1 Thursday, 9 June 2005
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.05 a.m.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning to everyone.
6 Madam Registrar, would you please call the case.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. Case number
8 IT-00-39-T, the Prosecutor versus Momcilo Krajisnik.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
10 Mr. Hannis, is the Prosecution ready to call its next witness?
11 MR. HANNIS: We are, Your Honour. I understood from Mr. Stewart
12 there was one matter he wanted to raise with you before we began.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Then I'll give an opportunity for Mr. Stewart to
14 raise the matter he has in mind
15 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, I'm just for the moment trying to find
16 a microphone that works easily. It was only this, Your Honour, just for a
17 couple of minutes. It was just to say -- Your Honours may know that we
18 put in some fairly short submissions yesterday on the self-representation
20 JUDGE ORIE: I have not seen them yet. But I take it that I'll
21 see them.
22 MR. STEWART: Yes, I hope, so Your Honour, through the normal
23 channels. It was filed yesterday afternoon and it annexes the notes on
24 the United States and English cases, but it's also -- it's -- Your Honour,
25 in effect -- I've explained to the Prosecution this: It's a summary of
1 where we say we've got to now, basically..
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
3 MR. STEWART: But Your Honours will see. There's no point in my
4 elaborating because it will find its way to Your Honours.
5 And the only thing I wanted to mention is that Ms. Loukas is
6 going to deal with this witness this morning. But in relation to all
7 these issues of self-representation and particularly the sort of matters
8 that have been raised by Mr. Krajisnik in his letters to the
9 Trial Chamber, Your Honour, this is -- this is not an area in which both
10 of us, Ms. Loukas and I, have been heavily involved. I keep Ms. Loukas
11 informed, but Your Honours will appreciate that many of those matters are
12 distinctly lead counsel' responsibility, and in the interest of not
13 wasting resources, we don't both deal with that. So, Your Honour, if
14 anything does come up in this area, I'm very rarely more than 20 minutes
15 away, if the Court should need to deal with the matter at any time. And,
16 of course, I'm at the -- the Trial Chamber's disposal. But I would
17 particularly ask in that area that if -- if matters such as that --
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
19 MR. STEWART: -- do arise, that I could be alerted and --
20 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart, I do understand that you -- that you
21 are -- standby. This is not the same as being standby counsel.
22 MR. STEWART: I appreciate that, Your Honour.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, that's understood.
24 MR. STEWART: Yes. All right, thank you very much for that,
25 Your Honour. I shall -- if I may, I shall leave at some point, I hope
1 discreetly, quite soon, though I am going to stay for a short while.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then, Mr. Hannis, are you ready to call your
3 next witness? Is there anything -- would there be anything that should be
4 dealt with in the absence of the witness prior to calling him in?
5 Ms. Loukas, I'm not soliciting, but ...
6 MS. LOUKAS: Your Honour, there's no need to solicit because
7 there is an issue a and significant issue that needs to be dealt with --
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
9 MS. LOUKAS: -- in the absence of the witness and prior to the
10 commencement of the witness's evidence.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please.
12 MS. LOUKAS: I can indicate, Your Honour, this was a witness that
13 was initially scheduled for viva voce evidence. The Prosecution now
14 wishes to proceed by way of 89(F) in part. And in those circumstances,
15 Your Honour, I can indicate that the Defence vigorously opposes any
16 attempt to use 89(F) in respect of this witness.
17 Your Honour, it's -- it's a situation whereby, as Your Honours
18 are well aware, it was -- and I can go further into what my arguments, if
19 Your Honour wishes at this stage, or if Your Honour wishes to hear
20 Mr. Hannis's response prior to my going into the matters that I wish to go
22 JUDGE ORIE: Perhaps you briefly could explain why you consider
23 89(F) not suitable for this witness, and then please concentrate on the
24 question why partial 89(F) would be unacceptable and why the whole of the
25 testimony should be led without the use of 89(F).
1 MS. LOUKAS: Thank you, Your Honour. I'll keep Your Honour's
2 injunction in mind.
3 Now, firstly, of course, Your Honour, this is an area that was
4 dealt with on appeal from the Milosevic Trial Chamber, and it is, of
5 course, the -- the issue in the context of -- that Justice Judge Hunt gave
6 his famous dissenting opinion about the nature of the decision by the full
7 Appeals Chamber and the spreading stain that it would leave on the
8 reputation of this Tribunal.
9 Going from there to what the Appeals Chamber actually held,
10 Your Honour -- and I'd point Your Honours to this matter, and that is that
11 it was indicated in terms of whilst the discretion on the part of the
12 Trial Chamber is available, Your Honour, the Appeals Chamber decision
13 itself did not in fact circumscribe in any detail the matters that do go
14 to the specific exercise of the discretion.
15 Now, Your Honour, what they did indicate was that it was --
16 should be exercised in the interests of justice and also that -- in the
17 interests of justice and two matters that were specifically enumerated in
18 the majority Appeals Chamber decision was acts and conduct of the accused
19 and the surrounding circumstances.
20 Now, firstly in relation to acts and conduct of the accused,
21 Your Honour, this is not a statement that contains some passing reference
22 to Mr. Krajisnik. This is a statement, Your Honour, that is flooded with
23 references to Mr. Krajisnik, firstly.
24 Secondly, in the context of a witness of this nature and the
25 numerous references to Mr. Krajisnik, to assert in any meaningful way that
1 in some way it's divisible in these circumstances is, in my submission,
2 Your Honour, not a position that can be taken on any reasonable basis.
3 When one counts -- even if one were to go to superficial numerical
4 exercise of counting the numbers of reference to Mr. Krajisnik throughout
5 this statement, we are dealing with a statement that in no real sense is
6 divisible. The matters are inextricably intertwined and should be the
7 subject of proper viva voce evidence led by the Prosecution without
8 leading questions, and, Your Honour, it's simply not the sort of evidence
9 that can be allowed to proceed in this shorthand fashion.
10 Secondly, surrounding circumstances, Your Honour. If one looks
11 at the surrounding circumstances of this particular witness, this
12 particular witness, Your Honour, was requested by the Prosecution in April
13 of this year. This is not a witness that has been on the timetable for
14 quite some time now. This is a witness that is only recent. This was a
15 request for a new viva voce witness by the Prosecution in the middle of
16 April of this year.
17 Now, Your Honour, that's -- that's a very specific and important
18 matter that goes to the surrounding circumstances because this is also a
19 matter that requires, and quite clearly requires, investigation by the
20 Defence, and proper investigation, and it's not the sort of evidence that
21 can be dealt with in this perfunctory truncated fashion under 89(F).
22 And as I've indicated previously, to -- to assert that it is
23 divisible is, in my most respectful opinion -- cannot be asserted on any
24 reasonable basis.
25 So, Your Honour, there we have it. In my submission, taking into
1 account what was specifically stated in the majority decision in the
2 Appeals Chamber decision, look at interests of justice, look at the
3 surrounding circumstances, look at acts and conduct of the accused. I've
4 addressed Your Honours on those matters.
5 In addition, Your Honour, it's -- it's quite clear that even
6 though Your Honours have a discretion in this circumstance, that certainly
7 does not mean that this is the sort of evidence that should just be
8 brought forward in this way. It is not divisible. It is not appropriate.
9 And it is not in the interests of justice, Your Honours.
10 And I would also indicate that if for some reason the Prosecution
11 would think that this is some sort of time-saving exercise, I can indicate
12 that it would not be, Your Honours. Your Honours are well aware that I
13 have just completed the cross-examination of a significant expert. That
14 was a witness that Mr. Tieger dealt with for the Prosecution. The
15 Prosecution go on to have another attorney for the next witness. I have
16 to deal with both. That's because we're a limited Defence team. I will
17 in any event require this weekend so that I can be in a position to
18 cross-examine this witness, and that is a matter very much in the
19 interests of justice, when one takes into account the limited resources of
20 the Defence in comparison with the Prosecution. So I'll also make that
21 point about potential time-savings. Your Honour, in my submission, they
22 do not exist.
23 So, Your Honours, in conclusion, firstly, a matter to be taken
24 most seriously by the Trial Chamber in light of the matters covered in the
25 majority Appeals decision and dissenting opinion of Judge Hunt. And I
1 also note Your Honours observations from the Trial Chamber in Galic in
2 that regard.
3 But leaving that aside, acts and conduct of the accused,
4 surrounding circumstances, interests of justice, late notification of this
5 particular witness and the effect that that has in relation to the Defence
6 situation, and the general scheduling of the ability of the Defence to
7 deal with the Prosecution case. Those are my submissions, Your Honours,
8 and -- unless there are any further specific matters Your Honour wishes
9 know go to.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Ms. Loukas.
11 Mr. Hannis, would you please respond.
12 MR. HANNIS: Thank you, Your Honour.
13 With regard to late notification, Your Honour, when we field our
14 witness list in December 2003 we indicated at that time that there were
15 something in the neighbourhood of, I think, eight or ten witnesses that we
16 were considering once we were able to speak with them and determine
17 whether or not they would be available. This is one of those witnesses,
18 Your Honour.
19 JUDGE ORIE: I think, as a matter of fact, that Ms. Loukas was
20 not complaining about not announcing that such a witness came, but of
21 course it's difficult to prepare if you don't know who it is.
22 MR. HANNIS: Correct, Your Honour.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I think that's the issue raised by
24 Ms. Loukas.
25 MS. LOUKAS: That's precisely correct, Your Honour.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Hannis.
2 MR. HANNIS: And the reason that we couldn't do that,
3 Your Honour, was that this witness was not permitted to speak to us until
4 a waiver was brought from Serbia and that was pending for almost two years
5 before we obtained their approval.
6 With regard to the argument about the -- the appropriateness of
7 Rule 89(F), Your Honour, Rule 89(F) says that "The Chamber may receive
8 evidence of a witness where the interests of justice allow in written
9 form." We would contend that the interests of justice would allow those
10 portions of his written statement that I propose in this case. I have
11 gone through and in every instance that I could find where there was
12 mention of the acts and conduct of the accused, I highlighted those for
13 redaction. They have been redacted. I do not propose to submit that
14 evidence regarding this accused in the written form. I will lead that
15 from this witness viva voce. I -- I disagree with the argument that they
16 are not separable. I believe the Court can look at his statement, see
17 what's been redacted, see what remains, and determine whether or not they
18 can be discussed separately.
19 Thank you.
20 JUDGE ORIE: And ...
21 MR. HANNIS: Was there another point you wished me to address,
22 Your Honour?
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. There's one issue, that is, where Ms. Loukas
24 says that it doesn't save time because she'll need anyhow the weekend to
25 prepare for cross-examination.
1 MR. HANNIS: Well, Your Honour, I would submit it does save time
2 because if the Court determines that I'm not permitted to introduce any of
3 his evidence in written form, then I will lead that viva voce and that
4 will be time that we all spend in the courtroom with me asking him
5 questions about all those other un-redacted items in the proposed 89(F)
7 JUDGE ORIE: Do you say -- if I understand you correctly, that
8 you say that at least Ms. Loukas gain some time in cross-examination by
9 leading the evidence in the 89(F) matter?
10 MR. HANNIS: Well, Your Honour, whatever time she's given, she
11 would gain that, yes.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Loukas, is there any need to briefly respond?
13 And take an example of Mr. Hannis, who was quite ...
14 MS. LOUKAS: No, Your Honour. Your Honours already made the
15 point that my submissions in relation to the late notification did not go
16 for the reasons on the part of the Prosecution for the late notification
17 but what impact that has in relation to the Defence.
18 Beyond that, Your Honour, the question of reduction of time or
19 what have you, that, of course, I went to in the context of what the
20 Prosecution might put forward to the Trial Chamber as potential reduction
21 of time, that that does not detract from the essence and the substance of
22 the argument, Your Honour, and that is that this sort of evidence, with
23 the numbers of references that the statement has, taking into account the
24 surrounding circumstances, taking into account the acts and conduct of the
25 accused question, this is a matter of substance in applying the
1 discretion -- under 89(F) is simply not a suitable statement or witness
2 for the application of 89(F) and it is not divisible simply because the
3 matters contained within the statement are so interrelated. They are
4 intertwined. They are inextricably intertwined, Your Honour.
5 And when one looks, for example -- if I might take Your Honours
6 to -- I have a copy of the redacted version here. These are not just --
7 these are sentences in the middle of particular paragraphs throughout the
8 statement as well as entire paragraphs.
9 Your Honours, this is not a matter that one could say in any
10 realistic fashion is divisible.
11 Those are my submissions, Your Honours.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Ms. Loukas.
13 Ms. Loukas, Mr. Hannis, the Chamber does not find that the
14 statement is indivisible, as you argued, and therefore does not exclude
16 Further, the late introduction of this witness does not affect
17 the way in which the evidence through this witness is led.
18 As far as the preparation for cross-examination is concerned, the
19 Chamber does not need to decide that right away, and we'll consider that.
20 Therefore, Mr. Hannis, you may call your next witness.
21 MR. HANNIS: Thank you.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Which is --
23 MR. HANNIS: Thank you, Your Honour.
24 JUDGE ORIE: No protective measures?
25 MR. HANNIS: No protective measures.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Davidovic.
2 MR. HANNIS: Milorad Davidovic.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Madam Usher, would you please escort the
4 witness into the courtroom.
5 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, while that's happening --
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
7 MR. STEWART: May I simply introduced -- I didn't earlier because
8 he wasn't here. Michael -- Mr. Michael Matlak, who is now with the
9 Defence team for the next few weeks.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Welcome in the court, Mr. Matlak.
11 [The witness entered court]
12 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning, Mr. Davidovic. Can you hear me in a
13 language you understand?
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I can.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Before you give evidence in this court, the Rules of
16 Procedure and Evidence require you to make a solemn declaration that
17 you'll speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. The
18 text is now handed out to you by Madam Usher. May I invite you to make
19 that solemn declaration.
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will
21 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Davidovic. Please be seated. You'll
23 first be examined by Mr. Hannis, counsel for the Prosecution.
24 MR. HANNIS: Thank you, Your Honour.
25 WITNESS: MILORAD DAVIDOVIC
1 [Witness answered through interpreter]
2 MR. HANNIS: I'd like to begin by first of all showing this
3 witness two items: His redacted ICTY statement, if that could be given a
4 number; and also, a supplemental information sheet, if that could be given
5 a separate number.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar, could you please assign first of
7 all a number to the redacted statement.
8 Madam Registrar, if a number could be assigned.
9 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honour. That would be number P764 and
11 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
12 MR. HANNIS: And as well -- is "A" the supplemental information
13 sheet or is --
14 JUDGE ORIE: I take it that "A" is the supplemental information
16 MR. HANNIS: Thank you.
17 Examined by Mr. Hannis:
18 Q. Mr. Davidovic, could you please take a look at those two items,
19 the first being a redacted version of your ICTY statement and the second
20 being a supplemental information which contains some of the changes that
21 we made after reviewing it in preparation if your testimony today. First
22 of all, do you recognise your original ICTY statement?
23 A. Yes, I do.
24 Q. And have you now had a chance to look at the B/C/S version of the
25 supplemental information sheet which contains some of the changes that we
1 made after proofing you for your testimony today?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. And having had a chance to review your statement before coming to
4 court today and having made those changes, are you satisfied with that
5 statement and are you able to certify to the Court that that statement is
6 truthful and accurate to the best of your knowledge and belief?
7 A. Yes. The statement is correct and truthful, and what I said is
8 properly reflected in this paper.
9 Q. One other item I would like show the witness, Your Honour, would
10 be the next exhibit number, please. This is an intercepts authorisation
11 sheet -- authentication. I'm sorry.
12 Mr. Davidovic, during the course of preparing your statement, you
13 may recall that we played some intercepted telephone conversations for you
14 in which you were able to in some cases make voice identifications and
15 comment on the content of some of those. Can you indicate to us whether
16 or not that document in front of you is the summary of what was done in
17 connection with those intercepted conversations and if it's also true and
18 accurate to the best of your information and belief.
19 A. Yes.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hannis, were copies provided -- a number to the
21 Chamber so that we can have a look at it.
22 THE REGISTRAR: Yeah. It will be P764B.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But could we have a look at it.
24 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Please proceed.
1 MR. HANNIS: Thank you, Your Honour. At this point in time, I
2 would like to read an 89(F) summary of what is in the -- in the redacted
3 version of his statement.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Please do so, Mr. Hannis.
