in Mr. Pasic's office,
8 because he was the representative of the Croatian government. But Pasic
9 told me that his office was not conducive to such meetings. He did not
10 have conditions conducive to holding such meetings in his office.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Before we further discuss the logic of where
12 the meetings took place, let's try to find out what Ms. De Landri would
13 like to elicit from you.
14 Ms. De Landri.
15 MS. DE LANDRI:
16 Q. Are you aware, Mr. Cipci, that in 1998, Mr. Cermak himself said
17 that he had meetings and talks with Minister Jarnjak about matters having
18 to do with the civilian police?
19 A. I find it only normal that Mr. Cermak had contacts with
20 Minister Jarnjak. It was also logical to me when Mr. Cermak started
21 receiving complaints from the monitors on day two or three after
22 Operation Storm, that he sent a letter to the prime minister, to the
23 president of the state who appointed him, the minister of defence, and
24 the minister of the interior, to inform them about the events that he had
25 learnt about from the international monitors.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Before we start explaining, the first question was
2 whether you were aware that this is what Mr. Cermak said. From your
3 answer I still do not know, but it seems that you are not aware that he
4 said it --
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know, no, but if he said
6 so, I find it absolutely normal.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Right. Please proceed.
8 MS. DE LANDRI: Could we have Exhibit P2525, please.
9 Q. Mr. Cipci, are you aware that Mr. Cermak was interviewed by
10 representatives of the Office of the Prosecution back in 1998?
11 A. No.
12 Q. Well, in the document that I'm going to ask you about in the --
13 it's going to appear in front of you on the screen, is a partial
14 transcript of that interview, and at that time he was asked some
15 questions about his interactions with the police and about his authority
16 over the police force, and in particular I want to direct your attention
17 to lines 26 and 28.
18 MR. KEHOE: Excuse me, Mr. President. I'm not sure. My
19 transcript says 2001.
20 MS. DE LANDRI: Oh, I'm sorry, you're right, 2001. I'm
22 MR. KEHOE: Oh.
23 JUDGE ORIE: That's on the record. Please proceed.
24 MS. DE LANDRI:
25 Q. At that time, he, Mr. Cermak, said, "And when I spoke with
1 Mr. Saranac [phoen] I always asked to strengthen the police force, and I
2 always found understanding both with Mr. Saranac [phoen] and the
4 A. Can I be provided with a Croatian translation, please, if there
5 is one?
6 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. De Landri, I think you asked for P2525 and
7 referred to line 26, and I take it that we are now on the first page.
8 MS. DE LANDRI: Yes.
9 JUDGE ORIE: And that's --
10 MR. KAY: We don't appear to have a context like that on the
11 screen here, Your Honour.
12 JUDGE ORIE: This seems to be very much the first page, and is
13 that what you really wanted to refer to? If it is line 26, if you could
14 please read what you wanted to.
15 I think the document is well over a hundred pages, so we have
16 well over a hundred lines 26, and I wonder whether this is the line 26 on
17 the first page.
18 MS. DE LANDRI: Your Honour, there is another exhibit that we can
19 turn to which -- where I'm clear that we have a translation. It's P2526.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Which also consists of several pages, so if you
21 could ...
22 MS. DE LANDRI:
23 Q. Well, Mr. Cipci, let me ask the question without reference to the
24 document specifically. I don't think we need a reference to the document
25 at this point. There is no disagreement about -- amongst the parties
1 what the document reflects, and the document's in evidence.
2 It's -- it's clear that Mr. Cermak had conversations with
3 Minister Jarnjak about his interaction and his control over the civilian
4 police, and in particular, P2526, page 21, I believe, is the relevant
5 B/C/S translation. I'm sorry. But my question to you is: In that
6 document Mr. Cermak says, when he's asked the question about his
7 relationship with Minister Jarnjak and asked if he had an official
8 relationship with him, he said:
9 "Yes, I did, actually. I had meetings and talks with Minister
10 Jarnjak. We had talks. We had telephone conversations about matters
11 having to do with the civilian police."
12 And my question to you is does that reinform your view that's
13 expressed in your statement that was filed with the Court on September --
14 in September 2009 of this year?
15 MR. KAY: Again, I think it's much more helpful if the witness is
16 being asked what his view is on a single sentence in a transcript that
17 the later explanation given by Mr. Cermak should be considered, otherwise
18 it's very misleading, and to be frank, Your Honour, it's utterly
19 worthless, in my submission, as a piece of evidence to approach it that
21 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. De Landri, on this page you have read one
22 answer, and if I only look at the following answer, you'll see that this
23 one answer gives perhaps part of the picture.
24 Now, I think that it would better assist the Chamber if you would
25 give more of that picture. I'm not even insisting on completeness. The
1 witness doesn't have to read the whole of the transcript, but, for
2 example, last couple of lines, 32 and the following. And I have not
3 looked at the next page, but it could well be.
