Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 24491

1 Wednesday, 19 March 2008

2 [Open session]

3 [The accused entered court]

4 --- Upon commencing at 9.01 a.m.

5 JUDGE BONOMY: Good morning, everyone. We continue this morning

6 with the evidence of Mr. Gagic, who will be cross-examined by the

7 Prosecutor, who has transmogrified into Mr. Hannis.

8 [The witness entered court]

9 JUDGE BONOMY: Good morning, Mr. Gagic.

10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning.

11 JUDGE BONOMY: Your evidence will now continue with

12 cross-examination by the Prosecutor, Mr. Hannis. Please bear in mind

13 that the solemn declaration to speak the truth which you made at the

14 beginning continues to apply to your evidence throughout.

15 Mr. Hannis.

16 MR. HANNIS: Thank you, Your Honour.


18 [Witness answered through interpreter]

19 Cross-examination by Mr. Hannis:

20 Q. Good morning, Mr. Gagic. I just wanted to clarify a couple of

21 questions about your background. Yesterday you told us that you started

22 working at the ministry headquarters in 1996 and that after that you

23 worked on crime prevention with the crime prevention police. You said:

24 "At the outset I dealt with property-related crime and juvenile

25 delinquents and between 2002 and my retirement I dealt with murder."

Page 24492

1 So that sounds like you worked on property crimes and juvenile

2 delinquents between 1996 and 2002, but from what I read in your 65 ter

3 and what I think you said later, I got the impression that you had

4 started working on sex crimes and murder crimes sooner than that. Can

5 you help me out. Can you tell us exactly when you worked on which types

6 of crimes?

7 A. Well, you probably didn't get the right picture. I started

8 working with the Ministry of the Interior back in 1980. As for the

9 ministry HQ, the Ministry of the Interior I mean, as an executive body of

10 the police I started working there in 1996. So between 1980 and 1996 I

11 first dealt with property-related crime and juvenile delinquency up until

12 sometime around 1991. As of 1991 I started working with the Belgrade SUP

13 where I had first started working in the ministry, one of its

14 organizational units, it was sometime late in 1991 and 1992. I worked

15 murder and sex-related criminal offences. And then I switched to the

16 ministry, the seat of the ministry, and then between 1996 and 2004 I was

17 dealing again with murder, homicide, and sex offences. I was the chief

18 of that particular department. Between 2004 and my retirement I worked

19 as chief of the department for discovering war crimes.

20 Q. Thank you. I think I understand now. You mentioned meetings at

21 the MUP staff facility, and I'm talking about 1999. I'd like to start by

22 looking at Exhibit P1996. I think you were shown part of this document

23 yesterday. Now, I've got a hard copy I can have the usher hand you.

24 This is from a meeting on the 7th of May, 1999, in Pristina, and on the

25 first page you'll see that along with those attending were your boss,

Page 24493

1 Major-General Dragan Ilic and also Vladimir Aleksic from the forensic

2 centre, forensic investigation centre and Sinisa Spanovic from the head

3 of the department in the UKP. What was -- can you explain to me, what

4 was your position in relation to those other two gentlemen, Aleksic and

5 Spanovic? Were you sort of equals, were you on the same level with them?

6 A. Aleksic was the head of department, the criminal forensic centre

7 is a department. He outranked me. He was a head of department, and

8 Sinisa Spanovic was a head of section. We were at the same level. There

9 was no subordination between us because we did completely jobs in terms

10 of his function, Aleksic was above me and Sinisa Spanovic was at the same

11 level, but in terms of the nature of our respective jobs, we were quite

12 independent.

13 Q. And what was Spanovic's job, what was his department or section?

14 I'm sorry.

15 A. Spanovic was head of the search department, the sort of thing

16 that his sector did was they looked for suspects and perpetrators. Every

17 time there was a police search or a judicial search, perpetrators,

18 suspects and also unidentified perpetrators, those were the people -- the

19 groups of people they tried to track down.

20 JUDGE BONOMY: I don't know if it's necessary to note this, but

21 there's something missing from the transcript, a complete answer, but no

22 doubt that will be rectified later.

23 MR. HANNIS: Thank you, Your Honour.

24 Q. Now, sir, if you could go to I think it's on page 8 of the B/C/S

25 hard copy you have and for those of us following in English it's page 9.

Page 24494

1 There should be a reference there, sir, to the meeting being given or the

2 floor being given to General Ilic to speak and then it talks about the

3 things he talked about. Do you find that where General Ilic is speaking?

4 A. Yes, yes. I saw that. I didn't attend the meeting myself, but

5 I've seen the document.

6 Q. And I realize you didn't attend this meeting and I have a couple

7 of questions about that. First of all, why weren't you at this meeting?

8 It seems like some of the topics that are being discussed by General Ilic

9 here are things that would relate to your particular job. Were you aware

10 of this meeting and just unable to attend or were you told it wasn't

11 necessary? Why weren't you there?

12 A. I didn't attend this meeting although I knew that the meeting

13 would be held simply because I was busy elsewhere.

14 Q. Do you recall what you were doing on the 7th of May?

15 A. I can't be specific, but I think that was the day I went to

16 Glogovac. I mentioned Hasan Corbic who was a military officer. I think

17 that was the date. Other than that at the time this meeting was held and

18 at the time generally speaking I was working full tilt on lists with

19 statistical information because this was a priority task that I was

20 dealing with at the time and they had to be completed in no time at all.

21 Q. Okay. You see the first thing that General Ilic mentions, that

22 there was a meeting held on the 5th of May, 1999, at the staff in

23 Pristina with the chiefs of SUP UKP at which precise task and

24 instructions were given on how the work of crime investigation police

25 should proceed, and I think you told us before you didn't attend that

Page 24495

1 meeting either on the 5th of May, right? I'm sorry, I'm not sure they

2 were able to pick up your answer. Would you say it again out loud?

3 A. No, no, I hadn't attended the previous meeting either.

4 Q. Again that one sounds like maybe it's even more specifically

5 related to your kind of work, wasn't it?

6 A. Yes, but there were high-ranking officers present at the meeting

7 and that was quite sufficient, I mean their presence. And we could dish

8 it out among ourselves. We talked, they told me who had attended the

9 meeting, but none of this was necessary because there were already three

10 high-ranking police officers at the meeting. It wouldn't have been a

11 good thing if it ended up seeming as though there were more of us from

12 the police at the meeting than the other guys. It wasn't necessary for

13 too many people to get involved, although I can go back and at least I

14 can read the tasks, and I can also consult with other people.

15 Q. So at the meeting on the 5th was that also General Ilic,

16 Mr. Aleksic and Mr. Spanovic, you know that those three attended that

17 meeting?

18 A. As far as I know all three of them were at the meeting.

19 Q. And do you recall where you were on the 5th of May, 1999?

20 A. I can't remember. I abide by my previous answer. I was hard at

21 work on introducing those statistical lists I was gathering modules and

22 forms, and my work focused on that sort of thing over those days.

23 Q. But at the time back in May 1999 you were aware of these meetings

24 and what was being discussed at them, were you?

25 A. Yes.

Page 24496

1 Q. The next thing that General Ilic mentions, the tasks were clearly

2 defined and then it goes on to say: "But there has not been sufficient

3 efficiency when pursuing all types of criminals in the Kosovo-Metohija

4 area."

5 Do you know what types of criminals were being referred to there?

6 A. All different types of crime or criminals. The conditions were

7 difficult, it was difficult to investigate and take any steps. The

8 ability at the time was down to a bare minimum. It was very difficult to

9 prosecute effectively, it was difficult to achieve anything resembling

10 peacetime conditions. The principal task was for those working on crime

11 prevention to be motivated in some way. There had to be permanent

12 pressure, there had to be meetings and dispatches containing instructions

13 in order to get the best of the work and the chief -- the best result

14 possible. In actual fact, the results we saw across there just didn't

15 please us not those achieved anywhere, but this was largely due to the

16 difficult conditions that prevailed at the time.

17 Q. All right. Continue on to the second point after that, if you

18 will, if and for those in English we have to go to the top of page 10.

19 It mentions: "A meeting was held with VJ top officials, at which it was

20 agreed that measures were being applied, but they were not sufficient at

21 the moment."

22 Did you know about that meeting?

23 A. No.

24 Q. And if you move on three points down, my English translation

25 says: "A plan of restoring territory has been compiled and distributed

Page 24497

1 to all the SUP UKP ..."

2 Do you know what that plan of restoring territory was?

3 A. I never saw that plan, I'm not even sure if it existed. There

4 was a dispatch containing a set of instructions or a letter that was

5 drafted at more or less the same time and it talked about exactly all the

6 same things that we have been talking about, stepping up of activity and

7 crime prevention, that sort of thing. There is a document talking about

8 that, there is a reference there too.

9 Q. Let me stop you there and ask you a question. Your answer was

10 translated as: "I never saw that plan, I'm not even sure if it existed."

11 This is General Ilic speaking at the meeting. Do you have any

12 doubt that there was a plan, he said: "The plan has been compiled and

13 distributed ..."

14 I understand you say you never saw it, but do you have any reason

15 to doubt General Ilic when he said that at this meeting? Mr. Sainovic

16 was at this meeting, General Stevanovic was at that meeting.

17 A. I have no doubt that General Ilic said that at the meeting, but

18 I'm not sure if he meant what you think he meant, this being a plan with

19 detailed instructions on what to do or was this just a generic set of

20 instructions saying that on-site investigations should continue to be

21 carried out, that crimes should be uncovered, perpetrators identified,

22 and that they should get on with that. I know that there is a document

23 like that, but it's certainly not "asanacija" plan as reflected in this

24 document. I think it might be worded differently and probably also

25 written differently.

Page 24498

1 Q. In the B/C/S does it say "asanacija"?

2 A. "Saniranje."

3 Q. And you said just now that you think that this -- you said: "I'm

4 not sure if he meant what you meant," meaning me, "this being a plan with

5 detailed instructions -- "

6 MR. HANNIS: I see Mr. Lukic.

7 JUDGE BONOMY: Yes, Mr. Lukic.

8 MR. LUKIC: I don't think he has the document in front of him,

9 but it doesn't say, "asaniranja" but "saniranje."

10 JUDGE BONOMY: That was the spelling we were given yesterday.

11 Mr. Hannis.


13 Q. But if you read that whole sentence it says: "A plan of

14 restoring territory has been compiled and distributed to all the SUP UKP

15 which specifies and clearly defines assignments."

16 That sounds like more than just a generic set of instructions, it

17 specifies and clearly defines assignments, right?

18 A. That's what this document seems to indicate, but I've never seen

19 the plan.

20 Q. Okay.

21 A. I'm not sure that it existed because even if I didn't come across

22 it at the time I probably would have seen it at a later stage.

23 Q. Well, why in the world were General Ilic be referring to a

24 non-existent plan at this meeting attended by the deputy prime minister

25 and General Stevanovic? That doesn't make any sense, does it?

Page 24499

1 A. You are quite right. It appears here that he's misinforming the

2 state leaders, and this is certainly not something that General Ilic was

3 normally in the habit of doing. It wasn't typical of him, that's why I

4 have to say this. I'm afraid that there's a gap between what he said and

5 what was recorded in the transcript, there is a discrepancy, because what

6 a transcript normally reflects or minutes of a meeting is normally an

7 abridged version of what was actually said and he was probably saying

8 that this was about instructions, about what to do whenever human remains

9 were found and whether any procedure applied on such occasion was

10 perfectly in keeping with the Law on Criminal Procedure.

11 Q. Okay.

12 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Fila.

13 MR. FILA: [Interpretation] Again, I must object to the way these

14 questions are being asked. All right, maybe Sainovic has no place in

15 this context, but it's certainly out of the question that his name should

16 be taken in a way that is untruthful based on all of the evidence that we

17 have seen so far, he was there at the beginning and then he left.

18 General Ilic talks about all, all of the witnesses so far, and Sainovic

19 is not there, no exception. Sainovic is being used here as some sort of

20 a catch word and I simply have to oppose it. This is my objection.

21 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Hannis.

22 MR. HANNIS: Your Honour, this document reflects that Deputy

23 Prime Minister Sainovic took part in the meeting, and my point is this

24 claim that General Ilic is talking about a non-existent plan makes less

25 sense to me if he's speaking at a meeting where big shots, like the

Page 24500

1 deputy prime minister, is attending.

2 JUDGE BONOMY: Where does it show the part he played?

3 MR. HANNIS: At page 1, Your Honour, under the minutes it says

4 the deputy prime minister, Nikola Sainovic, took part in the meeting. So

5 I'm assuming he's present when General Ilic is speaking.

6 JUDGE BONOMY: And there is a clear suggestion in what Mr. Lukic

7 says that he has made a speech?

8 MR. HANNIS: Yes, he does speak at page 2 of the English, Your

9 Honour, at some length, page 2 to 4.

10 JUDGE BONOMY: Now, Mr. Fila, this is a matter for

11 re-examination. There is foundation for the questions. If you want to

12 challenge this you'll be given an opportunity if it appears that you

13 would otherwise be prejudiced.

14 MR. FILA: [Interpretation] No, no, no, I won't be taking that

15 opportunity because the witness said he wasn't at the meeting at all, so

16 therefore I probably can't ask him for how long Sainovic was at that

17 meeting for because the witness wasn't there. All I'm saying is the

18 Prosecutor heard it right. All of the witnesses heard mentioned in this

19 transcript and there's at least seven of them I think have been heard so

20 far, so that Sainovic gave a speech and left. Therefore, he couldn't

21 possibly have been at the meeting at the time General Ilic took the

22 floor. So I'm looking for a foundation for this question and what I'm

23 actually suggesting is this is not true because everybody so far has been

24 saying the same thing. Sainovic spoke and he left. He came, he spoke,

25 he left, and all of the witnesses heard so far have been saying the same

Page 24501

1 thing. That's what I'm saying. I don't think the witness could help us

2 see the way, by the way but Mr. Hannis knows this full well, and if I can

3 put it that way I think he's doing it deliberately, and I'm not

4 re-examining if that's what your wondering about.

5 JUDGE BONOMY: What you've said is a matter for submission, it's

6 a matter for us to decide which parts of the evidence we accept, and that

7 we will do in due course, but there's nothing improper about the question

8 being put the way it was. We note that you claim, and you're right, that

9 the question is just as valid without any reference to the individual

10 personalities. The real issue here is whether the statement made is a

11 misleading one or an accurate one and it doesn't really matter who was

12 there.

13 MR. FILA: [Interpretation] That's fine, that's fine, the question

14 is fine. But Mr. Hannis has a copy of these minutes in his hands and you

15 can tell that Mr. Lukic thanks Sainovic. Sainovic is on his way out, and

16 it isn't before such time that Ilic actually takes the floor. Let's just

17 try to be a bit more honest and not insinuate anything. You can tell

18 that General Lukic is thanking Sainovic. Yeah, yeah, yeah, it's there.

19 If you go back to the document you'll see it right there.

20 JUDGE BONOMY: Our position remains the same. There's nothing

21 wrong with your question.

22 Please continue.

23 MR. HANNIS: Thank you, Your Honour. I have to indicate I'm not

24 being dishonest. I don't see an indication here that he left. I see

25 that General Lukic thanked him for his remarks but it doesn't say he then

Page 24502

1 left, so I resent the implication that I'm being dishonest with my

2 question.

3 JUDGE BONOMY: I think Mr. Fila's comment is based on the oral

4 evidence of other witnesses that we've heard so far, but however I agree

5 with you that there's no basis for suggesting that your conduct is

6 improper.

7 MR. HANNIS: Thank you, Your Honour.

8 JUDGE BONOMY: It's important, Mr. Fila, to --

9 MR. FILA: [Interpretation] I do apologise.

10 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you very much.

11 MR. HANNIS: Thank you.

12 Q. Moving down from where we were, Mr. Gagic, I think it's one, two,

13 three, four, five bullet points down there's a reference to Article 218.

14 Can you tell us very briefly what Article 218 refers to.

15 A. I don't know. I can't tell you off the bat. I think it's

16 probably something from the Law on Criminal Procedure, but I wouldn't

17 know those off the cuff. I always get a copy of whichever law it is that

18 I'm supposed to be a applying.

19 Q. Well, here it says specifically: "With regard to conduct in

20 accordance with Article 218, a suspect must be questioned during the

21 investigation and all the measures and tasks that are involved must be

22 included ..."

23 Is this Article 218 something that's more applicable to a -- an

24 investigative judge or a prosecutor than it would be to you doing the

25 kind of work you did or do you know?

Page 24503

1 A. I know, I know, but 218, I can't just quote the article off the

2 top of my head or explain it and I don't remember which particular

3 article that was because you know there are quite many of those. But

4 what's being discussed here is in actual fact that instead of the

5 procedure that you used to apply when interviewing witnesses -- because

6 we're not interrogating witnesses, we interview them. A statement was

7 taken and an official note drawn up as part of the procedure that

8 applied. In the meantime there was a module that was drawn up to contain

9 any witness's or suspect's personal details first of all, so that was

10 what page 1 of each of those modules was about. It was about the

11 personal details of whoever is being interviewed and the rest was

12 freestyle you might say. So the module was changed to some extent but

13 the essence remained the same. The module that was introduced now began

14 to be used on the eve of the air-strikes, and I think that's what

15 Dragan Ilic was talking about. He was talking about this, that modules

16 should be used as envisaged in Article 218, those modules were being

17 used, they were pre-printed, so to speak, and he was saying not to use

18 the free-style approach that the previous procedure had envisaged for us.