5 MR. HANNIS: Thank you.
6 Your Honour, I think counsel is trying to address me.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
8 MS. LOUKAS: I was trying to do it with some subtlety,
9 Your Honour. On the basis that -- I was wondering when the Prosecutor had
10 actually forwarded the 89(F) summary to me.
11 MR. HANNIS: I'm looking at my case manager. Apparently we
13 MS. LOUKAS: That's what I thought.
14 MR. HANNIS: I would indicate to counsel, however, the 89(F)
15 summary is almost identical to the information that was provided about
16 this witness at the time we requested that he be added as an additional
17 witness. It's basically a cut and paste from that motion.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But it's unclear. Has Ms. Loukas received the
19 copy or ...
20 MS. LOUKAS: No, Your Honour, I haven't. And the Prosecution --
21 JUDGE ORIE: Whether -- whether it's cut and paste or -- I mean,
22 Ms. Loukas is entitled to have a look at it.
23 MR. HANNIS: Certainly, Your Honour. I didn't realise she had
24 not been given a copy this morning. I have an extra.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Well, since the summaries are mainly meant to
1 inform the public, it's not necessary to read it right away, Ms. Loukas.
2 You can have a -- you take your time to review the summary and see whether
3 there's any comment, and Mr. Hannis would then read that, perhaps after
4 the first break or at a later stage.
5 MS. LOUKAS: Yes. I think that's an appropriate course,
6 Your Honour.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
8 MS. LOUKAS: And I just want to ensure that the Prosecution
9 endeavours to ensure that I am sent the 89(F) summaries prior to the
10 witness coming to court.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
12 MR. HANNIS: I will, Your Honour. I apologise for the oversight
13 on this occasion.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
15 MR. HANNIS: I would indicate --
16 JUDGE ORIE: I would have one question, however: Mr. Hannis,
17 you -- let me just check that on the transcript.
18 Yes. I see it's just -- not just identification but it's also
19 comments on the -- I take it that then you consider this to be also a kind
20 of 89(F) procedure?
21 MR. HANNIS: Correct, Your Honour, but I will be leading some viva
22 voce testimony from him concerning the substance of some of those
23 conversations that may pertain to the accused or those close to the
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Ms. Loukas, you're aware of the comments. Is
1 there any problem in -- of course, apart from your general problem with
2 89(F) evidence led through this witness, but if there are specific
3 portions on -- especially on the comments. I mean, identification is
4 perhaps a different matter. Then please led us know if Mr. Hannis, in
5 your view, would not pay sufficient attention to the portions that in your
6 view certainly would not be acceptable under 89(F), coming too close to
7 the accused or related to the acts and the conduct of the accused.
8 MS. LOUKAS: Thank you, Your Honour.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Hannis.
10 MR. HANNIS: Thank you, Your Honour. I would indicate also for
11 the 89(F) summary, I indicated that it was taken from the prior motion.
12 However, one change that was made was I omitted some of the things from
13 the motion that went directly to the acts and conduct of the accused.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Well, Ms. Loukas has an opportunity to review
15 it and you'll hear from her if there's any objection.
16 MR. HANNIS: Yes.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
18 MR. HANNIS: Thank you, Your Honour.
19 Q. Mr. Davidovic, a little while later on I will read a summary of
20 what's in your redacted statement, but from this point we'll talk about
21 the fact that your working career was as a professional policeman. And in
22 your statement I think you indicated you started work in 1974, and after
23 various jobs and working various locations you became the chief of police
24 in Bijeljina municipality in 1989. Is that correct?
25 A. It is.
1 Q. And --
2 A. In 1999, not 1989.
3 Q. I'm sorry, are you certain about that? Your statement indicates
5 A. I'm certain. I was a commander of the traffic police in 1989 in
7 No. I'm sorry. I do apologise. Yes, 1989. I got confused. You
8 were correct in the first place.
9 Q. And I'm going to talk about -- or ask you a question about
10 paragraph 10 in your statement. You talk about the elections in 1990,
11 the -- the multiparty elections. Before the elections actually took
12 place, you mention that you were approached by local SDS members about
13 joining the SDS, and in paragraph 10, you say that they said, "If you're
14 not with us, you're against us." Could you explain what your
15 understanding of that was in regard to the request to join the SDS.
16 A. Even before the start of the elections, when the SDS party was
17 being set up in Bijeljina, some individuals tried to get me involved in
18 this process, the setting-up of the party. I was not of the view that it
19 was possible for me to do that and to opt for such a political choice, but
20 once the party had already been registered and they started to act
21 officially, then again they tried to attract members. And I always
22 refused. And even when they won the elections, I was asked to join in and
23 I refused once again. And I believe that my understanding of the role of
24 the police and police service with regard to any political parties, that
25 is to say, that it was irreconcilable, was correct. But the way in which
1 it was done and people who were trying to set up the party were really
2 low-level individuals, from my point of view. I knew some of those
3 people. They had suspicious pasts, and in the past they were sometimes
4 involved in crime, and I thought it would be inconceivable for me to join
5 in with these people.
6 But they did say, "If you're not with us, you're against us." And
7 when SDS came to power, a very unpleasant situation arose, in terms of the
8 way in which the members of that political party viewed and interpreted
9 things. They considered that whoever was not a sympathiser or a member of
10 the party was their enemy, whether it was a Serb or a member of any other
11 ethnicity. When I say "Serbs," I mean they normally said if you were a
12 Serb and you were not with them, you were some kind of traitor. You were
13 not real Serbs. And I must admit this is something which I've always
14 failed to understand. I mean, we are second-class Serbs or what? We were
15 not in the same category of the people joining the Serb party.
16 Q. And --
17 A. And then --
18 Q. If you could stop you there. I think you've satisfied the answer
19 to that question.
20 Let me ask you, then: After at the recollections and the SDS
21 came to power in Bijeljina, what happened to you and your position in the
22 police department in Bijeljina?
23 A. As soon as they came to power, far-reaching changes started and
24 they started getting rid of people, within the judiciary, the police, et
25 cetera, and anything that had to do with implementation of the law. They
1 immediately changed the entire team when it came to the SUP leaders at the
2 local level, the local community level, and the same thing was done at the
3 republic level and at the local level. All the leadership positions were
4 changed and members of other ethnic groups who were leaving the service or
5 trying to go abroad, well, they were leaving these positions vacant and
6 they were filled by their people and then they were also going through the
7 lists of people who are on the reserve lists of the police. And if you
8 were not a sympathiser or a close collaborator of that party, you would be
9 dropped from the police force.
10 JUDGE ORIE: One second. May I ask you to carefully listen to
11 the question and, to start with, to answer the question specifically put
12 to you. The question was: What happened to you? And, of course, it may
13 be that Mr. Hannis is interested also to know what happened to others, but
14 the question was what happened to you. Would you first focus on that. We
15 are under some time restraints. Mr. Davidovic, you'll understand that
16 hearing evidence of what happened in the former Yugoslavia could easily
17 take you four, five, or six years even in one case. We can't do that. So
18 please focus on the specific questions put to you. If more information is
19 needed, Mr. Hannis certainly will ask for it.
20 Please proceed.
21 MR. HANNIS: Thank you.
22 Q. And, Mr. Davidovic, then what did happen to you in terms of your
23 position as chief in the Bijeljina police station?
24 A. I was replaced. New people came along and they took over my
1 Q. Who -- who was put in your old position?
2 A. Predrag Jesuric. He used to be a lawyer before. And I think he
3 was behind the setting up and the registration of the party and the chief
4 of municipal police was a member of the Bosniak people, a professor who
5 worked at a school. I can't remember his name right now.
6 Q. Thank you. Now, had Mr. Jesuric had any prior police experience,
7 to your knowledge?
8 A. No.
9 Q. And when you say he was behind the setting-up and the
10 registration of the party, which party are you referring to?
11 A. The SDS party. He was leading the party from the very start. He
12 prepared the documents for the registration, and he was one of the key
13 people within the party from the start.
14 Q. Thank you. Mr. Davidovic, I now want to move to a point later in
15 time. After you had been replaced, you sought employment with the federal
16 SUP, and I'm looking at paragraph 14 of your statement now. Could you
17 explain briefly to the Judges what the -- what the federal SUP is and
18 where that is in the hierarchy of the police organisations in the former
19 Yugoslavia. In particular, how it relates to the republican MUPs and the
20 local SUPs. If you can just do that briefly.
21 A. The federal SUP is based in Belgrade and it is a federal
22 institution which dealt with internal affairs at the level of the former
23 Yugoslavia, and they were in charge of the federal institutions, apart
24 from security forces and any security-related activities, they had a role
25 in coordinating expert coordination amongst MUPs at the republic level, in
1 terms of the Ministry of the Interior.
2 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
3 MR. HANNIS: [Microphone not activated]
4 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
5 MR. HANNIS: I'm sorry.
6 Q. In the former Yugoslavia before the war there was only one
7 federal SUP for the entire Yugoslavia; is that correct?
8 A. Yes. It was the federal SUP, the federal police.
9 Q. And then there was a separate republican MUP for each of the
10 republics that were members of Yugoslavia, Croatia, Slovenia, Bosnia, et
11 cetera; is that correct?
12 A. Yes. In every republic, depending on the constitutional
13 provisions - I'm talking about the 1974 Constitution - every republic had
14 such a body with full authority for all these matters, and they were in
15 charge of everything. The federal SUP only had an institutional
16 supervision power, in terms of their expert duties. They did not have the
17 right to supervise operational activities except for the secret police.
18 Q. And then within each of the republics, at the municipal -- at the
19 municipality levels, there was a component of the police that was known as
20 the SUP and their physical facilities was the SJB; is that correct?
21 A. Yes. At the republic level, there was a Ministry of the
22 Interior, which consisted of the State Security and Public Security. And
23 then it was republic MUPs, the security offices at the regional level, and
24 then at municipal level.
25 Q. And when the SUPs at the municipal level and the MUP at the
1 republic level, you mentioned regional levels. What were they called?
2 Was there a name or an acronym for them?
3 A. Yes. They were called the centres of the security service. They
4 were called centres. It would be the first step up, starting from the
5 municipal level. So we had to communicate through them, and they were in
6 charge of communicating between us and the centre.
7 Q. [Microphone not activated] And you said that -- in paragraph 14,
8 you say that you became -- you became a chief inspector when you joined
9 the federal SUP. How many chief inspectors in the whole of Yugoslavia
10 were there?
11 A. Each republic had a chief, and there were five in the police. In
12 Yugoslavia, there weren't more than five or six of us in total.
13 Q. Now, Mr. Davidovic, I want to skip ahead a little bit and go to
14 paragraph 23 of your statement, where you talk about a -- a mission to
15 Bosnia-Herzegovina in September 1991 and you talk about a joint commission
16 that was dealing with issues of police staffing and ethnicity within the
17 police force, relations with the JNA, et cetera. You talk about the first
18 meeting that happened at Han Pijesak in September/October 1991. I want to
19 ask you about a second meeting that you described in paragraph 25 at Banja
20 Luka. Can you tell the Court who attended that meeting in Banja Luka.
21 A. In Banja Luka there was Petar Gracanin on behalf of the federal
22 SUP, and I was with him. On behalf of Republika Srpska -- or rather on
23 behalf of Bosnia- Herzegovina, there was Biljana Plavsic, Mr. Koljevic,
24 Kljujic, a member of the Presidency was there, there was Ganic, also a
25 Presidency member. Zepinic was there, the then-chief of the public
1 security station in Banja Luka. There was the commander, Uzelac, a
2 lieutenant colonel. He was a corps commander, the commander of a corps in
3 Banja Luka. And there was Mr. Tirnanic, an assistant in the Federal
4 Ministry for Internal Affairs. He was the assistant of Petar Gracanin.
5 Q. And can -- can you tell us what was discussed at that meeting
6 with these representatives from the Presidency and the military.
7 A. They discussed the future tasks of the security service and
8 coordination between the army and the police. I think that they continued
9 discussions that had been commenced in Han Pijesak and they tried to reach
10 an agreement according to which the police with the federal SUP would be
11 engaged at joint checkpoints and they would coordinate the work of the
12 police and the army. At these checkpoints the federal SUP police were to
13 be present and the police from the army and from Bosnia and Herzegovina
14 were also to be present there.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hannis, may I --
16 MR. HANNIS: Yes, Your Honour.
17 JUDGE ORIE: -- just ask one question to the witness.
18 You said that "Also present was Mr. Zepinic, the then-chief of
19 the public security station in Banja Luka."
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The Security Services Centre in
21 Banja Luka.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Was Mr. Zepinic?
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, Stojan Zepinic.
24 MR. HANNIS:
25 Q. In regard to that, Mr. Davidovic, I would indicate to you that
1 there has been some evidence that the security chief in Banja Luka whose
2 last name was Zupljanin, and there was a Zepinic, who was a member of the
3 federal --
4 A. Zupljanin. Zupljanin. I apologise. Please don't tie me down to
5 precise surnames. A long time has passed since then and I'm really not
6 able to remember all the details.
7 Q. I understand we're talking about persons and events from 13 years
8 ago. And in the proofing I know you indicated to me that sometimes with
9 dates and names you have difficulties. Is that correct?
10 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Loukas.
11 MS. LOUKAS: Your Honour, I do object to evidence from the bar
12 table in the context of leading evidence from a witness in this way.
13 Firstly, the -- the filling-of-the-gap aspect, I mean, that was
14 the witness's evidence. If it needs to be cleared up later, it can be
15 cleared up later. But -- but secondly, there's some -- you know, "during
16 the proofing session you indicated this." That is thoroughly
17 inappropriate, Your Honour.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hannis, I think that the witness indicated that
19 a long time has passed, and, of course, that's part of his evidence. I
20 asked this question because the Chamber heard quite some evidence about
21 Mr. Zupljanin being the -- in the position where the witness did put
22 Mr. Zepinic ... I think that reference to what happened during the
23 proofing session, especially in this respect, is not -- is not necessary
24 and could better be avoided.
25 MR. HANNIS: I will try to do that in the future, Your Honour. I
1 was trying to indicate that that is something that you will see -- partly
2 from the corrections that are made in the supplemental information, you
3 will see that names have been changed and dates have been changed.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes
5 MR. HANNIS: And he has indicated that on more than one occasion.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, he did.
7 MR. HANNIS:
8 Q. Mr. Davidovic, now I want to go to paragraph 30 of your
9 statement, and you explain your statement a little bit about what the
10 commission was trying to do and one of the things you did was examining --
11 examine what was happening in Bosnia with regard to the police force and
12 the number of reserve police and the arming of the reserve police.
13 You mention that -- you talk about an example in Tuzla
14 municipality where the number of reserve police apparently had been
15 greatly increased to approximately 10.000. I want to quote a line from
16 your statement. You say: "The new SDS Bijeljina chief refused to
17 surrender these weapons," referring to some 900 weapons, "that the Tuzla
18 chief was requesting be returned because he had made a change in -- or a
19 reduction in the number of reserve police." At that time, in Bijeljina
20 who was the chief?
21 A. At the time Predrag Jesuric was the chief of police. To go back
22 to what you asked me about earlier on, as a commission it was our task to
23 establish whether the Security Services had acted on reports filed by
24 citizens with regard to clashes on an ethnic basis. They had to decide
25 whether there had been any reports concerning the army and the police and
1 citizens, and we had to establish whether the police and the reserve
2 police force had applied the law. We had to decide how the reserve force
3 functioned, what its ethnic composition was, et cetera.
4 Q. And in your statement, you indicate that -- that all three of the
5 national parties were engaged in this process of trying to arm their
6 groups by increasing the number of reserve police in those municipalities
7 where they were a majority. Does that apply to Croats, Serbs, and Muslims
8 equally? Correct?
9 A. Yes, exactly.
10 Q. I want to ask you another question related to -- to arming of the
11 civilian population, and I'm going now to paragraphs 39 to 41 of your
12 statement, not necessarily just civilians but others as well. You
13 describe in your paragraphs how weapons and equipment were transferred
14 from the Republic of Serbia in Belgrade to the newly formed Republika
16 Paragraph 39, the last sentence, you talk about high-quality
17 weapons for approximately 500 men. What kind of weapons were you talking
18 about there when you say "high-quality weapons"
19 A. Infantry weapons on the whole, automatic weapons. There were
20 some Heckler weapons. There were weapons for special purposes, with
21 silencers, et cetera, and there were new NATO rifles, rifles used by the
22 NATO forces at the time.
23 Q. You mentioned in paragraph 40 about weapons and equipment going
24 on to helicopters for transport to Pale. Whose helicopters were these?