4 So could you please give the witness a bit more -- or at least a
5 bit more complete information about what the gist of the statement in
6 this respect is?
7 MS. DE LANDRI: Certainly, Your Honour. It's lines 32 to 35.
8 Q. Can you see that, Mr. Cipci?
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but that's in English.
10 MS. DE LANDRI: Yes. May I have a moment?
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
12 MS. DE LANDRI: I'll just take a moment to ...
13 JUDGE ORIE: It looks as if we do not have the Croatian version
14 of what we see in English at this moment on our screen.
15 MS. DE LANDRI: Well, Your Honour, I don't -- I would make the
16 following suggestion: I don't think that the document is key for the
17 witness's comprehension. It's the --
18 JUDGE ORIE: No. I tend to agree with you, Ms. De Landri.
19 Nevertheless, if we start summarising it, I know exactly what's going to
20 happen, that you summarise it in a way which finds objections, and then
21 we spend five minutes on what's the proper way of summarising what
22 Mr. Cermak said during the interview and -- so let's try to see to what
23 extent we can use the document if you want this witness to think again
24 about his statement in light of what Mr. Cermak apparently has said.
25 What I notice at this very moment, that on the left of my screen
1 I see text which does not correspond with what I see on the right of my
2 screen, if only because on the left of my screen KD is not speaking,
3 whereas on the right side of the screen he is. If only because further
4 up apparently names are spelled which I do not see in the original. So
5 therefore, try to have the English and the Croatian both on the screen so
6 that we and the witness can follow the statement you'd like to put to
8 MR. KAY: And in fullness, page 22 of the English certainly has
9 relevant information, Your Honour --
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
11 MR. KAY: -- as the witness is being asked to comment on
12 something someone else said.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now, I'm a bit uncertain, Ms. De Landri,
14 whether you still would like to use this interview or not. If so, please
15 do it in a transparent and precise way, and if not, be aware that
16 summarising statements are for 95 per cent a guarantee for objections.
17 MS. DE LANDRI: Yes, Your Honour. I will do the following: I'll
18 read with completeness the answer, and I will --
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And if you then invite Mr. Kay to say whether
20 he would like another answer closely related to it to be read, and then,
21 of course, you can consider to follow that suggestion if it makes sense.
22 Please proceed.
23 MS. DE LANDRI: Thank you.
24 JUDGE ORIE: And you are reading at this moment from what page?
25 MS. DE LANDRI: Page 21.
1 JUDGE ORIE: 21, yes.
2 MS. DE LANDRI: And I'm beginning with line 32, and this is the
3 statement of Mr. Cermak.
4 "No. The civilian police didn't have any connection with the
5 military hierarchy. My contacts with Mr. Jarnjak were to do with the
6 civilian police and the actions they should take in the field vis-a-vis
7 all the incidents of arson and looting, and so on. The idea was to step
8 up the actions of the police in Knin and further afield in this regard.
9 In Knin alone, there were 150 civilian policemen who were protecting the
10 civilian buildings. We had good co-operation with the... police."
11 And the following question is:
12 "So if I understood you correctly, you spoke directly to the
13 Minister of Internal Affairs, Mr. Jarnjak?"
14 And Mr. Cermak answers:
15 "Yes, directly. I know him and we're friends."
16 Q. So my question to you is, Mr. Cipci, does -- now knowing that,
17 does that inform or re-educate you in relation to the statements you made
18 which was filed with this court in September of 2009?
19 A. This is fresh information for me. I did not hear this before.
20 However, what I learned from this transcript reinforces my statement with
21 regard to the authorities of General Cermak -- about the civilian police.
22 If Mr. Cermak had had authority to issue orders to the civilian police,
23 at that moment he would not have had conversations with his friends
24 minister -- friend, Minister Jarnjak, and he would not have said that
25 they had good co-operation, because in a relationship of subordination
1 people don't have conversations but issue orders. In that case, orders
2 would have been given to Mr. Matic, Mr. Cetina, or me. He would not have
3 asked Mr. Jarnjak to help him with having the police do what the police
4 were supposed to do, because only Mr. Jarnjak could issue orders to me,
5 Cetina, and Matic and other chiefs, not Mr. Cermak. That's why
6 Mr. Cermak says, "I had excellent co-operation with the civilian police,
7 and I spoke to my friend Minister Jarnjak, because I wanted to see some
8 things resolved, things that fell within the purview of the civilian
9 police. That's why I talked to my friend, Mr. Jarnjak."
10 Q. Mr. Cipci, you in your statement, you said that you stayed with
11 your men in Knin for months. Approximately how long did you stay in Knin
12 after you arrived on August 5th of 1995?