19 Q. Okay. You mentioned yesterday that "asanacija" was a new term

20 for you when you heard it in, what, Kosovo in 1999? Was that the first

21 time you heard the term?

22 A. As for "asanacija," it's something that I heard before as a term

23 but not in a military sense. I even heard the term being used in

24 medicine, meaning that somebody was being taken care of, was being

25 assisted in the medical way, he was being helped. And "asanacija" should

Page 24504

1 be exactly the opposite, but I never heard it as a military term. I did

2 hear the term in other areas of life. I maybe used it myself

3 occasionally maybe to mean -- to signify a totally different kind of

4 activity, and that's precisely why I started looking into this, because I

5 refused to be directly or indirectly involved in something that I didn't

6 even though the meaning of, but then I came across this term, "asanacija"

7 [as interpreted] of the battle-field and that caused an entirely

8 different reaction in me and simply led me to familiarize myself.

9 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you -- Mr. Lukic.

10 MR. LUKIC: Yes, page 13, line 7, witness said: "I even heard

11 the term," and the term actually is missing, it is "saniranje," without a

12 and it's the term which he explained later on before explaining

13 "asanacija."

14 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.

15 Mr. Hannis.


17 Q. And in conjunction with the military use of this term, when did

18 you first become aware of it, was that you heard somebody say it or you

19 saw it in a document?

20 A. I think it would be too long a story if I were to tell you how I

21 first came across this. This was totally informal, totally unofficial.

22 Actually, I first heard the term twice informally, unofficially, then I

23 leafed through the military encyclopedia and then I realized that it had

24 to do with dealing with the possibilities of hazardous effects on

25 person's health --

Page 24505

1 Q. Let's try and keep it short if we can. You said you first heard

2 it twice informally. Can you tell us when and where that was and who you

3 heard it from?

4 A. Well, that's precisely what I wanted to avoid, this long story.

5 The first time I heard this --

6 Q. [Previous translation continues] ...

7 JUDGE BONOMY: Sorry, Mr. Gagic, that doesn't need a long story.

8 You've been asked who told you, who mentioned it to you, and what were

9 the circumstances, in other words, when and where. That's three words

10 that you give, the name, the place, and the time.

11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I am sorry. I cannot respond in

12 three words. The courier of a military officer was looking for me at the

13 Forensic Medicine Institute in Pristina, he was asking for Dr. Galic for

14 "asanation" while I was working on Pusto Selo, so the story continues.

15 The second time I heard about it was when I went as a private person to

16 visit a friend of mine from the army and the duty officer who was

17 supposed to announce my arrival said that this officer had gone away to

18 deal with "asanacija." So it was completely new to me, and then I

19 realized that really I had to deal with it and find out what this was all

20 about.


22 Q. And in the rest of your answer about that yesterday you said you

23 also had an occasion to see a document, an order, in the "naredba" that

24 had been issued by the army in relation to "asanacija." Can you tell me

25 what that document was and when and where you saw it?

Page 24506

1 A. This is a document I saw at the Pristina SUP at the then-head of

2 the crime police's office because actually I came there to ask him

3 whether he knew what this word meant in our war conditions. He showed me

4 this order, I read the order, although it was confidential but I am an

5 authorised official so I could familiarize myself with its content. That

6 is to say that I read it, and I saw that both procedures were in line

7 with the Law on Criminal Procedure but military and civilian authorities

8 act in a significantly different way. We have a system whereby the

9 executive and the judiciary is completely separated, I mean --

10 Q. Let me stop you. That's not answering the question.

11 Approximately when was that?

12 A. Well, it was say between the 25th of April and the 1st of May,

13 while I was in Pristina.

14 Q. And do you recall from whom the document or order came? You say

15 it was issued by the army, but do you recall a unit or an individual from

16 whom it came?

17 A. I think it was the command, the military command, that had issued

18 it I think but I really cannot assert this, that the signature is that of

19 General Pavkovic.

20 Q. Have you ever seen that document since that date in late April or

21 around the 1st of May, 1999? Did you see it while preparing for your

22 testimony here?

23 A. Yes, I did see the document because I was working on the KiM

24 dossier in terms of armed conflicts in Kosovo, so I had occasion then to

25 see it.

Page 24507

1 JUDGE BONOMY: Are we talking about 1999 or 1998, Mr. Hannis?

2 MR. HANNIS: I took him to be referring to 1999.

3 JUDGE BONOMY: All right.

4 MR. HANNIS: The 25th of April and the 1st of May, 1999.

5 Q. Right, 1999?

6 A. Yes, yes.

7 Q. Thank you. And when did you do work on the KiM dossier, from

8 when to when?

9 A. Well, I worked on that sometime from 2001 when this dossier was

10 first being established, at least my line of work, missing persons, and

11 all the way up until I retired. It's not that that was my basic task,

12 but I did participate in the establishment of this dossier by providing

13 documents and by analysing documentation.

14 Q. Thank you. You were asked by Mr. Lukic if you'd heard anything

15 about a proposal to set up a joint commission between the VJ and the

16 police, and I think this was in connection with dead bodies in Kosovo and

17 you said, No, you heard no such thing. And then you were asked a

18 hypothetical question by Mr. Lukic. He said: "Say, for example, a joint

19 committee of the VJ and the police the MUP was set up, could it possibly

20 take over the powers of the investigating judge of all the other bodies

21 normally involved in a procedure like this?"

22 And you said: "First of all, under the law no such committee

23 could be established and secondly it would require several hundred

24 people."

25 You're not a lawyer, are you, sir?

Page 24508

1 A. No, I'm not a lawyer.

2 Q. What about a joint committee between the MUP and the VJ, solely

3 for the purpose of establishing which of those two entities was in an

4 area at the time that dead bodies were found, there would be no legal bar

5 to setting up that kind of joint committee would there?

6 A. That's not what I said.

7 Q. No, but that's my question to you. There -- this is a different

8 question --

9 A. Oh, that's the question. I thought -- well, no, as I said during

10 the previous examination, such a body could be established only for

11 following a particular subject matter from the point of view of analysis

12 but not functionally. This body -- well, it depends on how you treat it,

13 I mean whether it would have to do with "saniranje" or "asanacija."

14 Q. No, but if the only purpose is trying to determine which of the

15 two entities the army or the MUP were carrying out operations or actions

16 in a particular area at the time those dead bodies became dead bodies

17 instead of living human beings, there is nothing in the law that would

18 prevent setting up a joint commission or a joint committee to sort that

19 out between the MUP and the VJ, there's no reason they couldn't do that,

20 right?

21 A. There would be no bar to establishing such a commission, but

22 there was no need to establish such a commission.

23 Q. You mentioned that during your time in Kosovo that you didn't

24 have any responsibility toward General Lukic as the head of the MUP staff

25 nor towards any other member of that staff, no responsibility whatsoever

Page 24509

1 is what you said. You went on to say: "The only commitment that I did

2 have in my own line of work was to report to whichever official was in

3 charge of crime."

4 So could you tell us, who would be the official "in charge of

5 crime"? Is that somebody in each of the respective SUPs? Who were you

6 referring to?

7 A. First of all, I did not say that I had to report to any person

8 that was in Kosovo and Metohija. Perhaps a mistake was made in the

9 transcript. I did not report to anyone; I would inform the person who

10 was in charge of crime about my own movement in Kosovo and Metohija for a

11 simple reason, that it is known that I am in Kosovo and Metohija for my

12 sake and for the sake of the other people involved. That is to say if I

13 go out into the field and I do not come back, if I do not get to an

14 appropriate secretariat that means --

15 JUDGE BONOMY: Who is that person?

16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Tomislav Blagojevic, who worked on

17 crime.

18 JUDGE BONOMY: No, he worked in the MUP staff. You're being

19 asked who your superior was.

20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] My superior in Kosovo was no one

21 whatsoever. Dragan -- General Dragan Ilic in terms of work.

22 JUDGE BONOMY: You were a free spirit, were you?

23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Precisely.

24 JUDGE BONOMY: Who were you answerable to?

25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] To General Ilic and his assistant

Page 24510

1 or the head of the department, it depends on who I was given this task

2 by. I was responsible to those who sent me there.

3 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Hannis.

4 MR. HANNIS: Thank you.

5 Q. You mentioned that later on you became a member of the MUP staff,

6 and I think we saw that in Exhibit P1811 yesterday where you were

7 appointed a member of the MUP staff. You know you were recommended by

8 General Lukic to become a member of the staff, right?

9 A. General Lukic proposed me because work is done on the basis of

10 proposals rather than recommendations.

11 Q. Well, one of the questions that we've had early in this case was

12 whether or not General Lukic as head of the staff had any ability to

13 affect appointments. I would like to show you Exhibit 6D366, if I could.

14 I don't know if you will have seen this before or not, Mr. Gagic.

15 Do you recall having seen it? It's dated the 28th of May, 1999, from

16 General Lukic to the Ministry of the Interior to -- actually to

17 General Djordjevic.

18 A. Yes, I haven't had an opportunity to see this document, but I did

19 have an opportunity to see the decision on the establishment of the staff

20 that stemmed from this proposal.

21 Q. Okay. Thank you. And isn't it correct that of the ten people

22 proposed here by General Lukic to make up the staff effective 1 June 1999

23 indeed were all named by Minister Stojiljkovic in that order that you saw

24 the other day in Exhibit P1811? Everybody that General Lukic proposed

25 was named to the staff by Minister Stojiljkovic, right? Do you need to

Page 24511

1 see the other exhibit?

2 MR. LUKIC: Your Honour.

3 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Lukic.

4 MR. LUKIC: I may have a wrong document in front of me, but here

5 I see the proposal for termination of tenure.

6 MR. HANNIS: Well, read the rest of it.

7 MR. LUKIC: I don't see anybody proposed, so --

8 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, if you have the same as --

9 MR. LUKIC: My mistake, sorry.

10 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.


12 Q. Would it help you, Mr. Gagic, to see P1811 side by side with that

13 one so you can check?

14 A. No, no, no need for that. What I see here at the same time is

15 whose engagement is being terminated and who was being proposed for the

16 new staff. I think that this is a technical procedure in actual fact.

17 This is prescribed by internal regulations of the Ministry of the

18 Interior. Who it is that makes proposals, who makes nominations or

19 appointments, and who sends people to different places, and of course

20 consultations take place before that among the different lines of work

21 because this was probably preceded either by a document or an oral

22 agreement with -- between General Lukic and the heads of the lines of

23 work. In my particular case it was General Ilic and he probably proposed

24 me, my name. However, in order not to have six different types of

25 proposals, then there are these oral consultations or perhaps

Page 24512

1 consultations in writing and then General Lukic sends a proposal in

2 writing --

3 Q. Sir, let me stop you there. You're going well beyond my

4 question. My question was just: Isn't it correct that the ten people

5 named here and proposed by General Lukic indeed were named in the

6 decision by Minister Stojiljkovic to become part of the new staff

7 effective at the beginning of June 1999, right? All of General Lukic's

8 proposals were accepted and followed, right?

9 A. Right, because that had been agreed upon beforehand, before this

10 proposal.

11 Q. How did you know that? Did you sit in those meetings with

12 General Lukic and Minister Stojiljkovic?

13 A. No, I was asked by my chief, General Ilic, to come and see him

14 and he asked me whether I could and wanted to be a member of the staff as

15 of the 1st, because the staff was being changed and this kind of a

16 proposal was supposed to be sent to General Ilic. I agreed with that.

17 Now, whether Dragan Ilic informed Lukic orally or in writing, and then I

18 don't know. But at any rate I had been asked.

19 Q. Okay. But you don't know what the situation was with the other

20 nine people, do you?

21 A. Quite identical. I state with full responsibility that

22 General Lukic did not know more than half of these people so he couldn't

23 have made proposals concerning them. They were proposed to him and then

24 he just made the proposals formally.

25 Q. You're saying he didn't know half these people? Can you tell me

Page 24513

1 which half he didn't know?

2 A. Well, I'm not sure that General Lukic knew Vojislav Gucic, I'm

3 not sure that General Lukic new Dragan Lukic, I'm not sure that he knew

4 Petar Bogdanovic -- or actually, some of these people were from the old

5 composition of the staff so he knew them from there but probably he

6 hadn't known them before that.

7 Q. So he's only known them for a year, right, like Dr. Krdzic, who

8 had been on the staff for the previous year?

9 A. I'm telling you about the principle involved. He knew them if

10 they were old members of the staff; as for new members of the staff that

11 were proposed by his organizational units, very often he would not know

12 them and he would only meet them once they came to the staff. That is to

13 say it wasn't General Lukic's free choice.

14 Q. How do you know that? Did you talk to General Lukic about that,

15 whether it was his free choice or not, you didn't, did you?

16 A. I know the principle.

17 Q. Look at number 2, Lieutenant-Colonel Arsenijevic, he had been

18 part of the staff since 3 April 1999, so General Lukic must have known

19 him for at least those seven or eight weeks, right?

20 A. Well, what is being written here is that his assignment is being

21 terminated, Goran Radosavljevic, of course he knew him.

22 Q. No, I'm not asking you about Goran Radosavljevic, I'm asking you

23 about number 2, Lieutenant-Colonel Milenko Arsenijevic, already part of

24 the staff since 3 April 1999?

25 A. He was on the staff and General Lukic, of course, knew him.

Page 24514

1 Q. And of course he knew Major Bogdanovic, which is not what you

2 told us just a little bit ago, because he had been on the staff since the

3 8th of April, 1999, that's what it says here?

4 A. You didn't understand me. What I'm claiming is the people who

5 were sent to the staff for the first time, usually the head of the staff

6 personally does not know these people visually either. Later on he gets

7 to know them. I'm sure that General Lukic never saw Tomislav Blagojevic,

8 my predecessor, who was sent from Krusevac to the staff and his first

9 encounter with him was in the month of February when he was sent to the

10 staff. So I'm talking about that principle. It does not necessarily

11 mean that these people that General Lukic proposed are General Lukic's

12 choice. They are the choice of the heads of the organizational units,

13 and consultations take place before Lukic actually makes the proposal.

14 It is in that context that I said this, that indeed quite a few of these

15 employees were -- well, there. But if you take the new staff for the AP

16 KiM that was established on the 15th of July after the bombing, I am sure

17 that once --

18 Q. Stop. I'm not interested in that. That's not what my question

19 was about. You did tell us that you didn't think that he knew

20 Colonel Bogdanovic and here it states that Colonel Bogdanovic had already

21 been a member of the staff since the 8th of April --

22 JUDGE BONOMY: He backed off of that very quickly, Mr. Hannis,

23 and qualified it in exactly that way when the answer was given. The

24 point the witness is making is that there's a system that operates that

25 you're not familiar with. Whether it was actually operating in this case

Page 24515

1 is undoubtedly the issue that you're pursuing. But he is not the first

2 witness to tell us all these things are stitched up before the proposal

3 is actually made.


5 Q. And you're telling us that during the course of year that

6 General Lukic would not know, would not have opportunity to see

7 face-to-face the members of the MUP staff of which he was the head? Is

8 that what you're saying?

9 A. I claim that General Lukic did not have to know a member of the

10 staff if he was being changed or being re-assigned unless in his previous

11 activities he had worked in his line of work and therefore they met at

12 work, not knew them. That is to say it wasn't his initiative but

13 consultations took place with the heads of the organizational units, and

14 they know better who should be sent in terms of the work that had to be

15 done, they know better than anything General Lukic could propose on his

16 own.

17 Q. Okay. And so I take it then you're saying that when

18 Minister Stojiljkovic makes the final decision, that's based on the best

19 input and advice, not only from General Lukic but from the heads of these

20 other entities or organizational units because they proposed who the

21 people should be, right? So the minister is making an informed,

22 intelligent decision based on input from all those people, right?

23 A. No additional proof is sent to the minister because it goes

24 without saying that before a proposal is sent out consultations had

25 already taken place and that the candidate put up -- does meet all the

Page 24516

1 requirements and is capable of carrying out all the tasks that he would

2 be entrusted with.

3 Q. Did you see in your preparations for testifying here the decision

4 from 16 June 1998 to establish a ministerial staff for the suppression of

5 terrorism? It's a similar document to this P1811, but it was from June

6 of 1998. Did you see that one?

7 A. As far as I know, no, as far as I can remember.

8 Q. Okay. Then in that one it indicated that the deputy head of the

9 staff was David Gajic, who we understand was from RDB; among others

10 listed were Milorad Lukovic, who we know by the nickname Legija, as

11 assistant head for operations; Lieutenant-Colonel Zivko Trajkovic, as

12 assistant head for special anti-terrorist units. Did you know that they

13 had been named to the staff in 1998?

14 A. As for all the mentioned officers, I know them personally. I did

15 not know that they were members of the staff. I knew that in certain

16 stages they were engaged either like I or in some more official form, but

17 I did not come across any of them in Kosovo because I arrived later.

18 Q. Okay. Thank you. Let me move onto something else. You were

19 shown an exhibit yesterday, 6D475, which was dated I think the 13th of

20 June, 1999, and this one has a signature block for

21 Lieutenant-General Obrad Stevanovic. Now, you told us as far as you knew

22 he was not a member of the MUP staff at that time, in June of 1999,

23 right?

24 A. Yes, as far as I know he was not a member of the staff.

25 Q. Then Mr. Lukic went on to ask you: "Do you know of any other

Page 24517

1 instances when documents or dispatches were being sent from the staff by

2 people who were not members of the staff?" Even though in the heading we

3 still had ministry staff.

4 Your answer was: "Yes, I know of such instances."

5 Now, you did tell us about a dispatch and an amendment that you

6 had drafted, I believe, but we'll talk about that one in a minute.