25 What agency or organisation had helicopters for this purpose?
1 A. Well, these were the Yugoslav Army's helicopters, JNA
2 helicopters. We would take the weapons to the airport at Batajnica or to
3 the barracks in Bajnica and the weapons were then transferred to Republika
4 Srpska, or rather, to Pale.
5 Q. You talk about going on the first occasion with Pero Mihajlovic
6 when some weapons and equipment were actually handed over. First of all,
7 tell me who was Pero Mihajlovic.
8 A. Pero Mihajlovic went with me when I went to Pale for the first
9 time. He was a member of the federal SUP. He worked in the Department
10 for Foreigners and for Passports. I think that was the name of the
11 department. He was in charge of those weapons because I gave him the
12 weapons from the brigade. I couldn't take those weapons and give them to
13 him. I had to assign this task to someone, who would then hand these
14 weapons over to him. He was a colleague of mine from the federal SUP.
15 Q. And on this trip that you went with him to hand over weapons and
16 equipment, do you recall how much equipment? What was the quantity of
17 equipment and weapons you delivered on that occasion?
18 A. Well, we went there by helicopter on the first occasion. We only
19 took uniforms, flak jackets, some helmets, some field boots. This is
20 equipment from the special unit of our brigade, and that is the equipment
21 that we took with us on that first occasion. We did not take any weapons.
22 Q. [Microphone not activated]
23 A. Because it was too heavy. We couldn't carry more than that with
25 Q. [Microphone not activated]
1 MR. HANNIS: Thank you. I'm sorry.
2 Q. Who ordered that and directed you to take the equipment on that
4 A. The federal minister, Kalipovic [phoen], who issued the order,
5 and there was a request from the assistant minister, Kertes.
6 Q. Okay. And that was -- that was the federal minister of which
8 A. The federal Ministry of Internal Affairs.
9 Q. Thank you. Now, I want to back up for just a second because when
10 we started a discussion about arming, I had asked you a question about
11 Mr. Jesuric as the Bijeljina chief who refused to surrender weapons. I
12 would like to show you just one shot from a video.
13 MR. HANNIS: This is a video that's already in evidence,
14 Your Honour. It's a -- it's an interview on a TV programme called "My
15 Guest - His Truth."
16 Q. Mr. Davidovic, did you know an individual named Mirko Blagojevic?
17 A. Yes. He's someone from Bijeljina. I knew him from before the
18 war, too.
19 Q. Who was he and was he associated with any political party or any
20 group in Bijeljina at the -- in late 1991 and early 1992?
21 A. Mirko Blagojevic was the first associate of Mr. Seselj's. He was
22 a member of the Radical Party. When this party was first established,
23 Mirko Blagojevic was its secretary, and I think that he was even its
24 president for a certain period of time. But he was a secretary of the
25 party on a permanent basis and he was one of Seselj's key associates.
1 Q. Did you also know an individual by the name of Branislav
3 A. Yes, of course. Brano Filipovic is a criminal who was convicted
4 on a number of occasions. But when the war broke out, he immediately
5 joined Mirko Blagojevic and the Radicals, and he was one of the key
6 individuals involved in the clashes at the beginning of the war and right
7 up until the time that he was killed.
8 Q. I want to show you a copy of the transcript of a TV interview.
9 Do you recall having seen a video during proofing of Mirko Blagojevic
10 talking about his experiences during the war?
11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hannis, you indicated that this was a video
12 which is already in evidence. Could you please tell us under what number.
13 MR. HANNIS: Your Honour, the number is P727, and it's in the
14 Brcko dossier at tab 3.
15 Q. And, I'm sorry, Mr. Davidovic, I don't know where we left off.
16 Did you -- did you -- you recall seeing that video?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. And I've handed you the transcript, and it's page 19 of the
19 English, Your Honour. And in the B/C/S, Mr. Davidovic, I think it's on
20 page 17. The time counter is at 2 hours, 50 minutes, and 29 seconds.
21 A. I have it here.
22 Q. Okay. Is that the -- the Branislav Filipovic referred to there,
23 is that the one you knew in Bijeljina that you have been talking about?
24 A. Yes. Yes.
25 Q. Did he have a nickname that you're aware of?
1 A. They called him Sumar.
2 Q. Thank you.
3 MR. HANNIS: I'd like to hand him another item which should get
4 the next exhibit number, please. And this is a document dated the 31st of
5 May, 1992.
6 Q. Mr. Davidovic, could you tell us what that document is.
7 THE REGISTRAR: The next exhibit number will be P765.
8 MR. HANNIS: Thank you.
9 A. This is a travel order that is issued to individuals using an
10 army vehicle.
11 Q. Was Mr. Filipovic a member of the regular army in 1991 or 1992?
12 A. No. He was a member of the Radical Party. They had an armed
13 formation which was engaged in the Brcko area at the beginning of the war.
14 That is where they were. They had their headquarters and their forces,
15 their men and equipment there. They were engaged in operations in the
16 Brcko area.
17 Q. Thank you. I have nothing further to ask you about that document
18 at this time, sir.
19 I want to go to another topic in your statement, that's the first
20 paragraph under the heading about "Assistance to the new Republika Srpska
21 MUP," and you talk about around April 6th, 1992 you were called in to see
22 Kertes and Gracanin. Do you recall that meeting; yes or no?
23 A. Yes. Yes.
24 Q. Would you tell the Judges, please, what happened at that
25 meeting? What did they talk about? What did they tell you they wanted you
1 to do?
2 A. I was summoned to the meeting by Mr. Kertes. He asked me to come
3 to the ministry, and that's why I saw Kertes and the minister. The
4 minister was Petar Gracanin at the time. Kertes then told me -- he asked
5 me, "What are you doing here? Why aren't you in Bosnia? Do you want me
6 to defend the Serbs in Bosnia given that I'm a Hungarian?" He asked me to
7 engage as many men as I could and to go to Bosnia and help the Serbian
8 people there.
9 Q. Did -- was this a request?
10 A. Yes. It wasn't a request, but he then asked for a solution to be
11 found, for me to go there immediately. I asked him how I was to go there.
12 He said, "We'll find a way for you to go there but you'll be a member of
13 the federal SUP. You'll remain a member of the federal SUP but whatever
14 you do there will be done under the auspices of the Republika Srpska." I
15 wanted this to be legally regulated. I wanted there to be a decision
16 because if I was killed, I wanted to -- it to be clear what my status was.
17 They then called Marko Baletic, who was the secretary in the federal SUP
18 at the time and he was told that he should prepare the necessary documents
19 and issue decisions according to which we were going on leave, but we were
20 to leave our official documents in the federal SUP and take those
21 decisions with us. And when we arrived in the republican MUP, we would
22 receive other documents, decisions stating that we were policemen there
23 and that we could work there, but any additional salaries, any additional
24 remuneration was to be paid out to us in the federal MUP.
25 I remember one detail: Marko Baletic said, "How are we going to
1 do this? This isn't legal." And Kertes reacted very angrily, even
2 brazenly. He said, "What kind of law are you talking about?" I'll say
3 this quite freely. He said, "Fuck the law. Do whatever I say. There's
4 no other law." And Marko had no other comments. He said, "Okay, that's
5 what we'll do. That's how we'll proceed," and that's what we did.
6 Q. Let me try and clear this up. At the beginning, I asked you
7 whether Kertes's remark to you about going to the Republika Srpska to help
8 defend it, was that a request that you felt you could refuse?
9 A. Yes. I think that it's the right of every man to say whether he
10 will go or not, but the request was quite decisive. He said, "You're
11 going to Bosnia. What are you doing here in Brdo [as interpreted]? Do
12 you want me as a Hungarian to defend the people?" That meant that I had
13 to go there. That is what was implied.
14 Q. Now, you indicated that Mr. Gracanin was the -- the Minister of
15 the Interior at that time?
16 A. Yes. Yes.
17 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... your direct supervisor, your
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. And then what was Mr. Kertes's position in relation to Gracanin
21 and in relation to you in the -- in the hierarchy, in the structure, in
22 the chain of command?
23 A. Mr. Gracanin was the federal secretary. He was a minister. He
24 was the main person. But when Kertes arrived as an assistant, he took
25 decisions on behalf of the secretariat. Petar Gracanin wasn't asked much
1 about such details, and Gracanin always gave in to Kertes. Kertes imposed
2 himself. He had been sent from Republika Srpska to work in the federal
4 And there's something I have to say. He was sent there to break
5 up the federal SUP. They still thought that we were the former Yugoslav
6 SUP composed of men from various ethnic groups. There were men from other
7 republics there, and they thought that we in the federal SUP were against
8 the future activities that the forces in Bosnia and Herzegovina would be
9 involved in, and we were against the way in which they were going to deal
10 with the state of the Serbs in the upcoming war in Bosnia-Herzegovina.
11 And so they treated us in a somewhat unusual way and they always viewed us
12 slightly condescendingly, as an organisation opposed to the policies of
13 Slobodan Milosevic. Those policies were quite nationalistic. Kertes --
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. --
15 MR. HANNIS:
16 Q. I'm sorry, let me stop you there. You were talking about --
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hannis, if you would allow me.
18 MR. HANNIS: Yes.
19 JUDGE ORIE: I would like to seek one clarification. Witness,
20 you said -- at least, that's what I read on the transcript: "And when we
21 arrived in the republican MUP, we would receive other documents, decisions
22 stating that we are policemen there and that we could work there, but any
23 additional salaries, any additional remuneration was to be paid out to us
24 in the federal MUP"; whereas, until now, at the federal level you
25 referred, rather, to the SUP than to the MUP. Could you explain here why
1 any additional remuneration was to be paid out to you in the federal MUP.
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know how clearer I can be.
3 The federal MUP is the federal MUP and the republican MUP is at the level
4 of the republic. These are the same institutions. But I worked in the
5 federal SUP. I continue to work for that SUP. I had a right to a salary
6 there. But when I went to Bosnia, I only received fabricated documents in
7 case I was killed somewhere, in case I or one of my men were arrested or
8 killed, we needed such documents to confirm that we were not from
9 Yugoslavia but that we were, in fact, members of the Republika Srpska MUP.
10 So this -- the purpose of these documents was to conceal our actual
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I'm -- I do understand that part of your
13 testimony. I do not fully understand why any additional payment would
14 come from the federal MUP rather than from the federal SUP.
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I apologise. The federal MUP and
16 the federal SUP, well, it's the same thing.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Until now, you used the -- usually the
18 abbreviation "federal SUP." I do understand that the difference is "SUP"
19 stands for secretariat and MUP stands for ministry. So you say that's the
20 same. Then I better understand your testimony.
21 Please proceed.
22 MR. HANNIS: Thank you, Your Honour. That helped clear up my
23 confusion as well.
24 Q. So -- now I want to ask you about your answer where you indicated
25 that Mr. Kertes had been sent to -- to break things up. Who sent him?
1 A. Mr. Milosevic. Prior to that, Mr. Kertes was a member of the
2 Presidency of the Republic of Serbia. He was a member of the Presidency
3 of that body that was the leading body at the level of the Republic of
4 Serbia and it was considered that the federal SUP -- that federal
5 ministry, that is. We've got several different words, secretariat or what
6 have you, but it's all the same. It was considered that it was still a
7 bastion of resistance to the policies of Mr. Milosevic. It was considered
8 somebody stronger than Mr. Petar Gracanin as a general could be placed in
9 that position who would be more skilled and would be more able to
10 introduce rigorous changes and break it up, as it were.
11 Q. And in that earlier answer, you said "they didn't like" -- I
12 don't recall your exact words. They didn't like the federal SUP because
13 you were sort of a multi-ethnic group and not in favour of the
14 nationalistic policies. Who was the "they" that they were referring to in
15 that answer?
16 A. Precisely what I mean is the Republic of Serbia and people who
17 were leading figures at the level of the Republic of Serbia, the policies
18 of Mr. Milosevic, and Mr. Kertes as one of the represents of that policy.
19 Q. Thank you. In this meeting, when it was discussed how
20 logistically you were going to be able to go to the Republika Srpska, you
21 mentioned that Mr. Baletic objected and said it would be illegal. Did he
22 explain why in his opinion it would be illegal?
23 A. He said that it was against the law for a simple reason, because
24 an employee of the federal ministry -- of the federal MUP, that is, could
25 not simply go and work for the SUP at the level of the republic and use
1 their equipment and bear their insignia or what have you. It was
2 illogical for somebody working at the state level, federal level, and --
3 to go and work at the republic -- at the level of the republic. We
4 couldn't work for them and continue to receive our salaries back in
5 Belgrade. So there were different legal provisions in terms of organising
6 contracts, et cetera. So we were talking about two different categories,
7 different budget lines, different funding, everything. And that's why he
8 couldn't find a solution. How could he send us to work there officially
9 on a business trip, as it were? And that's why he said there was no
10 legal basis for that.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Judge Hanoteau as a question.
12 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] I just wanted to ask the
13 following question: Why, in your view, did they contact you and what
14 do you think they expected you to do? Why did they choose you in
15 particular and what was the kind of mission that you were entrusted
16 [Realtime transcript read in error "interested"] interested with down
18 THE INTERPRETER: "Entrusted with," not "interested."
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I was a high-ranking official
20 within the federal SUP. I was the chief police inspector and it was the
21 highest ranking position at that time, in terms of anyone from Bosnia and
22 Herzegovina working within the federal SUP, and it was only logical that
23 as such a highest ranking official I would have been asked to gather
24 people from Bosnia around me and go to Bosnia. It was obvious. It went
25 without saying. So it was not something that was put anywhere in writing,
1 but the armed forces asked for people who were originally from Bosnia to
2 go to Bosnia, and the same happened within SUP. And I was the highest
3 ranking Bosnian official, so I was asked to go and organise things there.
4 MS. LOUKAS: Your Honours, I'm just wondering if it would be
5 possible to take the break at 10.25.
6 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] I had not finished with my
8 In the reply you gave, did you mean to say that you were being
9 sent down there because you were the highest ranking official but also
10 because you had the highest qualifications? You were asked to get other
11 people organised.
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. Well, I had spent a long time
13 within the police force. I was a professional policeman.
14 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] Very well. Thank you, sir.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Loukas, it's still 10.25. There must be
16 specific reason why you asked for a break.
17 MS. LOUKAS: This is an urgent matter, Your Honour, that's just
18 arisen. And I do apologise to Judge Hanoteau. I thought he'd finished
19 asking his questions.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We'll then have an early break, Mr. Hannis, if
21 you do not disagree. We'll adjourn until ten minutes to 11.00.
22 --- Recess taken at 10.25 a.m.
23 --- On resuming at 10.58 a.m.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Could the witness be escorted into the courtroom.
25 MR. HANNIS: Before --
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
2 MR. HANNIS: Your Honour, may I ask you one brief question?
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
4 MR. HANNIS: Very shortly I intend to play some intercepted
5 conversations. Most of these that I have are ones that are on the
6 intercept authentication sheet, which he's listened to and made his
7 comments in terms of identifying voices and something about the content.
8 Because in my view some of that content seemed to relate to matters
9 that -- not necessarily acts and conduct of the accused but the acts and
10 conduct of some individuals closely associated with him or high ranks.
11 For purposes of 89(F), I thought this was material that I needed to
12 leave --
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. You should say it's too much in the proximity
14 of the accused to introduce them in any other way.
15 MR. HANNIS: Yes. But I didn't know if the Court wanted me to
16 play the entire intercept or if I could go to portions in the transcript
17 or if Ms. Loukas had an objection to either process.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Of course, if you'd play only portions of it, the
19 Chamber is not immediately in a position to see whether that would cause
20 any specific problem.
21 Ms. Loukas might be in a position. If she thinks that it's
22 appropriate to have the whole context of the conversation in evidence as
23 well, we'll hear from her. But let's start with playing those portions
24 that are in the view of the Prosecution most relevant.
25 MS. LOUKAS: Indeed, Your Honour. Just one first matter that I
1 might indicate prior to the witness being brought into court.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
3 MS. LOUKAS: There is just an introduction I would like to make
4 to the Court, and that is that Mr. David Josse is with us today, who's
5 recently been appointed a legal consultant in relation to the Defence team
6 and hopefully will be able to join the Defence team should we continue as
7 Mr. Krajisnik's representatives in light of his application to represent
8 himself as co-counsel.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I might spend a few more words on it later
10 today. But first of all, welcome in this courtroom, Mr. Josse.
11 Then if there's nothing else, then, Mr. Hannis, I'll ask
12 Madam Usher to escort the witness into the courtroom.
13 [The witness entered court]
14 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Hannis.