13 A. I stayed in Knin an hour, a bit longer. And since some
14 commanders of the Croatian Army had asked me to bring any sort of police
15 to Knin, I returned to my area in order to establish communication with
16 my minister, because I could not do it from Knin. There were no
17 communication lines up from there. That's why I stayed only very
18 briefly. On the following morning I arrived very early because President
19 Tudjman was supposed to arrive, and I stayed until his departure from
20 Knin and then I returned to Split
21 dropped by more often for certain reasons as time progressed. I didn't
22 go every day, but I didn't stay in Knin for a month. I was in Split
23 my police administration.
24 MS. DE LANDRI: Could we have D1723, please.
25 Q. And in particular, I'd like to direct your attention, Mr. Cipci,
1 to paragraph 12 of your statement.
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. You say here: "I stayed with my personnel in Knin for months."
4 And then you continue on to list a number of activities, accomplishments
5 of yours in Knin. Is that first sentence inaccurate?
6 A. It is accurate to the extent that I would spend a few hours on
7 any day, sometimes a whole day. I never spent the night there. For
8 example, I would go to Srb, Lapac, Donje Srb. It would take me a whole
9 day to carry out those visits and then I would return home in the
10 evening. Where it says here that I stayed with personnel for months,
11 it's just the turn of the phrase.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe.
13 MS. KAY: Mr. President, I'm getting reports back that we're
14 still in private session at this juncture.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, you may be right. Well, on my screen nothing
16 of the kind appears, but, Mr. Registrar, am I wrong?
17 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, I confirm that we're in open
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, and that's what appears on our screens.
20 Please proceed.
21 MS. DE LANDRI: Your Honour, may I have a moment, please?
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
23 [Prosecution counsel confer]
24 MS. DE LANDRI: Your Honour, I don't have any further questions
25 for this witness.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you. Mr. Kehoe, may I invite you that before
2 you raise the matter you just raised that you first see confirmation on
3 your system which, when I consulted, that is pushing the video button,
4 that I do not any -- see any indication that we would have been in
5 private session.
6 MR. KEHOE: My apologies, Judge. I thought we were in open
7 session either, and then I was getting some messages back, people saying
8 why are you continuously in closed session, so --
9 JUDGE ORIE: And then you first verify that on your own system.
10 MR. KEHOE: I did see it. I looked at -- upon my initial -- my
11 initial response back to them was we are in open session because my
12 equipment shows we're in open session, and they sent back saying, No,
13 you're in closed session, which is -- I didn't know if my equipment was
14 faulty or I was mistaken or not doing it properly. That's why I raised
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now, of course, I'm saying this because there
17 have been quite many interruptions in the cross-examination by
18 Ms. De Landri, and this was one which, preferably, should have been
20 Mr. Kay, any need to re-examine Mr. Cipci?
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I apologise. Could
23 I be excused for a moment to go to the toilet? I am getting on, you
24 know, so I will be prepared to continue when I come back.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Yes.
1 [The witness stands down]
2 MR. WAESPI: Mr. President --
3 JUDGE ORIE: Which allows me, perhaps, to read a decision.
4 Yes, Mr. Waespi.
5 MR. WAESPI: Yes, just one point on Dabar. We checked the grid
6 reference, and it appears that it's indeed the Dabar you found on the
7 lake of Vrlika.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, because there is another one also near Otocac
9 from -- and let me be very transparent in this respect. I just Google
10 maps Dabar and then see what comes up, and I find two Dabars, the other
11 one perhaps not even in Sector South.
12 MR. WAESPI: That's correct, Mr. President. And if you go back
13 to P511, the ECMM report, it talks about M2 patrolling in the
14 south-eastern corner of UN Sector South which is consistent.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Then I hope, as a matter of fact, that the parties
16 could agree on that, and then the next question is where are exactly the
17 boundaries of the area of responsibility of this witness.
18 I meanwhile would like to use my time, and Mr. Cipci will forgive
19 me, to read the reasons, the Chamber's reasons for its decision of the
20 31st of August, 2009, denying the Prosecution's objection to documents to
21 be used with expert witness Anthony R. Jones.
22 On the 27th of August, 2009, the Prosecution filed its objection
23 to documents to be used with expert witness Jones. It submitted that out
24 of 37 documents which the Gotovina Defence indicated it may use with the
25 witness, 14 were not referred to in his expert report.
1 [The witness takes the stand]
2 JUDGE ORIE: Secondly, the Prosecution requested the Chamber to
3 preclude the Gotovina Defence from presenting 7 of the 14 documents to
4 the witness during his testimony if those documents had not been provided
5 to him at the time he drafted his report. The Prosecution added that
6 these seven documents were key exhibits pertaining to central issues in
7 the case.
8 Finally, the Prosecution requested the Chamber to preclude the
9 Gotovina Defence from presenting two of the 14 documents to the witness
10 because they concerned the manner in which Serb civilians left Krajina
11 which, according to the Prosecution, is an issue that is outside of the
12 scope of the witness's expert report and unrelated to his expertise.
