Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 8235

 1                          Thursday, 15th February 2001 2                          [Open session]

 3                          --- Upon commencing at 9.23 a.m.

 4                          [The accused entered court]

 5            JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Good morning.  Please be

 6    seated.  Good morning to the technical booth, the interpreters; good

 7    morning to the Registry; good morning to the counsel for the Prosecution

 8    and for the Defence; good morning, Mr. Kvocka.

 9            THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning.

10            JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] We are going to continue with

11    your cross-examination.  I wish to remind you that you are continuing

12    under oath.  I don't have to explain that because you know that very

13    well.  I will give the floor to Ms. Susan Somers.

14                          WITNESS:  MIROSLAV KVOCKA [Resumed]

15                          [Witness answered through interpreter]

16                          Cross-examined by Ms. Somers:  [Continued]

17       Q.   Mr. Kvocka, when was the last time you saw Zeljko Meakic?

18       A.   I saw him in the course of 1992, perhaps once or twice.  Maybe

19    also in 1993 twice.  I saw him very few times in all the years that went

20    by until my arrest.  A couple of times only throughout that whole period.

21       Q.   Did you see him in either 1995 or 1996?

22       A.   I may have in passing.  We may have passed one another and greeted

23    one another, but I cannot say for sure.  I really do not remember.

24       Q.   Did you see him after a time you were both indicted?

25       A.   No.


Page 8236

 1       Q.   Where is he today?  Do you know?

 2       A.   No.  I know he has a socially-owned apartment in Omarska, that is

 3    what I heard, because in 1992 he wasn't living in that apartment.  But I

 4    later heard that he had that apartment.

 5       Q.   You indicated on page 4 of the interview that has the -- it bears

 6    the name of the author Christopher Bennett.  It is 3/201.  On page 4 of

 7    that interview, you were asked -- have you found it, Mr. Kvocka?  Do you

 8    have your copy in your language?

 9       A.   I don't have the interview.  I tried to keep it as a memento but

10    the ladies from the Registry took it away from me.

11       Q.   I'm sure we'll get one in just a moment.  If you can find the

12    section which discusses why you left Omarska, it is on page 4 of the

13    English version.  If you're able to locate it, I'd appreciate it if you'd

14    let me know when you've found it.  You were asked, "Why did you leave

15    Omarska in June?"  Have you found it?  Thank you.

16                Q.   Why did you leave Omarska in June?

17                A.   Well, just like I was appointed, people from my station

18                     told me that I was to be transferred to another post.

19                     The formulation used in the police is "transferred in

20                     accordance with the needs of the service.

21            And then you were asked:

22                Q.   Were you perhaps relieved of office because you

23                     complained because of what was happening in Omarska?

24                A.   Let me tell you, I complained specifically to no one.  If

25                     I was present when excesses occurred, I would prevent


Page 8237

 1                     them and ask for a regular investigation to be

 2                     conducted.

 3                Q.   Do you think that this is the reason you were replaced?

 4                A.   Possibly.  I do not know.  I never even inquired as a

 5                     matter of principle.  In fact, I think they did me a big

 6                     favour.

 7            Tukovi --

 8       A.   However, there is a lack of precision in many places here.  The

 9    wording is quite different.  Here it says, "Why did you leave Omarska?"

10    The answer doesn't follow, just like I was appointed.  I think the

11    phrasing is rather strange, but I don't think that is important.  I think

12    I will be able to respond.

13            The question was probably, "How did you leave?  How did you go

14    away from Omarska?"  And I said in the same way as I got there, which

15    means my superior can determine where I am to work.  Similarly, he can

16    say, "You're no longer going to work there."  Because of the needs of the

17    service, superiors are not obliged to give any extensive explanations, so

18    they simply say that the needs of the service require that you go to work

19    in another location.  Not a different workplace, just a different

20    location.  So I wanted to point out that there was a lack of precision.

21            Here it says I did not complain to anyone in particular because my

22    principle was not to ask any questions, any additional explanations if I

23    am given an order to do something.  But I think that the substance is not

24    affected by this lack of precision.

25       Q.   Then the substance being that it was an administrative transfer,


Page 8238

 1    not a punitive transfer, correct?  Strictly administrative, needs of

 2    service, correct?

 3       A.   It could be described in that way in the context of the

 4    explanations I have just given.  The superior would simply say, "You're

 5    going to work there."  I don't understand the difference between

 6    administrative and non-administrative or punitive.  I simply had to obey,

 7    and I did, and I didn't want to inquire about the reasons.  If I had

 8    inquired, it is highly questionable what the response would have been.

 9    "Why are you asking?  It's more or less none of your business.  I am the

10    one who will decide where you work."

11       Q.   Tukovi, you indicated in your testimony, was a small reserve

12    station.

13            MS. SOMERS:  Just so that all of us have a clear picture of what

14    the reserve station concept means, I would ask the usher kindly to

15    distribute 3/209.  It is a document from the Prijedor collections, a

16    police station document.  And mindful of the Chamber's wish to have

17    authentication issues resolved, I'm waiting for the individual who was the

18    leader of the search to return, and I shall provide a written summary of

19    locations of seizure.

20            If the usher has an extra -- no, it's okay.  One for the ELMO.

21    That's fine, thank you.

22       Q.   Do you clearly see in front of you, Mr. Kvocka, what is called

23    "Receipt For Solemn Oaths Taken," and it --

24       A.   Yes.

25       Q.   And the purpose for which I'd like to ask you to look at this


Page 8239

 1    document is it lists reserve police stations using the initials "RSM," and

 2    the stations are broken down into ten stations.  The first being Prijedor

 3    I, the second Prijedor II, the third being Omarska RSM, the fourth

 4    Lamovita, the fifth Rakelici, the sixth Gomjenica, the seventh Brezicani,

 5    eighth Cikote, ninth Tukovi.

 6            So Tukovi and Omarska have the same status in terms of what they

 7    are; would you agree?  They are reserve police stations.  Correct?

 8       A.   That's what it says here.

 9       Q.   Now, although the numbers perhaps of staff may be different, they

10    are nonetheless, as we both agree, reserve police stations.  That's what

11    they have in common.  The difference I would like to ask you about, and I

12    would ask you if you can tell me what you know about the cleansing of an

13    area known as Brdo.  Are you familiar with Brdo?

14       A.   Yes, yes.  As a name, I know it.

15       Q.   Which municipalities are included in that title, Brdo?

16       A.   Brdo is part of Prijedor municipality, as far as I know.

17       Q.   Yes, yes, I stand corrected.  You're absolutely right.  I meant

18    which villages, I'm terribly sorry.

19       A.   Several villages.  I may know some of them, but I did not move

20    around much in the area, or rather, I never did, except in 1977 and 1978

21    where I went on patrol there at the beginning of my career as a

22    policeman.  But there were villages there such as Biscani and Rizvanovici,

23    Zecovi, Rasavci.

24       Q.   How about Carakovo?

25       A.   Carakovo, yes.


Page 8240

 1       Q.   And how about Hambarine?

 2       A.   Yes, yes.

 3       Q.   And Hambarine was the location where in May there was the

 4    checkpoint incident; is that right?  That's the same Hambarine?  Is that

 5    correct, Mr. Kvocka?  Okay.

 6       A.   Yes, I heard of that incident.

 7       Q.   That was, was it not, essentially the last, as it were, Muslim

 8    stronghold in terms of population that had not been cleansed as of the

 9    time you transferred to Tukovi.  There were still quite a few Muslims

10    living in those villages, were there not, at the time?

11       A.   I wouldn't quite agree.  I think there were some activities prior

12    to that.  About the 20th of May were the incidents in Hambarine, after the

13    operation, Hambarine, Biscani, Rasavci, I think that the operations were

14    already over.  However, Rasavci, and Zecovi were populated by majority

15    Serb population.  Rasavci is almost totally Serb, and Zecovi had a mixed

16    population, as far as I can remember from what I knew in 1977, 1978.

17       Q.   Would you not agree that, let's say roughly the 23rd, 24th of

18    July, 1992, certain villages including Carakovo were cleansed of whatever

19    Muslim population remained, and they were cleansed either by way of murder

20    or removal to various camps.  You would know about that; you were in

21    Tukovi at the time.  Do you remember that?

22       A.   I only remember that the Red Cross, at a stadium which was not

23    completed, transported a certain number of people.  The stadium was still

24    under construction.  They were transported in the direction of Travnik;

25    that is, I'm not quite sure where.  But I do remember that.  This was


Page 8241

 1    something of general knowledge in Tukovi.

 2       Q.   You were working --

 3       A.   And I also remember that an interventions platoon had some

 4    activities in that connection.  An intervention platoon, I'm not quite

 5    sure which unit it belonged to, but it did belong to the public security

 6    station in Prijedor.  I think it was not part of the police station

 7    structure.

 8       Q.   A Serb intervention platoon, you're saying?  Part of the Serb

 9    institutions' intervention platoon from --

10       A.   Yes, yes.

11       Q.   You were working regular hours at that point in time, as I

12    understand it.  You were working a regular, full-time, active-duty

13    position once you got to Tukovi; is that right?

14       A.   I worked in Tukovi when this event that the Red Cross organised

15    took place.  At that time I was in Tukovi.

16       Q.   When do you say the Red Cross event took place, please?  When do

17    you date that?

18       A.   Sometime in July, but I don't know exactly.

19       Q.   Now, that was the local --

20       A.   It may have been seven, eight, or ten days, or maybe even 15 days

21    after I arrived there.  I cannot be more precise.

22       Q.   This is the local Red Cross, correct, not the International Red

23    Cross?  This was a local Red Cross unit; am I correct?

24       A.   Yes, the Red Cross of Prijedor.  In those days, we never had

25    occasion to see the International Red Cross.


Page 8242

 1       Q.   What date do you put your arrival for work at the Tukovi Police

 2    Station?

 3       A.   From everything that I learnt about during the proceedings and the

 4    documents tendered by yourself and the Defence, I am able to assert that

 5    it was the 1st of July, though before that I couldn't be quite precise.

 6    It could have been a day earlier or a day later.  Afterwards, when I look

 7    back and analyse things more closely, I do know that that was the date,

 8    that is, the 1st of July.  I'm sure about that now.

 9            MS. SOMERS:  Can I ask the usher, please, to distribute

10    Prosecution's 3/189.

11       Q.   Mr. Kvocka, the document which you have before you - also, Your

12    Honours, from the Prijedor seizures - is a record from the Public Security

13    Station Prijedor concerning salaries and personnel records from 29 June

14    1992.

15            On this document, there are the names of various police personnel,

16    including Jankovic, as you can see, Brane Bolta.  I'm leafing through it

17    trying to get to your name.  And then on -- I'm sorry.  I'm leafing too

18    fast.  I beg your pardon, Your Honours.

19            It's page -- well, actually, it has a "1" at the bottom, but in

20    the upper right-hand corner, it says 01907797.  You are listed as number 1

21    on that particular grid.  Do you see it Mr. Kvocka?  I'm sorry if I go too

22    fast.  The upper right-hand corner of yours may have a different number.

23       A.   Yes, yes, I've found it.

24       Q.   It lists your personnel number and then it has points which I do

25    not understand.  But what it has that I want to just confirm with you is


Page 8243

 1    hours.  It has your hours for the month of June 1992 as 184 hours, and

 2    it's the same number of hours that show for Zeljko Meakic, for Ljuban

 3    Grahovac, for Mladjo Radic, for Milutin Vujic.  There seems to be a

 4    standard number of hours for having worked the month of June.  That would

 5    represent, would it not, a full-time activity on the work schedule for the

 6    month of June?  Do you agree with that?

 7       A.   Yes, yes.  It was between 182 and 184 hours.  This was permitted

 8    by law.  But in the police it was possible to work a couple hours longer.

 9    Because of the limit set by law, overtime is not paid in the police in

10    this sense.

11       Q.   However, everybody who was working that month in these positions

12    had 184 hours, and you're one of those persons.  Okay.

13            There's no indication, I note, for any type of leave.  That

14    appears to represent actual hours worked, if I'm correct.  That represents

15    actual hours worked, real hours.

16       A.   Well, if a commander gave somebody a day off, then the number of

17    hours would not be reduced accordingly.  If you have something that you

18    need to do, a private obligation, and you ask your commander for a day off

19    and he grants you that day off, that would not affect your salary.  The

20    commander had the right to give you this day off, free day, without

21    reducing the number of hours, the number of working hours, precisely

22    because of what I just said.  Sometimes you would have to work overtime,

23    in which case, again, the number of working hours would not go up.  That

24    would not be reflected here.

25       Q.   But these hours, 184 hours, reflect the number of hours you would


Page 8244

 1 

 2 

 3 

 4 

 5 

 6 

 7 

 8 

 9 

10 

11 

12  Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French

13  and English transcripts.

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 


Page 8245

 1    have worked on your 12-hour shifts times whatever number of days; would

 2    that be a fair way of calculating 184?  I'm not sure how they did the

 3    arithmetic, but that it represents all hours worked on all shifts that you

 4    had; right?

 5       A.   Yes, but I have to clarify something.  This is a report to the

 6    accounting service, the finance service, for them to be able to pay out

 7    your salary, and that is why you see here that all the workers have an

 8    equal number of hours.  But I'm quite certain that in reality the number

 9    of hours differed for each of these workers.  The actual number of hours

10    spent at work can be seen from other records but not from this record,

11    which is intended to the accounting service for the payment of salaries.

12            The commander puts down 184 hours for each one so that everyone

13    can get his full salary.  He will not increase the number of hours because

14    that would not be remunerated, nor will he decrease the number of hours.

15    Exceptionally, if there was certified sick-leave which was longer than

16    seven days, then that would be indicated on this list and the number of

17    hours would be reduced accordingly.

18            So this is an ordinary report for salaries.  The commander simply

19    indicates that every worker performed his duties during the month, not

20    counting one, two, or three days that he may have given him as free days,

21    nor does he indicate any increase in the number of hours because that will

22    not be reflected in the salary.  There would not be an appropriate

23    increase in the salary.

24       Q.   I note, Mr. Kvocka, that on some of the earlier pages before we

25    get to your name, there are some indications -- for example, on the fourth


Page 8246

 1    page in, I notice that, for example, a Mr. Milorad Macura has 92 hours

 2    down, not 184.  His name appears two persons below the name Brane Cvijic,

 3    whom we've talked about as one of the persons who arrested Fikret Kadiric,

 4    if you recall.

 5            Now, there is some variation on different pages.  Not everybody

 6    has 184 hours.  So perhaps there's a bookkeeping secret neither of us

 7    knows.  But it's not for everybody; would you agree?

 8       A.   This shows exactly what I was just saying.  Macura probably worked

 9    for half the month; the other half he was either on sick-leave or on

10    annual leave.  That's why he has 92 hours.  It's the exact half of 184.

11    So he didn't work for half a month and that has to be reflected.  Because

12    if he was on sick-leave, then somebody else makes up for the difference in

13    his salary, that is, social insurance will compensate him, because this is

14    a drastic reduction in the number of hours and that has to be recorded.  I

15    said that if it was one, two, or three days, that is, ten hours up or

16    down, that would not be reflected, at least as far as I know from

17    practice.  Some commanders may have been more particular than others in

18    their records.

19            In any event, if the commander granted leave for somebody to be

20    off for a day, he will not reduce the number of hours; but if somebody

21    failed to turn up at work without permission, then the number of hours

22    would be reduced.  So that is the difference.

23       Q.   So are you suggesting that you can work 45 hours fewer than are

24    required and still be listed as being there full time?  Is that what

25    you're telling us?  If you work three-quarters of the month, you indicated


Page 8247

 1    you could essentially with less than seven days or fewer than seven days,

 2    get away without having it recorded.  Is that right?

 3       A.   Yes.  And I am saying that if the commander gave you two or three

 4    days off at his own initiative, and he has the right to do that - I think

 5    it is specified up to three days - in that case he would not reduce the

 6    number of hours for the purpose of salaries because this has to do with

 7    the payment of salaries.  However, in certain other records, such as

 8    perhaps the roll-call paper, then it would be indicated clearly that I

 9    hadn't worked on that day.  A traffic accident may occur, and you are on

10    the list as working whereas in your free time you had an accident, this

11    could have serious consequences.  So there are other records which show

12    exactly who worked on what day and who was off.