15 MR. HANNIS: Thank you.
16 Q. Mr. Davidovic, before we continue, I should indicate to you that
17 the interpreters spoke to me during the break and indicated that I've been
18 guilty sometimes in the past of speaking too fast, and I know they
19 indicate that you speak rapidly sometimes. They also indicated that
20 sometimes your enunciation combined with the speed made it difficult for
21 them. So please bear that in mind.
22 I wanted to ask you -- we were talking about the meeting you had
23 with Kertes and Gracanin where it was decided for you to go to Republika
24 Srpska. In paragraph 44 of your statement, you say: "The problem was the
25 federal SUP could not be seen to be taking sides with the RS MUP." Why
1 not? What was the problem with that?
2 A. First of all, the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia was not supposed
3 to appear as a country participating in war, so it was a war but it was
4 taking place outside the official bodies within that country.
5 Q. Did anyone tell you that?
6 A. Well, no. It went without saying.
7 Q. Thank you. Now, sir, I want to play an intercepted telephone
8 conversation for you that -- that you have heard before and actually made
9 comments on.
10 MR. HANNIS: If we can give this a number. This is a
11 conversation --
12 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.
13 THE REGISTRAR: Yes. Your Honour, it will be P766.
14 MR. HANNIS:
15 Q. Mr. Davidovic, I would tell you this is from approximately the
16 18th of April, 1992. We'll listen to it all the way through and then I'll
17 have some questions for you at the end.
18 [Intercept played]
19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hannis, it would not appear on the transcript if
20 it's not read by the interpreters. It will then also not appear on the
21 French transcript. So could you please restart and could I invite,
22 according to our usual procedure, to ask one of the interpreters to read
23 it and the other one to follow it on paper. And we are aware that the
24 speed is such that the interpreter reading the English text will be
25 behind, but we'll just in this way verify that everything is consistent
1 both on paper and in audio.
2 Could we restart, please.
3 [Intercept played]
4 THE INTERPRETER: [Voiceover] Yes.
5 Good afternoon.
6 Good afternoon.
7 Is this Pero?
9 This is Sarajevo here. Hold on a moment. Cedo Kljajic needs to
10 speak to you.
11 Thank you. Hello?
14 Hi. How are you?
15 What's going on?
16 What's up, Pero?
17 Fuck, all kinds of things. I've been working.
18 When are you going to how many here, man?
19 Look, I told Dragan, but I don't know if he managed to convey it
20 on to you. Here we've reached an agreement.
23 All right. He did tell us.
24 Yes. We've agreed that this should go through these colleagues
25 from this Ministry next door.
2 So I don't appear in the official procedure any more.
3 All right.
4 I thought I could come for a private visit.
5 But won't you be coming here any more?
6 Well, no.
7 Why not?
8 Well, the ministers, this federal one, and the Serb minister from
9 next door have decided this cooperation should go through them in the
11 Oh, damn.
12 Fuck, I don't know. Maybe if somebody ... that's why I wanted to
13 talk to you.
14 All right.
15 That's one thing. The other thing is ...
16 What can we do so that I can reach agreement with Mico? He's for
17 any solution that can contribute to ...
18 We can't really make any arrangements on the phone. I was hoping
19 one of you would come here so that we...
20 We, too, wanted to come. We've tried to insist on that, but you
21 know how it is. Problems arise one after another and that has slowed down
23 I can see you have a whole lot of problems.
25 And that ... it is very complicated. Here we had reached an
1 agreement, designated some to send, but I had organised it all. I was
2 going to transport it to you but I ... didn't work out. This is why it is
3 all going through the colleagues from the next door who will ...
4 Yes. Yes.
5 That's one thing. The other thing ... when he called ... that I
6 have Momo here. I couldn't get through ... Momo ordered some equipment
7 from our institute of security.
8 All right.
9 Well, you know what was still functioning and we have now stopped
10 it all.
12 We don't want it to go to these guys. Momo didn't order that for
13 the Serb MUP but for that ...
14 Yes. Yes.
15 So we stop all that.
17 All of it. I will ... because they called me. I will stop it
18 all now.
19 Well, if you could bring that to us here, we could make further
20 arrangements, you know.
21 Fuck, we need to get together. Maybe we could do that. I'm
22 going to check that now.
23 Can you bring it about then?
24 I can't.
25 Not even that?
1 It was said that --
2 Listen, Pero ...
3 Can you come here for a private visit?
4 Well, today I can't ... we'll see, but not today. I'll check if
5 I can come one of these days for a private visit. If I don't come, I
6 could send that Mico Davidovic from here, the one you know, on a Saturday
7 or Sunday.
8 Yeah, I know him.
9 Maybe him then.
10 I'd prefer if you came.
11 Well, I'd like to come but ...
12 Let him come too, but I'd prefer it if you came, you know.
13 All right.
14 We could also arrange some other things, some relations, you
16 Yes. Yes, we should. I'll wait today.
17 There are helicopters flying from Belgrade and here daily.
18 I can't reach him, damn it. You should ask around. They're
19 operating constantly, you know?
20 It would help if Mico called and said.
21 Who does he need to arrange this with?
22 My boss, Gracanin.
23 All right.
24 I just received what you had sent to me and it is very
25 interesting. It has drawn serious attention.
2 Here, I mean.
4 I could make an arrangement with him.
5 All right.
6 Hey, do you know if ... some of my people from Semberija and
7 Majevica had a talk on personnel issues last night. Have you determined
8 who will be the mayor of Bijeljina?
9 No. I did talk to Jasaric but we discussed another issue.
11 No, they didn't ...
12 All right. There were some people here last night but I don't
13 know if they were at your place or somewhere else ...
14 They were probably up there.
15 Yeah, up there.
16 Pero, please, come for a private visit, if you can.
17 I'm try and you can check it with Mico then.
18 Yeah, I'll do the rest with Mico.
19 Maybe you could have Mico talk to you ... if I can't come now.
20 Give me a call if you can't make it.
21 I'll know whether I can or not today. I'll let you know. Check
22 that today and call me immediately.
23 You got it.
24 All right.
25 You go got it. I'll give you a call if I can't make it, and then
1 you reply ...
3 You got it.
6 I'll talk to you later.
7 Talk to you later.
10 JUDGE ORIE: I think we have not finished the French translation.
11 I'm -- we're still at the helicopters. Could the French translators
12 continue and finish their ...
13 I'm not quite sure I understood, which seemed to be a request for
14 an additional ten minutes by the French interpreters.
15 THE INTERPRETER: Quite some time. So perhaps we could add the
16 transcript of the translation later so as not to waste any more time.
17 JUDGE ORIE: It might be -- it might be difficult to insert at a
18 later stage the missing portion, so even if it takes time, I would highly
19 appreciate if the translation would be finished right away. And I take it
20 that the interpreters have the English text in front of them. Yes.
21 So I invite the French interpreters to finish the translation.
22 Please proceed, Mr. Hannis.
23 MR. HANNIS: Thank you, Your Honour.
24 Q. Mr. Davidovic, did you recognise the speakers in that
1 A. I do.
2 Q. And who were they?
3 A. Pero Mihajlovic, my colleague from the federal SUP, and Cedo
4 Kljajic, who at the time was an assistant to the Ministry -- minister of
5 the interior for public security.
6 Q. Early in the conversation, Mr. Mihajlovic had made a remark
7 about, "We've agreed that this should go through the colleagues from the
8 ministry next door." In the context of that conversation, and knowing who
9 Mr. Mihajlovic was, do you know what he's referring to there, what
10 ministry next door?
11 A. Yes. A building, the Federal Ministry of the Interior, was
12 across the road from the Republic of Serbia's ministry, so we were divided
13 by this street. And when he says "next door," or "across the road," what
14 he meant, it would be within the area of competence of the MUP of the
15 Republic of Serbia.
16 Q. And just shortly after that he says, "The ministers, this federal
17 one, and the Serb minister from next door, have decided this cooperation
18 should go through them in the future." The federal one would be who?
19 A. Not through them but that all future cooperation with the MUP of
20 the Republic -- of the Republika Srpska should go through the MUP of the
21 Republic of Serbia, no longer through the federal ministry. The federal
22 ministry should be out of it.
23 Q. Thank you for that. Who was the federal one that they're
24 referring, to the federal minister, the name of that person?
25 A. Petar Gracanin.
1 Q. And the Serb minister from next door, who would that have been in
2 April of 1992?
3 A. Sokolovic.
4 Q. Now, your name is mentioned in that conversation. But near the
5 end, Mr. Mihajlovic is asking Cedo Kljajic, "Have you determined who will
6 be the mayor of Bijeljina yet?" Do you remember hearing that?
7 A. No, not the mayor but the chief of MUP in Bijeljina. He said
8 that Cedo didn't know. The way I understood, it was about MUP because
9 afterwards, very soon afterwards Predrag Jesuric was replaced by another
10 man, and Predrag Jesuric was moved to another job within the Ministry of
11 the Republika Srpska, within the Ministry of the Interior, I mean.
12 Q. [Microphone not activated]
13 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
14 MR. HANNIS:
15 Q. Maybe there is a problem in my translation. My English has it
16 as "have you determined who will be the major of Bijeljina?" Could you
17 look -- do you have a copy of the B/C/S transcript for this conversation
18 on the table?
19 JUDGE ORIE: Could the witness be provided with it.
20 MR. HANNIS: And --
21 JUDGE ORIE: It's the semi-last page --
22 MR. HANNIS: Yes. It's the page --
23 JUDGE ORIE: The ninth -- approximately the ninth box from the
24 top, the first one being empty.
25 MR. HANNIS:
1 Q. The page number at the top, the last four digits is 0232 and it's
2 Mr. Mihajlovic speaking in the eighth box down with -- that has anything
3 in it. Do you see that?
4 A. [No audible response]
5 Q. Could you read that last sentence in the box. It talks about
7 A. Yes. I still think -- "Have you decided who would be the chief at
8 Bijeljina?" So the reference is not to the mayor but the chief. And
9 since we are talking here about two people having a conversation and they
10 work for the police, they always mean the police. I don't think he asked
11 the question about the mayor. It is within the police.
12 Q. Thank you.
13 MR. HANNIS: That makes sense to me, Your Honour. I think we
14 would submit a revised translation and change "mayor" to chief. Or if
15 Defence counsel is willing to do it now, perhaps we can do it on the
16 record and I can submit a copy to the Court.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Ms. Loukas, would there be any problem to do
18 it on the record?
19 MS. LOUKAS: No, Your Honour. That seems eminently sensible in
20 the circumstances.
21 JUDGE ORIE: I would then -- I would like to have the original.
22 I'll change that with handwriting and -- so that it reads "chief" rather
23 than "mayor."
24 MR. HANNIS: Thank you, Your Honour.
25 Q. Mr. Davidovic, in connection with that, Mr. Kljajic says, "I did
1 talk to Jasaric about that." Do you know who he's referring to there?
2 A. Jesuric?
3 Q. Yes. Do you know who that person was?
4 A. He meant Predrag Jesuric, who was the chief of MUP or SUP in
5 Bijeljina, at the municipal level in Bijeljina.
6 Q. And I understood his name was spelled with a "U," as "Jesuric."
7 This appears in the transcript as Jasaric, with an "A." I think that's
8 just a mispronunciation?
9 A. Yes. Yeah, it's a mistake.
10 Q. Thank you. And then finally near the end, Mr. Mihajlovic says he
11 will check with Mico and Cedo Kljajic -- no, Pero says, "You should check
12 it with Mico." Cedo Kljajic says he will. What Mico are they talking
13 about? Is that you?
14 A. No. It was Mico Stanisic. He said, "Should I talk to Mico?
15 Will you?" And then he said, "No, I'll talk to him. So they meant Mico
16 Stanisic, who was the minister the interior of the Republika Srpska.
17 Q. Thank you. That's all I wanted to ask you about for now.
18 MR. HANNIS: And for the benefit of the registry officer, I'm not
19 going to use the next intercept that was on her list, but I would like to
20 go to the following one, which is from the 6th of May. If -- if we could
21 give that a number.
22 THE REGISTRAR: Yes. It will be P767.
23 MR. HANNIS: And what I propose to do here, Your Honour, is
24 because it's rather long, and I just want it for a point of sort of
25 establishing a date when a certain event happened. I would propose just
1 to ask Mr. Davidovic about a particular passage in the transcript. And if
2 Defence counsel wants to have the whole tape played, then we can do that
3 after -- after I've done that.
4 JUDGE ORIE: We'll hear from Ms. Loukas if she objects.
5 MR. HANNIS: Thank you.
6 Q. Mr. Davidovic, this is a conversation between Pero Mihajlovic,
7 and in your authentication sheet I think you identified a second speaker
8 as being Petar Gracanin. But what I'm interested in is on the first page,
9 after the introductory conversations. And it begins at the very bottom of
10 your page in B/C/S, where Mr. Mihajlovic is speaking. Could you read that
11 out for us. It's after he's asked, "Have you arrived?"
12 A. Yes. "Here I am at Vrace, at the headquarters of the Ministry
13 of -- Serb Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina. I'm at the minister's
14 office. We arrived yesterday. We couldn't return last night. Mico
15 Davidovic, deputy commander of the brigade, is with me."
16 Q. Could you read the next three boxes.
17 A. "Mico?"
18 "Yes. We couldn't see it yesterday, since the helicopter by
19 which we came had some other assignment. We couldn't return yesterday.
20 We expect to return during the day, and the minister will probably return
22 "Yes. All right."
23 Q. Thank you. Now, do you recall how many times you went to Pale in
24 a helicopter -- or to -- to the Republika Srpska in a helicopter with
25 Mr. Mihajlovic?
1 A. I went there with Mihajlovic on two occasions. We went there by
3 Q. Do you recall being in Vrace with him on this occasion?
4 A. On the first occasion, we were with him in Vrace. We were in the
5 minister's office and spoke to people there, the people who were in the
6 ministry. I think that Momcilo Mandic was there, too. He was there on
7 the first occasion that we were there. And we spoke about it -- about how
8 to continue sending weapons.
9 Q. Okay. And did this trip occur before you came to Republika
10 Srpska with your group of men to help, as had been proposed by Mr. Kertes?
11 A. Yes. In fact, these were preparations for my visit to Vrace.
12 Q. Okay. All right. Thank you. That's all I have to ask you about
13 that one.
14 MS. LOUKAS: Just in relation to the last intercept,
15 Your Honours, I can indicate that the Defence has no desire to have the
16 entire intercept played.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Ms. Loukas.
18 MR. HANNIS: Thank you.
19 JUDGE ORIE: The we have a number already? Yes, we have.
20 MR. HANNIS:
21 Q. Mr. Davidovic, in relation to that I want to ask you about
22 paragraph 46 of your statement. You mentioned that your group arrived in
23 early April; however, in the intercept we just played, which is dated from
24 the first week in May, 1992, it appears that was a preparatory trip you
25 made. So having heard that now, do you still contend that you arrived
1 with your group in April 1992?
2 A. I would like the Chamber and the Prosecutor to understand my
3 testimony. I can't remember all the details, all the dates. I was
4 involved in a lot of activities, and I can't remember whether I went there
5 at the beginning of the month or at the end of the month. You must
6 understand that it's been 13 years since I had this conversation. It's
7 very difficult to remember whether this took place at the beginning or at
8 the end of the month, and this is something I've already told the
9 Prosecutor. It's something you have to understand.
10 Q. Thank you, sir. I'm -- I do understand, and I'm hoping that the
11 documents and -- and intercepts will help us firm up dates where we can.
12 In paragraph 46, you talk about when you did arrive with your --
13 your group of men from the federal SUP, and you met with Stanisic and
14 Mandic at Vrace. You said you asked Stanisic what your task would be.
15 What did Mico Stanisic tell you your tasks were going to be?
16 A. First of all, to organise the tasks of the unit for special
17 purposes. This was the special unit that had separated from the former
18 joint republican police. It was to be brought up to strength with new men
19 and we were to create an efficient unit for special purposes. That
20 concerned the organisation of the work in the Republika Srpska ministry.
21 Q. And --
22 MS. LOUKAS: Before we proceed any further, just as a marker,
23 Your Honours, that question at the end of page 52, I would ask that
24 Mr. Hannis attempt to refrain from comment. "Thank you. I do understand
25 and I'm hoping," what have you, Your Honour.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Hannis, to be quite honest, it came into
2 my mind to say something of this kind to you when you said that you
3 understood; whereas the witness, I think, asked the Chamber for
5 MR. HANNIS: I apologise, Your Honour. I note the marker.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
7 MR. HANNIS: Thank you.
8 Q. Mr. Davidovic, now I want to play another intercept for you.
9 This is -- this is a short one. This is from the 17th of May, 1992.
10 You've heard it before and remark upon it in your intercepts
11 authentication document.