13 The Prosecution argued that allowing the Gotovina Defence to use
14 the nine documents it objected to, would be tantamount to eliciting an
15 oral addendum to the expert report without adequate notice to the
17 In its response of the 28th of August, 2009, the Gotovina Defence
18 submitted it was not required to provide notice whether the 14 documents
19 were provided to the witness prior to the drafting of his report. It
20 argued that the general disclosure obligations of the Defence were
21 governed by Rule 67(A) and that it had satisfied its disclosure
22 obligations under Rule 94 bis.
23 In relation to the seven documents objected to, the Gotovina
24 Defence submitted the Prosecution had been allowed to use documents which
25 were not referred to in the expert report of witness Konings during his
1 testimony in the Prosecution's case. It added that the Prosecution could
2 remedy its concerns by cross-examining the witness. As the two documents
3 objected to, the Gotovina Defence argued that it had given notice of the
4 evidence it intended to present through proper disclosure and that the
5 documents are within expert witness Jones's knowledge and are relevant
6 and probative to his expert report. Lastly, the Gotovina Defence argued
7 that the Prosecution's objection was premature as the proper time to
8 object would be during the witness's testimony or when the witness's
9 written evidence was being tendered.
10 On the 31st of August, 2009, in an oral decision with reasons to
11 follow, the Chamber denied the Prosecution's objection. This can be
12 found at transcript pages 20890 through 20891.
13 In its written decision on disclosure of expert materials of the
14 27th of August, 2009, the Chamber held that there's no obligation for the
15 Defence to disclose to the Prosecution lists of all the information
16 provided to their proposed expert witnesses. The Chamber's oral decision
17 to deny the Prosecution's request for a notification of which, if any, of
18 the 14 documents were provided to the witness prior to the drafting of
19 his expert report, was in line with this written decision and rendered
20 for the same reasons.
21 With regard to the request to preclude the Gotovina Defence from
22 using the nine documents objected to with the witness, the Chamber
23 recalled that it had -- it has previously held in paragraph 7 of its
24 decision on part of the Gotovina Defence's Rule 73 motion in limine of
25 the 21st of May, 2008, that if proper notice has been given, a party may
1 examine an expert witness with respect to matters not included in his
2 expert report, so long as they are relevant, probative, and within the
3 witness's expertise.
4 In relation to the seven documents, the Prosecution did not
5 dispute that these documents were relevant, probative, and within the
6 witness's expertise. The Chamber saw no reason to preclude the Defence
7 from using these documents with the witness and found that the
8 Prosecution's concerns could be addressed during cross-examination.
9 In relation to the two documents, which according to the
10 Prosecution fall outside the scope of the witness's expertise, the
11 Chamber considered that the two documents do not only address the manner
12 in which Serbs left Krajina, but also issues of a military nature such as
13 the regrouping of the RSK Army and the military situation in Krajina on
14 the 4th of August, 1995. The Chamber found these issues relevant,
15 probative, and within the witness's expertise and that the Defence should
16 not be precluded from using the documents with the witness.
17 With regard to adequate notice that certain documents would be
18 used with the witness, the Chamber considered that, in e-mails of the
19 18th and the 20th of August, 2009, the Gotovina Defence had notified the
20 Prosecution and the Chamber that it may use the 14 documents with Jones.
21 This was well in advance of Jones's first day of testimony on the 31st of
22 August, 2009. Further, the nine documents had already been admitted into
23 evidence prior to August 2009, and the Prosecution was well aware of
24 their contents.
25 And for these reasons, the Chamber denied the Prosecution's
1 objection, and this concludes the reasons for the Chamber's decision on
2 this matter.
3 Mr. Cipci, we abused the opportunity of your absence -- we abused
4 the opportunity of your absence to read a decision. Mr. Kay will now
5 re-examine you.
6 Mr. Kay, you may proceed.
7 MR. KAY: Thank you, Your Honour.
8 Re-examination by Mr. Kay:
9 Q. The first matter we're going to look at concerns the document
10 that was shown to you which was under seal. We've no need to bring it
11 up. Exhibit D487, with the information contained in that. Do you
12 recollect that, Mr. Cipci, without going into the detail?
13 A. What information?
14 Q. All right. Let's -- you recollect that you were asked questions
15 about a document. We went into closed session. The document was under
16 seal, and various questions were put to you and you were asked for your
17 view about the matter, your opinion, and I'm just putting you there in
18 the context because we're going to look at some documents ourselves and
19 put them before you.
20 MR. KAY: And the first document, Your Honour, which triggered
21 the previous document is 2D00436.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kay, would it help if you would say to the
23 witness that this document dealt with murder or rape?