13            But this is a report for salaries, and if the commander gave you

14    one, two, or three days off - I can't remember exactly how many days he

15    had the right to give you, according to the internal regulations I think

16    it was a maximum of three days - then the hours counted for your salary

17    would not be reduced because he could count on you that another month you

18    would work ten hours extra, so then it would mean 200 hours.

19            But as I said, since overtime in the police is not remunerated,

20    then in these reports for salaries, 184 is written as a rule, if there is

21    no annual leave or sick leave longer than seven days.

22       Q.   And so how would a commander or how would a person from the

23    Prijedor police department many years later be able to look at records

24    like this and determine, for example, that you were out for seven days

25    during the last week of June?  On what would that person base it if it's


Page 8248

 1    not indicated?

 2            JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Ms. Susan Somers, I think we are

 3    turning around in a circle.  I think that Mr. Kvocka will tell you that

 4    there was another record.

 5            MS. SOMERS:  May I --

 6            JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] I have a feeling we're repeating

 7    things, but it's up to you.

 8            MS. SOMERS:  I appreciate, Your Honour, and I'm sure you, I'm sure

 9    you're correct.  And I'd like him to tell me that there is.

10            JUDGE RODRIGUES:  Okay, sorry.

11            MS. SOMERS:

12       Q.   Could you tell me, please, how would a person six, seven, eight

13    years later be able to say, "Oh, yes, he was out during those days," if

14    it's not reflected?  Explain it, please, what type of records.

15       A.   There is a document called Narodni list, or work schedule, and the

16    worker in the administration in the police station, not in the department

17    but in the police station, he keeps a record.  And every two or three days

18    he collects all the daily schedules of the whole service and enters this

19    in this global work schedule.  And then from this schedule one can see

20    exactly who worked when, from what time until what time, what type of

21    service, patrol, security, traffic control, or something else.

22       Q.   Thank you for the information.  You were only one of two

23    active-duty police officers to be stationed at Tukovi; is that not

24    correct?

25       A.   Yes, at first.  I think another person came, Macura, Dragan, but


Page 8249

 1    not this one, not -- oh, it may be this one, Milorad Macura.  He came to

 2    Tukovi sometime after me, maybe ten or 15 days later.  And if you are

 3    thinking of Lazo Basrak, he was an active duty policeman; however, he was

 4    still not employed in Prijedor, so he was treated as a reserve policeman.

 5    So he was a professional, but as he came from Zagreb, he still did not

 6    have permanent employment.

 7       Q.   And so you were sent to Tukovi to be an assistant to the chief

 8    then, the commander then, Milodrag, is that his name, Drazic?

 9       A.   Drazic, yes.  He was the commander.

10       Q.   And you were sent to be his assistant?

11            MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Objection, objection.

12            JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Simic.

13            MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Mr. Kvocka, do not respond because

14    this is a blatant example of a leading question.  "You were sent to be his

15    assistant," that was what my learned colleague said.  At least, that was

16    the translation I received.  You were sent there to be an assistant to

17    Mr. Mile Drazic.

18            JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] I think that Mr. Kvocka was

19    going to answer the question.  Do not worry about him.  He knows how to

20    answer questions that are being put to him.  At any rate, there are

21    leading questions and leading questions.  There is also a difference.

22    Mr. Kvocka was going to answer the question calmly with no problem

23    whatsoever.  I am sure about that.

24            Ms. Somers, would you please continue.

25            MS. SOMERS:


Page 8250

 1       Q.   You went there, you were sent there, to be his assistant, as your

 2    wife told us in her testimony; is that correct?

 3       A.   Well, my wife doesn't have a clue when it comes to the work of a

 4    police.  I said in an interview, in this interview with Bob Reid or

 5    someone else - I'm sure you will be able to find it - that on that morning

 6    when I was able to find Jankovic to see what was going to happen with me,

 7    he told me -- at least, my impression was that he wanted to calm down the

 8    tension that had developed between the two of us over the past several

 9    days.  He said, "Go to Tukovi, report to Mile Drazic, and help him with

10    the records at the station because there's no one there who is able to do

11    that, who is able to draft an official note," for example, which is, which

12    is one of the most simple things in the police.  An official note is

13    something that contains official information on the basis of which further

14    work is necessary.  I may have said to Bennett, Chris, that I went there

15    to work as some kind of assistant.

16       Q.   I think you're right.  If you look at page 6 of your interview in

17    the English, and I'm sorry, I don't have a B/C/S edition --

18       A.   I know it by heart.

19       Q.   But on page 6 of the Bennett interview:

20                Q.  What happened to you after you left Omarska?  What did you

21                do from then on?

22                A.  I was assistant commanding officer in a wartime police

23                station, a reserve police station, in a place --

24       A.   Sorry, I do apologise.  As, as an assistant.  That's what it says

25    in my translation.  Please, do not skip it.  I think the same wording is


Page 8251

 1    used in your text.  I was as an assistant to the commander in a police

 2    station, in a reserve police station.  We are again confusing the same

 3    thing as we did yesterday.  In a neighbourhood in Prijedor, at the

 4    outskirts of Prijedor, that was the answer that I gave, and that's what it

 5    is stated here.

 6            I couldn't come to terms to what was happening with me, so --

 7    well, I was some kind of assistant.  I stayed in the service.  And my

 8    wife, she knew that I was the leader of the sector in Omarska department.

 9    When she was speaking about that, what she had in mind was the fact that I

10    was the chief of the sector in Omarska, and then all of a sudden I become

11    an assistant of the sector leader.

12       Q.   (redacted)

13    (redacted)

14    (redacted) who indicated that you returned to Omarska camp three times a week

15    roughly, every third day, until the 6th of August.  That suggests, does it

16    not, you had a fair amount of liberty, discretion, as to how to structure

17    your day when you were at Tukovi?

18       A.   First of all, I don't know who said that, two or three times a

19    week until August, (redacted), I don't know who you have in mind.

20            MS. SOMERS:  I'm sorry to interrupt.  The transcript has the wrong

21    name. It should read Nusret without an "A" for correction, please.

22       Q.   I'm sorry, Mr. Kvocka, I didn't mean to interrupt you.

23       A.   I don't remember his testimony about those details exactly.  I

24    remember that he said that he used to see me in Omarska after his arrest,

25    and my testimony was, and I -- that is what I said on a couple of


Page 8252

 1    occasions, both to the journalists, your investigators, and during my

 2    testimony here, that I had left two or three times from Omarska during

 3    that first week.  Now, I know that I left on two or three occasions, and

 4    once again after the 1st of July while I was still in Tukovi.

 5       Q.   I believe you yourself indicated you had come back to see your

 6    brothers-in-law.  You also indicated in your direct examination that one

 7    of your wife's relatives who lived in one of the villages - I'm trying to

 8    think of it, it begins with an "A," - needed some assistance, and you were

 9    able to commandeer a truck, a driver, some petrol while you were at Tukovi

10    and render the assistance and get these people to safety through what you

11    described as great risk.

12            Again, you seem to have enough latitude from your job --

13       A.   Yes.

14       Q.   -- to do that.  When did you leave Tukovi?

15       A.   We're not talking about an important position that I had there.  I

16    did it because I felt like I should do it.  I worked in Tukovi in a

17    building which has only one small office with an iron bed where Mile

18    Drazic as an elderly man slept.  And there was a telephone indeed, and on

19    one occasion my wife did call, and she told me that the Alisic people, our

20    cousins, had called me.  They live in the Alisici village towards the

21    direction of Sanski Most, at the very border of the two municipalities,

22    Sanski Most and Prijedor.  They said there was shooting going on in their

23    area, shelling as well, that they didn't know what to do.  I said, "I will

24    be home shortly and then we will see what we are going to do."

25            And within one hour or two hours I think we found a truck, fuel.


Page 8253

 1    There was a person by the name of Mijatovic who was a driver.  He was in

 2    Prijedor with a small truck.  We found him, but he was afraid to go there,

 3    and I said, "I will go as well."  And then happen what may, my wife also

 4    went with them.  I was not in the truck with them.  I was ahead of them in

 5    a small -- in a white Golf which had been requisitioned in Tukovi at the

 6    reserve police station.

 7            So I drove ahead of him in that Golf, and we went to Alisici.  We

 8    took them in.  There was an elderly woman there and her cousin, Alisic,

 9    together with his wife and two children.  They had already prepared some

10    sacks of potatoes and I don't know what else.  We put everything in the

11    truck, and I advised them to lie down on the bottom of the truck.  And it

12    is from there that we went to Prijedor and arrived in the house of my

13    in-laws.

14            And in Prijedor, we realised that the canvas had some bullet

15    holes, the canvas which was on top of the part of the truck which was used

16    for the transport of goods.

17       Q.   This was while you were working as a police officer in --

18       A.   As a police officer in Tukovi.

19       Q.   Just reminding you that in your interview with Investigator Reid,

20    on page 124, and that would be in your document -- sorry, just a second,

21    please.  Bear with me.  Page 131 to 132, that is, 131 to 132 in

22    Serbo-Croat.  Investigator Reid, on page 124, asks you:

23                Q.   And what position did you hold at this reserve police

24                     station in Tukovi?

25                A.   Jankovic told me that I was to assist in the work because


Page 8254

 1 

 2 

 3 

 4 

 5 

 6 

 7 

 8 

 9 

10 

11 

12  Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French

13  and English transcripts.

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 


Page 8255

 1                     there was only one other professional policeman there and

 2                     there was nobody else, no other professional policeman.

 3                     The others were reserve policemen.

 4                Q.   And you were to assist the commander; is that correct?

 5                A.   Yes.

 6       A.   That's what I just told you about.  That's the same thing.

 7       Q.   The cleansing of villages such as Carakovo, when that occurs and

 8    there are people who are arrested, your police station at Tukovi is on the

 9    road that these people would have to be taken along if they were going to

10    go to camps, would they not?  Is that not correct?  Tukovi is the closest

11    police station to the Brdo area.

12       A.   Yes.

13       Q.   Can you tell us, please, how many persons from the various

14    villages that you enumerated were arrested through the cleansing process

15    in late July of 1992?

16       A.   During those operations which were conducted at that time in that

17    area - we can call them cleansing, I don't know exactly what it was; there

18    was shooting going on that could be heard - they were conducted by the

19    military.  According to the information, police information, that I had,

20    because I'm curious by nature, the military police and an intervention

21    platoon also took part in those operations.  The intervention platoon

22    which, according to my assessment and knowledge, was under the direct

23    command of Simo Drljaca.  It was the intervention platoon of the MUP, the

24    police station.  So those sections of the police took part in that, the

25    military police and the intervention platoon.


Page 8256

 1       Q.   It was necessary, was it not, to have a well-staffed police

 2    station to be available for eventualities arising from this cleansing

 3    process; correct?

 4       A.   No, it's not correct.  It was not necessary for the police to do

 5    anything there.  It was the military command which conducted military

 6    operations.  The reserve police has nothing to do with that.  They did not

 7    take part in those operations, nor could they participate.  The military

 8    command - I don't know exactly which one, maybe the 43rd or 343rd, as it

 9    was called at that time, Motorised Brigade - together with a portion of

10    the military police, and according to what I could observe, the

11    intervention platoon also took part in that.

12            If military operations are conducted in a given area, the police

13    does not interfere.  They cannot interfere; they are prohibited from

14    interfering.  Those are military operations.  I'm talking about wartime

15    conditions and not peacetime conditions.

16       Q.   Simo Drljaca was a member of the police structure, was he not?

17       A.   Yes.

18            MS. SOMERS:  I wonder if I might ask for just a moment of private

19    session.

20            JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, let us move into private

21    session.

22                          [Private session]

23    (redacted)

24    (redacted)

25    (redacted)


Page 8257

 1   

 2   

 3   

 4   

 5   

 6   

 7   

 8   

 9    

10   

11   

12   

13    Page 8257 redacted – private session

14   

15   

16   

17   

18   

19   

20   

21   

22   

23   

24   

25   


Page 8258

 1    (redacted)

 2                          [Open session]

 3            JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] We are in public session.

 4    Please continue.

 5            MS. SOMERS:

 6       Q.   Mr. Kvocka, without repeating those names, do you recall going

 7    with those two individuals back to Carakovo, however it's pronounced, to

 8    dig up the wealth that had been left behind by these Muslims who had to

 9    flee?  You were in your police uniform or your military uniform and Ckalja

10    was in his police uniform.  You found the gold jewellery after the woman

11    returned with her brother and you gave back the watch of the husband who

12    was brutally murdered in front of the woman's eyes.  You don't remember

13    that event?

14       A.   No, I remember how it went.  I will tell you all about it, but it

15    was not the way you described it.  There were no murders whatsoever.

16       Q.   Mr. Kvocka, I'm not suggesting you had anything -- that you were

17    involved in the murder.  The murder occurred when the Serb soldiers

18    cleansed that village in 1992.  However, you did know, as did Ckalja, that

19    it was a village of some wealth and that's why you went back there with

20    that man --

21       A.   No, that is not correct.  No.

22       Q.   Explain why the gold was divided between you and Ckalja.

23       A.   We didn't divide it.  Let us be clear about that right away.  It

24    is possible that the event happened in 1993 or maybe 1994.  Maybe you have

25    more precise information about that, but that is not important.


Page 8259

 1            It was Ckalja who came to me in Prijedor and he told me that he

 2    had a very good friend who had to dig up something that had been hidden,

 3    and he asked me whether we could help him.  I told him that we could.  So

 4    we went there but not in a blue Lada, in a Zastava 101, which belonged to

 5    my kum, Hasan Oklopcic.  It was his car.  (redacted)

 6    (redacted)

 7    (redacted).

 8            MS. SOMERS:  (redacted)

 9    (redacted).

10       A.   We went there but he wasn't quite sure about where it was.  So we

11    went back to Prijedor and he said that he would contact someone by

12    telephone who was living abroad at the time so that the person would

13    explain to him the exact location of the place.

14            After awhile, the two of them came to me again, saying that they

15    had some more reliable information now.  When we went there on the second

16    occasion, he did find a jar with a golden watch, two or three rings, and

17    one golden chain, and he took it.  I don't know what happened with those

18    things afterwards.

19       Q.   Don't you remember telling him to take back the broken watch that

20    belonged to the murdered man, give it to his widow, and to give her the

21    worthless items, and you kept the gold?  You don't remember that?  You

22    otherwise seem to recall quite a bit.

23       A.   No, nothing.  That man, the man by the surname that we just

24    mentioned - I don't want to mention it again - he was the one who took

25    those items.  I don't know who the items belonged to and to whom he was


Page 8260

 1    supposed to give it back.

 2       Q.   Moving on.  Women in Omarska camp, how many women were there

 3    altogether, as far as you know, in Omarska camp during the time that you

 4    were there?

 5       A.   Between 15 and 18.

 6       Q.   What were they doing in Omarska camp?

 7       A.   They were detainees there.  They were considered to be detainees.

 8       Q.   What were they doing?  What was their task in the camp?

 9       A.   They didn't have any tasks.  They would sit down there in the

10    restaurant, in one of the corners, and that is where I would usually see

11    them.  From time to time, one, two, or three of them would wash the dishes

12    in the area where the food was distributed.

13       Q.   Your interview, on page 9, the Bennett -- the one marked Bennett,

14    page 9, you are asked about women.  English page 9.  I'm sorry, I do not

15    know the B/C/S page.  You are asked:

16                Q.   In connection with the evidence that some women were

17                     locked up, maltreated, and raped at Omarska, what do you

18                     know about that?

19                A.   I know only that there was a certain number of women

20                     there.  I do not know how many exactly.  Some 20 of

21                     them.  I know that they were separated from the other

22                     prisoners, to call them that, and their conditions of

23                     accommodation were much better than for the others

24                     because they were women.  I knew some of them personally

25                     before the war.  If they complained of boredom, they were


Page 8261

 1                     allowed to work a bit in the kitchen, help with the

 2                     washing up and distribution of food.

 3            Please tell me how often and who complained to you of boredom?

 4       A.   (redacted).  She was a kind of woman -- she was very lively,

 5    if I can use that expression.  She was very active.  She kept walking up

 6    and down the restaurant, complaining of boredom, and she would ask if

 7    there was any kind of work that she could do.  She kept laughing, asking

 8    for cigarettes, and saying, "Is there anything one can do here?  I'm bored

 9    to death."