7 That's the one about getting information about unidentified dead bodies.

8 But apart from that, can you tell me about any other specific instances

9 where documents were being sent from the staff by people who were not

10 members?

11 A. In addition to that dispatch of mine, I mentioned yet another

12 document, a document that was sent by Dragan Ilic, and I think when you

13 were questioning me a few minutes ago about "saniranje," that is the

14 document that I worked on too, that's the document that I know about. I

15 think I sent yet another document or actually I'm sure that I sent yet

16 another document, but it was towards the end of May.

17 Q. Okay. And you told us -- pardon me. You told us that with

18 regard to Exhibit P1188, that's a one to which there was an amendment

19 sent out the same day, the only change had to do with unidentified bodies

20 as opposed to all the bodies. You recall the one I'm talking about? I

21 see you're nodding your head yes, but I need you to answer out loud.

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. And that is our exhibit P1188. My question to you is: What was

24 the source of your authority to issue that document basically on behalf

25 of the MUP staff of which you were not then yet a member? Did you have

Page 24518

1 some written permission from General Lukic or some oral permission ahead

2 of time or did you discuss this one specifically with him or did you just

3 do it? How did that happen?

4 A. Well, I've already explained that but it will be no problem for

5 me to repeat all of that yet again. I was tasked with the following. I

6 was supposed to have --

7 Q. Before you repeat all that again, can you just answer my specific

8 question. Did you have any specific oral or written permission from

9 General Lukic to issue that kind of document, yes or no?

10 A. I had neither oral nor written permission, and I didn't need one.

11 Q. Tell us why you didn't need one.

12 A. Because when the document is being registered in the log, which

13 in itself is a credible document, it is also noted down who sent the

14 document. It was the staff log-book and it was there so that I didn't

15 have to go to Belgrade to register that in the UKP book. In -- that's

16 why I sent it with the heading of the staff, with General Lukic's

17 signature, and it was registered under that number as the UKP being the

18 sender of that dispatch registered at the staff. In case of need or

19 misunderstanding, we know who sent it and measures can be undertaken.

20 Therefore, I didn't need any separate authorisation on the part of

21 General Lukic to use the log-book and the communication devices or means

22 that we only had at our disposal at the time. In some other conditions I

23 would have used the communication channels of the criminal police

24 department, but there were no conditions in place for that at the time.

25 Q. Okay. Now, help me if you can with a question I have about the

Page 24519

1 numbering of dispatches. That exhibit, P1188, is listed as dispatch

2 number 145 dated the 28th of May, 1999, and I think the amendment is also

3 the same day and it appears to have the number 145-A, can which I assume

4 means amendment to 145. Is that right?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. Now, where does the number 145 come? Is that just a sequential

7 number from the beginning of the year in 1999, so this is 145th one sent

8 in 1999?

9 A. I don't know if it was the 145th document in 1999 or the 145th

10 document in June, or rather, May 1999.

11 Q. But can we relate that number to the MUP staff or does that

12 number, 145, refer to something back in Belgrade where you came from? Do

13 you understand my question? Is this 145 in the log-book for MUP staff?

14 Please, sorry.

15 A. Yes, it is the number in the MUP staff log-book. If it had been

16 in the log-book of the UKP, the number would have been different.

17 Possibly before this particular number and this document, the other

18 documents also had to do with the work of the staff.

19 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Gagic, where does it say on this document that

20 it comes from the UKP?

21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Nowhere in the document does it say

22 that.


24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] From the context and the text it

25 can be concluded that it was sent by the UKP, and you can see that from

Page 24520

1 the signature. In the heading it is not there. We only see the MUP

2 staff there because that was the prescribed heading. I cannot change

3 that --

4 JUDGE BONOMY: Where is that prescribed?

5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Legal regulation in terms of

6 headings in the bylaws of the UKP, the police -- criminal police

7 administration, et cetera.

8 JUDGE BONOMY: So what do these bylaws say that prevent you from

9 identifying that it's the UKP that's sending this?

10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I cannot appear as the sender,

11 since I used the log-book of the dispatches of the staff. When you use

12 the log-book, you always use the staff heading. Other people can send

13 documents such as General Stevanovic, Ilic, and myself.

14 JUDGE BONOMY: From a common sense point of view that would

15 suggest that the whole object of this system is to conceal the truth

16 rather than to make things clear.

17 [Trial Chamber confers]

18 JUDGE BONOMY: Do you wish to comment on that?

19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, I don't think your remark

20 stands. The whole system was aimed at those who are familiar with how it

21 works. By mere chance it is you who have now encountered this problem.

22 Another thing is that the book is a public document and you can see very

23 well who sent what dispatch when, and anyone who can -- who wants to see

24 that can. Of course I don't mean public outside the police domain.

25 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, do we have that book, Mr. Hannis?

Page 24521

1 MR. HANNIS: No, Your Honour, not that I'm aware of.

2 JUDGE BONOMY: And have you tried to get it?

3 MR. HANNIS: Yes, I believe that's part of our previous RFAs

4 cover -- it would have covered that kind of log-book.

5 JUDGE BONOMY: There are times, Mr. Gagic, when it has been

6 difficult for this Tribunal to get documents to put the whole picture

7 together. That may not apply in this case, I don't know, but it's just a

8 possibility. Can we see the -- where this you say is signed by the UKP

9 or by you? And you'll tell me it's a dispatch and it's not signed.

10 MR. HANNIS: Your Honour, I think yesterday he explained he

11 signed the original, but this document we have is --


13 MR. HANNIS: Sorry.

14 JUDGE BONOMY: You're right, but this is the one we have,

15 Mr. Gagic. Where do I tell from this document that it's a UKP document?

16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You'll have to take my word for it

17 in terms of this document.

18 JUDGE BONOMY: So we can't tell from what we have in front of us

19 that this is UKP; is that the position? What's your answer so that it's

20 recorded, please?

21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] My answer is: Based on the

22 document we have before us that one cannot see that the document was sent

23 on behalf of the UKP via the MUP staff for Kosovo and Metohija.

24 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.

25 [Trial Chamber confers]

Page 24522

1 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Hannis.

2 MR. HANNIS: Thank you.

3 Q. Mr. Gagic, to be sure I understand correctly, yesterday you

4 explained that the copy we have is not the original copy, right? That's

5 not the original?

6 A. This is a copy.

7 Q. But on the original you signed and you put "za" or "for" Sreten

8 Lukic on the original, right? You'll have to answer out loud. I'm

9 sorry. I see you nodding your head, but we need --

10 A. Yes, and the format is not the same. This went through a

11 distribution machine for dispatches. It was in the form of a report,

12 standard form.

13 Q. And since that time that you originally signed it and before it

14 was sent out and during your time working on the KiM dossier, have you

15 ever seen the original again?

16 A. I have never seen the original again. I do think I came across a

17 copy, although I'm not certain whether it was a copy of this dispatch or

18 of another dispatch which I sent perhaps a day or two later.

19 Q. And do you know where the original might be today?

20 A. If the original was preserved, it should be with the MUP of

21 Serbia.

22 Q. Okay.

23 JUDGE BONOMY: Can you give us a moment, Mr. Hannis.

24 MR. HANNIS: Yes.

25 [Trial Chamber confers]

Page 24523

1 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you for your patience, Mr. Hannis.

2 MR. HANNIS: Thank you, Your Honour.

3 Q. Mr. Gagic, I think, if I understood your testimony yesterday,

4 there was another one that had sort of a submission situation, that was

5 Exhibit 6D874, if I could hand you a hard copy of that one. And this is

6 dated the 6th of May, 1999, and you told us yesterday that regarding

7 whose name is typed at the end of this document we see it as

8 Sreten Lukic. You said:

9 "As in the previous case and this was a general rule head of

10 staff, Major Sreten Lukic and it was subsequently signed by whoever

11 happened to be sending the circular out. Any recipients would know this

12 is the person informing them and this is the person sharing information

13 with them so the situation is perfectly identical. It's just the header

14 that was used was the header of the MUP staff. The fact is that

15 General Ilic was in Kosovo at the time and this was to keep him from

16 going back to Belgrade."

17 So this exhibit, 6D874, which we have with the typed signature of

18 Sreten Lukic, is it your evidence that it was actually signed by

19 General Ilic in the original? Sorry, you'll have to answer out loud.

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. And is this one that you helped draft?

22 A. Yes, I think this document has to do with the plan for

23 "saniranje" of the terrain, I think that's how it was taken as well.

24 Q. And we see this is dated the 6th of May, the day before that 7th

25 of May meeting, that we saw on P1996 at the beginning of my

Page 24524

1 cross-examination of you. Isn't this document the plan regarding terrain

2 that General Ilic was talking about in that meeting?

3 A. This is precisely what I said. The only document I am familiar

4 with is this document, in the drafting of which I took part. As for the

5 other document pertaining to the plan of "saniranje" of the terrain, I'm

6 not familiar with that. I think it wasn't clarified sufficiently in the

7 minutes we saw. I don't know of any other documents.

8 Q. Are you telling me you didn't understand when we were going

9 through that earlier that the plan that General Ilic was talking about

10 was this one that you helped draft, that he signed, and that was sent out

11 the day before? You didn't understand that when we were talking about

12 it?

13 A. No. I understood that you thought there was another document. I

14 don't know whether there is one. There may well be, but if it doesn't

15 exist then General Ilic had this document in mind that was sent to all

16 departments of crime police.

17 Q. Really, Mr. Gagic, you -- in the beginning I asked you about what

18 this reference was, it said: "A plan of restoring territory has been

19 compiled and distributed to all the SUP UKPs."

20 Isn't that this plan in 6D874? This is a plan of restoring

21 territory, isn't it?

22 A. I don't know if another plan exists. I have never seen it. In

23 case it does not exist, then this is the plan General Ilic was referred

24 to at the meeting on the 7th.

25 Q. Of course it is and why didn't you say that when I was asking you

Page 24525

1 about it before? You said you didn't think such a plan existed. You

2 helped draft it and sent it out the day before, didn't you?

3 A. That's what I said. Go back to the transcript.

4 Q. You'll see in item number 4 of this document it also makes

5 reference to the provisions of Article 218 which I asked you about when

6 we were looking at the meeting of 7 May, right?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. But the main question I wanted to ask you about this was again

9 you said this was an identical situation, so I take it this not a

10 document for which you or General Ilic had written or oral permission

11 from General Lukic to send out under the MUP staff header, right, just

12 yes or no?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. And do you know where the original of this one is with

15 General Ilic's signature?

16 A. No.

17 Q. And you didn't ever see it again after the 6th of May, 1999, not

18 during your time working on the KiM dossier or otherwise?

19 A. I didn't see the document. I saw him sign the document in front

20 of me and it was to be distributed, then we split, I went on an

21 assignment and he remained at the staff. After that time, I did not see

22 the document. I wasn't working with that part of the documentation.

23 Q. Okay. You said that this was a general rule. It is formalised

24 in a document or a manual somewhere, this practice?

25 A. There is a manual regulating and defining the names of

Page 24526

1 organizational units of the MUP and the headers. As far as I know, as

2 regards auxiliary bodies it is not mentioned there; however, the

3 principal organizational units are included. In practice the same

4 headers are used as the headers of other organizational units of similar

5 composition, which is something that we can clearly see from this

6 document. Be not confused by the number 21, it's another, different,

7 book of confidential mail; the book I used was a general one.

8 Q. Yes. So the one that you used in Exhibit P11 --

9 A. 145, sir.

10 Q. Yes, that was in Exhibit P1118 [sic], that had dispatch 145 and

11 145-A. We see this one as the number 12A-21?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. And you say that's just because that was in a different dispatch

14 log because this involved confidential documents of the MUP staff; is

15 that right? You nodded your head, but I need an oral response.

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. Thank you. Now, in terms of this practice of being able to have

18 a dispatch sent out with the MUP staff header by someone who was not a

19 member of the MUP staff, I understand you say you were able to do it and

20 General Ilic was able to do it. I mean, how far did that go? Could

21 anybody from the MUP in Belgrade who happened to be in town come in and

22 have a dispatch sent out with a MUP header or did you have to hold a

23 certain rank or a certain position to be able to do that, if you know?

24 A. There was no limit. It was defined by the need [as interpreted]

25 at the moment. It wasn't foreseen for only generals, colonels, or majors

Page 24527

1 to be able to do that; it depended on the urgency and necessity to

2 forward documents ASAP. I was calling a meeting for the next day here.

3 Most of those dispatches were sent by couriers. There was no time for me

4 to go to Belgrade to work on it. It all depended on what needed to be

5 done and what a certain dispatch refers to. Junior as well as senior

6 officers were able to use the book.

7 Q. You explained to us earlier how --

8 JUDGE BONOMY: Just before you move on there are a couple of

9 things to be clarified. Line 12 on page 33 should be P1188 rather than

10 1118, I think. And also I think the answer to the last question, that's

11 line -- page 34, line 1, on my transcript which may not be identical to

12 everyone else's, it was defined by the -- I think the witness said

13 functional need at the moment rather than simply need at the moment.

14 Do you recollect if that's what you actually said, Mr. Gagic?

15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, precisely so.

16 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.

17 MR. HANNIS: Thank you, Your Honour. And that's correct, it

18 should be 1188.

19 Q. Now, I think you explained earlier that the recipients of these

20 documents would know who it came from even though it only said MUP staff

21 and General Lukic at the bottom, right? Again you'll have to answer out

22 loud.

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. Is that because of the contents of the document they would answer

25 who it was coming from?

Page 24528

1 A. Mostly based on the content. When a dispatch arrives from the

2 staff to the secretariat, it has eight or nine organizational units.

3 Sometimes it is addressed in particular to what unit, but sometimes it

4 also says the chief of SUP. He gets acquainted with the contents, and

5 then depending on the type of issue he forwards that to the competent

6 unit.

7 Q. Thank you. Yesterday you mentioned a prosecutor, Mr. Hartman.

8 It wasn't clear, but Mr. Hartman's a prosecutor in Kosovo I think with

9 the UN. He's not a prosecutor here in The Hague with this Tribunal,

10 right? Again, you'll have to answer out loud.

11 A. I said an international prosecutor, which is precisely what he

12 used to do in Kosovo, but not anymore, I think. When I said

13 international I didn't mean the ICTY, I meant the UNMIK judiciary.

14 Q. Okay. Thank you. And the last thing I wanted to ask you related

15 to your testimony yesterday about interviewing Mr. Protic. You said you

16 conducted an interview with Bozidar Protic in relation to his testimony

17 when he was summoned to testify before the Hague Tribunal. Now, my notes

18 indicate that you interviewed him I think around the 4th of June, 2001,

19 or maybe you're referring to an interview with Protic that was done on

20 the 27th of August, 2002. But those are the only two that I'm aware of,

21 does that ring a bell for you?

22 A. I think 2002 is more likely to be the case than 2001. I can't

23 remember when exactly I talked to Protic, but I'm convinced that it was

24 in 2002 because in 2001 I think it was Karleusa that talked to him.

25 Q. What I'm interested in though is your comment that you said it

Page 24529

1 was in relation to his testimony when he was summoned to testify before

2 the Hague Tribunal. My knowledge is he wasn't summoned to testify in

3 front of this Tribunal until sometime in 2006, I think. So is that

4 correct? Did you testify -- did you interview him in connection or in

5 relation to his testimony when he was called to testify here?

6 A. I didn't interview him when he was summoned to testify. I

7 interviewed him when his obligation was veiled to preserve official

8 secrets and when he had been summoned for an interview by the ICTY local

9 office in Belgrade.

10 Q. Okay. Is that standard practice, to interview witnesses who have

11 been called to speak to The Hague Tribunal representatives and a waiver

12 has been sought?

13 A. Yes, in a way it was standard practice simply because officials

14 of the Ministry of the Interior were entitled to receive legal

15 assistance, technical assistance, depending on their choice when they

16 went to those interviews. We would call them and secondly we conducted

17 talks to see if their potential evidence had anything to do with anything

18 related to the waiver itself. So the taking of those statements was

19 based on that. We did not lean on any of the witnesses; quite the

20 contrary, in fact. Most of them, as far as what they stated to us at the

21 time, repeated the same thing when testifying in court. I think there

22 are documents showing that, and if need be I'm sure we can deliver those

23 documents to you.

24 Q. Mr. Gagic, I didn't ask you if anybody leaned on them, but were

25 you just anticipating that I might?

Page 24530

1 A. No, I wasn't anticipating.

2 MR. HANNIS: Thank you, Your Honours. I'm sorry I went a little

3 over, but I'm finished with my questions now.

4 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you, Mr. Hannis.

5 Mr. Lukic, re-examination?

6 MR. LUKIC: Yes, Your Honour. Thank you. Very short one.

7 I'd like to have P1824 on the e-court, please. We need page --

8 this is code on criminal procedure, and we need page 8 -- 15, actually,

9 Article 218.

10 JUDGE BONOMY: Yes, Mr. Hannis.

11 MR. HANNIS: I withdraw. Thank you.

12 Re-examination by Mr. Lukic:

13 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Gagic, my learned friend Mr. Hannis asked

14 you a question about the fact that Article 218 was something that people

15 were adamant about. What is Article 218 of the Law on Criminal Procedure

16 that then applied about?

17 A. If you look at the very first sentence you can tell what it's

18 about. It talks about the circumstances that a suspect is to be

19 interviewed about, the term here is suspect, but we use the term

20 perpetrator. So it's about how an interview is to be conducted in order

21 to prove the commission of a crime.