12 MR. HANNIS: Could that be given a number, please.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.
14 THE REGISTRAR: This will be Exhibit number P768.
15 MR. HANNIS: And when we're ready, we'll begin that.
16 [Intercept played]
17 THE INTERPRETER: [Voiceover] Hi. Ceca is here. Good evening.
18 Good evening.
19 Is Davidovic there.
20 One moment please.
21 Thank you.
25 Ceca is here. Good evening.
1 Good evening. How are you?
2 Good. And you?
3 Very well. Thank you.
4 Here you are, Mile.
5 Thank you.
8 How are you, sir?
9 Good. And you?
10 What are you doing?
11 Here I am standing with these people. We are talking a little.
12 I see. Are there any problems?
13 No problems at all.
14 Say hello to the guys.
15 I will. Thank you. If you have time tomorrow, maybe you can pay
16 us a visit.
17 I was just thinking about that.
18 These men went up to Pale. Today we visited the area where we
19 have a separation line, where we will be engaged, so the men can get
20 acquainted, to feel it.
21 Excellent. It would be best for us to meet tomorrow in this --
23 To get to know each other better.
24 Excellent. Thank you.
25 Do you need anything?
1 No. We've got everything. I didn't want to come to bother you,
2 as you are very busy. When I need something, I will contact you through
3 Cedo or maybe I'll do it through you. If I get a chance.
4 Thank you.
5 Thank you.
6 MR. HANNIS:
7 Q. Mr. Davidovic, do you recognise the speakers in that
8 conversation? If so, tell us who they were.
9 A. Myself and Mico Stanisic, the Minister of Internal Affairs.
10 Q. And what -- what had happened at that time? Can you tell us if
11 this was before or after -- or at the time that you came to Republika
12 Srpska with your group of men from the federal SUP.
13 A. This was when I had arrived in Pale with that group of people.
14 During that period of time, I found accommodation. I went to the
15 secondary school building of the Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina in Vrace.
16 We had accommodation in the school building, in the lower part of the
17 building, beneath the classrooms where there were office premises, offices
18 for the teachers.
19 Q. In your statement at paragraph 51, you mentioned while you were
20 at Vrace you saw a unit of Red Berets arrive. You mentioned a person
21 known as "Carli." Where were these Red Berets from?
22 A. I then met those people. I met someone who said his name was
23 Carli. He was the commander of the Red Berets. They had come from
24 Serbian. They'd been sent there by the Republican Ministry of the
25 Interior and all the equipment that they had was new, high-quality
1 equipment. They had personal weapons, infantry weapons, and they had
2 official identity cards from the Serbian MUP. The appearance of these
3 individuals and the way they acted was quite interesting. Mostly they had
4 tattoos, they had a particular way of speaking, and this enabled one to
5 identify them as individuals who had the past -- a criminal past. Later I
6 had the opportunity of getting to know some of these people. I could
7 answer some questions if you have any questions you would like to put to
8 me about this.
9 Q. I do have a couple more questions. What -- what kind of unit was
10 this? Is this a military unit, a police unit?
11 A. They were a police unit. They had police uniforms, camouflage
12 uniforms, a police insignia, and they introduced themselves as special
13 forces from the Serbian MUP, as special police forces.
14 Q. Were they -- well, at that time in Yugoslavia, how did one get to
15 be a police officer? Did you have to go to any special kind of school or
17 A. Before someone became a policeman, before the war broke out, in
18 order to become a policeman it was necessary to have finished secondary
19 school, to have served in the army, and to be fit to work in the police
20 force. That meant that you had no criminal record and that you had no
21 tendencies that would place you in the category of individuals who were
22 prone to certain deviations. And what I have in mind is criminal
23 activity. They -- once they're accepted, they're sent to a course, to
24 attend a course, which lasts for at least six months. After the course
25 has been completed, they're trained in some of the republics, sent to
1 certain bodies where they're trainees for about a year. They're trained
2 by a senior policeman, and after one year, these individuals are then
3 appointed to police posts. They can start operating independently as
4 policemen. That is how one proceeded.
5 But when the war broke out, men would join the police overnight.
6 You just put a uniform on and you'd become a policeman overnight. But in
7 these units that were sent from Serbia in particular, well, it wasn't that
8 easy to assemble the men who would be sent to the front line and who would
9 carry weapons. There was a particular procedure that had to be followed.
10 I assume that people with criminal backgrounds were recruited. I know
11 that they would release people from penal and correctional facilities so
12 they could go to the front and they were trained for three or five days
13 and would then become members of a police unit which would be sent to the
14 front or to provide assistance in Republika Srpska.
15 And there is something that is quite interesting that I would
16 like to point out. I have to admit that when these units appeared, I
17 realised that the police force as such could no longer function. It no
18 longer existed. I saw people in -- wearing uniforms like the uniform I
19 wore and had the insignia that I had, but in order to have the uniform I
20 had and wear the insignia I had, well, it's impossible for someone to get
21 a uniform overnight. I'm just making a comparison with those people who
22 were wearing those uniforms. And later in Bijeljina and elsewhere, I saw
23 individuals in police uniforms, high-ranking individuals, et cetera. And
24 this demonstrates the kind -- what kind of people came to work in the MUP
25 and in the police force.
1 Q. [Microphone not activated] Let me ask you a question about that.
2 You said earlier that the problem was the federal SUP could not be seen to
3 be taking sides with the RS MUP. Was there any problem with the Republic
4 of Serbia MUP being seen to be taking sides with the RS MUP or the
5 Republika Srpska, period?
6 A. Well, I must admit that I didn't notice that that the republican
7 Serbian MUP was involved. They didn't conceal their engagement, in fact.
8 They didn't conceal the engagement of their leaders. I knew them from
9 Belgrade. I had regular contact with them. I didn't notice that they
10 kept this secret. When -- in fact, when they did arrive, they would say
11 that they were from the Serbian MUP. No one tried to conceal this.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hannis, for the record, on page 58, line 12, it
13 reads "RS MUP," and that's what you said. But there you had in mind
14 Republic of Serbia MUP; whereas, later you are again referring to RS MUP
15 but then you had something different in mind, and you added to that
16 Republika Srpska. Could you please clarify that, because otherwise it
17 might be quite confusing.
18 MR. HANNIS: Okay, Your Honour. I -- what I meant when I asked
19 that question was he had earlier said --
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
21 MR. HANNIS: -- And it's in, I think, paragraph --
22 MS. LOUKAS: Just in relation to this, I think it's -- if there
23 is going to be a clarification, in light of the fact that the witness has
24 answered that question, confusing as it may be, it's not appropriate, I
25 think, for the -- for the witness to hear what Mr. Hannis --
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
2 MS. LOUKAS: -- was attempting to do.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Well, what he was attempting to do is -- what I
4 would like to verify - and I think there's no problem with the witness
5 hearing that; it is even an advantage - to ask Mr. Hannis exactly what he
6 meant when he for the first time said "RS MUP" and then what he meant when
7 he said for the second time "RS MUP." No further clarification is needed.
8 Just to see whether the witness answered the question as it was intended
9 to be put to him by Mr. Hannis.
10 MS. LOUKAS: Well, indeed, Your Honour. I take that point. But
11 nevertheless I think Mr. Hannis should be cautioned --
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
13 MS. LOUKAS: -- not to, in answering Your Honour's question, give
14 the witness any guidance as to how the question might be -- how Mr. Hannis
15 is hoping that the question might be answered.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Hannis, without giving any further
17 clarifications as to your intention, could you please tell us what you
18 intended to ask the witness and then we'll then verify whether that's how
19 the witness understood it.
20 MR. HANNIS: I'll try to do that, Your Honour. I -- I thought I
21 understood him, but I think the understanding was between me and
22 Your Honour.
23 Q. In paragraph 44 of your statement, Mr. Davidovic - and we talked
24 about this earlier, in terms of you and a unit from the federal SUP going
25 to the Republika Srpska to help in the fight - you said "The problem was
1 the federal SUP could not be seen to be taking sides with the RS MUP,"
2 meaning the federal police agency couldn't go into one of the republics to
3 help one side against another; is that correct?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Then in -- when you were at Vrace, you saw this unit of Red
6 Berets who had identity cards from the Republic of Serbia MUP. Now
7 they're in the Republika Srpska helping Republika Srpska. Was there a
8 problem with that, with one republic MUP helping another republic MUP?
9 A. I don't think that was a problem. They did not conceal their
10 identity at all.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. The matter has been sufficiently clarified.
12 Please proceed, Mr. Hannis.
13 MR. HANNIS: Thank you, Your Honour.
14 Q. You mentioned in your statement that there was a young woman who
15 was some sort of coordinator for this group of Red Berets and that she
16 introduced herself as being from the Serbian DB. Can you tell the Judges
17 what the Serbian DB was and what relationship it had with the Republic of
18 Serbia MUP.
19 A. Yes. There was a woman there who said she was a coordinator.
20 She was a coordinator. She coordinated between that unit and the State
21 Security Service. And on one occasion I even asked her whether she was
22 from the Serbian MUP and she said, "Yes, I am from the SDB." That means
23 the State Security Service. That's the secret police. And Jovica
24 Stanisic was in charge of it. And she represented that service and worked
25 as a coordinator. She coordinated matters between the Serbian MUP and the
1 Republika Srpska MUP.
2 Q. Thank you. Now, in paragraph 53 of your statement, you indicated
3 that you informed your boss, Mr. Gracanin, about chaos and a general
4 disorder and that she gave you some instructions to locate General Mladic.
5 At this time I'd like to play another intercepted conversation,
6 Your Honour, if I may. If we could give it a number.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.
8 MR. HANNIS: This is from the 19th of May.
9 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit P769.
10 [Trial Chamber confers]
11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hannis, I am informed that the French booth has
12 not received the text of this intercept.
13 MR. HANNIS: [Microphone not activated]
14 JUDGE ORIE: Could you please --
15 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
16 MR. HANNIS: It is ERN 0212-9514 through 9519. It's the ET
17 number of the ERN. I think on the English it says "Conversation led on
18 00.05.1992." It may have been misled by my mentioning the 19th of May.
19 Between Petar Gracanin and Mico Stanisic. Can we confirm whether they
20 have it or not? If not, we'll try and find another copy to give to them.
21 THE INTERPRETER: The English booth do have a copy.
22 JUDGE ORIE: I do understand that the French interpreters have --
23 have retrieved the text.
24 MR. HANNIS: Thank you. We'll try and play that now, then.
25 Your Honour, it appears we're having some technical difficulties.
1 What I would like to do then is just hand the witness the transcript and
2 ask him about a particular reference.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
4 MR. HANNIS: I'm sorry --
5 JUDGE ORIE: I see that the last attempt to have it played was
6 not successful.
7 Please proceed as you intend.
8 MR. HANNIS: Thank you.
9 Q. Mr. -- for the Court and counsel I'm going to the English
10 version, page 4, coming up from the bottom, where there is a mention
11 of "Davidovic" by Mr. Gracanin. And I'm not sure where that is in the
12 B/C/S transcript, Mr. Davidovic, but I think it's the first place where
13 your name appears. It's about a page and a half from the end, if you're
14 working from the back to the front.
15 A. Yes. Yes.
16 Q. Now, you --
17 JUDGE ORIE: It is on the semi-last page, second box from the
18 top, last three digits, ERN 518, where the question mark appears and -- is
19 that correct, Mr.--
20 MR. HANNIS: Yes --
21 JUDGE ORIE: Is it the first time where the name appears?
22 MR. HANNIS: That is correct, Your Honour.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Please proceed.
24 MR. HANNIS:
25 Q. Do you see that, Mr. Davidovic?
1 A. Yes, I can that.
2 Q. And the next comment Mr. Gracanin says is "let him wait for you
3 there and let him just say that I sent him." Do you know what he's
4 talking about there?
5 A. Yes. Before I went to Sarajevo, I was told that whatever I
6 needed, as far as additional equipment, weapons, and ammunition were
7 concerned, could be obtained by contacting General Ratko Mladic. This was
8 his responsibility. They had already spoken to him about this matter, and
9 General Petar Gracanin had told him that we would be arriving in Sarajevo
10 and that if we needed anything, we should contact him in order to receive
11 weapons and ammunition from him in good time.
12 Q. And, sir, if you could go to the next reference to your name,
13 down below that, where Mr. Gracanin mentions your name again. And if you
14 would read that one and the next two -- or the next three boxes following.
15 A. Can I read it out now?
16 Q. Yes, please.
17 A. "Okay ..." That's what Stanisic said, Mico Stanisic.
18 Petar Gracanin replies: "Okay. We'll by in touch. Let
19 Davidovic go to see Mladic and report to him personally."
20 Stanisic says, "Agreed."
21 Gracanin then says, "Let him tell him that I spoke to him."
22 "Did you speak to Mladic?"
24 Q. Thank you. That's all I have to ask you about that one.
25 JUDGE ORIE: One question for you, Mr. Hannis, the -- the
1 conversation is dated 00.05.1992. Is that for an unknown date in the
2 month of May 1992?
3 MR. HANNIS: Yes, Your Honour.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, that's understood. Please proceed.
5 MR. HANNIS: I should indicate to Your Honour it that has the
6 date the 19th of May in his authentication sheet which was done at that
7 time based on, I think, his conversations in connection with another
8 conversation on the 19th.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you for that clarification.
10 Please proceed.
11 MR. HANNIS: Thank you.
12 Q. Now, Mr. Davidovic, did you go find General Mladic and have a
13 conversation with him?
14 A. Yes. I found him and I told him who I was. I told him where I
15 had come from. He said he had spoken to Petar Gracanin and he said that
16 if I needed anything, I should contact him and he would help me. The
17 relationship was very correct.
18 Q. Now, in your statement at paragraph 54, you talk about going to
19 find him. Where did you find him?
20 A. I found him in the Lukavica barracks, which is where the regular
21 army used to be based in Sarajevo, and that's where the command of that
22 unit had previously been located.
23 Q. And when you found him there and had a conversation with him, was
24 there anybody else present during your conversation with Mr. -- with
25 General Mladic?
1 A. Yes. We started a conversation and then Mr. Karadzic joined in.
2 He entered the premises, greeted, greeted Mladic, and he joined in the
3 conversation that General Mladic and I were having.
4 Q. Okay. Was it just the three of you?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Had you ever met either one of them before this occasion?
7 A. I never spoke to them personally, but I had had prior contact
8 with them. I knew Karadzic when he -- from the time he came to Belgrade,
9 but I never had direct contact with him. That was the first time that the
10 three of us had direct contact, the first time I had direct contact with
11 General Mladic and the first time I had direct contact with Mr. Karadzic.
12 Q. From your statement, it appears this meeting occurred after you
13 had complained to Gracanin about what you had seen at Vrace. Did you tell
14 Mladic and Karadzic anything about that?
15 A. Yes.
16 MS. LOUKAS: Now, Your Honours, just before --
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
18 MS. LOUKAS: -- the witness continues to answer that question,
19 there are matters that have been excised from the statement specifically
20 because they're not appropriate to 89(F). In those circumstances, the
21 evidence should be led viva voce and a question: Did you tell Mladic and
22 Karadzic anything about that is not appropriate in the circumstances,
23 Your Honour. It should be: What was the conversation? Simple, open
24 question. Not leading, Your Honour. And I object to questions on those
25 specific areas that are not subject to 89(F) being the subject of leading
2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hannis, where you said it appears that this
3 meeting occurred after you had complained about something, then it's still
4 not clear to the Chamber, of course, what were complaints about. The most
5 appropriate would have been to ask the witness for the subject of the
7 MR. HANNIS: I understand, Your Honour.
8 Q. Mr. Davidovic, can you tell us what you said to General Mladic
9 and Mr. Karadzic.
10 A. I told General Mladic about certain things. I had started to
11 speak to him when Mr. Karadzic entered the premises. I said that I had
12 noticed that there was a lot of crime, looting, that flats were being
13 broken into. There were all sorts of things taking place, and most of all
14 looting. I said that the property had to be protected. People were
15 breaking into flats and taking items out of these flats in Sarajevo, et
16 cetera, and I thought that Mr. Ratko Mladic should be informed of the
17 fact. He said that it was necessary to establish some kind of a central
18 warehouse where this sort of property would be taken to. There was all
19 sorts of stuff, televisions, furniture, et cetera, and this should then be
20 distributed to wounded soldiers. And Mr. Karadzic also said that some
21 sort of solution would be found to protect this property in some way so
22 that it could be put to good use, so that the troops and the people could
23 make good use of this property. This was the subject of the discussion.