10       Q.   I note that in your interview with Investigator Reid you made no

11    mention of your brother Zoran Kvocka.

12       A.   I think I mentioned him somewhere but I'm not sure.  He didn't ask

13    me anything about that.  But I will tell you everything you want to know.

14       Q.   Let me just amend my comment to you.  I should apologise in that

15    you didn't mention that your brother, whose name was Lija, is that what

16    you told us in court?  Lija was his nickname?

17       A.   Yes, my brother's name is Lija.

18       Q.   That Lija was at Omarska for at least -- at least one night that

19    you were there.  He told us that in court; you didn't mention it.

20       A.   I did not mention that he had been there, and I don't think he

21    said that either.  He didn't say that he was there at the time I was

22    there.  I don't know whether you are doing it on purpose, but you're

23    misinterpreting.  He talked about his arrival there at the beginning of

24    the work of the investigations centre, and he also spoke about people

25    being detained.  He never said at any point in time that I was there, nor


Page 8262

 1    was I able to tell Bob Reid anything about him because I did not know

 2    anything.  It was prior to his testimony that I actually learned that he

 3    was there on the first night, on the 27th or 28th, at the beginning of the

 4    work of the investigations centre.  I don't know exactly what they did.

 5    You are misinterpreting things, and things are actually very simple.

 6       Q.   He was also a guard, or at least he had access to the detainees,

 7    didn't he, at Omarska?

 8       A.   That is not correct, no.  There were guards.  Milojica, Zoran, and

 9    Miroslav Kvocka, those were the three people who were guards.  And Zoran,

10    son of Gorcin, from the village of Maricka, who was killed at the front in

11    Gradacac in the month of November or December 1992, that is Zoran Kvocka

12    who was a guard -- he was a guard at the Omarska.  As regards Zoran

13    Kvocka, called Lija, my own brother was not a guard in the Omarska camp.

14    You can easily find out about that if you have a look at your documents.

15       Q.   Whether or not he was an official guard, he was in the camp on a

16    number of occasions, was he not, abusing inmates, detainees.  You know

17    that.

18       A.   That is the kind of knowledge that you have.  However, what I know

19    is something that I heard from him that I didn't know from before, that on

20    one occasion he brought cigarettes to my brothers-in-law.  And here I

21    heard that he was there on the first night together with Cigo.  So don't

22    make me repeat his testimony here; you have it.

23       Q.   Yesterday we saw a document that you helped us identify as one

24    that lists the title of wartime police station Omarska, and it had the

25    names of various persons who were to be given passes to get in.  And on


Page 8263

 1    that list, I believe at the bottom under the cooks section, kitchen

 2    transport related, was a name --

 3            MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Objection.

 4            JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Simic.

 5            MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Mr. Kvocka's cross-examination has

 6    been going on for ten hours and more, and I would request that my learned

 7    friend shows the document to Mr. Kvocka so that he can follow what she's

 8    talking about.  We have seen so many documents.  He can't remember

 9    everything.  He can't have everything in his mind, so that would speed

10    things up and facilitate understanding if he's given a copy of the

11    document she's referring to.

12            JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Simic.  You mentioned

13    the time, and we have to calculate also the time spent on your

14    interventions.  Mr. Kvocka did not complain that he wants to have the

15    document.  You are a very, very attentive lawyer, but give some space to

16    your witness as well.

17            So Ms. Susan Somers, continue, please.

18            MS. SOMERS:  Yesterday's document, just so that the Chamber and

19    document are aware, was 3/208, and on it was the name Dzervida, D with a

20    little line through it, e-r-v-i-d-a, as someone who worked in the kitchen

21    area as a cook or a bread deliverer, I'm not quite clear, but it was

22    related to food, in Omarska camp.

23            I would ask the usher kindly to distribute 3/199.

24       Q.   Mr. Kvocka, what you have in front of you, if you've received it,

25    first of all the top page of it, which I believe may only be in


Page 8264

 1 

 2 

 3 

 4 

 5 

 6 

 7 

 8 

 9 

10 

11 

12  Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French

13  and English transcripts.

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 


Page 8265

 1    Serbo-Croat, is a document which indicates that a Tribunal representative,

 2    who signed his name as William A. Studenar, received certain documents

 3    from the Bosnian government in Bihac, and among those documents is a

 4    document bearing the number of 0212716/94, as is indicated on the face of

 5    that document, and also 0212715/94.

 6            The document appears to be a statement as well as -- actually, a

 7    statement in two forms.  One is a summary report and the other is

 8    background information with -- one of the documents in the original

 9    language bears a signature of the person Dzervida as well as the people

10    who conducted -- took the statement.

11            This date is a date before your indictment.  It was 1994.  And the

12    individual Dzervida, who calls him Drasko in this particular report, is a

13    Serb who was captured by the Bosniaks and was giving information.  In the

14    document on the second page, he talks a bit about himself and you.  I'm

15    sorry, second page talks about your brother Zoran, but he talks about you

16    as well.  As to Zoran on the second page of the document he says, "Cigo is

17    a sabotage group, the commander of which was Momcilo Rade Kovic called

18    Cigo."  And he goes on to describe him.  "The following were members of

19    his group, Zoran Kvocka called Lija, from the village of Maricka," and he

20    names people.  "Zoran Kvocka is tall, balding, and about 30 years old.

21    Cigo's group took part in the looting together with the Maniakosi," I hope

22    I'm pronouncing it right.  "They burned houses, killed, expelled the

23    population from Lenic and took them to the camps.  People from Prijedor

24    and the surrounding villages were taken to Omarska --"

25            JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Simic.


Page 8266

 1            MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I have to object,

 2    regardless of the time.  Is the purpose here for Ms. Somers to read to us

 3    the statement?  And I must point out straight away, in the statement

 4    before us we don't see the signature of Dzervida.  Shouldn't she ask the

 5    witness about this statement, or is the purpose to enter this whole

 6    statement into the transcript, which is a pattern that is repeating

 7    itself?

 8            JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Ms. Susan Somers, what is the

 9    purpose?

10            MS. SOMERS:  Your Honour, I'm only trying to link the passages

11    about Zoran Kvocka, and on the next page, the top paragraph of the last

12    page, about Miroslav Kvocka.  I do not wish -- certainly do not wish to

13    take the Chamber's time in reading it.

14            And it is unlikely, Your Honours, that this individual would have

15    seen this document.  It's the information contained in it that I would

16    like to ask about.

17            JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. O'Sullivan.

18            MR. O'SULLIVAN:  I have an objection, Your Honour, and it's based

19    on the previous rulings of this Chamber, and Your Honours have ruled that

20    during cross-examination it is unfair and not permitted to put someone

21    else's statement to a witness during cross-examination based on what

22    someone else may have said.  And indeed, Your Honours have ruled that

23    during cross-examination, we cannot put to a witness what a previous

24    Prosecution witness has said about certain events.  And certainly it is

25    unfair and inappropriate to put what purports to be a statement by someone


Page 8267

 1    else for this witness to comment on.

 2            Your Honours have ruled that way in the past, and I submit that

 3    that ruling should be followed here.

 4            JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes.  You are right, but the

 5    Chamber ruled that the parties could use in the cross-examination things

 6    to clarify a contradiction or check the credibility of the witness.  The

 7    documents may be used but will not be admitted into evidence.  This came

 8    as a result of a whole series of discussions that we had.

 9            Therefore, Ms. Susan Somers, I think the point is, you have to

10    choose:  Either you read the document and not tender it, or you ask for it

11    to be tendered.  I'm sorry, I seem to have lost, to have got lost.

12            The ruling of the Chamber was that prior statements, including

13    statements given to other authorities, are not admitted into evidence.

14    However, they may be used to impeach the witness or to clarify a

15    contradiction.

16            So if you're using the document, you're not going to tender it

17    into evidence.  So it's up to you to choose.

18            MS. SOMERS:  That's correct, Your Honour.

19            JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. O'Sullivan.

20            MR. O'SULLIVAN:  With respect, previous statements given by the

21    witness can be used in the way you just described, but in my submission,

22    we're talking about a statement given by somebody else, that's purportedly

23    given by somebody else.  By a third person.  And precisely you have not

24    allowed us to put to successive Prosecution witnesses what a previous

25    Prosecution witness stated on the basis of fairness and appropriateness to


Page 8268

 1    the witness testifying.

 2            This is not a statement that purports to come from Mr. Kvocka, a

 3    previous statement from him.  This is from a third person.

 4            JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes.  I think we have to speed

 5    things up and get to your question because the question is what is

 6    important.  All parties can say, "I have information that is such and

 7    such," and then put your question to the witness.

 8            MS. SOMERS:  Thank you, Your Honour.  I was not going to seek the

 9    admission, but I wanted, in fairness, to at least have the documents in

10    front of everyone so that they could see from what I was reading.

11       Q.   There is information from a particular document I would ask you to

12    comment on.  This Serb who was part of the group indicated the camp

13    commander at Omarska, again, I have to -- I'm sorry, I have to back up a

14    little so you know what I'm talking about.

15            On the second page at the very bottom it indicates, "I was

16    allocated to the 3rd Battalion of the 43rd Prijedor Brigade in the rear

17    unit.  I worked in the kitchen which prepared food for the Omarska camp.

18    I was in charge of the bread transport from Prijedor to Omarska.  The camp

19    commander was Miroslav Kvocka who was replaced after a certain time by

20    Zeljko Meakic."

21            Did you know this individual Dzervida?  Do you remember him?

22       A.   I'm not quite sure.  I'm trying to think of his face.  There are

23    at least three or four Dzervidas, and even Drasko Dzervidas.  There are

24    three or four Drasko Dzervidas in the areas of the villages of Gradina and

25    Omarska, and it is quite possible that one of them drove bread from


Page 8269

 1    Prijedor to the kitchen in the iron ore mine.  It's quite possible.  But

 2    he said that he drove bread from Prijedor to the kitchen.  He knows

 3    nothing more than that.

 4            I would like you to analyse many of the things that he has said

 5    here because I see that the man was captured, that he was talking a lot of

 6    nonsense.  He just linked up some names that he happened to remember.  You

 7    see, he was exchanged.  I heard that he was exchanged under very difficult

 8    circumstances, and if we're talking about the same Dzervida, it's quite

 9    possible that he was never exchanged, that he's still missing.  I didn't

10    know you would ask me about this; I would have perhaps inquired.

11            There is one Drasko Dzervida who was never exchanged, and he gave

12    to the Muslim police or army in Bihac these statements, and subjected to

13    such torture, he would be ready to say that he slept with his mother if

14    that would help him.

15       Q.   Your position -- I beg your pardon, Mr. Kvocka.  Your views on

16    when a person entered Omarska camp and when a person was standing, as we

17    might say, on the threshold of Omarska camp, are discussed between you and

18    Investigator Reid on page 42 of the English version of your interview,

19    which would be in your language - I'll tell you in just a second - 46 of

20    the B/C/S.

21            MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours.

22            JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Simic.

23            MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] As I see that my learned friend has

24    moved on from this document, she stated that the document was signed,

25    regardless of what Mr. Kvocka said.  But really, there is no authenticity


Page 8270

 1    of this document.  There's no signature.  So we would like to see whether

 2    Drasko Dzervida signed this document which was referred to in this

 3    examination.  I'm not doubting that it was signed, but I'd like to see, us

 4    and Your Honours, to see that signature.

 5       A.   What we have here, this is not Drasko, this is AID that gave the

 6    statement.

 7            MS. SOMERS:  Your Honour, I'm not, of course, seeking to have it

 8    admitted.  There are signatures.  I don't have the original, this is a

 9    copy.  Let me see if I can -- my translation indicates a place on the left

10    side, and I think in the original language it's -- I don't know how

11    well -- it's very, very faint, but it looks to -- my B/C/S copy bears the

12    name Dzervida Drasko, and I don't know whether or not -- I do not see --

13    my copy is not sufficiently clear to show anything else.

14       A.   But without a signature, no signature.

15            JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Excuse me.  You can have the

16    floor when I give you the floor.  I am listening to the translation, so I

17    cannot hear Ms. Susan Somers as well as you at the same time.  So I have

18    to say, "You have the floor."  So "floor."  So now you have the floor, and

19    please remember that there are the interpreters.  So go ahead.

20            MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] I apologise, Your Honour.  On the

21    photocopy that I have, the signatures of the other two persons are clearly

22    visible, but not that of Mr. Drasko Dzervida, and my learned friend said

23    that it was signed by Mr. Dzervida, so I'm protesting.  If there is no

24    signature, then this whole passage should be redacted from the transcript;

25    otherwise, it cannot be allowed to stand.


Page 8271

 1            JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Simic, what Ms. Susan Somers

 2    said, she said it was signed because in the translation there is mention

 3    of a name.  She said that she looked at the original, and the original has

 4    a signature, and what we have is a copy.  So what we need to do is for

 5    Ms. Susan Somers, tomorrow or on another day, to show to the parties the

 6    original document with the signature, that's all, that's all.  And as we

 7    are going to have a Status Conference next week, we can clear this matter

 8    up when talking about documents.

 9            For the moment, Ms. Susan Somers is not going to tender this

10    document into evidence.  This is a document that will not be part of the

11    file.

12            MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.  But Ms. Somers

13    quoted from this document.  She asked questions; she asked comments.  If I

14    am asking comments about something that is construed, that is a forgery,

15    that is not permissible.  She used this document as a valid document

16    asking the witness to comment on it, confusing the accused.  So it is not

17    permissible to use a falsified document regardless of whether it will be

18    tendered and admitted or not.  That's what I'm saying.

19            All we want is to see the original and to see the signature.

20            JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Ms. Susan Somers, do you have

21    the original with the signature?

22            MS. SOMERS:  Your Honour, I do not have the original.  If it could

23    be that there is not one, what I am submitting to the Court is the fact

24    that this came from the Bosnian authorities.  Even unsigned, it came from

25    the authorities.  Its value can be weighed or rejected.  I do not intend


Page 8272

 1    to submit this into evidence.  I wanted to ask about certain incidents

 2    that came out of the archives of the Bosnian authorities, having captured

 3    a Serb soldier.  If, in fact, the witness cannot recollect anything that

 4    was mentioned in there, so be it.  I won't push the issue any further.

 5            JUDGE WALD:  Let me just emphasise one thing, that when you're

 6    using this technique, and I admit that it gets a bit confusing when you

 7    quote enormously long passages from a particular document, I understand

 8    you not to be, as you've reiterated, not to be seeking admission of it

 9    into evidence; though, as I say, it begins to get a little bit on the edge

10    when you're reading paragraph after paragraph after paragraph.

11            But what I do want to emphasise is that even though you do that,

12    nothing - nothing - of substance in those paragraphs is anything which we

13    can use as evidence that that really happened.  The only thing that

14    becomes evidence is what Mr. Kvocka says when he says, "That never

15    happened; I never knew that person; that couldn't have happened; I never

16    knew that."  That's the evidence in the case, and the evidence is not

17    anything that's read to him.  We can't, in a judgement, site anything that

18    you put in through that particular technique.  That's the way I'm

19    receiving it, in which case, the authentication becomes less important

20    than if you were trying to admit it into evidence for the substance

21    thereof.

22            But I do admit it gets a little confusing when you really read --

23    if it were conceivable to say, "In this document, a person was captured by

24    the Bosnians.  It says that your brother went into the camp and did

25    looting things, and in particular here are a couple of sentences.  Now,


Page 8273

 1    what do you say about that?" and he says, "Never happened.  I never heard

 2    about it," that's the evidence.  Nothing that you read to him can we rely

 3    upon unless it's actually admitted into evidence.  Now, that's the spirit

 4    in which I'm receiving this.

 5            MS. SOMERS:  This is absolutely correct, Your Honour.  As it was

 6    meant, I needed to give enough information to elicit a response --

 7            JUDGE WALD:  Sometimes you give us more than enough.

 8            MS. SOMERS:  I'm sorry.  I try to put it in the context so that

 9    there would be no confusion as to what I was referring.  Yes, that is

10    exactly correct, Your Honour, Judge Wald.