22 Q. What about paragraph 2, what is the first thing that is

23 communicated?

24 A. Grounds for suspicion against him, that is the first thing that

25 is communicated. A perpetrator is informed of the reasons he has been

Page 24531

1 brought in for. He's also told about any evidence that exists against

2 him incriminating him.

3 Q. What about paragraph 8 or item 8?

4 A. This is the same as the previous law and any law so far, no

5 coercion, no use of force in order to obtain a confession.

6 Q. What about item 10, paragraph 10? We don't have time to go

7 through all of it now.

8 A. If there has been any violation of Articles or paragraphs 8 and 9

9 of this article in the presence of counsel -- my copy is very poor.

10 Q. No court ruling can be based on any statement made by an accused,

11 that's what it says. And my question to you is: Where did this law

12 apply, in which territory?

13 A. Throughout the former Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. During the

14 air-strikes and the state of war, in addition to this law what also

15 applied was a decree extending the powers of the bodies of the Ministry

16 of the Interior.

17 Q. What remains to be seen, is the exhibit that is to blame for all

18 this confusion as to what the plan was and what it wasn't 6D874, please.

19 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: The interpreter is not

20 certain whether it's 874 or 814.

21 JUDGE BONOMY: Is it 874 or 814, Mr. Lukic?

22 MR. LUKIC: 874, Your Honour. 6D874.

23 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.

24 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

25 Q. Mr. Gagic, I talked to you about this, Mr. Hannis talked to you

Page 24532

1 about this particular exhibit, this is a dispatch. You confirmed that

2 you were involved in the compiling of this dispatch. It was signed by

3 General Ilic. We shall be requiring page 2, or rather, the last page of

4 this version. The English is gone. Can you please read the last

5 sentence, the very last sentence of that document. They're about to zoom

6 in.

7 A. Yes, that's what I'm waiting for too.

8 Q. What does it say?

9 A. "Immediately inform the MUP and the crime police administration

10 of the results of the undertaken activities from the mentioned plan and

11 supply statistical and analytical data on the 1st and the 15th of each

12 month."

13 Q. The last sentence, please.

14 A. "This plan shall come into effect immediately."

15 Q. So is this a plan?

16 A. Yes, it is.

17 Q. All right. Now, please go to the sentence at item 7.

18 A. "Undertake all measures and activities pursuant to the provisions

19 of the law, or rather, secretariat chiefs are responsible for the

20 realization of the envisaged activities and UKP crime police department

21 chiefs are tasked with their direct realization."

22 Q. How do you see this item?

23 A. Just as it is. I see it as a plan concerning measures and steps

24 to be taken about this plan of taking more urgent steps to shed light on

25 crimes, but it's also about unidentified corpses being found, how they're

Page 24533

1 forensically examined and identified, if they are buried there is to be

2 an exhumation and this is the regular procedure.

3 Q. So who is in charge of this activity?

4 A. The crime police department, that's what it says, isn't it? The

5 reporting is to be done vis-a-vis the UKP.

6 Q. Thank you, Mr. Gagic. Thanks for testifying.

7 Questioned by the Court:

8 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Gagic, would you read again, please, slowly

9 the paragraph that begins: "Immediately inform ..."

10 It's the second-last paragraph.

11 A. Sure.

12 "Immediately inform the MUP and the crime police administration

13 of the results of the undertaken activities from the mentioned plan and

14 supply statistical and analytical data on the 1st and the 15th of each

15 month."

16 JUDGE BONOMY: The reference there is to two organizations or

17 organizational units perhaps, the MUP and the crime police

18 administration. So what do you understand by the MUP in that context?

19 A. It's a reference to the MUP staff.

20 JUDGE BONOMY: Is the word "staff" there in Serbian?

21 MR. ZECEVIC: [Indiscernible]

22 JUDGE BONOMY: Because it was read -- we asked for it to be read

23 twice and the word "staff" was not read to us.

24 MR. ZECEVIC: Well, actually, I'm sorry, Your Honours, if I may

25 be of assistance actually, the witness read MUP staff.

Page 24534

1 JUDGE BONOMY: I don't suggest otherwise, Mr. Zecevic, and I

2 particularly asked because I was keen to know if the word "staff" was

3 there. All right. That clarifies the position. Thank you.

4 [Trial Chamber confers]

5 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Gagic, looking again at the document on the

6 screen and picturing in your mind the original, which you say was signed

7 by General Ilic, in what form was the name Major-General Sreten Lukic

8 applied to that document? Was it as we see it here, typewritten, or was

9 it applied in some other way?

10 A. When the original document was compiled, and this is what it

11 looks like, as shown here, what you found in the signature line was

12 always the name of whoever was in charge of the unit mentioned in the

13 document's header. Regardless of what organizational unit from my crime

14 police administration was sending --

15 JUDGE BONOMY: I understand that. My question is a much more

16 basic one, and that is: How was the name actually placed on the paper?

17 Was it typewritten? Is it handwritten? Is it a stamp? Or is it some

18 other way of applying the name Major-General Sreten Lukic to the

19 document?

20 A. Just as shown here, it's typewritten, they use an electrical

21 typewriter or a mechanic one something like that.

22 [Trial Chamber confers]

23 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Gagic, that completes your evidence. Thank

24 you for coming here to give evidence to us. You're now free to leave the

25 courtroom with the usher. Thank you.

Page 24535

1 [The witness withdrew]

2 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Lukic, is the next witness Mr. Paponjak?

3 MR. LUKIC: Yes, Your Honour, he is.

4 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, we can do that after the break, and we'll

5 resume at 20 minutes past 11.00.

6 --- Recess taken at 10.50 a.m.

7 --- On resuming at 11.21 a.m.

8 [The witness entered court]

9 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Paponjak, good morning.

10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning.

11 JUDGE BONOMY: Would you please make the solemn declaration to

12 speak the truth by reading aloud the document which will now be shown to

13 you.

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

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

16 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you. Please be seated.

17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.

18 JUDGE BONOMY: You'll now be examined by Mr. Lukic.

19 Mr. Lukic.

20 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

21 [In English] I need help from the usher.


23 [Witness answered through interpreter]

24 Examination by Mr. Lukic:

25 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Paponjak, you have an amended statement in

Page 24536

1 front of you pursuant to a Court order yesterday --

2 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: Could all the other

3 microphones in the courtroom please be turned off. There is an awful

4 amount of background noise.

5 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Lukic, you're going to have to start that

6 again because the interpreters are having a problem. Someone's

7 microphone is apparently on, either that or yours is somehow or other

8 being disturbed.

9 MR. LUKIC: Thank you, Your Honour.

10 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Paponjak, we're facing a certain amount of

11 technical difficulty, therefore, I have to repeat my question. Suppose I

12 were to ask you the same questions today as the ones you answered in your

13 statement, would your answers be the same?

14 A. Yes, they would.

15 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, we are now tendering

16 Mr. Paponjak's statement, 6D1603.

17 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Paponjak, the document in front of you, is

18 that your statement?

19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Indeed it is, Your Honour.

20 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you, Mr. Lukic. How many paragraphs does it

21 now have? I don't think I've actually been given the redacted version.

22 MR. LUKIC: The number of paragraphs are the same, only the

23 paragraphs that have to be redacted are black now.

24 JUDGE BONOMY: That's fine. I can deal with that myself. Thank

25 you.

Page 24537

1 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

2 Q. Mr. Paponjak, for the sake of the record, can you please state

3 your name?

4 A. Radovan Paponjak, born on the 1st of May, 1948, in the Rudo.

5 That is where I completed my elementary school education. I went to a

6 secondary school in Foca, it was a teacher training school, it was in

7 Uzice that I completed an academy for teachers, and then prevention and

8 resocialization of persons with disturbances to their social behaviour.

9 Q. As you know, your statement was redacted or amended in part. My

10 questions to you today will be very short and will focus on a limited

11 range of matters. My first question: Were there any kidnappings in Pec

12 municipality by the KLA?

13 A. Yes, there were abductions by the KLA.

14 Q. Not just Pec municipality but also the Pec SUP?

15 A. Yes, the Pec SUP as well, meaning all the other municipalities

16 covered by the Pec SUP, those abductions increased at one point in time

17 1998, May, June, and July specifically. At the time a total of 19

18 persons were abducted over such a short period of time, ten of them Serb,

19 and nine Albanians, persons of Albanian ethnicity. There was a large

20 number of abductions at roughly the same time next year, 1999, after the

21 peace forces, peacekeeping forces had arrived.

22 Q. Were there any killings, were there any attacks by the KLA on the

23 Serb settlements in the area covered by the Pec SUP?

24 A. Yes, this was a particularly difficult problem jeopardizing the

25 security situation in that area. There were killings which caused fear

Page 24538

1 to arise among people living there. People would be killed in their own

2 front yards, they would be killed by travelling. For example, Zorica

3 Belic in Stepenica Klina municipality, he was killed in his own front

4 yard. Mr. Vasic, for example, who was from the Kosovska Mitrovica area,

5 he was waylaid and killed. There was another serious incident that

6 affected the people living in the area, the shooting of Lazarevic, a

7 young boy aged 16 whom the terrorists took away from his home and shot or

8 executed outside his home. This is an incident that was publicised in

9 the local papers and this caused the people living in the area to feel a

10 huge amount of unrest.

11 Q. Where was the situation at its most difficult concerning the

12 security aspect, and I'm talking about the area covered by the Pec SUP?

13 A. The most difficult situation --

14 Q. We're talking about 1998, right?

15 A. Yes, throughout 1998 in the so-called Baranjski Lug area

16 comprising a number of villages, such as Celopek, Baran Rasic, and then

17 further afield in the Klina area, a place called Kijevo settled by Serbs

18 for the most part and it ended up isolated from the remaining sections of

19 the area. You couldn't go there and you couldn't leave without exposing

20 yourself to danger. One couldn't travel through the Rugovska Klisura

21 area because the terrorists were attacking anyone making their way

22 through and then Istok, Vrelo village, and Stari Dvorani and those areas

23 too.

24 Q. What about Serbs in 1998, did they begin to leave certain areas

25 covered by the Pec SUP?

Page 24539

1 A. It was precisely this kind of situation that left Serbs leaving

2 their villages, quite a number of Serbs, from this very area, the

3 Baranjski Lug area. They moved to Pec, those who had families there.

4 Some left for Sumadija, which is in Serbia proper, in central Serbia as a

5 matter of fact, or to Montenegro. People took refuge wherever they

6 could. It wasn't just Serbs leaving the area. There were Albanians

7 leaving as well who were facing problems with the terrorists.

8 Q. What is Lodja and what is typical of that place at the time?

9 A. Lodja is a settlement, it's on the outskirts of Pec because Pec

10 and Lodja are now joined practically. At the time the terrorists had a

11 particularly important stronghold in that village. They had built-up

12 trenches, connecting trenches, gun-fire nests and fortifications. They

13 even put up or established a gun-fire nest at the top of a mosque. The

14 situation was dangerous. There was a danger to all the Serbs living

15 there or anyone attempting to make their way into Lodja, even our own

16 access to that settlement was limited.

17 Q. What about this Pec suburb, were there any attacks that occurred

18 there and who was subjected to those attacks? Are you aware of any

19 incidents that were typical?

20 A. There were always skirmishes there and shoot-outs. Sometime

21 early in July 1998, in the morning hours, homes were attacked belonging

22 to the Josevic family. The Pec SUP got wind of this and a unit was

23 immediately dispatched to the extent that men were available at all to

24 provide assistance. It was not a very strong unit. There were only so

25 many men available and on duty at the time.

Page 24540

1 Q. So what happened next once this unit had been dispatched to

2 Lodja?

3 A. They managed to reach the Vujosevic homes. The terrorists had

4 given up on the attack that they had launched because an end was put to

5 their attack. These officers who arrived there talked to members of the

6 Vujosevic family and the unit was now on its way back. On their way back

7 the terrorists set up an ambush and opened fire on the vehicles that the

8 police were using on their way back. They used rifles and hand-held

9 launchers in the course of this attack. A shell hit one of the police

10 vehicles killing two policemen and wounding many. There was a skirmish

11 and the unit was soon assisted by another unit that came to their rescue

12 from the Pec SUP. Those killed and wounded were evacuated, and two

13 members of the Pec SUP, two police officers Captain Srdjan Perovic and

14 police officer Mirko Rajkovic were abducted by the terrorists.

15 Q. There was something you told me about yesterday, paragraph 21,

16 there is another amendment to be made. It says the petrol station owner,

17 Nasiri petrol, this is page 7 in the B/C/S. How should this read?

18 A. The owner of the petrol station and then quotation marks

19 "Nasiri," deriving from the name Nasir, "Nasiri" petrol. This is what

20 the petrol station was called.

21 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Lukic, what exactly is the amendment to be

22 made? After Berisha this word should be inserted, should it?

23 MR. LUKIC: The name of that petrol station is petrol, but Nasiri

24 petrol.

25 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.

Page 24541

1 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

2 Q. Just to go back to this. You said that two police officers were

3 abducted during this attack. Do you know what became of them? Did you

4 ever learn?

5 A. Yes. Following an anti-terrorist operation once the terrorists

6 had been pushed back from that village, the bodies of these two

7 colleagues of mine were found. There was a post mortem establishing that

8 they had been killed. Prior to their deaths, however, they had been

9 tortured, parts of their bodies were severed, and they had been

10 mutilated.

11 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter did not hear the last sentence

12 that the witness said.

13 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Paponjak, could you repeat the last sentence

14 of your answer, please, the interpreter did not catch it.

15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think that there's a case file in

16 the Pec SUP covering this incident.

17 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.

18 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]

19 Q. Mr. Paponjak, what about the MUP of the Republic of Serbia, is

20 there information there, reliable information, on various incidents that

21 occurred in the area covered by the Pec SUP and what is this kind of

22 information about?

23 A. Yes, there is, both in the MUP of the Republic of Serbia and in

24 the Pec SUP. This is about the killings of Serb civilians, of Albanian

25 civilians, and persons belonging to other ethnicities. There is

Page 24542

1 information about mistreatment of Serbs, Albanians, all civilians, other

2 ethnicities too, about abductions that occurred, abductions of civilians

3 again, belonging to all the different ethnic groups there. It's about

4 terrorist attacks, it's about attacks on the police and the army. There

5 is information about the air-strikes against the area, its installations,

6 facilities, settlements. There is information about anything that was

7 security-related and that was going on in the area at the time.

8 Q. Did you at a later stage process this information?

9 A. Yes, that's right. There was more processing at a later stage.

10 Certain documents were compiled after those incidents. Crime scene

11 investigation reports were drawn up by investigating judges, appropriate

12 official notes were drawn up, criminal complaints were filed, and so on.

13 By the time we had no choice but to leave the area, those documents were

14 transported in a number of ways. We did whatever we could, and we used

15 whatever we could to take these documents to a number of different towns

16 in Serbia, specifically to Kragujevac and to other towns in that general

17 area. Once we had been forced to move out of our forward command post in

18 Kragujevac - if I'm referring to the Pec SUP - we started to gather those

19 documents. These documents would be unloaded as soon as they arrived.

20 The case files were kept separate. We first had to make sure all of the

21 case files were complete, we had to assign numbers to them, and then we

22 had to organize these case files all over again. We organized all this

23 documentation and made sure the system was the same as the one we had

24 applied back in Pec.

25 Q. Who gave the order, "nalog," to process all this information?

Page 24543

1 A. The documents were organized and classified with no particular

2 order. This was something that we had to do and we had to organize our

3 own records. At a later date we received an order from the Ministry of

4 the Interior to organize our documentation in line with a methodology

5 that had never before been used in the SUP. This was an order from the

6 ministry and they prescribed a methodology for us to apply according to

7 which we organized all this material by chapters. It was for that

8 purpose that I set up a team to deal with this. The job took months.

9 Heads of departments were involved in this work, especially those of the

10 internal organizational SUP units, people who were actually heads of

11 those departments at the time, and if there were any changes to be made

12 new people that were involved, police station commanders, each in

13 relation to their own areas, and then chiefs of certain sectors that were

14 part of the secretariats, analysts, IT people, and people who provided

15 different kinds of technical support. I was in charge of the overall

16 effort.

17 Q. With regard to all the parameters that were provided, are there

18 individual case files?

19 A. That's the way we worked. First individual case files were

20 organized and then lists of events were compiled according to the

21 relevant methodology, then statistics were worked on, that is to say

22 tables were made. Finally, a general piece of information was compiled

23 which could be used by anyone who would be looking at this for the first

24 time to get some basic information. If this person would be interested

25 in individual cases, then he could find them through tables, through

Page 24544

1 lists, and through individual case files.

2 Q. Do you know the names of some of these surveys, lists, do you

3 know that off the top of your head?

4 A. Well, these chapters, if I can call them that, are classified,

5 categorised, and marked by numbers, or rather, letters. In the Ministry

6 of the Interior this was called the KiM dossier, the dossier of Kosovo

7 and Metohija. Chapter A pertains to security-related events resulting in

8 death pertaining to armed conflicts in Kosovo and Metohija in 1998 and

9 1999. A is the letter that is the designator of that chapter, but the

10 relevant SUPs have Roman numerals. So A/III means that it is that

11 chapter resulting in death --

12 JUDGE BONOMY: Ms. Kravetz.

13 MS. KRAVETZ: This evidence that the witness is giving at this

14 point is going into the documents that were excluded yesterday from the

15 Defence 65 ter list and which were excluded from this witness statement.

16 So I don't feel it's appropriate for him to be going into this specific

17 evidence. It is precisely the paragraphs that were removed. We're

18 omitting reference to the exhibit numbers, but the evidence is the same.