24 Q. At what point in time in your conversation with General Mladic
25 did Mr. Karadzic come into the room?
1 A. As I said, when I started speaking to Ratko Mladic, Karadzic
2 entered the room and he joined in the conversation. He was informed of
3 the problem I was talking about and we continued to discuss this subject,
4 how to prevent the looting of property. Karadzic and Mladic confirmed the
5 fact that such things were happening and that this was quite noticeable.
6 Q. Did -- did you make any suggestion about what should be done
7 about the problem?
8 A. Well, I said that it had to be prevented. I must admit that we
9 weren't really involved in protecting the front lines but the policemen I
10 saw there were mostly involved in looting and breaking into flats and
11 stealing things. And when I saw the demarcation line, I could see people
12 taking goods -- unloading goods from some kind of a lorry. It was a very
13 difficult situation. You could see people who were -- who were crying,
14 who were distressed, and armed individuals were mostly involved in such
15 acts. At least, that's what I noticed. There were members of the police
16 force in police uniforms involved in such acts.
17 Q. How did -- how did your discussion end? Was there any agreement
18 reached about what to do about the problem?
19 A. Well, the conversation ended by Mr. Karadzic saying that there
20 were quite a few problems there and that something had to be done, and he
21 said that he would talk to the head of government, Djeric and that a
22 solution had to be found which would be satisfactory in terms of the needs
23 of both the armed forces and the people. And General Ratko Mladic said
24 that it had to be stopped and that any stuff that was found and found to
25 have been stolen would have to be placed into some kind of central
1 warehouse and that it was one in a range of problems. And then they
2 continued to talk and I left.
3 JUDGE ORIE: May I ask one question: Mr. Davidovic, what in your
4 view as a policeman would be a proper response to looting?
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, there's no proper response.
6 There's only one response: To stop looting and to implement the necessary
7 measures. That's the only thing you can do, put a stop to it.
8 JUDGE ORIE: What do you understand to be the -- the measures to
9 be taken? As you said, "necessary measures."
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] What I mean is that the police
11 officers should arrest those people and start proceedings and take them in
12 and keep them in custody and make it impossible for them to continue to
13 engage in looting. This is something that can't be tolerated.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Was that discussed, whether or not those who were
15 found to be looting would be arrested or not?
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
17 JUDGE ORIE: What was the content of the discussion in that
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, actually not about them being
20 arrested. It was mentioned that certain checkpoints should be set up in
21 order to make it impossible to access that area where war was going on and
22 that any such looted goods would be impounded at those checkpoints.
23 Nobody mentioned arresting those individuals. It was only about the goods
24 because this was a generally accepted attitude, as it were, and
25 Mr. Karadzic mentioned it in the course of that conversation. He
1 said, "We should not allow for any sort of conflict to arise between
2 Serbs -- amongst Serbs." It was very important for Serbs not to fight one
3 another, as had been the case in some other conflicts in our part of the
4 world, such as during the Second World War. So that's what he said. But
5 that checkpoints should be set up in order for the looted goods to be
6 impounded, yes.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
8 Please proceed.
9 MR. HANNIS: Thank you.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Judge Hanoteau has a question.
11 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] I would just like to ask an
12 additional question now. Who could have taken it upon themselves
13 considering the balance of power? The existing balance of power at the
14 time, who could have take it upon themselves to make those arrests? What
15 service -- what force would have been able to put a stop to such activity?
16 Looting, I mean.
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It was -- well, the only service
18 would have been the police force. They had a sufficient staff and
19 equipment and they were the only ones who were actually professionally
20 prepared to do that. They were the only ones who could have done it.
21 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] And with regard to these people
22 engaging in such acts, did the regular police force, if I may say so, did
23 they have sufficient power to intervene? What I mean is, for example, you
24 referred to a unit of Red Berets of about 50 men, and you said that that
25 unit was made up of criminals for the most part. Would the police still
1 have had the possibility and the ability to react in the face of such an
2 armed group?
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know whether I've made
4 myself quite clear, but I'm trying to make it clear now. Well, all this
5 looting was mostly perpetrated by police officers. They were wearing
6 uniforms. And during -- I mean, these were people who became police
7 officers overnight and there was no other unit, no other force that could
8 have countered that because they had been incorporated within the regular
9 police force. But considering the command structure, the police force
10 still could have stopped this but no effort was made to put a stop to
11 this. Quite the contrary. They actually encouraged police officers to
12 engage in looting and stealing. And I'll tell you why: On a number of
13 occasions, I heard superiors within the same ministry say to police
14 officers, "We won't interfere with you taking any stuff for your own needs
15 but you must do what we tell you to do." So this conflict, as it were --
16 well, basically they were being asked to take sides and to fight on the
17 side of that particular authority and policy. And for that reason, it
18 might well have happened that -- I mean, that's why it happened that this
19 group behaved as it did, the group that came from Belgrade. I myself
20 witnessed something like that.
21 On one evening, there was this group around the place called
22 Carli and they were bringing in some technical equipment and they had some
23 kind of warehouse where they stored it. And I think they had found
24 somewhere a robe belonging to a Catholic priest. And this person called
25 Carli put it on and walked around dressed like that. And he was mocking
1 it. And that behaviour was quite beyond the pale, if you think in terms
2 of normal human relations.
3 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] Thank you, sir.
4 MR. HANNIS: Thank you.
5 Q. Mr. Davidovic, I want to go now to paragraph 56 of your
6 statement. Did you have later on occasion to be involved in discussions
7 about evacuating the JNA from barracks in which they were located in
8 Sarajevo at this time, in -- in May of 1992?
9 A. Could you repeat the question, please. I haven't quite
11 Q. I'm sorry. In your statement at paragraph 56, you talk about
12 being involved in discussions about evacuating the JNA from barracks in
13 Sarajevo and you mention going to Lukavica with Milenko Karisik and
14 meeting with Colonel Stupar. First of all, can you tell me, who was
15 Milenko Karisik? What agency was he a part of?
16 A. This requires a somewhat lengthy answer, because you've asked
17 quite a few questions here. Let me tell you first: I participated in
18 talks which were held between I, myself, and Milenko Karisik, who was a
19 commander of a special unit within the MUP of the republic, and at a later
20 stage, Mr. Stupar -- I think it was -- he was a lieutenant or a lieutenant
21 colonel from the JNA. And he came to Sarajevo and to Pale and he was at
22 the school in Vrace, where the unit was being prepared for taking the
23 Marsal Tito Barracks in Sarajevo and for the soldiers, officers, and their
24 families who were there to be taken out of the barracks and taken to the
25 Republika Srpska and Serbia. And that was the first time that I met
1 Mr. Stupar and Karisik was there throughout, since he was the commander.
2 He had been appointed commander of that special unit because their own
3 commander, Mr. Rapija [phoen], who was the commander up until then, well,
4 he had been wounded in the operation that was aimed at taking the school
5 at Vrace and so he had to be hospitalised. And Karisik was then appointed
7 Q. And you mentioned this particular that was discussed. Why --
8 what was happening at that time? Why was it necessary to try and have a
9 plan to evacuate the JNA from the barracks, from the Marsal Tito Barracks?
10 A. And we're talking about the beginning of the war here. Within
11 this barracks, Marsal Tito Barracks, the barracks were surrounded by
12 either the Patriotic League or the newly set up Armed Forces of the
13 Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina. I can't tell you with any degree of
14 certainty. But at any rate, the barracks was in Sarajevo in the part
15 controlled by either the Patriotic League or the armed forces and they
16 surrounded it and they did not allow for any contact with the outside
17 world. They made it impossible for people to go in and out. There was
18 shooting every day and their electricity and water supplies had been cut
20 Since there was a large group of soldiers within those barracks,
21 the aim was for the barracks to be taken and for both the army personnel
22 and the civilians to be enabled to leave.
23 Q. Was that plan carried out, the plan to take the barracks?
24 A. No.
25 Q. Why not, if you know?
1 A. Of course. The plan had been devised, and I think it had been
2 completed -- I mean, the plan. The plan was for the school at Vrace to go
3 and cross Miljacka, the river, to go through the barracks and go to Han
5 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, may I stop you. The question was why the
6 plan was not carried out. In your response you now describe what the plan
7 was. Could you please answer the question.
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The plan was never carried out
9 because General -- Major General Boskovic at the time came to Sarajevo
10 bearing a decision from the Presidency of the former Yugoslavia, as he
11 said, with -- with explicit orders that armed conflict should be avoided
12 and that we should not try and take the barracks but that he would engage
13 on talks and on the basis of the outcome of those talks those people could
14 then be moved out and for the armed attack to be avoided. And that was
15 the reason why the plan was never implemented.
16 MR. HANNIS: [Microphone not activated]
17 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
18 MR. HANNIS:
19 Q. After this change of plans when General Boskovic came, did you
20 later have a conversation with Mico Stanisic?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. And what was you -- what were you asked or tasked to do now in
23 the Republika Srpska with your group of men that had come from the federal
25 A. My task upon arriving at the republic SUP was to train a special
1 police unit and to assist in organising and training of the MUP officers
2 within the Republika Srpska.
3 Q. Did you do that?
4 A. Yes. That was my main task.
5 Q. And how long did it take you to do that, approximately?
6 A. As soon as we got there, we started to look at the situation and
7 try and see how many people from the previous special units had remained
8 within the Republika Srpska. I think it was about a dozen people there.
9 And then we started planning for that unit to include about 100 people.
10 The MUP gave us a list of either volunteers, people who volunteered to
11 join this special unit. And they, of course, had to be either athletes or
12 have some kind of sports background or some martial arts or whatever and
13 that they would then be trained and taught how to use weapons and then
14 they would be trained as members of the special unit. And we got more
15 than 100 volunteers who came forward and became members of that unit.
16 The training took place in the following way: One of them and
17 one of us --
18 JUDGE ORIE: Witness --
19 MR. HANNIS: I think you've gone on to another topic.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, again, may I stop you. The question to you
21 was: When you said that your task was to train a special police unit and
22 to assist in organising and training of the MUP officers, you were asked
23 "How long did it take you to do that, approximately?" So how much time?
24 And you now in full detail are explaining to us what it all included. If
25 Mr. Hannis would like to more -- to know more details about what the
1 training exactly was about, he'll ask you. What he did ask you at this
2 moment was how much time that took. And may I ask you to focus very much
3 on the question while answering it.
4 Please proceed.
5 MR. HANNIS: Thank you.
6 Q. Do you remember how long -- how long you spent approximately in
7 this training process? Was it days or weeks or months?
8 A. Approximately three weeks. Three weeks tops. We would have
9 needed much longer, but that's what we had available. And after those
10 three weeks, we were asked to do other things, and so that's where we had
11 a problem.
12 Q. And what was the next thing that you were asked to do?
13 A. They asked us to go to the front line and participate in this
14 conflict and to hold the front line at -- at the Jelenska
15 Globlje [phoen].
16 THE INTERPRETER: Sorry, at the Jewish cemetery.
17 MR. HANNIS:
18 Q. Okay. And how long were you and your men at the Jewish cemetery,
20 A. Two to three days. We had already left on the third day.
21 Q. Did you talk to your boss, Petar Gracanin, about that?
22 A. Yes. I gave him all the details and I asked what to do next. I
23 said that I was not an expert on those matters, the front line and all
24 that, and that I had originally been sent down there to do other things.
25 And then he initially agreed. He said he would get in touch with Mico
1 Stanisic, and then we talked to him as well and then I was moved somewhere
3 Q. After this conversation with Gracanin, did you have a personal
4 conversation with Mico Stanisic about what you should do next, other than
5 hold the front line at the Jewish cemetery?
6 A. Yes. I asked Mico to give me some police tasks. But obviously
7 at that point in time they did not need a policeman. They needed
8 something else, because they had enough people to carry out those police
9 duties. But originally those people were engaged doing other things.
10 They were driving golf carts to Belgrade [as interpreted] and they wanted
11 to send us to hold the front line.
12 Q. What was your next task in the general vicinity?
13 A. There was no other task, and we were asked to go to Jahorina,
14 where there was the seat of the government and the Presidency, and we were
15 asked to provide security there for the Presidency. And we went to
16 Jahorina, and I think we staid at a hotel called Bistrica.
17 Q. And you mentioned that the government and the Presidency were
18 located there at that time? What was -- can you describe for the Court
19 what the atmosphere was like or what the situation was.
20 A. I can briefly. That hotel and another hotel - I can't remember
21 what it's called; it was at a slightly higher altitude - that's where the
22 seat of government was situated, and there were always quite a few people
23 there, women, and there was a restaurant there. And people used to eat
24 and drink a great deal. And there were lots of people. And there was a
25 state of chaos, which in my view properly depicted the overall situation
1 characterising Bosnia and Herzegovina, not just the Republika Srpska.
2 There was a lot of confusion and people were sitting around talking and --
3 even the president of -- the head of government at that time, Mr. Djeric,
4 that I spoke to -- I mean, I said, "Well, what's going on here?
5 Everything's falling to piece and there are all these comings and goings
6 and we don't know what's going on." And he said, "Yes, it is quite clear
7 to me, yeah, that something will have to be done."
8 Q. Did you -- did you report this situation to Mr. Gracanin?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. In your statement, you say that you kept copies of these reports
11 but you don't have them any longer. Why is that?
12 A. I did write a report and sent it to the minister. It was
13 dispatched to the minister. And I asked for instructions on what to do
14 next. And I gave a detailed account of what was going on and what my view
15 was. That document went to the federal minister and I had a copy, but
16 that copy afterwards was taken away from me and I never managed to find it
18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hannis, it's -- it's close to 12.30. If we
19 would have a break for 20 minutes, we would have one hour remaining.
20 Looking, for example, at your last question, Mr. Hannis, there's a clear
21 answer to that question in the statement, which is part of the 89(F), so
22 looking at the clock, looking at where you approximately are, I wonder
23 whether such questions are necessary not because the information is not
24 perhaps assisting the Prosecution's case but since it's clearly in the --
25 in the statement.
1 MR. HANNIS: You're right, Your Honour. I was looking at the
2 paragraph above, which was part of the redaction. And I -- I missed that
3 this is not in the redacted portion.
4 JUDGE ORIE: No. This is --
5 MR. HANNIS: This is in the statement and it's not something I
6 need to ask him about here.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Could you please keep that in mind because
8 from what I understood was your time assessment, if I look at the clock
9 and where we are in the statement, Ms. Loukas might not be too unhappy
10 that you would need some extra time, but the Chamber would like to have
11 the evidence to be presented as efficiently as possible.
12 We'll adjourn until quarter to 1.00.
13 MR. HANNIS: Thank you.
14 --- Recess taken at 12.26 p.m.
15 --- On resuming at 12.52 p.m.
16 MR. HANNIS: Thank you.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hannis, please proceed.
18 MR. HANNIS:
19 Q. Mr. Davidovic, before we broke, you were talking about your time
20 at Mount Jahorina and activities you observed there. What kind of
21 activities was it that you felt it was necessary to file reports about?
22 You described it was chaotic and that there were women there, but that
23 doesn't seem to be unusual for a wartime situation.
24 A. I don't know whether I've been clear. "Chaotic" means it was in
25 total disarray. I could see the Prime Minister there, representatives
1 from the government, people sitting in the cafe. Some unknown people were
2 arriving there. Certain things were going on. And as far as I could see,
3 it didn't seem as if everything was functioning properly. I was referring
4 to women, wives, who were present in a chaotic situation and life was not
5 really going on as usual in the cafes and restaurants.
6 Q. When you say certain things were going on, are they things that
7 you believed to be criminal activity?
8 MS. LOUKAS: Your Honour, I object to the phraseology of that
9 question now.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Loukas -- Witness Davidovic, you said that "life
11 was not really going on as usual in the cafes and restaurants," which is a
12 rather vague expression. What exactly did you observe that needed
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, I said that I noticed that
15 the state bodies and the state as such were not functioning. Why did I
16 say that? Because the bodies, the organs that were supposed to be
17 functioning properly from the police and the state bodies, including the
18 government bodies, et cetera, well, they weren't functioning in the way
19 they should have been functioning. Each department should have functioned
20 in its own manner. The police was in a state of total chaos. Citizens
21 would appear, ask for certain certificates, for authorisation, et cetera,
22 et cetera. And as a result no one knew where people were residing. It
23 was quite difficult to define the situation. Everything was taking place
24 in the street, in restaurants, in cafes. Armed groups of people, armed
25 individuals, would appear. Certain formations would appear. No one knew
1 who they were or why they had come.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. When you said that the police was not
3 functioning and was in a total -- a state of total chaos, what kind of
4 police functions were not performed or fulfilled?