11            JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] If I may, Judge Wald, I would

12    like to add a point.  I agree.  But there is one thing, and that is that

13    you are presenting this document and you told us that the document was

14    signed, and that is the problem.  You cannot present a document as being

15    signed when you don't have a signature.  That is the problem, after all.

16            We have wasted a lot of time because of this, Ms. Susan Somers,

17    and we come back to yesterday's issue.  You are presenting documents, but

18    in this particular case, we do have an explanation and the receipt

19    indicating the source.  But you should have said that the document was not

20    signed.  But when you said that it was signed, that was what caused all

21    the confusion.

22            So I think that now we should have a break, a half-hour break.

23                          --- Recess taken at 10.57 a.m.

24                          --- On resuming at 11.30 a.m.

25            JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Please be seated.


Page 8274

 1 

 2 

 3 

 4 

 5 

 6 

 7 

 8 

 9 

10 

11 

12  Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French

13  and English transcripts.

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 


Page 8275

 1            Not yet, Ms. Somers.  Mr. Kos is not yet here.

 2                          [The accused entered court]

 3            JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Very well.  I think that we are

 4    now ready to proceed.  Ms. Somers, please continue.

 5            MS. SOMERS:  Thank you, Your Honour.

 6       Q.   Mr. Kvocka, I was beginning to ask you about your views on when a

 7    person enters Omarska camp, and in trying to understand this, I was

 8    looking at page 42 of your interview with Investigator Reid.  If I could

 9    possibly get the B/C/S number for you.  English page 42; it would be 46,

10    47 in Serbo-Croat.

11            A discussion that I'd like to try to get some clarification about

12    surrounds prisoners who were getting off of buses as they were being

13    brought to Omarska, and it begins with the question -- I'm sorry.  Reid

14    asks:

15                Q.   Were there not some of these extremists who were more

16                     extreme than the others who would need special looking

17                     after?

18                A.   I had no clear information about that.  I know that the

19                     people escorting in the beginning used to say that a

20                     certain group was particularly -- a group of particular

21                     extremists because they were caught in combat.

22                Q.   When these prisoners were being taken from the buses, did

23                     you ever see cordons or lines of police and escorts

24                     lining up and the prisoners having to pass through and

25                     being beaten while they were passing through these


Page 8276

 1                     cordons or those lines?

 2                A.   I think in the beginning there were situations like

 3                     that.

 4                Q.   Did you see that?

 5                A.   Yes, in the beginning.  At least once.

 6                Q.   And what did you do?

 7                A.   Nothing I could do, and should do nothing.  This was done

 8                     by the people who brought the prisoners, they draw them

 9                     through this line or cordon, and that was it.  And then

10                     they were put up as I already mentioned.  And the guards

11                     went back on buses.

12                Q.   But isn't it true that these prisoners are being

13                     transferred into your custody?

14                A.   I cannot understand it that way, because the people who

15                     brought them are still there.

16                Q.   But aren't you responsible for their safety as well as

17                     part of the security, weren't they your instructions?

18                A.   I would say that they did not actually get into the

19                     centre then yet.

20            What I find confusing is you're telling the Chamber, interviewers

21    as well, that you would only act if something happens before your very

22    eyes.  Those were your words, "I did not see certain things.  If I had

23    seen."

24            Now, in this instance, you see it, but you nonetheless seem to

25    suggest that it's still not your responsibility even when it happens in


Page 8277

 1    front of your eyes.  Can you explain this confusion?

 2       A.   Yes, I can.  It would take me at least half a day to do that, but

 3    I'll try to be as brief as possible.  I don't know what is the most

 4    interesting part for you here, perhaps the cordons.

 5            When people were brought there in buses, it was customary for the

 6    escort to get off the bus.  I'm referring to the first two days when

 7    people were brought in buses.  That was the last time they were brought in

 8    buses after that.  That is while I was there and according to what I

 9    know.  Usually buses were coming one after the other, and then one bus

10    would wait for another, that is, for the people to get off from the

11    previous bus.

12            So what would happen then was that the escort people who were on

13    the buses, four or five of them, got off the bus, and then two or three of

14    them would stand on each side of the door outside the bus.  And the

15    detainees getting off the bus would have to pass through between them.  So

16    that was the cordon that is referred to and that we mentioned it as such.

17            However, what is not mentioned here is something that I can tell

18    you about.  I remember a particular event when people from this cordon

19    forced the detainees to sing some songs which at that time were considered

20    to be sort of nationalistic songs.  The detainees were even made to slap

21    each other at times.  This is what I was able to observe on one occasion

22    from the window of the duty office.

23            The people who were taking those people into custody were wearing

24    white belts, so I assumed that they were members of the military police.

25    There were others as well, but there were quite a few of them wearing


Page 8278

 1    white belts.

 2            If you want me to comment on the second part, I can only give you

 3    my opinion.  As long as they were not put up in rooms, they were under

 4    their jurisdiction.  The detainees were under their jurisdiction before

 5    they were actually accommodated.  Once they were put up in appropriate

 6    rooms, we were supposed to be in charge after that.  They were our

 7    responsibility.  And that is what I was trying to explain to Bob Reid.

 8       Q.   Where is that written, that there is an inner phase and a little

 9    grey area when people are taken off of a bus, heading toward whatever

10    accommodation you see fit to give them, that they are not your wards upon

11    setting foot on the grounds of Omarska camp; where is that written?  Who

12    said that?

13       A.   I really don't understand you.  There were no established lines

14    like on a football field.  People who were their escorts were responsible

15    for them for as long as they were not put up anywhere.

16       Q.   Where is that written?

17       A.   That was the customary procedure.

18       Q.   That was the custom.

19       A.   I don't know where that is written.  It was a practice.  I'm

20    talking about how things were in practice.  There was no appropriate law

21    on the investigation centre.  Had there been such a law, I would gladly

22    give you my comment on it, but there wasn't such a law.  There was a law

23    on the application of police rules and regulations.

24       Q.   You stood there, you watched everything you just described to us

25    that you saw with your own eyes, watched the abuse of persons in your


Page 8279

 1    presence, in your presence, and you did absolutely nothing.  Isn't that

 2    really what happened?

 3       A.   You cannot talk about my presence there.  If I had been there --

 4    you cannot say that I was really actually there at that moment.  This took

 5    place over a period of a couple of seconds.  I cannot say -- I don't know

 6    whether you can call that singing torture, torturing of people.  I don't

 7    know if it was really necessary for me to get organised, so to speak, and

 8    to enter into a conflict with the military police if they were forcing

 9    those people to sing songs.  This lasted for a minute or two.

10            I don't know what kind of intervention one could expect from

11    anyone at that moment with a view of preventing it.  I don't know what

12    would be a logical intervention.  To open fire on the military police, and

13    in that exchange of fire to kill perhaps 100 detainees?  Maybe that would

14    have been the solution.  Maybe I would have been more satisfied in that

15    case.  Excuse me, maybe that would have been to your satisfaction.

16            JUDGE RIAD:  Ms. Somers.

17            MS. SOMERS:  Yes, Your Honour.

18            JUDGE RIAD:  Just, you mentioned that there was no established

19    line between the military police outside and inside.  Does that mean that

20    the military police could also go inside and practice the same actions;

21    and vice versa, that you can go outside and do whatever you like if there

22    was no -- if there was no established line?

23       A.   In principle, yes.  I am referring to the people who were

24    escorting the buses, who had taken those detainees into custody, and they

25    were the ones who took them off the buses and put them up in appropriate


Page 8280

 1    rooms.  This is what I'm talking about.

 2            So they could also entered the premises at that moment until that

 3    work of putting up prisoners was completed.  They were able to enter the

 4    actual premises.  There was no way of preventing them from entering those

 5    buildings.  There were no instructions or orders to that effect, that that

 6    would have been prohibited.  The military police came to ask for some

 7    detainees on several occasions, the detainees that they wanted to

 8    interrogate on the matters that were of interest for them.

 9            JUDGE RIAD:  And if they entered inside and did this and practised

10    the same violations, asking them to beat each other, as you said, or

11    that -- did you have the authority to stop them, or were they higher than

12    you?

13       A.   At any rate, at that moment they were above us.  It was upon -- up

14    to the guard who saw that to decide whether he would intervene or not, and

15    it depended on the attitude he had with the military police.  It was

16    something that depended on every individual guard.  I told you about

17    myself.  I would have intervened had I been present down there when that

18    happened.

19            So it is an individual thing, whether to oppose the military

20    police or not, and it depended on the assessment of each guard of the

21    situation.  And when I was in a position to make such an assessment, I

22    would do that.  If it was impossible for me to do anything, at least I

23    would comment on what was going on or tell people it is really not an

24    appropriate thing to do, please stop it, and things like that.

25            JUDGE RIAD:  Thank you.


Page 8281

 1            MS. SOMERS:

 2       Q.   Now, did you use the same line of reasoning when persons were

 3    getting off the bus and you described the heroic intervention of stepping

 4    in front of what you described to be a drunken Serb with a machine-gun who

 5    subsequently killed, is it four, five, or six people?  Did you do the same

 6    analysis of in whose custody these people were before you intervened?

 7       A.   Yes, yes.  I was thinking along the same lines, only this was a

 8    very drastic example because of the noise and the shooting that took

 9    place.  I stepped over that threshold, if can put it that way.  I reacted

10    in accordance with my principles as a police officer.

11            And here, as I told you, it was a matter of singing songs.  I

12    don't think it was life threatening in any way, although I know it's a

13    kind of humiliation, and the detainees probably experienced it as a

14    humiliation.  But their lives were not threatened, and their lives would

15    have been threatened if there was -- there had been an intervention and a

16    conflict.

17       Q.   I believe we were talking -- or Mr. Reid was asking you about

18    people being beaten, not singing.  Does that change your opinion about the

19    need to intervene and invoke -- or cast away what you said were rules and

20    use your police instincts?

21       A.   No, it doesn't change anything.  As I said a moment ago, in

22    addition to singing, the prisoners were made to slap each other on a

23    couple of occasions.  I don't think that slaps are life threatening.  But

24    again, I have to say that it was my assessment.  Had I interfered, had I

25    entered into a conflict with the military police, shooting might have


Page 8282

 1    occurred, and the people from the escort would have probably opened fire

 2    and some people would have been killed.  If you analyse the situation, you

 3    are presented with a choice of two evils.  You choose the lesser one.

 4       Q.   I'd like to ask you a little bit about the description of your job

 5    before, just before the wartime situation in Omarska transformed your

 6    department as you then knew it.

 7            MS. SOMERS:  If the usher would be kind enough to distribute

 8    3/206.

 9       Q.   The document before you, 3/206, is -- does everyone have it?

10       A.   My document is in the English language.

11       Q.   I have one in Serbo-Croat.  Let me give it to you, please.  Do you

12    have it in your language now, Mr. Kvocka?

13       A.   Yes.

14       Q.   The document is out of Sarajevo from January of 1990, and it is

15    called "Rules on the Internal Organisation of the Republican Secretariat

16    of the Interior."  This, at one time, this secretariat, would have been

17    your parent organisation, would it not, your umbrella organisation?  Would

18    that be correct?

19       A.   Yes.

20       Q.   Thank you.  On the English page 2, there's a paragraph number 40

21    which is labelled, "Duties and tasks of the patrol sector leader and the

22    patrol area leader."  You were a patrol sector leader in the Omarska

23    Police Station Department and then the Omarska Police Station; that's

24    correct?  I'm sorry.

25            MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Objection.


Page 8283

 1       A.   No, no.  I was the leader of the patrol sector within the Omarska

 2    Police Station Department.  As regards the police station in Prijedor, I

 3    was one of the patrol sector leaders later on, until 1993.  After 1993, I

 4    was also a sector leader in Prijedor in 1994, and after 1994, I was the

 5    shift leader in Prijedor.  But that all happened in Prijedor.

 6            MS. SOMERS:

 7       Q.   Okay.  The patrol sector leader position was Omarska, then, is

 8    that correct, when you were working at Omarska?  Okay.

 9       A.   Yes, and the police station department in Omarska.

10       Q.   I'm sorry.  Just up to the time of, let's say, April 30th, 1992.

11       A.   Even after that.

12       Q.   Very good.  Looking at what is included in your job description,

13    and I'll just take a few points so as to -- I'm sure everyone can read it,

14    but "establishes a security dossier for the area/sector; responsible for

15    ensuring that data in it is kept up-to-date; patrols the sector/area and

16    performs preventive, operational, and repressive duties and tasks in the

17    sector/area; constantly evaluates the security situation in local communes

18    in the sector and informs the station commander and proposes measures for

19    every newly arisen situation," and it goes on and on.

20            This type of job description reflects your understanding of what

21    you would have been doing as a patrol sector leader; is that right?

22       A.   Yes, more or less.

23       Q.   So these would have been your responsibilities on the eve of the

24    takeover of Prijedor; would that be fair?

25       A.   Those were my regular tasks, not responsibilities, the tasks that


Page 8284

 1 

 2 

 3 

 4 

 5 

 6 

 7 

 8 

 9 

10 

11 

12  Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French

13  and English transcripts.

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 


Page 8285

 1    are carried out by a patrol sector leader.

 2       Q.   Thank you for confirming that.  Now, when you -- excuse me.  If we

 3    were to try to get a very vague idea -- not so much a vague idea but a

 4    notion of the responsibilities, the job responsibilities of, let's say,

 5    Zeljko Meakic, would that include seeing how policemen were working?  I

 6    mean, in a supervisory role, seeing how policemen were working, how they

 7    were doing, using experience to suggest the correct way of conducting

 8    themselves, would that be something that Meakic should have been

 9    responsible for as well?  Does that sound like his role?

10       A.   You mean at the time he was the commander of the department?

11       Q.   Yes, and the camp.  I mean, would that be fair to say, that he had

12    among his duties, drawing on his experience, to observe how the policemen

13    were working?  Would that be your understanding?

14       A.   Yes, that would have been expected, that he would, in a way,

15    supervise the work of the policemen; that is, a department commander would

16    supervise the work of police officers, in professional terms.  However, as

17    regards the actual command structure, that wouldn't really mean anything,

18    except for the fact that it would involve the drafting of the daily

19    schedule.

20            You have two things here:  You have the command structure and the

21    professional structure.  You can have a position in accordance with the

22    command structure and you can also have a position because of your

23    professional abilities.  The commander of the department is there because

24    of his professional skills; however, he receives orders from the police

25    station commander.  Everything relating to the commanding itself comes


Page 8286

 1    from the police station.

 2       Q.   His experience and skills would enable him, if he noticed

 3    something not correct with his troops, with his subordinates, to correct

 4    it or to inform them of the need to correct their behaviour; would that

 5    also describe something that Meakic would do?

 6       A.   Yes, that would have been necessary for him, to correct certain

 7    irregularities, to give his advice.  If he was not able to do that, then

 8    in that case, he would have to refer the matter to his superior.

 9       Q.   On page 39 of your interview with Investigator Reid, and that

10    would be in Serbo-Croat, 43 and 44, that is, 43 and 44, with the English

11    being 39, Reid puts to you the question:

12                Q.   What did you do in the camp?  What was your role?  What

13                     did you do during the time that you were in the Omarska

14                     Interrogations Centre, your day-to-day duties?

15                A.   If Zeljko Meakic was not there, and I already said that I

16                     did not have a guard post which I was supposed to be at,

17                     his orders, so to say, to me meant that I was to see how

18                     the policemen were working, how they were doing; to use

19                     my experience and suggest to the policemen the correct

20                     way of conducting themselves; and probably if I noticed

21                     anything wrong, to inform him.  That would be the essence

22                     of it.

23            That sounds very much like what you just described Mr. Meakic

24    would be doing.

25            I would also like to ask you about the amount of time that you --


Page 8287

 1       A.   I have to comment.  Yes, but you seem to be looking for something

 2    else and moving over.

 3            First of all, this may sound similar, but that was the task of

 4    Mr. Meakic in respect of his subordinate policemen.  On the same page you

 5    have the question, "When Mr. Meakic is issuing you a task, is he issuing

 6    you the task as his subordinate policeman or as his deputy"? and the

 7    answer is, "As his subordinate police officer," and it goes on and on.