19 This was particularly -- I think it was paragraph 25 which was redacted

20 from the statement.

21 JUDGE BONOMY: So it's not 6D614 that this relates to?

22 MR. LUKIC: I think that it's obvious that I'm not using any

23 documents. I'm asking this witness whether he remembers what he did.

24 JUDGE BONOMY: Yeah, and what's the purpose of that, Mr. Lukic?

25 MR. LUKIC: To be able to include the documents that were left

Page 24545

1 out of his statement. If he remembers his work I don't understand why he

2 wouldn't be able to tell us what he remembers.

3 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.

4 Ms. Kravetz.

5 MS. KRAVETZ: This specific evidence was in paragraph 25 and it's

6 one of the paragraphs that was redacted precisely because the Chamber

7 considered that we weren't given sufficient notice that these -- I

8 understand the actual exhibits that are underlying this evidence are not

9 being used, but the evidence itself has been redacted from the statement.

10 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.

11 [Trial Chamber confers]

12 JUDGE BONOMY: We do not think what has occurred so far in this

13 chapter of the evidence circumvents the order that was made. The

14 evidence relating to the system that was used may well be relevant in a

15 wider context and in particular at a later stage of the case.

16 So, Mr. Lukic, as long as you confine yourself to the system and

17 keep away from the particular incidents for which the details have not

18 been provided because of the redaction of the statement, then we will

19 allow you to continue to pursue this line.

20 MR. LUKIC: Thank you, Your Honour. I'm exactly trying just to

21 establish the system, nothing else.

22 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Paponjak, could you please tell us what this

23 system was and could you give us the names of these individual parts that

24 you produced?

25 A. In this chapter A there are security-related incidents resulting

Page 24546

1 in death, A/III is the designation for the Pec SUP. This contains

2 information about the relevant events. I can dictate the full name for

3 you, information on security-related events resulting in death in

4 relation to armed conflicts in the territory of the SUP of Pec during the

5 course of 1998 and 1999. The next document is a survey consisting of

6 tables. Now, we have two such surveys one is a survey of incidents

7 resulting in death in terms of territory, and the other survey has to do

8 with these same incidents but in relation to different time-periods. The

9 next document is a list of security-related events resulting in death

10 pertaining to armed conflicts in the territory of the SUP of Pec during

11 the period of 1998 and 1999. The next part are individual case files

12 that are also marked individually, each and every one of them. Chapter

13 P -- chapter B has to do with crimes committed against Albanians in 1998

14 and 1999. That chapter has the same documents, that is to say this

15 general document or information. Then there is a table based on the

16 time-periods involved, then a table based on the territory involved, then

17 there is a list of crimes committed against Albanians and there are

18 individual case files for each and every crime committed against

19 Albanians. Subsequently a chapter B asterisk was introduced, this was

20 done by the MUP and it has to do with crimes committed against Serbs

21 during 1998 and 1999. This chapter also contains information about these

22 events, a table based on time-periods, a table based on the territory

23 involved, a list, and individual case files. Chapter D pertains to

24 security-related events pertaining to kidnappings and missed persons. It

25 also has documents of its own as well as a piece of information about

Page 24547

1 these events, then also tables based on time-periods involved and based

2 on the territory involved. Then there is a list of these events and

3 individual case files.

4 I have to point out that this chapter cannot be fully defined yet

5 because the final number of kidnapped persons remains unknown as well as

6 the fate of kidnapped and missing persons. I think that it is noteworthy

7 in relation to chapter A that perhaps it was formulated in a rather

8 clumsy way. Perhaps we did this in a slightly different way without

9 understanding. In chapter A we recorded all the deaths that we found out

10 about, regardless of whether they have to do with deaths that are the

11 result of armed conflicts or deaths that are the result of homicide or

12 some kind of suspicious death where we did not know what it was all about

13 in the first place. Then chapter A includes descriptions of all crimes

14 resulting in death, regardless of whether they have to do with the armed

15 conflict or not. So the information from this chapter --

16 JUDGE BONOMY: I think, Mr. Paponjak, that's enough for the

17 moment and Mr. Lukic can ask you if there's any more detail he requires

18 on this.

19 Mr. Lukic.

20 MR. LUKIC: Thank you, Your Honour, I think that suffices.

21 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Paponjak, for our purposes here today what

22 you've said so far is sufficient. Thank you very much. In addition to

23 A, B, D, were there --

24 A. Yes, there were other chapters.

25 Q. Just give us the numbers, can you remember?

Page 24548

1 A. Well, there were chapters that pertained to police conduct, then

2 pertaining to the Roma, then there was a chapter on the effects of

3 bombing and so on.

4 Q. Thank you. That will do. And who compiled these surveys, these

5 lists, and these pieces of information?

6 A. As for the SUP of Pec, this was completely done by the employees

7 of the Pec SUP, so these were the crime police employees, the police

8 employees and the other employees that dealt with this, that is to say

9 the analysts, the IT people, and the appropriate services.

10 Q. Who headed them?

11 A. I headed this particular team as chief of the secretariat of the

12 interior.

13 Q. Thank you very much. Now we're going to move onto something

14 completely different, the presence of the Kosovo Verification Mission and

15 the time involved. Do you know whether terrorists --

16 JUDGE BONOMY: Just one moment before you ...

17 Sorry. Please continue, Mr. Lukic. Thank you.

18 MR. LUKIC: Thank you, Your Honour.

19 Q. [Interpretation] Did terrorists launch attack while the Kosovo

20 verification was in Kosovo and Metohija?

21 A. Yes, it did. At one point in time, or rather, in one period

22 before the Kosovo Verification Mission arrived there weren't any such

23 attacks, and the attacks started and intensified precisely during the

24 presence of the verification mission, which really hit us hard. During

25 the stay of the verification mission in Kosmet in the territory of the

Page 24549

1 SUP of Pec 61 terrorist attacks took place, namely, seven against

2 buildings and 54 against persons. In all these attacks, or rather,

3 members of the Kosovo Verification Mission were informed about all these

4 attacks, they attended on-site investigations whenever they wanted to, it

5 was their choice, they had this option of choosing whether they would

6 attend or would not attend. I can say that the terrorists were not very

7 picky as far as targets were concerned, so they attacked ethnic Albanians

8 as well and ethnic Albanians got killed too. For the most part attacks

9 took place on roads or by way of breaking into houses. They openly fired

10 at vehicles that were moving along roads.

11 Q. Thank you. In Pec itself were there any attacks and what would

12 be an attack that particularly disturbed the public?

13 A. There were several attacks in Pec, primarily at -- against cafes

14 and restaurants. A glaring case was the attack against the Slavica cafe

15 and then in December, I think it was the 14th of December, 1998, in the

16 evening hours near the high school in Pec, there were some young men who

17 were sitting in a cafe called Panda and terrorists fired at them using

18 automatic rifles. On that occasion six young men were killed on the spot

19 and a few were wounded. Of course this affected people deeply and was an

20 additional complication in terms of the situation in Pec.

21 Q. Since you already have this statement I keep leaping from one

22 topic to another. So now I'm going to ask you whether in the territory

23 of the SUP of Pec there were established check-points and what are

24 check-points?

25 A. Check-points are one of the ways in which the police operate. I

Page 24550

1 would define a check-point as a stationary patrol or a patrol that is

2 fixed at one particular point, at one particular location. Check-points

3 are organized in order to check on persons and vehicles. Persons are

4 checked with a view to identifying and finding the perpetrators of crimes

5 and vehicles are checked with a view to finding objects that were used to

6 commit crimes because in the contemporary world crime, as a rule, is on

7 wheels, smuggling, transportation of goods that are the result of crimes

8 and so on.

9 Check-points are a customary way of operation in Serbia ever

10 since I've been in the service that is to say, since 1970, perhaps this

11 was the case earlier on as well and these check-points do yield certain

12 results. In the territory of the SUP of Pec there were some

13 check-points. Throughout my stay there, there were check-points. We

14 even had some customary traffic check-points, they can be permanent, they

15 can be there from time to time, they can be traffic check-points, and

16 there can be combined check-points in terms of the structure of their

17 work. The combined ones are the best where traffic policemen check on

18 vehicles and drivers and a member of the crime police who's at the

19 check-point deals with aspects of his own work to see whether there are

20 perpetrators of crimes that are trying to pass that way or whether there

21 are objects related to crimes.

22 Q. Are there check-points in Belgrade and Pristina nowadays?

23 A. There are, in the outskirts of Belgrade there are check-points,

24 they are different from the ones we had, they have booths with everything

25 else that is needed for extended stays of employees. When leaving

Page 24551

1 Belgrade in any direction, you should encounter such a check-point. I

2 know there were some in Pristina and there were some in Pec at the moment

3 of my departure under the protection of the UN. I saw in the centre of

4 Pec that their check-points were different from ours since they were

5 inside barbed wire. At the time I was leaving Pec, the peacekeeping

6 forces had already come in. While we worked there we had no barbed wire

7 check-points. We had a different type of security, traffic security.

8 First we would impose signs in order to reduce the speed with a warning

9 that there is a police check-point nearby, and when terrorist attacks

10 commenced we had in-depth check-point security in order to secure our

11 personnel. We would have other people in depth trying to prevent

12 terrorists from attacking check-points.

13 Q. Thank you. In 1999 in Pec were there any VJ check-points?

14 A. Yes, there were.

15 Q. In the territory of SUP Pec?

16 A. Yes, during a period of time. In the territory of the Pec SUP in

17 the settlement of Pec itself I know there were two such locations. In

18 Ramiz Sadiku Street and Miladin Popovic Street. Then there were some in

19 the area of Istok in a location called Rudnik. Then in Djurakovac and in

20 Bijelo Polje we held joint or combined check-points. At Savine Vode, we

21 had a permanent check-point, and for a while we were assisted by VJ

22 members in providing security there from terrorists. We had some other

23 check-points which were regular traffic check-points in town, in certain

24 key intersections. They didn't have any particular signs, but we would

25 just refer to, for example, the Durija [phoen] check-point and the

Page 24552

1 policemen who were supposed to go there knew exactly what it was and

2 where to find it.

3 Q. In Pec and in Istok were there any members of military

4 territorial detachments?

5 A. There were. In Pec there was the 177th Military Territorial

6 Detachment, in Istok there was the 69th Military Territorial Detachment.

7 Q. Thank you. To go back to your statement, there is something

8 there that I would like to hear from you. What happened in Pec on the

9 27th and the 28th of March, 1999? Tell us what you know personally.

10 A. At the time I was the chief of the traffic police. We were in

11 charge of controlling and regulating traffic. I don't particularly

12 recall those two days as such, but I do know that at that time after the

13 air-strikes began there was more movement of vehicles and pedestrians

14 along the roads. That was causing certain problems in terms of traffic

15 regulation. Around those days I also moved about much more. I went into

16 the field more frequently in order to direct the work of patrols.

17 Traffic cannot be regulated partially. You need to encompass an entire

18 area. Those who know that know that traffic is regulated along axes and

19 roads and it cannot be regulated partially but even across state borders.

20 There were villages surrounding Pec where we had our patrols, and they

21 were reporting that there was an increased movement of all sorts of

22 vehicles, freight vehicles, tractors, as well as an increased number in

23 pedestrians. All of those were pouring into the city towards its centre.

24 Realizing that there will be masses of people, I went into the field,

25 especially to the places where there were most people assembled to try

Page 24553

1 and redirect the movement if necessary. This is how I recall those

2 particular events.

3 Q. Did you attend a gathering of citizens in the centre of Pec?

4 A. I did. I was in the centre of town myself.

5 Q. Were there any policemen in the centre of town?

6 A. Yes, there were. We had our regular patrols at their usual

7 points or posts. These were permanent areas for our traffic patrols. In

8 most towns traffic is usually the worst in the centre, and as you move

9 outside the settlement there is less and less traffic. In the centre

10 itself we had patrols at three locations or points. At those three

11 points we were trying to assist the movement of vehicles and passengers.

12 I was in my vehicle and by that time there was no possibility to move

13 inside the centre. I managed, however, to enter the centre with my

14 vehicle since there was a certain space, a lane was left for the movement

15 of vehicles. I was alone for the most part, I did not have a driver,

16 since my job post was such, and I reached the building of the Municipal

17 Assembly. Excuse me. There were many people, the centre was crowded. I

18 did manage to reach the municipal building without any problems. I saw

19 that those people were mainly Albanians, of course I don't know all of

20 Pec's inhabitants, but during the eight years there I met a number of

21 people. I saw some of my acquaintances there.

22 Q. Was the gathering addressed by anyone from the Serb side?

23 A. No.

24 Q. Did you address those gathered?

25 A. No, I did not.

Page 24554

1 Q. Did anyone address the gathering and who it was and in what way,

2 did you understand what they were saying?

3 A. There were some speakers. I don't understand the Albanian

4 language, maybe I know 10 or 20 words. I did hear some people speak.

5 They were using a mouthpiece, a loudspeaker, but I couldn't make out what

6 they were talking about. I did speak to some of my acquaintances there.

7 There was this Albanian postman, and he told me that he was approached by

8 a Serb asking for a certificate that some payment was made. He said,

9 Well, this is what he finds important. He doesn't mind the bombs. He

10 just wants me to issue him with a receipt. This is the conversation we

11 had.

12 Q. Did anyone force those people to go to the centre of town or did

13 anyone force them to leave the centre of town on the Serbian side?

14 A. No, it was impossible. Let's discuss whether anyone forced them

15 to leave. How many policemen would one need in terms of policemen or

16 soldiers to force such a mass of people to leave? Or vice versa, to

17 force them into the centre of town. First you would have to gather them

18 from all around the town and the villages we -- that we did not even

19 enter.

20 Q. Why were you not entering certain villages?

21 A. We were unable to because they were occupied or controlled by the

22 terrorists. If we tried going to those villages, they opened fire.

23 Q. From what time did you stop going to those villages and can you

24 tell us the names of some of those villages that the police could not go

25 to?

Page 24555

1 A. Several month or half a year, for example, from the fall before,

2 and those were most of the villages surrounding Pec, Istok, and Klina

3 inhabited by Albanians who were Muslim. Most of those villages were

4 terrorist strongholds. We could go to some other villages inhabited by

5 Catholic Albanians because their relationship with the terrorists was

6 somewhat different and there weren't that many of them involved in

7 terrorism. They even had problems because they refused to participate in

8 that and the terrorists were targeting them as well.

9 Q. Except for your conversation with the postman, did you speak to

10 anyone else? Did you manage to grasp why those people were leaving?

11 A. People were asking me whether they can go to Montenegro, to

12 Djakovica, or Pristina, and I found that strange. There was no

13 restriction of movement for anyone. It wasn't clear to me why they were

14 asking that. They also asked me whether they can use their vehicles to

15 move. I told them that certainly they can use their vehicles as they

16 wish. It all boiled to that particular topic, boiled down to that

17 particular topic. They were also asking me whether they would be

18 restricted in terms of movement if they tried to use the Kula mountain

19 pass. I told them as far as I know that road was open. I saw several of

20 my acquaintances. One of them I asked where he was going to. He said

21 that he was going to his children and his wife who were in Germany. He

22 was together with another acquaintance of mine who had a van. They

23 wanted to go together.

24 Q. Did you see the people boarding any buses in the centre of town?

25 Was anyone forcing them to go on the buses?

Page 24556

1 A. Buses could not reach the centre of town, that was the traffic

2 regulation in place, no buses in the centre of town. All bus traffic at

3 the time was still running pretty regularly, there were buses leaving for

4 Belgrade and other parts of the country. You could go to Montenegro,

5 Prizren, Djakovica, there were local buses as well as inter-city buses.

6 People were using buses normally.

7 Q. Did you or anyone else on the Serb side order that those people

8 should be forced onto any buses?

9 A. Absolutely no. No one had ordered anything of the sort to me and

10 I did not order that to my people. There was no reason for me to do so.

11 Q. How long did it take for the centre of town to be empty? When

12 did the crowd disperse?

13 A. I cannot say that the centre of town became empty. There were

14 waves. People were coming and going and the whole thing lasted for

15 several days. We also had crowds along all roads and both going and

16 going out. Some were coming into town from Pristina and Djakovica as

17 well as Kosovska Mitrovica. The critical point was the Kula mountain

18 pass, since there are great elevations there, it was steep and the

19 vehicles wouldn't be able to negotiate those frequently. They would stop

20 around bends, there were tractors with trailers, the whole thing was a

21 very difficult one. I moved along that road twice in those days.

22 Q. Can you tell us where this Kula is?

23 A. Kula is a mountain pass. I'm not very a maps, but it is between

24 Pec and Rozaje in Montenegro, it is on that road. The elevation is at

25 least 1400 metres above sea level.

Page 24557

1 Q. Thank you, Mr. Paponjak. I have no further questions for you.

2 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Aleksic.

3 MR. ALEKSIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

4 Cross-examination by Mr. Aleksic:

5 Q. [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Mr. Paponjak.

6 A. Good afternoon.

7 Q. I have just a few questions for you. Paragraph 79 of your

8 statement you say that on the 12th of April you were sent from the

9 headquarters of the Pec SUP to the OUP Istok. Can you just tell me what

10 position you were in at the OUP Istok in this period from the 12th of

11 April until the 11th of June, what kind of work did you do there?

12 A. The OUP Istok is one of the organizational units of the Pec SUP.

13 I was sent there to work for a certain period of time to help out at the

14 OUP Istok without any kind of decision on that kind of an appointment,

15 that is to say without specifying a particular type of job, as one of the

16 more senior colleagues there with more experience, that is why there was

17 no need to have a decision on appointment.