24 MR. KAY: Yes.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Subject of information provided.
1 MR. KAY: Yes.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
3 MR. KAY:
4 Q. And this is a document I don't expect you've seen before,
5 Mr. Cipci. Is that right? Just say yes or no. It's a letter dated the
6 18th of September, 1995, from the International Committee of the Red
7 Cross. It's to General Cermak. It concerned a conversation on the
8 Saturday, 17th of September, and he's being informed of serious incidents
9 which have taken place. There's a reference there to those incidents.
10 The International Committee of the Red Cross is receiving reports, and
11 then there is a list which is mentioning incidents, and you can see there
12 on the 27th of August, 1995
13 Can we go to page 2. And we see matters continue to be referred
14 to in a list. Siveric 28th of August, and then we see Knin, 6th of
15 September, 1995. And it refers to a report given to a nurse from the
16 ICRC on the 7th of September by a member of the local ICRC staff, and
17 then there is a reference there to a rape with a man and a weapon, and
18 then another man also raping, and that the event was reported to the
19 police in Knin, and the ICRC is still expecting results of the
21 And next page in the Croatian, remaining on that page briefly.
22 We see a reference to Brgud. If the English page could be turned over.
23 And you can see the letter is signed by the head of the
24 delegation of the International Committee of the Red Cross in Knin, a
25 lady called Carmen Burger. And the request for the presentation of the
1 results to the Knin International Committee of the Red Cross.
2 Am I correct in thinking you've not seen this document before?
3 A. No. I have never seen it before.
4 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: The witness is kindly
5 asked to approach the microphone.
6 MR. KAY:
7 Q. Could you get closer to the microphone.
8 A. [In English] Okay.
9 Q. And that triggered the earlier document you were shown in
11 Can we just go now to 65 ter 2D00-227, and in the interim,
12 Your Honour, while that's being brought up, may I make the previous
13 document an exhibit.
14 MS. DE LANDRI: No objection.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
16 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will become Exhibit D1729.
17 JUDGE ORIE: And is admitted into evidence.
18 MR. KAY:
19 Q. Now looking at the next document if you could, Mr. Cipci, it's a
20 record of receipt of criminal report, dated the 8th of September, 1995
21 and we can see information recorded within that concerning the allegation
22 of a rape.
23 First question: Is it correct that you will not have seen this
24 document before?
25 A. [Interpretation] I have never seen it before.
1 Q. But as a record of receipt of a criminal report, do you recognise
2 it as being an official document from the crime police department of
3 Zadar-Knin police administration? So not the content but the form of
4 document that we have that it's authentic?
5 A. The format of all records in the police are either the same or
6 similar. The format of this record appears to be the official one. I
7 have no reason to doubt that it was indeed created by the Zadar-Knin
8 police administration.
9 Q. Thank you. Shall we just finish the -- looking at this document
10 by going to the next page so you and Their Honours can see the details
11 that were recorded in the document of the crime police department on the
12 8th of September.
13 I have no further questions about that, but I did it in the
14 interests of completeness.
15 MR. KAY: Your Honour, may this document be made an exhibit,
17 MS. DE LANDRI: No objection.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
19 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours that, becomes Exhibit D1730.
20 JUDGE ORIE: D1730 is admitted into evidence.
21 Please proceed.
22 MR. KAY:
23 Q. Can we go to the next document please, still on this topic that
24 was raised to you in cross-examination, 2D00031. Another document from
25 the Zadar-Knin police administration, dated the 10th of September, 1995
1 And again it concerns the incident that we've been looking at. We can
2 see the name of the injured party and personal details there.
3 Do you recognise this document as being an official document from
4 the Zadar-Knin police administration? Not the content within it, but the
5 form of the document.
6 A. I recognise the form of this document. For clarification, I'd
7 like to say this: After a certain preceding criminal procedure either
8 submitted a criminal report or a special report, if they were uncertain
9 that indeed the entire incident happened as reported. In such cases,
10 special reports were submitted to the prosecutor, who would go through it
11 and then perhaps order the undertaking of additional measures so as to be
12 able to issue a criminal report which would eventually lead to an
13 indictment depending, of course, on the type of crime.
14 In any case, this document does bear the form of a special report
15 issued by the police. In a way, this falls under or proceeds a criminal
17 Q. Thank you. If we could just turn to the second page in the
18 English and the second page in the Croatian language, please. We see the
19 details there. We've no need to dwell upon them, but the content of the
20 information shows that there are reasonable grounds for suspicion that
21 subjects with two names, Kristijan, illegible in the English, I'm too far
22 away from the screen to read. If I can see it in the -- Nakic.
23 A. Nakic, Kristijan Nakic.
24 Q. Thank you.
25 A. It's a last name from Sibenik.
1 Q. And Sasa Barisic were the suspects. And if we turn to the next
2 page, we see the final part of the document, and we see that it was
3 submitted to various departments, both the crime police, department for
4 analysis, the investigation centre of Zadar County Court, Zadar District
5 Public Prosecutor's Office, and it's signed by the chief of the crime
6 police, Mr. Ive Kardum.