 8            It is my obligation, as an experienced policeman, to give

 9    suggestions to a less-experienced police officer, especially a reserve

10    police officer.  We are talking about reserve police officers here.  They

11    do not know anything about the work of the police.  They had only recently

12    joined the force.  It is my obligation, without specific orders from

13    Meakic, to provide them with appropriate suggestions and advice.

14            But I probably took it to mean quite literally and exaggerated a

15    little bit.  It would have been far better for me to have moved away.  And

16    I think that more evil would have been done, more harm would have been

17    done in that way, but I wouldn't be considered as a superior.

18            But we are talking about sector leaders here who are at that

19    position because of their professional abilities and not because of the

20    command structure.

21       Q.   The number of hours that you were at work, we touched on

22    yesterday, and I didn't think it was clear.  If I understood you, you

23    suggested that of the hours that you spent, a significant number were

24    spent in the office.  How many hours a day did you spend in the office

25    when you were on shift?


Page 8288

 1       A.   It is very hard to tell exactly now.  I said that for the first

 2    two days I was there something like 16 or 18 hours.  Maybe yesterday I

 3    said 19.  But, anyway, 16 or 17 hours was the time I spent in the

 4    investigation centre during the first two days.  Out of that, half the

 5    time in the office.

 6            We've already said that that morning Zeljko told me to continue my

 7    duty shift until he tells me to stop, and I did.  On the way -- and he

 8    also mentioned the fact that there was some new reserve policemen.  "Be

 9    there for them so that they don't do something wrong," those were Zeljko's

10    orders.

11       Q.   Page 97 of your interview with Bob Reid, which in Serbo-Croat

12    would be 102, 102 roughly, you are asked by Reid:

13                Q.   On an average, as best you can, can you estimate how long

14                     you were doing this out on the pista area, down in this

15                     area in the carpark, in the restaurant, occasionally in

16                     this area here, on average how many hours a day would you

17                     be doing that in a 12-hour shift?

18                A.   That was all the time.  If I was there for 12 hours, that

19                     was the total time.

20                Q.   That you spent outside?

21                A.   No, I would go into the office.

22                Q.   How many hours in a shift would you spend in the office?

23                A.   When we put all the time together as I went in an hour

24                     or two.

25                Q.   The other 10 to 11 hours, you were outside somewhere


Page 8289

 1                     in the centre?

 2                A.   Yes, one could say that.

 3            So if the lion's share of your time, if the majority of your time

 4    were outside, did you see, did you hear people suffering?  Did you see

 5    persons lying on the pista on a regular basis in the heat?  Did you hear

 6    screams?

 7       A.   I heard screams when I was in the office.  I explained that

 8    yesterday.  I don't want to repeat myself and waste time.  I saw them

 9    lying down on the pista once, and I told you about that yesterday.  I

10    won't repeat myself.  I did see men, and in view of the conditions and the

11    situation, they were suffering.  But I didn't see how they were

12    suffering.  I saw people with injuries.

13            But you must take something else into account:  I spent there from

14    the 28th or the 29th, I don't remember the exact date, most probably from

15    the 29th in the morning until the 22nd or 23rd of June.  For two or three

16    days, three days I was off after that incident, and I was also off between

17    the 16th and the 19th because of problems with my left leg.  I can show

18    you those injuries which are still visible if necessary.  So I was absent

19    for six days, and taking into account the shifts when I was replaced by

20    others.  So please build into your questions the actual time I spent

21    there, four or five nights and maybe another six, seven, or eight days.  I

22    can't work it out now mathematically.

23       Q.   Your interview with Bennett --

24            THE INTERPRETER:  Mike, please.

25            MS. SOMERS:  I'm terribly sorry.


Page 8290

 1       Q.   Your interview that is marked "Bennett Interview" has a question

 2    on English page 4, a question which is put to you in the lower half of the

 3    page, question, "Did you try to have members of your family" -- oh, I'm so

 4    sorry.  I thought you had it.  Do you have it in front of you,

 5    Mr. Kvocka.  It's a question about --

 6       A.   Yes.

 7       Q.   Okay.

 8                Q.  Did you try to have members of your family or your wife's

 9                family who were in Omarska released?

10                A.  I don't know how to explain that to you.  I did not try to

11                have them released.  For they also had been brought to the

12                investigation centre and I thought that if they were guilty of

13                anything in connection with the organising of the attack on

14                the Serbian authorities in Prijedor, they should undergo the

15                procedure, but for the sake of providing for their security

16                when I was absent I put them up with my parents near the camp,

17                the investigations centre.

18            In your interview with Mr. Reid on English page 139, which would

19    be in your language --

20            MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Objection, Your Honour.

21            JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] What is the objection,

22    Mr. Simic?

23            MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, this text was quoted

24    from by Ms. Somers yesterday.  She's quoting from it again.  Mr. Kvocka

25    has explained, and again she's referring to another text.


Page 8291

 1            JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Simic, did you hear

 2    Ms. Susan Somers' question?  Did you hear the question?

 3            MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] No.

 4            JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Well, wait, then.

 5            Please put your question, Ms. Somers.

 6            MS. SOMERS:

 7       Q.   On your page 138/139 in the Serbo-Croat text of your statement,

 8    you said -- let's see now.  I beg your pardon.  I'm sorry, it's 147, I'm

 9    wrong, 147 of the Serbo-Croat text.

10            The discussion is about your brothers-in law, and it begins on the

11    bottom of English page 138, and then continuing on to 139 you say, it's in

12    answer to the previous question, "No, not at that time.  But I did go to

13    see Simo Drljaca to ask him to release them.  I believe I even went twice,

14    but I did go once for sure.  He was very brief and told me that he did not

15    want to discuss this with me and that he was not going to release any

16    Muslims and told me to leave his office."

17            My question is, which is the truth?  Did you ask for the release,

18    or didn't you?  Just so I can know which one to believe.

19       A.   That is the truth.  I told Bob Reid that, and I said it in my

20    testimony.  I also said that to Mr. Chris.  Chris didn't ask me whether I

21    asked for their release.  I said that I could not release them because

22    somebody had decided that they go into detention.  And the person who made

23    that decision could release him.  And as it appeared to Simo Drljaca who

24    decided on the detention of persons, I didn't know at the time who was the

25    one.  It was a regular procedure: the chief up to three days, then the


Page 8292

 1    investigating judge, and so on.  We talked about that the day before

 2    yesterday.

 3            However, Chris asked me why I didn't release them, and I said that

 4    I could not release them.  If a competent authority had decided to put

 5    them in detention, then as a policeman, I have to respect that decision.

 6    There is not something that I can do to rescind that decision.

 7            But after the interrogation by the investigators who did the

 8    interrogations of my brothers-in-law, and as those guys are quite good

 9    guys, Neso Babic and Neso Tomcic, they said that they had no guilt of any

10    kind and that everything was fine, but that that was the end of their

11    job.  And once I heard that, Meakic told me, "Don't ask me to go to Simo.

12    You know what he's like.  You go and talk to him since they have been

13    interrogated and no guilt has been established."  And then after that, I

14    went to see Simo Drljaca.  So I could not release them, I could only

15    protect them.

16            JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Ms. Susan Somers, I'm sorry for

17    interrupting you.

18            Mr. Simic, please, could you stand up.  What is your objection

19    now?

20            MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, these questions were

21    covered yesterday.

22            JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] No, I'm sorry, this is the first

23    time that Ms. Susan Somers is asking the witness which is the truth

24    because she compared one version with another version.  Do you understand

25    that, Mr. Simic?  Do you accept that your intervention was precipitous?


Page 8293

 1            MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] This time, yes.

 2            JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] All right.  You may be seated.

 3            Ms. Susan Somers, you may continue.

 4            MS. SOMERS:

 5       Q.   You just said something I wish I could ask you for an explanation

 6    on:  "So I could not release them, I could only protect them."  How could

 7    you protect them?  Could you explain that, please?

 8       A.   In the way I did.  If I repeat all that, that will be taking up

 9    your time.  I could protect them by violating a particular rule, taking

10    them out of the premises which had been designated for the detention of

11    persons.  You have the orders among your documents when Simo Drljaca says

12    that no one can be released without his signature.  Regardless of the

13    staff and the investigators and the coordinators, that nobody could

14    release a prisoner without his signature.  You have that among your

15    documents.

16            So I took a risk in this case.  It's becoming a bit boring and

17    quite embarrassing for me to keep emphasising something I did, so I don't

18    like to talk about it, but I did that out of my human considerations and

19    moral considerations.  I didn't pay attention to what would follow.

20            I am aware of the confusion in the investigation centre and around

21    it, and I know that all kinds of things could have happened to them and

22    all the others.  And to avoid that and to simply rid myself of some

23    pressure, if I put them in my house, I have more time for the others.  If

24    I had left them there, then I would have guarded them only.  And then some

25    other people would have been left unprotected that I wanted to protect.  I


Page 8294

 1 

 2 

 3 

 4 

 5 

 6 

 7 

 8 

 9 

10 

11 

12  Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French

13  and English transcripts.

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 


Page 8295

 1    wanted to protect everyone, in fact, but possibilities ...

 2       Q.   When you visited Trnopolje to release your in-laws or to get at

 3    least one of them released, did you also --

 4       A.   Two of them, actually.

 5       Q.   Did you also pass Keraterm camp?

 6       A.   No.  It's possible to pass it, that's why I hesitated, but no.

 7    You can -- you would have to go through the town and the road along the

 8    rail tracks.  You don't take the road towards Banja Luka.

 9       Q.   When you came in from your home in Prijedor going to work, did you

10    pass Keraterm camp?

11       A.   If you're talking about the time of the existence of the Keraterm

12    camp.

13       Q.   When it was an active --

14       A.   No, no, then no.  While the Keraterm camp was functioning, I had

15    to go to work via Gomjenica, Cela, Tomasica, but this was not on a daily

16    basis because I spent some nights in Omarska.  I would go to Prijedor to

17    check on my apartment, sometimes from midnight until morning.

18            On one occasion we tried, but before the Keraterm camp was

19    established.  This was immediately after the operations in Kozarac as far

20    as I can remember.  There was a military police checkpoint there and there

21    was no traffic, so I was turned back.  After that, I didn't even try to go

22    that way.  Maybe one could have passed, but so as not to waste time and

23    have to turn back, the next few times that I went there I took the road

24    via Tomasica, Cela -- Gomjenica, Cela, and Tomasica, and then to the left,

25    the road to Donja Maricka, and that is how you reach Omarska.


Page 8296

 1       Q.   So do I understand that when you went from Prijedor to Tukovi, you

 2    don't pass Keraterm?  You don't pass it, is that -- just so I understand

 3    the directions, you would not pass it?

 4       A.   Now you're mentioning Tukovi for the first time now.  I explained

 5    to you yesterday that Tukovi were on the road from Prijedor to Sanski

 6    Most, and Keraterm is on the road from Prijedor to Banja Luka.  These are

 7    two opposite directions in relation to the town of Prijedor.

 8            If you're going to Sanski Most you pass through Tukovi, and when

 9    you're going to Banja Luka, you pass by Keraterm.  And when you're going

10    to Omarska, the Omarska camp, there are two or, in fact, three ways of

11    going there.  Going past Keraterm along the Prijedor-Banja Luka railway

12    tracks when you pass through Trnopolje, and the Gomjenica-Cela road, and

13    you turn left to Omarska just before reaching Tomasica.

14       Q.   So you didn't go to the intersection of the crossroads where

15    Keraterm is found, you did not go that route?  Even though it would have

16    been along the main road, you found another route?

17       A.   When I was going to Omarska?  Yes, in that period.  I did go later

18    on.  I don't know whether Keraterm was already dismantled by then.

19    Afterwards, that road to Omarska was open.

20       Q.   You indicated yesterday, made a comment about Simo Drljaca hating

21    you.  What is that based on?  Why would he hate you?

22       A.   I didn't use the word "hate."  I said that he ignored me.  He

23    ignored me because of my first encounter with him which was an unpleasant

24    one, so I concluded from that.

25            MS. SOMERS:  If the usher would be kind enough to distribute


Page 8297

 1    3/207.

 2       A.   [In English] The English version is with me.

 3       Q.   This document is only in the English language as that is the

 4    language of the individual who sent it in, and I will have to rely on the

 5    translators -- the interpreters to assist us from the ELMO.

 6            This document was drafted and sent by a Colonel Jozsef Boda, a

 7    Hungarian national, who is in his own country at this time as a training

 8    officer, but in 1996, from March until end of December, was working for

 9    the International Police Task Force, commonly known as IPTF, in the Banja

10    Luka district region, in the office there.  He performed his duties as a

11    deputy regional commander and then became regional commander.

12            Colonel Boda indicates that, in the course of his duties with

13    IPTF, at the end of March, he received a poster on indictees that was

14    circulating in Bosnia-Herzegovina.  IPTF, and I shall quote, "We started

15    an investigation and tried to identify the war criminals in our area of

16    responsibility.  We successfully identified four war criminals in Prijedor

17    area."  The first is listed as Miroslav Kvocka; the second, Milojica

18    Kos --

19            MR. O'SULLIVAN:  Objection, Your Honour.

20            JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. O'Sullivan.

21            MR. O'SULLIVAN:  My client is presumed innocent until proven

22    guilty.  He is described in this document as a war criminal.  That

23    violates the Statute of this Tribunal.  It should not be before the

24    Chamber.  It violates his right to the presumption of innocence.

25            MS. SOMERS:  May I respond, Your Honour?


Page 8298

 1            JUDGE RODRIGUES:  Not yet.  [Interpretation] Yes, now.

 2            MS. SOMERS:  The terminology is not what is critical here, Your

 3    Honour.  It is a person whose first language is not English.  However, it

 4    is evident that the poster involved is the IPT -- the ICTY poster which is

 5    distributed worldwide.

 6            What is the crux of this document is what was done by Simo Drljaca

 7    in the next paragraph.  The characterisation, I think that would go to

 8    weight.  Certainly counsel is correct that perhaps "indictee" would be

 9    more appropriate, but we did not write this, we received it.  And I think

10    that if permitted to proceed on the next paragraph, having simply set the

11    stage to show the link to this trial, if the Chamber would let me proceed

12    and understand what this is about, that would be helpful.  I think I

13    can ...

14            JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, but we are not here with

15    any prejudices.  These are words that are used which shouldn't be used.

16    In any event, the Chamber is not to make similar conclusions simply

17    because that is what it says in this document.  This is rather like what

18    Judge Wald said a moment ago.

19            Mr. Fila, you also have an observation?

20            MR. FILA: [Interpretation] No, I don't have any objection.  But I

21    got a document which must have been given to me by mistake.  I have three

22    pages, Your Honour, and this is the third page signed Selina.  I'm sorry,

23    I forgot my glasses so I cannot read the signature.

24            MS. SOMERS:  This is a two-page document, Your Honour.

25            JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] The document I have consists of


Page 8299

 1    two pages.

 2            MR. FILA: [Interpretation] But mine has three, as you can see.

 3            JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] You are lucky.  You are luckier

 4    than me, Mr. Fila.  Perhaps Ms. Susan Somers can check with the usher.

 5            MS. SOMERS:  Thank you very much.

 6            JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] So is that all, Mr. Fila?

 7    Fine.  Ms. Susan Somers is very generous.  She gave you three pages

 8    instead of two.

 9            Please proceed, Ms. Susan Somers.

10            MS. SOMERS:  I ask the Chamber to allow me to thank Mr. Fila for

11    his assistance in returning it.

12            JUDGE WALD:  Can I inquire, is this a document which comes out of

13    the documents you've had admitted into evidence - I note its very recent

14    origin - or is this just something you're using again for the purposes of

15    cross-examination but not for admission?

16            MS. SOMERS:  Your Honour, this document came specially.  It is not

17    part of any seizure.

18            JUDGE WALD:  I understand that because it's 12/02/2001.

19            MS. SOMERS:  That's correct.  This document is a confirmation of

20    certain information that was sent to us as recently as yesterday.

21            JUDGE WALD:  Okay.  But are you - are you - just using it now for

22    the purpose we talked about earlier, as a basis at the end of which you'll

23    say, "What do you think about that, Mr. Kvocka?" or are you going to, at

24    some point, attempt to introduce it?