18 Q. Thank you. In paragraph 86 of your statement you say that on the

19 14th of April a commission came to Istok that had been set up through an

20 order of the commander of the 3rd Army, the number is given there, it's a

21 strictly confidential document, and the date is the 13th of April. Can

22 you please tell me when it was that you first saw this document on the

23 establishment of this commission?

24 A. I think that I saw this document only after the leaving the

25 territory of Kosovo and Metohija. I don't know the exact date.

Page 24558

1 Q. Thank you. And in the next paragraph, 87, of your statement, you

2 say that this commission established beyond any doubt on the spot that

3 there was no camp there as some misinformation had stated. I'm asking

4 you whether you know that this commission after returning from Istok

5 compiled some kind of a report about this?

6 A. I'm not aware of what kind of a report this commission compiled

7 but I know that they interviewed me while they were in Istok, what kind

8 of a report was ultimately compiled is something that I really don't

9 know.

10 Q. Thank you.

11 MR. ALEKSIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, 4D212 is this report

12 and it has been admitted into evidence. Thank you, Your Honours, I have

13 no further questions for this witness.

14 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you, Mr. Aleksic.

15 Mr. Cepic.

16 Cross-examination by Mr. Cepic:

17 Q. [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Mr. Paponjak.

18 A. Good afternoon.

19 Q. I am Djuro Cepic, and I appear for the defence of General

20 Vladimir Lazarevic. You do have your statement in front of you, don't

21 you?

22 A. Yes, I do.

23 Q. I will start my questions with referring to paragraph 71. My

24 colleagues tell me that there is a transcript problem. Now it looks

25 better.

Page 24559

1 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Aleksic, the number again of the report?

2 MR. ALEKSIC: [Interpretation] 4D212, Your Honours, thank you.

3 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.

4 Please continue, Mr. Cepic.

5 MR. CEPIC: Thank you, Your Honour.

6 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Paponjak, in paragraph 71 you provided a

7 description to the effect that there were many reserve members of the

8 military who were there. Can you perhaps tell us whether you know

9 whether these were people who were moving from their residences, their

10 homes, to the mobilisation sites?

11 A. Yes, yes, that's it.

12 Q. Thank you. Mr. Paponjak, paragraph 72, you say that a number of

13 criminals were mobilised in the reserve force who had committed serious

14 crimes before that as well as disturbing public law and order. I assume

15 that you draw that conclusion on the basis of your personal knowledge of

16 particular individuals, right?

17 A. Yes. It's not only on that basis. We also have crime records

18 and we know that; however, the fact remains that we did recognise certain

19 people as such.

20 Q. Do you perhaps know that as far as conscription is concerned,

21 having a criminal record is of no consequence?

22 A. Yes, I know that.

23 Q. And I assume that you know that most citizens who were males,

24 regardless of whether they had a criminal record or not, were part of the

25 reserve force of the military?

Page 24560

1 A. Yes, that's right, and no one can be free of this obligation

2 regardless of whether they had committed a crime in the previous period.

3 Q. Thank you.

4 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: Could all other

5 microphones please be switched off. Thank you.

6 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Cepic -- perhaps I should direct this to the

7 witness.

8 Does that apply to someone who's been convicted of rape or murder

9 or serious injury to life and limb?

10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, I really don't know now. I

11 don't know what it was that they had been convicted for, but I do know

12 that there were some there who had committed property-related offences.

13 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Cepic.

14 MR. CEPIC: [Interpretation]

15 Q. Mr. Paponjak, if we are to call these people criminals, did any

16 one of them commit any one of these crimes while they were on the reserve

17 force of the army?

18 A. I do not know of any such thing. I don't have any such

19 information that one of these persons did something like that.

20 Q. Thank you. Paragraph 73, what you say here is that a number of

21 criminals were self-mobilised, they put on uniforms and so on. You will

22 agree with me that there were abuses of uniforms and insignia, right?

23 A. I remember this period. This was one of the problems that

24 encumbered our work because a certain number of persons moved about in

25 uniform, they were driving vehicles on which --

Page 24561

1 Q. We have that in the statement. We have all of it. I'm just

2 asking you the following: Is this abuse of uniform by unauthorised

3 persons?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. Thank you. Let us now move onto paragraph 74. Could we please

6 call up in e-court 6D125. I would just like to tell you, Your Honours,

7 that after March 1999 there are three numbers 6D125, 5D36, and P1208

8 respectively, it's the same document.

9 Mr. Paponjak, we have an order of the -- from the commander of

10 the Pec defence office, the date is the 30th of March, 1999. If we look

11 at the first paragraph of this document the author of this document is

12 not invoking any particular order. You will agree with me that this kind

13 of order did not affect your work and the work of the police, rather, you

14 worked independently of this and carried out your regular work and

15 duties?

16 A. That is correct.

17 Q. Thank you. Do you perhaps know that this document was

18 subsequently declared null and void by this very same structure upon

19 orders from higher instances?

20 A. I saw this document considerably later, not in this particular

21 case.

22 Q. 5D37, please. Could we please have that in e-court.

23 Mr. Paponjak, here's the document, have you seen this before, not --

24 never mind.

25 A. Yes, I saw it later.

Page 24562

1 Q. Thank you. Now I would like to move onto paragraph 76 of your

2 statement --

3 JUDGE BONOMY: Sorry, I'm trying to follow --

4 MR. CEPIC: Sorry.

5 JUDGE BONOMY: What's the point of that question? Does 5D37

6 relate to 6D125 in some way?

7 MR. CEPIC: [Interpretation] Precisely, Your Honour --

8 JUDGE BONOMY: Is this the declaration of it being null and void?

9 MR. CEPIC: [Interpretation] That's right, Your Honour, precisely.

10 JUDGE BONOMY: Now I understand. Thank you.

11 MR. CEPIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

12 Q. Mr. Paponjak, let us now deal with the municipality of Istok, or

13 rather, the commander of the military territorial detachment, the 69th

14 Detachment that is and the situation that prevailed there.

15 Tell me, Mr. Paponjak, when the 7th Infantry Brigade arrived, did

16 the situation calm down in the town of Istok?

17 A. Yes, it did, yes, of course.

18 Q. Do you perhaps know -- well, I don't know of other structures now

19 in relation to the one that you're in, but do you know that the military

20 detachment, or rather, this military territorial detachment was it

21 subordinated to the military office of Pec, if you know you do tell us,

22 and if not --

23 A. I really have to tell you that I don't know much about this.

24 Q. Very well. You will agree with me that your structure, that is

25 to say the structure of the Ministry of the Interior, acted independently

Page 24563

1 without the influence of any kind of staff or body in carrying out its

2 duties on the basis of the law?

3 A. Yes. We have a specific law and a rule book on organization and

4 other rules that regulate this.

5 Q. And no influence was exercised over your work by the military

6 territorial detachment in the sense of them issuing some kind of orders

7 or tasks to you?

8 A. No, there was no such thing.

9 Q. Thank you.

10 MR. CEPIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, just for the transcript

11 we have already tendered 5D374 dated the 23rd of April prohibiting any

12 kind of establishment of staffs by the members of the Army of Yugoslavia.

13 Thank you.

14 Q. Mr. Paponjak, paragraph 85, Colonel Cirkovic, commander of the

15 7th Infantry Brigade spoke about the return of displaced persons and

16 about combat activities taking place near Lukavac. Was there high

17 intensity in these combat activities in the area of Lukavac?

18 A. Not at that time; however, all of us were highly concerned about

19 these civilians because we didn't know what would go on or what would

20 happen later. This was the defence area, as the colonel said, and

21 persons should not be there, rather, they should be at safe locations

22 that should be found for them. Later on there was heavy bombing

23 throughout that area.

24 Q. Thank you. Am I right if I say that there were fierce terrorist

25 attacks there as well?

Page 24564

1 A. Yes, that happened too.

2 Q. Mr. Paponjak, what about the members of the army, the members of

3 the MUP, the members of civilian authorities, did they to their best to

4 provide safe accommodation for civilians as well as food, aid, medicine,

5 et cetera, outside combat areas?

6 A. Yes, the Red Cross health institutions, social welfare

7 institutions were involved in all of this. They got food, I know that

8 personally because I moved about quite a bit in the area. I know people

9 who were involved in that, even I personally gave some people tinned food

10 and things like that.

11 Q. Thank you.

12 MR. CEPIC: [Interpretation] Perhaps, Your Honours, this would be

13 a convenient moment to take the break.

14 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.

15 Mr. Paponjak, we break for lunch at this stage. Could you leave

16 the courtroom with the usher and we will see you again in one hour at

17 quarter to 2.00.

18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I understand.

19 [The witness stands down]

20 --- Luncheon recess taken at 12.45 p.m.

21 --- On resuming at 1.47 p.m.

22 [The witness takes the stand]

23 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Cepic.

24 MR. CEPIC: Thank you, Your Honour.

25 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Paponjak, my last set of questions, perhaps

Page 24565

1 even a single question. You testified about Lodja. I have a piece of

2 footage dated the 16th of August, 1998, that I would like us to look at.

3 Can that please be played in e-court, this is Defence Exhibit 5D1239.

4 This is Lodja on the 16th of August, 1998.

5 [Videotape played]

6 MR. CEPIC: [Interpretation]

7 Q. Mr. Paponjak, are these the connecting trenches that you

8 mentioned?

9 A. Yes. This is just one portion of it. Of course the TV crew had

10 no need to take it all in. I arrived in the village following this

11 action because one had to re-establish a normal flow of traffic and for

12 people to get on with their lives. I had to clear the roads and not just

13 here. I arrived at the scene after several of those actions had taken

14 place. The roads were blocked or cluttered. This is just part of the

15 connecting trenches that were there and the weapons that were floating

16 about that had been assembled by the time the TV crew got there. The

17 gathering of those weapons had not been completed yet or the clearing of

18 the roads for that matter.

19 Q. We heard this was a police action. What I want to know is how

20 long were these connecting trenches?

21 A. Kilometre-long trenches [as interpreted]

22 Q. Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. Paponjak. I have no further

23 questions for you.

24 MR. CEPIC: Just to clarify something more because in transcript

25 it's not correctly as the witness said. With your leave, one more

Page 24566

1 question, please.

2 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Paponjak, it is not reflected in the

3 transcript one kilometre or kilometres?

4 A. Kilometres.

5 Q. Thank you. Were each of the homes strongholds as it were?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. Thank you.

8 A. I encountered some difficulty trying to pass by a house that was

9 full of ammunition which at one point exploded and the sound of the blast

10 could be heard although the action had been completed. The journalists

11 were there and they heard it too.

12 Q. Thank you very much. No further questions for you, Mr. Paponjak.

13 MR. CEPIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours.

14 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Cepic, had that exhibit been admitted before?

15 MR. CEPIC: [Interpretation] Yes, a part of it, two clips in

16 relation to Malisevo and the village of Junik. The third part of this CD

17 has just been shown, the last section has not been shown so far.

18 JUDGE BONOMY: And what happened in relation to the commentary in

19 the other cases?

20 MR. CEPIC: [Interpretation] In relation to Junik village during

21 our own case we heard testimony of Veljko Odalovic and we tendered the

22 transcript, the language of the video. My colleague Mr. Lukic and I

23 still owe you the footage on, or rather, the footage on Malisevo was

24 played when Andreja Milosavljevic was here, but I think Mr. Lukic took it

25 upon himself to do the Malisevo transcript if I'm not mistaken. And if I

Page 24567

1 may, with your permission, I can perhaps secure a transcript of what the

2 journalist was saying in relation to Lodja.

3 JUDGE BONOMY: We shall admit the video without the sound, so we

4 have -- unless the situation changes between now and the end of the

5 evidence.

6 MR. CEPIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

7 [Trial Chamber confers]

8 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you, Mr. Cepic.

9 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

10 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Paponjak, you'll now be cross-examined by the

11 Prosecutor, Ms. Kravetz.

12 Ms. Kravetz.

13 MS. KRAVETZ: Thank you, Your Honour.

14 Cross-examination by Ms. Kravetz:

15 Q. Good afternoon, Mr. Paponjak.

16 A. Good afternoon.

17 Q. I want to begin by asking you some questions about the events you

18 described in Pec municipality in March of 1999. You told us during your

19 evidence today in your statement that after the state of war was declared

20 on 24th March VJ reserve forces were mobilised in the Pec area. Were

21 regular VJ units also mobilised in -- to the Pec area in this period?

22 A. I don't know that. I don't know. I know about the reserve

23 forces because those were locals from Pec and the surroundings, those who

24 came. I did not recognise any of the regular forces in town. I simply

25 was in no position to know.

Page 24568

1 Q. So the reserve forces you are talking about or you spoke about

2 earlier are local Serbs who were mobilised and they were assigned a

3 uniform and weapons?

4 A. Yes, yes.

5 Q. And why do you distinguish these persons as reservists from just

6 the regular VJ units, how were you able to distinguish these were

7 reservists and they were not just regular VJ soldiers?

8 A. Because those were my neighbours, people who lived nearby, in my

9 area, and now I saw them wearing uniforms. I knew that they were no

10 regular soldiers, I knew they were not doing their regular military term

11 because they were older - what I'm saying is over 18 or 19 years of

12 age - and they were telling me that they were supposed to report to a

13 mobilisation point and that's why I knew that they were reservists and no

14 regular soldiers.

15 Q. Do you know who issued these persons with weapons and with

16 uniforms?

17 A. No, I know about police members. As I said a while ago, I don't

18 really know much about all these military matters. It's not what I was

19 trained for and it certainly wasn't my job. I did do my own regular

20 military term, but after that I never had anything more to do with the

21 military.

22 Q. I see. I understand. Were local Serbs also incorporated into

23 the police once the state of war was declared, and I'm speaking

24 particularly of Pec municipality?

25 A. Yes, some. We had our own reserve police which at the time was

Page 24569

1 involved in something.

2 Q. And would there be -- was there any distinction of staff between

3 the regular policemen like yourself and these local reservists, reserve

4 policemen which began working for the MUP once a state of war was

5 declared? Was there any differentiation of tasks between the regular

6 police officer and the reservist?

7 A. No. There was no apparent distinction. You couldn't draw a

8 distinction if you looked at a patrol made up of regular police officers

9 or one of reserve police officers. They wore the same uniform, they

10 carried the same weapons, and they had the same tasks. It's just that

11 reserve police officers could not perform their duties on their own,

12 independently. They would also be monitored by regular police officers,

13 and this is how patrols were made up. A regular police member was always

14 in charge of a patrol.

15 Q. Do you know approximately how many local Serbs were mobilised and

16 joined the police force once a state of war was declared?

17 A. I really don't know. I was busy elsewhere at the time on a

18 different job and it had nothing to do with this.

19 Q. Very well. You told us in your --

20 JUDGE BONOMY: Sorry, just to be clear, what was the other job?

21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I was chief of the traffic police

22 department, and that job had nothing to do with the police reserve

23 forces. Other than that, as to how many members of the reserve police

24 force were involved in this, this is something that should be easy enough

25 to track down in various documents that I think exist. We certainly have

Page 24570

1 this in our own reports. I can't tell you off the top of my head, not

2 even a ballpark figure, but I'm sure the exact figure is somewhere or

3 other in one of our documents.

4 JUDGE BONOMY: So you can't assist us at all with a rough

5 indication of the numbers involved in spite of all the activity you were

6 involved in, in Pec itself at the early stages of the war?

7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't want to engage in that sort

8 of guess-work. What I'm saying is we had this information in our

9 documents and this is in the public domain in the sense of not being

10 confidential. It's just that I can't give you a ballpark figure.

11 JUDGE BONOMY: I suspect we don't have the document, so please

12 try to help us as best you can. As I've indicated already today, we do

13 sometimes have great difficulty getting documents from the Republic of

14 Serbia.

15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The one thing I can do is promise

16 the Chamber that I will make sure to have this information forwarded to

17 you, but unfortunately there isn't much more that I can say about that

18 right now.

19 JUDGE BONOMY: For example, you have been able to tell us a

20 considerable amount of the activities of VJ reservists in the town,

21 criminals being associated with the VJ, but you can't tell us anything at

22 all about numbers of police reservists mobilised in Pec at that time?

23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I never said anything about any

24 numbers, including those pertaining to the military reserve forces

25 because I'm not really aware of those either.

Page 24571

1 JUDGE BONOMY: You have been able to tell us, for example, there

2 was a large presence of VJ reservists in towns and villages. You've told

3 us that the reserve forces of the Yugoslav Army were mobilised in the Pec

4 area.

5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

6 JUDGE BONOMY: A number of criminals who had committed serious

7 crimes in violations of law and order in the past were also mobilised

8 into the VJ reserve force. A number of criminals were self-mobilised.

9 So what concerns me is your unwillingness to tell us anything, give us

10 any indication, even your impression of numbers of reservists being

11 mobilised at that time. You're prepared to do it in respect of the army,

12 why not the police?

13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, I can say to you that an

14 insufficient number of people were mobilised because I had a constant

15 manpower problem because I did not have enough traffic policemen. Not a

16 sufficient number had been mobilised in my view. So if I were supposed

17 to say something about that I would say that I did not have enough people

18 mobilised in terms of my own liking because I really needed a lot more

19 policemen.

20 [Trial Chamber confers]

21 JUDGE BONOMY: Ms. Kravetz.

22 MS. KRAVETZ: Thank you, Your Honour.

23 Q. Just to follow-up on this last issue, how many reservists were

24 mobilised in your department, the traffic department? You said an

25 insufficient number. Do you recall how many?