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, for example, buildings were
6 not protected. Institutions were not protected. Individuals who were
7 there were not protected by the police. None of these duties were
8 performed. One knows how one is to enter buildings, how individuals are
9 to be received, and one knows what sort of duties the police should
10 usually perform, regardless of whether the police force was established
11 before the war or during wartime.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Hannis -- Judge Hanoteau has a
14 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] Yes. You said that copies of
15 this report disappeared when your flat was searched in Belgrade in 1995,
16 and you said that this search had been organised by the MUP, by the
17 Serbian MUP. I have a number of questions with regard to this subject.
18 How did you know that the search had been organised by the Serbian MUP?
19 What went missing from your house? And is it only the reports that were
20 taken, that disappeared? If you could please answer that question, sir.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] When they entered the flat, they
22 introduced themselves as MUP officials. They showed their identity cards
23 and the search warrant that they had. They didn't provide this to -- to
24 me. But when they entered the flat, they tried to find out where my
25 documents were, and that's what the search was interested in. After they
1 had finished the search, they issued a certificate which showed that they
2 had taken items that were of interest to the Davidovic case in Bosnia and
4 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] So there were other documents
5 apart from the copies of the report that were taken away by these
6 individuals who carried out the search.
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As far as other documents are
8 concerned, they took my two official pistols and they took the documents
9 from Bosnia. Nothing else.
10 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] Thank you, sir.
11 MR. HANNIS: Thank you.
12 Q. Mr. Davidovic, in paragraph 62 of your statement, you talked
13 about when you left after this exercise, and upon returning you say you
14 were instructed to leave behind your weapons and equipment, including the
15 five pinzgauers. Who instructed you to leave that equipment behind with
16 the RS MUP?
17 A. The federal secretary, Petar Gracanin, instructed me to do this.
18 He did this personally.
19 Q. Well, I want to move on to after your return -- well, before you
20 had left, you say in your statement that you had made a trip to Bijeljina
21 before this first visit to the Republika Srpska after the war started.
22 And in paragraph 65, you talk about being at the SUP building in Bijeljina
23 with Cedo Kljajic. You describe him selecting out vehicles and writing
24 down chassis numbers. Do you recall that incident? These were the seized
1 A. Yes. Kljajic and I left Sarajevo, Pale. We went down there with
2 the unit. And I drove to Bijeljina. The reason was to see what
3 accommodation was available since in Bijeljina a few years prior to the
4 war a new SUP building had been built which was quite functional. It had
5 been built for the organs of the internal affairs and the Republika Srpska
6 Ministry of the Interior was to move -- or be transferred to Bijeljina.
7 That's why I went there. And when I arrived there, I then saw that --
8 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, I have to stop you again. The question was
9 specifically about selection of vehicles and writing down chassis numbers,
10 and the question was whether these were seized vehicles. In your answer,
11 you deal with a lot of other matters. Could I ask you: Were these seized
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, these vehicles had been seized
14 from individuals who had committed offences of some kind and they were on
15 the grounds of the SUP and they took down the chassis number, the number
16 of the engine, so that such numbers would be included in the documents.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
18 MR. HANNIS: Thank you, Your Honour.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Please proceed, Mr. Hannis.
20 MR. HANNIS:
21 Q. In that paragraph 65, you indicate that Mr. Kljajic was
22 falsifying vehicle registrations on blank registration forms. Did you ask
23 him about why he was doing that? And if so, what did he say?
24 A. Yes, that's correct. I entered the office and I saw Kljajic
25 there. He was typing out details into new driving licence form. I asked
1 him what he was doing and I asked him why he was typing out driving
2 licences, because he was a high-ranking official. And he said that Mico
3 Stanisic had authorised him to do that. They had to live in a normal way.
4 They had to have something to live off. And this is probably why he was
5 typing this out, in order to sell these items and obtain resources in this
6 way. And this was subsequently confirmed.
7 Q. In paragraph 64 through 66, you talk about visiting the SUP in
8 Bijeljina and finding that Arkan's men had taken over. Did you -- did you
9 report this fact to anyone?
10 A. Yes. And there's a detailed report about that. When I arrived
11 there, I saw a group of individuals, some of whom I knew from before.
12 There was a colonel there in Arkan's army. He later became a general. I
13 saw Sasa there, a special police commander in that body, and there were
14 some other individuals among whom I recognised Legija.
15 Q. We do have the details about that in your statement, and that is
16 in evidence and the Judges can -- can read that, so I will try and focus
17 my questions on things that are not in the portion of the redacted
18 statement we gave them.
19 Who did you report to about that fact, that the -- Arkan's men
20 had taken over the SUP in Bijeljina?
21 A. I informed my minister and I informed Mico Stanisic, as the
22 Minister of the Internal Affairs of Republika Srpska, and he was aware of
23 the fact. He knew that they were there and that they were in power. Cedo
24 Kljajic was the assistant, was someone I couldn't convince of this.
25 Q. And did you get any response to your report about the presence of
1 Arkan's men in the Bijeljina SUP from either Mico Stanisic or from your
2 boss, Mr. Gracanin?
3 A. No, I didn't. Mico Stanisic commented. That's all. He said, "I
4 know there's nothing else we can do. That's how it has to be."
5 MR. HANNIS: Your Honours, in the interest of time, I've decided
6 to skip a couple items that were on my list. And for the purposes of the
7 court reporter and the registry, I want to go to item number 13 on the
8 list I had previously provided them. It's a newspaper article from a
9 publication called, I think, Muslimanski Glas. This is dated the 12th of
10 June, 1992.
11 Q. Mr. Davidovic, I think you've had a chance to look at this
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. This article describes the presence and the individuals
15 associated with a number of paramilitary groups, many of whom are
16 reportedly from the Republic of Serbia. Did you have a chance to read
17 this article before today?
18 A. No. I saw this a few days ago. Or to be more precise, the day
19 before yesterday. That's when I read through it. But this is probably a
20 newspaper of some kind from the Federation, an article which refers to the
21 groups present in the territory of Republika Srpska. He mentions Arkan's
22 men, Seselj's men, the White Eagles, volunteers, et cetera, royalists, et
24 Q. I can stop you there.
25 A. And it's numbered 1 to 10.
1 Q. Let me stop you there and ask you a question.
2 MR. HANNIS: But before I do, could I ask for the number that
3 would be assigned to this one.
4 THE REGISTRAR: Yes. It will be Exhibit P770.
5 MR. HANNIS: Thank you.
6 Q. In terms of what the article says about the groups that were
7 present and the individuals who were the heads of those groups, based on
8 your knowledge, is it accurate in that regard? Just in terms of the names
9 of the groups and the people that were leading those groups.
10 A. Yes, it's accurate.
11 MS. LOUKAS: Well, Your Honour, just in relation to that, I think
12 firstly there's quite a broad category here there's quite a list. And
13 in -- in terms of the fact that we are dealing with a newspaper article.
14 We are dealing with an article that was produced during the war. And as
15 we all know, the first casualty of war is truth. So I think Mr. Hannis
16 should be a little bit more defined in terms of which particular aspects
17 he's talking about here, because there's quite a list there - one, two,
18 three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine - it's not clear from the
19 question and thereby not the answer what actual groups and leaders are
20 being referred to here.
21 JUDGE ORIE: From what I understood, it's the whole list.
22 MS. LOUKAS: Well, if -- that's where the confusion comes in,
23 Your Honour, because there's -- the whole list does not include leaders in
24 some categories. So therefore --
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But of course --
1 MS. LOUKAS: -- it is confusing and amorphous.
2 JUDGE ORIE: But of course -- of course the witness could not be
3 expected to confirm the correctness of a leader which is not mentioned.
4 It's about groups. It's about leaders. And to the extent that leaders
5 are mentioned, I take it that the witness confirms that these were leaders
6 of those groups. And where there are no leaders mentioned, there -- of
7 course there's nothing to confirm.
8 Is -- Mr. Davidovic, when you said "it's accurate," did you mean
9 to say that the names of the groups were accurate or the -- I would say,
10 the description sometimes where not a name is given is accurate?
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, they are accurate.
12 JUDGE ORIE: To the extent that leaders were mentioned, are these
13 leaders mentioned correctly in relation to the groups they are linked to?
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. And that is the order they
15 appear on, the order they appear on is based on the strength of these
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And that's true for all the nine groups
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hannis.
21 MR. HANNIS: Thank you, Your Honour.
22 MS. LOUKAS: There's just one further matter, Your Honour.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Ms. Loukas.
24 MS. LOUKAS: It's -- "We will require further information from
25 the Prosecution as to the -- where this newspaper article appears." In
1 the list of exhibit, it's got Glas or Glasnik. It's -- it hasn't been
3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hannis said that it was Muslimanski Glas.
4 MS. LOUKAS: Yes, Muslimanski Glas, that's what he said. But
5 it's -- is it Glas or Glasnik? That's what it says in the exhibit list.
6 It leaves it open, Your Honour.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hannis.
8 MR. HANNIS: The document information sheet I have for this item,
9 Your Honour, indicates that this is an article from 12 June 1992 from
10 Muslimanski Glas or Glasnik, and I don't know if that's because the copy
11 we have was somewhat illegible and the title couldn't be read, but that's
12 what I have.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. If you could find the front page of that
14 newspaper or periodical.
15 MR. HANNIS: I will do some further research with our open
16 sources --
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
18 MR. HANNIS: -- section, Your Honour.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please do so.
20 MS. LOUKAS: And also, just in relation to this, Your Honour, a
21 marker: Seeking to confirm matters contained in a newspaper article in a
22 sort of global way, without confirming from the witness what his precise
23 knowledge and is how he could actually confirm the contents of a newspaper
24 in this way, is, in my submission, a rather too-broad way of trying to
25 confirm the sort of matters that are contained in a newspaper article and
1 would not be of great assistance to the Trial Chamber.
2 JUDGE ORIE: First of all, of course, the knowledge of the
3 witness on what happened on the ground in Bosnia and Herzegovina is in
4 some detail set out in his statement. At the same time, Ms. Loukas, I
5 tend to agree with you that getting spontaneous answers from the witness,
6 instead of let him confirm lists in newspapers, might have a greater value
7 to the Chamber. At the same time, Ms. Loukas, the whole issue of
8 spontaneous coming up with answers is, of course, in a system where the
9 parties spend hours and days on proofing sessions is a bit limited, if you
10 look at the origin of the value of such trial techniques.
11 MS. LOUKAS: Well, Your Honour, at the same time --
12 JUDGE ORIE: Let me say the following: I have worked -- no. I
13 have observed how a pathologist in the Belgian criminal proceedings would
14 give the details of the post-mortem. These were pathologists who were not
15 allowed to consult any papers because you had to elicit that information
16 from such an expert witness without him consulting any papers. I once
17 spoke to the daughter of such a pathologist, who told me that her father
18 would be learning by heart, exact, the numbers of how many blood there was
19 in the left chamber of the heart, how many -- so that he could reproduce
20 that the next morning without any mistake.
21 Of course, I just would like to put the trial technique in which
22 you elicit from the witness the answer that comes up on the basis of the
23 non-leading question in some perspective. Having done so, you may
24 proceed, Mr. Hannis.
25 MS. LOUKAS: Well, Your Honour, can I just make one quick comment
1 in relation to that?
2 JUDGE ORIE: Well, I'll allow you to make a comment in relation
3 to that after you have thought it over for 24 hours. So I'm not -- it's
4 not a debating club here, as you know.
5 MS. LOUKAS: I --
6 JUDGE ORIE: But I am open for any comment but rather not enter
7 into a debate at this moment.
8 Please proceed, Mr. Hannis.
9 MS. LOUKAS: Indeed, Your Honour. And I'm happy to take on board
10 what Your Honour has indicated. But -- and I will be providing further
11 comment with the opportunity of --
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
13 MS. LOUKAS: -- the 24 hours. But nevertheless one important rule
14 is the evidence must come from the witness.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
16 MS. LOUKAS: Not from the mouth of the Prosecutor, Your Honour.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But here it comes from the newspaper article
18 and then confirmation by the witness. The newspaper article will be an
19 exhibit, and the witness -- but I said already that it's of greater value
20 to receive that evidence in a different way.
21 MS. LOUKAS: Yes.
22 JUDGE ORIE: So to that extent, you got some support.
23 MS. LOUKAS: Thank you, Your Honour.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Please proceed, Mr. Hannis.
25 MR. HANNIS: Thank you, Your Honour.
1 Q. Mr. Davidovic, in that article, later on in the English - it's
2 page 2, the last full paragraph at the bottom of the page - it mentions
3 Petar Gracanin having sent to Bosnia-Herzegovina a special unit of 150
4 men. Your unit was a special unit, but how many men did you have in your
6 A. There were members of the special force units in my unit, and
7 there were 14 or 15 men in this unit at the most.
8 Q. So this article, in terms of your unit's presence in Bosnia,
9 exaggerates the numbers by a factor of 10; correct?
10 A. Yes. Yes. It says 150 men, and that is totally absurd.
11 Q. And with regard to the number of Arkan's and Seselj's that were
12 mentioned in the article, did you find that the numbers were exaggerated
13 by a similar factor?
14 A. Yes. Yes. And that's what I said. There were -- it says that
15 there were several thousand men. It says that Arkan had 2.000 men, and
16 then it says that he had 8.000 Chetniks who were at the ready. I think
17 this has been so exaggerated that it's just pointless to comment on it.
18 Where would you find accommodation for 2.000 or 8.000 men? This is an
19 enormous number of men and you would have to provide them with
20 accommodation and food. So it simply doesn't make sense. Everything has
21 been multiplied by a factor of 10.
22 Q. Let me now take you back to your statement. In paragraph 70, you
23 say that "There was also widespread looting in Bijeljina as you had -- as
24 there had been in Pale." Do you know -- well, how do you know about this
25 looting in Bijeljina?
1 A. Well, I have to say that I lived in Bijeljina, as did my family,
2 and every weekend, when it was possible for me to go to Bijeljina, I went
3 there. And when I performed my official tasks -- well, I could observe
4 this when I went there over the weekend, and I realised that this was
5 taking place when I spoke to various people. People would approach me.
6 There were lots of questions that they would ask me. They would ask what
7 to do. So I could observe this directly and I also heard about it when I
8 spoke to various people.
9 Q. You say in that paragraph that this looting was organised, and
10 you describe one Vojkan Djurkovic as a local man involved in the process.
11 Do you know where that money was going that was taken as a result of this
13 A. I do. It was divided into several parts. He kept one part for
14 himself. Another part was given to Arkan. Another part was sent to Pale,
15 to the people who had authorised him to do what he was doing. And as for
16 the property that was there, well, there was -- there were technical goods
17 there, et cetera. But this was mostly sold to refugees who arrived in the
18 Bijeljina area. They arrived from Brcko, Zvornik, areas that had been
19 caught up in the war. They would then appear and they would sell houses
20 and property to them.
21 Q. You said in your answer that part of it was going to "the people
22 who had authorised him to do what he was doing." Who are those people?
23 A. Well, people in charge of the SDS, Krajisnik, Karadzic, people in
24 power, Mandic, all those who took decisions. Because this wasn't only
25 happening in Bijeljina; it was also happening in Trebinje and Zvornik, and
1 these are the policies pursued by that party.
2 Q. You talked about Bijeljina. In terms of where it's located
3 geographically, do you know whether Mr. Krajisnik and Mr. Karadzic were
4 ever in Bijeljina during the war?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. What do you know about that?
7 A. Yes, I know that. I saw them myself. I had the opportunity to
8 hear about them having been there, and on a number of occasions I saw them
9 coming and going. Because if you travelled by car from Republika Srpska
10 to Belgrade, you either travelled through Zvornik or Bijeljina, but
11 normally through Bijeljina because there were no war activities there, so
12 it was safer. So if we think in terms of war, this was a peaceful area.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hannis, you asked the witness to specify the
14 people who had authorised him to do what he was doing. Could you also
15 explore the source of knowledge in this respect.