25            MS. SOMERS:  In fact, I was going to attempt to introduce it,


Page 8300

 1    albeit I don't have the individual here at this time.  But, reading

 2    between the lines, I can certainly read from it the relevant portions.  It

 3    would be, however, my intention at some point - if not now, then on

 4    rebuttal - to introduce it.  But I would like to at least have the

 5    opportunity to address the central issues to the witness, and depending on

 6    answers, seek to move it into --

 7            JUDGE WALD:  So you're not seeking --

 8            MS. SOMERS:  I'd like to, subject to --

 9            JUDGE WALD:  You're not seeking to admit it right now.  If you

10    are, then we do have the authentication problem.  This is like affidavits

11    for us.  If you have an affidavit problem, then you've got to have --

12            MS. SOMERS:  I'm mindful of that.  I would just ask it to be

13    identified with a number and held in abeyance.  But I would like, if the

14    Chamber permits me, to ask questions from the document.

15       Q.   Colonel Boda indicated --

16            JUDGE WALD:  Well, in my view, you can't admit it now.  You would

17    have to go through the regular procedures as with affidavits.  I guess you

18    can ask questions from it, but I think that it is a somewhat prejudicial

19    document to --

20            MS. SOMERS:  If I may ask just:

21       Q.   From the description of the individuals, without characterising at

22    all, the individuals mentioned in this document, if I may, Your Honours,

23    by IPTF are Miroslav Kvocka, Milojica Kos, Mirko Babic, and Mladen Radic.

24            The issue is a request made by IPTF to the Chief of Police, Simo

25    Drljaca, in Prijedor, to provide the duty schedule of different duty


Page 8301

 1    officers.  In so doing, it became apparent that Miroslav Kvocka, that you

 2    were working at the Prijedor Police Station or Police Department.  When

 3    Mr. Drljaca was requested to take action to arrest, it was denied, it was

 4    refused.

 5            Are you aware -- can you give us any reason why Simo Drljaca would

 6    refuse, as a police officer, to assist you in any way if he distrusted

 7    you, disliked you, or, as I recollect from the language you used

 8    yesterday, hated you?  Why would Drljaca, if you can guess, do that, or

 9    did he do that?

10       A.   [Interpretation] Before I start guessing, I have to understand

11    your question correctly.  What did he refuse, how he protected me, how he

12    didn't protect me, what it is that the international policeman asked for,

13    I'm afraid I don't understand anything from what you said.  Who refused to

14    do what?

15       Q.   You were working under Simo Drljaca after you had been indicted by

16    this Tribunal; is that correct?

17       A.   Yes.  He was chief of the centre.  At the end of 1995 or the

18    beginning of 1996, there was a reorganisation in the security service of

19    the whole republic, and he was still the chief.  But from 1993 until 1995,

20    he did not work, he did not work in the police in Prijedor.  But he was

21    brought back in 1995 or 1996.  I don't know the exact date, but those

22    were, roughly, the years.

23       Q.   He was aware, was he not, of the fact that you had been indicted?

24       A.   I assume he did.  Everybody knew about it when they heard it on

25    the media.


Page 8302

 1       Q.   Can you explain why you, as a policeman, having heard about it,

 2    and why he, as your superior officer, knowing about it and being a sworn

 3    police officer, refused to honour the warrants of this Tribunal and hand

 4    you and your other colleagues under indictment over for arrest?

 5       A.   In the first place, he didn't want to surrender because he too was

 6    indicted secretly; not in public, that is true.  But according to my

 7    reasoning, all these things that we've been talking about for the last

 8    four or five days, with Bob Reid for four or five days, with you for these

 9    three or four days, all these are reasons why Simo Drljaca would prefer to

10    kill me than to deliver me to the international police.  He was protecting

11    himself not me.

12       Q.   Mr. Drljaca, I believe, was indicted in 1997.  Did he ever discuss

13    with you concerns about indictment?  Did you two ever talk about

14    indictment together?

15       A.   I think that on one occasion he said, "I won't be seen going to

16    The Hague dead."  I remember what he said.  That is precisely why I told

17    Chris Bennett that I would sort of even like to be arrested but that I did

18    not want to surrender to The Hague.  I wanted it to look like an arrest.

19       Q.   Whether or not he was under indictment at the time, and I cannot

20    say for certainty the date, did the two of you have an agreement about not

21    surrendering and possibly encouraging others not to do so, for example,

22    Kos, Radic?  Was there any agreement?

23       A.   No.  We didn't have any contact, the two of us.  I did work for

24    awhile after the indictment in the service, and it was probably during

25    that period of time, Simo told me, "I won't be seen going to The Hague


Page 8303

 1    dead."  If I had given him any indication that I would go, I don't think I

 2    would have ever arrived here.  If I had indicated to him or, rather,

 3    intimated to him that I would go to The Hague, I don't think that I would

 4    have ever gotten here.

 5       Q.   Where were you arrested?

 6       A.   In the yard of my house - I call it my house but it's actually the

 7    house of my in-laws, the parents of my wife - in the garden.  I was

 8    wearing very dirty boots, torn trousers, and my wife wanted me to put on

 9    my shoes but they wouldn't let me, though I raised my hands immediately.

10    But those people were very excited.  As they were handcuffing me, their

11    hands were shaking, and with those three words of English that I knew at

12    that time, I said, "It's okay.  Everything is going to be fine.  Do not be

13    afraid."

14            I wasn't afraid of anything except perhaps of their fear, the fear

15    that they demonstrated.  I was afraid that they might fire a bullet into

16    my head or into my wife or my daughter, to whom they placed a gun at the

17    doorstep of our house.  They were holding a gun against their forehead

18    like this.  I wanted everything to be done as smoothly as possible so that

19    the neighbours wouldn't have to watch this scene.

20       Q.   Did you resign from the police or were you decertified?

21       A.   I was sacked.  Actually, I was told that I could no longer come to

22    work.  It was sometime in October or November of 1996, I believe.  But

23    then after awhile, the then chief of police, that is, the second man after

24    Simo Drljaca, told me that the best thing for me to do would be to sign a

25    termination of employment by mutual consent.


Page 8304

 1 

 2 

 3 

 4 

 5 

 6 

 7 

 8 

 9 

10 

11 

12  Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French

13  and English transcripts.

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 


Page 8305

 1            So after awhile, he sent me a document to that effect and it was,

 2    officially speaking, by mutual consent that I terminated my employment

 3    there.  But that piece of paper was signed probably one month after I

 4    stopped working, and he very briefly explained to me that the IPTF would

 5    no longer allow for me to work in the police.  So it was actually not my

 6    desire to leave the service.

 7       Q.   Are you still getting --

 8            THE INTERPRETER:  Microphone.

 9            MS. SOMERS:

10       Q.   Are you still receiving a police pension or salary now?

11       A.   Currently, the situation is not really resolved.  It's not clear.

12    I could have retired earlier on.  I had already fulfilled all the

13    necessary criteria for early retirement.  But I still felt capable of

14    continuing with my work and my service, and I didn't make any mistakes in

15    my work, so I didn't think that they could, that they could force me to

16    retire.  Because that was the kind of thing that was commonly used in the

17    police:  If anyone committed a mistake, he would be forced to retire.

18            I am sure that there are members of the police service who would

19    be -- who would gladly have me back in the service.

20            MS. SOMERS:  Thank you.  No further questions.

21            JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Very well, Ms. Somers.  I don't

22    think that you have used all of the time that was allotted to you.  Thank

23    you very much.

24            Shall we start with additional questions, Mr. Simic?  Are you

25    ready to proceed?  But I think that you have already used 20 minutes of


Page 8306

 1    your time.  No, it's -- I'm not serious.  I was referring to the 20

 2    minutes that you used of the Prosecutor's time, but no, I'm just joking.

 3    You have all the time you need for your additional questions.

 4            MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Thank you very much, Your Honours.

 5                          Re-examined by Mr. K. Simic:

 6       Q.   [Interpretation] Mr. Kvocka, yesterday in response to a question

 7    by Ms. Somers that was put to you regarding brigades and other terrorist

 8    organisations which were mentioned in the context of your work in the

 9    embassy in Paris, I should like to ask you several questions in relation

10    to that matter.  How many people were providing security to our embassy in

11    Paris?

12       A.   Three men.  There were always two officers.  I know that from the

13    preparations that we had at the time.  But the situation in Paris was

14    somewhat special and specific because the immigration, both Ustasha and

15    Chetnik immigration in France was very strong at the time.  So that was

16    the main reason, not because of any other foreign terrorist organisations.

17       Q.   You said three men were employed there.  How were the shifts

18    organised?

19       A.   In principle, two of these three individuals had to be there

20    during the working hours of the embassy.  They had to be present there in

21    a room which was next to the entrance to the building, and the third would

22    be off during that period of time.  However, once -- after the working

23    hours of the embassy, one officer always had to be inside the building of

24    the embassy, and the other two could go out, were free to go out.

25       Q.   Could you describe your typical day of work in the embassy in


Page 8307

 1    Paris?

 2       A.   We would be sitting in one of the offices.  That office had a TV

 3    monitor from which we could control the entrance into the embassy.  Later

 4    on there was an x-ray machine which was set up there in that office, and

 5    with that x-ray machine we could control the contents of smaller shipments

 6    like letters or similar parcels.  That was all.

 7            We supervised entry of individuals into the embassy, but that was

 8    a very -- that was a very easy part of our job because our citizens were

 9    the most frequent visitors.  They visited the consular premises; however,

10    when it comes to the embassy, our usual guests were diplomats, people you

11    do not really suspect, you assume that they are clear, so to speak.

12       Q.   What aspect of police work would your job in Paris constitute?

13    What kind of police work is that?

14       A.   Security.

15       Q.   Thank you.  We discussed the issue of uniforms that you wore at

16    length, and I should like you to clarify some things for us.  Mr. Kvocka,

17    what kinds of uniforms did you yourself wear while you worked as a member

18    of the duty service in the Security Service of the Omarska camp?

19       A.   I only wore the regular blue police uniform which was commonly

20    used by the police at the time, that is, a light blue shirt, sometimes

21    with short sleeves sometimes with long sleeves, it depended; and a pair of

22    trousers which were somewhat darker, greyish or bluish, made of special

23    kind of tissue called kangar.  There was also a blue jacket to go with the

24    uniform if the weather was cold.  And on a few occasions, I also had a

25    green camouflage uniform which resembles a military camouflage uniform 99


Page 8308

 1    per cent; however, there is a small difference because of the material it

 2    is made of.  I can explain that to you if necessary.

 3            MR. K. SIMIC:  [Interpretation] Can I now ask for the Exhibit

 4    number 34/1 to be shown to the witness.  D34/1.

 5       Q.   Mr. Kvocka, do you recognise these uniforms?

 6       A.   Yes, of course I do.  These are the uniforms that belong to the

 7    police with the usual police insignia.  You cannot see the trousers, but

 8    this is the kind of blue shirt that I wore for about 15 years while I was

 9    in service.

10       Q.   Did you wear that shirt in the Omarska camp as well?

11       A.   Yes, I did.  I also had this insignia, but I think I only -- I had

12    three stripes here on the epaulette.  This is what you get every four

13    years, for every four years of service.

14       Q.   Thank you very much, Mr. Kvocka.

15            MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Can I now ask the usher to show the

16    witness -- we can remove this exhibit and have 3/81 shown to the witness,

17    please.

18       Q.   Mr. Kvocka, before I ask my question, could you please identify

19    these people for me?

20       A.   I can identify two of them.

21       Q.   Who can you identify on this picture?

22       A.   The first individual here that we can see on the photograph and

23    the tallest one is Simo Drljaca.  Next to him is a person I don't know,

24    and behind him, this small person, the small guy, is Zeljko Meakic.  And

25    this man here is a man with a beard, I'm not quite sure who that person


Page 8309

 1    might be.  But I'm sure about these two.

 2       Q.   Mr. Kvocka, have a look at the uniforms worn by Mr. Drljaca and

 3    Mr. Meakic.

 4       A.   Yes, I can see them.

 5       Q.   Did you have that kind of uniform on those two or three occasions?

 6       A.   Yes, except for that small difference that I told you about, I

 7    think that my wife told you about that.  She made this uniform of a

 8    special material which has some yellow hue in it.  So there is a very

 9    small difference between this type of uniform and the one that I had a

10    couple of times.  But more or less you can say that it is the same kind of

11    uniform.

12       Q.   What about the background on which we can see this pattern, is it

13    the same colour?

14       A.   Yes, it is a green background, the same one.

15            MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.  We can remove

16    that photograph.  3/81 -- I'm sorry, 3/22, if we can have that document at

17    hand, please.

18       Q.   Mr. Kvocka, yesterday in your testimony you said that when you

19    first arrived in Omarska, that is, to the investigation centre or the

20    camp, whatever you prefer, you told us that on that occasion you found

21    members of the military police there who were wearing uniforms which you

22    saw for the first time on that occasion?

23       A.   Yes, that is correct.

24       Q.   Would you have a look at this photograph now, please.  Members of

25    the units whom you found there at that time, did they have this kind of


Page 8310

 1    uniform?

 2       A.   Yes, they did, those several policemen whom I was able to see in

 3    the morning.  That is, I never saw anyone wearing any other kind of

 4    uniform.  Those who were there all had this uniform with blue background

 5    and light and darker spots or pattern.  You cannot see it very well on

 6    your screen, but it is quite visible on the photograph.  It was a blue

 7    uniform with darker and lighter spots on it.

 8            MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] We no longer need the photograph,

 9    thank you very much.

10       Q.   Mr. Kvocka, while you were in the investigation centre in Omarska,

11    did you ever wear this kind of uniform?

12       A.   No, never.

13       Q.   Mr. Kvocka, these uniforms, did they -- were they ever used by the

14    police?

15       A.   I received it at the end of 1994, beginning of 1995, for the first

16    time when all police officers were wearing this type of uniform.  It was

17    at that time that it became the official uniform.  Before that, it would

18    appear from time to time on members of special units or intervention

19    platoons.

20       Q.   Mr. Kvocka, I don't think an introduction is necessary, both you

21    and many other people told us about the presence of a Special Police Unit

22    in Omarska at the beginning.  Could you tell us about the kind of uniforms

23    that they wore?

24       A.   The group who was there during the first week was wearing various

25    kinds of uniforms.  The second group which was under the command of


Page 8311

 1    Strazivuk, all of its members had this type of blue uniform that we have

 2    just seen, and they had a number on their sleeves, 1, 2, 3.  Those were

 3    some kinds of insignia that they had which indicated to the membership of

 4    their unit or to a larger portion of their organisation -- I'm not

 5    familiar with their structure.  The only thing I can say was that they had

 6    this very large number on their sleeve.

 7       Q.   Mr. Kvocka, we have heard a number of testimonies here of

 8    witnesses who said that they had seen you in Omarska in this blue uniform,

 9    the one that we identified on exhibit number 3/22.  Could you comment on

10    that, please?

11       A.   I cannot give you a serious comment on that.  It's a lie.  I never

12    put on a blue camouflage police uniform before 1995.

13       Q.   Thank you.  Mr. Kvocka, we talked a lot about the police station

14    department.  I should like you to describe for us the building itself,

15    that is, the building of the police station department in Omarska and what

16    it consisted of.

17       A.   The department was located in a building, I cannot tell you

18    exactly how big it was.  It had two entrances and it was a one-storey

19    building.  There were two entrances on the ground floor.  I can tell you

20    about why there was a second entrance; I'm familiar with the situation.

21    But it consisted of a whole room which was used by duty officers, and then

22    another room which was used by police officers in general, and there was a

23    third room which was used by the commander of the department.  So those

24    were the premises which were used by the police station department.

25            There was a partition wall there as well which separated that area


Page 8312

 1    from the area with the second entrance that I mentioned.  From time to

 2    time, this second portion, second half of the ground floor, was used as a

 3    flat which was allocated to a police officer who didn't have a flat.  This

 4    was also customary before I arrived.

 5            There were also two other spaces upstairs for the police -- that

 6    were intended for the police originally.  But I know that a war veteran

 7    from the Second World War used to live there and also a policeman who -- a

 8    retired policeman who used to work there before.

 9            JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Simic, I think that this

10    would be a convenient moment for a break.  You were not going to finish

11    within five minutes anyway so we might as well have a lunch break at this

12    point.

13            A 50-minute break, please.

14                          --- Luncheon recess taken at 12.56 p.m.

15                          --- On resuming at 1.55 p.m.