Page 24572

1 A. I think less than 30, I think, that is to say that I'm not sure.

2 As for the number of people in my group, it was the commander of the

3 police station who took care of that. I would have to provide an

4 explanation so that the Court would understand why it is that I'm saying

5 this. In my group it was traffic police work that was the main activity

6 and the commander of the police station was in charge of that.

7 Administrative work and work related to inspection in terms of the

8 civilian part, that is to say the technical regulation of transport,

9 driving lessons, the technical examination of vehicles, and so on, that

10 was a different part of my service. I was the chief of both of these. I

11 had heads of lines involved in different lines of work, so I don't know

12 of anything very specific in any one of these cases. I can just talk

13 about my general impression in terms of what it was that I saw.

14 Q. If I can interrupt you there. I was just asking about numbers.

15 You said less than 30. Would it be fair to say in other departments was

16 that number similar, around 30 or more than 30, do you know that, other

17 departments of the Pec SUP?

18 A. I don't know. I don't know. Possibly there may have been more,

19 there may have been less.

20 Q. Very well. Let's move on. You indicated today and also you

21 referred to this in your statement starting at paragraph 55 that towards

22 the end of March, 27th, 28th March, large crowds of Kosovo Albanians

23 began pouring into the centre of the city and you said that you --

24 patrols of your department reported this to you; correct?

25 A. Yes.

Page 24573

1 Q. And you yourself went to the centre of Pec to see what was

2 happening that day, when these large crowds of people were pouring into

3 the centre of town?

4 A. Yes, that's right.

5 Q. And when you say large crowds were pouring or I think you said

6 many people and it was crowded, approximately how many people were there

7 in the centre of Pec towards the end of -- we're talking 27 March, do you

8 recall? I mean are we talking thousands? Hundreds?

9 A. Thousands.

10 Q. Do you know where these people were coming from, these thousands

11 of Kosovo Albanians that had gathered in the centre of Pec, where were

12 they coming from?

13 A. There were people from Pec who I knew personally. According to

14 the reports of patrols, on the basis of which I have this knowledge,

15 there were people from the surrounding villages too. It's not that it

16 was people from one village only. It is from the surrounding villages

17 that they were pouring into town.

18 Q. So people were coming in from surrounding villages of Pec

19 municipality and all heading in the direction of the town of Pec?

20 A. Yes, that's right.

21 Q. And these columns of Kosovo Albanians, they gathered I think you

22 said in the centre of the town, that's where they were gathered?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. So when you arrived there and you saw that thousands of people

25 had gathered in the centre of Pec, what did you do exactly? What actions

Page 24574

1 did you take?

2 A. Nothing. I stood there for a while, I talked to them, and then I

3 went further on on the ground. I didn't spend two days there, but I

4 didn't take any measures except for the fact that the patrols had the

5 task of not allowing any bottlenecks. It was important for passengers in

6 vehicles to move on, pedestrians and vehicles, that was difficult work.

7 In the centre of town there was a patrol, in the centre towards the

8 patriarchate and then towards the center towards Djakovica and the third

9 one was towards the SUP of Pec, which is towards Mitrovica. These are

10 the regular places where traffic police patrols were. And then further

11 on, on the outskirts of town there was yet another patrol towards

12 Vitomirica and then there was a patrol by the Drvni Kombinat the timber

13 processing plant.

14 Q. So you arrived there and you saw that these large crowds of

15 people had gathered there. Did you contact, for example, the SUP chief

16 to tell him what was happening in the centre of town or the deputy chief

17 of the SUP?

18 A. I informed the chief of SUP before I went there, the chief of SUP

19 had been informed about the fact that columns were coming in and that

20 there was a lot of commotion, and I said that I would be going to the

21 centre to take measures so that traffic could go on.

22 Q. So you got there and you're saying that your only concern was to

23 regulate traffic, you were faced with these crowds of Kosovo Albanians in

24 the centre of town and you thought that the most important thing to do in

25 that situation was to regulate traffic?

Page 24575

1 A. I -- yes.

2 Q. And you say in your statement that you were the highest-ranking

3 member of your SUP there that day when these crowds of people gathered in

4 the centre of town?

5 A. Yes, that's right.

6 Q. You also said earlier that your patrols were there from your

7 department. Approximately how many police officers were present in the

8 centre of town?

9 A. Well, I'm trying to work it out on the basis of the number of

10 patrols involved. There were over 20, say between 20 and 30. I'm giving

11 a rough approximation on the basis of the number of patrols and the

12 number of men on each patrol, which is to say three per patrol.

13 Q. Were there any VJ soldiers present in the centre of town when

14 this was going on?

15 A. No.

16 Q. Any other armed personnel other than you and your 20 or so or 30

17 police officers?

18 A. I don't know whether there were any in the small streets, but

19 there weren't any in the streets where I was moving. I know that police

20 patrols of a general nature also carry out patrol activity, but these

21 patrols were not the subject of my interest at that time. They were not

22 there simply. It was only the traffic police patrols that were there.

23 Q. Do you know why these persons had gathered there in such large

24 crowds?

25 A. I found out about that from my conversations with certain

Page 24576

1 individuals that I knew. I mentioned the postman that I talked to. I

2 mentioned an acquaintance of mine as well who had said to me that he was

3 supposed to leave Pec. The postman also told me that he was leaving Pec,

4 and that is why he was saying this to me, that this man had asked him for

5 a receipt in terms of his telephone bill or whatever it was. Then

6 further on some people asked me whether they could go towards Montenegro,

7 others asked me if they could go towards Djakovica.

8 Q. Sir, what I'm asking is: Do you know the reason why such large

9 crowds of people had gathered in the centre of town, 27th March? Why

10 were those people there heading from all villages in Pec municipality to

11 the centre of the town?

12 A. I did not understand you, actually. What do you mean by the

13 reason why?

14 Q. Do you know why -- what was forcing these people or what were the

15 reasons these people left their homes and headed towards the centre of

16 the town of Pec on that day?

17 A. I don't know the exact reason. I can assume that the reason was

18 the same like for the others who were leaving their homes. The Albanians

19 came on that day or during the course of those days to the centre of

20 town. Some Serbs were leaving without going into the centre of town, the

21 reason was the same. I had requested from policemen who were requesting

22 leave in order to take their families out of the area. So I can assume

23 that the reasons were common to all. I don't know why each and every

24 individual came there. We had a number of policemen who, although they

25 were not granted leave left the area nevertheless. They did not report

Page 24577

1 for work. They would drive their wives and children to Montenegro, for

2 instance, to stay with their relatives or say to the other part of Serbia

3 and they'd come back --

4 Q. Sir, but during your evidence today you said that these persons

5 who had gathered in the centre of town were mostly Kosovo Albanians.

6 You're saying the reasons were the same. What were those reasons? Why

7 had these people gathered in such large numbers there?

8 A. When the bombing started -- I can tell you what my personal

9 impression was. First of all, I could not believe that the bombing had

10 actually started.

11 Q. Sir --

12 JUDGE BONOMY: No, you're being asked if you know the reason why

13 these people had gathered in the centre of Pec. Now, you're a police

14 officer in charge of trying to control the crowds to enable the traffic

15 to move. It's difficult to imagine anyone better-placed than you to tell

16 us why these people had come into Pec.

17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's precisely what I've been

18 trying to do. I assume that it had to do with fear. I was afraid too.

19 JUDGE BONOMY: But fear of what?

20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Fear of bombing, attacks, conflicts

21 with terrorists, that's the fear we had, that we would be bombed and that

22 the terrorists would attack us. My policemen had that fear. At that

23 time I wish I could have left the area, going anywhere.

24 JUDGE BONOMY: I think Ms. Kravetz is asking you this question

25 because the people initially weren't leaving the area, they were all

Page 24578

1 congregating together in the area most likely to be bombed. Why were

2 they doing that?

3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know, unless it was part of

4 some kind of a plan or agreement.

5 JUDGE BONOMY: Ms. Kravetz. I may have misinterpreted your

6 question, so please do not feel confined because of these questions.


8 Q. Sir, it doesn't make sense, does it, that if these people who

9 arrived in the centre of Pec that day feared the NATO bombing they would

10 have left the security of their home and gone out and exposed themselves

11 in the open. That doesn't make sense, does it, that the reason for them

12 gathering there would have been fear of being bombed?

13 A. Well, it makes sense to me, I would have done that.

14 Q. But by doing so, weren't they more -- weren't they exposing

15 themselves to NATO bombs by gathering in the thousands in the open in the

16 centre of a town? Why would people leave the security of their homes and

17 head out to the road if what they're fearing is that NATO will bomb their

18 home? Why would they do that?

19 A. I also had the impression that we were safer if we were in a

20 crowd, if there was a mass of us, that then we wouldn't be bombed by

21 anyone. I was sure that they wouldn't bomb our buildings that were in

22 town, that everyone would try to avoid a large number of civilian

23 casualties. Believe me, in that situation I would have preferred going

24 along with these people.

25 Q. And what happened to these people? I mean they gathered there

Page 24579

1 and where did they go later?

2 A. Some went towards Djakovica, others went towards Montenegro

3 through Kula, yet others went towards Mitrovica. So they went in those

4 directions.

5 Q. Was -- were -- was the police monitoring the departure of these

6 people from the town of Pec when they left in these different directions?

7 Was this something that was monitored by the police?

8 A. We had a certain number of patrols at key points where there

9 could be bottlenecks. If that's what you mean, then the police was

10 following this and they were providing information if there were some

11 roads that were totally crowded. I had information that the road towards

12 Kula, the road in the mountains, was jammed. At the check-point at

13 Savine Vode people in vehicles were checked. I went to that check-point.

14 I asked for the checks to be made simpler, to keep vehicles there for as

15 short as possible, to do things just by looking at vehicles. Further on

16 some cars broke down which impeded traffic further. So I asked patrols

17 if they could go out there and regulate traffic there. So I'd rather say

18 that we were checking the roads themselves than movement.

19 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Paponjak, what roughly was the ethnic division

20 in Pec between Albanians and non-Albanians?

21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, I just had assessments or

22 estimates. For a long period of time there hadn't been a census, so we

23 really had no idea how many Albanians there were there. However, if we

24 are to speak in terms of estimates we could say that the ratio was 80:20

25 or 75:25 per cent.

Page 24580

1 JUDGE BONOMY: And would the same ratio apply in the surrounding

2 area?

3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, as far as Istok and Klina are

4 concerned, that would be around it roughly. Again, I'm only talking

5 about estimates, our estimate of the Albanian population figures. They

6 didn't want to take part in a census, they refused to do that.

7 JUDGE BONOMY: And did the bulk of -- of the 20 per cent, what

8 sort of proportion were Serbs?

9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] One-third. That was the ratio

10 roughly, 7, 8, 9. When I came to Pec the information I got was that

11 there was 7 per cent Montenegrins, 8 per cent Serbs, and 9 per cent

12 Muslims, that's what people told me then, and that's how I remembered it.

13 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.

14 [Trial Chamber confers]

15 JUDGE BONOMY: Were you aware at all of groups of Serbs gathering

16 in the centre of Pec for safety?

17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.

18 JUDGE BONOMY: Ms. Kravetz.

19 MS. KRAVETZ: Thank you, Your Honour.

20 Q. Sir, you said that you went to a check-point where there was

21 problems with the traffic and you asked for the traffic to be made or the

22 crossing of the check-point to be facilitated. Was this a border

23 check-point that you went to where there were problems with the

24 circulation?

25 A. No, it wasn't a border check-point. It was a check-point along

Page 24581

1 one of the roads. At the time, there was no border in that area.

2 Q. And who was manning that check-point?

3 A. At that check-point there were members of the traffic police,

4 members of the general police force, and some members from the crime

5 police. There was a permanent check-point that had existed for a number

6 of years.

7 Q. Now, you tell us in your statement that the columns of refugees

8 crossed the border into Montenegro, Macedonia, and Albania by car and on

9 foot. Were these columns of refugees that were heading in these

10 directions escorted by men of your SUP, Pec SUP?

11 A. No. Excuse me, I don't know whether I noted that they crossed

12 the border. I may have wanted to say they were leaving towards. I don't

13 know what exactly the phrase is in the statement. In any case, they were

14 not escorted by any members of the Pec SUP or the traffic police from

15 there.

16 Q. Once a state of war was declared, were there -- was there any

17 procedure in place that allowed the police to requisition privately owned

18 vehicle or company-owned vehicles for the use of the police? Was there

19 any procedure in place for that?

20 A. No. The police could seize something that had been used in the

21 commission of a crime, and in that case they were supposed to issue a

22 receipt.

23 Q. We have heard evidence that the -- for the VJ there was a

24 procedure which entitles the owner to receive a receipt and later

25 compensation when his vehicle was seized. You're telling us the police

Page 24582

1 could not seize any private vehicles following a similar procedure?

2 A. No. I am familiar with that part by chance. In order for us to

3 register a vehicle, we asked for confirmation that it had been registered

4 with the police in case it should be commandeered. I think that's what

5 it was about. I don't know that the police had such a possibility.

6 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Zecevic.

7 MR. ZECEVIC: Your Honours, I believe we are having a problem

8 with the transcript. I think on two places. The first is the witness

9 has answered -- let me just find out - 18, 2, not only commission of a

10 crime but also as a result of a crime, so both of it. And the second

11 thing is in 18 --

12 JUDGE BONOMY: That one I don't understand before you move on.

13 MR. ZECEVIC: Well --

14 JUDGE BONOMY: Something can be seized because it's been used in

15 the commission of a crime.

16 MR. ZECEVIC: That is right, Your Honour.

17 JUDGE BONOMY: And you would naturally expect the police to seize

18 something that was the proceeds of crime.

19 MR. ZECEVIC: That -- well, that is what the witness has said.

20 JUDGE BONOMY: That's fine.

21 MR. ZECEVIC: I'm just trying to be as accurate as possible.

22 JUDGE BONOMY: That's clear now. Thank you.

23 MR. ZECEVIC: And the second thing is in 18, 7, 8, 9, the witness

24 was talking about the mobilisation, which is, in fact, the material

25 obligation which we heard evidence about that, and it is not in the

Page 24583

1 transcript. I mean, it was translated not properly I think. The essence

2 of the witness's answer was that the police asked the owners of the

3 vehicles when they wanted to renew their registration if they have

4 registered their vehicle with the army in case of mobilisation of the

5 vehicle. And that is what he was actually talking about there about.

6 JUDGE BONOMY: So the mistake in line 9 is a reference to the

7 police instead of the army?

8 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes, that's right.

9 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you. Thank you.

10 Ms. Kravetz.

11 MS. KRAVETZ: Thank you, Your Honour.

12 Q. Sir, so other -- other than those circumstances that you have

13 described when the police is authorised to seize a vehicle and that was

14 in the commission of a crime and what's recently been clarified what was

15 the other situation, if the police seizes a vehicle belonging to a

16 private individual, that requisition would be illegal; correct?

17 A. Completely so.

18 Q. Now, sir, we have heard testimony here in this court of persons

19 who were in the centre of Pec on 27th March, these are Kosovo Albanians,

20 and they told this Chamber that the reason they had gathered there was

21 because they had been forced out of their homes by Serb forces at

22 gunpoint and ordered to gather in the centre of town. Are you aware of

23 that?

24 A. No, absolutely not.

25 Q. We also heard evidence that buses were organized for these

Page 24584

1 persons who were there, these Kosovo Albanians who were there in Pec, to

2 take them to the border. Are you aware of that taking place on that day

3 in Pec town?

4 A. The bus traffic was in order, if I understood you correctly. I

5 guess you wanted to know whether there were buses organized to transport

6 them. I'm telling you that the bus traffic was functioning without any

7 particular problems.

8 Q. The persons who testified here told us that the police had

9 organized buses to get the Albanian population out of the town and to

10 transport them to the border.

11 A. No, no.

12 Q. You did not see this taking place while you were there in Pec

13 town?

14 A. No, not in a single case.

15 Q. These officers that were from your department that were there

16 that you say these 30 officers, they were armed, were they not?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. And isn't it true, sir, that there were also Serb soldiers in the

19 centre of town and local armed civilians who were forcing the population

20 who had been forced to gather there out of the town, directing the

21 population out of the town?

22 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Aleksic.

23 MR. ALEKSIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, a part of this

24 question was already answered. It was said that there was no presence of

25 the army in the centre of town.

Page 24585

1 JUDGE BONOMY: The context is important and the question is

2 admissible in its context, so please continue with it, Ms. Kravetz.

3 MR. LUKIC: And one more thing, I'm sorry, Your Honour, but the

4 witness explained where his police officers were on the check-points, not

5 in the centre of the town 30 police officers. He described -- maybe it's

6 not understandable for us who do not know that town, but I think that he

7 tried to explain that those 30 were not in the centre of the town but in

8 the town.

9 JUDGE BONOMY: That's not the question that's being the asked.

10 The question is based on evidence that we've heard already in the case at

11 an earlier stage.

12 So I think you should pose the question again, Ms. Kravetz, but

13 there's no reason why it should be altered in any way.

14 MS. KRAVETZ: Thank you, Your Honour.

15 Q. Sir, isn't it true that in addition to your police officers there

16 were also Serb soldiers in the centre of town and local armed civilians

17 who were forcing the population that had gathered there out of the town,

18 they were directing this population out of the town and towards the

19 border?

20 A. When I was there, there were none. I don't have any knowledge

21 pertaining to other periods of time. When I was in the centre of town

22 there were no army members. I didn't see a single armed civilian either.