7 Again, is that a regular procedure, Mr. Cipci?
8 A. This had to go to the department of crime police to be registered
9 and archived. The analysis department put all of this into the computer
10 so that it was simultaneously be put into the database of the central
11 computer of the Ministry of the Interior. Then we have the archives and
12 the investigation centre of the county, as well as the district public
13 prosecutor's office.
14 This concerns the special report sent to the addressees under
15 numbers 4 and 5.
16 Q. Thank you very much.
17 MR. KAY: The Court will recollect that the two names in this
18 report were within D487 under seal and are connected in that way to the
19 documents used in cross-examination.
20 Q. And then if finally we go to exhibit --
21 MR. KAY: May I make the last document an exhibit, Your Honour.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. De Landri, I take it that there are no
24 MS. DE LANDRI: No objection.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
1 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that becomes Exhibit D1731.
2 JUDGE ORIE: And is admitted into evidence.
3 MR. KAY:
4 Q. And then finally, if we go to Prosecution Exhibit 1223, a
5 document dated the 11th of October, 1995, from the Knin Garrison, sent to
6 the lady who triggered the matter from the International Committee of the
7 Red Cross, Carmen Burger. And we see references there. If we go to the
8 bottom of the page, we see the name S. Borovic. On the 9th of September,
9 the perpetrators were discovered and remanded to the investigating
10 magistrate in Zadar. And in the next page there is further information
11 on an unrelated case which is part of another inquiry, and we see that
12 General Cermak signed that document.
13 Again, is it correct that you've not seen this document before?
14 A. I have never seen it before.
15 Q. Thank you. But it -- it completes the documentary chain.
16 In relation to looking at that matter raised with you, is your
17 opinion changed in any way or your -- what you know, whether Mr. Cermak
18 was involved with having authority over the civilian police?
19 A. As I have said already, on a few occasions General Cermak did not
20 have such authority. He received an inquiry by the ICRC. In order to
21 comprehensively and appropriately respond to the ICRC's representative he
22 had to be informed, and this he could only be if he requested appropriate
23 information from the Zadar-Knin police chief. He received the necessary
24 information, and as a decent person he forwarded all the details in the
25 letter you showed to me. He sent it to the head of the ICRC by way of a
1 response. I don't think there is anything in dispute in the whole thing.
2 MR. KAY: Thank you. I have no further questions, Your Honour,
3 in re-examination.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Kay.
5 Any need for further cross-examination, Mr. Kehoe?
6 MR. KEHOE: No, Mr. President. Thank you.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Mikulicic?
8 MR. MIKULICIC: Me neither, Your Honour.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. De Landri.
10 MS. DE LANDRI: No, Your Honour.
11 [Trial Chamber confers]
12 Questioned by the Court:
13 JUDGE ORIE: I may have a few questions for you. In your
14 statement, paragraph 6, and I read it to you, it is about on the 5th of
15 August, when you entered Vrlika, you said: "Nobody was killed in Vrlika,
16 and no houses or stables were burned down."
17 Now, we also looked at D606, and perhaps we could have that on
18 the screen. In which it is reported, and I think the date of that
19 document is the 8th of August, but we'll have an opportunity to look at
20 it in a second, in which it is reported that six human bodies have been
22 Could you give us additional information about these bodies being
23 buried? And perhaps we have to go to page --
24 A. I truly cannot supply any information in that regard. There is a
25 possibility that during the combat, as the territory was being liberated,
1 those people were killed and then decently buried.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So you can't give us any specific information,
3 and therefore your statement that no one was killed in Vrlika seems,
4 well, to be less certain as you put it in your statement.
5 A. When I said that no one was killed and that nothing was burnt
6 down, I meant as of the moment that the military operation ceased, not
7 during the military operation. There were murders in certain areas even
8 following the end of combat activity. That is why I specified that there
9 were no killings or burnings in my area of responsibility.
10 JUDGE ORIE: [Interpretation] Yes, but the identity of the
11 persons that were buried and circumstances under which they died, you
12 cannot give any further details?
13 A. Not at this moment, because as I am saying the area under my
14 authority was too large, and I did really did not have the time to get
15 everywhere. I had seven chiefs of different sectors subordinated to me,
16 and 15 commanders of police stations that performed their duties. My
17 chief of the police sector, Mr. Jure Radalj, and the then commander of
18 the police station in Sinj, Mr. Bilobrk would probably know much more
19 about that because they covered that area and their office was in Vrlika.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. In this report on terrain clearance in the
21 area of Vrlika municipality, it is also stated that 60 conscripts took
22 part in it. Could you tell me, were these military conscripts? Were
23 these soldiers?
24 A. Your Honour, I'm afraid I did not understand your question. What
25 terrain clearance do you have in mind?