16            JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Please be seated.

17            Mr. Simic, we have had ten minutes of sun so you may continue.

18            MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

19       Q.   Mr. Kvocka, when you were describing the building in which the

20    police station department of Omarska was headquartered, you mentioned the

21    duty room.  Could you please tell us what the purpose of that room was and

22    who would be in that room?

23       A.   One or several duty officers would be in that room, depending on

24    the daily schedule drawn up by the commander.  The function of the room is

25    to have a telephone and a radio communications device.  Occasionally,


Page 8313

 1    there would be a TV set, a radio.  All citizens, if they had anything to

 2    report, would come to that room.  That would be the description.

 3       Q.   If the leader of patrol sectors, together with their partners,

 4    were to go to carry out an assignment in their sector, upon their return,

 5    would they report to the duty officers that they had come back?

 6       A.   Yes.  That is where they returned to.  They leave their reports

 7    with the duty officer, because we would usually come late, after the

 8    working hours of the commander, so that the commander would see them the

 9    next day.  The rule is, however, if the commander is present, that he

10    should send us on assignment and see us when we come back.  But the duty

11    officer will then make a record of the fact that we had returned from our

12    patrol.

13       Q.   During your testimony and the testimony of many witnesses, mention

14    was made of the duty room of the security service in the Omarska

15    investigations centre.  Could you describe the contents of that room?

16       A.   Up to a point, it resembled the duty room in the police station

17    department, insofar as there were one or several duty officers there.

18    There was a radio communications device and a telephone, which wasn't

19    really operating too well.  The other part of the duty room was occupied,

20    so to speak, by others so that it didn't perform its normal function,

21    because there were two typists additionally working there, and I think we

22    heard about all that from witnesses.

23       Q.   Mr. Kvocka, according to the Rules of Service, which you mentioned

24    frequently here, is it allowed or advisable for other persons to be

25    present in the duty room apart from officers on duty?


Page 8314

 1 

 2 

 3 

 4 

 5 

 6 

 7 

 8 

 9 

10 

11 

12  Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French

13  and English transcripts.

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 


Page 8315

 1       A.   No.  According to the rules, there should be only one or several

 2    duty officers there, precisely because if citizens had something to

 3    report, they can report it to the duty officer without anyone else being

 4    present.  That is why I am saying that the duty room was degraded, in a

 5    sense, in the investigations centre because of this.

 6       Q.   Do you know who designated that particular room as a room to be

 7    used by duty officers?

 8       A.   All I know is that it had already been designated as such before

 9    we arrived.  Whether it was by the commander of the Prijedor Police

10    Station or by whoever it was who issued the order on the establishment of

11    the investigations centre, I'm not sure.  But somebody from that level.

12       Q.   When members of the police station department took over the

13    security service, was that room, duty room, technically equipped?

14       A.   Yes.  The radio station already existed; there was a telephone

15    probably from before.  The radio station was installed for that purpose,

16    but before we arrived, it was already operational.

17       Q.   Mr. Kvocka, upstairs in the administration building, was there a

18    room where interrogations were not conducted?

19       A.   Yes.  At the end of the corridor that you would face directly,

20    there was a door leading to a room where there was no interrogation, as

21    far as I know.  That is where the bosses, the coordinators, whatever they

22    were called in the various documents, were there; and people if they came

23    to visit.  I said somewhere, either in my testimony or to Bob Reid, that I

24    once saw through the open door of the duty office Simo Drljaca going

25    directly into that room.


Page 8316

 1       Q.   Mr. Kvocka, did you ever enter that room where the coordinators

 2    linked to the three different lines of investigations were sitting?

 3       A.   No, never.

 4       Q.   The duties of the duty officer, did they differ from the duties

 5    providing security from the standpoint of someone who is familiar with the

 6    functioning of the police?

 7       A.   There is a visible difference in the way in which duties are

 8    performed.  A duty officer is on duty in a room where he has a desk and a

 9    radio receiver, whereas a security service officer either performs guard

10    duty in a particular place if he is assigned to do so, or by patrolling a

11    certain area.

12       Q.   Can that give an impression of differences in status or position

13    among people who are not familiar with the work of the police?

14       A.   Yes.  Various terms were used by people in free speech, and I

15    remember from my own practice when I would come home after patrolling on

16    foot with mud up to my knees and tired, and I walk into the duty office

17    and say, "You're having an easy time, Chief.  You're sitting in a dry and

18    warm room and watching television."  So this is a just a manner of

19    speaking that we would use addressing one another.  But in fact, that

20    policeman may have only just started working as a policeman, but I would

21    still address him as "chief" because his position was much better than

22    mine.  But of course, the word is used ironically.

23       Q.   Mr. Kvocka, my learned friend a moment ago showed you a document

24    marked 3/206.

25            MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] So could I ask the usher to be


Page 8317

 1    returned to Mr. Kvocka.  It is the rules on the internal organisation of

 2    the republican secretariat for internal affairs.

 3            Could the usher place the second page on the ELMO where it says,

 4    "Duties and tasks of the patrol sector leader and the patrol area

 5    leader."

 6       Q.   Mr. Kvocka, my learned friend quoted from this document paragraph

 7    40, "Duties and tasks of the patrol sector leader and the patrol area

 8    leader," and she quoted certain tasks which you recognised as falling

 9    within your duties.  However, I will not go into that now, though she left

10    out some of those duties, but I would like us to clarify something else.

11    It says towards the bottom of the page --

12            MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Could you move the page up, please,

13    Mr. Usher so that we can see the last paragraph.

14       Q.   It says here, "Duties and tasks of basic activities," and then

15    "-  specialised - operational - simple."  Mr. Kvocka, in police practice,

16    the patrol sector leaders' duties, were they considered to be simple

17    duties as defined by the rules?

18       A.   Yes, indeed.  These are considered to be the simpler activities

19    within the police service.  These are considered simpler activities.  That

20    is regulated by decree.

21       Q.   You testified today that you were the patrol sector leader until

22    1994; is that correct?

23       A.   Yes.

24       Q.   Thank you.  We don't need those documents any more.  Mr. Kvocka,

25    yesterday in answer to one of Ms. Somers' questions, you mentioned an


Page 8318

 1    incident in which, as you put it, a petty criminal took part known as

 2    Djordjin.  You also testified that you saw this from the window of the

 3    duty office?

 4       A.   Yes.

 5       Q.   How far was it between your room and the place where the incident

 6    occurred?

 7       A.   You have to make a kind of semicircle covering a distance of some

 8    15 metres.

 9       Q.   You also testified yesterday that in the compound there were other

10    security officers.  So let me ask you now, were there any in the corridor

11    in front of the duty office and the office of the inspectors?

12       A.   Yes, there were some guards, because almost always there were some

13    guards in the corridor.

14       Q.   Why didn't you order one of the guards to carry out this duty of

15    camp commander?

16       A.   I couldn't give orders to anyone.  All that I can do is what comes

17    under the description of the tasks and duties of a policeman.

18       Q.   On that occasion, did any one of the guards, other members of the

19    security, come to your assistance?

20       A.   No.

21       Q.   Mr. Kvocka, during your testimony, you mentioned a person by the

22    name of Igor Kondic several times.

23       A.   Yes.

24       Q.   You said that during one visit you found him in a very bad state,

25    because he had been beaten up; is that right?


Page 8319

 1       A.   Yes.

 2            MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Could I ask Mr. Kvocka to be shown

 3    a document, and distribute it to Their Honours and the parties.  It is

 4    D44/1, if admitted, of course.

 5       Q.   Have you received the document?  Mr. Kvocka, will you look at the

 6    second page where you see photographs of several persons.

 7       A.   Yes, I see it.

 8       Q.   You see that it says there, "Igor Kondic."

 9       A.   Yes.

10       Q.   Is that the person that you mentioned in your testimony, saying

11    that you found him in a very bad state after he had been beaten up on one

12    of your visits?

13       A.   Yes, 100 per cent, that is him.

14       Q.   Mr. Kvocka, could you read what newspaper this was published in

15    and on what date?

16       A.   Yes, I can.  The name of the newspaper is Kozarski Vjesnik; the

17    date, the 7th of August, 1992.

18       Q.   Mr. Kvocka, I should now like to ask you to look at the top

19    left-hand corner of the obituary to Mr. Kondic and read out what it says.

20       A.   "On the 7th of August 1992 it will be 40 days from the premature

21    death of our beloved and never forgotten son and brother, Igor Kondic,"

22    then the date when he was born and the date he died.

23       Q.   According to our local customs, is this the 40 days that is always

24    observed when somebody dies?

25       A.   Yes.  I think among Orthodox believers, 40 days after the death of


Page 8320

 1    a person, there is a religious ceremony, the tomb is visited, and friends

 2    and family are informed about that ceremony through the media.

 3       Q.   Does that mean that Mr. Igor Kondic had died 40 days prior to

 4    this?

 5       A.   Yes, that is what it says here with precision.  The ceremony was

 6    on the 7th of August, and that date marks the 40 days since his death.

 7       Q.   Mr. Kvocka, did you see Mr. Kondic when you brought your

 8    brothers-in-law there or during a visit?  Can you remember that?

 9       A.   When I went to visit them for the second time, to the best of my

10    recollection.

11            MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.  The document will no

12    longer be needed.

13       Q.   Mr. Kvocka, a great deal of time was spent here in an effort to

14    explain the status of a police station department.  My learned friend

15    presented a document marked 3/186.  It is the work schedule for the 18th

16    of May, 1991.

17            MS. SOMERS:  Your Honour, may I register an objection, please.

18            JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, Ms. Susan Somers.

19            MS. SOMERS:  The death of Igor Kondic was not an issue that was

20    raised during the course of the cross.  I don't want to make an

21    unwarranted objection, but if there is any issue specifically about this

22    individual, I just want to remind the Chamber it did not come up.

23            JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Simic, what is the question

24    that was raised in the cross-examination that you wish to clarify with the

25    help of this document?  In other words, will you respond to this


Page 8321

 1    objection?

 2            MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] I will respond very clearly.  Your

 3    Honours, 70 per cent of the cross-examination by my learned friend had not

 4    been included in the examination-in-chief.  You yourself said that there

 5    was a certain degree of flexibility allowed in this Chamber, and this was

 6    a point that we wished to clarify as there is an affidavit and a protected

 7    witness who testified about this.  So I think the same amount of

 8    flexibility should apply to the Defence, though we will not take advantage

 9    of it very much in our re-examination.

10            JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Ms. Susan Somers.

11            MS. SOMERS:  I think that the difference, Your Honour, is that we

12    have, under 90(H), the obligation to put the case, the entire case to the

13    witness not just the limited questions that are raised on direct.  In so

14    doing, we've had to put all the evidence that has been presented.  Our

15    cross, as I read the Rules, unless I have misread them, would be limited

16    by -- our counsel would be limited by the scope of cross in that 90(H)

17    talks of putting the case to the witness.

18            MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] May I comment?

19            JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Excuse me.  I didn't hear that.

20            MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] May I be allowed to comment?

21            JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] No, Mr. Simic, we have to end

22    this.

23                          [Trial Chamber confers]

24            JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Ms. Susan Somers, your objection

25    is overruled.


Page 8322

 1            So you may continue, Mr. Simic.

 2            MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

 3            THE INTERPRETER:  Microphone.

 4            MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] I apologise, thank you.

 5       Q.   Let me go back to document 3/186.  Mr. Kvocka, what does the

 6    document in front of you represent?

 7       A.   This is a customary schedule of work for a particular day which is

 8    drawn up in the Prijedor Police Station or any police station.  So in the

 9    basic police institution.

10       Q.   Is this the general police station which had three departments?

11       A.   In this particular case, it is the general police station in

12    Prijedor.

13       Q.   Mr. Kvocka, could you please look at a part of this work schedule

14    for the 18th of May, 1991, where it says "Security Service, order number

15    417."  Have you found that?

16       A.   Yes.

17       Q.   Are there nine names listed there?

18       A.   Yes.

19       Q.   Are members of the department of the Omarska Police Station listed

20    there as well; if so, will you read out their names, please?

21       A.   They are not among the first five, they're not from Omarska, and

22    then the following four are from Omarska.

23            MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] I'm sorry, this is a document that

24    we had problems with the translation, so this is on page 2.  I don't know

25    whether this was shown to Your Honours.  Will you turn over the page,


Page 8323

 1    please, of the English version.

 2       Q.   Are those the names, please?

 3       A.   Yes, under number six, seven, eight, and nine, these are policemen

 4    from the Omarska Police Station Department.

 5       Q.   Could you please look and see who issued this work schedule for

 6    the 18th of May.

 7       A.   The station commander, Fikret Kadiric.

 8       Q.   Beneath your names, do you find also Police Station Department

 9    Kozarac, Police Station Department Ljubija, and Police Station Omarska,

10    and next to Omarska you have the number five?

11       A.   Yes.

12       Q.   Could you comment on that, please?

13       A.   In the schedule that is drawn up by the commander of the police

14    station, for that day he noted all the services provided, and for the

15    departments he just mentioned the number.  However, for Omarska, he

16    reduced the number by four because they had already been assigned to some

17    particular service, and the remaining five were probably left at the

18    disposal of the department commander.

19       Q.   Mr. Kvocka, you were an employee of the Omarska Police Station

20    department.  How can someone else give you a work schedule for that day

21    without your commander?

22       A.   It's no one else.  He is my main -- he is my commander, Fikret

23    Kadiric.  He is the one who makes the schedules for all the workers.  But

24    this shows that those remaining in the department, probably because of

25    assignments he had previously given to the department commanders.  We have


Page 8324

 1 

 2 

 3 

 4 

 5 

 6 

 7 

 8 

 9 

10 

11 

12  Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French

13  and English transcripts.

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 


Page 8325

 1    already heard that the department commander would go to the station

 2    commander every morning to be given instructions.  So the commander of the

 3    police station is the basic commander and the only commanding officer.

 4    The others are superiors in a sense, but they do not have the right to

 5    issue orders.

 6       Q.   To make this quite clear, will you please give us the structure of

 7    the chain of command starting from you yourself upwards.

 8       A.   First of all there is the department commander.  And then up the

 9    chain of command the deputy of the station commander and the station

10    commander himself.  Then also the assistant station commanders are my

11    superiors in the chain of command.  Their rank is more or less equal to

12    that of department commander.  I have also left out, before the deputy and

13    the station commanders there are the shift leaders in the station, and

14    they, too, are superior to us ordinary policemen.

15            JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Simic, it seems to me that

16    we've already seen this with diagrams.  You have already tendered into

17    evidence these tables with the command structure.

18            MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.  Thank you for

19    reminding me.  I am aware of that, but I wanted, through Mr. Kvocka's

20    testimony and this document, to illustrate once and for all the police

21    station department, that it wasn't autonomous or independent in any sense

22    but only a small segment of the police station.  Thank you.

23       Q.   I know it's hard, but could you remember what you were securing

24    then at the time?

25       A.   According to the number of people envisaged, a total of nine in


Page 8326

 1    this case; and in view of the person who was patrol leader at the time,

 2    probably Dusan Jankovic, and who was at the time deputy to Fikret Kadiric;

 3    and in view of the hours, that is, from 1900 hours onwards, it could have

 4    been a football match of the local club Rudar which is -- which often

 5    attracts between 5.000 and 10.000 spectators.  So taking these elements

 6    into consideration, that would be my conclusion, but I can't guarantee

 7    that.

 8       Q.   Talking about these things, you mentioned Fikret Kadiric, and

 9    yesterday Ms. Somers spoke about him and put some questions to you linked

10    to him.  When this report was written, what did it represent?

11       A.   On the 18th of May, 1991, it was written by the station commander

12    Fikret Kadiric.

13       Q.   And you said a moment ago that Dusan Jankovic was his deputy?

14       A.   Yes.

15       Q.   After the establishment of three-party rule, SDS, SDA, and HDZ,

16    were there changes in the command structure?  What position did

17    Mr. Kadiric hold when he was arrested?

18       A.   After the elections there were certain rotations, but at the time

19    he was arrested, Fikret Kadiric was commander of the police station for

20    traffic safety.

21       Q.   And who became the commander of the general police station?

22       A.   Dusan Jankovic.

23       Q.   If I understand you correctly, was that how the police was

24    organised until the Serbs took over power on the 30th of April?