23 Q. So you're telling us you did not see anyone forcing the civilians

24 who had gathered there to head to the border towards -- in the direction

25 of the border with Montenegro, Albania. Is that really your evidence?

Page 24586

1 A. That is correct.

2 Q. And you did not see Serb forces loading civilians onto trucks,

3 civilians that had gathered there, and transporting them out of the town?

4 A. No.

5 Q. Very well. I will move on then from that topic.

6 JUDGE BONOMY: That last question referred to trucks, is that

7 what you meant to refer to?


9 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.

10 MS. KRAVETZ: I had asked about buses and now I was asking about

11 trucks.

12 Q. Sir, during your testimony today you spoke about an order that

13 you received from the minister of interior to organize documentation when

14 you were based in Kragujevac. Do you recall you spoke at length about

15 this documentation and the compilation of that?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. Do you recall when that took place, when you worked on this

18 project that you described to organize the documentation?

19 A. It was in 2002.

20 Q. You had left the SUP of Pec municipality in June of 1999; is that

21 correct?

22 A. It is correct.

23 Q. And you said that at the time you took with you, you and your

24 fellow police officers, took with you the documents that were in the

25 archives of the SUP; correct?

Page 24587

1 A. I did not, but some policemen did. That was before I left the

2 area. The fact is that it was transported from SUP Pec and other

3 organizational units to, for example, Kragujevac and some other places in

4 different parts of Serbia.

5 Q. When were these documents transported out of the SUP of Pec

6 municipality?

7 A. Around those days when the police was withdrawing, or rather,

8 leaving the territory of the SUP, I mean June 1999.

9 Q. How many members of the Pec SUP relocated to Kragujevac,

10 approximately if you recall?

11 A. I don't know. I didn't arrive in Kragujevac around that time. I

12 arrived in Kragujevac later because I remained in the area of Pec. When

13 I arrived there the situation was not orderly because we didn't know

14 where the police of SUP Pec were. There was no accommodation that had

15 been secured for them. They were finding accommodation whichever way

16 they could. They were also trying to find places for their families to

17 stay, to go on with their lives.

18 Q. When did you arrive to Kragujevac?

19 A. I arrived to Kragujevac on the 26th of June or the 27th.

20 Q. You're talking -- this is 1999?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. And you remained there until 2002, when you were tasked with this

23 project of organizing the documentation?

24 A. Yes, and later.

25 Q. Do you recall what were the specific instructions you received

Page 24588

1 from the minister of interior regarding this project that you embarked

2 on, this project was it dealing with the organization of the

3 documentation of the SUP?

4 A. They were in written form.

5 Q. And what were the instructions you had received? What were you

6 told to do?

7 A. There were strict prerequisites that case files be gathered and

8 sorted out the way I have described. First we had to gather all the case

9 files and to compile -- complete individual files, then a list had to be

10 drawn up as well as statistical tables. And based on that a joint

11 document was supposed to contain all of the information so as to be able

12 to navigate through it more easily. It was strictly prescribed how

13 things were to be designated, how certain security-related events will be

14 marked.

15 Q. Yes, you have explained all that earlier in your testimony. Do

16 you know the reasons why three years after or approximately three years

17 after you had moved, relocated, your SUP to Kragujevac you were requested

18 to organize the documentation of the SUP? Why was this done three years

19 after you had moved there?

20 A. I'm afraid -- well, I don't know, but I'm a bit afraid or

21 hesitant to express my view since you may find it not particularly

22 serious or founded. My first impression was that someone was preparing a

23 Ph.D. thesis. It was organized in a way of a research of significant

24 scope. That was my first impression once we started working on it.

25 Q. Sir, but was -- but didn't you say that the order that you got

Page 24589

1 was coming from the ministry in Belgrade?

2 A. Yes, that is correct.

3 Q. And would it be normal procedure for the ministry in Belgrade to

4 send you an order of this kind if the purpose of gathering this and

5 organizing this documentation was for the purposes of academic research?

6 A. I don't know. You asked me why it was being done, and I told you

7 what my impression was at the moment.

8 Q. Weren't you the person who was put in charge of this project?

9 A. In the part pertaining to Pec, yes.

10 Q. And weren't the reports pertaining to Pec signed by you?

11 A. That is correct.

12 Q. But you're saying you have no idea why you received these

13 instructions to put this material together?

14 A. I can only assume. We at the Ministry of the Interior carry out

15 our tasks as received. It is not up to me to assess why I had been given

16 a task; it is up to me to implement it. There is only a single case in

17 which I do not have to carry it out if it is against the law. All other

18 tasks I implement, without going into it whether I like it or not.

19 Q. Wasn't the purpose of preparing these reports based on your

20 documentation to assist Mr. Milosevic who was at trial here before this

21 Tribunal?

22 A. I don't know that.

23 Q. Didn't you -- didn't --

24 A. If you're asking me for my opinion, I can share it with you.

25 Q. I'm asking you what you know based on your experience at the time

Page 24590

1 and information you had.

2 A. That I don't know.

3 Q. Didn't you include specific references to the indictment against

4 Mr. Milosevic in some of these reports?

5 A. It is possible.

6 Q. And why did you do that if the purpose wasn't to assist the

7 defence of Mr. Milosevic before this Tribunal? Why would you include

8 references to the indictment against him?

9 A. Because it was probably stipulated in the task. If it was indeed

10 mentioned, if there are references, then that must have been our working

11 task.

12 Q. You're saying it was probably stipulated, you do not recall why

13 this was done, these reports that you yourself signed?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. And you do not recall why in these reports that you signed, you

16 included references to the Milosevic indictment?

17 A. It is certain that we did not make it up. For sure I didn't

18 mention the indictment against Mr. Milosevic because I wanted to. It is

19 most likely that there was a request to which we were supposed to

20 respond.

21 Q. So it would be correct to say that you were specifically

22 instructed in this order you received from the ministry to include these

23 references in the reports that you were compiling?

24 A. It doesn't necessarily have to be that way. It may have been

25 mentioned in one of the documents asking us to respond to this and that.

Page 24591

1 Q. Respond to this and that. What do you mean by that? When you

2 say to respond to this and that?

3 A. I mean if we mentioned something in relation to the indictment

4 there must have been a request for us to provide information or provide

5 indications of information that may have to do with the indictment.

6 Q. Thank you, sir.

7 MS. KRAVETZ: I have no further questions for this witness, Your

8 Honour.

9 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you, Ms. Kravetz.

10 Questioned by the Court:

11 JUDGE BONOMY: When was it, Mr. Paponjak, that you became the

12 chief of the SUP Pec?

13 A. In July 1999. July. I was appointed acting chief I think on the

14 12th of June, and in July a decision was released on my appointment as

15 chief of the Pec SUP. I think the decision was passed by the minister.

16 JUDGE BONOMY: What happened to your predecessor?

17 A. He was then assigned to other duties.

18 JUDGE BONOMY: What were they?

19 A. Duties as a police officer, and I'm afraid I can't be more

20 specific than that.


22 A. Yes, with the Pec SUP.

23 JUDGE BONOMY: Was he demoted?

24 A. In terms of rank, yes, he was.


Page 24592

1 A. I don't know.

2 JUDGE BONOMY: What was the rumour?

3 A. No one shared any with me.

4 JUDGE BONOMY: What was his name?

5 A. Borislav Vlahovic.

6 JUDGE BONOMY: Where is he now?

7 A. I don't know. I retired late in 2004, and I haven't really been

8 in touch since.

9 JUDGE BONOMY: Was he still in the police in 2004?

10 A. Yes, he was.

11 JUDGE BONOMY: And you have absolutely no suspicion of why he was

12 demoted?

13 A. No, I can't say I spent any time considering that. Truth to

14 tell, my own appointment sort of took me aback. I expected that after

15 everything that had happened I would be taking some time off, some time

16 to rest a little. And then this appointment came which surprised me. To

17 be perfectly honest, I can't say that I was really looking forward to

18 this appointment.

19 JUDGE BONOMY: Bearing in mind that your predecessor was being

20 demoted, you weren't even concerned to find out why just in case the

21 problem might end up in your -- or on your plate?

22 A. Anyone who knows me knows that I tend not to ask too many

23 questions about what's going on unless it concerns me directly. I spent

24 a long time working in the police, and this is a type of behaviour that I

25 picked up along the way; other than that, I also happen to be that kind

Page 24593

1 of person.

2 [Trial Chamber confers]

3 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Lukic, re-examination?

4 MR. LUKIC: Just a short one, Your Honour.

5 Further Re-examination by Mr. Lukic:

6 Q. [Interpretation] Good afternoon yet again, Mr. Paponjak. Several

7 questions from me. First of all, there's a certain amount of confusion

8 created by this. Why do you not know the regular forces of the VJ. Are

9 those soldiers doing their regular military term or just members of units

10 of the VJ from the Pec area or they came from elsewhere?

11 A. I know that there were those that came from elsewhere.

12 Q. Thank you. That's all I need. We talked about weapons being

13 seized -- vehicles being seized. Can police seize a vehicle that had

14 been involved in the commission of a crime?

15 A. Yes, absolutely.

16 Q. Can the police seize a vehicle that was used in order to commit a

17 crime?

18 A. Yes, they are under an obligation to do just that.

19 Q. Did you know a man named Edison Zatriqi, who was a haulier from

20 Pec?

21 A. Yes, he was a haulier from Pec, that being the reason I knew him.

22 Q. Do you know where he kept his buses in early March 1999, or

23 rather, let me ask you something else to begin with, it's something that

24 I think we have discussed already. The garage where police vehicles were

25 kept, did that garage burn down at one point?

Page 24594

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. Yes or no, please.

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Do you now remember where the Zatriqi Edison buses were parked at

5 the time?

6 A. Yes, they were parked nearby, just next to that workshop.

7 Q. And when the garage burned down did the police suffer any damage

8 as a result of this?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. Did that affect the way in which police vehicles were maintained?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. Thank you. The owner of that garage, which ethnic group did he

13 belong to?

14 A. He was an ethnic Albanian.

15 Q. We talked about this. You tried to say but somehow you didn't

16 make it. Tell us your opinion, your opinion, on why these reports were

17 compiled. What did you tell me?

18 A. My impression was they were compiled in order to assist this

19 Tribunal with its work.

20 Q. Just another question from me. You, what about you in the Pec

21 SUP, did you have green and blue APCs positioned at junctions, traffic

22 junctions, where police were waving people on and sending them to

23 Montenegro?

24 A. No.

25 Q. Did you have any APCs at all?

Page 24595

1 A. No, none.

2 Q. Thank you, Mr. Paponjak.

3 A. No, my intention is to at least make sure that I myself remain

4 protected.

5 Q. Thank you very much. I have no further questions for you. Thank

6 you for testifying.

7 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Paponjak, when was damage done to Zatriqi's

8 buses?

9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Right at the beginning of the

10 air-strikes, the 24th, possibly the 25th of March.

11 JUDGE BONOMY: How many buses did he have?

12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Four.

13 JUDGE BONOMY: What about to them?

14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] They burned down along with a

15 workshop or a garage next to which they were parked.

16 MR. ZECEVIC: I'm sorry, Your Honours, we're not getting

17 transcript.

18 JUDGE BONOMY: It's on LiveNote if you have it.

19 MR. ZECEVIC: Okay. Thank you.

20 JUDGE BONOMY: And were these buses destroyed?

21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, burned down to the ground. I

22 remember that he had a double-decker as well.

23 JUDGE BONOMY: Can I take it that his buses did not provide the

24 normal service of buses in the area?

25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] They were being used until such

Page 24596

1 time as they burned down.

2 JUDGE BONOMY: But you told us that the buses were running as

3 usual in March, 27th and 28th ...

4 [Trial Chamber confers]

5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, they ran to schedule.

6 JUDGE BONOMY: Yes. Perhaps it would have been better to phrase

7 the question this way. What were his buses normally used for?

8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The buses were used to get

9 passengers, for example, from Pec to Belgrade. He drove some of my

10 friends and that's why I know.

11 [Trial Chamber confers]

12 JUDGE BONOMY: When being used that way, was it a regular-service

13 bus that would travel at a particular time between Pec and Belgrade?

14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes.

15 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.

16 That completes your evidence, Mr. Paponjak. Thank you for

17 assisting us with your evidence. You may now leave the courtroom with

18 the usher.

19 MR. LUKIC: Your Honour, can we just -- Mr. Paponjak, can we just

20 clarify one thing arising from your questions. We should see how much

21 these four buses affected normal transportation even if destroyed.

22 JUDGE BONOMY: Sorry, you wish to ask that?

23 MR. LUKIC: Yes, please.

24 JUDGE BONOMY: Yes, very well.

25 Please return, Mr. Paponjak. I was premature in thinking that

Page 24597

1 your evidence was complete.

2 Mr. Lukic wants to ask some more questions.

3 Mr. Lukic.

4 MR. LUKIC: Thank you, Your Honour.

5 Q. Mr. Paponjak, you were asked about those four buses that burned

6 down?

7 A. Indeed.

8 Q. Was there a public, state-owned transportation company in Pec?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. How many inhabitants in Pec roughly speaking?

11 A. Between 50.000 and 70.000.

12 Q. I know you don't like figures, I have come to realize that while

13 working with you, how many buses were there regularly operating

14 throughout the Pec area, a ballpark figure, do your best, please?

15 A. The socially owned company was poorly equipped. They didn't

16 really have good buses or safe buses. They had a total of about 20. The

17 problem was resolved through the service of private hauliers who had

18 their own private pools of vehicles. That's why I knew Mr. Zatriqi

19 because I became interested when I saw the buses, I wanted to know who

20 they belonged to, and I was told at the time that they belonged to him

21 and he had very good buses.

22 Q. How many such private hauliers in the general whereabouts?

23 A. A total of maybe about six or seven.

24 Q. What about the four buses that you mentioned, the ones that

25 burned down, did that kind of damage really reduce the traffic potential

Page 24598

1 in the area?

2 A. Yes, to some extent. It was more difficult at that point in time

3 to travel to Belgrade, and that was it.

4 Q. Thank you very much.

5 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] I have no further questions.

6 JUDGE BONOMY: Anything arise for you, Ms. Kravetz?

7 That now completes your evidence, Mr. Paponjak. You may this

8 time leave without fear of further detention.

9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.

10 [The witness withdrew]

11 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Lukic.

12 MR. LUKIC: I'm in even a worse position than the last week.

13 What I can propose -- we don't have any more witnesses for the 15 minutes

14 left, and we may have that Status Conference tomorrow morning instead of

15 afternoon.

16 JUDGE BONOMY: Yes, I think it was suggested to you last week

17 that this situation would arise this week.

18 MR. LUKIC: Yes, we tried to dealt with it but we were informed

19 only people can come on Wednesday evening.

20 JUDGE BONOMY: That means someone's coming tonight. Now, if we

21 have the hearing first thing tomorrow --

22 MR. LUKIC: Now nobody came, we said no, because we wouldn't have

23 enough time to prepare the witness for tomorrow.

24 JUDGE BONOMY: Why? Maybe that's one of the problems we have in

25 this Tribunal, that far too much time is spent on preparing witnesses

Page 24599

1 rather than getting them into court and having them examined. A witness

2 who came tonight could surely be seen if we delayed the start of his

3 evidence while we have the hearing in the morning, then his evidence

4 could have begun in the second session or later. Where's the difficulty

5 with that?

6 MR. LUKIC: Your Honour, if we don't show enough documents to our

7 witnesses, they cannot cope with our examination at all. We really have

8 to go through many of documents, even lately when we were too

9 overburdened with the witnesses, we -- you could hear that we didn't show

10 them some crucial evidence and we really didn't have time to cover

11 everything. Then they have problem with you because they cannot answer

12 some questions and they seemed unreliable.

13 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

14 JUDGE BONOMY: What's the dead-line for the written filing on the

15 issue of -- that we're going to look at tomorrow on the impact of the

16 statement of accused?

17 MR. ZECEVIC: It was this afternoon, Your Honour, and it has been

18 filed already, and it is already on the docket.

19 [Trial Chamber and legal officer confer]

20 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, you've known, Mr. Lukic, all along what

21 action we're likely to take in a situation like this. In the case of the

22 Prosecution it was of no effect because they did not use all their time;

23 in your case it may well be of some effect if you use all your time as

24 all the indications suggest. We'll make a final decision when the time

25 comes, but you should have regard to the fact that the time lost

Page 24600

1 tomorrow, at least to the extent of one half --

2 MR. LUKIC: We'll try to organize ourselves during this break and

3 to -- we'll try to organize ourselves during this break and to use our

4 time as efficiently as possible.

5 JUDGE BONOMY: And as an indication I think to everyone of the

6 basis on which you might wish to work, between now and the break that we

7 will have on the 25th of April there are I think 17 days, sitting days in

8 April. And on the face of it, that should be enough to deal with the

9 remaining evidence for your case and the expert evidence for all accused.

10 So you should proceed on the basis that there is a distinct possibility

11 of all these witnesses being required during that period.

12 So far as tomorrow is concerned, if it's convenient to everyone

13 else, then we can have the hearing at 9.00 tomorrow morning.

14 Ms. Kravetz, that a problem?

15 MS. KRAVETZ: No, that's fine by us.

16 JUDGE BONOMY: All right. Well, in the absence of any dissent,

17 we will rise now and resume at 9.00 tomorrow morning.

18 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 3.19 p.m.,

19 to be reconvened on Thursday, the 20th day of

20 March, 2008, at 9.00 a.m.