1 JUDGE ORIE: If you look at the document, as regards terrain
2 clearance in the area of Vrlika municipality until today, the 8th of
3 August, and that was the date I had on my mind, although the document is
4 dated the 9th of August, "please be informed that the terrain clearance
5 unit, 60 conscripts, has accomplished the most important tasks,
7 Now, you are reporting -- yes, Mr. Mikulicic.
8 MR. MIKULICIC: Your Honour, I will try to help. I think it's a
9 matter of translation in this document.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Let's then --
11 MR. MIKULICIC: Because the original says something different
12 than the English text.
13 JUDGE ORIE: And is it the word after 60?
14 MR. MIKULICIC: No, it is the word immediately in Croatian text,
15 the second word in the first paragraph.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Second word --
17 MR. MIKULICIC: "Asanacija."
18 JUDGE ORIE: "Asanacija."
19 MR. MIKULICIC: Yes. I believe there is a problem in translation
20 of that word because that word was translated as terrain clearance --
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
22 MR. MIKULICIC: So could be a misunderstanding between your
23 questions and the witness answer.
24 JUDGE ORIE: For the --
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Very well then, yes.
1 JUDGE ORIE: If I would just read, and my pronunciation may be
2 very bad, [Interpretation] "Regarding the sanitation and hygiene measures
3 on the ground."
4 [In English] Yes. That is now corrected on the record.
5 These 60 conscripts the document is referring to, you are
6 reporting, were they instructed by you?
7 A. Well, you see, within the framework of the police administration,
8 in addition to the police officers we also had fire -- fire-fighting
9 service and a so-called civilian protection. The civilian protection at
10 certain moments, whenever necessary, members of the civilian protection
11 would be called to carry out certain duties. One of such occasions was
12 Operation Storm and its aftermath. I sent members of the civilian
13 protection, the 60 members of the civilian protection to carry out the
14 sanitation and hygiene measures on the ground. The highest priority was
15 to inspect the area to see whether there were any dead bodies. That was
16 the highest priority. Graves
17 bags were used for the bodies for further proceedings and identification.
18 Those were my men.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Those were your men. That means that apart from the
20 police officers that were in your teams, you also had, in addition to
21 that --
22 A. The civilian protection and firefighters. I sent some members of
23 the civilian protection and some of the firefighters to Knin to
24 Mr. Romanic. On the 5th in the afternoon I sent a fire truck with
25 drinking water for my men and for others as well because they had run out
1 of drinking water.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I was mainly interested in better
3 understanding where these 60 conscripts came from, and I do understand
4 that these were persons under an obligation to perform the service as
5 civil protection personnel, and they were under your command for the
6 performance --
7 A. The civilian protection, they were engaged in natural disaster
8 situations and such like, and then I would take a list and I would issue
9 an order --
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now, one final matter I'd like -- briefly like
11 to put to you. You described how collection centres, I think you called
12 them, were established. You made reference to the school and that --
13 yes. You said that: "Upon returning to Knin, I ordered the reception
14 centre for old people and children to be established in the elementary
15 school hall," and you said, "A few hundred people that had stayed in
16 their houses remained, and my policemen brought them to the school and
17 that the school was -- in two days was full of old people."
18 A. Could I be allowed to explain, please?
19 JUDGE ORIE: I'd first like to ask you a question.
20 A. [In English] Okay.
21 JUDGE ORIE: What I'd like to know is if there were -- there were
22 no men in these collection centres, able-bodied men, well, let's say
23 between 18 and 60?
24 A. [Interpretation] As far as I could see, when I visited the
25 collection centre, and I had a good look when I was searching for the
1 in-laws of my friend Mr. Svestan Zadric [phoen], who had remained in
2 Knin, as I told you he called me from Zagreb and asked me to look for
3 them. Then I went to the -- my officers. I took the list of all those
4 who were there, and I found the gentleman and his wife. They were mostly
5 elderly people, but let me tell you also this: When I arrived in Knin on
6 the 5th, in the vicinity of the military command I observed a larger
7 group of elderly people, women, men, and children, who looked scared to
8 me, and that's why I said to my chief, Radalj, that "a collection centre
9 should be established for such people who wanted to feel safe."
10 JUDGE ORIE: That is in your statement and already you testified
11 about that. My question simply was whether able-bodied men, who you do
12 not mention, were in those collection centres, of in that collection
13 centre in Knin or the other one you mentioned.
14 A. No, no, no. I assume that all the young people were in the other
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. In the other one. Other collection centre or
17 other school? What are you referring to?
18 A. No. It was the UNPROFOR barracks where other people from Knin
19 found shelter. There were quite a few of them there, and I suppose that
20 some younger people might have been there as well.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but there was no place where able-bodied men
22 between 18 and 60 would be received in any centre?