16 MR. HANNIS: I will, Your Honour. Thank you.
17 Q. Mr. Davidovic, we were talking about Vojkan Djurkovic
18 participating in this organised looting you described in Bijeljina and I
19 asked you to tell who the persons were in Pale that you say had authorised
20 him to do this. How do you know about that? What's your source of
21 information for that fact?
22 A. I spoke about that in broader terms in one part of my statement.
23 I can't remember exactly where. But if you want to talk about the goal in
24 particular, the goal of the Serb Democratic Party in particular, it was to
25 ethnically cleanse the area of people who were not Serbs. And for that
1 reason it was a legitimate policy from them.
2 MS. LOUKAS: [Previous translation continues] ... the witness is
3 quite clearly not answering the question --
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Let me.
5 MS. LOUKAS: -- that was asked.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Let me reformulate the question.
7 You said about --
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I will reply to the question, if I
9 may. I would really like you to give me the opportunity to answer. You
10 don't have to rephrase the question. I'm going to answer.
11 JUDGE ORIE: I will rephrase the question for the following
12 reason: Because it's a question which is complex and is -- the following:
13 When you were referring to those people who authorised, there are two
14 elements. The first one is that these people authorised, if I correctly
15 understood, the looting to take place. First of all, how do you know that
16 they authorised the looting?
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I myself saw a document that Vojkan
18 Djurkovic showed to me authorising them to carry out merciful moves of
19 people and that the police force and the armed forces should not interfere
20 with his task, and so it was an approval which came from the cabinet
21 and signed by Mr. Krajisnik in person, and he used to show it around and
22 he carried it around. I was not the only person who saw that piece of
23 paper. Other people saw it, too. And when I got in touch with Micic, who
24 was a member of parliament, as a member of the Serb Democratic Party., he
25 said he saw that document and he asked Mr. Krajisnik about that document
1 and he apparently answered he did not want to interfere with that.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Now, the second issue is that you said that they
3 profited from the looting, since part of it was made available -- part of
4 the -- of the financial results were made available to them. How do you
5 know that?
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Because Vojkan Djurkovic used to
7 say publicly that he was taking that money to Pale to Karadzic and
8 Krajisnik, and he did it in person and also through Luka Karadzic and
9 Momo's brother and so on. It was common knowledge. He never tried to
10 hide it. He said it out loud.
11 JUDGE ORIE: So the basis of that knowledge is what Vojkan
12 Djurkovic told you, and you said, "He used to say publicly that he was
13 taking the money to Pale to Karadzic and Krajisnik." And then you
14 said, "And he did it in person." Is that what he told you, or is that
15 what you observed yourself?
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] He told me himself, and I heard it
17 on a number of occasions when other people were talking about it.
18 JUDGE ORIE: These other people, could you mention their names?
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Of course. People from Bijeljina,
20 the people they were in touch with. I can give you the names, if you want
21 me to.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Please do so.
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] For example, a man who is in
24 Bijeljina, Dusko Marjanovic, he's a lawyer there today. Then Gavrilovic,
25 someone who was in charge of a unit during the war. Then people from MUP
1 who were also involved and who witnessed that. And there were some
2 officers there as well.
3 JUDGE ORIE: May I take it from your answer that where you
4 mentioned Marjanovic, Gavrilovic, that they told you about it but that
5 specifically the MUP people told you that they were involved and that they
6 were witnesses of such things to happen?
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] MUP was directly involved in all
8 that. There were people within MUP who did not want to get involved but
9 they could do nothing to put a stop to it because if they tried to do
10 something, they would be turned back and they would be subject to
11 disciplinary measures and some of them were even sacked.
12 JUDGE ORIE: What I mainly want to find out is the following:
13 Where you said that the MUP people said they were involved and that they
14 were witnesses, is it a correct understanding that the other persons that
15 told you did not tell you that they were witnesses themselves or that they
16 were personally involved in it?
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. People who were eyewitnesses,
18 who worked at SUP and were police officers, people I knew in person - it
19 they were my staff in the past - they told me. They actually participated
20 in. And they asked -- they actually were involved directly in this kind
21 of operation, in those people being picked up, et cetera.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
23 Please proceed, Mr. Hannis.
24 MR. HANNIS: Thank you.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Judge Hanoteau has a question.
1 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] Yes. You've answered a question
2 earlier on by specifying that you yourself witnessed looting. You
3 mentioned a weekend that you spent in Bijeljina, and on that occasion,
4 you yourself saw looting going on. Is that correct? Is that what you
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I meant that too. And I also
7 meant other occasions when I worked in the police force, when I came back
8 to the Bijeljina region and -- that is to say, after coming back from
10 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] I would like you to explain to
11 us more specifically and to provide some details as to what exactly you
12 did say and you did see. Perhaps on a number of occasions, but what was
13 it exactly that you saw?
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm going to tell you. I've got a
15 house in Bijeljina. That's where I live. And my neighbour -- my
16 neighbours are not far away, 10, 50, 100 metres. And I saw myself in the
17 course of the night at 1.00, 2.00, or 3.00 a.m., Vojko Djurkovic or other
18 people sent by him who you would come along, pick up Bosniaks who had
19 lived in those houses up until then, and they would take them to an
20 unknown location. And on a number of occasions I actually came out of the
21 house and I was carrying weapons. I tried to put a stop to that. But I
22 was prevented from doing so. I myself called the police and asked them to
23 intervene and they said they couldn't.
24 And what happened afterwards: After the departure of those
25 Bosniaks, another group of people came along and they took all the
1 valuables. And it all happened within an hour or two. And then, in the
2 morning, they would place refugees from other parts of the country in
3 those houses and they would take possession of those houses. But in order
4 for them to be able to do that, they again would have to pay. They did
5 not get that accommodation free of charge. They had to pay. And things
6 were being sold. You could buy all sorts of things very cheaply,
7 especially technical equipment.
8 Let me be even more specific. For example -- I mean, I can give
9 you the names of individuals. People were picked up at night, and
10 normally they would walk into their house and say, "Pack up your
11 belongings. You're going to be taken to the Federation." And they would
12 be given five to ten minutes and those people were supposed to pack up all
13 their belongings, all that they thought would be necessary, and all their
14 valuables within those five to ten minutes.
15 What would people take? First, money, valuables or jewellery,
16 photos, and diplomas if they had them, plus a couple of items of clothing,
17 and that was all they could take. As to money or any valuables, they
18 would try to hide them. They would try to hide them with their belongings
19 or even in body orifices. And when they were taken away, they would be
20 taken to so-called collection centres, and those collection centres would
21 be old buildings, abandoned buildings, such as schools, et cetera, or
22 Lovacki Dom, a hunters' lodge at Suvlecka [phoen]. And they would be
23 searched thoroughly. I must say even all the women had to go through
24 gynaecological searches, as it were, and any valuables would be taken away
25 from them. And when sufficient quantity -- I mean, sufficient number of
1 people was gathered there, between 100 and 150, they would be loaded onto
2 trucks and then those trucks -- and they would be totally closed there,
3 and they would be taken to the demarcation line between the Muslim and the
4 Serb side, and it was mostly in the area of Majevica, in the direction of
5 Tuzla, or the area of Brcko, in the direction of Srebrenik again, towards
6 Tuzla, and they would be left in that no man's land. And sometimes they
7 would spend several days there because the Bosniak side wouldn't have them
8 either. And exhausted and worn out like that, finally they would be
9 accepted by the Federation.
10 Or else there were organised departures through Serbia to take
11 people to Hungary and the West. And I can give you detailed information
12 about that as well.
13 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] Just a second question now, sir,
14 if you don't mind. You referred to this person called Vojkan Djurkovic.
15 You explained his role. I would like you to place him within context.
16 Who is he, exactly? And who was he in relation to you? What was his
17 position in relation to you? Was it somebody with whom you were friends?
18 Did you talk to one another? Did you exchange confidences?
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'll try and give you an -- as
20 brief a description as possible. I've known Vojkan Djurkovic for a long
21 time, before the war. I knew him because at a certain point he asked for
22 a permit to carry firearms and it was turned down, and his own sister
23 worked within SUP. She was one of my employees. And when we think about
24 Vojkan Djurkovic, he was a farmer. He was of no interest to us
25 politically speaking or otherwise, and I never had any contacts with him
1 in person before the war. There was no need for that. I actually met him
2 just before the war and he was authorised by the Municipal Assembly to
3 collect payment for the crossing of the River Raca. He was collecting
4 money for that, and the money collected in that way was collected to cover
5 the expenses of either the party or the authorities. He certainly gave
6 that money to someone. And that was how I met him for the first time,
7 when I crossed the bridge to go to Belgrade.
8 And afterwards I met him in person once again and I got to know
9 him better. And when I was at Bijeljina and I was involved in the
10 disarming of the paramilitary formation and I knew what he was and who he
11 was before and what he did during the war, and I know what he is now. He
12 is a man who was basically serving the political party, the SDS, and the
13 members of that party.
14 If I may say so, he was an extended arm of Mauzer and the local
15 authorities but he was doing the dirty work. His main task was to
16 basically pick up Muslims from Bijeljina and chase them away. And I think
17 there is no institution that has not said what I've already said about
18 him. And what I'm saying now is something I said in 1994 at the
19 International Red Cross in Belgrade, at their offices in Belgrade. And
20 there were also investigated events in the Republic of Bosnia and
21 Herzegovina. And I was still wearing uniform at that time, and that's
22 what I told them.
23 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] Thank you, sir.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hannis, we are close to a break anyhow. I have
25 a procedural matter as well. But I have one additional question to you:
1 The ones who told you that they are personally involved in bringing the
2 financial results of the looting to Pale, did any of these persons
3 specifically mention one of the names, especially the four names that you
4 gave us: That was Mr. Karadzic, Mr. Krajisnik, and you also mentioned
5 Luka Karadzic and the brother of Momo Karadzic -- of Momo Krajisnik. Did
6 they ever mention any of these names to you? So not the others who said
7 what was common knowledge but the ones who said they had been involved.
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. I heard it myself from
9 Mr. Djurkovic, and he actually never hid the fact that he was giving and
10 taking that money and handing it over to Karadzic, Krajisnik, and their
11 brothers, who were mediators. And I heard the same thing from a number of
12 people from MUP who still work for MUP today.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Thank you.
14 Then, Mr. Davidovic, we'll have to stop for the day. I have two
15 small procedural issues to be raised. Mr. Davidovic, I'd like to instruct
16 you -- could you keep your headphones on. I'd like to instruct you not to
17 speak with anyone about the testimony that you have given and the
18 testimony you are still about to give during the days to come.
19 Madam Usher, could you please escort Mr. Davidovic out of the
21 [The witness stands down]
22 JUDGE ORIE: I have two decisions to be delivered. One -- I'll
23 start with the short one -- is an order for releasing to the public the
24 transcript of Mr. Krajisnik's intervention of the 10th of May, 2005.
25 On the 10th of May, the Chamber asked the parties to consider
1 which portions of Mr. Krajisnik's intervention can be made public. On May
2 the 11th, the Defence informed the Chamber through the legal officers that
3 the parties had agreed on the release of transcript page 12.902, line 1,
4 starting with - and I quote - "The witness withdrew" up to page 12.919,
5 line 12, ending with - I quote - "to which the Defence has not objected."
6 The Chamber has reviewed this portion of the transcript and considers that
7 it can be released to the public.
8 This concludes the Chamber's decision on this matter.
9 I would now give the Chamber's response to Mr. Krajisnik's
10 request for a meeting at which to discuss issues related to his defence.
11 Ms. Loukas, I take it that I can give this response and that
12 Mr. Stewart will read it, because he's mainly dealing with it, but it's
13 not the opening of a debate.
14 MS. LOUKAS: Indeed, Your Honour.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
16 On the 1st of June, 2005, Mr. Krajisnik requested -- the
17 beginning is at transcript page 13.851 -- that the Chamber make allowance
18 for the holding of a meeting among members of his Defence team, Registry
19 staff, and the Chamber's senior legal officer, Mr. Harhoff. Time was
20 running out at that session, so there was no elaboration of the request.
21 The next day, on June the 2nd, the Chamber asked Mr. Krajisnik to
22 indicate the issues he wished to place on the agenda of the proposed
23 meeting. Mr. Krajisnik responded by letter dated the 3rd of June, in
24 which he stated that - and I quote - "Mr. Stewart would be better suited
25 to sit this out." This letter, in other words, did not specify the issues
1 as requested by the Chamber. Hence, on the same day, transcript page
2 13.975, the Chamber again invited Mr. Krajisnik to articulate an agenda
3 for the proposed meeting. A proposed agenda was finally received by the
4 Chamber in a letter from Mr. Krajisnik dated the 5th of June, 2005.
5 This second letter lists ten - I quote - "questions" most of
6 which are clearly matters that Mr. Krajisnik should raise with represents
7 of the Registry and/or his counsel. Some questions are not immediately
8 clear to the Chamber and will require further clarification by
9 Mr. Krajisnik at the initial meeting. One question refers to - and I
10 quote - "certain technical issues" which Mr. Krajisnik does not specify
11 further in this second letter.
12 The Chamber has decided to offer its good services in the person
13 of Mr. Harhoff, who will attend the initial meeting between Mr. Krajisnik
14 and the representatives of the Registry. The Registry is kindly invited
15 to arrange for such a meeting as a matter of priority. Mr. Harhoff is in
16 a position to give the Chamber's view on some of the questions raised by
17 the accused in his letter. Mr. Harhoff is also in a position to assist
18 with the clarification and further specification of the issues that
19 concern Mr. Krajisnik.
20 The Chamber foresees that Mr. Harhoff will withdraw after the
21 first meeting but will remain available to Mr. Krajisnik and the Registry
22 staff should a further contribution by him be needed.
23 Having dealt with the request for a meeting or a series of
24 meetings, another issue on the mind of the Chamber is the strengthening of
25 the Defence team. This matter is in fact in the hands of the Registrar.
1 It is thus for the Registrar to comment at the appropriate time on the
2 progress that's being made in this area. Nevertheless, I'm able to
3 indicate already now that a positive resolution on this point is expected
5 You are perhaps wondering why the Defence team is being
6 strengthened at the time when Mr. Krajisnik has purported to dismiss his
7 team in order that he represent himself. As you will recall from the
8 Chamber's status quo decision of the 26th of May, 2005, Mr. Krajisnik in
9 fact does not represent himself. He is represented by his two counsel for
10 as long as no final decision has been rendered in this respect.
11 Mr. Krajisnik has requested that urgent attention be given to
12 issues related to his defence. The efforts to strengthen the defence --
13 Defence team may well have a significant impact on those issues, and
14 therefore they are logically and in time linked to the letter. The
15 strengthening of the Defence team has been under consideration by the
16 Registry already for some month. There's no reason to hold that process
18 On a parallel track, the series of meetings I refer to above will
19 be instituted in order to assist Mr. Krajisnik to resolve the issues he
20 has with the organisation of his Defence. If by the end of that series of
21 meetings self-representation continues to be an actual wish of
22 Mr. Krajisnik's, the Chamber will deliver a final decision on the matter
23 at the appropriate time.
24 Lastly, I believe that the Prosecution has not received copies of
25 Mr. Krajisnik's letters.
1 MR. HANNIS: [Microphone not activated] Not to my knowledge,
2 Your Honour.
3 JUDGE ORIE: No. That is confirmed.
4 The Chamber is waiting to hear from the Defence on the question
5 of whether to file those letters in the usual manner. The Prosecution is,
6 of course, entitled to be involved in all matters it has an appropriate
7 interest in. So on this point, the Chamber awaits the parties'
8 submissions. And I take it that we'll then hear from Mr. Stewart on that
9 issue, Ms. Loukas.
10 MS. LOUKAS: Yes, precisely, Your Honour.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
12 MS. LOUKAS: That is the situation.
13 JUDGE ORIE: That's what I wanted to know.
14 This, then, concludes the Chamber's remark in response to
15 Mr. Krajisnik's request.
16 MS. LOUKAS: Yes. I can indicate, Your Honour, Mr. --
17 Mr. Stewart, as he indicated this morning, is dealing with all matters
18 relating to the -- the issue of self-representation.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That's clear, yes.
20 MS. LOUKAS: And that is why he asked me in the middle of my
21 dealing with Nielsen to also deal with this witness.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I do understand.
23 Then we'll adjourn until tomorrow morning, 9.00 in this same
25 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.55 p.m.,
1 to be reconvened on Friday, the 10th day of
2 June, 2005, at 9.00 a.m.