25       A.   Yes.


Page 8327

 1       Q.   Was there a change of your commander then?

 2       A.   Yes.  After the takeover, the command structure was changed again.

 3       Q.   Who was your commander after that?

 4       A.   The commander of the Prijedor Police Station was Cadjo Milutin,

 5    and Jankovic took over as chief of police, second in command to Simo

 6    Drljaca.  So he was chief of all the police in the municipality, but only

 7    the uniformed police.  That is why the official title is chief "for" the

 8    police, not "of" the police.

 9       Q.   Thank you.  Let me go on now to a document, 3/186.  The document

10    was tendered by my learned colleague.  3/176.

11            Could the document please be shown.

12            Mr. Kvocka - can we have the document placed on the ELMO, please -

13    in front of you is a document and I would like you to tell us who is the

14    author of this document.  What is the origin of this document?

15       A.   The Public Security Station Prijedor, Police Station Prijedor.

16       Q.   Mr. Kvocka, are we talking about the same police station which

17    also had the police station department of Omarska as its component part?

18       A.   Yes, it is.

19       Q.   Could you tell us, what is this document?

20       A.   This is a report of the results of the work of the Prijedor Police

21    Station employees for the purposes of giving out salaries.  It was drafted

22    pursuant to a proposal which was discussed at the general meeting and

23    which was signed by the president of that meeting.

24       Q.   Mr. Kvocka, a police station department, is it also comprised --

25    is it also mentioned in this report issued by the Police Station Prijedor?


Page 8328

 1       A.   Yes.  All three departments are included in this report, that is,

 2    the part of the police station of Prijedor, that is, the Ljubija, Kozarac,

 3    and Omarska departments.

 4       Q.   Mr. Kvocka, you omitted to indicate the period of time for which

 5    this report was made.

 6       A.   The 16th of June to 15th of July, 1992.

 7       Q.   Thank you.  Would you please turn to page 3.  Here we read

 8    "Omarska Police Station Department."

 9            Mr. Kvocka, 12 employees are listed here.  Were all of them

10    employees of the Omarska Police Station Department?

11       A.   Yes, they were, but not all of them were actually working within

12    the department during this period of time.

13       Q.   Could you tell us which of these individuals worked in the Omarska

14    Police Station Department directly, and also the individuals who were

15    relocated and tell us where they were reassigned?

16       A.   I will try to answer your question, as far as I remember.  As

17    regards Miroslav Kvocka, yes, but not until the end of this period of

18    time, the period of time for which the salary is calculated.  Ljuban

19    Grahovac did not work in Omarska.

20       Q.   Where did he go?

21       A.   He went to the reserve police force in Lamovita.  Zeljko Meakic,

22    he worked in Omarska, yes; Branislav Bojic as well.  Bozo Karajica did not

23    work in Omarska.  I think that he went to the reserve police in Prijedor,

24    the area of Urije.  Dusan Aleksic, if this is Dusko whom I know, went to

25    Rakelici.  Mladjo Radic, he worked in Omarska.  Boro Delic also worked in


Page 8329

 1    Omarska.  Branko Mudrinic went to Prijedor as well, to the Urije section,

 2    to the reserve police force there.  Dragan Macura did not work in Omarska

 3    at that time, but I don't know exactly where he went.  Milutin Bujic, he

 4    went to Rakelici; that was what he himself told us the other day.  And,

 5    finally, Zeljko Stojnic, I don't know exactly where he went.

 6       Q.   Mr. Kvocka, we all heard the testimony of Mr. Bujic here, who told

 7    us that in March 1992 he was deployed by Hasan Talundzic to the reserve

 8    police station in Rakelici; is that correct?

 9       A.   Yes, it is.

10       Q.   So how come his name is on the salary list of the Omarska Police

11    Station Department for the period of time from the 16th of June until the

12    15th of July, 1992?

13       A.   This is his original police station, that is, the police station

14    of Prijedor.  He had his assignment at the police station department in

15    Omarska, and it is from there that he was redeployed.  So this is why he

16    is still mentioned on this piece of paper which is issued by the finance

17    service.  This is a salary list.  He could not have been on any other

18    salary list.

19       Q.   Was there a job description within the overall structure of police

20    officer at the reserve police station in Tukovi or Rakelici?

21       A.   No, there is no such possibility provided for in the Rules of

22    Service.

23       Q.   While you were working in Tukovi, on what salary list could your

24    name be found at that period of time?

25       A.   At the police station of Prijedor, probably in this section


Page 8330

 1    referring to the departments, until a new appropriate decision was

 2    issued.  I think it was issued in 1993 sometime.

 3       Q.   Mr. Kvocka, was this document drawn up by the people who are

 4    familiar with the structure and the status of the police at the time, at

 5    the time this document was written?

 6       A.   I believe so.  This document was issued by the Prijedor Police

 7    Station and the report was made according to the list of employees.

 8       Q.   What is the official term that is used in this document for your

 9    work place, that is, for your job in the month of June, at the moment this

10    report was drafted?

11       A.   The term that is used is the police department in Omarska.  That

12    is the appropriate term.  They're using the official document, the right

13    document which is prescribed for in appropriate regulations.  "Police

14    Station Department Omarska."  So from this title, one can conclude that

15    the department in question is part of a given police station.

16       Q.   Practically speaking, at the time you left, was that place, the

17    place where you worked, was that the police station department of Omarska?

18       A.   Yes.

19       Q.   Thank you.

20            MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, let me go back to

21    document 3/208 at this point.  I no longer need this document.  Thank

22    you.

23       Q.   Mr. Kvocka, yesterday you had an opportunity to see this document,

24    and throughout these proceedings, I think we all omitted to deal with the

25    issue of members of the military who were part of the internal security


Page 8331

 1    service.

 2            Please have a look at the Roman numeral one and tell us what this

 3    section of the document covers.

 4       A.   "Members of the army unit helping out," and then we have 19

 5    individuals listed under this title.

 6       Q.   Mr. Kvocka, are these the soldiers the individuals that Nenad

 7    Pusac, if I remember it correctly, testified about?

 8       A.   Novak Pusac, you mean.

 9       Q.   Yes, you're quite correct.

10       A.   No, no.  These individuals were helping out inside the compound as

11    part of the internal security service.  It's a group of soldiers who were

12    helping out the internal security service, that is, the members of the

13    police.

14       Q.   Mr. Kvocka, what kind of uniforms did they wear?

15       A.   Most of them were wearing the old JNA uniforms.

16       Q.   Were they members of the reserve police force?

17       A.   No.  That can be seen from this document.  They were not members

18    of that force.

19       Q.   Did they have their own superior officer?

20       A.   Yes, they did, but I don't know who that was.  However, within the

21    structure of the unit itself, there must have been someone, but I don't

22    know exactly who their superior officer was.

23       Q.   You have had ample opportunity to familiarise yourself with this

24    document.  What was the purpose of this document or, rather, of this

25    request?


Page 8332

 1       A.   This document actually expresses a wish of Zeljko Meakic to put

 2    some order as regards entries into the compound of the investigation

 3    centre or the mine complex, as far as I understand it, because one can see

 4    that there are over 40 people who were employed there, that is, in the

 5    mine company, in various shifts.  Then there are also 19 individuals here

 6    who were not members of the police, and he probably wanted to have a

 7    certain document issued for these people; that is, the members of the

 8    military who would be allowed to enter the compound of the investigation

 9    centre in order to avoid various individuals wearing uniform or having a

10    military identity card to enter the premises.  That happened very often at

11    the beginning.  It is my assessment that he wanted to know exactly who can

12    be allowed to enter the investigation centre because he was in charge of

13    the security of the centre.

14       Q.   Thank you very much, Mr. Kvocka.

15            MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] We no longer need the document.

16       Q.   In your testimony, and this is something that was also mentioned

17    by your wife and I addressed that issue in my opening statement, mention

18    was made of the fact that you seized some money from Desanka Stanojevic

19    and not Desanka Popovic.  I believe I misspoke the first time.

20            MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] I would like document D45/1 to be

21    shown at this point, please.

22       Q.   Mr. Kvocka, what is the document that you have in front of you?

23       A.   It's an ordinary document used by members of the police, and it is

24    a certificate for the temporary confiscation of items.

25       Q.   I would like you to be as brief as possible because we are running


Page 8333

 1    out of time and tell us what is certified in this document?

 2       A.   This document certifies that I, together with two other police

 3    officers, had carried out a confiscation of a certain amount of money, the

 4    legal tender is indicated here, as well from Desanka Stanojevic from

 5    Gornja Omarska, and then the address is given, number BB, on the 13th.

 6            JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, Ms. Somers.

 7            MS. SOMERS:  Your Honour, before we get any further, the

 8    clarification of the date I would request.  The original language suggests

 9    it is 13 of the 5th month, and the translation has a question mark next to

10    "March" in English.  Is it possible to have some clarification as to

11    which month is invoked here?

12            JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Simic.  I think that we

13    can all read 13th of May 1992, at least this is what I see on the

14    document.  But the witness might be able to help us with the date.

15            MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.  I would like to thank

16    my learned colleague as well.  We also had not noticed that there has been

17    a technical mistake here in the translation, but we have the original in

18    front of us, so we're able to clarify the issue.

19       A.   I was about to say that the measure -- the procedure was -- took

20    place on the 13th of May, 1992.

21       Q.   Who were these items confiscated from?

22       A.   From Desanka Stanojevic, daughter of Aleska, from Gornja Omarska,

23    BB, no number.

24       Q.   Mr. Kvocka, is this the woman to whom you returned that money

25    during your leave between the 16th and 19th after the killing of her


Page 8334

 1    husband?

 2       A.   Yes, that is the woman in question.  She was involved in some

 3    black market activities, and this is the certificate in question.

 4            MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Could the witness now be shown

 5    document D46/1.

 6       Q.   Mr. Kvocka, would you please identify this document, but try to be

 7    as brief as possible.  We only have ten minutes left for today.

 8       A.   This is the list of soldiers who were killed, which list was made

 9    by the Public Security Station of Prijedor on the 22nd of June, 1992.

10    This list is made according to their dates of death.

11       Q.   Would you please turn to the next page and have a look at the 12th

12    of June, 1992, and tell us who was killed on the 12th of June, 1992?

13       A.   Strahilo Stanojevic, father's name Vid.  I'm using the usual

14    police wording:  Stanislav Stanojevic, father's name Vid, from Lamovita.

15    This is the husband of the lady to whom I returned the money.

16       Q.   Did you return the money after the burial of this gentleman,

17    Mr. Stanojevic?

18       A.   Yes, she was supposed to come.  That is what Zeljko told me, and

19    he told me that she had already seen someone else for that purpose, but

20    because her case was not processed yet and the status of that money was

21    that of a temporary confiscation, and he only told me that a decision had

22    been made that the money should be returned to her.  And this is what I

23    did during the period of time which I spent on sick leave, that is, from

24    the 16th until the 19th.

25       Q.   Is that the same period of time which was mentioned by your wife?


Page 8335

 1       A.   Yes, and she knows about that.

 2       Q.   I will ask several very brief questions at this point; however,

 3    before I do that, today you testified that Mr. Drljaca was the only man

 4    who could release prisoners from Omarska.  In my opening statement, I

 5    mentioned a letter which was written by Franjo Komarica, the archbishop

 6    Franjo Komarica.

 7            MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] And I should like Exhibit D47/1 to

 8    be shown and distributed, and the document, of course, to be shown to

 9    Mr. Kvocka.

10       Q.   Mr. Kvocka, I should like to draw your attention to paragraph 3 of

11    Bishop Komarica's letter.  First of all, let me ask you who this letter

12    was addressed to?

13       A.   It was addressed to Mr. Simo Drljaca, Public Security Station

14    Chief.  The letter was sent by the bishop of Banja Luka, that is, the

15    bishop's office of Banja Luka.

16       Q.   Would you please have a look at the last page and tell us who

17    signed the letter.

18       A.   Bishop of Banja Luka, Dr. Franjo Komarica.

19       Q.   Who else was this letter sent to?

20       A.   To the president of the municipal assembly of Prijedor, Milo

21    Stakic, to General Talic, and also to the apostolic nuncio in Belgrade.

22       Q.   Would you now please have a look at the pertinent passage, that

23    is, the third paragraph of the letter?

24       A.   Yes.

25       Q.   "Since you could not at that time grant my request to visit my


Page 8336

 1    priest, the Honourable Mr. Stipo Sosic, the parish priest from Ljubija who

 2    has been in the Omarska camp since the 15th of June 1992, you promised to

 3    call me within two days and let me know what was happening to him and why

 4    he was in the camp at all."

 5            Mr. Meakic in his capacity as the Omarska Police Station

 6    Department commander within whose authority was the security service, was

 7    he able to grant visits to the camp to any individual?

 8       A.   No, he wasn't.

 9       Q.   Did he have any authority to enable contact of the detained

10    persons there with their members -- with the members of their family?

11       A.   No.

12       Q.   Who was able to do that?

13       A.   Simo Drljaca was the only person who had authority to do that.

14    That can be seen from other documents as well, and this document testifies

15    to that fact as well.  And we have seen orders where it is explicitly

16    stated that it was Simo Drljaca who could allow entry/departure from the

17    centre, and also all other contact with the detained persons there.

18       Q.   I don't want to go back to the document; we have seen it a number

19    of times.  It's an order on the 31st of May, 1992, an order issued by Simo

20    Drljaca.  You have seen it many times.  Did that order contain all

21    elements of command structure and organisation of the place?

22       A.   Yes.  The order shows what I have just mentioned.  It's a

23    classical type of order which provides for all tasks and elements of work

24    for various departments, and where he explicitly states that superior

25    officers are in charge of submitting a daily report to him.  I think that


Page 8337

 1    even the time limit is mentioned in the decision; that is, that they were

 2    to report to him on the situation on a daily basis.

 3       Q.   Thank you very much.  I now have a series of very brief

 4    questions.  I don't wish to discuss the interview with Bob Reid in

 5    detail.  I just want to know whether he asked you whether you could issue

 6    any authorisation to anyone in Omarska.

 7       A.   Yes, he asked me that.

 8       Q.   Sorry, whether you could issue orders to anyone in Omarska.  Could

 9    you please repeat your answer?

10       A.   Upon Bob Reid's question whether I could issue orders, I answered

11    no, and I can repeat that here once again:  No.

12       Q.   Did Mr. Reid ask you whether Mr. Kos, Mr. Radic, and Mr. Gruban

13    had the authority to issue any kind of order to anyone?

14       A.   Yes, he asked me that, and I told him that they did not have that

15    authority.  They could not issue any order of that kind, any order at

16    all.

17       Q.   Let me ask you today, once again, whether the three individuals

18    actually issued orders.  I'm not talking about their ability to issue

19    orders.

20       A.   No, they never issued any orders, nor did they have ability to do

21    so.

22       Q.   Mr. Kvocka, did Mr. Reid ask you about an individual by the name

23    of Dragoljub Prcac?

24            JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, Ms. Somers.

25            MS. SOMERS:  Would it be possible to ask counsel to indicate the


Page 8338

 1    page, for the record, so we can have a look at it as well.

 2            MR. K. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, Mr. Kvocka is

 3    testifying about what he spoke.  If we now read this interview, we will

 4    have the same scenario as with Ms. Somers.  I think that it is very easy

 5    for Ms. Somers to check on this by comparing the transcript of

 6    Mr. Kvocka's testimony of today and the interview with Mr. Bob Reid, and

 7    she can even point to certain inconsistencies if there are any such

 8    inconsistencies.

 9            JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Simic, are you sure you want

10    to offer that -- could you please tell that to Ms. Somers tomorrow?

11            Very well.  Yes, Ms. Somers.

12            MS. SOMERS:  Of course it would not be necessary to have anything

13    read out now.  It's just to assist us whether that was said in the

14    transcript.

15            JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, I think that this is a very

16    good solution.  I think time has come for us to wind up for today.  I hope

17    that Mr. Simic can do his colleague a favour and give her the page

18    number.

19            I think that we will stop here and come back tomorrow at twenty

20    minutes past nine.  I think that Mr. Kvocka also needs some rest.  Until

21    tomorrow.

22                          --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 3.05 p.m.,

23                          to be reconvened on Friday, the 16th day of

24                          February, 2001, at 9.20 a.m.

25