23 A. Well, listen, apart from this centre in Knin, I also had a
24 smaller-sized centre near Sinj, and I told my officers to try and shelter
25 even younger people in Sinj, not to let them stay in Knin. Later on I
1 was told that there were some younger ones who were obviously able-bodied
2 and fit for service, and they were sheltered in that collection centre
3 near Sinj.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Was there any civilian police activities aiming at
5 identifying possible suspects of armed rebellion; that is, Serbs who may
6 have been involved in the army of the -- the RSK? Because you do not say
7 anything about that. Do I have to understand that no such police
8 activity took place or that it was not something you considered worth
10 A. I did not mention that for a very simple reason: Nobody ever
11 asked me. During the occupation of that area within my police
12 administration, we had a department which tried to collect as much
13 information as possible about those people who were involved in the armed
14 conflict. Likewise, the service for the protection of the constitutional
15 order, the intelligence service that had been established with the
16 Ministry of the Interior, also dealt with that issue, and for that
17 reason, as far as I can remember, the Service for the Protection of the
18 Constitutional Order, after the liberation, compiled a list of people who
19 found shelter in the UNPROFOR barracks who might have been charged with
20 the armed conflict and that list was accompanied with all the materials
21 that they had collected.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe.
23 MR. KEHOE: I've been advised by Mr. Misetic that there is a
24 translation issue. So if I can turn the floor to him on that score.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Misetic.
1 MR. MISETIC: Mr. President, it's the translation of the phrase
2 at page 72, lines 13 to 14, and I believe you mention it again. It's
3 being translated as "armed conflict," and I believe the witness is using
4 the phrase you used in your question.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That is "armed rebellion."
6 Now where -- and this will really be my last question. I'm not
7 interested in details. I am just trying to complete my picture of the
8 activities. Where were these younger, able-bodied men who could be
9 suspected as having taken part in the armed rebellion and who were not in
10 the UNCRO premises, where were they interviewed or were they held at
12 A. You see, as far as I know, in the liberated area very few or no
13 people who had been involved in the armed rebellion could be found.
14 Either they fled together with the army or if they stayed on they found
15 shelter in the barracks that was under the protection of UNPROFOR.
16 Negotiations were conducted with UNPROFOR for a long time for those
17 people to be handed over, as far as I know.
18 JUDGE ORIE: In my question I specifically excluded those who
19 were on the UNCRO premises. So if I do understand --
20 A. There were no other premises of that nature, and the police never
21 questioned those people. If that was possibly done subsequently, then it
22 was done by either the Sibenik or the Zadar Police Administration Crime
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Thank you for those answers. I think I
25 have -- I have no further questions for you.
1 Have the questions by the Bench triggered any need --
2 MR. KAY: No, Your Honour.
3 MR. KEHOE: No, Mr. President.
4 MR. MIKULICIC: No, Your Honour.
5 JUDGE ORIE: That's three times no.
6 Ms. De Landri.
7 MS. DE LANDRI: No, Your Honour.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you. Mr. Cipci, this then concludes your
9 testimony in this Court. I would like to thank you very much for coming
10 a long way to The Hague
11 that were put to you both by the parties and by the Bench, and I wish you
12 safe trip home again.
13 Madam Usher, could you --
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I must say one thing. I enjoyed
15 the attention. I enjoyed the comfort of the hotel. However, the stay
16 was really too long. I should have stayed nine -- two days. I've stayed
17 nine. I repeat, I am getting on. I have my own rhythm. I am used to my
18 own ways, so I have been bothered by such a long stay. Still, would I
19 like to thank everybody who has helped me feel comfortable in The Hague
20 and I must say I have felt comfortable in your courtroom as well.
21 Thank you.
22 JUDGE ORIE: That's good to hear. Thank you.
23 [The witness withdrew]
24 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
25 JUDGE ORIE: I'm not aware of any other procedural matters we'd
1 have to deal with at this very moment. I may have missed something,
2 but ...
3 MR. KAY: There is -- because we're coming up to the break -- --
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
5 MR. KAY: -- there is the outstanding issue of a witness that we
6 applied to add to our list.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
8 MR. KAY: His statement's been distributed.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That's Witness 43 or ...
10 MR. KAY: [Overlapping speakers] Surak [phoen] 46. I'm sorry,
11 forgetting the number. IC46.
12 [Trial Chamber confers]
13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kay, I can inform you that either -- I have
14 already signed this morning a written decision on the matter. I think I
15 did, so it may already have been filed. But if not, then I would sign it
16 within the next hour because there's agreement. And your request, which
17 was not objected to by the Prosecution is granted.
18 MR. KAY: I'm much obliged to Your Honour.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Then any other matter? If not, then I'd first like
20 to apologise to interpreters, transcribers, and all those who are
21 assisting us by going on for such a long time, but it saves us another
22 session, because we'll adjourn, but we resume on Monday, the 26th of
23 October, at 9.00 in the morning, in Courtroom III.
24 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 12.51 p.m.
25 to be reconvened on Monday, the 26th day of
1 October, 2009, at 9.00 a.m.